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

: )

,.".

Case 1:98-cv-00126-JFM
Ronald A Milner

Document 833-14
Washington, D.

Filed 06/28/2004

Page 1 of 11
May 8 , 2002

Page 267

Yes.
And that' s been an objective throughout

your time in RW?

Yeah, I believe it

has.

And when you consider efficiency in

operating the waste management system, is it also
proper in your view to take into account utility

costs?
My personal opinion , that should be a

consideration.
And that would be particularly appropriate
given that it is a full-cost recovery contract?
Well, I don t know that I would blend

those two ideas together.
doesn

Full-cost recovery only
Full-cost recovery

refers to the DOE expenditures.
t consider utility costs.

Do you think given it is a full-cost

recovery contract and program that it puts some kind
of responsibility on the department to operate it in
a way where practicable to minimize utility costs?
MR. SHULTIS:

Objection ,
answered.

mischaracterizes

prior testimony, asked and

In my personal opinion, I think

i t ~-

the

department should and in fact I think the department

did consider utility costs, and

that' s factored in

Alderson Reporting Company, Inc.

111114th Street, N. W. Suite 400 1-800-FOR- DEPO Washington , DC20005

Case 1:98-cv-00126-JFM
Ronald A Milner

Document 833-14
Washington, D.

Filed 06/28/2004

Page 2 of 11
May 8 , 2002

Page 268

many decisions what the impacts would be on utility

costs.
BY MR. SKALABAN:

And that consideration of utility cost has been a constant through your tenure at RW?
MR. SHULTIS:

Objection, asked and

answered.
In my mind~ it has.
BY MR. SKALABAN

Now, in

considering utility exchanges,

what was the department

I s position if you have a

utility that has an allocation for example that

doesn

t perfectly match up?

For example, you have a utility one year

that has an allocation of 20 MTUs, another one that

has an allocation of ten MTUs in a later year, and
they want to swap that ten- MTU allocation.
The first

utility with the allocation of 20 would then be

swapping away for example ten MTUs, but still hold a

ten- MTU

allocation.

Would that sort of partial trade, if you

will ,

not a trade of exactly the same allocations, be

permissible in the department' s view?

MR. SHULTIS:

. Objection, calls for
(b )( 6) witn

~peCUlation ,

Mr. Milner is not a 30

Alderson Reporting Company, Inc.

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

Case 1:98-cv-00126-JFM
Ronald A Milner

Document 833-14
Washington , D.

Filed 06/28/2004

Page 3 of 11
May 8 , 2002

Page 269

asks for a legal conclusion.

Well , since no exchange request or
swapping request had ever been made, I can '

t really

say how the department would have ultimately dealt

with that.

My personal opinion was that a partial

trade like that would work.
BY MR. SKALABAN:

Because as a practical matter , it would be

coincidence or not very likely that any utility would
have the exact same allocation in two different

years. Right?
MR. SHULTIS:
Same objections.

I believe that I s true.
BY MR. SKALABAN:

I . d have to look

at the allocations there, but I believe that' s true.

I mean , I think that that

Isa

fair

characterization, more likely than not , they re not,

and so to have a swap -- to be able to have swaps in

the system , the partial trades would need to be

allowed?
In my opinion , yes.

And that wouldn t be a problem, would

it,

because the utility could just resubmit new DCSs to reflect that change?
MR. SHULTIS:

Same objections, calls for a

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

Case 1:98-cv-00126-JFM
Ronald A Milner

Document 833-14
Washington , D.

Filed 06/28/2004

Page 4 of 11
May 8 , 2002

legal conclusion, asks for

speculation.

Yeah.

Again ,

in my personal opinion,

because the department had never received a
in my opinion , that would make

request,

sense.

BY MR. SKALABAN:

And you do not have any reason to believe
that that would be a problem for the department?
MR. SHULTIS:
Same objections.

Other than some slight increase in

administrative burden, I have no reason to believe

that.
MR. SKALABAN

Let I S go off

the record for

a second.

(Discussion off the record.

MR. SKALABAN:

Back on the record.

BY MR. SKALABAN:

You agree that commercial nuclear power

has been used in the United States for a long period
of time?

Yes.
And is there a history of -- history
available of shipping consistent quantities of spent
fuel from reactor sites to commercial and governments

facilities?
There
s certainly been large numbers of

Alderson Reporting Company, Inc.

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

Case 1:98-cv-00126-JFM
Ronald A Milner

Document 833-14
Washington , D.

Filed 06/28/2004

Page 5 of 11
May 8 , 2002

Page 271

nuclear shipments within the
that there

country.

I don t know

I s been large number of shipments from

reactors to government

facilities.
country.

There certainly

has been some small amounts of that that I I m aware

of, at least within this

And has there been a lot of shipments of
foreign fuel?
I mean , are you aware that spent fuel has

been shipped in large quantities in foreign

countries?
Yes.
In fact, I believe countries such as

Britain, France, Japan, and Russia reprocess spent
fuel, don

t they?

France and Britain reprocess spent

fuel.

Germany, Japan ,

I believe others ship their fuel to

one of those two countries for reprocessing or have

in the past at least.
So in view of that, there ' s been

substantial amounts of spent fuel transportation
shipments abroad?

Yes.
Would you have any reason to disagree with

an opinion that through 1998 more than 100, 000 MTUs of spent fuel has been shipped by road, rail, and sea

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

\...

Case 1:98-cv-00126-JFM
Ronald A Milner

Document 833-14
Washington, D.

Filed 06/28/2004

Page 6 of 11
May 8 , 2002

Page 273

don t know that any of the casks used for shipments
have been certified by the United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission, but certainly we '

re aware of

what I S been done and utilize that

information.

Would you agree with the opinion that with
sufficient advance planning, DOE could develop the

casks or casks for nonstandard fuel , failed fuel, and

GTCC waste and obtain the necessary licenses from the
NRC -MR. SHULTIS:

speculation, asks for a

Objection , calls legal conclusion.

for

BY MR. SKALABAN

-- to perform in 1998 if it had been able
to do so?

MR. SHULTIS:

Same objection.

Transport casks, you re referring to?

BY MR. SKALABAN:

hm.
Certainly transport casks could have been

developed and in fact I believe were developed that

were certified by the NRC for transport of spent

fuel.
I can

I guess in my recollection , I don t know of

any that had been developed for failed fuel or GTCC.
t offhand at this point -- I have no reason to

believe at this point that that couldn t have been

Alderson Reporting Company, Inc. 111114th Street , No W. Suite 400 1- 800-FOR- DEPO Washington , DC 20005

Case 1:98-cv-00126-JFM
Ronald A Milner

Document 833-14
Washington, D.

Filed 06/28/2004

Page 7 of 11
May 8 , 2002

Page 274

done.
And in the period of 1991 approximately
through part of 1994 when you were the director of
storage and transport, did you have any concerns at
that time?

And I believe you had testified previously
that at that time you still believed DOE could make

1998?
hm.
Did you have any -- during that ' 91

through ' 94 time period,
in place

did you have any concerns

that the transportation system wouldn '
you were

t

be able to be

going

to perform

1998?

No,

didn

In view of
seeing about the

the documents that we department 1 s current plans -

been

current objectives to reach a steady state of 3, 000
MTUs shortly after the beginning of repository

operations in approximately 2010, do you have any
reason to believe that the department can t develop a corresponding transportation system that can take
that 3, 000 MTU a year?

MR. SHULTIS:

Objection, asked and

answered.
No, I see no reason why a

transportat~
, DC 20005

Alderson Reporting Company, Inc. 111114th Street, No W. Suite 400 1- 8oo-FOR- DEPO Washington

.-./
Case 1:98-cv-00126-JFM
Ronald A Milner
Washington, Do

Document 833-14

Filed 06/28/2004

Page 8 of 11
May 8 , 2002

Page 275

system can
MTUs.

t be developed to eventually handle 3, 000 \

BY MR. SKALABAN

And how about if the department had been
performing in 1998?

Do you think it could have developed a
transportation system that could have handled 3, 000

MTUs in 1998 or within a few years
MR. SHULTIS:

thereafter?

Objection, asked and

answered.
It had never been the department I s

plan to

begin accepting 3, 000

MTUs in 1998, but according to

the schedule that existed, I don t recall what the

year that we ramped up to 3, 000 was , but , yes

,I

think the system could have been developed.
BY MR. SKALABAN:

A system could have been developed in 1998
after a reasonable rampup

that
MTU?

would have been

capable

of handling

000

A system could have been developed with a

rampup which began in 1998 and ultimately have ended

up with 3, 000

MTU whatever that year was, yes

,I

believe that a system could have been

developed.

Because for example from the early mission

25 ~1ans .

we see rampup period beginning in 1998 and

Alderson Reporting Company, Inc. 111114th Street , No Wo Suite 400 1-800-FOR- DEPO Washington , DC 20005

Case 1:98-cv-00126-JFM
Ronald A Milner

Document 833-14
Washington , Do

Filed 06/28/2004

Page 9 of 11
May 8 , 2002

Page 276

few years thereafter making 3, 000 MTU.

hm.
Again on that kind of schedule, you

wouldn t see a problem on making -- on developing a
transportation system to do that?
Developing a transportation system?
Because that' s simply -- how manyMTU you can

No.

handle

relates strictly to how many casks trailers and

railcars there

are.

MR. SKALABAN:

Off the record briefly.
I . d like to mark Exhibit
(Milner Exhibit No. 106

(Discussion off the record.

MR. SKALABAN:

106.
was marked for

identification.
BY MR. SKALABAN:

Mr. Milner

, I' d

like to call your

attention -- this is a letter that

I s actually signed
July 15,

by you for Lake Barrett, and it I S dated
1998.

I just received it , so if I can take a

moment.

Sure.

Please.

(Pause. )

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

Case 1:98-cv-00126-JFM
Ronald A Milner

Document 833-14
Washington, Do

Filed 06/28/2004

Page 10 of 11
May 8, 2002

Page 285

estimate

at the time?

4~
answered.

don t know.
Just don t know.

Why was the department looking for this

5 , information about the number of shutdown reactors and
the annual maintenance cost of those reactors?
MR. SHULTIS:

Objection, asked and

The department was interested in the

status of reactors and storage, and certainly we had

been interested in utility
BY MR. SKALABAN

cost.

And part of your interest in utility cost

was to help promote efficiency in the overall system
and at the individual reactor sites?

Yeah.
MR. SHULTIS:

Asked and answered.

It had been a goal of the department to

minimize those costs to the extent possible, looking
at the industry as a whole.
MR. SKALABAN:

Mr. Milner, I have no

further questions.
THE WITNESS:

Okay.
I don t have any redirect.

MR. SHULTIS:

MR. SKALABAN:

Great.

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

Case 1:98-cv-00126-JFM
Ronald A. Milner

Document 833-14
Washington , D.

Filed 06/28/2004

Page 11 of 11
May 8 , 2002

Page 284

Page 286
MR. SHULTIS: OITlhe record. MR. SKALA BAN: We are concluded. (Whereupon , at 6:02 p. . the taking of the instant deposition ceased.

II A. 12 Q. 13

which fuel the utility shipped to uSo Q. How so? Utilities verbally -- I don t recall anything in writing -- but I think utilities verbally indicatcd to. us that if they placed fuel in dry storage. they would more likely give us fuel out of spent fuel pool than pull it out of dry storage. Q. I seeo I f I can ca1\ your attention to Bates No. HQ 0013570 , and it s a page entitled , dry 10 storage requirements , 1998 to 2002.

A.

)

1~re

9.~
1)1

:!i~

9 SUBSCRIBED

AND SWORN to before me this

;),;/1

day of

14 1998. No additional reactors shut down during the

Yes. In the I guess the third paragraph, it says: Therc are eight shutdown reactors prior to

12
13

A~f/ ~7U
Yot
ary ~bliC' Expires:

14 My Commission

5//1/ /L1J.:

15 period 1998 to 2002. The annual maintenance cost at 16 each of these reactors is assumed to be 4.5 milliono

19 A. No, specifically Idon t. I vaguely 20 recall at some point in time that utilities were 21 basically asked what their costs wereo Whether that 22 is the basis of this figure , ( don t know. Q. Okayo Do you have any reason to believe

17

Do you know where the 4.5 million figure

18 came from?

23 24 it

25

s -- or it s an accurate estimate? I mean , do you believe it' s an accurate

Page 285

Page 287

estimate at the time A. I don t know. Just don t know. Why was the department looking for this information about the number of shutdown reactors and the annual maintenance cost of those reactors? MR. SHULTIS: Objection , asked and answered.

Q.

4I

CERTIFICATE OF COURT REPORTER UNITED STATES OF AMERICA DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA , CHERYL A. LORD , the reporter before 5 whom the foregoing deposition was taken , do hereby certify that the witness whose testimony appears in the foregoing deposition was sworn by me; that the testimony of said witness was taken by me in machine
shorthand and thereafter transcribed by

A. The department was interested in the

II been interested inutility cost.

10 status of reactors and storage, and certainly we had

BY MR. SKALABAN: Q. And part of your interest in utility cost 14 was to help promote efficiency inthe overall system 15 and at the individual reactor sites? Yeah. MRo SHULTIS: Asked and answered. A. It had been a goal of the department to 19 minimize those costs to the extent possible , looking 20 at the industry as a whole. MR. SKALABAN: Mr. Milner l have no 22 further questions. THE WITNESS: Okay. MR. SHULTIS: I don t have any redirect. MR. SKALABAN: Great.

12 13

10 computer-aided transcription; that said deposition is
II a true record of the testimony given by said witness; that I am neither counsel for, related to , nor

12 13 employed by any of the parties to the action in which 14 this deposition was taken; and , further, that I am
15 not a relative or employee of any attorney or counsel

16 A. 17 18

16 employed by the parties hereto , or financially or 17 otherwise interested in the outcome of this action.
CHER YL A. LORD Notary Public in and for the District of Columbia My Commission expires April 30 , 2006

21 23 24 25

61 (Pages 284 to 287)
Alderson Reporting Company, Inc.
1111 14th Street, No W. Suite 400 1- 800- FOR- DEPO Washington , DC 20005