Saturday June 4, 2011 BRATTLEBORO -- Entergy, the owner and o=
perator of Vermont Yankee nuclear power plant in Vernon, is attempting t=
o "usurp Vermont law (and) walk away from their legal obligations," wrot=
e attorneys for the Conservation Law Foundation and the Vermont Public I=
nterest Research Group in a filing submitted to the Vermont Supreme Cour=
t on Thursday.
And even though Entergy received a renewed license to operate Yankee =
to 2032, 20 years past its original license expiration date, the license=
could be vacated if the District Court Circuit of Appeals in Washington=
, D.C., rules the Nuclear Regulatory Commission violated the Clean Water=
Act when it issued the new license, wrote the attorneys.
That means that Entergy's request for a preliminary injunction from t=
he Supreme Court for the District of Vermont to prevent the state from o=
rdering the shutdown of Yankee in advance of March, 2012, has no merits,=
said Sandy Levine, senior legal counsel for CLF.
"They're missing a key part of their license," she said, which negate=
s Entergy contention that Vermont's threat to close the plant is causing=
it irreparable economic harm.
"Entergy's claim has no merit because there is uncertainty over the v=
alidity of the NRC license," said Levine.
The Vermont Public Service Board has been reviewing motions filed by =
several environmental advocacy groups, including CLF, who contend it sho=
uld order Yankee to cease operations until all sources of tritiated wate=
r
leaking=
into the ground have been identified and repaired and the effects of th=
e leakage have been mitigated.
Entergy is asking the district court to issue an injunction preventin=
g the PSB from doing so.
Getting a clean water certificate of the state is something Entergy i=
s required to do, said Levine, and is not a new requirement.
"The Plaintiff's own failures and repudiations preclude granting the =
equitable relief of a preliminary injunction," stated the documents subm=
itted by CLF and VPIRG.
Levine had no comment as to why the NRC accepted the incomplete licen=
se renewal application and why it approved it without the permit.
Neil Sheehan, spokesman for the NRC, had no comment at this point on =
the filing in the Court of Appeals, though he did say the NRC is expecte=
d to issue a comment soon.
"We're continuing to review what documents were in place at the time =
we issued the approval," he said.
In past license renewal proceedings at other power plants, both a wat=
er quality permit and a water discharge permit have been necessary compo=
nents to the license renewal application, he said.
However, said Sheehan, even if Yankee's application lacked the water =
quality permit, it is doubtful the NRC will put a hold on the extended l=
icense.
"I'm not aware of an approval that was subsequently withdrawn," he sa=
id.
Normally, a power plant can operate under an old permit until a new o=
ne is granted.
But, according to CLF and VPIRG, it cannot operate if the licensee ha=
s not requested a new water quality permit.
The word "request" is the linchpin to whether Entergy can operate the=
plant without a new permit.
ANR has notified Entergy that it has not yet received "the requisite =
request ..."
"For the court to adjudicate (Entergy's) claim that it will suffer ir=
reparable harm, the court must make a threshold determination that (Ente=
rgy's) ‘2011 license' is in fact valid and confers certainty on wh=
ich (Entergy's) irreparable harm allegations hinge," stated the document=
s.
Bob Audette can be reached at raudette@reformer.com, or at 802-254-2311, ext. 160.
=
![3D"Media](3D"http://extras.mnginteractive.com/live/media/mng_logos/mng_fo=)
![](3D"http://extras.mnginteractive.com/live/media/site511/2010/12=)
=
![3D"Quantcast"/](3D"http://pixel.quantserve.com/pixel/p-4ctCQwtnNBNs2.gif?labels=)