Document 9LrVQKe08x4M5m6qjqZM5rDbD

PLAINTIFF'S EXHIBIT GF-I484 New Home of Our Process Division... built by a leading engineering and building firm. Us. Last year our expanding Process Division, serving clients all over the world, outgrew its cramped Chicago area quarters. So we took it out of town and put it under a new Austin roof. Not way out, but close torO'Hare Interna tional Airport, convenient for out-of-town clients, and yet orw a few minutes from downtown Chicago over an expanding system of expressways. Our Process people like it The operation is even more efficient and they can expand their staff of over 150 by 50 per cent whenever they have to. It's close to where most of them live, they don't have to fight city traffic, and they have a place to park when they get there. And clients appreciate the new convenient and pleasant surroundings inherent in the suburban setting, as well as the short trip from the airport. The Process Division of The Austin Company is an integrated organiza tion specializing in the development of processing facilities for the food, chemical, pharmaceutical, petrochemical, and electrochemical Industries. They offer a complete service ranging from feasibility studies and plant site location through to start-up assistance and contract maintenance. Inquire; 2001 Rand Road. Des Plaines, Illinois 60016, or phone (312) 827-6633. 8 CHEMICAL WEEK October 8. 1966 The Austin Method is a comprehensive system of consulting, design, engineering, and construc tion servicesperformed under a single contract When co-ordinated with a chant's knowledge of his requirements, facilities result which pro duce for turn the maximum economic benefits. m THE AUSTIN COMPANY GESHUL WACO. OMMOWta Ottica pwreh dm d eS tmeka nmMMKMU HEMMUMTHH: 77DF>rt feam. OHicM m UUn Pail teewem. GMMi Em IWe tkSaeeet MICH06087 Asbesto3s3*^ SSaafety Reaffirmed To tub Editor: The article titled "Asbestos: Awaiting Trial'" (OK, Sept. 10. p. 32) contains many inac curacies, which have led to erroneous assumptions and false conclusions. Briefly, the facts are these: (1) Asbestos is a uniquely useful product serving the needs of modern man and society, and it is not likely to be replaced by economically feasible synthetic polymers, or anything else, in the foreseeable future. (2) No published reports, even the most speculative, support the general ized statements in your article regard ing health effects of possible exposure to asbestos. (3) There is no basis for the sugges tion that Congress "may act" regard ing asbestos use, for no such proposals are being considered by Congress. We are informed that the congressman quoted as predicting action disclaims any knowledge of health evidence relating to asbestos or of proposals to control its use. (4) No evidence exists to show that asbestos poses health risks for the gen eral public or to show that even 1% of Americans have "mild chronic asbestosis," much less the 40% figure you give in your article. (5) Regarding your list of "sources of airborne asbestos," there are no data to support the contention in your article that the "man on the street" is exposed to asbestos from these sources, or indeed that these sources contribute asbestos to the ambient air. (6) We know of no data to support your claim of a sixfold increase in socalled "asbestos-related cancer." As you doubtless realize, the proper conduct of our business requires us to keep abreast of scientific developments regarding asbestos, both medical and technical. Is is our opinion that syn thetic polymers are not likely in the CW welcomes expressions of opinion from readers. The only requirements: that they be per tinent, as brief as possible. Address all correspondence to: H. C. E. Johnson, Chemical Week, 330 West 42nd St., New York, N.Y. 10036. foreseeable future to completely re place asbestos in the many applications for which it is now used. Any syn thetics would have to prove superior to natural asbestos and be economical ly competitive. As to health aspects, in June of this year the U.S. Surgeon General ap peared before the Senate Public Works Subcommittee on Air and Water Pol lution, with Senator Edmund Muskie of Maine as chairman, to discuss var ious problems relating to air-pollution abatement. Surgeon General William Stewart enumerated a number of sub stances in common use, including plastics and asbestos, about which he said: "The public health hazards that may arise from these aspects of en vironmental contamination have not been adequately documented. In each instance further investigation is needed to determine whether health is indeed threatened and what control measures may be necessary." In these days when all substances in our air and water and even the food we eat are constantly under scrutiny, as to their effects on the pub lic, the fact that asbestos is among the subjects of investigation is not surpris ing. In fact, we have always supported and will continue to support investiga tions by the U.S. Public Health Service and other research scientists, Roger Hackney Vice-President Johns-Manville Corp. New York To the Editor: In reference to your article, "Asbestos: Awaiting Trial'" (Sept. 10, p. 32), we know of no scientific evidence supporting the statement that "40% of all Amer icans have mild, chronic eases of asbestosis." Even in the asbestos industry, where more is known about exposure levels than among the general population, there is imprecise knowledge about the health effects of exposure to as bestos. With the cooperation of labor and industry, the Division of Occupational Health has under way a long-range, in-depth study to answer this question, as well as to develop better criteria for the safe handling and manufacture ocr 1ft FAC i __-- of asbestos. In the meantime, however, the division win conti&ue to promote the application of known control methods so that the workplace can be kept as healthy as possible. Murray C. Brown, M.D. Chief Division of Occupational Health Department of Health, Education it Welfare Public Health Service Washington, D.C. CW is pleased to set the record straight. Some of those interviewed apparently drew unwarranted conclu sions from insufficient and dubious data.--Ed. MEETINGS Aaa of Ofldai Analytical Chemists, annual meeting, Twi: -:.es Marriott Motor Hotel, Washi D.C., Oct. 10-13. Tsthalcea tarnation:,, .ympodam on automation in analytical chcmlriry, Slitler-Hiitoo Hotel, New York, Oct 17-19. Dsag, Chemical > AIBad Trades Assa^ animal meeting, Hollywood Beach Hotel, Hollywood, Fla., Oct 20-22. Commardri Chemical Development Asm, discussion of packaging, Drake Hotel. ChicagaptOcL 26-28. National Amm, at Fnrchaalng Agents, Chemical Grow, annual fall conference. Continental PlaWtfotel, Chicago, Oct 27. Society of Frightenring Sriaaco, fourth technical meeting. North Carolina State University, Raleigh, Oct 31-Nov. 2. Americas Society for Metals, national metal oongreaa and exposition. McCor mick Place, Chicago, Oct 31-Nov. 3. Parental Deng Aron* annual conven tion, Statler-Hilton Hotel, New York, Nov, 1-4. FertObev tndastry round-table con ference, Mayflower Hold, Washington, D.C., Nov. 2-4. The Society of the Ftarila Indastry, 11th plastics film, sheeting and coated fabrics conference, Waldorf-Astoria Ho tel, New York, Nov. 9-19; conference on cellular plastics in transportation. Edgewater Beach Hotel, Chicago, Nov. 13-17. The Fraahttn IHllata Raeeawh Labi oratories, fourth annual symposium on the organic-solid state, Philadelphia, Nov. 14. Caaaral Atomic Divides of General Dynamics Carp., and Air Force Ofke of Scientific Research, fundamentals of gassurface interactions, San Diego, Calif., Dec. 14-16. October 8, 1966 CHEMICAL WEEK 7 MICH06088