I did not send this to ACRS

I need about 15 minutes to make a presentation via bridge line to the ACRS Planning and Procedures Subcommittee that will hold a meeting on February 3, 2010. I will be describing the need for ACRS procedures that will at least frown upon the unprofessional treatment that my partner and I encountered following our presentation to the ACRS SUBCOMMITTEE ON THERMAL HYDRAULIC PHENOMENA, MONDAY, OCTOBER 18, 2010 (ML103190234).

Briefly, we had 10 minutes for a succinct presentation at about 1:00 PM at the meeting. The subcommittee members had no comments at that time, and the meeting moved on at about 1:10 PM as the Chairman thanked us:
CHAIR BANERJEE: Thank you both very much.
16 We appreciate your comments, and we will certainly
17 take them into account.

My partner and I were then removed from the capability of addressing the subcommittee and we thought that any discussion of our presentation was ended.

The “trouble” began near the end of the meeting, sometime after 6:30 PM, page 467 of the transcript:
CONSULTANT KRESS: I found it very unusual
17 that public comments are made to the subcommittee.
18 Those usually go to the full committee.

As the discussion proceeded it became increasingly infuriating to the blocked Leyses.

The crowning blow came from Bajorek, pages 469 and 470 of the transcript:

MR. BAJOREK: He did make the point that
23 while there was a user need letter, point out and the
24 research was supposed to have responded by I think the
25 end of August. That was the original schedule. But
because they amended their own petition, and submitted
2 another petition, OGC decided to lump it together and
3 that window of time has moved out.
4 CHAIR BANERJEE: Okay. Well with that, I
5 think I'd like to thank you all and adjourn the
6 meeting.
7 (Whereupon the meeting was adjourned at
8 6:55 p.m.)

So, I need about 15 minutes to discuss the need for ACRS procedures that will avoid a repetition of this outrageous development. I will have no handouts; however, I will refer to appropriate parts of the transcript.

As an aside, but for the record, my belief is that with the exception of the Leyse presentations, the meeting was a waste of the taxpayers’ money.