ML20204F781

Order Directing ASLB to Certify Relevant Record for Resolution,To Refrain from Issuing Subpoena Contemplated in Board 860722 Notice of Intent & to Provide Explanation Supporting Subpoena.Served on 860731

ML20204F781
Person / Time
Site:	Braidwood
Issue date:	07/31/1986
From:	Chilk S NRC OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY (SECY)
To:	Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel
References
CON-#386-148 OL, NUDOCS 8608040313
Download: ML20204F781 (3)

Text

-

DOCKETED USNRC UNITED STATES OF AMERICA NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION W J131 P4 :54 0FFICE y SEL . y ;

00CHET!Nb & su va' BRANCH Commissioners:

Lando W. Zech, Jr., Chairman Thomas M. Roberts James K. Asselstine g g3 /1986 Frederick M. Bernthal

) -

In the Matter of )

)

COMMONWEALTH EDISON COMPANY ) Docket Nos. 50-456-0L

) 50-457-OL (Braidwood Station, Units No.1 and 2) )

5 ,

i ORDER I

On July 22, 1986, the Atomic Safety and Licensing Board which is currently conducting a hearing on the issue of harassment and intimidation of quality control personnel during the construction of the Braidwood facility issued a confidential " Notice of Intent to Require Disclosure Under Protective Order." In that Notice, the Board stated that it intended, unless directed otherwise by the Commission, to issue a subpoena to a particular individual whose testimony was sought by the intervenors.

The Board noted the objections of the Office of Investigations, which had contended that an ongoing investigation might be jeopardized if the subpoena were to issue. In a July 29 filing to the Board, the Office of Investigations has reiterated its objections to the issuance of the requested subpoena, as well as to the compulsory disclosure, even for in camera consideration, g!S 188st St85NP ,

o 3 5o o,

O q

b 2 l of any documents bearing on the matter. It is 0I's position that the course of action authorized by the Board would compromise a confidential source as well as interfere with an ongoing investigation.

The Commission's 1984 Statement of Policy on Investigations, Inspections, and Adjudicatory ProceedingsI _/ is specifically addressed to the problem of accommodating Licensing Boards' need for information pertinent to ongoing hearings with OI's need to preserve the confidentiality of its sources and the integrity of ongoing investigations.

The Policy Statement provides that when OI or the staff believes that disclosure of particular information, even under the terms of a protective order, would defeat the purpose of non-disclosure, it shall provide the Board with an explanation of the basis of its can'cerns in an in, camera session. This has already occurred in this case. The Policy Statement further provides that if the Board then disagrees with the position taken by 01 or the staff, and intends to order disclosure, it shall so notify OI or the staff, and given them a reasonable period of time to state their objections or concurrence. If OI or the staff continues to object to the disclosure, and the Board continues to adhere to its position, then the Board shall promptly certify the record of the in camera proceeding to the Commission for resoTution of the disclosure dispute, and so inform the other parties.

We intend to give this matter our expeditious consideration, conscious of our responsibility both to assure the completeness of our 1/ 49 Fed. Reg. 36032 (September 13, 1984).

5

}

o t'

3 adjudicatory proceedings and the integrity of the investigatory process, which depends, on confidentiality. In intervening to address this problem, we are following to the letter the provisions of the Policy Statement, the objective of which is to ensure that the Comission's vital investigative functions and its equally vital adjudicatory functions are, to the maximum extent possible, kept from conflicting.

The Board is therefore directed to certify the relevant record to the Comission for resolution, as provided in the Policy Statement, and to refrain, pending Commission disposition of this matter, from issuing the subpoena as contemplated in the Board's July 22 " Notice of Intent." As provided in the Policy Statement, OI may file a brief with the Comission no later than August 7,1986. In addition, we ' request that the Licensing Board provide us, also by August 7,1986, a filing explaining in greater detail its reasons for believing issuance of the subpoena to be the correct course of action.

It is so ORDERED.

F r the Comission j#" *%.,

s-

?

(<',

f l , 3 .5 ' > ~.

.i , , ; ( L 6 uC_

/SAMUELJ. CHI Elt ~

.. - J .j i Secretary of the Comission

l~ ;,. . . .::

• Dated at Washington, D.C.

this 31st day of July,1986