Document O1g6pQ13zO7BbjG7LrZxqOGVw

NOWTH AMIHrCA ASBESTOS INFORMATION ASSOCIATION 1745 Jefferson Oavis Highway. Crystal Square 4. Suite 509 Arlington. Virginia 22202 (703) 979-1150 PLAINTIFF'S EXHIBIT December 4, 1984 CAP-1709 Nr. Gordon H. Miner Deputy Director Bureau of Mines U.S. Department of the Interior 2401 E Street, N.W. Washington, D.C. 20241 Dear Gordon: This letter is to bring you up-to-date on the current situation regarding the pending regulations on the commercial use of asbestos and to request that you urge that the end result is not? draconian and totally unjustified. I recall with pleasure our . j meeting in your office on April 5th; my memorandum of April 9th'provided you with a status of regulatory initiatives affecting asbestos at that time. A proposed revision to the OSHA asbestos standard was published on April 10th and informal public.hearings were conducted from June 19th to July 12th. We understand tliat the record is now undergoing review within OSHA, and publication of a final stan dard may be expected in the summer of 1985. The industry considers that the hearing was well conducted and is hopeful that the final results will be reasonable and permit the continued use of asbestos. Quite frankly, it is not OSHA but rather the persistent intentions of EPA that are cause for great concern. Two proposals have been drafted by EPA and are presently undergoing review at OMB. The first one having gone to OMB in May and the second one in August. These two proposals would effect the demise of the U.S. asbestos industry. The first rule would ban four product categories that contain asbestos (flooring felt, roofing felt, vinyl asbestos tile and asbestos-cement pipe); the second rule would phase out the use of asbestos in the remaining uses over a 10-year period. As to the proposed ban rule, its impact on the asbestos-cement pipe manufacturers, with two plants in California, two in Texas and one in Arkansas, would have the worst consequences. Articles in the trade press indicate that OMB is opposing the phase-out proposal; however, it is less clear in regard to the proposed ban rule. A news article of November 30, 1984 from Inside the Administration is enclosed. I am also enclosing a letter dated November 29, 1984 from the asbestos industry associa tion's counsel to EPA which supplements earlier information sub- CAPCO JEN 0012745 Pag* 2 mitted to the agency and reiterates the case for control of asbestos rather than the drastic action of putting an industry out of business without just cause. Any support .that you can give to promoting, at appropriate government levels, a national policy to regulate commercial use of asbestos stringently in the workplace and in commerce so that it can continue to be used safely by the public would be very much appreciated. Please let me know if you should need any further information. Thank you in advance for consideration of this important matter. Sincerely, Executive Director Enclosures PS - It has been a while since my last conversation with our mutual good friend, Frank Zimmerman. X trust that all is well with him and he continues to enjoy retirement. CAP CO JEN 0012746 ASBESTOS INFORMATION ASSOCIATION/NORTH AMERICA DUES STRUCTURE December 12, 1984 Association dues structure for fiscal (calendar) 1985 is as follows: Regular Members: Manufacturing -- 5.760 mills ($.005760) per dollar cost (freight excluded) of asbes tos consumed in calendar year 1983 Minimum of $2,000 per annum. Mining/Milling --- .5082 mills ($.0005082) per dollar value of asbestos fiber sales worldwide, excluding sales or transfer to associated companies, in calendar year 1983. Minimum of 8.000 U.S. dollars and maximum of 25.000 U.S. dollars per year. Brokers/Sellers --- $2,000 per annum Associate Members: --- $500 per annum The Association employs the services of a private accounting firm for the billing of dues. This procedure assures confidentiality of information provided by manufacturing or processing companies and miners and millers whose dues are based on consumption or sale of fiber. Upon receipt of new membership applications and subsequent to noti fication of members, the accounting firm, Frantz, Warri,ck, Strack & Associates, P.C., Bethesda, Maryland, will communicate directly with members to obtain information for the computation of dues as appro priate to raw fiber consuming or mining/milling companies. Dues are normally billed quarterly. Dues may be paid by single remittance. - over - CAP CO JEN 0012747 January 1* 1985 . - December 31, 1985 ~ 1985 Budget RECEIPTS Membership Dues Zntarest Incom# Publications Xncoaa Conference Xncoaa Contributions $384,350 1,000 6,000 3.000 5.000 $399,350 DISBURSEMENTS (PROJECTED) Salaries G Administrative Expense Staff'Salaries v $98,250 Temporary Help 7,200 Pension 4,000 Payroll Taxes 7,200 Insurance (Group) 9,500 Total Salaries and Administrative Expenses $126,150 Rent General Office Expenses Postage Telephone Stationery & Supplies Office (Other Taxes) Office (Equipment G Furniture) Office Machine Rentals - Xerox Insurance (Other) .. Clipping Service Subscriptions .6 Publications Association Memberships Total General Office Expenses 6,000 6,000 2,800 500 1,000 - 8,200 . --2,200 2,800 2,700 25,000 27,500 57,200 it t Travel G Meeting Expenses Travel Exec. Cmte., Board G Spec. Mtgs. Annual Conference Total Travel G Mtg Expenses 14.000 11.000 8,500 33,500 Printing 12,000 Medical Consultant Expenses Total Medical Consultant 1,000 1,000 Legal, Accounting & Paychex Service Legal Accounting Paychex Service Total Legal, Acct. G Paychex Svs. Contingency/Special Projects Regulatory Initiatives Expenses Total Disbursements 28,000 12,500 500 41,000 1,000 100,000 $399,350 CAP CO JEN 0012748 ) SoV * 1 *l T~\\ \ / Asbestos: Is the new permissible "exposure leveljustified? by Leonard Messier Atbestotle. Gastrointestinal eoncer. Mesothelioma. Lung cancer. Words that have become very fwriHar to the general public fa) recent yean. These diseases have caused concern among employees, employer* and government offidab since before the turn of the century. Yet It is only in the past few yean that this same concern has been dramaikafiy brought before the American people. With the 1982 bankruptcy actiontaken by three major asbestoe manufacturers, wMch tnduded legal action filed against the Federal Government,' concern was generated in other areas of suspected public exposure to asbestos, such as water defivery systems.* The bankruptcy action also resulted in legislation being proposed to establish a national system from asbestos-related disease compensa tion.* One result of this Increased concern was intensified pressure from tabor unions for reduction fa) the asbestos per missible exposure level As a result, fa) November, 1982, a Federal Occupa tional Health and Safely AdminfatralSon Emergency Temporary Standard was enacted, to reduce asbestos permissible exposure leveb for workers to A fibers per cubic centimeter of air. The.Asbestos Information Association protested Ails action, stating no new evt- dence had surfaced to establish the "grave danger" needed to Justify such legislation. Corporate officials felt the standard too stringent, contending studies linking asbestos related diseases to a variety of exposure levels did not support lowering the permissible expo sure level Labor unions argued fee new standard dSd not go far enough, that the only acceptable limits were zero expo sure.1* Although the new standard was over turned March 7, the points raised by the A1A, corporations, and labor unions ctO remain. Was there a "grave danger" from the old standard of two fibers per cubic centimeter? Can the new standard reduce future asbestos-related efiseases? Does the standard need to be lower? Or, at asserted by various industrial offices and associations, art there (actors, beyond lesfslallve control, Influencing the affect of asbestos on occupational HI-' nesses and deaths? Background In the early 1900's, the first mefficaOy diagnosed death from asbestosis wu re corded. By 1918, American and Cana dian insurance companies refused to in sure workers employed fa) asbestos re lated occupations. After numerous studies and statistical analyses, asbestos exposure was irrefutably finked to asbestosis in the early 1930's, and by 1955 the relationship was established between asbestos and lung cancer. Studies per formed In the mid and late 1970's dem onstrated a definite^ink between higher incidence rates of asbestos related dis eases in family members of asbestos worker*. These studies were performed fa) Calfomia and Newfoundland, where asbestos workers did not have access to shower fadlties nor did they commonly change dothlng before going home: In addition, mortality rates for asbestos re lated diseases were significantly higher for residents of neighborhoods near asbestos mining or manufacturing operations.' Yet tt was not until late 1982 that the true Impact of asbestos exposure was brought before the American pubic. In that year, with 16,500 pending lawsuits, an additional 500 a month being filed, and an estimated future labifity of $1 bil lot), the Martvffle Corporation filed for bankruptcy protection. Within a few months, two other major asbestoe man ufacturers foBcwed tufa. With those actions, a spat* of lawsuits followed, ranging from protests of Manvde's actions to legal actions by asbestos manufacturer* against their Insurers and the Federal government Amid all the legal maneuvering, some victim* died before their cases could be concluded. Of the 24,000 asbestoe workers or their famffles who have filed suit fa) the last twenty years, only 4,000 have received any compensation.* In discussing the effects of asbestoe ex posure levels, it Is necessary to under stand what Illnesses are Involved and how the Inks between asbestos exposure and Increased morbidity were estab lished. Asbestos fibers art extremely thin, very Jong and wry light They can drift deeply Into the lungs, past the lung's filtering defenses, where they casdyp^netrate the tissues and cause a fibrosing response (the build-up of material around the . foreign body). This effect produces ray ing diseases, tome of which are fataL The maladies Asbestosis is a fibrosing disease of the lungs whoa the hmgs are permanently scarred and the victim progressively dis abled The affected Individuals experi ence the same physical shortness of breath as emphysema patients, it was probably first described in detail In 1924 and researchers have come to some con clusions concerning its progress It takes about 15 to 35 year* after fint exposure for asbestosfs to appear. The oc currence of asbestosis is time and dote related, but this must be considered fa) fight of the measurement methods for as bestos exposure from twenty and thirty yean ago, Because It takes so long to de velop, the disease found today does not necessarily indicate that today's actual exposure conditions will contribute-to slmlhr disease rates in the future. Some scientists feel that a level of exposure can be reached where the threat of asbestoris Is mlnfanaL* Although asbestosfs does not necessar ily lead to lung cancer. Individuals with the disease are fa) a high risk category.1 Pleural plaques or scarring of the mem branes fining the chest cavity Is a comptcation of pulmonary asbestosis and is often used as a sign of asbestos exposure. Lung cancer may take twenty to thirty years to develop but has been shown to be the cause for 20% of all deaths in as bestos workers. The fink between asbes tos exposure and lung cancer was fint identified In 1935, and the fact that Professional Safety November 1984 S5 CAP CO JEN 001274-9 = *lp (*lw certain levels of ubestos ^as wposure and this typeoteanear. - Effect of fiber length - *" .One area that has been studied and where significant findtog* am amettfng Is Lung cancer . the concept of fiber length havtog an ef fect on the incidence rates of various can has been shown to be the cause for 20% can related to asberto* exposure. In ani mal studies. It has been shown that longer, thinner fibers an more enable of ofall deaths , In asbestos workers. producing tumors when planted pJeuraly than shorter, thicker fiber Some manu facturing and mining proce--s tend to produce fibers of longer lengths. For example, textile processing has been shown to produce a greater air borne fraction of kxig. thin fibers. Certain asbestos types are more prone to long, thin, fibrous characteristics (such as chry- smoking can significantly enhance the probability of lung cancer In asbestos workers was supported In 1978.* When the death rate from natural causes and kmg cancer It considered for die nonsmoking, nonasbestos exposed sotie) or are more friable when bonded wrfth certain cements.4 Other experimental work Indicates the degnre of caidnogenidtyb related to the proportion of fibers of diameters between , 0.5-2 micrometers and lengths be tween 10-80 micrometers. Very fine &- population, the risk factor for dying from lung cancer for asbestos exposed smok bers less than J2 mkrometea and lengths of 5 to 10 micrometers had nejJ^ie ers is extremely high. To simpfify die re cardnogenidty. sults of some of the studies perfotmed, if a 1 were assigned to nonsmoker* who were not exposed to asbestos, non* While tome researchers have dis agreed with these studtes, their sole con cern is the lack of epidemtolorjeal studies smoken exposed to asbestos would have tn which ultra fine fibers (less than .025 5 times as great a chance of dying from micrometers) were an isolated variable. lung cancer. Smokers not expo&d to as Since al shxfies involved exposures to bestos had a ten times greater chance. . However, in the group of smokers ex posed to asbestos, the expected death rate was 53 times as great as nonexposed nonsmokers. Cigarette smoke and in commercial asbestos, which generally constitutes heavier fibers visible within file fight microscope's range, the contri- button of uhrafine-fiben to asbestoe-rtlated diseases cannot be quantised.1*-* - haled asbestos fibers act as catalyst on each other in the formation of cancerous turnon.1**- Another dbease which b almost exdu- Degree of closure The de^ee of exposure to rabestoe is also related to the friability of the product stvely fled to asbestos exposure is meso that contains the asbestos. Some ce thelioma, a cancerous tumor that rapidly ments and boivfing agents ufl so encap spreads in the cefis of the membranes . covering the lungs and body organs By the time symptoms are diagnosed, death sulate the asbestos fibers that there bfitfic chance of their being released to the at mosphere This b found to products such usually occurs In one year. as asphalt ties and certain fcwufaSons. While various studies have indicated that even brief exposure can cause mesofoefiomas, the cancerous tumors may not develop for as many as 30 years. . Other mediums, such as spray on Insula tion or acoustical ceifings, have the as bestos o tightly booded that even minor repair work wfit cause heavy release to The relationship between foe amount of ' the air. dose of fiber and foe incidence rate for While industry standards are some the disease has not been determined. what silent on the frfabtfity of certain The most significant point about meso- products, a new development by Clay foefiomas Is thdr rare occurrence outside of asbestos exposure conditions.T ton Environmental Consultants may help to alleviate the lack of knowledge. This The fink between asbestos and gastro firm has developed an instrument that intestinal cancers is a little more tenuous can test foe friability of asbestos-con than other finks. Studies have not been taining products and Indicate the amount definitive in estabfishing an absohie cor of force or blows needed to cause the relation, although there have been'higher release of asbestos fibers Into the ab. levels of stomach, colon and rectal can With fob development, products can cers in both employees of asbestos plants be graded on their potential for asbestos and those fivtng in the Immediate vicin exposure over file permissible exposure ity.*' The rate of colon cancer has been reported at 1.61 to 3.17 times the ex pected rate. However, there b no evi level and assist both employees and employers in adjusting work operations accordingly. dence that firmly supports the refaiion- The examination of fibers b also an area fiat must be constdind when St teiminlng foe level of acceptable expo sure. Methods of measuring dust leve} have changed over time. In samptng.fe strummte, thermal precipitation was ora of the earlier methods but has given vraj to the more aophlsOeated membrane fl ten. The location of the samptng affect the results rinot ambient air samples car have a strfkintfy different readtog leve than samples taken In the employees breathing space. The method of count tog. such as particles versus fibers, cv affect exposure readings versus actua exposure, particularly if we accept Dm posribtfity that fiber die may affect 0m cardnogenidty of exposure levefc. The method of evaluating fits data re suits has abo changed over the years. AI these facton affect the error ratio which k present h aB sampling studies. Combtnec vtffo differing opinions on foe measure o foe dose and the long latency period fa the asbestos caused diseases, the exac concentration of fibers for a permissibl> exposure level cannot be absolutely re led upon." Variables Another point that must be Induded In a evaluation of an acceptable exposur level b the amount of outside variable affecting any sampling and statistics analysis. Even when taking samples In a Industrial setting, the ambient air b cor taminated by outside factors, such a other construction and traffic In add tion, nonasbestos materials that hav characteristics similar to asbestos can ab affect the sample results. The only effective method of analys in such circumstances is use of the etot Iron microscope to enumerate and stee a asbestos fibers. Since this was not done i many of the studtes used to support ck crease of the permissible exposure find the actual need for such a reductio would be suspect/ One other variable which must be cor. sldcred b the increased use of cardno genie products as foodstuffs and re3eas< of carcinogenic wastes to the general at mosphere as an outgrowth ofourindustria society. While there b an increased num ber of lung cancers from asbestos ex posed workers as.compared to nonex posed, foe exposures occurred man years ago when engineering control were primitive, to say the least Respire toiy protection was minimal, exhatc ventilation reduced in power and ablfitj dean up*adfitles were non-existent A that time, there were few permissible e> posure levels as most states efid not cor. cem themselves with the problem. T compare morbidity rates from that Cm period and use epidemiolo^cal stuefie based upon higher exposure rates t lower existing rates b not reasonable. Conclusion Asbestos exposure, as defined by Secfla 1910.1001 of foe Federal OSHA Stan 36 November 1984 Professional Safety < .. CAP CO JEN 0012750 303 LA Exposures to Asbestos. Presentation and Paper at Symposium on As bestos and the Work Environment ' January 12-13, 1984. University of California, Irvine. The degree ofexposure 8. Nicholson, William J., PhD; Perkel, George; and Selkoff, Irving J., MD. is also related to the friability ofthe product that contains "Occupational Exposure to Asbes tos: Population at Risk and Projected Mortality--1980-2030." American Journal of Industrial Medldne. VoL 3:281-311.1983. the asbestos.* 1 2 3 4 5 6 79. "Occupational Dlsaast: Elusive Target for Statisticians." Occupa tional Hatardt. Cleveland, Ohio. October, 1983. Vol 45. No. 10. 10. "OSHA Communique: OSHA Is sues Asbestos ETS." Occupational Hazards. Cleveland, Ohio. Decem ber, 1983. Vol 45, No. 1Z dards, it the ptesenoe ofasbestos fibers In the employee's breathable atr environ* ment at a rate greater than two fibers for every cubic centimeter of air. However, based upon the questions raised by some of the studies dted In thb papa, there is the potential that fiber length and type of asbestos can directly affect actual mar* bidtty rates. Notwtthstarxfing the dfirect Bnk of asbestos exposure to carcinogenic and pulmonary diseases, it would appear the reduced permissible exposure level was not fuly supported by the evidence X3used to set the emergency standard. 11. Peters, George A., and Peters, Bar bara J. Sourcebook on Asbestos Diseases: Medical, Legal, and Engi neering Aspects. New York: Garland STPM Press. 1980. 12. Picker, Michael, and Shea, Kevin. "We Can't Control Toxics Until They're Defined.*' The Los Angeles Times. February 9,1984. 13. Rajhans, GyanS., and SuDivan, John L. Asbestos Sampling end Analysis. Michigan: Ann Amor Sd- ence. 198L .! 14. Rasmussen, Ranald E Mechanisms of Asbestos Toxicity: Experimental Studies. Presentation and Paper at Symposium on Asbestos and the References 1. Begin, Raymond, M."D.; Cantln, Andre, M. 0.; Berthlaume, Yves, M. D.; Bofleau, Robert, M. D.; Pdoquin, Serge; and Mase, Serge. "Air way Function in Lifetime-Non smoking Older Asbestos Workers." American Journal of Medkfne VoL 75. October, 1983. (Reprint). 2. Chen, Edwin. "Justice Takes Slow Path In Asbestos Cases." The Los Angeles Timet. February 13,84. 3. Dement, John M., PhD; Harris, Jr., Robert L, PhD; Symons, Michael J., PhD; and Shy, Carl M., PhD. "Ex posures and Mortality Among Chrysotfle Asbestos Workers. Part L Ex posures Estimates." American Jour nal of Industrial Medicine 4:399419.1983. 4. Dement, John M., PhD; Harris, Jr., Robert L, PhD; Symons, Michael J., PhD; and Shy, Caii M., PhD. "Ex posures and MortaSty Among Chrysotile Asbestos Workers. Part ft Mortality." American Journal of In dustrial Medldne 4:421-433.1983. 5. "House Moves on Occupational Disease BQL" Occupational Hazards. Cleveland, Ohio. December, 1983. Vol45.No. 12. 6. Jones, Robert A. "Asbestos In the Aqueduct Worries State." The Lot Angeles Times. February 9,84. 7. Nicholson, WUBam J. Environmental 'Work Environment January 12-13, -- 1984. University of California, Ir vine. 15. Sargent, E, Nicholas. Asbestos Re lated Disease--Pleural Abnormal ities. Presentation and Paper at Symposium on Asbestos and the Work Environment January 12-13, 1984. University of California, Ir vine. 16. SeUkoff, hvlng, and D.H.K. Lee. Asbestos and Disease. New Yoric Academic Press, Inc 1978. 17. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health. Workplace Exposure to Asbestos. Washington, D.C November, 1980. IE U.S. Department of Labor. Occupa tional Safety and Health Administra tion. Health Hazards of Asbestos. Cancer Alert Series. Washington, D.C 1979. 19. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Office of Pesticide and Toxic Substances. Guidance for Controlling Friable Asbestos-Con taining Materials tn Buildings. 1983. 20. Wamodc, Martha L The Relation of Asbestos Fiber Deposition In the Lungs to Disease. Presentation and Paper at Symposium on Asbestos and fire Work Environment January 12-13, 1984. University of Califor nia, Irvine, /j CAPCO JEN 0012751