ML061170058
| ML061170058 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Vermont Yankee  |
| Issue date: | 04/20/2006 |
| From: | Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel |
| To: | |
| Byrdsong A T | |
| References | |
| 50-271-OLA, ASLBP 04-832-02-OLA, RAS 11586 | |
| Download: ML061170058 (23) | |
Text
I - - 9
'-RA5 Official Transcript of Proceedings N4UCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
Title:
Entergy Nuclear Vermont Yankee Pre-Hearing Conference Docket Number: 50-271-OLA; ASLBP No.: 04-832-02-OLA Location: (telephone conference) DOCKETED USNRC April 26, 2006 (11:15am)
OFFICE OF SECRETARY Date: Thursday, April 20, 2006 RULEMAKINGS AND ADJUDICATIONS STAFF Work Order No.: NRC-987 Pages 889-909 NEAL R. GROSS AND CO., INC.
Court Reporters and Transcribers 1323 Rhode Island Avenue, N.W.
Washington, D.C. 20005 (202) 234-4433
-Fem p tafe =-5 c e y - o 3 ,L -SEC~y- oc-.
889 1 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA 2 + + + + +
3 NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION 4 + + + + +
5 ATOMIC SAFETY AND LICENSING BOARD PANEL 6 + + + + +
7 PRE-HEARING CONFERENCE CALL 8 .1 9 In the Matter of: 11 10 ENTERGY NUCLEAR VERMONT 11 Docket No. 50-271-OLA 11 YANKEE L.L.C. II ASLBP No. 04-832-02-OLA 12 NUCLEAR OPERATIONS INC., 1I 13 Applicant. II 14 15 Thursday, April 20, 2006 16 The above-entitled conference was 17 convened, pursuant to notice, at 11:00 a.m.
18 BEFORE:
19 ALEX S. KARLIN, Administrative Law Judge 20 ANTHONY J. BARATTA, Administrative Judge 21 LESTER S. RUBENSTEIN, Administrative Judge 22 23 24
.1.:--2 . .... 5 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON; D.C. 20005-3701 www.neafrg ross.com
890C 1 APPEARANCES:
2 On Behalf of the Licensee:
3 MATIAS E. TRAVIESO-DIAZ, ESQ.
4 of: Pillsbury Winthrop Shaw Pittman 5 2300 N Street.; N.W.
6 Washington, D.C. 20037 7 (202) 663-8142 8
9 On Behalf of Intervenor State of Vermont:
10 ANTHONY Z. ROISMAN, ESQ.
11 of: Hershenson, Carter, Scott & McGee, P.C.
12 P.O. Box 909 13 Norwich, Vermont 05055 14 (802) 295-2800 15 and 16 SARAH HOFFMAN, ESQ.
17 of: Department of Public Service 18 State of Vermont 19 112 State Street - Drawer 20 20 Montpelier, Vermont 05620 21 (802) 828-3088 22 23 24 25 K> )NEAL R.GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.corr
891 1 APPEARANCES (Continued):
2 On Behalf of Intervenor New England Coalition:
3 RAYMOND SHADIS, ESQ.
4 New England Coalition 5 P.O. Box 98 6 Edgecomb, Maine 04556 7 (202) 882-7801 8
9 On Behalf of the Nuclear Regulatory Commission:
10 SHERWIN E. TURK, ESQ.
11 of: Office of the General Counsel 12 U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission 13 Mail Stop 0-15D21 14 Washington, D.C. 20555 15 (301) 415-1533 16 17 ALSO PRESENT:
18 JONATHAN RUND, ASLBP Staff 19 KAREN VALLOCH, ASLBP Staff 20 MARCIA CARPENTIER, ASLBP Staff NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.coro
892 1 P-R-O-C-E-E-D-I-N-G-S K J 2 (11:05 a.m.)
3 JUDGE KARLIN: I think we do have a full.
4 contingent here, and we are on the record. Let me 5 just cite that this is the Atomic Safety had Licensincr 6 Board Panel, docket number 50-271, ASLBP number 7 4-832-02. And it's an operating license amendment.
8 proceeding for the uprate by Entergy.
9 Let me just double-check again. Is there 10 anyone else on the line, members of the public, that 11 sort of thing?
12 (No response.)
13 JUDGE KARLIN: Hearing none, then I won't KLA} 14 go through the basic ground rules with regard to 15 public and press except to reiterate, as the court 16 reporter has said, if we could each try to identify 17 ourselves as we begin speaking, this would be helpful 18 for purposes of the transcript.
19 Here in Rockville, we have Judge Baratta 20 and myself and Jonathan Rund and Marcia Carpentier of 21 Walkers and Lawyers and Karen Valloch, our 22 administrative assistant. Judge Rubenstein is 23 participating by phone from Tucson, Arizona, I 24 believe. You're on, Judge Rubenstein?
25 JUDGE RUBENSTEIN: Yes, I am, and it is --
NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com
89; 1 JUDGE KARLIN: Okay. Good.
.2 JUDGE RUBENSTEIN: -- unlike Phoenix.
3 JUDGE KARLIN: Well, yes. The main 4 purpose of today's call is simply to have a status 5 report and check in on what we think is going to be an 6 going and basically monthly basis.
7 We have, this Board has, no set agenda 8 that I or we think needs to be decided or resolved 9 here today, but we do think a couple of topics we just.
10 might cover briefly. I'll list them. And then if you 11 have, if the parties, have any suggestions or concerns 12 that they think they would like to bring up, please 13 let now be a moment for doing that.
i,5} 14 In terms of topics we think need to be 15 covered briefly, we would talk about the June limited 16 appearance statement proceeding. We will talk briefly 17 about the revised scheduling order. Third would be 18 just to let you know where we are in the scope of the 19 NEC contention 4, the legal scope issue. Fourth, we 20 would just remind people of certain obligations 21 relating to proprietary documents. And, fifth, we 22 will talk briefly about our expectations for the 23 written statements that are now due and initial 24 testimony that are now due on May 17th.
.,. { .,::. :M:
AN.......
25 Are there any other suggestions or J NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.corr.
894 1 concerns that the parties would like to bring up in.
Ka) 2 this call?
MR. TRAVIESO-DIAZ: Mr. Chairman, this is 4 Matias Travieso-Diaz from Entergy. There is one more 5 that I think I would like to have added to the agenda.
6 We have received this morning a proposed new 7 contention by the New England Coalition. I would like 8 to talk briefly about the schedule for responding tc 9 it.
10 JUDGE KARLIN: A proposed new contention?
11 All right. I don't think we have seen that yet, but 12 we'll add that to the agenda if there is no objection.
13 Okay. Anything else that anyone would 14 like to cover on this call or bring up?
15 (No response.)
16 JUDGE KARLIN: Okay. With that, let's 17 proceed. The first item we want to just briefly 18 review is the limited appearance statement in June.
19 This will be the first time we have had limited 20 appearance statements oral statements. And we would 21 just ask each of the parties to confer with their 22 constituents and to make sure that they understand as 23 much as possible the nature of the limited appearance 24 statement proceeding.
- _( And the scope is essentially as the 25 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE.. N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.corr
895 1 uprate. There are other things going on, a lot of 2 other things going on with regard to Entergy 3 apparently. And we are not here, this Board is not 4 able, to deal with any of those other matters. And 5 hopefully the people who participate in June will 6 understand what the scope of our proceeding is.
7 We tried to issue in our notice on this 8 matter some ideas about guidelines for conduct, 9 behavior, signage, this sort of thing. And if you all 10 could help get the word out on those kinds of issues, 11 this would be helpful to us. So we're looking forward 12 to that and think that it will be a good session.
13 The second item we mentioned was the If}' 14 revised scheduling order. We took into consideration 15 your joint motion and extended some of the deadlines 16 and tweaked some of the others. And so we think that 17 the schedule will work.
18 But one thing I did want to say here today 19 that the Board, all Board members, wanted me to 20 mention is developing that schedule, the revised 21 scheduling order, we were very well-aware that there 22 is a renewal proceeding that has been at least noticed 23 for an opportunity for a hearing. And we operated on 24 the assumption that there might be contentions
- .25 proposed or suggested interventions suggested there.
K) NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com
896 1 So we were well-aware of that parallel proceeding that may exist and occur. We are alsc 3 well-aware, of course, that NEC has filed three new 4 contentions in this proceeding.
5 And we do not think that either one of 6 those was going to change our revised scheduling 7
12 order. So that if and when the day comes that a 8 pleading is due, please do not come to us and say, 9 "Well, you may not know it, Mr. Board, but there is 10 another proceeding. And we've got extra work to do" 11 and whatever. We think this proceeding is important.
12 And we hope you will prioritize it accordingly.
13 And we know that there are other 14 proceedings. And that is not going to be a 15 significant factor in changing this, any suggested 16 changes to this, revised scheduling order.
17 Most of the revised scheduling order we 18 still have to work out ultimately, although we don't 19 propose to do it now, the details of the two 20 evidentiary hearings on the four contentions, whether 21 they will be -- which ones will go first, whether or 22 not they need to be open or whether or not they need 23 to be closed if they're going to be open unless they 24 absolutely have to be closed for some portion.
... 25 Right now we're contemplating trying to NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com
897 1 have the evidentiary hearing in a courtroom setting.
2 We have investigated this. And we think there may be 3 a courtroom available that we can borrow for some of 4 that time frame in the Vermont area, in the Newfane.
5 Actually, the Newfane, Windham Superior Court is 6 available to us. And I'm thinking that venue might be!
7 appropriate.
8 So that is all we have to say about the 9 revised scheduling order. With regard to NEC' 10 contention 4, we are working on the ruling on the 11 legal scope. We expect to have something forthcoming 12 to you on that, if not by the end of this week, by the 13 first part of next week. As we noted, that is d) 14 relevant to what you need to submit in the written 15 testimony on the 17th.
16 Questions? Comments? Anything?
17 (No response.)
18 JUDGE KARLIN: All right. Next item, 19 proprietary documents. We just want to recognize that 20 under the protective order, as I think we've pointed 21 out in the revised scheduling order, the time frame 22 for any objections that might be made to claims that 23 some document is proprietary, I think the date we 24 calculated, May 5th, except under some extraordinary
.(.- 25 circumstances, we hope that there will not be problems NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com
89E 1 associated with claims of proprietary documents.
K 2 We further hope that the proprietary 3 documents will be minimal because this would allow the!
4 proceeding to be as public, open to the public, as 5 possible. Just keep that in mind. We're standing by 6 for anything that might come in on that in early May.
7 Finally, in the written statements and.
8 testimony that you are going to be filing in May anc.
9 then rebuttal in June, I guess, one minor point and.
10 one more substantive point.
11 The minor point, the Privacy Act police 12 around here have told us that we ought to avoid, ask 13 you to avoid, incorporating any individual's Social 14 Security number or any privacy type of information 15 about that individual in their resumes.
16 Let's say you've got a witness who is 17 going to be giving us a resume to support, if we can 18 avoid Social Security numbers? We don't need their 19 home phone number or even their home address probably.
20 Just exclude that kind of Privacy Act information, and 21 it will save us some problems or Privacy Act police 22 some problems.
23 That's a minor point. For the more 24 substantive one, I will turn to Judge Baratta and ask 25 him to help us focus this.
K)i NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com
899 1 JUDGE BARATTA: Yes. We discussed, some 2 of the Board members, what points we might like to 3 hear, particularly with respect to NEC contention 3.
4 This is in addition to whatever testimony you want to submit, of course, that you feel is pertinent to your 6 position.
7 For the Board's purposes, we wanted to 8 make sure that that covered significant points that we 9 would like to hear about. As kind of a preamble, at; 10 the October prehearing conference on the contention, 11 there was some discussion with respect to things such 12 as confidence in the modeling and computer modelincr 13 and the kind of programs to try to assimilate the 14 stress of the large transient testing and also with 15 respect to being carefully measured, all of the inputE.
16 and the results, as well as being able to justify 17 particular calculations and such and whether or not.
18 those calculations would be sufficient to predict 19 failures of steam dryers and other instrumentation.
20 problems or other problems with instrumentation being 21 swept away and pipe breaks and such.
22 This we felt was clarification that the 23 NEC provided as to what their contention was directed 24 towards. As a result, the Board feels that a number
. W....
e1 25 of points should be addressed in connection with the L, - NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.corr.
90(
1 NEC 3 contention.
K) 2 We would like, for example -- there is 3 quite a bit of talk about the computer code ODIN which 4 apparently was used to analyze the transients and that:
5 the analysis predicts the kind of behavior experienced 6 in other plants. I think at one point there was 7 discussion of overseas plants as well as U.S. plants.
8 It would really be helpful if the parties 9 could provide any details on the ODIN code and the 10 basis for that statement that was made by Entergy.
11 Similarly, codes such as ODIN are often 12 divided into design codes and what are referred to as 13 best estimate codes. And generally design codes are K 14 written to include certain conservatisms that may in 15 some cases overprotect various parameters so as to 16 make sure those results bound plants.
17 Best estimate codes, on the other hand, 18 tend to be written using correlations and assumptions 19 that are intended, really, to enable and to predict.
20 with a high degree of fidelity the actual plant.
21 behavior.
22 We would be interested in understanding 23 which class of codes that ODIN code belongs to and 24 what impact that has in obtaining the realistic X 25 predictions of plant behavior during the two subject:
NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.coni
903.
1 transients that are the subject of this contention.
2 Also, codes that are argued in the 3 industry tend to undergo defensive and ongoing 4 assessment. And usually such assessments are done by 5 comparison to code with predictions to both actual.
6 plant data as well as predictions of similar codes.
7 We would be interested in a discussion of 8 the assessment process that ODIN underwent and whether 9 or not ODIN was assessed for a facility to predict the 10 types of transients that are of concern, namely the 11 load rejection transient and the MSIV closure 12 transient.
13 With respect to the load rejection.
14 transient, we would be particularly interested in 15 hearing if the code were assessed against the recent 16 NEA -- that's Nuclear Energy Agency -- Peach Bottom 17 turbine trip transient benchmark exercise and if so, 18 basically how the results compared.
19 We would like to get at some sort of a 20 summary of the assessments that have been performed 21 and the summary of the results from those assessments 22 and conclusions that one would draw from those 23 assessments as the ability of the ODIN code to predict 24 such things.
25 Another point that we would like to have NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com
902 1 addressed was -- I'm going to quote from the K2 transcript here. Mr. Shadis noted that they needed tc 3 "try to simulate the stress of large transient 4 testing."
5 The Board is interested in how the 6 calculations of the mechanical stress on components 7 such as stream dryers, MSIV, main steam line, et 8 cetera, during a transient under uprate conditions 9 were performed. We would be particularly interested 10 in the nature and type of social effects analyses of 11 systems components that were affected were performed 12 in order to pick how such effect might occur and lead 13 to cycle fatigue or over-stressing components during 14 the MSIV closure or for a load rejection transient.
15 Also, Mr. Diaz, I think it was, discussed 16 the turbine trip test performed in the October 17 prehearing conference. And he stated that the plant
.:. .18 basically performed as it was supposed to. It would 19 be helpful to us to understand what the test results 20 were compared to and have the comparison include a 21 comparison to ODIN or other codes and also any s 22 measurements that were made for stress or vibration 23 during these transients and how they compared with the 24 pre-test and post-test analyses that were done.
- .: 25 Finally, for the Board in understanding NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com
903 1 the position that produced the most significant and 2 structural impacts, it would be helpful to have a 3 discussion comparing those effects during normal 4 operations at the operating condition and during an 5 MSIV closure and a load rejection transient. We think 6 that this would be very enlightening to helping us 7 assess this particular contention.
8 The other Board members, do you have 9 anything to add?
10 JUDGE KARLIN: No, no. I don't.
11 JUDGE RUBENSTEIN: No. That was pretty 12 complete.
13 MR. TRAVIESO-DIAZ: This is Mat K) 14 Travieso-Diaz for Entergy.
15 Could you please repeat your last point of 16 interest?
17 JUDGE BARATTA: Okay. Yes, sure.
18 Basically we would be interested in understanding the 19 conditions, whether it's normal operation for the 20 transients that are the subject produced in most 21 significant structural effects in the various 22 components, primarily in the steam system.
23 In other words, one way to think about it 24 might be if you have a high stress for a long period 25 of time, there is a classic phenomenon called creep NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.corr
904 1 that occurs. Is that limiting?
12 Well, that is going to occur predominantly 3 during our operations or during a transient, you may 4 have a very high peak stress, but it's only for a very 5 short time and then might cause some over-.stress 6 conditions very briefly, which might not be very 7 damaging or may be very damaging.
8 In other words, which is the more limitino 9 condition overall to take into account?
10 MR. TRAVIESO-DIAZ: Thank you very much.
11 JUDGE KARLIN: Okay. Thank you.
12 Yes. I think those are words to the wise 13 in terms of what we hope to see in the written Q1 1 testimony and the direct and the rebuttal and for 15 witnesses to be prepared to and to address those so 16 that when we have the oral conferences, if we have 17 further questions, those experts will be available to 18 ask and to answer those questions.
19 With that, I think there probably isn't 20 anything else except to discuss the item Mr. Diaz has 21 added to the agenda, which is a proposed new 22 contention, Mr. Diaz?
23 MR. TRAVIESO-DIAZ: Yes. Mr. Chairman, if 24 I may, when I arrived at the office this morning, I
- .. (.......25 noticed an e-mail from Mr. Shadis raising a proposed NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com
905 1 new contention by NEC.
2 And a quick panicky look on my calendar 3 made me realize that responses to that contention 4 under the typical 25-day rule will be the May 15th, 5 which is 2 days prior to the filing of the significant 6 testimony on status of position that the parties have 7 to submit.
8 And I was hoping that the first responder 9 would move the due date for responses to that new 10 contention to something like ten days to allow us to 11 focus fully on the testimony that is before us and not 12 be averted by having to respond to that contention.
13 JUDGE KARLIN: Well, we have not seen the 14 document, the proposed new contention -- I haven't --
15 that you're referring to. Mr. Shadis, have you filed 16 this or is this just an informal e-mail with Entergy?
17 MR. SHADIS: No, sir. We filed electronic 18 service on the parties and the Board. And we are 19 putting the hard copy in the mail today.
20 JUDGE RUBENSTEIN: This is Judge 21 Rubenstein. I received my copy by e-mail this 22 morning.
23 MR. TURK: This is Sherwin Turk. I've not 24 seen it yet, and I checked my e-mail just before 25 coming to the conference call.
.. m NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE.. N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com II
906) 1 JUDGE KARLIN: Yes. Well, neither Judge 2 Baratta or I or Jonathan Rund or Marcia Carpentier 3 have received that, Mr. Shadis. You need to, if you 4 would, double check and be much more careful because 5 we're not receiving these things.
6 And I check my e-mail. We all checked our 7 e-mail just ten minutes ago, before we walked in here.
8 MR. SHADIS: Truly? Well, I don't have!
9 any explanation for that except that we will do a 10 resend. And, as I said, the hard copy will be going 11 into the mail.
12 And other than that, in terms of what Mr.
13 Travieso-Diaz suggests, I have no problem with 14 extending the time to respond.
15 JUDGE KARLIN: You're looking -- okay.
16 Now, let me see if I understand this, Mr. Diaz.
17 You're looking for an extension in time to respond to 18 the proposed new contention?
19 MR. TRAVIESO-DIAZ: Yes. By my 20 calculation, the response will be due on May 15th.
21 And I would like to request that it be moved to May 22 25th just to allow sufficient time to address it 23 fully.
24 JUDGE KARLIN: May 15?
25 MR. TRAVIESO-DIAZ: May 15 is a Monday.
COURT NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.com
9071 1 And this will be, we're suggesting, due on Thursday, 2 the 25th. Particularly, we don't ask for extensions 3 unless it's necessary, but in this case, there is a 4 real serious conflict.
5 JUDGE KARLIN: Okay. Well, we'll take 6 those into consideration. Let's think about it for e.
7 minute here. I mean, as I said at the outset, we are 8 not enthused about changing our schedule in light of 9 these other things, but we want to be reasonable. Mr.
10 Shadis or Mr. Roisman can file all the new contentions 11 they want to file, and it's not going to change our 12 schedule here.
13 Let's just look at that. Let me talk with K) 14 Judge Baratta here for a minute.
15 MR. TURK: Your Honor, this is Sherwin 16 Turk.
17 JUDGE KARLIN: Yes?
18 MR. TURK: As I understand it, Mr. Diaz is 19 not asking to change your schedule for filing 20 testimony. He's asking to change the time for 21 responding to a new contention.
22 JUDGE KARLIN: Right. I understand that.
23 MR. TURK: I would join him in that. Ever.
24 without seeing the contention, I know we will be very 25 busy. We will be responding to the other three NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.corr,
908E 1 contentions on the 1st of May. And on the 17th, we t, 0 2 will be filing testimony. So we will be very busy 3 with all of these other tasks up until the 17th.
4 So I would appreciate also an opportunity 5 to respond to the new contention that we haven't seen 6 yet during the following week, hopefully on May 25th.
7 JUDGE KARLIN: Right. One of the things 8 we are going to take into consideration is when is the 9 Board going to be busy. And we don't want to create 10 a train wreck in terms of the Board having to deal 11 with ruling on proposed new contentions and at the 12 same time preparing for the hearing.
13 If we can accommodate your concerns Q-zi ~14 without creating a train wreck somewhere else in the 15 schedule, I mean, I think that's the thought process 16 we have to go through.
17 If you will hold on a moment? I'm not.
18 sure whether we're going to be able to rule on that ir.
19 the phone here right now. Judge Rubenstein is at a.
20 distance. But just hold for a moment, if you would.
21 (Pause.)
22 JUDGE KARLIN: We're back on the record 23 here. Can you hear us, Mr. Diaz?
24 MR. TRAVIESO-DIAZ: Yes.
25 JUDGE KARLIN: Okay. I think what I would I 0 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.coni
909 like to do is take this under advisement. We're not K) 2 in a position to rule right now, but we're willing tc 3 accommodate some time frame here if it does not 4 otherwise create a crunch in terms of our ability tc 5 handle the hearing in this proceeding and the 6 contentions that have been admitted so far.
7 So, with that, why don't we take a look at 8 the filing? And if you would file something short 9 today, Mr. Diaz, or tomorrow, we'll rule by Monday one 10 way or the other.
11 MR. TRAVIESO-DIAZ: Yes. Thank you very 12 much, sir.
13 JUDGE KARLIN: Thank you.
. i 14 Anything else that anyone thinks we need.
15 to cover in the conference call today?
16 (No response.)
17 JUDGE KARLIN: Okay. Great. Well, I 18 appreciate your time and attention here. I think we 19 have now scheduled our next conference call for May --
20 what is it? -- May 23rd. And so we'll look forward to 21 talking to you at that time.
22 With that, I am going to adjourn the call.
23 Thank you very much for participating.
-. 4 24 (Whereupon, the foregoing matter was 25 concluded at 11:33 a.m.)
NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrgross.con l
CERTIFICATE This is to certify that the attached proceedings before the United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission in the matter of:
Name of Proceeding: Entergy Nuclear Vermont Yankee, LLC and Entergy Nuclear Operations, Inc.
Pre-hearing Conference Docket Number: 50-271-OLA and ASLBP No.04-832-02-OLA
< Location: Via teleconference were held as herein appears, and that this is the original transcript thereof for the file of the United.
States Nuclear Regulatory Commission taken by me and, thereafter reduced to typewriting by me or under the direction of the court reporting company, and that the transcript is a true and accurate record of the foregoing proceedings.
Michael Kocher Official Reporter Neal R. Gross & Co., Inc.
t<... .
NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1323 RHODE ISLAND AVE., N.W.
(202) 234.4433 WASHINGTON. D.C. 20005-3701 www.nealrqross.corn
-