Document 15ZGqZ2yOvxwLXzJzLemV84za

cc: Dr. R. A. Kehoe SAFETY DSPAHEtEST \ Mr* H* 'bssett TirT'Associated Ethyl Company Limited Jrtilljgt Houfe^ Artillery fie* London, 1 Sbgjusad ,August 8 194-5 Dear Hugh* I hare read with interest your letter dated July 17th, together with the attached correspondence to m from Mr. J. 2, Batchelor of Australia We have a sufficient number of copies of Dr. 1'sehle* s report oa hand. One each is being sent to Batchelor and Eisso-Gill and two under separate cover to yourself. So far a w teaow it is not a general practice in this country to maintain a variable water bottom as a means of keeping do?m evaporation, losses in & tank with a fixed roof* Water bottoms are used primarily to prevent the loss of gasoline as a result of tank leakage. It has been observed in certain cases where the water bottom has been changed frequently that considerable sludge collects in the tank. In one ease, in a tank that had not been cleaned for a number of years, the depth of sludge varied from 12 s to 18** Such of the sludge consisted of mud and silt from-the source of water supply. While the lead content of the sludge may be low, it t doubtful.if the total load content m s materially reduced* It would seem logical that some lead would b carried off with the water if"the water bottom -wore changed with a ry degree of regularity* In the ease that cams to Batchelor* s attention, he mentioned that there was but a trace of lead in the sludge*'' If he ha a-more accurate figure, e should like to have it ad we should also like more information with regard to the amount of water held in the tank and the frequency with which it was' changed* ; .. . '' Certainly the phenomena is of interest bat whether it goes \ beyond the point of academic interest, thereby affecting ottr tank clean- \ i n g precautions, sesas questionable. If Batchelor is correct la hie assumption and the oil companies were encouraged to change the water in floating roof tanks at frequent intervals as a mean of reducing the lead 0015752 content of sludge, probably the companies would then infer that the lead hazard would be reduced to such a point that our tank cleaning precautions would no longer be required, We doubt if this ever would, be true. Efforts expended in this direction sight then paradoxically result in less assurance of safety in tank cleaning then now exists. We shall be pleased to review from time to time any additional information you care to supply. An analysis of the additional data may change our opinion of the ultimate result of the procedure* fo iy tru ly yours, ,SL"ET 0, B. LEWIS Manager KE 0015753