Free Response to Motion - District Court of Federal Claims - federal

. . ", ' ~...- , ~ , ", ' ,

, "
~,

..

..

.---

.. ,.j ' . . .

. p~. ,

. . ""'.. ",.-. ;-..~... '
Page 1 of 15

Case 1:98-cv-00126-JFM

Document 791-7

Filed 04/16/2004

of Sj1CJlt

fuel are delivefed at a time. ' This efficiency steins largely &om the fact that the

~vcinent of spe~~ luC;1 ftom a'spent fuel pool is a de~~ ~~r-m~Dsive
\volkers

The

petro~ the ~eceswy taskscan perf~rin th~m mOre efficiently if they do them
that petmits and encourages the USe
1povemen~ of spent ,fuel from
of ciunpaigns is

_1yrath~thanep~cal.Y., ' .
, A schedule

particularly advantageous '

for

o~g plants. The

a spent fuel pool at

operating plant can '

~be diSrupti~e ~,
. o

fthe no~31 electricity gerieratio~ activi~es ~ ~e plantl~

This diS1UptiO

:o ": because the ~erSoiuiel th~t ~reqUired by gov~~ent' regulatjon to be in~olved in the ~ovement
0'

of the

~nt fuel ftom the pool are the same personnel that are required for the- normal operatio~ '
these reas9~, th~schedule f~r spen~
fuel ~cceptal\ceshoutd pe111,1it, and ,

of the plant. ,For

enco~e utilities to organize their deliveries of !)peni fuel to DOE in a limited number of
aunp3igns,
Rol~ of Spent Fuel Discparge Listffig

PlaintitI'scontract requires the governmentto list utilities ' spent fuel discharges &om
their respective reacto(SJn the order intim,e in which such discharges oceurr.edas ~'

anaiuiual

acceptance prioritY ranking" for receipt of spent fuel at the DOE repository.20

The spent fuel

~barged ' earliest is listed fIrst and is frequently referred to ~ the oldest

fuel

' I undeI$nd that

, the government has taken the position that the appropriate schedule fo~ its acceptance of spent,
II .In addition to my own knowledge of this fact, i have considered the expe rt witness reportofIvait' Stuart as :further support forthis opinion.

addition ~ my own knowledge of this fact, I have considered the expert witness report ofIvan Stuart as further support for

19 In

this opinion.
0078

20 See

Plaintiff's Contract , Art IV. B.5. (a).

. , ', . : , '

, .
Case 1:98-cv-00126-JFM
as,

..

,- -._~, , ,;~ .
, ,

. ,' ,

Document 791-7

Filed 04/16/2004

Page 2 of 15

melftom utilities woUld' be the order shown in this listing. ' TIds sort of schedule is ftequep.tly
refCaed, to

oldest-fuel-fust" or'"OFF.

OFF would not be areasonabte sch~ule for the actual acceptance ofspcnt fu~1. Pap ~f' ,
the :problem With OFF.is

apparent ftom a reView ~f the government' s most recent combined
a schCduling

0 AmiUalCapaclty, Report and Annual Priority Report.21 Tms, reportincludes
applies the gov~mmept' S

queue

stat~ 8m1~ rCceiving

awacity f ~r

spent fuel.from utilities to the .

list of spent Atet- discbfu:ges

~ed according to OFF. The sche4'ullng qu~ue consists ofa

1~ by ' a utility of ~e amount of spent fuel to be picked up ftonitJtat utility in ,each' of the first
, tCQ.Years of

the govemmenes acceptaticeofspent'fuel ftomutilities.~ The OFF-based
sniall amounts of spent fuel be accepted, from a

SChecJulit;1g 9u(fUe would require that ,relatively

large n~ber of different plants eac~ year. The' scheduling q~eue does not take into acco~t '
whethe~ ~ ut~lity ~as Must-~ove

fuel. The sch~uling queue w~uld not pe~it~e

use ~~

transpo~tion campaigns. In fact; many of the BnnWu aliocatio ~ to indiVidual utilities in the
OFf queue are so small that they do not even call for full containers of spent fuel to be used. For
these reasons, among others, the OFF queue d~es not represent a reasonable schedule for spent
fuel acCeptance. In my' opinion, DOE would and could' not have followed an OFF schedule even'

' ifit bad co~enced spent fuel acceptance by January' 31, 1998.

21 See

1995 ADnual Capacity Report/Annual

1995).
22 Id.

Priority Report, DOFlRW-O457

(March

at 6;

12 ,

0079

".
Case 1:98-cv-00126-JFM Document 791-7 Filed 04/16/2004

....- -~..
Page 3 of 15

Bxchanges ' ofSclteduling
The OFF

Slots

can be useful, however. The scheduUtig q~eue ,can be used as an

, ailocation of'

Sch~~ slots ..ather tban as a rigid schedule for 8.ctuaI acteptance. , If used as an '
OW,

2illocation,ofschedwmg slots, the

liSting can serve as ' a useful starting point from which

, Utilities can exchange or swap such scheduling sloisin a maimer that would' increase efficiency
, for each utility

mid ~uce total u~ty costs. ,
the ~change provisions in the S ~dar~ ~~tracts would
In~t individual utility

~~E has long ~xpect~

allow 41dustry to optimize the allocation of waste acceptance ~acity;1o

Ji~ Without

thc? overt

involvement ()f (DOE)~"21 :I had that eXpectation myself when I was

.., .I)~tor ofOCRWM. Using suchexchaO.ges, utilities wi~ M~t-Move fuel would have
m:~nti~e to ~de for early a~eptan~e slots so ~ to reduce their spent fue1 ~otage costS.

3.

DOE~ sConsiderationofProposed Exchanges

As noted above, plaintitI's contract provides a mechanism through which utilities can
exchaIigeacceptance slots. The contract provides DOE with a role in approving or disapproving
of such, exchanges of slots for

spent fuel acceptance, IIi order to have achieved an: efficient

sch~ule for spent fuel acceptance, and thereby to have minimized utilities' total costs , DOE
wotild have approved such exchanges ~iberaUy. I expected that DOE would do so when I , was
Director of OCR WM;

With reasonable planning, DOE would have been able to have accommodated most
exchanges that would have been likely to have added to the efficiency of-the spent fuel

g., Letter from Dreyfus (OCRWM director) to ~drewKadak (Yank~Atomic chief.executive officer) dated September 28 , 1995.
, e,

23 See

0080

'\ '

. ~ ',
, "

,'
Document 791-7 Filed 04/16/2004

" "

. -.. ~_.. ' ,

Case 1:98-cv-00126-JFM

Page 4 of 15

acceimmce schedule. As explained above. plants with Must~Move fuel

wo~d have been thos~

1Iiat would most 1ike~y hav~ had an economic inCClltive to exchange fo~ th~' oppo~ty

to have

had their spent fuel

~ted

earlier4Jy the

gove~ent. Similarly, as exPi~ed

abovct plantS

\Vtthoitt MoSt.-iMovc'fuel, parncularly plantS withmitple spcnt' fuel pOOrcaPacityt would have bad
aD. economic

incentive to .exc_e away carty slots for spent fuel acceptance in favor: of grijups

~f1ate'r slots in order. to avoid the disi11ptionsinherent in moving spent fuel from an: o~ri1tfug

, ,piaut. Also as noted abo~

t1iegovennD..ent tracks

m~

d$ showiu(i~ ~OII$ au.! '

timhtg ofMust-~ove ~~l; The government could hav~and should have ' used this datato have
planned its spent fu~l accep~ce capabilities ' in order~o have been: able to have a~pted MUSt- '

, Move fuel..flo~ the places it wo~d be. Indeed, the government haS performed a variety
aDatyses in" Wb.ich it has identified efficien~y enhimcing spent fuel a~ptan~, sche4ules.
1~ Thus;

DOE should andw~ul~ h~ve. been-able to have
, n.

~nunodatdd' efficien-cy-e~cingexchanges.

Data or Infonnation Considered in fonning Opinions
, ~ata and ' other information I considered in fonnmg my opinionS is listed in exhibit 1 to

this report.,

, m.

Qualifications

My qualifications to offer the opinions included in thIs report, including a list of all
. publications I have authored within the preceding ten years, are set out in exhibit 2 to this report.

2~

See, e.

Operation Options Report;

Spent~uel Acceptance Scenarios Devoted to

Shutdown Reactors Prepared by Pacific Northwest La~rat()ry for the U. S. Department of
, Energy (October 1989); MRS Systems Study Task Prepared by Pacific Northwest Report; Laboratory for the U. S. Department of Energy (April 1989) .

addition to my o~ knowledge and expertise, I have considered the expert witness report ofIvan Stuart as further support for
2S In

this opiniolL
0081

, , ,'.

. . , . , "

. , ' '

.'

,.

~. . .

',

:. .
, "

",
~y

....'

. -

~.

Case 1:98-cv-00126-JFM

Document 791-7

Filed 04/16/2004

Page 5 of 15
0 0' -~,

IV.

Compensation
Jam beiogPmd

$1S0'

~o~

~or

time wodwig

on this

matter.

(jther~,TestiJ!1Qn%
I have

not-t~fie(t."as an expert at trlalor by' dePosition m any other

cases within

the

precedii1g four years-

Respectfully

sub~ttCd;

Dated:

'1un~ ' ~O~' 1~99

',..

0082
'is

...

, , ' ' .",., " "

." ,

'

,, ' .,.~ ' ,, "
-'
Case 1:98-cv-00126-JFM Document 791-7
Exhibit 1

'
...
Filed 04/16/2004

' , ""

,

, ,

. -. ,' -""'"~,-", -, , --.. ...." ,;,~... ', '" - -..--' ..
. " . :' , .

Page 6 of 15

pArA AND pTHER INFORMATION CONSID~RiID IN FORMING

Op~

I.
, 2.

CiVilian Radioactive Waste Management Syst~ ModUlar DesigO/COristiuctionand

. Op~~~.Qptions Report, it~vision 02 (December IS, 1998). '
S. Department of Energy Contract No. DE-CR01-83NE44428, Contract for Disposal of Spent NuclearFuel andlot~gh Level Radioactive Waste (June '22, 1983).
:' Missio~ Pladfor the Civilian Radioactive Waste Management Program, DOEIRW-OOOS .

, 3~

~1~
Proceet!ings of

T. W.. Wood (pacifi~ ~ortbwest LaboratOlY), Spent Fuel Storage Requirements for"

'

. ' Nuclear Utilities and' OCRWM,
t~e

in 2

High LevefRlldioiIitive Waste /tlmragemelit:
Vegas, Nevada; Apr!l

Intentational Topical Meeting at

12,

1990.
5.

Spen~ Fuel Stonige Req~irements 1994-2042 , DOEIR.W:-O431, Rev~ 1 '(June

1995).

CiVilian RadioaCtive Waste ' Management System Requirements ~ocuihent,ReVislon OS;

DOElRW-O406 (January 1999). '
Expert Witness Report ofFrapk C. Graves,

. 7.

" Expert Witness Report ofIvan F. Stuart.
, ' 9.

J.W. Doman (WESTONlR.ogers & Associate~) and T.R Tehan (pa~ific Nuclear),

Significance of.campmgned Spent Fuel Shipments.
10.
11.

1987 Annual Capacity Report, DOEIRW-0146 (June 1987).

1988 Annual Capacity Report, DOElRW-0191 (June 1988).

12. ' 1995 Annual O1pacity ReportlAnnual Priority Report, DOFlRVI-0457 ~1arch 1995).
13.

Letter from D~iel Dreyfus (OCRWM Dir~or)

to Andre~ Kadak (Yankee Atomic

Chief Executive Officer), dated September 28

1995. ,

14.

, Spent FuelAcceptailce Scenarios Devoted to Shutdown Reactors, Prepared by Pacific Northwest Laporatory for the U. S, Department of Energy (October 1989).

15.

MRS System Study Task G Report, Prepared by Pacific Northwest Laboratory for the S. Department of Energy (ApriI1989).

0083

. ,

,.

, ,-- . , . ,

-,

. . , ..~ .
Case 1:98-cv-00126-JFM

..,. '

..

.. '.
p~ ..

Document 791-7

Filed 04/16/2004

Page 7 of 15

16. , Altemati\'c AllOcation Strategies for DeliveryRigl:lts to ,
for~pent Nuclear F~el and High-Level Radioactive

Putcbasers

of DispoSal

Services '
on Issue L 1,

Waste: 4. ,White

Prep~'by
J3nergy (IanU31y

~eTrausportationOperatioDS Project Qfficeforthc
1991)~ .

u:.s.-DepartlnCl\t of. ,

V'.

0084

, .' , . j , , -

.';, .'

, . "

.,
..,

.,
Document 791-7 Filed 04/16/2004

...

. . .,.-.... - -' -'" '
:;"""

.,,-

Case 1:98-cv-00126-JFM

Page 8 of 15

Exhibit 2
JOHN W. BARTlEtT

WORK EXP,ERIENCE

~eldor Project Manager, S. ~ohen& Associates,. Mclea

, '! A '

(1996-pre~~t)

DireCts projects concerned with radioactive .and hazardous waste management and disposal, decommissioning of ' nucle?f fayUitles, risk asses$men~, regul?tt?rY impact' ass~ssr:nent, andfissilematenals:management and' dispo$iti9n,

PreSident , The Bartlett'Company, Vier:'na, VA.

(1993~ 1996)

Provided technical and management supportconsultang services to government agencies and " the priva.te sector. Services to" clientsin9Iuded~ technical support' to development . of regulations for- management and, disposal of radioactive . wastes: anaiyses..of alternative technol9'gies for lreatment' of h~ardous and radioacti~e wastes in the Department of Energy complex: analysis of options f~r

manage ment and disposition of fissile, materials from dismantled ' nuclear weapons: analyses of alternative technologies for" packaging .and transport of
hazardous materials: development ,of a conceptual design and implementation

plan for an international repository for disposal of radioactive wastes: and development , of a methodology for selecting methods. for Sustainable

Development of energy resources.

, 1993)

Senior Consultant Golder Associates, Inc., RockviUe, MO~ (January-August'

. ~articipated in busln'ess development activities for programs concerning energy supply, environmental restoration , and radioactive waste management for private

seetorclients in other nations.

Director, Office of Civilian Radioactive Waste Management (OCRWM), U. Department of Energy.
Executive Schedule level IV

(1990-1993)

Senate. The OCRWM has responsibility for the U. S, program for management and disposal of ' commercial spent nuclear fuel and defense high-level radioactive wastes.
, Program activities under the Director's cognizance include technical

Nominated by President Bush and confirmed by the U. 8,

0085
~ t!--,

,'

,,
Case 1:98-cv-00126-JFM Document 791-7

. . -."
Filed 04/16/2004

- ' - - --,- ~",..,_.
..:!:

Page 9 of 15
.f':.",! '

. . John W.

Bartlett~ Page 2

Characterization ' of the' cahd'd' ~te Yucca Mountain site 'and determination ' of its .-SUitability as a location for diSposal;, siting. design. licensing. andopetation of " , ' central. facility. for . sto.f~~ p,f CQmmercial spent nuclear fuel;: design. of waste . packages, and the, engineered' repository; ' and . se!ection and design of the technology andoperational system for transport of 'waste materials.

, Work ~ctivities in this service included agency and national policy, d~velopment: . budg~tdeveloprnent; pfogr~ strategy development; interagency. intema.tional.
intergovernmental. and.

,co.nstituencies:'staff and' Contractorditection; and technical. leadership, of program ene.rgy. acti~itie$~ ReSPQrtsib ilit.ies , Involved substantive participatio~, defense issues of concern to viroo,mentaJ, regtJ1atory. ~Cqnomi~. ~nd national administraJion agencies and-the U, S. Congress. . Tt).eOCRWM has an annual, , budget' of aQotJt$400 million, ' and, invoives, the s~rVices Qf over ~OOOper$OnneL, "

Congressiooal interactloos: ' repre$entat~on to:'

, ~entific disciplines~
i "

: The technical fu nctions i'n the:program span approximately 25 engineering and

.

Di~ecto ~:o Ene~g, 'c~n (;f~n.vir6nment prQgrams, The ' Analytic Scien ~es ' (1978Corporation, Reading,

1990)

Respon~ible for management , technical direction , and business deyetopment for , projects witl:1in cognizance. Clients included Federal Government agencies such. as the, S, NuclearRegulatoryCommission, the Departmentof Energy. a,nd the
,

Department of Defense; state agencies; and private sector-organizations such as the Edison Electric Institute and ~he: Electric Power'Research Institute. Topicsof work. included waste management program development; regulatory compliance, risk assessment, a,nd technical ~systems integration, Accomplishments included

significant business ,expansion, high proposal win

rates ,

and client retention.

Program Manager, Pacific Northwest Laboratories, Richland, WA. (19681978)

Management positions and busjness develqpment activities in chemical technology and radioactive waste management. Led development of the first
,

computercode for prediction of nuclide transport from a geological waste repository. and directed preparation of ERDA- 16-43, , a five-volume document which was the first cOmprehensive compilation of alternativta . technoI6gies fo.r radioactive waste management. Authored or cO-authored numerous papers and presentations concerning waste managementprogram strategies and technical activities. Served as consultant to the International AtomicEnergy Agency, presented testimony to Congress , and participated' in founding of the Pacific Basin Conference for the nuclear fuel cycle. . While at PNL served as Adjunct Professor of the University of Washington, teaching engineering curriculum course ~such astran~port-phenomena altneJoint ' Center1or Graduate Study~, '

0086 '

'- '

" ... ", ,, , .. .'

,, ' .,.,..,
Case 1:98-cv-00126-JFM

" , . '. ",,
. ,

.. ',. ",,

.. ,..... '' , ,,

,;, '. :..:~, , '. , ,..' " "

. . ' , .." ,'....",,..,.
. .._,

:..~..

: " .., '' '

, , " "

" ,,,.' '
, ,-

" "

...' "..' -.... .. ..

Document 791-7

Filed 04/16/2004

Page 10 of 15
"';0
::'It
1!:,

presidential Exchange
Gaithersburg, MD.

, (1973-

On leave from , Battelle. served ~ ~f*1ior. stAff()fficer,to the Oir~tor Qf the Ceot~, for R8;dIationRese8rch, in the National ,Bureau' of Stand~rds (now th~Natioriar

1974)
Exe.cutive~,:
the Director of the

John W. Bartlett. Pa~e 3

National Bureau of Stand~rds"

Nas program in nuclear safeguards. Had signIficant participation in budget and program developmentfor~BS. ,,
" Fulbright Professor of Nuclear

Institutefor Science and T echnology)~ ' , Developed the plan for what becam~ the

Engineering, Istanbul Technical University" Istanbul , Turkey. (1~68- 69), "

Taught ' courses in nuclear~ ~ngineerrng and atomIc physics , directed student a Tufki~h for research projects, and developed the, chtWteron thermal-hydraulics

text on nuclear engineering. Assisted,

, J

, NASA technology transfer program' w~i~h)twolved travel ~hroughoutthe n~tion describing the U. R, space progranrqricfit$)eGhnical appli~tions: Stimulated and

Nuclear 1nst1tute t development of Torkey's national nu'clear power program. PartIcipated ,In a

, ' evaluated research propo~I~. -

Assistant Pro fessor, Chemical Eng'ineering Oepartnlent , The, University of Rochester , Rochester , NY. (1962- 1968) ,,
, Taught courses in

the chemical engineering curriculum , directed " and taught the nuclear engIneering program. directed M. S. and Ph. D. theses, and served as for particiPation in the Summer VIsiting consultant to various clients, ~elected S. Atomic Energy Commission at the" Hpnford $ite in Professor Program of the U. Richland , WA. Initiated collaborative research with the School of- Medicine Which introduced concepts of chemical system, function" and modeling to research on
began use of inoovative strategies for

diabetes. This -work

diabetes research and

was at the forefront of bioengineering te~earch at the time,

Staff Engineer, Knolls Atomic Power Laboratory, Schenectady, NV. (1957Proj~t engineer with

the D1G ProjeCt, which designeqand.built the prototype for

the, flr~t nuclear- powered

1'

surface ship, Developed mathematical models for activation and transport" of radioactive corrosion products in nuclear reactor coolant systems , and participated in design and test engineerIng for the USH Bainbridge prototype. The work on corrosion product transport became the basis for subsequent research and development program~ (n the United States and

Canada. '-0087

;n-

. .' '

. ~

"'

. . . ..

..

' ' .. - ,.' .

---;-.

""

. .'
Page 11 of 15

Case 1:98-cv-00126-JFM

Document 791-7

Filed 04/16/2004

JohnW. Bartlett, Page 4
EDUCATION
University of Rochest~r~,

R6dhe$ter~, NY

B. ' S.

in Chemical Engtoeering, 1
Chemical EAgioeeting, 1 ~59

ReSselaer Polytechnic Institute, Troy, NY
Master of'

" Rensselaer. P6lYt~hnic InStitute, Troy, NY
f'hDi , Chemical Engineering, 1962
. Burlington High SOOo01 ,

Burlington, NJ: Diploma 1953~ "

" ~. . Valedictorian.

HONORS. AwA~DS,- AND PROFESSIONAL ACTIVI11ES

Bausch ~nd Lomb Scholar. Elected .to Sigma Xi an~ -Phi Lamb~a Upsilon. ' Reclpiel1f' of s everal re~earch grants while at the ' University of Roch~ster.
. Numerous' tech~ical pu~lications, ,
~J'

: Member oflhe AmeriCan Institute of Chemical Engineers~the American Nuclear Society. and the American Association for the Advan-Cement of Scien~. - In the American Nuclear Society was elected to two terms , of service' on the Executive .

Committee of the Fuel Cycle and 'Waste Management Division, ' served as Chairman of the Niagara~Finger Lakes S:ection, and Director for the Ni~gara-

'Finger Lakes and Northeast Sections. , Participates extensively in teChnical paper ' reviews and service as session chairman in ANS conferences. .
. Received, from toe

.Nuclear Division of the .AIChE. the Hobert E. Wilson Award,

fQr leadership in nuclear chemical engineering.

Usted in Who s Who in America.
CIVIC SERVICE

Twice 'elected 'to the City. Co~ncil of Richland, Washingtor~ and served one tenn as Mayor Pro.T em. Also was elected to two terms on the Richland Sehool Board " . and served on the Ricl:tland CommunityConcertB6ard. . Served thre~ terms on " the Conservation Commission of Lynnfield. Massachusetts, which ~as , com munity responsibility for implementation of wetland protection statutes. Also ' seOled as member and. Director of Rotary International clubs in Richland and

Lynnfield .

0088

.u
AfkJ

),

.. ' ' .
,.

". ;' ~.

,.
,...,

. ,.

..... ... .'

..

....-. .., .,. ..

....

" - :...... , --,---'--\, , . -.,'\' :":" . , - '. .
. .

, ;""--,. , .;-.,.. , .' ,. .

Case 1:98-cv-00126-JFM

Document 791-7

Filed 04/16/2004

Page 12 of 15

John W. PE~SQ.NALIN~RMA

Bartlett~ Pag~ 5

110N

, Born

oCtober '18.

1935. Camden. NJ. US atizen
PreferQl1Ce ~ploYment:

No Veterans
Highest Federal seCurity

CI~arances: .

Executive Schedule IV DOE " SCI. 000 Top S ecret,

:f.

0089

/1d7"

. ~::, . ~!. ~-:..' :$-: ~", ~... 'j-

...

",
Filed 04/16/2004 Page 13 of 15
CONF-831217

Case 1:98-cv-00126-JFM

Document 791-7

!:J

Proceedings

0 f

the 1983

Civilian

Radioactive Waste Management
Information Meeting
r..'

December 12-15, 1983
-s'"f:

Washington, D.

February 1984

Sponsored by:

S, Department of Energy Office of Civilian Radioactive Waste Management Washington , D,C, 20585

0090
:'GEX- QOOOO2

Case 1:98-cv-00126-JFM

Document 791-7

Filed 04/16/2004

Page 14 of 15

PROGRAM OVERVIEW

Robert Morgan. Acting Director of Civil Radioactive Waste Management S. Department of Energy Washington. D,

ian

Since the Nuclear Waste Policy Act was signed January 7, 1983, we ve made considerable progress in implementing the Act. Within this first year. there has been a demand iog set of timetables in process requi rements. We have signed contracts

issue a pre 1 iminary draft to get comments before we get into a formal stage of issuing the draft for comments.

with all nuclear utilities. We' ve

started

nuclear generated electricity, We

accepting the one lIi11 per kilowatt hour of ve identified

We have just received a preliminary draft of Volume I of the mission plan and we hoPe to have this available to interested parties . the States and others by Christmas,
In the mission plan, what we are trying to do ;s outline the strategy. discuss the schedule in the interrelationship of all the aspects of the program , including Monitored Retrievable Storage (MRS). Federal Interim Storage and a Repository Program. In addition , we will cover the management of the waste fund.

States with one or more. potentially acceptable repository sites for the first repository. We have establ1shed the fee collection and payment procedures for the one or more potentially acceptable repository sites for the first repos itory. We have es tab I ished the fee co llect ion and payment procedures for the one mi II per kilowatt hour I ment ioned a moment ago, We have also fulfilled most of the other requirements in the time fralne tha t the Act has couple, specified except for

justa

We are late in one area and that is In issuing final siting guidelines, We have not done so because we felt we needed to extend the process of consultation with the States beyond the process specified in the Act. Proposed fina I guidelines were transmitted to the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (~~C) on November 22, which was about four months late. We believe that the

Volu~e II of the mission plan will address those 11 specific areas required by the Act. Volume It is not yet ready; however, we will get Volume 11 out as soon as possible for early review and collllient, The formal process for issuing the
draft mi~s ~o!" ~.1an w ill beg in In

Karch 01' Apri I.

process of extending the consultation with the
States, was worthwhile and necessary for our credibility. We are not racing to judgement; we intend to go through the process requi rements and

the technical requirements, and if we have slip schedules. we will slip schedules. Our intent is to ful1y comply with the Act in process and in technical mandates, However, if we must schedule to accomplish the requirements and intent of consultation , we "ill

sl ip a date in the
co so,

process, we learned one lesson early in the process. That lesson that we learned is important early consultation. For that reason , we will be adding an extra early step in the development of the mission plan, The Act requires that the draft Federal Re ~ister mission plan be published in the

In going through the 9uidel ines

I would like to talk' a little bit about the strategy as laid out in the mission plan and what we intend do. I think most of. you know that the Act requires that we receive waste from the utilities by January '. 1998, Technically. the Act does not specify how much waste or spent fuel we must begin receiving at that time. if we accepted one spent fuel element in 1996 we would technically be in accordance with the Act. However, we did not believe that that meets the intent of the Act. The basic strategy which ve outlined in the mission plan, is that beginning in 1998 , utilities will not have to provide any additional storage facilities on site. During the first year of operation of the repository in 1996, we should be receiving fuel at a rate so that no utility would have ' to add

In fact,

any further storage facilities either on

sitear

at another location.
After the initial operation df the repository through the first few years, we would dnticipate that the weight of acceptance af fuel should be the rate of discharge from the redctars that are in operation at the time, So, by the year 2000 or 2001 , we should ~e accepting in the repository

and distributed 15 months after enactment 0 the Act and that a final mission plan be issued 17 months after the enactment, We are going to add an extra step in that process; we are going to

the amount of fue 1 1S be Ing di scharged from the

1 1

0091
i1.

, (GEX- OOOOO3

,.

~..,
Case 1:98-cv-00126-JFM Document 791-7 Filed 04/16/2004 Page 15 of 15

reactors, It is ant
repository fo110\01$

icipated that at that point, it would look at bringing home the second repository. According to the Act, the second
the

Hrst repository by four

or five years. ' We are looking at the sensitivity of that sequence. and we n~y use the second repository to start working on the backlog of fuel. In addition, by that time, there may be some reactors which have reached the end of their design lifetime and that will be shutting down. If so, we "IOU Id have the second repos Hory to receive the fuel from the bas ins of those reactors so that they could go through the appropriate decommissioning aspects,
That is our ~asic strategy which we are outl in the draft mission plan,

ining

We are concerned with the schedule on the

1998. We believe that there are Challenges in that some will say risks to obtainin9 that date. Therefore, we 8USt. have an alternative plan or a parallel plan to begin receiving waste by January 31, 1998. Monitored Retrievable Storage could serve as that alternative. The mission plan will als~~over federal Interim Storage, waste
p~ckagin9 and other interrelated

repository is e.tremely optimistic for getting to

issues,

to work wi th the States in the reso lut i on of is IJur intent to continue and . thos~ issues. in many cases expand the consultation process. The lime- t.1bles set ollt in the Act and those

We have learned a lot in the consultation process. There are some very difficult issues that have been identified and we are attempting

. It

discussed in the mission plan are clearly
assumptions in laying'
tillW'. ava

optimistic. While we are making a number of
out the schedules contained
in the I1Ihs Ion ph'n, we are trying to identify

those areas where we know there is

inadequate

ilab Ie to meet a nlanda

ted mi les tone,

such

dS lhe time allowed in the Act for site
charac teri z ation.

that in January 1985 we recoamend to the President th~e sites for site characterization, Then in March 1987 . the Pres ident must recOlMlend a site for the first r~pository, Clearly two yearS, from 1985 to 1987 , is insufficient for conducting site characterization.

For !!xamp

Ie.

the Act specifi es

As WE'. develop

better schedules. we will present those schedules to thl! states and to the public. We are now ant icipat Ing poss ib ly a two or three T1!convnending the first site. \.Ie are looking at ways of bringing that date closer It is questionable th4t we could complete site characterization on those three sites In less than four or five years.

year delay in

as best. we can, but I think

To sunmariZe. the basic strategy is o to
repository in operation in

have a

1998, ~e will

however. keep a para lle 1

program going on an MRS .

so that if a repository Is not an Hable by 1998 or if Congress decideS to authorizt the conHruction of an /'IRS prior to tl1;t time, we will be able to canply with the 14.., -- to begin accept Ing waste in 1998.

0092
,-I

J G EX - 000004