Free Notice (Other) - District Court of Federal Claims - federal

Case 1:98-cv-00488-SGB

Document 370-2

Filed 08/18/2006

Page 1 of 2

Sacramento Municipal Utility District v. United States Fed. Cl. No. 98-488C Rancho Seco Spent Nuclear Fuel Summary of Government's Adjusted Damages per Court's Order Dated March 31, 2006

Description Total Damages Presented at Trial Table A Adjustments to Damages Stipulated Adjustments to Table A Claim Value after Table A Adjustments Table B Adjustments to Damages Claim Value after Table B Adjustments Table C Adjustments to Damages Claim Value after Table C Adjustments Table D Adjustments to Damages Claim Value after Table D Adjustments Table E Adjustments to Damages Claim Value after Table E Adjustments Other Costs from Court's Order Dated March 31, 2006 Spent Fuel Building Upgrade PCC Loan Workout Agreement Wet Pool Cost Savings Total Other Costs $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $

Total 78,558,211 (28,829,938) (6,514) 49,721,759 (13,854,071) 35,867,688 (12,566,244) 23,301,444 (4,618) 23,296,826 (754,057) 22,542,769

$

$

(450,000) (500,000) (4,196,360) (5,146,360)

Government's Adjusted Damages per Court's Order Dated March 31, 2006

$

17,396,409

Notes: \1 As prepared by Stephen J. Kiraly.

Case 1:98-cv-00488-SGB

Document 370-2

Filed 08/18/2006

Page 2 of 2

Sacramento Municipal Utility District v. United States Fed. Cl. No. 98-488C Rancho Seco Spent Nuclear Fuel Table B Removal of Transportable Features of the Dual-Purpose Dry Fuel Storage System

Table B

Total 06/01/97 Description Transportable Features of Dry Fuel Storage System Costs in Mr. Kiraly's Expert Report Other Suppliers Costs Per Plaintiff Table B, Exhibit 5 Total Transportable Features of Dry Fuel Storage System $ 10/31/99 11/01/99 12/31/03 Government Adjustment Total SMUD Adjustment (2,135,453) \3 $ (32,868) (2,168,321) $ Difference 11,685,750 11,685,750

(2,942,956) $ (10,878,248) $ (13,821,203) \1 $ (32,868) (32,868) \2 $ $ (2,942,956) $ (10,911,116) $ (13,854,071)

Notes: \1 The Government presented evidence at trial regarding the value of the "dual-purpose" transportable features of the dry storage system as they related to Vectra and Transnuclear. Navigant priced the damages based upon support and information provided by Jerry Burford of Watkins Consulting, Inc., whom the Court qualified as an expert in, among other things, the management of nuclear capital projects, and claim preparation (see 3/31/06 Opinion at page 50, footnote 34). See Stephen Kiraly expert report dated 11/22/04 (Bates: EXS 0060119 ­ 0060141). See Exhibit E1-i to Stephen Kiraly Expert report at EXS 0050092-0050108. The costs for Vectra and Transnuclear, as presented on Kiraly Expert Report Exhibit E-1-i are presented below. Only the costs recorded after 6/1/97 are included on table B.. Description Pre-5/97 6/97 - 10/99 11/99 - 12/03 Total Vectra TNW Totals $ $ 3,217,330 3,217,330 $ $ 168,414 2,774,542 2,942,956 $ $ 10,878,248 10,878,248 $ $ 3,385,744 13,652,789 17,038,533

\2 These costs relate to amounts included by Jim Field on Table B, Exhibit 5 filed with the court on 7/21/06. \3 Includes $1,407,241 submitted with Jim Field's written direct testimony on 7/21/06. SMUD's adjustment also includes $728,212 submitted by Plaintiff at Mr. Field's deposition on 8/17/06.