Big Collection WWII Aircraft Instrument Panels and Instruments confiscated

[Huub Vink]

Before you take actions which can't be reversed. When I did a check of the instruments of my friend, only about 50% had dials painted with Radium. Of course the proper way to check is with a suitable dosimeter, but in most cases the Radium paint can be recognised because it is more brownish and looks more brittle than the chemical luminous paint.

One hazard I had forgotten to mention is the release of "Radon" gas because in the decay process Radium turn into Radon. Radon is known for its ability to cause Lung cancer.

For our fellow Europeans; Radiation safety legislation is more or less directed by Euratom for all its member states. However every country translates the directives to its own legislation. In all these countries the ALARA (As low as reasonably achievable) principle is applied. Therefore in all countries possession is forbidden without a proper justification. There is however a large difference in all countries what is regarded as "proper justification". One country accepts "collecting" as a proper justification and my country doesn't.
As this is most likely related to how much value a gouvernment gives to the past I personally don't think you will have a similar situation in the UK soon.

Regards,
Huub

[RolandF]

In case you are living in a country with substantial granite and gneiss formations you won´t have such problems. There´s so much "natural" radiation and Radon gas escape so there is no chance of coping with such problems. Apart from the evacuation of entire districts.

The Netherlands can afford such luxury like confiscating your collection. What makes me wonder is the obvious fact they did not contact or inform you to get an adequate solution.

Regards

Roland

[Pim-Pouw]

Originally Posted by Andy Saunders

It seems from Huub's useful post that insofar as the Netherlands are concerned this must be an open and shut case .

I wouldn't agree with this conclusion. The degree mentioned by Huub Vink : Radiation protection Decree (Besluit Stralingsbescherming) is there to protect employees. An employee works for an employer. An employer can be ofcourse a company but also a foundation with volunteers.

This degree in the case of Radium regulates the following:

- First it is no longer permitted to make new instruments with Radium.

- Second to store them you have to keep the radiation level for your employees within certain limits.

- Third maintenance. This will in our case means opening the radium contained instruments, special regulations are there for this case.

Back to an individual. He doesn't work for an employer so this degree doen's aplly to him and therefore he cannot ask for a permit. Think for example of asbetos. Companies have to comply with strict regulations about how to handle this stuff. An individual with a shed with an asbestos roof plates is not in any violation.

Now back to Liad van Praag. The police said to him : They told me that they will place it in concrete and dump it somewhere and that it can't pass the Dutch border anymore.

So probably he is being charged of transporting dangerous goods across the border. Although this is maybe true for his P51 panel , it isn't for the rest of his collection which he probaly obtained within the Europeen borders.

I am not happy for Liad van Praag. But I am happy that this case is going to apear in court. Once there is an verdict , we as collectors in the Netherlands will finally now what we are dealing with.

my 2 cents on this case,

Pim

[Luc Vervoort]

Hi,

Not being an expert on this subject and not a collector of such items...

Is it not possible to remove the radium(or wathever substance) from the instruments, so that they are (almost) radium-free and no longer to be considered as dangerous ?


Best regards

Luc

[Andy Saunders]

Pim

An interesting post!

So, it isn't straightforward after all. I suppose that shouldn't surprise any of us.

In the UK if one operated a business or undertaking (lets say self employed) then there is a legal duty placed upon that person under Section 3 of the Health & Safety at Work Act not to do anything that might affect the health, safety or welfare of persons not in ones employment. So, selling items that may contain radium and are likely to cause harm to a person not in ones employment (ie a customer or potential customer) would be an offence - and that is quite aside from anything laid down in the Ionising Radiations Regs. There is already a ban on such sales via e-bay and in placing any such material in the postal service.

Clearly, and quite apart from how businesses (including museums!) might have an affect on a third party, there could also be public health issues to neighbours, family, visitors, tradesmen etc who may be invited onto a property where there are radioactive substances kept by a collector/dealer.

It is all a minefield. A radioactive one!!

[Larry]

How many collectors of WW2 aircraft instruments have died of radiation poisoning in the last 65 years I wonder? None I'm sure!

There's more risk to the collector from being killed by an aircraft panel falling from the top shelf in his garage or God forbid if he cuts his finger on a nasty sharp bit of metal and dies of blood poisoning!

When I think of all the simple things I did as a lad that now are classed as dangerous by the Heath & Safety 'industry' it makes me sad for my children. People need to get a grip with reality and for the future make sure laws that are used to protect us from real nuclear threats are not used to make a criminal out of a collector. But then that's going to be very hard, as someone recently said you cannot legislate for 450 million Europeans without getting it wrong for someone most of the time.

[Andy Saunders]

Larry

For the avoidance of doubt.....I am entirely with you!

Just in case my previous post gave the impression I was toeing the 'elf n safety line. I was just trying to say how it is out there, and not how it ought to be!

[Huub Vink]

Originally Posted by Pim-Pouw

I wouldn't agree with this conclusion. The degree mentioned by Huub Vink : Radiation protection Decree (Besluit Stralingsbescherming) is there to protect employees.

Hi Pim, nice to meet you here as well, but I think you are wrong here. This Decree is much wider than just the employer- employee relation (In fact only chapter 7 covers occupational exposure.)

It contains the legal requirements for possession (het voor handen hebben) en working with and manufacturing (handelingen en vervaardigen), storage is seen as "working with" however storage in relation to transport isn't. The decree provides even the requirements the medical world must meet when they expose their patient to radiation.

The main reason behind this is that in the Netherlands radiation is not covered by the Enviromental Act (Wet Millieubeheer) and the Dangerous Goods Act (Wet Millieu gevaarlijke stoffen, see Article 3 from this Act). Therefore the Nuclear(energy) Act" (Kernenergiewet) and the Radiation protection Decree cover all aspects of radiation.

The base on which possession is illegal is Article 29 from the Nuclear Act, which refers to the substances defined in the Decree.

Originally Posted by Luc Vervoort

Is it not possible to remove the radium(or wathever substance) from the instruments, so that they are (almost) radium-free and no longer to be considered as dangerous ?

It is possible, however you this will be costly and can only be done by experts. And you should wonder whether the instrument still has its value as "original". I can't remember which organisation did was, but a historical organisation replaced all Radium painted dails in their aircrafts by photografic repoductions.

Regards,
Huub

[Pim-Pouw]

Hi Huub,

Started to read the Nuclear(energy) Act" (Kernenergiewet) , this mention a limit of 10e5 Becquerel for Radium. I found a document which puts a wristwatch at aprox a maximum of 0.2 uCu which would put it within the limit but an aircraft instrument will use a lot more radium.

Have you ever done measurements on aircraft instruments ?

I slightly disagree with your conclusions about "working with" is the same as storage and the same as possesion. If we take Mercury as an example. You are allowed possesion of this material, but if you store it in such a way that it will harm your surroundings , that is nature , people , animals etc you will be in violation of the enviromental act.


Please correct me if I am wrong.

Greetings, Pim

[Huub Vink]

As I don't have the same documents and I don't have all the limits for every nuclide in my head I can not confirm or deny that an activity of 74 kBq on a wristwatch is below the threshold above which a permit is required.

Radium is an alpha emitter. As the alphas are blocked by the glass of the instrument you can only measure the secondary radiation. It is therefore virtually impossible to calculate the real activity. But on several instruments I have measured a dose rate above 25 µSv/hr, while the exposure limit for non-radiation workers is 1 µSv/hr.

As it is very hard to translate Dutch legislation I will write you an e-mail to explain the legal context. (I still must have your e-mail address somewhere).

For the Americans there isn't a real problem. In the US an aviation instrument is considered a sealed unit, therefore the presence of radio-active material is not taken in account.

Regards,
Huub