ML20126L128
| ML20126L128 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Issue date: | 02/21/1990 |
| From: | NRC |
| To: | |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20126K503 | List: |
| References | |
| FOIA-91-533, FOIA-92-A-1 NUDOCS 9301070345 | |
| Download: ML20126L128 (35) | |
Text
_ _ _ _ _. _ _ _ - _. _
-e' M
3 N AL f
OFFICIALTRANSCRIPT OF PROCEEDINGS (G,
4 4
4 AgCDCy Nuclear Regulatory Coasnission Investigative Intervlet of I!dC Patrick W. Ilarris (CLOSED)
Docket No.
r-Cincinnati, Ohio goc 4pog;
~ ~ '.
1 33 February 21, 1990 pcw DATE:
ANN RILEY & ASSOCIATES, LTD,
()
\\{ lh\\
hl 1612 K St. N.W. Suite 300 lN l
mm ac 20006 EXHIBIT h
^- ~
3389.'O1 1 (202) 293-39M N:
N d P,'*M
)
7,_ [),
(
9301070345-920707 g%
[-
-f-RESNICK92-A-1: PDR
r 4
1 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA 2
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION 3
4 OFFICE OF INVE!TIGATIONS s
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -x 6
In the Matter oft 7
INVESTIGATIVE INTERVIEW s
8 Patrick W. Harris 9
(CLOSED) 10
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -x 11 Offices of BEC}0iAN, WEIL, 12 13 SHEPARDSON AND FALLER 14 Suite 1714 15 105 East Fourth Street 16 Cincinnati, Ohio 45202 17 February 21, 1990 18 19 The above-entitled matter commenced at 10:47 20 o' clock a.m., when were present 21 21.
On behalf of the Nuclear Regulatory Commission:
23 24 RICHARD C. PAUL, Investigator-25 MARY KAY FAHEY, Investigator
~
i 2
i 1
On behalf of the witness 2,'
y 3
BEC}34AN, WEIL, SHEPARDSON MID FALLER 4
BY:
Margaret A. Fiorino, Esq.
5 Peter L. Cassady, Esq.
6 Suite 1714 7
105 East Fourth Street 8
Cincinnati, Ohio 45202 9
10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20
'21 22 23 24 m.
25
um erm
. - - -... ~.
f a
3 PROCEEDINGS 1
M" 2
MR. PAULt For the record, this is an interview with Patrick W. Harris, spe' led H-A-R-R-I-S, who is employed 3
4 by the University of Cincinnati.
The location of this 5
interview is Cincinnati, Ohio.
Present at this interview, 6
in addition to Mr. Harris, are Richard C.
Paul, Mary Kay Fahey, with the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, and 7
Peter Cassady and Peg Fiorino, with the law firm of Beckman 8
9 and Weil.
It is agreed that this interview is being 10 transcribed by court reporter, Ron LeGrand.
The subject natter of this interview concerns the University of 11 12 Cincinnati Medical Center.
(
13 Whereupon, PATRICK W. HARRIS, 14 a witness, was called for examination, and, having been 15 first duly sworn, was examined and testified as follows:
16 EXAMINATION 17 18 BY MR. PAULt 19 Q
Mr. Harris, what is your background in health 20 physics?
21 A
I had -- I was in the Army.
I was the 22 environmental health technician in Denver.
Part of that job i
I 23 was health physics, and when I was in Alaska I was an industrial hygiene technician, not specifically radiation 24 25 safety, but --
e i
4 4
1 Q
llow many years have you worked in this area of b-2 henith physics?
3 A
Before UC or --
4 Q
Yes, before UC.
5 A
A year.
6 Q
Defore we go any farther, there's something I 7
forgot to ask you.
Is Mr. Cassady and Ms. Florino your 8
parronal attorneys in this matter?
9 A
Yes 10 Q
And you are aware that they also represent other il parties in the matter?
12 A
Yes.
13 Q
And it's your request that they are present here 14 today?
15 A
Yes.
16 0
When did you first go to -- or,- when did you begin 17 employment at the University of Cincinnati?
18 A
August 20, 1986.
19 Q
In what capacity did you go to work there?
20 A
As a --
21 MR. CASSADY:
You have to speak up a-little bit.
22 THE WITNESdt I'm trying to think what they called i
23 us back then.
It's now a health physics technician, but it 24 had a different title back then, t
25 KR. PAULt Was it in the radiation safety i
f l
',-, - J 5
1 department?_
.W 2
THE WITNESS:
Yes.
3 BY MR. PAUL 4
Q And who was your supervisor when you started in l
5 1986.
g 6
A Well, the immediate supervisor was Mr. Jason.-
U 7
Q And who was the Radiation-Safety Of ficer at that 8
time?
9 A
Ken Fritz.-
10 Q
Did Jason provide you with your day to day 11 direction as far as management was concerned, or did Frits?-
l 12 A
Well, Jason, if something needed_to be done.- He's 13 the one who told me to go do it.
14 Q-Did Fr) z get involved in the day to day 15
-activities?
16
-A
_Normally he's the one Jason would go see -- or, 17 who do you.want to do this? -- and then he would come back 18 and assign the responnibility of-performing the task.
19 Q
In-1986 who else was in the. department besides:
20_
yourself?
21 A'
Okay_-- Jeff was there..
22-Q Jeff Barbro?'-
23 A
Jeff Barbro, Ray Estes, Greg Zimbrodt, myself,-
24 Jason and Fritz, and Alexander.
25 Q-
-What was_ Alexander'c -- what did--he do-in the
.-.-w---
~
p, 6
1 department?
' YT -
2 A
His: title was Administrative Director-of Radiation' 3
- Safety.
4 Q
Did' he ever give you any day.to day instructions 5
on work performed?-
6 A
No.
g 7
Q Was he Fritz's boss?
8
'A Not on paper, I don't believe.
9 Q
In ef fect, was he the one who ran the department?
10 A
Money wise, yes.
11 Q-By " money wise," you mean, administratively?
t' 12 A
Yes.
13 Q
-What abcut radiation safety?
Was Alexander 14 involved in that-at all?
15.
A1
-Only when it had nuclear medicine parts.
16 Q
Does that mean use of isotopes by_nuclemr 17 medicine?
Did he'get involved-at.all.:vithithattarea?-
18 A
He was the director, he'was the administrative:
19 director down.there also, so if we didn't like anything they
- 201 did, we would hear from him;to stop it if weLhad a problem 21 down there.
22 Q-So I'm just trying.to understand-the: situation.
23 Is it correct'in that if-you performed some type.of function 24
-in radiation safety in the nuclear medicine department that
~ ~
\\
25
'he didn't particularly agree-with he would get back to -Fritz-m pip-v p.!w
--et eJw-y
- s
+ty e
w s'
e
,7 1
about the situation?
Is that --
2 A
Most of the time, yes.
If we had done something 3
or said something they did.it like in nuclear medicine, we 4
vould hear about it from him.
5 Q
Do you know what his title was, Alexander's?
6 A
I believe it to be Chief Nuclear Medicine 7
Technician, Administrative Director -- something like that.
8 Q
Quite a title.
Regarding sealed sources, did the 9
Radiation Safety Department have responsibility over those 10 scaled --
11 A
Yes.
12 Q
And as one of your duties, did you periodically 13 survey the sealed sources?
14 A
Yes.
15 Q
And that included wipe tests?
16 A
Yes.
17 Q
Did you yourself perform these wipe tests?
Were 18 you ever assigned to do that?
19 A
Yes.
20 Q
And was everyone in the department -- did they 21 have the same responsibility on a periodic basis?
22 A
Sometimes Ray didn't --
23 Q
Did?
Did not do it?
24 A
Didn't do it.
L 25 Q
Was there any written procedure within the
8 1
department to_ perform your surveys?-
2-A No.
3 o
were you ever trained on how to perform the 4
surveys?
5 A
I was taken around by another technician for a few 6
months at the beginning, and just learned.
7 Q
And this was back in 19867 8
A Yes.
9 Q
And who was that who showed you how to do that?
10 A
Most of the time it ifas Greg Zimbrodt.
11 Q
when did Zimbrodt leave?
12 A
I can't think off hand.
It may.have been 1987.
13 Q
Did he quit or resign, or was he fired?
14 A
He quit.
15 Q
-Do you know where he's at now?
16 A
Yes, he works at th old Zimmer --
17 Q
Huclear power -- or --
18 A
Yes, they're changing to coal plant and he works 19 out thern nowf 9
20 BY 'bS. FAMEY:
21 Q
Do you know why he quit?
What_was your 22 impression of why_he-_ quit?
23 A~
Well, he'd had a few run-ins with Maxon and --
24 Q
Dr. Maxon?
')
25 A
Yes.
And Ken wouldn't back him up and he got
c w
e-a 9
9 chewed out a few times-and Ken just let this go on-1 2
BY MR. PAULt 3
0-And who_was Maxon?
Back then he was just a nuclear medicine 4
A 5
physician.
6 Q
Now what is he?
7 A
He's the director of the department.
B Q
Of Nuclear Medicine?
J 9
A Yes.
Did Alexander work for him?'
10 Q
When I first got there he worked for Saenger and 11 A
12 now he-works for Maxon.
Was Maxon on the Radiation Safety Committee?"
(
13 Q
14 A
Yes.
Since 1986,_ since you've been there?
15 Q
16 A
As far as I know, yes.
17 Q
Did you have,'in thatLframe -- 1986-1987~-- did.
-7 you have any dealings at all with the Radiation: Safety, 18 19' Committee directly?'
.20 A
No.
Do youlknow if-Fritz; reported directly to'the 21 Q
Radiation Safety Committee, or vere they an advisory body? -
~
22 23 A
I'm not-real$sure of that.
24 BY'MS. FAHEY:
.-(
5-25
_Q*
Were these -- to back-up a little bit -Lwere'these-
~
e a
10 run-ins that Zimbrodt had with Dr. Maxon relating to the 1
2 missing of certain sources?
3 A
No.
4 BY MR. PAUL:
What was the procedure as far as when you did a 5
Q 6
source survey?
How would you document your survey?
The results would be transcribed onto a card, 3 x 7
A 8
5, 5 x 7 card.
Was there an existing card for every source?
9 Q
10 A
Yes.
And would you be given the card to go out in the 11 Q
field to perform the survey, or did you just go do the 12 survey and then come back, look up the card and then 13 s
14 document it?
How did you handle --
Okay, they were broken up into Alpha, Beta, Gamma 15 A
and one person might get the Alphas and another person get 16 and you take the cards with you to check 17 the Beta, Gammas, the serial numbers and write a wipe number on there so_you 18 knew what wipe corresponded to what source and then bring 19 20 them back with you.
21 Q
Did anybody within the department have a 22 responsibility over the cards?
23 A
Not that --
24 Q
Did Jason --
,' ~
25 A
Not that was ever shown that it was your
% 1mem mseouseiwsau+une W-11 1
responsibility to keep these, or --
(f""
so it was just a general working document that was 0
2 3
available to everyone within the department?
Is that 4
correct?
5 A
Yes.
6 Q
Did you ever have any occasions to attempt to perform a survey on a source that you could not find?
7 8
A Me?
One that I couldn't find?
No.
9 Q
Were you aware of any incidents such as that happening with other radiation safety techs, where they had 10 11 nroblems locating the source so they could perform the 12 survey?
13 A
Yes.
And who had problems?
Do you recall?
14 Q
15 A
I'm not sure which one it was, but --
16 Q
Was it something that happened often, or was it 17 just a rare occasion?
18 A
Sealed sources -- it was rare.
19 Q
Is the one instance you're familiar with the 20 incident with Mr. Boyd-attempting to locate the Nickel'63 21 source?
Is -- are you familiar with that particular event?
22 A
Somewhat.
23 Q
Was that the one you were thinking about or was 24 there another incident?
25 A
Yes, that's the one, from the Nickel 63.
m..
1.
O In June of 1988, it's my understanding _that there 4
C'['
was a meeting in which George _ Alexander and Ken'Fritt met 2
with the radiation safety technicians regarding a memo _that 3
they wanted you to sign concerning your' responsibility as to 4
5 reporting safety concerns.
Do you recall that?
6 A
Somewhat, yes.
7 Q-What do you recall about that, as far as what:
happened and what the subject of what they were talking-8 9
about?
10 A
Well, what I remember about the day is -- we had to -- I'm not sure if it was before-or after -- we had to 11 sign our_ evaluations for the _ year and sign that letter.:
12 13 Q
Do you know-what the letter stated?
Yes, that you weren't allowed 'o_go to outside t
14 A
people about anything that went_on in the office._
15 16 Q
_Did you consider that'to include the NRC?
I 17 A
_Not myself, no.
18 Q
Was there any' discussions about the requirements to -- did any of the technicians bring up the fact that
(
19 Run there weren't Federal regulations related to outside agency 20 21 contact?
22 A
I can't recall if that was ever mentioned or not.
23 Q
Do you know what brought this about, this issue?
Was there some-incident, or something that brought it on?
24 L
I don't remember that either.
25 A
..w......-~
m
- l..
13 1
Q Were you working at the University when h
M )Vas employed there?
2 3
A Ho.
4 Q
Were you familiar at all with the reasons why c4 5
left?
6 A
Just from --
7 Q
What was your understanding?
What did you know?
8 A
All I know is went to the NRC several times 9
complaining about safety problems and they 10 Q
By "they," you mean Fritz?
11 A
Among -- he's among one -of.them..w. a
...y%
12 Q
Did you have any -- in this timeframe we're 13 talking about -- 1988 -- did you look upon contact with tha 14 NRC as being detrimental to your career with the University 15 of Cincinnati?
Did you make that connection?
16 A
It wouldn't have helped.
17 Q-Were you required to sign that form?
18 A
Yes.
19 Q
Did th'ey make any threats that if you didn't you'd 20 be fired, or some type of job action?
21 A
I can't say that they did.
22 Q
But you were acting under that impression?
23 A
Well, if they say sign it, you've got to --
24 Q
Did everybody sigt.?
Q) 25 A
Yes.
/ Ae, no
e 4
14 1
.Q Do you recall that approximately two months _later 2
there was an NRC inspection in August 1988 conducted by Don 3
Gibbons?
4 A
Yes.
5 Q
Do you recall an incident just prior to Gibbons' 6
inspection, an incident where Jason.gave Melvin Boyd some oaFJ 7
inventory cards and sealed sources?
8 A
Yes.
9 Q
Were you present when that happened?
10 A
Yes.
11 Q
And basically, could you tell us what happened and 12 what you knew about the particular situation?
(
13 A
Okay, I was sitting over at Ray's desk.
14 Q
Ray Estes?
15 A
Yes, he was either off or out of the office for-16 some reason, and Jason came from the back room with -- I 17 didn't know at first what he had in his hand, but he said, 18 here get rid.of these, and then I saw what they were.
They 19 were sealed source cards, and I said, no, I won't do-it.
20 Q
Oh, he asked you first?
21 A
Well, he asked the whole group.
I said no, that I 22 wasn't going to do it.
l 23 Q
At that time were you aware the NRC was coming?
- 24 A
I believe they knew.
i e
25 Q
Did you know?
I
~
.m
- m _ __ _.
15
[
1 A
I knew;they were coming about a. week before he
~ d?
2 actually showed up.-
Now, I don't the exact date that Jason came out of there, out of Ken's office,-or the back area.
3 4
Q What was your understanding-of why Jason was giving these -- coming out and.asking you to get rid of the 5
-6 cards?
7 A
They were missing.
8 Q
What was missing?
9 A
The sources.
Or we couldn't find them.
10 Q
Do you know how many sources were missing at that 11 time?
12 A
All I know is of the one over in Dr. Tan -- over 13 in the --
14
-Q The Nickel'63?
15 A-Yes.
16 Q
So that was the only one-that you were aware of?-
17 A
That-I'can recall, yes.
18
- BY MS. EAHEY:
19 Q-Did Jason tell you why he wanted'you to.get rid.of 20 the cards?
21 A
No.
22 BY MR. PAUL:
23 Q
Who ended up getting the cards?
24 A
Mel.
.h 25 Q
What did he do with them?
y y *uwauacussam my23o%ue t
16 1
A He put them in his desk drawer.
C-a Did you ever have discussions with Jason on why ha 2
Q 3
did this?
4 A
Not why he did it.
5 Q
Or what was behind all that?
Nothing was ever mentioned until he -- Dr. Wlot 6
A 7
wanted a letter from him.
Which was a year later; is that right?
8 Q
9 A
[No response.)
Were the sources -- the inventory cards on the 10 0
11 sources kept in Jason's area?
12 A
Yes.
13 Q
' At that time in preparation for the NRC
(
inspection, were you involved in any type of review of 14 procedures or existing documentation in. preparation for the 15 16 NRC visit?
17 A
Yeah.
Were you given any instructions regarding your 18 Q
contact with the NRC inspector, whether you were prohibited 19 or encouraged.to talk with the inspector?
20 21 A
Neither way.
22 Q
Neither way.
At that point in time, did you have any concerns 23 regarding the radiation safety program as far as the 24
(
25 operatTon of the department?
a
s 17 1
A Some.
2 Q
Did your concerns include concerns regarding
^"
3 radiation safety?
4 A
Yes.
5 Q
Did you ever attempt to discuss these with the NRC 6
inspector?
7 A
Never had a chance.
8 Q
What do you mean by "never had a chance"?
He 9
never interviewed you or you were out of the office or what 10 was the --
11 A
No interview, and Ken was never away from him.
12 Q
Is it my understanding you didn't-feel you could 13 talk to the NRC inspector in the RSO's presence -- Fritz' 14 presence?
15 A
Correct.
16 Q
Did this feeling have anything to do with the memo 17 you'd signed back in June regarding proper notification 18 procedures?
19 A
No.
20 Q
At that point in time, did you have any 21
-impression regarding the adequacy of the recordkeeping at 22 the University of Cincinnati as far as what was required per 23 the license?
l 24 A
Yes.
'6-25 Q
Did you feel it was adequate?
~--,
.. ~. -... ~
.z m.,
~
~
18--
1 A
No.
's, '
It's my understanding:that ultimately in late 1988 2
Q 3
or early 1989 that you went before the University of-4 cincinnati's radiation safety committee; is:that true?.
5 A
Yes.
6 Q-And you presented the committee with a-number.of 7
memos; is that right?
8 A
Yes.
9 Q
Do you know why the situation with the missing 10 sealed-sources and the inventory cards was not presented to 11 the committee at that time?
12 A
I don't.
-13 Q
Did you have a spokesman before the committee that
(
1 14 represented the safety techs or were you all sort of 15 independent?
16 A
We were independent and I.didn't say a word during 17 them.
'18 Q
Who did most of the talking?
19 A
Jeff and.Melvin.
20 Q
'Was Fritz at-the meeting?
21 A
No.
22 Q
At that time, who was the chairman of the-23 radiation safety committee?
24 A~
Dr. Wiot.
N-25' Q
Did you bring up the issue about the memn that
...-..a
,19 1
Alexander had had you sign earlier in June?
2 A
Yes.
3 Q
Was there any discussion about that issue with the 4
committee?
5 A
Yes.
6 Q
Did they concur with that type of action or what 7
was said about it; do you recall?
8 A
As far as I can recollect, Dr. Silberstein -- he about flew out of his chair and Maxin and Wiot were trying 9
10 to shadow over the issue.
11 Q
Meaning make it a --
12 A
sidestep, whatever.
13 Q
Avoid it?
14 A
Just say no, that's not what it meant, although I 15 16 Q
Did you have the concern at that time when it was 17 discussed that there was an attempt to void or violate the 18 requirements of 10 CFR that was posted throughout the 19 facility?
20 A
I don't know if it was a specific attempt by 21 anyone, but --
22 Q
Did you connect that memo with that particular 23 issue to your ability to freedom of access to the NRC?
Were 24 those issues connected in your mind at that time?
25 A
It could -- the memo could be read that way, yes.
'~
.... ~
20 1
Q Now, I understand that Alexander Was at the 2
meeting; is that right?
3 A
Yes.
4 Q
What did he say?
Do you recall?
5 A
When that came up, I don't recall if he even said 6
a word.
7 Q
Did Silberstein ever confront him about it?
8 A
Not to my knowledge, Silberstein didn't.
9 Q
Is it true that after the meeting, the safety 10 committee formed some type of subcommittee to look into the 11 radiation safety techs' concern; was that true?
12 A
Yes.
13 Q
And Silberstein was the one who headed it up?
14 A
I believe so.
15 Q
Do you know who else was on this subcommittee?
16 A
Somehow, I believe George for some reason was on 17 it.
18 Q
19 A
Yes, and for sure, I couldn't tell 'yoa anybody but 20 Silberstein.
21 Q
Did you ever meet with them after that?
22 A
Hyself?
No.
23 Q
Were you working the week that the issue regarding 24 the inventory cards of August '88, where Jason gave them to 25 Helvin, were you present when that issue came to the surface
% w 1ausnip ctv:: auk A u n1q &
~...,-
e 4
21 1
again in -- I guess it was in relation to Dr. Wlot got Y"
2 involved.
Were you there at the University then?
3 A
Yes.
4 Q
How did it come up again; do you know?
5 A
I believe Jeff was talking to Wiot to resign and 6
in their discussion this came up.
7 No, that's not correct.
That was later.
I think 8
Silberstein wanted it.
9 Q
Silberstein wanted the incident brought out?-
10 A
He wanted for some reason, I believe, I'm not sure if it's Silberstein, but he wanted a letter saying that this 11 12
-- the source cards had been hidden.
13 Q
This is when Jason wrote his letter, is that --
14 A
Yeah.
15 Q
This was before that?
16 A
Yes.
17 Q
So then how did Jason come to write his letter; do 18 you know?
19 A
That's when Jeff went to resign and then he 20 started going on about what the problems with the program was, and Dr. Wiot asked Jeff if he could get Jason to write 21 22 a letter.
23 0
okay.
So evidently -- let's just go through this-24 again and make sure I understand what's happening.
D 25 Initially Silberstein was involved.
At what point in time
22 1
was that?
Cly?
2 A
I had no direct meetings or anything with him..
3 That was Melvin and Jeff.
4 Q.
Went to Silberstein initially?
5 A
Yes.
6 Q
And evidently, they told Silberstein about this.
7 incident regarding Jason giving inventory cards to Boyd.
8 A
I believe-so.
9 Q
So then how much-time passed before Jeff met-with 10 Wiot?
11 A
Maybe a month.
I'm not realisure.
12 Q
So then af ter he went to Wiot, it was subsequent 13 to that when Jason wrote the letter; is'that right?
('
14 A
Same day, I believe.
15
_ Q When did HES get there?
Was that at that1-- were 16 they there when this_' happened?
17 A
No, NES came in-the following week.
18-0 At that point, which'is really inLmy 19 understanding, is August of89,Ldid Silberstein's committee 20 ever - -did you feel' that-theyehad made an attempt to-21 correct your concerns that you'd brought to:them back in 22 January -- December?
23 A
I don't kno. rd t. hey ever resolved anything.
~
24-Possibly the service license stuff, but --
I' 25-Q Your other concerns you felt were still pending or
.1
-... -. ~.,
23 1
2 A
They made minor -- like the protocols. -Everything had to be reviewed by the committee, all protocol changes, 3
4 minor things.
Were there any other cases there in '89 regarding _
5 Q
missing sources; did that ever come up again?
6 7
A-Missing source -- I can't recall.
8 Q
Only the one that you're aware of; right?
9 A
The Dr. Tan one, yeah.
10 0
Were you ever asked to falsify any records that were required to be kept in regards to the license at UC?
11 12 A
Falsify, no.
r e
13 Q
Are you aware of any instances where records were
(
14 not accurately filled out?
15 A
Specific records, no, none offhand.
16 Q
Okay.
17 BY MS. FAHEY:
When the NRC inspector came out, did he go through 1B Q
19 the sealed source cards?
20 A
I believe so, yes.
21 Q
But you weren't present at the time?
22 A
I was in the office but --
23 Q
Do you knou if he identified any missing cards?
24 A
I have no idea.
25 Q"
Did you see the NRC inspection report at the
_ gya
-24 1
conclusion of the inspection?
I believe it was one of those that he could write
~
2 A
up right there and there was nothing on it.
3 And he didn't identify any of your concerns?
4 Q
5 A
No.
It was about that time that all of you techs had 6
Q 7
gotten together; correct?
August?
8 A
August.
Started documenting some of your concerns?
9 Q
10 A
That happened.
You already stated on the record you didn't have
'y 11 Q
an opportunity to speak with him even if you'd wanted to?
12 13 A
Correct.
14 Q
I have one other question, something you said earlier on the record about the nuclear medicine department.
15 Is it correct that -- I got the impression from you that the 16 radiation safety procedures and rules were not consistently 17 applied to all the departments in the hospital?
18 19 A
Yes.
20 Q
okay.
So the nuclear medicine department got away with doing some things that other departments might not 21 22 necessarily have gotten away with?
23 A
Correct.
24 Q
okay.
Now would any of those things that they got
\\
away with have to do with radiation safety concerns?
I
~'
25
]
-..,.. ~,,
25 1
mear, would,they be any serious safety concerns?
2 A
It was -- as f ar as I recollect, they got special privileges on -- see, we had to come in early specifically 3
4 for them and they always wanted things now and if we didn't 5
do it for them now, we heard about it.
6 Q
Whereas if another department requested something, 7
they would have to get in line --
8 A
Right.
Go through them.
9 Q
-- and when you guys were available, you'd get to 10 it.
11 A
Correct.
12 Q
That was a direct result of George Alexander 13 having --
14 A
Not specifically George.
15 Q
Who else?
16 A
Sanger.
17 Q
Dr. Sanger?
18 A
Uh-huh.
19 Q
Okay.
And you said that he used to be the 20 director of nuclear redicine department, and Dr. Maxin.
21 A
You could say he still is.
22 Q
okay, but Dr. Maxin is now the director in name?
23 A
Correct.
24 Q
I also want to talk to you about the service use -
25
- is that how you term -- is that the same thing that I'm --
'~~
l
]
3 26 i
A Service license.
2 Q
commercial use of a license?
e 3
A commercial use, yes.
4 Q
okay.
There were allegations made that certain physicians at the hospital were running a business using the 5
6 University's sources to calibrate instruments.
Were you 7
aware of that?
8 A
Physicians, no.
9 Q
Who?
Mr. Fritz?
10 A
And Terlakis.
11 Q
Well, he's a physiciant isn't he?
12 A
Ph.D.
(
13 Q
Oh, I'm sorry.
Okay.
And what was your 14 understanding of what they were doing?
15 A
All I knew --
16 Q
This is your personal opinion, what you 17 understood.
18 A
All I knew was he had contracts -- both of them had contracts with various' hospitals, agencies, around this 19 area, to perform their radiation safety responsibilities or 20 21 whatever, calibrate instruments, stuff like that, -and Ken would calibrate his instruments and he would also calibrate 22 23 the ones for Teriakis.
24 Q
Were you ever asked to calibrate instruments for
\\,_.
25 either one of them?
27 1
A No.
2 Q
How about any of the other techs?
'~
3 A
Possible.
I can't --
4 Q
And do they calibrate these instruments during 5
work time or was it something that --
6 A
Yes, always work time.
7 Q
Did you know whether the hospital was billing for this service or if it came from the two individuals 8
9 themselves?
10 A
Hy opinion, right?
The hospital had no idea.
11 Q
Was it a violation of the hospital's license?
Again, I realize you might have limited knowledge of the 12 13 license requirements.
14 A
Up until Jeff or Melvin saw that there had to be a 15 special service license, we didn't have any problems, and we 16 had no knowledge that that was improper.
17 Q
It was brought to the radiation safety committee's 18 attention by your group?
19 A
I believe so.
20 Q
Do you remember how they addressed that matter?
21 A
I don't recall them getting upset at the meeting.
22 Q
Now, there were other services that the radiation 23 safety office provided to outside clients that were billed 24 directly to the University.
25 A
Yes.
m 28 1
Q What were those types of services?
2 A
Room surveys for Good Samaritan Hospital and I
'~
believe there were radiography sources for companies or from 3
4 sealed source wipes or other companies like
Dear Iron,
5 Almart, et cetera.
6 Q
Okay, so at the time, the fact that these two 7
gentlemen were also doing it, a similar type service, it didn't really bother the techs until it was discovered that 8
9 there needed to be an amendment or a special license to 10 allow them to perform those functions?
Do you know if the 11 license was ever amended to allow that?
12 A
I believe it has been because -- well, Dr. Wyatt
[
13 stopped it when NES got here.
I don't know if it had been 14 approved then or not and he just didn't want it done.
15 Q
He stopped it before NES got here?
16 A
When NES got there -- now.
We had been doing it a 17 few months before that, I think, because they had said we 18 had gotten approval, a license to do these things.. When NES 19 got there, I don't know if they found out that we had never 20 received it or not, but Dr. Wyatt stopped us until -- like 21 this January.
22 Q
So it's currently going on again?
23 A
Yes.
24 Q
Are you aware of any hospitals or companies being 25 found to be out of compliance as a result of either one of
!. ~ - ^:r~
.c
-. ~
29 I
these gentlemen conducting their business?
j..
2 A
Otto Epp Memorial Hospital, I believe, is the name 3
of it.
4 Q
What did you hear about that incident?
5 A
Well, actually, I read it.
6 Q
In an NRC type?
7 A
Yes.
8 Q
We don't need to go into that, if that's what your.
9 knowledge is limited to.
10 A
It's a date is what the problem was as far as I 11 know it was.
12 Q
Did you read it in your office?
13 A
Yes.
14 Q
Everyone saw it, I assume?
15 A
Yes.
16 Q
What did you all think of that?
17 A
Just that it was going to happen sooner or later.
18-Q Okay.
19 BY MR.' PAUL:
20 Q
Just one question on the special services that you-21 were asked to perform for the Nuclear Medicine Department 22 where exceptions were taken for that --
23 A
Yes.
24 Q
Were any of these exceptions where radiation 25 safety procedures were bypassed; did that ever occur?
' ~
+
e
.. g.
F
/-
30.
1 A
I believe so.
2 Q
Could you tell us the specifics on that?-
3 A
Syringe shields.-
4 Q
Syringe shields?
5
'A They were supposed to have syringe shields on 6
there when they draw a dose
-- license.
They, vere: supposed to have them -- they weren't supposed'to have them in -their 7
They were supposed to be on trays and a111they_did 8
hands.
9 was just carry them around.
I believe -- I never brought-
~
that up, because I never saw them:do that, but I believe 10 11 Jeff had mentioned that several times.
12 Q
To Fritz?
13 A
To Fritz, to Alexander and --
(
14 Q
There was no action taken on it?
o And probably 'craig ' Williams, - the -radiopharmacist.
15 A
16 Q
Craig Williams?
17 A
Yes..
18 BY MS. FAHEY:
19.
Q Do you know if it was standard procedure up there 20 to not use them, or if it-was just --
21 A
They-never use them.
22 Q
Never?
23 A
-Never.
24=
Q Has that situation been corrected that you know 25 of?
. _ _ _ - - _ _ - - - _ - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ _ _ _ _. - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _. - - _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ - _ _ = _ _ _.
M u m puxagggggggga,gyy J
+
31 1
A I believe so, yes, at least an attempt.
Whether they do it when we're not around is hard to say.
2 3
Q Certainly the techs up there must realize the 4
importance of using those things?
A lot of times you find them without rings on, 5
A 6
too.
7 BY MR. PAUL:
8 Q
Is Alexander still in your department?
9 A
No.
10 0
Is he back over in Nuclear Medicine?
11 A
Yes.
p He doesn't have anything to do with the radiation 12 Q
/*
13 safety department?
(
~
14 A
One minor thing.
He gets to sound out the 15 balance?
16 Q
Balance?
17 A
The thing for human use protocols.
He gets to 18 make sure they're all nice and neat for the committee.
19 Q
Is he on the committee or an advisor to the 20 committee?
21 A
No.
22 Q
He was before in some type of function?
He used to make sure the food was there, and sit 23 A
24 in and listen.
25 BY MS. FAHEY:
1
a
+-
e +,
.:.m, n.,m,,
3g__
1 Q
That's an'important function.
I just have one r(.
2 more thing-that we didn't address, and you may have some 3
limited knowledge of it.
Regarding Fritz being notified by the NRC that 4
5 some anonymous allegations had come in'.
6 A
I know bits and pieces of that.
7 Q
Okay, tell us what you know, what limited 8
information you have.
9 A
What I remember is that we needed NRC Form 30's.
10 We were out.
We called and they sent us -- it was a two or 11 three minute phone conversation.
I' don't remember 12 specifically who called.
Then, I guess they looked at the
(<r.
phone bill and checked out the numbers,'and then there was a 13
.s 14 letter from Dr. Wyatt saying due to things out of ourf 15 control, this has happened; that someone's.gone to the NRC.
I don't know if it specifically said the NRC; it 16 may have said outside agencies, or something like that.
17 18
'That's all-I ever heard of it.
19 Q
Fritz never came out and accused anybody_or-held a 20 meeting?
21-A Not that I was aware of or.in on.
~
22 Q
Were you ever asked.if you had gone to the NRC?
I 23 A
Me?
No.
24 MS. FAHEY:
I can't think of anything else.
Let's-25 go off the record for a minute.
g' a
33 1
(Discussion off the record.)
KR. CASSADY I did say at the beginning of this 2
3 interview, as I had with the others, that you had told me that you're not targeting Mr. Harris in this investigationt 4
5 that he's being interviewed as a witness; is that correct?
6 MR. PAUL That's correct.
7 HR. CASSADYr He's not a target?
8 MR. PAULt He's not a targets he was interviewed 9
as a witness.
10 KR. CASSADY:
Thank you.
11 BY MR. PAULt 12 Q
Hr. Harris, have I or any other NRC representative 13 here threatened you in any manner or offered you any rewards
(
14 in return for this statement?
15 A
No.
16 Q
You gave this statement freely and voluntarily?
17 A
Yes.
18 Q
Is there anything further you'd care to add for 19 the record?
20 A
No.
21 MR. PAULt The interview is concluded.
Thank' you 22 for your time.
23 (Whereupon, t 11:37 a.m., the interview was 24 concluded.)
25 4
.y.
gT M7
- is
=~
M F
=
w
--r-
M
, e 3'l REPORTER'S CBRTITICATE This is to certify that the attached proceed-ings before the United states Nucisar Regulatory Consission in the matter off NAME OF PROCEEDINO:
Investigative Interview DOCKET NUHgER.
PLACE OF PROCEEDING:
were held as herein appears,- and that this is the original transcript thereof for the file of the United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission taken by me and thereafter reduced to typewriting.
by se or under the direction of the court report-ing company, and that the transcript i s a true and accurate record of the foregoing proceedings.
0mdY W Y' As Ronald N. LeGrand Official Reporter Ann Riley & Associates. Ltd.
en s.,r..,.
,-.-y..,.,
o,--
,,,ny-
-imy
,,o
...,_..,..#._,,m e.,
..-w
-,,,,,,,m.s...
m
,