ML22215A231
| ML22215A231 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Palisades, Big Rock Point File:Consumers Energy icon.png |
| Issue date: | 08/03/2022 |
| From: | Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel |
| To: | |
| SECY RAS | |
| References | |
| 50-155-LT-2, 50-255-LT-2, 72-007-LT-2, 72-043-LT-2, License Transfer, NRC-2049, Palisades & Big Rock Point-LT-2, RAS 56433 | |
| Download: ML22215A231 (20) | |
Text
Official Transcript of Proceedings NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
Title:
Entergy Nuclear Operations, et al.
Docket Number:
50-255-LT-2, 50-155-LT-2, 72-007-LT, 72-043-LT-2 ASLBP Number:
22-974-01-LT-BD01 Location:
teleconference Date:
Wednesday, July 27, 2022 Work Order No.:
NRC-2049 Pages 1-19 NEAL R. GROSS AND CO., INC.
Court Reporters and Transcribers 1716 14th Street, N.W.
Washington, D.C. 20009 (202) 234-4433
1 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA 1
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION 2
+ + + + +
3 ATOMIC SAFETY AND LICENSING BOARD PANEL 4
+ + + + +
5 HEARING 6
x 7
In the Matter of: : Docket Nos.
8 ENTERGY NUCLEAR OPERATIONS, INC.,: 50-255-LT-2 9
ENTERGY NUCLEAR PALISADES, LLC, : 50-155-LT-2 10 HOLTEC INTERNATIONAL, AND HOLTEC : 72-007-LT 11 DECOMMISSIONING INTERNATIONAL, : 72-043-LT-2 12 LLC :
13 (Palisades Nuclear Plant and : ASLBP No.
14 Big Rock Point Site) : 22-974-01-LT-BD01 15
x 16 Wednesday, July 27, 2022 17 18 Teleconference 19 20 BEFORE:
21 PAUL S. RYERSON, Presiding Officer 22 23 24 25 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1716 14th STREET, N.W., SUITE 200 (202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20009-4309 www.nealrgross.com
2 APPEARANCES:
1 2
Counsel for the Petitioner 3
Michael Moody, Esq.
4 Joel King, Esq.
5 of:
Michigan Department of Attorney General 6
525 W. Ottawa St.
7 Lansing, MI 48906 8
moodym2@michigan.gov 9
On Behalf of the Nuclear Regulatory Commission 10 Jeremy Wachutka, Esq.
11 Anita Ghosh Nabor, Esq.
12 of:
U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission 13 Office of the General Counsel 14 Mail Stop O-14A44 15 Washington, DC 20555-0001 16 jeremy.watchutka@nrc.gov 17 On Behalf of Holtec International 18 Alan Lovett, Esq.
19 Jason Tompkins, Esq.
20 of:
Balch & Bingham LLP 21 1710 Sixth Avenue North 22 Birmingham, AL 35203-2015 23 alovett@balch.com 24 25 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1716 14th STREET, N.W., SUITE 200 (202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20009-4309 www.nealrgross.com
3 Jason Day, Esq.
1 General Counsel and Corporate Secretary 2
of:
Holtec Decommissioning International 3
1 Holtec Boulevard 4
Camden, NJ 08104 5
6 On Behalf of Entergy Nuclear Operations, Inc.
7 David R. Lewis, Esq.
8 Anne R. Leidich, Esq.
9 of:
Pillsbury Winthrop Shaw Pittman LLP 10 1200 Seventeenth Street, NW 11 Washington, D.C. 20036 12 david.lewis@pillsburylaw.com 13 14 Susan Raimo, Esq.
15 of:
Entergy Services, LLC 16 101 Constitution Avenue, NW 17 Washington, D.C. 20001 18 sraimo@entergy.com 19 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1716 14th STREET, N.W., SUITE 200 (202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20009-4309 www.nealrgross.com
4 P R O C E E D I N G S 1
2:00 p.m.
2 JUDGE RYERSON: Good afternoon everyone.
3 This is Judge Ryerson. We are here on a conference 4
call concerning the Michigan Attorney General's 5
challenge to Holtec's acquisition from Entergy of the 6
Palisades Nuclear Plant in the Big Rock Point Site.
7 On October 15, as you probably all know, 8
the Commission identified four very specific issues 9
for hearing before a single administrative judge as 10 presiding officer. My responsibilities as presiding 11 officer are limited to compiling the hearing record of 12 these four issues, ruling on motions related to 13 developing the factual record, presiding at any oral 14 hearing if we have one, and certifying the completed 15 hearing record to the Commission. Thereafter, the 16 Commission will issue a decision on the certified 17 record.
18 Before we take appearances, just a couple 19 of administrative matters. Please identify yourself 20 when speaking. It will make life much easier for the 21 reporter. This proceeding is being transcribed and a 22 transcript will be available on the NRC website in a 23 few days. We've also made available listen-only 24 telephone lines for the public so that interested 25 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1716 14th STREET, N.W., SUITE 200 (202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20009-4309 www.nealrgross.com
5 members can follow along in real time.
1 With that, let's get appearances. Who do 2
we have for the state of Michigan today?
3 MR. MOODY: Thank you, Your Honor. This 4
is Michael Moody from the Michigan Attorney General's 5
Office. I also have with me Joel King from our 6
office.
7 JUDGE RYERSON: Okay. Thank you and 8
welcome.
9 Holtec International and Holtec 10 Decommissioning International, LLC. Do I have that 11 right?
12 MR. LOVETT: Thank you, Your Honor. Yes, 13 you do. This is Alan Lovett of Balch & Bingham for 14 Holtec International and Holtec Decommissioning 15 International. With me on the phone is my colleague 16 Jason Tompkins also of Balch & Bingham. And then 17 general counsel for Holtec Decommissioning 18 International Mr. Jason Day.
19 JUDGE RYERSON: Thank you. Welcome to 20 you.
21 And Entergy Nuclear Operations, Inc. and 22 Entergy Nuclear Palisades, LLC. Who do we have today?
23 MR. LEWIS: Good afternoon, Judge Ryerson.
24 This is David Lewis from Pillsbury Winthrop Shaw 25 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1716 14th STREET, N.W., SUITE 200 (202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20009-4309 www.nealrgross.com
6 Pittman. Also on the line is Anne Leidich. We 1
represent Entergy. In addition, Susan Raimo who is 2
the Associate General Counsel for Entergy is on the 3
line.
4 JUDGE RYERSON: Okay. Thank you and 5
welcome.
6 Now, the NRC staff, of course, has yet to 7
decide whether they will be a party. I think 8
regardless the Commission has directed your 9
participation at a minimum on certain issues and 10 invited your participation on other issues. Who do we 11 have for the NRC staff today?
12 MR. WACHUTKA: Good afternoon, Your Honor.
13 This is Jeremy Wachutka from the NRC Office of General 14 Counsel representing the NRC staff. I am joined by 15 Anita Ghosh Nabor and Lois Room.
16 JUDGE RYERSON: Okay. Thank you and 17 welcome. By the way, do you have an impression as to 18 whether you are going to join as a full party or are 19 you going to defer that until Monday?
20 MR. WACHUTKA: The NRC staff hasn't made 21 that determination yet, Your Honor. We will 22 definitely inform you and the parties before or by 23 Monday, August 1st.
24 JUDGE RYERSON: Sure. Okay. You're 25 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1716 14th STREET, N.W., SUITE 200 (202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20009-4309 www.nealrgross.com
7 entitled.
1 Let's see. Before we take up the issues 2
that we identified in the hearing notice, let me talk 3
first about the joint motion that I think came in last 4
Friday for an extension of time. As you know, the 5
Commission has encouraged the presiding officer to 6
adhere to the Subpart M model milestone to the extent 7
practicable. Strictly speaking, the milestones would 8
seem to call for the beginning of a hearing in mid-9 October which is about the time the parties proposed 10 to provide initial disclosures.
11 I think the Commission was well aware of 12 the date. The only real fact mentioned in the motion 13 was the closing of the license transfer transaction on 14 June 28th. Again, I think the Commission was well 15 aware of that. I think they mentioned it in Footnote 16
- 7. Perhaps the parties would like to provide a little 17 more explanation of why the initial delay is 18 necessary.
19 I turn to you first, Mr. Lovett. I think 20 you would probably have the initial lead on the four 21 issues that the Commission has identified. Would you 22 care to comment?
23 MR. LOVETT: Thank you, Your Honor. This 24 is Alan Lovett for the Holtec applicants. I'd be 25 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1716 14th STREET, N.W., SUITE 200 (202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20009-4309 www.nealrgross.com
8 happy to comment. As you know, obviously, this sort 1
of license transfer has already occurred, as indicated 2
in the Commission's order. The Michigan Attorney 3
General has not challenged the Holtec applicant's 4
technical wherewithal to decommission the plan, nor 5
does that relate to any of the issues admitted for 6
hearing.
7 Obviously sort of the meat of the matter 8
is to be potentially put to hearing and is financial 9
in nature. Given the schedule that the Holtec 10 applicant submitted in their initial LTA application, 11 or alongside their initial LTA application, which was 12 filed back in December of 2020, wholesale sort of full 13 decommissioning activity ostensibly at which the 14 financial concerns raised by the Attorney General 15 might occur, would not happen until 2036 based on the 16 PSDAR filed by the parties in December 2020.
17 Given that the transaction is closed and, 18 as we said, obviously the Commission was aware of 19 that, I mean, our view is it was worth our collective 20 time with the consultation with the Attorney General 21 to have some early discussion about ways to 22 potentially limit the scheduled issues for hearing 23 and/or potentially enter into some negotiations.
24 In full candor we are still sort of having 25 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1716 14th STREET, N.W., SUITE 200 (202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20009-4309 www.nealrgross.com
9 these discussions to kind of feel out whether that is 1
a viable option. In the interest of respecting the 2
parties' resources, we didn't want to start producing 3
extensive discovery until we at least had the 4
opportunity for an early discussion.
5 JUDGE RYERSON: All right. Thank you, Mr.
6 Lovett.
7 Entergy. I suppose you're the seller now 8
and you perhaps still have a lot at stake. Any 9
further comments from Entergy?
10 MR. LEWIS: Only that we are very 11 supportive of providing the opportunity to Holtec and 12 the Attorney General's office to have discussions and 13 see if they can resolve matters that follows in the 14 interest of the parties and of the NRC. I think this 15 motion would further that. This is Mr. Lewis.
16 JUDGE RYERSON: Thank you, Mr. Lewis.
17 All right. Mr. Moody, I suppose you have 18 a great an interest as anyone in the prompt 19 adjudication of your claims. I take it you're 20 comfortable with this two-month extension.
21 MR. MOODY: Yes, that's correct, Your 22 Honor. The Attorney General in talking with Holtec's 23 attorneys we believe an effective and efficient use of 24 time might be to talk among the parties and see if we 25 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1716 14th STREET, N.W., SUITE 200 (202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20009-4309 www.nealrgross.com
10 can resolve potentially some of these things. We're 1
early stages but we thought it might be just a waste 2
of a lot of resources so to push this along quickly 3
and maybe we can come together.
4 JUDGE RYERSON: Okay. Thank you. And, 5
again, the NRC staff, not yet a party, but does not 6
oppose. Am I correct?
7 MR. WACHUTKA: This is Jeremy Wachutka.
8 You are correct, Your Honor.
9 JUDGE RYERSON: Okay. Thank you.
10 Well, let's put off a decision on that.
11 Obviously it's a joint motion. We encourage joint 12 motions and agreements. I did want to get perhaps the 13 context of how we might be going forward if there's a 14 two month extension.
15 Why don't we turn back to the issues that 16 we identified in the hearing notice, the Notice of 17 Call. First, do you parties contemplate asking for a 18 written hearing? All you need to do is have one 19 objection, I believe, under the rule. Let me turn to 20 you, Mr. Lovett.
21 MR. LOVETT: Thank you, Your Honor. We've 22 actually talked with Entergy and the Attorney General.
23 I think our collective preference is to do an oral 24 hearing.
25 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1716 14th STREET, N.W., SUITE 200 (202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20009-4309 www.nealrgross.com
11 JUDGE RYERSON: All right. And if there's 1
a hearing, an oral hearing, I know it may be early but 2
any projection of the length? I must say these 3
Subpart M hearings are not high drama. They're 4
basically questions from the presiding officer to the 5
witnesses there would be. I guess there are four 6
different issues. Any projection of two days, one 7
day, three days? Any thoughts about that at this 8
point?
9 MR. LOVETT: Your Honor, I mean, with the 10 caveat that it's a complete swag at this point, our 11 best guess is two days. We're still obviously 12 developing sort of who would be a witness and how much 13 pre-trial testimony would there be for these issues.
14 Of course, that will drive how long the questioning 15 will take.
16 JUDGE RYERSON:
Right.
Very 17 understandable. The third question that we ask, where 18 if there is a hearing might it be? Obviously today we 19 can probably, especially with financial issues, do it 20 remotely, virtually, or here in the NRC's hearing 21 room. Let me turn to the Office of the Michigan 22 Attorney General on that point.
23 Would you have a preference for holding it 24 in Michigan if that were possible?
25 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1716 14th STREET, N.W., SUITE 200 (202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20009-4309 www.nealrgross.com
12 MR. MOODY: I didn't think that was a 1
possibility but that would be -- from the Attorney 2
General's point of view obviously that would be 3
preferable. We're somewhat flexible. We do a lot of 4
Public Service Commission hearings virtually so we 5
know how to do that. We're not exactly sure how the 6
NRC process would work virtually.
7 We're used to this kind of uploading 8
process. You know, you have -- I think we do a Teams 9
type situation. We're flexible but live sometimes 10 does work easier with documents and witnesses, people.
11 We in Michigan so that would be great. We're 12 flexible. Let me put it that way.
13 JUDGE RYERSON: Okay. I probably should 14 interject that my preference -- I mean, the rules are 15 flexible in terms of whether a witness who files 16 written testimony absolutely needs to be present. My 17 own preference would be that they should be. I guess 18 that's a factor as well.
19 Mr. Lovett, how do you feel about either 20 coming to the NRC or virtual hearing?
21 MR. LOVETT: I think both Holtec and 22 Entergy would sort of prefer to do it live in 23 Rockville. We're certainly happy to travel to 24 Michigan as well to accommodate travel if it comes to 25 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1716 14th STREET, N.W., SUITE 200 (202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20009-4309 www.nealrgross.com
13 that, but our first preference would be to do it at 1
the NRC.
2 JUDGE RYERSON: Yeah, okay. While 3
sometimes the NRC staff -- well, you're not even a 4
party yet. Sometimes the NRC staff has expressed a 5
neutral feeling. I'm sure that there's no objection 6
from the staff to do it here in Rockville.
7 MR. WACHUTKA: This is Jeremy Wachutka 8
from the NRC staff. We will have a sponsoring witness 9
even if we are a non party. The NRC staff would 10 prefer in-person and is neutral as to where NRC 11 Headquarters are within the vicinity of Palisades.
12 NRC staff would be fine with either of those options.
13 JUDGE RYERSON: I didn't quite hear you.
14 Which option?
15 MR. WACHUTKA: Either NRC headquarters or 16 within the vicinity of Palisades in Michigan.
17 JUDGE RYERSON: I see. Okay. Well, if 18 there's a hearing, I take it the Office of the 19 Attorney General is not opposed to traveling to 20 Rockville. Do you have a budget for that?
21 MR. MOODY: No, Your Honor. We could 22 travel to D.C. -- Rockville. I'm sorry.
23 JUDGE RYERSON: Yeah. All right. I am 24 personally leaning towards here in Rockville because, 25 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1716 14th STREET, N.W., SUITE 200 (202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20009-4309 www.nealrgross.com
14 again, even the post-COVID age of minimal travel is 1
kind of desirable. Let me think about that.
2 The fourth issue that we identified in the 3
hearing notice would be the scheduling of specific 4
components of the hearing. I must say I am inclined 5
to granting your unopposed motion if, in fact, the 6
parties can comply with, say, a two to three-month 7
hearing schedule that's contemplated by the model 8
milestones.
9 In other
- words, with the initial 10 disclosures on October 14th basically there are 11 somewhat different schedules actually on the 12 regulations and the model milestones but there's 13 basically a sense that there ought to be two to three 14 months thereafter after the initial disclosures.
15 I guess I'm wondering is that consistent 16 with what the parties envision? If you joint motion 17 is granted, that would put us in a time frame of 18 either two months, roughly mid-December or three 19 months, roughly mid-January. Again, let me ask Mr.
20 Lovett because you have probably the initial laboring 21 ore on these issues. Is that something you 22 contemplate if the motion is granted? In other words, 23 two to three months for the beginning of a year.
24 MR. LOVETT: Thank you, Your Honor. This 25 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1716 14th STREET, N.W., SUITE 200 (202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20009-4309 www.nealrgross.com
15 is Alan Lovett for the Holtec applicants. In full 1
candor we have talked a little bit internally and 2
obviously we are going to need to coordinate with 3
everybody's sort of schedules. You said if you kind 4
of kick out the natural progression if you do grant 5
our motion to have initial disclosure on October 14th.
6 By my math we would have started sort of 7
roughly the first week or second week of January.
8 After a little bit of internal discussion our ideal 9
situation would be to start a hearing in February 10 which I understand would be a little bit outside of 11 sort of the window that you just talked through but 12 mostly to avoid sort of witness crunch over the 13 holidays.
14 Again, I say that with the caveat that 15 while I think we may have indicated that to Mr. Moody 16 in the AG's office, yeah, we certainly haven't talked 17 at length about when sort of an optimal hearing might 18 occur from the AG's perspective.
19 The one thing I'll add in the interest of 20
-- along these lines is that my hope would be, you 21 know, obviously once we kind of know staff's 22 preference that the parties might get together and 23 propose, you know, a little bit more granular schedule 24 for your consideration, as well as probably pretty 25 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1716 14th STREET, N.W., SUITE 200 (202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20009-4309 www.nealrgross.com
16 standard sort of joint motion on what those initial 1
disclosures are going to look like.
2 JUDGE RYERSON: Yeah.
3 Mr. Moody, is that somewhat consistent 4
with your view that there might be a deferral of an 5
oral hearing until February?
6 MR. MOODY: That's correct, Your Honor.
7 Thank you.
8 JUDGE RYERSON: Okay. Here is what I 9
propose. Why don't the parties, and I don't mean to 10 leave you out, Entergy, but I think probably the two 11 laboring parties will mostly be Holtec and the 12 Attorney General. Why don't you propose, if you can, 13 a schedule that has the principal dates in it.
14 Assuming that there's disclosures initial 15 disclosures October 14.
16 I think a combination of the rules and the 17 model milestones involve initial statements of 18 position, direct testimony, and exhibits. That's the 19 first stage. The next stage is written response and 20 rebuttal testimony and exhibits and proposed questions 21 for the presiding officer to ask. The third stage is 22 proposed questions addressed to the rebuttal 23 testimony.
24 The last time we had an emiary at the 25 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1716 14th STREET, N.W., SUITE 200 (202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20009-4309 www.nealrgross.com
17 ASLBP, which was I think six or eight years ago, there 1
was a provision allowing written concluding statements 2
of positions prior to the oral hearing. That's not in 3
the rules but I think the parties agreed to that. It 4
might be optional.
5 Then there's an oral hearing and then 6
clearly under the rules, a written post hearing 7
statement of position within 20 days of the close of 8
hearing and the presiding officers certification to 9
the Commission just five days after that.
10 Do you think that you could outline those 11 broad issues, broad progress, say starting in -- well, 12 targeting an oral hearing in February. Is that 13 something that would be worthwhile for you, Mr.
14 Lovett?
15 MR. LOVETT: Yes, Your Honor. We've 16 already sort of got a starting version of that just 17 working internally and we're happy to circle up with 18 the AG's office and then, I suppose, staff as well if 19 they decide they are going to be a full party to put 20 something on the docket for you.
21 JUDGE RYERSON: Okay. And that would be 22 okay with Mr. Moody?
23 MR. MOODY: Yes, Your Honor. Thank you.
24 JUDGE RYERSON: Okay. I take it there is 25 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1716 14th STREET, N.W., SUITE 200 (202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20009-4309 www.nealrgross.com
18 no objection from the staff at this point?
1 MR. WACHUTKA: No objection from the NRC 2
staff.
3 JUDGE RYERSON: Okay. Again, no objection 4
from Entergy to that proposal?
5 MR. LEWIS: No objection.
6 JUDGE RYERSON: Okay. All right. How 7
long do you think you would take to outline a 8
proposal? Ideally a joint proposal.
9 MR. LOVETT: Your Honor, this is Alan 10 Lovett for the Holtec applicants. I think -- I mean, 11 I think we can have something to you to give staff 12 time to digest it. Maybe by the 5th which would be 13 the end of next week we can certainly align -- try to 14 align earlier than that. I just want to make sure the 15 staff has an opportunity to consider it as well.
16 JUDGE RYERSON: Okay, yeah. Again, it's 17 not a very complicated schedule. Let's target that.
18 I'm really optimistic you can all agree on a schedule.
19 If you can't, certainly after that date submit 20 competing schedules but I'm pretty optimistic you can 21 agree on a schedule.
22 And I really don't think -- on good faith 23 I will issue an order granting the motion. Obviously 24 if the parties can't agree, we'll just issue a 25 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1716 14th STREET, N.W., SUITE 200 (202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20009-4309 www.nealrgross.com
19 scheduling order at some point. I don't think there 1
is really a need for any direction at this point 2
beyond what we've just stated. I will grant the 3
motion, the joint motion.
4 All right. Is there anything else we 5
should be talking about today?
6 Mr. Moody?
7 MR. MOODY: No, Your Honor. I appreciate 8
the hearing and for granting the motion. Thank you.
9 JUDGE RYERSON: And Mr. Lovett?
10 MR. LOVETT: Nothing further from Holtec.
11 Thank you, Your Honor.
12 JUDGE RYERSON: And nothing further from 13 the NRC staff?
14 MR. WACHUTKA: Nothing further.
15 JUDGE RYERSON: Okay. And Mr. Lewis for 16 Entergy?
17 MR. LEWIS: Nothing further, Your Honor.
18 JUDGE RYERSON: Nothing further. All 19 right. Well, again we'll expect ideally a joint 20 proposal targeting a hearing in February at the end of 21 next week. We will grant the motion and we stand 22 adjourned. Thank you.
23 (Whereupon, the above-entitled matter went off 24 the record at 2:26 p.m.)
25 NEAL R. GROSS COURT REPORTERS AND TRANSCRIBERS 1716 14th STREET, N.W., SUITE 200 (202) 234-4433 WASHINGTON, D.C. 20009-4309 www.nealrgross.com