In the Matter of Mr. Lawrence E. Grimm; Order Prohibiting Involvement in NRC-Licensed Activities, 10526-10529 [2010-4831]
Download as PDF
10526
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 44 / Monday, March 8, 2010 / Notices
srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with NOTICES
3. AES shall, in writing, within 20
days of the date of this order, notify the
Commission (a) if it is unable to comply
with any of the requirements described
in the order or (b) if compliance with
any of the requirements is unnecessary
based on its specific circumstances. In
the notification, AES shall provide
justification for seeking relief from, or
the variation of, any specific
requirement.
Licensees shall submit their responses
to B.1, B.2, and B.3 above to the
Director, Office of Nuclear Material
Safety and Safeguards, U.S. Nuclear
Regulatory Commission, Washington,
DC 20555. In addition, licensees shall
mark their responses as ‘‘SecurityRelated Information—Withhold under
10 CFR 2.390.’’
The Director, Office of Nuclear
Material Safety and Safeguards, may, in
writing, relax or rescind any of the
above conditions on demonstration of
good cause by AES.
IV
In accordance with 10 CFR 2.202,
AES 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, the NRC will
consider extending the time to request
a hearing. A request for an extension of
time in which to submit an answer or
to request a hearing must be made in
writing to the Director, Office of Nuclear
Material Safety and Safeguards, U.S.
Nuclear Regulatory Commission,
Washington, DC 20555, and must
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 set forth the
matters of fact and law by which AES
or other entities adversely affected rely
and the reasons as to why the NRC
should not have issued the order. Any
answer or request for a hearing shall be
submitted to the Secretary, Office of the
Secretary, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory
Commission, ATTN: Rulemakings and
Adjudications Staff, Washington, DC
20555. Copies shall also be sent to the
Director, Office of Nuclear Material
Safety and Safeguards, U.S. Nuclear
Regulatory Commission, Washington,
DC 20555; to the Assistant General
Counsel for Materials Litigation and
Enforcement at the same address; and to
AES if an entity other than AES submits
the answer or hearing request. Because
of possible delays in the delivery of mail
to U.S. Government offices, the NRC
requests that answers and requests for
VerDate Nov<24>2008
17:12 Mar 05, 2010
Jkt 220001
hearings be transmitted to the Secretary
of the Commission either by facsimile
transmission to 301–415–1101 or by email to hearingdocket@nrc.gov and also
to the Office of the General Counsel
either by facsimile transmission to 301–
415–3725 or by e-mail to
OGCMailCenter@nrc.gov. If an entity
other than AES requests a hearing, that
entity shall set forth, with particularity,
the manner in which its interest is
adversely affected by this order and
shall address the criteria set forth in 10
CFR 2.309, ‘‘Public Inspections,
Exemptions, Requests for Withholding.’’
If AES or a person whose interest is
adversely affected by this order requests
a hearing, 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 this hearing
shall be whether this order should be
sustained.
Under 10 CFR 2.202(c)(2)(i), AES
may, in addition to demanding a
hearing, at the time the answer is filed,
or soon thereafter, move that the
presiding officer set aside the immediate
effectiveness of the order on the grounds
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
a hearing or written approval of an
extension of time in which to request a
hearing, the provisions, as specified
above in Section III, shall be final 20
days from the date of this order without
further issuance of an order or
proceedings.
If an extension of time for requesting
a hearing has been approved, the
provisions, as specified above in Section
III, shall be final when the extension
expires if a hearing request has not been
received. An answer or a request for a
hearing shall not stay the immediate
effectiveness of this order.
Dated this 26th day of February 2010.
For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Michael F. Weber,
Director, Office of Nuclear Material Safety
and Safeguards.
[FR Doc. 2010–4829 Filed 3–5–10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590–01–P
PO 00000
Frm 00072
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
NUCLEAR REGULATORY
COMMISSION
[IA–09–068; NRC–2010–0085]
In the Matter of Mr. Lawrence E.
Grimm; Order Prohibiting Involvement
in NRC-Licensed Activities
I
Mr. Lawrence E. Grimm was
employed as a radiation safety officer at
the U.S. Department of Commerce’s
National Institute of Standards and
Technology (NIST or Licensee),
Boulder, Colorado facility. NIST holds
License 05–3166–05, issued by the U.S.
Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC
or Commission) pursuant to 10 CFR part
30 on December 19, 1966, and amended
to include 10 CFR parts 40 and 70 on
April 19, 2007. The license authorizes
the operation of the NIST-Boulder
facility in accordance with the
conditions specified therein. Mr. Grimm
was listed on the license as the radiation
safety officer (January 18, 2007,
Amendment 27, until the issuance of
Amendment 33, on January 16, 2009).
II
On July 22, 2008, the United States
Nuclear Regulatory Commission’s Office
of Investigations (OI) initiated an
investigation to determine if Mr. Grimm
willfully failed to provide complete and
accurate information to the NRC in a
license amendment application dated
February 15, 2007, regarding written
procedures for the safe use of
radioactive sources and security of
material. A predecisional enforcement
conference was held on January 7, 2010,
with Mr. Grimm to obtain Mr. Grimm’s
perspective on the apparent violation.
Based on a review of information from
the investigation and information
provided during the predecisional
enforcement conference, a violation of
the NRC’s rule prohibiting deliberate
misconduct, 10 CFR 30.10, was
identified, with two examples,
involving the dosimetry program and
the security of materials, which caused
the Licensee to be in violation of 10 CFR
30.9. Specifically, on February 15, 2007,
Mr. Grimm submitted an amendment
request to expand NIST-Boulder’s
licensed activities to acquire and use
source and special nuclear material,
including plutonium. The 2007
amendment request stated that the
‘‘Boulder facility maintains a radiation
safety procedure manual entitled,
‘Health Physics Instructions’ (HPIs).
Drawn from the Gaithersburg radiation
safety procedures, these procedures
cover all health physics aspects
pertinent to Boulder’s radiation safety
E:\FR\FM\08MRN1.SGM
08MRN1
srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 44 / Monday, March 8, 2010 / Notices
program.’’ Those HPIs did not cover all
health physics aspects pertinent to
NIST-Boulder’s program, however,
because they did not address the types
of materials NIST-Boulder was
amending its license to acquire. Mr.
Grimm stated that he had reviewed all
the HPIs cited throughout the
amendment request before submitting
the request to the NRC, and admitted
believing that they were not all
appropriate for NIST-Boulder. These
procedures included NIST’s Dosimetry
Program Procedures HPI 2–1 through
HPI 2–7. Mr. Grimm stated during the
OI interviews and also during the
predecisional enforcement conference
that the Gaithersburg procedures were
cited because it was convenient, but that
the program described in the
amendment request was not in place at
the time of the request, and that he
never intended to implement the cited
procedures as written. Notably, there
were no procedures in place for
providing internal monitoring of
occupationally exposed workers, as
described in Procedure HPI 2–5 (which
would have been appropriate to assess
and monitor personnel exposure to
plutonium). Also, there was no program
in place for providing dosimetry to
frequent users of the laboratory, or
‘‘public dose workers,’’ who did not
actually work with radioactive
materials, but who worked in the same
laboratories while the materials were in
use. Mr. Grimm admitted having the
knowledge and understanding that the
information provided to the NRC in the
license amendment was required to be
complete and accurate. Because Mr.
Grimm knew that he needed to provide
the NRC with complete and accurate
information and knew that the
information he was providing about the
dosimetry program was not accurate,
Mr. Grimm’s statements in the
amendment request regarding the
dosimetry program constituted
deliberate misconduct.
The 2007 amendment request also
referenced security protocols. Item 9 of
the request, ‘‘Facilities and Equipment,’’
stated that ‘‘access to buildings and
laboratories requires a coded key card’’
and, in the laboratories section of the
amendment request it stated, ‘‘NIST
laboratories require a coded key card for
access.’’ The NRC inspection staff
identified that laboratories where
licensed materials were used did not
have coded key card access. The NRC
determined that NIST staff members and
associates assigned to work in the
Quantum Physics Laboratories at the
NIST-Boulder facility were issued a key
to the project laboratories, including the
VerDate Nov<24>2008
17:12 Mar 05, 2010
Jkt 220001
laboratory in which the licensed
materials were used and stored. The
vast majority of these people were not
involved in using the licensed material.
The keys were not controlled in a
manner to secure the material from
unauthorized removal or access while in
storage. While Mr. Grimm worked at
NIST-Boulder for four months and
acknowledged visiting the laboratory
where the material would be stored
prior to submitting the amendment
request, Mr. Grimm stated that he did
not know how the laboratory keys were
distributed or controlled. In addition,
Mr. Grimm stated that he never
intended to rely on locked doors as a
means of securing the material, because
he thought the doors would be
impractical to control in such a research
environment. During the predecisional
enforcement conference, Mr. Grimm
stated that he considered the laboratory
door to be a secondary barrier and he
considered a lockable file cabinet and
cryostat to be the methods used to
ensure compliance with the regulations.
While a locked container was described
in the amendment requests as one of the
security features, the cryostat was not.
Mr. Grimm further stated that, in his
opinion, security for a source in an
academia situation is not predicated on
doors. Mr. Grimm knew he needed to
provide the NRC with complete and
accurate information, and he knew his
statement in the amendment request
regarding security provisions for the
licensed material was not complete or
accurate. Accordingly, Mr. Grimm’s
statements in the amendment request
regarding security constituted deliberate
misconduct.
III
Based on the above, Mr. Grimm, while
an employee of the Licensee in 2007,
has engaged in two instances of
deliberate misconduct that has caused
the Licensee to be in violation of 10 CFR
30.9. Further Mr. Grimm deliberately
provided to the NRC license reviewers
information that he knew to be
incomplete or inaccurate in some
respect material to the NRC, in violation
of 10 CFR 30.10. The NRC must be able
to rely on the Licensee and its
employees to comply with NRC
requirements, including the requirement
to provide information and maintain
records that are complete and accurate
in all material respects. Mr. Grimm’s
misrepresentations to the NRC caused
the Licensee to violate 10 CFR 30.9 and
have raised serious doubt as to whether
he can be relied upon to comply with
NRC requirements and to provide
complete and accurate information to
the NRC.
PO 00000
Frm 00073
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
10527
Consequently, I lack the requisite
reasonable assurance that licensed
activities can be conducted in
compliance with the Commission’s
requirements and that the health and
safety of the public will be protected if
Mr. Grimm were permitted at this time
to be involved in NRC-licensed
activities. Therefore, the public health,
safety, and interest require that Mr.
Grimm be prohibited from any
involvement in NRC-licensed activities
for a period of one year from the date
this Order is final. Additionally, Mr.
Grimm is required to notify the NRC of
his first employment in NRC-licensed
activities for a period of three years
following the prohibition period.
IV
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. Mr. Lawrence E. Grimm is
prohibited for one year from the date
this Order is final from 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, or
order 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 Mr. Grimm is currently involved
in NRC-licensed activities, he must
immediately cease those activities;
inform the NRC of the name, address
and telephone number of the employer;
and provide a copy of this order to the
employer.
3. For a period of three years after the
one year period of prohibition has
expired, Mr. Lawrence E. Grimm shall,
within 20 days of acceptance of his first
employment offer involving NRClicensed activities or his becoming
involved in NRC-licensed activities, as
defined in Paragraph IV.1 above,
provide notice to the Director, Office of
Enforcement, U. S. Nuclear Regulatory
Commission, Washington, DC 20555–
0001, of the name, address, and
telephone number of the employer or
the entity where he is, or will be,
involved in the NRC-licensed activities.
The Director, Office of Enforcement,
may, in writing, relax or rescind any of
the above conditions upon
demonstration by Mr. Grimm of good
cause.
V
In accordance with 10 CFR 2.202, Mr.
Grimm must, and any other person
E:\FR\FM\08MRN1.SGM
08MRN1
srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with NOTICES
10528
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 44 / Monday, March 8, 2010 / Notices
adversely affected by this Order may,
submit an answer to this Order within
20 days of its publication in the Federal
Register. In addition, Mr. Grimm and
any other person adversely affected by
this Order may request a hearing on this
Order within 20 days of its publication
in the Federal Register. Where good
cause is shown, consideration will be
given to extending the time to answer or
request a hearing. A request for
extension of time must be directed to
the Director, Office of Enforcement, U.S.
Nuclear Regulatory Commission, and
include a statement of good cause for
the extension.
All documents filed in NRC
adjudicatory proceedings, including a
request for hearing, a petition for leave
to intervene, any motion or other
document filed in the proceeding prior
to the submission of a request for
hearing or petition to intervene, and
documents filed by interested
governmental entities participating
under 10 CFR 2.315(c), must be filed in
accordance with the NRC E-Filing rule
(72 FR 49139, August 28, 2007). The EFiling process requires participants to
submit and serve all adjudicatory
documents over the Internet, or in some
cases to mail copies on electronic
storage media. Participants may not
submit paper copies of their filings
unless they seek an exemption in
accordance with the procedures
described below.
To comply with the procedural
requirements of E-Filing, at least 10
days prior to the filing deadline, the
participant should contact the Office of
the Secretary by e-mail at
hearing.docket@nrc.gov, or by telephone
at (301) 415–1677, to request (1) a
digital ID certificate, which allows the
participant (or its counsel or
representative) to digitally sign
documents and access the E-Submittal
server for any proceeding in which it is
participating; and (2) advise the
Secretary that the participant will be
submitting a request or petition for
hearing (even in instances in which the
participant, or its counsel or
representative, already holds an NRCissued digital ID certificate). Based upon
this information, the Secretary will
establish an electronic docket for the
hearing in this proceeding if the
Secretary has not already established an
electronic docket.
Information about applying for a
digital ID certificate is available on
NRC’s public Web site at https://
www.nrc.gov/site-help/e-submittals/
apply-certificates.html. System
requirements for accessing the ESubmittal server are detailed in NRC’s
‘‘Guidance for Electronic Submission,’’
VerDate Nov<24>2008
17:12 Mar 05, 2010
Jkt 220001
which is available on the agency’s
public Web site at https://www.nrc.gov/
site-help/e-submittals.html. Participants
may attempt to use other software not
listed on the web site, but should note
that the NRC’s E-Filing system does not
support unlisted software, and the NRC
Meta System Help Desk will not be able
to offer assistance in using unlisted
software.
If a participant is electronically
submitting a document to the NRC in
accordance with the E-Filing rule, the
participant must file the document
using the NRC’s online, web-based
submission form. In order to serve
documents through EIE, users will be
required to install a Web browser plugin from the NRC Web site. Further
information on the Web-based
submission form, including the
installation of the Web browser plug-in,
is available on the NRC’s public Web
site at https://www.nrc.gov/site-help/esubmittals.html.
Once a participant has obtained a
digital ID certificate and a docket has
been created, the participant can then
submit a request for hearing or petition
for leave to intervene. Submissions
should be in Portable Document Format
(PDF) in accordance with NRC guidance
available on the NRC public Web site at
https://www.nrc.gov/site-help/esubmittals.html. A filing is considered
complete at the time the documents are
submitted through the NRC’s E-Filing
system. To be timely, an electronic
filing must be submitted to the E-Filing
system no later than 11:59 p.m. Eastern
Time on the due date. Upon receipt of
a transmission, the E-Filing system
time-stamps the document and sends
the submitter an e-mail notice
confirming receipt of the document. The
E-Filing system also distributes an email notice that provides access to the
document to the NRC Office of the
General Counsel and any others who
have advised the Office of the Secretary
that they wish to participate in the
proceeding, so that the filer need not
serve the documents on those
participants separately. Therefore,
applicants and other participants (or
their counsel or representative) must
apply for and receive a digital ID
certificate before a hearing request/
petition to intervene is filed so that they
can obtain access to the document via
the E-Filing system.
A person filing electronically using
the agency’s adjudicatory E-Filing
system may seek assistance by
contacting the NRC Meta System Help
Desk through the ‘‘Contact Us’’ link
located on the NRC Web site at https://
www.nrc.gov/site-help/esubmittals.html, by e-mail at
PO 00000
Frm 00074
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
MSHD.Resource@nrc.gov, or by a tollfree call at (866) 672–7640. The NRC
Meta System Help Desk is available
between 8 a.m. and 8 p.m., Eastern
Time, Monday through Friday,
excluding government holidays.
Participants who believe that they
have a good cause for not submitting
documents electronically must file an
exemption request, in accordance with
10 CFR 2.302(g), with their initial paper
filing requesting authorization to
continue to submit documents in paper
format. Such filings must be submitted
by: (1) First class mail addressed to the
Office of the Secretary of the
Commission, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory
Commission, Washington, DC 20555–
0001, Attention: Rulemaking and
Adjudications Staff; or (2) courier,
express mail, or expedited delivery
service to the Office of the Secretary,
Sixteenth Floor, One White Flint North,
11555 Rockville Pike, Rockville,
Maryland 20852, Attention: Rulemaking
and Adjudications Staff. Participants
filing a document in this manner are
responsible for serving the document on
all other participants. Filing is
considered complete by first-class mail
as of the time of deposit in the mail, or
by courier, express mail, or expedited
delivery service upon depositing the
document with the provider of the
service. A presiding officer, having
granted an exemption request from
using E-Filing, may require a participant
or party to use E-Filing if the presiding
officer subsequently determines that the
reason for granting the exemption from
use of E-Filing no longer exists.
Documents submitted in adjudicatory
proceedings will appear in NRC’s
electronic hearing docket, which is
available to the public at https://
ehd.nrc.gov/EHD_Proceeding/home.asp,
unless excluded pursuant to an order of
the Commission, or the presiding
officer. Participants are requested not to
include personal privacy information,
such as social security numbers, home
addresses, or home phone numbers in
their filings, unless an NRC regulation
or other law requires submission of such
information. With respect to
copyrighted works, except for limited
excerpts that serve the purpose of the
adjudicatory filings and would
constitute a Fair Use application,
participants are requested not to include
copyrighted materials in their
submission.
If a person other than Mr. Grimm
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 2.309(d).
E:\FR\FM\08MRN1.SGM
08MRN1
Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 44 / Monday, March 8, 2010 / Notices
If a hearing is requested by a licensee
or a person whose interest is adversely
affected, the Commission will issue an
Order designating the time and place of
any hearings. 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 IV above shall be final 20 days
from the date this Order is published in
the Federal Register 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.
Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 1st day
of March 2010.
For the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory
Commission.
Roy P. Zimmerman,
Director, Office of Enforcement.
[FR Doc. 2010–4831 Filed 3–5–10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590–01–P
POSTAL REGULATORY COMMISSION
[Docket Nos. MC2010–19; Order No. 415]
Mail Classification Change
Postal Regulatory Commission.
ACTION: Notice.
srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with NOTICES
AGENCY:
SUMMARY: The Commission is noticing a
recently-filed Postal Service request to
make a minor modification to the Mail
Classification Schedule. The change
affects a change in terminology. This
notice addresses procedural steps
associated with this filing.
DATES: Comments are due: March 10,
2010.
ADDRESSES: Submit comments
electronically via the Commission’s
Filing Online system at https://
www.prc.gov. Commenters who cannot
submit their views electronically should
contact the person identified in the FOR
FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section
by telephone for advice on alternatives
to electronic filing.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Stephen L. Sharfman, General Counsel,
202–789–6820 or
stephen.sharfman@prc.gov.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On
February 26, 2010, the Postal Service
filed a notice with the Commission
pursuant to 39 CFR 3020.90 et seq.
concerning a change in classification
which reflects a change in terminology
from Bulk Mailing Center (BMC) to
VerDate Nov<24>2008
17:12 Mar 05, 2010
Jkt 220001
Network Distribution Center (NDC), and
revises its regulations to change the
terms in Mailing Standards of the
United States Postal Service, Domestic
Mail Manual (DMM) and other related
manuals and publications effective
March 15, 2010.1 The Postal Service
states revisions will also be made in its
service standard regulations in 39 CFR
part 121 to indicate the terminology
change from BMC to NDC. The Postal
Service states it will concurrently file a
notice explaining these changes in the
Federal Register. Id. at 1.
The Postal Service indicates that the
original BMC network was established
in the 1970s to process mail which now
includes Parcel Post, Bound Printed
Matter, Media Mail, Standard Mail, and
Periodicals. Id. However, variation in
volume and changes in the mailing
habits of the public and large mailers
require modifications to BMC
processing and transportation. Id. The
Postal Service states in order to
maximize its efficiency, changes have
been made to mail flow processes
through the new NDC network, and it is
converting BMCs to NDCs. Id. at 1–2. It
notes that as part of the transition to the
new NDC concept, only a terminology
change is being implemented now and
there are no revisions to mailing
standards, service standards, or
processes as a result of this notice. Id.
at 2. The Postal Service states that in the
future, it intends to propose changes to
the preparation, entry and deposit of
mail related to the NDC concept. Id. The
Postal Service proposes conforming
Mail Classification Schedule language to
replace references to the BMC, with
references to the NDC.2 Id. at 2–3.
Pursuant to 39 CFR 3020.92, the
Commission provides notice of the
Postal Service’s filing and affords
interested persons an opportunity to
express views and offer comments on
whether the proposed classification
change is inconsistent with 39 U.S.C.
3642. Comments are due March 10,
2010.
Section 3020.91 requires the Postal
Service to file notice of the proposed
change with the Commission no less
than 15 days prior to the effective date
of the proposed change. The Notice
states that the classification change is to
become effective March 15, 2010.
1 Notice of the United States Postal Service of
Minor Classification Change, February 26, 2010
(Notice). This notice is available on the
Commission’s Web site, https://www.prc.gov.
2 The Postal Service also notes that on August 3,
2009, it changed all of its applicable labeling lists
to effectuate the name change from BMC to NDC.
It states that mailers were given a 73–day transition
period to make the appropriate changes to mailing
software applications. Id. at 2.
PO 00000
Frm 00075
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
10529
The Commission appoints Paul L.
Harrington to serve as Public
Representative in this docket.
It is ordered:
1. The Commission establishes Docket
No. MC2010–19 for consideration of the
matters raised in this docket.
2. Pursuant to 39 U.S.C. 505, Paul L.
Harrington is appointed to serve as
officer of the Commission (Public
Representative) to represent the
interests of the general public in these
proceedings.
3. Comments by interested persons in
this proceeding are due no later than
March 10, 2010.
By the Commission.
Shoshana M. Grove,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2010–4861 Filed 3–5–10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7710–FW–S
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE
COMMISSION
Proposed Collection; Comment
Request
Upon Written Request, Copies Available
From: Securities and Exchange
Commission, Office of Investor
Education and Advocacy,
Washington, DC 20549–0213.
‘‘Checking in with the SEC’s Enforcement
Division’’; SEC File No. 270–598; OMB
Control No. 3235–NEW.
Notice is hereby given that, pursuant
to the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995
(44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.), the Securities
and Exchange Commission
(‘‘Commission’’) is soliciting comments
on the collection of information
summarized below. The Commission
plans to submit a questionnaire to the
Office of Management and Budget for
approval.
The Commission intends to send the
questionnaire to Securities Law
Practitioners, Securities Law Professors
and Securities Industry Participants.
The questionnaire consists of three (3)
questions. It asks participants to identify
activities that they believe to be
significant, to explain why and to rank
the significance of the activities.
The Commission needs the
information to develop a balanced,
informed, and insightful perspective on
the impact of the Division’s activities.
Ultimately, this will be used in
developing a new metrics beyond
Enforcement statistics, which will assist
the Division in evaluating and
prioritizing its activities. A secondary
purpose is to create an effective medium
of communication to encourage and
E:\FR\FM\08MRN1.SGM
08MRN1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 75, Number 44 (Monday, March 8, 2010)]
[Notices]
[Pages 10526-10529]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2010-4831]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
[IA-09-068; NRC-2010-0085]
In the Matter of Mr. Lawrence E. Grimm; Order Prohibiting
Involvement in NRC-Licensed Activities
I
Mr. Lawrence E. Grimm was employed as a radiation safety officer at
the U.S. Department of Commerce's National Institute of Standards and
Technology (NIST or Licensee), Boulder, Colorado facility. NIST holds
License 05-3166-05, issued by the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission
(NRC or Commission) pursuant to 10 CFR part 30 on December 19, 1966,
and amended to include 10 CFR parts 40 and 70 on April 19, 2007. The
license authorizes the operation of the NIST-Boulder facility in
accordance with the conditions specified therein. Mr. Grimm was listed
on the license as the radiation safety officer (January 18, 2007,
Amendment 27, until the issuance of Amendment 33, on January 16, 2009).
II
On July 22, 2008, the United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission's
Office of Investigations (OI) initiated an investigation to determine
if Mr. Grimm willfully failed to provide complete and accurate
information to the NRC in a license amendment application dated
February 15, 2007, regarding written procedures for the safe use of
radioactive sources and security of material. A predecisional
enforcement conference was held on January 7, 2010, with Mr. Grimm to
obtain Mr. Grimm's perspective on the apparent violation.
Based on a review of information from the investigation and
information provided during the predecisional enforcement conference, a
violation of the NRC's rule prohibiting deliberate misconduct, 10 CFR
30.10, was identified, with two examples, involving the dosimetry
program and the security of materials, which caused the Licensee to be
in violation of 10 CFR 30.9. Specifically, on February 15, 2007, Mr.
Grimm submitted an amendment request to expand NIST-Boulder's licensed
activities to acquire and use source and special nuclear material,
including plutonium. The 2007 amendment request stated that the
``Boulder facility maintains a radiation safety procedure manual
entitled, `Health Physics Instructions' (HPIs). Drawn from the
Gaithersburg radiation safety procedures, these procedures cover all
health physics aspects pertinent to Boulder's radiation safety
[[Page 10527]]
program.'' Those HPIs did not cover all health physics aspects
pertinent to NIST-Boulder's program, however, because they did not
address the types of materials NIST-Boulder was amending its license to
acquire. Mr. Grimm stated that he had reviewed all the HPIs cited
throughout the amendment request before submitting the request to the
NRC, and admitted believing that they were not all appropriate for
NIST-Boulder. These procedures included NIST's Dosimetry Program
Procedures HPI 2-1 through HPI 2-7. Mr. Grimm stated during the OI
interviews and also during the predecisional enforcement conference
that the Gaithersburg procedures were cited because it was convenient,
but that the program described in the amendment request was not in
place at the time of the request, and that he never intended to
implement the cited procedures as written. Notably, there were no
procedures in place for providing internal monitoring of occupationally
exposed workers, as described in Procedure HPI 2-5 (which would have
been appropriate to assess and monitor personnel exposure to
plutonium). Also, there was no program in place for providing dosimetry
to frequent users of the laboratory, or ``public dose workers,'' who
did not actually work with radioactive materials, but who worked in the
same laboratories while the materials were in use. Mr. Grimm admitted
having the knowledge and understanding that the information provided to
the NRC in the license amendment was required to be complete and
accurate. Because Mr. Grimm knew that he needed to provide the NRC with
complete and accurate information and knew that the information he was
providing about the dosimetry program was not accurate, Mr. Grimm's
statements in the amendment request regarding the dosimetry program
constituted deliberate misconduct.
The 2007 amendment request also referenced security protocols. Item
9 of the request, ``Facilities and Equipment,'' stated that ``access to
buildings and laboratories requires a coded key card'' and, in the
laboratories section of the amendment request it stated, ``NIST
laboratories require a coded key card for access.'' The NRC inspection
staff identified that laboratories where licensed materials were used
did not have coded key card access. The NRC determined that NIST staff
members and associates assigned to work in the Quantum Physics
Laboratories at the NIST-Boulder facility were issued a key to the
project laboratories, including the laboratory in which the licensed
materials were used and stored. The vast majority of these people were
not involved in using the licensed material. The keys were not
controlled in a manner to secure the material from unauthorized removal
or access while in storage. While Mr. Grimm worked at NIST-Boulder for
four months and acknowledged visiting the laboratory where the material
would be stored prior to submitting the amendment request, Mr. Grimm
stated that he did not know how the laboratory keys were distributed or
controlled. In addition, Mr. Grimm stated that he never intended to
rely on locked doors as a means of securing the material, because he
thought the doors would be impractical to control in such a research
environment. During the predecisional enforcement conference, Mr. Grimm
stated that he considered the laboratory door to be a secondary barrier
and he considered a lockable file cabinet and cryostat to be the
methods used to ensure compliance with the regulations. While a locked
container was described in the amendment requests as one of the
security features, the cryostat was not. Mr. Grimm further stated that,
in his opinion, security for a source in an academia situation is not
predicated on doors. Mr. Grimm knew he needed to provide the NRC with
complete and accurate information, and he knew his statement in the
amendment request regarding security provisions for the licensed
material was not complete or accurate. Accordingly, Mr. Grimm's
statements in the amendment request regarding security constituted
deliberate misconduct.
III
Based on the above, Mr. Grimm, while an employee of the Licensee in
2007, has engaged in two instances of deliberate misconduct that has
caused the Licensee to be in violation of 10 CFR 30.9. Further Mr.
Grimm deliberately provided to the NRC license reviewers information
that he knew to be incomplete or inaccurate in some respect material to
the NRC, in violation of 10 CFR 30.10. The NRC must be able to rely on
the Licensee and its employees to comply with NRC requirements,
including the requirement to provide information and maintain records
that are complete and accurate in all material respects. Mr. Grimm's
misrepresentations to the NRC caused the Licensee to violate 10 CFR
30.9 and have raised serious doubt as to whether he can be relied upon
to comply with NRC requirements and to provide complete and accurate
information to the NRC.
Consequently, I lack the requisite reasonable assurance that
licensed activities can be conducted in compliance with the
Commission's requirements and that the health and safety of the public
will be protected if Mr. Grimm were permitted at this time to be
involved in NRC-licensed activities. Therefore, the public health,
safety, and interest require that Mr. Grimm be prohibited from any
involvement in NRC-licensed activities for a period of one year from
the date this Order is final. Additionally, Mr. Grimm is required to
notify the NRC of his first employment in NRC-licensed activities for a
period of three years following the prohibition period.
IV
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. Mr. Lawrence E. Grimm is prohibited for one year from the date
this Order is final from 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, or order 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 Mr. Grimm is currently involved in NRC-licensed activities,
he must immediately cease those activities; inform the NRC of the name,
address and telephone number of the employer; and provide a copy of
this order to the employer.
3. For a period of three years after the one year period of
prohibition has expired, Mr. Lawrence E. Grimm shall, within 20 days of
acceptance of his first employment offer involving NRC-licensed
activities or his becoming involved in NRC-licensed activities, as
defined in Paragraph IV.1 above, provide notice to the Director, Office
of Enforcement, U. S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC
20555-0001, of the name, address, and telephone number of the employer
or the entity where he is, or will be, involved in the NRC-licensed
activities.
The Director, Office of Enforcement, may, in writing, relax or
rescind any of the above conditions upon demonstration by Mr. Grimm of
good cause.
V
In accordance with 10 CFR 2.202, Mr. Grimm must, and any other
person
[[Page 10528]]
adversely affected by this Order may, submit an answer to this Order
within 20 days of its publication in the Federal Register. In addition,
Mr. Grimm and any other person adversely affected by this Order may
request a hearing on this Order within 20 days of its publication in
the Federal Register. Where good cause is shown, consideration will be
given to extending the time to answer or request a hearing. A request
for extension of time must be directed to the Director, Office of
Enforcement, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, and include a
statement of good cause for the extension.
All documents filed in NRC adjudicatory proceedings, including a
request for hearing, a petition for leave to intervene, any motion or
other document filed in the proceeding prior to the submission of a
request for hearing or petition to intervene, and documents filed by
interested governmental entities participating under 10 CFR 2.315(c),
must be filed in accordance with the NRC E-Filing rule (72 FR 49139,
August 28, 2007). The E-Filing process requires participants to submit
and serve all adjudicatory documents over the Internet, or in some
cases to mail copies on electronic storage media. Participants may not
submit paper copies of their filings unless they seek an exemption in
accordance with the procedures described below.
To comply with the procedural requirements of E-Filing, at least 10
days prior to the filing deadline, the participant should contact the
Office of the Secretary by e-mail at hearing.docket@nrc.gov, or by
telephone at (301) 415-1677, to request (1) a digital ID certificate,
which allows the participant (or its counsel or representative) to
digitally sign documents and access the E-Submittal server for any
proceeding in which it is participating; and (2) advise the Secretary
that the participant will be submitting a request or petition for
hearing (even in instances in which the participant, or its counsel or
representative, already holds an NRC-issued digital ID certificate).
Based upon this information, the Secretary will establish an electronic
docket for the hearing in this proceeding if the Secretary has not
already established an electronic docket.
Information about applying for a digital ID certificate is
available on NRC's public Web site at https://www.nrc.gov/site-help/e-submittals/apply-certificates.html. System requirements for accessing
the E-Submittal server are detailed in NRC's ``Guidance for Electronic
Submission,'' which is available on the agency's public Web site at
https://www.nrc.gov/site-help/e-submittals.html. Participants may
attempt to use other software not listed on the web site, but should
note that the NRC's E-Filing system does not support unlisted software,
and the NRC Meta System Help Desk will not be able to offer assistance
in using unlisted software.
If a participant is electronically submitting a document to the NRC
in accordance with the E-Filing rule, the participant must file the
document using the NRC's online, web-based submission form. In order to
serve documents through EIE, users will be required to install a Web
browser plug-in from the NRC Web site. Further information on the Web-
based submission form, including the installation of the Web browser
plug-in, is available on the NRC's public Web site at https://www.nrc.gov/site-help/e-submittals.html.
Once a participant has obtained a digital ID certificate and a
docket has been created, the participant can then submit a request for
hearing or petition for leave to intervene. Submissions should be in
Portable Document Format (PDF) in accordance with NRC guidance
available on the NRC public Web site at https://www.nrc.gov/site-help/e-submittals.html. A filing is considered complete at the time the
documents are submitted through the NRC's E-Filing system. To be
timely, an electronic filing must be submitted to the E-Filing system
no later than 11:59 p.m. Eastern Time on the due date. Upon receipt of
a transmission, the E-Filing system time-stamps the document and sends
the submitter an e-mail notice confirming receipt of the document. The
E-Filing system also distributes an e-mail notice that provides access
to the document to the NRC Office of the General Counsel and any others
who have advised the Office of the Secretary that they wish to
participate in the proceeding, so that the filer need not serve the
documents on those participants separately. Therefore, applicants and
other participants (or their counsel or representative) must apply for
and receive a digital ID certificate before a hearing request/petition
to intervene is filed so that they can obtain access to the document
via the E-Filing system.
A person filing electronically using the agency's adjudicatory E-
Filing system may seek assistance by contacting the NRC Meta System
Help Desk through the ``Contact Us'' link located on the NRC Web site
at https://www.nrc.gov/site-help/e-submittals.html, by e-mail at
MSHD.Resource@nrc.gov, or by a toll-free call at (866) 672-7640. The
NRC Meta System Help Desk is available between 8 a.m. and 8 p.m.,
Eastern Time, Monday through Friday, excluding government holidays.
Participants who believe that they have a good cause for not
submitting documents electronically must file an exemption request, in
accordance with 10 CFR 2.302(g), with their initial paper filing
requesting authorization to continue to submit documents in paper
format. Such filings must be submitted by: (1) First class mail
addressed to the Office of the Secretary of the Commission, U.S.
Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555-0001, Attention:
Rulemaking and Adjudications Staff; or (2) courier, express mail, or
expedited delivery service to the Office of the Secretary, Sixteenth
Floor, One White Flint North, 11555 Rockville Pike, Rockville, Maryland
20852, Attention: Rulemaking and Adjudications Staff. Participants
filing a document in this manner are responsible for serving the
document on all other participants. Filing is considered complete by
first-class mail as of the time of deposit in the mail, or by courier,
express mail, or expedited delivery service upon depositing the
document with the provider of the service. A presiding officer, having
granted an exemption request from using E-Filing, may require a
participant or party to use E-Filing if the presiding officer
subsequently determines that the reason for granting the exemption from
use of E-Filing no longer exists.
Documents submitted in adjudicatory proceedings will appear in
NRC's electronic hearing docket, which is available to the public at
https://ehd.nrc.gov/EHD_Proceeding/home.asp, unless excluded pursuant
to an order of the Commission, or the presiding officer. Participants
are requested not to include personal privacy information, such as
social security numbers, home addresses, or home phone numbers in their
filings, unless an NRC regulation or other law requires submission of
such information. With respect to copyrighted works, except for limited
excerpts that serve the purpose of the adjudicatory filings and would
constitute a Fair Use application, participants are requested not to
include copyrighted materials in their submission.
If a person other than Mr. Grimm 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 2.309(d).
[[Page 10529]]
If a hearing is requested by a licensee or a person whose interest
is adversely affected, the Commission will issue an Order designating
the time and place of any hearings. 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 IV above shall be final 20 days from
the date this Order is published in the Federal Register 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.
Dated at Rockville, Maryland, this 1st day of March 2010.
For the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Roy P. Zimmerman,
Director, Office of Enforcement.
[FR Doc. 2010-4831 Filed 3-5-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590-01-P