Document RvE4JbYO63gDDGDDymNYKLRa

\ THE ASSOCIATED ETHYL COMPANY LIMITED {Re#Office: THE ADEl,PHI, LONDONW.C.2 jfddivss all communications until furthernoticeto.-- ma fnrnr~ i **.. KINGSWAX, LONDON, W.C.2 iL(rectors: a. */. b o y l e U. B.AUG.KESSLER (NETHERLANDS) H. 3. HEATH EVES R.W.SELLERS N.A.GASS A. J . SINGLETON W. N. GRUBB (U.S.A) E.E. SOUBRY L.N. HAMILTON (U.S.A) E. W. WEBB (U.S.A) T. R. A. SEVAN, MANAGINGDIRECTOR Telephone: Temple Bar 5225 (4 lines) Inland Telegrams: Ethylppri, Estrand, Eondon OUR REF. N/e. HF/MB. YOUR REF. 21st August, 1940. Dr. R.A. Kehoe, Dept, of Physiology, College of Medicine, University of Cincinnati, Cineinnati, Ohio, U.S.A. Dear Dr. Kehoe, Tank Cleaning. I have just completed reading with very great interest your monumental report on the investigations carried out on the lead hazard from tanks which have contained Ethyl gasoline. . There is one point which is not quite clear to me, and, as it assumes the very greatest importance, I am writing to you to see if you will be so kind as to elucidate thevpoint for me. It concerns the incidence of organic lead found in the sludge in the various categories of tanks. On Pag 26 and in Table 20 it is reported that the mean value for organic lead for a total of 504 results gives a mean of 0.042, from which it is -- deduced that the margin of safety between the recorded mean value and the known lethei. concentration is scant. However, the recorded means for the various different astegories of tanks given in Table 20 would seem to lie between 0.015 and 0.018, this general level being Somewhat over one-third of the quoted mean for all results of 0.042 and being about one-sixth of the value 0.010 which is Indicated as being a lethal concentration. ~ I am ready to admit that my interpretation of the data summarised in Table 20 is in error, and, therefore, I would be very grateful if you could clear this matter up for m . Yours very truly, Original by steamer.