Document a4ynQddrBYG7JKVYqnLypNqKb

INTER-OFFICE CORRESPONDENCE Et h y l Ga s o l in e Co r p o r a t io n Ch r y s l e r b u il d in g 405 Le x in g t o n a v e n u e Ne w Yo r k September 9, 1940 Doctor W. F. MacbJLe Cincinnati Dear Doctor Machle: Confirming our conversation during the week, I am attaching a list of questions from members of the New Xork Division pertaining to your report "A Study of the Hazards of Cleaning Gasoline Storage Tanks." Very truly yours, cc - ?ir. B. W. Kaley Mr. 0. B. Lewis KE 0022356 INTER - OFFICE CORRESPONDENCE Et h y l Ga s o l in e Co r p o r a t io n Ch r y s l e r b u il d in g 405 LEXINGTON AVENUE Ne w Yo r k August 2k, 19^0 / Mr. R. C. Murphy- Dear Dick* The following are my questions and comments on the report on l,A Study Of The Hazards Of Cleaning Gasoline Storage Tanks" The terminology used in this report makes it extremely difficult for a layman or any one not constantly in touch with re search and allied work to understand. The question that comes to the front in my mind in connection with this is* Who is the report to be given to? The report is based on the per centage of lead in the sludge which may be and probably is the correct method however I would like to asks Is a small well ventilated tank gm with a given per centage of lead in the sludge just as hazardous as a lange poorly ventilated tank -with the same concentiation of lead in the sludge? Is the distribution of the lead uniform throughout the sludge in a tank ? If not isn*t it likely that the sample taken from tanks which shov/ed a lower concentration did not include a poration of the sludge from the spot of high concentration ? This latter question does not mean much though in view of the conclusions that all tanks must be treated as hazarddus. Is the concentration of^sca?e^rom the aides of the tank so low that no special prec^tuons nedd be taken when workmen are removing it? Is it so low that we can now say there is no hazard from lead when ho-fc work is done on the sides ? Just how thoroughly must a tank be cleaned before we can say it is free of any lead hazard ? Must the scaile be removed from the side walls ? At the moment the above seem to ba the only questions I have concerning the report. Very truly yours. \ K& 0022357 N22484.01 Et h y l Ga s o l in e Co r p o r a t io n Ch k y s l e r Bu il d in g -105 Le x in g t o n Av e n g e Ne w Yo k k August 24, 1940 Mr. R. C. Murphy Dear Dick: Herewith my questions on Dr. Machle's paper as per your circular letters 265 and 275. 1. Have any small tanks(10,000 gal.) been checked for sludge and what results if any were found? 2. Are there any known cases of lead poisoning from cleaning these small tanks - in facty are they ever cleaned? What is the symbol 'P. E. * as used in the tables, table #5, foe example? 4. Does thickness of sludge affect the amount of lead to which men are exposed? 5. What is meant by 'variability* pages 9 & 10, also explain table on page 10. 6. What is the function of litharge in the refining operation? 7. Explain significance of symbols 'R* and 'f' in Table 14. Very truly yours K 0022358 N22484.02