Document 2RQD5XwXvdkqY1821Oj337EG5

( July 31, 1984 More On AIA/NA's Ninth Industry- Government Conference Sept. 18-19 As reported (N&N June), the Association will conduct an indus try-government conference on Sept. 18-19, in conjunction with its 14th annual meeting and third quarter board of directors meeting scheduled for Sept. 19. Conference and meetings will be held at the Twin Bridges Marriott Hotel, Arlington, VA. The conference begins with a reception and dinner on Tuesday, Sept. 18. Dr. John A. Moore, Assistant Administrator for -V} Pesticides and Toxic Substances, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, is the expected dinner speaker. Speakers at breakfast and lunch on Sept. 19 will be Deputy OSHA Head Patrick R. Tyson and Nancy Harvey Steorts, Chairman Consumer Product Safety Com mission respectively. During the conference on Wednesday morning. Sept. 19, guest speakers include: Jim E. Lapping, Director Safety and Health, Building and Construction Trades Department, AFL-CIO; Wilfred Penney, Director General, Asbestos Information Centre (United Kingdom); Gary J. Nash, Director General, Minerals and Metals Strategy Branch, Energy, Mines and Resources, Government of Canada; Dr. Jacques Dunnigan, Director General, Institute for Research and Development on Asbestos, University of Sherbrooke, Quebec; and Dr. Malcolm Ross, U.S. Geological Survey. AIA/NA President John L. Myers and members of the Executive Committee and staff will complete program participants. The conference will conclude early afternoon Sept. 19. The industry-government conference is an important event in the Association's work year since its affords an opportunity for a meaningful update and exchange of information on a number of areas affecting the asbestos industry. Speakers will cover: current status of plans for further regulation of asbestos; overview of international events concerning asbestost labor's views on asbestos regulation in construction industry; an as sessment of the asbestos and substitutes issue; and a review of mineralology and health during the past decade. ASBESTOS INFORMATION ASSOCIATION 1745 Jefferson Davis Highway. Crystal Square 4, Suite 509 Arlington. Virginia 22202 (703) 979-1150 CAPCO JEN 0013082 Page 2 Conference and meeting details were provided to members by AIA/NA memorandum of July 17. Information to nonraember in terested parties was mailed late July. Registration forms are requested by Aug. 30. Further inquiries to AIA/NA Executive Director are welcome. OSHA's Informal Public Hearing On Proposed Standard For Asbestos Concluded The U.S. Occupational Safety and Health Administration's (OSHA) informal public hearing on its proposed standard for occupa tional exposure to asbestos (N&N Apr., May & June), was con cluded July 12. The hearing began June 19 and the published schedule was maintained. Over 100 witnesses appeared during course of hearing and a voluminous record was .created. The July portion of the hearing reflected a wide variety of in terested parties presenting testimony including this Associa tion with its witnesses appearing on July 6,9-10. Other witnesses included representatives from organized labor, in-.-, dividual companies, and the National Constructors Association. AIA/NA's 21 witnesses included experts that addressed technical matters associated with the proposed standard and panels of ~ member-company representatives who spoke to specific asbestoscontaining product categories. Staff presented an opening statement that summarized the Association's overall position and responded to some testimony presented earlier in the hear ing. It was emphasized that the permissible exposure limit (PEL) should be reduced through engineering and work practice controls, and OSHA should not rely on respirator use for any lower PEL. OSHA was urged to publish a separate standard for control of the unique exposures that can occur in demolition, renovation and maintenance activities. (See news clip). The next phase of the rulemaking calls for submission of re buttal testimony, additional evidence and responses to ques tions deferred during the hearing to OSHA by Aug. 27. Argu ments on entire OSHA hearing record (post hearing brief) must be submitted by Oct. 11. No firm prediction can be given for publication of a final standard(s) by OSHA. The agency's health standards programs head stated during the hearing that such may be expected by June 1985. Congress Adopts Asbestos School Hazard Abatement Act On July 25, the House voted to adopt Senate-approved amendments to H.R.1310, a bill to provide assistance to improve elementary. CAP CO JEN 0013083  Page 3 secondary, and postsecondary education in mathematics and science. Included as Title V of H.R.1310 is the Asbestos School- Hazard Abatement Act, originally introduced in the Senate by Sen. James Abdnor (R-SD). The Senate adopted the proposal on June 6 (N&N June). Approval by the House clears the measure for signing by the President. Purposes of Asbestos School Hazard Abatement Act are to direct the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to establish a pro gram to assist states and local educational agencies to ascer tain the extent of the danger to the health of school children and employees from asbestos materials in schools; provide con tinuing scientific and technical assistance to State and local agencies to enable them to identify and abate asbestos hazards in schools; provide financial assistance for the abatement of asbestos threats to the health and safety of school children or employees; assure that no employee of any local educational agency suffers any disciplinary action as a result of calling attention to potential asbestos hazards which may exist in schools. EPA is also required within 45 days of enactment, to develop an interim or final application form for distribution to Ideal educational agencies. These forms are to be the basis for ap plications for financial assistance from the governors of the individual states. Applications are to be accompanied by pri ority lists ranking potential candidates for abatement action based on the nature and magnitude of the existing and potential exposure presented by the asbestos materials. Following review by the EPA and the Department of Education, financial assistance may be awarded to carry out projects for abating the threat posed by materials containing asbestos to the health and safety of children or employees; replacing the asbestos materials removed from school buildings with other appropriate building materials; and restoring school buildings to conditions comparable to those existing before abatement activities were undertaken. An applicant for financial assistance may be granted an inter est-free loan of up to 100 percent of the costs of an abate ment program. If EPA determines the applicant is unable to undertake and complete an asbestos abatement program with a loan, such an applicant may also receive a grant not to exceed 50 percent of the cost of abatement. Although the Act autho rizes the appropriation of $600 million through 1990, no funds are actually appropriated in the measure. As a condition of the award of any financial assistance, the recipient of a loan or grant is to permit the United States to sue on behalf of the recipient any person determined by the Attorney General to be liable for the cost of the abatement activity. The proceeds from any judgment recovered in a suit bought by the United States would be used to repay the amount CAP CO JEN 0013084 Page 4 outstanding on any loan or grant along with an amount equal to the interest which would have been charged on such a loan by a commercial lender at prevailing interest rates. EPA is also charged with establishing standards for determining which contractors are qualified to carry out abatement activi ties, and what training, equipment, protective clothing and other information and material must be supplied to adequately advise and protect school employees carrying out abatement ac tivities. In addition, the EPA may adopt other regulations, such as procedures for testing the level of asbestos fibers in schools and standards for evaluating the liklihood of the leak age of asbestos fibers into the school environment. EPA Science Panel Reviews Asbestos Update Document The Environmental Health Committee of the Environmental Pro tection Agency's Science Advisory Board met on July 24 to re view and comment on the scientific adequacy of a review draft of a document entitled "Asbestos Health Assessment Update. The document was prepared for the Office of Health and Envi-| ronmental Assessment of EPA's Office of Research and Developjment by Dr. William J. Nicholson, Associate Director, Environ mental Sciences Laboratory, Mt. Sinai School of Medicine. Purpose of Update document is to evaluate information published since 1972 on human disease from asbestos exposure, with em phasis on studies that provide information on the risk from low-level exposures such as those encountered in the non-occupational environment. The document also contains a risk as sessment for asbestos. The Update is to be used by EPA to evaluate its current standard for asbestos emissions under the Clean Air Act. Testimony commenting on the document was presented to the Com mittee by AIA/NA staff. In addition to focusing on particular details of the study, AIA/NA comments pointed out unsupported assumptions and wide areas of uncertainty in the Update's risk assessment. AIA/NA comments also questioned the utility of a highly uncertain exercise such as the risk assessment which predicted small excess of disease that, in any event, would be neither dectectable nor attributable. AIA/NA comments contrasted this highly uncertain quantitative data of doubtful utility with qualitative data which indicates the carcinogenic potential of durable fibrous materials gen erally, within certain optimum size perameters. Comments then pointed out, "the term 'asbestos' itself is merely one based on commercial usage to identify six separate mineral fibers. The substitutes for these fibers are simply other mineral or synthetic fibers just coming into widespread use." These ob servations lead one to ask, "what social purpose is accom CAPCO JEN 0013085 Page 5 plished in eliminating asbestos from commercial usage in order to less a very uncertain and undetectable risk?" Comments concluded by stating, "there is obviously a need for fibrous materials in a modern, technological society. The greatest overall social benefit is to be derived from their rational use and. regulation." The Environmental Health Committee also received comments on the draft report from two special consultants to the Committee, Dr. Brooke T. Mossman, Department of Pathology, University of Vermont, College of Medicine, and Dr. J. Corbett McDonald, Pro fessor of Epidemiology and Occupational Health, McGill Univer sity. Dr. Mossman questioned the 0.01 f/cc exposure level used in the Update's risk assessment as being too high to be characteristic of environmental exposures. She noted that report of the National Academy of Sciences' Committee on Nonoccupational Health Risks of Asbestisform Fibers, on which she served, had used a level of 0.0004 f/cc as the basis for its risk assess ment. Dr. McDonald observed that the draft Update was "a far from up-to-date document." He also criticized it for its ../j selective use of available information, and for its failure to summarize data on both sides of an argument. Individual members of the Committee also commented on the draft Update. The Committee's views on the draft are to be compiled by Executive Secretary Dr. Daniel Byrd, and its recommendations will then be transmitted to the EPA. Because it is an advisory group only, the Committee's recommendations need not be adopted by the Agency. In general, the Agency uses the Committee as a "sounding board" in attempt to keep its actions in step with general scientific thinking. CPSC Proposes Voluntary Standard Recognition Rule In the Federal Register of June 19, the Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC) published proposed rules dealing with the recognition of voluntary standards. Since its inception, the Commission has been involved with trade associations, voluntary standards organizations, and manufacturers in developing volun tary standards and other cooperative activities aimed at re ducing injuries and deaths associated with consumer products. However, CPSC notes that its high level activity in.the devel opmental process of voluntary standards has not been matched by the same level activity in the recognition of successful volun tary standards development efforts. CPSC has identified three levels of support that is could pro vide to voluntary standards development (adoption, endorsement, and recognition). Adoption of a particular voluntary standard CAP CO JEN 0013086 Page 6 would mean its establishment as a mandatory standard by the Commission. As such, it is the most far-reaching of any Commission action in approving a voluntary standard. En dorsement of a voluntary standard means a formal Commission approval of the standard to the exclusion of any other volun tary standard that may address the same product. Manufactur ers whose products are certified to meet the standard could take full advantage of a Commission endorsement in their at tempts to market their product as widely as possible. Recognition of a voluntary standard, the approach addressed in the proposal acknowledges the existence of a particular voluntary standard, and, where appropriate, may urge manufac turers to comply with it. CPSC would also take the necessary steps to make consumers aware of the existence of any safety benefits provided by the standard. As explained in the proposal, the purpose of such recognition is to enhance consumer selection of safer consumer products and encourage industry to adhere to specific voluntary safety standards which have been favorably evaluated by the Commis sion. Formal recognition could provide an incentive for iniv tiation of voluntary standards and related activities; provide manufacturers and trade associations the opportunity to take| advantage of safety-related marketing benefits for products-J that are in conformance with effective voluntary standards; and provide encouragement to manufacturers to implement and comply with effective voluntary standards. Recognition of specific voluntary standards could have a multiplier effect on safety efforts and achieve results that would be difficult to obtain by either the Commission or manufacturers working independently. The proposal further notes that, ultimately, the recognition of voluntary efforts should benefit the consumer by encour aging safer product design, installation, operation and main tenance. They could also provide the consumer with informa tion for selecting safer products, thus reducing injuries and deaths. It is proposed that the Commission select the standards to be recognized. Typically, such standards will have been devel oped in full cooperation with CPSC on Commission priorities, emerging safety concerns, and other non-priority Operating Plan projects having significant CPSC involvement. The stan dards will be evaluated by the Commission and its staff prior to initiating any activities which tend to advance such stan dards. Where appropriate, the Commission will decide under what circumstances activities will be undertaken for encour aging the implementation of an effective voluntary safety stan dard. CAPCO JEN 0013087 Etta&lisfcisf age level by the lupwr ___________________ produce rignifcant differentials fa cftatlou frequency be tween employer* using "best" cointtIs *nd thoae talag tern than "best" controls, and consequently, will provide a sensi ble incentive for alt employer*' to achieve ."best" control states.Bran contended. - ;* V VcfSea**-: --"r JUN.i2 1884 Manville Settlement for Asbestos Victimise?; Asbestosi ` May Help Defend Insurers Against Suits^ Judge cites. i By Jonathan Dahl ~ ifflat WAixSnmJooiutAi. DENVER--A {315 million Insurance set tlement that Manville Corp. has said would be for asbestos victims also may help the concern's insurers. Three of Manvine's insurers recently agreed to pay the {315 million to settle a suit as pest ef the company's efforts to pay asbestos victims. But in an unusual provi sion in die planned agreement, the money that would be set aside for asbestos victims could be used to defend the insurers against further asbestos-related liabilities. Critics contend that could drain settle ment funds before some or an victims are paid. But Manville contends it can prevent such a drain. The dispute is a serious threat to Manville's reorganization plans in bankruptcy court Attorneys for asbestos victims, who only recently said they were nearing an agreement on the company's reorganization plans, said they've now halted negotiations.' Eves some asbestos producers, usually al lies of Manville, said they don't like what they've heard about the settlement Man ville said It nonetheless plans to complete the agreement this week and present It to the bankruptcy court for approval. Manville, a maker of building and paper products, sought court protection from cred itors' lawsuits under Chapter XI of the fed eral Bankrupcty Code In August 1382. The company wasn't broke, but said it needed protection from'16,500 lawsuits from individ uals claiming health damage from exposure to Manvhle-made asbestos products. Under Chapter 11, Manville is receiving that pro tection while It tries to work out a reorgani zation plan. Entangled Legal Dispute A critical element of that plan has fo-c cused on an entangled legal dispute between Manville and Its Insurers. Since asbestosrelated diseases often don't show up for years, the company and the insurers hadnt been able to agree on their liability. Man ville sued Its carriers for {5 bililan In dam ages over the matter. Last May, the company said It resolved the suit with three of Its major carriers: Travelers Indemnity Co., Hartford, Conn.; Home Insurance CO~, New York; and a grocg ofsyndicatesfrom Lloyd's of London. The compose settleaent' hasn't yet been made public or provided to attorneys for asbestos victims. But Manville and some of the carriers agreed to discuss its outline. The outline provides a somewhat differ ent picture than some attorneys for the vic tims said they had been led to believe. Origi nally, Manville said the three insurers would pay it {315 million that would be placed In a trust fund used exclusively for asbestos vit Urns, the attorneys aid. The trust it ex ~ appealed case pected to receive an additional {300 million contribution from 24 other insurance car riers that Manville is suing. Now, however, --.V -Manville has agreed to allow the trust to \ indemnify the three carrier* from any fu ture asbestos-related lawsuits, as well as any associated legal costs. . By JAY HANCOCK "! -!r- -- Staff Writer . t- : NORFOLK -- More than 80 7 ' asbestos trials ' scheduled this :- year will be delayed at least - until early 1885 because the 4th Demand for Provision . . U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals A Manville official said the company was has agreed to rehear a landmark forced to accept the provision because the " decision. insurers demanded it The insurers did so because they felt they were essentially buy ing back their Manville policies for {315 mil lion and thus wanted to be guaranteed they wouldn't be held liable for them again,- ac cording to attorneys for Traveler* Indem nify and Home Insurance. "When we put out that kind of money, we want to be able to sleep at night," Dennis J. Drebsky, an attor ney for Home Insurance, said.' ~ The move is important be cause it could permit a retrial of a 1983 case that set the stage for - millions of dollm in out-ofcourt settlement*:) A judge of the! court, Robert F. Chapman in Columbia, S.C., canceled an asbestos trial sched uled to begin today in U.S. Dis- But attorneys for asbestos claimants said trict Court in Norfolk.. - the arrangement forces the trust to shoulder the liability of potential lawsuits that the in surers might have had to. The total liability for those suits isn't known, and some of the suits might simply be brought by other In surance companies that are also seeking compensation for asbestos victims. But the attorneys said the defense costs and punitive damages alone from those suits could signif icantly-cut into payments to asbestos vic He also stayed all other trials involving workers exposed to asjstos.in area shipyard* until; the appeals court decides whether the U.S. Admiralty Code should apply to those cases. The court set a hearing date for Oct. 2, but probably won't reach a decision until next year, tims. "It's absurd," said Fred M. Baron, a Dallas attorney representing 900 asbestos claimants. "Instead of using the money to.. . protect the victims, we might have to pro-- " said Arch Wallace, a Richmond attorney representing asbestos manufacturers. Asbestos is believed to cause tect the insurance companies:''. several ailments, including lung Manville officials Insisted, however, that . ... the company plans to receive a court ordef .. barring suits that might drain settlement: cancer and asbestosis, a fibrous hardening of the lungs. The dis eases typically don't appear funds. They conceded there wasn't much le gal precedent for making such an order ' until decades after the victim is exposed. binding, but said that even if they didn't get' it, the liability of the suits wouldn't amount: to much. "I would never agree to any settle-!: - - ment that I felt would jeopardize the trust,'-' r said Richard Von Wald, a vice president and '< corporate counsel for the company. * ....... .-. Mr. Von Wald said many of the fear* -- - . over the settlement probably will subside I once details are released and scrutinized in -- . .-:: banfcruptey court But Robert Rosenberg, " counsel to a committee of asbestos claim- . ants, said that wasn't likely. He described current negotiations between the committee ', 7.' .. x - Hundreds of workers at New- port News Shipbuilding and the. Norfolk Naval Shipyard came in contact with asbestos during the - 1950s end 1960s. About 450 ship-, yard workers or their survivor* have sued various manufacture-, ers of asbestos. In 1981, the 4th U.S. Circuit. Court of Appeals decided that. admiralty law should apply to cases where workers were ex-' and the company over its reorganization posed to asbestos on board ships. plan as "dead In the water." The decision was important be THE WALL STREET JOURNAL * cause, under the Admiralty Code, time limits on when a vic Monday, July 23, 1984 ___ tim can sue are much more flex ible and considered favorable to plaintiffs. CAP CO JEN 0013088 ENGINEERING, WORK CONTROLS SHOULD BE USED - 'Asbestos measurements made through phase contrast rolA TO ATTAIN LOWEST FEASIBLE LEVEL, AIA SAYS erbscopy do Dot reflect the true airborne concentration of alH The permissible expoeure limit for asbestos should be reduced to the lowest level feasible through engineering aad work practice controls, representatives of the Asbestos la- formation Association testified July 0 at Occupational Safe- - ty and Health Administration rulemaking hearings no asbestos. * . , aibestos fibers regardless ot size, but rather represent only * a small subset of all fibers meeting a generally defined aim i and shape criteria, according to Cassette. The lower bound : on the dkvneter of a countable fiber is unspecified and consequently depends on the limit of visibility of the slids/microscope/counter combination, he asserted. AIA's testimony came In the third week of the hearings, * `Unpredictable'Changes ' '. which began June 19 and which have featured presentations , by other industry groups and by organized labor and govern*.' ment agencies (Current Report, June 21, p. 3$; June 2t, pp. _". - v- -- . ' ' ' '; '' This limit of visibility r- , .... the graticule size and the Vi- along with other factors counting rules affect the such level as of $0, <1; July S, pp. MO, Ml). OSHA should not rely on respirator use when engineering' - ' Ai-f~:iP* tade* obtained on a sample," he- noted. "A series of .- - 'contemporaneous changes in the method as has been made and work practice controls can feasibly achieve the PEL, BJ. pigg, executive director of AIA, stated. He maintained,' however, that in some settings it may be desirable to * supplement such controls and urged OSHA to consider the, / :.' following options; ` A requirement that feasible engineering and work prac-' , tice controls that are shown to yield significant exposure- - --------by NIOSH will result in completely unpredictable changes in - measured results." For this reason, CosMtto advocated a ` p i: requirement by OSHA for testing of the method. ,, - * .-. Another reason for OSHA to require testing is NIOSfTs \ -- admission that in some undefined circumstances, the meth- * .. fc.. od cannot be used over Its entire working range due to / nuisance dust loading, according to Cossette. Other issues of reduction benefits be implemented even in workplaces that - practical field application of the method also need explora- are achieving the new PEL. - A program to reduce substantially or eliminate smoking rr. Hon/-such as the effect of higher pumping rates on the . ` capture efficiency of large agglomerates, he noted. among asbestos workers. A program to achieve respirator use even where the... ."ft is likely that Method 7400 will leave a large measure - - V*.~-/:'of Inter-laboratory variation," he stated. Prior to adopting PEL has been achieved through feasible engineering and Method 7400, OSHA should obtain testing information con- work practice controls. ; rfinning or denying the claims for the new method, Cossette Pigg also recommended a separate standard for asbestos. ~ / ; .maintained. He suggested that OSHA particularly determine in the construction industry. "We cannot, however, in gener- al, support the Building and Construction Trades Depart--- .7/ ' .7 7.1L -v. - inter-filter. Intra-laboratory, and Inter-laWratory variabHIties associated with the existing and candidate methods, ment's proposed construction standard because Its underiy-" the realistic limits of reliable detection forjpeh, and the ing premise is that OSHA should eliminate all exposures to . asbestos," he said. Pigg explained that, although OSHA is / mandated to eliminate significant risks to the extent feast-.,' ble, a standard that attempts to eliminate all workplace risks is just as unreasonable for asbestos as it would be for . any workplace hazard. *- - / -'t-' * comparabilltycf measurement results', between- the old - method and the candidate methods. _ J ' . Cossette suggested that a smsll round-robin exchange of v.. = optimally loaded filters from various sectors should provide " the needed variability and comparability information, as- . . .;- V.;. : sumlns a proper experimental design is followed. The AIA maintained that significant risks can be eliminate - ' ' 'v:.:l-:' ! In presenting conclusions of a feasibility study conducted " ed in the installation of new asbestos-containing products ...through the use of recommended work practices sines "al- --- - 77 ; earlier this year for the Asbestos Information Association on / if./ . occupational asbestos dust controls, Gordon M. Bragg, a '/ most all asbestos products marketed today occasion only . very low exposures and then only for brief periods.'' Pigg . -s .. ',7.' . professor of engineering at the University of Waterloo, t stated that a PEL established at 0.5 fibers per cubic cent!- ; stated that, in urging OSHA to focus on work practice ' requirements for the installation of new products as well as ; .'7.7/.v.7. in regulating renovation and demolition activities, the asso- v` elation is expressing its belief that the agency can develop a simple but effective standard for the control of asbestos '- w " meter is likelyto result in indefinite full-shift respirator use at a few work stations in each major asbestos industry sector. In addition, he asserted that a PEL established at Off f/cc is likely to result in indefinite full-shift respirator use in a large majority of primary industry work stations. 7 exposures. "Vv-a ' "Unless appropriate provisions tre made for necessary "We are concerned that if OSHA regulations Impost a ' ; - - lead time to produce exposure reductions through engineer-' multitude of additional ancillary requirements, such as ex ing controls and work practices, temporary full-shift respt- tensive monitoring and reporting, the regulation will be toe - . :rater use will be widespread for one or two years even in complex for contractors to follow, too difficult for OSHA to those workplaces that will ultimately be able to consistently enforce, and ultimately ineffective," according to Pigg. "Ho achieve the new PEL," Bragg said. standard is of any usefulness to protection of worker health,. regardless of bow comprehensive, unless compliance is ... He suggested that OSHA incorporate a realistic variabil- 1 = * - ity model of exposure incidences into its feasibility detenni- < achieved on the worksite." . '*' nation. "Without this conceptual framework, OSHA cannot 'i Marcel Cossette, director of research and technology for - 7 - clearly assess the Implications for employers and the effects ' :i Societe Nationale de L'Amlante, a state corporation whoHy - on employees of establishing a PEL at any particular level," owned by Quebec which operates most of the asbestos mines - Bragg asserted. - v [! and milling operations in Quebec, also offered testimony - /:.'7 ' Variability in exposure conditions from one day to the concerning asbestos measurement and monitoring on behalf " ' next is a fact that employers "must explicitly consider" in of the Asbestos Information Association. He recommended designing their dust control programs, be said Maintaining > that any proposed substitute analytical procedure must bo that employers generally aim to achieve average airborne ' t proven suitable by formal trials prior to its adoption. He asbestos levels between one-half and one-quarter of the PEL .1 asserted that the National Institute for Occupational Safety ' to assure compliance, Bragg complained that establishment and Health bad admitted that it has not tested its new of the PEL at the lowest level that can be achieved on asbestos analytical method. Method 7400, but has merely.. . - - average deprives employers of their operating margin and constructed it based on extrapolation from the current exposes them to a "constant fifty-fifty chance of citation" by method. an OSHA inspector. OCCUPATIONAL SAFETY & HEALTH REPORTER 7-12-04 CAPCO JEN 0013089 I Ingested Asbestos Study ' Completed in Washington Researchers at the Univenity of ^ . Washington Department of Environ*- '? mental Health have completed a 21 ;.. 2 ] month study of the ratio of asbestos fibers retained or excreted by persons': , consuming drinking water-containing high levels of asbestos. The study, funded by the' U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, was designed to determine whether asbestos fibers were present in the urine of residents in and around Everett, Wash., where tap water contains about 200 million fibers per liter. The researchers investigated whether significant num* bers of asbestos fibers penetrate the wall of the intestinal tract, whether asbestos fibers are found in other or* gans of the body and in body fluids, and what is the effect during long 'J?'A small group of people in Everett, ..... According to a news release from all in good health and without his* the AC Pipe Producers Association tones of kidney disease or occupa the investigations concluded that al- tional exposure to- asbestos, con . - though the concentrations of fibers is sumed drinking water 'containing - the urine samples varied throughout approximately 200 million fibers per - l j the sampling period, none were con liter. This group was compared to a i sistently and significantly higher that control group of Seattle, Wash., resi* '-the concentrations of fibers estimated dents where levels of chrysotile as- - :" for the control waters. There was bestos in the drinking water are 100 however!. a significant difference times less (2 million fibers per liter). (p0.05) between the counts of fi Urine samples from both groups were bers in the urine samples of person: taken over a 21 month period and , ! who had been residents of Everett foi asbestos fibers counted by means of a . less than three years comparedto per transmission electron miscroscope. sons of more than 24 years residence. i.imiu of detection ranged from 70,000 to 300,000 fibers per liter. . . . The study revealed that the concen- lengths of asbestos fibers in the .. tration of fibers in the urine sample: drinking water ranged from 0.3 to 5.0 of Everett donors combined (0.97 s micrometers; fiber length in the urine 10* fibers per liter) was not signifi samples ranged Trom 0J to 1.2. cantly different than the concentre- micrometers.;'!'..'.'.' ' tion for Seattle/Bellevue control 56M4 JOURNAL OF donors, even though the numbers of ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH - J fibers in the drinking water of the BI-MONTHLY 1,900 latter were at least 100 times less. term exposures of 20 or more years. The report says that although the data Is inconclusive, the study sug JUN 1964 gests there is no relationship between . high concentrations ofasbestos fibers in drinking water mid the numbers Choosing his words .estimated for voided urine. Lots of public figures have reasonably be expected to ftmc* speech writers with sound in tion these days without getting , stincts for the topics that will into this area, but evidently Mr. ` gain approving attention, and Gale is convinced that it can even for. the well-turned phrase. and should. He does not ap But the writer who is really prove of such words and phras worth his weight in gold is the es as "uncontrollable," "glob one who can get right down to ally catastrophic," "conse the nuts and bolts -- the words quences fatal" and "high risk themselves. to future generations" because William D. Ruckelshaus, administrator of the Environ mental Protection Agency in the United States, is a lucky man to have Roger Gale as his special assistant. Mr. Gale is to words what the super-sniffer is to airborne, chemicals: if there is a word that contains the merest trace of ah alarming element, he can detect it. The Gale nose- has wrinjded in distaste over the discovery of unnecessarily alarming terms in recent agency pronounce* ments and he has written a these inspire dread. His prefer ence is for terms that suggest control and "are likely to en courage a greater willingness to accept risk." Thus: "control- lable," "limited scope" and Tow risk to future genera- tions." The Yn'emo -- not, one sus ` pects, intended for public perusal -- counsels Mr. Ruckel- shaus that when he speaks to - non-scientific audiences about environmental risk, he should add "an element of passion" to show "that you understand the depth of their concern and their I memo in a few well-chosen I words to show how damaging a few ill-chosen ones can be. He apprehension." With this kind of skilled guid ance, citizens on both sides of warns the administrator that the border may find it increas- "more attention be paid to your ingly difficult to gauge the vocabulary" and that he should concern and apprehension of avoid words that reflect "dread the EPA. Oh, well, at least they and catastrophe." have begun, to clean up the The innocent citizen may' administrator's vocabulary. wonder whether the EPA can It's a start. CAP CO JEN 0013090 .."WJien the flirt Norfolk cue - r. u tried under maritime lav in " ' Aucuit 1682, the victim u '- * . awarded $944,000. Ever since, asbestos manufacturers' have -.-Jo', V-..- ' settled out of court with plain* tiffs on the eve of the. triaL. '1.= - , t,;. More than 70 cases have been settled.'- "' ^'11'" f' |Inju^Suit RulesEasedin JerseyThe awards have not been made publie,- .- but attorneys say they add up to tens of* ' - -- millions of dollars. Court decisions now. s. .' won't change those settlements but could , , : ' ' ^ affect future negotiations. Wallace said the court may have been . . pressured by recent decisions from other , a. ,- appeals courts that disallowed the appli- cation of maritime law in shipyard asbes*; ? ' , '_ tos cases. - Richard S. Glasser, a Norfolk attorney who represents shipyard workers, said ' he would prefer asbestos cases to be tried under the Admiralty Code. Sea law l- TRENTON, June 18 (AP) -- New Jersey reaidenti seeking to bring per sonal injury UnrsnfCs against onurf* statecorparatioos morethantwoyears after thetr tnjuriea have until August IS to file the claims, the State Su preme Court ha* ruled. A lawyer rapeMeeting people who claim injury from asbeetne exposure said the ruling would help them bring lawsuits against foreign companies that mined the suhataooa far proems in* in New Jersey plants. UA UiMOJ cases."Besaid the "0*lancing of inter-, ests and impact" should let such *utt$ proceed.- . " a lawyernpceeeutingthe ___ _ ^sbeftoc exposure victims* said the ruling would assist them in bringing suits against foreign'compa nies mat "elected to play Udeantigote|k" tp avoid lawsuit*. ... , lows more flexibilty on how long an in*, jured plaintiff can wait before suing, he said. Under Virginia law, a plaintiff must ' sue within two years of the "cause of ac* ' The court'* ; 44o4 decision on Wednesdaycame in the case of Walter Cocoa of Metiichcn. whowas injured in 551. Si - .'* an auto aocidect in 1674- and brought suit fouryears later againstthe Booda }JU*nr COOBUXf Of JftSttL tion" of the suit. Courts have interpreted New Jersey's statute of limitations that in various ways, but in any case it is requires pfcrscoaHnjory suits to be filed,within two years of the injury, but stricter than admiralty law. the law provide* an exception in cases Wallace, the asbestos manufacturers' lawyer, said the two codes offer advan tages and disadvantages for both sides. inwhichthe companysued itnotrepre stheentsetdaftso.rlegalpurposes by anagentin NY-040 THE NEW YOSK TIMES (M)963,400 (S)1,563jUp For instance, he said, although admiralty . ; * law might limit lawsuits, it would divide. rm MadlflM TMMg . in August 1883 the Supreme Court payment of awards on the basis of mar ruled that die exception was invalid. ket share-- a disadvantage to some large But on Wednesday it. modified its manufacturers. Other differences include: stand, saying the two-year cutoff period for pending and future suits began when it made its earlier ruling Under state law, it is harder for' : and would run until August IMS.. . plaintiffs to prove exposure to asbestos' Justice Robert Clifford, writing the that took place long ago, Wallace said. ...............-rtOw- .. JUN 17 1984 Under Virginia law, negligence by' >- the plaintiff in an injury effectively nul* ' lifies the suit. Under maritime law, plain*----' - tiff and manufacturer negligence are: - '*swweighed to see which is greater. . .. .. Asbestos's Perlstein Under Virginia law; punitive dam- ' ages against the manufacturer are not available if the injured worker has diedy^ '' -- : Resigns as Chairman OSHA Chief Is Recess Appointee President Reagan has given Rob ert.'Rowland a recess appointment 'to head the Occupational Safety and'Health Administration, al-. lowing him to serve in the post--' without Senate confirmation-- at least for the remainder of this Rowland will succeed Thorne Au* dhter, Reagan's first OSHA chief, at least through the end of this year. ` Auchter resigned from the peat in March to take a job in private indus-. try^ 1 . :L. year. The nomination was made Fri day, three days before Congress was scheduled to return from its Fourth of July and Democratic con THE WASHINGTON POST - vention recess. Rowland, an Austin 'attorney, is currently chairman of the Occupa- ..: - : tional Safety and HeAlth. Re- '. *' view Commission. He was vice tr. w chairman of Reagan's 1980 Texas campaign committee. . uiuiuAb-uanui penstdo resigned u chairman of Asbestos Corp. and as presi dent of Sodete Nationaie de 1'Amltnte, the Quebec gtjvernment'sasbestasagency, which controls the ssbestos-mlning concern. . A Quebec government spokesman said Mr. Perlstein decided to change career di rections. Mr. Perlstein couldn't be reached . for common. .. Succeeding Mr. Perlstein atthe agency is ' Jacques Ptquta, 54 yean old. a business ''consultant and Whnerty senior vice presi' dent of Sodete Generate de Klnancement <fu <>jebec, a Quebec government bolding eom- pany. A spokesman for Asbestos Corp., based In Tbetlord Mines, Quebec, said a suc cessor for Mr. Perlstein as chairman will be 'chosen shortly... THE WALL STREET JOURNAL ... July 13, 1984 CAP CO JEN 0013091