Betsy; From Callaway, replies are from the perspective of "ad hoc" surveys such as pre dive, or object surveys (such as an underwater vacuum system).
I see you've received a couple of replies that use sleeve or some sort of dip coat. Personally I have found these to be problematic. Thin plastic sleeve tends to get torn by banging around (which makes it a contamination control nightmare when the cable/detector is removed from the pool). Dip coating HAS to be water proof (it MUST NOT be soluble). In general dip coated detectors either got nicked and torn, nullifying the contamination control scheme, OR the dip coat was a major pain to remove from the detector following the survey doe to adherence. We have had limited success encasing the detector in a hard plastic shell, then taping the end really well, or filling the top part of the shell with silicone sealant to seal around the cable. This can have a downside in that you have to be careful to not make the detector float, the advantage is it provides double protection on the detector-cable connection. In this scheme, I consider the cable to be sacrificial. I would WELCOME success stories from others. I'm now in the camp that a cable(s) AND detector(s) can be sacrificed for a pool survey. (I have calibrated the board from a contaminated detector in an uncontaminated shell, along with a separate cable, then placed the calibrated detector board into the contaminated detector and used the contaminated cable following a Response Check). Some programs would not allow such, mine does. If your question is for longer term applications (installed type of detectors), an engineered solution must be used that has a temporary outer cover, preferably metal appropriate for the pool chemistry. Plastic or dip coat can degrade over time, bad issue for fuel pools. Questions? Call or email Dewey at Callaway Dewey : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : Dewey Thompson Staff HP Radiation Protection Department T 314.225.1061 F 573.676.4484 E [email protected]<mailto:[email protected]> ......................... Ameren Missouri Junction CC & Highway O Fulton, MO 65251 Please consider the environment before printing this e-mail. From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Hillmer, Betsy Sent: Tuesday, April 29, 2014 10:39 AM To: [email protected] Subject: Powernet: Instruments in Spent Fuel Pools Hi, I am supporting researchers who are placing instrumentation in spent fuel pools world-wide. We would like them returned to us with as little contamination as possible. What does your plant do to reduce contamination in items placed in the spent fuel pool? Any advice is appreciated! Betsy Hillmer --------------------------------------- Betsy (Elizabeth) Hillmer Los Alamos National Laboratory Radiation Protection Office: 665-1302 Blackberry: 695-8868 The information contained in this message may be privileged and/or confidential and protected from disclosure. If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient, or an employee or agent responsible for delivering this message to the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution or copying of this communication is strictly prohibited. Note that any views or opinions presented in this message are solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of Ameren. All e-mails are subject to monitoring and archival. Finally, the recipient should check this message and any attachments for the presence of viruses. Ameren accepts no liability for any damage caused by any virus transmitted by this e-mail. If you have received this in error, please notify the sender immediately by replying to the message and deleting the material from any computer. Ameren Corporation
