[Federal Register Volume 64, Number 1 (Monday, January 4, 1999)]
[Notices]
[Pages 199-200]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 98-34793]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
[Docket No. 030-34318, License No. 06-30361-01, EA 98-521]
Special Testing Laboratories, Inc., P.O. Box 200, Bethel,
Connecticut 06801-0200; Order Suspending License (Effective
Immediately)
I
Special Testing Laboratories, Inc. (Special Testing or Licensee) is
the holder of Byproduct Nuclear Material License No. 06-30361-01 issued
by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC or Commission) pursuant to 10
CFR Part 30. The license authorizes possession and use of Troxler
Electronics Laboratories, Campbell Pacific Nuclear, Humbolt Scientific,
Seamen Nuclear, or Soiltest nuclear gauges. Mr. Richard Speciale (Mr.
Speciale) is the President and Radiation Safety Officer of Special
Testing Laboratories. The license was issued on August 6, 1997, and is
due to expire on August 31, 2007.
License No. 06-19720-01 authorizing possession and use of portable
nuclear density gauges was previously issued to Testwell Craig
Laboratories of Connecticut, Inc. (Testwell Craig), but was suspended
on July 1, 1996, due to non-payment of fees. Mr. Speciale was also the
President of Testwell Craig.
II
On October 14, 15, and 16, 1998, and November 9-10, 1998, an NRC
Region I inspector, accompanied by an investigator from the NRC Office
of Investigations, conducted an inspection at the Licensee's facility
in Bethel, Connecticut. During the inspection, the NRC determined that:
(1) portable gauges containing NRC-licensed material were routinely
used by some Licensee employees who had not received the required
training; (2) some Licensee employees were using the gauges without
being provided the required personnel dosimeters; and (3) leak tests of
the gauges were not being performed at the required frequency.
During the October inspection, Mr. Speciale was interviewed by the
inspector and investigator. In that interview, Mr. Speciale, when
questioned concerning the scope of the Licensee's program, informed the
NRC that the Licensee possessed four Troxler portable gauges that were
used by three or four authorized users, including himself. He also
stated that he did not believe any of his field technicians were
operating gauges without training.
The NRC inspector and investigator returned to the facility on
November 9-10, 1998, to complete the investigation, at which time the
NRC was provided records indicating that nine individuals had received
manufacturer's training on October 29, 1998, which was subsequent to
the NRC's October 1998 visit. Mr. Speciale was questioned as to why
nine individuals had received such training when he had previously
stated that gauges were used by three or four users. Although Mr.
Speciale initially maintained that only three individuals were using
four gauges, he subsequently stated, and available records showed, that
Speciale Testing possessed 13 gauges, and these gauges were used by as
many as 14 individuals. Also, during the November inspection, seven
gauge users stated that they used portable gauges without formal
training for periods ranging from several weeks to four years prior to
October 29, 1998. In addition, the NRC learned, based on discussions
with Mr. Speciale, that there were periods when gauge users were not
provided personnel dosimeters. Further, five gauge users stated that
they operated portable gauges without wearing ``film badges'' for
periods ranging from one to several months prior to October 1998. When
questioned as to why individuals were using gauges without training or
personnel dosimeters, Mr. Speciale indicated that the required training
and dosimeters were not previously provided due to financial
considerations, even though he continued to direct the individuals to
use the gauges.
Based on this November review by the NRC, Mr. Speciale, during the
October 1998 communications with the NRC regarding the review of gauges
being used, the number of users, and the training of those users,
provided information to the NRC that he knew at the time was not
complete and accurate in all material respects.
Furthermore, during a subsequent interview with the OI investigator
on November 19, 1998, Mr. Speciale also admitted that he ``never
stopped using nuclear gauges'' after the Testwell Craig license was
suspended for non-payment of fees and before the Special Testing
license was issued. He stated that he failed to do so because Testwell
Craig had ``job commitments to finish.''
[[Page 200]]
III
The NRC investigation is continuing. However, in light of the facts
set forth in Section II, the NRC finds that the Licensee has
deliberately violated NRC requirements by: (1) directing untrained
individuals to use gauges, contrary to License Condition II.A; (2) not
providing these individuals with the necessary dosimetry while they
were using the gauges, contrary to License Condition 19; (3) making
false statements to the NRC, contrary to 10 CFR 30.9. Furthermore, the
facts show that Mr. Speciale used gauges between July 1, 1996 and
August 6, 1997, even though Testwell Craig's license had been suspended
for nonpayment of fees and Special Testing's license had not yet been
issued, contrary to 10 CFR 30.3 and the Order Suspending License issued
to Testwell Craig.
Deliberately violating NRC requirements is significant because the
NRC must be able to rely on the integrity of Licensee employees to
comply with NRC requirements. Moreover, providing false information to
the NRC is of significant regulatory concern because the Commission
must be able to rely on its licensees to provide complete and accurate
information. Directing untrained individuals to conduct NRC-licensed
activities and not providing dosimetry is also of significant
regulatory concern because misuse of gauges (which contain NRC-licensed
material) could result in unnecessary radiation exposures to workers or
members of the public. Given the above, it appears that the Licensee is
either unwilling or unable to comply with the Commission's
requirements.
Consequently, I lack the requisite reasonable assurance that the
Licensee's current operations can be conducted under License No. 06-
30361-01 in compliance with the Commission's requirements, and that the
health and safety of the public, including the Licensee's employees,
will be protected. Therefore, the public health, safety and interest
require that License No. 06-30361-01 be suspended, with the exception
of certain requirements enumerated in Section IV below, pending
completion of the NRC investigation and further Order by the NRC.
Furthermore, pursuant to 10 CFR 2.202, I find that the significance of
the conduct 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 Part 30, it is hereby ordered,
effective immediately, that:
A. Except as provided below, the authority to perform NRC-licensed
activities under License No. 06-30361-01 is hereby suspended pending
completion of the NRC investigation and further Order by the NRC.
B. All NRC licensed material in the Licensee's possession shall be
placed in locked storage at 21 Henry Street, Bethel, Connecticut and
shall not be used.
C. The Licensee shall not receive any NRC licensed material while
this order is in effect.
D. All records related to licensed activities shall be maintained
in their original form and shall not be removed or altered in any way.
E. Within 2 days of the date of the Order, all Licensee employees
shall be informed of this Order.
F. Within 7 days of the date of the Order, the NRC shall be
provided a list of all clients for whom the Licensee has performed
activities that involve use of the gauges within the past 12 months.
G. Within 24 hours of receipt of this Order, a copy of this Order
shall be posted at the facility, pursuant to 10 CFR 19.11(a)(4).
The Regional Administrator, Region I, 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 Rulemaking and Adjudications Staff,
Washington, D.C. 20555. Copies also shall be sent to the Director,
Office of Enforcement, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington,
D.C. 20555, to the Deputy Assistant General Counsel for Enforcement at
the same address, to the Regional Administrator, NRC Region I, 475
Allendale Road, King of Prussia, Pennsylvania, 19406, 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 23rd day of December 1998.
For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Malcolm R. Knapp,
Deputy Executive Director for Regulatory Effectiveness.
[FR Doc. 98-34793 Filed 12-31-98; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590-01-P
