101

[\1. it S. ,'r Ccmnittee Staff



Asbestos - Chronological Highlights - Kenneth w. Carlson



* Caments of Johns-Manville Corporation with Respect to NJtice of

Proposed Rulemaking Oxupational ExpJsure to Asbestos



* Asbestos Industry Response to (£cupational Safety and Health Adminis-

tration, United States Depa.rtnent of Labor on the NJtice of Proposed

Rule Making for (£cupational Exposure to Asbesto s- weston Consultants



* Technological Feasibility and Economic Impact of OSHA Proposed Revision

to the Asbestos Standard - weston Consultants



* Impact of Proposed OSHA Standard for Asbestos - Arthur D. Little



OPNAV Instruction 6260-lA - Control of Asbestos Exposure to

Naval Personnel and Environs



U. S. Navy - Minimum requirements for safety and industrial health

in CXJntract shipyards



Asbestos - A Case Study of the u. S. Navy's Response to Upgraded Safety

and Health Requirements - u. S. Navy



Asbestos Infonnation Association - Depart::IIent of Navy Regulations on

Asbestos (Merrorandtnn)



NAVFAC NOI'ICE 5100 - Asbestos Sprayed-on Ceiling Surfacing and Insulation



A Brief History of Asbestos Related Diseases and Asbestos Regulations







* Cover page and table of CXJntents only - full dc:>cum:mt

available on request fran Versar Inc.









NNS-MOR-0003S2

A Chronology of Events read j ng to the Black Lung

Benefits Program



1813 Physicians were reporting the occurance of black ll.mgs in autopsied coal

miners.



1839 U. S. begins to keep count of deaths in coal mines.



1861 First miners' association organized in U. S. in Illinois.



1865 A canpany town locked out the tmion. It expelled all the town I s people

fran the canpany owned musing. It broke the union influence in Pa. for

many years hence.



1877 Hospital established in Pueblo, Colorado



1890 The United Mine r«:>rkers was fonned. They called for "proper earnings'

arrl safety. They aske:i for an eight mur day and prohibition of

enploying children under fourteen years of age. They had an aim for

arbitration and conciliation.

1893 A hospital was establisha:l in Pueblo, Colorado by the Colorado Fuel and Iron

Co.



1903 President IClosevelt intervened to get the coal operators to arbitrate

before the anthracite coal commission.



1907 The ~rst disaster in coal mining histol:)" occured with the funongah

explosion that took 361 lives.

1910 Congress established the Bureau of Mines in the Department of Interior,

July 1, 1910



1930's The Division of Occupational Health of the U. S. Public Health Service

investigated health effects of anthracite mining. Over 22% of the

miners studied showed effects of anthracosilicosis.

1939 A bill was introduced on May 16, 1939 to establish in&>eCtion authority

for the Bureau of Mines. It did not pass.



1941 The above bill was reintroduced and passed. It became known as title

L of the Federal Coal Mine Safety Act.



1942 Black lung recognized as a canpensable occupational disease in Great

Britian.



1946 April 10, 1946. Coal miners struck asking for a royalty on coal to pay

for a welfare and retirement fund. Mine owners refused.

1946 March 22, 1946. The United States Government siezed control of the

mines. The government agreed to pay 5urse as a result of the number of accidents and deaths.



The Black. Ilmg Benefits Program was originally enacted as Title IV of

the Federal Coal Mine Health and Safety Act of 1969 (nCM the Federal Mine

Safety and Health Act of 1977) and substantially anended by the Black. Illng

Benefits Act of 1972. Further anendrrents were discussed, debated, and

passed in the House, but The Black. Illng Benefits Reform Act and Black. Ltmg

Benefits Revenue Act did not become effective until 1978.



The 1969 Act, as a bill reported by the Senate labor and Public Welfare

Carmittee, did not contain any provisions relating to black lung benefits.

HaNever, Title V of the bill established a Coal Mine Health and Safety Re-

search Trust F\md financed by a tonnage assessment on coal mine operators

and inporters of roal. Senator Jennings Randolph offered a black lung bene-

fits program as a substitute for Title V and that anendrrent was unaninously

adopted.



Under Senator Randolph I s proposed program, HEW was to determine eligi-

bility of persons for emergency coal mine health disability benefits. Q1e

hundred percent of the benefits were to be paid by the Federal Govern:rrent

through FY 1971, with the States and the Federal Governrrent each paying 50%

in FY 1972 and 1973. No benefits were payable after J'lIDe 30, 1973.



Benefits to a disabled miner or widCM were 50% of the anount payable to

a disabled GS-2 under the Federal F1Tployees Carpensation Act with a provision

to augnent for dependents. If a miner received payrrent 'lIDder any other law

for a disability caused by work-related black l'lIDg, his benefits fran the

Federal F1Tployees Carpen.sation Act were reduced by the ano'lIDt he received

fran the other source.



The House-passed bill, the Federal Coal Mine Health and Safety Act of

1969, as reported by the Education and labor Ccmnittee, included a black.

lung benefits program which was passed by the House without anendrrent. The

provision for funding research from a payrrent based on coal prcx:luced was

struck. by a floor amendrrent.



The House corrpensation program provided for paynents, in the sane anounts

as provided in the Senate bill, to persons or their dependents totally disabled









NNS-MOR-000358

- 4 -









by work-related, ccmplicated pneurroconiosis (black ltmg). A person with ccm-

plicated pneunoconiosis was deened totally disabled by an occupational disease

if he worked for 10 or nere years in a coal mine. Payrrents were reduced if

the person received any payrrents under State \ll15t'IPloynent cc:mpensation, work-

neIl'S ccmpensation or disability laws, or by the aIIOtmt of any earnings.

Payrrents were 100% Federally funded, but paid through agreement with the States.

Tine limits were set for filing claims.



'!be House bill provided two distinct programs of black ltmg benefits.

One program, "Part B," applies to claims filed through 1972, is administered

by the Secretal:y of HEW, and is financed through general revenues. The other

program, "Part C," applies to claims filed in 1973 or lates, was intended to

be administered through State worknen' s COll'penSation laws and the Secretary

of labor only if the States do not enact acceptable laws, and was to be funded

by employers.



Benefits to a miner or widow are equal to 50% of the minirnum payrrent for

total disability to a GS-2 tmder the Federal Employees catpensation Act (aug-

mented to 100% for a beneficiary with three or nere dependents) and are re-

duced by the arrount received under State worknen' s carpensation, unemploynent

insurance or disability laws, and "excess" wages; i.e., those that would re-

duce a Social Security retirenent benefit.



Claims in Part C are to be filed under the State worknen' s carpensation

law if such law is certified by the Secretary of labor as providing "adequate

coverage." Where there is no certified State law, the mine operator must pay

benefits for death or total disability due to work-related pneurroconiosis.

Benefits are payable by the "responsible" operator as defined in regulations

of the Secretal:y. Benefits are reduced by the aIIOunt received under any State

or Federal worknen' s corrpensation law, and a three-year statute of limitations

is applicable. Part C was to teJ:mi.na.te after seven years.





TheArgurrents



'ttlere was no controversy in the Senate about the need for a black lung

provision. It was recognized that nest State worknen' s carpensation laws did









NNS-MOR-000359

- 5 -







not provide benefits for this ~rk-re1ated disease and that an interim

Federal program for those already disabled or for the widCMS of those who

had already died was a necessity.



'!here was nere controversy in the House. '!he Camri.ttee report stated

that the corrpe11ing reason for establishing the interim program was the

failure of the States to assure canpen.sation responsibility for miners and

to provide retroactive coverage. '!be report also recognized that States

without mines would be nest tmlike1y to provide benefits for disabled miners

or to widCMS living in those States. The report errphasized that this was not

a ~rk:men' s corrpensation program but rather a limited form of energency assis-

tance. '!he minority views attacked the program as an tmwarranted incursion

into the field of ~rkrren' s conpensation, traditionally a State matter. They

also argued that it would inhibit inprovenent in the State laws and ~uld be

discriminatory against ~rkers suffering from other occupational diseases

such as asbestosis and ~ssinosis.



A point of order was raised against the Conference report on the House

floor on the grounds that it included matters not in either the Senate or

the House bills. The nest strenuously argued point was that ccxrpensation was

1imi-:.ed to "canplicated" pleUlIOConiosis under the Senate and House bills but

is not so limited in the Conference report. The potential costs of the

program were also argued; opponents suggested they might reach $380 million

and supporters thought that $120 million was too high.



The purpose of the 1972 arrendments was to expedite the benefits claims

process. The 1972 amendments contained the following amendments to the black

lung benefits program:



(1) Provided benefits to children where roth the miner and his

wife are deceased;



(2) Provided that black lung benefits under Part B shall not be

subject to the workmen's conpensation offset provisions of

the Social security Disability program;



(3) Extended the period of Federal responsibility for two addi-

tional years to 1974;









NNS-MOR-000360

- 6 -





(4) Prohibi ted th= use of chest x-rays as the sole basis for

denying a claim; and



(5) Extended the period for vbich benefits are payable under

Part C by two additional years, through 1978.



'!he Senate Labor and Public Welfare carmi ttee made important additions

and changes to the House-passed bill. It extended Federal responsibility

under Part B for one year only; deleted the tennination date for Part C bene-

fits; limited the Social Security disability offset; added a rebuttable pre-

stmption that a miner with 15 years of mining E!l;>loynent who is disabled by

a respiratory ail.ITent is disabled by pneurroconiosis; altered the definition

of total disability to include inability to work at the previous mine enploy-

nent; required notification of prior cla.im:mts that their cases will be re-

considered under the new standards; and provided benefits to certain other

dependents; and provided benefits to a widCM if her husband was eligible for

benefits at the tine of his death.



The Conference report follCMed the bill as emended in the Senate except

that the Federal responsibility was extended for only 18 rcon.ths; Part C was

extended to 1981; and the l5-year presunption was made applicable to Part C

only if the enployrrent occurred before July 1971.

The 94th Congress and the 95th Congress l:oth considered the Black Lung

Benefits Reform.Act. It was however, the Black Lung Benefits Reforrn .Act

of 1977, which went into effect on March 1, 1978, and the canpanion Black

Lung Benefits Revenue Act of 1977, which went into effect on April 1, 1978

that cemented the foundation for a pennanent benefit program for the coal

miners. Major provisions of the two acts changed the original law and

operation of the 1972 black lung program.



The Black Lung Benefits Reforrn .Act makes a nmnber of changes in

eligibility requirements to rarove statutory defects in the old law which

unfairly prevented a large number of deserving claimants frc:m receiving

benefits. The Black Lung Benefits Revenue Act changes the financing

provisions to place the cost of the black lung program on the coal industry

as was intended in the original law









NNS-MOR-000361

- 7 -



The 1977 Act changes the types of evidence needed to qualify for

benefits and makes changes in eligibility requiranents, and making the

program pennanent.



The Refonn Act provides for reconsideration of all claims denied or

pending under the program administered by HEW (in part B) and the program

administered by OOL. The claims that HEW does not approve upon review

will be reviewed autanatically by the Labor Department under Part C of

original Federal Mine Safety and Health Act of 1977.



Total disability was redefined. A change in the law will give the

Secretary of Labor the opportmri.ty to use the latest developnents in medical

science in setting appropriate starxlards for Part C of the program. This

amendment becanes a permanent fixture. HEW I s medical standards go unchanged.



The 1977 Refonn Act rrodifies the evidence required to prove disability

due to black lung disease. A major drawback with the 1972 black lung

program was that the evidence needed to prove eligibility was frequently

not available. The 1977 amendments pennit the acceptance of affidavits

as proof of disability in the absence of medical or other relevant evidence.

Chest x-rays are not the sole determining factor; a pul.nonary function

exam and blood gas tests are also used. In addition, the new law requires

the Secretary of Labor to accept an autopsy reFOrt as evidence of a black

lung prognosis.



The survivors of coal miners are looked uFOn with special consideration.

Congress believed such claimants have been rrore adversely affected by the

medical uncertainty concerning the diagnosis of black lung disease than

any other group.



The new law rem::wes all t.i.ne restrictions in establishing eligibility

for benefits. The illS-year presunption" clause serves to extend black lung

benefits to miners who worked in the coal mines for lS years if there is

also evidence of totally disabling respiratory or pulm::>nary inpaiJ:ment,

but not proof of canplicated pneurroc:oniosis which is the advanced stage of

the disease. Prior to the 1977 amendments, the lS-year presumption was

restricted by arbitrary time limitations. M::>re than 90 percent of the

denials of survivcr I s claims by the Labor Deparbnent were caused by the

limitation rather than an evaluation of the evidence.









NNS-MOR-000362

- 8 -



In contrast the amended Act allows a Part C living miner's claim to

be filed within 3 years of the date of enactrcent of the RefoIIn Act of 1977

or of a medical detennination of total disability because of pneurroconiosis.

The new law eliminates all limitations on survivcr claims.



Adjunct to easing time restrictions, the benefit coverage was extended

to additional workers exposed to coal dust. They include (I) self-employed

miners, (2) workers anployed in or around a coal mine or other facilities

engaged in the extraction or preparation of coal, and (3) transportation

and coal mine construction workers.



The Depa.rt:nent of Lal:x::>r program {Part C} was scheduled to em on

December 30, 1981. No cla:ims were to be accepted or paid under Part C

to any claimant. It was thought that by 1981 State workers' cx:mpensation

laws would provide coverage for vict:ims of black lung disease. The

expectations of Congress were not realized nor has the disease been

eliminated as a problan in the mines. To date no State workers I CCITpen-

sation law meets with the specifications advocated by the Lalx>r Depa.rt:nent.



The 95th Congress changed the Black Lung Benefits Revenue Act of 1977

by changing the assignment of liability for black lung benefits. The

changes are expected to eliminate nruch of the confusion, delay in processing

claims, and litigation which have plagued the program. The purpose is to

assign financing of black lung benefits to private operators if their

responsibili ty can be established.



In making Part C of Ti tie IV of the Federal Mine Safety and Health Act

a permanent program and a source of restitution for the miner, the

Department of Lalx>r through the Act created an industry-financed Black Lung

Disbility Trust Fun:i, thus transferring fran the Federal Government to

industry the cost of those claims for which no responsible operator

is found. The Act also establishes pay benefits where the eligible miner's

last coal-mining enployment occured prior to January 1, 1970. This fund

will be financed by a tax on coal sold or used by producers after March

31, 1978. The tax will be equal to 50 cents per ton for coal fran under-









NNS-MOR-000363

- 9 -









ground mines and 25 cents per ton for coal fran surface mines so long as

the tax does not exceed 2 percent of the sales price. For miners anployed

after December 31, 1969, individual operators will be sought to pay claims.

Under the old law, liability for payrcents of benefits was assigned on the

basis of the date clalins were filed.



One of the major arguments in Congress centered around the furrling of

Part C through which an irrlustry financerl fund was necessary, because no State

had passed an approverl law arx1 it was difficult identifying operators responsible

for the payment of benefits. The objections to the fund go nore to its method

of financing, a cx:mbination of premiums based on tonnage prcxlucerl arx1

assessments based on operator liability for benefits, arx1 administration

than to the basic rational. The funding is considered unfair by those

operators with low black lung risk (particularly those in strip-mine operations) .

'fue inability to appeal certain medical detenninations of the Secretary are

challenged as denying due process.



The cx:mpranise reached in the legislation favors the operator. A major

statutory change now limits operator liability to cases involving coal mine

anployment on and after January 1, 1970. It is felt this will serve to

speed up the processing of claims and reduce possible litigation. M:>st of

the claimants had been out of the mines for a long tim:. Employment records

were incanplete, and a number of the coal ~es had gone out of business.

As a result, the Labor DepartJnent expended t.:ine and resources to only identify

a responsible operator in one-fourth to one-third of the cases.



Coal mine operators have expressed the view that it was unfair to assign

liability to operators for retire:i miners who last worked in a mine many

years ago. As a result, well over 90 percent of all claims involving

p::>tential liability of an operator have been contested. M:>st have been forced

into fonnal adju:iication.



Urrler the new amendments, liability for approved claims based on the last

anployment of the miner occurring prior to January 1, 1970 has to be assigned

to the coal industry as a whole through the trust fund. Coal mine operators

will not participate in the adjudication of pre-l 97 0 anployment claims paid

by the trust fund.









NNS-MOR-000364

- 10





Coal mine operators must secure protection for payment of benefits

through a private insurance carrier or personally insure their liability

in accordance with regulations prescribed by the Depart:m3nt of Labor.

The Depart:m3nt may impose penalties of up to $1,000 a day on coal mine

operators who fail to secure insurance of benefits.



In assessing major steps for future legislation a cx::n;>lete w:::>rker' s

cx:mpensation program should be planned. Recognizing that w:::>rkers' canpensation

systems do not adequately provide for occupational disease canpensation, the

1977 amendments require the Secretary of Labor, with the cooperation of

the Director of the National Institute for Occupational Safety arrl Health,

to study all occupationally related lung diseases, including analyses of

factors similar to coal w:::>rker' s pneurroconiosis.



The adequacy of w:::>rkers' canpensation programs for such diseases and

the status of Federal health and safety regulations and related industries

should be considered.



When the responsibility for the black lung program shifted to the

Deparbrent of Lal::.or in July 1973, the law provided that the Secretary of

Labor oversee the transfer of administrative responsibility for this

program to States which had w:::>rkers' canpensation laws providing adequate

coverage for black lung disease.



A State seeking exerption fran the Federal law n.cM is required to provide

coverage only for ercq;>loyment occuring after the Secretary of Labor's approval

of the State law. Miners whose last enployment ceased before the State law

was certified w:::>uld be paid under Federal law. To date no State law has

met the specifications set by the Labor Depart:m3nt.









NNS-MOR-000365

Extent to Which 27 Coal Mining States

Meet Certain Provisions of the Black Lung Criteria





Criteria



Pr0- Claims

ce- COver- (time Medical Benefit Benefit

State dure age limit) Stan:lards Guarantee Anounts



Alabama

Alaska X

Arizona X X



Arkansas

California X

Colorado X

Illinois X X



Indiana X

Iowa X

Intana X

New Mexico

North Dakota X X X

Ohio X X

Oklahana

Oregon X

Pennsylvania X

Tennessee X X

Texas

Utah X X

Virginia

Washington X X

West Virginia X

Wyaning X X









" ... ".~ .... --~ ~~~-- ---'-'-", .



NNS-MOR-000366

Indannity Benefits for Pe.nnanent Partial Disability fran

Occupational Diseases under State and Federal ~rkers I

~ation Laws







A. Jurisdictions authorizing payment of sane irrlemnity benefits for

pennanent partial disability fran any occupational disease covered

as for accidental injury:

Alabama Louisiana. Oregon

Alaska Maine Rhode Island

Arizona Marylarxi Tennessee

california Massachusetts Texas

Colorado Michigan Virginia

Connecticut Minnesota Washington

Delaware Mississippi West Virginia

District of t-tissouri Wisconsin

Columbia Nebraska Wyaning

Florida New Hampshire

Hawaii New Jersey

Illinois New York

Indiana. North Carolina

Kansas North Dakota

Kentucky Oklahana



Federal Employees' Conpensation Act

Longshoremen's and Harl:x:>r Vbrkers' Canpensation Act



B. Jurisdictions authorizing no indamity benefits for pennanent partial

disability fran sane or all occupational diseases, or limiting them as

noted:



Arkansas Provides ~ation for asbestosis or

silicosis if disability is one-third or

nore of total disability.

Georgia Provides benefits in the case of occupa-

tional disease causing total, but not

partial, loss, or loss of use, of members

or loss of vision of an eye.

Idaho None for silicosis.

Iowa Provides canpensation for uncanplicata:i

pneurrcconiosis only if disability is

one-third or nore of total disability.

M::>ntana None for any occupational disease

Nevada None for any occupational disease

New Mexico None for any occupational disease.

Ohio None for asbestosis, silicosis, or coal

miners I pneumoconiosis or occupational

diseases of the respiratory tract, other

than berylliosis.







NNS-MOR-000367

Pennsylvania None for silicosis, asbestosis, coal

\\Urkers I pneurroconiosis, or anthraco-

silicosis.

South Carolina For perm:ment partial disability due to

occupational disease, benefits limited

to 52 weeks.

South Dakota None for any occupational disease.

Venront Max:inrum ccmpensation for silicosis and

asbestosis limite:l to $7,000.









NNS-MOR-000368

SLCM AUJUDlCATION OF CLAIMS

roR BlACK r.mx:; BENEFITS





One purpose of the 1972 arendments was to experlite benefit payments

to eligible coal miners and their deperrlents or survivors. HC1fJever, the Office

of W:>rkers' Ccnpensation programs has been slow in adjudicating claims and a

large backlog of claims has resulted.



Fran July 1, 1973, through June 30, 1976, (loOl received 92,727 clcrims.

As of June 30, 1976, it had adjudicated-approved or disapproved-only 42,281

and had a backlog of 50,446 claims. Of the claims which had been adjudicated,

only 8 percent (3,233 claims) had been approved far benefits. The effect of this

92-percent rejection rate has been that the black lung special fund appropriation

authorized by the Congress has been used to only a limited extent to pay black

lung benefits.



Instead, the rroney appropriated has served as an al ternative source

of funds for other ESA programs, such as the Federal Einployees' Canpensation

Program. Of the $83 million appropriated to cx-cP for fiscal years 1974 to 1976,

the first 3 fiscal years far which it was responsible for the program, it

obligated $22.5 million in carp=nsation and medical benefits, transferred

$41 million to the Federal Einployees' Ccnpensation Program, transferred $2 million

to ESA for its salaries and expenses, and returned $11.4 million to the Treasury

because the appropriations had lapsed. At the end of fiscal year 1976, CMCP

also carried over the unobligated $6.1 million of its $20 million appropriation

for black lung benefits into the transitional budget period.









The number of undecided claims has been increasing steadily since CMCP

asSt.1m2d program responsibility on July 1, 1973. For example, in fiscal year 1974

~ received 36,856 claims rut adjudicated only 1,893 of than. This situation

deteriorated during fiscal year 1975, as the 20,664 claims adjudicated did not

even offset the 29,820 cla:ims received during the year, much less reduce the

backlCXJ fran the previous year.









NNS-MOR-000369

FACl'ORS AFFECI'ING THE PRX:ESSIN;

OF BLACK LUNG CIAIMS



Internal factors that have contributed to the delays in claims

processing and the increased backlog of claims are:



--(loO? problens with inadequate developnent of

individual claims by SSA district offices.

--Slow claims processing by CN:P caused by pieceneal and

Clmlbersane procedures.

--Delays in the infonnal hearings of contested claims by

CN:P and fonnal hearings by the Office of Administrative

Law Judges.

--Lack of effective assistance by SSA am Labor to

claimants filing benefit claims.

--Failure of La1:x:>r top managarent to take effective

action to alleviate CN:P' s staffing problens.



Labor officials believe that other factors contrihlting to the current

adjudication rate and increased claims processing \o,Orkload are the fact that (1)

unlike other \o,Orkers' canpensation programs under which evidence is collected

by anployers or their representatives (for example, insurance ccmpanies) ,

Labor has assumed responsibility for collecting viturally all of the claimant's

evidence, (2) after initial determination and after claims are served upon

responsible coal mine operators (who contest al:x:lut 97 percent of the claims), they

often urxlergo a second. investigation including a repeat medical evaluation, and

(3) the act does not provide a means for canpensating differences in disputed

cases, such as through partial disability benefits or lump sum settlarents, am thus

disputed claims must be fonnally litigated to resolve contested issues.



Regarding the ntm1ber of claims approved, Labor officials said that the

older miners, who have many years of service and are lTOst likely to either have

canplicated CWP or be covered by the presumptions on the existence of disabling

CWP based on their number of years in coal mine \o,Ork, had filed with SSA under

title IV, part B, of the act. Thus, the claims filed with La]:x)r under title N,

part B, of the act. Thus, the claims filed with Labor under title IV, part C

of the act were lTOre often fran miners less likely to have canplicated CWP

or the required number of years of \o,Ork to cane under the act's disability

prest:Urptive provisions. r-breover, La]:x)r has not been allowed to use the rrore

liberal "Interim Standards"-disability evaluation criteria which HEW adopted in

early 1972. HEW established the Interim Standards for adjudicating claims urxler

ti tle IV, part B. They were established as a result of concerns expressed by the

COngress when considering the Black Lung Benefits Act of 1972 that fewer than 30

percent of the claims were approved under the 1969 act.



Another factor affecting the number of claims approved by Labor is the

legal provision requiring a miner to file for benefits within 3 years of last coal

mine anployrcent (for eligibility based on the rebuttable presumption) or the

miner's survivors to file within 3 years after the miner's death.



In addition, lTOre clamants \o,Ould be given a chance to qualify for benefits

if CN:P revised its procedures to have X-rays reread for miners whose initial X-rays

are interpreb;(1 as negative for CWP.









NNS-MOR-000370

STATISTICAL EVALUATION OF 'mE

BLACK LUNG BENEFITS ProGRAM







Benefits paid

Social Depart:rcent

Security of

Mninistration La1:x:>r

Under Part B (in $ millions) under Part C (in $ millions)



FY 1970 $ 10 FY 1970

1971 320 1971

1972 408 1972

1973 938 1973

1974 975 1974 $ 2

1975 940 1975 6

1976 (est) 961 1976 20

1977 (est) 906 1977 27



Beneficiaries--part B

December: 'Ibtal Miners Widows Other

1970 111,976 43,921 24,889 43,166

1971 231,729 77,213 67,358 87;158

1972 298,963 101,802 88,067 109,094

1973 461,491 159,837 124,154 177,500

1974 487,216 169,097 134,700 183,419

1975 482,311 165,405 139,407 177,499

1976

1977

Administration--part C June 1975 August 1976

Claims filed - - - - - - - - - - - - - 75,000 97,000

Initial decision made- - - - - - - - - 24,000 46,000

benefits awarded - - - - - - - - - 1,807 3,500

(paid by operator) - - - - - - - - - 30 101

benefits denied - - - - - - - - - - 22,610 42,780

Pending initial decision - - - - - - - 50,000 41,000



The basic monthly benefit for a miner totally disabled from Black Lung or a

survivor is 50 percent of the rn:i.n:i.rrun monthly payment to which a totally disabled

Federal employee in grade GS-2 w::>uld be entitled. A totally disabled miner or

a survivor with one deperrlent will have the basic monthly benefit rate increased

by 50 percent, with tw::> dependents by 75 percent, a'1d with three or more dependents

by 100 percent. Benefit rates are revised in October of each year to reflect any

revision in the Federal pay scales. The rates as of October 1977 are:

miner or one survivor - $219.90

miner or survivor with one deperxlent - $329.80

miner or survivor with tw::> deperx1ents - $384.80

miner or survivor with three or nDre dependents - $439.70

Benefit Pa~ts: Until October 1978 the basic monthly benefits for a totally

disabled nuner or widow is $219.90 per month. This may be increased to a maximum

of $439.70 per IroIlth for individuals with three or more qualified dependents.









NNS-MOR-000371

- 2 -

Sane Data an the Program



Benefits payable (as of Nov. 1976)

miner or survivor - - - - - - - - - $205.40

with 1 dependent - - - - - - - - - 308.10

with 2 dependents - - - - - - - - - 359.50

with 3 or nore dependents - - - - - 410.80









NNS-MOR-000372

FACT SHEET

Prepared by Senate labor Carmittee Staff





NATIONAL w)RKERS' CCMPENSATIOO srANDARDS OF 1978

[Preparerl for Use of the Labor Subcarmittee]







In 1972, after a c::x:Eprehensive study of the laws of the States

which provide carpensation of \\Urk-related deaths, injuries, or disabilities,

the National Carmission an State w:>rkrren' s CcJrpensa.tion laws issued its Re-

port, which fotmd that the laws of the States were fundarrentally inadequate

in providing canpensation to Arrerican workers for work-relaterl injuries and

diseases ~ and that, in addition to general inadequacy, there existed wide

disparities in the \\Urkers' canpensation laws of the States with respect to

benefits, coverage, and administration. In 1977, the Interdepart:nental Task

Force on State Workers' CCIrpensation found that while the States had made

sorre progress in rrodemizing and refonning their \\Urkers' canpensatian laws,

wide disparities and inequities anong the States still existed.



It is these inequities and disparities which this bill addresses.

The bill creates a series of ferleral mi.nirmJm standards for the States' \\Urkers'

coopensation programs, which incorporate 17 of the 19 "essential" recarrrenda-

tions which the National Ccmnission made in 1972 plus certain other standards

which are consistent with the National Carmission' s report.



The bill embodies an approach to federal-state relationships which

is specifically designed to avoid the frictions which have developed in

ferleral m:ininulm standards programs in the past. The bill does not create

a federal \\Urkers' carpensation program, nor does it pennit a federal take

over of the existing State programs. Indeed, a staterl objective is to ac-

ca:rplish the reforms Ybile maintaining "the primary authority and responsibility

for \\Urkers' canpensation in the States." 'nle bill instead. provides the neans

by which the State programs can be brought up to date, and can be made rrore

responsive to the needs of \\Urkers and their employers. In addition, the bill

contanplates the operation of the refornEd workers' canpensation system through

the existing insurance/self-insurance mechanism as it has developed in the

several States.



STANDARDS



'nle federal minimum standards for State workers' carpensation laws

are contained in section 4 of the bill, and include the following:







Coverage is CClITfUlsory, not elective, and all employees and employers

engagerl in ccmrerce or an industJ:y affecting ccmrerce are covered. 'nle bill

does not cover federal, state or local govenment errployees or employees

Ybose wages are not subject to Social Security taxes. Also excluded are agri-

cultural and darestic workers who \\Urk for an employer who does not employ

such ~rkers for at least 15 days in a calendar quarter.









NNS-MOR-000373

-2-





BENEFITS



(1) Benefits paid by snp10yers for death or total disability shall

be no less than 66 2/3 percent of the snp1oyee's average weekly wage; subject

to a maxinn.m which, t\\U years after enactment may not be less than 100 percent

of the Statewide average weekly wage, and five years after enactment may not

be less than 200 percent of the Statewide average weekly wage. Alternatively,

States may require benefits of 80 percent of the employee's spendable earnings

subject to the applicable max:i.nuJms.



(2) Mi.ninum rronetary benefits for death or total disability shall

be no less than 50 percent of the Statewide average weekly wage or the em-

p1oyee's average weekly wage, whichever is less.



(3) Survivors are entitled to a continuation of the employee's

benefits. Provision is made for a lump sum paynent if the surviving spouse

remarries, and for oontinued paynent of at least 50 percent of benefits to

minor children (or until canp1etion of their education) and to children in-

capable of self-support. States are permitted to provide certain offsets

against Social security benefits in case of survivor's benefits.



(4) 'n1ere may be no tiIre or dollar maximum 1i.mits on ccrrpensation

due to death or total disability: and there may be no tiIre or dollar maximum

1i.mits on medical benefits in any case.



(5) Benefits for death or total disability lasting rrore than t\\U

years must be adjusted at least annually to reflect increases in the Statewide

average weekly wage: subject to a permissive maximum of not less than six per-

cent per annum.



REHABILITATION & REEMPLOYMENI'



(1) Employees shall be entitled to prarpt rehabilitation designed

to restore the physical, mental and vocational functioning of the employee and

his or her return to snp1oynent.



(2) Employers shall be required to make reasonable efforts to re-

anp10y disabled employees.



ArMINISTRATIVE STANDARDS



(1) Employees may select a physician for diagnosis and treat::nent

subject to control by the State agencies. Ehp10yer selected panels of physi-

cians are prohibited. States may deny benefits to employees who refuse Iredica1

attention, except where such refusal is because of a good faith choice of

treatment through prayer or spiritual means.



(2) Where employnent requires travel outside the State of hire,

claimants may select the appropriate State in which to file claims.



(3) The waiting period for rronetary benefits shall be no rccre than

3 days, and the period of qualifying for retroactive benefits during such wait-

ing period shall not exceed 14 days.









NNS-MOR-000374

-3-





(4) A claim nay be filed within t\\U years of death or disability;

or wi thin t\\U years after an employee knew or reasonably should have been

aware of the causal relationship between a disability and employmant. There

is to be no tine limit based on recency of employnent.



(5) No canpranise or release of canpensation is pennitted except

with approval of the State workers' canpensation agency. Pre-injury waivers

and releases are void.



CCCUPATIONAL DISFASE



In addition to the general requirement of full coverage of occupa-

tional diseases, the bill authorizes the Secretary of labor, in cooperation

with the Secretary of Health, Fducation and Welfare, to develop and prarn.llgate

standards for determining whether particular diseases are errploynent related

and whether death or disability is due to such a disease. Such standards nay

include rebuttable presunptions.



Standards are to be developed in response to infonnation provided

by interested groups or organizations, or in response to studies conducted by

the National Institute for r. The

decision of the Board must be based on the evidence in the record before the

State agency, and the State agency's findings of fact and conclusion of law

regarding issues covered solely by State law are conclusive and binding on

the Board. The State agency's findings of fact regarding issues pertaining

to federal standards for which the State law is not certified are binding on

the Board if supported by substantial evidence. The Board may refer the case

to an Adrninistrative law Judge for additional fact finding if the State agency

has precluded the offering of pertinent evidence.



'!he Board, upon a finding of eligibility, will award supplemental

c:::o:rpensation in accordance with the requirerrents of the applicable federal

standards to the extent that the State agency has not awarded such catpensa-

tion.



EMPIDYER RESPCNSIBILITY AND rnSURANCE



Employers are responsible for paying canpensation which neets the re-

quirements of the federal standards, and must either secure insurance for such

liability or qualify as self-insurers. Every insurance contract which provides

workers' carpensation coverage will be deemed to provide coverage at least con-

sistent with the requirements of the federal standards. In addition, canprehen-

sive personal liability policies (either alone or as a part of a homeowner's or

tenant's policy) are required to provide workers' canpensation benefits for

danestics covered by the federal law unless the employer otherwise provides

for payment of such benefits.



CCMPENSATION CF PARI'IAL DISABILITIES



'!he standards in the bill apply only to cases of death or total dis-

ability due to occupationally related causes. Since partial disability cases

represent a significant portion of the total nUIti:ler of catq?eIlSation cases and

the total cost of VJOrkers' ~tion, the bill requires the Secretary to

conduct a study, to include, where necessary, pilot programs and other experi-

mental projects, with the objective of carparing the efficiency, effectiveness

and adequacy of various rreans of ~ting partial disabilities. No later

than three years after enact:Inent, the Secretary must report to the COngress

on his study, and nust make recarmendations for legislation to arrerrl the Act

to establish federal minimum standards for carpensation of partial disabilities.









NNS-MOR-000376

-5-





MISCEI..IANEOOS ProvISIONS



EMPLOYMENI' DISCRIMINATION



'!he bill prohibits erq;>loyment discrinrination against an erq;>loyee who

files a carpensation claim or gives testinony in a canpensation case. A civil

penalty is provided, and reinstatarent is required unless the erq;>loyee is no

longer qualified to perform his or her foJ:Jter duties.



'lliIRD PARrY LIABILITY



'!he bill nakes oonpensation under the applicable State law the worker's

exclusive remedy against the erq;>loyer, the erq;>loyer's insurance carrier, fellow

erq;>loyees and the collective bargaining agent. In an erq;>loyee' s action against

a third party as a result of that party's liability for a work related injury,

illness or death, however any award or judgrrent in such action must be reduced

by the arcount of workers' canpensation received by the erq;>loyee and the present

cash value of all future workers' cc.rnpensation awarded to the erq;>loyee. SUb-

rogation to the erq;>loyee' s third party claim to the erq;>loyer or erq;>loyer' s in-

surance carrier is prohibited. '!he third party-defendant may not maintain an

action for indemnification, contribution or damages against the erq;>loyer, fellow

erq;>loyees or collective bargaining representative of the erq;>loyee-plaintiff.



STATISTICS



The bill encourages the developtent of a program of uniform statis-

tical analysis of workers' canpensation data. '!he Secretary is authorized to

prcmulgate regulations requiring the sul:::mission of simplified factual reports

at the ti.rre of the occurrence of an injury or illness, at the ti.rre of the

first carpensation pa.yrrent, and at the ti.rre the oonpensation case is closed.

Reports are to be filed for all claims except claims for nedical benefits

only with the State agency. As a condition of receiving federal grants to

assist them in improving data collection, States must agree to nake periodic

reports analyzing the data received to the Secretary. If the States decline

to nake such periodic analyses, the reports on canpensation cases are to be

filed by the erq;>loyers or carriers direcUy with the Secretary. The Secretary

is required to prepare arumal reports of workers' oonpensation data, and make

such reports available to the public.







'!he bill authorizes the Secretary to engage in research, including

pilot projects and denonstration programs to develop recamendations to im-

prove oonpensation programs, and make them rccre econanical and efficient.



GRANTS '10 STATES



The bill authorizes $75 million for grants by the Secretary to the

States to assist them in evaluating their catpmsation programs and meeting

the requirenents of the federal standards, and to ircprove the administration

of the State programs. '!he federal share of any project may be no rccre than

66 2/3 percent.









NNS-MOR-000377

-6-





l>JJVISORY CCMMISSION



The bill establishes a standing National ~rkers I Canpensation

Mvisory camri.ssion ccmposed of nine members representing employees, em-

ployers, and the public, appointed. for fixed tenns. The camnission shall

noni tor State progress in improving the canpensation laws, moni.tor State

administration of canpensation programs, and provide assistance to the

Secretary in carrying out his responsibilities under the Act.









NNS-MOR-000378

A HIS'IDRY OF ASBESTOO RELATED

DISFASE AND ASBESTOS RmJIATICN.









NNS-MOR-000379

INTROIXJCTICN







'!he following pages contain a sumnary of historical events relating to

asbestosis, revelent rbrkman' s c.at'q?ensation, arrl Asbestos Regulations.

The sumnary is a revised and expanded version of Kenneth w. Carlson's

"Asbestos - Chronological Highlights" which he presented at the Hcuse

Carmi.ttee on Education and Labor, Subccmnittee on c.at'q?ensation Hearings

on Asbestos-Pelated Diseases held in San Francisco, calif. on October

23-24,1978. Mr. Carlson's original entries are marked with (*). The

entries marked with (**) were obtained fran Barry castlanan' s testinony

before the Senate Ccmnerce Carmi.ttee on April 28, 1977. All other entries

were made by Versar, Inc.









NNS-MOR-000380

CHRONOUXiY OF ASBESTOSIS AND ASBESTOS REIATED DISEASES







* 1906 Auribault, M., Note sur l' Hygiene et la Securite des

Ouvrier dans 1es Fi1atrues et Tissages d'Arniante. Bull.

l' Inspect. Trav., 126 (1906)



Auribau1t, an inspector in the Department of I.alx>r at

caen, linked fifty (50) deaths to exposure to asbestos

dusts in a weaving mill to asbestos exposure.



1907 Murray, H. M., in EEport of the Departmental Ccmnittee on

* Q:mPen.§ation for Industrial Disease. Minutes of Evidence,

Appendices and Index: c.d. 3495, 3496. t'V'yman and Sons,

wndon, 1907; (also wndon: H.M. Statoinery Office, p.127,

HMSO, 1970, by H. M::>ntague Murray, also in Charring Cross

Gazette, IDndon, 1900)



Asbestos cases reported in England



* 1913 State of Iowa enacts w:>rkman' s Ccmpenstation law covering

disease of asbestosis



* 1913 State of Illinois enacts w:>rkman' s Ccxrpensation Law COI/ering

disease of asbestosis



* 1915 State of Hawaii enacts w:>rkman' s Corpen.sation law covering

disease of asbestosis



* 1917 H.K. Pancoast, T.G. Miller, H.R.M. !andis, A IbentengOlogic

Study of the Effects of I)Jst Inhalation upon the Imlgs, Trans.

Association of American Physic., Vol. 32, pp. 97-108



* 1917 State of ca1ifomia enacts w:>rkman' s Ccmpensation law covering

disease of asbestosis



* 1918 F. L. lbffman, M::>rtality fran Respiratory Diseases in rust

Trades (Inorganic I)Jst), Bulletin u.S. Bureau of Labor

statistics No. 231, pp. 172-180, washington, June, 1918



Reported that it was the practice of l!merican ana canadian

insurance canpanies not to in..crure asbestos workers due to

the assurred health-injurious conditions of the industry.

Ieferred to Hoffman's 1907 report.



* 1919 State of Wisconsin enacts w:>rkman' s Ccmpensation law covering

disease of asbestosis



* 1919 State of Connecticut enacts w:>rkman' s Ccmpensation Law covering

disease of asbestosis









NNS-MOR-000381

* 1924 Cooke, W.E., "Fibrosis of the Lungs IAle to the Inhalation

of Asbestos Dust," British Journal of M:rlicine, II, July

26, 1924 (Bepublished, 1927)



Beport of death of thirty-three (33) year old \OllaIl who had

~rked since age 13 in an asbestos factory - Autopsy frund

massive deposits of asbestos dust in her lungs.



* 1927 Cooke, W.E., Pulrronary Asbestosis, British Jc:urnal of Medicine,

Vol. II, pp. 1024-1025.



* 1927 r.t::D:>na1d, s. History of Pulmonary Asbestosis, British

Journal of M:rlicine, Vol. II, pp. 1025-1026



Description of asbestosis and "curious 1::xx1ies" originating

fran asbestos fibers that reach the lungs



* 1927 Oliver, T., "Clinical Aspects of Pullronary Asbestos. " Brit.

Med. Jour., Vol. 2, pp. 1026-1027, (1927).

case Histories of ~ W::men with Pullronary Asbestosis, Clle

~e 48 and the other 39.



* 1928 Seiler, H.E., A case of Pneurooconiosis. Besult of the

Inhalation of Asbestos Dust, British Journal of M:rlicine,

II, p. 982.



Eleven (11) Cases by patho1Dg'ist at hospitals in Lomon and

Wigan and at medical schools in Leeds and Olrham showing

asbestosis in autopsies



* 1929 Haddow, A. C., proceedings, Clinical Aspects of Pullronary

Asbeostis, British Journal of Medicine, Vol. II: 982 (1928)



Workers discovering hazards of job around asbestos and left.



1930 (Prees En #19, #27) #39



* 1930 Lynch, K.M. and W.A. Smith, Asbestos IOlies in Sputum and

Lung, Journal of American Med. Assoc., Vol. 95, pp. 659-

661



u.s. report on asbestosis bodies found in the sputum of

asbestos ~rkers



* 1930 Merewether, E. R. A., The o::currence of Pulrronary Fibrosis

and other Pullronary Affections in Asbestos Vhrkers, J.

Ind. HYg., 12: 198-222, 239-257 (1930)









,."



NNS-MOR-000382

1930 ~e\Yether, E.R.A. and C.l ~ Price, IEport on Effects of

* Asbestos D.lst on the Iimgs and Dust Suppression in the

Asbestos Industry, H.M. Stationery Office, lDndon (1930)



* 1930 Mills, R.G., "P1um::mary Asbestosis: IEport of a Case,"

Minnesota ~cine, XIII, p. 495



IEpart at Mayo Clinic where an autopsy on a cardiac victim

revealed heart failure due to asbestosis



1930 IDvisetto, D., "Pulmonary Asbestosis". IEcords at the Inter-

national Conference on Silicosis held at Johannesb.lrg, Aug.

13-27, 1930. Studies and IEports, Series F (Ind. Hyg.) No.

13, pp. 506-509.



COncluded that at least 5 years required to produce Asbestosis.



1930 M:>ssa, G. "Clinical and Radiological Notes on Pneurroconiosis

Due to Asbestos." IEcords of International Conference on Silicosis

Held @ Johannesl::urg, Aug. 13-27, 1930. Studyes and IEports, Series

F (Ind. Hyg.) , No. 13, p. 509.



Radiology Study of Mvances Asbestosis.



1930 ~, W.B. and Page, D.S., "A Case of Pulm:::m.ary Astestosis: Death

fran Tuberculosis two years after first exposure to the dust."

Tubercle, Vol. 11, pp. 157-158, (1930).



* 1930 Soper, W.B., "Pulrconary Asbestosis: A Case" Arrerican Review

of Tuberculosis, XXII, p. 571



IEport of death by asbestosis by pathologist at Yale



* 1931 Gardner, L. U. and D.E. CUrrmings, Studies on EXperimental Pneuno-

koniosis Vi Inhalation of Asbestos Dust, Journal of Ind. Hygiene,

Vol. 13 pp. 65081, 97-114



Studies on animals



* 1931 Stewart, et al., Arch. Path. Vol. 12, pp. 909-16



Asbestosis in factory workers including one victim of only

nine (9) roonths exposure



* 1931 w:x:xi, W.B. and S.R. G1oyne, Pulrconary Asbestosis CCInp1icated by

Pulrconary Tuberculosis, Lancet, 2: 954 (1931)



Asbestosis, factory \\1Orker



1931 British government made asbestosis a canpensab1e disease under

* its \\1Orkman IS ccmpensation laws; established dust control standards

for asbestos textile industry



1931 Buresch, A., "Pneunokonisis, Berufskranheit und Entsehadi-Gungspf1ight.

Deutsche ~. Wochenschr., Vol. 57, pp. ~10-1102 and 1247-1248, (1931)







NNS-MOR-000383

Retort on Asbestosis in Asbestos Textile worker.



1931 Lynch, K.M. and Snith, W.A., "Pulmonary Asbestosis. II.

Including the Retort of a pure case." Arrer. lev. Tuber!.

23, pp. 643-660, (1931)



Reporte1 death of asbestos textile worker due to asbestosis



1931 SChuster, N. H. "PulIronaiy Asbestosis in a Dog. II Jour. Path.

and Bact., 34, pp. 751-757, (1931)



Report of a Dog KEM in an Asbestos Factory for 10 years

Developed Asbestosis.



1931 Seiler, H.E. and Gilnour, M.D., "A case of Pulm:mary Asbestosis."

Brit. Med. Jour., pp. 112-114, (1931)



Report an Death of Asbestos w:>rker fran Asbestosis.



* 1932 G1oyne, S. R., The M:>rbid Anatany curl Histology of Asbestosis,

Tubercle, Vol. 14, pp. 445, 451, 493-497, 550-558 (1932-1933)



Discussion of pathology of asbestosis and methods for diagnosis

of asbestos bodies curl asbestosis



* 1932 ~andum on Silicosis and Asbestosis to English Govermnent,

H.M. H:me Office, July, 1932



Lists dusty occupations and includes repair of mattresses and.

sawing asbestos



* 1932 lmsse11 , A.E., Proceedings of a Conference Concerning Effects of

D.lsts Upon the Respiratory Systan, November 16-17, 1932, J:lerrocrat

Printing Co., Madison, Wis.



Conference attende1 by Drs. Leroy Gardner and O.A. Sander later

affiliated with the asbestos industry



* 1932 lmsse1l (Ind. Ccmn. of Wis.)



Docurrents insulator with asbestosis



1932 Addie M. Platt v. Raybestos-Manhattan CcJnpany, Hartford Accident

* and Indemnity Ccr.1pany and the Arcerican Surety canpany, Connecticut



Asbestosis canpensation claim; settlement: $2,500.00 in 1933



1933 Dressen # 32, # 33



* 1933 Ellman, P., Pullronary Asbestosis: Its Clinical, Radiological and

pathological Features, and Associated Risk. of Tuberculosis Infection,

J. Ind. Hyg .• Vol. 15, pp. 165-183 (1933)









......... __ ,~,~"·'")···_ ...."A ... _" , ....

_~_~"._->drn.

10, pp. 126-129, (1933)



Peported ~ath of Asbestos Vbrker fran Asbestosis



** 1933 Stroebe, H. "Bericht Uber den Fall von lJ.mgen-Asbestosis,

Welcher der Arbeit des Han1 Prof. Beger Zugnmde liest."

Virchow's Archiv. Pathologische Anatanie u. Physiologie,

290, pp. 354-357, (1933)



Death of Asbestos worker of Asbestosis



* 1933 Johns-Manville Conpany board of directors meeting. nary

Asbestosis, Brit. J. Radiol., 7: 281 (1934)



* 1934 w:x:xl, W. B. and S. R. Gloyne, PuJ.nonary Asbestosis,

A Review of One Hundred Cases, lancet, Vol. 2, pp.

1382-1384 (1934)

Reports at least three cases of asbestosis fran

less than one year of asbestos exposure, one to a

clerical worker, two to workers handling asbestos

outdoors, and two cases with carcinana of the lung.



* 1934 Decenber 15, Letter fran Attorney Hobart to Brown,

Legal Department of Johns-Manville Conpany



Reports he has canpared galleys with preliminary

report of three years earlier. Suggests elimination

-of canparison of silicosis with asbestosis because

of pendency of workrren' s canpensation legislation

in New Jersey where Johns-Manville was lol:bying against

recognition of asbestos as an occupational

disease.

" • .. and it is the policy of Johns-Manville

to oppose any bill that attanpted to inch.rle

asbestos as ccmpensable, it would be very

helpful to have an official report to show that

there is a substantial difference between

asbestosis and silicosis and by the same token,

i t ~uld be troublesane if an official

report should appear fran which the conclusion

might be drawn that there is very little, if

any, difference between the two diseases."



Explains state of art of defense being used by Johns-

Manville in camon law suits by anployees. Conplains that

plant E is described as: "unnecessarily dusty." Says he

knows E isn't Johns-Manville plant, but ~nders "whether the

proprietor of Plant E has had an opportunity to review the carrnent."

Concludes that carment indirectly concerns Johns-Manville and

requests that it be deleted. Objects to phrase in this conclusion

which apparently a:mpared asbestos dust to granite dust as Hobart

feared that the conclusions might suggest a "possibility that a

pneurroconiosic may arise nore readily fran asbestos than granite

dust. " Therefore, Hobart suggests that recarmendation 4 be softened

by inclusion of "possible" before "studies." Doesn't think his

suggestion was ":ilrq;x::>rtant."



* 1934 December 18, Letter fran Brown (Legal Dept. Johns-Manville) to

Judd (Raybestos-Manhattan). Brown fol:Wards galleys, his and

Attorney Hobart's carments to Judd:

"I was just talking to Dr. Ianza and I am inclined to

believe he will accede to I'OC)st of our requests by making

appropriate provisions in the article."







",'_ ._.h.". __



NNS-MOR-000386

* 1934 Decanber 21, letter fran BrCMIl (legal Dept. Johns-Manville)

to Lanza. Returns galleys to Dr. Lanza with Hobart's cannents:

"I trust ycu will give" hobart "your most serious

consideration. "

Says they are not suggesting that any scientific facts or inevitable

conclusions be altered.

"All we ask is that all of the favorable aspects of the survey

be included and that none of the unfavorable be unintentionally

pictured in darker tones than the ccmnents justify. I feel

confident we can depend upon ycu and Dr. M:Cormell to give

us this ' break' •.• "



* 1934 Decanber 24, letter fran Brown to Judd (Raybestos-Manhattan).

Apologizes for requesting return of galley prior to Raybestos-Manhattan

review, but this was necessitated because of FUblication date

pressure and failure to pranptly ranit would have resulted in

papers publication "as it stood." Touts efforts of he and Hobart

in suggesting changes:

"that will be beneficial fran the Industry viewpoint.

'!he interest of your canpany in the Report is identical to

that of Johns-Manville" and our accanplisrments respecting

the rep:::>rt will be for the "benefit of both."



* 1935 Egbert, D. S., Pu1n'onary Asbestosis, Anerican Review of Tuberculosis,

Vol. 31, pp. 25-34 (1935)



Reported a fatal case of asbestosis in a thirty year old man.

Includes table of other fatal cases with rnirUmal exposure.



* 1935 Fulton, W.B., et al. Asbestosis, Part II, The Nature and Arrount

of Dust Encountered in Asbestos Fabricati.n:J Plants Part III.

'!he Effects of Exposure to Dust Encountered in Asbestos

Fabricating Plants on the Health of a Group of WJrkers, Carmonwealth

of Permsylvania, Department of Lal:x:>r and Industry, Harrisl::urg,

September 20, 1935.

Found that eight (8%) percent of the workers exposed to an average

dust concentration of five million particles per cubic foot had

asbestosis; ~ty-two (22%) percent exposed at the seventeen

million particle level and fifty-seven (57%) percent exposed at

a forty-four million particle level had asbestosis.



* 1935 Lanza, A.J. and W. J. M:Cormell and J. W. Fehnel, Effects of the

Inhalation of Asbestos Dust of the lllngs of Asbestos ~rkers, Publ.

Health Rep., Vol. 50, pp. 1-12 (1935)

Study revealed thirty-three (33%) of those examined had signs of

asbestosis although he saw "no marked disability." He recannended

that industry "sponsor studies on known cases of asbestosis as well

as studies on effects of asbestosis on the heart." Lanza later

became a consultant to Johns-Manville. (While Lanza did not

FUblish until 1935, his study was substantially canpleted in 1931.)









NNS-MOR-000387

* 1935 Lynch, K.N. and W.A. Snith, "Pulmonary Asbestosis" American

Journal of Cancer, XXIV, p. 56



Two doctors at Medical College of South Carolina reported on

autopsy on asbestos ~rker who had asbestosis and lung cancer.



* 1935 October 3, Brown (Johns-Manville) to Sumner Simpson (Raybestos-

Manhattan) re" Asbestos magazine request to publish:

"I quite agree with you that our interests are best

served by having asbestos receive the min.i.rm.m of

publicity ••• I think '...e should warn the publishers (if

they decide to publish) to use American data (generated by

Lanza) on the subject rather than English."



* 1935 State of New York enacts r«:>rkman' s Conpensation Law covering

disease of asbestosis.



** 1935 Alwens, W. "Uber Asbestose der Ltmgen.", Mllncher rned.

Wochenschr. , 82, pp 1797-1800, (1935)



Found Asbestosis in 22 of 35 asbestos workers surveyed.



** 1935 Martz, L., "Asbestosis und Tul:erk Ulose der Ltmgen."

Zeitschr, f. Tuberk., 72, pp. 11-15, (1935).

Reported Asbestosis and tuberculosis in Asbestos worker.



1935 White, T.P., "Pulmonary Asbestosis. "Trans. r-Ed. SOc. State

of N. Carol., pp 259-262 (1935)



1935 Gloyne, S.R., "Squarrous Carcinana af lung occurring in

Asbestosis: two cases.", Tubercle, 17, pp 5~10, (1935)



Autopsies revealed tumors in regions of asbestosis



* 1936 D::>nnelly, J., Pulrronary Asbestosis: Incidence and Prognosis,

J. Ind. Hyg., Vol. 18, pp. 222-228 (1936)

Famd x-ray evidence of asbestosis in 52 of 151 workers (34.4%).

He stated,



"That the serious industrial hazard of this type of

work has not previously received sufficient attention is

becaning nore apparent. The manufacture of asbestos

products has increased nore than fcur-fold in the last 20

years, and hence, because of the greater number of workers

exposed, and the nore frequent the recognition as a

pathological entity of the resulting pulnonary condition, the

subject of asbestosis has rapidly assumed greater importance."



1936 lanza, A.J. "Asbestosis." Jour . .Arner. Med. Assoc., 106,

pp. 368-369, *1936)

Dexcribed early observations of asbestosis in u.s.







NNS-MOR-000388

1936 walsh - Healy Public COntracts Act. Passed.



* 1936 Q:tober 31, Letter of Sunmer Simpson to Jeffords (General Astestos and

~ Division) regarding proposed United States Public Health

Service (USPHS) x-ray survey. Doesn't want x-rays to te given to

all the "shyster lawyers and doctors in the county" because of fear

of suits. Says it would te good to have x-rays of all anployees by

USPHS without it getting in hands of others; would probably te

tetter to let USPHS do it as "it would te one way of getting them

withcut arousing much suspicion on the part of the anployees"

teing interpreted by the anployees "as having sane connection with

the Social Security Act." Again expresses concern over

proliferation of law suits.

1936 Shull, J .R., "Asbestosis: A roentgenologic review of 71 cases."

Radiology, 27, pp 279-292, (1936)



Results of medical examination of asbestos textile workers.



1936 Egbert, D.S. and Geiger, A.J. "Pulnonary Asbestosis and carcinana..",

Amer. Rev. TUberc., 34, pp 143-150, (1936)

Found lung cancer and asbestosis in asbestos textile y,urker.



* 1936 November 5, Letter of Sunmer Simpson (Raytestos-Manhattan) to

Jeffords (General Asbestos and R.lbber Division) regarding

request of USPHS to x-ray anployees at Charleston. Sumner Simpson

pennits x-rays, rut restricts their use to public health

infonnation and

"you want to stress the fact that we do not want them given

to shyster lawyers and doctors so as to te the subject of

suits for, as you know, we have had enough adjustments for

anyone canpany."

Beseeches the USPHS to help them as far as they legally can.



* 1936 Novanber 10, Letter of SUmner Simpson to Schulter, President of

Thennal Rl.lbber regarding proposal for Saranac experiments cites

need for data in the Court Ibcms to support their position. Cits

cost ($5,000 per year generally paid for by industry). Concern is

expresses over sequalae of asbestos exposure especially regarding

T.B.

"My own idea is that it y,uuld te a good thing to distril:ute

the info:cnation arrong the ne:lical fraternity, providing it is

of the right type and would not injure our cx:JTpanies."

Suggests a rreeting of Johns-Manville, Raybestos-Manhatta, Keasbey

arrl Mattison, Asbestos Manufacturing, Thennal and russell

Manufacturing.









NNS-MOR-000389

1936 Novanber 20, Letter of Brown (Johns-Manville) to L.U. Gardner

*

regarding tenns of agreanent:

"It is our further lUlderstancling that the results obtained

will be oonsidered the property of those who are advancing

the required funds, who will deteJ:mine whether, to what

extent and in what manner they shall be made public. In the

event it is deened desirable that the results be made public,

the manuscript of your study will be sul:mitted to us for

approval prior to publication."



1936 Letter fran L. U. Gardner, Saranac Laboratories to Sunmer

* Simpson (Faybestos-Manhattan)

Critique of K. N. Lynch's criticisn of Gardner's early

theories. Suggests Lynch's cases may have baen sillcotics

instead of or in addition to asbestotio.



1935 Charles Mizinski and Julia M. Mizinski v. Raybestos-Manhatta,

* The American Surety canpany, COnnecticut



Asbestosis carpensation claim of plant \\Orker, settlanent of

$2,100.00 in 1936



1937 d:Basi, W., "Zur Pathologischen Anatanie der Lungen Asbestose."

Archiv. fur Gewerbeputh. lUld Gewerbehyg, ~ pp. 135 - 155, (1937)



Death fran Asbestosis of Asbestos Vbrker.



1937 SUndius, N. and Bygden, A., "Der Staubinhalt Einer AsbestosisllUlge

urrl die Beschaffenheit der sogenannteh Asbestosis Korperchen."

Archiv. fur Gewerbepath. urrl Gewerbehyg. 8, pp 26-70, (1937)



Detennined "Asbestos Bodies" made up of iron, protein and

Asbestos fiber. Found no chBnge in the chanical ccmposition

of Asbestos.



* 1937 January 8, Letter of Jeffords (General Asbestos and Rubber

Division) to Sunmer Simpson (Raybestos-Manhattan) regarding

receipt of Dr. Shull's article. canplains about rredical tenns

in article. Is going to discuss the article with Dr. Kenneth

Lynch. Decries the acceleration of articles in literature about

asbestos which he says do "not tend to solve the problem, it

it is a problem."



* 1937 May 26, Letter fran Jeffords (General Asbestos and Rubber Division)

to Sunmer Simpson (Raybestos-Manhattan) enclosing a report fran

Dr. Sayers entitled "A Stu:ly of Dlst COntrol Methods In an Asbestos

Fabricating Plant" which Sayers wanted to publish. Jeffords is

criticizing the report. IEfers to experiment of cutting off

exhaust fan and increasing dust COlUlt to fifty million particles

per cubic foot. Jeffords is fearful that plaintiffs may seize

upon this as evidence of prior negligence.

"Of course, you, as well as other, who are canpetent

to judge, know that nothing was known of the asbestos

dust hazards, in this country, prior to 1929 ••. "





NNS-MOR-000390

* 1937 Septenber 29, Letter of Brown (Johns-Manville to Simpson (Raybestos-

Manhattan). Concerned over early Saranac laborato:r:y report that

one injuection of asbestos caused the :imtediate death of an

an:imal.



* 1937 State of Pennsylvania enacts Vbrkman' s Ccrnpensation Law covering

disease of asbestosis



* 1937 State of Indiana enacts Vbrkman' s Ccrnpensation Law covering

disease of asbestosis



* 1937 Cali v. Paybestos-Manhattan, The American Surety Conpany, The

Hartford Accident & IndE!I1I'lity Catq:lany, The Travelers Insurance

canpany, Connecticut



Asbestosis canpensation claim of plant \A.Orker; settlement of

$3,500 in 1937



* 1937 Siket v. Paybestos-Manhattan, The American Surety canpany,

The Hartford Accident & IndE!I1I'lity CaIpmy, The Travelers

Insurance canpany, Connecticut



Asbestosis canpensation claim of plant \A.Orker; settlement of

$4,000.00 in 1937. By letter dated September 1,1937, of

Dr. Cole B. Gibson, Superintendent and rre:lical director,

Undercliffe Sanataritml, Meriden, Connecticut, diagnosis

based upon histo:r:y of nineteen years as asbestos weaver, onset

of symptons, character of symptans and sterescopic x-ray

examination



Letter dated J1.me 16, 1937, of Dr. M. J. Antell, Bridgeport,

Connecticut. With the histo:r:y of exposure to asbestos of

over a period of twenty years and in the presence of several

negative sp..lta... he makes a diagnosis of bilateral

pu1.rcona:r:y asbestosis (far advanced) •



* 1938 Dreesen, W. C., J. M. Dallavalle, J. I. Edwards, J. W. Miller

and R. R. Sayers, A Study of Asbestosis in the Asbestos Textile

Industry, Public Health Bulletin, No. 241, 1938



Made a reccmnended tentative standard for controlling exposure

to asbestos dust of five million particles per cubic foot.

Only 13% of \A.Orkers stu:1ied had over ten years exposure to

Asbestos.



* 1938 Vorwald, Arthur J. and John W. Karr, "Pneum::x::oniosis and

Pulnona:r:y Carcinana, "American Journal of Pathology, XVIII, p. 49

ReFOrt of Saranac laborato:r:y (relationship of doctors and industry

not disclosed)









NNS-MOR-000391

* 1938 Stanley D.Jdzinski v. Paybestos-Manhattan, The American

Surety Canpany, Dartford Accident & Indemnity Ccrrp3ny,

Connecticut



Asbestosis canpensation claim of plant \*.Orker; settlement

in 1938 of $2,500.00



* 1938 Andrew Urban v. Paybestos-Manhattan, The Travelers Insurance

canpany, Hartford Accident & Indemnity Ccrrp3ny and The

American Surety canpany

Asbestosis canpensation claim of plant \*.Orker; settlement in

1938 of $3,200.00



* 1938 Ambrozewich v. Paybestos-Manhattan, Hartford Accident &

Indemnity Canpany, The American Surety Ccrrp3ny, Connecticut



Asbestosis canpensation claim of plant worker; settlement in

1940 of $850.00



** 1939 State Insurance Carriers in Gennany recognized and canpensated

slight asbestosis with fatal lung cancer as death caused by

occupational disease.



* 1939 March 22, Letter of Stm1I1er Simpson (Paybestos-Manhattan) to

Asbestos Magazine re Dreesen article



"I think when we get through with our Saranac

investigation, we will show that this paper is

considerably distorted although he does say at

last that where the air can be kept down to five

million microns (wrong) there is no danger, and I

can tell you confidentially, but I am not willing to

make it p.1blic, that the air can be kept belCM five

million microns with proper controls, but I am not

willing to start a controversy with my canpetitors."



Says he and Johns-Manville will share dust control secrets

with canpetitors "when the time is right." Says he knows the

plants studied by Dreesen:



"And as nearly as I can find out they have no dust control

at all that arrounts to anything."



* 1939 Alex Fekete v. Paybestos-Manhattan, The Hartford Accident & Indenni ty

Ccrrp3ny, The American Surety Ccrrp3ny, Connecticut



Asbestosis canpensation claim of plant \*.Orker; Settlement of

$300.00 in 1939









NNS-MOR-000392

* 1939 Alex Fekete v. Raybestos-Manhattan, The Hartford

Accident and Indannity Canpany, The American Surety

CCJnpany, Connecticut.

Asbestosis canpensation claim of plant worker: Settlement

of $300.00 in 1939

* 1939 Joseph F. Sbmn v. Raybestos-Manhattan, The Hartford Accident

and Indannity CCJnpany, The American Surety CCJnpany, Connecticut



Asbestosis canpensation claim of plant worker: Settlement of

$600.00 in 1939

~tter dated Septe:nber 15, 1939, fran Dr. Paul T. Lengyel,

Bridgeport, Ct., Bluish discoloration of lip and fingernails

suggests cyanosis.

* 1939 Gus Wargo v. Raybestos-Manhattan, Hartford Accident & Indannity,

The Travelers Insurance Canpany, Connecticut

Asbestosis canpensation claim of plant worker: Settlement of

$2,500.00 in 1939

* 1939 Benjamin SzaOO v. Raybestos-Manhattan, Hartford Accident &

Indannity Canpany, The American Surety Canpany, Connecticut



Asbestosis canpensation claim of plant worker; Settlement of

$1,350.00 in 1939



* 1939 Steve ~lner v. Raybestos-Manhattan, Hartford Accident &

Indannity COnpany, The American Surety Canpany, Connecticut

Asbestosis canpensation claim of plant worker; Settlement of

$3,000.00 in 1939

* 1939 Andrew Vajanyi v. Raybestos-Manhattan, The Travelers Insurance

Canpany, Hartford Accident & Indennity Canpany, The American

Surety Canpany, Connecticut

Asbestosis canpensation claim of plant worker: Settlement of

$4,250.00 in 1939

* 1939 Joseph Tivadar v. Raybestos-Manhattan, The Travelers Insurance

Canpany, Hartford Accident & Iooennity Canpany, The American

Surety Carpany, Connecticut

Asbestosis canpensation claim of plant worker: Settlement of

$2,500.00 in 1939

* 1939 John Reske v. Raybestos-Manhattan, The Travelers Insurance

Canpany, Hartford Accident & Indemnity Ccxnpany, The American

Surety Canpany, Connecticut



Asbestosis canpensation claim of plant worker: Settlement of

$1,000, in 1939

~tter dated July 7, 1939 fran Dr. Cole B. Gibson,

Underc1iffe Sanatarium, c1a:irns that the cupational history

(thirteen years as asbestos weaver) suggests possiliility of

pulnonary asbestosis. Dr. Gibson also claims the asbestosis

corrlition :mproves when patient is rarcved fran worJd..n3"

envi.ronnent.







NNS-MOR-000393

* 1939 March 23, Letter of Asbestos Magazine to Stmmer Sirrpson

(Raybestos-Manhattan) re: Gardner I s preliminary \.Qrk:

"of course, we understam that all this info

on asbestos is to be kept confidential and that

nothing sould be published a1:::out asbestos in Asbestos

Magazine at present."

* 1939 May 4, Letter of Stmmer Sirrpson to Brown (Jolms-Manville).

Stmmer S:impson (Raybestos-Manhattan) agrees that Gardner has

violated their agreanent.

"the reports may be so favorable to us that they

\.Quld cause us no trouble but they might be just the

opposite which could be very embarassing."

* 1939 Letter of Asbestos Magazine to Sumner S:impson (Raybestos-Manhattan):

We have written you many times re: publishing on asbestos

"always you have requested that for certain obvious

reasons, we p.lblish nothing, and naturally, your wishes

have been respected."

"Possibly, a discussion of it (asbestosis) along the

right lines would serve to canbat sane of the rather

undesirable publicity given to it in current newspapers."

* 1939 Letter of Stmmer Sirrpson (Raybestos-Manhattan) to Brown (Johns-

Manville) re: Asbestos Magazine request to publish:

"I think the less said aOOut asbestos the better off

we are ... "

Asbestos has "been very decent about not reprinting the

English articles."



* 1939 State of Washington enacts W:>rkman IS Canpensation Law covering

disease of asbestosis

* 1939 State of Maryland enacts w:>rkman I s Ccrnpensation Law covering

disease of asbestosis

* 1939 John Haydu v. Raybestos-Manhattan, The Arrierican Surety Conpany,

Hartford Accident & Indamity arrl The Travelers Insurance

Canpany, Connecticut

Asbestosis canpensation claim of plant \.Qrkeri Settlement of

$990.00 in 1939



* 1939 Mary Kisley (widow of Stephen Kisley) v. Raybestos-Manhattan,

The Travelers Insurance Canpany, Hartford Accident & Inderrru. ty

Canpany, The American Surety Canpany, Cormecticut



Asbestosis canpensation claim of plant \.Qrker i Settlement of

$950.00 in 1939









NNS-MOR-000394

* 1939 Frank Torok v. Raybestos-Manhattan, The Travelers Insurance

canpany, Hartford Accident & Indamity Canpany, The American

Surety canpany, Cormecticut

Asbestosis canpensation claim of plant Y.Orker; Settlanent of

$2,000.00 in 1939.

* 1939 Charles Brooks v. Raybestos-Manhattan, The American Surety

Canpany, Connecticut

Asbestosis canpensation claim of plant Y.Orker; Settlanent of

$100.00 in 1939

* 1939 John E. Nichols v. Raybestos-Manhattan, The Travelers Insurance

Canpany, Hartford Accident & Indemity Ccrnpany, The American

SUrety CCmpany, Connecticut

Asbestosis canpensation claim of plant Y.Orker; Settlanent of

$3,000.00 in 1939



* 1939 John Gyana v. Raybestos-Manhattan, The American Surety Canpany,

Connecticut

Asbestosis canpensation claim of plant Y.Orker; Settlement of

$1,900.00 in 1939

* 1939 William Punyo v. Raybestos-Manhattan, The Travelers Insurance

Canpany, The Hartford Accident & Indamrity canpany, The American

SUrety canpany, Connecticut

Asbestosis canpeI1sation clam of plant Y.Orker; Settlement of

$1,200.00 in 1939



* 1940 January 25, Letter of Dr. Alfred Kornblut to Sumner Simpson

(Raybestos-Manhattan) regarding his analysis of Gardner I s rep:>rt



Says Dreessen study is proof p:>sitive in a human latoratory

of the "hazards of the Y.Ork and the end results of the effect."

Quotes Dreessen Threshold Lllnit Value stateme.'1t: Kornblut recarmends:



"Seriously face the problan of dust control where asbestos is

being used I continue to make dust counts.

* 1940 Archie Poceluiko v. Raybestos-Manhattan, The Travelers Insurance

Ccrnpany, Hartford Accident & Indemity Ccrnpany and The American

SUrety Canpany, Connecticut

Asbestosis canpensation claim of plant Y.Orker;

Settlement of $1,550.00 in 1940

Dep:>sition of Dr. Gibson, Urrlercliffe Sanatarium, states that the

x-ray examination of Archie Poceluiko revealed noderate

interstitial fibrosis and symptanatology coupled with the

occupational history of fourteen years as asbestos weaver

canpatible with a m:rlerate degree of pulnDnary fibrosis which is

probably due to pu.lm:)nary asbestosis









NNS-MOR-000395

* 1940 Pasquale Crocco v. Raybestos-Manhattan, The Travelers Insurance

Conpany, Hartford Accident & irrlannity Ccmpany, The American

Surety carpany, connecticut

Asbestosis canpensation claim of plant \\Orker; Settlement of

$1,250.00 in 1940

* 1940 Benjamin Crooks v. Raybestos-Manhattan, The Travelers Insurance

Ccmpany, Hartford Accident & Irxiannity Ccmpany, The American

Surety CcIrpany, Connecticut

Asbestosis canpensation claim of plant \\Orker; Settlement of

$2,100.00 in 1940

* 1941 Novanber 3, Letter fran Brown (Jorms-Manville Legal Department)

to Sumner S.impson (Raybestos-Manhattan) re: proposed review of

bJok, "Pneurroconiosis" by Lanza

Says Johns-Manville nor Raybestos-Manhattan \\Ould object, but

refers to sensitivity of rest of industry to public discussion

of asbestos and specifically says:

"I have in mind the ostrich like attitude which

has been evidenced fran t:iIre to t:iIre by sane nanbers

of the industry."



* 1941 State of Delaware enacts Workman's CCIl1pellsation Law covering

disease of asbestosis.



* 1941 Edgar Gravell v. Raybestos-Manhattan, The American Surety Conpany,

Connecticut

Asbestosis canpensation claim of plant \\Orker; Settlerrent of

$2,000.00 in 1941



* 1942 Holleb, H. B. an:1 A. Angirst, "Bronchogenic Carcinana In

Association with Pu1.nonary Asbestosis," American Journal of

Pathology, XVIII, P. 123

ReFOrt of ten cases of asbestosis and lung cancer in asbestos

insulators

* 1942 Hueper, Occupational TLmors and Allied Diseases,

Lists asbestos as a carcinogen, sw:veys case reports, an:i calls

for use of a substitute product



* 1942 December 29, Letter fran Raybestos-Manhattan to Lanza

Advises Lanza of another camon law suit by ex-atq?loyee;

calls treating physician a quack; related he is sending x-rays

to Dr. Perrlergrass:

"Inasrm.lch as this claim may wind up in the Courts, I am

writing you with the hopes that you may be able to rerrler

us that assistance which has been so invaluable to us in

the past."

** 1943 The Gel:man Government fo:onal.ly recognized hmg cancer wi asbestosis

as a canpensable occupational disease.









NNS-MOR-000396

* 1943 Hueper, Bulletin for the Anerican Society for the Control of Cancer,

Volume 25, No. 6 (1943)

He states at page 65:

"Industrial concerns are in general not particularly anxious

to have the occurrence of occupational cancers anong their

anployees or of envirorlrrental cancers anong the consumers of

their prcducts made a matter of public records. SUch publicity

might reflect unfavorably upon their rosiness activities and

oblige them to undertake extensive and expensive technical and

sanitary changes in their production methods and in the types

of products :-manufactured. There is, IlDreover, the distinct

possibility of becaning involved in ccmpensation suits with

extravagant financial claims by the injured parties.

lilt is, therefore, not an uncarm:>n practice that sane pressure

is exerted by the parties financially interested in such matters

to keep infonnation on the occurrence of industrial cancer 'Well

under cover. II

* 1943 State of Oregon enacts W::)rkman I s Conpensation Law covering the

disease asbestosis

* 1943 State of Nebraska enacts W::)rktnan I s Conpensation Law covering the

disease asbestosis

* 1943 State of Minnesota enacts W::)rkman I s Canpensation Law covering the

disease asbestosis

* 1943 State of Michigan enacts W::)rkman IS Canpensation Law covering the

disease asbestosis

* 1943 State of Arizona enacts W::)rkman IS Conpensation Law covering the

disease asbestosis

i944 State of Virginia enacts W::)rkman IS Canpensation Law covering the

disease asbestosis

* 1945 State of New Mexico enacts W::)rkman I s Canpensation Law covering the

disease asbestosis

* 1945 State of Colorado enacts W:::>rkman' s Conpensation Law covering the

disease asbestosis.

1946 The Oreesen standard was adopted into the AO:;IH List of Mac Values.

* 1946 Fleischer and Drinker, J. of Ind. Hyg. and Toxicology, Volume 28,

p. 9 (1946)

Epidemiologic survey finding three cases of asbestosis in shipyard

pi,.,.. concltrles trade isn I t hazardous (no IlDnitoring of re:tOVal of

old insulation and the majority of men surveyed had less than fifteen

years exposure.)

* 1946 August 12, Letter fran Gatke (President, Gatke Corporation) to

lbhrback (Raybestos-Manhattan)

~lains that final report has not been rerrlered. Pefers to

interim reports that less than five microns is innocuous and says

that heavier dust (greater than five microns) can be oontrolle1 by

approve:l respirators









NNS-MOR-000397

'~ith these ~ facts established, and without

injection of possibilities of cancer, etc., etc.,

we ~uld have sanething definite an::l ~rthwhile to

canbat the claims of these COtU'ltry doctors" whose

testinony is accepted by the Courts. Refers to

fact that all they need is this part of the report

and "we could let the rest of it (experiments) go

by the boaJ:d."



* 1946 December 12, Letter fran Brown (Johns-Manville Legal Dept.) to

Bowditch (Saranac I.a1::oratory)

Asks whether saneone else could canplete Gardner I s studies.

Reninds saranac of agreenent that results are the property of

industry an::l that any reports are to be approved by industry

prior to publication.



* 1946 State of Alaska enacts ~rkman IS Conpensation Law covering the

disease, asbestosis

* 1946 State of Georgia enacts ~rkman' s canpensation Law covering the

disease, asbestosis

* 1947 Hemeon, W.C.L., Rep:>rt of Preliminary rust Investigation for ATI,

IHF (JtU'le, 1947 (tU'lFUblished)

The report, in part, states:



" The maximum f€IlI1issable dustiness for asbestos

is camonly taken to be five mppcf. This

represents gcx:::d attainment in the dust control program.

It is E!!Iphasized, hc::Mever, that dust elimination to this

extent does not p:>stively insure that no asbestosis will

develop in ~ ~rkers after a long ~rking life. (greater

that twenty to twenty-five years). Scientific evidence

is obscure on this p:>int.

* 1947 Kennaway and Kennaway, British Journal of Cancer Volume 1, p. 260 (1947)

Autopsies of cancer victims. Included an insulator.

1947 Merewether, E. R.A., "Annual Report of the Chief Inspector of factories

for the year 1947." H. M. Stationery Office, london. January 1949



Reported that of 235 cases of asbestosis among deceased ~rkers, 31

(13 %) had also had cancer of lungs or pleura at time of autopsy.

Contrasted to an expected rate of 1. 0%

* 1947 Safety Review (U. S. Navy) Vol. 4, January, 1947

Cites insulators as being at risk. an::l reccmnends that dust

suppression measures be undertaken. Finds Threshold L:imit

Value exceeded in an insulation operation.

* 1947 Minutes, Air Hygiene Ccmnittee, ATI, November 19, 1947.

Proposal made to study effects of long tenn low-level asbestos

exposure. (Pejected, June 17, 1948).









NNS-MOR-000398

* 1947 State of Termessee enacts Workman I s Conpensation Law covering

the disease, asbestosis

* 1947 State of New Hampshire enacts v«:>rkman IS Canpensation Law covering

the disease, asbestosis

* 1947 State of Nevada enacts v«:>rkman IS cattpensation Law covering the

disease, asbestosis

1948 Dreesen Standard adopted into Aa;IH TLV values

* 1948 Willis, E., Pathology of 'I'Lmors (1948 ed.)

Textbook citing inter alia the 1942 Holleb and Angrist

case retx>rt.

* 1948 Pneurroconiosis: Retx>rt of the Ministry of National Insurance,

r~rted (1953)



Insulators are made eligible for v«:>rkmen IS Canpensation in New

England. Covers asbestosis.

* 1948 State of Arkansas enacts Workman IS Conpensation Law covering the

disease, asbestosis

* 1949 Annual Retx>rt of the Chief Inspector of Factories for the year

1949, British Home Office, (1951)

He states:

"It is very necessary to keep an ever watchful eye for

the new case of asbestos in sane manufacturing or other

process, for example, on ships or buildings where the

work may be undertaken by saneone not fully realizing

the necessity of preventing as far as tx'Ssible' the

inhalation of asbestos fiber and dust."

* 1949 Editorial, 140 Journal of the American Medical Association, 1219

Lung Cancer" (1949)

"Since sane 20,000 workers are anployed in the asbestos

prcrlucing industries of this country and Canada and

many additional thousands in various asbestos consuming

industries, increased attention to this probably occupational

hazard of cancer of the lung by the medical profession is

desirable. "

* 1949 Smith, Kermeth and Johns-Manville officers

Health survey of Johns-Manville mill and request for funds

to suppress dust inside and outside the mill in order to

prevent nore cases of asbestosis.

* 1949 Conklin

Brands asbestos as cancer agent an:J calls for testing and

search for substitute products

* 1949 Franchini

Medical retx>rt of asbestosis in an insulator









NNS-MOR-000399

* 1949 State of West Virginia enacts Workman's canpensation Law

covering the disease, asbestosis

* 1949 State of South Carolina enacts Workman's canpensation Law

covering the disease, asbestosis

* 1949 Asbestos strike in Q,lebec area. Arbitration before Quebec

Lal::or Relations Board, Decanber 14, 1949. Test:im:my fran

in:iustry and private doctors on asbestos disease and exposure

levels. Ccmni bnent by canpanies to reduce dust levels.

* 1949 Mary Crocco (widow of Angelo Crocco) and JOM Crocco v.

Raybestos-Manhattan, The Travelers Insurance canpany,

Hartford Accident & in:iannity Catpany, The American Surety

Canpany, Connecticut

Asbestosis canpensation claim of plant v.orker; Settlement of

$2,250.00 in 1949

Letter dated May 7, 1949, fran Dr. A. Phillip Dinan, Jr., Stratford,

Connecticut, in:iicates that history of exposure as a weaver for

eighteen years along with clinical symptans and x-ray findings

resulted in diagnosis of asbestosis. There was a marked progression

of the fibrosis fram x-ray in 1947 compared to x-ray in 1949

even though employee was not exposed to asbestos dust during

those tv.o years (he v.orked in locker roams as a janitor) •

Asbestosis, once the lungs becane involved, will progress

whether the man is in the environment or not.



* 1950 Frost, Ugeskr Laeger, Vol. 112, pp. 1284-9 (1950)

Medical report of asbestosis in an insulator

* 1951 Gloyne, S. R. "PneUll'OCOniosis, " Lancet, Vol. 1, p. 810

Lung cancer anong asbestosis victims.

* 1951 Stoll, Bass and Angrist, 88 AMA Archives of Internal Medicine

831 (1951)

They concluded:

"This association (between asbestosis and lung cancer in

an insulator) emphasizes the hazards of in:iustrial exposure,

the canpensability of the cancerous process as well as the

asbestosis and the need of careful preventative measures."

* 1951 Stokinger, H. E., Lal::or Deposition and Retention of Inhaled

Insoluable Particulates, Arch. IOO. Hyg. Occup. Mal., Vol. 4

pp. 346-353.

Asbestos article

* 1951 Vozwald, Arthur J. et al., "Experimental Studies of Asbestosis"

A.M.A. Archives of Industrial Hygiene and Occupational Medicine, III,

p. 1

(They disniss the case s'bldies linking lung cancer with

asbestosis because the group of v.orkers examined was not

a typical, random group of asbestos v.orkers.)









,.-rking on this"

3. Medical - cooperate arx1 give all merlical

infonnation pertinent to asbestosis to an organize1

merlical group. "We feel confident that such a

merlical group will not release any infonnation

that may create, in the minds of the public

or of employees a feeling that the asbestos

industzy is a hazardous one"



* 1954 July 13, letter fran Luttenberger to Hugh Jackson

(Jolms-Manville) re: case of bronchogenic carcinana

arx1 its relationship to asbestosis "it is very

:important case as far as we are concerne1."





* 1954 Jack CUthbertson v. Annstrong Cork, Mundet Cork,

california



Asbestosis worker I s carpensation claim of insulator



* 1954 Edward Campbell v. JoJms-Manville AJ::rnstrong Cork, Mundet

Cork, Keasbey & Mattison, Connecticut



Asbestosis worker I s canpensation claim of insulator

letter date1 October 4, 1955, fran Standard insurance

Company to Armstrong Cork: "A serious claim ••••

asbestos."









NNS-MOR-000402

1955 roll, R., "M:>rtality from Lung cancer in Asbestos v«:>rkers,"

* British Journal of Industrial Medicine, XII, p. 81



A British scientist's plant-wide study finding an unsually

high rate of hmg cancer anong all asbestos workers. Records

from data kept by British Govermrent. Reported that in late

1940' s a frequency of bronochogenic cancer greater than that

expected on the basis of the general rrale population was

manifest anong persons who worked in the 1l1al1ufacture of

asbestos products.



1955 Fisher, IHF Transactions Bulletin, No. 29, pp. 12-18

*

Fisher, president of Johns-Manville, presentation before

Industrial Health Foundation in Nove:nber, 1955, CCJrq?aring

past "unconcern" over testing with current "insistence on

every safeguard prior to marketing a product"



* 1955 Hueper, u.s. D=pt. of HEW Public Health M:>nograrn No. 36



In a l:ook written by this pioneer, Dr. Hueper again indicts

asbestos as a cancer agent and suggests that the general

population is at risk fran atrrosphere pollution and speci-

fically lists insulators as being at risk. Dr. Hueper again

calls for the use an::1 developrent of substitute products



1955 Hueper, Arrer. J. of Clinical Path. Vol. 25, p. 1388 (editorial)

*

Surveys environmental causes of cancer, cities use of asbestos

as an insulation material and lists asbestos as carcinogenic

1955 McLaughlin, AMA Archives of Ind. Health, 12: 83-98

*

Traces history of dust diseases and lists insulators at

risk. M:Laughlin was a rredical inspector in England.



* 1955 John E. Swartout v. Armstrong Cork, Phillip Carey, Johns-

Manville, Mundet Cork, California



Asbestosis worker's oonpensation claim of insulator Letter

and reIX>rt dated August 14, 1956 from Ivan Schwab (attorney):

"All the rredical points to death by asbestosis." Final









NNS-MOR-000403

reconsidered award in March, 1958.



Petitien, Decanter, 1958, by Western Asbestos, seeking idanni ty

from MLmdet Cork, Annstrong Cork, Johns-Manville and Phillip

Carey. Petitien granted.



* 1956 Cook, Present Trends in MAC's, Industrial Hygiene Q.1arter1y,

17: 273



Address the fallacy of attempting to establish a Threshold

L:i.rnit Value for suspected cancer causing substances including

asl:estos



* 1956 Frost, Georg, Danish Med. Bulletin, 3: 202-4



Survey and sttrly of insulators at a Danish shipyard and finds

extensive asbestosis, 9 or 31 workers; This survey was annotated

by the Industrial Health Foundation in June, 1937, and supplied

to the leading U. S. manufacturers.



* 1956 Mereweather, Vol. 3 Ind. lvB:1. & Hyg., p. 103-16



Textbook citing insulation work as hazardous to a small extent



* 1956 Hartwig v. Annstrong Cork, Wisconsin



w:>rker's canpensation claim for asbestosis of insulator



Letter of Feburary 22, 1957 fran Schiedt to A&A re attorney

letter "In all probability the occupational disease they refer

to is asbestosis which could result in a sizeable award." Order,

of January 7, 1958, approving $16,000.00 settlarent without con-

tribution by Annstreng Cork



* 1956 E.O. McCarrell v. Annstrong Cork, California



w:>rker's Canpesation clam for asbestosis of an insulator



Letter of March 1, 1957 fran Schiedt to A&A

"These asbestos clabns are on the increase and we are

wondering if the manufacturers of this high temp in-

sulation which we use could be of serre assistance in

the defense of these claims."

Letter of February 25, 1957 A&A to Hughes of Annstrong Cork

refers to Travelers proposal of a survey of an insulating job

in their letter of February 19, 1957 from Bryant of Travelers to

A&A

"'Ihls is to advise you that our engineering departlne.nt is

planning to make a survey of an insulating plant in Cali-

fornia. This way it is felt that we will then be able to

develop recannendations or provide you with sufficient

infonnation so that recannendations might be developed which

will prevent or minimize this exposure."

March 22, 1960, ADmstrang Cork paid $13,000 in settlement.









NNS-MOR-000404

* 1957 Harry Harke v. Johns-Manville, Annstrong Cork Connecticut



Asbestosis canpensation clabn fo insulators; letter of

October 18, 1957, fran Schiedt

"In view of the very recent employment with Annstrong

Cork, Mr. Harke I1UlSt have ~rked extensively with other

employers so that our liability in the case of an asbestos

claim should be relatively small."



* 1957 Vincent P. ColI v. Armstrong Cork New York



Vbrker's canpensation cancer claim of an insulator



Decision of Vbrknan' s Conpensation Board dated July 39, 1957,

granted benefits against Armstrong Cork.

Medical record in file indicates cancer.



* 1957 Fred E. Strickland v. Annstrong Cork, Fiberglass Engineering,

CMens-corning

California



letter of August 21, 1958 refers to clabn as being one for

asbestosis. Worker's Ccxnpensation clabn of in insulator.



* 1957 Janes W. Riley v. Annstrong Cork, Phillip Carey, ~-COrning,

Johns-Manville

California



Worker's Ccxnpensation claim for asbestosis of· an insulator

Award of November 27, 1959 against Johns-Manville and Annstrong

Cork; Petition for reapportianent filed on Novanber, 1960, against

Fiberboard, Paraffine, CMens-COming, Annstrong Cork, Phillip

Carey, United Refractory.



* 1958 Braun, D.C. and T.D. Truan, "An Epidemiological Study of IJ.mg

Cancer in Asbestos Miners," Archives of Industrial Health, XVII,

p. 634



large study by Industrial Health Foundation, supported by United

States Industry. (Good for industry but only thirty (30%) per-

cent of w:>rkers had been employed for twenty or rrore years. These

rren were aware of twenty year latent period but ignored it in reports.)



* 1958 Pendergrass, American Journal Roent. 80: 1



Medical report of asbestosis in insulators



* 1958 R:>bert Zini v. Annstrong Cork

California



Worker's CCJnpensation claim for asbestosis of an insulator;

claim denied July 1, 1960;



Dr. ~gna testifies: relates death to cancer suggestible

relationship between asbestos and cancer. Cancer is canpendable





,- -.-..- .....".........- "" . ~,,~"....,... " ,,~~- ....---..-,.........., -"'-~-"'--.--,-~- ..

NNS-MOR-000405

-~-~~ --.~-.--









in Gennany.



Letter, August 25, 1959, fran Schiedt to Taylor of Annstrong

Contracting & SUpply:



"Apparently the California Industrial Connission accepts

the fact that asbestos is contracted by pipe covering

mechanics although we have had very few awards in other

states due to asbestos."



* 1958 James Shepherd v. Annstrong Cork

Massachusetts



\"brker's Ccrnpensation claim for asbestosis and cancer of an

insulatio; Shepherd was a plasterer on loan as a pipe coverer.

Says claimant only worked for seven (7) weeks.



February 19, 1960 mEm) with copy to Liddell imploring

than to begin chest x-rays so as to avoid claims like

this.



Case settled by Annstrong Cork for $5,800.00.



* 1958 Tl'nnas B. Spencer v. Annstrong Cork Pennsylvania



w::>rker's catpensation claim of an insulator for asbestosis



* 1959 Gough, Proceedings of the Pneum:x:onisis Conference S. Africa

Council for Scientific & Industrial Research (Discussant) p.

389



Reference in 1959 pneunoconiosis conference to incident of

asbestosis in ship building demolishers who strip old insulation



* 1959 Hertz, C.W. and H. Reinwein, Asbestose bei insolierin.

Arztl. W:>chenschr. 14: 361-365



r.Ed.i.cal report of asbestosis and cancer in insulators



* 1959 Letter fran Dr. K.W. Snith, M:dical Director of Johns-Manville

to G.H. Brewer, Johns-Manville, Pittsburgh, Cailfornia.



Dr. Snith told them that of thirty long service employees whose

medical files were reviewed, twenty-one shovaj positive evidence

of puJ.m:mary disease. He urged the removal of all atnospheric

dust contamination.



* 1959 Clarence Peed v. Armstrong Cork

Texas



Insulator death alleged due to asbestos; June 7, 1960,

Axmstrang Cork paid $1,500.00



* 1959 Roy 'Ihorsted v. Axmstrong Cork

California







NNS-MOR-000406

W::>rker's Conpensation claim of insulator alleging asbestosis

letter of March l?, 1960 fran SChiedt to Edgar:



"as you knCM these pneurooconiosis and asbestos claims are on

the increase in many sections of the country."





Referee's decision of Decenber 30, 1959: no asbestosis



* 1959 R:>bert F. CUthbertson v. Annstrong COrk

california



W::>rker' s Conpensation claim of insulator for asbestosis



letter of July 29, 1959 fran SChiedt to Harma & Brophy (attorneys):

"We knCM your attorneys roth in your San Francisco and oakland

offices have had considerable experience handling asbestos

claims."

August 13, 1959, claim was dismissed for lack of diagnosis.



* 1959 Thanas Maggio Bond-Washington filed against multiple defendants

in washington State. Vbrker' s Conpensation claim for asbestosis

of an insulator.



* 1959 Lloyd U. Viall v. Annstrong COrk



W::>rker' s Conpensation claim for asbestosis of an insulator

letter of August 5, 1959 fran Schiedt to J.S. Taylor of

Armstrong COntracting and SUpply:



"If the number of lung claims keep on increasing as they have

in the past several weeks, ItDst of your tirce will be spent on

asbestosis and pneurroconiosis claims. Seriously, though, it

is :important that we cc::x:>perate with our insurance carriers

and give them all the help we can for tw:J reasons. First,

these claims usually result in total pennanent disability

which we will pay our proportionate share. Second, there

is sare doubt that our type of \\Ork could cause asbestosis.

However, since one employee collected under the california

Occupational Disease Lae, we have had quite a few asbestosis

Claims.



Very truly yours,



ARMSTRCNG CORK mtPANY



R.C. Schiedt, Jr.

Insurance Department"



* 1960 Ahlmark, Survey of insulator disease in SWeden



Reports nineteen cases of asbestosis, nearly all laggers



* 1960 Anderson and Campaga, Archives of Envirormental Health, Vol. 1 39







... " ~ ~_.> .. __ -.w_r_ _ __









NNS-MOR-000408

M:rli.cal reports of Dr. Hinshaw, 1960 and 1962, indicate pleural

changes consistent with asbestosis but non-disabling.



* 1960 Harvey Curtis v. AI:mstrong Cork and OIals-COrning Michigan



~rker' s Canpensation claim of an insulator for asbestosis



* 1961 Brugsch, N. England Journal of M:rlicine, 265: 379



aeport of asbestosis in an autcrrobile undercoater



* 1961 ~in and Rubin: Textbook on Thoracic Diseases

w. B. SaW1ders & Canpany



Emphasizes cardipulm:>nary relationships; Textbook describing

risk of asbestos and lung cancer to insulators



1961 Sleggs, et al., S. Afr. Med. J., 35: 28-34 (Jan. 1961)

*

Epidaniologic follow-up to Wagner. Includes insulators and

finds mesotheliana.



* 1961 Telischi and Rubenston, Archives of Pathology 72: 116 (1961)



Case aeport of asbestosis and lung cancer in a plaster mixer;

material contained sane percentage of asbestos



* 1961 Steve Gilivich v. Plant Rubber & Asbestos, M.mdet Cork, Parafifine

(Fiberboard), Armstrong Cork, ()...e1s-COming, Phillip Carey

California

W:>rker's Canpensation Claim of an insulator for asbestosis

Claim settled December 22, 1964, for a total of $7,968.00



* 1961 John B. Gronenthal v. AI:mstrong Cork and AI:mstrong Contracting

and Supply

washington



w:>rkler's Canpensation claim of an insulator for asbestosis;

Appellate order of Novanber, 1962, discussing causal cormection

with asbestos and cancer.



* 1962 Cordova, Cancer, 15: 1181, (1962)



Survey and study of cases including insulators finding asbestosis

and lung cancer



1962 Eisenstadt, Vol. 13, American Practitioner, p. 573 (1962)

*

Asbestosis and mesotheliana in three oil refinery \\Orkers who

WJrked with insulation



* 1962 Hervieux, J., Certains aspects d l' asbestose.

Cah. Med. Interprof. 2: 41-2 (1962)



Asbestosis in an insulator







NNS-MOR-000409

* 1962 Hueper, 3 Clinical Phannacology and Therapeutics, p. 776



Survey of ~rld literature and reports of asbestosis and

lung cancer in insulators



* 1962 r-tCaughey, 2 Brit. M3dical Journal, p. 1397



Asbestosis and rresotheliana in an insulator



* 1962 Schepers, chapter on occupational chest diseases fran Flaning,

D' Alonzo and Zapp, MJdern OCcupational M3dicine (1962)



Textbook describing disease in persons whose only exposure was

during ~rld War II ~rking on "Liberty Ships"



1962 Song Hi Cin and Koprwska, Aeta Cytol., p. 391 (July-Aug. 1962)

*

Survey of lung cancer in asbestos ~rkers citing six insulator

reports of asbestosis and lung cancer



* 1962 Smither, 2 Birt. M:rl. J., p. 1194 (1962)



Asbestosis and mesotheliana in an insulator



* 1962 Spencer, Pathology of the lllIlg (1962)



In textbook states it is \\ell recognized that asbestos occurs

in all who handle the mineral .



* 1962 preliminary Industrial Hygiene Survey of the phillip carey

Mfg,. Co., (December, 1962)



Plant was called very dusty



* 1962 John Wyss v. Armstrong Cork, Ov.ens-Corning, Mmdet Cork

california



~rker' s Conpensation cla:im of an insulator for asbestosis

case settled for $6,600.00 in April, 1966



* 1962 Paul J. Greischar v. Ov.ens-Coming, Armstrong Cork,

Joms-Manville

california



w::>rker's Conpensation claim of an insulator for asbestosis

Claim settled in April, 1966

~ca1 reports in file dating to 1962 indicate asbestosis





* 1962 Irene Brodale v. Armstrong Cork

california



w::>rker's Conpensation claim for death of an insulator fran cancer

and asbestosis









NNS-MOR-000410

----- --------

- -----------------------.....----





* 1962 Anthony Olofrio v. Annstron:r Cork, Phillip Carey,

Johns-Manville

Connecticut



w:>rker's Conpensation claim of an insulator for asbestosis



* 1962 Arthur Miller v. Annstrong Cork, M.mdet, Cork, Fil::erboard Corporation

california



w:>rker's Conpensation claim of an insulator for asbestosis



* 1962 George A. Kingston v. Annstrong Cork

Mirmesota



w:>rker' s Conpensation claim of an insulator for asbestosis

letter of O::tober 29, 1962, acknowledging receipt of claim

for asbestosis as result of working for numberous cxmtractors.

Settlement of $13,500 dated March 27, 1963



* 1962 John D. Staples v. Annstrong Cork

california



w:>rker's Conpensation claim of an insulator for asbestosis



* 1963 Case Pecords of the Massachusetts General Hospital N. Eng. J.

Men. 269: 747 (19h3)



case Peport, Asbestosis and nesotheliana in an insulator



* 1963 Ieathart and Sanderson, Ann. O::c. Hyg. 6: 65 (1963) Describes

in great detail the risks to insulators



* 1963 Selikoff, et al., Asbestos Exposure and Neoplasia, JAMA, 188:

142



Initial paper presented on epidaniologic survey of insulation workers

discovering asbestosis, lung cancer and rnesotileliana



* 1963 Thanpson, J. G., et al., "Asbestos as a MJdern Urban Hazard,"

South African M::dical Journal, p. 38



Study of lung smears fran five hundred consecutive autopsies

on urban rker IS COnpensation claim of an insulator for asbestosis

Letter of January 14, 1964 fran Charles M. McMillan, attorney

to Industrial Ccmni.ssion of california and copy to all defendants

re: rredical report of Dr. Hinshaw dated Q::tober 14, 1968, diagnosing

Goans as having asbestosis and listing him as an insulator.



* 1963 Gus Addison v. Plant Rubber and Asbestos, Annstrong Cork and Johns-

Manville

California



rorker's COnpensation claim of an insulator for asbestosis

Settled on April 29, 1965



* 1963 Allan Everett v. AIJnstrong Cork, Phillip carey, Fiberl::oa.rd Corporation,

M..mdet Cork, o...ens-COming

California



W::>rker I s catlpensation claim of insulator for asbestosis

letter dated May 4, 1964 fran Schwab (attorney) to Annstrong

Contracting & SUpply:



"We know fran experience gained fran typing other asbestos









NNS-MOR-000412

cla:ims that magnesia pipe covering does contain asbestos

and that is has to be cut anl the use does create sane

dust. "



* 1963 Edward Novak v. AI:mstrang Cork, Fiberboard Corp.

California

'fbrker IS Canpensation claim for asbestosis of insulator



* 1964 Ehticknap curl Snith, Birt. J. Ind. ~., 21: 21 (1964)



Epidemiologic studies showing asbestosis, lung cancer anl

nesothe1iana



* 1964 Marr, Ind. Hyg. J., p. 264 (1964)

Epidanio1ogic studies showing asbestosis, lung cancer anl mesothe1iana



* 1964 ~Vi ttie, NeW York h::a.. Sci.



:Eetrospective study (1955-63) of insulators who filed for ~rkmen I s

CcInpen.sation showing large number of claims from asbestosis.







FIRST ASBESTCS HEALTH WARNIN; SUPPLIID

WITH PRODUcrS



1964 Joms-Manvi11e

1964,

May Eagle-Picher

1964 &

1967 ~~ming

1966 Fiberboard

1968,

Nov. Pittsburgh Corning

1969 Keene Corporation

1971,

CCt. Ce1otex, previoos1y Phillip CArey

1972,

June Anatex

1972,

July Ragbestos-Manhattan

1972 H.K. Porter









NNS-MOR-000413