ML19329F206
| ML19329F206 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Midland |
| Issue date: | 05/08/1975 |
| From: | Jablon R MICHIGAN MUNICIPAL ELECTRIC ASSOCIATION, SPIEGEL & MCDIARMID |
| To: | NRC ATOMIC SAFETY & LICENSING APPEAL PANEL (ASLAP) |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8006230729 | |
| Download: ML19329F206 (7) | |
Text
__ __ _.. _ - _
vs UNITED-STATES OF AMERICA BEFORE THE ATOMIC ENERGY COMMICSION In the Matter of
)
)
Consumers Power Company
)
Docket Nos 50-32
)
- 30A (Midland Plant Units 1 and 2) )
COMMENTS OF NON-BLRTIES ON STATEMENTS NEGOTIATIONS CONCERNING DOCUMENT REQUESTS AND INTERROGATORIES 1
Since the Appeals Board's ruling of April 24, 1973, i
I -
Applicant and the non-parties have exchanged proposals, have had one meeting lasting four and one half hours and have had numerous telephone discussions.
They have agreed upon proposals W
l to limit the burden on the non-parties in two ways.
They have reached an understanding limiting the document requests and interrogatories, which understanding has not yet been reduced l
to writing.
In addition, as modified by this understanding, Counsel have reached a further agreement, which will be, attached to Applicant's comments to the Appeals Board.
Applicant and.the Non parties have not been able to reach agreement concerning confidentiality of the data.
Counsel for the non parties has stated that the non parties 1/
- Various'other means of, resolving the question of burden and confidentiality.were discussed such'as sampling and stipulations.
8006280 7 2 7 4
, we
-w a,
,eeen 1
- n,- w n
--s--
s,
would not object to a protective order which allowed attorneys for the Applicant, Wald, Harkrader & Ross, and any consultants retained for the purpose of either this case or the Federal Power Commission's rate case making use of these data.
He further stated that at this time he would not seek protection covering such data which might properly be introduced into 1/
~
evidence.
However, the non parties objected to present publication or to allowing free access to the data by Consumers Power's officials.
They did indicate that they might agree to certain specific Consumers Power's officials seeing the data.
However, attorneys for Consumers Power stated that it was necessary for many top officials in the Company to have access to the data, including those engaged in marketing and those at the highest level of decision making.
In not objecting to consultants using the data, the non parties inquired whether the consultants who would have access to them had worked for Consumers Power on matters other than this Atomic Energy Commission licensing case or the Federal Power Commission's rate case within the last five years or had a present intention of doing so.
We further inquired whether such consultants had other Michigan clients or did other work whereby the information obtained from the non parties would be useful.
The non parties stated that,1f any consultants 1/ epending upon the nature of an evidentiary presentation, the i
D non-parties might seek subsequent protection from the Trial Board. !
responded to such questions affirmatively, we would not
- necessarily object to their I at 'ng access to the data, but we would then want to be able to assess such usage.
Based
-upon discussions with Applicant, we helieve that Applicant's consultant, National Economic Research Associates (NERA),
could meet the preconditions of not having any interest apart from this proceeding in Lne non-party responses which i
raise questions gf confidentiality.
However, since there has not been agreement between the parties on this matter, the Appeals Board should adopt a limitation against consultants obtaining access to the data who would have independent interests in confidential responses.
Consumers Power has stated that it is necessary for its various senior officials to have access to the confiden-tial data referred to in our Appeal in order to prepare its
- case.
Since the non-parties are in direct competition for customers with Consumers Power and since these officials determine rates, promotion, approval of purchases of other systems, etc., during negotiations the non-parties took the position that such approval would give the information to the very persons against whom the non-parties seek i
protection.
3-m' en v -.---
~+
--w wr-e
,,w,
-w vmw--+sev-e--
m m --- s we w e e-r9~t w s* w 4-4 it
-ww*^
m WHEREFORE, the non-parties request that the Appeals Board rule on this issue.
Respectfully submitted, M
Robert A. Jablon Appearing Especially for Bay City, Charlevoix, Chelsea, Clinton, Croswell, Dowagiac, Hart, Hillsdale, Lansing, Lowell, Marshall, Niles, Paw Paw, Portland, Petoskey, St. Louis, Sebewaing, South Haven, Sturgis, Union City and Wyandotte, Michigan Law Offices Of:
George Spiegel 2600 Virginia Avenue, N. W.
Washington, D.
C.
20037 i :
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA BEFORE THE ATOMIC ENERtfl COMMISSION In the matter'of
)
)
Consumers Power Company'
)
Docket Nos. 50-329A
)
50-330A (Midland Plant Units 1 and 2)
)
AFFIDAVIT DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA, SS:
~
' Robert A. Jablon, being first duly sworn, deposes and says that he is an attorney appearing especially for Bay City, Charlevoix, Chelsea, Clinton, Croswell, Dowagiac, Hart, Hillsdale, Lansing, Lowell, Marshall, Niles, Paw Paw, Portland, Petoskey, St. Louis, Sebewaing, South Haven, Sturgis, Union City, and Wyandotte, Michigan and that as such he has signed the foregoing Comments for Non-Parties on Statements Negotiations Concerning 4
Document Requests and Interrogatories for and on behalf of said parties; that he is authorized so to do; that he has read said Comment and is familiar with the contents thereof; and that the matters and things therein set forth are true and correct-to the best of his knowledge, information or belief.
- 8. Y Robert A( Jablon Subscribed and sworn to before me this'8thday)ofMay,'1973
. L'
/-:
- .y ll Amp,/fAftkDr_,
i
!Not'ary/Public
.My Commission expires Sept. 30, 197.4
.d'*
m UNITED STATES OF AMERICA BEFORE THE ATOMIC ENERGY COMMISSION In the Matter of
)
l
)
Consumers Power Company
)
Docket Number 50-329A (Midland Plant, Units 1 and 2)
)
50-330A CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE Hon. Alan S. Rosenthcl Atomic Safety and Licensing Abraham Braitman, Chief Board Panel Office of Antitrust and U. S. Atomic Energy Commission Indemnity Washington, D. C.
20545 Atomic Energy Commission Washington, D. C.
20545 Joseph J. Saunders Department of Justice Mr. Frank W.
Karas, Chief Antitrust Division Public Proceedings Branch Washington, D.
C.
20530 office of the Secretary Atomic Energy Commission Harold P. Graves, Esq.
Washington, D. C.
20545 V.P. and General Counsel Consumers Power Company Wallace Edward Brand, Esq.
212 West Michigan Avenue Antitrust Public Counsel Jackson, Michigan 49201
^ Washington, D. C.
20044 Post Office Box 7513 William Warfield Ross Wald, Harkrader, & Ross Dr. J. Venn Leeds, Jr.
1320 - 19th Street, N.
W.,
P. O. Box 941 Washington, D. C.
20036 Houston, Texas 77001 Joseph Rutberg, Esq.
Hugh K. Clark, Esq.
Atomic' Energy Commission P. O. Box 127A 7920 Norfolk Avenue Kennedyville, Maryland 21645 Bethesda, Maryland Honorable Frank Kelly Jerome Garfinkel, Esq.
Attorney General Chairman, Atomic Safety &
State of Michigan Licensing Board Lansing, Michigan 48913 Atomic Energy Commission Washington, D. C.
20545 Atomic Safety & Licensing Board Panel U.
S. Atomic Energy' Commission Washington, D. C.20545 L
J e
William T. Clabault, Esq.
David A.
Leckie, Esq.
Antitrust Division Department of Justice P. O. Box 7513 Washington, D. C.
20044 Robert J. Verdisco, Esq.
Counsel for AEC Regulatory Staff U. S. Atomic Energy Commission Washington, D. C.
20545 Mr. James B. Falahee General Attorney Consumers Power Company 212 West Michigan Avenue Jackson, Michigan 49201 I hereby certify that the foregoing document in the above-captioned matter was served upon the above by deposit in the United States mail, first class or air mail, this 8th day of May, 1973.
ll Robert A.
Jablon Law Offices Of:
Appearing Especially For Bay City, Charlevoix, Chelsea, George Spiegel Clinton, Croswell, Dowagiac, 2600 Virginia Avenue, N. W.
Hart, Hillsdale, Lansing, Washington, D. C.
20037 Lowell, Marshall, Niles, Paw Paw, Petoskey, Portland, St. Louis, Sebewaing, South Haven, Sturgis, Union City and Wyandotte, Michigan '
L_