ML20136B326
| ML20136B326 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Issue date: | 11/21/1984 |
| From: | Connelly S NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTOR & AUDITOR (OIA) |
| To: | Olmstead W NRC OFFICE OF THE EXECUTIVE LEGAL DIRECTOR (OELD) |
| Shared Package | |
| ML19310G510 | List:
|
| References | |
| FRN-48FR36358, RULE-PR-2 AB78-1-022, AB78-1-22, NUDOCS 8511200184 | |
| Download: ML20136B326 (2) | |
Text
_.
-6:2 P # e d, n/t&}?u
%)&
p CEg
~Q o,j UNITED STATES fg .E NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION WASHINGTON, D. C. 20555
.t
'***** November 21, 1984 MEMORANDUM FOR: William J. Olmstead Director and Chief Counsel Regulation Division Office of the Executive Legal Director FROM: Sharon R. Connelly, Director Office of Inspector and Auditor
[
SUBJECT:
NRC STATEMENT OF POLICY ON INVESTIGATION, INSPECTIONS AND ADJUDICATORY PROCEEDINGS - INITIATION OF RULEMAKING TO ESTABLISH SPECIAL PROCEDURES FOR RESOLVING CONFLICTS CONCERNING THE DISCLOSURE OR N0NDISCLOSURE OF INFORMATION Reference is made to your memorandum, subject as above, dated October 22, 1984. In general 01A has no objection to the proposed amendments to 10 CFR Part 2 as presented therein. However, the following coments are offered for consideration as a means of both enhancing and clarifying the proposed amendments:
- 1. Section 2.795b and c - Both of these sections make reference to "the person responsible for releasing the ir. formation" without a further reference to who that person is. Secondly section 2.795c makes reference to possible delegation of authority to another person "on behalf of the person responsible for releasing information," while section 2.795b does not. These matters should be clarified to avoid controversy later as to whether procedurally the proper person acted, particularly under section 2.795b.
- 2. Section 2.795k(b) - This section establishes the right of any party to the pending adjudication to file an in, camera reply to an NRC in, camera brief to the Commission. Presumably, this does not mean that such a party gets access to the NRC brief in preparation of their own. However, in order to avoid possible conflict in this regard, it night be better to make it clear that the party will have to file their brief "in the blind," so to speak, without benefit of the NRC brief.
CONTACT: Ronald M. Smith OIA 492-4454 8511200184 851115 N eF M35g PDR r
2
, p
- 3. Section 2.975p (added) - As this office has responsibility for investigation of employee misconduct and section 2.7950 makes the general prohibition against release of " protected infomation," it is suggested that a new section 2.795p be added as follows:
"52.795p Disclosure of protected infomation by NRC employees or contractors.
Any NRC employee, special employee, or contract employee, who knowingly discloses protected infomation in violation of the prohibition contained in section 2.7950 of this part, is subject to disciplinary action 4 pursuant to NRC Manual Chapter 4171, in the case of NRC employees, and administrative action, up to and including temination, in the case of special or contract employees."
- 4. Subsections 2.740(b)(1) and 2.780(a) - The question is raised as to whether confoming amendments are appropriate for these two sections to make it clear that they are not in conflict with the proposed amendnents to 10 CFR Part 2. For example, the first sentence of subsection 2.740(b)(1) might be changed to read " Parties may obtain discovery regarding any matter, not privileged or prohibited from disclosure by section 2.795a, et seq., which is relevant..." Similarly, subsection 2.780(a) might be changed to read "Except as provided in paragraph (e) of this section and section 2.795a, et. seq., of this part, neither (1) Commissioners..."