ML20134B377
| ML20134B377 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Shoreham File:Long Island Lighting Company icon.png |
| Issue date: | 06/24/1985 |
| From: | Felton J NRC OFFICE OF ADMINISTRATION (ADM) |
| To: | Belair R KIRKPATRICK & LOCKHART |
| References | |
| FOIA-85-190, FOIA-85-A-14 NUDOCS 8508150604 | |
| Download: ML20134B377 (5) | |
Text
i
' b4
.h
-[.s 4
UNITED STATES g
'c NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION L
E WASHINGTON, D. C. 20555
%, * *
- pl JW 3 4 W Docket No. 50-322 l
Robert R. Belair, Esquire Kirkpatrick & Lockhart IN RESPONSE REFER 1900 M Street, NW TO F01A-85-190 and Washington, DC 20036 85-A-14 (85-190)
Dear Mr. Belair:
This is in final response to your letter dated March 19, 1985, in which you requested, pursuant to the Freedom of Infonnation Act (FOIA), copies of documents related to radiological emergency plans for the Shoreham Nuclear Power Plant since January 1984, and copies of correspondence between NRC and the Long Island Lighting Company since January, 1984.
The document identified on enclosed Appendix H is being placed in the NRC Public Document Room (PDR) located at 1717 H Street, NW, Washington, DC 20555, in file folder F01A-85-190 in your name.
The documents identified on enclosed Appendix I contain the predecisional analyses, opinions and recommendations of the Commissioners, and between the Commissioners and their staffs, on emergency planning issues. Because the documents reflect the predecisional process among the Commissioners, and between the Commissioners and their staffs, the documents are exempt from mandatory disclosure pursuant to Exemption 5 of the F0IA, 5 U.S.C. 5552(b)(5),
and the Commission's regulations, 10 CFR 69.5(a)(5). Release of the documents would tend to inhibit the open and frank exchange of ideas essential to the deliberative process. There are no reasonably segregable factual portions.
The documents are being withheld in their entirety.
Pursuant to 10 CFR 9.15 of the Commission's regulations, it has been determined that the information withheld is exempt from production or disclosure and that its production or disclosure is contrary to the public interest. The person responsible for the denial of the documents on Appendix I is John C. Hoyle, Assistant Secretary of the Commission.
These denials may be appealed to the Comission within 30 days from the receipt of this letter. Any such appeal must be in writing, addressed to the Secretary of the Comission, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Comission, Washington, DC 20555, and should clearly state on the envelope and in the letter that it is an
" Appeal from an Initial FOIA Decision."
e 8508150604 850624 PDR FOIA BELAIR85-A-14 PDR
/
i On April 24, 1985, we received your letter dated April 12, 1985, appealing our lack of response to this request. On April 15, 1985, May 6, 1985, and June 10, 1985, this office provided you with partial responses. Since you were given appeal rights in my June 10, 1985, letter end in this letter, no further action will be taken on your letter of April 12, 1985.
Sin rely, J
- 1. Felton, Director Division of Rules and Records Office of Administration
Enclosures:
As stated
,r i
Re: F01A-85-190 3
APPENDIX H f
Document BeliifTlaced in the PDR 1.
05/14/84 Memorandum from James Asselstine to the Comission, subject:
May'4, 1984 Markey Letter. (1 page)
?
l
[
[
t V
i I
I J
L r
1
+
N
Re: F01A-85-190 APPENDIX I Documents Being Withheld 1.
05/01/84 Note from L. Stoloff to F. Bernthal, "New York Times Article on Shoreham" (1 page) 2.
05/16/84 Point paper prepared by L. Stoloff for F. Bernthal, " Status of Shoreham Emergency Planning." (1 page) 3.
08/01/84 Note from L. Stoloff to F. Bernthal, " Emergency Planning Issues." (3 pages) 4.
09/17/84 Internal office recomendation to Cmr. Zech regarding review of ALAB-780. (1 page) 5.
01/08/85 Talking points preparad by L. Stoloff fcr F. Bernthal,
" Emergency Preparedness at NT0Ls." (1 page) 6.
01/08/85 Memo from T.M. Roberts to Cmrs. " Scheduling of Emergency Plan Drill for Shoreham," (1 page) 7.
01/10/85 Response from J.A. Asselstine to T.M. Roberts on 1/8/85 memo from T.M. Roberts to Cmrs. " Scheduling of Emergency Plan Drill for Shoreham." (1 page) 8.
01/10/85 Internal office note to Cmr. Zech regarding 1/8/85 memo from T M. Roberts to Cmrs. " Scheduling of Emergency Plan Drill for Shoreham." (1 page) 9.
01/25/85 Memo from F. Bernthal to Cmrs., COMFB-85-1, " Procedure for Comission Consideration of New Source Term Information
(
Reference:
SECY-85-17)." (1 page)
- 10. 01/29/85 Note from L. Stoloff to F. Bernthal, Emergency Planning Issues." (1 page)
- 11. 02/08/85 Note from L. Stoloff to F. Bernthal, CR-85-2. (2 pages)
- 12. 02/19/85 Memo from T.M. Roberts to Cmrs., COMTR-85-5, " Scheduling of Emergency Plan Exercise for Shoreham." (1 page)
- 13. Undated Draft comments of J.". Asselstine on proposed letter to Senators Simpson and Johnson.
- 14. Undated Talking Points prepared by L. Stoloff for F. Bernthal, "Shoreham Emergency Planning."
(1 page)
[pa ms:s
'o UNITED STATES 8
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION o
WASHIN; TON, D.C. 20555
'y
\\...../
cFFICE OF THE cOMMIS$10NER ggy }4, }gg4 MEMORANDUM FOR:
Chainnan Palladino Comissioner Gilinsky Corr.issioner Roberts Comissioner Bernthal FROM:
4 James K. Asselstine 2
SUBJECT:
MAY 4, 1984 MARKEY LETTEP.
In his May 4,1984 letter to the Comission, Congressman Markey requested an accounting of any comunications with the Executive Branch relating to energency planning or the.Shoreham proceeding.
I have the following to report:
On Ma' rih 7,1984, while in Florida to observe the full-scale federal field exercise at the St. Lucie plant, I had breakfast with Samuel W. Speck, FEMA's Associate Director for State and Local Programs and Support.
Although we did not discuss the emergency planning situation at Shoreham, we did discuss the proposed legirlation offered by Senator Simpson, which would provide for federal implementation of an emergency plan in the event that state and local governments refuse to participate.
I told Mr. Speck that based on what I had observed of the federal participation in the St.
Lucie drill, I suspected that it would be very difficult, if not impossi-ble, for the federal government to manage an effective emergency response without having a large cadre of federal employees on site at all times.
I told Mr. Speck that I thought the federal response at St. Lucie was irrpressive, but because it was limited to a support function to the state and local response authorities, the St. Lucie federal response exercise did not demonstrate.a federal capability to manage an emergency response at a commercial nuclear powerplant.
I also expressed the view that legislation granting a federal management role could well serve as an ircentive to a number of state and local governments not to participate in the implementation of radiological emergency response plans, thereby ur.dernining our emergency response capability.
cc:
I
+
p
~ " ~ ~ ~
'.r*
KIRKPATRICK & LOCKHART
~
P' M M W N' s ASH:NGToN. D C 200k c.t sesTco PLAC1 i
partem wa caic, 1
nwie.a cen au xxx
.n..m nm **x" *
n,u n amu m acer o a::,.u m :
um. rt m n
- m. U44182 March 19, 1985
,, 6em PfTTW%c,h PA lu; MJTIR5 Dut1C DLAL NUMMA Mili M4W (202) 452-7023 FREED 0" 7 '"
~"
A C 1 nt-E JE,S L fora-05#0 HAND DELIVER Q'
7-b Director, Office of Administration U.S.
Nuclear Regulatory Commission 1717 H Street, N.W.
Washington, D.C.
20555 Re:
Freedom of Information Act Request
Dear Sir:
On behalf of our client, Suffolk County, we request, pursu-ant to the Freedom of Information Act, as amended, 5 U.S.C.
5 552, ("FOIA") and the rules of the Nuclear Regulatory Commission
(" Commission") issued thereunder, 10 C.F.R. Part 9, copies of all written materials which are dated January 2, 1984 or later, or, if undated, which were created after January 1, 1984 in the pos-session or control of the Commission relating to radiological emergency planning and preparedness concerning the Shoreham Nuclear Power Plant in Suffolk County, New York, except for those materials which have been served on all the parties in the Shoreham proceeding (Docket No. 50-322-OL).
Without limiting the scope of this request, but merely to assist the Commission in its search, the written materials that we are requesting may include the following:
1.
All materials since January 1984 concerning the imple-mentation by the Long Island Lighting Company of radiological emergency plans for the Shoreham Nuclear Power Plant.
2.
All materials since January 1984 re: implementation by the Federal Government, or any Federal departments, agencies, instrumentalities, or contractors, of radiological plans for the Shoreham Nuclear Power Plant.
ML:Z%? B--
LP P
MATRICK & LOCKHART Director, Office of Admin 2stration March 19, 1985 Page 2 3.
All materials since January 1984 concerning an exercise of radiological emergency plans for the Shoreham Nuclear Power Plant, including materials related to participation by or,obser-vation of such an exercise by any Federal department, agency, instrumentality, or contractor.
In addition, we request copies of all correspondence, memo-randa and any other written materials between the Commiscion and the Long Island Lighting Company and/or its employees, agents or representatives, occurring after January 1, 1984.
In the event that access is denied to any part of the requested materials, please supply the following information:
a.
Identif y the withheld or deleted material and specify your reasons for believing that an exemption applies, as required by 10 C.F.R. 6 9.10(b).
b.
Segregate the nonexempt from the allegedly exempt portions of all materials and release the former, as required by 10 C.F.R. 5 9.10(a).
c.
Supply a detailed statement of the content of the withheld or deleted material, along with the date on which the material was written; its section heading or title; its author; the author's title, and an identification of any persons or entities who have received copies of such material, as required by applicable case law.
Vaughn v.
Rosen, 4E4 F.2d 820, 826-827 (D.C. Cir. 1973).
d.
Separately state your reason (s) for not invok-ing your discretionary power to release the allegedly exempt materials.
The undersigned is willing to inspect the requested material prior to its reproduction in order to identify specific material for reproduction.
The undersigned will pay charges for search time and copying fees, as provided by Commission regulations, 10 C.F.R. 6 9.14.
If search and copying fees to be incurred by the undersigned will exceed $100.00, please notify the undersigned before this sum is exceeded.
~g
~
, KRKPATRICK & LOCKHART f.
Director, Office of Administration March 19, 1985 Page 3 We expect to receive your response to this FOIA request within ten (10) working days of your receipt of this request, as required under the FOIA and as set out at 10 C.F.R. 5 9.8(c).
Sincerely, S-0 Robert R.
Belair l
l t
I l
l 1
_