Previous by Date: Subject: Re: Uranyl Acetate Date: Tue, 13 Apr 2010 16:33:43 -0700 Author: Mark Cameron
Next by Date: Subject: Re: Hand sanitizer Date: Tue, 13 Apr 2010 16:41:00 -0400 Author: Andrew Gross
Demystify:
Date: Tue, 13 Apr 2010 19:58:22 -0400
Reply-To: droberts**At_Symbol_Here**depauw.edu
Sender: DCHAS-L Discussion List <DCHAS-L**At_Symbol_Here**LIST.UVM.EDU>
From: David Roberts <droberts**At_Symbol_Here**DEPAUW.EDU>
Organization: DePauw University
Subject: Re: Uranyl Acetate
Comments: cc: John Longo , droberts**At_Symbol_Here**gapps.depauw.edu
In-Reply-To: <1925224434.2374081271194644184.JavaMail.root**At_Symbol_Here**ram.sju.edu>
I believe that uranyl acetate, just like thorium nitrate, is
unregulated radioactive material as it isn't enriched. However, it
becomes a disposal nightmare as EPA sites won't take it due to it's
radioactivity (it's actually pretty high, try it sometime). Therefore,
it must be disposed of as radioactive waste. You can accumulate it on
site no worries, but I would manage it as radioactive waste and keep it
in the stream just to be safe (and true).
Dave
On 4/13/2010 5:37 PM, John Longo wrote:
Hi
All,
Is uranyl acetate from EMS (cat# 22400) low level radioactive
material? Does a facility need to have it on its radiation licence if
it uses less than 100 gram quantities?
The content of this page reflects the personal opinion(s) of the author(s) only, not the American Chemical Society, ILPI, Safety Emporium, or any other party. Use of any information on this page is at the reader's own risk. Unauthorized reproduction of these materials is prohibited. Send questions/comments about the archive to secretary**At_Symbol_Here**dchas.org. The maintenance and hosting of the DCHAS-L archive is provided through the generous support of Safety Emporium.
