JUN O 3 2009

NEF--09~102-NRC

Attn: Document Control Desk Director. Office· of Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards U.S. Nud.ear.R.~gulatory Commission,· Washington, t>.C. 20555~0001

Louisiana Energy Services. LLC National Enrichmcmt. Facility NRC Docket No. 70-3103

)

Subject: Phot~graphs.ofNational Enric);up.ent Facility ConduitJ~uri~Js

As discussed v.:ith memoers ofyo,µ- staff as well as DOE staff, LES is to provide photographs of the installation activities during consiructfon of NEF buildings TSB- · SBM-CRDB -fot conduit 1,urials that wm contain ·classified .irif(mnatiotj:. ,

. Attached as Encloslµ'e l)saDVD providingpictuies of th¢ installatioI_l. Tpe file.is-a . power point presentation which documents all phases of conduit consduction and bu:rial. The NEF conduit burial has been designed·.so that appropriate s¢parc1tion .and

CC: (with e:;nclosur¢):

Timothy C. Johns.oil.,"Senior Project 1\1:artager Two White Flint North Mail Stop T-8A33 11545 Rockville Pike Rockville, MD 20852-2738

J. Keith Everly, Senior P"rogram Manager U:S. Nuc1ear RegulatQry·commission One White Flj.nt North Mail Stop 0-2D-1. 5 1.1555 Rock~ille Pike .Rockville,'MD 20852

,.

June 8, 2009

U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Attn:. Document Control Desk Washington, D.C. · 20555-0001

Duane Arnold Energy Center Docket 50-331 License No. DPR-49

81-09-010 1 O CFR 50.54(p)(2)

ou·ane Arnold Energy Center Security Plan Change Revision 6

In accordance with the Code of Federal Regulations, Title 10, Part 50.54(p){2), NextEra Energy Duane Arnold, LLC, f/k/a FPL Energy Duane Arnold, LLC, submits Revision 6 of the3 Duane Arnold Energy Center'Security Plan. This revision of the Plan adds information concerning an enhancement to a barrier, and incorporates changes required due to the company name change from FPL . Energy, LLC, to NextEra Energy Resources, LLC, and FPL Energy Duane Arnold, LLC, to Ne~Era E~ergy Duane Arnold, LLC. It has been determined the changes do not reduce the. effectiveness of tlie DAEC Security Plan and · therefore the changes have been made pursu·ant to 10 CFR 50.54(p)(2). Enclosure 1 contains a Change Synopsis, and Enclosure 2 contains the revised . Security ·Plan. ·

This letter contains no new commitments and no revisions to existing commitments.

. NOTE The Enclosures to this letter-contain "SAFEGUARDS INFORMATION" and must be

protected accordingly. Upon separation this page is "DECONTROLLED."

NextEra Energy Duane Arnold, LLC, 3277 DAEC Road, Palo, IA 52324

Sl-09-010 June 8, 2009 Page 2 of 2

SAFEGl)ARDS INFORMATION

Should you have any questions regarding this matter, please contact Ben Kindred, DAECSecurity Manager, at (319) 851-79.59. · · ·

-r,, 0r:~· .. ~.~ ._ Richard L. Angers n" · . . Vice President, Duane Amel~ ~nergyCenter . ·NextEra Energy Duane Arnold, LLC ·

Enclosures (2)

cc: Administrator, Region Ill, USNRC Residenflnspector, DAEC, USNRG o·; Barta w/o CTS Project w/o IRMS, A-53 w/o

NOTE The Enclosures.to this letter contain ''SAFEGUARDS INFORMATION" and must be

protected accordingly. Upon s·eparation this page is "DECONTROLLED."

SAFEGUARDS INFORMATION

DiabloCanyonNPEm Resource I .----------------------. yogen garu~(b)(G) From:

Sent: To: Cc: Subject: Attachments:

Bart,

Tuesday,Ap·~n""l2..,.,.0 .... ,"'20'"1,.,.,0'""9""':0""6...,.·P .... M...---' Fu, 81:)rt Medoff, James ORAi forDCPP on XI.M1 DRAI_DCPP AMP 82.1.1"'-ASME Sec. XI ISI_Garud_FU.doc

Final Document Publicly Available at ML101540419

. . Attached for your review and feedback is my draft RAI document for the GALL XI.Ml (ASME Section XI ISI for IWB, IWC, IWD), based on the audit performed last week for the Diablo Canyon power plant.

I look forward to any comments, suggestions, or additions you may have. Also, let me know if I need to send this to _any one else. ' · If you have any quest~ons you may contact me at j(b)(G) I·

. Thank you .

. - Yogen Garud

.1

Hearing Identifier: DiabloCanyon_LicenseRenewal_NcinPubliq Eri'li,iiJ Number: 191 . .

·Mall Envelope Propertl~'s (v2odS29bcde1004201805>(1 fd7e44ewc63abbc4725Sdf3a)

Subject: Sent Date: Received Date: From:.

.createc;t By:

· Re«;ipients: .

DRAI for DCPP .on XI.M1 4/20i2010 9:05:51 PM . . 4/20/2010 9:05;55 PM. yoge,n garud

. "Medoff, James" T~acking,Stat.us: None · "Fu, B~rt"· 'Tracking Status:. Nori~

. .

P~st Office: maiLgmail.corn

I

Files ·size Date & TJme MESSAGE 448 4/20/2010 ~:05:55-PM: DRAI ,DCPPAMP 82.1.1 ASME Sec. XI ISi Garud Fu.doc 37440 ·-, . - . . - - . . Options· Priority: Return Notification: Reply Reque~ted: Sensitivity:· Expiration bate: R~cipie_rits .Re(?eived:

Standard No No Normal

~-

(

I

_)

June 14, 2010

Mr. John Conway Senior Vice President Generation and Chief Nuclear Officer Pacific Gas and Electric Company 77 Beale Street, MC 832 San Francisco, CA 94105

SUBJECT: REQUEST FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION RELATED TO THE REVIEW OF THE DIABLO CANYON NUCLEAR POWER PLANT, UNITS 1 AND 2, LICENSE RENEWAL APPLICATION (TAC NOS. ME2896.AND ME2897) -AGING MANAGEMENT PROGRAMS .

Dear Mr. Conway: ./

By letter dated November 23, 2009, Pacific Gas & Electric Compa.ny submitted an application pursuant to Title 1 O of the Code of Federal Regulations Part 54, to renew the operating licenses

· for Diablo Canyon Nuclear Power Plant, Units 1 and 2, for review by the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC or the staff). The staff is reviewing the information contained in the license renewal application and has identified, in the enclosure, areas where additional information is needed to complete the review.

The request for additional information was discussed with Mr. Terry Grebel, and a mutually agreeable date for the response is within 30 days from the date of this letter. If you have ~ny questions, please contact me at 301-415-1045 or by e-mail at nathaniel.ferrer@nrc.gov.

Sincerely,

IRA/

Nathaniel Ferrer; Safety Project Manager Projects Branch 2 · Division of License Rene'!Val Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation

/ Docket Nos. 50-275 and 50-323

Enclosure: As stated

cc w/encl: See next page

June 14, 2010 Mr. John Conway Senior Vice President Generation and Chief Nuclear Officer Pacific Gas and Electric Company 77 Beale Street, MC 832 San Francisco, CA 94105

SUBJECT: REQUEST FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION RELATED TO THE REVIEW OF THE DIABLO CANYON NUCLEAR POWER PLANT, UNITS. 1 AND 2, LICENSE RENEWAL APPLICATION (TAC NOS. ME2896 AND ME2897) -AGING

. MANAGEMENT PROG.RAMS

Dear Mr. Conway:

. By letter dated November 23, 2009, Pacific Gas & Electric Company submitted an application pursuant to Title 1 O of the Code of Federal Regulations Part 54, to· renew the operating licenses for Diablo Canyon Nuclear Power Plant, Units 1 and 2, for review by the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRG or the staff). The staff is reviewing the information contained in the license renewal application and has identified, in the enclosure, areas where additional information· is needed to complete the review.

The request for additional information was discussed with Mr. Terry Grebel, and a mutually agreeable date for the response is within 30 days from the date of this letter. If you have any questions, please contact me at 301-415-1045 or by e-mail at nathaniel.ferrer@nr6.gov.

Docket Nos. 50-275 and 50-323

Enclosure: As stated

cc w/encl: See next page

DISTRIBUTION: See next page . . ADAMS Accession No.: ML 101540419

OFFICE PM:RPB2:DLR LA:DLR

NAME NFerrer !King

DATE 06/10/10 06/09/10

Sincerely, IRA/

. Nathaniel Ferrer, Safety Project Manager Projects Branch 2 Division of License Renewal Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation

BC:RPB2:DLR PM:RPB2:DLR

DWrona NFerrer

06/11/10 06/14/10

OFFICIAL RECORD COPY

RAI 82.1.1-1 ,

Diablo Canyon Nuclear Power Plant, Units 1 and 2 License Renewal Application

Request for Additional Information Set 3 & 4 Aging Management Programs

Generic Aging Lessons Learned (GALL) Report aging management program (AMP) XI.M1 ,· "scope of program" element contains a broad class of components for inservice inspection (ISi) with respective standards for flaw acceptance and flaw evaluation. Also, the "detection of aging. effects" program element covers the inspections of Class 1 small-bore piping and socket welds.

In its description of the ISi p·rogram under license renewal application (LRA) Section 82.1.1, the applicant stated that Diablo Canyon Nuclear Power Plant (DCPP) evaluates every indication. · However,-the acceptance standards IWD-3400 and IWD-3500 and the flaw evaluation standard IWD-3600, for Clas~ 3 components, are not included in the."program description" of LRA AMP 82.1.1. Also, Class 1 small-bore piping and socket welds for the AMP are covered under different AMPs for DCPP. . .

Explain how the "program description" includes the use of acceptance and evaluation standards for Class 3 components. Also, indicate in which AMP the inspection of Class 1 small-bore

· · piping and socket welds are covered or supplemented, including a-justification for using this program.

RAI 82.1.1-2

In its "operating experience" summary,·the applicant noted an instance of intergranular stress · corrosion cracking in an accumulator nozzle, identified in 1987, stating that all nozzles ·were inspected and those with unacceptable indications were subsequently weld-repaired or replaced

· with nozzles made of a new material. Also, in its evaluation of operating experience, the applicant indicated that a long-term inspection plan is followed with visual examination of all . nozzles and underskirt piping at normal operating pressure, and ultrasonic testing (UT) of those nozzles and underskirt piping which were not replaced. ·

The nozzle cracking was not identified as part of the inspections performed under the ASME Section XI ISi program. It is not clear why the UT is not performed on the replacement nozzles · as part of the long-term plan, while it is performed on the non-replaced nozzles.

Provide justification for why only a visual inspection is performed on the replaced nozzles and underskirt piping, and not UT, as part of the long-term inspection plan for aging management. .

. RAI 82.1.3-1

In LRA Section 82.1.3 and a program exception to the GALL Report, the applicant stated, "[t]he future 120-month inspection interval for DCPP will incorporate the then-current requirements specified in the version of the ASME Code incorporated into 1 O CFR 50.55a twelve months

ENCLOSURE

-2-

. before the start of the inspection interval." Also, LRA Appendix A, Section A 1.3 states, "DCPP is required to update its Section XI ISi program and use the ASME Code Edition consistent with the provisions of 10 CFR 50.55a during the ·period of extended operation."

The staff determines the acceptability of the newly proposed ASME Code Section XI editions for license renewal in the Statements of Consideration (SOC). The SOC are issued on the update . of the 10 CFR 50.55a rule and published in the Federal Register. It is not evident to the staff whether the applicant's statement refers to the SOC associated with the update of 10 CFR 50.55a in order to justify the applicant's use of a more recent edition of the ASME Code Section XI when the plant enters the period of extended operation.

Clarify whether the statement quoted above means that for the future 120-morith ISi intervals, which will be implemented during the period of extended operation, the applicant will incorporate the editions and addenda of the ASME Code that will be endorsed for use in 1 O CFR 50.55a (as· modified and subject to any limitations in rule) and be acceptable for the license renewal as referenced in the SOC on the update of 10 CFR 50.55a and published in the Federal Register.

RAI 82.1.3-2

During the audit of the Reactor Head Closure Studs Program (LRA Section B2.1.3), the applicant identified an exception to the "scope of program" program element. The applicant . . stated that the tensile strength of four heats of the material used in fabricating the studs · exceeded the maximum tensile strength limit of. 1172 MPa (170 ksi) specified in Regulatory Guide (RG)' 1.65, "Materiai and Inspection for Reactor yessel Closure Studs," October 1973. The applicant also stated that only heat and charge numbers are marked on the studs, and because there is a significant variation in tensile properties within a Heat and Charge of the material, it is unlikely that DCPP will be able to identify which stud from a given heat has tensile strength greater than 1172 MPa (170 ksi).

In addition to the tensile strength exceeding 1172 MPa, the yield strength of these heats of material exceeded 1034 MPa (150 ksi). For some materials, the yield strength was as high as 1138 MPa (165 ksi). When tempered to a tensile strength level above 1172 MPa, the high strength low-alloy steel for the studs becomes increasingly susceptible to stress corrosion cracking (SCC). In NUREG-1339, "Resolution of Generic Safety Issue 29: Bolting Degraoation or Failure in Nuclear Power Plants," June 1990, the U.S. Nuclear Reguiatory Commission establtshed a position that the yield strength of high-strength bolts should not exceed 1034 MPa (150 ksi). , ·

' (a) Revise the LRA to·include the newly identified exception to GALL "scope of program" program element that identifies that the'tensile strength of four of the heats used in fabricating the studs exceeded the maximum tensile strength limit of 1172 MPa (170 ksi) specified in Regulatory Guide (RG) 1.65, "Material and Inspection for Reactor Vessel Closure Studs," October 1973.

(b) fn view of the greater susceptibility of some of the studs to SCC, describe any preventive actions taken or planned to avoid the exposure of the studs to the environmental conditions that

-3-

can lead to sec, and describe possible changes/modifications in the program for managing cracking due to stress corrosion cracking for reactor head closure studs. -

RAI 82.1.8-1

In LRA Section B2.1.8, the applicant stated th.at the "tubing and secondary internals in the replacement steam generators are not susceptible to corrosion due to advanced material design." ·

Thermally treated Alloy 690 may be susceptible to corrosion as demonstrated in laboratory tests, but are more resistant than Alloy 600 mill annealed which was previously used in the DCPP steam generators. Please clarify the statement in the LRA regarding the corrosion susceptibility of the Alloy 690 material in the replacement steam generators .

. RAI 82.1.10-1

10 CFR Part 54.4(a) provides the regulations for which plant systems, structures, and components are within the scope of the license renewal. These include items under 10 CFR 54.4(a)(2), which are all nonsafety-related systems, structures, and componen~s whose failure could prevent satisfactory accomplishment of any of the functions identified in safety-

. ·related systems. The "parameters monitored or inspected" program element of the Closed-Cycle Cooling Water AMP in the GALL Report, Sectio.n Xl.M21, indicates that the program includes monitoring the effects of corrosion and stress corrosion cracking by testing and inspection in accordance with the guidance in the EPRI report closed cooling water chemistry

· guideline as well as performance testing for pumps and heat exchangers. ·

· LRA, Appendix B; Section B2.1.1 O indicates that the applicant's Closed-Cycle Cooling Water Program will be consistent with the GALL Report Section Xl.M21 with var.ious exceptions. In both the LRA B2.1.1 O program description and the applicant's basis document, the applicant

. indicated that the program will not conduct inspections or performance testing for components .in scope of license renewal under criterion of 1 O CFR 54.4(a)(2) .. It is not clear to the staff what the technical basis is for limiting the prescribed guidance in the GALI,. Report based on how a

. component was scoped into the license renewal process.

Provide justification for not performing the program's inspections and performance testing on components within the scope of liqense renewal under criterion 10 CFR 54.4(a)(2).

RAI 82.1.10-2

The Closed-Cycle Cooling Water. System AMP in the GALL Report, Section XI. M21, includes non-chemistry monitoring parameters, including pump and heat exchanger performance monitoring. · ·

-4-

LRA, Appendix A, Section A 1.1 O indicates that the Closed-Cycle Cooling Water System Program will include maintenance of system chemistry parameters, but does not mention any non-chemistry monitoring. parameters.

Update the Final Safety Analysis Report (FSAR) supplement to be consistent With LRA Section B2.1.10 program description, including monitoring of non-chemistry parameters or provide justification for not including the monitoring of these parameters.

RAI 82.1.16-1 ·

GALL Report AMP XI.M32, "0ne-Time Inspection," "detection of aging effects" program element states that "the inspection includes a representative sample of the system population, and, where practical, focuses on the bounding or lead components most susceptible to aging .... " The applicant's One-Time Inspection program description states, in part, that sampling will be conducted "using an engineered sampling technique for each material-environment group based on criteria such as the longest service period, most severe operating conditions, lowest design margins, lowest or stagnant flow conditions, high flow conditions, and highest temperature."

Provide additional details of the sampling procedure to be used. ·indicate whether the· One-Time Inspection program utilizes a risk-informed inservice inspection or similar methodology, or an alternative form of probabilistic or statistical sampling to select the number, types, and locations of t~e components to be inspected under this program. If not, provide additional details of the .sampling procedure to be used. ·

RAIB2.1.16-2

LRATable 3.3.1, item 3.3.1.07 refers to the aging evaluation of stainless steel non-regenerative heat exchanger components exposed to treated borated water iri the auxiliary systems. The. aging effect identified is cracking due to stress corrosion cracking, and the GALL Report recommends the use of the Water Chemi~try Program to manage this effect. The GALL Report also states that further evaluation is recommended and that an acceptable verification program is to include temperature·and radioactivity monitoring of the shell side water, and eddy current testing of the tubes. The applicant proposes to manage this aging effect using its Water Chemistry Program, with its One-Time Inspection Program to be used for verification of program effectiveness. ·.

In its further evaluation of this aging effect, the applicant states that temperature and radioactivity of the shell-side water of the letdown (non-regenerative) heat exchanger is monitored continuously by installed plant instrumentation. The applicant also states that its One-Time Inspection- Program will be used in lieu of eddy-current testing of the tubes to provide confirmation that cracking is not occurring: However, the applicant does not identify ttie testing technique to be used to perform the proposed inspections.

-5-

Describe the details of the inspection technique to be used to perform the one-time inspection of these components in lieu of eddy-current testing and provide relevant plant or industry experience to demonstrate the effectiveness and reliability of this technique.

RAI 82.1.17-1

Program element "parameters monitored or inspected" of GALL Report Program XI.M33, "Selective Leaching of Materials" states:

The visual inspection and hardness measurement is to be a one-time inspection, Because selective leaching is a slow acting corrosion process, this measurement is performed just before the beginning of the license renewal period. Follow-up of unacceptable inspection findings includes expansion of the inspection sample size and location.

In the LRA, the applicant describes its Selective Leaching of Materials Program in' Appendix · 82.1.17 as consistent with the GALL Report, with no exceptions or enhancements. The program descriptions provided in the LRA and the FSAR Supplement (A.1.17) state that the detection of selective leaching will result in the performance of an engineering evaluation, which will then determine the need for an expansion of inspection sample sizes arid locations. It is unclear if an engineering evaluation will result in an expansion of inspection sample sizes and locations, consistent with the GALL Report.· ,

Clarify if the Selective Leaching of Materials Program will expand the inspection· sample size and location if selective leaching is detected, Provide justification if no expansion of sample size and location is to occur if selective leaching is detected.

RAI 82.1.19-1

GALL AMP XI.M35,· "One-Time Inspection of ASME Code Class. 1 Small-Bore Piping," states that a volumetric inspection should be used to detect cracking in small-bore piping. However, the applicant's One-Time Inspection of ASME Code Class 1 Small-Bore Program in LRA Section 82.1.19 states that a r~liable and effective volumetric inspection technique to detect cracking in socket welds is curreritly not .available. The applicant instead proposes to use the visual ex~mination technique (VT-2) for the examination of small-bore socket welds.

The applicant's proposed usage of the VT-2 technique for the examination of these welds conflicts with the guidance in the GALL Report.

Justify the proposed deviation from the.GALL Re.port recommendation to perform volumetric examinations of socket welds in ASME Code Class 1 small-bore piping.

J

- 6 -

RAI 82.1.19-2

GALL AMP XI.M35 states that the One-Time Inspection ofASME Class 1 Small-Bore Piping Program is applicable only to plants that have not experienced cracking of ASME Class 1 small-bore piping. It further states that "[s]hould evidence of significant aging be revealed by a one-time inspection- or previous ·operating experience, periodic inspection will be proposed, as managed by a plant-specific program." ·

During a review of the applicant's operating experience, the staff noted thatthere have beeri failures of Class 1 small bore piping at DCPP. ·

In view of the above-cited GALL Report guidance and plant-specific operating experience, justify the proposed application of the applicant's proposed One-Time Inspection of ASME Code Class 1 Small-Bore Piping Program, or provide a plant-specific AMP for managing aging during the period of extended operation.

RAI 82.1.22-1

GALL AMP XI.M38, "Inspection of Internal Surfaces in Miscellaneous Piping and Ducting Components," states that the program includes visual inspections of internal surfaces of steel piping, piping components, ducting, and components in an internal environment (such as indoor uncontrolled air, condensation, and steam) for degradation frorri various corrosion mechanisms. In the two exceptions to the GALL Report stated in LRA Section. B2.1.22, the program is expanded to include additional materials (aluminum, asb~stos cement; co.pper alloy, elastomers, nickel alloys, stainless steel, and cast austenitic stainless steel) and to include . additional examination techniques (volumetric testing and physical manipulation).

, ,

In the-actual application of this AMP as summarized in the applicant's LRA, the scope of the program is significantly expanded beyond both GALL X1.M38 and the appiicant's description of the program in LRA Appendix B, Section 82.1.22. This expanded application of the program in the LRA appears to encompass a substantial number.of.additional component types, materials, and environments beyond those in the GALL Report and the applicant's AMP description. ·

. . .

Clarify that the program description for Inspection of Internal Surfaces of Miscellaneous Piping and Ducting Components Program in Appendix 8 of the LRA encompasses the actual application of the program as described in the LRA.

RAI 82.1.22-2

In LRA Appendix 8, Section B2.1.22, the applicant states that this program "will use the work control process for preventive maintenance and surveillance to conduct and document inspections."

The term "work control process" appears nowhere else in the applicant's LRA except in the Appendix A FSAR supplement for this AMP,.nor does it appear anywhere in either the GALL Report or NUREG-1800, Revision 1, "Standard Review Plan for Review of License Renewal

-?-

Applications for Nuclear Power Plants.I' Consequently, the staff is unable to determine precisely what is meant by this term in the context of the applicant's program description.

Define what is meant by the term "work control process"-as it is used in the description of the program, particularly with respect to what program elements in the GALL Report it impacts a_nd how it impacts these elements.

RAI B2.1.24-1

The GALL Report AMP XI.E:1 program description states that cables and connections from accessible areas (the inspection sample) are inspected and represent, with_ reasonable assurance, all cables and connections in the adverse localized environments. The Electrical Cables and Connections Not Subject to 10 CFR 50.49 Environmental Qualification Requirements Program in the LRA statesllAt least once every 10 years, accessible cables/cable jackets, connections, and terminal blocks within the ~cope of license renewal located in an adverse localized environment are inspected." · ·

It is unclear if the applicant will u$e sampling or include all cables (within the scope of license renewal) in its inspection. \

Please clarify if all accessible cables and connections within adverse localized environments will , be inspected consistent with the GALL Report .

. RAI 82.1.25-1

In order for NRC staff to review an AMP with enhancement(s), the impact of the enhancement(s) for each element of the AMP must be clearly stated:

The Electrical Cables and Connections Not Subject to 10 CFR 50.49 Environmental Qualification Requirements Used in Instrumentation Circuits Program (LRA Appendix B, Section 82.1.25) states "the following enhancement will be implemented in the following program elements: Scope of Program - Element 1, Parameters Monitored/Inspected - Element 3, Detection of Aging Effects ~ Element 4, Acceptance Criteria ~ Element 6, and Corrective Actions - Element 7." The LRA lacks detailed information on how the enhancement impacts each element. This information is also incomplete in the basis document.

Explain how each element will be impacted by enhancement such that·it wili be consistent with the GALL Report. .

RAI 82; 1.36-1

The applicant proposed to credit the Metal Enclosed Bus program for inspecting the in-scope iso-phase bus. The iso-phase bus provides the station blackout delay access offsite power source through back feeding the unit transformers and is included in the scope of the Metal Enclosed Bus Program. However, the inspection aspects of the iso-phase bus are different .

- 8 -

from those of the non-segregated bus. For example, the iso-phase bus does not have bus insulation, but has a bare conductor tube with no insulation material. Therefore, the bus insulatipn inspection as described in the Metal Enclosed Bus Program is not applicabl!;l.

The GALL Report XI.E4 program is written specifically for managing non-segregated buses. The program attributes including parameters monitored or ·inspected, detection· of aging effects, and acceptance criteria for non-segregated buses may not be appropriate for the iso-phase bus.

Explain how the inspections of non-segregated buses as described in the Metal Enclosed Bus Program are appropriate for the iso-phase bus.

Letter to J. Conway from N. Ferrer dated June 14, 2010

SUBJECT: REQUEST FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION RELATED TO THE REVIEW OF THE DIABLO CANYON NUCLEAR POWER PLANT, UNITS 1 AND 2, LICENSE RENEWAL APPLICATION (TAC NOS. ME2896 AND ME2897) -AGING MANAGEMENT PROGRAMS

DISTRIBUTION:

HARD COPY: DLR RF

E-MAIL: PUBLIC RidsNrrDlr Resource RidsNrrD1rRpb1 Resource RidsNrrDlrRpb2 Resource · RidsNrrDlrRarb Resource RidsNrrDlrRapb Resource · RidsNrrDlrRasb Resource RidsNrrDlrRerb Resource RidsNrrDlrRpob Resource RidsOgcMailRoom Resource

. N. Ferrer . K. Green A. Stuyvenberg D. Wrona A. Wang M. Peck, RIV T. Brown.RI G. Miller, RIV N. O'Keefe, RIV I. Couret, OPA V. Dricks, OPA W. Maier, RIV

·J. Weil, OCA . . E. Williamson, OGC

S. Uttal, OGC . · R. Rihm, EDO

Diablo Canyon Nuclear Power Plant, Units 1 and 2

cc:

Chairman San Luis Obispo County Board of

Supervisors 1055 Monterey Street, Suite D430 Room 370, County Government Center San Luis Obispo, CA 93408

Mr. James R. Becker, Site Vice President Pacific Gas & Electric Company· Diablo Canyon Nuclear Power Plant P.O. Box 3, Mail Station 104/6/601 Avila Beach, CA 93424

Ms. Jennifer Post, Esq. Pacific Gas & Electric Company 77 Beale Street, Room 2496 Mail Code B30A San Francisco, CA 94120

Mr. Gary W. Butner, Chief Radiological Health Branch

· Division of Food, Drug & Radiation r Safety ·

· California Department of Public Health P.O. Box 997414, MS-:7610

· · Sacramento, California 95899-7414

Mr. Tony Brown . I

NRC Resident Inspector Diablo ·canyon Nuclear Power P.lant c/o U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission P.O. Box369 Avila Beach, CA 93424

Mr. Michael Peck NRC Senior Resident Inspector Diablo Canyon Nuclear Power Plant c/o U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission P.O. Box369 Avila Beach, CA 93424

. Regional Administrator, Region IV ' U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission,

Texas Health Resources Tower 612 East Lamar Boulevard, Suite 400 Arlington, TX 76011-4125

Mr. Terence L. Grebel Manager, Regulatory Projects Diablo Canyon Nuclear Power Plant P.O. Box56 Avila Beach, CA 93424

Mr. Truman Burns Mr. Robert Kinosian California Public Utilities Commission 505 Van Ness, Room 4102 San Francisco, CA 94102

Mr. James D. Bo'yd, Commissioner California Energy Commission 1516 Ninth Street (MS 31) · Sacramento, CA 95814

Mr. Brian Hembacher Deputy Attorney General 300 South Spring Street, Suite 1702 Los Angeles, CA 90013

Ms. Susan Durbin 1300 I Street P.O. Box 944255 Sacramento, CA 94244-2550

Mr. Tom Luster· CA Coastal Commission 45 Freemont Street, #2000 San Francisco, CA 94105

Mr. Mark Johnsson . CA Coastal Commission 45 Freemont Street, #2000 San Francisco, CA 94105

Diablo Canyon Nuclear' Power Pl;mt, 2 Units 1 and 2

cc:

Mr. Eric Green 505 Van Ness Avenue San Francisco, CA 94102-3214

Ms. Barbara Byron Senior Policy Advisor California Energy Commission 1516 9th Street, MS 36 Sacramento, CA 95814

Mr. Kevin Bell General Council California Energy Commission 1516 9th Street, MS 36 Sacramento, CA

0

95814

Ms. Rachel MacDonald Nuclear Policy Advisor California Energy Commission 1516 9th Street, MS 36 Sacramento, CA 95814

Mr. Bill Potter Senior Emergency Services Coordinator California Emergency Management Agency Radi.ological Preparedness Unit · · 3650 Schriever Avenue Mather, CA 95655

Mr. Michael Warren California Emergency Management Agency Radiological Preparedness Unit · 3650 Schriever Avenue Mather, CA 95655

Mr. Chris Wills Supervising Geologist California Geological Survey 801 K Street, MS 12-32 Sacramento, CA 95814-3531

Mr. John G. Parrish, PhD State Geologist California Geological Survey 801 K Street, Suite 1200 Sacramento, CA 95814

Lieutenant Jim Epperson California HighwayPatrol Commercial Vehicle Section 601 B North 7th Street Sacramento,·CA 95811

Mr. Peter Von Lagen, PhD, PG . 895 Areovista Place, Suite 101

· San Luis Obispo, CA 93401

Mr. Burton Chadwick, PhD, PG Core Regulatory Permitting Central Coast Water Board 895 Areovista Place, Suite 10.1 San Luis Obispo, CA 93401

Ms. Jane Swanson· · San Luis Obispo Mothers for Peace P.O. Box 3608 . San Luis Obispo, CA 93403

Ms. Rochelle Becker, Executive Director Alliance for Nuclear Responsibility P.O. Box 1328 San Luis Obispo, CA 93406~1.328

Diablo Canyon Independent Safety Committee

~ Office of the Legal Counsel 857 Cass Street, Suite D · Montere.y, CA 93940

Mr. Jerald G. Head Senio_r Vice Pr~sident, Regulatory Affairs GE Hitachi Nuclear Energy 3901 Castle Hayne Rd MC A-18 Wilmington, NC 28401

March 2, 2011

SUBJECT: REQUE~T F=OR WITHHQLDING INFORMATION FROM PUl3L;IC DISCLOSURE · (MFN'09~789}

Dear Mr. Headi

By letter dated December 15, 2009, and associated affidavit executed on December 15, 2009, by David A. Piepmeyer; Mr. Piepmeyer indicated that the information contained in "Response to Portion of NRC Request for Additional Information Letter No. 396 Related to ESBWR Design Certification Application - Fuei'Racks - RAi Number 9.1-1,46, n should be withheld as proprietary.' GE-Hitachi Nuclear Energy (GEH) requested that this information be withheld from public disclosure.pursuant to Title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations (10 CFR} Section 2.390.

' GEH has requ,ested that the infofmation be withheld in its entirety, therefore a nonproprietary

' copy is not available. '

The affidavit stated that the submitted information should be considered exempt from mandatory public disclos1,1re for the following reasons:

· 1. The information disclose!, a process, method, or apparatus, including supporting data and analyses, vvhere preveriti9n of its use by GEH's competitors~without license from GEH constit1.,1tes .a oompetitivt:1 economic·advantage oye'r other companie.s; and

2. · The information which, if used by a competitor, would reduce his expenditure of resources.or improve his competitive position in the design, manufacture, shipment, ins.{a!(ation, assurance of quality, or.licensing· Of a similar product. .

We have reviewed the December 15., 2009, letter and affidavit in accordance with the requirements of 10 CFR 2.390 and, on the basis of the.statements contained therein, have determined that the information sought to be withheld. con,tains proprietary commercial· information and should be withheld frorn public disclosure. Therefore, the ,submitted information marked as proprietary will be withheld from public disclosure pursuant to 10 CFR 2;390(b)(5) and Section 103(b} of the Atomic 'Energy Act of 1954, as a.mended.

J.Head - 2 ..

, Withholding from public inspection shall not affect the right, if any, of p·ersons properly and directly concerned to inspect the document. If the need arises, we may send copies of this information to our consultants working in this area. We will, of course, ensure that the consultants have signed the appropri~te agreements for handling proprietary information.

If the basis for withholding this information from public inspection should change in the future su~h that the information could then be made available for public inspection, you should promptly notify the NRC. You also should understand that the NRC may hav~ cause to review this determination in the future, forexample, if the scope of a Freedom of Information Act request includes your information. In all review situations, if the NRG makes a determination adverse to the a_bove, you will be notified in advance of any public disclosure.

If you have any.questions regarding this matter, I may be reached at30'1-415-6256.

Docket No. 52-010

cc: See next page

Sincerely,

IRA/

Dennis Galvin, Project M,,mager· BWR Projects Branch Oivision of New Reactor l..icensing Office of New Rl:lactors .

J.Head -2-

WithholdingJrom pul:>lic inspection shall riot affect, the rig~t. -if ariy, ·of. perso~s ·properly arid dir~ctly"concemed to inspect thEl document. If the need arises, we may· send copies of this .information to our consultants wo~ing in this area. · VV !3 will, of course, ensure that the consultants have signed the ~ppropriate agreements .f9r handling proprietary information.

IUhe basis for withholding thi_s informa,iott fron1 public inspec~io_ri should change in the future such that the information could'_then be- made available .for public inspection, you should promptly notify the NRC .. You also should understand that the NRC ·may have cause to review 'this ~etermjnat,ion in the future, fo'r·exan,ple;ifthe scopEfofa Freedc>m of lnf9ri')'latiQn Act request-.includes your inform~ticm: In all review situations, .if'the NR.C ·make~ a qE!t~·rmination adve_rse to th!3 above, you wm be notified in advance of any public disclosure. . I( you have any questions regarding this .matter, I may- be rE!ac~ed a~ 301:415~6256;

Docket No. 52-01 o

:.cc: See next page

DISTRIBUTION: Hard Copy . BWR_R/F DGalvin SGreeri AC~bbage.

E-Mail _ BWR.Gr.oup RidsAcrsAcnv,,MailCenter RidsOgcMailCenter SMarshall, RES RidsNroDeSeb2

SincerE:!ly,

!Riv

Dennis Galvin,:Project Manager BWR Projects Branch . Oivisiori of New·ReactorUcerising

· Office,of New-Reactors. ·

ADAMS ACCESSION NO: ML 100191964 OFFICE PM:BWR:DNRL LA:BWR:DNRL BC;SEB2:DE BC:BWR:DN_RL.

NAME DGalvin SCGreen KHawkins(Gruss) MTonaccl

DATE ·02125/2011 01/27/2010 02/25/2011 03/02/2011

OFFICIAL -RECORD COPY

DC GEH- ESBWRMailing List

cc:

Ms. Michele Boyd Legislative Director Energy Program Public Citizens Critical Mass Energy and Environmental Program ·

215 Pennsylvania Avenue, SE Washington, DC 20003

Mr. Tom Sliva 7207 IBM Drive Charlotte, NC 28262

· (Revised 02/15/2011)

Page 1 of3

DC GEH .. ESBWR Mailing List . ' '

Email aec@nrc,gov (Amy Cubba·ge) APH@NEl.org (Adrian Heymer) aw9@nei.org (Anne W. Cottingham) bevans@enercon.com (Bob Evans) bgattoni@.roe.com (William (Bill) Gatto.ni)) BrinkmCB@westinghouse.com (Ch~rles Brinkmari) .cberger@energetics.com (Carl Berger) charleS.bi:lgnal@ge.com ctiarles@blackburncarter.com (Charles Irvine) chris,maslak@ge.com (Chris Masla~) . ,, CumminWE@Westinghouse.com (Edward W. Cummins) cwaltman@roe.com (C: Waltman) · Daniel.Chalk@nuclear;energy;gov (Daniel Chalk david;hinds@g~.com (David Hinds) david.lewis@pillsburylaw.com (David Lewis) David.piepmeyer@ge.com (David Piepmeyer) donaldf.taylor@ge.com (Don Taylor) erg-xl@cox.net (Eddie R. Grant) gcesare@~nercon.cpm (eard@gene.ge.co·m (James Beard) jerald.head@ge.com (Jerald G. Head) Jerold.Marks@ge.com (Jerold Marks) Jim.Kirisey@inl.gov. (James Kinsey) jim.riccio@wac.greehpeace~org (James Riccio) jqel.Friday@ge.com {Joe! Friday) · Joseph_Hegrier@dorri.com (Joseph Hegner:) j1,michi_uchiyama@mnes-us.com (Junichi.Uchiyama) kimberly.milchuck@ge.com. (Kimberly Milchuck) KSutton@morgan!ewls.com · (Kathryn M. Sutton) · ~waugh@impact-netorg (Kenneth o. Waugh)

-lchandler@morganlewis.com· (Lawrence J. Chandler) lee.dougherty@ge.com MamBr9oks@dhs.gov (Marc ~rooks) m·aria.webb@pillsburylaw.com (Maria Webb) mark.beaumont@wsms.com (Mark Beaumont)· matias.travieso-diaz@pillsburylaw.com (Matias Travieso-Diaz) · media@nei.org (Scott Peterson) · mike~moran@fpl.com (Mike Moran)· MSF@nei.org (Marvin Fertel}

Page2of3

DC GEH - ESBWR Mailing List

mwetterhahn@winston.com (M. Wetterhann) nirsnet@nirs.org (Michael Mariette) Nuclaw@mindspring.com (Robert Temple) patriciaL.campbell@ge.com (Patricia L Campbell) Paul@beyondnuclear.org (Paul Gunter) pbessette@morganlewis.com (Paul Bessette) peter.yandow@ge.com (Peter Yandow) pshastings@duke-energy.com (Peter Hastings) rick:kingston@ge.com (Rick Kingston) RJB@NEl.org (Russell Bell) Russell.Wells@Areva.com (Russell We.Us) sabinski@suddenlink.net (Steve A. Bennett) sandra.sloan@areva.com (Sandra Sloan) sara.andersen@ge.com (Sara Anderson) . sfrantz@morganlewis.com (Stephen P. Frantz) stephan.moen@ge:com (Stephan Moen) · steven.hucik@ge.com (Steven Hucik) , . strambgb@westinghouse.com (George Stramback)

. tdurkin@energetics.com (Tim Durkin) timothy1.enfinger@ge.com (Tim Enfinger) tom.miller@hq.doe.gov (Tom Miller) trsmith@winston.com (Tyson Smith) Vanessa:quinn@dhs.gov (Vanessa Quinn) Wanda.K.Marshall@dom.com (Wanda K. Marshall) wayne.marquino@ge.com (Wayne Marquina) · whorin@winsto(l.com (W. H_orin)

Page3 of3

ENCLOSURES CONTAINS "OFFICIAL USE ONLY 01.IN'IESTIGA+ION INFORMATION"

January 25, 2011

NOTE TO COMMISSIONERS' ASSISTANTS

OCM/GBJ

~ Josh Batkin __ John Monninger 11L Angela Coggins

Lisa Clark __ Tom Hipschman

Michael Marshall Anna Bradford Almas Azeem Roberta Warren

_·_Melody Fopma · Susari Loyd

--David Montes Patti Pace

--Herald Speiser --Catina Gibbs

OCM/KLS

_Jeffry Sharkey _@_ Darani Reddick

Patrick Castleman John Thoma

__ Janet Lepre __ Carolyn Harves

OCM/WDM

M)_Patrice Bubar Bill Orders

_Rebecca Ta_desse. Margaret Bupp

--Carrie Crawford

FROM: Mary C. Muessle IRA/ Acting Assistant for Operations, OEDO

OCM/GEA

__ Belkys Sosa .QL Roge(Davis __ Michael Snodderly __ . Steve Baggett

Kathleen Blake _Carmel Savoy

OCM/WCO

.@_Ho Nieh Michael Franovich Andrea Kock

--Jason Zorn .Linda Herr

__ Sunny Bozin

SUBJECT: OFFICE OF INVESTIGATIONS MONTHLY REPORT AS OF JANUARY 21, 2010·

This note provides for your information the Office .of.Investigations (01) monthly report for January 2010. It provides lists. of investigations cipe.ned and closed in Jari1,1ary, as well as a status report of all open investigations as of January 21, 2n10 (l;:nclosures 1-;3). Similar reports for . · assistance to staff are also'. provided (Enclosur~s 4~6). The following ~hart provides data on the worl

Public Release Timeliness (PRT) Report of Internally Generated Docu~ents

Period Covered for this Report: January 1, 2011 through March 31, 2011 (Based on Date Actually Released to .PARS) RGN-IV. 3!54 out of 368 documents (98.9%) appear to conform .to release policy

Agency policy regarding the "timely release· or publicly available documents to the public is provided in the agency's Yellow Announcement YA-00-0039 "Revised Policy Goal i:Jn Timing the Release or . Documents to the Public In the ADAMS Environment" (issued May 22, 2000). This policy states, in·part; that "Documents produced by the staff addressed to external entities are to be released 5 full working days after the date of the document.' In addition, the policy states that 'Documents produced by the stall addressed to other Internal addressees or documents with no specific addressee shall be released 5 full working days after the date of the document.'

Tho purpose of tho Public Release Tim81incss· (PRT) RepOrt is to inform offices of their efficiency in timely relcn~e of ADAMS documents to thC public for a defined period and specifically identify' (by accession number) documents which appear not to have been released to the public within the time frame specified under NRG agency poli~.

Certain NRC documents have a different time period for public release, as stipulated under Yellow Announcement YA-00-0039, which had to tie factored Into this report generator as exceptions. In order to effectively filter these 'exception' documents out, the staging queue criteria listed below Is applied to documents that were not released to the public In accordance with the NRC 6th day release policy. Documents not recognized as exceptions are considered aS being rel8ased.late and are specifically listed on the detailed portion of the PRT report following the Summary pages. This report includes documents copied to the ADAMS Publicly Available RE,cords System (PARS) Library during the Period of Report date range defined at !he report prompt. ·

Staging Queue Criteria • Dale Copied to PARS ... within date range entered at 'Period of Report" prompt (except 25-oct-2007 to 16-nov-2007) • Author Affiliation .. .like ... NRC/RGN-IV• • Document Date .•. is after •.• Qne year prior to PRT report "Start• date entered at "Period of Report· prompt

Exceptions • Added By User ... equal...capture • Author Affiliation .. .like ... NRC/ACMUI • Case/Reference Nurnber ••• like .... FOIA' • Docket Number .. .like ••. 030" .. Document Type ... equal .. .Agr~ernent States-RegulaUo!')~ Review • Document.Type .• ,equal .•. Commlsslon Action Memoranda (COM) • Document Type ... equal...Commission SECY Paper . • DocumentType ... equal. .. Commission Staff Requirements Memo (SRM} • DocumentType ..• equal ••. Commission Voting Record (CVR) ·• Docur11ent Type ... equa.l. .. Commlttee·Letter Aepor;t • Document Type ... equal ••. Congresslonal Correspondence • Document Type ... eq~at..Emergency Preparedness-Emergency Plan and Post ,Exercise Evaluatlon.(FEMA} • Document Type ... equal...Emergency Preparedness-Emergency Plan Exercise Objectives and Scenario • Document Type ... equal ..• Emergency Preparedness-Review of Emergency Plan Exercise Objectives and Scenario • Document Type ... equal •.. Enforcemerit Action · , • Document Type .•• equal. •• Enforcement Notification • Document'Typ9 ... equal...FederalRegister Notice • Document Type ... equal...FOIA/Priyacy Act Response to Requestor • Document Type .•. equal...Legaf-Exhibit · • Document Type ... equal...Legal-Pre-Flled Exhibtts • Document Type ••. equal...Licerise-Operator License Exam, Draft • Document Type ... equal. .• Llcense-Operator, Fonm 396, Certification of Medical-Examination • Document Type •.. equal ... Llcense-Operator, Fonn 39B, Personal Quallllcatlon Statement • Document Type ••• equal ..• License-Operator, Form·474, Simulation Facility Certification • Docum·ent Type ... equal ... License-Operator, Other HO and Regional Correspondence • Document Type ... equal...License-Operator,.Part 55 Examination Related Material • Document Type •.. equal .•• Management Directive • Document Type ... equal...Meetlng Tninscript • Document Type; .. equal...NUREG

Report Created on 7-Apr-11 Cover Page 1

Staging Queue Criieria - Exceptions (c~ntinued) • Document Type .•. equal...NUREG, !;)raft • Document Type ..• equal, •. OCFQ Fee Policy Documentation • Document Type.:,equal...OMB Clearance Material · •· Document Type ... equal. •. Privacy Impact Assessment • Document Type: .. equat •. Regulalory Gulde ; Document Type •.• equal. •. Regtilatory Guide;Draft •. Document Type •.. equal. .. Route Am>roval Letter to Licensee _. Doajment:rype ••• equal...Safety and Compliance Inspection Record, NRC Form 591 • Keyword ... like ••• '+rur' • Keyward .. .like· .•. 'NRR/DLR/OGC Email' • Keywo[d .. .like.,. '0MB. 300' • Keyword ... like .•. 'Aedacted Public Version' • Keyw9rd ... llke .•. 'Retrofit' . • Title .• .like ..• 'certified index' • Tifle .• .like ..• COMSECV' -• Trtle: • .like ••. SEC)" :. Keyword: .. like.'..'MLRoot' _ , Document Type ... equal ••. NRO Safe!Y Evaluation.Report (SER)-Delayed • Document Type ... equal...Differing Professional -Opinion Case ~ile • (Document Type: •. equal...Meeling ·Agenda) ••. and .•. (Author Affilia!ion.,.like ... N_RCIACRS') • (Document Type ... equal...Meeting Agenda) ... and ... (Author Affiliation .. .like ... NRC/ACNW') • (Document Type .. ,equal...Me~ling _Minutes) ... ana ... (Author Affiliation ... eq~al ... NRC/CRGR}

_, ([)ocument Type ... equal ••. Legal-Hea~ng Transcript) .•. and .. , (Ainhor Affillanon .•. llke ... NRCIASLBP') • (Original File N/lme •.• like ... NR1~) .,.and ... (Addressee Affiliation .•. llk~ .•. NRC/NRO') • (Document Type ... equal ... Environmental Report) .•. and ... (Addiessee-AffiUation .. .like .•. NRC/FSME')

_Release·Compliant criteria . _ • • Docurn·ents that DO NOT qualify as.an exemption from PAT and were "Copied to PARS" more than six .(6) workdays after their "Document.Date'., are listed on the following detailed P.age(s). ·

R~port Created on 7-Apr-11 Cover~age 2

NRC Internal Documents That .Appear to Meet Policy for Release to the Public 1-Jan-2011 to 31-Mar-2011

RGN-IV - 4 out of 368 dopuments (1.1 %) documents do not appear to conform to release policy Author ·Affiliation

NRC/RGN-IV • 2 out of 29 documents (6.9%) documents do not appear to conform to release p_olicy

M1

NRC Internal Documents That Appear to Meet 'Policy for Release to the Public 1 ~Jan-2011 to 31-Mar-2011

RGN-IV - 4 out of 366 documents (1.1 %) documents do not appear to Document conform tci release policy Author Affiliation Date NRC/RGN-IV/DNM!> - 1 out of 237 documents (0.4%) documents do not appear to conform to release policy

P

NRC Internal Documents That App~ar to Meet Policy for Release to the Public 1-Jan-2011 to 31-Mar-2011

RGN-IV • 4 out of 368 documents (1.1 %) documents do not appear to Document conform to release policy Author Affiliati~ri Date

NRC/RGN-IV/DRP - 1 out 9! 28 documents (3.6%) documents do not appear to coliform to release policy

Policy Release

Date

Staff DPC Folder Release

Date Date

· Actual Release

Date

IR 05000397-l

NRC Internal Documents That Appear to Meet Policy for Release to the Public 1.Jan~2011 to 31-Mar-2011

RGN-IV - 4 out of 368 documents (1.1%) .documents do not appear to Document conform to release policy Author.Affiliation Qate NRC/RGN-IV/DRS - o out of 70 documents (0.0%) documents do not appear to conform to release policy

Report Created on 7-Apr-1 f

Policy Release

Date

Staff DPC Folder Release

Date Dale

Actual Release.

Date

Page4

NRC Internal Documents That Appear to Meet Policy for Release to the Public 1-Jan-2011 to 31-Mar~2011

RGN-IV • 4 out of 368 documents (1.1%) documents do not appear to Document conform to release policy Author Affiliation Date

NRC/RGN-IV/ORA - 0 out of 4 documents (0.0%) documents do not appear to conform to release policy

Report Created on 7-Apr-11

"Policy Release

Date

.staff DPC Folder 'Release

Date Date

Actual Release

Date

Page5

PMLevyCOLNPEm Res~:>Urce

From: Sent:

Clell Ford [Cford@hcbcc.org] Tuesday, August 04,.2009 1:30 PM

To: DuMorid, Melissa · Cc: Quick, Polly; Mu$satti, Daniel; Bruner, Douglas; kristi.branch@pnl.gov; Smith, Michael Alan;

.Preindergast~Ke.rinedy, Ellen L Subject:· RE:.PREDECISONAL tlQT FQR liiU'llaliilC LEVY

Mel\ssa: Thank you very much for the link. I hope you were able to obtain the informc;1tion you needed. Clell . Clell J. Ford . Hjghlands County Lakes Mana er Hi hlands County N~tur~I Resources phone: (863)402-6545, cell: (b)(6) . fax: (863)385-7028, e-mail: cford@hcbtc.org - --- . --------. -- . ------------------------------ . -------------------------

From: DuMond~ Melissa [MDuMond@icfi.com] Sent: Tuesday, August 04, 2009 12:42 To: Clell Ford Cc: Quick, Polly; Daniel Mussatti; Douglas Bruner; ki'isti.branch@pnl.gov; Smith, Mic:h~elAlan; Prendergast-Kennedy, Ellen L · , Subject: PREDECJSONAL ... U8iif F8R: PW8Lie • LEVY

HiClell,

Thank you for your time on the ·µhone today discµssing information on subsistence use in Highlands 'County. I am following up with this·.email at -your request. Information on the Levy County Nucl~ar Power Plant proposed nuclear reactors can b_e found at http://www.nrc.gov/reactors/new-reactors/col/levy.html

Thank you for y~mr help, Melis,sa Elefante buMond, AICP ICF International. o: 703.934.3763 f: 703.934.'3740 c:!(b)(si I mdumond@icfi.com

1

Hearing ldentifil:!r: Email Number:

Levy_County_COL_NonPublic 941

Mail Envelope Properties (OFB895554CD4974FB7FE694D763036BA07E34E5B9C)

Subject: Sent Date: Received Date:

,from:

Created By:

Recipients:

RE: PREDECISONAL mn rs~ 121 lliilklC 8/4/2009 1 :30:02 PM 8/4/2009 1 :30:55 PM Clell Ford

Cford@hcbcc.org

"Quick, Polly" · Tracking Status: None

"Mussatti, Daniel" Tracking Statu~: None "Bruner, Douglas" Tracking Status: None "kristi.branch@pnl.gov" Tracking Status: None "Smith, Michael Alan"

. Tracking Status: None "Prendergast-Kennedy, Ellen L"

.. ,

EPO Principal Correspondence Control

FROM: -DUE: 08/31/09

Amy Pow.ell, OCA

T.O:

Virgilio, DE:DMR,;l'

FOR SIGNATURE OF:

DESC:

** GRN, **

EDO CONTROL: G20090475 DOG DT: · 08/25/09

FINAL REPµY:

CRC NO:

Testimony for House Homeland Security subcommittee September l:4, 2009 Hearing on Radioactiv~ Source Securitr (ED.ATS: OED0-2009-0507)

.ROUTING:~

BorclJ,ar~t vrrgilio Mallett Ash

DATE: 08/25/09 ,

ASSIGNEO TO:

FSME

CONTACT:

Miller

SPECIAL INSTRUCTIONS OR REMARKS:

Plea_se provide testimony as noted in. the attached emai],..to Stev~n Baggett, OEDO~y 7:00 a.m., Au~st 3·1, 2009. .Test:.imoriy due to OCA after DEDMRT review by n0on, August 31, 20.09-.

. Ordaz Burns/Gr~y Zimmerman, NSIR Schmidt, OCA Baggett, OEDO.

EDATS Number: OEDQ ... 2009-0507 Source: OEDO

. . General Information i · • .; . · · · • ::· : • :- · :· · · 1 ' •

Assigned To: FSME

.Other Assignees:

OEDO D11e Date: 8/31/20.09 7:00 AM· ·SECY Due Date: NONE

Subject: Testimony for House Homeland Security Subcommittee's September 14, 2009 Hearing oµ Radioactive Source ~~ ' ' ·. '

Description:

CC Routing: NONE ADAMS Accession Numbers - Incoming: NONE Response/Package: NONE

Other Information I · · . · · , · · · j Cross Reference Number: 020090475

Related Task:

File Routing: EDA TS

Staff Initiated: NO

Recurring Item: NO

Agency Lesson Learned: NO OEDO Monthly Report lfem: NO

Process Information ; .. ·. · . ' · . ·, · ·• · · " · · · ·- , · ; ! . · : • 'I • I • '

Action Type: Testimony

Signature Level: No Signatu·re Required

OEDO Concurrence: NO

OCM Concurrence: NO

OCA Concurrence: NO

Priority: Medium

Sensitivity: None

Urgency:NO

Special. Instructions: Please provide testimony as noted i1.1 the attached emai) to Steven Baggett, OEDO by 7:00 a.rp., Augu~t 31, 2009. Testimony·due to OCA after DEDMRT review by noon, August 31, 2009.

I ' , & '

Document Information. · . · · _ .. · . · ·r • •

OriIDnator Name: A1ny Powell

Originating Organization: OCA

Addressee: M; VirgiHo, DEDMRT

Incoming Task Received: E-mail

nate of Inconiing: 8/25/2009 Document Received by OEDO Date: 8/25/2009

Date Response Requested by Originator: NONE

Page I of I

Jaegers, Cathy

From: Powell, Amy . S~lit: Tuesday, August 25, 2009 10:22 AM To: Lewis, Robert; Layton, Michael; Miller, Charles; Zimmerman, Roy; Virgilio, Martin Cc: Lukes, Kim; Landau, Mindy; Andersen, James; Deegan, George; Casby, Marcia; Bagley,

Susan; Schmidt, Rebecca; Jones, Cynthia; Correla, Richard; Decker, David; Brenner, Eliot; .R~ynolds, Steven , · .

Subject: Witness, testimony for House Homeland Security Subcommittee's 9/14.field hearing

During the meeting this morning with Chairman Jaczko, Marty, Charlie, Roy, and OCA, it was agreed that Rob Lewis from FSME would be the NRC's witness for the S_eptember 14th Field Hearing that the House Homeland Security Subcommittee on Emerging Threats, Cybersecurity, and Sciel'!ce and Technology is holding on radioactive source s.ecurity. Mike Layton from NSIR will also attend In support ("second·chair").

OCA will continue to work with the Subcommittee staff to gather as much Intel abolJt attendance from Members, other panelists, and any other factors about the hearing. Field hearings.are often not as predictable as those held in DC, especially with regard to Members' attendance srnce the House will be in .session on September 14th. OCA will 1;1lso b_e in touch with our counterparts at the other agencies that will be testifying.

David Decker will be OCA's·lead on this hearing.

For the written testimony, David will find out the latest possible date that we can submitthe testimony "to the Subcommittee to allow your staff as much time as possible to draft the testimony; However, I would anticipate that OCAwill-need a draft no later than noon on Monday, August 31st in order to allow the Commission their 5-day review and comment_period (we also lose some time With Labor Day). I understand from Charlie and Roy that.there may be a good base for the written testimony In a document that was prepared for last month's tri-lateral meeting. .,

Rob and Mike, OCA will also want to schedule a prep·session with you closer to the field hearing to run you thre>ugh a gauntlet of questions based on the intel that we get from the Subcommittee. Let us know what dates · work for you during the week of September 7th. ,

I've cc'ed Steve Reyn~lds from Region Ill on this e-mail since he just participated in.a field hearing back in June. He could give you his perspective on the witness experience if that would be helpful.

D,avid will keep,you posted on 'what we learn fro!TI the Subcommittee. Thanks.for .supporting· thi_s hearing.

Amy

Amy.Powell Associate Director U. -s; Nuclear Regulatory Commission Office of Congr~ssional Affairs Phone: 301-415-1673

1 EDO --G20090i75

. '

Received: from HQCLSTR02.nrc.gov {[148.184.44.77]) by lWMs·o1.11rc;gov ([148.184.200.145]) with mapi; Tue, 25 Aug 200910:22:00 -0400 Content-Type: application/rns-tnef; ·narne="winmail.dat" Content-Transfer-Encoding: binary From: "Powell, Arny" To: "Lewis, Robert" , "Layton, Michael"

, "Miller, Charles" , "Zimmerman, Roy" , ''Virgilio, Martin"

CC: "Lukes, kim" , "Landau, Mindy" , "Andersen, James" , "Deegan, George;' · , "Casby, Marcia" , "Bagley,·

Susan" :, "Schmidt, Rebecca" , "Jones, Cynthia" , "Correia, Richard;' ·, "Decker, David" , "Brenner,

Eliot" , "Reynolds, Steven" . Date: Tue, 25 Aug 2009 10:21:59-0400 · Subject:. Witness, testimony for House Homeland Security Subcommittee's 9/14 field hec1ring Thread-Topic: Witness, testimony for House Homeland Security Subcommittee's 9/14 field hearing· · ·

Thread~lndex: Acolj2h+3R01 adzwTpuFINFJw7/FFw== Message-ID: · Accept-Language: en-US · Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach:

· X-MS-Exchange-Organization-SCL: -1 ·x-MS-TNEF-Correlator: ' MIME-Version: 1.0