ML20151Y105
| ML20151Y105 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Issue date: | 04/18/1988 |
| From: | Chilk S NRC OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY (SECY) |
| To: | Garde B GOVERNMENT ACCOUNTABILITY PROJECT |
| Shared Package | |
| ML19332B522 | List: |
| References | |
| FOIA-86-126, FOIA-86-127, FOIA-86-131, FOIA-86-166, FOIA-86-201, FOIA-86-209, FOIA-86-263, FOIA-86-80, FOIA-86-82, FOIA-86-A-225, FOIA-86-A-226, FOIA-86-A-227, FOIA-86-A-228, FOIA-86-A-229, FOIA-86-A-230, FOIA-86-A-231, FOIA-86-A-232, FOIA-86-A-233, REF-10CFR9.7 NUDOCS 8805040345 | |
| Download: ML20151Y105 (3) | |
Text
.......... -
~
f J
[,,,..
o UNITED STATES
!\\-
g NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION gg p
W AS HIN G TON, D.C. 20$M
\\..../
7g',%,'y*
@dl M MM Ms. Billie Pirner Garde, Esq.
Governmer;t Accountability Project Appeals 86-A-225C Midwest Office thru 86-A-233C 3424 Marcos Lane Appleton, Wisconsin 54911
Dear Ms. Garde:
This letter responds to your November 21,19E6 appeal from an initial FOIA decision dated October 30, 1986 which denied in part certain requests for documents contained in F01As 86-80, 86-82,86-126, 86-127,86-131, 86-166,86-201, 86-209, and 86-263.
In response to your appeal, the agency has re-reviewec the documents initially withheld. After that review, I have affirmed the agency's initial action with regard to those documents except as otherwise noted below.
Initially, the agency has already released certain occuments in response to other recuests for inforr.ation under the F0IA.
For example, Document R-5 w s released in its entirety in response to F01A-86-497.
Document R-2 was partially released in response to F01A-87-137. Document R-23 was partially re' leased in response to F01A-87-196.
You r.ay review these documents bv requesting those FOIA folders in the NRC's Public Document Room ("PDR').
The NRC still claims the listed exer,ptions for the remaining withheld portions of Documents R-2 and R-23.
The agency withheld portions of ten (10) docurents listed in Appendix R of the October 30 decision under Exemption 1 of the Freedom of Infomation Act (FOI A), 5 U.S.C. 552(b)(1) and 10 C.F.R. 9.5(a)(1).
The withheld information is properl C.F.R. p. y classified under Executive Order No. 12356 (August 1,1986),3 166(1982 Comp.).
This exemption protects from disclosure national security information concerning the national defense or foreign relations. As you will note from the portions of the documents released, those documents deal with exports of nuclear material to foreign nations.
The U. S. Departrent of State has designated the withheld portions as classified and prohibited their release.
Therefore, this material is exempt from discicsure.
See, e.o, Halperin v. CIA, 629 F.2d 144 (0.C. Cir.1980), Military Audit Fo' ject v. Casey, 656 F.2d 724
~u (D.C.Cir.1981). Other portions are withheld as proprietary as indicated below.
Next, the agency withheld four documents in their entirety under the deliberative process privilege of Exemption 5 of the FOIA, 5 U.S.C.
552(b)(5) and 10 C.F.R. 9.5(a)(5) of the Comission's regulations because 8805040345 880410
^
P
_4_gg5 PDR D
2 those documents consisted of predecisional information, drafts, or other docurents containing the preliminary advice, opinions, and recomendations of members of the staff. These documents are listed in Appendix *S" to the October 30 Initial Decision.
Upon review, the Comission is releasing small, segregable portions of documents S-3, S-5, and S-6 which are factual in nature. The Comission will place those portions in Folder F01A-86-263 in the Public Dccument Room under your name with the appropriate designation of having been released on appeal.
Howeve, the Coritission continues to witFhold the remainder of those documents under the deliberative process privilege.
The purpose of the deliberative process privilege is to "prevent injury to the cuality of agency decisions." NLRB v. Sears, Roebuck & Co., 421 U.S.
132,151(1975). Disclosure of these predecisional documents would be likely to "stifle honest and frank comunication within the agency."
Costal States Gas Corp. v. Cepartment of Eneroy, 617 F.2d 854, 866 (D.C.
Ci r. 1980). The remainder of these documents do not contain any reasonably segregable factual portions.
Mead Data Center, Irc. v. U.S.
Department of the Air Force, 566 F.2d 242 (D.C.Cir.1977).
Likewise, the Comission withheld the portions of those documents listed in Appendix "R" of the October 30 Initial Decision under Exemption 5.
Upon review, the Comission is releasing certain additional portions of documents R-16, R-20, and R-22.
Again, the Cernission will place these portions released in the Public Document Room in Folder F01A-86-263 under your name with the designation of having been released upon appeal.
However, the Ccmission continues to withhold the other previously withheld portions of those and other documents under the predecisicnal portion of Exemption 5.
Furtherinore, the agency withheld portions of three (3) documents listed in Appendix "R" under Exemption 4 of the F0IA, 5 U.S.C. 5529(b)(4), ard 10 C.F.R. 9.5(a)(4) of the Conrissiun's regulations.
Exemption 4 protects infonnation which consists of trade secrets or confidential business (proprietary) infonration. Gulf & Western,,Iedustries, Inc. v. United States, 615 F.2d 527 (D.C.Cir.1979); National Parks & Conservation Assceiation v. Korton, 498 F.2d 765 (D.C.Cir.1974). As noted above, the Comission has already released a fourteen page attachment to Docurent R-2.
However, the Comissien is reaffirming the other withholdings under Exemption 4.
Finally, the agency withheld two documents in their entirety and pertions of another document in whole or in part under Exemption 7A of the FOIA, 5 U.S.C. 5529(b)(7)(A), and 10 C.F.R. 9.5(a)(7)(1) of the Comission's regulations. This exerption protects investigatory records compiled for law enforcement purposes because release of these records would terd to hinder an ongoing or prospective enforcement proceeding.
NLRB v. Cobbins Tire & Rubber Company, 437 U.S. 214 (1978).
Exemption 7 applies tc civil administrative enforcement proceedings under Federal Statutes as well as crininal enforcement proceedings.
Stern v. FBI, 737 F.2d 84 (1984).
In
,6
i 3
this instance, the two documents withheld under Exemption 7A in Appendix "S" refer to a now complete investigation.
Likewise the docurent withheld under Exemption 7A in Appendix R refers to a now complete investigation.
Therefore, the agency is releasing Document "S-2" and all but three sentences and one attachment of Document "R-22".
However, the agency centinues to withhold the remainder of "R-22" and document "S-4" under Exemption 5.
This letter represents final agency action on your November 21, 1986 F0IA Appeal.
Judicial review of the denial of the documents or portions thereof is available in the Federal district court in the district in which you reside or have your principal place of business, or in the District of Columbia.
ncerel,
N C mu...\\
()m.
el J. C ecretary of the Connissio
j "..
.i a
%...../
POLLCY lSSUE February 12,1984 (Notation Vote)
SEcY-85-51 Fer:
D e Ca missioners Frce:
Victor Stello, Jr.
Acting Executive Director for Cperations
Subject:
NEPA REVIEW PAHES KR GE00001C RECElTCRIES KR HIGi-LEVEL WASIE Purpcse:
To obtain Ccanission guidance on the rulenkirq approach to establish criteria to be used, in connection with the issuance of a construction authorization and license, in adoptir.g any envirormental impact statement prepared by DCE pursuant to $114(f) of the Nuclear %ste Policy Act of 1982 ChhPA).
Category:
his paper covers a mafor policy atter and involves Category 1 resource estimates.
Issue:
To detennine the approach to be taken by tite Caruttissica in sking a judgment concerning adoption by the NRC of any ECE EIS suhnitted in sup;crt of an application for ecnstrtction authorization and a license to operate a geologic repository.
Sinmary:
i
,,,,,,, q,~ -//
^
>Q Jh.S WJU & /
Contact:
F.X. Cameron, OEID 492-8689 93
11 j
!& k E N $'d h &
V ctor Stell'o, Jr. '
Acting Executive Director for Operations Comissioners' comments or consent should be provided directly to the Office of the Secretary by c.o.b. Friday, February 28, 1986.
I Commission Staff office comments,.if any, should be submitted to the Commissioners NLT Friday, February 21, 1986, with an information copy to the Office of the Secretary.
If the paper is of such a nature that it requires additional time fo-rnalytical review and comment, the Commissioners and the Secretariat should be apprised of when comments may be expected.
DISTRIBUTION:
Commissioners OGC OPE OI OCA OIA OPA REGIONAL OFFICES EDO ELD ACRS ASLBP ASLAP SECY e
i
/.....,%
6 March 31,1986 POLICY ISSUE stcr-86-101 (Notation Vote)
For:
The Comissioners Fron:
Victor Stello, Jr.
Acting Executive Director for Operations
Subject:
DESIGN BASIS THREAT - OPTIONS FOR CONSIDERATION Pu rcose:
To provide the staff's evaluation of options identified in the staff requirements nemorandun of February 7,1986 concerning the design basis threat.
An additional option has been included in response to Comissioner Bernthal's request in the mercrandum of February 12, 1926 to discuss "contingency" planning, musumuseuum CONTACT:
E 4
J. J. Davidson, t#iSS E
42-74708 5's D. J. Kasun, faiSS a2-74771 V W ' O'"'*
nxv 7 / ui u
~
m
-: ).
g'
,/
-,,, /g
/
7
. r -.
- = * *
- Victor Stello, Jr.
Acting Executive Director for Operations
Enclosures:
1.
Vehicle Access Controls 2.
Estimated Cost of Options 3.
Implenentation of Options
i e Commis sioner s ' comments or consent should be provided directly to the Office of the Secretary by c.o.b. Wednesday, April 16, 1986.
Commission Staff Office comments, if any, should be submitted
,,,s to the Commissioners NLT Wednesday, April 9, 1986, with an information copy to the Office of the Secretary.
If the paper is of such a nature that it requires additional time for analytical review and comment, the Commissioners and the x
Secretariat should be apprised of when comments may be expected.
DISTRIBUTION:
Commissioners OGC OPE OI OCA OIA OPA REGIONAL OFFICES EDO ELD ACRS ASLBP ASLAP SECY l
I
.=
/,......h
/
RULEMAKING ISSUE April 8,19F6 (Notation Vote)
S m 1 7 For:
The Commissioners From:
Victoi Ste11o, Jr.
Acting Executive Director For Operations
Subject:
DEFERRAL. OF FINAL RULE 10 CFR 51, APPENDIX 8, EXPLANATORY NARRATIVE FOR TABLE S-3
Purpose:
To inform the Commission of new developments affecting the narra-tive explanation of Table S-3 and the incorporation of estimates for environmental releases of radon-222 and technetium-99, and to recommen(
Catecory:
This paper covers a policy matter requiring Commission considera-tion.
The resource estimates, which are an important factor in the consideration, are Category 1.
Issue:
Whether the rulemaking on Table S-3 should be fully completed as soon as possible, or partially completed now and fully completed later, or deferred entirely until such time as new reactor license applications make it desirable to complete the final rule.
Decision Criteria:
Contact:
W. E. Thompson, HMS$
427-4510 e
~ ~~ ~. x O d?,{ / / r /y ' } / / / *./
.r, T
Conpissioners 11 i
I s-
.. Victor Stello, Jr.
Acting Executive Director for Operations
Enclosures:
A.
Federal Reaister Notice B.
Letter to Chairman of Congressional Subcomittees Commissioners' comments or consent should be provided directly to the Of fice of the Secretary by c.o.b. Friday, April 25, 1986.
Commission Staff Office comments, if any, should be subndsted to the Commissioners NLT Friday, April 18, 1986, with an infor-mation copy to the Office of the Secretary.
If the paper is of such a nature that it requires additional time for analytical review and comment, the Commissioners and the Secretariat should be apprised of when comments may be expected.
DISTRIBUTION:
Commissioners OGC OPE l
OI OCA OIA OPA REGIONAL OFFICES EDO s
ELD g.ACRS l
ASLBP l
ASLAP SECY
loeT %
'o.,
UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSIOEECRET RECORD COPY c
I
- - c o. o. c.
'%,,,,, #j
\\
e, MAR 10 SIE i
MEMORANDUM FOR: Chairman Palladino Comissioner Roberts Comissioner Asselstine Comissioner Bernthal Comissioner Zech FROM:
Victor Stello, Jr.
Acting Executive Director for Operations
SUBJECT:
PLAN FOR ASSESSING SAFETY SIGNIFICANCE OF INTIMIDATION, HARASSF.ENT, AND WRONG 00!NG ISSUES AT TVA Pursuant to directions given to me by Chairman Palladino and Comissioner Zech at a reeting on Marchl,1986?the attached plan is provided for your review. You will note that we have been directed to proceed with this plan imediately - any Comission adjustments will be incorporated when received.
l/
,. gf Victor Stello, Jr.
Acting Executive Director for Operations Enclosure Memo to VStello/EDO fn HRDenton/NRR dtd 3/7/86, subject above CC: SECY-OGC
'h OIA OPE b
C
[
^'
nwl
(>/ r "
tJ 5
l UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION o
1 WASHHec70% 0. C, Roses AFAR 7 g
wiMORANDUM FOR:
Victor Stello, Jr.
Acting Executive Director for Operations ROM:
Harold R. Denton, Director Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
SUBJECT:
PLAN FOR ASSESSING SAFETY SIGNIFICANCE OF INTIMIDATION, HARASSMENT, AND WRONGDOING ISSUES AT TVA
- n response to direction provided by Chainnan Palladino, the staff has eeveloped the enclosed plan for reviewing intimidation, harassment and c ongdoing allegations and employee concerns at TVA.
In sumary, the plan calls for a review of each allegation and concern by a multidiscipline team of EC headquarters personnel and a detennination of whether the allegation or concern, if substantiated, has potential safety significance. The team will be reviewing the information to establish any patterns of harassment by specific TVA eeployees and supervisors in order to provide the Commission with infonnation, much of which may be 'unsubs.tantiatad, about the level of c,anagement involved and the potential to have adversely affected s.afety-related work at TVA.
Tne staff is implementing this plan irrnediately with the objective of having a status report to the Commission on the results of their review by March 21, l
1986.
I recocinend you forward this plan to Commission.
l l
n Harold R. Denton, Director Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation
Enclosure:
As stated e
i T( s rQ J D? m IQ-
' Q./J F i V v i i
PLAN FOR REVIEWING INTIMIDATION, HARASSMENT, AND WRONGDOING ISSUES Af TVA
Purpose:
4 1.
Review all intimidation, harassment, and wrongdoing issues relating to TVA with particular focus on determining potential safety concerns based on individual (s) involved, the chilling effect of particular instance (s) of harassment and/or systems / components involYed.
2.
From this review develop a report which:
(a)identifiesthose potentially safety related allegations or concerns, (b) correlates these in a manner which raises the issue of the competence, integrity, or conduct of.indjvidual TVA employees or supervisors, with particular attention to the invof9erent of the latter, and (c) is based on review of information received in reverse chronological order (issues arising since early January 1986 getting first priority).
Review Team:
Team Leader - J. Craig, IE Team Members - K. Hooks, IC J. Holont>:h, NRR R. Lloyd, IE P. Hilano, IE R. Shewmaker. IE 01 Investigator W. Paton, ELD l
1 Enclosure
t 2
Procedure:
1.
Initial review team meeting in the NRC Region !! office to review purpose and methodology of allegation review.
In particular, methods of review necessary to protect confidentiality of individcals making
]
allegations and integrity of any other ongoing reviews will be cove red. Particular training for team members by OI on investigating and interviewing techniques will also be provided.
Guidance delineated in MC 0517 vill be utilized as much as practicable.
2.
Review team members will conduct a review of all available records addressing allegations or concerns of intimidation, harassment and wrongdoing. These records are contained in the files of the NRC Office of Investigations -(OI),4he Department of Labor (DOL) Regional Office,* the office of Quality Technology Company (QTC), as wil as various offices of TVA such as the Office of General Counsel (OGC) and the Office of the Inspector General (IG). This review will be conducted in reverse chronological order, e.g., starting in March 1986 and working backwards. Additionally, relevant information will be obtained through discussions with selected QTC and OGC personnel.
)
3.
In each of these reviews, the specific questions to be answered include:
a.
If the allegation of harassment, intimidation or wrongdoing was substantiated, would it involve a potential safety concern?
Criteria of Enclosure 2 will be used.
- A memorandum from William H. Otter, DOL Wage Hour Administrator, to Assistant DOL Regional Administrators, dated October 17, 1984 authorizes NRC personnel to examine and copy DOL records. DOL point of contact is i
Sterling 2. Williams, Region IV Assistant Regional Administrator, j
FTS 229-1301 (Enclosure 1).
f
~
3-b.
Does appropriate information exist in the current records to identify this item to TVA and request TVA follow-up' action? For example, a particular allegation which involves vague references to individuals and total lack of first-hand'information may not include enough specific information to make a safety evaluation, c.
Are interviews with other TVA personnel necessary in order to complete specific details?
4.
The need for interviews, as discussed in 3.c., will be determined on a case-by-case basis and will be conducted after the approval of the Team Leader. A11egers or concerned individuals will not be contacted without prior consultation with O! managenent. Enclosure 5 provides authort:ation for granting a.cgnfidentiality request of an inte rviewee.
Documentation:
1.
For each allegation review, complete the review check sheet (s), as appropriate (Enclosures 3 and 4), noting whether or not the matter is a potential safety concern and including justification for that determination.
2.
The team leader or another team member other than the criginal reviewer will review each check sheet and verify that appropriate information has been provided.
3.
Provide a listing of those items determined to be a potential safety concern together with the check sheets for those items.
This inforration is to be used by the team to develop a report (discussed in 12.0 of the Purpose Section) which will be evaluated by senior NRC officials.
O e
a-
_ _ - _ _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ _ Resources:
1.
All resources for this effort should be tracked and charged to the TVA resource tracking code.
e l
1
__ -_\\
'I ge e.
U.s Department of Labot Em+
eN 8te' den 88 N8'* Wen w,,,v,,e w,o m n WaaNagton.0.C 20210 i
OCT I T SB4 i
MDastANDUM FOR ASSISTANT REGIONAL ADMINISTRATORS 1
i W448-5051 i
mm...
p h n.G K..
Administrator l
SUBJ&CT:
Changes la FOR 52 Histleblever Frecedarse f
- ne fe11eving changes to Frecedares for handling whistleblever e
i investigattens are effective issnediately. F0s Sta is belag
(
<evised to in.or,erais these cham.es.
g.
1.'
submission of histlehtower case Files te no
.eP thistleblever esse flies will no lembr be restinely submitted to the 30. FOR 52:04 will be revised accordingly. Bowever, the felleving satorials free every completed whistleblever C/A shes14 f'
be septed and forwarded to the 50 (AA/0F0, Atta Stanch of FLSA (l
Enforcessat):
A.
FOR 52:04 and 52:09 letters with a seFy of the complaint (FOR 51:01(a)(3)),
'I 3.
Fot 52:10 er Stall 1etter (Fot 52 03(c)),
C.
case marrative, 3.
docuneetaties of any monetary settlement for which statistical credit is being claimed, and E.
any other letters written by the A0 or 10 la ceanecties with the C/A.
- 11. Precedure for Disclosian Whistleblever Case Pfle Lterial i
Unen Recelot of FOIA or Other Reevesta 1
i Whistleblever case flies are "closed" for VIMIS statistical recording and for purposes of disclosure (1) upon settlement by
)
C/A, or (2) prior,te completion of the investigation phase of the the parties after the A0 completes the lavestigation and mails
- J the appropriate advisory letter (FOR 52:10 er 52:11). The case file material is then available for disclosure espon receipt of am 1
FOIA roguest, a roguest from another Federal Government Agemey (such as the Declear Regulatory Commission), a roguest free sa A1J. er through discovery procedures utilised by as attorney.
i Roguests for case file materist from A1Je er atterneys should be i
referred to the 18 for handling.
.. -._ ___.... _ __. _ ~..., _ _ _ _ - -
- -- b N I N--
2-A. Case File Lecasted in the Field Ussal F0IA hand 1Las precedures shall be fellowed.
- 3. case File tacated in the 30 If the case file which is the subject of a disclosare request is letated in the 50, the roguest shall he forwarded immediately (through channels) to the 30 (A&l0F0, Atta 3rsach of FLSA Enforcement) for handling. FOIA rogueste should be clearly labeled as esch.
111. _Coordtaation with the Nuclear Retulatorv Commission (MC) la_
weA c/Aa 1
f
. A. Assistance he the MC on the.feb Site The MC is presently willing te assist TE La obtalaing k
permission free IRC licensees to asaduct es-site investigattens and employee interviews. 111 FOR 50f16. If any respondent La an ERA case r uses to allow a WR 00 to examine the records or interview he emphyees en-site, the AD/AAD sheste contact San Goldstela at the 30 en FTs 513-
~(
7043.
~
- 3. A11ovina the MC to Cent Whistleb1cver Case File Material Notwithstanding F05 50402(e)(4), vs will make available for photocopying by ERC officials all case file material.
Iowever, there most be a clear understanding by the RC j
officials that any F01A or other disclosure roguest directed to the RC involving such material must be redirected to the appropriate VI Disclosure officer and suet met be disclosed by the HC. The Ntc officials will be allowed to use the photocopying facilities utilised by the A0 or to, but will not be permitted to remove the case files for a period of time longer than is necessary to accomplish the photocopylag. The NRC aust utiliae their own personnel for the photocopying.
IV.
statistical Creditina of Settlements in "Vbistleblower" SA8AA Aos say take statistical credit for the amount of a monetary settlement ressitist f rom whistleblever C/As under the following conditieset A.
Statistical credit any gnh be taken in whistleblower cases where there is a bona fide settlement agreehent compristas a eneelfic meestery award. Under so circumstances ces findings he reported is whistleblower case s en Form VR-51-M!s unless there is a specific monetary settlement. Where fladings are recorded, they nest egual tne amount recorded as income i
f 1
- _ ~ - - -. - -_ -. -. - - - -
3 J
restored. For eaample, a monetary settlement for statistical credit seald include the specific amoest of vases a retastated employee test as a result of terniasties. It seuld aise include epecif ts expenses incurred by an employee-such as attermey fees, travel aspenses, telephone seats la f
seeking commeasurate employment, medical espesses related te }
the trauma of tersianties, ets.
l Se statistical credit may be taken for settlements which are 3.
not documented in writing. Where statistical credit is taken, a sepy of the settlement agressent er transcript of payment records must be placed in the case flies asether sepy Branck of F1.S&
must be forwarded to the 50 (AA/070, Attat Enforcement).
C.
statistical credit for findings and recovery can be takes i
Rail if VI involvement played a significant rete is effecting the settlement. Therefore, where VI senciliaties acties is set successfal, the sukseguest f act-finding investigaties f
results is findings favoring the reopendent, and the F0E
=
51a10 letter was mailed, se findings and recovery saa be recorded even if the cesplaisant 14ter receives a monetary sward as a result of negotiations by the pTrties or the findings of a hearing and secretary's Order. If, however, there is a settlement involving a specific mesetary enount 311,g,; the A0 mails the Fot 52:03 and 5109 letters and axlar.
to a telegran reguest for a hearing, the A0 may take J
l statistical credit arevided findings made in the case fevered the complaisant. In such instances, the enount reported ea the VI-51-Mis is recorded as both findings and incouie restored mader F1.g&-MW Items18-21A.
4 set ras i
i t
4 An intimidation, harassment, and wrongdoing employee concern or allegation involves a potential safety concern if any of the following criteria are met.
i 1.
The systems involved are within the scope of the General Design Criteria, l
2.
The circumstancas involving the issue could introduce an unreviewed safety question as defined in 10 CFR 50.59 or involves a deviation from the FSAR.
3)
The resolution of the issue could necessitate a change in the plant
{
technical specifications.
i 4)
The issue af fects: (1) the security of the plant, (2) radiological controls at the plant, (3) emergency planning, and (4) plant operation.
l 5)
The individual creating the atmosphere of intimidation and harassment or directing or condoning wrongdoing has been involved in several situations I
or is in a position of authority, responsible for safety related services or hardware.
A position of authority is deemed to include first-line supervision and above.
s i
4 I
e l
]
FORM A A11egatien/ Employee Concern No.:
Allegation By:
Against:
Name:
Name:
Position /
Title:
Position /
Title:
Organization: _
Organization:
Is Alleger Confidential? Yes No Two X-Forms Generated? Yes No If not, which is missing? Tech ISH Potential Safety Concern Yes No
Rhed Add +tional Information Via Interview (s)*
Issue Charactcrization and Discussion:
i 1
Date Received by TVA:
NRC:
TVA Action Investigation: Pending In Progress Closed N/A Information obtained from Interviews will be recorded on Form B.
NOT FOR PUBLIC DISCLOSURE; MAY INVOLVE CONFIDENTIAL SOURCES OR INVESTIGATIVE MATERIAL.
Enclosu e 3
Form A NRC Action Investigation: Pending In Progress ___
Closed N/A Is there sufficient inforwetion for TVA to be asked to followup?
Yes No Connent:
Location and Identification of Information Reviewed
- * 's e
Reviewer:
Date:
4 2
Checker:
Da te:
(5ignature) 1 i
i l
)
l
]
1 NOT FOR PUBLIC DISCLOSURE; MAY INVOLVE CONFIDENTI AL SOURCES OR INVESTIGATIVE l
MATERIAL.
9 m - - - - -.- - _- _
I
FORM B*
Allegation / Employee Concern No.:
Interview Authorized By:
Ikte:
Interview With:
Name:
Date:
Position /
Title:
1 Organization:
Interview Conducted By:
Confidentiality Requested:
Accepted By:
~, <
Form Attached:
Others Present:
l i
Summary:
i Potential Safety Concern: Yes No i
Interviewer:
Date' (5ignature) l Checker:
Date:
(Signature)
To be attached to the Form A for which this completed forn provides additional information.
NOT FOR PUBLIC DISCLOSURE; MAY INVOLVE CONFIDENTIAL SOURCES OR INVESTIGATIVE MATERIAL.
CONFIDENTIALITY AGREEMENT
! have information that I wish to provide in confidence to the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Coanission (NRC).
i confidentiality as a condition of prcviding this information to the NRC NRC, by agreeing to this confidentiality, will adhere to conditions.
(1)
During the course of an inquity or investigation, the NRC will make its best effort to avoid actions which would clearly be expected to result in disclosure of siy identity to persons subsequently coming in contact with the NRC.
(2)
Except as necessary to assure public health and safety and except l
as necessary to inform Congress or State or Federal agencies in furtherance of their responsibilities under law or public trust,
)
the nRC will not identify me by name or personal identifier in any t
conversation, comunication or NRC-initiated document released disclosures made outsidr et the NEC.outside the NRC. The i
(3)
)
The NRC will disclose my identify inside the NRC only on a 1
need to-know basis to the extent required for the conduct of NRC-related activities.
Consequentl further contacts with MRC personnel.y, ! acknowledge that if I have i
i I cannot expect that those people will be cognizant of this Confidentiality Agreement and it will be ey responsibility to bring that point to their attention if I desire similar treatment for the information provided to them.
(4)
Even though the NRC will make its best effort to protect my i
identity, my identification could be compelled by orders or subpoenas issued by courts of law, hearing boards Administrative Law Judges, or similar legal entities, in such cases, the basis for granting this promise of confidentiality and any other relevant facts will be connunicated by the NRC to the authority ordering the disclosure in an effort to maintain my confidNiality.
i to confidentiality if I take, or have taken, any action so the grant of conffderittalit confidentiality such as (1)y that the action overrides the purpose behind the i
status as a confidential source or (2) intentionally providing fals i
j information to the ARC.
revoke confidentiality andThe NRC will attempt to notify me of its intent to j
action should not be taken. provide me an opportunity to explain why such 1
\\
i
]
O O
i i
1 j
Other Conditions:
(if any) t I have read and fully understand the contents of this agreement.
l agree with its provisions.
)
L i
4 Date:
Name:
Address:
i i
Agreed tr in behalf of the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Comission.
Date:
Signature:
j Name:
' Tit 1t>
t m
l, I
1
,~
i d
1 e
1 i
i l
1
.--m
_,,._____,__,__.,.,.-.,.,,_,__,..__,,y-_,,
,..._m_-
y,,
____.,-+a--
' ' " ~ ' ' ' ' "
1
-,e niden! angletar / Val. m No..ter f Wendey.16owember 2.1ses /10seiies',.. [.$
. eases noted m,enhe a tem between etss aJs. and ses psm.Peemene
.ideatg d.e sea.$duesd as. sire,s ed he r
,ta,.s to e,,em,s.es
.e
- u. w
. e Ce., e =
c,
,emen,senegner eryd to seeteet tw Aero named w96 a ase6404. mew.R wtB%e evitend ?
p
- s. awanerpued1m has em; e evWalaos w too deye befsee to h
aute6de
_ e.se 25.tC uQy is to heselig, edeia heve.se tehto be e.~d
.e e..,.
c
&mos. a.sen e see c....,
es.e, t
o.e,,
t.e.e,.
e.,
os
,te
,ar see.m e..g ed. C,.. u m
. P, o t s
e.r-ies e e
ry.re-b.v. ed est.
creterte and messeaty and
.,,es,,,e.e,.v ~.
C o eee
.=
ar,iew.
probatestis Aseesarmt; theme Isl Men a Federe!er Saete agency pt Dee, awsoes md t1-aHL a es and twielme he We t ney,v,,, y is tarearmenafIsa
~ un un.e mee.. une, e
se -
', u, n :,
Ph g
M ark Asuument b hold a jotat meetLas as 9tseesserit of PrAsyen CE r 7
,sodd spese to tic sensese:
.,w_.e,y 4 reement, and the December 4.1 set R.,can 11gr.1717 N se-e ww mamm assary:Neeleer tapelmesy
" " + -
renua, she ideesty id sowas wtB
,rowdw ie s.eae, age.c,eae. e.be' N ** * ***E8 C-amba.
Pubhc attendance. 8 d N'""
Aerteen Potier statement aatreerenary case where he ne agende far $4 enbject meettag abaD be as foDe=*
svumany.1ida etatement presente the Comadeeman tenelf Anda that fureerence Wednesday. December d. Isps-dt.tp Commisshos's poBcy for p to Wb pdhe uroes mme AM imM the concAvion of 6usiness.
Wetty of as te&edual who hee na Subcomm.'ttees wtD meet with es pr,mked onesdesushty.1t provee NE ""P**" " * "'I8""
detath ding b bechamed of the "9'"'""*
EDO end dfecues estattading innes 6,,elops of thh etetement of l
esisting to b NtC position se a rew=d itsee opi.ine b e,,,,,t.ne.P.ohey.
- $0 "*" I # **'" *F safety GeeJ Pebcy and to meet wth g.,
stammet which the NRC a mea ge4 premet se Northse.et Uttbuse and the NR.C Staff to
,coddoettobry. ar7.td c d e au,'nh and Wang [eenSdenN omrces samptla n'n b eu.a e ongw w.i.. e m
o,a to e
,,,, he ai.w. - -no s w e a m 6ene Milletone Unit 1 Probebihanc SafetF 8'udf yantet FWeDy. It wtU descrb he etteens se Casselasian wts take l
& 'tatemaan may be prnented by carassetances and extent to wWe b whotaw actees it saa, as as enhng e
of the bbc with he identity of a coddeetal souros me tee
- 3**
d"' "
es.
.me of Sebcommisse drulged sad b circumstanca sader M
"8**'***'**Y' Q6airmas; wnries statements wnD be whjd a peat of con 8dentality may be P
accepted and made erailable to ne
- revned, detalla regardtag the backpound of es Committee. Record. age wtU be paramined usrettivs e afst:Neve'aber Is tees.
developmase af tWe Foucy Statemest. It only darlag them partions of the poe mts.an piroauanos coenaert alm yams te htanen sedu meetag when a transcript la be.ne kept.
RJeherd P. kn Obe of b W wWeh sne PetC may past i
and euesuena mae to ashed onlyby Cesasal. U,S. Nvele at Rag.detory entideandry, and me maraer and me:bers of b 5.bremmJttee. las Coedselos. Wesbi: stoa. DC umaa form na wtsch coa 8denbatty wtl be y, tea yinag, g wG hocrb the consultanta. and StaH. Persons dasiring (303-434-434 y
b cshe oral statements should actify supMussrtw esponseannet ctramstances and estant to whle to b ACRS staff maober und below as identty of a osanderda! semics be 1
far la advu.co as is practicaWe es that I'%*d"8888 divs! sed and the eumetences wbd a p ess ef ewnSdentsahty may be
~
aporopriete arrangesnts can be made.
N Nuclear Regulatary Camaransion
- revoked, hing the laJtial portos ofibe
('NRC" or "Comuniseica"1 has dedded 4
meeting. the $sbcseutlttee, sleet with to tsene tWe Ststement of Poucy to seder Bodysmed may of its cones)taats who may be to provide a cJeat, apacy. wide pehcy N Commluloa cruted an Advtaory preent, may andange preliminary en oonadaritahty.Tae Ceannismen's Comm!ttee For Revtew of intestigenen views regard.tng satie's to be hopection and nevntigatory proyuee Pobcy se Aghts ofIJeansee E.mployees i
contidored dar.ag b balance of the rely to an indtviduale volontarey Under inventestlos (WSaaPter seeeting eon forwand wee taformation. Scene
- Advisory Coer.Jrter) en Febesary 35 De Subcoetahtee wtB thee beer wt!! come (crwud only tf preesntstaans by sad hold dieeses6een her beheve thejr Woches wtU be isst One ce the lusoe b Consdeolon e dad tN 'dvisory Comett'se to l
with reptweats tivee of b NRC Stat.
protected from public dec!ctwo,ie,
. addroee coecerned coandentiaBty.
Its copultaata. and e6er toteseemed ea$y if by are g!ves eeradaste.ttty, he Meiesty C:madttee whis perwas tesarding tWe review.
SafassanDng b ndantanee el esbedriene esport to the Comuutosten Further taformat.on regardag topie soddactial ocurces le therefese a on Septeakt 14.19e1. deftsed t:3 be discussed whethat the neeeng s'Jrnmat facte la emmetsg the htwo caddeetathty se fbe wfthholding he e
j hte been canceDed er rochedeled me inluatory Bow of such trheessee, dJeseminston to b putte... ebbe a
Chairman's ruling en requeens ter ibe The himos through thle Prhey matne and seer personelldennSare of r
apporttalty to present oral ete====am Ststernent, whkk appuso te au pac l
andt' " se aneued therefor see to alEces,latends to meLa c!*ar bt it wtD nrJorr.auce to the Commiseloa."h cerula indwt als who prodde j
sbts r a prepeld telephans anil to make in best eEorts to protest to 2
hi aat ACFJ eta 5 maabet.Dr.'
6dentity of a condWetLal eowes. As Addeory CorunJttee acted bt a pant of conAdestahry woul Rich ars Se vie (teleph es e Jas/se6-&any nytaimed la more detaC below. &s carten har.ecoce, e s.d be ewbied is 6e coaBeesWal i'
i
( -
~
g l
redw ! angletar / Vel, m No. ser / Menaar.hmedier a seus'/ seenkin
% gyy t
,wc, egne sjght be nyeaisd to do se only ade estromsdy sere Comeetuhm beteousihet
- C.
sehr ageacy. a cowt er a circustances. med. enes 6en. uder M--7 abodt be peoned edy nery resinesed esedssoas.1%e DO seen to acquire 1efuseaween tooard, w might be pobudy coorJosed thes she WC Acald aso(w, I
whm b eowce acted is a maar r related to en _--
Me
.a w incoastetest with the yest of satyoes alma ese6dese'nlay "d to rW 5ea.or erbas weresaned by coddecuauty.W Advuary abthty and eEorte ev=hw to preamos spedal dramstanese It shedd Committee reconswsded sealeet his idematar?
erdinerty est be panted. ter hetsmen.
psnting ooddentiabry is a5 Teasystateneme when to toevedselle weispyrvelde totareewoes because of es discahy of ene he.formeees witboat ' i The P-w irresedgeUn and
____y _ 9.y, C,
tmplemenung effective sodden e
eree2nents and b djm;Wues inspection popeans sety is part sa Thee detsseninetos le bibed em' pants of confidentsahty t?!sht cause to ledMdule comaag forward wish several osasiderstena. Firet, here ts an las eettgeton or enforsment actias.
taformatma aQsafey woosses 8' httk pierpose se a genersi metter en
& Advisory Committn g, perenind m
, See, ag. Ome" othnce er ersettee con 6deetaltty se neommended agatast odeptas d2erent Nectric (Cauewer mot-someone wh has not n.
pobcin for di!!annt enn of Urdta 1 and 2k 9 Petc tas-E8 bdeed, ed woon cod Lapode b intaruewus, although it noted 641 the
- W P'eo **88 O' free Sow of informados by tuplying bt 9
stata cf 6 Laterwewee say he a vahd M *8t d'.s of es who ones fonrasd cessWraten La maling a cawby<4se with sucb informatka codd lead m be witness seede confidenuabty, and detercu. nation on whether to rent reprisals agatast those indMduals.
codd need k d2e@ des ta % b.
d I
coeIdent euryJineUy. the Advisory W nkmytamobaad %ph M taformatke at a teter time le ccanection Commutte, ncoa: mended that ibe harm to toe todWaat. W may "tah with as nevntisados or enforcement
.T Commission not normally Feet mon subtle forme such as economic acton. Second it la nneatial to protect i
oorddenbab La the ebeeoce of a dunn. W er utnoem An n h Westry d b reddenud noww w b etmost antent possible tf
)
nqueet and at the h1lC advies a A
QF-coddestah to panted. Wideepnee r
witness of the avallahhty of Fanta d deodah wd Lamase g, g.a f
cer3dentjahty enjy where oppropriate 9,,ckan Attfy. 435 U.isse t,be nethood bt b identity da j
in 6 Judg=ent of the Lensteater.
conSdenual source wos,ld be Co Tu Departzneat of jusdesIDOf) 1and t
'.o e d rersentjy relas sed. Thurd, tbs remmented on 6 Advisory j
Ccem.ttee's report on Tdnery it 196( (1W IM nehoes debudy medd Adneory Comagttas was awan af"no empL4 cal evidemos"indkating that deter ebto frees malhforward with
- id"Pr* e d Fsats of conSdensahty "rte DOl e poed that the h1C ehemld not Wormenom., ud. ucae see.,e,aa, e,m.ed i
,,e a b w ei po w of,- a
.u momase swcou, se now of s
,e,a, h e e
I acidentabry to every witness who 7C's actyttes.
Laformahoo to b Comm'amma a rega sts IL The dol fait est gMeg Both Cong was and en Casandastes primary ressea for ever considering i
conf;dentjahry would be mese importaat h w W nisco m h widespre ed pants.
to the can of those who nymt a 21 of the Emergy staorgsatution Aes. 42 7be Commfnion n see beverver.
Holston, the existewes of which te US C. 6451 aM the C wm'nales's that sonne treividuals e desee
?.
I urinowa to tha bltC. wkne gMes ngdauone impleenseting bt annen deaeatty stay not nessetit corldentjatty would be less impcriant an designed so pactact thone wie societ becesse af as erroseous bebd abat the i
q for these who onJy cedra e' the tutC la osaves een its estery identtaes of au pmone proveeg currobotato a violeton aher6e NRC rnponsibthdes frees n mLance.
trJorma tsee no & h1tc an h.ept to b u discontod the violates and the Sunilarly, the Cammieaion's repleBone cerdiseca. asd some indindeals mey probable Lodestry of thou rupees $le-authenas b wt& bolding af the not prvode taformetron becsaos they do The DC) felt tht witr.eene is a er.rd ideouties of oor.Sdentil sourose bem act amew of the evei)abibty of d
catescry-those who pn 1eek to the pubbt n! ease. is Cy1L 13W4),
conadentiahty. While the Comanasies i
h1tC regardir.g how e snowe eteletlan 2.fs0(e)(y). Further. Part 21 of the flnde that its seed to have the mezimum occurred and/or who say home bees Cocunintoe's retslabone preeWe 61.
Possibk mee of lafarmatke to carry out re sponalble-pruented e ame hh "aa uthorised by law? the idecury of its responsibtuties estweigha ibe l
queshon.
LadMduals *oot onbfect to the potestal benefits trom rouunety e5ertad 1
Tk DOJ bn tak isees sehIbe ng.deU:me to this part" who report or Fanting onddacts.U. 6e limjta tions on grann af meadesmality certain nuclear asd.:ti.mtatedfyt' Costen!enson le cae ebeen shoes suggested by b Advisory Damittee.
wtu be withheid froca &sdesen."to
- bo may be harmed by thetr erneeous The DO] etsted that tbc peestlity of CFR 21.2. b fe5 ewing discuntee endentnadin6 of wktber by how discjosun of a cenadutaleemus's empfeins the Comm!nton's geners) been sms conSdentiabty and a> belt identry Le "quite remete.'11s301 polq regerug coddentlehty, thou who do not kaew of the '
l aaimta2.sd that se NILC meet ed avatabairy of cerMantiabry.
hw 2 Odue c sundesad esco's L G.reueutsacee Uader M M a6 g %g 9, gg odentity to another pehile egney, and CorWe m y W N eGennseef decided to odopt a poficy wtuch requins that am totaMewn ebeeWme N Camajniam. while M recognamme as keveal destring conMentrebty escenardy be couldered ashese the import asce ci coddantiabty, does orpudtjy to reeseet it.but etcm e se I
- wnd contdende\\ty by pathes not bebris that ee:Bdentahry should subr.ud NRC ewyloyee to tsise the infor=e tloo to anebe pemen shich be panted to su todMdnale who nuus of cerfWntebry to 6 et.emco of. '
satreicts what he/ehe tolf to Alic, prodds talarmathae to the PatC. sket it a repest La ciertain ciresmetances. n w DO] further stened shot eksering shodd be pseed as a routire metier, or kdlo-o.When Pt becweee aryerwt &st oard does not han the seheng to evon that taindsale shculd routirely an istyh1le not yrveding conspel dlacloeure of a asetemmel be addeed ofits evallabtury preer to informaton because of a feer 6t hisr mouc4's Ldestity, and ibet a meet erwe3d,betng eteree wed. Rather, she her Wenety wCl be d>ec)ceed. aa
_. ~ - -.. -
. ~ _..
4 0
i s... w w a,.
- k.,, ' *.....l'
'.,' r Federal Ragleter / Vel 30, Na, IIy / Wooday November u, tees 1 Memene h D i dagm e*bertmed NRC neyruleethe ting it. If the NMaatality need to protect te lederndere Wesley,
'a af eeredeot!
. Similarly, en eat is met eiped within a
- bt teos types of eases, to esorte um l
4 maad NRC maymagnet reasonsW use, he EDO, Direeter. CM.
beisace me kapensase of to ' W
. m n tity la of a er Director, CIA, as appro deterialse whether he =priate, WEE hderments testimesy to to defendents regener when it le apparent hem he nhah y enes ecolast he etnagh of he E!4 t
eurresadans circumstances Ibet he ebeeW be eastened.
Omos ese8dentlakty le ptated,'he Cowanmante laterset la maletahhg
- witeens wsahoe bis to es hefennamt's anomyndty.5 J
remas see8 des his be es ledividual's name abonW De divulged to sneersf/rSweres v.Gehad Atress c
cua. Ier testason, where a witeses rete NRC empleyose only se a ased le haeur F.ad tant (tsrel.
my as neeerview to a secretive naamer, hasta. Bad NRC employee wttb access ggg ge seemed estegory of 'k*.
Because of the wide eastety of to a sonAdential ooeron e ideauty aheald aircemetances when e see8ddettel
circasestances here, however, take all necessary to ensure that seuroeo m outy ajsht k deelseed Commenos cannot provide explicit the identity is not essentaated. 'estelde b NRC levolves tecleewe guidance' he e area bot meet Isave he DLiector. 08 and EDO, and the -
implemassetion of tble pohcy to the Director. OIA are to ensure that abrug as NRC adleecetary presseeag, d;screcen of the relevant NRC conalsteet procedwee are developed Whee e esert, throegb tu een empt ThiCaenalploo also pee no reases throughout the agency for haplemeaun8 powere, saa enforce se order ereceeg emplerees, tat Iba ideouty of a coaBdestal eserse e requirement, which abould preveat be released, as ed}edicatory board amet to treet venous poupe ddrenntly la e taadvertent discloserse-regard. no purpou eened by Fanung loses a nebpoene to obtale the conndesuahty may be more prononced
- 3. Clicumet. wee Uhdar MNcA /dem/ty of a eenBdential sowes, and mast for one group of a Confideat/c/ Source WiB Ae soforceaneet of the esbpoena la esert, be be more prono.than another. as. It unced for empkywe av4pd ible peeral sense, thee, en NRC come to the NRC with evidence of he Comajeeice stresses the edtescetary board does not have to v.iolanens unknown to b NR.C than for importance wiuch it attaches to eethority to regeiro bt the ideouty of a ose.be.e wi e=C eu,u, hue.u,.ons,a.e,si ma8dwea,l enra b,em,n,ald, kcsen b bow
,--ege,ea,uo.ofaes.adeau re
, d.,e e.,,, ose
,am.
_ -oe e ver, fou, -
e,,.
does.et b.uevo ine oesue to is
-.e wb.,e *. ha eta C' 'es"s's,'E*M,dsaa,%,'T, MO"d"he et="d,
as tam *c,p > =a- **",T= *e ac, cf poenb&e altvetions, and uch requot emphastsee that to web of thoes cases can require the NRC staff to reveal a for canademushty win have to be b Comadesion wtD sitampt to Ilmit
""d*nual owns. De Pa== tad = ha reWved se a caw by case beels by as belosun to the minimum necessary, a sepants Statenest WPebey en 4
m enbrised to psat and thtit expects pod discleeurs to lerwegasona, inspecdome, and a
ey-occa Ay rarely.
A.dte&catary 1 The Adaseerondformis Mica
& n h e a,si.te
.v.,voo order encloeure o.f the Idestry of a se-ana Conf,dentaehty SAov/d Ae Cransed and wun punsaat to a esert wde, A888maamd M'/ thin the MC n e m e n e,sesi,e g eg,....
l,
-na.=ual souros shad setonsuenay where a lJeansa or obe souty coalg.
he ceruBd to the Ceam!selos Aer
., T-no Commiutoa has decided to aDow obtain a court order requinag b NRC rniew. de FR astata tomber ta, the Dvoctor, Office of lavuugesene to evs!se b Identity of a osaadaeual 1984). hwefore, the adjudioetery (OI). te Deector, Office of Inspecear source. If ht bappena, the NRC wig board withis the NRC with the sceent and Aeditor (OlA), and the tascottve seek to keep the teclovers limited, eetherity to require ht b ndanut of n
. Directer for Opereuono (EDO) to throu6h protective ordare er ehrwies, senadeogal source be revealed la e]se deelsnate thoes persons with crgan setsons who will be on.is their to b mialaum neceenary.
Comenission. It is thus appropriate to ortaed to With regard to the standards mood by provide some geners! guidance as when grant medMendaDty. Coandesuahty a court la deciding whether to order es Camalaston wtB requ!re each wiu be Fsated only when as NRC declosure, it is clear that "twlbert the declosers.
empleree eethertsed to yent declosure of as talormer's Idanuty, er id he prt$er opproach for as ocandantiality and the indtvidest the contenta of hja commimications,le ret conMdentiabty algi e relevant and helpful to es defense of adfescatory board to decidhg wheter i
etendard C Coandesuakty the scevnd, or is euentisj te a fair to order disclosure is b ease as that for a couri, f.e,It eheuld foBew the i
Ayveneet. salwa it is tapesable to
' deterednatios of s essee,ibe privilege standards set forth le Aeriore and he eten the As eement at the une es must give way." Aorfare v. Uniad tarormetion le obtained. De Agreemaet Stefee. 353 UA 88, EH1(1987j Dea, progeey and balance b public laterest wtB explan the con &tiona te which the for lastnaca, disclooes is la aR in protectinst b Bow of laformetoe assinet a party's right to develop his/bar NRC wil edhere whenit grass thelihood required u ensure a fair trial ciala or sefehaa. Whether ht katana conftdentishty, se set forth in IHe policy in cases like Acriate, whart Ibe requitw discjoeure *must depend eroa Statement, no thoes circumeteaans informant played an actin and crucial the partenlar circumetances of sed when W Le imposelble to sign a role ta the eunts sadel the sene...* Aavists, eupre, 23 UA et eg.
Can8dsesahty Agreemeat etits strae patsatial crindnal er habthty, or the Factore to be conaldered la making tie the informa noe is obtaland,e4 wears bernsing aetloa. At the e6er oz1rema, deterednation loclude whether to the tafarma tion to obtetned eve ibe when m taformaatle not as acute trJormaties provided by b eenRdeogal t;!
conadendabry may be gives particJpant, but tother a mere tipoter, v prod ng signing er tbs disclosun would normaDy not be kserca is nesonably avallable threega t
C strabry Agrwment.wh6eh meet required. no meet difBesh casse ahernative means, whether it relates b
wtthin a rusonable ama. N involve a third catator7, =%ere the
- d.,ctly to b rut.etenew steieuses at i
en
.anahty is gesated ernay, ibis defendant may benett tros disclosers.
lasa to b receeding what the cus' be fury deamented by ibe pereen het b Cournment claims a compet!bs aceMess tource is, whether a parere pruent om cyant poelues of b
1 1
2 ibe Comissioners Environmental Stancards for High-l.evel Fadioactive Wastes.
In l
responding to SECY-85-272, the Comissien directed the staff to t
submit the rulemaking package which confor-s 10 CFR Part 60 with the EPA standard.1 Discussion:
i t
l l
t t
t
)
l 15taff requirements remorandum f ren Saruel J. Chilk to William J. Dircks, dated
!!cvember 27, 1955 (Enclosure D).
2Pemorandum to Chairran Palladino fron David A. Ward, dated November 14,1985 j
(Enclosure H).
(K-20 (SECI' 92)
~!
r
UNIT ED STATES
[
DH d5
,p NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION CASHIN; TON O A 30646 g
g e
Stello ngg "9h"*
- e#s*
tb,wbar 27, 1985 orect or tus Kerr, SP sienstany Fehringer,,W.ss Qrit.hard, RES MEMORANDUM TOR:
William J. Dircks Executive Director for.Hirations TROM:
Samuel J. Chilk, Sect
SUBJECT:
STAFF REQUIREMENTS - NgTAp ION VOTE ON SECY-85-272 - RIPORT ON Tn E ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY'S ENVIRONMENTAL STANDARDS FOR HIGH-LEVEL RADICACTIVE WASTE DISPOSAL On September 19, 1985, the commission (with all Commissioners agreeing) approved the proposed letter to EPA, as attached.
Ienediately following Comission approval, the ACRS requested that this matter be discussed with the Committee.
On October 21, 1985, the commission met with the staf f, ACRS and others to discuss conflicting views.
Upon due consideration of the concerns expressed by the ACRS and the responses by the staff, the Commission reaffirred releasir.g the letter to EPA.
The letter has been forwarded to the chairman for his signature.
1 s805040373 e00410
^
(':. -2C )
f
j
- t Y
1 l 1' i
/
i e
t d
i I
i I
l l
i i
i 4
)
Attachment:
As stated I
1 Chairman Palladino ces comissioner Roberts l
Comissioner Asselstine l
Comitsioner Bernthal j
Comissioner tech j
oGC j
CPE l
j ACRS t
4 1
f I
1 i
^
b
%::.~::.
4 I
1
\\
\\
i 8
1 4
l i
l l
i i
4 l
1 1
-,,,-.,-.-_,n,..-,
l lI I
[
(,cks umiso srArms f
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION gg nAsmworon. o. c. soses 3g
\\*****
WM 00CMET CONTP L Da m Minogue OENTp\\'f canuAm December 2, 1985 u
ngham t
'85 i bf. 4fk.-
Kerr. SP The Honorable Lee Thomas a,
s c-Administrator g
Fehringer, NMSS E00 R/F U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Washington, D.C. 20460 Dear Mr. Thomas 3
On May 10 and 11,198J the Nuclear Regulatory Constission (NRC) submitted formal consnents on the Environmental Protection Agency's proposed environmental standards for management and disposal of high-level radioactive wastes.
Among other things, we stated our view that the proposed "assurance requirements" and "procedural requirements" contained in those proposed standards involved matters of implementation and thus went beyond the limits of EPA's jurisdiction.
In letters dated July 19 and August 15, 1984 Acting Chairman Roberts and Former Administrator Ruckelshaus, respectittely, agreed that the staffs of EPA and NRC should attempt to develop modifications to 10 CFR Part 60 to incorpcrate the principles of EPA's proposed assurance and procedural requirements.
EPA could then delete these requirements or make them applicable only to facilities not licensed by the NRC, eliminating any @tentfal yroblems of jurisdictional overlap.
The NRC staff recently reported to the Commission several proposed changes to Part 60 which have been worked out by the NRC and EPA staf f (text enclosed).
Consistent with the provisions of the Administrative Procedure Act, the Commission will propose these changes for incorporation into Part 60 now that the final EPA high-level waste standards have been published.
The NRC staf f anticipates submittal of a rulemaking package, incorporating both these wordirg changes and other conforming amendments, to the Commission within 120 days.
The Cossaission appreciates the cooperation shown by the EPA staff in working to reach this agreement.
Sincerely, R _._ g ej O1
' l n ' f. lladino% L..
/g/ -
/
gu.z)
Nunzio Enclosures W'.1 Record File W Pro;tet -
Proposed changes to
/o.s 3._j ___
Odt No.,
10 CFR Part 50 9 o 4. 1..?
pp
/-
(OriginatedbyNMSS)
T.f M ot AA*A_m 3 6-t't.'r..
g,.,9
,,,p iv> n - _ _ a e w m A,8 e
l
/*
UNITED STATES s,
8 NUCLEAR REGULATOR 1Y COMMIS$10N l
I ADVisOP,Y COMMITTEE DN REACTOR SMEGUARDS
~
j n ;.,,:
.==uow... c. y I
Novernbar 14, 1985'
)
.x
~ '
~
i w:.i e-y;q s q.o __
.a$1k L':ct:t ric....__
o.a
)
Honorable Nunzio J. Palladino Chairman
, ':,J,, -' - -
Washington, D. C.
20555
-
- h.g- ---
U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Comission
- - -. M- -
gg-
Dear Dr. Palladino:
@ -. W.!? d E E I f#
3
SUBJECT:
ADDITIONAL ACRS COMMENTS ON EPA STANDARDS FOR A HIGH-LEVEL.
RADIOACTIVE WASTE REPOSITORY During its 307th meeting, November 7-9, 1985, the Advisory Comittee on Reactor Safeguards met with members of the NRC Staff and the Environ-mental Protection Agency (EPA) for additional discussions on the nature and implerentation of the EPA Standards for a High-level Radioactive Waste (HLW) Repository.
This was also the subject of a meeting of the NRC Comissioners with the ACRS on October 10, 1985; of a meeting of the NRC Cormissioners with representatives of the NRC Staff, the Department of Energy (00E), EPA, and the ACRS on October 21, 1985; and of a com-bined meeting of our subcomittees on Waste Management and Metal Coo-ponents on October 24-25, 1985.
In addition, we reported to you on this i
subject in our letters of July 17, 1985 and October 16, 1985.
As a result of these meetings and associated discussions, we offer the following additional coments.
1....
1.
It is generally recognized that there is essentially no prospect that compliance with the EPA Standards can ever be demonstrated by actual observations.
Determination of corpliance will have to be based on the results os calculations using some agreed-upon set of release scenarios, environmental transport models, and their underlying assumptions.
As stated in our letter of October 16, 1985, we believe that this has the potential for introducing obstacles in the licensing process, and it was for this reason that we recomended in our letter of July 17, 1985, that the Comission assure itself that the Staff's endorsement of this approach was Correct.
2.
We continue to believe that the EPA Standards contain deficiencies and inconsistencies, e.g., that the dose limits for single organs are not risk-baud, and that dif ferent dose Ifmits are being applied to NRC-1;cer' sed HLW facilities than to similar DOE facil-ities. Althcugh we understand that time constraints did not pennit the EPA Staff to correct these deficiencies, they nonetheless exist.
In addition, there are errors in the recomended methods for the analysis and interpretation of data collected in the evaluation of the perfomance of a repository,
":1CI.ostw n f-20
. _h/VJIW yt
l Honorable Nunzio J. Palladino Noveder 14, 1985 The NRC Staff is proposing an approach that may prove successful.
However, we have no confidence that it will succeed.
Our basic concern continues to be whether a formal detemination can be made that a licensee is complying with the EPA Standards.
To help resnive this problem, we encourage the NRC Staff to accelerate their efforts to develop analytical methods based on both deterministic and probabilistic approaches. and we recomend that a consensus be sought on these methods as they cre. devrioped.
We also encourage the NRC Staf
- to use rule-making as a mechanism for implementing these methods, and we support the approaches being developed by the NRC Staff to utilize outside experts to help identify relevant issues and information needs.
Additional coments by ACRS Members Harold W. Lewis and Dade W. Moeller are presented below.
Sincerely, David A. Ward Chairman Additional C:ments by ACRS Member Harold W. Lewis It is worth repeating and extending the statement in the ACRS letters of July 17,1985 and October 16, 1985, that the EPA Standards are too stringent. All these problems of conpliance determination derive from the fact that the E#A risk Neits.are Gr below any reasonable likeli-hood of detection.
It is that tnat drives the dependence on models and calculationt I kaow of no rational basis (though recognize the political constraints) for a standard involving one-tenth of a fatality per year for ten thousand years, beginning in a few hundred years. If one uses cost / ben-efit analysis with any reasonable estimate of the benefit of the repcst-tory; if one uses reasonable discounting of future costs against current benefits, a procedure unders tood by all surviving businesses and nations; if one compares with the risk or even the radioactive affluents from coal burning, the only viable alternative to nuclear power; if one compares with cosmic rays or other natural radiation; however one makes the coeparison, these are unreasonably stringent standards.
I recognize that they are the product of EPA, and the result of a necessary political process, but think that the NRC should develop regul'atory procedures in such a way as to make the best of a bad set of standards by moving the assessment of the risk in the direction of realism. To add the usual regulatory conservatism to the implementation of standards which are already too stringent would not be in the na-tional interest.
e e
-.,...,-,,--.-----,--.,_.----.--------,,-,-,-,,-----.-n.,..
-,.,..,--an
-n
,n-w-
f.
Honorable Nunzio J. Palladino 3
November 14, 1985
! know of no risk issue (perhaps excepting UFOS) in which the discrep-ancy between perceived risk and actual risk is so high.
That seems to be what has put us in this position, but it is still the responsibility of scientific advisors to remain rational and to deal with real risk.
That is extraordinarily small here.
Additional Remarks ty ACRS Member Dade W. Moeller I recognize that mary of the issues associated with the EPA Standards are controversial anc' subject to a range of interpretations. A primary example is the estimation of the average annual societal risk to an individual as a consequence of the operation of an HLW repository constructed and operated in accord with the EPA Standards. Depending on the number of people assumed to be exposed, one can "demonstrate" that the Standards are either comparable to the risks associated with some I
other existing radiation standards, or that the risks are several orders of magnitude lower.
Since, at the present time, there appear to be no acceptable guides for use by Federal agencies in making risk estinates for radionuclide sources that have the potential for exposing large numbers of people at extremely low dose rates over long periods of time, I would encourage the NRC to request that the Comittee on Interagency Radiation Research and Policy Coordination (CIRRPC) undertake to develop such guides.
I understand that the CIRRPC would be receptive to such a request.
E..,
I n
4
...e
.*w s
-s
--w
-s-s-w,
,w-w-w---~~w-w- - wev==~-~~-
ww~~ mv-=v.---m-,ev~~~ ~,