1. John Raper Consultant Forensic Scientist Understanding Your Client’s Evidence asbestos products v asbestos-free substitute products SARAG – South Yorkshire Asbestos Victim Support Group WORKING FOR ASBESTOS VICTIMS ACROSS SOUTH YORKSHIRE AND NORTH NOTTS 1

2. Understanding Your Client’s Evidence: asbestos products v asbestos-free substitute products Aims Understanding your client’s evidence Principal uses of asbestos-containing materials Evidence relating to exposure to asbestos Exposure dose calculations Asbestos v asbestos-free products Approach Regulatory controls Some examples 2

3. Understanding Your Client’s Evidence: asbestos products v asbestos-free substitute products Principal uses of asbestos-containing materials include: Thermal insulation (lagging) Sprayed Coatings (e.g. limpet) Asbestos insulation board (AIB) Asbestos cement (AC) Friction materials (e.g. brakes and clutches) 3

4. Understanding Your Client’s Evidence: asbestos products v asbestos-free substitute products Thermal insulation (lagging) 15 – 100% asbestos Used up to the late 1960s / early 1970s All types of asbestos used Mixed on site / pre-formed Also includes rope, string, yarn, mattresses and blankets 4 Image source – HSE

5. Understanding Your Client’s Evidence: asbestos products v asbestos-free substitute products Sprayed Coatings Up to 85% asbestos Usually crocidolite (up to 1970) Amosite and chrysotile up to the cessation of use in 1974 5 Image source – HSE

6. Understanding Your Client’s Evidence: asbestos products v asbestos-free substitute products 6 Image source – HSE Asbestos Insulation Board (AIB) 16 – 40% asbestos (mainly amosite) Used from 1950s to circa 1980 Numerous construction uses Fire protection Heat resistance Partitions Some ceiling tiles General building board

7. Understanding Your Client’s Evidence: asbestos products v asbestos-free substitute products 7 Image source – HSE Asbestos Cement (AC) 10 - 15% asbestos (chrysotile) Early 20 th Century to 1990s Numerous construction uses Corrugated and flat sheets Moulded products

8. Understanding Your Client’s Evidence: asbestos products v asbestos-free substitute products 8 Friction products Up to 50% asbestos (chrysotile) (as supplied) Majority converted to fosterite Use up to the mid-1980s Brake and clutch linings Image source – HSE

9. Understanding Your Client’s Evidence: asbestos products v asbestos-free substitute products 9 Other products include (but not limited to): Millboard Fire blankets, gloves, protective clothing Flooring materials Textured coatings

10. Understanding Your Client’s Evidence: asbestos products v asbestos-free substitute products 10 Evidence: “I keep six honest serving-men (They taught me all I knew); Their names are What and Why and When And How and Where and Who.” Rudyard Kipling – The Elephant’s Child (Just So Stories)

11. Understanding Your Client’s Evidence: asbestos products v asbestos-free substitute products 11 Evidence: Industry Nature of the exposure Application of control measures Elimination Engineering controls Segregation Clearing up – vacuums, wet methods Ventilation control measures Respiratory Protective Equipment Information / Instruction / Training / Supervision

12. Understanding Your Client’s Evidence: asbestos products v asbestos-free substitute products 12 Dose Calculation Nature of the exposure Duration – hours per day Calculated estimate of the 8-hour Time Weighted Average (TWA) exposure Extent of exposure – years Asbestos dose – fibres / ml years

13. Understanding Your Client’s Evidence: asbestos products v asbestos-free substitute products 13 Why consider if exposure was to an asbestos-free alternative? Regulatory controls Industry / voluntary bans Industries / situations where asbestos was not commonly used Considering the actions the Defendant should have taken

14. Understanding Your Client’s Evidence: asbestos products v asbestos-free substitute products 14 The Asbestos Industry Regulations 1931 The Asbestos Regulations 1969

15. Understanding Your Client’s Evidence: asbestos products v asbestos-free substitute products 15 Asbestos (Prohibitions) Regulations 1985 ban on importation, use in manufacture and marketing of crocidolite (blue) and amosite (brown) asbestos Asbestos (Prohibitions) Regulations 1992 ban on importation, supply and use of all amphibole asbestos prohibit supply and use of certain products containing chrysotile (white) asbestos Asbestos (Prohibitions) (Amendment) Regulations 1999 ban on importation, supply and use of all chrysotile asbestos ban on trade in second hand products some minor exemptions

16. Understanding Your Client’s Evidence: asbestos products v asbestos-free substitute products 16 Alternatives - Some References Engineering Equipment Users Association (Handbook No.33) (1969) – Appendix III Some industry, trade and independent research reports (1970s) Selected written evidence submitted to the Advisory Committee on Asbestos 1976-1977 Alternatives to asbestos products: A review (HSE) (1986)

17. Understanding Your Client’s Evidence: asbestos products v asbestos-free substitute products 17 Engineering Equipment Users Association (Handbook No.33) (1969) – Appendix III Lists commonly available alternatives Notes alternatives not equivalent in all respects No alternative? Consider treated asbestos products Alternatives often more expensive Notes poor heat + steam resistance of glass and rock wool

18. Understanding Your Client’s Evidence: asbestos products v asbestos-free substitute products 18 Industry-specific documentation (1960s and 70s) Industry never advocated wholesale removal of installed asbestos Alternatives evaluated and specified for new work

19. Understanding Your Client’s Evidence: asbestos products v asbestos-free substitute products 19 Trade publications (1970s) Tended to focus on the uses and attributes of asbestos (maintain the status quo) Alternatives to most asbestos-containing materials Costs Lack of adaptability inherent with the alternatives very high stock inventories safety critical failings

20. Understanding Your Client’s Evidence: asbestos products v asbestos-free substitute products 20 Independent Research (1970s) Many (not all) applications can utilise alternatives “substitution on health grounds often involves a penalty in cost and performance” Caution on possible unidentified health hazards from the alternatives Recognises that some residual use of asbestos will be necessary Even if banned, legacy of existing installation will necessitate education and strict enforcement

21. Understanding Your Client’s Evidence: asbestos products v asbestos-free substitute products 21 Selected written evidence submitted to the Advisory Committee on Asbestos 1976-1977 Submissions from many manufacturers of asbestos products Some manufacturers identified research into alternatives Alternatives identified due to a perceived “shortage of supply” of raw materials

22. Understanding Your Client’s Evidence: asbestos products v asbestos-free substitute products 22 Alternatives to asbestos products: A review (HSE, 1986) Independent review Performance data only – health risks of alternatives not considered Technical feasibility of replacing asbestos Thermal insulation and dry packings Textiles for heat and flame protection Millboard Electrical insulation Friction materials Bearings Reinforced plastic composites Building materials Others List of suppliers

23. Understanding Your Client’s Evidence: asbestos products v asbestos-free substitute products 23 Claimant’s description of asbestos exposure is unlikely when describing the use of asbestos after: 1970use of crocidolite 1974sprayed asbestos dispersions early 1980suse of AIB in construction 1988decorative textured coatings in construction Some suppliers already voluntarily removed asbestos content 1999use of asbestos products in the UK Of course this doesn’t exclude exposure from disturbance of existing asbestos-containing materials

24. Understanding Your Client’s Evidence: asbestos products v asbestos-free substitute products 24 General points on substitutes Commonly available from 1960s Early to mid-1970s – trade associations still promoting ACMs Keen to point out costs of substitutes were higher than ACM Independent assessment was rare Focus upon the performance of the substitute – not the health risks from that substitute No universal replacement – would likely have the same health hazard Majority of substitutes suggested were glass or ceramic fibre

25. John Raper Consultant Forensic Scientist Pragma Asbestos Ltd 2 Beacon Walk Gringley on the Hill Doncaster DN10 4TD johnraper@pragmaconsulting.net www.pragmaconsulting.net (01777) 816506 Understanding Your Client’s Evidence: asbestos products v asbestos-free substitute products 25