ML19296C851
| ML19296C851 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Comanche Peak, South Texas  |
| Issue date: | 02/25/1980 |
| From: | Chanania F NRC OFFICE OF THE EXECUTIVE LEGAL DIRECTOR (OELD) |
| To: | Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel |
| Shared Package | |
| ML19296C852 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8002280687 | |
| Download: ML19296C851 (3) | |
Text
.
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION BF[0RE THE ATOMIC SAFETY AND LICENSING BOARD In the Matter of
)
HOUSTON LIGHTING & POWER COMPANY NRC Docket Nos. 50-498A PUBLIC SERVICE BOARD OF SAN ANTIONIO )
50-499A CITY OF AUSTIN CENTRAL POWER AND LIGHT COMPANY (South Texas Project, Unit Nos. I and 2 TEXAS UTILITIES GENERATING COMPANY NRC Docket Nos. 50-498A et al.
30-499A (Comanche Peak Steam Electric Station, Units 1 and 2)
)
NRC STAFF'S MOTION FOR EXTENSION OF TIME AND LEAVE TO FILE MOTION TO MODIFY SUBP0ENA The NRC Staff hereby moves the Atomic Safety and Licensing Board in the above-captioned proceeding, pursuant to 10 CFR 6 2.720(f), for an extension of time and leave to file the NRC Staff's Motion to Modify Subpoena, enclosed herewith. Upon application of Houston Lighting & Power Company ("HL&P"),
the Board issued the instant subpoena directed to Keeper of Record, Transcomm, Inc. on February 1,1980. The subpoena called for production of documents to HL&P on February 12, 1980.
Without knowledge or consent of NRC Staff counsel, HL&P attorneys unilaterally contacted Dr. Lerner, a principal of Transcomm, by telephone and requested that Transcomm accept service of the subpoena by registered mail, rather than by personal service.1/ Only af ter Dr. Lerner had received the subpoena J/
See letter from William J. Franklin, counsel for HL&P, to Norman C. Lerner, of Transcomm, dated February 4,1980, attached hereto as Exhibit A.
8 0 02 2 80 (h> j{,'"l
and notified NRC Staff counsel did the Staff become aware of these circum-stances, which reduced substantially the time for responding to the subpoena.
At the same time as the instant subpoena was served HL&P also served its First Request for Production of Documents and its Fourth Set of Interroga-tories on the NRC Staff. These two discovery requests were, for all practical purposes, duplicative of the Transcom subpoena and of information sought by HL&P in its Second Set of Interrogatories and Request for Production of Documents, which the NRC Staff was then in the process of updating and has now, in fact, sent to HL&P.
In light of these circumstances and in light of the Board's directive to re-solve discovery disputes informally, counsel for the Staff and HL&P agreed to an extension of time for the Staff to submit its response and objections to the Transcomm subpoena. Concurrently with this Motion for an Extension of Time and Leave to File the Staff's enclosed motion to modify the Transcomm subpoena, the Staff has submitted its response and objections to the Trans-comm subpoena to HL&P. The language of 10 CFR 9 2.720(f) is, however, not clearly dispositive of whether the Staff must request the Board, under these particular circunstances, for an extension of time and leave to file the enclosed Motion to Modify Subpoena.
. Accordingly, as may be deemed necessary, the Staff hereby moves the Board for an extension of time and leave to file the Staff's Motion to Modify Su bpoena.
Respectfully submitted, 8
AL 9 4 ^ $ ' ' '- L Fredric D. Chanania Counsal for NRC Staff Dated at Bethesda, Maryland this 25th day of February,1980.