Our Radiation Safety department will not allow us to install the tritium
style because they say that there was a recent change with the NRC
regulations. I can't site what exactly changed, but Rad Safety says that we
have to pull all of our tritium signs out. I guess there have been some
incidents in NJ (go figure) of students breaking them open and being exposed.

MJF

At 03:36 PM 8/2/01 -0600, Rob Farris wrote:
>The 2000 LSC does allow photoluminescent signs.  Specifically, NFPA 101,
>7.10.7.2,  it's appendices and commentary (handbook).  However the
>lighting source requirements are fairly Draconian, and would likely not be
>suitable for you as they would require additional wiring to be
>installed.  Have you considered tritium source lights?  We've had
>excellent luck with them, BUT, as they reach their expiration dates,
>disposal becomes a problem.
>
>
>
>
>At 05:08 PM 8/2/01 -0400, you wrote:
>>Can anyone give me reasons why I cannot use phosphorescent exit signs such
>>as the Duraglo brand in our buildings? Our AHJ will not accept them and
>>says that they do not meet NFPA specifications. All of the buildings that
>>we would be using them in have emergency lighting, either by battery pack
>>units or by alternate service into the building. We do not want to run
>>exposed conduit in some of our aesthetically sensitive buildings and
>>chopping into the walls isn't an option.
>>
>>Any info or suggestions would be appreciated.
>>
>>thanks,
>>
>>Michael Fox
>>Dep. Fire Inspector
>>Yale University
>>Office of the Fire Marshal
>>314 Prospect Street
>>New Haven, CT 06515
>>voice: 203-432-9924
>>fax: 203-432-8937
>>email: [log in to unmask]
>
>           Rob Farris P.E.
>CGRP Program Manager
>W (505) 665-0283
>C  (505) 699-1971
>P  (505) 664-6644
>Los Alamos National Laboratory MS M713
>Los Alamos NM, 87545