Should the state of Vermont have appealed Entergy v. Vermont?

Peter Shumlin

VERNON — As I said when the court opinion was issued, I do not agree with Judge J. Garvan Murtha's decision.

We as a state have had many important and legitimate concerns with Entergy Louisiana and its operation of Vermont Yankee that are not reflected in the opinion. I support the attorney general's work in getting a positive result on appeal.

Meanwhile, my administration will be focusing on the state's continuing authority over Vermont Yankee.

Peter Shumlin is governor of Vermont.

Entergy Corp.

We stand ready to respond to the state's appeal.

We are committed to ensuring that Vermont Yankee continues to deliver safe, clean, and reliable power to the people and businesses in New England, as it does today, and to protecting the jobs of the 600 dedicated Entergy employees in Vermont.

Nancy Braus

Attorney General William Sorrell is doing absolutely the right thing in appealing Judge Murtha's ruling.

The very idea that a large corporation can become the legislative thought police is beyond chilling. Legislators in every state have the right to an open and thoughtful discussion of all the ramifications of a proposed law.

Entergy's basing its case on the intent of the citizen legislators of Vermont seemed a huge overreach, and the fact that the company won does not make it right.

Vermont needs to get the best legal minds in the field of environmental law to stand up for our right to a clean energy future. Entergy has been a corporate bully in our state and others, and I am so grateful to the citizens of Vermont for electing officials who are willing to stand up to bad behavior.

Putney resident Nancy Braus, a business owner in Brattleboro, is a longtime antinuclear activist.

Meredith Angwin

It is not in the best interests of the Vermont for Attorney General Sorrell to appeal the Vermont Yankee case. If Sorrell loses (most probable), it will cost the state more money, both for state lawyers and for Entergy lawyers.

However, the appeal is a political gain for Governor Shumlin. Even when he loses, Shumlin will be able to tell anti-nuclear supporters, “I really tried.” I think this is why the state is filing the appeal.

It would be in the best interest of Vermont to encourage Vermont Yankee to keep supplying power and jobs and taxes.

The NRC has extensively reviewed Vermont Yankee for safety issues (and keeps reviewing it every year). The plant has passed these reviews with flying colors.

Of course, there are many people who are against nuclear power. However, there are also many people who are in favor of it. If we shut down every facility that some subset of people does not like, we would soon have no electricity at all.

Meredith Angwin maintains the Yes Vermont Yankee blog.

Deb Katz

On Jan. 19, Judge Murtha issued his controversial decision to support a rogue corporation in its evisceration of a state's rights.

When Murtha ruled that Entergy was no longer bound by contracts it signed with the state of Vermont in 2002, and for which until 2010 it repeatedly sought state approval for its actions, it undermined Vermont's authority. When the judge further ruled that the Vermont legislature could not determine its own energy future, he eviscerated the democratic process.

Act 160 passed unanimously by the House and by Republicans and Democrats alike in the Senate, and was signed into law by Republican Governor Jim Douglas. This law empowered the legislature to decide whether Vermont Yankee's continued operation was in the public good - not based on safety, but on economics, reliability, and the environment.

Yet Murtha, by accepting Entergy's cherry-picked record, chose to determine what was in the hearts and minds of legislators based on comments of a few. He opted second-guessing of 180 legislators rather than accepting the law as written. What is in the hearts of legislators is better left to confessionals and fortune tellers than to a federal court judges.

With Murtha's ruling, Entergy has grown bolder in its disregard for the state.

Entergy is now refusing the state's request to continue the testing of contaminated wells to determine the level of contamination. Entergy now is also requesting that, instead of inspecting the ancient steam dryers for cracks every 18 months, that they be allowed to do so only every 10 years! To add insult to injury, the company is asking for over $4 million in fees and wants an instant decision from the Public Service Board.

It is essential that the attorney general uphold the will of the people and the state of Vermont by appealing. The effects of Murtha's decision are far-reaching, undermining states' rights and stultifying the democratic process and the free exchange of ideas. We are grateful for the Attorney General's brave decision to take on this rogue corporation and hold it accountable for its contractual agreements.

Deb Katz serves as executive director of the antinuclear Citizens Awareness Network.

Howard Shaffer

Vermont will appeal the decision of the Federal District court all the way to the U.S. Supreme Court, an act that is in the best political interests of the governor and the attorney general. They can't afford to be seen as not going the last mile in their crusade against Vermont Yankee. It is a case which cries out for Supreme Court resolution - “states' rights.”

In addition, there are precedents.

The California case cited in the decision is one. In New England, Massachusetts sued the Nuclear Regulatory Commission over the regulations for Seabrook and appealed all the way. It was in then-Governor Dukakis's political interests.

Howard Shaffer is a nuclear power advocate and former startup engineer and support engineer at Vermont Yankee.

Dan DeWalt

It could be argued that Attorney General Sorrell had no choice but to appeal the district court ruling that so badly misconstrued Vermont law, the Vermont legislature, and the Supreme Court's past rulings in regard to judging the words of a law rather than trying to read the minds of those who crafted it.

If left to stand, Murtha's ruling will hamstring this and future legislatures in ways that fall far beyond the subject of nuclear waste production in the state of Vermont.

Rich and powerful corporations like Entergy were likely already salivating at the thought of going after any inconvenient state law that might stand between them and maximum profits. Lawsuits claiming federal preemption in response to high-priced lawyers' clairvoyance regarding legislative intent might become commonplace.

Now the second circuit can weigh in and one judge's questionable decision will be tempered by the consideration of a group of three.

Dan DeWalt is a longtime antinuclear activist and a member of the coordinating committee of the SAGE Alliance.

Subscribe to the newsletter for weekly updates