South Dakota Mesothelioma and Asbestos Exposure Risks

Fortunately for South Dakota residents, there are few major industrial asbestos sites. There are, however, some naturally-occurring deposits of the substance located in the state.

Three of the asbestos deposits are located around the Custer State Park area. Two of these are amphibole asbestos, while a third is serpentine. There is an additional amphibole asbestos deposit near Jewell Cave National Monument, as well as more serpentine deposits to the north of this location.

At Risk Occupations and Locations in South Dakota

With its deep rural and agricultural roots, most of South Dakota's asbestos exposure has occurred in relation to sites such as machine shops, mechanical repair facilities, power generation facilities, and older buildings, including commercial, public, and residential buildings that were constructed using asbestos-contaminated materials.

One particular asbestos hazard in South Dakota exists in power plants. There are several of these in the state, including three hydroelectric plants. While the latter are cleaner-burning facilities, asbestos exposure may still be a hazard, as the substance was a popular choice in any location where heat protection was required. Turbines and generators often included amphibole asbestos, as it is an efficient electrical insulator. Older machinery may present a health hazard as the asbestos contained within becomes friable and more likely to release fibers into the air. Utility workers in these facilities are particularly vulnerable, since they are more likely to come in closer contact with potential sources of asbestos exposure.

In the construction industry workers may be at risk even today, when asbestos is no longer added to construction materials. Those who worked in the construction trade in the 1980s and earlier are likely to have worked with asbestos-containing materials, but construction workers today may also be exposed when working on repairs and remodeling in older buildings.

Jobsites with Known Asbestos Exposure

Asbestos Related Deaths in South Dakota

As one of the lowest population-density states in the country, South Dakota also has a low rate of asbestos-related deaths. Between 1979 and 1999, 63 people died from asbestos-related diseases. Seven of these people died from asbestosis, while the remaining 56 died from mesothelioma.

Asbestosis is the more common disease, but because mesothelioma is more immediately fatal as the majority of people with the cancer pass away within two years of diagnosis.

Legal Resources for South Dakota Residents

Since 1979, at least 63 people have died from asbestos-related diseases, and 39 people have pursued asbestos-related legal action in South Dakota. As in most other states, safety issues relating to asbestos exposure often arise during demolition and renovation projects in public, commercial, and even residential buildings. According to reports from the South Dakota Department of Environment and Natural Resources, there have been many complaints of improper asbestos removal, indicating that some local officials throughout the state may not be aware of health and safety requirements concerning older buildings.

South Dakota's asbestos emission standards have been adopted from the Federal National Emissions Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants (NESHAP). These requirements mean that a qualified asbestos inspector must check a location that is scheduled for demolition or renovation before those activities are carried out.

Additionally, when a building owner or operator is taking contract bids for work, they are required by law to include details about whether asbestos is present anywhere on the premises, including information about the type, location, and quantity of asbestos that is present.

A potentially important case heard by the South Dakota Supreme Court in 1998 concerned the owner of a small business who claimed he suffered "negligent infliction" of emotional distress when a bank foreclosed on business loans. The Supreme Court denied the small business owner, saying that the man did not have physical symptoms of distress.

When explaining its reasoning behind the decision, the South Dakota Supreme Court referred to a decision made by the US Supreme Court, in which it denied a similar claim made by a plaintiff who had been exposed to asbestos, on the grounds that the plaintiff had no physical symptoms present and therefore could not claim emotional distress.

This is relevant to people who may wish to file an asbestos-related claim in South Dakota because if they have been exposed to asbestos but have not yet developed an asbestos-related disease, they may find it difficult to obtain a favorable decision if they try to claim for emotional distress. Click Here to receive a packet with additional information on mesothelioma.

State Index