ML20126C862
| ML20126C862 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | South Texas, Comanche Peak  |
| Issue date: | 03/26/1980 |
| From: | Green D BAKER & BOTTS, HOUSTON LIGHTING & POWER CO., LOWENSTEIN, NEWMAN, REIS, AXELRAD & TOLL |
| To: | Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20126C865 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8004100271 | |
| Download: ML20126C862 (18) | |
Text
_
s
_a UNITED STATES OF AMERICA I
or1*L;cICn r^n'~cc w
.,a
~-
1
\\
BEFORE THE ATOMIC SAFETY AND LICENSING 3 CARO' In the Manter of
)
)
HOUSTCM LIGHTING &
)
Docket Nos. 50-498A PCWER COMPANY, ET AL
)
"50-499A
)
(South Texas Project,
)
l Units 1 and 2)
)
I
)
)
TEXAS UTILITIES
)
Docket Nos. 50-445A GENERATING CO.,
50-446A
)
(Comanche Peak Steam
)
i Electric Station,
)
Units 1 and 2)
)
HOUSTON LIGHTING & POWER COMPANY'S MOTION TO COMPEL PRODUCTION OF COCUMENTS SUBPOENAED FROM THE FILES OF THE SOUTHWEST TEXAS ELECTRIC COOPERI.fIVE Houston 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 7'.
4
~
Ecuston immediataly requastad and the 3C;rd issued a sub-
::::rmen: A) directed to the new witness.
Mean-p:an while, an attorney for EcustOn 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 sucpoena 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. __-
arr:.; tha su' ccena 33r esd upcn Mr. McGi.nes to include only c
the documen:s specificall 1 an:ified during his deposition, the witness stlii refused to agree to produce any documents.
'ne focumen a 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 i
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 i
1 1
?cwer Prc:urament Gr:u 2: testified to i
by 'tr. M:Oir.ic.
- ~;
All no ca, memoranda or docu-ments referring or relating to or setting forth the telephone conversation between l
Mr. 'icGinnes and the representative of T23:0 cencerning the purpose of bulk wholesale pcwer, 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*lleil informed Houston's counsel that he refuses to produce the requested documents even under the Protective Order.
4
Mr. McGinnes' deposition testimony concerned the events memorialized in the documents recrested by Hcuston and T'l.
These e'/ents concern meetings ragarding the bulx 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 l
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-i ever opinions and words Mr. Stover propounds on power supply in 1
1 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 -,
Its new witnesses.
Cne of the witnesses, Elton McGinnes, though properly subpoenaed and appearing for his deposition, refused to produce any documents in response to the subpcena 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 _ _ _ - - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _.
l l
l a
2re unfamiliar,_ n th2 rules Of d_2;;72r; wh_ch apply, sucn
- 1;;;r; T.2nauvering 12 prijud_cial and simply shoula n0 he t0lerated, particularli at this juncture.
Consequently, u?t:r moves the Board to enter an Crder requiring the Southwest 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 fr0m the record in this matter.
Respectfully submitted,
/
v green j ouglas G.
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 i
(Attachment A) 1 1-170(-10;;
February 6, 1980 liOUSTE: I.I c"tT I "G
(, P C'.!"? CO: "" 'iY (CSM/;:itC)
]
fa r. Ulton "coinnis So u t hve.~: L " ry v: "lcetric Coon 2
P.
O.
nra'Pr ^77 I:1 Do r.'d o,
T,'y's 76430 1
Dr. 3 r I'r.
'er.i nr G c :
i j
1 ineloned is an original subpoena requiring your 4
testi!"ony at tl o t.ine and place referred to thereon.
As we discuss 2d in cur recent telephone conversation, if you have j
any questiotis concerning this matter I suggest that you con-tact ?!G. Susan Cyphert at the Dopartment of Justice (202 -
7" 724-6667).
j Very truly yours, J. Michael Baldwin JttD : 32 i
I:nc.
i
,,,..... _.. _. _., - - -.. -. - _,,,., _... -,,,,,.. ~, _,,....,
-s
.m J
- T E D STATES CF A" ERICA
-~.
... :.: e,
- a.
- .
3.,D 7 ' ~. ~ ' ' ~0 7 '. ; F2
.C n.,'u~wn
,._ - r n..i... -.-r.-_
a.s.
v.
u s.,
- - the
".;__2:
Of
)
)
H O U S ~'C:: LIGliTI::0 & PO'.'ER COMP ANY,
)
Docket I:o s. 50-493A et al.
)
50-499A
)
(South ' Texas Pro'ect,
)
Ch'ts 1 ani 2) i
)
TEXAS UTILITIES GE::F R ATI':0
)
Docket Nos. 50-445A COMP A::Y, et al.
)
50-446A
)
(Comanche P e a.'- Steam Electric
)
Station, Units 1 and 2)
)
SUBPOE!!A TO:
Eltcn McGinnes Southwest Texas Electric Coop P.O.
Drawer 677 l
El Dorado, Texas 76936 YOU ARE HEP.EBY COMMAMDED, pursuant to the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended, and 10 C.F.R. 52.720, to appear at the (2500) Bryan Ttr.er, 2001 Bryan Stree. t n the City of D.al.las.,.
I on the 21.st. d ay o,. Fe.br.uar.y, 1980 Texas i
9:00 A'M*
at (and thereafter from day to day, if necessary) to testify by deposition on oral examination in the above-entitled action, and to bring with you the document (s) or objects described in the attached schedule.
Your tes timony will be required to the testimony you may give in the trial of this action, all as matters relating thereto, and all subject matters covered in the e
-a----
n a
3 p
attached schedule.
1 Ei Cr:E
- ? 7E T:M:C 3AFETY 4..,
..s aau=..:..a
= u.". ~. a BY 19 Coualas G.
Green Attorney for Hcustor Lighting
& Power Corgany LO'c?E::STEI?I, II F' 1A ", REIS',
AXELR;D & TC:.L 1025 Connecticut A';enue, t!. W.
Washington, D.C.
20026 (202) 862-8400 10 C.F.R. 2.720(f)
On motion made promptly, 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.
.s sci!ED"LE TO SUBPOEUA 1.
A__
. ; : u--
. ; ; 1. sa:
_c'c can:2;.
_ c. f : rm a t i: n about, ref:r or re. ate :c insta.w;s c; cc.mpe:_ _:n
_c ar, pha 3 f the 2 lac:ric utility industry :.r" imrg-
! uster 1_72:ir7 Ocwer C:qpany and/or s
[n s
( 2 's Te:: 2s FO. car anf 1;>:: Ccr : 2r-and cr :2 T 3.: 2 3 :lectric Service Ccm-p e n ;. anf/cr (4) 221.23 P:wer and Light Ccnpan;; cr to any communicaricnz h?:Weer Southcest Texas Electric Corp, its agents, or encloyees and any of the aforementiened entities, 2.
All documents provided to or received frc= the U.S.
Depart-e ment of Justice or the U.S.
Nuclear Regulancri Cor. mission or any of the.
c:nsaitants' : designated eitnesses in ccrnecticn with this pro-ceed;ng, or the liconsing of any nuclear powered electric generation go plant.
All dccuments referring er relating to or settihg fcrth meet-if ings or conversaticns with any attorney, consultant, or designated wit-ness for cr erployee of the U.S.
Department of Justice er U.S.
Nuclear Regulatcry Ccmmission.
3.
All dccuments provided to or received from an attorney for or an empicyee 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 Ccrporation; (6) Central and Scuthwest Corporation and/or any of its subsidiaries including without limitation Central Power and Light Cem-pany, Mcc Tc:::
Utilitics Company, Public Service Com,nany of Oklahoma and Southwestern Electric Power Company; (7) any other party to this proceeding; (8) any municipality, cooperative, government agency, or entity which operator 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.
4.
All documents referring or relating to or setting forth evalua-3 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 g
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 Pool and/or (2) the Western Systems Coordinating Council.
e
/
o
,. d,.g-e}
w
,*s
.c u...
,...:-~.....-
v.
u.
- .- -...
- e o w
.w. a%,..
.,,,.,c..
. t..,.3 v...
y m,
v s.m.
.. y.1.a..
w.
a.-.......4,.. p. ;
y a.
.i.a i,
.,,-.-.-.4...,.,.
-, e,-
- a. -
T.
r -
wa.,,..
(. d. w b 4
I. '.
s.
- 2, a,
c.,. s e. u..:..c.,
.c,.s u..
c u,.s
.- n - _
- ,, - c.
n,a& 2..e v
3..
.. -... c...,,.. n n. u a o_.
.e 1
v..
n_,.,,
._ a c.. - :.
g m-o
- u..w o s +.
w.
,.s. e.
.4.:.1,, n o-
., a a
.,3_-
-.a
".... '.'. '.. ' '. - ^. t a_.-
. a,-
.4,' CC - 4 ". c c n.. n ~ ~. 4 '_'... 4 ". =.. ',
^
.~
..:., 3.,
y-y m
ba" 7 a "~ ". a..
c.. - y.1..
,la.,
c c "vn..- e.s. 4 4..
4 'w....
e v
..o~
-u y.
.=. a +. _ 4.. e. c., - ~ u.
o.
<p..,
A -.,
c.
-. n. c.
..:.,,3.., c.. c,. n
- a.,.. n u
un m-
.v.
- - -...... a v.
- 3 m c 4,,
c.3 e.,.e e..
.e.,,,
- a. 1s.e s &.
n,,.-
n..,. n_ e -....z
.. m.. c,. u.. a. c e.,
2v-.
1
.. <.. o v
r-Ccon and a-" electric utility or electric coooerative con-cerninc the purchase and/or sale of electric power.
1 10.
711 dccu ents referring cr relating to or setting forth an" corresocndence or contracts between Southwest Texas Electric Coce and an'.
electric utility or electric ccccerative f0 concerninc the curchase and/or sale of fuel to be used for l
the generating of electric power.
+
J
- nstructions The paried of ti e #cr "icS incu erts are recuested in-clades rs =
..;r-
'rir: fr:- ~ n ar
_?'"
"1:e on wh::P d::ur^ ts
-, = '"
n-nnd copyina b" Hcus: r Lichtinc & Pcwer Cornan" or it:
recresencatives.
Houston L i g '. : i r. & Pcwcr Ccmpan-recuests thc: :;. : :cerer of the Reccrds identify the specific recuest or recuests to which each document is responsive.
Where possible, the F.eeper of the Records is recuested tc T.cintain the intecrity of its filina and recordkeeninc systems bv croducing tecether dccuments responsive to this subpcena which are fcund together in the Keecer of the Records' files.
If you claim that any document requested hereunder is j
crivileged, with resnect to each such document, please provide the follcwine:
(a) date; (b) type of document; (c) identit" of author and addresses; (d) present location and custodian:
(e) 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 orotection alleged to be necessary to protect the privilege or confidential nature cf 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 dif ferent from originals bv 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 or not now in existence, of correspondence, telegrams, notes or sound recordings of anv type of conversation, meeting or conference, ninutes of. directors' or committee meetings, memoranda, inter-office communications, studies, analyses, notes, books, records, reports, summaries and results of investigations and tests, reviews, contracts, agreement, pamphlets, diaries, calendar or diary entries, macs,
a e
em
[
0 et
,I
...,--,a.
- -...,.-9
..-s w
- a.,., -- aw p
< a
.a a,.-
3
,. =,.
e m. o.. 3 f n.19*
.=.=..n.
g n..a.w.q n..,; *. 3_ **
r,n.e. e...
to a 2...
.t
,%.ta e
.n.==t;.
g.e y
,s
.,...4..u,,..
40.
e
,. r--
..s w
~.4
\\.
..2 + - s. c
.s. B r.. -
s s.
-...-a..a c
r
..a c
2.".',
C ~-
ts A '.-^ " r.*; *..' ". ~.:. " ".. a.". ". S 'a ",. " *w " '-.' *. ~:
0'.~,'"~~;
4
~-
.1 -
".. a ** *%.".4 '.'L.
4 c *-
yr c y.,. 3., C.",*.*
w r
e a
I.
=
s O
p.-... r u.
- r..,
-.-,..c
.. a
.._u_
i I
)
- _. - =..;
e-
., : =
2 - ;.. a.,.,
- z. u.
.........................v.n.
n m
............ 3.". d C n 30..........
....................=.t..,oa.
.t. u on t h e s _s u.-n.;.. a m e c.
w
.o.......
...................u..
n,;..-
.a _.. m.
- 1.. _, a c,,,..._. n. u...... 2. 2 l
l l
- m_.n. 4.. t... ~-
'n..
.'*.a_
- f. e,3
- f. c v o, n a_
c ;.,, e
' s c._-._. ;3.. A_ c,..r. a a.n A 1
.- n n
~
the mileage allowed hv law.
l l
l l
l Cate..............
19....
By..........................
l l
l
\\
l Service Pees Travel....................S 1
1 5ervices..................$
l l
l m.o+a1.......
.............S Subscribed and sworn to before me, a..................
this......... day of...............,19.....
q l
(Attachment B)
' - 17 0 C - 10 *:
TcLruary 2-5, 19e0 12005TC:. LIGhTI:l0 5 PC*<?2 COME'dri (CSU/'iRC)
Mr. 'ioc Crcqy Grogg C S t.erling P.
C. Drewer 10J2 Fan huqc10, Toxus 7C302 1.'c a r k.r. G raf y :
Thic letter la to menorialize our t01n.'hcan con-versation of rubruar'/ 22, 1950, cor. corning doeur.cnt. produc-tion on bohnif of b.r. Piton ! cGinaio and t.he 5<.authseat Texas T.lectric Ccoperativo in co: pliance with tho 1&C subpoena issued to Nr. McGinnis.
The only document that Mr. McGinnis brought to his dopouition was A powcr purchase arjrecnont botticua his cocpernt.ive end (ITU.
During the courso of Mr.
McGinnic' deposition we identified other documents responsive to the nubcoena servol upon hi:: that we feel are necersary to e eneplete cross-exanination of Mr. :*ccinnia and unould have been producud in response to the subpoena.
ib:,c e focuments are:
(1)
Cince t.to formal inception of the Povar Procurcrmnt Group (approninately two years ago),
all doeun.cnts roferring or relating to or sottinj forth the rever Frecurenont Study beine den 2 by Mr. ccrl Stover for the croup, includiaq c11 pxclininary drafta, un-dates and correepondence ri:Inted to auch study.
l
( /. )
'All correspondonce at:eng nurters of the T,owcr Procurament Group since its fornal inception.
l
+
'. T c., : :.1:;
7.2hr uary
!,, '.. a ;
(3)
All correurcn+ r.ca bet *.mun Mr. Stover and other Nf.cra o f tha Graup sinc.* the C; cup ' a for.ral incep tion.
(4)
All correspondance braten thn rewar Procurus2nt Group (or any war.bor of that Group) nnd any other utility cencerning the purchasa of 1ulk wholennic pcvur or the anya;crent wit!.
uuch other utility in joint generation pro b: cts.
Thin ruquent 12 not rennt to encer.paca day-to-day correte nendanco with any r crior ' a prer.cnt.
pcuer sopplier, such no routine billing docuecnts, e t.c.
(3)
Any co mants, whether sonorated inter-nelly or by a consultant, on the PTI report, the Stone 6 K e nter Study and/or the Gtacg Study.
(6)
All notes,.v eranda, handouts or ot.t.or written information referring or relating to or setting forth the contents of the group nocting botvoon Folnan ning of WTU and techera of the Powcr trocurenent Croup as testified to by Mr.
McGinnic.
(7)
Any notes, unorands or doenments reforr1ng or relating to or setting forth the telt phono conversation between Mr. !!c'; ira.in and a reprocentative of TTSCO concerning the par-chase of bulk wholesale power, as testiflod to by Pr. McGinnis.
Nesuse
'*r. Recinnis has indicated a reluctance to
- roduce some of those documents for qaneral distribution, I
e enclosing a cample Protective Order tliat the GPC has issued concerning docunont discovery of other utilities aud induntrial concerne that are in the r.idst of nonsitive negotiatios.s.
In escance, tho order would pornit year client to designate as " confidential' these docunents tue qeneral dissemination of which would adversely af feet its negotiations with ITTU, Such docunents could only be re-vaaled to the attorneys in this case, to their outside overt witnesses and to certain clerical personnel assistin:;
th e. in the preparation of thi.s case.
This is not the Ordsr i
f
me Mr. Tc.r. Cregg
-J-7ebruary 25, 13:30 1
that 'sould be.:ntnicd with reg.c t to Southwest T?.xas Slcet.ric Coc[cra ive, but I hrnish it to you so that you j
ray rofar to the general torna r.nd conditions of the order and got back to ne a:: seen au possible on whether an order of this nature vould satisfy your client.
If sc, I will draft an apr:ropriate ordor and Potion actting forth the bac).gro;nd of the document production, the need for tho Protective Order and the protective ter".s agroed u; on mr. cog the attornoyc.
I will then circulato that Order for signa-t urtA by the attorney; who are intorceted in re.:siving copice of the docctments produced, and then filo the Motion and Order with the flRC Liconsing Dcard.
I would approciate your pro.cpt httention to this r atter.
Please contact re if you havo furthor questions.
Very truly yourn, J. Micha01 Baldwin J:'3:#2 Enc.
cc(w/o enc.):
Fr. Joe Knotts
!tr. Jares Carney
.M s. Susan Cyphert bu*
Mr. J. Gregory Copeland
q 4
lb f i i CC : Ok+>Q Q'
~'
pg
- Y:
4'\\g.01 i s@
/-ciddw;,-
JA
-rW.-::
D ger.5 n
v\\
uss4 vge pW y,m
...=-.v.,
-.a m
w u
'~~~E2 ?.IT"_rCFl? CCi: CSS :M ! ?.
W, -, a we-a/,
e.
~
.- c
<M r ' ' ',... s. -g e m. '*p.,,' /
\\
g r
c', we si In the Matter of
)
Gd YY
)
.:e. r.~., :. ~ L.r.~_.,v c~_m = <.=_.= rd..>.r.:, : e. )
.~
~
n v
.m
)
Cccket Scs.50-69E!.
(Scuth Te.xas Project,
)
50-499A Units 1 cnd :')
)
)
.- r L.n. _- -. e G1-e.,... o Cc.u..r. e.. v.,
e-. )
2
)
Docket I!cs. 50-645A (Cc anche Pe&. Steam Electric Statica,
)
50-44cA Units 1 and 2)
)
PECTECTIVE CPIER (March 23, 1979) on February 7,1979, Houston Lighting and Power Ccmpany (El&P) filed its First Set of Written Interrogatcries to Central Pcwer and Light Ccepany (CPL) and First Request for Production of Docu:r.ents to CFL.
In response, CPL, West Texas Utilities Ccepany (WIU), Public Service Company of Oklahcca (PS0) and Southwestern Electric Power Company (SWEP) (collectively "the Mcnants") filed a Motion for Protective Order alleging, in substance, that certain ratters inquired into by the IH.&P Interrogatories and certain doctnants requested by the bl&P Request for Production relate to cr contain infonratica Wich is of a ecnfidential or proprietary nature, and the release or disclosure of which to third parties could seriously impair Movants' respective relationships with existing or potential custcmers.
F2AP has advised the Board that it has no objection to the entry of a Protective Order protecting the confidentiality of the infor-ration and docurents referred to by Movants in their Motien for a Protective Order.
h@
3y07020 4 W t
y y,..
0
......~.._.:
- , a.
.a.. ;.....,. 3,,
-. a.-. ~:.:.......:.,,
u.=.
.. a.
u.=.
...e
-... -. =..
..---a.
a..
rescictions c=tained in prag-aphs cne thrcugh eight folicwi q :
(a) all dcc= ant; c.; in_.==i;n refen2g cr relating to or setting fen'.- (i) effccs or acti.itia by c.y b zr.: to encourage any industrial c =cc m to locate, expand er retain a plant or cther facilitj in the ser/ ice territorj cf r.y Movant, cnd (ii) to the panicular =dus=ial ccncern's respcase to such efforts or activities; (b) all documents and informatica referring or relating to cr setting fon h the rates or other te =s and ccnditions wnica any..c.cvant.nas ottered to any incustrial concern, or under which any Movant has supplied or does now supply electric service to any industrial cencern.
1.
Ccafidential doc =ents and info =ation defined above shall not be disclosed to any persen other than (a) counsel for parties to this proceeding, including necessary secretarial and clerical personnel assisting such counsel; Q) qualified persons taking testimony involving such documents or info =ation and necessa-y stenographic and clerical personnel thereof; (c) independent consultants
.d technical experts and 1/
- As used in this Prctective Order the term " doc =ents" shall have the same meaning as ascribed to it in HL&P's First Set of Interrogatories to CPL.
1
--_-______._.1
My
,9
+
s.y
" thei-staff P.:
1_
r.II.;ed dira::if r n-_
_i:i.;1:ir-r.: T :h2 Ccanissiun, the F.ca d, the presicir; officar. er Crri.::ir 's staff.
2.
Criidr.tial iccrr.t ed ricraticn definn abc ce c'. 21'_
be rade available to any person designated in paragaph 1(c) unless : hey shall have first read this Order and shall have agreed, in writi.:; (a) to be bound by the ter.s thereof; Co) not to reveal such confidential document er inferation to anjene etw ^ " cncther persr. designated in paragraph one; and (c) to utilize such confidential docurrent and infer-ration solely fer purposes of this proceeding.,
3.
If'the Comnission or the Board orders that access to or dissemina-tien of confidential doct: rents ed infonation defined above shall be rade to persons not included in paragraph 1 above, such ratter shall caly be accessible to, or disseminated to, such persens based upon the condi-tiens pertaining to, and obligations arising from this Order, and such persons shall be considered subject to it.
4.
Any portion of a transcript in connection with this proceedirs containing any confidential documents or inforratica defined above shall be bound separately and filed under seal. khen any ccnfidential docrents or infonation are included in an authorized transcript of a depositicn or exhibits thereto, arrargerats shall be rade with the court reporter taking the deposition to bind such confidential portions and separately label them (Comoany's Name), CONFIDMIAL BUSINESS IKFONIICN', SL~d.iECT
'IO PROTECT 1VE CPER.
Before a court reporter receives any such document
N
(.
,r
-L-cr i-i =ation, he er she 2211 h: c firs: rec! dis Crce; cr.
.._11 agreed in =iti q to be bc=d by Se ta= i:r3:f.
5.
Any cc-lidential dec re.: c inferation definn i :.e is :o :e treated as such within the meanic; cf 5 U.S.C. 552(b) (4) and is U.S.C.
1905, subject to a fi.al ruling, af ter notice, b; de Ccr.ission, Ecard, the presiding officer, or the Ccccissica's Freedcm of Irforatien Act Cfficer to de contrar/, or by appeal of such a ruling, interlecutory or otherwise.
6.
If ccafidential docments or i-location are disclosed to any person other than in the ranner audcriced by this protective order, the person respcnsible for the disclosure must imediately brirg all pertinent facts relating to such discles=e to the attention of counsel for Movants and the presiding officer and, without prejudice to other rights and renedies of any Movant, rake every effort to prevent further disclosure by it or by the persen who was the recipient of such infomation.
7.
Ilothing in this order shall affect the admissibility into evidence of confidential documents or informatica defined above, er abridge the right of any person to seek judicial review or to pursue other appropriate judicial acticn with respect to any ruling trade by the Ccrissien, its Freedan of Informatica Act Officer, the Board or the presiding officer concerning the issue of the status of ccnfidential business infocation.
A Q
s.x
\\
~
.2-
- . e
.,....:,...u,,.-..u.:-,...- s, e,
u.. n.
.u,.
.~.-
s+.i. a ~- to M. s C". _t,_
o,,
n_ w". _ _ =_
u
-.A.*..~. -- ~.. -.1
. = ~... -. _. ~ ~
e
' ' ~ *
=-
~~
all confidancial dec=.e.ts and inforatien defir.ed abeve, includin;; all ccpies of such c.atter which ray have been made, but net includi a ecpies c=taining notes er other atecrney's ved product that r2-j ha/c been placed thereen by counsel for the recei'.ie~ party.
All copies contairin;;
notes or other atecrney's work product shall be des royed.
Tnis paragraph shall not apply to the Cem.issica, the Ecard, the presiding officer or the Ccmissica's staff, sich shall retai.n such raterial pursuant to statutory recuirer.ents and fer other recordkeeping purposes, but ray destroy those additional copies in its possession which it regards as surplusage.
FOR Tr'E ATGIIC SAFETl RO LICE:GitG BOARD f
i iQ1
/
///
., ( /)
f h'
- .
- >,'y c*
Marshall E. Miller, Chair.an Dated at Bethesda, Maryland this 23rd day of March 1979.
_ _. _. - - - -. -