From a Bartlett campaign press release/email:
Why are we rushing to a vote on Vermont Yankee?
Holding a vote on Wednesday means we will ignore the thoughtful, methodical process we already have in place to consider the facts. It means that 30 people instead of 180 people will make a statement. It’s more political theater than making good public policy. If we really want Vermont Yankee closed, we should make the decision as an entire legislature.
It’s the oddest example of “have your cake and eat it too” political rhetoric I’ve seen. She repeats in the release that she opposes relicensing – but she then opposes the opportunity to vote on that conviction? Or will she vote against the relicense after all? She doesn’t explicitly say that she won’t.
For a candidate who seemed to be building a reputation as a no-BS straight-talker, this uncoordinated press release seems pretty self-destructive.
Setting aside for a moment the fact that Bartlett is apparently parroting Entergy’s lines about “rushing” a vote (and thereby empowering them – especially if she is successful), her reasoning is a scrambled mess on its face, and I’m not just referring to the strange message that the legislature should function in some sort of mass joint session, rather than through the normal, centuries-old procedure of one body acting on legislation and sending it to the other. The cognitive dissonance runs deeper than that:
This vote is being pushed through without the benefit of two reports due in the next six weeks. One is a forecast on the economic impact of Vermont Yankee from the Joint Fiscal Office; the other is the “vertical audit” on reliability that we asked for. These are important studies that should be considered before taking a vote.
I have watched closely as Entergy has made one mistake after another. From where I sit, the place is a mess. Entergy has lied under oath. They said they don’t have underground pipes carrying nuclear material and now those pipes are leaking. I really don’t think there is much Entergy can do to regain my confidence or that of most Vermonters.
[…] I am on record as wanting to close Vermont Yankee in 2012. Their behavior in the past few months has only confirmed my opinion. This isn’t about my vote, it’s about doing the job right.
So she’s made up her mind? So much for this process she seems to be defending, then. In fact, by pushing for more process, she is implicitly suggesting that she jumps to premature conclusions. Is that a good quality in a Governor?
On the other hand, she could be suggesting that she doesn’t jump to conclusions at all, and that she has enough information and has heard enough evidence to conclude the plant must be closed. In that case, she casts herself as a champion of bureacratic red tape and busy work, as this “process” she is defending is simply process for its own sake. Is that a good quality in a Governor?
Or perhaps we’re just to conclude that this intellectual disconnect is a sign that she’s simply trying to pander to everyone on both sides simultaneously. Is that what we’re looking for in a Governor?
There is no possible way to slice this that leaves Bartlett looking good to anyone. If this is a political calculation, its a poor one that’s liable to leave an impression of weakness and a lack of conviction in the face of a powerful corporate bully. If it’s a straight-up opinion, it just leaves an impression of confusion.
In any event, one wonders if, when we look back on this period, this press release will be remembered as the epitaph for her campaign. That would be a real shame.
At the very least, she’s going to find she needs to make up even more primary ground after this move.
To Quote Senator Bartlett:
1. Crossover on bills from Senate to House or House to Senate requires that one body hold a vote now.
2. The Fiscal impact of VY has to do with the creation of Enexus and the power purchase agreement. The power purchase agreement is a higher rate – market rate of 6.1¢/kwh for significantly less power – only 115mw out of the 630mw it produces. Thus 515mw is shipped out of state while VT bears 100% of the environmental risks and will have to fight for the greenfield decommissioning promised 40-years ago. Attorney Richard Saudek submitted a fiscal review of Enexus MOU in December to JFC/JFO that shows it is not viable. See the JFO website. Fairewinds Associates, Inc submitted its Enexus review last week, and that also shows the MOU is not enforceable and Enexus is not in the best interest of Vermonters. Entergy’s alleged power-purchase agreement is with Enexus, a fictitious corporation that has no assets and has not even yet been created. It is unbelievable to me how a fictitious corporation created by the parent corp Entergy will hold all the liability, while Entergy receives the cash, with allegedly no responsibility for plant reliability or decommissioning. It appears to be more of the Enron type shenanigans. See JFO website for reports.
3. Finally, there is no new vertical audit. First, there was no actual vertical audit. DPS changed the format from a comprehensive vertical audit, (yes, I know that was what Act 189 required) to what Commissioner O’Brien has called a comprehensive reliability audit. Since the uncovered allegedly non-existent buried pipes, the reconvened panel is only allowed by DPS to look at the contractor’s (NSA) and subcontractor’s (WSCI) assessment of the advanced off-gas (AOG) system and ENVY’s buried pipe program including ENVY’s ability to accurately monitor, repair, and maintain its current pipes. However, it appears that the leaking pipe is in a concrete chamber which Entergy calls underground and not buried and is therefore not covered in the program being evaluated by NSA and WSCI. Also the contractors have not been chartered to look at how they relied upon ENVY’s truthfulness and data integrity in the remainder of Commissioner O’Brien’s reliability audit. It is my opinion that the entire audit, which was based upon the assurances (alleged truthfulness) of the licensee (Entergy Nuclear Vermont Yankee – ENVY), is worthless since the entire assessment was based upon the truthfulness and integrity of the data submitted. From the evidence I have reviewed, the depth of the misstatements under oath regarding buried pipes, the condition of the physical and management systems, and the other aging management issues at the plant make ENVY a totally unreliable energy source for Vermont. Of the 81-items identified by the Panel as requiring either correction or repair by ENVY in order to make the plant reliable, only 5 have been completed as of the end of December 2009 and some have been pushed off for action as far as 2016. These mechanical problems and management flaws were guaranteed immediate attention more than 1-year ago, and instead only have plans and promises to repair in place.
Ms. Barlett just doesn’t want to see fellow gubernatorial candidate Shumlin successfully orchestrate a vote to block VY. Its not about VY, its about her election chances.
Dan DeWalt
Newfane
She has just taken a sharp right turn off of my interest list.
VY has had a fire, a tower collapse, a crane carrying nuke fuel lose its brakes, a tritium leak into the Ct. River, lost some nuclear fuel, fines by the PSB of $50,000 and $80,000 for shenanigans back in 2003 and 2004 and lied again to the PSB in 2008 and 2009 …. why in the world do we need a “time-out”?
The Governor has been demanding a vote, Entergy has been demanding a vote, you’ve been demanding a vote and now that a vote has been scheduled all of sudden none of you want the vote to take place??? What?
What a pile of 100% organic genuine Vermont bovine compost.
Vote now and stop the relicensing of this increasingly dangerous power plant. The timing is perfect, the Gov and Entergy are getting their vote. That Entergy has been lying to everyone in Vermont from the day they gained control of the plant should NOT delay this vote now, just because they are caught lying. What better time to hold the vote, when it’s made clear that Entergy AND the Governor have been brazenly lying to all of Vermont! You would prefer to wait until Entergy can snow Vermonters with more of their lies?
The reports that you mention are not going to evaluate what the economic impact on Vermont would be if Entergy’s inept staff were to ‘Chernobyl’ the reactor, nor will it have anything about the massive Tritium leak now pouring into the CT river and that impact on MA or CT. The reports you cite as reason to wait will be woefully inadequate and not representative of the true story.
As you point out, Entergy did lie, repeatedly. Not only are there underground tritium pipes, they already had a tritium leak in 2005 and they quietly repaired them at that time. So they doubly lied.
Why do we need to wait any longer for the vote? What more do we need to know? Because 200 Vermonters will lose their jobs by shutting down a plant whose lifespan we’ve known about for the last 40 years? Really? What if VY was never going to extended? Those jobs have been scheduled to be lost for 40 years. It’s not like we didn’t know this day was coming.
And really now, are the 200 Vermonter’s jobs really worth running this dangerous, dilapidated and deadly plant, managed by serial liars, courting a massive failure and quite possibly irradiating all of New England for another 20 years?
The only hope you have of redeeming yourself now is to vote against relicensing and be bold and public about it. Otherwise I won’t be voting for you.