-'-
""
"".
""'
.".
q",&
Case 1:98-cv-00126-JFM Document 833-9 H. BARRETT, VOLUME 1 of 23 DEPOSITION OF LAKE Filed 06/28/2004 Page 5 CONDUCTED ON FRIDAY , MAY 10, 2002
1156
generated wi thin the Office of Civilian Radioactive
Waste Management Control, if I got the name right, and
I apologize if I got it wrong.
I take it there would
have been documentation generated wi thin the office
relating to the proposed .
report setting out
the reason
the report was proposed, arguing why or why not the
report should be conducted, and that documentation
would be circulated through the appropriate
individuals in the office, correct?
MS. HERRMANN:
Obj ection.
Compound.
Correct.
And would there be some type of typically
sign- off
sheet accompanying that analysis of the need
of the report where the various authorizing officials
wi thin your office would individually sign off on the
proposed report and then send it to the next person up
the chain of command?
Yes.
The chain might be short.
May only
have been one person did it but, nonetheless, there
should be those documents similar to what you
descr ibed.
Is it possible that you personally may have
(202) 861-'3410
D. REPORTING & DIGITAL VIDEOGRAPHY COMPANY
(301) 762-
8282 (410)
539-
3664 (800)
292- 4789
Case 1:98-cv-00126-JFM Document 833-9 H. BARRETT, VOLUME 2 of 23 DEPOSITION OF LAKE Filed 06/28/2004 Page
CONDUCTED ON FRIDAY, MAY 10 , 2002
1163
fine.
Do you disagree with any other aspect of
the statement?
No.
Again I'
m starting with the beginning
receipt rates ranging from
1500 to 6, 000,
that entire
statement, do you disagree with any other aspect of
it?
No.
But you do disagree wi th
the statement that
there is not a clearly documented rationale for 3, 000
MTU per year receipt rate, correct?
Correct.
Because you believe that there is, in
fact,
a clearly documented rationale for a 3, 000 MTU per
year receipt rate, correct?
Yes.
And could you explain to me that rationale that you believe has been clearly documented by the
department?
There was one in the old mission
plans.
basically was that the rate of 3, 000 tons per year
(202) 861-
3410 (301)
D. REPORTING & DIGITAL VIDEOGRAPHY COMPANY
762-
8282 (410)
539-
3664 (800)
292- 4789
.....
""",
Case 1:98-cv-00126-JFM Document 833-9 H. BARRETT Page DEPOSITION OF LAKE Filed 06/28/2004VOLUME 3 of 23 , 5 CONDUCTED ON FRIDAY, MAY 10, 2002
--.... 1164
exceeded a generation rate of a nominal 2, 000 tons per
' I
year and allowed a catchup of a thousand tons per year
del ta.
And for where the program was at that time
that was sufficient, and I felt that was sufficient at
that time.
Sufficient to do what?
Sufficient as a design basis for the
facili ty.
I didn t want to basically put
resources,
inasmuch as I was involved in this, into further
refinements and expendi tures of money on fine-tuning
when we needed to focus on do we have a site and can
we ever do
this.
And fine-tuning, for example, whether it
shoulq be higher than
3, OOO?
Correct.
And when you just stated " allowed a catchup
of a thousand tons per year delta, " what did that
statement refer to?
The receipt rate of a nominal 3,
000 tons
per year steady state when the generation rate was
approximately 2, 000
tons per
year.
The system
capacity and take- rate was exceeding the generation
(202) 861-
3410 (301)
D. REPORTING & DIGITAL VIDEOGRAPHY COMPANY
762-
8282 (410)
539-
3664 (800)
292- 4789
'-.
'" '
Document 833-9 Filed 06/28/2004
"....,
,.. "
"""""""""
"""'
"""
Case 1:98-cv-00126-JFM
DEPOSITION OF LAKE H. BARRETT, VOLUME CONDUCTED ON FRIDAY , MAY 10, 2002
Page 4 of 23
1165 j
rate in the
nation.
Why was that important?
Because we would like to catch up and, you
know , remQve the waste that had been accumulating at
whatever the start date of the facility would
be.
Did you consider that to be your mission
under this statute, the 1982 Nuclear Waste Policy Act?
MS. HERRMANN:
Obj ection.
Vague, calls for
a legal conclusion.
Repeat the question
agaln.
and,
You stated " We
would like to catch up
you know , remove the waste that had been accumulating
at whatever the start date of the facility would be.
Do you recall that statement?
Yes.
Why would you have liked to have caught
as you stated in that answer?
up,
Because waste existed in the United
States,
both commercial waste and defense waste, and we were
to start, either be it '
98 or some other date, there
would be an inventory existing, and you wanted to work
off that inventory as soon as
practicable.
"c"
(202) 861-
3410 (301)
D. REPORTING & DIGITAL VIDEOGRAPHY COMPANY
762-
8282 (410)
539-
3664 (800)
292-4789
Case 1:98-cv-00126-JFM Document 833-9 Filed DEPOSITION OF LAKE H. 06/28/2004
BARRETT, VOLUME CONDUCTED ON FRIDAY, MAY 10, 2002
Page 5 of 23
1166
Why did you want to work off that inventory
of spent nuclear fuel as soon as practicable?
Because I believe that' s the intent of the
act.
By " the
act" you re referring to the
Nuclear Waste Policy Act of 1982?
Correct.
MR. CAYNE:
It'
s 9:18.
Let'
s take a short
break.
MS. HERRMANN:
Okay.
(There is a recess from the record.
(Deposi tion Exhibit Barrett 58 was marked
for identification and was attached to the
transcript.
Mr. Barrett, the court reporter has handed
you a document marked for identification as Exhibit
58.
It'
s a parametrics analysis for future program
costs scenarios bearing Bates number HQR- 022- 0001
through 0030.
On the front page it says November
5th,
1999, Stephen Goldberg with the DOE CBO staff , draft.
Do you have that document before you?
Yes.
(202) 861-
3410 (301)
D. REPORTING & DIGITAL VIDEOGRAPHY COMPANY
762-
8282 (410)
539-
3664 (800)
292- 4789
Case 1:98-cv-00126-JFM Document 833-9 H. BARRETT , VOLUME 65 23 DEPOSITION OF LAKE Filed 06/28/2004 Page of CONDUCTED ON FRIDAY , MAY 10, 2002
1295
What was the purpose of this statement or
report?
This was an aid used to brief various
people or organizations on what the dyaft
environmental impact statement was.
time to time.
I used it from
Can I turn your attention to page 12 under
Addi tional Analyses.
Yes.
Is it reasonably foreseeable that
commercial greater than Class C waste will be
deli vered to and
accepted for disposal in the
permanent repository?
MS. HERRMANN:
Obj ection.
Foundation.
Obj ection,
Obj ection, calls for a legal
conclusion.
speculation.
It is my understanding under CEQ guidelines
for environmental impact statements these were
appropriately classified as reasonably foreseeable
future scenarios, and analysis would be
appropriate.
Why do you conclude that the acceptance of
greater than Class C waste would be a reasonably
(202) 861-
3410 (301)
D. REPORTING & DIGITAL VIDEOGRAPHY COMPANY
762-
8282 (410)
539-
3664 (800)
292-4789
Case 1:98-cv-00126-JFM Document 833-9 Filed 06/28/2004 Page of DEPOSITION OF LAKE H. BARRETT , VOLUME75 23 CONDUCTED ON FRI DAY , MAY 10, 2002
1296
foreseeable scenario?
MS. HERRMANN:
Same obj ection.
Acceptance
the repository of the greater
Same obj ections .
than Class
waste.
MS.
HERRMANN:
It'
s my understanding that the Low-Level
Waste Policy Act of 1980 requires waste to be disposed
of in an NRC-licensed deep
geologic.
It is not
appropriate for a near- surface disposal
facility.
The
only other one
would be a deep
I know of for ul timate disposition
one.
Which Yucca Mountain , if there
were appropriate authorizations made, could dispose of
greater than Class
So we did evaluate, and also
there were requests from the EIS scoping that we
evaluate the disposition of both what' s called module
one and module two.
What is the EIS scoping?
EIS scoping is a necessary part of
preparing an environmental impact statement, which was
done before the draft environmental impact statement
was prepared.
Could you please turn to the page, a number
(202) 861-3410 (301)
D. REPORTING & DIGITAL VIDEOGRAPHY COMPANY
762-
8282 (410)
539-
3664 (800)
292- 4789
Case 1:98-cv-00126-JFM
DEPOSITION OF LAKE H. BARRETT, VOLUME 5 CONDUCTED ON FRIDAY, MAY 10, 2002
Document 833-9
Filed 06/28/2004
Page 8 of 23
1332
reference to a variety of DOE
documents.
My question
is do you have an understanding of the term
steady- state
rate
I believe
so.
What' s your understanding of that term?
Basically constant over
time.
I believe you testified that there is a
relationship between the 3, 000 MTU annual steady- state
rate and either the discharge rate or '
Is that correct?
generation rate.
There
s a difference.
Is there a relationship between the two?
Discharge rate is what it
is. Utili ties
control that.
The receipt rate, which is what you
call 3, 000, is something that is variable, but
depending upon the system we design to build, we can
vary that.
the two.
So there s no direct relationship between
My understanding from your testimony -- and
20 j please correct me if I'
m wrong -- was that the 3, 000
MTU steady- state rate or receipt rate as you just used
that term , was chosen in part because it exceeded the
(202) 861-3410 (301)
D. REPORTING & DIGITAL VIDEOGRAPHY COMPANY
762-
8282 (410)
539-
3664 (800)
292- 4789
',"
'-,
~ ,. .",
Case 1:98-cv-00126-JFM Document 833-9 Filed 06/28/2004 Page of DEPOSITION OF LAKE H. BARRETT, VOLUME 95 23 CONDUCTED ON FRI DAY, MAY 10, 2002
1333 i
discharge rate or the generation rate by utilities.
Is that right?
Correct.
What other factors went into choosing a
3, 000 MTU receipt ra te?
The 3, 000
rate that we have was established
before I was ever involved in the
program.
It'
s my
understanding that it was looked at then as a proper
balance for total life- cycle costs as well as
near-term cash flow requirements and
performance.
you make the number too high , then you have -- you
would quickly work off the backlog, and then you would
have a lot of idle
capacity.
If it was too low, you
would have reactors needing to put in dry storage, and
000, based on an early 1980s, seemed like a
reasonable number to
use.
rate being a reasonable number
Do you know if there were any studies that
talked about the 3, 000
to use?
I don t know of any that were done back
then, but
told there were some
done.
I never had
reason to ever
look.
There were some -- we went
(202) 861-
3410 (301) 762-8282 (410) 539-3664 (800)
D. REPORTING & DIGITAL VIDEOGRAPHY COMPANY
292-4789
Case 1:98-cv-00126-JFM Document 833-9 DEPOSITION OF LAKE FiledBARRETT, VOLUME10 of 23 H. 06/28/2004 Page 5
CONDUCTED ON FRIDAY, MAY 10, 2002
1334 ;
through some of them here that were done in the middle
eighties and some done in the early nineties that
would say that you can run them at a higher
rate.
And
you can run them at a higher rate and there are puts
and takes on costs and
performance.
And am I right in understanding that the
, 000 steady- state rate has been used as the
steady- state
rate in the majority of design documents
DOE will eventually use to take
for the facili ty that
and emplacement spent nuclear
fuel?
Yes, it' s around 3, 000.
And am I also right in understanding that
the 3,
000 steady- state rate has been the rate that is
used in the maj
ori ty of documents
issued by DOE with
regard to total system life- cycle costs?
Correct.
Wi th regard to those documents, the
documents issued in connection with estimating total
system life- cycle costs, what is that document
supposed to reflect, the TSLCC document?
Our best estimates of what the costs would
be, you know , year by year for the
program.
And to
(202) 861-
3410 (301)
D. REPORTING & DIGITAL VIDEOGRAPHY COMPANY
762-
8282 (410) 539-3664 (800)
292- 4789
Case 1:98-cv-00126-JFM Document 833-9 DEPOSITION OF LAKE Filed BARRETT , VOLUME 5 23 H. 06/28/2004 Page 11 of CONDUCTED ON FRIDAY , MAY 10, 2002
1335
determine those you would have some assumption as to
what the receipt rate would be, and we used 3, 000.
And is the receipt rate of
3, 000 used
because that'
s what your intention at the time you
issued that TSLCC report, is that the intention at
that time,
to use that rate for whatever facility you
would have running when you begin to accept spent
nuclear fuel?
MS. HERRMANN:
Obj ection.
Foundation.
At steady state,
yes.
Do you have an understanding of what the
term " waste
management system " is?
Yes.
What' s your understanding of that term?
That would be the transportation system to
remove it from the
reactors.
It would be an MRS if
there were to be an MRS, and it would be the
reposi tory, or repositories if we have more than
one.
With regard to the transportation
system,
other than the RFP that we ve discussed just a couple
of hours ago, were there any other documents that
talked about the acceptance rate or the physical
D. REPORTING & DIGITAL VIDEOGRAPHY COMPANY
292-4789
(202) 861-
3410 (301) 762-8282 (410) 539-3664 (800)
Case 1:98-cv-00126-JFM Document 833-9 DEPOSITION OF LAKE Filed 06/28/2004 H.
BARRETT, VOLUME CONDUCTED ON FRIDAY , MAY 10, 2002
Page 12 of 23
1368 '
The higher the rate of performance the
better.
That doesn t answer the question of whether
or not the rate -I couldn t understand the question.
the question.
Repea t
At least you told me
that.
All right.
question, but try
I thought that was your
again.
My understanding is that one of the goals
of the Civilian Radioactive Waste Management Program
was to design a system that could take spent nuclear
~uel at a rate that would eliminate the need for
utili ties to
provide for additional on- site storage
Is that correct?
after January 31st, 1998.
No.
What is not correct about that statement?
I never considered the design of the system
to solely try to avoid spent-fuel pool
overflows.
tried to design the system to be as large as you could
reasonably make it to avoid not only spent-fuel
overflows but pool rerackings to allow shut-down
A. D. REPORTING & DIGITAL VIDEOGRAPHY COMPANY (202) 861-3410 (301) 762- 8282 (410) 539-3664 (800) 292-4789
.,
., '-"""
Case 1:98-cv-00126-JFM Document 833-9 DEPOSITION OF LAKE Filed BARRETT , VOLUME of 23 H. 06/28/2004 Page 13 CONDUCTED ON FRIDAY, MAY 10, 2002
1369
reactors to empty their si tes
reasons in addi tion
For all those other
to.
So the way you phrased it
don t think is correct.
Thank you for clarify a misimpression
clarifying.
I had, so
It actually did
glad I asked the
question.
And is it your testi~0~Y that prior to you
actually coming to the Office of Civilian Radioactive
Waste Management DOE had established that a
steady- state
rate of 3, 000 MTUs on an annual basis
would achieve all those obj ecti
specified in your prior answer?
MS 0 HERRMANN:
ves that you
just
Obj ection.
Foundation
In a general
sense, yes.
At any point during your tenure at OCRWM
did you have a reason to disagree with that rate that
was selected, the 3, 000
MTU steady- state rate on an
annual basis?
Never paid much attention to it
Because
all my energies were focused on trying tc get a system
that could run as soon as practicable.
But in your tenure at the program did you
,"d,..""
(202) 861-
3410 (301)
D. REPORTING & DIGITAL VIDEOGRAPHY COMPANY
762-
8282 (410)
539-
3664 (800)
292- 4789
Case 1:98-cv-00126-JFM Document 833-9 Filed 06/28/2004 Page 5 DEPOSITION OF LAKE H. BARRETT , VOLUME14 of 23 CONDUCTED ON FRIDAY , MAY 10, 2002
1370
ever see any evidence that would indicate that that 000 MTU rate was not sufficient to address all of those needs as you specified a couple of answers ago?
I saw no reason nor saw no reports that
said 3, 000 was a bad choice.
There were some studies
done in the late eighties, also in the early nineties
that, you know, it didn t say there was an obvious
better number
bet ter
That 2, 000
was better or 4 000 was
So I didn
It wasn
And 3, 000
appeared to be okay
pay much attention.
So I was satisfied.
conscious per se
I saw no reason why I should change
it.
Let'
s phrase it that way.
And I'
ll take it
a step further.
Do you
believe that the 3,
000 annual steady- state
rate is a
reasonable rate for DOE to plan to use in terms of
taking spent nuclear fuel from utili ties? I think it' s a reasonable rate.
be better rates that if we
There may
if the nation gets a
little clearer that we re going to really perform
think we will refine that number and we may, based on
events of September 11 th, maybe it will be
raised.
And would you agree that the 3, 000 annual
A. D. REPORTING & DIGITAL VIDEOGRAPHY COMPANY (202) 861-3410 (301) 762- 8282 (410) 539- 3664 (800) 292- 4789
"",
Case 1:98-cv-00126-JFM Document 833-9 DEPOSITION OF LAKE FiledBARRETT, VOLUME15 of 23 H. 06/28/2004 Page 5 CONDUCTED ON FRIDAY , MAY 10 , 2002
1371
steady- state
rate is a rate that is consistent with
achieving the obj ecti
ves that you
yes.
enumerated earlier?
Generally so,
In your opinion would a steady- state rate
of 2, 000 MTUs
on an annual basis be consistent with
achieving those same obj ecti
ves?
low.
would
Why?
think that'
Because
that'
about what the generation
rate is, and if we start with that, matching the
generation rate at 2010 -- if we steady state at 2010
all the fuel that' s in dry storage and a lot of the
shut-down reactors, it will be difficult to avoid new
storages or prolong decommissionings.
And what would your opinion be if an annual
steady- state
rate was chosen that was around 1, 000
MTUs per year?
MS. HERRMANN:
Obj ection.
Speculation.
For performance aspect it would be better
you know , better than none, but not as good as 2, 000
and not as good as 3
000.
Would you believe that a steady- state
","".m
(202) 861-
3410 (301)
D. REPORTING & DIGITAL VIDEOGRAPHY COMPANY
762-
8282 (410)
539-
3664 (800)
292- 4789
~-~_.__......' ~._- - ' --"-'- ._-~ -,-Case 1:98-cv-00126-JFM Document 833-9
- -.
~~ .--
DEPOSITION OF LAKE H. BARRETT, VOLUME 5 CONDUCTED ON FRIDAY, MAY 10, 2002
Filed 06/28/2004
Page 16 of 23 ""1;:2
1434
funds or is being paid on a regular basis?
Yes.
Okay.
MR. TOMPKINS:
I believe that' s all I have.
We reserve our right to reopen the
deposi tion pending resolution of the outstanding
document production
issues.
And of course we obj ect
MS. HERRMANN:
that.
MR. TOMPKINS:
Other than that, we re done.
(Signature having not been waived,
the deposition
of Lake H. Barrett was concluded at 5: 21 p. m. )
ACKNOWLEDGMENT OF DEPONENT
I, Lake H. Barrett, do hereby acknowledge that
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.
6/17/c
(DATE)
:!C~
(202)
A. D. REPORTING & DIGITAL VIDEOGRAPHY COMPANY 861- 3410 (301) 762- 8282 (410) 539-3664 (800) 292- 4789
.=,
----------------------Case 1:98-cv-00126-JFM Document 833-9 Filed 06/28/2004 Page 17 of 23
May 14 2002
Lake H. Barrett CONTAINS CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION PURSUANT TO THE PROTECTIVE ORDER
Washington , D.
Page 1
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF FEDERAL CLAIMS
- X
YANKEE ATOMIC ELECTRIC
uri;':u
COMPANY , CONNECTICUT YANKEE
CO?Y
ATOMIC POWER COMPANY, MAINE
YANKEE ATOMIC POWER COMPANY,
: Case No. 98-126C,
: 98- 154C, 98-474C
Plaintiff,
vs.
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
(Senior Judge Merrow)
Defendant.
: Volume I
- X
Washington ,
D. C
Tuesday, May 14 , 2002
Deposition of LAKE H. BARRETT , a
witness herein, called for examination by counsel
for the Plaintiffs in the above- entitled matter
pursuant to notice , the witness being duly
sworn, taken at the offices of Spriggs & Holl innsworth ,
1350 Eye Street ,
N. W., Washington, D. C. ,
commencing at 9:30 a. m., Tuesday, May 14, 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
Alderson Reporting Company, Inc. I I I I 14th Street , N. W. Suite 400 1- 800- FOR- DEPO Washington , DC 20005
Case 1:98-cv-00126-JFM
Document 833-9
Filed 06/28/2004
Page 18 of 23
Lake H. Barrett CONT AINS CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION PURSUANT TO THE PROTECTIVE ORDER May 14 , 2002
Washington , D.
Page 64
most of the sequencing would remaln the same?
They should be minor.
So they would be substantially the
same today, there might be some minor variations?
Correct.
Putting aside those minor variations,
is it your understanding that when the program
starts to operate in 2010, or some other
time,
that this listing of allocations of oldest fuel
first is going to be the actual sequence in which
the Department picks up spent fuel from the
various contract holders?
MS. HERRMANN
Obj ect ion.
THE WITNESS:
Could I have that again?
(The record was read as requested.
I doubt
it.
it?
BY MR. STOUCK:
And why do you doubt
Because from a practical matter , the numbers on some of the contract holders are not an
efficient size or , for example , Consolidated
Edison has 2. 9
tons , Dairyland 0. 7 tons, and it
would not be very efficient to pick up such
small amounts for either the Department of
Energy I S contractor nor the utility itself 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
Document 833-9
Filed 06/28/2004
Page 19 of 23
Lake H. Barrett CONTAINS CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION PURSUANT TO THE PROTECTIVE ORDER May 14 2002
Washington, D.
Page 65
prepare for shipping such small amounts, so most
likely there will be some arrangement such as more
efficient sizes as determined through a process
worked out.
When you say more efficient sizes, are
you referring to fuel casks, filling up casks?
Correct, cask campaigns.
So you are referring to filling up
casks, but that I s not Correct.
all you are referring to?
So in addition to filling up casks you
are referring to cask campaigns?
Correct.
And what do you mean by cask
campaigns?
From a practical point of Vlew
primarily for the utility, but also somewhat for
the Department of Energy that you would establish
a term that' s
sometimes used, bite size, the
campaign size of how much tonnage you would take
in a campaign that would be scheduled to be
consistent with the reactor I s operating
be mutually beneficial for both
cycle or
the situation at the contract holder which would
parties.
Okay.
Could you just clarify or
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 833-9 Filed 06/28/2004 Page 20 of 23
Lake H. Barrett CONTAINS CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION PURSUANT TO THE PROTECTIVE ORDER May 14 2002
Washington , D.
Page 67
for an acceptable arrangement for both the
contract holders and the Department of
Energy, to
What are
present that for mutual
approvals.
to?
Well , for mutual approvals.
MS. HERRMANN
the contractual matters that you are referring
Obj ection.
Calls for a
legal conclusion.
Given that the contract
contracts
exist under the statute and that there are
implementing documents under the contract
,I
would -- it is our goal that there 1S an acceptable arrangement for all the parties how to work the allocations into actual shipping
campaigns.
And when you referred a moment or two
ago to working out the most efficient system
for scheduling that could be arranged
recall that reference?
do you
Yes. Okay.
What are your expectations in
the context of working out the most efficient
system or an efficient system for scheduling?
What are your expectations about the extent to which exchanges of allocations between or among
utilities will occur?
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 833-9
Filed 06/28/2004
Page 21 of 23
Lake H. Barrett CONT AINS CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION PURSUANT TO THE PROTECTIVE ORDER May 14 2002
Washington , D.
Page 68
MS. HERRMANN:
Obj ection.
Foundation.
Speculation.
Calls for a legal conclusion.
I don
- - I'
m hopeful , but I don'
know what the actual utility contract holders will
do.
Why are you hope ful
always been my hope lesser need earlier
?
From a macroscopic perspective it has
that utilities that have a
would exchange the appropriate
remuneration
or compensation
might have a greater need to
with others that work out the mos
effective national utilization of whatever
I capacity you
were able to bring on
line.
And that' s your hope because that
would promote the most effective national
utilization of the capacity?
Is that why it is
your hope , because it would be the most effective
utilization of the capacity of a system?
It would be more effective than a
layout like this on this
21 I
most it would be better.
program has ,
table. You say the
goal that the
22
Q.
Okay, but that I s a
is to promote effective utilization
of the capacity of the system?
MS. HERRMANN
Obj ection.
Foundation.
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 833-9
-Filed 06/28/2004 Page 22 of 23
Lake H. Barrett CONTAINS CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION PURSUANT TO THE PROTECTIVE ORDER May 14 2002
Washington , D.
Page 71
Yes.
BY MR. STOUCK:
Okay.
Do you think there is any possibility that when the spent fuel acceptance program
commences operations in 2010 , or at some other
time, that the actual sequence of pickup of spent
nuclear fuel will be the sequence
putting aside
the minor variations that we referred to
previously - -
do you think there is any
possibility that the actual sequence will be the
sequence that is shown on this OFF array on Page
40?
MS. HERRMANN:
Obj ection.
Speculation.
Yes. You do? Yes. Okay. Can you quantify the
possibili ty?
MS. HERRMANN
Obj ection.
Speculation.
No.
If that sequence were to be followed
in actuality, do you believe that the costs would
1111
Alderson Reporting Company, Inc. 14th Street , N. W. Suite 400 1- 800- FOR- DEPO Washington, DC 20005
Case 1:98-cv-00126-JFM
Document 833-9
Filed 06/28/2004
Page 23 of 23
Lake H, Barrett CONTAINS CONFIDENTIAL INFORMATION PURSUANT TO THE PROTECTIVE ORDER May 14 , 2002
Washington , D.
Page 72
be greater or less than the costs of a system that
includes some
included some amount of campaign
pickups?
MS. HERRMANN
Obj ection.
Speculation.
Greater.
Okay.
So it would be in the utility'
interests to avoid tnat greater cost through some
kind of rearrangement of the sequence; would you
agree wi th
that?
MS. HERRMANN
Obj ection.
From a cost perspective,
Foundation. yes.
Okay, and it would be in DOE'
interest from a cost perspective to promote some
rearrangement of the sequencing to be more
cost-effective, right?
Wi thin the extent of the law, yes.
And is the reason that you believe it
is possible that the actual sequence for pickup
would be the sequence that is shown on Page
8 of
Exhibit 40 is
the reason that you believe that
is a possibility, that contractual matters and issues and disputes on the utility side would
require that that schedule be maintained if those
Alderson Reporting Company, Inc. 1111 14th Street , N. W. Suite 400 1- 800- FOR- DEPO Washington , DC 20005