Document rpL9oqawJ2m5N01JZ6Q5b7dGe

PLAINTIFF'S EXHIBIT EPA proposes ban on asbestos-containing products n January, the United States Envi ronmental Protection Agency (EPA) announced a proposal to immediately ban five major asbes tos products, including saturated and unsaturated roofing felts. The proposal also called for a phaseout of all remaining uses of asbestos in the United States over the next 10 years. In announcing the proposed ban, EPA Administrator Lee M. Thomas said, "This proposal starts us down the path that will eventually rid asbestos from our environment. "The proposal would immediately pro hibit the importation, manufacture and processing of five asbestos products for which substitutes are now readily availa ble," Thomas continued. "These asbestos products accounted for about half of cur rent asbestos consumption in 1981." The 10-year phaseout is almost a carbon copy of a proposal EPA made nearly 18 months ago. The Office of Management and Budget (OMB) turned thumbs down on that proposal, however, saying it was not warranted and too expensive. Thomas said his agency's latest proposal not only has OMB's blessing, but that OMB has also suggested the labeling requirement for products containing asbestos that are not subject to immediate ban. ti Door number 1,2 or 3 i 5 In addition to the main proposal, EPA also offered several options For consideration. "We are asking for comment on a num i ber of alternative ways of achieving the same goal: the ultimate elimination of i widespread asbestos use in this country," Thomas said. One option would immedi ately ban asbestos construction products such as asbcstos-ccmcnt sheets and shin gles as well as felts, floor tile, A1C pipe and asbestos clothing. A second option would ban all asbestos ) construction products in five years, and Jim Matthews is afree-lance writer liv ing in Chicago. He is afrequent contribu tor to Roofing Spec. Asbestos . ;, roofing : felts would be banned - as well ; byjim Matthews zi ` ".i." f*.- V >! _ .'I i/.* ijpt: ^-v;' jT j 1 4 i i-t i I ban the remaining asbestos products in 10 years. Option three would ban asbestos con struction products and asbestos clothing immediately and phase out the remaining products over a 10-year period. "Finally," Thomas said, "we are propos ing that all products not immediately banned be labeled as containing asbestos." He said labeling would ensure that persons working with asbestos products would know that the products contained asbes tos, enabling them to take steps to reduce the likelihood ofexposure. Asbestos ban would make itself felt If the EPA's proposal to ban asbestos roofing felts were to become reality, what would the probable effect on the roofing industry be? Kenneth Nyquist, a spokes man for the Asbestos Information Associa tion (ALA), characterized the impact as primarily a concern of industry suppliers. "This is really a manufacturers' war," he said. Only one company. Cascades, Inc., still produces asbestos felts. Other felt produc ers have substituted fiberglass forasbestos. Cascades, a Canadian company that pur chased the Manville Corp.'s asbestos roof ing business several years ago, is represented in the United States by Power Marketing. President Jim Power is con vinced his product does not pose a health hazard and will vigorously oppose EPA's efforts to implement the ban. Some producers ready to protest EPA's proposal also applies to asbestoscement roofing products. Three com panies--Supradur, Atlas Thmer and Atlas International Building Products--make and distribute asbestos-cement shingles and sid ing. EPA's primary proposal wouldn't ban theseproducts immediately, as allthree com panies have been quick to point out to their customers. However, EPA's optionswould, if approved, immediately ban these products as well as asbestos felts. President Alfred Netter of Supradur believes the ban doesn't apply to his prod uct because during the manufacture of the MARCH 1986 35 BIRD 013042 At this time, the ban is no more than aproposal and will not take effect immediately. ' product the asbestos fibers are "perma nently bound into the cement base." Don Stevenson of Turner Brothers, a Canadian asbestos-cementshingle distribu-* tor, said, "Our response to EPA is that the ban doesn't apply to us. Even if our prod uct is pulverized, the asbestos fibers can't be released into the atmosphere.'' Jack Coombs-Payac of AIBR another Canadian company with a significant U.S. market, said, "We plan to attend the hear ings and will lobby through AIA. Our belief; which we're prepared to support with documented evidence, is that our Iockedin-cement asbestos roofing tiles are not a health hazard." What now? At this time, the ban is no more than a proposal and will not take effect immedi ately, despite the wording EPA used in its announcement. In fact, Thomas said EPA wants "public comment" on the proposal, which he believes will be "widely and actively debated." That raises several questions. First, when will theban take effect? Second, what form will the ban take, i.e., will it be Option 1,2 or 3, or something else? Finally, is a ban likely? Although the battle lines surrounding this controversial issue have been firmly and unmistakably drawn, both sides agree on one thing: it will- be many months before the proposed ban or any of the opdons becomes binding- "The [EPA] administrator has forecast that it could be a year from now," Luke Hester, EPA's press officer; told Roofing Spec. AIA's Nyquist thought two years might be necessary to resolve the issues. While the exact lead time is debatable, it is known that federal procedures dictate a 90-day period for interested parties to comment on the proposal That comment period beganJan. 29,1986, and will extend to April 29. Beginning May 14, according to Nyquist, EPA will hold public hearings on its pro posal, probably at several locations around the country. An announcement as to the exact time and place(s) of the public hear ings will be made later, most likely in the Federal Register. In the meantime, EPA has established an Asbestos Hot Line for those who want to stay abreast of developments. The toll-free number is 800/424-9065; District of Columbia residents can call 544-1404, and residents outside the United States can call 202/544-1404. What will they go for? Right now, no one knows what form the ban will take. At first glance, it appears that EPA seeks no less than an immediate ban on the five specifically mentioned product categories, with all other asbestos products to be gradually phased out over 10 years. But that's not necessarily the case. "The ban is the ultimate, but there are several lesser things EPA might go for," said Nyquist. "One of those is just labeling all products without banning anything. It's a graduated proposal. In addition to the allout immediate ban, they've announced a possible ban after so many years for groups of products and labeling And of course, there are combinations ofthese.' ' Netter's thoughts on the probable end result paralell Nyquist's. "It's not a take-itor-leave-it proposition," he said. "Any thing can still happen, and certain things will happen. Any regulations proposed by any federal agency must be ruled on by OMB for their cost effectiveness and eco nomic impact. To some extent, certain aspects of this proposal are intended to be horse-traded during the process.'' No one can say with certainty that EPA will be able to implement a ban. Nyquist did say, "The industry's position is that EPA can't support its case to come out with an outright ban." At this writing, EPA has yet to announce what penalties will be imposed on persons or businesses that disregard the ban. Nor has EPA said how it will enforce the ban, or what plans it has for disposing of existing stocks of banned products when the ban takes effect. What should contractors be doing now? According to EPA's Hester, until the EPA announces an actualban and how it willbe implemented, "Ifs business as usual." How to express your views Public comment, whether pro or con, will have some influence on the EPA's final decision. If you want to express your views to the EPA on the proposed ban and how it might affect you, write to Edward Klein, director. Office of TSCA Assistance (TS-799), Room E543, 401 M St., S.W., Washington, D.C. 20460. You can contact the Asbestos Information Association, the asbestos industry lobby organization, by calling703/979-1150. 36 ROOFING SPEC BIRD 013043 zefr'.'A hile everyone agrees that victims of ships that helped the country win WWII. W asbestos-related ailments deserve Johns Manville Corp., as the world's largest compensation, there is still some producer of asbestos, is also being blamed j&Afl argument about who should foofotr workers' exposure to the carcinogen. the bill Manville has already been hit with law "It is difficult to assess blame in asbestos suits totalingseveral million dollars filed by cases since it can take up to 30 years for the asbestos victims. The company tesponded symptoms ofasbestos exposure to surface," to the crisis by filing for Chapter 11 bank says Carl Good, NRCA's director of mem ruptcy in 1982, halting all litigation aimed bership. "Complicating the problem is the at it until the proceedings are completed. fact that many insurance policies have Manville has proposed a multi-million dol lapsed, leaving victims and their families lar trust to aid in asbestos victim compensa without coverage " tion, but technicalities still need to be The manufacturers, insurance compa ironed out before distribution of the fund nies and federal agencies involved are all can begin. responsible to someextent for theproblem. In light of these complications, some The government exposed thousands of groups are calling for the creation of a workers to asbestos as they built the war national commission devoted solely to han dling asbestos injury claims. Bepresentative Pat Williams, D-Mont., believes that the fed eral government should assume some responsibility for compensating victims of occupation-related diseases. His plan calls for federalizing workers' compensation to allowforclaimsagainstthegovernment. The congressman hopes his idea will provide a common sense, non-adversarial way to.deal with the staggering backlog of asbestos claims. Recent asbestos litigation includes die unanimously passed Senate bill S. 0083, the Asbestos School Abatement Act. The bill requires schools to abate asbestos hazards. House and Senate versions of the bill would allocate an additional 525 million annually through 1990 for this work. The biggest difference between House and Senate amendment proposals is a provision in the House legislation that exempts contractors and school officials from liability for personal injury or property damage resulting from abatement activities unless the damages are caused by negligent conduct. Another provision states, "An asbestos contractor ora local educational agency who is a defendant in such an action may not be held jointly liable with any other defendent in such action, but may be held severely liable in such action." Insurance hard to find Manviile's problems havenot gone unno ticed by the insurance industry. As a result, contractors are finding it increasingly diffi cult to locate companies willing to under write asbestos removal. Some insurers are coming to the contractors' aid, however. One Connecticut-based contractor, the Acmat Corp., and United Coastal Insurance have undertaken a joint venture to insure high-risk clients. Tb protect themselves, contactors not regularly involved in asbestos retrieval are taking a hard look at the job before pro ceeding. Ifthey find some asbestos removal will be required, they are renegotiating their contracts to allow for the extra work or expense involved. i6 ROOFING SPEC