Document G6w37bvG3yGBnmRn4NKyV79kV

ETHYL CORPORATION INTER-OFFICE To D r. R. A. Kehoe Fr o m Su b j e c t K. C. Jost SAFETY ACTIVITIES Ad d r e s s Cincinnati Ad d r e s s D etroit Da t e O ctober 1, 1968 A ttached fo r your review is an a p p ra isa l of overall safety activ ities from each of the regions. It includes: ' 1. P e rso n n e l a ssig n m e n ts . 2. Tank cleaning a c tiv itie s. 3. An a s s e s s m e n t of reg io n al safety activities. Also attached for your quick referen ce is my memo to you of 4-12-68 and a copy of our Safety P o licy which includes the b a re basic re q u ire m e n ts to fulfill the policy. The Safety M anual of c o u rse e la b o ra te s on the r e q u ir e m ents. ' :. ;. ;, ; I have studied your "R eport on a Survey of V arious F a c ilitie s of Ethyl C orporation fo r the M anufacture and D istribution of Lead Alkyl Antiknock Compounds". I offer the following com m ents for your consideration: On page 4 you indicate disappointm ent in not having had the opportunity to v isit cu sto m ers. I feel sure th ere a re no objections from PCD for such v isits. P erso n ally , I would encourage this but re a liz e it would take a vast num ber of v is its to atta in a tru e a p p ra is a l of in d u stry thinking on m ed ical, hygienic, and safety a ffa irs. I would also encourage your visiting with each of the five Regional M anagers, Chief P roduct Service Engineers and th eir associates. In connection with custom er v isits, I was su rp rise d that you mention nothing about your im pression of the visit to Texaco. The Texaco mixing plant is typical of say 1/2 of our dom estic re fin e ry lead plant operations. The new design such as you saw at Texaco re p re se n ts a big departure from the e a rlie r design except it reta in s the eductor concept. The uniqueness of the new design is that it is safer not from a toxic standpoint but from a therm al stand point. This was illu stra te d la s t week at the Atlantic Richfield R efinery fire when th e ir Ethyl Mixing P la n t was to ta lly dem olished because of a la rg e gasoline sp ill in the tank fa rm a r e a . We w ere exceedingly fo rtu n ate th at the weigh tank did not rupture and the fluid sp ill/b u rn . Only through the efforts of Tom Gillen, the local P roduct Service Engineer, the weigh tank did not 0002631 -2 explode. I mention this because the new Ethyl design does not require a building and a pit which in this case trapped gasoline vapors. A lso, the Texaco installation which you saw re p re se n ts a significant expenditure and manpower effort to make the eductor principle applicable to today's in-line blending concept. D r. Kehoe, I have repeatedly m entioned that one re a l problem we face in the fu tu re on handling lead alk y ls a t a re fin e ry is , can we or can we not pump fluid. I have ju st recently recom m ended to our m anagem ent a firm policy that we do not pump until we have a ll the engineering a n sw e rs and have a complete m eeting of th minds with high level m anagem ent and m edical personnel and that after this we even get opinions from com petitors as well as custom ers before such a device is introduced. I think this is a v ery se rio u s problem . So f a r , we have r e s is te d fluid pumping r a th e r strenuously. In fa c t we have even avoided the u se of nitrogen in sp ecialized c a se s w here it would have been condoned in the p ast. Now, I recognize that the problem s of EID a re quite different from PCD. I do no u n d erstan d your statem en t on page 27, "It w ill not be p o ssib le in this re jport to say anything new or im portant about these hazards. Very little has beqn learned, through this survey, of th e ir significance. Questions have been ra.ise d , but few a n sw e rs have been obtained. " I was quite s u r p r is e d a t this statem ent in view of our conversations and previous correspondence. If there is any inform ation you think I have not p assed on to you, please so advise. K CJ/lad Attachm ents cc: F . A. McCoy D. E . P a rk M. C. Shonfield K. C. lo s t {Z 0002632