a. Personnel: ' (1) ' (2) (3) (4) | 3 b. used: One (1) officer ani two (2) NCO suprrvisors (Rad-Sufe personnel), EQeven (11) B-36 maintenance persome]/aircraft, One (1) water heater operator, Pour (L) truck drivers/shift, Utilizing the persormel aobve, the following procedures were (1) after the completion of the mission amt the aircraft had landed they were parked in an isolated area art allowed to ddcay for a specified length of time. In this instance, the period was 20 hours after the initial exposure, (2) Stands were placed in position, cowling removed ania guik-kerosene mixture in the rutio 1:5 applied over the exterior surface of the aircraft and engines, Following this, a warm water and detergent mixture was applied to remove the emulsion formed by the gunk, This ia turn was followed by a warm water wash to remove ull residues The surfaces of the aircraft were allowei to drain for 30 minutes ani then reatings were made of the mdiation levels, (3) Maintenance personnel were wiilized throughout the decontamination of their aircruft, in this perticular : case 18 hours, Other personnel were used on a 12 or more hour shift basis, (4) aN/POR-39C ratiac instruments were used to reat levels of gamma coutardnation, Caution mst be used in making tnese observations as un accumulation of water in certzin parts of the cowling will cause thesc areas to read higher following decontamination than ocfore. (5) The entire proceturuy time, above, was repeatei for a second It was found that if an aircraft was thoroughly cleaned in two (2) washings it was impossible to bring the contamination level down to any noticeable extent by further washings. 1G. Evaluation of the. ‘aircraft decontaninat don program following Shot "BRAVO" revealed the following discrepancies: °(1) . amoulta ant (2) _ Mairtenance crews assigned to the aircraft anow.4a met: me be used for iecmtamination because of the limited exposure allowed during this operation, (3) . , Insufficient number of personnel assigned for the decontaminat fonof aircraft, . Insmeiiate maintenance facilities should be available for the repair “of the tecontamination equipment. . . . approximately (6) six hours were lost tue to breakiown| of equipment. , au of which was new, _Luproper scheduling of aircra"t ani wash crews, resulted . , in epproxinately four (4) hours per aireraft, lost for are we hy ee adequateighiing facthities£for Bightoperations w were, - not, available, ‘¢ 2 oR RSees oan 4 , ys : , Safety featares‘for ‘wash crews workingoneRofBI .._ ines were notavailable, ange 4 oe :