Document om8rYmBLeLmKOXkrONgNq2ny8

September 4, 1968 Hr. J. L. Jacqmaln Amway Corporation 7575 East Pulton Road Ada Michigan 49301 Dear Mr. Jacqmaln: I will reply aerially to the queatlona about Aroclor 1254. Included In your letter of August 23. 1. The oral LDr0 In rata whan administered undiluted was approximately 12,000 mg/kg of body weight. --- 2. When applied undiluted to the skin of rabbits the mini mum' lethal dose was between 1260 and 2000 mg/kg. When applied as a 4 solution in com oil consecutively for 20 days themean lethal dose was approximately 75 mg/kg. These data Indicate that the undiluted material la not readily absorbed through the unbroken akin, whereas when In a solution In oil penetration of the unbroken skin Is significant. 3. We have not done the gross animal skin Irritation , and eye irritation potential studies. As far as skin . contact Is concerned we have never had any particular j problems during the manufacture of the material nor ! have we had reports from users of skin reactions. i. We do not know of any significant hazards In connection 1 with the Industrial use of Aroclor 1254 as long as , our recommended handling precautions are observed. For example, we recommend good mechanical exhaust ventilation control of any vapors that might be liberated if Aroclor 1254 la heated. We recommend that repeated and prolonged skin contact be avoided. : This Is because members of the Aroclor series of produots can be absorbed through the unbroken skin and cause systemic Injury. Secondly, the liquid MONS 090485 I Nr. J. L. Jacqmaln -2- Saptember 4, 1968 Aroolora ara relatively good aolvanta tor tha protaotlva fata and olla In tha akin. Contlnuoua or prolongad exposure than can lead to drying and chapping of the akin. 5. About 20 pears ago 200 humane subjected to tha Schwartz and Peck patch teat procedure resulted in only one ' Individual with a positive reaction. There was no reaction on retesting in this Individual 10 daya later nor did arty'of the other subjects show any reaction on retesting thus Indicating that Aroclor 1254 la not a sensitizer. We are not aware of tha use of Aroclor 1254 In any consumer product although It la possible that It haa been used In latex-type paints for outdoor applications. I am sure that our Nedleal Director, Dr. Kelly, and X would have to know the type of consumer product and use contemplated before we could express an opinion as to the advisability of Including ' Aroclor 1254 In a consumer product. Sincerely, HFWioJs Elmer P. Wheeler Manager, Environmental Health MONS 090486