Panel Questions Safety, Finances of Vermont Yankee
February 10, 2010
Grafitti spray painted on a bridge outside Montpelier, Vt., states sentiments about Vermont Yankee that were echoed by many panelists and attendees at Tuesday's event.
The Vermont Yankee nuclear plant is unsafe and a planned spin off to put it under new ownership is financially questionable, according to panelists at a public forum Tuesday at Vermont Law School.
The Advocacy Group of the Environmental Law Society (ELS) hosted the meeting on Vermont Yankee, where radioactive contamination has been found to be leaking into groundwater at the facility.
ELS members gave an overview of the nuclear reactor, which supplies 30 percent of Vermont's energy and also feeds the New England power grid. The plant opened in 1972, making it one of the oldest nuclear reactors in the nation. Entergy Nuclear bought the facility in 2002 from Central Vermont Public Service, Green Mountain Power and other Vermont utilities.
Vermont Yankee, the state's lone nuclear reactor, is seeking state approval for a 20-year renewal of its operating license, which expires in 2012. The Nuclear Regulatory Commission decides whether a nuclear plant is safe to operate, while the Vermont Legislature and the state Public Service Board (PSB) decide whether a plant's operation is in the public good.
Utility regulators, state legislators and the PSB recently criticized Vermont Yankee's management for making misleading statements about radioactive tritium found in the plant's groundwater monitoring wells and underground pipes along the Connecticut River.
The Vermont Department of Health said Monday that contamination levels of radioactive tritium continue to rise in a large area at the plant.
About 150 people attended the VLS public meeting at Chase Community Center, where James Moore of the Vermont Public Interest Research Group said Vermont Yankee was too old to be reliable or safe.
He said Entergy has proven itself untrustworthy because of its repeated denials about underground pipes carrying radioactive material.
"It's just asking for trouble" to relicense the plant, he said.
Moore said relicensing Vermont Yankee would make it 60 years old when a new license expires in 2032, which would make the plant more than a decade older than the current world record of 47 years for a nuclear reactor.
If Vermont Yankee closes, renewable electricity from wind, solar, hydropower and other sources and energy efficiency could provide an ample, safe and affordable supply of power and reduce greenhouse gas emissions, Moore said.
Panelist Don Kreis, who is a VLS assistant professor, discussed Entergy's corporate spinoff proposal in which a new company, Enexus, would take ownership of Vermont Yankee. Kreis said he had no opinion on whether the facility should be relicensed, but that Entergy has failed to meet its legal obligation to prove that its spin off proposal would benefit Vermonters. Enexus would be $3.5 billion in debt at its creation, he said.
Panelists Arnie and Maggie Gundersen discussed nuclear safety, oversight and the role of the law.
Arnie Gundersen is a consultant to the Vermont Legislature on Vermont Yankee, serving on the independent oversight panel that reviewed the plant's reliability last year.
He said Vermont Yankee managers repeatedly denied the plant had underground pipes carrying radioactive material. He said the company has a culture of dishonesty and that replacing the plant's top officials likely wouldn't correct the problem.
Vermont Yankee officials said the tritium contamination poses no public health risk, but Maggie Gundersen said it was clear a plume of radioactive groundwater was moving toward the Connecticut River beside the plant.
"There is a public safety hazard," she said.
SHARE