[Federal Register Volume 69, Number 55 (Monday, March 22, 2004)]
[Notices]
[Pages 13336-13339]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 04-6275]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

[Docket No. 030-33765; License No. 24-26628-01; EA-03-177]


KTL Roudebush Testing, Kansas City, MO; Order Suspending License 
(Effective Immediately) and Demand for Information

    KTL Roudebush Testing (Licensee) is the holder of Byproduct 
Material License No. 24-26628-01 issued by the Nuclear Regulatory 
Commission (NRC or Commission) pursuant to 10 CFR parts 30 and 34. The 
license authorizes the possession and use of iridium-192 in sealed 
sources for industrial radiography, and cesium-137 and americium-241 in 
sealed sources for measuring physical properties of materials, at 
temporary job sites of the Licensee anywhere in the United States where 
the NRC maintains jurisdiction for regulating the use of licensed 
material. The license identifies Christopher V. Roudebush as the 
Radiation Safety Officer (RSO). Mr. Roudebush is the President and 
owner of KTL Roudebush Testing, and he serves as a Licensee 
radiographer. The license, originally issued on November 20, 1995, was 
last amended on January 16, 2004, and is due to expire on March 31, 
2011.
    On April 8, 2003, two NRC inspectors attempted to inspect the 
Licensee's activities and inquired about radiography at temporary job 
sites. The Licensee's RSO indicated that the Licensee might be 
performing radiography work at the Kansas City Power & Light Iatan 
Generating Station located in Weston, Missouri on either Thursday or 
Friday (April 10 or 11, 2003). On the morning of April 10, 2003, the 
inspectors again called the Licensee inquiring about radiography at 
temporary job sites. A Licensee employee, a radiographer's assistant, 
answered and stated that the Licensee's staff had just finished 
radiography at a temporary job site in Weston, Missouri, and was 
preparing to return to the main office. Following the telephone 
conversation, the inspectors drove to the Licensee's office at 1606 
Cherry Street, Kansas City, Missouri and waited for the work crew to 
return. When a Licensee

[[Page 13337]]

radiographer returned to the office, the inspectors evaluated the 
Licensee's transport of the radiographic exposure devices within the 
vehicle and discovered that one of the devices was not properly secured 
in the vehicle and shipping papers were not present.
    When the RSO returned to the office, the inspectors conducted an 
inspection of the Licensee's records that are required by 10 CFR Part 
34. During the inspection, the RSO presented the inspectors with four 
records of the quarterly maintenance/inspection of radiographic 
exposure devices. Two records were dated March 30, 2002, and two 
records were dated March 28, 2003. The records were blank, other than 
the device identifiers and the dated signature of the RSO. When 
questioned about the blank records, the RSO stated that the 2002 
maintenance/inspections were completed after the dated signature and 
the resulting records were entered into his office desktop computer. 
The RSO also stated that the records for the maintenance/inspection of 
exposure devices for the second through fourth quarters of 2002 were 
not available. The RSO claimed that a Licensee employee had entered the 
information into the computer and he was unable to retrieve these 
records. The RSO also claimed that the employee may have removed these 
records when he left the company under unfavorable conditions. On April 
14, 2003, one of the inspectors interviewed the former employee by 
telephone. The former employee denied entering any records of 
radiographic operations into a computer system maintained by the 
Licensee and recalled the completed records were normally handwritten. 
The inspection resulted in nine unresolved items.
    On April 21, 2003, the NRC Office of Investigation was asked to 
look into concerns regarding potential willful/deliberate violations of 
NRC requirements by the RSO. These concerns included: (1) Deliberately 
falsifying exposure device records; (2) deliberately providing 
incomplete and inaccurate information regarding the performance of 
quarterly inspections; (3) deliberately failing to perform quarterly 
inspections; (4) deliberately failing to properly secure an exposure 
device during transportation; and (5) deliberately violating the two-
man rule requirement at a temporary job site in Joplin, Missouri.
    On September 16, 2003, the NRC was contacted by a former Licensee 
radiographer's assistant, who informed the NRC that the RSO had asked 
him after the April 2003 NRC inspection to falsify the missing records 
and to manipulate the computer data so it would not appear as if the 
records were backdated. After the former Licensee employee told the RSO 
that he would not be able to manipulate the computer data, the former 
employee stated that the RSO hid the computer in the attic and 
subsequently destroyed the computer after he was issued a subpoena for 
the computer contents. The former Licensee employee also stated that 
the RSO was hiring personnel with no previous radiography experience 
from a temporary agency and the temporary personnel were not provided 
with the required training or radiation dosimetry. On September 18, 
2003, these concerns were provided to the NRC Office of Investigations 
for inclusion in its ongoing investigation.
    On October 23, 2003, an NRC inspection was conducted at a temporary 
job site in Livingston County, Missouri. Based on the results of this 
inspection, three violations of NRC requirements were identified 
involving: (1) A failure to have shipping papers readily accessible in 
the vehicle cab when the driver is not at the vehicle's controls; (2) a 
failure to provide the emergency response telephone number on the 
shipping papers; and (3) a failure to amend the license to reflect a 
name change from PSI Inspection, Inc. to KTL Roudebush Testing.
    On February 18, 2004, the NRC Office of Investigation (OI) issued 
its report (Case No. 3-2003-009) and substantiated nine deliberate 
violations of NRC requirements. Based on the results of the April 2003 
inspection and the OI investigation, the following deliberate 
violations of regulatory requirements have been identified:
    1. On April 10, 2003, October 28 and 29, 2002, and on several 
occasions between October 2001 and January 2002, the Licensee's RSO, 
who is also the President and Owner of KTL Roudebush Testing, 
deliberately conducted radiography at locations other than a permanent 
radiographic installation (temporary job sites), and the RSO/
radiographer was not accompanied by an additional qualified individual 
who could observe the operations and was capable of providing immediate 
assistance to prevent unauthorized entry, as required by 10 CFR 34.41.
    2. On April 10, 2003, and on October 28 and 29, 2002, the 
Licensee's RSO deliberately permitted individuals to act as a 
radiographer's assistant before these individuals had successfully 
completed the Licensee's training program for radiographer's 
assistants, as required by 10 CFR 34.43(c) and License Condition 26.
    3. On October 28, 2002, the Licensee's RSO deliberately permitted 
an individual who was not wearing a direct-reading pocket dosimeter, an 
alarming ratemeter, and either a film badge or a thermoluminescent 
dosimeter, as required by 10 CFR 34.47(a), to act as a radiographer's 
assistant.
    4. As of April 12, 2003, the Licensee's RSO deliberately failed to 
conduct inspections and routine maintenance of Licensee radiographic 
exposure devices and associated equipment during the first quarter of 
2003, an interval exceeding three months, as required by 10 CFR 
34.31(b).
    5. On April 8, 2003, the Licensee's RSO deliberately provided 
inaccurate and incomplete information to an NRC inspector regarding the 
maintenance of records of quarterly inspections of radiographic 
exposure devices, required to be maintained in accordance with 10 CFR 
34.73. The RSO stated that the required inspections had been conducted 
in calendar year 2002 and that electronic records of the subject 
inspections were prepared by another named individual. Transcribed 
sworn statements by one or more individuals indicated that the Licensee 
never prepared the subject records, electronic or handwritten, in 
calendar year 2002.
    6. On August 5, 2003, the Licensee's RSO deliberately provided 
inaccurate and incomplete information to an NRC Office of 
Investigations Special Agent and deliberately did not afford the 
Commission an opportunity to inspect records of quarterly maintenance 
and inspections of radiographic exposure devices, required to be 
maintained in accordance with 10 CFR 34.73. The Licensee's RSO 
deliberately failed to provide information requested in a subpoena for 
the hard disk drive data, including any magnetic or optical media, 
floppy disks, zip disks, and compact disks, pertaining to the 
Licensee's quarterly maintenance and inspection logs for the year 2002. 
The Licensee's RSO stated that he had thrown the computer in the trash 
because it was not working. However, a licensee employee notified the 
NRC that the computer was in the attic in August and was destroyed by 
the owner, after the subpoena had been served.
    7. On April 10, 2003, and between October 2001 and January 2002, 
the Licensee's RSO transported on public highways a SPEC Model 150 
radiographic exposure device (package), containing a nominal 142 curie 
iridium-192 sealed source, and the Licensee deliberately did not block 
and brace the package such that it could not change position during 
conditions normally

[[Page 13338]]

incident to transportation, as required by 10 CFR 71.5(a) and 49 CFR 
177.842(d). Specifically, two radiographic exposure devices were 
transported in the back of a company truck and one of the exposure 
devices was not properly blocked or braced.
    8. On April 10, 2003, the Licensee's RSO deliberately transported a 
SPEC Model 150 radiographic exposure device, containing a nominal 142 
curie iridium-192 sealed source, by highway without a shipping paper 
and the material was not excepted from shipping paper requirements, as 
required by 10 CFR 71.5(a) and 49 CFR 177.817(a).
    9. On April 10, 2003, the Licensee's RSO deliberately transported a 
radiographic exposure device, containing a nominal 142 curie iridium-
192 sealed source, without its safety cover installed to protect the 
source assembly from water, mud, sand or other foreign matter, as 
required by 10 CFR 34.20(c)(3).
    The NRC must be able to rely on the Licensee and its employees to 
comply with all NRC requirements and to ensure that radiography is not 
conducted unless all required qualified individuals are present, have 
completed all required training, and are wearing all required dosimetry 
(i.e., a direct-reading pocket dosimeter, alarming ratemeter, and a 
film badge or a thermoluminescent dosimeter). The failure to ensure 
that qualified individuals with appropriate dosimetry are present 
during radiography is a significant safety issue. The purpose of the 
second qualified individual is to observe radiographic operations, to 
provide immediate assistance to prevent unauthorized entry into areas 
where radiography is being conducted, and to assist the radiographer in 
case of an event involving the radiography source. The purpose of 
dosimetry, in particular the alarming ratemeter, is to provide 
information to the individuals involved in radiographic operations that 
there is a substantial radiation dose rate present, thereby allowing 
individuals to take appropriate precautions to reduce their exposures 
and those of the public.
    In addition, the NRC must be able to rely on its licensees to 
maintain accurate records and to provide information to the NRC that is 
complete and accurate in all material respects. Based on the violations 
described in Section II above, the Licensee has deliberately failed to 
comply with NRC requirements, and has deliberately provided inaccurate 
and incomplete information to the NRC. These actions by the Licensee 
have raised serious doubt as to whether the Licensee can be relied upon 
in the future to comply with NRC requirements.
    Consequently, I lack the requisite reasonable assurance that the 
Licensee's current operations under License No. 24-26628-01 can be 
conducted 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. 24-26628-01 be suspended. Furthermore, 
pursuant to 10 CFR 2.202, the significance of the violations described 
in Section II above is such that the public health, safety, and 
interest require that this Order be immediately effective.
    In addition to these deliberate violations which occurred within 
NRC's jurisdiction, and upon which this Order is based, the 
investigation conducted by the NRC Office of Investigations determined 
that the following activities occurred in the State of Kansas, an NRC 
Agreement State. On February 17 and March 6, 2003, and on several 
occasions between May and October 2002, the Licensee deliberately 
conducted radiography at temporary job sites and the radiographer was 
not accompanied by an additional qualified individual. On February 17 
and March 6, 2003, the Licensee deliberately permitted individuals to 
act as a radiographer's assistants before they had successfully 
completed the Licensee's training program for radiographer's 
assistants, and these individuals did not wear a direct-reading pocket 
dosimeter, an alarming ratemeter, and either a film badge or a 
thermoluminescent dosimeter while conducting radiography.
    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. 24-26628-01 is 
suspended pending further order:
    A. All activities authorized by License No. 24-26628-01 involving 
the use of licensed material are hereby suspended pending further 
action by the NRC. All other requirements of the license remain in 
effect.
    B. All activities authorized by 10 CFR 150.20 involving the use of 
licensed material in Non-Agreement States and areas of exclusive 
federal jurisdiction are hereby suspended.
    C. All NRC-licensed material in the Licensee's possession shall 
immediately be placed in secured storage at the Licensee's facility 
located at 1606 Cherry Street, Kansas City, Missouri.
    D. Within 24 hours following issuance of this Order, the Licensee 
shall notify Mr. Marc Dapas, Director, Division of Nuclear Materials 
Safety, NRC Region III, or his designee, at telephone number (630) 829-
9801 and advise him of the current location, physical status, and 
storage arrangements of licensed materials. A written response 
documenting this information shall be submitted, under oath or 
affirmation, to the Regional Administrator, NRC Region III, 801 
Warrenville Road, Suite 255, Lisle, IL 60532-3451 within seven days of 
receipt of this Order.
    E. No material authorized by the license shall be ordered, 
purchased, received, or transferred by the Licensee while this Order is 
in effect.
    F. All records related to licensed activities and materials shall 
be maintained in their original form and must not be removed, 
destroyed, or altered in any way.
    The Director of the Office of Enforcement, the Director of the 
Office of Nuclear Materials Safety and Safeguards, or the Regional 
Administrator, Region III, may, in writing, relax or rescind this Order 
upon demonstration by the Licensee of good cause.
    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. Where good cause is shown, consideration will be 
given to extending the time to request a hearing. A request for 
extension of time must be made in writing to the Director, Office of 
Enforcement, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555, 
and include a statement of good cause for the extension. 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: 
Rulemakings and Adjudications Staff, Washington, DC 20555. Copies of 
the hearing request also should be sent to the Director, Office of 
Enforcement, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555-
0001, to the Assistant General Counsel for Materials

[[Page 13339]]

Litigation and Enforcement at the same address, to the Regional 
Administrator, NRC Region III, 801 Warrenville Road, Suite 255, Lisle, 
IL 60532-4351, and to the Licensee if the hearing request is by a 
person other than the Licensee. Because of continuing disruptions in 
delivery of mail to United States Government offices, it is requested 
that answers and requests for hearing be transmitted to the Secretary 
of the Commission either by means of facsimile transmission to 301-415-
1101 or by e-mail to hearingdocket@nrc.gov and also to the Office of 
the General Counsel either by means of facsimile transmission to 301-
415-3725 or by e-mail to OGCMailCenter@nrc.gov. 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 Sec.  
2.309.
    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, or written approval of 
an extension of time in which to request a hearing, the provisions 
specified in Section IV above shall be final 20 days from the date of 
this Order without further order or proceedings. If an extension of 
time for requesting a hearing has been approved, the provisions 
specified in Section IV shall be final when the extension expires if a 
hearing request has not been received. An answer or a request for 
hearing shall not stay the immediate effectiveness of this order.
    In addition to issuance of this Order suspending License No. 24-
26628-01, the NRC requires further information from the Licensee in 
order to determine whether the NRC can have reasonable assurance that 
in the future the Licensee will conduct its activities in accordance 
with the NRC's requirements.
    Accordingly, pursuant to sections 161c, 161o, 182 and 186 of the 
Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended, and the NRC's regulations in 10 
CFR 2.204 and 10 CFR parts 30 and 34, in order for the NRC to determine 
whether the license should be further modified or revoked, or other 
enforcement action taken, the Licensee is required to submit to the 
Director, Office of Enforcement, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, 
Washington, DC 20555-0001, within 20 days of the date of this Order and 
Demand for Information, in writing and under oath or affirmation:
    1. An explanation as to why, in light of the findings set forth in 
Section II of this Order and Demand for Information, that License No. 
24-26628-01 should not be revoked.
    2. If the Licensee believes that the license should not be revoked, 
the Licensee, in its response, should address, at a minimum, why the 
NRC should have reasonable assurance that the Licensee, in the future, 
will ensure appropriate management oversight of licensed activities 
such that licensed activities will be conducted in accordance with 
regulatory requirements (this shall include a description of who will 
be responsible for assuring such activities are conducted in accordance 
with 10 CFR parts 30 and 34 requirements).
    Copies also shall be sent to the Assistant General Counsel for 
Materials Litigation and Enforcement at the same address, and to the 
Regional Administrator, NRC Region III, 801 Warrenville Road, Suite 
255, Lisle, IL 60532-4351.
    After reviewing your response, the NRC will determine whether 
further action is necessary to ensure compliance with regulatory 
requirements.

    Dated this 11th day of March 2004.

    For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Carl J. Paperiello,
Deputy Executive Director for Materials, Research and State Programs.
[FR Doc. 04-6275 Filed 3-19-04; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590-01-P