Since the contaminant appeared to be ionic, some ion exchange
tests were made. Strontium, cerium, and iron carriers were applied
to small surface areas of unpainted and painted wood. Abcut 60
per cent decontamination was achieved on painted surfaces by this
method with two hour contact. However, as previously indicated,
further studies of the effects of ion exchange should be conducted.
5.3
DOSE RATE INSIDE BUILDINGS
Since vertical surfaces became contaminated, on the windward
side at least, t2 an equal or greater extent than roofs and
horizontal surfaces, it was felt that previously calculated and
experimental building dose rates may be in error as no wall
contamination was assumed.15 Accordingly, as an illustrative example,
the relative dose rates at the center of the standard 20 ft x 100 ft
Army Theatre of Operations unlined frame building, TM 5-280, have
been calculated for three conditions:
1.
2.
3.
Unit contamination on roof and ground, no wall contamination.
Unit contamination on roof, ground, and one long wall.
Unit contamination on roof and ground, and three times unit
contamination on one long wall (as suggested by Shot 2 data, Fig.
4.1).
The dose rates for these three conditions, normalized to the
first condition, vary as factors of 1, 1.02, and 1.05 for the order
given above, at a distance 10 ft from the contaminated long wall.
Corresponding factors for dosage at 2 ft from the contaminated wall
are 1, 1.26, and 1.79 respectively.
These calculations were made
using methods and equations suggested in referencel?, Similar
calculations relating to other type buildings are considered beyond
the scope of this report, bt very worthy of further investigation,
5.4
OTHER DECONTAMINATION METHODS
Dry sweeping as a method of decontamination was attempted on
the smooth painted wood back of one panel that had light contamination. The method was completely without merit. Wet scrubving
methods on other lightly contaminated panel backs of the same material
were many times as effective.
Tha effectiveness of reclamation of unpaved ground areas is
apparently independent of the nature of the contaminant.
This is
bezed on the effectiveness of the crude seraping performed on the
porous coral surface underneath the experimental panels, This porous
coral soil became contaminated by wash liquids, Physical removai of
the top 3 to 4 inches of soil gave the same effective decontamination
-as similar operations in Nevada where the area was contaminated by
ary fallout.
LS
CONFIDENTIAL — RESTRICTED DATA