ML20133G966: Difference between revisions

From kanterella
Jump to navigation Jump to search
(StriderTol Bot insert)
 
(StriderTol Bot change)
Line 1: Line 1:
{{Adams
#REDIRECT [[IA-85-589, Responds to FOIA Request for Documents Re Ofc of Inspector & Auditor Inquiry Into Charges That NRC Responded Improperly to Allegation by Whistleblowers.Documents Withheld (Ref FOIA Exemptions 5 & 7(a))]]
| number = ML20133G966
| issue date = 10/03/1985
| title = Responds to FOIA Request for Documents Re Ofc of Inspector & Auditor Inquiry Into Charges That NRC Responded Improperly to Allegation by Whistleblowers.Documents Withheld (Ref FOIA Exemptions 5 & 7(a))
| author name = Felton J
| author affiliation = NRC OFFICE OF ADMINISTRATION (ADM)
| addressee name = Devine T
| addressee affiliation = GOVERNMENT ACCOUNTABILITY PROJECT
| docket = 05000275, 05000323
| license number =
| contact person =
| case reference number = FOIA-85-589
| document report number = NUDOCS 8510160205
| document type = CORRESPONDENCE-LETTERS, NRC TO PUBLIC ENTITY/CITIZEN/ORGANIZATION/MEDIA, OUTGOING CORRESPONDENCE
| page count = 2
| project =
| stage = Other
}}
 
=Text=
{{#Wiki_filter:- _ .
i
          /. [      jo.,,                          UNITED STATES
          !"          o            NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION                  \
h                                  WASHINGTON, D. C. 20555
          \...../
e OCT 3 @
Thomas Devine, Esquire Government Accountability Project 1555 Connecticut Avenue, NW, Suite 202                  IN RESPONSE REFER Washington, DC 20036                                    TO F01A-85-589
 
==Dear Mr. Devine:==
 
l            This is in response to your letter dated August 20, 1985, in which you re-quested, pursuant to the Freedom of Information Act (F0IA), all records re-garding the Office of Inspector and Auditor (0IA) inquiry into charges that NRC staff responded improperly to allegations by whistle-blowers at the Diablo Canyon Nuclear Power Plant.
The OIA staff has approximately thirty (30) feet of documents subject to this request. The OIA staff informed me that they believe a majority of these documents has either been previously provided by you to the NRC or have been provided by the NRC to you.
The OIA review of matters relating to Diablo Canyon is ongoing. All the documents are predecisional in nature and are being withheld from public disclosure pursuant to Exemption 5 of the FOIA (5 U.S.C. 552(b)(5)) and 10 CFR 9.5(a)(5) of the Comission's regulations. There are no reasonably segregable factual portions in these documents because releasing the factual portions of these documents would reveal a predecisional evaluation of which facts are important.  (See Russell v. Department of the Air Force, 2 GDS
              $81,123 (D.D.C. 1981), aft'd, 682 F.2d 1045 (D.C. Cir. 1982). Such " selective" i
facts are therefore entitled to the same protection as that afforded to purely deliberative materials as their release would " permit indirect inquiry into
:              the mental processes," Williams v. Department of Justice, 556 F. Supp. 63,65 (D.D.C. 1982), and so " expose" predecisional agency deliberations. Montrose Chemical Corp. v. Train, 491 F.2d 63 (D.C. Cir. 1974). Additionally, some of the documents are being withheld pursuant to Exemption 7(A) of the FOIA (5 3              U.S.C. 552(b)(7)(A)) and 10 CFR 9.5(a)(7)(1) of the Commission's regulations.
i Pursuant to 10 CFR 9.15 of the Comission's regulations, it has been determined that the information withheld is exempt from production or disclosure and that its production or disclosure is contrary to the public interest. The person responsible for this denial is Ms. Sharon R. Connelly, Director, Office of Inspector and Auditor.
i i
i l                          8510160205 851003 PDR  FOIA DEVINE85-589    PDR
(
 
Thomas Devine, Esquire                  I This denial may be appealed to the Secretary of the' Commission within 30 days from the receipt of this letter. Any such appeal must be in writing, addressed to the Secretary of the C9mmission, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555, and'should clearly state on the envelope 4        and in the letter that it is an " Appeal from an Initial F0IA Decision."
Si    rely,
                                                    . M. Felton, Director i                                                  Division of Rules and Records i                                                Office of Administration i
1 a
e 4
i i
t L}}

Revision as of 13:53, 2 September 2020

Redirect to:

Retrieved from "https://kanterella.com/w/index.php?title=ML20133G966&oldid=2939714"