ML19224A789
| ML19224A789 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Crane  |
| Issue date: | 04/18/1979 |
| From: | Bickwit L NRC OFFICE OF THE GENERAL COUNSEL (OGC) |
| To: | Gilinsky V, Hendrie J, Kennedy R NRC COMMISSION (OCM) |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 7905300319 | |
| Download: ML19224A789 (3) | |
Text
-
..)
AJ
\\
.y2/
April 18, 1979
'IE**.ORANDUh4 FOR:
Chairman Hendrie Commissioner Gilinsky '
~.
Commissioner Kennedy
_ Commissioner Bradford Commissiorer Ahearne PROM:
Leonard Bickwit, Jr., General Counsel
SUBJECT:
FREER 0M OF INFOR'"ATION ACT REQUESTS FOR DOCUMENTS CONCERNING THREE MILE ISLAND Following our meeting yesterday with representatives of both staff and Commission offices.on the ebeve subject, we have evolved the attached recon =endations.
These should be sub-stituted for the " Tentative Recommendations" forwarded as paces 6-7 of our April 14.menorandum.
For your' convenience, the. April 14 memorandum is also attached.
Your comments /
concurrences are requested'as soon as.possible but no later than noon, Thursday, April 19, 1979 Attachments-1.
Recorrendations
. ~
2.
Memo, 4/14/79, Bickwit.
to Corm.
l t
cc:
SECY (2)
~._.
PE (2)
EDO bec:
GC:SUBJ' GC: READING (2)'
GC : BIC K'dIT GC:KELLEY GC:EILPERIN:
GC:FITZGERALD -
-168 00 033003/$
[-
CONTACTS:
James L. Kelley~, X-43224 etonhan v.
v41nonin v_h, ace
/
Jar as A. Fit::strald, X-43238 erew = >
.. G.C.,
Bi..c kwi.t : sm.. c g.g7 q ur.>-
.14A.GC D... s.,
ww meu u, m nru aus
- o........-=,.--........-...->i.
RECOMMENDATIONS 1.
Uniform Commission Policy.
Under the regulations, decisions to withhold or release staff-level documents are made by staff offices, subject to an appeal to the EDO.
Commission office papers are reviewed by Com-mission offices, subject to appeal to the Commission itself.
In the circumstances of this case we think there should be a uniform Commission policy on release of all TMI documents.
2.
Procedure for Review.
Because of the likely bulk of these documents, we do not think that the Commissioners themselves should seek t-review them all, page by page.
Rather, we think that the usual procedures-specified in Part 9 of the regulations should be employed.
We favor employing the usual Part 9 pro-cedures with the caveat that if a particular office, such as the Division of Operating Reactors, is inun-dated with other tasks, then that office's FOIA respon-sibilities should be shunted to a less burdened office.
3.
Policy Guidance.
We think that the Commission should be as forthcoming as it can in disclosing TMI-related documents, subject to other overriding interests.
The most important of these interests, as we see it, is to insure that the investigations now in progress or to begin in the near future not be compromised.
Exemp-tion 7 can, of course, serve this purpose where the requested records are " compiled for law enforcement proceedings."
We suggest a fairly narrow reading of this exemption along the following lines:
(a) only records actually produced or gathered for the inves-tigations should be considered within the scope of the exemption, and (b) these records should be withheld (even if the exemption technically applies) only if their release is likely to impede the progress of the investigation.
Examples of records within this rubric would be interviews, preliminary reports and drafts of conclusicns and recommendations, and communications among investigators and their superiors.
(It is pos-sible that much of this information could later be disclosed when the investigation is completed.)
Exemption 5 can be applied to certain investigative documents which are not being compiled specifically for law enforcement purposes, under the usual Exemption 5 doctrines discussed above.
Again, we would urge that 168 050
2 2
only records produced or gathered for the investiga-tions be considered for withholding and that the exemp-tion not be used unless the investigation would other-wise be impeded.
Exemption 5 is alse available to pro-tect from disclosure certain documerts which are not investigation-related, such as pre decisional memoranda.
We recommend, however, that in view of the sensitivity of this matter, this exemption be applied sparingly.
Only where disclosure might result in demonstrable harm to the ability of the agency to conduct its business and reach decisions should this application of Exemp-tion 5 be utilised.
These principles as they relate to investigative naterial can be applied at this time by the offices now actively conducting investigations, viz., I&E and MRR.
For documents now being collected in anticipation of the Commission's full-scale investigation of TMI, we suggest that the Director of CIA be given the respon-sibility of FOIA review based upon the Ccanission's guidance.
We recommend that this review function not extend to documents beyond those actually assembled for the Commission investigation.
s sumusupp 168 051