[Federal Register Volume 62, Number 40 (Friday, February 28, 1997)]
[Notices]
[Pages 9216-9218]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 97-4999]


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

NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
[IA 97-011]


In the Matter of Krishna Kumar; Order Prohibiting Involvement in 
NRC-Licensed 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 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 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

[[Page 9217]]

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,<SUP>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.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ Mr. 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.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    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 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. 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 NRC-licensed 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 NRC-licensed 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

[[Page 9218]]

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