Re: saftey of being in the proximity of someone on RAI therapy

[daleboyce@charter.net]

Are Weidis and Jose out there?



It would be interesting to get a lawyers opinion on this topic. Under what

laws would the "suits" come after a patient? Yes, the NRC position (at least

in the past) was that licensee's cannot treat material contaminated with

excreta as exempt from disposal and labeling. However, since the patient is

not a licensee they are specifically exempted from the disposal

requirements. I suspect that if you went after a patient, a sharp lawyer

would line their pockets on violation of right to privacy. The regulatory

authorities have no basis to go after the patient, and the disposal site

operator doesn't make a sympathetic plaintiff in a civil case, but the

patient certainly does in a counter suit. Instruction from the administering

institution is in no way binding on the patient.



Once the hospital has met the release requirements to turn the patient

loose. The material is exempt.  No different than your smoke detector. In

fact if the patient walks AMA the hospital can't stop them, and it is still

exempt.



§ 20.1002 Scope.

The regulations in this part apply to persons licensed by the Commission to

receive, possess, use, transfer, or dispose of byproduct, source, or special

nuclear material or to operate a production or utilization facility under

Parts 30 through 36, 39, 40, 50, 60, 61, 63, 70, or 72 of this chapter, and

in accordance with 10 CFR 76.60 to persons required to obtain a certificate

of compliance or an approved compliance plan under part 76 of this chapter.

The limits in this part do not apply to doses due to background radiation,

to exposure of patients to radiation for the purpose of medical diagnosis or

therapy, to exposure from individuals administered radioactive material and

released under § 35.75, or to exposure from voluntary participation in

medical research programs.



Dale



[67 FR 20370, Apr. 24, 2002; 67 FR 62872, Oct. 9, 2002, as amended at 67 FR

77652, Dec. 19, 2002]