ML20235W002
| ML20235W002 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | 05000142 |
| Issue date: | 03/12/1985 |
| From: | Mcqueen A NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION V) |
| To: | Schuster M NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION V) |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20235V882 | List: |
| References | |
| FOIA-85-196 RV-SSL-00052, RV-SSL-52, NUDOCS 8903100448 | |
| Download: ML20235W002 (2) | |
Text
_ - __
/
o UNITED STATES 8
NUCLEAR RECULATORY COMMISSION o
s
{
REGION V 4
1450 MARIA LANE, SUITE 210 o,g
,o*
WALNUT CREEK, CALIFORNIA 94596
....+
March 12,1985 MEMORANDUM FOR:
M. D. Schuste'r, Chief, Safeguard / Section, RV @fA5 FROM:
A. D. McQueen, Region V Security Licensing Reviewer
SUBJECT:
SAFEGUARDS REVIEW REPORT - LICENSEE SECURITY PLAN REVISION:
DN 50-142 RV CASEWORK CONTROL NUMBER:
RV-SSL-00052 l
Background:
With letters dated October 18 and November 13, 1984, the Univer-sity of California at Los Angeles (UCLA) submitted Revision 8 to the UCLA Argonaut Research Reactor approved Physical Security Plan for the Protection of Special Nuclear Material of. Moderate.
Strategic Significance, dated March, 1980.
On January 31,
- 1985, in a telephone conversation with the
- licensee, it was indicated to the Region V principa_ Safeguards Inspector for UCLA that this revision 8 had been overtaken by events and that its review by Region V was no longer pertinent or relevant (see enclosure 1 hereto).
On February 26, 1985, having heard nothing further regarding this licensee submission, enclosure 1 was discussed with the SGFF licensing reviewer for this facility.
He indicated there appear-ed no basis for reviewing this change in light of the licensee's action.
He suggested the undersigned contact Colleen Woodhead of the Office of the Executive Legal Director to insure there were no legal ramifications or problems in abandoning review of this licensee submittal.
On February 26,
- 1985, enclosure 1 hereto was discussed with Ms.
Woodhead.
She indicated she was aware that UCLA no longer appeared subject to provisions of 10 CFR 73 67(c)(1).
She further indicated she had advised a UCLA attorney some time ago that they should formally notify NRC of this and request return of NRC-held copies of their security plan.
On February 26, 1985, the above conversations and correspondence
'N were discussed telephonically with the UCLA Reactor Security
\\
Officer.
He indicated that on January 16,
- 1985, UCLA had N notified NRC in writing that they were no longer required to have a
security plan under 10 CFR 73 and requesting plan copies and amendments be returned to UCLA or treated as UCLA proprietary s\\
8903100448 890306 AbER 5-196 PDR'
\\
7
data.
He' indicated that he would forward that dato, a copy ef
,theiletter to Region V.
On February 28,
- 1985, the UCLA January 16 letter (enclosure 2
hereto) was received at Region V.
Ms. Woodhead was telephonical-ly advised of its conte'nts.
She indicated she had not yet seen a copy of the letter, but would obtain one from NRR.
She agreed there was no legal reason for not, or problem in, abandoning re-view of Revision 8 to the UCLA Security Plan.
On March 11, 1985, in a telephone discussion with the Safeguards Licensing Reviewer, SGFF, of the above correspondence and tele-phone calls, it was agreed that this case should be closed with-out further review.
On March 11, 1985, this licensing review case was closed at Re-gion V with preparation of this safeguards review report.
No correspondence or notification to the licensee regarding this action by Region V appears appropriate in light of the licensee letter (enclosure
M e
Arthur D. McQueen Physical Security Inspector
Enclosures:
/.s stated cc. Chief, SGFF, NMSS
-f Chief, SMPB, IE
/
Chief, SSPB, NRR /
File L-2-5 LRN ADM Norderhaug
/
/84 i
r 2
l l
1
~'
~ ~
1
_- -