Document a12gyQRomvjbBO3qm842B76Ob
February 19, 194-0
Analysis of Tank Cleaning W ork Done by J. S. Cole
(1) Total number of tank cleanings of which he was advised 30
(2) Number supervised in entirety
21
(3) Number of tanksopened before visit
0
(4-) Left before sludge was buried and covered
6
(5) Number in which
bathing was supervised
7
(6) Number in which
bathing was not supervised
20
(7) Number found to have been cleaned without notification 24-
(3) Probable number cleaned but not notified (calculated
on the base of 1039 tanks on a 4-year basis)
200
(9) Average duration of steaming (calculated on the
basis of 1 day per 10,000 barrels)
24- hours
(10) Average length of time - steaming to the burial
and coverage of sludge
2 days
(11) Total number of days required if all tank cleanings were supervised (estimated)
500
(12) New York office has been advised of failure of
notification. All Texaco bulk plants have communi-
'
cated with New York and were advised by Mr. Lewis
that no notification was necessary (154- tanks).
(13) In the case of three companies in which tank cleaning
occurred (see item 7) and of which Ne w York was
advised, nothing was done. These reports of failure
to notify were sent in Weekly Letters only and Cole
received no acknowledgment or .knowledge of what was
done to correct the failure of notification#
KE 0022381
2-
(14-) Safety Engineers can not write to each other. (15) Reports on lead discrepancies are sent to Division Offices
about 1 week after the blend has been made, at which time they should be checked. They have not been in the past and are now reported to Mr. Lewis, who accumulates them and advises the Safety Men in a Circular Letter about 1 month or 6 weeks later for investigation, which is too late as the gasoline has already left the tank in most instances. Find out why Mr. Lewis has not gotten after Safety Men to investigate these items when the reports are received and not let them go for 1 month or more until a number have accumulated for printing. Also differentiation should be made between lead lost, that is, blends which are too low and those which are too high, which may have an entirely different significance from a hygienic point of view0
0022382