After reviewing uncontroverted evidence of criminal wrongdoing, Vermont Attorney General Bill Sorrell gifted Entergy with a nicely wrapped State of Vermont package (glowing?) with a fat green ribbon tied in every direction.
The deceit perpetrated against our elected representatives, Vermont ratepayers and public safety official is now safely bundled into a spent fuel pool. At the same time, the old adage -- that there is an inverse relationship between the size of a Corporation's wallet and the likelihood of accountability for its wrongdoing -- has been enriched.
Odd changes in Entergy's J. Wayne Leonard's compensation package according to the April 14 issue of Forbes.
I've been so busy worrying about the accident at Japan's Fukushima reactor, that I almost forgot about Vermont Yankee and all the doins here in Vermont. Although I haven't forgotten that VY is the same age and make as Fukushima.
An out-of-state friend was reviewing the compensation packages for utility execs in Forbes magazine and sent me this little gem today, and I just had to share it with Vermonters since the state is also being sued by Entergy.
Total Compensation
$18.12 mil
5-Year Compensation
$101.96 mil Education:
College: Ball State University BS '73
Graduate School: Indiana University MBA '87
J Wayne Leonard has been CEO of Entergy (ETR) for 12 years. Mr. Leonard has been with the company for 13 years. The 60 year old executive ranks 2 within Utilities
Leonard also ranks 65 in compensation compared with other corporate execs. Wow.
In 2009, the Vermont Yankee Public Oversight Panel recommended that Entergy Nuclear Vermont Yankee (ENVY) buy a new condenser for its reactor. Well, actually ENVY's own staff recommended that VY needed a new condenser all the way back in 1999. ENVY has claimed it does not have the $100 Million needed, but they did have the $100 Million to pay out over 5 years in a special compensation package for Entergy CEO J. Wayne Leonard!
Wow - Leonard could buy VY its condenser and still have more than $1 Million in compensation. Leonard could make a significant donation and ease VY's reliability issues and still be left with a pretty hunk of change. Of course, he still couldn't change VY's Fukushima Mark 1 BWR design.
"We cannot just go back to business as usual," [German Chancellor Angela] Merkel said, adding that events in Japan "teach us that risks that were thought to be completely impossible cannot in fact be completely ruled out".
Just when I thought it could not get any worse, it got worse.
As you all know, one nuclear plant had the top blow off and began to leak radioactivity into the air (Unit 1, built in 1970). Then a 2nd one it exploded yesterday (Sunday) (Unit 3 built in 1974) Tonight we received word at 8 pm that Unit 2 exploded (built in 1972 - the same year as Vermont Yankee). Each explosion has gotten worse, and the third explosion has severely damaged the containment building.
By the way, the 2nd reactor to blow - Unit 3 is burning MOX fuel - mixed oxide fuel, which has plutonium added. Did you know that plutonium is named after Pluto the god of hell?
Now Unit 4 has a fire in spent fuel pool caused by exposed fuel and burning hydrogen. A burning fuel pool fire is worse than a meltdown because the uranium and plutonium vaporize.
By the way, all 4 Japanese nuke plants in trouble are the same vintage, design, & model as Vermont Yankee, Oyster Creek (NJ)(Exelon owned), and Pilgrim (MA - just south of Boston) (another Entergy plant)
It is very, very late Monday night, no early Tuesday morning. I am exhausted. Yesterday (Sunday) we researched and prepped for several radio shows and NY Times, Washington Post, and WSJ. This morning began with Chicago radio, where Illinois has 11 working nukes - 4 of its oldest units are like Fukushima. All the Illinois nukes are owned by Exelon, the corporation that was President Obama's biggest campaign donor.
Next Arnie interviewed w/ a Miami station. It always bothers us to do press in Florida, where we already did a nuclear case with a cancer cluster of 42 families exposed to illegal radioactivity from a nuclear power plant that was covered-up by the NRC.
After those two radio shows Arnie was on Democracy Now & will be again on Tuesday morning @ 8:10 a.m.
Sometimes we feel a little lonely around here, thinking, "Doesn't anyone else see what we're seeing?" Today, someone else sees it. The title of this morning's Burlington Free Press editorial speaks for itself: "Regulator's partisanship chips away at credibility".
I could quibble, pointing out that Dave O'Brien didn't have much credibility to begin with, but the key is that the whole world is now seeing that Dave O'Brien's loyalties are to the Douglas/Dubie administration and their wealthy friends, and not with the people of Vermont. Here's a sampling:
You should read the whole editorial. I'll just say that I'm very pleased that one of our leading daily newspapers is saying what we've been saying all along: We need someone who will be an independent defender of the health and safety of all Vermonters.
Predictably, promoters of Brian Dubie's agenda have seized on the ISO-New England statements about Vermont Yankee's withdrawal from the power auction, to do a little campaign cover-shot. It's no longer possible to link to the editorial content of the St. Albans Messenger, so you will just have to take my word for it that Emerson Lynn's Sept. 1 editorial is all over this opportunity. Get this:
...understandably, the other states in the region cant' be too happy about it. They are already beginning to talk about how the cost should not be borne by them, but by Vermont. If we cause the problem (deny the company its license) then Vermont should share more of the burden in making sure the energy source is replaced.
He goes on...and on...and finally gets to the point of lambasting Peter Shumlin for his opposition to relicensing.
Here is my e-mailed response to Mr. Lynn:
'Looks like another election year fact-check is in order when it comes to the ISO-New England and Vermont Yankee. In your September 1 editorial, you refer to the ISO as "independent." Even though it may be independent of control by any single power supplier, it is nevertheless a vehicle of the energy market as a whole, and so represents the interest of all the companies that supply power in New England. To imply that the ISO is entirely independent of Entergy is therefore somewhat disingenuous.
The ISO's clucking over the possibility that Vermont Yankee soon will not be part of the configuration of power suppliers to New England as a whole is kind of like an entity representing "big dairy" scolding Vermont for wanting to protect it's small dairy farms. As the coordinating arm of an industry dominated by big power corporations, it is unsurprising that they would take a dim view of replacing a plant operated by one of their constituents with alternative sources. If the ISO is indeed suggesting that Vermont should bear more of the burden of replacing the megawatts lost from the grid when VY goes off-line, the idea is absurd. Vermont has hosted Vermont Yankee for forty years, while consuming only a very small portion of its output. For forty years, the state has absorbed all of the risk of hosting the plant on its soil; and when it's gone, we will be the state that must cope with a long-term clean-up issue of unknown proportions.
ISO's sabre-rattling is most unbecoming, and if Brian Dubie is foolish enough to pick-up this line of argument in his campaign for governor, he can well expect that Vermonters will consider this disloyalty rather worse than what was displayed in his recent banner ads announcing that Vermont is in 47th place as one of the least friendly places in which to do business in the United States.
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.
New fish samples taken from the Connecticut River on April 23 and analyzed by Vermont Yankee's contract laboratory have tested positive for strontium-90 (Sr-90).
Concentrations of Sr-90 detected in the inedible portions of these fish are in the range of what would be expected as a result of fallout from nuclear weapons testing in the 1950s, and the Chernobyl release in 1986.
Specifically, the laboratory results for Sr-90 were 70 pCi/kg from fish taken near the plant in the Vernon Pool, and 100 pCi/kg from fish taken about 5 miles upstream, near the Route 9 bridge as it crosses the river north of Brattleboro. A New York study found background levels of Sr-90 in fish to be in the range of 120 to 360 pCi/kg
But of course, according to DOH, Strontium 90, which has not been found in fish in the CT River until recently is not due to the recent tritium and strontium leak from the Vermont Yankee nuclear reactor, but is due to old 1950's bomb testing and the 1982 Chernobyl reactor accident.
How convenient that
Vermont Yankee reported these latest test results to the Health Department on June 30.
and DOH was able to post it on their website late on the afternoon prior to one of the region's biggest holidays... NEWS DUMP.
Want the truth about fish? Ask David Dean River Steward for the Connecticut River Watershed Council.
It has already been a tough week for Vermont Yankee and Entergy, maybe that is why DOH took care of new piece of disturbing news.
In a press release issued today, the Nuclear Regulatory Commission said it
will conduct additional inspections at the Vermont Yankee nuclear power plant, operated by Entergy Nuclear and located in Vernon, Vt. Through enhanced specialized inspections, the NRC will oversee Entergy's efforts to address groundwater contamination at the site and to review and assess the company's response to an NRC Demand for Information (DFI) issued in early March.
In January, Entergy notified the NRC that it had received positive sample results for tritium from a groundwater well at Vermont Yankee. The NRC has been closely monitoring Entergy's actions to identify, mitigate, characterize and remediate the source of the contamination. The NRC's Resident Inspectors and regional specialists continue to provide oversight of the company's actions through direct observations and independent assessments.
Both NRC and Entergy continue to maintain that the "tritium contamination does not pose any health or safety concern for members of the public or plant workers".
NRC has continued this stance in spite of the extensive release of thousands of gallons of tritiated water and research by reputable scientists who contend that NRC does not adequately address the health effects of tritium.
California and Colorado have set significantly more stringent tritium release standards of 400 pico curies per liter in California and 500 pico curies per liter in Colorado compared with the NRC standard of 30,000 pico curies per liter before even requiring reporting of tritium, and EPA requires a limit of 20,000 pico curies per liter for drinking water. See original document below:
The bill passed Tuesday evening 11-0. The full Vermont House plans to pass the bill soon and then it moves to the Senate, where lawmakers are also pledging quick action because for legislative leaders this bill is a priority.
"It is 100 percent the primary issue to protect Vermonters from having to pay the cost," said Rep. Tony Klein, D-East Montpelier.
"You have a promise to green field with not one penny in an account to accomplish that point. We now know that the waste is going to be stored there for decades if not 100 years and there is not one penny set aside to manage that waste, so that's why we need to do this bill," Klein said.
The decommissioning bill assures Vermonters that the corporate parent, whatever firm that may be, Entergy or if sold another firm, has enough money to decommission to NRC standards and also enough money to meet Vermont's more rigid greenfield requirements. This requires that the parent company post a guarantee covering decommissioning to a greenfield standard of Entergy's current estimate of $40 million. I personally believe this estimate is too low; discussion follows.
Fairewinds Associates testified on Friday April 5 to the House Natural Resources and Energy Committee regarding the discrepancy on decommissioning costs as projected by TLG Services, now a wholly owned subsidiary of Entergy. See report entitled Fairewinds Cost Comparison TLG Decommissioninghttp://www.leg.state.vt.us/JFO...
Entergy's Rob Williams just sent out the attached press release announcing that the recently labeled NRC workshop has been changed to an Entergy hosted tritium information night.
Brattleboro, Vt. -- Entergy Vermont Yankee will host a tritium information session for the local community at the Ramada Inn on Putney Road on Monday, April 12 from, 4 p.m., to 7:30 p.m. Vermont Yankee engineers who conducted the investigation will be available on a one-on-one basis for discussion of all aspects of how the tritium leak at the plant site occurred as well as how it was identified and stopped.
Jim Matteau, Executive Director of the Windham Regional Commission said he was invited and does intend to attend. Matteau said,
It's going to be Entergy telling its side of the story, and I want to hear it.
Some people have told me that they are confused since the NRC already canceled this April 12 meeting, but an NRC spokesperson informed me that this meeting
is something separate that they were already planning. We are still reviewing our public interactions and venue going forward.
Another public figure said,
I love the irony: Learn more about the leak of radioactive material at WWW.safecleanreliable. com
For me, I guess it is a matter of framing. At least that is what I call it. How many ways does one spin the fact that the underground pipes that were not buried actually began leaking at least one year before the leak was discovered. This information according to Dr. David Ahfeld, an expert in buried pipe and tank corrosion and leakage, who wrote to the state legislature just prior to the February Senate vote that the leak had been ongoing for at least one-year.
When Fairewinds Associates, Inc brought the matter of the allegedly non-existent buried underground pipes to the Legislature's attention last fall, our report was hotly criticized by Entergy. I guess it is a matter of framing because Rob Williams wrote,
While on the subject, we take issue with the entire tone of the consultant's report which leaves the impression that plant reliability is lacking at VY. Issues cited as "significant" are really routine maintenance/repair issues that are routinely handled in the normal course of business in running a steam generating plant. One fact that didn't appear at all in the reliability report was that Vermont Yankee's three-year rolling average of plant reliability is now in the top nine percent among all nuclear plants in the world.
According to the press release,
state and federal agencies that oversaw the tritium investigation have been invited to participate. Refreshments and handouts will be available.
Wow, it almost sounds like a party, except that I imagine the latest tritium science data will be missing, surely they could send some of the allegedly not unhealthful tritiated water home with guests. "Dilution is the solution to pollution," they say.
UPDATE #1: NRC has basically verified all this. Listen to this phone call.
* * *
Once again the NRC is up to its old antics of creating secret meetings for the privileged few it deems as stakeholders. NRC's alleged Government-to-Government meeting is in direct violation of federal and state Sunshine Laws, the NRC Chair's commitment to NRC transparency and inclusiveness, and President Obama's promise for Change to the electorate to usher in a new era of openness in our federal democracy.
According to the private email sent by the NRC to selected public officials:
The meeting is closed to members of the public and the media and it will not be publically noticed. The meeting is open to elected State/Town officials or a member of their staff and selected representatives from your State agencies. The purpose of the meeting being closed is to provide you an opportunity to have an open and frank discussion, ask questions and express your concerns. Our goal is for the invitees to feel comfortable in an environment that won't lead to possible misquotes in the media or misunderstandings with your constituents.
The initial email sent out by NRC included a PDF document detailing the meeting. I have pasted the entire PDF at the bottom of this post.
SUBJECT: U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION, REGION I
VERMONT YANKEE GOVERNMENT-TO-GOVERNMENT MEETING
Dear:
You are cordially invited to attend a government-to-government meeting among the U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC); representatives of various Vermont, New Hampshire and Massachusetts state agencies; and Federal and local government officials from the communities surrounding the Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power Plant. At this meeting, NRC will discuss its independent inspection of Entergy's groundwater initiative program and the NRC's review, to date, of the activities related to the recent tritium leak at the Vermont Yankee site.
The NRC is providing this information in advance of the public release of its inspection report on
this subject to better equip government stakeholders to answer questions they may receive from their constituents. The meeting will be limited to elected officials, or their staff, to best facilitate an open and courteous discussion and will not be open to the public or the media.
At a minimum . . .
. . . I expect the Democratic candidates for Governor with the exception of Matt Dunne who is not an elected official to send staff to this meeting. Why should Dubie get a pass? He should be there with a tape recorder too.
This meeting must be recorded in accordance with Vermont's Open Meeting laws. If these four Vermont government officials send their staff, then all records. . . are public documents. . .
I want to see all four elected candidates commit to upholding open government on one of the biggest liabilities the Douglas administration is hoisting on Vermont's taxpayers and all of us rate payers.
This is a really good idea!
Do you want to know what is happening? Time to get on the phone to Susan Bartlett, Deb Markowitz, Doug Racine & Peter Shumlin. There is no excuse for them, or someone representing them, not to be at that meeting protecting Vermont's interests.
These entities have proven that they can never be trusted behind closed doors. Can we trust our elected representatives to attend and give a full accounting? Let's find out.
* * *
UPDATE #3: The Times Argus has now picked up this story:
FITNESS FOR DUTY - SUPERVISOR TESTED POSITIVE FOR ALCOHOL was today's posting on the NRC Website for current event notifications.
A non-licensed employee supervisor had a confirmed positive for alcohol during a random fitness-for-duty test. The employee's unescorted access to the plant has been revoked. Contact the Headquarters Operations Officer for additional details.
What is a non-licensed employee supervisor? Well, that means he was not one of the plant operators, but is a supervisor of another group, like engineering, maintenance, purchasing, or even health physics meaning dose measurement.
Not only is Vermont Yankee on a hiring freeze on orders from parent company Entergy, but the VT Legislature's appointed oversight panel (VYOP) noted that staffing problems were endemic throughout the organization. In some departments 80% of the employees had been at VY less than three years, which according to VYOP is an indication of high turnover and inexperience.
Last spring, VY informed the Legislature that it would meet the VYOP recommendations, yet with an Entergy hiring freeze at a plant that already had staff shortages, how will that be possible? Now on top of failing cooling towers, equipment degradation and dose miscalculations we have supervisors arriving to work drunk.
250-1
55-1
