UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
	DEPARTMENT OF LABOR
	MINE SAFETY AND HEALTH ADMINISTRATION (MSHA)
	+ + + + +
	Public Hearing on Asbestos Exposure Limit

	October 18, 2005
	Conference Room 1787
	Building 25
	Denver Federal Center
	6th Street and Kipling Street
	Denver, Colorado

	The above-entitled matter convened for public hearing, pursuant to notice, at 9:00 a.m., REBECCA J. SMITH, Associate Director, Office of Standards, Regulations and Variances, MSHA, presiding.
	ALSO PRESENT:
	CHRIS FINDLAY, Industrial Hygienist, Metal and
	               Non-metal Division, MSHA
	CHERIE A. HUTCHISON, Regulatory Specialist
		     Office of Standards,
		     Regulations and Variances
		     MSHA

	P R O C E E D I N G S
	MS. SMITH:  Good morning.  My name is Rebecca Smith; I am the Acting Director of the Office of Standards, Regulations and Variances for the Mine Safety and Health Administration, MSHA.  And on behalf of David Dye, who is the Acting Assistant of Labor for Mine Safety and Health, I'd like to welcome all of you to this public hearing this morning on lowering the permissible exposure limit for asbestos.
	I'd also like to introduce.  On my right is Ms. Cherie Hutchison.  Ms. Hutchison is the Chairman of the MSHA committee developing this asbestos rule; she is from the Office of Standards in Arlington, Virginia.
	On my left is Chris Findlay.  And Mr. Findlay is from the Metal and Non-metal organization in MSHA; he's an industrial hygienist, also on this committee for the development of the PEL for asbestos.  We've got other MSHA folks and Department of Labor folks here in the audience also with us today.
	This is the first of two public hearings that we're holding on our asbestos proposed rule; the other hearing will be in Arlington, Virginia, this Thursday, October 20.  We announced these hearings in the notice of proposed rule making published in the Federal Register on July 29, 2005.  The purpose of these hearings is to obtain public comment on this proposed rule.  We've brought a few extra copies, and they're over on the table for your use if you care to get a copy.
	Before we hear testimony from the public on this proposed rule to lower the permissible exposure limit for asbestos, I'd like to give some background on this issue, a brief overview of our historical enforcement actions at the Libby, Montana, vermiculite mine and our rule making activities concerning asbestos in general.
	MSHA's predecessor agency, the Mining Enforcement and Safety Administration, MESA, in the U. S. Department of Interior monitored and enforced health and safety standards at mining operations, including the W. R. Grace vermiculite mine in Libby, Montana, from 1969 to 1977.  At that time, the exposure limit for asbestos was five fibers per cubic centimeter of air.  Our sampling data showed high asbestos exposures among minors at the vermiculite mine in Libby, with the highest exposures occurring in the mill.
	To reduce exposures, the mine installed or improved a number of engineering controls, such as exhaust ventilation and automatic bagging machines.  In 1974, the mine closed its old dry mill and began using its newly built wet mill to process and concentrate vermiculite, and occupational exposures dropped remarkedly.  All 8-hour, time-weighted average job exposure estimates decreased annually from 1972 to 1976.
	Then in 1978, we lowered our full-shift asbestos exposure limit to two fibers per cubic centimeter.  All 8-hour, time-weighted average job exposure estimates from 1977 to 1982 were less than one fiber per cubic centimeter in most areas.
	In 1980, we requested that the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health  that's NIOSH  investigate health problems at the Libby mine and other vermiculite operations around the country.  NIOSH conducted this investigation and published their results in 1987.
	The NIOSH study verified the high occupational exposures at the Libby mine and documented an increased risk of morbidity and mortality among vermiculite miners and millers exposed to tremolite actinolite.  In part because of the NIOSH findings and in part because of OSHA's 1986 final rule that lowered their asbestos permissible exposure limit from two fibers per cubic centimeter to 0.2 fibers per cubic centimeter, we included asbestos in our air quality rule making.
	Our 1989 air quality proposed rule covered several health issues, including carcinogens such as asbestos.  The air quality proposed rule would have lowered our permissible exposure limit for asbestos from two fibers per cubic centimeter to 0.2 fibers per cubic centimeter.
	The W. R. Grace vermiculite mine in Libby, Montana, ceased production in 1990 and closed permanently in 1992.  The record for MSHA's air quality proposed rule closed in 1992.  Although we split this massive rule making into several smaller rules, some were not completed and were withdrawn from the Department's regulatory agenda.
	Then in November 1999, a Seattle newspaper published a series of articles about the unusually high incident rate of asbestos-related illness and fatalities among individuals who lived in Libby, Montana.  These articles raised public and congressional awareness, and the Department of Labor's Office of Inspector General began an evaluation of MSHA's role at the Libby mine.
	The Office of Inspector published its findings and recommendations in March of 2001.  In that report, they recommended that MSHA do three things:  Number One, that we lower the existing permissible exposure limit for asbestos to a more protective level; Two, that we use transmission electron microscopy instead of phased contrast microscopy in the initial analysis of fiber samples that may contain asbestos, and; Third, that we implement special requirements to address take-home contamination.
	Exposure to asbestos has been associated with lung cancer, mesothelioma and other cancers, as well as 
asbestosis and other non-malignant respiratory disorders.
	Although there were no asbestos mines operating in the United States at this time, asbestos occurs naturally and is found in places where other commodities are mined.  Lowering our permissible exposure limit for asbestos would help to assure that fewer miners who work in an environment where asbestos is present will suffer material impairment of health or functional capacity over their working lifetimes.
	This proposed rule would reduce the full-shift permissible exposure limit and the excursion limit for air-borne asbestos fibers and make several non-substantive changes to add clarity to the standard.  We are not proposing to change the definition of asbestos or the analytic methods that are in our current standard; neither are we proposing additional requirements to prevent take-home contamination.
	In response to the Office of Inspector General recommendations, we published an advanced notice of proposed rule making in the Federal Register on March 29, 2002 in which we requested information regarding the Office of Inspector General recommendations.  We also held seven public meetings around the country to provide the public an additional opportunity to comment.
	Following a review of those comments and testimony taken at the public meetings and relying on OSHA's 1986 asbestos risk assessment, we determined that it is appropriate to propose reducing the PEL for asbestos and to clarify criteria for asbestos sample analysis.
	In response to the Office of Inspector General recommendations and to public comments and to enhance the health and safety of miners, we are proposing to lower the existing 8-hour time-weighted average asbestos PEL of 2 fibers per cubic centimeter to 0.1 fiber per cubic centimeter and to lower the short-term limit from ten fibers per cubic centimeter over a minimum sampling time of 15 minutes to an excursion limit PEL of one fiber per cubic centimeter over a minimum sampling time of 30 minutes.
	To clarify the criteria for the analytic method in our existing standards, we are proposing to incorporate a reference to Appendix A of MSHA's asbestos standard  I'm sorry  OSHA's asbestos standard.  Appendix A specifies basic elements of a phased contrast microscopy method for analyzing air-borne asbestos samples; it includes the same analytic elements specified in our existing standards and allows us to use other methods that meet the statistical equivalency criteria in OSHA's asbestos standard.
	After considering approaches to prevent take-home contamination, we determined that non-regulatory measures could adequately address this potential hazard.  Although we are only proposing to lower the permissible exposure limit for asbestos, we also discuss analytic methods and take-home contamination in the preamble of our proposed asbestos rule, and those issues are an acceptable subject for this public hearing today.
	The issues surrounding asbestos exposure are important to us, and we will use the information provided to us at these public hearings and in written comments to help us decide how to best proceed.
	The procedures for each of these public hearings is the same.  Those of you who have notified us in advance of your intent to speak or have signed up today will make your presentations first.  After all scheduled speakers have finished, others are free to speak.  We will conclude this public hearing when the last speaker has finished.
	We will conduct this hearing in an informal manner, and formal rules of evidence will not apply.  The MSHA panel may ask questions to clarify statements for the record, but there will be no cross-examination of the speaker.
	If you wish to present any written materials or statements today, please clearly identify your material and give it to me before the conclusion of this hearing.  I will identify the material for the record by the title as you have submitted it.
	You may also submit comments following this hearing, but please submit them by November 21, which is the close of the comment period.  You may submit comments to us by electronic mail, fax or regular mail at the addresses listed in the proposed rule document.
	A transcript of this hearing is being made today and will be on our web site within several days of this hearing today.  If you want a personal copy of the transcript, you can make your arrangements directly with the court reporter.
	Thank you for your patience and attention to these introductory remarks.  May I ask now if we have any speakers?
	(No response.)
	MS. SMITH:  We currently have no speakers signed up this morning.  What I would like to do is  at this point, we will go off the record, and we will wait until about 10:00 or 10:30.  We'll go back on the record to see if we have any speakers at that time, and, if so, we will re-open the record for that information.  Thank you.
	(Whereupon, a short recess was taken.)
	MS. SMITH:  We're back on the record.
	At this point in time, we have no one signed up to speak at this hearing.  So I'd like to ask again.
	Is there anyone in the audience who would like to speak?
	(No response.)
	MS. SMITH:  If not, given that, we're going to close this hearing.  Thank you very much.
	(Whereupon, at 10:16 a.m., the public hearing was concluded.)










??

??



 

 




	NEAL R. GROSS & CO., INC.
	(202) 234-4433