MONTPELIER – The Vermont Public Interest Research Group called on state regulators Thursday to throw out Entergy's case for continuing the operation of Vermont Yankee after its license expires in 2012.

VPIRG's petition with the Vermont Public Service Board argues that the inaccurate testimony given by Entergy officials about the plant's infrastructure is cause to dismiss their bid for operating the plant for another 20 years.

James Moore, the clean energy program director for the organization, said at a press conference on the Statehouse steps Thursday that if the PSB does not throw out the case it is "in effect rewarding Entergy for their lies."

"They would be saying that you can come to Vermont, lie to our regulators in formal proceedings and that's fine," Moore said.

Vermont Attorney General William Sorrell has launched a criminal investigation into allegations that top Entergy officials misled the PSB and state officials about the existence of underground pipes at Vermont Yankee. On numerous occasions, Entergy officials said those pipes, now suspected of leaking tritium, did not exist.

The PSB, a quasi-judicial body, has also launched its own investigation into whether Vermont Yankee should be forced to close until that leak is stopped. The board, in a separate case, is also considering if it is in the "public good" to let the plant operate for another 20 years.

VPIRG, which has called for Vermont Yankee to close and for the state to move to renewable energy, cites a U.S. Supreme Court ruling in its filing that an agency may dismiss a legal proceeding if one party is found to have submitted false testimony.

That ruling came from a 1994 case between ABF Freight Systems Inc. and the National Labor Relations Board over a fired worker accused of submitting false testimony. The Supreme Court reaffirmed the Labor Board's right to reinstate the worker, but stated such a move should not be common.

"False testimony in a formal proceeding is intolerable," the court wrote, as cited by VPIRG. "We must neither reward nor condone such a flagrant affront to the truth-seeking function of adversary proceedings."

Entergy did not respond Thursday to VPIRG's filing.

VPIRG is also seeking financial reimbursement from Entergy for staff and legal time related to the case, which they say was wasted because of the false testimony supplied by the company.

The PSB filing, written by VPIRG attorney James Dumont, states that staff spent "hundreds of hours" of time working on the case. The organization plans to submit later this month a detailed list of costs associated with the case.

The filing states the organization's prior attorney alone spent 123 hours on the case in 2009. Dumont, the group's new attorney, estimated he will spend at least 114 hours on the case this year. His charge to VPIRG is $180 an hour.

Moore said at the press conference Thursday that VPIRG is still "crunching the numbers" for the total price tag the case has cost them.

"If the PSB simply fines Entergy, then for them that is the cost of doing business," Moore said.

The Vermont Department of Public Service, which has supported Vermont Yankee on several key issues in the past, could not be reached for comment Thursday.

daniel.barlow@rutlandherald.com