ML20245D528
| ML20245D528 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Seabrook  |
| Issue date: | 07/19/1988 |
| From: | Zech L NRC COMMISSION (OCM) |
| To: | Udall M HOUSE OF REP., APPROPRIATIONS |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20245D530 | List: |
| References | |
| NUDOCS 8807280105 | |
| Download: ML20245D528 (8) | |
Text
_ _ - _ - _ - - _ _
l Distribution:
VStello EJordan UNITED sT ATEs JTaylor WRussell NUCLE AR REGULATORY COMMISSION a[
'a w AsHiNcTON, D. C. 20555 e
.,i OGL DBrinkman BBoger WTravers
%, *.. * /
SVarga TMurley July 19, 1988 FMiraglia JScinto cwAiauAs TMurley i
The Honorable Morris K. Udall, Chairman Subcommittee on Energy and the Environment Committee on Interior and the Environment U. S. House of Representatives Washington, D. C.
20515
Dear Mr. Chairman:
12, 1988, I am enclosing the In response to your letter of MayCommission's responses to questio 26, 1988 Subcommittee Mavroules for the record of the Aprilhearing on bills to reform th Sincerely, W.
Lando W. Z c, Jr
Enclosure:
As Stated Rep. Manuel Lujan, Jr.
cc:
Originated: NRR:Brinkman J
y NoTLMlcU
(
St y
9' O
RESPONSE TO QUESTIONS FROM CONGRESSMAN MARV0VLES Are you aware of a statemert that the NRC's top safety
\\
~ QUESTION 1_
officer Victor Stello made to FEMA in January of this year the NRC would " wage total war on FEMA" unless it that withdrew its opposition to the emergency evacuation plan for the Seabrook Nuclear Power Plant?
ANSWER Through various news media reports, Chaiman Zech and Commissioner Robe became aware of the allegations concerning statements to FEMA referred to Chaima> Zech inquired of Mr. Stello whether he had mede the above question.
the statements, and Mr. Stello said that he had not made the statements as Neither Comission:: Carr nor Commissioner Rogers was aware of reported.
Stello made such a the alleged statement.
Questions about whether Mr.
statement have been raised in the ongoing adjudicatory proceedings involv the Seabrook facility.
Testimony on this issue was received by the Seabrook Licensing Board in The Comission has asked the staff to write to you under May of this year.
separate cover with additional information developed during the adjudica l
process.
7 i4( ~
uC
/}< t~ D ',I.
- ~...
1 J
4 What meetings did the NRC staff hold with officials of FEMA OtfESTION 2 in January,1988 concerning the Seabrook evacuation plan and FEMA's testimony in the New Hampshire hearings?
ANSWER A meeting was held between the NRC staff and FEMA officials on January 19, This meeting concerned various offsite emergency planning issues ige 4.
affecting the Shoreham and Seabrook nuclear plants.
The meeting was described in detail by three FEMA officials who attended the meeting (Grant Peterson, David McLaughlin and Richard Krim), during the course of hearings on the Seabrook operating license application on May 25-27, 198't.
Ir. addition, a meeting of the FEMA Regional Assistance temittee (RAC), of 7-8, 1988.
This which the NRC is a member agency, was held on January meeting was described in detail by the NRC's RAC representative (Dr. Robert Bores) rad by.the FEMA RAC chairman (Edward Thomas) in testimony during Atomic Safety and Licensing Board hearings on the Seabrock operating license application on January 11-13, 1988.
j CL'ESTION 3 Has the NRC had any meetings with the owners of the Seaurook Nuclear power plant that is not a part of the f
public record?
ANSWER All NRC staff meetings with the Seabrook applicants / licensees are conducted in accordance with the NRC staff's Open Meetings policy, which is detailed in 43 Fh 28058 (See attached Federal Register Notice).
All meetings, including those which in accordance with the policy are closed in order to discuss proprietary or tafeguards infomation, are publicly noticed, and once completed, written sumaries of non-proprietary and unclassified portions of the meetings e,e prepared and made available to the public.
As part of the routine regulation of the
- licensee, the NRC staff the licensee's personnel through telephone contacts or communicates with infomal face-to-face discussions in order to reach agreement on schedules, to make inquiries co. >,erning licensing actions, and to conduct inspections.
the Typically, no public record is made of these interactions; however, results of significant interactions are made part of the public record through documents such as safety evaluations and inspection reports.
In accordance with Comission practice, all Comission meetings with Seabrook's owners would have been held in public unless there was a specific need (such as discucsion of security or proprietary infomation) to close the
QUESTION 3 (Continued) 1 No Commission meetings with Seabrook owners have been identified meeting.
which were not open to the public.
Because the Seabrook case has been under adjudication, private meetings between Seabrook owners ard NRC Commission would be prchibited in most matters relevant to Seabrook by g parte cor.siderations.
1
Enclosure to Question 3 e
a NOTICES M458 evtsien. For..esample.liise persons e 4 twh in mameter, an the toneetne of enent of Justles, ass Indiana Avenue May nM be permitted to SW meet, t s er Leel. prer18ee for in iteme 444 49.
NW, Washingtogg D.C. 30631.
Ings when classified ot. proprietary in.
Josnt M.Rac'roa.
formauon (includtat sensiuva aa.fe.
acase les ebhe al ae eg Adminuftstor, Offtet af. / wee.
ruards ormam wYrt te sad Delinemency g
y gt oul a
13es t g:=a,;',y,gm,td =
Ipm pee.16.iteto yued e.rt.it t as amt-m,s.,
i
.pu
.,u e,amt h
and forward the sumanary to interest.
n8 #8'bl' %8 Sit *nd 84 th61 iddle-18)
'd 8'w**u be informed of that tran.
F DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICI
[7390-41]
they i aptred at the anung. However, at.
NUCLEAR REOULATORy n-a-will not be limised solely be.
ta. saame.eesioo se Ae.w *ene.
CO8WISHON -
eauss preliminary sp1Alons. Fecom.
Isan0 stat SCae0OL StSOURCI WM escadauons, or advies viu be offered 80satsttCUtsent APruCAfsesel open meenaes and seeee er et aest seen has the uns sensmesse When a party Dr pet!Lloner for leave The Offlee of Juven!!e Justsee and Pea'F to latervene requests. ressorable et.
Deltneuency Pretention announces a covepeutive grant program focusing on 3,h,.s (NRC's) regulations in le Cygg forts vul be made by the NRC sta!!
e Nuclear Itegulatery Cosamb.
Inform the party of petitioner of the problem of school violence and vandalism. The objective of this solicl* 3.102 permit appucants to confer in.
for hooming meetings conducted by tauon is development ni a school re* foanally with the NRC technical staff the NRC techs$m! staff so that appro.
sourse netaork that provides easts 4*
during reviews of domesue lleense or - priate arrangements for attendance anm to students, teachers, parents, se* permit appucauons. These muungs ena he made. It is recognised Usat in curity personnel, achool administra. have aerwd as an emuual means for some esses the need for a prompt ters, and community persormel. The the enchange of technient informauen meMing may snake it impossible or Im.
e a,,nd, views necessary for the tech,nient praeusable la neufy su parues and pe.
nauonst network is to include a na*
,g, og appuc gens, pg,,,,,g lationers, ne poucy described abow Donal school resource center and four years Mher parues w poknMal parues also enanot precucably be applied t regional school resource centers, he to domesue Ucenamt pWie=== es nauch61 networt wiu help local chance encounters between NRC tech.
schoots and school districts design and weU as members of the general public, alcal staff personnel and other gardes lenplement school violence and vandal
- have upon request. been permitted to 8r peuuoners but such chance encoun.
ists pmvenuen programs through attend applicant.NRC technical staff lors wS1 mot be permaed te serve as a training, technical assistance, and ad' meetings as observers. Igovever, the soure: sf infortsation for the conduct voeser that reeult in changes in school Commission's regulauons do not go, sf usansing ?eviews.
quire that others be parasitted to
, At the present time, there le 80 an. attend such informal moeungs be.MedatM % Nmis2 g
resporus to rcuth behavior, tween appucant and staff and the darofJune*IMS.
tional strategy to assist schools in dea!Ing effeettvely with school crime. general pracuce being foUowed in this For the melear Regulatory Com-Resources are minimal and fragment
- regard has never been forsnaur arucu. 8 hiss 388.
ed. Many local programs are developed lated. This sLatement is latended to las V.Oossics.
provide such trucultuen. It is also hh hierAr Operenona scialy in the interest of security. Dey noted that this saatter is related to the IFR Des. T6-119h' yued 4 31.tk t46 aml isD to accomp!!sh their obleetives, fa!!
provision for increased pubUc parcel.
to address the real needs of the school pauon which was approved by the systems, and fall to provide benefits that are consistent with their costs. A Commission during its seasidersuon N N
of NUREO 0292 (Denten Reporu.
(Destet pe.Io.stel nauons! achool resource netsork dedi.
As a general snatter, the Consolaslon cated to advocacy. reform, and a safer and staff try to involve concerned elu.
.JEslsY essefast powes a us ef ne.
environtnent for studente and teachers sens in any Ceramission eeuvity in We P, bnemsf Es needed to provide overall direction which they > ve expressed an laterest, heuense et * -
o,,,,,,,',y,,,,,
and coordination of esisting and new All meetings conducted by the NRC school resources.
technical staff as part of its review of ' ne U.S. Nuclear Regulatery Com.
Pre!Lminary app 1feations in response a particular domestic Uoense or perrait mission (the Commissions has issued to this announcement are due Novem-app!! cation tincluding an appilcation Amendment No. 22 to Provisional op-ber 1. IM8. While it is anucipated that for an amendraent to a fleense or ersting Utense No. DPR.18,lesued to only one grant award etU be snade, perm!L1 wiu be open to attendance by Jersey Central Power et Usht Co. Ithe subtrant arrangement are both ac. all parties or petitioners for leave to liceruee), which revised the Techalcal ceptable and encouraged. The grant intervene in the ease. These sneetings Specifiestions for operation of the period will be for a durauon of fifteen are intended by the.NRC technical Oyster Creek Nuclear Generating Sta.
till months; the award amount wt!! De staf f to f acilitate an enchange of infor. uen (the facultyl, located in Ocean up to a maximum of $2.600.000. Pro. snauon between the applicaat and the County, NJ The arnendment is effee, Ilminary applications wul be sensid. sta!!. It is espected that the NRC Uve 30 days after the date of its issu.
eted only from public and private non. techrdeal staff and the appucant wtB profit agency, organizations, and insti. asuvely parucipale h the asetting.
The amendroent revised the Techal.
anos.
tuuona. All such agencies, organisa. Others may attend as observers uke. en! Specificauens to incorporate re.
Mona, and institutions must have desa. wise, when meetings are scheduled be.
autrements for estabilshing and main.
onstrated experience la den!!ng with tween the staff and other parties or talning the drywell to suppression pelluoners, applicants would be per. chamber differetiual pressure and sup.
- yoeth, Copies of the prograre guidelines mitted to attend only as observers.
pression chamber water level. to main.
r1H be released on August 1. IMS. rad The general polley of open meetings lain the margins of safety established can be obtained by contacting the described above wiu admit of only a la the NRC staffs Mark I Contain.
Offnce of JuvenUc Justice and Dellre few eseepuona, which must be ap.
anent Short Term Prograss Safety euency Prevenuon. taw Enforcement Proved by the Directer of the relevant I
Assistance Administratfork Depart.
I ns=At esterm.voi. e, no, to-nosesmay, a e m im -
l QUES 110N 4 There is a letter that an attorney with Connor and Wetterhahn wrote to Gulf States Utilities Company of Beaumont, Texas that states that he talked with NRC Commissioner Fred Bernthal and was able to change his vote.
Are you familiar with such a letter, and, if so, what vote is he referring to and what relationship did it have with Gulf States Utilities?
Answer:
Yes.
This letter was the subject of a Congres'.tional inquiry by the Subcommittee on Nuclear Regulation, Senate Comittee on Environment and Public Works, during a hearing held on October 20, 1987, c'; which the The letter was placed in the public record of Commissioners were present.
The vote mentioned in the the hearing by Subcommittee Chainnan John Breaux.
letter was a Comission vote in May 1985 on SECY-85-149, the Proposed Rule This was a proposed generic "ule change under on Material False Statements.
consideration by the Comission in its legislative or rulemaking capacity.
The proposed rule potentially affected many NRC licensees, including Gulf States Utilities.
As a rulemaking rather than an adjudication, the j
l l
parte rules did not apply, and there was no impropriety i
Comission's ex involved in a Commissioner discussing the proposed rule change with representatives of the law finn.
At issue in the Senate hearing was the Comission's subsequent dental of an FOIA request for SECY-85-149, which had already been placed in the Public j
The letter and the FOIA denial seemed to suggest that sorre Document Room.
l l
j
OUESTION 4 (Continued) This me bers of the public had access to infonration unavailable to others.
sa:ter was revicwed by the Connission's General Counsel.
A copy of a unscrandum discussing that review and the letter transmitting it to the I
Subcour.ittee is attached.
i Commissioners Carr and Rogers note that they were not aware of the letter urtil it was raised as an issue during the October 20, 1987 hearing and that they were not members af the Comission at the tiene the letter was written.
i i
l
- p a % q).
UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMM!SSION Enclosure to
[
wasmwcToN. o. c. nosss Question 4
\\...../
l December 23, 1987 CHAmMAN l
' The Honorable John B. Breaux, Chaiman Subcommittee on Nuclear Regulation omMttee on Environment and Public Works Jnited States Senate Washington, DC 20510
Dear Mr. Chaiman:
During the Comission's appearance before Your Subcommittee on October 29, 1907. I comitted to report to the Subcommittee on the circumstances surrounding the disposition of an FOIA request filed by Inside N_RC on R
June 7, 1985.
Der General Counsel has looked into this matter and has concluded th inadvertent error was made while processing this particular F0IA request.
However, I reiterate A copy of his report on this matter is enclosed.that, as I stated predecisional material, such as its vote sheets, public.
On May 3,1985, a transcript of a May 2,1985 Comission meeting)and a The copy of SECY-85-149 were placed in the Public Do when Commission documents go into the PDR.
Had that Branch received the notification was overlooked or misplaced.
such notification, it would have logged SECY-85-149 as a public document.
Inside NRC, at that point, would have and should have been notified of this fact and been given the accession number of the document f retrieval purposes.
Office of the Secretary, a Comission level office, sent a memorandum to the Division of Rules and Records advising that the Comission had detemined that SECY-85-149 was to be withheld pursuant to Exemption 5 of However, the usual documentation that would indicate that the Thus, as the the FOIA.
Comission had in fact been consulted has not been located.
General Counsel notes, the most that can be said is that However, the requested vote sheets had not been made public and would not have been released except by the election of each individual Commiss One Commissioner did so elect in this case.
Wetterhahn had access to these. vote sheets in order to make t There were in his July 16, 1985 letter that you read during the hearing.
no ex parte considerations that would preclude discus i
by using infomation gathered from infomal conversations, speeches, rule.
transcripts of meetings, and other communications.
%inMO n o
I j
00000}
The Honorable John v. Breaux
-2 d
The Comission does not believe that the circumstances surrounding the handling of this isolated FOIA request means that our FOIA procedures are generally flawed.
I assure you and the other members of the Subcommittee that we make every effort to be fair in complying with FOIA requirements.
Sincerely.
W.
A, Lando W. Zec Jr.
cc: Senator Alan K. Simpson
Attachment:
As stated
000003 g
UNITED STATES
/
'g NUCLE AR REGULATORY COMMIS$10N
/
t We ASMits0T0tt, s. C. peses I
h Y
October 28, 1987 y.....'
Chairman tech MEMORANDUM FOR:
i William C. Parler/
FROM:
General Counsel DENIAL OF A FOIA REQUEST FOR A RECORD
SUBJECT:
ALREADY MADE PUBLICLY AVAILABLE
===.
Background===
on October 20, 1987 at a hearing of the Subcommittee on Nuclear Regulation, an incident was discussed concerning the agency's processing of a FOIA request submitted by Inside a record, SECY-85-149, which had already be NRC.
I asked an OGC attorney the Public Document Room ("PDR*).to look into this matt Staff's Proposed Rule on SECY-85-149 (
Subject:
Material False Statements) was submitted to tneDiscu 26, 1985.
commission on April paper was scheduled for May 2, 1985 at an openPrior to the Ma Commission meeting.
Commission monitor assigned to the Secretary's of fice was advised by the of fice of the Executive Legal Director to make SECY-85-149 available to members of the public who would be attending theT copies of the paper on a table in the back of the meeting.
room where the meeting was to be held.
On May 3, 1985, a transcript of the May 2 meeting and copies of SECY-85-149 were delivered to the 15, 1985, these documents were PDR, and on May catalogued and otherwise made available forre SECY papers are catalogued by(number. CONNER fi 1:ITTERHANN)
Consequently, Mr. Wetterhahn or any other member of the public could haveob pp/p[ogf(y
Contact:
Carolyn F. Evans, OGC x41493
t 000004
)
i t
simply requesting '8ECY-85-149,' assuming it was j
not obtained at the Commission meeting.
On June 7,1985, Margaret L. Ryan, Chief Editor, Insids NRC submitted a FCIA request for 'all l
i notation votes made by the Commission in the j
months of January, February, March, April, and May In instances where the vote was to approve 1985.*
any documents not attached to the vote sheets such as SECY papers, Ms. Ryan requested release of these documents as well.
In this way, SECY-85-149 was captured by Ms. Ryan's FOIA request which was subsequently assigned the sequential FCIA number 85-409 by the Division of Rules and Records.
e Ms. Ryan's FCIA request was processed in the Copies of her request were customary manner.
forwarded to all offices reasonably expected to Forty-six documents in have responsive records.
all (including SECY-85-149) were identified as These documents responsive to Ms. Ryan's request.
were then reviewed for the purpose of making a release / withhold determination under the FOIA.
First, the The review process was two tiered.
offices which authored the documents reviewed them and made an initial release / withhold The documents were then reviewed recommendation.
With respect to at the Commission level.
SECY-85-149, the of fice of the Executive Legal Director made an initial ' release" recommendation.
Instead it This recommendation was not followed.
was determined at the Commission level that SECY-85-149 was v thholdable under Exemption 5 of l
the FOIA and it was denied on that basis.
Discussion Inadvertent error can be isolated as the cause of the agency's ' faulty" processing of Inside MDC's FOIA request.
When the transcript of the May 2,1955 meeting and copies of SECY-85-149 were delivered to the FDR, someone apparently forget to advise the Chief of the Commission's Had he correspondence & Records Branch of the transmittal.
been so advised, he would have listed SECY-85-149 in his log
{
Thus, when SECY-85-149 was as a publicly available record.
identified as a responsive document, his log would have shown that the document was already in the PDR, Inside NRC would have been advised of this fact and given the accesssion number of the document for retrieval purposes, and the document would never have been The errer could have 21so been avoided if the Division of kules and Records had
000005
~
to see if any accessed the Document Control System ('DCS*)
of the SECY papers identified as responsive to Inside NRee s
request had been previously released to the public.
The system would have indicated that SECY-85-149 was a publicly available document.
Commissioner Roberts l
Commissioner Bernthal cc:
Commissioner Carr Commissioner Rogers EDO SECY
_.____________.__-____________________._-________.________.______._______..s
_ _ _ _. - _ _ _ _ _. _ _ _ _ _. _ _ _. _ _ _ _. _ _ _ _ _ _. _ _... _ _ _ _