ML19305C543
| ML19305C543 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | South Texas, Comanche Peak  |
| Issue date: | 02/07/1980 |
| From: | Simmons D HOUSTON LIGHTING & POWER CO. |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML19305C541 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8003310036 | |
| Download: ML19305C543 (11) | |
Text
_ _ _
7 EXHIBIT C
- s..
4 j
1
'JN ;*- -
s---
,e s EP.1CS
?
2 NJCLr.r.-
" I MI 7
- 3 1
I 4
BEPOD.E ~1!;- -
- - A. ; 9 w ; -..
- r - -.-
s
LICFNSING BOA 47 5
6 In the '4atter of
)
l 7
HOUSTON LI7HTING & POWEP
(
%AC Docket Nos.
l l
j B
C 0 6t P A N Y, et a1
)
50-493% and 50-499A l
I 9
(South Texas Project,
(
10 Unit Non. I and 2)
)
11
'l g
12 13 I
14 In the Matter of
)
I 15 TEXAS UTILITIES CEERATI't1
(
j IG C O M P A'J Y, et a1
)
- rf N ket 'os.
i 17 (Conanche Peak Stea,
(
50-445A and 50-445A i
18 Electric Station,
)
l 19 Units 1 and 2)
(
l 1 20 I
21 (Cons o l i 4 t e for i s c o v e r y )
l i
22 23 O
24 ORAL DEPOSITION OF 25 D.
E'J G E E T. I '4" '?' 3 en -
8 003310 0 3b 3
l
I l
4 APPEARA9CES:
i l
UNITED 4TATES DEPAET'4r.-;T 3r.7'UT:CF, a
~
RY:
'iR. DAVI7 A.
n o r 50'.'I C,
3,
4 Anti-Trust
",1 vision, t
5 P.
O.
Box 14141, l
g 4
8 6
Washington, D. C.
- 20044,
(
7 Appearing for the Governnent; P
ISHA", LINCOLN & OEALE 9
BY:
MR. JAMES A.
- CARNEY, 10 1050 17 th F t.
M.N.,
11 Washington.
D.
C.
- 20036, IP l
!?
Appearing for Central Power & LigSt; i
13 DEBEVOISE & LIBERMAN, l
1 It RY:
Ma, LYN'1 p E L T E n,.
-l' i
15 1200 Seventeenth Street, N.V.
l 1
M 4
Washington, D.
C.
70035 t
i i
17 Appearing for Texas Utilites Conpany; j
t I
[
IJ RAMER & ROTTS, 19 BY: FR. J.
GREGORY COPELAND
.t E'
-and-i 21 MR. MICliAEL BALD'dI9 L
22 One Shell Plaza, 23 Houston, Texas
- 77002, l
24 Appearing for Houston Power & Light; 20
)
UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY D (* '" D
~
(.A bop
~w a
ns w
__...,, - ~ ~..a
-:.~;ws-,;.~ ; _
2- -.. =-~~:, w w...
~- -
t l
I 1
COM.* I SS I O'3 I
e l
i 2
ny:
Sm. M I C3! ^ E L *,LU
- E,
3 washington, D.
C.
- 20034, 4
Appearinj for the Nuclear i
5 negulatory Connission.
e l
7 DEPOSITION upon oral examination, of the
, i 8
- witness, D.
EUC E !E SIM.*O'JS, taken on behalf of the 9
Government, in the above-entitled cause,, in the Matter of g
10 Houston Lighting & Power Company, et al and Texas i
11 Utilities Generating Conpany, et al, before DEB 0P Ali 3.
12 HARPEn, certified Shorthand Reporter in and for the State 13 of Texas, on *5e 7th day of February, A.
D.
1990, Raker 14
& Botts, 3300 One Shell Plaza, Houston. harris County, 15 Texas, between the hours of 10: 50 o' clock 4 w
and 3:00 16 o' clock P.
pursuant to <*ue Notice an:' the followinc 17 agreenent of counsel:
In
._e 19 It is stipulated and agreed by g
g i
20 and between counset and the respective parties hereto, l
4 l
l 21 that the deposition of the witness naned in the caption 22 hereto, may be taken at this time and place, time and 23 notice being waived, and that the said deposition, er any I
24 part thereof, when so taken may be used on the trial of 25 this case the same as if the witness were present in mass ar,3nennn ra n TU@n @lMU@]UUWA
r g
court and testifyInn in person.
l l
It is forther stipulat
- an'
(
3 a ; reed by and between counsel and the respective partie7 8
4 hereto that the necessity for preserving objections to i
5 the questions propounded or to the answers given, except f
6 objects as to the forn of the question or the 7
responsiveness of the answer, at tha tine of the taking i
I 8
of the deposition or anytir,e thereaf ter, whether orally j
f 9
or in writirig, is waived and that any and all objections i
10 to this deposition, or any part thereof, may he nade and 11 urged for the first time at the tine sane is souaht to be f
12 offered in evidence on the trial of this eaune.
13 It is further stipulated and 14 agreed by and between counse) and the respective parties f
15 hereto, that the witness nay sign said deposition before 16 any duly authorized and acting Notary Public in the State i
17 of Texas.
I I
f 10 al 19 i
t..'
i r
21 22 23 24
)
j s
h l
K:kT &Qf C W ;~ ~ W ' ~ = ~ ~ - ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~~
=..
/d stipulate to me which ones you have?
'in. C D P C L M ? :
All riab'.
"0
e f
3 your list and let's go off the record a..d I'll :-: n t h e.
'I 4
A 4
5 (Discussion off the record.)
i 7
Q.
My questions were going to lead to docunent 9
Nunber 233 which is December 13th, 1977, datec'.
9 MR. COPELMO.
Let's see.
10 MR. BLUME:
That is one of the l
1 l
11 documents you checked off as beinn p r o d u ce r*.
Just for l
12 clarity sake, could I read into the records documents you I
13 checked off on thin list?
(
1' MR. COPELAND:
They are in here.
I j
15 don't see any reason to waste the tine.
14
- R. B L'J " ? :
We)1, it will bc very i
17 quick.
Mr. Copeland in an off the r e c o rri discussion with 18 counsel has indicated that Itouston has or will produce te 19 the Department of Justice docunents listed in Appendix C 20 to the Department's notion to concel prne'uction r'ated 21 July 11, 1979, nunbers 207, 200, 233, 242, 260 and that's 22 it.
I request, Greg, that the Staff receive copies of f
23 those documents as well.
24 0
Mr. Simnons, I'n. going to Sand you Appen*1x C 25 to that motion and I'm going to ask you to look at all g
... m _
=.
1 thosa dscumants'which cre not na r k.o.4 in any way en.d I 2
want you to review that that, review those docunents an<
3 please take your time.
I 4
A.
All ri gh t.
,1 i
5 O.
Mr. Sinr.ons, have you reviewed those documents?
6 A.
Yes.
7
- R.
COPELAND:
Has Sc reviewed the 6
docunents?
9 MR. DOPSOVIC:
I ' ro sorry, reviewed 10 the list of documents in Appendix C7 11 A.
Yes.
12 9.
ai r. Sinnons, at any time dii you ever read 13 those documents?
14
- m..
I assune that I did.
l 15 0.
Now, in past testinony in an.y form, have you 16 ever relied or consulted those docunents, relied. on or P
17 consulted those docunents in your testimony in any past 18 testinony in any forn?
1 19 A.
I don't recall tha t I did.
20 0.
But you're not sure?
?
21 A.
Well, I can't sit here and -- I don't recal) t 22 what's in all of the documents that's listed here 1
23 specifically, so I can't say absolutely, but I do not 24 recall using the information.
25 B
O.
In any future testinony in this proceeding or memm armnannnon 1
- 1 7
g.,.m w.,=.,
[* V
19
/>.
i 1
in cny other form, is it possible that you may rely or 7j 2
consult these documents?
1 3
A.
I don't plan to.
M e
4 0
And why is that?
,y
+
5 A.
Because I look at what the situation is now I
}
6 and not look at what's been done in the past particularly.
7 0
In terms of your testimony concerning the t
9 present situation, are not past events important?
9 A.
They may be.
10 0.
So, you nay have sone reason to connult those i
11 documents for your future testinony?
12 A.
I don't know.
I haven 't reached that point 13 yet.
3 t
14 Mit. COPr.L V n :
And if he does av* he 15 does decide to rely on then, we 'll produce then to you.
16 c.
I have one quest $on in terms of ?ocumer.t 17 number 242 which Mr. Copeland he would produce and that J
18 is, fi rst of all, which was, if I nay characterize it, n
19 Stagg I, when was that published?
Was that approximately
..i i
20 December 1st, 1977'
+
1 j
21 A.
It was in that period of time.
.1 22 Q.
Okay.
Now, the draft of Staog study which is 1
23 dated January 19th, 1970, do you know what that refers to?
J
)
24 Does that refer to Stagg II, if I may characterize that 25 as Stagg II to which was recently filed with the SEC?
i W\\ h
\\
pwn -
i
/a a,
i do not know.
I ccn't toll from this I
s
?
- n : r i, :. r.
7
. ell, if it were not Stagg II, whct Sta,1 3
8 4
st.2af co.!d it refer to?
i 5 !
g.
I do not know.
I don't recall that 6
speelfically when the Stagg I was issued, so I just don't 7
have these dates that clearly in ny mind withoist i
O.
Assuning Stagg I was issued Decen5er 1st, 1977 --
I 9
- rt. COPELANO:
Wait, you're going to I
1 i
10 get t51u document.
Why are we continue to asking 11 questions about it?
l I?
M9. DOPSCVIC Just to clarify it.
l 13 I do have reason.
i 14 M*-l. COPCLAND:
Well, but the reason i
(
15 for your taking his deposition today is to deternine if i
16 he 's going to rely on any of thene docunents.
17 Q.
Mr. Simnons, other than the Stagg I and Stag ;
19 TI, were there any other Stagg studies?
i
~
}
19 A.
Basically not.
There were several areas that i
20 were wrapped up into Stagg I and Stagg II.
Basically, 21 those were the Stagg studies as I recall.
22 Q.
When you say other areas that were wrapped up l
i 23 in Stagg I and Stagg II, could you clarify that for me?
24 A.
Smaller studies in snaller areas of 25 investigation.
l l
I.
~
...,..C. _,.~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ T T 7_7,~~..T.~_ T.~.
~
~.
m
,,-VT
. trh e *m %, A "s W.7. v
- 49
- WP
- i M.5"
.pg F y, ?
/, 4 '
A,
=
[.
3f. - -
1 0.
So, could ycu cpactfy which crocs of ig
's 2
investigation?
i
'le're not going to
'l 3
M?.. CO P E L A *"):
4 4
talk about this anynore today.
Let's go on to something 5
olse.
6 MR. 00P50VIC:
This is factual l
7 discovery 8
COPELAND:
Counnel, you are herc 9
today to determine if Mr. Mr. 91mmons is going to rely on 10 any of these docunents listed.
That's all we're going to 11 talk about on this subject.
I don't know how nany times 12 I have to tell you.
7 13 Mn. 00P50VIC:
First of all, Mr.
I F-l 14 Simmons was issued a subpoena months ago end has a l
15 continuing obligation under a subpoena if we want to call 15 hin and I think from the Board order of a veel: ago, rore 17 than a week ago, it was fairly clonr that 19 MR. COP ELAN'D :
I don't have any 19 order.
Do you have one?
20
- 1't. DOPSOVIC:
Fell, if you hed (l
14 21 participated in the conference cell, you might have h
22 understood it.
l 23 MR. COPELAND:
If you she' me an I
2<
ord.r that says you can go beyond the scope of the
' subpoena today, I'll go be yon <1 the scope of the subpoens.
61 FernYnM MEMbb u
u wee l-
~
~ ' - ~ ~ ~ ~ ~. ~,_, _.,._.gw.
j I f,i e
t.,o'ro horo to cnswor tho quocticns in tha subpoona.
d o
, i M7 00P.40VIC:
Well, we can ask hir-N J
in March, Greg.
We just want to expedite things now.
4 Q.
What were the snaller studies that you 1N 5
indicated -
I 6
M"1.
COPELAN7:
I instruct you not to 7
answer.
8 0
Was one of the areas of investination, "r.
9 Simnons, DC interconnection?
10 MR.,COPELAND:
I instruct you not to D
11 answer.
I 12 M9. DOP30VIC:
On what bosis?
13 That's within the scope of the subpoena, Mr. Copeland.
14 MR. COPCLAND:
Are you asking hin if 15 Stagg investigated the DC interconnection?
1G MR. DOPF0VIC:
I'n askino "r.
i 0
I 17 Simmons if any of the smaller studies, paraphrasing you, k
18 in the other specific areas, did any of that inclur!e a DC t
19 interconnection?
i l
2 c, KI. COPELANS:
I instract you not to 1
g 21 answer.
It's relating to work by non-testifying expert.
2 MR. DOPSOVIC: Greg, just for 23 clarification, are you saying that Mr. Strigg did this work for attorneys for Houston Lighting i, Power?
M P., COPELAND:
Nope.
D ) J P ]) M I A L l
6
__N__;_$_f___J-r?'M
~ *M*= = =
~ ~ ^ ^ ^ ^
^
~
I 16
)
\\
t t
MR. DOPSOVIC: Wsuld ycu clarify your I
2 instruction?
I 3-M~t. COP CL A'C :
I'm saying he is a I
4 non-testifying expert in this case.
Therefore, the 5
Boarc* has ruled you're not entitled to inquire.
I've i
6 been very lenient in letting you go beyond that and I 7
think we're wasting tir'e.
8 MR. 00PSOVIC We're not allowed to I.
9 inquire of Mr. Stagg, but that doesn't say we can't i
10 inquire of Mr. Simnons.
11 MR. COPCLAND:
You can ask er.
12 Sinmons what studies he's done.
13 0
Mr. Siemons, are you going to rely on the 14 Stagg study in your future testinony in any forn?
15 A.
I do not know.
16 0
Okay.
So you do not know, then, whether or I'
17 not you would use any of these other studien that you're 18 referring to which may include a DC interconnection; is 19 that correct?
20 A.
That's correct.
21 FR. POPCOVIC:
And on that basis, f
22 Greg.
On that basis, Greg, I mean --
23 M7 COPELAND:
!!e 'll answer the 24 question.
1 l
25 MR. DLUvE: May I have the question Frh@@F6) (51fFAll@flfhDM0 u"'9 1 o"""""mFa m %
~ _ _ _ _ _ _.__. _ _ _______.._ _ _ _ _.._ _ _ _.
-