[Federal Register Volume 64, Number 89 (Monday, May 10, 1999)]
[Notices]
[Pages 25085-25086]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 99-11671]


-----------------------------------------------------------------------

NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

[IA 99-002]


In the Matter of James S. Dawson; Order Prohibiting Involvement 
in NRC-Licensed Activities (Effective Immediately)

I

    James S. Dawson was employed as a radiographer by International 
Radiography and Inspection Services, Inc. (IRIS or Licensee), Tulsa, 
Oklahoma. IRIS holds License No. 35-30246-01 issued by the Nuclear 
Regulatory Commission (NRC or Commission) pursuant to 10 CFR Part 34. 
The license authorizes IRIS to possess and utilize sealed radiation 
sources in the performance of industrial radiography in accordance with 
the conditions specified in the license.

II

    On November 7, 1998, Mr. Dawson and another IRIS employee were 
performing radiography at Sagebrush Pipeline Equipment Company in 
Sapulpa, Oklahoma, using a radiographic exposure device (camera) 
containing approximately 87 curies of iridium-192. Mr. Dawson was the 
radiographer on this job; the other IRIS employee was a radiographer's 
assistant. In accordance with 10 CFR 34.46, the radiographer's 
assistant was required to be under the personal supervision of Mr. 
Dawson when using the radiographic exposure device or performing 
radiation surveys. Thus, Mr. Dawson was responsible for assuring that 
certain NRC-licensed activities carried out by the radiographer's 
assistant were being performed appropriately and in compliance with NRC 
requirements.
    On November 9, 1998, the radiation safety officer for IRIS notified 
the NRC Operations Center in Rockville, Maryland, of an incident that 
occurred on November 7, 1998 involving Mr. Dawson and the 
radiographer's assistant. The incident resulted in a radiation exposure 
to the radiographer's assistant in excess of the annual limit in 10 CFR 
20.1201.
    The NRC conducted an inspection and investigation to review the 
circumstances surrounding this incident, and identified numerous 
apparent violations of radiation safety requirements associated with 
this incident, many of which were committed deliberately. The results 
of the NRC investigation were described in an investigation report 
issued on January 5, 1999. The results of the inspection were described 
in an inspection report issued on March 3, 1999. On January 25, 
February 4, and March 18, 1999, respectively, the NRC conducted 
separate predecisional enforcement conferences with the radiographer's 
assistant, Mr. Dawson, and IRIS representatives. The conferences were 
conducted to discuss the apparent violations and to assist the NRC in 
reaching enforcement decisions in this matter.
    With respect to Mr. Dawson, the NRC has determined that he engaged 
in the following acts of deliberate misconduct prohibited by 10 CFR 
30.10(a)(i) that caused IRIS to be in willful violation of regulatory 
requirements by: (1) Knowingly conducting radiography at a site at 
which there was no radiation survey instrument, contrary to the 
requirements of 10 CFR 34.25(a); (2) knowingly conducting radiography 
without performing radiation surveys each time the radiographic source 
was returned to its shielded position following an exposure, contrary 
to the requirements of 10 CFR 34.49(b); (3) knowingly conducting 
radiography without wearing all of the required personal radiation 
monitoring equipment, contrary to the requirements of 10 CFR 34.47(a); 
(4) knowingly permitting the radiographer's assistant to resume work 
associated with licensed material after the radiographer's assistant's 
pocket dosimeter went off-scale and before a determination of the 
radiographer's assistant's radiation exposure had been made, contrary 
to the requirements of 10 CFR 34.47(d); and (5) knowingly failing to 
immediately contact the IRIS radiation safety officer after the 
radiographer's assistant's pocket dosimeter went off-scale, contrary to 
the requirements of IRIS's operating and emergency procedures (i.e., 
Item 3.1.2.1 IRIS' Radiation Safety Manual). In addition, Mr. Dawson 
knowingly provided false and misleading information to IRIS's radiation 
safety officer following the incident, contrary to the requirements of 
10 CFR 30.10(a)(2). With regard to the latter violation, Mr. Dawson 
knowingly provided IRIS officials with false information which was 
intended to cause them to believe that Mr. Dawson was in the restroom 
at the time of the exposure incident, that he and the radiographer's 
assistant had followed radiation safety requirements regarding the use 
of radiation survey instruments and personal dosimetry, and that he had 
halted radiography work following the radiographer's assistant's pocket 
dosimeter going off-scale.

[[Page 25086]]

III

    The NRC must be able to rely on the Licensee and its employees to 
comply with NRC requirements, including the requirement to provide 
information that is complete and accurate in all material respects. Mr. 
Dawson's deliberate misconduct, which caused IRIS to violate the 
Commission's regulations and resulted in a radiation exposure to the 
radiographer's assistant in excess of the annual limit in 10 CFR 
20.1201, and his misrepresentations to IRIS officials, have raised 
serious doubt as to whether he can be relied upon to comply with NRC 
requirements, and to provide complete and accurate information to the 
NRC and its licensees.
    Consequently, I lack the requisite reasonable assurance that 
licensed activities will be conducted in compliance with the 
Commission's requirements and that the health and safety of the public 
will be protected if James S. Dawson were permitted at this time to be 
involved in NRC-licensed activities. Therefore, the public health, 
safety and interest require that James S. Dawson be prohibited from any 
involvement in NRC-licensed activities for a period of 5 years from the 
date of this Order. Additionally, James S. Dawson is required to notify 
the NRC of his first employment in NRC-licensed activities following 
the prohibition period. Furthermore, pursuant to 10 CFR 2.202, I find 
that the significance of James S. Dawson's conduct described above is 
such that the public health, safety and interest require that this 
Order be immediately effective.

IV

    Accordingly, pursuant to sections 81, 161b, 161i, 161o, 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:
    1. . James S. Dawson is prohibited for 5 years from the date of 
this Order from engaging in NRC-licensed activities. NRC-licensed 
activities are those activities that are conducted pursuant to a 
specific or general license issued by the NRC, including, but not 
limited to, those activities of Agreement State licensees conducted 
pursuant to the authority granted by 10 CFR 150.20.
    2. If James S. Dawson is currently involved with another licensee 
in NRC-licensed activities, he must immediately cease those activities, 
and inform the NRC of the name, address and telephone number of the 
employer, and provide a copy of this order to the employer.
    3. For a period of 5 years after the 5-year period of prohibition 
has expired, James S. Dawson shall, within 20 days of his acceptance of 
each employment offer involving NRC-licensed activities or his becoming 
involved in NRC-licensed activities, as defined in Paragraph IV.1 
above, provide notice to the Director, Office of Enforcement, U.S. 
Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555, of the name, 
address, and telephone number of the employer or the entity where he 
is, or will be, involved in NRC-licensed activities. In the first 
notification Mr. Dawson shall include a statement of his commitment to 
compliance with regulatory requirements and the basis why the 
Commission should have confidence that he will now comply with 
applicable NRC requirements.
    The Director, Office of Enforcement, may, in writing, relax or 
rescind any of the above conditions upon demonstration by James S. 
Dawson of good cause.

V

    In accordance with 10 CFR 2.202, Mr. Dawson must, and any other 
person adversely affected by this Order may, submit an answer to this 
Order, and may request a hearing on this Order, within 20 days of the 
date of this Order. 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, DC 20555, 
and include a statement of good cause for the extension. The answer may 
consent to this Order. Unless the answer consents to this Order, the 
answer shall, in writing and under oath or affirmation, specifically 
admit or deny each allegation or charge made in this Order and shall 
set forth the matters of fact and law on which Mr. Dawson or other 
person adversely affected relies and the reasons as to why the Order 
should not have been issued. Any answer or request for a hearing shall 
be submitted to the Secretary, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, 
Attn: Rulemakings and Adjudications Staff, 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 Materials Litigation 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. Dawson if the answer or 
hearing request is by a person other than Mr. Dawson. If a person other 
than Mr. Dawson 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 Mr. Dawson or 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 Order should be 
sustained.
    Pursuant to 10 CFR 2.202(c)(2)(i), Mr. Dawson may, in addition to 
demanding a hearing, at the time the answer is filed or sooner, move 
the presiding officer to set aside the immediate effectiveness of the 
Order on the ground that the Order, including the need for immediate 
effectiveness, is not based on adequate evidence but on mere suspicion, 
unfounded allegations, or error.
    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 this 29th day of April 1999.

    For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Malcolm R. Knapp,
Deputy Executive Director for Regulatory Effectiveness.
[FR Doc. 99-11671 Filed 5-7-99; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590-01-P