ML052500437

Vermont Department of Public Service Motion to Compel Production of Certain NRC Staff Documents

ML052500437
Person / Time
Site:	Vermont Yankee
Issue date:	08/31/2005
From:	Hoffmann S State of VT, Dept of Public Service
To:	Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel
Byrdsong A T
References
50-271-OLA, ASLBP 04-832-02-OLA, RAS 10420
Download: ML052500437 (79)

Text

DOCKETED USNRC UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION August 31, 2005 (12:37pm)

OFFICE OF SECRETARY BEFORE THE ATOMIC SAFETY AND LICENSING BOARD RULEMAKINGS AND ADJUDICATIONS STAFF In the Matter of )

) Docket No. 50-271 ENTERGY NUCLEAR VERMONT )

YANKEE LLC AND ENTERGY NUCLEAR )

OPERATIONS, INC. ) ASLBP No. 04-832-02-OLA (Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power Station) )

VERMONT DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC SERVICE MOTION TO COMPEL PRODUCTION OF CERTAIN NRC STAFF DOCUMENTS I. INTRODUCTION Pursuant to 10 C.F.R. §2.323 the Vermont Department of Public Service (DPS) moves the Board to direct the NRC Staff (Staff) to produce certain documents the existence of which was disclosed on it July 27, 2005 Deliberative Process Log (DPL). The documents, based on their limited description in the DPL, do not qualify for a deliberative process privilege. These documents merely represent ongoing work by NRC Staff personnel on issues which are directly relevant to the current proceeding.' Contrary to the very limited type of documents to which the deliberative process privilege applies - non-factual material which reveals the decision-making process of the NRC - these documents appear to contain substantial factual information and none involve any decision-making process. Thus, DPS requests the Board order the production of the documents at issue and establish a principle for use of the deliberative process privilege that will require the NRC Staff to produce all similar documents that are relevant to this proceeding.

There is no issue that the documents are relevant to the proceeding since they all appear on a disclosure made by the Staff in this proceeding pursuant to 10 C.F.R. §§2.336(b)and (d).

lptde-secv'-cY .. SG'C0=O

II. COMPLIANCE WITH 10 CFR § 2.323 Prior to filing this motion, DPS and Staff conducted both oral and written communications in an effort to resolve their differences. Copies of the written communications, including e-mail exchanges, are attached as Tab A. The Certification of counsel required by § 2.323(b) is attached as Tab B. While some DPS concerns were addressed in supplemental disclosures by the Staff, the nub of the disagreement remains and necessitates this motion.

There is also a requirement of § 2.323(a) that all motions must be filed within 10 days after "the occurrence or circumstance from which the motion arises." Because it is possible the 10 days could be deemed to run from the date of Staff disclosures to which objection is raised, which in this case would be 10 days after July 27, 2005, when Staff produced the DPL at issue here, DPS and Staff have reached an agreement, reflected in the correspondence at Tab A, that Staff will not raise an issue of timeliness of this pleading provided it is filed, as it is, within five (5) business days of Staff's written response to DPS's objection to the DPL.2 Staff responded to DPS's August 7, 2005 objections to the July 27, 2005 DPL on August 24, 2005. However, it is possible that an agreement of the parties will not trump a regulatory deadline and therefore,-DPS offers the following discussion on the issue of the timeliness of the motion.

The operative language in § 2.323(a) requires a motion to be filed within 10 days "after the occurrence or circumstance from which the motion arises". However, § 2.323(b) requires a meaningful consultation among the parties prior to filing a motion. It would not be sensible if that consultation were required to be conducted with the 10 day time limit hanging over it. Thus, 2 Also pursuant to agreement between DPS and Staff, the objections to the DPL had to be filed, as they were, within 10 days of its production.

2

it is reasonable to conclude that the "occurrence or circumstance" that triggers the 10 day filing period is the unsatisfactory conclusion of the consultation process. Viewed in that light, this motion should be deemed to have been timely filed.

III. RELEVANT LEGAL STANDARDS The deliberative process privilege is not favored and when asserted, is to be narrowly construed. United States v. Nixon, 418 U.S. 683 (1974)("the deliberative process privilege is among those that the Supreme Court has ruled are not to be 'expansively construed, for they are in derogation of the search for truth"' (id. at 710)); accord, In the Matter oqfDuke Energy Corporation,2004 WL 2617623 at *3 (N.R.C.). The burden is initially on the agency claiming the privilege to prove entitlement to the privilege. Nixon.

The deliberative process privilege protects inter- and intra-agency communications reflecting advisory opinions, recommendations, and deliberations comprising part of a process by which governmental decisions and policies are formulated. The privilege may be invoked in NRC proceedings. Georgia Power Vogile ElectricPlant, 39 N.R.C. 105, 197 (1994). The privilege applies only to information that is (1) "predecisional" and (2) "deliberative."

Petroleunm Information Corp. v. DepartmentofInterior, 976 F.2d 1429, 1434 (D.C.Cir.1992).

The Board uses this two part test when determining if something is privileged. Duke 2004 WL 2617623 at *3. A document is predecisional if it was prepared before the adoption of an agency decision and specifically prepared to assist the decision-maker in arriving at his or her decision.

Jogtle 39 N.R.C. at 197. Communications are deliberative if they reflect a consultative process.

Vogtle 39 N.R.C. at 198.

The privilege applies only where the information would reveal the agency's decision-3

making process priorto the time when the decision is made. Duke 2004 WL 2617623 at *4.

The privilege has no application to factual information. "The executive privilege does not protect purely factual material unless it is inextricably intertwined with privileged communications, or the disclosure of the factual material would reveal the agency's decisionmaking process." Long IslandLight (Shoreham),19 N.R.C. 1333, 1335 (1984). The facts are protected only if the inseparable portion of the communication includes those "which would inaccurately reflect or prematurely disclose the views of the agency," suggesting an agency's position that is merely a preliminary opinion. CoastalStates Gas Corp i. DOE, 617 F.2d 854, 866 (C.A.D.C., 1980).

These principles were summarized by the First Circuit:

The Supreme Court has restricted the deliberative process privilege to materials that are both predecisional and deliberative. See EPA v. Mink, 410 U.S. 73, 88, 93 S.Ct. 827, 836, 35 L.Ed.2d 119 (1973). In other words, to qualify for the privilege, a document must be (1) predecisional, that is, "antecedent to the adoption of agency policy," and (2) deliberative, that is, actually "related to the process by which policies are formulated." National Wildlife, 861 F.2d at 1117 (citation omitted). Because the deliberative process privilege is restricted to the intra-govemmental exchange of thoughts that actively contribute to the agency's decisionmaking process, factual statements or post-decisional documents explaining orjustifring a decision already made are not shielded. See Sears, Roebuck, 421 U.S. at 151-52, 95 S.Ct. at 1516-17; Mink, 410 U.S. at 88, 93 S.Ct.

at 836; see also Developments in the Lawv--Privileged Communications, 98 Harv.L.Rev. 1450, 1620-21 (1985).

Texaco PuertoRico, Inc. v. Department of ConsumerAffairs, 60 F.3d 867, 884-85 (1995).

IV. DOCUMENTS AT ISSUE There- are three documents disclosed on the July 27, 2005 DPL that are at issue here. All relate to the station blackout analysis. Station black out was one of the events for which contaimnent over-pressure was initially required as part of the EPU application. Since that date 4

Entergy has submitted information to Staff asserting that it can avoid the need for containment over-pressure in the event of a station black out. The three documents, as disclosed on the DPL and further explicated by the Staff in their letter of August 24, 2005 are:

ML0519400 Peddy, D.K., E-mail - Reddy, 07/12/2005 E-Mail Gill, A.S., 2 95 41CJNRR .RR, to Gill, NRC/NRR ZRR, re: VY EPU SBO Review.

ML0519902 Gill, A.S., E-mail - Gill, 07/13/2005 E-Mail keddy, D.K., 2 37 NRC/NRR qRR, to Reddy, NRC/NRR 4RR, re: VY EPU SBO Review.

ML0520600 ratum, J.E., E-mail - Tatum, 07/20/2005 E-Mail Ennis, R.B., 2 72 NRC/NRR fRR,-to Ennis, NRC/NRR

RR, re: VY PU SBO Feview.

The Staff supplemented the DPL with the following comments as to these documents in a letter dated August 24, 2005:

ML051940095 & ML051990237 - The Staff declines to produce these documents. These internal communications pertain to the utilization and organization of NRC staff resources relative to the Staff's evaluation' of the Applicant's station black-out coping analysis. As such, it is protected by the deliberative process privilege. Further, DPS has no need for the memorandum, which does not pertain to DPS's admitted contentions.

ML052060072 - The Staff declines to produce this document. This internal communication pertains to the NRC staffs treatment of the Applicant's supplement to 5

their application concerning the station black-out coping analysis. As such, it is protected by the deliberative process privilege. Further, DPS has no need for the memorandum, which does not pertain to DPS's admitted contentions.

V. THE DELIBERATIVE PROCESS PRIVILEGE DOES NOT APPLY TO THESE DOCUMENTS A. The Documents Are Relevant to the DPS Contentions With regard to all three documents Staff asserts "DPS has no need for the memorandum, which does not pertain to DPS's admitted contentions." This excuse for refusing to produce the documents is both legally erroneous and factually incorrect.

The provisions of §2.336(b) do not create any exception to the production of Staff documents based upon their alleged irrelevance to admitted contentions. All of the disclosure obligations are tied to the "application", not the subject matter of the admitted contentions.

Therefore, even if the memoranda at issue had nothing to do with DPS contentions, Staff would still have to produce them. Staff essentially concedes this point since it listed the documents among those that it is required to produce but is nonetheless withholding because of the claimed privilege. If the documents were not to be produced at all, they would never have been listed.

In addition, since station blackout is one of the events for which containment over-pressure is required and since DPS contentions are focused on over-pressure use, the documents at issue are relevant, or at least may lead to relevant information with regard to DPS's contention.

The documents pertain to the station blackout coping analysis. The coping analysis is integral to the need, or lack of need, for containment over-pressure in a station blackout. Entergy first asked for containment over-pressure credit for station blackout. Then they analyzed it away, based in part, on the coping analysis. See the Affidavit of William Sherman attached at Tab C. Thus, the 6

documents relate specifically to an issue raised by DPS in its admitted contentions.

B. The Documents Are Not Deliberative Process Documents It appears from the DPL that Staff believes any document that is not a final document published on ADAMS is a deliberative process document and that all internal communications between staff, whether transmitting facts, suggestions for an investigation or suggested areas of inquiry to be presented to the applicant, are part of the deliberative process. Staff erroneously equates these routine internal communications with the narrow and carefully defined category of documents to which the deliberative process privilege applies. The Commission held in Vogtle:

A document is predecisional if it was prepared before the adoption of an agency decision and specifically prepared to assist the decisionmaker in arriving at his or her decision. See Renegotiation Board v. Grumman Aircraft Engineering Corp., 421 U.S. 168, 184 (1975); Hopkins v. Department of Housing and Urban Development, 929 F.2d 81, 84 (2d Cir.1991).

Vogtle, 39 N.R.C. at 197. The documents at issue are at least one level, if not more, removed from being deliberative process documents. These documents reflect Staff efforts to identify potential problem areas in Entergy's analysis or areas in which Staff believes additional information is required. They do not represent preliminary opinions on the final decision Staff will make on Entergy's EPU application. Staff areas of questioning and lines of inquiry will assist DPS in preparing its own analyses of the proposed EPU. In addition, the information is more in the nature of factual information - i.e. what facts does Staff believe it needs to see in order to properly evaluate Entergy's proposal - not opinion or predecisional analyses.

This motion focuses on the NRC Staff disclosure made on July 27, 2005. However, this is illustrative of a wide-spread Staff policy to withhold access to substantial internally generated 7

information through the mis-use of the deliberative process privilege. For example, in its first DPL on January 18, 2005, are documents that clearly contain substantial factual information and represent areas of questioning, not preliminary opinions:

ML0435 Ennis, R. B., E-mail - Ennis, 9/28/2004 E-Mail Lobel, R. M., Message 20 70412 NRC/NRR NRR, to NRC/NRR pertains to Lobel, NRR, containme re: Comments nt re: VY and overpressu State of re issue.

Vermont.

ML0500 Black, S. C., E-mail - Black, 10/21/200 E-Mail Sheron, B. 2 50047 NRC/NRR NRR, to 4 W.,

Sheron, NRR, NRC/NRR re: VY and Overpressure, for NPSH When Pumping from Containment.

ML0500 Lobel, R. M., E-mail - Lobel, 10/25/200 E-Mail Black, S. C., 2 50044 NRC/NRR NRR, to 4 NRC/NRR Black, NRR, re: VY and Overpressure, for NPSH When Pumping from Containment.

ML0435 Stutzke, M. E-mail - 10/29/200 E-Mail Lobel, R. M., 2 70495 A., Stutzke, NRR, 4 NRC/NRR NRC/NRR to Lobel, NRR, re: VY Containment Overpressure Credit -

Another PRA Issue.

8

ML0435 Stutzke, M. E-mail - 10/29/200 E-Mail Lobel, R. M., 2 70487 A., Stutzke, NRR, 4 NRC/NRR NRC/NRR to Lobel, NRR, re: VY NPSH Best Estimate Calculation, and PRA Success.

Criteria.

Attached at Tab D is the 1/18/05 DPL. Thus, the three documents involved in this Motion are not isolated instances, but part of an ongoing practice of shielding from disclosure information that is not part of the deliberative process, is not pre-decisional and does not implicate the decision-mak-ing process. These documents are merely information requests or identifications of potential areas of concern. As such, they are not entitled to protection from disclosure.

No part of the DPL discloses how any of the documents reveal, or could reasonably be concluded to reveal, preliminary opinions related to what may be the final position of the Staff.

Rather the DPL reveals that the withheld documents relate to questions and issues Staff is considering raising with regard to the proposed EPU. If such preliminary inquiries-are deemed to be part of the deliberative process then all documents generated by Staff would be subject to the privilege, an absurd result not contemplated by the case law or the policy behind the deliberative process privilege. The possible questions or issues themselves will not reveal the decision-making process but only the information gathering process which precedes decision-making.

Such disclosures will not compromise the decision-maker or inhibit the process by disclosing preliminary opinions or decisions.

Many of the documents appear to relate to technical analyses being conducted by staff 9

personnel regarding safety issues at the Vermont Yankee plant. The computational analyses being reviewed are facts and there is no indication that the documents involved represent preliminary opinions by the authors of the documents regarding the outcome of the safety analysis much less the position of the NRC Staff related to the proposed licensing amendment.

Thus, at this point the Staff has not provided any evidence that the limited documents requested by DPS are not factual or, that the facts are inextricably intertwined with draft opinions or decisions to which the deliberative process privilege would apply.

VI. DPS'S NEED FOR THE DOCUMENTS EXCEEDS ANY STAFF INTEREST IN REFUSING TO DISCLOSE THE DOCUMENTS Even if Staff had met its burden of proving that the documents at issue are entitled to deliberative process privilege protection, the documents could still be ordered produced if "[t]he government's interest in confidentiality is balanced against the litigant's need for the information.

See Northrop Corp. v. McDonnell Douglas Corp., 751 F.2d 395, 404-05 (D.C.Cir.1984)" and the party seeking disclosure proves that the balance tips in its favor. Vogtle, 39 N.R.C. at 198.

As already noted, Staff has provided no evidence to support the proposition that disclosure of the questions it is considering asking or the issues it is considering raising would compromise the deliberative process. In fact, in the near future, when the Staff publishes its initial position on the EPU, these documents will have to be produced since they will no longer be pre-decisional. See Duke, 2004 WL 2617623 at *4. It is difficult to see any way in which the issues of concern to Staff or the questions it is considering asking could compromise the decision-making process.

10

On the other hand, although the extent to which the documents contain important information that will materiallyassist DPS in preparing direct testimony and proposed cross-examination cannot be ascertained from the limited disclosure of the nature of the contents of the documents provided by the DPL, it is apparent the documents relate to an important coping analysis undertaken by Entergy. That analysis purports to obviate the need for containment over-pressure in an accident scenario for which it was originally believed over-pressure was required.

Staff analyses of Entergy's coping analysis and facts that Staff may have uncovered that bear on that analysis are potentially of vital significance to DPS and the development of its case. On these complex issues of computational analysis, DPS should expect to be able to benefit from the insights of members of Staff. Why should Staff want to hide the insights of its analyses from public disclosure? Such disclosure would not interfere with the deliberative process but could materially aid DPS in carry-out its public obligations. In Duke 2004 WL 2617623 at *3 the Board noted that a critical factor in the Commission's decision in Vogtle was that "premature release of such agency communications before issuance of a final report would harm the deliberative process". Staff has not made such a claim here and it is difficult to see how it could.

VII. CONCLUSION For the reasons stated we urge the Board to order Staff to produce these documents and to withdraw the claim of a deliberative process privilege for all similar documents where the document reflects issue of concern to Staff or areas of potential inquiry identified by Staff.

Alternatively, we request the Board direct Staff to produce these and all'similar documents for in camnera inspection arid on the basis of that inspection order production of all documents which do not meet the criteria discussed above.

11

Respectfully submitted, Sarah Hofm Director for Public Advocacy Department of Public Service 112 State Street - Drawer 20 Montpelier, VT 05602-2601 Anthony Z. Roisman National Legal Scholars Law Firm 84 East Thetford Rd.

Lyme, NH 03768 Dated this _ day of 2005 at Montpelier, Vermont.

12

TABA Written Communications Between Staff and DPS re Deliberative Process Dispute

NATIONAL LEGAL SCHOLAMs LAW IRM P.C 84 EAST THETFORD ROAD LYME, NH, 03768 603.795.4245 603.795.4246 (FAX)

NLSLF@VALLEY.NEr MANAtING PARTNER" AFFILIATED ATTORNEYS" ANTHONY Z. ROISMAN ERWIVN CIENMERINSKY Dartmouth College Duke University Law School' MICHAEL H. GOTESMAN Georgetown University Law Center RICIIARDJ. LAZARUS Georgetown University Law Center' JONATHAN S. MASSEY Bethesda. MD STEPHEN A. SALTZBURG George Washington University law School' ROBERT F. WILUAMS Rutgers law School -Camden' For Identification Only Not Admitted in NH July 20, 2005 Brooke Poole, Esq.

Office of the General Counsel Mail Stop 0-15 D21 U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D.C. 20555-0001 Re: VYUprate - Docket No. 50-271 (ASLBP No. 04-832-02-OLA)

Dear Brooke:

This letter identifies documents on the NRC Staff's July 7, 2005 Deliberative Process Log which DPS believes should have been produced. The documents are the following:

ML051640030 Abdullahi, Z., NRC/NRR E-Mail - Abdullahi, NRR, to Ennis, NRR, re: VY EPU RAIs.

06/09/2005 E-Mail Ennis, R.B., NRC/NRR Also contains proprietary information as to thermal/hydraulic analysis.

ML051640036 Ennis, R.B., NRC/NRR E-Mail - Ennis, NRR, to Akstulewicz, Abdullahi, NRR, re: VY EPU RAIs.

06/09/2005

E-Mail Abdullahi, Z., Akstulewicz, F.M., NRC/NRR Also contains proprietary information as to thermal/hydraulic analysis.

ML051640046 Abdullahi, Z., NRC/NRR E-Mail - Abdullahi, NRR, to Ennis, NRR, re: VY EPU - SRXB RAIs.

06/10/2005 E-Mail Ennis, R.B., NRC/NRR ML051610421 Paperiello, C.J., NRC[RES Memo to James E. Dyer, User Need Request for Review of Computational Fluid Dynamics (CFD) Analysis Relating to Vermont Yankee Power Uprate Amendment (NRR-2005-006).

06/10/2005 Memoranda Dyer, J.E., NRC/NRR ML051670410 Boyd, C.C., NRC/RES/

DSARE/SMSAB FY05-06 FTE ADD/SHED Analysis for Christopher Boyd in Response to User Need Request for Review of CFD Analysis Supporting Vermont Yankee Power Uprate.

06/14/2005 Memoranda Baranowsky, P., Eltawila, F., NRC/RES/DSARE, NRC/RES/DSARE/SMSAB ML051730236 Tatum, J.E., NRC/NRR E-mail - Tatum, NRR, to Ennis, NRR, re: EPU Questions.

06/21/2005 E-Mail Ennis, R.B., NRC/NRR MLO51750320 Wu, C., NRC/NRR E-mail Wu, NRR, to Ennis, NRR, Re: VY EPU RAIs.

06/22/2005 E-Mail Ennis, R.B., NRC/NRR Also contains proprietary information with respect to steam dryer analysis.

ML051810386 Abdullahi, Z., NRC/NRR

E-mail - Abdullahi, NRR, to Ennis and Sheron, NRR, re: VY EPU GE Methods.

06/29/2005 E-Mail Ennis, R.B., Sheron, B., NRC/NRR Also contains proprietary information with respect to thermal/hydraulic analysis.

ML051800109 Baranowsky, P.W., NRC/RES/

DSARE/SMSAB RAI Input from RES Review of Computational Fluid Dynamics (CFD) Analysis Relating to Vermont Yankee Power Uprate Amendment (User Need NRR-2005-006).

06/29/2005 Memoranda Imbro, E.V., NRC/NRR/DE/EMCB We believe the scope of the Deliberative Process Privilege is narrow and does not include documents that do not disclose the deliberative process leading to a policy decision by the NRC Staff and does not include facts contained in documents. As best as we can determine from the limited disclosures made in the Log none of the documents identified above meet the narrow criteria for application of the Deliberative Process Privilege.

Consistent with our discussion yesterday during the lunch break at the ACRS Subcommittee meeting and your confirmatory e-mail this morning, I understand that the Staff agrees that the time for filing a motion with the ASLB regarding the failure to produce the identified documents will be extended until a reasonable time following a response to this letter from the Staff. I suggest the time be 5 business days from the date of the response. I also propose the Staff provide its response to this letter request within the next two weeks. Since technically an "agreement" between us as to a filing deadline set by the Regulations is ineffective, I propose we agree that I may advise the ASLB of our agreement and that the Staff will not oppose any motion with regard to these documents that we file based on timeliness.

If my understanding of our agreement as to process is in error, please respond within the next two days so we can iron out any differences. Thank you for consideration of our request.

Sincerely, Anthony Z. Roisman

Hofmann, Sarah From: Brooke Poole [BDP@nrc.gov]

Sent: Thursday, July 21, 2005 10:09 AM To: aroismaninationallegalscholars.com Cc: Robert Weisman; Hofmann, Sarah

Subject:

Re: Deliberative Process Log Tony and Sarah:

This is to confirm that I am in receipt of Tony's letter to me dated July 20, 2005. This will also confirm that the Staff agrees to the process set forth on page 3 of the letter. We will provide.a response to your letter request no later than August 4, 2005. Although I do not anticipate any delays, should the Staff determine that it needs additional time to respond to the July 20 letter request, I will notify both of you in an expeditious fashion and, in any event, no later than COB August 2, 2005.

Further, the Staff has no objection to DPS advising the Licensing Board of the circumstances outlined in the July 20 letter, and in my July 19 e-mail to you both.

Finally, it would be helpful if you would let me know whether DPS has signed the Confidentiality and Non-Disclosure Agreement (appended to the Licensing Board's March 1, 2005 Order) for access to Entergy's proprietary information.

If you have any questions, please call.

Brooke Poole 301-415-1556

>>> "Anthony Roisman" <aroisman@nationallegalscholars.com> 07/20/05 4:00

>>> PM >>>

Please see attached letter. Thank you.

Anthony Z. Roisman National Legal Scholars Law Firm, P.C.

Stonewall Farm 84 East Thetford Rd.

Lyme, NH 03768 603-795-4245 603-795-4246 (fax) www.NationalLegalScholars.com The content of this e-mail is privileged and confidential and for the exclusive use of the persons to whom it is sent. Any inadvertent receipt of this message by someone other than the intended addressee is not a waiveri of the privilege and confidential status of this message.

1

Hofmann, Sarah From: Hofmann, Sarah Sent: Wednesday, July 27, 2005 2:59 PM To: 'Brooke Poole'; aroisman@nationallegalscholars.com

Subject:

RE: Re: Deliberative Process Log Sorry Brooke. I think this was one of those cases where Tony thought I had responded, and I thought Tony had.

The answer is we have signed the confidentiality and non-disclosure agreement governing proprietary information in this docket. The following people have signed for the Department:

William Sherman on 5-3-05 Anthony Roisman on 4-20-05 Sarah Hofmann on 5-3-05

---

Original Message-----

From: Brooke Poole [1]

Sent: Wednesday, July 27, 2005 2:44 PM To: aroisman@nationallegalscholars.com; Hofmann, Sarah

Subject:

Fwd: Re: Deliberative Process Log Tony and Sarah:

This is a follow-up to my e-mail of 7/21/05 (attached). As requested therein, could you let me know whether DPS has signed to confidentiality and non-disclosure agreement governing proprietary information in this proceeding? It will help me in responding to your letter.

If I don't hear back from you before August 2, I will assume that you have not signed the agreement. (I know I could also check with the applicant, and I think I asked them a while ago whether either NEC or DPS had entered into the agreement, but I would prefer only to make representations about DPS that I have obtained from you.)

Thanks, Brooke I

Hofmann, Sarah From: Brooke Poole [BDP@nrc.gov]

Sent: Wednesday, August 03, 2005 11:57 AM To: aroisman@}nationallegalscholars.com; Hofmann, Sarah Cc: Robert Weisman

Subject:

VY EPU - Questions About Deliberative Process Privilege Log Tony:

This responds to your voice mail of yesterday, August 2. As I understand it, DPS would like to enter into an arrangement regarding questions to the Staff's Deliberative Process Privilege Logs. We agree that an informal arrangement can be made with respect to future hearing file/mandatory.

disclosure supplements filed in this proceeding going forward. The following summarizes my understanding of the issue and the Staff's position.

To the extent that DPS challenges the Staff's decision to withhold certain documents pursuant to the deliberative process privilege, DPS would like to enter into an arrangement with the Staff to consult on certain documents prior to the filing by DPS of a motion to compel disclosure. Under such an arrangement:

(1) DPS would have ten (10) days from the date of service of the hearing file/mandatory disclosure update in question to provide to Staff counsel a list (in writing) of the documents challenged. The Staff requests that the DPS written request be transmitted via e-mail, with a conforming hard copy via U.S. mail.

(2) The Staff would have a reasonable period of time (I propose two weeks or ten business days) from the date of receipt of the e-mail to respond, to the DPS request. The Staff would then respond in writing (by e-mail and hard copy, as described above) to DPS's request.

(3) To the extent DPS is not satisfied with the Staff's answer, it would then have five business days in which to file a motion to compel with the Licensing Board. In responding to the motion to compel, the Staff would not object to the motion on the basis of timeliness. (As I have previously stated, of course, the Staff does not waive any substantive objections that it would otherwise make, and it does not waive any timeliness objection with respect to documents provided in the initial disclosures or other, previous supplements, apart from the specific supplement in question.)

The Staff agrees that the consultative process described above would serve as the consultation required pursuant to 10 C.F.R. 2.323(b).

If this arrangement is amenable to you, let me know by return e-mail.

Thanks, Brooke Poole 301-415-1556 1

-^;es'qs A

UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSOtILE IL CJOP a 3WASHINGTON, D.C. 20555-0001 August 3, 2005 Anthony Z. Roisman, Esq.

National Legal Scholars Law Firm, P.C. -

84 East Thetford Road - -

Lyme, NH 03768 In the Matter of '

ENTERGY NUCLEAR VERMONT YANKEE LLC and ENTERGY NUCLEAR OPERATIONS, INC.

(Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power Station)

Docket No. 50-271-OLA

Dear Mr. Roisman:

This responds to your letter dated July 20, 2005, in which you requested nine documents that were identified in the NRC Staff's Deliberative Process Privilege Log dated July 7, 2005.1 In response to your letter, the Staff is producing some of the requested information. Each document is discussed in turn below.

(1) ML051640030 - The Staff is producing 2 of 21 pages. The remaining 19 pages consist of draft requests for additional information ("RAls") generated by the Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation, Reactor Systems Branch, regarding the analytical methods used to predict Vermont Yankee's core and fuel performance for steady state and design basis event conditions. The Staff declines to produce these draft RAls, as they constitute predecisional, deliberative information that reflects a consultative process. To the extent that the draft RAls contain factual material, it is 'inextricably intertwined" with the opinion portion. Further, it is the Staff's view that the Vermont Department of Public Service

("DPS") has no need for the draft RAls, which do nrot pertain to DPS's admitted contentions regarding the use of containment overpressure.

(2) ML051640036 - The Staff is producing 2 of 35 pages. The remaining 33 pages consist of draft RAls generated by the Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation, Reactor Systems Branch, regarding the analytical methods used to predict Vermont Yankee's core and fuel performance for steady state and design basis event conditions. The Staff declines to produce these draft RAls, as they constitute predecisional, deliberative information that reflects a consultative process. To the extent that the draft RAls contain factual material, it is 'inextricably intertwined" with the opinion portion. Further, it is the Staff's view that DPS has no need for the draft RAls, which do not pertain to DPS's admitted contentions.

1 The Deliberative Process Privilege Log is Enclosure 3 to Hearing File Supplement 10, filed by the Staff in this proceeding on July 7, 2005. Due to an error in service, Supplement 10 was re-served on the parties on July 13, 2005.

- 16 Anthony Z. Roisman, Esq. August 3, 2005 (3) ML056140046 - The Staff is producing this document in its entirety.

(4) ML051610421 - The Staff is producing this document in its entirety.

(5) ML051670410 - The Staff declines to produce this document. The deliberative process privilege is designed to protect, among other things, interagency communications "reflecting advisory opinions, recommendations and deliberations comprising 'part of a process by which governmental decisions and policies are formulated." Georgia Power Co. (Vogtle Electric Generating Plant, Units 1 & 2), CLI-94-5-, 39 NRC 190, 197 (1994),

quoting NLRB v. Sears, Roebuck& Co., 421 U.S. 132, 150 (1975). This internal memorandum pertains to the prioritization and organization of NRC staff resources relative to the applicant's computational fluid dynamics analysis which, in turns, supports the steam dryer analysis performed in connection with the EPU amendment. -As such, it is protected by the deliberative process privilege. Further, it is the Staff's view that the DPS has no need for the memorandum, which does not pertain to DPS's admitted contentions.

(6) ML051730236 - The Staff is producing 2 of 4 pages. The remaining two pages consist of draft RAls generated by the Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation, Plant Systems Branch, regarding (a)the spent fuel pool cooling and cleanup system, (b) reactor auxiliary cooling water systems, (c)the condensate and feedwater system, and (d)the power ascension and testing plan. The Staff declines to produce these draft RAls, as they constitute predecisional, deliberative information that reflects a consultative process. To the extent that the draft RAls contain factual material, it is 'inextricably intertwined" with the opinion portion. Further, it is the Staff's view that DPS has no need for the draft RAls, which do not pertain to DPS's admitted contentions.

(7) ML051750320 - The Staff is producing 3 of 12 pages. The remaining nine pages consist of draft RAls generated by the Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation, Mechanical and Civil Engineering Branch, regarding the applicant's revised steam dryer analysis.

The Staff declines to produce these draft RAls, as they constitute predecisional, deliberative information that reflects a consultative process.' To the extent that the draft RAls contain factual material, it is Inextricably intertwined" with the opinion portion.

Further, it is the Staff's view that DPS has no need for the draft RAls, which do not pertain to DPS's admitted contentions.

(8) ML051810386 - The Staff is producing this document in its entirety. It should be noted that this document contains information proprietary to Entergy's contractor, General Electric, and its disclosure and use is therefore governed by the Atomic Safety and Licensing Board's ("Licensing Board") March 1,2005 Protective Order.Governing Non-Disclosure of Proprietary Information.. A redacted version of this document will be released to the public as an update to the Staff's mandatory disclosures.

Anthony Z. Roisman, Esq. August 3, 2005 (9) ML051800109 - The Staff is producing this document in its entirety. The document references an attachment that was not requested by DPS, but that is also identified in the July 7, 2005 Deliberative Process Privilege Log, is identified as ADAMS accession number ML051800444.2 The attachment contains draft RAls pertaining to the applicant's steam dryer analysis.

At this time, the documents identified above are being produced to you in hard copy.as enclosures to this letter. The hearing file will be updated in accordance with NRC rules and the Licensing Board's April 5, 2005 Order. If you have any questions regarding these disclosures, please call me at (301) 415-1556.

Sincerely, Brooke D. Poole Counsel for NRC Staff

Enclosures:

As stated cc w/enclosures: Sarah Hofmann, Esq.

cc w/o enclosures: Jay E. Silberg, Esq.

2 ML051800444 is identified as an attachment to ML051800109 in the Deliberative Process Privilege Log (at 5).

NATIONAL LEGAL ScHoLRs LAW RRMP-tc..

84 EAST THETFORD ROAD LYME, NH, 03768 603.795.4245 603.795.4246 (FAX)

NLSLF@VALLEY.NET MANAGING PARTNERS AMUATED ATTORNEYS" ANTHoNY Z. ROISNAN ERWIN CHEMERINSKY Dartmouth College Duke University lAw School' MICHAELH. GOTESMAN Georgetown University Law Center RICIIARDJ. LAZARUS Georgetown University Law Center JONATHAN S. MASSEY Bethesda. MD STEPHEN A. SALTZBURG George Washington University law School' ROBERT F. WILUAMS Rutgers Law School -Camden

• For Idenification Only Not Admitted in NH -

August 9, 2005 Brooke Poole, Esq.

Office of the General Counsel Mail Stop 0-15 D21 U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D.C. 20555-0001 Re: VYUprate - Docket No. 50-271 (ASLBP No. 04-832-02-OLA)

Dear Brooke:

This letter identifies documents on the NRC Staff's July 27, 2005 Deliberative Process Log which DPS believes should have been produced. The documents are the following:

ML051870418 ML051890208 MLO51940095 ML051940101 ML051990237 ML052060154 ML052060158 ML052060072

We believe the scope of the Deliberative Process Privilege is narrow and does not include documents that do not disclose the deliberative process leading to a policy decision by the NRC Staff and does not include facts contained in documents. As best as we can determine from the limited disclosures made in the Log none of the documents identified above meet the narrow criteria for application of the Deliberative Process Privilege.

Consistent with our previous discussions, I understand that the Staff agrees that the time for filing a motion with the ASLB regarding the failure to produce the identified documents will be extended until a reasonable time following a response to this letter from the Staff. I suggest the time be 5 business days from the date of the response. I also propose the Staff provide its response to this letter request within the next two weeks. Since technically an "agreement" between us as to a filing deadline set by the Regulations is ineffective, I propose we agree that I may advise the ASLB of our agreement and that the Staff will not oppose any motion with regard to these documents that we file based on timeliness.

Thank you for consideration of our request.

Sincerely, Anthony Z. Roisman

Hofmann, Sarah From: Hofmann, Sarah Sent: Wednesday, August 10, 2005 4:06 PM To: 'Brooke Poole' Cc: 'rmw~nrc.gov'; 'axf2@nrc.gov'; 'Anthony Roisman'

Subject:

Deliberative process Hi Brooke, Thanks for calling today. I appreciate your trying to work through these deliberative process issues. Just to recap our conversation, the State of Vermont will not be filing a Motion to Compel regarding the nine items we had questioned from the Deliberative Process Log dated July 7, 2005. Going forward the NRC Staff will be providing some more detail in the deliberative process logs to hopefully aid the State in determining what the documents in question are and whether they are truly deliberative process in nature. Additionally, if the State has questions about documents in earlier deliberative process logs, we can bring the specific documents to the Staffs attention and the Staff will review them to see if the document or any part can be released -from the deliberative process designation.

Best wishes on your new rotation. You have been a pleasure to work with. Your competence and professionalism were always apparent.

Sarah Hofmann Director for Public Advocacy Department of Public Service 112 State Street - Drawer 20 Montpelier, VT 05620-2601 Ph: (802) 828-3088 Fax: (802) 828-2342 1

112 STATE STREET FILE COPY . FAX: (802) 828-2342

• - DRAWER 20 TTY (VT): 1-800-734-8390 MONTPELIER VT 05620-2601 -; . e-mail: vtdps@psd.state.vt.us TEL: (802) 828-2811 I=nternet: http://www.state.vt.us/psd STATE OF VERMONT DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC SERVICE August 23, 2005 Antonio Fernandez, Esq.

Office of the General Counsel Mail Stop: 0 15D21 Washington, D.C. 20555-0001 Re: VY uprate - NRC 50-271 (ASLBP 04-832-02-OLA)

Dear Mr. Fernandez:

This letter identifies documents on the NRC Staff's August 16, 2005 Deliberative Process Log which DPS believes should have been produced. The documnents are the following:

ML052090072: E-mail - Ennis, NRR, to Pal, NRR, re:VY EPIT SBO Review.

ML052090044: E-Mail - Pal, NRR to Ennis, NRR, re: VY FPLJ SBO Review.

ML052220133: E-mail - Pal, NRR, to Ennis, NRR, re:V EPJ Questions.

ML052220550: E-mail - Ennis, NRR, to Pal, NRR, re: BY EPLJ Questions.

-ML052220539: E-mail - Ennis, NRR, to Razzaque, NRR, re: VY EPU RAIs.

ML052220535: E-mail - Ennis, NRR, to Razzaque, NRR, re: VY EPU RAIs.

ML052220543: E-mail - Pal, NRR, to Ennis, NRR, re VYEPU Questions.

We believe the scope of the Deliberative Process Privilege is narrow and does not include documents that do not disclose the deliberative process leading to a policy decision by the NRC Staff and does not include facts contained in docurnents. As best as we can determine from the limited disclosures made in the Log none of the documents identified above meet the narrow criteria for application of the Deliberative Process Privilege.

I1

August 23, 2005 Consistent with our previous discussions, I understand that the S Gaff agrees that the time for filing a motion with the ASLB regarding the failure to prodiuce the identified documetits will be extended until a reasonable time following a response to this letter from the Staff. I suggest the time be 5 business days from the date of the response. I also propose the Staff provide its response to this letter request within the next two weeks.

Since technically an "agreement" between us as to a filing deadline set by the Regulations is ineffective, I propose we agree that I may advise the ASLB of our agreement and that the Staff will not oppose any motion with regard to these documents that we file based on timeliness.

Thank you for consideration of our request.

Sincerely, Director for Advocacy 2

REo0 UNITED STATES FILE COPY Ao NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION 0 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20555-0001 v 6- August 24, 2005 Anthony Z. Roisman, Esq. whorl National Legal Scholars Law Firm, P.C.

84 East Thetford Road r Lyme, NH 03768 F, In the Matter of ENTERGY NUCLEAR VERMONT YANKEE LLC and ENTERGY NUCLEAR OPERATIONS, INC.

(Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power Station)

Docket No. 50-271 -OLA

Dear Mr. Roisman:

This responds to your letter dated August 9, 2005, in which you requested eight documents that were identified in the NRC Staff's Deliberative Process Privilege Log dated July 27, 2005. In response to your letter, the Staff is producing some of the requested information. Each document is discussed in turn below.

(1) ML051870418 - The Staff is producing 3 of 8 pages. The remaining 5 pages consist of draft requests for additional information (uRAls"), regarding the computational fluid dynamics modeling of the Vermont Yankee steam dryer. The Staff declines to produce these draft RAls, as they constitute predecisional, deliberative information that reflects a consultative process. To the extent that the draft RAls contain factual material, it is "inextricably intertwined" with the opinion portion. Further, it is the Staff's view that the Vermont Department of Public Service ("DPS") has no need for the draft RAls, which do not pertain to DPS's admitted contentions regarding the use of containment overpressure.

(2) ML051890208 - The Staff declines to produce this document. This internal communication pertains to the scheduling, utilization and organization of NRC staff resources relative to the Staff's overall evaluation of the Applicant's request. As such, it is protected by the deliberative process privilege. Further, DPS has no need for the memorandum, which does not pertain to DPS's admitted contentions.

(3) ML051940095 &ML051990237 - The Staff declines to produce these documents.

These internal communications pertain to the utilization and organization of NRC staff resources relative to the Staff's evaluation of the Applicant's station black-out coping analysis. As such, it is protected by the deliberative process privilege. Further, DPS has no need for the memorandum, which does not pertain to DPS's admitted contentions.

(4) ML051940101 - The Staff is producing this document.

Anthony Z. Roisman, Esq. August 24, 2005 (5) ML052060154 - The Staff is producing 2 of 5 pages. The remaining pages consist of draft RAls, regarding the computational fluid dynamics modeling of the Vermont Yankee steam dryer. The Staff declines to produce these draft RAls, as they constitute predecisional, deliberative information that reflects a consultative process. To the extent that the draft RAls contain factual material, it is "inextricably intertwined" with the opinion portion. Further, DPS has no need for the draft RAls, which do not pertain to DPS's admitted contentions regarding the use of containment overpressure.

(6) ML052060158 - The Staff declines to produce this document. This internal communication pertains to the scheduling, utilization and organization of NRC staff resources relative to the Staff's evaluation of steam dryer modeling. As such, it is protected by the deliberative process privilege. Further, DPS has no need for the memorandum, which does not pertain to DPS's admitted contentions.

(7) ML052060072 - The Staff declines to produce this document. This internal communication pertains to the NRC staff's treatment of the Applicant's supplement to their application concerning the station black-out coping analysis. As such, it is protected by the deliberative process privilege. Further, DPS has no need for the memorandum, which does not pertain to DPS's admitted contentions.

At this time, the documents identified above are being produced to you in hard copy as enclosures to this letter. The hearing file will be updated in accordance with NRC rules and the Licensing Board's April 5, 2005 Order. If you have any questions regarding these disclosures, please call me at (301) 415-1797.

Sincerely, tonio Fer andez unsel for NRC Staff

Enclosures:

As stated cc w/encls: Sarah Hofmann, Esq.

cc w/o ends: Jay E. Silberg, Esq.

Hofmann, Sarah From: Anthony Roisman [aroisman@nationallegalscholars.com]

Sent: Thursday, August 25, 2005 9:06 AM To: Antonio Fernandez

Subject:

Re: Response to letter dated August 9, 2005 I am sorry I did not get back to you regarding your phone mail request. I am away on vacation and only check mail sporadically. In any event the two weeks was more of a suggestion than a deadline. In the future if you cannot reach me, you can contact Sara Hofmann.

I did have one question. Why did you send a copy of our communications to counsel for Entergy? If it was because they are involved in the case, then why did you not send a copy to counsel for NEC? I had assumed our correspondence regarding these issues was in the nature of settlement discussions - i.e. can we resolve a potential dispute over document production? As such, I have kept our correspondence just between us. I do not mind this being made "public" but I think it should be fully public.

Please let me know if you have different thoughts on this matter.

I look forward to meeting you at the next live hearing. Tony All:

> Attached please find copies of a letter sent to you today, via FedEx.

> The letter responds to Mr. Roisman's request for the Staff's

> reconsideration of its assertion of privilege over certain documents

> in the Vermont Yankee EPU proceeding.

> Please let me know if you do not receive the letter tomorrow. I can

> be reached at 301-415-1797.

> Sincerely,

> Antonio FernAndez

> Attorney

> Office of the General Counsel

> U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission 1

TAB B Certificate of Counsel

UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION BEFORE THE ATOMIC SAFETY AD1 LICENSING BOARD In the Matter of - 3

) Docket No. 50-271.

ENTERGY NUCLEAR VERMONT )

YANKEE LLC AND ENTERGY NUCLEAR )

OPERATIONS, INC. ) ASLBP No. 04-832-02-OLA (Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power Station) 3 CERTIFICATION OF COUNSEL Pursuant to 10 CFR §2.323(b) the undersigned counsel certifies that he has made a sincere effort to convince NRC Staff that its interpretation of the deliberative process privilege is in error. Staff has not been willing to concede the point and has continued to insist, while releasing minor snippets of some documents and a few other documents, that its internal documents reflceting the questions it is considering asking of Entergy and the issues it is considering raising with regard to the EPU are not subject to disclosure. Staff has not provided undersigned counsel with any persuasive reasons or legal precedents sufficient to convince him that the position of DPS is in error. Thus, thc good faith efforts of Staff and undersigned counsel to resolve this matter without involvement of the Board have failed.

NationalLaw Finn 84 East eturd d.

Lyme,NH 03768 August 31, 2005

TAB C Affidavit of William Sherman

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION BEFORE THE ATOMIC SAFETY AND LICENSING BOARD In the Matter of )

) Docket No. 50-271 ENTERGY NUCLEAR VERMONT )

YANKEE LLC AND ENTERGY NUCLEAR ) ASLBP No. 04-832-02-OLA OPERATIONS, INC. )

(Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power Station) )

Affidavit of William K. Sherman I1. My name is William K. Sherman. I am employed by the Vermont Public Service Department ("Department") in the position of State Nuclear Engineer. I have held this position since November, 1988. My duties include ongoing State regulatory oversight of the Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power Station ("Vermont Yankee"), as well as advising the Department and other State agencies on issues related to Vermont Yankee and nuclear power.

2. In the NRC staffs letter of August 24, 2005, the staff includes the following common wording for items ML051940095 & ML051990237, and ML052060072:

These [This] internal communications pertain to the utilization and organization of NRC staff resources relative to the Staff's evaluation of the Applicant's station black-out coping analysis.... Further, DPS has no need for the information [memorandum], which does not pertain to DPS's admitted contention. (Emphasis added).

The staff is not correct in its claim that station black-out analyes do not pertain to DPS's admitted contention.

3. DPS's contentions are as follows:

State Contention 1: Entergy has claimed credit for containment overpressure in demonstrating the adequacy of ECCS pumps for plant events including a loss of coolant accident in violation of draft General Design Criteria 44 and 52 and therefore Entergy has failed to demonstrate that the proposed uprate Nvill provide adequate protection for public health and safety as required by 10 C.F.R. § 50.57(a)(3).

State Contention 2: Because of the current level of uncertainty of the calculation which the Applicant uses to demonstrate the adequacy of

NRC Docket 50-271 ASLBP No. 04-832-02-OLA Affidavit of William K. Sherman Page 2 of 4 ECCS pumps, the Applicant has not demonstrated that the use of containment overpressure to provide the necessary net positive suction head for ECCS pumps will provide adequate protection for the public health and safety as required by 10 C.F.R. § 50.57(a)(3).

Memorandum and Order, November 22, 2004

4. The contentions relate to the uncertainties associated with the claim of overpressure credit.

5. In its filing of Safety Analysis Report for Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power Station Constant Pressure Power Uprate ("PUSAR"), NEDC-33090P, September 2003, Entergy claimed credit for containment overpressure in evaluating an ECCS pump on a station black out (SBO) event:

RHR is also required to operate during SBO and Appendix R fire events. CS is required to operate during an Appendix R fire event.

CPPU RTP operation increases the reactor decay heat, which increases the heat addition to the suppression pool following these events (see Sections 6.7.1 and 9.3.2). As a result, the peak suppression pool water temperature and peak containment pressure increase. The NPSH evaluation at these peak pool temperatures shows that adequate overpressure is available to satisfy NPSH requirements for these pumps.

PUSAR, Section 4.2.6.

A new operator action will be incorporated into plant procedures to satisfy certain aspects of Appendix R and SBO evaluations at CPPU. This action is to close a normally open torus vent line.

Closure of this line (which is a simple action performed using Control Room switches) allows credit for containment overpressure to maintain ECCS NPSH. However, this action has no direct applicability to the PSA as the PSA credits torus cooling (in which case the action is moot) whereas the Appendix R and SBO evaluations requiring this action do not.

PUSAR, Section 10.5.3.

6. These sections of PUSAR have not been revised through the review period of Entergy's extended power uprate request for Vermont Yankee, although, as stated later, Entergy

NRC Docket 50-271 ASLBP No. 04-832-02-OLA Affidavit of William K. Sherman Page 3 of 4 claims overpressure credit for SBO is no longer required.

7. On December 2, 2004, NRC issued NRC Inspection Report 05000271/2004008, a report of the Independent Engineering Inspection performed, in part, as a result of request from

• theVermont Public Service Board. This inspection included the following finding:

The team identified a non-cited violation of 10 CFR Part 50.63, "Loss of All Alternating Current Power," because the licensee had not completed a coping analysis for the period of time the alternate alternating current (AC) source (the Vernon Hydro-Electric Station) would be unavailable and had not demonstrated by test the time required to make the alternate source available for a station blackout involving a grid collapse.

The meaning of this finding is that the assumptions used to develop the overpressure requirements for SBO identified in PUSAR were uncertain and in question.

8. On March 24, Entergy submitted Supplement 25 to its request for extended power uprate.

In this supplement, Entergy stated:

"Based on new and revised analyses regarding station blackout (SBO) . . . the following conclusions are drawn:

1. Containment overpressure credit is not required to ensure adequate net positive suction head (NPSH) is available to low-pressure ECCS pumps during SBO....

2. VYNPS has the ability to withstand a SBO until alternate power is available: The coping analysis included with this submittal demonstrates that VYNPS has the capability to withstand a station blackout until the alternate AC power source and required shutdown equipment are started and lined up to operate.

This illustrates that Entergy has performed a station blackout coping analysis, in response to the deficiency identified in the Indpendent Engineering Inspection, and based on this coping analysis, claims containment overpressure credit is no longer necessary for SBO.

9. The issue of the adequacy of the SBO coping analysis is therefore directly on point with regard to the uncertainties associated with containment overpressure credit (DPS's contentions). If the coping analysis is correct, overpressure credit for SBO indeed may not be required. If the coping analysis is incorrect, the amount of overpressure required

NRC Docket 50-271 ASLBP No. 04-832-02-OLA Affidavit of William K. Sherman Page 4 of 4 may exceed the amount available such that public health and safety is no longer protected.

10. Understanding the staff review and considerations of the SBO coping analysis provided in March 24, 2005, is critical to DPS pursuit of its admitted contentions.

William K. Sherman State Nuclear Engineer Subscribed and sworn to before me this 31st day of August, 2005.

Audrey n gren Notary Public My commission expires February 10, 2007

/

TAB D NRC Staff Deliberative Process Log of 1/18/05

ATTACHMENT 3 VERMONT YANKEE EPU HEARING FILE AND MANDATORY DISCLOSURES PRIVILEGE LOG - DELIBERATIVE PROCESS INITIAL DISCLOSURES - JANUARY 18, 2005 Certain documents otherwise subject to inclusion in the hearing file and mandatory disclosures for this proceeding have been determined by the NRC Staff to contain information subject to withholding from public disclosure as predecisional, deliberative information. Pursuant to 10 C.F.R.

§ 2.336(b)(5), the Staff is providing this log to identify the following documents, withheld under the "deliberative process" privilege.

Accession Author Title/Description Document Document Addressee / Comment Page Number Name/Affiliation Date Type Addressee Count Affiliation ML043580020 Scarbrough, T. G., E-mail - Scarbrough, 10/17/2003 E-Mail Wu, C., 4 NRC/NRR NRR, to Wu, NRR, NRC/NRR Re: Vermont Yankee Power Uprate, Draft RAls.

ML043580028 Scarbrough, T. G., E-mail - Scarbrough, 10/28/2003 E-Mail Terao, D., 2 NRC/NRR NRR, to Terao, NRR, NRC/NRR Re: Vermont Yankee Power Uprate Vibration Problems.

ML033300397 Lund, A. L., Request for 11/20/2003 Memoranda Clifford, J. W., 3 NRC/NRR/DE/ Additional NRC/NRR/

EMCB Information on DLPM Extended Power Uprate in Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power Station.

-I-

Accession Author Title/Description Document Document Addressee I Comment Page Number Name/Affiliation Date Type Addressee Count Affiliation ML033440043 Rubin, M. P., Request for 12/4/2003 Memoranda, Clifford, J. W., 5 NRC/NRRIDSSA/ Additional Request for NRC/NRR/

SPSB Information (RAI) Additional DLPM/LPDI Regarding Extended Information Power Uprate (EPU) (RAI) for Vermont Yankee TAC MC0761).

ML033460249 Jenkins, R. V., Vermont Yankee RAI 12/12/2003 Memoranda, Clifford, J. W., 3 NRC/NRRIDE/ For Thermal Power Request for NRC/NRR/

EEIB Uprate. Additional DLPM/LPD1 Information

._ _._ _ . _._ _'_(R A I) .

ML043580035 Scarbrough, T. G., E-mail - Scarbrough, 2/5/2004 E-Mail Ennis, R., 2 NRC/NRR NRR, to Ennis, NRR, NRC/NRR Re: Vermont Yankee EPU Submittal, Acceptance Review on Flow Effects.

Accession Author Title/Description Document Document Addressee I Comment Page Number Name/Affiliation Date Type Addressee Count Affiliation ML043440386 Ennis, R. B., E-mail - Ennis, NRR, 3/4/2004 E-Mail Bongarra, J. P., 3 NRC/NRR to Bongarra, NRR, Cai, J., Coyne, et. al., Re: Vermont K., Davis, R.,

Yankee EPU Elliot, B. J.,

Schedule (TAC No. Gallucci, R.,

MC0761). Garg, H., Hart, M., Imboden, S., Kendrick, E., Lobel, R.

M., Parczewski, K., Pedersen, R. A., Pettis, R.

L., Reddy, D.,

Stutzke, M. A.,

Trehan, N.,

Walker, H., Wu, C., NRC/NRR ML040640591 Boyce, T. H., Request for 3/4/2004 Memoranda, Laufer, R. J., 16 NRC/NRR/DIPM/ Additional Request for NRC/NRRI IROB Information for Additional DLPM/LPD1 Vermont Yankee Information Proposed Changes (RAI) to TS.

ML043580319 Helton, D. M., E-mail - Helton, 3/24/2004 E-Mail Wu, C., 5 NRC/RES RES, to Wu, NRR, NRC/NRR Re: VY Submittal, Comments on Steam Dryer Analysis.

Accession Author TitlelDescription Document Document Addressee I Comment Page Number Name/Affiliation1 Date Type Addressee Count

._ _ _ Affiliation .

ML040900523 I Tappert, J. R., Request for 3/29/2004 Memoranda, Clifford, J. W., 3 NRC/NRR/DRIPI Additional Request for NRC/NRR/

RLEP Information (RAI) to Additional DLPM/LPD1 Support the Staffs Information Environmental (RAI)

Review for the Extended Power Uprate for Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power Station.

ML043440396 Ennis, R. B., E-mail - Ennis, NRR, 4/8/2004 E-Mail Clifford, J. W.,

NRC/NRR to Howe, NRR, Re: Howe, A. G.,

D-Note to Leeds, E. J.,

Commissioner Marsh, T.,

Assistants on NRC/NRR Vermont Yankee EPU and AST.

ML041050140 Dean, W. M., 04/12/04 - Recent 4/12/2004 Note (draft) Beall, J. E.,

NRC/EDO/AO Staff Interactions Croteau, R. P.,

with Entergy on Holahan, G. M.,

Vermont Yankee Lopez-Otin, M.

Licensing Issues (To: E.,

Commissioner Zimmerman, J.

Assistants; From: W. I., NRC/OCM M. Dean).

Accession Author TitlelDescription Document Document Addressee / Comment Page Number Name/Affiliation Date Type Addressee Count Affiliation ML043440401 Ennis, R. B., E-mail - Ennis, NRR, 4/16/2004 E-Mail Barrett, R., 6 NRC/NRR to Wang, NRR, et. . Beckner, W. D.,

al., Re: Vermont Borchardt, R.

Yankee Steam Dryer W., Bumell, S.

Crack Info. R., Clifford, J.

W., Craig, C.,

Dyer, J. E.,

Grimes, C.,

Howe, A.,

Imbro, E. V.,

Jolicoeur, J.,

Kim, T., Leeds, E. J., Manoly, K.A.,

McMurtray, A.,

Reis, T.,

Ruland ,W.,

Scarbrough, T.

G., Screnci, D.,

Sheehan, N.,

Sheron, B.,

Skay, D.,

Terao, D.,

Wang, A., Wu, C., NRC/NRR Accession Author Title/Description Document Document Addressee / Comment Page Number Name/Affiliation Date Type Addressee Count Affiliation ML043440407 Terao, D., E-mail - Terao, NRR, 4/19/2004 E-Mail Clifford, J. W., 3 NRC/NRR to Clifford, NRR, Re: NRC/NRR Vermont Yankee Steam Dryer Crack Info.

ML043560254 Ennis, R. B., E-Mail - Ennis, NRR, 4/20/2004 E-Mail Lobel, R. M., 4 NRC/NRR to Lobel, NRR re: NRC/NRR RAls for VY Power Uprate on Containment Effects.

ML043570364 Stutzke, M. A., E-mail - Stutzke, 4/21/2004 E-Mail Lobel, R. M., E-mail envelope 2 NRC/NRR NRR, to Lobel, NRR, NRC/NRR properties page not re: Risk RAI related available.

to credit for containment pressure for ECCS pump NPSH.

Accession 'Author TitlelDescription Document Document Addressee I Comment Page Number NamelAffiliation Date Type Addressee Count Affiliation ML043440426 Ennis, R. B., E-mail - Ennis, NRR, 4/22/2004 E-Mail Florek, D., 3 NRC/NRR/DLPM/ .to McMurtray, NRR, Gray, E. H.,

LPDI et. al., re: Followup Hernandez, J.,

to VY Steam Dryer. Lorson, R.,

Call. Manoly, K. A.,

McMurtay, A.,

Scarbrough, T.

G., Sheng, C.,

Terao, D.,

NRC/NRR, NRC/NRR/DE/

EMCB, NRC/NRR/

DLPM,

._ _ _NRC/RGN-l ML050100304 Reddy, D. K., E-mail - Reddy, 4/26/2004 E-Mail Ennis, R. B., E-mail envelope 3 NRC/NRR NRR, to Ennis, NRR, NRC/NRR properties page not re: VY RAIs (TAC available.

MC0761).

ML043440412 Anderson, C. J., E-mail - Anderson, 4/30/2004 E-Mail Howe, A. G., 3 NRC/RGN-1 RGN-1, to Howe, NRC/NRR NRR, re: VY Analysis Reviews on Steam Dryer Cracks.

Accession Author Title/Description Document Document Addressee I Comment Page Number Name/Affiliation Date Type Addressee Count Affiliation ML041340510 Manoly, K. A., Request for 5/3/2004 Request for Clifford, J. W., 7 NRC/NRR/DE Additional Additional NRC/NRRI Information -Vermont Information DLPM/LPDI Yankee Nuclear (RAI)

Power Station, Technical Specification Proposed Change No. 263, Extended Power Uprate (TAC No. MC0761)

'MI-041330159 Akstulewicz, F. RAI Regarding 5/7/2004 Memoranda, Ennis, R. B., 3 M., Vermont Yankee Request for NRC/NRR/

NRC/NRR/DSSAI Nuclear Power *Additional DLPMILPD1 SRXB Station License Information Amendment Request (RAI)

- Proposed Technical Specification Change No. 263- Extended Power Uprate (TAC No. MC0761).

I I tI E-mail - Lobel, NRR, 5/18/2004 E-Mail Dennig, R. L., E-mail envelope 3 to Dennig, NRR, re: NRC/NRR properties not NPSH Calculation available.

Conservatisms.

Accession Author TitlelDescription Document Document Addressee / Comment Page Number Name/Affiliation Date Type Addressee Count

._ Affiliation ML043560267 Ennis, R. B., E-mail - Ennis, NRR, 5/20/2004 E-Mail Elliot, B. J., 25 NRC/NRR to Elliot, NRR, et. al, Irboden, S.,

re: Vermont Yankee Kendrick, E.,

RAls - draft for Lobel, R. M.,

review. Pettis, R. L.,

Reddy, D., Wu,

._ C., NRC/NRR ML050050021 Howe, A. G., E-mail - Howe, NRR, 5/25/2004 E-Mail Elliot, B. J., 4 NRC/NRR to Elliot, NRR, et. al., NRC/NRR re: Briefing for Brian Sheron - 5/26 1:00 PM - VY Steam

. __ _Dryers. _

ML043580042 Scarbrough, T. G., E-mail - Scarbrough, 5/26/2004 E-Mail Terao, D., 4 NRC/NRR NRR, to Terao, NRR, NRC/NRR re: EPU Next Steps Table - revised, on EPU Flow Effects.

ML043570362 Stutzke, M. A., E-mail - Stutzke, 6/4/2004 E-Mail Lobel, R. M., 3 NRC/NRR NRR, to Lobel, NRR, NRC/NRR Re: VY Containment Overpressure Risk..

Assessment.

Accession Author TitlelDescription Document Document Addressee / Comment Page Number NamelAffiliation Date Type Addressee Count Affiliation ML043560380 Ennis, R. B., E-mail - Ennis, NRR, 6/8/2004 E-Mail Lobel, R. M., 2 NRC/NRR to Lobel, NRR, re: NRC/NRR Overpressure &

Appendix J, for VY containment.

ML043560422 Ennis, R. B., E-Mail - Ennis, NRR, 6/16/2004 E-Mail Lobel, R. M., 2 NRC/NRR to Stutzke, NRR, re: Stutzke, M. A.,

RAI for VY on ECCS NRC/NRR Pump NPSH.

ML043570372 Lobel R. M., E-mail - Lobel, NRR, 6/16/2004 E-Mail, Ennis, R. B., E-mail envelope 5 NRC/NRR to Ennis, NRR, re: Request for NRC/NRR properties page not RAls for VY on the Additional available.

NPSH issue. Information (RAI)

ML043440436 Yerokun, J. T., E-mail - Yerokun, 6/21/2004 E-Mail Howe, A., 6 NRC/NRR NRR to Howe, NRR, NRC/NRR re: Additional RAls VY Extended Power Uprate.

ML043560473 Ennis, R. B., E-mail - Ennis, NRR, 6/21/2004 E-Mail Howe, A. G., 3 NRC/NRR to Howe, NRR, re: NRC/NRR Independent Calcs/Audits, for VY EPU.

Accession Author TitlelDescription Document Document Addressee I Comment Page Number Name/Affiliation Date Type Addressee Count

-_ Affiliation ML043560455 Ennis, R. B., E-mail - Ennis, NRR, 6121/2004 E-Mail, Lobel, R. M., 12 NRC/NRR to Reddy, NRR and Letter, Reddy, D.,

Lobel, NRR, re: Request for NRC/NRR Vermont Yankee Additional RAls, Draft RAI for Information

_ Review. (RAI)

ML043560462 Ennis, R. B., E-mail - Ennis, NRR, 6/23/2004 E-Mail Stutzke, M. A., 2 NRC/NRR to Stutzke, NRR and NRC/NRR Lobel, NRR, re:

RAls, for VY, Review of Progress on RAI on Loss of NPSH.

ML043570173 Black, S., E-mail - Black, NRR, 6/24/2004 E-Mail Dennig, R. L., E-mail envelope 2 NRC/NRR to Lobel, NRR, et. Ennis, R., properties page not al., re: VY calcs., Johnson, M., available.

Research Assistance Lobel, R. M.,

with Containment Tschiltz, M.,

Overpressure. NRC ML043560470 Lobel, R. M., E-mail - Lobel, NRR, 6/24/2004 E-Mail Black, S. C., 3 NRC/NRR to Black, NRR, Re: NRC/NRR Vermont Yankee Audit Calculations on Containment

.__ _ Conditions for NPSH. .

-I1-

Accession Author Title/Description Document Document Addressee / Comment Page Number Name/Affiliation Date Type Addressee Count Affiliation ML043570488 Lobel, R. M., E-mail - Lobel, NRR, 6/30/2004 E-Mail Ennis, R. B., E-mail envelope 4 NRC/NRR to Ennis, NRR, re: NRC/NRR properties page not Request for available.

Additional Information, TAC MC0761, Vermont Yankee EPU and NPSH.

ML043570468 Notafrancesco, A., E-mail - 6/30/2004 E-Mail Lobel, R. M., 5 NRC/RES Notafrancesco, RES NRC/NRR to Lobel, NRR, re:

Vermont Yankee Input List for LBLOCA Containment NPSH Calculations.

ML041840232 Jenkins, R. V., Vermont Yankee 7/1/2004 Memoranda Clifford, J. W., Memorandum 9

-NRC/NRR/DE/ Thermal Power NRC/NRR/ contains draft input EMCB Uprate. DLPM/LPDI to safety evaluation regarding electrical system and environmental qualification of electrical components Accession Author Title/Description Document Document Addressee / Comment Page Number Name/Affiliation Date Type Addressee Count Affiliation ML043580311 Helton, D. M., E-mail - Helton, RES, 7/19/2004 E-Mail Wu, C., 2 NRC/RES to Wu, NRR, re: VY NRC/NRR RAI Responses, Comments on Steam Dryer Analysis. __l ML043570255 Ennis, R. B., E-mail - Ennis, NRR, 7/21/2004 E-Mail Manoly, K. A., 2 NRC/NRR to Manoly, NRR, re: NRC/NRR EPU Review Standard SE Section for Steam Dryer.

ML043440453 Holden, C. F., E-Mail - Holden, 7/21/2004 E-Mail Ennis, R. B., 2 NRC/NRR NRR, to Ennis, NRR, NRC/NRR et. al., re: Summary of VY Steam Dryer Analysis Meeting.

ML043570270 Elliot, B. J., E-mail - Elliot, NRR, 7/26/2004 E-Mail Ennis, R. B., 2 NRC/NRR to Ennis, NRR, re: NRC/NRR VYNPS EPU Confirmatory Items.

ML043580048 Scarbrough, T. G., E-mail - Scarbrough, 7/26/2004 E-Mail Elliot, B. J., 2 NRC/NRR NRR, to Elliot, NRR, NRC/NRR re: Vermont Yankee EPU, Cracks In The Steam Dryer.

Accession Author TitlelDescription Document Document Addressee / Comment Page, Number NamelAffiliatlon Date Type Addressee Count Affiliation ML043580119 Scarbrough, T. G., E-mail - Scarbrough, 7/27/2004 E-Mail Imbro, G., 13 NRC/NRR NRR, to Imbro, NRR, NRC/NRR re: VY EPU Flow Effect Slides.

ML043580306 Helton, D. M., E-mail - Helton, RES, 7/30/2004 E-Mail Malik, S. N., 5 NRC/RES to Malik, RES, re: NRC/RES Thoughts on 07/21-22/04 Meetings with GE/Entergy on Steam Dryer Analysis for VY EPU.

ML042050427 Weerakkody, S., Fire Protection 7/31/2004 Memoranda, Howe, A. G., 4 NRC/NRRIDSSA/ Safety Evaluation for Safety NRC/NRR/

SPLB Vermont Yankee Evaluation DLPM/LPD1 Extended Power

. Uprate.

ML043510106 Chen, S. S., Review of the 8/6/2004 Report, 10 Mulcahy, T. M.; Vermont Yankee Technical Shah, V. N., Steam Dryer Integrity Argonne National Issue Associated Lab (ANL) with Uprated Power Operation Licensing Actions. .

Accession Author Title/Description Document Document Addressee/ Comment Page Number Name/Affiliation Date Type Addressee Count Affiliation ML043620145 Elliot, B. J., E-mail - Elliot, NRR, 8/9/2004 E-Mail Ennis, R., 3 NRC/NRR to Ennis, NRR, re: . NRC/NRR Vermont Yankee Power Uprate, License Condition for Vessel Test Capsules.

ML042290204 Chan, T. L., Safety Evaluation on 8/9/2004 Memoranda, Howe A G, 5 NRC/NRR/DE/ License Amendment Safety NRC/NRRI EMCB Request for 20 Evaluation DLPM/LPD1 Percent Power Uprate for Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power Station (TAC No. MC0761). .

ML043570245 Ennis, R. B., E-mail - Ennis, NRR, 8/16/2004 E-Mail Notafrancesco, 3 NRC/NRR to Notafrancesco, A., NRC/RES RES, Re: Vermont Yankee EPU Supplement 11.

Accession Author Title/Description Document Document Addressee I Comment Number Name/Affiliation Date Type Addressee Affiliation ML043570229 Ennis, R. B., E-mail - Ennis, NRR, 8/16/2004 E-Mail Scarbrough, T.

NRC/NRR to Scarbrough, NRR, G., NRC/NRR re: ANL Reports on Vermont Yankee Dryers.

ML043580130 Scarbrough, T. G., E-mail - Scarbrough, 8/16/2004 E-Mail Ennis, R. B.,

NRC/NRR NRR, to Ennis, NRR, NRC/NRR Re: GE Audit of Analysis for EPU Flow Effects at VY.

ML043570357 Manoly, K. A., E-mail - Manoly, 8/16/2004 E-Mail Ennis, R. B.,

NRC/NRR NRR, to Ennis, NRR, NRC/NRR re: ANL Reports on Vermont Yankee Dryers.

ML042310744 Tappert, J. R., Draft Environmental 8/18/2004 Environ- Clifford, J. W.,

NRC/NRR/DRIP/ Assessment of mental NRC/NRR/

RLEP Extended Power Assessment, DLPM/LPDI Uprate for Vermont Federal Yankee Nuclear Register Power Station. Notice, Memoranda Accession Author Title/Description Document Document Addressee I Comment Page Number Name/Affiliation Date Type Addressee Count Affiliation ML043570272 Ennis, R. B., E-mail - Ennis, NRR, 8/18/2004 E-Mail Elliot, B. J., 2 NRC/NRR to Elliot, NRR, re: NRC/NRR Vermont Yankee Power Uprate, License Condition for Vessel Test'

. _ Capsules.

ML043570248 Ennis, R. B., E-mail - Ennis, NRR, 8/18/2004 E-Mail Elliot, B. J., 2 NRC/NRR to Elliot,NRR, re: NRC/NRR Vermont Yankee Power Uprate, License Condition for Vessel Test Capsules.

ML043580137 Scarbrough, T. G., E-mail - Scarbrough, 8/18/2004 E-Mail Ennis, R. B., 3 NRC/NRR NRR, to Ennis, NRR, NRC/NRR re: GE Audit of Analysis for EPU Flow Effects at VY.

ML043580143 Scarbrough, T. G., E-mail. - Scarbrough, 8/18/2004 E-Mail Wu, C., 3 NRC/NRR NRR, to Wu, NRR, NRC/NRR et. al., re: GE Steam Dryer Analysis.

Accession Author Title/Description Document Document Addressee / Comment Number Name/Affiliation Date Type Addressee Affiliation ML043620017 Ennis, R. B., E-mail - Ennis, NRR, 8119/2004 E-Mail Elliot, B. J.,

NRC/NRR. to Elliot, NRR, re: NRC/NRR Vermont Yankee Power Uprate, License Condition on Vessel Test Capsules. _

ML043580150 Helton, D. M., E-mail - Helton, RES, 8/19/2004 E-Mail Wu, C.,

NRC/RES to Wu, NRR, re: GE, NRC/NRR Audit Trip on Flow Effects and Steam Dryers for VY EPU.

ML043570521 Ward, L. W., E-mail - Ward, NRR, 8/19/2004 E-Mail Lobel, R. M.,

NRC/NRR to Lobel, NRR, re: NRC/NRR Very Preliminary Results, of RELAP5 Model of Vermont Yankee. _

ML043440464 Jacobson, J. B., E-mail - Jacobson, 8/19/2004 E-Mail Ennis, R. B.,

NRC/NRR NRR, to Ennis, NRR, NRC/NRR re: Vermont Yankee Engineering Inspection -

Installation of Capacitors.

Accession Author TitlelDescription Document Document Addressee I Comment Number Name/Affiliation Date Type Addressee Affiliation ML043620045 Wu, C., NRC/NRR E-mail Wu, NRR, to 8/20/2004 E-Mail Imbro, E. V.,

Imbro, NRR, Re: NRC/NRR August 23-27, GE Audit for Vermont Yankee EPU Submittals.

ML043580347 Wu, C., NRC/NRR E-mail Wu, NRR, to 8/20/2004 E-Mail Imbro, E. V.,

Imbro, NRR, re: NRC/NRR August 23-27 GE Audit for Vermont Yankee EPU Submittals on Flow Effects and the Steam Dryer.

ML043580061 Scarbrough, T. G., E-mail - Scarbrough, 8/21/2004 E-Mail Terao, D.,

NRC/NRR NRR, to Terao, NRR, NRC/NRR et. al., re: GE Audit Entrance Meeting for VY EPU Flow Effects and Steam Dryer.

ML043440495 Ennis, R. B., E-mail - Ennis, NRR, 8/23/2004 E-Mail Jacobson, J.

NRC/NRR to Jacobson, NRR, B., NRC/NRR re: CST Temperature and NPSH.

Accession Author Title/Description Document Document Addressee I Comment Page Number Name/Affiliation Date Type Addressee Count

._ Affiliation ML043650384 Dennis, S., E-mail from Steven 8/23/2004 E-Mail Anderson, C., 3 NRC/RGN-I Dennis (Region I) to Bower, F. L.,

Cliff Anderson Doerflein, L. T.,

(Region I) and Jacobson, J.,

Others Dated NRC/RGN-I 08/23/04 re: State's Potential Issues for a Hearing Request.

ML043650371 Lanning, W. D., E-mail from Wayne 8/23/2004 E-Mail Rogge, J. F., 4 NRC/RGN-I Lanning (Region I) to NRC/RGN-1 John Rogge (Region I) Dated 08/23/04 re:

VY Engineering Inspection -

Installation of Capacitors. . -

ML043450141 Holden, C. F., E-mail - Holden, 8/23/2004 E-Mail - Howe, A., 4 NRC/NRR NRR, to Howe, NRR, Miller, C.,

re: Vermont Yankee NRC/NRR Engineering Inspection Update. .

ML050050093 Howe, A. G., E-mail - Howe, NRR, 8/23/2004 E-Mail Akstulewicz, F. 2 NRC/NRR to Akstulewicz, NRR, M., NRC/NRR Re: MELLA + and CPPU Topical, Possible Impact on Vermont Yankee EPU. .

Accession Author Title!Description Document Document Addressee / Comment Number Name/Affiliation Date Type Addressee Affiliation ML043570291 Ennis, R. B., E-mail - Ennis, NRR, 8/25/2004 E-Mail Stutzke, M. A.,

NRC/NRR to Stutzke, NRR, re: NRC/NRR Comment to VY EPU PRA & Review on

. __ _ Operator Actions.

ML043440532 Jacobson, J. B., E-mail - Jacobson, . 8/25/2004 E-Mail Howe, A. G.,

NRC/NRR NRR, to Howe, NRR, NRC/NRR re: VY Engineering Inspection Briefing Notes.

ML043440487 Akstulewicz, F. E-mail - Akstulewicz, 8/26/2004 E-Mail Marsh, L. B.,

M., NRC/NRR NRR, to Marsh, NRC/NRR NRR, re GE Part 21 Report on SLMCPR Part 21.

ML043440478 Berkow, H. N., E-mail - Berkow, 8/27/2004 E-Mail Howe, A. G.,

NRC/NRR NRR, to Howe, NRR, Ruland, W.,

re: Questions on GE NRC/NRR codes for CPPU/EPU. .

ML043570297 Ennis, R. B., E-mail - Ennis, NRR, 8/30/2004 E-Mail Manoly, K. A.,

NRC/NRR to Manoly, NRR, re: NRC/NRR Steam Dryer Writeup, for Vermont Yankee EPU.

Accession TitlelDescription Document Document Addressee I Comment Page Number NamelAffilliation Date Type Addressee Count

_ _ _ ._ Affiliation ML043570301 Ennis, R. B., E-mail - Ennis, NRR, 8/31/2004 E-Mail Jacobson, J.B. 3 NRC/NRR to Jacobson, NRR, NRC/NRR re: Containment Overpressure &

__ EOPs.

ML050050084 Howe, A.G. E-mail - Howe, NRR, 9/1/2004 E-Mail Holden, C. F., 4 NRC/NRR to Holden, NRR, re: NRC/NRR Steam Dryer Writeup, Related to the Vermont Yankee EPU review.

ML043580069 Scarbrough, T. G., E-mail - Scarbrough, 9/1/2004 E-Mail Bower, F. L., 4 NRC/NRR NRR, to Bower, NRC/RGN-1 RGN1, re: VY's Failure to Follow-up on Commitments -

As Discussed, for Engineering Inspection on MOVS.

ML043570403 Notafrancesco, A., E-mail - 9/1/2004 E-Mail Lobel, R. M., 6 NRC/RES Notafrancesco, RES, NRC/NRR to Lobel, NRR, re:

Vermont Yankee LT -

NPSH, Draft Analysis Results.

Accession Author Title/Description Document Document Addressee / Comment Page Number Name/Affiliation Date Type Addressee Count

__ Affiliation ML043440580 Ennis, R. B., E-mail - Ennis, NRR, 9/2/2004 E-Mail Howe, A. G., 4 NRC/NRR to Howe, NRR, re: NRC/NRR Draft Status Bullets for the Dyer/Ellis Brief on VY EPU.

ML043440598 Imbro, E. V., E-mail - Imbro, NRR, 9/2/2004 E-Mail Howe, A. G., 3 NRC/NRR to How, NRR, re: NRC/NRR Draft Status Bullets for the Dyer/Ellis Brief re VY Dryer Issue.

ML043440586 Jacobson, J., E-mail - Jacobson, 9/2/2004 E-Mail Blough, A. R., 5 NRC/NRR NRR, to Blough, Collins, S.,

RGN-I, et. al., re: Crlenjak, R.,

Briefing Notes for VY Holian, B.,

Engineering Jacobson, J.,

Inspection. Lanning, W. D.,

Wiggins, J.,

NRC, NRC/NRR,

__ NRC/RGN-I ML043440595 Scarbrough, T. G., E-mail - 9/2/2004 E-Mail Ennis, R. B., 4 NRC/NRR Scarborough, NRR, NRC/NRR to Ennis, NRR, re:

Vermont Yankee Steam Dryer Issues.

Accession Author Title/Description Document Document Addressee I Comment Number Name/Affiliation Date Type Addressee Affiliation ML043440569 Terao, D., E-Mail - Terao, NRR, 9/2/2004 E-Mail Ennis, R. B.,

NRC/NRR to Ennis, NRR, re: NRC/NRR Steam Dryer Writeup for the EPU Safety Evaluation.

ML043650350 Dennis, S, E-mail - Steven 9/9/2004 E-Mail Bower, F. L., Subject of NRC/RGN-l Dennis (Region I) to NRC/RGN-I message: timeline Fred Bower (Region for RCIC I) and Others Dated operability 09/09/04 re:

Followup on Today's Phone Call.

ML043580115 Shah, V., Argonne E-mail - Shah, ANL, 9/9/2004 E-Mail Wu, C.,

National Lab to Wu, NRR, re: Trip NRC/NRR (ANL) Report of Audit of GE Steam Dryer Analysis for W EPU.

ML043580123 Malik, S. N., E-mail - Malik, RES, 9/9/2004 E-Mail Wu, C. I.,

NRC/RES to Wu, NRR, re: My NRC/NRR

. Comments from Vermont Yankee Steam Dryer Analysis Audit at GENE (Aug. 24-26).

Accession Author TitlelDescription Document Document Addressee i Comment Page Number Name/Affiliation Date Type Addressee Count Affiliation ML042540482 Lund, A. L., Safety Evaluation of 9/9/2004 Memoranda, Clifford, J. W., 5 NRC/NRR/DE/ Request for License Safety NRC/NRR/

EMCB Amendment in Evaluation DLPM/LPD1 Support of Application for the Extended Power Uprate in Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power Station (TAC No. MC0761).

ML043580131 Mulcahy, T. M., E-mail - Mulcahy, 9/10/2004 E-Mail Scarbrough, T. 9 Argonne National ANL, to Scarbrough, G., NRC/NRR Lab (ANL) NRR, re: TMM Comments on Section C. of the Audit Report on GE Steam Dryer Analysis.-

ML043440602 Jacobson, J. B., E-Mail - Jacobson, 9/13/2004 E-Mail Howe, A. G., 2 NRC/NRR NRR, to Howe, NRR, NRC/NRR re: SBO Issue at VY.

ML043580141 Shah, V., Argonne E-mail - Shah, ANL, 9/13/2004 E-Mail Mulcahy, T. M., 3 National Lab to Mulcahy, ANL, re: Argonne (ANL) Audit Report Redraft National Lab 9-12-04, of the (ANL)

Report on GE Steam Dryer Analyses. . . -

Accession Author Title/Description Document Document Addressee / Comment Page Number Name/Affiliation Date Type Addressee Count Affiliation ML042610110 Scarbrough, T. G., Memo - Technical 9/14/2004 Memoranda Imbro, E. V., 3 NRC/NRRIDE/ Audit of.Vermont NRC/NRRIDE/

EMCB Yankee Steam Dryer EMCB Analysis in Support of Extended Power Uprate Request (TAC MC0761).

ML042650258 Scarbrough, T. G., Memo w/Attachment, 9/14/2004 Audit Report, Imbro, E. V., 25.

NRC/NRR/DE/ Appendices A, B, E, Memoranda NRC/NRR/DE/

EMEB G - Technical Audit EMEB of Vermont Yankee Steam Dryer Analysis in Support of Extended Power Uprate Request (TAC MC0761). . .

ML042650340 Scarbrough, T. G., Proprietary Info 9/14/2004 Memoranda. Imbro, E. V., 4 NRC/NRR/DE/ Removed - Technical NRC/NRR/DE/

EMEB Audit of Vermont EMEB Yankee Steam Dryer Analysis in Support of Extended Power Uprate Request (TAC MC0761). .. . .

Accession Author Title/Description Document Document Addressee I Comment Page Number Name/Affiliation Date Type Addressee Count

_ Affiliation ML043650338 Scarbrough, T. G., E-mail - Thomas 9/15/2004 E-Mail Bower, F. L., 4 NRC/NRR Scarborough (NRR) NRC/RGN-I to Fred Bower (Region I) dated 09/15/04 re: Vermont Yankee EPU RAI response on MOVs and AOVs.

ML043650330 Scarbrough, T. G., E-mail - Thomas 9/15/2004 E-Mail Bower, F. L., 4 NRC/NRR Scarbrough (NRR) to NRC/RGN-I Fred Bower (Region

1) Dated 09/15/04 re:

Vermont Yankee EPU RAI Response on MOVs and AOVs.

ML043580078 Scarbrough, T. G., E-mail - Scarbrough, 9/15/2004 E-Mail Bower, F. L., 3 NRC/NRR NRR, to Bower, NRC/RGN-1 RGN1, re: Vermont Yankee EPU RAI Response on MOVs and AOVs.

ML043580096 Scarbrough, T. G., E-mail - Scarbrough, 9/20/2004 E-Mail Ennis, R. B., 2 NRC/NRR NRR, to Ennis, NRR, NRC/NRR re: VY EPU Schedule - Draft Memo & Letter, on Steam Dryer Analysis.

Accession Author Title/Description Document Document Addressee / Comment Number Name/Affiliation Date Type Addressee Affiliation ML043580085 Scarbrough, T. G., E-mail - Scarbrough, 9/20/2004 E-Mail Bower, F. L.,

NRC/NRR NRR, to Bower, NRC/RGN-1 RGN-I, re:

Documenting Tl158-MOV-Findings, for the Engineering

_ _ Inspection at VY.

ML043580341 Helton, D. M., E-mail - Helton, RES, 9/22/2004 1E-Mail Wu, C.,

NRC/RES to Wu, NRR, Re: NRC/NRR Comments on Follow-ups from July 21-22 Meeting, on VY EPU Steam Dryer Analysis.

Accession Author Title/Description: Document Document Addressee I Comment Page Number Name/Affiliation: Date Type Addressee Count Affiliation ML043580324 Helton, D. M., E-mail - Helton, RES, 9/23/2004 E-Mail Parks, B. T., 4 NRC/RES to Parks, NRR, re: NRC/NRR Comments on Follow-ups from July 21-22 Meeting, on VY EPU Steam Dryer Analysis.

ML043580330 Parks, B. T., E-mail - Parks, NRR, 9/23/2004 E-Mail Helton, D. M., 3 NRC/NRR to Helton, RES, re: NRC/RES Comments on Follow-ups from July 21-22 Meeting, on VY EPU Steam Dryer Analysis.

ML042710051 Marinos, E. C., LAR to Increase 9/27/2004 Memoranda Howe, A. G., Memorandum 5 NRC/NRRIDE/ Vermont Yankee NRC/NRR/ provides draft input EEIB Reactor Power from DLPM/LPD1 into safety 1593 Mwt to 1912 evaluation MWt. regarding instrumentation and controls.

ML043570412 Ennis, R. B., E-mail - Ennis, NRR, 9/28/2004 E-Mail Lobel, R. M., Message pertains 20 NRC/NRR to Lobel, NRR, re: NRC/NRR to containment Comments re: VY overpressure and State of issue.

Vermont.

Accession Author Title/Description: Document Document Addressee I Comment Page Number Name/Affiliation: Date Type Addressee Count

.__ _Affiliation ML042780185 Dennig, R. L., Safety Evaluation 10/4/2004 Memoranda, Howe, A. G., 4 NRC/NRR/DSSAI Input for Vermont Safety NRC/NRR/

SPSB Yankee Extended Evaluation DLPM Power Uprate (TAC MC0761).

ML043650324 Scarbrough, T. G., E-mail - Thomas 10/5/2004 E-Mail Bower, F. L., 3 NRC/NRR Scarbrough (NRR) to NRC/RGN-1 Fred Bower (Region I) Dated 10/05/04 re:

Vermont Yankee EPU Supplements 16 and 17.

ML050050032 Howe, A. G., E-Mail - Howe, NRR, 10/5/2004 E-Mail Ennis, R. B., 4 NRC/NRR to Ennis, NRR, re: NRC/NRR Briefing for Brian Sheron, on Vermont Yankee Containment Overpressure Issue.

ML043580161 Scarbrough, T. G., E-mail - Scarbrough, 10/5/2004 E-Mail Bower, F. L., 3 NRC/NRR NRR, to Bower, NRC/RGN-1 RGN1, Re: Vermont Yankee EPU Supplements 16 and 17, Commitment on MOV Testing.

Accession Author Title/Description: Document Document Addressee I Comment Page Number Name/Affillation: Date Type Addressee Count Affiliation ML043570305 Ennis, R. B., E-mail - Ennis, NRR, 10/6/2004 E-Mail Malik, S. N., 3 NRC/NRR to Malik, RES, re: NRC/RES Detail Drawings of Modified Steam Dryer for Vermont Yankee Plant.

ML042810511 Dennig, R. L., Safety Evaluation 10/6/2004 Memoranda, Howe, A. G., 12 NRC/NRR Input for Vermont Safety NRC/NRR/

Yankee Nuclear Evaluation DLPM/LPD1 Power Station Technical Specification Proposed Change No. 263, Extended Power Uprate.

ML043580167 Scarbrough, T. G., E-mail - Scarbrough, 10/12/2004 E-Mail Duvigneaud, D. 20 NRC/NRR NRR, to Duvigneaud, D., NRC/NRR NRR, re: Brian Sheron Briefing 10/13/04, on Power Uprate Flow Effects and Steam Dryers. .

Accession Author Title/Description: Document Document Addressee I Comment Page Number Name/Affiliation: Date Type Addressee Count Affiliation ML043570479 Notafrancesco, A., E-mail - 10/1312004 E-Mail Lobel, R. M., 3 NRC/RES Notafrancesco, RES, NRC/NRR to Lobel, NRR, re:

Vermont Yankee Latest Results on Containment LOCA Parameter for NPSH.

ML050050047 Black, S. C., E-mail - Black, NRR, 10/21/2004 E-Mail Sheron, B. W., 2 NRC/NRR to Sheron, NRR, re: NRC/NRR VY and Overpressure, for NPSH When Pumping from Containment.

ML050050044 Lobel, R. M., E-mail - Lobel, NRR, 10/25/2004 E-Mail Black, S. C., 2 NRC/NRR to Black, NRR, re: NRC/NRR VY and Overpressure, for NPSH When Pumping from Containment.

ML043570495 Stutzke, M.A., E-mail - Stutzke, 10/29/2004 E-Mail Lobel, R. M., 2 NRC/NRR NRR, to Lobel, NRR, NRC/NRR re: VY Containment Overpressure Credit

- Another PRA Issue. .

Accession Author TitlelDescription: Document Document Addressee / Comment Page Number NamelAffiliation: Date Type Addressee Count Affiliation ML043570487 Stutzke, M. A., E-mail - Stutzke, 10/29/2004 E-Mail Lobel, R. M., 2 NRC/NRR NRR, to Lobel, NRR, NRC/NRR.

re: VY NPSH Best Estimate Calculation, and PRA Success Criteria.

ML043620006 Dixon-Herrity, J., E-mail - Dixon- 11/1/2004 E-Mail Thatcher, D. F., 4 NRC/NRR Herrity, NRR, to NRC/NRR Thatcher, NRR, re:

EPU Review Standard and Draft SRP 14.2.1 re:

Large-Scale Transient Testing. .

ML043620030 Pederson, R. L., E-mail - Pederson, 11/1/2004 E-Mail Ennis, R. B., 3 NRC/NRR NRR, to Ennis, NRR, NRC/NRR re: Comments on the VY EPU Environmental Assessment.

ML043570309 Ennis, R. B., E-mail - Ennis, NRR, 11/2/2004 E-Mail Jacobson, J. 3 NRC/NRR to Jacobson, NRR, . B., NRC/NRR and Doerflein, RGN1, re: VY SBO, Issue from the Engineering Inspection.

Accession Author Title/Description: Document Document Addressee I/ Comment Number Name/Affiliation: Date Type Addressee Affiliation ML043620020 Lyons, J. E., E-mail - Lyons, NRR, 11/5/2004 E-Mail Duvigneaud, D. 7 NRC/NRR to Duvigneand, NRR, D., NRC/NRR et. al., re:

GENE/GNF-A Analytical Methods Review Update, Concerns with BWR Core Exit Void Conditions.

ML043100510 Jacobson, J. B., Engineering 11/5/2004 Memoranda Lanning, W. D., 9 NRC/NRR/DRIP Inspection NRC/

Preliminary Results. RGN-I/DRS ML050050026 Holden, C. F., E-mail - Holden, 11/7/2004 E-Mail Ennis, R. B., . 4 NRC/NRR NRR, to Ennis, NRR, NRC/NRR re: Vermont Yankee

- Setpoint Methodology.

ML050050104 Hannon, J. N., E-mail - Hannon, 11/9/2004. E-Mail Akstulewicz, F. 3 NRC/NRR NRR, to Akstulewicz, M., NRC/NRR NRR, et. al., re:

Questions on BWR Sump Closure.

ML043150224 Quay, T. R., Vermont Yankee 11/10/2004 Memoranda, Collins, D. S., 7 NRC/NRR/DIPM/ EPU SE Input Safety NRC/NRR/

IPSB Section 2.10. Evaluation DLPM/LPD1 Accession Author Title/Description: Document Document Addressee / Comment Page Number Name/Affiliation: Date Type Addressee Count Affiliation ML043570336 Ennis, R. B., E-mail - Ennis, NRR, 11/16/2004 E-Mail, Pettis, R. L., Transmits draft 5 NRC/NRR to-Pettis, NRR, re: Request for NRC/NRR requests for SPLB - VY EPU Additional . additional RAls Set 3. Information information from (RAI) Plant Systems

._ Branch ML043580301 Helton, D. M., E-mail - Helton, RES, .11/16/2004 E-Mail Wu, C., 6 NRC/RES to Wu, NRR, re: VY NRC/NRR Supplement 20 -

September 29 VY Presentation Slides, Comments on Steam Dryer Analysis.

ML043650345 Snell, M., E-mail - Snell 11/18/2004 E-Mail Barron, C., 3 NRC/RGN-I (Region 1) to Barron NRC/RGN-1 (Region I) and Others Dated 11/18/04 re: VY Final Review.

ML043580173 Scarbrough, T. G., E-mail - Scarbrough, 11/23/2004 E-Mail Koenick, S. S., 15 NRC/NRR NRR, to Koenick, NRC/NRR NRR, re: Background Paper for Commission Briefing, on Power Uprate Flow Effects and Steam Dryers.

Accession Author Title/Description: Document Document Addressee I Comment Page Number Name/Affiliation: Date Type Addressee Count Affiliation ML043380300 Coffin, S. M., Vermont Yankee 11/24/2004 Memoranda, Howe, A. G., This document 15 NRC/NRR/DE/ Nuclear Power Safety NRC/NRR/ provides draft EMCB Station - License Evaluation DLPM/LPD1 safety evaluation Amendment Request input regarding for a 20-Percent structural integrity Extended Power of the reactor Uprate (TAC No. vessel and reactor MC0761). vessel intemals.

ML043370068 Akstulewicz, F. Request for 12/1/2004 Memoranda, Howe, A. G., This documents 2 M., Additional Request for NRC/NRRI includes draft NRC/NRR/DSSA/ Information for the Additional DLPM/LPD1 requests for SRXB Vermont Yankee Information additional Extended Power (RAI) information from Uprate (TAC No. the reactor MC0761).  : systems branch.

ML043620011 Marsh, L. B., E-mail - Marsh, NRR, 12/8/2004 E-Mail Sheron, B. W., 4 NRC/NRR to Sheron, NRR, et. NRC/NRR al., re: Q&A on VY EPU Schedule.

ML043570349 Lobel, R. M., E-mail - Lobel, NRR, 12/15/2004 E-Mail Ennis, R. B., 5 NRC/NRR to Ennis, NRR, re: NRC/NRR Round Two VY RAls, With Edits. .

Accession Author Title/Description: Document Document Addressee / Comment Page Number Name/Affiliation: Date Type Addressee Count Affiliation ML043510174 Jenkins, R. V., Vermont Yankee: 12/15/2004 Memoranda Clifford, J. W., This document 10 NRC/NRR/DE/ Thermal Power NRC/NRRI provides draft EEIB Uprate, Revision 1. DLPM/LPD1 safety evaluation input regarding the electrical system and environmental qualification of electrical components.

ML050070193 Skay, D. M., E-mail - Skay, NRR, 12/21/2004 E-Mail Ennis, R. B., 2 NRC/NRR to Ennis, NRR, re: NRC/NRR 12/21 Teleconference with VY on Steam Dryer Issues.

ML050110201 Ward, L. W., E-mail -Ward, NRR, 12/27/2004 E-Mail Lobel, R. M., 2 NRC/NRR to Lobel, NRR, re: NRC/NRR VY RELAPS Plots, Showing LOCA Break Flow and Energy.

Accession Author Title/Description: Document Document Addressee I Comment Page Number Name/Affiliation: Date Type Addressee Count Affiliation ML050110011 Notafrancesco, A., E-mail - 12/29/2004 E-Mail Lobel, R. M., 6 NRC/RES Notafrancesco, RES NRC/NRR to Lobel, NRR re:

Draft VM Input Using CONTAIN Software to Analyze the Vermont Yankee Containment Response.

ML050070182 Ennis, R. B., E-mail - Ennis, NRR, 1/3/2005 E-Mail Wu, C., 4 NRC/NRR to Wu, NRR, et. al., NRC/NRR re: Proposed VY License Condition, on Steam Dryer Integrity at EPU Power Level.

ML050070186 Sheron, B. W., E-mail - Sheron, 1/3/2005 E-Mail Howe, A. G., 2 NRC/NRR NRR, to Howe, NRR, NRC/NRR et. al., re: Proposed VY License Condition, on Steam Dryer Integrity at EPU Power Level.

Accession Author Title/Description: Document Document Addressee I Comment Page Number Name/Affiliation: Date Type Addressee Count Affiliation ML050070210 Holden, C. F., E-mail - Holden, 1/3/2005 E-Mail Sheron, B. W., 2 NRC/NRR NRR, to Sheron, NRC/NRR NRR, et. al., re:

Proposed VY License Condition, on Steam Dryer Integrity at EPU Power Level.

ML050070205 Scarbrough, T. G., E-mail - Scarbrough, 1/4/2005 E-Mail Ennis, R. B., 2 NRC/NRR NRR, to Ennis, NRR, NRC/NRR re: Proposed VY License Condition, on Steam Dryer Integrity at EPU Power Level. ._._.

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION BEFORE THE ATOMIC SAFETY AND LICENSING BOARD In the Matter of

) Docket No. 50-271 ENTERGY NUCLEAR VERMONT YANKEE LLC AND ENTERGY NUCLEAR ) ASLBP No. 04-832-02-OLA OPERATIONS, INC.

(Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power Station)

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I hereby certify that copies of the Vermont Department of Public Service Motion to Compel Production of Certain NRC Staff Documents in the above captioned proceeding has been served on the following by deposit in the United States Mail, first class, postage prepaid, and where indicated by asterisk by electronic mail this 31s't day of August, 2005.

Alex S. Karlin, Chair* Dr. Anthony J. Baratta*

Administrative Judge Administrative Judge Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel Mail Stop T-3 F23 Mail Stop T-3 F23 U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, DC 20555-0001 Washington, DC 20555-0001 E-mail: ask2(anrc.gov E-mail: aib50nrc.gov Lester S. Rubenstein* Office of the Secretary*

Administrative Judge ATTN: Rulemaking & Adjudications Staff Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel Mail Stop: 0-16 Cl 4270 E. Country Villa Drive U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Tuscon, AZ 85718 Washington, DC 20555-0001 E-mail: lesrrr(comcast.net E-mail: HEARINGDOCKET(nrc.gov Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Office of Commission Appellate Adj.

Mail Stop T-3 F23 Mail Stop 0-16 C1 U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D.C. 20555-0001 Washington, D.C. 20555-0001

Jay E. Silberg, Esq.* Antonio Fernandez, Esq.*

Matias Travieso-Diaz, Esq.* Robert Weisman, Esq.*

Douglas J. Rosinski, Esq. Office of the General Counsel Pillsbury Winthrop Shaw Pittman Mail Stop 0-15 D21 2300 N St., NW U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, DC 20037-1128 Washington, D.C. 20555-0001 iav.silberg(epillsburvlaw.com axf2(a.nrc.gov matias.travieso-diaz(pillsburvlaw.com rnw(inrc.gov douplas.rosinski(inillsburvlaw.com Anthony Z. Roisman, Esq.* Jonathan M. Block, Esq.*

National Legal Scholars Law Firm 94 Main Street 84 East Thetford Rd. P.O. Box 566 Lyme, NH 03768 Putney, VT 05346-0566 aroisman(inationallegaischolars.com ionb~.sover.net Raymond Shadis* John M. Fulton, Esq.*

New England Coalition Assistant General Counsel P.O. Box 98 Entergy Nuclear Operations, Inc.

Shadis Road 440 Hamilton Avenue Edgecomb, ME 04566 White Plains, NY 10601 shadiseprexar.com ifultol QentergV.com Sincerely, Sarah Hofmann Director for Public Advocacy Vermont Department of Public Service 112 State Street - Drawer 20 Montpelier, VT 05620-2601