Document dY33XV4rg1yR0LpJpvDLZ0Oo9

FRICTION ~1ATERI.ALS STANDARDS I~STITUTE, INC., E-210 ROUTE 4, PAP.AMUS, N. J. 07652 BULLETIN N O. 6 1 2 October 12, 1977 OSHA PROPOSED RULE}~ING FOR SUBSTANCES POSI~G AN OCCUPATIONAL ~JRCINOG~IC RISK On Tuesday October 4, 1977, OSHA published a notice of proposed rulemaking on suspected carcinogenic substances in the Federal Register. In this proposed rulemaking, substances ~11ould be classified: Category I Category II Category III Category IV Toxic substance confirmed as carcinogenic in humans Toxic substance indicated as a potential carcinogen Any toxic substance not classified in Category I or II Toxic subst~~ce not found in the American uorkplace. The proposed reguletions then drm11 up standards for the Categories for control through establishing permissible exposure limits, monitoring, regulated areas, respirators, medical surveillance, etc. Asbestos ~.-rould be a Type I carcinogen and would require that workers' exposure be kept to "lowest level feasible. 11 Hhile the indications are that OSHA does not intend to re-~.rrite the Asbestos Regulation, it appears that this "fill-in-the-blanks" proposal is patterned after the asbestos regulations. Presumably, substances such as lead, benzene, etc '"m1ld be coottollcd by establishing the Category, and then filling in expos,J:re limits, etc. The full text of the notice covered 100 pages in the Federal Register of Tuesday October 4, 1977 startir.g on Page 54147. A single copy of these proposed regulations is available on request. (Additional copie3 at $5.00 each). A writ~-up on these proposals from the NENJ YORK TIMES is enclosed. EVID/erc Enclosure: cc-Active Members-List C Regional Hembers E. H. Drislane Executive Director FMSI 06937 FRICTION MATERIALS STANDARDS INSTITUTE, INC. BERGEN MALL OFFICE CENTER . E. 210 ROUTE 4 .EARAMUs. N. J. Ol652_ . ~~~~~- :~~~~},~;)~~~~.:<- ~~,~~.B~ WASHINGTON-'Seven years after - Congress appruved, the Oc!:upationafi_ each' s~ecy- 8J!d Health Act,. tJ!e Fed:rai ' ' eame U?der regulation. carcinogen ~'. "~ ~': . _ _1i:,> Government this week la1d out an en One 1ssue the Government.wants to_,::- .-forcement -plan tl1at, if -upheld: by the ,., deeide as a general policy is what kinds_ :: ocoo-urtthse,- choteial~lithl:'ahvaezaarsdisgnfiofiucnadnt)inm.ptahcet" -~of proofs' l\:ill" be required -to that a--given substance causes -declare_,.. cancer.~ , i..wolJrkppl'atoce't.-h-e:-p:irei s:e-'n- t'...i'i'l-t-h~o:~u_g,;-,h:'th:~e--O- c. - _:- .The second 'issue :is. what:action the ;.qovernment wmexpect a.business to: '- cupational Safety and Hea.tth_-Adminis- v take after a substance -is_ declared a. - tta-tion has been subjected to an.almost' ieartinogen. ~~-- '.(<< .:. , . )'. - : -erialess. barrage of criticism :by husi~ ' ; :As spelled out in the " 7 ''-ft''"8 nessmen, many experts agree it ]las ..Department: prc>poul, : ~im largely ineffective ln confr~mting_:- -velope_d; < - ttfriiealhperaolcthessperso.b. le'm.s.:cr.reat.ed'.'by' In:du,s.-. ~In more than six years of operation; .~-_:.,.~s.ttuehehstssbtaa.psoicsnelf..oirsr?:ra~~~E~r~t.~~!~ ter example, OSHA has managed to ;, . S(_) 'determined; that ~the exl~~ure put into effect regulations limiting; . :-~/wllll:ie set:as low-as the ~xposure of only 17 of the more-:';> .Assumingthe new ccmJlre.heJ~sl've than -1,500 carcinogen~ that scien.tls~s \ cancer pro.QOSal survives -the efd~s~~~ ~]iev~ are pr_esent m t~e .nations challenges _by business and .. ir factones, hosp1t~ls, chem1c~ . plants, the p9tential impactof the. plan .. b~ll.U!Y sho~s,_.ml?l7 cleamng store:s mous.:During the. last 75. years- _ '"f~~;~{;~6~t';;~~!f: aud even off1ce bulidmgs.. creasing industrialization; for example,_--....._,_ .:.:'' .Y~A ' reportby the GeneralA~cciuntlng deaths from cancer have risen from . 64 per 100,000 in 1900, to 162.8 per Olfice last sjn-ing said that at the exist- itrli)sanp::aacceenittuwryoutold take OSHA more regulate substances 100,000 in 1970,-and 171.5 .per 100,000 in 1975~ Cancer is now killing about fected said that''it 1,000 persons per_ day in the United _ ment'~- coneein iri w~tntiinll' already, identified as hazards .and that ' State_s and each year ~00,0,00 n,ew oases ,.'occupational eXposure caJrcilJOI! . n~w. and dangerous, products. were , ared1agnosed, ,: ', . :.: ... : . But tt denounced the b~nJi.added to t~e' envlrGnment ev_ery ,, > ..-: i .: :, e . e:- .. , ~;~'-,' ' more than an, . d4Y. ~ 1fie>e"T~heupos,r"t ._ '. :. ,: -~,,. , :. .rs. ,.,,, .: :. Somewhere between 60 J)ercent and tchoen.~lGuedneedr,al"tAhc~cbolueanktinhge'aOltfh--.." ~:::.9n0owp, e'rbec!eienvt.e~o:;f:..a,.rteh.e~s-etr-icgagesreesd,-:-'sbcyie: nstuisbt-s.:: ; ;~~~~~;~;~~~;]~;~~~~~~ .. ~sImofplldplir_o~!vI~oiensst,,(_mawnthdhicehmHaCneoyanltgmhraeAyssctbseooufgge1ht9tti7n.0tgo)- ., i 1 ' misntaan.n~ytehos~fInwh~~hel~-~ec_n~vhi~r-o~n~i~n~e~nlt~o~ f~~-";"="'~rfu:~:~::a.~-}-.[,..~ ~;~~~~~~~~~ 1worse. _. . . OSHA. __ :; ., .~,,., ~ut on Monday, Labor SecretarY' While "the. Ray--Marshall and Dr. 'Eula Bingham, . the11e statistics is im]possible ~ J~:ead of the_ _OSffi.\. made _a. .:_ the costs can.be ... . pJOposal that would provide .a drastic to some- studies, about $1.8 billlon a change in the agency's approach- to year is spent in the United States solely-_ . - health problems :and a great .increase -for hospital care for: cancer patients, in the:pressure on business to confront $3 billion_.to $5 billion a year is spent. ~:s:re"p_roblems. . - ' : ' 1 : for all kmds. of treatment of cancer and perhaps_ SI2.billion a year is lost "Mr.-' Marshall. and- Dr. Bingham in ea,rning power and.productivity be- recommended the Federal Govern- - cause of cancer. . . ; . :. ~ht~s first comprehensive plan to con- Mr. 'Marshall referred to these 'broad- tml the hundreds of substances that er costs to society-some of which are produce cancer and the -abandonment reflected. iJ,l higher health-care. preml. of -the- present substance-by-substance . . urns paid for .the general population...,- approa,ch. Under the plan, model fill-in- . when aske~ whether he had ~alculated tlie-blanks regulations would be estab- - wha~ the new.comprehensive enforce~ liihed for carcinogens. More important, ment plan would cost industry; Tbe perha'ps; .the proposal provides that the .. Secretary !laid that he believed the poli- . -GOvernment will argue on. a-once-and- cy, when implemented, wou:ld save for~anbasis two key policy issues that-~ soclety.aFe&tlieal Of'D.Joneg.~~~":i:f FMSI 06938 . FR'ICTION MATERIALS STANDARDS INSTITUTE, INC., E-210 ROUTE 4, PARAMUS, N. J. 07652 BULLETIN N 0. 6 1 0 September 26, 1977 UNITED AUTO WORKERS PETITION TO ESTABLISH AN EMERGENCY TEMPORPBV STANDARD FOR OCCUPATIONAL EXPOSURE TO ASBESTOS Enclosed is a copy of a letter written by Mr. Douglas A. Fraser, President of the United Auto Workers to Mr. Ray Marshall, Secretary of Labor. This letter was written on July 6, 1977 and I received a copy of it at the recent meeting of the Asbestos Information Association in Washington. f.:Jr. Fraser is petitioning the Secretary to arle.bllsh rules for occupational exposure to asbestos as the proposal appeared in the Federal Register on October 9, 1975. Along with medical surveillance, record keeping requirements, regulated areas and other controls in the workplace, there was the proposal to establish the 0.5 fiber per cubic'centimeter ma.imum concentration for asbestos fibers. This proposal was to be areduction from the current 2 f!ber per cc level. By petitioning for an emergency standard, Mr. Fraser, among other things is attempting to speed the regulatory process and have the new standard finalized as soon as possible. A copy of this letter is forwarded to you as a matter of information. G!D/ere Enc: co-Active Members (List C) Regional Members (U.S.Dues) E. W. Drislane Executive Director FMSI 06939 .11\\"1 1'1 I HUll"' ( P /JJ / c//? ~/CJtturo,~zy iZ/ltJNJfJ 0000 EAST JEFFERSON AVE. 0 E T R 0 I T, M I C tl I G A N 4 0 2 I 4 PHONE 13131 926:5000 IIITWIATIOHAL UNIOII, UNITED AUTO!AOBILf, AE~OSPACE & AGRICULTURAL IMPUMfHT WORKERS OF AMERICA-UAW 0 0 U G l AS A. FRASER, 'RESIDENT EM ll MAZEY, S~CRETARY-rREASURER VICE-PRESIDENTS ~- PAT GREAlHOUSE" ' KEN BANNON DENNIS McDEIIMOlT IRVING BLUESTONE ODESSA KOMER MARC STEPP MARTIN GERBER July 6, 1977 The Honorable Ray Marshall, Secretary of Labor, U.S.Dcpartment of Labor, Washington, D. C. 20210 Dear Secretary Marshall: On behalf of the UA W I am writing to petition you to exercise your authority under Section 6(c) of the Occupafional Safety and Health Act, 29 U.S. C. ~655(c), to establish the proposed moc1in.:::a.tion of the Occupational Standard for E>..-posure to Asbestos, 29 CFR 1910.10-01, as an emergency temporary standard. In addition, the UA W petitions that as speedily as possible thereafter you commence hearings and promulgate a permanent standard consistt>nt with recent medical findings, under Section 6(b) of OSHA, 29 U.S. C. ~655{b), and 29 CFR19ll. 3. This petition is made on behalf of UA 'vV members engaged in the .L1anuf2.cturc of friction products, the repair and remanufacture of b:;:-a k:!S and trans In is sions, maintcnanc e workers in contact with asbestos insulation, chemical formulation workers and others who are regularly or incidentally expos eel to this highly hazardous znaterial. These workers may suffer irreparable harm if the norrnal, time-consuming standard-setting process is pursued. The risk to health is documented by data presented in the prearnble to the proposed standard, which notes that cancer can-arise from both brief and low-level exposures to asbestos fibers. That proposal was dated Septcn1ber 3 0, 1975, over one ancl one-half years ago. Thus, any additional delay in acting on the proposal through normal ~hanncls, which could take additional years, may :r;:;~l! inca:-;,,!; of l:~: c<J.ll:<!t" <111d nc,;nllt,:1inn:1. \-,),i,~h '.VOnlcl h:t\~~ b,~(:;l prevented hy inl]H"CJVI~d conlrol over the worhplace. The dcl;J.y in pronmJgation of the standard affects our mcrnbcrs 1n lwo rnajor ways. First, we arc aware of several plants in the friction prorluds indur.try which apparently arc in c01npli.ance with the current standard of 2 fibers per cubic ccnli1netcr, but in which olJvious steps to cunlrol airborne: asbestos cxposutc: have not been l;tkcn. The: current sLtnd;trd thus allows pollution to the lin1il of?. fibers per cubic centirnct.er, dJt-:l v:r>rl,,,,:; arc (;:,ros.::d til },\/(']!; or ;~::1)(~~tus fi!Jl:!":.i ,,_l.ich t"Ytld e;t:;ily L.; low~~r,:d. ' .. FMSI 06940 . :j, -2- In addition, the current requirements for protective clothing and locker room facilities are tied to the measurement of levels of airborne asbestos fibers in excess of 2 fibers per cubic centimeter. b1 our experience the clothing of workers becomes quite visibly contaminated with asbestos containing dust or mud where airborne asbestos measurements do not indicate a reqt.;tireinent for hygiene practices under the current standard. Therefore, workers may take asbestos home, serving to provide a continuing source of preventable exposure to themselves, and a completely unconscionable exposure to their families. While these issues have been pursued through collective bargaining, the weakness of the current standard is a major obstacle. "Where such demands are won, the companies employing our members are placed at a competitive disadvantage to other employers. \Ve are prepared to submit data and to testify m support of these assertions. We are aware that the standards-setting machinery of OSHA is currently greatly overloaded with the need for initial regulation of many substances. The solution to this problem, however, should not be to delay action but to increase staffing and support for these activities. The cnvironn1cnt of asbestos-using operations which are apf'O! ~.:;ntly in cornpliancc with the current standard of 2 fibers per cubic centimeter are visibly dusty although not highly contan1inated. Our me1nbcrs arc \Vell aware of the health ha:t.ards of the dust which they com.e in contact with every day and demand better control. The fact that the application of the current OSIIA standa~d docs not furnish relief is damaging t~ the credibility of the entire OSHI\. effort. For these reasons, the UAW 1s filing this petition to request that tl1c proposed modification of the Occupational Standard for Exposure to Asbe::;tos, 29 CFR 11)10. 1001 b.c adopted as an emergency temporary stancla nJ, and that as sao~ as possil.Jl e thereafter, a pen-nanent standard CtJ,,_-:i.;l;;d v:ilh l't:<.:cn:. Jnt~<lic~l cvit1t:ncc h,, prOJ!JULL:cl. I ,._,,,nl<l apl>rcci;;.lc an e:1rly rcl'lY a:: it' the :;Lcp!i which will be taken in this area. Sine crcly, ~,/~-r'd')Y[_r::/'-'~/.Y/-'~-~(""' [ ).'\1': 1' Cl'Ol''~iu1 rJ1 c< :J) r. J-:nla J\iTq~J,:IITI (),(;[ [,\ J>oc:kt:t: J 1-013 J'''ll<.l.L: i\ l'r:l::,:r, l'r.:~;i.J~nl., INTJO:LZN.I\'l'JONI\.J, UN JON U.l\ \V. FMSI 06941