Document zooKqe2pYBVBrEyQwOqOYN4g6

DIVISION OF SAFER AND HXQIEN5 NOVEMBER 3, 1950 PLAINTIFF'S EXHIBIT BKK-239 Janes H. Fluknr, Superintendeat Division of Safety md Hygiene Columbus, Ohio In ret Moraine Products DlvisUm General Motors Corporation Dayton, Ohio On HoTOEber 2, 1950 the two undersigned members of the DiTision of Safety and Hygiene re-surreyed this plant for possible exposure to material* causing dermatitis. On April 20, 1950 both members also nade a report on existing conditions In this plant end stated therein that the company had installed equipment to filter and sterilise the oils which were thought to be inducing dermatitis. The incidence of cases lessened by degrees bat was not completely eliminated. It was learned that in Department $ (Cast Iren Machining or Bearinfixing) there were no cases of dermatitis at the time of this present wisltj in Department 7 (Wheel Cylinder Asaeubly) on lines #2 and #3 there were no dermatitis cases on the date of this visit} and in Department 19 (Brake Shoe) only one msy^had a case of dermatitis on this date. The company places men who hare developed dermatitis in some other area in this latter department so that they can be away from the oil mid not sub jected to recurrent exposures. Practically all of the people who have experienced dermatitis have worked with a material consisting of diacetone alcohol to which is added from 20% to 20JC castor oil. Parts are placed in this mixture for a leak testing operation. It is a part of a manufacturing process and, according to company officials, cannot be changed. There are approximately ^50 people working with this material and only a few cases of dermatitis have developed. The company lmaedlately removes an employee from this opera tion who shows signs of dermatitis and places him on a job where there is no exposure to the material used there. The Medical Department treats the dermatits and there have been no lost time on any of the cases to date. The question was presented to the Management as to whether this diacetone alcohol could be eliminated and a substitute used in its place. The ccepany officials stated that to the present time there is only this material which will definitely give a satisfactory inspection test and not be corrosive to the various parts being tested. Me present below from The Chemistry of Industrial Toxicology by Elkins the statement that - -, - 'i. diacetone alcohol, (CHj)2 CCBCHj COCHj* has harmful effects including narcosis and possible , -V *- " a <-_-- . . v ' jv kltasy damage} and the Condensed Chemical Dictionary states that there are tse^idss';^^% i  ;? n- : .r**^i vt . p-r-v V-fr, -,,***?.* 1. r**?? <<. 1 w&vS, ?HF*J .VfrVJ X* v -a- of diacetone alcohol, one of which is acetone-free* S"s. .^"A!V\ ' 1 ^ ".>-#'< ;>* * *;-*. sr*v?-?*- :4*Va<. The coapany .stated that ^fpraxlMAly ?5$}ot the dermatitis eases.cleared up when the. , -4^ \\ . akin was given coaaiat^t and thoroxigh cleansing. ^' - . 4- .V. .. u -.a,..* .* - . v* ' * Xv * y- I *. *y *.#> * rr **-".* .' -.-V, ; , ^ ;*> !v. .` The foreman in the Department'of Testing statedthat? he^tfcought the castor oil might be ' * - . - ->: ' .>**& ` '" - ` a factor for when the pH of'the castor oil. is around 6*^ or:leao, it is on the acide ' . x- v.- ' ' . side and some dermatitis had been experienced; when it s?aronnd 7*0 or at normal, or -,v" >'' * > . even on the alkaline side, no dermatitis appeared'to develop* However, the writer feels that the castor oil is not a factor since the diacetone alcohol is of such a nature that * s ' V-* .. it continually removes the natural oils from the skin' and any type of oil, either castor / .. / ' \ ' ' or lanolin, would tend to be helpful rather than harmful*' - . -. k-. : . . *.. -V v 't ..V