Skip to Content, Navigation, or Footer.
Wednesday, April 1, 2026
The Daily Pennsylvanian

Agency fines Drexel for safety violations

As a result of 10 alleged safety violations, the Nuclear Regulatory Commission fined Drexel University $6,250 last week. Drexel has 30 days to appeal either part or all of the fine. It also has 30 days to admit or deny the violations, describe actions or plans designed to prevent recurrence and give the date when it expects to be in full compliance with NRC requirements. Drexel is currently deliberating whether to appeal the fine, said Drexel spokesperson Philip Turanova. According to Diane Screnci, spokesperson for the NRC's Region I Office in King of Prussia, the violations "collectively demonstrate a breakdown of licensed activities at the facility." The alleged infractions include failure of the university's radiation safety officer to periodically review the terms of the facility's license, failure of the radiation safety staff to adequately evaluate the type and amount of radioactive materials at the university, and failure to perform leak tests of sealed sources. NRC staff discovered the alleged violations during inspections of Drexel's facilities on July 22, July 27 and August 1 of this year. In a letter to Drexel, Thomas Martin, regional administrator for NRC Region I, said "These violations are particularly disturbing since a total of 12 violations were identified during the last routine NRC inspection in 1991." "However, adequate corrective actions were not taken to correct the violations and prevent recurrence, as evidenced by the fact that five of the violations identified during the recent inspection were repetitive of the violations identified in 1991," he wrote. According to Screnci, the repeat nature of five of the violations and the fact that the NRC, not Drexel, discovered them, caused the government agency to raise the fine by 150 percent. The normal penalty for such infractions is $2,500. Drexel was not fined for the 1991 violations. "Each of those violations would not have warranted a fine," Screnci said. "However, all 10 indicate a breakdown of control."