Document RJNgweea6nD6dbqQOjdqngdbX

R&S 140960 agenda LEGAL committee Princess Resort Hotel Salon IV Scottsdale, Arizona Thursday May 12, 1988 9:00 a.m. I. II. III. IV. SELF-INTRODUCTIONS APPROVAL OF MINUTES OF DECEMBER 10. 1987 COMMITTER MEETING REGULATORY AGENCY MATTERS A. EPA Settlement Agreement SPI v. EPA (See P. de la Cruz letter to Richard RoosCollins of February 10, 1988.) P. de la Cruz B. OSHA 1. Status PVC labeling - MSDS's; Hazard Communication Standard. P. de la Cruz 2. OSHA Carcinogen Warning Requirements; R. D. Luss Response to.Occidental Chemical Citation. C. FDA Status Report - Status of Review Requested of EPA; Other Activity to Expedite FDA Decision. P. de la Cruz R. D. Luss LITIGATION MATTERS A. Dupont Plaza - Puerto Rico Hotel Fire R. D. Luss B. Cathedral Hill Hotel Inc, v. Shelbv Williams - Document Production R. Gottesman C. Personal Iniurv Lawsuit - Letter from P. de la Cruz Fuller and Henry to P. de la Cruz f3/1/881 . > 1 The Vinyl Institute, A Division of The Society of the Plastics Industry, Inc. Qr,,,tn------------------- A4 VJpvne Nev; Jprsev 07470. f201) 890-9299 2- - V. VI. VII. VIII. IX. NEW BUSINESS A. Chicago Plastic pipe Suit: - Garibaldi Square Associates v. City of Chicago B. Development of VX Recommended Policy on Labeling C. New York. Toxicity Data Bank - Need for Stronger Caveat Re: Flawed Test Method VINYL INSTITUTE STRATEGIC PLAN LEGAL BUDGET FOR FISCALYEAR 1988-1989 NEXT MEETING DATE ADJOURNMENT R. D. Luss /R. Gottesman R. D. Luss R. D. Luss R. Gottesman R. Gottesman Group R&S 140961 R&S 140962 JOSEPH E.KELLER JEROME H.HECKMAN CHAR1.ES M. MEEHAR WILLIAM H. ROROHE3ANI. JR. ROBERT R. TIERMAM WAYNE V. BLACK DAVID L. HILL MARTIN W. BERCOVICI JOHH S. ELDRED CAROLE C. HARRIS MICHAEL P. MORRONE LARKY S. SOLOMON JOHN B. DUBECE CHRISTINE a. MEAOHER SHIRLEY S. ETJJIMOTO PETER L.OK la CRDZ * LAWRENCE P. HALPRIN DEBORAH SHL'R THINKER C. DOUGLAS JARRETT EDWARD L. KORWEK ROBERT L PLESHNER JONATHAN P. LEVINE SHEILA A. MILLAR * OSIO BAS OMIT LAW orPICES Keller and Heckman HOO 17" STREET. N. w. SUITE IOOO WASHINGTON, D. C. 20036 May 11, 1981 TELEPHONE 303-407-1100 CABLE ADDRESS "KELMAN" WRITER'S DIRECT DIAL NUMBER 202/457-1116 Mr. John R. Lawrence The Society of the Plastics Industry, Inc. 355 Lexington Avenue New York, New York 10017 Re: Employee Training Under OSHA Vinyl Chloride Standard Dear John: The purpose of this letter is to inform you of the recent completion of a case involving the employee training provisions of the Occupational Safety and Health Administra tion (OSHA) vinyl chloride standard. As you may recall, in September, 1978, an OSHA inspector issued a citation to Hooker Chemical Corporation. The citation noted Hooker's, alleged failure to provide training on vinyl chloride for employees who worked in the calendering, compounding and warehouse areas. Hooker contested the citation for its Burlington, New Jersey facility on the basis that employees working in these areas were not required to be trained on the hazards of vinyl chloride. Both Hooker and OSHA's monitoring of vinyl chloride in the calender and compound facilities indi cated concentrations significantly below the 0.5 parts per million (ppm) action level. Relxeb and Heckman Mr. John R. Lawrence May 11, 1981 Page Two In May, 1979, the administrative law judge issued a decision that adopted Hooker's position and vacated the OSHA citation. The judge held that the training provisions of the standard do not apply to areas where the vinyl chlor ide level in the ambient air is below the action level of 0.5 ppm. Although not requested to do so by any party, a commissioner on the Occupational Safety and Health Review Commission directed that the case be reviewed. In respond ing to the review proceedings, OSHA changed its position and filed a letter stating that the judge's decision should be affirmed. Significantly, OSHA stated that the training requirements were not applicable in this case because Hooker's compounding and calendering operations simply were not processes that could result in hazardous exposure to vinyl chloride. Because no party sought review by the Commission, and the Commission did not consider the issue one of com pelling public interest, it chose not to review the case. Thus, under the Commission's order of March 31, 1981, the judge's decision remains intact. While the case has limited precedential value, it does clarify what is a regulated area and when training requirements must be met. In addition, the proceedings indicate that OSHA is unlikely to issue citations in circum stances similar to that which existed at Hooker's Burlington facility. 33 Qo CO Q O<o) CO Because the conclusion of this litigation may be of general interest, you may wish to further distribute this letter to the PVC Safety Group. As always, if you have any comments or questions, please feel free to contact me. Cordially yours, Peter L. de la Cruz cc: Mr. Jerome P. Carroll Ms. Fran Lichtenberg Mr. Thomas R. McGrath