Just the kind of thing you like to peruse over brunch. From the Saturday Feb. 4 Brattleboro Reformer:
Entergy demands $4.6 million from the state
Yup, they want to be reimbursed for legal costs associated with their lawsuit over Vermont's denial of a license extension. Oh, and in case you were thinking about causing any more trouble?
"(The $4.62 million) amount is likely to increase if the fee petition is extensively litigated and/or Defendants appeal the Judgment," wrote Entergy's attorneys.
Been quite a couple of weeks for our good neighbor and provider of safe, clean, reliable power. They win the suit, they try to limit tritium testing, they demand that the Public Service Board immediately approve the 20-year extension. Can we look forward to 20 more years of corporate intransigence and bullying? Mebbe so:
...because Entergy prevailed against the state, the legal relationship between the two parties was "materially altered and was judicially sanctioned."
There's a marker for you. The Entergy/Vermont relationship has been "materially altered." Which seems to be a lawyerly way of saying, "You tried to f*ck with us, you lost, we own you." So says Pat Parenteau of the Vermont Law School:
"If there was any doubt about Entergy's scorched-earth policy toward the state of Vermont, it's been resolved," he said. "When you couple this motion with the motion to the Public Service Board, which is 'Give us our certificate of public good and give it to us now,' it's an in-your-face kind of move."
I guess we won't be seeing any more touchy-feely "I am Vermont Yankee" ad campaigns. Let's just hope the "scorched earth" stays completely in the rhetorical realm.
The NRC is feeling good about itself.Sounding pumped, like a lean mean nuclear regulatin’ machine on their "blog" where they declare:
“When the NRC says we consider new and significant information, we mean it.”
The story is, errors in recently submitted information were found during a review process for equipment replacement at an existing plant in the Southern US. Based on this new significant information the NRC found that designs for a new Economic Simplified Boiling-Water Reactor (ESBWR) plant might have similar errors. What’s the upshot of these NRC discoveries? It could mean the NRC must revise reports and/or have the applicants make changes to design control documents which will delay their final decision on design certification. New information comes to light, consideration given to the new facts, followed by regulatory action. Has a watchdog stirred?
Well, our good neighbors at the Vermont Yankee nuclear plant are at it again. Report from the Associated Press, which came to my computer by way of the Huffington Post:
Energy Corp.'s Vermont Yankee nuclear plant once again is refusing the state's request that it conduct more tests for radioactive tritium ikn a former drinking water well on the plant grounds.
Christopher Wamser, site vice president for plant owner Entergy, says in a Jan. 20 letter to Public Service Commissioner Elizabeth Miller that such testing would be inappropriate because it could contaminate the bedrock aquifer at the bottom of the well and might not produce reliable results.
Well, all righty then. The fine folks at Entergy are simply trying to protect the environment. (Not that they haven't argued all along that tritium poses no danger to public health and safety, so a bit o'tritium in the groundwater shouldn't be a problem, should it?)
Read further in the story, and you discover that the problem isn't necessarily with testing the well water -- it's with the type of testing VY wants to do. Its preferred method involves purging the well, which could force tritium-tainted water into the aquifer.
The state's preferred method is to take a "grab sample" from the well. No purging, no pumping, no danger of spreading contaminated water. Wamser argues that this sampling technique might produce inaccurate results: "vertical flow within the well and insertion of the sampling equipment could cause mixing within the well column..."
But state geologist Lawrence Becker says he checked with the EPA, who assured him that the "grab sample" method is perfectly fine, and should produce a representative result.
Oh, and one more thing.
Wamser's Jan. 20 letter came one day after a federal judge in Brattleboro issued a ruling saying Vermont may not force its lone nuclear plant to shut down when its initial 40-year license expires March 21.
Well, it looks like the way is clear for 20 more years of "safe, clean, reliable power" with absolutely "no threat to public health or safety." Yesterday's ruling by federal judge Garvan Murtha was pretty much a slam-dunk victory for Entergy and Vermont Yankee. Sure, Vermont could appeal, but it'd be a costly process with an uncertain outcome. Today on WDEV's Mark Johnson Show, Vermont Law School Professor Cheryl Hanna said that the state would have little to no chance at overturning Murtha's decision. And there seems to be nothing the Legislature can do to change things.
(Addendum, Saturday 1/21. A differing opinion, reported in the Comments to this post by Doug Hoffer:
I heard one of her colleagues from the VLS say something quite different on VPR this morning. The 2nd Circuit Court of Appeals could very well look askance at Judge Murtha's attempt to read the minds of legislators. Prof. Parenteau (sp?) said he put the state's chances at 50 - 50.
That is more encouraging than Hanna's outlook. I'm almost certain we'll get the chance to find out; appealing the decision is pretty much a political no-brainer for Shumlin, whether a reversal is likely or not.)
I have a few thoughts about this, and welcome yours in the comments below.
-- Was the agreement giving the state a say in license extension just a big scam all along? No other state had any such deal with a nuclear power plant; regulation is otherwise the province of the feds. So was Vermont's agreement doomed from the start? Was Entergy willing to sign it because, deep down, it knew it could go to court and get the deal tossed out? Did the Legislature accept the deal knowing it might be nothing more than a fig leaf? Were they misled by leadership, or too clueless to realize the fact? I can't say; I didn't live in Vermont at the time. I'd be glad for some historical perspective.
-- Will our plucky Ethan Allen Institute conservatives be all up in arms over this trampling of states' rights? Mmmm, probably not. Hypocrites. Moving on...
-- Is it time to start a "Dump Bill Sorrell" movement? He got his ass kicked but good on this one. Maybe he was playing a weak hand, but hey, when a football team loses, the coach and the quarterback get the blame. (His losing streak also includes the state's campaign finance law.) And let us not forget his issuance of a free pass allowing the Hartford Police Department to commit mayhem in the name of keeping the peace, topped off by his opinion that "there is no right to resist an arrest, even an illegal one."
(And maaan, did he sound stupid and clueless on the radio this morning, when Mark Johnson was questioning him about Murtha's ruling. If you didn't catch it live, Mark podcasts his shows on his website. (Google "Mark Johnson Show.") He usually posts fresh audio within a day or two. Sorrell was on right at the beginning of the first hour today.)
I'd call for a Sorrell version of the GMD Oddsmaker if not for The Salmon Theorem: The voters of Vermont will blindly re-elect incumbents unless/until they (a) commit felonies or (b) die.
And I'm not sure about (b).
-- In a moment of pure political cynicism, I find myself thinking that the decision is a big fat win-win for Governor Shumlin. He gets credit for vocally opposing Vermont Yankee, but he doesn't have to deal with the consequences of an actual closure.
But I'm sure that evaluating a politician on the basis of cynicism is completely unfair.
I am Seamus, and I am grateful to be riding on the roof.
"Gift" is the German word for poison. That bit of trivia sprang to mind when I came across a piece in the, "oh by the way" section of today's Free Press (corner pocket, 3c) informing us that, just in time for Christmas, "a small amount" of tritium has been found in the Connecticut river.
The nuclear plant says it learned Tuesday that a small amount of tritium was found in a sample taken near the plant on Nov. 3. The amount was significantly below the federal drinking water limit, and samples taken Nov. 7 and 10 showed no signs of tritium.
Absent from this statement is whether or not those benign samples taken November 7 and 10 were the only other samples taken since that date.
As the mandated closing approaches in March, there is a sense of desperation to VY's PR efforts. Like an aging spinster she wraps her boney frame in economic illusion and insists you'll miss her when she's gone.
Hold the presses! There's been another incident report from Vermont Yankee. Only this one took two months for the NRC report to appear, and it clearly illustrates that there were significant safety and reliability concerns at the time:
LOSS OF VITAL AC POWER WHILE SHUTDOWN
"This 60-day telephone notification is being made pursuant to 10CFR50.73(a)(2)(iv)(A) and 10CFR50.73(a)(1) to describe an invalid actuation of a containment heat removal system.
"On October 11, 2011, with the reactor shutdown for refueling, a partial loss of vital AC power was experienced which resulted in a loss of shutdown cooling as well as PCIS group 2, 3, 4, and 5 half isolations. The actuation was determined to be invalid as it occurred because a breaker supplying power to the 'A' vital AC was manually opened, resulting in actuation of the associated PCIS logic circuitry. The Group 4 actuation resulted in a complete isolation of the single train Residual Heat Removal shutdown cooling suction path. The shutdown cooling path was isolated for approximately 12 minutes resulting in a coolant temperature increase of approximately 2 degrees F. At the time of the event, the reactor cavity was flooded with the spent fuel pool gates removed and the normal fuel pool cooling system in operation to provide reactor cavity cooling. Based on this, there was no impact on public health and safety."
The licensee notified the NRC Resident Inspector.
That's one hell of a temperature climb in just twelve minutes!
Vermont Yankee missed the golden opportunity to use their "Friday Flash" model to share their latest misadventure with the public in a more timely manner.
Apparently, this event actually occurred last Friday, December 2; so it will be interesting to see how long it takes for it to grind its way into the Free Press.
"While hanging tags on the 'B' Diesel Generator, which was tagged out for maintenance, the operator mistakenly entered the 'A' Diesel Generator Room and tripped the 'A' Diesel Generator fuel rack, making it inoperable. At this time both diesels were inoperable placing the plant in a 24 Hour LCO.
"When the fuel rack was tripped alarms were received in the control room, the operator was immediately contacted and the problem was identified and corrected. Total LCO time was approximately 2 minutes."
In August after revelations that leaking tritium from Vermont Yankee had reached the Connecticut River shoreline Governor Shumlin called for increased monitoring of the situation. However anyone that assumed Vermont State monitoring and coordination would quickly tighten-up might be mistaken.
A Brattleboro Reformer report about a Vermont State Nuclear Advisory Panel meeting to review VY disaster response (which VY officials were too busy re-fueling to attend) reveals almost as an afterthought that some State officials were aware a month ago on Sept. 15th that dump trucks are relocating soil/silt material from inside Vermont Yankee to a Vernon gravel pit.
He [Vermont Health Department inspector Bill Irwin] said there was concern that the removal of those materials was not approved, but the inspection found Yankee has a permit with the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers to trawl the Connecticut River and typically deposits the silt on site.
Plant officials opted to hire a trucking company to remove the soil because of a lack of space within the station’s boundary after Entergy sold a portion of land to the Vermont Electric Power Company (VELCO) and instead took the materials to a Vernon gravel pit. Miller said the panel was not informed of the hauling.
According to Irwin, inspectors took photographs of the sediment at the pit and analyzed samples of the soil, testing for hundreds of radioactive materials to identify any byproducts of the plant’s operation.
"What in the soil is what see [sic] in all soils and sediment in the Connecticut River," Irwin said.
It is not made clear when exactly Yankee's Army Corp. permitted river dredging took place.
Seems like prompt knowledge and explanation of this silt/soil relocation is just the kind of thing that would fall front and center for the Vermont State Nuclear Advisory Panel.
A recent report to the State of Vermont on Entergy’s Vermont Yankee decommissioning trust fund shows the value continues to fall short, failing to meet projected requirements. The trust fund six month ago, at the end of April was $498,546,853. It was up slightly in May and then declined steadily. The fund as of the end of September 2011 was $472,346,906. This is a six month loss in value of almost $27 million.
The Vermont Yankee decommissioning fund was at $304 million in 2002 when Entergy of Louisiana purchased the plant. Entergy has not contributed to the fund which is intended to cover clean-up, fuel management and site restoration when Yankee closes. According topast projections the decommissioning fund was supposed to have been $464 million by 2008 but has languished in recent years. It continues to be way below Entergy’s 2007 estimated plant decommissioning costs of $656 million to $991 million.
concluded that the current requirement for the State to review the adequacy of the trust fund to meet all cleanup obligations every five years is not frequent enough.
The new policy apparently is for the State to watch Entergy's decommissioning trust fund’s value fall in real time, rather than slow motion.
Imagine my surprise when I heard the (u)n-credible Entergy VY spokesman Larry Smith's pronouncement regarding yesterday's earthquake on this morning's VPR news!
Vermont Yankee nuclear plant spokesman Larry Smith said nothing was recorded by the plant's seismic monitor.*
*corrected
Perhaps 'nothing was recorded' because the machine wasn't plugged in ... or had no ink in its graphic pen ... or was under a pile of newspapers ... or because we're not supposed to worry about what an "unlikely" earthquake might do to fuel pool containment, not to mention cooling systems and reactor containment.
Or perhaps nothing was measured as the flip side of how Entergy's hyper-sensitive lab instruments measured tritium in riverbank samples "below minimum detectable levels."
At our house, 171 miles northwest of the nuclear power plant, the lights flickered once, and that was all.
But imagine, my friends, what will happen when there's a serious earthquake, before or after the plant closes. With onsite storage of old fuel (which, we learned from the ongoing Fukushima disaster, is still radioactively HOT!), that Vernon site, so close to the elementary school (3-tenths of a mile on the same road), will be dangerous for a very long time.
Just ask Arnie Gundersen.
I wonder whether the closing costs include the cost of building a new school. I wonder whether the evacuation plans include using roads that might be torn apart in a serious quake. I wonder why it is that we're using this hellish fuel at all: have we no regard for the future? For our children and their children?
Well now we know how Entergy will try and spin it . In his rushed pushback against the Vermont Department of Health’s announcement that radioactive tritium leaking from VY has reached the Connecticut River, Entergy Vermont Yankee spokes-flack Larry Smith makes a claim that dips below the level of detectable credibility.
Smith maintains that Entergy’s tests are showing tritium levels below the minimum detectable level. He fails to explain how Entergy labs perform this miraculous feat of science.
But New Orleans-based Entergy Corp. issued a statement, saying its testing of the same July 18 and July 25 samples showed levels of tritium below the minimum detectable amount.
"Results from our laboratory testing of those same samples ... show levels that are below that same extreme lower limit," Vermont Yankee spokesman Larry Smith said.
Smith said he could not explain how the company was able to detect tritium at levels below the "minimum detectible." He said Entergy wants an independent third party to analyze both sets of test results to resolve the discrepancy
The only remaining question is how Entergy will choose to spin this one. Will it be the banana story or the one about "background" radiation from nuclear testing in the 1960's?
It doesn't really matter which one they settle upon, since it's all just a dumb show to distract us from the terrible truth that other, far more deadly isotopes have likely made the same trip.
So, despite earlier threats to shut-down cold this fall if not granted the requested preliminary injunction to continue operating past March 2012, Entergy has decided to refuel Vermont Yankee.
There is still some more profit to be extracted from the old tin can, even if only until March; and look what just this gesture of confidence has done for Entergy stock:
Following the 8 AM release of the decision to refuel, the company's stock rose as soon as the market opened Monday, ending the day up 47 cents to $68.78 a share.
It's all about gamesmanship, an Entergy specialty. If rather than refueling, they had lived-up to their threat and announced an immediate closure, not only would their stock have taken a huge and long-lasting hit, but the prospects for their case against the state would have gone right up the spout.
Arnie Gundersen of Fairewinds Associates sheds some additional light on Entergy's likely motives:
Without new fuel, Entergy could not have kept the plant running at full power beyond this fall, said Arnie Gundersen, a nuclear engineer in Burlington and a critic of the plant. Running the plant at reduced power is less reliable and less profitable, he said.
Gunderson goes somewhat further and speculates that, even if allowed to operate past next March, the plant might in any case close in 2015:
Vermont Yankee faces replacing a $100 million condenser and making repairs that will be required in response to the March failure of the Fukushima plant in Japan following an earthquake and tsunami. “They may decide to throw in the towel in 2015,” Gundersen said. “It makes no economic sense.”
This way, any bad news for investors may be kicked down the road while the cash-cow that is VY, though elderly and prone to leakage, can still be stripped for the cream she continues to yield.
"VT thinks ENVY wants a 20 year marriage, but what they really want is a series of 20 years of one night stands. The moment VY becomes too costly, they will be gone!"
This is just a reminder that Saturday, July 23, from 10AM to 5PM, "The Vermont Nucelar Power Conference: From Fukushima to Vermont" will be held in the Livak Ballroom on the 4th Floor of the UVM Campus Building. Arnie Gundersen will be presenting from 10:30 until noon. His topic: "Nucelar Power 101." ___________________________________________________________
There is fresh evidence that the contamination in Japan extends well beyond Fukushima Prefecture.
In the newest video release from Fairewinds Associates,Arnie Gundersen explains how radioactive materials have made their way much more deeply into the food chain than was earlier anticipated, through deposits of so-called "black rain" that was carried by plumes from the early releases at Fukushima, and settled on feed straw as far away as 45 miles from the site.
Also in this video segment, Gundersen discusses the dismal outlook for neutralizing onsite hazards in the forseeable future, and worrisome findings in environmental test samples collected in the vicinity of Tokyo.
This week, Reuters reported on the growing credibility gap among Japanese with regard to the ethical reliability of their nuclear industry as a whole, even as the Fukushima disaster remains unresolved.
With Tokyo Electric already discredited, the industry has been further tarnished by revelations that Kyushu Electric Power Co. attempted to manipulate a public forum on nuclear safety by instructing its workers to pose as ordinary citizens and send e-mails in support of restarting nuclear power plants in the south.
"There is growing suspicion that power companies are playing fast and loose with data to support their cause and will go so far as to orchestrate public support," said Jeffrey Kingston, director of Asian studies at Temple University's Japan campus.
To their credit, the Japanese public actually seem surprised and outraged by this effrontery! Over here, we've just come to expect such unethical behavior as a matter of course.
There's little comfort for Vermonters in Attorney General William Sorrell's conclusion that Entergy and Vermont Yankee's misrepresentations do not exactly rise to the level of criminal behavior. As the Free Press observed today, incompetence in the administration of a nuclear facility is hardly more desirable than downright dishonesty.
"We found more incompetence than malevolence," Attorney General William Sorrell said this week in announcing the results of the investigation. "A corporation of this size and this importance -- I don't mean to disparage cops -- but this was like Keystone Kops."
In a sane world, where concerns for public safety would trump all corporate claims, this finding would be...should be... the final nail in the coffin for Vermont Yankee.
But, no...if the Attorney General thinks he can't make a criminal case out of the whoppers perpetrated by Entergy and VY, we just go on as if nothing ever happened; and the NRC doesn't even care that the operators have been publicly exposed (at the very least) as colossal incompetents.
Isn't this sort of the corporate equivalent of claiming innocence by reason of insanity?
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.
For anyone who has been following Arnie Gunderson on Fairewinds’ videos since the Fukushima meltdowns it may be no surprise that they are attracting considerable attention. Not surprisingly the videos, produced on a shoestring, are straight forward and informative.
Pro nuclear power blogger Rod Adams has noticed too, and this isn’t the first time. Last March, Adams was taken to task by the Brattleboro Reformer for an unsuccessful effort to smear Gundersen’s reputation. He penned a letter to the editor attempting to blunt Gundersen’s critique of Vermont Yankee by attacking his reputation. The Reformer called out his methods in an editorial titled: If you can't refute the message then try to discredit the messenger.
It’s archived unfortunately, but in it the Reformer noted the ongoing efforts at personal destruction:
That's the tactic several Vermont Yankee advocates have taken to impugn the character and devalue the experience of Arnie Gundersen, a nuclear safety advocate who has been highly critical of the operation of the nuclear power plant in Vernon.
The writer [Rod Adams] of Atomic Insights (atomicinsights.blogspot.com) accused Gundersen of inflating his resume…,
Gundersen, a former nuclear industry senior vice president, was once praised by the Chairman of the NRC for his congressional testimony about problems in the nuclear industry to the Committee on Governmental Affairs in 1993. Former NRC Chairman Selin said “Everything Mr. Gundersen said was absolutely right; he performed quite a service....”
Fast forward to the latest effort (here) where Adams pulls no punches and accuses Gundersen (not TEPCO) of causing fear, uncertainty and doubt. He confesses to being tired due to the effort required to respond and debunk what he says are false claims. Yet Adams marshals enough strength to author a long attack piece and at the close flatly explains he believes it is simply more effective to attack the messenger rather than argue the facts. His confessed tactic in simple and straight forward terms:
Several people have challenged me with regard to my efforts to expose Gundersen as having strong personal and financial motives to attack his former industry. [Note: Adams has had a business relationship with the French nuclear firm Areva currently contracted by TEPCO and is marketing small nuclear reactors] They do not like my efforts to show that he has not been completely forthcoming about his experience. They have told me that it is not fair to focus on the messenger; they say I should focus on countering his assertions instead.
My response is to remind people that it is often far more effective to aim at the archer than to aim at the arrows. (Of course, I am speaking figuratively here. My weapon is my keyboard.)
The Energy Collective blog is an energy industry (Siemens AG) sponsored site with a variety of bloggers that offers interesting information on all forms of power sources in that context. It is significant that Adams is readily taken to task in the comment section by a fellow Energy Collective diarist for his tone and destructive methods on what should be his home turf.
This [Adams' diary] post doesn't create the context that correctly illustrates the news reporting climate that's shrouded Fukushima, in your article debunking Arnie. That includes those we would expect to hear from which includes TEPCO, the Japanese government and the IAEA. Gundersen has also been completely correct in many of his assertions from day one, but you haven't pointed that out.
UPDATE: Today the Free Press continues to run the AP IMPACT report. Today's story: tritium leaks, like those found at Yankee, are present in 75% of all U.S. nuke plants.
You have to wonder, though, how many of the plants lied about even having the pipes the way Vermont Yankee did.
If you've been following the stories about Vermont Yankee and Fukushima you will be interested in this story published in today's Burlington Free Press.
We have no information on whether specific changes have been made to the standards for Vermont Yankee, but given the age of the plant it seems quite likely that they have.
Due to space limitations the full story didn't appear in the Free Press, but you should read it. The article discloses a series of failures in virtually every operational or safety system in nuclear plants across the country.
What's our experience in Vermont: collapsing and leaking cooling towers, valve failures, leaks from pipes that the management claimed didn't even exist, yet we are told that state regulators have no authority to even look at the safety of the plant that directly imperils residents of Vermont and New Hampshire.
Read the story, think about what's happening in Japan, and think about what you want to see here in Vermont.
After six years of repeated attempts to engage the Nuclear Regulatory Commission's Advisory Committee on Reactor Safety, Arnie Gundersen of Fairewinds Associates was finally given five-minutes of their precious time in a hearing that allotted a full two hours of that time to industry representatives.
Despite the brevity of his opportunity, and despite persistent interruptions, Arnie ably made the argument that, in light of recent developments at the Fukushima reactors, the NRC can no longer take the position that there is "0%" chance of containment failure at boiling water reactors in the U.S.
In Japan the validity of that NRC position has been thoroughly tested. Failure of the containment vessels occurred in all three reactors that were tested in the Fukushima disaster (two, in the minutes following the earthquake, before the tsunami even hit.) As predicted by the Fukushima experience, the failure rate should now be at 100%!!
This one goes under the heading "better late than never." Tepco is now admitting that the containment buildings may very likely be leaking. No kidding. ____________________________________________________________
We are fortunate to have a new video analysis from Arnie Gundersen examining the implications of the Fukushima crisis for reactors located in the U.S.; and another excellent informational video in which our own Maggie Gundersen, president and founder of Fairewinds Associates, interviews Marco Kaltofen, of Worcester Polytechnic Institute in Worcester Mass.
Mr. Kaltofen is an expert in radiation chemistry and monitoring. He answers some of the questions Fairewinds has been receiving about the nature and pathways of radiation as it spreads, and how exposure can be minimized.
250-1
55-1
The NRC is feeling good about itself.Sounding pumped, like a lean mean nuclear regulatin’ machine 
So, despite earlier threats to shut-down cold this fall if not granted the requested preliminary injunction to continue operating past March 2012, 
