Document e5dbLpqxzvjGV40oRELLZqq5m

FILE NAME: Shipbuilders Council of America (SHIP) DATE: 1969 Apr 2 DOC#: SHIP032 DOCUMENT DESCRIPTION: Minutes of the Safety Committee Meeting pfNGAD tMvo" M inutes Safety Comxnittee M eeting Shipbuilders Council of A m erica A pril 2, 1969 SlsJusstiDrl-tT..E -1i'-..itt.-*! it ?2iSi&thT The Safety C om inittee of the Council convened at 9:30 A. M. A pril 2, 1969. P resent were: H arry H. Howard (Chairman) Lloyd B eers G. M. Bryan John P. Carey Vernon Duke - John F. Fitzgerald David A. Lavalette W illiam F. M etts Harold J. M organ Lloyd J. Piccin M. P. Bedford Linwood Tem ple G. P. W alls . .. Bethlehem Steel Corn. Bath Iron W orks Corp. Ingalls Shipbuilding Div. /L itton Bath Iron W orks Corp. A labam a D ry Dock 8; Shipbuilding Jacksonville Shipyards, Inc. General Dynam ics/Quincy N ew port News SB & DD Co. General Dynam ics/Groton Sun Shipbuilding & DD Co. Norfolk Shipbuilding DD Co. Bath Iron W orks Corp. M aryland Shipbuilding & DD Co. Edwin M. Hood, P resident Edward P. Ruddy, Secretary Shipbuilders Council of A m erica Shipbuilders Council of A m erica W hile the follow ing statem en t w as m ade by a m em ber o the Com m ittee later at the m eeting it was pertinent to all subjects d is cussed and, therefore, reported at this point. The m em ber of the Com m ittee stated: . "The money involved in the subjects discussed at the 'A ccident Prevention C om m ittee' m eetings go far beyond that involved in practically every other com m ittee that is dfuisnccutisosneidngbwy ioththinerthgeroCuopusntchial.t rTe ahlelrye aipspnrooathcihnegs ththaet ipso tential cost to shipyards of A m erica like that involved in the subjects discussed by this C om m ittee." At the invitation of Com m ittee Chairm an Howard, the P resident of the Council opened the m eeting with brief com m ent on several item s of current interest: ` PLAINTIFF'S EXHIBIT : `"'1 _SBCA5016 ,1 _ i _ --------.................. 2 CHANGE OF NAME TO "ACCIDENT PREVENTION COMMITTEE" M r. Hood noted that the Council had adopted revised By cLoamwsmwittheiechs, traumc otunrge oitnhcelrudtihnign gas,remc oandesticthuatinognesofinthtehe"SCaofeutnyciCl'os m m ittee" as the "Accident Prevention Com m ittee. " This change, subject to Board approval, is to take place in June. R eaction of the Com m ittee m em bers was unanim ously favorable with com m ent by several particularly endorsing the elim ination of "Safety" from the Comm ittee nam e. ASBESTOS FIBER HEALTH HAZARDS IN SHIPYARDS The Com m ittee had before it press clippings which pointed up a potentially serious problem involving asbestos fiber health hazards in shipyards. Apparently recent m edical studies among ' asbestos w orkers of the incidence of asbestosis and a type of lung cancer associated w ith exposure to asbesto s, had led to recom m enda tions that the acceptable "Threshold lim it" be reduced from 5 m illions of particles per cubic foot to 2 m illions. Also, th ere has been wide publicity of autopsy findings of "asbestos bodies" in the lungs of a high percentage of the general population. The im plication was that asbestos fibers are becom ing an im portant pollutant in the general atm osph ere (See attached a rtic le fro m the WASHINGTON POST dated D ecem ber 4, 1968). M r. Hood rep orted that a m em ber of the C ouncil's Board at its M arch m eeting had stated his opinion that the F ederal safety , rules and regulations on this subject now being considered for adoption, vpirtoyb. a bTlyhecoBnosatirtdu tme eomneb eorf hthaed mp roosptoismedp ofrutratnhte ar rtehaast tfhoer sCaofuentycial nadc thie alth problem of asbestosis (and also industrial deafness) might best be dealt with by the Council on an industry-w ide b asis. In o rd er to be effective the Board m em ber suggested that the Council consider establishm ent of a highly skilled technical and m edical group to cope with these prob lem s. M r. Hood reported further that the Board had agreed the m atter should first be review ed by the Safety Com m ittee w ith a view to subm itting its recom m endations to the B oard. Council P resident Hood noted that David Swankin, D irector of the Bureau of Labor Standards, had disclosed an intense in terest in the industry's handling of this potentially serious health problem and had pinpointed asbestosis as an area to which he hoped the shipyard industry would direct close attention. His basic thought appeared to be 3 ian dceosailremtihnaint ga bseituaavtoiiodneds.uch as the re c e n t ''b lack lung" c o n tro v e rsy One m em ber of the Com m ittee referrin g to the proposal that this problem be dealt with by the Council on an industry-w ide b asis by m eans .of a highly skilled technical and m edical group suggested that com panies having these talents among their employees pshoosuedld thapatpoaintht rtehee-mm taon sgurcohupa , girnoculpu.dinTgotwgeot ttehcinhgnsicasltamrteend ,frhoemptrhoe industry and one from the Comm ittee representing the m anagem ent area be appointed. The three-m an group would study the situation and rep o rt back to the Com m ittee with its suggestions. However, sub sequent discussion disclosed a lack of clarity as to how serious the problem really is . and also that some yards already have studies under way to determ ine the situation both from the standpoint of industry use of asbestos and as to the m edical picture. A dditionally, Labor D epart m ent industrial hygienists w ere reported to have approached several shipyards to determ ine what action is being taken by industry. There was m ention that D r. Irving Selikoff nam ed in the WASHINGTON POST article, has also contacted some yards. Dr. Selikoff was reported to be D irector of Environm ental M edicine at Mt. Sinai H ospital in New York and a p art of a joint venture . betw een Mt. Sinai, Johns-M anville Corp. and the International Pipe C overers and R efrigeration W orkers Union. O thers m entioned as having an in terest included the International Office of A sbestos W orkers, Aetna Insurance and the A rm strong Company. 'A feeling was ex p ressed by se v e ra l m em bers of the C om m ittee that it is unwise for the yards to refuse access by these interests. In this context, attention of the C om m ittee w as draw n to an article in the W ALL STR EET JOURNAL dated M arch 17, 1968, w hich discloses that H ill & Knowlton, Inc. , national public relatio n s firm , is now representing Johns-M anville Corp. on health problem s connected with asbestosis and other diseases w orkers develop from inhaling asbestos dust. Ensuing discussion convinced the Com m ittee that there are a lot of things going on and that at this tim e rather than appointing the rroup of technical people that had been proposed, it would be advisable to firs t develop fu rth er in fo rm ation .. The consensus was that the problem needs close watching with coordination of the available inform ation and p ro m p t actioh7~"^ h e C o m m itte e ag reed th at the C ouncil should im m e d iately take steps to develop what is taking place in the various are a s, catalogue all of them , and determ ine w here the Council can coordinate and fit into the picture. 4 As one step the Com m ittee agreed the Council should ask a ll m em bers to provide any inform ation they m ay have such as studies being m ade, visits from research groups and so forth. Concern was expressed both as to the asbestos and the hearing pro b lem 'th at the A m erican M edical A ssociation seem s to be left out. M ention was m ade that a D r. Howe, who heads up the Industrial M edicine D ivision of AMA, -is the proper person to ,, approach for coordination with that group. M r. Hood agreed that he would establish liaison with the Hill and Knowlton concern to further develop the activities under way and that the AMA would be contacted. During the discussion there also was comm ent that so long as asbestos is used in industry it w ill present a health prob lem and that at least from the shipyard industry point of view the eventual solution m ay lie in the use of substitutes. One proposal was that recom m endations be m ade to the Navy, MarAd and the ship o w ners th at a sb e sto s containing p ro d u cts not be sp ecified fo r v ess'el construction. It was recalled that in sandblasting the safety and health problem had led to substitution of shot blasting and synthetics. The thought was expressed that there m ay be a substitute for asbestos. In any event, the use of m asks w as recognized as quite objectionable " from a w orker efficiency standpoint. Comm ittee discussion indicated also that the problem has not arisen suddenly and that recent publicity has resulted from suggestions for surveys by the labor unions. It was reported that a paper onthe problem is scheduled to be presented at the National Safety Council m eetings in New York on A pril 16th. F u rth er, as to w hether the asbestos problem is new, it was pointed out that as long ago as 1964 the Council had received a letter from the then D irector of the Bureau of Labor Standards, A rthur Motley, listing a num ber of item s of this nature which the Bureau intends will, as a m atter of evolution, lead to som e regulatory action in the future. Further Comm ittee discussion of various bits and pieces of inform ation led to a recognition that basically a national rath er than a single industry problem is involved and that at this point the Council would not be justified in raising a fund to m ake a study on behalf of the shipyard industry. ' 5 The Com m ittee recognized that the shipyard em ployer is at a p articu lar disadvantage because under presen t legal principles the last em ployer is being held responsible for all dam age to a w orker even though his exposure m ay have been during previous employment periods. The legal situation appears to be quite like that in the h e a r ing cases. . At the conclusion of the Com m ittee discussion, Council P re si dent Hood stated he would contact Hill and Knowlton and inform the Com m ittee as to his findings. SAFETY ADVISORY COM M ITTEE M EETING - F eb ru ary 24. 25, 1969 M r. Ruddy reported that the P resident of the Council, as a m em ber of the new Safety A dvisory Com m ittee to the Bureau of Labor Standards had attended the firs t day of that group's tw o-day m eeting in late F ebruary and that he (M r. Ruddy) had attended the second day in place of M r. Hood. He reported that a good part of the m aterial made available to the advisory group at the m eeting had been already r e produced and d istrib u ted to the C o u n cils C om m ittee and that he would continue this procedure to keep the C om m ittee inform ed as to the activities of the A dvisory Com m ittee. M r. Ruddy reported that one im portant recent outgrowth of the general industry expanding dialogue on safety m atters has been an in te re st by the U. S. Cham ber of C om m erce, the NAM and sim ilar n a tional business groups in the Longshorem en's and H arbor W orkers Com pensation Act. One reflection of general industry concern with this law is seen in the scheduling by the N ational A ssociation of M anufacturers of a sym posium for high level policy m akers on the pending Burton Bill which proposes to in crease the benefits under that A ct from $70 to $105 per week . The NAM sym posium is scheduled for late A pril and M r. Ruddy prom ised to rep o rt back to the C om m ittee in due course as to the outcome of the discussions. HAZARDOUS MATERIALS DATA SHEET The Com m ittee was inform ed that this final regulation is expected to be issued by the Bureau of Labor Standards in a m atter of days and when available copies w ill go to the Com m ittee m em bers and all yards. W hile the final text has not been disclosed to industry, it is expected that the regula tion and the data sheet w ill follow the form at agreed to by the C ouncil's Safety Com m ittee some tim e ago. The m em bers of the Com m ittee agreed that it would be useful if a standard form of transm ittal letter is developed for use by the yards in forw arding the data sheet to th eir suppliers. M r. Ruddy indicated he would 6 cCooourndciinlaateg rseuecdh tha adtetvheisloipsmaenptraolpeefrfoarcttiivf iCtyo.unsel for the S hipbuilders HANDLING OF POTENTIALLY EXPLOSIVE SHIPS BY U. S. R E PA IR YARDS The C om m ittee had before it a req uest by the Council's B oard that it review the ship rep air in dustry 's overall policy as to handling vessels that are in a potentially explosive condition w hether due to th eir not being gas freed or because of other facto rs. The . basic thought which prom pted the Board to direct this review was that if yards continued to handle these tankers it would be only a m atter of tim e before a m ajor catastrophe occurred with loss of life "and p ro p erty both in the shipyard and enviorns . The Com m ittee was inform ed that at its m eeting on M arch 5 m em bers of the Board had indicated their agreem ent with the principle that no vessel should be handled in a ship rep air yard until it has been gas freed or otherw ise rendered safe, and that it was the apparent sense of the Board that this m atter should be review ed by the Council to d e te r m ine w hat should be done to elim inate potential dangers As a first step, the Board had agreed that the Safety Com m ittee should consider the problem a t its m eeting A pril Z, 1969, and subm it its recom m enda tions to the Board. Subsequent to the Board m eeting the P resident of the Council received a confirm ing letter on the subject which states, in part: ''A s you can a p p re c ia te , the c o st and tim e involved in gas freeing a tanker can be an im portant cost fqaucetsotriotno oaf sghaisp forepeeirnagtobr,ecaonmdeass aapcaornt soefqutheencceo,mtpheisti tive atm osphere surrounding the procurem ent of ship rep air work. As I indicated at the D irectors Meeting, it is not in our m utual best in terests to inject safety considerations of this type into the com petitive arena and you will recall I proposed to m ake our position clear, on an individual company basis, to the Coast Guard and the D epartm ent of Labor. P rio r to taking this action and as a result of the discussions and assu r ances that the Council would consider this m atter in some depth and take reasonable prom pt action, I agreed to defer my approach to the governm ental "authorities on this subject." ` *k 10 STANDARD UNIFORM STATE SAFETY LAW One m ajor subject being currently discussed within the D epartm ent of Labor and which has been taken up with industry and labor on the agenda of the Advisory Com m ittee, is a proposal for a Standard Uniform State Safety Law. M r. Ruddy reported that the specific proposal for a uniform act before the Advisory Committee had been reproduced and forw arded to the Com m ittee for th eir r e v iew . After brief discussion, it was decided that all legislation dealing w ith the F e d e ra l and State W orkm en's C om pensation and Safety- laws including the F ederal Occupational Safety and Health Act are m atters that can best be handled by the Legal Com m ittee and that the S ecretary of the Council should take w hatever action m ay be required to bring these m atters to the attention of that Com m ittee. T here was agreem ent that the Council should testify before the Congress against the increases in the level of benefits being proposed in the Burton Bill, HR-6949. ` GEAR CERTIFICATION Mr. Ruddy reported that no comm ent had been received from m em bers of the Com m ittee on the Bureau of Labor Standards regulation, P art 1505, Gear C ertification, published in the FEDERAL REGISTER, M arch 4, 1969 and forw arded to the m em bers of the Com m ittee for final com m ent on M arch 12th. The assum ption is that fro m the viewpoint of the shipyards, this regulation is acceptable. There was some discussion as to w hether shore side cranes now require certification. No action was taken. ADJOURNMENT The m eeting adjourned at 3t00 P. M. Edward P. Ruddy Secretary