Re: September 5,2017. Dear Ms. Ferrell:

Size: px

Start display at page:

Download "Re: September 5,2017. Dear Ms. Ferrell:"

Godwin Butler
5 years ago
Views:

1 DINSMORE & SHOtii LLP 707Virginia Street East I Suite Char!eston, WV Kelby Thomas Gray (304) (direct) (304) (fax) kelby.gray@dinsmore.com P. 0. Box Charleston. WV September 5,2017 Via - HAND DELIVERY Ingrid Fenell, Executive Secretary Public Service Commission of West Virginia 201 Brooks Street Charleston, West Virginia Re: Case No E-CS Brooke County Power I, LLC Application for a Siting Certificate to Authorize the Construction and Operation of a Wholesale Electric Generating Facility in Brooke County, West Virginia Dear Ms. Ferrell: Enclosed for filing in the above-referenced matter, please find Jason Nuzum s Responses and Objections to ESC Brooke County Power, LLC s Second Set of Interrogatories, Data Requests or Requests fur Zitfurmation. Should you have any questions in regard to this matter or this filing, please feel free to contact me at (304) Thank you. Sincerely, Enclosure cc: Certificate of Service ~

2 PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION OF WEST VIRGINIA CHARLESTON CASE NO E-CS ESC ~ ~ COUNTY ~ POWER, O LLC ~ K ~ ~,JASON N ~JZU~ S R~SPONSES AND OBJ~~T~ONS TO COUNTY POWER, LLC S SECOND SET OF lntei~ogatolues, DATA REQUESTS OR REQUEST FOR PRODUCTIO~ OF DOCUMENTS Jason Nuzum ( Mr. Nuzum ) asserts the follo\ving responses and objections to each individual rcquesl of ESC Brooke County Power, LLC s Second Sct of Interrogatories, Data Requests or Requests for Infomiation for Mr. Nuzum, Intervenor: Mr. Nuzum s Responses and Obiections to Brooke Countv Power s General Instructions 1. Mr. Nuzum objects to the General Instructions to the extent they seek to impose obligations upon Intervenors greater than those mandated by the Procedural Rules of the Public Service Commission of West Virginia (the Con~mission ). 2. Mr. Nuzum objects to the General Instructions to the extent they seek to require Mr. Nwum to respond to the Requests outside of the August 16,201 7 deadline established in the Commission s Procedural Order in the above-captioned proceeding 3. Mr. Numm objects to the General Instructions to the extent they seek information protected by attorney-client privilege 4. Mr. Nuzuin objects to General Instructions to the extent they conflict with the Commission s Procedural Order, which establishes an October 13, deadline for submission of the Agreed Witness List from all parties. 1

3 5. Mr. Nuzuin objects to the General Instructions as overly broad, unduly burdensome, and not likely to lead to the discovery of evidence relevant to the above-captioned case or bfr. Nuzum s Petition to Intervene therein. Mr. Nuzum s Responses and Obiections to Brooke County Power s Data Requests Ql. The Supplemental Information submitted by Petitioners/Brooke County Residents on July 10, 2017 states certain things which are your interest in proceeding. Please state in detail: Response: Objection. The Request, and each of its subparts, is overly broad and unduly burdensome, as it seeks information beyond the scope of the above-captioned proceeding, or Mr. NULU~I S interest and intervention therein a. how you have an economic interest as a ratepayer that in any way relates to this pro~ee~in~; Response: Mr. Nuzum states that his interest as a ratepayer relates to the interests as stated in the direct testimony of the Local Residents. b. how the Brooke County Power project has an impact on the reliability of the West Virginia power supply; Response: MI. Nuzum states that he lacks information and knowledge related to this Request. Mr. Nuzum is no longer pursuing a claim related to adverse impacts to the reliability of the West Virginia power supply. Mr. Nuzum reserves the right to supplement this Response in accordance with the Commission s Rules E. how you have an economic interest as a taxpayer that in any way relates to this proceeding; and Response: Mr. Nuzum states his interest as a taxpayer relates to the interests as stated in the direct testimony of the Local Residents 2

4 d. the facts which support your claim of any adverse environmental impact other than the general claim of air pollution. Response: Mr. Nuzum direct ESC to the following documents, filed with the Commission in the above-captioned proceeding: The Application filed in this action which addresses environmental impacts, including air, water, wildlife and noise and visual. The direct testimony filed by Applicant including the direct testimonies of Carol Colby, Matthew Fluharty and John P. Black. The direct testimony filed by Intervenors including the direct testimonies of Jon Pollack, Derek Watry, and the Local Residents, including Mr. Nuzum. Mr. Nuzum has no other discoverable, non-privileged information responsive to this Request at this time, but reserves the right to supplement this Response in accordance with the Commission s Rules. Q2. Please explain who contacted you to become an intervenor in this proceeding and what you were told by the person who contacted you. Response: Objection. The Request is not relevant nor likely to lead to the discovery of relevant evidence. Without waiving these objections, Mr. Nuzum states that he was contacted by Donna Paules to become an intervenor in this proceeding. Mr. Numm further states that Donna Paules called him and told him about the proposed project. Donna Paules also told him about the Ohio Valley Jobs Alliance Q3. For these Data Request Responses provide the executed verification under oath in compliance with Rule 13.6.c. of the Public Service Commission Rules of Practice and Procedure which requires that the person responding to a discovery request shall verify the responses. Response: See the enclosed verification. Q4. Your direct testimony states I believe the smoke stacks will be blowing toward my property. a. Which property of the two properties you mention that you own are you referencing the above statement quoted from your direct testimony? 3

5 Response: Mr. Nuzum states that he was referring to both residences but particularly his current residence on Abby Lane. b. Upon what basis do you believe anything emitted from the stacks will be blowing toward your property? Response: Mr. Nuzum believes that emissions from the stacks will be blowing toward his property based on the direction of the wind, the distance of his residences from the property, and based upon hearing John Black speak at the Cross Creek United Presbyterian Church on April 20,2017. E. If yon reached this conclusion on your own please explain bow you reached this conclusion. Response: Mr. Nuzum states he reached this conclusion on his own based upon his personal experiences and observations and based upon hearing John Black speak at the Cross Creek United Presbyterian Church on April 20,2017. d. If you were told this conclusion by somebody, who told you and under what circumstances? Response: Mr. Nuzum states that he was not told this conclusion by somebody. Q5. Your direct testimony states that I understand that the noise will be of a low frequency and my understanding is that it will carry farther that high pitches sounds. a. Upon what basis do you understand that the noise will be low frequency? Response: Mr. Nuzum states that he understands that the noise will be low frequency based upon hearing John Black speak at the Cross Creek United Presbyterian Church on April 20, b. Upon what basis do you understand that the noise will carry farther than higher pitched sounds? 4

6 Response: Mr. Nuzum states that he understands this based upon based upon hearing John Black speak at the Cross Creek United Presbyterian Church on April 20, E. If you reached these conclusions on your own please explain how you reached these conclusions. Response: Mr. Nuzum states he reached this conclusion on his own based upon his personal experiences and observations and based upon hearing John Black speak at the Cross Creek United Presbyterian Church on April 20,2017. d. If you were told these conclusions by somebody, who told you and under what circumstances? Response: Mr. Nuzum states that he was not told this conclusion by somebody Q6. Your direct testimony states that I will hear the hum of the power plant. a. Upon which hasis do you believe you will hear the hum of the power plant? Response: Mr. Nuzum states that he believes he will hear the hum of the power plant because the power plant will have two diesel motors running twenty-four hours a day. Mr. Nuzum also states he believes this based upon hearing John Black speak at the Cross Creek United Presbyterian Church on April 20,2017. b. If you reached this conclusion on your own, please explain how you reached this conclusion. Response: Mr. Nuzum states he reached this conclusion on his own based upon his personal experiences and observations and based upon hearing John Black speak at the Cross Creek United Presbyterian Church on April 20, c. If you were told this conclusion by somebody, who told you and under what circumstances? Response: Mr. Nuzum states that he was not told this conclusion by somebody. 5

7 Respectfully submitted, Kelby Thomas Gray (WVSB #11445) DINSMORE & SHOH LLP 707 Virginia Street East, Suite 1300 Charleston, West Virginia Telephone: (304) Facsimile: (304) kelbv. David A. Landman (Pro Hac Vice Admission) Emily V. Danford (Pro Hac Vice Admission) Nora K. Cook (Pro Hac Vice Admission) BENESCH, FRIEDLANDER, COPLAN & ARONOFF LLP 200 Public Square, Suite 2300 Cleveland, Ohio Telephone: (216) Facsimile: (216) edanford@beneschlaw.com Counsel for Ohio Valley Jobs Alliance and Brooke County Local Residents 6

8 ~ ~ X F I ~ ~ T ~ O ~ Jason Nuzum, being first duly contained and sworn, states the factual information in the Responses and Objections to ESC Brooke County Power, LLC s Second Set of Interrogatories, Data Requests, or Requests for Production of Documents provided above is true and correct to the best of his knowledge and belief. ri 2. Sworn to and subscribed in my presence thisha day of August, 2017

9 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE The undersigned counsel for Ohio Valley Jobs Alliance and Brooke County Local Residents hereby certifies that the foregoing Jason Nuzum s Responses and Objections to ESC Brooke County Power, I.LC s Second Set of Interrogatories, Data Requests or Requests for Information was filed with the Public Service Commission and true and exact copies of the same were served this 5th day of September, by U.S. Mail on: Linda S. Bouvette, Esq. Staff Counsel, Public Service Commission of West Virginia 201 Brooks Street P. 0. Box 812 Charleston, West Virginia Counsel for Staff ofthe Public Service Commission Lee F. Feinberg, Esq. Susan J. Riggs, Esq. Spilman Thomas & Battle, PLLC 300 Kanawha Boulevard East Charleston, West Virginia Counsel for ESC Brooke County Power, LLC Vincent Trivelli, Esq. The Law Office of Vincent Trivelli, PLLC 178 Chancery Row Morgantown, West Virginia Counsel for WVStute Building and Construction Trades Council, AFL-CIO Keith D. Fisher, Esq. Spilman Thomas & Battle, PLLC P. 0. Box 273 Charleston, West Virginia Counsel for West Virginia Oil and Gas Association Joshua L. Jarrell, Esq. West Virginia Department of Commerce State Capital Complex Building 3, Suite 600 Charleston, West Virginia Counsel for the West Virginia Department of Commerce DINSMORE & SHOHL LLP 7

Control Number : Item Number : 329. Addendum StartPage : 0

Control Number : Item Number : 329. Addendum StartPage : 0 Control Number : 43599 Item Number : 329 Addendum StartPage : 0 SOAH DOCKET NO. 473-15-1589 DOCKET NO. 43599 APPLICATION OF LCRA TRANSMISISON SERVICES CORPORATION TO AMEND CCN FOR THE PROPOSED BLUMENTHAL