Document wEY5Y7xDKY7Om5vnmB2Rk6md

PLAINTIFF'S EXHIBIT 'A/C Pipe Producers Association Hoard of Directors International Affairs Committee TO' FROM. lr ernal Corrl November IS, 1033 DATE: SUBJECT U.S. Occupational Safety end Health Standard for Asbestos Temporary REF:' (1) (2) JF\\ correspondence, U.S. Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSUA)-Hxposure Standard for Asbestos, September If., 1983 JF',7 correspondence, U.S, Occupational Safety and Health A dm ini z h-= Lion (OSIIA) - Preliminary Risk Assessment for Asbestos, March 21, 1983 ACTION REQUIRED: Sevis-v/ for information Current Status On November 4, 1S83, OSHA issued an emergency temporary standard (ETS) for asbestos, immediately lowering the permissible exposure limit from 2 fibers per cubic centimeter of air to 0.5 fibers per cubic centimeter (f/cc.) as an 8-hour time-weighted average. The rationale for OSJIA's action is that "workers exposed to asbestos under exposure conditions existing under the current standard face a grave danger of developing; incurable cancer and asbestosis." The determination that a grave danger exists is based on risk assessments previously distributed (Reference 2) or recalculated by OSHA contractors. The ETS became effective November 4, 1983 .and applies to manufacturing, construction and maritime industries. Compliance may be effected by "all practicable control methods, such as engineering controls, work practices and personal protective equipment." This is the first time that OSHA has permitted use of all control methods to comply with a standard. Although the ETS also requires the institution of training programs and the posting of signs at workplaces, both these requirements arc triggered by exposures in excess of the permissible exposure limit (PEL). The ETS will remain in effect for six months; OSJTA must promulgate a permanent standard by May 3, 1984. Thus, OSHA will issue a separate notice of proposed rulemaking which will further address the issues of reducing the PEL, revising provisions on respirator selection, improving sampling and analysis and strengthening worker training requirements. The proposed rulemaking also "intends to address unique problems among exposed workers in construe Lion, including: requirements for and frequency of medical examinations; special needs for the construe Lion industry; the use of certified work practices; and other issues." OS LI .Us current timetable is to publish the proposed rule December 6-9, 1 983 and hold public hearings on or about February 9-14, 1 984, According to Kirkland t: Ellis, AIA/NA u-.-ooial counsel, the proposal vvi1.1 examine a number of PEL'S ranging from 0.5 to 0.1 f/cc. A PEL of 0.2 f/cc. is favored by OSHA staff and supported by the agency's updated economic impact assessment. -1 - CAP CO JEN 0011595 OSTIA'S Medics! Evidence - Ingestion of Asbestos While most of the moclie.nl ev'ienee presented in t!:o ETB relates to occupational exposures via inhalation, the carciao-.mieity of asbestos at sites other than the Um7 or rne.sothelium is discussed. OSHA dismisses the value of ecological epidemiologic studios on ingestion, e.g. Kanarek, Meigs, Polissar, and bases its conclusions on "well-conducted epidemiologic studies of asbestos workers ... because inhalation rather than ingestion is the primary route of workpiece exposure." The agency concludes: In summary, at least 12 different.occupational cohorts ' exposed to asbestos have been observed to have excesses of mortality from gastrointestinal cancer, 7 of which were statistically significant. OSHA considers that the. . findings constitute substantial evidence for an associntiou .istwnen asbestos exposure and gastrointestinal ounce- Toxicology studies were also reviewed: OSHA considers that there is some evidence that oral ingestion of asbestos is carcinogenic to laboratory animals; however, this evidence is raiher inconsistent. The gcneralizability of the non-positive NTP (National Toxicology Program - National Institute of Environmental Heath Sciences) studies is somewhat limited by the low doses and short fibers that were administered to the animals. And the overall evidence is summarized: . OSHA regards the numerous epidemiologic studies indicating increased risk from gastrointestinal cancer as outweighing non-positive and equivocal findings in animals ingesting asbestos. Although-OSIIA's assessment of the medical evidence on ingested asbestos is admittedly biased by its focus on occupational exposures, as opposed to environmental exposures, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (Office of Drinking Water) undoubtedly will use the assessment when determining the need to regulate asbestos in drinking water. EPA's concerns about gastrointestinal (GI) cancer incidence in workers was highlighted in its Advance Notice of Proposed Rulemaking for National Revised Drinking Water Regulations: The epidemiology data on the occurrence of gastrointestinal tract cancer among occupationally exposed persons appears to be the- most relevant issue relating' to risks from (asbestos) ingestion from water. Tiius, the net effect of OSHA's conclusions on ingestion will be to increase AACPP's burden in the ERA rulemaking to shew that no adverse effects from ingested asbestos have been found in epidemiologic studies. Relative Carcinogenicity of Difi-'.rcnt Fibers Beyond stating that .some scientists "generally believe that croeidolite and amositc are more carcinogenic than chrysotile and anthophyllite,,,xOSIIA gives little -2- CAPCO JEN 0011596 indication that it favors separate regulatory treatment for amphiboles. The ETS characterizes the evidence for risk differentials by fiber type as inconclusive for nsbestosis, lung cancer and methothelioma. The entire JITS is approximately 53 pages in length. Since a substantial portion deals with occupational health data on asbestos related diseases, only those sections immediately gennain to the ETS action have been routed. Full copies of the ETS are available from AACPP upon request. Action Plan Immediately after the ETS was filed, Kirkland & Ellis filed a petition for judicial review of the ETS in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit (New Orleans). Filing in che Fifth Circuit assures the asbestos industry of a fair and impartial hearing of its case, as opposed to the more liberal or public-interest group oriented venue of the District of Columbia Circuit. It also assures industry that any appeals of the proposed rulemaking will also be heard in this court. To date, no petitions have been filed by adversary interests, e.g. labor unions. Since promulgation of the ETS, AACPP has actively supported the legal counter initiative by soliciting, through member companies, A/C pipe distributors and contractors as co-petitioners. Further, Kirkland & Ellis requested that AACPP assist in preparing an affidavit documenting the adverse impacts of the ETS on municipalities, contractors, distributors and A/C pipe manufacturers. All these activities are being conducted under SOP-01-06, OSHA-EPA Rulemakings. Industry's request for a stay of the ETS must first be filed with OSHA. This will occur on November 16, 1983. OSHA will be given 24 hours to respond, at which time a motion for a temporary stay of the ETS, effective immediately, will be filed with the Fifth Circuit Court. Kirkland & Ellis expects the'temporary stay to be granted. Oral arguments on a permanent stay could occur by December 1, 1983; a schedule for full judicial review cannot be predicted at this time. If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to call. JFW/ajb Enclosure cc: A. Kahn, Esq. -i copies to: Board of Directors L. Ambler L. Cejudo J. M. Couture L. Taylor A. Verploegh International Affairs Committee R. Dorner . H. Hudson E. van dor Rest - R. Hobbs A.. Junes ; P. Hart L. Giar.nitrapani - A. Saoulis G. Zaviezo R. Jalan J. Schmaus . V. Pattabhi C. Barton S. Al-Tarkait F. Mansour C. Snidvongs M. Delcourt B. Giboin B. Dubois M. A. Elola R. G. Cairns L. Dolbcau J. Glanville 0172111101 Chrono S' -3CAPCO JEN 0011597 S' CAPCO JEN 0011598