Asbestos News Roundup: 7.12.12 – Roofer Asbestos Risk

July 12th, 2012. By LucyC

A roundup of recent asbestos-related news and information that you should be aware of. An ongoing list of reported asbestos hot spots in the US from the Asbestos News Roundup archive appears on our asbestos map.

Roofers at risk for Asbestos Disease

Recently, a restoration project of a heritage site in Kentucky revealed asbestos roofing tiles under the wooden shingles the roofers were contracted to remove. As a consequence, the project has been put on hold until money can be raised to appropriately remediate the asbestos from the site.

The asbestos was found in asphalt roof shingles, which are a common roofing product. Many men who have worked with these tiles over the past decades may not be aware that the dust and debris generated by these tiles, and floating in the air around them as they work to remove the tiles, contain asbestos fibers. Those fibers can become lodged in their lungs, on their clothes–exposing their loved ones to the same carcinogens, and in the air in the neighborhood–exposing the public. But it’s the roofers who will suffer the worst fate, particularly if they have been working around these types of tiles over a prolonged period of time.

Asbestos Lawsuits

Charleston, WV: A relative of Ralph Gary Brown, who was diagnosed with asbestos-related lung cancer on July 14, 2011, and subsequently died on August 6, 2011, is suing 45 companies he claims are responsible for Mr. Brown’s illness and death.

Barry S. Brown claims Ralph Brown was exposed to asbestos while he was employed as a millwright at Armco Steel from 1964 until 2005.

The defendants are being sued based on theories of negligence, contaminated buildings, breach of expressed/implied warranty, strict liability, intentional tort, conspiracy, misrepresentations and post-sale duty to warn, according to the lawsuit.

The companies named as defendants in the suit are A.K. Steel Corporation; A.W. Chesterton Company; Amdura Corporation; Bucyrus International, Inc.; Caterpillar Inc.; Clark Equipment Company; Cleaver-Brooks Company, Inc.; Columbus McKinnon Corporation; Crane Co.; Dravo Corporation; Eaton Corporation; Elliott Company; Flowserve f/k/a the Duriron Company Inc.; Flowserve Corporation; FMC Corporation; Foseco, Inc.; Foster Wheeler Energy Corporation; General Electric Company; Goulds Pumps, Inc.; Hercules, Inc.; IMO Industries, Inc.; Industrial Holdings Corporation; Ingersoll-Rand Company; Insul Company, Inc.; ITT Corporation; McJunkin Red Man Corporation; Morgan Engineering, Inc.; NACCO Materials Handling Group, Inc.; Nagle Pumps, Inc.; Nitro Industrial Coverings, Inc.; Oglebay Norton Company; Pettibone/Traverse Lift, LLC; Premier Refractories, Inc.; Riley Power Inc.; Rockwell Automations, Inc.; Schneider Electric USA, Inc.; State Electric Supply Company; Sterling Fluid Systems (USA) LLC; Tasco Insulations, Inc.; The F.D. Lawrence Electric Company; U.B. West Virginia, Inc.; United Engineers & Constructors and Washington Croup International; Vimasco Corporation; West Virginia State Electric Supply; and Yale Materials Handling Corporation. (wvrecord.com)

Asbestos Settlements

Boston, MA: Allegations over violations of Massachusetts air pollution and asbestos regulations have been resolved, according to an announcement by the state’s Attorney General Martha Coakley. The consent judgment was handed down on Friday against Suffolk Construction Company Inc. and Emerson College. Under the terms of the judgment, Suffolk and Emerson will each pay $250,000 in civil penalties to the state.

The lawsuit was filed by Coakley, together with the consent judgment on Friday, alleging that Suffolk and Emerson violated the state’s air pollution prevention statute and asbestos regulations during the 2007-2008 renovation of Emerson’s Colonial Building, according to LegalNewsline.

The 13-story Colonial Building in Boston was bought by Emerson in 2006. It was used for leased offices and student rehearsal space until 2007, when Emerson hired Suffolk to renovate the building and convert it into a student dormitory.

Concern was raised because the demolition allegedly had not utilized proper asbestos containment measures and the contaminated demolition materials removed from the building may consequently have exposed the public to asbestos fibers. Although the potentially contaminated demolition materials should have been sent to a licensed asbestos landfill, approximately 80 percent of the contaminated material may have been sent to recycling facilities. exposing workers in the process.

The terms of the judgment require Emerson to prepare and put into effect a maintenance and operations plan for the building, so as to avoid future releases of asbestos if the building is renovated or repaired.(legalnewsline.com)

Tags: Asbestos, Asbestos Exposure, asbestos lawsuit, Asbestos Mesothelioma, Asbestos Settlement

This was posted on Thursday, July 12th, 2012 at 2:10 pm and is filed under Asbestos Mesothelioma . Feel free to respond, or trackback. Read our comments policy.