Document 6Rd7drk7KK8o8mQ8XJrr8YbX9

AR226-2472 Stephen R Peck 03/07/2000 07:48 AM To: cc: Subject: Carey E Cole/CL/DuPont@DuPont, Roger J Zipfe!/AE/DuPont@DuPont Ta-Wei Fu/CL/DuPont@DuPont 3m fluoride? Please see attached from Ta-Wel. Have we doone a round robin? ----,,------_------ Forwarded by Stephen R Peck/SE/OuPont on 03/07/2000 07:47 ---- Ta-Wei Fu 03/06/2000 22:14 To: cc: Subject: Stephen R Peck/SE/DuPont@DuPor>t Oscar T Garza/AE/DuPorrt@DuPont Re: LPW2859 /012 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 oTi our analysis. Would you please help find out from Carry Cole or Roger Zipfe! 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 03/06/2000 04:22 PM To: Subject: Michael E McCord/AE/DuPont@DuPont 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 Re: LPW2859/012 3M CO jh The contract was written with the expectation that the material would be under the free flourides limit and that they would blend reasonable close stuff, t 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 03/06/2000 03:41 PM EID932955