Document rxoDp3orN1ZJJrLw73xwxd1r

August 2$, i m Mr. C U, Orlaceli CTFA Talc Subcommittee Dear Larry; As a member of the CTFA Talc Subcommittee we attended a meeting on August 14 at Bristol M*y*r' teboratorws, HIIIsid. Haw Jersey, to near a report by the Scientific Committee hooded by Dr. F, Robert Roll of Johnson $ Johnson Company. Hi# committee was formed to determine *a method of testing talc to Identify dm presence of asbestos forte minerals1*. Or* approval of tha TaJc Subcommittee, the findings would be submitted to the Food and Drug Administration. Their recommen dation was that D.T.A. {Dlffaranttel Thermal Analysis) should be used to identify the presence of chrysolite atibesto* stnee it Is effective and occur*te to a degree of 0.3% to 1. >%. This method Is suggested over the previous use of X-Ray Diffraction because when chlorite, a desirable mineral, Is present it has boon mlalmorpretod as chrysodte asbestos, X-Ray DlflTactlon will be recommended to identify the* presence of tromoilte and other forms of asbostoe. This is the cemfnuaus seen method, using the compressed pellet or tablet. When presence Is identified, the *step scan method* will be used to dotemlrw tha perewnttg* degree to an {curacy of 0.3% to 1.d%, If detectable, the use of optical microscopy will be employed. Tills Is dispersion staining method, a modified refractive Index system to determine to fiber form. Thw phase form contrast microscope method Is not recommended, Somo discussion was given that the fiber particle should be abio to be ftfearized; that Is, split into Individual fibroids, Ths approved recommendation will be sent to tha food and Drug Administration, suggesting a limit of 1%chrysolite and I I tremolito in tele. The D.T.A. test for the project was run on several cosmetic teles such 3s Italian, North Carolina, Vermont and Alabama and ail were found with no detect*bio presence of chrysotlle, The companies running the test wore Johruon & Johnson and Avon, Both Chesebrough Ptmds and McCrone AsscclateS are going to buy this equipment which costs In the range Of $*009.00 to $12,900,90'. PLAINTIFFS EXHIBIT WCD-196 continued COFY LoGiudice/WCD/0252 w r, v - L#r l a v n M fU IV I *< At PtH meeting a most timely raport was given by Mr. J, H. Slvertsen, Manager - Statistical amt Computer Oprations of Johnson %Johnson Company, on "an estimate of * safe dtctlon level of asb*toi fiber In baby powder talc*. A copy of this is attached to this report, it shows that w o n j f there wore a pretence of l V a sb istpg, under the most adv^r se-otspiications 5? bstsy cswrfar to an Infant, the expasur* yfP^H tS n Sr IjwS limit of 10 asbeatos fibers per cc of atr. In fact, 3 computed tu ft/iy factor would bo approximately *8,308 to 1. Thus, 2 analytical ttwthod capable of detecting T%asbestos in talc would be more than adequets to confirm an acceptable low level of asfeoston In talcum powder used on Infant*. ThU report will be sent to the Pood and Drug Administration for consideration even before the report on the teat method Is submitted. It la felt that. If thta report on baby powder to ocknewlodged by the Pood and Drug Administration, it will definitely support our tu&t method. FFR/aam Attachment cc/Mr. G . J . Olppold Mr. R, R, Krsmmes Mr. J . C . Woodruff Mr, O. Ferry Mr. P. htxby Fred Rossch COPY LoGiudice/WCD/0253