ML20203D754
| ML20203D754 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Issue date: | 01/09/1995 |
| From: | Ebneter S NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTION & ENFORCEMENT (IE REGION II) |
| To: | Cummings T AFFILIATION NOT ASSIGNED |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20203D757 | List: |
| References | |
| SSD, NUDOCS 9902160344 | |
| Download: ML20203D754 (3) | |
Text
t, UNITED STATES
/pMog% NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION 3* 4 PEGION 11 I O S 101 MARIETTA STREET N.W., SUITE 2900 5
% 'j ATLANTA, GEORGIA 303234199 a., e .
'% ,,8 ,- .
January 9, 1995 EA,942'4I Cumberland Village Mining Group (s' ATTN: Mr. Thomas L. Cummings, Jr., Chairman x200 12th Avenue South'.
NashvilleTTennessee 37203
SUBJECT:
NOTICE OF VIOLATION (NRC INSPECTION REPORT NO. 999-90002/94-02)
Dear Mr. Cummings:
This refers to the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) inspection conducted by Mr. Jerry D. Ennis of this office between March 18 and November 30, 1994. The inspection involved the review of the loss of a gauge containing byproduct material and included onsite inspections at a facility owned by Steel of West Virginia in Huntington, West Virginia and at your Matewan, West Virginia f acility as well as telephone conversations with representatives of several companies with knowledge of the events surrounding this matter. The report documenting this inspection was sent to you by letter dated December 16, 1994.
During the inspection, a violation of NRC requirements was identified.
The violation described in the enclosed Notice of Violation (Notice) involved a failure to comply with the requirements of 10 CFR 31.5 during transfer of a Kay-Ray /Sensall Model 7062BP gauge, serial number 16661, containing 100 millicuries of cesium-137. 10 CFR 31.5 requires that a device containing byproduct material be transferred or disposed of only by transfer to a person i holding a specific license to receive the device. The failure of your staff to control the device during dismantling of your coal preparation plant resulted in the inadvertent shipment of the device in a load of scrap metal to a Steel of West Virginia smelter in Huntington, West Virginia. The loss of the device was discovered on March 16, 1994, when a truckload of scrap from the Kentucky and West Virginia Metal Company scrap yard in Williamson, West Virginia, activated a radiation alarm at a Steel of West Virginia facility in Huntington, West Virginia. Neither of these entities held a specific NRC license to possess byproduct material. Subsequent review indicated that the gauge was registered to Cumberland Village Mining, Matewan, West Virginia.
The gauge was shipped to Cumberland Village Mining in March 1984, under the general license granted by 10 CFR 31.5. The device had been evaluated by the State of Illinois, an Agreement State, and a Safety Evaluation entered in the Registry of Radioactive Sealed Sources and Devices under registration number IL-412-D-129-B. In addition to this gauge, Kay-Ray /Sensall records indicated l that one other Model 7062BP gauge, serial number 19997, had been shipped to Cumberland Village Mining Group, Matewan, West Virginia. Records indicate l that the second gauge es properly transferred to an authorized recipient. ,\
- TN Technology records indicate that two other gauges were shipped to l Cumberland Village Mining in 1984 and 1985, respectively, for use on Power _~
Screen equipment. As of this date, these gauges have not been located and the Ny"q~
records regarding the gauges are no longer available from the licensee or 9902160344 950109 .d g O PDR RC
- _ _ , , . ,
SSD PDR
< t
- h. !
t Cumberland Village' .
l Mining Group !
I i .
- manufacturer since records are not required to be maintained longer than three j years. !
i The root cause of the violation was the failure of the Cumberland Village ;
Mining staff to track the location of the gauges as operations and staff were '
reduced prior to the company being sold and the assumption of the Cumberland .
Village Mining staff that the gauges had been removed and properly disposed.of in connection with the removal of other specialized equipment from the !
i Matewan, West Virginia facility prior to December 1988. During the exit i interview following the inspection, you stated that you continued to believe that the Cumberland Village Mining staff had probably' assumed, without :
independently verifying, that the gauges had been properly disposed of, i.e., >
, returned to the supplier, in connection with the removal of certain !
- specialized equipment sometime prior to December 1988. .
) As stated in our letter of December 16, 1994, the NRC normally provides an :
opportunity for an enforcement conference with a licensee prior to making a i decision regarding an escalated enforcement action. In a December 7, 1994
- telephone call with Mr. J. Ennis of my staff, Mr. C. Harris, your attorney,.
! declined participation in an enforcement conference. During a telephone l conversation with Mr. Harris on December 27, 1994, he advised us that you had ;
- reviewed the inspection report and believed that we had all of the necessary i information concerning the violation and that an enforcement conference would -
be of no benefit in this case. We have reviewed the information obtained :
- during inspection of this issue and have concluded that sufficient information !
! is available to determine the appropriate action in this matter. !
The NRC' considers the loss of byproduct material to be a serious safety t
concern. We expect all general licensees involved in the use of devices '
containing byproduct material to implement effective control of these devices.
} Adherence to these requirements is essential to ensure that the health and :
! safety of your employees and the public is protected. Therefore, in
- accordance with the " General Statement of Policy and Procedure for NRC ,
i Enforcement Actions" (Enforcement Policy), 10 CFR Part 2, Appendix C, this ,
- violation has been categorized at Severity Level III.
In accordance with the " General Statement of Policy and Procedure for NRC Enforcement Actions" (Enforcement Policy), 10 CFR Part 2, Appendix C, a civil l penalty is normally considered for a Severity Level III violation. However, !
given the age of this matter a civil penalty is not being proposed in this l case for the violation. The device was most likely transferred either in December 1988 when Cumberland Village Mining was sold to Rawl Sales and Massey Coal Sales or the device was removed from the facility with equipment that had 1
been removed by the R. L.' Cook Company before the company was sold. You also stated that Cumberland Village Mining was not currently an operating company, that there was no intention to resume operations, and that corrective actions to prevent recurrence were not needed. You indicated that you would notify 1the NRC if any additional information concerning the two missing gauges came to your attention. Since you are no longer operating or have a location where such devices would be used in the future, you do not need to respond to the
. ' enclosed Notice or advise NRC of any corrective actions.
O i
4 6
Cumberland Village Mining Group In accordance with 10 CFR 2.790 of the NRC's " Rules of Practice," a copy of-this letter, its enclosure, and any reply will be placed in the NRC Public Document Room.
Should you have any questions concerning this letter, please contact Mr. Charles Hosey at (404) 331-5614.
Sincerely, dv Stewart D. Ebneter Regional Administrator Docket No. 999-90002 License No. General License (10 CFR 31.5)
Enclosure:
Notice of Violation cc w/ encl:
State of Tennessee State of West Virginia 4
i i
h i
+ p