Document YrX8bKrd56937d9008NpvdyVD

'tu.-*''** may 1965 I U.S DEPAF -WENT OF LABOR Wothington RECORDS AUTHENTICATION CERTIFICATE PLAINTIFFS EXHIBIT T-9TR I HEREBY ATTEST, That the annexed copy, of each of the specified number of copies, of each document listed below is a true copy of a document in the official custody of the Department of Labor. 1 copy each of: Transcripts from March 14,15,16, and 17 Comments and hcaiing exhibits of: W.J. Nicholson, American Petroleum Institute, D.A. Holaday, Brand Insulations Inc., L.J. Bibri, B.J. Phillips(Certain-teed), M.W. Borow, J.D. Moran(Flintkote), F.L. Pundsack(J-M), J.W. Rawlings, W.M. Hancock(Dow), W.K. Hesse(J-M), E.M. Fenner(J-M), E.J. KillianCNat. Gypsum), Cement Asbestos Products Co., M.M. Key, G.E. Best(MCA) SIGNATURE ANDj OFFICIAL TITLE DIVISION AND BUREAU DATE DonielyO Marsick Technical Information Specialist Docket Office/Technical Data Center/Occup. Sfty & Hlth Adm/ U.S. Dept, of Labor 7 Sep 78 1 HEREBY CERTIFY, That Daniel J Marsick____ who gigned the foregoing attestation, is now and was at the time of signing (title) Technical Information Specialist and ha9 ,egal cuslody of the official records of the United States Department of Labor therein atf .sted and that full faith and credit should be given to his act as such. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I J. J. Lafranchise \?^duly designated by the Secretary of Labor as Authenti* <*f^5jP^:l.'^P^^jH^!>ration Officer of the Department of Labor, hare here- Mg 0i. '*' w k> fot subscribed my name and caused the seal of the Department of Labor to be affixed this 'th day of Septer.be:1 ^g 7Si 0 (/. y.4/ c/fy Authentication Officer // // Department of Labor /\ T**.*--Tfrrrr\ Oc?.. -i * 7^r4*. * ^* ***.?. ^ *w\\i?' ?l.tn Lr>w* 1\ :;?;r. tcTJ.'J(L 1 v< - .T1*\ w- 4 In- t'ne Ifctter ci : a-- STAKD-CT ~0H EXT'CrUHE TO ASBESTOS BUST, PAOKOSED KULE W/.'CTHC- PUBLIC !I3ARIi*0 Ccnfnee room S Inter c e p?. rt ~ c- n V-r_ 1 Auc i tor iur. 12th cr Constitution A*;s . . f.i 'oshinefton, D.C. Thurrosy. ilorch 16. If:72 The Lc^e-er)\;it;lcd r.istter osm-s or. for further h'jerinr. pursue nt to iec'.-rr. rt 9:00 o'clcc':. .:?.., Thursctey, Harur. If, ( 197?. BEFORE: ARTHUB M. GCvfFBEP.G, Kedrins E::nil r.er APPEAUkCES: { Ac heretofore noted.} 5 178 (The document above referred 20 i111 wa6 marked as Er.hibit Ko. 3b ?-- for identification.) EXAMINEE'GOLDBERG: All right. MU. FAY: And the second one is the Asbestos Fact Sheet concerning the uses of asbestos and asfcectos products. EXAMINER 60LDBEUG: That will be Exhibit 39. (The document above referred to vjas marked as Exhibit ilo. 39 for identification.) EXAMIKEP. GOLDBERG: Thank you. Exhibits 38 and 39 are received. (The documents previously identi EXAMIiTIE GOLDBERG: fied as Exhibits I!os. 3S and 39 j 1l t:crc received in evidence.) j 1I Introduce yourself. j I 121. SMETOITIC: Hy name is Matthau Id. Suctcnic, and *. I .?ju Executive Secretary of the Asbestos Information A.ssocia- tier. of I.'crth America and alec manager cf ssecial projects ivt the Fublic Affairs Section for tlie Johns-Mr.nville Corpora- ________ ` taon. -- i ! j i i Mr. Fay has already described the association, and j * /" 1 identif:.nd the ccncan3.es which it ::epresents. Ms are;-basically an information die Semina t5.rs organisation and the facts o? L opinien'i contained 5.n ny presentation are supported in the n * t 179 medical Literature or constitute the professional opinion of medical and technical experts available to the industry'as consultants. _ The osucstos industry has recognized for many years that there are occupational health hazards associated v:ith the excessive inhalation of asoestos dust. Recognizing its ooligsticn to protect its workers, the industry has over the 4 years invested many millions of dollars in sophisticated and highly efficient equipment to reduce asoestos dust levels in the work places generally accepted safe limits. Some $1U0. million has oecn invested for this purpose in the past decade alone. I just might point out in reference to seme of the testimony that was given tnis morning tnat almost exclusively this equipment was designed to prevent exposure at the source. ,j dust collection equipment of the type that was described for > in the insulation trade but on a much, much larger scale n net protecting the worker, cut protecting him from the uefcrc it ever gets to him. The general no sition within the incus is the v;e wculc never like to sec a man ever have to v:ear a respirator, for example. The source is the place to stop exposure. Over the years, aceeptocle safe limits for asbestos exposure has ueen Lowered a numoer of times uy various oocies, including I1CGIK and others. The industry has worxed hard to :.-r-ot each of those lowered limits, how. however, the industry 'D is ceing faced with the pcssioilifcy .of yet another decrease in the acceptable Limits for asoestos exposure. In the past, each new standard was accepted uy the industry uecause the developing medical evidence indicated that new lower limits might indeed ue necessary. This is certainly not the case with the tuc-fioer standard proposed, oy the National Institute of Occupational Safety and Health. The medical urief pre pared oy I-IIOSH in support of the tuo-fiaer limit, in cur opinion, falls far short of establishing the necessity of su a standard. The criteria document, in fact, states quite clearly on page D-10 that "the number cf studies that have collected both environmental and medical data and with a to others when they developed their standards in the past There is general agreement among the professionals studying thel proolem that it should?prouauly ue lower than 12 floors par I cc, out how much lower is a question that has not been answered to everyone's satisfaction. The main reason for this! is that the disease we are seeing today is the result of j i conditions that existed 20 or 30 or 40 years ago, at a time when today's highly sophisticated dust collection equipment was not readily availaole and- when ooth the industry and the medical profession knew relatively little aoout the hazards of asbestos dust. This point has been made repeatedly cy the doctors testifying before this hearing. Vie simply do not know for sure what the dust levels were in those days, out there is every indication that they j were enormously higher then they are today. For this reason.. ! liI as many ooctors nave pointed out, we must be very carezul ) aoout looking at today's conditions and today's disease and j I trying to draw a parallel between the two. Such a parallel . ! dceo not exist, and this can lead to some very erroneous conclusions. Let me give you an example. It has occn reported oy come researchers studying the in ula tier. trades in this country that the oust cond or. tkat exist today on insulation jou sites and in ship- ( 1C2 led to a^calculation that the very high death rate found j among these men is directly attributable to levels of around -- li!: three fibers per cc. The evidence is substantial that this I i: i ' calculation is inaccurate. ! I am submitting with ny testimony a paper which iIIi- describes the decreasing asbestos content of insulations used v ! in the trades over the past 30 to 40 years. You will recall o '!; I! that this basic question about the levels of exposure in the : past among these people was brought up yesterday uy Dr. Nicholson and under question by Hr. ShecUler. The basic document \vhich substantiates the conclusion that the levels are considerably different, although we don't know v;hat they j were 40 years ago, but we do knot; they were much higher, is i contained in this paper which I have here entitled, ''Changing \ Concepts of Insulation Material." ' i f I will not go into the details of what is concerned .i in this paper, except to submit it. 1 example, I submit this paper not cc discredit an; researcher's ;:ork. Obviously, I am net in a position tc d?. that, hut merely to point cut as others have cone, the | I | ouarr.ous difficulty or.e encounters in trying to establish meaningful numerical standards. In addition, as Dr. Holmes pointed cut in his testimony, the evidence seems to indicate that mere importr.ncel shoulc! ce given to peak exposures in evaluating disease i <4 133 | potential Chan Co time weighted averages. * To;: example, in the tcarout of old insula cions i ! \ aboard chip, th: British have counted levels as high as 3000 fibers per cc, T.:i*h"n mean ranging cetv;cen 133 fibers per cc and 333 fioers per cc. Today, of course, men performing this work are protected by air supply respi.rators. Thirty * ! years ago, when they received exposures chat led Co their present disease, they were not soprotected. ! Thedoctors aregenerally agreedthat the lung's fl ; i ability to cleanse itself of accumulated dust v:ouid ba . ' I seriously reduced at such high levels, yet s> time-weighted ! j average for a 40-hour week might show a relatively low level. In the spraying industry, counts as high as 1300 *' fibers per cc have been recorded. Yet, considering the time j i spent o:i preparation of the equipment and ether non-spraying Cashs, the tine-weighted average for these workers might come ov.c to be reasonably moderate. Thus, in the opinion of most experts, time-weighted avsi-ages can oe very misleading if the men are periodically e::p cod tc fiber levels so high that the lung's cleansing mechanism fails considerably in its ability to rid the lung of accumulated fiber. If, as the experts have told us, the lungs can remove 99% of all inhaled particles, including nrcce::cs rice::, Chen a reduction in the clsaneing function.of even a few percent will increase the amount of fiver retained 18U by that rtr.ny rzagnitude. . " In addition to these reasons, there are excellent \ i j technclc-gical and eccaerie reasons for rot prcnuigating too strict r.' titre-reighcedt average. and instead placing core i ! i attention on e.U.'r.inati.ng the high penh exposures. j.he industry I :i is in the process of trying to develop accurate data with re- ! gavel tc ccor.osiic imp sc t. ; l<1!;i r.'v . Pay referred to thi c in his pro se: . !! Y:e are warking hard on th5.s problem w !j :*j :1 bureau of St andards, and with Art hur D. Littl e. V.'hiie it iji > will he some weei:s before final figu;:es will te * ii rurlv e:t:r.a tea Indian te that the cor C to the i 4 res''lag a ;:v:o-Iitcr standard ,in those sections of the industry! i v;c:;c- such a standard is feasible, would be in the vicinity ; cl wiiO million. In re e cruse n-Ji.r.g a standard of two fibers per cc. i i i I be ::*ver.eeus cr.sus* :ticn has beer: mace that t oo or*;1 s techr ele gy is capable of .lowering the levels in each and every > ! a senate sopcrat5.cn totwo fibers. Past experience would : : n c ; i. - -.it in a sinable a wear ofoperations it will ue 'prosii:ie to reduce the levels to r.v;o f.iters, no uattcr hen : i i rr-':i\ aw 5.c sr-ent. * i f i In there eases, the operations obviously would have j .5 r.i.v.t conn and the men thrown out of werh. Us have cnly a:;/ rough idea at this true lie;; large a segue at of the & manufaccuring industry would ts affected in this manner, but an estimate of perhaps 15 to 20% seema reasonable. Applied to the sales of a billion dollars, this would obviously work out'in the range of 150 to 200 million ! In addition, there will no doubt be cases where the ii technology is available to reduce levels to two fibers, but I where the cost involved would cake a particular product line either r.o longer profitable or no longer competitive cn the | i open market against non-asbestos containing products of the same type. i iii In these cases, the plant or manufacturing operation! j would also be shut down. This particular type of situation would also emist at a five-fiber level hopefully in not as many cases. Trying to put a handle cn the potential number of lost jobs is ewhrcmely difficult. Mary email manufacturing operations will undoubtedly go under, but it is nearly ., . j *i ! iI j i j t ` i j I impossible to determine the total number of men we are talking about. Perhaps 15 to 30 thousand is acout as cross j i ; i a a we can. come at this Lime. This would not be just :n | I manufacturing but would he a consideration of the insulation I I trader, acid other g?:our.s as we 11. j i The figures I have just mentioned may not seem laroe j. ' * "I wren cor.pared to what tne steel or autcnooile Industries would j Ii have to pay in similar circumstances, but the asbestos industry j lSS t in this country is ouch smaller, and $200 million in equip- ! mcnt, another $200 million cr more in eliminating product linos due to an inability to meet the two-fiber standard, and 20 j or 25 thousand lest jobs is an enormous chunU of thi3 industry *' For this reason, it is Vital that GS1IA give considerable i thought before- promulgating a standard that even the experts agree is not based on'solid scientific evidence* Of addit5.or.al enormous potential financial impact cn the industry is the labeling requirement as contained in the final recommendations of the OSIIA Advisory Committee. It j mould require the placing of a warning label cn each and every! product containing more than 5% asbestos by Height. This j label which contains the words: "Do not breath dust -- mav cause asbastosis and cancer." Such Oi label would surely spell the cornice of a ! t i ! I1 ; number cm major proeuct lix*es of the industry* including viynlr actestes floor tile, asb-cstos-pipc, and any other product ! t'.-n;: lo cold directly to the consumer mnrhet. In addition, th:rs io no count that our competitors will atconut to tabs c I;-'.-;.'rye of the citunticn by encouraging the public to avor.c . " " f '.opFitalr: " f? n'T-'* u-ctc be sauso of * < Implied. in the -miry, labej., c r> * * t* r. :-* iie such harard r.mists. 7. mould. question whether such a label is. in.face. ; .{ rcsensary or called for in the majority of asbcstcs-ccotaimimgj X! 17 IE? products. Everyone ir. the industry- end in the radical and j scientific profession who has dealt with the asbestos health pro hies*, ever i:ho years is familiar with the concept cf Icohcd- ?-- in and r.cn-lcehcd-i;: products. A lcched-in product is ere in which the asbestos is bound into the product with cinert, asphalt, plastic or sore ether binder which prevents the escape cf free filter in use.* rraroie-s cf losh.cn in products would be asbestos cement products and floor tile. ICon-loched-in products would i i be these in which the fiber is loosely bound and which release' Ii fiber during hand ling or application. Hose asbestos-containing j insulations would fall into this category,, as would fire- ; proofing sprays and insulating cements. j X should non tier, that while there is no labeling ; recuircr.cnf Linder any Federal statute for insulation products ;< at the present tine. 7. believe the majority cf the ccripanicc :tie industry voluntarily hove, a warning label on roost wr.nan tacy consuls:: potent-.r.l.'.y line nrecus nr use. ' s c a-.plies to a lot cf bag asbestos cement products and :*-.bcr shipments- This, was a voluntary action on the part of rau.y of the eery.anion in the industry. ; that the' cercent of 1 -01 .o1Xn while an asbestos cerent sheet with 157. asbestos requires -icily none. Per this reason, it is only logical that the Advisory Ccrriittco rscpisaendcd labeling system be discarded in raver ox a syshea which only requires labeling on those products which readily release asbestos fiber in a hazardous quantity during handling or application. Tilth regard to the monitoring requirements of the proposed regulations, I would only libs to point cut that there are probably no more than three dozen trained incustrie hygienists in the entire country available to industry to * couple and analyse asbestos dust concentrations. OOrlA should appreciate this problem because of its own diffacuities in urnaarg raOirfrec; wnauscrral hygieni.srs. Lee can be trarr.cn to do this job, but it is going to teas touch mere time tbr.n 1 C permittee under the in::. 7. might also point cut that the duct monitor in g cvcten required in the regulations will cost the manu facturing industry alone between $3 and $5 million per your, ret an errorbitaut sum when viewed by itself, out arc that adds to an already heavy financial burden cc the industry. As my final pc5.nt, I would lihc to discuss for: a minute the radical aspects of the Advisory Ccmitttee reccr.rrerda tiros. The reccirmsndatior.s state that the r.cdicnl ev.rueillau.ee program dial! be carried cut by physicians 139 selected by the employee, and that tha medical records :5.11 be available only to IILJv and DOL physicians and Radical ccnsuluCir.tr. and physicians designated and authorised L-y the employee." --r You will note this employer is by omission pro hibited from seeing an employee*s medical record, even though the employe:: is responsible under the la;; for the medical condition of his employees. Under Section (c) {/) of the Advisory Ccrr.ittee recommendations, an employer is required ho-rare cure chat no employee "should be assigned to tasks requiring use of *:c spiral: err? if his most recent medical e::amine -ion indicates" and then the seetier goes on to the certain medice?, criteria. her can an employer obey the section of the regulations if he is prohibited from seeing an employee's medical records by another section of the regulation? This is completely illogical and is obviously reflective of the haste with which the advisory committee rnr, required i:c perform its duty. In addition, nor could an employer conduct c pre ventive medicine program in his plant if he cannot perform c:::r.vir.:i;ions, note changes in medical cor.dit5.enr, and counsel employees? These programs arc in existence in essentially all ;.-a-?:lr.wtaring companies in the asbestos industry. And I Aright reint out that not only arc employees counseled on 190 possible occupational health problems, but on the general overall" health condition as well. \h2 have heard the arguments from certain unions, net necessarily here4 but from others, that it should be solely up to the employee to deci.de whether or not he is willing to work under the existing conditions, whatever they nay be. ! * This simply docs not make good sense, because it is still the responsibility ci the employer to safeguard the health of his employees, where the responsibility lies is where the implementation of the conical surveillance program should be centered, and no place* else. It should also be pointed out that a system of the type proposed in the recommendations would effectively present future ei'.idemiolorical studies of the asbestos industry, cricept on a very limited or local scale. The meaicel records vital to such studies would be distributed among thousands c'f doctors all across the country, and retrieval would be virtu- a'.lv impossible. In cor.cius5.on, 1 would like to summarise very briefl; .V c .various points I have attempted to bring cut in my pre- *. ` i. One. The medical evidence for establishing a .:Vnr::--.l time-weighted average is unavailable at this time. Two. Host experts agree that the brief, massive dr.scs of asbestos fiber are probably more important in the 6 191 1 causation, of the disease .than continuing, Long-tern, lev; or moderate exposure. This it not to prac.lu.dc that lou exposure over an enormous pericq. of time are not to be considered at all. but that the one is more important than the other. Three. If CSKA promulgates a tiieo-neigh too average * a::or than 5.ve, the economic'impact eh the industry x-jill be il ! i ! iI * l : t Gromov--. In addition, many asbestos-containing products uill f`i probably disappear from the marketplace and thousands of jobs ' i i irill be eliminated. .j it Four. A labeling requirement of the Syce recommended j by the CSIiA Advisory Committee r.'ill result in the unnecessary : i t; \\ loss of hundreds of millions of dollars in sales each y ear. !i Fnivixe'segments of the industry *rili be destroyed, -.;ith resultant large-scale unemployment. \ I I j Five. The dust monitoring program recommended by j C'?M*i is- impractical at this time because of the lac'.: of . inch personae.I. rwJ . The medical cur yoiliancc re commend a.;: sen of I i I . Committee is illcg icni and urr.;c "liable . i 11 ere are, of coarse, other sc-cticnc of the prepared *; * l.ri that uill create di fficuj.tier- in addition to those 1 1*. t\ 1 hr-* discussed and these v;ill be mentioned by separate l.es:- if ic.. Hcrever, I believe that the points that I have / ; cove red arc the most important. at least to the curr-ifac Curing ; rice of the industry. JD r 19? CSKA has a tremendous responsibility in the establishing of occupational health standards on asbestos. l:ot only must the workers be protected, but the continued availability of asbestos-containing products to our society must be assured. To promulgate unnecessarily strict or impractical standards that mould destroy entire segments of the asbestos industry mould be a serious misLahe. EX/uIILTEn. GCv..D5EHG: Do you wish to introduce your oocumenu: IE.. SUZTOEIC: I have two ox them. EXAI-IIiiZn GOLDEilf.G: Document entitled, "Change (The document above referred to mas marked Exhibit I?o. AO for identi fication and received in evidence.) rr/illi'J:?. GOLDDdr.G: Iday these gentleman be excused? you, gentlemen. LlAD.Ctl: Gentlemen, ny name is John K. Harsh, h'am Director or 3.a ring for uaybestes-Hanhattan; .ir.e. iTier to my remarks which mill be directed terare the economic impact of the proposed regulations, I should like to have lir. Isaac II. Jea cf read'.ing the proposed a.?.rA. cuts of the proposed `t