Why You Can't Trust the State of Vermont to Oversee the Decommissioning Fund

Crystal ball

The State Foresees the Future and Provides Insults

The State of Vermont insists that it needs to have oversight of Entergy's Vermont Yankee Decommissioning fund. They have often asked for a "seat at the table" when fund disbursements are planned. The state recently petitioned the NRC, asking the NRC to investigate Entergy's finances, and whether or not Entergy would have sufficient funds to decommission Vermont Yankee.  NRC turned down that petition, but the state is back at it.

On Friday, November 6,  groups within the state government (the Attorney General, the Department of Public Service) along with Green Mountain Power, brought a new petition. This new petition to the NRC attempts to limit usage of the Vermont Yankee Decommissioning Fund.

While the earlier petition pretty much asked for an investigation, this new petition can best be described as insulting.  Here's a quote from the petition, according to VTDigger's State Ramps Up Pressure on NRC to Review Yankee Spending:

"Considered together, Entergy’s actions threaten to undermine the radiological decommissioning work that is the very purpose of the fund,” the document says. “Unless the commission intervenes, Entergy will divert hundreds of millions of dollars from their intended purpose.”

Wow.  "Entergy will divert." Crystal ball time!  Actually, what Entergy will do is that Entergy will follow all the rules and the guidelines of the NRC. But the state doesn't like that. The state could write: "Hey, NRC, we don't like your guidelines and rules." Instead, the state leads off with an insult directed at Entergy. (Vermont Business Magazine also has a lengthy article on this new petition.)

I Review the Past and Hope the State is Foiled

I found this "[Entergy] will divert millions of dollars" funny, because I have a sick sense of humor sometimes.

Let's say I was required to rank Vermont's ability to oversee projects: say I had to rank Vermont's project oversight on a scale from one to ten.  I would give the state a negative-five rating.  Vermont wants to oversee how Entergy spends its funds?  Is this a joke?

You don't have to dig very deep to come up with huge examples of inadequate project oversight by the state of Vermont. I will give a short list, along with one or two links for each example. Each of these situations has a long and well-documented history.  I could be here for two days, inserting links.

Lousy Project Management by the State of Vermont

Vermont Health Connect

This is the big one. The Shumlin administration wanted to bring single-payer to Vermont, and so it didn't sign up with the federal government for an Affordable Care website. Other states obtained and customized the federal website, and got their Affordable Care websites going fairly quickly, and at reasonable cost.  Vermont decided to build its own software, which didn't work and cost over $200 million.  At this point, we are trapped because, after all, who else can maintain this custom software?

Costs go to $200 Million.  VTDigger.
Trapped in Expensive Quicksand.  John McClaughry of Ethan Allen Institute.

Vermont Public Service Board Commissioners
Margaret Cheny, Chairman James Volz, Sarah Hofmann

Vermont Gas Systems Pipeline

This is big, also.  Basically, Vermont Gas Systems (part of Gaz Metro) proposed a pipeline that was supposed to cost $80 million dollars.  Pipeline technology is comparatively straight-forward: this is not a first-of-a-kind project. The estimated costs have now risen to $150 million, to be paid by Vermont ratepayers.  This cost increase would have put the state Public Service Board  (which approved the project) in a bind where they might have to take some action.  Instead, the administration and Gaz Metro did a de facto end run around the Public Service Board, signing a Memorandum of Understanding and getting the Public Service Board off the hook. AARP is very upset about the effect on ratepayers.

AARP accuses Vermont of End Run in MOU with state. VTDigger

Entergy funds for Windham County Development

This is not so big, but somewhat indicative. In its agreement with the state concerning the last months of Vermont Yankee's operation, Entergy promised to send the state $2 million per year, for five years (total $10 million) for Windham County economic development.  The state has received $4 million of these funds, and I believe is due to receive another $2 million sometime in the next two months.

The state is sitting on most of these funds. So far, it has awarded around $800,000. The Governor makes the final decision on all awards. The Governor says he didn't award the money because the proposals just weren't good enough. If I lived in Windham County, I might find this insulting.

Inadequate project management by the state? Or inadequate proposals? Or the state being comfortable by keeping an extra few million in the bank for a while?  Whatever reason the state has for not-releasing those funds, the funds are currently not-growing the economy of Windham County.

State Reboots Application Process for Entergy Money. Times Argus

My request to the NRC: Please don't let the state of Vermont be the project managers  for the decommissioning funds.
-----

End Note: Project Management and me

I have years of experience and interest in project management. I managed small projects at Acurex, back in the late 70s. In the early 80s, I joined the Electric Power Research Institute (EPRI), where my title was "Project Manager."  At EPRI, first I managed projects in the renewable division, and later in the nuclear division.  I left EPRI to go into business with a friend. The name of the business was Crescent Project Management.  I think it is still going, but my friend and I went our separate ways, business-wise. Then I started Fourth Floor Databases, Inc. As president of that company, I competed for, won, and managed many projects for utilities. I closed the company after eleven years.  Meeting a payroll in a small business is very stressful.

Nevil Shute

More recently, I have been very interested in the author Nevil Shute. He was a working engineer, a business owner, and an author. In September of this year, I gave a talk at the Nevil Shute Society conference in Oxford. All the talks at the Conference are posted here, and here is a direct link to the audio for my talk: Nevil Shute for Project Managers

A Report is Released about Economics. Released Christmas Eve.

The Report As Dumped

I didn't plan to blog today.  My "Christmas Post" went up yesterday. Families get together on Christmas Day.  That is what happens.

However, yesterday, during the magical time of Christmas Eve....we had a major News Dump about the huge financial effects of closing Vermont Yankee. "News Dump" is the technical term for releasing news at a time when it may be hard for reporters to cover it, and where it may just (hopefully) sink into oblivion at a time when few people are paying attention to the news.  At least, sinking-out-of-sight is the purpose of a news dump.

Vermont Digger (praise them!) was Johnny-on-the Spot cover the story. Thank you, Digger!  Thank you, John Herrick!

Here's the Digger link: UMass-Dartmouth Report Details Impact of Vermont Yankee Closing.  Within that link, there's a link to the report itself. From the Herrick article:

"Regional economic development planning officials say the closure will cost more than 1,100 related jobs and $480 million in economic activity in the region."

The press release about the report called the results "stark."  A good word choice.

Pat Bradley at WAMC

Although Pat Bradley's radio commentary on Vermont Yankee's closing was broadcast on Christmas Eve, it wasn't a news dump. Radio goes on all the time. A radio show is not the timed release of a major document. It's just another radio show.  Also, businesses and institutions practice News Dumping, while reporters simply practice reporting.

And here's the link to that show.  I am one of the interviewees. Vermont Yankee to Shut Down Permanently On Monday.  And here's part of my quote on that show:

Ethan Allen Institute Energy Education Project Director Meredith Angwin has supported continued operation of the plant.  “The plant is in beautiful shape. It has high ratings from the NRC. It has great labor relations. It is a really wonderful plant with a lot of wonderful people, many of whom are being hurt one way or another.”

Clean Energy plus Development Money. PSB Comments by Milton Eaton

You can still comment to the Public Service Board

This is one of a series of posts containing  people's comments to the Public Service Board about the Vermont Yankee agreement. The comments describe some of the reasons the Board should grant a Certificate of Public Good (CPG) to Vermont Yankee.  

I hope these examples will inspire you to write your own  comment to the board.   Here's the link for comments.

http://psb.vermont.gov/docketsandprojects/public-comment?docket=7862

Comment by Milton Eaton

Dear Vermont Public Service Board:

As a longtime public servant with over 50 years experience in energy and economic management, I am in full support of the Certificate of Public Good (CPG) for Vermont Yankee.

Your approval of the CPG will assure all the New England states another year of low-cost, clean, reliable electricity from one of its base load merchant plants.  This is a matter of increasing importance, as the grid's operators are now warning of a looming supply shortfall.

Closer to home, approval of the CPG will enable Brattleboro and Windham County to receive the proposed Entergy economic development money totaling $10 million over five years. This is the result of a good-faith effort by State and Entergy leaders to offset the terrible economic loss that will occur when the plant closes by the end of 2014.   In fact, I understand the December 2013, Entergy/Vermont proposed settlement is entirely contingent on CPG approval.

Without the CPG, Vermont loses not only the $10 million in economic development funding, but also $5 million earmarked for clean energy development. It also risks reversion to the lamentable legal state of affairs in which the two parties were engaged before the agreement.

Gov. Shumlin said the settlement was a good Christmas present for the people of Windham County. (Note by blogger...the settlement was announced on December 23.)

Please approve the CPG and thereby insure the continuation of this important agreement. 

Thank you

Milton Eaton,
Brattleboro, VT

------

Milton Eaton has had a distinguished career as a public servant, including serving as Cabinet Secretary of Development and Community Affairs for the State of Vermont.  At the federal level, he was East Asia Representative to the Department of Energy and Energy Attaché at the American Embassy in Tokyo. In the private sector, Eaton founded a five-office business brokerage firm, based in Brattleboro.

Looking Back Toward Decommissioning

Picture of Dry Casks at Maine Yankee
From 3Yankees website

Let me start with a fact:

Entergy can use SAFSTOR or Prompt Decommissioning, their choice.  With either type of decommissioning, the current workers lose their jobs.

Meanwhile---Current Posturing about SAFSTOR

Currently, a great deal of posturing is being published about decommissioning Vermont Yankee.

Here's an example.

The Windham Regional Commission published a position paper in The Commons newspaper: What's in our best interests when VY closes?  The author, Chris Campany, answers his own question in the paper's subheading: "Now more than ever, our region needs to attach conditions to Entergy’s CPG."

A quote from this article above:

"We asked that whether or not a Certificate of Public Good is granted, the Public Service Board consider the following.....Require the prompt and complete decommissioning and site restoration of the VY station after shutdown (whenever that occurs) and prohibit the use of SAFSTOR."

This request is pretty much nonsense on the face of it.  As Tim McQuiston wrote in Vermont Business Magazine: Vermont Yankee, the Decommissioning Dilemma:

"The new battle will be over SAFSTOR, or Entergy's plan to postpone dismantling the plant right away, and take up to 60 years to do so. Furthermore, since this is a federal issue, the state may have little to say about it."  (emphasis added by blogger)

McQuiston also noted that Vermont might have achieved prompt dismantling  of Vermont Yankee if they had bargained for it as part of a new 20-year Certificate of Public Good. But they didn't.

 In my own opinion, once Entergy announced it was closing Vermont Yankee, Vermont lost almost all its bargaining power with Entergy.  "We're going to shut you down three months sooner than you planned to shut down anyway" is not a very credible threat.  Entergy has little to lose in its bargains with the state, once it decided to shut down the plant.

Looking Back at My Blog Posts about Decommissioning

I have three blog posts about decommissioning, and I will reference and summarize them here.

Entergy can use SAFSTOR or Prompt Decommissioning, their choice.  With either type of decommissioning, the current workers lose their jobs.

1) SAFSTOR is in the contract, whether Governor Shumlin likes it or not

The first post is In Vermont, Our Word is Our Bond, so We Don't Honor Contracts.  In this post, you can see Governor Shumlin accuse reporter Terri Hallenbeck of "working for Entergy." This is his answer when Hallenbeck reminds him that the state signed a purchase agreement, and the purchase agreement allows Entergy to use Safstor.

Here's the link to the purchase agreement itself, the Memorandum of Understanding.   The use of SAFSTOR is explicitly allowed in item 9, page 5 of this document, which is a total of eight pages long (plus some signature pages).

2) SAFSTOR and Prompt Decommissioning are both jobs cliffs. They do not protect current workers.

In Decommissioning, Facts Versus Fantasy, I show that 80% of the workers are gone within one year with SAFSTOR.  With prompt decommissioning,  50% are gone in one year, 80% in two years.  Both methods are a jobs cliff.

Most decommissioning work is done by teams of contractors. Wayne Norton, who was president of the Three Yankees during decommissioning, wrote the following in a paper he presented to industry.

Another advantage to early and aggressive downsizing is that it opens up opportunities to bring in workers with skill sets that are more suited to a decommissioning environment. Also, if these workers are contractors, they tend to be more accustomed to completing a given scope of work and moving on to another job.

3) There's no local jobs bonus.  Long-distance truckers and waste disposal sites get most of the money.

In my post, There is no Jobs Bonus.  Decommissioning Helps Long-Haul Truckers and Destroys Communities,  I try to follow-the-decommissioning money very closely.  Let's just say I don't like what I see.

Only Someone Like Our Governor Could Love Decommissioning

I will undoubtedly be posting more on this in the future, but I thought I would start with a summary of my older posts on this subject.

Decommissioning is a miserable situation for the workers and the local people.  It's the kind of situation that only our current governor could love.

Nuclear Makes a Lot of Electricity. Controversial Renewables Make Very Little.

Where Does Electricity Come From? 

Nuclear:

Vermont Yankee went back on-line after refueling.  The outage lasted 26 days and included replacing a pump motor and transformer, as well as other maintenance.

Power produced: Vermont Yankee is 620 MW and operates over 90% of the time.   At a 90% capacity factor (actually it is higher) this would be about 560 MWyears of energy. (620 MW multiplied by 0.9 capacity factor)

Wind:

Opponents of big wind are pretty much stymied by the permitting process in Vermont.  The Public Service Board and the Siting Commission do not have to pay any attention to local planning.

However, two enterprising Vermont senators from the town of Windham are trying to get around the fact that the towns can be ignored in wind siting decisions. The town plan for Windham bans industrial wind, and these senators have sponsored a bill in the legislature which says that wind turbines cannot be built in the town of Windham.

In my opinion, there is no chance that this bill will pass. Still,  the senators will be able to tell their constituents: "I sure tried to stop big wind around here."

Power produced: The controversial Kingdom Community Wind (Lowell Mountain) project is 21 turbines, totaling 63 MW and can be expected to operate (capacity factor) less than 30% of the time.  Lowell is the largest wind installation in Vermont and can be expected to produce less than 21 MWyears of energy. (63 MW multiplied by 0.3 capacity factor)

Biomass:

There's a biomass plant being planned for Springfield, Vermont. It is running into a fair amount of opposition.  The VPR article by Susan Keese is headlined:  Sustainability of Springfield Biomass Plant in Question.  Meanwhile, Susan Smallheer reported in the Rutland Herald that the state is critical of wood-fired project's forestry plan.

A leading state forester, Steven Sinclair, recommended that the harvest plan should include that about third of the slash be left on the land for the health of the forest.  His office also removed the word "renewable" from their website when describing wood-fired projects.  For wood-fired projects, Sinclair said that “The science on both renewableness and carbon-neutrality is in question.”

Power produced: The Springfield biomass plant would be 35 MW.  Biomass plants capacity factors are variable, but on the average they have lower capacity factors than coal.  A recent National Renewable Energy Laboratory chart shows biomass with an average capacity factor of 70%. Therefore, the Springfield plant could  be expected to produce about 25 MWyears of energy. (35 MW multiplied by 0.7 capacity factor)

Solar:

Rutland Vermont is going to be a solar city.  Green Mountain power plans to "give Rutland the highest solar capacity per capita of any city in New England."  This quote is from the April 9, Green Mountain Power announcement of a Request for Proposals for a solar installation in Rutland.

Montpelier is also planning to install solar energy: Gayle Hanson of the Rutland Herald wrote about this in Capital City eyes going solar. In that article, the chairman of Montpelier's energy committee was quoted as follows: “The city gets a predictable future energy cost, and the bill for the city will be well below the cost from the utilities, so the more we have the more we save.”

Electricity from solar tends to be expensive electricity, but with net-metering (the power company buys electricity from solar arrays at a high price, but sells back-up electricity to the array owner at a lower price), a solar installation can save money for its owner.  This news release from All Earth Renewables describes these zero-cost solar programs.

Power Produced: Rutland will start with a 150 KW solar farm. Montpelier is looking at 150 to 500 KW solar arrays.   Capacity factor for sun in this area is about 18%, that is, average of 4.3 equivalent  sun hours per day.  Energy produced for the 150 KW installations would around 0.027 MWyears. (0.15MW multiplied by 0.18 capacity factor)

Why the Rush to Industrial Wind Isn't Good for Vermont: The Press Conference

At a press conference Thursday two Vermont senators announced proposed legislation for a three-year moratorium on new industrial wind development on Vermont's ridges. Rob Roper of the Ethan Allen Institute made four-minute video at the conference: it has some amazing graphics of wind development.


 

Two recent articles also cover this press conference:

Brattleboro Reformer: The Local Ridges

An article by Mike Faher in the Brattleboro Reformer describes the press conference, and connects it to the town of Windham's fight against industrial wind on its local ridges. (The town of Windham is in Windham County, which is also home to the town of Vernon and Vermont Yankee.)

Eight pro-wind groups made a lengthy statement against this proposed legislation. The groups include the local Sierra Club,  Citizens Awareness Network (their website is nukebusters.org), and  the Vermont Yankee Decommissioning Alliance. The Reformer article says:  In the groups' press release, Kilian characterized wind-power opposition as "the extreme voices of those who refuse to take responsibility for our energy future."

(Snark warning  I just LOVE it when nuclear-opponents-and-wind-promoters insult people that way. Winning people to your side by name-calling.  Go for it, guys! Do some more of this! End snark.)

Vermont Digger: The Governor's Opinion and the Bill Itself

An article by Andrew Stein in Vermont Digger includes a video of the conference, a link to the draft bill itself, and an interesting correction (the correction, IMO, is not the reporter's fault...)

Here's the correction: Gov. Peter Shumlin said on Friday that he is still vehemently opposed to the idea of a moratorium on utility-scale wind development. VTDigger originally reported that Shumlin indicated earlier this week that he was not completely opposed to the idea.  

The Digger article has a lengthy comment stream, including many comments by my friend Willem Post. Post is a world-wide authority on wind power and its problems. He has many excellent posts on wind power  on The Energy Collective website.  Thousands of people follow his posts there. He is also an occasional guest blogger on this blog.

--------

Rob Roper made the video above. Roper is President of the Ethan Allen Institute, and the Energy Education Project (I am director) is part of the Ethan Allen Institute.

I blogged about this press conference a few days ago: A Wind Moratorium Press Conference in Montpelier. That earlier post includes information about Vermont Electric Cooperative and wind power.

A Wind Moratorium Press Conference Tomorrow in Montpelier

Never a dull moment here in Vermont.  Tomorrow in Montpelier: a press conference on a proposed moratorium for industrial wind.

Cedar Creek Room at State House
Oil Painting of Battle of Cedar Creek

Wind, the Press Conference 

Two Vermont Senators are co-sponsoring a bill calling for a moratorium on Industrial Wind in Vermont.  There may be other co-sponsors also.  Senator Joe Benning (R-Caledonia) and Robert Hartwell (D-Bennington) will introduce the bill at a press conference tomorrow, Thursday, at 2 p.m. in the Cedar Creek Room at the State House in Montpelier.

 If you look at the Senate District map of Vermont, you will see that the Caledonia district is in the northern part of Vermont, on the eastern side of the state, while the Bennington district is in the southern part of the Vermont, on the western side of the state.

In other words, this is more than a bi-partisan press conference. It's practically an all-Vermont press conference. According to a Times Argus article. Vermont Senate President Campbell says there may be 18 votes for the moratorium,  which would be a majority in the 30-person Vermont Senate.  However, the Vermont House is less likely to pass a moratorium. Governor Shumlin's administration is solidly against it.

If you want to learn more about wind in Vermont, it would be fun to attend the press conference.  Here's the official press release about the conference.

Wind, the Reactions

David Hallquist, CEO of Vermont Electric Cooperative (VEC),  is not happy with ever-expanding renewable mandates. He was quoted by WCAX: VEC CEO Dave Hallquist says the utility is concerned about finding balance between rising electric rates and the adoption of a greener power portfolio.

"I don't think we've really thought this out entirely. We're kind of looking at this through different perspectives. Our perspective as the boots on the ground utility that has to carry it out says we don't know how it can work even from a physics standpoint," Hallquist said.

The VEC Board of Directors has sent a request to the Vermont legislature, requesting that the legislature not continually increase the requirements for renewables. Vermont Digger's Anne Galloway wrote Vermont Electric Co-op directors ask law-makers to put a hold on new renewable energy mandates.  Her article includes the text of the Board of Directors request to the Legislature.  The director's request for no-new-mandates is not the same as the new-wind-moratorium that the senators propose.  But the director's request is surely in the same direction. The last paragraph of their request states:

The VEC Board of Directors recommends that the Vermont Legislature impose a moratorium for a period of two years effective on January 1, 2013, on further renewable power supply mandates or sooner if the grid instability, human health impacts, and cost issues have been addressed and a transition plan is in place that considers the cost and reliability impacts of moving to higher levels of renewable resources. 

A quote from CEO Hallquist in the same article: “We observed the wind issue splitting our community....We asked ourselves, why are we doing this when it represents only 4 percent of our carbon footprint?”


Specific Wind: Facts and Quotes

The Georgia Mountain Wind Turbines were connected to the grid by December 31, enabling them to receive a 30% federal tax rebate on the project.

In Windham County, home of Vermont Yankee, the Town of Windham has been fighting against wind development. Residents were hopeful when the Vermont Department of Public Service backed the Town of Windham's fight.  However, the Public Service Board (PSB) has overruled the local citizens, at least for now.  In an article in the Bennington Banner:  (Windham) Selectboard Chairwoman Mary Boyer also said the permitting process has been a valuable experience.

"Although we were hoping that the PSB would support our right to determine our own land use as the governor has suggested, that is not to be at this time," Boyer said in a statement sent to the Reformer.

Rep Tony Klein

In contrast, Tony Klein of the Vermont legislature is all in favor of wind energy. In WCAX's article on the wind moratorium, Klein, chair of the House Natural Resources and Energy committee, was quoted as follows: "I think it's (a wind moratorium) about the most anti-business statement the Legislature could make," said Rep. Tony Klein, D-East Montpelier.

The Press Conference

Stop in at the Cedar Creek Room tomorrow afternoon, if you can make it, and attend the press conference.  It should be an interesting afternoon.

Young Workers in Windham County: Guest Post by Lindsay Rose

Lindsay Rose
Recent Graduate
Vermont Yankee Employee

Good evening commissioners,

My name is Lindsay Rose, and I would like to first thank you for giving me the opportunity to speak to you this evening. I’m from Hinsdale, New Hampshire and graduated from UNH in 2010. About a year after I graduated I got a job at Vermont Yankee where I found an exciting opportunity, a well-paying job, and a company with good community values.

It’s a fact that the demographics in Windham County are changing. From 2000 to 2010, the number of older workers, or the baby boomer generation, increased, but the number of young workers, aged 25 to 44, declined.  Basically Windham County’s future workforce is leaving.

Vermont’s future workforce will be looking for opportunity: A steady job, a well-paying job, a company that gives back to their community, and an industry that’s contributing to the overall good and health of our country. VY provides these jobs: more than 600 of them. It was ranked among the Best Places to Work for the last three years in a row by Vermont Business Magazine; VY management encourages volunteerism in our communities; and the nuclear energy industry is contributing to a clean, safe, reliable energy future.

Vermont Yankee is a company that brings professionals to Vermont. These professionals include recent graduates like me, and our country’s military veterans with nuclear experience who are ready to bring their skills and experiences to Vermont. Vermont Yankee is an essential economic driver and is a business that provides career opportunities that keep people in Vermont.

At Vermont Yankee I have a steady, well-paying job, I’m encouraged to learn and take on new activities and experiences, and I’m given opportunities to help the community by participating in VY’s many volunteer activities. This year I joined my co-workers and helped remodel the Brattleboro Drop In Center, I’m supporting Project Feed the Thousands, and I have begun volunteering for Big Brothers Big Sisters.

I’ve chosen to stay in the area specifically because of my job at Vermont Yankee and I enjoy living in the area. The opportunities that I’ve described are what keep me working at VY, and are what keep me in the area. If I didn’t have these opportunities at Vermont Yankee, I would find them elsewhere. This is a great place to live if you have a good job, but I couldn’t live here without one. Thank you for considering my comments.

----------

This is the second in a series of posts which share statements made in favor of Vermont Yankee at the Public Service Board hearing on November 7, 2012.

Ms. Rose spoke on behalf of herself as a personal statement.

If Vermont Yankee Closes: Hard Times in Southern Vermont

A Task Force

Windham County, Vermont, is home to Vermont Yankee. A recent Task Force from that area issued a report on what will happen (and what should be done) when Vermont Yankee closes.

The Task Force was formed by the Southeast Vermont Economic Development Strategy Planning Group. Task force members included businessmen, anti-nuclear activists, and people who serve on various commissions. I have not been able to find a website for the parent organization. (With a name that long, they should have no trouble getting a unique URL.) If anyone can find a web site for them, please let me know.

According to an article in The Commons, "the task force invited representatives from VY and the town of Vernon, where the plant is located, to participate. Both politely declined."

The town of Vernon refused to participate in this task force, but the Safe and Green campaign did participate. Very interesting. This could be a comment on how this supposedly bi-partisan task force was perceived, or it could be chance.

The Task Force Results

A short Vermont Tiger story ("Hard Times") about the task force gave me the idea for the illustration. You can read the task force report here.

Basically, the Task Force report agreed with earlier posts in this blog:

• approximately 1000 jobs would be lost in the region and millions of dollars of tax revenues will be lost.

The report also predicts:

• a decline of 5 to 15% in local real estate prices. I personally think this is optimistic, and the decline will be more like 10-20%
• a decline in quality health care. When hundreds of families with high-quality health insurance leave a small area, you can expect doctors to leave also.
• a decline in quality of life, from the loss of educated and active people, many of whom are community-minded and spend time volunteering.

Mitigation Plans

All those lousy effects are very predictable. However, the Task Force wasn't just supposed to define the problem, they were supposed to begin to cure it. In other words, they were to suggest "mitigation plans" and they did. Here are a few of the plans:

• Vermont should declare the area a Special Economic Zone and give it money from the state general fund
• The area should apply for state resources for a comprehensive mitigation plan
• (Someone should) expand healthcare services and assistance services
• The area should prepare for the proposed location of a Vermont Technical College location in Brattleboro
• Locals should advocate for immediate decommissioning of VY following closure, rather than long-term SafeStor, so that there is mitigation in the form of decommissioning jobs and economic impact over a period of up to 10 years. (This won't work. As I wrote in an earlier post, Decommissioning: Facts Versus Fancy, decommissioning doesn't bring steady jobs.)
• There should be regional marketing efforts designed to attract young retirees and career changers to the area.

Well, now we know the plan.

---------

Howard Shaffer Describes the Public Service Board Meeting

Howard Shaffer has an excellent blog post at the ANS Nuclear Cafe:Back to the Vermont Public Service Board: Square One or Before! With all due respect to the various newspaper reporters, Shaffer does a better job of describing the three major issues in front of the Public Service Board. These issues are: when does the certificate run out, the effect of the federal court ruling on the Public Service Board, and spent fuel storage. Worth reading!

---------------

The Rally

On March 17 (this Saturday) we will be holding a rally at Vermont Yankee at 5 p.m. (shift change). I will blog about this tomorrow, and probably leave that blog in place through Saturday. If you live in the area and support the plant, I hope you can come! My earlier post about the rally is here.

-----------

Illustration from Dickens novel Hard Times. The pie illustration seemed to be various places on the web.