Vermont’s primary election date, the second Tuesday in September, is one of the latest in the country. While this has worked for Vermont for many years, it does not fit with the new federal election rules. The new Military Overseas Voter Empowerment Act, or MOVE, require states to send out overseas ballots at least 45 days prior to the general election. This year, the second Tuesday falls on September 14^th, leaving only 49 days between the primary and the general election. Prior to the general election, the votes need to be verified and new ballots formatted and printed to include the winners of the primary as well as any independent or minor party candidates. The current dates would leave only 4 days to complete what is typically an 18-day process.

Last April, the Vermont Senate addressed this problem by passing a bill that would move the primary date from September 14^th to August 24^th. The House Government Operations committee took up the bill this year, hearing testimony from a variety of sources before passing it out of committee.

The debate on the floor was quite lively, very partisan and revolved around a few central issues. Those against changing the date to August 24^th, expressed concern that our already low 11-12% turn out for primaries would be further reduced by moving the date before Labor Day. They also felt we had other options. One suggestion was to have the state apply for a hardship waiver. The second was to have ballots sent to our soldiers electronically and it would take less than $10,000 to get the state up and running by the fall. A third option was to move primaries to a caucus vote rather than a ballot vote, saving the state about $200,000 and the fourth was to make no changes and risk paying a penalty. In addition, Adjutant General Michael Dubie had testified that he was interested in electronic voting. The cons reminded us that this is about “supporting our troops.”

Those in support of the bill indicated it was very unlikely we would meet the stringent criteria for the 2010 waiver. In addition, there will be no waivers permitted by 2012. Allowing our troops to vote electronically was as compelling as it was problematic. First, 24 town clerks in this state are without Internet access or email so would not be able to participate. Secondly, security and privacy issues have yet to be resolved and estimates to establish electronic voting were closer to $500,000. Caucus voting remained interesting but unresolved. In addition, 59% of the town clerks who responded to a poll supported the move to August 24^th. The pros reminded us that this is about “supporting our troops.”

At the end of the day, I voted against the amendment to provide for electronic voting because I believed the evidence that we were simply not ready – yet. I voted for the change of date in order to comply with the new federal law. I also figured those of us on vacation were more easily accommodated than our soldiers overseas. And, of course, I wanted to “support our troops.”

The politics? To me, it’s just a noisy grade B movie in a very small state. The bill heads back to the Senate for approval of a few technical changes and if accepted, will then go to the Governor.

I have had many calls and messages asking me to please vote to close Vermont Yankee both before and after the recently found tritium leaks.

By statute, the legislature only has the right to decide on the “Continued Operation” of the plant beyond 2012. If the legislature voted “no” today, this would not close the plant tomorrow. The closing date would still be March 21, 2012.

Neither do we have authority to vote on whether the plant is safe or a risk to public health. That lies in the hands of the Nuclear Regulatory Commission and the Depart of Health respectively. In fact, if the legislature should vote not to continue operations based on safety, we would be entirely outside of our jurisdiction and the Nuclear Regulatory Commission could pre-empt our right to vote. For that reason, I share everyone’s concerns about safety, but if called to vote, I must base my vote on issues related to economics and reliability and leave the safety decisions with the experts.

If and when the current crisis is over and the NRC and Vermont Health Department are satisfied, the Speaker and Senate Pro Tem will order committees to start hearings on the economic value and reliability of the plant. Testimony will revolve around 1) a thorough review of the power-price offer, 2) the request to spin off to Enexus, 3) the decommissioning fund and 4) misrepresentations made by Entergy Nuclear Vermont Yankee. All of these can be considered by the legislature. Speaker Shap Smith is holding firm that this process be disciplined, thoughtful and very complete. When these questions are answered, we will be ready to vote.

As it currently stands, Yankee is not looking so good in any of these areas: 1) The power-price offer of 6.1 cents is unacceptable to the utilities; 2) the spin-off to Enexus appears to offer little security to Vermont; 3) the decommissioning fund is grossly under funded and 4) there is a serious breach of trust stemming from critical misinformation provide by Vermont Yankee.

In the meantime, various legislative committees are looking at different aspects of Vermont Yankee. As I serve on the water resources committee, I have been following tritium testing in drinking water, ground water, and the surface waters of our rivers and streams. Health Commissioner Dr. Wendy Davis and Radiologic Health Chief Dr. William Irwin are speaking to our committee on a weekly basis. Staff from the Departments of Health, Environmental Conservation and Agriculture are on site forming teams and undergoing safety and security training. One of their tasks will be witnessing the taking of water, fish and sediment samples in order to insure no break in the “chain of custody” occurs from the taking of samples to the reporting of results. It is likely that ground water contamination will head east toward the Connecticut river, however the shear volume of water makes it unlikely that it could ever be detected.

News from Vernon is changing on a daily basis. I will continue to stay informed and post updates on my website: www.katewebbvt.com.

Please join Joan Lenes and me at Open Arms on Tuesday mornings in February from 7:30-8:30. I will also be at Village Wine and Coffee most Monday afternoons from 4:30-5:30. Call or email to make sure. 985-2789; 233-7798; KLWebb22@mac.com

House Fish Wildlife and Water Resources Committee continues to follow the impact on water at the Vermont Yankee plant.  Health Commissioner Wendy Davis stated that the most striking development was the identification of tritium at much much higher levels.  She felt this really underscores their concern with the need to find the leak and take action.  Again, she reported no contaminated drinking water at this time.

Dr. William Irwin, radiological health chief, presented us with a map identifying various wells on the VY site.  The map identifies 4 contaminated GZ well sites with the G-7 site recently measuring at 775,000 picocuries (the limit for drinking water is 20,000).  Of the 7 sites tested for tritium leaks around the country, this is the second highest ever reported, with the highest being 800,000 (71,000  200,000  300,000  and 600,000 being other high levels for comparison purposes).  As this site is very close to the river, to active farms and a school, reports at this level of concentration raises this to a very serious public health issue.  The half-life of tritium is 12+ years.  It is not inconceivable that this could have happened long ago at much higher levels.

The G-7 site is in a courtyard of sorts between the reactor, turbine and the condensation storage tank.  The condensation storage tank is the largest container of radioactive water and is used by multiple systems.  It is the most densely piped and plumbed part of the site and is in the middle of all key structures for generating electrical energy, nuclear power radioactive waste and other processes.  Although there is some progress in narrowing down the geographic site, ruling out the condensation tank as a source means that now they need to look at the many individual pipes one by one.  This becomes even more challenging given that it is an active facility with electrical cables, ventilating systems, and dense piping of which some are radioactive and some not. This will require very deliberate planning in order to avoid a mistake to individuals that do the work as well as safe operation of plant.

Dr. Irwin reported that a radiological sampling team has been formed, made up of members of the Agency of Natural Resources, Agency of Agriculture and Department of Health.   Training and security screening are in process and they should be ready to go next week.  (Note: the screening is a bit beyond the visitors’ screening many of us underwent last year.  Visitor screening looks at what you’ve been up to recently, while this level reviews your life!)

Dr. Davis was asked what her authority was should the plant escalate to levels that put public health at risk. She stated that her authority lies in the allowable limits stated in radiologic health rules.  Depending on where she is in the investigation, depending on what other data are required, she has the authority to ask that the suite of steps be taken in order to take what is “prudent caution.”  She stays in constant contact with the town health officers of the 6 surrounding towns as well as her NH and MA partners.