The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission has sole authority in matters of nuclear safety. Vermont should play at least an advisory role in the plant’s decommissioning. It’s reassuring to know that the administration has selected one key decision-maker who has experience-based, nonpolarized understanding of the radiological safety issues of spent fuel storage and plant dismantling. Some Vermonters might assume that when Vermont Yankee stops making power this December, the plant will become irrelevant to our future. Nothing could be further from the truth.
Any breakdown in the orderly decommissioning of Vermont Yankee risks a breach in the master settlement agreement of 2013, with serious consequences for Vermont’s environmental and economic future. Vermont Yankee has already paid its first $5 million commitment to the Vermont Clean Energy Development Fund, the state core of clean energy capital. The agreement also commits Vermont Yankee to contribute an additional $10 million for investment in clean energy and Windham County redevelopment.
The state should not put these vital funds at risk. For example, if Vermont Yankee fails to receive a certificate of public good for a second spent fuel storage pad, the settlement agreement could be declared invalid. This could also prompt an acrimonious legal battle and deprive southern Vermont of the economic and environmental benefits provided to it under the agreement. Spent fuel would remain in the fuel pool, which all parties agree is less desirable than dry cask storage. Investor interest in Windham County could be further tainted.
I wish Mr. Leshinskie every success in his role as a skilled, trustworthy observer and mediator of the real technical opportunities and challenges of the decommissioning of Vermont Yankee.
------
Milton Eaton holds an MBA from the University of Michigan, and has claimed Vermont as his permanent residence since 1969. Eaton had a distinguished career at the intersection of energy policy and economic activity. He has held positions in the Department of Commerce, and was the Vermont Secretary for Development and Community Affairs from 1983-1985. From 1989 to 1999, Eaton served as the East Asia Representative for the Department of Energy and Energy Attaché at the U.S. Embassy in Tokyo. He is now retired, and currently serves on the Brattleboro Energy Committee, as well as other local volunteer positions.
This letter has also appeared in several newspapers in Vermont.
OK, ya got me. Please explain why denial of a CPG for a second ISFSI could result in the docket 7862 settlement agreement being declared invalid. Or specifically why any future disagreement could jeopardize the legally binding settlement agreement and MOU negotiated in a separate docket, for which Entergy has been granted authorization for operations through the end of 2014.
ReplyDeleteMy understanding is that the PSB only permitted a concrete pad big enough for all the fuel that would be used up to the end of the 40 year license. Obviously allowing a bigger pad would have been conceding that the plant might operate longer.
ReplyDeleteNo other pad, no place for the additional used fuel to go. Fuel Pool must stay, so reactor building and pool support systems must stay. Decommissioning stops.
Great. Such a wonderful job tearing down and burying the life's work of others. Must be a very rewarding feeling to throw that last shovel of dirt on the grave.
ReplyDelete