You don't need the product names or old records. No fee unless we recover compensation for your family.
Five letters from C. L. Sheckler, of J-M's headquarters industrial relations staff, sending the results of the annual dust and noise surveys to the managers of the Advocate Mine in Newfoundland, the Coalinga Mine in California, the Manville, New Jersey, building products plant (1965 and 1966), and the Waterville technical center. Each lists the stations over the limits and asks that the dust stations be fixed first. To Advocate he wrote that "prolonged exposure to atmosphere contaminated with asbestos dust will cause occupational pulmonary diseases," resulting "in permanent injury and related workmen's compensation liability"; at Coalinga two stations had been over the limit for three straight years.
- Author
- C. L. Sheckler
- Published by
- Johns-Manville
- Date
- April 25, 1965
- Number
- Bates ML115331041–ML115331042; AB105210871–AB105210875; EA109611765–EA109611766
- Rights
- Republished under fair use for research and historical study.
Read or download
- Letter to Advocate Mine, April 25, 1965 ACL Doc 11169 · 2 pp. · PDF, 64 KB
- Letter to Coalinga Mine, June 15, 1965 ACL Doc 11170 · 2 pp. · PDF, 69 KB
- Letter to Manville Building Products, August 26, 1965 ACL Doc 11171 · 3 pp. · PDF, 86 KB
- Letter to Waterville Technical Center, November 24, 1965 ACL Doc 11172 · 2 pp. · PDF, 42 KB
- Letter to Manville Building Products, August 17, 1966 ACL Doc 11173 · 2 pp. · PDF, 76 KB
What it shows
At the mines Sheckler recommended respirators until the dust was controlled. At Manville in August 1965, with 16 dust stations over the limit and "the present occupational disease claim mass filing," he made "no recommendation for the wearing of respirators," because to require them "on jobs where they have not been used in the past will stimulate mass claim filing"; the dust was to be cleaned up "within the next three months" instead. A year later, Manville still had 12 dust stations out of control, most of them over the limit for two years and several unstable since 1962, and Sheckler again urged a task force, citing "the number of employees with some degree of pulmonary involvement and the current liability potential."
In Johns-Manville's chronology
Johns-Manville's own chronology of what the company knew describes this document as follows:
In a series of summaries of results of annual industrial hygiene surveys at various J-M facilities (Advocate Mine, Coalinga Mine, Manville plant, and Waterville Technical Center), dated 4/25/65, 6/15/65, 8/26/65, 11/24/65, and 8/17/66, C.L. Sheckler recommends that first priority be given to correcting the dust stations over TLV and that respirators be used in the interim. "Needless to say, that prolonged exposure to atmosphere contaminated with asbestos dust will cause occupational pulmonary diseases. These conditions will result in permanent injury and related workmen's compensation liability."
With regard to the Manville plant, Sheckler states that "[c]onsidering the number of disease cases currently existing and the present occupational disease claim mass filing at Manville, it is essential that these dust stations be controlled as quickly as possible." Sheckler states that he is not even going to recommend that respirators be worn, because requiring respirators in new areas will stimulate mass claim filing. "Instead, every effort should be made to clean up the dust by engineering and housekeeping within the next three months."
Cited on this site
Cite this document
“C. L. Sheckler's Industrial Hygiene Survey Letters to Advocate Mine, Coalinga Mine, Manville and Waterville.” April 25, 1965. Bates ML115331041–ML115331042; AB105210871–AB105210875; EA109611765–EA109611766. Johns-Manville. AsbestosClaims.Law Library. https://asbestosclaims.law/library/documents/c-l-shecklers-industrial-hygiene-survey-letters-to-advocate-mine-coalinga-mine-manville-and-waterville-1965-1966.
ACL Doc numbers and their short links never change. See how to cite the Library.
Talk with an asbestos lawyer
Start with what you remember, and we'll take it from there.
This page is provided for general informational purposes and does not constitute legal advice. Every asbestos case turns on its own facts, exposure history, diagnosis, deadlines, available evidence, and applicable law. Reviewing this page does not create an attorney-client relationship. For advice about your specific situation, call 833-4-ASBESTOS for a free case review.