2012阅读：
Text 2 
A deal is a deal-except, apparently ,when Entergy is involved. The company, a major energy supplier in New England, provoked justified outrage in Vermont last week when it announced it was reneging on a longstanding commitment to abide by the strict nuclear regulations. 
协议就是协议——但显然的，Entergy公司就是个例外。该公司是新英格兰地区的一家主要能源供应商。当它上星期宣布将违背“遵守严格的核安全条例”这一长期许诺时，在佛蒙特州激起了愤怒，这种愤怒合乎情理。
Instead, the company has done precisely what it had long promised it would not challenge the constitutionality of Vermont’s rules in the federal court, as part of a desperate effort to keep its Vermont Yankee nuclear power plant running. It’s a stunning move. 
然而，Entergy公司恰恰做出了它过去一直承诺不会做的事：在联邦法庭上，质疑佛蒙特州核规则的合宪性。这是它为了使佛蒙特州扬基核电厂继续运营而做出的拼死努力的一部分。这是一个惊人之举。

The conflict has been surfacing since 2002, when the corporation bought Vermont’s only nuclear power plant, an aging reactor in Vernon. As a condition of receiving state approval for the sale, the company agreed to seek permission from state regulators to operate past 2012. In 2006, the state went a step further, requiring that any extension of the plant’s license be subject to Vermont legislature’s approval. Then, too, the company went along. 
当2002年时，公司在弗农买下佛蒙特州仅有的核电厂，一个日渐老化的反应堆，这场争议便已浮出水面。作为政府允许买卖的条件，公司当时同意，2012年以后的运营许可证须向州立监管机构申请。在2006年，政府更进一步，该核电厂的任何延期申请，都需该州立法机构的批准。当时，该公司也同意了。


Either Entergy never really intended to live by those commitments, or it simply didn’t foresee what would happen next. A string ofreactor 翻译 accidents, including the partial collapse of a cooling tower in 2007 and the discovery of an underground pipe system leakage, raised serious questions about both Vermont Yankee’s safety and Entergy’s management– especially after the company made misleading statements about the pipe. Enraged by Entergy’s behavior, the Vermont Senate voted 26 to 4 last year against allowing an extension.
或者是Entergy从未想过要遵守那些约定，或者是它没有预料到接下来所发生的事情。一连串的事故，包括2007年冷却塔的局部塌陷、地下管道系统的泄漏，尤其在管道事故错误性的陈述之后——人们对佛蒙特州扬基核电厂的安全性以及Entergy公司的管理产生了质疑。由于Entergy的激怒，去年，佛蒙特州参议院以26:4否决了它的延期申请。
Now the company is suddenly claiming that the 2002 agreement is invalid because of the 2006 legislation, and that only the federal government has regulatory power ov
er nuclear issues. The legal issues in the case are obscure: whereas the Supreme Court has ruled that states do have some regulatory authority over nuclear power, legal scholars say that Vermont case will offer a precedent-setting test of how far those powers extend. Certainly, there are valid concerns about the patchwork regulations that could result if every state sets its own rules. But had Entergy kept its word, that debate would be beside the point.
现在，该公司由于2006年法规突然声明2002的条约无效，但只有联邦政府才有对核问题制定规章的权力。此案件中的法律问题还模糊不清：虽然最高法院判定州政府对地方核电厂有管理权，法学者认为佛蒙特州一案将为“州政府的权力究竟有多大”提供一个先例。当然，假如各州都设立自己的法规，将导致“补丁法规”的担忧也是合理的。但如果安吉特遵守约定，这场争议便也就毫不相关了。

The company seems to have concluded that its reputation in Vermont is already so damaged that it has noting left to lose by going to war with the state. But there shoul
d be consequences. Permission to run a nuclear plant is a poblic trust. Entergy runs 11 other reactors in the United States, including Pilgrim Nuclear station in Plymouth. Pledging to run Pilgrim safely, the company has applied for federal permission to keep it open for another 20 years. But as the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) reviews the company’s application, it should keep it mind what promises from Entergy are worth.
这家公司看起来已经推断自己在佛蒙特州的荣誉尽毁，继而一无所有，所以坚持与政府对抗。但这也仅仅是推断。允许使用核能源是公众的信任。安吉特在美国经营了包括普利茅斯的核圣地在内的11种其他的反应堆。为了安全地经营圣地的安全，公司向联邦许申请继续开放20年。但是，作为核条约组织，审核公司应用，它应当注意它所应允的安吉特是否值得。

版权声明：本站内容均来自互联网，仅供演示用，请勿用于商业和其他非法用途。如果侵犯了您的权益请与我们联系QQ:729038198，我们将在24小时内删除。