Virginia Regulatory Town Hall
Agency
Virginia Department of Health
 
Board
State Board of Health
 
chapter
Virginia Radiation Protection Regulations [12 VAC 5 ‑ 481]
Action Repeal and Replace Virginia's Radiation Protection Regulations
Stage NOIRA
Comment Period Ended on 1/14/2026
spacer
Previous Comment     Next Comment     Back to List of Comments
1/13/26  4:44 pm
Commenter: Michael Welling, University of Virginia

12VAC5-481 repeal
 
  1. Request that the Office of Radiological Health (ORH) abandon the repeal of 12VAC5-481 and adoption of 12VAC5-482.  The full repeal and creation of a new regulatory Chapter will cause undue burden to all licensees and registrants.  If a new Chapter is created, all Notice to Employee forms posted will need to be replaced as this form lists the current regulatory requirements in 12VAC5-481 and this form is required to be posted by 12VAC5-481-2260.  Also, all policies and procedures created by licensees and registrants would need to be updated to the new chapter and regulations.  The Office should revise 12VAC5-481, not repeal it.
  2. Request that the Office of Radiological Health provide the proposed regulations to the Radiation Advisory Board prior to releasing them to the public for review.  This Board is tasked by Virginia law to make recommendations and should be able to provide this prior to the proposed regulations being released to the public.  A meeting of the Advisory Board should be held after reviewing the proposed regulations to address any questions, concerns or proposed changes.
  3. Request that the Office of Radiological Health include a definition of non-medical X-ray devices so that they may be regulated separately from human use X-ray devices.  Currently there is only a definition of “analytical x-ray systems” while there are other types of X-ray systems that perform other functions.
  4. Request that the Office of Radiological Health include a new section in 12VAC5-481-340 Private Inspector Qualifications for non-medical X-ray systems.  The qualifications should be less stringent that the requirements for human use X-ray systems as these systems are typically closed/shielded or of such low kVp that there is no public health safety issues from these devices.
  5. Request that the Office of Radiological Health include a definition for “excreta : waste matter, such as sweat, urine or feces, discharged from the body” and “excretion : waste material eliminated from the body, including feces, urine and sweat”.  This will help to alleviate issues with the excreta exemption listed in 12VAC5-481-930 B.
  6. Request that the Office of Radiological Health include language in 12VAC5-481-971 Disposal of certain radioactive material, to state that radioactive excreta can be accepted at a disposal facility as they pose no public health and safety risk.
  1. Request that 12VAC5-481-1890 be revised to allow decay-in-storage for half-lives up to 271 days.  This regulatory requirement has an NRC compatibility of Health and Safey (H&S) which state:

    “Program elements identified by H&S in the Comment column are not required for purposes of           

     compatibility; however, they do have particular H&S significance. Although not required for

     compatibility, the State must adopt program elements in this category, that embody the basic H&S

     aspects of the NRC’s program elements because of particular H&S considerations.”  Other agreement

     states allow licensees to decay-in-storage beyond the 120 days listed in 12VAC5-481-1890.

  1. Request that revisions to 12VAC5-481 or a new 12VAC5-482 include language that clarifies that therapeutic medical devices with integrated on-board X-ray based imaging systems used only for non-diagnostic and non-therapeutic purposes such as patient positioning and treatment verification do not require additional qualifications beyond what is required to use the therapeutic system. (For instance, gamma stereotactic radiosurgery systems with integrated on-board x-ray systems do not require qualifications beyond which is required for the gamma stereotactic radiosurgery system in order to operate the x-ray system). This would otherwise cause an undue burden to licensees.
  2. Recommend that ORH inform all licensees and registrants when the proposed revisions are submitted to the Town Hall and post the information on the Laws and Regulations webpage.
  3. Recommend that ORH have a “town hall” meeting with licensees and registrants to discuss the regulations.  This can be a virtual meeting to lessen the impact/burden.
  4. Recommend that these regulation revisions have a public comment period of 90 days.  It will take a vast amount of time to review the entire regulation and formulate comments.
CommentID: 238914