[Federal Register Volume 59, Number 98 (Monday, May 23, 1994)]
[Unknown Section]
[Page 0]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 94-12497]
[[Page Unknown]]
[Federal Register: May 23, 1994]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
[Docket No. 15000004, License No. 0373-70 (CA), EA 93-201]
Richardson X-Ray, Inc., Rancho Dominerey, California, Order
Imposing Civil Monetary Penalties
I
Richardson X-Ray, Inc. (Licensee or Richardson) is the holder of
Byproduct Material License No. 0373-70 issued by the State of
California. The license authorizes the Licensee to possess and use
sealed sources in industrial radiographic exposure devices within the
State of California. Pursuant to 10 CFR 150.20 and Richardson's
California license, Richardson is authorized to possess and use
licensed byproduct materials to perform industrial radiography in Non-
Agreement States and areas under exclusive Federal jurisdiction.
II
An inspection by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) was
conducted on July 29 and 30, 1993, of the Licensee's activities that
were performed in an area of exclusive Federal jurisdiction at
Vandenburg Air Force Base, California. The results of the inspection
determined that the Licensee had not conducted its activities in full
compliance with NRC requirements. A written Notice of Violation and
Proposed Imposition of Civil Penalties (Notice) was served upon the
Licensee by letter dated November 5, 1993. The Notice states the nature
of the violations, the provisions of the NRC's requirements that the
Licensee had violated, and the amount of the civil penalties proposed
for the violations. The Licensee responded to the Notice in a letter
dated November 30, 1993. In its response, the Licensee admitted the
violations assessed civil penalties, but requested that the proposed
civil penalties be remitted based on its corrective actions and its
alleged inability to pay the proposed $25,000 civil penalty.
III
After consideration of the Licensee's response and the statements
of fact, explanation, and argument for remission contained therein, the
NRC staff has determined, as set forth in the Appendix to this Order,
that the Licensee's timely and extensive corrective actions support a
$5,000 reduction of the $25,000 civil penalties proposed in the
November 5, 1993 Notice, based on mitigation consistent with the
Enforcement Policy.
IV
In view of the foregoing, and pursuant to section 234 of the Atomic
Energy Act of 1954, as amended (Act), 42 U.S.C. 2282, and 10 CFR 2.205,
it is hereby ordered that:
The Licensee pay civil penalties in the full amount of Twenty
Thousand Dollars ($20,000) by check, draft, or money order, payable to
the Treasurer of the United States and mailed to the Director, Office
of Enforcement, USNRC, Washington, DC 20555. This payment shall be made
within thirty (30) days of the date of this Order or in accordance with
the attached Promissory Note for Payment of the Civil Penalties (Note).
If payment is to be in accordance with the attached Note, the Licensee
within thirty (30) days of the date of this Order shall submit the
signed Note in duplicate to the Director, Office of Enforcement, U.S.
Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Mail stop 7H5, Washington, DC 20555.
V
The Licensee may request a hearing within 30 days of the date of
this Order. A request for a hearing should be clearly marked as a
``Request for an Enforcement Hearing'' and shall be addressed to the
Director, Office of Enforcement, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission,
ATTN: Document Control Desk, Washington, DC 20555. Copies also shall be
sent to the Assistant General Counsel for Hearings and Enforcement at
the same address and to the Regional Administrator, NRC Region IV, 611
Ryan Plaza Drive, suite 400, Arlington, Texas 76011.
If a hearing is requested, the Commission will issue an Order
designating the time and place of the hearing. If the Licensee fails to
request a hearing within 30 days of the date of this Order, the
provisions of this Order shall be effective without further
proceedings. If payment has not been made by that time, the matter may
be referred to the Attorney General for collection.
In the event the Licensee requests a hearing as provided above, the
issue to be considered at such hearing shall be whether, on the basis
of the violations admitted by the Licensee, this Order should be
sustained.
Dated at Rockville, Maryland this 13th day of May 1994.
For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
James Lieberman,
Director, Office of Enforcement.
Appendix--Evaluation and Conclusion
On November 5, 1993, a Notice of Violation and Proposed
Imposition of Civil Penalties (Notice) was issued to Richardson X-
Ray, Inc. (Licensee) for violations identified during an NRC
inspection conducted on July 29 and 30, 1993. The Licensee responded
to the Notice in a letter, dated November 30, 1993. In its response,
the Licensee admitted the violations but requested remission of the
penalties, based on its corrective actions and its alleged inability
to pay. The NRC's evaluations and conclusion regarding the
Licensee's requests are as follows:
Summary of Licensee's Request for Mitigation
The Licensee admitted the violations, but requested remission of
the proposed civil penalties, in whole or in part, on the following
bases:
1. In response to earlier violations of state radiography
requirements, the State of California had required the Licensee to
obtain the services of a consultant to provide radiation safety
training and perform unannounced job site surveys of each
radiographer. The cost of hiring the consultant was $10,000.
2. Corrective actions taken by the Licensee after the
Enforcement Conference included appointing a new RSO and terminating
the prior RSO, and implementing a disciplinary policy for
radiographic personnel.
3. The imposition of the civil penalties would cause a financial
burden on the licensee to the point of possible forfeiture of its
radioactive materials license.
NRC Evaluation of Licensee's Request for Mitigation
The NRC has evaluated the Licensee's response and has determined
that an adequate basis was not provided for full remission or
reduction of the civil penalties, however mitigation of the civil
penalties is warranted based on the Licensee's corrective actions is
warranted. In particular:
1. Earlier inspections by the NRC and the State of California
had identified similar violations by Licensee personnel during the
two years preceding the July 1993 NRC inspection. For example, in
December 1991 Licensee was cited by the State of California for: (1)
Failure to perform surveys of the radiographic exposure device, (2)
failure to recharge a pocket dosimeter at the beginning of the
shift, and (3) failure to perform quarterly audits of radiographic
personnel.
In April 1992, the Licensee was cited by the State of California
for: (1) Failure to wear personal monitoring devices, (2) failure to
perform surveys of the radiographic exposure device, (3) failure to
post the restricted area and high radiation area, (4) failure to
maintain surveillance of the restricted area to prevent unauthorized
access into the high radiation area, (5) failure to maintain records
of surveys, source usage, and training, and (6) failure to perform
quarterly audits of radiographic personnel.
In May 1992, the State of California held an Enforcement
Conference with the Licensee to discuss the violations identified
during the April 1992 inspection. As a result of the Enforcement
Conference the Licensee was required to hire a consultant to perform
radiation safety training and audits of radiographic personnel. The
Licensee's hiring of a consultant in May 1992 did not prevent
recurrence of the same types of violations in July 1993.
Costs incurred by licensees to ensure compliance and
implementation of their radiation safety programs are not considered
in determining the base civil penalty, nor in escalating or
mitigating the civil penalty.
2. The Licensee cites additional corrective actions in its
response that include appointing a new RSO, terminating the prior
RSO and implementing a disciplinary policy for radiographic
personnel. The NRC recognizes that the Licensee took immediate
corrective actions following the inspector's identification of the
violations which included retraining of all radiographers and
assistant radiographers, monitoring with regular unannounced job
site audits, ensuring radiographers have the needed equipment prior
to leaving for the job and ensuring that the radiographers are
trained on all equipment.
The November 5, 1993, Notice stated that based on the
repetitiveness of the violations, the Licensee's 1992 corrective
actions were inadequate and that additional corrective actions
needed to be considered to prevent further repetition. Given that
the Licensee's more recent corrective actions were timely and
extensive, these actions support a $5,000 reduction of the $25,000
civil penalties proposed in the November 5, 1993 Notice, based on
mitigation consistent with the Enforcement Policy.
3. Based on its review of the financial information provided by
the Licensee, the NRC determined that the Licensee possesses
sufficient financial resources to pay the proposed civil penalties
over a period of time, including interest. Accordingly, a payment
schedule has been developed and is enclosed in the form of a
Promissory Note in Payment of the Civil Penalties (Note). The
Licensee, however, may pay the civil penalties in full, if it so
desires.
In view of the above, the proposed civil penalties should not be
reduced based on the Licensee's alleged inability to pay.
NRC Conclusion
Based on its evaluation of the Licensee's response, the NRC
concludes that the Licensee's timely and extensive corrective
actions support a $5,000 reduction of the $25,000 civil penalties
proposed in the November 5, 1993 Notice.
Notice, based on mitigation consistent with the Enforcement
Policy. Accordingly, civil monetary penalties in the amount of
$20,000 should be imposed.
[FR Doc. 94-12497 Filed 5-20-94; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590-01-M
