ML19260C679
| ML19260C679 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | South Texas, Comanche Peak  |
| Issue date: | 12/18/1979 |
| From: | Franklin W HOUSTON LIGHTING & POWER CO., LOWENSTEIN, NEWMAN, REIS, AXELRAD & TOLL |
| To: | JUSTICE, DEPT. OF |
| Shared Package | |
| ML19260C677 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8001080295 | |
| Download: ML19260C679 (6) | |
Text
.
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION BEFORE THE ATCMIC SAFETY AND LICENSING BOARD In the Matter of
)
)
HOUSTON LIGHTING & PCWER
)
Docket Nos. 50-498A COMPANY, et al.
)
50-499A
)
(South Texas Proj ect,
)
Units 1 and 2)
)
)
TEXAS UTILITIES GENERATING
)
Docket Nos. 50-445A CCMPANY, et al.
)
50-446A
)
(Comanche Peak Steam Electric
)
Station, Units 1 and 2)
)
THIRD SET OF INTERROGATORIES AND REQUESTS FOR PRODUCTION OF DOCUMENTS FROM HOUSTCN LIGHTING & POWER COMPANY TO ANTITRUST DIVISION, U.
S.
DEPT. OF JUSTICE Preface Pursuant to Sections 2.740b and 2.741 of the Commission's Rules of Practice, Houston Lighting & Power Company propounds the following Interrogatories and Requests for Production of Documents to the Antitrust Division, U.
S.
Department of Justice
(" Division").
Each interrogatory should be answered separately and fully in writing under oath or affirmation by the person or persons making them no later than 14 days after service of these Interrogatories and Requests for Production, and each document requested should be produced no later than 30 days after service of these Interrogatories and Requests for Production.
1702 203 8001080 95 h6
Definitions As used herein the terms listed below are, unless other-wise specifically indicated, intended to have the following meanings:
1.
"First Set" refers to the First Set of Interrogatoires and Requests for Production of Documents from Houston Lighting
& Power Company to Antitrust Division, U.S.
Department of Justice, dated August 1, 1978.
2.
All Definitions of the First Set are incorporated in these Definitions by reference.
3.
" Comanche Peak OL advice letter" is the advice letter dated August 1, 1978, published in 43 FR 34850 (August 7, 1978).
4.
" Comanche Peak TMPA advice letter" is the advice letter dated September 5, 1979, published in 44 FR 53594-95 (September 14, 1979).
5.
'Ccmanche Peak Brazos advice letter" is the advice letter dated September 25, 1978, from John H.
Shenefield to Howard K.
Shapar.
General Instructions The following General Instructions apply to each of the discovery requests contained herein:
1.
Restate the interrogatory or document request as the first part of the answer.
2.
Documents in the possession of any other party to this proceeding or publicly available are not to be regarded as being in Houston's possession.
3.
All Gene-al Instructions of the First Set are incorpor-ated in these General Instructicns by reference.
1702 204
t
' Interrocatories 1.
With respect to the Comanche Peak OL advice
- letter, (a) identify those persons with whcm the Division communicated in the course of its Comanche Peak operating license antitrust review; and (b) provide all documents which relate to such communications or otherwise to the advice rendered.
2.
With respect to the Comanche Peak TMPA advice
- letter, (a) identify those persons with whcm the Division communicated in the course of its antitrust review in connection with this letter; and (b) provide all documents which relate to such ccm-munications or otherwise to the advice rendered.
3.
With respect to the Comanche Peak Brazos advice
- letter, (a) identify those persons with whom the Divisica communicated in the course of its antitrust review in connection with this letter; and (b) provide all documents which relate to such com-munications or otherwise to the advice rendered.
4.
With respect to each alleged intrastate only re-striction identified in the Comanche Peak TMPA advice letter, (a) provide a copy of the contract er agreement containing each such restriction or, if oral, state the terms of such contract or agreement; 1702 205
-4_
(b) state whether the Division contends that Houston directly influenced, participated in the negotiations for, is a party to, or is otherwise responsible for, each such alleged intrastate only provision; and (c) unless your answer to subpart 03) is an unqualified negative, identify and provide all evidence re-1rting to your answer to subpart (b).
5.
With respect to the 1973 agreement between the City of Garland and TPSL, as described in the Comanche Peak TMPA advice
- letter, (a) state whether the Division contends that Houston directly influenced, participated in the negotiations for, is a party to, or is otherwise responsible for, the 1973 agreement between the City of Garland and TP&L:
0:)
unless your answer to subpart (a) is an unqualified negative, identif *: and provide all evidence relating to your answer to subpart (a); and (c) for each year this agreement was in ef fect, state the amount of electricity consumed in the marketing area (s) which was (were) the subject of this agreement.
6.
With respect to each alleged intrastate only re-striction identified in the Comanche Peak Brazos advice letter, (a) provide a copy of the contract or agreement containing each such restriction or, if oral, state the terms of such contract or agreement; i702 206
- (b) state whether the Division contends that Houston directly influenced, participated in the negotiations for, is a party to, or is otherwise responsible for, each such alleged intrastate only provision; and (c) unless your answer to subpart (b) is an unqualified negative, identify and provide all evidence re-lating to your answer to subpart (b).
7.
Identify all documents which the Division has received (i) by any method other than formal discovery procedures pur-suant to 10 CFR SS2.740-2.742 (ii) from any person other than Houston, TU, or an attorney, expert witness, or employee of Houston or TU (iii) in the course of either the South Texas or Comanche Peak antitrust proceeding.
Include as part of such identification, (a) the name of the person who furnished each such document to the Division, (b) the circumstances under which the Division received each such document, and (c) all objective identifying identification (for example, production or document control numbers) assigned to each such document by the Division.
(Note that tests (i)-(iii) are cumulative).
i702 207
. Respectfully submitted, s
(
Attorney for Houston Lighting
& Power Company Baker & Botts 3000 One Shell Plaza Houston, Texas 77002 Lowenstein, Newman, Reis, Axelrad & Toll 1025 Connecticut Avenue, N.W.
Dated:
December 18, 1979 Washington, D.C.
20036 1702 208