ML19290D582
| ML19290D582 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Comanche Peak, South Texas  |
| Issue date: | 02/12/1980 |
| From: | Mark Miller Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel |
| To: | CAROLINA POWER & LIGHT CO. |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8002220221 | |
| Download: ML19290D582 (2) | |
Text
p.
k N
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA cgG O
2-NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION uW k
$\\qEO F
~
THE ATOMIC SAFETY AND LICENSING BOARD
?
,S
-3 !
Marshall E. Miller, Esquire, Chairman M Tg4 E'
Michael L. Glaser, Esquire, Member b
lto /
Sheldon J. Wolfe, Esquire, Member e
In the Matter of
)
)
HOUSTON LIGHTING & POWER COMPANY, et al.
)
)
Docket Nos. 50-498A (South Texas Proj ect,
)
50-499A Units 1 and 2)
)
)
TEXAS UTILITIES GENERATING COMPANY, et al. )
)
Docket Nos. 50-445A (Comanche Peak Steam Electric Station,
)
50-446A Units 1 and 2)
)
ORDER EXTENDING TIME FOR RESPONSE BY CENTRAL POWER AND LIGHT COMPANY, et al.
(February 12, 1980)
On February 7, 1980, Central Power and Light Company, et al.
(CP&L) filed a motion to extend the time for response to TUGCO's first set of interrogatories and document requests, filed January 30, 1980, to March 28, 1980.
A subsidiary of CP&L, Central and South West Services, Inc. (CSWS) filed a motion for protective order seeking relief from complying with any discovery requests, and also joined in the request for extension of time if a protective order was denied.
TUGC0 opposed the length of time requested, but did not obj ect to a lesser extension of time.
Factual discovery is to end by February 29, 1980 in accordance with the schedule previosuly adopted.
Some extension of time to respond to these discovery requests is in order in view of their 3n0220t gg}
~~ }{
extensive nature and rather late filing date (January 30, 1980).
Accordingly, both CP&L and CSWS may have their time for answering interrogatories extended to February 29, 1980, and for the production of documents extended to March 14, 1980.
The motion of CSWS for a protective order exempting it from discovery is denied.
Although CSWS is not a named party to this proceeding, it is apparently a subsidiary of CP&L.
The subsidiaries of TUGC0 were subj ect to discovery requests, and no good reason appears for treating other parties any differently.
It is so ordered.
FOR THE ATOMIC SAFETY AND LICENSING BOARD l
Ad oh $
C r
Marshall E. Miller, Chairman Dated at Bethesda, Maryland this 12th day of February 1980.
_