Document QDo3BYeKaQBG0pbDG02mJ0QL

April 5* m S Hr. C* H. Schaefer Ethyl gasoline Corporation Chrysler Building Hew fork City Hew fork ' \ Dear Mr*.Sehaefept* X am returning to you herewith Hr* G-ress1in*s memorandum of March Shth which you sent me for examination* X liar no comments to make in addition to those whichyou have already taken into account. I think* however* vjq should take immediate steps to determine Just how far the regulations in Question apply* It they do not apply-to. such ships as those of the fexas Company* and - ' ' to situations such as those Involved in the transportation of Fluid on tank ships from one plant to another within the same industrial organisation* then we can afford to allow the situation to rest as it is. If* however* these regular tlons do apply to such vessel# and to such situations* then I am disposed to believe that we. should go very slow in any attempt to obtain exception# to the general rule. X should hate to see Ethyl Fluid being generally transported by method# similar to those the Xex&g Company is now using* therefore anything which might involve.'an extension, of this practice should he examined thoroughly in detail, tfe oan not afford: to suggest or to condone the use of practice#.which can he made reasonably safe only through the application of extensive and persistent supervision on our part* ' Very truly yours* HAStie '; .' Bobert C Kehoe * ''$, i)*~ K 0000925 CC Dr S. A, Kehoe March 28, 1939 Memorandum toi Mr. E. J. Crosslin Thank you very much for your letter of March 24 regarding proposed rules and regulations now being drafted by the U. S. Department of Commerce, Bureau of Marine Inspection and Navigation, concerning handling of explosives and other dangerous articles on board vessels I see nothing particularly objectionable to the proposed regu lations to which Motor Fuel Anti-Knock Compound may be subjected. I do agree, however, with you that we should make some attempt to restrict the general provisions for the inspection of package goods. I am not quite clear from the information you have given me 'whether the regulations will apply to all vessels, including those privately owned. I have in mind particularly the situation which occurred with the Texas Company concerning the handling of fluid both coastwise to Fort Arthur and from Port Arthur to Belgium. As you know the stowage was made under deck in cargo hatches but it was approved by us because of the particular conditions of the case. You sight discuss this natter further with Mr. lasserman if you are not entirely familiar with all phases of the discussion we have had with,Texas* If there is some ques tion concerning the application of the proposed regulations to such ves sels and if you know the entire story, you might bring this to the attention of Mr. Oldis of the Texas Company* Otherwise let me know and I will be glad to forward him your advice. ` S dmw J. H. Schaefer Dr. Kehoej Please note the attached and return to me with your comments \<&s* 0 0 0 0 9 26^