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

-Case 1:98-cv-00126-JFM
Robert L. Campbell
Washington, D.

Document 840-4

Filed 07/07/2004

Page 1 of 25
June 13 ,

2002

Page 31

that.
From 1995 forward, when was the next time

that your responsibilities changed in any
substantial way?

In 1999, I became responsible for the
rest of the Greater- Than- Class C program.
I also

became the Department' s liaison to a group called

the conference of radiation control program directors, and I also picked up responsibility

for - - with - -

what we call orphan waste.

They'

basically DOE waste that lack some sort

- - there I s

some sort of barrier to either treatment or

disposal.

And so the work there is to figure out

how to take these waste and get them treated and
get them disposed.

Okay.

In 1999 when your duties changed

and you became responsible for the rest of the GTCC

program, was there a corresponding change in the
organizational structure that went along with that?

Yes.

Yes.
Can you

Can you tell me about that?

please tell me about that change?

Sure.

That was a rather dramatic

reorganization.

We shifted from

we shifted from

a more or less straightforward waste management

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

-Case 1:98-cv-00126-JFM
Robert L. Campbell

-Page 2 of 25
June 13 ,

Document 840-4

Filed 07/07/2004

2002

Washington, D.

Page 47

Okay.

So to make sure my question and

your answer is clear, I want to

ask:

To your

knowledge, all the GTCC waste that exists today is
not mixed low- level waste?
MS. HERRMANN:
THE WITNESS:

Obj ection, vague.
I I m not aware of the

current chemical characterization of the GTCC waste
around the country.
BY MR. SKALABAN
So I don

It

I don

I t know.
- - you

Has it ever

corne up in

any of your

know, any of your work as the person in charge of

GTCC waste for DOE at this time, has it ever corne

up that GTCC waste may be

or some GTCC waste

that'

s out there may be mixed waste?
Yes, it has.

And how did that corne up?

Wha t

was the

context of that discussion or analysis?
Simply that it' s possible. I mean, the

Department of Energy deals with mixed waste all the

time.

And so any - -

any system or just in looking

at Greater- Than- Class C waste, one would need to

assume that some of it could be mixed waste as

well.
To your knowledge, are you familiar with
the term activated metal GTCC waste?

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

-Case 1:98-cv-00126-JFM
Robert L. Campbell

Document 840-4

Filed 07/07/2004

Page 3 of 25
June 13 ,

2002

Washington , D.

Page 48

Yes.
Okay.
And can you explain for the record

what that means to you?

It is stainless steel typically that has

been in contact either with the fuel assembly or
the fuel basket in the reactor.
And it'

s--

as

metal is in close proximity to the nuclear

reaction ,

it becomes activated.

It becomes

radioact i ve .

The iron, various impurities and the

stain cobalt, things like that, become radioactive forms of those elements, and that is basically what
is activated metal.

And due to the typical run time of a
commericial nuclear power plant, it becomes highly
enough activated that it exceeds the Class C

limits.
So if we refer to nuclear utility

activated metal GTCC in this deposition, we will be
referring to that description you just gave me; is

that fair?
Yes.
To your understanding, is any of the

nuclear - -

and I do want to make sure

actually,

let me back up one second.

Nuclear utilities are the source of the

1111

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

Case 1:98-cv-00126-JFM
Robert L. Campbell

Document 840-4

Filed 07/07/2004

Page 4 of 25
June 13 ,

2002

Washington, D.

Page 52

Who took over for Mr. Rhoderick?
Karen Guevara.

And can you spell that last name for me,

please?
G-u-e-v-a- r-a.
And when did Ms. Guevara take over?
This was a year and a half ago roughly.

So approximately the beginning of 2001?

Yes.
And she took over from Mr. Rhoderick?

Yes.
What happened to Mr. Rhoderick, did he
retire or move on?

No.

He was promoted to the Richland

he was the office director for the Richland

office,

which would be in the Office of

proj ect Completion.

So prior to 1999, when your program
manager responsibilities included all of GTCC
waste, did you work on any other GTCC waste
projects other than sealed sources prior to 1999?

Yes.
Can you tell me about that?

For a brief time period in about 1997,
they reorganized responsibilities for

Greater- Than- Class

C.

And -- and in the process of

Alderson Reporting Company, Inc.

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

Case 1:98-cv-00126-JFM
Robert L. Campbell

Document 840-4

Filed 07/07/2004

Page 5 of 25
June 13 ,

2002

Washington, D.

doing that, they had decided that they wanted it
all under one person.

They had put it under me.

We began - - and
was.
Okay.

then a month or so later, they

changed their minds and it went back to the way it

And when did that occur?

I believe it was 1997.

1997.

And that lasted, I believe you

said, about a month?

About a month, maybe two months.

So for that one month or two months in
1997, you had full responsibility for all GTCC

waste?
Yes.
And then after that time period, there
was another reorganization and you went back to

just working on sealed sources, the sealed source
end of GTCC waste?

Yes.
Okay.
And then in 1999, there was the

reorganization, you became project manager, and

that included all your responsibilities -- and you
had full responsibility for all GTCC waste?

Yes.
Okay.
In 1990 -- in the 1999 period

Alderson Reporting Company, Inc.

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

Case 1:98-cv-00126-JFM
Robert L. Campbell

Document 840-4

Filed 07/07/2004

Page 6 of 25
June 13 ,

2002

Washington , D.

forward, who do you -- who have you worked
GTCC waste issues within the Department of Energy
or its contractors?

Out at the Idaho site, contractors Bob

Hansson , Phil Wheatley and the Department of
Energy; but at the Idaho site, Mark Arenaze.

And

then I I ve worked

with my management.

ve also worked with Lee Lenard at the

Los Alamos site; Joel Grimm, who is DOE
Albuquerque; and Jim Orbin, who is DOE Those are the main people I worked
m sorry.

Albuquerque.

with.
s

What was Mr. Orbin '

first

name?

Jim.
Jim.
No.
And what part of DOE does Mr. Grimm
Are they part of EM?

and Mr. Orbin work for?
Our field

- - well, our

field sites

don't really fall into those categories

exactly.

But they do work on environmental management

programs.
Mr. Orbin is the waste management

division director for the Albuquerque operations

office, and Joel Grimm is a program manager who

works for him in that

division.

And so Mark Arenaze is similar to

Alderson Reporting Company, Inc.

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

-Case 1:98-cv-00126-JFM
Robert L. Campbell Washington , D.

Document 840-4

Filed 07/07/2004

Page 7 of 25
June 13 ,

2002

Page 60

stopping that.
to the program.

I do not know what

I I m not part

of the discussions on

- - on what' s

going to happen

So I do not know.

BY MR. SKALABAN:

Okay.

So you haven' t been involved in

any conversation - -

let me ask this question:

Have

you been involved in any questions where it was

discussed what would happen to the GTCC program in

view of the top-to- bottom
Yes.

review?

And can you tell me about those
conversations, what was discussed?

There was at least one conversation where

the - -

it was reported to me that management had

discussed the idea of transferring the

Greater- Than- Class

C program to the Office of

Civilian Radioactive Waste Management and the

sealed source program to the National Nuclear Security Administration, which is another part of
DOE.

And who was involved in this conversation

besides yourself?

Susan Rudzinski.
office director.

She I s

the current EM22

Was there anyone else involved in that

Alderson Reporting Company, Inc.

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

Case 1:98-cv-00126-JFM
Robert L. Campbell

Document 840-4

Filed 07/07/2004

Page 8 of 25
June 13 ,

2002

Washington , D.

Page 61

conversation?
I do not believe

so.

Okay.

Did she give you any indication
well, first of all, do you have

where management - an understanding - -

when Ms. Rudzinski told you

that management was considering transferring GTCC

responsibilities to OCRWM, did you have any
responsibility of what management she was referring
to, who the managers were that were talking about

this?
MS. HERRMANN

Objection, speculation.
Yes.
Jessie Roberson.

THE WITNESS:

would be her decision.

So that I s who she was

referring to.
BY MR. SKALABAN

The

assistant secretary?

Yes.
Did she give any indication of whether
Jessie Roberson was talking to OCRWM about
this matter?

- - about
that

Yes.

I believe she said that the - -

she had met with the director of OCRWM.

that your

So that Ms. -- I just want to make testimony is clear. Ms. Rudzinski

sure

indicated to you that Ms. Roberson had talked to

Alderson Reporting Company, Inc. 1111 14th Street, No W. Suite 400 1- 800- FOR- DEPO Washington , DC 20005

Case 1:98-cv-00126-JFM
Robert L. Campbell

Document 840-4

Filed 07/07/2004

Page 9 of 25
June 13 ,

2002

Washington , Do

the director of OCRWM about the potential transfer

of GTCC responsibilities to them, to OCRWM?

Yes.

And when was - - when
transfer of responsibility?

was your

conversation with Ms. Lazinski about this possible

Within the last two months.

It I s Rudzinski.
that?
Yes.

Do you want me to spell

Would you please?

R-u-

i-n-s-

Did you get any indication of how likely

this possibility was
MS. HERRMANN

Obj ection.

BY MR. SKALABAN:

-- the transfer of responsibilities of GTCC to OCRWM?
MS. HERRMANN

Obj ection, speculation.
Yes, I did.

THE WITNESS:

BY MR. SKALABAN:

Can you tell me about what your sense of
that was?

MS. HERRMANN:
THE WITNESS:

Same obj ection.
I need to ask you a

question.
Alderson Reporting Company, Inc. 1111 14th Street , No Wo Suite 400 1- 800- FOR- DEPO Washington , DC 20005

Case 1:98-cv-00126-JFM
Robert L. Campbell

Document 840-4

Filed 07/07/2004

Page 10 of 25
June 13 ,

2002

Washington, D.

Page 84

So the problem with sealed sources and

with other is that they can have things that are
transuranic; they can have things that are not

transuranic, and so there ' s - to be desired.
BY MR. SKALABAN

it leaves something

So when you were referring earlier to
I think it was about two or three questions ago

when I asked you about any other problems besides
the neutron- generating sealed sources, I believe

you identified multiple waste forms and the

possibility of hazardous

wastes.
I re referring
to

Yes.
In that answer, when you

the multiple waste forms and the possibility of

hazardous wastes, are you referring to the sealed
sources and the other category of GTCC waste?

Yes.
And to your knowledge, are you aware of

any technical obstacles of putting nuclear utility activated metal GTCC waste in the Yucca Mountain

repository?
MS. HERRMANN
Obj ection , speculation.

THE WITNESS:
BY MR. SKALABAN

I I m not aware of

any.

Alderson Reporting Company, Inco 1111 14th Street, No W. Suite 400 I- 800-FOR- DEPO Washington , DC 20005

Case 1:98-cv-00126-JFM
Robert L. Campbell

Document 840-4

Filed 07/07/2004

Page 11 of 25
June 13, 2002

Washington, D.

Page 94

That would be parts of the fuel assembly
that aren

I t actually the fuel.
And are nonfuel- bearing components with

respect to spent fuel, are they understood to be

Greater- Than- Class
legal conclusion.

C waste?

MS. HERRMANN:

Objection ,

calls for a

THE WITNESS:

My understanding is that

spent fuel is spent

fuel.

So the fuel assembly

would be spent fuel, including the nonfuel bearing

components, because you can I t have
wi thout some of it not being

a fuel assembly
s all

fuel. That'

spent fuel as far as I know.
BY MR. SKALABAN

And as far as you

know, that I s going to

be accepted and disposed of by OCRWM along with the

spent fuel?
MS. HERRMANN

Obj ection, foundation,

speculation, calls for a legal conclusion.
BY MR. SKALABAN

And, again, I' m
nonfuel- bearing
MS. HERRMANN:
THE WITNESS:

talking about

components.

Same obj ections .
My understanding is that

assembly is being put into the canister by

Alderson Reporting Company, Inc.

1111 14th Street , No W. Suite 400 1- 800- FOR- DEPO Washington , DC 20005

Case 1:98-cv-00126-JFM
Robert L. Campbell

Document 840-4

Filed 07/07/2004

Page 12 of 25
June 13 ,

2002

Washington , D.

Page 95

most utilities.
of a storage.

Those are being put into

And OCRWM has not formally

published, to my knowledge, exactly what it is they are and are not going to

accept, but I believe it'

the assumption that everything that is placed into

the canister is - -

that those canisters are not

going to be reopened again.

But that is simply, I think, a common
assumption that enough people make that that I s why

I believe that to be

true.

I don

I t know

for

sure,

but that ' s - -

that' s the assumption I believe that

I I m making and everyone else is

making.

BY MR. SKALABAN:

What you say everyone else, you'
referring to DOE , people at DOE?
And of the utilities.
I don' t believe

that the utilities would be packaging up their fuel that way if they thought that that was not how it
was going to be accepted.

So, to your knowledge -- I mean, that' s a
commonly shared assumption by utilities and DOE?

Yes.
MS. HERRMANN
Obj ection , foundation.

BY MR. SKALABAN:

Do you know, are nonfuel- bearing

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

.)

Case 1:98-cv-00126-JFM
Robert L. Campbell

Document 840-4

Filed 07/07/2004

Page 13 of 25
June 13 ,

2002

Washington, Do

Page 125

to this area?

Yes.
MR. SKALABAN

Just to make clear my
I don't know how many

request on the record - -

drafts of this policy analysis paper there
It may be too many to produce to us to ask

were.

questions on them tomorrow, but if it is a
manageable amount, we would like to see whatever
available so we can try and ask him the

questions.

It seems clear there was one on paper and then

iterations and then a final
MS. HERRMANN

paper.
I don't know how

Yes.

many there are, but I would make a call on our next

break.
MR. SKALABAN

Thank you.

I appreciate

that.
MS. HERRMANN

Sure.

MR. SKALABAN:

Let me ask you about -It has

m going to introduce an exhibit to your

deposition.

Let'

s mark this as Exhibit

Bates numbers of HQR092- 0045 through 0052.
(Jones Exhibit No.

was marked for

identification.
BY MR. SKALABAN

Alderson Reporting Company, Inc.
1111

14th Street , No Wo Suite 400 1- 800- FOR- DEPO Washington , DC 20005

Case 1:98-cv-00126-JFM
Robert L. Campbell

Document 840-4

Filed 07/07/2004

Page 14 of 25
June 13 ,

2002

Washington , Do

Page 126

Mr. Campbell, just review this
and I will point out on page 092- 0049,

document,

you are

listed at the bottom with a phone number.

Okay.

Do you recognize this document,

sir?
Yes.
And can you identify what it is for the

record?

It'
issued paper.

s a Greater- Than- Class C waste program

Is the paper intended to assist in

determining the content and direction of the EM
GTCC program?
MS. HERRMANN

Objection, foundation.
I believe

THE WITNESS:

so.

BY MR. SKALABAN:

If I can turn your attention -- first of

all, does this break up the

- - does this

paper

break up the different types of GTCC sources along
the lines we' ve been talking about earlier as a

sealed source GTCC, nuclear utility activated metal

GTCC, and other GTCC for purposes of the analysis?
MS. HERRMANN:
Obj ection , the best

evidence.
THE WITNESS:
Yes, it does.

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

-Case 1:98-cv-00126-JFM
Robert L. Campbell Washington , Do

Document 840-4

Filed 07/07/2004

Page 15 of 25
June 13 ,

2002

Page 150

THE WITNESS:

No.

BY MR. SKALABAN:

Do you think , even if it was, for

example, Hanford you would still have the same
level of opposition to storing the activated metal

there that you would if you picked an area with no
nuclear connection?
MS. HERRMANN:
THE WITNESS:

Same obj ection.
To the extent that I can

compare a specific to anything else, yes.
BY MR. SKALABAN

Now, in Option 1, there' s a reference
to the metal could be placed in the backfill
spaces according to RW.

What does that mean, that the metal could
be placed in the backfill spaces?
What does that

mean?
My understanding is that when they place
the fuel in the repository that there will be space

between the fuel and then there will be corridors

leading in for forklifts and things like

that.

As you place the fuel in, you could then
take activated metal and place it in as you, you

know, started in the back of a room

or whatever
your way

it I s going

to look like

- - and filled

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

-Case 1:98-cv-00126-JFM
Robert L. Campbell

Document 840-4

Filed 07/07/2004

Page 16 of 25
June 13 ,

2002

Washington , Do

Page 151

forward, as opposed to putting fill dirt or
something in there.

So anywhere that you were

going to backfill with dirt as opposed to fuel, you
could put the metal there

instead.

So it'

s your understanding that the

nuclear utility activated metal could be placed in
the backfill spaces of Yucca Mountain repository
under development?
MS. HERRMANN:
THE WITNESS:

Obj ection, speculation.
That has not been

specifically analyzed, but I' m not aware of

anything prohibiting

that.

If you analyzed

it,

included it in the license application and did all

the other administrative things, I'

m not aware of

anything that would prevent you from

from

physically doing that that would inhibit the
performance of the repository.
BY MR. SKALABAN
You I re

not aware of any technical

problems from putting it into the backfill spaces?

No.
When you say -- it says according to RW
did you have any conversations with RW where they
said that the nuclear utility activated metal could
be placed in the backfill spaces?

Alderson Reporting Company, Inc.
1111

14th Street , No W. Suite 400 1- 800- FOR- DEPO Washington , DC 20005

-Case 1:98-cv-00126-JFM
Robert L. Campbell

Document 840-4

Filed 07/07/2004

Page 17 of 25
June 13 ,

2002

Washington, D.

Page 152

Yes.
Who were those
those conversations?

who was involved in

Conversation was with Dave

Zabransky.

And when was your conversation with
Mr. Zabransky?

At least a year
exactly when.

ago.

I don't remember

Did you have one conversation on this
topic or multiple ones?

ve had multiple conversations with
Mr. Zabransky, but I believe we only talked about
this one time.

And what did he tell you about putting
nuclear utility activated metal GTCC into the
backfill spaces?
MS. HERRMANN:
THE WITNESS:

Obj ection, hearsay.
He simply said it could be

done.
BY MR. SKALABAN:

And was he talking from a technical point

of view, capacity point of view, or both?
MS. HERRMANN

Obj ection, speculation.

THE WITNESS:

Both.

BY MR. SKALABAN:

1111

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

Case 1:98-cv-00126-JFM
Robert L. Campbell

Document 840-4

Filed 07/07/2004

Page 18 of 25
June 13 ,

2002

Washington, D.

Page 153

Did you and Mr. Zabransky talk about any
other aspects of placing nuclear utility activated
metal into the Yucca Mountain repository?
Not that I remember.

Have you talked to him just generally

about this subj ect, other than this one
conversation, about the backfill

spaces -- utilizing the backfill spaces?

Have you

had conversations with him generally about
incorporating GTCC into the repository?

The other conversations I'
were - - had

ve had with him

more to do with the logistics of

packaging, transport to the repository, not
placement in the repository.

So you have had conversations with

Mr. Zabransky about the logistics and
transportation aspects of taking nuclear utility
activated metal GTCC to the repository?

Yes.
And why were you discussing with him the
logistics and transportation aspects of taking
nuclear utility activated metal GTCC?

The reasons for the conversations were

determining whether the spent nuclear

fuel/high- level

waste repository was a reasonable

1111

Alderson Reporting Company, Inco 14th Street, No Wo Suite 400 1- 800- FOR- DEPO Washington , DC 20005

Case 1:98-cv-00126-JFM
Robert L. Campbell

Document 840-4

Filed 07/07/2004

Page 19 of 25
June 13 ,

2002

Washington , Do

Page 154

disposal site for Greater- ~han- Class C and how that

could - -

you know , how that could be implemented.

And what did he say to you regarding the
logistical and transportation aspects of taking
nuclear utility GTCC to the repository?
MS. HERRMANN

Obj ection, hearsay.
Basically, you know, if the

THE WITNESS:

activated metal is packaged in a similar fashion to
the fuel, then there' s very little difference in

handling fuel canisters as opposed to activated

metal canisters and that he saw

- - he didn' t

see

anything that would make that difficult to do in

the same fashion that you would handle the

fuel.

We were speaking only in terms of the

physical and technical, not the administrative, you
know, political, legislative aspects; just purely the physical and technical issues
BY MR. SKALABAN

involved.

So with Lespect to the physical and technical issues, he told you that logistically and

technically the GTCC, if packaged like spent

fuel,

could be handled and transported without problems?
MS. HERRMANN:
THE WITNESS:
Obj ection , hearsay.

The GTCC activated metal,

yes.
Alderson Reporting Company, Inco 14th Street , No Wo Suite 400 1- 800- FOR- DEPO Washington , DC 20005

1111

,-",

-Case 1:98-cv-00126-JFM
Robert L. Campbell.

--

Document 840-4

Filed 07/07/2004

Page 20 of 25
June 13 ,

2002

Washington , Do

Page 156

option.

I was looking to see if there were

physical or technical issues that would

prevent/cause problems with that as -- as a
disposal option as opposed to administrative
issues, which, as I state in this paper, everything

got an administrative issue associated with

it.

So Mr. Zabransky told you from logistical

and transportation issues, it would not be a

problem and from capacity and performance of the repository, it would not be a problem to put it in
the backfill spaces; is that correct?
MS. HERRMANN

Obj ection, hearsay.
I believe everything you

THE WITNESS:

said was correct.

I don

I t recall

if we discussed
I just -- we may

repository performance aspects.

have talked about that.
BY MR. SKALABAN

I don' t remember.

Did you talk about anything else other
than what I just mentioned about placing GTCC in

the repository -No.

with Mr. Zabransky?

that after your feeling, that
Not

recall.
you had
it would

talked to him what

was

fair

say

Alderson Reporting Company, Inc.

1111 14th Street, No W. Suite 400 1- 800- FOR- DEPO Washington , DC 20005

-Case 1:98-cv-00126-JFM
Robert L. Campbell Washington , D.

Document 840-4

Filed 07/07/2004

Page 21 of 25
June 13 ,

2002

that your feeling was it'

s not a problem from a

physical and technical point of view to take the
nuclear utility activated metal and dispose of it
in Yucca Mountain?

From a physical and technical point of

view, yes, that' s

correct, the conversation

resulted in that that would not be a

problem.

Did you explore with him at all

administrative roadblocks to Yucca Mountain for
GTCC waste?

We may have discussed

it.

ve had a

number of conversations with him on a variety of

topics.

Since he works in RW, it would all be

related to this

issue.
I do recall now that we did have

I do

an issue where it was a -- someone had suggested

that the NRC might

- - or someone

had requested in a

letter to the NRC that they reclassify

Greater- Than- Class C as high- level

waste.

And we

had a conversation in preparing the response

- - the

technical response to that and what would that

entail.
It would then become RW' s responsibility,

if it was high- level waste, commercial high- level

waste, that would fall within their realm of

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

Case 1:98-cv-00126-JFM
Robert L. Campbell

Document 840-4

Filed 07/07/2004

Page 22 of 25
June 13 ,

2002

Washington, D.

Page 161

understanding it'
Yes.

s nuclear utility activated metal?

And the backfill spaces will be adequate
to dispose of the 1850 cubic meters that'

estimated?
MS. HERRMANN
Obj ect ion,

speculation.

THE WITNESS:

I don't know the answer to

that.

We discussed

it.

Mr. Zabransky did not

indicate there was a capacity problem, but we did

not discuss exactly how much backfill space there was versus how much nuclear utility activated metal
there was.

But my memory of the conversation is

that that -- because it didn't corne up, my memory
is that I believe there' s going to be more backfill

space than activated metal.
BY MR. SKALABAN:

Which is why you put it -- recognize it
in the paper?

Yes.

If there was a problem with only a

limited amount, yeah , I wouldn

I t have

recommended

it.
In fact, 1850 cubic meters

- - what' s

your

sense, is that a large volume of material or
relatively a fairly small volume of material?
MS. HERRMANN:
Obj ection , vague.

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

Case 1:98-cv-00126-JFM
Robert L. Campbell

Document 840-4

Filed 07/07/2004

Page 23 of 25
June 13 ,

2002

Washington, Do

Page 162

THE WITNESS:

It'

s small compared to the

spent nuclear fuel and high- level waste
that will be placed in the repository.
BY MR. SKALABAN:

Can you take the paragraph that reads
storage of nuclear utility activated metal?
still on page HQR092- 0049.

It'

I I ve read
Okay.

the paragraph.

Are you familiar with the report

to Congress required by the Public Law 99- 240?

Yes.
Do you understand in that report, DOE
committed to accepting GTCC for storage when

needed?
MS. HERRMANN:
Obj ection , best evidence,

calls for a legal conclusion.
THE WITNESS:

The report makes this

statement similar to that, yes.
BY MR. SKALABAN:

So that - -

I mean, that' s what you wrote

here on this page, correct

- - you wrote the
the Department

Department committed - - quote,
needed?

committed to accepting GTCC for storage when

Yes, that'

s what I wrote.

1111

14th Street ,

Alderson Reporting Company, Inc. N. Wo Suite 400 1- 800-FOR- DEPO Washington , DC 20005

Case 1:98-cv-00126-JFM
Robert L. Campbell

Document 840-4

Filed 07/07/2004

Page 24 of 25
June 13 ,

2002

Washington, Do

Page 163

And that'

s your understanding of the

report?
Yes, it

is.
Let I S make the record

MR . S KALABAN :

clear, I would like to make as Campbell Exhibit 2 a

February 1987 report to

Congress.
(Campbell Exhibit No.

was marked for

identification.
BY MR. SKALABAN:

My question for you is, is this the
report that you
paper, Exhibi t

I re referring
Let'
Yes.

to here in this issued

MS. HERRMANN

s wait until you get

it.
THE WITNESS:
MR. SKALABAN

Can you read back the
on the record?

question so it I s clear

THE REPORTER: " Question: My question for
you is, is this the report that you re referring to

here in this issued paper Exhibit
BY MR. SKALABAN:

I?"

Exhibit 2 is the paper referred to in the
section of Exhibit 1 that we' ve just been talking

abou t ?

Alderson Reporting Company, Inco
1111

14th Street, No W. Suite 400 1- 800-FOR- DEPO Washington , DC 20005

Case 1:98-cv-00126-JFM
Robert L. Campbell

Document 840-4

Filed 07/07/2004

Page 25 of 25
June 13 ,

2002

Washington, D.
Page 165

you agree that the Department is obligated for the
final disposal of GTCC waste?
MS. HERRMANN: legal conclusion.
THE WITNESS:

Objection, calls for a

You sort of paraphrased

there, but in terms of the Department is not

obligated for the final disposal of GTCC

waste,

yes, I agree with
BY MR. SKALABAN:

that.

I was trying to avoid a double negative,
but thank you.

What do you mean here when you say a

reasonable approach would be that utilities are currently required to store their spent nuclear
fuel until the Department begins to accept it at

Yucca Mountain.

At that point, EM could have

identified and established a storage facility to accept and store nuclear utility activated metal

until such time as a disposal option is

available,

such as placement in a geologic repository for
SNF /HLW .

The intent of those sentences was that up

until the time that the Department begins accepting
spent fuel, we' ve got until then to come up with

some sort of an answer to this nuclear utility

Alderson Reporting Company, Inc.

1111 14th Street, No W. Suite 400 1- 800-FOR-DEPO Washington , DC 20005