Yesterday NRC Chairman Gregory Jaczko made an unprecedented trip to Vermont to meet with seven intervenor and environmental groups to discuss ongoing safety and aging management issues at Vermont Yankee.
Jaczko had a 90-minute discussion with representatives from the New England Coalition, Citizens Awareness Network, Conservation Law Foundation, Vermont Public Interest Research group, Safe and Green, Nuclear Free in 2012, and the Vermont Yankee Decommissioning Alliance in Brattleboro followed by a private tour of Vermont Yankee and meeting with Entergy officials.
While I had a meeting and could not listen to the whole event on the phone bridge provided by NRC, I did hear the first few minutes during which Chairman Jaczko thanked Vermont State Representative Sarah Edwards for setting up this meeting with the representatives of the seven groups. This statement received a round of applause from a majority of the group in attendance. In addition to the seven groups given time to speak, there were a myriad of observers from the press, the Congressional Delegations, state employees like Department of Health health physicist Dr. Bill Irwin, various elected officials, and concerned individuals. I have asked for a transcript and will post it when it is available. In the meantime Nuclear Free Vermont and VPIRG have sent me copies of their statements which are posted in their entirety below the fold.
James Moore of VPIRG was the last to speak and closed with the following points agreed upon by the seven groups. Moore said,
To that end I have been asked by the group to share four requests with you:
1. Cease consideration of ENVY’s relicensing application promptly, and turn all regulatory focus toward ensuring safety during the transition to closure of the Vernon reactor, and implementation of comprehensive waste storage procedures. NRC should act with transparency to enforce its regulations and maintain strict vigilance so as to ensure against accidents, mishaps, and accidental releases in the interim.2. Compile and disseminate a detailed plan for closure of Vermont Yankee. This plan should include a list of tasks and a timeline for their completion, in anticipation of closure in 2012. This plan should reflect NRC staff expertise, lessons learned from other reactors, and the particular expertise of people who have worked at Vermont Yankee or who have relevant knowledge of its operations.
3. Work with the licensee, state and local government officials, Entergy workers, independent experts and affected citizenry to form an advisory panel to advise and monitor activities directed toward a safe transition to closure.
4. Prepare and distribute monthly reports to update the public and elected officials about the closure process.
Ed Anthes of Nuclear Free Vermont, who posts often on Green Mountain Daily had the most detailed comments regarding Vermont Yankee’s key safety and reliability issues due to its age and condition. He quoted specifically from the Legislature’s oversight of VY and its reliability issues. See these and more information regarding Entergy’s response below the fold.
Ed Anthes of Nuclear Free Vermont focused on the recent assessment of VY ordered by the Vermont Legislature. See Anthes entire statement at the end of this post.
In 2008, the Vermont Legislature enacted a law requiring an inspection of Entergy Nuclear Vermont Yankee, to help ensure that legislators could make a responsible, informed choice when deciding if Vermont will switch to renewable energy sources, or allow Entergy Nuclear to operate their reactor in Vernon for twenty years past its design life.
A summary of the NSA inspectors’ evaluation is Appendix B, Vermont Yankee Benchmark Report. The Benchmark Report compares Entergy Nuclear Vermont Yankee to all other reactors in the US. ENVY ranks in the worst group of reactors in half of the benchmark measures compared. These include:
•Plant Overall Performance
•Production Cost
•Recordable Injuries
•Number of Systems Supervised by each System Manager
•Industry Equipment Reliability Performance
ENVY vs. Sister Plants Equipment Reliability Performance
ENVY ranks 10th worst of 12 similar reactors
ENVY vs. Entergy Fleet Equipment Reliability Performance
ENVY ranks 11th worst of 12 Entergy reactorsEquipment Reliability Index
The NSA report states: “The ER Index performance does not meet industry standards.”
In addition, the inspection report identified high personnel turnover, significant staffing vacancies, and poor levels of experience in two key departments: Maintenance and Equipment Reliability. As ENVY enters its final operating run, the importance of some of these critical deficiencies loom larger.
During the group’s closing remarks, VPIRG’s James Moore began his discussion emphasizing who VPIRG represents and then delineating breaches of NRC trust. In VPRIG’s entire statement pasted at the end of this post, Moore said,
I am the clean energy program director for the Vermont Public Interest Research Group (VPIRG). VPIRG is the largest consumer and environmental organization in Vermont and we have worked on Vermont Yankee related issues since 1972, when Vermont Yankee reactor was commissioned.
We are here today in part because Vermonters have good reason not to trust Entergy Vermont Yankee, and because we have good reason not to trust the NRC.
This mistrust has grown out of NRC’s actions and apparent willingness to side with the nuclear industry at the expense of being straight with the public and putting safety first. Vermont Yankee is one of the oldest reactors in the country and we need a real cop on the beat.
Rutland Herald reporter Susan Smallheer has written a thorough recap of the meeting entitled NRC chair hears state has lost trust in his oversight. VPR also interviewed Smallheer and you may listen to the Smallheer interview here.
Not all Vermonters have been happy with Chairman Jaczko’s meeting with the nuclear safety advocacy groups that both the press and the industry try to portray as simply biased anti-nukes.
•Yesterday the Brattleboro Reformer posted a nasty editorial criticizing anti-nuclear activism and theatrics,
•The Vermont Energy Partnership sent a letter to Chairman Jaczko and the different newspapers and blogs criticizing the Chair’s private meeting.
•Finally, pro-nuke blogs from around the country, led by Vermont’s own Nuclear Energy Institute’s connected Yes Vermont Yankee, also jumped in to condemn the NRC meeting with the Intervenors.
It is especially interesting to note that according to Source Watch the allegedly independent Vermont Energy Partnership includes Entergy Nuclear, IBM, Green Mountain Power, and former Governor Tom Salmon as key members.
See Membership List Here.
Pro-nuke blog Yes Vermont Yankee is written by an industry insider who makes her money working for the industry as does Rod Adams with his Atomic Insights. Although they all portray themselves as independent concerned citizens, all receive income from the nuclear industry and are part of an online group that spreads the same biased throughout the country. Like the Vermont Energy Partnership, these blogs are heavily connected to the lobbyists and nuclear industry groups of which they claim to have an unbiased opinion. [Don’t believe what I say, do the research yourself via SourceWatch and Google.]
The pro-nuke blogs are similar to the resurrected I AM VY site, which features plant employees supposedly telling their own stories, although former Entergy legislative liaison Dave McElwee is no longer featured. You may remember that he was the Entergy employee who denied the existence of buried underground pipes carrying radioactivity to the legislature and condemned my firm Fairewinds Associates, Inc for bringing this critical environmental issue forward to the Joint Fiscal Committee in a report and testimony.
Lastly, check out Vermont Digger for two key reports Jaczko verbatim: Trust gap is “something I’d like to improve” which includes a photo of Jaczko and Environmentalists blast Nuclear Regulatory Commission chairman, which is a piece by Olga Peters of The Commons that came to Vermont Digger through a special arrangement with commonsnews.org.
Ed Anthes_ Nuclear Free Vermont Statement to NRC Chair Jaczko remarks 7-14-10
James Moore_ VPIRG Statement to NRC Chairman Jaczko 7-14-2010
The NRC should have been insisting, since many years, that launch-ready plans be developed around the assumption that the plant would be decommissioned on schedule, including provision for early closure due to structural failures. This was a known “expiry” date. By not taking this position, the NRC has failed to execute its mission to protect the public good.
A ceremonial airing of the grievances
This was kind of like the NRC’s version of the fictional Seinfeld holiday called Festivus.
Some concrete NRC action at this point might be nice, hopefully this is a start.
Hard to believe it will be with all that has gone before.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/F…
Between the NRC (regulator for nuclear industry) and the MMS (regulator for oil drilling industry) when it comes to failed regulatory oversight?
As a participant in the meeting, I can say that our intention was to be clear with NRC Chair Jaczko that the decision to close ENVY on schedule by March 2012 has already been made in Vermont. Our recommendations to the NRC follow from that, to try to ensure safe operation till closure in 2012.
Jaczko validated the safety and employment concerns we raised, saying his staff had discussed these issues, and quoting his Executive Director of Operations on the need to keep operations safe at the Vernon reactor during its final months.
Big problems with NRC: it’s slow and reactive, not proactive. But those are design features, not unintended flaws. Jaczko said it took the NRC a year –2007– to write a “generic letter” about electric cables, designed for dry use, underwater at reactors. It wasn’t til this year that VY acknowledged the problem and started pumping water out of their underground cableways.
If you look at the IAMVY site, notice how short the employment for many of the featured employees. High turnover, inexperienced staff, and job vacancies unfilled are key indicators of the Entergy style of management. This will only get worse, unless employees know they will have jobs after shutdown, during the cleanup phase.
Presentation of Citizens Awareness Network to NRC Chairman Jaczko
We appreciate your offering this opportunity to meet with you. We also want to thank Representative Sarah Edwards for helping to make this meeting possible.
Citizens Awareness Network (CAN), with over 3,000 members in the tri-state community, was instrumental in the closure of Yankee Rowe, CT Yankee and the Millstone Unit 1 reactors. We’ve participated in Atomic, Safety and Licensing Board hearings on both decommissionings of Yankee Rowe and Ct Yankee, license transfer hearings on Indian Point, Fitzpartick and Vermont Yankee reactors. CAN won lawsuits against the NRC in the first Circuit Appellate Court on the illegal decommissioning of Rowe reactor and against Boston Edison’s attempt to join a consortium of nuclear corporations in the creation of a high level waste storage facility on the Skull Valley Goshute Reservation in Utah. We authored as well as commissioned seminal papers on the vulnerability of nuclear fuel pools to terrorism by Dr. Gordon Thompson and Tritium.
Given the overwhelming vote by the Vermont Senate to reject VY’s continued operation after it license expires in 2012, its confounding that you Chairman chose this moment to visit VY and offer this meeting . Why not last January when the ongoing leaks as well as Entergy’s misrepresentations became apparent?
I assume Chairman that you are not here to undermine this vote that expressed the will of the people of Vermont to pursue a state energy policy that does not include Vermont Yankee;
I can only assume the reason for the visit involves the continued problems that manifest at this troubled reactor and how the NRC intends to deal with Entergy and VY during this important transition period.
Entergy’s systemic mismanagement, its delayed maintenance program coupled with its repeated misrepresentation to state officials is of great concern as Entergy prepares to close Vermont Yankee in 2012.
We are also concerned with the NRC’s actions during this period. I believe a lessons learned could be helpful to you as Chairman about how your staff has been perceived by many Vermonters and public officials. First I want to deal with Entergy.
We are concerned that Entergy will continue to delay maintenance and repairs since it will have little incentive with closure looming. We are concerned that both safety related and non safety related (from NRC point of view) systems will be neglected and that problems will escalate. We have experienced repeated mishaps with the tower collapse and the unending repairs to this deteriorating system, transformer fire, endless leaks from non existent pipes, ground water contamination, and refusal to implement state commitments in a timely manner.
We are also concerned that with closure, a number of issues will manifest.
Given the fact the upon closure there is no longer any NRC resident inspector required on site, how can we be assured that Entergy will do an adequate job of decommissioning when with a resident inspector it has fallen far short.
How will Entergy deal with the high level radioactive waste remaining in its fuel pool. The NAS acknowledged that Mark 1 reactor fuel pools are most vulnerable to terrorism. VY’s pool is located outside of containment 7 stories in the air with a metal roof. It is essential that the fuel must be moved as quickly as possible to on site dry storage.
But we’re also concerned with dry cask storage. With over 50 million curies of high level waste in its fuel pool and no repository available for the foreseeable future, waste- upwards of 40 casks will remain in dry storage for decades if not centuries. Besides its vulnerability to terrorism and the need for hardening, it is “across the street” from two elementary schools on either side of the Connecticut River. Even with Entergy buying up residential houses in close proximity to VY, there are concerns that the shine from these casks located so close to schools as well as residences compromises health and safety.
We believe that the creation of a Citizen Advisory Board to oversee the transition, closure and decommissioning of VY is an important component of community outreach. The Board would be a formal mechanism for community participation. It should be organized by the licensee and NRC in conjunction with local government and community representatives. The Board would meet regularly to give meaningful input into decisions concerning health and safety. It would function to educate the community to the issues involved in decommissioning.
Then there is your agency.
When NRC staff began holding meeting on Entergy’s application for relicensing of Vermont Yankee and the repeated failure of its maintenance programs, 800 people attended the first meeting. The last I heard was attended by 10.
The community does not have confidence in the NRC as a regulator with a mission to protect the health and safety; NRC has frequently been experienced as an extension of Entergy. These concerns preceded relicensing and increased substantially with the uprate proceeding.
The leaking of tritium into the ground water whether it left the site or not is a violation of the public trust. NRC is experienced as being nonchalant in response to this violation and the corporate culture that allowed these non existent pipes to leak for months on end unabated.
No one came to the community while the pipes were leaking; no meetings by Entergy or NRC were held to update the community and answer questions. Months later when the leaks was found, pipes were repaired and a contamination cleanup plan was in place did Entergy, NRC and the state show up. This was to little too late.
And I am concerned that your decision to visit Vermont Yankee and our community may well add to that perception. There is a great opportunity to create a successful model for reactor closure that includes meaningful public participation, we hope that you chose to make this a reality.
Deb Katz
Executive Director
Citizens Awareness Network
It wouldn’t make much sense to allow a plant to run to the end of its license without a decommissioning plan, would it? Federal law requires one to be submitted years (5?) before. VY has. Check the Federal Register and the VY NRC docket.
The NRC uses a framework described by Sam Collins the Region I Administrator at the last meeting. Congress has decided that the country should have nuclear power. It is the NRC’s job to have it safely. Like every other regulatory agency they have to be fair. That means having rules and follwing them. They don’t regulate based on winter marches.
Many anti nukes want to change national policy and have already decided that the world should not have nuclear power. Ms. Katz is one. She said so on the State House steps last spring. Is it any wonder that they report only bad news? Free speech is a precious right which I wore our country’s uniform to defend. Of course free speech means others can disagree with you.
I don’t know where Mrs. Gundersen gets her info, but she may be open to a liable suit. Meredith Angwin, with whom I collaborate, doesn’t get paid to blog. She won’t because it would hamper her independence. In fact we are both trying to get some paid work. In the meantime we are supporting nuclear power for our grandchildren’s sake. See our website coalitionforenergysolutions.org and Meredith’s blog Yes,Vermont Yankee.
Fairewinds is doing OK on the Chief Engineer’s $300 an hour, including time spent driving around and to the VY plant. Did the President Pro Tem work this out to punish VY, since it gets billed to them?