Document wgLoGGkL01XKZr0p3VrGJ34wD

iNTfJlNAL CORRESPONDENCE JU^ fftiftlftQ AND METALS DIVISION Mr* d. V. Murray UCC Law Department 46th Floor Mow York, NY Copy to - R. F. X. Fusaro J. L* Myers W. C. Thurber File / 4625 ROYAL AVE..P* 0. BOX 579, NIAGARA FALLS, NSW YORK 1430*. * April 28, 1975 "Calidria" Asbestos oriinung Dept. --TECHNOLOGY DEPARTMENT Answe"n? letter dai* . Dow Toxicology Literature The background information reiative to our discussion of the Dow literature of October 16, 1974 is attached as agreed. It includes a formal paper, "ChrysotiTe Asbestos in Plastics" presented in San Francisco on May 14, 1974 and a script based on the paper Mr* Myers used for his MACE talk in Rochester on October 9, 1974- (The deletions were made for subsequent presentation in Europe and should be ignored). Also included is a brochure "The 5afe Use of ''Calidria11 RG-244, February 1973," This was distributed to customers for a period following the date and we know that Dow had a popy of it. / Mr, Myers states that he does not follow the prepared text verbatim In his presentations of the toxicology subject matter but is always very careful to stating positive conclusions where discussing controversial medical data. He does not touch upon the "nuisance dust1' analogy in the second paragraph of the Dow literature. Possibly they extrapolate this from our February 1973 brochure but no such analogy is implied. . H* B. Rhodes Eric, /ds CHRYSOTILE ASBESTOS. IN PLASTICS John l. Myers "DAL l'DRTA,u A3BEST6S UNION CARBIDE CORPORATION MINING AND metals.DIVISION NIAGARA FALLS, NEW YORK Presented on May 14, 1974 at the 32nd Annual Technical, Conference of. the Society of Plastics Engineers In San Francisco. INTRODUCTION Asbestos has received a great deal of attention and publicity in recent years, especially after It was designated b "target health hazard" by OSHA and a "hazardous ,air pollutant" by the EPA. Many of the articles on asbestos by the press have been ano+ionally oriented or distorted and In some cases stories have been sensationalized, based on obvious misinterpretation of facts. The use of half-truths or unsubstantiated statements has led to general confusion and the unfair castigation of asbestos and products containing asbestos*. The purpose of this paper Is to put the matter of asbestos use and asbestos hazards In a logical and practical perspective* In this paper the different types of asbestos and their many uses are discussed along with * government regulations controlling the use of asbestos* The health hazards associated with asbestos, both occupational and environmental, and some industrial experience with air sampling and dust control measures are also covered. WHAT IS ASBESTOS? Asbestos, is a commerical or generic term used to describe six naturally-occurring ".asbesfiform" minerals that are fibrous, hydrated metal silicates. The six varieties are divided Into - two classes, serpentine and amphlbole, based on their crystal structure* Chrysotile is the only member of the serpentine class while the amphiboles Include crocidolIte, amosite, anthophy11ite, trerholite and actinoJf+e. ChrysotUe Is by far the most used variety and accounts for over 95? of U.S. consumption, as noted in Table I . Orocfdolite, also known as blue asbestos, is imported from South Africa. Because of its high mechanical strength and good resistance to acids and alkalis. It Is used to reinforce a limited variety of plastics where Its pronounced color is not objectionable. Amosite, also imported from South Africa, is used primarily ih thermal Insulation* Although there are some deposits of anthophyl I ite In the U.S., most of It is imported from Finland. |+ Is used primarily as a filler for polypropylene "and In i-nsuteting -materials. "A comparison of The four varieties of asbestos which are of commercial importance Is presented in Table II. It should be noted that there are significant differences between ehrysotlle and the amphiboles with regard to chemical composition and certain physical properties. '% ' WHERE IS ASBESTOS USED AND WHY? . '. Asbestos has served mankind for over .|0Q years In a broad variety of applications. The general areas In which asbestos is used .in the United States are shown in Table 111*. Based on Information from asbestos producers and consumption surveys. It Is estimated that the plastics'Industry uses about |/3 of the 800,000 tons consumed annually, which makes it the largest single user of , asbestos fiber. ' ' The largest uses of asbestos by the plastics' Industry are In vinyl /asbestos floor tile and in phenolic molding compounds* It Is also used In other plastics such as polypropylene, polyester,nylon, melamine, epoxy, silicones and vinyls. Asbestos provides According to the 33-member Advisory Committee on Asbestos Cancers of the International Agency for Research on Cancer (a division of the World Health 0rganl2aflOh); "There is evidence of an association of mesothelisl tumours with air pollution In the neighbourhood of crocldoll+e mines and of factories using mixtures of asbestos fibre types* The . evidence relates to conditions many years ago. There is evidence of no excess risk of mesotheliomas from asbestos air pollution which has existed in the neighbourhood of chrysotlle and amosite mines* There are reported differences on Incidence of mesothelioma between urban and rural areas, the causes of which have not been established. There is no evidence of a risk to the general public at present." (5) The same body quoted above has also concluded that there Is at present no evidence of lung damage by asbestos to the general public; and such evidence as there is does not indicate any risk of cancer resulting from asbestos fibers present In water, beverages, food or in the fluids used for the administration of drugs. . While there seems to be general agreement that the public Is not In any present danger from asbestos, it Is also recognized that excessive, long-term occupational exposure can cause serious health problems* Also, if man-made emissions are not controlled, then environment! contamination could approach harmful levels. During the past two years, significant legislation has been enacted by the Federal Government to reduce and control . occupational exposure to asbestos fibers and to minimize fiber emissions to the environment*. Additional standards or regulations have been proposed or enacted by many state and local governments. . SUMMARY. OF OSHA REGULATIONS The WI11iams-Steiger Occupational Safety and Health Act of 1970 became effective on ApVfl 28, 1971, with the following CongressipnaJ .purposes "to assure so far as possible every working man and woman in the Nation safe and healthful working conditions and to preserve our human resources*1' The Act established the Occupational Safety-and Health Administration (OSHA) within the Department of Labor, which has responsibility for administration and enforcement* Research and related functions are handled by the Department of Health, Education and Welfare (HEW) through the National Institute of Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSHh Five million employers and 60 million of the nation's 80 mil Mon workers are covered by OSHA* Specifically excluded from coverage are government employees and operations which are protected under other Federal health and safety laws, in a news release issued January 4, 1972, OSHA announced a Target Health Hazards Program aimed at improving health factors associated with working conditions. The following five substances were designated to be the focus of Initial and concerted efforts by OSHA end NIOSH: Asbestos^ Cotton Dust, Silica, Lead and Carbon Monoxide, ... At the present time new standards have been established only for asbestos; although, of the B,Q00 toxic substances on the exposed- On torch 31, 1971 * asbestos, along with beryllium and mercury, was identified as a "hazardous air pollutant" by. the Administrator of the EPA. National Emission $tandards_for asbestos were then published by the EPA In-the Federal Register, Vo 1. 38, No. 66- Friday, April 6, 1973. Although no numerical fission standards were established, operating criteria are . prescribed to prevent or IImit asbestos emissions to the ^ outside air from asbestos mills, roadways, certain manufacturing operations, building demolition, end the spray^on application of materials used to insulate or fireproof equipment and machinery. The law further requires that spray-on materials used to Insulate or fireproof buildings, structures, pipes, end conduits shall contain less than Ip asbestos on a dry weight basis. This should significantly reduce emissions to which the general . public may be exposed, especially In large urban areas* n.**ths Administrator (of the EPA) has determined that, in order to provide an ample margin of safety to protect the public health from asbestos, ft Is necessary to control emissions from major man-made sources of asbestos emissions Tnto the atmosphere, but that it Is not necessary to prohibit all emissions. In this determination, the Administrator has relied on the ` National Academy of Scjencesr report on asbestos, which concludes: 'Asbestos Is too Important In our technology and economy for its essential use to be stopped. But, because of the known serious effects of uncontrolled inhalation of asbestos minerals In industry and uncertainty as to the shape and character of the dose-response curve in man, it would be ' highly imprudent to permit additional contamination of the public environment with asbestos* Continued use at minimal risk to the public requires that the major sources of man-made asbestos emission into the atmosphere be defined and control led.1" (7) WHAT 1$ INDUSTRY DOING? . The Asbestos Information Association/North America reports that, during the past 30 years, the asbestos industry has spent millions of dollars to improve mining, milling, and manufacturing methods (8). The establishment of ^far'wri^iTTg,,wnTdittc^*,,t(a5 treenprltmb target and this work continues unabated and in close association wi th government agencies and i ndependent med lea I researchers (9). The ultimate goals of the.asbestos industry ere: -- Reduction of work-area dust to minimum levels. -- Protection of workers from asbestos-related diseases. -*** Maintenance of environmental emissions at levels low enough to preclude public endangerment. ' AIR SAMPLING .' * - In order to comply with OSHA 5+andardsand to determine the need for dust, control measures, air monitoring should be conducted in areas where asbestos is regularly handled or used* OSHA Standards require that "all determinations of airborne concentrations of asbestos fibers shall be made by the membrane f i I ter method at 400-450X (magnification) (4 mil limeter.objective) with phase contrast illumination.*' (10) The equipment for collecting air samples oosts less than ,$400 and fs readily available. A phase , this product serves 3 fair portion of the asbestos market* Pellets not only reduce dust during conventional handling but they are also available fn bulk hopper cars and can be transferred and used in totally enclosed systems. Barring leaks in the system* dust In work areas is virtually eliminated. Used in bulk, asbestos pellets also reduce shipping costs, eliminate warehouse storage and handling, facilitate automation, reduce elean-up, and eliminate bag handling and disposal. The pellets contain no binder and are friable enough to be dispersed in dry form or In aqueous or r&sinovs systems with conventional highshear grinding equipment (13>. Several types of special packaging are currently available and suppliers consider customer requests for unusual requirements. The floor tile Industry can obtain asbestos tn plastic bags which can be added directly to the compounding operation. Asbestos in bleached paper bags assembled with water-soluble glue and printed with water-dispersible Ink can be added directly to paper-making furnishes or acoustical celling tile formulations. Water-proof bags are available to permit slurrying of the asbestos in the bag. Wider use of shrfnk-f i Iming Is being offered to reduce dust during bag handling, transportation and storage* Although 'Vetted" asbestos Is not generally available, most suppliers are working with customers to provide "dusfiess" products. When Justified by market demand, asbestos can be treated with water, mineral spirits, glycol or other materials compatible with the application or system, CONCLUSION Asbestos is one of industry's many raw materials which involves a potential hazard when not used with reasonable respect and care. Although all forms of asbestos are recognized as hazardous to health when inhaled excessively, there is growing evidence that crocidoli+e and amostte are more hazardous than chrysotile. Fortunately the plastics Industry uses primarily chrysotile asbestos and In most products the fibers are locked-In to prevent airborne contamination. Although asbestos dust levels ere generally -lower -ibaxt expected., -industry. .contJ.-nnag .to expend large amounts of time end money .to further improve the quality of the workplace. Although the general public Is not currently in danger, occupational controls are required to prevent future environmental contamination. Chrysotile asbestos is an important and necessary raw material, vital to the nation's safety and economy; and, with proper control, It can be used safely and in compliance with government regulations. Medical, scientific, government, and Industrial personnel must continue to work closely together to establish reasonable exposure limits, provide safe work areas* and eliminate any possibility of pOblic endangerment. i INTERNAL CORRESPONDENCE *V h U*. rrtSTAiS DIVISION Tyyt c. jhurbef civ'siart Metals Division nation 38th Floor - 270 Park Avenue New York, M- Y. 10017 cjtty;p Messrs. R- L- Folkman R* F. X. Fusaro F,, H. Larrison J,, 1. Myers J. J. Welsh 4S25 ROYAL AV5..?.0. 13* i:2. ? A rLS. ']** ' .lr.\ atc ' May 12, 1975 ' orgi^'P* =>* -TSSK.'JCIS'S'' Answering lauer sate ' sudi** Roderman et al.v.Union Carbide Corporation et at- Attached are answers to questions 5 and 8, providing background information In the form of supplemental interrogatories. Question 8 is specific for "trade11 and "product" periodicals. Unfortunately I can only speak for this location and not for the Corporation, To list all journals pertinent to asbestos would be almost all published. Question 5 >S ambiguous, and 1 answered it the best 1 could without knowing exactly what the question really was. In the answer to Question 5 1 also included the answer to one of Fusaro's throwaways at the end of bs letter, L.e. the mill went on stream in October 1963 and up to then we didn't have "products". Jim Bright first examined asbestos claims in 1957* and we acquired our claims by the end of 1959- We began process development Work 11959- Product development came later,, probably late' 1959* The attached history should be of interest to the lawyers. I can't understand how we-are involved in this- The Incubation period, or whatever they call the time between exposure and cancerous disease, for meso thelioma is 20 to: kO years. Anyone conking out now couldnlt relate to us because-we didn't ship product until' late 1963 or early 1964* and our lawyers should have acakewalk with the time element. If you need my credentials for questions 1, 2, and 3 let me know or just bring my biography in American Men of Science up to date. 7o: From: Date: v. C. Thurber R, J* Klotzbech May 12, 1973 . Roderman et al. v Union Carbide Corporation et al. Question 5 The question specifically asks whether we have or have ever had a "research and product control department11* The answer Is "no11, specifically for the single department mentioned, and it is unlikely that any industrial Organ* .. izatton has such a singularly-named department. We have a Technology Department, existing in Its present form since 1970, combining departments, most of which have been in continuous existence since 1955 at various locations* The oldest group, the metallurgical group, has been in continuous existence since 1917. None of the combined departments handled asbestos ''products11 prior to October 1963 when the King City Mill went on stream, or handled ores prior to 1959- The Technology Department performs research, development* and engineering functions with the following functional groups: 1. 2, * 3, 4. 5. 6. 7* 8. 9. Mineral Science Process Development Product Development Process Engineering Project Engineering Analytical Laboratory Metal Properties Laboratory Quality Assurance Administration ' ' The present director of the department is Robert J. Klotzbaeh. The department provides business relevant; mineral research, process and engineering devel opment, product development, preliminary engineering and estimates, design . and process engineering, project and construction engineering, plant technical assistance, technical sales assistance, new product uses, morphological and metaMographic analyses and aneTytfcal s'ervTce^, -and quality as'S'arsnce -for new and existing mineral deposits and manufactured chemical and metallurgical commodities, won from these ores and related chemical and special metallurgical products. Jt supplies processes,, facilities, products, technical services', capital forecasting, and technical! problem-solving to the Operating, Marketing,. Exploration, and Mining departments* Quality assurance is.the- regulatory process through which we measure actual product quality performance, by comparing it with- standards, and acting on the difference- At this time it consists of a manager,, acting alone, who coordi nates activities of seven people reporting at the plant and sales level. Quality assurance has been a continuous function since 1965-. Quality assur- - ance applies to all of our manufacturing and milling facilities* '' To: From: Oete: W* C* Thurber R. j, Klotzbaeh May 12, 1975 Roderman at al. v. Union Carbide Corporation et al- Question 5 (continued) ' A function of the engineering group Is to provide a safe working environment, and design and construct process and plant facilities that equal or exceed Corporation and OSHA safety standards and exceed mining industry standards and comply with national, state, and local environmental quality standards* A separate safety divisional department works outside the technical- depart ment and relates primarily to in-house safety* To: From: Date: W, C. Thurber R. J. Klotzbach May 12* 1975 Roderman et al, v Union Carbide Corporation et si Question 8 We have in the library at Niagara subscriptions to two product research and trade association periodicals which we have received since I9$7: ASBESTOS BULLETIN Bimonthly Science* Technology and Applications of Asbestos- based Materials Printed in-Engl and , ASBESTOS Monthly Willow.Grove, Pa. However, asbestos is an industrial mineral, and used in drilling muds, con* struction, water purification, etc*, and constant reference is made to it In mining journals, chemical abstracts, engineering index, construction journals, oil and gas journals, sanitary journals, etc., ad infinitum. We subscribe to a host of these Journals, abstracts, and indices, and have done so continuously since the Corporation was formed In 1917 at all of our locations. In addition the Medical and Toxicology library located inNew York City contains discipline-related journals from 1930 through 1975* We have been aware of the hazardous potentials of asbestos consistent with the state of medical and toxicological knowledge at any particular time and are also aware of the degree of uncertainty, even at the present time, in defining what constitutes a biological hazard. : / i.Vl Mr. VI. C. Thurbet Metals Division New York, NY . . J'sAU aVC i.:-::aCa?a 'alls, VG3K . May 30, 1975 "Calidria" Asbestos * Dtsi. - u?A?!T^cwT Messrs. R. E. Byrne J. L. Myers File---- 05HA Regulations - Asbestos Use Warnings This is in response to your request for comments on Marjorie Chamberlain's memorandum of May 5, 1975 on the above noted Subject. The suggestions made by the taw Department undoubtedly maximize protection against possible future product liability suits. On the other hand, cancer is a very emotional word and there is a strong possibility that people will react to it far beyond the real danger involved. This is particularly . true when it appears on a label where the actual extent of the risk is not explained. - We cannot predict with certainty what effect the use of the proposed label will have on our business, but the general feeling here is that it is likely to vary somewhere between serious and fatal. RG-244 sales and the future of RG-600, where we have technical and economic advantages but also where substitutes are readily available, appear to be particularly vulnerable. In view of this it is strongly recommended that the whole picture of business risks, medical risks and the potential liability risks be reviewed in detail and balanced against each other before we pioneer a new concept in asbestos warning labels. . In reality, the memorandum in.question focuses on a problem that has been a major concern for the past several years; i.e., what is Union Carbide Is basic position on the asbestos and health issue. In lieu of any specific definition of our awn, v/e have been relying on the AIA/NA information which, as I understand It, can be summarized as follows: - 1. The 2 fibers/cc limit is safe for chrysotile. 2. Increased incidence of lung cancer require both asbestos exposures sufficient to cause asbestosis and smoking. The effects of these two are synergistic, however. 3. Mesothelioma has only been clearly associated with croeidolite inhalation. There is a real doubt that it can be caused by inhalation of chrysotile fiber. AC-08S3 The toxicological picture was outlined orally In general terms to Hr Stephenson at an Asbestos Review Meeting in early 1974'and he found it acceptable. He also made it dear that Union Carbide Corporation should not be in a business that caused undue risks to people; I.t was also stressed that if any new medical information became available that would change the pictures we should review our position promptly. I know of no new medical evidence to change this basic view. The Bo'rel Case, however, seems to have altered the concurrent legal situations. The - recommendations in the Chamberlain memorandum place the people in the asbestos business in the ambivalent position.of being charged with the responsibility of maximizing the use of asbestos (in applications where it can be used in compliance with OSHA regulations) and simultaneiously being obligated to inform the potential customer that he should really use something else because asbestos "can cause cancer," Actually this problem is not.unique to asbestos even within Union Carbide. Vinyl chloride is in a very similar situation and styrene, vinyl toluene, and`phenol appear to be close behind. In fact, it is my understanding that almost any organic chemical based on the aromatic ring can be considered as a suspected cancer-causing agent. It is suggested that we need tD look to broad corporate policy in the area of marketing of potentially hazardous materials for guidance in our particular problem. In this connection it is relevant to mention that the Union Carbide Corporation vinyl, latex marketing group has met their problem by reducing the VC monomer content in the latex to a level where there is little chance for the user's exposure to exceed the OSHA action level. They are not labeling. A competitor also lowered the monomer content to a comparable level but a corporate decision was made that they would also label to be on the safe side. The net result of this was a large "label removing ceremony" with pictures and Union representatives participating at the customer's (PPG) plant. Returning to the immediate question of the assessment of the various risks. Union Carbide does not appear to have "in-house" the specialized medical expertise on asbestos to judge the merits of the minority position on asbestos hazards as expounded by the Mt. Sinai group. It is to be expected, however, that all of the latest research results will be argued in great detail in the next few months during the. hearings on.-thfi-^i^^ed.^amendmeDt^ to the OSHA asbestos regulations. It is strongly recommended that we do not take any unilateral action until we have the benefit of this information and the decision of the U.$, Government on what they consider to be a safe level. If appropriate, an outside consultant such as Dr. Wright or Dr. Weill might be used at that time for a final review of our position. We have been in the asbestos business about ten years, are complying with the OSHA regulations and urging our users to do so, and are looking at ' thepossibility of medical problems which take 15-30 years to develop. A period of 3-6 months to study the very complex medical, legal and ethical problems in sufficient depth to reach a proper decision does not seem unreasonable. It is also possible that the labeling question will be takeh out of our hands in this time period and be covered by government mandate for the entire asbestos industry. This may occur in the revised OSHA regulations or as a result of two current government studies on the labeling of hazardous materials. . . . To conclude these general comments, I would like to express two personal opinions which I am sure represent the attitude of the Asbestos Group at Niagara Falls: 1* If there is really an appreciable chance that the use of our product will result in serious injury to a substantial number of people we should not be supplying it for that end use. 2. If it should turn out that exposure to low levels of asbestos does cause serious injury to a substantial number of people, the courts will find a way to assign liability to the producer regardless of the- type of warning labels and information dissemination that they may have used. The first and most basic thing we need is our best assessment of the '' medical risk and our best judgment on the reliability of the assessment. When this Is available, the legal and business problems can be examined in perspective and an objective decision made on the proper course of action. The foregoing ideas have been used to prepare the attached commentary on Miss Chamberlain's letter. The comments are not intended to .imply an adversary position with our Law Department at a time when communication and cooperation are urgently needed. It is my impression* however, that she was working without benefit of much information on the asbestos, health controversy or on the nature of our business. One Item not covered is our potential obligation to provide warning labels in the language of the countries to which we ship. We must be sure that the conclusions drawn accurately represent Our . situation, so I suggest that we have a meeting with the Law Department soon after the new OSHA regulations are published. H. fl. "Rhodes Attachment /ds The commentary on the letter has been done in two parts; one covers the letter Itself and the other presents specific remarks on the five recommendations. The memorandum opens with a discussion of S402A liability as it applies to a "defective" product. We are not selling a "defective"; product so it is not clear how this is relevant to our problem* The real heart of the matter would seem to lie with comments k and 1, i.e., / "recognition has been given to those products which are inherently dangerous, incapable of being made safe, and yet their utility to the consumer market counter-balances the risk*11 . There are two portions of this statement which deserve careful examination, 1) "incapable of being made safe," and 2) "consumer market*4' If "consumer market11 means the general public, that is the type of end use now being studied by the CPSC and the FTC* Very little of our product reaches this market without being materially altered in ways to reduce the potential to produce airborne dust. If "consumer market" means industrial users the situation is obviously different. We need an Interpretation of this relative to where our warnings should go. - The phrase "Incapable of being made safe" also presents an interesting consideration. Dry, open, asbestos fiber has a definite tendency to become airborne when handled* We have a great deal of data that shows that our asbestos can be handled in a way that the airborne fiber levels are below 1 the QSHA limits. The potential is constantly present, however, that the material can be mishandled to exceed these levels by a substantial amount. It is technically feasible to treat our opened products to greatly reduce or eliminate their potential to cause airborne dust under normal handling situations {except abrasion when held by certain binders). One of our competitors, Johns-Manville, has already done this with a product used in the drilling industry and the patent literature contains a substantial amount of information on other applications. It would seem to me that treating our products to make them virtually dustless would be an outstanding defense under general liability. On the other hand, failure to do so, particularly in areas where others have, might leave us wide open to charges of defective product; i.e., one which could be rendered safe but v/as not, regardless of the extent of our.warnings.. Commentary ,o43. this counsel is suggested. The next section of the letter where a question occurs is in the discussion of compliance with OSHA regulations as a defense against strict liability. A number of cases "brought by a private citizen" are cited and the statement is made that "Section 16 of the OSHA regulations provides that states may assume jurisdiction where OSHA does not apply." This leads to the critical conclusion that we must do considerably more than comply with OSHA to avoid responsibility under strict liability* The mention of "private1 citizen" and "where OSHA does not apply" leads to the following areas that need clarification: 1* Do the cases cited cover the situation where the exposure causing ` * the alleged Injury took place only In the industrial situation . and where the appropriate state or federal regulations were complied ` with? .. , , a08S3 - Z* Our products used in tne unuea iwtes will usually pass cnrgugn an industrial handling that will be regulated by the Federal QSHA standards or by a state enforced standard that is at least as stringent as the Federal. We would not appear to be Involved herewith a situation here where the state is "assuming jurisdiction where OSHA does not apply*" Is it correct that under these circumstances we can be sued for an occupational Injury that . occurs even though the employer complies with all applicable . regulations? , 3. Are we making a clear-cut distinction in our planning between an injury that occurs in an occupational setting and one which - occurs to a private citizen who purchases a product containing our asbestos? . In essence, the thing that bothers me here is the situation where the , Federal Government held extensive hearings, consulted a wide variety of experts* allowed cross-examination of witnesses, and, after evaluation of the input, promulgated a regulation that was required by law to protect the health and safety of the workers. The procedure used to arrive at the regulation was subsequently upheld In court* Is it really true that the company manufacturing asbestos must have superior wisdom and go beyond these regulations to protect itself against liability arising from occupational use of asbestos within the scope of the regulations? The last general comment concerns the section that discusses "adequate warning" and concludes that the OSHA warning is obviously Inadequate. The OSHA warning starts with the words "Caution" in capital letters on a single line. It is fallowed by the key statement; "breathing asbestos dust may cause serious bodily harm..." In contrast the Bore] label does not use any direct warning word, does not say that the effects may be serious and adds the qualifications of "excessive quantities" and "long periods of time*" Thus; /'Inhalation of asbestos In .excessive quantities over long periods of time may be harmful," . The OSHA wording is admittedly much less alarming than "can cause permanent lung damage such as asbestosis, mesothelioma or other cancers," but I submit that it is considerably stronger than the Borel label and it is by no means obvious that it is inadequate. Comments on the specific recommendations are as follows: 1* There is no question that Union Carbide Corporation should continue to use the OSHA label* i 2* The question of the second label has been discussed adequately elsewhere. 3. Regarding a literature file that includes both positive and - negative articles,I feel that this Is an ineffective way to . ' handle.the situation* ' . a* The positive articles are used to counter the massive negative publicity that appears In the press,. The customer already has the other side. b* Any customer who has the competence to read and evaluate the serious literature in the field already has access to it. c. Unless we put together a specified balanced package and Insist that the field representatives use it, the negative information will stay In the files. It is suggested that literature like "Asbestos and Health" and ' concensus articles like the "WHO Summary" and the "NAS Report" are adequate and appropriate to do the job* A more complex . approach would be a suninary like "Asbestos and Health" edited to mention the adversary position. This would have to be blessed by some recognized medical authority like Dr. Wright* 4. Regarding the HSDS, I agree that there are certain statements that can be misleading and should be changed* The same comments made previously regarding the wording of the revised warning apply here. 5. Regarding our obligations to make a reasonable effort to "acquaint anyone who comes into direct contact with asbestos with the hazards," some definition is needed. This should certainly be limited to those whose contact is above the action level. The OSHA regulations proposed recently contain an employee information requirement. This may help take care of the problem for all users who handle fiber. 6/S/75 ds A*"', ru*.,.co n oo UNION CARBIDE CGRFOftA7HN - MININS & METALS DIVISION * P,O.fi0X579 * NIAGARA PAUS* N. Y, 14302 * TBj 715-^73^376 July 22, 1975 . .Hr,.Craig Ellsworth Sold Bond Building Products Division of National Bypsua Company 325 Delaware Avenue ' Buffalo, NV 14202 ' .. ` ' ' ' '. *. . * -- . . .. Bear Mr. Ellsworth: . ' To confirm our various discussions, we shall sell to you, and you shall' purchase "Calidria" asbestos SG-210 (hereinafter referred to as "material"! under the Terms and Conditions contained In Exhibit A attached hereto and under' the following provisions; . * '. 1. Delivery of a minimum of 1200 tons of material shall be made to you during the term of this agreement In approximately equal monthly Installments. We will use our best efforts to supply additional material from time to time If requested by you, .- ' 2. The term of this agreement shall ccmwertce on September 1, 1975 and shall terminate on December 31, 1976 and shall be renewable annually thereafter by mutual agreement. . . - 3.We will have the right to Increase or decrease the prices set forth herein by giving you written notice-thereof, Said increase or decrease -shall tre effective as to all deliveries made JW^a^d-cf-ter-the date specified'In the written notice* provided, "however, that in the case of an increase: the effective date shall not be less than thirty (30) days after said notice;, and If you, . within fifteen (15) days after said notice, furnish us evidence that you can purchase asbestos from a responsible seller of the same qual1tyunder similar conditions and at a Tower delivered price, and If, with fifteen (15) days there after we do not agree to meet said lower price, you will have the right within ten (10) days thereafter to terminate this agreement by giving us not less than ten (10) days1 prior written notice. 1 . nr* urdiy ciiswQrcn -c.- JUiy CC-, 13/5^ This offer shall terminate within 15 days after the date hereof If we have not received the duplicate copy of this letter signed by you indicat ing your agreement and acceptance* . Very truly yours, . UNION CARBIDE CORPORATION By______________________ ___ Titla Marketing Manager Date_________ Agreed to and Accepted: GOLO BOND BUILDING PRODUCTS By Title Date * J.L*Myers:ejb Attachment EXHIBIT A TERMS AND CONDITIONS 1* in addition to the purchase price. Buyer shall pay Seller the amount of all governmental taxes* excises and/or other charges (except taxes on or measured by net Income) that Seller may be required to pay with respect to the production, sale or transportation of material delivered hereunder* except where the law otherwise provides* 2. Seller warrants that at the time of delivery the material will be . of the Seller's standard specifications for the type and grade of the material described herein (unless otherwise specified herein) and will conform to the description thereof on the face of this document* THERE ARE NO EXPRESS WARRANTIES BY SELLER OTHER THAN THOSE SPECIFIED IN THIS PARAGRAPH 2. NO WARRANTIES BY SELLER OTHER THAN A WARRANTY OF TITLE AS PROVIDED 8Y TIE UNIFORM COMMERCIAL CODE SHALL BE IMPLIED OR OTHERWISE CREATED UNDER THE UNIFORM COMMERCIAL CODE, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO A WARRANTY OF MERCHANTABILITY AND A WARRANTY OF FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE- 3. Buyer's receipt of material delivered hereunder shall be an unqualified acceptance of, and a waiver by Buyer of any and all claims (includ ing, but not limited to, claims arising under the express warranties specified in Paragraph. 2) with respect to such material unless Buyer gives Seller written notice of claim within thirty (30) days after such receipt; the damages available in such Instance shall be limited to that provided in Paragraph^* , 4. Buyer assumes all risks and liability for use of the material; has full knowledge of all hazards to persons and property involved in handling and using the material; and-'warrants that employees, independent contractors, and others who handle and use the material for Buyer have been advised of all hazards to persons and property involved In handling and using the material.. Buyer hereby assumes arid agrees to hold Seller harmless from all liability resulting from the use of the material, whether or not such is In combination with other articles or substances or is used in any manufacturing process* No claim against Seller of any kind,'Whether as to the material delivered or for nondelivery, and whether or not based on negligence or warranty* shall be greater In amount than the purchase price of the material With respect to which such claim Is made* In no event shall Seller be liabie to Buyer for any special, indirect or consequential damages, whether or not caused by or resulting from the negligence of, or breach of warranty by. Seller hereunder* .' 5* In the event Buyer fails to fulfill Seller's terms of payment for ' the material or In case Seller shall have any doubt at any time as to Buyer's financial responsibility. Seller may decline to make further deliveries of material except upon receipt of cash or satisfactory security* continued t1.1 T INTERNAL CORRe3PONDe^^^gjp^0- mining and metals division JUL 18 1975 P. 0. BOX 579, NIAGARA FALLS, NEW YORK LM To Dt.Won letlDit Cftpy t4 Mr. W. C. Thurber UCC Metals 38th Floor . 270 Park Avenue New York, NY 10017 Messrs. R. E. Byrne* Jr. J. L. Myers R. L. Schult File T) Dirt* Ju|Jr 16* 1975 o.,,. "Calidrla" Asbestos Ajuwtrlnp iMMr dor* $ubj*ct Metals Division - Terms and Conditions of Order Acknowl edgement Form Used in the ; Sale of Asbestos.. This is in response to yolnr request for comments oh Mr, Zupa's letter pf July 2 1975. Under Article 4 of the proposed "Terms and Conditions," we require that In return for the priviiedge of being allowed to purchase our material, the buyer: 1. Assumes all risks and liability for the use of the material, 2. Warrants to us that lie has full knowledge of the hazards and has educated afl who may come in contact with the material about such hazards. - 3. Gives us a hold-harmlets from all liability resulting from the use of^^the material* ' The problem with this approach is that it puts total emphasis on building a defense against possible future product liability suits and completely ignores the realities of the marketplace. It may be possible to slip this sort of thing by on a certain percentage of customers who do not read their order acknowledgements* Some of the traditional large asbestos users would also be forced to accept it until the Canadian strike Is over. It is extremely doubtful, however, that companies like Marco, Chrysler, fnterplastfcs, Reichhold or any of our large RG-244 users with knowledgeable legal staffs and reasonable alter natives to asbestos would even talk^bout it. This proposal,'and the recent recommendations for labeling from the Law Department, emphasize the need for a UCC policy on the myrid of products they sell which can be hazardous under certain conditions. We need to strike a reasonable balance between the legal and business risks. HBRicjb H, B* Rhodes , miMiA TERMS AND CONDITIONS 1. In addition to the purchase price. Buyer shall pay Seller the nt of all governmental taxes, excises and/or other charges (except taxes jr measured by net income) that Seller may be required to pay with respect the production, sale or transportation of material delivered hereunder, :ept where the law otherwise provides. . 2. Seller warrants that at the time of delivery the material will be f the Seller's standard specifications for the type and grade of the material escribed herein (unless otherwise specified herein) and will conform to the iescriptlon thereof on the face of this documnt. THERE ARE HO EXPRESS WARRANTIES BY SELLER OTHER THAN THOSE SPECIFIED IN THIS PARAGRAPH 2. NO WARRANTIES BY SELLER OTHER THAN A WARRANTY OF TITLE AS PROVIDED BY THE UNIFORM COMMERCIAL CODE SHALL BE IMPLIED OR OTHERWISE CREATED UNDER THE UNIFORM COMMERCIAL CODE*' INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO A WARRANTY OF MERCHANTABILITY AND A WARRANTY OF FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE. 3. Buyer's receipt of material delivered hereunder shall be an unqualified acceptance of, and a waiver by Buyer of any and all claims (includ ing, but not limited to, claims arising under the express warranties specified in Paragraph 2) with respect to. such material unless Buyer gives Seller written notice of claim within thirty (30) days after such receipts the damages Available in such instance shall be limited to that provided in Paragraph' 4. Buyer assumes all risks and liability for use of the material; has full knowledge of all hazards to persons and property Involved in handling and using the material; and warrants that employees, independent contractors, and others who handle and use the material for Buyer have been advised of all hazards to persons and property Involved In handling and using the material.. Buyer hereby assumes and agrees to hold Seller harmless from all liability resulting from the-use of the material, whether or not such is in combination with other articles or substances or is used^in any manufacturing process* No claim against Seller of any kind, hetfeer as to the material delivered or for nondelivery, and whether or not based on negligence or warranty, shall be greater in amount than the purchase price of the material with respect to which such claim is made. In no event shall Seller be liable to Buyer-for any special, indirect or consequential damages, whether or not caused by or resulting -from the negligence of, or breach of warranty by. Seller hereunder. . 5. In the event Buyer fails to fulfill- Seller's terms of payment for * the material or in case Seller shall have any doubt at any time as to Buyer's financial responsibility. Seller may decline to make further deliveries of material except upon receipt of cash or satisfactory security. continued*.*.* INTERNALcOKKbsrun miHG ANO METALS DIVISION. Noma) ftttA iHsH Mr* W. C. Thurber UCC Metals Division 3Sth Floor 270 Park Avenue New York, NY 10017 Messrs, R. E* Byrne, Jr, R. F. X, Fusaro B. L. Ingalls J, V. Murray J. L. Myers R. L, Schult File * r a eox 579. kiagw. fails, new york 343a 6* ^ly 24, 1975 Originating "Calldrla" Asbestos Aniwir(n( lottnr dl* Dust Controlled "Calldrla" Products ' This is in response to your letter of May 20, 1975, requesting a delineation of the advantages of a dustless Super Visbestos product. Since the potential for dustless asbestos applies across much of our product line* the question will be discussed in general terms with Super Visbestos treated as a special case where appropriate. Several of the most Important advantages to be described depend on the interpretation-of the law and of the federal regulations. Comnehts from counsel on the correctness of our understanding of the points of law are requested. If we are correct, the main advantages of dustless products can be summarizelTas follows: 1, The health risk to users of our product is not well defined and will not be defined in the foreseeable future. Whatever this risk may be, it will be very substantially reduced with dustless products, .-Provides a strong"defense a'gai'ns't ^foture^prothict "TfatrHi'ty suits. 3. Provides a strong psychological counter to militant union activities against handling asbestos. 4. Provides a good defensible position that the OSHA monitoring and medical examinations do not apply. This position becomes very solid if the "action level" concept is Incorporated In the . revised regulations. 5. Provides a good defensible position that EPA source registration Is not needed and bag disposal requirements are being met. 6. Reduces our shipping costs and largely eliminates the In-transit spout leakage problems which have been much improved by shrink . . film but are still present. ` ITrassr EXHIBIT I WV-08400 Before describing the reasoning for these advantages, it Is necessary to define +he vague term, "dustless, For purposes of this discussion, a dust less product is one which, under reasonably anticipated handling conditions while in the raw state, does not release airborne fibers at concentration levels which can be distinguished from background by analytical procedures prescribed In the OSHA regulations* These specific limitations are necessary because our: data on spraying and sanding of materials containing wetted and/or bound asbestos indicated that airborne fiber levels that are very low but still distinguishable from background can be obtained from any asbestos-containing material if suffi cient mechanical Energy Is applied. One further point should be made in considering the "dustless" condition. It is possible to treat asbestos with water and render it dustless as long as a substantial proportion of the water remains. Spills and damaged packages, however, would dry out In a fairly short period and become about like unwetted asbestos. It is also possible to use higher molecular weight, relatively nonvolatile wetting material that would retain dust suppression activity for extended periods. This distinction can be important when looking at the Interactions with the OSHA regulations, . The most fundamental question in assessing the need for a dustless asbestos is the possible health hazard to the users of our product. Dry, opened asbestos has-a potential to become airborne in substantial quantities every time It Is handled or disturbed. Although most of the fiber counts we have made are at or below the allowable limits, they do demonstrate that It takes on7y a little carelessness to exceed the celling limits by substantial margins for short-time periods. This is particularly true for random accidents that occur and are not picked up by the dust counts. If the potential to become airborne were removed. It would largely remove the chance for the accidental high exposure and would also reduce the average occupational exposure level to our product by arT order of roaonltufleor more. If the 1976 OSHA levels do in~Tact contain a goo? margin of safety, are generally being observed by Industry, and random short excursions at high concentrations are not a significant factor, the health hazard problem is under control. If we are not quite confident that this is the case, however, the incentive for a dustless product becomes strong, ' The other Important aspect of health risk concerns general liability. In a recent memorandum, April 30, 1975, Ms; Marjorie Chamberlain discussed the doctrine of general liability and the Borel asbestos case. To quote a key point: "recognition has been given to those products which are Inherently dangerous, incapable of being made safe, and yet their utility to the consumer market counter balances the risk." . The phrase, "incapable of being made safe," raises several interesting questions. There Is considerable literature in existence right now about treating asbestos to control dust. The main competitive product to Super Visbestos has been water wetted to make It dustless. If the medical experts prove to be wrong and the two fiber limit does result in serious injury to a substantial number* of workers, wouldn't we be extremely vulnerable to the contention that the product was "capable of being made safe" and we chose not to dp It? From the positive side, If we do make our products dustless, it would set us apart from most of the other asbestos products and give a strong argument to get out of the typical class action suits* _ The last medically related problem to-consider Is militant union pressure againts handling asbestos* This Is an. emotional Issue and Is hard to combat when It Is obvious to the worker than he-Is breathing asbestos dust arid has It all over his clothes. An asbestos product that does not dust, comes clean from the container, and does not whiten the workers' clothes should have a very strong psychological effect to counter this growing problem. The Interaction of a dustless product with the 05HA regulations obviously depends on how the regulations are Interpreted, if the "action level11 concept is introduced In the revised regulations, as expected, the need for Interpretation Is largely eliminated and our position becomes that much stronger. ' The biggest problems which our customers have with the present OSHA regulations stem from the monitoring and medical examination requirements* There have been sporadic, often nuisance problems with signs, housekeeping* and waste disposal * _ Regarding monitoring, paragraph f(l) of the regulations states, "every employee shall cause every place of employment where asbestos fibers are released to be monitored,..11 With a dustless product as defined earlier, we should be able to demonstrate at a reasonable number of Industrial locations that the airborne fiber counts are Indistinguishable from background. On this basis, we should be able to take and, if necessary, defend the position that asbestos fibers are not released so monitoring is not necessary. The main weak spot here is that water is the most likely liquid to be used, particularly for Super Visbestos. Spills and broken bags may be a source of low levels of dust* If a 1 fiber/cc TWA Action Level goes into effect, however, the chance that this will be exceeded Is J-f ,the .user exercises -modest -precautions . Regarding medical examinations, paragraphs j(2), (3), and (4) require medical examinations In "occupations exposed to airborne concentrations of asbestos fibers." The same arguments used to show that monitoring Is not necessary for the dustless product can be applied to the medical examination question. state: In addition to the monitoring and medical requirements* the regulations Paragraph (g) (1) Signs "Caution signs shall be provided and displayed at each location where airborne concentrations of asbestos fibers may be In excess of the exposure limits.,." ' A ,lor>y mQu294 Paragraph (h) tl) Housekeeping "All external surfaces *\. shall be maintained free of accumulations of asbestos fibers If* with their dispersion, there would be an excessive concentration." Paragraph (hi (2l Waste Disposal 1 "Asbestos waste, scrap* debris, bags, ... which may produce In any reasonably foreseeable use* handling .concentretions of asbestos In excess of the exposure limits..*" Although all of these paragraphs refer to concentrations over the allowable limit, we have had a number of cases where the inspector gave out > citations without monitoring on the basis that asbestos was present In the plant. With the present opened products, our data show he was probably incorrect* It is* however, certainly possible to exceed the limits with gross mishandling. With a dustless product, the chances of such an occurrence are reduced essential ly to zero. We should be able to convince OSHA these would be frivolous citations. In the Super Vlsbestos market, unfortunately, we encounter all of these OSHA related problems. Asbestos Is handled In Individual bags at a great multiplicity of temporary field locations by transient labor. Although the men work for subcontractors, the ultimate safety responsibility In the drilling rigs goes back to the major oil companies with their large professional safety and industrial hygiene staffs. A number of the major companies have taken the position that there is no practical way to meet the monitoring and medical exam ination requirements and have stopped using asbestos in their rigs. Several of the smaller contractors have been Inspected and when told that warning signs were required immediately stopped using asbestos. Our only competitor In the field, Johns-Manvllle has come out with a product wetted with water to make it dustless. If the decision Is made to proceed with a dustless product, this market will be the first one attempted. In the EPA area, our customers report that there has been little federal enforcement activity so far. We have no way of knowing how long this .situation -continue-and -are -a -couple -ef points -regulations that can turn into serious problems with.our specialty product customers if active enforcement gets under way* The EPA regulations require the registration of all "stationary sources" that fall In the Industrial categories covered by the regulations. A "stationary source" Is defined as: ".*. apy building, structure, facility* or installation which emits or may, emit any air pollutant which has been designated alPhazardous by the Administrator." In the majority of cases, the users are already in compliance with, the other provisions of the regulations so registration is largely a formality. There is a great reluctance, however, to volunteer for another government list. It.would seem that a dustless product would provide a very good argument that t the product would riot-fall under- "may emit" and registration is unnecessary, ' ' ; " " A0G2Ob ; - 11'* H v* lliui witi The EPA regulations are now being revised to include much more stringent provisions on the disposal'of asbestos shipping bags and asbestos con taining waste. The final details are not settled but will Undoubtedly be built around the "no visible emissions" criteria now in effect for manufacturing operations. Wetting to suppress dust has been emphasized In the proposed: changes. A prewetted product should make it much more practical for our;/ specialty customers to achieve compliance. The foregoing advantages fori a dustless product are primarily customer oriented. There are two additional points relating to shipping that involve us more directly. j First, our opened fiber products are packed in valve pack bags which leak asbestos whenever the bag is handled. This leakage has been largely 1 eliminated with Super Visbestos by the! fairly expensive procedure of shrink filming the Individual bags. With thejother opened products, the entire pallet is shrink-filmed. The pallet shrink-filming has greatly improved but not eliminated the leakage problem. A dustless product In a suitable bag would eliminate both of these cumbersome procedures. | i>3 . Secondly, a wetted product will have a bulk density of 40-60-lb./ft. , comparable to pellets. This will sharply reduce shipping costs. This completes the six main advantages that we can see for providing dustless asbestos products. There are1 obviously some very strong reasons to move In this direction that must be balanced against the obvious disadvantages of added product cost. The ksy ingredient needed now Is advice from counsel on the validity of the legal and regulatory points made. It is suggested that we move to obtain this and plan to meet during the first half of September to settle on a course of action for Supe^ Visbestos. Ti* B. Rhodes ^ HBR;pcr 0620(3 INTERNAL CORRESPONDENCE ION CARBIDE CORPORATION fNomsJ Jstart JOftart Mr. Robert F. X. Fusaro Daw Department 47th Floor y to * 270 PARK AVENUE. NEW YORK, NEW YORK 10017 D^ate Gfi&nat^g Ocpt. t May 22, 1973 Medical Department Answering letter Jo'e Stjfa/tcf ^ Dear Mr. Fusaro: We have carefully studied tlie Calidria Asbestos study from Mining & Metals Division in Niagara Falls. The study was divided into a seven page report and a six page slide presentation. Both were very well done and represent much study on the part of the author. However, we seem to differ in our interpretation of the literature as presented. Going through the seven page study, "The Safe Use of Calidria RG-244" and comparing it with the NIOSH criteria document for asbestos, paragraph by paragraph, we find these variations in interpretations. Section 2, Asbestos Toxicology, paragraph 2, "It is important to note, however, that asbestos! and statistical excess occurrences of bronchogenic, carcinoma (lung cancer), the two most common asbestos - related diseases, have occurred only in workers with long term exposures to massive concentrations of asbestos dust. The risk of this type of exposure is usually in asbestos mines and mills and in large manufacturing operations. . . " NlOSH Itl-7 reports "a number of tJCC 014310 PLAINTIFFS EXHIBIT /*ja9o-<& i fy m Mr. Robert F, X. Fusaro -2- May 22, 1973 intense intermittent exposures are also suspect'* and "positive x-ray finding among individuals having had known exposures to asbestos as 4 short as one day". HI-8 says, "This excess of lung cancer was demonstrated among those workers with jobs which entailed heavy p exposures irrespective of the duration of employment. M IH-1&, "In 1968, Balzer and Cooper reported aabestosis among insulation workers exposed at levels not exceeding the time-weighted average of 5 rnppcf-T'' On HI-21, NIOSH states. "In a recent unpublished paper. Williams, Baier. 8c Thomas compiled data from the Pennsylvania Department of Health files on exposure levels at various textile processing operations in two plants. The data included duet concentrations from 1930 through 1967 in one plant and from 1948 through 1968 in the second plant. Even though controlled exposures were for the most part below 5 mppcf and in many cases below the 1968 ACGIH Notice of Intended Change to Z mppcf, 64 cases of aabestosis were reported from these two asbestos textile plants. The authors conclude that: "If asbestosis is to be prevented, airborne asbestos dust must be stringently controlled in the working environment." 1H-ZZ concludes, "Champion's two cases seem, to support earlier data of family cases, with reasonably short and/or low levels of exposure." Concerning the risk due to mining and milling, the NIOSH document has this to say on pages 18 and 19 of Section HI: "The authors (McDonald f\ J o J'JJ UCC 014311 Mr. Robert F, X. Fusaro -3- May 22, 1973 et al) concluded that the additional data supports evidence of other studies that even heavy exposure to asbestos in mining and milling carries ** only modest risk of contracting lung cancer and less still of contracting malignant mesothelioma." Another quotation on page 19 is "Wright pointed out that others have noted the striking differences in the health experiences of workers in mines and mills as compared to other workers, specifically in comparison, to insulation operations, but that he felt the question was still unresolved. In contrast to populations exposed to mixed environments, those engaged izi the mining and milling of asbestos fibers showed no augmented frequency of bronchogenic cancer." NIOSH concludes "Although it has been suggested that the risks associated with asbestos exposure may be less in mining than in industrial operations, additional study will be necessary to Confirm if such is true, based upon the comparison made by Selikoff". On pages 23 & 24 there are comments on the occurrence of two cases, one mesothelioma and one asbestosis, in floor tile installers, and specifically comments on the very low levels encountered in this work on a time-weighted average. To continue with the third paragraph under Asbeetbs Toxicology, in which it is stated that chrysotile asbestos does not cause an excess of mesotheliomas. NIOSH in V-l says, "The consumption of asbestos in this 030SG UCC 014312 Mr. Robert F, X. Fusaro -4- May 22, 1973 country is overwhelmingly in the form of chrysotile* Where other forms of asbestos are used, such as crocidelite and amosite, they are often mixed ebrysotile and are encountered alone, mainly in research and specialty situations. " It is the predominant opinion of the scientific community that an excess of mesothelioma is found in workers in the asbestos industry in the United States. In Section III, page 11, is found the statement "It must be pointed out that a clear picture of the relationship between the type of asbestos and the production of asbestosis, neoplasms, and mesothefiomas is not defined in the exposures reported. M ' NIOSH describes in III-22 a case of mesothelioma, occurring * in which "it was believed that he was exposed only to chrysotile...u. Continuing to paragraph 4 of Asbestos Toxicology, where it says "Finally, there is no evidence that the general public is in any danger from the amount of asbestos fiber in the community air. The U. 5, National Academy of Science states in an October, Z971publication* "Asbestos- The Need For and Feasibility of Air Pollution Controls'1: "At present, there is no evidence that the small number of fibers found in most members of the general population affect health and longevity. " We submit that these statements are not precisely the same. ucc 014313 Mr, Robert F- X. Fusa.ro -5- May 11, 1973 In Section III, page 23, NIOSH states "., .however, some question may be raised of a possible neighborhood exposure even it it only concerned s going to work. The possibility of such exposure must be Considered in view of the neighborhood case noted by Selikoff*M . In Section 3 of "The Safe Use of Calidria", paragraph 3, there is discussion of the meaning of the phrase "exposed to asbestos", and the advice is given to follow the NIOSH recommendation that "exposed to asbestos" means "average exposures above one fiber per cc or peak exposures above five fibers per cc. " This has no validity: the OSHA regulation is interpreted to mean "regular exposure to asbestos as part of the job, or exposure to asbestos as a usual part of a regular job assignment". There is no minimum number of fibers designated below which^is not required to follow all the stipulated procedures if such an exposure occurs, and we feel we are obligated to give this information to customers. In Section 4, "Calidria RG-244 in Polyester Resin" we question whether the sampling and counting were done by registered Industrial Hygiene Engineers: if they were not, then the results would not be likely to be acceptable to any regulatory agency, and we would not want to convey a contrary impression to a customer. Section 5 - Silica Toxicology. This is not mentioned in the NIOSH document or the OSHA regulation. RG-24^. Is it part of "Safe Handling of 'Calidria' 030Si UCC 014314 Mr, Robert F. X. Fuaaro -6- May 22, 1973 In Section. 6 - Oust Control. When exhaust ventilation is discussed it should be pointed out that it '`shall be designed, constructed, installed and maintained in accordance with the American National Standard Fundamentals Governing the Design St Operation of Local Exhaust Systems, ANSI Z-9. 2-1971". Failure to comply with this standard would lead to citation and penalty. Slide Commentaries Slide 3 - this is misleading. Slide 4 - "excess" in fact may be lees.than the allowable concentration and "many" may be a few or less. Chryaotile is net an important distinction. Slide 5 - massive long term exposure to asbestos has caused asbestosis and cancer, but so have some low level short term exposures: this is a half truth, and ia misleading. Slides 7 through 10 - the discussion of the varieties of asbestos is interesting but irrelevant to the fact that all varieties ' produce disease. Slide li - we arc -discussing chrysotile: this is a diversionary tactic. UCC 014315 Mr, Robert F. X- Fusaro -7- May 22, 1973 Slide 12 - advise deleting "strong" from the first sentence* Five cases did occur, and this is likely to be < considered an excess for a group of 9304 employees- Dr, Selikoff has studied the John Manville manufacturing plant in New Jersey as well as the insulation workers. Slide 20 - monitoring and record keeping requirements are stipulated in the regulation, including methods and frequency of monitoring. These requirements stay in force no matter how good the compliance is or how long it continues. * Slide 21 - the minimum medical examinations required are more extensive and specialised and frequent than those generally performed in industry, and therefore more expensive. The statement about NIOSH recommending i "exposed to asbestos" to mean "average exposures above one fiber per cc" is obsolete and should be deleted. The OSHA regulation does not say this: they mean a regular exposure, to any asbestos. There is no point in speculating or showing a slide of naturally occurring outcrops of asbestos. C3G30 UCC 014326 t Mr. Robert F. X, Fvsaro . -8- May 12, 1973 Slide 25 - It is theoretically possible to fillip* store, transfer and use asbestos without releasing any to the environment, but how many installations actually manage to do it? This glib statement makes a difficult job seem simple. ^ The statement "More is probably known about the * potential health hazards of asbestos and the proper means for controlling or eliminating them than would be the case with possible substitute materials. n is Certainly debatable; and is clearly not true universally. Questions* I Wasn't the Academy of Science quote regarding fibers found in I most members of the general population rather than asbestos in air and water? t)r. Selikoff's work is no longer limited to a "very limited group of workers, none of whom were exposed only to chrysotile". And importantly, don't forget cbryeotiie causes disease. Very truly yours, UCC 014317 I INTERNAL CORRESPONDENCE t 3UTAJ.S DIVISION * To [ttim,] Messrs* DivHm 'LodtfOA R. E. Byrne* Jr. 6. L* Dickson E. J* Kleber T. P. Norris J. E. Walsh a,,a Messrs. File. 0. F. Collins H. B. Rhodes , E. Wi'Shortridge W. C. Thurber " i P. 0. BOX 579 *4625 ROYAL AVE*. NIAGARA FALLS, flEW YORK 143 Oat* Originating tupt. November 30, 1977 "CalidriaI11 fsbestos Answtrfrg Pat* SuWKt . CPSC/TJC The CPSC Is expected to publish a final ruling on patching and similar compounds on December 12, 1977** - According to information we have: obtained from reliable sources, the ruling Hill prohibit the Intentional addition of asbestos to products for consumer use. * This may not sound too bad, butt; the ban applies not only to products sold for consumer use but also to compounds containing asbestos which are used by anyone in residences? schools, hospitals, public buildings or other'areas where consumers have customary access. ' It is expected.that the ban will; be effective 30 days after the ruling is published, presumably on December 12. This would mean that asbestos-containing products cannot be sold for consumer use after that date (dan. 11, 1978). Compounds which are labeled las, marketed, and sold solely for industrial use In non-consumer environments are not subject to the ban* If our customers have any asbestos-containing products on hand after the cut-off date, they could move them into this type 6f construction. . 1 I presume that you have kept your customers aware of the CPSC activities and I that those still using asbestos are doing so with full knowledge of the sit uation* You.can decide whether or not to discuss the contents of this letter with your customers. There is always the possibility that the CPSC could revise their ruling or delay action and we could lose some business prematurely or unnecessarily. We plan to draft a customer letter for mailing on December 13, or as soon as the CPSC acts and: we know the final wording of their ruling. fTuUNTTFPS |j EXHIBIT I! WV-08349 Do not offer* to buy back any! asbestos* If the customer mentions it* try to discourage them. If they are insistent, our regular terms will be used; 1* Accept only full pallets Of re-salable product. 2* Customer pays (freight to King City or a warehouse of our choice. J . 3* Credit will be at 75X of their original purchase price. JLMsdal ACG47 UNION CARBIDE CORPORATION METALS DIVISION - P.O. BOX $79-4625 ROYAL Aye.. NIAGARA FALLS, N6W YORK 14302 I' December 14, 1977 Individual letters sent to: The Honorable S. John Byingt'on, Chairman Barbara Franklin , Commissioner . ' R* David Pittlej , Com]missioner Consumer Products Safety Commission 1111 - 18th Street, Ntf - Washington, DC 20207 Although we are aware that Ithe Commission has moved to publish a ban on the consumer use of joint taping compounds containing free-fom asbestos* we wish to reiterate for the record our contention that the finding of "unreasonable risk" is not supported by ^he available evidence and we question whether "due process" was properly appli. ed in this case. During the Commission's consideration of the ban* the Union Carbide Corporation has provided extensive technical data on the exposure to free-form asbestos fiber during the use of these materials. These data have included: I- A presentation and analysis of all of the commercial use data available, including data from a number of OSHA compliance inspections* 2. Detailed studies of a large and a small consumer installation of drywall* It should be noted these were;the only, exposure data presented during the proceedings that beaf directly on the ban in question. The Union Carbide work was! checked by two independent laboratories and there I is certainly no reason to poubt the levels found in the OSHA compliance inspections. In spite of this, your staff has continued to quote an analysis of risk based on exposures found in one commercial study of only 30-60 minutes duration that was conducted at vaguely defined operating conditions. This latter study showed exposures thaft were much higher than all of. the other results including the OSHA data. The staff also based its estimate on an assumption of four extensive consumer exposures over the period lof a year. While we have no objection to this as a maximum case, provided the appropriate exposure levels are used, risks are also quoted for five years of exposure at the same time* This number of exposures is far beyond that which can be expected for consumers. In view of the statutory requirement for a showing|of "unreasonable risk," we feel it is extremely important to draw these points to your attention. In the installation of drywall, three successive applications of taping compound are made about a day apart. The compound, when dry, may be sanded after the second and third application* On this basis, two extended exposures can occur during the complete finishing, or extensive remodeling, of a full room* The four exposures over a year used by the staff in their risk analysis thus corre- A0G4S0 -2- sponds to finishing two roomsL Although this extent of exposure Is not by any means experienced by the entire population of the country. It appears to be a reasonable upper limit for estimation purposes as long as It is recognized as such* The further extension ^>f this to the five years cited would correspond to consumer contact with active finishing operation for about ten (10) rooms. Exposure of this extent is so' rare that Is Is not relevant and should not be used in the estimation of risk* Let us assume that the four exposures in a year are taken as correct and that Bayard modification of the Eriterline model is also accepted* The excess risk estimate of 10 deaths per million over a 40-year period presented by the staff assumes an 8-hour time-weighted average exposure of 10 fibers/cc >5p* This is based on a test where an unidentified number of professionals conducted polfrand handsanding for about 15 minutes each, mixed an undefined amount of dry compound, and dry swept under unspecified conditions. The handsanding exposure, which is the procedure used by consumers, averaged 5*3 fibers/cc, but much higher levels were present for short periods during mixing and sweeping so the higher level was assumed* The 15-minute exposure level was also assumed to occur over a full eight hours which Is far longer than occurs In consumer use* The value of 10 fibers/cc >5i for eight hours is clearly much too high and, in fact. Is not even supported by the handsanding data of the work upon which it is basein : f *'k . The OSHA compliance inspection data presented to the Comnission showed a range of 0.1 to 4 fibers/cc during sanding and 0*6-2.7 fibers/cc during cleanup* Using the highest values found for two hours of sanding and one-half hour of cleanup, which Ti a reasonable approximation of consumer operations, and a value of 0.5 fibers/cc in thfe room during the remainder of the day, the eight- hour time-weighted average becomes 1*5 fibers/cc >5u. The Bayard model predicts a risk of 0*0016 excess dearths over a 40-year period per million persons exposed. If the consumer data for the installation of drywall in a large room are used, the eight-hour time-weighted average Is only 0,2 fibers/cc >5u* The corresponding risk for the finishing of two roans over a year Is something less than 0.0000001 excess deaths. 'per million*. ovi|fer a 40-year period* Application of the values of 0.0016 per million estimated from the OSHA compliance Information and the value of less than 0.0000001 per million predicted from the actual consumer exposure da^a to the present U.S* population of about 250 million persons yields calculated excess deaths of 0*4 and less than 0.00003, respectively, over a 40-year time span, lit should be noted particularly that the value of 0*4 is based on the maximum not the average exposure values reported by OSHA, and the assumption that the enti re population Is exposed at this maximum level during substantial installation of drywall In two rooms. To the extent that these conditions are not met, the risk would be less* The Consumer Product Safety j[nAccrt requires a rfindaing orf an "unreasonaobile nrissk* as a basis for the banning action by the Commission. The following listing ooff UU..SS** edfecatttthhsc ffrrrotmm vvaarriionuusc Icraauucsescs -is* rptfr-onvvJidHeiadri for rreaffeerreenncfae:* A0G 40 -3 Type of Accident or Cause Bites and Stings ! i[ Lightning ! ' j Suffocation by Food Ingestion *i Poisoning In theiHome U.S* Deaths* 53 (1974) US (1974) 2181 (1974) 4300 (1975) Fires in the Home i 5100 (1975) Falls in the Horae I 8400 (1975) *From 1976 edition of "Accident Facts" published by the National Safety Council* . As discussed above, the highest excess of risk estimate from the 0SHA exposure data was 0.4asbestos-related deaths over a 40-year period* This Is almost 300 times less than the chances of being struck by lightning in a single year and approximately 5,000-20,OOOj times less than the annual risk from such common consumer hazards as food Ingestion, poisoning, fires and falls. ` ; j * Me submit that the risk from consumer exposure to asbestos during joint taping Is not an "unreasonable risk" within the meaning of the statute. The evidence available to the Conmission contradicts rather than suppors the finding that such a risk exists* Very truly yours. Signed by John L. Myers for H, B. Rhodes, Ph.D. Technology Manager J. F. Collins Vice-President ` yiT* . HBR/rnn | . BCC: A. L. Bayes j R. E. Byrne, dr T, W* Carmody1 J. F* Collins T* D. Finnlgan R. F. X. Fusaro J* L. Myers U* C* Thurber R. H* Mereness - AIA/NA A08402 INTERNAL COaaSSPOMDEWCE METALS DIVISION To {rumn PlVlllOp Location Mr. W. C. Thurber UCC - Metals Division 270 Park Avenue - 38th Floor Hew York, NY i Copy to Messrs, R, E. Byrne. Jr.; R, F. X, Fusaro I D. E. Hamby H. H. Humphreys F,, J. McCarthy --ih L. Myers P.0. BOX 579 4G25 ROYAL AVE,, NIAGARA FALLS, NEW YORK 14302 December 20, 1977 Originating D*pl. "Calidria" Asbestos AnswerLnfl 1oiler d*tc Svbjtwt A. T. Kearney Inquiry re Certain UCC Patents This confirms our telephone conversation of December 2D, 1977 on the abovenoted subject. A. T. Kearney is conducting a survey study under contract with the CPSC to identify asbestos-containing products which may present a "hazard" to "consumers"1 The CPSC intends to move to protect consumers from such hazards. I have had numerous deallngswith Mr. Jim Lewis of that firm during the extended proceedings on tape-joint compounds. They did a reasonable,economic impact study for, TJC and they are trying to do an objective, balanced, non-sensational report on the other products. I In view of the potential value of such an - objective study in blunting possible future CPSC actions, I have tried to help Mr. Lewis as much *s possible in a general way without getting into sensitive areas. Numerous requests to identify specific.products and name manufacturers thereof have been refused. .. . Mr. Lewis called me several days ago to obtain information about the following four patents that a computer pearch had identified with Union Carbide: 3,891,565 - travel Packing Composition - Colpoys 3,888,085 - Latex Paint - Myers 3,558,485 - ^ire-Fightlng Composition - Skvarla .3,947,286 - Pigmented Latex Coating - Myers He Indicated that they had written Or. Humphries and had not received an answer and were in a tight deadline situation* I told him that 3*891,565 and 3,558,485 had never been practiced. After consulting with Mr, Raeburne, he war, informed that th6 b*ie> latex rasps had pnjpyed upry limited commercial success and at most represented an extremely minute fraction of the market for asbestos-containing paints. This seemed to satisfy him. I ' At- iw"' u /`.f o'* o ,. . j ' *7)'A Hajrison 8. Rhodes HBR/ram "Intentionally added asbestos" is specified in 1304.3(f) as asbestos which Is: i i. "(1) added deliberately (as an ingredient intended to impart specific characteristics; or, (Z) contained In the final product as the result of knowingly using a raW material containing asbestos. Whenever a manufacturer finds out that the finished product contains asbestos* the manufacturer will be considered as knowingly using a raw material containing asbestos, unless the manufacturer takes steps to reduce the asbestos to the maximum extent feasible." Banned consumer products which are mentioned specifically as containg respirable, free*fon# asbestos fiber include drywall spackling compounds and tape joint com pounds (cosraonly known as joint cement or tape joint mud). The ban does not cover caulks, sealants, and similar materials which are not available in a dry form and which are not ordinarily sanded. s/vf^u-V i' ^4. After January 16, 1978, the banned products cannot be manufactured or shipped from the manufacturer's facility. 1 'i ,, After June 12, 1978, the! banned products cannot be sold or used, regardless of the date of man ufactui,re. Union Carbide Corporation ancl others have spent considerable amounts of time, effort and money in an unsuccessful attempt to oppose or modify the CP5C action. Ue do not believe that the ban was justified by the evidence presented and we have presented oral and written testimony in support of our belief. A copy of our most recent letter is'1 enclosed. * . |i Although subsequent action may be taken, there is little possibility that the CPSC will make any beneficial changes, at least not in the near future. We appreciate your past business and look forward to continuing to supply you with asbestos If you make compounds for industrial use or export. Let us know if you have any questions, or if we can be of any assistance. Very truly yours, i John L* Kyers Marketing Manager JLMidal Enclosures f ; A r1 rt i r UNrow carbide CORPORATION If MIW AKWSL^nr 'mat, rt. ti *031* LAW DEPARTMENT fiacaaber 22 > 1977 Kr- J. I,* ttffir* Metals Division Niagara Falls, Jtev 'Stick. Re: Metals Division - Gonaurex Traduce Safety ComisSion * legislations on Asbestos in Wallhoard CoppOiaitte ' Dear Mr. Hyerai Reference is sada to yetsr draft letter* dated December 20, 1977, is connection with tits above-captioned regulations. P^ztsuant to our discussion, I advise that the following chag&e* he s&ade therein.' 1, Paragraph 1 of- your letter should he revised as follows: Ehe CPSC ban covers only censuses products ss not covaT industrial products or product^ fling consumer products) for erjiort. For stalls <m the use. of asbestos in industrial re, please see paragraph 2 below and on the uae ua asbestos in products for export, please sec paragraph 3 below^ , TTfmn'M-frn fnsggte^ ana sficuxd > "The bn shall not apply to any ce&sfs&r product if fl) it can he shown that such product 1$ manufactured, sold, or held for sale far expert from the Tfaited States (or that such product was isportad for export), unless such conttB&r product Is In fact distributed in commerce for use in the Doited States, and (2) such consumer product when distributed in conmurce* or any container in which it is enclosed when so disttimitsd^ beers a stfisp or label stating that such consumer product la intended for export; except that this chapter shall apply to any coastaaer product reanufsetured for eale> offered for sals, or sold for shipment to any ^ 084G6 5. Paragraphs 3 And 4 <?f ynrwr latter &h&3ild be - renv^ibereti paragraph 4 and 5 f . . If you bsve any questions, I vlU he b^PFT ce discuss theta vitft you- . Very truly yoiOT* fcfrLkZ X>( jr.^-sc^ Hobett 3P, X, ?uaaro SS3?/db c- tf. C, Sburber C* P. a*ebvr=/ffle A0ii407 v ' f-r~- - i------ UJ <L -rU usrlacr- December 20, 1977 X cj d-AW (icnsu, Wi <Ut$ 6l^pveVt* . *>0 toe. -u** mi /$/**/" ee-*/ ivc?* j. i^itr? <d J *** 4**"**- 0 At>* 30 i J r I JL - M <- A J. Because of the extensive publicity and since we have attempted to keep many of you directly informed, you should not be surprised that the Consumer Product Safety Conmisslon has finally published their ban on "Consumer Patching Com pounds Containing Respirable, Free-Forra Asbestos". A copy of the Federal Register notice, dated December 15, 1977* Is enclosed for your information ' and file. To assist you in understanding the extent and effect of the CPSC action, we call your attention to the following items: The ban only applies to "consumer patching compounds" which contain "inten tionally added asbestos" from which "respirable free-form asbestos fibers" can become airborne under reasonably foreseeable conditions of use*. In the ban. a "consumer" product is defined very broadly as follows: 1304.1(c) "Only consumer products are subject to this regula tion. Patching compounds which are consumer products include those which a consumer can purchase. Merely labeling a patching compound for industrial use would not exclude such articles from the ban. If the sale or use of the product by consumers is facil itated, it Is subject to the ban. Patching compounds which are labeled as, marketed, and sold solely for industrial use in non consumer environments are not subject to the ban. In addition to those products which can be sold directly to consumers, the ' ban applies to patching compounds containing respirable free form asbestos which are used in residences, schools, hospitals, public buildings or other areas where consumers have customary- aceess.* r\ r* > o t '-'0434 IKi 14K METALS DIVISION * ........ PtO.BOX579<r462S ROYAL AVE., NIAGARA FALLS,NEW YORK 14: ToCTlHI*] di9Jon Location Messrs. . R. E, Byrne, Jr. G. L. Dickson E* J. Kleber T. P* Norris J. E, Walsh copy 19 Messrs. J, F. Collins T. D. Finnegan R. F. X. Fusaro R. H. Mereness H. B. Rhodes W* C Thurber Ms. Stella Miller - NPCA File oat* December 20* 1977 Originating Dtot. "Calldrift" Asbestos AnstMrlmr kttar 0*0 Subject Letter to Customers about CPSC Action - -, - Enclosed is a copy of the Subject, the Federal Register Notice, our last letter to the CPSC and a list of those to whom the letter was sent. Although the same letter was sent to all, we typed the addressee's name and address on each one. ' . Please let me know if you have any questions or If we should send the letter to anyone else. Please remind your distributors that they are responsible for advising their customers as appropriate. John L. Myers JLMrdal Enclosures A0G40S December 22, 1977 Dear Mr. Because of the extensive publicity and since we have attempted to keep many of you directly informed, you should not be surprised that the Consumer Product Safety Comnission has finally published their ban on ``Consumer Patching Com pounds Containing Respirable, Free-Form Asbestos". A copy of the Federal Register notice, dated December 15, 1977, is enclosed for your information and file.- * To assist you in understanding the extent and effect of the CP5C action, we call your attention to the following items: 1* The CPSC ban covers only consumer products and does not cover Industrial products or products (including consumer products) for export. For more details on the use of asbestos in Industrial products, please see para graph 2 below and on the use of asbestos in products for export, please see paragraph 3 below. 2. The ban only applies to "consumer patching compounds" which contain "inten tionally added asbestos0 from which "respirable free-form asbestos fibers11 can become airborne under reasonably foreseeable conditions of use. In the ban, a "consumer" product is defined very broadly as follows: 1304.1(c) "Only consumer products are subject to this regu lation* Patching compounds which are consumer products include those which a consumer can purchase. Merely labeling a patch ing compound for industrial use would not exclude such articles from the ban. If the sale or use of the product by consumers is facilitated, it is subject to the ban* Patching compounds which are labeled as, marketed, and sold solely for industrial use in non-consumer environments are not subject'to the ban. In addition to those products which- can be sold directly to consumers, the ban applies to patching compounds containing respirable free-fgrtn asbestos which are used in residences, schools, hospitals, public buildings or other areas where con* sumers have customary access." - "Intentionally added asbestos" is specified in 1304.3(f) as asbestos, which is: i; j ._ "(1) added deliberately as an ingredient intended to impart specific characteristics; or, (2) contained in the final pro duct as the result of knowingly using a raw material containing asbestos. Whenever a manufacturer finds out that the finished product contains asbestos, the manufacturer will be considered as knowingly using: a raw material containing asbestos, unless the manufacturer takes steps to reduce the asbestos to the maximum extent feasible*" . ' Banned consumer products which are mentioned specifically as containing . respirable, free-form asbestos, fiber include drywall speckling compounds and tape joint compounds (commonly known as joint cement or tape joint mud)* The ban does not cover caulks, sealants,* and similar materials which are. not available in a dry form and which are not ordinarily sanded. 1i i . 3* The ban shall not apply to any consumer-product if. (1) it can be shown that such product is manufactured, sold, or held for sale for export from the United States (or that such product was Imported for export), unless such consumer product is in fact distributed In commerce for use in the United States, and (2) such consumer product when distributed In commerce, or any container in whijch it Is enclosed when so distributed, bears a stamp or label statingi;that such consumer product Is intended for export; . except that this chapter shall apply to any consumer product manufactured - for sale, -offered for sale* or sold for shipment to any installation of the United States located outside of the United States." 4- After January IS, 197fiJ the banned products cannot be manufactured or shipped from the manufacturer's facility. 'i 1 5. After June 12, 1978, the banned products cannot be sold or used, regardless of the date of manufacture. ' Union Carbide Corporation and others have spent considerable amounts of time, effort and money In an unsuccessful attempt to oppose or modify the CPSC action* Ue do not believe that the ban was.justified by the evidence presented and we have presented oral and written testimony In support of our belief. A copy . of our most recent letter is enclosed. Although subsequent actforijmay be taken, there is little'possibility that the CPSC will make any beneficial changes, at least not in the near future* ;i , . We appreciate your past business and look forward to continuing to supply you with asbestos if you make compounds for industrial use or export* Let us know if you have an^ questions, or if we can be of any assistance. Very truly yours. Marketing Manager JLMrdal Encs* , ` ftOG49C Hr, Gib Kflimsy Apperson. Chemicals* Inc. P. 0. Box 2555 Jacksonville* FL 32203 Beadex Mfg- Company 833 Hauser Way N. Renton. WA 98055 | * Attn; Purchasing Agent , ' Hr* Alex Callas A.T- Callas Company 2300 West Big Beaver RdTroy* HI . 48084 Hr- Gil Carpenter ! Florida Rolling MtlTs.Inc* J ' 850 $W 21st Terrace . | Ft. Lauderdale, FL 33312 \ Hr- Robert Favero Georgia Pacific Corp* P*tf, Box 776 . Marietta, GA 30060 . Hr* E- L* Aasen Georgia-Pacific Corp* 900' SW 5th Avenue Portland, OR 97204 ' i , ii 1 | i Hr. Sterling Clark Georgia Pacific j Bestwall DlvP.0* Box 330 Qttanah, TX 79252 Hr, Gail ElTings, President Greater Iowa Drywall Corp- 1834 Fuller Road . U. Des Moines, Iowa 50265; Hr* Kerwln Labels , .! Harrisons A Crosfield (Pacific) Inc* 4000 Birch Street . Newport Beach* CA 92660 Mr- William Clary : Harrisons & Crosfteld (Pacific) Inc* Benson Chemical Dlv- 2450 8th AvenueS. Seattle. WA 98134 Hr. D. J, Boyd - x Harrisons & Crosfield (Canada) 4 Banigan Drive Toronto. Ontario M4H 1ST CANADA - Hr. R* A- Goddard Harrisons & Crosfield (Canada) ; { 3070 Kings Way St* ^\ Vancouver, British Colombia V5R 5J7 CANADA `? Hr, Fran 0" Connor .. Harwtek Chemical Corp* 60 S. Selberling Street Akron, OH 44305 Mr* George Proodlan Harwlck Chemical Corp* i 7225 Paramount Blvd. | Pico Rivera, CA 90660 Highland Stucco Products 3650 N* 40th Avenue Pheontx, AZ 85019 Attn: Purchasing .Agent Mr, Lloyd Johnson ,, 0 & A Mfg. Enterprises Calle No. 13, F-17 Jardines de Caparra Baiamon, Puerto Rico 00619 | ! : Hr* Wasnus Harp - Kelly Moore Paint.CP. 301 W. Hurst Blvd. Hurst* TX 76053 * -Mr- Doug Merrill 1 Kelly Moore Paint Co. ' 909 Old County Rd. j San Carlos* CA 94070 \ Mr* Uilmer Davis Monarch.Paint Company p.0. Box 55604 Houston, IX 77055 . Mr- Kelly Booth proto Company . 1910 Wall Street \ p.O* Box 15768 J nallas. TX 75215, Mr. Jerry Nichols - j Roach Paint Company ; 1301 Broom Street Dallas, TX 75202 Mr. Robert Mueller ~ ] . Ruco of Atlanta Inc, / 468 Bishop St. HW Atlanta, GA. 30318 Hr. Rick Rett Ruco Inc. 9190- Johnson Drive Shawnee Mission, K5 . 66023 Mr. RayGroya Technical Products Inc 3500 Ridge Road Cleveland* OH 44102 Mr, Robert Wiggins Texas Texture Paint Co. P.0. Box 14347- . Fanners Branch, TX 75234 Mr. Chuck Ragland ~ Union Oil Co* of Calif, AMSCO Div. 1100 Milam Bldg. Suite 2675 Houston, TX 77002 Mr. James Schneiter Jim Walter Research Corp. 10301 9th Street N. St. Petersburg, FL 33702 Mr* Hale Parker -' Western Chemical Mfg. Co, 3270 E. Washington . Ld$ Angeles, CA 90023 Hutson Industries j 1B05 W. Irvington Place Denver, CO 80223 1 Attn: Purchasing Agent UC 149-2 INTERNAL CORRESPONDENCE tfETALS DIVISION To tNamo) CHvislM LMtllOP Mr. W. C. Thurber UCC - Metals Division 38th Floor 270 Park Avenue New York, NY 10017 cosy to Messrs* R. E. Byrne, Jr, R. F. X, Fusaro / 0. L* Myers Flleir ! p.o, box 579 - 4G2B royal ave., Niagara falls, new york H3cz Oil* September 22, 1976 1 . OrlJln*tln| Dept. ! "Calidria" Asbestos f1 AnswerM^g letiar dale . 1 Subject 1 1 Material Safety Data Sheet Suggested revisions in the asbestos Material Safety Data Sheet are attached. An annotated copy off Mr. Raeburn's suggestions is also attached for convenient reference.! .1 Basically, Mr, Raeburn's! recommendations have been followed with occasional minor editorial revisions except as follows: K Instead of deleting ithe respirator use table entirely, it has been updated tojfit the current regulations and specific references to products have been removed, Acceptable pro ducts are referenced to N10SH approval, This will change from time to time but will not affect the validity of this sheet. I think it ivITT be to our advantage to show in a simple way what type of respirators are acceptable for the various concentration ranges. 2. The idea that contaminated protective clothing should not be removed from the plant premises has been added to "OTHER PROTECTIVE EQUIPMENT11. I 3. The "no smoking11 concept is added under VIII SPECIAL PRE CAUTIONS. j ! 'A) *>. j ' H. B.~Rhodes n8R:dal Attachments UCC 007416 A207 1 J pEwnttff-s exhibit I , September 1. 1972 # UNION CARBIDE CORPORATION * 462S RQfAL AVENUE NIAGARA PALLS, NEW YORK * 14302 TlLtPHONC: I71BI JTl-XPC \/ \/ ' PRODUCT; Chrysolite Aibrtto* Trade names; tn CHEMICAL FORMULA: Mfla(0H|#Si0,0 fq. Dfffo;'.f" fr BOILING POINT AND MELTING POINT: Not Pertinent nauvBLva jiw iammuvbw yM*>niMV However, the raCerial itself can be hazardous under certain conditions. (See Vbalers.) Hi; rV:&\ -piyT'iX -j' ^ Materimal_i_i_n_o_t CoI mbustible, No Fin o^r Ex^pl^o_s_io_n__H__az_ard. L Ittsfl [ -.---. P . .'; INERT MATERIAL: No Decomposition or PolymerizationConditions. PERMISSIBLE EXPOSURE TO AJRBDflNECDNCENTBA'^lpN;^^ ^ C ^ it>.i0ay) The current mndiidrpl the Occupational ISafety and Heaith^Aea-aias^D contains the following exposure limit*: ,j __ The 8-hour tiwe-weighted average airborne coticen' tratacnSof asbestos fibers to 'wbich any eT^loyee Tray be exposed rtvill i;iot reiAW 2 fibers, lon&er " t'lu-tn 5 ]!iicyu:':ters per cubic);CfcntijW2ter of air, as detcn?.inc`d by the i:,'..bivsiG fjilter nisthod At ' 400-4bO X HnpilfScailta <4 mi llii-ieter objective) phase contrast: illumination. ' Mo #crployee shall be " exposed at iny t. liras to airborne concaritratiorss of asbestos fibers in excess of!10 fibers;longer than " 5 liflci'crxetprs per cubic centiliter of air<4-^39 , ' ' '- ,' ' ` , 'i EFFEtTSOFyW* EXPOSURE: CtyvTrQff: BrtAfhi^ ,,.*/ muse. jef1*"1 iSTrm- EMERGENCY AND FIRST AID PROCEDURES: Ho flCUte toxicity. Use respirator if airborne ______________ : |J asbestos fiber# concentration exceeds OSUA lirnics. (_Vl J^Oji : ` v'.:' j STEPS TO BE TAKEN IF MATERIAL 1^ RELEASED OR SPiTlEO: ' Avoid Million of duaL 'R.mm. ipiilic/ Material by vacuum eleaner or by walif watft. ' waste Disposal method: | ^ 7If reasonably foreseeable handling will nol produce airborne concentrations in excels of exposure fimtet,' no special procedures are required. When limits are rikoly lo be exceeded, waste and scrap shall be collected nd disposed ol in impermeable sealed bags Or other dosed, impermeable containers, suitably labelled. 7 . | Ii UCC007417 Union Carbide Corporation assumes no responsibility and mmaakk.el s no warranty, expresied or Implied, repre- UflT<MiiVV Arnmic# nr rlilnMp 4 ____ U5f, fy>(d VENTILATION: li)l txhAM for each operation h preferable. (Set American Nstionxl Standards Institute booklet. ZB.2 -- 1971.1 General area exhaust is acceptable, No rfxciil consideration!. PROTECTIVE GLOVES: None 6YE PROTECTION! None RESPIRATORY PROTECTION*1! 7hK Citrnc4.+ iQ/e.Jl n ........ "............................................................... " " Sa'Ftfjf' f7la*T^r'V _ 'n f rf+/~Gmr-/i mf*+ f** r**/4+,,t AIRBORNE CONCENTRATION131 ) 8-HOUR EXPOSURE'3' CEILING 1 CONCENTRATION i j^maalmum 10 maximum j REQUIRED MASK TYPE NjiA.rcquirede'heA ImiM arf n+ rr 'JO maximum 1 Coieryw.il i.,tJ ihujUi.-- ! Atm -d/C ff fimj/t lefc rxf^/Vjstr* 00 maximum Powered mter positive pressure. i - -. Over^00 , Typo C positive pressure, air supplied. . -1 (1) Allowed on))' during rbf tine required for insinuation of engineering eontipls, when engineering contieli arc not technically feasible or adequate, md in emergencies. An employee may not be assigned to larks requiring respirator if nil rrutl rt<tnj medical exjmiflal'oo indicates be will be unable ig function normally, 6l\p aajJet ---------in bp AfQSft' 4t rn*y~ bt " ' " ' W* (2) Fibers per milliliter greater than 5 microns in length, 21 determined by the membrane filter method at 400-4&0X magnification (4 millimcler objective) phjtJK contrast iHurnintlion. (3) 8'Hout time weighted average. OTHER PROTECTIVE EQUIPMENT; i ( If-time m.-ighltd-nu jyL ^ccilihg concentration limiUere exceeded, clothing providing whole body covering shall be supplied and iti use required { V*nt*--t'natr4 /,/*..-f - vrrre^ fr*** } ^4r^ If the lime weighted /vr'jge and ceiling concentration limits are mi receded, no special precautions are reputed except: , a| Rag damage and dusting should be min'mi/erf and dun inhalation avoided. b) Every place of employment where asbestos fibers ire teleased must be moftiiotod,hy Ow.mbei >7 determine exposure levels, c) A cdmprehenifyr medical cva/rinaiign ii required lor any employee exposed id airborne fibers within 30 days of first such employment, annually thereafter and on termination of employment. *'"tr? rm*<-r When exposure limiu^fty txeeerted. reference should be made to the regulation far details on eaufrgn signs, mcrfuloring, change rooms, protective clothing laundering srvd itcord keeping. J j/F/S ST4<t**GL.y UiGf* TMfr W/th fifties/vs >& Af^r s'Sjsfb' UCC 007418 72 , t . UNION CARBIDE CORPORATION NM AVtNUC, NEW YORK, N. Y. 1001? LAW DEPARTMENT received FEB 6f976 February 5, 1976 Mr. W, C. Thurber Metals Division 3Sth Floor Be: Metals Division - .Material Safety Data Sheet CALIDRIA Asbestos Dear Mr, Thurber; At Bob Fus0X0*3 request, I have reviewed the Material Safety Data Sheet dated September 1, 1972 for Chrysotile Asbestos, as sold by Union Carbide, I have the following ocements: 1. Under the heading "TRADE KAMES,11 the term "Calidria" refers to a trademark, I si^gest that, this `traderark be set in all capital letters, without quotation mafks. 2. Under the heading '^ZAilDOUS UnKtRSIENIS ,11 the words "Not 0X X Applicable'* should be deleted) and the following words substituted therefor: ] 'i . Asbestos contains:ino hazardous ingredients. However, the material itself can be hazardous . under certain conditions. (See Vbelow.) .. &. K 3. Under the heading f'HEALTH HAZARD DATA," "PERMISSIBLE EXPOSURE TO AIRBORNE CONCENTRATION, " tie present language should be delated and the following language substituted therefor: . . '* Effectiv^/July lf] 1976,- 'the following exposure limits jfcfider the Occupational Safety and Health Act of 1970) shall) apply: \/ - , c The 8-hour tline-weighted average airborne concen trations of asbestos fibers to which any employee may be exposed shall not exceed 2 fibers, longer than 5 micrometers per cubic centimeter of air, as determined by thel maifcrane filter method at 400-450 X magnification (4 millimeter objective) phase contrast illumination. Ho employee shall be exposed at any time to airborne concentrations of asbestos fibers ih excess of 10 fibers: longer chan 5 jnicraneters per cubic centimeter of _ -StF.R. 1910rWi)! . . AtlO,/?-' UCC 007419 -2- ` , The heading "EFFECTS OF OVEREXPOSURE"' should be modified .to read "EFFECTS OF EXPOSURE" and the existing language should be ' deleted end the following language substituted therefor: . ` . CAUTION: Breathing asbestos nay cause serious ,, . bodily harm. * .. _ 6,!i ifader the heading 'EMERGENCY AND FIRST AID PROCEDURES," the existing language should be deleted and the following language substituted therefor: - . t ' No acute toxicity. Use respirator if airborne asbestos fibers concentration exceeds OSHA, limits. o.K. 4. The disclaimer statanent at the bottom of the Safety Data ' Sheet should be set in upper case bold type. o.K 5. Under the heading "SPECIAL PROTECTION INFORMATION"OTHER PRCriECZlVE, EQUIPMENT,1 * the words "time weighted average or" should be deleted. The sentence will then read as follows: tlw , , IfAceiling concsitration limits sa?e exceeded, > clothing providing Whole body covering shall be supplied and its use required. ' *" The chart which is printed under the heading lfRESPIRAIURY ~\ PROTECTION" and the acccc^anying footnotes should be deleted from the Material Safety Data Sheet. This information is subject to frequent change and the Data Sheet is therefore subject to going out of date. The following s<tence should be inserted under .the heading "RESPIRATORY PROTECTION'1; Proper selection of respirators shall be made according to the guidance of American National ' "Standard Practices for Respiratory Protection , 2 88.2-1969, end any subsequent regulations on _ {** ;c^ O' i, f ;Vt ' K,ii ** the selection of i respirators enacted by the . National Institute for Occupational Safety and 'Health (N10SH). 6. Under the heading "SPECIAL PRECAUTIONS t" die first sentence should be modified to read "If ceiling concentration limits are not exceeded..and the last sentence should be modified to read "When exposure limits may be exceeded..' 0-kf If you have any questions about the above ccnmcnts, I will be pleased to discuss this matter further. Also, I can review the new Safety Data Sheet in proof form before it is finally printed, if you wish. Very truly yours, CFR;bl ' cc; J, V. Hjrray F, X. flisgro/File UCC 0074-20 Charles F. Raeburn A20723 Call Report DATE: September 27, 1979 SUBJECT.: Broken SG"IOQ Baas COMPANY: Nitto Boseki Co. INTERVIEWED: Mr. Kanno, Deputy Manager* Tile Production Section Mr. Tajima 1 A considerable number of broken bags were found among total 2,250 bags SG-100 delivered under order B-11930. Called upon the factory to check into the problem. Situation: / *1 , ' Of 2,250 bags, 49 (1,lll:~kgs) were found broken, the asbestos powder from such bags flying around and piling up on the container floor. ` During palletizing operation some more broke and how many more get broken during onward handling was unknown. Problems: . . 1. Decreased work efficiency - difficulty in palletization 2, busting problem - exposure to asbestos dust (how to dispose of broken bags) Nittobofs request: 1. Nittobo no longer accepts PE bags, so future delivery be made in paper bags. 2. Unbroken bags be replaced with rigid ones for the delivery made today, ' 3. Broken bags be returned to the shipper. Countermeasures: For the request 2 above, replacement is impossible at this moment, and improvement appears difficult for the next order because of the time limit. (The manager Mr. Tsuda said the situation calls for a discount of at .least ^5 or over, for the drop in the workefficiency much disturbed the production managert) Tomoejwill telex UCC for improvement, and based upon its reply will negohijt J fjg^in i'| UCC 007421 with Nittobo. , We Will comply with request 3 above. -2 - UCC 007422 ji 2 0 7 2 b