Document QXdYq27ZREon6JdqgQYa46GZk

FILE NAME: Ford (FD) DATE: 1980 DOC#: FD145 DOCUMENT DESCRIPTION: Memos Inter Office To: cc: Subject: J. V. Durstine G. F. Bolling T. J. Feaheny G. 0. Eeutgen Carcinogens Task Force Report You requested comments on the subject Carcinogens Task Force Report. The general tone of the report is that strategies, work plans, programs, and timetables are in place in Engineering, to develop substitutes for asbestos, chromium and benzene. Although efforts have been started in these areas and you note some cautions and uncertainties I think the risks and timing prob- / lems associated with these efforts should be more greatly emphasized to V company management. Another important point is that each of the 1^5 applications noted for asbestose, 7 chromium, and benzene will require Engineering funding. The total will be sub stantial. Without additional funding or directed prioritization over other Engineering efforts this work cannot be done, particularly under the present economic and budgetary conditions. A final point is that while the company's obligation, insofar as carcinogens, is recognized, it is imperative that we do not over-react. A measured reaction is provided by CEPL-10 on asbestos. This was designed to provide substitute materials on an orderly basis, with the provision that engineering limitations might make some substitutions impractical (assuming we would continue to meet existing regulatory controls). lour strategy "...to proceed to eliminate these / three carcinogens'by Job 1, 1985, ..." appears to be too rigorous or inflexnbxeF more er+ensive and detailed analysis of the implication of the strategy is warranted.. S. M. Frey 7 006438 PRODUCED BY FORD Inter Office / Generai Services To: Mr. G. 0. Keu'tgen ` cc: Mr. J. V. Duratine " Subject: Carcinogens Task Force Report to E&R and M&S Sut*ommittees General Services comments on the subject Report are: While the Report focuses on engineering materials usage, its conclusions nnd recommendations must apply to the broad range of product and non-product materials used in General Services operations. Our major need is for better coiumuniuauion of available information on carcinogens and other toxic and hazardous materials to the operating level. We require greater awareness of problem areas, assistance and information on possible solutions and to be kept up to date on new regu lations. In particular, regular communication with and education for our safety personnel who are often the first to see the problems must have high priority. The Report correctly identifies the need for "an integrated approach throughout the Company and a sustained effort over a number of years" to carry out the recommended strategy for carcinogens. It appears that this might be a wise approach for the Company to all of its toxic and hazardous materials problems. . . We agree that Directive B-101 with its distributed responsibilities is now inadequate to carry out the strategy and should be re- ^ drafted. In particular, the functions of compliance and compliance reporting must be more closely aligned. Because complete elimination of useful materials like asbestos may not be in the best interests of the Company, it might be more prudent to stress awareness of the dangers and control measures than attempt to eliminate usage by fiat. D. R. Learned Director 006492 PRODUCED BY FORD SOCCO Retunda D.-i-.j De:..'33rn. U :" :;o r . ; W .V.p.ii.-.g Ag 2t; : ; r .0 Sex 2053 Dfcsrcsrn, Mic Sc g " 3` 2` -- 27, 010976 Subject: Asbestos-Free Lining Developnent Program Chassis Engineering, Brake Department, has initiated a program to eval uate asbestos-free brake lining materials. The objective of this pro gram is to develop asbestos-free disc ana drum lining materials that have the performance characteristics'of present asbestos-containing organic and semi-metallic materials, and meet the requirements of toxic substance regulation. ' Attachment I cut lines a recommended lining evaluation program. fun currently released lining materials will be used 'as baselines for relative performance comparison; TP1353M for organic non-asbestos disc materials, U J lilA for semi-metallic disc materials, and H3198/ 3199 for drum materials. An asbestos-free organic material offering performance improvements, relative to the baseline, in the areas of increased fade resistpr.ee and a higher average coefficient of friction is desired. Likewise, an asbestos-free semi-metallic material offer ing performance improvements, relative to the baseline, in the areas of increased cold effectiveness and reduced rotor wear is desired. ri* (Vi -emissions to Ford should be accompanied with your test results for oth your proposed asbestos-free material and the corresponding base line material. Ford will conduct structural and performance evaluations in the laboratory and on the dynamometer, and will review all perform ance data submitted by the supplier. Premising candidates will then be subjected to vehicle evaluations. It is recommended that all dynamometer and vehicle evaluations be run with Ford test procedures on the 1980 Tr.underbird braize system to ensure that the final comparison is as fair r,:\ possible. System parameters for the 1980 Tnurdei-b: z are given i ' . Attachment II, test procedures will be supplied as requested. -conti produced by ford J May 27, I980 If you are interested in participating in this program as outlined, please confirm your intention with a brief letter. Material and per formance data submissions should be made to the Brake Department at your earliest convenience. I We are looking forward to your participation in this program, as your expertise and cooperation are instrumental in making this a successful program. f BM/my attach 010977 PRODUCED BY FORD ASBESTO5-TEZI ERASE LINING LEVELOPi-ENT l920 CALENDA?. YEA?. v.'OKK PLAN ATTACHMENT I Project. Objectives Develop asbssmos-frse brake lir.ir.g naterial, both semi-metallic and organic, to meet reo_ui.rer.ents of toxic substances regulation. Techr.icai .---wros.cr- 1. u n f o m potential suppliers of program intent . C o m o r a t e relic;' to reduce asbesmes usage . Nish m: evaluate be oh r.on-asbesros semi-met and organic linings for front disc and rear drum applications . Zuuolier uill conduct mrelininary tests and present data to Ford . Ford vill conduct nrelininar;.' laboratory and dynamometer evaluations then vehicle test promising candidates 2. Submission of candidate material's) should be accompanied with the following - performance data for both submission and relative baseline: . PC-C, FAST, C-ogar. Hardness, Specific Gravity . Dynamometer Temperature - wear . . Dynamometer Effectiveness and fluid displacement (Simulated FMVSS 105-75) . Static friction test for rear drum linings . Vehicle City Traffic and effectiveness performance (Optional) 3. Work with Scientific Research to evaluate candidates using the following tests: . FAST _ _ . . Susceptability of corrosion bonding to cast iron . Tensile strength - transverse and longitudinal . Shear strength . Rivetability _ . Thermal expansion coefficient - transverse and longitudinal . Dynamometer -- wear procedure and PHVSS 105 simulation . Contaminant sensitivity ' Provide feedback to suppliers on test results of their submissions, identify properties which need improving -continued- 010978 PRODUCED BY FORD promising candidates on vehicle .ier Evaluation City Traffic (Detroit. Los Fleet 3uild FKvSS 105-75 simulation Angeles, Minneapolis) Evaluation City Traffic (Detroit. Los Angeles, Fleet Build Mountain Effectiveness FMVSS 105-75 t Combined durability F;-2,7M Minneapolis) Braie Department May 27, 980 010979 PRODUCED BY FORD ATTACHMENT II 0 THX'IDERSIHD SESTE-: PAPJ-ETSRS Weights GVW?. 2 Passenger Brake Test Weight Front Rear Total 2306 2058 *436*4 . 21^49 1*491 36*40 220*4- I905 *4109 , Wheel Base Rolling Radius IDo. 5 in 12.*4 in Vertical center of gravity Rear wheel cylinder Proportioning valve 6.2 in 1 3 / 1 6 in 30 0 /.36 Line pressure at 150 lbs pedal effort I5OO lb/in2 Brake Department May 15, 1980 g A0980 PRODUCED BY FORD