Case 1:98-cv-00126-JFM
Document 783-4
Filed 04/07/2004
Page 1 of 15
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF FEDERAL CLAIMS
Y;i.,
YANKEE ATOMI C ELECTRI C COMPANY
CONNECTICUT YANKEE ATOMIC POWER COMPANY
MAINE YANKEE ATOMIC POWER COMPANY
FLORIDA POWER & LIGHT COMPANY
NORTHERN STATES POWER COMPANY
DUKE POWER, A pi vision of DUKE ENERGY CORP.
INDIANA MICHIGAN POWER COMPANY
SACRAMENTO MUNICIPAL UTILITY DISTRICT
SOUTHERN NUCLEAR OPERATING COMPANY COMMONWEALTH EDISON COMPANY
'i.
, et al.
BOSTON EDISON COMPANY
GPU NUCLEAR ( INCORPORATED
WISCONSIN ELECTRIC POWER COMPANY
POWER AUTHORITY OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK
OMAHA PUBLIC POWER DISTRICT
NEBRASKA PUBLIC POWER DISTRICT
TENNESSEE VALLEY AUTHORITY
Plaintiffs
UNITED STATES
Defendant.
DEPOSITION OF ROBERT L. MORGAN
March 21 and 22, 2002
Volume 2, Pg 213 - 330
0010
Court n_--_..
541/485-11111 . IlL haSt 11th Avenue.
Imgene, Oregon 97401
800/344-0983 . FAX 541/485-0926 . Salem Office 503/362-9193
CERTIFIED COpy
Case 1:98-cv-00126-JFM
Document 783-4
Filed 04/07/2004
Page 2 of 15
R. Morgan / Neslin
shutdown reactors
is necessary to prevent
314
reactors from waiting 20 or 30 years to be
decommissioned after they finish generating
electrici ty.
Does that
Would you agree wi
that?
Did you agree with that at the
time?
Yes.
What did you mean,
necessary to
II ?
prevent them from
wai t ing 20
to 30 years
We didn't want to hold up D and D of
a reactor si te.
liD and D" referring to?
Decommissioning and - - 14
what'
s the --
I don't remember the acronym.
Shutting down the
reactor.
Was that one of your objectives,
avoid -MR. BANES:
Obj ection.
Vague.
BY MR. NESLIN:
to avoid holding up
A utility from D and D?
Yes.
Decommissioning.
We didn I t want to
do that.
That was an objective of yours?
C & C COURT REPORTING 0011
541/485- 0111
Case 1:98-cv-00126-JFM
Document 783-4
Filed 04/07/2004
Page 3 of 15
R. Morgan
1 Neslin
315
Yes.
Not to.
Now if we could turn to
page 16602.
Yes.
The bottom of the first column,
Article VI.
1(b).
Yes.
Do you see that at the
bottom of the page?
This is the provision that allows a
priority for shutdown
MR.
reactors. Correct? BANES: Obj ection. Calls for
that I s correct.
Strike
a legal conclusion.
I bel ieve
BY MR. NESLIN:
Did you have - this provision?
MR. BANES:
that.
How
did you expect the Department of Energy to apply
Obj ect
ion.
Calls for
speculation.
BY MR. NESLIN:
Do you understand my question?
2 3
tell you
Unless faced with the issue how we would resolve it. Did you have any cri teria in
I can
I t
mind
for when priori ty would have been accorded to a
C & C COURT REPORTING 0012
541/485- 0111
Case 1:98-cv-00126-JFM
Document 783-4
Filed 04/07/2004
Page 4 of 15
0013
.,;.
) .
Case 1:98-cv-00126-JFM Document 783-4 Filed 04/07/2004 EXHIBIT
ALt,1 I"
Page 5 of 15
Ai
1f-
Jf- 1-1f~tJ)'
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF FEDERAL CLAIMS
YANKEE A TOMI C ELECTRIC COMPANY (98- 126C)(Merow , S. CONNECTICUT YANKEE ATOMIC POWER COMPANY (98- 154C) (Merow , 8.1. MAINE YANKEE ATOMIC POWER COMP ANY (98-474C) (Merow , S.1. FLORIDA POWER & LIGHT COMPANY (98- 483C) (Wilson, J. NORTHERN STATES POWER COMPANY (98-484C) (Wiese, J. DUKE POWER, A Division or DUKE ENERGY CORP. (98-485C) (Sypolt, J. INDIANA MICHIGAN POWER COMPANY (98-486C) (Hodges, J. SACRAMENTO MUNICIPAL UTILITY DISTRICT (98-488C) (Yock, 8.1.
SOUTHERN NUCLEAR OPERATING COMPANY,
et at
(98- 614C) (Merow , S.1. COMMONWEALTH EDISON COMPANY (98- 621C) (Hewitt, J. BOSTON EDISON COMPANY (99-447C) (Allegra, J. GPU NUCLEAR , INCORPORATED (00-440C) (Bush, J. WISCONSIN ELECTRIC POWER CaMP ANY (00-697C) (Merow , S.1. POWER AUTHORITY OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK
(00- 703C) (Damich , 1.)
OMAHA PUBLIC POWER DISTRICT (01- 115C) (Bush, J. . NEBRASKA PUBLIC POWER DISTRICT (01- 116C) (Sypolt, J. TENNESSEE VALLEY AUTHORITY (01- 249C) (Broggink, J.
Plaintiffs
THE UNITED STATES
Defendant.
Discovery Judge:
(Judge Sypolt)
0014
---.-... -..... ....-....... .--......,Case 1:98-cv-00126-JFM Document 783-4 Filed 04/07/2004 Page 6 of 15
NOTICE OF DEPOSITION
PLEASE TAKE NOTICE that, pursuant to Rule 30(b)(6) of the Rules of the Court of
Federal Claims and the Order of the Discovery Judge dated March 25, 2002 , counsel for the
above-referenced Utility Plaintiffs will take the deposition of Defendant' s designated
representative at 9:30 a. m. on Wednesday, April 24 , 2002, at the law offices of Jenner & Block
601 Thirteenth St., NW , Suite 1200 South, Washington, DC 20005. The deposition will be
recorded by stenographic means and will continue day to day until completed.
Defendant' s designated representative will be examined with respect to the matters set
forth in the attached exhibit.
Dated: April 18 ,
2002
Respectfully submitted
Alex D. Tomaszcm
ffA-.
SHA W PITTMAN LLP
1650 Tysons Boulevard
McLean, V A 22102-4859 Telephone: 703. 770. 7940 Fax: 703. 770. 7901
1r-
Counsel of Record for Plaintiffs Florida Power & Light Company, Northern States Power Company, Duke Power, Indiana Michigan
Power Company, Boston Edison Company, GPU
Nuclear , Inc., Power Authority ofthe State of New York , Omaha Public Power District , and Nebraska Public Power District
OF COUNSEL: JayE. Silberg Devon E. Hewitt ' Daniel S. Herzfeld Jack Y. Chu SHAW PITIMAN LLP 2300 N Street , N. Washington , DC 20037- 1128
0015
j(.
Case 1:98-cv-00126-JFM Document 783-4
('.
.#.- -.
...
..
(~. ! '-../
' .: ( "'
Filed 04/07/2004
Page 7 of 15
M. Stanti d Blanton Balch & ingham , LLP
~trz
I'
1710 Sixth Avenue North Binningham, AL 35203 Tel: (205) 251- 8100 Counsel of Record for Plaintiff: Southern Nuclear Operating Company, et at
rLW
Richard C. Johnson Jenner & Block
4~j
0~
601 13lh Street , N.
Suite 1200 South Washington , D. C. 20005 Tel: (202) 639-6075 Counsel of Record for Plaintiff: Commonwealth Edison Company
M-t!~
Richard W. oehler Perkins Coie LLP 1201 Third Avenue, 40'h Floor Seattle, WA 98101- 3099 Tel: (206) 583- 8419
::J-c,
Counsel of Record for Plaintiff: Wisconsin Electric Power Company
MelvinC. Garbow
Arnold & Porter
555 Ith Street , N. Washington , D. C. 20004- 1206 Tel: (202) 942- 5666 Counsel of Record for Plaintiff: Sacramento Municipal Utility District
0016
Case 1:98-cv-00126-JFM
Document 783-4
Filed 04/07/2004
Page 8 of 15
PeterGeneral Counsel . K. Shea Office of
Tennessee Valley Authority 400 West Summit Hill Drive Knoxville, TN 37902- 1401 Tel: (865) 632- 7319 Counsel of Record for Plaintiff: Tennessee Valley Authority
S4-~
0017
~.
.... ... ........
,. . '
.--.
Case 1:98-cv-00126-JFM
Document 783-4
Filed 04/07/2004
Page 9 of 15
EXHIBIT
3. DOE' s responses to DCS forms submitted by the utility plaintiffs , including DOE' to stop approving such DCS forms.
consideration ofits obligation to accept Greater-Than- Class-
s decision
5. DOE' s
C waste.
7. The date
that DOE currently believes that it will begin accepting fuel under the Standard Contract and the acceptance rate that DOE is planning to use once acceptance begins.
9. The
role and purpose of the provision on priority for shutdown reactors in the performance of the Standard Contract.
0018
...
Case 1:98-cv-00126-JFM Document 783-4 Filed 04/07/2004 Page 10 of 15
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
I hereby certify that on this 18th day of April 2002 , I caused a copy of the foregoing
NOTICE OF DEPOSITION to be served by facsimile and by U. S. mail , postage prepaid, on:
Harold D. Lester, Jr.
Assistant Director
Commercial Litigation Branch Civil Division United States Department of Justice Washington, D. C. 20530
Attention:
Classification Unit
th Floor, 1100 L Street, N.
~J;
Document": 1180086 v.
0019
: "::
Case 1:98-cv-00126-JFM
Document 783-4
Filed 04/07/2004
Page 11 of 15
Susan Klein (vol
Page 275
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF FEDERAL CLAIMS
YANKEE ATOMIC ELECTRIC COMPANY
(98- 126C) (Merow,
CONNECTICUT YANKEE ATOMIC POWER COMPANY
MAINE YANKEE ATOMIC POWER COMPANY (98- 474C)(Merow, S.
FLORIDA POWER
(98- 154C) (Merow,
S. J..)) S. J
NORTHERN STATES POWER COMPANY
(98- 484C)
(Wiese, J.
(98- 483C)
& LIGHT COMPANY
(Wilson, J.
DUKE POWER, a Division of DUKE ENERGY CORP.
INDIANA MICHIGAN POWER COMPANY
(98- 486C) (98- 488C)
(Hodges, J.
(Yock, S.
(98- 485C)
(Sypolt, J.
SACRAMENTO MUNICIPAL UTILITY DISTRICT
SOUTHERN NUCLEAR OPERATING COMPANY, et
COMMONWEALTH EDISON COMPANY
(98- 614C)(Merow, S.
ale
BOSTON EDISON COMPANY
(00- 440C) (Bush, J. WISCONSIN ELECTRIC POWER COMPANY : (00- 697C)(Merow, S.
POWER AUTHORITY OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK
(98- 621C)
(Hewitt, J.
GPU NUCLEAR, INCORPORATED
(99- 447C)
(Allegra, J.
VOLUME
OMAHA PUBLIC POWER DISTRICT
NEBRASKA PUBLIC POWER DISTRICT Discovery
(01- 115C)
(Bush, J.
(00- 703C)(Damich ,
J.
TENNESSEE VALLEY AUTHORITY : (Judge
(01- 249C)(Bruggink, J.
(01- 116C)
(Sypolt, J.
:Judge:
Plaintiffs,
0020
:Sypolt)
: PAGES :275 - 533
Esquire Deposition Services
800-441-3376
.'
- - -- - - - ----
- - - - - -- - -- --- - -------- ---- -- - -Document 783-4 Filed 04/07/2004 Page 12 of 15
Case 1:98-cv-00126-JFM
Susan Klein (vol
Page 276
. ..1
THE UNITED STATES,
Defendant.
Deposition of Susan Klein
Washington, DC
T~ursday, April 25, 2002
Reported by:
JOB NO.
Denise Dobner Vickery, RMR , CRR
144540
0021
Esquire Deposition Services
800- 441-3376
,,:.
Case 1:98-cv-00126-JFM
Document 783-4
Filed 04/07/2004
Page 13 of 15
Susan Klein (vol
Page 516
Under the standard
contract; that. s
correct.
Under . the standard contract.
And so DOE' s
consideration of granting priority at this time
is --
would you describe it as being
premature?
we reserve the right to
I guess
it. s just that
do it if we had a huge repository and we Gould meet
everybody
s need and it might seem to be a reasonable
So, I mean, we may determine once we' re
. thing to do. operational.
You haven' t prejudg ed and foreclosed the
possibility; is that fair to
say?
That. s
fair to
say.
If . the
repository were operating at such a
rate that granting priority would not harm operating utilities, DOE would consider granting a priority to a
shutdown reactor.
Is that also fair to say?
I think
that. s fair
to say, yes.
MR. MACDONALD:
48.
(Thereupon, the reporter marked for
identification Deposition Exhibit
BY MR. MACDONALD:
No. 48.
Ms. Klein, I I ve handed
Esquire Deposition Services
you a document marked
0022
800- 441-3376
:')
Case 1:98-cv-00126-JFM
Document 783-4
Filed 04/07/2004
Page 14 of 15
Susan Klein (vol
Page 524
My question
is:
Was the reason this
provision was included, the prio~ity shutdown
provision, that is because it was necessary to prevent
reactors from waiting 20 or 30 years to be
decommis s ioned?
A.
Yes.
And DOE included this provision despite the
fact that four commenters recommended .the
deletion of
the provision?
Yes, that I s correct.
And as you explained I believe earlier,
acceptance of fuel from a shutdown reactor would allow
that reactor to go to green fields I believe is the
word that you used; is that correct?
Yes, it would.
In most cases, it would allow
them to go to green fields, yes.
If DOE had begun accepting fuel in 1998 at a
000 MTU rate or a ramp-up, a reasonable ramp-up to a
000 MTU rate, do you have an opinion as to whether
DOE could have given priority to shutdown reactors
without harming or prejudicing the rights of operating
utilities.
Esquire Deposition Services
0023
800-441-3376
. " ,..
Case 1:98-cv-00126-JFM
Document 783-4
Filed 04/07/2004
Page 15 of 15
Susan Klein (vol
Page 525
MS. POWELL:
Object to beyond the
scope,
but you can
answer.
THE WITNESS:
It could have
given.
think that would be policy considerations that would be
looked at, but it would make it certainly -BY MR. MACDONALD:
Would have made it easier?
Much eas ier, yes.
(Discussion off the record.
(Thereupon, the reporter' marked for
identification Deposition Exhibit
BY MR. MACDONALD:
No. 50.
Ms. Klein,
I' ve just
marked -- had marked for
you Exhibit 50, which is a memo dated June 28, 1991
from P. N. McDuffie and S. A. Vance to D. C. Langstaff
and A. B. Brownstein.
Do you have that there before
you?
Yes, I do.
I believe we discussed earlier Mr. Vance,
Scott Vance, who you know; is that right?
That. s
correct.
And Mr. A. B. Brownstein is Alan
Esquire Deposition Services
Brownstein;
800- 441-3376
0024