NEWS BULLETIN: August 15, 2007
EXCLUSIVE

Will Blue Topaz Be ‘X-rated’ for X-mas?

By David Federman, Colored Stone Editor-in-Chief

Don’t ask Santa Claus for ‘London’ or ‘Swiss’ blue topaz this Christmas—not if you live in the United States. Neutron-irradiated topaz, which many jewelers hope will be given a special exemption from tough Nuclear Regulatory Commission safety rules, is looking less and less likely to be given a one-season clemency.

Funny thing, the NRC wants badly to keep existing backlogs of topaz on jewelers’ shelves. But it needs safety assurances about future supplies of this gem, which the industry may not be able to give in time. And even if it can, the industry will have to adapt to new procedures that it will probably hate.

Here are some of the problems jewelers will face.

Mounted topaz imported into this country can probably not be tested accurately for radioactivity. Stones must be tested loose. So jewelry will have to be disassembled or set from scratch here. That means higher labor costs for blue topaz jewelry.

The need to test and certify loose stones will also create tracking headaches as the jewelry industry seeks to find ways to prove stones cleared for distribution in the U.S. and then sent overseas to be set are the same stones that return to America. “If topaz cost as much as diamonds, one could try to develop a ‘fingerprinting’ system like Gemprint to trace stones,” says one irradiation specialist. “But the cost of a fingerprint could easily exceed the cost of a topaz.”

In addition, sterner U.S. standards for safe topaz will almost certainly require longer quarantine periods while ‘hot’ goods cool down. Somebody has to foot the bills for extended storage times.

The upshot: blue topaz prices are going up. The big question is, will demand for this gem go down?

Presently, the NRC is studying two applications to build testing centers for irradiated gems—one from Ideal Source and the other International Isotopes. Both companies have principals who are versed in topaz irradiation and testing because of previous affiliation with the University of Missouri (which was at one time the leading domestic treatment and testing center for topaz) or with other centers (such as Alnor and General Atomics) that held licenses with the NRC in the early 1990s.

If the NRC had policed its regulations, it is highly likely the University of Missouri would still be the leading topaz colorizing and distribution facility in this country—especially since America is estimated to use at least 90% of all the irradiated blue topaz produced annually. Indeed, there would have almost certainly been a flourishing gemstone irradiation industry in this country.

But when the NRC, as well as U.S. Customs, made no attempts to enforce safety standards, and the industry failed to police itself, the gem trade adopted far laxer standards used abroad. As dealers abandoned stocks of irradiated stones requiring longer cool-down times in this country, domestic reactors had to quit the treatment and testing business.

Or so everyone thought.

In actuality, some reactor facilities continued to treat stones for customers abroad, testing them to make sure they complied with softer regulations in their countries of origin before retuning them. Eventually, most of these goods were re-exported to America. While this practice is not illegal, it certainly raises ethical concerns. It is thought that the NRC knows about these back-door arrangements and wants to prevent their recurrence. That’s why it is pushing for a small number of high-volume, state-of-the-art testing facilities which it can easily monitor and from which it can take samples for independent verification.

One thing for certain: the days of laissez faire commerce for topaz are over. What’s more, odds are running high against the chances for relaxed regulations. Indeed, we talked to treaters who want them kept as they are. If so, we’re going to have a standards clash.

This is where the topaz situation gets even murkier.

To listen to some treaters, you would think that they are complying with international standards when they irradiate topaz in a reactor. That standard, they are fond of saying, is 74 Becquerels (Bq) per gram (meaning there are 74 disintegrations of atoms every second in a gram of material that has been neutron-irradiated). In a 1-carat blue topaz weighing approximately 1/5th of a gram, that would be equivalent to 15 Bq.

The trouble is that the 74 Bq standard is one adopted for shipping of materials not possession or distribution of them. Here’s how it works. An exporter ships some topaz abroad. If it carries the appropriate documentation (UN2910) certifying that the average activity is 74Bq or less, and the surface doses are low enough, Customs will allow it to come into the country.

But just because a parcel of topaz can enter a country doesn’t mean the goods inside the parcel are ready to be cleared for commerce in that country. There are different standards for possession and distribution of irradiated goods. Do you want to know why? Because it’s one thing to measure a container of irradiated gems for safety that is quickly passing through a port of entry and another thing to measure it for safety at its destination where its contents will be held and handled for long periods of time. For these longer holding times, a tougher standard is needed—one that takes into account greater exposure to radioactivity.

To its credit, the NRC wants to ensure safety along the entire gemstone distribution pipeline. Toward that end, its permissible radioactivity standards are some of the strictest in the world: typically about 20 Bq per gram. In other words, if radioactivity readings go above 20 Bq per gram, the gem must be stored until radioactivity levels reduce to that level. However, countries which have adopted the 74 Bq shipping standard for holding and possession of neutron-irradiated gems permit stones with far higher radioactivity readings to be declared safe for commerce. So even though those stones will most likely end up in America, they are not forced into lock down until they meet America’s far more conservative safety standards. That bothers the NRC. So it wants stones tested and certified here, in strict accordance with its regulations.

There are those that accuse the NRC of nuclear nitpicking when it comes to standards. Such critics might want to study the exempt concentration (of radioactivity) regulations in some European countries like France which make clearance for commerce of neutron-irradiated gems even harder than America. While the NRC may deserve criticism for non-enforcement of its standards, there are many who think their standards are reasonable and fair. No doubt defenders of these standards will make themselves heard if the jewelry industry petitions the NRC for lighter permissible radioactivity regulations.

This was also sent out to our Colored Stone E-News mailing list members as an e-mail news blast. Want to receive the latest up-to-date information on the gemstone industry? Sign up for our Colored Stone E-News mailing list here.

Back to Part 1 of Topaz Troubles

Sept/Oct 2007 • Blue Topaz: The Ban That Never Was • Pearl Trade Faces Crisis • Chinese Pearl Farming Imperiled • Blue Topaz: From Hot Rock to Cool Stone This X-Mas • Topaz Troubles • NRC Exclusive Statement to CS on Irradiated Topaz • This Holiday Season May Not a Blue (Topaz) Christmas • The NRC's website