W. B. Reitze to T. S. Patterson on Ontario's Proposed Asbestos Limits (1980)

A two-page memo of September 11, 1980, from W. B. Reitze of J-M's Health, Safety and Environment Department (HS&E) to T. S. Patterson in Toronto, copied to Dr. Paul Kotin, G. E. Parker, S. W. McCallie and others, on the Ontario Ministry of Labour's proposed asbestos, PVC and noise rules. Ontario proposed time-weighted limits of 1.0 fibers per cubic centimeter (f/cc) for chrysotile, 0.5 for amosite and 0.2 for crocidolite, against the U.S. limit of 2.0. Reitze saw no major operating problems, but wrote that J-M should "take a stand which is consistent with our corporate policy regarding the fact that we feel the 2.0 f/cc TLV for asbestos is safe and we see no need for reducing this level," and should object to singling out crocidolite and amosite: "We in HS&E believe that scientific medical data in support of crocidolite-amosite being more hazardous just does not exist."

What it shows

Reitze acknowledged that U.S. agencies were proposing limits "far lower" than Ontario's and that Europe was also singling out blue asbestos and amosite. J-M's Toronto plant had opposed a lower crocidolite limit in Ontario five years earlier (Machin to the Ontario Ministry of Labour, 1975). That same year a U.S. government mineralogist told J-M's technical director that the evidence on blue asbestos was clear (Leineweber and Ross, 1980).

In Johns-Manville's chronology

Johns-Manville's own chronology of what the company knew describes this document as follows:

Reitze writes a memorandum to Patterson (Toronto), 9/11/80, regarding Ontario's proposed new regulations for asbestos. (For chrysotile it would be 1.0 f/cc; amosite, .5 f/cc; crocidolite, .2 f/cc.) Reitze states that these TLV's should not cause J-M too many operational problems, but J-M should take a stand which is consistent with its corporate policy that 2 f/cc is safe. It should also oppose separate TLV's for amosite and crocidolite. Reitze states that we in HS&E don't believe that scientific/medical data supports that amosite and crocidolite are more hazardous.

Related documents

• B. C. Machin to the Ontario Ministry of Labour Opposing a Lower Limit for Crocidolite (1975)