Mesothelioma Health News

The Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ) is suing a Billings, Montana hotel owner for ignoring fines issued to him for violating asbestos laws during work on a condominium project that is now under foreclosure in the town of Livingston.

According to an Associated Press article, the DEQ filed the lawsuit earlier this week, alleging work at the Guest House hotel violated six asbestos laws during renovation work that took place from July 2006 through February 2007.

The owner of the hotel, Hassan Kangarloo, who is a well-known San Francisco developer, was fined $64,000 in January 2007 for failing to have an asbestos inspection, an asbestos permit, hire an accredited asbestos contractor and failing to follow proper asbestos work practices.

Kangarloo claims he was not familiar with Montana asbestos laws and didn’t realize he was doing anything illegal. The DEQ says he never responded to the violation letter and will, therefore, face an escalated penalty.

According to the article, court documents charge Kargarloo with five violations over 133 days and one violation for one day. If a judge rules in favor of the DEQ, the Guest House owner would be fined up to $25,000 per violation per day for a total of more than $6 million, a spokesman for the DEQ explained.

Records show that Kangarloo has also defaulted on a $540,000 loan from a Livingston investment company and the Guest House property has numerous liens against it. The building is scheduled to be auctioned on April 10.

A class action lawsuit has been filed by several former workers of the Holy Cross Centre in Calgary, alleging they were exposed to dangerous asbestos at the former hospital.

According to an article in the Calgary Herald, the lawsuit claims the facility’s owners were “callous and arrogant” when they allegedly failed to protect nurses, construction workers and other staff at the hospital from exposure to asbestos during renovations that took place at the hospital in 2002.

However, hospital officials say the claims are “baseless”, noting that they believe the lawsuit to be a personal attack against the hospital’s owners, particularly eye surgeon Dr. Peter Huang. Holy Cross was once a public hospital but was sold to the Huang family in 1997.

The former workers affirm, however, that their concerns are real. Shirley Martindale, who worked at a nursing home in Holy Cross Centre, said Wednesday she will join the lawsuit because she is worried about her long-term health after she was allegedly exposed to asbestos there.

“I’m always wondering what’s going to happen in the future,” said the 61-year-old registered nurse. “The disease process doesn’t start right away.”

Asbestos-related diseases usually take 20-50 years to develop, so those exposed to the material may not know for decades whether or not it has affected their health.

Stephen Carter, a spokesman for Holy Cross and the Huang family, said the issue of asbestos at Holy Cross has already been visited. In 2005, Enterprise Universal paid a $10,000 fine for failing to comply with a stop work order from Occupational Health and Safety during an asbestos investigation.

Carter adds that the 2005 case “did not show workers at Holy Cross were exposed to asbestos,” noting that the new allegations are unfounded.

Five classrooms at a private school in Lodi, California were closed earlier this week when it was discovered that the air inside may be contaminated with dangerous asbestos fibers.

According to an article in the Lodi News-Sentinel, the classrooms represented nearly a third of the rooms in the privately-owned Mokelumne River School, which serves 225 students from grades K-12 from the Lodi area.

The potential asbestos contamination, according to the school’s board president Clifford Goehring, may have been a result of some work that was done over President’s Day weekend to repair a leaky walkway overhang. During the repairs, asbestos may have been disturbed, notes Goehring.

In order to avoid exposure, the school’s elementary students moved into the 12 remaining, open classrooms and the high school students were moved to a church approximately five miles away from the school. The five rooms in question were sealed off.

“We don’t know how much if any got into the classrooms,” Goehring said.

He admitted to asking the workers whether or not he should be concerned about them disturbing asbestos during the repairs, but they said that it wouldn’t be a problem.

“That was a mistake. I should have pursued it,” Goehring said.

School officials ordered that a third party test the air near the bin where workers put materials taken out of the overhang, Goehring said. Preliminary tests came back positive. However, school officials have yet to receive the final results.

Parents of the students were informed of the situation via a mass email sent on Saturday evening. Goehring said that the reactions he got from parents were “a mixed bag.”

“Some parents are glad we’re following through. (There are) some that are not too happy,” Goehring said. “We’re doing everything we can to alleviate the situation.”

According to an Associated Press article, W.R. Grace and Company is attempting to clean up their act - and their environmental record - by selling 10 contaminated plots of land and its liabilities for their contamination for nearly $4.4 million.

The company was asked the U.S. Bankruptcy Court in Delaware to allow them to sell the properties in question so that they may be cleaned up and so that Grace can save some money. The company filed bankruptcy more than five years ago, faced with thousands of lawsuits by individuals who developed asbestos-related diseases caused by Grace-manufactured insulation products.

“This court’s approval of the agreement will eliminate over $12.5 million in environmental liabilities of the debtors in perpetuity and transfer ownership of the properties,” Grace said in court documents filed last Friday.

The company has a potential deal with Environmental Liability Transfer, Inc. and its parent company, Commercial Development Corporation, to buy the property. They have offered to pay Grace $2.5 million for the properties, plus 40 percent of the proceeds it will bring in from selling the land, for a total of about $4.36 million, a company spokesperson explained.

Grace said the agreement “cost-effectively resolves significant environmental liabilities” and allows the company to avoid any additional liabilities that may arise in the future. The company’s lawyers have told the court that not approving the request would be a major mistake.

“Any result other than this agreement would not comprehensively resolve the debtors’ liabilities, would likely be more costly and not as efficient, and would take several months if not years to negotiate,” Grace said.

The unused industrial properties, which vary in size from 5 to 180 acres, are located throughout Florida, Georgia, Kentucky, Massachusetts, Missouri, New York, Puerto Rico, South Carolina and Tennessee, the article points out. Grace said they have varying degrees of environmental contamination.

W.R. Grace and Company, based in Columbia, Md., is currently in the midst of a trial in a Delaware court to determine how much the company owes its asbestos creditors.

The U.S. Coast Guard and the Guam Environmental Protection Agency (GEPA) have stated that they are currently on the lookout for the SS Independence, an asbestos- contaminated cruise liner that’s reportedly headed to Guam after being refused entry to Hawaii for refueling.

According to an article in the Marianas Islands Variety News, the ship is believed to be loaded with toxic polychlorinated biphenyls (PCB) and tons of asbestos, known to cause a rare form of cancer. It is being pulled by the tug ship Pacific Hickory and is on its way to India, where the 57-year-old cruises liner will be scrapped in one of that country’s infamous shipbreaking yards.

“In order for the vessel to come to Guam, they have to send a request for entry. And if they were to request entry, they have to file a 96-hour notice of arrival. They still have four days to file the request,” said Lt. Marquez Hirschberg, spokesman for Coast Guard.

Hawaii turned the SS Independence away because of the risk of contamination from all the toxic substances aboard.

“We believe [the ship is] still in Hawaii,” Hirshberg said. “The Coast Guard has the authority to prevent them from entering Guam based on Guam EPA’s recommendation. We are keeping an eye on the situation and we have been in communication with the Coast Guard legal office in Washington D.C.”

Tammy Anderson, Guam EPA’s public information officer, said the agency is on the watch but no recommendation has been made so far.

“Guam has not been officially notified (of the ship’s possible entry), so we can’t make any decision at this point,” Anderson said.

However, Guam Senator Ben Pangelinan hopes the federal government will take an official stand before the ship gets too close to the U.S. territory. Pangelinan urged the governor to immediately direct all appropriate agencies to block the contaminated ship from entering Guam’s port and waters.

“I respectfully request that you exercise all due caution on this matter that would have grave environmental consequences on the people of Guam,” Pangelinan said. “With Hawaii successfully rejecting the ship’s entry, I see no reason why Guam cannot do the same with the interest of our people’s health and safety at hand.”

The ship was mothballed for several years at a shipyard in San Francisco, leaving last week on its way to India for dismantling.

According to an article in Japan Today, a South Korean man who is a victim of an asbestos-related disease arrived in Japan with his supporters earlier this week to protest in front of Nichias Corp., a Tokyo-based housing materials manufacturer that exported machinery and technology to a South Korean company that made asbestos products until 1992. The man was sickened by exposure to those products.

However, officials at Nichias, founded in 1896 and long a leader in the thermal insulation industry in Japan, refused to meet with the man and his companions. The protestors had asked that they be allowed to explain their concerns to the company, which set up an asbestos products manufacturing plant in Busan, South Korea in 1971, operating jointly alongside a South Korean company.

Officials at the Tokyo plant sent a message to the protestors indicating that they should take their concerns to the South Korean company rather than to Nichias.

A Superior Court judge has cited juror misconduct in the decision to award a new trial in the case of a Navy veteran seeking compensation for developing an asbestos-related disease as a result of on-the-job exposure to the dangerous mineral.

An article in the Metropolitan News-Enterprise states that the new trial has been granted because a fellow veteran relied on his personal experiences in explaining to fellow jurors why he believed the plaintiff was not exposed to asbestos aboard the USS Kitty Hawk in the 1960s.

Paul Whitlock, who served on the Kitty Hawk from 1965-1967, contends that his mesothelioma is indeed linked to his service aboard the naval vessel. According to the article, the defendant, Foster Wheeler LLC, did not dispute that Whitlock had the disease or that the condition is almost always caused by exposure to asbestos. But it denied that he was exposed to any of the original Foster Wheeler asbestos in the boilers, saying it had all been removed before Whitlock came aboard. Whitlock was diagnosed with the aggressive form of cancer in 2005.

The case was originally tried in late 2006 and the verdict was for the defendant, Foster Wheeler. Later, it was discovered that the juror in question, referred to as Mr. W., told other jurors that his own experience in the Navy led him to believe that all of the original block insulation would have been replaced during previous repairs prior to Whitlock coming aboard the ship.

Those statements “constituted external information in the form of a juror’s own claim to expertise or specialized knowledge for which there was no evidence,” and thus qualified as juror misconduct, said Judge Mary Wiss.

Wiss also noted that jurors had been given standard instructions not to treat external information as evidence unless so instructed, to determine the facts based solely on the evidence, and not to “use or consider any special training or unique personal experience” because such “training or experience is not a part of the evidence received in this case.”

Alameda (Calif.) Superior Court Judge Jeffrey Horner upheld the original ruling by Judge Wiss, noting that the misconduct “certainly influenced Mr. W’s vote for the defendant on the exposure issue and might well have influenced enough of the other jurors to have altered the outcome.”

In an Australian court this week, a man from Perth became the first auto mechanic in that country to win a successful negligence verdict against a car company for exposure to asbestos.

According to an article on Fox News Australia, Anthony Lo Presti, age 58, suffers from severe asbestosis and requires constant breathing assistance due to his years of work as an auto mechanic. Five years ago, he filed suit against Ford Motor Company of Australia in hopes of receiving compensation for his injuries. Yesterday, a judge awarded him $840,000.

Lo Presti’s lawyer, Michael Magazanik, proclaimed that the judgment pronounced in the Western Australian Supreme Court could potentially pave the way for lawsuits from thousands of other mechanics who suffer from asbestos-related diseases.

“This decision will set a precedent because it’s the first time a mechanic has succeeded against a car manufacturer in this country and there are literally thousands of mechanics who have been exposed to asbestos while working with brakes,” he said.

According to records, Lo Presti worked in the auto industry from 1970 to 1987, where it was his job to use compressed air to blow out the brake drums and to handle asbestos brake linings when brakes were serviced or changed. He worked for two Ford dealerships during his tenure as a mechanic.

“[My work] would generate large amounts of dust containing asbestos, which would blow up into my face and stick to my clothes and hair,” Mr. Lo Presti said in his witness statement to the court. “It would cause a cloud or haze in the air and fall down in the area where I was working.”

Lo Presti was diagnosed with asbestosis in 2001. Ford tried to argue that he did not have asbestosis but rather some other sort of pulmonary fibrosis. However, during the trial, Ford did admit that it knew by 1970 that “exposure to certain asbestos fibers could cause asbestos-related diseases” but denied it knew Mr. Lo Presti’s type of work could increase the risk of developing these diseases. Lo Presti claimed that while he worked for Ford, he was never told that there was asbestos in the brake linings nor was he informed of any health hazards connected with his job.

The presiding judge, Justice Andrew Beech, ruled that Ford ought to have known that, if no protective measures were taken, the asbestos fibers released from the brake linings could cause “life threatening injury.” He also stated that Ford owed its mechanics “a duty of care” and should have warned them of the dangers of working with the toxic material.

Residents of Ambler, Whitpain and Upper Dublin Townships, all suburbs of Philadelphia, will soon hear the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA) final removal action plan for the 32-acre BoRit asbestos site. Some speculate that the site may wind up on the agency’s National Priorities List, reserved for the most seriously environmentally-contaminated sites in the nation.

According to an article in The Reporter, EPA Community Involvement Coordinator Larry Johnson has already received in excess of 300 emails from area residents who are concerned with exposed asbestos, erosion of stream banks and site monitoring.

“We hear those concerns,” he said, adding, removal action is being designed around those issues. “We’re going to address them.” He notes that the report is not yet complete but that he hopes to present the cleanup plan to area residents by early to mid March.

The public meeting has been delayed because health agencies requested the opportunity to simultaneously present an environmental review they are still working on, according to Johnson. Health experts plan to be present at the meeting to answer questions about the possible health effects of asbestos exposure.

The BoRit asbestos site, as it has become known, is a result of waste disposal operations by the former Keasby and Mattison Company, Certainteed Corporation, and Nicolet Industries. All of the aforementioned companies manufactured asbestos products at the location for decades, including items such as paper, piping, brake linings, millboard, roofing shingles, asbestos cement pipe, and more. Manufacturing of asbestos products at that site began in 1897 and finally ended in the late 1980s.

The article notes that while EPA officials are preparing removal action for sometime this spring, BoRit is also going through the Site Assessment Program that evaluates individual sites, establishing the best of five main options to address their needs.

EPA Regional Site Assessment Manager Charlene Creamer explained the process that determines whether or not BoRit will be proposed to the National Priorities List, (NPL) for which the BoRit Community Advisory Group (CAG) members have expressed a desire. The CAG was formed specifically to address concerns about the site and they have been instrumental in garnering the attention of the EPA.

The NPL is a listing of sites where hazardous conditions or contamination exists, requiring extensive evaluation or remediation. A listing on the NPL is a last resort reserved for the “worst type of sites,” where there is no alternative remediation, Creamer said.

Though many Australians and others worldwide develop asbestos-caused mesothelioma due to occupational exposure, thousands of individuals have been exposed to dangerous levels of asbestos merely by living or working near natural deposits of the dangerous mineral. That’s why an Australian university has decided to embark upon a study outlining the dangers of naturally-occurring asbestos.

According to an article penned by the Australian Associated Press, the new study, led by Macquarie University researcher Marc Hendrickx, is aimed at determining how many cases of mesothelioma may have been caused by exposure to asbestos in its naturally occurring state around the nation.

“It’s been largely overlooked as a potential source of asbestos exposure,” Hendrickx said. “The risk of small, naturally-occurring deposits, from disturbing those, have been mostly ignored, I think.”

The study will produce detailed maps of naturally-occurring asbestos throughout Australia and involve comprehensive checks of medical records around the deposits, as well as monitoring of air quality to determine the level of fibers to which nearby residents are being exposed.

While Hendrickx admits that the risk of disease from living near asbestos-containing rock is low, he notes that those at highest risk are road construction workers, farmers, and those working in forestry, mainly because they are often involved in digging or disturbing the land in some way.

But Hendrickx points out that a California study released in 2005 found that residential proximity to naturally occurring asbestos was indeed associated with an increased risk of mesothelioma.

“The sort of situations they’re talking about in California are no different to what they are in Australia. We’ve got these belts of asbestos-bearing rock here,” he said.

“It’s something that really needs to be addressed, and when I started looking into it, it became apparent that no one was really looking into it or being overly concerned about it.”

Hendrickx adds that about 10 percent of mesothelioma cases occurred in people with no known exposure to asbestos. He believes that some of these cases could be linked to naturally-occurring asbestos.