Opinion ID: 1667285
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: 3M Products:

Text: ¶ 2. The 3M products at issue in the case sub judice are the 8500 dust mask and the 8710 disposable respirator. Neither product contains asbestos; however, only the 8710 mask was designed to reduce exposure to respirable fibers, including asbestos. The 8500 mask, first manufactured in 1962, was designed to keep nontoxic nuisance dusts out of the wearer's nose and mouth. 3M claims that it never represented the 8500 mask as suitable for protection from asbestos. 3M's packaging for the 8500 mask stated that the mask was suitable only for non-toxic substances. For toxic dusts and vapors, the packaging directed the user to use NIOSH/USBM approved masks. [3] However, in 1978, 3M added warnings to the box containing the 8500 mask, cautioning the user not to use the mask around asbestos. 3M later placed this warning on the mask itself. ¶ 3. In 1972, 3M introduced the 8710 disposable respirator for protection against pneumoconiosis-producing and fibrosis-producing dusts, including asbestos. The United States Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) approved the 8710 respirator for use in environments where exposures to certain substances, including asbestos, did not exceed ten times the permissible exposure limit (PEL). Federal regulations required that 3M submit the 8710's packaging, including the instructions and other data, to NIOSH for approval. In 1986, 3M voluntarily withdrew the 8710 respirator for use with asbestos after OSHA reduced the PEL for asbestos from 2 fibers/cc of air to .2 fibers/cc.