ML042120528
| ML042120528 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Vermont Yankee File:NorthStar Vermont Yankee icon.png |
| Issue date: | 04/14/2004 |
| From: | Lyman P Entergy Nuclear Operations |
| To: | Richard Ennis NRC/NRR/DLPM/LPD1 |
| References | |
| FOIA/PA-2004-0267 | |
| Download: ML042120528 (12) | |
Text
L.',s'a'. 8._Vl 9w?
Ve!l~ds^1
_4 UV
_.......v......................
_v
_ wuIu y
pi_i
, e ~ u Page 1 From:
"Lyman, Pat" <PLYMA90@entergy.com>
To:
"_Power Uprate" '<PowerUprate~prod.entergy.com>, "Al Chesley"
<al.chesley@netzero.net>, "Al Parker" <AI.Parker@vynpc.com>, "Alan Haumann"
<Alan.Haumann © vynpc.com>, "Alan Robertshaw" <arober6 @ prod.entergy.com>, "Art Wiese"
<awiese @ entergy.com>, "Audra Williams" <Audra.Williams @ vynpc.com>, "B. Cosgrove"
<brendan@vermont.org>, "Barbara Williams" <Barbara.Williams©vynpc.com>, "Bernard Buteau"
<Bernard.Buteau ©vynpc.com>, "Bernie Jwaszewski" <Bernie.Jwaszewski ©vynpc.com>, "Beth Sienel"
<bsien90 ©prod.entergy.com>, "Bill Lynch" <Bill.Lynch ©vynpc.com>, "Boguslawski"
<john.boguslawski @adelphiabusiness.net>, "Bonnie Notte" <bnotte @prod.entergy.com>, "Bonnie O'Rourke" <borourk@cvps.com>, "Brian Cosgrove" <Brian.Cosgrove©vynpc.com>, "Brian Finn"
<Brian.Finn © vynpc.com>, "Bryan Croke" <bcroke © prod.entergy.com>, "Candy Sak"
<Candy.Sak~vynpc.com>, "Carl Crawford" <ccrawfo~entergy.com>, "Charles Edwards"
<Charles.Edwards © vynpc.com>, "Chris Hansen" <Chris.Hansen © vynpc.com>, "Chris Wamser"
<Chris.Wamser~vynpc.com>, "Christina Canty" <Christine.Canty~vynpc.com>, "CONNIE WELLSO
<CWELLS ©entergy.com>, "Craig Nichols' <Craig.Nichols @vynpc.com>, "David Andrews"
<David.Andrews~vynpc.com>, "David M. Rocchio^ <drocchio~thearnogroup.com>, "David Mannai"
<David.Mannai@vynpc.com>, "David McElwee" <David.McElwee@vynpc.com>, "David Pelton"
<dpelt9O@prod.entergy.com>, "DEBORAH WAGLEY" <DWAGLEY©entergy.com>, "Diane McCue"
<Diane.McCue ©vynpc.com>, "Dolord DeForge" <Dj.DeForge ©vynpc.com>, "Donald Johnson"
<djohn9l @prod.entergy.com>, "Dorothy Schnure 2" <schnure greenmountainpower.biz>, "Dutton Christopher" <dutton gmpvt.com>, "Ed Matson" <Ed.Matson vynpc.com>, "Ellen Cota"
<ecota©prod.entergy.com>, "Eve Finkenstadt" <Eve.Finkenstadt~vynpc.com>, "Frank Lipinski"
<Frank.Lipinski©vynpc.com>, "G Franklin" <gfranklin © ecvtlaw.com>, "GARY TAYLOR"
<GJTAYLOR @ entergy.com>, "George Thomas" <gthomas @prod.entergy.com>, "George Wierzbowski"
<George.Wierzbowski@vynpc.com>, "Gerry Morris" <gmorris @vtlobbyists.com>, "Goldsmith, Steve"
<epzsteve0l ©yahoo.com>, NGreg Brede" <Greg.Brede~vynpc.com>, "Harry Sutton"
<Harry.Sutton@vynpc.com>, "Howard C Shaffer" <howardmariann @uno.com>, "Kent Brown"
<kbrown @ cvps.com>, "Jack Balla" <JBalla @ entergy.com>, "James Callaghan"
<James.CallaghanG @vynpc.com>, "James Kritzer" <jkritze©prod.entergy.com>, "James Rogers"
<James.Rogers@vynpc.com>, "Jan Bennett" <Jan.Bennett@vynpc.com>, "JayThayer"
<jthayer@entergy.com>, "Jeff Meyer" <Jeff.Meyer~vynpc.com>, "Jim Devincentis"
<Jim.Devincentis @ vynpc.com>, "John Apostoles" <japostoO prod.entergy.com>, "John Herron" 1JHerron © entergy.com>, "John Hoffman' <John.Hoffman © vynpc.com>, "John Lampron"
<lamp44©aol.com>, "John McCann" <jmccan1 @entergy.com>, "John Moriarty"
<jmoriar©prod.entergy.com>, "John OConnor" <John.OConnor~vynpc.com>, "John Patrick"
<JPATRIC ©prod.entergy.com>, "Julie Hayward" <jhaywarOprod.entergy.com>, "Karen Mego"
<Karen.Mego @vynpc.com>, "Kevin Bronson" <Kevin.Bronson @vynpc.com>, "Kilburn"
<bobbi.kilbum adelphiabusiness.net>, "KIM RIVERO" <KRIVERO~entergy.com>, "Larry Smith"
<Larry.Smith @vynpc.com>, "Leonard Gucwa" <LGUCW90 @ prod.entergy.com>, "Liliane Schor"
<Liliane.Schor©vynpc.com>, "Lori Tkaczyk" *Lori.Tkaczyk @vynpc.com>, "Lynn DeWald"
<idewald@prod.entergy.com>, "Marshall, John" <jmarshall@drm.com>, "MEMA Region 3"
<tjstarr@ hotmail.com>, "Mike Desilets" <Mike.Desilets ©vynpc.com>, "Mike Empey"
<Mike.Empey~vynpc.com>, "Mike McKenney" <Mike.McKenney~vynpc.com>, "Mike Metell"
<Mike.Metell ©vynpc.com>, "Milton Eaton" <maeshe©sover.net>, "MYRA NORVILLE"
<MNORVIL©entergy.com>, "Nancy Blake" <Nancy.Blake ©vynpc.com>, "Nancy Malmquist"
<nmalmquist@drm.com>, "NANCY MOROVICH" <NMOROVI@entergy.com>, "NEI" <sck~nei.org>, "Pat Corbett" <Pat.Corbett@vynpc.com>, "Pat McKenney" <Pat.McKenney@vynpc.com>, "PAUL LAROSA"
<PLAROSA©entergy.com>, "Paul Rainey" <Paul.Rainey@vynpc.com>, "Pedro Perez"
<Pedro.Perez vynpc.com>, "R. Barkhurst" <silverkingjr~earthlink.com>, "Richard Bargeron"
<Richard.Bargeron ©vynpc.com>, "Richard January" <Richard.January@ vynpc.com>, "Rick Ennis"
<RXE©nrc.gov>, "Rick McCullough" <Rick.McCullough©vynpc.com>
Date:
4/14/04 9:50AM
Subject:
VY News, Wednesday, April 14, 2004
Rick EnnisVY News Wednesday i 1 Page
- 3. N.H. senators push for a say on Vermont Yankee - Keene Sentinel(Region, page 3, above fold)
- 4. Meeting to discuss energy - Brattleboro Reformer(Local, page 11, above fold)
- 5. Who decides? - Brattleboro Rerformer(Letter, page 4)
- 6. 20 percent rise in power output seems risky - Keene Sentinel(Letter, page 7)
- 7. Birds and bats could doom wind proposal - Rutland Herald(Front page, above fold)
VY Daily News Wednesday, April 14, 2004 If you have news items to contribute contact Pat Lyman - plyma90@entergy.com Vermont Public Radio, April 12, 2004 Inside the Vermont Yankee nuclear power plant John Dillon Toby Talbot/AP VERNON, VT (2004-04-12)
(Host) For the rest of the month, the Vermont Yankee nuclear plant will be shutdown for a major overhaul.
Over a thousand people are working around the clock to install new equipment so the plant can boost its power by 20 percent.
Yankee officials say the upgrade is a relatively low-cost way to gain an additional 11 0 megawatts. But opponents worry that safety will be compromised as more power is squeezed out of the aging, 32-year-old reactor.
VPR examines this issue in a two-part series. Today, reporter John Dillon takes us inside the Vernon power plant.
(Dillon) The Yankee nuclear plant is a now a huge construction site. Eleven-hundred workers go through these gates and pass through a rigorous security screening. Private security guards wearing black uniforms and carrying automatic weapons check IDs. A machine puffs air over each worker and then sniffs for hidden explosives.
Once inside, dosimeter badges are required to detect radiation.
"So here we go. As soon as It's green you've got to go." (Clanking sound) "Perfect, you're in. We've still got to go down to dosimetry to pick up the self-reading dosimeters."
(Dillon) Last month, state regulators allowed Vermont Yankee to install the equipment needed for the increase in power. Entergy, the Louisiana company that owns Yankee and nine other reactors, still needs
iI-icK tnnis - VY News. Wednesday, April 14, 2004 P
3 Page 3.
approval from the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
But under the federal rules, it can start the work now. So Entergy is betting the $60 million cost of the upgrade that it will win federal approval next year, after the equipment is installed. It's probably a safe bet.
The NRC has reviewed more than 90 previous upgrade requests, and rejected none of them.
"Now you've entered what we call the radiation controlled area..."
(Dillon) Craig Nichols, the manager of the project, leads me through the reactor building. A nuclear power plant harnesses a controlled chain reaction from radioactive uranium to generate heat. The heat boils water and the steam from the water spins a turbine, which in turn drives a generator to produce electricity.
To get the 20 percent power boost, the reactor needs to generate more heat and send more steam through a new turbine. It's this higher temperature and pressure that critics worry could weaken the plant and compromise safety. Nichols says key components will be replaced.
(Nichols) 'We'll walk all the way down to the front of the turbine and over here, and you'll see the new high pressure turbine that we're putting in. That's another power uprate modification that actually allows the 20 percent more turbine to make more power. Nice shiny new high pressure turbine.'
(Dillon) But to produce more power, about 20 percent more fuel will be consumed.
(Nichols) "As you can see down there - without going over - this is our spent fuel pool. This holds all our fuel since first starting up..."
(Dillon) Thirty-two years worth of old fuel rods are stacked here under water that reflects a pale blue light.
The tank is smaller than a swimming pool, but much deeper - about 40 feet deep. And it's running out of room.
(Nichols) 'We have 368 fuel assemblies in this reactor. Normally we would replace approximately 100.
When we do this refueling for the purposes of power uprate, we'll have to replace approximately 20 more each time.'
(Dillon) The spent fuel remains highly dangerous for thousands of years. Yankee plans to store the excess waste in dry concrete casks on site until a permanent repository is built in the Nevada desert. Opponents of the power boost have focused on the fuel issue. They say it doesn't make sense to produce more waste, which could become a target for terrorists, without a safe or permanent place to put it.
The critics have also challenged the overall safety of the project. They point out that Yankee would be the oldest plant to undergo the largest-ever power upgrade, and that it's exempt from some newer federal safety standards. And they argue that the power increases have led to shutdowns at other nuclear plants.
I Outside the plant, the issue is hotly debated. During a recent Switchboard on Vermont Public Radio, Peter Alexander, director of the New England Coalition that opposes the Yankee upgrade, challenged plant spokesman Brian Cosgrove.
(Alexander) 'Of these eight plants that Brian has cited that have received large uprates, five of them according to our information and the reports that we're seeing from the NRC, five of them have experienced serious uprate-related breakdown of one sort or another.'
(Dillon) Vermont utility regulators also focused on the reliability question. Since replacement power is more expensive than Yankee's, the state Public Service Board recently pointed out that extended shutdowns at
"Rick Ennis - VY News, Wednesday, April 14,2004
=
_Pa Yankee could bring financial harm Vermont ratepayers.
Back at the plant, Yankee executive Craig Nichols says each retrofit is different and that Yankee has learned from the ones that have gone before. He says that the upgrade allows Yankee to install new and safer equipment.
(Nichols) 'We're making some of the components thicker, and adding some bracing, so under increased power operation we won't get a vibration that could cause a problem that they did at some of the other plants. Those plants did not do those modifications in advance. We've learned from that and are making these pre-emptive modifications."
(Dillon) The scale of the work here is enormous. Overhead, a 140-ton crane stands ready to lift the main piece of the generator out to a railroad car. From there, it will be shipped to Brattleboro for rebuilding.
The boost in power production will also cause a slight increase in radiation that leaves the plant. If the levels exceed state limits, Yankee will be required to install additional shields or reduce power. The 1,100 people who work here are all checked for radiation. Two machines scan for signs of exposure:
(Mechanical voice) "Right hand, left hand, 11, 10, 9, 8, 7, 6, 5, 4, 3, 2, 1 - please go backl (Nichols) "Oh, go back."
(Dillon) Visitors are also checked. And there's a delay as the last machine warns of contamination as I walk through. After a morning inside the plant, even my microphone has picked up some faint radioactivity. Yankee officials assure me that the levels are safe. And after a few minutes for the particles to decay and disperse, the device flashes the green light, and we're free to go.
For Vermont Public Radio, I'm John Dillon in Vernon.
Note:
In Tuesday's story, VPR examines whether federal regulators have weakened a key safety standard in their review of the project.
(c) Copyright 2004, VPR <http://www.vpr.net>
This is the online edition of VPR News. Text versions of VPR news stories may be updated and they may vary slightly from the broadcast version.
Vermont Public Radio, Tuesday, April 13, 2004 Federal safety review questioned in Vermont Yankee case John Dillon COLCHESTER, VT (2004-04-13)
(Host) The safety of nuclear power hinges on the concept of "redundancy." How much redundancy is one of the questions raised by the proposal at the Vermont Yankee plant in Vernon to boost power by 20
Rick Erinis - VY News, Wednesday, April_14, 2004 Page 5 percent. Critics say that at least two layers of safety systems are needed to control radiation releases. But they charge that the increase in power could trigger a situation in which a key safety system could fail.
VPR's John Dillon reports in the second of two parts on Vermont's only nuclear power plant.
(Dillon) Everyone's worst nightmare at a nuclear plant is what's known as a "loss of coolant" accident. In an emergency, a nuclear reactor must be quickly cooled by water. If the pumps that provide the water fail, or if the water rapidly boils off into steam, a meltdown could result.
(Sherman) "With power uprate, power uprate results in hotter temperatures of the water because there's more fuel. There's 20 percent more fuel in the reactor."
(Dillon) William Sherman Is the state nuclear engineer. He's concerned that federal regulators have weakened an essential safety standard In the case of Vermont Yankee. The problem has to do with boiling water and the pumps that are needed to cool the reactor in an emergency.
In a loss of coolant accident, these massive pumps are supposed to quickly flood the reactor. The danger arises if boiling hot water from the reactor causes bubbles of steam to form, which could make the pumps fail.
As Sherman, the state nuclear engineer, points out, after the 20 percent power upgrade the emergency water inside Yankee will be heated up to 194 degrees. That makes the pumps less effective.
(Sherman) 'So these hotter temperatures mean that the water, the hotter water, is less dense. It means that the pressure from the column of water in the suction line is less."
(Dillon) Now think of a pressure cooker. Water under pressure boils at a higher temperature. So if there's enough pressure inside the reactor containment area, the pumps should still work, even at the higher temperatures after the power upgrade. Yankee is counting on this pressure cooker effect to keep the safety system operating in an emergency. Here's Sherman explaining how it's supposed to work:
(Sherman) "What happens in accidents is that, it is postulated that steam leaks into the containment and the pressure in containment increases. So I believe they have stated that they want to take credit for that increased pressure as a safety function."
(Dillon) But the Nuclear Regulatory Commission has in the past been very reluctant to allow nuclear operators to rely on pressure inside the containment - "take credit" it's called -as a way to guarantee that the emergency pumps will work. Sherman told a recent meeting of the state nuclear advisory panel that the NRC has changed long standing safety policy.
(Sherman) "That's a new thing and we're pretty skeptical about that. We've asked the NRC a number of very specific questions about a change in policy that they appeared to have made only in the last year or so. We've asked them for the basis for their changing the policy. And we've asked for the safety Implications of allowing credit for containment accident pressure."
(Dillon) The issue Is important because there are accident scenarios in which containment pressure could be lost due to equipment failure, operator error, even a terrorist attack. And if there's no pressure, the emergency cooling water may not reach the reactor core in time.
(Paul Blanch) "If that pressure is lost through any one of many single failures that could occur -a valve fails to go shut, a valve opens by mistake - then what happens is you lose the containment integrity. Meaning that at the elevated pressure, we'll have radioactive material leaking out."
(Dillon) Paul Blanch is an engineer with 35 years of experience in the nuclear industry. He says he might
HIcK nnIs - VY News Wednesday, Page 6 be able to support the increase in power, if there was more review to show it's safe. In the Vermont Yankee case, Blanch was a witness for the New England Coalition, the group opposed to the power upgrade.
According to Blanch, the NRC has in the past always required levels of redundancy in safety systems. The concept is called "defense and depth." The idea is that no single failure of a key system should allow radiation to release or an accident to escalate. Blanch says that in the Yankee case, the NRC has violated the basics.
(Blanch) "It's an extremely significant thing and it takes away all the defense and depth and it takes away the basic premise that nuclear power is built on. And that is defense and depth, and not tolerating a single failure."
(Dillon) Yankee officials have argued there's a wide margin of safety built in. In an accident, they believe the containment would stay pressurized for hours, thus assuring sufficient water and pressure to cool the reactor.
Plant spokesman Rob Williams says Yankee is not the only plant for which NRC has approved the pressure issue.
(Williams) Twenty-five other reactors are allowed to take credit for that existence of pressure in the containment. So we have that issue now before the Nuclear Regulatory Commission, and they're reviewing it."
(Dillon) But if that's the case, critics say, there's reason to question the effectiveness of the NRC oversight.
David Lochbaum, a nuclear engineer with the Union of Concerned Scientists In Washington, says Yankee is wrong about the other reactors in which the NRC has reviewed the containment issue.
(Lochbaum) "What's unique about Vermont Yankee is that the amount of pressure is much higher than in the previous cases and the time period that the pressure has to be there is much longer than in the prior cases. So those two factors make it less likely that there'll be success at the end. It's a pretty big departure from precedent."
(Dillon) According to Lochbaum, there's a simple solution to the problem.
(Lochbaum) "The least expensive thing they could do is not go for 20 percent upgrade. Right now, the plant doesn't take credit for containment over-pressure. There's nothing that requires them to increase power pressure by 20 percent, other than greed. There ought to be some sanity involved, so that we don't sacrifice safety just so the company can make a few more dollars."
(Dillon) Yankee insists that the accident scenario that the critics foresee is extremely unlikely. Meanwhile, the NRC has not yet responded to the Vermont state nuclear engineer Bill Sherman, who formally asked in December about the safety implications of the containment pressure issue.
For Vermont Public Radio, I'm John Dillon.
(c) Copyright 2004, VPR <http://www.vpr.net>
This is the online edition of VPR News. Text versions of VPR news stories may be updated and they may vary slightly from the broadcast version.
Keene Sentinel, Tuesday, April 13, 2004(Region, page 3, above fold)
N.H. senators push for a say on Vermont Yankee
i Rick Rl Newts, Wednesday, April 14 2004_
Page 7 By REBECCA WADDINGHAM for SentinelSource Two N.H. state senators are pushing for an independent engineering assessment of the Vermont Yankee nuclear power plant, and they asked Senate President Thomas R. Eaton of Keene to help ensure the resolution will be heard by the Senate.
Eaton did not sponsor the resolution, contrary to information provided for a Sentinel report on Monday.
Sen. Clifton Below, D-Lebanon, primary sponsor of the resolution urging an assessment, said he talked over his Vermont Yankee concerns with several Vermont state senators and a constituent who's on the board of the New England Coalition, a nuclear watchdog group based in Brattleboro.
Proposing the Senate resolution "seemed like a good thing to reinforce their concerns," Below said.
"Obviously, the whole Connecticut River Valley, especially south of here, is potentially impacted" by the nuclear plant.
"Sen. Eaton said it was a concern to him, too, so he wanted to join in," Below said.
The Vermont Public Service Board has requested the independent assessment, which would review the plant's performance and Identify any problems.
The request was part of the board's review of a plan by Entergy, Vermont Yankee's owner, to increase the power plant's output by 20 percent.
Vermont Yankee is in Vernon, Vt., directly across the Connecticut River from Hinsdale.
Below's resolution urges the federal Nuclear Regulatory Commission to 'condition approval of any uprate' upon the outcome of an independent engineering assessment. The Vermont board made the same request March 15, and the Vermont Senate passed a similar resolution last month.
Below said the New Hampshire version mirrors the Vermont Senate's resolution, with minor changes.
"It's sort of obvious what it does - it calls on the (Nuclear Regulatory Commission) to do the full engineering evaluation," he said.
However, the resolutions are not binding; the Nuclear Regulatory Commission can ignore them.
Below said his Vermont Yankee concerns comes from his experience on the N.H. Legislature's energy policy committee.
"Vermont Yankee (would be) the oldest nuclear power plant to ever get an uprate, and it's a fairly large uprate," Below said.
He said metals inside the reactor core can become brittle from radiation exposure, and there are other structural concerns with a plant as old as Vermont Yankee, which has been producing power for more than 31 years.
"We want to be confident about public safety in terms of additional stress on the (structure)," Below said.
The Senate resolution, co-sponsored by Sen. Sylvia Larsen, D-Concord, won't be introduced until at least Thursday, Below said.
"There is a concern when you have a 30-year-old plant and you want to boost the power by 20 percent,"
Larsen said. "It's something that we ought to keep an eye on."
She said New Hampshire's legislative input should match Vermont's. "This side of the (river) is equally concerned," she said.
Rick Ennis - V News, Wednesday, April 14,2004 Pae 8 Eaton said Monday he had received several phone calls and e-mails from constituents concerned about the uprate request. Larsen said she asked Eaton to help push the resolution to the 24-member Senate.
Eaton is chairman of the Senate rules committee, and it unanimously let the resolution go to the Senate, although the deadline for new legislation had already passed.
Other senators have also expressed interest, Below said, Including Sen. Bob Odell, R-Lempster, whose district also includes towns on the Vermont border.
Below said if the Senate passes the resolution, copies will be sent to Vermont Gov. James H. Douglas, Nuclear Regulatory Commission Chairman Nils J. Diaz and Vermont Public Service Commissioner David O'Brien. Gov. Craig R. Benson will also likely get a copy, Below said.
It's just sending a message," he said.
Brattleboro Reformer, Wednesday, April 14, 2004(Local, page 11, above fold)
Meetings to discuss energy BRATTLEBORO -- With Vermont Yankee scheduled to close in 2012 and the state's long-term contract with HydroQuebec ending in 2015, Vermont is at an energy crossroads.
In response, the first In a series of meetings on renewable energy resources will be held on Thursday, April 29, at the Brattleboro Municipal Building In the selectboard meeting room from 7 to 9 p.m.
Sponsored by the southeastern Vermont unit of the League of Women Voters, the meetings will focus on the opportunities various renewables offer and potential constraints on their development, and will feature a slate of speakers.
David O'Brien, commissioner of the Department of Public Services, will speak about the draft version of the state's 20-year energy plan and the wind energy policy the department is developing.
David Farnsworth, staff attorney for the Vermont Public Service Board, will talk about the various regulatory tools that will be used to promote or evaluate renewables. He will also provide an overview of the recently released draft renewables standard portfolio mandated by Act 69.
James Brown, manager of Energy Resource Planning at Green Mountain Power, will talk about that utility's wind power initiatives and programs that reduce energy use.
The League of Women Voters of Vermont is conducting a two-year study to examine the feasibility and efficiency of renewable energy sources and fuels in Vermont and their potential role in reducing environmental degradation.
On the demand side, the league is looking at conservation measures, including public transportation and alternative fuels for motor vehicles.
Brattleboro Reformer, Wednesday, April 14, 2004(Letter, page 4)
Who decides?
Editor of the Reformer:
The head of the Nuclear Regulatory Commission Entergy Vermont Yankee uprate review recognized an important fact in public comment recently. He candidly admitted that major decisions are not made by someone at his pay grade. In other words, the decision to accept, or reject, a request for an independent safety assessment would be made by people higher up than the NRC staff at the public
I Rick Etiiis-VY News, Wednesday, April 4, 2004 Pageg9 meeting in Vernon.
The question is: Who gets to make this decision; based on what input? We know there is at least one higher office, the office of the vice president, with a strong Interest in expanding generating capacity. This same office has a track record of showing contempt for public opinion or independent input into energy decisions. It is a fixed, prevailing attitude in this administration that will not change, despite the best efforts of Vermont's congressional delegation to open the decision-making process to public view.
We, the public, can assume that senior executives from General Electric and Entergy Corp., the parent company of Entergy Nuclear, participated in the vice president's closed-door discussions on energy policy.
They probably are on a first name basis.
Private, corporate access to power is the reason why public hearings are essential. As Vermonters, we have a long history of public participation in the decisions of local government. As citizens, we should insist our national government plays by the same rules. Public participation in NRC hearings is our right, our responsibility.
John Evans Dummerston Keene Sentinel, Tuesday, April 13, 2004(Letter, page 7) 20 percent rise in power output seems risky To The Sentinel:
I wish to thank The Keene Sen-tinel staff for its excellent coverage of the Vermont Yankee nuclear power plant's proposal to increase its power by a 20 percent uprate.
Your thoughtful editorials and insightful articles, voicing safety and mechanical concerns at the aging plant, help to keep area residents informed.
I also want to thank all the people who attended last week's meeting in Vernon, and thank the watchdog group from Brattleboro.
The nuclear plant Is 31 years old and a power increase of 20 per-cent seems risky. I hope it is not approved, but at the very least, an independent safety and mechanical assessment of the plant should be insisted upon by area resi-dents; Vermont, New Hampshire and Massachusetts officials; the Vermont Public Service Board; the Nuclear Regulatory Commis-sion; and, yes, Entergy.
I love living in southwestern New Hampshire, but if this In-crease is granted without a prop-er independent inspection, I'll certainly consider relocating.
CHARLES NOBLES 55 Martin St., Keene Rutland Herald, Wednesday, April 14, 2004(Front page, above fold)
Birds and bats could doom wind proposal
<https://www.vermonttoday.com/subscribe/>
By DARREN M. ALLEN Vermont Press Bureau
Rick Ennis - VY News, Wednesiday;, April 14, 2004 Pane 1 0 MONTPELIER - The Douglas administration has asked developers of a proposed Northeast Kingdom wind farm to pay for studies of how wind turbines might affect the migration and breeding of birds and bats.
Developers said Tuesday the $850,000 expense would almost certainly doom their project.
"It's an incredibly high cost to do studies that are not necessary, won't provide the information they seek or give an adequate basis for judging the potential mortality rate for these animals," said David Rapaport, vice president of East Haven Windfarm.
The company wants to erect four, 330-foot-high wind turbines on an abandoned radar base atop East Mountain in Burke.
"If you can't do wind at that site at that scale in Vermont, you can't do wind," Rapaport said.
Administration officials, however, said the study request was part of the negotiation process that always accompanies applications for utility projects.
"This hasn't just come out of left field," said Warren Coleman, environmental litigation attorney for the Agency of Natural Resources. "The development of wind projects is something that Vermont has no experience with. We don't have enough Information to make regulatory decisions."
The agency's request, made in a confidential memo on April 5, has led to an impasse between regulators and East Haven Windfarm.
Both sides said Tuesday that Jhey were unlikely to return to the bargaining table. East Haven and the agency have been talking since November, when the developers formally petitioned the Public Service Board for permission to erect the turbines.
'It's obviously safe to say that we're no longer negotiating," Coleman said.
The PSB has the final say on whether the project can go forward, and on what types of conditions the developers have to satisfy in order to build. Usually, utilities and the agency negotiate those conditions and present a united front before the board.
The agency's request for a study would delay construction of the project until at least a year from this fall, Rapaport said.
The East Haven project is poised to be the state's second commercial wind farm, and is becoming a test of sorts of how the expansion of wind energy will play in Vermont.
The only functional wind farm is in Searsburg in southern Vermont, where Green Mountain Power Corp.
operates an 11-turbine facility that it hopes to expand at least twofold.
Where the ANR sees reasonable protection of Vermont's wildlife, Rapaport sees duplicity on the part of an administration that talks about support of alternative energy sources.
"We've already spent a lot of time and money assessing potential risks, and we have repeatedly said we want this to be a pilot project, where we conduct extensive post-construction studies and learn from them,"
Rapaport said.
"I don't want to speculate, but one has to wonder if there is somebody who does not want to see wind power developed in Vermont."
Gov. James Douglas and ANR officials are not among those people, said gubernatorial spokesman Jason
Rick Ennis - VY News, Wednesday, April_14,2004 Pagel1 Gibbs.
"The governor is an advocate for alternative energy," he said. "He believes that this project or perhaps others might serve as a demonstration project for the role wind energy will play in Vermont, but only if it is done on a scale that is consistent with the state's environmental ethic."
The East Haven project meets that threshold, Rapaport said. Its location on a 15-acre abandoned Air Force radar base means that a new road does not have to be cut to reach the site. It also means, he said, that the area already is far from environmentally pristine.
That fact is acknowledged by Coleman. The scope of studies proposed by his agency is less stringent than it otherwise would be if the site was an undisturbed summit, he said.
'We want to be able to make regulatory decisions with the benefit of research behind us, not the other way around," Coleman said.
The East Haven project is the brainchild of Mathew Rubin, a Montpelier hydroelectric plant owner who already has spent about $1 million on studies, legal fees and the permit process.
The four-turbine project is slated to generate enough electricity to power 3,000 average-size households and is expected to cost $10 million.
The 20 million kilowatt hours of power the turbines would generate each year would be sold to the Lyndonville Electric Department.
The project has the support of many local and statewide elected officials, but has spurred vocal opposition from Kingdom Commons, a group of Northeast Kingdom residents, second-home owners and business owners who say the turbines would hurt the area's natural beauty and economy.
Contact Darren Allen at darren.allen~rutlandherald.com.
The Recorder, Wednesday, April 14, 2004(Letter, page 8, below fold)
A nuclear problem In his opinion pieces advocating the con-struction of more nuclear plants, Tim Blagg neglected to mention a major unsolved prob-1cm of these plants: high-level radioactive waste.
President Bush has decided that Yucca Mountain will be the repository for the nation's nuclear waste, even though scien-tists determined there were problems with the site. A dry, stable, salt cave for storing the waste for 10,000 years would have been the perfect solution.
Unfortunately, scientists discovered mois-ture in the cavity, indicating the possibility of eventual 'corrosion of storage casks and high-level radioactive waste leeching into and contaminating the ground water.
Scientists are designing a massive liner for the site in hopes of remedying the situation.
Yucca Mountain is also located near an active earthquake fault line. More than $400,000 of Department of Energy equipment was destroyed when an earthquake measur-ing 5.6 on the Richter scale occurred 12 miles from Yucca Mountain in 1992. Another earthquake measuring 4.4 on the Richter scale occurred eight miles from Yucca Mountain in 2002. Yucca Mountain is not dry, not stable.
Transporting the waste is another prob-lem. Besides waste-toting trucks and trains, being terrorist targets, there have been plen-ty of derailments and tractor-trailer acci-dents in Franklin County. including the most recent tractor-trailer accident in Rowe, dumping debris from the decommissioning of Yankee Rowe. High-level radioactive waste remains stored on site - Franklin County's own nuclear
Rick Ennis - W _News, Wenesdgpay, A6pril 14, 2004 Rick Ennis
- VY
- News, Wednesday, April 1420Q4 Page 121 waste dump.
Vermont Yankee will run out of waste storage in its spent-fuel pool in 2008 - or 2006, if the 20 percent power uprate is approved by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. Vermont Yankee will have to start storing its waste in cement casks on site - another nuclear waste dump for our area.
More nuclear plants equal more nuclear waste. Until the waste problem is solved, no more nuclear plants should be built.
ROSE SINCLAIR Greenfield CC:
"Dower, Mary" <mdower@ prod.entergy.com>, uSandstrum, Sally' cssandst@ prod.entergy.com>, "Dreyfuss, John' <jdreyfu @prod.entergy.com>