developer
10,268
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
SW: Decommissioning funds
In April 2008, at "the last of four public meetings held by the [Governor Jim] Douglas administration on the future of the nuclear reactor," two officials with Vermont's Department of Public Service were "peppered ... with questions," reported Vermont's ''Rutland Herald''. "People appeared to be the most upset when [state engineer Uldis] Vanags talked about the high-level radioactive nuclear waste produced at Vermont Yankee, and the fact that it would remain deadly for thousands of years. ... While the vast majority of the comments were against any future for nuclear power in Vermont, there was a small contingent of pro-nuclear residents, some of whom were employees from the nearby reactor." <ref>Susan Smallheer, "[http://www.rutlandherald.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20080403/NEWS02/224476666/1003/NEWS02 Brattleboro hosts boisterous nuclear forum]," ''Rutland Herald'' (Vermont), April 3, 2008.</ref>
==Funds for closing the plant in doubt==
What one Vermont paper called the "contentious debate" over whether Entergy has sufficient funds set aside to go through the process of closing, or decommissioning, the Vermont Yankee plant heated up in April 2008. That's when Entergy "asked for federal permission to use the plant's decommissioning fund to pay for storage of waste rather than for taking the plant apart." The Yankee plant fund "needs roughly to double from its current $420 million to pay for dismantling of the plant and it was discovered that the fund actually has shrunk recently by about $17 million." Entergy "responded that -- since it is seeking permission to continue beyond the 2012 expiration of its operating license -- there may be more time for the decommissioning fund to grow before it is needed." <ref>Louis Porter, "[http://www.timesargus.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20080426/NEWS02/804260346/1003/NEWS02 Vermont Yankee wants to raid decommission fund]," ''Barre-Montpelier Times Argus'' (Vermont), April 26, 2008.</ref>
==Safety concerns==
