ML19294B509

From kanterella
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Responds to Appeal Re Denial of FOIA Request for NRC Rept Concerning Investigation of Alleged Security Breaches.Nrc & FBI Conclude That Info Release Would Jeopardize Enforcement Actions.Document Withheld (Ref FOIA Exemption 7)
ML19294B509
Person / Time
Site: Quad Cities  Constellation icon.png
Issue date: 02/26/1980
From: Dircks W
NRC OFFICE OF NUCLEAR MATERIAL SAFETY & SAFEGUARDS (NMSS)
To: Runningen R
AFFILIATION NOT ASSIGNED
References
FOIA-79-514, FOIA-80-A-2 NUDOCS 8003040367
Download: ML19294B509 (1)


Text

.

blU L8 OUMI fL'

g.., q

+$o u,

. lI s

E y i v [%j NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION YALCMr 4M/LL>

UNITED STATES j

E WASHINGTON, D. C. 20555 t

/8

\\.,

February 26, 1980 Mr. Roger Rur.ningen Bureau Chief Small Newspapers 1063 National Press Building IN RESPONSE REFER Washington, DC 20045 TO F01A-80-A-2

Dear Mr. Runningen:

This is in response to your letter dated January 20, 1980, appealing Mr.

J. M. Felton's January 2,1980, initial denial of your Freedom of Information Act (F0IA) request of November 30, 1979.

That request sought the Nuclear Regulatory Commission's report on its investigation of alleged security breaches at Commonwealth Edison's nuclear power plant at Cordova, Illinois.

I have reviewed the record in this case relevant to the withheld document to which your appeal is directed.

I have determined, for the reasons stated in Mr. Felton's January 2,1980 letter, that the document previously denied is exempt from compelled disclosure under exemption (7)(A) of the Freedom of Information Act (5 U.S.C. 552(b)(7)(A)) and 10 CFR 9.5(a)(7)(i) of the Cormiission's regulations.

Your appeal, therefore, is denied.

In connection with your November 30, 1979, initial request, NRC contacted the FBI's Springfield, Illinois office for their withholding determinatic't.

However, in connection with your January 20, 1980 appeal letter NRC contacted the FBI Headquarter's staff and they continue to request that NRC withhold the document from disclosure because its release would interfere with an ongoing investigation.

In view of these circumstances, I have determined that production of the NRC document would interfere with enforcement proceedings and, accordingly, that the document is exempt from public disclosure.

This determination is a final agency action.

As set forth in the Fr _ dom of Information Act (5 U.S.C. 552(a)(4)(B)), judicial review of this decision is available in a district court of the United States in either the district in which you reside, have your principal place of business, or in the District of Columbia.

Sincerely, b.

William. Dircks Acting Executive Director for Operations i

8003040 hQ}