Re: RADSAFE digest 3626

["Alois N Singer/SINGAN/CC01/INEEL/US" <SINGAN@inel.gov>]

To those on this listserver who have been vocalizing the immediate need for
NRC regulation of the DOE due to their being more effective, more timely,
and more willing to inflict the harsh punishment needed to deal with DOE
shortcomings please review this earlier posting on RADSAFE and then ask
yourself the following questions:

How is it that this had been going on for 4 years and the NRC was not aware
until the March 31, 2000 overexposure was self reported by Mallinckrodt,
particularly in light of the fact that the NRC had been there in May of
1997 to investigate a somewhat similar extremity over-exposure situation?
I would think a thorough review of all extremity monitoring activities
would have uncovered the practices that lead to the March 2000 overexposure
and it would have been prevented.

Is a $125,000 fine really a harsh penalty for overexposing 31 people over a
four year period, involving a company that has other documented exposure
control problems that they were also fined for?  Remember, the most recent
enforcement action announced by DOE included an announcement that if
allowed to levy a fine by law, the fine would have been $605,000.00 for
overexposing a few workers.  A DOE enforcement action prior to this did
levy a fine against a DOE contractor in excess of $1,000,000.00

<<Mallinckrodt Irradiates Workers

The Nuclear Regulatory Commission cited Mallinckrodt, Inc. on Dec. 21 for
exposing 15 employees to radiation levels in excess of federal safety
limits at the company's Maryland Heights, Mo. complex over the past four
years.  Mallinckrodt produces radioactive drugs at the complex for use in
research, medical diagnosis, and therapy.   The NRC boosted the fine to
$125,000 because of the number and severity of the overexposures and due to
Mallinckrodt's "poor enforcement history."

The agency launched its investigation after a contract employee on March
31, 2000 received a radiation dose to his thumb and forefinger that was
more than ten times greater than the NRC's annual exposure limit.  The
worker received a dose of 510 rems after handling a device containing
radioactive material.  A rem is a standard measure of radiation absorbed by
the human body.  Federal safety regulations limit radiation doses to a
worker's hand to no more than 50 rems for an entire year.

The NRC also cited Mallinckrodt for exposing 14 other employees to
excessive radiation levels at two other work areas at the Maryland Heights
complex between 1996 and 2000.  In all, the NRC identified 31 overexposures
to these 15 employees during those years, ranging from 54 to 510 rems, with
six exposures greater than 250 rems.  Mallinckrodt paid the $125,000 fine
on Jan. 22, 2001.

The NRC has cited Mallinckrodt in recent years for the following additional
violations:

       A worker at the company's Harrisburg, Pa. facility received a
cumulative radiation dose of 62 rems to one hand during the first six
months of 2000.  The NRC faulted Mallinckrodt for failing to adequately
monitor the worker to prevent the excessive radiation exposure.

       An employee in Maryland Heights received an overexposure of at least
290 rems when his left hand became contaminated during routine clean up of
radioactive waste on May 14, 1997.  Contaminated material on the employee's
thumb went undetected until after he had left the plant and returned to
work the next morning.  The company also found contaminated toweling and
clothing at the employee's residence.


************************************************************************
The RADSAFE Frequently Asked Questions list, archives and subscription
information can be accessed at http://www.ehs.uiuc.edu/~rad/radsafe.html