ML20205Q138

Responds to Expressing Concern That Region IV Conducting Meetings W/Texas Utils Electric Co in Direct Violation of NRC Open Meeting Policy.Meeting Held for General Discussion & Not Required to Be Open to Public

ML20205Q138
Person / Time
Site:	Comanche Peak
Issue date:	05/21/1986
From:	Martin R NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION IV)
To:	Garde B TRIAL LAWYERS FOR PUBLIC JUSTICE, P.C.
References
NUDOCS 8605280176
Download: ML20205Q138 (2)

Text

k MAY 211986 Ms. Billie P. Carde Trial Lawyers for Public Justice, P.C.

Counsellors At Law 2000 P Street,t.'W Washington. D.C. 20036

Dear Ms. Garde:

This in in response to your letter to me dated May 9, 1986, in which you exprenn concern that Region IV "...has conducted and is conducting meetings with [ Texas Utilities Electric Co.] TUEC in direct violation" of the NRC Staff's open meeting policy as published in 43 FR 28J58 on June 28, 1978.

You originally wrote me expressing concern about a March 23, 1986, meeting.

In response, I informed CASE by letter dated April 29, 1986, that there was no such meeting. You now indicate that you were actually referring to a March 28, 1986, meeting. There was no meeting with TUEC on that date either.

There was a meeting between Region IV management and senior nuclear utility executiven from the utilities within Region IV, including TUFC, on matters of general Interent not involving any matter particular to TUEC on March 19, 1986.

Thin is the only meeting that we believe you could possibly be referring to.

This was not a meeting " conducted by NRC technical staff as part of its review of a particular domestic license [ emphasis added] or permit application" with TUEC. Since thin meeting was one of general discussion of generic regulatory matters on a management level, it was not one required to be an open meeting by the above referenced NRC Staff open meeting policy. The invitational letter to the utility officials dated February 3, 1986, was placed in the NRC's Public Document Room.

Your letter included a request for an accounting of meetings with TUEC pursuant to the discovery provinion of 10 CFR Part 2. I note that you included Mr. Lawrence Chandler, Special Litigation Counsel, to receive a copy of your letter.

Mr. Chandler han informed me that your discovery request will be responded to under separate cover. You also requested that your 1ctter be treated as a requent under the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA). By copy of this letter.

I am forwarding your requent to the F0I Branch, Office of Administration, for appropriate handling.

With regard to your requent that you be notified in the future of all planned meetings with TUEC, Region IV will continue to abide by the NRC Staff open meeting policy for review of license applicationn an it han done in the past.

Similarly, the staff policien and practicen relative to enforcement and management meetings will also be followed.

AI 86-235 RIV RC ',I ELDh EDO f V . RA'Ig )

WLBrow sjc LChandler[ TRehm RDMartin 5/p /86 5/;t/86 I 5/U/86 5/3!/86 N -

0605200176 060021 PDR ADOCK 0D000445 C'i A PDR tQ

\ \

. A i

)

i I

MAY 211986 1 Ms. Billie P. Garde We are pleased to respond to your requests for information. We cannot help but note, however, that the annertions in the last paragraph of your letter are simply unfounded and do not contribute to resolution of the concerns you wish to pursue.

Sipeerely.

,- , N ' ree; si

. R.3LRI D./MhikN Robert D. Martin Regional Administrator cc: L. Chandler L. Robinson T. Rehm RIY Official Filo copy l 1

ON Dm(b:zS3y/

1 1