Document 10GkB5yQqBXpeR2EnMEQMe9da

m JUN 5 ASBESTOS INFORMATION ASSOCIATION 1745 Jefferson Davis Highway, Crystal Square 4, Suite 509 Arlington, Virginia 22202 (703) 979-1150 (NEWS NOTE More on CPSC-EPA National Workshop On Substitutes For Asbestos i>1 ^ <$$' 30 May 1980 As previously reported (N&N Apr.), Consumer Product Safety Commission and Environmental Protection Agency will sponsor a three-day Workshop on Substitutes for Asbestos during July 14-16, 1980. Formal notice was published in Federal Register of May 27. The Workshop will be held at the Sheraton National Hotel, 900 S. Orme St., Arlington, VA. There will be no charge for admission. Advance registra tion may be accomplished by contacting EPA/(800)424-9065; in Washington, D.C.; 544-1404.- Persons who register by early June will receive a background information packet prior to the Workshop. Stated purpose of Workshop "is to help EPA and CPSC gather information on the current technical and economic issues and potential health hazards relating to substitutes for asbestos and asbestos-containing products." The two major portions of Workshop are described as: (1) technical/economic presenta tions on substitutes for approximately ten asbestos product categories; and (2) health effects of both fibrous and nonfibrous types of substitutes. Discussion sessions will also be scheduled according to F.R. notice. The Association has become increasingly concerned about the Workshop format as currently planned. Specific concerns and alternative suggestions were conveyed to EPA and CPSC by let ter on May 27. While AIA/NA feels the agencies should be seeking full and accurate information on asbestos substitutes, the format of the draft, detailed program made available to the Association by EPA appears to go beyond collection of information and to conduct a session the purpose of which will be to promote use of such substitutes. As an alternative approach, AIA/NA has suggested the following guidelines for conduct of the Workshop: . The Workshop should not include any Product Review Sessions. UCC 004612 Page 2 . Sufficient time should be allowed for discussion and comment from the audience after each speaker. . The program should be expanded to encompass the many products being developed by the asbestos industry to foster safer use of asbestos. It was pointed out that the Workshop program does not include de velopment of asbestos-containing products with reduced possibility of hazardous use or mis-use. Such products, and improved methods of use of these products, are "substitutes" for asbestos products of the past. AIA/NA asserted that, only if asbestos and asbestoscontaining products and their substitutes are considered jointly, will it be possible for EPA and CPSC to obtain a better understand ing of the complex technological, economic and medical issues. The Association called upon a commitment from the agencies for "a fair and rational evaluation of all issues." U.S. Regulatory Council's Semiannual Calendar Includes Status Report On Asbestos Standard U.S. Regulatory Council, bv notice in Federal Register of May 30, published its calendar of important upcoming Federal regulations. Of particular interest is Department of Labor section which ineludes review of OSHA's Standard for Occupational Exposure to Asbestos. Stated reason for planned revision to current asbestos standard is "to protect workers from the carcinogenic risks and other ad vance health effects associated with exposure to asbestos." It is said that OSHA's existing permissible exposure limit (PEL) of 2 f/cc was established for the limited purpose of reducing the incidence of asbestosis, rather than cancer. Revised regulation will set a lower PEL for employee exposure to asbestos, and affected industries will have "the opportunity to implement control measures to achieve the PEL for their operations in the most cost-effective manner." OSHA is considering a ranae of alternative PELS, including: (A) 1 f/cc eiaht-hour TWA with a 5 f/cc ceiling. (B) .5 f/cc eight-hour TWA with a 5 f/cc ceilina. (C) .1 f/cc eight-hour TWA with a .5 f/cc ceiling. ror each of above alternatives, other revisions to current provisions for engineering and work practice controls, hygiene facilities, medical surveillance, respirators, training, etc., may be included in proposed regulation. OSHA does not rule out approach of establishing regulations for asbestos on basis of feasibility of compliance for different industries. Specific reference is made to feasibility of various control measures in different industries or processes, such ! as construction versus general industry. It is stated that OSHA currently has "no preferred alternative." UCC 004613 Page 3 F.R. notice also includes a summary forecast of benefits and costs from a revised asbestos standard. OSHA has not yet completed a quantitative risk analysis of any of the alternative levels beinq considered, but asserts that mortality and morbidity reductions are expected to be large. According to notice, further controllino asbestos exposures will stimulate search for asbestos substitutes and for alternatives to asbestos-containing products. As to costs, increased capitol and operating expenses incurred bv industry will result in price increases for asbestos-containinq pro ducts; this is expected to reduce the demand for such productsNotice acknowledges that higher prices for asbestos products will result in switch to presently unregulated substitutes. To the extent that some of the substitutes may have adverse health or safety effects, these will also be costs of a revised standard. Timetable in notice for revision of asbestos standard is quoted below: . Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM) - fall 1980 . Regulatory Analysis - fall 1980 . Final Rule - fall 1981 . Final Rule Effective - to be determined It is noted that the F.R. notice does not contain any mention of issuance of an emergency temporary standard as an alternative being considered by OSHA nor does it make reference to an advance notice of proposed rulemaking (ANPRM) as the initial action of a proposed revision to the asbestos standard. However, in statement on Apr. 17 (N&N Apr.), Dr. Eula Bingham, Assistant Secretary of Labor (OSHA), in regard to recent NIOSH recommended level of 0.1 f/cc, said, "I can't tell you yet what permissible level will be proposed or whether we will issue an emergency temporary standard or pursue the proposed permanent standard route." Further, Dr. Bingham said that a proposed revision to the asbestos standard would be developed pursuant to OSHA's cancer policy announced in Jan. Latter remark implies that initial publication would be an ANDRM. _ More details and clarification of OSHA's intentions are expected at Association's Board of Directors meetinq June 11 (see article below). Association June Meetings Regular second quarter meeting of AIA/NA Board of Directors will be held June 11 at Ramada Inn, 901 N. Fairfax St., Alexandria, VA, commencing at 9:00 AM. Robert L. Jennings Jr. Esq., Special Assistant to Assistant Secretary ot Labor (OSHA) ISui'a Binqham will be luncheon speaker. Association Executive Committee will meet on June 10 at Ramada Inn, Alexandria, VA. UCC 004614 Page 4 EPA Publishes Resource Conservation and Recovery Act Regulations EPA's Office of Solid Waste (OSW), by publication in Federal Register of Feb. 26 and May 19, 1980 has issued the bulk of its cradle-to-grave hazardous waste management system regulations pursuant to Resource Conservation and Recovery Act of 1976. Rules include criteria listing as hazardous some 85 process waste streams and 416 commercial products and chemicals (if discarded). This comprehensive regulation provides require ments for hazardous waste generators and transporters as well as notification requirements for handlers of hazardous waste. Provisions requiring waste containerization, proper disposal sites and manifests to be maintained are also included. Although asbestos was not listed as hazardous waste in rules as proposed in Dec. 18, 1978 Federal Register, it has been listed as hazardous (toxic) waste in Section 261.33(f) and has been assigned hazardous waste number U013. substances listed in this section are "commercial chemical products or manufacturing chemical inter mediates." This has been interpreted by OSW to include asbestos only as a "pure" material. Manufacturing process waste which contains asbestos is therefore not to be regulated as hazardous waste. A 1000 kg/month "small quantity generator" exemption applies to category of substances in which asbestos is listed. If total of less than 1000 kg of hazardous wastes from all substances is generated by single plant location in calendar month, such waste is exempted from most regulatory requirements. A generator must still either treat or dispose of waste in on-site facility, or ensure delivery to proper off-site treatment, storage or disposal facility. For hazardous waste to which small quantity exemption does not apply, i.e. 1000 kg or more per month, requirements for regula tion's comprehensive hazardous waste management system would become relevant. These include standards applicable to hazard ous waste generators and transporters as well as to treatment, storage and disposal facility owners and operators. In addition, notification requirements are applicable to persons not qualifying for above exemption. These requirements are estab lished by Section 3010 of the Act and were published in Federal Register of Feb. 26. Any person who generates or transports a hazardous waste or who owns or operates a facility for treatment or disposal of hazardous waste must notify EPA by Aug. 14, 1980. Notification forms are provided in Federal Register publication. Although this publication by EPA is considered final aaency action, status of certain sections of regulation including that portion in which asbestos is listed as hazardous waste. Subpart D, has been denoted interim final. EPA will accept public comments on- this portion of rulemaking until July 18, 1980. Entire regulatory package becomes effective on November 19, 1980. Consideration is beina given to an Association response. UCC 004615 Page 5 OSHA Publishes Final Rule On Access To Exposure, Medical Records By notice in Federal Register of May 23, OSHA finalised rule re quiring employers to make employee exposure and medical records available to employees, their designated representatives and OSHA. Assistant Secretary of Labor (OSHA) Eula Bingham stated that immediate purpose behind new standard is to enable workers to play more meaningful role in their own health management. The rule, which goes into effect Aug. 21, 1980, also specifies conditions under which access is allowed. It applies to each general industry maritime and construction employer who makes, maintains, contracts for or has access to employee exposure or medical records, or analyses thereof, pertaining to employees exposed to toxic substances or harmful physical agents. , Under provisions of the standard, each worker (or worker representa tive who has received written consent) is permitted to examine and copy an employer's records of exposure to toxic meterials, personal medical records, and analyses based on these records. Employers are given flexibilitv in providing access in a reasonable time, place, and manner, but must comply within 15 days of a request without cost to the employee. According to regulation, exposure records include records of the em ployee's past or present exposure to toxic substances or harmful phvsical agents, exposure records of other employees with past or present job duties or working conditions related to those of the em ployee, records containing exposure information concerning employee's working conditions, and material safety data sheets. Medical records contain an employee's medical history, examination and tests results, medical opinions and diagnoses, descriptions or treatments and prescriptions, and employee medical complaints. Ex posure records must be maintained for 30 years and medical records for the duration of employment plus 30 years under the new standard. Dr. Bingham noted that no significant new burdens are imposed on employers as new standard adds no new recordkeeping requirements. It applies equally to medical and exposure records that employers voluntarily create as to those required by specific occupational safety and health standards. This rule has resulted in changes to the "Records" sections of several individual substance health standards so that those standards will conform to the access to records rule. The asbestos standard has been amended with revisions to certain paragraphs concerning exposure records and records of medical examinations respectively. The current re tention period of the asbestos standard for exposure records and medical records, "at least 20 years", remains applicable even though a longer period of retention is provided for in new access rule. In other respects, the asbestos standard is modified so as to con form generally with the provisions of the new access rule, it is ex pected that upcoming proposal for revision to asbestos standard will extend 20-year retention period. UCC 004616 Page 6 Although OSHA has been given a right of access to exposure and medical records bv the rule, the agency must abide by companion rule on agency practice and procedure also published in May 23 issue of Federal Register. This rule provides that, due to sub stantial personal privacy interests involved, OSHA authority to gain access to personally identifiable employee medical information will be exercised only after the agency has made a careful determina tion of its need for this information, and only with appropriate safeguards to orotect individual privacy. Once this information is obtained, OSHA examination and use of it will be limited to onlv that information needed to accomplish the purpose of access. Proposed Hazard Rule to Control School Exposure Now In Draft Form EPA's proposed rule on control of asbestos-containing materials in schools is being readied for publication. The rule, now in draft form, is first section of a two-part regulatory program to reduce exposure to asbestos in schools. According to draft, proposed rule would be "immediately effective." Second part of effort will be on abatement and assessment program. Draft rule would require all public and private elementary and secondary schools to identify friable asbestos-containing materials and provide "adequate notice" of their location to school employees. School officials, the draft stated, must inspect all areas of school buildings and take samples of any friable material. School officials then must have the samples analyzed for their asbestos content. This must be done in accordance with two analytical protocols that will be published with the rule. If the analysis shows the materials contain asbestos, school officials must keep a record of their locations and provide the employees in formation about how they can reduce their exposure to the asbestos. All schools must keep records of inspections, samplings, and analyses. Those schools having asbestos-containing materials must submit in formation about the materials and the school to the appropriate EPA regional office, according to the draft rule. In Sept. *79, EPA issued an advance notice of proposed rulemaking for asbestos-containing materials in schools. Regulatory plan at that time was in three parts as opposed to current two as described above: identifying and marking friable asbestos-containing materials in schools and assessing problem of exposure to such materials; taking corrective action for those materials whose asbestos content con stituted an unreasonable risk; and reviewing, periodically, friable asbestos-containing material. AIA/NA submitted comments on the ANPRM (N&N Nov.). " Best information indicates that publication date of first section of proposed rule has been delayed pending additional work on related health effects support document. UCC 004617 Of l/. Firm on Eve of Sovereignty Vote ---------------------------- ----- --------------------------------------------------------------------. * ; * : ---- By Fwdbrick " SluSt Reporter nf TH* walt. ; MONTREAL-Quebec agreed tfHd$uire for $35.5 million (Canadian! the asbestos-re- iated Canadian operations of Turner k Ne well Ltd., London. But the province said it won't drop its long-standing campaign to ex propriate the much larger Quebec assets of Asbestos Corp.. a General Dynamics Corp. subsidiary. Yesterday's announcement carried an unmistakable political tone in the midst of a bitter referendum battle over whether to ne-. godate sovereignty for the province. The po litical nature of the purchase was under scored bv the announcement that the sched uled completion date of the transaction Is May 19. a Canadian holiday and the day. be fore the referendum. Quebec Premier Rene Levesque has used foreign ownershp of export-oriented asbestos operations as a symbol of the province's failure to benefit from its own resources. Quebec officials, however, denied politi cal motivations in the timing. They said the May Allow Revtston Concerning Asbestos Corp., Messrs. Pari- zeau and Berube said the purchase of Bed Asbestos may make unnecessary the pre vious plan to expropriate Asbestos Corp.'s operations at Asbestos mil in far northern Quebec. The mine, which is paired with a processing mill in Nordenham, West Ger many, has been an awkward part of the ex propriation, plan, because tbe German oper ation is beyond the reach of Quebec law. The mine, on the other hand, is of little use without the processing plant . Maurice Taschereau, president and chief executive officer of Asbestos Corp., said the company is "surprised" by the planned pur chase of Bell Asbestos. "We are extremely disappointed to hear that tbe government didn't take advantage of this opportunity to drop their efforts to buy Asbestos Corp-." Mr. Taschereau said, adding, "They've got their mine, why do iey need another?" purchase of Turner & NewaU's Bell Asbes tos Mines Ltd. unit and two smaller fabri cating operations will give the provincial government "a good base" In the asbestos industry. Jacques Parlzeau, Quebec's finance min Asbestos Corp.'s ister, and Yves Berube, the minister of natu ral resources, said the province will con tinue to pursue expropriation of Asbestos Battle in Quebec Corp. assets with a view to a merger with Beil and Asbestos Corp. operations. The two companies operate neighboring mines about Sustains Setback 100 miles east of Montreal. Quebec's expro priation action is bogged down in legal chal lenges by Asbestos Corp. Figures on Purchase Court Rejects Mining Finn's The Bell Asbestos mine, for which Que bec will pay 2.3 million plus the assump tion of undisclosed liabilities, has annual production capacity of about 77,000 tons of Constitutional Challenge Of Expropriation Law cement-grade asbestos fibers. Mine reserves i are equal to about 20 yean at current pro duction rates, Quebec officials said. Sales in 1979 totaled about $36 million. About 600 peo ple are on the payroll. . The purchase also includes $3.2 million for Atlas Turner Co. and Turner Building Products, other units of Turner It NewaU. Based in Montreal and in BritishCbjfambia.! the units produce pipes and i niliui llmi forms from asbestos cement. Sated at the two concerns totaled $27 million 1979. About 540 people are employed In the opera tions. Messrs. Parizeau and Berube said the ac quisition of asbestos-products operations is in line with provincial policies to expand as bestos-based industry in Quebec. They said the province plans to triple the amount of asbestos processing in Quebec. About 3% of the fiber mined in tbe province is used in At Rua Wall Strut Jopwial M*//Reporter MONTREAL--Asbestos Corp.'s legal bat tle with the Quebec government-sustained* major setback when a Quebec court rejected the mining company's constitutional chal lenge of a provincial expropriation law. 1 The decision left General Dynamics Carp's 54%-owned subsidiary teetering on the edge of expropriation. Lawyers close to the case said a previously granted injunc tion against government action may have lapsed, but Quebec officials Indicated that the province wouldn't move immedlstety. Throughout an eleven-month legal battle, the Quebec government has maintained that it wouldn't undertake a "savage" expropria tion under legislation that allows It to take possession of all Asbestos Corp. assets in Quebec and fix remuneration aftenrardi. "A Very Sensitive Decision" las Turner's operations, which represent al most the only such industrial use of asbestos in the province. In Quebec City, a spokesman for the province's Ministry of Natural Rewurces said a move to expropriate is "a very sensi tive decision" that would be made "at the highest levels" of the Quebec government A spokesman for General Dynamics in the wall street journal. Friday. May 9, 1980 St. Louis said: "Since we haven't had a chance to study the decision, we have no comment at this time." Yesterday's decision by tbe Quebec Supe rior Court further opens a door that was first put ajar by Quebec Premier Rene Lev-1 esque in 1977. In a major speech then the premier said the province would seek direct t ownership and control of tbe asbestos Indus try within Its borders. Subsequently, the province narrowed its target to the acquisition of Asbestos Corp., the only major asbestos producer in Quebec with publicly listed shares. However, Gen eral Dynamics, as the majority holder, re fused to sell. Expropriation Legislation ! Quebec passed expropriation legislation last June. That legislation was challenged almost immediately by Asbestos Corp. in a series of complicated constitutional objec tions. In his decision issued yesterday. Jules Deschenes, chief justice of tbe Quebec Supe rior Court, found that the expropriation leg isladon is "fully within the powers of Que bec." Mr. Deschenes struck down Asbestos Carp 's claim that die provincial law "ster ilized" a company incorporated under Cana da's federal laws. In a judgment that adds another twist to Canada's complicated constitutional juris prudence, Mr. Deschenes wrote that "de spite the undeniable effect that an expropri ation would have on the company, the (power of expropriation) remains no less . within the framework of Quebec's consdtubonal prerogatives and doesn't encroach on tbe ground reserved for (the federal) parlia ment Despite its federal charter. Asbestos Corp. must submit" to the expropriation. A spokesman for Asbestos Corp. said the Montreal company will make a statement today. It's expected the company will ap peal While the legal ground grew rougher, operations looked somewhat brighter for As bestos corp. as the company settled an 84- day strike at company facilities in Thetford Mines. Quebec, about 120 miles east of Mon treal About 1,150 blue-collar workers fatified a three-year contract calling for wage In creases tied to the cost of living plus a first year across-the-board boost of 30 cats an i hour and 2% and 3% increases in tbe second and third year. j According to the Quebec-based Confeder- atkxt of National Trade Unions, which repre sents the workers, the average hourly wage will climb to about $10.90 (Canadian) at the end of the first year from $9.46 at the end of foe previous contract. Separately, office employes went back to work yesterday as foe company ended a lock-out that began March 7. However, foe 130 Inside workers remain without a con tract. THE WALL STREET JOURNAL TUESDAY. May 27. 1980 UCC 004618 Asbestos Pipe Ban Is Sent to Governor Majority Leader Joseph L Lieber- several Connecticut communities. . man cast the deciding vote Thursday The measure adopted Thursday deals that sent legislation banning the instal specifically with asbestos cement lation of asbestos cement pipe in water pipes. Although.it imposes a ban, effec supply systems to Gov. Grasso for her signature. Sen. Eugene A. Skowronski, D-Derby, offered two amendments designed to tive Oct 1,1980, it also allows the state health services commissioner to lift the., restriction "if he finds conditions in which the installation (of asbestos ce? eliminate the outright ban, but both moit pipes) makes sense," said Sen* failed on 18-17 votes, with Lieberman, a William E. Curry Jr., D-Farmington, a New Haven Democrat, breaking the tie key proponent. on the last vote. The bill itself then was adopted unanimously on the consent calendar -- a list of items on which the Senate has reached agreement and which is approved in a single vote. The Senate Thursday also approved unanimously a bill to establish a system Efforts to outlaw the pipes gained momentum in the legislature recently when evidence of cancer-causing chemicals attributed to the pipes turned up in several local water sys tems. , of fixed, rather than indeterminate, Skowronski argued firmly against criminal sentences. the ban -- both m caucus and on the But the chamber amended the legis senate floor--saying the state Depart1 lation so the new system becomes ef ment of Health Services, which he said fective July 1,1981, instead of Oct 1, "has waffled" on the issue, now doesn't 1980. The amendment also alters the . want the ban. way sentence reductions are computed for arrested persons who serve time in He also protested that there's been no jail before they are tried and convicted. proof the pipes are a health hazard, that These changes send the bill back to alternative pipes aren't effective and the House for further action. that the senate, in considering the mea The ban on installation of asbestos sure, shouldn't make the issue being cement pipes adopted Thursday is dif voted on "whether you're for cancer or ferent from a bill given final approval not" by the House Wednesday. Curry contended that the health de The latter measure imposes a one- partment had decided to ban the pipe C moratorium on the use of vinyl some time ago, but rescinded the deci , asbestos pipes -- the type be sion when threatened with a suit by wa lieved to have released a suspectetedr companies, fearing it didn't have cancer-causing chemical, tetrachlor- the legal authority to impose the mora oetbylene, into the water systems of torium. ' '''V '/.A HOLYOKE .1 * r - r rv p* '-',c " Little^concern shown over asbestos pipes CHICOPEE - Local and state officials will not call for a halt in the use of afbeatpHamcretc pipes, despite 111 CoMMCticut that the pipes could pose Tliere Is no proof that asbestos ingested with water is harmful, according to Roger A. Rondeau, deputy director of water supply for the state Department of Environmen tal Quality Engineering. The Connecticut legislature Tuesday approved a moratorium that would han future installation of asbestos-concrete water pipes. A Connecticut health of ficial today said he was surprised Massachusetts is not also considering a moratorium. Rondeau said he does not expect a similar moratorium to be imposed in Massachusetts. Asbestoacoucrete piping is used in some areas of the city, including Chicomansett Village, new lines in Fairview and a major line that runs from the Chicopee Memorial State Park to Center Street, according to Water Department Superintendent Joseph J. Swiatlowskl. The rest of the water pipes in the city are made of Iron piping which is more expensive to install, he said. The department uses asbestos-concrete piping to make repairs in the areas wbere such piping now in use because of different diameters of the asbestos-concrete and iron pipes, Swiatlowskl said. Asbestos Is considered a possible cancer-causing agent if it Is inhaled, but there is no proof it causes any problem* if ingested with water, Rondeau said. Rondeau and Swiatlowskl both said little asbestos gets Into the water system even when the asbestos-concrete pipes are used and do not have a vinyl lining. Richard Woodbuli, chief of the Connecticut Health Ser vice* Department's water supplies section, said although there is no proof asbestos ingested with water is harmful, there also is no proof it Is not harmful. "Our view is why use It (the asbestos-concrete pipe) un til there's proof it isn't harmful," Woodbuli said. Another problem with the asbestos-concrete pipes lined with vinyl has been discovered in recent weeks. The chemical tetrachlaroethylene, known as TCE, is used to apply the vinyl lining and has been found in some water systems, including areas of Chicopee whore the vinyl ' lined pipe is located. TCE has caused cancer in laboratory animals. Swiatlowskl said testing and line flushing is continuing in the Westover Airpark and Burnett Road areas where the chemical was detected in the water supply. 0 Asbestos use halted at Harborplace A threat by state safety officials to halt construction of Harborplace Mall because of allegedly careless use of asbestos has prompted builders to stop using the potential ly hazardous material. . The Maryland Occupational Safety and Health Agency threatened to close the site because it said workers were not taking enough precautions to reduce exposure to as bestos fibers. But Whiting Turner Contracting Co. and subcontractor John H. Hampshire Inc. agreed Friday to stop using wallboard con taining asbestos, which has been shown to cause cahcer and lung disease. James Rouse, chairman of the board of the Rouse Co., which developed and will own Harborplace, said Saturday that all asbestos problems Would be corrected. He said, "A constructionjob is enormous ly complex. All kinds of things happen that are out of the ordinary and nave to be cor rected___ If somebody made a mistake well see that it is corrected." Frank Morgan, who beads the state safe ty agency, said he drafted papets dedaring the site an "imminent danger1' but withheld them because contractors agreed to stop us ing asbestos. Harborplace is being built by the Rouse Co. at the Inner Harbor- and will contain shops and restaurants, but Morgan said the firm and its contractors apparently did not know the board contained asbestos. "For protection the workers were using only surgical masks, and apparently they weren't being careful," he said. "They were laying their masks down in the stuff and us ing them again. "They were eating and smoking in the area and taking no precautions with their clothes. They were also eating in restaurants, taking their contaminated clothes home. They were spreading it around. It was a pret ty bad situation." / UCC 004619 Man's Claim That He Has Asbestosis BriraactAiVEK A Philadelphia pulmonary disease expert asserted Wed nesday that former Long Beach Naval Shipyard worker Richard J. Hogard has chronic bronchitis caused by smok ing and does not have asbegosis as Hogard claims. \ Dr. William Weiss offered the diagnosis as the first de fense witness for Johns-ManvilleCorp., the world's largest miner and manufacturer of asbestos, in Hogard's Los An geles Superior Court trial against asbestos manufacturers. Hogard claims Johns-Manville and'Raybestos-Manhat- tan Inc. /ailed to warn him of the health hazards of work ing -with their asbestos insulation products and thus were responsible for his contracting asbestosis. Questioned by Johns-Manville attorney Fulton Haigh about Hogard's physical condition, Weiss said with convic tion; "I believe he has chronic bronchitis attributable to heavy cigarette smoking." Weiss said in answer to Haight's questioning that asbes tos; dust cannot cause bronchitis. The prime cause of bronchitis, he said, is cigarette smoking. - Weiss' diagnosis was a direct contradiction to that of Dr. Oscar J. Balchum, head of County-USC Medical Center's lung disease unit, who testified earlier on Hogard's behalf. Balchum said Hogard has asbestosis and does not have . bronchitis. Balchum examined Hogard several times from 1975 to 1977. Hogard left the shipyard with a disability pension in late 1975 after the doctor advised him to get away from as bestos fibers. Balchum, like Hogard's other doctors, also advised him to quit smoking, a feat Hogard testified he has been unable to accomplish. . Weiss, a professor of pulmonary medicine at Hahne mann Medical College, Philadelphia, and former practi tioner and researcher at Philadelphia General Hospital, never personally examined Hogard. He made his diagnosis from examining X-rays and results of lung function tests made by Balchum. Showing jurors,an X-ray which still bore Balchum's pencil marks, Weiss said the scarring which Balchum had attributed to asbestosis was actually caused by Hogard's smoking. Lines Balchum had identified on the X-ray as "pleural thickening," another symptom of the irreversible asbestosis, were described by Weiss as mere "muscle sha dows." . "This is normal," the manufacturers' medical witness said, "for a man who has smoked a pack of cigarettes a day for 25 years." . One reason Balchum had insisted Hogard had no chronic bronchitis was that tests showed no obstruction of air flow common m the disease. Questioned about that during cross-examination by HogardEeattorney Robert B. Stein berg. Weiss said many people WWi bronchitis never show such obstruction until the disease advances into emphyse ma. Weiss said a high red blood cell count, called polycythe- nia. helped move the diagnosis away from asbestosis to bronchitis. , "A fair number of people with bronchitis do develop po- lycythema." he said. "It never happens in asbestosis." Disagreeing with other experts, Weiss said asbestosis develops only after about 20 years of constant exposure to asbestos fibers. Hogard worked with asbestos materials about 10 years. Anyone with asbestosis also should have "crackles," dry crackling noises while breathing, Weiss said, and no lest results showed Hogard had them. An asbestosis victim, he added, could only expect to get worse, and Hogard's lung function tests in 1977 actually showed some improvement over those in 1975. T Hogard, 40, has said he smoked one pack ot agamies a day since he was 15. (Haight insists pre-trial statements by Hogard indicate he regularly smoked two packs a day.) The asbestos manufacturers have maintained that Ho gard's cough, by now familiar to jurors, and lung scarring were caused by smoking and a 1978 bout withpneumoiua. Weiss said X-rays taken in 1979 and 1980 showed an added scar tissue on Hogard's lungs, which he attributed directly to the pneumonia. As for the effect of asbestos on chances of getting lung cancer, Weiss said he believes the key cause is smoking and that asbestos would be only an "enhancing agent" He said a smoker working with asbestos would nave a five times greater risk of getting lung cancer than a smoker in another occupation--an estimate far lower than that of other researchers. ' The Hogard case in the courtroom of Judge Earl F. Riley is being watched by litigants across the nation who hope it will establish guidelines for settling their own similar cases out of court More than 1,000 such suits are pending in the Los Angeles Superior Court alone. ^ r................. .. ' ' 'P"';: ;< f, ,,IV , i" i Asbestosis: Johns-Manville view To the Editor of The Day: - Your Feb. 21 I960 editorial, "Money and morals look to source for cost of asbestosis," is a continua tion of the media's regrettable pat tern of publishing only those items which sensationalize a subject rather than which tend to inform the public in a balanced report. I would like to specifically respond to some of the statements in your ed itorial. You are quite right that knowledge of asbestosis did exist in the 1930s. At that time, however, the disease was thought to be confined to the very intense occupational expo sures found in asbestos textile mills. Steps were taken then and after wards to control the dust exposure and to learn more about the medical aspects of isheato^exposure. In the early 1930* the asbestos in dustry and its Insurance carriers un derwrote medical studies on asbes tos-related disease. Seminars, attended by the chief medical officer ot the UJS. Public Health Service and his counterpart id Canada, were conducted during these studies. A documented history of continuing in dustry participation in medical stu dies can be traced from the 1930s up to today. Further there are some additional facts about exposures in the ship yards that the media continually chooses to overlook: The government specifically re quired that asbestos products be used for insulation and fire protec tion in warships. The government was responsible for the shipyard work practices In the Navy yards. The government followed the U.S. Public Health Service recom mended standard for exposure set In 1938. As late as 1948 the government published s study which Indicated that insulation work in the shipyards was not a hazardous occupation. The association between exposure to asbestos and lung cancer in insu lation workers was not confirmed until publication of a study in 1964 by Dr. Irving Selikoff of Mount Sinai School of Medicine. In that same year Johns-Manville began putting a caution label on its asbestos insula tion products, seven years before government regulations required such labeling. , From this same study the medical community now agrees that "but for cigarette smoking, lung cancer would not have been a significant disease factor among asbestos workers," It is beyond our under standing why this association be tween cigarette smoking, asbestos exposure and lung cancer is contin ually overlooked by the media when they print stories about asbestosrelated disease. Also, asbestos is not the only known cause of mesothelioma. The medical community has identified the existence of mesothelioma in po pulations exposed to naturally oc- curing zeolites (a silicate used in water softening and as an absor bent) and in sugar cane workers in Louisiana. ' James F. Reis The writer is director, Asbestos Policy, for Johns-Manville Corp., Denver, Colo. , , .' L.'ificns p ' W UCC 004620 Asbestosis far from hopeless, expert says [ VAY t) QUINCY -- Shipyard workers who are getting results from asbestos-related lung disease tests' a"nd~&eing advised to seek medical help may have another problem -- finding the ap propriate treatment Dr. Robert Clubb, medical di rector of the Boston-based Na tional Asbestosis Foundation, maintains the medical profession is not fully aware of how treatable the disease is. "It is felt by the majority of the physicians that asbestosis is a hopeless disease and that's not true... there are a lot of things that can be done for these peo ple," Clubb said. Dr. Bartley Cilento of Sciluate, president of the Norfolk South District Medical Society, dis agrees with that assessment. He maintains most physicians in the county have been appraised of the situation and are prepared to con trol the disease in their patients. "Asbestosis was a subject of dis cussion at one of our more recent meetings," he said. "You can have a positive test, but it does not mean its life threat ening." Some 300 workers at the Quincy shipyard last week began receiv ing results of tests done in Novem ber by Dr. Irving Selikoff of New York. The study was confined to those who worked at the yard 12 or more years ago. Selikoff said he could not com ment on the specific results until the study is completed. Earlier reports indicated the results would show more than 80 percent of the workers suffering from scar tissue frqjn asbestos. But if the calls to the Norfolk County Hospital in Braintree, which specializes in respiratory disease, are any indication, the number of positive results is not high. Kevin Kenny, public relations director for the hospital, said four men called last week saying Selikoff had recommended they seek medical help. Each sched uled appointments. The disease can't be cured, but the symptons can be treated, he said. The hospital can prescribe medicine to reduce lung conges tion and exercises to increase the capacity of the undamaged sec tions of the lung. In some cases Ihe patients will only need to be told to stop smok ing and avoid contact with any other dangerous substances that could harm lungs already dam aged, he said. Clubb said otber studies showed that 95 percent of those exposed to asbestos develop some type of ; lung-related diseases over time, I including lung cancer and bronchitis. It takes 10 years for the first signs of complications to surface and then the complications be come increasingly worse over the next 20 to 40 years. "But I think that just because there is scar tissue, that does not mean they're going to get cancer; not at all.'' He said about 10 percent develop cancer of the lungs, while another 20 percent develop other fatal bronchial com plications. But what that really means is that 70 percent won't die from the disease," Clubb said. He said something must be done to ensure "that these guys do obtain good medical care and means for proper survival. What is going to happen is that when they develop shortness of breath and can no longer function on the job, then I imagine tiny will either quit, be fired of retire." It is up to labor unions, industry and insurance cotnpanies to ensure the proper medical treat ment, he said. ^ , The facts on asbestos Fifteen years ago, asbestos figured in the news only in terms of the world market for its uses, the price, and whether its applications could be expanded to the general benefit of mankind. Today, we are uncomfort ably aware of walking on floor tiles made from it, or under ceiling tiles from which tiny, invisible, deadly fibres may be drifting down -- to join those that billow forth from the brake linings of automobiles. worker* has been fairly welt estab lished for some years, officially rec ognized to a degree by the changed attitudes of the Workmen's Compen sation Board. The apprehended threat to the genera! public is a more recent phenomenon, and one that has been marked by chaotic responses. Should this ceiling be allowed to remain? Should that duct be tom out? Would it be wise to close the school altogeth er? Would paint hold the fibres in place on fire dampers? How many fibres per cubic centimetre can be tolerated? Is there no alternative substance? In dealing with any threat, it is a fairly sound rule to begin by taking its measure; by assembling the facts from the best known authorities and. if necessary, by commissioning new studies. The Ontario Government has made the right move by setting up a three-man royal commission to look into the hazards of asbestos and to recommend safety standards. v Something of the kind might have occurred sooner (Opposition nagging goes back quite a long way) but the move is welcome nevertheless -- doubly so with the assurance of Labor Minister Robert Elgie that the new commission would ij^ither stall nor displace other efforts to obtain infor mation or establish safety. "If further immediate action of a remedial na ture appears to be warranted," said Dr. Elgie, "we will not hesitate to act simply because a commission has been appointed to conduct a thorough study of the entire subject." There is much to be studied, and a number of different opinions to be resolved -- among them the selection of a standard of safety in terms of fibres per cubic centimetre of air. New Democratic Party Leader Mi chael Cassidy, noting that the Gov ernment had been reviewing occupa tional exposure standards since 1978, said that the current standard of two fibres was much too high and that it should be .5 or .1. This proposal carries with it the weight of apparent U.S. Government endorsement. Earlier this month, Jo Lindhard, an employee with the stan dards branch of the Occupational Safety and Health Administration in Washington, said that within a year the United States would probably adopt a standard between .5 and .1 (The standard at present is the same as Ontario's--2 fibres per cc.) The royal commission may be able to help make an intelligent choice. Hie scientific and medical back grounds of its members encourage optimisrri; the chairman, Stefan Dupre, has served on the National Research Council; Fraser Mustard is dean of health science at McMaster University; and Robert Uffin is dean of applied sciences at Queen's Uni versity, and formerly chief science advisor to the federal Government. We may not ail breathe more easily now that the commission has been set up -- but in time we may., UCC 004621