ML20238D203
| ML20238D203 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | 05560755 |
| Issue date: | 10/05/1987 |
| From: | Woodhead C NRC OFFICE OF THE GENERAL COUNSEL (OGC) |
| To: | Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Panel |
| References | |
| CON-#188-5186 SP, NUDOCS 8801040149 | |
| Download: ML20238D203 (4) | |
Text
_
.N 30CEEJE0 USNRC ptgry, pgj UNITED STATES OF AMERICA NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSIOWICE Di dEMTAd'f HCKE:1ih0 W 'ilnVICl:
BEFORE THE ADMINISTRATIVE' JUDGE in the Matter of
)
)
ALFRED J. MORABITO
)
Docket No. 55-60755 - 58
)
(Senior Operator License for
)
Beaver Valley Nuclear Power
)
Station, Unit 1)
)',
NRC STAFF RESPONSE TO MOTION REQUESTING JUDICIAL REVIEW OF RECORDS 1.
INTRODUCTION By motion dated September 14, 1987 Alfred J. Morabito requested the Administrative Judge appointed to this proceeding to review certain records denied Mr. Morabito by the Commission's Freedom of Information Branch in response to his Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request of September 3, 1987.
The NRC staff opposes the motion and recommends that it be denied for the reasons discussed below.
1 11.
DISCUSSION A.
The Motion in his motion, Mr. Morabito states that he has appealed a denial of certain records he requested through the FOIA process, which he would have liked to submit as a supplement to his Specification of Claims previ-ously filed in this proceeding.
Motion at 1.
Mr. Morabito states that he believes the records requested would support his assertion that "an 8801040149 871005-SECY LIC55 05560755 i
PDR f)h 0
/
l
9 inadequate quality assurance (QA) review was administered to lhim] on July 22 6 23,1986."
Motion at 2.
Mr. Morabito asserts that if an ade-quate "QA review" had been performed, he would not have been denied his senior operator license.
Id.
Mr. Morabito concludes that, although the Administrative Judge has ruled that he cannot address the operator licensing process in this proceeding, nevertheless, the Judge may find sufficent cause in the records denied to seek authority from the Commis-sion for expanded jurisdiction.
Attached to the motion are several docu-l ments relating to Mr. Morabito's FOIA r'equest and appeal.
Included in the attachments is a September 3, 1987 denial of requested records pur-l suant to exemptions 5 and 6 of FOI A and 10 C.F.R. 9.5(a) of the Com-mission's regulations.1 B.
Staff Response The motion is without merit.
The Commission's Division of Rules and Records, Freedom of information and Privacy Acts Branch, implements the provisions of the Freedom of Information Act, the Privacy Act, and the Commission's conforming regulations, all of which are legally binding on all Commission employees, including Administrative Judges.
Mr. Morabito has already instituted the proper method of seeking access to the re-quested records by his appeal to the Executive. 1l rector of Operations (EDO).
If the appeal is cenied, he may seek judicial review of the denial
-1/
The Commission's Freedom of information Act regulations are set out in 10 C. F. R. Part 9. The exemptions to public disclosure of certain l
types of agency records are set out in 10 C.F.R. 6 9.5.
Exemptions l
5 and 6 pertain to records which are interagency or intraagency memoranda or letters not available by law to a private party in liti-gation with the NRC, and personnel files, the disclosure of which would constitute an invasion of privacy.
. in federal district court.
10 C.F.R. 6 9.11(a)(3).
Mr. Morabito's re-quest for the Administrative Judge to review the documents included within his FOIA request that have been decilned is not contemplated by 1.
the Commission's regulations.
There is no authority for the Administra-tive Judge to review the procedures followed by other offices in reviewing l
FOIA requests.
This proceeding is limited to a review of Mr. Morabito's argument that he should have received his SRO license in that he has met all the qualifications including passing the written and simulator examinations.
Mr. Morabito has also requested a meeting with the Director of the Division of Rules and Records to discuss a rulemaking petition to address his concerns, as indicated in the letter of appeal to the EDO attached to the motion.
.in this letter Mr. Morabito also expressed his concerns di-rectly to the EDO.
In short, Mr. Morabito has availed himself of the proper means of addressing his concerns about the operator licensing procedures and there is no valid reason for his repeated attempts to air his complaints on this matter within the prescribed confines of this proceeding.
Ill.
CONCLUSION For the reasons stated, the motion should be denied.
Respect ful ly sutml tted, ColIeen P. Woodhead Counsel for mC Sta f f Dated at Bethesda, Maryland this 5th day of October,1987
't; 00f.KETED U5NRC UNITED STATES OF AMERICA 37 ET -6 P6:01 NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION hh
' kNN BEFORE THE ADMINISTRATIVE JUDGE in the Matter of
)
)
ALFRED J. MORABITO
)
Docket No. 55-60755
)
(Senior Operator License for
)
Beaver Valley Nuclear Power
)
Station, Unit 1)
)
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I hereby certify that copies of "NRC STAFF RESPONSE TO MOTION REQUESTING JUDICIAL REVIEW OF RECORDS" in the above-captioned proceeding have been served on the following by ' deposit in the United States mail, first class, or as indicated by an asterisk through deposit in the Nuclear Regulatory Commission's internal mail system, this 5th day of October,1987:
Charles Bechhoefer, Esq.
Alfred J. Morabito Administrative Judge 685 Tulip Drive Atomic Sefety and Licensing Poard New Brighton, PA 15066 U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D.C.
20555*
Atomic Safety and Licensing Board Jay Gutierrez U.S. Nuclear Regulatery Commission Regional Counsel Washington, D.C.
20555*
USNRC, Region 1 631 Park Avenue Atomic Safety and Licensing Appeal King of Prussia, PA 19406*
Board Panel U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Docketing and Service Section Washington, D.C.
20555*
Office of the Secretary U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D.C.
20555*
ff Colleen P. Woodhead Counsel for NRC Staff