ML112930585
| ML112930585 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Vermont Yankee File:NorthStar Vermont Yankee icon.png |
| Issue date: | 10/20/2011 |
| From: | Mulligan M - No Known Affiliation |
| To: | James Kim Division of Operating Reactor Licensing |
| Kim J, NRR/DORL, 415-4125 | |
| References | |
| tac ME7022 | |
| Download: ML112930585 (2) | |
Text
From: Michael Mulligan [steamshovel2002@yahoo.com]
Sent: Thursday, October 20, 2011 11:01 AM To: Kim, James
Subject:
Re: PRB's Initial Recommendation on your 2.206 petition-Vapor Plume from Turbine Building roof Addendum to this 2.206
Dear Mr Hiland,
I had the Vermont State nuclear engineer Uldis Vanage investigate the phantom radioactive plume seen in my tiny said plume of VY. Entergy entered into their document system CR-VTY-2011-03628 on Sept 12 and we know you took my testimony on Sept 14, 2011. Generally the plume is acknowledge to be reactor steam leaking from the turbine seals and it is being sucked into the turbine lube oil system exiting out the vapor extractor piping on top of the turbine building. It has all the components of radioactivity that is in reactor steam. I bet you this steam leaves the reactor vessel and escapes out the turbine building within seconds, certainly less than a minute. It is a unanalyzed pathway discharge of radiation and it is a black hole radioactive discharge without any evaluation and no plant documentation of any kind for 40 years. I suspect a document shredding operation going on. People suspect I had inside help on this.
This has been one of largest cover-up operation of the NRC in many years and there is certainly high level NRC officials being involved. The PRB's response to me that I had insufficient evidence was a malicious fabrication....the PRB's response to me was maliciously inaccurate and falsification considering CR-VTY-2011-03628 and the NRC questioning that went on at the plant .
At the end of the day, everyone is left wondering what is so big going on behind the scenes that the NRC would risk attempting to perform such a dangerous blatant cover-up?
- Thanks, mike mulligan Hinsdale, NH PS: This went unanswered?
From:
Michael Mulligan <steamshovel2002@yahoo.com>
To: "Setzer, Thomas" <Thomas.Setzer@nrc.gov>
Sent: Thursday, September 8, 2011 11:34 AM
Subject:
Re: Regarding your August 23, 2011 email about Vermont Yankee
- Tom, Could I talk to you about the VY LO vapor extractor plume...or one of your inspectors before the 2.206 PRB? The basic operation of the system and what radiation goes out the pipe on top of the turbine building...the sampling results of the steam. Is VY continuously monitoring that emission? What is in that plume and how does it get into the lube oil? How does these emissions fit into plant studies and tech specs? Is there much radioactivity in the turbine lube oil?
VY has discovered abnormal contamination on the turbine building roof and they say some of it was discovered in the storm drain out take and into the mud of the Connecticut River.
Thanks.
mike From: "Kim, James" <James.Kim@nrc.gov>
To: Michael Mulligan <steamshovel2002@yahoo.com>
Sent: Tuesday, October 18, 2011 7:27 AM
Subject:
RE: PRB's Initial Recommendation on your 2.206 petition-Vapor Plume from Turbine Building roof Mr. Mulligan, The PRB teleconference has been scheduled for October 25, 2011 from 2:30 to 3:30 pm.
Please let me know whether the proposed date and time is acceptable.
Thanks Jim Kim From: Michael Mulligan [1]
Sent: Monday, October 17, 2011 1:58 PM To: Kim, James
Subject:
Re: PRB's Initial Recommendation on your 2.206 petition-Vapor Plume from Turbine Building roof Mr Kim, For the PRB's interest, I got the Vermont nuclear engineer going into VY asking entergy questions about the turb building plume and the vapor extractor.
mike From: Michael Mulligan <steamshovel2002@yahoo.com>
To: "Kim, James" <James.Kim@nrc.gov>
Sent: Thursday, October 13, 2011 10:15 AM
Subject:
Re: PRB's Initial Recommendation on your 2.206 petition-Vapor Plume from Turbine Building roof Mr Kim, I would like to address the PRB again?
Mike From: "Kim, James" <James.Kim@nrc.gov>
To: Michael Mulligan <steamshovel2002@yahoo.com>
Sent: Tuesday, October 11, 2011 2:06 PM
Subject:
PRB's Initial Recommendation on your 2.206 petition-Vapor Plume from Turbine Building roof Mr. Mulligan, On October 4, 2011, the PRB met internally to discuss the petition and to make the initial
recommendation. The PRB determined that some of the petition requests do not meet the criteria for review because the petition failed to provide sufficient facts to warrant further inquiry. The remaining requests within the petition meet the criteria for rejection because they have already been reviewed, evaluated, and resolved by the NRC during prior 10 CFR 2.206 reviews.
Therefore, the PRBs initial recommendation is to not accept your petition.
If you want to provide any comments on the PRBs initial recommendation for not accepting your 2.206 petition, we can schedule a teleconference. Please let me know if you want to have a teleconference to provide any comment on the PRBs initial recommendation. Otherwise, the PRB will issue a closure letter documenting the PRBs final recommendation for rejecting your petition.
Thanks James Kim Project Manager, DORL U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission 301-415-4125 E-mail: james.kim@nrc.gov<http://us.mg5.mail.yahoo.com/dc/mailto%3A%25e%25>