DOE vs. DOT contamination limits

["David Levy"<david.levy@fernald.gov>]

     People,
     
     I thought I had this issue licked, but people on my site don't seem to 
     want to let it die.  Perhaps a review of the list's collective 
     experience would be of use here...
     
     I am a radiological engineer at the former uranium processing plant in 
     Fernald, Ohio (DOE owned, subcontractor operated).  We are in a total 
     state of remediation right now and for the first time in ages, we are 
     prepared to ship waste out of our site via lidded gondola railcars.
     
     Eventually, the isotope of concern in our waste will be regarded as 
     Th-230, the free-release limits for which are 20 dpm/100cm2.  We had 
     decided long ago that to survey railcars to this restrictive limit 
     could take too long and looked to Department of Transportation 
     regulations for help.
     
     As it turns out, since we are shipping LSA-1 material via exclusive 
     use conveyances, the DOT sets less-restrictive surface contamination 
     limits on conveyances traveling across the country than the DOE will 
     allow their workers to handle without protective clothing.  This 
     brings us to a situation where we (DOE/subcontractors) assemble a 
     loaded train on site, wearing protective clothing, and hand it off to 
     a qualified railcar movement subcontractor (CSX or Union Pacific, for 
     example), who doesn't wear protective clothing.  It sounds two-faced, 
     but it is within the bounds of the law.  
     
     The new 10 CFR 835 (DOE) distinguishes between "radioactive material 
     transportation" and "release" and, for a while, we managed to convince 
     our site DOE representatives that we could control the loading and 
     storage of these railcars on site, following DOE-regulated measures of 
     radiological control, but hand these cars over to CSX Transportation 
     (for example) as part of radioactive material transportation.  The 
     DOE/subcontractor personnel would wear protective clothing, but the 
     CSXT folks would not.
     
     I agree that the perception of this situation is lousy and it sounds 
     silly, and yet, per DOE and DOT regulations, it's totally legal.
     
     I ramble on regarding this issue by way of introduction to my 
     question:  has anyone out there found themselves in a similar 
     predicament and what have you done about it?
     
     If I have left out certain details which you need to evaluate my 
     situation, please don't hesitate to ask.
     
     Thank you.
     
     David Levy
     Fernald, OH
     david.levy@fernald.gov
     (513) 648-3816

************************************************************************
The RADSAFE Frequently Asked Questions list, archives and subscription
information can be accessed at http://www.ehs.uiuc.edu/~rad/radsafe.html