Re: Shipping Limited Quantity of RAM

[Aquaman-Kerry Pate <patekp@musc.edu>]

Just a short clarification:

My response was simply based on an individual moving between 
households (per Tad's scenario) and not disposal :)

But, the refusal to accept at the annual hazmat cleanup
could be based on (I'm guessing here),
(a) small quantities of RAM in comparison to other wastes
(b) permits, disposal facilities, cost, refusal to accept by contractor
(c) just a big pain in the butt
(d) all of the above


You are right though, it is a huge catch 22 for the
gov't to "classify" a device with RAM as a consumer
commodity, and then later designate it as a hazardous
waste when it is discarded.  Could someone from
DOT, EPA, NRC  etc. out there give us an explanation?
I would be willing to be that (90% or better) of
individuals would just throw it in the trash and
don't even know there is RAM in the detector.

Kerry Pate
MUSC
Environmental Hazards Assess. Program
Charleston, SC


On Tue, 27 Feb 1996, Jeffery G. Derge wrote:

> At 03:00 PM 2/27/96 -0600, you wrote:
> >
> >Please correct me if I'm mistaken but...
> >Isn't a smoke detector classified as a "consumer commodity"
> >and therefore exemept from the labeling, markering etc.
> >requirements? 
> 
> You may well be right about the legalities of the labeling, etc, ... BUT
> 
> We have not been able to dispose of old smoke detectors for several years,
> presumably because of the rad waste mess.
> 
> I'm sure I could drop it in my household trash, and no one would be the
> wiser.  However, at the annual HAZMAT cleanup, they are specifically not
> accepted.
> 
> If your initial assumption is correct, why the Catch 22?
> 
> Jeffery G. Derge
> NCI-FCRDC, Frederick, MD
> Derge@dtpax2.ncifcrf.gov
> 
>