[Federal Register Volume 62, Number 82 (Tuesday, April 29, 1997)]
[Notices]
[Pages 23279-23280]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 97-10972]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
[IA 97-008]
Derek F. Stephens; Confirmatory Order Prohibiting Involvement in
NRC-Licensed Activities (Effective Immediately)
I
Mr. Derek F. Stephens was employed as a radiographer by Barnett
Industrial X-Ray, Inc. (Licensee). The Licensee is the holder of
License No. 35-26953-01 issued by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission
(NRC or Commission) pursuant to 10 CFR Parts 30 and 34 and last renewed
on March 21, 1996. The license authorizes possession and use of
byproduct material in accordance with the conditions specified therein.
II
On October 3, 1996, Mr. Stephens and a radiographer's assistant
were conducting radiography activities at a refinery in Ponca City,
Oklahoma. Mr. Stephens was the more senior of the two and had received
training regarding his responsibilities for conducting activities in
accordance with Licensee procedures and NRC regulations.
NRC regulations require, in part, that at all times during the
conduct of radiography activities, each individual wear a direct
reading pocket dosimeter, an alarm ratemeter, and either a film badge
or a thermoluminescent dosimeter (TLD) (10 CFR 34.33). NRC regulations
also require that a survey be made after each exposure to determine
that the sealed source has been returned to its shielded position (10
CFR 34.43). NRC regulations further require that whenever a
radiographer's assistant uses radiographic exposure devices or conducts
radiation surveys required by 10 CFR 34.43(b), and the radiographer's
assistant shall be under the personal supervision of a radiographer,
including the radiographer providing immediate assistance if required
and the radiographer watching the assistant's performance of the
operations (10 CFR 34.44).
During radiography activities on October 3, 1996, Mr. Stephens and
the radiographer's assistant were assigned to complete two radiographs.
The exposure device was placed on a scaffold approximately 6 feet above
the ground with the drive cable controls located on the ground. After
the second exposure, Mr. Stephens instructed the radiographer's
assistant to crank the source back in and remove the source guide tube.
Mr. Stephens then left to remove the barricades and did not watch the
radiographer's assistant. Without a survey meter, the radiographer's
assistant approached and disconnected the source guide tube. After
disconnecting the source guide tube, the radiographer's assistant
observed that the source was not fully retracted into the exposure
device and was still exposed. The radiographer's assistant immediately
left the vicinity of the source and informed Mr. Stephens. As a result
of this event, the radiographer's assistant received a higher-than-
normal exposure, but the exposure did not exceed regulatory limits.
In violation of NRC requirements, Mr. Stephens did not wear a
direct reading pocket dosimeter, an alarm ratemeter, and either a film
badge or a TLD. Further, Mr. Stephens did not effectively supervise the
radiographer's assistant to ensure that the radiographer's assistant
conducted a proper survey, as required by 10 CFR 34.43(b). Because he
was not properly supervising the radiographer's assistant, Mr. Stephens
did not notice that when the radiographer's assistant approached the
source, the radiographer's assistant could not have performed the
proper survey because he did not have a survey meter.
NRC's investigation and inspection of this incident began on
October 4, 1996. In a sworn, signed statement provided by Mr. Stephens
to NRC's Office of Investigations (OI), Mr. Stephens stated he had been
working for the Licensee since August 1995, and that he had received
written and oral training, on-the-job training, and formal classroom
training. He stated he had been a Level II radiographer for about 3
months and that he had been taught his responsibilities as a
supervisor, including ensuring that the radiographer's assistant and
others comply with safety and regulations. Further, he stated that both
he and the radiographer's assistant forgot their personal dosimetry and
realized it only when they discovered the source was not retracted. The
results of NRC's investigation and inspection are documented in NRC
Inspection Report 030-30691/96-01 dated December 23, 1996. A
predecisional enforcement conference was conducted with the Licensee on
January 6, 1997, and on February 24, 1997, the NRC issued a Notice of
Violation and Proposed Imposition of Civil Penalty in the amount of
$4000 to the Licensee for the violations described in this Section II
of this Order.
III
Based on its review of all available information, the NRC has
concluded that Mr. Stephens, a former employee of the Licensee, engaged
in deliberate misconduct in violation of 10 CFR 30.10 by causing the
Licensee to be in violation of 10 CFR 34.33(a). Specifically,
notwithstanding Mr. Stephens' assertion that he forgot his personal
dosimetry, the NRC has concluded that Mr. Stephens deliberately failed
to wear the required personal monitoring devices. This conclusion is
based on the fact that: (1) Mr. Stephens was trained on using personal
monitoring devices; (2) Mr. Stephens was provided personal monitoring
devices, which he had in the Licensee's truck used in traveling to the
work site; (3) prior to conducting licensed activities, Mr. Stephens is
required to perform daily preoperational tests, such as checking the
operability of the alarming ratemeter and zeroing the pocket dosimeter
assigned to him; and (4) in an October 8, 1996 signed, written
statement to OI, Mr. Stephens stated that he ``knew it was [his]
responsibility to ensure Kevin [Assistant Radiographer] had his
dosimetry but did not do so.''
In addition, the NRC has concluded that Mr. Stephens' failure to
supervise, through direct observation, the radiographer's assistant as
he approached the exposure device without a survey instrument and
attempted to disassemble the equipment, represents careless disregard
for regulatory requirements. Given his training and experience, Mr.
Stephens
[[Page 23280]]
knew or should have known of the requirements of 10 CFR 34.44 that a
radiographer's assistant must be under the personal supervision of a
radiographer, including the radiographer providing immediate assistance
if required and the radiographer watching the assistant's performance
of operations. This conclusion is also supported by Mr. Stephens'
October 8, 1996 signed, written statement to OI that he had been taught
that his responsibility as a supervisor included insuring the
assistants and others complied with safety and regulations.
These willful acts are significant because Mr. Stephens, the senior
radiographer, failed to observe the safeguards designed to protect him,
the radiographer's assistant, and others from unnecessary and
potentially dangerous radiation exposures. These willful acts
contributed to an unnecessary radiation exposure to the radiographer's
assistant. The NRC must be able to rely on the Licensee and its
employees to comply with NRC requirements. Mr. Stephen's actions during
this incident have raised serious doubt as to whether he can be relied
upon to comply with NRC requirements.
IV
By letter dated February 19, 1997, the NRC described its
conclusions to Mr. Stephens. The letter documented the NRC's
understanding that Mr. Stephens did not wish to participate in further
discussions of the above issues, and that Mr. Stephens agreed to a
commitment that he be prohibited from engaging in NRC-licensed
activities for a period of 3 years. Mr. Stephens signed a statement
dated March 11, 1997, consenting to the issuance of this Order with the
commitment as described in Section V below. Mr. Stephens further agreed
in his signed statement, that this Order is to be effective upon
issuance and that he has waived his right to a hearing.
I find that Mr. Stephens' commitments as set forth in Section V are
acceptable and necessary and conclude that with the commitment the
public health and safety are reasonably assured. In view of the
foregoing, I have determined that the public health and safety require
that Mr. Stephens' commitments be confirmed by this Order. Based on the
above and Mr. Stephens' consent, this Order is immediately effective
upon issuance.
V
Accordingly, pursuant to Sections 161b, 161i, 182, and 186 of the
Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended, and the Commission's regulations
in 10 CFR 2.202, 10 CFR 30.10, and 10 CFR 150.20, it is hereby ordered,
effective immediately, that:
Mr. Stephens is prohibited from engaging in NRC-licensed
activities, including work conducted as an employee of an Agreement
State licensee if the work is performed in a non-Agreement State or
an area of exclusive federal jurisdiction, for a period of 3 years
from the date of this order.
The Director, Office of Enforcement, may, in writing, relax or
rescind any of the above conditions upon demonstration by Mr. Stephens
of good cause.
V
Any person adversely affected by this Confirmatory Order, other
than Mr. Stephens, may request a hearing within 20 days of its
issuance. Where good cause is shown, consideration will be given to
extending the time to request a hearing. A request for extension of
time must be made in writing to the Director, Office of Enforcement,
U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D.C. 20555, and include
a statement of good cause for the extension. Any request for a hearing
shall be submitted to the Secretary, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory
Commission, ATTN: Chief, Docketing and Service Section, Washington, DC
20555. Copies also shall be sent to the Director, Office of
Enforcement, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555,
to the Assistant General Counsel for Hearings and Enforcement at the
same address, to the Regional Administrator, NRC Region IV, 611 Ryan
Plaza Drive, Suite 400, Arlington, Texas 76011 and to Mr. Stephens. If
such a person requests a hearing, that person shall set forth with
particularity the manner in which his or her interest is adversely
affected by this Order and shall address the criteria set forth in 10
CFR 2.714(d).
If a hearing is requested by a person whose interest is adversely
affected, the Commission will issue an Order designating the time and
place of any hearing. If a hearing is held, the issue to be considered
at such hearing shall be whether this Confirmatory Order should be
sustained.
In the absence of any request for hearing, or written approval of
an extension of time in which to request a hearing, the provisions
specified in Section IV above shall be final 20 days from the date of
this Order without further order or proceedings. If an extension of
time for requesting a hearing has been approved, the provisions
specified in Section IV shall be final when the extension expires if a
hearing request has not been received. An answer or a request for
hearing shall not stay the immediate effectiveness of this order.
Dated at Rockville, Maryland this 15th day of April 1997.
For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
James Lieberman,
Director, Office of Enforcement.
[FR Doc. 97-10972 Filed 4-28-97; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590-01-P