Document 2JM2eKk6QbryVRgngRq4ndkQ6

Oecesibar 6, 1937 Mr. John Schaefer Dear John, This is in reply to your letter of December 3rd regarding the number of drivers we should have on our trucks in vie?? of increasing cost and restricted driving time in certain states. , The second paragraph of your letter seems irrefutable, i.e. that under conditions surrounding possible accidents, tro men would be better than one. 'Doubtless you have borne in mind we hove stioulatod to our cus tomer companies, among other things, two men' to a truck when they transfer drums between certain points. These transfers are one step,further removed from our control and if e relax our own regulations, they will doubtless feel justified in- doing the same. They say then assume we have found road transportation of fluid not to bo as hazardous a,s we formerly believed and may revert- to careless - practice. It sterna inevitable that at some time we will have a serious accident to fluid in transit on the public highways, and from that standpoint whatever cost we are rut to will be justified. I think our program of restricting tank truck shipments, which we have started in the East, is the right direction to go and that wo might discuss the com plete elimination of all such shipments at some time in the future, such as January l^J-O. Frankly, I do not see how we can eliminate all road shipments out of the plant due to the fact many of our blending points arc located off the railroad. However, I believe we can-greatly cut down this traffic by a more stringent policy and we might possibly sake some additional allowances toward bulk plants or remodelled drum plants ter wo have this physical difficulty. To sum tip, I do not know the magnitude of the anticipated increased cost, but I do not believe we should hurriedly take any step which might be backward in the matter of safety. Very truly yours, J. C. Taylor '3:0Cl. cc: Or. R. A. ehoe<r~'* Or. 0. Tcigar Mr. H. n.. Kaley Kf 0000970 % d>