ML20246K262
| ML20246K262 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Issue date: | 01/23/1989 |
| From: | Stello V NRC OFFICE OF THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR FOR OPERATIONS (EDO) |
| To: | Kohn M KOHN, KOHN & COLAPINTO, P.C. (FORMERLY KOHN & ASSOCIA |
| References | |
| FOIA-89-47 NUDOCS 8909050420 | |
| Download: ML20246K262 (2) | |
Text
-
UNITED STATES '
~ ~
Le 9,
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
.[
p,.
E-WASHWG TON, D. C. 20$55 5
)
January 23, 1989 g
we
,e Mr. Michael D. Kohn 526 U Street N.W.
Washington D.C.
20001
Dear Mr. Kohn:
As a preliminary matter, please be advised that " Petitioners Joseph J. Macktal and S.M.A. Hasan Motion for Protective Order" which you filed before theThe Commission on December 7, 1988 has been referred to me for a response.
Commission's Statement of Policy on Confidentiality, 50 Federa_1 Register 48506 (November 25,1985) expressly provides for revocation of confidentiality and sets out the procedure to be followed. The Executive Director for Operations is authorized to revoke grants of confidentiality made by offices reporting to The Statement of Policy on Confidentiality directs that the NRC attempt him.
to notify the confidential source of its intent to revoke confidentiality and to provide him/her with an opportunity to explain why such action should not The Commission policy has been incorporated into NRC Manual Chapter be taken.
This precedure Appendix 0517, " Management of Allegations," Part II, page 22.
has been followed in this matter.
Specifically, our letter of October 3,1988 informed you of our reasons for considering the revocation of confidentiality granted pursuant to the two Confidentiality Agreements (Agreenents) executed on March 5,1986 and March 11 1986 with your client, Mr. Joseph J. Macktal, Jr., i.e., because the substance of the technical concerns obtained purtuant to the' Agreements had been made Consistent with NRC-0517, you were provided an opportunity to respond public.
to us within 10 days regarding any reasons why the NRC should not take the proposed action.
By letter dated October 9,1988, you informed us that you did not have copies of the transcribed interviews in which Mr. Macktal provided information to the NRC and so you could not advise Mr. Macktal until you had been given an opportunity to review the transcripts.
Our letter of October 31, 1988 provided copies of the documents you stated were needed to advise your client and informed you that your October 9,1988 letter did not provide information to change our intention to revoke the Our letter also aavised you that if we did not hear from you Agreements.
within 10 days that we would, oceed with the proposed action and send you
/
confirmation.
L On November 14, 1988, Mr. Steven Kohn talked to Messrs. Grimes and McKee of the Office of Special Projects staff by telephone and discussed various as;ects of the proposed revocation. During this discussion, Mr. Steven Kohn had several questions and requested an exter.sion of the time in which to respond to our October 31, 1988 letter. The staff agreed to delay the decision on revocation 28, 1988. On Hovember 18, 1988, the staff talked with you by until November We have telephone and responded to the questions raised by Mr. Steven Kohn.
received no written response to our letter of October 31, 1988.
CERTIFIED MAIL hETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED e909050420 a90123 FDR FOIA COLAPINT89-47 PDR
1 4
Mr. Michael D. Koh,n _,.e We have carefully considered the arguments that you have presented on behalf of your client and determined that revocation of confidentiality is proper in this case.
Accordingly, this letter constitutes our revocation of confidentiality granted pursuant to the Agreements with Mr. Joseph J. Macktal, Jr. effective l
on the date of this letter. As Mr. Macktal's attorney, we request that you i
provide him with a copy of this revocation so that he will be fully informed of the actions taken on this matter.
r Sincerely, M
i W
NV ict b el o, r
Executive Dire or for Operations
. _ _ _ ___ ____ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ -