ML19276E030

Houston Lighting & Power Co'S First Set of Written Interrogatories to Central Power & Light Co.Requests Response within 14 Days.Certificate of Svc Encl

ML19276E030
Person / Time
Site:	South Texas
Issue date:	02/07/1979
From:	Barnett E BAKER & BOTTS
To:
References
NUDOCS 7903020144
Download: ML19276E030 (49)

Text

, -g 81 *f,"LJ,?.

C PUBLIC Don;y;

/,.

3 F4

+

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA d'3 NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION ,

sc#

BEFORE THE ATOMIC SAFETY AND LICENSING BOARD In the Matter of: S S

HOUSTON LIGHTING & POWER S COMPANY, THE CITY OF SAN 5 ANTONIO, THE CITY OF AUSTIN, 9 DOCKET NOS. 50-498A and CENTRAL POWER AND LIGHT S 50-499A COMPANY S S

(South Texas Project, Unit S Nos. 1 and 2) S HOUSTON LIGHTING & POWER COMPANY'S FIRST SET OF WRITTEN INTERROGATORIES TO CENTRAL POWER & LIGHT COMPANY Houston Lighting & Power Company hereby serves the following Interrogatories upon Central Power & Light Company, to be answered fully and separately in writing and under oath, no later than 14 days after service of these Interroga-tories, as provided in Section 2.740b of the Commission's Rules of Practice.

I.

Instructions A. .hese Interrogatories shall be deemed continuing, so as to require additional answers if after answering such Interrogatories Central Power & Light Company obtains information as to the subject of any interrogatory.

7903028/F/

B. In your answer, repeat each Interrogatory set forth herein and then set forth the answer thereto separately and fully. As to any Interrogatory, section or sub-section of said Interrogatory 'that you refuse to answer for any reason, separately state the grounds for any such refusal.

Where a complete answer to a particular Interrogatory, section or sub-section of said Interrogatory is not possible, such Interrogatory, section or sub-section of said Interrogatory should be answered to the extent possible and a statement made indicating the reason for the partial answer.

C. If any response is withheld, in whole or in part, for any reason, including but not limited to any claim or privilege, confidentiality or trade secret, set forth the basis upon which such response is withheld, and include in such explanation a statement of what is being withheld, the whereabouts of all documents referring expressly to whatever response is being withheld, and the identify of all persons who have seen any documents being withheld or have knowledge of the matters being withheld.

II.

Definitions The following definitions and instructions shall apply to these Interrogatories:

A. The words " person" or " persons" include natural persons, firms, partnerships, associations, joint ventures, unit operations and corporation, or any other legal entity.

B. The terms " officers," " directors," " agents,"

" employees" and any other designation mean any person serving at any time during the relevant period in any such capacity even though no longer serving in such capacity.

C. The term "CP&L" includes within its meaning all officers, directors, agents and employees of Central Power & Light Company and/or any affiliated company serving at any time during the relevant period even though no longer serving in such capacity. The affiliate companies of CP&L include, without limitation, any companies that own or control CP&L, or that are owned or controlled by CP&L, or that are commonly owned or controlled with CP&L. The definition of the term "CP&L and/or any affilitated comapny" includes, but is not limited to, the companies Public Service Company of Oklahoma, West Texas Utilities, Southwestern Electric Power Company of Oklahoma, Central and Southwest Company and Central and Southwest Services, Inc., and its predecessor CSR Services, Inc.

D. The words " identify," "identifing" or "identi-fication" when used in reference to a natural person means to state his full name and present or last known address, his present or last known position or business affiliation, and each of his positions during the relevant period; when used in reference to a business entity, means to state the name, address and any account or computer number to which such entity is referred in your records; when used in reference to a document, means to state the type of document (i.e.,

letter, memorandum, chart, sound production, report, computer input or output, etc.), the location where it is maintained, all identifying marks and codes, the addressee, the document date, author, and persons to whom copies were sent or person initiating or reading or approving the document and the name of each of the present custodians of the document. If any such document was, but is not longer in your possession, or subject to your control,. or in existence, state whether it is (1) missing or lost, (2) has bee;1 dastroyed, (3) has been transferred, voluntarily or involuntarily, to others, or (4) otherwise disposed of, and in each instance, explain the circumstances surrounding an authorization for such disposition thereof and state the date or approximate date thereof.

E. The term " document" means and includes every writing or record of any type and description that is in your possession, control or custody or your attorney's possession, control or custody as of the date of filing your answers to these Interrogatories, including, but not limited to, correspondence, memoranda, stenographic or handwritten notes, drafts, studies, publications, invoices, ledgers, journals, books, records, accounts, pamphlets, voice recording, reports, surveys, statistical compilations, work papers, data processing cards, computer tapes of print outs, or any other writing or recording of any kind. The term " documents" also includes every copy of a writing or record where such copy contains any commentary or notation of any kind that does not appear on the original or on any other copy. Without limitation of the term " control," a document is deemed to be within your control if you have ownership, possession, or custody of the document or a copy thereof, or the right to secure the document or copy thereof from any person or public or private entity having physical possession thereof.

F. The term " electric utility" means any entity engaged in the generation, transmission or sale, at either wholesale or retail, of electric energy, whether such entity is a corporation, agency of a federal, state or local government or a membership cooperative.

III.

Interrogatories

1. Separately state for CP&L and each affiliated company the total megawatts of generating capacity in each year since January 1, 1968, and define the basis upon which such capacity was measured, i.e., nameplate, maximum dependable capacity, etc.

2. Separately state for CP&L and each affiliated company the total megawatt-hours of electricy generated in each year since January 1, 1978; the average cost of generation per megawatt-hour in each such year; the average cost of generation per megawatt-hour for operating ~ costs excluding fuel, maintenance costs and fuel cost; the average cost of fuel per million BTU; and the average BTU per kilowatt-hour.

3. Separately describe for CP&L and every affiliated company each rate schedule under which CP&L or the affiliated company has extended or offered electric service to industrial customers since January 1, 1968, and provide the criteria that each company used to define an industrial customer.

4. Separately state the total megawatt-hours of electricity that CP&L and each affiliated company has sold to each category or subcategory of industrial customer in each year since January 1, 1968, and state the basis upon which such customers were categorized and the rate or tariff designation of each category or subcatagory.

5. Separately state whether CP&L or any affiliated company presently has or expects to have a generating capacity surplus, and if so with respect to each such company separately state:

(a) the analytical basis upon which surplus is defined, including the measurement of capacity and reserve requirements; (b) the quantitative measure in megawatts and megawatt-hours of such surplus; (c) the price per megawatt and per megawatt-hour at which such surplus can be sold; (d) the cost per megawatt and per megawatt-hour of generating such surplus; (e) the basis upon which the cost per megawatt and per megawatt-hour has been determined; (f) the expected duration of such surplus; (g) the arrangements, including assurance of delivery and price, for fuel supply which would support the potential sale of such surplus; (h) the identity of every person with whom the company has discussed or is discussing the potential sale of such surplus; and (i) the identity and location of every 3 document referring or relating to or setting forth the matters inquired into this Interrogatory.

6. Identify every electric utility with which CP&L or any affiliated company has discussed the sale of electric power by such electric utility to CP&L or an affiliated company since January 1, 1968, and with respect to each such utility separately state:

(a) the date(s) upon which such utility discussed selling electric power to CP&L or an affiliated company; (b) the terms, if any, upon which such utili'ty offered to sell electric power to CP&L or an affiliated company on each such date; and (c) the identity and location of every document referring or relating to or setting forth the matters inquired into in this Inter-rogatory.

7. Identify every electric utility (including affiliated companies) from whom CP&L or an affiliated company has purchased electric power in each year since January 1, 1968, and with respect to each such electric utility for each such year separately state:

(a) the identity of the purchaser; (b) they type of power purchased, such as firm power, contract power, economy power, emer-gency power, and wholesale power; (c) the megawatts and megawatt-hours of electricity purchased; (d) for each type of power purchase identified in (b), the sales price (s) per megawatt-hours and the number of megawatt-hours purchased at each such price; and (e) the identity and location of every document referring or relating to or setting forth the matters inquired into in this Inter-rogatory.

8. Identify every electric utility (including affiliated companies) to which CP&L or an affiliated company has sold electric power in each year since January 1, 1968, and with respect to each such utility for each such year separately state:

(a) the identity of the seller; (b) the type of power sold, such as firm power, contract power, economy power, emergency power, and wholesale power; (c) the total megawatts and megatwatt-hours of electricity sold; (d) for each type of electric power identi-fied in (b), the unit price (s) per megawatt-hour and the number of megawatt-hours sold at each such price; and (e) the identify and location of every document referring or relating to or setting forth the matters inquired into in this Inter-rogatory.

-9_

9. Identify every Electric utility (including affiliated companies) that has requested to purchase electric power from CP&L or an affiliated company since January 1, 1968, but to which CP&L or an affiliated company has refused or declined to sell all or part of the electric power requested, and with respect to each such electric utility separate state:

(a) the identity of the entity to which the request was made; (b) the type of power requested, such as firm power, contract power, economy power, emergency power, and wholesale power; (c) the date(s) upon which such utility requested each type of power identified in (b);

(d) for each type of power identified in (b), the amount of electric power in megawatts and megawatt-hour requested on each such date, and the amount, if any, sold to such utility; (e) whether at the time of requesting electric power such electric utility was within or adjoining the service area of the company to which the request was made; (f) the reason (s), if any, given to the requesting utility for not selling the requested amount of electric power; and (g) the identity and location of every document referring or relating to or setting forth the matters inquired into in this Inter-rogatory.

10. Identify every electric utility (including affiliated companies) to which CP&L or an affiliated company has offered to sell electric power since January 1, 1968, but which has refused or declined to purchase all or part of the electric power offered, and with respect to each such utility separate state:

(a) the identity of the offeror; (b) the type of power offered for sale, such as firm power, contract power, economy power, emergency power, and wholesale power; (c) for each type of power identified in (b), the amount of electric power offered, the date of such offer, and the amount, if any, purchased by such utility; (e) whether at the time of requesting electric power such electric utility was within or adjoining the service area of the company to which the request was made; (f) the reason (s), if any, given to the requesting utility for not purchasing all of the electric power; and (g) the identity and location of every document referring or relating to or setting forth the matters inquired into in this Inter-rogatory.

11. Identify every electric utility (including affiliated companies) with which CP&L or an affiliated company has offered to negotiate an interconnection or pooling arrangement, or joint construction of generation facilities, since January 1, 1968, but which has refused or declined to participate in such agreement, and with respect to each such utility separate state:

(a) the identity of the offeror; (b) the date upon which such agreement (s) was offered to such utility; (c) whether at the time of the offer such utility was in the service area of the company offering the arrangment; (d) the reason (s), if any, given by the utilitv for not entering into such an agreement; and (e) the identity and location of every document referring or relating to or setting forth the matters inquired into in this Inter-rogatory.

12. Identify every electric utility (including affiliated companies) which has offered CP&L or any affiliated company an interconnection or pooling arrangement, or joint generating plant construction, since January 1, 1968, but in which CP&L or an affiliated company has refused or declined to participate, and state separately with respect to each such utility:

(a) the identity of the entity to which such offer was made; (b) the date(s) upon which such offer was received; (c) whether at the time of the offer such utility was within or adjoining the service area of the company receiving the offer; (d) the reason (s), if any, given for not agreeing to the interconnection or joint construction arrangement; and (e) the identity and location of every document referring or relating to or setting forth the matters inquired into in this Inter-rogatory.

13. Identify every electric utility that has requested transmission services from CP&L or an affiliated company since January 1, 1968, but to which CP&L or an affiliated company has refused or declined to provide any of the transmission services requested, and with respect to each such electric utility separately state:

(a) the identity of the entity to which the request was made; (b) the type of transmission service requested; (c) the date of the request; (d) whether at the time of the request such electric utility was within or adjoining the service area of the company to which the request was made; (e) the reason (s), if any, given for not providing the transmission services requested; and (f) the identity and location of every document referring or relating to or setting forth the matters inquired into in this Inter-rogatory.

14. Identify every electric utility that has requested an ownership interest in any coal or nuclear powered electric generating plant being p]anned or constructed by CP&L or any affiliated company, and with respect to each such electric utility separately state:

(a) the identity of the entity to which the request was made; (b) the electric generating plant in which the ownership interest was requested:

(c) the response, if any, given to the request, and (d) the identity and location of every document referring or relating to or setting forth the matters inquired into in this Inter-rogatory.

15. Identify every electric utility that has recuested access to services or facilities (other than those identified in Interrogatory Nos. 8, 9, 13 and 14) from CP&L or an affiliated company, and with respect to each such electric utility separately state:

(a) the identity of the entity to which the request was made; (b) the type of service (s) or facility involved; (c) the type of access requested and the date of the request; (d) the response, if any, given to the request; and (e) the identity and location of every document referring or relating to or setting forth the matters inquired into in this Inter-rogatory.

16. Identify every industrial concern that has requested to purchase electric power from CP&L or an affiliated company since January 1, 1968, but to which CP&L or the affiliated company has refused or declined to sell all or part of the electric power requested, and with respect to each such concern separately state:

(a) the identity of the entity to which the request was made; (b) the date(s) upon which such concern requested electric power; (c) the amount of electric power in megawatt-hours requested on each such date, and the amount, if any, sold to such conern; (d) whether at the time of requesting the electric power such concern was within or adjoining the service area of the company to which the request was made; (e) the reason (s), if any, given to such concern for not selling the requested amount of electric power; and (f) the identity and location of every document referring or relating to or setting forth the matters inquired into in this Inter-rogatory.

17. Identi every industrial concern that has contacted CP&L or an affiliated company since January 1, 1968, about the possible purchase of electric power from CP&L or the affiliated company, but to which CP&L or the affiliated company has responded, in whole or in part, that CP&L or the affiliated company might not be able to supply some or all of the electric power inquired about by such concern, or to which CP&L or the affiliated company offered a more limited class of service than requested by such concern, and with respect to each concern separately state:

(a) the date(s) of such contact; (b) the company such concern contacted; (c) the identity of the individual (s) at such company who was contacted; (d) the reason (s) given by CP&L or the affiliated company for such response; and (e) the identity and location of every document referring or relating to or setting forth the matters inquired into in this Inter-rogatory.

18.. Identify every existing or potential industrial customer of CP&L or any affiliated company that has located a new facility in HL&P's service area instead of the service area of CP&L or an affiliated company, or has expanded an existing facility in HL&P's service area instead of expanding an existing facility in the service area of CP&L or any affiliated company since January 1, 1968, because of the difference, if any, in the reliability of electric service between HL&P's service area and the service area of CP&L or any affiliated company, and for each such customer separately state:

(a) the date(s) on which each customer located or expanded in HL&P's service area; (b) the identity of the utility in whose service area such customer did not locate or expand because of a difference in reliability; (c) whether CP&L or any affiliated company had sold such customer electricity before such customer located or expanded in HL&P's service area; (d) the megawatts and megawatt-hours per year of electricty that CP&L or any i " filiated company had sold such customer, if any, in each of the five years preceding the year in which such customer located or expanded in HL&P's service area, and the identity of the company furnishing such electricity; (e) the number and length of all service interruptions suffered by such customer, if any, in each of the five years preceding the year in which such customer located or expanded in HL&P's service area, and the identity of the company furnishing such electricity; and (f) the br.ais for the assertion that reliability was the determining factor in the location or expansion of the facility or facilities in question; (g) the identity of every customer's represen-tative with whom CP&L or any affiliated company dealt on this matter; and (h) the identity and location of every docurent referring or relating to or setting forth the matters inquired into in this Inter-rogatory.

19. Identify every existing or potential industrial customer of CP&L or any affiliated company to which CP&L or any affiliated company has offered to provide service at a rate that differs from what was otherwise the applicable rate schedule or tariff in existence or on file at the time of the offer; and for each such customer separately state:

(a) the identity of the entity making the offer; (b) the date(s) such offer was made to the customer; (c) whether such customer located or expanded in HL&P's service area or in the service area of CP&L or any affiliated company; (d) whether CP&L or any affiliated company had sold such customer electricity before such customer located or expanded; (e) the megawatts and megawatt-hours per year of electricity that CF&L or any affiliated company had sold such customer, if any, in each of the five years preceding the year in which such offer was made to such customer; and (f) the identity and location of every document referring or relating to or setting forth the matters inquired into in this Inter-rogatory.

20. Identify every existing industrial customer since January 1, 1908, which is or has been served under a rate or tariff schedule under which it is or has been the only such customer served, and state separatcly for each such customer:

(a) the identity of the customer; (b) the location of the customer; (c) the principal product of the customer at the location at which it is or was being served; (d) the annual megawatts and megawatt-hours sold to such customer in each year since January 1, 1968; (e) the reasons for establishing the rate or tariff in effect; (f) the identity of all person having knowlege of any contacts, negotiations or other communications concerning the establishment of the rate or tariff under which the customer is or has been served; and (g) the identity and location of every document referring or relating to or setting forth the matters inquired into in this Inter-rogatory.

21. Identify separately every area in which CP&L and/or each affiliated company competes with HL&P, including but not limited to:

(a) each relevant product and geographic market; (b) the nature and extent of competition between CP&L, each affiliated company, and HL&P n e.tch such market; (c) the date upon which competition began and the length of time that competition has existed in each such market; (d) the identity of every actual competitor in each such market, and a description of such competitor's activities in that market; (e) the identity of each potential competitor in each such market; (f) the market share of every competitor in each such market; and (g) the identity and location of every document referring or relating to or setting forth the matters inquired into in this Inter-rogatory.

22. List and describe every instance since January 1, 1968, known to CP&L or any affiliated company in which an officer or director of CP&L or any affiliated company has prepared or approvec any writing, including handwritten notes, or made or approved any oral statement that concerns the presence, absence or extent of competition between CP&L or any affiliated company and HL&P, excluding pleadings, motions or affidavits filed in any proceeding to which HL&P is a party. State the identity and location of every document referring or relating to or setting forth the matters inquired into in this Interrogatory.

23. Identify every existing or potential industrial customer of CP&L or any affiliated company that has located

~

'cw facility in HL&P's service area instead of the service area of CP&L or an affiliated company, or has expanded an existing facility in HL&P's service area instead of building a new facility or expanding an existing facility in the service of CP&L or any affilicated company, since January 1, 1968, because of the difference, if any, in the cost of electricity between HL&P's service area and the service area of CP&L or any affiliated company, and for each such customer separately state:

(a) the date(s) such customer located or expanded in HL&P's service area; (b) the identity of the entity in whose service area such customer did not locate or expand because of a difference in the cost of electricity; (c) whether CP&L or any affiliated company had sold such customer electric power before such customer located or expanded in HL&P's service area; (d) the megawatts and megawatt-hours per year of electric power that CP&L or any affiliated company had sold such customer, if any, in each of the five years perceeding the year in which such customer located or expanded in HL&P's service area, and the identity of the company furnishing such electric power; (e) the basis for the assertion that the cost of electricity was the determining factor in the location or expansion of the facility or facilities in question; (f) the identity of every customer's repre-sentative with whom CP&L or any affiliated company dealt on this matter; and (g) the identity and location of every document referring or relating to or setting forth the matters inquired into in this Inter-rogatory.

24. Identify every existing or potential industrial customer of CP&L or any affiliated company that has cut back production in a plant located in the service area of CP&L or any affiliated company and has increased production in a plant making the same product in the service area of HL&P since January 1, 1968, because of a difference in the cost of electric power between HL&P's service area and the service area of CP&L or any affiliated company, and for each such customer separately state:

(a) the date(s) such customer cut back production in the service area of CP&L or any affiliated company; (b) the date(s) such customer increased production in HL&P's service area; (c) whether CP&L or any affiliated company sold such customer electric power before such customer cut back production in the service area of CP&L or any affiliated company and expanded production in HL&P's service area; (e) the megawatts and megawatt-hours per year of electric power that CP&L or any affiliated company sold such customer in each of the five years preceding the date upon which cuch customer cut back production in the service area of CP&L or any affiliated company and expanded production in HL&P's service area, and the identity of the company making such sales; (e) the megawatts and megawatt-hours per year of electricity that CP&L or any affiliated company sold such customer in each year following the date upon such customer cut back production in the service area of CP&L or any affiliated company and expanded production in HL&P's service area, and the identity of the company making such sales; (f) the billing demand, the average price per kilowatt-hour and the total revenue per year that CP&L or any affiliated company received from such customer, in each of the five years preceding and in every year following the date upon which such customer cut back production in the service area of CP&L or any affiliated company and expanded production in HL&P's service area, and the identify of the company making such sales; and (g) the identity and location of every document referring or relating to or setting forth the matters inquired into in this Inter-rogatory.

25. Identify separately every' industrial concern that CP&L or any affiliated company actively sought to have locate or expand an existing facility in the service area of CP&L or the affiliated company since January 1, 1968, in competition with any other electric utility (including

! affiliated companies), and for each such industrial concern identified separately state:

j (a) the identity of the entity that actively sought to have such concern locate or expand in its service area; i

(b) the identity of each electric utility (including affiliated companies) with which the entity identified in (a) competed with respect to the location or expansion of such concern; 1

l l _ _ _ .

(c) the person (s) connected with such concern who was contacted by the entity identified in (a);

(d) the person (s) representing the entity identified in (a) who contacted such person; (e) every action taken by the entity identified in (a) in seeking to have such concern locate or expand in its service area; (f) the location of such concern when contacted by the entity identified in (a);

(g) the nature of the business of such concern when contacted by the entity identified in (a);

(h) the utility in whose service area such industrial concern ultimately located; (i) the estimated megawatts and megawatt-hour sales that would or did result from the location or expansion of such industrial concern in megawatts, megawatt-hours and annual revenues; and (j) the identity and location of every document referring or relating to or setting forth the matters inquired into in this Inter-rogatory.

26. Identify every industrial concern that CP&L or any affiliated company did not actively seek to have locate or expand a facility in CP&L or the affiliated company's service area since January 1, 1968, but for which CP&L or any affiliated company nevertheless competed with other utilities (including affiliated companies), by reason of the existence of potential locations, or the interest in the service area of more than one utility, and for each such concern separately state:

(a) the identity of each electric utility, including affiliated companies, with which CP&L or any affiliated company competed with respect to the location or expansion of such concern; (b) the nature of the business of such industrial concern; (c) how CP&L or the affiliated company became aware that such concern might locate or expand in its service area; (d) why CP&L or the affiliated company did' not actively seek such location or expansion; (e) the person (s) in CP&L or the affiliated company who were responsible for the decision not to actively seek such location or expansion; (f) the utility in whose service area such industrial concern ultimately located or expanded; and (g) the identity and location of every document referring or relating to or setting forth the matters inquired into in this Inter-rogatory.

27. Separately describe the efforts that CP&L and each affiliated company have made to influence potential or existing industrial customers to conserve and/or reduce consumption of electric power in each year since January 1, 1973, and identify and state the location of every document referring or relating to or setting forth the matters inquired into in this Interrogatory.

28. For each year since January 1, 1968, separately state:

(a) the total amounts that CP&L and each affiliated company has spent on advertising; (b) the total amounts that CP&L and each affiliated company has spent to influence actual or potential customers to locate or expand existing facilities within the service area of CP&L or the affiliated company; (c) the total amounts that CP&L and each affiliated company has spent to influence actual or potential customers to conserve electric power; and (d) the identity and location of every document referring or relating to or setting forth the matters inquired into in this Inter-rogatory.

29. State whether CP&L or any affiliated company was ever forced or coerced into intrastate operation against its will, and if so state which company, when and by whom.

State the identity and location of every document referring or relating to or setting forth the matters inquired into in this Interrogatory.

30. State whether CP&L or any affiliated company was ever forced or coerced to remain in intrastate operations against its will, and if so separately state:

(a) which company was forced to remain in intrastate operation against its will; (b) the person (s) forcing that company to remain in intrastate operations; (c) the date(s) upon which such person (s) forced such company to remain in intrastate operations; (d) the methods employed by such person (s) on each such date to force such company to remain in intrastate operations; and (e) the identity and location of every document referring or relating to or setting forth the matters inquired into in this Inter-rogatory.

31. State whether CP&L or any affiliated company has ever been a party to any agreement or understanding to operate only in intrastate commerce, and if so separately state:

(a) the identity of all parties to the agreement or understanding; (b) the beginning and ending dates, if any, of such agreement or understanding; (c) the nature of the agreement or under-standing; (d) whether such agreement or understanding has been abandoned, and if so, the reasons therefor; and (e) the identity and location of every document referring or relating to or setting forth the matters inquired into in this Inter-rogatory.

32. State whether CP&L or any affiliated company was forced or coerced or influenced to join TIS and/or to remain a member of TIS against its will, and if so separately state:

(a) the identity of the company; (b) the date(s) upon which such company was forced, coerced or influenced to join and/or remain a member of TIS; (c) the person (s) tnat forced, coerced or influenced such company to join and/or remain a member of TIS ,on each such date; (d) the method used to force, coerce or influence such company; and (e) the identity and location of every document referring or relating to or setting forth the matters inquired into in this Inter-rogatory.

33. Separately describe each occasion on which CP&L, WTU and their affiliated companies outside of TIS studied or otherwise evaluated the establishment of synchronous connections with one another, and with respect to each such study or evaluation separately state:

(a) the date(s) of such study or evaluation; (b) the person (s) at CP&L or the affiliated companies who made the study or evaluation; (c) the purpose of the synchronous connection studied or evaluated; (d) the reason (s) that plans for such synchronous connections, if any, were abandoned; and (e) the identity and location of every document referring or relating to or setting forth the matters inquired into in this Inter-rogatory.

34. State whether the disconnection of TIS in 1976 caused CP&L or any affiliated company to experience operating difficulties, and if so separately state:

(a) the company affected; (b) the date and nature of each operating difficulty encountered by that company during the period that TIS was not interconnected; (c) whether each such operating difficulty impaired such company's ability to serve its customers in any way, and if so how; (d) state h.ow this disconnection placed CP&L or any affiliated company at a competitive disadvantage in each of the product and geographic markets identified in Interrogatory 21; and (e) the identity and location of every document referring or relating to or setting forth the matters inquired into in this Inter-rogatory.

35. State whether HL&P has ever denied CP&L or any affiliated company access to any service or facility that CP&L or any affiliated company considered necessary to effectively serve its customers, and if so separately state:

(a) the identity of the company denied such service or facility; (b) the service or facility denied; (c) the date of such denial; (d) the person (s) at HL&P denying such service or facility; (e) the manner in which such denial affected CP&L or the affiliated company's service to its customers; (f) the extent, if any, to which such denial caused CP&L or the affiliated company to be disadvantaged with respect to its competitors; (g) the competitor (s) with respect to which CP&L or the affiliated company became disadvantaged as a result of such denial; and (h) the identity and location of every document referring or relating to or setting forth the matters inquired into in this Inter-rogatory.

36. Separately describe every instance in which CP&L or any affiliated company considered.the possibility of taking electric power from the South Texas Project under a Mode 2 arrangement, and with respect to each instance state separately:

(a) whether CP&L or any affiliated company made any study of the cost of obtaining power from the South Texas Project under a Mode 2 arrangement, and if so fully describe the cost identified by such study; (b) whether CP&L or any affiliated company gave any consideration to the cost of obtaining power from the South Texas Project under a Mode 2 type condition prior to its agreement to participate in the South Texas Project; and (c) the identity and location of every document referring or relating to or setting forth the matters inquired into in this Inter-rogatory.

37. State every occasion upon which HL&P has denied CP&L or any affiliated company access to or use of any nuclear power plant, or the electric power generated by such plant, and fully describe each such occasion, and identify and state the location of every document referring or relating to or setting forth the matters inquired into in this Interrogatory.

e

38. State every occasion upon which HL&P has denied CP&L or any affiliated company access to or the use of HL&P's transmission lines, and fully describe each such occasion. Identify and state the location of every document referring or relating to or setting forth the matters inquired into in this Interrogatory.

39. State whether, with or without participation by other utilities, CP&L or WTU, since January 1, 1968, has given any consideration or made any studies of the feasibility of the construction of an electric generating unit, either coal fired or nuclear fired, to be constructed and operated for the joint use of CP&L and WTU and if so, fully describe the results of such study or studies and the identity and location of every document referring or relating to or setting forth the matters inquired into in this Interrogatory.

40. State whether CP&L or WTU, with or without participation by other utilities, has at any time since January 1, 1968, made any study of the feasibility and cost of establishing the central dispatch of the CP&L and WTU generation within the state of Texas and, if so, fully describe the results of such study and the identity and location of every document referring or relating to or setting forth the matters inquired into in this Interrogatory.

41. State whether CP&L and its affiliated companies can implement " Mode 2" as proposed by C&SW in SEC Admin.

Proc. File No. 3-4951 and discontinue interconnections with other non-affiliated members of TIS without degrading service to the customers of any electric utility involved in such rearrangement of interconnections. If the answer is negative, identify and describe the existing and/or potential problems that would prevent such rearrangement of interconnections.

Identify and state the location of every document referring or relating to or setting forth the matters inquired into in this Interrogatory.

42. With respect to the following paragraph set forth at page 16 of the prospectus issued by CS&W on December 14, 1976, in connection with the issuance of 6,250,000 shares of common stock:

The CSW System is committed to attempting to restore and augment electrical ties with HL&P and TU, as part of a general interconnection of SWPP and the intrastate systems comprising the Texas Interconnected System (" TIS"), since the Corpora-tion's engineering studies indicate that such interconnection would make possible the greatest economies of operation for the CSW System. Even if HL&P and TU cannot be induced or required to resume their interconnections, the Corporation will attempt to continue and make permanent the synchronous interstate operation of the entire CSW System, since its engineering studies indicate that such mode of operation would still be more economic in the future than nonintegrated operation of the operating companies as separate entities or maintenance of separate interstate and intrastate systems. Construction of certain facilities necessary to implement these plans may require certificates of convenience and necessity from the Public Utility Commission of Texas.

(a) State whether it is still the present intention of C&SW to make permanent the synchronous interstate operation of the entire C&SW System regardless of whether HL&P and TU maintain their interconnections with the CS&W System; (b) state in exact detail the manner in which CP&L and affiliated companies will be disadvantaged with respect to competition in the product and geographic markets identified in response to Interrogatory 21 if the C&SW System is permanently interconnected on a synchronous basis but without interconnections with HL&P or TU; (c) identify and state the location of:

(i) every document referring or relating to of setting forth the matters inquired into in this Interrogatory; and (ii) every do.cument referring or relating to discussions, decisions, analyses or any other actions by C&SW regarding C&SW's decision to "make permanent the synchronous interstate operation of the entire C&SW System."

43. Separately describe every instance upon which CP&L or an affiliated company considered the possibility of taking electric power from the South Texas Project by means of a DC interconnection, and with respect to each such instance separately state:

(a) whether CP&L or any affiliated company made any study of the cost of a DC interconnection, and if so fully describe the costs identified by such study; (b) whether CP&L or any affiliated company made any study or comparison of how the use of a DC interconnection would affect the potential or projected costs of " Mode 2" as compared to " Mode 4",

as described in SEC Admin. Proc. File No. 3-4951, and if so fully describe the results of such study; and (c) the identity and location of every document referring or relating to or setting forth the matters inquired into in this Inter-rogatory.

44. State whether CP&L has received any request for an ownership interest in or unit power purchase from the South Texas Project from any electric utility not a participant in the project, including affiliated companies, or from any municipal electric system, electric companies, or from any municipal electric system, electric cooperative or other entity and, if so, separately state:

(a) the identity of every entity from which such a request was received; (b) the date(s) of each such request; (c) the terms incorporated in such request; (d) the response to such request; (e) the identity of every person known to CP&L or an affiliated company to have knowledge of such request and/or response; and (f) the identity and location of every document referring or relating to or setting forth the matters inquired into in this Inter-rogatory.

45. Separately describe every instance upon which CP&L or any affiliated company considered the possible interconnection of any electric utilities (including but not

_ limited to CP&L and/or affiliated companies) by means of a DC interconnection, and with respect to each such instance separately state:

(a) whether CP&L or any affiliated company made any study of the cost of a DC interconnection, and if so fully describe the costs idenLified by such study; (b) whether CP&L or any affiliated company made any study or comparison of how the use of a DC interconnection would affect the potential or projected costs of any mode of interconnection between such utilities, and if so fully describe the results of such study; and (c) the identity and location of every document referring or relating to or setting forth the matters inquired into in this Inter-rogatory.

46. State whether CP&L or ay affiliated company has performed or is performing any study or analysis of the economic, electric or other effects of the withdrawal from the South Texas Project of CP&L, or any study or analysis of power supply alternatives to the South Texas Project, and if so separately state:

(a) the status, results and conclusions of each such study or analysis; (b) the total coal and nuclear megawatts available to CP&L under " Mode 2" for each year in the future for which such information has been determined or projected; and (c) the identity and location of every document referring or relating to or setting forth the matters inquired into in this Inter-rogatory.

47. State whether CP&L or any affiliated company has conducted, directed, taken part in or is otherwise aware of any comparison, study; computation or other consideration directed toward the implsmentation of " Mode 2" and if so separately state:

(a) the entity making each such comparison, etc.;

(b) the date(s) upon which each such comparison, etc., began; (c) the identity of every person who contributed information or data for such comparison, etc.;

(d) the identity of every person outside of CP&L or an affiliated company who took part in or was consulted with respect to such comparison, etc.;

(e) the conclusion (s) reached by such comparison, etc.;

(f) the problem (s) of operating " Mode 2",

if any, identified by the compari son, etc. ; and (g) the identity and location of every document referring or relating to or setting forth the matters inquired into In this Inter-rogatory.

48. State whether CP&L or any affiliated company has conducted, taken part in or is otherwise aware of any comparison, study, computation or other consideration of duplicating HL&P's transmission lines and/or securing al-ternative transmission lines in the event that the transmission lines of HL&P are not availabe to CP&L and/or affiliated companies, and if so separately state:

(a) the entity making each such comparison, etc.;

(b) the date(s) upon which each such comparison, etc., began; (c) the identity of every person who contributed information or data for such comparison, etc.;

(d) the identity of every person outside of CP&L or affiliated companies who took part in or was consulted with respect to such comparison, etc.;

(e) the conclusion (s) reached by such comparison, etc.;

(f) the identity and location of every document referring or relating to or setting forth the matters inquired into in this Inter-rogatory.

49. (a) Describe and identify the current plan for interconnecting CP&L with its affiliated companies.

(b) State whether CP&L or any affiliated company has studied or evaluated the cost that such plan would impose upon the electric utilities in ERCOT and/or the loads that such plan would impose on the transmission lines of the ERCOT companies, and if so state the status, results and conclusions of each such study or evaluation.

(c) State the identity and location of every document referring or relating to or setting forth the matters inquired into in this Inter-rogatory.

50. State whether CP&L has offered an ownership share in, or unit power from, the South Texas Project to any electric utility not a participant in the Project, including affiliated companies, or to any municipal electric system, electric cooperative, or other entity, and if so separately state:

(a) the identity of every entity to which such offer was made; (b) the date(s) of each such offer; (c) the terms of each such offer; (d) the response to each such offer; (e) the identity of every person known to CP&L or an affiliated company to have knowledge of such offer and/or response; and (f) the identity and location of every document referring or relating to or setting forth the matters inquired into in this Inter-rogatory.

51. State whether CP&L has studied, analyzed or contemplated offering an ownership share in, or unit power from, the South Texas Project to any electric utility not participating in the Project, including affiliated companies, or to any municipal electric system, electric cooperative, or other entity, and if so separately state:

(a) the identity of each entity to which an offer was contemplated; (b) the terms of the offer; (c) the reason the offer was not made; (d) the identity of every person known to CP&L or any affiliated company to have knowledge of such offer; and (e) the identity and location o every document referring or relating to or setting forth the matters inquired into in this Inter-rogatory.

52. State the reason (s) for CP&L's decision to participate in the South Texas Project. Separately state the identity and location of every document that refers or relates or sets forth any evaluation of alternatives to participation in the South Texas Project by CP&L, including but not limited to the alternative of interstate operations with other C&SW companies.

53. Separately state the identity and location of every document referring or relating to or' setting forth CP&L's or any affiliated company's participation in preparation of the document entitled " South Texas Project Units 1 and 2, Information Required By The Attorney General For Antitrust Review."

54. State whether CP&L or any affiliated company (inclding attorneys) have met with members of the Department of Justice or the NRC Staff with respect to the antitrust implications of the construction and/or operation of the South Texas Project, and/or Commanche Peak Steam Electric Station and/or the Allens Creek Nuclear Generating Station, and if so separately state:

(a) the date(s) and location of each such meeting; (b) the identity of every person present at each such meeting; (c) the identity and location of every document furnished to the Department of Justice or the NRC Staff by CP&L or any affiliated company during or in connection with each such meeting; (d) the identity and location of every document furnished to CP&L or an affiliated company by the Department of Justice or NRC Staff during or in connection with each such meeting; and

~

(e) the identity and location of every document referring or relating to or setting forth the matters inquired into in this Inter-rogatory. ,

55. Identify separately the person at CP&L or any affiliated company who directed the filing of the original petition of June 4, 1976, in the NRC with respect to the South Texas Project, and the filing of the petition of September 5, 1978 for intervention with respect to~the Commanche Peak Project.

56. Identify separately each person that CP&L and/or any affiliated company expects to call or present testimony on its behalf of'as an expert witness at the hearing in this matter, and with respect to each such person identified state the subject matter on which the expert is expected to testify and the substance of the facts and opinions to which the expert is expected to testify, and give a summary of the grounds for each such opinion.

57. Identify and state the location of every document received, reviewed or generated by, or which formed in whole or in part the basis for or in any way contributed to the conclusions reached by, the experts identified in response t'o Interrogatory No. 56 in this matter.

58. Separately identify each person whom CP&L and/or any affiliated company has employed in anticipation of or in connection with the preparation for the hearing in this matter, and who is not expected to be called as an expert witness.

59. Identify every non-expert witness that CP&L and/or any affiliated company expects to call as a witness at the hearing in this matter.

Respectfully submitted,

.E. W. Barnatt 3000 One Shell Plaza Houston, Texas 77002 (713) 229-1234 Attorney-in-Charge for Defendant, Houston Lighting & Power Company OF COUNSEL:

BAKER & BOTTS 3000 One Shell Plaza Houston, Texas 77002 (713) 229-1234 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE This is to certify that a true and correct copy of theforegoinginstrumenthasbeenforwarpedtoall of record in this matter, on this the 7 day of sel 1979. /

E. W. Barnett