In the Matter of:                     )
                                           )
     30 CFR PARTS 58 AND 72                )
                                           )
     RIN 1219-AB24                         )
                                           )
     MEASURING AND CONTROLLING             )
     ASBESTOS EXPOSURE                     )
     
     
     
     
     
     
     
     
     
     
     
     
     
     
     
     
     
     
     
     
     
     
     
     
     
     
     Pages:   1 through 42
     
     Place:   Phoenix, Arizona
     
     Date:    June 5, 2002                   UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF LABOR
                 MINE SAFETY AND HEALTH ADMINISTRATION
     
     
     In the Matter of:                     )
                                           )
     30 CFR PARTS 58 AND 72                )
                                           )
     RIN 1219-AB24                         )
                                           )
     MEASURING AND CONTROLLING             )
     ASBESTOS EXPOSURE                     )
     
     
                                       Hampton Inn
                                       160 W. Catalina Drive
                                       Phoenix, Arizona
       
                                       Wednesday,
                                       June 5, 2002
     
                   The public hearing convened, pursuant to 
     
     notice at 9:00 a.m.
     
     BEFORE:  
     
     MARVIN W. NICHOLS, JR.
     Director, Office of Standards, Regulations
     and Variances, MSHA
     
     CAROL J. JONES,
     MSHA, Chief, Division of Health
     
     WENDY L. HOCH, MSHA, Technical Support Organization
     
     ALFRED D. DUCHARME, Office of the Solicitor
     
     PHUC PHAN, Office of Standards, Regulations
     and Variances                            C O N T E N T S
     
     STATEMENTS:                                            PAGE:
     
     OPENING STATEMENT OF MARVIN NICHOLS, DIRECTOR              3
     OFFICE OF STANDARDS, REGULATIONS AND
     VARIANCES, MSHA
     
     DEENA CIGOY, VENTANA LAKES PROPERTY OWNERS                 9
     ASSOCIATION, ARIZONA
     
     SANDRA McKENZIE, SUN CITY, ARIZONA                        15
     
     GORDON ROSIER, SUN CITY HOMEOWNERS                        17
     ASSOCIATION, ARIZONA
     
     CHUCK ULLMAN, SUN CITY WEST, ARIZONA                      22
     
     DORIS GARY, SUN CITY, ARIZONA                             23
     
     RUSSELL BOWERS, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR,                       27
     ARIZONA ROCK PRODUCTS ASSOCIATION
     
     SHIRLEY McDONALD, SUN CITY WEST, ARIZONA                  39                         P R O C E E D I N G S
                               (9:00 a.m)
        MR. NICHOLS:  Good morning, everybody.  My name is
     Marvin Nichols and I am the Director of our Office of
     Standards, Regulations and Variances for the Mine Safety and
     Health Administration, and I will be the moderator for
     today's public meeting.  On behalf of our Assistant
     Secretary Dave Lauriski I want to welcome all of you here
     today.
        I have some other folks from our organization with
     me and I would like to introduce those folks.  On my left is
     Wendy Hoch.  Wendy is from our Technical Support Group.
        On my immediate left is Dr. Carol Jones.  Dr.
     Jones is with our Metal and Non-Metal Mining Group in
     Arlington, Virginia.  She is the Chief of our Health
     Division.
        And on my far left is Al Ducharme.  He is with our
     Office of the Solicitor.
        This is the fifth of seven public meetings on
     asbestos.  The previous meetings were held in Pittsburgh,
     Pennsylvania, Spokane, Washington, Vacaville, California and
     Canton, New York.  We have two remaining meetings after
     this, one on June 12 in Virginia, Minnesota, and on June 20
     in Charlottesville, Virginia.
        The initial announcement of these public meetings
     was contained in a advance notice of proposed rule making
     published on March 29, 2002 in the Federal Register.  A
     subsequent Federal Register notice was published on April 18
     and announced the date of the Charlottesville, Virginia
     meeting was changed to June 20 and a public meeting would be
     held here in Phoenix, Arizona today on June 5.  These two
     Federal Register documents are available in the back of the
     room if you would like to pick one up.
        The purpose of these meetings is to obtain
     information from the public that will help us evaluate the
     following five issues: 
        1) Whether to lower our asbestos permissible
     exposure limit;
        2) Whether we should replace our existing fiber
     analysis method referred to as Phase Contrast Microscopy
     with a more sensitive method which is Transmission Electron
     Microscopy;
        3) Whether we should implement safeguards to limit
     take-home exposure;
        4) Whether our field sampling methods are adequate
     and how our sampling results are being used, and;
        5) What is the likely benefit and cost impact of
     any rule making action on these issues?
        These five issues were discussed in the March 29
     Federal Register documents.  The scope of the issues we are
     addressing with this ANPRM is limited, therefore this public
     meeting will be limited to hearing public input on the five
     issues I have just mentioned.  We are particularly
     interested in responses and information related to these
     questions.
        I would like to tell you a little bit about the
     role of the Mine Safety and Health Administration and then
     give you some background which led us to these public
     meetings.
        The Mine Safety and Health Act of 1977 limits MSHA
     jurisdiction to mine property and authorizes us to write
     regulations which are enforced on mine property for
     violations of health and safety rules that occur there.  the
     purpose of these regulations is to protect the health and
     safety of our nation's miners at these mines.  
        One of our regulations addresses asbestos.  Our
     current asbestos standard for coal mining and for metal and
     non-metal mining is 2 fibers per cubic centimeter of air. 
     And these standards date from the mid-1970s.
        In 1980 we requested that the National Institution
     for Occupational Safety and Health, or NIOSH as it is better
     known, investigate health problems at vermiculite operations
     around the country because our sampling data at that time
     showed higher than average asbestos exposures among the
     miners.  The results of the NIOSH study were published in
     1986 and verified our sampling results that indicated high
     occupational exposure prior to 1974 at a vermiculite
     operation in Libby, Montana.  The highest exposures were in
     the mill.
        The NIOSH report showed that in 1974 the mine
     began to use a wet process to concentrate vermiculite in the
     mill and occupational exposures dropped markedly.  The
     asbestos-exposed miners employed at the vermiculite mine in
     Libby however inadvertently carried the asbestos fibers home
     on their clothes and in their personal vehicles thereby
     continuing to exposure themselves and family members.  At
     that time we had encouraged the operator to change from a
     dry to a wet processing of material and also to reduce take-
     home contamination by installing showers and requiring the
     miners to change clothing before they leave the site.
        In November 1999 a Seattle newspaper published a
     series of articles about the unusually high incident of
     asbestos-related illnesses and fatalities among miners who
     had lived in Libby, Montana.  Because MSHA had jurisdiction
     over the mine the Department of Labor's Office of Inspector
     General began and evaluation of MSHA's role at the Libby
     mine.  
        The findings and recommendations of the Office of
     the Inspector General were published in March 2001.  Three
     of their recommendations would require additional rule
     making by MSHA, and those issues are the subject of this
     public meeting today.  The OIG recommendations were that
     MSHA lower the existing permissible exposure limit to a more
     protective level, that MSHA use a more sensitive method,
     Transmission Electron Microscopy -- that is a tough word for
     me to pronounce, so bear with me -- to quantify and identify
     fibers in our samples rather than the Phase Contrast
     Microscopy method current used, and that MSHA address take-
     home contamination from asbestos.
        Recently MSHA adopted new asbestos sampling
     techniques and we have increased the scope of sampling for
     airborne asbestos fibers at mines in an attempt to better
     determine miner exposure levels to asbestos.  Our efforts
     have included taking samples at all existing vermiculite,
     taconite, talc and other mines to determine whether asbestos
     is present and at what levels.  
        Since the spring of 2000 we have taken almost 900
     samples at more than 40 operations employing more than 4,000
     miners.  Our preliminary review and analysis of these
     samples show that very few exposures occurred during the
     sampling period which were above the OSHA 8-hour time
     weighted average of .1 fiber per cubic centimeter of air. 
     The sampling results are now available to the public on our
     website at www.msha.gov and also the sampling results will
     be made part of the rule making effort if we move forward
     with rule making on asbestos.
        The issues surrounding asbestos exposure are
     important to MSHA and we will use the information provided
     to us at these public meetings to help us decide how best to
     proceed to address the five issues, so we want to hear your
     views.  These meetings will give mine operators, miners and
     their representatives and other interested parties an
     opportunity to present their views on the five issues that
     we are considering for potential rule making.
        The format of this public meeting will be as
     follows:
        Formal rules of evidence will not apply and this
     meeting will be conducted in an informal manner.  Those of
     you who have notified MSHA in advance of your intent to
     speak or who have signed up at our sign-in table will speak
     first.  And then after that anyone else that wishes to speak
     will be allowed to do so.
        If you wish to present any written statements or
     information today please clearly identify your material. 
     When you give it to me I will identify the material by the
     title as it is submitted.  And you may also submit comments
     following the meeting.  But please get them in by June 27,
     2002; that is when the comment period on this part of the
     rule making will close.
        Comments may be submitted to MSHA by electronic
     mail, fax or regular mail, but please note that our
     headquarters office in Arlington, Virginia are moving on
     June 10 and we have a new address back at our sign-in table.
        A verbatim transcript of this public meeting will
     be available upon request.  If you want a personal copy of
     the transcript please make arrangements with our court
     reporter.  Or you may just want to view it on our website. 
     It will be posted on the website within five days of the
     close of this meeting.
        Now, we will begin with the people that have
     signed up to speak.  And as I said, after that anybody else
     that would want to speak is certainly welcome to.  And we
     will stay here as long as we have people wanting to give us
     information.
        Our first speaker will be Deena Cigoy.  So come on
     up, Deena.  And will you for the court reporter spell your
     last name and give it.
        STATEMENT OF DEENA CIGOY, VENTANA LAKES PROPERTY
     OWNERS ASSOCIATION, ARIZONA
        MS. CIGOY:  C-I-G-O-Y.  C like Charles, I, G as
     George, O-Y.  First name is D-E-E-N-A.  And I represent
     Ventana Lakes Property Owners Association.
        We are an adult community of some 3,000 people who
     have the misfortune of being the main truck route for five
     large gravel mining operations in the Agua Fria River from
     99th and Beardsley to way down by Williams and Jomax Road. 
     We have discovered over the last eight years that we have
     been looking into this a huge number of our residents that
     have developed chronic obstructive pulmonary disease and for
     no -- they are not people who are a high risk group, they
     were not employed by the mining industry, they did not
     smoke.  They were retired senior citizens who came out here
     for a nice lifestyle in an affordable community.
        What they did do was take a walk every day.  And
     they walked and walked in close proximity to the gravel
     trucks that are racing up out of that river bottom,
     sometimes uncovered, with huge clouds of dust and black
     diesel fumes being emitted from these trucks which we know
     contain benzene and formaldehyde, other known carcinogens. 
     You mix that all together with what may be coming out of the
     mines and the dust in the air and other particulate and you
     have a lethal cocktail.
        Our next, well, our neighbor two doors away just
     died two years ago of COPD.  We now have another friend who
     was just recently diagnosed with COPD.  We are afraid.  We
     have been trying to raise consciousness in this state for
     eight years about the harm that is being done to the
     residents, not just mine workers but to the residents and
     possibly the truck drivers who are employed by these large
     gravel operations to their health.  Our air is some of the
     worst in the nation right now because of it.  And we haven't
     gotten any response from anybody.
        Maybe this isn't the right place to be.  But Dr.
     Jones is a medical doctor and I'm going to address most of
     our concerns to her.  We have finally reached the point
     where we got an air quality monitor in our community.  And
     for the last three months my husband and I have taken
     readings every other day.  
        Right now those pits are boxed in down there. 
     Because of no planning and poor planning large communities
     have been allowed to be built surrounding those gravel
     mines.  Now, these communities are filled with little kids. 
     There are just not old like us.  Three, four, five bedroom
     houses.  There is also a grade school down there now off of
     109th and Williams which is right in the backyard of CEMEX,
     one of the largest mining operations there.  And I know in a
     couple years there will be more breathing machines in that
     nurse's office than you can possibly imagine.
        The state was going to put in an air quality
     monitor down there and the county said, no, let us do it. 
     However, the county turned up very suddenly saying, no, we
     have no money to do that.  And our guess is that they are
     just afraid because those young parents down there don't
     have a clue as to what their children are breathing.  And
     when they start turning up with asthma and chronic
     bronchitis and every other respiratory ailment possible we
     feel those parents have a right to know that, just gives
     them the option of moving away if they want.
        There are more little kids sick in this state from
     asthma and other bronchial and respiratory-related illnesses
     than back in the Cleveland, Ohio area where we came from
     which is part of the sinus belt.  So this is our concern,
     our concern is not only for the mining people but the
     residents who have the misfortune of living in an area this
     close to it.
        Some of our houses have 10 and 20 feet from the
     truck route to their backyards.  Some of the houses are
     within a half mile of the mining operations.  Some of those
     kids are down there within feet of what goes on down in that
     river bottom.  And someplace, someday, somewhere someone has
     to come in and do something about it.
        We are looking for cleaner engines, diesel.  There
     is supposed to be a mandate. 
        You can't pronounce "microscopy," I can't read
     without my -- with my glasses.  This was in the Friday
     Arizona Republic, May 31, talking about trucking fleet
     operations who are rushing to buy current truck models to
     avoid a new generation of less polluting diesel engines that
     take over the market in October.
        This one was in the day before:  "Air pollution
     increasing cancer risk by 10 times," "10 times greater
     than...acceptable by the federal government, according to a
     government report released Friday."
        "More than 20 million Americans, including those
     in Maricopa County, are being exposed to a cancer risk
     closer to 1 in 10,000...100 times higher than the acceptable
     level."
        So we feel we have some real valid concerns.  The
     trucking industry has shown no desire to cooperate with us
     at all.  Even though they always tell us we would like to be
     good neighbors they never do anything.  If you say please
     stop running at night, they say no, you can't, we can't do
     that.  They run 365 days a year, 24 hours a day, and all it
     does is create more of a hazard than we feel we should be
     exposed to.
        And so I've had my say.  And maybe Dr. Jones can
     lead me to the right people in Washington.  I don't know,
     we've tried our best.  We are asking for help.
        MR. NICHOLS:  Edna, could we have, are you going
     to submit those articles to us?
        MS. CIGOY:  If you'd like you can certainly have
     them.
        MR. NICHOLS:  Sure.
        MS. CIGOY:  There's the Arizona Republic, it's
     syndicated nationally.
        MR. NICHOLS:  Anybody have any questions of Edna.
        MS. JONES:  Deena.  Her name is Deena.
        MR. NICHOLS:  Oh, Deena.
        MS. CIGOY:  Yes.
        MR. NICHOLS:  I'm sorry, Deena.
        MS. CIGOY:  Yes.
        MS. JONES:  I would like to say for the record
     that I am not a physician.
        MS. CIGOY:  That you what?
        MS. JONES:  I am not a doctor, a physician.
        MS. CIGOY:  Oh, you're not.
        MS. JONES:  I'm a doctor of biology.
        MS. CIGOY:  Oh, okay.  Well, maybe you still know
     somebody that would help us in Washington.
        MS. JONES:  I will look into it and see what I can
     find out as far as.
        MS. CIGOY:  Okay.
        MS. JONES:  Probably it is an environmental issue
     at this point.
        MS. CIGOY:  Yes.
        MS. JONES:  And I think that is where we need to
     look.  And I will do what I can to help you find the right
     person.
        MS. CIGOY:  Well, we would certainly appreciate
     it.  I will have to say that the state people DEQ in
     Washington have -- I mean not Washington, Phoenix, have been
     very helpful to us.  But their hands are tied because we
     have a legislature that refuses to acknowledge it's a real
     problem and to write some legislation that would require
     these trucks to use cleaner burning fuel and better
     emission, you know, devices on their trucks.  That's
     something that only the electorate can do in this state.
        But there are things I think that people in
     Washington can do to prompt the issue along.  And there are
     federal highway funds that can be taken back for different
     reasons, we know that.  And it's just time for this state to
     acknowledge that there is a real health issue here caused by
     the mining industry.
        MR. NICHOLS:  Thank you, Deena.
        MS. CIGOY:  You're welcome.
        MR. NICHOLS:  Our next presenter will be Sandra
     McKenzie.
        STATEMENT OF SANDRA McKENZIE, SUN CITY, ARIZONA
        MS. McKENZIE:  Hello.  I'm Sandy McKenzie from Sun
     City, the 85351 ZIP Code, close to Youngtown, about 111th
     Avenue.
        It was just really strange, my husband had a chest
     X-ray, he was having some difficulty breathing.  And the
     doctor suggested from that that he have a CT scan of the
     chest.  We just got that result back last week and it says
     that my husband may have these calcifications probably
     caused, the density raises suspicion of asbestos.  He does
     have COPD and sleep apnea and he is getting worse and worse
     and worse.  
        So, you know, I'd never been aware of all of this
     before until I read it in the local newspaper and thought
     that my husband and I should come being that we have some
     type of evidence here that my husband, you know, maybe
     possibly be suffering with that.
        That's pretty much all I have to say.
        MR. NICHOLS:  Did your husband ever work in the
     mining industry?
        MS. McKENZIE:  Never, no.
        MR. NICHOLS:  Okay.  Thank you, Sandra.
        MS. McKENZIE:  Okay.  Should I give this also?
        MS. JONES:  Yes.
        MS. McKENZIE:  I have another one at home.
        MS. JONES:  You have a copy because we can make a
     copy for you.
        MS. McKENZIE:  Yes, I have one at home.
        MS. JONES:  Okay.
        MR. NICHOLS:  Thank you.
        MS. JONES:  Thank you.
        MR. NICHOLS:  Our next speaker will be Gordon
     Rosier.  And I probably did not pronounce that last name
     right.
        STATEMENT OF GORDON ROSIER, SUN CITY HOME OWNERS
     ASSOCIATION, ARIZONA
        MR. ROSIER:  My name is Gordon Rosier representing
     Sun City Homeowners Association.
        The previous speaker's location is important in
     this situation.  She is a few blocks from the Vulcan
     facility which is located in the Agua Fria.
        A recent Department of Labor Mine Safety Health
     Administration news release scheduled public meetings
     throughout the county in order -- or the country in order to
     gather information about asbestos issues for the purpose of
     collecting information to assist in its deliberations about
     revised rules which would protect workers who may be exposed
     to asbestos in mines.  As a result of that news release Sun
     City Homeowners Association requested a public meeting in
     Phoenix.  That request was granted.
        Sun City Homeowners Association serves 40,000
     retired residents of Sun City.  Additionally, Mine Safety
     Health Administration presented their findings to Sun City
     Homeowners Association on May 30, 2002 regarding asbestos
     testing of 28 sand and gravel mines in the Salt River Basin. 
     We sincerely appreciate Mine Safety Health Administration's
     involvement in Maricopa County, the home of over 100 sand
     and gravel mines, most of which are located in the
     residential communities.
        We look forward to the testing MSHA will conduct
     in the Agua Fria Basin, the location of 27 sand and gravel
     mines, again in residential communities.
        Your meeting with us resulted in the following
     findings:  no asbestos was detected in any of the air
     samples analyzed.  A trace of asbestos was detected in one
     bulk sample using MSHA's two-stage process. 
        Your two-stage process has disadvantages as
     follows:  it cannot resolve all asbestos fibers and it
     cannot distinguish asbestos fibers from other fibers.
        You were unable to identify the fibers and could
     not state if they could or could not cause asbestosis or
     other pulmonary diseases.  The same scenario was occurring
     at the RT Vanderbilt talc mine in Gouverneur, New York, a
     source of talc for the crayon industry.  Hundreds of miners,
     millers and mine supervisors died or are dying from disease
     caused by asbestosis fibers in the lungs.
        The Mine Safety and Health Administration tests
     failed to detect asbestos at the Vanderbilt talc although
     tests identified similar appearing fibers called magnesio-
     anthroplite.  
        The mines in the Salt River and the Agua Fria
     Basin also contain talc, mica and silica.  Arizona has a
     history of asbestos issues.  The family community of
     Mountain View near Globe was evacuated in the early 1980s
     because of asbestos and buried under 25 feet of soil. 
     Maricopa County environmental personnel confirm Sun City,
     ZIP Code 85351, death rate from asbestos 20 times the state
     and national average. 
        Protecting miners from asbestos protects
     residents.  Present MSHA limit of 2.0 asbestos fibers per
     cubic centimeter in the air can result in a risk of death
     from asbestos of 68 per 1,000 workers.  Those risks are
     unacceptable.  Libby, Montana is a perfect example of limits
     that were too high and placed and entire community of 5,000
     residents at risk.  Two hundred persons have died from
     asbestosis and one-third of their population has asbestosis. 
     Libby, Montana does not have 100 mines in their
     neighborhood, we do.
        It is suggested MSHA use the same sampling
     techniques that EPA developed in Libby.  The EPA will take
     action if the expected death frequency is 1 in 10,000 or
     greater, corresponding to an asbestos count of 0.004 fibers
     per cubic centimeter.  Sixteen people have died from
     asbestos-related diseases in the northwest valley in recent
     years.  Countywide 111 asbestos-related deaths during the
     same period of time.
        Sampling in accordance with the California Air
     Resource Board, or CARB, particularly the El Dorado,
     California division, is a proactive position MSHA must
     initiate.  At the same time, the Arizona State Mine
     Inspector needs to institute a similar position, protect
     miners not the mining industry.
        Sun City Homeowners Association and other members
     of the coalition of Arizona in Arizona will follow the lead
     of the California Resource Board to force mining industry
     accountability.  The Seattle P.I. reports that the U.S.
     Bureau of Mines lists more than 100 mineral fibers as
     asbestos-like fibers, yet because of lobbying by asbestos
     and stone industries the government regulates only six.  
        The rationale for that policy must also be
     reviewed.  There is no excuse for regulatory policies that
     deliberately prevent government agencies charged with
     protecting human health from using the tools needed to carry
     out their charge.  Generally miners have families.  The
     miners have placed themselves and their families in the
     paths of dirty diesel trucks that cause lung cancer and
     other pulmonary diseases.  If the miner and his family live
     in the Agua Fria or the Salt River Basins they are
     confronted daily with 500 to 700 dirty diesel-emitting
     trucks that blast through their neighborhoods.
        We are encouraged that MSHA is also proposing
     changes to diesel emissions, the sooner the better.  Local
     jurisdictions must also accept responsibility for the diesel
     trucks that transit our neighborhoods and re-route
     accordingly.
        The Vulcan facility located in the Agua Fria
     recycles asphalt.  Miners and the neighborhoods are
     potentially at risk from the fibers emitted from recycled
     asphalt.  We are encouraged your sister agency OSHA will
     begin testing for fibers emitted from that recycled plant. 
        For years the American Lung Association has told
     us there is no safe level of asbestos.  To protect miners
     and residents the Mine Safety and Health Administration must
     therefore establish a permissible exposure level at 0.0000. 
     Residential communities and mining operations are not
     compatible.  For miners and residents it's a health and a
     quality of life issue.
        Thank you.
        MR. NICHOLS:  Thank you.  Does anyone have any
     questions of Mr. Rosier?
        MS. JONES:  Excuse me, Gordon, when you said that
     in the Sun City area you have 20 times the rate of asbestos-
     related disease?  I just wanted to make sure I had that
     clear.
        MR. ROSIER:  That the death rate from asbestos at
     85351 exceeds the national average by -- is 20 percent
     greater than the national average.
        MS. JONES:  Oh, 20 percent greater, okay.  Thank
     you.  I just wanted to make sure I had the number correct.
        MR. NICHOLS:  Are you going to leave a copy of
     your statement with us?
        MR. ROSIER:  Sure.
        MR. NICHOLS:  Thank you.
        MR. ROSIER:  Thank you.
        MR. NICHOLS:  Our next speaker will be Chuck
     Ullman.
        STATEMENT OF CHUCK ULLMAN, SUN CITY WEST, ARIZONA
        MR. ULLMAN:  My name is Chuck Ullman, U-L-L-M-A-N. 
     I am a director for property owners residents association,
     Sun City West and a resident of ZIP Code 85357 -- 85375.
        I appreciate you folks coming out here and
     listening to us.  I understand miners, you are concerned
     about the miners who are working.  They work eight hours a
     day.  The residents in the area are around there 24 hours a
     day.
        My cousin passed away last year from lung cancer. 
     Lives in ZIP Code 85351, Sun City.  Had been living there
     for 20 years.  Unfortunately, there is no way of telling
     what kind of lung cancer he had, whether he had asbestosis
     or not because there was no autopsy.  Most of those deaths
     are not autopsied.
        In the article that Deena Cigoy presented I would
     like to quote:  "More than 20 million Americans, including
     those in Maricopa County, are being exposed to a cancer risk
     closer to 1 in 10,000.  That's 100 times higher than the
     acceptable level..."
        "Americans are being exposed through air pollution
     to a 1 in 100,000 risk of contracting cancer during their
     lifetimes, the report says.  Any risk higher than 1 in 1
     million has typically been considered too high..."
        I don't know what else I can tell you folks but we
     are concerned about our livelihood, our residents in the
     area.  Certainly miners are also there but we are concerned
     for ourselves.
        Thank you.
        MR. NICHOLS:  Thank you, Chuck.
        Any questions of Chuck?
        MS. JONES:  No.
        MR. NICHOLS:  Our next speaker will be Doris Gary.
        STATEMENT OF DORIS GARY, SUN CITY, ARIZONA
        MS. GARY:  My name is Doris Gary and I live in the
     85351 area that we are addressing this morning.
        When we first moved into our home five years ago I
     smelled this really bad odor and I thought we had a gas
     leak.  So I called Southwest Gas Company to come out and
     check our gas.  And they came out and they looked through
     everything and eventually the young man told me, he said,
     well, it's probably the Vulcan Batch Plant. 
        And since then we've had those odors mostly in the
     cooler months.  And they are on our carport and our patio
     and our yards.  And they are all through the area because
     they either smell like gas or like they have a petroleum
     odor to them.  And that's one of my concerns.
        And I have called Maricopa County about it several
     times and I have talked to everyone and they all say, well,
     we can't do anything about it.  They have all the permits
     they need and they were here before you were.
        And also, we live about a mile as the crow flies
     from the cement and batch plant.  And I didn't know that
     until a couple of years ago.  And I went out Grand Avenue
     toward Sun City West and I looked down the river bed and
     just right there was this huge cement plant.  I mean like I
     would see if I lived back in Ohio, you know, in the outer
     edges of the city.  So that really just horrified me to know
     that I lived that close to that.
        And also at one point I swept up some dust on our
     patio.  You cannot sweep dust up on your patios, you can
     sweep and then you sweep again and then you get a fine brush
     and then you can sweep up the real dust that's there.  So I
     collected a sample of that and I sent it to our state
     senator and I have never heard anything about it.
        But it's a real concern to us.  And I have a
     neighbor that is, she's lived there for about 30 years and
     she goes to emergency all the time.  She can't breathe
     outside without a face mask.  And I know that several
     elderly people in the area have problems like that too.  And
     my husband and I have both, we both have a lot of throat
     congestion since we moved in there, especially my husband. 
     And my neighbors have that, you know, you're always clearing
     your throat and dry throats.  And I'm just concerned that
     the longer we live there that we are going to be, you know,
     we are going to become ill like some of the other elderly
     have.
        And I think this should be addressed if possibly
     by just moving those plants farther away from the
     population.  That would be, you know, the best solution is
     to moving that plant.  And we have one of the stockholders
     in that plant is I think he's on the Board of Supervisors in
     Maricopa County.
        MS. CIGOY:  It's Max Wilson.
        MS. GARY:  Yeah, Max Wilson.  I mean he's on the
     Board of Supervisors and he is a stockholder in that cement
     plant. 
        So I just hope that someone seriously addresses
     this because now that cement plant is sitting right in the
     center of these incredibly populated areas, El Mirage and,
     oh, Surprise, Peoria, Youngtown.  I had no idea that these
     plants were there until, well, I knew the batch plant was
     there because of the odors but I didn't know where the dust
     was coming from.
        And when we take a walk at night we usually about
     a mile from us is a golf course and we go up there and sit
     on the bench and we can see that cement plant from there. 
     So I just hope that someone will do something about it.  I
     don't know if they think because everyone lives there is
     elderly and it's not worth the trouble or what it is but it
     isn't being addressed.
        So I thank you very much.
        MR. NICHOLS:  Thank you, Doris.
        I think Dr. Jones has a question for you.
        MS. JONES:  I just wanted to ask you, you were
     saying that both you and your husband have suffered from
     congestion.
        MS. GARY:  We have throat congestion, uh-huh.
        MS. JONES:  Has your husband ever been involved in
     mining operations per se himself?  Has he ever worked in a
     mining operation?
        MS. GARY:  Yes, he did about, it's been about 30
     years ago.
        MS. JONES:  For a brief time or?
        MS. GARY:  For about a year.
        MS. JONES:  Oh, okay.
        MS. GARY:  Yeah.
        MS. JONES:  Thank you.
        MS. GARY:  Thank you.
        MR. NICHOLS:  Thank you.
        That's all the people we have signed up to speak. 
     Would anyone else like to make comments?  Come on up.
        STATEMENT OF RUSSELL BOWERS, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR,
     ARIZONA ROCK PRODUCTS ASSOCIATION
        MR. BOWERS:  My name is Russell Bowers and I am
     the Executive Director of the Arizona Rock Products
     Association.
        We have a membership of some 44 to 45 producing
     members across the state of Arizona and there are many other
     members, I should say many other producers who are not
     members of our organization.  We are, the diversity of our
     organization is threefold: we have members who break, mine,
     not in that order, mine and then break up rocks for a
     variety of aggregate uses and applications.  We have members
     who created, distill and create asphaltic oils for asphalt
     concrete products, and Portland cement products and fly ash
     and other additives and admixtures for the glues of the
     rocks that we use.
        The problem that we have, obviously, is that you
     mine aggregate where the aggregate is.  And not all
     aggregate is created equal.  The aggregates that we find in
     the Salt River Basin which ultimately would include the
     Verde and Salt Rivers and the Agua Fria which ties in close
     to the Gila or into the Gila at the confluence here on the
     southeastern end or western end of our valley are very, they
     are obviously close to each other.
        The reason for your meeting here today is to
     discuss the exposure levels and the relative risks posed to
     the mining population.  And the neighbors of these mines I
     feel legitimately have an interest and a degree of concern
     because if there are high exposure levels at the source of
     our mining and crushing operations while those levels would
     be just by pure laws of physics dissipated somewhat by
     distance there is still an exposure capability.  and so if
     there was a very, very high level of exposure to our miners
     it would be expected intuitively that neighboring folks,
     institutions, schools, hospitals and not the least of which
     residents would also face an exposure level probably less.
        I attended with great interest the meeting that
     was held in Sun City recently.  I believe Mr. Rosier stated
     that it was on the 30th.  And why?  Because if in fact we
     have high exposure levels to our miners that's our industry. 
     And to have people who mine in a world that is moving away
     from earth-based to natural resource-based industries, that
     meaning the world of the United States culture, it's
     increasingly hard to find people who are mining oriented who
     would wish to make that a career.  And, also, obviously if
     our miners faced high exposure levels then that wears on
     miners, not just on their bodies but on their mentality and
     their ability and their desires to work in the industry.  So
     I attended with great interest.
        I noted, and I would be corrected by you please,
     that the majority of the first regiment of testing occurred
     along the Salt River Basin because that was what was
     understood the petition to be.  And I know that the Sun City
     homeowners have requested that you induce or begin a
     regiment of testing along the Agua Fria plants.  That
     obviously is your choice and it is a concern of theirs and
     you may respond as you wish.
        If there are findings of any asbestos which come
     from the regular testing both by the mining inspector and by
     yourselves under Benny Lara and our new gentleman who has
     just recently come in his mine, and his name escapes me and
     -- Mr. Franklin, that I know that they do test on a regular
     basis but perhaps not as much as money allows or if there
     was money that they could accommodate our mines.  And we
     appreciate that because we want to know if in fact there is
     an over exceedance in any standard from any contaminant to
     our miners because they are our, the backbone of our
     industry.
        It was of note that Globe, Arizona was mentioned
     by Mr. Rosier.  Globe, Arizona, on the eastern end of town
     near the railhead there was a large stockpile for asbestos
     for many years.  The asbestos mining in the lower Sierra
     Anchas is well-known to anybody who is outdoors oriented in
     our state, Asbestos Point being one of the geographic
     features in the area obviously took its name because of its
     major constituent being the asbestos and the mine there.
        But it is also of note that that is on the Salt
     River Basin.  That's where the asbestos mining in large part
     in our state occurred, and yet you did not find any airborne
     samples in any of the sites in the lower Salt River where
     that would be a constituent in the erosion process that
     would move down the river basin.
        The Agua Fria to the contrary may have asbestos
     deposits in the Bradshaw Mountains and along the basaltic
     front of the Agua Fria and its drainage.  But I am not a --
     I don't claim to be the state geologist, I am just not aware
     of any well known mining operation for asbestos.  Typically
     copper mining, silver mining, there is some lead mining,
     there are other mines in the Bradshaws.  In fact, the
     Bradshaws, the mountain range that is the major watershed of
     the Agua Fria is one of the most highly mineralized areas in
     the world.  But it just isn't that particular type of
     mineral.  
        We have a lot of naturally occurring arsenic which
     occurs regularly in the waters of the Agua Fria.  People are
     encouraged not to eat fish, if they could find any because
     of the damming of the Waddell, but in that, behind that dam
     you are encouraged not to eat those fish and would take a
     personal risk of arsenic inhalation or consumption.
        So I want to know as an industry executive if in
     fact our miners are being exposed.  If there is an exposure
     we want it to the lowest possible and viable way that we can
     accommodate in mining.
        I would ask a question of the panel, if in fact
     there are any improved techniques that are employed by MSHA
     or others in detecting these fibers?  And have any of the
     other fibers mentioned of the 100-odd fibers that are at
     least recognized found to be by any working of the CDC or
     any of your investigative sides or capabilities are they
     found to be contributory to asbestosis or any cancer?  That
     would be information that I would personally and as an
     executive want to know.
        Also, just to the nuts and bolts of having now the
     clash between an urbanizing area and the necessity of one of
     its major constituent needs, that is aggregate, would there
     be if the mines moved away a lowering of the death rate in
     Sun City?  Are all deaths in Sun City or along any of the
     close areas to our mining operations attributable to our
     operations?  That, I don't know if that is under your
     purview but that would be something that we would like to
     know.  If there are, obviously that must be addressed.
        If there are any other protocols that are more
     scientifically advanced we would want them employed because
     our people are exposed first and we care for them and we
     care for our neighbors and we want them also to be addressed
     if there are any existing protocols.
        It is easy in these types of situations in a very
     highly polarized clash between mining and its neighbors and
     major encroachment to throw a lot of things at the wall and
     see if they stick.  We are concerned about silica because
     silica is in our product.  It's everywhere.  And it's all
     over in a desert environment especially where we have highly
     eroded areas such to windborne transport mechanisms.  So we
     are concerned about that.
        And we are cited regularly, if our plants are
     found to be in exceedance of the silica standards they are
     cited.  They must go through measures that would diminish
     those risk for obvious reasons.  If there are any other
     contaminants that are in our plants or that are byproducts
     of the crushing and mining process we would want to know
     those things as well.
        So we are grateful that you would come.  I don't
     have any epidemiological studies at hand.  Our industry has
     not commissioned any because we have not noted any
     associated responses in our miners or in the workers and
     transport portions of our industry.  But if there are
     epidemiological studies that show a causal link between our
     operations and effects both on our miners and our neighbors
     we would want to know of any.  And I am sure that you would.
        So if there is any links that you would have with
     institutions that would secure such studies we would want
     those made available to us.  The associations with Libby,
     Montana and Gouverneur, New York where there were asbestos
     mining operations and there were talcum operations I don't
     think is a fair comparison.  We don't have talcum or
     asbestos mining operations in close -- and I'm missing the
     word -- proximity is the word, to urbanized areas as yet. 
     But I do know that in the Globe area there are in fact that
     was a high mining area.  And it would be good to know in
     history, and I don't know if you have access to current
     history, what the rates of exposure and the associated rates
     of death were that could be causally linked even in Globe so
     that we could use that as a comparison with the rates of
     exposure here in the valley.
        And I am grateful that you would come.  I know
     that I may not have given you any information relative to
     mining exposure or the exposure of miners to these
     pollutants but I would be willing to stand to any question
     that you may have had that may have been generated by the
     other witnesses.
        MR. NICHOLS:  You are correct that none of our
     sampling data has shown exposures above the .1 fiber limit. 
     And as far as any new and better techniques, you respond to
     that.
        MS. JONES:  You mean new and better techniques in
     measuring asbestos?
        MR. BOWERS:  Yes.  Or in any way would improve our
     ability to know if these pollutants existed in our mines or
     in proximity.
        MS. JONES:  Well, that is one of the topics that
     we are dealing with today is should be use a more sensitive
     method to determine whether or not it's present.  And that
     is certainly something that we are looking into and
     considering here.
        You had also raised another issue about studies
     that would attribute the exposures in Sun City to the death
     rate.  And admittedly those studies I have not seen any,
     anything like that.
        But I understand that there is a study that's been
     initiated I believe by the county to look at the death
     certificates from the deaths in Sun City and in that region
     to see if they can link any exposures to the deaths.  But as
     far as a definitive epidemiologic study of this I have not
     seen one.
        MR. BOWERS:  Is there any study -- and here I am
     asking you and perhaps that's out of order -- but are there
     any studies that show an acceleration in the time span
     between a potentially unhealthy or potentially lethal
     exposure to asbestos and the onset of asbestosis?  Is that
     like would it be a year or two years or five years or ten
     years?
        I was under the impression loosely that it was
     like 20 to 30 years of continual exposure above a given
     level or from the time of a great deal of exposure at a
     given level.
        MS. JONES:  Well, that's been debated over the
     years.  And I don't think this is the forum for doing that. 
     But it is cumulative exposure, it's how much accumulates in
     the lungs.  So if you have low exposure for a long time or
     if you have high exposure for a short time it's similar
     sorts of risk.
        But oftentimes people are exposed to fairly low
     levels of asbestos and it does have a latency period often
     up to 30 years.  I have heard of cases being 30 years from
     exposure, so.
        MR. BOWERS:  And that's of concern to me because
     that puts me right in the time span from the old days when
     we would be putting in asbestos, at least additives of
     asbestos in insulation and other things and piping and
     plumbing.  So that's a concern for me.
        The last thought I had is that the general overlay
     of population and the demographics of the valley in those
     areas where there are not high numbers of retired persons
     and persons of a greater age, in which age I am now finding
     myself, I am wondering if there is a intuitive conclusion
     that more people die where older people are than die where
     younger people are.  Depending on how that would lay out it
     would seem intuitive that Sun City will see a higher
     mortality rate generally.
        I don't like to see that light that's in the end
     of my tunnel but I have a feeling it's not the fountain of
     youth that's waiting for me.
        MS. JONES:  Well, any study, any study that would
     be done would have to be adjusted for the age to look at the
     risk.  I mean you would have to take that into account
     before you determine what the risk level is for someone. 
     But, you're right, we don't get out of this alive.
        MR. BOWERS:  Yeah.  I wish there was another
     alternative but so far there isn't.
        Thank you very much.
        MR. NICHOLS:  One moment.
        (Pause.)
        MR. NICHOLS:  The method that we are considering
     adopting is much, it's much, much better than the current
     method I have seen, maybe a few hundred times better for
     identifying fibers.  And that's the method, the TEM that we
     are considering adopting.
        MR. BOWERS:  Is it, is that method, and I know
     that's the acronym and I can't remember those big words.
        MS. JONES:  Electronmicroscopy.
        MR. NICHOLS:  Thank you, Carol.
        MR. BOWERS:  Okay.  And is the process where one
     would have to send these samples to a core area and then
     there is the time span or could we possibly have sampling
     locally where we could submit samples and have a very quick
     response?  Do you know if that particular things go on?
        MS. JONES:  There are certified laboratories that
     do transmission electronmicroscopy in most large cities. 
     The Industrial Hygiene Association sends out samples to
     those labs to make sure that they do them correctly and so
     they get certified. 
        And one thing I would mention to you though that
     it's a great deal more expensive to do more sensitive
     method, it's much more time consuming and the electron
     microscope itself costs tens of thousands of dollars.  So
     it's not an inexpensive proposition but it is much, much
     more sensitive, as Marvin said, several hundred times.
        MR. BOWERS:  The fear that I have generally and
     having had just a little bit of experience which possibly
     makes me more dangerous than helpful, in some of the
     environmental discussions within the state and a little bit
     beyond the state is that while our abilities to detect with
     absolute certainty levels of presence of a wide variety of
     pollutants increases, also the cost increases, the ability
     to avoid in a general sense the exposure also decreases. 
     Because every brake pad for many years had asbestos and
     those things don't evaporate.  And so they can be in lawns
     and fields and palm trees and a host of places over time.
        And, also, the ability of an industry to address a
     general pollutant problem and almost any other problem with
     a degree of viability, you can address about 98 percent of
     the cost and get down to a very, very low level.  But then
     that last 1 to 2 percent which we increasingly are able to
     detect becomes increasingly difficult to address from an
     industry standard and still maintain the industry.  That's
     just a general concern.
        MS. JONES:  Well, as part of the rule making
     process we are mandated to look at the costs of the
     regulations.  And they are not to be infeasible, that's not
     to drive everybody out of business.  There is a degree of
     reason built into the process.  So that is a consideration.
        MR. BOWERS:  Okay.  Lastly, inasmuch as you have
     come here talking about miners and we have given you lots of
     testimony about rock products I would like to give just a
     few factoids.
        The typical house, 1,600 square foot house
     consumes in excess of 100 tons of our product.  All of the
     folks in this room probably live in a house.  And so the
     products that were used to build their houses, and this
     building probably took five to six, maybe ten thousand tons
     of our product.  And the freeway system took probably 92
     million tons of our product.  And every street a 12-foot
     lane for a mile in width takes about 15,000 tons of our
     product.  All of those products have to come from somewhere. 
     And typically they come from where the aggregate is.
        So while you are being asked to address it from a
     medical, tangential medical point of view, planners and
     owners and developers and communities on our side of the
     ledger need to address the ability to approximate this
     industry and the people who require our industry to live. 
     And that's a continuing balancing act that is filled with
     tensions.  And that doesn't seem to dissipate with time.
        So thank you so much for coming.
        MR. NICHOLS:  Thank you.
        STATEMENT OF SHIRLEY McDONALD, SUN CITY WEST,
     ARIZONA
        MS. McDONALD:  Shirley McDonald from Sun City
     West.
        I have two questions.  In the paper recently the
     EPA was cleaning up several sites in Phoenix for vermiculite
     because I think nurseries had mixed it in with the soil for
     planting and stuff.  But some of these sites are almost
     super cites and they are trying to clean them up.  And I was
     wondering if there are any sites in the Agua Fria River?  We
     didn't talk about that but I mean it's a nice big dumping
     area, I wonder if anybody dumped out there or if there are
     any mines out there in the river bed as well, I mean mines
     not looking for gravel but something else where?
        And the other thing is I noticed when you were
     speaking the other day about how you looked at six types of
     fibers out of a possibility of maybe 30-some if you're
     finding fibers maybe the criteria should change for not just
     those six but for any kind of fiber if it gets in your lungs
     it's going to cause essentially the same kind of problem I
     would think.  So maybe the criteria should be not even
     looking too hard at it, just saying we should cut fibers,
     you know, you can't have more than so many.
        That's my comment.  Thanks.
        MR. NICHOLS:  Thank you.
        Would anyone else like to speak?
        --
        MR. NICHOLS:  Okay.  As I mentioned earlier, our
     primary responsibility is on mine sites but we are not
     insensitive to the general public issues I think as
     evidenced by our meeting last week and taking your comments
     today.  So we really appreciate all of your comments.
        If you have not signed in to the attendance sheet
     will you please do that.  That's very important to us to
     list the number of attendees.  So if you missed that, please
     sign in.
        Anyone else like to speak?
        --
        MR. NICHOLS:  If not, we will go off the record.
        (Whereupon, at 10:00 a.m. the hearing recessed
     until 11:00 a.m.)
        MR. NICHOLS:  This is Marvin Nichols.  It's 11:00
     o'clock here.  We do not have anyone present to present
     comments so we are going to close the hearing.
        Thank you.
        (Whereupon, at 11:01 a.m., the hearing was
     concluded.)
     //
     //
     //
     //
     //
     //
     //
     //
     //                        REPORTER'S CERTIFICATE
     
     DOCKET NO.:        N/A
     CASE TITLE:        Measuring and Controlling Asbestos
                 Exposure              
     HEARING DATE:      June 5, 2002
      
     LOCATION:              Phoenix, Arizona
     
      I hereby certify that the proceedings and evidence are
     contained fully and accurately on the tapes and notes
     reported by me at the hearing in the above case before the
     Department of Labor, Mine Safety and Health Administration.
     
     
              Date:  June 5, 2002
      
     
                Raymond M. Vetter  
              Official Reporter
              Heritage Reporting Corporation
              Suite 600
              1220 L Street, N. W.
              Washington, D. C.  20005-4018