ML20023C799
| ML20023C799 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Issue date: | 11/13/1979 |
| From: | Strickler L NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTOR & AUDITOR (OIA) |
| To: | NRC OFFICE OF INSPECTOR & AUDITOR (OIA) |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20023A415 | List:
|
| References | |
| FOIA-82-515 NUDOCS 8305180031 | |
| Download: ML20023C799 (2) | |
Text
- ' * *,
0 pa EE Cg,
/
\\'..
UNIT E D STAT ES
[
7, "+.
j NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION WASHINGlON, D. C. 2055$
\\....+ /
November 13, 2979 f
j] l 11EMOPRIDUM FOR:
File
..e FR0ft:
Lawrence l. Stricklcr, Investigator
, b4/
Office of Inspector &nd Auditor t/
SUBJECT:
NUCLEAR PHARMACY, INC.
On November 5, 1979, Attorneys Bruce Bellin and Richard Taller,' General Litigation and Legal Advice Section, Criminal 'livision, U. S. Department of Justice (DOJ), visited 0IA to discuss the potential _for developing a prosecutable case against the subject licensee.
After discussing'the case with Assistant Director for Investigations Roger A. Fortuna and
. investigator Lawrence J. Strickler, it was agreed that the group should talk with attorney Richard Bachmann, Office of Executive ' egal Director -
(ELD),NRC.
This decision was based on the fact that Bachmann was representing ELD in providing advice to NRC's Office of Inspection and Enforcement (IE), regarding the imposition of civil penalties against the licensee for failing to comply with one or more license conditions.
Bachmann briefed the group on what he considered to be deficiencies in NRC's case. He then explained that with the concurrence of IE, he had entered into negotiations with the licensee's attorneys to have the licensee sign a consent decree.
He said that essentially the decree would stipulate that the licensee agrees that it was in violation of license condition number 15 in that it purchased Xe-133 from a source that did not possess an HDA (new drug application) or an IND (investiga-tional new drug application).
Bachmann said that NRC was willing to forego a fine through imposition of a civil penalty and was only asking for a consent decree.
In response to a question from Bellin, Bachmann claimed that the licensee would not sign a consent decree unless it was assured that the DOJ would agree to not prosecute for criminal acts arising from violations of the license condition.
Bellin said that the DOJ would be willing to be utilized as a " bargaining chip" in that the DOJ would decline prosecution if the licensee would agree to pay an appropriate fine imposed as a civil penalty by the NRC.
Bachmann flatly refused to accept this condition explaining that he felt the licensee might refuse the offer and that Bachmann would then have to present NRC's case in a civil hearing.
Bachmann said that he felt that he had less than a 50 percent chance of winning such a case. Bellin's response was that if the NRC did not 8305180031 830412 PDR FOIA EMSHWIL82-515 PDR N
.pe.
i?
-.- ;.*e
(
. {.
- n - '
u; y-1
-: Tile.
2' Nove:nber 1),1979 aq =- r s
i
[
A
- consider a-license violation to be of sufficient significance to warrant ?
l a civi1 penalty,.the D0J _hed.no interest. in proceeding with a criminal action.
}-
_..y-l:
Further effort by OIA in this matter no longer appears justified.-.
+
.n a f-g
?
v' g
-r a
Y
.g,
+
b'
- .. T UM
-w I
fJ' p
~
9 1
i
' 8 4
W.
. 7, I:
7
(.
[
S 3 -
,)
7.
4...
% S
=
D d
=
D re
.+w.
-wv--ww
-e-++,w-u-r-ewer--++-w.-a-
-e-
- - -r
-v'
---**+' ' ' * * - * ' 's
= -
+r--"T*F"-T"'rC F'
~
F
""'"I'"' ' ' ' ' *
I'
-