Document jB8vX42VwjZzwE9wO1ZVZ9me9

Drastic Cut in Asbestos Exposure Urged By Federal Agency for 250,000 Workers In a South Dakota gold-mine study pub- | By G,ul Bronson St::/; Reporter of The Wall St met Journal Federal researchers are urging a drastic reduction in the occupational exposure of ni'rt- than 25''i.ri.-'i workers lo asbestos, a luDwn carcinogen, to one-tenth of the cur rent federai stand ird. Carcinogens are canct r prc'JucmE or iiciting agents. In .v! i.r published renort, the National Insti.ute tor G-,,n uj.ation3l Safety and Health recommends that worker exposure to air borne asbestos be limned to 100,000 fibers per cubic meter if air in eight hours. In ad dition, the research-is want peak concentra tions of exposure limited to 000,000 fibers per cubic meter of air based on 15-minute place is slashed, Industries that use the ma terial such as construction and oil refining, may come under increased pressure to sub , I stitute nontoxic materials. Asbestos Is used in fireproof textiles, shingle insulation, and thermal piping, among other products. "It's not possible to establish a safe expo sure level for the carcinogenic activity of as- hestos," says Dr. John F. Finklea, director of the institute. "Therefore, emphasis should be placed on prohibiting the occupational use of asbestos in other than completely closed operations, and on substituting other products whenever possible.'' The 1972 institute recommendations on lished this year, researchers found that the i HO workers had three times as many cases j of respiratory disease as expected, based on ! the state mortality rates. These workers were exposed to less than 250,000 fibers per cubic meter In eight hours. "We're saying reduce exposures (to as bestos) to a bare minimum because we can't tell you how low you have to go to eliminate a cancer risk," says Mr. Dement. "All studies have shown an excess of cancer risk at all levels of exposure to asbestos." Tite reason for OSHA reevaluating the as bestos standard stems from a 1974 suit by .the AFL-CTO's industrial union department against the Department of Labor complain sampling periods. Current federal standards limit asbestos asbestos to OSHA were based in part on the research ol the British Occupational Hy ing about several points in the 1972 exposure 1 standard. The AFL-CIO petitioned for I to two million fibers per cubic meter of air. giene Society, which evaluated 200 workers Tins standard was promulgated by the Oc in an asbestors factory. Based on that work, cupational Safety and Health Administration the institute concluded that a two-miiiion-fi- in l72, at which time industry was given bers limit would prevent asbestosis. four years to comply. Plants were required However, when the British plant was res to set up improved ventilation systems. In tudied in 1072, it was found that there was a the interim p--r.n0, an 'emergency" expo greater incidence of asbestosis than the sure standard reclamed in force alter it was British standard warranted. In fact, 36% of set by OSHa under pressure from the AFL- the workers exposed for 10 years to 10 years had some kind of chest abnormality, and the changes to be made in the required medical records that employers maintain on work- ! era, and it requested that the timetable for j lowering asbestos exposure limits be stopped up. ! The federal court t appeals in Washing- j ton, D.C., directed OSHA to reconsider those t two provisions of the standard. At that time. | tiie enforcement agency decided the star.- J dard possibly wasn't protective enough of ! CIO. The institute recommendations in 1972 to OSHA were well below those actually car ried out. "Our 1972 recommendations were designed to protect workers from asbestosis, or chronic lung disease," says Verne rose, institute director for criteria documentation, rate of abnormalities increased with the rate of asbestos exposure. Other studies show an increased mortal ity rate from cancer among workers ex posed to asbestos, says John Dement, an in stitute industrial hygienist. A British study published this year showed that workers ex "but not necessarily from cancer. We are posed to asbestos from 1933 to 1950 had 1.8 now* suggesting the least detectable expo times as much chance of contracting lung asbestos workers' health and it decided to | repropose the entire standard, beyond the i court directive, says an OSHA spokesman. OSHA enlisted the aid of the National In stitute for Occupational Safety and Health in the re-evaluation to study new research de velopments and explore advances in protec tive technology as they related to asbestos exposure. The OSHA spokesman said the ! sure level in the workplace. The reason is cancer as the expected number of cancer that we don't know wliat could possibly be a cases in the general population. Mr. Dement safe level of exposure over the working life adds that British secientists found that in time without adverse health effects." workers employed up to 15 years beyond Jagency will hold public hearings early next j year on proposed revised standards before promulgating the final rule. ] The lethal quality of tiny asbestos fibers 1950, during a period when industry Im dial lodge in the lungs is well documented. proved its engineering controls and technol If the exposure to asbetos dust in the work ogy fur plant environment, the excess' can cer case statistics continued to show up. I t .v c 000356 LAM022265