Univ.
of California hit with proposed $3M fine for Los Alamos breach
The
penalty is the largest ever sought by the DOE
Jaikumar
Vijayan
July
16, 2007 (Computerworld) -- The U.S. Department
of Energy has proposed levying a fine of $3 million on the University of
California and a separate $300,000 fine on Los Alamos National
Security LLC (LANS), for their alleged failures to protect classified
information in an October 2006 security breach.
In
addition, Secretary of Energy Samuel Bodman today ordered LANS to undertake
specific actions to bolster its physical and IT security. A failure to
implement the required measures within the prescribed time frame could result
in the imposition of additional civil penalties of up to $100,000 per day for
each violation, Bodman said in a compliance order issued today.
The
formal enforcement actions against both organizations follow months of
investigation into the breach, in which a contract worker at Los Alamos
National Laboratories (LANL) illegally downloaded and removed
classified data from the site via USB thumb drives.
The
university, which is based in Oakland, managed and operated LANL from 1943 to
May 2006 through its laboratory
management division. LANS, which is a limited liability
corporation that comprises the university as well as Bechtel National Inc. and
two other firms, took over management of LANL in June 2006.
The
university and LANS have 30 days to submit a written response to the notice of
violations. A failure to do so would end their right to appeal the proposed
penalties.
"Investigations
revealed that management deficiencies of both contractors were a central
contributing factor" in the 2006 breach, a DOE statement
said. The agency noted that the proposed civil penalty of $3 million is the
largest it has ever assessed.
In
a formal Preliminary Notice of Violation addressed to Robert Foley, vice
president of laboratory management at the University of California, the DOE
listed five separate areas where the university failed to follow DOE
requirements for protecting classified information. Those violations included a
failure by the university to protect data ports, despite knowing about the
vulnerability, and a failure to impose adequate escorting requirements to
detect unauthorized access and removal of classified data.
The
university was also charged with violating the DOE's physical security
requirements, as well as rules regarding roles and responsibilities and
oversight of subcontractors. The notice of violation was sent by the DOE's
National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA).
In
a similar notice to LANS, the NNSA listed many of the same violations. In
addition, the NNSA said that LANS failed to stop the unauthorized reproduction
of classified material both on paper and on removable electronic media and
allowed the material to be stored in a private residence.
Chris Harrington, a University of California spokesman, said the school is "carefully reviewing" the enforcement notice from the DOE and would respond with its concerns and objections. "The content of our response will be informed by the fact that the incident at issue occurred in October 2006 -- after the University's management contract ended in May 2006," Harrington said via e-mail. "In addition, we will outline the actions the University took to strengthen security processes at the laboratory prior to the change in management to Los Alamos National Security LLC."