Sue Prent highlights our DC-3's view on Vermont Yankee:
We believe that Entergy should respect and abide by Vermont's laws and the MOU signed with the state in 2002, which require approval by the Vermont Legislature, and then the Vermont Public Service Board, for the plant to continue to operate beyond 2012.
Now she calls this a no-brainer, but that's only the case if there were no threat to corporate profits and the politicians who are funded by them. Fortunately, I don't think those will hold sway with the current Democratic governor and legislature because, as Leahy, Sanders and Welch note, state law governs this and it'll be an uphill battle to change it or get an extension under it.
The Memorandum of Understanding from 2002 is rather important because under terms of Entergy's purchase of Vermont Yankee, they agreed that the Feds have no jurisdiction over the plant's operation beyond March 21, 2012. Paragraph 12:
The signatories to this MOU agree that any order issued by the Board granting approval of the sale of VYNPS…will authorize operation of the VYNPS only until March 21, 2012 and thereafter will authorize [Entergy] only to decommission the VYNPS…[Entergy, et al]irrevocably agrees: (a) that the Board has jurisdiction under current law to grant or deny approval of operation of the VYNPS beyond March 21, 2012 and (b) to waive any claimeach may have that federal law preempts the jurisdiction of the Board…
The default action, therefore, is that VY must be decomissioned. Doesn't matter what Entergy says. Doesn't matter that they got NRC rubber-stamping or not. Absent any positive Board approval, the plant shuts down about 364 days from now.
However, the Board is subject Vermont law, which according to Act 160 stipulates:
No nuclear energy generating plant within this state may be operated beyond the date permitted in any certificate of public good granted pursuant to this title, including any certificate in force as of January 1, 2006, unless the general assembly approves and determines that the operation will promote the general welfare, and until the public service board issues a certificate of public good under this section. If the general assembly has not acted under this subsection by July 1, 2008, the board may commence proceedings under this section and under 10 V.S.A. chapter 157, relating to the storage of radioactive material, but may not issue a final order or certificate of public good until the general assembly determines that operation will promote the general welfare and grants approval for that operation.
Please note the reference to 'general welfare'. That's what should drive this discussion above all else, and the Senate has already determined that extending an aging, flawed, mismanaged plant beyond it's original life expectancy does not meet that requirement–S.289 was shot down 26-4 last February, and voters didn't see fit to turn out the Democratic majority so it's highly likely that the decision will not be reversed.
That won't stop people from trying, which is a good thing in a democratic republic. Unsurprisingly, the GOP rep from Vernon/Entergy is leading the charge:
[Freshman Rep. Mike Hebert] said it’s “improper” for the Legislature to have the power to decide Vermont Yankee’s fate. Instead, the authority should go to scientists, at places like the Vermont Public Service Board or the NRC, who know what they’re doing, he said.
It's amusing to see a Republican of all people get religion on science when the party generally is hostile to things like evolution and climate change (Herbert didn't complete his Politcal Courage Test so I don't know his overall posture toward science). It's disturbing that they think the People don't have the ability or right to determine what promotes the general welfare.
Nevermind the increasing levels of radiation further from Fukushima. Nevermind the odds of a disaster in Vernon. I'm not concerned about the science and safety statistics at the moment.
I'm not even concerned that we can create more economic benefit by shutting down the plant and making aggressive investments in sustainable energy.
What concerns me is that a legislator wants to remove the People's voice from the process. So I'm glad that the DC3 are reminding everybody of Entergy's agreements and the primacy of Vermont law. They really remind us to stayy vigilant and ready to fend off cynical ploys to lock us out when the public good is at stake.
ntodd
of the Douglas administration continue to resurface.
After watching the machinations of the right thus far, it should come as no surprise as to why they are marginalized to the point of irrelevance. Although I recognize there are good Jeffords-style conservatives, the majority represent the worst element of the party.
Entire undertaking a fools errand.
The two versions, House & Senate, are extremely disturbing. Also proves the rightwingers in VT are more than happy to sacrifice states rights on the altar of Entergy Louisiana. They must do their homies proud. I’m sure Wayne Leonard & the rest of their cronies are having quite a laugh at the shameful antics of those sworn to represent our state & residents. Another great reason to see these reckless & irresponsible traitors to our state remain marginalized to the point of irrelevance forever.
Not only can they not be trusted to act on behalf of the well being or best interests of VTers, they will happily sell out to corporate interests if it benefits their agenda & the bottom line of their ‘donors’.
Science is not the primary a consideration to this issue but secondary. Overarching is what states, in our case VTers, want. Where we choose to purchase power & how we achieve that goal is more important.
Scientists are not gods nor the supreme decision makers as the most important interests & considerations are not found in that realm. However, it is extremely deceptive to even claim legislators not qualified since they rely upon the consult of those who are. It also negates the *years* of study undertaken by legislative committees & testimony taken from those qualified to speak on the issue.
David Lochbaum of UCC, a former NRC staffer is no dummy. Peter Bradford, also with NRC, Arnie Gundersen & other VY POP members have lifelong careers in nuclear industry & are much more qualified to make decisions regarding VY’s reliability & benefit than PSB regardless, & all have deep reservations, to put it mildly.