Opinion ID: 503451
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 1

Heading: The Safe Buildings Alliance

Text: 3 Appellants National Gypsum Company, United States Gypsum Company, W.R. Grace & Co., The Celotex Corporation and Owens-Corning Fiberglas Corporation (the corporate-defendant-appellants or the SBA members) are manufacturers of building products. These companies formerly produced and supplied asbestos-containing materials for use in buildings, and they are among the approximately fifty defendant companies in the underlying litigation, which was commenced in 1984. 1 SBA, though not a party to the litigation, is an association whose membership consists entirely of the corporate-defendant-appellant. 2 Joint Appendix (Jt.App.) at 240, 384. SBA readily admits that it is funded almost exclusively by the corporate-defendant-appellants, and that its executive committee and board of directors are composed entirely of representatives of those companies. 4 SBA was formed in April 1984, in part to assist its members in organizing to participate in a United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) proceeding concerning asbestos in buildings. The formation of SBA also coincided with the initiation of this litigation. 5 By 1984, the asbestos-in-buildings issue had been a focus of public attention and debate for several years. Asbestos in schools has been a particular focus of public concern since the early 1980s, and litigation constitutes only one forum in which this debate has taken place. At the time the SBA was formed, numerous state legislatures and regulatory agencies were investigating the issue, and some state asbestos-related laws had been enacted. The United States Congress was actively considering the problems posed by the presence of asbestos in buildings, and had passed two statutes that concerned asbestos in schools. 3 Several federal regulatory agencies, including the EPA, 4 had also turned their attention to the asbestos-in-buildings issue. 6 According to the corporate-defendant-appellants, they formed the SBA to communicate their point of view more effectively to government officials and the general public. They describe the SBA as a lobbying and public education organization with four goals: (1) development of practical alternatives to dangerous, indiscriminate asbestos removal; (2) adoption of objective standards of asbestos abatement; (3) development of a responsible building inspection process; and (4) establishment of training and certification programs for removal contractors. Brief of Appellants National Gypsum Co., United States Gypsum Co., W.R. Grace & Co., The Celotex Corp., and Owens-Corning Fiberglas Corp. (Brief of Appellant Corporations) at 6. SBA, responding to what it describes as a public misperception ... about the hazards of asbestos in buildings, id. at 7, has since its formation represented its members' views before Congress, 5 the EPA, 6 state legislatures and regulatory agencies. 7 SBA has also presented its views to the general public through a self-initiated public education campaign. 7 The corporate-defendant-appellants stress that the SBA is not a litigation-oriented, litigation-related, or litigation-support organization. [Jt.App. at ]320-30, 385, 409. Brief of Appellants Corporations at 9. They note that the SBA has never been involved in any product liability litigation. The SBA members acknowledge, however, that [a]s the record indicates, existence of litigation was one factor promoting SBA's formation. [Jt.App. at ]90, 287-88. Id. at 10 n. 7. In addition, SBA itself notes that concerns regarding member companies' potential liability in this and other products liability litigation has been central to its lobbying efforts and public education campaign. 8 The costs and risks of asbestos control fall in the first instance on the building owner. But the suppliers' risk of liability to building owners in lawsuits like the School Asbestos Litigation also puts them in a position of possible responsibility for the owners' response costs. Building owners and former suppliers thus share a similar interest in addressing potential asbestos risks promptly and efficiently, in order to minimize the costs of the control strategy without compromising safety. 9 Brief of Appellant Safe Buildings Alliance (SBA Brief) at 10. One of the main goals of the SBA's public education campaign has been to disseminate information concerning what the SBA members describe as the growing body of scientific evidence concerning the very low level of risk to building occupants from installed asbestos-containing products, the possibility that removal could increase exposure levels, and the need for careful, expert consideration and appropriate responses to asbestos in buildings. [Jt.App. at] 153, 294. Brief of Appellant Corporations at 8. 10 The SBA describes its public education campaign as being directed at architects, abatement contractors, environmental engineers, building owners and managers (including school officials ), public health officials, building contractors, home owners, and the general public. [Jt.App. at ]295-389. Brief of Appellant Corporations at 8 (emphases added). It has participated in a variety of seminars on the asbestos-in-schools issue attended by these individuals, Jt.App. at 335-36, 338-89, 408, and it has otherwise contacted them directly through mailings and telephone conversations.