Document p29rDRk5azYm7NYG1JkjeqaYB

.i V X ' * - " r . --: -- ii I ( COPY Dr. D .V.hJ Hardy,"' Dr. H.H. Kevuaa. Honsento Chfcdcal Cacsflmy St* Louis, Kissouri Septoaber 20, 1955 Dr. J.W . Barrett London ifour osco Septecber 8 to h r. Naso: AHOCLOR TQXICHY Howard Hason has given a your oeao of 8eptecber 8. I w ill be happy to diaouss th is v lth Dr. Hewaan during his v i s i t hors. I th ick , however, there are several points that Z can answer you now. You consent upon the differen ce in to x ic ity between Arcelor 125^ and 12V2. This i s not p a rticu la rly surprising because in the e a rlie r work i t was found that to x icity increased with chlorin ation. Of course, fro a the standpoint o fiv o l a t i l i t y in the case of inhalation or absorption froa the gut fro a the point o f view of ingestion are important. Frankly, there was not too great a difference between the two coapoundt, however. As you know, the aexiaua allowable concentrate i s 0.1 al/cub ic oeter in the case of 125*, and as high as 10.0 aga in the case o f 1266. I think the forcer i s too low and the la t t e r i s too high. In this country they don't use the HACs very ro u tin e ly , but certainly in England Z th ick i t would be a lrig h t to consider 0.2 cga/cubic aeter as perfectly safe. ' - 'Til'dif*tr'-knbtf ~fiW'you'^'rd'^*gYt'*Ahy"fcirti'dulift"" 'dvih f kgef 'f-* doing aore work. What i s i t that you want to prove? ; I bello re your work should be directed towards finding out vhat the concentrations are o f Aroclor during differenti operations .whether i t i s in d u s tria l or painting. The re ports you have seen fro a Kettering Laboratory are the re su lt o f approximately 15*000 to 520,000 expenditure by KCC. HOC*a position can be suaoerired' in th is fashion. Wa know Aroclors are toxio but the actual l i c i t has not bean pre c is e ly defined. Zt does not cake too aucb difference, ; i t seeas to ae, because our aaln worry is what w ill happen i f an individual dovelopes any type o f liv e r disease and gives a history of Aroclor exposure. I aa sure the ju ries would not pay a great deal of attention to H lCi. 1 57 c ^( -( C an face 2 Septsaber 20, 1955 AftOCLOR 7QXIC2T? V, therefore, review very new Aroclor use froa th is point o f view I f I t la tn in d u stria l application where we can f t t a ir concentrt Iona and have some reasonable expectation that the a ir concentrations v l l l stay the sane, ve are ouch ore lib e r a l in the ate of A roclor. I f , however. I t la < d istrib u te d to householders where I t can be used in alcost any shape and fo ra and ve are never able to taow hov ouch o f the concentretlon they are expoaed t o , va ara suoh core s t r ic t Ko amount o f to x lo lty ts s tln x v l l l obvita th is la s t dllaaoa and therefore 2 do not believe any more test* In c vould be ju s tifie d * i L e t 's see vhat our discussions v lth Dr. Newoan and yourself brine out BKKtk B. Enmet K e lly , K.D . "l 58