and what our state is saying is after 40 years, we want to shut vermont yankee down. we want to move in a new direction that we think benefits our state. and we do not want the department of justice to intervene in this case, where entergy is suing vermont. let me just conclude while we're on the issue of nuclear power in pointing out that the associated press recently revealed that 48 out of 65 nuclear power sites in this country have leaked radioactive tritium, and vermont yankee is one of those sites. 37 facilities had leaks at levels that violated federal drinking water standards. and some leaks have migrated off the sites, contaminating private water wells, although none is yet known to have contaminated public drinking water supplies. these allegations by the a.p. are extremely disturbing. safety at our nuclear plants should be the top priority at the n.r.c., particularly after we saw what happened in japan. they should not answer -- the function of the n.r.c. is not to represent the nuclear power industry. it's to represent the needs of the people of the united

we want vermont yankee to shut down. doing that, i believe they were reflecting the wishes of the people of our state. vermont wants to move in a new way in terms of energy. we are number one in terms of energy -- energy efficiency. we are moving aggressively towards sustainable energy. you may disagree, but that is the direction the state wants to go. what is the role of the nrc in that discussion? is it appropriate for the nrc to get involved in one of the largest utility companies in the united states of america, a $14 billion company that pays its ceo $18 million a year? to get involved in a legal case between the state of vermont and this company? they want to stay open and make more money. i understand that. people in vermont want to shut it down. i agree with that. why should you be involved in that? what concerns me very much is my understanding is that yesterday, by a 3-2 vote, this commission decided to urge the department of justice to get involved in that fight. i do not care what your view

among the best compensated best industry ceo's at $18 million per year, to decide whether or not vermont yankee is licensed, that we will see an opting out of the voting rights act. he could not be more wrong or out of touch. that is why the vermont congressional delegation was heartened to learn that the chairman, who i believe is a fair minded and diligent public servant, even if we occasionally disagree, said publicly that the nrc should not intervene between them and vermont. i believe this position is the right one. the nrc regulates safety. that is what your job is. it is a difficult job. it is an important job. some people say you are not doing the job well. but they are not involved in legal disputes between a huge energy company and the people of the state of vermont. frankly, that is not your business. you have enough on your plate to deal with the complicated issues of maintaining safety. there was a story in "the new york times" today raising concern of us not doing a good job in this country and protecting people in the event of a shutdown of all electric power. pay attention to th

at $18 million a year, saying that if vermont successfully defend its right to decide whether vermont yankee is real licensed that we will see states opting out of the voting rights act. he could not be more wrong or out of touch. that is why the vermont congressional delegation was heartened to learn that the chairman, who i believe is a diligent public servant, even if we occasionally disagree, told vermont publicly that the nrc should not intervene in any legislation between that company and vermont. i believe his position is the right one. the nrc regulates safety. that is what your job is. it is a difficult job. it is an important job. many people in vermont think you are not doing that job very well. but the nrc is not an arbiter of political disputes between a huge energy company and the state of vermont. that is not your business. it is not on your plate to do with a complicated issue of maintaining safety. there is a story in the new york times today raising issues that maybe we are not doing a good job in this country in protecting people in the event of the shutdown of all electri

they want vermont yankee shut down. vermont wants to mover in a new way in terms of energy. we are number one in the country in terms of energy efficiency. we are moving in a positive way in terms of sustainable energy. that is the direction the state of vermont wants to go. the question is what is the role of the n.r.c. in that discussion? is it appropriate for the n.r.c. to get involved with one of the largest utility companies in the united states of america, entergy, a $14 billion a year coming, pays his c.e.o. $18 million a year. entergy wants to stay open. they want to make more money. i understand that. the people of vermont want to shut it down. i agree with that. why should you be involved in that in what disturbs me very much, and i want to purse this later, is my understanding is that yesterday by a 3-2 vote, this commission decided to urge the department of justice to get involved in that fight. now i don't care what your view is on what vermont yankee should or should not be doing, in my strong opinion, it is not your business to get involved in that fight. you

this and we haven't decided yet order of the nuclear power plant lesson number two we've got in vermont yankee. we have more spent fuel in one spent fuel pool all the used fuel that very hard but causing so many problems in japan and then all four fukushima reactors put together now we know that dry storage is much might see and we're looking out in front of their some dry storage it was ok even with the even with the tsunami it was ok and the earthquake the nuclear regulatory commission read licensed this plant which is just like fukushima for twenty years ten b.'s into the fukushima crisis i was in or a month on that day when it happened to live near it without ordering the spent fuel to be emptied into dry storage so it could be safe i was shocked thank you so much for being with us that i think you appreciate it it's i think it's needs what's going on in omaha nebraska is yet another warning sign of the dangers of nuclear power that our lawmakers are once again ignoring we don't start heeding these warnings and it's nuclear power soon like germany just did and switzerland just did and japa

they've got life extensions for another twenty years and then and then they're going to remodel vermont yankee they're all alike freaked about well and the people from vermont have access to very clean very affordable energy because of that but if the people of vermont like the people of germany want to get rid of that valuable resource then you know maybe they can have they're having that debate right now i'm saying that the potential of nuclear energy is significant let's let the market make those determinations the role of government should be to create an environment where the true market value of all energy sources can compete. and i believe that you think all the extra maladies the deaths from your rainy a mining billions that poison other dozens i don't know about raining i don't know about the deaths from commercial uranium mining there you have to tell me about that i've actually have good. was the information that i just got a thirty second note because because no one wanted to bags from uranium mine a million residents. increase killings in the new little you're already using get ca