Document NEGO9JY2eooQyEYqB9B0Zy3OE

atm-. EK-IOK REV l-IO <mw> CSTAIUSMCO C2 E. . du Pont de Nemours & Company INCORPORATED WILMINGTON, DELAWARE EMPLOYEE RELATIONS DEPARTMENT CC: W. H. Reynolds, C&P December 20, 1983 CLAYBURN BOOTH, M.D. CHEMICALS & PIGMENTS DEPARTMENT NIAGARA FALLS, NY X-RAY FILMS The attached letter from Dr. Olin Allen, our consultant in radiology here in Wilmington, may be of interest to you, ref. paragraph 4. Dr. Allen reviewed 10-15 recent x-rays from your plant that he considered to be poor quality, attributable to inadequate developing and exposure techniques. A technical representative of the Photosystems & Electronic Products Department will call and visit you in the near future. MEDICAL DIVISION Burford W. Culpepper, M.D. Director BWC/mch att. BETTER THINGS FOR BETTER LIVING DU 039008 ..jaaais Bi.i i-tufeaf. EB-02 EV l-SC <5uPro CSTAIUSHCD HO? E. I. du Pont de Nemours & Company INCORPORATED Wilmington, Delaware EMPLOYEE RELATIONS DEPARTMENT t CC: N. L. Cross - Photo December 20, 1983 JAMES S. STOUT, M.D. PHOTOSYSTEMS & ELECTRONIC PRODUCTS DEPT. BREVARD, NC X-RAY FILMS The attached letter from Dr. Olin Allen, our radiology consultant in Wilmington, may be of interest to you, refer ence paragraph 5. In the opinion of Dr. Allen, the quality of your x-rays continues to be poor, with a background chemical fog and some inadequate exposure techniques. Additionally, a cassette holder adequate for a cross wise film should be obtained for large and obese patients in order to prevent multiple exposures of those patients. A technical representative of the Photosystems & Electronic Products Department will call and visit you in the near future. MEDICAL DIVISION Burford W. Culpepper, M.D. Director BWC/mch att. BETTER THINGS FOR BETTER LIVING DU 039009 DUP 0948058 O S. ALLEN. II. M.D. S. B DIZNOFF. M.D. A. B. EVANTA9H. M.D, J, D. KERN. M.D. Z, KOZIC. M.D. J. F, LALLY, M.D, S. T. MILLER. M.D. J. T. OGLESBY. M.D. X-RAY ASSOCIATES, P.A. 102 N. CLEVELAND AVENUE WILMINGTON. DELAWARE 19809 Area Code 302 Telephone 694-4417 McH. PETERS. JR.. M.D. R. E. PRICE. M.D. E. M. RENZI. M.D. L. ROSENBAUM. M O H. J. STEIN. M.D. J. H. TAYLOR. M.D, J. S. WILLS. M.D, December 7, 1983 B. W. Culpepper, M. D. Medical Director-Medical Division Erployee Relations Department Wilmington, De. 19898 RECEIVED lurfgcd W, Culpappw, MU, Dear Burford: I thought it wauld be appropriate to send you a report on the quality of the x-ray films done at the corporate headquarters and also the films sent to me fran various plants for interpretation. I am happy to say that the films done at the corporate head quarters are excellent. They have always been of high quality but I think they have even irrproved in the past six months to a year since we got better service for the x-ray equipment and better service for the processor. I dont really see any future prospect for improvement since they are of excellent quality already. I also read the films of employees with possible asbestosrelated changes fran many plants, including Chanters, Repauno, Experimental Station, Louviers, Edgemoor, Cape Fear, Potcmac River and possibly other plants. The films fran those plants pose no problem and are all well above average in the very good to excellent range. The quality of these films has improved significantly over the last year or two. I recently had the apportunity to review 10 or 15 films from the Niagara Plant and in general the technique was very poor. Sate of the films could not be interpreted at all and had to be repeated. There is considerable variation in technique. There are numerous solution problems and probably technique problems although this is difficult to evaluate with this limited number of films. If we are to bring the quality at the Niagara Plant up to the rest of the plants, we need immediate assistance fran the Technical Representative at Photo-Products and we also need followup on the progress he has made after his initial evaluation. Brevard continues to be a significant problem. I have been inter preting these films for about 1 year and the technical quality when I started was very poor and it has improved very little in the interim. Brevard has a problem with background chemical fog which has persisted throughout this period of time. In addition, there are seme technical DUP 0948059 DU 039010 3iBiajgWBaBi^jssaaBg2iaBia:B^gag 2- - problems involving exposure. They have no cassette holder to do a cross-wise film and therefore each employee that requires a film of this type gets exposed twice in the film changer. There is no question about the fact that this is unnecessary exposure for the employee and should be corrected. Brevard's problem may be, in part, due to the fact that they have experimental rare earth screens in the chest changer. These could well have deteriorated to the point where they should not be used. As far as I knew, they are using Cronex 4 film with this screen combination but the end result is anything but satisfactory. I really see no reason why these films can't be brought up to the quality of the other plants if we go back to the guidelines and see that the guidelines are followed at Brevard. I am quite sure if this were done, the quality of the films would improve significantly. I shall attempt to bring you up to date as I did Dr. Bonnett on the quality of the films at periodic intervals. If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact me. Incidentally, the films that are read over at the office are apparently of satis factory quality since I have not been informed by the other members of ny group of any particular problem. Thank you for your interest. Sincerely yours OSArsmc Consultant Radiologist DUP 0948060 DU 039011