ML20209G976
| ML20209G976 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Comanche Peak  |
| Issue date: | 09/09/1986 |
| From: | Stello V NRC OFFICE OF THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR FOR OPERATIONS (EDO) |
| To: | Garde B GOVERNMENT ACCOUNTABILITY PROJECT |
| References | |
| FOIA-86-214, FOIA-86-A-102 NUDOCS 8609150123 | |
| Download: ML20209G976 (3) | |
See also: IR 05000445/1984032
Text
&A
0{
p uan
+f
Io
UNITED STATES
8
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
o
p
WASHING TON, D. C. 20555
%*****/
gy
Ms. Billie Pirner Garde, Director
Environmental Whistleblower Clinic
Government Accountability Project
IN RESPONSE REFER
1555 Connecticut Avenue, NW, Suite 202
Washington, DC 20036
Dear Ms. Garde:
This is in response to your letter dated June 26, 1986, in which you appealed
Mr. Donnie H. Grimsley's letter dated June 3,1986, which denied-in-part your
Freedom of Information Act (F0IA) request for documents related to Inspection
Report numbers 50-445/84-32 and 50-446/84-11 regarding the Comanche Peak plant.
Acting on your appeal, I have carefully reviewed the record in this case and
have determined that the previously withheld documents will continue to be
withheld pursuant to Exemption (5) of the F0IA (5 U.S.C. 552(b)(5)) and 10 CFR 9.5(a)(5) of the Commission's regulations. Your appeal, therefore, is denied.
While reviewing the records subject to this appeal, it was noted that
several of the withheld records consist of an underlying draft record and a
one, two, or three-page cover for the draft, which are routing and distribution
forms and typing cover pages. The forms could be separated from the underlying
drafts, but they will not materially respond to your request and some of the
forms themselves are dated while the underlying drafts are not. Accordingly,
we have identified these forms on the appendix but will continue to treat the
draft and forms as one record.
Document one listed on the enclosed appendix contains the preliminary advice,
opinions, and recommendations of several consultants who assisted in the
preparation of the inspection report. Documents two through five listed on
the enclosed appendix are drafts of the inspection report, notice of violation,
and letters to the licensee. These doc'uments contain the preliminary advice,
opinions and recommendations of the Region IV staff. These documents are
clearly predecisional because they were prepared prior to and in the course
of reaching a final agency decision. Exemption (5) shields from mandatory
disclosure documents generated in the deliberative process that precedes most
decisions of government agencies and was intended to permit the agency's
withholding of such information to preserve the free and candid internal
dialogue necessary for the careful formulation of agency decisions.
8609150123 860909
GARDE 86-A-102
. _ _ _
. ~ .
.
d. . ,,
.
.
Ms. Garde
-2-
This is a final agency action. As set forth in the F01A-(5 U.S.C.
552(a)(4)(B)), judical review of this decision is available in a district
court of the United States in the district in which you reside, have your
principal place of business, or in the District of Columbia.
Sincerely,
4
8
/r
or Stello,
xecutive Director for Operations
Enclosure: As stated
l
l
.
I
i
1
4
1
-
- , - -
.-
e
,,, -
.
n-.-
- -
- - . - , - . , - ~ ~ - .
, - - . .
- - . ,
--n-.---ec.----, - , - ,----,-, - -
i
v1.c.
%
.
F0IA: 86-A-102
APPENDIX
1.
8/30/84
EG&G consultants handwritten input on inspection report
(36 pages)
2.
Undated
Draft letter to licensee, notice of violation, and inspection
report (52 pages)
3.
Undated
Cover form and draft letters to licensee, notice of violation,
and inspection report (39 pages)
4.
Undated
Cover form, distribution list, and draft letters to licensee,
notice of violation, and inspection report (30 pages)
6.
Undated
Cover form, distribution list, and draft letters to licensee,
notice of violation, and inspection report (28 pages)
.
'
/
[.
(
. . . . .
-GOVERNMENT ACCOUNTABlu1Y PROJECT
1555 Connecticut Avenue, N.W., Suite 202
Washington, D.C. 20036
(202)232-8550
March 24, 1986
..t c ; y . r.
yp s n u t ~
.
a: n.
.
Mr. Donnie H. Grimsley, Director
[O7g_f4 gjg
Division of Rules and Records
-
Office of Administration
h /g g_ g g
U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission
D.C.
20555
Dear Mr. Grimsley:
In light of the NRC's treatment of our March 6,
1986 appeal
of FOIA 85-151 as untimely, we request that you not only
reconsider the release of all documents specifically denied under
your initial response, but also treat 86-182 as an entirely new
request for the time period of March 6,
1986 to the present.
As you know, the FOIA does not specify how many days a
requestor is allowed in which to file an appeal of initial agency
denials.
We look forward to your response to this request within ten
days.
Sincerely,
k .CLt
'
'
R-
Billie P. Garde
BPG:43428
I
Of A /,16 Mf, !! .
yo mu e y
.
_
a ne<,9
(
.
,
tg .
UNITED STATES
,
'
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
o
5
ii
'
WASHINGTON, D. C. 20555
JUN 03 N
'
.....
~
Ms. Billie Pirner Garde
Director, Environmental Whistleblower Clinic
Government Accountability Project
IN RESPONSE REFER
1555 Connecticut Avenue, NW, Suite 202
TO F01A-86-214 AND
Washington, DC 20036
86-A-82 (F01A-86-214)
Dear Ms. Garde:
This is in response to your letter dated March 24, 1986, which we processed
as a Freedom of Information Act (F0IA) request for all records to March 25,
1986, the date we received your letter, related to Inspection Report numbers
50-445/84-32 and 50-446/84-11 regarding the Comanche Peak plant.
The records identified on the enclosed Appendix A are being made available
for public inspection and copying at the NRC Public Document Room (PDR),
1717 H Street, NW, Washington, DC 20555. The records will be filed in PDR
folder F01A-86-214 under your name.
The records identified on the enclosed Appendix B consist of predecisional
advice, opinions, and recommendations regarding the subject inspection
findings and are being withheld in their entirety pursuant to Exemption (5)
of the F0IA (5 U.S.C. 552(b)(5)) of the F0IA and 10 CFR 9.5(a)(5) of the
NRC's regulations.
~
Pursuant to 10 CFR 9.9 of the Commission's regulations, it has been determined
=
that the information withheld is exempt from production or disclosure and
that its production or disclosure is contrary to the public interest.
The
persons responsible for this denial are the undersigned and Mr. Robert D.
Martin, Regional Administrator, Region IV.
This denial may be appealed to the Executive Director for Operations within
30 days from the receipt of this letter. Any such appeal must be in writing,
j
addressed to the Executive Director for Operations, U. S. Nuclear Regulatory
'
Commission, Washington, DC 20555, and should clearly state on the envelope
and in the letter that it is an " Appeal from an Initial F0IA Decision."
h&bYb't
~1
1
,
(
.
('
~
-
_
,
'Ms. Billie Garde
-2-
,
,
.
-
This completes action on your F0IA request.
Therefore, we are taking no
action on your letter dated May 15, 1986, appealing our lack of response to-
your request.
Sincerely,
C79wC-
-
'
Donnie H. Grimsley, Director
Division of Rules and Records
Office of Administration
Enclosures: As stated
l
l
'l
l
l
l
!
L
.
.
-
~
~
(
.
.
(~
.
.
.
.
.
.
Re:
.
.
APPENDIX A
-
1.
12/6/85
CPSES FSAR Change Rept, Ref 1A(B), pg 59
(1.page)
2.
11/8/85
TUGCo office memo, D.R. Woodlan, FSAR Change Request
(1 page)
3.
11/25/85 TUGCo office memo to file, CPSES FSAR Change Request
-
Status (1 page)
Attached,
Request for additional information, CPSES-FSAR Amend-
ment 54 and 55 (1 page)
4.
9/30/85
Memo, Vincent Noonan to W.G. Counsil, TUGCO, Request
for Additional Information Pertaining to Comanche
Peak FSAR Amendment 54 and 55, Chapter 17
(1 page)
Attached,
5.
8/27/84
CPSES/FSAR Page 1A(B)-59
(1 page)
6.
12/5/84
CPSES FSAR Change Request 62-FSR-003, IA(B)
(1 page)
Attached,
7.
1/21/85
CPSES/FSAR 1A(B)-59 (1 pg)
s
8
12/3/85
Letter, W.G. Counsil. TUGCo, to V. Noonan, subject:
CPSES Final Safety Analysis Report, Chapter 17
(1 page)
.
-
(
-(~
_
Re:
'*
.
.
.
.
..
'
APPENDIX B
_
.
.
1. - 8/30/84
Bert Freed to H.S. Phillips, EG&G consultant assist
inspection report input (36 handwritten pages)
Ref: 85-151,86-182
~ ' 2.
Undated
Typed draft inspection report, H.S. Phillips to
.
D. Hunnicutt, 50-445/84-32; 50-446/84-11
(52 pgs)
Ref: 85-151,86-182
3.
Undated
Draft inspection report (computer typed) 50-445/84-32
50-446/84-11
(39 pgs)
Ref: 85-151,86-182
4.
Undated
Draft inspection report, S Phillips (ref, B5 of
.
FOIA 85-151) (30 pgs)
5.
Undated
Draft inspection report, S Phillips, (ref, B/6 of
FOIA 85-151)
(28 pgs)
?
9"
j
l
1
l
l
l
_
_.==...-.w.,,w
.
I