9216 Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 40 / Friday, February 28, 1997 / Notices

hearing. Any hearing held would take

place after issuance of the amendment.

If the final determination is that the

amendment request involves a

significant hazards consideration, any

hearing held would take place before

the issuance of any amendment.

A request for a hearing or a petition

for leave to intervene must be filed with

the Secretary of the Commission, U.S.

Nuclear Regulatory Commission,

Washington, DC 20555–0001, Attention:

Docketing and Services Branch, or may

be delivered to the Commission’s Public

Document Room, the Gelman Building,

2120 L Street, NW., Washington, DC, by

the above date. Where petitions are filed

during the last 10 days of the notice

period, it is requested that the petitioner

promptly so inform the Commission by

a toll-free telephone call to Western

Union at 1–(800) 248–5100 (in Missouri

1–(800) 342–6700). The Western Union

operator should be given Datagram

Identification Number N1023 and the

following message addressed to

Frederick J. Hebdon: petitioner’s name

and telephone number, date petition

was mailed, plant name, and

publication date and page number of

this Federal Register notice. A copy of

the petition should also be sent to the

Office of the General Counsel, U.S.

Nuclear Regulatory Commission,

Washington, DC 20555–0001, and to A.

H. Stephens, General Counsel, Florida

Power Corporation, MAC–A5D, P.O.

Box 14042, St. Petersburg, Florida

33733, attorney for the licensee.

Nontimely filings of petitions for

leave to intervene, amended petitions,

supplemental petitions and/or requests

for hearing will not be entertained

absent a determination by the

Commission, the presiding officer or the

presiding Atomic Safety and Licensing

Board that the petition and/or request

should be granted based upon a

balancing of the factors specified in 10

CFR 2.714(a)(1) (i)–(v) and 2.714(d).

For further details with respect to this

action, see the application for

amendment dated February 17, 1997,

which is available for public inspection

at the Commission’s Public Document

Room, the Gelman Building, 2120 L

Street, NW., Washington, DC, and at the

local public document room located at

the Coastal Region Library, 8619 W.

Crystal Street, Crystal River, Florida

32629.

Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 24th day

of February 1997.

For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.

L. Raghavan,

Project Manager, Project Directorate II–3,

Division of Reactor Projects—I/II, Office of

Nuclear Reactor Regulation.

[FR Doc. 97–4997 Filed 2–27–97; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 7590–01–P

[IA 97–011]

In the Matter of Krishna Kumar; Order

Prohibiting Involvement in NRCLicensed Activities; (Effective

Immediately)

I

Krishna Kumar (Mr. Kumar) was

President of Power Inspection, Inc. (PI

or Licensee). PI is the holder of

Byproduct License No. 37–21428–01

(License) issued by the Nuclear

Regulatory Commission (NRC or

Commission) pursuant to 10 CFR Parts

30 and 34. The License authorizes the

Licensee to use iridium-192 and cobalt60 sealed sources for the performance of

industrial radiography at its facility in

Wexford, Pennsylvania, as well as at

temporary job sites. The License was

most recently renewed on January 31,

1989, and expired on January 31, 1994.

In addition, the Licensee submitted a

request, dated December 30, 1993, that

the license be terminated. Action on

that request has been held in abeyance

pending further NRC review.

In addition, PI acted as a vendor

supplying services to nuclear power

plants, including the performance of

nondestructive testing services, such as

eddy current testing. Such services were

provided to the Perry and Cooper

nuclear power plants in 1993.

II

On December 2 and 3, 1993, the NRC

performed an inspection at the

Licensee’s Wexford facility of activities

conducted under the License. During

the inspection, the NRC found

numerous violations of NRC

requirements. The violations included:

the failure of the Radiation Safety

Officer (RSO) named on the License to

perform required duties; the failure to

conduct quarterly audits of all

radiographers; the failure to provide the

required annual refresher training to the

radiographers; the failure to perform, at

the required frequency, the required

inspection and maintenance on the

exposure device (camera) containing an

iridium-192 source; the failure to

perform leak tests of the sealed sources

at the required frequency; the failure to

promptly collect and submit film badges

for processing; and the failure to

maintain radiography utilization logs.

Furthermore, the NRC found during

the December 1993 inspection that the

utilization logs for the iridium-192

source, covering the period of July

through November 1993, as well as the

utilization logs for the cobalt-60 source,

covering the period of July through

October 1993, were also unavailable for

inspection at the time of the NRC

inspection on December 2, 1993.

On December 2, 1993, an NRC

investigation was also initiated by the

NRC Office of Investigations (OI).

During its investigation, OI concluded

that:

a. With respect to the vendor-related

activities: (1) False Eddy Current

Testing (ET) qualification certifications

were deliberately generated by PI for at

least three employees who performed

ET examinations at Perry and Cooper

nuclear power plants during 1993 and

false ET qualification certification

examination results and Personnel

Certification Summaries were

deliberately generated for four

employees, and these falsifications were

condoned or directed by the former

President (i.e., Mr. Kumar), the former

Vice President/RSO, and the former

Quality Assurance Manager; and (2)

three PI employees tested positive for

illegal drug use prior to working at Perry

and Cooper in 1993, and the former

President of PI was aware of this and

did not notify Perry and Cooper.

b. With respect to the materials

License: (1) A minimum of 38 source

utilization logs (for radiography

performed) were falsely created by PI

employees to satisfy questions asked

during an April 1993 NRC inspection

regarding the lack of utilization logs,

and this activity was undertaken at the

direction of the former President of PI;

(2) the former President of PI knowingly

failed to notify the NRC of a change of

radiation safety officer in approximately

August 1993; and (3) responses in PI’s

letter, dated July 14, 1993, to the NRC,

were deliberately incomplete and

inaccurate, and the former President

and individual identified on PI’s NRC

license as the RSO were responsible for

knowingly providing this false

information to the NRC.

The inaccurate information provided

to the NRC in the letter dated July 14,

1993, was in response to a previous

Notice of Violation issued to the

Licensee on June 16, 1993, for numerous

violations identified during an

inspection conducted in April 1993.

One of the violations identified during

the April 1993 inspection involved the

failure to maintain personnel

monitoring records for the radiographers

at the facility. In the July response,

signed by the former RSO (i.e., the
Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 40 / Friday, February 28, 1997 / Notices 9217

1Mr. Kumar and PI were indicted by the United

States Attorney in the Western District of

Pennsylvania for fraud and false statements in

connection with testing that was to be performed at

the Duquesne Light Company, a licensee of the

NRC. In this case, Mr. Kumar admitted that he

directed falsification of eddy current test equipment

calibration certifications to save PI time and money,

and subsequently provided the false certificates to

Duquesne Light Company.

individual identified on PI’s NRC

license as the RSO), the Licensee stated

that records of such personnel

monitoring had been misplaced at the

time of the April inspection. In fact, the

NRC learned, during the December 2

and 3, 1993 inspection, that Mr. Kumar

knew that those records alluded to in

the licensee’s July 1993 response did

not even exist at the time of the April

inspection, since the film badges had

not been processed until after the April

inspection was completed.

III

Based on the above, Mr. Kumar,

former President of PI, a contractor to

licensees of the NRC, engaged in

deliberate misconduct, a violation of 10

CFR 30.10(a)(2), by deliberately

submitting in March and in October

1993 to the Cleveland Electric

Illuminating Company (CEIC) and

Nebraska Public Power District (NPPD),

both licensees of the NRC, ET

qualification certification examination

results and Personnel Certification

Summaries which were inaccurate. Mr.

Kumar also violated 10 CFR 30.10(a)(2)

by submitting on March 5, 1993, and on

October 6, 1993, to each NPPD and

CEIC, respectively, three inaccurate

letters stating that the trustworthiness

and reliability of two individuals had

been established by an investigation,

when Mr. Kumar knew that the

individuals had used illegal substances.

In addition, Mr. Kumar, an employee

of PI, a licensee of the NRC, engaged in

deliberate misconduct, a violation of 10

CFR 30.10(a)(1), which caused PI to be

in violation of 10 CFR 30.9(a) and 10

CFR 34.27. Specifically:

a. As a result of Mr. Kumar’s direction

to fabricate source utilization logs, PI

violated 10 CFR 30.9(a) and 10 CFR

34.27 by maintaining a minimum of 38

inaccurate logs for radiography

performed by PI; and

b. As a result of Mr. Kumar’s

direction, PI violated 10 CFR 30.9(a) by

providing to the NRC a letter dated July

14, 1993, which contained inaccurate

information relating to whether

corrective actions had been taken in

response to violations listed in an NRC

Notice of Violation dated June 16, 1993.

The NRC must be able to rely on its

licensees and their employees to comply

with NRC requirements, including the

requirement to provide information and

maintain records that are complete and

accurate in all material respects. Mr.

Kumar’s actions in deliberately violating

NRC requirements and in causing the

Licensee to be in violation of NRC

requirements 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 both the NRC and NRC

licensees. Moreover, given Mr. Kumar’s

indictment on April 28, 1988,1 there is

a pattern of record falsification which

raises further doubt about Mr. Kumar’s

integrity and whether he can be relied

upon to comply with NRC requirements.

Consequently, I lack the requisite

reasonable assurance that information

provided to the NRC by Mr. Kumar, or

records required to be maintained by the

Licensee, will be complete and accurate

in all material respects if Mr. Kumar

were permitted to be involved in any

NRC-licensed activities. I also lack the

requisite assurance that NRC-licensed

activities will be conducted safely or in

accordance with NRC requirements or

that the health and safety of the public

will be protected if Mr. Kumar were

involved in NRC-licensed activities. In

addition, I find that Mr. Kumar is either

unable or unwilling to assure that NRC

requirements are being and will be

followed.

Therefore, I find that the public

health, safety, and interest require that

Mr. Kumar be prohibited from

involvement in NRC-licensed activities

for ten years from the date of this Order,

and if he is currently engaged in NRClicensed activities with another NRC

licensee, he must immediately cease

such activities, and inform the NRC of

the name, address and telephone

number of the employer. In addition, for

a period of five years commencing after

the ten-year period of prohibition, Mr.

Kumar must notify the NRC of his

employment or involvement in NRClicensed activities to ensure that the

NRC can monitor the status of Mr.

Kumar’s compliance with the

Commission’s requirements and his

understanding of his commitment to

compliance. Furthermore, pursuant to

10 CFR 2.202, I find that the

significance of the misconduct

described above is such that the public

health, safety, and interest require that

this Order be immediately effective.

IV

Accordingly, pursuant to sections 57,

62, 81, 103, 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, 30.10, 50.5,

and 150.20, It is hereby ordered,

effective immediately, that:

A. Mr. Krishna Kumar is prohibited

for ten years from the date of this Order

from any involvement in NRC-licensed

activities. For purposes of this Order,

licensed activities include the licensed

activities of: (1) an NRC licensee; (2) an

Agreement State licensee conducting

licensed activities in NRC jurisdiction

pursuant to 10 CFR 150.20; and (3) an

Agreement State licensee involved in

the distribution of products that are

subject to NRC jurisdiction. In addition,

if Mr. Kumar is currently engaged in

NRC-licensed activities with another

NRC licensee, he must immediately

cease such activities, and inform the

NRC of the name, address and telephone

number of the employer.

B. For a period of five years, after the

above ten-year period of prohibition has

expired, Mr. Kumar shall, within 20

days of his acceptance of each

employment offer involving NRClicensed activities or his becoming

involved in NRC-licensed activities, as

defined in Paragraph IV.A 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 the

NRC-licensed activities. In the first such

notification, Mr. Kumar shall include a

statement of his commitment to

compliance with regulatory

requirements and the basis as to why

the Commission should have confidence

that he will now comply with

applicable NRC requirements.

The Director, Office of Enforcement

(OE), may, in writing, relax or rescind

any of the above conditions upon

demonstration by Mr. Kumar of good

cause.

V

In accordance with 10 CFR 2.202, Mr.

Kumar 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, D. C. 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
9218 Federal Register / Vol. 62, No. 40 / Friday, February 28, 1997 / Notices

Order, and shall set forth the matters of

fact and law on which Mr. Kumar 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: 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 I, 475 Allendale Road, King

of Prussia, Pennsylvania 19406, and to

Mr. Kumar if the answer or hearing

request is by a person other than Mr.

Kumar. If a person other than Mr.

Kumar 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. Kumar

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.

Kumar or any other person adversely

affected by this Order, 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 at Rockville, Maryland this 18th day

of February 1997.

For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.

Edward L. Jordan,

Deputy Executive Director for Regulatory

Effectiveness, Program Oversight,

Investigations and Enforcement.

[FR Doc. 97–4999 Filed 2–27–97; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 7590–01–P

[IA–97–012]

In the Matter of James L. Mulkey;

Order Prohibiting Involvement in NRCLicensed Activities; (Effective

Immediately)

I

James L. Mulkey (Mr. Mulkey) was

employed as Vice President by Power

Inspection, Inc. (PI or Licensee), and

was identified on PI’s NRC license as

the Radiation Safety Officer (RSO) for

PI. PI is the holder of Byproduct License

No. 37–21428–01 (License) issued by

the Nuclear Regulatory Commission

(NRC or Commission) pursuant to 10

CFR Parts 30 and 34. The License

authorizes the Licensee to use iridium192 and cobalt-60 sealed sources for the

performance of industrial radiography at

its facility in Wexford, Pennsylvania, as

well as at temporary job sites. The

License was most recently renewed on

January 31, 1989, and expired on

January 31, 1994. In addition, the

Licensee submitted a request, dated

December 30, 1993, that the license be

terminated. Action on that request has

been held in abeyance pending further

NRC review.

In addition, PI acted as a vendor

supplying services to licensees of

nuclear power plants, including the

performance of nondestructive testing

services, such as eddy current testing

(ET). Such services were provided to the

licensees of Perry and Cooper nuclear

power plants in 1993.

II

On December 2 and 3, 1993, the NRC

performed an inspection at the

Licensee’s Wexford facility of activities

conducted under the License. During

that inspection, the NRC found

numerous violations of NRC

requirements. The violations included:

the failure of the RSO named on the

License to perform required duties; the

failure to conduct quarterly audits of all

radiographers; the failure to provide the

required annual refresher training to the

radiographers; the failure to perform, at

the required frequency, the required

inspection and maintenance on the

exposure device (camera) containing an

iridium-192 source; the failure to

perform leak tests of the sealed sources

at the required frequency; the failure to

promptly collect and submit film badges

for processing; and the failure to

maintain radiography utilization logs.

On December 2, 1993, an NRC

investigation was also initiated by the

NRC Office of Investigations (OI).

During its investigation, OI concluded

that:

a. With respect to the materials

license, responses in PI’s response letter

dated July 14, 1993, to the NRC were

deliberately incomplete and inaccurate,

and the President and former RSO were

responsible for providing this false

information to the NRC. Specifically,

the inaccurate information provided to

the NRC was in response to a previous

Notice of Violation issued to the

Licensee on June 16, 1993, for numerous

violations identified during an NRC

inspection conducted in April 1993.

In a response, signed by Mr. Mulkey,

to the violations listed in the June 16,

1993 Notice of Violation, the licensee

stated that: (1) observations of the

licensee’s radiographers had been made

when, in fact, the observations had not

been made; (2) a ratemeter had been

sent for calibration, when, in fact, the

ratemeter had not been sent; (3) pocket

dosimeters had been calibrated, when,

in fact, the dosimeters had not been

calibrated; (4) source utilization logs

had been maintained, when, in fact, the

logs had not been maintained; (5)

personnel monitoring reports were

available, when, in fact, the reports had

not been available.

b. With respect to the vendor-related

activities, false ET qualification

certifications were deliberately

generated by PI for at least three

employees who performed ET

examinations at Perry and Cooper

nuclear power plants during 1993 and

ET qualification certification

examination results and Personnel

Certification Summaries were generated

for four employees, and these

falsifications were condoned or directed

by the former President, former Vice

President/RSO (i.e., Mr. Mulkey), and

the former Quality Assurance Manager.

In addition, Mr. Mulkey deliberately

provided false information to the NRC

during a December 2, 1993 telephone

discussion with a representative of the

NRC in that Mr. Mulkey stated he was

the RSO, and that in September of 1993

he had visited the Wexford office and

executed the duties of an RSO. These

statements were false in that: (1)

Interviews with PI employees

established that Mr. Mulkey had not

visited the Wexford office during 1993,

and they were not aware of Mr. Mulkey

performing any audits related to

radiographic operations out of the

Wexford office; and (2) Mr. Mulkey