Response to Aslab Questions Directed to NRC at 830119 Oral Argument.Govt May Introduce Into Evidence Informer Evidence or Call Informer to Testify W/O Disclosing Identity. Certificate of Svc EnclML20028F178 |
Person / Time |
---|
Site: |
Comanche Peak ![Luminant icon.png](/w/images/d/d7/Luminant_icon.png) |
---|
Issue date: |
01/26/1983 |
---|
From: |
Ellis J Citizens Association for Sound Energy |
---|
To: |
|
---|
References |
---|
NUDOCS 8301310215 |
Download: ML20028F178 (9) |
|
|
---|
Category:LEGAL TRANSCRIPTS & ORDERS & PLEADINGS
MONTHYEARML20196G4021999-06-18018 June 1999 Comment on FRN Re Rev of NRC Enforcement Policy NUREG-1600, Rev 1 & Amend of 10CFR55.49.Concurs with Need to Provide Examples That May Be Used as Guidance in Determining Appropriate Severity Level for Violations as Listed ML20206H1881999-05-0606 May 1999 Exemption from Requirements of 10CFR50,App K Re ECCS Evaluation Models. Commission Grants Licensee Exemption ML20206M5111999-04-30030 April 1999 Comment Supporting Draft RG DG-1083 Re Content of UFSAR IAW 10CFR50.71(e). Recommends That Listed Approach Be Adopted for Changes to Documents Incorporated by Ref CY-99-007, Comment Supporting Proposed Changes to Improve Insp & Assessment Processes for Overseeing Commercial Nuclear Industry That Were Published in Fr on 990122 & in SECY-99-0071999-02-22022 February 1999 Comment Supporting Proposed Changes to Improve Insp & Assessment Processes for Overseeing Commercial Nuclear Industry That Were Published in Fr on 990122 & in SECY-99-007 TXX-9825, Comment Endorsing NEI Comments on Proposed Rulemaking to 10CFR50.65, Requirements for Monitoring Effectiveness at Npps1998-12-14014 December 1998 Comment Endorsing NEI Comments on Proposed Rulemaking to 10CFR50.65, Requirements for Monitoring Effectiveness at Npps ML20154C4101998-09-30030 September 1998 Comment Re Proposed Rule 10CFR50 Re Reporting Requirements for Nuclear Power Reactors.Comanche Peak Electric Station Endorses NEI Comment Ltr & Agrees with NEI Recommendations & Rationale ML20216E1051998-04-0707 April 1998 Comment Supporting Draft RG DG-1029 Titled Guidelines for Evaluating Electromagnetic & Radio-Frequency Interference in Safety-related Instrumentation & Control Sys ML20217H3611998-03-26026 March 1998 Comment Opposing Draft GL 97-XX, Lab Testing of Nuclear Grade Charcoal, Issued on 980225.Advises That There Will Be Addl Implementation Costs ML20198Q4851998-01-16016 January 1998 Comment Opposing PRM 50-63A by P Crane That Requests NRC Amend Regulations Re Emergency Planning to Require Consideration of Sheltering,Evacuation & Prophylactic Use of Potassium Iodide for General Public ML20211A4871997-09-12012 September 1997 Changes Submittal Date of Response to NRC RAI Re Proposed CPSES risk-informed Inservice Testing Program & Comments on NRC Draft PRA Documents ML20149L0311997-07-21021 July 1997 Comment on Draft Guides DG-1048,DG-1049 & DG-1050.Error Identified in Last Line of DG-1050,item 1.3 of Section Value/Impact Statement.Rev 30 Should Be Rev 11 ML20140A4871997-05-27027 May 1997 Comment Opposing Proposed Rule Re Safety Conscious Work Environ.Util Agrees W/Nuclear Energy Inst Comment Ltr ML20133G5411996-12-0505 December 1996 Transcript of 961205 Meeting in Arlington,Tx Re Comanche Peak Thermo-Lag Fire Barriers. Pp 1-111 ML20135B7881996-11-29029 November 1996 Order Approving Corporate Restructuring of TU to Facilitate Acquistion of Enserch Corp ML20128M8011996-10-0303 October 1996 Comment Opposing Proposed NRC Generic Communication, Primary Water Stress Corrosion Cracking of Control Rod Drive Mechanism & Other Vessel Head Penetrations ML20097D7321996-02-0909 February 1996 Comment Opposing Petition for Rulemaking PRM-50-63 Re CPSES Request for Amend to Its Regulations Dealing W/Emergency Planning to Include Requirement That Emergency Planning Protective Actions for General Public Include Listed Info ML20094Q6421995-11-28028 November 1995 Comment Supporting Petition for RM PRM-50-62 Re Amend to Regulation Re QAPs Permitting NPP Licensees to Change Quality Program Described in SAR W/O NRC Prior Approval If Changes Do Not Potentially Degrade Safety or Change TSs ML20094H4801995-11-0808 November 1995 Comment Supporting Nuclear Energy Inst Comments on Proposed Rules 10CFR60,72,73 & 75 Re Safeguards for Spent Nuclear Fuel or high-level Radwaste ML20091M6441995-08-25025 August 1995 Comment Opposing Proposed Rule Re Review of Revised NRC SALP Program.Believes That NRC Should Reconsider Need for Ipap or SALP in Light of Redundancy ML20086M7921995-07-0707 July 1995 Comment Supporting Proposed GL Process for Changes to Security Plan Without Prior NRC Approval ML20084A0181995-05-19019 May 1995 Comment Suporting Proposed Rule 10CFR50 Re Containment Leakage Testing.Supports NEI Comments ML20077M7311994-12-30030 December 1994 Comments Opposing Proposed Rule 10CFR50 Re Shutdown & Low Power Operations for Nuclear Power Reactors ML20077L8711994-12-22022 December 1994 Comment Supporting Proposed Rule 10CFR50,55 & 73 Re Reduction of Reporting Requirements Imposed on NRC Licensees ML20073B6731994-09-19019 September 1994 Affidavit of Cl Terry Re License Amend Request 94-015 ML20073B6951994-09-19019 September 1994 Affidavit of Cl Terry Authorizing Signing & Filing W/Nrc OL Amend Request 94-016 ML20058E0561993-11-10010 November 1993 Comment on Proposed Rule Re Staff Meetings Open to Public. Believes That NRC Has Done Well in Commitment to Provide Public W/Fullest Practical Access to Its Activities ML20056G3351993-08-27027 August 1993 Comment Opposing Proposed Rule 10CFR2 Re Review of 10CFR2.206 Process ML20045D8321993-06-11011 June 1993 Comment Supporting Proposed Rules 10CFR50 & 54, FSAR Update Submittals. ML20044F3271993-05-21021 May 1993 Comments on Draft NRC Insp Procedure 38703, Commercial Grade Procurement Insp, Fr Vol 58,Number 52.NRC Should Use EPRI Definitions for Critical Characteristics ML20056C0831993-03-19019 March 1993 Texas Utils Electric Co Response to Petitioners Motion to Stay Issuance of Full Power License.* Licensee Urges NRC to Reject Petitioners Motion & to Deny Petitioners Appeal of 921215 Order.Motion Should Be Denied.W/Certificate of Svc ML20056C1881993-03-17017 March 1993 Order.* Directs Util to Respond to Motion by COB 930319 & NRC to Respond by COB 930322.W/Certificate of Svc.Served on 930317 ML20128D9651993-02-0303 February 1993 Memorandum & Order.* Stay Request Filed by Petitioners Denied.W/Certificate of Svc.Served on 930203 ML20128F6221993-02-0303 February 1993 Transcript of 930203 Affirmation/Discussion & Vote Public Meeting in Rockville,Md.Pp 1-2.Related Info Encl ML20128D3391993-02-0202 February 1993 Emergency Motion to Stay Issuance of low-power Ol.* Petitioners Specific Requests Listed.W/Certificate of Svc ML20128D4651993-02-0202 February 1993 Texas Utils Electric Co Response to Emergency Motion to Stay Issuance of low-power Ol.* Petitioner Request Should Be Denied Based on Failure to Meet Heavy Burden Imposed on Party.W/Certificate of Svc ML20128D3461993-01-29029 January 1993 NRC Staff Notification of Issuance of OL for Facility.* Low Power License May Be Issued by 930201.W/Certificate of Svc ML20128D6321993-01-29029 January 1993 Memorandum & Order.* Denies Citizens for Fair Util Regulation for Fr Notice Hearing on Proposed Issuance of OL for Facility.W/Certificate of Svc.Served on 930129 ML20127L9321993-01-26026 January 1993 Affidavit of Re Architzel Re Thermo-Lag Installation at Testing for Unit 2.* Statement of Prof Qualifications Encl ML20128D6111993-01-26026 January 1993 Joint Affidavit of I Barnes & Ft Grubelich Re Borg-Warner Check Valves.* Discusses Issues Re Borg-Warner Check Valves Raised by Cfur & Adequacy of Actions Taken by TU Electric ML20127L9181993-01-26026 January 1993 NRC Staff Reply to Cfur Request for Publication of Proposed Action Re Licensing of Unit 2.* Cfur Request That Notice Re Licensing of Unit 2 Be Published Permitting Parties to Request Hearings Should Be Denied ML20127L9661993-01-26026 January 1993 Affidavit of Rl Pettis Re Borg-Warner Check Valves.* Statement of Prof Qualifications & Certificate of Svc Encl ML20127L9091993-01-25025 January 1993 Tx Util Electric Response to Citizens for Fair Util Regulation Request of 930113.* Request Fails to Raise Worthy Issue & Should Be Denied.W/Certificate of Svc ML20127L8891993-01-21021 January 1993 Order.* License Should File Response to Citizens for Fair Util Regulation Ltr Requesting That Commission Issue Fr Notice Providing for Opportunity for Hearing Re Issuance of OL by 930125.W/Certificate of Svc.Served on 930122 ML20127G9191993-01-19019 January 1993 Order.* Grants Petitioners Extension of Time Until 930122 to File Brief.Replies to Petitioners Brief Shall Be Filed on or Before 930208.W/Certificate of Svc.Served on 930119 ML20127G9441993-01-19019 January 1993 TU Electric Brief in Opposition to Petitioners Appeal of ASLB Memorandum & Order.* Requests That Petitioners Appeal Be Denied & Licensing Board 921215 Memorandum & Order Be Affirmed.W/Certificate of Svc ML20127G8041993-01-15015 January 1993 NRC Staff Response to Appeal of Licensing Board Decision Denying Petition for Leave to Intervene & Request for Hearing Filed by Bi & Di Orr.* Board 921215 Decision Should Be Upheld.Certificate of Svc Encl ML20127G7451993-01-14014 January 1993 NRC Staff Response to Motion of Petitioners RM Dow & SL Dow, (Disposable Workers of Comanche Peak Steam Electric Station),For Leave to File Out of Time & Request for Extension of Time to File Brief.* W/Certificate of Svc ML20127G7941993-01-12012 January 1993 Opposition of TU Electric to Motion for Leave to File Out of Time & Request for Extension of Time to File Brief by SL Dow (Disposable Workers of Comanche Peak Steam Electric Station) & RM Dow.* W/Certificate of Svc ML20127A5931993-01-0808 January 1993 Brief in Support of Petitioner Notice of Appeal.Aslb Erred by Not Admitting Petitioner Contention & Action Should Be Reversed.W/Certificate of Svc ML20127A6371993-01-0707 January 1993 Notice of Appeal.* Appeal Submitted Due to 921215 Memo Denying Petitioner Motion for Rehearing & Petition for Intervention & Request for Hearings.Proceedings Were Terminated by Aslb.W/Certificate of Svc 1999-06-18
[Table view] Category:OTHER LEGAL DOCUMENT
MONTHYEARML20128D3461993-01-29029 January 1993 NRC Staff Notification of Issuance of OL for Facility.* Low Power License May Be Issued by 930201.W/Certificate of Svc ML20127A5931993-01-0808 January 1993 Brief in Support of Petitioner Notice of Appeal.Aslb Erred by Not Admitting Petitioner Contention & Action Should Be Reversed.W/Certificate of Svc ML20127A6371993-01-0707 January 1993 Notice of Appeal.* Appeal Submitted Due to 921215 Memo Denying Petitioner Motion for Rehearing & Petition for Intervention & Request for Hearings.Proceedings Were Terminated by Aslb.W/Certificate of Svc ML20127A7461992-12-30030 December 1992 Appeal of ASLB Memorandum & Order.* Bi Orr & Di Orr Filed Notice of Appeal of Subj Memorandum & Order Issued by Board on 921215 ML20126F7241992-12-26026 December 1992 Petitioner Notice of Change of Address & Telephone Number.* W/Certificate of Svc ML20127M4341992-11-17017 November 1992 Notification of Addl Evidence Supporting Petition to Intervene Filed by B Orr,D Orr,J Macktal & Hasan.* Submits Newly Obtained Evidence Not Available to Petitioners as of 921005.Certificate of Svc Encl ML20101R3371992-07-13013 July 1992 Response to Tuec to Comments of Cajun Electric Power Cooperative,Inc ML20141M1031992-03-25025 March 1992 Comments of Cap Rock Electric Cooperative,Inc Re Significant Changes in Activity of Licensee Texas Utilities Electric Co That Warrant Antritrust Review Before Issuance of Ol ML20091D5351992-03-25025 March 1992 Comments of Cajun Electric Power Cooperative,Inc on Antitrust Info Filed by Texas Utilities Electric Co Per Reg Guide 9.3 ML20090C8711992-02-27027 February 1992 Change of Address & Telephone Number.* Informs All Parties to Action That Address & Telephone Number of Disposable Workers of Comanche Peak Steam Electric Station Has Been Changed as Listed ML20099E4851990-01-30030 January 1990 Amended Agreement Between Tex-LA Electric Cooperative of Tx, Inc & Texas Utils Electric Co ML20248J3801989-10-15015 October 1989 Declaration of L Burnam.* Discusses Settlement Awarded to Whistleblower Witnesses for Case ML20248J3471989-10-15015 October 1989 Declaration of B Brink.* Discusses Settlement Awarded to Whistleblower Witnesses for Case ML20248D5831989-08-0202 August 1989 Praecipe.* Notifies of New Address for Kohn,Kohn & Colapinto in Washington,Dc ML20236B7741989-03-10010 March 1989 Suppl to Comments & Reply Comments of Cap Rock Electric Cooperative,Inc.Info Re Util Need for Antitrust Review at OL Stage Encl ML20207C8021988-08-0909 August 1988 Comments of Cap Rock Electric Cooperative,Inc Re Significant Changes in Licensee Activity That Warrant Antitrust Review at OL Stage ML20151A5921988-07-12012 July 1988 Notice of Withdrawal.* Withdrawal as Attys of Record for Petitioners Citizens for Fair Util Regulation,Greater Fort Worth Sierra Club & Comanche Peak Citizens Audit Noted. Search for Replacement Counsel Unsuccessful ML20150E3051988-07-11011 July 1988 Notice of Withdrawal W/O Prejudice.* Withdraws J Doe as Potential Intervenor in Proceedings.W/Certificate of Svc ML20118B1951988-07-0505 July 1988 Agreement Between Brazos Electric Power Cooperative,Inc & Texas Utilities Electric Co Dtd 880705.W/Exhibits J Through O ML20154H6391988-05-20020 May 1988 Fr Notice (880601 Prehearing Conference).* Public Prehearing Conference Previously Scheduled for 880511 Rescheduled to 880601 in Dallas,Tx.Served on 880520 ML20154E5251988-05-0303 May 1988 Applicant Eleventh Progress Rept.* Rept Covers Period Mar-Apr 1988,per ASLB 860606 Order.Next Rept Will Be Submitted by 880630.W/Certificate of Svc.Related Correspondence ML20151Y5311988-05-0202 May 1988 Fr Notice (880511 Prehearing Conference).* Public Prehearing Conference for Conducting Oral Argument for Two Proceedings Re Plant Scheduled on 880511 in Dallas,Tx.Served on 880503 ML20151Y6031988-04-28028 April 1988 Case Identification of Piping/Pipe Support Issues.* Case Intends to Litigate Inadequacy of Collective Significance Rept,Collective Evaluation Rept,Root Cause Evaluation Repts Re Piping/Pipe Support Issues.Certificate of Svc Encl ML20151T7611988-04-26026 April 1988 Answers to Board 14 Questions Re Action Plan Results Rept (Memo;Proposed Memo of 860416) Regarding Action Plan Results Rept VII.a.9.* Answers Submitted Per Board 860414 Memorandum;Proposed Memorandum & Order.W/Certificate of Svc ML20151P9341988-04-22022 April 1988 Notice of Availability of Collective Significance Rept & Working Files.* Working Files for Collective Significance Rept Available at Stated Address.Certificate of Svc Encl. Related Correspondence ML20151P8301988-04-21021 April 1988 Notice of Availability of Issue Specific Action Plan Isap VII.a.9 Results Rept Working Files.* Working Files Available for Copying at Site.Certificate of Svc Encl.Related Correspondence ML20151P3361988-04-21021 April 1988 Answers to ASLB 14 Questions (Memo;Proposed Memo of 880414) Re Action Plan Results Report I.d.1.* Action Plan Results Rept I.d.1, QC Inspector Qualifications Encl.W/Certificate of Svc ML20148K2101988-03-28028 March 1988 Answers to ASLB 14 Questions (Memo;Proposed Memo of 860414) Re Action Plan Results Rept VII.b.3.* Certificate of Svc Encl ML20148G2481988-03-24024 March 1988 NRC Staff 10th Annual Progress Rept & Annotated Bibliography.* List of NRC Documents to Applicants & Certificate of Svc Encl ML20150D0501988-03-14014 March 1988 Case Tenth Progress Rept.* Provides Tenth Progress Rept,Per Board 860606 Memorandum & Order.Certificate of Svc Encl ML20196H9561988-03-10010 March 1988 Answers to Board 14 Questions (Memo;Proposed Memo of 860414) Re Action Plan Results Rept Ii.D.* Answers to Rept Re Control Room Ceiling.Supporting Documentation & Certificate of Svc Encl ML20147H8391988-03-0404 March 1988 Applicant Tenth Progress Rept.* Progress Rept Covers Period of 871225-880229,per Board 860606 Memorandum & Order.Next Rept Will Be Issued on 880429.W/Certificate of Svc ML20196G1421988-03-0303 March 1988 Notice of Availability.* Documents Ref in Project Status Rept Available for Review & Will Be Placed in Lpdr & Computer Link Between Lpdr & Util Data Base Established. Certificate of Svc Encl.Related Correspondence ML20147D7321988-03-0101 March 1988 Answers to Board 14 Questions (Memo;Proposed Memo of 860414) Re Action Plan Results Rept Vii.C.* Responses Provided to Action Plan Vii.C Re Const Reinsp/Documentation Review Plan. Supporting Documentation & Certificate of Svc Encl ML20149L9761988-02-19019 February 1988 Notice of Availability.* Rev 0 to Project Status Rept Re Instrumentation & Controls & Documents Ref in Rept Available for Review,Per ASLB Memorandum & Order .W/Certificate of Svc.Related Correspondence ML20149L9721988-02-19019 February 1988 Notice of Availability.* Rev 0 to Listed Project Status Rept (Psr) & Documents Ref in Psr Available for Review,Per ASLB Memorandum & Order .W/Certificate of Svc.Related Correspondence ML20149L9381988-02-19019 February 1988 Notice of Availability.* Notifies That Listed Project Status Repts (Psr) & Documents Ref in Such Psrs Available for Review.Certificate of Svc Encl.Related Correspondence ML20106B1601988-02-12012 February 1988 Agreement Between Texas Municipal Power Agency & Texas Utilities Electric Co Dtd 880212.W/Exhibits E & I Through M ML20196D2361988-02-10010 February 1988 Submits Notice of Change of Address & Requests That All Mail & Svc Lists Be Revised Accordingly.Certificate of Svc Encl IR 07100101/20120311988-02-0303 February 1988 NRC Staff Ninth Progress Rept & Annotated Bibliography.* Forwards Annotated Bibliography Rept of All NRC Documents to Applicants & Intervenors Re Project Indexed During 871101-1231.W/Certificate of Svc ML20148H9291988-01-26026 January 1988 Notice of Availability of Collective Evaluation Rept & Working Files.* Per Established Procedure & ASLB 871118 Memorandum & Order,Util Makes Working Files Available for Insp.Certificate of Svc Encl.Related Correspondence ML20148C9791988-01-21021 January 1988 Notice of Availability of Results Repts & Working Files.* Advises Az Roisman That Comanche Peak Response Team Senior Review Team Approved & Published Issue Specific Action Plans I.d.1 & VII.b.3.W/Certificate of Svc.Related Correspondence ML20195J0801988-01-20020 January 1988 Answers to ASLB 14 Questions (Memo;Proposed Memo of 860414) Re Action Plan Results Rept V.B.* Answers to Questions Re Action Plan V.B, Shortening of Anchor Bolts. Certificate of Svc Encl ML20195J0661988-01-20020 January 1988 Notice of Availability.* Notice of Project Status Rept Rev 0 to Equipment Qualification & Ref Documents in Rept Available for Review.Certificate of Svc Encl.Related Correspondence ML20147D7351988-01-15015 January 1988 Notice of Appearance.* RM Fillmore Will Appear as Counsel for Util in Proceeding.Certificate of Svc Encl ML20147D6001988-01-15015 January 1988 Notice of Appearance.* RM Fillmore Entered Appearance Re Facility.Certificate of Svc Encl ML20147B8711988-01-14014 January 1988 Supplemental Notice of Availability of Results Rept & Working Files.* Working Files of Results Rept Vii.C Will Be Made Available Onsite Upon 48 H Notice of Intention to Inspect.W/Certificate of Svc.Related Correspondence ML20147D6721988-01-12012 January 1988 Case Progress Rept.* Submits Progress Rept Per Board 860606 Memorandum & Order.Case Interested in Util Filing W/Security Exchange Commission & Reported Settlement W/Gibbs & Hill. Newspaper Articles Encl.W/Certificate of Svc ML20147B9671988-01-0707 January 1988 NRC Staff Eighth Progress Rept & Annotated Bibliography.* Progress Rept in Response to ASLB 860606 Order.W/ Certificate of Svc ML20238D0741987-12-30030 December 1987 Applicant Ninth Progress Rept.* Progress Rept Covers Period of 871026-1225 Submitted Per Board 860606 Memorandum & Order (Progress Rept & Notice of Available Documents). Next Rept Will Be Issued on 880229.W/Certificate of Svc 1993-01-08
[Table view] |
Text
o
/
o 00LNETED U3NPI UNITED STATES OF AMERICA NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION -
, ,Julp Before the Atomic Safety and Licensing Appeal Board $ kf 'T '"
In the Matter of: X X
APPLICATION OF TEXAS UTILITIES X GENERATING COMPANY, ET AL., FOR X Docket Nos. 50-445 AN OPERATING LICENSE FOR X and 50-446 COMANCHE PEAK STEAM ELECTRIC X STATION UNITS #1 AND #2 (CPSES) X CASE RESPONSE TO APPEALS BOARD QUESTION DIRECTED TO NRC STAFF ON JANUARY 19, 1983 Intervenor CASE submits the following memorandum in response to two questions the Atomic Safety and Licensing Appeals Board
("Apptals Board") directed to the Staff >l the Nuclear Regulatory Commission ("NRC" or " Commission") at oral argument on January 19, 1983.
Specifically, this memorandum outlines authority for the principle that without disclosing the identity of its informer or source, the government may introduce into evidence the informer's evidence or may call the informer himself or herself to testify.
I. BACKGROUND The NRC has explicitly upheld the informer's privilege in its proceedings. In the seminal South Texas case the Appeals Board stated:
The need to protect confidential informants is not an achdemic concern to the NRC. That this is so finds confirmation not only in the Commission's B301310215 830126 PDR ADOCK 05000445 U PDR
- 2 -
regulations...but in Congressional enactments designed specifically to safeguard from retali-ation those who assist the NRC in carrying out its safety responsibilities.1/
Houston Lighting and Power Co. (South Texas Project, Units 1 & 2),
ALAB-639, 13 NRC 469 (1981).
The NRC Staff and Licensing Boards have been given the authority to maintain as confidential the identity of workers who bring safety violations to their attention because frequently these workers suffer harassment and reprisals after raising these concerns.
However, as in all cases in which the informer's privilege is upheld, the Licensing Boards must balance the public interest in protecting the flow of information to the Commission against an individual's or party's right to prepare his case. See Roviaro'v. United States, 353 U.S. 53, 62 (1957). Moreover, once the government asserts the privilege, the party desiring disclosure of the informer's identity i
has the burden of demonstrating entitlement to and need for.the in f o rma tion . In re United States, 565 F.2d 19, 23 (2nd Cir. 1977),
cert, denied, 436 U.S. 962 (1978); United States v. Hansen, 569 F.2d 406 (5th Cir. 1978).
A Licensing Board, just as a court, must look at all the circumstances to make its determination of whether disclosure of an informer's identity is necessary. Among the factors a Licensing Board must consider are:
(1) the position of the informer and his susceptibility to harassment or reprisals;
-l/ See Energy Reorganization Act of 1974, as amended, 9 210, 42 U.S.r. 5 5851 (1980).
3 -
(2) any history cf harassment or retaliation at the siter (3) whether or not the individual requested or demanded confidentiality as a condition of giving information to the NRC; and (4) whether the identity of the informer has already been disclosed and become knc.in to any peraan outside the NRC Staff.
See senerally, Westinghouse Electric Corp. v. City of Burlington, Vermont, 351 F.2d 762 (D . C . Ci r . 1965); Black v. Sheraton Corp.,
564 F.2d 550 (D.C.Cir. 1977); In re_ United States, supra.
For example, a Licensing Board would have much.less reason to protect the identity of a director or top-level manager of a utility or constructor building a nuclear plant than to protect middle-management, tradespersons, construction workers or quality assurance personnel, since it is clear thet top management, by their place in the hierarcty, are much less likely to suffer retaliation or harassment for reporting of safety violations. In fact, such top managers are obliged under 10 CFR Part 21 tc notify the NRC of any facility, activity or basic component supplied to a plant which fails to comply with the Atomic Energy Act or NRC regulations. Al-though the NRC may give such individuals confidentiality, the fact l
l l
l these individuals have a legal obligation to report such deficiencies l is more likely to undercut any basis for retaliation against them by their superiors.
In this case, the Licensing Board correctly and carefully balanced opposing interests in reaching its decision requiring disclosure of names of NRC sources. Licensing Boards in the future must subject each of their cases to this same close examination of
- 4 -
all circumstances and the same careful balancing of conflicting interests. To aid them in such balancing, the courts may use in camera hearings to determine the usefulness to a party of identify-ing a particular witness or the potential harm to a particular wit-ness of publicly disclosing his or her identity. United States v.
Jackson, 384 F.2d 825 (3rd Cir. 1967); Levine, The Use of In Camera Hearings in Ruling on the Informer Privilege, 8 U.Mich.J.L.Ref. 151 (1974). In addition, courts may employ protective orders so that litigants can obtain information useful for cross-examination of a particular confidential witness without jeopardizing that wit-ness' physical safety or job security.
II. COURTS HAVE ADMITTED INFORMERS' TESTIMONY AT TRIAL WITHOUT DISCLOSURE OF THEIR IDENTITIES.
Courts have admitted into evidence at trial testimony of an informer while barring a party's inquiry into that informer's identity. In United States ex rel. Abbott v. Twomey, 460 F.2d 400 (7th Cir. 1972), on en appeal of a conviction for sale of heroin, the court held that a defendant was not denied his constitutional right to confront his accusers by the trial court's refusal to allow questions about an informer-witness' identity and place of business. See also, United States v. Rangel, 534 F.2d 147, 148 (9th Cir. 1976); United States v. Cosby, 500 F.2d 405, 407 (9th Cir. 1974); United States v. Ellis, 468 F.2d 638 (9th Cir. 1972).
Also upheld has been a court's right to bar questions at trial atout an informer-witness' address when the information solicited by such questions is not likely to bear on the witness'
5 -
credibility. United States v. Daddano, 432 F.2d 1119 (7 th Cir.
1970), cert. denied, 402 U.S. 905 (1971); United States v. Lawler, 413 F.2d 622 (7th Cir. 1969); United States v. Teller, 412 F.2d 374 (7th Cir. 1969), cert. denied, 402 U.S. 949 (1971).
Similarly, courts have been upueld in rulings that government witnesses may testify at trial about the substance of what informers told them without identifying the informers. In United States v.
Brooks, 477 F.2d 453 (5th Cir. 1973), the defendant defended against charges of possession with intent to distribute and distribution of heroin by claiming he was entrapped by the police. On the appeal of his conviction on these charges it was held that the trial court had not erred in admitting into evidence testimony of a government witness that several unnamed informants had told him defendant had been involved in other drug transactions. See also, United States
- v. Bell, 506 F.2d 207 (D.C.Cir. 1974), in which the informer's l f
privilege was upheld when a government witness testified at trial f that an informer'had told him the defendant participated in other drug transactions in rebuttal to a self-serving statement of defen-dant that he was unfamiliar with drugs; Mitrovich v. United States, 15 F.2d 163 (9th Cir. 1926) (held, on review of conviction for j violation of National Prohibition Act, that where government wit-ness testified that the premises at which intoxicating liquor was found were pointed out to him by informer, it was not error for trial court to sustain an objection to a question asking for iden-tification of witness); McInes v. United States, 62 F.2d 180 (9th Cir.), cert. denied, 288 U.S. 616 (1932).
7 -
420 U.S. 910 (1975); Davis v. Beto, 423 F.2d 633 (5th Cir. 1970). [
Similarly, courts, in determining whether there exists probable cause for an arrest or search, routinely consider informers' information, either in the form of an affidavit or hearsay statements communicated to the court through the testimony of police witnesses.
See generally, United States v. Freund, 532 F.2d 501 (5th Cir.),
3ert. sonied, 426 U.S. 923 (1976); United States v. Moreno-Duelna, 524 F.2d 1129 (9th Cir.), cert. denied, 423 U.S. 1035 (1975);
United States v. Hart, 526 F.2d 345 (5th Cir. 1976); Riley v.
United States, 411 F.2d 1146 (9th Cir. 1969), cert. denied, 397 U.S. 906 (1970); Lane v. United States, 321 F.2d 573 (5th Cir.
1963); Buford v. United States, 308 F.2d 804 (5th Cir. 1962).
Both the preliminary hearing stage and the hearing on a motion to suppress are critical stages in a criminal proceeding at which-all of a defendant's due process rights adhere. Therefore, if a court has the authority to uphold the informer's privilege in making its determination regarding probable cause for an arrest or a search, or probable cause to charge a defendant with a criminal act, it cer-tainly has the authority in a civil proceeding to uphold the privi-lege when its ';alancing of opposing interests dictate.
In Summary, CASE believes the authorities cited above demonstrate the Licensing Board's authority to consider evidence 2/ An exception to this rule of nondisclosure is enforced if the informer's information is the essence or core information sup-porting probable cause and is not corroborated by any independent evidence. United States v. Manley, supra; United States v. Com-missiong, 429 F.2d 834, 838-39 (2nd Cir. 1970).
i i
i J
r 8-or testimony of an informer without public disclosure of the informer's identity.
Respectfully submitted, Mrs.) Juanita Ellis, President CASE (Citizens Association for Sound Energy) 1426 S. Polk Dallas, Texas 75224 214/946-9446
/ '
Dated: January 26, 1983
. \
t i
1 IINITill STATES Of AMTRICA NUCIIAl: HLGill A10RY COtHIS$10N BEFORE THE ATOMIC SAFETY AjiD LICENSING APPEAL BOARD In the Matter of i 1
APPLICATION OF TEXAS UTILITIES I Docket Nos. 50-445 GENERATING COMPANY, ET AL. FOR I and 5L.446 AN OPERATING LICENSE FOR I COMANCHE PEAK STEAM ELECTRIC i STATION UNITS #1 AND'#2 (CPSES) l CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
~
By my signature below, I hereby certify that true and correct copies of the forecoine CASE RESPONSE TO APPEALS BOARD OUESTION DIRECTED TO i NRC STAFF ON JANUARY 19. 1993.
have been sent to the names listed below this 26th day of January , 198_3_
by: Express Mail where indicated by
- and First Class Mail elsewhere.
Administrative Judge Marshall E. Miller Alan S. Rosenthal, Esq. , Chainnan U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Comission Atomic Safety and Licensing Appeal Board Atomic Safety and Licensing Board U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D. C. 20555 Washington, D. C. 20555 Dr. Kenneth A. McCollom, Dean Dr. W. Reed Johnson, Member Division of Engineering, Architecture, Atomic Safety and Licensing Appeal Board and Technology U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Comission Oklahoma State University Washington, D. C. 20555 Stillwater, Oklahoma 74074 Thomas S. Moore, Esq., Member Dr. Richard Cole, Member Atomic Safety and Licensing Appeal Board Atomic Safety and Licensing Board U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Comission Washington, D. C. 20555 Washington, D. C. 20555 Atomic Safety and Licensing Appeal Panel Nicholas S. Reynolds, Esq. U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Debevoise & Liberman Washington, D. C. 20555 1200 - 17th St., N. W.
- Washington, D. C. 20036 Docketing and Service Section- ,
Office of the Secretary Marjbrie Ulman Rothschild, Esq. U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Comission Office of Executive Legal Director Washington, D. C. 20555 o
U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Comission Washington, D. C. 20555 Ms. Lucinda Minton, Law Clerk Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel Atomic Safety and Licensing Board U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Comission -
Panel Washington, D. C. 20555 U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Comission Washington, D. C. 20555 David J. Preister, Esq. J t Assistant Attorney General Environmental Protection Division P. O. Box 12548, Capitol Station -
rs Juanita Q11s, President Austin, Texas 78711 '
tion for ASE(Cit egAsso John Collins, Regional Administrator Reoion IV U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Domission 1426 S. Polk Suite 1000, Dallas, Texas 75224 61T RyanTX Arlinstono @laza 7601 Dr.i ,