ML20247R791
| ML20247R791 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Issue date: | 09/28/1989 |
| From: | Grimsley D NRC OFFICE OF ADMINISTRATION (ADM) |
| To: | Airozo D INSIDE N.R.C. (MCGRAW-HILL PUBLICATION) |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20247R796 | List: |
| References | |
| FOIA-89-256 NUDOCS 8910020074 | |
| Download: ML20247R791 (5) | |
Text
J
~_ ~ ~ -, _ - -. _ _ _ ~--_
FOIA -$ 9
.1, 5(o j e.gk.
RESPONSI TYPE g,
u
.g g
i RESPO SE
. FREEDO OF l'a=
M e^anat B W1)
^"
[
INFORMATION ACT (FOIA) REQUEST S
SEP 2 81989 Neee e DOCKET NUMBf.RtS)iff appdecaout REQUESTOR l
~
[]
P/RT 1.-. AGENCY RECORDS RELEASED OR NOT LOCATED (See checked boxes)
No agency records subje to the request have been located.
No additional agency records subject to the request have been located.
Requested records are available through another public distribution program. See Comments Section.
Agency records subject to the request that are identified on Append # ales) are already avcitable for public mspection and copying en the NRC Pubhc Document Room. 2021 L Street, N W., Washington, DC 20555 Agency records subsect to the reauest that are edentified on Appendix (es) I-7 Y N_
are being made available for pubhc inspecteon and copying in NRC Pubhc Ctvenent Room, 2021 L Street, N.W., Washengton, DC, in a folde#r under this FO!A number and requester name.
The nonproprietary version of the proposalls) that you agreed to accept in a telephone conversation with a member of my staff is now being made available for pubhc inspection and copying at the NRC Pubhc Document Room 2021 L Street, N W., Washington, DC, in a foMer under this FOlA number and requester name.
Agency records subject to the request that are identif,edon Appendsales) may be inspected and copied at the NRC Locar Pubhc Documer:t Room identified in the Comments Section.
Enclosed is information on how you may obte n access to and the charges for copying records placed m the NRC Pubhc Doavment Room, 2021 L Street, N.W.,
Washington, DC.
Agency records subject to the request are enclosed.
Records subject to the request have been referred to another Federal egencyhes) for review and direct response to you.
You will be billed by the NRC for fees totaling 4 No.
in view of NRC's response to this request, no further action es being taken on ap.,eal letter dated PART u. A-INFORMATION WITHHELD FROM PUBLIC DISCLOSURE j
Certain information in the requested records es bemg withheld from public desclosure pursuant to the esemptions described m and for the reabons stated in Part it, seClions B, C, and D. Any released portions of the documents for whech only part of the record as bemg withheld are beeng made available for public enspection and "Copyeng in the NRC Pubhc Document Room 2021 L Street, N W., Washington, DC en a folder undet this FOIA number and requester name 4
COMMENTS
&N W%.
890928 8910020;
- PDR FOIA AIROZOB9-256 PDR SIG)fyVRE, DIRECTOR, OfVlSIO OF FREEDOM OF INFORMATION AND PUBUCATIONS SERVICES WM /h Jm
(
~ e m.-.
FOIA -%9-2,5 6 DATESEP 2 8 m FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT RESPONSE FOiA NuusER;St PART 11.B-APPLICABLE EXEMPTIONS Records subject to th3 ftQuest th%t fr3 drscribed on the enclosed Appendis(Is)
_3*
cre being withhs;d in their entirsty or in pIrt under the Ezernptions and for the reasons set forth below pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 552(b) and 10 CFR 9.17(as of NRC Regulations..
I'. The withheld information is properly classifed pursuant to Executive Order (EXEMPTION 18
- 2. The withheld m6ormation relates solely to the intomal personnel rules and procedures of NRC. dXEMPTION 2)
- 3. The withheld information is specifically exempted from pubic disclosure by statute mdecated; (EXEMPTION 3) i Sections 141 145 of the Atomec Energy Act which prohibits the disclosure of Restreted Date or Formerty Restrected Data 142 U S.C. 216121651 l
Section 147 of the Atomic Energy Act whch prohibits the disclosure of Unclassified Safeguards informaten (42 U.S C. 2167).
l
- 4. The withheld 6nfortnaten is a trade secret or commercial of financial information that is bemg wrthheld for the reason!s) mdicated. (EXEMPTION 41 N
The information is considesed to be confidential busmess (propretary) informaten.
3 The informaten is considered to be propnetary mfoemation pursuant to 10 CFR 2.790(dHil.
l W1 l
.i The information was submitted and recewed in conLdence pursuant to 10 CFR 2.790tdH2).
1 1
- 5. The withheld eformaten consists of interagency or mtraegency records that are not available through discovery dunng litegsten IEXEMPTION 51. Applicable Pnvilege:
j Delibersteve Process: Disclosure of predecisional mformation would tend to inhitHt the open and frank exchange of sdeas essential to the deliberative process.
Where records are withheld m their entirety, the f acts are mentrecably etertwmed with the predeceseonal mformation. There also are no reasonably segregable f actual portions because the release of the facts would permit an indirect gry into the predecisena! process of the agency.
Attomey worit-product privilege. IDocuments prepared by an atto** e.m Priuplation of litigation.1 ear Attorney-client pnvilege (Confidential communications between m sero e4 hm'her clienti s - - r.
- 6. The withheld information is exempted from pubhc disc 60sure because its Mrwn vmuld result in a clearly unwananted mvasion of personal privacy. (EXEMPTION 6) i
- 7. The withheld information consists of records compiiod for law enforcement purposes and is bemg withheld for the reason (s) endcated. (EXEMPTION 7)
I Disclosure could reasonatdy be expected to mterfere with an enforcement proceedmg because it could reveal the scope, detection, and focus of en.
forcement efforts and thus could possibly allow them to talte acten to sheid potential wrongdoing or a violation of NRC regarements from mvestigators.
Nc.
EXEM? TION 7 (An w
+
Draciosure would constitute an unwarranted invasion of personal pnvecy (EXEMPTION 7(Cl)
N The informaten consists of names of mdividuals and ouer mformation st$e disclosure of which could reasonably be espected to revealidentities of confidential sources (EXEMPTION 7 (Du OTHE.R PART 11. C-DENYING OFFICIALS Pursuant to 10 CFR 9 25(b) and/or P 25 (c) of the U S Nuclear Regulatory Commissen regulatens. it has been determened that the eformation withheld is enempt from production or disclosure, and that its producten or disclosure is contrary to the pubic mterest The persons responsible for the denial are those offecials identsfed below as denyeng offcaals and the Director. Division of Freedom of Informaten and Pubhcatiuns Servces Office of Administration and Resources Management, for any 6snols that may be appepled to the Emecutive Director for Operatens (EDOt DENYING OFFICIAL TITLE / OFFICE RECORDS DENIED APPELLATE OFFICIAL
'Af' o
~
]
l hAuf $$
)
D 1
c-(
g4 :
PART 11. D-APPEAL RIGHTS The denial by each denying offcialidentifed m Part II.C may be appealed to the Appellate Offcial edentified in that section. Any such appeal must be m writing and must be made withm 30 days of receipt of this response. Appeals must te addressed as appropriate to the Executive Director for Operations,oMo the Societary of the Commission.dd U S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission. Washmgton, DC 20555. and should clearly state on the envelope and in the letter that it is an " Appeal frgrr an instel FOlpd Ar A AfWDecision.%
$ fT L}g R Qdiert NRC FORM 464 (Part 2)
U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSIO2 in-as' FOIA RESPONSE CONTINUATION
L Re: FOIA-89-256 (FifthPartial)
APPENDIX I RELEASED IN ENTIRETY 1.
Undated Cashier Reimbursement Youcher and/or Accountability Report (1 page) 2.
Various Sumary of Travel Activity (Office of the ED0) (1 page)
Summary)of Travel Activity (Office of Inspector and Auditor) 3.
Various (1 page 4.
Various Hotel receipt (Howard Johnson's Motor Lodge), with attached plane ticket for Mark Resner, OIG.
(2 pages) 5.
9/2/86 Memorandum for Ben 8. Hayes from Hudson B. Ragan, re; Expenses of Confidential Sources (7 pages) Attachment identifed on Appendix J-9 6.
8/25/88 Memorandum for Sharon R. Connelly from William C. Parler, re:
Special Fund.
(1 page) 7.
9/1/88 Requisition for Supplies, Equipment or Labor Services.
(2 pages) (1 page contains handwritten notation) 8.
9/26/88 Receipt (1 page) - NOTE: This wi.s released without handwritten notations in the 3rd Partial response dated 8/21/89.
9.
9/28/88 Voucher and Schedule of Payments.
(1 page) 10.
9/30/89 Requisition for Supplies, Equipment or Labor Services.
(1 page)
- 11. 1/30/89 Division Sumary of Obligations, Payments and Costs (EDO).
(1 page)
- 12. 2/27/89 Letter to Chairman Zech from George Miller and Sam Gejdenson (2 pages)
- 13. 2/28/89 Memorandum for John Bradburne fron William C. Parler.
(1 page) 14.
2/28/89 Letter to Congressman Miller from Chairman Zech.
(1 page)
- 15. 2/28/89 Letter to Congressman Gejdenson from Chairman Zech.
(1 page)
- 16. 3/1/89 Letter to Hugh Thompson from Chairman Zech, with enclosed appendix.
(4 pages)
- 17. 3/22/89 Letter to Chairman Zech from Gejdenson and Miller.
(4 pages) 18.
4/5/89 Letter to Chairman Zech from John Glenn.
(4 pages)
l Re: F01A-89-256 (FifthPartial) l l
APPENDIX J PORTIONS OF RECORDS DELETED - EXEMPTION 6 1.
8/5/88 Telephone or Verbal Conversation Record, re: Allegations Concerning Breach of Confidentiality by NRC Employees.
(2 pages) 2.
8/16/88 Official Travel Authorization form for C.R. Kraus.
(1 page) 3.
8/16/88 Official Travel Authorization form for D.M. Rowe.
(1 page) 4.
8/26/88 Official Travel Authorization form for S.R. Connelly.
(1page) 5.
8/23/88 Travel Voucher for D.M. Rowe.
(7 pages) 6.
9/15/88 Travel Voucher for C.R. Kraus.
(5 pages) 7.
9/21/88 Travel Voucher for S.R. Connelly.
(7 pages) 8.
9/21/88 Travel Voucher for S.R. Connelly, with handwritten notations.
(9 pages) 9.
various dates - Hotel Statement - Ellison (4 pages)
Re:
F01A-89-256 (FifthPartial)
. APPENDIX K PORTIONS DELETED - EXEMPTION 6 1.
3/27/89 Note to Graham Johnson from James L. Blaha, re: Payments to Douglas Ellison.
(1 page) 2.
Undated Copy of Identification Card.
-3.
2/6/75 Handwritten note.
(1 page)
-4.
Undated W-2 Form for Doug Ellison.
(1 page) l l
l 1
E
June 7, 1989 Washington, D.C.
3
.Mr.
Do le Grimsley i
. Director.g Divisin of Rules & Records Office air Advninis tra tion & Resources Managemen t FREEDOM 0F INf0RMATl0N U.S.
Nucl ear Regulatory Commission ACT REQUEST Washington, D,C,
[0/A. /1-AR Dear Mr. Grimsley g.7 Pursuant t o the Freedom of Information Act, I hereby request the following material:
- 1) All records pertaining to the Office of Inspector & Auditor's August 12, 1988 decision to open a formal inquiry into charges that Office of Investigations deputy director Roger Fortuna and/or other 01 or NRC regional personnel failed to adequately carry out their duties.
- 2) All records pertaining to Office of Inspector & Auditor. personnel travel to Daytona Beach, Fla. to interview Douglas Ellison, a former employee of Niagara Mohawk Power Corp. This request includes, but is not limited to3 all travel souchers, requests for travel funds, hotel bills and receipts, and miscellaneous costs'and receipts related to the trip. The OIA personnel who traveled to Florida for this purpose include OIA Director Sharon Connelly and DIA staffer Mark Resner. In addition, James Blaha, the assistant for operations in the Office of the Executive Director for Operations, accompanied the OIA personnel. This request pertains to Blaha as well as the OIA personnel..The time frame is around the last week of August, 1988.
- 3) Receipts for hotel accommodations and food purchased for DIA personnel or Blaha or Ellison, for the period September 1 through September 16, 1988.
The hotel in question is an Embassey Suites hotel located in suburban Washington, D;C. I would also like any information regarding whether Blaha or other NRC personnel had Ellison registered at the hotel as an NRC employee and if the hotel charged NRC the ' government rate' for Ellison's room.
- 4) Any records of telephone conversations or other contact between NRC Chairman Lando Zech and EDO Victor Stello, OIA director Sharon Connelly or General Counsel William Parler between August 18 and September 1, 1988.
Zech was traveling in the Soviet Union at the time.
- 5) Any correspondence between or among Zech, Stello. Connelly or Parler dated September 1 or 2, 1988 which is related to the OIA investigation of Roger Fortuna or the investigation of charges brought by Doug Ellison.
- 6) Any correspondence between or among Connelly, Stello and Parler regarding the agency's pursuit of audio tapes that are in the possession of an ti-nuclear activist Stephen Comley. The time period I'm interested in is August 12, 1988 through March 24, 1989.
m
- 7) Any cor despondence orf other records of discussion between or among Zech',
Connelly, Stello,.Parler, Ellison and consultant Alan Rosenthal or any of theih assistants or staff regarding the disposition of an Internal Revenue Service form 1099 for Ellison's ' consulting' services for the NRC. The time period I'm interested in is March 13, 1989 through April 1,
1989.
- 8) Any correspondence or other records of discussion between or among Connelly, Parler, Stello or Zech or any of-their assistants regarding the
~ Department of Justice's written memorandum declining to pursue allegations by Ellison against Fortuna. The time period I'm interested in is July 1, 1988 through April 1,
1989.
- 9) All records pertaining to or making reference to a contract signed by NRC's Ed Halman and Doug Ellison dated September 1, 1988. The contract calls for Ellison to provide 'consutling' services to NRC in return.for' an hourly wage. Sharon Connelly is the contract pro.iect officer. The contract's FIN number is B8169. The B&R number is 80-19-01-00. The time period I'm interested in is September 1, 1988 through April 1,
1989.
This request is made on behalf of Inside N.R.C., a McGraw-Hill newsletter with readers in government, industry, and non-profit organizations. The information I am seeking will be used in the preparation of news articles, which will benefit the public. Therefore, I ask that all search and copying fees be waived. If they are not, McGraw-Hill is prepared to pay norsnal NRC fees.
If you have any questions, please call 202-463-1659.
Sincerely, i
Dave Airo Managing Editor Inside NRC
.__--_--_n_
- .?,
O o
m \\'g:
UNITED STATES hhh
& [
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION SWASMsteoToed. D. C. s0665 SEP t 1986 l
l MEMORANDUM FOR:
Ben B. Hayes, Director Office of Investigations FROM:
!!udson B. Ragan Assistant General Counsel for Administration.
Office of the General Counsel
SUBJECT:
EXPENSES OF CONFIDENTIAL SOURCES By memorandum of July 17, 1986, you requested our opinion as to whether the NucJaar Regulatory Commission's (NRC) current appropriation law would provide the authority to support the payment of confidential sources for
- information, travel, etc., and to reimburse investigators for appropriate related expenses".
For the current fiscal year. Congress has enacted a lump-sum appropriation for the necessary expenses of the NRC in carrying out the purposes of the Energy Reorganization Act of 1974, as amended, and the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended, under the broad category of ' salaries and expenses".
See, Energy And Water Development Ap;propriations, Publ. L. No.99-141, 99 Itat. 577-78 (1985).
The language of NRC's appropriations act does not' expressly provide for the payment of informers for information on their expenses. '
- However, the well-settled _ 'necessary expense
- rule of appropriations law is that an appropriation made for a specific purpose is available for ex pens.es necessarily incident to secomp!!shing that purpose
'mtems prohibited by law or otherwise provided for by some other s ppNpriation.
4 Comp. Gen. $19, 621 (1927): U.S. Genemi Accounting Office, Principles of Federst Appropriations I.aw, at 312 (1982).
Given the absence of specific statutory authority in the appropriation act for such expenditures, the NRC's appropriations and other statutory authority must be analysed to determine whether the purpose is authorized.
The NRC's appropriation ' Salaries and Expenses
- providen in pertinent part:
For necessary expenses of the Commission in carrying out the purposes of the Energy Reorganization Act, as amended, and the Atomic Energy Act, as amended * *
- Energy Aid water Development Appropriations. Pub. L. No.99-741, 99 Stat.
577-78 (11/85).
Under Section 206 of the Energy Reorganization Act of 1974, as amended, the Commission is expressly ' authorized to conduct such reasonable inspections and other enforcement activities as needed to insure T
eMsw d AVacJvn+0b y r k ? % ' j hp?
d
% p 4sy w e--(7g
w W
I
&Q
' to a civil eompliance with the provisions of (Section 206]" subjecting persons f
penalty for knowingly and consciously failing to notify the Commis l
ith regnated facility, activity (or basic cornponent that (1) fails to com Reorganization Act of 1974 42 U.S.C.
I 5847 (1974).
the Atomic Energy Act or 161c of the the Commission is authortred under the Section Energy hazard.
Atomic Energy Act of 1954 to "make such studies and inves Furthermore, auch information...
this act. or in the assist it in exercising any authority provided, in Atomic Energy Act of 1954, administration or enforcement of this Act * * **.There are several. provisions 42 U.S.C. I 2201c.
i l ti f its that impose criminal penalties for the willfull or attempted v o a on o42 U.S.C See. Atomic Energy Act of 1954, Furthermore, tfiere are provisions that-impose criminal penalties on t provisions.
who nuclear inspectors in performance of their duties or (2) intentionally and willfully sabotage or attempt to sabotage nuclear facilitie who harm Thus, the fuel.
See, Atomic Energy Act of 1954, 42 U.S.C. Il 2282-84.
and the Atomic Energy Act authorite the investigations and obtain such information it Act Energy Reorganization Commission to conduct such Nevertheless, deems necessary to enforce certain civil and criminal law technique.
supporting its requast for the FY 1986 lump-sum appropriation, the Commission submitted its budget estimate to the House appropriations In cocmittee explaining how the Commission propos the fouowing:
The Office of Investigations is an independent office which conducts and supervises agency investigations of all a!!egations of wrongdoing' by other than employees and contractors, including reactor licenseen, fuel cycle licensees, and materials safety and The Office of safeguards and facilities licensees.
Investigations maintains liason with other sgencies and organizati appropriate referrals to the Department of Ju matters.
Hearings Before A Energy And Water Development Appropriations For 1986 99th Cong.,
1st Sess. 413 (1985).
Neither the Commission's budget fusitification before Congress nor the ralsted hearings informed of informers is an investigative technique employed by the Commission in the administration or enforcement of the Energy the payment or the Atomic Energy Act.
Act available for carrying out these purposes of the Energy Reorganization Act to and the Atornie Energy Act, the Commission is veste determine which
kL However, Comptroller General decisions make clear tha enforcing these laws.in the absence of statutory authority express to the informers for the furnishing of informa o criminal laws, the information must be
- essential or necessa distinguished effective administration and enforcement - of the law as See, 9 Comp. Gen 413 (1929): 9 Comp.
August 5, being merely ' helpful or desirable' (TF71 (unpubitsbed) B-193933 U.S. General Accounting Office, Principals of Fed B-173359, Apr019 Cen. 309 (1930):
,197$ (unpublished):
3-177 178 (1993). uniform results on this issue In Appropriations Law, at General decisions have not reached 413, 614 (1939) addressing this issue in 8 Comp. Gen.the Interior, the Comp An appropriation general in terms is available to do the thin f
d by the essential to the accomplishment of the work authorise As to whether such an appropriation may f
properly be held available to pay a reward for the furnish appropriation to be done.
information, not essential but probably helpful t The doubt arises accounting officers have not been uniform.
ih generally because auch rewards are not necessarily in f
the value of the information furnished and d
d e
appropriation general in terms available fo h
d the rewcrds, and the Congresa having on many occasions accep h
matter as one for its consideration and expression, it appea duty of this office to require those in administrative piece desire to offer rewards for information wo ith respect to all appropriations hereafter to be made.
the reward to' informers in that decision was a!! owed, t it would Comptroller General stated, as noted, that specific legislative Although h
nd of the be required in the future and reiterated this position at t e su decision (Id. at 615).
h Secretary holding it reached in 8 Comp. Gen. GIS to a decision involving t of Commerce, 9 Comp. Gen. 309 (1930).
In 9 Comp. Gen 930, the
~
comptroller General held that the general appropriatio Secretary of Commerce to offer awards for information Service of the Department d li m against apprehension and conviction of persons committing acts of va 9 Comp Gen. 309, aids to navigation maintained by the Lighthouse Servic awards were not essential but merely helpful.the offering all (1970).
idered by the Lighthouse Service regarding the enforcement of a law that
~
~ --u[
=
interfering with navigation i
- misdemeanor and' imposing a fine for obstruct ng or Id. at 311.
As such, the sids asaintained or established by the Service. Compt for submission to congress for consideration of whether the enactment sp I,d,
that purpose is necessary or proper.
a that have On the other hand, the Comptroller General has rendered decisio informers in the perrsitted the expenditure of funds for the payment of In B-183922 absence of specific legislative authority for such e li nce portion of t
the Internal Revenue Service's general appropriatio i
d rt expenditures enforcement activities * * ** was sufficiently beced to suppoept for the protection, support and maintenance of an informant / w from the for periods in which the same witness s!so qualified for such s Crime Control Act of 1970.
under the OrganisedThe Comptroller General observed of Justice August 8.1975 (unpublished).
ific authority nor a Department that the IRS appropriation statute neither contained specFurthermore, the le B-183922 to the meaning of specific, appropriation for such expenditures.
statute was sDent asThus, the Comptroller appropriation Id.
titstory of the enforcement activities *.
h a large General reasoned that the Commission of the TR3 was vested w
" investigation and measure of discretion as to whleh However, the Comptroller General investigation and enforcement activities.
f the Treasury noted that, as early as 1969. Congress was exp For determined that the IRS's 1975' these reasons, the Comptroller General ditures in appropriation statute was sufficiently broad to support the expen August 5.1975 (unpublished).
question., 53. B-183922 General In an earlier decision involving the Forest Servloe, the Comptrol ning held that the paymerit of compensation to informers for informa
~
violations (such as deliberately set forest fires, theft obe considered essent unauthorized occupancy. and vandaHam) may desirable, in the effective distinguished from helpful c-Service making the Forest administration and enforcement of a statute i
by fire and as necassary.
responsible for protecting the national forests against destruct on d use, and degradation, and authorizing it to reg (ulate their occupsney an 18 U.S.C. I 553).
B-172259. April preserve the forests from destructionThe Comptroller General noted that the Fo ti n Service appropriations provided for expenses necessary for fo 1971 (unpub!!shed).
ting 29 utDisation and was specifically available for fightin ding and damage to the Eitonal forests are caused by persons violating forest fires.
Id.
d the Comptroller use of the national service, the Forest Service infor t efforts must rely on apprehension and prosecution.
ii ns leads to identifying culprits are very slim for some esses and th For some cooperation in providing information must be heavily relied on.
nnm
[M-4
- esses, the necessary information is not spontaneously offered or is intentionally withheld for possible monetary gain. Finally, the Forest Service noted that there potential informants usually possess information which could prove' invaluable to successful investigation, identifloation and prosecution of violators. &
Except for the 1971 decision (B-172259, April 29.1971 (unpublished),
the Comptroller General has either strongly admonished agencies to seek specific 613 (1929): 9 Comp. Gen 309 (1930) or legialstive authority (9 Comp. Genrelied on the fact that Congress had been in activity and Congress did not object (B-183922 August 5,
1975 (unpublished).
Moreover, Congress has considered the issue and has granted statutory authority for rewards for the furnishing of information in several other 16 U.S.C. I 668 (information on capturing, attuations.
See, for example: 16 U.S.C. I 1540(d) (violations of Endangered buying or selling bald eagles):
Species);
18 U.S.C.
I 1751(g)
(information concerning Presidential assassinations or attempted assassinations); 18 U.S.C. $ 3056 (rewards by the Secret Service):
21 U.S.C.
8 986 (information on violations of laws by the Drug Enforcement Administration) and 39 U.S.C administered 5 404(a)(9) (information on violations of postal laws).
These ensetments create the imp 1feation that such expenditures should not be incurred except by express authority or by expressly informing Congress that such expenditures will be incurred.
~
Aa to whether other appropriations are ava!!able, we note that under the-provisions of the Atomic. Weapons and Special Nuclear Materials Rewards Act, the Attorney General is authorised to make a reward to persons who furnish original information to the United States concerning fliegal introduction, manufacture, acquisition or export of special nuclear material or atomic weapons or conspiracies relating thereto. See, 50 U.'S.C. $$ 47a, 47b (1974),
1974 U.S. Code Cong. & Ad. News 4050, TH2. It seems that appropriations,
- See, to administer that law have been made to the Department of Justice.and State, t
- Justice, Departments of Commerce, 1986 Pub. L. No.99-190, Title II,1985 U.S.
Agencies Appropriation Act, Code Cong. 4 Ad. News (99 Stat 1141).
Consequently, the payment of informanta in the context of investigations involving violations of the Atomic Weapons and Special Nuclear Materials flewards Act would not be authorised because it would be an expenditure that comes within the scope of some other appropriation
==
Conclusion:==
In the absence of specific legislative authority for paying informers for information concerning the vioistions of criminal or civil laws, there is no precise rule that can be formulated for when the NRC is authorised to pay In each instance, the NRC's appropriations and other statutory informers.
authority must be examined to determine whether the purpose is authorised, Without along with evatusting the administrative justification that is offered.
. j gg c
+
en explanation of the speciflo circumstances under whic were auch an explanation to be provided, a
difficult to make.
Even determination that such expenditures are authorized would not be on sound legal ground given that the Atomic Energy Act, the Ener
~
For scent on the use of such an investigative technique by the Commission.
the foregoing reasons, we are unable to conclude that auch expenditur would be authorised and would advise Commission seek. specific legislative authority, perhaps. through a minor revision to next years appropriation act, or inform Congress through our budget justification supporting the appropriation act that such an investigative technique will be employed in our investigations for enforcement of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954 and' the Energy Reorganization Act of 1974.
However, should a particular situation arise that you deter tbs Atomic Energy Act or Energy Reorganization Act. you should promptly seek our advice.
With respect to your reference to AEC Manual Chapter 1001
- Expenditures of A Confidentis) Nature', the NRC has no sinDar set of established procedures The AEC Manual Chapter 1001 la no' longer governing such expenditures.
effective or nperative since it was not adopted by the NRC as part of its See Nuclear Regulatory approved NRC Management Directives System. Commission N
~
- 15. 1986): U.S. Nuclest Regulatory Commission Announcement No.
4 (January 30, 1975).
Consequently, the AEC Manual Chapter 1001 does not represent an expression of current Commission polley regarding such expenditures.
lSf Hudson B. Ragan Assistant General Counse!
for Administration Office of the General Counse!
William C. Parler. OGC tc:
Guy H. Cunningham. 0GC James A. Fitzgerald. 0GC James Murray. 0GC m n c - m 7,,
4;.,y,,
gr;.y g g,y 4
o*
c::
$2rd
' an' explanation of the specific cirouestances under w were such an explanation to be provided, a
difficult to make.
Even determination that such expenditures are authorised would not be on sound
/*
Jegal ground given that the Atomic Energy Act, the E r
For scent on the use of such an investigative technique by the Commission.
the foregoing reasons, we are unable to conclude that such expenditures would be authorised and would advise your office to either have the Commission seek. specific legislative authority, perhaps through a minor irevision to next years appropriation act, or inform Congress through our budget justification supporting the appropriation act that such an investigative technique will be employed in our investigations for enforcement of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954 and' the Energy Reorganization Act of 1914 Mowever, should a particular situation arise that you determine has a direct connection and is essential to carrying out an investigation on a violation of the Atomic Energy Act or-Energy Reorganization Act, you should promptly seek our advice.
With respect to your reference to AEC Manual Chapter 1001, ' Expenditures A Confidential Nature", the NRC has no sinDar set of established proc
~
governing such expenditures.
effective or operative since it was not adopted by the NRC as part of itsU.S. N See approved NRC Management Directives System. Commission NRC U.S. Nuclest Regulatory Commission Announcement No.
4 (January 30, 1975).
Consequently, the AEC Manual Chapter 1001 does not represent an expre of current Commission policy regarding such expenditures.
ISf Hudson B. Ragan Assistant General Counse!
for Administration Office of the General Counsel William C. Parler. 0GC cc:
Guy H. Cunningham. 0GC James A. Fitzgerald. 0GC James Murray. 0GC 4
6 0
I
- asu = 4 de ug u
um M
m
,y
- - - - -