Document 4D90E1vmMoZpZxYmjRQxBBKa

(Amiricsn ^Axaitrirtg of (Igmipatiimal JSUbitmt Lee B. Grant, H.D. PPG Xnduatriee, Inc. One Cateway Center Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania 1S2Z2 June 27, 1972 NOTE: THIS DOC'/M-v AiOi CGiVii FRQfi-i ppQ f Dr. Charles H. Powell National Institute of Occupational Safety and Health Parklavn Building 5600 Fishers Lane Rockville, Maryland 20852 Dear Charlie: I have decided to submit my request to be replaced as the American Academy of Occupational Medicine's Commissioner on the Accreditation Commission of Occupational Health Services. This comes at a time when NIOSB has let an 18-month contract to the Comnlsslan for $71,481 to develop and validate occupational health stsndards. I was involved with others in developing the successful proposal. So that the reason for my request will hopefully be understood, I felt it necessary to inform you and others of the circumstances which led up to my decision* Simply stated I am aequleslng to a suggestion from the Industrial Medical Association to the Acadmay of Occupational Medicine that'the Academy replace me as their Coanissloner. The alleged reasons for this suggestion I will deal with in a moment, but first let me say that it was because of my deep conviction that as professionals in occupational health we must do what we can to enhance the quality of occupational health programs, which must have as their prime function the protection of the msployee's health, that I became involved In an attempt to improve the wholaly inadequate accreditation progrm that had been carried on by the I.H.A. It was my reef--endation to the I.M.A* that their progrmi be discontinued as such and that a broadly-baaed approach Involving other professional organisations in the occupational health field be considered that lead to the development f the Accreditation Commission of Occupational Health Progress. The alleged reasons given by the I.M.A. for their suggestion to the A.A.O.M. were two; One, that because of my consultant relationship with Pittsburgh Corning. Corporation and their highly publicised difficulties at the Tyler Unlbestos Plant, I am, according to the I.M.A., considered by Mr. Samuels of the AFL-CIO as being anti-labor and, therefore, unacceptable to Mr. Samuels as a Commissioner; Two, that I have, according to the I.M.A., been considered by the Commissionars of the ther member organizations as ov rbearlng and uncooperative. TWlc document was not a record of PPG*I NDUSTRt ES, INC. DID NOT COME IT'S FILES AND CANNOT BE AUTHENTICA ED RY PPG INDUSTRIES, INC. _ ______ J_BB^002J095~J Or. Charles H. Powell Page 2 June 27, 1972 NOT:: ?' I CGiViii (TvUlVi r'ru r The basis of the latter allegation Is completely contrary to fact. I was unanimously elected by the Comnlselonera to chair the Commission in spite of my Initial request to withdraw my nomination. I felt that for many reasons a Commissioner representing one of the industrial hygiene organizations would be more appropriate; one reason being the past difficulties between the I.M.A. and A.X.H.A., which resulted in the A.I.H.A. dropping out of the annual Industrial Health Conference. Andy Hosey or Jerry Lynch, 1 believe, will attest to the falseness of this allegation. Bill Kelley, who worked with me as a member of the Accreditation Committee, will attest to the harmonious relationships chat existed on that Ccenlttae over the eighteen months or so that it took for the Comalttee to complete its work. The basis of the first allegation is more difficult to consent an because it reflects an alleged position taken by Mr. Samuels and 1 don't know the basis for Mr. Samuels' position. However, one of the reasons that I am writing to you is that you are familiar with the Tyler situation and with Bill Johnson's letter to Dr. Peavey, Commissioner of Health of Texas, a copy of which was sent to the International Office of the Oil, Chemical and Atomic Workers Union, which lead to the December 13, 1971, meeting that 1 had with HIOSH in Cincinnati that you attended. You will recall that Bill stated that I refused to permit the MlOSH x-ray experts to review the Tyler employees' x-rays which I felt was a misunderstanding and I recommended a meeting to clear it up as promptly as possible. 1 have attached a copy of the Memorandum for Kecord of that meeting which contains same history of the Tyler Plant problem. A pertinent fact not covered in this memorandum is thet on my recemendation in 1969 Dr. Morton Corn, the Professor of Industrial- Hygiene at the University of Pittsburgh, assisted in the design of a ventilation system to control employee exposure to asbestos dust, both for the Tyler Plant and the Port Allegany Plant of Pittsburgh Corning. The system was Installed first at Port Allegany and by the time this was completed, a determination had been made to develop an asbestos-free product. Again, this decision wee partially on ay raeonnandation and also the evidence that was developed by Dr. Clark Cooper of the University of California in a study which I Also rectrendad. . 1 believe that you. Dr. Cora, end Dr. Cooper, whose professional judgment 1 respect, would support me in my opinion that X acted in a wholely professional end unbiased manner in my consultant relationships with Pittsburgh Corning and do not deserve the alleged anti-labor label. In any event X am requesting the A.A.O.M. Board to replace me as their Commissioner. Since X have worked long and hard for a meaningful accreditation program, X would not like to have it jeopardised by any opinions of me, false as X believe them.to be. THIS DOCUMENT WAS NOT A RECORD OF PPG INDUSTRIES, INC. DID NOT COMt FROM IT'S FILES AND CANNOT BE AUTHENTICATED BY PPG INDUSTRIES, INC. LBC:lc Enclosure cc: Harold GoU, M.D. - President, A.A.O.M. ^.Accreditation Cooission Members' Clark Cooper, M.D. Dr. Morton CornWilliam K lley 7 ptT0023096 1 Very truly yours, ----------------- Lee g. Grant, M.D. * - i- * .4290 f ?rt 7/Il/72 WOUSTRies opinion ocher rh*ht b* ine*restd * *** rw-r " Attechaenc Lee s Gr*nCf M.D. NO i E; THJ H ''- '- ' V i-?vIVc.'! v(H,J T * rs r ID f0T COME FROM PPG FILES THIS DOCUMENT WAS NOT A RECORD OF PPG INDUSTRIES, INC. DID NOT COME FROM IT'S FILES AND CANNOT BE AUTHENTiCA iED BY PPG INDUSTRIES, INC. 4331 CjUAi>* .* 1 i .aOU>0-t*l UNJVcHM i Y OJ KITTSHUKCili i'l'H PENNSYLVANIA lsd > UtAI.rU DlrtKiMIM uh Lm\:NliD\AI IIIM HI HCTF T1.'-' rso<^' .MrT:T nn it * i ' NOT CviVic b1--KUiVl ii*u i'it-1-- w* July 5, 197 % Vr. Charles H. Powell tout a-nut Institute of Occupational Medicine P.7n kiaivn HuiIdong 5600 F iti, ex* Lane Pockv ittc, Maryland 20SS2 Qoar Chari te* 7 was shocked and dismayed by Lee Grant's tetter to you dated June 27, 1972. Specifically, I am disheartened by the alleged reasons given by the IMA for suggesting that the Academy of Occu pational Medicine replace Lee as their representative as Accredit ation Commissioner on the Accreditation Commission of Occupational Health Services. Without v iclatlng the consultant-client relationship, It Is possible for me to state that In all my dealings as an engineering consultant to the Pitts burgh-Corning Corporation, Lee was first and foremost concerned with the welfare of the worker. The written `tsec'td of the Tyler Plant would substantiate this statement. The installation of controls In F-C facilities, per my recommendations, were always backed to the hilt by Lee. My presence on the site as an Engineering Consultant to F-C was through the efforts of Lee Grant, for. Lee Grant to be designated as anti-labor by Mr. Samuels, of the AFL-C10, is an injustice. _ Z have not been close' to progress with the Accreditation Com mission but have heard from others of the extraordinary effort put forth by Lee. H-ti resignation for all eg ed -- and In my opinion in correct reasonst Is a toss to alt groups associated with the efforts of the Commission. tut I am mere disturbed by the possible damage to the profes sional reputation of one of our best Industrial Medical Virectors. In this regard, I am puzzled as to how to proceed to set the Tylet record sfreight, but wish you to knew that it would be my pleasure to do so under conditions that.would maintain the confidentialitu of the Pittsburgh-Corning client-consultant relationship, but would clearly establish among members of the professional community, the rote cf Vr. Grant. To my knowledge, he has nothing to be ashamed r in this case. jdUSTWES, iriC' 4392 c ptMenai At^a.xdU, t/iuty ouju. MC; n.j cc! Lae 8. Gnant / UoAtan Co An, ?koIu>oa Pk.V. NOTE: T'>f!? r'''",,Vr'IT NO? ( I /3 . ', H; (r, i'J U f i1 RECEIVED julIO (972 medical director THIS DOCUMENT WAS NOT A RECORD OF PPG INDUSTRIES, INC. DID NOT COME FROM IT'S FILES AND CANNOT B,E AUTHENTICATED BY PPG INDUSTRIES, INC. <_BB.QQ23Q99 J 4393