Startling Honest Statement from Entergy

Most honest statement I ever heard from Entergy!

Our Opinion: Time to move forward

The Public Service Board's announcement on Friday that it was approving a certificate of public good for the operation until the end of the year of Vermont Yankee nuclear power plant in Vernon was not wholly unexpected.

The board had until March 31 to approve the CPG and a memorandum of understanding that was agreed to by the state and Entergy in December 2013. The MOU had a number of concessions from Entergy, which has owned and operated the plant since 2002, including money specifically for economic development in Windham County ($10 million over five years) and the release of $5.2 million to the state's Clean Energy Development Fund, at least half of which is targeted to the county. Entergy also agreed to commence with cleaning up the site as soon as is fiscally reasonable and not wait the 60 years authorized by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.

The Public Service Board noted that while the state's past interactions with Entergy were often contentious, resulting in litigation, acceptance of the MOU and approval of the certificate was in the best interests of the state and its residents, especially those in Windham County.

"The Company's sustained record of misconduct has been troubling to observe over the years ..." wrote the three members of the board. That record made the board question whether Entergy could be going forward "a company that lives by its commitments, adheres to legal requirements, including statutes and rules, provides accurate and timely information, and generally is a fair partner for Vermont."

However, noted the PSB, the memorandum of understanding indicates both the state and Entergy have been able to restore their working relationship.

"High-level Entergy VY representatives have shown a positive evolution in their commitment to the state of Vermont," wrote the board.

The board revealed the text of an e-mail sent to then-CEO Wayne Leonard from Entergy Corporation Vice President Curt Hebert, in which Hebert elaborated on Entergy's problems with Vermont.

"We did not get to this point because of poor communications strategy and lack of an advertising corporate giant," wrote Hebert. "We are where we are because people were sloppy, arrogant and unwilling to recognize that what people outside of the nuclear facility think, matters more than they can ever imagine ..."

In that e-mail, Hebert indicated Entergy had a "broken culture" when it came to its relationship with Vermont and its residents.

In an interview with the Reformer a day after the MOU was announced, Bill Mohl, president of Entergy Wholesale Commodities, attributed the change in the tenor of the conversation between the state and Entergy to a change in leadership at the energy giant.

"While we certainly have had our differences in the past and went through an extensive amount of litigation, it became very clear, when we made the decision to shut down, that we really needed to take a step back and understand and be thoughtful about how we approached this," he said.

Chris Recchia, the commissioner of the Department of Public Service, was one of the people who negotiated the MOU with Entergy and related to the Public Service Board his impression of the willingness of the new corporate leaders to work with the state.

"This really provides a way forward and we are glad the board realized this," said Recchia. "It provides certainty for the workers at the plant as well as for a careful and predictable shutdown and next steps moving forward with decommissioning."

Paul Burns, the executive director of the Vermont Public Interest Research Group, wasn't so enraptured by the MOU or the board's decision. VPIRG had repeatedly asked the board to deny the CPG.

"The order sends a troubling message," stated Burns in a press release, "suggesting that a company with the worst kind of record of misconduct could still merit a CPG. It does nothing to discourage that kind of behavior from Entergy or any other company in the future."

And Ray Shadis, speaking for the New England Coalition, which has fought Yankee's operation since it went online in 1972, claimed the board's order was filled with "numerous legal and factual errors ..."

"NEC did not enter into this amended CPG for VY application process two dockets, six-plus years, and more than $200,000 ago with the understanding that a pretty-much unadorned offer of money (and little else) from the applicant to the regulators could moot the whole thing," stated Shadis in a press release. "This is not so much a settlement as a payoff and a capitulation."

We at the Reformer have been watching this whole story unfold over the years and doing our best to report back everything that has transpired. We followed the sale, the uprate and the approval of on-site storage of spent nuclear fuel. We followed the application for license renewal from the Nuclear Regulatory Commission and the CPG process with the Public Service Board. We followed the Legislature's decision to give itself the authority to prohibit Yankee's continued operation and the federal lawsuit that resulted. We followed the news about the leak of tritiated water at the plant that happened just months after Entergy representatives testified there were no underground pipes carrying radionuclides.

Some of us at the Reformer have toured the power plant stood on the reactor vessel and next to the spent fuel pool. We were the first to publish the pictures of the collapsed cooling tower. We've been neck deep in Vernon for as long as the Reformer has been in print and our coverage has only intensified since Entergy announced the closure of the plant.

Friday's announcement is not the end of the story, but it is the end of part of the story. What's ahead now is nine more months of operation and then a long decommissioning process.

We are satisfied most of the issues have been settled and we are pleased by the financial settlement. Windham County is going to need help when the power plant closes, and the memorandum of understanding brings some sense that our future is not as bleak as when we learned that 600 good-paying jobs would be gone at the end of the year.

Yes, there is still good reason to not trust Entergy, but as the board noted, if it hadn't approved the certificate and the MOU, Yankee would have likely continued to operate until the end of the year anyway. We will continue to keep a watchful eye on Entergy, but we are glad the county is getting something out of the deal, and that wouldn't have happened if the PSB had denied the certificate.

.

Brattleboro Reformer Clears The Air Over Court Plea by "Angel Guy"

Feb 26, 2015 Update:

Remember, 261 days after I plead guilty, the NHDOT replaced on both bridges the wooden walkways costing some $31,000... 

I wonder what the prosecutor or judge would have did to me if they knew this job was being contemplated or complete...that is why this was so unfair. 

All the cards weren't one the table...just a selective disclosure of the facts favoring I am a bad guy.

***Hmm, March 26, 2015: I am free to begin protesting again. I put away my halo under my bed. Don't tell Joanne! 

Maybe the Reformer is smarter than I thought...the below entry is dated March 25, 2013. I wrote this entry is March 25, 2014. This shows you why thought it worth getting arrested for: 

NH DOT Inspection of Hinsdale's Rt 119 bridge

March 25, 2015: 

They have exhausted me today...I will fill in the rest of the story tomorrow.

The players.

Tom D’Errico Executive Editor, Web Master.

Dominic Poli- reporter

My court date was March 26...the plea. Within days of that, on a very cold sunny winter day, I rode over to the Brattleboro Reformer office on my bicycle. I requested to speak to Mr. D'Errico. I told him the police complaints and the Reformers reporting about my arrest was basically a travesty of justice. I told him you own me a follow up story seeing how I made a plea deal on just a misdemeanor class B, while the Hinsdale Police made charges of a felony and a host of other serous charges. He asked me a few questions, told me to make a follow up e-mail to remind him. I thought to myself, fuck you, if write can’t write down a note and follow up on it... He is a arrogant SOB.

Everything about getting this bridge replaced in time before a disaster was predicated on his newspapers coverage of the bridge. This situation is as much his newspaper’s fault as the NHDOT.

I remember the first time I was up in his office conference room. I brought my 10 pound bag of bridge rust chips he spoke about in this article. I picked a the biggest chunk of rust, tried handing it to him saying feel how heavy this chip is. He wouldn’t touch it. I asked him to get a reporter to take a tour with me. I’d show him all the dangerous spots. You could take pictures and put it up in the newspaper. He said he is not a bridge engineer…we wouldn’t know what he were looking at. So we are not doing that.

Right,they are not a lawyer, so the Reformer can't write about the area crime and events in the courts?

Mulligan takes plea deal for bridge damage

By DOMENIC POLI / Reformer Staff

Posted: 03/25/2014 03:00:00 AM EDT0 Comments

KEENE, N.H. -- A Hinsdale man known to many for his public demonstrations around the two bridges linking his town to Vermont accepted a plea deal in 8th Circuit Court District Division in Keene.

Michael J. Mulligan, 60, agreed on Wednesday, Feb. 26, to pay a $1,000 fine, plus a $240 penalty assessment, if he cannot pay $1,253.76 in restitutions within a year for damage he caused to the portion of the Charles Dana Bridge designated for pedestrians. In exchange for pleading guilty to a felony and three misdemeanors, he must also avoid going within 100 feet of that structure or the Anna Hunt Marsh bridge, except for routine travel without stopping, or risk the fine and penalty assessment.

He was charged with reckless conduct, disorderly conduct, and two counts of criminal mischief. Reckless conduct is a felony. He also received a ticket for littering.

According to documents filed by Hinsdale Patrolman Joshua Murray, the arresting officer, Mulligan caused damage to the walkway portion of the bridge by using a crowbar to remove several wooden boards from it, creating a hazard for pedestrians, on July 31, 2013. Murray said Mulligan littered by leaving a white poster board sign reading "NEED NEW BRIDGE" on public property.

"I reached a plea agreement but I don't think justice was done," Mulligan told the Reformer, adding that he did not get enough time in court to discuss the condition of the bridges. He said, however, he made a statement and the judge recognized the problems with maintaining infrastructure in the United States.

Mulligan told the Reformer he removed the boards from the bridge in order to send a message and get the deterioration noticed.

"When I was pulling up them boards, a witness walked by and said, 'What are you doing?' and I said, 'I'm fixing the bridge,'" Mulligan recalled. "And within 12 hours those boards were renailed to the bridge."

He mentioned he considers that witness to be a hero.

After being arrested, Mulligan was released on $5,000 personal recognizance.

Mulligan's arrest occurred one day after he appeared at a public meeting -- hosted by the Federal Highway Administration, the New Hampshire Department of Transportation and the Vermont Agency of Transportation in the Brattleboro Union High School Multipurpose Room -- held to gauge local support for a project to rehabilitate the Charles Dana and Anna Hunt Marsh bridges and construct a new one, which would stretch over the nearby railroad tracks in Brattleboro and touch down near the stop light at the former Walmart location.

Mulligan, who brought with him pieces of rust he had chipped off the bridges, said he feels the environmental assessment contained gross inaccuracies and said he fears the bridges are in danger of collapsing. He said the assessment overestimates "by many magnitudes" the bridge's integrity, even though those who put together the assessment consider it "functionally obsolete."

Mulligan, wearing a homemade halo, also referenced movies in which an angel lurks near a bridge before it collapses and said he is that angel for the Charles Dana and Anna Hunt Marsh bridges.

He has brought pieces of the rusted bridges into the Reformer to describe what he considers dangerous deterioration.

Domenic Poli can be reached at
dpoli@reformer.com, or 802-254-2311, ext. 277. You can follow him on Twitter @dpoli_reformer. 

Yea, I was pissed. I left a voice recording on the editor's and reporter's phones. Both these guys should be fired over this. Tom is too busy with outside activities to keep appropriate watch over the quality and reputation of the newspaper. I am informing the Reformer I am leaving a log over events about this article on Topix. Here is my first e-mail to the Reformer. 

...Mar 25 at 9:07 AM

dpoli@reformer.com <dpoli@reformer.com>

Mulligan: It’s A Travesty Of Justice 

You need to repair my reputation over a grossly materially inaccurate statement(s) in your newspaper!

My children and wife are actually wondering if I lied to them about my plea...let alone all their friends.

Here begins the sequential entries into Topix mostly submitted on March 26, 2013. You catch on this message board, I am the only one using my real name. Have always been like that. Beginning about 8 am...I am making my case to the Reformer. 

...I plead guilty to one count of a class B criminal mischief misdemeanor. My fine and punishment is congruent with a plea of three class A misdemeanors and a felony.

I am astonished they put the below old comment in the article without the reporter asking me a context about this. This is a obscene misunderstanding how our police and courts system works. None of this by the Reformer was put under a test of swearing under oath and testing whether this was factual information. Like, did you ever see mike using the crow bar...was it the first or second time Mike took up the board? This just came from witness statement and the police complaint ...I got no right to comment about it. Now if that came from direct testimony or the witness reporting it to the newspaper, well that is another story.  I suspect this came from the police chief on background...him giving the reporter inappropriate background information on a up coming court case. Its aims was a smear job to prejudiced the public image of me based on knowingly incomplete information. Where is my rights within the newspaper...it was basically a smear job based on hearsay evidence. I didn't even get to make a context comment to it in the second swipe. Talking about being convicted in the eyes of the public without due process. After I was given an opportunity to explained it to them the reformer agreed to remove it. Where is my due process within the Reformer reporting...I thought I was innocent until proven guilty. Does the Reformer understand the limitations of a police complaint and due process?

"According to documents filed by Hinsdale Patrolman Joshua Murray, the arresting officer, Mulligan caused damage to the walkway portion of the bridge by using a crowbar to remove several wooden boards from it, creating a hazard for pedestrians, on July 31, 2013. Murray said Mulligan littered by leaving a white poster board sign reading "NEED NEW BRIDGE" on public property."

...Just because a newspaper reports it and a police officer’s says it with our form of government...it doesn't make it true. You got to have the proof to back up that statement and cycle it through the courts.

As part of the plea agreement, the prosecutor agreed to remove off the charge, strike off the complaint the part of me using a crow bar or hammer on the bridge. There is nothing remaining on the court record that I used any instruments on the bridge other than my hands. The boards I removed, twice I might add, weren't physically attached to the bridge.

 ...I repeat, I did not plead guilty to any class A misdemeanor or any felony!!!

This statement is inaccurate. It is both bridges. This is where I first realize Dom got the court documents in his hands and he still made this obscene error. It is baffling beyond all hell. 

..."In exchange for pleading guilty to a felony and three misdemeanors, he must also avoid going within 100 feet of that structure or the Anna Hunt Marsh bridge, except for routine travel without stopping, or risk the fine and penalty assessment."

Jesus, they seen the court paperwork! 

I am amazed at their gross misunderstanding of the NH court system. The felony was almost immediately dropped once I got a lawyer.

...Freaking idiots..the case goes over to superior court with a felony. 

There is a huge difference between a class A and B misdemeanor by the way! 

I am explaining what it took out of me to get this article written.

...I  was pushing Tom D and his newspaper to write a rebuttal: 

 message 22 and 23: Made a personal appearance to Tom last Friday April 28....

This is where I documented I called the Reformer. Large parts of the article I thought was good...but on whole, it was intentionally slanderous.  

...I called up Dominic and Tom to tell them how I felt about them slandering me in their newspaper.

Left a voice recording because they are too chicken to talk to me personally. 

Still can't get over Dom had my court documents in his hands and he still got it so wrong.

...“Michael J. Mulligan, 60, agreed on Wednesday, Feb. 26, to pay a $1,000 fine, plus a $240 penalty assessment, if he cannot pay $1,253.76 in restitution within a year for damage he caused to the portion of the Charles Dana Bridge designated for pedestrians.”

I didn’t give them these specific numbers…although I had the documents in my hand during the telephone conversation with Dominic. Once I heard the $1257.76 on the phone, I knew he had court documents in his greasy hands.

This is prima-facie proof they knew I plead to a class B criminal mischief and they put a lie into their newspaper that I plead guilty to the felony and all the class As.

 This is really what happened. 

 ...I plead guilty to fixing a bridge without getting state permission!

This is Dominic's e-mail to me. Notice the time? He still didn't answer my e-mail about the premeditated crow bar. They have a bad history with me with giving as little information as possible...giving me no feed back. So I am going on the offence.

...Re: Mulligan: "It's A Travesty Of Justice"

Domenic Poli
To Me
Today at 1:34 PM

Hello Mike,

I want to offer my sincerest apologies that I misread the court document. My editor has said it was fixed online and we are rerunning the story in tomorrow's paper.

-Dom 

Here is rev 1

UPDATE: Hinsdale man takes plea deal for bridge damage 

By DOMENIC POLI / Reformer Staff 

Posted: 03/25/2014 03:00:00 AM EDT0 Comments | Updated: about 7 hours ago

(Zachary P. Stephens/Brattleboro Reformer) Editor's note: This story has been updated since it was originally published, to correctly reflect the charge Mr Mulligan pleaded to; one misdemeanor count of criminal mischief. 

KEENE, N.H. -- A Hinsdale man known to many for his public demonstrations around the two bridges linking his town to Vermont accepted a plea deal in 8th Circuit Court District Division in Keene. 

Michael J. Mulligan, 60, agreed on Wednesday, Feb. 26, to pay a $1,000 fine, plus a $240 penalty assessment, if he cannot pay $1,253.76 in restitutions within a year for damage he caused to the portion of the Charles Dana Bridge designated for pedestrians. In exchange for pleading guilty to one misdemeanor charge of criminal mischief, he must also avoid going within 100 feet of that structure or the Anna Hunt Marsh bridge, except for routine travel without stopping, or risk the fine and penalty assessment.

He was originally charged with reckless conduct, disorderly conduct, and two counts of criminal mischief. Reckless conduct is a felony. He also received a ticket for littering.

According to documents filed by Hinsdale Patrolman Joshua Murray, the arresting officer, Mulligan caused damage to the walkway portion of the bridge by using a crowbar to remove several wooden boards from it, creating a hazard for pedestrians, on July 31, 2013. Murray said Mulligan littered by leaving a white poster board sign reading "NEED NEW BRIDGE" on public property.

"I reached a plea agreement but I don't think justice was done," Mulligan told the Reformer, adding that he did not get enough time in court to discuss the condition of the bridges. He said, however, he made a statement and the judge recognized the problems with maintaining infrastructure in the United States.

Mulligan told the Reformer he removed the boards from the bridge in order to send a message and get the deterioration noticed.

"When I was pulling up them boards, a witness walked by and said, 'What are you doing?' and I said, 'I'm fixing the bridge,'" Mulligan recalled. "And within 12 hours those boards were renailed to the bridge."

He mentioned he considers that witness to be a hero.

After being arrested, Mulligan was released on $5,000 personal recognizance.

Mulligan's arrest occurred one day after he appeared at a public meeting -- hosted by the Federal Highway Administration, the New Hampshire Department of Transportation and the Vermont Agency of Transportation in the Brattleboro Union High School Multipurpose Room -- held to gauge local support for a project to rehabilitate the Charles Dana and Anna Hunt Marsh bridges and construct a new one, which would stretch over the nearby railroad tracks in Brattleboro and touch down near the stop light at the former Walmart location.

Mulligan, who brought with him pieces of rust he had chipped off the bridges, said he feels the environmental assessment contained gross inaccuracies and said he fears the bridges are in danger of collapsing. He said the assessment overestimates "by many magnitudes" the bridge's integrity, even though those who put together the assessment consider it "functionally obsolete."

Mulligan, wearing a homemade halo, also referenced movies in which an angel lurks near a bridge before it collapses and said he is that angel for the Charles Dana and Anna Hunt Marsh bridges.

He has brought pieces of the rusted bridges into the Reformer to describe what he considers dangerous deterioration.

Domenic Poli can be reached at dpoli@reformer.com, or 802-254-2311, ext. 277. You can follow him on Twitter @dpoli_reformer.

Maybe a little humor. You never know you can get unless you ask?

...Me
To Dominic Poli

Today at 2:49 PM

Dom,

On the front page tomorrow?

Would you run it with one of my pictures?

Does Tom want to interview me on his radio program about the bridge?

Mike

This is how it went wrong from my side.

...Neither Tom or Dominic have the courtesy to give me a call back after listening to my voice recording today. This is what we are changing on the story and do you have any other concerns with the story. 

Remember Dominic cold call me out of nowhere about the plea agreement many weeks after I went to the Reformer asking them to clear up their story. Dom gave me no professional forewarning, a call about the plea is coming and you will be on the record when we talk. 

I picked up the vibs he wasn’t getting the responses out of me he expected...he was a bit frustrated. He seemed rushed... 

He showed absolutely no curiosity at all...like coming back to me three or four times asking me exactly what charges have you pled too. He thinks he knows everything about the story...the reformer only prints the words of god. Actually they are the gods...they already know the story before it happens 

Then he submitted the story and it simmering in their system for four or five days. No worry from him with a fear of inaccuracy...to give me one more call back to verify the facts of the story.

Hey, but if you want to run an outlet like that... 

That is how a story becomes so inaccurate...a reporter feels he already knows the story before he talks to the witness. He just didn’t have the instinct to dig for the wider truth. He seemed like he knew zero about me and didn't even do a internet search about me and the bridge...I have written extensively about the troubles with the NHDOT.

Just like the Reformer doesn’t have the balls to give me a call...even to make sure they got the story right on the second swipe. 

There are two issues I am not comfortable about, the generic misdemeanor and the god dam premeditated crow bar. I am convinced on the day this occurred...when the police officer wrote up that complaint, he had a incomplete understanding on really what happened on that bridge.

And you know, the Reformer still doesn't have a complete understanding with what went on with this bridge. You always have been printing this story on incomplete understanding and the Reformer is standing on really thin ice. I got a case of severe mistrust with this newspaper and here is why.

...Today at 5:23 PM 

Dom, 

You guys keep spinning this thing into making me worse than I am. Or you won't back out of your spinning.. 

Just why can’t the paper be accurate. I plead guilty to a B misdemeanor. A “A” misdemeanor means I faced a risk of going to jail...where a “B” misdemeanor means I faced no threat of being sentenced with going to jail at all. There is a big difference between misdemeanors...being inaccurate defames my character. 

The words of cops aren’t god. The courts though are mostly. 

“According to documents filed by Hinsdale Patrolman Joshua Murray, the arresting officer, Mulligan caused damage to the walkway portion of the bridge by using a crowbar to remove several wooden boards from it, creating a hazard for pedestrians, on July 31, 2013.” 

I adjudicated this statement through the court, judge and prosecutor. It was found to be materially inaccurate and a false statement. 

You know, I’d got in my possession all the pretrial discovery including the witness statement and name. 

The accurate statement is, I pulled up unattached boards up with my hands...where the nails and screws were rusted off. I pulled up only dangerous loose boards...thus I repaired the walkway. 

In pre trial discovery I got the recent bridge inspection reports where the NHDOT has admitted many loose and unattached boards...where they were negligent and too lazy to re attach them until I cued them. I mean, if your are interested in the truth... 

And the NHDOT renailed more than twice as many boards as I pulled up with my hands... 

It is not my fault you are having problems backing out of your terribly skimpy interview of me. 

Mike

          Domenic Poli

I know the Reformer is looking over this and I know they will never admit it. Just to remind everyone what I was really doing.

The reformer from my the very first contact with me today knew I referenced this blog site. They knew I was logging down the events surrounding their inaccurate article about me. 

I had the Reformer taking the crow bar e-mail out of rev 2 and I am reminding everyone how long it took for a response.

I added this about 9 am and you notice how they never got back to me.

"I plead guilty to one count of a class B criminal mischief misdemeanor. My fine and punishment is in-congruent with a plea of three class A misdemeanors and a felony.

Just because a newspaper reports it and a police officer’s says it with our form of government...it doesn’t make it true. You got to have the proof to back up that statement and cycle it through the courts.

As part of the plea agreement, the prosecutor agreed to remove off the charge, strike off the complaint the part of me using a crow bar or hammer on the bridge. There is nothing remaining on the court record that I used any instruments on the bridge other than my hands. The boards I removed, twice I might add, weren’t physically attached to the bridge." 

Here is the e-mail.

Domenic Poli
To Me

Today at 5:44 PM

I have taken out the part about the crowbar. 

I am waiting for basic communication, yea mike we are still working on the misdemeanor issue. It is a pattern of shoddy communication. This is a form of single minded self and organization protection...crooks communicate like this. I imagine they are doing this disrespect to all members of the community for years who communicated by e-mail about stories. Here again is my take on the big view here.

I asked him about clarifying the misdemeanor issue. Gave them a reason why I think it should be remove. Yet, there is no response about this. 

I just saying this isn't at all professional and open...how can you ever trust working with this newspaper when your nuts are on the line.

I am just saying from the beginning the Reformer never showed any interesting in discussing this bridge or interviewing me. Nothing for three years... 

Once I got arrested they only portrayed me in a very antagonistic point of view...what the police reported about me and the papers interpretation of what the police said. It was nothing about every tale has two sides of the story. Never did they come talk to me about what my point of view was. And as Tom spoke about, I came to them in their office with big chips of rust from the bridge and Tom just blew me off.

Personally I think this paper knows me as a whistleblower and they hate me for it...
They hate me for being a snitch...

I have a lot experience concerning huge events and enormous personal consequences...I held the outcome of my family and many other families in my hands. I also put CEO crooks in jail based only on my observation. So how does a newspaper communicate to tipsters....how does a newspaper communicate when their are enormous consequences around the events.  The Reformer is one of the worst outlets I ever talked too, sadly most of there behavior just like this. For whistle-blowers, they guys are extremely untrustworthy.

I remember the good old days in around 1991 and 1992 when I was slipping the Reformer stolen document from high official in Vermont Yankee. We made all them officials at VY and the NRC jump with terror!

The employees of Vermont Yankee to to joke, "the accurate plant plan of the day was already in the Brattleboro Reformer a day before it was posted at the plant". 

I am just a nut case and I know it.

But I am just the nut at the foot of the bridge wearing a halo!

So really, all I've been doing for the last few year is investigating and interviewing the Brattleboro Reformer.

You know, like a reporter's instinct when something doesn't fit. I don't know what isn't Kosher yet…but here is one more swipe at it. So let me get this straight mike, you plead guilty to:“reckless conduct, disorderly conduct, and two counts of criminal mischief. Reckless conduct is a felony. He also received a ticket for littering.”

That would have got me to say, I plead guilty to the one class B criminal mischief. And you idiots, I never was convicted of littering with a “Build New Bridge” sign on public property. It was a utterly a stupid charge by the police. 

Lots of people off the streets told me they communicated to the Reformer they'd like a story about the bridge in the newspaper.

Lots of people over the years both pro and con wrote and called up the Reformer asking them to write a story about the guy protesting on the Brattleboro bridge. I have no idea they refused to interview me. People stopped on the side of the road or pulled off the road saying they informed the Reformer about wishing a story. 

Why I think loose and unattached boards on a bridge walkway is dangerous...what motivated me into action.

...You see, I think it is evil to have any not attached boards on a bridge 30 feet over a river. You need not have a reason why it is terribly neglectful. My best guess at a accident would be my bike would catch a wobbly board and kick it up into my wheels. It makes me fall off the bike and this breaks my neck. You say how probable is that, further many people would be looking forward to this accident.
How about a few winters ago where the Hinsdale town snow plow machine attempted to plow the snow off walkway. He flipped up one loose board, then a whole set of loose boards. The big machine fell in the hole and almost killed the driver as they almost went in the Connecticut river. 

I am just saying, these loose boards and for very long periods of time, it is a very complex situation. It is very unlikely you can think up all the possibilities with somebody getting hurt over loose boards. There is more opertunities than you think.
Another one we thought about is a big person in a battery operated wheel chair. A board come loose, tips him over. Again his weight causes him to break his neck or suffocate when his head hits a stanchion. 

Just because you can’t think of a threat to human life and limb…it is because you can’t see or think up all the possible scenarios.

Loose public walkway boards should always be considered extremely dangerous because your slice of experience or time observing events or possibilities on a particular walkway is very thin.

Who would ever think a snow machine would plow up loose boards on the bridge nearly throwing a driver into the Connecticut River drink

...You see, I think it is evil to have any not attached boards on a bridge 30 feet over a river. You need not have a reason why it is terribly neglectful. My best guess at a accident would be my bike would catch a wobbly board and kick it up into my wheels. It makes me fall off the bike and this breaks my neck. You say how probable is that, further many people would be looking forward to this accident.

How about a few winters ago where the Hinsdale town snow plow machine attempted to plow the snow off walkway. He flipped up one loose board, then a whole set of loose boards. The big machine fell in the hole and almost killed the driver as they almost went in the Connecticut river.

I am just saying, these loose boards and for very long periods of time, it is a very complex situation. It is very unlikely you can think up all the possibilities with somebody getting hurt over loose boards. There is more opertunities than you think.

Another one we thought about is a big person in a battery operated wheel chair. A board come loose, tips him over. Again his weight causes him to break his neck or suffocate when his head hits a stanchion.

Just because you can’t think of a threat to human life and limb…it is because you can’t see or think up all the possible scenarios.

Loose public walkway boards should always be considered extremely dangerous because your slice of experience or time observing events or possibilities on a particular walkway is very thin.

Who would ever think a snow machine would plow up loose boards on the bridge nearly throwing a driver into the Connecticut River drink

...I mean, I have way more observable experience on the bridge than most people. This gives me cues even I have a extremely thin slice of all observable time on the bridge…much events and opportunities get by my prying eyes.  

How many severe car or vehicle dents or severely bent iron members are there on the bridge…how times have vehicles hit the bridge hard. 

I count 17 severe impacts! There are many tens of thousands unaccountable accidents not reported on these bridges. Unaccountable $100,000s of dollars of damage!c

It is a unseen tax on you! 

I getting back feedback all ready in Hinsdale asking why the Refomerer  ran the story twice. You know Mike, we agree with you about the bridge...why is the reformer talking two shots at you with their hatchet.   

Everyone in Hinsdale thinks the story being run two days in a row…Mike, they are running over you two days in a row with a pavement roller. Once is enough.

I didn’t find it on their internet site yet…have to go out and get a paper. 

I love trying to figure out the big picture and philosophizing about why things happen the way they do. That god dam crow bar issue really bothers me. I am amazed how well my competitors used this phony issue against me...how well it worked. You live and learn!

...Right, bringing a crow bar implies violent premeditation. It didn’t go down like that and the police knew that. But it made a pretty story in the newspaper for the police!

Everything about this including the courts and even my lawyer…it didn't matter what my true motivations were. This is the law of the courts of NH and at the whim of the NH politicians… 

It is a grave Constitutional error… 

I am telling you justice isn't the so called rule-of-law…it is way bigger than that and something almost unquantifiable 

It is something deep in ever human often not even expressed. It is a cousins to forgiveness…you can’t rule or law out justice or forgiveness. It is something that only occurs deep in a human heart and no electron microscope can ever detect its making. it. It just occurs out of nowhere. 

... Well, it’s a attribute of god.

... The newspaper is a incarnation of evil itself. 

...Cause of your not constantly fighting for justice, then you are fighting against justice... 

...For the record…justice is for those who has the power to write down the record of history. Most grave injustices begins and remains in our lives without ever getting written down. All injustices are about powerless peoples' inability to get their record written down in the history of life!

I am trying to live my life as a open book.

So, the reformer hasn't put rev 2 up on any internet site today. I put up the first article and the rev I grabbed from their internet site on TOPIX. Strangely Topix removed them yesterday. 

Playing Games At Palisades for Decades With Primary Coolant Pumps

THE COVER UP

Right, if Palisades nuclear plant was a person. He could cold bloodily shoot somebody dead. If he could remain at large in the community in excess of three years...the rules say nobody could charge him for any crime or NRC violation. All he’s got to do is get away with for three years without being caught. 

 

The agency habitually has the inability to connect the dots. This is a NRC cover up. The NRC only presents the happy ever after story. From the event date of Oct 2011 to the inspection report of Aug 2012, the potential of a severe accident was right around the corner. We could had three seals fails out of four with severe pump impeller or worst damage in 1984...a much worst accident was right around the corner any time operating outside the FSAR and improper quality reactor component parts The accident could begine any time a huge impeller blade sloughs off.

2012 inspection report: Additionally, pieces suspected to be from impellers were discovered in the bottom of the reactor vessel in 1984 and 2007.  

Why didn’t the agency and the big dog NRR connect the dots between the 1984 and 2011...to disclose to the public that operating these components outside the FSAR could lead to a severe event like 1984? Does the agency get to pick and choose what information it release to make Palisades looks good? Just put the best face on any terrible event Palisades creates for themselves, the Industry and the nation?

So this is the pattern of the agency and Palisades picking the happy land information to release to the public. Putting a grossly inaccurate spin on actual and potential events at these plants. You are intention miscommunicating risk to the public and not demanding a change in behavior according to real risk the community faces with Palisades. 

So in 1984 the plant was ascending up in power to 57% when a broken impeller almost seized up the motor. God know how long the pump was "knowingly" operating contrary to the FSAR and equipment designs in 1984 when stresses threw off a big hunk of impeller blade. The severely unbalanced impeller tore off the cap screws and the two guide pins. The impeller wobbled around inside the pumps casing for many hours with only the remaining guide pins attaching the impeller to the safety.

Additionally, pieces suspected to be from impellers were discovered in the bottom of the reactor vessel in 1984 and 2007.

Man, I 'd like to be at that plant in 1984. To see that cloud of metal shards, missing cap screws and pieces of casing circulating around in the coolant like sandblasting the fuel pins and steam generators for months. Anyone find the cap screws yet? Didn't a RCP go crazy in the China Syndrome?




****Now I get it...these were on the secondary side...do they report what they find in the primary inlet side?

I'd certainly like to see the coolant activty record and the record of fuel pin failure over these years.

STEAM GENERATOR TUBE INSPECTION REPORT for the 2012 REFUELING OUTAGE, 1R22, EC39067

There are three tubes in SG E-50A that were removed from service preventively in contact with a loose part at the top of the hot leg tubesheet (TSH) in Row 130 Column 61, Row 132 Column 61, and Row 133 Column 62.

These guys are funny...they don't remove the loose part. They aren't interest in what broke?

These tubes had no wear indications from the loose part but were stabilized and removed from service by tube plugging to prevent issues due to wear from the loose part in the future.

 

So the worst accident I see is a LOCA through the failure of the pump mechanical seals and the destruction of the pump casing. The largest size hole of the Reactor Coolant Pump Loop pipe.

These guys are operating way out of their stated risk analysis and this is a cover-up of it. The secrecy and lying creates this opportunity.

Hell, it is probably not illegal to tell the public the probability of an accident is this to their face, then to conspire to operate these plants at a much higher accident risk level behind the scenes. It is just probably illegal just to tell the truth.

I am saying, if Palisades is the model for honesty and integrity throughout the NRC and the Nuclear industry, then a accident of infinite consequences could be right around the corner.

UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION OFFICE OF INSPECTION AND ENFORCEMENT WASHINGTON, D.C. 20555

January 15, 1985

Information Notice No. 85-03:   SEPARATION OF PRIMARY REACTOR COOLANT PUMP SHAFT AND IMPELLER

Addressees:

All pressurized water power reactor facilities holding an operating license (OL) or construction permit (CP).

Purpose:

This information notice is provided to alert recipients of an event  involving primary reactor coolant pump impeller separation from the pump  shaft. It is expected that recipients will review the information for applicability to their facilities and consider actions, if appropriate, to  preclude similar problems occurring at their facilities. However, suggestions contained in this information notice do not constitute NRC requirements and, therefore, no specific action or written response is required.

Description:

On September 16, 1984, the Palisades Nuclear Plant had been operating for approximately three days in the process of initial power ascension following a refueling outage...

IR2012003: The research concluded that the cause of the failures is fatigue-related effects from the operation of the pumps in conditions beyond the maximum flow rates and below the minimum net positive suction head recommendations as described in the UFSAR and other design documentation. These conditions are present when operating only one or two PCPs during reduced temperatures and pressures (typically during startup and shutdown activities.

...The plant was at approximately 57 percent power. At 3:45 a.m. (EDT), reactor coolant pump (RCP) seal cavity pressures indicated that the first (lower) and second (middle) seals had failed simultaneously, and an orderly shutdown was commenced. At 5:20 a.m., the third (upper) seal failed. The reactor was taken off-line and, at approximately the same time, the pump vibration level reached the "danger" level (10 mils). The pump was then secured. In the 3-hour period prior to securing the pump, the electric current to the pump had increased by approximately 10 to 15 percent.

Inspection Report 2012003 references this 1984 event. Why didn't the NRC disclose in the 2012003 this severe seal and pump damage was a possibility till the replacement? Were they prettying up the engineering certainty-uncertainty? Did the Offices of Research and Nuclear Reactor Regulation in 2011 till the next outage consider the 1984 event as a possible acceptable and a safe outcome to the 2012 outage? Without question, the NRC considers the mysterious 1984 event as a sentinel issue...a cornerstone.

(2012003: "The licensee identified impeller cracking had been observed at Palisades on several occasions since 1984, when the pumps had been removed for inspection and refurbishment/replacement. Additionally, pieces suspected to be from impellers were discovered in the bottom of the reactor vessel in 1984 and 2007")

During the event, the flow in the loop driven by the affected pump remained normal. During the examination to determine the extent of the seal failure and to evaluate required repair, major damage to pump components was discovered. The bolts and guide pins that secure the impeller to the shaft had been severely damaged. Unexpected wear on the pump impeller/shaft assembly and pump internals was found. The impeller is normally fastened to the shaft by eight cap screws and four guide pins. However, when the pump was examined, all eight cap screws and two of the four guide pins were found broken. The impeller had been kept in rotation by the two guide pins that had remained intact. Stationary pump parts showed unexpected wear in 360 degrees of arc; rotating pump parts showed wear in 180 degrees of arc.

It is amazing. The NRC has allowed this plant simultaneously for decades to run outside the FSAR and with poor quality impellers.

The RCP at Palisades is a Byron Jackson 850 rpm, single stage, centrifugal pump 1 with a 42-inch diameter impeller and a 4,000-hp Allis-Chalmers motor. The pump has four seal stages with controlled bleed off (and no seal injection) for cooling. Because an impeller was damaged during 1983 by an apparently unrelated failure, another impeller and pump shaft assembly was installed as a unit in February 1984.(Come on, the 1983, 1984 and 2011 event were all related and caused by the same issue. Running this system not according to the FSAR and causing damaging vibrations and fatigue.) Procedures prescribed by the pump manufacturer were, followed for the installation of the impeller/shaft assembly; however, no manufacturer's representative was present when the installation took place. This assembly had been stored horizontally in the plant store room for approximately 12 years after it had been used in the 1972 time-frame during initial hot functional testing. It is this impeller/shaft assembly that failed on September 16, 1984, after the pump had accumulated approximately 1,300 hours running time before the event.

(Did you catch between the official notification and the update this shifted from a single impeller issue into a common cause issue...from the utility's fault to a manufacturer issue effecting many impellers.)

The analysis of the failure of the eight cap screws and the two guide pins indicated that failures resulted from fatigue and impact loading. The two out of four guide pins that did not fail were bent, which caused the pump shaft to be forced upward and the impeller to be forced downward. No bolt corrosion was found. Although a sheared RCP shaft occurred at Surry 1 in November 1973 as a result of a manufacturing defect, the event described here is the first involving the potential separation of a primary coolant pump impeller from its shaft.

Discussion:

Events leading to the pump impeller/shaft failure cannot be precisely determined; however, examinations of the cap screws indicate that abnormal stress caused them to fail. It is believed that the pump impeller/shaft assembly caused the abnormal cap screw stresses that ultimately led to the failure. It is now believed that the improper torquing of the pump screws was the root cause.

The event and the above conclusion regarding the cause of the failure raise three issues which should be emphasized. (1) Disassembly and reassembly of primary reactor coolant pumps is an operation which should be done in a rigorous manner employing manufacturer's recommendations and proper procedures. (2) The nearly simultaneous failure of the two seal stages is indicative of the seal package under abnormal stress. This stress, concurrent with high pump vibration is indicative of possible severe pump damage. Operator response to these indications led to the pump being shut down before the final two guide pins failed, thus, preventing a more severe event. This action was a prudent response to the situation. (3) Although the event described here is apparently isolated, it demonstrates the credibility of a pump failure event which could lead to a rapid flow decrease transient of the type expected with a sheared shaft event. Most PWRs have a licensing basis analysis for that event or the similar seized rotor event. These analyses generally assume an automatic response of the plant's reactor protection system which generates a reactor trip as a result of low reactor coolant flow.

IE INFORMATION NOTICE NO. 85-03, SUPPLEMENT 1: SEPARATION OF PRIMARY REACTOR COOLANT PUMP SHAFT AND IMPELLER

IE Information Notice 85-03 described an event at the Palisades Nuclear Plant involving the separation of the primary reactor coolant pump impeller from the pump shaft during operation. That notice stated that electric current to the pump increased by approximately 10 to 15 percent in the 3-hour period prior to securing the pump. Subsequent information received from the licensee indicates this current increase did not occur.

The postulated cause of the Palisades' cap screw failure was fatigue about brought by preload on the bolts insufficient to resist cyclic loading. This is believed to have been caused by the poor surface condition of the cap screw threads. This condition resulted in the specified torque values not being sufficient to properly preload the cap screws that join the impeller to the shaft in 1971. This situation suggests two points that should be stressed. First, the failure described in IN 85-03 was not caused by improper disassembly and reassembly of the reactor coolant pump; rather, the problem apparently occurred during initial assembly. Second, the cause of under tightening of the cap screws was the poor (rough) surface condition of the screw threads themselves. Thus, use of the torque to measure axial bolt loading was, in this case, misleading.

See, between the OE and NRC information, it is all unreliable crap information. Nothing agrees!

OE13604, Palisades, Byron Jackson/Flowserve: Three cracks were found in a primary

coolant pump impeller that was removed for refurbishment during the 2001 refueling

outage. The three cracks were similar in nature; each started on a separate impeller vane at

the suction side of the vane tip near the hub and then transverses in the vane in a linear

fashion. Prior to the removal of the pump, the pump exhibited no symptoms that would

indicate the presents of the cracks.

***The root cause concluded that a combination of increased residual stresses, caused by a lack

of the proper post weld heat treatment at the manufacturing facility, and high stress risers,

due to poor fabrication practices, allowed the stresses associated with the starting and

stopping of the pump to initiate fatigue-type cracks on the impeller vanes.

Based on Flowserve's evaluation, the cracks initiate perpendicular to the vane leading edge

and completely penetrate the vane. Most of the cracks have propagated back into the vane

and appear to self-arrest in the thicker vane cross-section. In a few cases the crack

propagated in a semi-circular direction. In one case the semi-circular section was lost from

the impeller. A piece approximately 3" by 6" was found in the reactor vessel. No evidence

of ISCC attack has been observed. The problem was caused by lack of post weld heat

treatment for repairs that were made during post manufacturing.

The stuck piece of impeller in the core today: "The metal is 5 inches by 12 inches long".

A means for external monitoring and detection of this condition does not exist. Impeller

cracking can only be determined by removal of the impeller from the pump, chemical

decontamination, and inspection by visual and liquid penetrate examination techniques. The

cracks are not detectable without removal of the oxide layer from the impeller by chemical

decontamination.

Flowserve recommends that pump impellers in excess of 175,000 hours of service (-20

years of running service) be removed and inspected for cracking to preclude in-service

failure. However, they have found cracking as early as 13 years. Davis-Besse has replaced

all four reactor coolant pump rotating elements in 1986 as due to issues with the RCP shaft

cracking. Preliminary estimate of the operation time for these impellers is estimate at

-103,000 hours (-12 years).

Review of the Acceptance Data Package for the 4 rotating elements that were installed in

1986. Tle Data Packages shows that all 4 impellers had weld repairs performed without

post-heat treatment. It is preferred that the currently install impellers should be refurbish

due to less starts on these than the current spares.

NRC Chairperson Mcfarland Speaking To Me Under The Table

This secret message in a bottle and now Magwood is out.

Unquestionably Chairman Macfarland was sending me and the industry a message. Now I am left to only read the tea leaves. Maybe you ain’t getting that huge impeller fragment out of the Palisade's core...but we will give you Magwood.

I just think this means, with a nice pat on the head, the highest echelon of the NRC and beyond are hearing your message...now just shut up and go away.

I just want some level of power, control and transparency...but I don't need ultimate control of anything. 

Originally posted on 2/11/2014

Me

Dear Chairperson McFarland, If you really believed this from your recent speech… “As we continue to strive for effective, credible regulation, and assist other regulators in upholding these values

To Chairman@nrc.gov

Today at 2:43 PM

Dear Chairperson McFarland,

If you really believed this from your recent speech…

“As we continue to strive for effective, credible regulation, and assist other regulators in upholding these values, our commitment to continuous learning is critical. I believe that when we demonstrate that our decisions reflect the best available information, and when we demonstrate openness to external interlocutors, it enhances public confidence. This is an objective I’ve embraced since my tenure at NRC began, and I continue to believe in its importance.”

…you’d help me gain much better transparency in my upcoming Palisades 2.206. The 2.206 processes for an outsider are a travesty and circus. It is designed for an outsider to fail most of the time because of a lack of evidence. It should be a firing or disciplinary offence if a NRC employee ever misleads a petitioner or to withheld information from inside this process. You’d make a licensee answerable to my questions or severe consequences.

How about all petitioners’ activities and the whole process be recorded and put on your NRC internet site?

There is a tremendous difference in power between me and the NRC/licensee...while you guys have almost unlimited god like powers to withhold information based on unseen justifications. I remain utterly powerless and have no rights of transparency within this process. But I do have the right to get my letter in the NRC documents, and of course, I get a shot for you to transcribe my words by a telephone bridge to many NRC employees. I have to admit there is substantial power in this for a petitioner.

If you really believed what you wrote, you would help me overhaul the NRC’s 2.206 process. You would think this current system is a tremendous injustice to a petitioner, the community and mostly to the USA.

The agency should also provide me with a senior experience NRC executive...where his job is to serve a petitioner. Her job is to help me with this NRC process...explain to me in a high level position way what is going on with my issue and figure out how to get the information I need ...she is to be tasked with being my inside the NRC advocator. She would be like my special NRC lawyer...

I honestly think this would make the industry more stronger and resilient...

Sincerely,

Mike Mulligan

Hinsdale, NH
steamshovel2002@yahoo.com

16033368320

 ...Reply, Reply All or Forward | More

CHAIRMAN ResourceThis is to acknowledge receipt of your communication to the Chairman of the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission. Thank you for your input. Office of the Secretary U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission

To Me

Today at 3:59 PM

This is to acknowledge receipt of your communication to the Chairman of the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission. Thank you for your input.

Office of the Secretary

U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission

Is NRC commissioner chairperson Allison M. Macfarlane sending me a message in her most recent speech? 

'Continued Learning: The Best Defense against an Uncertain Future'

"The NRC staff’s work has focused on better positioning the reactor fleet to respond to future “unknown unknowns”." The below is my latest petition to the NRC concerning the Palisades nuclear plants.

‘Palisades 2.206 PCP Broken Impeller: Emergency Request to Stay Shutdown’

My quote:

“Engineers make sense out of the apparent available evidence...I worry about the unknown unknowns. Donald Rumsfeld: ‘Reports that say that something hasn't happened are always interesting to me, because as we know, there are known knowns; there are things we know that we know. There are known unknowns; that is to say, there are things that we now know we don't know. But there are also unknown unknowns – there are things we do not know we don't know”.”

McFarland’s speech:

We’re focusing our energies and resources on the most safety-significant issues and re-aligning our efforts when appropriate to ensure we’re operating in the most effective and efficient manner possible. 

I believe there are four safety zones: emergent, safety insignificant, safety significant and the event.

The history of accidents and events in the nuclear industry informs us a flaw emerges, it is detectable and we ignore it for a prolong period of time. The flaw picks up enormous inertia, then shoots though safety insignificant and safety significant zone not seeable into the beginning of the accident. Most of the big events in the industry became observably emergent and safety insignificant…then shoots though the unobservable into the safety significant zone and on to the accident realm.

Scientific wise, you would have to say all accidents emerges and it is always seen in the safety significant zone…but the study or accidents and safety teaches us this accident prevention philosophy (most) is patently falsifiable! Davis Besse is a clear example of that. Safety significance is a economic and profit realm...it has nothing to do with safety. It is more a political or business profit centric philosophy or ideology.

So knowing all safety significant events is a terribly insufficient barrier with preventing all accidents… missing safety insignificance defects are more deadly that missing safety significant flaws and the consequences are worst.