Document BRJ3yxKakky6NEzm2DGmM11mL

FILE NAME: RT Vanderbilt (RTV) DATE: 1977 Feb 18 DOC#: RTV026 DOCUMENT DESCRIPTION: J-M Memo RE Paper by C.S. Thompson Asbestos in Your Future J o h n s-M a n v ille E. M. F e n n e r, 1-06 dm February 18, 1977 From: R. S . Lam ar, 3-05 copies: J . H. Sw ensen, J . P . L e in e w e b e r, W. C. S t r e i b , D, C Subject: P a p e r by C. S . Thompson "A sbestos in Your F u tu re ". D r. L einew eber ' s comments^on th is^ p a p er., g iv e n h is memo t o y o u d a t e d ^ F e S i i ^ l 7 r 1 9 7 7 , a r e i n my o p i n i o n c o r r e c t b u t :perhi&;pV^tS^iSSld. R. S . Lamar ib A ttachm ents a l l co p ies CRMC-BEV-000675 b y , G 7 a " . T H ^ S N , ' '. ............. Mara^r-^inera&CtaMh'Pki^rlR&DfR7>yifiBtBn('C. vOip.t ,- , ... - V.- - (hcDeccmbcr ^976|ic|^lMintg;Gohgrcss^lournul C R M C -BEV -000677 by C. S. THOMPSON Manager - Minerals, Ceramics and Paper R&D, R T. Vanderbilt Co. To many, ihe title of these comments mighlinfcr a ma jor discovery of new asbestos deposits, an increase in production, or new areas of application. However, oihers might suspect a more serious and sinister"rneaningjfahd, unfortunately, thc'are correct. Relative to .Wori(isa,sl^stos>pix^uct.ipn'^ari^es^ryes (with f h ^ c x o c p i i ^ 'o f |l h ^ h e ' i ^ l^ ^ ( ^ h ^ ^ i ) ^ i n pcrtisc (USBMUSGS, etc:), ``asbestos" was defined as4% any one pf six;;mincrals. ... . . . 3lffi^>ith"^ocunielTr^. S tate^is^!W tty %b e e p a - ^ i^ U ^ 0 .n t^ jh Y ^ ^ ^ |ii^ ' - If f a p p e t^ ^ l^ fo 'rc m u in fiK c ^ c ^ P n ^ t i^ l^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ly, sawrfit to distribute Ihe majoriiy.offthisfunique^ndhighly useful material elsewhere5indhe world. tiWwi&te, commonr" b ll H ^hichfrarelyiccr=i n fi- " Asbestos" minerals created by regulations However, in the last few years; since excessive:cxpo-_ sure to asbestos .has.bcemshown. lq.be a,iseriious||i6iil(h |razani.ihe^U nitcd-Stat& ^gbve^1ncm ^th^r(^i^||3us i-poul:ilnrv :iui'nf,i('.s: h a s n r n m 1 1 I aridIrirhnOKfeilJhll- ----- ttrbean cases; ............ ____ .... ...... ..... so that the n a tu ra liw ea D i n n g {-p rb t(^ ^ f^ ^ n ^ jfe these newiy^iny^ntcU^` ^ t^ tp s ' m M ^ j^ iii( | lp ^ ^ lr, surface runoffiand grpundfwatcr^InT h& tc^ s^ i^ rai^ hin- ers and producers olf1i^ u ^ H ^ l m i'a ^ lp h f bestos" materials are\disfnbuted manufacturing openitidns as mineral fillers in':p0 nltplistics, rubber, or as basic, ingredients in ccm enls'ispaCklihg ---- eompoundiMnid-eefiumcTproductST T O 'UhderStand-howtfiiS-sfariiihg-'siluatiphjhasrcome about, let us examine 'the':chrtj^Tojgy'^&r-sihVirifehlLin'o f events which has occurred oVctjthjb;pasiTew years.' Table I. ``sbcstos'^lftcnils as listedjn/Fetlcrai Register ( L;isY^d;miB^riHS"iirc;itIicfzctl} Ashstiform Variety Chemical Composition Non Ashstiform Variety SERPENTINE GROUP Antigorite. lizafditc AMPrilBOLEGROUP 'lC^f<W0f^N a'^?i(SisO ^X O H .F), '^F SiyD K H ), Ribekitej: X CdrOTngtbh- t ^ r u n r - ' .a te Anihophyllile asbestos (Mg.Fc),(SiHOj2)(OH.F), ~w Antliophyllite Tremolile , asbestos CaMgA(SiB0,)(OH,F) Trematite Aciinliie ` asbestos Cij(Mg.Fe),(SHC)2S)(OH,F)2 Actinolte Issuance of standard in 1972 start it all bcgan.witlvthe issuance .f the Oc*. ^utiohhljSafc-, ty and Hith'%d.miftist,sttion ha) Asbc-t. ?*anitfrfi in Ju--ly.;.|972. .4>.b.a.sU..d&nt&h&jN&&a'&. ** . . . . Q&jfci* ulgatcd regulations listed in table 2. It is obvious; from the realization lhal nialcrials to be regulated must be cor these documents that the majority or standard producing rectly defined and described by the field of science to which they belong if meaningful standards arc to be dcvcl- Table 2. Initial Reaction. (Primary definitions covering asbestos exposures) o p e d T o quote Professor Tibor Zoltai of the Department of Geology and Geophysics, University of Minncsota; in Agency D a te D efinitions comments lo the Minnesota Pollution Control ^Agency* reBtiftlii^dhddisiinclion between fibers of natural asbes* Osha July 7. 1972 6 Minerals (See labte 1) tbs and of cleavagefragments: (Revised Oct. Fiber 3: t length: width ratio Unfortunately, the misuse o f some relevant mineral- IX. 1972) - >5 Micrometers in ogical concepts and terms are becoming so wide USttM (Coal) EPA (Air) Nov. 7. 1972 Apr. 6. 1973 length Same as Osha Same as ( )sha Asbestos material - Asbestos or any material containing asbestos Asbestos tailings - Any solid waste product o f asbestos-mining or milling operations which con tains asbestos spread that it may he extremely dijficidt to correct them. However, if that is not done, some nuncraiagical, concepts and expressions will have double definitions: one fo r mineralogists and physical scientists, and one: for use in environmental public health sciences and practices. The continuing use o f these double definitions would be most uifortunate as it will undoubtedly lead lo addi tional misunderstanding and confliclrbetween mineral ogists and geologists, on one side, and{environmental agencies, arc reluctant to develop definitions of their own and public health personnel on the other. As the con ganatdedarbcypoetrhfeecrstlyevseantistfoietdhetopeinrpceotrupaotriaotne atnhdoseexppraonmsiuoln lcoetpiotsnatnodtheixspprreossbiloenms awroeumldinbeerfaolor gthiceapl,etrhseonlongeilcianl sthoe- w of erroneous ones. .. . second category to restrict themselves to the proper m seofm iinerahgiad^ Bureau o f Mines tried to clarify issue with symposium .^<E F * X ) > i i *RevitfetllPialiomdyStfirdfforj^'sfees- Thcifirst, major ^breakthrough in correctingithciciTor.Siin the orjglrii|1;:asbestos1-Udfinltions c a m c ;a s ^ h c f i ^ j[ i^ a isidelslcpi^dxtiy^. <W'alfrfitSHnt3 to and that^halerials c o m ^ ^ ^ Q & it'by.the^Bu'rcaoof Mines tOlilSfif^iH^iiu- -'* ation beholding a.Symposium on Talc ori'MaV;8^i'973^in ci;cU ."jTH ey;^ arc%ot, covmines and "manu facturing'operations-and 'the "releases of asbestos from Table 3. Turn about or Sidestep. (Secondary reactions . concerning asbestos definitions) . taednite milling Operations" as being excluded from cov m erage. % Agency lim e Definitions sit EPA May 3. 1974 Same as O.sha . Effort was made to correct error ili (Air) Standard revised to include only " commercial asbestos," not opera In the meantime, through the diligent and consistent cf M tions where asbestos was a con taminant ;forts of a sm allgroupofintcrcstcd parties, Oshabecam e avvarc of the crrbrs in dcfinition and the Department;Of USIJM July 1.1974 Only includes asbestiform varieties (Metal- o f six minerals, Recognizes exis :Iaabor issued.nigfcment on Oct. 9,' l974!-witK:6hc,in* nonmelal) tence of nh-fibroui fOiWs&.BiScd 4diistria1'taI&p|rttiticcr^stiitjhg that " non-fibrous or,hdn;s- decision oh data presefited ill i l^tfdfB "(hihe^l^^h;& fnbh-tC stestifnn trcmplifjiire symposium on talc-1 ribf'within' the: scope,ofdhe standard . . Sbnfthre- Osha Oct. 9. 1974 Agreement with tale producer7 after. on Nov. 21. 1974, Osha issued a Field Information Nov. 21. 1974 Issued lietd memorandum* using five criteria for fiber identifi bMelmmoriannedrualms *anrdccloisgtninizgirfiigv;ethccr-ittweroiaftoormbes uosfetdhci-nadmeptehri-- & cai ion (see table 4) -#m- (EAPiAr) Oct. 25. 1974 aSsebt ecsxteolus-scioonn.tleevnet"l'o' f one percent Tablc 4. Criteria lo be used by Osha in countingfiber!. diS?r Mesa Dee. 13. 1974 Issued memorandum requiring use. A. Particles must appear to be fibrous rather than as crystals or oferitcrin.similar to Osha for counting libers Washington. D.C.:i Numerous speakers presented data on the medical circts'M.talc.`aml.1s.sai!ci^i/^,^ h both M n W ^i& In lU v fA lw i cation-ahtl lssifiafionif these min'eraH wcPcdiMfssiii; in detail. slivers. If II. 'flic maximum diameter of a fiber to be counted is 3 it crons. ... Oc~' C. .The' maximum lcngih;of a fiber to be counted is 30 microns. D. 'fhc;icrtgth;io.wiUlh;hitio;must be 5 or mre to I. that i s ,. NoO o timcs'or;nre"IdritSi1ri'lhan\wd. o1 li.''11c>kc|Mhite:ikdhUividi^hfi(^ra must contain fibHls"or,..thc s stage)^VS'Tibri!etiini>t-HeisVibtlividcdjtin'UjwCiLiId=be*oTtcil. . if it meets the ihi*rrcHtVht.fThc'6fe'trfn^tlcrja^pe:ttay.i- q in 1 hc.usedrtb^piavcilhc^iibmtts nature,ofThe{pitrticlcs.7Thc ofJlijyl -/ =v afd^I.nr efcfeihen , ... .. j coi rect^difitUSi's length to width ratio of 5 or more to t is hot meant to imply that other particles arc hot haztirdous. qt I,zedr- - mining .whethera mineralpnrticle could be considered as ........... S' "fiBirbus or nsbestiformt.These are. tabulated in. tbl 4; <>sh**`s recognition of the problem as evidenced by these two documents ind its repented verbal assurances that correct mincralogical terminology and identification method would be incorporated into the asbestos amend ment appeared to signal a real and welcome change in this agency's attitude toward the scientific correctness of its standards. Very soon thereafter, on Dec. 13, 1974, Mesa issued " Health Division Instruction Memorandum No. 8--Defi nition of Asbestos Fiber for Trcmolile Occurring in Talc," which listed criteria for fiber determination similar to those outlined in the Osha document. The year 1974 ended with a feeling of optimism that science.had won out and that future regulatory-documents dealing with " asbestos" would contain definitions and terminology that would limit their application to the true asbestos min erals upon which all medical data concerning human health hazards has been obtained. Plan to rescind Labor Dept, agreement revealed The first indication that all was not well was a thinly veiled threat early in 1975 that Osha was considcring thc rescinding of the Department of I^boragrecmcntvvilfi the before mentioned talc producer ah 'd lth |^ itlfd rati'al-of Osha Field information M em orandum ^T^^/rT'M s;tna- neuver was based on misinformation sifji^l{b$by a com petitor concerning the mineralogy;b0hb4tal<^prpducts in .question and on continuing->.pres^uri^/rpth\;Niosh which, to this day. insists on using pn|yithcfs|mplistic 3:1 (length.width) criterion to define a>fibcr;,,-A;1n|^tihg;Was hckl with the then Assistant Secretary fp F l^ b b f, John Slender, with all principals represehtedSt.;^Hl<5H)Sjcnder stated that as long as he held office both' the agree ment and Field Information Memorandum .wriuliijrcmain; in force. Slender left the Department.of LabbrsoonTthere- aficr. ' Another document was brought tp o u r alicntipn late.in the summer of 1975 by,'Bureau of-M inejs^.j^gljeli'frhis was a study, commissioned by. telle. Columbus Assessment of Asbestos .E m issip 'tis^ fi^ ^ ^ l^ itiifa l Sou roes'of Asbestos.''10 Hly with the occurrences of amphib'blesV'^ under.the-sUbtitle of " A sb e stifo rm 'M ^ All 'ampKibbles form; because;theiauthdrs,iitate1'^ cleavage characteristic se ries-(some 27 individual; species) `V c iiu 's ^ tl^ ^ h e o il to fragment into fibcrs." -This`itatcmdiids^iri(ib3i^^1ntriitV to the principle, in-general accciplahbeliimVnisi^ibVralo- gists, that miricralfibcrs yi*ow,iis_fiBis ficl Hiji|ifltwibS;are notygcnd.riired>rrbm.*hbn-fibrbusfci^'^lj^^^'^ifil\by.' fragmebtfdidn^'ntis.i> a|K r-gqcsbni(j^^ii^^settjiiiilly. nltyKediiuofdiining By statc.HwfthThe co%sistehTunfe^^^ amphiKblcs in any rockmakes that rock a potcnt!aI'" inci- denlial source of asbestos." AsbcstpsfSiaijdiirtl (see table 5)." Not only did Osha pro* pdsc ibyak&ilii^tfep liabkWanl and use the aspect rations^! t h e ' d e f i n i n g a fiber but also to lower, this (h r c s h d f d l i l t r r i i f r o m 5 fibcrs/cm* (thisTLV was autorhatipiily/idropfHid to 2 ftbcrs/cm* on Ju ly jj, 1976) t(V0.5 fibb^ln thc picamblc to this document Oshjt continues to sh6w>its'lack of mincralogical cxpeiiisc^by Table 5. Back to go and worse. (Most rcecni reactions concerning asbestos definitions) Agency Date Osha O ct.9. (975 titA (Air) i:pa (Water) Oct. 14. 1975 Oct. 16, 1975 Mesa June 29. 1975 (Mctalnonmctnl) Definitions 6 Minerals--No distinction as to crystalline form./; ;,, , . Fiber = 3:1 IcnglhisVidth rittio = >5 micrometers in length (negates field memorandum") No change from original--details disposal methods No change from original--groups wollastonitc with asbestos for re quired effluent controls Removes 'asbestos'' tcmiinalogy and substitutes " mineral fiber" Mineralfiber - any mineral par ticle with a 3:1 aspect ratio or more >5 Micrometers in ICngth <5 Micrometers in width copyingran.;asbcstpssdbfinition from a N ew ,York.Acd- .abd^daistio^t|f^|li|^|l^^d^.l.^..H....e. ye^ending- attemptsjby.s^bmc., thcirjurisdictibn mdfinile- iy. ' " '' ' ' ' aminatipmp -t i If by thcTindustryTsince no c'o u h tb ro ^ ii^ b l^ cn t'-h as been discovered to-date. Mesa proppsalwouldexpandmining regulation Proposed, amendment tost . i' -..-step THershbe drpppcd r O ct.-9. 1975(Black, Thursday) .^witi^n^iissil^filhc .`ha-proppScdlmcridhien^ to its f'linlntitti ,'fiS CRMC-BEY-000681 AMHI-.S r< )S`1 MINKUi\I ,,S (me defining, from the standard ami replacing it with two words, "mineral fiber." The agency would further simpli fy the regulator's task by defining a "fiber" as any "pat ti d e that exceeds 5 microns in length but not 5 microns in width, and shall have a length-to-width ratio of at least 3 lo I." While (he terminology and definitions arc altered, the requirements lor handling these " mineral fibers" re main the same as (hose promulgated for true asbestos. To my knowledge, there is no mineral assemblage being mined, milled, processed and either used as such or discarded as tailings (hat would not contain significant amounts of mineral particles which would be classified as "mineral fibers" using the Mesa definition. The majority of silicates, including those most common in mineral de posits (i.c. amphibolcs. pyroxenes and feldspars), and nu merous nonsilicates have, by nature, cleavage character istics that cause them to elongate during comminution. Nature itself forms particles meeting Mesa's criteria through normal weuthcringprocesscs. Two points should be made quite clear at this time: --All of the medical data concerning the nature and cx- tent of health hazards related to asbestos exposure has been gained on: truly asbestiform varieties of only four minerals, chrysolilc, crocidolilc, amositc and anthophyllitc groups of workers exposed to extremely excessive amounts of these asbestiform minerals, usually as mixtures of at least two types. --No definitive medical data has been presented to in dicate (hat comparable health hazards exist with re spect to the non-asbestiform varieties of the true as bestos minerals. No references at all regarding expo sures to (renulitc or actinolite, in any form, were includ Osha ed As in be the stos lSisttaondf a7r0dpalunsd rtehfee raendcdeitsiolnisatle d42incothne- taming "new information" in the proposed amend ment. The extrapolation of hazard from three or four extremely rare forms of common minerals to the in clusion of cleavage fragments and particles of csscn- * tially all other minerals is entirely unwarranted. Ramifications to mining boggle the mind There arc many ramifications of the,present and pro posed "asbestos" regulations, which would directly af fect the mining industry, that may not be immediately ap parent. As mentioned earlier, regulatory agencies show a great reluctance to develop definitiops of their own and eagerly adopt thosc~supplied;by- others. ThciEPA.is using the 3:1 aspect ratio exclusively for the six ,listed " as bestos" minerals in its extensive study of water con tamination by mines, mills and manufacturing facilities. At present, the Kl5A requires that any material containing one percent or more "asbestos" must be disposed of by covering willi "at least 15 cm (ca. 6 in.) of non-asbestos C. Sheldon I lionipson is P A D Man- aticr-Minerals, Ceramics and Paper /><- p a n n im i, U. 7. Vanderbill Co. Thomp son began his nrofessianol earner ill the field o f mineralogy in /955 as - , -ifessar at Westminister College in Sait 'tike ( ity. Tallowing linn, Tinnii uni serw 1 ns research mineralogists' 'em l.iuh Kcnneeall Capper Carp; ' ........., u mineralogisl-gmiip main . ( sriences. Union Carini!r Carp. Mining and Metals Division. V nnpsun has a PhD from the Universi0 / / Utah. containing material . . . at the end of each operating | day." Try to imagine (he situation the mining industry I would be in when the EPA starts to apply the proposed J Mesa "mineral fiber" definition to the hundreds of thousands of tons of mine tailings and overburden dumped | J daily. Even worse, try to dream up a soil dr cover of any | f kind which would not contain any "mineral fibers," Many state agencies try to improve on their federal coun- terparts by setting more stringent standards. The Illinois | EPA, for example, requires that any "asbestos" con- f taining material be disposed of in steel drums. | $ Every mining company would be affected i All the potential problems need not be elaborated on here. Everyone in the business of mining has been greatly affected by one or more of the multitude of safety and health regulations nowon the books, but this latest "m in eral fiber" proposal by Mesa is probably the only stand ard that affects every mining company in this nation. To make it worse, it is based on a lack of medical data, a to tally unjustified extrapolation of hazard from fibers to non-fibers and a complete absence of mincralogical under standing and expertise. In conclusion, I would urge the entire mining industry to support the efforts now being spearheaded by the AMC Noncoal Occupational Health Committee to coun teract the ever growing umbrella of the " asbestos-miner al fiber" regulations. An AMC ad hoc subcommittee on "mineral fibers" has already made a presentation to the Federal Mine Safety Advisory Committee in Birming ham, resulting in the assignment of that topic to subcom mittee for study. Continued efforts will be made to pre sent any and. all d ata which will aid all regulatory agencies, federal and state, to correct past errors in min eral definitions and to make use of the vast reservoir of mincralogical expertise in the U.S. Bureau of Mines and (he U.S, Geological Survey in all future standards dealing <r with minerals. To accomplish this, the backing of the en tire mining industry vyill be needed. j Almost everyone knows what asbestos is, but there seems to be a great many people in numerous regulatory agencies that do not know what "asbestos" is not. Un less these people are enlightened, most everyone who has not had " asbestos" in his past will find that he has "asbestos" in his future. References . 'Federal Register. Vol. 37, No. 110, July 7. 1972, p. 11320-11322, ..'Critcria-For A Recommended Standard . , ; Occupational Exposure To Asbestos, National Institute For Occupational Safely and Health, i 1972. . . . . 'Proceeding of the Symposium on Talc. Washington. D.C., May 8, 9 1973. U.S. bureau of Mines Information Circular-8639, 1974. `Federal Register. Vol. 39. No. 127. July I. 1974. p.24316. 'Zollai. Tibor ami J. H. -Stout. ' `Comments on Asbestiform and Fi brous Mineral Fragments," Relative to Reserve Mining Company Taco- nitc Deposits." Minnesota Pollution Control Agency -Mar. 24, 1976, "Federal Register. Vol. 39. No. 87. My 3.1974/p. 15396. 'Letter to H. U.;Vundcrbilt from John'H, Slender. Assistant Secre i? tary ofjiitx ir, dated OcL 9,- 1974. "Field.Information-Memorandum #74-92, Nov. 21. 1974, "Tremolite ~P and Tnlc>v,.Oceuptttionit;Safcty.and'Hcillh':Administration., ___ "Federal Register? Vo1. 39, No;j208, Oct. 2Se 1974?p. 38064-38073. : '"Kuryvml." R .J.: R. A. Wood. nnd R. E.-Barrett. "Identification 1 And Assessment of Asbestos-Emissions From Incidental Sources Of Asbestos," EPA-650/2-74-087, Battclle Columbus Laboratories. Sept. l 1974. * "Federal Register, Vol. 40, No. 197.Oct. 9, 1975. p .47652-47665. "Federal Register. Vol, 40. No. 199. Oct. 14. l975,p.48292--48302, n Federal Register. Vol. 40, No. 201, Oci, 16,1975, p`48652-^4^668. Mi'n"eASguenredtayfAiirdvthiseor1y9tOh Meeting ..... of the - - Federal -> ...i,, Metal i um andNcmmctal Birmingham, Al' CRMC-BEV-000682