P440SG6NC-BASED C-HEMICALS KtLU BUGS.UJESOS. AND OUR ADVERTISING
PROGRAM! It can't be helped—we're too REST busy to write nice advertiseIN We're HEAcf ments. getting so many orders for PHOSGENE-BASED CHEMICALS and for converting them into CARBAMATES AND UREAS that we can't expand our facilities and staff fast enough. Our plant—complete with house trailers for temporary offices—would look like a Yukon mining camp if it weren't so clean (by the way—know any chemists or ChE's who'd like jobs...eventually in permanent quarters?). But don't think we're just "busy." We're also hungry for new business. Name your need—phosgene derivatives, pharmaceutical intermediates, agricultural chemicals, etc.—then call, write, or wire Ott. We're never too busy to give you personal attention.
OTT Chemical Tjr © AA
4
C&EN
500 Agard Road, Muskegon, Michigan PHONE: 616 744-1626 J A N . 3. 1966
LETTERS Webb-Pomerene Report D E A R SIR:
As a former chief of t h e F e d e r a l T r a d e Commission's division of export trade, I would like to compliment you on your special W e b b - P o m e r e n e report (C&EN, Nov. 1, 1965, p a g e 9 2 ) . I think it is the most comprehensive and trenchant review of the act which has been done in recent years a n d probably ranks close to the best reporting job on this law that has ever been done. Several random comments: 1. Export T r a d e Bulletin 1-55 (in which a price-exchange arrangement b e t w e e n a W e b b Act association a n d its principal foreign competitor was struck d o w n ) was more t h a n simple staff action. While technically promulgated by the staff, it was an announcement (less identification) of a formal action taken by the commission against one W e b b - P o m e r e n e association. It was worked out carefully with t h e Justice D e p a r t m e n t and certainly h a d the intended effect of interring t h e Silver Letter once and for all. Of course, it is not "binding" on t h e courts, b u t I have little doubt it accurately reflects prevailing court rulings. 2. At some point, Congress' focus is going to shift from "How well is F T C performing under the Act?" to "Is there any compelling reason w h y F T C should b e in the Act at all?" W h a t e v e r purpose Congress may have h a d in 1918 for committing supervisory authority to t h e F T C , today F T C simply interferes with functions that should b e performed either b y Commerce or by Justice, and the resulting confusion probably has h a d m u c h to do with the unimpressive performance of W e b b - P o m e r e n e in the over-all scheme of U.S. foreign economic policy. W e b b - P o m e r e n e administration has two simple aspects: (1) It is a promotional vehicle for expanding United States export trade. ( 2 ) It provides a kind of sanctuary from t h e antitrust laws which, u n d e r traditional doctrine, must b e closely policed. These are not always consistent objectives, and logically Commerce and Justice ought respectively to administer them, working out t h e necessary priorities w h e r e abrasions occur. W i t h F T C holding primary jurisdiction, however, W e b b - P o m e r e n e
has mostly fumbled along. Traditionally, F T C has b e e n schizoid about which aspect it should stress a n d t h e periodic flareups with Justice h a v e m a d e Commerce gun-shy over t h e whole deal and unwilling to perform its role effectively. This is certainly not a criticism of the quality of present W e b b Act administration under F T C ' s able William Bailey. I do suggest, however, t h a t there are basic institutional flaws in the existing statutory scheme which m a y i m p e d e t h e fundamental purposes of the law. Perhaps W e b b Pomerene is an anachronism and ought quietly to b e laid to rest. But if the Act still has some utility, its potential is probably never going to b e realized until F T C is diplomatically taken out of the picture (a development which the Commission, at least, might privately w e l c o m e ) . Presumably this would have to b e b y n e w legislation. O n e of these days Congress ought to get on with it. R O B E R T L.
Washington,
WALD
D.C.
D E A R SIR:
. . .Your article on the W e b b - P o m erene Export T r a d e Act of 1918 is excellent. I believe its publication m a y have beneficial results in t h e area of promoting n e w associations. . . . W I L L I A M A. B A I L E Y
Assistant General Counsel for Export Trade, Federal Trade Commission Washington, D.C.
D E A R SIR:
M y congratulations for an excellent job on your W e b b - P o m e r e n e special report. I read it with m u c h interest. I was interested to note that most of the chemical company lawyers felt as I did, as evidenced b y the unidentified sampling in your article. F R A N K R. L Y O N , J R .
Director of Law Carbide Corp. New York, N.Y.
Department,
Union
D E A R SIR:
T h e National Export Expansion Council is taking a h a r d look at actions
and measures which might serve to expand U.S. exports. Your special report will be given thoughtful attention by the National Council in connection with this particular aspect of the export expansion effort. FRED C. FOY
Chairman National Export Expansion Washington, D.C. •
•
Council
•
specific structures lor creative chemistry
DEAR SIR:
. . .There are very few subjects of the importance of Webb-Pomerene that so little has been written about. I think the article makes a very real addition to information in an area that is certainly in need of clarification.
OCH2CH2CI
CHARLES S. MADDOCK
organic intermediates
General Counsel, Hercules Powder Co. Wilmington, Del.
Water Pollution Control
Phenoxyethyl Chloride: Colorless to straw colored liquid with boiling range 120-125°C. at 25mm. Used as an intermediate for preparation of textile products.
DEAR SIR:
Having been in the U.S. Public Health Service as a research aquatic biologist for many years, I would like respectfully to take issue with the last item under "Washington Concentrates" (C&EN, Dec. 6, 1965, page 19). Please, this is my opinion and cannot reflect the viewpoint of the PHS. The statement that "Morale is sagging in the Government's water pollution control office" is a gross understatement, but this is true largely because of the history of the Commission Corps in the water program, where this kind of service was never needed. Your treatment in this writeup tends to make the reader believe that the good past of the coips in the water program is being overlooked. How can you be writing about the uncertainty of their status under the new law? The new law is crystal clear on their status. They can't be in the coips and be in the new Water Pollution Control Administration. I hope that some of them will continue to serve by transferring to civil service status. The best part of the new law is the abolition of the coips. Certainly there can be no reason for a military, or rather, uniformed organization, in this water program. Would you argue that there is a need for a military organization in this water program? Furthermore, why should young men serving two
OCH3 NO 2
CI 4-Chlor-2-Nitro Anisole: Dry, yellow to brown needles. 99-100% purity with melting point at 97-98°C. Used as dyestuff intermediate, organic chemical intermediate.
Pfister CHEMICAL WORKS, INC.
RIDGEFIELD, NEW JERSEY
Pfister
PHONE AREA 201 WH 5-5400 IN N.Y.C. DIAL 947-4934 JAN.
3, 1 9 6 6 C & E N
5
years in this corps be given credit for serving their military obligation? The fear stated in your treatment "that the appointment will be more political than practical," should not worry anyone who wishes to change to civil service status and to perform a practical service, away from this elite but outmoded U.S. PHS Commission Corps. Much of the so-called bad image of the water program stems from these privileged insiders who have held back outsiders who have been trying to perform a better service in making the truth known about the status of water quality of the major waterways of these United States. Louis G. WILLIAMS
Cincinnati,
How much water do you have to heat? How fast? Give Hazen the problem.
Ohio
When Are Overheads Huge? DEAR SIR:
If your problem is volume water heating—for any industrial purpose —Hazen will build you a heater to do the job. It may not be the cheapest heater you can buy, but it will stand up and give you the least maintenance, longest life and best economy. Efficient heat transfer is Hazen's business, from air or gases at high temperature to low temperature liquids. If you have any of these jobs to do Hazen may have equipment already designed to suit your needs. Hazen uses bayonet combustion tubes immersed in the fluid you want to heat. They are made of the stainless alloys that made the Hazen metallic recuperators famous for high temperature furnaces. Within these tubes is the Hazen patented "inside-out" gas combustion principle, where jets of combustion air enter a stream of gas and primary air already mixed. Heat input is uniform through^ FUEL GAS IN
WASTE GAS OUT
r
Tl
*-
4
i
4
4
k
4
4
'_*_'_'_
»
'
'
'
*
d
•»—•—*—•—t—•—•—• — • — • — • — • — » ~ r IGNITION
Y COMBUSTION AIR IN
out the tube length, minimizing hot spots and tube distortion and aging. The process is kind to metal—that's why Hazen installations are so enduring. If you have a fluid heating problem—air, gases, solutions, petroleum—give it to Hazen engineers. Or write for literature. *The heater illustrated was built to heat water at the rate of 250 gpm open flow at a temperature rise of 5 0 ° F . U-tube economizers carry the flue gases through the water in two passes providing a thermal efficiency of 9 0 % plus. Water use: heating a liquid chemical by recirculation. 6
C&EN
JAN.
3,
1966
HAZEN ENGINEERING Box 10597, Pittsburgh, Pa. 15235 412-242-1750
Some of the reasoning in R. Curtis Johnson's letter on "Federal Aid to Education" (C&EN, Dec. 13, 1965, page 5) strikes me as poorly thought through. Mr. Johnson refers to the "huge overheads" of the Federal Government. Let's look at a specific example. The National Science Foundation (a major federal supporter of university engineering research) this year received an appropriation of $479,999,000, of which $14,200,000 is earmarked for "program development and management." The rest will go for grants, contracts, and fellowships. Is less than 3% a "huge" rate of overhead? Will Mr. Johnson's university accept and administer grants whose overhead is limited to 3%? Mr. Johnson's indictment of the telecommunications industry for contributing only 0.06% of profits to universities overlooks the extensive inhouse research programs of the leading companies in this field. If Mr. Johnson could show that the annual $2 million or so that this percentage represents is insufficient to provide the increments of trained manpower needed in the telecommunications laboratories, he would be on firmer ground. Without such a showing, isn't it somewhat parochial for a university administrator to criticize corporations for conducting their own research instead of subsidizing universities to do it for them? JOHN LYMAN
Washington,
D.C.
