ML18037A902
| ML18037A902 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Issue date: | 02/05/2018 |
| From: | Annette Vietti-Cook NRC/SECY |
| To: | Tarver J - No Known Affiliation |
| Shared Package | |
| ML18037A896 | List: |
| References | |
| FOIA, NRC-2018-000013, NRC-2018-000271 | |
| Download: ML18037A902 (2) | |
Text
UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION WASHINGTON, D.C. 20555-0001 SECRETARY Julian Tarver DOC885530 Washington State Penitentiary IMU South H-2 1313 N 13th Avenue Walla Walla, WA 99362
Dear Mr. Tarver:
February 5, 2018 IN RESPONSE REFER TO:
NRC-2018-000013 On behalf of the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC), I am responding to your December 15, 2017, letter, in which you appealed the NRC's response to your Freedom of Information Act (FOIA} request dated November 6, 2017. In your FOIA request, you asked for "all internal communications on FOIA-2017-0038." On December 11, 2017, the NRC sent you _
26 pages of NRC records responsive to your request.
In your December 15, 2017, letter, you state that you are appealing the "redactions" to the set of released records and "the search performed." In fact, the records provided to you contain only one redaction.* 1n your appeal letter you do notprovide any information, or any basis, supporting your request that the NRC reconsider this redaction. _You simply state that you are appealing the "redactions" generally, without specifically addressing the sole redaction in the numerous records that _you received. Likewise, you do not specify any reason for reconsidering the scope of the search performed.
In any event, I have reviewed the redaction and find that it remains appropriate. The NRC redacted the information in question under Exemption 6 in the FOIA. This exemption covers certain files "the disclosure of which would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy." See 5 U.S.C. § 552(b)(6). In determining whether the disclosure of information would meet this standard, an ag!;}_rjcy must weigh the privacy interest involved against any public interest in disclosure asserted by the person submitting the FOIA request.
In this case, you have not identified any public interest that may be served by disclosing the redacted information. I therefore find that, in this case, disclosing the redacted information would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy. Accordingly, I am denying your appeal, and the NRC will continue to withhold the redacted information under_
Exemption 6.
Moreover, I have determined that the scope of the search was adequate. The_ FOIA office reviewed the communications in its files related to your request and provided you with the responsive documents. I see no reason to find the search inadequate.
This is the final agency decision ori your appeal. As set forth in the FOIA (5 U.S.C.
552(a)(4)(B)), you may seek judicial review of this decision in the district court of the United States in the district in which you reside or have your principal place of business. You may also seek judicial review in the district in which the agency's records are situated or in the District of Columbia.
- As part of the 2007 FOIA amendments, the _Office of Government Information Services (OGIS) was created to offer mediation services to resolve disputes between FOIA requesters and Federal agencies as a nonexclusive alternative to litigation. In other words, using OGIS services does not affect your right to pursue litigation. If you are requesting access to your own records (which is considered a Privacy Act request), you should know that OGIS does not have the authority to handle requests made under the Privacy Act of 197 4.
You may contact OGIS in any of the following ways:
Office of Government Information Services National Archives and Records Administration
- 8601 Adelphi Road-OGIS College Park, MD 207 40.
Email: oqis@nara.gov Telephone: 202-741-5770 Toll-free: 1-an-684-6448 Fax: 202-741-5769 Sincerely, Annette L. Vietti-Cook