Re: Exposure from a spent fuel rod from the US supplied ResearchReactor

["Gerry W. Kindred" <gwkindred@centerior.com>]

gwkindred@centerior.com

A "spent fuel rod" by definition has been "used".  Assuming
that it is actually a "spent fuel rod" the actual dose rate after
ten years of decay would depend on the type of fuel and the
enrichment.  As far as the isotopes present, charts are 
available that give the probability of specific isotopes for the 
fissioning of U-235 for example.  However, after ten years of
decay some isotopes will no longer be present (as a measure
of remaining activity versus what you started with) and there
would also be a long list of daughter products. 

If it is not a "spent fuel rod" I do not know of any mechanism 
where you would get 320 REM/hr at a meter.  You need to 
have more specific infomation.

I

----------
> From: mjo@scs.unr.edu
> To: radsafe@romulus.ehs.uiuc.edu
> Subject: Exposure from a spent fuel rod from the US supplied
ResearchReactor
> Date: Monday, November 03, 1997 3:21 PM
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I was a DOE sponsored training class. An instructor stated that the
> exposure rate would be 320 REM/hr at an arms length from a spent fuel
rod.
> If this fuel has been in dry
> storage for 10 years and not used, what causes that high exposure and
> what would be main fission or activation products causing the exposure.
> The fuel rod was 1.5 inch cylinder and about 3 feet long. I would
> appreciate any comments. Thank you in advance.
> 
> Myung Chul Jo <mjo@scs.unr.edu>
> University of Nevada, Reno
> Health Physics
> EH&S/MS 328
> Reno, NV 89557
> (702) 784-4540(voice)
> (702) 784-4553(fax)
>