Re: Exemptions - further clarifications

[Lynn McGuire <elmcguire@LIFE.UAMS.EDU>]

Let's see if we can get a consensus on at least one focused issue:
Disposal & transfer for purposes of disposal - exempt sources.  By
exempt sources or materials, assume this to mean a 0.1 uCi Cs-137
check source NOT otherwise covered by 30.15 (a) (9) [rad survey
instruments sources]. According to HPPOS-190, you cannot dispose of
these by just chunking them in the trash.  Agree? [I know Wes  Dunn
does not - but this looks like an official NRC interpretation to me]
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Date:          Tue, 29 Oct 1996 11:23:19 -0600 From:         
Catherine Mattsen <CRM@nrc.gov> Subject:       Exemptions - further
clarifications To:            Multiple recipients of list
<radsafe@romulus.ehs.uiuc.edu> Reply-to:     
radsafe@romulus.ehs.uiuc.edu

Much of what has been said in the most recent postings concerning exemptions are
corrrect; however, one can not generalize too much because there are a number of
differences amongst the various exemptions. 

 Most of the byproduct material exemptions, but specifically not 30.18 (exempt
quantities), contain an exemption from Part 20.  Thus licensees can treat the
specific products covered by such an exemption as non-radioactive.  None of the
source material exemptions specifically contain an exemption from Part 20 so these
materials should be controlled under Part 20 (in the case of a licensee).  However,
there is not anything explicit to prevent licensees from transferring source material
to exempt persons as a way of getting rid of it.  

Generally, exemption provisions assume that it is not possible to enforce
restrictions on non-licensees.  Thus, disposal in municipal waste or sometimes
recycling is assumed.  In the case of specific product exemptions one can estimate
the number likely to be in one place under normal circumstances and take this into
account in the regulatory decision to exempt.   

Exempt quantities is different because the use is not specific and there is no
incorporation into a device.  Since one cannot prevent unlicensed persons from
obtaining many exempt sources, the information provided to the recipient that the
quantities should not be combined  is intended to discourage use in combination
which would increase the likely exposures.  The requirement for a license to
distribute in this case is tied to commercial distribution rather than initial
distribution.  In the case of product exemptions, the intent is not to license
secondary distributors such as mass merchants.  For exempt quantities, there is
more of a need to reduce the number likely to accumulate in one place not under
license so even secondary commercial distributors are required to be licensed. 
However, non-commercial transfers between licensees is not controlled by a
distribution license.  This is to allow such things as transfers of samples between
labs. 

Ten separately packaged exempt sources can be tranferred in one shipment.

Although decay in storage is allowed, specific criteria are not contained in the
regulations.  Exempt concentrations and exempt quantities do not apply to this
situation.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------


Lynn McGuire - ELMCGUIRE@LIFE.UAMS.EDU
Veterans Health Administration (VHA) 
Little Rock AR 
DISCLAIMER: Not speaking in any official capacity of VHA