Document n9gNE51N52z2eLe6GbaxR1qYG

FROM THOMAS B. BONNEY PITTSBURGH OFFICE ^PUUNTIFFS l| EXHIBIT |l AL-227 1978 July 28 RE: ELIMINATION OF UNNECESSARY USE OF ASBESTOS-CONTAINING MATERIALS Over the past six years, primarily by means of Industrial Hygiene Newsletters, we have attempted to discourage the use of asbestos at all of our operating locations. We have taken this position for two reasons. First, excessive exposure to asbestos represents a real hazard. Second, compliance with the applicable OSHA standard costs us money which we would not have to spend if substitute materials were used (e.g., for air sampling, medical surveillance, disposal procedures, etc.). Although our plants have made Impressive headway, it appears that our goal of eliminating unnecessary asbestos usage is not yet at hand. As we visit our plants, we still see asbestos products being used. We suspect that for many of them there are asbestos-free, functionally acceptable alternates. Because continued use of asbestos products may result in unnecessary health hazards and concerns to our employees as well as additional costs to Alcoa to comply with specific provisions of the OSHA standard, we believe that it is in Alcoa's best interest to eliminate the use of asbestos products wherever possible. To accomplish this objective requires that first we know for what specific applications It is presently being used. Therefore, we request that you survey your location to provide us with information about your plant's use of asbestos. The attached form Indicates the data that is required and can be used for submitting your survey results. We ask that you submit the results of your survey by 1978 September 01. Upon receipt we will compile a listing of current usage throughout Alcoa. With the assistance of appropriate plant and Pittsburgh personnel, we will place each usage into one of four categories: (1) No foreseeable employee exposures; substitutes available. (2) No foreseeable employee exposures; no viable substitutes available. (3) Potential employee exposures; substitutes available. (4) Potential employee exposures; no viable substitutes available. Following classification, with the aid of appropriate Pittsburgh and plant personnel, we will work toward a prompt and orderly replacement of all items in category "3". Jointly, we will further consider If there is merit to taking the same action for any or all of those materials in category "1". ALCOA <cv (') Apc 001081 1978 July 28 Page 2 This, of course, will require a determination of whether the economic consequences would justify such action. Our ultimate aim Is to provide the plants with the information necessary to attain effective control over their use of asbestos. To help accomplish this, we will provide you with information about substitute materials. Eventually, we will publish a list of "approved" asbestos products and applications (l.e., those for which there are no currently viable substitutes) to offer guidance for purchasing, production, industrial hygiene, and other interested plant personnel. We ask your cooperation In collecting the information needed to make this possible. THOMAS B. BONNEY TBBrlmn Attachment Letter sent to Industrial Hygienists Copies sent to: M. J. Caprlo, Pittsburgh 19AB J. Z. Nelson, Pittsburgh 3WPH N. Kloap, Arkansas Works R. C. Hinkle, Badin Works J. D. Breazeal, Davenport Works H. E. Chandler, Tifton R. K. Morrow, Massena Works E. B. Parker, Rockdale Works W. S. Stroud, Tennessee Works J. A. Blessinger, Vancouver Works G. H. Farrah, EHL, Alcoa Technical Center W. W. Williams, Fort Meade, Fla. J. B. Dolan, Lafayette Works G. R. Hartnett/Albert Lee, HC Products Co., Princeville, 111. J. R. Archibald, Pittsburgh 7AB P. R. Atkins, Pittsburgh 7AB B. D. Dlnman, Pittsburgh 7AB W. B. Garyotls, Pittsburgh 2AB R. V. Newsome, Mobile Works APC 001082 cc m >a a o& c & tn Item Product D escription^ ASBESTOS SURVEY 1 c c 4J K V aa < u n- u aj Q <-o 2 Dust Generated? c ca oc a* - CM co - tn vo f-* CO at o - CM <n 3 o* OJC (A in -- 4o-> -- mOf 0U) .Q *M W? <C E *-- tn r<-0 4O- tn w a> -o oo a> ^ tan t3n tn c *o oi o a> e. -o tOo 41-9 -Q tn > a> >> a* Q.*-- U in tn w 0) o3 3u D *" 3 > OJ --u 0wJ U0 c a. i- tn o T03> C -3 0) 3O e--U E(D ecu IA^" P4J a m o a) F- c u 0) o APC 001083 15 o in in O ** (VA 4-> J3 * 4/e> TJ ian; a a -c co u0D> in S. o o Q.-Q Oi 01 C. U a> *<--0 jq a. >Jc coe Note 2. I fShould be answered In lig h t o f c u rre n tly a v a ila b le In fo rm a tio n . A p ro d u ct w i l l be considered capable o f generating s ig n ific a n t a irb o rn e concentrations o f asbestos fib e rs the measured o r estim ated fib e r con- I tc e n tra tlo n s are In excess o f 0.1 f ib e r per cc (e ig h t-h o u r tim er-w eighted average). In responding to th is q u e s tio n . w ill be necessary to c o n s id e r the p o s s ib ilit y o f d u st being generated not o n ly d u rin g In s ta l- Letter 1978 July 28 re eliminating asbestos went to the following Industrial hygienists: D. E. Thompson, Addy, Washington 0. E. Wilkinson, Anderson County Works J. H. Plunkett, ATC J. F. Dey, Arkansas Works Earl H. Morgan, Badln Works V. Locke, Jr., Wear-Ever, ChillIcothe L. L. Grubb, Cleveland J. V. Muncie, Corona K. W. Williams, Davenport S. Huey, Rea Magnet, Fort Wayne W. D. Coker, Lafayette L. M. Crlvaro, Lancaster R. Andrew, Lebanon W. D. Helmlck, Logans Ferry T. V. Byerley, Marshall G. D. Hicks, Massena W. J. Boutrels, Mobile R. E..Podhora, Point Comfort J. D. Gibbs, Richmond A. G. Clayton, Rockdale J. C. Vergho, Tennessee L. L. Halsch, Vancouver D. P, Hooghklrk, Vernon R. L. Parsons, Warrick APC 001084