ML19329C306
| ML19329C306 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Davis Besse, Perry  |
| Issue date: | 03/25/1975 |
| From: | Lessy R NRC OFFICE OF THE GENERAL COUNSEL (OGC) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML19329C305 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8002130670 | |
| Download: ML19329C306 (4) | |
Text
-
n
.o In the Matter of '
)
.THE TOLEDO EDIS0!! CO?I?ANY, and THE CLEVELAilD ELECTRIC ILLU:lli:ATIt!G NRC Docket No. 50-346A CODiPA?iY (Davis-Besse Huclear Power Station)
' THE CLEVELAi!D ELECTRIC' ILLUMINATING
)
)
NRC Docket Nos. 50-440A (Perry Muclear Pcwer Plant, Units 1
)
50-441 A
)
and2),
MINUTES OF TELEPHONE CONFERENCE CALL HELD !! ARCH 25, 1975 At approximately 11':35 a.m. on March 25, 1975 a telephone conference call concerning the scheduling of matters before the Special Master (appointed by tlie Board to examine " privileged documents" and resolve clairs with respect thereto) was held with the following participants:
f Douglas Rigler, Esq. - Chairman, ASLB Board Marshall Miller, Esq. - Special Master Gerald Charnoff, Esq. - Counsel for Applicants Reuben Goldberg, Esq. - Counsel for the City of Cleveland Roy Lessy, Esq. - Counsel for NRC Staff Melvin Berger, Esq. - Antitrust Di-vision, Department of Justice Staff indicated that it had requested the conference call with the Bocyd Chairman participating in'smuch as the schedule propcsed by Applicants a
during a conference call held March 20, 1975 with the Special f: aster was not acceptable to Staff cnd the other parties as being too lengthy. E 1/ At that tice, the Special. aster had indicated that Apolicant's prooosed scheu:le cy h.:ve been nra lengthy t;un the Board had contemlated. The Special :: aster had sugge..tod that the carties fila letters with the Bu.ird, but sub:equently 3 conference call was agreed to uith both the Special Eas ter and Chairman participat.ing.
8002130g g L
(
Staff also reported that subsequent to the conference call of I: arch 20,1975 with the Special Master, the Department of Justice and Staff had discussed a proposed revised schedule with counsel for Applicants.
Counsel for applicants th'en presented the proposed revised schedule, after first stating that (i) Toledo Edisen was prepared to waive privilege with respect to all documents but one, which in the opinion of Leslie Henry, Esq., local counsel for that company, was not responsive to the government's request and (ii) Cleveland Electric, Illuminating Company (CEI) was prepared to waive privilege with respect to approximately fifteen (15) of. twenty-three, file drawers with respect to which it had asserted privilege.
These documents would be delivered to the central depository in Washington,
(
D.C. axi or before April 16, 1975.
Applicants proposed revised schedule was as follows:
Completion by CEI of a listing of privileged documents --
Completion of responses to interrogatories filed by the Cepartment of Justice concerning April 16 the privileged documents -
" Sending" privileged documents to Special Master in Washington Filing of Briefs April 26 i
9 I
t a
The proposed revised schedule was discussed among the parties with agreement as follows:
Completion of Listing -
Completion of responses to Interrogatories -
April 16 Sending privileged documents to Special Master Receipt by Special Master of Privileged Documents April 17 Briefs hand delivered April 25 Reply Briefs (if any)
May 2 Additionally, the government indicated that it v.ould agree to rough screen approximately fifteen file drawers of documents with respect to which
('
CEI was waiving privilen at the central depository.
Documents not selected by the government for further inspection would be returned to CEI in approximately three (3) weeks after their delivery.
Documents selected for further examination would remain at the depository throughout depositions.
The Chairman indicated the Stard's desire for the expeditious resolution of this matter and menticned that the Board had issued an Order setting a pre-hearing conference for Monday, April 21. The Chairman also indicated that he would hava no objection. to parties filing notices of depositions with the Board in advance of the pre-hearing conference in instances whcre the subsequent resolution of privileged document questions might not rer,uire the re-calling of the same deponent.
... At the conclusion of the conference call the Chairman requested that Staff prepare, circulate for approval, and present to the Board on April 21, minutes of the conference call.
Respectfully submitted,
[).
re%.a.
Roy P,.essy, Jrj' ff Counsel for NRC Sta/ \\
)
4
- -,.