[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

RE: Welcome to California



I think "bigger" here is an integrating function, in which case the best technology is not available, i.e., a detector that simultaneously surveys the entire land mass under question.

Jack Earley
Radiological Engineer

-----Original Message-----
From: Huston, Thomas E [mailto:HustonThomasE@UAMS.EDU]
Sent: Saturday, June 01, 2002 12:43 PM
To: 'Speercl'; radsafe@list.vanderbilt.edu
Subject: RE: Welcome to California

It's worth noting that bigger is not always better---you always need to have some idea what contaminants you are looking for.  For example you want to use a fairly thin NaI(Tl) crystal when looking for lower energy photon emitters (e.g., 60 keV from Am-241)...the thicker detectors result in lower signal to noise (higher relative background), which in affects the detector's sensitivity.  Its an optimization problem.  There is no ONE right detector that fits every situation.
-----Original Message-----
From: Speercl [mailto:Speercl@EARTHLINK.NET]
Sent: Friday, May 31, 2002 9:36 PM
To: BLHamrick@AOL.COM; radsafe@list.vanderbilt.edu
Subject: Re: Welcome to California

I am in the beginning stages of starting my own business of performing radiation scanning surveys of large land areas.  If I was to perform gamma surveys for license termination in California, what would be the "best" technology available to perform these surveys?  I know sampling will have to be done and can be counted on a HPGe, REGe or the like, but what about land area scanning?  Typically in the past 2 x 2 NaI detectors were used, and large area plastic scintillator (LAPS) detectors are comparable, but the "Best" is . . . .?  I have thought about getting a 4 x 4 x 4 NaI but then a 4 x 4 x 16 NaI would be better. . .then four 4x4x16 NaI detectors would be better still.  But then this large of a detector array would mean I would be averaging a point source over the field of view of the detector system . . . I run into the same line of thinking when I try to figure out how fast to scan.  I typically take a moving one second count with a LAPS using a GPS, but wouldn't a one minute static count be better before moving on?  What detector and scanning method is out there that can measure gamma emitting radioisotopes to a 1 in a 1,000,000 cancer risk?
 
 
Carl Speer
Real-time Radiological Services, Inc
Las Vegas, NV
702-639-0066
 
-----Original Message-----
From: BLHamrick@AOL.COM <BLHamrick@AOL.COM>
To: radsafe@list.vanderbilt.edu <radsafe@list.vanderbilt.edu>
Date: Friday, May 31, 2002 5:35 PM
Subject: Welcome to California

-----Snip-----

SB 1444, the worst of the quartet before the legislature sets a simple, and simple-minded standard, of ZERO radioactivity above background for unrestricted release, using the BEST available technology, and prohibiting any averaging of activity over any "larger area" of potential contamination.

Snip   
 
Barbara L. Hamrick