Implementation of the federal asbestos standard in Connecticut

Our plain-English summary of Implementation of the federal asbestos standard in Connecticut, by J.B. Schoenberg, C.A. Mitchell (Journal of Occupational Medicine., 1974).

The study

• Authors: J.B. Schoenberg, C.A. Mitchell
• Journal: Journal of Occupational Medicine.
• Published: 1974;16(12):781-4
• Cited by: 3 articles, as counted by NIH iCite
• Read it: PubMed · Publisher
• In J-M's library: Johns-Manville's company medical library held a copy (J-M no. 002478).

In plain English

In this survey, the authors examined how the first federal asbestos standard, issued by the U.S. Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) in June 1972, was being put into practice in Connecticut. Between September and December 1972 they contacted companies by letter and telephone, and sometimes toured plants. They identified 63 companies using asbestos materials: 38 manufacturers and 25 contractors. Fourteen of the 38 manufacturers believed the standard did not apply to them. Only one of these cited fiber measurements to support that view. The manufacturers considered about 1600 employees exposed. Of the 24 manufacturers that saw themselves as covered, 13 did not know the standard's specific details, and three learned it existed only through the survey. Seventeen of the 24 reported some fiber measurements. The insulation contractors had never monitored dust levels at job sites. Sixteen manufacturers and all 12 insulation contractors lacked convenient access to personnel or facilities for the required medical examinations. The authors concluded that better two-way communication was needed between government agencies and the affected companies and employees. They noted that their list probably missed many minor users of asbestos.

We wrote this plain-English summary from the full article with the help of AI, and a second AI model checked each sentence against the article. It is not the authors' wording; the abstract and the article are their own account.

What the study did and found

• Design: Survey of companies using asbestos materials, by letter, telephone interviews and some plant tours
• Who was studied: 63 Connecticut companies using asbestos materials (38 manufacturers and 25 contractors, mostly insulation and acoustical contractors), contacted between September and December 1972
• Exposure: Workplace exposure to airborne asbestos fibers from asbestos materials used in manufacturing products such as gaskets, insulated products, reinforced plastics and friction materials, and in insulation and acoustical contracting work. None of the plants made asbestos textiles or asbestos cement products. Fiber types were not named.
• Main results:
  • Of the 38 manufacturers, 11 were certain and another 3 were almost certain that the standard did not apply to them. Only one of these companies cited fiber measurements to back this up.
  • The manufacturers considered approximately 1600 employees exposed to asbestos.
  • Of the 24 manufacturers that considered themselves covered, 13 were uninformed about the standard's specific details. Three of these learned of the standard's existence through the survey.
  • Of the 24 covered manufacturers, 17 reported some measurements of asbestos fiber concentrations. Of the remaining 7, four seemed to have no plans to take any measurements.
  • Eight manufacturers had some measurements above the then-current 5 fiber/cc standard. Only one of these planned to stop using asbestos for that reason.
  • In plant visits, torn asbestos sacks and loose dust on tables and machinery were still very common.
  • The insulation contractors had never monitored dust levels at job sites. This finding is reported in the subsection on the 12 insulation contractors.
  • At least 6 of the 12 acoustical contractors occasionally cut asbestos-cement materials. Only one contractor thought this infrequent work made the standard apply to him.
  • Sixteen manufacturers and all 12 insulation contractors had no convenient access to the personnel or facilities needed for the standard's medical examination requirement.
• The authors' conclusion: The authors concluded that improved two-way communication was needed between federal and state agencies on one side and affected companies and employees on the other. They also discussed the need to standardize fiber measurement and medical examination methods, to study the hazards of asbestos substitutes, and to continue medical surveillance of formerly exposed workers.
• Limitations the authors state:
  • The company list probably overlooked a large number of minor asbestos users.
  • Most brake lining repair services were excluded because of the large number of very small companies, so the findings may underestimate the practical problems.

Related studies

• Technological feasibility of the 2 fibers/cc asbestos standard in asbestos textile facilities — R.A. Curtis, P.H. Bierbaum (1975)
• Technical implementation of the new asbestos regulations — S. Luxon (1970)
• Comparison of U.S. Occupational Safety and Health Administration standards and German Berufsgenossenschaften Guidelines for Preventive Occupational Health Examinations — K. Straif, M. Silverstein (1997)
• The hygiene standard for chrysotile asbestos — J. Peto (1978)
• Hygiene standards for asbestos — S.A. Roach (1970)
• Identification and enumeration of asbestos fibers in the mining environment: mission and modification to the Federal Asbestos Standard — A.M. Langer (2008)

Browse more research in Journal of Occupational Medicine., or return to medical research.