Troy Pruett's Grand Gulf 2.206

Grand Gulf 2.206

Inbox

x

Mike Mulligan <steamshovel2002@gmail.com>	Thu, Mar 7, 10:32 AM
to Troy

Mr. Pruett,

I am a nuclear safety advocate. Here is my blog: http://steamshovel2002.blogspot.com/ and http://steamshovel2002.blogspot.com/2019/02/grand-gulf-most-explosive-nrc-high.html.

You are welcome to publish anything nuclear related on my blog. We can work out the details. I spend a lot of time on LinkedIn. 

I have been watching Grand Gulf and Entergy for years now. I call Entergy a outlaw corporation. It has just been unbelievable what the NRC has allowed at GG from my experience.

A few friends have been talking about your petition. You have no chance of effecting change within the NRC. You know that. I believe you need protection from the NRC. The Wall Street Journal wants to interview you for a article on your petition. It will be the top WSJ reporter on the nuclear industry issues and he specializes risk perspectives. It could change the arc of history by telling the WSJ what you know. You might be able to reform the NRC and prevent a another meltdown. The greater public needs to understand what you know. I can't begin to tell the perilous condition the industry is in. You will ruin nuclear power for 75 years if you don't speak in a wider venue.  

I am the nuts case who left you a message on your telephone recently.

Sincerely,

Mike Mulligan

Hinsdale, NH 

cell: 16032094206   

Pruett, Troy	Fri, Mar 8, 12:18 PM
to me

Mike:

I did receive your voice message and emails.  Thank you for reaching out.  I also skimmed your recent posts to the blog page.  While some of the commentary is accurate, the portions regarding my involvement with Fort Calhoun and covering up violations are not correct.  I have filed several Differing Professional Opinions (DPOs), all of which are or will become public.  Several of the DPOs were posted to the Union of Concerned Scientists website.

It is true that many years ago 1, or maybe 2, employees filed a joint anonymous letter asserting I downplayed compliance issues.  After a 1.3 year investigation by the Office of Inspector General, I was cleared and no adverse actions were taken.  I returned to my position and was promoted soon thereafter.

At the time of the Fort Calhoun events I was assigned to the NRC Headquarters Office.  I had no involvement in the fire or flooding events.  This item, as well as most of the information in the anonymous complaint was false.  Additionally, it was my proposal and recommendation that the NRC adopted to transition Fort Calhoun to the NRC’s Manual Chapter 0350 process to ensure the correct level of oversight and inspection occurred. 

I have an impeccable safety record.  I value my role as a public servant and make regulatory decisions based on protecting the public and environment.  I have personally taken on some of the most safety significant oversight roles in the agency.  These include Waterford (SALP 3), Clinton (Manual Chapter 0350 oversight), Cooper (Group Lead for 95003), Post 9-11 Compensatory Order implementation and Mitigative Strategies implementation, Palo Verde (95003 Team Leader), Fort Calhoun (Initial Oversight Executive for Manual Chapter 0350), Arkansas Nuclear One (95003 Executive Oversight), and now San Onofre (ISFSI issues).  I have not, and will not, sacrifice safety oversight.

Sincerely

NRC Senate Hearing: Clouds On The Horrizon

update

So Burns is heading towards door. He is a democrat nominee. Anyways, all the democrat commissioners are duds and the democrats on the sub-committee are weak on nuclear safety. There are just enough weak big mouth democrats on the sub committee to give the appearance we are strongly pro safety. 

Who even cares about anything nuclear safety in Trump's America? The Trump show drowns out everything nuclear safety. The system is weakening regulations and safety on a broad scale and our political chaos is putting nuclear safety way way on back burner. The trends are a recipe for disaster. It is the happyland Titanic just before they hit the iceberg.  

The democrats are more captured by the industry as the republican's Trump nominated two commissioner leading to a full set of commissioner since 2016. The republicans denied those nominees to Obama. The NRC recently has gone hard core deregulation and government weakening as a result of Trump's nominees. But you have seen nothing yet. So Burns is heading out the door this summer. There is no reason for Trump to replace Burns...what is the purpose for another democrat on the commission. That position won't be filled until after the next presidential election. That will make the NRC commission MORE hard core regulation weakenors in the worst financial in the history of the Nuclear industry. The commissioners and sub committee politicians are systemically blinding our government from seeing the true conditions in the industry. The decline of the quality with NRC employees identified in this hearing are going intensified the blindness of US government with seeing the real conditions in the nuclear industry. Our world is going increasingly dark on us!!! 

I like Senator Whitehouse. He makes the case the industry has been fiddling with the comissionors nominees in order to weaken regulations...

"Annie Caputo and David A. Wright, nominated by President Donald Trump and confirmed by the US Senate last week, were sworn in on May 30 as commissioners of the US Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC). Ms. Caputo will serve the remainder of a five-year term ending June 30, 2021, and Mr. Wright will serve the remainder of a five-year term ending June 30, 2020. The Senate also reconfirmed Jeffrey Baran to serve a second term as commissioner, with the new term expiring on June 30, 2023. He will be sworn in at a later date."

***Senate Hearing

What say the House and where do they sit on nuclear safety horizon?

Senator Asks NRC for ‘Game Plan’ on Workforce Stabilization

Sen Ben Cardin, D-Md., today asked leadership of the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) for a “game plan” on workforce stabilization and recruiting after discussing with agency officials the steady reduction of headcount at NRC as the agency’s budget has declined in recent years.

At a hearing of the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee, Cardin said NRC’s employee headcount had fallen by 23 percent since FY2010, and agency officials testified that efforts to fill the hiring pipeline with younger people have not borne much fruit.

Kristine Svinicki, chairman of the NRC, said the agency has a “very senior workforce,” with barely two percent of the workforce under the age of 30. “It is a growing concern, the front end of the pipeline,” she said.

NRC Commissioner Jeff Baran said the agency needs to focus on “stabilizing” its workforce, and that it was “harder to retain folks” because NRC is a smaller Federal agency and is unable to offer a larger number of promotion opportunities.

He said NRC staff was “working very hard” on the workforce problem, but added, “as long as our budget keeps declining, it will be very difficult.”

Sen. Cardin said he worried that “attacks” on the Federal government workforce in the form of budget and benefits reductions at some agencies were contributing to the workforce problem at NRC and crimping its ability to attract younger workers.

“We have to pay a little bit of attention to this,” he declared. “We understand size is one thing,” but not having the brightest minds in the field of nuclear safety “is a challenge for us,” the senator said. 

Chairman Svinicki said NRC is making a lot of IT investments “to give people the tools to do things more efficiently,” and added, “we have a lot of mid-career employees who are bringing a lot of energy” to the agency.

Troy Pruett's 2.206

Well, we know risk perspectives is solely a political instrument paid by the powerful utilities. Guys like you have been undermined all your careers. Basically risk perspectives is about deep insiders making assumptions not even connected by science and engineering. Basically no evidence risk perspectives can quickly turn a bad plant into a good one The risk guys are uncontestable. 

I personally think the technical implementation of the nuclear industry has been the worst disaster for the nation associated with power generation equipment or any new technology.  

Can't you yet see the winds of a great national turning point coming? 

I give you an example. Why didn't the politicians in the recent NRC senate hearing bring up your Grand Gulf 2.206? I'll tell you why, the senators are terrified of the political power of the utilities.

I'll tell you want your highest priority is bar nothing else. Itis to feed, house and take care of your family. That is soley why our conuntry is the way it is today. Serving a higher cause and our greater national interest is never about our lives today.   
    

 Grand Gulf 2.206

Inbox 



Mike Mulligan <steamshovel2002@gmail.com>

Thu, Mar 7, 10:32 AM

to Troy

Mr. Pruett,

I am a nuclear safety advocate. Here is my blog: http://steamshovel2002.blogspot.com/ and http://steamshovel2002.blogspot.com/2019/02/grand-gulf-most-explosive-nrc-high.html.

You are welcome to publish anything nuclear related on my blog. We can work out the details. I spend a lot of time on LinkedIn.

I have been watching Grand Gulf and Entergy for years now. I call Entergy a outlaw corporation. It has just been unbelievable what the NRC has allowed at GG from my experience.

A few friends have been talking about your petition. You have no chance of effecting change within the NRC. You know that. I believe you need protection from the NRC. The Wall Street Journal wants to interview you for a article on your petition. It will be the top WSJ reporter on the nuclear industry issues and he specializes risk perspectives. It could change the arc of history by telling the WSJ what you know. You might be able to reform the NRC and prevent a another meltdown. The greater public needs to understand what you know. I can't begin to tell the perilous condition the industry is in. You will ruin nuclear power for 75 years if you don't speak in a wider venue. 

I am the nuts case who left you a message on your telephone recently.

Sincerely,

Mike Mulligan
Hinsdale, NH 
cell: 16032094206


Pruett, Troy 
Fri, Mar 8, 12:18 PM

to me 

Mike:

I did receive your voice message and emails. Thank you for reaching out. I also skimmed your recent posts to the blog page. While some of the commentary is accurate, the portions regarding my involvement with Fort Calhoun and covering up violations are not correct. I have filed several Differing Professional Opinions (DPOs), all of which are or will become public. Several of the DPOs were posted to the Union of Concerned Scientists website.

It is true that many years ago 1, or maybe 2, employees filed a joint anonymous letter asserting I downplayed compliance issues. After a 1.3 year investigation by the Office of Inspector General, I was cleared and no adverse actions were taken. I returned to my position and was promoted soon thereafter. 

At the time of the Fort Calhoun events I was assigned to the NRC Headquarters Office. I had no involvement in the fire or flooding events. This item, as well as most of the information in the anonymous complaint was false. Additionally, it was my proposal and recommendation that the NRC adopted to transition Fort Calhoun to the NRC’s Manual Chapter 0350 process to ensure the correct level of oversight and inspection occurred.

I have an impeccable safety record. I value my role as a public servant and make regulatory decisions based on protecting the public and environment. I have personally taken on some of the most safety significant oversight roles in the agency. These include Waterford (SALP 3), Clinton (Manual Chapter 0350 oversight), Cooper (Group Lead for 95003), Post 9-11 Compensatory Order implementation and Mitigative Strategies implementation, Palo Verde (95003 Team Leader), Fort Calhoun (Initial Oversight Executive for Manual Chapter 0350), Arkansas Nuclear One (95003 Executive Oversight), and now San Onofre (ISFSI issues). I have not, and will not, sacrifice safety oversight.

Sincerely

A Nuclear Plant Melting Down: We Still Don't Understand How Disruptive That Would Be?

I contend we would automatically default into a full scale nation wide panic if a nuclear plant melted down, the least of which, would be this would force all our nuclear plants to be withdrawn from the grid. It would be a much wider catastrophe than Fukushima. Fukushima shut down all their plants  \with their meltdown. Only six have been returned in Japan considering they had 50 plants. At best, we would get back six plants in the same ways. You know, the pertinent  questions everyone would ask, why didn't Fukushima fix our nuclear plants.    

U.S. nuclear regulators do not recognize real danger of dirty bombs, says watchdog

Besides killing people with radiation, a dirty bomb would spread panic, prompt evacuations, require clean-up and undermine the economy, says a new report.

April 4, 2019, 11:00 AM EDT

By Dan De Luce

WASHINGTON — The Nuclear Regulatory Commission is failing to recognize the full range of dangers posed by a potential dirty bomb attack and needs to take more action to secure high-risk radioactive material, according to a government watchdog report released Thursday.

In assessing the possible effect of a radioactive dirty bomb detonated in an American city, the U.S. nuclear regulator has only focused on the possible health effects caused by the spread of radiation, the Government Accountability Office report said. But the NRC has not taken into account the potential consequences of a panic-driven evacuation and costly decontamination effort, according to the report.

"NRC's regulatory approach in many ways is based on the idea that a dirty bomb would not be a high consequence event," said David Trimble, director of the National Resources and Environment office at the GAO.

"Their view of what the risk is is very circumscribed, it's very narrow."

A dirty bomb uses a conventional explosive combined with radioactive material to spread radiation over a wider area, and some terrorist groups have sought to construct such a device over the years.

Rather than deaths or harm caused by radiation, the most significant impact of a radioactive dirty bomb would be its disruptive effect, by spreading panic, prompting evacuations, requiring clean-up work and undermining economic activity, said the report, citing experts convened by the National Academy of Sciences as well as other studies.

A chaotic evacuation could cause more deaths than any radiation released in an attack, and the results of the disruption and contamination could cause billions of dollars in damage, the report said...

Indian Point Is In Trouble In Their Closing Years

Sounds similar to the troubles Grand Gulf is in. Don't get the people who know how to fix this equipment.  

Indian Point reactor down again, this time as a precaution

Thomas C. Zambito, Rockland/Westchester Journal News Published 12:12 p.m. ET April 3, 2019

Indian Point shut down its troubled Unit 2 reactor Tuesday afternoon to fix a persistent problem in its generator, according to Entergy, the power plant’s owner.

The shutdown came after workers at the Buchanan plant noticed that an excitation system, which provides the current needed to create electricity, was not functioning as designed, Entergy spokesman Jerry Nappi said.

Over the past three weeks, Unit 2 automatically shut down twice after a malfunction in the generator located on the non-nuclear side of the power plant...

NEI: Out Of The Horse's Mouth

Why isn't this setting themselves up for a terrible accident?

NEI Sees Glass Half Full for Nuclear Industry

April 1, 2019

By Rich Heidorn Jr.

Despite record-high capacity factors and reduced operating costs, the U.S. nuclear power industry is threatened by federal and state policies and an “increasingly distorted” energy market, Nuclear Energy Institute CEO Maria Korsnick said last week in her annual state of the industry address.

Maria Korsnick | NEI

“Our capacity factor and generation has never been higher, and our operation costs have not been this low since 2004,” said Korsnick, citing the 2018 capacity factor of 92% and a 25% drop in “average total generating costs” since 2012. Nuclear power produced 20% of the nation’s electricity in 2018 and more than 55% of emissions-free power, she added.

But Korsnick said nuclear’s role in limiting carbon emissions is at risk from both RTO energy markets that fail to compensate them fairly and renewable portfolio standards in more than half of the states that limit their carbon-free technologies to wind and solar. “They ignore nuclear, and that’s shortsighted,” she said.

 You are not going to see a declining licensee who racks up a lot of so called mirror infractions? 

Korsnick said she was hopeful NRC’s Transformation Initiative would result in “off ramps” that allow the commission to terminate proceedings involving issues of “low-safety significance.”

The Electric Power Research Institute “came out with a report recently and mentioned that the current designs … are over 100 times safer than the original safety goals that the NRC set many years ago. … The industry is mature,” she said. “Let’s come up with ways — we’re calling it off ramps — so that we’re not spending an inordinate amount of time … churning on an issue that quite frankly just has low safety significance.”

Grand Gulf Special Inspection and Troy Pruett

https://adamswebsearch2.nrc.gov/webSearch2/main.jsp?AccessionNumber=ML19088A335



Mr. Eric Larson, Site Vice President Entergy Operations, Inc. Grand Gulf Nuclear Station P.O. Box 756 Port Gibson, MS  39150
 SUBJECT: GRAND GULF NUCLEAR STATION – NRC SPECIAL INSPECTION REPORT 05000416/2018050
 Dear Mr. Larson: