Connecticut Law Tribune
  • Home
  • News
  • Decisions
  • Columns
  • Special Issues
  • Practice Areas
  • Verdicts
  • Books
  • Lawjobs
  • Events

Home > Connecticut Yankee Nuclear Plant Awarded $39.7 Million

Font Size: increase font decrease font

Connecticut Yankee Nuclear Plant Awarded $39.7 Million

The U.S. Energy Department will reimburse ratepayers for not removing radioactive materials

By CHRISTIAN NOLAN All Articles 

The Connecticut Law Tribune

February 15, 2013

  •    
  •    
  •    
  •      
 

Back in 1996, the Connecticut Yankee nuclear power plant in Haddam Neck was shut down because it was too costly to keep operating. Dangerous radiation had leaked from the plant in 1978 and again in 1989, which contributed to the decision.

But even after the plant closed, the meter kept running.

Under a contract that was tied to the operation of the plant, the federal government was supposed to take possession of the spent nuclear fuel at the site starting in 1998, but never did. As a result, the company paid more than $10 million a year to keep the materials secure.

The federal Department of Energy had attempted to build a repository to permanently store the waste in Nevada's Yucca Mountain, but its efforts to remove and store the fuel rods and other waste didn't materialize. In a lawsuit that was filed in 1998, the plant owner accused the federal government of being in breach of its contract to remove the materials from the state. The suit was joined by two other nuclear plants in New England.

This month, the federal government agreed in a settlement to pay the owners of the closed Connecticut Yankee plant $39.7 million for the costs related to removing the radioactive materials, which had been paid by electric customers, but never done. The settlement agreement calls for the government to reimburse an additional $120 million to the Maine Yankee Atomic Power Co. and Yankee Atomic Electric Co. in Massachusetts. Because electric customers in the three states had been paying the federal government for the cost of storing the nuclear waste, plans are being filed with the Federal Energy Regulation Commission to establish a process to distribute the funds.

Owners of the three plants said the entire $160 million settlement will be returned to the rate payers, after adjustments are made for state and federal taxes. The money has already been transferred from the U.S. Treasury to the three companies.

In a statement from the owners of the three plants, which are part of a consortium of New England utility companies, the companies plan to find "the best way to use the proceeds from the damage awards to benefit the ratepayers."

The three plants, which were all decommissioned at around the same time, together sued the government for breach of contract. In August 2004 there was a seven week trial on damages in federal court. Various appeals dragged the process out until last May when the U.S. Court of Appeals upheld a decision by U.S. Court of Federal Claims Senior Judge James F. Merow.

In addition to the $39.7 million awarded to Connecticut Yankee, Maine Yankee was awarded $81.7 million and Yankee Atomic $38.3 million.

Some say the settlements are just the beginning. That is because the issue of disposing of the spent nuclear waste remains unsolved.

A browser or device that allows javascript is required to view this content.

Continue reading

  • 1
  • 2

Next



Subscribe to The Connecticut Law Tribune

You must be signed in to comment on an article

Find similar content

Companies, agencies mentioned

    
  • U.S. Court of Federal Claims
  • Nuclear Energy Institute
  • U.S. Treasury
  • Yankee Atomic Electric Company
  • Maine Yankee Atomic Power Company
  • Energy Department
  • U.S. Court of Appeals

Most viewed stories

    
  1. Chimp Attack Victim Is Denied $150M State Lawsuit
    •      
  2. Judge Quinn To Retire As Chief Court Administrator
    •      
  3. New Connecticut Privacy Guide Reflects Technology Advances
    •      
  4. Auto Body Case May Lead To CUTPA Reassessment
    •      
  5. No More Automatic Fee Waivers For Low-Income Litigants
    •      
lawjobs.com

TOP JOBS

MORE JOBS

POST A JOB

From the Law.com Network

In-House Counsel Go to Privacy Boot Camp

In-House Changes at News Corp Ahead of Corporate Split

Proskauer, Former CFO Settle Bias Suit

Global Firms Cope With Istanbul Unrest

D.C. Circuit Nominations a Defining Moment

D.C. Circuit Nominees Widely Respected Within the Bar

Nine Tips to Avoid Starring in a Spreadsheet Horror Story

Snapshot: Tom Gelbmann

The Recorder 25: California Golden Again for Many Firms
  •      
    • Subscription Required

Capital Accounts: Judicial Branch's Brothers Don't See Eye to Eye
  •      
    • Subscription Required

Miami Photographer Sues Pop Star Justin Bieber
  •      
    • Subscription Required

Jeremy Alters Settles With Argentinian Firm For $1 Million
  •      
    • Subscription Required

Alcotest Should Be Discontinued Right Away, DWI Lawyers Say

Lawyer's Fudging of Forms Draws N.J. High Court Censure
  •      
    • Subscription Required

The Affordable State-Specific Practice Solution
Available in NY, NJ, PA and CT editions - research, draft and prepare even the most complex cases with ease.

Ties to Senecas Cannot Shield Golf Course Developer, Panel Says
  •      
    • Subscription Required

Circuit Decision Costs Prevailing Attorneys $200,000 Fee Award
  •      
    • Subscription Required

Corbett Signs Bill to Eliminate Traffic Court

Christian College Granted Injunction In Obamacare Suit
  •      
    • Subscription Required

Sorry, Charlie, Your Wife Won't Support You

Top Reasons to Take Your Husband's Name

Interim Dean Named at Texas Wesleyan University School of Law
  •      
    • Subscription Required

Water Works: H2O Kept Lawyer-Lobbyists Busy
  •      
    • Subscription Required

Boosting Lawyers And Saving Lives
  •      
    • Subscription Required

11th Circuit Conflicted On Juveniles Stance
  •      
    • Subscription Required

Chimp Attack Victim Is Denied $150M State Lawsuit

Auto Body Case May Lead To CUTPA Reassessment

  • About The Connecticut Law Tribune
  • Contact The Connecticut Law Tribune
  • Advertise with Us
  • Sitemap
  • About |
  • ALM Properties |
  • ALM Reprints |
  • Customer Support |
  • Privacy Policy (updated 6/14/13) |
  • Terms & Conditions |
  • ALM User License Agreement
ALM Media