Document aB11pdvE36w4GGvwJwzBYjoye

UNION CARBIDE CHEMICALS COMPANY INSTITUTE PLANT P. 0. BOX CHAPIFSTOH. W[ST VIRGIN. ..(Nom.j <" onipuny g. c. Giumbruno Industrial Relations DaU 4 December 1962 Originating o.pi. Medical Department - Plant 512 Aniwtring UlUr dot* W o Mr. L. N. Dickinson Mr. G. H. Daniels Mr. N. S. Eastman Mr. R. A. Huber Mr. B. F. King Mr. F. B. Snyder Dr. E. M. Best, Jr. Mr. E. G. Heinz Mr. P. E. Henry Mr. R. A. Neal Mr. D. R. Matheny-'-i,"<2!! Mr. N. H. Ketcham Dr. C. U. Dernehl Insulation Block Dust Survey Construction Insulation Shop Plant 511 Two reports by Mr. R. E. Peele have been issued on this subject (21 March 1962 and 20 July 1962) and sent out under my signature. On 16 May 1962, a copy of a letter from Doctor Nale to the UCC Central Purchasing Department in New York pertaining to this subject was sent to Gome of the people on the above distribution list. Undoubtedly, Johns Mnnville is extremely interested in having our Construction Department use their "Thermobestos" blocks. However, I believe that possibly unnecessary pressure is being applied to U6 from several sources. The enclosed report by Mr. Peele Includes information on an invitation for Mr. Peele to visit Manville, New Jersey, at Johns Manville's expense to evaluate their industrial hygiene studies. Mr. Peele points out in this report also that he has been contacted recently by the Design and Construction Department at the Technical Center who have implied that Mr. Peele should comply with Johns Manville's proposal. It is my opinion that we should continue to do surveys, with limitations, on samples of '"thermobestos" blocks that are of a new formula and are submitted to our Construction Insulation Shop at the Institute Plant for evaluation. However, I am not in favor of Mr. Peele accepting Johns Manville's invitation and would appreciate approval or disapproval for tills trip from my supervision so that Mr. Peele can be informed accordingly. Very truly yours, R.L/. Sexton, M.D. Plant Medical Director M' INTERNAL CORRESPONDENCE 808799 UNION CARBIDE CHEMICALS COMPANY institute plant r o dck ?sji, i i imi ;mrj. v.tm vihmnia riNom.) C ampoflr locaiion R. J. Sexton, M.D. Medical Department Copt I. Dal* 3 December 1962 Originoihg op. Industrial Hygiene - Plant 512 Antwting Uttf tfali Subjttl Johns Manville "Thermobestos" On 21 March 1962, an Industrial Hygiene Report, i.e., 62-IH-1-6-1, identified the existence of a hazard to health in the Construction Insulation Shop during such times as when insulation blocks manufactured by the Johns Manville Company are being fabricated with exhausted band saws. It was recommended at that time thatLjLQ" x 36" x 4"--"Thermobestos" insulation blocks^shontd not be fabricated with the existing equipment unless -- (a) The atmospheric dust problem could be reduced to below 20 mppcf of air through the use of ventilation, etc., or The producer of this product begins manufacturing an insulation block which will not release upon fabrication with a band saw, dust concentrations in excess of 20 mppcf of air. In accordance with these reconnendatlons, the Construction Insulation Shop discontinued almost immediately the purchase of "Thermobestos" insulation blocks. Qa 20 July 1962, a second Industrial Hygiene Report, i.e., 62-IH-2-G-1, was submitted subsequent to an evaluation of three new insulation materials supplied by the Johns Manville Company. This report concluded that these materials were improved over the original. However, the dust concentrations produced upon fabrication of these insulation blocks were substantially in excess of the recommended safe concentrations of 20 mppcf of air. Therefore, the recommendations contained in this report remained exactly as those stated in the initial report of March, 1962. On 20 November 1962 the author was contacted by Mr. D. R. Matheny, General Foreman of the Insulation Shop, who stated that three Jolins Manville representatives, i.e., Messers. F. E. Saxer, N. Gordon, and H. E. Kaufman, were present and had requested a meeting with the Plant Industrial Hygienist.. This meeting was held in the lobby of Building 2, at which time Mr. Saxer produced the accompanying copy of portions of a report submitted by the Johns Manville -Industrial Hygiene laboratory located at Manville, N.J. Mr. Saxer stated that, in accordance with this report, they were not able to produce results which agreed with those contained in the reports submitted by this department. Therefore, they were concerned and interested in learning if their methods of reproducing The Johns Manville trade name*`fcfctheir insulation blocks 808800 R. J. Sexton, M.D. 1 December 1962 i'uf.;e 2 cir environmental conditions, sampling and evaluating the dust concentrations contained therein were oubjcct to question. At this point he stated also that thi3 conclusion was promoted on the basis of their analysis of the atmospheric dust conditions produced by their competitors product, (i.e., Enylc or Item H 'jAT in the report) which in no way agreed with the data submitted in the industrial Hygiene Report - IH-62-I-G-I. It wa3 explained at this point, that this department's interest in this problem is alwayG confined solely to the environmental conditions ns they effect the health of oug. workers, and that no part of the investigation should be construed as an attempt to arbitrarily promote the use of one * company's product over that of another. Upon completion of this statement, Mr. Snxer proposed that Mr. D. R. Mathery and the Plant's Industrial Hygienist make a trip to Mmvillc, Hew Jersey, at Johns Manville's expense and at a time selected by Union Carbide. This visit would be for the specific purpose of observing, scrutinizing and comparing their method of atmospheric dust evaluation with that as utilitized by the Institute Plant's Industrial Hugiene Department. It va3 Mr. Cnxcr's opinion that such a visit would permit a more positive approach to the problem and remove the possibility of misunderstandings, etc., that results from written correspondence. At this point, Mr. Saxer wa3 assured that there wuuld be no personal objection on my part to the performance of such a service. However, a proposal of .this nature would have to be submitted to the Plant Manager, Mr. L. N. Dickinson, through appropriate channels before a final decision could be made. In conclusion,.It should be stated that a phone call was received from Mr. F. G. Comerford ofISSsign and Construction on the morning of 21 November 1962, who requested that he be brought up to date on this specific problem. This request wa3 immediately satisified both by verbal explanation end by the promise that copies of both reports, i.e., 62-3E-I-G-I end (.2-111-2-M-l, would be mailed to him iucncdiately. Mr. Comcrrord further stated that vo should ' not back down on our requirements, but that it probably might be vise to consider their proposal in light of. the many ramifications of the problem t-.:j it affects the whole company structure, i.e., purchasing, sales, manufacturing, etc. V--ry truly yours, ( Robert E. Fcelc Industrial Hygienist HEP:gh Enclosure 808802 l . w' X-'~ b vn;; :: .. i - / cu ^ . or.** . c:: If ror ,-l-t -- r.*.:.* Mr /- ;.7.z.~l of 2-GO f } ; ;r '.I: O U bO a. tlu'j cLcdc caterer tie ll-iai. . .) < - .-i -v;loa v:"0 t.r';tcu ir;lv. 11 I Var-. - r. i err ./ v. .t-J. '/".i c/vat blech'.. /or....alr-3 ra*2 ;;lv. : i i. L.d.. b.l:ch.- c..' r:ro oo:: a it Lor'..2 071 r.) r. .cLr.drc of.. -.r- c. Z.'r/j b) c"^irv; 2>Cv s..co:.21tjU> 'll i'er 1C t. iO par car.. c ) u. c. ZpO.- ... a cciailt.Le.rlr ^ v.or lo oryc a. V^^r-CD car cca. ....j ' ~'.r. '..a'; a.:.:-, arc rj vo:: la II. i/.o clu.vt car; .tie.; ta:. t j ` 1: 11c:/..aa far/. v.\e ou'r'vlorit/ report'.1 lr/ Crier C-all/a of . `./.or .r.:.2 ;. :rir.;r.L`.L v>.~a as.it blrarc :r:I..Ittrl to t'.r;: 1j . / r_. V.:- raai'.lGa rlr-a Leif;ri'.rl 11 .vt fee. j.lr.ta Curt cccrcoeiticn, Z-.' In..-' . ."_v:r;`...riD err./, G'.rr: <o elf;.;* tj?;:; oi* blccfe. " b ' * ** C C v Ox C*J,. I. y -- - Ca 3<U V --c C. * w C --... w '. 3 - . , , V -- l * t-.L Mli," wV,.:.u * O C4 .. W .. J * fttv w ^ mm C* . . . V4 -- -- ' ^ c.o:^d*^ic-. Oa Ccr- cc::.-*':-wiv.-iC'V. L; i.-*.Vv i. r r*crc.j "i* j_* ii *,,r.y c L ;<;jwi:ro c-^ *1.0 r.:; ^.n Cu'd-i* **0 cJ~tla tluv r. - J c*: V. 1 v Z - m \ . Jr OC* **-^\ 'Ij, **CC 4/*.^.^ !i T f.. v w* < w*c> r'Tz-ivo clocii^ics ex ho i*cr:.'ulco c^k.. 0 --< -- *~"v 0 wj 7,^11^' CwA ,u. j J ^ZISHZ II 'r"'" DAT* Ai::osrx:rjc duo? co::cz:.Tr-inc:: dava 808803 ( IlrpcivLr-itAl ?._i Ccut j ; {i-.*y___<_____ 2-v; < . 3-<v:i i wU* V,'- /-.Vl' Corc.^Lrc'.iou la cppoi' cl Air 250? CcsdJ.'.iwiisd at vc; :.i, 7j7 Ac ail -loco J u* 95-1CC3 9>.' HO.C J _ 19.9 I I39.3 ;o._4 .'j. ol Urea cozdltion-aj S3.2 | 15.1 ;! loll -0.-0 Abaor'c-d Oariaij CoALaio. iu.i - '3 > i* 1 G.-y to 7> ,o ..1, 707 i 2.7 D.-y vo V1>-3CG,j f-i, 9o-' 13.6 i 2.0 12.3 1 t 16.4 47.1 4 j j I ; M./ ' 31.6 **> * + 17.2 1 i 34.2 15.0 IP' .0 51.3 .-.y.j *.vv< j 54.0 > ji * ' * I ill-j I .4.0 i i * : ^ **+'w. ioi--u.ai.icr. uao uucd for ccr.pico cctai.ica to Ooioo Carbide .4Pwi'cr co Ao.-aalc iio. 5o, sacploo 21, 2P., 23, ?cscarcij> 2cport !o. 4. - 0. . If im I