"SAVING THE PUBLIC" ?...or POSTURING FOR AIR TIME ?

Do we really need another O.J. Simpson trial?


Suppose I was an honest lawmaker (or a citizen), with concerns about the accuracy, the honesty, or the stringency of previous NRC inspections at Indian Point? Would I be out in the cold, stonewalled by some NRC "omerta" system?

Would I have no help , in my quest to understand the truth? Would there be no way to judge whether NRC performed as promised, or slacked off, allowing unseen dangers into our world? Would I be faced with complacent NRC inspectors, not aware of the needed depth, completeness, or stringency of NRC's relations with Indian Point ? Would I have nowhere to turn? Nowhere but writing new targeted one-of-a-kind legislation? Oddball, biased legislation amounting to a bill of attainder against a legally licensed functioning business? (a targeted bill in the National Socialist mold, un-American to the Nth degree, a partisan vendetta masked as "law"?)

Some might say yes. But if there were no alternative, it might be necessary, right?

What if there were an existing group, doing that job already? An official group unknown, or overlooked by the freshman lawmaker? Well, yes, actually, there always has been. You see, NRC has an "Internal Affairs" department, just like any police force, and it's called the ACRS.

Woops!

Link to : http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/doc-collections/nuregs/brochures/br0286/br0286.pdf "ADVISORY COMMITTEE ON REACTOR SAFEGUARDS"

This committee, a high level expert committee completely separate from the day-to-day routine of NRC inspections, exists under law to provide, amazingly enough, exactly the function John Hall and Chris Shays claim to be implementing with their punitive new bill-of-attainder, and does it long term, as a devil's advocate within NRC, to ensure the NRC process is sound, that its implementation is strict, and that its basis is purely scientific (not political). It's mission for 2005-2008 can be found at the link given above, and I'm happy to say that Dr. Bill Shack has just become its chairman, after a 25+ year career in aging degradation analysis, (allow me to quote): "His work has included measurement and modeling of residual stresses, fracture mechanics analyses of stress corrosion crack growth, assessment of leak-before-break behavior in piping systems, and fatigue of reactor materials. He was appointed to the ACRS in 1993." If anybody in the world can tell us that Indian Point is too old, and gonna blow, it ought to be Dr. Bill Shack, right?

But Does Dr. Bill think it's his mission to keep NRC honest on this ?...(I quote yet again): "The ACRS advises the Commission independently from the NRC staff on the safety and safeguards aspects of nuclear facilities and the adequacy of safety inspections. ACRS reviews and advises the Commission with regard to safety issues, the adequacy of proposed reactor safety standards, technical issues related to the licensing of plant designs, and other matters referred to it by the Commission. On its own initiative, may conduct reviews of specific safety-related items. Submits an annual report to the Commission commenting on NRC Safety Research Programs." Well, geeze, Louise, it seems that Dr. Bill and his oversight committee, are ALREADY DOING every single thing Shays, Hall, and the other newbies want to tell the public is not being done!!! Amazing!!!

Maybe Hall, had he known anything about the NRC, could have simply written Dr Shack a congressional request to check into the inspections done at Indian Point. Maybe he could have called him up. or visited his office. What could POSSIBLY ever be a motive for the "Dance with Me" author to ignore Dr. Bill Shack, and ACRS, and "Go Public" with a new vendetta bill, to pretend ACRS never existed??

Alas, dear readers, I have to let YOU decide that. I cannot read Chris Shays' mind, or John Hall's either. Could press coverage have played a part? Could one sided (anti-nuclear) staff research have blinded the honorable Congressmembers to what already was routinely tackling these problems?

Could a trumped up adversarial stance, used to garner anti-nuke votes have crippled the perpetrators, so that they ignored, bypassed, and suppressed information about an existing non-confrontational way to protect the public, or pretended it does not exist, and went on their own merry inexpert way to re-invent the wheel, with many many glorious sound bites, and headlines, so they can seem like heroes on the news, while really, all they were doing was ignoring the highly qualified people (Dr. Bill Shack) who were actually doing the job, without consulting newly elected ex-musicians who needed to look good to their fringe anarchist support base?

Or maybe there's some other explanation?
Well,,,, if there is.... We're waiting!

And tell me this: Does a one time only ISA, with non-expert members in it, stand a better chance of understanding the reality in 3 weeks, or does Dr Bill Shack's permanent expert office , with his 30 years of expertise, and their 30 years of expertise, and a mandate to look into the matter in an ongoing manner, with no cutoff point , stand a better chance of finding the truth, without an O.J. Simpson trial type media feeding frenzy clouding all the issues?
How did that O.J. Simpson trial turn out, anyway? Think that it uncovered the truth?

Could it be that a "new O.J. Simpson trial" effect is exactly what Hall , Shays & the others are after?

PSST: REP HALL: LOOK LIKE YOU'RE DOING SOMETHING !!

PSST: REP HALL: LOOK LIKE YOU'RE DOING SOMETHING !!

NRC just finished a CDBI vertical slice inspection of Indian Point on Thursday of this week. What that means, is NRC arrived, and demanded to see several systems, from the topmost FSAR description, all the way down through the most lowly switch, screw, nut and bolt, in excruciating detail, examining whether the safety functionality promised to the public in the FSAR, was indeed implemented by every single component in the system, 100% top to bottom, no substitutions, no "forgotten details" , no excuses, or "we were going to fix that up later" put-offs.

(The FSAR, or Final Safety Analysis Report, is part of a nuke plant's license. In it the operator explains just what he intends to do, in every single particular way, to keep the public safe. It is a ten volume set of very extensive and detailed promises. It took me about three months to read, and understand it...... any promise made, but not kept, means NRC can shut you down, no questions asked, no appeals, no supreme court to bail you out).

This vertical slice method was one third of the Independent Safety Assessment conducted by NRC on Maine Yankee plant in 1996 (which they just barely passed with a D-minus grade).
So.... one-third of the vaunted "Indian Point Independent Safety Assessment" was just completed on Thursday, and can either be believed, and used by John Hall, Maurice Hinchey, et al. to decide what they think about Indian Point, OR-- they can ignore it, get a lot more press time, and pass a law to ask NRC to do it again in 6 months.

The other parts of the Maine Yankee ISA, general operational compliance, and computer code compliance, have also been routinely tested at Indian Point, and if John Hall's research arm is a bit weak, or one-sided, all the Honorable Rep. needs to do , is post online that he would like me to point him to the existing test results, and I'll be happy to.

But he won't.

Why?

He is preaching to his old choir.
The skeptical-towards-government, but gullible-towards-urban-myths Jeff Rense anti-nuke crowd, all full of themselves with exaggerated factoid on exaggerated mythoid, proton-rays-from-your-lightbulb Helen Caldicott generation.
He needs to impress them with his strength, sternness, independence, and lack of co-optation by what they tell themselves is a corrupt electrical industry watched by a corrupt NRC. I have personally never ever seen a single hint of corruption in the NRC, who scare the living bejabers out of me with their stern professional demeanor, accurate penetrating questions, and willingness to follow the evidence where ever it goes, far beyond my usual comfort level. Entergy, the operator, is falling all over itself lately to be pro-people, pro-safety, pro-environment, and pro just about everything the enviro-anarchists used to claim as their own territory, even to the point where blogs have been seen, accusing Entergy of "stealing the green movement". These claims are 100% true. Entergy, with its expertise, its billion dollar financial clout, and its proactive longterm vision, has positioned itself to carry on the torch, just as Dr Caldicott & her "Anti" generation fall into paranoid babbling, and senile repetition, AND WHO BETTER TO DO IT?

Can Robert F. Kennedy jr light your houses for you? Short answer = NO.
Can 100,000 non-expert bloggers save the Hudson? Maybe--- given time (and Entergy finances).
Can Entergy act to save the Hudson? YOU BETCHA!
Has Entergy acted to save the Hudson? YEP, IN SPADES.
Question: If Entergy is not fooling, and really means it...WHY REJECT THE MOST POWERFUL AVATAR THE MOVEMENT HAS EVER HAD?
.
.
.

( This quiet time is intentionally injected, to allow contemplation of the preceding sentence.)
.
.
.
Which prompts my next proposition.
Go ahead. Chase Entergy away. Take your Hudson, with a closed, useless Indian Point STILL THERE, and ask Hall, Hinchey , Spano, and Cuomo-the-lesser to craft your 21st century lifescape for you.


Sound scary?
I'm getting "lousy future coming" goose bumps , even as I write!


And just in case I'm "spinning you up".... contemplate this: Name for me, a single instance of Hall, Hinchey, Spano, Lowey or Cuomo junior proposing a bond issue FOR A NEW POWER PLANT?

But what the hell, Honda makes a great gasoline powered generator for about $3000. Of course, your house power panel will have to be rewired (about $6000), and YOU provide the gasoline, the testing, the maintenance, etc., etc.

SO WHAT IS REALITY HERE ??

Well, my lights, and my oil burner are on right now!
and I haven't done a thing! ....(It's 17 degrees outside)