ML20032B967
| ML20032B967 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Idaho State University |
| Issue date: | 10/16/1981 |
| From: | Brown G NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION IV) |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20032B965 | List: |
| References | |
| 50-284-81-01, 50-284-81-1, NUDOCS 8111060563 | |
| Download: ML20032B967 (2) | |
Text
- _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
APPENDIX A NOTICE OF VIOLATION Idaho State University License: R-110 Docket:
50-284 As a result of tt' inspection conducted on August 3 and 4,1981, and in accordance with the attached Interim Enforcement Policy, 45 FR 66754 (October 7,1980), the following violations were identified:
A.
The approved security plan, page 7, " Detection of Theft or Attempted Thef t,"
states, in g rt, ".
. roving patrols.
Randomly, approximately every two hours, the security patrol physically checks the status of the CAA's... in the vicinity of the CAA's. The roving patrols are trained and knowledgeable about their duties...."
10 CFR 73.67(d)(8) states, "(8) Establish a security organization or modify the current security organization to consist of at least one watchman per shift able to assess and respond to any unauthorized penetrations or activities in the controlled access areas."
Contrary to the above, the patrols check the hall side of Door 14 every four hours and the controlled access areas (CAA's) cannot be observed from the hallway into which Door 14 opens.
Therefore, the watchmen cannot determine if there are people in the between rooms or in the CAA's, or the status of the doors opening into the CAA's.
In ad.h tion, the watchmen have no written instructions concerning what or why they are checking.
This is a Severity Level VI violation (Supplement III).
B.
The approved security plan, page 8, " Security Response" states, in part,
"... The University Security Department maintains a liaison with the Pocatello Police Department which has comitted to a response...."
In 10 CFR 73.67(f)(4), the following requirement is set out, "(4) Establish and maintain response procedures for dealing with threats of the"s or thefts of such material."
Contrary to the above, there is no formal agreement for a responsa (to a threat of nuclear sabotage, thtft of materials, or an actual event' by the police or sheriff.
In fact it was established by interviev that neither the police chief nor chief deputy sheriff were aware of the nucletr laboratories' existence.
This is a Severity Level VI violation (Supplement III).
8111060563 811016 PDR ADOCK 05000284 G
F-Idaho State University Pursuant to the provisions of 10 CFR 2.201, Idaho State University is hereby required to submit to this office within 30 days of the date of this Notice, a written statement or explanation in reply, including:
(1) the corrective steps which have been taken and the results achieved; (2) the corrective steps which will be taken to avoid further violations; and (3) the date when full compliance will be achieved.
Under the authority of Section 182 of the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended, this response shall be submitted under oath or affirmation.
Consideration may be given to extending your response time for good cause shown.
1 The responses directed by this Notice are not subject to_the clearance procedures of the Office of Management and Budget as required by the Paperwork Reduction l
Act of 1980, PL 96-511.
f Dated
[m Mew Gren D. Brown, Chief Technical Inspection Branch i
i I
i 1
i a
1 4
1, 1
i i
l l
.