ML19346A137
| ML19346A137 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Bailly |
| Issue date: | 05/29/1981 |
| From: | Eichhorn W EICHHORN, EICHHORN & LINK, NORTHERN INDIANA PUBLIC SERVICE CO. |
| To: | IZAAK WALTON LEAGUE OF AMERICA, PORTER COUNTY CHAPTER |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8106050238 | |
| Download: ML19346A137 (18) | |
Text
v .
>~ s2]
Y
.RELATED CORRESPONDENCF / 4
- h. CCCIC n - .
g....,,
] JUN 1198f . N!.-
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
- A.
5i
':ry
~
p NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION t ..
N')}i,,y i BEFORE THE ATOMIC SAFETY AND LICENSING BOARD In the Matter of ) Docket No. 50-367 NORTHERN INDIANA PUBLIC
)
) (Construction Permit j' h@ !
/4' SERVICE COMPANY ) Extension) g i q
) -
4 Igg) w - I (Bailly Generating Station, ) April 23, 1981 -i. b Nuclear-1) ) Refiled May 29, 1981 ^y, ,g 0th 4 g ,. g 1}
f.h , .
NORTHERN INDIANA PUBLIC SERVICE COMPANY'S /
8 SECOND SET OF INTERROGATORIES TO PORTER COUNTY CHAPTER OF THE IZAAK WALTON LEAGUE OF AMERICA, INC.
To eliminate any possible confusion which may have arisen as a r9sult of Northern Indiana Public. Service Company's (NIPSCO) service of interrogatories on Porter County Chapter Intervenors rather than the three organizations and two individuals which make up that group of intervenors, NIPSCO is again propounding its Second Set of Interrogatories to each organization and individual included in the group of int.ervenors known as "PCCI."
NIPSCO hereby again serves its Second Set of Interrogatories to Porter County Chapter of the Izaak Walton League of America, Inc. (hereinaf ter " Porter County Chapter") , pursuant to 10 C.F.R.
S 3.740b._ Each interrogatory is to be a,nswered fully -in writing, l
pso3 s
0//
l THIS DOCUMENT CONTAINS P00R QUAL.lTY PAGES 8186 05 o 3l3% _ . _
under oath or affirmation, by.an officer or agent of Porter County Chapter and is to include all pertinent information known to Porter County Chapter. Each answer should clearly indicate the interrogatory to which it is intended to be responsive.
Under NRC regulations (10 C.F.R. S 2.740 (e)) parties are required to supplement responses to interrogatories under cer-tain circumstances when new and/or-different information becomes available.
In responding to these interrogatories, please include all information available to agents, employees, attorneys, investigators, and all other persons directly or indirectly subject in any way to the control of the person or organization to which'these inter-rogatories are directed.
" Documents" means all written or recorded material of any kind or character known to Porter County Chapter or in its possession, custody or control, including, without limitation, letters,
! correspondence, telegrams, memoranda, notes, records, minutes, I
contracts, agreements, records or notations of telephone or personal conversations or conferences, inter-office communications, microfilm, bulletins, circulars, pamphlets, studies, notices, summaries, reports, books, articles, treatises, teletype messages, I
invoices, tape recordings, and work-sheets.
When used with respect to a document, " identify" means, without limitation, to state its date, the type of document
(e.g., letter, memorandum, telegram, chart, photograph, sound reproduction, e tc .~ ) , the author and addressees, the present location and the custodian, and a description of its contents.
When used with respect to a person, " identify" means, without limitation, to state his or her name, address, occupation, and professional qualifications.
If Porter County Chapter cannot answer any portion of any.of the Incerrogatories in full, after exercising dae diligence to do so, so state, and answer to the extent possible, specifying the-inability to answer the remainder and stating when Porter County Clapter expects to be able to answer the unanswered portions.
i i
NIPSCO'S INTERROGATORIES
- 9. (a) For what period of time do you contend that the Bailly site will be dewatered during the extended-period of construction?
O Numbering of the following Interrogatories continues from NIPSCO'S First Set of Interrogatories to PCCI (April 10, 1981).
i l ..
(b)- For what period of time do you contend that the Bailly site was dewatered between May'1, 1974, and September 1, 19797 (c) What period of dewatering of the Dailly-site was assessed in connection with issuance of Construction Permit No. CPPR-104?
(d) By what incremental period does the sum of your answers to 9 (a) and 9 (b) exceed your answer to 9 (c) ?
(e) Please provide the b,ases for your answers to 9 (a) ,
9 (b) and 9 (c) . .
- 10. (a) What' total volume of water do you contend will be removed from the Bailly site as a result of .
dewatering during the extended period of con-struction?
(b) What total volume of water do you contend was removed from the Bailly site as a result of de-watering between May 1, 1974, and September 1, 1979? .
(c). What was the total volume.of water removal from the Bailly site which was assessed in connection l with issuance of Construction Permit No. CPPR-104?
(d) By what incremental volume does the sum of your answers to 10 (a) and 10 (b) exceed your answer to 10 (c) ?
l l
S- a (e) Please provide the bases for your answers to 10 (a) , -
10(b) and 10(c).
- 11. (a) The environmental assessment at the construction permit stage contemplates dewatering to what I elevation?
l (b) For what period'of time is dewatering to the elevation specified in your answer to ll(a) contemplated?
(
(c) Please provide . the' bases for your - answer do ll(a) and 11(b) .
- 12. (a) If the Bailly site is continuously dewatered to the elevation specified in your answer .to 11(a), .
how long after the onset of such dewatering will the groundwater levels in the Bailly-site area -
reach equilibrium as a result of dewatering . (dis-counting variations in the groundwater levels from factor's other than dewatering)?
(b) Please specify the depth of drawdown of the ground-water levels in the area around the Bailly site which you contend will result from continuous dewatering to the elevation specified in your answer to Interrogatory ll(a) at distances of 700 feet, 1/2 mile, and 1 mile from the excavation.
(c) . Please specify the rate of dewatering (vol/ min. )
l which you contend will occur as a result of con-tinuous dewatering to the elevation specified .
in your answer to Interrogatory 11(a) . . . ,
I l
.w %.---- ,rr-----r-,,,,- .,----,4.--...,--------g, ,--,e, -,-,~a++- ,,-we.ww-~. ---<e--,--e. - -- - - - -v+----w - " * - - -
- 13. If the Bailly site is continuously dewatered to the .
elevation specified in your answer to Interrogatory ll(a), how long after the onset of such dewatering will the environmental impacts as a result of such dawatering reach an equilibrium (discounting variations in environmental impacts from factors other than de-watering)?
- 14. Do your answers to Inter rogatory 12 (a), 12(b), 12(c),
and 13 bound the results which would be.obtained if the Bailly site is dewatered to an elevation higher than that specified in your answer to Interrogatory .
11(a)?
- 15. (a) Do you contend that an incremental environmental .
impact during the extended period of construction will result from (1) dewatering during the incremental period specified in your answer to Interrogatory 9(d)?
(2) dewatering of the incremental volume of water specified in your an.swer to Interrogatory 10 (d) ?
(3) other cau es? If yes, please specify the cause[s).
(b) Please describe in detail the incremental environ-mental impact which will result f rom each of the
~
causes specified in your answer to Interrogatory
~ .
15(a). ,
-- . , - -----,w .--.v-.we,,
' -7
- 16. Are the incremental environmental impacts described '
irreversible in your answer to Interrogatory 15(b) in whole or part once dewatering during the extended period of construction is completed?
- 17. IfyouranswertoInAerrogatory16isyes,pleasespecify which impacts are irreversible.
18.
If the incremental environmental impacts described are reversible in your answer to Interrogatory 15(b) i in whole or part once dewatering during the extended i
period of construction is completed:
1 in .
(a) please specify which impacts are reversible .-
I
' whole or part; (b) please specify the degree to which the impacts .
are reversibic; (c)
Please specify the time required to complete the reversal process for each impact.
- 19. (a)
Are you contending that dewatering of Bailly during the extended period of construction will cause different groundwater levels at distances of 700 feet, 1/2 mile, and 1 mile from the excavation than occurred as a result of devatering prior I
I
. to September 1, 1979?
(b)
Are you contending that dewatering of Bailly during
~ the extended period of construction will c'ause different direction or rates of groundwater flow at distances of 700 feet, 1/'2 mile,,and '
. .: c. ..g 1 mile. .
. .~ f.
. . Jy , - .
from the excavation than occurred.as ..
~ . .- : _a result of dewatering prior to September 1, 19797
- 1. . . - . . . - --. - - - .- --.:...-- . - - . - - -- - . . - - . . _ . . - - . - . .
(c) Are you contending that dewatering of Bailly during the extended period of construction will cause the groundwater at distances of 700 feet, 1/2
-mile, and 1 mile from the excavation to exhibit different chemical characteristics than occurred as a result of dewatering prior to September 1, 1979?
(d) Are you contending that dewatering of Bailly during.
the extended period of construction will cause the groundwater to be different in any other respects t
than occurred as a result of dewatering prior '
l
! to September 1, 1979?
l l (e) If your answer to Interrogatories 19 (a), 19 (b) , .
19 (c) or 19 (d) is yes, .
(1) please describe each difference, specifying, e.g., its magnitude, geographic extent, and duration;
, ,( 2) please describe the bases for contending that each difference will occur; (3) please describe the incremental environmen'tal impact which will be caused by each difference.
.....g. .... > -
(f) If your answers to Interrogatories 19 (a) , 19 (b) ,
19 (c) , and 19 (d) are no, please describe why the env.ironmental impacts attributable to dewatering *
. =- . .
during the extended period of construction of ll Bailly will differ in kind'or degree from those, -
,) p . , '-7 ,..-7. ] ' ' ' ' -g ,,2 q qj..'y g . .
.t . . . g. / r.'.;<. ; .,
. impacts,. If any, which,' occurred as'a result.ofc
. - . .y .~ . - n -
.. .v . -
. . , . . . . - g- .1 ,
~
~ '
dewatering prior to September 1, 1979.
_9
- 20. (a) Are you contending that the extra period of de-
~
watering of Bailly (as distinct from any changes in the parameters of the groundwater which will allegedly occur after September 1, 1979, as-a result of dewa5ering during the extended period l
l of construction) will cause an incremental environ-mental impacti l
I (b) If yes,
- i. please describe the impact, l 11. please provide the bases for your contention.
- 21. You have contended that the " additional period of con-
- struction time [ sought) is sufficient to cause some i
! of the rare species, particularly the
- Bog Indicator' .
l
[ Indicator] plants to disappear from the dunes eco- ,
l system."$/
I (a) Please identify the " rare species" mentioned above.
(b) Please specify the periods and rates of dewatering of the Bailly site which are required to cause the above plants "to disappear." ,
(c) Ple&se provide the bases for your contention.
. .. 22... You have contended that the Indiana Dunes National Lakeshore would be adversely affected by "a deficiency I
of water, or a surplus of water; a change in water
$/ " Joint Intervenors' First Supplement to Petition for l p. 10' (Feb. 26,'1980).
- Leave to Intervene," Contentionl. 74,
- l.t: h[.', l }.' ' , ._. .
. - ). , Dl '.. * ;;.1. .. - ..'l*. j. .
l . .
I ' ..
_ ,. . - y .m . -= yy.=.:n a e ~ c. ? . ~~. : . . 4 r. . s.z 9s. c x :.
. ,. .s . .
I l
-10 ,
characteristics; an increase in the rate or direction
." I/
~
of water flow; dilution of existing water. . .
(a) Please specify the " water" to which'you are re-i ferring.
l (b) Please specify the numerical values for the para-meters of the water which you are using as a re-ference in order to determine whether a deficiency, l
l surplus, or a change in the water occurs.
(c) Please describe the adverse effects upon the Indiana Dunes National Lakeshore which will result from
- 1. deficiencies of water; ,
ii. surpluses of water; .
iii. changes in water characteristics; .
iv. changes in water flow direction; .
- v. changes in water flow rates; and .
vi. dilution.
(d) Using the values specified in your answer to Inter-rogatory 22(b) as a reference, please specify the magnitude of change in the following para-meters of'th'e' groundwater of the Indiana Dunes ,
National Lakesho.re which can occur- before -. any
.... . - . . p- ..
adverse impact will result in the Indiana Dunes National Lake' shore: **
- i. . groundwater' level;
.: :. : . . a .. -
- 11. grou'n'dw'ater flow rate; .
~
gr'oundwater flow direction; ' , . * .
' '. ' .r : - - .
iiil
- . ; ~ .. :-= <'" L .: * .
..-J.% :?*i..T.5iN..% 11b.*.* '? .in ' . .
'iv. - groundwater characteristics. .i .7b-Z'Y.'b': ~
? '.
.. ~ ~.r.:.: y:.
. . .. si W .s.::
. .. . . s ** .%.yE. ?r
'. .: . . . , .D. , .'. '.Y.a,.
A/ " Joint Intervenors' First Supplement to Petition for Leave to Intervene," Contention 4, p. 10 (Feb. 26, 1930).
~
the values s.pecified'in ynor ancwer to : I il . r -
-(e) Uning rogatory 22(b) as a reference, please :pecify
~
the magnitude of change ~in the:following parameters ~
of the groundwater in the Indiana Dunes National Lakeshore~which you allege will occur as a result of dewatering during the extended period of construction:
- 1. groundwater level; ii. -groundwater flow rate; iii. groundwater flow direction; iv. groundwater characteristics.
(f) Please describe the environmental impact which you allege will result from the change in items specified in Interrogatory 22(e) ..
(g) Please identify all documents upon which you relied .
- and persons whom you consulted in answering Inter-rogatories 22(b) through 22 (f) .
(h) Please provide calcul'tions a upon which your answers to Interrogatories 22(b) through 22(f) are based.
- 23. You have contended that "had NIPSCO, and its contractors and subcontr' actors, known more about what they were .
doing, much of the delay lin construction] could not
. .. .~ ', " .. .'
have occur r ed. ".../ - . . ~ .
(a) Please identify the tasks associated with construction _
of Bailly which you contend were parformed in aninchmpetentmannerbyNIPSCO, its contractors,
-:...a..: L .. ::t'L ..: ,: '
'or 'i'ts sub^ contract _ ors', and which thereby resulted
.r.: ::- !:'.y.2 . .' - ~ . ..
in a delay of construction of Bailly..--
~
- . : ::. ~;. . y : . . . .-
.. , v c.- h:n
- :; ,.l ' y.;D:'BQ4.4,1fO$f:-)-F.:s t,4 ,. . .. .:7.:' ;i.y. . ..
. .u . . . .. ,.
+c~ n:- a g:?:: ' n.,: ;q ?.y .~sy ::; . :.N;;;5':;:.W.:;.;}:-4:r;
~r ... .
I, "Jci.%- Intervencrs'- First Supplacant to Pe.tition .for : .
- Leave to Intervene," Contention 7, p. 14 ( F,,e b . 2,6, 1980). ,,
(b) For each task identified in the answer.to Inter-rogatory 23(a):
(1) . Specify the period of delay associated with the task.
(2) Identify'the companies-which are responsible ;
for the delay' associated with the task.
(3) Identify the individuals within the companies-1 l
identified in-your answer to Interrogatory 1
23 (b) (2) who are responsible for. delay associated.
t
{ with the task.
Specify which actions associated with the l
i (4) .
l l
tasks were performed in an incompetent manner.
l l
l (5) Specify those actions which a competent person .
l l' would have performed but which were not i
performed in connection with the task.
(6) Specify those actions which a competent person ,
would not have performed but which were performed i
! in connection with the task. -
(c) For each individual identified in your answer to Interrogatory 23 (b) (3),, ,
(1) Specify the infdtmation which he did not
,. . ,. .. . M, .- 1 : . - : .~ -:. c ., - - r v .
know'bst should have-knewn in crder to perform the task competently. 'e.. . , 7- .- . . ,
...., e;;..<:.;
.~ . . . .., : . .vu:- ;...
. . .w. -a. . . . . .. ...
receive
.Specify th'e training which he did not..
~
. .. ..(2)
. . :, . . . .: . x.;w. . .,. . .:.:s p. . ,u.-
w .. u ,u . . ~ . u. ; . . . : s:.y c .--
.:~. . . :
' but' should have rece'ived
.. . ~
e,.c . e.
in order to perform
. . . ;. ... ? y.: .-
- . . . v .; .m. . .
,.:,. .. :x ... ~us y.n.:n:r q 5ggy. ;., - .- _ . . . . , ,
the task competently x.t y.<W 5+
c c - : u.m .e -Y:#': -.= - :.v-; 'T .T- . z.- . - . . - * ' - :-
. :.m .:z;c. :s- : :t . ..., .v.m?.
y.g.S: : .c- hF.- R.{ F W 11:- .* . ..~.. ., _ .. ' "
- .- W.,; ??*:..
y .-. p.n ,ag :mq.g,;.gyy,ii:h: f'w'.'gVg, {:
- .y L . , . _ . L r. i . -. .V * :. . b -
. -l: ' .
- .;c.at.nn; .:~. wh a; nV.~-
- s.:.. .s:;.
' 7 : w.. :: ~r:-
- c
.'.+ v . m .. -: . ,'*~'-:- '
~ - 0 .~.C. . " .. .; , ;;* . T, '.; :-.. . ..= ; # *.,
v v . -;.... .
n &* - Q . *:"..E ._ .
13-(3) Spectly the ability which he did not poc:: enc but should have possessed in order to perform -
the task competently.
(d) For each task identified in your answer to Inter-rogatory 23fa),-
, (1) Specify whether.or not the delay is attributable to the need to repeat actions which were initially performed in an incompetent manner.
I (2) Spe71fy whether or not the delay is attributable to the failure to perform actions as'quickly as a competent person would havs performed the actions.
- 24. With regard to each of your contentions admitted in this .
proceeding:
l (a) Identify each person whom you expect to cail as an expert witness in respect of'each contention.
State the subject matter on which the expert witness
~ 1 (b)
(
is expected to testify.
(c) State the substance of the facts and opinions . . . ,
to whicit.he expert witness is expected to testify
. ; . ; ,. . . u .,. . n ,. . _ .
and summarize.the ground for each opinion.
. . .T : . .r.n *. e. .: : * .:: .'.,.. . . . . . , . , . .. . . . . . . . .
Identify all dc,cuments' relied upon or". examined' (d) by the expert witness in answering subparagraph
. . . .p e a -e . . .,- . . . . . .
- 4^;-
' ~ .9
- 1 T - -
0- M-;:'i. 'M. .k. -':-:: :N
- 3;T.in 1 . :, -
. . c e 24 (c)f *above.
ed@ . . ,
Identify all documents not identified in answering. -
(e) 3Q
. y..WNnD -:%;. . .qv. '
subpar'agraph 24 atfove (d)".b.W?;-:r.;Yi?).c -:uQgs:: r d.~.; it' ne which the" expert.w * *
? ' - :'-W:'$5f.:f5*-l,'QliM&S&$.9l::3Sl.4.:M $9.R%i$$$ :bin'.- . * .1" . .
~
to r
.'.'"' .-.pects"to put' into eviden,ce or,-r;gaely'..upon ;,.,,.,:
- lI' ex -
- . .. . .: a::-x c: . .a
. es...=:,.:=n. :n. w i
- r:w%..-a.n.;
e..- . .<..... <n., ; . .,... ,,-'
m .n: . . .-: -
su ppo r t',,o f, h i s ..or .-:s her testimony in.this proceeding.
, i.w'.
. . .2 .. . r:n l
i
~ ..
- 25. With respect to each of your contentions admitted in this proceeding:
(a) Identify any person having knowledge of the facts relating to each of your contentions (other than the expert witnesses identified in response to Inter-rogatory 24 (a)) . This question is limited to those persons whom you expect to call as witnesses other than expert witnesses in this proceeding, or with whom you have consulted or expect to consult in connection with this proceeding.
(b) For each person who has been consulted, state when he or she was consulted and by which representa-tive of yours and summari e the substance of any facts or opinions communicated by such person to the representative of yours relating to the subject matter of each of your contentions.
(c) If you expect to call any person identified in r9sponse to Interregatory 25 (a) above to testify, state the substance of his or her testimony, summarize the basis for any opinions contained in such te.timony, s and identify all documents which will be introduced as evidence or relied upon by such person in support of such testimony. .
- 26. Please identify all documents which you expect to
. . . . , . . ...z....,.... . ... .. ._. ... . . ..;. . .
... c:
.. Introduce in evidence.or use for'impeachmen);.or . . . '
. . g.:;;&
other. -
... ' . . s..
proceed ing;.,..v. ,:
cror.s-examination purposes in this.. other
...: * ,.' . .. . .. ) . .i:.nE!.4. n '
i' ident ified
\
tha
.'n . -those
.... n.. ; e, . ,..
. e p. . . :.,in
. . the"
. ;.y. , . responses.
, ; c ..to' .-
s , ythe
. . ., .prev.:
- y. .
. _ y,
. o.us . - .
..- . .. .g.. i. . 3. ,.. . :,.
i Inti.:r r oga to r ie s'. :4jp.*g d' 3 . 5.,;QG.
.. .. ;,,.,... 7.2 ,,'-lP s .
'.',", .,:' r. 3,:cq,3.f.
, .3 , . .., ->gj,.a.
g, .- ,, . .
j .. f .. ,. , .
- ~
- 27. Please identify the documents upon which you rely which relate to each of your contentions admitted in this proceeding, other than those documents identified in responses to previous Interrogatories.
- Respectfully submitted, EICHHORN, EICHHORN & LINK 5243 Hohman Avenue Hammond, Indiana 46320 By 1 ! /% .
- ' William H.' Eichhorn Attorneys for Northern Indiana Public Service Company LOWENSTEIN, NEWMAN, REIS
& AXELRAD 1025 Connecticut Avenue, N.W.
Washington, D.C. 20036 l
t l
l l
I 1
l
. , . . . - - , , , , ~ - , , - - , ,
,--,-,,,-,,,,,,,,-.r-- - , . , , - , , - , en.,.,-., ,, ,r. , -. ,, ,- ,+w.. -
' \ /,, -
RELATED. CORRESPONDENCh a.
)
x cecxm3 l UNITED STATES OF AMERIC?. '
1 )
- JUN 1198l ,
r NUCLEAR REGULATORY cob MISSION i-C.'
- - +] kl' 3 BEFORE THE ^!?OMIC SAFETY AND LICENSING BOARD ' ' ,\
gy' e 1
l In the Matter of ) Docket No. 50-367 I
f NORTHERN INDIANA PUBLIC ) (Construction Permit SERVICE COMPANY ) Extension)
)
(Bailly Generating Station, ) May 29, 1981 Nuclear-1) )
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE-i I hereby certify that copies of the following documents: -
l Northern Indiana Public Service Company's i
Second Set of Interrogatories to Porter County Chapter of the Izaak Walton League -
of America, Inc. dated April 23, 1981, l refiled May 29, 1981 Northern Indiana Public Service Company's Second Set of Interrogatories to Concerned Citizens Against Bailly Nuclear Site dated April 23, 1981, refiled May 29, 1981 1
Northern Indiana Public Service Company's Second Set of Interrogatories to Businessmen for the Public Interest, Inc. dated April 23, 1981, refiled May 29, 1981 Northern Indiana Public Service Company's Second Set of Interrogatories to James E.
Newman dated April 23, 1981, refiled May 29, 1981 Northern Indiana Public Service Company's Second Set of Interrogatories to Mildred Warner dated April 23, 1981, refiled May 29, 1981 were served on the following by deposit in the United States mail, postage prepaid, on this 29th day of May, 1981:
Herbert Grossman, Esquire, Chairman Administrative Judge U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission
' Washington, D.C. 20555
. 2 Dr. Robert L. Holton ,
Administrative Judge School of Oceanography Oregon State University l Corvallis, Oregon 97331 i 1
- Dr. J. Venn Leeds Administrative Judge 10807 Atwell ,
Houston, Texas 77096 j j
Docketing and Service Section l
! Office of the Secretary !
U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission i Washington, D.C. 20555 l Howard K. Shapar, Esquire Executive Legal Director ,
U.S. Nuclear. Regulatory Commission Washington, D.C. 20555
- Stephen H. Lewis, Esquire Office of the Executive Legal Director U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D.C. 20555 .
i Susan Sekuler, Esquire I Environmental Control Division .
188 West Randolph Otreet Suite 2315 Chicago, Illinois 60601 Robert J. Vollen, Esquire c/o BPI 109 North Dearborn Street Suite 1300 t Chicago, Illinois 60602 Edward W. Osann, Jr., Esquire One IBM Plaza Suite 4600 Chicago, Illinois 60611 Robert L. Graham, Esquire One IBM Plaza 44th Floor Chicago, Illinois 60611 l
l
~ . _ . _ -_ _ . . _ . . . _ _ . _ . _ . _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ _ _ _ _ . . - _ . . _ . _ _ _ . . _ _ . . _ . _ _ _ _ - . _ . _ -
Mr. Mike Olszanski Mr. Clifford Mezo United Steelworkers of America Local 1010 3703 Euclid Avenue East Chicago, Indiana 46312 Mr. George Grabowski Ms. Anna Grabowski 3820 31dge Road ,
Highland, Indiana 46322 44e4 /
WILLIAM H. EICHHORN Eichhorn, Eichhorn & Link 5243 Hohman Avenue Hammond, Indiana 46320 Attorneys for Northern Indiana Public Service Company l
l l
O
- --,.-,----e --,,---v---e- ,-.--w-r-~--, ,-w.e y - +-, - - - - -- - -,, - - - --ew,n-.