Case 1:98-cv-00126-JFM
Document 856-12
Filed 09/03/2004
Page 1 of 12
DEPOSITION OF LAKE H. BARRETT, VOLUME CONDUCTED ON WEDNESDAY, MAY 8, 2002
1054
The paragraph reads
but this appears
Start of waste acceptance:
The
Upton/Towns Bill mandates a storage facility in 1998,
infeasible.
More realistic estimates
are that a storage facility could be available in five
to seven years after legislation is passed, depending
on the degree of procedural streamlining included in
the law.
Assuming passage of legislation 1995,
therefore acceptance could begin from 1999 to 2003.
Do you see that?
That'
s the statement you
referring to, correct?
Yes.
Earlier on your office believed that an
interim storage facility could be up and running
wi thin three- and-
half years of the start of
construction, correct?
MS. HERRMANN:
Obj ection.
Speculation.
half years.
I don t recall three- and-
You do not recall testifying in this
deposi tion that at an earlier point in time you
believed that it would take less than five to seven years to get an interim storage facility up and
running?
(202) 861- 3410
(800) 292-4789 (301)
D. REPORTING COMPANY, INC.
762-8282
(703) 288-0026
Case 1:98-cv-00126-JFM
Document 856-12
Filed 09/03/2004
Page 2 of 12
DEPOSITION OF LAKE H. BARRETT, VOLUME CONDUCTED ON WEDNESDAY, MAY 8, 2002
1055
All depends on the infrastructure and
degree of streamlining,
etc.
The shortest I think
ve ever said was four under some -- some
circumstances which I don t remember the details.
But
generally -- I'
ve never said less than
four.
You can
do it in three and a
half. That'
s the licensing phase
But go ahead.
or something, to put it in
context.
mean, what'
s the
what' s the question?
I f you
saying three and a half, I don t think you can do it
in three and a hal f .
My question is do you agree with the statement at page Bates 0579 that a realistic estimate
of the amount of time that it would take to get an
interim storage facility up and running would be from
five to seven years after the enactment of authorizing
legislation?
MS. HERRMANN:
Obj ection.
Speculation.
Could be four , could be five, could be
seven.
All depends on a lot of
things.
057 9?
Would an MRS facility be an interim storage
facili ty wi thin the meaning of this paragraph on
MS. HERRMANN:
Obj ection.
Foundation.
D. REPORTING COMPANY, INC.
(202) 861- 3410 (800) 292-
4789 (301) 762- 8282
(703) 288- 0026
Case 1:98-cv-00126-JFM
Document 856-12
Filed 09/03/2004
Page 3 of 12
DEPOSITION OF LAKE H. BARRETT, VOLUME CONDUCTED ON WEDNESDAY, MAY 8, 2002
1056
It would be very
similar.
Foundation.
Is that what was in mind?
MS. HERRMANN:
Obj ection.
Speculation.
The Upton/Towns Bill was straight
storage.
An MRS was more than straight
integral part of the
storage.
It was an
system.
Turn to page -- it' s a section that on the
top of the page it states " supporting initiatives for
policy options.
re going back in the document or
forward?
It' s -MR. MACDONALD:
Third-to-the- Iast
page.
-- third-to-the- Iast page.
I see that page.
And can you take a moment to read this
portion of the memorandum.
And to put it into context
for you, I' m
going to specifically ask you about, on
the following page, the section on policy
considerations.
Why don t you read this memorandum,
this portion of the memorandum so that you can respond
D. REPORTING COMPANY, INC.
(202) 861- 3410
(800) 292-
4789 (301) 762- 8282
(703) 288- 0026
Case 1:98-cv-00126-JFM
Filed 09/03/2004 Page 4 of 12 DEPOSITION OF LAKE H. BARRETT , VOLUME 4
Document 856-12
CONDUCTED ON WEDNESDAY, MAY 8, 2002
1057
to the questions I have on that
section.
Am I supposed to read B or A?
m focusing on Subsection
Oh, I' m sorry, I' m doing A.
ve read
Okay.
Now , under page
0581.
Tell me which
one.
That'
Yes.
s the first page with " supporting
Do you see that?
ini tiati ves for policy actions.
In 1995, in April 1995 was the multipurpose
canister program still in force, or had you terminated
it already?
It'
early
' 95.
s my recollection it was still there in
And as you discussed earlier , the
mul tipurpose canister program would have been intended
to mitigate at least some of the harm suffered by
utili ties as
a result of the delay in acceptance of
spent nuclear fuel, correct?
Correct.
Well, why, as reflected in this Exhibit 50,
D. REPORTING COMPANY, INC.
(202) 861- 3410 (800) 292-
4789 (301) 762-8282
(703) 288- 0026
Case 1:98-cv-00126-JFM
Document 856-12
Filed 09/03/2004
Page 5 of 12
DEPOSITION OF LAKE H. BARRETT , VOLUME CONDUCTED ON WEDNESDAY, MAY 8, 2002
1058
was it also believed that -- by the department and the
Office of Management and Budget that additional
payments would be required to be made to the utilities
to supplement the provision of multipurpose canisters?
MS. HERRMANN:
Obj ection.
Foundation.
It doesn t say that.
It says it could be.
You know, if this option were adopted you could do
that to additionally compensate them for the
delays.
Because I thought when you explained the
mul tipurpose canister program, that would have been a
stand- alone
proposal, to compensate the utilities?
That was a -- that was a stand- alone
proposal, but what this is referring to, I believe, is
. 14
this would be in addition to the multipurpose
canisters.
It says right there, These payments would
supplement the multipurpose
canisters.
You indicated that the multipurpose
canister program was intended to mitigate the harm
suffered by the utilities, correct, as a result of the
acceptance delays?
Yes.
Why was the department in 1995 considering
(202) 861-3410
(800) 292-4789 (301)
D. REPORTING COMPANY, INC.
762-8282
(703) 288-0026
Case 1:98-cv-00126-JFM
Document 856-12
Filed 09/03/2004
Page 6 of 12
DEPOSITION OF LAKE H. BARRETT, VOLUME CONDUCTED ON WEDNESDAY , MAY 8, 2002
1059
the possibility of supplementing the provision of
mul tipurpose
canisters to utili ties
with additional
payments reflected in the proposal on page 0581 and
0582 of Exhibit 50?
MS. HERRMANN:
Obj ection.
Foundation.
Speculation.
It would be my understanding that many
utili ties were
not particularly satisfied that the
mul tipurpose canisters being supplied were sufficient
to cover the delays and wanted more. And this was
our -- an option that we were looking at that we could
provide more.
An example is one you said earlier, we
talked about earlier was that the multipurpose canisters did not cover the construction costs that
on- si te reactors
would have to
do.
And would the payments reflected in the
proposal set forth at page 581 have covered such
construction costs?
Could have been used for
that.
purposes,
That would have been one of the
correct?
Could have been, yes.
D. REPORTING COMPANY, INC.
(202) 861-3410
(800) 292-
...I
4789 (301) 762- 8282
(703) 288- 0026
Case 1:98-cv-00126-JFM
Document 856-12
Filed 09/03/2004
Page 7 of 12
DEPOSITION OF LAKE H. BARRETT , VOLUME CONDUCTED ON WEDNESDAY, MAY 8, 2002
1060
For what other purposes would the payments
reflected at page 051 have been used?
MS. HERRMANN:
I don t know.
Obj ection.
Foundation.
Well , rather than glvlng me all the
purposes, what other purposes can you think of?
you think of any other purposes?
MS. HERRMANN:
Same objection.
Can
Other than construction?
Well, if it was a payment in terms of
cash,
utili ties could
do with it what they wished to do in
conj unction with the PUCs.
In conj unction with the?
Public utility
commissions.
How would the amount of the payments have
been determined?
MS. HERRMANN:
Obj ection.
Foundation
speculation.
That' s a complexity that' s
the reasons why we never did
there and one of
it.
On the next page, page 0582.
MS. HERRMANN:
Can we get a title on the
(202) 861-3410
(800) 292-4789 (301)
D.
REPORTING COMPANY, INC.
762- 8282
(703) 288-0026
Case 1:98-cv-00126-JFM
Document 856-12
Filed 09/03/2004
Page 8 of 12
DEPOSITION OF LAKE H. BARRETT, VOLUME CONDUCTED ON WEDNESDAY, MAY 8, 2002
1061
top, please?
MR. CAYNE:
The first entry is Legislative
Implications.
MR. MACDONALD:
The second-to-the-last
page.
The next-to-the- last page?
Yes.
You said a moment ago the payments
weren t made because of the complexity of determining
the amount.
Do you recall that statement?
Yeah, I recall the
statement.
I shouldn
have made
it.
You didn t mean to indicate that the
department didn t make the payments because it didn
believe that it had an obligation to mitigate or
rectify the harm sustained by the utili ties as the
resul t of the delay in acceptance, did you?
MS. HERRMANN:
Objection.
testimony.
Foundation
calls for a legal conclusion.
Objection to the extent
it mischaracterizes prior
Cash payments are extremely
complicated,
and this was not pursued beyond the preconceptual
discussion that you see
here.
(202) 861-3410
(800) 292-4789 (301)
D.
REPORTING COMPANY, INC.
762- 8282 (703) 288- 0026
Case 1:98-cv-00126-JFM
Document 856-12
Filed 09/03/2004
Page 9 of 12
DEPOSITION OF LAKE H. BARRETT , VOLUME CONDUCTED ON WEDNESDAY, MAY 8, 2002
1062
But it was not pursued, if I understand
your testimony, because of the difficulty in
determining the amount of the cash payments as opposed
to a determination by the department that it didn
have an obligation to rectify the harm suffered by the
utili ties as
correct?
a result of the acceptance
delays,
MS. HERRMANN:
Obj ection.
Foundation,
calls for a legal conclusion.
Correct?
MS. HERRMANN:
Same obj ections .
I don t know how to answer that
question,
I don
because you had so many things mixed in
know how to answer that
it.
question.
If I understand your testimony, the
department basically threw up its hands and
said, It'
too complicated for to us figure out how much we
should pay each utility, so we re not going to pursue
this proposal.
Would that be a correct statement?
MS. HERRMANN:
prior testimony.
Obj ection.
Mischaracterizes
No, it would not be, because the amount
(202) 861-3410
(800) 292-4789 (301)
D. REPORTING COMPANY, INC.
762-8282
(703) 288- 0026
Case 1:98-cv-00126-JFM
Document 856-12
Filed 09/03/2004
Page 10 of 12
DEPOSITION OF LAKE H. BARRETT, VOLUME CONDUCTED ON WEDNESDAY, MAY 8, 2002
1063
that one would pay is probably one of the more easy things to do, and that is very complicated in
itself.
So there are many issues involving direct
payments, of
which determining what amounts to whom and when is a
very complicated one, but that is probably less complicated than the source of funds and the other things discussed in this
statement.
s a lesser
So I did say that, but that'
item.
Although that is a major
item.
I have nothing
to do -- in my statement on that, my remark had
nothing to do regarding obligations or anything else
that revolved through contractual matters.
Do you see under Policy Consideration it
says " mitigates the perceived problems of utili ties
having to pay twice for storage
I see that.
Do you see that?
What is that?
MS. HERRMANN:
Obj ection.
Foundation,
speculation.
I believe what the authors were trying to
do here was find a way to provide resources back to
the utili ties that were having to spend resources due
D. REPORTING COMPANY, INC.
(202) 861- 3410
(800) 292-
4789 (301) 762- 8282
(703) 288- 0026
Case 1:98-cv-00126-JFM
Document 856-12
Filed 09/03/2004
Page 11 of 12
DEPOSITION OF LAKE H. BARRETT, VOLUME CONDUCTED ON WEDNESDAY, MAY 8, 2002
1064
to the fact that we didn t pick the fuel up, through
storage or whatever , while they were -- operating
utili ties, not
shut down ones -- were still paying
money into the waste
fund.
The ones who were
operating claimed they were paying twice; once to pay the waste fund and once to do with
storage.
So we
were trying to figure a way to cover some of the
storage costs that would alleviate the utili ties
have to, quote, pay
to
twice.
Under the statute the utili ties were
supposed to pay into the waste fund, and at that point
it became the obligation of the Department of Energy
to store and dispose of the spent fuel, correct?
MS. HERRMANN:
legal conclusion.
Obj ection.
Calls for a
Correct?
MS. HERRMANN:
Same obj ection.
Repeat the question
again.
The problem of the utili ties having to pay
twice for storage arose because under the Nuclear
Waste Policy Act it was the intention of Congress that
the utili ties pay once into the nuclear waste
fund,
D. REPORTING COMPANY, INC.
(202) 861-3410
(800) 292-
4789 (301) 762-8282
(703) 288- 0026
Case 1:98-cv-00126-JFM
Document 856-12
Filed 09/03/2004
Page 12 of 12
rff
DEPOSITION OF LAKE H. BARRETT, VOLUME 4 CONDUCTED ON WEDNESDAY , MAY 8, 2002
1100
ACKNOWLEDGMENT OF DEPONENT
I, LAKE H. BARRETT, do hereby acknowledge that I
have read and examined the foregoing testimony, and
the same is a true , cOrrect and complete transcription
of the testimony given by me and any corrections
appear on the attached Errata sheet signed by me.
~h
~/6
~47
(SIGNATURE)
(DATE)
(202) 861- 3410
D. REPORTING COMPANY, INC.
(800) 292-
4789 (301) 762- 8282
(703) 288- 0026