Re: Internal Licensing

[michael_coogen@ccgw1.hq.dla.mil]

     In the good old days when I work at Bethesda Naval Medical Research 
     center we had the following:  Name of isotope, PI name, protocol and 
     specified possession limits for each investigator for each isotope.  
     There were restriction on acquisition of istopes or adding new 
     isotopes.  All acquisition of isotopes by investigator had to be 
     coordinated with the Health Physicist (RSO) to ensure that his/her 
     possession limits were not exceeded and that protocols were 
     established for the use of each isotope.  In addition, the PI had to 
     account for transfer of radioactive material to and out of the 
     institution in support of his/her research protocols...Hope this is of 
     assistance...mike coogen


______________________________ Reply Separator _________________________________
Subject: Internal Licensing
Author:  radsafe@romulus.ehs.uiuc.edu at ~GW1
Date:    2/9/96 7:40 AM


Good morning!  We are considering alternatives to our current method of inter- 
nally licensing University principal investigators to use radioisotopes.
Under our current program, we accept an application for Authorization from a 
principal investigator who specifies: what isotopes he/she wants to be autho- 
rized for, what maximum possession limit for each isotope, what physical form 
and the experimental methodology, among other things.  After the PI is inter- 
viewed by a health physicist, the HP issues a recommendation to the Radiation 
Safety Committee members who review the application and then approve or 
disapprove it.  After the Committee has acted, an Authorization Number is 
issued for each specific isotope.  This Authorization is then good for as long 
as the researcher remains at the University or until we are notified that he/ 
she no longer wishes to use that Authorization.  Theoretically, the Authorized 
User is expected to let us know when the nature of work with any given isotope 
changes, e.g., the experimental methodology changes significantly.  Authorized 
Users may, of course, submit applications for new isotopes or for changes in 
possession limits.
     
I'm interested in hearing about alternatives to this approach.  For instance, 
do you put time limits on your authorizations and require periodic renewal? 
Do you have alternatives to establishing specific possession limits for each 
user for each isotope?  For instance, I can imagine that one could set up a 
system in which PIs apply to be a Type A or Type B lab, under which a Type A 
lab might be generally authorized for a limited spectrum of isotopes with 
some upper limit (10 mCi, as an example) for each of those isotopes.
     
On a related subject, have any of you established a classification system for 
your labs, based on type of isotope, amounts used, frequency of use?  I can 
imagine that such a system might be used to determine how often labs are 
surveyed and audited, how authorizations are issued, and for other purposes.
     
This may be of general interest and I'd like to generate some discussion of 
the possible approaches.  But please feel free to respond directly to me.
     
Thanks in advance for allowing me to benefit from your experiences!
     
Sue Dupre/Health Physicist/Princeton University 
e-mail:  dupre@princeton.edu
phone:  609/258-6252