ML20153C348

Ack Receipt of Inquiring About Gap Request for Independent Task Force to Review Allegations & Citizens Concerned About Nuclear Power Motion to Reopen Record Re Plant

ML20153C348
Person / Time
Site:	South Texas
Issue date:	07/31/1987
From:	Harold Denton NRC OFFICE OF GOVERNMENTAL & PUBLIC AFFAIRS (GPA)
To:	Hipolito Gonzalez HOUSE OF REP.
Shared Package
ML20153C231	List: ML20153C227 ML20153C255 ML20153C300 ML20153C318 ML20153C331 ML20153C348 ML20153C374 ML20153C393 ML20153C416 ML20153C460 ML20153C531 ML20153C547 ML20153C573 ML20153C582 ML20153C602 ML20195G452
References
FOIA-88-107 NUDOCS 8805060212
Download: ML20153C348 (1)

Text

- - - - - - _ . _ . ____

Df5TRIBUT10N e

g 8jouseg#o ^g UNITED STATES SECY

! " , y. g NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION OGC

• ;, E WASHINGTON, D. C. 20555 ED0 t OSP

' / GPA/CA

"% * " " *# JUL 311987 PA l IP  !

SLITP l

%b I The Honorable Henry B. Gonzalez United States House of Representatives l Washington, D.C. 20515

Dear Congressman Gonzalez:

The Comission is in receipt of your July 8,1987 letter inquiring about the Government Accountability Project's (GAP) request for an independent task force to review allegations and Citizens Concerned About Nuclear Power's (CCANP) motion to reopen the record regarding the South Texas Nuclear Project.

In a July 15, 1987 letter, the Commission informed GAP that the agency could I detemine more appropriately whether the appointment of an independent task force is warranted, after careful review of the allegations in detail. (See attachment.) Thus, the t. omission encouraged GAP to provide the allegations I to the agency. GAP repeatedly has refused to provide the allegations to the agency and has yet to do so. Once GAP complies with this request, the agency ,

will be in a position to make the appropriate detsmination regarding (

allegations management. Further delay by GAP in turning over the infortnation will only result in further delay in the agency looking into the matters to which GAP has alluded in its comunications with the NRC and others.  ;

The Commission recently denied CCANP's motion to reopen and referred it to the NRC staff for consideration under 10 CFR $ 2.206.

Thank you for your concern regarding these matters.

Sincerely,

/ *--

Harold R. Denton Director Office of Governmental and Public Affairs

Attachment:

NRC Letter to GAP, July 15, 1987 e80060912880428 Esekh PDR

[go cacyc,

. UNITED STATES g ,, g NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION i  ; g W A S H IN G T ON. D.C. 20%$

(.s. *****

j July 15, 1987 or r.C r o' '*5 SECRETARY

'87 Ju.17 A9 :52 Billie P. Garde, Esq. b.-

Director, Midwest Office Richard E.:Condit, Esq.

Staff Attorney Government Accountability Project 1555 Connecticut Avenue,,N.W., Suite 200 SERVED JUL 1 7 1987 Washington, D.C. 20036

Dear Ms. Garde and Mr. Condit:

This letter responds to your May 29, 1987 petition under 10 CFR 2.206 for the establishment of an investigative unit independent of NRC Region IV and the Executive Director for Operations (EDO), to review allegations concerning the South Texas nuclear power plant.

You s >ecifically state in your petition that "[i]t would be inappropriate to

• have :the ED0] or anyone connected with Region IV decide the merits of this petition since they are the individuals we are seekino relief from." GAP 2.206 Petition at 15. A 2.206 petition is addressed to the Director of Nuclear Reactor Regulation or the Director of Nuclear Material Safety and Safeguards. 10CFR2.206(a). These directors report to the EDO who by virtue of his position is involved in the 2.206 deliberative process. Taking into consideration the plain language of your request, the Connission decided to treat the document that you characterize as a 2.206 petition as a request for Comission consideration. The ConMssion notes, however, that the detennination of the most appropriate means of evaluating allegations is essentially within the Connission's discretion and is not within the scope of actions contemplated by 10 C.F.R. 2.206.

The agency can best detennine whether the allegations should be handled by Region !Y personnel or by an independent task force only after detailed review of the nature of the allegations. The Comission encourages GAP to provide the allegations to the agency promptly pursuant to the May 20, 1987 subpoena issued to Ms. Garde. Additional delay in turning over the infonnation to the agency will only result in further delay in looking into matters which you claim are relevant to public health and safety. After the agency has reviewed the substance of the allegations, it will be in a better position to detennine whether Region !Y is the appropriate entity to review the allegations or whether the appointJnent of an independent task force is necessary. The Comission assures GAP that the agency will handle the investigation of the allegations properly, both with regard to technical review and confidentiality.

Sincere 1 f]O

' mdelJMilk i / Secretarp of the Ccanission l _ _ _