NRC NEWS

 U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION 

 Office of Public Affairs, Region I

 475 Allendale Road, King of Prussia, Pa.

www.nrc.gov

 

No. I-06-007 February 10, 2006

Contact: Diane Screnci, 610/337-5330 Email: opa1@nrc.gov

Neil Sheehan, 610/337-5331

NRC CITES NASA FOR VIOLATIONS OF NRC REQUIREMENTS 

The Nuclear Regulatory Commission has cited the National Aeronautics and Space

Administration for violations of NRC requirements involving the submission of inaccurate

information. The enforcement action against NASA does not entail a fine but does require several

corrective actions to prevent recurrence. 

An August 2005 letter informed NASA that the NRC Office of Investigations had concluded

that a NASA contract Radiation Safety Officer (RSO) deliberately failed to report missing licensed

material, as required, and provided incomplete and inaccurate information in writing and orally to an

NRC inspector during a December 2002 inspection. 

In response to the OI finding, NASA requested the use of the Alternative Dispute Resolution

(ADR). ADR is a process in which a neutral mediator with no decision-making authority assists the

NRC and licensees in reaching an agreement resolving any differences regarding an enforcement

action. An ADR session between NRC staff and NASA representatives was held on Nov. 4, 2005, at

the NASA facility in Greenbelt, Md. As a result of that session, as well as a subsequent session held in

King of Prussia, on Dec. 19, a settlement agreement was reached.

NASA has agreed that the contract RSO caused NASA to violate NRC requirements when he

failed to perform a reasonable and necessary evaluation of information provided to him by a NASA

health physics technician to determine whether licensed material reported as missing reached the

threshold for reportability under NRC requirements. NASA also agreed that the contract RSO 

provided inaccurate information to NRC during the inspection. While NASA and the NRC agreed to

disagree on the willfulness of the contract RSO’s actions, NASA and the NRC agreed that the contract

RSO’s actions caused NASA to be in violation of NRC requirements, which resulted in this

enforcement action.

In addition to actions previously taken by NASA to assure that the violations do not recur,

NASA agreed to ensure that others at NASA facilities and other NRC licensees learned from these

violations. Those included: increasing the frequency of its internal audits; retaining an independent

organization to conduct an annual independent review of the radiation safety program for 2006 and

2007, at a minimum; providing a presentation at the NASA Occupational Health Conference in 2006
describing the violations, the circumstances that led to them, lessons learned and corrective actions. 

NASA must complete all of the actions by December 31, 2007 and notify the NRC in writing that they

have been completed. The NRC agreed to issue a Severity Level III Notice of Violation to NASA but

to not issue a civil penalty. Four Severity Level IV violations were also issued. 

The terms of the enforcement action have been confirmed via a Confirmatory Order issued by

the NRC to NASA.

The contract RSO also took part in the ADR sessions. While the RSO and the NRC also agreed

to disagree on the willfulness of his actions, the RSO agreed to take future corrective actions, including

providing a lessons learned presentation to NASA Goddard materials-users and also at the 2006 NASA

Occupational Health Conference. Those actions were also confirmed in a separate Confirmatory Order

to the individual. 

Both NASA and the contract RSO may respond to the order in writing within 30 days. 

A copy of the enforcement action will be posted on the NRC web site at:

www.nrc.gov/what-we-do/regulatory/enforcement/current.html#materials.

###