United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission - Protecting People and the Environment

EA-03-114 - Salem International University

July 24, 2003

EA-03-114

Salem International University
ATTN: Dr. Arthur E. Linkins
             Vice President for Academic Affairs and Provost
P. O. Box 500
Salem, West Virginia 26426-0500

SUBJECT:    NOTICE OF VIOLATION (NRC INSPECTION REPORT NO. 47-25265-01/03-01)

Dear Dr. Linkins:

This refers to the inspection conducted by this office on April 21, 2003, at the University. The inspection was an examination of the activities conducted under the University's license as they relate to safety and compliance with the Commission's rules and regulations and the conditions of the license.

The results of the inspection, including the identification of two apparent violations, were transmitted to you by letter dated May 21, 2003. A final, telephonic exit briefing was held with you on June 6, 2003. During the telephonic briefing, you were informed that the NRC was considering escalated enforcement action for one of the two apparent violations involving the failure to have a Radiation Safety Officer (RSO). Additionally, you were informed that the NRC had sufficient information regarding the apparent violations to make an enforcement decision without the need for a predecisional enforcement conference or a written response from you. You indicated during the telephone conversation of June 6, 2003, that you wished to provide a written response to the apparent violations, which you forwarded to the NRC by letter dated July 14, 2003.

Based on the information developed during the inspection and your response, the NRC has determined that violations of NRC requirements occurred. The violations are described in the enclosed Notice of Violation (Notice), and the circumstances surrounding them are described in the subject inspection report. Violation A involved the failure to retain an RSO as required by the license. Specifically, the individual named as RSO on the license had not worked for the University since 2001 yet, no other qualified individual was appointed to perform the duties of the RSO. Based on a review of the circumstances, the cause of the violation was determined to be an oversight in not recognizing that the position was vacant. The NRC considers the RSO position to be vital in ensuring the proper oversight of NRC licensed activities. In this case, the potential existed for inappropriate use or misuse of byproduct material, although no actual consequences occurred as a result of the RSO vacancy. Therefore, this violation has been categorized in accordance with the "General Statement of Policy and Procedure for NRC Enforcement Actions" NUREG-1600, (Enforcement Policy) at Severity Level III.

In accordance with the Enforcement Policy, a civil penalty with a base value of $3,000 is considered for a Severity Level III violation. Because the University has not been the subject of escalated enforcement action since the last two NRC inspections or within the last two years, the NRC considered whether credit was warranted for corrective action in accordance with the civil penalty assessment process in Section VI.C.2 of the Enforcement Policy. The corrective actions included filing for and subsequent NRC issuance of a license amendment designating a qualified individual as the RSO, administrative changes associated with the review of yearly staffing and budget such that the RSO position will not become vacant, and other actions as discussed in the NRC's Confirmatory Action Letter (CAL) No. 2-03-001, dated January 9, 2003. As indicated in the subject inspection report, the CAL was closed on the basis of the information you provided in your letter of May 12, 2003. On the basis of the actions outlined above, the NRC has determined that credit was warranted for corrective actions.

Therefore, to encourage prompt and comprehensive correction of violations, and in recognition of the absence of previous escalated enforcement action, I have been authorized, after consultation with the Director, Office of Enforcement, to propose that no civil penalty be assessed in this case. However, you are on notice that significant violations in the future could result in a civil penalty. In addition, issuance of this Severity Level III violation constitutes escalated enforcement action that may subject you to increased inspection effort.

An additional violation (Violation B) was identified during the NRC inspection and involved the failure to calibrate survey meters annually, as required by the license. This violation was characterized at Severity Level IV due to its low safety significance. As you indicated during a follow-up telephone conversation of July 22, 2003, with Mr. Andy Miller of my staff, your corrective actions for this violation included the establishment of an administrative tracking system to ensure that survey meter calibrations are conducted at the proper frequency.

The NRC has concluded that information regarding the reason for the violations, the corrective actions taken and planned to correct the violations and prevent recurrence, and the date when full compliance was achieved is adequately addressed on the docket in this letter. Therefore, you are not required to respond to this letter unless the description herein does not accurately reflect your corrective actions or your position. In that case, or if you choose to provide additional information, you should follow the instructions specified in the enclosed Notice.

In accordance with 10 CFR 2.790 of the NRC's "Rules of Practice," a copy of this letter and its enclosure will be made available electronically for public inspection in the NRC Public Document Room or from the Publicly Available Records (PARS) component of NRC's document system (ADAMS). ADAMS is accessible from the NRC Web site at http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/adams.html (the Public NRC Library).

If you have any questions regarding this matter, please contact Douglas M. Collins, Director, Division of Nuclear Materials Safety, at 404-562-4700.

  Sincerely,

   /RA/

   Luis A. Reyes
Regional Administrator

Docket No: 030-33256
License No: 47-25265-01

Enclosure: Notice of Violation

cc w/encl:
State of West Virginia


NOTICE OF VIOLATION

Salem International University
Salem, West Virginia
  Docket No. 030-33256
License No. 47-25265-01
EA-03-114

During an NRC inspection conducted on April 21, 2003, violations of NRC requirements were identified. In accordance with the "General Statement of Policy and Procedure for NRC Enforcement Actions - May 1, 2000," NUREG-1600, (Enforcement Policy), the violations are listed below:

A.   Condition 11.B of License No. 47-25265-01 names an individual as the Radiation Safety Officer for the license.

Contrary to the above, as of April 21, 2003, the individual named as the Radiation Safety Officer on the license was no longer employed by the facility. Specifically, the individual had not worked for the licensee since 2001, and the licensee did not appoint another qualified individual to perform the duties of the Radiation Safety Officer.

   This is a Severity Level III violation (Supplement V1).

B.   License Condition 20 states, in part, that the licensee shall conduct its program in accordance with the statements listed in any enclosures [to the license]. An enclosure to the license includes a letter dated May 17, 1995, which states that radiation survey instruments will be calibrated once per year.

Contrary to the above, as of April 21, 2003, the licensee failed to have its radiation survey meters calibrated once per year. Specifically, one survey meter had last been calibrated on July 19, 2000 and a second survey meter had last been calibrated on July 26, 2000.

This is a Severity Level IV violation (Supplement IV).

The NRC has concluded that information regarding the reason for the violations, the corrective actions taken and planned to correct the violations and prevent recurrence, and the date when full compliance was achieved is already adequately addressed on the docket in the letter transmitting this Notice of Violation (Notice) and in your response of July 14, 2003. However, you are required to submit a written statement or explanation pursuant to 10 CFR 2.201 if the description therein does not accurately reflect your corrective actions or your position. In that case, or if you choose to respond, clearly mark your response as a "Reply to a Notice of Violation," and send it to the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, ATTN: Document Control Desk, Washington, DC 20555 with a copy to the Regional Administrator, Region II within 30 days of the date of the letter transmitting this Notice.

If you contest this enforcement action, you should also provide a copy of your response, with the basis for your denial, to the Director, Office of Enforcement, United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555-0001.

Because any response will be made available electronically for public inspection in the NRC Public Document Room or from the Publicly Available Records (PARS) component of NRC's document system (ADAMS), to the extent possible, it should not include any personal privacy, proprietary, or safeguards information so that it can be made available to the public without redaction. ADAMS is accessible from the NRC Web site at http://www.nrc.gov/reading-rm/adams.html (the Public NRC Library). If personal privacy or proprietary information is necessary to provide an acceptable response, then please provide a bracketed copy of your response that identifies the information that should be protected and a redacted copy of your response that deletes such information. If you request withholding of such material, you must specifically identify the portions of your response that you seek to have withheld and provide in detail the bases for your claim of withholding (e.g., explain why the disclosure of information will create an unwarranted invasion of personal privacy or provide the information required by 10 CFR 2.790(b) to support a request for withholding confidential commercial or financial information). If safeguards information is necessary to provide an acceptable response, please provide the level of protection described in 10 CFR 73.21.

In accordance with 10 CFR 19.11, you may be required to post this Notice within two working days.

Dated this 24th day of July 2003

 

Page Last Reviewed/Updated Thursday, March 29, 2012