The state has sued six asbestos manufacturers and suppliers, charging they sold hazardous ceiling and fireproofing materials for use in public buildings then conspired to hide the danger.
Weber and Salt Lake counties, Salt Lake City, Ogden and Provo joined the suit, which involves more than 100 buildings statewide.The suit seeks damages, expected to run in the millions of dollars, to reimburse the state for its programs to remove or safely seal over asbestos, a carcinogen. The state says it already has spent more than $10 million on asbestos abatement.
The suit names as defendants W.R. Grace & Co. of Connecticut; the United States Gypsum Co. of Delaware; Georgia-Pacific Corp. of Georgia; Kaiser Gypsum Co. of Washington state; Hanson Industries of Delaware; and As-bes-to-spray Corp. of New York.
The Utah attorney general's office filed the suit and has retained Texas lawyer Martin Dies, a nationally prominent asbestos attorney. He has been hired under an agreement that will give him one-third of the state's eventual award, if there is one, said Assistant Attorney General Alan Bachman.
The suit follows a national trend, said Karen Cordry, an attorney with a Washington, D.C., asbestos clearinghouse funded by the National Association of Attorneys General.
Asbestos is a heat-resistant insulator used widely in American shipbuilding and steel industries in the 1940s. Its use spread to buildings in the 1950s, Cordry said. But by the 1970s, it had been declared unsafe.
More than a quarter-million personal-injury lawsuits have been filed nationally, many by employees who inhaled the fine fibers and developed illnesses, from breathing disorders to lung cancer.
Lawsuits over alleged property damage, however, are a newer tactic, said Cordry. Some states, including Massachusetts, Mississippi and Minnesota, filed suits years ago and have since settled, but asbestos manufacturers are aggressively fighting the property cases.
"These are not easy cases to win," she said. "In these property-damage cases, each building is a major piece of litigation. Just basic liability is hard-fought."
Companies question whether the specific type of asbestos in each building is hazardous; how much, if any, became airborne; whether it is likely anyone was harmed; and whether a state waited too long to sue, Cordry said.
Utah's lawsuit was delayed by an investigation into which companies had sold the asbestos found in state buildings, said Bachman.
The suit does not allege that any specific Utahns became ill from the companies' asbestos in the state buildings.
The asbestos was purchased in the 1960s and 1970s, Bachman said. The lawsuit claims the companies knew they were marketing a hazardous product and failed to warn purchasers.
It claims the asbestos products had a common defect that released millions or billions of fibers into the air. The fibers can permeate a building, landing on desks or employees' clothing. Occupants have been exposed to multiple health risks, it claims.