Entergy Makes its Gesture

Well Entergy of Louisiana can’t keep the valves at the plant oiled but they do keep their legal team lubricated with money. Entergy’s legal team was successful in the challenge to Vermont’s law covering Vermont Yankee operating past 2012.The Times Argus reports that Entergy has sent a message from New Orleans demanding Vermont pay $4.6 million in legal fees they claim they incurred in the suit against the State of Vermont.

Reacting to this news Vermont Attorney General William Sorrell said he had thought the claim from Entergy would be “in seven figures” more in line with Vermont standards. The Attorney General says “I guess it [$4.6 million] shows the ‘David-versus-Goliath’ aspect of the case,” The mismatch is suitable but it’s kind of an ill fit otherwise for this situation as Goliath has won and is now making demands from David after this part of battle.

It also seems Sorrel had a surprising hope. Against all past dealings with Goliath he thought Entergy might make a gesture of being a good corporate citizen to atone for sins of the past.

Sorrell said he had even thought Entergy might not seek legal fees in a gesture of being “a good corporate citizen making up for the sins of the past and the misleading statements about the underground pipes.”

Sorrell had investigated Entergy officials for more than a year for possible criminal charges for the misstatements about underground pipes, which were later found to be the source of radioactive tritium leaking at the plant in 2010. Entergy executives had said such pipes did not exist.

Under pressure they grudgingly admitted to miss communicating about underground pipes.No criminal charges charges were filed; no case was brought so why would Entergy feel it had sinned? Hardly sinning in Goliath’s rule book, maybe in the eyes of Entergy Corp the only sin is losing.

The NRC says: “… we mean it.”

Woof,woof! The NRC is feeling good about itself. Sounding pumped, like a lean mean nuclear regulatin’ machine on their "blog" where they declare: “When the NRC says we consider new and significant information, we mean it.”
The story is that errors in recently submitted information were found during a review process for equipment replacement at an existing plant in the Southern US. Based on this new significant information the NRC found that designs for a new Economic Simplified Boiling-Water Reactor (ESBWR) plant might have similar errors.
What is the upshot of these NRC discoveries? It could mean the NRC must revise reports and/or have the applicants make changes to design control documents which will delay their final decision on design certification. New information comes to light, consideration given to the new facts, followed by regulatory action. Has a watchdog stirred?

“We mean it” yips the NRC watchdog. Well, ok calm down. So let’s say significant new information about potential seismic activity near an existing plant (let’s call it Indian Point-which rhymes with Vermont Yankee) was readily available; the NRC would of course considerate it in the ongoing relicensing process. Well not exactly as a former oil industry geologist writing in a vtdigger.com opinion piece points out:

Judging by Indian Point, the Nuclear Regulatory Commission may be forcing us to base Vermont Yankee’s geologic risk analysis on antiquated data:“Much new seismological information is available since their initial approvals (of Indian Point) in 1973 and 1975. Nevertheless the US NRC, so far has not permitted any new information to be used or old information on which the original licenses were granted to be contested in considering extension of licenses,” according to a 2008 study by researcher Lynn Sykes.

New York State has an aggressive attorney general who has called upon the NRC to do a comprehensiveColumbia University seismic review as part of their Indian Point relicensing process. The New York AG must have considered significant the findings from 2008 by seismologists. They found that two intersecting fault lines near Indian Point were capable of creating a 7.0-magnitude earthquake. Despite all this, none of this recent information is incorporated into the current NRC process.

Now remember clearly the NRC claims–“When we say we consider new and significant information, we mean it”. Well, except when there are significant fault lines.

Entergy’s lines in the sand

The battle front is shifting slightly for Vermont Yankee power plant as it escalates toward a crunch point; a financial decision on refueling. Making it clear that Entergy will not glow quietly into the night Vermont Yankee Entergy CEO J. Wayne Leonard stated this week in an AP report he felt pushed into a corner by the State of Vermont. “…and there's a point where there's a line in the sand and we've got to make a decision whether we're pushed any further or not." Leonard also maintained the NRC had final say on the plant’s future. The re-licensing issue may be headed to the courts and we should hope the Vermont Attorney General can be as aggressive with Entergy in court as he has proved with sugared drinks. In more than a year that VY has been leaking radioactive tritium and leaching it into the Connecticut River no legal action was initiated by Vermont’s AG.

A little help from friends nationally. Just prior to Entergy CEO’s line- in-the-sand statement pressure was being brought to bear in Congress about the NRC’s speed in nuclear plant re-licensing. Representative Fred Upton, chairman of the House Energy and Commerce Committee claims the NRC’s actions show indifference to the economic realities challenging its applicants and is pressuring the NRC to explain their nuclear plant license renewal procedures. Mirroring this,a energy trade publication reports two Republican Senators are raising pointed questions about the NRC’s speed in nuclear plant re-licensing. Senators James Inhofe, from Oklahoma and David “diaper me” Vitter, of Louisiana(home of Entergy VY’s owner) have written to NRC chairman Gregory Jazcko.
The Senators claim that "the commission has incentivized opponents to intervene solely because the NRC will delay the conduct of these adjudications and relicensing processes." Entergy Vermont Yankee and Entergy owned Pilgrim power plants both up for relicening where not mentioned specifically but understood to be the subject of this.

They [Inhofe and Vitter] asked him to explain how it determines whether opposition to a nuclear power plant license renewal application is deemed to be "local" and the agency decides on a"threshold of 'minimal' opposition" to a license renewal

Vermont Yankee shutdown ,leak in 24”pipe

A 24” pipe in the feedwater system at the Vermont Yankee (VY) nuclear power plant in Vernon, VT is leaking and therefore the plant has commenced a shutdown. The NRC has been notified according to a press release from VY spokesperson Larry Smith.

At approximately 7:00 p.m. Sunday night plant operators identified leakage of approximately 60 drops per minute from a system pipe. Subsequent investigation by technicians and engineers identified the leak to be in the feedwater system piping. Because the leak is in a 24 inch piping section which cannot be repaired with the plant in operation, a conservative decision was made to take the plant out of service to perform a repair.

It’s a big pipe and it’s under pressure.
The difficult to access heavily insulated feedwater pipe carries radioactive water at about 300 degrees in temperature and is operated under 400 psi (pounds per square inch of pressure).
At 24” in diameter this pipe is roughly as big in diameter as the rescue tunnel used to rescue the trapped 33 Chilean miners. Plant reliability at this aging nuke are at issue here as the feedwater system is one of those systems the state legislature asked to be scrutinized by the public oversight panel in the Act 189 Reliability Assessment.

In Jan. 2009, an age related feedwater leak required a 50% power reduction.

Last week Entergy public ally addressed persistent rumors and disclosed that Vermont Yankee is up for sale and they are actively trying to find a buyer. Accumulating reliability issues could make the sale of the 30 plus year old plant difficult as it is clear faces accumulating series of hurdles.

Maggie Gundersen, president of Fairewinds Associates, Inc, notes that this is another significant reliability issue for the aging VY plant and emphasizes the need for its retirement, decommissioning, and dismantlement beginning in 2012.

A wee bit of the old glow in the dark?

Vermont Public Radio reported this week Entergy's Vermont Yankee has another leak. A high pressure emergency coolant system is leaking small puffs of steam, mild levels of radioactive steam. If it’s not exactly the same as many other times it’s at least a very familiar chain of events.

"We're talking about relatively mild levels of radioactivity coming out of here. This is a system connected to the reactor obviously but any radioactive liquid flowing out of here would be at low levels."

There was a notable delay in reporting the news to the public as often is the case. Remember as Vermont PSD Commissioner David O’Brien said recently

“How many days until the election?”

The leak (called minor by the NRC) was discovered almost a month ago, September 24th and reported to the NRC.

"Our maintenance department put a maintenance patch on this drain line to make temporary repairs and we have permanent repairs that will be made sometime in the future. But the high pressure injection coolant system is operable.

We have no issues whatsoever with the operation of the system and we're considering this routine maintenance

that our maintenance department would perform at a nuclear plant on a day to day basis."

Tuesday VPR reported poll results showing that statewide 44 percent of those surveyed said they want the plant to close, 39 percent supported re-licensing and 17 percent undecided with an error of plus or minus 4 percentage points.

Vermont Yankee leaking news:The Weekend Report

Today's Vermont Yankee News

"The observed short duration and small volume of leakage from the drain line appears to indicate that the event did not result in any impact to public health and safety," according to an NRC statement.

Vermont Yankee by coincidence or design never fails to make a small headline sometime on Friday afternoon or some sleepy Saturday or Sunday morning .What are the odds?
The latest caps a busy couple weeks getting the beast back online after refueling.
The newest hi-jinks at the troubled plant comes on the heels of misleading Vermont state officials about under ground pipes leaking tritium and the state senate vote against re-licensing ,strontium 90 was discovered in a fish near the plant and almost as a side show the entire unit was “Scrammed”, automatically shut down due to a switching problem during power up.

Picture this power plant running for twenty more years, 2032?
Safe, clean and reliable headlines released every slow news day.

A new leak of radioactive material has been found and fixed at the troubled Vermont Yankee nuclear power plant, officials said Saturday.
Vapor and water containing 13 different radioactive substances was found late Friday coming from a pipe in a hole workers dug to find the source of an earlier leak.

"This was a new leak," Vermont Yankee spokesman Larry Smith said in an e-mail. "The leak has been stopped. ... There is no threat to public health or safety."
The federal Nuclear Regulatory Commission also said the public faced no danger.

also posted at Green Mountain Daily

New Vermont Nuke from Dept. of Half-baked Ideas

At the Vermont Senate vote on Yankee re-licensing newly appointed Senator Peg Flory proposed an amendment that called for supporting a new reactor be built on the Vermont Yankee site. I wonder if she realized that rate payers in many states are being asked to pay nuclear plant construction costs in advance.

The advertised nuclear power rebirth is facing more problems than those generated by Vermont Yankee’s ongoing tritium leak. Daunting start up construction costs scare private investors away. New plants can cost a quarter to one hundred percent of an entire utilities market capitalization.

Federal backed loans guarantees and local rate payers will be footing major portions of the bill if utilities have their way. In states with nuclear power projects, utilities have lobbied for the ability to charge rate payers while construction is in progress. Residents of Georgia, Florida, Texas, South Carolina and Missouri may all be required to cover the advance costs of new nuclear power construction.
The Washington Post reports

Financing has always been one of the biggest obstacles to a renaissance of nuclear power. The plants are expensive, and construction tends to run late and over budget. …
So utilities have turned to state legislators and regulators to help contain capital costs. In states such as Georgia, Florida and South Carolina, utilities have won permission to charge customers for some of the cost of new reactors while construction is still in progress -- a financing technique that would save utilities a couple of billion dollars for each reactor. Previously, utilities had to wait until power plants were in operation before raising rates, as they still do in most states.

Never Cry Tritium in a Crowded Theatre

From the Vermont Health Department online

On January 7, the Vermont Department of Health was notified by Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power Station that samples taken from a ground water monitoring well on site (identified as GZ-3) contained tritium.

Tritium is a radioactive form of hydrogen. It is a by-product of the nuclear fission process in a nuclear reactor, and also occurs naturally in the environment in very low concentrations.
Most tritium in the environment is in the form of tritiated water, which easily moves about in the atmosphere, bodies of water, soil and rock.

The finding of tritium in ground water signals that there has been an unintended underground release of radioactive material, and that other radioisotopes may have contaminated the environment.

Perhaps a Vermont Health Department notification of a house fire might read as follows:
Vermont Health Department Notice of Rapid Oxidation and Chemical Process of Combustion

On February 11, The Vermont Health Department was notified by local private authorities that a previously unknown section of a house was found to be on fire. Samples were taken from a monitoring portion of the site (identified as 1-SOH ,1-Side of House).

Fire is the rapid oxidation of a material in the chemical process of combustion, releasing heat, light, and various reaction products. Most rapid oxidation in the environment is in the form of fire and may easily move about. Slower oxidative processes like rusting or digestion are not considered to be part of this definition.

The discovery of fire in monitoring area 1-SOH (1-side of house) signals there has been and unintended combustion process occurrence that may need further voluntary monitoring.

Vermont Officials are conducting a thorough investigation to identify the magnitude of the occurrence and the source of the combustion process .Assistance will be provided by a number of private and state agencies, a team of Rapid Oxidation Experts (ROE’S) will be on site to analyze data.
This process if unchecked has the potential to cause physical damage through burning and can occasionally result in a phase transition in the affected mass if the temperature of the flame is hot enough.

Weakly, updates will be scheduled, soon

"...vigilant in prosecuting crimes against Vermont's environment."

"Had these actions not been reported to the state so quickly, there was the potential for significant environmental contamination at the site and surrounding community,” said Vermont Attorney General William Sorrell. "We will continue to be vigilant in prosecuting crimes against Vermont's environment."

No it’s not the leaking tritium at Entergy’s aging Vermont Yankee nuclear power plant but 23 buried waste oil drums the Attorney General is talking about.

A Danby Vermont man got a one to two year suspended sentence, probation and a $10,000 fine .The maximum sentence was a possible fives years in jail and $250,000 in fines .

After this success there is no word on what Vermont’s vigilant regulators may have in store for Entergy and their tritium leak.
Currently the leak has spiked to well above the federal standard for drinking water (20,000 picocuries per liter) to 2.7 million picocuries per liter. Tritium levels in reactor water usually measure 2.9million picocuries

Recently the Vermont AG submitted a request to Entergy for information about whether plant officials lied to state officials about the existence of underground piping that is the source of the leak. Entergy has proven reluctant in the past to release documents without a court fight.

Vermont Yankee Groundwater Test Positive for Tritium

With a sneezing and wheezing the calliope crashed to the ground …



Around the same time today Entergy Vermont Yankee officials dealt with the news that their aging plant’s monitoring wells had tested positive for tritium (a radioactive isotope)Vermont Governor Douglas was urging the legislature to vote to extend the operating license and allow regulatory boards to handle the issue.
Today’s evidence of tritium in monitoring wells and an alarm caused by the oil level in a pump used to control the power level in the reactor come on the heels of Vermont Yankee new feel good about nukes PR blitz called I am Vermont Yankee

Reports say The problem at the 38-year-old reactor is similar to those cropping up at nuclear plants around the country, with the discovery of a radioactive isotope called tritium in a monitoring well.
Both Spokesman Rob Williams and William Irwin, radiological health chief for the Vermont Department of Health, said there was no threat to the public health and safety from the level of tritium reported. They said the 17,000 picocuries of radioactivity per liter of water measured at Vermont Yankee was 3,000 less than the 20,000 picocurie safety limit set for drinking water by the federal Environmental Protection Agency.

But Arnold Gundersen, a former nuclear industry engineer who has consulted with the Legislature on issues related to Vermont Yankee, on Thursday called the discovery of tritium on the plant site "a big deal."

"It's a sign that there's a pipe or a tank leaking somewhere" at the plant, Gundersen said. "It's highly unlikely that the highest concentration in the ground would happen to be at the monitoring well," he added.

This is a problem with older plants and its effect the cost of decommissioning could be significant.For a much more thorough run down of all things Yankee and tritium leaks in general Green Mountain Daily's Maggie Gunderson has more more.
Link here New Tritium Leak at Vermont Yankee