Re: posting requirements

["Kent N. Lambert" <lambert@auhs.edu>]

Two points are in order.

1.  There is no requirement to post restricted areas.  Just lock the 
door to prevent access to the radioactive material and the area is, 
by definition, a restricted area.

2.  The  CRAM posting is required for the presence of 10x Appendix C 
quantities.  So if I have a researcher using 5 mCi of P-33 (5x 
Appendix C) and I label the door, have I mislead workers and members 
of the public?  If a researcher conducts an experiment once a month 
should the room be posted during the experiment, and unposted after 
the waste is removed?  I don't believe (and I expect that no one out 
there believes) that we should waste our time posting and unposting 
facilities as the activity levels rise above and below the posting 
threshold. 

While I agree that using the radiation symbol for non radioactive 
work is "blatantly misleading" and should be discouraged, keep 
in mind that this could be considered an extension of accepted 
practices depending on one's perspective.

 On 30 Apr 98 at 9:42, Boyd H Rose wrote:

>      Misposting an area as a restricted area or non-radioactive
>      items as radioactive for the unrelated purpose of deterring
>      theft or vandalism is blatantly misleading and invites mistrust
>      and suspicion of one's safety program by both workers and
>      members of the public regardless of the regulator's position.
> 
>      Additionally, if any of us as safety professionals actually
>      knows of such a practice and does not challenge the practice,
>      we would be derelict in our professional responsibilities as
>      well as in violation of our professional ethics.
Kent N. Lambert, M.S., CHP
lambert@auhs.edu
Allegheny University of the Health Sciences
Hahnemann Division
Radiation Physics and Safety, MS 106
Broad and Vine Streets
Philadelphia, PA  19102-1192

215-762-8768 (voice)
215-762-7683 (fax)