In St. Louis, MO, a company who makes heat resistant products has filed for chapter 11 bankruptcy protection in order to manage their legal liabilities concerning asbestos exposure lawsuits. 

Christy Refractories filed its petition for bankruptcy last week. The company has been subject to many lawsuits that stem from products sold by a company they acquired back in 1995. The company began to be named in asbestos-related cases back in the early 1980s, but the frequency of these lawsuits significantly increased about 8 years ago.

The manager of Christy Refractories, Frank O’Brien, says that on a monthly basis, asbestos settlements average out to be about $1 million per month and estimates that there are an additional 1,000 lawsuits pending. These lawsuits include people that were exposed to asbestos in schools, steel mills, and other commercial and industrial spaces.

A trust fund is being established for the lawsuits, and the bankruptcy court will decide how much money should be put in to the trust fund. O’Brien says there will be at least $18 million in the fund. 

O’Brien plans to keep the company running through its reorganization process. He speculates that it could take up to one year.

James Ross, 71, of Seattle, WA, is fighting against a rare form of lung cancer due to asbestos exposure after working many years as a brakeman and conductor. Ross is also fighting a requirement that says he must undergo an autopsy after his death, which is a requirement in order for his estate to file a lawsuit(s) against the responsible companies involved.

Ross objects to the autopsy based on his own personal belief that an autopsy results in ultimate destruction and disfiguration of the body, according to court documents. Ross is also arguing that the autopsy is unnecessary to confirm the diagnosis.

Washington state law specifies that participants in asbestos legislation can opt out of an autopsy if they cite religious beliefs.

According to court documents, if the court refuses to honor Ross’s request to forgo the autopsy, they may be in violation of Washington's statute governing autopsies and breaks fundamental notions of religious freedom and equal protection.

The Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry (ATSDR) has produced a report on 28 U.S. sites that have processed asbestos-containing vermiculite from the mines of Libby, Montana. While the EPA identified a total of 245 U.S. sites that may have received the asbestos-containing vermiculite from Libby, the ATSDR narrowed its list down to 28 in which they would base their study on. All of the sites studied had processed a minimum of 100,000 tons of vermiculite from the Libby mines and had been mandated by the EPA to take further action at the site due to contamination.

The report contains information compiled while evaluations were done on sites that processed the vermiculite. The evaluations focused on potential past, current, and future pathways of exposure to asbestos associated with the Libby mines. The report summarizes the findings of the evaluations along with recommendations that local, state, and federal agencies can use to address similar sites. 

ATSDR started the evaluations of these sites per the Environmental Protection Agency’s request based on a report pertaining to Libby, Montana the ATSDR had done in 2002.

The 2002 report showed asbestosis mortality rates in the community as much as 40 to 80 times higher than expected; lung cancer mortality rates 20% to 30% higher than expected. Most of the asbestosis cases were former Libby mine employees along with employees from the facilities that processed the vermiculite from Libby. Moreover, the family members of some of these employees were also affected due to the asbestos fibers retained on the worker’s clothing.   

Based on their evaluations, the ATSDR concluded that three main groups of people experienced significant exposure to asbestos from the Libby mines; former employees, former employees’ families, and members of the communities that surrounded the processing sites. Although the Libby mine hasn’t been running since 1990, there is still believed to be residual asbestos located in settled dust as well as the soil surrounding the facilities where the vermiculite was processed.

In the report, ATSDR made recommendations on how to improve awareness about exposure to asbestos associated with these sites.   

It has been three years in the making, but a federal judge has finally set a date for the largest environmental criminal trial in US history. 

Jury selection will begin February 19 in the case against WR Grace Co., alleging that the company knowingly endangering the lives of thousands by exposing them to asbestos-tainted ore from a vermiculite mine right outside of Libby, Montana.

Judge Molloy, the federal judge assigned to the case, is eager to move forward with the trial as it has been roughly two years since the last hearing, and the trial is expected to last nearly four months. Over the years, Molloy has ruled on a number of government efforts to hold WR Grace accountable for the asbestos contamination and has already levied huge fines that add up to hundreds of millions of dollars.  

The thirty three lawyers representing WR Grace in the trial will argue that the people of Libby could not have been harmed by the asbestos in the vermiculite ore. Environmental lawyers say that Grace’s legal team will make their argument with the help of industry-paid-for scientists who will conclude that the asbestos in Libby is not dangerous. In their counter argument, the government can point to hundreds of deaths that appear to be directly linked to asbestos-related diseases in Libby.

From the outset, this trial can be deemed unusual. The case was brought to the Federal Grand Jury just as the Bush administration was trying to force Congress to protect industry from civil asbestos claims. According to congressional investigators, the White House told the EPA and OSHA that it wanted to make sure unwarranted attention was not given for issues involving asbestos safety. 

WR Grace, if found guilty, could be fined up to $280 million, and WR Grace’s executives could receive maximum sentences of 55-70 years. The WR Grace executives that are in danger of being sentenced include Henry Eschenbach, who was the health and safety director in WR Grace's industrial chemical group; Jack Wolter, a former WR Grace vice president; Bill McCaig, an early general manager of the mine; Robert Bettacchi, also a WR Grace senior vice president; O. Mario Favorito, former general counsel for the corporation; and Robert Walsh, who was another senior vice president. A seventh official, Alan Stringer, the last general manager of the Libby mine, was also indicted. He died shortly after pleading not guilty.

A month before Stringer’s death, Les Skramstad, a former Libby miner, died of mesothelioma. Not only did the asbestos take Skramstad’s life, his wife and three children were all exposed to the asbestos through the clothing he wore home from work, and now have all been diagnosed with fatal asbestos-related diseases. Skramstad had hoped to survive to see WR Grace and the company’s executives tried in court.

A decision was handed down Tuesday at the Rotterdam Convention in Rome that confirmed chrysotile asbestos will be left off of the United Nation’s international list of harmful substances. This decision means that Canada, the world’s second largest producer of chrysotile asbestos, will continue to be able to export the harmful substance to developing countries. Despite information that exposure to asbestos can lead to health complications such as lung cancer, mesothelioma, and asbestosis, Canada still maintains the stance that the developing countries they export the asbestos to are able to manage and handle it in a safe manner.  

Back in 2006, Canada was the only western democracy to oppose the substance’s inclusion on the list of harmful substance. The Canadian delegation did not even participate in the meetings this year and, instead, got others to work on their behalf.

In the Canadian Medical Association Journal, Dr. Matthew Stanbrook likened the Canadian government's support for exporting asbestos to developing countries to the deadly arms trade. Moreover, Stanbrook said he was “deeply disappointed” with the results of the meeting. "This is something we hoped would be an opportunity for Canada to take a stand and make a decision that would benefit the health and welfare of people in the world, especially people who are in the developing world in countries least prepared to cope with the health burden that asbestos imposes everywhere that it's used."