Archive for the ‘Minnesota’ Category

Minnesota, March 10, 2008 - Following the reduction of permissible exposure limits for asbestos by the Mining Safety and Health Administration, two mines in Minnesota’s Iron Range may now face penalties as a result of failure to comply with the new regulations.

The MSHA published the new regulations, which cover metal, nonmetal, and underground coal mines, on February 29, 2008. The regulations reduce the asbestos permissible exposure limit in these locations from two fibers per cubic centimeter to just 0.1 fibers per cubic centimeter, in line with the Occupational Safety and Health Administration permissible exposure limit that has protected all other types of workers since 1994.

The new MSHA regulations are good news for miners, but not so good for two mines in northern Minnesota, which may fail to comply with the new permissible exposure limit.

Since 2003, the federal Mine Safety and Health Administration has identified a total of five US Mines-including two in Minnesota-that are operating above the new asbestos permissible exposure limits.

Under the new MSHA rule, which takes effect on April 29, 2008, federal regulators will be able to order mining companies to reduce dust levels in their operations, if tests show levels of airborne asbestos above the new 0.1 fiber limit.

In the past, mine regulators asked mining companies to comply with the limits voluntarily. This was the case in the Northshore Mining ore plant at Silver Bay, Minnesota. Asbestos fibers have been detected in the location repeatedly since 2003, according to the results of federal tests. Another Northshore mine in Babbitt, Minnesota was also found to have airborne asbestos following testing. In both cases, the levels are above permissible exposure limits set by the new MSHA rule.

According to Northshore spokesperson Dana Byrne, the company puts the safety of its employees first, and has installed new protective equipment, including dust collectors, to safeguard its workers.

Byrne has also said that the fibers found in air samples taken at Northshore facilities are not asbestos. In addition, Byrne has indicated that Northshore Mining may challenge federal regulator testing methods if future federal tests show Northshore Mining’s asbestos levels to be above permissible exposure limits.

Minnesota miners are at higher risk than most other occupational groups of developing mesothelioma, a rare and highly aggressive asbestos-related cancer. New state-funded studies will be carried out over the next few years in an attempt to pinpoint the exact cause of the high rate of mesothelioma among this occupational group.

Meanwhile, the new MSHA regulations provide Minnesota workers with an extra level of safety. Mines that exceed the new permissible exposure limit will be issued with a citation, and workers will be ordered to wear respirators. Federal regulators can also issue fines, and order companies that violate the new rule to install additional dust-collection and air-ventilation equipment.

SILVER BAY, Minnesota – The Northshore Mining Company will have their day in court this morning in a hearing before the state court of appeals. They will be facing off against the Minnesota Center for Environmental Advocacy.

The mining company is trying to get the state to remove its permit limit on asbestos emissions for their Silver Bay plant. Currently, the standard requires that the amount of asbestos fibers in the air around the plant must be equal or less than the amount that is found in the air around St. Paul.

Environmental groups see this as an attempt to remove the only standard that regulates the amount of asbestos fibers that the mine’s processing plant can send into the air around the small town of Silver Bay. Mining company officials say that they object to the form of the limit itself, which requires that it meet a fluctuating standard that cannot be predicted, and which, they state, the plant has been in compliance with for years.

At issue is a controversial air quality standard that was established many years ago by a judge who was unable to determine ‘safe levels’ of asbestos fibers in the air. The standard is one of a kind – a so-called ‘control city standard’ which ties the limits of asbestos fibers that the mine can output to the air quality levels in the city of Saint Paul, which was arbitrarily selected by a federal court judge thirty years ago.

Back in the early 1980s when the issue came up before the court, there were no experts that could enlighten the court on what levels of asbestos might be “acceptable”. The judge chose to rule that the asbestos in the air around Silver Bay could not exceed the levels of asbestos in a control city – one without a mining facility nearby. The judge chose St. Paul.

The problem with this, says Northshore Mining, is that it’s a moving target. They achieved that standard years ago when they installed air pollution controls and air scrubbers in the plant facility. However, in the last few years, the asbestos levels around St. Paul have dropped lower – and the law says that Northshore Mining must bring the levels around Silver Bay lower as well.

An attorney for the environmental agency says that removing the standard from the company’s permit would effectively remove any controls on the amount of pollution that Northshore Mining may output – and put the residents of Silver Bay at risk of developing mesothelioma and other asbestos-related diseases.

Airborne asbestos fibers in the air have been linked to mesothelioma, a deadly cancer that destroys the lining around the lungs, heart or abdominal cavity. In addition, it increases the risk of developing lung cancer, throat cancer and a number of other cirborne asbestos fibers in the air have been linked to mesothelioma, a deadly cancer that destroys the lining around the lungs, heart or abdominal cavity. In addition, it increases the risk of developing lung cancer, throat cancer and a number of other cancers. The history of asbestos in the United States is one where big business ignored the safety and health of its workers and the general public, exposing them to a deadly airborne pollutant that kills thousands of people a year.

The company says that they just want the elimination of a moving standard, and would accept a defined standard, particularly one that is health-based. Unfortunately, there is currently no health-based standard and the national environmental agencies state that there is no safe level of asbestos exposure. Several studies that are being undertaken currently may help define that more clearly.