[Federal Register Volume 68, Number 45 (Friday, March 7, 2003)]
[Notices]
[Pages 11159-11161]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 03-5487]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
[IA 02-049]
In the Matter of Mr. Donald Hinman; Order Prohibiting Involvement
in NRC-Licensed Activities
I
Mr. Donald Hinman (Mr. Hinman) was formerly Operations Manager of
United Evaluation Services (UES) (Licensee), also previously known as
Accurate Technologies Incorporated. UES was the holder of Byproduct
Nuclear Material License No. 29-28358-02 issued by the Nuclear
Regulatory Commission (NRC or Commission) pursuant to 10 CFR part 30.
The license authorized UES to possess and use sealed sources for use in
industrial radiography and depleted uranium for shielding material. The
license, which was issued on November 16, 2001, was due to expire on
November 30, 2011, but was subsequently terminated on January 6, 2003.
II
On September 25, 2001, an event occurred at the McShane facility in
Baltimore, Maryland, involving a radiation injury to one of the
Licensee's radiographers. This event was discussed with the Licensee on
October 4, 2001. During the discussions, the NRC learned that the
radiographer received a very significant radiation exposure to his
hands in excess of regulatory limits (at a minimum, approximately 250-
300 rem) while performing radiography at that facility. Since the
facility was located in Maryland, an NRC Agreement State, the
activities related to that exposure were within the jurisdiction of the
State of Maryland.
Although this event occurred while the radiographer was performing
activities in an NRC Agreement State, the same equipment was possessed
and used pursuant to an NRC license. Therefore, NRC inspections were
conducted at the Licensee's facilities in New Jersey during October
2001. Subsequent inspections were also conducted in November 2001 and
in May 2002. In addition, the NRC Office of Investigations conducted an
investigation, between October 31, 2001, and August 14, 2002, of the
Licensee's activities. Based on the inspection and investigation, the
NRC has determined, among other things, that Mr. Hinman participated in
the creation of false records, allowed an uncertified radiographer to
conduct radiography without the presence of a certified radiographer,
deliberately conducted radiography at an unauthorized location, and
knowingly transported a radiography device without an end cap cover.
Specifically, Mr. Hinman:
1. Participated in the creation of a false radiographer annual
refresher training examination, dated September 1, 2001 (later changed
to September 4, 2001). The examination, which was required to be
maintained in accordance with 10 CFR 34.79, was inaccurate because it
was not completed by the radiographer whose name was on the examination
and it was not completed on the date indicated on the examination. Mr.
Hinman's actions in causing this violation were deliberate because he
directed an individual to take the exam for the radiographer. Mr.
Hinman testified to the NRC, during an enforcement conference conducted
on November 19, 2002, that he asked an assistant radiographer to take a
refresher training examination for the radiographer on or about October
9, 2001. In addition, that assistant radiographer testified to the NRC,
during an enforcement conference conducted on December 12, 2002, that
Mr. Hinman asked him to take the test for the radiographer on or about
October 9, 2001.
2. Deliberately conducted radiography at a non-licensed location
(the licensee's facility located in Beachwood, New Jersey) on at least
one occasion (January 18, 2002). The licensee's Beachwood facility was
not an approved location to conduct radiography in accordance with 10
CFR 34.41(b). Mr. Hinman admitted to the NRC, during an enforcement
conference conducted on November 19, 2002, that he performed
radiography at that non-licensed location in Beachwood, New Jersey, and
that he
[[Page 11160]]
knew at the time that he should not have done the radiography at this
location because it was not a location authorized for radiography on
the NRC license.
3. Knowingly transported a radiography camera from Tinton Falls,
New Jersey, to Baltimore, Maryland, without an end cap. The end cap is
required during transport in accordance with 10 CFR 34.20(c)(3). Mr.
Hinman admitted to the NRC, during interviews with OI, that he
transported (and used) the radiography camera during the week of
September 24-28, 2001, and at the time, the camera did not have a
required end cap in place, and he knew he could not use or transport
the equipment without the end cap.
III
The NRC's requirements in 10 CFR 30.10(a)(1) prohibit an individual
from engaging in deliberate misconduct that causes or, but for
detection, would have caused, a licensee to be in violation of any
rule, regulation, or order, or any term, condition, or limitation of
any license, issued by the Commission. Based on the above, the NRC has
concluded that Mr. Hinman, as the Operations Manager for the Licensee,
violated 10 CFR 30.10. The violations are significant because during
the conduct of radiography, there is potential to cause serious harm or
injury if unqualified persons are involved in the performance of
radiography.
IV
The NRC must be able to rely on the Licensee, and Licensee
employees, to comply with NRC requirements, including the requirement
to maintain information that is complete and accurate in all material
respects. Although the NRC has not found evidence that Mr. Hinman, who
was also a radiographer, had deliberately violated any requirements
while performing licensed activities as a radiographer, Mr. Hinman's
deliberate violation of Commission regulations as the Operations
Manager raises serious questions as to whether he can be relied upon to
manage, supervise, or oversee any licensed activities to assure
compliance with NRC requirements, including the requirement to maintain
complete and accurate information.
Consequently, I lack the requisite reasonable assurance that the
management, oversight, or supervision of licensed activities can be
conducted in compliance with the Commission's requirements and that the
health and safety of the public would be protected if Mr. Hinman were
permitted at this time to be involved in the management, oversight, or
supervision of NRC-licensed activities. Therefore, the NRC has
determined that the public health, safety and interest require that Mr.
Hinman be prohibited from any management, oversight, or supervision of
persons involved in NRC-licensed activities for a period of one year
from the date of this Order. If Mr. Hinman is currently involved in the
management, oversight, or supervision of NRC-licensed activities at any
NRC licensed facility, Mr. Hinman must immediately cease such
activities, and inform the NRC of the name, address and telephone
number of the employer, and provide a copy of this Order to the
employer.
V
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, 10 CFR 30.10, and 10 CFR 150.20, it is
hereby ordered that:
1. Donald Hinman is prohibited from managing, overseeing, or
supervising NRC-licensed activities or individuals while they are
engaged in licensed activities, including (but not limited to) the
duties of a Radiation Safety Officer, for one (1) year effective from
the issuance of this Order, except that Mr. Hinman may supervise an
assistant radiographer when acting as a radiographer engaging in NRC
licensed activities. NRC-licensed activities are those activities that
are conducted pursuant to a specific or general license issued by the
NRC, including, but not limited to, those activities of Agreement State
licensees conducted pursuant to the authority granted by 10 CFR 150.20.
2. If Donald Hinman is currently involved in the management,
oversight, or supervision of NRC-licensed activities, Mr. Hinman must
immediately cease such activities, and inform the NRC of the name,
address and telephone number of the employer, and provide a copy of
this Order to the employer.
The Director, Office of Enforcement, may, in writing, relax or
rescind any of the above conditions upon demonstration by Mr. Hinman of
good cause.
VI
In accordance with 10 CFR 2.202, Donald Hinman 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 shall
set forth the matters of fact and law on which Mr. Hinman 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, Rulemakings and Adjudications Staff, Washington, DC 20555.
Copies also shall be sent to the Director, Office of Enforcement, U.S.
Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555, to the Assistant
General Counsel for Materials Litigation and Enforcement at the same
address, to the Regional Administrator, NRC Region I, U.S. Nuclear
Regulatory, 475 Allendale Road, King of Prussia, Pennsylvania 19406,
and to Mr. Hinman if the answer or hearing request is by a person other
than Mr. Hinman. 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 [email protected] and also to the Assistant General Counsel
either by means of facsimile transmission to 301-415-3725 or by e-mail
to [email protected]. If a person other than Mr. Hinman 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).\1\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ The most recent version of title 10 of the Code of Federal
Regulations, published January 1, 2002, inadvertently omitted the
last sentence of 10 CFR 2.714(d) and paragraphs (d)(1) and (d)(2)
regarding petitions to intervene and contentions. For the complete,
corrected text of 10 CFR 2.714(d), please see 67 FR 20884; April 29,
2002.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
If a hearing is requested by Mr. Hinman 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.
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 V above shall be final twenty
[[Page 11161]]
(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 V shall be final when the
extension expires if a hearing request has not been received.
For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Dated this 28th day of February, 2003.
Carl J. Paperiello,
Deputy Executive Director for Materials, Research, and State Programs.
[FR Doc. 03-5487 Filed 3-6-03; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590-01-P