Federal Register / Vol. 63, No. 120 /Tuesday, June 23, 1998 / Notices 34197

Month Days used Location

Cumulative days in 1997

June ....................................................................... 30 Buffalo, WV .......................................................... .................... 121

July ........................................................................ 31 Buffalo, WV .......................................................... .................... 152

August ................................................................... 31 Buffalo, WV 31; Ft. Knox 3 .................................. 183 ....................

September ............................................................. 30 Buffalo, WV 30; Ft. Knox 7 .................................. 213 ....................

October .................................................................. 28 Buffalo, WV 28; Ft. Knox 9; Clarksville/Jeffersonville IN.7 241

November .............................................................. 30 Buffalo, WV 30 ..................................................... .................... 271

December .............................................................. 19 Buffalo, WV 19; Ft. Knox 1 .................................. 290 ....................

This is a Severity Level III violation

(Supplement VI).

Civil Penalty—$5,500.

Summary of Licensee’s Request for Mitigation

The Licensee admitted that the violation

occurred as stated in the Notice, but denied

that the violation was the result of careless

disregard for NRC requirements and

protested the civil penalty of $5,500. In

support of its assertion that the violation was

not the result of careless disregard, the

Licensee explained that the Louisville office,

where the violation was identified, had been

informed by the corporate office that

licensing for non-Agreement States would be

obtained prior to initiation of work. However,

the corporate office person responsible for

obtaining such licenses did not obtain the

licenses. The Licensee asserted that this

situation resulted from the fact that the

corporate office was undergoing a troubled

period, but that there had been no willful

disregard for NRC requirements.

Furthermore, the Licensee noted that any

actions required by an NRC license had been

completed, and that no effort was made to

conceal the use of radioactive equipment at

sites requiring an NRC license, and that its

compliance in other ways refutes the claim

of ‘‘careless disregard.’’

The Licensee also asserted that, contrary to

the claim in the Notice that there had been

delay in halting use of nuclear gauges,

immediately upon determining that an NRC

license had not been obtained, it halted all

testing with portable nuclear gauges at sites

under NRC jurisdiction. According to the

Licensee, this constituted appropriate,

prompt corrective action warranting credit.

NRC Evaluation of Licensee’s Request for

Mitigation

The Licensee has provided no new

information which would refute a finding of

careless disregard. Ground Engineering was

aware of the requirement of filing for

reciprocity, as evidenced by its having done

so in 1995. Moreover, the Licensee was

notified by the Commonwealth of Kentucky

on September 23, 1997, during a Kentucky

inspection, of the need to file for reciprocity

or obtain an NRC license prior to conducting

operations in areas of NRC jurisdiction.

Notwithstanding this notification, Ground

Engineering continued to use licensed

materials in areas under NRC jurisdiction

without an NRC license until December 1997.

The finding of careless disregard was based

on the fact that Ground Engineering had been

given this notice, but did not take sufficient

steps to assure that a proper license was

obtained. In addition, the Kentucky license

was amended in September 1997 to clearly

state that it did not authorize operations in

areas under exclusive federal jurisdiction.

This should have served as an additional

reminder of the need to obtain reciprocity or

a specific NRC license prior to conducting

licensed activities in these areas.

The Licensee’s contention that its failure to

file for reciprocity resulted from its

misplaced reliance upon the corporate office,

which was undergoing a troubled period,

does not excuse the Licensee from

compliance with NRC requirements. If fact,

its knowledge that the corporate office was

undergoing a period of upheaval should have

alerted it to the fact that it needed to confirm

that the proper license for conducting

licensed activities had been obtained.

With regard to the Licensee’s claim that its

corrective action warranted credit, the NRC’s

conclusion that the Licensee’s corrective

action was not prompt was based on the

belief that the licensed material continued to

be used until December 18, 1997. However,

in its responses, the Licensee provided new

information to the NRC which indicates that

on December 12, 1997, after the Licensee was

informed by the NRC of the violation, all

operations at the Buffalo, West Virginia site

were suspended and the gauge was placed in

locked storage. Based upon this new

information, the NRC has determined that the

Notice should be revised to reflect that you

used licensed material between January 1

and December 12, 1997, rather than the

previously cited period of time, January 1

through December 18, 1997. In addition, we

have also determined that credit is warranted

for your prompt corrective action.

NRC Conclusion

The NRC has concluded that an adequate

basis for retracting a finding of careless

disregard was not provided. However, the

NRC has determined that the Licensee

provided an adequate basis for mitigating the

civil penalty in light of its prompt corrective

action. Consequently, the proposed civil

penalty in the amount of $5,500 should be

mitigated to $2,750 and should be imposed.

[FR Doc. 98–16646 Filed 6–22–98; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 7590–01–P

NUCLEAR REGULATORY

COMMISSION

[Docket No. 55–22234–SP ASLBP No. 98–

745–01–SP]

Randall L. Herring; Designation of

Presiding Officer

Pursuant to delegation by the

Commission dated December 29, 1972,

published in the Federal Register, 37 FR

28710 (1972), and §§ 2.105, 2.700, 2.702,

2.714, 2.714a, 2.717 and 2.1207 of the

Commission’s Regulations, a single

member of the Atomic Safety and

Licensing Board Panel is hereby

designated to rule on petitions for leave

to intervene and/or requests for hearing

and, if necessary, to serve as the

Presiding Officer to conduct an informal

adjudicatory hearing in the following

proceeding.

Randall L. Herring

(Denial of Reactor Operator’s License

Application)

The hearing, if granted, will be

conducted pursuant to 10 CFR Part 2

Subpart L of the Commission’s

Regulations, ‘‘Informal Hearing

Procedures for Adjudications in

Materials and Operator Licensing

Proceedings.’’ This proceeding concerns

a denial by NRC Staff of Mr. Herring’s

reactor operator’s license application

and Mr. Herring’s request for a hearing

pursuant to 10 CFR Section 2.103.

The Presiding Officer in this

proceeding is Administrative Judge

Charles Bechhoefer. Pursuant to the

provisions of 10 CFR § 2.722, the

Presiding Officer has appointed

Administrative Judge Richard F. Cole to

assist the Presiding Officer in taking

evidence and in preparing a suitable

record for review.

All correspondence, documents and

other materials shall be filed with Judge

Bechhoefer and Judge Cole in

accordance with § 2.701. Their

addresses are:

Administrative Judge Charles

Bechhoefer, Presiding Officer, Atomic

Safety and Licensing Board Panel,

U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission,

Washington, D.C. 20555
34198 Federal Register / Vol. 63, No. 120 /Tuesday, June 23, 1998 / Notices

Dr. Richard F. Cole, Special Assistant,

Atomic Safety and Licensing Board

Panel, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory

Commission, Washington, D.C. 20555

Issued at Rockville, Maryland, this 16th

day of June 1998.

B. Paul Cotter, Jr.,

Chief Administrative Judge, Atomic Safety

and Licensing Board Panel.

[FR Doc. 98–16639 Filed 6–22–98; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 7590–01–P

NUCLEAR REGULATORY

COMMISSION

[Docket No. 50–315]

Indiana Michigan Power Company;

Notice of Withdrawal of Application for

Amendment to Facility Operating

License

The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory

Commission (the Commission) has

granted the request of Indiana Michigan

Power Company (the licensee) to

withdraw its August 4, 1995,

application for proposed amendment to

Facility Operating License No. DPR–58,

for the Donald C. Cook Nuclear Plant,

Unit Nos. 1, located in Berrien County,

Michigan.

The proposed amendment would

have revised the technical specifications

to allow for repair of hybrid expansion

joint sleeved steam generator tubes.

The Commission had previously

issued a Notice of Consideration of

Issuance of Amendment published in

the Federal Register on January 29,

1997 (62 FR 4351). However, by letter

dated January 6, 1998, the licensee

withdrew the proposed change.

For further details with respect to this

action, see the application for

amendment dated August 4, 1995, and

the licensee’s letter dated January 6,

1998, which withdrew the application

for license amendment. The above

documents are 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 Maud Preston Palenske

Memorial Library, 500 Market Street, St.

Joseph, MI 49085.

Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 15th day

of June 1998.

For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.

John F. Stang,

Senior Project Manager, Project Directorate

III–3, Division of Reactor Projects—III/IV,

Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation.

[FR Doc. 98–16650 Filed 6–22–98; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 7590–01–P

NUCLEAR REGULATORY

COMMISSION

[Docket No. 50–315 and 50–316]

Indiana Michigan Power Company;

Notice of Withdrawal of Application for

Amendment to Facility Operating

License

The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory

Commission (the Commission) has

granted the request of Indiana Michigan

Power Company (the licensee) to

withdraw its November 16, 1994

application for proposed amendment to

Facility Operating License Nos. DPR–58

and DPR–74, for the Donald C. Cook

Nuclear Plant, Unit Nos. 1 and 2,

located in Berrien County, Michigan.

The proposed amendment would

have revised the technical specifications

to reduce the decay time required before

refueling operations could begin.

The Commission had previously

issued a Notice of Consideration of

Issuance of Amendment published in

the Federal Register on December 21,

1994 (59 FR 65816). However, by letter

dated January 27, 1998, the licensee

withdrew the proposed change.

For further details with respect to this

action, see the application for

amendment dated November 16, 1994,

and the licensee’s letter dated January

27, 1998, which withdrew the

application for license amendment. The

above documents are 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 Maud

Preston Palenske Memorial Library, 500

Market Street, St. Joseph, MI 49085.

Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 15th day

of June 1998.

For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.

John F. Stang,

Senior Project Manager, Project Directorate

III–3, Division of Reactor Projects—III/IV,

Office of Nuclear Reactor Regulation.

[FR Doc. 98–16651 Filed 6–22–98; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 7590–01–P

NUCLEAR REGULATORY

COMMISSION

[Docket No. 030–31174, License No. 07–

28386–01, EA NO. 98–061]

Koch Engineering Company, Inc.,

Newark, Delaware; Order Imposing a

Civil Monetary Penalty

I

Koch Engineering Company, Inc.

(Licensee) is the holder of Byproduct

Materials License No. 07–28386–01

(License) issued by the Nuclear

Regulatory Commission (NRC or

Commission) on July 24, 1989, and most

recently renewed by the NRC on August

28, 1995. The License authorizes the

Licensee to possess and use certain

byproduct materials in accordance with

the conditions specified therein at its

facilities in Newark, Delaware, Canton,

Michigan, and temporary job sites

anywhere in the United States where

the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory

Commission maintains jurisdiction.

II

A special inspection of the Licensee’s

activities was conducted on September

15, 1997, to review the circumstances

associated with an event involving the

shipment of a package of radioactive

material (3 cesium-137 sources) via

Federal Express from the Licensee’s

facility in Newark, Delaware to

Wilmington, North Carolina. The

package was empty upon arrival in

North Carolina, and the sources were

later found at a Federal Express facility

in Memphis, Tennessee. The NRC

inspection was continued in the Region

I office on January 20, 1998, to review

evaluations of doses received by Federal

Express workers as a result of the event.

The results of this inspection indicated

that the Licensee had not conducted its

activities in full compliance with NRC

requirements. A written Notice of

Violation and Proposed Imposition of

Civil Penalty (Notice) was served upon

the Licensee by letter dated March 13,

1998. The Notice states the nature of the

violations, the provisions of the NRC

requirements that the Licensee violated,

and the amount of the civil penalty

proposed for the violation.

The Licensee responded to the Notice

in letters, dated April 8 and 9, 1998. In

its responses, the Licensee admits the

violations, but disputes the Severity

Level of the violation that resulted in

the issuance of the civil penalty and

requests that the proposed penalty of

$4,400 be reconsidered.

III

After consideration of the Licensee’s

response and the statements of fact,

explanation, and argument contained

therein, the NRC staff has determined,

as set forth in the Appendix to this

Order, that the Licensee has not

provided an adequate basis for reducing

the Severity Level of the violation or for

withdrawal of the civil penalty

associated with this violation.

Therefore, a civil penalty in the amount

of $4,400 should be imposed.