Hilton C. Lewinsohn and Harrison B. Rhodes on Medical Surveillance in the AIA Industry Statement (1978)

Seven pages on a draft industry statement for the Asbestos International Association, from John H. Marsh's files at Raybestos-Manhattan. They hold a memo of August 22, 1978, from Dr. Hilton C. Lewinsohn, R-M's corporate medical director, to Marsh; Lewinsohn's handwritten note of August 17; a letter of August 15 from Harrison B. Rhodes, technology manager at Union Carbide, to Marsh; and Rhodes' draft of July 31, 1978, with handwritten changes. The dispute was over item 6.3, which said employees exposed "above the statutory level" should get routine medical checks; Lewinsohn changed it to all employees "occupationally exposed."

What it shows

Rhodes objected that the industry had told OSHA there was a minimum exposure below which examinations should not be required, and that a position covering all employees "exposed to asbestos" would "seriously undercut this approach." Lewinsohn answered that the trigger should be "occupational exposure" and not over-exposure, because "the exact level for the prevention of cancer has not been demonstrated," and "all 'occupationally exposed' workers should be examined, regardless of fiber count." His note said J-M's Bill Reitze agreed and that this was J-M policy except in California. A handwritten change to the draft softened the line that the general public is not at risk to say the industry considers it not at risk. It follows Marsh's June 1978 draft.

In Johns-Manville's index

Johns-Manville's legal department indexed the Motley 1,000 in 1984. Its index describes this document as follows:

Draft titled "Asbestos International Association Detailed Statement of the Industry's Position in Relation to Asbestos and Health Problems," prepared by Harrison B. Rhodes (Technology Manager, Union Carbide), 7/31/78. The draft includes comments by Dr. Hilton C. Lewinsohn. Harrison B. Rhodes letter to J.H. Marsh, 8/15/78, responding to Dr. Lewinsohn's comments on Rhodes' 7/31/78 draft, especially with respect to Item 6.3. Under Item 6.3, Rhodes' draft states, "It is the industry's policy to insure that areas where asbestos is used are monitored in accordance with the regulatory requirements of the country of use and that all employees exposed to asbestos above the statutory level are subject to routine periodic medical surveillance." Dr. Lewinsohn's version is as follows: "It is the industry's policy to insure that areas where asbestos is used are monitored in accordance with the regulatory requirements of the country of use and that all employees occupationally exposed to asbestos should be (Dr. Lewinsohn eliminates the words "above the statutory level are.") subject to routine medical surveillance." Rhodes states that the AIA took a strong position in its response to the October 9, 1975 OSHA proposal that there was a minimum exposure level below which medical examinations should not be required. It is Rhodes' understanding that this is also to be AIA's position in the forthcoming OSHA asbestos rulemaking. "An industry position that all employees 'exposed to asbestos' should be subject to routine periodic medical surveillance would seriously undercut this approach." Handwritten note from Dr. H.C. Lewinsohn to J.B. Marsh, 8/17/78, noting that he has inserted the word "occupationally" under Item 6.3. Dr. Lewinsohn states that this word removes doubts about casual exposure and defines the worker who should be examined. Dr. Lewinsohn also states that Bill Reitze agrees with this addition and says that this is J-M's policy except in California "where there is an action level which triggers medical examinations." Dr. H.C. Lewinsohn memo to J.H. Marsh, 8/22/78, entitled "Asbestos International Association - The Most Important Points to be Included in an Industry Statement on Asbestos and Health Problems." Dr. Lewinsohn states that he has read Rhodes' letter to Marsh dated 8/15/78 and notes Rhodes' concern about his attitude toward what should trigger the medical surveillance of asbestos workers. Dr. Lewinsohn has also reread the Asbestos Industry's response to OSHA dated 4/9/76. Dr. Lewinsohn states that it was not his intention to insist upon unnecessary medical examinations, and believes that the insertion of the word "occupationally" between "employees" and "exposed" will considerably narrow the field. Dr. Lewinsohn believes that the trigger for medical examinations should be "occupational exposure" and not "over exposure." "The viewpoint expressed in the AIA document that it is unnecessary to keep under surveillance persons exposed to asbestos below the prescribed standard is not a valid one in the light of the acceptance by the industry that the exact level for the prevention of cancer has not been demonstrated."

Related documents

• John H. Marsh to T. A. Dougherty and Others on an Industry-Wide Asbestos-Health Position (1978)

About this copy

This is document 702 of the Motley 1,000, from the set the Manville Personal Injury Settlement Trust's records facility certified as true copies, pages CRMC-Motley1000-Subj-002539 to CRMC-Motley1000-Subj-002545.