ISHN
  Home
  Subscribe
  Subscribe to e-News
  Online
  This Just In
  Calendar
  Digital Editions
  Showrooms
  Webinars
  Current Issue
  Cover Story
  Features
  Columns
  Web Exclusives
  Vendor News
  Product Spotlight
  Buyers Guides
  Resources
  ASSE Bookstore
  Classifieds
  Career Search
  Archives
  e-News Archives
  Sites to See
  White Papers
  Market Research
  Special Collections
  For Distributors Only
  Behavioral Safety
  OSHA Resources
  E-Learning
  Convention Companion
  ISHN Info
Search in: EditorialProductsCompanies
Federal Judge: Safety Organizations May Comment (5/15)

May 15, 2008

ARTICLE TOOLS
EmailEmailPrintPrintReprintsReprintsshareShare



In a summary judgment ruling issued on May 6, 2008, a federal judge in the United States District Court in Macon, Ga., dismissed the last of four counts in a lawsuit against the American Conference of Governmental Industrial Hygienists (ACGIH), according to a recent press release from the organization.

The suits concerned silica, n-propyl bromide (nPB), copper and diesel particulate matter, which were listed on ACGIH’s Notice of Intended Change. The industry groups believed that the organization, as well as the Departments of Labor and Health and Human Services, did not have the right to discourage the use of the groups' products.

The organization said the ruling represents a major victory for the occupational and environmental health community.

According to court documents, the suit sought to prevent the organization from publishing its Threshold Limit Values (TLVs) on the basis that they are "false and deceptive because they are not supported by credible science," and that "they disparage the goods, services or business of another by false or misleading representation of fact." The suit was initiated by the International Brominated Solvents Association (IBSA), National Mining Association (NMA), and other plaintiffs.

In its ruling, the court stated that "ACGIH, a non-profit association comprised of a group of scientists that adopts workplace safety exposure levels, is more like an entity designed to promote ideas than one that engages in deceptive advertising in an effort to derive a financial benefit." Further, the court "remains unconvinced that the cause of action created in the UDTPA should be able to stifle ACGIH's dissemination of its opinions as to what exposure levels of certain substances are in fact safe."

Three counts had been previously dismissed in March 2005. Judge Hugh Lawson presided over the case.



Did you enjoy this article? Click here to subscribe to the magazine.





BNP Media
© 2008 BNP Media. All rights reserved. | Privacy Policy