ML20236M478

Responds to Which Informed That Copy of Documents D Chancellor Listed in 980626 Were Sent to D Nielson & Leavitt.Informs That Copies Not Received by Chancellor or Other Parties to Proceeding.Related Correspondence

ML20236M478
Person / Time
Site:	07200022
Issue date:	07/06/1998
From:	Chancellor D UTAH, STATE OF
To:	Silberg J SHAW, PITTMAN, POTTS & TROWBRIDGE
References
CON-#398-19298 ISFSI, NUDOCS 9807140099
Download: ML20236M478 (2)

Text

. _ _ _

, [/2.f f STATE OF UTAH OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENER AL

,++ "*%,

DOCKETED t

USHRC t.!

% JUL 13 A10:34 4....

J AN GR AH AM yy A

ATTORNEY GENER AL p"

J CAnot CLAWSON REEo RicHAnos MM -

. PALMER oEPA%fS Schece General Cheef Deputy Attomey General Chef of Staft

)

July 6,1998 Sent Via first class mail and e-mail to: Jay _Silberg@shawpittman.com Jay Silberg, Esq Shaw, Pittman, Potts & Trowbridge 2300 N Street, N. W.

Washington, DC 20037-8007 In the Matter of Private Fuel Storage, L.L.C.

re:

Docket No. 72-22 ISFSI

Dear Mr. Silberg:

This letter is in response to your letter of July 2,1998 informing me that a copy of documents I listed in my June 26 letter to you (primarily revisions to the Safety Analysis Report and Emergency Plan) were in fact sent to Dianne R. Nielson, Department of Environmental Quality and Governor Leavitt. However, a copy of these documents were not sent to me, or to other parties to the proceeding, including NRC's counsel Mr. Sherwin Turk.

Please be advised that the distribution to the State described in your June 30 letter is not acceptable. It is imperative that counsel for the State timely receive a copy of whatever license amendments, documents, correspondence, etc. that the Applicant submits to the NRC l

Staff, as it does with all pleadings filed in this proceeding. This shculd be the case whether j

the documents are generated by the PFS project office or directly by Mr. Parkyn. Please send a copy of the information requested in my June 26 letter directly to me.

One further note about the proposed confidentiality agreement between the Applicant l

and the Star:: that would allow the State to have access to proprietary information submitted by the Applicant to the NRC, deals with the fact that Utah Contentions E (Financial Assurance) and S (Decommissioning) have been consolidated with Castle Rock Contention 7 and Confederated Tribes of the Goshute Reservation (Confederated Tribes) Contention F. As the State has the lead on these consolidated contentions, it may need to share details from the 9007140099 980706 PDR ADOCK 07200022 C

PDR w

16o East 3oo South. 5th Floor. P.o. Box 14o873. Salt Lak. City. Utah 84114 o8 9 3

yf T.i.pnon.: <sosi ses.oreo rac.imii.: <aoii ses. ores

Letter to Jay Silberg, Esq.

July 6,1998

~page 2 proprietary information with Castle Rock and the Confederated Tribes. Therefore, the State requests that the Applicant also enter into separate agreements with Castle Rock and the Confederated Tribes that would allow them access to confidential and proprietary

. information. I have written to counsel for both panies requesting that they contact you about entering into such an agreement. A copy of my letter to counsel for both parties is enclosed.

_ Since writing the above, I have received your email copy of the Confidentiality and Nondisclosure Agreement and have the following comme-ts. First, the State does not see the need for 16, which does not allow the State to disclose, without PFS's prior written consent, that Confidential Information has been made available to the State or that the State has inspected such information. I request that 16 be deleted. Second,17 require; the State, prior to disclosure of any Confidential Information in the NRC proceeding, to advise PFS in advance of the disclosure. If and when the State submits a pleading to the NRC based on Confidential Information obtained from PFS, it is willing to submit the pleading to the NRC as a proprietary or confidential pleading. A mechanism airc:.dy exists in the ASLB proceeding i

for filing confidential pleadings. However, the State does not agree that it thould first advise PFS that the State will use of such information in the NRC proceeding. I will contact you by 1

telephone to determine what mutually agreeable changes may be made to the agreement to j

satisfy the foregoing concerns.

i Since

<.$44Aa Y

enise Chancellor j

Assistant Attorney General l

l enclosure: as stated cc: PFS Service List L

L j

i

_ = - _-_ __

.___ _ - __- _ ______ __-________ _-_ - ___