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.
If I had thought much about it I would have assumed the ever vigilant Vermont Yankee management team might keep their corporate office’s door locked.
However in Brattleboro on Monday eleven women from an anti-nuclear group walked through an unlocked door and entered Entergy’s Vermont Yankee corporate headquarters.
The eleven protesters walked in and spread out yellow crime scene tape in the emergency operations press center conference room in order to make a citizens arrest before they themselves were arrested.
The door they gained entrance through is operated by an electronic key system and people normally enter only when accompanied by an Entergy employee.
Did I mention the door was unlocked and unattended?
All this follows after last September’s fire at VY headquarters. The fire at Vermont Yankee corporate offices in Brattleboro was termed brazen and suspicious. As far as anyone knows it is still under investigation.
"It's a little disturbing; it's unnerving. If the cause of the fire is determined to be deliberate, that's the most brazen, deliberate attempt on our property, or our employees or one of our facilities in our 39 year history."
Suggestion: Keep an eye on those unlocked doors, never know who might wander in.
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!
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.
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!"
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.
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.
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.
Yesterday the Vermont Electric Co-op sent a clear signal to Entergy Vermont Yankee. They voted 9-1 against signing a 20 year power purchase agreement with the aging plant. One VEC board member described his vote as follows:
“We need to lock in with a credible supplier,” he said. “We need to deal with a company that has the trust and support of the majority of our members. Entergy isn’t that company.”
Entergy had fired off its PR gun a little early on March 30th with a press release that was trumpeted by local online cheerleaders of the plant.
Entergy Corporation today announced Entergy Nuclear Vermont Yankee, LLC has completed negotiations on a 20-year agreement to sell power from the Vermont Yankee nuclear plant to customers of Vermont Electric Cooperative, Inc., the third-largest electric distribution utility in Vermont.
This announcement was quickly shot down by the VEC Chairman, and yesterday’s vote shows the deal had little support. Chalk it up to an ill timed PR move or an awkward attempt to bulldoze the VEC board or…it could be a move sooo sly only a few chosen souls even understand the sheer cleverness. You see according to YesVY blog (which understandably claims no inside knowledge) it was never meant to be about a VEC power deal at all!!
Entergy was sending secret signals to others.
It’s a little long but here put on these special glasses and you will see the message.
I think Entergy is signalling. Signalling can be sort of fancy word for advertising. However, advertising is often comparatively simple: "Strawberries now available at $2.50 a quart." Signalling can be much subtler. For example, a potential employee shows his dedication to his career by going to night school, therefore "signalling" to the potential employer that he will be a very good employee. In my opinion, this press release signals: Entergy Vermont Yankee intends to be open for business after March 2012, and they are willing to give very good power purchase agreement rates.
[…] Similarly, I think that the question of why Entergy sent this press release at this time cannot be answered by looking at Entergy's relationship with VEC. This press release is a signal to a wider market. Also, this is an upbeat way of signalling: we're ready to sell power to a buyer! If the VEC board turns down the agreement later this month, Entergy's signal would not be as effective.
What is it with the media's love of meaningless polls?
In an article in today's Rutland Herald, staff writer Susan Smallheer may have slipped and fallen prey to Vermont poll syndrome by letting another questionable poll punch above its weight. This stands out from Smallheer’s usual Vermont Yankee coverage.
Jefferies does and seeks to do business with companies covered in its research reports. Investors should be aware that Jefferies may have a conflict of interest that could affect the objectivity of this report
So how does a pound of feathers ever weigh more than a pound? Smallheer claims:
The Jefferies report also gave weight to the recent results of The Doyle Poll, the unscientific poll conducted during town meeting by Sen. William Doyle, a Washington County Republican, which showed that 45 percent of Vermonters now favored Vermont Yankee to continue to operate. The poll, which is voluntary and open to repeated participation, showed a flip from 2010, when Vermonters were 52 percent against the relicensing, in the wake of the radioactive tritium leaks at Yankee.
But this poll, Doyle’s latest in his long running series of voluntary, easily manipulated polls, was taken on town meeting day before the almost month old Fukushima power plant problems.
Can’t imagine how the Jefferies report - insightful or not - gives weight to a thoroughly unscientific local poll taken before the Japanese nuclear accident which may shift attitudes. It still weighs a pound.
Sometimes you've just got to re-state the obvious. Entergy doesn't understand the meaning of the word "no" and the NRC seems to be suffering from short-term memory loss.
In light of the Fukushima crisis, our "DC-3" (Leahy, Sanders and Welch) have issued the following joint statement:
"It is hard to understand how the NRC could move forward with a license extension for Vermont Yankee at exactly the same time as a nuclear reactor of similar design is in partial meltdown in Japan. 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."
With an emboldened plutocracy flexing its muscles all over the country, it's good to have another reminder that our DC delegation continues to look out for the poor "step-children" who have been generally cut-adrift in the current round of economic blackmail. In this case, those "step-children" are the twin causes of environmental and human safety, both of which Entergy apologists would willingly sacrifice on the altar of "cheap" energy, just to keep VY burbling away well past its sell-by date.
Our own "DC 3" have all signed onto a letter drafted by Bernie Sanders, who sits on the panel charged with oversight of the NRC, urging that regulatory body to ensure that clean-up of Vermont Yankee is undertaken immediately following closure of the plant.
The lawmakers called it "unacceptable" that Entergy, which owns the Vermont plant, could engage in "decades of delay" before cleaning up the site along the Connecticut River at Vernon, Vt. "Immediate decommissioning will assure Vermonters that the plant is being disassembled safely," the delegation wrote. An immediate cleanup and shutdown of the site also would allow the plant operator to take advantage of the skills of many long-term Yankee employees who otherwise would lose their jobs.
In the letter to Commission Chairman Gregory Jaczko, the delegation requests a meeting with the full commission; and that the meeting should include Governor Shumlin,
because of the "enormous consequences" for Vermont and the state's "vital interest" in the plant's safe shutdown.
Tying swift decommissioning to job retention is a brilliant and entirely legitimate strategy, which should steal some thunder from one of VY's dwindling arguments against closure.
As we know all too well,
Entergy has indicated it favors a so-called "SAFSTOR" decommissioning method, a process that the delegation letter said "would let Entergy off the hook" for cleanup and waste disposal for years or even decades. "While Entergy may prefer leaving the plant to sit like an abandoned factory because it has not saved the necessary funds to fully decommission the plant, this is not the safest option for Vermonters," Leahy, Sanders and Welch wrote.
"We have a right to our own opinions but not our own facts." Suffice it to say, Entergy Louisiana & VT Yankee still do not get this. Judging from past & present behavior, they never will. Their display of inherent dishonesty which was found to be corporate-wide, including being caught deliberately giving false information to VT regulators, legislature & those tasked with oversight has proven this, as well as abject failure at the 'transparency', as promised. Since then, things have only worsened.
On the anniversary of the historic and infamous vote by VT senate to close Entergy Louisiana owned Vermont Yankee, on schedule, by nearly unanimous 26-4 vote, Entergy Louisiana continues its fear mongering campaign and 'sky is falling' message to VT residents with all out assault on the state. The big prize? To overshadow and thereby obscure VT's victory, all taking place on the anniversary of the vote, hopefully with favorable outcome for them.
Obvious mission to undermine the will of the people by overturning the vote taken one year ago to shutter VY on schedule. Using their corporate might, attempted muscling of VT is very bald. This includes VT business community aligned with AIV-Entergy is also a member, and very own Entergy sponsored VTEP, a 'diverse business group' in which all members share at least one thing in common, all support VY continued operation-Entergy is also a member.
With VT news media at its disposal, in this past year continuing to the present VT has been bombarded with full page ads from Entergy Louisiana promoting VY as they & apologists attempted to explain away the series of failures spanning six years which served as evidence the plant had fallen into a state of disrepair due to faulty maintenance procedures by the company.
Ads were stopped when VT AG ruled they contained false information. Media blitz from Entergy Louisiana including employees and VT businesses all appearing as virtual bots in Stepford-like trance, as well as slanted & erroneous missives from a variety of sources, primarily VTEP staffers doing double duty as 'energy lobbyists' to legislature, Brad Ferland & Guy Page. Also including academicians from NH & VT, who have no nuclear experience or credentials, as evidenced by their irrelevent and inaccuracy-laden commentary. Valley News 1/19/2011 letter titled, "The Truth About Tritium" by Thomas Curphey, is a mere straw man argument as tritium itself has never been the main issue but the spin orchestrated by Entergy Lousiana. Another, Brattleboro Reformer "Free speech, energy choices and public health" op-ed by Gerry Silverstein, frequent VY apologist to VT news media, in which he compares the health of 38 year old plant to a 38 year old human body, was very strange since this is from a UVM professor teaching medical students. Facepalm.
Hope springs eternal in the breast of Vermont Yankee supporters who maintain that, even after countless leaks, squeaks and outright collapses; even after the legislature voted to let it go, and even after the man who led that vote is seated as Governor, there still could be some way to keep the infernal thing in operation. In today's Free Press, VY spokesman Larry Smith and Brad Ferland of Vermont Energy Partnership both expressed the hope that the Legislature could somehow be persuaded to take up the matter again; and Steve Costello of CVPS says
"If it could be shown to be safe, we want it,
But there's the rub. Every story coming out of VY over the past two years has provided more reason to believe that it is definitely unsafe to operate the plant beyond it's predicted closure date.
Apparently, supporters think that the sale of VY to a different entity could somehow put things right again; but simple commonsense predicts that any new owner of the antediluvian facility would most likely be regarding it as a strategic liability to be minimally maintained and mined for whatever tax credits or incentives might be available before an unceremonious death- dump on Vermont's front stoop. And a couple of years of marginally cheaper power are supposed to be enough to keep us on the hook? Please... we may be a rural state but we weren't born yesterday!
Some, like Orleans Senator Vince Iluzzi envision a scenario in which the sale of VY to a different entity might allow the NCR (Nuclear Regulatory Commission) to overrule Vermont's Legislature and renew VY's license unilaterally.
"Vermont may not have jurisdiction over Vermont Yankee," said Illuzzi, who voted against the plant in the Senate this year and said if there were a new vote, he's not sure how he would vote.
Now that would be really well-received by fiercely independent Vermonters.
Arne Gundersen, who advises the Legislature on all things nuclear, doubts that the NRC would intrude to such a degree, although he can well see Entergy courting any legal maneuver that might further delay the inevitable shut-down.
That's a little like sending the Lusitania in to rescue the Titanic," he said.
One thing is certain, before that glow-farm on the banks of the Connecticut River is finally shutdown, VY and her owners will have milked every opportunity available for delay.
It was great to hear Peter Shumlin taking the Entergy issue right to Brian Dubie yesterday. As reported on VPR, Shumlin launched a powerful attack on Dubie's pro-Entergy partisanship:
Dubie weakly claimed that he doesn't work for Entergy, although it would be hard for Dubie or Douglas to prove that. Meanwhile, Yankee isn't the only Entergy plant pumping tritium into the water. Down in Massachusetts, the PatriotLedger reports that Entergy's Pilgrim plant is doing the same thing:
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.
250-1
55-1
If I had thought much about it I would have assumed the ever vigilant Vermont Yankee management team might keep their corporate office’s door locked.
So, despite earlier threats to shut-down cold this fall if not granted the requested preliminary injunction to continue operating past March 2012, 
