ML19257A419

From kanterella
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Order Compelling Applicant to Respond to Intervenor Tx Pirg Interrogatory 10 Re Fifth Set of Interrogatories.Info Sought Relevant to Conservation Issue
ML19257A419
Person / Time
Site: Allens Creek File:Houston Lighting and Power Company icon.png
Issue date: 12/21/1979
From: Wolfe S
Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel
To:
HOUSTON LIGHTING & POWER CO.
References
NUDOCS 8001040238
Download: ML19257A419 (2)


Text

ge UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

[8 D

y NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION a

THE ATOMIC SAFETY AND LICENSING BOARD

$F b

e3

~

I~ h : '.

  • E2

~

-7

.S G

Sheldon J. Wolfe, Esquire, Chairman Dr. E. Leonard Cheatum, Member

'a U Gustave A. Linenberger, Jr., Member N

8 3

%n e7 M

In the Matter of

)

)

HOUSTON LIGHTING AND POWER COMPANY Docket No. 50-466 CP (Allens Creek Nuclear Generating

)

Station, Unit 1)

)

SERVEo DEC 2 61973 ORDER (December 21,1979)

On December 5, 1979, ToxPirg filed a Motion To Compel Discovery Responses.

Therein, said intervenor urged that the Board compel responses to Interrogatory 10 in all of its subparts as set forth in its Fifth Set of Interrogatories. -1/

In a Response filed on December 14, 1979, Applicant argued that the interroga-tory sought information ranging beyond the scope of the energy conservation issue raised by Contention 7, and that, at best, properly framed interroga-tories might be submitted addressing the issue of whether or how the forecast model accounts for TexPirg's proposed conservation measures set out in Conten-tion 7.

After reviewing the interrogatory in dispute and the submissions of the disputants, as well as the documents cited therein, we grant the Motion To Compel.

Some of the questions posed in Interrogatory 10 clearly indicate that the information sought with regard to Applicant's forecasting model is relevant 1/ TexPirg also requested that we compel Applicant to identify certain documents in its possession as requested in Interrogatories 6, 7 and 9.

In its Response of December 14, 1979, Applicant identified these documents, and, accordingly, this portion of the Motion To Compel is denied as having been mooted.

'" ml o40 N b 1684 090 to the issue of conservation, and the balance indicate that the information sought appears reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence relating to conservation.-2/As we have previously stated in our Order of September 24, 1979, we liberally construe our discovery rules and give broad application to the concept of relevancy.

Applicant shall have fourteen (14) days from the service of this Order to answer TexPirg's Interrogatory 10.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

FOR THE ATOMIC SAFETY AND LICENSING BOARD NN

'Sheldon J.yolfe, Esquire Chainnan Dated at Bethesda, Maryland this 21st day of December, 1979.

2] Once again, and hopefully for the last time, we urge that the parties will confer informally to resolve their differences. These conferences would serve to lessen the number of submissions inundating our docket or, at least, would serve to crystallize the matters in dispute.

1684 091