Why Industrial Device Distributors Must Act Now: New Category 3 Regulations Are on the Horizon

In the world of industrial radiation safety, few things are more disruptive than the sudden imposition of regulatory changes—especially when they come without industry input. Today, Category 3 radioactive devices may be facing just that.

A new initiative by the Transportation Security Unified Stakeholders Group is seeking to impose stricter regulatory requirements on Category 3 devices, despite previous guidance and historical context suggesting otherwise. If you’re a distributor, manufacturer, or user of industrial gauging equipment, this article is your wake-up call.


Now is the time to act.

What Are Category 3 Devices? Why Do They Matter?

Category 3 radioactive sources, as defined by the IAEA Code of Conduct (2002), include devices containing intermediate levels of radioactive material—significant enough to warrant basic safety controls, but not enough to cause serious health consequences in the event of misuse or loss.


Common examples include


  • Fixed nuclear gauges used in industrial process control
  • Portable moisture/density gauges
  • Well logging tools
  • Some types of industrial thickness measurement devices

These devices are widely used in construction, manufacturing, oil and gas, and infrastructure industries. They’re essential, efficient, and—under normal use—safe

The IAEA’s original position made it clear: Category 3 devices do not pose enough of a hazard to warrant the use of heightened regulatory controls. That assessment has guided U.S. and international regulations for over two decades.

The 2012 Category 3.5 Proposal: A Warning from the Past

Fast-forward to 2012, when the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) attempted to introduce a new classification: Category 3.5.This proposal aimed to:

  • Add “increased controls” to Category 3 devices
  • Require background checks and fingerprinting for individuals with access
  • Mandate surveillance (video and audio)
  • Implement tracking systems for shipments and receipts (e.g., GPS, RFID, central databases)


It was met with significant pushback from industry professionals and distributors, who argued that the cost, complexity, and time required to comply with these measures far outweighed the actual risk posed by Category 3 devices.

How Did the Industry Stop It?

The proposal was ultimately voted down 3-2 by the NRC commissioners. That close vote didn’t happen by accident. It was the result of organized, proactive engagement by the radiation industry.

Distributors:

  • Submitted detailed written comments to the NRC
  • Attended public meetings and hearings
  • Personally met with commissioners and stakeholders to present their case


Lesson learned? Regulatory proposals can be stopped—but only if the industry speaks up.

Today’s Threat: The Transportation Security Unified Stakeholders Group Push

A decade later, a similar threat is resurfacing.

The Transportation Security Unified Stakeholders Group, composed of multiple agencies and security experts, is revisiting the question of whether Category 3 devices should face increased regulatory scrutiny.

They are considering a new set of regulations that may look similar—or even more burdensome—than the Category 3.5 proposal.

Potential “Increased Controls” Could Include:

  • Mandatory RFID or GPS tracking devices on all radioactive shipments
  • Background investigations for all individuals with access to devices
  • Video and audio surveillance requirements in storage and transit
  • Database tracking for each transfer, shipment, and receipt of devices
  • Chain-of-custody documentation for end-to-end tracking


These measures may be appropriate for higher-risk categories (e.g., Cat 1 and 2), but applying them to Category 3 devices risks over-regulating an already well-managed space.

What’s at Stake for Distributors and End Users

If these proposed controls become regulations, the impact could be severe for both device suppliers and the industries that rely on them.

1. Increased Financial Costs
  • Purchasing, maintaining, and disposing of RFID/GPS tracking units
  • Staff time and software needed for compliance and documentation
  • Surveillance equipment upgrades and security audits
  • Background screening costs per employee
2. Delays in Shipment and Workflow
  • Slower procurement and delivery timelines due to clearance checks
  • Delays in project schedules where devices are mission-critical
  • Regulatory inspections and approvals introducing bottlenecks
3. Operational Burden
  • Additional personnel needed just for compliance management
  • Training programs to keep staff up to date with new requirements
  • Recordkeeping and reporting burdens
4. Competitive Disadvantage
  • Smaller distributors may be pushed out of the market
  • End-users may shift to alternative (possibly less effective) technologies
  • Global customers may seek non-U.S. suppliers not bound by new rules
The bottom line? These changes don’t just affect compliance officers. They affect entire business models, customer relationships, and operational timelines.

What Worked in 2012 Can Work Again—But Only If We Act

Back in 2012, regulatory overreach was stopped because the industry organized. The lesson is clear: if you want to avoid burdensome regulation, you must be part of the conversation now.

Key Steps You Can Take Today
1. Submit Written Comments

  • Clearly explain the operational and financial impact of these proposals
  • Offer real-world examples from your business


2.Attend Stakeholder Meetings
  • These are public and often recorded—your voice matters
  • Look for upcoming NRC or DOT stakeholder meetings


3.Engage with Your Industry  Associations
  • Organizations like IRSC, HPS, and others can amplify your voice
  • Ask them what they’re doing and how you can participate


4.Reach Out to Regulatory Commissioners and Staff
  • Share your concerns respectfully and constructively
  • Provide data, case studies, and technical insight


5.Get Technical Assistance If You Need It
  • If writing isn’t your strength, ask for help
  • IRSC is available to assist in drafting regulatory comments that align with compliance language and agency expectations

Why IRSC Is Urging Immediate Industry Participation

At IRSC, we’ve seen what happens when stakeholders don’t engage early: last-minute scrambling, unclear compliance rules, and costly retrofits.
This isn’t fear-mongering. It’s a call to action.

We strongly encourage distributors, manufacturers, and end-users of Category 3 devices to:

  • Monitor activity from the Transportation Security Unified Stakeholders Group
  • Stay alert for NRC or DOT proposals related to increased controls
  • Proactively communicate your concerns and recommendations


We’ve helped stakeholders navigate these waters before. If your team needs:

  • Technical assistance in writing position papers
  • Guidance on how to present risk assessments or cost data
  • Help identifying which regulations apply to your shipmentsWe’re here to help.

Conclusion: Stand Up Before the Rules Change Without You

You may have trusted that Category 3 devices were safe from further regulation. For over 20 years, that has been true. But today, those protections are no longer guaranteed.

If you:

  • Use fixed or portable nuclear gauges
  • Ship or receive Category 3 devices
  • Operate in industries like oil and gas, mining, manufacturing, or construction
  • Work with radioactive material licenses or compliance departments

This proposed change affects you directly.

Ignoring it won’t make it go away. Participating in the process might be the only thing that protects your business.

✅ Take Action Now

  • Prepare your organization for a possible rule change
  • Submit written comments and attend public hearings
  • Contact IRSC if you need support advocating your position


Let’s make sure history repeats itself—in the best way possible.
Need help drafting regulatory comments or presenting your concerns?

📧 Contact IRSC today for technical writing support and strategic advice.