Document G5wZM9dOOJzGdDrLLMjx3qLyY

I ASBESTOS TEXTILE INSTITUTE General Meeting June 7, 1973 Key Bridge Marriott, Arlington, Virginia In Attendance AMATEX CORPORATION W. Maaskant fl. J. Scanlan II. IT. Walter BELL ASBESTOS MINES LTD. U. H. Smith GARLOCK INC. S. G. Dixit A. Kuzmuk LANE ASBESTOS OF QUEBEC LTD. E. A. Farrell R. Lcfebvro C. E. Stiefkcn (Asarco) JOIIMS-MANVILLE CORPORATION C. G. Guerin T. P. Jackson J. P. Power (C.J-M) V7. B. Reitze K. C. Streib MANUFACTURAG MULTIPLES S.A. R. Arnal Olivo CADWALADER, UICEEESJ'Af'' & TAFT E. J. Leff NICOLET INDUSTRIES, INC. E. VJ. P.ussell J. K. PTiittaker AMERICAN SOCIETY FOR TESTING AMD 2 tATERIALS P. 0. Nicodemus K PO^^EP COfiPANY, INC. 'e C. Eratt D. E. Childers J. W. Echercl L. E. Moody ASBESTOS TEXTILE IT7STI1U..E n. Fa?an' Executive Secretary PAYBESTOS-MANIATTMN, INC H. M. Brooks J. W. Franpton, Jr. J. W. Hawkins R. T. Matthew 21. Q. Sccv/croft I. 1!. Weaver UNIROYAL, INC. W. D. Rittinger B. E. Carden L. F. Dieringer E. A. Morris ASBESTOS CORPCEATION LTD. P. E. Leclerc GUESTS OF THE A.T.I. __ Asberit S.A. Marchello Oattaneo Adorno Asbestos Information As s o c i a t i on/- North America Matthew m. Swetonac Industrial Safety Equipment .Association Charles IT. Fumv/nlt, Tr. l iLL ~ P zi <2 i U.S, Bureau of Minos Robert A. Clifton .saiqqei Total attendance during the two-day meeting was *!G people, including 10 women and 3fi men - representing IS companies or associations. Pago 2 -- ATI General Meeting -- G/7/73 PLAINTIFF'S $ EXHIBIT 1.0 ; .~ 'J M I_ I! U T E S 1. The General Mooting of the .Asbestos Textile Institute was called to order by President M. Q. Ccowcroft at 1:00 P.M., June 7, 1973. 2. President Scowcroft v/elcomed the members and guests in atten dance and introduced four guests? namely, Matthew M. Sv/etonic, Executive Secretary/ Asbestos Information Association/Morth America; J'archello Cattaneo Adorno, Asborit S.A.; Robert A. Clifton, Division of bonnetallic Minerals, U.S. Bureau of Mines; and Charles M. Sumvalfc, Jr., Secretary/Treasurer, Industrial Safety Equipment Association, and member of its Safety bearing Apparel Product Group. 3. 'Following past tradition. President Scovrcroft asked each member in attendance to rise and state his name and company affiliation. 4. President Scov/croft called for the reading of the ninutos of the last stated General Meeting. It was moved hy A. Muzmuk, seconded by T. P. Jackson, and so carried, to dispense v/ith the reading of same. 5. Treasurer I. A. Morris presented the Report of Funds of the Institute as of April 30, 1973. C. E. Gtiefhen roved the report accepted. The notion was seconded by S. G. Dixit and so voted, unanimously. A copy of the full Report is attached to these Minutes. be C. In the absence of U, P,. Alcorn, the Legal Counsel address was gTvcn by Eugene J. Leff of Cadwalarler, Pickershan r, Taft. The full text of his report is attached hc-roto. Mr. Leff discussed two cases -- one concerned v/ith the illegal division of the narkot, and the other noting a connection betv/eon anti-trust, violations and the private exorcise of governmental power. 7. VI. K. Smith, Technical & Sales Representative, Bell Asbestos Mines Ltd., delivered the Fibre Producers* Report (see attached). Mr. Smith stated that crudes and ultra-long spinning fibers cositinue to be in short supply but medium and short spinning fibers from Grades 3F to 32. are in fair supply from most producers. Mo shortage in those grades is foreseen for the remainder of this year and a change in the situation is not indicated, at the present tine, for 1974. u. Pursuant to calling for Committee Reports by the respective Chairmen, President Scov/croft advised that C. G. Guerin had replaced I. Barnett on the ATI Technical Committee. 9. The following reports of ATI activities at the Committee level vforc presented by the respective Chairman to the general membership. A copy of each .Report is attached hereto, i.e.: n't* Page 3 -- ATI General Meeting -- P/7/73 Air Hygiene & Manufacturing - P.. E. Carden, Chairman? Asbestos Advisory - E. vJ. Russell, Chairman? Technical - J. W. Echerd, Chairman; Fiber Research 6 Testing - C. 2. Htiofken, Chairman? Environmental Health - 1. F. Diorir.gor, Chairman. 10. It was related by President Gcovcroft that recent technological breakthroughs in basic yarn production techniques have influenced the* Institute to seek wider representation in its membership. It was reported that as a result, the ATI hoard of Governors had approved a change in the Constitution and By-Lavs of the Institute involving .Associate Membership requirements. Article III, Para graph 2(c) of the Constitution has been revised as follows: "those weavers of asbestos-containing fabrics and tapes, for resale as such, who do not manufacture the asbestos-containing yarns used in same, shall be eligible for .Associate Membership in this Institute." 11. President Gcovcroft referred to the new identification cards that had been given to each member in attendance, asking that they be returned to the Executive Secretary for use at future n.-vatings. 12. As stated by President Ecovcroft, there seers to bo some diffi culty with the postal process in that some reservation cards are not arriving at ATI headqxiarters. In an endeavor to avoid undue problem at future meetings, it was advised that each member v?ho makes a reservation with tho Executive- Secretary would receive a brief acknowledgment within approximately ten days' tine. If same does not arrive in due course, it would be well to so advise the Gccrotary. 13. The next General Meeting of the Asbestos Textile Institute will .be liald: October 3-5, 197 3 Uyclmere Harbor Club, inrwichport, Massachusetts Guest Speaker will be Ur. J. Corbett McPonald, Epidemiologist, McGill University, and Medical Advisor to the Ouohec Asbestos Min ing Association. 14. President Bcowcroft advised that ovary -'ffort is being made to oblige the v/ishos of the men! >orship-nt-l arga by scheduling, when ever possible, future General Mootings of tho Institute so that they end on Fridays. beginning in 1974, future mootings will February 7-8, 1974, at the Mills Hyatt House, Charleston, houth Carolina; June 6-7, 1974, at Twin bridges Harriott, Hashington, P.C.; Gap tomb or 25-27, 197*1, at The Cloister, Eca Island, Georgia; February 6-7, 1975, at Holiday Inn-Indopondonce Hall, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania. Tentative future mooting sites include Ponte Vodra Club, Ponte Vedra beach, Florida, in hetobur 1975 and the Marriott in Mow Orleans, Louisiana, in February 1976. . before introducing the Guest Gpoakor, President Ecovcroft re ferred to five booklets that wore distributed prior to calling the PLAINTIFF'S EXHIBIT j-o Pago 4 -- ATI General fleeting -- 6/7/73 meeting to order. Just off the press, the booklets were publish'd by the AI7./NA and are entitled: The Asbestos Information A.ssocintion/North America, uhat Asbestos Is--how And '.'hero It Is Used, Asbestos And Health, Questions and Answers--.Asbestos And Health, and Protecting The Asbestos Uorker. .Tingle copies of the booklets arc available from the AIA/T'A, 22 Hast 40th Street, Hew York, "aw York 10016 [bulk*.rates on request]. 16, President Scovcroft introduced the Guest Gpenker: Matthew f'. Gwetonic, Executive Secretary, Asbestos Information Association/ North America. Mr. Gwetonic {'whose profile is. attached) discussed the AIA/UA, its formation, its history and the work it is doincr on behalf of the asbestos industry in the United'Gtates. Ho also talked about the impact of OGIIA and EPA regulations to control the amount of asbestos dust in the atmosphere. Ho d.isciissod the ques tion: Why has the Asbestos Industry boon singled out by governrnnt, the press and various conservative groups? He stated that the industry is passing through a crisis period in the U.G. and that closer ties between trade associations would bo beneficial. Mr. Gv/otonic advised that he has been talking with the press about asbestos and health since I960 and that out of 133-171) reporters, only 2 were over 35. Me are dealing with a vour.g and idealistic group, he said. From, a survey taken of the awareness and attitudes toward the use of asbestos, it.was discovered that asbestos is relatively unknown to the general public. The situation changes little between urban and rural areas. It was interesting to note that the survey indicated that those in the 10 -25 acre bracket know little about asbestos but that awareness incro asod in those intorviewed who wore between 40 and 43 years of age . .A copy of Mr. Gwetonic1s presentation, in its entirety, is a ttached. to those Minutes, 17. There being no further business to be brought before the membership, the mooting vas adjourned at approximately 3: 0 0 P.M as per a motion by H. A. Farrell, socondcxl fry o. a. F.orri s, and. unanimously approved by the attending members. / F.ospoctfullv submitted, -f //'/ <? Doris ii. Fagan, ^ Hxocu hive Goo rotary NOTE: Enclosed herewith is your copy of the Constitution and I3y- Laws of the Asbestos Textile Institute, revised as of Juno 6, 1973. Paragraph 3 of the Dy-baws (page 7) is subject to approval by the Interim! Revenue Service. i ew ASBESTOS TEXTILE INSTITUTE Report of Funds as of April 30, 197. Balance on Hand January 2, 1973 General Fund Reserve Fund Potty Cash Fund Total on Hand Receipts To reserve Fund -- Interest adjustment to 17/31/72 Dues for Year 1973 To General Fund -- Book Pales Insurance Credits Total Receipts .9 1,3P.33 3,096.90 10a.90 . 01 14,750.00 115.29 37.00 Disbursements Rental of Office Space (5 months) $ Telephone (4 months) II. J. Employment Tax (4tb Otr 1972) Federal Income Tax (4th Qtr 1972} rcdoral Unemployment Tax (Year 1972) Federal Incom.a/FICA Taxes (1st Qtr 1973) Ta. Unemployment Tax (1st Otr 1973) Pa. Income Tax (1st otr 1973) Secretary's Nat Wages (4 months) Insurance for Net; Office quarters Postage, Printing, Office Supplies, etc. Revision of Fibre Tost Manual Legal Services 9 Expenses (4th Qtr 1972) Secretary's Travel Expense (2/72 moating) Petty Cash Vouchers 01-1C 270.00 135.97 33.75 70.00 15.00 102.07 5.25 12.09 503.00 145.00 213.99 25.37 007.40 175.19 93.05 Total Disbursements . . ** Miscalculation from last Statement ............................. BALANCE ON HAND APRIL 30, 1973 * t * * funds as of April General Fund Reserve Fund Petty Cash Fund 30, 1373 3 1,457.95 19,345.31 7. a5 TOTAL AVAILABLE. FUNDS ssets as of April 30, 1973 -- Total Funds as listed above Accounts Receivable (book Bales) Furniture f Equipment (nominal value) C 21,31r,92 6.00 ___________1. 0 TOTAL ASSETS . . TOTAL L7?.r.TT.TmTr:r. ___________ _ ... O^ra.'ry Respectfully submitted/ >oris m. Facran V.Xrj'AT. !I!'.y V'UK'''!' $ 14,402.3 0 23,995.13 3 2,935.2 5 21,309.3 7VO $ 21,316.9 21,316. o/ 7L m1 f 3 L o3 $ 21,323. FIBRE PRODUCERS' REPORT [Presented at ATI General Hooting, Juno 7, 1973, at Roy Pridge Harriott, Arlington, Virginia] There has been an increasing demand throughout the world in 1373 for a number of fibre grades, notably in 4 Group and 7 Group. After the fall-off in 1972 in 5 and 6 Group fibres, this market has begun to recover, although not to the sane extent as the previously-mentioned 4 and 7 Groups. Of main interest to members of the 7..T.I. are; the spinning fibre Group 3 grades. Crudes and ultra-long spinnings contimia to be in short supply, but the medium and short spinnings in the 3F to 3Z range are in fair supply from most producers. Ho shortage is foreseen in these grades during 1973, although individual produ cers may be tight in some specific gradings. There arc no indications at present that there will lie a marked change during 1974 in spinnings; however, in short fibres, the currant oversupply of 61) fibres nay be closer to balance next year. One or tv;o now nines in Canada are scheduled to cone into produc tion in 1975, but there is no likelihood that they vn.ll produce any spinning fibres. The same is true of now sources in Australasia. Walter II. Smith Technical ft Halos Repre.sonta.tive Dell Asbestos "linos. Ltd. M I 1' U T E S Ain HYGIENE Ft MANUFACTURING COMMITTEE Asbestos Textile Institute June 7, 15)73 - - Key Bridge. Harriott/ Arlington, Virginia The Committee mot with sixteen members and guests in attendance, representative of ten companies, as follows: Amatcx Corporation IT. H. Uniter, Morristown, Pennsylvania Itsberit 3. A. M. Cattaneo (Adorno), Rio do Janeiro, Brazil Cadwnlader, Wickersham & Taft E. J. Leff, Hew York City Canadian Johns-IIanvilla Company Ltd. J. P. Power, Asbestos, Quebec Garlock Inc. >. G. Dixit, Palmyra, New York Johns-Hanville Corporation C. G. Guerin, Manvilla, Mow Jersey . 11. B. Heitze, Denver, Colorado Lake Asbestos of Quebec Ltd. E. A. Farrell, Hew York City E. L. Lefebvre, Black Lake, Quebec II. K. Porter Company, Inc. E. C. Eratt, Charlotte, North Carolina I,. E. Moody, Charlotte, North Carolina Rayboston-JManhattan, Inc. R. T. Matthew, North Charleston, .Couth Carolina I. II. Weaver, Mnnhoin, Pennsylvania Uniroyal, Inc. W. D. Eittincer, Uinnshoro, Couth Carolina P. E. Carden, Hogansvilie, Georgia L. F. Diwringer, Middlcbury, Connecticut Thu meeting included discussions in the following areas: dust (fiber) counts improvements, special checking, etc.; aru. r icon . experiences with OfNIA inspections. When taking dxist counts, one company now is using a method. o~ placing the filter intake valve near the person's month and nose Pago 2 - Minuter? of the ATI Air Hygiene f< Ufa. Committee - P/7/7 3 and in some cases will use two units with the second on the enployee's shoulder. Also, it was pointed out, again, that the height of the person being checked has some bearing on the dust count. Dust on fiber samples, when chocked by different people, shows a difference or a variation of as much as 5 to 1 and an average of 40% variation, plus or minus, with more variation on higher counts. Spacing of equipment, using a larger area and using a. second unit to recirculate the air has shown some reduction in dust counts. 'Then stripping cards, use hoods placed as low as possible over the area and strip with a brush attached to a vacuum. Home plants utilize the Abington system when stripping cards. One plant reported the use of a light spray (T-R-X) on mixes using roughly 2%, while another plant sprays carrier only with a mixture of water and ban-set. both plants report some reduction in dust as a result of using the sprays. In a recent plant inspection by Of>KA, one company received several fines for the following itans: 1) Some employees with no respirators; 2) Company had not provided protective clothing in required areas; 3) Citations resulting in two .7700,00 fines for exceeding five (5) iibors in one area a.nd a time-weighted average of over ten (10) fibers in another area. In soma recent cases the OCHA ?.genoy has reduced dust counts by 25% before actually issuing a citation. Some plants are using rental uniforms and lockers both furnished by the rental uniform people. The uniforms, two par employee each week, averages shout $2.50 weekly. In most cases the rental uniform is a short-r.loevod shirt and pants only, and this has been acceptable. Re spec tfully subnitfced, P.ual F. Carden, Chairman HI HU?E S ASBESTOS ADVISORY COMMITTEE Asbestos Textile Institute June 7, 1973 -- ICey Bridge Harriett, Arlington, Virginia IN ATTENDANCE: E. \1. Russell, Chairman T. P. Jackson A. Buzmuk :i. J. Scanlan M. Q. Scov/croft D. H. Fagan, ATI Lxecutivo Secretary E. J. Leff, ATI Legal Counsel The Board of Governors of the Asbestos Textile Institute took action at its September 1972 meeting to change the Institute's Constitution and By-Laws. The change permitted weavers of asbestos-containing fabrics and tapes, for resale as such, who do not manufacture the asbestos yarns used in same, to be eligible for Associate Membership. In light of this action, tho Asbestos Advisory Committee was requested to determine a method of extending membership. After considering several alternatives, the Committee ac cepted the offer of ll. Q, Rcowcroft to prepare a news release for insertion in tho July 1973 issue- of Af.BESTOS magazine. The release will state the By-Law change and will publicly extend membership to those qualified and interested. T. P. Jackson of Jobr.s-Canvilla Corporation will serve as Membership Chairman. Respectfully submitted, K. V. Bussell, Chairman *HI MIR I] T E S TECHNICAL COMMITTEE Asbestos Textile Institute June G & 7, 1973 ------J'ey Bridge Harriott, Arlington Virginia IK ATTENDANCE J. 17. Hawkins, Rnybcstos-ilanhnttan, Inc. T7. Maas3:ant, Anatcjx Corporation P. O. Hicodemus, General Electric Company/AGTM C. G. Guerin, Johns~.Mnnvi?.Io Corporation n J. V. Echerd (Chairnan) , I!. A. Porter Company, Inc. Carl G. Guerin, of Johns-.Hanville Corporation, was welcomed, as n new member of the ATI Technical Committee, replacing Irvin Barnett. A special meeting of the Committee was hold on June fith to review the ASTM Standards for Yarn, Coving, and Lap. The Committee's proposed statements on precision and accuracy were approved by the Editorial Committee of A"TV D-13 as being editorial. However, tho statements were rejected by the ACT;' Standards Editor who spe cified they must bo put to letter ballot after assigning a schedule for intor-laboratory testing. The samples of yarn, roving and lap will he analysed by Haybostos-.Manhnttan, Inc., Am.atox Corporation, General Electric Company, Garlock Inc. and E. E. Porter Company, Inc. Testing should be completed prior to tho Spring 1974 mooting. Tho Johns-Iianville tumbler-test procedure v'as discussed as a means to determine tho relative dustiness of variou s asbestos products, J, ?. Hawkins will determine if this oquipnon t is available for ,ATI evaluation. The feasibiiity of. building a similar tester also will be considered. AST'! Subcommittee .013.14 has been requested by the U.S. Havv to change D-315 Asbestos Tapes to conform, with Cedar a 1 Specification E.II-T-17R2 so it nay be used for direct procurement purposes. Re vision would require tho addition, of a quality assurance provision, a section on packaging ana an obsolete table on tape styles. The ATI Technical Committee feels that thin information should not be included in a "Material Cpocification." P. 0. Eieodemus will re view the objectionable items with AETH before replying to the Navy. A draft of proposed Military Specification * * 11, -1 - 3 0 5 3E - - " I n s u 1 a tion. Electrical, Ashestos-E iber, Treated and Untreated" v>as submitted for approval. The Chairman war, instructed to request an extension for comments until after the October 1973 Committee meet ing , respectfully submitted, J. ", Tcherd, Chairman .4 MINUTES FIBER RESEARCH & TESTING COMMITTEE Asbestos Textile Institute dune 7, 1973 -- Key Bridge Marriott, Arlington, Virginia I'd ATTENDANCE: *'!. C. Streib, Johns-Manville Corporation. H. Smith, Boll Asbestos Mines Ltd, D. E. Childers, II. I". Porter Company. Inc. C. E. Stiefken (Chairman) , American 'Aialting Refining Co. The meeting was totally dovotfid to discussions of the progress of the 3rd Edition of the Chrysotile Asbestos Tost Manual. It was noted that the A.CPA (Asbestos Cement Products Association) has become defunct and all references to that organization have been removed from the new normal. It was decided that for future: test deletions, a substitute page would be inserted into the manual, containing the* previous test number with an explanation of the reason for deletion. It would ba indicated that the tost could be obtained from 7iTI, if required. Since ACPA is defunct, the ATI has, for the record, earned to sponsor an original ACPA tost -- Strength in Asbestos Corn-ant Products, F-3. Tost G-9, Tan Magnetic Eating, has been approved for snonsorship by the ATI. The Test Manual has been assembled in rough form, requiring some editorial changes. This draft will now be ry the ATI Fiber Research & Testing Committee. Uhon approved, the draft will be submitted to the: printer for a reasonably-accurate cost estimate. All original typing, sketches and photographs will then bo assembled for printing, hopefully by the end of this summer. It will be helpful for the membership to submit copy roquiromerits to Doris Fagan as soon as possible '.ospeetf ully submitted., iw Ftiofhen, Chairman frt RElMs.Kfi OF COIIUFFL Asbestos T o;cti la nstitut.e Gonaral hooting Juno 7, 1073, Arlington, Virgin!.'' At the February General lice ting in Atlanta, rendall Alcorn presented to you remarks of counsel dealing with illegal divisions of territory among competing sellers. The cases ho referred to then dealt with explicit agreements in which the nap was carved up among the soiling companies involved on the principle of "cue region one company''. The decided cases have hold such agreements to Joe unlawful, with a few United exceptions. A recent case has focused attention on the division of markets whore the agreement cr plan is not clearly spelled out. In. Hobart brothers Company v. Halcelh T. Gil Hand, Inc. , *171 F.2d 894 (5th Cir. 1973), cert, denied, 41 U.d.L.u. 3C?.i (Pay '29, 1973), a distributor of welding equipment was assigned by the uanufacturar "primary responsibility" for distribution in northern Georgia. The natural commercial instincts of the firm, however, loc it to begin selling in Tennessee, which was not only outside the northern Georgia territory, but was within an area supplied directly by the manufac turer. Eventually, the distributorship agracr.r.nt was cancelled by the manufacturer, and the distributor sued the manufacturer, charging an illegal division of territories. The defense emphasised the absence of a '.written contract prohibit ing the distributor from selling in any particular area. There hac been such an agreement years earlier, but counsel had remedied t*h; problem by drafting new contract assigning responsibility", which did not o ! ^ ! v* *i - <r of orinarv The courts nevertheless held the arrangement to be illegal. The' Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals stated, that "A silent understanding can be shown by the course of conduct of the parties." The chief damaging evidence was an intra-office nemo from the Tennessee dis trict representative of the manufacturer to the hone office which reported the distributor ' s sales ir. Tennessee and urged the manu facturer to "counter" by selling directly in the distributor's territory, northern Georgia. One of tho important teachings of this can) is that compliance with the antitrust lav/s - whether the issue is prices, distribution schemes, refusals to deal with certain companies, or any other sensitive trade regulation natter - is not achieved by norelv avoiding the obvious, spoiled out forms of transgression. Gar-' m.uvt bo taken not to lessen competition indirectly or through unex.prossd understandings an 'well. leaving mentioned violations of the law through more devious moans, which seor-.s to no appropriate at this gathering, so close to the ba.tergta.te building, I would like to note: another convection t-otwaen antitrust law and volition. morbidity data, no nev? reported adverse conmnts and initia tion of nevr studies not available for a nur-hnr of years, the subcommittee on asbestos stated, "It is therefore recommended that no changes be made at the present tine, but that the standard be kept under review;." 3) Pages 9-17, Biological r,fleets of Cancer - Report of the Advisory Committee on Asbestos Cancers to the Director of the International Agency for Research on Cancer - Deport divided into t*?o parts, the first a question-nnd-nnsver section devoted to the latest thinking on the relation of. asbestos exposure and cancer, and the second to recommendations for future research in epidemiology, pathology and physics and chemistry of asbestos-related cancer. P-ospectfully submitted, L. Dieringer, Chairman M I I! O T E f! ENVIiK)7.!HJINTAL HEALTH COMMITTEE PLAINTIFF'S EXHIBIT AO Asbestos Textile Institute June 7, 1973 -- Ecy Bridge Harriott, Arlington, Virginia Ho formal meeting of the Committoo r-'nn held, and. the throe members sat in on the discussions of the ?.ir Kycfieno & Manufacturinq Committee. As of meeting tine, the ollov>ing is the status of various pro posed OSTIA occupational health standards which are of interest to member companies: 1) Hoiso --; A Department of Labor standards Advisory Commit tee is meeting periodically to consider this standard. At its meeting in Boston on TIav 21, 1973, the American Confer ence of Governmental Hygienists (ACOIH) recommended the adoption of a notice of intent to change the noise Threshold Limit Values to C5 dBA for an B-hour-n-day, tine-weighted exposure. .At the- CE-IIA standards Advisory Committee meeting in Washington, D.C., on TJay 30, 1973, Dr. V. II. "i.ldynrd, Committee Chairman, stated that the level of exposure to noise for employees will probably remain at 90 drA. 2) Heat Ctrcss - ACGIII also recommended at its Boston meeting the adoption of the Heat Stress Threshold Limit Values which were published as a notice of intent in 1972. It differs slightly from those recommended by HIOEJ! in its criteria package in that permissible work-rest regimens are specified. The status of the proposed, standards is clouded by recent criticism that the !*BGC index is not an adequate indicator of heat stress. Proposals have bean made that sweat rates and heart rates are more indicative of heat stress. Accent articles of .interest from the Annuals of Occupational Hy giene, Volume Id, 1973, house organ for the British Occupational Hygiene Society, arc: 1) Pages 1-5, Hygiene Standards for Airborne Amosito Asbes tos Dust - "The subcommittee (on asHmtos) has reviewed the information on human exposure to airborne. Ariosi to dust and animal experiments. The subcommittee believes it has insuf ficient knowledge of the relationship I et"ccn airborne Amosito dust exposure and tV. risk of asbestoses to permit an. accurate statement of the degree of protection afforded, by a specified hygiene standard. 'Tovertholoss, on the basis of comparisons between the affects of Amosito and Thrysotilr duct on won. and animals, it is rcoonmtondod that the standards on Arr.ositn should be no less strinnent than those for Choaiotile."2 2) rage 7, Boview of the Hygiene standard for Cb.rysotilo Asbestos Dust - bused on in to mat ion of. Ouvbee mortality and Pago 2 - bo-narks of Counsol Conorul ! looting - 6/7/7 3 Trade associations as wall as other ccnnorcial groups can run afoul of the lav; by assuming power in their private nativities which pro perly belongs to the government. The* early price-fixing cases reflect the view that private parties should not be permitted to regulate sc sensitive a feature of the econony as prices, similarly, any joint action which excludes -i certain companies from important commercial benefits is viewed by the courts as the imposition of a punishment - which is a power reserved to the courts. In Fashion Originators' Guild, Inc, v. Federal Prado Commission, 312 U.5. 457 (1041)/ for example, a combination of mnnufacturers cf women's garments and manufacturers of textiles tried to prevent the copying of their fashionable clothes by sc-callod "style pirates". The fashionable clothes group refused to sell their products to manufacturers or retailers of garments who dealt with the competing "style pirates". The Supreme Court rejected the defense that s'uch a practice was justified by the necessity of ridding the business of unscrupulous garment designers. The Court said: ". . . the combination is in reality an extra-governmental agency, which prescribes rules for the regulation and re straint of interstate commerce, and provides extrajudicial tribunals for determination and punishment of violations, and thus 'trenches upon the power of the national legislature and violates the statute' [i.c,, the Sherman Act]." 312 r.f-. at 4C5. So long as private companies retain their competitive individuality, however, and restrict their joint efforts to constructive objectives which reasonably serve that individuality, there is little danger of antitrust difficulties. ruqonti d. Tioff, Attorney CADT'iUJiDFR, t'lCAFFhl'AM n rama hyiima. U i EXHIBIT Kj.o ABOUT THE SPEAKER The names Matthew M. Swetonlc and Asbestos Info.tr mation Association/North America are synonymous. It was Matt who developed the original AIA/NA Prospectus in the Fall of 1970 and who prepared the presentations for both the introductory and the organization meetings. Upon J-M*s decision to move its corporate head quarters to Denver and Matt's electing not to make the move, he was employed as AIA/NA's first full-time Executive Secretary. For the first three months of 1972 he handled two jobs: Manager of Environmental Affairs for J-M and Executive Secretary for AIA/NA. During this time he orga nized the industry effort for the EPA and OSHA hearings and wrote for others or presented himself six major presentations in a period of 45 days, a record which he states he hopes he "will be never asked to break." Matt is 30 years of age and is married. He is a native New Yorker, was reared in Easton, Penna., and now resides in Manhattan. He holds a B.A. in Creative Writing and an M.S. in Journalism. Following a tenure as Feature Writer for The Eas ton Express, he joined J-M in July 1965 as Associate Editor of News/Pic, an employee maga zine. He was promoted to Editor in January 1967 and one year later was named Coordinator, Special Projects. This is the job that granted him the expertise to superbly fulfil his duties as Execu tive Secretary of the AIA/NA as the major respon sibilities included writing J-M asbestos-health position papers, preparing speeches on asbestos- health for top J-M executives, working with J-M public relations counsel and learning asbestos- health literature backwards and forwards. PLAINTIFF'S (g EXHIBIT j0 _ A Presentation Before the VJHY ASBESTOS ? Asbestos Textile Institute Arlington, Virginia - June 7, 1973 Ey: Matthew M. Swetonic, Executive Secretary /asbestos Information Association/ilorth America I am sure that, many of you have asked yourselves, as I have asked myself, why has the asbestos industry seemingly been singled cut as the prime target for so many assaults by government, labor, the press, certain segments of the medical profession, and by various environmental and consumer activist groups? VThy us? Can asbestos really be all that bad? Are the products ws produce truly going to kill millions of Americans, as some experts have predicted? Or is there some sort of nefarious conspiracy afoot to destroy the asbestos industry? The answer to the question of "V7hy us" Complex because it is a combination of separate factors. Simple because each considered by itself, quite obvious. is both complex and simple. three interrelated but of the factors is, when The three factors are (1) asbestos can cause disease, (2) a spokes man arose to champion the need for asbestos control, and (3) a cornucopia of new government agencies were set up to control materials and products that can cause disease. Let us lock at each of these factors in turn. First, there is no doubt that the inhalation of substantial amour.es of asbestos can lead to increased rates of various types of lung disease, including two forms of cancer. These are facts which can not be denied, even if they do not apply in all circumstances and under all conditions. The medical literature is full of solid evi dence linking asbestos to disease. In my office, I have on file more than 2,000 medical papers dealing with the health risks of asbestos and hundreds more are published every year. Secondly, the spreading of concern over the health risks of asbes tos has as its prime spokesman one of the most talented medical publicists of the ago -- Dr. Irving J. Sciikoff of Pew York's Mount Sinai Hospital. Hot cnlv is Dr. Selikoff capable of arousing the ire and moral indignation of the most conservative reporter or politician with his graphic descriptions and predictions of the ravages of asbestos, but he has also surrounded himself with a group of similarly talented associates who have carried the Mount Sinai message to the far corners of the nation. bhile Dr. Solikoff has, in his zeal, unquestionably painted a far darker picture than the facts warrant, wo should always remember in his defense that the insulation vorkors he has boon studying fa- PLAINTIFF'S ri EXHIBIT JiO Page 2 - Why Asbestos?', by II. ii. Swetonic, AIA/NA Presented to the ATI at Arlington, Virginia - 6/7/73 more than a decade were and still are dying from asbestos related disease at an appalling rate. Such a situation would be sufficient to make a crusader our of the most conservative of scientists. Finally, in the past decade there has been a trenendous growth in public and governmental interest in environmental and occupational health natters. This interest has been translated into a scries of far-reaching lavs affecting industry in a manner hitherto unknown in this or any other country. I believe it is accurate tc say that these new lavs, such as the Occupational Safety and Healrh Act, the Clean Air Act, the Consumer Product Safety Act, and others, have forever altered the concept of the free enterprise system as it was knov;n in this country for a hundred and fifty years. Thus, in combination, these three factors created a situation in which a cadre of freshly created federal agencies, with strong statutory authority, were prodded into assigning priority status tc asbestos by Dr. Selikoff and his followers, who achieved these er.cs through skillful use of the great wealth of negative asbestos-healer, data contained in the medical literature. In short., the asbestos industry was singled out because it was vulnerable to attack, because there was someone willing to lend that attack, and because Congress had graciously provided the vehicles for such an assault. The background of industry efforts to deal with the asbestos-health problem as a national issue goes back nearly a decade, to Dr. Selikoff's now famous 1964 seminar on asbestos disease at the Hew York Academy of Sciences. While this seminar did nuch to prick th= industry's conscience about asbestos and health, the problem still remained one of limited public and press interest until around 1967, when the media began beating the medical bushes searching fer stories that would graphically portray American industry's supposed disregard for the environment and for" the health and safety of its workmen and the American public. The asbestos-health problem was found to be tailor-made for such stories. As a result, starting with Paul Brodeur's infamous Hoy; Yorker article of March 1963, asbestos has since grown into an item of major press interest. In those years, industry efforts to combat the spate of negative press articles on asbestos were carried on primarily by the Johns* flanvilie Corporation, which set up a task force of specialists in various fields to do v;hat it could to portray the problem in its proper perspective. While some minor successes were achieved, it was found that no one company acting independently could adequately or effectively represent an entire industry in dealing with the press and with government officials. As a result, in late 1970, eight companies gathered in Now York Ciry to launch the Asbestos Information /association of North America, Page 3 - Why Asbestos?', by M. M. Suctonic, AIA/HA Presented to the ATI at /Arlington, Virginia - 6/7/73 which was patterned after the British Ivsbestos Information Commit tee, which had been established some three years earlier. In our original concept, the Association would limit its activitie to providing accurate, unbiased information on asbestos and health to the press, to the public and to interested politicians and othc government officials. It must be remembered that at this particu lar time, the enormous problems that v/ould later develop with regard to OSHA and other Federal regulatory agencies wore as yet c the distant horizon and basically unrecognized by the industry. Fortunately -- and properly -- the Association has had the wisdom to alter its original limited concept of its proper functions, and nov; endeavors to assume whatever activities and responsibilities i deems necessary to protect the interests of the asbestos manufac turing industry in the United States vis-a-vis asbestos-health. From this rather narrow initial public relations concept, the Association has grown in the last two years into an organization with priorities in eight major fields of endeavor. These are: Medical Affairs, Legal Affairs, Environmental Control, Customer Relations, Employee Relations, Inter-industry Relations, Publicity and Public Relations, and Government Affairs. To take these activities one at a time, let us start with medical affairs. It is an obvious fact that if an organization is to speak authori tatively on a medical matter, it must not only be steeped in the literature of that particular medical subject, but it must also keep itself constantly informed of new discoveries and development This we have accomplished in a number of ways. For example, by sending representatives to important medical meetings, such as the 1972 Lyon, France, international conference on the biological effects of asbestos, which was sponsored by the World Health Organ zaticn. V7e also meet on an irregular basis with various medical experts in the field, both from the United States and abroad, to review and discuss recent developments and discoveries. Our literature research is eased considerably by receiving the monthly medical paper distribution of the Institute of Occupations and Environmental Health in Montreal, which is funded by the Quobe Asbestos lining Association. This year, for the first time, the AIA has elected to sponsor medical research of its own. Currently underway is a completely AIA/H/v funded study of chest sounds, which is being conducted by Dr. Raymond Ilurphy of the Harvard School of Public Health. The purpose of the study is to find a new method of determining ar. individual's potential susceptibility to asbestos disease. rage 4 - Why Asbestos?, by M. M. Swctonic, AIA/NA Presented to the ATI St Arlington, Virginia - 6/7/73 The Association has also o>:citing research into a electromotive treatment. Hospital in Hew Jersey. recently decided to contribute to some very possible cure for mesothelioma through This study is being conducted at Somerset In the legal affairs area, the Association participated in an amicus curiae capacity in the lav; suit brought .by the Industrial Union Department of the AFL/CIO against the Occupational Safety cr.z Health Administration on the asbestos standards. In our brief tbs Association supported 0S1IA against the IUD, somewhat of a unique position for an industry to find itself in vis-a-vis a governmental regulatory agency. Oral argument on the case was held April 4 ir. Washington. While a decision has yet to be handed down by the Court of Appeals, we are confident that the case will be decided in our favor. The Association has retained the services of a special technical consultant on environmental control affairs. At the present time, he is working with thw AIA/MA Environmental Control Sub-Committee on the development of a series of five Association compliance manuals on the OSHA standards. Last year, because of the v/ell established unreliability of the membrane filter method as a monitoring tool in the asbestos industry, the A17. undertook the sponsorship of a study at a research laboratory in California to determine the effect of ccrtr.r. variables on the overall accuracy of the method. The results of the study shov7ed an error factor cf plus or minus 50 per cent under the most favorable of measuring conditions. These results were to both OSH/i and to the National Institute for Occupational Safoty and Health. T\ number of the recommendations contained in the study for improving the accuracy of the method have been incorporated ir.ro a scon-to-be-released revised HICSII operations manual on fiber counting. In the customer relations area, the total effect of negative press publicity ar.d government regulations on industry customers is still today rather poorly defined. Seme members of the 7*.ssocinticn ha*, e reported serious problems in this area, while others hove experienced few or no difficulties thus far. Where customer problems do exist, they normally fall into one of five categories. First, the customer has thoroughly investigated his situation and has found that ho can no longer afford to continue using asbestos or asbestos-containing products, either because the cost of control is too high or because ho would have to raise the price cf his product to a level that would make it non-competitive with non-asbestos containing substitutes. Second, the customer has not thoroughly investigated his situntior and only thinks that he can no longer afford to continue using asbestos. I PLAINTIFFS |I.Ij E/XH>IBIT I Pago 5 - Uhy Asbestos?1, by 11. 11. Swetonic, AIA/iJA Presented to the ATI at Arlington, Virginia - 6/7/73 0//s^. 'J'ZT Third, the customer has reed one or more negative articles on asbestos in the public press and has made the snap decision that "we ought to get that dangerous stuff out of our plant." Often, decisions of this nature are forced on top rnno.gr.Tr.ent by illinformed medical advisors or safety and health directors. Fourth, the customer has neither a control problem nor is he parti cularly afraid of using asbestos in his own plant. However, he is fearful that those of his competitors whose finished products do net contain asbestos will stress the adverse health effects of asbestos in trying to take business away from hin. Customer fears of this nature are essentially "gut" reactions and are hence extremely difficult to deal with. Fifth, the customer has none of .these problems cr fears but he has been advised by a government official or inspector that he would be bettor off if he quit using asbestos or asbestos-containing products in his plant. iThile this problem does not appear to be widespread, we have learned of a number of situations where it has occurred. Actions of this nature by government officials are totally uncalled for and should be dealt with promptly and decisively. The best solution is to obtain complete details on the incident and then to register a formal complaint with the offending official's immediate superior cr with the government agency involved. The Association's first reaction to the overall customer relations problem was to approve funds for a series of four regional seminars at which industry customers would be given a number of basic presen tations on the various aspects of the asbestos-health problem. The seminars were tentatively scheduled for the Spring of 1973. However, the experiences of a number cf our member companies shewed that general "catchall" typo seminars of the type originally contemplated would not be effective in dealing with the majority cr customer relations problems. In order to do the job properly, it was found that customer presentations have to be tailored to the needs and problems of the individual customer. As a result, the Association cancelled its scheduled series of seminars and instead elected to develop a number of packaged slice presentations on such topics as "The Facts About Asbestos and Health," and "Understanding the 053HA Regulations," which could be _ used by member companies as part of a tailored presentation to individual customers. As with customer relations, the /association feels that employee relations is a pr abler. best handled by the individual member companies. Thus far, the AIA's sole contribution in this area of industry concern has been tc prepare th_ draft of an Employee f.nfcty and Health Guide on Asbestos-Health. The draft was made available to the member companies for their own use and at least one has produced it in booklet forn for distribution to all its employees. Page 6 - Why Asbestos?1, by M. 21. Swetonic, AIA/NA I Presented to the ATI at Arlington, Virgini a - 6/7/73 PLAINTIFF'S EXHIBIT 10 I personally believe that the employee relations aspect of the asbestos-health problem is one that has been sorely neglected by most companies within the industry, and that it could develop intc a major problem area in the near future ar.d that steps should be taken nov; to deal with it. Ue know that various organized labor groups are planning a full scale campaign to bring their interpre tation of the asbestos-health problem to the attention of asbestos industry employees throughout the nation. If the industry permits this interpretation to bo disseminated without rebuttal, the consequences could bo grave indeed. Inter-industry relations are best defined as keeping the industry informed about important new developments on the governmental, medical and press relations fronts that affect asbestos. This is accomplished within the AIA by periodic distributions of documents and information to the member companies and to others on our mailing list. The value of this activity can be gauged by the fact that our overall mailing list increased from approximately a dozen names in 1971 to more than 60 a year later. T'hile we have had to trim the list somewhat this year for logistical reasons, we assume from the frequent requests we still receive to be placed or. the list that the material we send out is being read and is of considerable value to those receiving it. Next to government affairs, our public relations and publicity activities constitute the single largest consumer of time, effort and money within the Association. Those of you v/ho are familiar with the treatment that asbestos has been receiving in the public press over the years can readily understand whv this activity ranks so .high on our priority list. ^br.at you may not understand are the reasons why c.ur extensive efforts in dealing with the notion's press have boon so unsuccess ful to date in producing the theoretical "balanced" or "positive" story on asbestos and health. The simple fact is that from the standpoint of today's young activist reporter, industry is the bad guy, and nothing we do, say or achieve can over change this impression. If we spend $100 million dollars on environmental control, the press either says vet ought to have done it ten years ago or that we should have spent $200 million. If we sponsor medical research, they say v/e ere trying to buy favorable results. If v/e arc opposed to ridiculously stringent standards, they say wc are in fav<~r of letting our employees die. A television executive in .Minneapolis described this new hr< :;d of reporter as being "so intent on demolishing the establishment that they would blindly destroy the credibility of the media in the bar gain." 7inothcr TV executive, this time in Chicago, stated "they Page 7 - Why Asbestos?, by M. tl. Swetonic, AIA/HA Presented to the ATI at Arlington, Virginia - 6/7/73 want to make moral and political and social judgments on their assignments and then take sides, never mind getting the facts straight." As a result of this "industry is a monster" philosophy, asbestos will remain a hot news item only so long as the nev/s is bad. The "good" that asbestos does in protecting lives and property is of no concern to the press. Likewise, industry efforts to protect workmen and the general public from asbestos exposure will alx-;ays be given minimal coverage, since such information is directly contrary to the portrait of an irresponsible industry producing a "killer" product that is the sole element of news worthiness in the asbestos story. The press relations battle will therefore be won, not v/hen the media starts to print positive or balanced articles about asbestos, but when the press ceases to print anything about asbestos at all. As long as negative news on asbestos-health continues to be generated, the media will continue to eat it up. The media will only cease to carry such stories when the generation of negative news ceases. It is as simple as that. Positive or balanced stories are a chimera, since they are, by definition, not newsworthy. Let me give you a very specific example of this last principle ir. action. As most of you already knew, the Association is currently engaged in an extensive campaign to interest the trade press in articles on the benefits of asbestos and on industry accomplish ments in the environmental control area. The trade press, unlike the national or public media, is much more receptive to articles of this nature and we expect to be seeing a number of positive stories in the trade press in the next few months. In any case, we also from tine to time put out press releases on various subjects relating to asbestos-health. A few vieeks ago, w; issued a release on the report of the advisory committee on asbestos cancers of the World Health Organization. In brief, the report concluded that the general public is not in danger from asbestos in the environment. Thus far, we have received nearly two dozen press clippings from trade publications that carried the story. To the best of our knowledge, not a single newspaper, nows magazine, radio or TV station, or any other segment of the public media ran the story, with the solitary exception of a French language paper in Toronto. As I said before, if the nows is good, the press simply isn't interested. Nonetheless, the Association has no intention of abandoning our efforts vis-a-vin the national media. We will continue to issue appropriate press releases, cooperate with feature writers doing stonus on asbestos, write letters to the editor when those stories appear, and in short, do all wo can tc present the press with a balanced view of the asbestos-health situation. PLAINTIFF'S EXHIBIT Page 0 - Why Asbestos?', by M. M. Swetonic, AIA/!TA Presented to the ATI at Arlington, Virginia - 6/1 Our most recent effort in this regard has been the preparation ar.d printing of an Asbestos and Health Information File, vhich v'e have nailed to some 3,000 newspapers, magazines, trade publications, radio and TV stations, science writers, etc., across the United States. Basically, the file contains copies of five industry position papers on asbestos and asbestos-health, as well as a number of important medical papers and a pair of photographs illustrating the benefits of asbestos and industry efforts at environmental control. While we don't expect our information file to change the whole attitude of the press toward asbestos, wc are hoping that the media will nake use of it to accurately report the industry's position when dqing stories on the subject. And now, having heard the had side of-the public relations problem, it's time for some good nows. And the good news is that despite all the negative articles on asbestos-health that have appeared in the press over the past halfdozen years, very few people have been paying attention. Let me explain. In February, the Association undertook a personal interview research survey of the American public to determine its attitude toward asbestos and its awareness of the health issue. The survey was conducted by the Opinion Research Corporation during Ilarch r.r.i Apfii. Wore than 2,000 demographically selected Americans were interviewed. Without going into enormous detail, the results shew that only 2 per cent of the American public are aware of the health hazards asbestos, and that 80 per cent of those consider it a hazard oni to those who are occupationally exposed. 7 mere three per cent or those interviewed stated that they considered asbestos a heal hazard to the general public, and loss than one quarter of one p cent considered it the most dangerous material on the list they were given to choose from. Surprisingly, the college ago youths of America are no more aware of the hazards of asbestos than the parents and grandparents. These results should be reassuring to those industry customers who fear that the general public will stop buying their products because they contain asbestos. Before going on to describe our activities in the government relations area, I think it night be interesting at this point to take a very brief look at the manner in which Dr. Sclikoff and his supporters have used his research results to dramatize and exaggerate the seriousness of the asbcstos-henlth problem. I have two charts which point this out rnrhor conclusively. Page 9 - *.?hy Asbestos?, by H. 11. Gwetonic, AIA/Ik*. Presented,to the ATI at Arlington, Virginia - 6/7/73 The first chart -shows the actual results of Dr. Selikoff's four mortality studies'cf asbestos workers. The numbers in parentheses beside the figures for total number of workers indicate those who have so far died from all causes. The percentage figures aiengsid the total number of deaths from ashestosis, lung cancer and nesctheliona are based on the total number of deaths from all causes, not on the number of workers in the study. iv The most important study of the igroup is the second from the top, showing the deaths from asbestos-related disease among all members of the insulation workers union, regardless of length of exposure. You will note that 34 per cent of those workers who have d.ied thus far have died from one of tho three asbestos-related diseases. Those, then, are the facts Dr. Celihoff works from. This is what he knows from his ovn investigations, new let us take a look at what he has done with those figures in order to dramatize the problem. Chart number II shows Dr. Golikoff's predictions about asbestosrelated deaths in the United States. Without going intc details, Dr. Celihoff has arrived at his projections by the simple proccdur of multiplying the percentage of deaths from asbestos-related disease among his insulation workers by the total number of employees in the entire industry. You vrill also note that ho has raised his projected death esti: ate to enormous heights over the past year by simply increasing th base figure of employees exposed, "hilc still retaining tho percentage multiplier of 34 per cent being experienced: by tho insulation workers. I night point out that this tactic, however deceptive, has been nr. enormous success since each raising of the estimate has earned Dr. Sclikcff correspondingly creator coverage >'y the media. >1o finer example exists of tho total gullibility of the prose than the manner .n which it allowed, its prejudices to be manipulated an-; played, upon in this situation. Please don't get no wrong. have no doubt that the insulation workers are in fact dying as rapidly a.e; Dr. e.'lihoff says they arc The problem is that ho has translated their mortality experience to the rest of the entire industry, which is comictely erroneous. In the first place, the estimated number of employees in the industry is too high -- five times too high to be precise. Even mere important, according to an analysis }/' the Association of more than a dozen mortality studios, including those of Dr. Gclikoff, our prediction is that approximately 25, ODD past and present, employees in the asbestos industry have died or ''ill eventually die of asbestos--related di.sor.se. '..'his is l^ss -t-hnn two- th:i vtofwvt'- Pacre 10 - Why Asbestos?, by bi. !!. Swotonic, MA/ITA Presented tc; the ATI at Arlington, Virginia - 6/7/73 PLAINTIFF'S rf EXHIBIT AO of Dr. G<lib.cff's most recent estimate. In addition, our figures shov* that 20 c-.f the 25,000 deaths -- or 00 -- will occur among those in the insulation trades. F'hila those estimates should, ho reassuring tc those .in the mining and namifacturing areas of the industry', wo should not forget that 5,900 of our workmen arc still going tc die of asbestos-related disease and that, all tilings considered, there is absolutely nothing that v/o can do to prevent it. The only thing T,e can do is to clean up cur plants to assure that those entering the industry in the future will net have the sane cxnerience. Hithin the past year and a half, the nain thrust of Association effort has shifted to the government affairs front. The principal agencies in Washington with which we have linen dealing are the Occupational Safety and Health Administration; the- Environmental Protection .Agency; the Fond and Drug Administration; the Bureau c.f 'lines; and, to a lesser degree, the national Institute of Occupational Safety and Health, and the national Institutes of Health, both of which are mainly involved in research efforts. In addition, a few weeks ago we were contacted by the Federal Trad. Commission, v/hich had. received a petition from the Center for Science in the Public Interest requesting an investigation of consumer uses of asbestos for the purpose of determining whether certain products ought to I e labeled, as hazardous and. whether warnings should he required, on all advertisements for those pro ducts. On the basis of a preliminary meeting with an investigater from the FTC it would appear that vo have little to worry about in this particular area. The Occupational Safety and Health Administration has been of enormous concern to the. industry over the past 1C months. As most of you already know, the Association expended tremendous efforts during the six month period; leading to the promulgation of last Juno's 0511?. standards on asbwstos. I think it is a gauge of the offectivonoss of the total industry involvement in this most crucial natter that of eleven main rcnuireru:-nts in the standards, the industry position was accepted totally by QSl'A on nine of the eleven, about fifty per cent on a tenth, and. totally rejected on only one. OSIIA is now planning to redo the standard, package and. vjo are work ing closely with then on this project. The first stop 'mil be the formation of a 15 nan advisory committee to review the currant standards and any additional nodical and technical data that has become available in the year since the standards vorc promulgated. forking in cooperation with, nine other trade associations we have selected four individuals as Indus try-wide recommendations to 05IT. for the four so-called "employer" snots on the advisory committee. Page 11 - Uhy Asbestos?, by i\. l\. Cwetcnic, AIA/UA Presented to the ATI at Arlington, Virginia - 6/7/73 In discussing the formation of the advisory committee with John O'lTeill of the os nil Standards Development Section, we wsrrj ashed to add a couple of names to the list so that OGIIA would have more of a selection to choose from. This wo have agreed to do. The committee '-rill be given up to nine months to complete its deliberations and prepare for C3RA a revised, standard package. This will be followed by public hearings, approximately a year from nov.'. !?e do not expect tr see a new standard promulgated before the Fall of 1974. It is of course impossible to determine at this tire vhat the nev* standards will look like, however, I would venture to say that they will certainly net be less strict than the ones we have today, although they will probably be less confusing and. leave less rocn for employer interpretation. Something will unques tionably be done to improve the current difficulties with the monitoring requirements. The nain function c-f the national Institute for Occupational Safct and Health is to conduct research and to prepare so-called Criteri Packages, which are essentially recommendations to OSIIA for stan dards on various materials, chemicals and activities. Such a package on asbestos was prepared by UlOSk at the tine of the OSUA proceedings last year. niGSF trill not bo preparing a nev/ or revis criteria package for the upcoming review of the asbestos standards I do not believe it would be unfa.ir to say that ef all the agen cies in 'Washington dealing with asbestos. Dr. Pelikoff has had his greatest influence on the young idealistic scientists and doctors at illCSIl. Consequently, industry influence in weakest in this agency. It was UIOSII, after all, that made the original recommen dation for a tv;o fiber standard in the United States asbestos industry. !Icxt to OPF-A, the environmental Protection Agency has the greatest potential of any federal agency for adversely affecting the future of the asbestos industry in this country. not only is the PPA responsible for developing and o.nforcing air and. water pollution standards, but the T^xic Substances Control Act, 110; pending in Congress, will also become an I IPA function after passage. Fcr this reason, I an pleased to be able to say that the asbestos industry lias an excellent relationship v/ith the r.r.A. In finer proof of this exists than the fact that there was not a single major industry recommendation node to the FPA at the public hear ings on the proposed asbestos emission regulations that was n~t accepted either in toto or in principle in the final standards, which were published in early April of this year. Ue are presently './orbing with the UFA on the dev lopment of waste water effluent standards for asbestos mnnufactur m; pi.ants. T,a Page 12 - XJhy Asbestos?; by M. M. fvetonic, AIA/I7A Presented to the ATI nt Arlington, Virginia - f/7/73 certainly hope that these standards \jill turn out to bo as reason able as the air pollution regulations. The proposed effluent standards are scheduled to be published, in the Federal Register scir.2t.ino this Sumner, to be followed by public hearings, with the final standards being prcnulgated in the Fall, perhaps as early as October. ?7e are also planning, in the near future, to r.eet in Washington with representatives fron the standards -development and enforcemen branches of the F.rA to discuss with then questions of interpretati and compliance policy with regard to the new air pollution regulations. Fe have already resolved one interpretation question that is of special interest to the asbestos textile industry* Approximately two weeks ago I was asked by a member company of the Association to find out whether the EPA was planning to require the manufac turers of asbestos safety clothing to register as potential emission sources under the lavr. In discussing the situation over the phone with FPA compliance officials, I argued that the producers of asbestos safety clothing were not manufacturers H3 defined in the regulations but wore inst only fabricators of an asbestos product, and as such, should not have to register as potential emission sources. After our phone conversation ended, a brief meeting was held among the EPA compliance people. I was then called hack and informed that they agreed \/ith mo that the safety clothing producers should not be required to register. Fhilo this rather minor problem took half and two or throe phone calls to the type of day-to-day services that its member consanies. approximately an hour and a resolve, it is indicative of the Association provides for Over the past year the Food and Drug fdministration has shown an increased interest in asbestos as a possible hazardous contaminar. in various foods, beverages and drugs. Late in 1D72 they net up a asbestos task force to review the situation and to propose regula tions and guidelines './here appropriate. Thus fir they have concentrated their efforts in two areas -- on the use of asbestos-contaminated talc in food packaging and in cosmetics, and secondly, on the use of asbestos caluloso filter pads in the beverage and drug industries. In our first mooting v?ith the FDA task force last. 'Icvombor on the filter problem, they demonstratod and admitted to an appalling ignorance about the health, hazards of asbestos. Since then, they have gotten one bock of a lot smarter, due at least in part to the tremendous amount of data and information '.hie1' the sor i nt j on Page 13 - VThv Asbestos?, by M. U. Swotonic, AIA/UA Presented to* the ATI at Arlington, Virginia - 6/7/73 has been supplying to then. As a consequence, the FDA is today less panicky about asbestos and therefore less likely to propose foolish, unsupportable regulations. Spokesmen from the FDA have, in fact, defended the filter industry against environmentalist attacks in the press and elsewhere in recent months. This is, quite obviously, a healthy sign. Our activities in the area of Congressional relations have been quite minimal to date, although we are preparing for the upcoming struggle in Congress over workmen's compensation reform, at 'which time asbestos is unquestionably going to be racked over the coals by Dr. Celikoff and by representatives of organized labor. Unfortunately, the Association has neither the manpower nor the time to embark on a full-scale legislative information program. We have met on occasion with the legislative and legal assistants to various Senators who have attacked asbestos, however much more needs to bo done in this area and I am afraid individual member companies are going to have to be the prime ball carriers and not the Association. For essentially the same reason, our government activities at the state and local level have declined to essentially zero over the past year and a half. This has not been too serious a deficiency as most of the authority of the cities and states in asbestos con trol has been usurped by various Federal regulatory agencies, nonetheless, more individual company activity is required at these levels of government. In conclusion, I thin]: ve can all be justifiably pleased with what we have bean able to accomplish in the past few years in resolving the cornucopia of interrelated problems that constitute tha asbestos-health situation. Our plants are cleaner and our workmen bother protected. The gene ral public has been shovm to be in no danger from asbestos, if it ever was. While we have been regulated extensively, fer the most part the standards that have been developed have net been as bad as we feared they might be, and in some cases they turned out far bet ter than we ever dared hope. In addition, v;hilo we are still taking cur lumps in the public press, the not effect of all this adverse publicity has been shown to be surprisingly small. We have sweated a lot and we have groaned a lot, but we are still standing and we are still viable. I sense today vw.thin the indus try a greater feeling of confidence in the future than at any time in the past faw years. Rut v/e must not rest contented. Uu must remember that Dr. Celikoff has to date bc.on far less suc cessful than our industry has in influencing the decisions of the various governmental regulatory agencies. This will make him try :iiit * ;.-j! -2 /- 002 /?j73 . ASCST0S JsxTtL. JZW277 7-c.r O " yr> I am sure that many cf you have asked yourselves, , ' i as I have asked myself, why has the asbestos industry seemingly been singled out as the prime target for so many assuits by government, labor, the press, certain segments of- the medical profession, and by various environmental and consumer activist groups? Why us? Can asbestos really be all that bad? Are the products we prcduce truly going to kill millions of Americans, as seme experts have predicted? C:r is there seme sort of nefarious conspiracy afcct to destroy the asbestos industry? The answer to the question of "Why us* is both complex and simple. Complex because it is a combination cf three interrelated but seoarate factors. simple because each of the factors is, when considered by itself, cult i OCViCUh. The three factors are (li asbesins causes disease, (2) a spokesman arose to champion Lhc need ;cr estates ccr.r.rol, 3 ! and (3) a cornucopia of new government agencies were sec up co control tilings that cause disease. Let us lock at each of these factors in turn. tivr>*-First, there is no doubt that the inhalation of substantial amounts of asbestos can lead to increased rates cf KVm !>> various types cf lung disease, including two forms of cancer. These are facts which cannot be denied, even if they do not m apply in all circumstances and under all conditions. The medical literature is full of solid evidence linking asbestos to disease. In my office, I have on file more than 2,CCC medical papers dealing with the health risks of asbestos an hundreds more are published every year. Secondly, the spreading of alarm, ever the health risks of asbestos has as its prime spokesman one of the most talented medical publicists of the age ------- Dr. Irving J. Selikoff of New York's Mount Sinai Hospital. Not only is Dr. Selikoff 1 o- capable of arousing the ire and moral indignation of the cost conservative reporter or politician with his graphic descriptio and predictions of the ravages of asbestos, but he has also surrounded himself with a group of similarly talented publicity conscious associates who have carried the Mount Sinai message to the far comers of the nation. While Dr. Selikoff has, in his teal, unquestionally painted a far darker picture than the facts warrant, we should always remember in his defense that the insulation workers he 'has been studying for more than a decade were and still are dying from asbestos related disease at an appalling rate. This would be enough to cloud any man's thinking Finally, in the past decade there has been a tremando growth in public and governmental interest in environmental and occupational health matters. This interest has been translated into a series of far-reaching laws affecting induetr os* Wmtim, PLAINTIFF'S EXHIBIT LO -5- in a manner hitherto unknown in this or any ocher country. I believe it is accurate to say that these new laws, such as-:the Occupational Safety and Health Act, the Clean Air Act, the.Consumer.Protection Act, and others, have forever altered the concept of the free enterprise system as it was known in this country for a hundred and fifty years. Thus, in combination, these three factors created a situation in which a cadre of freshly created federal agencies with strong statutory authority, were prodded into assigning priority status to asbestos by Dr. Selikcff and has followers, who used and in some cases misused the great wealth of.negative asbestos-health data contained in the medical literature to - achieve these ends. In short, the asbestos industry was singled out because it was vulnerable to attack, because there was somecr.e willing, almost anrticuo, to lead that attack, and because Congress had graciously provided the vehicles for such an assaul PLAINTIFF'S i EXHIBIT l 1,0 3.3 6 How much of what Dr. Selikoff says about asbestos . true, and the manner in which he has abused the available mac data in order to blow up an essentially occupational problem into a national calamity are topics which we shall examine a bit later. The background of industry e fforts to deal with the asbestos-health problem as a national issue gees back nearly a decade, to Dr. Selikoff's now famous 1954 seminar on asbestc disease at the h'ew York Academy of Sci enoes. While this sarin did much to prick the industry's consc icnce about asbestos and health, the problem still remained one of limited public and press interest until around 1967 , when the media began beating the medical bushes searching for ston as that would graphical!7 portray American industry's supposed c ompleca disregard for the environment and for the health and safety of its workmen and the American public. The asbestos -health problem was four. n m ft \ 7 to be tailor-made for such stories and Dr. Selikcff was r.ct hesitant in catering to the sensationalist whins of the press. As a result, starting with Paul Brodeur's infamous New Yorker ar-icle of March 1963, asbestos has since grown into an item or major cress interest. In these years, industry efforts to combat the spate of negative press articles on asbestos were carried on primarily by the Johns-Manville' Corporation, which set up a task force of specialists in various fields to do what it could to portray the-problem in its proper perspective. While scr.a minor successes were achieved, it was found that no one company acting independently could adequately or effectively represent an er.cir industry in dealing with the press and with government officials As a result, in late 1970, eight companies gathered in Mew York City to launch the Asbestos Information Association of North America, which was frankly patterned after the British PLAINTIFF'S EXHIBIT AS_ Asbestos Information Committee, which hod been established seme three years earlier In our original concept, the Association would limit its activities to providing accurate, unbiased information on asbestos and health to the press, to the public and to interested politicians and other government offiicals. It must be remembers th.at at this particular time, the enormous problems that would later develop with regard to OSHA and other Federal regulatory agencies were as yet on the distant hcnron and basically unrecognized by the industry Fortunately ----- and properly ----- the Association has had the wisdom to alter its original limited concept of its proper functions, and now endeavors to assume wnataver activities and responsibilities it deems necessary to protect the interests * of the asbestos manufacturing industry^Tn^the United States vis-a-vis asbestos-health. 9 From our rather .-.arrow initial public relations ccr.cap the Association has grown in the last two years into an organization with priorities in eight major fields of endeavcr. These are: Medical Affairs Legal Affairs Government Affairs Environmental Control Publicity and Public Relations Customer Relations Employee Relations, and Inter-industry Relations In briefly discussing AIA activities in each of these fields, I will leave government affairs for last, not because it has a low priority within the Association ----- in fact it is currently the most important ----- but because it is the most complicated and requires the most discussion.* * -------- err To take our activities one at a time then medical affairs. It is an obvious fact that if an organization is to speak authoritatively on a medical matter, it must not only be seeped in the literature of that particular medical subject, but it must also keep itself constantly informed of new discove and developments. This we have accomplished in a number of way For example, by sending representatives to important medical meetings, such as the 1972 international conference on the biological effects c: asbestos held at Lyon in France, which va sponsored by World Health Organisation. Both John Marsh, the President cf the AIA, and I attended that conference cr. behalf cf the Association. We also meet on an irregular basis with various medic experts in the cieid, both :rcn the United States and abroad, to review and discuss recent developments end discoveries. - 11 - Our literature research is eased considerably by receiving the monthly medical paper distribution of the Institute of Occupational and Environmental Health in Montreal, which is funded by the Quebec Asbestos Mining Association. This year, for the first time, the AIA has elected to sponsor medical research of its own. Currently underway is a completely AIA/NA funded study of chest sounds, which is being conducted by Dr. Raymond Murphy of the Harvard School cf Public Health. The purpose of the study is to find a new method of determining an individual's potential susceptibility to asbestos disease. The Association has also recently decided to contribute to some very exciting research into a possible cure for mesothoiioma through electromotive treatment. This study is -being conducted at Somerset Hospital in Mew Jersey. 12 Industrial Union Department of. the AFL/CIC against the Occupational Safety and Health Administration on the asbestos standards. In our brief, which was considered by the Justice Department to be the best one filed, the Association supported OSKA against the IU3, somewhat of a unique position for en industry to find itself in vis-a-vis a governmental regulatory - i agency. Oral argument on the case vas held April 4 in Washington. While a decision has yet to he handed down by the Court of Appeals, we are confident that the case will be decided in our favor. The Association has retained the services of C. L. Sheckler, with whom many or you are familiar, as our special consultant on environmental control affairs. At the present time, Cliff is working with the AIA/NA Environmental Control Sub-Committee on the development of a series of five Association compliance manuals on the OSHA standards. We expect to have these manuals available within a short period of time. PLAINTIFF'S .. j EXHIBIT * /o_______ 13 Last year, because of the well established ur.reiiabil ^T'. 'of the membrane filter method as a- monitoring tool in the asbes industry, the AIA undertook the sponsorship of a study at a research laboratory in California to determine the effect of certain variables or. the overall accuracy of the method. The results of the study shoved an error factor of plus or minus 50 per cent under the most favorable of measuring conditions* These results were sent to both CSHA and to the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health. A number of the recommendations contained in the study for improving the 'accuracy of the method have been incorporated into a sccn-cobe-released revised NIOSH operations manual on fiber counting. In the customer relations area, the total effect of negative press publicity and government regulations on ir.dustrv customers is still today rather poorly defined. Some members of the Association have reported seraous prcoiems in this area while others have experienced few or r.c difficulties thus- far. u Where customer problems do exist, they normally fa1 into one of five categories. First, the customer has thoroughly investigated his situation and has found that he can no longer afford to conti using asbestos or asbestos-containing products, either becaus the cost of control is too high or because he would have to raise the price of his product to a level that-would make it ncn-ccrr.petitivo with non-asbestos containing substitutes. Second, the customer has not thoroughly investigate his situation and only thinks that he can no longer afford to continue using asbestos. Third, the customer has read one or more negative articles on asbestos in the public press and has rude the sr.a decision that "we ought to get that dangerous stuff out of cu plant.- Ofen, decisions of this nature are forced cn top management by ill-informed medical advisors or safety and health directors. PLAINTIFF'S EXHIBIT / / yMi Q ---- - IS - Four, the customer has neither a control problem r.cr .... is he particularly afraid of using asbestos in his own plant. However, he is fearful that those of his ccmpetitiors whose finished products do not contain asbestos will stress the adverse health effects of. asbestos on trying to take business away from him. Customer fears of this nature are essentially "gut" reactions and hense extremely difficult to deal with. And Five, the customer has none of these problems or fears but he has been advised by a government official or inspector that he would be better off if he quit using asbestos or asbestos- containing products in his plant. While this problem does not appear to be widespread, we have learned cf a number of situations whera it has occurred. Acticns cf this nature by government officials aro totally uncalled for and should be dealt with promptly and decisively. The best solution is tc obtain complete details on the incident and then to register a formal complaint 16 with the offending official's immediate superior or with the government agency involved. The Association's first reaction to the overall customer relations problem was to approve funds for a seriesof four regional seminars at which industry customers would be given a number of basic presentations cn the various aspects of the asbestos-health problem. The seminars were tentatively scheduled for the Spring of this year. However, the experiences of a number of our member companies showed that general catchall type seminars of the ' type originally contemplated would r.ct be effective in dealing with the majority of customer relations problems, in order f ; to do the job properly, it was found that customer presentations have to be tailored to the needs and problems of the individual customer. PLAINTIFF'S rf EXHIBIT i.o `WeJ-'Z'T - 17 As a result, the Associaton cancelled its scheduled series of seminars and instead elected to develop a number of packaged slide presentations on such topics as "The Facts About Asbestos and Health," and "Under standing the OSHA Regulations," which could be used by neither companies as part of a tailored presentation to individual * customers. These slide presentations are still in the works, but should be available shortly. As with customer relations, the Association feels that employee relations is a problem best handled by the individual member companies. Thus far, the AlA's sole car.tribution in this area cf industry concern has been to prepare the draft of an Employee Safety and Health Guide or. AsbestosHealth. The draft was made available to the member companies for their own use and at least one, Raybestos-Mar.hattan, has produced it in booklet form for distribution to all its employe I personally believe that the employee relations aspect of the asbestos-health problem is one that has been sorely neglected by most companies within the industry. I feel that this could develop into a major problem area in the near future and that steps should be taker, now to deal with it. We know that Or. Seiikoff and various organized labor groups are m planning a full scale campaign to bring their interpretation of the asbestos-health problem to the attention of asbestos industry employees throughout the nation. If the industry permits this interpretation to be disseminated unchallenged, the consequences could be grave indeed. 19 Inter-industry relations are best defined as keeping the industry informed about important new developments on the governmental, medical and press relations fronts that affect asbestos. This is accomplished within the AIA by periodic distributions of documents and information to the member companies and to others cn our mailing list. The value of this acridity can be gagued by the f act that our overall mailing list increased from approximately a dozen names in 1971 to more than 60 a year later. While we have had to trim the list somewhat this year for logistical 20 reasons, we assume from the frequent requests we still receive to be placed on the list that the material we send out is being read and is of considerable value to these receiving it. Next to government affairs, our public relations and publicity actitities constitute the single largest consumer of time, effort and money within the Association. Those of you who are familiar with the treatment that asbestos has been * receiving in the public press over the years can readily understand why this activity ranks so high on our priority list What you may not understand are the reasons why cur extensive efforts in dealing with the nation's press have been so . unsuccessful to date in producing the theorecica balanced" or "positive- story on asbestos and health. V'-f' 21 The simple fact is that fron the standpoint of *" t today's young activist reporter, industry is the bad guy, and nothing we do, say or achieve can ever change this impression. If we spend 100 million dollars on environmental control, the press either says we ought to have done it ten years ago or that we should have spent 200 million. If we sponsor medical research, they say we are trying to buy favorable 'results. Id we are opposed to ridiculously stringent standards they say we are in favor of letting our employees die. A television executive in Minneapolis described this new breed of reporter as being "so intent on demolishing the establishment that they would blindly destroy the credibility of the media in the bargain." Another TV executive, this time in Chicago, stated "they want to make moral and political and social judgments on their assignments and then take sides. Never mind getting the facts straight.*4 r 1 - 22 As a result of this "industry is a monster" philosophy asbestcs'will remain a hot news-item only so long as the news is bad. The "good" that asbestos does in protecting lives and property is of r.o concern to the press. likewise, industry efforts to protect workmen and the general public? from asbestos, exposure will always be given minimal coverage, since such information is directly contrary to the portrait of an m irresponsible industry producing a "killer" product that is the sole element of news worthiness in tho asbestos story. The press relations battle will therefore be wen, not when the media starts to print positive or balanced articles about asbestos, but when the press ceases to print anything about asbestos at all. As long as negative news on asbestos-health continues to be generated, the media will continue to eat it up. The media will only cease to carry such stories when the generation of negative news ceases ... 23 - it is as simple as that. Positive or balanced stories are a .* chimera, since they are, by definition, not newsworthy. Let me give you a very specific example of this last principle in action. As most of you already know, the Association is currently engaged in an extensive campaign to interest the trade press in articles on the benefits of asbestos and on industry accomplishments in the environmental control area. The trade press, unlike the national or public media, is much more receptive to articles of this nature and wc expect to be seeing a number of positive stories in the trade press in the next few months. In any case, we also from time to time put out press releases on various subjects relating to asbestos-health. A few weeks ago, we issujeed a release on the report of the advisory committe on asbestos cancers of the World Health Organization, in brief, the report concluded that the general public is not in danger from asbestos in the environment. Thus far, we have .i 24 received nearly two dozen press clippings iron trade publications v that carried the story. To the best of our knowledge, not a newspaper, news magazine, radio or TV station, or any other segment of the public media ran the story, with the single exception of a French language paper in Toronto. As I said before, if the news is good, the press ain't interested. Nonetheless, the Association has no intention of m abandoning our efforts vis-a-vis the national'media. We will continue to issue appropriate press releases, cooperate with feature writers coing stories on asbestos., write scathing letters to the editor when those stones appear, and in short. do all we can to present the press with a balanced viiew cl the asbestos-health situation. Our cost recent effort in this regard has been the preparation and printing of an Asbestos and Health Information File, which we have mailed to seme 3,CC0 r. ewspapers, magazines. trade publications, radio and TV stations, science writers etc -* across the United States. I have brought'a'half-dozen files along with r.e that you can take a look at after the r.eeting. Basically, the file contains copies of the five industry position papers which were distributed earlier, as well as a number of important medical papers and a pair of photographs illustrating the benefits of asbestos and industry efforts at environmental control. You may-be interested to know that the item chosen to illustrate the benefits of asbestos is a fire-proof asbestos suit. While we don't expect our information file to change the whole attitude of the press toward asbestos, we are hoping that the media will make use of it to.accurately report the industry's position when doing stories on the subject. And now, having heard the bad side of the public relations problem, it's time for the good news. PLAINTIFF'S EXHIBIT 1.0 26 And the good news is .... despite ail the negative ... articles on asbestos-health that have appeared in the press over the past half-dozen years, very few people have been Mying attention. Let me explain. In February, the Association undertook a personal interview research survey or the American public to determine lr its attitude toward asbestos and its awareness of the healt issue. The survey was conducted by the Opinion Research Corporation during March and April. More than 2,0CC dencgraphicaliy selected Americans were interviewed. I have here with me sufficient copies for all- of you of a summary of the results. ( CCMMih'T FROM SUMMARY } Before going on to describe cur activities in the government relations area, I think it might be interesting at this point to take a very brief look at the manner in 'l..r 7- which Or. Selikoif and his supporters have used his research results cs dramatize and exaggerate the seriousness of the asbestos-health problem. I have two slides which point this out rather conclusively. SLIDE 1 ------- RESZARCH DATA The first slide shews the actual results of Dr. Selixo four mortality studies of asbestos workers. The numbers in " parenthesis beside the figures for total number of workers indicate these who have so far died from ail causes. The percentage figures alongside the total number of deaths from asbestosis, lung cancer and mesothelioma are based on the total number of deaths from all causes, not on the number of workers in the study. The most important study of the lot is the second from the top, showing the deaths from asbestos-related disease amcr.g all members of the insulation workers union, regardless 23 of length of exposure. You will- note that 34 per cent of those workers who have died thus far have died from one of the three asbestos-related diseases. These, then, are the facts Dr. Selikoff works from. This is what he knows from his own investigations. Now let us take a look at what he has done with these figures in order to dramatize the problem. SLIDE 2 ------- PREDICTIONS This slide shows Dr. Selikoff's predictions about asbestos-related deaths in the United States. Without going into details. Dr. Selikoff has arrived at his projections by the simple procedure of multiplying the percentage of deaths from asbestos-related disease among his insulation workers by the total number of employees in the entire industry. You will also note that ha has raised his projected death estimate to enormous heights over the past year by simply increasing the base figure of employees exposed, while still retaining the precentage multiplier of 24 per cent being experienced by the insulation workers. I might point out that this tactic, however improper and deceptive, has baen an enormous success since each m raising of the. estimate has earned Or. Selikoff -correspondingly grater coverage by the media. Ho finer example exists of the total gullibility of the press than the manner in which Dr. Selikoff manipulated and played on their prejudices to gain publicity. 1 can readily envision the let of them up there at Mount Sinai laughing themselves silly over the ease with which they bamboozled the press with these trumped-up predictions. 30 Please don't get me wrong, gentlemen, I have little . doubt, that the insulation workers are in fact dying as rapidly .as Dr.. Selikoff says they are. The problem is he has translated their mortality experience to the rest of the entire industry, which is absolutely ridiculous. In the first place, the estimated number of employees C. r- in the industry is too high --- five times too high to be precise. Even more important, according to an analysis by the Association of more than a coten mortality studies, including those of Dr. Sclikoff, cur prediction is that approximately 25,000 past and present employees in the asbestos industry have died or will eventually die of asbestos-related disease. ^ This is less than one-thirteenth of Dr. Selikoff's most recent estimate. In addition, our figures show that 20 cf the 25,000 deaths----- or 80 per cent------- will occur among those in the insulation trades. .\ 31 While these estimates should be reassuring to those of us in the raining and manufacturing areas of the industry/ we should not forget that 5,000 of our workmen are still going to die of asbestos-related disease and that, all things considered, there is absolutely nothing that we can do to prevent it. The only thing we can do is to clean up our plants to assure that those entering the industry in the future will not have the'same experience. SLIDE 3 -------- GOVERNMENT AGENCIES Within the past year and a half, the main thrust of Association effort has shifted to the government affairs front. The principal agencies in Washington with which we have been dealing are, of course, the Occupational Safety and Health Administration; the Environmental Protection Agency; the Food and Drug Administration; tho 3ureau of Mines; and, to a lesser degree, the National Institute of Occupational Safety and Health 13 EXHIBIT AO And the National Institutes of Health, both of which are . mainly involved in research efforts. In addition,-a few weeks ago we were contacted by the Federal Trade Commission, which had received a petition from the Center for Science in the Public Interest requesting an investigation of consumer uses of asbestos for the purpose of determining whether certain products ought to be labeled as hazardous and whether warnings should be required on all advertisements for those products. On the basis of my meeting with an investigator from the FTC I would say that we have - little to worry about in this particular area. SLICE 4------- OSHA The Occupational Safety and Health Administration has been of enormous concern to the industry over the past 18 months. As most of you already know, the Association expended tremendous efforts during the six month period 33 leading to cho promulgation of last June's GSHA standards on asbestos. I think it is a gauge of the effectiveness of the total industry involvement in this most crucial matter that of eleven main requirements in the standards, the' industry position was accepted totally by OSHA on nine of the eleven, .'bout fifty percent cn a tenth, and totally rejected on only one. Now, of course, OSHA is planning to redo the standard m package and we are working closely with them on this project. The first step will be the formation cf a IS man advisory committee to review the current standards and any additional data and information that has been developed in the year since the standards were promulgated. Working in cooperation with nine ocher trade associations, including your own, we have selected four individuals as industry wide recommendations to OSKA for the four so-called employer i - 34 '1 r spots on the advisory committee. The four people selected . were Guy Gabrielscn, President of Nicolet; Ike Weaver of Raybest03-ttanha.ttan; Dr. Fred Pundsack, Vice President for Research and Development of Johns-Kanvilie; and Cliff Sheckler. In discussing the formation of the advisory committee with John O'Weill of the OSKA Standards Development Section,' we were asked to add a couple of names to the list so that OSKA would have at least the semblan.ee of a selection. This we have agreed to do. The committee will be given up to nine months to S\ complete tis deliberations and prepare for CSKA a revised standard package. This will be followed by public hearings, approximately a year from now. Wo do not expect to see a * new standard promulgated before the Fall of 1974 . \i .1 i V-' : ij J i- i. !! M.1 PLAINTIFF'S jj EXHIBIT J.O - 35 It is ex course impossible to determine at this time whot the new standards will look like, however, I would venture to say that they will certainly not be less strict than the ones we have today, although they will probably be less conx'using and leave less room for employer interpretation. Something will unquestionably be done to improve the current difficulties with the monitoring requirements. SLIDE '5 -------NIOSH m These slides, by the way, are merely simplified organization charts of the various agencies with which we deal in Washington. The main function of the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health is to conduct research and to prepare so-called Criteria Packages, which are essentially recocmendaticns to OSHA for standards on various materials and chemicals. Such a package on asbestos was preoared A* X by NIOSH At the time of the OSHA proceedings last year. NIOSH i will not be preparing a new or revised criteria package for the upcoming review of the asbestos standards. I do not believe it would be unfair to say that of all the agencies in Washington dealing with asbestos. Dr. Seiikoff, has had his greatest influence on the young idealistic scientists and doctors at NIOSH. Consequently, ,, industry influence is weakest in this agency. It was NIOSH, after ail, that made the original recommendation for a two fiber standard in the asbestos industry. SLIDE 6------- SPA Next to OSKA, the Environmental Protection Agency ha. the greatest potential of any federal agency for adversely affecting tha future of the asbestos industry in this country. Not only is the EPA responsible for developing and enforcing air and water pollution standards, but the Toxic Substances Control Act, r.cw pending in Congress, will also become an EPA function after passage. .. For this reason, I am pleased to be able to say that the asbestos industry has an excellent relationship with the EPA. No finer proof of this exists than the fact that there was not a single major industry recommendation or suggestion made to the EPA at the public hearings on the proposed asbestos emission regulations that was not accepted either in toto or in principle in the final standards, which were published in early April of this year. We are presently working with the EPA on the development of waste -water effluent standards for asbestos manufacturing plants. We fully"'expect that these standards will turn out to be as reasonable as the air pollution regulations. The proposed effluent standards are scheduled to be published in the Federal Register in early July. This will be followed by" 3S i ; public hearings, probably in late July or August, with the final standards being promulgated in the Fall, perhaps as early as October. We are also planning, in the near future, to meet in Washington with representatives from the standards development and enforcement branches of the E?A to discuss with them questions of interpretation and compliance policy with regard to the new air pollution regulations. We have already resolved one interpretation question that is of special interest to the asbestos textile industry. Approximately two weeks ago I was asked by a member company cz the Association to find out whether the Z?A was planning to require the manufacturers of asbestos safety clothing to register as potential emission sources under the law. i \ 39 In discussing the situation ever the phene with SPA compliance officials, I argued that the producers of asbestos safety clothing were not manufacturers as defined in the regulations but were instead only fabricatiors of an asbestos product, and as such, should not have to register as potential emission.sources. After our phone conversation ended, a brief meeting was held among the EPA compliance people. I -was then called back and informed that they agreed with me that the safety clothing producers should not be required to register. While this rather minor problem cook approximately an hour and a half and two or three phone calls to resolve, it is indicative of the type of day-to-day services that the Association provides for its member companies. t SLIDE 7 FDA Over the past year the Food and Drug Administration has shown an increasing interest in asbestos as a possible hazardous contaminant in various foods, beverages and drugs. Late in 1972 they set up an asbestos task force to review the situation and to propose regulations and guidelines where appropriate. m Thus far they have concentrated their efforts in two areas ----- on the use of ashescos-contaminated talc in food packaging and in cosmetics, and secondly, on the use of asbestos celulose filter pads in the beverage and drug industries. In our first meeting with the FDA task force last November on the filter problem, they demonstrated an appalling ignorance about the health hazards of asbestos. Since then, they have gotten one heck of a lot smarter, due at least in part to the tremendous amount of data and information which the Association has been supplying to them, As a ccnsequa: the FDA is today less panicky about asbestos and therefore less likely to propose foolish, unsupportable regulations. Spokesmen from the FDA have, in fact, defended the filter in against environmentalist attacks in the press and elsewhere recent months. This is, quite obviously, a healthy sign. SLIDE 8 ------- INTEREST GROUPS e Since our contacts with the National Institutes of Health have been quite minimal, and since the health and safety section of the Bureau of Mines is presently being reorganized, we can now proceed to take a brief look at the 1 various interest groups that have bean in the forefront of the assault on asbestos. These are the groups end crganizati that constitute "the other side." As you can see, there are a lot of them, and between them they can exert powerful pressure on legislators and administrators at all levels of government. A 42 Sir.ce time is not available to discuss each of their activities and philosophies in detail, I would like to say that we keep a close watch on all of them and are always prepared to take whatever action is appropriate when they step out of line. SLID! PROJECTOR OFF ------- LIGHT ON Our activities in the area of Congressional relations have been quite minimal to date, although we are preparing for the upcoming struggle in Congress over workmen's compensation reform legislation, at which came asbestos is unquestionably going to be racked over the coals by Or. Selikoff and his compatriots in organized labor. Unfortunately, the Association has neither the manpower nor the time to embark on a full-scale legislative information program. We have met on occasion with the legislative and legal assistants to various Senators who have attacked asbestos, 4 43 however cuch no re needs to be done in this area and I a.T. afraid individual member companies are going to have to be the prime ball carriers and not tho Association. For essentially the same reason, our government 'activities at the state and local level have declined to essentially zero over the past year and a half. This has not been too serious a deficiency as most of the authority of the cities and states in asbestos control has been usurped by the various Federal regulatory agencies. Nonetheless, mere individual company activity is required at these levels of government. In conclusion, I think we can all be justifiably pleased with what we have been able to accomplish in the past few years in resolving the cornucopia of interrelated problems that constitute the asbestos-health situation. Cur plants are cleaner and our workmen tetter protected The general public has been shown to be in no danger fron asbestos, if it ever was. While we have been regulated extensively, for the most part the standards that have been developed have r.ct been as bad as we feared they might be, and in some rases they turned cut far better than we ever dared hope. In addition, while we are still taking our lumps in the public press, the net effect of all this adverse publicity has been shown to be surprisingly small. We have sweated a lot and we have groaned a lot, but we are still standing and we are still viable. I sense today within the industry a greater feeling of confidence in the future than at any time in the past few years. Sut we must not rest contented.  45 Wa must remember chat Dr. Selikoff has co caca been far lass successful than our industry has in influencing the decisions of the various governmental regulatory agencies. i This will make him try harder. Just last week 1 saw a speech \ of his in which he purposely misinterpreted some data by a distinguished Encish scientist in order co prove that even two fibers is not a sufficiently safe level for occupational exposure to asbestos. The struggle is far from over. We must not only continue but indeed expand our activities in the various areas of concern if we are to assure the future well-being of the asbestos industry in the United States. Thank you very much. Mb PLAINTIFF'S ORIGINAL AFFIDAVIT OF ROBERT C. COHEN STATE OF PENNSYLVANIA COUNTY OF PHILADELPHIA ) ) ss. : ) ROBERT C. COHEN, of full age,upon his oath, deposes sand says: 1. I am principal in the firm of Knipes Cohen Associates , a shorthand reporting service Located at 400 Market Street, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania. 2. In 1978 Knipes Cohen Associates was designated as the official repository for documents of the Asbestos Textile Institute. 3. In February 1980 the deposition of Doris Fagan, executive secretary of the Asbestos Textile Institute, was taken at the offices of Knipes Cohen Associates. __ 4. Ms. Fagan produced at her February 1980 deposition the originial minutes of ATI meetings as maintained by her as executive secretary of the Asbestos Textile Institute. 5. From the date of that deposition, I have been custodian of records of those originial minutes. 6. The originials of the ATI minutes have remained in the drawers at the offices of Knipes Cohen Associates under my direction since Ms. Fagan's deposition of February 1980. 7. Whenever copies of those minutes are requested by a party to the asbestos litigation, they are xeroxed by Knipes Cohen Associates' employees under my direction and are certified. 8. The copies of the ATI minutes which I have provided are Indicated as Exhibit "A" and are true and accurate copies of documents identified by Doris Fagan at her deposition on September 9, 1980. page 9. There have been no additions to, deletion from or alterations to the documents as identified by Ms. Fagan on Septemebr 9, 1980. Sworn to and subscribed before me this ~ day of October,1988 ROBERT C. COHEN alyssa carrin,gtcn Nc.ary Public. Fhj)a y Commusion xpire D