My impression with what went on in my 2.206. There was a new PRB chairman from any of my past 2.206, and its my impression it didn't go well. I spoke about my mental models...the models I make about events around me, Mr. Blunt said basiclly at one point, everything about you is models, models, models today mike. A big dog in the NRC recently said the agency models about backup power supplies are inaccruate and not conservative.
Comments:
...Did you ever go in front of this new guy...Blunt.
He tried to steer my presentation and be disruptive.
I am supposed to be allowed the state my presentation...he can ask me questions...but the intent of the question are not supposed to disrupt my conversation.
I was shocked, I had so many regional representatives in there...maybe 1 through 5....
I wanted to talk about the organizational attributes that was causing this...he wanted me to talk about the reactor building cracks...
I told him it was a process fallacy...him wanting evidence from me...and then the agency making me powerless to create my own transparency and all the barriers the agency puts up in front of me.
....I called them nuclear gods and I never seen a more corrupt and damaging group of people than as engineers in general...
They are all whores to money and promotionalism....
....We spent about 30% of my time talking about how I am supposed to be allowed to give a presentation on my take of the petition...I drove these guys into looking into their management directive. It is my pitetion and not yours...
I got really irritated, he told me the issue was there are cracks in the reactor building and my concern is the reactor building would collapse in on itself.
My take, a design earthquake would occur with maybe a wall delaminating away and damaging safety equipment. I don't have the engineering skills to know if the cracks challenge the whole structure.
I think Mr Blunt was trying to make me look like a fool, this idiot thinks the whole reactor building will collapse in on itself...he was setting me up to look like a crazy. I need no help from him in that department.
All these guys have to do is quote what I wrote in my petition...not make a crazed interpretation of what I was trying say.
...Right, I was right on cue, the media was filled with stories about backup power systems today, I spent all my time until I was interrupted talking about the tie and the crazed petition process...where the agency from days back was trying to steer my conversation into the cracks.
I was trying to say, these guys in the last petition process were crazy to accept the Vernon tie...my intent was to indict the NRC and the petition.
I told them right up front, I really want to make a 2.206 petition on NRC...but you won't let me.
I called Mr. Blunt a god and arrogant for playing with me...but I kept my cool and didn't get spitting mad at him....
...Mr. Blunt said I might be in the wrong process...I should go to rule making. I said Mr Blunt, your just like the rest of the NRC employees I have had to deal with. I gone to the NRC OIG, allegation amount others, I tell them my sad story, and they in turn tell me I am talking to the wrong department. I told him I could spend a decade of time with your employees...going down that rat hole...one right after another pawning me off to the next NRC employee down the line. I said it sounds like all you want me to do is run around in your unproductive rat hole. There always has been a extraordinary hurdle with any of your employees to listen to the public and even the nuclear employees.
...U.S. Nuclear Regulators Privately Doubted Power Plants Despite Expressing Public Confidence, Documents Show
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/04/06/us-n...
...My contention is not a component or utility centric problem...it is a NRC centric problem in that they would enforce quality electrical supply safety components needed in a design accident.
No comments:
Post a Comment