Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Report: Nearly 150 plant workers tested positive for drugs (at nuclear power plants)
Times Leader (Wilkes-Barre, PA) ^ | 11/14/2003

Posted on 11/14/2003 4:37:03 AM PST by Born Conservative







Posted on Fri, Nov. 14, 2003


Report: Nearly 150 plant workers tested positive for drugs


Associated Press

Nearly 150 workers and short-term contractors at two power plants tested positive for drugs and alcohol between July 1999 and December 2002, according to a published report.

The majority of the 143 workers with positive drug tests at both Three Mile Island and the Peach Bottom Atomic Power Station were short-term contractors, the York Daily Record reported Friday, citing Fitness-for-Duty reports from the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission.

The workers who tested positive showed traces in their systems of drugs including cocaine, marijuana and amphetamines, according to the newspaper.

But the reports may not reflect all workers who tested positive for drugs or alcohol during that period. The NRC lacks a no-tolerance policy regarding drug screening, instead utilizing cutoff levels in determining which workers are abusing drugs and alcohol.

The commission uses a 0.04 blood-alcohol ratio as an alcohol limit and a 100 ng/mL level for marijuana, about equal to smoking one joint in a week, the Daily Record said.

"You might have a small amount of alcohol in your body, but based on evidence, it will not impair your ability to do the job effectively," Neil Sheehan, commission spokesman, told the newspaper.

Under NRC policy, each power plant follows its own fitness-for-duty-program. The plants report to the commission twice a year the number of workers who tested positive for legal or illegal substances.

Information from: York Daily Record





TOPICS: Breaking News; Culture/Society; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: nuclearplants
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-52 next last

1 posted on 11/14/2003 4:37:04 AM PST by Born Conservative
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Born Conservative
Wonder what test they used?
2 posted on 11/14/2003 4:43:01 AM PST by dakine
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Born Conservative
Would that mean then, that many people can use drugs...and still perform normally at their jobs?
3 posted on 11/14/2003 4:46:31 AM PST by stuartcr
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Born Conservative
Homer was found with massive blood levels of illicit donut dough.
4 posted on 11/14/2003 4:49:19 AM PST by friendly (Man is so made that whenever anything fires his soul, impossibilities vanish.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: friendly

5 posted on 11/14/2003 4:51:36 AM PST by OXENinFLA (A good solution applied with vigor now is better than a perfect solution applied ten minutes later.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Born Conservative
Boot 'em. This is too serious an area to be breaking the rules (and the law).
6 posted on 11/14/2003 4:52:47 AM PST by ClintonBeGone
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ClintonBeGone
Suppose a person consumed two glasses of wine with supper. What level percentage of alcohol would be present in the blood 8 hours later?
7 posted on 11/14/2003 4:57:50 AM PST by snopercod (Lawyer: One skilled in the circumvention of the law - Ambrose Bierce)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: dakine
"Wonder what test they used?"

Probably GC-MS (gas-chromatography coupled to a mass spectrometer). Wet-chemical tests can be used for coarse screening, but any positives that show up are typically re-tested by GC-MS to eliminate "false positives".

8 posted on 11/14/2003 4:58:27 AM PST by Wonder Warthog (The Hog of Steel)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

Comment #9 Removed by Moderator

To: Born Conservative
As a former nuclear power plant worker, I want everybody here to understand that these tests are used for punishment.

If the boss doesn't like you, you will have to pee in a bottle or have your blood drawn every week. Word will get around that you are a "suspected drug user" and the management is watching you.

If you are a good little syncophant, you will only have to take the test once a year or so.

10 posted on 11/14/2003 5:01:22 AM PST by snopercod (Lawyer: One skilled in the circumvention of the law - Ambrose Bierce)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: OXENinFLA
DOH!
11 posted on 11/14/2003 5:02:10 AM PST by friendly (Man is so made that whenever anything fires his soul, impossibilities vanish.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Wonder Warthog
Thanks, I've searching for good oral-tests that are better then the 85% accuracy now available, the need for immediate test results is huge in industry now a days....
12 posted on 11/14/2003 5:02:16 AM PST by dakine
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: seamole
So then one would have to be drinking (or using cough syrup) on the job to produce a .04 level?
13 posted on 11/14/2003 5:03:38 AM PST by snopercod (Lawyer: One skilled in the circumvention of the law - Ambrose Bierce)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: snopercod
or had a whole bottle of whiskey for dinner.
14 posted on 11/14/2003 5:04:55 AM PST by glock rocks (just keep yer hands where I can see them.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: snopercod
NONE
15 posted on 11/14/2003 5:09:21 AM PST by Vaduz
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Vaduz; glock rocks
From Fast Eddie's 8/10 Method of Hand Calculating Blood Alcohol Concentration

Widmark Formula

Widmark called the hourly decrease in BAC his Widmark ß (beta) Factor. It's widely agreed now that normal humans metabolize, or burn off, EtOH at a rate of 0.010% to 0.024% per hour, with an average ß factor of 0.017% per hour.

16 posted on 11/14/2003 5:23:04 AM PST by snopercod (Lawyer: One skilled in the circumvention of the law - Ambrose Bierce)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: snopercod
Suppose a person consumed two glasses of wine with supper. What level percentage of alcohol would be present in the blood 8 hours later?

I'm not an expert, but I would guess probably none. Why?

17 posted on 11/14/2003 5:26:47 AM PST by ClintonBeGone
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: stuartcr
Would that mean then, that many people can use drugs...and still perform normally at their jobs?

Performing normally is not the key issue, it's how they would perform under adverse circumstances,i.e., emergencies. 'Dooood! whazzt ringin' noise?', is not want to here when the reactor farts. Many people can drive drunk as long as they are not required to react precisely.

18 posted on 11/14/2003 5:29:27 AM PST by tbpiper
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: tbpiper
It seems though, that if the only way to tell if someone is using drugs is after the fact via a urine test, that there are/were a lot of people in both everyday, and emergency situations, that were using drugs. It would seem that the 'dood...' analogy isn't really valid.
19 posted on 11/14/2003 5:37:49 AM PST by stuartcr
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: ClintonBeGone
Let me interject and assume that snopercod may actually consume two glasses of wine with supper.
20 posted on 11/14/2003 6:13:06 AM PST by New Horizon
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-52 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson