Gregory Desobry, Ph.D.; Order Requiring Notification of Involvement in NRC-Licensed Activities, 11529-11532 [2011-4682]
Download as PDF
emcdonald on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with NOTICES
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 41 / Wednesday, March 2, 2011 / Notices
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 firstclass 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://
ehd1.nrc.gov/EHD, 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 Dr. Kao requests
a hearing, that person shall set forth
with particularity the manner in which
his/her interest is adversely affected by
this Order and shall address the criteria
set forth in 10 CFR 2.309(d).
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
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:34 Mar 01, 2011
Jkt 223001
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 this 23rd day of February 2011.
For the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory
Commission.
Roy P. Zimmerman,
Director, Office of Enforcement.
[FR Doc. 2011–4680 Filed 3–1–11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590–01–P
NUCLEAR REGULATORY
COMMISSION
[NRC–2011–0047; IA–10–010]
Gregory Desobry, Ph.D.; Order
Requiring Notification of Involvement
in NRC-Licensed Activities
I
Mr. Gregory Desobry previously
performed duties as a medical physicist
at the Philadelphia Veterans Affairs
Medical Center in Philadelphia,
Pennsylvania (PVAMC). The
Department of Veterans Affairs (VA)
holds a Master Materials License (MML)
Number 03–23853–01VA issued by the
U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission
(NRC or Commission) pursuant to Title
10 of the Code of Federal Regulations
(10 CFR) part 30. The PVAMC is a
medical broad scope permittee which
was authorized by the MML to use a
variety of byproduct materials for
diagnostic and therapeutic purposes.
The therapeutic treatments included
brachytherapy iodine-125 used for
permanent prostate implants. Mr.
Desobry’s role included assuring the
safe use of radioactive materials for
patients, including performance of a
post-treatment determination of the
actual radiation treatment administered
to the patient in order that the actual
treatment parameters could be verified
with the intended treatment identified
in the written directive. Mr. Desobry
was involved with the vast majority of
the permanent prostate implants under
the permit.
II
On May 16, 2008, the NRC received
information that on May 5, 2008, a
potential medical event (as defined in
PO 00000
Frm 00106
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
11529
10 CFR 35.3045) occurred at the
PVAMC; this event report was followed
by numerous others. By October 2009,
the VA had reported to the NRC that 97
medical events involving prostate
brachytherapy occurred at the PVAMC
from February 2002 through June 2008.
In addition, during the period from
December 2006 through November
2007, post-treatment dose verification
was not performed for at least 16
patients due to computer system
interface problems. Even after the
computer interface problems were
resolved, post-treatment plans were not
completed for seven patients until
December 2007.
In response to the reported medical
events, the VA National Health Physics
Program (NHPP) conducted onsite
inspections at the PVAMC on May 28
through 29, 2008, and from June 24
through 25, 2008, and issued an
inspection report with violations of NRC
requirements, dated October 16, 2008.
The NHPP concluded that, for medical
events occurring between February 25,
2002, and May 5, 2008, Mr. Desobry was
aware of the D90 doses (the minimum
dose received by 90 percent of the
prostate volume) and, in some cases, of
the seeds being implanted outside the
prostate. However, Mr. Desobry did not
report these circumstances to the RSO to
evaluate as possible medical events. The
NRC considered this a missed
opportunity to correct the issue,
allowing further medical events to
occur. The NHPP also concluded that
Mr. Desobry had adequate clinical and
technical knowledge of the patient
circumstances surrounding the medical
events. Finally, the NHPP concluded
that the lack of evaluations by Mr.
Desobry and his failure to raise this
issue to higher-level management was
contrary to patient safety and
demonstrated a lack of a safety
conscious work environment.
The NRC also responded to the
medical events being reported by
conducting onsite inspections at the
PVAMC on various dates from July 23,
2008, to October 16, 2009. The results
of the NRC inspections were
documented in NRC Special Inspection
Report No. 030–34325/2008–
029(DNMS), dated March 30, 2009, and
NRC Reactive Inspection Report No.
030–34325/2009–001(DNMS), dated
November 17, 2009. The NRC
determined that Mr. Desobry was the
primary medical physicist at the
PVAMC for brachytherapy implants and
participated in the majority of
treatments that subsequently resulted in
reported medical events. Also, Mr.
Desobry was the primary medical
physicist during the period when post
E:\FR\FM\02MRN1.SGM
02MRN1
emcdonald on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with NOTICES
11530
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 41 / Wednesday, March 2, 2011 / Notices
treatment dose verifications were not
performed due to computer interface
problems. The NRC inspection reports
documented eight apparent violations of
NRC requirements and noted that the
VA’s internal Administrative Board of
Investigation concluded that there was a
lack of a safety culture at the PVAMC
where Mr. Desobry, among others,
accepted a substandard approach to
brachytherapy treatments, which
resulted in poor implant techniques, a
patient dose assessment process that
lacked rigor and formality, a failure to
communicate concerns with the
implants, a misperception that safety
checks were performed by other team
members, and an overall system that did
not demonstrate a commitment to
safety.
The NRC discussed these violations
with the VA in a Predecisional
Enforcement Conference conducted on
December 17, 2009. In a letter dated
January 14, 2010, the VA accepted the
violations, including the root or basic
causes identified by the VA and the
NRC.
On March 17, 2010, the NRC issued
a Notice of Violation with a $227,500
proposed civil penalty to the VA. The
Notice of Violation included two
Severity Level II violations and three
Severity Level III violations assessed a
civil penalty; and one Severity Level II
violation and two Severity Level IV
violations not assessed a civil penalty.
The VA provided the NRC with its
response to the Notice of Violation and
proposed civil penalty, dated April 8,
2010, and forwarded payment of the
civil penalty provided in a follow-up
letter, dated April 13, 2010.
During interviews conducted by the
NRC’s Office of Investigations (OI), Mr.
Desobry acknowledged being involved
in over 90 percent of the brachytherapy
procedures conducted at the PVAMC.
Mr. Desobry also informed the NRC OI
that he had never received training as to
what constituted a medical event and
was unaware of the reporting
requirements of a medical event.
Notwithstanding Mr. Desobry’s
training as a Medical Physicist, with
board certification by the American
Board of Radiology in 1989 and
subsequent practice in the field of
Medical Physics, Mr. Desobry’s actions
at the PVAMC, as they contributed to
these medical events, called into
question whether Mr. Desobry would
work to assure that radioactive materials
are used safely for patients, adequately
understands the applicable NRC
regulations, and would perform future
activities in accordance with applicable
NRC requirements and the Atomic
Energy Act.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:34 Mar 01, 2011
Jkt 223001
Therefore, on May 24, 2010, the NRC
issued a Demand for Information (DFI)
to Mr. Desobry. This DFI required Mr.
Desobry to provide information about
actions he had taken, or planned to take,
to ensure that Mr. Desobry fully
understood: (1) The 10 CFR part 35
definition of a medical event; and (2) his
role and responsibilities pertaining to
his duties as a medical physicist and the
steps necessary to identify and report
medical events to the NRC. The NRC
further required information about the
names and locations of the facilities
where Mr. Desobry worked as a medical
physicist. Finally, the NRC required
information about any other additional
actions not already mentioned that
would provide the NRC with reasonable
assurance about Mr. Desobry’s
involvement in NRC-licensed activities.
Mr. Desobry responded to the DFI on
June 28, 2010. His reply indicated that
he was not currently employed as a
medical physicist, but had been
employed at the Capital Health
System—Mercer Campus, in Trenton,
New Jersey, from January 2008 until
December 2009; Capital Health System
was affiliated with the University of
Pennsylvania Health System during that
time frame. Mr. Desobry indicated that
while at Capital Health System under
the supervision of the Head of the
Department of Radiation Oncology, he
worked with the Radiation Safety
Officer and with radiation oncology
physicians to examine that institution’s
definition of a medical event, which Mr.
Desobry indicated reinforced his
understanding (and corrected any prior
misunderstanding) of the 10 CFR part 35
definition of a medical event; his role
and responsibility regarding medical
events; and the steps needed to be taken
to identify and report medical events to
the NRC. Mr. Desobry indicated that he
was dedicated to regulatory compliance
and patient safety and stated that, in the
event that he should ever be hired to
work again as a medical physicist, he
would request training in this area at an
appropriate and accredited institution.
III
Based on Mr. Desobry’s response to
the May 24, 2010, DFI, the NRC
recognizes that Mr. Desobry has taken
steps to improve his understanding of
how to safely use radioactive material in
treatment of patients. Mr. Desobry
worked with the Radiation Safety
Officer and with radiation oncology
physicians at the Capital Health System
facility to correct and reinforce Mr.
Desobry’s understanding of the 10 CFR
part 35 definition of a medical event, his
role and responsibility regarding
medical events, and the steps needed to
PO 00000
Frm 00107
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
be taken to identify and report medical
events to the NRC. However, since Mr.
Desobry was involved in a large number
of reported medical events at PVAMC,
the NRC has concluded that it needs the
opportunity to inspect Mr. Desobry’s
involvement in future similar NRClicensed activities to assess the efficacy
of Mr. Desobry’s actions to improve his
understanding of the 10 CFR part 35
definition of a medical event, his role
and responsibility regarding medical
events, and the steps needed to be taken
to identify and report medical events to
the NRC, in the event that he accepts a
position as a medical physicist in the
future. This action will provide NRC the
opportunity to confirm that reasonable
assurance exists 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.
Therefore, the public health, safety
and interest require that Mr. Desobry
notify the NRC within 20 days of
accepting a position as a medical
physicist.
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, and 10 CFR 150.20, it is
hereby ordered that:
1. If Mr. Desobry accepts, or has
accepted since the time of his response
to the DFI, dated May 24, 2010, a
medical physicist position involving the
use of byproduct materials in either
NRC jurisdiction or in an Agreement
State, he shall inform the NRC within 20
days of acceptance of an employment
offer or within 20 days of this Order,
whichever comes later. This notification
is a one-time requirement and no further
notification is required for any
subsequent acceptance of an
employment offer. This notification
shall be provided to the Director, Office
of Enforcement, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory
Commission, Washington, DC 20555–
0001, with a copy to the Regional
Administrator, Region III, 2443
Warrenville Road, Lisle, IL 60532. The
notification shall include the name,
address, and telephone number of the
employer or the entity where he is or
will be employed as a medical physicist.
2. This Order shall be effective 20
days following its publication in the
Federal Register and shall remain in
effect until the conditions of Item 1 have
been met.
The Director, OE, may, in writing,
relax or rescind any of the above
conditions upon demonstration by Mr.
Desobry of good cause.
E:\FR\FM\02MRN1.SGM
02MRN1
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 41 / Wednesday, March 2, 2011 / Notices
emcdonald on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with NOTICES
V
In accordance with 10 CFR 2.202, Mr.
Gregory Desobry must, and any other
person adversely affected by this Order
may, submit an answer to this Order
within 20 days of its publication in the
Federal Register. Mr. Desobry’s answer
must be submitted under oath and
affirmation. In addition, Mr. Desobry
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://
VerDate Mar<15>2010
17:12 Mar 01, 2011
Jkt 223001
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,’’
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 the Electronic
Information Exchange (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/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
PO 00000
Frm 00108
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
11531
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
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://
ehd1.nrc.gov/EHD, 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.
E:\FR\FM\02MRN1.SGM
02MRN1
11532
Federal Register / Vol. 76, No. 41 / Wednesday, March 2, 2011 / Notices
If a person other than Mr. Desobry,
Ph.D., requests a hearing, that person
shall set forth with particularity the
manner in which his/her interest is
adversely affected by this Order and
shall address the criteria set forth in 10
CFR 2.309(d).
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 this 23rd day of February 2011.
For the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory
Commission.
Roy P. Zimmerman,
Director, Office of Enforcement.
[FR Doc. 2011–4682 Filed 3–1–11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590–01–P
POSTAL REGULATORY COMMISSION
[Docket No. CP2011–61; Order No. 680]
New Postal Product
Postal Regulatory Commission.
Notice.
AGENCY:
ACTION:
This document addresses a
recent Postal Service filing concerning
an additional International Business
Reply Service (IBRS) Competitive
Contract 3. It identifies preliminary
procedural steps and invites public
comment. It also grants an extension of
the current contract.
DATES: Comments are due: March 3,
2011.
ADDRESSES: Submit comments
electronically by accessing the ‘‘Filing
Online’’ link in the banner at the top of
the Commission’s Web site (https://
www.prc.gov) or by directly accessing
the Commission’s Filing Online system
at https://www.prc.gov/prc-pages/filingonline/login.aspx. Commenters who
cannot submit their views electronically
should contact the person identified in
emcdonald on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with NOTICES
SUMMARY:
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT
section as the source for case-related
information for advice on alternatives to
electronic filing.
VerDate Mar<15>2010
16:34 Mar 01, 2011
Jkt 223001
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Stephen L. Sharfman, General Counsel,
at 202–789–6820 (case-related
information) or DocketAdmins@prc.gov
(electronic filing assistance).
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Table of Contents
I. Introduction
II. Notice of Filing
III. Ordering Paragraphs
I. Introduction
On February 18, 2011, the Postal
Service filed a notice, pursuant to 39
CFR 3015.5, that it has entered into an
additional International Business Reply
Service (IBRS) Competitive contract.1
The instant contract is the successor of
the IBRS Competitive contract which is
the subject of Docket No. CP2010–22,
which is scheduled to expire on
February 28, 2011.2 Id. at 3. The Postal
Service requests that the instant contract
be included within the IBRS
Competitive Contract 3 product. Id. at
6.3
In Docket Nos. MC2011–21 and
CP2011–59, the Postal Service requested
that the Commission add IBRS
Competitive Contract 3 to the
competitive product list, and that the
contract filed in Docket No. CP2011–59
serve as the baseline contract for future
functional equivalence analyses of the
IBRS Competitive Contract 3 product.4
Docket Nos. MC2011–21 and CP2011–
59 remain pending before the
Commission.5
In support of its Notice, the Postal
Service filed the following attachments:
• Attachment 1—a redacted copy of
the contract;
• Attachment 2—a redacted copy of
the certified statement required by 39
CFR 3015.5(c)(2);
• Attachment 3—Governors’ Decision
No. 08–24, which establishes prices and
1 Notice of the United States Postal Service Filing
of a Functionally Equivalent International Business
Reply Service Competitive Contract 3 Negotiated
Service Agreement, February 18, 2011 (Notice).
2 The Commission finds that an extension of the
current contract is necessary to permit sufficient
time for regulatory review of the instant contract.
By this Order, the Commission extends the current
agreement until March 31, 2011.
3 The Postal Service will notify the mailer of the
effective date within 30 days of receiving all
necessary regulatory approvals. The contract will
remain in effect for 1 year unless terminated earlier
by either party. Id. Attachment 1 at 4.
4 See Docket Nos. MC2011–21 and CP2011–59,
Request of the United States Postal Service to Add
International Business Reply Service Competitive
Contract 3 to the Competitive Products List and
Notice of Filing of Contract (Under Seal), February
11, 2011.
5 The Postal Service Notice assumes the existence
of the IBRS Competitive Contract 3 product. The
Commission will review the instant contract in light
of its final order in Docket Nos. MC2011–21 and
CP2011–59.
PO 00000
Frm 00109
Fmt 4703
Sfmt 4703
classifications for the IBRS Contracts
product, and includes Mail
Classification Schedule language for
IBRS contracts, formulas for pricing
along with an analysis, certification of
the Governors vote, and certification of
compliance with 39 U.S.C. 3633(a); and
• Attachment 4—an application for
non-public treatment of materials to
maintain the redacted portions of the
contract, customer identifying
information and related financial
information under seal.
Functional equivalence. The Postal
Service asserts that the instant contract
is functionally equivalent to the IBRS
contracts previously filed. Notice at 4. It
also asserts that the ‘‘functional terms’’
of the instant contract and the
‘‘functional terms’’ of the proposed
baseline IBRS 3 Competitive Contract
‘‘are the same, although other terms that
do not directly change the nature of the
agreements’ basic obligations may vary.’’
Id. To that end, the Postal Service
indicates that prices under IBRS
contracts may differ based on volume or
postage commitments and when the
agreement is signed. It identifies certain
customer-specific information that
distinguishes the instant contract from
the proposed baseline agreement. Id. at
5.
The Postal Service concludes that the
instant contract complies with 39 U.S.C.
3633 and is functionally equivalent to
the proposed IBRS Competitive Contract
3 baseline agreement in Docket Nos.
MC2011–21 and CP2011–59. Id. at 6. It
submits that the instant contract ‘‘should
be added to the proposed IBRS 3
product grouping.’’ Id. at 4.
II. Notice of Filing
The Commission establishes Docket
No. CP2011–61 for consideration of
matters raised by the Postal Service’s
Notice.
The Commission appoints William C.
Miller to serve as Public Representative
in this docket.
Comments. Interested persons may
submit comments on whether the Postal
Service’s filings in the captioned docket
are consistent with the policies of 39
U.S.C. 3632, 3633 or 39 CFR part 3015.
Comments are due no later than March
3, 2011. The public portions of this
filing can be accessed via the
Commission’s Web site (https://
www.prc.gov).
III. Ordering Paragraphs
It is ordered:
1. The Commission establishes Docket
No. CP2011–61 for consideration of the
matters raised in this docket.
2. Pursuant to 39 U.S.C. 505, William
C. Miller is appointed to serve as officer
E:\FR\FM\02MRN1.SGM
02MRN1
Agencies
[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 41 (Wednesday, March 2, 2011)]
[Notices]
[Pages 11529-11532]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2011-4682]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION
[NRC-2011-0047; IA-10-010]
Gregory Desobry, Ph.D.; Order Requiring Notification of
Involvement in NRC-Licensed Activities
I
Mr. Gregory Desobry previously performed duties as a medical
physicist at the Philadelphia Veterans Affairs Medical Center in
Philadelphia, Pennsylvania (PVAMC). The Department of Veterans Affairs
(VA) holds a Master Materials License (MML) Number 03-23853-01VA issued
by the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC or Commission) pursuant
to Title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations (10 CFR) part 30. The
PVAMC is a medical broad scope permittee which was authorized by the
MML to use a variety of byproduct materials for diagnostic and
therapeutic purposes. The therapeutic treatments included brachytherapy
iodine-125 used for permanent prostate implants. Mr. Desobry's role
included assuring the safe use of radioactive materials for patients,
including performance of a post-treatment determination of the actual
radiation treatment administered to the patient in order that the
actual treatment parameters could be verified with the intended
treatment identified in the written directive. Mr. Desobry was involved
with the vast majority of the permanent prostate implants under the
permit.
II
On May 16, 2008, the NRC received information that on May 5, 2008,
a potential medical event (as defined in 10 CFR 35.3045) occurred at
the PVAMC; this event report was followed by numerous others. By
October 2009, the VA had reported to the NRC that 97 medical events
involving prostate brachytherapy occurred at the PVAMC from February
2002 through June 2008. In addition, during the period from December
2006 through November 2007, post-treatment dose verification was not
performed for at least 16 patients due to computer system interface
problems. Even after the computer interface problems were resolved,
post-treatment plans were not completed for seven patients until
December 2007.
In response to the reported medical events, the VA National Health
Physics Program (NHPP) conducted onsite inspections at the PVAMC on May
28 through 29, 2008, and from June 24 through 25, 2008, and issued an
inspection report with violations of NRC requirements, dated October
16, 2008. The NHPP concluded that, for medical events occurring between
February 25, 2002, and May 5, 2008, Mr. Desobry was aware of the D90
doses (the minimum dose received by 90 percent of the prostate volume)
and, in some cases, of the seeds being implanted outside the prostate.
However, Mr. Desobry did not report these circumstances to the RSO to
evaluate as possible medical events. The NRC considered this a missed
opportunity to correct the issue, allowing further medical events to
occur. The NHPP also concluded that Mr. Desobry had adequate clinical
and technical knowledge of the patient circumstances surrounding the
medical events. Finally, the NHPP concluded that the lack of
evaluations by Mr. Desobry and his failure to raise this issue to
higher-level management was contrary to patient safety and demonstrated
a lack of a safety conscious work environment.
The NRC also responded to the medical events being reported by
conducting onsite inspections at the PVAMC on various dates from July
23, 2008, to October 16, 2009. The results of the NRC inspections were
documented in NRC Special Inspection Report No. 030-34325/2008-
029(DNMS), dated March 30, 2009, and NRC Reactive Inspection Report No.
030-34325/2009-001(DNMS), dated November 17, 2009. The NRC determined
that Mr. Desobry was the primary medical physicist at the PVAMC for
brachytherapy implants and participated in the majority of treatments
that subsequently resulted in reported medical events. Also, Mr.
Desobry was the primary medical physicist during the period when post
[[Page 11530]]
treatment dose verifications were not performed due to computer
interface problems. The NRC inspection reports documented eight
apparent violations of NRC requirements and noted that the VA's
internal Administrative Board of Investigation concluded that there was
a lack of a safety culture at the PVAMC where Mr. Desobry, among
others, accepted a substandard approach to brachytherapy treatments,
which resulted in poor implant techniques, a patient dose assessment
process that lacked rigor and formality, a failure to communicate
concerns with the implants, a misperception that safety checks were
performed by other team members, and an overall system that did not
demonstrate a commitment to safety.
The NRC discussed these violations with the VA in a Predecisional
Enforcement Conference conducted on December 17, 2009. In a letter
dated January 14, 2010, the VA accepted the violations, including the
root or basic causes identified by the VA and the NRC.
On March 17, 2010, the NRC issued a Notice of Violation with a
$227,500 proposed civil penalty to the VA. The Notice of Violation
included two Severity Level II violations and three Severity Level III
violations assessed a civil penalty; and one Severity Level II
violation and two Severity Level IV violations not assessed a civil
penalty. The VA provided the NRC with its response to the Notice of
Violation and proposed civil penalty, dated April 8, 2010, and
forwarded payment of the civil penalty provided in a follow-up letter,
dated April 13, 2010.
During interviews conducted by the NRC's Office of Investigations
(OI), Mr. Desobry acknowledged being involved in over 90 percent of the
brachytherapy procedures conducted at the PVAMC. Mr. Desobry also
informed the NRC OI that he had never received training as to what
constituted a medical event and was unaware of the reporting
requirements of a medical event.
Notwithstanding Mr. Desobry's training as a Medical Physicist, with
board certification by the American Board of Radiology in 1989 and
subsequent practice in the field of Medical Physics, Mr. Desobry's
actions at the PVAMC, as they contributed to these medical events,
called into question whether Mr. Desobry would work to assure that
radioactive materials are used safely for patients, adequately
understands the applicable NRC regulations, and would perform future
activities in accordance with applicable NRC requirements and the
Atomic Energy Act.
Therefore, on May 24, 2010, the NRC issued a Demand for Information
(DFI) to Mr. Desobry. This DFI required Mr. Desobry to provide
information about actions he had taken, or planned to take, to ensure
that Mr. Desobry fully understood: (1) The 10 CFR part 35 definition of
a medical event; and (2) his role and responsibilities pertaining to
his duties as a medical physicist and the steps necessary to identify
and report medical events to the NRC. The NRC further required
information about the names and locations of the facilities where Mr.
Desobry worked as a medical physicist. Finally, the NRC required
information about any other additional actions not already mentioned
that would provide the NRC with reasonable assurance about Mr.
Desobry's involvement in NRC-licensed activities.
Mr. Desobry responded to the DFI on June 28, 2010. His reply
indicated that he was not currently employed as a medical physicist,
but had been employed at the Capital Health System--Mercer Campus, in
Trenton, New Jersey, from January 2008 until December 2009; Capital
Health System was affiliated with the University of Pennsylvania Health
System during that time frame. Mr. Desobry indicated that while at
Capital Health System under the supervision of the Head of the
Department of Radiation Oncology, he worked with the Radiation Safety
Officer and with radiation oncology physicians to examine that
institution's definition of a medical event, which Mr. Desobry
indicated reinforced his understanding (and corrected any prior
misunderstanding) of the 10 CFR part 35 definition of a medical event;
his role and responsibility regarding medical events; and the steps
needed to be taken to identify and report medical events to the NRC.
Mr. Desobry indicated that he was dedicated to regulatory compliance
and patient safety and stated that, in the event that he should ever be
hired to work again as a medical physicist, he would request training
in this area at an appropriate and accredited institution.
III
Based on Mr. Desobry's response to the May 24, 2010, DFI, the NRC
recognizes that Mr. Desobry has taken steps to improve his
understanding of how to safely use radioactive material in treatment of
patients. Mr. Desobry worked with the Radiation Safety Officer and with
radiation oncology physicians at the Capital Health System facility to
correct and reinforce Mr. Desobry's understanding of the 10 CFR part 35
definition of a medical event, his role and responsibility regarding
medical events, and the steps needed to be taken to identify and report
medical events to the NRC. However, since Mr. Desobry was involved in a
large number of reported medical events at PVAMC, the NRC has concluded
that it needs the opportunity to inspect Mr. Desobry's involvement in
future similar NRC-licensed activities to assess the efficacy of Mr.
Desobry's actions to improve his understanding of the 10 CFR part 35
definition of a medical event, his role and responsibility regarding
medical events, and the steps needed to be taken to identify and report
medical events to the NRC, in the event that he accepts a position as a
medical physicist in the future. This action will provide NRC the
opportunity to confirm that reasonable assurance exists 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.
Therefore, the public health, safety and interest require that Mr.
Desobry notify the NRC within 20 days of accepting a position as a
medical physicist.
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, and 10 CFR 150.20, it is hereby ordered
that:
1. If Mr. Desobry accepts, or has accepted since the time of his
response to the DFI, dated May 24, 2010, a medical physicist position
involving the use of byproduct materials in either NRC jurisdiction or
in an Agreement State, he shall inform the NRC within 20 days of
acceptance of an employment offer or within 20 days of this Order,
whichever comes later. This notification is a one-time requirement and
no further notification is required for any subsequent acceptance of an
employment offer. This notification shall be provided to the Director,
Office of Enforcement, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington,
DC 20555-0001, with a copy to the Regional Administrator, Region III,
2443 Warrenville Road, Lisle, IL 60532. The notification shall include
the name, address, and telephone number of the employer or the entity
where he is or will be employed as a medical physicist.
2. This Order shall be effective 20 days following its publication
in the Federal Register and shall remain in effect until the conditions
of Item 1 have been met.
The Director, OE, may, in writing, relax or rescind any of the
above conditions upon demonstration by Mr. Desobry of good cause.
[[Page 11531]]
V
In accordance with 10 CFR 2.202, Mr. Gregory Desobry must, and any
other person adversely affected by this Order may, submit an answer to
this Order within 20 days of its publication in the Federal Register.
Mr. Desobry's answer must be submitted under oath and affirmation. In
addition, Mr. Desobry 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 the Electronic Information Exchange (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://ehd1.nrc.gov/EHD, 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.
[[Page 11532]]
If a person other than Mr. Desobry, Ph.D., requests a hearing, that
person shall set forth with particularity the manner in which his/her
interest is adversely affected by this Order and shall address the
criteria set forth in 10 CFR 2.309(d).
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 this 23rd day of February 2011.
For the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission.
Roy P. Zimmerman,
Director, Office of Enforcement.
[FR Doc. 2011-4682 Filed 3-1-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7590-01-P