Document y1nNavMbpO4aDkxOn1qraDer

'tu.-*''** may 1965 I U.S DEPAF -WENT OF LABOR Wothington RECORDS AUTHENTICATION CERTIFICATE ------------------ ------------ 1 PLAINTIFFS EXHIBIT I HEREBY ATTEST, That the annexed copy, of each of the specified number of copies, of each document listed below is a true copy of a document in the official custody of the Department of Labor. 1 copy each of: Transcripts from March 14,15,16, and 17 Comments and hcaiing exhibits of: W.J. Nicholson, American Petroleum Institute, D.A. Holaday, Brand Insulations Inc., L.J. Bibri, B.J. Phillips(Certain-teed), M.W. Borow, J.D. Moran(Flintkote), F.L. Pundsack(J-M), J.W. Rawlings, W.M. Hancock(Dow), W.K. Hesse(J-M), E.M. Fenner(J-M), E.J. KillianCNat. Gypsum), Cement Asbestos Products Co., M.M. Key, G.E. Best(MCA) SIGNATURE AND OFFICIAL TITLE DIVISION AND BUREAU DATE DonielyO Marsick Technical Information Specialist Docket Office/Technical Data Center/Occup. Sfty & Hlth Adm/ U.S. Dept, of Labor 7 Sep 78 1 HEREBY CERTIFY, That Daniel J Marsick____ who gigned the foregoing attestation, is now and was at the time of signing (title) Technical Information Specialist and ha9 ,egal cuslody of the official records of the United States Department of Labor therein atf .sted and that full faith and credit should be given to his act as such. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I J. J. Lafranchise . v t-v- "1 T designated by the Secretary of Labor as Authenti* <*f^5jP^:l.'^P^^jH^!>ration Officer of the Department of Labor, hare here- iaARfeS8BR^5."" iub.cnbed rr name and caused the seal of the Department of Labor to be affixed this 'th day of rvisf 0 Jrf h ti Septer.be:* ^g 7S-? 0 (/. y.'J/ ,^ Authentication Officer / // Department of Labor /\ T**.*--Tfrrrr\ Oc?.. -i * 7^r4*. * ^* ***.?. *\\? ?^ wi' l.tn Lr>w* 1\ :i?*r. icTJJiL i v* - ^T\ i v- ( In- t'ne Ifctter ci : a-- s?a;oa:;e ~oh r::?c?tua2 to asbestos bust, PROPOSED KULE WA'CTHC- PUBLIC H3ARIK0 Confidence room 5 Inter c e p?. rt ~ c- n V-r_ 1 Auc i tor iur. 12th cr Constitution A*;s . . f.i hnshinjjton, D.C. ThuiT.Ssy, ilsrch 16. If:72 The Lo^e-entitled r.istter oeme or. for further heerinr. pursusni to iC'.-r;r. rh 9:00 o'clcc':. .:n., Thvrsdcy, March If, ( 1972. EEFGRE: AHTI-rj*; M. GOLDBERG, Kedrins EriS'Lner APPEARUCES: { Ac heretofore r.ov-ed.} 5 178 (The document above referred 20 i wa6 marked as Er.hibit Ko. 3b ?-- for identification.) EXAMINEE GOLDBERG: All right. MU. FAY: And the second one is the Asbestos Fact Sheet concerning the uses of asbestos and asfcectos products. EXAMINER 60LDBEUG: That will be Exhibit 39. (The document above referred to vjas marked as Exhibit ilo. 39 , for identification.) * EXAMINEE GOLDBERG: Thank you. Exhibits 38 and 39 are received. . (The documents previously identi fied as Exhibits Uos. 3S and 39 j ' ' 11 ' t:crc received in evidence.) j 1I EXAMIiTIR GOLDBERG: Introduce yourself. j I 121. SMETOITIC: Hy name is Mat the*.? Id. Suetonic, and *. I an Executive Secretary of the Asbestos Information Associe- tier. of North America and alec manager cf saecial projects ` ivt the Fublic Affairs Section for tlie Johns-Mr.nville Corpora- tacn. . _____ * --'' i ! j i i ; II:-:. Fay has already described the association, and j * /" 1 id.rntif5.ad the companies which it repr:sects. Ms are;-basically *. -L an information die Semina t5.ng organisation and the facts o? opinion'; contained in ny presentation are supported in the 'n * t 179 medical Literature or constitute the professional opinion of medical and technical experts available to the industry'as consultants. ' _ The osucstos industry has recognized for many years that there are occupational health hazards associated v:ith the excessive inhalation of asoestos dust. Recognizing its ooligsticn to protect its workers, the industry has over the 4 years invested many millions of dollars in sophisticated and highly efficient equipment to reduce asoestos dust levels in the work places generally accepted safe limits. Some $1U0. million has oecn invested for this purpose in the past decade alone. I just might point out in reference to seme of the testimony that was given tnis morning tnat almost exclusively this equipment was designed to prevent exposure at the source. ,j dust collection equipment of the type that was described for > in the insulation trade but on a much, much larger scale -- n net protecting the worker, cut protecting him from the uefcrc it ever gets to him. The general no sition within the incus is the v;e wculc never like to sec a man ever have to v:ear a respirator, for example. The source is the place to stop exposure. Over the years, aceeptocle safe limits for asbestos exposure has ueen Lowered a numoer of times uy various oocies, including I1CGIK and others. The industry has worxed hard to :.-r-ot each of those lowered limits, how. however, the industry * 'D is ceing faced with the pcssioilifcy .of yet another decrease in the acceptable Limits for asoestos exposure. In the past, each new standard was accepted uy the industry uecause the developing medical evidence indicated that new lower limits might indeed ue necessary. This is certainly not the case with the tuc-fioer standard proposed, oy the National Institute of Occupational Safety and Health. The medical urief pre pared oy I-IIOSH in support of the tuo-fiaer limit, in cur opinion, falls far short of establishing the necessity of su a standard. The criteria document, in fact, states quite clearly on page D-10 that "the number cf studies that have collected both environmental and medical data and with a to others when they developed their standards in the past There is general agreement among the professionals studying the l proolem that it should?prouauly ue lower than 12 floors par I cc, out how much lower is a question that has not been answered to everyone's satisfaction. The main reason for this! is that the disease we are seeing today is the result of j i conditions that existed 20 or 30 or 40 years ago, at a time when today's highly sophisticated dust collection equipment was not readily availaole and- when ooth the industry and the medical profession knew relatively little aoout the hazards of asbestos dust. This point has been made repeatedly cy the doctors testifying before this hearing. Vie simply do not know for sure what the dust levels were in those days, out there is every indication that they j were enormously higher then they are today. For this reason.. ! as many o. octors ,nave po.inted, out, we must be very carez- ul i*)I aoout looking at today's ` conditions and today's disease and jI trying to draw a parallel between the two. Such a parallel . ! dceo not exist, and this can lead to some very erroneous conclusions. Let me give you an example. It has occn reported oy come researchers studying the in ula tier. trades in this country that the oust cond or. tkat exist today on insulation jou sites and in ship- ( 1C2 led to a^calculation that the very high death rate found j among these men is directly attributable to levels of around 1 -- li!: three fibers per cc. The evidence is substantial that this I : i; i i calculation is inaccurate. ! I am submitting with ny testimony a paper which ii describes the decreasing asbestos content of insulations used II *' ! in the trades over the past 30 to 40 years. You will recall o '!; I! that this basic question about the levels of exposure in the : past among these people was brought up yesterday uy Dr. Nicholson and under question by Hr. ShecUler. The basic document \vhich substantiates the conclusion that the levels are considerably different, although we don't know v;hat they j were 40 years ago, but we do knot; they were much higher, is 'i contained in this paper which I have here entitled, ''Changing Concepts of Insulation Material." . if I will not go into the details of what is concerned . .i in this paper,except tosubmit it. 1 example, I submit this paper not cc discredit an; researcher's ;:ork. Obviously, I am net in a position tc d?. that, hutmerely to pointcut asothers have cone, the | I | ouarr.ous difficulty or.e encounters in trying to establish meaningful numerical standards. In addition, as Dr. Holmes pointed cut in his testimony, the evidence seems to indicate that mere importr.ncel shoulc! ce given to peak exposures in evaluating disease i <4 133 . potentialthan Co timeweighted averages. * To;: example, in the tcarout of old insula cions | i ; ! \ aboard chip, th: British have counted levels as high as 3000 fibers per cc, T.:i*h"n mean ranging cetv;cen 133 fibers per cc and 333 fd.oers per cc. Today, of course, men performing this work areprotected . by air supply respi.rators. Thirty * ! years ago, when they received exposures that led to their . presentdisease, theywere not so protected. The doctors are generally agreed that the lung's ability to cleanseitself ofaccumulated dust v:ouid be . . seriously reduced at such high levels, yet s> time-weighted average for a 40-hour week might show a relatively low level. ! fl ; i ' I ! j In the spraying industry, counts as high as 1300 j fibers per cc have been recorded. Yet, considering the time spent o:i preparation of the equipment and ether non-spraying tneks, the time-weighted average for these workers might come out to be reasonably moderate. Thus, in the opinion of most experts, time-weighted avsi-ages can oe very misleading if the men are periodically e::p ccd tc fiber levels so high that the lung's c3.cr. rising mechanism fails considerably in its ability to rid the lung of accumulated fiber. If, as the experts have told us, the lungs can remove 99% of ail inhaled particles, including octettes rice::, then a reduction in the cleansing function.of even a few percent will increase the amount of fiver retained 18U by that :.*.nny rzagnitude. . . " In addition to these reasons, there are excellent \ i j techncic-gical and eccrcrsic reasons for not prcneigasing too strict r.' ti^e-weighted, average. and instead placing core i ! _i attention on e.li'r.inatS.ng the high penh exposures. j.he industry I :i is in the process of trying to develop accurate data with re- ! gavel tc economic inipsct. \ l<1!;i r.'v . Pay referred to thi c in his pro se: . !! Y:e are working hard on th5.s proolen w !j :*j :1 lureau of St andards, and with Art hur D. Littl e. V.'hlie it iji > will he some weeds before final figu;:es will te * ii nurlv e:t5r.a ten rlriicn te that the cor t to the i 4 res 'ring a i:v:o-f itc:: standard ,in there sections of the industry! i v;c:;c- c;,eh a standard is feasible, would be in the vicinity ; ci -alio million. ' In rcec.:_vending a standard of Lr;o fibers per cc. i i *i I hn errsnocue ensur*etion has beer: race that toda*y's techr a'.c gy is capable of .lowering the levels in each and every > ! ! a senate s opcrat5.cn to two fibers. Past experience would . : n c;i.: t! at in a sinable number of operations it will ue : i 5sii:in to reduce the levels to r.v:o fibers, no ur.ttcr hen ; rr-':i\ rrinv 5.3 spent. i *i In there eases, the operations obviously would have j .5 r.i.v.t four and the men thrown out of verb. Us have cnly a:;/ rough idea at this true he;; large a segment of the & manufaccuring industry would ts affected in this manner, but an estimate of oerhaps 15 to 20% seems reasonable. ' Applied to the sales of a billion dollars, this would obviously work out'in the range of 150 to 200 million ! In addition, there will no doubt be cases where the technology is available to reduce levels to two fibers, but where the cost involved would cake a particular product line either r.o longer profitable or no longer competitive cn the open market against non-asbestos containing products of the same type. . ii I | i i iii In these cases, the plant or manufacturing operation! j would also be shut down. This particular type of situation would also emist at a five-fiber level hopefully in not as cany cases. . Trying to put a handle cn the potential number of lost jobs is extremeiy difficult. Mary email manufacturing operations will undoubtedly go under, but it is nearly ., . j *i ! iI j i j t ` i j I impossible to determine the total number of men we are talking about. Perhaps 15 to 30 thousand is acout as cross j i ; i a a we can. come at this Lime. This would not be just :n |I ranu "aisn-ring but would he a consideration of the insulation I l trader, acid other g?:our.s as we 11. j i The figures I have just mentioned may not seem laroe / * "1 wren compared to what tne steel or autcnooile Industries would j ' Ii have to pay in similar circumstances, but the asbestos industry j lSS t in this country is ouch smaller, and $200 million in equip- ! mcnt, another $200 million cr more in eliminating product linos due to an inability to meet the two-fiber standard, and 20 ' . ` j or 25 thousand lest jobs is an enormous chunk'- of thi3 industry *' For this reason, it is Vital that GS1IA give considerable i thought before- promulgating a standard that even the experts agree is not based on'solid scientific evidence* Of addit5.or.al enormous potential financial impact cn the industry is the labeling requirement as contained in the ` final recommendations of the OSIIA Advisory Committee. It j mould require the placing of a warning label cn each and every! product containing more than 5% asbestos by Height. This j label which contains the words: "Do not breath dust -- mav cause ashestosis and cancer." Such Oi label would surely spell the cornice of a ! t i ! I 1 ; number cm major proeuct lix*es of the industry* including viynlr acccstos floor tile, asb-cstos-pipc, and any other product ! t'.-n;: lo cold directly to the consumer nr.::bet. In addition, th:rs ic no count that our ccmyetitors will atccnui to ta'.-.o ; r-ye cn the situation by encouraging the public to avor.c . " ' f '.opntalr: -n.-rr n'T-'* u-ctc be oauso of * < 'j .-plied in the armin'; label, c r> * * t* " r- :-* iie such harerd r.rists. 7. mould question whether such a label, is. in.face. ; ' .{ rc sens ary or called for in the majority of ashes tcs-ccn ea-irirg [ X! 17 IE? products. Everyone ir. the industry end in the radical and j scientific profession who has dealt with the asbestos health pro hies*, ever i:ho years is familiar with the concept cf Icohcd- in and r.cn-lcehcd-i;: products. A lcched-in product is ere in . which the asbestos is bound into the product with cinert, ' asphalt, plastic or sore ether binder which prevents the : escape cf free filter in use.* rrarpls-s cf losh.cn in products would be asbestos ; cement products and floor tile. ICon-loched-in products would i .i be these in which the fiber is loosely bound and which release' - Ii fiber during handling or application. Hose as be s to s -e oa taining j insulations would fall into this category,, as would fire- ; proofing sprays and insulating cements. j X should non tier, that while there is no labeling ; vsyuiror.ent Linder any Federal statute for insulation products ; < at the present thro. 7. believe the majority cf the scripanv.ee . :tie industry voluntarily hove, a warninglabel onmost . wr.nan -lacy con so: or pohcntarl.Ly hacrrecus an : oo. . ' s c a-.plics to a lot cf bag asbestos cement prnducts and xhrr shipments- This, was a voluntary action on the part of rau.y of the ccrcar.ien in the industry. ; that the'cercent of ' 1 1GP while an asbestos cement sheet with 157. asbestos requires -icily none. Per this reason, it is only logical that the Advisory Ccrriittco rscpiseendcd labeling system be discarded in raver ox a syshea which only requires labeling on those products which readily release asbestos fiber in a hazardous quantity during handling or application. Tilth regard to the monitoring requirements of the proposed regulations, I would only lihe to point cut that there are probably no more than three dozen trained incustrie hygienists in the entire country available to industry to * couple and analyse asbestos dust concentrations. OGrlA should appreciate this problem because of its own difficuitics in urnaarg ruOirfwec; wasuseraal hygieni.srs. Lee can be trarr.cn i:o do this job, but it is going to tabe touch mere tire tbr.n 1 C permittee under the ler. 7. might also point cut that the duct monitoring cvcten required in the regulations will cost the manu facturing industry alone between $3 and $5 million per yen:-;, ret an error bitant sum when viewed by itself, out arc that adds to an already heavy financial burden cc the industry. As my final pc5.nt, I would lihe to discuss for a minute the radical aspects of the Advisory Ccmitttoo reccr.rrrrdaiicns. The ireccimendations state that the medical curve illau.ee program, dial! be carried cut by physicians 139 selected by the employee, and that tha medical records :5.11 be available only to IILJv and DOL physicians and Radical ccnsuluCir.tr. and physicians designated and authorised L-y the employee." --r You will note this employer is by omission pro hibited from seeing an employee*s medical record, even though the employe:: is responsible under the la;; for the medical condition of his employees. Under Section (c) {/) of the Advisory Ccrr.ittee recommendations, an employer is required ho-rare cure chat no employee "should be assigned to tasks requiring use of *:c spiral: err? if his most recent medical e::amine -ion indicates" and then the seetier goes on to the certain medice?, criteria. her can an employer obey the section of the regulations if he is prohibited from seeing an employee's medical records by another section of the regulation? This is completely illogical and is obviously reflective of the haste with which the advisory committee rnr, required i:c perform its duty. In addition, nor could an employer conduct c pre ventive medicine program in his plant if he cannot perform c:::r.vir.:i;ions, note changes in medical cor.dit5.enr, and counsel employees? These programs arc in existence in essentially all ;.-a-?:lr.wtaring companies in the asbestos industry. And I Aright reint out that not only arc employees counseled on 190 possible occupational health problems, but on the general overall" health condition as well. \h2 have heard the arguments from certain unions, net necessarily here4 but from others, that it should be solely up to the employee to deci.de whether or not he is willing to work under the existing conditions, whatever they nay be. * This simply docs not make good sense, because it is still the ; ! responsibility ci the employer to safeguard the health of his employees, where the responsibility lies is where the implementation of the conical surveillance program should be ; centered, and no place* else. `! It-should also be pointed out that a system of the type proposed in the recommendations would effectively present future ei'.idemiolorical studies of the asbestos industry. cricept on a very limited or local scale. The meaicel records vital to such studies would be distributed among thousands c'f doctors all across the country, and retrieval would be virtu- a'.lv impossible. In cor.clus5.on, 1 would like to summarise very briefl; .V c .various points I have attempted to bring cut in my pre- ; *. ` i. One. The medical evidence for establishing a .:Vnr::--.l time-weighted average is unavailable at this time. Two. Host experts agree that the brief, massive dr.scs of asbestos fiber are probably more important in the 6 191 1 causation, of the disease .thancontinuing,Long-tern, lev; or . moderate exposure. This it not to prac.lu.dc that low exposure over an enormous pericq. of tine are not to be considered at * '* all. but that the one is more important than the other. ewer Three. If CSKA promulgates a tSico-weighted average * than5.ve, theeconomic'impact eh the industry x-jill be il ! i ! iI * l : t ` enormous. In addition, many asbestos-containing products will ` fi probably disappear from the marketplace and thousands of jobs ' i i will be eliminated. .j ' it Four. A labeling requirement of the type recommended `j by the CSIiA Advisory Committee will result in the unnecessary : i t; \\ loss of hundreds of millions of dollars in sales each y ear. !i Fnivixe'segments of the industry *.riiibe destroyed, with resultant large-scale unemployment. i I I j - Five. The dust monitoring program recommended by j C'?M*i is- impractical at this time because of thelac'.: of inch personnel. I i ; rwJ . The medical cur yoiliancc recommendation of : I . Committee ic iileg ical and unworkable. i 11 ere are, of course, other sections of the pro cored *; * l.ri iiiorir* that will create di fficuj.tier- in addition to those 1 l*. *V.* t\ 1 hr-* dir.eurscci and there will be mentioned by separate : Ur.:- if ic.. However, I b.e3.ievc that the points that I have / cove red arc the most .important. at least to the manufacturing rice of the industry. JD ; : I '' r 19? CSKA has a tremendous responsibility in the establishing of occupational health standards on asbestos. l:ot only must the workers be protected, but the continued availability of asbestos-containing products to our society must be assured. To promulgate unnecessarily strict or impractical standards that mould destroy entire segments of the asbestos industry mould be a serious misLahe. EX/uIILTEn. GCv..D5EHG: Do you wish to introduce your oocumenu: IE.. SUZTOEIC: I have two ox them. EXAI-IIiiZn GOLDEilf.G: Document entitled, "Change ` (The document above referred to mas marked Exhibit I?o. AO for identi fication and received in evidence.) rr/illi'J:?. GOLDDdr.G: iday these gentleman be excused? you, gentlemen. LlAD.CtI: Gentlemen, ny name is John K. Harsh, h am Director o:: Die-ruing for r.aybastes-Har.hr.ttar., .ins. Drier to my remarks which mill be directed tcrard the economic impact of the proposed regulations, I should like to have lir. Isaac II. Hen cf read'.ing the proposed a orA. cuts of the proposed `t