When Peter Shumlin this week leaped on comments by Brian Dubie about Vermont Yankee, Dubie got a taste of the kind of treatment he is going to get in the General Election.

Shumlin is one of the five Democrats running in the Aug. 24 primary for governor, and it is far from certain that he will be the one to take on Dubie in the General Election. But he took the opportunity to blast comments by Dubie that seemed to cast a positive light on a report about the prospects for Vermont Yankee’s future.

Dubie’s comments came in an interview on Vermont Public Radio. He was discussing a report from the Public Oversight Panel last week about the continued operation of the Vermont Yankee nuclear power plant beyond the expiration of its license in 2012. Dubie said that if the owners of Yankee, Entergy Vermont, were to embrace a culture of safety and make necessary investments then the Public Oversight Panel saw no reason that Vermont Yankee couldn’t operate beyond 2012.

Shumlin saw his chance, and he turned what could have been passing comments on the radio into an issue about Dubie’s attitude toward Vermont Yankee.

In fact, Dubie’s characterization of the panel’s report on Vermont Yankee put a positive spin on a highly negative report. The panel, which was created by the Legislature, found serious problems at Yankee, raising doubts about the plant’s continued operation.

These problems include a corporate culture that does not encourage scrupulous attention to the truth, as well as the failure to devote adequate resources to the physical systems. These problems are “systemic,” according to the panel’s report. Vermont Yankee cannot operate reliably for another 20 years unless Entergy corrects this corporate culture and spends enough money on the plant, the report said.

The main thrust of the panel’s report was a warning: Things cannot go on like this. The report called what had happened at Yankee an “organization-wide breakdown” in attention to detail and in attention to the truth.

Dubie did not deny these findings. His spokesman said that Dubie believes safety is paramount and that the company’s actions were indefensible. Rather, Dubie was saying that if reality were different, there would be no reason why Yankee could not continue to operate. If the corporate culture could be corrected and we could receive adequate assurances of safety, then there would be no reason not to extend the plant’s license.

An election campaign is when statements such as Dubie’s inevitably come under minute parsing, with all shadings analyzed and all possible meanings teased out. In one sense, Dubie was merely stating the obvious: If everything were fine at Yankee, then everything would be fine.

But Dubie’s words suggested an eagerness to look on the bright side when it comes to Yankee. He claimed the report suggested that if a long list of mistakes were corrected, then perhaps the plant could carry on. But the emphasis of the report was on the list of mistakes and the fact that they hadn’t been corrected and doubt that the plant could carry on.

Dubie can expect more close parsing of his words as the election season continues. He is not as politically shrewd and verbally agile as Gov. James Douglas, and his Democratic opponent can be expected to pick up on any effort to spin a story to his liking.

Vermont Yankee may be a difficult issue for Dubie. Those who believe Vermont Yankee has been an important source of electric power and of well-paying jobs have been undercut by Yankee’s record of misstatements and mistakes. All five Democratic candidates believe the plant should be closed in 2012, and Dubie may lose credibility if he continues to look beyond the warning signs about Yankee to an unjustified rosy scenario.

Shumlin has made Yankee an important issue in his political career. But his Democratic primary opponents — Matt Dunne, Douglas Racine, Deborah Markowitz and Susan Bartlett — are also ready to see Vermont Yankee shut down in 2012. They, too, could be expected to take Dubie to task for looking past warnings about Entergy’s failures.

“Brian (Dubie) made comments on VPR last week that I am really concerned about… and I don’t think… they don’t reflect what we need from the next governor,” said Peter Shumlin, Democrat running for governor of Vermont.

Shumlin disagrees with Republican candidate Brian Dubie’s assessment of a new report about Vermont Yankee. The Public Oversight panel found last week the nuclear plant has a corporate culture problem and does not consistently spend enough on safety.

“What Brian indicated was that he trusts Entergy Louisiana, that he thinks they can change and that he thinks the report indicates that the problems are minor and can be overcome. That isn’t what the report says,” Shumlin said.

“I stand by what I said,” Dubie said. “I quoted the report.”

Republican Brian Dubie has stayed out of the spotlight. He does not have a primary race. Dubie supports Yankee and says if it’s proven safe it should keep operating and he thinks the report supports that.

“I’m not here to defend Entergy,” Dubie said. “What I’m here to say is we need to look at safety and we need to look at the importance of jobs, and when I give a pink slip to a fellow Vermonter I’m going to make sure all the questions are answered.”

All five Democrats for governor want Yankee to close in 2012. But Shumlin is the first to attack Dubie, trying to set the tone that he’s a frontrunner… already looking to the November election. But Shumlin needs to win the Democratic primary first on August 24. He admits it’s a tossup.

“It’s a wide open race,” he said.

Shumlin also said Tuesday that if Yankee closes in 2012, he would tax the plant to store its nuclear waste in Vernon. Brian Dubie’s campaign says it will have to study the issue but that Dubie supports having Entergy pay for clean up and maintenance of the site.

Kristin Carlson – WCAX News

http://www.wcax.com/global/video.asp?clipId=4979452&topVideoCatNo=63459&autoStart=true

BURLINGTON – Senate President Peter Shumlin opened up an attack on Lt. Gov. Brian Dubie Tuesday, accusing the Republican candidate for governor of going too easy on Vermont Yankee executives and misrepresenting a state report on the plant’s future.

Shumlin, a Windham County Democrat running for governor, said Dubie places too much trust in executives with Entergy Nuclear Vermont, the company that owns the nuclear power plant, after accusations this year that they misled regulators.

He also accused the Republican candidate of misrepresenting a report on Vermont Yankee by the Public Oversight Panel to paint a rosier picture of the plant’s chances to continue operation after 2012, when its current license expires.

“I’ve lost faith in Entergy Louisiana’s ability to tell us the truth,” said Shumlin, who led a vote in the Vermont Senate in February to reject the plant’s relicensing. “I don’t trust their word anymore. But it seems that Brian Dubie does.”

Corry Bliss, Dubie’s campaign manager, responded that Shumlin “has his facts wrong” and the lieutenant governor has always believed that “safety must come first at Vermont Yankee.”

“He has never wavered in this belief or in the belief that Entergy’s actions are indefensible,” Bliss said. “The evidence clearly shows Entergy misled the public and lost the public’s trust. Rebuilding that trust, if at all possible, will be a slow and carefully scrutinized process.”

Vermont Yankee’s future in the state is expected to become a political issue in the fall after the primaries, when Democrats have selected a nominee who will face Dubie in the November general election.

The company, which employs hundreds of Vermonters, saw its credibility whacked this year when it was revealed that executives misled regulators and lawmakers about the existence of underground pipes — infrastructure that was leaking tritium and other radioactive materials into the ground.

Vermont Attorney General William Sorrell is now investigating whether the company intentionally misled the state. He said last week that his office has received more than 2 million pages of documents and will soon begin interviewing Entergy executives.

“I wouldn’t say we are drowning in paperwork, but we are swamped,” Sorrell said last week. “This may take some time.”

Shumlin’s criticism of Dubie centers on an interview that the Republican gave to Vermont Public Radio last week, shortly after the release of a report by the state’s nuclear consultants that painted a dire picture of Entergy and its chances to operate beyond 2012.

When asked about the report on VPR last week, Dubie said its conclusion was that “if there is a culture of safety that management would embrace — absolutely I totally agree with that — and if investments are made that, if investments continue to be made in Vermont Yankee, the legislative-appointed Public Oversight committee saw no reason that Vermont Yankee couldn’t operate past 2012.”

Shumlin said Dubie’s statement on the radio show appears to come more from Entergy’s press release about the report rather than the report itself.

“The report stated that there were serious problems with Entergy Louisiana’s corporate culture,” Shumlin said. “These are problems that can’t be fix in one week or one month or even one year. They are systemic problems.”

Arnie Gundersen, one of the nuclear consultants on the Public Oversight Panel who worked on the report, agreed Tuesday that Dubie gave the wrong impression of the report’s conclusions. He said the report expressed strong doubts that the company could make the necessary corporate and infrastructure changes necessary to operate after 2012.

“The lieutenant governor’s quotes are based not on the history of Vermont Yankee, but his wishes for improvement,” Gundersen said. “You don’t make decisions based on wishes, you make them based on history.”

He also took issue with another statement from Dubie: That the report was the product of the Legislature and that Gov. James Douglas’ administration had no input.

Douglas’ first appointee to the panel died before the process was complete, but another member, Fred Sears, was appointed to the panel by the other members — with the blessing of Douglas, he said.

When asked about Gundersen’s comments, the Dubie campaign stood by their original statement issued after Shumlin’s press conference, held at his campaign’s offices in Burlington early Tuesday afternoon.

“I don’t see the difference between the report and LG Dubie’s comments,” Bliss wrote in an e-mail.

Vermont Yankee, which began operating in 1972, is scheduled to close in March 2012 unless it wins approval for a 20-year license extension. The Vermont Senate voted against continued operation in a 26-4 vote in February.

Dubie, in his role as lieutenant governor, presided over the Senate debate. Shumlin, as Senate president, led the charge against the bill, which would have allowed the Vermont Public Service Board to issue a decision on the plant’s continued operation.

http://www.timesargus.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20100728/NEWS02/707289945/0/NEWS&template=printart

Senator John Campbell (D-Windsor County)

Will we stake out a bold new energy agenda that creates thousands of good Vermont jobs in the fields of renewable energy and efficiency? Or will we stay tethered to an aging nuclear reactor — operated by a debt-ridden Wall Street business scheme — that could leave us paying high energy and cleanup costs far into the future?

For me the choice is clear. We must say “yes” to biomass, cow power and wind power in communities that want it. We must say “yes” to solar, small hydro and energy efficiency. We must make the kinds of investments that will help our small business owners create jobs for Vermont-based engineers, contractors, architects, plumbers, electricians, loggers, truckers, farmers and building supply companies.

For Vermont to reap the benefits of the high-paying jobs that the new economy can offer, we must have the courage to say “no” to relicensing Vermont Yankee for another 20 years. There are three main reasons why relicensing Vermont Yankee is not in the best interests of Vermonters.

First, the corporate spin-off from our current well-financed owner, Entergy, to the debt-ridden shell corporation, Enexus, is fiscally irresponsible and extremely unwise. Second, the decommissioning fund shortfall of almost $600 million leaves Vermont ratepayers on the hook to clean up the plant and its nuclear waste. Third, the price offered by Enexus (6.1 cents) for only 115MW, is a nearly 50 percent increase over our current price (4.2 cents), and would force Vermonters to pay more for less power.

Supporters of relicensing ask the following question: how will our state replace the 280 MW — 34 percent of all electric power usage — that is currently supplied by Vermont Yankee when the plant closes as scheduled in 2012?

The answer is clear when you consider what our region has to offer. The New England ISO’s (Independent System Operator) 2008 forecast demonstrates that the region will have nearly twice the capacity necessary to meet the demand of the six New England states now and in years to come. There is a diverse menu of options available, including natural gas, hydro, wind, solar, biomass and accelerated energy efficiency.

Vermont Yankee delivers just 2 percent of New England’s power. Natural gas, hydroelectric power and other renewable energy sources offer reliable, well-priced options with none of the liabilities and risks associated with an aging nuclear reactor. Vermont must take full advantage of these regional options in the short term, while aggressively developing local sources of renewable power that will ensure a stable and sustainable energy supply into the future.

Vermont Yankee is a 38-year-old nuclear reactor. Its parent company, Entergy, proposes to issue $4.7 billion in junk bonds and debt to spin Vermont Yankee and five other aging plants off to Enexus, pocketing $3.5 billion for shareholders while they wave goodbye to their Vermont commitment. After Lehman Brothers, AIG, Merrill, FairPoint and the rest, an objective observer would be justified in asking: When will we ever learn?

As a business owner, I urge us all to consider: If this spin-off is approved and Vermont Yankee is relicensed, we’ll be trading Entergy, an investment-grade company, for Enexus, a debt-ridden shell company with low-grade bond ratings. Enexus is more likely to default on its obligations or go bankrupt than Entergy. All of Vermont Yankee’s physical assets and contracts will be pledged as collateral for Enexus’ secured loans, whereas currently they are owned by Entergy, free and clear.

House Speaker Shap Smith and I are committed to a fair and open process as legislators decide whether or not to reauthorize Vermont Yankee to operate for an additional 20 years. I have asked my committees of jurisdiction to take testimony on the Enexus offer so that senators can draw their own conclusions. We welcome your thoughts as we consider this important decision.

It is my judgment that relicensing Vermont Yankee is not in the best interests of Vermont ratepayers. Now is the time to refocus our efforts on developing sustainable local sources of energy for our children, while at the same time bringing much-needed new economy jobs to our state.

This Op-Ed appeared in the Burlington Free Press

Vermont Yankee
By Bob Kinzel

The Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power Plant’s operating license expires in 2012 and this winter lawmakers in Montpelier gear up for the re-licensing debate and a potential vote. We talk to Senate President Peter Shumlin and Entergy Vice President Jay Thayer about some of the unresolved questions surrounding Vermont Yankee: nuclear waste storage; a post 2012 rate; the deficit in the plant’s decommissioning fund; and Entergy’s plans to form a new spin-off corporation.

Source: VPR

MONTPELIER — The Vermont Yankee nuclear plant’s future as a provider of a third of the state’s electricity could be in jeopardy if the plant’s owner spins it off to a newly created company, the head of the state Senate said Wednesday.

The comments from Senate President Pro Tem Peter Shumlin, a Democrat who represents Vermont Yankee’s home county of Windham, came as lawmakers prepare to debate early next year whether the aging reactor should get a 20-year extension on a license currently set to expire in 2012.

Plant owner Entergy Nuclear’s plan to spin off Vermont Yankee and five other reactors into a newly created company could make it a “tough sell” to get the Legislature — the only one in the country that has given itself the power to vote up or down on a nuclear license extension — to approve the continuance.

“I just got to tell you that it’s my judgment, based upon what I’ve heard about this proposed spinoff, that should it go ahead, it makes the possibility of this legislative chamber voting to continue to operate more difficult,” Shumlin said.

Shumlin criticized the Department of Public Service for reversing itself and deciding to support Entergy’s plan to create a new company that would own Vermont Yankee, three reactors in New York and one each in Massachusetts and Michigan.

Shumlin said Entergy currently owns the reactors debt free — Vermont Yankee, Pilgrim in Massachusetts, two at the Indian Point plant in New York’s Hudson River Valley, the Fitzpatrick plant in Oswego, N.Y., and the Palisades plant in Michigan.

By contrast, he said, the arrangement under a newly created company, called Enexus, would leave that firm owing $3.5 billion in junk bond debt and up to an additional $1.2 billion in short-term operating debt.

Entergy spokesman Robert Williams did not dispute the numbers Shumlin offered. But he said the spinoff deal had been strengthened since the Department of Public Service expressed skepticism about it in July.

“Under Enexus, we’ll be able to remain as part of a fleet of nuclear plants,” Williams said. “And there’s clear value in doing that. What’s more, the plant will have more financial support readily available during our operations than we have presently and also more financial support available during decommissioning.”

Stephen Wark, the department’s deputy commissioner, said the agency decided to support the spinoff after Entergy agreed to provide a $100 million revolving loan fund dedicated to Vermont Yankee for any needed repairs.

The Public Service Board makes the final decision on the deal. It is expected to rule in November. The spinoff proposal also is pending before New York regulators, where a decision is expected this winter.

Shumlin said the Enexus deal would mean Vermont would be trading a financially sound business partner — New Orleans-based Entergy — for a much shakier one. He called for legislative hearings on the deal, but acknowledged that the Legislature has little direct say over whether the transaction should go ahead.

Several other questions are swirling around Vermont Yankee as lawmakers prepare to debate its future.

One concerns the plant’s decommissioning fund and whether it will be adequate to remove Vermont Yankee’s radioactive shell and waste when the plant stops operating. The fund currently has less than half the estimated cost of nearly $1 billion to do the job.

Gov. Jim Douglas twice has vetoed legislation that would have required Entergy to shore up the decommissioning fund.

Also pending is the question of cost of electricity from Vermont Yankee post-2012, if the license extension is approved. Shumlin reiterated that lawmakers need an answer to that question before they vote on the request.

Wark said the Public Service Board could better provide those details. He said he was glad Shumlin was calling for hearings before the 2010 legislative session gets under way.

“It should leave them plenty of time to take up this question (on the plant’s relicensing),” Wark said. “The clock is ticking and Vermonters deserve an answer.”

Wednesday, 10/21/09
Bob Kinzel

Montpelier, Vt.

Senate President Peter Shumlin says the owner of Vermont Yankee, the Entergy Corporation, is taking actions that make it less likely the Legislature will vote to extend the plant’s license beyond 2012.

At issue is a proposal to reorganize the ownership of Vermont Yankee and 5 other plants.

VPR’s Bob Kinzel reports.

(Kinzel) It appears that a complicated debate in the upcoming Legislative session over the future of the Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power plant just got even more complicated.

That’s because Senate President Peter Shumlin doesn’t like Entergy’s proposal to spin off 6 of its older nuclear power plants to a new corporation that will be financed initially with more than $4.5 billion dollars of debt.

The Public Service Department originally opposed the re-organization but recently it changed its position and now it supports the plan.

Shumlin says the proposal could ultimately leave Vermont taxpayers with an enormous financial burden if there are future problems at Vermont Yankee, because the new corporation doesn’t have sufficient assets:

(Shumlin) “It makes a positive vote much more difficult if we are partnering with a junk bond rated business in Mississippi that owes 4.5 billion dollars to someone and has no assets versus a partnership with Entergy Louisiana that has lots of assets, lots of profit and is not going bankrupt.”

(Kinzel) Shumlin also says he’ll oppose the re-licensing of Vermont Yankee if Entergy doesn’t put enough money in the plant’s decommissioning fund.

(Shumlin) “Let’s be really clear whatever deal that they propose together has to include enough money to meet the promise that was made to Vermonters on decommissioning as soon as the plant cools off and is ready to be taken away whenever that day is.”

(Kinzel) Steve Wark is the deputy commissioner at the Public Service Department. He says there are several reasons why his department now supports the reorganization plan:

(Wark) “One of the most significant factors was that they had reduced their debt and so we were pleased with that but the 100 million dollar revolving loan fund dedicated specifically for Vermont Yankee reliability issues a replenishing fund that allows the ongoing development and maintenance of the facility so we think this puts Vermont in a much better position than we currently are and we’re comfortable with those aspects of the deal.”

(Kinzel) The Vermont Yankee reorganization plan is being reviewed by the state Public Service Board.

For VPR News I’m Bob Kinzel in Montpelier.

Source: VPR