Document mpVEna3wnBBq7DBokQLwqrd5Z

V cui yicrruu INTERDEPARTMENTAL COMMUNICATION TO: Mr. R. L. McCallister NOV 20 1331 DATE: LOCATION: October 9, 1974 Portland, Oregon FROM: L. K. Ryder LOCATION: Stamford, Connecticut SUBJECT: Akron, New York Asbestos Exposure Conference with Marvin L. Amdur, M.D. - Buffalo Industrial Medical Center - September 27, 1974 GP-1924 Per your request, an appointment was made to confer with the abovementioned medical specialist regarding his past and future examinations and/or evaluations of Akron employees suspected to have been exposed to asbestos inhalation. I met with Dr. Amdur at approximately 10:00 a.m. on September 27, 1974 in the Buffalo Industrial Medical Center, Buffalo, New York. The Medical Center was extremely busy upon my arrival, patients were sitting and standing awaiting various examinations and Dr. Amdur was in the process of making a professional evaluation. Despite the fact Chat the doctor was very busy, I found him to be a most congenial personality and anxious to assist me in any way.possible. In answer to my question, he stated the following: His previous evaluations of Akron employees given pulmonary function and x-ray examinations were not necessarily conclusive due to two different test methods utilized. Further, test results for pulmonary function are largely dependent upon the cooperation and effort of the individual undergoing test. Test results to date do not necessarily indicate asbestos exposure, but positive results indicate impairment of pulmonary function due to exposure to some specific agent. In the situation at hand, he stated that it may be assumed that if asbestos exposure at the work site did, in fact, exceed permissible limits, asbestos was the causative factor resulting in disabilities that have occurred. Dr. Amdur had no specific recommendations in regard to management's problems relating to procedures at the plant to control the working environment or adjust employee's exposure during employment. His function, he stated, is to conduct and direct necessary professional procedures, evaluate and report the results based upon his professional knowledge and expertise. The doctor stated that to date, there is nothing that labels asbestos exposure as the primary causative factor of ventilatory difficulty in the employees tested. Further, he stated that to reduce the level of asbestos exposure probably will result in little, if any, improvement In the results of previous chest x-rays or pulmonary function tests. However, he felt that there was the possibility that with proper employee effort and cooperation, there may be, in "some individuals, Improvement in pulmonary function test results. Beginning Monday, September 30, 1974, five (5) employees at the Akron plant were scheduled for pulmonary function and x-ray testing. Five employees CP o-t SGP 0007788 Mr. R. L. McCallister Pg- 2 October 9, 1974 are scheduled for each of several subsequent days until all employees concerned have been seen. Dr. Amdur stated that Mr. Schifferle had been provided with a supply of "Employee History" forms that the doctor felt essential to proper evaluation of test results. In checking, I found that Mr. Schifferle had not yet received the forms. He was urged to make a special trip to the Medical Center to secure a supply and take the action necessary to insure that each employee present a completed form at the time of examination. The doctor stated that Mr. Schifferle had requested a single 14 x 17 x-ray plate for chest examination. Further, he stated that if the 14 x 17 plate suggested the possibility of some problem or difficulty, he would prefer additional projections to gain additional information required for proper evaluation. In addition, Dr. Amdur stated that for employees showing a degree of substantial pulmonary difficulty, blood-gas tests should be administered to more accurately determine the level of physiological function. While bloodgas tests are not given at the Buffalo Industrial Medical Center, the doctor said that such testing could be arranged at the Kenmore Mercy Hospital on the same day as the other tests and he strongly recommended approval for such procedure. I found myself in the dlfficlt position of having to immediately allow or deny Dr. Amdur permission to take any additional x-rays he felt necessary and to arrange for any blood-gas testing he felt essential to proper evaluation. Tentative permission was granted with the understanding that if, upon checking with the Akron management, there were objections, he would be so advised. The Akron office was contacted' and I talked to Mr. Schifferle and advised him,of the above. Mr. Schifferle felt that he should not give an affirmative answer and I later called Mr. Rauch who gave his approval for additional x-rays and/or blood-gas tests at Dr. Amdur's professional discretion. In conclusion, the doctor felt that his next evaluation report will be in greater detail than previous reports and should be more conclusive and helpful in planning future affirmative actions by Akron management. Copies of the evaluation reports were requested for the Stamford office in addition to those sent to Akron. Your office"will be provided with photocopies as soon as possible after they are received. Respectfully submitted, LKR:as cc: Mr. K. Gipson - Portland Mr. J. Hurd - Portland Mr. J. Rauch - Akron Mr. R. Schifferle - Akron Mr. H. Peele - Wilmington SGP 0007789