Free Motion for Leave to File - District Court of Federal Claims - federal

Case 1:98-cv-00126-JFM

Document 846-13

Filed 07/14/2004

Page 1 of 24

EXHIBIT

..-

...

Case 1:98-cv-00126-JFM

Document 846-13

Filed 07/14/2004

Page 2 of 24

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF FEDERAL CLAIMS
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - x

YANKEE ATOMIC ELECTRIC

COMPANY; : Case

\87 (U
r;--;~

j 1

Nos.

iJ 98-126C,

CONNECTICUT YANKEE ATOMIC POWER
COMPANY; MAINE YANKEE ATOMIC
POWER COMPANY; FLORI DA POWER &

98- 154C, 98- 47 4C,
98-483C, 98-484C, 98-485C, 98-486C,
98-48 8C,

LIGHT COMPANY; NORTHERN STATES

98- 614C,

POWER COMPANY; DUKE POWER, a
Di vision of DUKE ENERGY CORP.

98- 621C, 99- 447C,

00- 440C, 00- 695C, 00- 703C, 01-115C,

INDIANA MICHIGAN POWER COMPANY;

SACRAMENTO MUNICIPAL UTILITY

01- 116C, 01- 249C

(Caption continued on the next

page)

Deposi tion of LAKE H. BARRETT

Washington, D.

C.

Monday, April 22, 2002

9:31 a.
Job No. : 11792-

Pages 1

through 272, Volume
Diane Gomez, RPR

Reported by:

D. REPORTING COMPANY, INC.
1100 Connecticut Avenue, NW . Suite 1150 ,

Fax: 202. 861. 3425

Washington, D. C. 20036 . 202. 861. 3410 . 800. 292. 4789 . Website: ladreporting. com . E-mail: lisa(!?ladreporting. com

NATIONWIDE COURT REPORTERS AND VIDEOGRAPHERS

....-.,

Case 1:98-cv-00126-JFM Document 846-13 H. BARRETT, VOLUME3 of 24 DEPOSITION OF LAKE Filed 07/14/2004 Page

CONDUCTED ON MONDAY, APRIL 22, 2002

234
likely would have read prior to its issuance, correct?

No.

I wasn t responsible for forecasts of

waste generation.

I can speculate that what they

saying in this last sentence is that by the year 2020

there will be available -- the amount of fuel existing at the reactors in the year 2020 is smaller than the

amount of fuel that was discharged by the year

2015.

What that has to do wi th

anything, I have no

clue.

Does this paragraph indicate that the

acceptance rate would be larger than the discharge

rate?
The acceptance rate should be larger than

the discharge rate under the plans

then.

Under the plans laid out under the draft
mission plan amendment?

Right.
Can I turn your attention to page 56.
MR. CRAWFORD:
MR. CAYNE:

56?

Yes.

Okay.
Mr. Barrett, a moment ago I asked you does
this

aragraph indicate that the acceptance rate would
D. REPORTING COMPANY, INC.
861-

!J

(301) 762-

8282 (202)

3410 (800)

292-

4789 (703)

288- 0026

Case 1:98-cv-00126-JFM

DEPOSITION OF LAKE H. BARRETT, VOLUME CONDUCTED ON MONDAY, APRIL 22, 2002

Document 846-13

Filed 07/14/2004

Page 4 of 24

235
be larger than the discharge rate, and you answered
the acceptance rate should be larger than the

discharge rate under the plan
that answer?

then.

Do you recall

Yes.

Why did you gl ve

that answer?

Because the acceptance rate would ramp up

in excess of

2, 000 tons per year

which was the

discharge rate.
Would ramp up to eventually what?
Higher than 2 , 000.

So more fuel would be accepted than was

being discharged, correct? Correct.
I ask you to look at the fourth column on

page 56.

Do you see that?

Yes.
And the take rate for years starting in
2008 is set at

2650.

Do you see that?

Per year until

many years out when it increases to 3, OOO?
MR. CRAWFORD:
MR. CAYNE:

You re on the fourth column?

Spent fuel

shipped.
288-0026

(301) 762-8282 (202) 861-3410 (800) 292-4789 (703)

D. REPORTING COMPANY, INC.

.....1...1 V..JI I IV" vr Lr\J'\..r. n. tli\KKt:.1 j , V VLUMI::. J Case 1:98-cv-00126-JFM DocumentMONDAY , APRIL 22 ,07/14/2004 Filed 2002 CONDUCTED ON 846-13

~(~ /

Page 5 of 24
68 (Pages 269 to 272)

269

271

ACKNOWLEDGMENT OF DEPONENT I, Lake H. Barrett do hereby acknowledge thaI 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 anached Errata s

ERRATA SHEET
IN RE: YANKEE ATOMIC v. UNITED STATES

3 RETURN BY:

4 PAGE LINE CORRECTION AND

REASON

(DATE) (~TlkE)
L::2--.:u-

t::

/77/

(J"

rret signed

~

(DATE)

(SIGNATURE)

270

272

2I

CERTIFICATE OF SHORTHAND REPORTER. NOTARY PUBLIC
, Diane Gomez. Registered Professional Reporter

ERRATA SHEET CONTINUED
IN RE: YANKEE ATOMIC \' . UNITED STATES

the officer before whom the foregoing proceedings were
4 taken , do hereby certify thatlhe foregoing transcript

3 RETURN BY:

4 PAGE LINE CORRECTION AND

5 , is a true and correct record of the proceedings; that
said proceedings were taken by me stenographically and

REASON

7 , thereaft~r reduced to typewriting under my
supervision; and that I am neither counsel for

related to , nor employed by any of the parties to this

12 IN WITNESS WHEREOF , I have hereunto set my hand
IJ and affixed my notarial seal this 25th day of April

II its outcome.

10 case and have no interest financial or otherwise, in ,

14 2002.
15 My commission expires:
16 June 14

2005

20 NOTARY PUBLIC IN AND FOR
2 I THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA

(DATE)

(SIGNATURE)

(30 I) 762- 8282' ~2) 861- 3410 (800) 292-4789 (703) 288- 0026

LAD. REPORTING COMPANY , INc.

DEPOSITION OF LAKE BARRETT, VOLUME 1 Case 1:98-cv-00126-JFM Document 846-13 H.Filed 07/14/2004 Page 6 of 24
CONDUCTED ON MONDAY, APRIL
22,

2002
271

IN RE:

YANKEE ATOMIC v. UNITED STATES
MAY 2 7

RETURN BY:
PAGE

2002

LINE

CORRECTION AND REASON
t 4 Q. '7

Yi t-~(?

/2r:/C'L
(DATE)
'..N~,'"
(301) 762-

8282 (202)

L. A. D. REPORTING COMPANY ,
861-

3410 (800)

292-

4789 (703)

INC.

288- 0026

---"".---."

,\
Case 1:98-cv-00126-JFM Document 846-13 Filed 07/14/2004 Page 7 of 24

527
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF FEDERAL CLAIMS

x /( ~~/ ' 0'
YANKEE ATOMIC ELECTRIC

COMPANY; : Case

Nos. 98-126C,

CONNECTICUT YANKEE ATOMIC POWER
COMPANY; MAINE YANKEE ATOMIC

98- 154C, 98- 47 4C,
98-483C, 98-484C,

POWER COMPANY; FLORIDA POWER
LIGHT COMPANY; NORTHERN STATES

98- 485C, 98- 486C,
98-488C, 98-614C, 98-621C, 99-447C,

POWER COMPANY; DUKE POWER, a
Di vision of DUKE ENERGY CORP.

00- 440C, 00- 695C,
00-703C, 01-115C, 01-116C, 01-249C

INDIANA MICHIGAN POWER COMPANY;

SACRAMENTO MUNICIPAL UTILITY

(Caption continued on the next

page)

Continued Deposition of LAKE H. BARRETT

Washington, D.

C.

Friday, April 26,
8:10 a.
Job No. : 11792-8

2002

Pages 527 through 825, Volume 3

Reported by:

Diane Gomez, RPR

D. REPORTING COMPANY, INC.
Fax: 202. 861. 3425

1100 Connecticut Avenue, NW . Suite 1150, Washington, D. C. 20036 . 202. 861. 3410 . 800. 292. 4789 . Website: ladreporting. com . E-mail: lisa(!?ladreporting. com

NATIONWIDE COURT REPORTERS AND VIDEOGRAPHERS

Case 1:98-cv-00126-JFM

Document 846-13

Filed 07/14/2004

Page 8 of 24

DEPOSITION OF LAKE H. BARRETT, VOLUME 3 CONDUCTED ON FRIDAY, APRIL 26, 2002

763
administri via

such as acceptance priority ran kings

and

annual capacity reports were, in your opinion, moot
until that time?
MR. CRAWFORD:
Obj ection , vague.

Obj ection

to the extent it mischaracterizes prior

testimony.

They weren

high
your

my priority.

They weren

They were not on my They were not on my priority.

priority all? priority, that' fair.

Because until you had a repository plan in

place, in your words it was

moot, correct?
accept

Okay.

Yeah

, I' ll

that.

Yes.

MR. CAYNE:

Let' s take a five- minute break.

It'

s 3:48.

(There is a recess from the record.

(Deposition Exhibit Barrett 39 was marked
for identification and was retained by counsp
18

Mr. Barrett, the court reporter has handed
you a document marked for identification as Exhibit

39, which is the acceptance priority ranking and

annual capacity report issued March 1995, and it bears
Bates numbers -- looks like the last four digits on
D. REPORTING COMPANY , INC.
861-

(301) 762-8282 (202)

3410 (800)

292-

4789 (703)

288- 0026

--

Case 1:98-cv-00126-JFM

DEPOSITION OF LAKE H. BARRETT, VOLUME 3 CONDUCTED ON FRIDAY, APRIL 26, 2002

Document 846-13

Filed 07/14/2004

Page 9 of 24

764
the first page are 0676 through 0748.
that document
Do you have

befo~~you?

I do.

Now, March 1995, this date is subsequent to

the 1994 plan you were referring to a moment

ago,

correct?
Correct.
What was that 1994 plan?

Program plan.
And that program plan did not reflect in
the table the

the acceptance schedule did not

reflect an MRS facility, correct?

That'

s my recollection.

You can look at it again, sir, if you need

to refresh your

recollection.
You probably

Did this have a table in it?

know what the tab~e

is.

1-2.

The program plan.

Mr. Barrett -You re asking about this one?

No.

Strike that.
861-

I asked you I think

(301) 762-

8282 (202)

D. REPORTING COMPANY , INC.

3410 (800) 292-4789 (703)

288-0026

Case 1:98-cv-00126-JFM DocumentOF LAKE FiledBARRETT, VOLUME10 of 24 DEPOSITION 846-13 H. 07/14/2004 Page 3

CONDUCTED ON FRIDAY, APRIL 26, 2002

795
I don t want you --

okay.
obj ections

MR. CRAWFORD:

I have the same

to that question.
Then let' s return to Exhibit

39.

In light of the sworn testimony you have

just provided, sir, why did the Department of Energy
choose to use an acceptance rate that reflected
capaci ty limits applicable to and only applicable to

an MRS facility when all the governing plans at that

point in time did not envision the use of any such
facili ty?

MR. CRAWFORD:
I don t know.

Obj ection , foundation.

Can you give any reason sitting here today

to justify why Exhibit 39 contains capacity

limi tations applicable

only in the context of an MRS

facili ty but

no such facility was envisioned at the

time Exhibit 39 was prepared?
MR. CRAWFORD:
Obj ection , foundation, asked

and answered, argumentative.
I don t know.

Can you come up wi th

any, sir?
288- 0026

(301) 762-

8282 (202)

D. REPORTING COMPANY, INC.
861-

3410 (800) 292-4789 (703)

Case 1:98-cv-00126-JFM

DEPOSITION OF LAKE H. BARRETT , VOLUME 3 CONDUCTED ON FRIDAY, APRIL 26, 2002

Document 846-13

Filed 07/14/2004

Page 11 of 24

MR. CRAWFORD:

Obj ection, argumentative,

answered.
No.
Did you in your capacity as director or

deputy director of the Office of Civilian Radioactive Waste Management sign off on the acceptance rates

reflected in Exhibit 39, specifically reflected in

Table 1,

page four of Exhibit 39?
I don t recall doing

so.

Do you think you would have?
I don t think

so.

I normally didn t sign

these lower priority documents like

this.

Did anyone in the Office of Civilian

Radioacti ve Waste Management who might have worked on
Exhibi t 39 consult with you personally concerning the

acceptance rates reflected on page four of Exhibit 39?
I don t recall ever discussing

it.

If not, if you never discussed it, sir, who
would have been the most senior official wi thin your

office, what you refer to as RW, who would have been
the most senior official who would have signed off on
Exhibit 39?

(301) 762-

8282 (202)

D. REPORTING COMPANY, INC.
861-

3410 (800)

292-

4789 (703)

288- 0026

DEPOSITION OF LAKE Filed 07/14/2004 Page Case 1:98-cv-00126-JFM Document 846-13 H. BARRETT, VOLUME 12 of 24
CONDUCTED ON
FRIDAY, APRIL 26,

2002

822
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.

If:

/Z? /;;It
(DATE)

(301) 762-

8282 (202)
z-:.

L. A. D. REPORTING COMPANY ,
861-

3410 (800)

292-

4789 (703)

INC.

288- 0026

DEPOSITION OF LAKE Filed 07/14/2004 Page Case 1:98-cv-00126-JFM Document 846-13 H. BARRETT, VOLUME 13 of 24

CONDUCTED ON FRIDAY, APRIL 26, 2002

824

IN RE:

YANKEE ATOMI C V UNITED STATES
MAY 3 0

RETURN BY:
PAGE
b '

2002

LINE

CORRECTION AND REASON
I '-'t 5.. '::2'/ I'. S;

--/Q-

Dc?

k~

/::rL
Ii '7

-L!1 t
r;

sf)

-J7

4/

'--1

t-Vf

-:r:
St'I/

ft/'iJv (V/t~/
h 0

hf'

y,4 ~, L/.~
t;/'!/

vL..; J) vL

.etr.

IV

J, MPc
d(V

rOt

vt,.

'-I , 7c

Ii

(J

(DATE)

(SIGNATURE)

(301) 762-

8282 (202)

L. A. D. REPORTING COMPANY ,
861-

3410 (800)

292-

4789 (703)

INC.

288- 0026

Case 1:98-cv-00126-JFM

Document 846-13

Filed 07/14/2004

Page 14 of 24

826
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF FEDERAL CLAIMS

YANKEE ATOMIC ELECTRIC COMPANY;
CONNECTICUT YANKEE ATOMIC POWER
COMPANY; MAINE YANKEE. ATOMIC
POWER COMPANY;

Case Nos. 98-126C,

98- 154C, 98- 474C,
98-483C, 98- 484C,
98-485C, 98- 486C,

FLORIDA POWER

LIGHT COMPANY; NORTHERN STATES

98-488C, 98- 614C,
98-621C,
99-44 7C,

POWER COMPANY; DUKE POWER, a
Di vision of DUKE ENERGY CORP.

00-440C, 00-695C,

INDIANA MICHIGAN POWER COMPANY;

00-703C, 01-115C,
0 1- 116C,
01- 24 9C

SACRAMENTO MUNICIPAL UTILITY

(Caption continued on the next

page)

Deposi tion of LAKE H. BARRETT, VOLUME

Washington, D. C.
Wednes day, May 8, 2002

9:31 a.
Job No.

11792-10

Pages: 826 through 1103

Reported by:

Diane Gomez, RPR

cg(Q)~Y

D. REPORTING COMPANY, INC.
1100 Connecticut Avenue, NW . Suite 1150, Washington , D. C. 20036 . 202. 861. 3410 Fax: 202. 861. 3425 . 800. 292. 4789 . Website: ladreporting. com . E-mail: lisa(!?ladreporting. com

NATIONWIDE COURT REPORTERS AND VIDEOGRAPHERS

Case 1:98-cv-00126-JFM Document 846-13 DEPOSITION OF LAKE Filed BARRETT , VOLUME of 24 H. 07/14/2004 Page 15 CONDUCTED ON WEDNESDAY, MAY 8, 2002

1050
No.
My question is with respect to this

statement:

When the nuclear waste policy was enacted

policy act was enacted, it was envisioned that the
department would have a repository available for

permanent waste disposal in 1998, and the department
entered into contracts with the utility to begin
accepting waste in 1998 on that basis.
Is that

statement consistent with your understanding?

Yes.
MS. HERRMANN:

Obj ection.

Foundation,

calls for a legal conclusion.

Yes.
On page three could you please turn to the
first paragraph on the top of the page.
Do you see

that?
Yes.
Why would continued on- site storage of
spent fuel threaten the orderly operation of the

nation

s civilian nuclear reactors?
MS. HERRMANN:

Obj ection.

Foundation.

You can take time to read it if you need

to.
D. REPORTING COMPANY, INC.
762- 8282

(202) 861-3410

(800) 292-4789 (301)

(703) 288-0026

--

Case 1:98-cv-00126-JFM Document 846-13 DEPOSITION OF LAKE Filed 07/14/2004 VOLUME of 24 H. BARRETT, Page 16 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
shut down ones -- were still paying

utili ties, not

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 to

have to,

quote, pay twice.
Under the statute the utilities 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:

Obj ection.

Calls for a

legal conclusion.

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,

(202) 861-3410

(800) 292-4789 (301)

A.

D. REPORTING COMPANY, INC.
762-8282
(703) 288- 0026

....

...

Case 1:98-cv-00126-JFM Document 846-13 DEPOSITION OF LAKE Filed BARRETT, VOLUME of 24 H. 07/14/2004 Page 17

CONDUCTED ON WEDNESDAY, MAY 8, 2002

1065
and the payments into the nuclear waste fund would be used to pay for the storage and disposal of spent fuel

and the utili ties

would not have to pay again directly

out of their own pockets to provide for such storage
and disposal during the period that the department
failed to comply with its statutory contractual

obligations to pick up the fuel, correct?
MS. HERRMANN:

Obj ection.

Calls for a

legal conclusion , compound.

Yes.

statement

correct?
was marked

believe so. (Deposi tion Exhibit Barrett 51

for identification and retained by Counsel.

The court reporter has handed you a

document marked

for identification

Exhibit 51.

you have that before you?

do.
And this document bears

Bates numbers

HQR-O38-0202 through 0204.

It'

s a letter dated March

1st, 1996, from the director of the Office of

L. A. D. REPORTING COMPANY, INC.
(202) 861- 3410 (800) 292-

4789 (301) 762-8282

(703) 288- 0026

Case 1:98-cv-00126-JFM Document 846-13 Filed 07/14/2004 Page 18 of 24 DEPOSITION OF LAKE H. BARRETT, VOLUME 4 rfP CONDUCTED ON WEDNESDAY, MAY 8, 2002

1100
ACKNOWLEDGMENT OF DEPONENT

, 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.

~/2 ~/6
(DATE)

(SIGNATURE)

D. REPORTING COMPANY, INC.
(202) 861- 3410

(800) 292-

4789 (301) 762- 8282

(703) 288- 0026

Case 1:98-cv-00126-JFM Document 846-13 H. BARRETT, VOLUME 4 of 24 DEPOSITION OF LAKE Filed 07/14/2004 Page 19 CONDUCTED QN WEDNESDAY , MAY 8, 2002

1102

IN RE:

YANKEE ATOMIC V UNITED STATES

RETURN BY:
PAGE

\01..,.'1 ~
CORRECTION AND REASON

:I"

LINE

71

( DATE)

(SIGNATURE)

L. A. D. REPORTING COMPANY ,
(202) 861- 3410
(800) 292-

4789 (301) 762- 8282

INC.
(703) 288 - 0026

("~"", . "\"

Case 1:98-cv-00126-JFM

Document 846-13

Filed 07/14/2004

Page 20 of 24

Lake H, Barrett CONTAINS CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION PURSUANT TO TIlE PROTECI1VE ORDER- VOLUME II May 15, 2002

Washington , D.
Page 242

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF FEDERAL CLAIMS

YANKEE ATOMIC ELECTRIC
COMPANY , MAINE YANKEE ATOMIC

CerIIed Copy
: Case No. 98- 126Ci
: 98- 474C,

POWER CO., and CONNECTICUT
YANKEE ATOMIC POWER CO.

Plaintiffs,
vs.
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

98- 154C

: (Senior Judge Merrow)

Defendant.

: VOLUME II

Washington, D. C .
-"-C

Wednesday, May 15, 2002

Depos i tion of LAKE H. BARRETT, a wi tnes

s

herein,

called for examination by counsel for Defendant in
the above-entitled matter, pursuant to notice, the

witness being previously duly sworn, taken at the
offices of Spriggs & Hollingsworth , 1350 Eye
Street, N. W., Washington, D. C., commencing at

9: 05

m., Wednesday, May 15, 2002, and the proceedings
being taken down by Stenotype by CAPPY HALLOCK, RPR-CRR, and transcribed under her

direction.

CONTAINS CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION

PURSUANT TO THE PROTECTIVE ORDER
1"'"'4Iif

Alderson Reporting Company, Inc. 111114th Street , N. W. Suite 400 1- 800- FOR- DEPO Washington , DC 20005

Case 1:98-cv-00126-JFM

Document 846-13

Filed 07/14/2004

Page 21 of 24

Lake H, Barrett CONTAINS CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION PURSUANT TO TIlE PROTECTIVE ORDER- VOLUME II May 15, 2002

Washington , D.
Page 339

I don

t recall.

I have lots of

meetings with Yankee -- there were quite a few

people included with the Yankees, and I don

remember.
Do you recall telling anyone at Yankee

Atomic, you know, shortly, sometime not long after
this denial letter, that you were receptive to
suggestions on a process for allocation of

priority under the contract which DOE could

follow?
MS. HERRMANN:
I might have.

Objection.

Vague.

Okay.
Do you think -- were you sympathetic to

Yankee s predicament at the time?

In other words,

to its desire to move this spent fuel off of its

site so that it could complete the decommissioning
activities which had been initiated?
MS. HERRMANN:

Objection.

Vague.

Yes.
Why?

I felt that it was in the nation

interests to support utilities like Yankee who

were trying to clean up their sites and return
that real estate to useful societal purpose in

Alderson Reporting Company, Inc. 111114th Street , N. W. Suite 400 1- 800- FOR- DEPO Washington , DC 20005

Case 1:98-cv-00126-JFM

Document 846-13

Filed 07/14/2004

Page 22 of 24

Lake H, Barrett CONTAINS CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION PURSUANT TO TIlE PROTECTIVE ORDER- VOLUME II May 15, 2002

Washington , D.
Page 340

that we should try to move the fuel off as quickly as we practically could, consistent with sound

~ national policies.
Good.

--J

That'

s what you thought, you

know, in your working life at RW?

Yes. Okay.

But because of these other

factors we have discussed previously, either the
time wasn t right or whatever to actually grant

the priority at that time?
MS. HERRMANN:

Obj ection as to the

characterization.
Even though you were sympathetic to
their predicament?

I was sympathetic to their predicament.

Sympathy did not drive the decision to grant

it.

Because of the other factors that we

discussed previously, is that what led you to deny

it?
Correct.
Okay.
MR. STOUCK:

Would you mark this as

Number 101 (sic), please.
(Barrett Deposition Exhibit

No. 102 was marked for

Alderson Reporting Company, Inc. 111114th Street , N. W. Suite 400 1- 800- FOR- DEPO Washington , DC 20005

Case BarTetl CONTAINS COk , .JENTIAL INFORMATION PURSUANT TOFiled 07/14/2004 VOLUME II of 24 2002 Document 846-13 THE PROTEdlVE ORDER- Page 23 May 15, Lake H, 1:98-cv-00126-JFM Washington , D.
Page 402

lookout for that.

(Thereupon, at

1:30 p. m., the taking of

the instant deposition ceased.

of the Witness

SUBSCRIBED AND SWORN to before me this

ill

day of

, 20

OZ--

/l !:t
:i

I --/

-X

;:;Z:

NOT

1,U BLIC
Pat l. Austin
Notary Public , District of Columbia

My Commission Expires:

My Commission Expires

!i:?DQ6

Alderson Reporting Company, Inc, 1111 14th Street , N, W. Suite 400 1- 800- FOR- DEPO Washington , DC 20005

Case 1:98-cv-00126-JFM Document 846-13 Filed 07/14/2004 ERFV.. A SHEET FOR THE TRANSCRIPl JF:

Page 24 of 24

Notice Date: May 16 , 2002 Case Name: Yankee Atomic vs. United States Case Number: 98- 126C- 987 4C Dep. Date: May 15 , 2002 Deponent: Lake Barrett (cont) Washington DC

Place:4269:
Ref. No.

CORRECTIONS:

Page

Line

Now Reads

Should Read
Ii /c1

Reasons Therefore

333

"1 l,-

e.

fA)Q.j
Cln

JJ)
537

S-/

iiI );

fu~ I

~u(1

t: /zo Date of Signature