Document e5VQr1EQx2XaNO2xE5KeK41rp

j' M 'v v PROXY AVAILABLE Lasco Brahe Products E.K. Porter Co. T. J. Laher (Z. W. Drislane) J. C. Black (E. H* Drislane) OTHERS PRESENT Auto Friction Corporation B. Kublin Bendix Corporation Friction Materials Division VS. F. liessler (6/28) Automotive Aftermarket Operations D Godfrey Heavy Vehicle Systems Group R Elliott Carlisle Corporation E. Ferritt Delco-lloraine Division R. Z* lettering G. P. Baynes (6/28) Lear-Siagler Corporation D. Lee R. Luellen Nuturo Corporation J. Hallow Raybestoa-Hanhattan, Inc. D. Cunningham Keddoway Manufacturing Corp. J* Moore S.E. Wellman Corporation E. Kaminski Wheeling Brake Block G. Stratton (6/28) Gorman & Cole R. P* Gorman Friction llaterials Standards Inc* E. W. Drislane -- -- w . b.tc r^^ucuL .ew--J june 40-4J, i?/o ASBESTOS STUDY COUJTTZE 32P0RT Ur. H. S. Vagner of Carlisle Corporation, Chairnan of the Asbestos Study Connittee paepared this report. In nr. !-fagnerTs absence the Secretary read the report. Please refer to Exhibit 9. t. Hr. Wagner reported on work that a Task Force from the Committee had completed on preparation of a work practices booklet concerning the hsndJins of asbestos-containing fricton materials. Considerable progress had been made in the preparation of this booklet but it was noted that at the Board of Directors meeting on June 27, 1978 that the Board directed that the Task Force submit this booklet to the Asbestos Study Cocsaittee who would then make recommendations to the Board of Directors. Upon motion duly made, seconded and unanimously passed, it was; 2SSCLVED: To accept the report of the Asbestos Study Committee as written. Hr. Adrian Comins asked that the Institute consider the question of a possible recall of asbestos-bearing friction materials if such action were taken by the Consumer Product Safety-Cooission. Hr. Conins was concerned with the recall provisions of the Federal Hazardous Substances Act which the Consumer Product Safety Cocisslon administers. If asbestosbearing friction materials were to be recalled under the Federal Hazardous Substances Act, manufacturers would have to refund not only their distributors or rebuilders for the manufacturers1 selling price but would have to pay shipping and packing costs of all those further down the line in the distribution network. He indicated that this was the bill that manufacturers would old: up for the Iris recall. He indicated that this could be a substantial cost should asbestos-bearing friction materials be recalled under Che Federal Hazardous Substances Act. A question was raised as to whether product liability insurance would cover the costs of any such recall. It was not known whether this insurance would cover this type of recall. One member Indicated that he didn't believe that there could be such a recall b7 the Consumer Product Safety Commission because he questioned whether the Consumer Product Safety Comission had jurisdiction over asbestos^earing brake linings. Discussion on the Consumer Product Safety Commission problem was enlarged to include other Federal regulatory agencies including CSEA. UFA, etc. It was indicated that even if a government recall could not be supported by a rational review of scientific data, that,____ in the existing environment, with pressures from environmentalists, the media-and some regulators, that a recall is still a possibility, s Ur. Carrigan Indicated that beryllium users have scientific data which would indicate that certain sections of the OSttA beryllium standards are unsupportabla, but that regulations have nevertheless been adopted. Ur. Harris noted that the Asbestos Information Association has given outstanding service to manufacturers with valuable legal and medical information concerning the asbestos problem. Be particularly suggested that friction materials manufacturers who are not members consider supporting and joining the Asbestos Information Association. Tht study that Dr. Jacko of Bendix had run for the Environmental Protection Agency was dicusaed. In that paper Dr. Jacko attempted to quantify the amount of asbestos amissions into the atmosphere from brakes and dutches. That paper provided data that supportad the view that the general public i-isuces oi cae ^suai tieciai June 23-2?, 1?73 *is not subject to excessive exoos asbestos from vehic^ u^la4r bW r4akes or clutches. a member commenced that the basic area where asbestos is a problem is in' the"wreplace and not in the general environment and he. questioned-,uhetJ}^^sbe^os^beaing__brai'.e linings could be considered a harmful cons\D* product, much less.a hazardous .substance. Hr. Comins suggested that the Institute should ask for a hearing while the Consumer Product Safety Commission nay be re-drafting rules on recall procedures. The Secretary advised that in 1977 Ur. Comins suggested that individuals write to the Consumer Product Safety Commission as regards recall procedures under the Federal Eazardous Substances Act. Hr. Comins was now' asking that the Institute act as an organization to bring this cuestion to the attention of the Consumer Product Safety Coraission. The Secretary quoted from the minutes of the January meeting of the Asbestos Study Committee where Hr. Ed Fenner of Johns-UanviHe stated that there was litigation underway concerning whether aluminum wiring in a house is a consumer product. Also it was noted that there was a survey being made for the Consumer Product Safety Commission by Kearney Associates concerning asbestos-bearing products which might emit respirable asbestos and be covered by regulations of the Consumer Product Safety Commission. The Secretary indicated that he would check the status of the Kearney report and advise. Hr. Comins stated that as regards individuals writing the &SC, that to his knowledge no action had been taken by anyone, and that it would be necessary for the Institute to take an active role as regards Consumer Product Safety Commission recall procedures. One member indicated that his company was concerned about the possibility of Consumer Product Safety Codssion action and had given serious consideration to the question of recall procedures. It vas suggested chat the Institute work through the Asbestos Information Association to call this problem to the Consumer Product Safety Commission's attention. In response to a question, the Secretary indicated chat the Institute has good liaison with the Asbestos Information Association. Hr. Comins indicated that he was not satisfied with the Asbestos Study Comlttee's handling of the recall problem with the Consumer Product Safety'Commission. After additional discussion lir. Comins made a.motion as follows: SxSOLVED: That the Friction Materials Standards Institute take an active role with the Consumes Product Safety Commission regarding eha position of friction materials manufacturers as'to recall procedures that could possibly affect asbestoscontaining friction materials. The motion vas duly seconded. A count of the members indicated that there were 11 is attendance when this motion was put on the floor. Six members voted in favor of this resolution, with two opposed and three asbstainlng. According to the Constitution and Sy-Laws, the resolution passed with a majority of those in attendance voting In favor of the resolution. Hr. Comins indicated concern about non-asbestos bearing friction materials., and noted that there may b* federal funds available for a project such as joint research to develop non-asbestos friction materials because of the alleged hazards of asbestos in the work place and environment, lir. Comins suggested that tha Institute seek federal ftadlng to establish such a joint research project. It was asked if a joint research project truces of the Annual tleetiac -12- June 28-29, 1978 would be legal and feasible- Were there anti-trust implications .from this type of research? Several members indicated that their companies-- would not'contribute either directly or indirectly to funding of* such joinf'research.* ^ Reference was made to a proposed Hew Jersey law whicb-vsS'-scrapped about a year ago which proposed to ban the manufacture-use.or sale of any carcinoganic material, which included asbestos^ If ^such a statute were to pass in one state it could effectively baa asbestos in brake linings throughout the United States* This proposed Hew Jersey statute was abandoned after it. was realized that it would Ju3t about close down the manufacturing industry in Hew Jersey. Even if such a ban were feasible, even Dr. Selikoff has indicated that there are controls that can keep asbestos concentrations to non-harnful levels. Several delegates indicated that they were strongly opposed to any kind of joint research project for the development of a non-asbestos lining and this siraect ___ was then dropped.* 1/1 / BSAlCE PE7J0EUANCE STUDY C0I-KETT5E Ur. Nelson. Chairman of the Brake Performance Study Committee prepared his committee's report. Ur. Nelson could not attend this meeting and Ur. Son Cutler of Abas read the report. Please refer to Exhibit 7. The Chairman's report discussed items such as the Quality Control Program and recent moves in Washington and the courts concerning Pederal Uotor Vehicle Safety Standard 121 (air brake systems standard). The Chairman also discussed Standard 105-75 and contact with Mr. Fred I-.edler of the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration concerning Docket 1-4 (replacement brake shoe and lining assembly). He indicated chat this docket was being reactivated and we could expect to hear more an it in the near future. '.Ir. Nelson reviewed his discussions with Ur. Redler concerning projects that could effect brakes including such items as longer life friction materials, brake system lnspectiblllty, and the up-grading of both the hydraulic and air brake systems standards. He also discussed AA2-TVA, certification requirements and activities of the Vehicle Equipment Safety Commission. He noted thet the Institute had been in contact with the Defense Supply Agency concerning the proposed federal brake lining specification HHL-3612, and that the Defense Construction Supply Center Indicated that the revision S variation of this specification calling for full dynamometer tests was not satisfactory. Thsy indicated agreement with the Institute position about the unvorkability of Revision S. The Defense Construction Supply Center 1$ now working on a Revision F which it is hoped will include some of the suggestions that the Institute * made over the past year. In reading Yx. Nelson's report, Ur. Cutler commented on the Quality Control Program where he esked for some feed-back concerning work of the Quality Control Sub-committee. It was asked If members had been