ML19305C868

Motion to Issue Order Compelling Southwest Tx Electric Cooperative & General Manager E Mcginnes to Produce,For Insp & Copying,Documents Set Forth in Motion.Draft Subpoena & Certificate of Svc Encl

ML19305C868
Person / Time
Site:	South Texas, Comanche Peak
Issue date:	04/07/1980
From:	Green D BAKER & BOTTS, HOUSTON LIGHTING & POWER CO.
To:	Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel
Shared Package
ML19305C871	List: ML19305C868 ML19305C877
References
NUDOCS 8004100552
Download: ML19305C868 (18)

Text

. __ _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ -

. I e

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION BEFORE Tile ATOMIC SAFETY AND LICENSING BOARD In the Matter of )

)

HOUSTON LIGIITING & ) Docket Nos. 50-498A POWER COMPANY, ET AL ) 50-499A

)

(South Texas Project, )

Units 1 and 2) )

)

)

TEXAS UTILITIES ) Docket Nos. 50-445A GENERATING CO., ET AL ) 50-446A

)

(Comanche Peak Steam )

Electric Station, )

Units 1 and 2) )

ilOUSTON LIGilTING & POWER COMPANY'S MOTION TO COMPEL PRODUCTION OF DOCUMENTS SUBPOENAED FROM TIIE FILES OF Tile SOUTilWEST TEXAS ELECTRIC COOPERATIVE Ilouston Lighting & Power Company (Houston) moves the Atomic Safety and Licensing Board (the Board) to issue an Order compelling the Southwest Texas Electric Cooperative (SwTEC) and its General Manager, Mr. Elton McGinnes, to produce for inspection and copying the documents set forth in this-Motion.

On February 1, 1980, the Department of Justice (the Department) filed its Fourth Supplemental Response to Houston's Second Set of Interrogatories, adding to its wit-ness list the name of Mr. Elton McGinnes, General Manager of the Southwest Texas Electric Cooperative in Eldorado, Texas.

~

8004100 $ Q

3 Houston immediately requested and the Board issued a sub-poena (Attachment A) directed to the new witness. Mean-while, an attorney for Houston notified Mr. McGinnes of Houston's intent to take his deposition and inquired whether Mr. McGinnes preferred personal service or service by regis-tered mail. Mr. McGinnes opted to receive service of his subpoena by registered mail, and his original subpoena was mailed to him on February 6, 1980.

On February 21, 1980, Mr. McGinnes appeared for his deposition as scheduled, but he refused to produce any of the documents set forth in the subpoena directed to him.

This was the first notice that Houston (and, apparently, the Department) had of the witness' refusal to comply with the subpoena. Mr. McGinnes complained that the subpoena was too broad to be easily complied with, and that disclosure of some subpoenaed documents might compromise the position of a group of cooperatives (of which his cooperative is a' member) that is currently negotiating a wholesale power purchase agreement with West Texas Utilities (WTU). 1/

During the course of Mr. McGinnes' deposition, attorneys for Houston and Texas Utilities (TU) were able to identify with specificity documents that had been. withheld

^

by the witness but that were directly relevant to his testi-mony and necessary for a complete and forthright cross-examination. Although counsel for Houston and TU agreed to 1/

~

During his deposition, however, Mr. McGinnes'made various assertions concerning those negotiations.

e narrow the subpoena served.upon Mr. McGinnes to include only the documents specifically identified during his deposition, the witness still refused to agree to produce any documents.

The documents specifically requested of the witness during his deposition are as follows:

(1) Since the formal inception of the Power Procurement Group (approxi-mately two years ago), all documents referring or relating.to or setting forth the Power Procurement Study being done by Mr. Carl Stover for the Group, including all. preliminary drafts, up-dates and correspondence related to such Study.

(2) All correspondence among members of the Power Procurement Group since its formal inception.

(3) All correspondence between Mr.

Stover and other members of the Group since the Group's formal inception.

(4) All correspondence between the Power Procurement Group (or any member of that Group) and any other utility concerning the purchase of bulk whole-sale power for engagement with such other utility in joint generation projects. This request is not meant to encompass day-to-day correspondence with any member's present power supplier, such as routine billing' documents, etc.

(5) Any comments, whether generated internally or by a consultant, on the PTI report, the Stone.& Webster Study and/or the Stagg Study.

(6) All notes, memoranda, handouts or other written information referring or relating to or setting forth the contents of the group meeting between Holman King of WTU and members of the d

Power Procurement Group as testified to by Mr. McGinnis.

(7) All notes, memoranda or docu-ments referring or relating to or setting forth the telephone conversation between Mr. McGinnes and the representative of TESCO concerning the purpose of bulk wholesale power, as testified to by Mr.

McGinnes.

Counsel for the Department then suggested that the parties agree to a Protective Order of the sort heretofore entered by the Board on several occasions as a means of allaying Mr. McGinnes' concern about disclosure. Counsel for Houston, TU and CSW readily agreed to such an Order. On February 22, 1980, an attorney for Houston explained the limited document request and the Protective Order to SwTEC's attorney, Mr. Tom Gregg; and on February 26, 1980, Houston sent to Mr. Gregg a letter (Attachment B) outlining the limited request and enclosing a proposed Protective Order.

However, in a subsequent conversation with Mr.

Gregg, counsel for Houston was informed that the decision to comply with the subpoena would be made by Mr. Robert O'Neil, an attorney for the Power Procurement Group of which SwTEC is one member. Houston's counsel then furnished Mr. O'Neil with a copy of Attachment B and reiterated Houston's request ,

for the documents set forth therein. On March 19,.Mr.

O'Neil informed Houston's counsel that he refuses to produce the requested documents even under the Protective Order.

L

Mr. McGinnes' deposition testimony concerned the events memorialized in the documents requested by Houston and TU. These events concern meetings regarding the bulk power supply options available to and under study by SwTEC and other cooperatives with which it is allied, and are directly relevant to Mr. McGinnes' expected testimony at the hearing. Moreover, since Mr. McGinnes' deposition the Department has formally announced that it intends to call Mr. Carl Stover, the consultant recently employed by the group of cooperatives negotiating with WTU, as both a fact and expert witness. (See the Department's Response to Houston's Motion to Compel the Department to Provide Inter-rogatory Answers with Respect to the Proposed Expert Testi-mony of Carl Stover, filed March 5, 1980.) Therefore, Houston needs access to the documents set forth above to test the credibility of assertions made by the witness about the facts surrounding the negotiations underway with WTU and Mr. Stover's role in those negotiations. Additionally, Houston needs the documents relating to Mr. Stover to test, by reference to his actions and opinions in the real world, what-ever opinions and words Mr. Stover propounds on power supply in the Southwest at the hearing.

In summary, Houston received the Department's new witness list at the beginning of the last month of factual discovery and immediately set about obtaining and serving subpoenas upon the individual listed by the Department as

-S-

Its new witnesses. One of the witnesses, Elton McGinnes, though properly subpoenaed and appearing for his deposition, refused to produce any documents in response to the subpoena served upon him. At the deposition Houston substantially limited the scope of its subpoena by questioning Mr. McGinnes about the existence of documents relating to his testimony. Never-theless, the witness still refused to produce any of the documents.

At the suggestion of the Department, Houston and the other parties at the deposition agreed to a Protective Order as a guid pro quo for the production of the requested documents.

On the next day, Houston's counsel communicated this arrang-ement to SwTEC's attorney, and shortly thereafter furnished SwTEC with a list of requested documents and a proposed Protective Order. Since then, SwTEC's attorney has deferred to the attorney of the Power Procurement Group of which SwTEC is one member, but the Group's attorney has refused to produce the requested documents.

Houston has negotiated in good faith with the Department, SwTEC and the Power Procurement Group in an attempt to narrow the scope of its subpoena and provide adequate protection from disclosure. Now it seems that the negotiations have merely protracted the matter, and neither

-Mr. McGinnes nor the Power Procurement Group have had any intention of responding to the subpoena either at the time of the deposition or in the future. While counsel for SwTEC have not been participating in this proceeding and perhaps are unfamiliar with the rules of discovery which apply, such dilatory maneuvering is prejudicial'and simply should not be tolerated, particularly at this juncture. Consequently, Houston moves the Board to enter an Order requiring the Sou 19est Texas Electric Cooperative to produce the documents set forth above immediately. In the alternative, Houston requests that the Board order that if such documents are not produced, Mr..McGinnes and all other members of representa-tives of the SwTEC may not testify at the hearing, and that the deposition testimony of Mr. McGinnes be stricken from'the record in this matter.

Respectfully submitted,

/

uglas . reen Attorney for Houston Lighting

& Power Company OF COUNSEL:

Baker & Botts 3000 One Shell Plaza Houston, Texas 77002 Lowenstein, Newman, Reis Axelrad & Toll 1025 Connecticut Avenue, N.W.

. Washington, D.C. 20036 Dated: March 26, 1980

(Attachment A)

!!-1700-10:1 February 6, 1980

!!OUSTOI: I.1 C'ITI t:G

& POUR.P. COMPNIY (CSU/i:ItC) 1 fir. 1.lton cGi nnis Sou thw<."it 're:m': *:lcctric Coop P. O. Drat,'r'r 6 7 7 J:1 Dor.'<lo , 'f e '.v '.o 7Gn36 I)<. a r !'r . ;'cr. i tu:G n :

Incioned is an original subpoena requiring your testis"ony at the f.irae and place referred to thereon. As we discuss 2d in our recent telephone-conversation, if you have any questionis concerning this matter I suggest that you con-tact !!n. Susan Cyphert at the Dopartment of Justice (202 -

724-6667).

Very truly yours, J. !41chael llaldwin JitD:32 1:nc.

4 s

. .-*o-

C' G J

~

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA NUCLEAR REGULATORY CO!D1ISSION

< BEFORE Tile ATOMIC SAFETY ANd LICENSING BOARD - .

In the Matter of ) ,

)  !

1 IiOUSTON LIGIITING & POWER COMPANY, ) Docket Nos. 50-498A 2

et al.. ) 50-499A

)

i (South Texas Project, )

Units 1 and 2) )

) .

TEXAS UTILITIES GENERATINO ~ ) Docket Nos. 50-445A COMPANY, et al. ) 50-446A

.)

(Comanche Peak Steam Electric )

Station, Units 1 and 2) ) .

SUBPOENA TO: Elton McGinnes Southwest Texas Electric Coop P.O. Drawer-677 El-Dorado, Texas 76936 1

t-1 l- YOU ARE HEREBY COMMANDED, pursuant to the Atomic Energy Act i

of 1954, as amended, and 10 C.F.R. S2.720, tc appear at the ,

(2500)

. . . . . .Bryan 'Itrer,

., . . . . . . . 2001 Bryan Stree. tin the City of D.al.las. , . . . .-. . .

D*.as . . . . . . . .. . on the 21st. day of . February,,1980 at 9:00

. . . .A'M". (and thereafter from day to day, if necessary) to testify'by. deposition on oral examination in the above-entitled i

action, and to bring with youLthe document (s) or objects described in the attached schedule.: Your testimony will be' required-

, as to the testimony you may give in the trial of this action, all matters relating thereto, and all. subject matters covered in the-6 I P 2

-- ,. , ,,,e . , ,

3 g attached schedule.

BY , ORDER OF T!!E ATOMIC SAFETY AtID LICEt; SING BOARD .

, BY

. . . . . . . . . . , 19 . .

Douglas G. Green Attorney for llouston Lighting

& Power Conpany LO'c!E"STE I!! , IIEM:1AM , RI:IS ,

AXELRAD & TOLL 1025 Connecticut Avenue, ti . W .

Washington, D.C. 20036 (202) 862-3100 10 C.F.R. 2. 7 20 ( f)

On motion mado pronotly, and in any event at or before the time specified in the subpoena for compliance by the person to whom the subpoena is directed, and on notice to the party at whose instance the subpoena was issued, the presiding officer or, if he is unavailable, the Commission may (1) quash or modify the subpoena if it is unreasonable .

or requires evidence not relevant to any matter in issue, or (2) condition denial of the motion on just and reasonable terms.

~.- . . .

l I

I i

SCHEDULE TO SUBPOEMA

1. All documents which set forth, contain information about, refer or relate to instances of competition in any phase of the electric utility industry involving: (1) Houston Lighting & Power Company and/or k (2) Texas Power and Light Company and/or (3) Texas Electric Service Com-pany and/or (4) Dallas Power and Light Company; or to any communications between Southwest Texas Electric Coop, its agents, or employees and any of the aforementioned entities.

2. All documents prosided to or received from the U.S. Depart-ment of Justice or the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission or.any of their consultants or designated witnesses in connection with this pro-ceeding, or the licensing of any nuclear powered electric generation o plant. All documents referring or relating to or settihg forth meet-ings or conversations with any attorney, consultant, or designated wit-ness for or employee of the U.S. Department of Justice or U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission.

3. All documents provided to or received from an attorney for or an employee of: (1) the Public Utilities Board of the City of Browns-ville, Texas; (2) Tex-La Electric Cooperative, Inc.; (3) the Committee on Power for the Southwest; (4) Tex-La of Texas, Inc.; (5) C. H. Guernsey Corporation; (6) Central and Southwest Corporation and/or any of its

,\% subsidiaries including without limitation Central Power and Light Com-T pany, West Texas Utilities Company, Public Service Company of Oklahoma and Southwestern Electric Pouer Company; (7) any other party to this proceeding; (8) any municipality, cooperative, government agency, or entity which operates or proposes to operate electric generation, trans-mission, or distribution facilities in any of the States of Texas, New Mexico, Oklahoma, Arkansas, and Louisiana or in the Republic of Mexico; and (9) any designated witness in this proceeding. Any documents refer-ring or relating to or setting'forth meetings or conversations with any of the aforementioned entities or individuals.

g 4. All documents referring or relating to or setting forth evalua-tions as to the benefits or detriments of ownership, or any other form of participation, in any nuclear powered electric generating plant by any electric utility, municipal system, electrical cooperative, or com-bination thereof.

5. All documents referring or relating to or setting forth the O desirability, feasibility, benefits or detriments of interconnecting the electric systems in the Texas Interconnected Systems and the Electric Reliability Council of Texas and (1) the Southwest Power Pool, and/or (2) Western Systems Coordinating Council.

6. All documents referring or relating to or setting forth any adverse effects resulting from the present lack of interconnections y, between the Texas Interconnected Systems and/or the Electric Reliability

\ Council of Texas with (1) the Southwest Power Poo.1 and/or (2) the Western Systems Coordinating Council.

e 6

e 2- -

' (7[

All'p#

documents referring or relating to or setting forth each bulk power supply plan prepared bv or for Southwest Texas Electric Coop since January 1, 1973.

~

(gAAf.MLWij_

hh All documents referring or relating to or setting forth each' transmission study develooed by or for the Southwest Texas Electric Coop in connection with any of the bulk power supply plans covered in item number 7 above.

9. All documents referring or relating to or setting forth correspondence or contracts between Southwest Texas Electric Coop and any electric utility or electric cooperative. con-cerning the purchase and/or sale of electric power.

10. All documents referring or relating to or setting forth any corresnondence or contracts between Southwest Texas Electric Coco and any electric utility or electric cooperative g10 concerning the purchase and/or sale of fuel to be used for the generating of electric power.

9 4

F A

=

4

i

./

Instructions The period of' time for which documents are recuested in-cludes the entire period from .Tanuary 1, 1970 to the date on which documents are made available for inspection, and copying bv flouston Lighting & Power Comnany or its representatives.

!!ouston Lighting & Power Company requests that the Keeper of the Records identify the specific reauest or recuests to which each document is responsive. Where possible, the Keeper of the Records is requested to maintain the intecrity of its filing and recordkeeoina systems by producing together documents responsive to this subp.oena which are found together in'the Keeper of the Records' files.

If you claim that any document recuested hereunder is privileged, with respect to each such document, please provide the following:

(a) date; (b) type of document; (c) identity of author and addresses; (d) present location and custodian;-

(c) any other description necessary to enable the custodian to locate the particular document; (f) the basis for the claimed privilege; and (g) . a detailed description of the nature of any judicial nrotection alleged to be necessary '

to protect the privilege or confidential .i

nature of any such document. -

" Documents" means, without limiting the generality of-its meaning, all or original (or-copies where.oriainals are unavailable) and non-identical cooies (whether different

from originals by reason of notation made on such_ copies or otherwise) of all written, recorded or graohic matter, however produced or reproduced, whether or not now in existence, however produced or reproduced, whether cr not

~

now in existence, of correspondence, telegrams, notes:or-sound recordings of any type of conversation, meeting orf conference, . minutes of directors' or committee meetings, memoranda,-inter-office communications, studies, analyses, notes, books, records, reports, summaries and results of-investigation,s and tests, reviews, contracts', agreement, pamphlets,. diaries, : calendar orf diary entries, maps,

t graphs, charts, statistical records, computer data, or papers similar to any of the foregoing, however denomina-ted, including preliminary versions, drafts or revisions -

of any of the foregoing and any supporting, underlying or preparatory material.

'1 PETU9t! O'l SERVICC Received this subpoena at............................on -

...................and on .................at..........

...................scrved it on the within names.......

...................by delivering a couv to h.....and tendering to h...the fee for one dav's attendance and the mileage allowed bv law.

Date.............. 19.... By..........................

Service reos Trave 1....................$

Services..................S Tota 1.....................S I

Subscribed and sworn to before me, a..................

this......... day of...............,19.....

I #

. ~

(Attachment B) f g '.0 " '

L O

!-170C-109 February 26, 1960 LOUCTC:i LIGhTI::G 1, PO*r7.It C0:@A'f1*

(CGt!/NhC) fir. ' tac. Crcqq Gror:q c St.orling P. C. Drnver 1032 San Angelo, 09xas 7C902 1.v.a r Mr. O rm; .' :

Thie lettor is t.o newrialize our tc:12rbcun con-versation of rebruary 22, 1950, cor. corning doeur ent produc-tion on behalf of Mr. Titon ficGinuis and t.l.n Southscat Tnas T.loctric Coo;,erativo in couplianco witit tho itPC subpoena inuued to Mr. Menir.;tia. The only document that Mr. McGinnis 1.rought to his dopouition van a power purel.ano arf rocront bott/uun his cocperat.ive and t.7U. Duriny the courso of MI.

McGinnia' doponition wo identified other dceuments ruopoaulve to the nubnoena servol upon him that wo feel are nececr.aty to a corplctu cross-exmination of Mr. !'cGinnia and unould Im.vo 1;een producud in responso to the subpoena. T hc s's lvcu:acuts are:

(1) Cince t'to formal inception o.' t!.o Pover Procureront Group (approninately two years ago),

all decanents ruferring or rotating to or sottin; forth the rover Trocuronont Study beine dono by tir. cer1 Stover for the Group, including all preliminary drafts, un-dstes and correrpondence reinted to auch study.

(4) 'All corrompondoncu arong nur-torn of the Power Procurement Group since its fornal inception.

/ \, (k @N.f on str. Toa Crogg February 26, 1900 (3) All correupondence betwuen Mr. Titover and othsr re:hcrs of the Group since tho Group's for2'al inception.

(4) All correspondonce betwosn thes Fcwor Procuruaant Group (or any wanbor of that Group) and any other utility concerning the purchasa of Lu1A wholensic povar or the engagemnt with such othor utility in joint generation projects.

Thin rugucst is not rennt to encor. pass day-to-day corrosnondonco with any n.or. hor's present r,cuer sopplier, such as routino billing docuecnts, et.o.

D) Any co nonte, whethar sonorated inter-nully or by a consultant, on the PTI report, tho Stone G Wolintor T.tudy and/or the Stagg Study.

(6) All notes, remoranda, handouts or othor written infornation referring or relating to or setting forth the contents of tho group nocting 1 ctwoon Foloan P.ing of WTU and conburn of the Powcr Procurunent Croup as testified to by Mr.

McGinnic.

(7) Any notes, t'.e.morands or docu:nents reforring or relating to or setting forth the telephona ennvorsation between Mr. McGinz.in and a ruproces.tative of TTBCO concerning the pur-ebase of bulk whoicsale power, an testified to by Pr. McGinnis.

Docsuoe '*r. A Cinnis has indicated a reluctance to

roduce some of those docunents for ganoral distribation. I e enclosinJ a sample Protective order that the HPC has issued concerning docu

ent discovery of other utilitios and induntrial concorna that are in the nidst of nonsitiva nogotiations. In essence, the Order would pornit yoar I cliont to designato as " confidential' thcne docunents tue  ;

qeneral dissemination of which would adversely af fect its  ;

I negotiatiens with UTU. Such docunents could only bc re- i voaled to the attornoys in this case, to their outside errert witnesr.os and to certain clerical personnel assistinq  !

then in the preparation of this case. This is not the Order l l ,

1  !

i t

l l  :

l

gg dSWL' Mr. Tom CregJ February 24, 1900 that would be entured with respect to Southwest ';%;un 1:loctric cooperative, but I furnish it to yoc se that you ray rofer to the goneral terne end conditions of the Order and got back to r.e ao socn as possible on whett.or an order of this nature vuulet satisfy your client. If so, I will draf t an appropriate Ordor at.d tiotion setting forth t!.c background of the docun:ent production, the noco for the Protectivo order aad the protective tcrns agroed upon a:tcog the attornoyc. I will then circulato that Ordcr for slifnn-ture by tho attorn.tys who are intorouted in receiving copies of the docunents produced, and then file the tiotion and Order with the FIRC Licensing Board.

I would approciate your frompt httention to this ratter. Please contact ne if you havo further questions.

Very truly yourn, J. Rici.a01 Italdwin J'aiP2 me.

cc(w/o enc.): Fr. Joe Mcotts

!tr. Ja, ca Carney Ma. lusan Cyphert bc: Mr. J. Gregory Copeland l

I

4

$13:.f'/1 cc:/kiqk*

O gg t? gl fs//& ' '\

E UIIITED STA'ES OF RERICA Z IAO7 g1973P a _,,

NUCLEAR REGULATORY CutilSSION -

t e.... qt::ll* 9 we;;m In the Matter of ) N O @

) t c HOUSIUti LIQfrING AND PCfER CGENU, ET AL. )

) Docket IIos. 50-498A (South Texas Project, ) 50-499A Units 1 and 2) )

)

TE7AS UTILITIES GEIEPATIIG CGENE, ET AL. )

) Docket Nos. 50-445A (Camanche Peak Steam Electric Station, ) 50-446A Units 1 and 2) )

PPUECTIVE ORDER (March 23,l'9797 On February 7,1979, Houston Lighting and Power Ccmpany (HIAP) filed its First Set of Written Interrogatories to Central Power and Light Company (CPL) and First Request for Production of Documents to CPL. In response, CPL, West Texas Utilities Company (WIU), Public Service Company of Oklahctra (PS0) and Southwestern Electric Power Camany (S'EP) (collectively "the Movants") filed a Motion for Protective Order alleging, in substance, that certain matters inquired into by the HLLP Interrogatories and

, certain doctments requested by the HIAP Request for Production relate to or contain infonmtion which is of a confidential or proprietary nature, and the release or disclosure of which to third parties could seriously inpair Movants' respective relationships with existing or potential custcmers . HIAP has advised the Board that it has no objection to the entry of a Protective Order protecting the confidentiality of the infor-mation and documents referred to by Movants in their Motion for a Protective Order.

D o Oe'O(Oy(O

.. . 7. , g g -

j .,

WEPEF0PE, IT IS ORDERED that the following categories of doctanents1 /

I and infonnation shall be considered " confidential" and subject to the ,

restrictions contained in paragraphs one through eight following:

(a) all documents and infonnation referring or relating to or setting forth (i) efforts or activities by any Movant to encourage any industrial concern to locate, expand or retain a plant or other facility in the service territory of any bbvant, and (ii) to the particular industrial concern's response to such efforts or activities; (b) all documents and infonnation referring or relating to I

or setting forth the rates or other tenns and conditions ,

which any Movant has offered to any industrial concern, or under which any Fbvant has supplied or does now supply electric service to any industrial concern.

1. Confidential documents and information defined above shall not i

be disclosed to any person other than (a) counsel for parties to this proceeding, including necessary secretarial and clerical personnel assisting such counsel; (b) qualified persons taking testimony involving such docunents or infonnation and necessary stenographic and clerical personnel thereof; (c) independent consultants and technical experts and N As used in this Protective Order the tenn " documents" shall have the same neaning as ascribed to it in HIAP's First Set of Interrogatories to CPL.

1

g g ,

their staff so are engaged directly in this litigation; and (d) the Ccrimission, the Board, the presiding officer, or Ccmnission's staff.

2. Confidential documents and infonnation defined above shall not be made available to any person designated in paragraph 1(c) unless they shall have first read this Order and shall have agreed, in writing (a) to be bound by the terms thereof; (b) not to reveal such confidential 1 doctrnent or infonnation to anyone other than another person designated  ;

in paragraph one; and (c) to utilize such confidential docurent and infor-mation solely for purposes of this proceeding..

3. If'the Conmission or' the Board orders that access to or dissemina-tion of confidential documents and infonnation defined above shall be made to persons not included in paragraph 1 above, such matter shall only l l be accessible to, or disseminated to, such persons based upon the condi-tions pertaining to, and obligations arising from this Order, and such i persons shall be considered subject to it.

4. Any portion of a transcript in connection with this proceeding containing any confidential documents or infonration defined above shall be bound separately and. filed under seal. khen any confidential documents or information are included in an authorized transcript of a deposition or exhibits thereto, arrangements shall be made with the court reporter taking the deposition to bind such confidential portions and separately.

label thcm (Ccxtpany's Name), EtEIDENTIAL BUSINESS INFORRTICli, SUBJECT j 'IO PRDIECTIVE ORDER. Before a court reporter receives any such docunent i

O (p '

~~

4 or information, he or she shall have first read this Order and shall have agreed in writing to be bound by the terms thereof.

P

5. Any confidential docurent or information defined above is to bc treated as such within the meaning of 5 U.S.C. 552(b) (4) and 18 U.S.C.

1905, subject to a final ruling, after notice, by the Ccmnission, Board, the presiding officer, or the Ccnmission's Freedcm of Information Act

Officer to the contrary, or by appeal of such a ruling, interlocutory or otherwise.

6. If confidential docunents or infourntion are disclosed to any person other than in the nunner authorized by this protective order, the person responsible for the disclosure nust imnediately bring all pertinent

, facts relating to such disclosure to the attention of counsel for Movants and the presiding officer and, without prejudice to other rights and rer.edies of any Movant, make every effort to prevent further disclosure by it or by the person who was the recipient of such information.

7. Nothing in this order shall affect the admissibility into evidence of confidential documents or inforrration defined above, or abridge the right of any person to seek judicial review or to pursue ~

other appropriate judicial action with respect to any ruling unde by f

the Comnission, its Freedcm of Information Act 0fficer, the Board or the presiding officer concerning the issue of the status of confidential business information.

8 t

d-

o.. .,.:

o g 5-ll

8. Upon final tenniantion of this proceeding, each person that is subject to this Order shall assenble and return to counsel for Movants all confidential docunents and inforration defined above, including all copies of such matter which ray have been made, but not including copies

, containing notes or other attorney's work product that may have been placed thereon by counsel for the receiving party. All copies containing, notes or other attorney's work product shall be destroyed. This paragraph i shall not apply to the Conmission, the Board, the presiding officer or the Ccmnission's staff, which shall retain such material pursuant to statutory requirements and for other recordkeeping purposes, but may destroy those additional copies in its possession which it regards as  ;

surplusage.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

FOR THE ATCMIC SAFETY AND

LIC ESUU BOARD lkn. .' ) b ..> l'IE' Y t.

Marshall E. Miller, Chairman Dated at Bethesda, Maryland -

.t this 23rd day of March 1979.

f i l

.c,-.-. , , - - - , -- - ,

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