ILLINOIS POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD
1
1
MIDWEST GENERATION EME, LLC
Petitioner,
)
PCB 04-216
(Trade Secret Appeal)
v.
1
)
)
ILLINOIS ENVIRONMENTAL
1
PROTECTION AGENCY,
)
Respondent.
NOTICE OF
FTLING
To:
Bradley P. Halloran
Hearing Officer
Illinois Pollution Control Board
James
R. Thompson Center, Suite 11-500
100 W. Randolph Street
Chicago, IL 60601
Lisa
Madigan
Matthew Dunn
Ann Alexander
Paula Becker Wheeler
Office of the Attorney General
188 West Randolph Street, Suite 2000
Chicago, Illinois 60601
PLEASE
TAKE NOTICE that I have today filed with the Office of the Clerk of the Pollution
Control Board Midwest Generation EME,
LLC's Amended Motion to Compel Respondent's
Discovery Responses,
a copy of which is herewith served upon you.
Is1 Mary
Ann
Mullin
Mary Ann Mullin
Dated: March 23,2007
Schiff
Hardin LLP
6600 Sears Tower
Chicago,
IL 60606
(312) 258-5687
Electronic Filing, Received, Clerk's Office, March 23, 2007
ILLINOIS POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD
MIDWEST GENERATION EME, LLC
Petitioner.
ILLINOIS ENVIRONMENTAL
PROTECTION AGENCY,
Respondent.
)
)
1
PCB 04-216
1
(Trade Secret Appeal)
1
MIDWEST GENERATION EME, LLC'S AMENDED MOTION TO COMPEL
RESPONDENT'S DISCOVERY RESPONSES
Comes Now MIDWEST GENERATION EME, LLC ("Midwest Generation"),
through the undersigned counsel and pursuant to
35 Ill. Admin. Code.
ยง
101.500, and hereby
files this Amended Motion to Compel the Illinois Environmental Protection Agency's
("IEPA's") responses to certain of Midwest Generation's Initial Interrogatories and Initial
Requests for the Production of Documents. In addition to the legal and factual bases for
compelling
IEPA's responses to discovery that were previously set forth in Midwest
Generation's Motion to Compel (currently pending before the Hearing Officer), deposition
testimony issued in this proceeding,
after the Motion to Compel was filed, directly contravenes
Respondent's objection that Midwest Generation's discovery requests are overbroad and unduly
burdensome.' This testimony should be considered in connection with Midwest Generation's
request for
an Order compelling IEPA's discovery responses. In support thereof, Midwest
Generation states as follows:
'
This matter was stayed on April 6, 2006. The Stay is now lifted and it is anticipated
that the Hearing Officer will set a new discovery schedule at the next Status Conference on April
12,2007.
Electronic Filing, Received, Clerk's Office, March 23, 2007
1.
Consistent with Hearing Officer's Scheduling Order in this matter ("Order"),
Midwest Generation served IEPA with written discovery. Midwest Generation's Interrogatories
and Document Requests sought,
inter
alia,
information relating to IEPA's prior trade secret
determinations regarding financial and operational data-including the same type of data at issue
in this trade secret dispute-submitted by other businesses and electric utilities. Midwest
Generation further requested the Agency's prior analyses
andlor determinations of what
constitutes "emissions data." The relevant interrogatories and document requests are set forth
below:
Interrogatory No.
13: Identify any determination you have made relating to the
trade secret status of a business's financial information submitted to IEPA.
Interrogatory No.
14: Identify any determination you have made that
information constitutes "emission data"
as that term is now or was in the past
defined under Section 517 of the Illinois Environmental Protection Act, 415
ILCS
517, or Section 114(c) of the Clean Air Act, 42 U.S.C.
5
7414(c), or their
predecessors, and their implementing regulations.
Document Request No.
4: All Statements of Justification that were submitted to
IEPA from January
1, 1990 to the present.
Document Request No. 5:
All agency responses to Statements of Justification
submitted to IEPA from January 1, 1990 to the present, including preliminary and
final agency determinations and correspondence related to the same.
See Petitioner's Initial Interrogatories and Initial Document Requests attached to the Motion to
Compel as Exhibit 1.
2.
IEPA provided no answers to the above-enumerated interrogatories, nor did it
agree to undertake reasonable efforts to locate responsive information. IEPA instead stated that
the discovery was overbroad, burdensome and vague.
See Resp't Resp. to Interrogs. and Req.
Produc. Docs. at 2. No substantiation of any of the objections was provided.
Electronic Filing, Received, Clerk's Office, March 23, 2007
3.
As explained in Midwest Generation's February 16,2006 Motion to Compel, the
parties were not able to negotiate a mutually satisfactory resolution of these discovery issues.
Accordingly, Midwest Generation filed its Motion to Compel, in which it explained that its
discovery requests were both reasonable and relevant and required complete responses pursuant
to Illinois law and the applicable Board rules. Midwest Generation incorporates by reference its
Motion to Compel, filed on February 16,2006, as if
hlly set forth herein.
4.
IEPA filed an Opposition to Midwest Generation's Motion to Compel, in which it
flatly refused to produce any information responsive to Interrogatory Nos.
13, 14, and Document
Request Nos.
4 and 5 and, in fact, claimed that any attempt to even look for certain responsive
information would be "unduly burdensome." Resp't Mem. Opp. Mtn. Compel at 11-12. For
instance, in response to the request for prior Agency trade secret determinations, IEPA
responded that no "separate record of trade secret determinations" existed; consequently, every
single source file would need to be reviewed, a task which, according to IEPA, would be
excessively burdensome.
See
id. Midwest Generation argued in its Reply that reasonable efforts
to comply are required by Illinois rules and suggested that IEPA simply ask its employees to
recall companies that had been involved in prior trade secret determinations, so that these
individual source files could be consulted. Midwest Generation's Reply at
4.
5.
Since the motions relating to Midwest Generation's Motion to Compel were filed,
several depositions of IEPA employees have been taken. Testimony provided during these
depositions demonstrates that Midwest Generation's interrogatories and document requests
relating to prior trade secret and Freedom of Information Act determinations clearly are not
overbroad or unduly burdensome. To the contrary, IEPA should be able to locate such
documents with reasonable effort.
Electronic Filing, Received, Clerk's Office, March 23, 2007
6.
IEPA's Associate Counsel for the Bureau of Air, Julie Armitage, testified that
copies of the Agency's trade secret determinations are kept in files labeled according to the
source involved in the determinations. (Armitage
Dep.,
Mar. 15,2006 ("Ex. A") at 23:19-23).
IEPA Assistant Counsel Christopher Presnall confirmed that the Bureau of Air's central files are
organized by
ID number and facility. (Presnall Dep., Mar. 15,2006 ("Ex. B") at 10:14-24,
12: 14-16). Thus, a trade secret determination involving a particular utility could be located
simply by pulling that utility's central file, given that the central files are organized by entity
name.
7.
At least five companies involved in relevant trade secret determinations were
identified by IEPA employees in their depositions.
(See
Ex. B at 31-33, 107; Romaine Dep,
Mar. 16,2006, ("Ex.
C") at 25-28). For instance, Chnstopher Presnall testified that he has
reviewed fewer than ten statements ofjustification under the trade secret rules and issued only
one trade secret denial prior to Midwest Generation's. (Ex. B at
20:ll-15, 30:6-10). He also
recalled names of at least two sources involved in formal or informal trade secret denials. (Ex.
B
at 31-33, 107). Clearly, these determinations could be retrieved with little effort.
8.
The above-cited deposition testimony establishes that IEPA employees know
where to locate some of the Agency's prior trade secret determinations; furthermore, these
determinations may be retrieved from the Agency's centrally located filing system. Midwest
Generation's discovery requests for prior Agency determinations are neither overly broad nor
unduly burdensome, and IEPA must produce responsive information to the extent practicable.
Electronic Filing, Received, Clerk's Office, March 23, 2007
WHEREFORE, Midwest Generation respectfully requests that the Hearing Officer grant
its Motion to Compel.
Dated: March
23,2007
Respectfully submitted,
MIDWEST GENERATION EME, LLC
By:
Is/ Mary Ann Mullin
Mary Ann Mullin
SCHIFF HARDIN LLP
6600 Sears Tower
Chicago, Illinois
60606
(847) 295-43 18
Attorney for
MIDWEST GENERATION EME,
LLC
Electronic Filing, Received, Clerk's Office, March 23, 2007
.m
a
1
(Pages
1 to
4)
Baldwin
Court Reporting
&
Legal Video Services
1-800-248-2835
EXHIBIT A
1
3/15/06
MidwesWCommonwealth
Julie Amitage
Page 1
1
ILLINOIS POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD
3 CWONWUILTH EDISON COMPANY,
4
complainantl~etitioner,
5
YS.
No. PCB 04-215
6 ILLINOIS ENVIRONMEN'AL
PROTECTION AGENCY.
7
Respondent.
8
9 UIDWEST GENERATION EME, LLCT-
10
Complainant/Pefitio"er,
11
VS.
No. PCB 04-216
12 ILLINOIS ENVIRONMENTAL
PROTECTION AGENCY,
13
Respondent.
14
15
16
DISCOVERY DEPOSITION of
JULIE ARMITAGE,
taken In the abovo-entitled
case
before Rhonda K.
17 O'Neal, CSR, RPR, a Notary Public of Sanganon
County, acting within and for the County or
18 Sangamon. State of Illinois, at d:59 o'clock P.M.,
on March 15, 2006, at 1021 North Grand Avenue
19 East, Springfield, Sangamon County, Illinois,
pursuant
to
subpoena.
20
21
22
BRLDWIN REPORTING
&
LEGAL-V1SU.U SERVICES
23
SERVING ILLINOIS, INDIANA
6 MISSOURI
24
hrs (2171 788-2835 Far (2171 788-2838
24
1-800-248-2835
Page
2
1 APPEARRNCES:
2
SCHIFC
HARDIN,
LLP
BY: Mary Ann Mullin, Attorney at Law
3
Sheldon
A.
Zabel,
Esq.
6600 Sears Tower
4
Chicago; Illinois 60606
On behalf
of Complainant/Petitioner
5
Midwest Generation EME,
LLC.
6
SIDLEY AUSTIN, LLP
BY: Byron F. Taylor, Esq.
7
One South Dearborn
Chicago, Illinois 60603
8
On behalf of
Complainant/Petitioner
Comnwealth Edison Company.
9
MS. ANN ALEXANDER
10
MS.
PAULA BECKER WHEELER
Assistant Attorneys General
11
188 Randolph Street
Twentieth floor
12
Chicago, Illinois 60601
On behalf of Respondent.
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
v.
IEPA
Page 3
1
INDEX
2 DEPONENT
PAGE NUMBER
3 Julie
Armitage
4
Examination by Ms. Mullin
5
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
EXHIBITS
12 NUMBER
MARKED FOR IDENTIFICATION
13 Exhibit
Number 1
5
Exhibit Number 2
14
14 Exhibit Number 3
24
Exhibit Number
4
32
15
,
Exbibit Number 5
33
16
17
18
19
20
2
22
1
68PV
23
24
'
Page
4
1
STIPULATION
2
It
is
stipulated and agroed, by and
between khe parties hereto, throvgh their
3 attornays, that the discovery deposition of JULIE
AXWITAGE my
be
taken before Rhonda K. O'Neal, a
4 Notary Public. Certified Shorthand Reporter, and
negisxered e~ofe9910nal Reporter, upon oral
5 interrosatoriea, on the 15th
of
March A.D., 2006,
at
the instance of the C~lainancslPetirion~~s
at
6 the hour
of
4:59 o'clock P.N.. 1021 North
Grand
Avenue East, Sprinqfield. Sangamon County,
1 lllinaisi
8
That' the oral interrogatories
and
the
answer.
of the
xlrneaa
my be taken down in
9 shorthand by the Reporter and afterwards
transcribed;
10
That. illlrequirsment~ of the rules and
11 regulations
pranulgated under the Pollution
Control
Board
of the state of Illinois and the
12 Rules of the Supreme court as ta dedimus, are
expzea91y waived;
13
hat any abjections
as
to competency,
14 materiality or relevancy are hereby reserved, but
any objection
as
to
the
form
of
qvestion is waived
15 unless specifically noted,
16
That the deporitian, or any parts thereof
may be used far any purpose for whish
di~covery
17 deporitions are competent. by any of the parties
hereto,
without Foundation proof;
18
That any party hereto my
be
rurnished
19 copie~ of the deporition at hi?, or her
own
expense.
.
20
21
22
23
24
Electronic Filing, Received, Clerk's Office, March 23, 2007
Baldwin Court Reporting
&
Legal Video Services
1-800-248-2835
0
311 5106
Midwest/Commonwealth
Julie Annitage
Page 21
1 typical or not.
2
Q who here at IEPA could make that call?
3
A ~aybe smabady in the permit section
a
would know bettez whether it's
a
typical practice
5
or
not.
6
Q
who in the permic section?
7
A
one
of the managers perhaps.
8
Q
Hhat
are
their names?
9
A
well, chris ~oinaine-s a manager and
Don
10 Sutton's a
manager
and Mike Reed is a manager,
sob
11 ~ernoteit's a manager, and cnarl~e Zeal'a (spl a
12 manager.
13
a once
the engineers in the permit aection
14
give Marilyn their determination about whether or
15 not to grant or deny a company's trade secret or
16 confidentiality claims, what happens atter tnat?
17
A They won't actually give Marilyn the
18 determination. ~t's just that Marilyn
has
pointed
19
out that a determination needs
ro
be
made to them.
20 and then they will make whatever determination
21
needs to be made. ~nd then mrilyn will know
on
22 the heels of that whether there'a more
or
less
23
documentation that's going out the door in
24 reswnae
to the FOIA.
Page 22
1
Q DO the permit engineers give any kind
oE
2 written documentation to Marilyn or anybody else
3
at IEPR about thair determination?
4
A NO.
No.
Short
of
whatever the
5 determination is, we .either--one
of
three thinge
-
6 is going to happen.
You're
either going to, the
7 claim isn't--you're uot going to react to the
8 claim
or you're going to accept the claim or
9
you're going to deny the claim. And
so
there's
10 either going to
be
a denial iL it's denied. And
11
I'm not,
I
believe they put together a lettee iE
12 it's granted, but I'm not a hundred percent
13 convinced
of that. And there wouldn't
be
anything
14 else.
15
Q
So
if the trade secret clalro is denied,
16
does the pemit engineer issue a letter to the
I7 company denying their trade secret claim?
18
A Probably
not
the assigned permit
19 engineer.
20
Q who would do that?
21
A There's
not necessarily a set
person
to
22 do that. To my knowledge, the denials are
23
typically going to go under either chief legal
24 counsel's signature or under the head of the
v. IEPA
Page 23
1 permit section's signature. But I do
know
that
2
that has been an isrue that's
been
up for debate.
3
I don't know that
an
assigned engineer has
ever
4 signed a denial. I think that
a
denial would at
a
5 minimum
kick
to
Wn
or, 1.ike I say, to chief legal
6 counsel, but it could potentially kick to just a
7 sfaff attorney
a3
well.
8
Q IS there a central file
where
the chief:;
.,,,. ;...y.,9r,.'.
..
9
legal counsel would keep all tln, dsii'iti that have
10
cme
?ut under his signature?.d
11
A
No.
l2
Q
where would
thoa~.lef&-+j#~~?+
,
...,i
,
.,..,..I,,I
,.,.
13
A
'&
underbta~in~.
is"
ti+$.
wii+
..
signs
a
:
14
letter, or whoever is the signetdry.coiirtter:
15
laud
here, the letter *auld
po
!?to a
cpron
ISPI.
16
file, just a running
chran
iile::
ii
. ~. ; ~
Q Okay.
Excurs M.
Yopad
it
be
that.
in
individual's
chren
tiie?
1'8
,
Yes. So
anything
thek?~~~wy4~,~
@
$ 'bat
file.
Aod
rhan
a
&&
.~~"'~OW*tkb
ad
zi:
made
that relato to
burylu ~tw:.woui~
., .* *. .
ty~csiiii
and
up in
source
files in the prr*.&~riies in
the.
23".
b-a"
there.
24
Q 19
Don
sutton the head of the permit
Page 24
I section?
2
A
Yes.
3
Q and how long has he held that position?
4
A
I
don't
know.
5
Q
As
long
as
you've bean at the agency?
6
A I don't think
DO" was
the permit section
I
manager when I ricst came to the bureau of air.
B
no.
9
Q ~nd you said there's been between one and
10 10 staff attorneys at the bureau of air
since
I1
you've
been here, is that accurate?
12
A I'd
say
it rangeb betreen there, yeah.
13
whereupon a document
14
was
duly marked for
15
purposes of
16
identification
as
17
Exhibit
Number 3 as
of
18
this date.)
19
MS.
MULLIN:
Q I'm handing you a document
20 that's
been marked Exhibit
3.
1'11 represent
21 that this is
a copy of the
mIA
regulations at
22
2 Illinois Administrative Code 1828. Are you
23 familiar with these regulations?
24
A
yes.
6 (Pages 21 to
24)
Electronic Filing, Received, Clerk's Office, March 23, 2007
Baldwin
Cwlt
Repotting
8:
Legal Video
~snricii
'
'
.
. ..
.
.....
... ..
1-800-248-2835
'.
.
.
..
.
.
... .
. .
.....
.....
EXHIBIT B
. . .
....
.....
..
.
. .
Electronic Filing, Received, Clerk's Office, March 23, 2007
. .
e
, .
. .
''
'
. .
.
Page
9
1
cw:r.r
pa=* DX
ur
ear.. a:.
the
ti-
aid men
2
would
have
drvtlweb
mars
se
racontly
a* :o
3
pyaviee
lajal
ouh~e:
tn
the wdraiF1
05
air.
it
I
could
be on
my
n-c
of
m2%ccHdaeo~a nilttgra.
5
. .
I hancled
help
:ill
nDIa
+qvenlr such
a.
6
,,th.t.
2ยฐC
i
YOYL*
sly
qsnecalty
~harac-erlz4
my
I
,
astit*
EW~
rlm
at gecclng more ad
mrm
cmp;ex.
8
The faat
ef
th.
mrter
Is
11 you
look at
hat
I
9 tie,
I
a0 a
lac of
axbastes *rIorment
acli\xr,
11
snfarc-nt
ict1.m.
and
the*
just
a
s.ariety
sf
11
other
typs.
e:
enforcement
actions,
I
a.
c!11 a
11
tot
at
mrar
138 crom
~lne
rc
zinc
lmk
et
trade
15
*srre;
ructscn.
11
'
(L
mat
11
your
eurrenr
Tltle?
15
'
R
It's
assl~t~ir
EDUOIIP~.
16
Q
,
Zoo
mantfoae3
wuc
n~p~nalbllitisb
.
11
,
ze98rdmg
mrx
rsqce%r.r. Can
you
explain fhoss
tr
18
-2
9
a
ras.
.
~t~=ntin,es
~b.e.eo
t
e.m
ACXII~
m.
in
2D
.nforo-er
tatter. rawbody,
1~ ~ovld
bm a
21 .~iti=.~.
it -id
be
deferas crwnael, If
colrldbe
22
me
mmnpalry
ltsslf
that r-rc
.rror:isj
rqdmsc,
.
21
~mld
lik~
LO
FLU
tho
Ells to
re*
me~'a
Page 1:
I
jvm.
2
mere
IM~
be SW:~
1%
T& tweiia~ce
and
J
gntom-nl
section
which
ia
in
a dliKsr-nt area
P
that nu)
he respmaiv. re
the
WIX
Deesuxa
it'*
5
ccpaiap.
~rd
so my, ta ~akc durn
that
the
Fcrs-hm
c
cr
1nCormticn
Act raqvsat
is Killed
a3 fully
as
7
~osrlbls, 1 rlll
99 look
ar
the
=emesC.
L.4
as
a
g
side
r.ofo.
~cte.rtL~a,
people =uMc
very broad
5
rreedm
of ;afomll~~
ACL
rewe*ra,
so
I will
1@ -11
back and say,
do
you
raalir~
y;iu*ve
lulr
11
rsvdesi.y ho
drarerl
oi
ancumen:ri What
as yl*
12
really
wax?
13
Ad
then
Ts
LI
call then
d.U
Chey*ll
say,
1l
well.
hat
i
-ally
want :s
cbe
Ispctlen
15
repr~.. C
dmrmt need
all
that
oaar
rcufi.
I
16
didn't
rmalire
r
raa repwrt:ng
it.
sc
I'LI--the
17
EVIA
as~tlaa
doeaabt
mut~noly
m
it. They
jvrt
18.
have
chair
B~D~S~ULS
T:.dt'4
*.em
they do it.
fin.
19
-re
pragmtic -ith it.
so
1.11
say.
-011.
I
ZD
thm.
mu is
what tbw
wxd.
I*IL--~M
21
thl%'s %hat
r
me**.
f':1
Zacilitnzc,
1'11
aaths:
.
22 the &=s-nts.
r'll
ray.
-re.
wu red the
=t,
:
23
01
w~elonllly
I'LI
*cad
th~r
wtt
wsnlr
*near
my
21
signa:*~e.
. .
Page
12
1
o
911
you
mld rmtine:y'imil a:'several
2 d~fferont Eli*$ to
anwer
I
RU requsst?
3
A
res.
6
o
I,
YW.
i.w~Ar pzs-i~y
*NO
YPU.
5
by..*
lila th=t
is
~sponeivs
Co Ow
mU.
6
myuemt?
,.....
7
'
-A
Yes.
B
'
q
lue chrn
ri+i
nun.
yiu
~afi~?~~~tr
yy
9
to
WIL
pwtgt .~hn
W.R
n&
mrUng
10,
en
r
puldiag-
lb1.t i
41
A
Iwld
r../.i@1
X.M. bst
I.
oftatlnqs
12
I
could
sw &re
lt
W-
*xi%
iCr
Em*
iNunC*r,
ii
there
La-am
acwtm
q.tt*rr
rhlch
irr
tnatad a
11
.
litr~
bit alff?~t+y
@C*U+
we
dOncE
ha.)--thq
is
tantul
ri:~a~~.~~~iid.'~.bu'"f~
mi
and'.
.
e.
.;,
24
'
cmtainsd in
tt.. file,
and
.a
~iemcnc~.
1
WIA
,
Page
10
i
,
~e~esc'warla
naeimtatae
but-an
or
.ti
=:a
2
mr~.n6s1.
. .
3
..
hey
"&la
s*r
that
me&
vou~d'be;
.tor
(
IwlaMe,
r
loaal
,flag
en
the
file v;lgqe3tlng
that
5
wards
smnethinrl 40iw
on.
a
18w.1
mat-:
win9
6
en.
ma),
wuld ?mtlcL
n.
&xd
s4,
thsra's a
0lA
I
tequa14
do
yw Nv*
bm~
docants relConllYe
rD
B
~hio
requsst,
baa
t
v3uld
althri
prou~da
tw
:
. . .
.
,
9
docum+nc3
oz
he1p
I~CLIII~PB
~h.
flllln-~
of
a
10
m~~m
of tnf~mcioo
act
ryuaet.
I1
0
wnac
do
m mean
h-lp
fwllltate
rha,
:
12
in~nx
pu
3.~1 rerpl"dlng
(a
a Prarla. or
21
fils? rlll
r*lt
have .am
it
to
the
central
tila,
21
.hock
with
rhs
arhsstaa
.rsti~x,
so
gi* it
to
12
$0
not
only
are there
G==uncnls
the:
1
my paasass
22
nr
ta
kip
e?aL~
la~llltate Iilll~
Of tho
.
.
.*
..
23
that
ere
ICSPOLSIY~
to
t?e
m?& ihara
.ry
bs
23
Tsym..t.
8%
=wI:~
1.d
shy .&me twa
mt
of
10,
j24
.
in
rhs
carrral
file that are reawns1.e
ta
the
24
ybe
uay i'm verking on
a PZIII
1s
becaurm
It's
"I
...
3
1Paaea 9 to 12
11
.
bnrsa~
01
a1r:
the
central
file
tn
che
mmau
ot
17
air. that cuntaina the
hlt
0C
the
dmulrentll.
18
permit CLlel, flald
operarich
saotion
oc Ta9
',
19 lils~,
1c.t
all
cho
files
thmt
-a
.aln~aio.
~ut
20
kf
thccelr
61 00101uq ~D~OIC-B~
action.
my
lagal
15,
tacility.
Asbastas
-a1
might rpo no i4
=mar
h
boll6lng ILFCJI.
th
rrreat
that
fiadno
ID
nshr,
11
an0
sa
If
a
~IA
mqudec
ma6
in on
rha:,
there's
19
no
central fL10, I
Boa
lor
ot arbcaras.
20
I
my nrf
=ct~ally
ham
a
car*.
but I
. .
i3
InfomarLon
icr
repast?
.. .
.
14
r
men
a
FDUL requesr
cms
in.
CL~~C'.
the
15
ciatrst rile unlch
concain~
the
b21k
01--in
Lhe
Electronic Filing, Received, Clerk's Office, March 23, 2007
. . . . . . .
.....
.
3/15/06
Comm4nWealthEdismiMidwfft
Generation
v. IEPA
.
.
. . . .
Wvbropher
R
PressnalI
. . . . . . .
. .
. .
...
e.
Page
17
.
. . . . . . .
1
us,
n~cxmfloen:
1%
rrrrv,
car. iie
cl;lr~ry
2
.
cmc?
&ked
:ox.
C=
you
wax
iskej for. in a
CIA
Page 19
1
c~s(;lv(~S
an4
,t
zeem~d
fairlg slear
WI
ire
fete
2
that
e:C*er,
~~11.
zaybe
tharo
-as aa
errcr
lc
-
. .
..
..
.e:
.
.
3
starnp~fig i: c0;Iidential
or mybe
it's Just. hsy,
&
company.
se
dafinicaiy.
re
nPPd
:hie.
This
part
5
rhar
pv
claim is awiagio-a dzta.
lis
:eed
it
:o
6
calculzte it.
so
cao
va
r=sol-e :his
=-5
it'a
i .
m:cl*,~d.
Bct again, :hat's--1'n
only !"st
r
zperiltirq arc
oC
really
ose
or
maybe
tro -t;err
I
9
~:iirlk
of
whsre tilere
:-as
arlscn
llcer
than
tra
13
.
lnaianl mdcter.
. .
. . . . . . .
11
a
okay.
HZW
lnaoy a:atmenri
oi
ii
junr1:icarloz undar
the
trade
aeler
rules
have
:S
*to"
reviexed
curing your
time
hare at cha IEP.%?
14
I
I
couldll'~
9.x-
you
an exdzt number. I
I?
would
ilaglce
enat
it
is
lesz
?ha.?
12.
IS
Q
:*.d
in
tlose
sltuatl~aa,
diE
afther
you
11
or
%means
alrs
fzam
the
IEPP
rake
a baterninstiir
la
at.>ut
whether the
infxmd~ioa clalzed 2os.fidaatlal
!hr
tra& secret
was
coofilential
or trade
secret?
2C
.9
Ceuli
you
repat the q>e:ioo or
have
it
21
read
back?
22
o
:
'1:
repear
the qneatior.
22
ix
what context did
>,as
review
the
7
.
ar~temar,r.
of
jgstic'zcation?
page zc
i
I:
~e1;. OF
~ursa.
I
received
two
ln
this
2
mrter,
so
thaL8r
:.do,;
&d :her.
~ren
I said rhst
3
3~+3
man
iO.
I ~apgly recall a:
3-
paint
I
:coking at
a
stat-ot
EK
jueLiliCatior. in perhap*
5
cne cf
tn~se other .matters
I uaS
talkLn9
ilbouC.
5
myond trat I,
I4n,r;ot
suze *at
your question
vaa
7
gettiny
6t a5 to
rhather
we
mads
a
datarnir.afior
B 2:--1
j35t =a~*t
-call
too
much
3f
the
substance.
5
rcsua9tl
4
.
,
N3. XULLIN: P
Right.
Ysu ia.5
sai6 tia;
'
S
.
there
was
a lor
~Cinfcmatloa
the:
folk^
claisas
f trade
secret.
Bur
If
the
agsoc*
3asx': have
any
7 T8040:: TO
bblieve that
s-bdy
elsa
wants that
8
infcmtian eitz~r
t.'hrnuqn
a
WI?.
ceqxest
or
9
.
0cflsrui.8~
.
YW
&net
qi.
b?edd
ax3
make
r
10
detemin3tionl
.. .
11
.
Riyh~,
rlgtr.
. . .
12
Q
50
in the siruari~~.
13
me So~taoce
I?.
13 whieh':h'.
agencg
is
gsng
tc
make
n
as:en:narion
1s
abmt
whether
or
not
acnsrh>b$ is
trace SQCTB~, rr.
15
Lnat si:~atl~n
is
it fairly typical
for
a
pmlr
15
engixeer
or
mmeane
ta give the
cowany
a
heads-up
t7
L=
axphin
:hat, to axclaim thar
ynac
the
IFPA
.
iB
ruler,
rke
IEPa
doss3.t thlnk
:hat
That
29
infomation is :lade
sscre'.?
20
h.
.
I
g~eas
tbt
red8en
I'm
llavina difflcul~y
2:
anrrerfnp
rhst
quesrioc--1
rean,
1'11
3r.s-r
ir.
22
.
bst why I
was
having
diiflculty Liaulng
amr
it
23
is just
inp ply
;o
my
knovledge <nix
ia
the osly
24 .
;Istermination
I...*
been
1nvolr.ed ic.
s?
vl!atEr
, . .
. .
Page
18-
I
typical, I
FJWDI~,
the2
it'$--l
can't
tsll
70"
2
.
v>az*s
ty~izdl
bs9e.j
CL
one
da:eminatioa.
+Ha
3 pre;.irnr
mL:.q~ that I
wsru
talkin3
aboul,
the
I
pcevioas ~ttsr~
1
was
talli.9
abou.;, them va4
,
:
5
fever
any
determination that
was
mads.
6
0
Right. I
understnrd rrherc
tte
conLusion
,
1
is.
f uam'r
calXLnp
abut
a
fom:
determination
3
that
ras
issued
by
tk*
agency, hi
:
*.zg
talking
9
'
about that
period
rl
ti=
bezore
ihe
lo-1
.
--
....
. .
. .
...
.:
'0
. . .
5
LFeges
17 to 20)
BaiMin
Court
Reporting&
Legal
\'idea
Services
.... .
. . . . . . .
1-800-248-2835
....
..
..
.
. .
.
.
I
9
Aqaln,
it
ne,ler
just'cose to
r3ls
ler-1.
3ui
is
12, dezerdnation
is
isssd .he.
+r,
enqioeer
cones
to
.
10
you
usat
rn
ssk
the
question
igain
maybs--.
!
11 speak nth
you
to
get
y3ur
oplnlon
-bout
whether
11
G
I appr~eiata
ylur
answer. I
this* that's
12
or no?
the
lofamtlun
1s
trade
secret.
I
ii
s~:?sยฃact:w.
...
.
. . .
13
n
I
su~?o$e
that it rnay
dspend
on the
k
3%~.
. .
14
.
sm>lex;ty
of
the mstzer.
I ras
zaltin.?
IS
Eafere
smrruz ~:,s cacple t%az
I
can
sorr
of
recall;
li ue';~
zalkirug ab3~t--I'm
gc1r.g
tc struggle
to even
11
Ismember
exactly
wkat it
*as,
but
we're
talkisg
16
abmt
.we
or
trc dafa >oin~s that
are
crlti~sl t3
L9
'
calculalinj
emissions
data,
or sctcnlly
I. ttere's
2D
I
tire
when
sanebody
3tamp.d
sctlethlnq
21
coafider.fie1
and
they Jtzn't
rean
ri,
staw it
ZZ
~oinfl4a~::sl.
,
23
.?ad ED
these
are
.iecr
r.imr--the
onex
iP
that
I renember. *'ere
th:ngs
that
ware
-,C?ZY
eaa:ly
P
fiat per:entaga
~f'you'r ti-
wid
yoa,
15
ilaj-
is spent
responaiw
to
FDIA
reqwsia?
16
h
21
COU~SO,
2:
racles, crt
I
~zuld
say
it
I1
SOU;^
be
upwaris c
10
pcrcel:
to 15
parcent.
Tt
11
seers
?3
rre
rhat lr
:aka5 up
a lot
oC
%y
zine.
and
is
1.5
coxLdec that quite a 3lt
cf
my tine
when
iG thrtls
net
my job,
Ouota,
unquote.
bly
job
12
ho
il
be
ril ~nf9r~arsn~
a:Lozney.
,
, ,
22
Q
ID it
fa~r~o
gay
that
you d02.i
have
61y
3
direct
experience
in
warngss
oc
LndU4tr~?
24
YLi.
.uan"JCR:
Cm
yl;
clcclLy
char
by. what
Electronic Filing, Received, Clerk's Office, March 23, 2007
Electronic Filing, Received, Clerk's Office, March 23, 2007
3/15/06
Commonwealth Edion/Midwest Generation
u.
IEPA
Chsistopher
R.
Pregsnall
R
I
0m.t
&llcvs
as.
lii
""
Q
IIl)O*T
Yhat
yedr
would
YC~Y say
the
WIZ
.
.
. .
. .
!
17
dete&a~Iom
-I
pad*?
IB
A
,
I
tkid itm*
XITW,
Y-f-3-C-O,
ali'bk
19
''
wocd.
. . ,
. ....
20
Q
Okay.
2:
R
,,
Probably
'98
or '99
:
'think
w"en I
first
22
rtartee
workins here
but
I. again, 1 don't
23 specifically
recall.
2(
(1
50
it
~011l1da
like
nest
of rhsse
i~su*ยถ
Page
3:
1
but
ir
*lso,
it
becows 4
little bit'*=*
2
'
L~CEicult, becau~e
the
different raw
Ratariala
3
actua:ly
directly
Met
your ~SO~OP.~.
.
.
.q
. .
sa.thsn it
hscnnes
6
tough call
aa
to
5
rhai's
missions
data
and uQata-r
trade aecrsi.
.
6
~ecau.%
the munt
ot
>-our
raw
materials in
7
,
certa3nyrcprr:iena
my
girrr
o
alve to another
I
cmpmy
of
rhsc youl
fornlilation
i..
than shoving
F cmperirirc
.+..notage.
but tbn again.
thmt
atso
10
smscftucaa, 11'3
whf
ysuz
eml%+io~--it*s
p~inj
11 to
haye
e'aissiml conae+mnnl.
12
Q
.
Ace yea
faailiar
with
any
other
bowl
13
'
detemibtions that
ISPA made
under
tke part
1.30
--
Page
34
I
are
reirolved 1ofornml:y.
is taat accurate7
Page
35
i
l~inzreticn
thx's--:here
could be
dcafr
2
1110m:dndvm~.
opinions,
icems
that
would
laterfers
3
wit?.
sy
eafnrcec)er:
case.
F8
~wld
ham d
:
criminal
inresr:qsiion
goitg M.
I
irould
maze
a
5
Ceterr,lnrtim chat ;has@
are
exempt
crsr
5
C:9:158drE.
-
P
mar.
yw
mais ?hat
Mte75lr:diion rMt
a i:mz
are exempt
free,
diScl38ure. utai
is
pur
P
*ra~t:cei NRU'~
you
mifa--:
w.os?stand rhat
you
10
xodd rrit~ the Ietitr.
but
vJUld
LLBre be any
11
o;ser
dacwrtari@
that
you
wrl3
pur
in :ha
rile
12
reqa:ding
~3zt?
13
a
6M
ocher thab
.:amp,
taking a
tee
rtmp
14
and
s-arjpioq if ca~:lael;lal far ma
and
roc
tls
11
perso"
~opyir.9
:h8
file
ra
knaw
that I have
made
a
16
oe~ar~i~tior
rhat thlsis
sot
:elw$al'la.
17
a
IE
YOU
detcmiued
that
ir is
releasahle.
la
what la
i.wr
practice
1C
:hat
painr,
or
do
you
13
0ce8te aiy rlocmanc
a: tnat point?
I)
NO. Just,
it"$ ~itner
releisad
or
It
21
idr'c,
and
re
zag
ir
:he cover
letter that
here's
22
all
the
no;leranot
materials,
we've
held
Baa*
some
23
enwt
mzerialg.
X, Y
sod
7, ceaaom.
hna
YOU
2d
hava
to a:sa
I su~~oeeundarrtand
xhst
when
I
. ..
Page
36
1 tall, I
~~1k
350Uf tne
bureau
of sir.
. ..
. .
...
.
.
.
.
. .
'
. .
..,
9 (Pages
33
to 36)
''
'
.
Baldsin Court Reponingb
Legat Videc
~trvices
.
.
1-800-248-2835
.
.
. ..
.
.
.
.
. . . . . . .
. .
. .
, . . . . . .
.
..
.....
.
.
.
.
. .....
.
.
2
k
Tomy
knowlelipe,
ysr.
3
Q
are
you
familiar
wiLh any
fo-1
r
bitemir,aticn3
bg
the :EP&
under
the
part 1823
2
Q
;
underrtsno.
3
A
Evecy
bureau
i:er
it diirersntly.
a
c
:
UR~~IST~D~..
...
.
.'
......
'
.
5
re$clationa7
. . .
5
a
You
zi~h~
9et a I'z~N2d
list
trm
6
x
nay
r
i30~
a:
me
r*gulatioil7
1 ;
&?*the?
bur==".
.
.
Q sura.
'
e
A
.
ru
tbr
as
derbminati<na
wdez
the
.
9
part
1eil
re;dulations,
IP*w
pzobehly
Mde
hundrsls
:O
of
then:
-:
--
Q
are
these
ro-I
dsteminetionr
under
:Z
these
requlatione?
.
?3
.
A
..
.Mai*r,
I think--ad
it's
probably
~y
.
21
Earl:--but I'm getting
him$& EP
or.
:5
detarr,inatims.
w?.en
2
may
I've
osde
huddredl.
in
16
lookiny at
tbwe Ceguial.1or.s
a3
f
ja.r did, it of
:i
cocrss
con:ains
rbe TOTE
erempticna.
If, Ear
:E
inatanue,
*-My
13
raq3asting a
file bmadly
19
and ;irf.dl.toroey
notee
ers
in
that
fils,
then I
.
20
will
mte
a detern1ia:ion
that
reS:e
not
.
.
21
3i901~8i39
them;
they
ire
exempt
rrom
disciasura.
22
I'
rill got :hat
lr. iae
C~RC
letter
and
Q
toes
the
turaau
of
air
have
let
wlicies
e o:
procaoures
roc
now TE iandlea
IYi:&
rs-auaar
9 under ll28?
. ,
.
...
1D
A
184.
T%e
bureaa of air
does..
11
P
h;l
whet
are :hale
po1lc:ss--
a2
A
Rnd
thea
apain.
when
you tall
amvt
13
'
DuraaY of air,
en
Z
ir
the
Surcau
of
air
o= a3
I
14
in the
alvisiao
of
legal
cwnsel?
lr'a
X?nb
?f
15
*--and
that's
1
cheiorieal quesrio?..
It'#
kind
or
16
a,
ir'~
a .=the-.
wrld
rbaf
I
exist in,
en Khan
I7
pi:
PSR aEwr
the
bureau
of
air.
I'm going
to
If
a.5~8:
shDa the
bureau
of
a:r
uh:ih
is
19
ddu~strirs.
The
rS3.
unit.
Yea.
tbay
do.
2D
They h&v*
~heet9,carbon
sbseta thar
21
Vney.11
gat a
file--?hen I
xes ta:kIng
atout
22
.
scrsenitg
a
tile--chey81:
idk at
it,
they'l~ hare.
23
'
:ell.W;~
:hay
have a
rlglt to appeal.
Tnert
28
CO~M
5.
op~tions
erocessea,
there
codla
il ddrdEZ
23
che
aremp:ions
liaced
out
on
thsr &*at.
they'll
20
write a
dsscription EC
.-hedc~lnen~
and
~ut
a code
Electronic Filing, Received, Clerk's Office, March 23, 2007
Page
135
Page
107
1 smut
vr.e:h?:
or
~t
iniormatlon
has
c~we:itive
1
rhare's
)"st
a
re-
~f
them
:ha:
I
carr
ever.
racall,
3
2
.
ualuc
h
to
axa:
d
ch-pans?
dm
mean by
.in&-
2
and
they
did
fru.
rri
beat
ci
my
rec~llacti~n
1
#
, ,
Q
,
HdVe YDU mdda
any
ot'hec
aererminatlons
5
'T~YJIPJI~~
whattar
oc
not
re;eals
a: infOrnalicn
6
rill
ceuse
a
cmt@srtg
ccrpe:lti'rc
'Am?
...
7
R
I:
y4Wra
askins--we're
poinq
ba-k rc
8
that derermlnatlan wegtion.
If
you're
asking
3
hare
I authored or ismdoc
any
,aLe.nilnJtiiJPs
. .
10
making -.>:at decision.
tb.a ansrsz
wwid
be 10.
' . .
.
11
nav*
I at
sons
point Perhaps
en:aiitrsra?
. .
12
.
i~f~rha~i~n
$r;cn
a9
1 taliad
absdr
befora whether
.
13 it
rovld be
a
reclw
or
car
materia!,
ilsaae
and
14
rce:ner
Chat u3ul?--f
a*
ibrllia:
rlct?
the cat;cspt
15
.of cnm~atx~lve
vdiud
dad
thinicing
ab~t
3zd
16 adZIaaslzg thuac
isslisa
but--?hat7#
my
answer.
I?
P
may,
In
tt.e
pdst--r~il
testicied
:hat
il
16
the
paat
y~u
had either called companies or
19
airsarm
y-~r
piDject
mgicear.
to
call
ccmpaiea
20
bellre yw
iasued a
denial
ragaxding
th<ir trade
21
.
SFCIC~
or
tanliaanrial inforation.
why
didn't
2i
YOU
ad11
HLdu~t
Generelion
co
dlscuea
Cbil
Lasue
23
'
vlin rhea
beisre
you rssaed
yoar
aeoial?
24
a
:
did not
tes:ify
that
I."=
cirqz ~ade
Page
106
1
sveh cails.
mat
t
stated
*.as
that
I
m
aware
Sn
IDYDIV*
the
:ssl;e
if
e;xif$i0:8 data.
3
Do y*~
remmber
tha
nam
cf en+
ccrwanie.1
tzos
ma:ter
!3volved?
......
R
I beli~.,~
ole
OI
ch& ri;s
F1eiscturar:~'s
ut.qse,
rmetting
3inllar to that.
4
las
ti?*:
s
de:emicarlon
raparding
.,L
...
sihsc
3:
not cad
ma:arlal
data infumticn
z~nsc1:uca: emisetaza
&=a?
r,
I
donL:
kxm.
ii
ir
k.39
parriculhr--1ยฐC''
not
sxactly. I
don':
reE611
c>e exact
~ac:i~ul*rs
OI
it.
:
believe it
had Lo
G5
with
wiysicns
dzta.
I
don't
Zr.ou
iL
it
was--actually
I dcrr': thifik
iZ
w&z
nsce9$dr:iy
Taw nzterizl
YSL?~.
I tnln,: it night
have
iad
to
do
via zhm
olrirning
rMir
sracir
flax
rate
rs
trade soccst.
Q
Kas
there an
IEPA
detOair.alioO
rejazjlny?
A
Nz.
=hit
was
a
mar:=:
tnat
.ra~
rwsfkved.
II
nvw -a3
tnaL resoliied?
a,
ir.:or.:ally
with the
caejzy
virhdraving
hi 1
To the beat.--thia
irwhar
I
bye
hasre.
I didn.t,
xasC8t
inu3luaa in it
Page
10t
1 pe:aonally.
:
jrsc.
It
was
-layen
to
re
thmuqn
.
. . . . .
.
. .
.
martins
&
Z&rral Vidw Services
. . . . . . .
.....
.
.
...
.. .
.
.
~
2
the
pajt
tha: individual snglneszs had cantaeted
3
c-ania.
in
ltCmt to
~s.01ve
sms
is$ues
with
.
4
inforpdtion
chat
r*aa clainued.
I:
waan't
avsn
5
necssrariiy at
my covnrel that
+h;s wni
dme.
6
it
.as
brvghr
to
m!. attantlan
chat
:he
7
~:wid-:
da
the
clainis
were being PL&.
30~10~e
8
1.-
had
some
past
experience
uSrh
rrads
seciee
9
mtte~8. thq
bounced ==as off of ae ar
to
10
whether
it should
be
clahsd
or
not.
I provided
11
my
ingu;.
Where
i:
venr
frm
there.
T
was
nct
12
inmlved.
13
Q
otbsr
thdn
the
WIlCO
dctenrinatioo
thac
'
14
we
taiked obout
prrvicualv
end
r>e
Midaerr
15
~ena~.~ion/Cawd
dsterninscionr,
havs you
Men
16
involved
in
any
dotartxination either'fomak
or
:s
iefonal
xndez the
trade reoret rule4
br
the
paxt
$8 1828
rvlsa
regardins
%*she=
or not inferzatiol
19
conscitute.
eaissimf
datl)?
20
A
YOU
raid other than
the
WlfCC
*hi&
"a
21 prcdau$ly
apah
oE and the
inatant
~L.~~FBL?
2
:he
grapsiils,
so :a swak,
tbat the macter bib
3
been
resol-5.
the
company
had rithdraxn tha
1 ~L-~SSE~
claims.
5
2
So
sameone
fm lEPA Called the
CmqaTL)*?
6
X
Tta-.
ia
cozrect.
7
,Q
ACB YO*
.M:B
3f any
ofh$c
dereminatirw
fegardi-p he (ferit~itlm
08
emlssims
lata
in the
9
=UP:.X~
of
the
trade eezrer
and mIA
rulaa?
13
3
Yone
thac
I csle--no.
11
Q
Ace you
aware
of
6aY
agiacy
guidance
12
clther lornil1 or issoml
oa =he
iotsrprs:arioo
oE
13
tla
ter*.
sni'lzicns
data?
1?
R
xa,
1.n
not.
what is the
nomi
course
:5
of
binlnl:r
is
t3
Ice'
at t3e de:ini:t?n
of
16
emi$5icn~ data.
rachar~
the
CTR
redecal
jefioicion
17
aoi?
rhs
ai3l.rdsior
that
ma7
aecwlpaly
thac.
aM
13
-then
:ry
t;
think thmlsh
ir
1ocicallp
in zly
19
q~val
ait'~sti;.n
uhelher
thil
ildvld
~cn5ticll:s
24
eni~alons
data
ar
net.
A3
la--
L.=st:fied to
21
before, scmeticsa
iL
gats
to be
m very pra~
lire
22
as
ta
trade
becret
rarzus
sniSSiDt.3 data.
23
2
Yo1
xctirned
d;fcus1i3n~
01
the
C?R
2J
T~~BS.
I p~88~me
y~ll'ce
r*rerrlnq
:C
rha
.
27
{Pages
105 to IC81
tl.'
C
rbac'n
right.
23
1
I
ha9:s.
I have
vaguely
reEarred't'6
'
,' ' * :
2
~ltlttecs
:D which
YC
hawe t~lwncei
ideas
aif of.
Electronic Filing, Received, Clerk's Office, March 23, 2007
1 (Pages 1 to 4)
3/16/06
Midwest/Commonwealth
Christopher P. Romaine
Page 1
1
ILLINOIS POLLUTION CONTROL BORRD
2
3
COMMONWEALTH EDISON COMPANY,
4
Complainant/Petitioner,
5
"9.
No. PCB 04-215
6 ILLINOIS ENVIRONMENTAL
PROTECTION AGENCY,
7
Respondent.
8
9 MIDWEST GENERATION EME, LLC.
10
Complainant/Petitianet,
11
YS.
NO. PCB 04-216
12 ILLINOIS ENVIRONMENTAL
PROTECTION AGENCY,
13
Respondent.
14
15
16
DISCOVERY DEPOSITION
Of
CHRISTOPHER P.
ROMAINE,
taken
in the above-entitled
case
bafore
17 Rhonda K. aqNeal, CSR, RPR, a Notary Public of
Sangamon County, acting within and for the County
18 of Sangamon. State of Illinois, at 3:00
o'clock
P.M., on March
16,
2006, at 1021 North Grand
19 Avenue
East,
Springfield, Sangamon County,
Illinois, pursuant to
subpoena.
20
2
1
22
BUDWIN REPORTING
6
LEGAL-VISUAL SERVICES
23
SERVING ILLINOIS, INDIANA
6
MISSOURI.
24
hrs (2171 788-2835
Fax
(2171 788-2838
24
1-800-248-2835
Page 2
1 APPEARANCES:
2
SCHIFF HARDIN, LLP
BY: Mary Ann Mullin, Attorney at Law
3
Sheldon A.
Zabel,
Esq.
6600 Sears
Tower
4
Chicago, Illinois 60606
On behalf
of
Complainant/Petitloner
5
Midwest Generation ENE, LLC.
6
SIDLEY AUSTIN, LLP
BY:
ByzonF. Taylor,
Eaq.
7
Roshna Balasubramanian, Attorney at Law
One
South Dearbarn
8
Chicago, Illinois 60603
On behalf of Complainant/Petitioner
9
Conanonwealth Edison Company.
10
MS. ANN ALEXANDER
MS. PAULA BECKER WHEELER
11
Assistant Attorneys General
I80 Randolph Street
12
Twentieth floor
Chicago, Illinois 60601
13
On
behalf of Respondent.
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
Baldwin Court Reporting
&
Legal Video Services
1-800-248-2835
EXHIBIT C
v.
IEPA
Page 3
1
INDEX
2 DEPONENY
PACE NUMBER
3 Christopher Romaine
4
EXdmindtiOn DY MS. Muilin
5
5
6
1
8
9
11
EXHIBITS
12 NUMBER
MARKED FOR IOENTI~ICATION
13 Exhibit Number 1
[Marked
prior to deposition.)
Exhibit Number 2
30
14 Exhlbit Number 3
44'
Exhibit Number 4
52
15 Exhibir Number 5
53
Exhibit
Number 6
65
I6
Exnibit Number 7
71
17
18
19
20
22
23
eQp~
24
Page 4
1
STIPULATION'
2
IL
r~
stipuldted and agreed, by and
between
the parties herero, through their
3 attorney.,
that
the di==overy deposition
of
CHRISTOPHE&
P. RWNE
may
be taken before Rhanda
4
K.
o'~ea1,
a
~otary public; certified shorthand
Reporter, and
Reqistered Prof=nsional ~epoitei,
5 upon oral inrerroga,tocies,
on
the 16th of mrch
A.D.,
2006, at the instance of cha
6
Cam~lainants/Petitioner~
atthe hour
ac
3:00
0'cloCk P.M., 1021 North Grand Avenue Ea.t.
7 Springfield. Sangamon County, Illinois;
8
That Lhe oral interrogatories and the
answers of the witness my bo
taken
dom
in
9
~horthand by the Reporter and afterward3
crnnscribedi
10
That all requirements of the rules and
11
regulations promulgated under the Pollution
Control Board
of
the state of ~llinoin and the
12 Rules
of me supreme Cavrt
as
to dedimur, are
exp~es~ly waived:
13
Thar any objections
as
to competency,
14 materiality or relevancy are hereby reserved, but
any
objection
oa
to the
form
of question is waived
15
UnleSS rpecifically noted;
16
That
the deposl~ion,
or
any parts thereor
may
be used
for any
puxpose.fur
which discovery
7 deperitions are competent, by any of
the
parties
harrro, without foundarian proof;
18
Thar any party hereto may be furnished
19
copies
or
rhe deposition at his
or
her
om
expense.
20
21
22
23
24
. .. ..~
!
Electronic Filing, Received, Clerk's Office, March 23, 2007
311
6/06
Christopher P. Romaine
7 (Pages 25 to 28)
Baldwin Court Reporting
&
Legal Video Services
1-800-248-2835
-
r
..
:
:
A
It
was
infcrrs*lOn desorilwd-in
the
)i
NS.
MULLIN:
Relevancy objaction, right.
13 don't
allor it.
Ms.
HULLIN:
Q What
was--?
14 denial issued?
A Within the last tvo years, I think.
17 used
as
to whether those
were
emission data or
Q Was that
one
the subject
of
a
board
18 action also?
Q Conld those materials be used to
A
NO.
it
was
not.
20 calculate emissions
from the unit?
Q Was
Lhera
any informal resolution
oc
the
A My recollection is that
is
what the
22
source dld in terms of preparing it$ emission
23 calculations.
A No. We resolved it with Condco Phillipl.
Page 25
1 between a utility and an independent power
2 producer?
3
R
NO.
By that I mean that there'a a lot
oE
1
terminOlagy going
on,
and I think
I
knew
what a
5 utility used to be, but
I'm
not sure I unnerstand
6 what a utility is
anymore.
7
MR.
ZRBEL:
Off the record.
8
(D~SCUSS~O~
off the recard.)
9
us.
MULLIN: Q
Is
it fair to say that you've
10 never been invoived in a formal agency denial of
11 trade secret status
apart
from the nldwesc
Gen
and
12
ComEd matters at issue in this
case
and the 04-155
13 matter?
14
A
No.
15
dii,:
.
,wher,
n&:$&wtm+@#h6e
. , . , ...~ll.l.
,..a
' ,
,;
'$6'
.., . . ,
other
denials
purr* invdlW withi"
17
A
I
think I
was
peripherallyinwlvsd in
18
the lmtter involvinp Closox b1saoh.fThere
was
a
19 matter Lnvolvinq a company in Darmille with trade
20 secret.
21
Q Let's
no
back to Clarox bleach far
one
22 second. About what time
was
char denial?
23
A I d0n.t recall.
24
Q
Can YOU give me a decade?
Page 26
1
A I think it
was
in probably the late
90s.
2
early 2000.
3
Q what kinds of information did that denial
4
involve?
5
US.
ALMANDER: At this point Ism just going
6 to state for the record my objection I've made in
7 the other two
cases,
which is that
we
object
to
Page 27
1 located?
2
A Somewhere in the Chicago Bedford
Par*
3
area
is what I tecali.
4
Q
YOU a130
indi~at~ythat you yere iovolvea
;
i
3
in
a
denial
of
craae ~ecret protection related ta
6 a facility in Danviila?
7
A
It
uaa
the Tepat Espl fa+lity. They
0 were
represented by Air Floyd lop)
;
9
Q And what kinds of information did the
10 denial involve?
Ii
A I don't recall that
case as
clearly. I
12 could only speculate at this point on the types
or
13 information that was involved.
1
I
Q War the basis,
was
the agency8a baais for
15 denial that the information constituted emissions
16 data?
17
A
Yea.
Thatr* my recollection.
18
Q
1"
both of these matters. did the sources
19 submit sfatements
of
justification?
20
A
I don't specifically recall.
21
Q
00
you recall who signed the denials?
22
A
No.
23
Q Here they foml agency denials?
24
A
Since they both led to aceian~ before ihe
Page
28.
1 board, I believe they
rere.
2
Q Okay.
What
other tcad.
'secrst
doniiLv
,
3
were
you involved in?
5
.
.
f
4
A
I ddnrt
recall
. . ,.
.
whethhz
. :. ,.
we
;
!
'issUqb
:
a trade.
5
6
.
Conoco
secret
.
denial
Phillips
to
in
~ooocoj~hi
~arcw!;*
,~::*w?i&.
ips
oq
not.
Wyba
j
1
Electronic Filing, Received, Clerk's Office, March 23, 2007
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
I, the undersigned, certify that I have served the attached Amended Motion to Compel
Respondent's Discovery Responses, by U.S. Mail, upon the following persons:
Bradley P.
Halloran
Hearing Officer
Illinois Pollution Control Board
James
R. Thompson Center, Suite 11-500
100 W. Randolph Street
Chicago, IL 60601
Lisa
Madigan
Matthew Dunn
Ann Alexander
Paula Becker Wheeler
Office of the Attorney General
188 West Randolph Street, Suite 2000
Chicago, Illinois 60601
Dated: March 23,2007
Respectfully submitted,
MIDWEST GENERATION EME, LLC
By:
Is/ Mary Ann Mullin
Mary Ann Mullin
SCHIFF HARDIN LLP
6600 Sears Tower
Chicago, Illinois 60606
(312) 258-5687
One of the Attorneys for
Midwest Generation EME, LLC
Electronic Filing, Received, Clerk's Office, March 23, 2007