ML20214G262
| ML20214G262 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Issue date: | 10/08/1986 |
| From: | Cotter B Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel |
| To: | Mapes J NRC OFFICE OF THE GENERAL COUNSEL (OGC) |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20213F620 | List:
|
| References | |
| FRN-50FR21072, RULE-PR-2 AB78-1-096, AB78-1-96, NUDOCS 8705260478 | |
| Download: ML20214G262 (1) | |
Text
..
t pa atog t
-fe
-k UNITED STATES y
E NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION ATOMIC SAFETY AND LICENslNG BOARD PANEL
,8 g
W ASHINGTON, D.C. 20555 I
October 8, 1986 MEMORANDUM FOR: Jane R. Mapes, 0GC i
FROM:
B. Paul Cotter, Jr.
Chief Administrative ' Judge
SUBJECT:
DRAFT C0PetISSION PAPER CONCERNING FINAL RULE ON DISCLOSURE /NON-DISCLOSURE PROCEDURES We found your paper to be very well written.
You_have done an excellent job of accommodating the regulations to the Comission's policy directives. So long as the Comission continues to feel that these regulations are necessary, we concur in their publication as you have presented them.
We do, however, have a sense that this matter is back where it started from the standpoint of the Panel. Our initial reaction to the concern addressed by-these new regulations was that Boards could handle the disclosure issues presented by investigations and inspections adequately and comfortably with the procedural tools already available to them. We continue to feel that way.
In response to the procedures set out in the proposed rule, the Comission received overwhelmingly negative comments. The primary response to those comments in this paper is, " Don't worry. Because of our new board notification policy, these rules will hardly ever be used." If that is true, why adopt them? As we said at the beginning, we do not need them, and it seems clear from the attitude of the commenters that they will be attacked in Court.
Again, however, so long as the Comission's intention is to give these procedures a trial, we think you have accomplished the objective admirably.
B705260478 B70520 PDR PR 2 50FR21072 PDR _;o
-