ML19350F074

Answer Opposing Porter County Chapter Intervenors' 810522 Motion to Compel Production of Documents from Util.Requests Protective Order.Disclosure Would Be Excessive. Certificate of Svc Encl.Related Correspondence

ML19350F074
Person / Time
Site:	Bailly
Issue date:	06/22/1981
From:	Edgar G GENERAL ELECTRIC CO.
To:	Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel
References
NUDOCS 8106240167
Download: ML19350F074 (8)

Text

• gA\I?!]

RELED CO*MS?0NDCTCE 4 ,

h W s

=

s g> @e

. ~

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA ,

p ~

NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION 6 e #

4  %

N #

Before the Atomic Safety and Licensing Board In the Matter of ) Docket No. 50-367

)

NORTHERN INDIANA PUBLIC SERVICE ) (Construction Permit..

COMPANY )

)

Extension)

/'g) '$7'C.

,( t' \

(Bailly Generating Station, Nuclear 1)

)

) pg]][,)'s f

_' JUN 2 319UI

• I GENERAL ELECTRIC COMPANY'S p .eua>+y""

ce"" ,

ANSWER IN OPPOSITION TO PCCI . C> -

MOTION TO COMPEL PRODUCTION OF DOCUMENTS ,

AND MOTION FOR A PROTECTIVE ORDER <

+L On May 22, 1981, Porter County Chapter Intervenors (PCCI) filed a " Motion to Compel NIPSCO to Physically Produce Documents," seeking an order compelling Northern Indiana Public Service Company (NIPSCO) to produce the following documents:

1. A letter dated April 29, 1979, from William H.

Eichhorn to Dr. J. K. McClusky of the NIPSCO nuclear staff.

2. A draft form of proposed agreement entitled

" Contract Between Northern Indiana Public Service Company and General Electric Company for Nuclear Fuel and Related Services for Bailly Generating Station, Nuclear 1", dated September 5, 1969, (draft 1/27/72).

3. A draft form of proposed agreement entitled

" Contract Between Northern Indiana Public Service Company and General Electric Company for Initial Core of Nuclear Fuel and Related Services for Bailly Generating Station, Nuclear 1", dated February 24, 1970 (Draft 7/11/73, Revised 1/3/74, Revised 7/8/74). yo 'f 4 A document entitled "8X8 C Lattice-100 mil Channels, Fuel Management Su= mary, Bailly IN, Data Sheet, 994.07, Rev. O, dated September 5, 1974. //

8106240/

GE has previously appeared specially in this proceeding and has obtained a protective order regarding PCCI discovery for GE documents.. GE herewith responds to PCCI's Motion to Compel NIPSCO to Physically Produce Documents and, in addition, moves for a protective order. GE is appearing specially for the limited purpose of anserting its claim that a disclosure, if any, of the aforementioned contracts and technical docu=ent or the information therein should be subject to a protective order.

1. Discovery has commenced in these proceedings even though final rulings have not been made on whether to admit the intervenors' contentions. Further, a firm schedule for discovery has not been established. It is quite possible that Board rulings may well limit the scope of the contentions in this proceeding and, therefore, the discoverability of the documents in question.

If the specific information contained in,the contracts and-tech-nical documents requested by PCCI fall within the scope of admitted contentions, GE may have no problem in providing such information in accordance with a suitable protective order. However, dis-closure of the subject contracts and technical document either in whole or in part, may well prove unnecessary and excessive in this proceeding. PCCI, therefore, is not entitled to discovery of these documents at this time. GE, therefore, requests a protective order precluding discovery of the subject documents pending ruling on all intervenor contentions and the opportz.ity to examine the document request in light of those admitted contentions. This action would conserve the resources of all parties and the Board while not forc-closing renewal of the discovery requests or a mutually acceptable resolution of the issue.

I

2. PCCI.in its Request for Production of Documents and Motion te Compel-fails to state:how each discovery request relates to matters at issue in the above-captioned proceeding. GE, therefore, requests a protective order limiting discovery to specific matters or types of information to be identified by the intervenors within the scope of their contentions. As noted above, GE cannot accurate):r determine on the current state of the record whether or not the discovery request is reasonably designed to lead to relevant infor-mation. The contracts in question contain information of sub-stantial value to GE which may have no bearing on this proceeding.

If intervenors identified the specific matters or types of infor-mation sought, there may be more appropriate forms for providing that information and better means of protecting GE against dis-closure than simply providing the subject documents in their entirety.

This procedure would enable the parties to arrive at an acceptable resolution of the present dispute while preserving the rights of all parties in the event that disclosure of certain elements of infor-mation contained in the documents were necessary.

3. PCCI's Motion with respect to the letter from William H. Eichhorn to Dr. J. McClusky and the draft form of pro-posed agreement entitled " Contract Between Northern Indiana Public Service Company and General Electric Company for Nuclear Fuel and Related Services for Bailly Generating Station, Nuclear 1, dated September 5, 1969, is premature. These documents were inadvertently gathered by NIPSCO in response to paragraph 8 of PCCI's Second Request for the Production of Documents. This request sought docu-ments reflecting or showing any change in the estimated or predicted

cost of construction or-operation of the Bailly Plant since May 1, 1974." Because of their dates, these documents are beyond the scope of that request and need not be produced. Indeed, PCCI admitts this by making a specific request for those two documents in its Fourth Request to NIPSCO for Production of Documents dated May 19, 1981.

Thus, PCCI's Motion to Compel Production of these two documents is premature.

4 The draft contracts and technical documents sought by PCCI contain highly confidential proprietary information. Infor-mation contained in the contracts and technical document is of a type uniformly held in confidence by GE and is nowhere found in any public sources. Because of the highly competitive condition of the nuclear equipment and services industry, it is essential for GE to maintain the secrecy of its trade secrets and business information. Therefore, GS is entitled to

a protective order pro-hibiting the discovery of these documents. -1/ In the alternative, however, GE requests a protective order on the terms set forth in this Board's prior protective order dated Mr_y 22, 1981. A copy of that order is attached hereto as Exhibit A. GE's contracts are of the type of highly sensitive commercial information which would fall within the scope of the four factors enumerated in 10 C.F.R. 5 2.790. An appropriate affidavit supplementing this motion is being filed separately.

1/ Kansas Gas & Electric Co. (Wolf Creek No. 1), ALAB-327,

-I N.R.C. 408 (1976).

l l

i Accordingly, for the foregoing reasons, GE respectfully requests that PCCI's Motion to Compel NIPSCO to physically produce documents he denied and that the Board issuc a protective order in accor, dance with the requests made herein.

Respec ully submitted, eorge . Edgar Attorney for G ral Electric Company Dated: June 22, 1981 I

l l

l l

i UNITED STATES OF AMERICA-NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION Before the o.omic Safety and Licensing Board In the Matter of )

) Docket No. 50-367 NORTHERN INDIANA PUBLIC SERVICE )

COMPANY ) (Construction Permit

) Extension)

(Bailly Generating Station, )

Nuclear 1) .,

)

C3RTIFICATE OF SERVICE I hereby certify, this 22nd day of June, 1981, that copies of General Electric Cospany's Answer In Opposition To PCCI's Motion *.c Compel Production of Documents and Motion For A Protective Order have been served by hand upon those on the following list marked by an asterisk, and by mail, fi:st class, postage prepaid, upon the remainder:

• Herbert Grossman, Esquire U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D.C. 20555 i

~

Administrative Judge Robert L. Holton School of Oceanography Oregon State University Corvallis, Oregon 97331 Administrative Judge J. Venn Leeds 10807 Atwell Houston, Texas 77096

Howard K. Shapar, Esquire Executive Legal Director U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D.C. 20555

- Dr. George Schultz 110 California Michigan City, Indiana 46360

Robert J. Vollen, Esquire Jene M. Whicher c/o BPI 109 North Dearborn Street Suite 1300 Chicago, Illinois 60602

~

Edward W. Osann, Jr., Esquire One IBM Plaza Suite 4600 Chicago, Illinois 60611 William H. Eichorn, Esquire 5243 Hohman Avenue Ha=mond, Indiana 46320 Mr. Mike Olszanski Mr. Clifford Mezo United Steelworkers of America -

3703 Euclid Avenue East Chicago, Indiana 46312 Tyrone C. Fahner Attorney General, State of Illinois Environmental Control Division 188 West Randolph Street, Suite 1215 Chicago, Illinois 60601 Richard L. Robbins, Esquire

Lake Michigan Federation 53 West Jackson Boulevard  ;

Chicago, Illinois 60604 Mr. George Grabowski Ms. Anna Grabowski 7413 W. 136th Lane Cedar Lake, Indiane 46303 Stephen Laudig, Esquire 21010 Cumberland Road Noblesville, Indiana 46060

• Maurice Axelrad, Esquire Kathleen Shea, Esquire Lowenstein, New=an, Reis, Axelrad & Toll 1026 Connecticut Avence, N.W.

Washington, D. C. 20035 Robert W. Hammesfahr, Esquire 200 East Randolph Street Suite 7300 Chicngo, Illinois 60601

e Diane B. Cohn, Esq.

William P. Schultz, Esq.

Suite 700 2000 P Street, N.W.

Washington, D. C. 20036

, Steven C. Goldberg, Esq.

Office of the Executive Legal Director U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D. C. 20555 Susan Sekuler, Esq.

Assistant Attorney General John Van Vranken, Esq.

Environmental Control Division 188 W. Randolph St. - Suite 2315 Chicago, Illinois 60601

• Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D. C. 20555

• Atomic Safety and Licensing Appeal Board Panel U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D. C. 20555

• Do:keting and Service Section "

Office of the Secretary U. S. Nuclear Regulatory. Commission Washington, D. C. 20555

}?

'Georgejp/ Edgar Attorney for General Eleceric Company Morgan, Lewis & Bockius 1800 M Street, N.W.

Washington, D.C. 20036 (202) 872-5000 DATED: June 22, 1981 e- m