Re: Exempt vs. Non-licensed ?

["Wesley M. Dunn" <WDUNN@brc1.tdh.state.tx.us>]

Jay, 

Generally correct.  My few comments are included below:

> Date sent:      Tue, 29 Oct 96 08:30:39 -0600
> Send reply to:  radsafe@romulus.ehs.uiuc.edu
> From:           "James P. Tarzia" <tarzijp@naesco.com>
> To:             Multiple recipients of list <radsafe@romulus.ehs.uiuc.edu>
> Subject:        Exempt vs. Non-licensed ?

>      
>      I for one appreciate people taking the time to donate their 
>      professional (and even non-professional) opinions on this exempt Vs. 
>      non-exempt topic.  I have received various conflicting answers from 
>      both regulators and licensees over the years regarding several 
>      questions pertaining to this issue. 
>      
>      So lets see if I have it down...From the majority of the past opinions 
>      it appears that the following statements are (or at least may be) 
>      correct:
>      
>      1. You can throw away smoke detectors as long as its in small 
>      quantities.
>      
>      2. Its not a good idea to combine large quantities of any exempt 
>      device.
>      
>      3. A licensee may transfer unlimited numbers of single exempt 
>      quantities to unlicensed persons as long as its not for disposal or 
>      commercial distribution

This apparently differs depending on jurisdiction (see below).  
However, (1) assuming exempt transfers are not prohibited by rule; 
(2) the sources are transferred separately; and (3) the sources are 
not combined, this is true.

>      
>      4. Once a license is issued, the terms of that license and Part 20 
>      govern with respect to waste disposal for exempt and non-exempt 
>      sources.

Nope.  Exempt is exempt is exempt.  The source is not received under 
the license, it is not disposed of under the license.

>      
>      5. Exempt quantity and concentration limits cannot be used to release 
>      contaminated material or someone with internal or external 
>      contamination (this seems obvious). 
>      
>      6. You need a license to distribute exempt sources for commercial 
>      distribution (and commercial distribution does not mean money has to 
>      change hands, but only that the source is introduced into the 
>      marketplace)
>      
>        
>      Now, lets bring this one step further... 
>      
>      Many licensees have specific requirements for inventory, storage, etc. 
>      regarding non-exempt sources that they receive under their license.  I 
>      have been told by regulators that once you receive a source under a 
>      license that all of the license requirements apply until the source is 
>      transferred or disposed.  Therefore, if a licensee received a 
>      non-exempt source that eventually decayed to less than its exempt 
>      quantity, the licensee would still have to inventory or control the 
>      source as his license dictates. 

This is correct.

>      
>      Does anyone have a conflicting opinion on this.. especially NRC or 
>      agreement state regulators?.. Furthermore, if a non-exempt source 
>      (originally received under your license) decays to an activity less 
>      than its exempt quantity limit, is it O.K. for you to transfer it to 
>      an unlicensed person.  (I would think at a minimum you better maintain 
>      paperwork to show that it decayed below the appropriate level before 
>      you transferred it).

This is not necessarily true in Texas (our regulations are slightly 
different than the NRC's).  I am attempting to resolve this issue "in 
the near future" (e.g., weeks to months).

>      
>      Thanks in advance for your thoughts
>      
>      
>      Jay Tarzia, CHP
>      tarzijp@naesco.com
> 
> 
*********************************************************************
Wesley M. Dunn, CHP                        512-834-6688
Deputy Director, Licensing                 512-834-6690 (fax)
(Texas) Bureau of Radiation Control        wdunn@brc1.tdh.state.tx.us
*********************************************************************