Browse > Home / Spotlight / Lobbyists fight for relicensing of controversial nuclear plant

Lobbyists fight for relicensing of controversial nuclear plant

January 11, 2008

ALBANY, N.Y. - New Yorkers and state Legislators are being hit with a multimillion dollar lobbying campaign by the owner of two of New York’s nuclear plants as one of the facilities near New York City faces relicensing opposed by Gov. Eliot Spitzer.

Entergy Nuclear Northeast will spend millions on radio and print ads and a Web site to sell the public on the idea that nuclear power is “right” for the environment and the economy in New York state and a tool to fight dependence on Middle East oil and pollution from traditional power plants.

The company, which owns 12 nuclear plants around the country including two in New York, promises nuclear power can improve the economy by generating millions in taxes and thousands of jobs. The ads also boast that nuclear energy doesn’t produce greenhouse gas emissions and is less expensive

Entergy’s radio ad says nuclear power supplies more than a third of New York’s electricity.

The ad goes on to say: “New York, from Binghamton to the Bronx, depends on clean, efficient and reliable electricity _ to retain and create good-paying jobs to run our homes; have commuterlines and subways; our schools, hospitals, places of worship _ just about everything to energize and light our lives. So now that you know the facts, let your local elected officials in on the secret that nuclear energy is right for the environment and right for a strong economy.”

“We’ve shifted the focus and stepped it up in connection with our license renewal efforts so people understand how valuable these plants are today and will be in the future,” Entergy spokesman Jim Steets said.

The company first started promoting the benefits and safety of nuclear power after the Sept. 11, 2001 terrorist attacks. In the past year Entergy has intensified those efforts in New York to combat opponents of their effort to renew their nuclear licenses for Indian Point, 35 miles north of midtown Manhattan.

As the advertising has increased, the amount the company’s political action committee _ EnPac _ spent on campaign contributions in New York has dropped by more than half. In 2006 Entergy donated $69,480 to various campaigns in New York, while in 2007 EnPac spent $30,520. Candidates were up for election in 2006 and will be again this year, but 2007 was not an election year.

The donations went to Democrats and Republicans, including $8,000 for the Democrat Assembly Campaign Committee; $4,500 for the New York Senate Republican Campaign Committee; $4,750 to the Westchester Republican County Committee; $1,000 to the Committee to Re-elect Senate Majority leader Joseph Bruno and $2,500 for the New York Senate Campaign Committee.

On the other side of the state, Entergy owns Oswego County’s James FitzPatrick plant, which is due for a license renewal in 2014. Indian Point licenses expire in 2013 and 2015. It takes between 22 and 30 months for the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission to renew a license.

Despite the advertising focus on nuclear power in general, critics, including Spitzer and Attorney General Andrew Cuomo, have argued that Indian Point in particular raises safety concerns.

Critics argue it’s a poor location because it’s a densely populated area and because the flight path of one of the airplanes that hit the World Trade Center was directly over the plant. They also warn that the plant, along the Hudson River, could leak dangerous materials into waterways.

“There is a fair amount of opposition in New York, both locally and on the state level, where certain public officials have come out against relicensing the plants,” Steets said. “Some have even called for the closing of the plants.”

Entergy has promoted nuclear power in other markets, including Vermont, but has done more in New York than anywhere else.

Indian Point has long roused the ire of politicians and nearby residents.

“It’s not safe, it’s not secure and it’s not vital,” Assemblyman Richard Brodsky said. “And ratepayers are paying the cost of being lied to (through advertising). It’s not cheaper, and if all the taxpayer support that Indian Point receives was factored into the rates … the power at Indian Point would not be cheaper. The reason it appears to be cheaper is all the tax subsidies.”

Indian Point Energy Center generates 2,000 megawatts of electricity, enough for about 2 million homes and businesses, according to Entergy. Officials argue that replacing the plants would cost more than $1 billion a year in electricity costs, and would lead to electricity shortages, price spikes of as much as 40 percent and rolling blackouts.

But critics are more concerned that it would be impossible to evacuate the population surrounding the nuclear plant should something go wrong.

“In fact, the chance of an accident at Indian Point is relatively small,” Brodsky said. “The problem is the consequences are mind-boggling.”

Scott Burnell, a spokesman for the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, said the agency is responsible for determining whether to relicense nuclear plants.

“If there was a safety issue at a plant it wouldn’t be allowed to operate,” he said.

The commission primarily evaluates what the potential environmental impacts would be for a plant to continue operating for an additional 20 years and whether or not the plant has sufficient plans and procedures in place to handle aging facilities, Burnell said.

“Most of the major parts of the plant have been replaced, while there are some out there who think these are aging plants, or in poor condition because of their aging, we will have to demonstrate that the plants are properly maintained,” Steets said. “In many instances we are able to point out that the components are new.”

Within the commission is the Atomic Safety and Licensing Board, which also looks at the legal side of relicensing. People or groups in the vicinity of the plant are allowed to contest applications to renew a license, as long as their legal argument is sound, Burnell said.

“Several government bodies in the state of New York have petitioned the board for the ability to intervene in this renewal,” he said.

On the Net: http://www.rightfornewyork.com/

Via Newsday

Related Articles

Written by NY Politics · Filed Under Spotlight 

One Response to “Lobbyists fight for relicensing of controversial nuclear plant”

  1. Don Ritherspoon on January 18th, 2008 5:19 pm

    The focus of your article is from deep inside the journalistic bubble that has obscured the Indian Point issue for 6 years. Outside that J-Bubble, no significant problem is seen by the people in regard to Indian Point. However, inside the J-Bubb, argument after strained argument has been floated by well-heeled antinuke foundation PR front people, and the media sees this faux argumentation as real.

    It is not.

    The Tamarind foundation alone has marshalled $260 million against nukes, and over $5 million of that is local and specific to attacking Indian Point. So putting a headline on your article saying “Entergy funds pronuke advertisements” or whatever is either misleading, or fatally naive. We’ve just emerged from 6 years and $260 million dollars’ worth of planted antinuke worry lies, injected into the journalism stream not as advertisement (which they were) but as “public statements” or “press releases”.

    Entergy is simply playing catch up, and attempting in its own way to reveal what the true situation is.

    The true situation is this: As great a story as Indian Point seems to make for lazy journalists, the public is done with the issue, and wants to move on.

    And, (did I make this clear?) They wish to move on AND retain their cheap dependable service from Indian Point.

    Bet you guys missed that, though, didn’t you?

    You should try to get out of the office a bit.

Comment on this article