Document 0664OX6qryNZy1GBdkzMdozvM

AR226-2472 '# Stephen R Peck 03/07/2000 07:48 AM To: Carey E Cole/CL/DuPont@DuPont, Roger J Zipfe[/AE/DuPont@DuPont cc: Ta-Wei Fu/CL/DuPont@DuPont Subject: 3m fluoride? Please see attached from Ta-Wei. Have we doone a round robin? --------------------------- Forwarded by Stephen R Peck/SE/DuPont on 03/07/2000 07:47 Ta-Wei Fu 03/06/2000 22:14 To: Stephen R Peck/SE/DuPont@DuPont cc: Oscar T Garza/AE/DuPont@DuPont Subject: Re: LPW2859 /0 1 2 3M CO Steve, Do you know the method that 3M uses to determine the fluoride level in C-8? This fluoride level , comparison could become an issue since it significantly impact the cost of C-8 purification at 3M. I do not think that we were above 30 ppm for all the recovered C-8 sent to 3M in January based oTt our analysis. Would you please help find out from Carry Cole or Roger Zipfel so we can do the exactly the same ? Thanks. Ta-Wei Forwarded by Ta-Wei Fu/CL/DuPont on 03/06/2000 10:05 PM David M Rurak V 03 /0 6 /2 0 0 0 04:22 PM To: Michael E McCord/AE/DuPQnt@DuPont cc- Oscar T Garza/AE/DuPont@DuPont, Polly Shackleford/CL/DuPont@DuPont, Ta-Wei Fu/CL/DuPont@DuPont, Roger J Zipfel/AE/DuPont@DuPont, Jan M Stouffer/AE/DuPont@DuPont, Bruce A Kaiser/AE/DuPont@DuPont Subject: Re: LP W 2 8 5 9 /0 1 2 3M CO J j The contract was w ritten w ith the expectation that the material would be under the free flourides lim it and th a t they would blend reasonable close stuff. I would expect this is a mistake in pricing and not a free flourides issue. About the only time we should be charged the higher price would be in a case that we knew we had a problem before we sent them the material. Michael E McCord Michael E McCord * * 03 /0 6 /2 0 0 0 03:41 PM " RJZ006499 EID932955