Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 32 / Thursday, February 16, 1995 / Notices 9063

Summary of Licensee’s Request for Mitigation

The Licensee, in its response disagrees

with the NRC statement in the October 17,

1994 letter that the Licensee’s corrective

actions were not sufficiently prompt and

comprehensive to warrant any mitigation of

the penalty. The Licensee indicates that the

NRC failed to recognize very significant

additional actions that had already been

taken by the time of the Enforcement

Conference. The licensee details the

corrective actions, which include the

establishment of additional management

oversight and monitoring controls. In

addition, the Licensee maintains that the

measures taken were effective, timely,

comprehensive, and pro-active, and

demonstrated a serious commitment to a

quality and effective radiation safety

program.

NRC Evaluation of Licensee’s Request for

Mitigation

The NRC letter, dated October 17, 1994,

transmitting the civil penalty, notes that no

credit was provided for the Licensee’s

corrective actions. As a result, a penalty of

$6,250 was proposed. Upon reconsideration

and evaluation of the licensee’s corrective

actions, after receipt of the Licensee’s

November 14, 1994 and January 17, 1995

responses, the NRC agrees that the actions

taken subsequent to the inspection were

prompt and comprehensive and that the full

mitigation allowable based on corrective

action should be applied. Therefore, 50%

mitigation of the base civil penalty amount

is being applied in this case based on the

corrective actions, which reduces the civil

penalty amount by $1,250. The Licensee did

not provide any basis for any further

mitigation of the penalty. Accordingly, no

further adjustment is warranted.

NRC Conclusion

The NRC has concluded that the violations

occurred as stated in the Notice, although an

example of Violation B should be withdrawn,

as described herein. In addition, the NRC has

concluded that the Licensee provided an

adequate basis for reduction of the civil

penalty based on its corrective actions.

Accordingly, a civil penalty in the amount of

$5,000 should be imposed.

[FR Doc. 95–3878 Filed 2–15–95; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 7590–01–M

[Docket No. 030–12279, License No. 45–

17151–01 EA 95–003]

Order Modifying License

In the Matter of Material Testing

Laboratories, Inc.

I

Material Testing Laboratories, Inc.

(Licensee) is the holder of Byproduct

Material License No. 45–17151–01

(License) issued by the Nuclear

Regulatory Commission (NRC or

Commission) pursuant to 10 CFR parts

30 and 34. The License authorizes, in

part, possession and use of byproduct

material not to exceed 200 curies of

Iridium-192 per source in the operation

of radiography exposure devices. The

License further authorizes the Licensee

to perform radiography at temporary job

sites in accordance with the conditions

specified therein. The License,

originally issued on March 17, 1977,

was renewed on December 16, 1993,

and is due to expire on December 1,

1998.

II

On November 15, 1994, an inspection

of NRC-licensed activities was

conducted at a temporary job site in

Northern Virginia and at the Licensee’s

office in Norfolk, Virginia. As a result of

the inspection, apparent violations of

NRC requirements were identified,

which are the subject of a Notice of

Violation and Proposed Imposition of

Civil Penalty issued this date. The

violations identified during the NRC

inspection include:

1. Use of NRC-licensed material by an

unauthorized and unqualified

individual, in violation of 10 CFR

34.31(b);

2. Failure to maintain direct

surveillance of radiographic operations

by an authorized and qualified

individual, in violation of 10 CFR 34.41;

3. Failure to perform an adequate

survey following a radiographic

exposure, in violation of 34.43(b);

4. Failure to post a high radiation

area, in violation of 10 CFR 34.42; and

5. Failure to post the Licensee’s

radiography vehicle as a radioactive

material storage area at a temporary job

site, in violation of Condition 20 A. of

the License.

A transcribed enforcement conference

was conducted in the NRC Region II

office in Atlanta, Georgia, on December

20, 1994, to discuss the violations, their

cause, and the Licensee’s corrective

actions. During the enforcement

conference, the Licensee acknowledged

that weaknesses in management and in

Radiation Safety Officer oversight of the

Lorton, Virginia, field office activities

contributed to the violations. These

weaknesses included a lack of

appreciation by management and the

Radiation Safety Officer (RSO) of the

effect of excessive overtime work on

employees’ performance and failure to

promptly monitor work practices of the

radiographer involved in the November

15, 1994, violations following the

indications of his poor performance by

a State of Maryland inspection which

identified a failure to maintain a

radiography exposure device under

constant surveillance and control.

III

Based on the above, the NRC has

concluded that the Licensee has

violated NRC requirements. The

performance of NRC-licensed activities

requires use of appropriate safety

procedures, training of personnel

regarding those procedures, meticulous

attention to detail by personnel

conducting radiography, and proper

oversight by Licensee management to

ensure these activities are conducted

safely and in accordance with NRC

requirements. This attention is

particularly important during the

performance of radiography given the

high radiation levels that can result

from use of the sources. The failure to

properly control the use of the

radiography devices could result in

significant radiation exposure to

individuals, both employees and

members of the general public. The

radiographer who had primary

responsibility for use and control of

NRC-licensed material at the temporary

job site failed to maintain proper control

and surveillance during radiographic

operations. The radiographer, as noted

above, one month earlier also failed to

maintain constant surveillance and

control of a radiography exposure

device in the State of Maryland. In

addition, based on the violations and

weaknesses identified above and

information and statements obtained

during the transcribed enforcement

conference, the RSO, who has the

responsibility for ensuring that NRC

requirements are met, had not

adequately controlled or maintained

oversight of the Licensee’s NRC-licensed

activities in the Northern Virginia area

to ensure compliance with all NRC

requirements including the conditions

of the License.

The violations described in Section II

of this Order and the concerns set forth

above demonstrate a significant lack of

attention to required radiation safety

requirements by the radiographer and

lack of management control and

oversight of radiographic operations by

the RSO and Licensee management.

Specifically, after the incident in

Maryland, the ROS did not identify the

root causes of the violations, the RSO

did not perform a field audit of the

radiographer’s performance, and the

retraining of the involved radiographer

was not sufficient to prevent the

November 15, 1994 incident which had

similar violations. Consequently, I lack

the requisite reasonable assurance that

the Licensee’s current operations can be

conducted under License no. 45–17151–

01 in compliance with the

Commission’s requirements and that the
9064 Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 32 / Thursday, February 16, 1995 / Notices

health and safety of the public,

including the Licensee’s employees,

will be protected. Therefore, the public,

health, and safety and interest require

that the License be modified as

described below in Section IV.

Furthermore, pursuant to 10 CFR 2.202,

I find that the significance of the

violations 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 and 10 CFR parts 30 and 34,

it is hereby ordered, effective

immediately, that license no. 45–17151–

01 is modified as follows:

A. The Licensee shall retain and

maintain the services of an RSO

approved by Region II to oversee the

activities of its radiographers based at

the Lorton, Virginia, facility. The RSO

duties must take priority over any other

duty. The Licensee shall within 30 days

submit the name and qualifications of

the Lorton RSO for approval to the

Regional Administrator, Region II.

B. The Licensee shall retain the

services of an independent individual or

organization (consultant) to perform an

initial assessment of the Licensee’s

radiation safety program in Lorton,

Virginia, and quarterly audits thereafter

for a period of one year to determine

compliance with all NRC requirements.

The consultant shall also provide

recommendations for program

improvements to ensure effective

management oversight and control of

radiography operations. Within 30 days

of the date of this Order, the Licensee

shall submit to the Regional

Administrator, NRC Region II, for

review and approval, the name and

qualifications of the consultant it

proposes to conduct the assessment and

audits. The consultant shall be

independent of the Licensee’s staff and

have experience in the management and

implementation of a radiation safety

program, including activities similar to

those authorized by the License.

C. Within 60 days of the date of NRC

approval of the consultant selection, as

described above, the Licensee shall have

the consultant submit its assessment

report to the Licensee and to the

Regional Administrator, NRC Region II.

Within 30 days of the end of each

quarterly audit period, the Licensee

shall have the consultant submit its

audit report and any recommendations

for improvements to the Licensee and to

the Regional Administrator, NRC Region

II. The assessment and audits of the

Licensee’s radiography program shall

include, but not be limited to:

1. A review of the adequacy of the

Licensee’s management control and

oversight in ensuring that radiographer

and equipment requirements, personnel

monitoring requirements, radiation

safety procedures in radiographic

operations, and other NRC requirements

are followed including:

(a) The Licensee’s program for

training, retraining, and qualifying all

individuals involved in using,

supervising, inspecting, and auditing

activities involving NRC-licensed

material;

(b) The scope, methods, and

frequency of the Licensee’s program of

surveillance and audits to determine

compliance by individual users of NRClicensed materials with NRC

requirements, the conditions of the

License, and the Licensee’s own

procedures for the safe use of

radioactive materials;

(c) The RSO’s functions and oversight

activities, including the methods of

monitoring the radiation of safety

program to ensure that problems or

violations are promptly identified and

corrected; and

(d) The Licensee’s radiation safety

program for developing and

implementing operating and emergency

procedures for the safe use of NRClicensed material, and record keeping

and documentation.

2. On-site reviews at the Licensee’s

Lorton, Virginia, office of activities and

records maintained for users, and

interviews and observations of selected

authorized users working at various

locations.

3. Direct observation during each

quarterly audit of, at a minimum, one

radiographer employed at the Lorton,

Virginia, office performing industrial

radiography activities with NRClicensed material. The audits should

ensure that all radiographers at the

Lorton, Virginia, office are observed

within the year.

D. Within 30 days of the date of the

initial assessment report and of each

quarterly audit report, the Licensee shall

submit to the Regional Administrator,

NRC Region II, the Licensee’s response

to the report either describing the

implementation of each of the necessary

corrective actions or recommendations

from the audit report, or justification for

not needing any corrective action or for

not adopting one or more of the specific

recommendations. Each Licensee

response shall include a status report on

action items completed or to be

completed with appropriate priorities

assigned and any schedules for, or dates

of, completion of each specific item.

E. The Licensee shall ensure that the

work of the radiographer involved in the

November 14, 1994 violations, as a

radiographer using NRC-licensed

material, is audited by the independent

consultant within 30 days of the

radiographer’s return to unsupervised

work and quarterly thereafter for one

year. All audits shall include direct

observation of the radiographer

performing industrial radiography with

NRC-licensed material.

F. For a period of one year from the

date of this Order, the Licensee shall

notify NRC Region II, by 9:00 a.m.

(Eastern Time) Monday (or Tuesday, if

Monday is a federal Holiday) of each

week, of the location in non-Agreement

states where the radiographer involved

in the November 15, 1994 violations

will be conducting radiography

operations. This notification shall

include the date, time, and specific

location where radiography is planned

to allow NRC to conduct an

unannounced inspection. If unplanned

work arises after the Monday

notification, the new work can be

performed by the involved radiographer

in a non-Agreement state provided that

the NRC has been given prior notice.

Notification shall be made by telephone

to Mr. Douglas M. Collins, Chief,

Nuclear Materials Safety and Safeguards

Branch, or his designated

representative, at (404) 331–5586 or by

facsimile at (404) 331–5559.

The Regional Administrator, Region

II, may, in writing, relax or rescind any

of the above conditions upon

demonstration by the Licensee of good

cause.

V

In accordance with 10 CFR 2.202, the

Licensee 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.

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 set forth the

matters of fact and law on which the

Licensee 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 Services Section,

Washington, D.C. 20555. Copies also

shall be sent to the Director, Office of

Enforcement, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory
Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 32 / Thursday, February 16, 1995 / Notices 9065

Commission, Washington, D.C. 20555,

to the Assistant General Counsel for

Hearings and Enforcement at the same

address, to the Regional Administrator,

NRC Region II, 101 Marietta Street,

Suite 2900, Atlanta, Georgia 30323, and

to the Licensee if the answer or hearing

request is by a person other than the

Licensee. If a person other than the

Licensee requests a hearing, that person

shall set forth with particularity the

manner in which his 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 the Licensee 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), the

Licensee, 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, the provisions specified in

Section IV above shall be final 20 days

from the date of this Order without

further order or proceedings. An answer

or a request for hearing shall not stay

the immediate effectiveness of this

order.

Dated at Rockville, Maryland this 9th day

of February 1995.

For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.

Hugh L. Thompson, Jr.,

Deputy Executive Director for Nuclear

Materials Safety, Safeguards, and Operations

Support.

[FR Doc. 95–3877 Filed 2–15–95; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 7590–01–M

[Docket No. 50–423]

Northeast Nuclear Energy Co.; Notice

of Issuance of Amendment To Facility

Operating License

The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory

Commission (Commission) has issued

Amendment No. 103 to Facility

Operating License No. NPF–49 issued to

Northeast Nuclear Energy Company (the

licensee), which revised the Technical

Specifications (TS) for operation of the

Millstone Nuclear Power Station, Unit

No. 3 located in New London County,

Connecticut. The amendment is

effective as of the date of issuance.

The amendment modified TS 3.5.2.a

to allow a one-time extension of the

allowable Residual Heat Removal (RHR)

pump outage time for the purpose of

mechanical seal replacement and its

related modifications. The allowable

outage time is extended from 72 hours

to 120 hours, may only be used one time

per pump, and is not valid after April

30, 1995. The amendment clearly

defines the times in which each RHR

pump and associated RHR hear

exchanger must be restored to an

operable state.

The application for the amendment

complies with the standards and

requirements of the Atomic Energy Act

of 1954, as amended (the Act), and the

Commission’s rules and regulations.

The Commission has made appropriate

findings as required by the Act and the

Commission’s rules and regulations in

10 CFR chapter I, which are set forth in

the license amendment.

Notice of Consideration of Issuance of

Amendment and Opportunity for

Hearing in connection with this action

was published in the Federal Register

on October 14, 1994 (59 FR 52200). No

request for a hearing or petition for

leave to intervene was filed following

this notice.

The Commission has prepared an

Environmental Assessment related to

the action and has determined not to

prepare an environmental impact

statement. Based upon the

environmental assessment, the

Commission has concluded that the

issuance of the amendment will not

have a significant effect on the quality

of the human environment (60 FR 7800).

For further details with respect to the

action see (1) the application for

amendment dated August 16, 1994, and

supplemented January 10, 1995, (2)

Amendment No. 103 to License No.

NPF–49, (3) the Commission’s related

Safety Evaluation, and (4) the

Commission’s Environmental

Assessment. All of these items 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

Learning Resource Center, Three Rivers

Community-Technical College, Thames

Valley Campus, 574 New London

Turnpike, Norwich, CT 06360.

Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 9th day

of February 1995.

For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.

Vernon L. Rooney, Sr.

Project Manager, Project Directorate I–4,

Division of Reactor Projects - I/II, Office of

Nuclear Reactor Regulation.

[FR Doc. 95–3875 Filed 2–15–95; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 7590–01–M

OFFICE OF PERSONNEL

MANAGEMENT

The National Partnership Council;

Strategic Action Plan for 1995

AGENCY: Office of Personnel

Management.

ACTION: Notice.

SUMMARY: The National Partnership

Council (the NPC; the Council) is

announcing the approval of its strategic

action plan for 1995.

DATES: The Council approved its

strategic action plan for 1995 at its

January 10, 1995, meeting in

Philadelphia, Pennsylvania.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Douglas K. Walker, National Partnership

Council, Executive Secretariat, Office of

Personnel Management, Theodore

Roosevelt Building, 1900 E Street, NW.,

Room 5315, Washington, DC 20415–

0001, (202) 606–0001.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The

strategic action plan outlines a number

of actions the Council plans to take in

1995 to support and promote

partnership efforts throughout the

Federal Government, as it is mandated

to do under Executive Order 12871,

Labor-Management Partnerships.

Additionally, the actions help the

Council meet its responsibilities to

change the culture of Federal labormanagement relations so that managers,

employees, and employees’ elected

union representatives work together as

partners in designing and implementing

comprehensive changes in support of

the Government reform objectives of the

National Performance Review.

Office of Personnel Management.

James B. King,

Director.

Accordingly, the 1995 strategic action

plan for the Council is as follows:

Executive Summary—National

Partnership Council 1995 Strategic

Action Plan; National Partnership

Council Charter: Executive Order

12871; NPC Strategic Goal

To institutionalize labor-management

partnerships in Federal agencies for the

purpose of achieving the National

Performance Review goal of creating a