EA-03-094 - Roofing Consultants, Ltd.

July 8, 2003

EA-03-094

Frank Balistreri, President
Roofing Consultants, Ltd.
P. O. Box 1305
Waukesha, WI 53187

SUBJECT:

NOTICE OF VIOLATION (NRC ROUTINE INSPECTION REPORT NO. 03018013/2003-001(DNMS))

Dear Mr. Balistreri:

This refers to the inspection conducted on April 9 and 11, 2002, at Roofing Consultants Ltd.'s Waukesha, Wisconsin, facility. The purpose of the inspection was to determine whether activities authorized by the license were conducted in compliance with NRC requirements. As described in the inspection report sent to you on May 8, 2003, two apparent violations of NRC requirements were identified involving the failure to secure licensed material from unauthorized access or maintain constant surveillance of this material and the failure to provide the manufacturer's training to an individual who used licensed material.

In the letter transmitting the inspection report, we provided you the opportunity to address the apparent violations identified in the report by either attending a predecisional enforcement conference or by providing a written response before we made our final enforcement decision. In a letter dated May 20, 2003, you provided a written response to the apparent violations.

Based on the information developed during the inspection and the information that you provided in your response to the inspection report, dated May 20, 2003, the NRC has determined that two 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. During the inspection, the NRC identified, through discussions with your staff, that an individual left a moisture density gauge unsecured and unattended in a hotel room and the same individual had not attended the manufacturer's training course as required by your license. While the individual had not attended the manufacturer's training course, he did receive in-house training.

The failure to adequately secure or maintain constant surveillance of licensed materials is a significant safety issue. While the gauge was secured in a locked hotel room when the individual went to dinner, the gauge was not appropriately secured from hotel staff who had access to the room. Implementation of adequate security measures is intended to prevent the loss or theft of licensed material and to prevent members of the public from being unknowingly and unnecessarily exposed to radiation. In addition, the failure to have an individual attend the manufacturer's training course is a concern, since the purpose of an approved training course is to provide the individual with the appropriate knowledge to safely operate, secure, and respond to an incident involving damage to or loss of the gauge. Therefore, these violations are categorized collectively in accordance with the "General Statement of Policy and Procedure for NRC Enforcement Actions" (Enforcement Policy), NUREG-1600, as a Severity Level III problem.

In accordance with the Enforcement Policy, a base civil penalty in the amount of $3000 is considered for a Severity Level III problem. 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. Credit for corrective action is warranted that included issuing a letter to all employees requiring: (1) that the gauges be locked in place within a locked van or truck; and (2) that all field employees participate in and pass the manufacturer's training course. In addition, notices of operational procedures have been posted in each locked gauge carrying case.

Therefore, to encourage prompt and comprehensive correction of the violations, and in recognition of the absence of previous escalated enforcement action, I have been authorized, after consultation with the Director, Office of Enforcement, 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 problem constitutes escalated enforcement action, that may subject you to increased inspection effort.

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 your May 20, 2003, letter. Therefore, you are not required to respond to this letter unless the description in this letter or Notice 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, and your response, if any, 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 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/
		J. E. Dyer Regional Administrator

Docket No. 030-18013
License No. 48-20142-01

Enclosure: Notice of Violation

cc: State of Wisconsin

---

NOTICE OF VIOLATION

Roofing Consultants, Ltd. Waukesha, Wisconsin

Docket No. 030-18013 License No. 48-20142-01 EA-03-094

During an NRC inspection conducted on April 9 and 11, 2003, two 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 April 8, 2003, the licensee did not secure from unauthorized removal or limit access to 50 millicuries of americium-241:beryllium located in a hotel room, which is an unrestricted area, nor did the licensee control and maintain constant surveillance of this licensed material.

B.

Condition 12 of NRC License No. 48-20142-01 requires that licensed material only be used by, or under the supervision and in the physical presence of, Frank Balistreri or individuals who have successfully completed the manufacturer's training program for gauge users. Contrary to the above, on several occasions as of April 8, 2003, licensed material was used by an unsupervised individual who had not successfully completed the manufacturer's training program for gauge users.

This is a Severity Level III problem (Supplements IV and VI).

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 the licensee's letter, dated May 20, 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; EA-03-094" 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 III, 801 Warrenville Road, Suite 255, Lisle, IL 60532-4351, 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 may be required to post this Notice within two working days.

Dated this 8th day of July 2003.