Re: H-3 Shipping Question

[LIPTONW@detroitedison.com]

I don't understand how the researcher could use 5 mCi of H-3 at a location 
with no monitoring.  I assume that, after the experiment is finished, the site 
will be returned to unrestricted use, so this goes beyond the question of 
shipping the material back. One question you need to answer is whether your 
license covers work at the remote site.  Often, licenses restrict licensed 
activities to specific locations.  If the license is valid, there, I'm sure 
there are monitoring requirements which would require that appropriate 
instrumentation be available.  If you can't survey the package at the remote 
site, you probably shouldn't be allowing the work there in the first place.  
This is more than "a minor wrinkle in the regs." 
 
The opinions expressed are strictly mine. 
Here's to a risk free world, and other fantasies. 
 
Bill Lipton 
liptonw@detroitedison.com

---

• To: Multiple,recipients,of,list,radsafe@romulus.ehs.uiuc.edu
• Subject: H-3 Shipping Question
• From: "radsafe@romulus.ehs.uiuc.edu" <radsafe@romulus.ehs.uiuc.edu>
• Date: 10 Jul 97 17:57:46
• Reply-to: radsafe@romulus.ehs.uiuc.edu

     I have a question regarding shipping small quantities of 3H.  A 
     researcher wants to ship about 5 mCi of tritium (limited quantity 
     limit for liquids is over 100 mCi) to a remote research site, conduct 
     some experiments, then return all the material to the lab for 
     analysis.  All the shipping would be done by the researcher, and 
     carried in his/her official vehicle.
     
     Does anyone have suggestions on how to perform the required survey of 
     the package (49 CFR 173.421(3)/173.443) for the return shipment?  
     We're dealing with small research budgets, so buying a portable 
     tritium monitor for $$$thousands of dollars just to survey the package 
     is not an option.
     
     One consideration is to perform the package survey at the site, load 
     it into the vehicle and return to the lab to count the wipes.  This 
     requires a variance from DOT.  Has anyone done this before?
     
     Any suggestions on how to approach this problem would be welcome.  
     What I want to avoid is having good research obstructed or canceled 
     because we can't work out a minor wrinkle in the regs.
     
     Thanks for the input,
     Dan Harlan
     Radiation Specialist
     Oregon State University
     
     harland@ccmail.orst.edu
     

---