Lee Larocque; Order Prohibiting Involvement in NRC-Licensed Activities

[Federal Register Volume 64, Number 46 (Wednesday, March 10, 1999)]
[Notices]
[Pages 11958-11959]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 99-5871]


-----------------------------------------------------------------------

NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

[IA 98-065]


Lee Larocque; Order Prohibiting Involvement in NRC-Licensed 
Activities

I

    Mr. Lee LaRocque (Mr. LaRocque) was the Chief Nuclear Medicine 
Technologist (CNMT) in the Nuclear Medicine Department (NMD) of Windham 
Community Memorial Hospital, Inc. (Windham or Licensee), Willimantic, 
Connecticut, from September 1991 until August 1997, when he was demoted 
to the position of Nuclear Medicine Technologist (NMT). Mr. LaRocque 
was employed as an NMT in the NMD at the facility from August 1997 to 
May 14, 1998, when his employment was terminated. Windham holds 
Facility License No. 06-15203-01 (License), issued by the Nuclear 
Regulatory Commission (NRC or Commission) pursuant to 10 CFR Parts 30 
and 35, which authorizes Windham to use byproduct material for medical 
use.

II

    On May 21, 1998, an investigation was initiated by the NRC Office 
of Investigations (OI), to determine if Mr. LaRocque, while functioning 
as the NMT at Windham, administered a dose of iodine-131 (I-131) 
greater than permitted by the License and created an inaccurate record 
of the dose. Based upon all the evidence, including an admission by Mr. 
LaRocque during an interview with OI on October 8, 1998, the NRC 
concludes that Mr. LaRocque deliberately altered a dose calibrator 
reading for an I-131 capsule, thereby misleading the Authorized User 
regarding the assayed dose, administered the capsule to the patient 
knowing that the dose exceeded the License limits, and deliberately 
created inaccurate records of the dose.
    Specifically, on the morning of May 11, 1998, when a patient 
arrived at Windham to be given a dose of 29.5 millicuries of I-131 in 
capsule form, Mr. LaRocque assayed the dose and found that it contained 
more than 30 millicuries (mCi) activity. The License limits doses 
administered to patients to 30 mCi of I-131. As a result, the patient 
was instructed to return to the hospital at 4:30 p.m., the time at 
which the dose was expected to have decayed to the prescribed dose.
    When the patient returned to the hospital at about 4:15 p.m., Mr. 
LaRocque measured the dose and found that it was slightly greater than 
30 mCi. Rather than waiting until 4:30 p.m., Mr. LaRocque retrieved two 
lead strips from a nearby closet and inserted them into the dose 
calibrator in order to lower the reading. With the lead strips inside 
the dose calibrator, the dose measured 29.2 mCi. Mr. LaRocque then 
informed the AU that the dose was ready for administration to the 
patient. Pursuant to the Licensee's Quality Management Program, the AU 
is required to observe the dose calibrator display before the dose is 
actually given to the patient. At the request of Mr. LaRocque, the AU 
observed the dose calibrator readout and approved administration of the 
dose to the patient. Mr. LaRocque then administered the dose.
    Mr. LaRocque also completed a radiopharmaceutical written directive 
and patient verification form stating that the assayed dose was 29.2 
mCi. This record is required to be maintained by the Licensee by 10 
C.F.R. 35.53(a) and (c). In his interview with OI, Mr. LaRocque 
admitted that he knowingly misled the AU as to the activity of the 
dose, and knowingly created inaccurate Licensee records, which stated 
that the assayed dose and the dose administered to the patient was 29.2 
mCi, when Mr. LaRocque knew that the dose was in fact slightly greater 
than 30 mCi and that the License prohibited the administration of I-131 
in doses greater than 30 mCi to patients.
    Mr. LaRocque's actions are of particular concern given that on 
December 10, 1997, only six months before the above-described 
deliberate misconduct occurred, the NRC had issued a letter to him, 
explaining that any future deliberate misconduct could subject him to 
significant enforcement action. Previously, when Mr. LaRocque was the 
Chief NMT at Windham: (1) after the fact and without first-hand 
knowledge, he created inaccurate records associated with the disposal 
of technetium-99m labeled DTPA aerosol kits; and (2) he failed to 
promptly report that dose calibrator constancy records had been 
falsified by another NMT. The NRC issued a Notice of Violation to 
Windham on February 6, 1998, based, in part, on Mr. LaRocque's 
deliberate misconduct while employed as the Chief NMT.
    In a telephone call on December 23, 1998, the NRC discussed its 
conclusions with Mr. LaRocque and offered Mr. LaRocque an opportunity 
to attend a predecisional enforcement conference. Mr. LaRocque declined 
the opportunity, noting that he did not believe he could provide any 
additional information from what he had already provided to OI. In a 
letter to Mr. LaRocque dated January 11, 1999, the NRC confirmed that 
he had declined the opportunity for a conference and offered Mr. 
LaRocque a second opportunity to attend a conference. Mr. LaRocque did 
not request a conference.

III

    Based on the above, Mr. LaRocque engaged in deliberate misconduct 
in that: (1) in violation of 10 C.F.R. 30.10(a)(1), he deliberately 
administered a dose of I-131 to a patient in excess of the 30 mCi limit 
of Condition 15 the License, thereby putting the Licensee in violation 
of its License; and (2) in violation of 10 C.F.R. 30.10(a)(2), he 
deliberately created materially inaccurate Licensee dose records, 
required to be maintained by 10 C.F.R. 35.53(a) and (c), thereby 
causing the Licensee to be in violation of 10 C.F.R. 30.9(a).

[[Page 11959]]

    The NRC must be able to rely on the Licensee and its employees to 
comply with NRC requirements, including the requirement to provide and 
maintain information that is complete and accurate in all material 
respects. Mr. LaRocque's action in causing the Licensee to violate its 
License and the Commission's regulations, his misrepresentations to the 
Licensee, and his prior actions as set forth in Section II of this 
Order, 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 and its Licensees.
    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 
would be protected if Mr. LaRocque were permitted at this time to be 
involved in NRC-licensed activities. Therefore, the public health, 
safety and interest require that Mr. LaRocque be prohibited from any 
involvement in NRC-licensed activities for a period of one year from 
the effective date of this Order. If Mr. LaRocque is involved in NRC-
licensed activities on the effective date of the Order, Mr. LaRocque 
must immediately cease such activities, and inform the NRC of the name, 
address, and telephone number of the employer, and provide a copy of 
this Order to the employer. Additionally, Mr. LaRocque is required to 
notify the NRC of his first employment in NRC-licensed activities 
following the prohibition period.

IV

    Accordingly, pursuant to Sections 81, 161b, 161i, 182 and 186 of 
the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as amended, and the Commission's 
regulations in 10 C.F.R. 2.202, 10 C.F.R. 30.10, and 10 C.F.R. 150.20, 
it is hereby ordered That:
    1. Mr. Lee LaRocque is prohibited for one year from the effective 
date of this Order 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, including, but not 
limited to, those activities of Agreement State licensees conducted 
pursuant to the authority granted by 10 C.F.R. 150.20.
    2. If, on the effective date of this Order, Mr. LaRocque is 
involved in NRC-licensed activities, he must immediately cease those 
activities, and 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 one year after the one-year period of 
prohibition has expired, Mr. LaRocque shall, within 20 days of his 
acceptance of each 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, D.C. 
20555, 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. In the first notification, Mr. LaRocque shall include a 
statement of his commitment to compliance with regulatory requirements 
and the basis why the Commission should have confidence that he will 
now comply with applicable NRC requirements.
    The Director, Office of Enforcement, may, in writing, relax or 
rescind any of the above conditions upon demonstration by Mr. LaRocque 
of good cause.

V

    In accordance with 10 C.F.R. 2.202, Mr. LaRocque 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, consideration will 
be given to extending the time to request a hearing. A request for 
extension of time must be made in writing to the Director, Office of 
Enforcement, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, D.C. 20555, 
and 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 
admit or deny each allegation or charge made in this Order and shall 
set forth the matters of fact and law on which Mr. LaRocque or other 
person adversely affected relies and the reasons as to why the Order 
should not have been issued. Any answer or request for a hearing shall 
be submitted to the Secretary, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, 
Attn: Chief, Rulemakings and Adjudications Staff, Washington, DC 20555. 
Copies also shall be sent to the Director, Office of Enforcement, U.S. 
Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555, to the Deputy 
Assistant General Counsel for Enforcement at the same address, to the 
Regional Administrator, NRC Region I, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory 
Commission, 475 Allendale Road, King of Prussia, Pennsylvania 19406, 
and to Mr. LaRocque if the answer or hearing request is by a person 
other than Mr. LaRocque. If a person other than Mr. LaRocque requests a 
hearing, that person shall set forth with particularity the manner in 
which that person's interest is adversely affected by this Order and 
shall address the criteria set forth in 10 C.F.R. 2.714(d).
    If a hearing is requested by Mr. LaRocque or a person whose 
interest is adversely affected, 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 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 of 
this Order 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 24th day of February 1999.

    For the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Malcolm R. Knapp,
Deputy Executive Director for Regulatory Effectiveness.
[FR Doc. 99-5871 Filed 3-9-99; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590-01-P