ML19350D553
| ML19350D553 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Indian Point  |
| Issue date: | 04/08/1981 |
| From: | Chilk S NRC OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY (SECY) |
| To: | Holt R NEW YORK UNIV., NEW YORK, NY |
| References | |
| FOIA-80-578, FOIA-81-A-1 NUDOCS 8104160681 | |
| Download: ML19350D553 (5) | |
Text
N n, 0
V o
UNITED STATES
)e
['
g NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION E
WASHINGTON D.C. 20%4 g og April 8, 1981
+
[ q k ' f'=j z
orrecc or na SECRETARY APR 0 91981*
3
~
us.><g y Robert R. Holt, Ph.D New York University RE: FOIA 80-578 M
m Department of Psychology 81-A-1 6 Washington Place, 4th Floor New York, NY 10003
Dear Dr. Holt:
This letter is in response to your February 18, 1981 Freedom of Information Act appeal of a denial of your request for records relating to the report of the Task Force on Interim Operation of Indian Point.
The Commission has determined that the documents in question are exempt from mandatory public disclosure under Exemption 5 and should be withheld because disclosure of this information about a proceeding of extreme sensitivity would adversely affect the deliberative process and inhibit the free flow of information between Commissioners and their staffs.
5 U.S.C.
552(b)(5), 10 CFR 9.5(a)(5).
The Commission recognizes that the public is interested in the Indian Point matter and it continues to be a matter of great concern not only to the public but in the NRC.
However, the Commission believes that this public interest is outweighed by the need for candid and complete deliberations among the Commissioners, between them and their respective staffs and their principal advisors - deliberations which would be impeded if subject to full disclosure.
The documents subject to this appeal are being withheld in their entirety, based upon the following reasoning (please refer to the numbered list of documents at Appendix B):
i Document #1.
" June 25, 1980 memo to Commissioner Bradford from Tom Gibbon re: Indian Point."
Document #14.
" Undated note to Commissioner Gilinsky from John Austin (mistakenly attributed to Bill Manning in initial response) re: Task Force Euport."
These documents are memoranda to individual Commissioners from their assistants containing summaries and analyses of selected portions of the Task Force Report.
The disclosure of the advice and opinions contained in the documents could interfere with the deliberative and 1
8104160 @
S 2
consultative process ongoing among Commissioners and their staf f.
The factual material included was selected and sunmarized in such a manner that disclosure of it too would interfere with the Commission's internal deliberative process.
In any event, all of the factual information in the documents is already part of the public record through the Task Force Report.
These memoranda are therefore exempt from disclosure and are withheld under Exemption 5.
See Montrose Chemical Corg.
- v. Train, 491 F.2d 63 (D.C. Cir. 1974).
Document #2.
" July 11, 1980 note to Commissioner Gilinsky from Bill Manning re: Interim Operations."
Document #3.
" July 16, 1980 note to Commissioner Gilinsky from Bill Manning re: Interim Operations."
These notes to a Commissioner from his legal assistant are exempt as part of the deliberative process, the disclosure of which would inhibit dae free flow of advice, opinions and recommendations.
Any factual material in these notes is inextricably intertwined with analysis and recommendations or may not be separated from the underlying context without distortion.
Disclosure is therefore not in the public interest.
See EPA v. Mink, 410 U.S.
73, 91 (1973); Mead Data Cent.,
Inc. v.
U.S.
Department of Air Force, 575 F.
2d 932, 935 (1978).
Document #4.
" July 21, 1980 memo to Commission Assistants from Bill Manning re: Draft Order."
Document #6.
" July 25, 1980 memo to the Commissioners from Commissioner Bradford re: Indian Point."
l Document #8.
" September 23, 1980 memo to Commissioner Gilinsky from Bill Manning re: Draft Order."
l Document #12.
" November 25, 1980 note to Commissioner Gilinsky from Bill Manning re: Draft Order."
Document 13.
" November 26, 1980 note to Commissioner Gilinsky from Bill Manning re: Draft Order."
l l
l l
l L_
3 These documents are memoranda among Commissioners, among their legal assistanta, or between a Commissioner and his legal assistant, and concern the actual development of die Indian Point Order issued in January 8, 1981.
They consist entirely of pre-decisional advice, re-commendations, and opinions and are exempt from mandatory disclosure, for reasons described above, under Exemption 5.
Document #5.
" July 25, 1980 Draft of Commissioner Gilinsky's separate views."
Document #9.
" September 30, 1980 memo to the Commissioners from Commissioner Gilinsky re: Draft Order."
Document #10.
" November 5, 1960 memo to Samuel Chilk from Bill Manning re: Draft Order."
Document #15.
" Undated draft of Commissioner Gilinsky's Questions for the Appeal Board."
These documents are draf t versions of portions of the Indian Point Order.
These proposals for Commission consideration reflect the views of the Commissioners themselves and their assistants on how the NRC should address this matter.
The matter was and continues to be one of great sensitivity within the Commission and, for that reason, the Commission believes dhat the public interest in understanding the deliberations of the Commission is outweighed by the need for confidentiality as described above.
These documents are withheld under Exemption 5.
All of the factual matter is already in the public record through the Task Force Report.
Document 7.
" August 1, 1980 memo to Samuel Chilk from Roger Tweed re: Indian Point."
This memorandum contains the opinions of dbe Commissioners regarding the draf ting of the Indian Point Order and outlines internal procedures which reflect the Commission's deliberative process.
It is withheld under Exemption 5 for the reasons described above.
i J
4 Document #11.
" November 23, 1980 handwritten notes of Bill Manning re: Draft Order."
This note contains the audior's summary and analysis of a telephone conversation with Joan Holt for his superior regarding the Indian Point Order and Task Force report.
The analysis is withheld under Exemption 5 for the reason described above.
Any factual material in inextricably intertwined with the analysis and therefore can not be reasonably segregated.
This letter is the final action of the Commission for which judicial review is available in a district court of the United States in the district in which you reside or have your principal place of business, in which the records are located, or in the District of Columbia.
$ncerelf 0
uu>h
/ SamuelJ.(Chilk Secretary of the Commission Attachments:
Appendix B - List of Documents.
i i
I I
Re:
F01A-80-578 APPENDIX B 1.
6/25/80 Memo from Tom Gibbon to Commissioner Bradford Re: Indian Point 2.
~ 7/11/80 Note from Bill Manning to Commissioner Gilinsky Re: Interim Operations 3.
7/16/80 Note from Bill Manning to Commissioner Gi.linsky Rei Interim Operations 4.
7/21/80 Memo from Manning to Commission Assistants Re: Draft Order
~
5.
7/25/80 Draft of Commissioner Gilinsky's separa'te views
~
6.
7/25/80 Memo from Bradford to Commissioners Re:
Indian Point 7.
8/1/80 Memo from Roger Tweed to Samuel Chilk R.e:
In,dian Point 8.
9/23/80 Memo from Bill Manning to Commissioner Gilinsky Re: Draft Order 9.
9/30/80 Memo from Ccmmissioner Gilinsky to Commissioners Re: Draf t Order 10.
11/5/80 Memo from Bill Manning to Samuel Chilk Re:
Draft Order l
11.
11/23/B0 Bill Manning's handwritten notes Re:
l Draft Order 12.
11/25/80 Note from Manning to Commissioner Gilinsky Re: Draft Order 13.
11/26/80 Note from Manning to Commissioner Gilinsky Re: Draft Order 14.
Undated Note from Bill Manning to Commissioner Gilinsky Re: Comments on Task Force Report 15.
Undated Draft - Gilinsky questions to the Appeal Board a
l l
. _..