Document oe6XNgVz8j4drZyNeqXjjL0x7

J ES-34Cfi HASKELL LABORATORY sc: C. p Rein-4ri* p _ A. Bower A. M. Kaplan PLAINTIFF'S! EXHIBIT DUP-2163 October 13 , 1984 J. R. GIBSON CR&D HASKELL LABORATORY RSSP-IRATOR WORKPLACE PROTECTION FACTORS FOR ASBESTOS (Haskell Laboratory Report No. 462-84 ? MR-SSS'J-OOl) SUMMARY AND BACKGROUND Workplace protection factors for alastomaric and single usa half-fact respirators wars measured during asbestos removal operations. The operations consisted of asbestos removal from a ceiling (fire proofing) and removal of pipe insulation. The use of water/surfactant solutions to spray fire proofing and insulation resulted in conditions of high humidity for indoors operations. Out-of-doors operations were also under high humidity conditions since light rain occurred on two of four days of sampling. Temperatures for both operations were in the 65-35*F range. The respirators were used in the context of a respirator program that followed the guidance in 29 CPX 1910.134 and ANSI Z88.2 (1980) including proper respirator selection and fit testing. A total of seventeen volunteers participated in the study, one or two workplace protection factors were determined for each respirator for which the fie test had been passed. The respirators tested were: e one successfully fitted elastomeric facepiece respirator chosen for comfort from six respirators (MSA Comfo II and Survivair 2000 brands - small, medium and large sizes). These respirators were tested using dust, fume and mist and high efficiency filters. e Each of three disposable respirators successfully fitted (3M 9910, 3M 0710 and American Optical R 1050). e A successfully fitted North 7700 elastomeric facepiece respirator, chosen from the small, medium or large size facepieces. DUP 0933722 DU 036288 a. In addition two workplace protection factor measurements ware mad# for a self-contained breaming apparatus operated in the pressure-demand mode. Results show that all respirators tested, reliably provide workplace protection factors of ten or greater, except the AO RIO50, which reliably provides a protection factor of five or greater, based on estimates of lower 5th percentile. These results are consistent with information supplied to the OSHA asbestos record by Los Alamos National Laboratory which reported on the.penetration of asbestos through respirator filter media. 1 Results for the self-contained breathing apparatus suggest that it may not provide appreciably better protection than the two better disposable respirators and the elastomeric facepiece respirators, though it presents a considerable stress and hazard of falling because of it's weight and awkwardness. Myhre et and Ravenhave shown that pressure-demand respirators do not maintain positive pressure inside the facepiece when workloads are increased from rest conditions. This may explain, in part, why the pressure-demand and self-contained breathing apparatus did not provide superior protection. PROCEDURE Prior to testing, each person was trained in ths selection and fit testing of respirators using the National paint and Coatings Association Training Program*4>. Each was then fit tested using the saccharin fit test14'. Pit test results are given in Table V. Respirators selected for use ar.d vendors are listed in Table I. Two Individuals war* also tralnad In us* oC a pcassupa--demand self-contained breathing apparatus. Fit testing was not done, as it is not required for pressure-demand equipment per the ANSI Z88.2 (1980) standard. During sample collection, each participant was observed continually to ensure that the sample train remained intact and did not Interfere with the respirator seal on the face, and to note occurrences which might have affected respirator performance, such as movement of the respirator on the face. The participants were very busy with their work activities and soon ignored the presence of the researchers. AIR SAMPLING AND ANALYSIS To determine the workplace protection factors, concurrent samples were taken from inside the respirator (in-mask) at nose level and outside the respirator at the lapel (lapel). Closed-face Olasrock (#1503) cassette filter holders fitted with half inch extenders and probes developed by NIOSB13' were used for both the in-mask and lapel samples. The sample probes are specially designed to minimize the loss of particulates. The cassettes contained 0.8 urn, 25mm cellulose ester filters. - 2- D0 0933723 DU 036289 IitaiaamiM^iaSfeaa^sSglaKiIjailBgf'g;aJrn3aii^LaigaiBiaaiagMJiaaaisgi^T^- fr The sample train* wr calibrated bsfor* and after taking each sample using a mass flow meter. The mass flow meter was calibrated against a bubble flow meter at the beginning and end of tne study. A flow rate of 2 Lpm was used for the in-mask samples. Lapel samples were taken at 0.5-1.0 Lpm to avoid overloading. Samples were collected for a one- to two-hour period. Each sample represented a single wearing of the respirator. Fiber counts were done per NIOSH method PsCAM 239{fi* (phase contract microscopy), except that the triacetin/acetone mounting method was used as described in NIOSH method 7400'7'. counting was done according to the PICAM 239 rules (the "A" counting rules in method 7400). Five hundred fields were counted for in-mask samples to increase analytical sensitivity. All analyses were done by one counter who participates successfully in the American Industrial Hygiene Association's Proficiency Analytical Testing quality assurance program. Concentrations were calculated from the actual number of fibers counted (even if fewer than 50 fibers were counted) per the formulas in the NIOSH method. NIOSH method P&CAM 239 reports a coefficient of variation of' 0.12 which applies to lapel samples in this study. He estimate that the coefficient of variation for the in-mask samples is 0.4 at the median in-facepiece concentration and fiber count (Table III). Transmission electron microscopic analyses were also done on selected samples to obtain data on small fiber penetration and size distribution. All tield and analytical data are retained in the HR-5557 file. SAMPLING AND ANALYSIS METHOD VERIFICATION In-mask sampling required use of elosed-faee filter cassettes. He used Glasrock *1505 25mm filter cassettes which have a unique tapered design for the outlet and a.half inch extender which improves.the deposition patterns'*'. To minimize sample loss, the NIOSH'9' probe was used to withdraw in-mask samples. To eliminate possible bias, the same closed-face/probed cassette was used for both in-mask and lapel samples. To document whether concentrations determined from elosed-face/probe cassette sampling differed from open-face sampling, twelve area samples were taken using both methods. Results are.compared in Table II with student's t and variance Ratio tests' '. The two sampling methods were found to give similar results with no significant bias or difference in precision. -3- DU? 0933724 DU 036290 RESULTS AND DISCUSSION Transmission electron microscopic analysts were dons on four lapsl samples by Elsctron Microscopy Service Laboratories, Inc., Camden, Sew Jersey. The resultant distributions of fiber diameters and lengths are shown in Figures 1 and 2. Fiber diameters and lengths covered a wide range. The overall median concentrations of fibers for in-mask and lapel samples are given in Table III. The median number of fibers counted for in-mask (500 fields counted) and lapel (<100 field counted) samples are also given in Table III. ~ Cumulative distributions, geometric means, geometric standard deviations, best estimates of 5th percentiles and lists of workplace protection factors are given in Figures 3 through 8 for each respirator. The distributions of workplace protection factors were found to be approximately lognormal for all respirators studied. Therefore, logs were used for the plots, geometric means are reported as the proper measure of central tendancy and geometric standard deviations are reported as the proper measure of variability. Best estimates of 5th percentiles represent the workplace protection factors that most (95%) respirator users are expected to obtain from each respirator. Distribution plots and geometric standard deviations include variability from the sampling and analytical method as well as from the workplace protection factors. The unavoidable inclusion of the sampling and analytical variability in the plots results in best estimates of 5th percentiles which are conservative (lower than actual). This should be considered in evaluating results. workpiece protection factors were determined for a self- contained breathing apparatus for two individuals. Results are reported in Table IV. Table V gives geometric means, geometric standard deviations, best estimates of the 5th percentile, and ratios of participants passing the fit test for each respirator studied. A Bonferronl'9' test for differences (pO.OS) was done and results are given in Table V. workplace protection factors for the 3M 9910 were found to be significantly higher than those for the AO R1050. No other significant differences were found. The importance of doing a fit test is apparent from the fit test results in Table v. The relatively low results for the AO R1050 are likely due to poorer filter efficiency for asbestos, reported by Dr. Ortiz of Los Alamos National Laboratory11'. -4 DUP 0933725 DU 036291 aaaEz.^,4aig. The unexpected comparability of the results from the 3M disposable respirators, and elastomeric facepiece respirators with both dust, mist and fume filters and high efficiency filters may be explained by several factors. First, because the filter efficiency is high (^99.9%), the limiting factor in performance of the respirators is likely face fit, not filter efficiency (except for the AO R1050 as noted above). Since the same fit test was used to select good fitting respirators for the study, comparable face fit results would be expected. In addition, the researchers noted a tendency for elastomeric respirators to slip around when some wearers' faces became wet with the water/surfactant spray. This did not occur with the disposable respirators because their fibrous material of construction clung to the skin. It is particularly noteworthy that the workplace protection factors for the self-contained breathing apparatus were not superior to the better disposable and elastomeric respirators. Myhre'2 and Raven13 have shown that at workloads exceeding approximately 35% of maximal aerobic capacity pressure inside the facepiece of pressure-demand type respirators does not remain positive with respect to the surrounding atmosphere. This would provide an opportunity for airborne asbestos to be drawn into the facepiece. The volunteers who wore the self-contained breathing apparatus complained of stress and discomfort due to its weight and bulk. Movement and balance were difficult and one volunteer almost fell from a step ladder as a result. Based on their observations, the researchers believe that routine use of self-contained breathing apparatuses for asbestos removal would likely result in injuries, in view of the large amount of climbing involved. Certainly, acceptance will be much poorer than for the other respirators studied, due to discomfort which would discourage respirator use. Transmission electron microscopic analysis results were also used to determine workplace protection factors for thin fibers (Table VI). Results for small diameter (<0.2um) fibers do not appear to differ from those for large diameter (>0.2un) fibers, for 5 um or longer lengths. Thus, results for fibers visible with the phase contrast method (>0.2um diameter) appear to be representative of those for smalTer diameter fibers for the 3M 8710 and 9910, and for elastomeric respirators with dust, fume and mist and high efficiency filters. CONCLCJSIOHS 1. All respirators tested provided protection against asbestos. The American optical RIO50 disposable respirator reliably provided workplace protection factors of 5 or greater. The 3M 9910, 3M 8710, and elastomeric half-face respirators with both dust, fume and mist and high efficiency filters reliably provided workplace protection factors of 10 or greater. DOT 0933726 DU 036292 2. 'jse of higher efficiency filters did not appear to improve cne workplace protector factors of the elastomeric respirators. 3. workplace protection factor measurements for a pressure demand self-contained oreatnmg apparatus were not significantly higher than tnose for the better disposable and elastomeric respirators. Comments from the test volunteers and observations indicate that acceptance of the selfcontained breathing apparatus would be poorer than that of the other respirators tested, in addition, it presents a significant risk of tripping or falling, where removal work requires climbing ladders and working from scaffolding. 4. Transmission electron microscopic analyses suggest that for fibers longer than 5 ura, the overall workplace penetration of small diameter (<0.2um) fibers is not higher than that of larger diameter fibers for the 3M 3710 and 3M 9910 disposable respirators nor for elastomaric respirators with dust, fume and mist or high efficiency filters. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS The valuable collaboration and participation of Thomas J. ' ' Nelson in this study, and the perserveranee and thoroughness of James E. Henry in doing microscopic analysis art gratefully acknowledged. Special acknowledgeaant is also dus Robert L. Frye, C. Norman McLean, tha study volunteers, and numerous other at the Kingston, Ontario site and the Potomie River sits for their excellent cooperation and assistance. The assistance of James M. Kayser, James C. Piner, James E. Henry and Susan S. Mileti in doing ths workplace studies is greatsfully acknowledged, as is the peer review of Edwin.C. Hyatt, Earle P. Shoub, and Charles E. Billings. REFERENCES 1. orti*, L. W. st el. I "interim Report* penetration of Respirator filters by sn Asbestos Aerosol.* May 2, 1984 (Los Alamos National Laboratory). 2. Myhre, L. <3. t. D. Roldan, P. w. Baumgardner and 0. Tuckers physiological Limits of firefighters, unclassified Report #ESL-TR-79-08, AfISC, Tyndall APB, florida (June 1979). 3. Raven, P. B. at el.i "physiological Response to 'PressureDemand' Respirator Wear*, Am. ind. Ryg. Assoc. J. 43(10):773-781 (1982). 4. "Guide to Respirator fit Tasting* (1961), National paint and Coating Association, Washington, D.C. -6- OOP 0933727 DU 036293 inmmmri IWiit-MiWtgaLF?:a'f n :;ngwiaai s .1 r-;5a3iST:-aaEsvji?tgjgiisBMMiaM:3naa- 5. Liu, 3. Y. u. et al.: "In-Mask Aerosol Sampling for Powered Air Purifying Respirators*, Am. ind. Hyg. A3soc. j. 45(4) : 278-283 ( 1984) . S . ,U. S. Department of Health, Education and Welfare: NIOSH Manual of Analytical Metnods, Second Edition, Volume I (April 1977). 7 . National Institute for Occupational safety and Health, Method 7400, February 15, 1984. 3. Adams, M. J. et al., "Cassette Extenders: Effects on Chrysotile Fiber Deposition and Concentration Measurements*, presented at the American industrial Conference, May 24, 1983 . 9. Snedecor, G. W. and W. G. Cochran: Statistical Methods, 7th Ed., Iowa State university Press, Ames, Iowa (1980). STEPHEN W. DIXON SECTION SUPERVISOR INDUSTRIAL HYGIENE Approved by: A. MICHAEL KAPLAN MANAGER - FIELD SERVICES SWD/tac/3.52 Date issued: October 18, 1984 Attachments: Table I-VI, Figure 1-8 Number of pages in this report: 21 7 DUP 0933728 DU 036294 i-jjiil-ik...-"- ,:,,eb.iii1:-BBiaiiiii.,,taJaiias|i^|K^|)| iafilitti Respirator Name Survivair 2000 Corafo II 3M 8710 3M 9910 AO R1050 North 7700 Scott Air-Pak TABLE I Respirators Studied Type Elastomeric (silicone rubber) with dust, fume and mist and high efficiency filters Elastomeric (neoprene) with dust, fume and mist and high efficiency filters Disposable with nonadjustable staps Disposable with adjustable straps Disposable with nonadjustable straps Elastomeric (silicone rubber) with high efficiency filters Self-contained breathing apparatus, pressure-demand Vendor U.S.D. Corp. Mine Safety Appliance Co. 3M Company 3M Company American optical Company * North Company Scott Aviation HLR 462-84 8OOf 0933729 DU 036295 TABLE II COMPARISON Of ASBESTOS SAMPLING METHODS (OPEN-FACE VERSUS CLOSED-FACE WITH PROBE) Parameter Mean Value 2.2 fibers/raL - open face filter cassette 2.3 fibera/mL - closed face cassette with probe Standard Deviation probe 0.264 fibers/mL - open face cassette 0.286 fibers/mL - closed face cassette with T Statistic* 1.28 variance Ratio** 1.17 -- Data Open-face cassette: 1.9, 1.9, 2.0. 2.1 2.1, 2.1, 2.2, 2.2, 2.2, 2.2, 2.3, 2.9 Closed-face cassette: 2.0, 2.0, 2.0, 2.2, 2.3, 2.3, 2.3, 2.4, 2.4, 2.4, 2.5, 3.0 * 1.28 is less than a comparison t statistic of 1.78 (p>0.05). Therefore, ths moans do not differ significantly. ** 1.17 is loss than a comparison t statistic of 2.69 (p*0.05). Therefore, the variances (precision) of the methods do not differ significantly. HLR 462-84 9- DUV 0933730 DU 036296 I'Miiaij i=l-^iaiafeai^iiaiM!iMiii:fli TABLE XII MEDIAN ASBESTOS CONCENTRATIONS AND COUNTS FOR WORKPLACE PROTECTION FACTOR STUDY Concentrations inside Respirator Outside Respirator Counts Inside Filter Outside Filter 0.006 fibers/raL (8 HR. TWA ~ 0.003)* 2.6 ibers/mL (8 HR. TWA ^1.3)* 9 fibers 130 fibers * no nort than four of eight work hours were spent doing asbestos reaoval. Therefore, a factor of 0.5 (4 HRS/8HRS) was applied to concentrations to estiaate HR TWA concentrations. HLR 462-84 10 OOF 0933731 DU 036297 TABLE IV WORKPLACE PROTECTION FACTORS FOR SELF-CONTAINED 3REATHING APPARATUS (PRESSURE DEMAND) Workplace Protaction Factors:: 400 830 Geometric Mean: 620 HLR 462-84 - 11 - t OUT 0933732 DU 036298 TABLE V COMPARISON OF WORKPLACE PROTECTION FACTORS TOR SEVEN RESPIRATORR Respirator Number of Measurements workplace Protection Factor Geometric Mean (Geom. S.D.) Ratio Passing Fit Test Lower 5th Percentile 3M 8710 18 3M 9910 AO R10SO Elastomeric/Dust, Fume and Mist Filter Elastomeric/High Efficiency Filter 14 7 17 14 North 7700 High Efficiency Filter 14 Self-Contained Breathing Apparatus 2 310 (5.3) 580 (4.2) 52 (4.2) 240 (6.3) 94 (3.0) 250 (6.9) 620 15/17 14/17 4/6 Not Tested Surv.-14/16 MSA-1/2 15/15 Hot Tested 20 55 5 12 16 11 *Based on Bonfsrroni tsstl9> at a 0.05 level of significance only the 3M 9910 and AO RIO 50 differed. HLR 462-84 12 DUV 0933733 DU 036299 JMMiian.jii su.^hm TABLE VX WORKPLACE PROTECTION FACTORS FROM TRANSMISSION ELECTRON MICROSCOPIC ANALYSES Respirator Workplace Protection Pactor Fibers Exceeding 0.2 um All Diameter Fibers Diameter and 5 um Length* Exceeding 5 um Length 3M 8710 3M 9910 Survivair 2000 with Oust, Mist and Funs Filter Survivair 2000 with High Efficiency Filter 330 47 28 21 120 41 29 ,,v 19 *Those which would be counted by ths standard phass contrast microscopy method. HLR 462-84 13 OOf 0933734 DU 036300 I FIGURE 1 FIB E R DIAMETERS- DIAMETER r oo HLR 462-84 I s T a o S838U 30 a39NflN O 0U 0933735 DU 036301  FIGURE 2 FIBER LENGTHSLENGTH I O o 40 HLR 462-84 T i---------- 1---------- r-- T oa 'T to . CM SV3SXJ JO V39MQH o 15 - DUF 0933736 DU 036302 ajtojsa>Mru: i. igMB i iMi- !m ga Figure 3 - Workplace Protection Factors for 3M 8710 Respirator Cumulative Distribution: (Lognormal) Geometric Standard Deviation: 5.3 Best Estimate of 5th Percentile: 20 Data: 7.4,15, 61,110,110,180,200, 310, 400. 420, 430.1000, 1000, 1100,1500, 1600, 1800, 3200 HLR 462-84 - 16 - DU 036303 Figure 4 - Workplace Protection Factors for 3M 9910 Respirator Cumulative Distribution: (Lognormal) Geometric Mean: 580 Geometric Standard Deviation: 4.2 DU 0933738 Best Estimate of 5th Percentile: 55 Data: 94,110,150,150,170, 280, 550, 630, 710,1300, 2400, 3000, 3700, 5600 BLR 462-84 . " 17 " I DU 036304 Figure 5 - Workplace Protection Factors for AO R1050 Respirator Cumulative Distribution: (Lognormal) Geometric Mean: 52 Geometric Standard Deviation: 4.2 Best Estimate of 5th Percentile: 5 Data: 9.7, 26, 28,38, 52, 75, 970 HUH 462-84 - 18 - OOF 0933739 DU 036305 tt iiriljiiii Figure 6 - Workplace Protection Factors for Survivair 2000 and MSA Comfo Halfmask Respirators with Dust, Fume and Mist Filters Cumulative Distribution: (Lognormal) Geometric Mean: 240 Geometric Standard Deviation: 6.3 OUT 0933740 Best Estimate of 5th Percentile: 12 Data: 15, 24, 45,46, 47, 74, 88,140, 190,370,480,1000,1100, 1100,1800,4100,4200 HLR 462-84 . - 19 - DU 036306 i:iraBRSgjrer r|yu,e t " wvorKpsac i'roicCiion tractors tor Survivair 2000 and MSA Comfo Halfmask Respirators with High Efficiency Filters Cumulative Distribution: (Lognormal) Best Estimate of 5th Percentile: 16 Data: 12, 28, 32, 42, 65, 85, 110,120,140,160,160, 220, 220, 780, 7900* HX.R 462-14 Rsmovsd from ptot analysis, as an ooBet 20 - DU 036307 sgMtiniifes li ajfeniaaa(.;S;age;: figure 8 - Workplace Protection Factors for North 7700 Halfmask Respirators with High Efficiency Filters Cumulative Distribution: (Lognormal) Geometric Mean: 250 du 0933742 Geometric Standard Deviation: 6.9 Best Estimate of 5th PercentSe: 11 Data: 12, 20, 36, .60,74,110, 260, 350,400,1000,1900, 2000, 2400, 3100 HLR 462-14 - 21 - DU 036308 RESPIRATOR WORKPLACE PROTECTION fACTORS FOR ASBESTOS SUMMARY AMD BACKGROUND workplace protection factors for elastomeric and single use half-face respirators were measured during asbestos removal operations. The operations consisted of asbestos removal from a ceiling (fire proofing) and removal of pipe insulation, copious use of water/surfactant solutions to spray fire proofing and insulation resulted in conditions of high humidity for in-doors operations. Out-of-doors operations were also under high humidity conditions since light rain occurred on two of four days of out-of-doors sampling. Temperatures for both operations were in the C5-85*P range. The respirators were used in the context of a respirator program that followed the guidance in 29 CPU 1910.134 and ANSI 288.2 (1980) including proper respirajtqg, selection and fit testing. A total of seventeen volunteer* participated in the study. One or two workplace protection factors were determined for each respirator for which the fit test had been passed. The respirators tested were< e one suecesefully fitted elastomeric facepiece respirator chosen for comfort from the two brands (H8A comfo il and Survivair 2000 - 3 sixes each). These respirators were tested with type T (dust, fume and mist) and type H (high efficiency) filters. "1" DOT 0933751 DU 036309  Each of the three disposable respirators successfully fitted (3M 9910, 3M 8710 and American Optical R 1050). e 'one successfully fitted (of three sizes) North 7700 elastomeric facepiece respirator. in addition two workplace protection factor measurements were made for a self-contained breathing apparatus operated in the pressure-demand mode. Results showed that all respirators tested reliably provided workplace protection factors of ten or greater except the AO R1050 which reliably provided a. protection factor of five or greater. Results for the self-contained breathing apparatus suggest that it may not provide appreciably better protection than the better disposable and elastomeric facepiece respirators, though It puts considerable more physical stress on the wearer due to its weight and bulk. PROCEDURE Prior to testing, each person was trained in the selection and fit testing of respirstors using the Rational paint and Coatings Association Training program*!). Each was then fit tested using the saccharin fit test(1>. Respirators selected for use by participants are listed above and in Table X. -2 DUP 0933752 DU 036310 --* it-iIWHiiMKiiSratiyn-Mii^ihiellni a- i Two individuals wars also trainsd in uss of a praasurt-damand sal-containad breathing apparatus, for which two workplace protection factor naasurtmants ware made. Pit tasting was not dona, as it is not raguirad in the ANSI 288.2 (1980) standard. During sample collection, each participant was obsarvad continually to ensure that the sample train remained intact and did not interfere with the respirator seal on the face, and to note oecurances which might have affected respirator performance, such as movement of the respirator on the face. The participants were very busy with their wort activities and soon ignored the presence of the researchers. AIK SAMPLING AMD ANALYSIS To determine the workplace protection factors, concurrent samples were taken from inside the respirator (ln-mask) at nose level and outsids the respirator at the lapel. Closed-face Glasroek (#150S) cassette filter holders fitted with half inch extenders and probes developed by ttlOSB*2* were used for both the inside and outside staples. The sample probes are specially designed to minimise the loss of particulates. The cassettes contained O.f urn, 25am cellulose ester filters. The sample trains were calibrated before and after each ample using a mass flow meter. The mass flow meter was calibrated against a bubble flow meter at the beginning and end "3' DOT 0933753 DU 036311 of the study. A flow rats of 2 Lpm was usad for the insida 4 samples. Outside samplas wars taken at 0.5-1.0 Lpm to avoid overloading. Samplas wars collected for a ona to two hour pariod. This duration was chosan bassd on axpactad fibar lavals. Bach sampla raprasantad a singla waaring of tha raspirator. Pibar counts wars dona par NXOSH proesduras 7400l3) (phasa contract microscopy) using tha "A" counting rulas. Plva hundrad fialds wars countad for in-mask saaplas to incraasa analytical sansitivity. All analysas wars dona by ona countsr who partieipatas succassfully in tha Aaarlcan industrial Hygiana Associations Proficiency Analytical Tasting quality aasuranca prograa. Concentrations wars ealculatad from tha actual number of fibers countad (even if fewer than 50 fibers ware countad) par the formulas in tha NXOSH method. NXOSH aathod 7400 reports a coefficient of variation of 0.12 which applies to lapel saaplas in this study. Ha estiaate that tha coefficient of variation for the in-aask saaplas is 0.4 at the median in-facepiece concentration and fibar count (Table III). DUP 0933754 DU 036312 um-A&i;,:> u#htijZJLi illii i'iifiiAft ffoiiili SAMPLING AMD ANALYSIS METHOD VERIFICATION in-maak sampling required usa of closed-face filter cassatta's. The Glassrock *1305 25mm filtar cassattas us ad hava a unique taparad dasign for tha outlat and a half inch axtandar which improvas tha dapoaition patterns*4'. it was also nacsssary to proba tha raspirator to withdraw tha in-mask saapla. Tha NIOSH proba12' was usad to minimisa sampla loss. To aliminata possibla bias, tha sama elosad-faca/probad cassatta was usad for both in-mask and lapal saaplas. To documsnt whathar eoncantrations datarminad from closad-eaea/proba cassatta sampling diffarad from opan-faca sampling, twalva asss saaplas wars takan using both mathods. Rasults arc eomparad in Tabla II with student's t and Varianea Ratio tasts. Tha two sampling mathods wars found to giva similar rasults with no significant bias or diffaranca in praeision. - 5 DUP 0933755 DU 036313 RESULTS A^D DISCUSSION Transmission slsctron microscopic analyses were mads on four lapsl samples to document the distribution of fiber diameters and lengths. Distributions are shown in Figures 1 and 2. Fiber diameters and lengths covered a wide range. The overall median concentrations of fibers for in-mask and lapel samples are given in Table III. The median number of fibers counted for in-mask (500 fields counted) and lapel (100 field counted) samples are also given in Table III. Cumulative distributions, geoswtric means, geometric standard deviations, best estimatss of 5th percentiles and lists of workplace protection factors are given in Figures 3 through 8 for all respirators. The distributions of workplace protection factors were found to be approximately lognormal for all respirators studied. Therefore, logs were used for the.plots, geometric means are reported as the proper measure of central tendency and geometric standard deviations are reported as the proper measure of variability. Distribution plots and geosMtric standard deviations include variability from the sampling and analytical method as well as from the workplace protection factors. This should be considered in evaluating results. DUF 0933756 DU 036314 Best estimates of 5th percentiles represent the workplace g protection factors that most (9St) respirator users are expected to obtain from each respirator. The unavoidable inclusion of the sampling and analytical variability in the plots results in best estimates of 5th percentiles which are conservative (lower than actual). Workplace protection factors were determined for a selfcontained breathing apparatus for two individuals. Results are reported in Table IV. Table v gives geometric means and standard deviations for all respirators studied, A Bonferroni(S) test for differences (p*0.05) was done and results are given in Table v. Workplace protection factors for the 3M 9910 were found to be significantly higher than those for the AO R1050. No other significant differences were found. The researchers noted a tendency for elastoaerle respirators to slip around when mm wearers' faces became wet with the water/surfactant spray. This did not occur with the disposable respirators because their fibrous material of construction clung to the skin. This msy explain the unanticipated comparability of the results for the 3M disposable respirators aad the elastomeric respirators. The relatively low results for the AO R1050 are likely due to poorer filter efficiency for asbestos, reported by Dr. Ortis of Los Alamos National Laboratory**1. OOP 0933757 DU 036315 It is^particularly noteworthy that tha workplace protaction factors for tha self-contained braathing apparatus were not suparior to tha battar disposable and alastonaric rasplrators. Tha voluntaars who wora tha self-contained braathing apparatus conplainad of strass and discomfort dua to its waight and bulk. Movement and balanca wara difficult and ona voluntaar almost fall from a stap laddar as a rasult. Basad on thair observations, tha rasaarchars baliava that routina usa of salf-containad braathing apparatusas for asbestos removal would likely result in injuries, in view of tha large amount of climbing involved. Certainly, acceptance will be much poorer than for the other respirators studied, due to discoaifort which would discourage respirator use. Transmission electron microscopic analyses were done on ln-mask and lapel samples. Resultant workplace protection factors are reported in Table VI. Results for small diameter (<0.2um) fibers do not appear to differ from those for large (>0.2um) diameter fibere, for s urn or longer lengtha. Thus, results for fibers visible with the phase contrast method O0.2un diameter) appear to be representative of those for smaller diameter fibers 09 um length) for the 3M B710 and 9910, and for elastomeric reepiratore with type P and M filters. - I OOP 0933758 DU 036316 CONCLUSIONS 1. All respirators tested provided protection against asbestos. Tbs'American Optical R1050 disposable respirator reliably provided workplace protection factors of 5 or greater. The 3N 9910, 3N 8710, and elastomeric half-face respirators with both Type P and Type H filters reliable provided workplace protection factors of 10 or greater. 2. use of higher efficiency (type H) filters did not appear to improve the workplace protector factors of the elastomeric respirators. 3. workplace protection factor measurements for a pressure demand self-contained breathing apparatus were not significantly higher than those for the better disposable and elastomeric respirators. Comments from the test volunteers and observations indicate that acceptance and safety of the self-contained breathing apparatus will be poorer than that of the other reepirators tested. 4. Transmission electron microscopic analyses indicate that overall workplace penetration of small diameter (<0.2un) fibers (longer thanS urn) is not discernibly higher than that of larger diameter fibers for the 3M 8710 and 3H 9910 disposable respirators nor for elastomeric respirators with Type p or H filters. DUt 0933759 DU 036317 REFERENCES 1. "Guide to Respirator Fit Tatting" (1981), National paint and Coating Association, Washington, D.C. 2. Liu, B. Y. U. at alt "In-Maslt Aerosol sampling for powered Air purifying Respirators," Aa. Ind. Hyg. Assoc. J. 45(4)1278-283 (1984). 3. National institute for Occupational safety and Health, Method 7400, February 15, 1984. 4. Adams, M. J. et al, "Cassette Extendersi Effects on Chrysotile Fiber Deposition and Concentration Measureaents", Presented at the American industrial Conference, May 24, 1983. 5. Snedeeor, G. W. and W. G. Cochran statistical Methods, 7th Ed., Iowa Stats university press, Aaes, Iowa (1980). 6. Orits, S., W. et all "Interim Reports penetration of Respirator filters by an Asbestos Aerosol." May 2, 1984 (Los Alamos Rational Laboratory). - 10 DUP 0933760 DU 036318  -* TABLE I Respirators Studied Respirator Hams Survivair 2000 Comfo II 3M 8710 3N 9910 AO ftlOSO North 7700 Scott Air-Fak Typo Elastomeric (silicone rubber) with type H and with type F filters Elastomeric (neoprene) with type H end with type F filters Disposable with nonadjustable steps Disposable with adjustable straps Disposable with nonadjustable ' straps Elastomeric (silicone rubber) with type fi filter Self-contained breathing apparatus vendor U.S.D. Corp. Nine Safety Appliance Co. 3N Company 3M Company American optical Company North Company Scott Aviation oar 0933761 I DU 036319 TABLE II 4 COMPARISON OP ASBESTOS SAMPLING METHODS (OPEN-PACE VERSUS CLOSED-PACE WITH PROBE) parameter Mean Value 2.2 fibers/mL - open face filter cassette 2.3 fibers/mL - closed face cassette with probe Standard Deviation 0.264 fibers/mL - open face casaette 0.286 fibers/mL - closed face cassette with probe T Statistic* 1.28 variance Ratio** 1.17 Data Open-face cassettet 1.9. 1.9. 2 a 0 f 2 e19 2fIf 2el# 2*2# 2 a 2 # 2 e 2 9 2.2, 2.3. 2.9 Closed-face cassettet 2.0, 2.0. 2*0# 22f 2*39 2*39 2*3# 2e4# 2*4# 2.4, 2.5, 3.0 * 1.28 la laaa than a comparison t statistic of 1.78 (p0.05). Therefore. too mans Go not differ significantly. * 1.17 is lasa than a comparison r statistic of 2.89 (p*0.05). Therefore* the variances (precision) of the methods do not differ significantly. POP 0933762 DU 036320 TABLE III MEDIAN ASBESTOS CONCENTRATIONS AND COUNTS FOR WORKPLACE PROTECTION fACTOR STUDY Concentrations Inside Respirator Outside Respirator Counts inside Pilter Outside Pilter 0.006 fibers/mL (8 HR. TWA ^ 0.003) 2.6 fibers/L (8 HR. TWA 1.3) 9 fibers 130 fibers DUP 0933763 DU 036321 TABLE IV WORKPLACE PROTECTION FACTORS FOR SELF-CONTAINED BREATHING APPARATUS (PRESSURE DEMAND) Da tat 400 8B0 Gaoaatrie Meant 620 DUP 0933764 DU 036322 aagriniia&iiiika -zmmmmmmmmmamimmil1'*' i T--A--B--LE V COMPARISON Of WORKPLACE PROTECTION PACTORS POR SEVEN RESPIRATORS Respirator Number of WFF Workplace protection Factor Geometric Mean (Geom. S.O.) 3H 8710 18 310 (5.3) 3H 9910 14 580 (4.2) AO R1050 7 52 (4.2) Elastomeric/ Type r filter 17 240 (6.3) Elaatoneric/ 14 Type H Filter North 7700 14 Type r niter Self-Contained 2 Breathing Apparatus 94 (3.0) 250 (6.9) 620 Significant Differences* Higher than R1050 Lower than 3N 9910 * Based on a lonferroni test15} at a 0.05 level of significance) only the 3N 9910 and AO ftlOSO differed. DUF 0933765 DU 036323 sewmw>? -pa i'HBMiiiin'i w w>aW`imwnHn -ff TABLE 71 4 WORKPLACE PROTECTION FACTORS PROM TRANSMISSION ELECTRON MICROSCOPIC ANALYSES Respirator 3M 8710 3M 9910 Survivair 2000 with Type F Filter Survivair 2000 with Type H Filter workplace protection Factor Fibers Exceeding 0.2 ua Ml Diameter Fibers Diaaetar and 5 un Length* Exceeding 5 urn Length 330 120 47 41 28 29 21 19 Those which would bo counted by the standard phase contrast microscopy method. DUP 0933756 DU 036324 iuMW-twits t.wi'MtHMi. FMiitii- JiLiJiIaai.J-jirtSagS imsuK FIGURE 1 FIB E R DX- DIAMETER io saiaii io loawriN DUf 0933767 DU 036325 a>w^tf:a FIGURE 2 FIBER LENGTHS- i s~r To o Ml fO ~r~ N nnii jo ocmqm DOF 0933768 DU 036326 LMlmL; FIGURg 3 - WORKPLACE PROTECTION FACTORS FOR 3M 8710 RfiT8r.B CUMULATIVE DISTRIBUTION: (LOGNORMAL) 4 .- f ii f K i M M ! i hh j ! ! -, :? f * / f. t Ii I i f. tt * * v1 f V T'Of ^ f. v i- t uf l .. v : iv t I * .* V T t* ;v f ` i-.;t T f J ( 04 t * 0* to 0 t0 tu to iu to 0 t0 0 u lu -.4 I t i > t . u > * \ : . J. f i >. 1 k * rc * .yO t i t*444444 HIMMUtH *** 44 M-4* * * *4* *4 t** -i . 4 i'jO.Ou 464.le * iOuvu.Ou GEOMETRIC MEAMi 310 GEOMETRIC STANDAltD DEVIATIONI 5.3 BE8T ESTIMATE 0T 5TH PERCENTILE I 20 OATAt 7.4, 13, SI, 110, 110, ISO, 200, 310, 400, 420, 430, 1000, 1000, 1100, 1500, 1S00, 1800, 3200 DU? 0933769 DU 036327 FIGURB 4 - WORKPLACE PROTECTION FACTORS FOR 3M 9910 RESPIRATOR CUMULATIVE DISTRIBUTION! (LOGNORMAL) > . 1 r *. i (.4 If f U f 1 i f I > f < t f- . ! : t. i`f f * * r V M s V V t i * * Vt-i i. : , I . iv it. 1t t i ~fi ?9 n it ?Ci. it it ?3*i! V t + * v* 0t t 'j i It t civ i- V It >, l 60 M j v l-1. : v I. I. *, iom' J-ji r aO* i v 0 0* t1u 0* u i uI u{ * *0 KU It *U * u *. it 5* fi V . 5 i f: 1 ii > 0. rr 1 0. i** > i'J .00 ix.bi c-tmtunn m**m***m.t*M**m**.m*tc i**i 1 V'.' . '.'V iii- .:;i 1000.00 1162.28 10000.00 wr GBomnac unit sio cbonetiuc tsubuuo dotiatiobi 4.3 BUT UTIMATB OT STB fUCWTXLBi SS DATAi 54, no, ISO, 150, 170, 210, 550, 530, 710, 1300, 2400, 3000 3700, 5500 DU? 0933770 DU 036328 PIGURB 5 - WORKPLACE PROTECTION PACTORS FOR AO RIO SO RESEIRAran CUMULATIVE DISTRIBUTIONt (LOGNORMAL) . * v M * m v; * r m - M M r. u* ;. ? .m. '.;i 4' . ; i i *>.. r-t ;*mnnitH.u m* **!>> i * 4 * 951 k. f 95 (* *. . u1l 4* SO**. i /wit * sO t: 5vt I: j 1 7 * 30*:* v .i\i H * 10* * * * 5*.* * jet- t .* * 1 i* i * t* j. 21 1 0.14* * 1.00 * 44J * *0 * *0 * 21.54 0 j * * 0* * * 100.00 mi * r * * * r t. t * t * 4 * * r. * * * * * * t * * ** * 464.14 2154.44 J. 0000.00. GEOMETRIC HEAR* 52 GEOMETRIC STAMDARO DEVXATIOMi 4.2 BEST ESTIMATE OT 5TB PERCENTILE* 5 DATA* 9.7, 24, 25, 3, 52, 75, 970 DU9 0933771 DU 036329 tn--w--kkmh i limi FIGUR* 6 - WORIPLACB PROTECTION FACTORS FOR SURVZVA2R 2000 AND MSA COMFO HALPHA3K RESPIRATORS WITH TYPE F FILTERS CUMULATIVE DISTRIBUTION! (LOGNORMAL) . : r < 99 if * * 954i t 0* 90 > I r. iiOti t :0 . I 4 aO-i-i ivtl I v i ( t -v.I ( i i t-T t ; r. ? i to to 0t ui 0 0* 0i u* 0 a *o u J :4 -.St f a V . - *. I 0. it* i> tuutt4iimtt) mt*U r UH * t f. * i -j . v 0 Jl.fcL ivv.vO 11b.22 MPF 1000.00 tG * 31S2.28 v t t t t t t t t f t f t I I * H t t * It 1 l t t * 10000.1/0 GSOMSTJUC HIM! 240 GB0MBT1IZC STABDA1D DXVZATZOMt 6.3 BIST ESTIMATI OF STB PICSNTILXi 12 DATAt 15, 24, 45, 46, 47, 74, It, 140, 150, 370, 410, 1000, 1100, 1100,1100, 4100, 4200 DU* 0933772 DU 036330 FIGURE 7 - WORKPLACE PROTECTION FACTORS FOR SURVIVAIR 2000 AMO MSA CQMTO* HALFMASK RE3PIRATOR8 WITH TYPE H FILTERS CUMULATIVE DISTRIBUTION (LOGNORMAL) * 99,?* 99.Sf * n,5it 99i* * 9e.u * 91** * ?cn * Sw ** * 70 ** * iw** 50 i T OH ion* i- JO* * * 10* + i l 3* f 0* * *0 a* 0t t *0 0 0* 0* 0* *0 0 it l:i* 0. SI* * v.O,* 0. U* * LO.OO '4 4 -MU* 54 -*>: t i 'i=.42 * 100,00 215.44 * (t * * * * i + * i I * f t it It e l K i I i * * 444.14 1000.00 GEGMETRZC NEAMl 54 GEOMETRIC STAMDARB DSmVZCKt 3.0 BEST ESTIMATE Of 5T1 MMBRIUi IS DATAi 13. 2S, 33, 43, <5, IS, 110, 130, 140, ISO, ISO, 330, 230, 710, 7900* Raoovod frea plot analysis, as an outllar. DUf 0933773 DU 036331 T FIGURE 8 - WORKPLACE PROTECTION FACTORS FOR NORTH 7700 HALFMASK RESPIRATORS WITH TYPE H FILTERS_________ CUMULATIVE DISTRIBUTION: (LOGNORMAL) 4 m ** * i * ( r t t i. t n tt* 11 * n-. j. r: i11? r*rr*t ?* * * * 11 >. * i, 11 * ., > i. V . f(4 : ; 7 i ' i~ t i .< . 5 4 4 t ?9 *i * 4 *8 k* k t ( I 92 44 rt Q :k 4: Ii kk 9Yk i 04 r. 4 *k 0 30 44 i *0 40 f k 4U r '/ 0* k i'Jt > 0 't I ;v t > 4 4 I : v ! 4 40 0 . k 30 k 4 0* k 4 o i 20*.* 0* ii * 04 44 k k t. ski f. * a - r t i j i-.n >* i : * 1 V & k. o. a** j . H * L Y . 00 -4 it. 2 44 44 4*4 4. k IvO.vO k jio.i'i * iOOOiOO t ildj.2t3 4 k 4 10000. ou GEOMETRIC NXAEt ISO GEOMETRIC STAROARD DEVIATION: S.S BIST ISTZMMB 0T STI PERCENTILE: 11 DATAi II, 20, 30, SO, 74, 110, 2S0, 3S0, 400, 1000, 1S00, 2000, 2400, 3100 DUf 0933774 I DU 036332 ilk.;,;i;3 taM-- , ITjiitiias.T L "I'Mija'i;... 'll':! -i FROM: UBFOUO W. CULPSPPtH. M.D. Smptoyaa fUlidom Dipt Madlcal Ohiltion N-11400 1.1. du Font da Namoar* k Co. Wilmington, Odwnii 1NM Pham: 77-M228 00 0933177 DU 036335 - i liJBBBBJML.... iM'tuL. --A....- jltfcrfaUK.. a ;-.ffEfclti...-riiT.B. X.i,,, .AiUit ~ ........il^.Ii.Ltg&.S.gjflj rjfBfflMi'||ittiiiSiiiiSlliiifi&fcii>fil..iiil^a^ji (^-\ - o-rz - ^UO ofA 00* 0933-n* DU 036336 DU 036337 ...j. ='iv;' ,....L.i;... iffiaMJ-- M^iijai.aaaK; -t COMPENSATION FOR DEATH FROM ASBESTOS WILLIAM C. JOHNSON and EDWARD HELER* This piper analyte* tk* idtquacy and equity of compensation to the rurvtvori of SCO men who died between 1M7 and U77 from workpiace exposure to asbestos. Data were gathered in interview* with the meat widow*, who received campcniation primarily from worker*' compmsation. aodal inauranee, private pennon*, and ton award* and ettiereentt. The resuluihow that compensation wu neither adequate ia amount, when compared to income loam, aor equitably distributed among nuviuon. The author* ute their finding* to evaluate one of the recent hilla befoie Congress that would intututr a (ederal eyitem of corapenaation lor aabeetot-releted deaths. sbestos kills between 1.500 and 10.000 stste workeia' conipenution coverage for Aworkers each year.1 Widespread dis asbestos-related illnass with federal benefiu satisfaction with existing means of compenand to prohibit product-liability suits by sating the survivors of these workers has led workers. This proposal represents an im to proposals for a federal statute to govern portant change in compensation legisla compensation for asbestos-related and tion. because its provisiona cam be extended similar occupational illneaa. The leading to govern compensation for other occupa proposal in IMS. H.R. S17S. wu to replace tions! diseases. But any such proposal alj&QRf be based on accurate information 'Wiliam JUma it Ptatswie at leaaamie* at the MimUSrkml dSniif He*rehAcUwSiSe HaaJih ScWin Program, back Syrcrwc tMnnu*. Uwsrd Htler ia Leneier at the I tliail if NMk and Emiteamemal Affairs. Indiana Uanermy Nanfewta. v cn4 Sewcrch Aname atthe Hrshh State about the defects of the current forms of compensation. This paper provides information, gathered us interviews with SfiO survivors, on the adequacy and equity of the benefits -- h That papa a an uteMiaa at iweerth # ^ cenjuanweueae arith thejlh liuLSchaal *f ifilttUlUK that wad*. aed PanaldSewawmaw currently paid to the sumvon of workers killed by asbcKos. It is one of the first studies of compensation for occupational nine* and. to our knowledge, is only the MWkari CeMBerg. second modern nudy of the consequences jimrt Lamhnaaa. and Mel WHUe Natal flider and Mirk Miller<r*awdtlwcam|MMtpt*fraanmtd in the of work-related deaths.' aiulym. and Barbara daa and Vhgam Repeal paended cirncai atamatMt. TWaiili prei wua adyefmlaer beeeriueCheiak 'WilliamJ. Nacbatmen al.. "Cmar tram OenapaMeal Aabeaiat Lapatam riejetueae IMS-MM." m Seatar> Repeat 9 Qaeeaykeetwt tf Ornpataaail Crnrrr (CaM Speieg Hatbae. N Y.: CaU Spaing at SOS widen afnrhan tiled ie IMS aid MS widen ef werkeretiScd in WM. Newef the werfcen died trees eacepscienet ilena. ba tact P. Chao. bpii> add Reeesery Ae Ceene *i tmflipum (New That: Lebeneery. 1181). Wiley. lMl). chaps 4 aed . MdsetrnlsadtebeeRsJMaeeiRnww VW J7. Ne 4 (Jab- lS4) t! IMA by CanwS Uentwfep MW 7SJS M SIM Ml UO 529 DU 0933781 % DU 036338 -t! SSO INDUSTRIAL AND LABOR RELATIONS REVIEW Data Thil malycs it based on data collected as pan oT a reudy of 995 ubestoa-related deaths that occurred between 1967 and 1977 among tnembcn of the International Asaotiitioa of Heat and Fran Intuiaton and Asbestos Workers, AFLCIO and CLC.' As pan of that study. 792 survives* from the United Sute* and Canada were interviewed in 1990 to determine the economic consequence* of the deaths.* We excluded interview* with Canadian citizens from the present analysis because of the differences between the Canadian and UA compensation systems. We also excluded interview* with survivor* other than the deceased^ widow and interviews with wid ow* whose husbands died after the expected end of their work life. Remaining after them exclusions were interviews with 560 widows. Interview questions probing the eco nomic consequences of the deaths focused on the cash income and later compensatory payments received by the widows. Queries about the amount and source of cash incomes were only for the year 1979, so minimise recall error; but questions about lump-sum payments from workers' com pensation and tort settlements asked about all yean 1967-79.* Wr can aanune that recall error in reports of lump-sum paymenu is low because the events surround ing the payment awards (such at court sens and woeket*'compensation agency rulings) tn*n*J. SaHhatr. <4.. tWwWMy fcr Atkmtm-Autemud tiNH at lU VuM JasM (Ntw Wrh: FawwnmiTWiI tdaacri likatantyi Ml W Schaei af Madanw. MSS). *Tha Murvinn mi* saedaciad as part af swaawh pr*i*a at th* Ml Siaat Mwsi af MaBMa*. Far a entiM 4M><uha sf the aMsenevv. eve ftsn Both, Twapaniaitaa Sw Uiknm-Snarmtd Btwwa: A w*ay af tahrir* MwUw.W* WSnhati hi it* Uatoad Bums see Caacda.* M MUMT. MeMS* Camptnta- mn.pp.ru-M. su-thehee--aswiodmh isuususet risw. Win assthasi as* mntM hsiwflts a aauflease, tWy sta vacatm * hasp was **vai w the sms *T jaatsBsaau Be* Ban she tint *1 she Smaafi Brash m the Bus* she slain is arnlrd. Ratraactm HI-- as* camatiad w c*,inlnis inatalhnanta ia this sutBy The am *hunp m` n*naibt a eae-iiaw haw*asm award atwtl>tm. _ *"* nual income lease* of survivor* were calculated from the time of death to the end of the worker * expected work life. Because our mow accurate data on com pensation payments are those for 1979. we emphasize the results for 249 widows whose husbands' expected work lives extended at Jexst to 1979. and we present only limited ratultx for the 911 survivor* of men whose work lives were expected to end before 1979. Methods lb measure lan replacement in this analysis, we uiad the ratio ofcompensation benefits to the survivors net losses. The net leu It the portion of the deceased's wage* (hat the survivor* would probably have consumed had he lived, namely, his wage income minus federal income taxes. FICA tax**, and the income he himself would have consumed had he lived.' Vtfc could not calculate coats for medical care or other expense* borne by the survivors on the deceased^ behalf. Finally we smutted that Scare* ended in the last year of the deceased! expected work me.1 and we therefore do not include in the analysis the ku of retirement benefits caused by the interruption of the work life. Wr estimate death-related payments is thesum ofcash benefits in any year plus the estimated income in that year from a *A aanparWaa *f amlnai' atrvay ratpenaaa wuh (hair bnshudf --tia' canpanaauan racarda i* on* mc avppatta dria nniin. Sat DnM Span. "Whahanf Caupaatatian uptritact AI| Thiat Graapaf Ashaam-ExpaatB Wertaita* Nr> Jancy* ia MBaff, DtmtMj Ctmpmmtn. p. SOt. Wsarly mat mm 1st each yaar vare ahuincB from Bw anBmh*harguataf afiaaamts af tacit mini laolar*l Wkpr iaraevi anatamtdiatkcpcaduct alnfiMaXnni.h.. worked each year ky Makar* af th* inaalniaa. wacira' him. Horn* data aw Ban a aawmiaanuaa frara CaiSsy Aaaactam. ia*.. Laadpm. Maryland. May M. MU. Fat dtrailasn B ka iwknaiiaa rntikaBoiafy. wt William G. Jahatam wB Idvard Htiar. Tkr Caau *f Aakcvcx Amriswd Data* and Death.* ifilkani Mtatanal And AaarrtW* MasM aad lvq. tol. U. Ns. t (Syria* IMS), pp. 177M. TWnymM watk HSr af aaah wtrhar wat abrainrd kwwlkirtryj Sauk. -Maw WatUiSt Ewwrutn Rrflrct fhaagktg FiafBr af Labar Pant* Mmkly Lakar Bnant, Vkl. m. N*. I (March Ittt). pp. IS -10 0U2 0933782 DU 036339 ASBESTOS COMPENSATION SSI previous lump-um payment. We derive esrirestes of income from a lump-turn payment in the following manner. The lump-turn payment minui attorney*' fee* i* treated a* financial capital.' In each year following the death, the net lee* for that year ii deducted from capital, and intent income on the balance for that year it added to capital. Thi* procedure it re peated until the capital is exhausted. Our method doc* not tojust for wage differen tials that may be paid for the risk of exposure to asbestos." Barth's itudy of atbe*to*-related differential* suggests that, if such premiums exut, they are unall." Saadardt ef Adequacy The preceding method for comparing benefit payment* to lottes win tell u* how individuals are compensated under the present system of benefits. but an evalua tion of current plans and proposed change* require* that we alto know how the present system it supposed to operate. What standards of adequate compensation have been developed to date? The present approach to compensation relict upon workers' compensation plana and ton suits in common last Our evaluation focuses primarily on payments from them `occupational iUntss pro gram*. hu to ho complete, we also include social imamace and private pcatiee bene fits in the analytic. The conventional wisdom it that workers' compensation benefits should equal two-thirds of the deceased wcekeri wage* in one or more yean prior to death." The tasserdau iodkaw dm msiaiyhss wwsgrt It pstrrm tf the mdk tomso oat takahMd oseg nm m U.S. Stany Bmdh ashen S. lakh. "Ompamdar Uhnr BMriro dab md SoWk Mkp A Rntoaf Mhrrtol otd later Attestm Mo fa*. Si. Me. S (April ptlH-U. "nmr henh. *fahg fttaheas hr WA at Aahroet Waters.* io SedkaST. AheMSy Cemfmmem. ft HI-IJ. The NiHaiil CsaalsCts se Sutt Vhrtsn' CaaprstMiea Laos rseaaaeeM that *vsgr lets he itpIswS a the mm tl Mtt% mhjm a a ewahaen hswdi ef SSI stream ef thr pavsiSae Sua tangs svUy wsg * See Swell Heftit tf lie ietritfen mental SMn' Cwpwmnse 1W ten*. fal. 1 (VWthtagae. O.C ; CTO. Jwa 1SW>. f IS- The radonale for the rwo-thiids standard is ambiguous, but its general acceptance among policymaker* makes it an important criterion touacin comparing compensation tchemea. In principle, common-taw damage awards should equal the mm of wage loas, medical costs, and compensation for pain and suffering. The objective of the com mon law it to return successful litigants to the sure of well-being they would have enjoyed had their spouses not died. Since our tstimate* equal only wage income losses, our replacement ratios far tort awards are higher than the true ratios. As a standard efadequacy for our results, we use a replacement ratio equal to one. Another important measure of adequacy it the proportion of survivors who receive benefits. Workers' compensation laws promise universal coverage for workrelated deaths. In theory; therefore, aB the survivors mdfad here were eligible far woeken' compensation. Common law re quires that each plaintiff prove his or her eligibility, however, and elements ef proof vary among jurisdictions and involve isms of fact about which we do not ham information. We therefore cannot define a general standard for common-law coverage of the survivors. The standards that we have defined here approximate only the moat general objec tives of the current forms of compensation. Our inabiBty to be more precise reflects the variation among workers' compensation bus and the confusion that surrounds the purposes of the current system of oompea- Three rets of ranks are presented fat this study The fim evaluates the adequacy and equity of benefit payments in 1979 for J49 widows whose husbands'expected seek life extended that yean The second stc of results provides infotmatfon about Sll tuivivon ef workers who. had they lived, would have been retired in 1979. hs hundred forty of the 911 widows received tome form of compensation during 1979. Their fames are compared to ertnaied payments from workers' compensation awl ton awards for the period from the time of the death to 1979. Wr then compare these Ita iMuitt ba thfur far iht 49 widows (i 009 0933783 DU 036340 anss&as aMatH. i ^Migai -fc MS* INDUSTRIAL AND LABOR RELATIONS REVIEW 7kUt 1. The Replacement of the Net Loaaei of Widow* Who Received Benefits ia 1979, by Source of Benefit.* MWten' loalhimaa rimfnan 7V* mi Aiwi Thai Mtiufill MntfiU Sami Mmtfi at* ut wo ut NomSrr NmLm Siiinkti Amman Amiwui Smmu|i fWUtm m in* fLm fLm fUm fLm Uttom pttmti Lao* Wwkm' Cwiprwuwr Only Wwkm' Cwiywuho, Swial Insvranrc. Twi Only Twi. Sochi laaunaw. lit Wwkm' Cwoynmim. Twi. Sadat It $)4.trt MS It 1S.4M 44.7 4 It.Ml t.t I 1S.M4 1.# t.t M ito.t ito.t t.t SS.I t.t 17.1 M.S II.7J4 77.* lM.t 4,110 t 117.1 (-*.) wrwio Social famraoca idtawn Only All lour-- I M.m H.4 n IS.MT it* It.MI it t.r Tt.t t.S tw 11.* ta. *4. 14*.* (-7.lt*) U. M.t MM a.tii *IUn and alma may mi add la ikt weals tot all ha an* kndk uhm aad pmsmufti an mediant. *Nfaun nlia nyraaam tte owdlan aaa af owrcawpnaadan. 'Median a m; ataa 17.1 parent. worked wboM axpettrd work ttvo* ex- tended to 1979. Tn* final ict of mult* compere* the adequacy and eouity of current benefio with the benefits that would be supplied under H.R. S17S. a 1999 bill before Cenflpam that would create a MmlttoftondBipiB for the victims of Mature to aobonao and other tonic thm paid 9917,011 (or 99 percent of that total): imputed income from ton award* and acttlemcMS paid 9195,994 (15.7 per cent): private pensions paid 9189.141 (99.6 percent): and mdal imunnee (primarily tocial seoarky) paid 9999.079 (29.4 per cent). The ratios of benefits to toate* by tourcc ef benefit* art doacribcd in Tible 1. TW Adeqmry and Equity of OMopekadon Payaueins Our mo accurate dau are far the 249 widewa wine husband*' expected work Ihn extended to 1979. During 1979. thm widow* Ion 99.401.094. Of the 949. 195 widow* were net compensated for their loom; the other 194 widow* received 9777,157 in bentfiu. Woken' compcnsa- Aa shown in column 9 of the table, among widow* whoae only source ofincome in 1979 was workers* compensation, that benefit replaced 99.2 patent of their leaen Among widow* who received addi tional payment! from other sources. 44.7 percent to 99.4 percent of their net tenet were replaced by worker*' compensation. Payment oflot than Mt Iocm* to survivor* it difficult to rationalise. Disincentive effects DOF 0933784 I DU 036341 i ASBESTOS COMPENSATION 533 not a concern in these cue* By deducting taxes hem our loti estimates, we avoid eomparinf nentaxabie benefit* before-tax wag*a. One can atfue. howerer, that worker*' compensation should be evaluated afainat the rwo-thirda itandard rather than aome abaolute measure of adequacy. Because these mult* represent net lorn* in the year that is a median ofsix yean after the worker's death, they cannot be directly evaluated by the two-thirds standard (the ratio of benefits at the time of the award to gross waigsa prior to death). Instead, we perform the following calculation, which approximates that kind of evaluation. Since workers' compensation benefits ate usually paid in installments of equal amounts, benefit* in 1979, for most wrvivors, should have been equal to the annual amount awarded after the worker's death. We evaluate the two-thirds stan dard. therefore, by comparing 1979 bene fits to the deceased's wages in the year ofhis death. The median ratio ofbenefits to gran wages prior to death is If percent." These results show that whether we consider the 1979 dam or the two-thirds standard, worker's compensation payments are not adequate. This conclusion it reinforced by the (act that our remits as* based on data for only thorn widow* who received such payment*. When the loam of widows who did not weave workett' compensation arc also included in the analysis, the replacement redo* are sub stantially lower. Only 39 (19 percent) of the 949 widows received workers' compensation payments in 1979. A larger aataber af widows had received payments before 1979. bur these payments had triad Of the B49 widow*. 12S filed werkerf compenastien claims; two of thaw wen danisd their claims. IS had cases pending in 1979, and KM had received an award orsettlement by the time of the interviews. Of thorn 101, 40 were awarded lump sums, and Of. installment payment*." If ail then beneficiaries an corisidemd, 43 percent of the widows `TTwte ate S* Mewt Is* wham that twfcuN reuM be was* "mi m ike eeiceew at tan claim wit twin) received worken' compensation death benefits at tome time between the death of their husband* and the yeer 1979. Only 39 of the original 109 recipients were still receiving payments in 1979. All but two of the 46 lump-sum payments were consumed by loans before 1979. and 23 of the (2 benefits paid in iiwtallmencs bad ended before 1979. The exhaustion of workerli compensation benefits before lames end has also been observed among worken disabled by accidental injuries. Studies show that. mmeraBy. the shorter the period of low, the higher the rate of replacement by worken' compensation.* In sum. the results show that the standard ofunivenal coverage is aot nearly met. Whether the failure is that ofworken' compensation scherew or ocher influences is not dean Most of the widows who filed claims received payments, but only onehalf of the widow* filed. An analysis of the reasons for this low rate of fifing is therefore critical to evaluating the adequacy of coverage, hut such an analjew is beyond the scope of this study Ibet Awards Wbrfccti* compensation laws typically bar worken from suing their employer for work-related injuries or iUnmnre. The exceptfaisw so these "eaeicufc* remedy* pmvtaont are the faOowiag: intentional tens, employer deceit, and dotations in which a third party (such as an asbestos producer), who is sued by the worken sues the workerli employer, wbrfccn can sue produccn of haxardoui substances without sacrificing their worken' compensation data*. Although many workers have adapted this strategy in recent yean, only one survivor in our study received income from both sources during 1979. Interestingiy, this widow was the beat compensated of those studied. "Wilkin C. Jekai--, Pul ft. faltiM and WUKaei a Cerieewe. TW A<*wt t WOrten' C-Mienies Ms.* eed XkketS CfcwaM. "A Fallow up SteSr at Fiinemi OhaMUar Cswi IMtr WweeWi Wwken' Cwipmiiiee.' kwk is Stiesw* Jape* afikt hnrr*tftnmr%ml KMe'i'Carepmeimo lhia Fifta, VW * (Wakwere*. D.C.: CFO.Jeer ISIS), pp. Ill is* SI. napeaMp Otjf 0933785 DU 036342 --uilL smm&M antt .Jiibdaha 5M INDUSTRIAL AND LABOR RELATIONS REVIEW Ion income replaced all the lone* of II of the other IS widow* who received ton income in 1979." The common law, therefore, utiafvea its standard of adequacy. The adequacy of compenaadon does vary, however; with the time at which benefit! and laaaea are compared. AD these II widowi, except for one whoae imputed income was loss than her net less is 1979, had capital left to invest at the end of that year. In the following year; eight of the 11 tan recipients received an imputed income sufficient to replace their 1*90 tomes. The other three widows would have exhausted their ton award capital during 1980. The pattern of the gradual exhaus tion of lump sum awarai is me that deserves mot* attention as an important pan of the adequacy of compensaaoa. The replacement ratio* for ton income in 1979 do not reflect the losaes of unsuccessful plaintiffs or of survivors whose lump sum was consumed before 1979. Of 44 widows who filed ton suits. SC received an sward or a settlement. Only IS of the SC (Table 1) received income in 1979 from their ton suit. Unfonunately, the data on ton tuits are incomplete. Six widows said their suit was successful but did not repon benefits, and twelve suits were undedded at the time of interview. It is dean however that few suns were filed. As fat the earn of failure to file workers' compensation damn, the reasons fee this behavior are am dear. The low raus of filing for (on and woriten' compensation do not suppen the suggtnion aometimas made that weeken tubednice ton claims far workers' compen sation. These rmults imply that other mfluencmare rmponrible far the low rate of filing; Prim* Psosfoos aad Serial Inwranc* _ Soda! insurance and private pensions are retirement schemes that also protect against io* resulting from death. The fact that these. pl*rs at* the only source of income for most (59 percent) of the widows nudied here is further evidence of the TV (U*t f irpliwnsna nn n* firswr itaa IQS pnenu a Sicutfd V ** `f** >S dw insaai at Mn i*taw tmrnmri m my jssr i* a*t prtm tk*a dw a*t lew failure ofboth workers' cempensatioa plans and the common law. Benefits from chose two sources typically replaced leu than SO percent of loans (Table 1). Widows who combined them benefits with payments from other sources, however, were the only ones whose compensation exceeded their loan. The amount of aodsl insurance benefits varies with the time at which they ire measured. Eligibility far sodal security Ktvivon' benefits is conditional on whether there at* any dependent children in the borne or on the age of the widow. Widows receive no benefits between the time their children come oflegal age and the time the widows teach mheneiu age. The dau on private pensions do not separate retirement cum survivors' benefits. None of the S49 widows received public asnsunc*.1' Instead, they presumably used income such * proceeds from life insur ance, their own wages, savings, and arsisonce from relatives to maintain con sumption above poverty leveis. Zoaity in the Diatribedon of Benefits Wt assume that benefits are equitably distributed if the proportion of benefits to lasma is the same far each survivor. The mean replacement ratio far those who received payments is 59.7 percent, but as shown in the figure, the distribution about the mean is sheared toward below-aversge levels at replacement. Approximately 55 pcreset of the recipients are able to replace last thsn 40 percent of their lost. The inequity is even more extreme if we include in the distribution the 11$ widows who were not compensated. Wr can better undencand the true impact at the* inequkim if we also consider the rise distribution of lows. The This f*nh parsIMs ttrUrr Sadlap chat few SbsbM mtktn man ta paMe manner Vranun baa* that aiy aae in ri* wrisoriy iajund VasTwisnss T oortm' lanpcmwWa la N*w Vwk City r*ei**4 paMk tsVuaf* r Worths fm prime cfctmy. Vkpv Mania. ItfHa tajarioa WMunms C*m- pnasiaa m* PuMc Saarsnrt ia Nra VI City.* i Uffinmmuf brnjmjV ikr Nttiaaai Csmmu-- " Suit KMswat Cmpnua/wa Laa*. Vol II (WVkaifim. D C.: CfO. p. M. DUP 0933786 DU 036343 ASBESTOS COMPENSATION 4 53$ Figure I. Distribudoa of Beplicement Bade* of Widow* Who Ihcdwd ItuiUi is 1979 tod Who** Husbands' Work Lift Included 1979. results in Table 9 show that a latfc The fact that compensation payments proportion of above-average ttdoa occur m may continue after our ssumates of femes eases in which losses arc me Mott low-loss equsl tens means that estimates based on a eases are those in which the deceased!* work single work-life year flkble 1) could be life was expected to end in 1979. Our fewer than the true ratios." Data on estimates of losses equal tern at the end of compensation payment* in 1979 m widow* the work life, and widow* who received compensation payments far the entite year, therefore, have hgh replacement ratios. whose husbands' week fives ended before 1179 provide additional infoemsdoo on the bias of angle-year estimates. The inequities in the distribution of benefits also reflect variation* in the eligibility rules under wocken' compensa tion plans, ton laws, and social assurance. In a pattern familiar so students of compensation proframa, replacement n> tios are higher for these with pmaaos Comparsedoa Psymenn Durian Bodzcmeat Bmi* Although our analysis dom not consider ferns ofretirement benefits, dam on the 311 widows whose husbands' work thus were from several sourefk than for those who rrijr on a single source. Some ofthe variation in worker*' compensation bsadkt occur* because of differences in benefits among different stgm^ /ftp* difference! also cause inequnrm u) payments so injured worker*." iw ... ^nwanrllaimeushilnSsiiiuem yay*Mr <* dw wMaw far Ufa ar ati nasamai*. Thaw - stints'** aat rdw t* dw yarn ia Wch dw awSar oaal* ha tsytew* w lesva dw *rh feet ha* ha Hart. The Haw Uwkkaadh.hr mania. k <**< w*aal ana.d>w**ltlw*fk*rko*sv<am iaeaseynari* "Saadi). kw is I9S9 dw kaadlt.rsd* am fe taa dwo "Johaf. atm*. Jr.. an* wn Visit*. *A ltr**n an Partial DUiSUtew l>a*tr MMirk Compenauaa* is Rnurtk Mtfmtt oflit Isoidi* mnul Warms' C--pnuswss urn. \W (. at SI-70 - |M par oMTar aHM duo sttt yse vaah fiiniian' knafiu mwdaaia ayaa nsimafa. at "kwh <k* kaay uea *uai no i*an *f kamtks a r<*- 9aa U.S Dryanmrm at Lakat State SMn' Camynua* was ten (Wshirm**. O C-CSO, Jtaoiry INtly. U. ..&&M.&.mt,i' i- j&.3ati:x\ I:[ 'JtAa Ufa l --* 534 . INDUSTRIAL AND LABOR RELATIONS REVIEW Tkblt 2. The Distribution of Benefit Adequacy, by Net Lae*. Among Widows Who Received Benefits in 1979. AUr UkftUa ss-lttw S.S00-I.MS Mot-s.m t.oM-u.m lt.M0-14.tM tl.SM-l7.SW It.SM saS Over Taut *AD pwrtigr vthM ate awSiaaa, N*mtor .JL 4 * 4 IS 70 S4 > 1*4 *f Lui1 tits 1U.S 7S.S M.t 11. SS.S S1.S expected to end before 1979 do provide information on the effect of pat-wock-lHe benefit* on the replacement of Ion*. Vk --itmr that workers' compensation bene fits in 1979 for 140 widows who received benefits equaled the annual amount paid nee the time of their husbands' death. Annual income from lump-sum payments was calculated from the ome of death to 1979 in the manner described in the methoda wetion. The ratios of the sum of benefits (ham the time of death to 1979) to the sum of lames (annual kmes equal scro after the expected end of the work lilt) art priMtued in Tkbte S. Tht time dfctribuooa of social inauraace and paaston benefita cannot be approximated, m replacement ratios are estimated only for tbe occupational-illneai programs. Since the pro cohorts sf uddotrs differ in aae and mirage lease, a comparison ofthe'1 ratios to Hitts I with those in Tkbte 1 only appiiwlmittf the df*a of pon-work-lift bsncfisoa the adequacy of compensation. The rcpfacahntnc ratios Car woeken1 comperhation in Tkbte S (column S) differ froth1 * those in Thtte 1. brine higher in tome categories ~ahd lower to others.- In no cafegtiKKpwcvcn do the ratios exceed 41 percent rod* team*. Afi the replacement ratios ftr Met awards (column 4 in Tkbte S) art lower than thoae for the cohort having a work fife that waa expected to include 1979. The fteuki for paat-work-Uft benefiu thus do not substantially alter the conchutona that were drawn from the more accurate data on the tingle year 1979. Summary The results of this study describe a compensation system that pays only 34 percent of the lanes af the 124 widows who received compensation in 1979. Payments am not distributed equitably although one ofthe causa of this inequity is the failure of widows re claim benefits. Those who succeed in commonlaw suits receive die mom compensation, whereat workers' compensation plana fail bath the two-thirds undud and the promise of universa] coverage. Thasc failures are not Umitcd to compen sating deaths from occupational Qlnew. Chritk condudaes about the survivors of death by workplace injury art timilar to the findings hem. Chrit concluded, for exam ple. that to 37 of II states in 1954. workers' eumpensation replaced 40 percent or less of the awimated lesots caused by occupational death." Our estimates are from 34 to 45 patent for mo* workers' compensation recipients. Chrit alio described the prob lem mentioned earlier of widows who receive no social aecurity benefits between the time their dependents leave home and the time they thernachwa retina.* Owm. hjwpmd Rmtrrp. p. US. "IM.. p. OS. MI 0318' l DU 036345 IHMlHir!.. Ul ll-Aili-i-- -U-.....All EMi-nAA*T! 1` -SRflHHf!! TPSSSfr -!! naxmm ' ASBESTOS COMPENSATION 557 7kSU i. The Replacement cf Net Loan, by Source of Benefits for Widows Who Received Benefits in 1979 and - Whose Huibandt* Work-Life Expectancy Ended Before 1979* S*MW Muala tfWidtm wrttti rieyirwirlM Only Wtiktn* Caapmmwa. Will [uuruKT. ud holoi Tat Oaiy Tan. Social t--react. u4 Pmw PwiMi Wtrtitn Cwnytaiiit. Tai, $Mj(l !--. and Mm rwill Sana) bmjKv wA Praam Oaiy ABtmna M M 11 * 4 tie >44 *fttpiacnwmi ntMiw 4.4. 0.0. U|> mi dd m lault kmn (DI cmM mi k* cakatewd tm mcuI tt.t. 41.*. Thai Nm mgt Lm III.074 HIM 44.Ml M.S4T 44.MI 44.Ter 41.01 imufiuti hitwiia /Urn 44.1 %n itntfiu u Armui fUm 0.0 Ml M l.l 0.4 M I7J iu .ft 0.0* 41.1 aft 4.4* That nmilarida in findinp art airpris- in* became Chehb dau art nearly SO yeart old. Oat would expect to find many chango fat the Krucnue of benefita and in benefit adequacy between the 1990a and 1*7*. but the only important dUtetneo are ia the adequacy at tan tworth. Our rnraln ihow that ton awarda replaced 7C.i to IQO percent ofnet loam in 1979 aad Cram 17 to *5.4 percent over a knar period, whertai Chefe found that in IMS ion awarda (enlaced only f to 1BJ percent of loan." The higher replarwirem rake found to ow nadir aw bit tot wgilt of the ir np||KMto ef prodect-UabilkpJlfc-Jt niwuiinml illnea. It ill allonge raa-^ 1977, oact which that \ don benefitshaveincteaod and mweiageef occupational Ones lue expanded. In "general, however, once benefits are awarded, they are Kill aet todened far inflation, and any atpaitrioa to cooeraa 11977 haa been nnalL A review of tat "tne.. p. in. 1979 worlenT eenpeneadon law*, for ex ample, found that the lama `deliberately fink the Bunher of cam. opedally ef the duoak, long am (end probably eo]y) variety, which aee adahted iaco the Another reaeon far caution b that toe nuvivots ttudied here aaay have had enee tuccot in obtaining conpeanrion than ocher nuvtan during the yuan 1967-77. Tbenmdvoes' huabandebdongednewefl- etganked *1 labor un&n and had exptn toforauden on the rriadonaWp between torir fflaqna and atoenae at tot workplace. Oa the ecber hand, the court dednons t^opaniM jwoducm'faMfo workers hadjdedJ^JUCTaae then to* Uayd W. Law*. StaaMi tf Cam tfaflndagWhlalisdlahrOiisiaiBil i wyat wife Aakuntlww . m. aad htaaah. Ill Pmaniw f tabm m. Aiwt/run-ie/4ias/A (wnwanm. O.C: tOSOL. May W* p. W. ------- ----- - - - tWmtmanye* PwduLiaMhyUuNa tUJmmtim Ciwwaiv sad lahry Orw.tr IMS), pp. M-4S DO? 0933789 DU 036346 5S INDUSTRIAL AND LABOR RELATIONS REVIEW which ear mute represent compensation ouaey end equity of compensation under for more preens deaths it unknown. the proposed legislation, we applied the benefit formula of H.R. 3175 to data for Evaluation of Proposod Pragmas each of the S60 widows in the nudy cohort. Three billa were introduced is she 17th Congress 10 provide compensation for asbestos-taodated disease and death.** With the adjournment of the 17th Confrets. those bills eapired. A toxicsubstances compensation bill. H.R. 5175. was then introduced in the Mth Congress by Confretsman George Miller of California." Evaluation of H.R. S17S it important because k could become the model far compensating victims of all occupational ilbieaes. It pternisa so-fault coverage of losses resulting from exposure to asbesua or ocher toxic subetancea that could be desig nated for coverage at a later date. TV b&l prohibits workers from suing employers or producers who purchase Insurance in amounts to V sec by the UJ. Secretary of Labor. Employes and produces can choose whether or not to purchase their own insurance, subject to the ptovksons of the bill, damn are to V administered by tV Office of Wbrkcn' Compensation aftV U.S. Depanmcnt of Laban Death benefits are to V paid in a lump sum equal so*the product of M percent of die avenge manufacturing weekly wage for the month fa which the death occurred, or BO percent of the national construction average weekly wage for the month in which the death occurred ... multiplied by HO."" In order so evaluate the potential ade- Uting the methods described earlier, we converted the lump sum to an annual income stream, and we uwaed that all the widows would receive benefits. Thble 4 presents the ratios of benefits to Iosks from the time ofdeath to the expectedend ofthe wofk Kit. The tumhs shew that H.R. 3175 would mVtantially increase the adequacy of compensation beyond that provided by workers' comperesnon and the common law. They also demonstrate that the paymans ef a lump sum not related to individual tomes aberinunaus against sur vivors with relatively large losses. If H.R. 5175 benefits had scan paid to the 560 survivors studied here, 60.5 percent (the median) of their loams would have been nunbunad. This la a higher percentage of widows'lomei than are our estimates for the anal number of widows who received payments in 1S79. TV meat important improvement over the current compensa tion spurn, however; is the payment of benefitsto widowswho would not V paid at all under the current system. TV Improvement that we estimate from tV Miller bill depends on the awumpeion ef universal coverage. Experience with workers' compensation, on which the bill is minified warm that our asmmpcion may V too optimistic. TV failure of workers' compensation to pmvide universal coverage colon so the need for natatory provisions nr objective monitoring of the perfor- natal StatatL. MM. tat- 4*tmm Hmti ..jname<ftpmpensstion plan*and for more HwS Cwllftaw 4m. mtk Ctaf.. Iinta. (VtaiqHS. O.C; 600. Cutar U. IMfc 6aqr L Hw. X MO: lit-- Miittltan Ctmfmm- research on the low rates offiling by eligible diteftMo uta 4m tfim VM Ceng., In on. OS^kiMwa, la addition, tV MlOer biDb reliance on DC.; CTO. fasetat Mlfc tta taqtliii H it lilt. OsnptamfMnS* Jtasn* (Mifa ' Ota 4* Him. Wih Cteq.. hi ass. pataU-e. O.C.: CM, Malta 4. MCtk *US. CsQta Hwi. iiaoMOWlti lump-sum payments deserves further jpnttinp TVartitmew of dairas by one time turnp-sum payments has been re putedly attacked as inequitable." TV use Ctmptnmum 'tfMtaWwtk MstaSwSMpi >IUaJi OtnttmmalEitmmr* tarr Tutmrrkr -IW m Anahita Iks Me SSqsie. sad fftatk fsi isrr-irli- ~r*-- --------- >-- CnsmMn tf CnsO OtnpKimaJ Aimv Mr- sa the nmsfansrisg warn- Ota. mdMr Otktt Pwpmm. M.tt Hit. afckCssg.. XaaalS CaaWy sta )sta NsMs. riNMm' Cam- lo ms. (Vtakiyos. D C: CTO. ISCSI, tamtam iimni,-J----- .................................................... dmk. | KM). Jttsm* tflit tarTttpmtmnml MnkflS' Crwyr** *IM. The sosomtiim wsgr 0 dw both hr hsasths on Sta tan. W-1. y- 71. 0 M33T90 DU 036347 4 ASBESTOS COMPENSATION $39 tkbl* 4. Eairatfed H.R. S17S Bcncfiu Sued on Net T now from the Time ef CWh to the Expected Ead at the Spouie's Work Life, for All Widows Surviving La 1979. NttUa s s.sm-m.sw 11.000. tt.SM a.ooo-M.wt st.ooe-M.tM 4I.OO-M.WS SS.OO.M.SO SS.0W-74.SW 7S.OO-M.SO n.so.M.*se M.OW-IM.Wt IO.SO-U4.SW US.044-144.7W 14S.OO-174.SW ITS.OW-SM.fW SM.SW-IM.7W ut.sw-tM.we SSS.SW - SM.tW Stt.SW-4M.SW 4CS.IW tad Owe Teul Absautemr V w If IS 4f a w a si a a IS a a 14 14 IS 1 . so Jli)IUMiJtaM Mae Medea 4.*41 Mil I.Mt 1.144 S.SW S.U1 S.ltt S.S1S S.IS7 471 S.4S4 S.41S e.sn S.S4S S.U4 S.SS7 S.IW e.ia .tee ' t.io 4.0W Lies ISOS i.tse 1.00 SOS S.TO t.toa SOS tot s.sos 0.40 s.sos to SJO SOS SJO s.sos e.iee JO of this form of payment a a`reform* of the compcnudoa system would merely per petuate (and perhaps exacerbate) a nuidamcmal problem with the existing workea' compensation and ton awards. Suntan with relatively wnaU loan are awnanpea- sated, but thoee with abone-average lotto teceiee lao chan 50 percent attheir loo (ace Tkbk 4). Mott of the diffaenor la looo is caused bp dUfaenco is expected week Beet. Because at the long tanner period of asbestos disease, deads cypicsay occurs in middle m (IS in this cohort), and the period ot loo so eeritsx is short (sen years). IfthepriodpioefthoMBlerbillara applied so eoeasn skat ant death at ypaagtr w doadeoarar ef corapenutoo would ba snhsriarfofly lower tkao the ranks in TbUe4. The introduction afoo ftah wattsto tt a time when conuuon tew damages are becoming e oigntfieaat am so anpfoyas partlltU the booty ef the auriy yean of workers' conpttwarion legislation.* Sente heScve tho the fwrwiwu low ^owt L. Oeyk. 'ladamM ActMm lisbaky Mtcvrfihe Cuh IbenlMh CimeesT/nmicraTUpi AeAM. tw. r. ro. i gw teiai. ro-*7*. ta. conpcnsato victims ineeuitibly and that the social costs ef Bdgaoon outweigh the soda] benefits obtained from comiBOB-iaw kceottvo.* The MBIo bill dfcnbuso the workers* cornperuation and tort rumadio hot mentheWo follows the workea' comperwaaon model. Serna studio of the adequacyofworkea' cotnpentatioo suggot tint wonan' campamtma laws do not match the adequacy of eouompceary common-law remedies:" they also minim the wtadcea at dBudng the facandvo for ride atmhnhtrioo that are provided by tbe Wttn OnMKQOB IVIIMIMi uwfIBll MMeanl soon he motvwd. The uncertainty surmuodiagtbepnCsmaace ofthat akematires and tho history of workers' 4*eCsal. TfoMsy JMaayOMww: uSrdxWiitaiih) tafow ISM ad Win a Swta UsUfep TUt WWSeW WUNat ^jeawfocRa. SSfoSphecUfatmtHmOk: TUMthtf MM' " esmswe (Utahtafw*. O.C: Aswnins latkae far M*t Nicy ten). DOP 0933791 \ DU 036348 540 INDUSTRIAL AND LABOR RELATIONS REVIEW of 'oriwn' right to rue could be i terioui mistake. Much of the current pressure for reform cornea from the recent flood of ubettat related lirigstieo. But unlcai propoeed compensation schemes include strong axcathei for evaluating and im proving their performance, the right to eue could be the only reaaon tor change. Coschuioa The implicatio&i of thii *udy are more general than our cencluoons regarding asbestos workeic. The rawlu demonstrate that thoae who benefit from the production and me of commodities euch u the producer* and uecre of asbestos, have not Kd the foil coit of the commodities. They , in affect, been subedited by the worfcen who have died and by their urvivon. Whether one wiihce to measure social goal* in terms of economic efficiency, morality, or me common-sense definition of what ie Jim. compensation that fails to payeven the net lorn to the survivors of dead wortas is gmariy inadequate. DUV 0933792 DU 036349 *& 5a,1 & -1 'IwilSi j'l ai maiil, ir> j <mMi- JMfiH dm 2/27/85 Tot ER N-11400 'T"! l v---- Cv Promt H. I. UMMUTZ (iUM Polymif PradMM Otportmotit M-418 For Information In event you may not have seen this. ^oLSI. Attachnent RECEIVED FEB 2 8198$ toMw.c*ewv,MA DOf 0933793 DU 036350