ML14076A060

LTR-14-0141 - Michael Mulligan Ltr. Overhaul the Nuclear Regulatory Commission'S 2.206 Petition Process to Gain Transparency in Upcoming Palisades 2.206 Petition

ML14076A060
Person / Time
Site:	Palisades
Issue date:	03/11/2014
From:	Mulligan M Public Commenter
To:	Macfarlane A NRC/Chairman
Shared Package
ML14076A061	List: ML14076A060 ML14077A367
References
2.206, LTR-14-0141
Download: ML14076A060 (1)

Text

Joosten, Sandy From: Michael Mulligan <steamshovel2002@yahoo.com>

Sent: Tuesday, March 11, 2014 2:43 PM To: CHAIRMAN Resource

Subject:

Palisades and 2.206 Reform

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 pititioner.

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 1