Document ppjyZ725RjYkQnRMx4qEq788a

FILE NAME: Abex (ABX) DATE: 1975 DOC#: ABX099 DOCUMENT DESCRIPTION: Letter from Medical Director to the VP of NY Office with Excerpt from the Occupational Safety & Health Reporter with Quote from Dr. Selikoff P L A IN T IF F S EXHIBIT & B-54 August 22, 1975 Mr. D. K. Rennie Vice President New York Office , Dear Don: In th e most recen t Occupational Safety & Health Reporter. there is a b rie f consent quoting Dr. 8eliko& regarding"" mesotheliomas. Apparently several cases have been noted In automobile re p a ir workers. I d o n 't know whether you would lik e to bring th is to the a tten tio n of the Midas management. ' A dditionally, in thinking of product l i a b i l i t y , do we need, to look upon the F ric tio n Products brakes as requiring any lab el regarding p o te n tia l haeard? You w ill re c a ll in the dynamometer te stin g o f the brakes in Mahwah some years ago, th a t the highest levels of ashes toB were found in the cheapest brakes, the best quality delivering the lea st asbestos pollution \ CCB:np Enc, C. C, Blackwell, J r , , M.D, Medical Director ALL0674-003.80 ABEX-167 SPNY 000068 ' SCF-ALLF-05620 * - k f - ^ .S a n t ^ ^ ^ H e f m U r & .- M a l i o r y - a n d P. Milner O.S.H.A. EXCERPTS - June 18', 1975 *2 ' OCCUPATIONAL SAFETY & HEALTH REPORTER Lltipation -- p * . ** . * ' THIRD CIRCUIT HEARS CHALLENGE ' T * CONSTITUTIONALITY OF PENALTY SCHEME , Ml argument on (he question or the constitutionality ot the occupational Safety and Health Act's provision (or ad- ' m im frative enforcement of civil penalties was heard en banc ra the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit on May 8 lb Philadelphia, Pa. ~ - ' * The c w l 's nine active Judges and one senior judge who participa(W In the court's initiai decision in F ra n k Irep, Jr., Inc. ikoSAH RC and B rennan (OSHC 1283} heard the case asV ie result of their granting lrey's petition for reconsideraIim (Current Report, January 8, p. 9ZS). McNeill Stows of the Atlanta, Ca'., law Arm of Stokes, Boyd &Shaplrovrged the court to adopt the minority opinion expressed by Circuit Judge John J. Gibbons In th origina] decision. Gibbons dissented on the ground that tbe ad ministrative civil penalty scheme violates the right to a jury trial guaranteed b \ the Sevehth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. The faqt (hat tbe Act permits the determina tion of a civil p en a)t\ without jury trial, which can be re duced to an in perso n am judgment, renders the law un constitutional, Stohes intended on .behalf, of Irey. 'Any statute that includes administrative enforcement ot civil penalties wfthout trial de nay is unconstitutional, according to Stokes. In fact, the attorney for Irey stressed..that the* petitioner's case rises or falfe on this issue. ............... The Government's defense okthe statute was presented by. Michael H. Stein, attorney. UlS. Department of Justice, Washington, D.C. Stein argued Ut the Act's penalty scheme makes a good dea) of practical sense since Hprovides nnifor; mity and efficiency in en fo rcem en t! the la ip. .Stokes sees the employer who must defend himself against penalties and citations as the "forgotten man" in' UiiSMrguinenC Stein also contended that a jury would be a t a disadvantage because of Us lade of expertise in.the area of occupational safety and. health. : ! . ' .................. Two other Courts of Appeals have heardVgum'ent on the identical issue of th e ' constitutionality ofVie'-Act's civil penally provision. 'A tlas Roofing Comparto,'Inc. (No.. 73*2249) is pending before the .S. Court of ApbesR for tbe , Fifth Circuit and Dorey .Electric Company (No. 74-2181) is awaiting a determination by the Fourth < 3 rcu \ (Current' Report, January 2, p. 912.) . . . . . \ . ... If the Government prevails in its defense of the AM's con1 slilutionality. tbe UJS. Supreme Court has discretion to review the case should the. employer decide to appeal. On the other hand, it the disputed section of (he Occupational Safety and Health Act is declared unconstitutional, the High Court is obligated to bear the case on Us m erits. -' Tbe Third Circuit will take the arguments in Iry under ad-' visement Chief Judge Selli, Snior Judge Staley, and G lq ilt ' Judges Vai Dusen,-. Aldtsert,. Adams, '.Gibbons, Rose,. Hunter, Weis, and Garth heard .the case.:,'.* . V The p la in tiffs include 183 fo rm er employees ot Raybcslos-Manhaltan, Inc., who, according to the Paterson, NJ . , l a w firm of Cclman and Celman, are seeking 31 million each for compensatory damages and. 31 million each in punitive damages. Most of these workers have filed workers' compensation claims against Raybestos. . . The suit charges that J-M as well as the Asbestos Corpora tion of America, Garwood, N J ., and three Canadian con cerns, Bejl's Asbestos Ltd., Asbestos Corporation, and Cassiar Asbestos Ltd., ignored scientific data and medical evidence that should have prompted them to take more stringent safety measures. The Raybestos. plant, which made brake shoes, was closed in 1973. Sunshine Mining Suit A suit seeking 35-8 miliion for property damage, and 35 million for punitive damages was fiied in Boise, Idaho, by the Sunshine Mining Company oi Kellogg, Idaho, relating to the'M ay 2, 1972, underground tire that killed 91 m iners. Tbe suit names Mine Safely Appliances Company, tbe Callery Chemical Company, and PPG Industries, Inc., as conspiring to fail to inform the mines of dangers in the use of polyurethane foam .c -. -: * Nerve Disorder Suit * ' *. A former'employee of Columbus Coated Fabrics plant fil ed suit in Ohio's Franklin County Common Pleas Court for 31.5 million in damages against Borden, Inc., Eastm an Kodak, and nine chemical company suppliers in connection with tota) disability from peripheral neuropathy. * . \ Tbe suit claims the defendants should have known that the chemicals to which the workers were exposed in the plant, including th e plaintiff in this suit, were dangerous and haiar- dous to (he health of the workers.- ' ' ' t Some 56 former employees filed suit la s t September 4, Bnd five others filed suit January 24. ' ' Crane Accident Suit .* , ' . . ! . ; . Suit was filed in an Arkansas federal court asking 3750,000 in ` damages following a crane accident in which 'one . employee was electrocuted and the plaintiff w as injured severely. . :* Grove Manufacturing Company, Philadelphia, P a ., was charged with negligence in the design of the crane, which had no protective'device. Tbe suit said Grove had a legal obligation to post conspicuously a warning to persons who would be using the crane that there was a hazard of elec trocution in operating tbe crane without safely devices. . ' Balley's Crossroads * ' '. - ' A U.S. grand jury in Alexandria, Va.# asked U.S. Attorney General Edward H. Levi to appoint*a'special prosecutor to investigate an alieged coverup conspiracy by government of ficials in the collapse of a high rise.construction a t Bailey's ' Crossroads, .Va.,' that killed 14 workers in March 1973. ." L i t i g a t i o n I - .'.- ,':* .. 1 763 FORMER RAYBES7OS-MANHATTAN* WORKERS SEEK DAMAGES fN SU IT; OTHER SUITS FILED -. A class action suit charging Johns-Manviile Corporation. Denver, Colo., and- four other asbestos .firms with negligence in exposing employees to dangerous health hazards w as filed in the U.S. District Court for the District of New Jersey.- - - ... - .- General Policy **' ' ' . ' ' STEIGER OBJECTS TO NIOSH CONTRACT ' '. 7 TO DEVELOP ACCREDITATION PROGRAM ' ! .Objections to a contract.for-m ore-.than a half million dollars awarded by the National Institute for.Occupational Safety and Health were voiced by Congressman William A. Steiger (R-Wis) in a series of letters and meetings with NIOSH officiais.. : - , ; *.. . . *..* .'The 3543,7.90 amount was awarded th e Joint .Commission on Accreditation of Hospitals, Chicago, Hi., to develop a . - -- > ( . 1. * * ' # H r r t W ) ) R r b 4 > / I f SpNV 000069