Archive for April, 2008

Kanawha County, West Virginia – A Wirt County man this week filed an asbestos-related lawsuit that names fifty different defendants. Among them are G.E. Plastics, where the man once worked.

The plaintiffs are Thomas P. McCue and wife Thelma. The couple filed the lawsuit in Kanawha Circuit court.

McCue alleges that he contracted a lethal lung disease as a result of working around asbestos for 32 years. McCue worked at Borg Warner, also called G.E. Plastics. During the course of his work as a laborer, maintenance worker and mechanic, he came into regular and repeated contact with asbestos rope, tape, blankets, and other asbestos-containing materials.

In the lawsuit, McCue says that he was not aware that working around asbestos could be dangerous, and further that he had no idea he had any asbestos-related health problems until he was diagnosed with mesothelioma.

McCue also says that he now knows that companies where he worked, or companies that produced products he was exposed to, are responsible for the disease he developed. In his lawsuit McCue claims that General Electric and Borg Warner are both guilty of ‘statutory misconduct’ due to having exposed him to asbestos.
The lawsuit has a total of twelve counts and seeks both compensatory and punitive damages.

Like Madison County, Illinois, Kanawha Court is a place where lawsuits like these are almost commonplace. A total of 165 such lawsuits have already been filed in Madison County this year. In both counties, a large number of asbestos-related lawsuits are filed by out-of-state plaintiffs.

The reason this occurs is that Kanawha County and Madison County (and other such places) have developed a reputation for finding in favor of the plaintiff in lawsuits where corporate entities are accused of negligence and misconduct. For example, judges in Madison County are more likely to hold corporations accountable for negligent actions such as those alleged in asbestos-related lawsuits.

Another factor that facilitates the high number of lawsuits in these counties is that the law allows anyone from any part of the country to file a lawsuit in any other part of the country. The only requirement is that they can prove that one party (either a plaintiff or a defendant) has some connection to the state where the suit has been filed.

That means, as long as a plaintiff can establish any link to West Virginia (or Illinois), they can file their case there. Given that many of the companies named are multi-state entities, establishing a link is not usually difficult.

Berkeley, California - Demolition is planned for a historic building at the Lawrence Berkeley Laboratory at the University of California, Berkeley, but the presence of asbestos in the building will complicate matters.

The building in question is a domed building that houses an outdated particle accelerator, a machine that enables scientists to study subatomic particles. The machine, known as the Bevatron, has been used in Nobel Prize-winning research. Two physicists, Emilio Segrè and Owen Chamberlain, won the prize for physics in 1959, after discovering a subatomic particle called an antiproton in 1955. Three other research projects involving the machine have led to Nobel Prize-winning results.

Despite its illustrious past, the Bevatron is now an outdated piece of equipment, and the building it is housed in is deteriorating. According to Department of Energy spokesperson Lauren Martinez, the building is a safety hazard that’s becoming too expensive to maintain. The building is leaking, and doesn’t meet current building or earthquake-safety codes.

On Wednesday April 16, the DOE announced results of an environmental impact assessment carried out for the proposed demolition of the building, and gave the project the go-ahead, saying that environmental impact would not be significant.

Demolition work may begin as early as June, with an estimated completion date of 2011. A cost estimate puts the total at $72 million.

One significant reason for the expense of the project is the enormous amount of hazardous material the building contains. The cement walls around the accelerator were built to shield scientists from radiation while the machine was operating, and now the walls themselves are slightly radioactive.

In addition, the laboratory is expected to contain large amounts of asbestos, and possible lead as well.

One estimate says that the amount of waste present in the building could require as many as 4,700 truck loads, of radioactive waste, asbestos materials, lead, and other hazardous substances.

Some Berkeley residents aren’t happy about the proposed demolition, partly because they believe the demolition would endanger the community more than leaving the building intact.

In addition, many believe that the building is a local icon that should be preserved. The Berkeley City Council agrees, somewhat-it gave the building historic landmark status in 2007, but didn’t go so far as to forbid the demolition.

Laura Martinez says that the DOE believes the demolition can be completed without endangering the public, because the radioactive material emits only very low levels of radioactivity.

Sandwich, Massachusetts - After delays lasting several months, a former freezer plant situated alongside the Cape Cod Canal is finally undergoing demolition. The project will be completed by May 8.

The work was delayed in March after roofing shingles were found to contain asbestos. Sandwich Fire Prevention Officer J.J. Burke said the asbestos in the shingles was encapsulated in roofing tar and wasn’t dangerous.

Even so, the asbestos-containing shingles has to be removed, contained, and safely disposed of before demolition can begin. Safe removal of asbestos materials usually requires so-called ‘wet removal,’ to prevent the formation of asbestos dust. According to required regulations, the asbestos waste will taken to an approved asbestos disposal site once it has been removed and sealed.

Further delays came from the requirement of the site to undergo preparation before the asbestos-containing shingles could be removed. Certain interior electrical components had to be removed prior to asbestos removal, to prevent the possibility of contamination. Asbestos waste is three times more expensive to dispose of than non-contaminated waste, so the plan had to minimize the possibility of contamination of ‘clean’ waste.

Another issue that held the procedure up was that some sections of the roof would land on adjacent property owned by the Army Corps of Engineers, meaning that the owners of that land also had to approve the plan.

Developing a careful plan for the removal of asbestos-containing waste is an absolute requirement in most states, particularly for large-scale industrial demolition. Failure to remove asbestos waste prior to demolition could constitute an enormous hazard to public safety, as demolition would create massive clouds of inhalable asbestos dust.

Inhalation of asbestos can cause lethal diseases such as asbestosis and mesothelioma, two serious lung conditions. Mesothelioma can develop in people who experience relatively low level asbestos exposure, so protecting the public is an important consideration in cases such as the Sandwich freezer plant demolition.

Because the potential risks are so severe, heavy fines and penalties face people who are convicted of crimes involving the failure to remove or dispose of asbestos safely. Unfortunately, some developers and contractors are tempted to ignore asbestos regulations due to the expense of removing and disposing of the toxic substance.

In the case of the freezer plant, asbestos removal and demolition of the building will cost in the region of $250,000.

Muncie, Indiana - An asbestos consultant working for Muncie Community Schools faces a penalty of up to $1,500 for alleged violations of the Indiana Occupational Safety and Health Act.

The consultant company is ACM & Environmental Services, Indianapolis. The company faces accusations of eight violations of the OSHA Act during renovations of Muncie’s Central High School that were carried out last year. Include in the list of alleged violations of the act are the following:

1. Training records were not made available for employees who performed work involving asbestos. The work included clean-up of asbestos-containing materials, including those such as spray-on fireproofing material.
2. Employees carried out spot abatement procedures on asbestos-containing spray-on fireproofing material without using respirators.
3. Employees carried out spot abatement procedures without first establishing an isolated area that could be safely controlled and regulated.
4. There was no written respiratory protection program for the project.
5. An incident in which asbestos-containing spray-on fireproofing fell onto the floor was not dealt with according to regulations. The required sampling and analysis procedures were not carried out according to approved OSHA methodology.
6. Employees did not spread plastic drop cloths on the floor before scraping asbestos-containing spray-on fireproofing material from the ceiling.
7. Employees that had not been trained to work with asbestos were allowed to scrape small spots of asbestos-containing spray-on fireproofing off the ceiling.
8. Employees who voluntarily wore respirators were not provided with basic information about the equipment they were using.

Indiana Department of Labor spokesperson Sean Keefer said that ACM & Environmental Services were expected to sign an Expedited Informal Settlement Agreement for the incident. The EISA calls for the penalty to be reduced from $1,500 to $975.

The mechanical-electrical contractor for the project, Sater Electrical, had already signed an EISA to revolve eight violations it had been accused of. These included failing to reduce dust emissions, failing to provide employees with respirators, protective clothing, and safety glasses, and disturbing asbestos-containing spray-on fireproofing without using drop cloths or isolating the work area.

Sater Electrical agreed to pay a fine of $796.25 and also said the company was no longer working in designated asbestos-containing areas until an exposure assessment had been conducted.

According to School Superintendent Marlin Creasy, it is unlikely that students were exposed to asbestos.

O’Fallon, Missouri – The tax abatement deal that would have allowed the redevelopment of a toxic waste dump laden with asbestos into a new residential development illustrates just how tricky asbestos issues can be.

Only a few days ago, it looked like a done deal, but now, concerns over the asbestos present on the site, and about the terms of the deal, mean that O’Fallon’s mayor may veto.

The twenty acre proposed development site, which had accommodated a trailer park from the 1960s until 2007, is currently vacant. The Highland Homes development company plans to build a $38.5 million housing and retail complex called Highland Terrace on the polluted site.

The building was demolished in 2007. During the demolition workers discovered an illegal dumping ground that contained hypodermic needles, asbestos waste, broken appliances, car parts, and other waste.

The results of an environmental study that was carried out suggest approximately 34,000 tons of asbestos-containing waste is present on the site. All of the asbestos must be removed, sealed according to regulations, and disposed of at a site that can deal with asbestos waste safely.

Cleaning up the site, which is contaminated with asbestos and other pollutants, will have an estimated cost of at least $2.2 million. The city of O’Fallon has agreed to reimburse the $2.2 million to the developers. The money is expected to come from property taxes.

Highland Homes also asked the city to declare the contaminated site as a “blighted area,” to allow the company to qualify for thirteen years’ worth of property tax abatement, according to Missouri’s urban redevelopment law.

On Thursday April 10 the City Council voted 5-2 to declare the site as a blighted area, and allow Highland Homes to qualify for the property tax abatement.

However, Mayor Donna Morrow says she plans to veto the deal due to concerns over an asbestos clean-up issue. City Attorney Kevin O’Keefe says the proposal doesn’t include a plan for asbestos clean-up, and doesn’t include a clause to revoke the development company’s tax abatement privileges if the development project isn’t completed. In addition, O’Keefe also says that the law allows only ten years’ worth of abatement, rather than the 13 years the development company asked for.

Another city official, Pierce Conley, who cast one of the two dissenting votes for the tax abatement deal, is concerned because Highland Housing hasn’t provided any documentation to prove their claims that 34,000 tons of asbestos contaminate the site.

The ASARCO mining company, which filed for bankruptcy in 2005, may be able to emerge this year now that parent company Grupo Mexico has agreed to assume the responsibility for paying asbestos lawsuit claims made against the company.

Grupo Mexico has made the offer partly to prevent the ASARCO company from putting itself up for sale. The parent company has therefore agreed to sponsor a reorganization plan that involves paying all legitimate claims that have been made against ASARCO.

Some estimates put the value of claims and other liabilities at tens of billions of dollars.

Among the total is several billion dollars worth of lawsuits relating to exposure to asbestos, lead, and other toxins. More than $165 million will be allotted to clean-up environmental damage in eight different Montana sites.

ASARCO filed for bankruptcy in 2005, and during the process a bankruptcy judge removed Grupo Mexico’s control over the company due to allegations that the parent company was stripping ASARCO’s assets.

On Monday, ASARCO filed documents indicating that it has reached an agreement with entities it owes money to, along with its intentions to sell itself to the highest bidder. The documents also included references to having six interested bidders.

The company said that the sale would raise enough money to resolve all asbestos and toxin-related liabilities as well as to fund the environmental clean-up. The company owns a total of twenty sites that are included on the EPA’s Superfund list.

Last month, the company managed to keep Hayden, the community that houses an ASARCO smelter, off the Superfund list by pledging to spend $13.5 million on soil testing on community property, and to cover the costs of any clean-up that might be needed.

The EPA had previously found carcinogens contaminating soil in Hayden and Winkelman, located nearby. Residents hope that ASARCO will either buy their contaminated properties, or pay for relocation.

Some residents have noted that the company seems willing to solve the community’s environmental problems, but it hasn’t always been that way.

Prior to the company’s bankruptcy declaration it used a 1912 deed to sue community residents to prevent them making claims for environmental damage the company had caused. The company alleged that the deed granted it the right to emit unlimited amounts of “smoke, dust, fumes and other deleterious matter” from the Hayden smelter without having to assume any liability for damage it might cause.

Enoree, South Carolina - John Adams, of Enoree, South Carolina, is about to get a new neighbor: W.R. Grace & Company want to dig a six-acre vermiculite mine on land that borders his property.

John Adams and Larry Saylor, both of whom live adjacent to the land where the company hopes to dig the mine, are concerned because the presence of the mine will lower property values. More importantly, they’re concerned about the possible effects the mine might have on the health of people who live near it.

W.R. Grace & Company have already made one town sick with their vermiculite mining activities. More than 1,200 residents of Libby, Montana have developed asbestos-related diseases as a result of working in or living near the company’s vermiculite mine, which operated until 1990. The vermiculite mine in Libby is contaminated with asbestos.

The Libby vermiculite was marketed under the brand name Zonolite as an insulation, and under the name Monokote as a spray-on plaster coating. Both products were heavily used for decades. It is believed that asbestos-contaminated Zonolite insulation is present in millions of American homes.

The tragedy that occurred in Libby as a result of the asbestos contamination isn’t guaranteed to happen again. Not all vermiculite mines are contaminated with asbestos. But the devastating problems that have plagued that Montana town are serious enough to worry those who live near the planned mine site.

W.R. Grace & Company has been indicted by a federal grand jury for “knowingly endangering residents of Libby, Montana and concealing information about the health effects of its asbestos mining operations.”

The company already operates a vermiculite mine in Enoree, and has permission to dig in more than 30 other South Carolina locations. According to the SC Department of Health and Environmental Control, it’s not likely that vermiculite mines in the state are contaminated with asbestos because the geology is different from that in Libby.

A spokesperson for the agency said that they have told W.R. Grace & Company that they will need to test for asbestos at current and new vermiculite mining facilities to ensure there is no asbestos present.

W.R. Grace says the company is listening to residents who are concerned about health and safety issues. The company has an industrial hygiene program that involves testing vermiculite at three separate stages of production to ensure it’s safe for workers and the public.

April 17, 2008, Minnesota - Last week the Minnesota House of Representatives passed the bill that would give the green light to the mesothelioma study on taconite miners in Minnesota’s Iron Range. However, the bill was strenuously opposed by several members of the House. This week, a compromise on funding might help the bill escape the threat of veto.

The research, which will be planned and executed by the University of Minnesota School of Public Health, is intended to determine why Iron Range taconite miners are at a vastly increased risk of developing mesothelioma, a type of asbestos cancer that is caused by asbestos exposure.

The Minnesota Department of Health has determined that at least 58 Iron Range taconite miners have been diagnosed with mesothelioma. Nationally, the average incidence of the disease is one case in every 500,000 people.

The bill passed by the Minnesota House of Representatives won by a majority vote of 88-45. The bill that was passed would use state workers’ compensation special fund money to fund the research, which will cost almost $5 million.

However, Gov. Tim Pawlenty had threatened to veto the bill, on the basis that the workers’ compensation special fund isn’t an appropriate source of funds for the study and that use of special fund money would drive up costs for businesses.

Pawlenty believes that the study should be funded not from the special fund, but via the state’s taxpayers, using funds from a state agency called Iron Range Resources. Some opponents to the use of the workers’ compensation fund say that Iron Range Resources funds are a more appropriate source because mesothelioma cases have been reported only in that region.

Opponents of the Iron Range Resources fund, however, say that using money from that source would unfairly impact on taxpayers who live in that area.

The compromise that has been proposed involves using money taken from a separate “assigned risk” workers’ compensation fund. That fund has higher reserves and is less likely to impact businesses. The funding compromise has gained broader approval than the previous proposal.

The University of Minnesota has attempted to obtain funding for similar research in the past, but has never received enough funding to complete an extensive study. Once the new study begins it will attempt to determine why taconite miners are developing mesothelioma at such a high rate, including determining the source of the substance that is causing the cancer. The study will also attempt to evaluate the level of risk for miners’ families, and the general public.

April 16, 2008, North Platte, Nebraska - The Nebraska Department of Environmental Quality and the Environmental Protection Agency are both currently testing a downtown site in North Platte, Nebraska, for signs of asbestos and chemical contamination.

The land that is undergoing testing is the site of a former dry cleaning service which was torn down several years ago. The site is situated slightly west of the town’s 1913 Post Office building, which is also undergoing contamination assessment.

The 1913 Post Office building was recently purchased by the North Platte Creativity Unlimited Arts Council, which plans to use a combination of fund-raising money and grant money to renovate the abandoned building.

However, their plans could be delayed considerably if tests show the presence of contamination. NDEQ spokesperson Steve Kemp says the 1913 Post Office building may be contaminated with asbestos and lead-based paint, which may be costly and time-consuming to remove, depending on the extent of the contamination.

In addition, it’s thought that the parking lot behind the Post Office building may be contaminated with chemical left-overs from the dry cleaning business, including trichloroethene (TCE) and tetracholoroethene (PCE). Both chemicals are known cancer-causing agents, and they have been detected in groundwater thought to have run off from the dry cleaning business.

Even worse, with TCE and PCE running through groundwater beneath the city, it’s impossible to predict where the dispersion of the chemicals might end. However, EPA remedial project manger Melvin Brown says that the city’s drinking water is safe because the contaminants affect only shallow wells.

The good news for the Creativity Unlimited Arts Council, according to spokespeople from the EPA, is that the site can be cleaned up with federal grants.

Unfortunately, however, applying for EPA funds will almost certainly delay the project considerable. EPA attorney Robert Richards says it will take around a year to complete assessments of the contaminated properties and grant clean-up funds, if the CUAC chooses to apply for a grant.

One delaying factor is that due to the presence of TCE and PCE as well as asbestos and lead, surrounding properties must also be assessed for contaminants. Because the cancer-causing chemicals have found their way into groundwater, it’s likely that properties near the 1913 Post Office Building and the former dry cleaning site have also been contaminated.

Burley, Idaho – An old processing plant in Burley, Idaho’s West Main Street will undergo a Phase I environmental study to determine the nature and extent of the plant’s environmental problems. The plant is expected to be contaminated with significant amounts of asbestos, and perhaps other potentially toxic substances as well.

The plant is currently owned by J.R. Simplot C. A company with planned premises nearby the plant site, High Desert Milk, Inc., plans to buy the old processing plant, and has requested the environmental study be carried out before it purchases the property.

High Desert Milk wants the plant so it can gain access to an industrial sewer line that connects to an industrial wastewater treatment plant. The company needs access to the sewer line before it begins operating, which is scheduled to happen in June.

Although the city of Burley had originally planned to buy the Simplot land itself, it’s happy to let High Desert Milk do so.

The High Desert Milk Company has expressed an intention to donate the Simplot property to the city once it has gained ownership. High Desert Milk wants the property simply because it needs quick access to the sewer line, and can buy the property more quickly than the city can. With operation scheduled to commence in June it doesn’t want to wait to obtain the property.

The Phase I environmental study for the Simplot property will cost an estimated $6,225, and is being paid for by the city of Burley.  Mayor Jon Anderson says that paying for the study is in the best interests of the city, because it will give a good indication as to how much asbestos is present on the site, and how much an asbestos abatement project would cost.

Anderson said that the possibility of the gift is a valuable one, but he doesn’t want the city to take it without a good idea of what it’s getting.

Asbestos abatement is an expensive business, and many older industrial plants contain large amounts of the toxic substance. Asbestos abatement projects in large industrial locations can potentially cost hundreds of thousands of dollars.

Asbestos was widely used in industrial plants because it provided cheap, effective insulation and fire resistance. In a processing plant it may be located in insulation and any locations where protection from heat is needed, such as near furnaces and boilers, and in moving parts of machinery.