Re: Exempt vs. Non-licensed ?

[Doug Turner <turners@earthlink.net>]

Jay,
I don't believe #3 is quite complete.  As a broad scope radioactive
materials license you can transfer exempt quantities for instance in an oil
sample to an unlicensed lab for analysis, but you are required to have a
specific license to manufacture exempt sources for distribution.  If you
have a licensed source and it decays to an exempt quantity it was not
manufacturered as an exempt source         ( perhaps exempt sources are
manufactured with a more durable holder or insoluble chemical forms?).  Most
universities have a radioactive materials license and are glad to accept
small radioactive sources (providing they aren't leaking), so the question
becomes academic.  You can still get your pants sued off so discretion as to
who you transfer to needs to ( not the local children's nursery)  be ran
past your legal beagles who will want a ninety page waiver of liability that
will cost more than the source and disposal.

We also haven't covered the issue of transport to exempt sources.  I believe
there is an HP position paper discussing an NRC inspector getting on an
airplane with a briefcase containing exempt manufactured check sources, and
the guidance was that a statement stating that radioactive material in
exempt quantities and the lowest applicable DOT category be enclosed inside
the briefcase.  I also have a state inspector's statement that "exempt"
means exempt from DOT reg's also. I have no idea what EPA's position on all
this is.

When it is all ironed out it would be interesting to get all the regulators
to sign a summary of agreement so we can quit wasting megabucks on
relatively harmless issues and apply the savings to benefit society.

Good Luck,

Doug Turner <turners@earthlink.net>  

   At 08:31 AM 10/29/96 -0600, you wrote:
>     
>     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
>     
>     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.
>     
>     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. 
>     
>     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).
>     
>     Thanks in advance for your thoughts
>     
>     
>     Jay Tarzia, CHP
>     tarzijp@naesco.com
>
>
>