Entergy Sues to Keep Vermont Yankee Open

1. You’re almost there, Peters, but not quite. Nobody’s disputing that the state may have jurisdiction over issues other than safety. Duh. That’s not what this fight is about. The issue is that in voting not to allow the PSB to proceed with a re-licensing decision, the Vt. state senate was basing its vote on concern for safety — whether it admits it or not — thereby intruding on the NRC’s exclusivity. The debate leading up to that vote made it quite clear that senators were voting on safety. The Shumlin Administration is now trying to pretend that the vote wasn’t about safety. But we all see through that. Except you, apparently. Even Shumlin couldn’t always remember not to use the word “safe” or similar terms when discussing why he thought the plant shouldn’t be relicensed. He kept slipping into language about safety.The point VY is making is that the state’s decision not to relicense VY isn’t about the issues that the state DOES have control over, but about the one single issue that it DOESN’T — safety. The state isn’t even trying to say that the fight is about economics or reliability. VY power is cheap, and, as power plants go, VY is extremely reliable. Even the commission that included Shumlin’s hand-picked VY-hater, Arnie Gunderson, admitted that the plant could be operated well into the future. This is all about the state’s attempt to shut down VY based on safety, which is pre-empted.The second issue is that the state welched on its 2002 agreement with Entergy to allow the PSB decide all the issues over which the state has jurisdiction.Are you with us now?

2. “over which the other entities may have jurisdiction.”Uh… yeah, bummer.Thanks for cross-posting your screed, though.

3. Cheryl Hanna needs to read up on some law. She apparently is smarter about this area than the official pronouncements of the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC), which clearly state that “the final decision” on continued operation of a nuke is up to other, non-NRC decision-makers _including_ the states.Here’s one, from volume 61 of the Federal Register, page 28743, 1996:“After the NRC makes its decision based on the safety and environmental considerations, the final decision on whether or not to continue operating the nuclear plant will be made by the utility, State, and Federal (non-NRC) decisionmakers. This final decision will be based on economics, energy reliability goals, and other objectives over which the other entities may have jurisdiction. The NRC has no authority or regulatory control over the ultimate selection of future energy alternatives.”If the NRC is right – and it is, after all, _NRC_ preemption that Entergy asserts – then Entergy loses.

4. Don thanks for the wiki-recap. If VY’s past record is an indication of the future then we are due for another cooling tower collapse and leaky pipe somewhere around 2040. But the purported seceding from the state is in fact interesting… JUST DO IT!! That would sure get Slumlin all riled up. VY continuing operation with all the proceeds headed to somewhere else…. No more CEDF, no more easy political pickings. I love it, great idea. I swear I will move to Vernon the day after this happens.

5. Is the Good Life Possible with Vermont Yankee?Vermont has “pro-nukes,” “anti-nukes” and those residents not seeming to fit in either group…perhaps there’s room for another category entitled, “anti-Vermont Yankee?” Some Vermonters have said they’re not against nuclear power, (if) the leaks can be stopped, the spent fuel rod storage problem can be solved and the structures can be fabricated to withstand all possible weather anomalies. Vermont Yankee (VY) is located in the town of Vernon which sits in the southeastern corner of the state at the junction formed by the Connecticut River and the Massachusetts border, and was once actually a part of the town of Hinsdale, NH. Purportedly, Vernon’s 2141 people have even discussed seceding from Vermont (to either NH or MA) if the Legislature refuses to grant VY a license extension beyond 2012.VY, operating since 1972 and employing about 650 people, is the state’s largest power source with a nominal 540 megawatt boiling water reactor, and is one of five operating nuclear plants in New England. In 2002, VY was sold by eight New England utilities to Entergy Nuclear Vermont Yankee, LLC, a subsidiary of the Entergy Corporation of New Orleans, the second largest nuclear generator in the US.In February of 2010, the VT Senate voted 26-4 against allowing the Public Service Board (PSB) to consider re-certifying VY after 2012, citing radioactive (tritium) leaks, misstatements in testimony by plant officials, a cooling tower collapse in 2007 and other problems. In the event the PSB refuses to issue them a Certificate of Public Good, VY could elect to continue to operate and the case would be decided in court, since the federal Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) has recently granted a license renewal to operate until 2032.So, where does all this see-sawing leave the customer who’s concerned about how high electric bills will be if VY closes? Since the Vernon plant supplies about a third of the state’s total power, how will that amount be replaced? The average Vermont Electric Cooperative (VEC) member would pay between 50 & 60 cents extra each month if VY closes. Replacement power will have to be purchased from the New England grid, which isn’t the most cost-effective way to obtain electricity, but it appears to be the best option right now.If Vermont Yankee’s past record predicts its future and safety modifications aren’t made, many Vermonters feel it should be closed permanently. Most VEC members seem to agree. Perhaps divining its prospects, two days after Peter Shumlin became the new VT Governor, Entergy put Vermont Yankee up for sale.(Don Worth is the Director for District 1 on the VEC Board of Directors and is running for re-election in May. The foregoing does not express the opinion of VEC or its Board.)

6. “I’m so jealous of JCarter’s confidence in the federal government.”I’m so jealous of Snark’s apparent confidence in the Shumlin Administration. After all, we all know that his motives have always been 100% pure and not at all motivated by partisan politics. And of course that’s also true for all the Mensa-members in the Legislature who all undoubtedly know a lot about energy issues.

7. I am certainly much more confident in a body of experts whose sole purpose is to keep tabs on the going on’s and safety of nuclear power plants then I am of a part-time body of people with varying levels of intelligence and backgrounds who have political generated motives in addition to moral motives. If you don’t have any confidence in the NRC I suggest you petition one of our good Senators to disband them. Feds are trying to cut costs, now might be a good time to pitch some savings in a body that apparently in your opinion isn’t capable of doing the job they are hired, trained and paid to do. I suggest Bernie. Is it just the NRC or should we also get rid of ICE/BP/DHS/DOD/DOJ too?

8. You’re right Snark, I am far more confident in the judgment of noted nuclear safety expert Tim Ashe than that of the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.

Comments are closed.