Document ppym4dXKJmmNyEvdepNg5Nxak

cftcNcc TO D. R. Bisho? -- A3NB V. T. Marrecci -- B3SB W. B. Pspaceorge -- G4WA P. S. Park -- E3NE G. Roush -- A2SA 0 1 197 COhriDENTIAL' CC: D. L. Coleman -- A2SA H. W. Curtis -- 1740 R. W. Flint -- G4NE W. R. Gaffey -- C2SH J. A. Guidi -- G4NG P. E. Heisler -- 1740 E. V. John -- A2ND J. E. McKee -- A3NB F. C. Meyer -- A2SA J.-W. Molloy -- 1740 E. Tillman -- A2SB B. J. Wander -- C2SA The attached Q&A reflects the comments received on the wording of the initial draft dated Sept. 26, 1979. We will consider this the final version on Oct. 2 unless factual errors are reported. JJS:pa Attachment John J) Spano V. r ' GOISO^S C02421 corfidehtiar SUBJECT TO PROTECTIVE O R D E R .^ September '28, 1979 Page 1 of 3 Q&As -- DR. SUSKIND'S KRUMMRICH STUDY Questions Re Chloracne 1. Q. What is the timetable for the study? A. It will begin Oct. 2 with interviews of volunteers. On Oct. A and 5 physical exams will take place. It is indefinite when the study will be completed and a final report made, but it will take at least several months. 2. Q. What is the skin disorder mentioned in the notice to employes? A. Chloracne, which is a'skin condition similar in appearance to acne in adolescents. 3. Q. Why are blood and urine samples included when they have never been before? A. Dr. Suskind has included these tests to verify that there are no ill effects.other than chloracne. A. Q. How many people are involved in the study? A. It depends on how many people volunteer to participate in the study. There could be as many as 141. 5. Q. Why haven't retirees and peopleformerly employed in the penta chlorophenol and chlorophenol departments been included in the study? A. Bnployes who formerly worked in these departments are involved in t h e . study. We needed a readily available and easily identifiable group, and present employes filled the bill. 6. Q. What about employes who are not regularly assigned to the chlorophenol department -- those who may enter and leave the area once or twice a day, walking through? A. That is a casual exposure which, to the best of our knowledge, should not cause chloracne. 7. Q. I understand Dr. Suskind conducted a similar study at Nitro, W. Va. What were the results? A. The Nitro study involved a different chemical and the final report has not been completed. 8. Q. Have there been any cases of chloracne at Krummrich? A. In July, 1979, when the last routine check was made there were five cases of chloracne observed among employes at the plant. GO i i > 0 4 6 Q&As -- DR. SUSKIND'S KRUMMRICH STUDY Questions Re Chloracne (Continued) 9* Q. What is chlorophenol and how is it used? A. The various chlorophenols (ortho, di and para) are used as inter mediate chemicals in the manufacturing of various products, such as dyes, agricultural chemicals and wood preservatives. 10. Q. Is chlorophenol a hazardous material? A. Chlorophenol is classified for shipping purposes as a corrosive liquid. It can cause burns. We regard It as a toxic product that requires worker protection to reduce exposure. Questions Re Dioxin 1. Q. We understand that OSHA has detected the presence of dioxin In ' samples taken at Krummrich. Is this true? A. In a meeting last June 5 at the Krummrich Plant, OSHA inspectors indicated verbally that dioxin levels were found in samples taken in and near one of the manufacturing units at the plant. 2. Q. According to our sources, OSHA found dioxin at 300 ppb with 2,3,7,8 tetrachlorodibenzo-para-dioxin (TCDD) representing about 50 percent of the total. A. That is the information OSHA gave us verbally. This product sample was taken last February from an out-of-doors location near the unit. However, analyzing for dioxin is an extremely difficult procedure and we are working to determine the validity of the OSHA data. 3. Q. We understand that Monsanto has analyzed some samples for dioxin to determine the validity of the OSHA data. What were the results? A. In our analysis of a product sample, using an analytical method capable of detecting dioxin down to 10 parts per billion; two tests did not indicate the presence of dioxin, while a third test indicated 18 ppb of 2,3,7,8 tetrachlorodibenzo-para-dioxin (TCDD). Another sample taken from a non-production area (a loading dock) showed 500 or 2,600 ppb o f _______ dioxin on two analyses of the same sample at two different labs. The source Is not known and is being checked now. 4. Q. What are the symptoms of dioxin poisoning? A. Significant exposure to certain isomer of dioxin can result in chlor acne. This is a skin condition similar in appearance to that of acne in an adolescent. SUBJECT TO G015047 September 28, 1979 Page 3 of 3 Q&As -- DR. SUSKIND1S KRUMMRICH STUDY Questions Re Dioxin (Continued) 5. Q. What is the current status of the OSHA citations issued against the Krummrich Plant? Are you contesting the citations? A. Yes, a notice of contest has been filed with OSHA. CONFIDENTIAL SUBJECT TO PROTECTIVE ORDER. G 015048