ML23193A979
| ML23193A979 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Issue date: | 05/30/2023 |
| From: | David Nelson NRC/OCIO |
| To: | Tarver J - No Known Affiliation |
| References | |
| APP-2023-000006, APP-2023-000007, FOIA-2023-000050, FOIA-2023-000047 | |
| Download: ML23193A979 (1) | |
Text
UNITED STATES NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION WASHINGTON, D.C. 20555-0001 May 30, 2023 IN RESPONSE REFER TO:
APP-2023-000006 APP-2023-000007 Appealing: FOIA-2023-000050 FOIA-2023-000047 Julian Tarver P.O. Box 88600 Steilacoom, WA 98388
Dear Julian Tarver:
On behalf of the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC), I am responding to your letter dated March 22, 2023 (received by the NRC on April 21, 2023), to the Freedom of Information Act Officer, in which you appealed the agency's decisions related to your Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) requests, FOIA-2023-000047 and FOIA-2023-000050.
Your requests sought the documentation generated during the NRCs processing of your requests, FOIA 2023-000002 and FOIA-2023-000024, respectively. You disagreed with the withholding in full of certain pages and the large number of redactions made in the partially released records.
Acting on your appeal, I have reviewed the records in both requests and have determined that the previously withheld information should be withheld. Therefore, I have denied your appeal.
In both requests, most of the redactions, as well as the pages withheld in full, were based on FOIA exemption 5 and the deliberative process privilege. Specifically, the NRC determined the withholding of this information is necessary to protect the integrity of our internal deliberations during the processing of the agencys responses to your FOIA requests. In addition, the advice provided by attorneys in the Office of General Counsel as they reviewed the agencys proposed responses to your requests was properly redacted under FOIA exemption 5 and the attorney-client privilege.
Moreover, the identities of Office of Inspector General and Office of Investigation agents, along with their cell phone numbers and email addresses, as well as the cell phone numbers and personal leave details of other NRC staff were properly redacted under FOIA exemptions 6 and 7C in the agencys response to FOIA-2023-000050. Finally, because disclosure of the internal pathways to NRC internal webpages and shared drives, which were included in the body of certain emails, could provide bad actors with targets of opportunity to infiltrate the NRCs network, such information was properly redacted under FOIA exemption 7F in the agencys response to FOIA-2023-000050.
This is NRCs final decision. As set forth in the FOIA (5 U.S.C. 552(a)(4)(B)), judicial review of this decision is available in a district court of the United States in the district in which you reside or have your principal place of business. Judicial review can also be had in the district in which the agencys records are situated or in the District of Columbia.
MLXXXXXXXXX
- Concurred via e-mail OFFICE OCIO/GEMS/FLICB OCIO/GEMS/FLICB PROGRAM OR REGIONAL OFFICE OGC OCIO NAME DGilet/MStevens KDanoff (Acting)
SRogers DNelson DATE 05/16/2023 5/17/2023 5/26/2023 5/30/2023