EA-02-258 - Roetech, LLC
April 21, 2003
Mr. Daniel S. Roe
President/Radiation Safety Officer
Sheridan, Wyoming 82801
|SUBJECT: ||NOTICE OF VIOLATION (NRC Inspection Report No. 030-35624/02-01) |
Dear Mr. Roe:
This refers to your letters dated February 13 and April 8, 2003, responding to six apparent violations identified during a routine NRC inspection at your Sheridan, Wyoming facility. The inspection findings were discussed with you during an exit briefing which was conducted on January 13, 2003, and the findings were documented in the subject inspection report dated February 7, 2003.
In the letter transmitting the inspection report, we informed you that the NRC was considering escalated enforcement. We provided you the opportunity to address the apparent violations by either attending a predecisional enforcement conference or by providing a written response before we made our final enforcement decision. Your letters dated February 13, and April 8, 2003, provided your response to the apparent violations.
Based on the information developed during the inspection, and the information that you provided in your February 13 and April 8 letters, the NRC has determined that six violations of NRC requirements occurred. These violations are cited in the enclosed Notice of Violation (Notice) and the circumstances surrounding them are described in detail in the subject inspection report. The violations include failures to: (1) secure radioactive material, (2) review the radiation safety program at least annually, (3) conduct hazmat refresher training for a gauge user every 3 years, (4) conduct leak tests every 6 months, (5) conduct a public dose assessment, and (6) have a calibrated survey meter or access to one.
The most significant of the violations involves your failure to secure radioactive material appropriately when it is in an unrestricted area and not locked in storage. This failure could have resulted in the loss or theft of licensed material, and ultimately could have resulted in unnecessary exposures to members of the public. Therefore, this violation is categorized in accordance with the "General Statement of Policy and Procedure for NRC Enforcement Actions" (Enforcement Policy), NUREG-1600 at Severity Level III.
In accordance with the Enforcement Policy, a civil penalty in the base amount of $3,000 is considered for a Severity Level III violation. Because your facility has not been the subject of escalated enforcement actions within the last two inspections, the NRC considered whether credit was warranted for Corrective Action in accordance with the civil penalty assessment process in Section VI.C.2 of the Enforcement Policy. In evaluating your corrective actions, we note that you immediately secured the gauge and implemented a program to periodically check to assure the gauges remain secured. As such, the NRC has determined that you are deserving of corrective action credit.
Therefore, to encourage prompt and comprehensive correction of violations, and in recognition of the absence of previous escalated enforcement action, I have been authorized not to propose a civil penalty in this case. However, significant violations in the future could result in a civil penalty. In addition, issuance of this Severity Level III violation constitutes escalated enforcement action, that may subject you to increased inspection effort.
The remaining five violations have been categorized at Severity Level IV and are not subject to escalated enforcement. With regard to your annual audit which you attached to your February 13 letter, item 11 indicated that you reviewed transportation for gauges that were shipped for calibration and repairs. Transportation regulations also apply to Roetech employee's transport of gauges to temporary job sites and, although not specifically required, you should consider including this aspect in a future audit. Your February 13 letter indicated that the reason many of the violations occurred was that you were not aware of the requirement. In fact, your February 13 response to your failure to conduct public dose assessments indicated that this (inspection) was the first time you were made aware of the requirement. As the RSO, you are responsible for knowing and implementing NRC requirements. The NRC inspection program is conducted on a sampling basis and is not intended to provide an exhaustive review of every activity.
The NRC has concluded that information regarding the reason for the violations, the corrective actions taken to correct the violation and prevent recurrence and the date when full compliance was achieved is already adequately addressed on the docket in the subject inspection report, and your letters dated February 13 and April 8, 2003. Therefore, you are not required to respond to this letter unless the description therein does not accurately reflect your corrective actions or your position. In that case, or if you choose to provide additional information, you should follow the instructions specified in the enclosed Notice.
In accordance with 10 CFR 2.790 of the NRC's "Rules of Practice," a copy of this letter, its enclosure, your February 13 and April 8, 2003, letters, and any further response you choose to submit will be made available electronically for public inspection in the NRC Public Document Room or from the NRC's document system (ADAMS), which is accessible from the NRC Web site at the Public NRC Library. To the extent possible, your response, if you choose to submit one, should not include any personal privacy, proprietary, or safeguards information so that it can be made available to the Public without redaction. The NRC also includes Issued Significant Enforcement Actions on its Web site.
| || ||Sincerely, |
| || ||/RA/ |
| || ||Ellis W. Merschoff |
Docket No. 030-35624
License No. 49-27690-01
Enclosure: Notice of Violation
cc w/ Enclosure:
Wyoming Radiation Control Program Director
NOTICE OF VIOLATION
|Roetech, LLC |
| ||Docket No. 030-35624 |
License No. 49-27690-01
During an NRC inspection which concluded on January 13, 2003, six violations of NRC requirements were identified. In accordance with the "General Statement of Policy and Procedure for NRC Enforcement Actions," NUREG-1600, the violations are listed below:
|A. || |
10 CFR 20.1801 requires that the licensee secure from unauthorized removal or access licensed materials that are stored in controlled or unrestricted areas. 10 CFR 20.1802 requires that the licensee control and maintain constant surveillance of licensed material that is in a controlled or unrestricted area and that is not in storage. As defined in 10 CFR 20.1003, controlled area means an area, outside of a restricted area but inside the site boundary, access to which can be limited by the licensee for any reason; and unrestricted area means an area, access to which is neither limited nor controlled by the licensee.
Contrary to the above, on November 5, 2002, the licensee did not secure from unauthorized removal or limit access to a Humboldt Scientific, Inc. portable moisture/density gauge containing a maximum activity of cesium-137 of 11 millicuries and a maximum activity of americium-241:beryllium of 44 millicuries, located in a pickup truck parked in front of the licensee's business office at 635 Broadway Street, Sheridan Wyoming, which is an unrestricted area, nor did the licensee control and maintain constant surveillance of this licensed material.
This is a Severity Level III violation (Supplement IV).
|B. || |
10 CFR 71.5(a) requires that a licensee who transports licensed material outside of the site of usage, as specified in the NRC license, or where transport is on public highways, or who delivers licensed material to a carrier for transport, comply with the applicable requirements of the regulations appropriate to the mode of transport of the Department of Transportation (DOT) in 49 CFR Parts 170 through 189.
49 CFR 172.704(a) specifies the elements of Hazmat employee training as: (1) general awareness/familiarization training, (2) function-specific training, and (3) safety training. 49 CFR 172.204(c) requires, in part, that a Hazmat employee receive initial training, and recurrent training at least once every 3 years.
Contrary to the above, as of November 5, 2002, the licensee did not provide recurrent training at least once every 3 years for its two Hazmat employees which satisfied the requirements in Subpart H to 49 CFR Part 172. One Hazmat employee received their initial training in 1987, and another Hazmat employee received their initial Hazmat training in 1993.
This is a Severity Level IV violation (Supplement V).
|C. || |
10 CFR 20.1101(c) requires, in part, that the licensee shall periodically (at least annually) review the radiation protection program content and implementation.
Contrary to the above, between February 12, 2001 and November 5, 2002 , a period in excess of annually, the licensee failed to review its radiation protection program.
This is a Severity Level IV violation (Supplement IV).
|D. || |
Condition 13 A of License Number 49-27690-01 states, in part, that tests for leakage and/or contamination will be conducted at intervals as specified in the certificate of registration. The certificate of registration for Model 5001 series Humboldt Scientific, Inc. gauges specifies that tests for leakage and/or contamination be conducted every 6 months.
Contrary to the above, between March 2002 and November 5, 2002, a period in excess of 6 months, the licensee's model 5001 series Humboldt Scientific, Inc. gauges were not tested for leakage and/or contamination.
This is a Severity Level IV violation (Supplement VI).
|E. || |
Condition 22 of License Number 49-27690-01 states, in part, that the licensee will conduct its program in accordance with the statements, representations and procedures contained in documents including enclosures of the license. In the license application dated December 28, 2000 and the facsimile dated February 12, 2001, the licensee committed to having or having access to, a calibrated survey meter.
Contrary to the above, as of November 5, 2002, the licensee failed to have in its possession or have access to a calibrated survey meter.
This is a Severity Level IV violation (Supplement VI).
|F. || |
10 CFR 20.1302(b)(1) requires, in part, that the licensee comply with the annual dose limit for a member of the public by demonstrating by measurement or calculation that the total effective dose equivalent does not exceed the limits specified in 10 CFR 20.1301. 10 CFR 20.1301(a)(1) specifies that the total dose equivalent to individual members of the public will not exceed 0.1 rem in a year.
Contrary to the above, as of November 5, 2002, the licensee did not demonstrate by measurement or calculation that the total effective dose equivalent to an individual member of the public, did not exceed 0.1 rem in a year, the limit specified in 10 CFR 20.1301(a)(1).
This is a severity level IV violation (Supplement IV).
The NRC has concluded that information regarding the reason for the violations, the corrective actions taken and planned to correct the violations and prevent recurrence and the date when full compliance was achieved is already adequately addressed on the docket in NRC Inspection Report No. 030-35624/02-01 dated February 7, 2003, and in the Licensee's letters dated February 13 and April 8, 2003. However, you are required to submit a written statement or explanation pursuant to 10 CFR 2.201 if the description therein does not accurately reflect your corrective actions or your position. In that case, or if you choose to respond, clearly mark your response as a "Reply to a Notice of Violation," [include EA-02-258] and send it to the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, ATTN: Document Control Desk, Washington, DC 20555 with a copy to the Regional Administrator, Region IV, 611 Ryan Plaza Drive, Suite 400, Arlington, Texas 76011-4005, within 30 days of the date of the letter transmitting this Notice of Violation (Notice).
If you contest this enforcement action, you should also provide a copy of your response, with the basis for your denial, to the Director, Office of Enforcement, United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555-0001.
If you choose to respond, your response will be made available electronically for public inspection in the NRC Public Document Room or from the NRC's document system (ADAMS), which is accessible from the NRC Web site at the Public NRC Library. Therefore, to the extent possible, the response should not include any personal privacy, proprietary, or safeguards information so that it can be made available to the Public without redaction.
In accordance with 10 CFR 19.11, you are required to post this Notice within two working days.
Dated this 21st day of April 2003
Page Last Reviewed/Updated Thursday, July 30, 2015