The Nukebusters Blog

BUT WE ARE NOT DONE. ENTERGY WILL NOT GIVE UP, NEITHER CAN WE

STATEMENT OF CITIZENS AWARENESS NETWORK

For the past few months we've heard endless reports that Vermont Yankee (VY) is leaking poisonous radioactive Tritium into our groundwater. We've learned that we've been lied to about the existence of underground pipes. The source(s) of the Tritium leak(s) have not been found, while the poisonous substance travels underground toward the Connecticut River. It's now clear that what is leaking is coming from the reactor itself. We also learned through a whistleblower that Entergy had a leak in 2005--serious enough that workers had to wear protective gear to deal with it. Yet it never informed the state or supposedly the NRC.

And how did Entergy deal with it? Instead of shutting the nuke down, the company put some kind of seal in it to continue to operate.

On February 25, 2010 the Vermont Senate held a courageous and historic vote; by 26 to 4 they overwhelmingly voted to deny Entergy the ability to continue to operate after its license expires in 2012. This was a validation of democracy and that the will of the people can triumph over a multinational corporation. Hundreds and hundreds of Vermonters contacted their Senators and made it clear that it was unacceptable for this corporation and this nuke to continue to operate.

And Entergy's response? It denies the importance of this historic vote and still wants the Vermont legislature to ignore its years of systemic mismanagement, delayed maintenance and deception to give it another chance to operate in the state. The deal that Entergy offered on the eve of the vote was to supply Vermonters with 25 MW of power at 4 cents a KW hour for three years! As if this paltry token would somehow cover its checkered history in the state.

Then there is the decommissioning fund. Entergy arrogantly refuses to fully fund its decommissioning fund by 2012 as they agreed to do when it bought the nuke. Decommissioning and cleanup costs are skyrocketing, and with the current radioactive leaks into our groundwater, costs will rapidly increase. Although Entergy has done a pretty good job of demonstrating the colossal failure of nuclear power while operating with its tower collapse, transformer fire, and repeated and unending leaks from pipes that never existed, decommissioning demonstrates how dirty nuclear power can be.

Yankee Rowe, the smallest commercial reactor, cost $39 million to build and a whopping $750 million to decommission due to leaks and ground water contamination. Connecticut Yankee cost over $1.2 billion to clean up the spills and groundwater contamination. This does not include the costs of guarding the high level radioactive waste indefinitely. So while the leak (s) continue into the groundwater and the Connecticut River, the NRC allows Vermont Yankee to continue to operate potentially endangering the health and safety of the river not to mention the health and safety of the tri-state community. Will people want to boat on a slightly radioactive river?

Then there is Entergy's new Limited Liability Corporation Enexus. Originally dubbed Spinco, this new LLC would house Entergy's newly acquired aging fleet of decaying nukes including Vermont Yankee. It would start with a $3.5 billion dollar debt and only $700 million in reserve funds to deal with any equipment failures or accidents at any of these nukes, all of which have already been found to have tritium leaks. And Entergy wants to tie any future power purchase agreement with Vermont to Vermont's acceptance of Entergy's Enexus.

To add insult to injury, Entergy's CEO, Wayne Leonard, recently announced that if its new LLC didn't fly with Vermonters, Entergy could, without state approval, proceed on its own to merge into Enexus and relegate its old nukes--with the $3.5 billion in debt and limited resources--to the new shell corporation Entergy.

We are at a tipping point. We have won a monumental victory. But we are not done. We are at the beginning of the end. Now we must focus our efforts on the Vermont House. All the people from the tri-state community who have worked so hard to make replacement a reality are still needed to ensure that democracy succeeds. Entergy will not give up, neither can we.

Remember, we still must act today to change tomorrow.

Deb Katz
Citizens Awareness Network
February 25, 2010

http://rutlandherald.com/article/20100310/NEWS04/3100368/1003/NEWS02

http://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/vermont-yankee-survey-tritium-leaks-push-two-thirds-of-vermonters-to-favor-closure-of-reactor-by-2012-only-9-would-pick-nuclear-to-power-home-85829767.html

For further information contact:
Dan Dewalt 348-7701
James Marc Leas 864-1575

20 year Vermont Yankee extension rejected by 15 more town meetings

With all 17 towns reporting, 15 passed the resolution asking the legislature to deny approval for Vermont Yankee to operate after 2012, one town voted against, and one town decided to table the resolution. The text of the resolution is below:

At least seven of the towns: Thetford, Brookfield, Montgomery, Mooretown, Cabot, Sharon, and Peacham passed the resolution with near unanimous votes

Danville and Woodstock passed it with a 2:1 majority, Jamaica with more than a 3:1 majority

Winooski passed the resolution by Australian ballot with more than a 2 to 1 majority (644-313)

The only town voting down the resolution was Rockingham, and there the vote was 33-36

The towns voting this year were all different from the towns that voted last year. Adding the results from both years, a total of 51 towns voted to close Vermont Yankee in 2012 and only 3 towns voted down the resolution.

"The town meeting vote mirrors the Senate vote not only in voting down operation after 2012 but also in the size of the majority," said Dan Dewalt. "A vast majority of Vermonters know Entergy cannot be trusted. Vermont Yankee is coming to its end, and we will be grateful if we safely decommission it in 2012."

15 Towns voting yes in 2010 on resolution to close Vermont Yankee in 2012 (see text of model resolution below)
Woodstock (passed 20-11)
Thetford (passed 150-1)
Bristol (passed unanimously)
Fayston (brought up under other business, passed 54-12)
Brookfield near unanimous
Montgomery (unanimous 65+)
Moretown (near unanimous 50+)

amendment added to Moretown resolution:"Entergy shall fund the training of Yankee's existing workers to build and maintain green energy production systems in Vermont to replace Yankee's power."

Waitsfield (first narrowly beat back motion to pass over, then on a voice vote passed by large margin with only a few votes against)
Danville (110-66)
Cabot (near unanimous)
Huntington (passed with an amendment)
Sharon (near unanimous)
Jamaica (55-16)
Peacham (near unanimous)
Winooski (Australian ballot result: 644-313)

1 Town voting to pass over 2010 (table)
Cambridge (passed over)

0 towns voting to split the resolution and pass one or more of the three parts of the resolution

1 Town voting no in 2010

Rockingham 33-36

Rockingham voters legally warned the resolution, but the selectboard refused to accept it in the warning, so it was brought up as other business at 11:30PM on Sat. Consternation was expressed at it being brought up without being warned. The resolution failed by three votes.

Model resolution used in most towns:

Shall the voters of _________________request the Vermont legislature to:

  1. Deny approval for the operation of Vermont Yankee after March of
     2012, which marks the end of its 40 year design life.
  2. Require that the Entergy Corporation of Louisiana fulfill its
     pledge to fully fund the cleanup and decommissioning costs of
     closing Vermont Yankee.
  3. Seek safe, renewable,regional sources of electricity combined with
     efficiency and conservation measures to replace the power
     presently provided by Vermont Yankee.


The 2009 results were 36 yes, 2 no, 3 table, 3 split resolution passing one or two of the points (I can send town by town results from 2009 if wanted)

Altogether from town meeting votes in both 2009 and 2010:

36 + 15 = 51 towns voted yes
2 + 1 = 3 towns voted no
3 +1 = 4 towns passed over
0 + 3 = 3 towns split up the resolution and passed part

The towns that had the Vermont Yankee resolution on the warning for a vote this year are: Sharon, Thetford, Cabot, Danville, Peacham, Bristol, Jamaica, Winooski, Moretown, Huntington, Montgomery, Cambridge, Waitsfield, and Brookfield.

The towns that considered the resolution under other business are: Woodstock, Fayston, and Rockingham

MONTPELIER -- Senate President Pro Tem Peter Shumlin, joined by three key senators, said Tuesday afternoon they would call for a vote on whether Vermont Yankee should continue operating.

http://www.rutlandherald.com/article/20100216/NEWS/100219944