Vermont Yankee (Year in Review 2010)

Vermont Yankee (Year in Review 2010)

There are 28 comments on the Brattleboro Reformer story from Dec 31, 2010, titled Vermont Yankee (Year in Review 2010). In it, Brattleboro Reformer reports that:

In a year dominated by news-related events at Vermont Yankee nuclear power plant, none inflamed the debate about its potential closing quite like the discovery of a tritium leak on Jan.

Join the discussion below, or Read more at Brattleboro Reformer.

First Prev
of 2
Next Last
VermontDad

Burlington, VT

#1 Jan 3, 2011
The media persists with lines like "With the future of Vermont Yankee still unknown..." The facts suggest otherwise. Its license to operate expires in March of 2012; the Vermont Senate voted overwhelmingly 24-6 to deny an extension to the permit and the leaders of both legislative houses as well as the new governor say that the matter of retiring the plant as scheduled is settled. I guess the media has to hold open the potential for the unforeseeable, to avoid being tweaked should it occur. But really, it's over. Adults at the state's utilities are buying up replacement power at very favorable rates. Even the Town of Vernon is planning for the plant's retirement. It's past time to use our energy planning the next phase.
This Vermonter

Orrington, ME

#2 Jan 3, 2011
Vermont Yankee will get the ok from the NRC and the Department of Public Service as they have little to no reason not to issue it.
This Vermonter

Orrington, ME

#3 Jan 3, 2011
"While posing a very low risk to the surrounding environment or public health, the leak caused a major flare-up between supporters and opponents about the long-term safety and reliability of the 38-year-old facility."

"While posing a very low risk to the surrounding environment or public health, the leak caused a major flare-up between supporters and opponents about the long-term safety and reliability of the 38-year-old facility."

"While posing a very low risk to the surrounding environment or public health, the leak caused a major flare-up between supporters and opponents about the long-term safety and reliability of the 38-year-old facility."

What's this?



This Vermonter

Orrington, ME

#4 Jan 3, 2011
"-- The Vermont Yankee Public Oversight Panel said in a July 20 report that change was needed at the management level within the plant, but noted the nuclear facility could operate reliably for another 20 years if certain concerns were addressed."

"-- The Vermont Yankee Public Oversight Panel said in a July 20 report that change was needed at the management level within the plant, but noted the nuclear facility could operate reliably for another 20 years if certain concerns were addressed."

"-- The Vermont Yankee Public Oversight Panel said in a July 20 report that change was needed at the management level within the plant, but noted the nuclear facility could operate reliably for another 20 years if certain concerns were addressed."

And this?
This Vermonter

Orrington, ME

#5 Jan 3, 2011
You forgot to mention the NRC awarded VY a green safety rating

You forgot to mention the NRC awarded VY a green safety rating

You forgot to mention the NRC awarded VY a green safety rating

http://www.burlingtonfreepress.com/article/20...
This Vermonter

Orrington, ME

#6 Jan 3, 2011
"It appears the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) will determine Vermont Yankee should operate until 2032. In June of this year, the NRC, in its annual assessment, stated that the plant has been operated safely and gave its highest safety rating -- green.

Since Vermont Yankee applied for license renewal in 2006, the NRC has spent tens of thousands of hours doing in-depth technical and environmental assessments. In August 2007, the NRC's environmental report recommended license renewal as did a February 2008 Safety Evaluation Report. There do not appear to be material scientific and engineering issues to impede license renewal"

Could it be?
mike mulligan

Charlestown, MA

#7 Jan 3, 2011
This Vermonter wrote:
You forgot to mention the NRC awarded VY a green safety rating
You forgot to mention the NRC awarded VY a green safety rating
You forgot to mention the NRC awarded VY a green safety rating
http://www.burlingtonfreepress.com/article/20...
It is called grade inflation...
glaring

Sunapee, NH

#8 Jan 3, 2011
How in tens of thousands of hours doing in-depth technical and environmental assessments do you miss pipes carrying radioactive waste that had never in their 38 year history been inspected? How is the public to interpret this?
This glaring incompetence on the part of the plant operators and the NRC are very alarming to the public.
How much of this incredibly complicated, poison manufacturing machine is still uninspected?
This can't be spun, it is grossly negligent, it is what happens when money becomes more important than public safety.
This Vermonter

Barnet, VT

#9 Jan 4, 2011
glaring wrote:
How in tens of thousands of hours doing in-depth technical and environmental assessments do you miss pipes carrying radioactive waste that had never in their 38 year history been inspected? How is the public to interpret this?
This glaring incompetence on the part of the plant operators and the NRC are very alarming to the public.
How much of this incredibly complicated, poison manufacturing machine is still uninspected?
This can't be spun, it is grossly negligent, it is what happens when money becomes more important than public safety.
NRC knew about underground pipes at VY
By BOB AUDETTE / Reformer Staff
http://www.reformer.com/vermontyankee/ci_1495...

NRC tritium report finds no violations
By BOB AUDETTE / Reformer Staff

http://www.reformer.com/vermontyankee/ci_1513...

NRC: Tritium leak no danger to public health
By BOB AUDETTE / Reformer Staff

http://www.reformer.com/vermontyankee/ci_1490...
Solar Bomb

Little Rock, AR

#11 Jan 4, 2011
When the license is renewed by the NRC things will begin to get interesting...

“figuresdontlie*l iarscanfigure”

Since: Feb 10

S. Londonderry VT

#12 Jan 4, 2011
This Vermonter wrote:
Vermont Yankee will get the ok from the NRC and the Department of Public Service as they have little to no reason not to issue it.
So says Entergy ministry of propaganda VTEP's stooge to Topix community whose sole purpose is to game the Topix community & continually misinform.
http://www.vtep.org

My, my how you do go on & on, broadcasting your feigned ignorance as well as continually attempting to pull wool over eyes of gullible public, as they are the only ones who could be fooled by you.

As far as DPS/PSD, Entergy still has yet to complete the 81 reliability items tasked by VY POP.

New DPS/PSD commisioner was hired specifically to represent VT residents, not those who sell services to VTers & not being an agency bureaucrat.

There is little doubt NRC will relicense, however VTs rejection of VY is *unaffected* by this. VT has the ability to oversee the relicensing of the plant in original mou & enhanced ability re Act 160:
The power of Act 160
http://www.vtcitizen.org/index.php/act-160.ht...
July 2006 Act 160 becomes effective. Act 160:
1) sets forth the VY studies to be completed by the DPS;
2) sets forth a public engagement process; and
3) states that the Public Service Board not begin reviewing Entergy’s petition for continued operation before July 1, 2008 and that
***** the PSB may not “issue a final order or a certificate of public good until the general assembly determines that operation will promote the general welfare and grants approval for that operation.”*****
http://www.leg.state.vt.us/jfo/envy/TIME%20LI...
Act 160 pdf:
eg.state.vt.us/jfo/envy/ACT160 .pdf
JFO link to all Entergy/VY documents:
http://www.leg.state.vt.us/jfo/envy.aspx

Not so nice try.

“figuresdontlie*l iarscanfigure”

Since: Feb 10

S. Londonderry VT

#13 Jan 4, 2011
This Vermonter wrote:
"It appears the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) will determine Vermont Yankee should operate until 2032. In June of this year, the NRC, in its annual assessment, stated that the plant has been operated safely and gave its highest safety rating -- green.
So, what's the holdup? One of the lengthiest application decisions in history.

If Davis-Besse can make it, anyone can:
"Problems at the Davis-Besse nuclear reactor near Toledo are worse than expected"
http://www.cleveland.com/business/index.ssf/2...

Since rules are made to accomodate the industry, their green crayons, and, in fact *anything* NRC says or does is a complete joke.

NRC has been widely discredited & distrusted for its complicity. Not a true regulatory agency since it is a part of the industry it supposedly oversees & in fact reliant upon plants it supposedly regulates to stay in existance. They will not bite the hand that feeds them.

The information they base their 'investigation' on is supplied by the NPPs themselves.

Keep shoveling your shyt. It's great cardio!

“figuresdontlie*l iarscanfigure”

Since: Feb 10

S. Londonderry VT

#14 Jan 4, 2011
Solar Bomb wrote:
When the license is renewed by the NRC things will begin to get interesting...
Wrong!
- No one expects it to *not* be relicensed by the NRC
- No one respects or trusts NRC except nuclear industry, employees & gullible public, so it means zip.
- VT's senate vote & decision is unaffected by NRC as VT has legislative oversight which overrides NRC.

As you, fellow employees & others who are here solely to misinform & game the Topix community by supplying a neverending stream of distorted & inaccurate info you really have changed nothing & no one is fooled by you except the extremely gullible, if even they are.
This Vermonter

Barnet, VT

#15 Jan 4, 2011
Testimony of Peter A. Bradford
Public Oversight Panel for the Vermont Yankee Reliability Assessment
House Committee on Natural Resources and the Senate Finance Committee
Vermont Legislature
March 19, 2009

"Act 189 required a comprehensive vertical. audit and reliability assessment of the
Vermont Yankee Nuclear facility. The reliability assessment was performed by
Nuclear Safety Associates (NSA) under contract to thô Vermont Department of
Public Service (DPS), and summarized in the report Reliability Assessment of the
Vermont YañkeeNuclear Facility. That Report was completed and made public on
December 22, 2008...After performing the reliability assessment, the NSA team's overall conclusion
was that VY is operated reliably and that the current level of reliability can be
maintained through an extended operating period'provided that the areas identified
by the NSA repoit are effectively addressed. The Panel agrees with the audit
team's principal conclusions, though we have additional areas of emphasis as
spelled out in our report..."

http://www.leg.state.vt.us/jfo/envy/Bradford%...
This Vermonter

Barnet, VT

#16 Jan 4, 2011
http://publicservice.vermont.gov/nuclear/Publ...
Public Oversight Panel Report - This is the report of the Public Oversight Panel created by Act No. 189 of the Vermont General Assembly, enacted in June 2008. The purpose of this report is to provide information to the legislature in making its determination whether the Vermont Yankee plant should be authorized to operate in the State beyond the expiration of its current license on March 21, 2012.
This Vermonter

Barnet, VT

#17 Jan 4, 2011
http://publicservice.vermont.gov/dockets/7440...

Report to the
Vermont Department of Public Service
on the
Vermont Yankee License Renewal
February 27, 2009

http://publicservice.vermont.gov/

“figuresdontlie*l iarscanfigure”

Since: Feb 10

S. Londonderry VT

#18 Jan 4, 2011
More inaccurate & misleading info:

This Vermonter South Burlington, VT #6 23 hrs ago
"It appears the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) will determine Vermont Yankee should operate until 2032."

You say this as though their decision actually counts. Comment a mere stunt & another hoax an attempt to purport & presuppose inevitability. All just a show. Their 'determination' amounts to *nothing*.

The decision has been made & there are no plans to revisit the decision or hold another vote. There is little if any support & not enough to overturn the decision.

It is the VT legislature, not Shumlin or anyone else who have already made the decision based on the evidence last year, what VTers want as well as the findings of their own hearings, oversight & committees which took place for *FOUR YEARS* prior to the vote a year ago.

Jaczko has said that:

-- VT is not in violation of NRCs purview
-- Has also acknowledged VT has the right to make its own rules & has ability to shutter VY.

"The state and the NRC both have a good understanding of our respective roles. Our focus is on radiological health and safety. And around the country, states have authority in other areas."

"Will the NRC pre-empt the Legislature’s decision to deny approval for relicensure of the plant?

As I said earlier, the agency has been communicating with the state, and right now it’s

--- nothing that would intrude on the agency’s purview (public health and safety).---

I don’t want to comment on what the decision of the Vermont Legislature would be"
http://vtdigger.org/2010/07/14/jaczko-verbati...

“figuresdontlie*l iarscanfigure”

Since: Feb 10

S. Londonderry VT

#19 Jan 4, 2011
This Vermonter wrote:
http://publicservice.vermont.g ov/dockets/7440/Final%20Report %202-25-09.pdf
Report to the
Vermont Department of Public Service
on the
Vermont Yankee License Renewal
February 27, 2009
http://publicservice.vermont.gov/
Information two years old, is now invalid as it has been superceded by the events which are more recent.

Keep trying!

“figuresdontlie*l iarscanfigure”

Since: Feb 10

S. Londonderry VT

#20 Jan 4, 2011
This Vermonter wrote:
http://publicservice.vermont.g ov/nuclear/PublicOversightPane lReportFINAL.pdf
Public Oversight Panel Report - This is the report of the Public Oversight Panel created by Act No. 189 of the Vermont General Assembly, enacted in June 2008. The purpose of this report is to provide information to the legislature in making its determination whether the Vermont Yankee plant should be authorized to operate in the State beyond the expiration of its current license on March 21, 2012.
Once again, your information is no longer accurate, has been invalidated by the discovery that Entergy lied about the existance of buried & underground pipes which were later found to be leaking radioactive nuclear waste.

Has been superceded by the *very same* VY POP which was reconvened to correct the inaccuracies which were later discovered & issued *an additional* report "VY POP Supplemental Report":

"The panel issued a
--- supplemental report ---
on the reliability of the plant Tuesday, and listed three main “concerns,” including “misleading information,” Entergy officials’ unquestioning attitude about the maintenance and conditions at the plant and the Louisiana-based corporation’s lack of investment in “non-safety” systems before problems surface.[...]

The panel declined in its latest report to state “conclusively” that Vermont Yankee can be operated reliably for an additional 20 years[...]The three nuclear experts on the panel said Tuesday that Entergy cannot operate the plant beyond its current license deadline unless it invests more money in the plant and “re-establishes a corporate culture” in which employees and the organization as a whole embrace “a questioning attitude.”[...]

Entergy is trying to spin the report, and saying there was no deliberate attempt to deceive,” Gundersen said.“That’s an inaccurate reading of the report.”
http://vtdigger.org/2010/07/20/report-entergy...

“figuresdontlie*l iarscanfigure”

Since: Feb 10

S. Londonderry VT

#21 Jan 4, 2011
This Vermonter wrote:
Testimony of Peter A. Bradford
Public Oversight Panel for the Vermont Yankee Reliability Assessment
House Committee on Natural Resources and the Senate Finance Committee
Vermont Legislature
March 19, 2009
"Act 189 required a comprehensive vertical. audit and reliability assessment of the
Vermont Yankee Nuclear facility. The reliability assessment was performed by
Nuclear Safety Associates (NSA) under contract to thô Vermont Department of
Public Service (DPS), and summarized in the report Reliability Assessment of the
Vermont YañkeeNuclear Facility. That Report was completed and made public on
December 22, 2008...After performing the reliability assessment, the NSA team's overall conclusion
was that VY is operated reliably and that the current level of reliability can be
maintained through an extended operating period'provided that the areas identified
by the NSA repoit are effectively addressed. The Panel agrees with the audit
team's principal conclusions, though we have additional areas of emphasis as
spelled out in our report..."
http://www.leg.state.vt.us/jfo/envy/Bradford%...
Ha ha.*Again*, your information is false & misleading. As you are well aware, your comment based on information which has been corrected as it was found to have been based on false information supplied to NSA by Entergy (see last three paragraphs).

The most current accurate information:

"But Gundersen alleges that the mistake turned into an attempt to mislead over the course of a 17-month period."

--- Entergy had ample opportunity to address inaccurate information in the NSA report about the pipes in technical comments, Gundersen said, but the company didn’t ask for a correction –it allowed the report to state there were no underground pipes carrying radioactive waste.

--- Then in January 2009, an engineer, under questioning from the Vermont Public Interest Research Group, stated in testimony to the Public Service Board that there were no such pipes.

--- In March 2009, the panel produced a report based on NSA’s comprehensive reliability assessment that included the inaccuracies about the nonexistent pipes.

--- Two months later, Jay Thayer, the then plant manager, also said no to the pipe question and said he’d get back to the board.

--- A week later, another official said no again under sworn testimony to the board. In August, Entergy sent a letter to Gundersen that stated there were no underground pipes carrying radioactive waste and that the issue was closed.

--- Entergy finally admits deliberately lying to under oath to the panel:
*****"The panel report points to an investigation conducted by Entergy’s lawyers that concluded that the corporation gave Gundersen an inaccurate response because he would “seek to reopen issues from the audit.”*****

"A correction to the comprehensive reliability assessment, however, would have been the proper remedy, according to the panel.

“Had this been done in August 2009,” the panel wrote,“Vermont Yankee’s reputation would hardly have suffered. Most, if not all, of the Entergy employees who have been removed from Vermont Yankee would still be employed there. Several million dollars spent responding to the inaccurate statement issue would have been available for other uses."
http://vtdigger.org/files/2010/07/POP-VY-Supp...

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker
First Prev
of 2
Next Last

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Vermont Government Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News Ben & Jerrya s Co-Founder Shares Bernie Sanders... (Oct '15) May '16 Three Psyche 27
News The Truth of the Matter: Let's try to keep them... May '16 Cheddar Cheese 1
News On Native GroundFUKUSHIMA Reminds Us of the Rea... Mar '16 APEFARANGUMINDEBD... 2
News Bernie Sanders' Iowa showing excites Vermont su... Feb '16 Community Disorga... 3
News Single payer advocates propose expansion of Dr.... (Dec '15) Jan '16 FEDERAL CIRCUS OF... 2
News Sanders' Face on Underwear Line (Oct '15) Nov '15 DILF 32
News Some Vermonters may get religion as vaccine out... (Sep '15) Oct '15 Hi sexy 3
More from around the web