CAR_Public/130607.mbx              C L A S S   A C T I O N   R E P O R T E R

               Friday, June 7, 2013, Vol. 15, No. 112

                             Headlines


BLESSINGS INC: Recalls Domestic 16-20 EZ Peel Shrimp
BMW OF NORTH AMERICA: Faces Class Action Over Water Damage Risk
BURGER KING: BKC Faces "Jay Clogg" Class Suit in Maryland
CANADA VOLUMES: Recalls Almond Powders Due to Undeclared Milk
CHEMED CORP: Sales Reps' Claims in "Santos" Suit Dismissed

CHEMED CORP: Still Awaits Rulings on Bid to Junk Securities Suit
CHEMED CORP: Unit Remains a Defendant in "Morangelli" Suit
CORELOGIC INC: CVS Continues to Defend RESPA Violations Suit
CORELOGIC INC: Teletrack Inked Tentative Deal to Settle FCRA Suit
DUTCHESS COUNTY, NY: BoE Settles College Voters' Class Action

FANNIE MAE: Obtains Favorable Ruling in Real Estate Tax Suit
FINGER LAKES: Recalls 12 Wheels of Gouda Cheese Over Health Risk
FIRST AMERICAN: Continues to Defend Suits Over Business Practices
GRUPO AVAL: Continues to Defend Pension and Severance Funds Suits
INT'L DESSERTS: Recalls Uncle Eddies Vegan Oatmeal Choco Cookies

NEW NEWSCORP: Defends Ebook Antitrust Suits vs. HarperCollins
NEW NEWSCORP: Still Awaits Ruling on Bid to Dismiss "Wilder" Suit
NEW YORK, NY: Class Action Challenges "Operation Lucky Bag"
RICHMOND SCHOOL OF HEALTH: To Settle Former Students' Class Action
SALMOLUX: Clarifies Cold Smoked Salmon Products Recall

SEI INVESTMENTS: Appeal From ETF-Related Suit Dismissal Pending
SEI INVESTMENTS: Awaits Ruling in Stanford-Related Class Suit
SIBANYE GOLD: To Oppose Suits Over Silicosis and Lung Diseases
STORM FINANCIAL: Premium May Prompt Self-Funded Class Actions
TNUVA FOOD: Admits Abusive Practices at Bet She'an Slaughterhouse

UNITED STATES: Tea Party Group File Class Action v. IRS

* Customers in Waikato to Join NZ Bank Fee Class Action
* Number of Class Actions Increasing for Businesses, Survey Says

                         Asbestos Litigation

ASBESTOS UPDATE: Precision Castparts Had 65 Pending PI Lawsuits
ASBESTOS UPDATE: Joy Global Continues to Defend Liability Suits
ASBESTOS UPDATE: Dust-Up Overcooked as Pollies Turn Up Heat
ASBESTOS UPDATE: Appeals Court Sharpens Schmidheiny Sentence
ASBESTOS UPDATE: Welsh Treatment Cost Recovery Bill is Postponed

ASBESTOS UPDATE: Toxic Fibro Found at 3 Queensland NBN Sites
ASBESTOS UPDATE: Fibro Management Task Force Set Up
ASBESTOS UPDATE: Asbestos Bill Invades Privacy of Victims
ASBESTOS UPDATE: Register for Asbestos Very Important
ASBESTOS UPDATE: Pittsburgh Corning's Legal Woes Grinding On

ASBESTOS UPDATE: Telstra Faces Giant Asbestos Liability
ASBESTOS UPDATE: Sick Driver Appeals to Bradford Ex-Workmates
ASBESTOS UPDATE: Researcher Named West Australian of the Year
ASBESTOS UPDATE: Horsham Family Angered at Asbestos Discovery
ASBESTOS UPDATE: Syracuse Grand Jury Investigating Projects

ASBESTOS UPDATE: Free School in Wembley Hit with Asbestos Claims
ASBESTOS UPDATE: $600,000 Roof Job to Change Ash Street Jail
ASBESTOS UPDATE: The Block Sky Criticised by Law Firm Over Fibro
ASBESTOS UPDATE: Asbestos Compensation Fund Gets AUD185MM Payment
ASBESTOS UPDATE: Chrysotile Variety, An Ideal Roofing Option

ASBESTOS UPDATE: Fly-tipper Fined for Dumping in Medway
ASBESTOS UPDATE: No Answers for Gosforth Mum Exposed to Asbestos
ASBESTOS UPDATE: QEII Track Reopened After Asbestos Scare
ASBESTOS UPDATE: Homes Evacuated as Fire Sparks Fibro Scare
ASBESTOS UPDATE: Fibro Link Ruled Out in Ex-Dockyard Worker Death

ASBESTOS UPDATE: Riverside Residents Living on "Death Row"
ASBESTOS UPDATE: Toxic Dust Taken and Found from Newport Market
ASBESTOS UPDATE: Daughter of Exposure Victim Appeals for Info
ASBESTOS UPDATE: Man in Court on School Asbestos Charges
ASBESTOS UPDATE: Mesothelioma Experts Present New Findings

ASBESTOS UPDATE: Asbestos Bill Ignores Justice for Vets, Citizens
ASBESTOS UPDATE: US Calls on High Court to Snub Pfizer Case
ASBESTOS UPDATE: Asbestos Trustees Need to Open the Books
ASBESTOS UPDATE: Winchburg Asbestos Disposal Fears are Baseless
ASBESTOS UPDATE: Pittsburgh Corning Plan Order Revised

ASBESTOS UPDATE: Horror Movie Right in the CBD
ASBESTOS UPDATE: Jarrow MP Claims Mesothelioma Bill Denies Justice
ASBESTOS UPDATE: Christchurch Call for Tighter Rules on Asbestos
ASBESTOS UPDATE: Fibro Contamination Hinders Buffalo Redevelopment
ASBESTOS UPDATE: New Bill Will Help Asbestos Cancer Victims

ASBESTOS UPDATE: NZ Gov't. Says Onus on Employers to Detect Fibro
ASBESTOS UPDATE: Lack of Training Possible in Asbestos Incidents
ASBESTOS UPDATE: School Board Considers Asbestos Issues in Schools
ASBESTOS UPDATE: Greens Want Answers on ASIO HQ
ASBESTOS UPDATE: Portsmouth Schools to Use Up Rest of Surplus Fund

ASBESTOS UPDATE: NEIC Appeal from Allocation Decision Denied


                             *********


BLESSINGS INC: Recalls Domestic 16-20 EZ Peel Shrimp
----------------------------------------------------
Blessings Inc. of Tucson, Arizona, is voluntarily recalling its
domestic 16-20 EZ Peel Shrimp because it contains the undeclared
allergen sulfite above the levels required for products labeled
"sulfite-free."  People who have an allergy or severe sensitivity
to sulfite run the risk of allergic reaction if they consume these
products.

The 16-20 EZ Peel Shrimp was distributed by Perishable
Distributors of Iowa (PDI) and sold from February 12, to May 23,
2013, at the seafood display counters in the retail markets
seafood section of Hy-Vee stores located in eight states: Iowa,
Nebraska, Kansas, Illinois, Missouri, South Dakota, Minnesota, and
Wisconsin, and at Cedar Valley Fish Market in Waterloo, Iowa.

This precautionary action was prompted when three lots of domestic
16-20 EZ Peel Shrimp were found to have exceeded the sulfite
levels required for products labeled as "sulfite-free."  Sulfite
is a commonly used preservative.

The product in question can be identified by lot numbers 13047-1,
13038-3 and 13037-1.

Consumers who have purchased 16-20 EZ Peel Shrimp are urged to
contact and return the product to the store from which it was
purchased for a full refund.  Consumers with questions may contact
Blessings at 1-800-492-1621.


BMW OF NORTH AMERICA: Faces Class Action Over Water Damage Risk
---------------------------------------------------------------
Megan Stride, writing for Law360, reports that BMW of North
America LLC was hit with a putative class action in California
federal court on May 17 asserting that it concealed design defects
in its X5, X3 and 5 series vehicles that allegedly cause trunk
leaks and make electrical components highly susceptible to water
damage, creating safety risks.

Plaintiffs Monita Sharma and Eric Anderson allege that the BMW
vehicles at issue were designed so that certain vital electrical
components are located in the lowest part of the cars' trunk and
are therefore prone to water damage.


BURGER KING: BKC Faces "Jay Clogg" Class Suit in Maryland
---------------------------------------------------------
Burger King Worldwide, Inc., is facing a class action lawsuit
initiated by Jay Clogg Realty Group, Inc., in Maryland, according
to the Company's April 26, 2013, Form 10-Q filing with the U.S.
Securities and Exchange Commission for the quarter ended
March 31, 2013.

On March 1, 2013, a putative class action lawsuit, captioned Jay
Clogg Realty Group, Inc. v. Burger King Corporation, Civ. Action
No. 8:13-CV-00662 (U.S. District Court for the District of
Maryland), was filed against BKC in the U.S. District Court of
Maryland.  The complaint alleges that BKC and/or its agents sent
unsolicited advertisements by fax to thousands of consumers in
Maryland and elsewhere in the United States to promote its home
delivery program in violation of the Telephone Consumers
Protection Act.  It is not possible at this time to determine the
likelihood of class certification in this case or reasonably
estimate the probability or amount of liability for monetary
damages on a class wide basis.

Based in Miami, Florida, Burger King Worldwide, Inc. is a Delaware
corporation formed in 2012 and is the indirect parent of Burger
King Corporation.  BKC is a Florida corporation that franchises
and operates fast food hamburger restaurants, principally under
the Burger King(R) brand.


CANADA VOLUMES: Recalls Almond Powders Due to Undeclared Milk
-------------------------------------------------------------
Starting date:            May 31, 2013
Type of communication:    Recall
Alert sub-type:           Allergy Alert
Subcategory:              Allergen - Milk, Allergen - Tree Nut
Hazard classification:    Class 2
Source of recall:         Canadian Food Inspection Agency
Recalling firm:           Canada Volumes Import/Export Inc.
Distribution:             Alberta, British Columbia
Extent of the product
distribution:             Retail
CFIA reference number:    8036

Affected products:

  Brand
  name   Common name       Size    Code(s) on product
  ----   -----------       ----    ------------------
  None   Almond Powder     500 g   BB 2014 SE 20, BB 2015 MR 26
         (no sugar added)

  UPC: 4 716809 01107 4

  None   Almond Powder     500 g   BB 2014 SE 20

  UPC: 4 716809 01007 7


CHEMED CORP: Sales Reps' Claims in "Santos" Suit Dismissed
----------------------------------------------------------
The Superior Court of California for the Los Angeles County
dismissed in March 2013 the sales representatives' claims in the
class action lawsuit commenced by Bernadette Santos, et al.,
according to Chemed Corporation's April 26, 2013, Form 10-Q filing
with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission for the quarter
ended March 31, 2013.

Vitas Healthcare Corporation is party to a class action lawsuit
filed in the Superior Court of California, Los Angeles County in
September 2006  -- Bernadette Santos, Keith Knoche and Joyce
White, Bernadette Santos, et al. v. Vitas Healthcare Corporation
of California, BC359356.  This case alleges failure to pay
overtime and failure to provide meal and rest periods to a
purported class of California admissions nurses, chaplains and
sales representatives.  The case seeks payment of penalties,
interest and Plaintiffs' attorney fees.  The Company contests
these allegations.  In December 2009, the trial court denied the
Plaintiffs' motion for class certification.  In July 2011, the
Court of Appeals affirmed denial of class certification on the
travel time, meal and rest period claims, and reversed the trial
court's denial on the off-the-clock and sales representation
exemption claims.  The Plaintiffs filed an appeal of this
decision.  In September 2012, in response to an order of
reconsideration, the Court of Appeals reiterated its previous
rulings.  In March 2013, the Court granted summary judgment
dismissing the sales representatives' claims as they are exempt
employees.

Cincinnati, Ohio-based Chemed Corporation --
http://www.chemed.com/-- was incorporated in Delaware in 1970 as
a subsidiary of W.R. Grace & Co. and succeeded to the business of
W.R. Grace & Co.'s Special Products Group as of April 30, 1971,
and remained a subsidiary of W.R. Grace until March 10, 1982.
Chemed purchases, operates and divests subsidiaries engaged in
diverse business activities for the purposes of maximizing
shareholder value.


CHEMED CORP: Still Awaits Rulings on Bid to Junk Securities Suit
----------------------------------------------------------------
Chemed Corporation is still awaiting court decisions on its and
other defendants' motion to dismiss a securities class action
lawsuit pending in Ohio, according to the Company's April 26,
2013, Form 10-Q filing with the U.S. Securities and Exchange
Commission for the quarter ended March 31, 2013.

On January 12, 2012, the Greater Pennsylvania Carpenters Pension
Fund filed a putative class action lawsuit in the U.S. District
Court for the Southern District of Ohio against the Company, Kevin
McNamara, David Williams, and Timothy O'Toole.  On April 9, 2012,
the Court issued orders (a) renaming the lawsuit as In re Chemed
Corp. Securities Litigation, Civil Action No. 1:12-cv-28 (S.D.
Ohio); (b) appointing the Greater Pennsylvania Carpenters Pension
Fund and the Electrical Workers Pension Fund, Local 103, I.B.E.W.
as Lead Plaintiffs; and (c) approving Lead Plaintiffs' selection
of Labaton Sucharow LLP and Robbins Geller Rudman & Dowd LLP as
Co-Lead Counsel.  On June 18, 2012, the Lead Plaintiffs filed an
amended complaint alleging violation of Section 10(b) of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and Rule 10b-5 against all
Defendants, and violation of Section 20(a) of the Securities
Exchange Act of 1934 against Messrs. McNamara, Williams, and
O'Toole.  The lawsuit's allegations concern the VITAS hospice
segment of the Company's business.  The Lead Plaintiffs seek, on
behalf of a putative class of purchasers of Chemed Capital Stock
between February 15, 2010, and November 16, 2011, compensatory
damages in an unspecified amount and attorneys' fees and expenses,
arising from the Defendants' failure to disclose an alleged
fraudulent scheme to enroll ineligible hospice patients and to
fraudulently obtain payments from the federal government.  The
Defendants filed motions to dismiss the amended complaint on
August 17, 2012.  The Defendants believe the claims are without
merit, and intend to defend vigorously against them.

Cincinnati, Ohio-based Chemed Corporation --
http://www.chemed.com/-- was incorporated in Delaware in 1970 as
a subsidiary of W.R. Grace & Co. and succeeded to the business of
W.R. Grace & Co.'s Special Products Group as of April 30, 1971,
and remained a subsidiary of W.R. Grace until March 10, 1982.
Chemed purchases, operates and divests subsidiaries engaged in
diverse business activities for the purposes of maximizing
shareholder value.


CHEMED CORP: Unit Remains a Defendant in "Morangelli" Suit
----------------------------------------------------------
Chemed Corporation's subsidiary remains a defendant in the class
action lawsuit filed by Anthony Morangelli, et al., according to
the Company's April 26, 2013, Form 10-Q filing with the U.S.
Securities and Exchange Commission for the quarter ended
March 31, 2013.

In February 2010, Chemed and Roto-Rooter Corporation, a
subsidiary, were named as defendants in a lawsuit filed in the
United States District Court for the Eastern District of New York,
entitled Anthony Morangelli, et al., v. Chemed Corp. and Roto-
Rooter Services Co., No. 10 CV-00876 (BMC).  The named plaintiffs
in this lawsuit, who are current and former technicians employed
by Roto-Rooter who were paid on a commission basis, asserted
against Chemed and Roto-Rooter claims for violation of the Fair
Labor Standards Act ("FLSA") and claims for violations of the
labor laws of multiple states.  The Plaintiffs alleged that Chemed
and Roto-Rooter failed to reimburse them for all business expenses
incurred in connection with their employment, failed to compensate
for all hours worked and made illegal deductions from pay.  The
Plaintiffs seek an unspecified amount of compensatory damages,
liquidated damages, other penalties, fees and costs.

In June 2010, the Court conditionally certified a collective
action under the FLSA and, in June 2011, it certified fourteen
separate state law class actions.  On February 4, 2013, the Court
dismissed all claims asserted against Chemed, dismissed
plaintiffs' illegal deduction claims and decertified from the
class and collective actions significant portions plaintiffs'
business expense and uncompensated hours claims.  Roto-Rooter
continues to contest the Plaintiffs' claims.

Cincinnati, Ohio-based Chemed Corporation --
http://www.chemed.com/-- was incorporated in Delaware in 1970 as
a subsidiary of W.R. Grace & Co. and succeeded to the business of
W.R. Grace & Co.'s Special Products Group as of April 30, 1971,
and remained a subsidiary of W.R. Grace until March 10, 1982.
Chemed purchases, operates and divests subsidiaries engaged in
diverse business activities for the purposes of maximizing
shareholder value.


CORELOGIC INC: CVS Continues to Defend RESPA Violations Suit
------------------------------------------------------------
On February 8, 2008, a purported class action was filed in the
United States District Court for the Northern District of
California, San Jose Division, against Washington Mutual Bank
("WaMu") and eAppraiseIT, LLC ("eAppraiseIT") alleging breach of
contract, unjust enrichment, and violations of the Real Estate
Settlement Procedures Act ("RESPA"), the California Unfair
Competition Law and the California Consumers Legal Remedies Act.
CoreLogic Valuation Services, LLC ("CVS"), a CoreLogic, Inc.
subsidiary, is the successor to eAppraiseIT.  The complaint
alleged a conspiracy between WaMu and eAppraiseIT to allow WaMu to
direct appraisers to artificially inflate appraisals in order to
qualify higher value loans that WaMu could then sell in the
secondary market.  The Plaintiffs subsequently voluntarily
dismissed WaMu on March 9, 2009.  On August 30, 2009, the court
dismissed all claims against eAppraiseIT except the RESPA claim.

On July 2, 2010, the court denied the plaintiff's first motion for
class certification.  On November 19, 2010, the plaintiffs filed a
renewed motion for class certification.  On April 25, 2012, the
court granted the plaintiffs' renewed motion and certified a
nationwide class of all persons who, on or after
June 1, 2006, received home loans from WaMu in connection with
appraisals that were obtained through eAppraiseIT.  On July 12,
2012, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals declined to review the
class certification order.

CVS, as the successor to eAppraiseIT, intends to defend against
this claim vigorously; however, it may not be successful.  At this
time the Company cannot predict the ultimate outcome of this claim
or the potential range of damages, if any.

No further updates were reported in the Company's April 26, 2013,
Form 10-Q filing with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission
for the quarter ended March 31, 2013.

Based in Irvine, California, CoreLogic, Inc. --
http://www.corelogic.com/-- is a property information, analytics
and services provider in the United States of America and
Australia.  The Company was originally incorporated in California
in 1894, and was reincorporated in Delaware on June 1, 2010.
Before June 1, 2010, the Company operated as The First American
Corporation.  Through a separation transaction, the Company spun
off its financial services businesses on June 1, 2010, changed its
name to CoreLogic, Inc.


CORELOGIC INC: Teletrack Inked Tentative Deal to Settle FCRA Suit
-----------------------------------------------------------------
CoreLogic, Inc.'s subsidiary reached a settlement in principle to
resolve a class action lawsuit pending in Illinois, according to
the Company's April 26, 2013, Form 10-Q filing with the U.S.
Securities and Exchange Commission for the quarter ended
March 31, 2013.

On June 30, 2011, a purported class action was filed in the United
States District Court for the Northern District of Illinois
against the Company's subsidiary Teletrack, Inc. ("Teletrack").
The complaint alleges that Teletrack has been furnishing consumer
reports to third parties, who did not have a permissible purpose
to obtain them in violation of the Fair Credit Reporting Act, 15
U.S.C. Section 1681 et seq., and seeks to recover actual, punitive
and statutory damages, as well as attorney's fees, litigation
expenses and costs of lawsuit.  On September 20, 2011, Teletrack
filed a motion to dismiss the complaint on grounds that the
plaintiffs lacked standing.  That motion was denied on March 7,
2012.  Teletrack denied the allegations and has been defending
against this claim vigorously.  On March 27, 2013, the parties
reached settlement in principle that would dismiss all claims.

Based in Irvine, California, CoreLogic, Inc. --
http://www.corelogic.com/-- is a property information, analytics
and services provider in the United States of America and
Australia.  The Company was originally incorporated in California
in 1894, and was reincorporated in Delaware on June 1, 2010.
Before June 1, 2010, the Company operated as The First American
Corporation.  Through a separation transaction, the Company spun
off its financial services businesses on June 1, 2010, changed its
name to CoreLogic, Inc.


DUTCHESS COUNTY, NY: BoE Settles College Voters' Class Action
-------------------------------------------------------------
Sarah Bradshaw, writing for The Poughkeepsie Journal, reports that
Dutchess County Board of Elections officials have settled a class
action lawsuit filed against them last year, in which four
students said their right to vote was denied.

Last October, Republican Commissioner Erik Haight deemed the
voting applications of four students incomplete because they
didn't provide their dormitory building names or room numbers.
About 100 college students were affected.

Under the terms of the settlement, college students do not have to
register to vote with a physical address.  A college box office
number is enough.

The students, who attend the Culinary Institute of America, Marist
College and Bard College, were represented by the New York Civil
Liberties Union and the law firm of Lowenstein Sandler PC.

Democratic Commissioner Fran Knapp said the settlement cost the
county taxpayers $58,000, which she said was "shameful."


FANNIE MAE: Obtains Favorable Ruling in Real Estate Tax Suit
------------------------------------------------------------
David Shepardson, writing for The Detroit News, reports that the
state of Michigan and counties can't collect real estate taxes
from home sales made by Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, a federal
appeals court ruled on May 20.

In 2011, Oakland County and Genesee County filed class-action
suits against the firms that won nearly $200 billion in U.S.
bailouts to collect real estate transfer taxes.

Oakland County said it was owed millions of dollars in transfer
taxes, largely from the sale of foreclosed property by the two
government-sponsored enterprises. U.S. District Judge Victoria
Roberts wrote a March 2012 opinion ordering the firms to pay the
taxes.  Her ruling was reversed.  The county said the two firms
may have recorded thousands of deeds without paying any transfer
taxes.

In a unanimous decision by a three-judge panel, Appeals Judge
David McKeague reversed a lower court ruling that had upheld the
right of the counties and state to collect the taxes.

Congress expressly said government-sponsored housing corporations
the Federal National Mortgage Association, known as Fannie Mae,
and the Federal Home Loan Mortgage Corp., Freddie Mac, along with
the Federal Housing and Finance Agency, were exempt from all
taxes.  The counties -- joined by the state of Michigan -- argued
that when Congress exempted them from "all taxation," it didn't
mean to include state and local transfer taxes.

"Because the statutes are clear, we are not in a position to
second-guess Congress and create a new exception in the statute
for state and county real estate transfer taxes," said the opinion
written by McKeague, who was a federal judge in Grand Rapids
before being appointed to the federal appeals court bench by
President George W. Bush in 2005.

Michigan imposes a $7.50 fee per $1,000 in value on the property
sold; counties impose a $1.10 per $1,000 in value of the property
fee. They are paid at the time a deed is recorded, when ownership
of a property is transferred.

Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac step in when a property is foreclosed
as the purchaser or entity that guarantees 65 percent of the
nation's new mortgages.  After the housing market collapsed in
2008, Congress seized the two publicly traded firms as part of
bailouts nearing $200 billion and placed them in conservatorship.

In July 2008, Congress created the Federal Housing Finance Agency
to oversee Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac, and the Federal Home Loan
Banks.  As of September 2010, the combined debt and obligations of
these government-sponsored enterprises totaled $6.7 trillion

The opinion was joined by Judge Boyce Martin Jr., an appointee of
President Jimmy Carter, and Ralph Guy, a former lawyer for the
city of Dearborn named to the appeals court by President Ronald
Reagan.


FINGER LAKES: Recalls 12 Wheels of Gouda Cheese Over Health Risk
----------------------------------------------------------------
Finger Lakes Farmstead Cheese Company LLC of Trumansburg, New
York, is recalling 12 wheels of GOUDA cheese manufactured on
December 20, 2012.  The results of U.S. Food and Drug
Administration product sampling revealed the presence of GOUDA
Cheese contaminated with Listeria monocytogenes Type 1.

Listeria monocytogenes is an organism that can cause serious and
sometimes fatal infections in young children, frail or elderly
people, pregnant women and others with weakened immune systems.
Healthy persons may experience fever, diarrhea, nausea, vomiting
and abdominal pain as a result.  For more information on Listeria
monocytogenes, please visit the Centers for Disease Control and
Prevention's Web site at http://www.cdc.gov/.

This production batch of GOUDA (may be called "SCHUYLER" OR "BIER
MECK" GOUDA) was distributed in New York State, predominantly in
the Albany region, and was distributed to retail stores and
restaurants.  The label on the product will clearly state the
product name and the company name.  These products were sold to
the distributor Adventure in Food Trading on March 26, 2013.
Pictures of the recalled products' labels are available at:

         http://www.fda.gov/Safety/Recalls/ucm355055.htm

No illnesses have been reported to date.

Consumers who have purchased Finger Lakes Farmstead Cheese
Company's Schuyler Gouda or Bier Meck Gouda with a production date
of 12-20-12 are urged to return the product for a full refund.
Questions may be directed to Nancy Richards, (607) 387-3108 Monday
thru Friday, 8:00 a.m. to 4:00 p.m. Eastern Standard Time.


FIRST AMERICAN: Continues to Defend Suits Over Business Practices
-----------------------------------------------------------------
First American Financial Corporation continues to defend itself
and its subsidiaries from lawsuits challenging practices in its
title insurance business, according to the Company's April 26,
2013, Form 10-Q filing with the U.S. Securities and Exchange
Commission for the quarter ended March 31, 2013.

The Company and its subsidiaries are parties to a number of non-
ordinary course lawsuits.  Frequently, these lawsuits are similar
in nature to other lawsuits pending against the Company's
competitors.

For those non-ordinary course lawsuits where the Company has
determined that a loss is both probable and reasonably estimable,
a liability representing the best estimate of the Company's
financial exposure based on known facts has been recorded.  Actual
losses may materially differ from the amounts recorded.

For a substantial majority of these lawsuits, however, it is not
possible to assess the probability of loss.  Most of these
lawsuits are putative class actions which require a plaintiff to
satisfy a number of procedural requirements before proceeding to
trial.  These requirements include, among others, demonstration to
a court that the law proscribes in some manner the Company's
activities, the making of factual allegations sufficient to
suggest that the Company's activities exceeded the limits of the
law and a determination by the court -- known as class
certification -- that the law permits a group of individuals to
pursue the case together as a class.  In certain instances the
Company may also be able to compel the plaintiff to arbitrate its
claim on an individual basis.  If these procedural requirements
are not met, either the lawsuit cannot proceed or, as is the case
with class certification or compelled arbitration, the plaintiffs
lose the financial incentive to proceed with the case (or the
amount at issue effectively becomes de minimus).  Frequently, a
court's determination as to these procedural requirements is
subject to appeal to a higher court.  As a result of, among other
factors, ambiguities and inconsistencies in the myriad laws
applicable to the Company's business and the uniqueness of the
factual issues presented in any given lawsuit, the Company often
cannot determine the probability of loss until a court has finally
determined that a plaintiff has satisfied applicable procedural
requirements.

Furthermore, because most of these lawsuits are putative class
actions, it is often impossible to estimate the possible loss or a
range of loss amounts, even where the Company has determined that
a loss is reasonably possible.  Generally class actions involve a
large number of people and the effort to determine which people
satisfy the requirements to become plaintiffs -- or class members
-- is often time consuming and burdensome.  Moreover, these
lawsuits raise complex factual issues which result in uncertainty
as to their outcome and, ultimately, make it difficult for the
Company to estimate the amount of damages which a plaintiff might
successfully prove.  In addition, many of the Company's businesses
are regulated by various federal, state, local and foreign
governmental agencies and are subject to numerous statutory
guidelines. These regulations and statutory guidelines often are
complex, inconsistent or ambiguous, which results in additional
uncertainty as to the outcome of a given lawsuit -- including the
amount of damages a plaintiff might be afforded -- or makes it
difficult to analogize experience in one case or jurisdiction to
another case or jurisdiction.

Most of the non-ordinary course lawsuits to which the Company and
its subsidiaries are parties challenge practices in the Company's
title insurance business, though a limited number of cases also
pertain to the Company's other businesses. These lawsuits include,
among others, cases alleging, among other assertions, that the
Company, one of its subsidiaries and/or one of its agents:

   -- charged an improper rate for title insurance in a refinance
      transaction, including:

      * Hamilton v. First American Title Insurance Company, et
        al., filed on August 25, 2008, and pending in the
        Superior Court of the State of North Carolina, Wake
        County,

      * Haskins v. First American Title Insurance Company, filed
        on September 29, 2010, and pending in the United States
        District Court of New Jersey,

      * Lang v. First American Title Insurance Company of New
        York, filed on March 9, 2012, and pending in the United
        States District Court of New York,

      * Levine v. First American Title Insurance Company, filed
        on February 26, 2009, and pending in the United States
        District Court of Pennsylvania,

      * Lewis v. First American Title Insurance Company, filed on
        November 28, 2006, and pending in the United States
        District Court for the District of Idaho,

      * Mitchell-Tracey v. First American Title Insurance
        Company, et al., filed on April 30, 2012, and pending in
        the United States District Court for the Northern
        District of Maryland,

      * Raffone v. First American Title Insurance Company, filed
        on February 14, 2004, and pending in the Circuit Court,
        Nassau County, Florida, and

      * Slapikas v. First American Title Insurance Company, filed
        on December 19, 2005, and pending in the United States
        District Court for the Western District of Pennsylvania.

      All of these lawsuits are putative class actions.  A court
      has only granted class certification in Hamilton, Lewis,
      Raffone and Slapikas.  For the stated reasons, the Company
      has been unable to assess the probability of loss or
      estimate the possible loss or the range of loss or, where
      the Company has been able to make an estimate, the Company
      believes the amount is immaterial to the financial
      statements as a whole.

   -- purchased minority interests in title insurance agents as
      an inducement to refer title insurance underwriting
      business to the Company or gave items of value to title
      insurance agents and others for referrals of business, in
      each case in violation of the Real Estate Settlement
      Procedures Act, including:

      * Edwards v. First American Financial Corporation, filed on
        June 12, 2007, and pending in the United States District
        Court for the Central District of California.

      In Edwards a narrow class has been certified.  For the
      stated reasons, the Company has been unable to assess the
      probability of loss or estimate the possible loss or the
      range of loss.

   -- conspired with its competitors to fix prices or otherwise
      engaged in anticompetitive behavior, including:

      * Klein v. First American Title Insurance Company, et al.,
        filed on July 10, 2012, and pending in the United States
        District Court for the District of Columbia.

      Klein is a putative class action for which a class has not
      been certified.  For the stated reasons, the Company has
      not yet been able to assess the probability of loss or
      estimate the possible loss or the range of loss.

   -- engaged in the unauthorized practice of law, including:

      * Gale v. First American Title Insurance Company, et al.,
        filed on October 16, 2006, and pending in the United
        States District Court of Connecticut, and

      * Katin v. First American Signature Services, Inc., et al.,
        filed on May 9, 2007, and pending in the United States
        District Court of Massachusetts.

      Katin is a putative class action for which a class has not
      been certified.  The class originally certified in Gale was
      subsequently decertified.  For the stated reasons, the
      Company has not yet been able to assess the probability of
      loss or estimate the possible loss or the range of loss.

   -- failed to pay required compensation and provide required
      rest periods, including:

      * Bartko v. First American Title Insurance Company, filed
        on November 8, 2011, and pending in the Superior Court of
        the State of California, Los Angeles.

      Bartko is a putative class action for which a class has not
      been certified.  For the stated reasons, the Company has
      not yet been able to assess the probability of loss or
      estimate the possible loss or the range of loss.

   -- overcharged or improperly charged fees for products and
      services provided in connection with the closing of real
      estate transactions, denied home warranty claims, recorded
      telephone calls, acted as an unauthorized trustee and gave
      items of value to developers, builders and others as
      inducements to refer business in violation of certain other
      laws, such as consumer protection laws and laws generally
      prohibiting unfair business practices, and certain
      obligations, including:

      * Carrera v. First American Home Buyers Protection
        Corporation, filed on September 23, 2009, and pending in
        the Superior Court of the State of California, County of
        Los Angeles,

      * Chassen v. First American Financial Corporation, et al.,
        filed on January 22, 2009, and pending in the United
        States District Court of New Jersey,

      * Coleman v. First American Home Buyers Protection
        Corporation, et al., filed on August 24, 2009, and
        pending in the Superior Court of the State of California,
        County of Los Angeles,

      * Deceuster v. First American Title Insurance Company,
        filed on February 13, 2013, and pending in the Court of
        Common Pleas of Ohio,


      * Eide v. First American Title Company, filed on
        February 26, 2010, and pending in the Superior Court of
        the State of California, County of Kern,

      * Gunning v. First American Title Insurance Company, filed
        on July 14, 2008, and pending in the United States
        District Court for the Eastern District of Kentucky,

      * Kaufman v. First American Financial Corporation, et al.,
        filed on December 21, 2007, and pending in the Superior
        Court of the State of California, County of Los Angeles,

      * Kirk v. First American Financial Corporation, filed on
        June 15, 2006, and pending in the Superior Court of the
        State of California, County of Los Angeles,

      * Muehling v. First American Title Company, filed on
        December 11, 2012, and pending in the Superior Court of
        the State of California, County of Alameda,

      * Sjobring v. First American Financial Corporation, et al.,
        filed on February 25, 2005, and pending in the Superior
        Court of the State of California, County of Los Angeles,

      * Smith v. First American Title Insurance Company, filed on
        November 23, 2011, and pending in the United States
        District Court for the Western District of Washington,

      * Tavenner v. Talon Group, filed on August 18, 2009, and
        pending in the United States District Court for the
        Western District of Washington,

      * Todd v. First American Title Insurance Company, et al.,
        filed on January 15, 2013, and pending in the United
        States District Court for the District of Colorado, and

      * Wilmot v. First American Financial Corporation, et al.,
        filed on April 20, 2007, and pending in the Superior
        Court of the State of California, County of Los Angeles.

      All of these lawsuits, except Kirk, Sjobring, and Tavenner,
      are putative class actions for which a class has not been
      certified.  In Sjobring a class was certified but that
      certification was subsequently vacated.  For the stated
      reasons, the Company has not yet been able to assess the
      probability of loss or estimate the possible loss or the
      range of loss.

While some of the lawsuits may be material to the Company's
operating results in any particular period if an unfavorable
outcome results, the Company does not believe that any of these
lawsuits will have a material adverse effect on the Company's
overall financial condition or liquidity.

Headquartered in Santa Ana, California, First American Financial
Corporation became a publicly traded company following its spin-
off from its prior parent, The First American Corporation, in June
2010.  After TFAC distributed all of the Company's outstanding
shares, the Company owned TFAC's financial services businesses and
TFAC, which reincorporated and assumed the name CoreLogic, Inc.,
continued to own its information solutions businesses.


GRUPO AVAL: Continues to Defend Pension and Severance Funds Suits
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Grupo Aval Acciones y Valores S.A. continues to defend itself and
its subsidiaries from class action lawsuits brought against
pension and severance fund administrators in Colombia, according
to the Company's April 26, 2013, Form 20-F filing with the U.S.
Securities and Exchange Commission for the year ended
December 31, 2012.

The Company, its banking subsidiaries, Sociedad Administradora de
Fondos de Pensiones y Cesantias Porvenir S.A. ("Porvenir") and
Corporacion Financiera Colombiana S.A. ("Corficolombiana") are
party to collective or class actions ("acciones populares" or
"acciones de grupo," respectively).  Collective actions are court
actions where an individual seeks to protect collective rights and
prevent contingent damages, obtain injunctions and damages caused
by an infringement of collective rights of which the following are
the most significant.

All pension and severance fund administrators in Colombia,
including Porvenir, are subject to at least two class actions in
which certain individuals are alleging that the pension and
severance funds administrators have caused damages to their
customers by (1) paying returns earned by the severance and
pension funds below the minimum profitability certified by the
Superintendency of Finance, and (2) making payments to its
customers -- under the scheduled retirement system -- below the
established standards.  Additionally, Porvenir and four of the
largest pension and severance funds are subject to a
constitutional action relating to charging commissions above the
legally established limits for contributions to mandatory pension
funds.  These constitutional actions are seeking the payment of
the alleged damages caused to fund managers' customers.  No
provisions have been established in connection with these three
constitutional actions because the amount is unquantifiable, and
the Company considers the probability of loss to be remote.

Grupo Aval Acciones y Valores S.A. -- http://www.grupoaval.com/--
is an issuer in Colombia of securities registered with the
National Registry of Shares and Issuers (Registro Nacional de
Valores y Emisores).  Grupo Aval, which is headquartered in Bogota
D.C., is a not a financial institution and is not supervised or
regulated as a financial institution in Colombia.


INT'L DESSERTS: Recalls Uncle Eddies Vegan Oatmeal Choco Cookies
----------------------------------------------------------------
International Desserts of Glendale, California, is recalling Uncle
Eddies Vegan Oatmeal Chocolate Cookies in 12 oz bags, because it
may contain undeclared walnuts.  People who have an allergy or
severe sensitivity to treenuts {chestnuts, brazil nuts, walnuts,
hazelnuts, pecans, pine nuts, cashews}, run the risk of serious or
life-threatening allergic reaction if they consume these products.

Uncle Eddies Vegan Oatmeal Chocolate Cookies was distributed
nationwide to retail grocers.

The Vegan Oatmeal Chocolate Chip cookies are in a 12 oz brown
paper bag and can be identified by the following lot numbers
#110813, and #58513.  Pictures of the recalled products' labels
are available at: http://www.fda.gov/Safety/Recalls/ucm354878.htm

No illness has been reported to date.

The recall was initiated after it was discovered that the product
labeled Oatmeal Chocolate Chip Cookies contained walnuts, and was
distributed in packaging that did not reveal the presence of
walnuts.  Subsequent investigation indicates the problem was
caused by a temporary breakdown in the Company's production and
packaging processes.

Consumers who have purchased the product are urged to return it to
the place of purchase for a full refund.  Consumers with questions
may contact the Company at 1-818-549-0056.


NEW NEWSCORP: Defends Ebook Antitrust Suits vs. HarperCollins
-------------------------------------------------------------
New Newscorp LLC continues to defend a subsidiary against
antitrust lawsuits and investigations related to ebooks, according
to the Company's April 26, 2013, Form 10-12B/A filing with the
U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission.

Commencing on August 9, 2011, twenty-nine purported consumer class
actions have been filed in the U.S. District Courts for the
Southern District of New York and for the Northern District of
California, which relate to the decisions by certain publishers,
including HarperCollins Publishers L.L.C. ("HarperCollins"), to
begin selling their eBooks pursuant to an agency relationship.
The Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation has transferred the
various class actions to the Honorable Denise L. Cote in the
Southern District of New York.  On January 20, 2012, the
plaintiffs filed a consolidated amended complaint, again alleging
that certain named defendants, including HarperCollins, violated
the antitrust and unfair competition laws by virtue of the switch
to the agency model for eBooks.  The actions seek as relief treble
damages, injunctive relief and attorneys' fees.  On
June 25, 2012, Judge Cote issued a scheduling order for the multi-
district litigation going forward. Additional information about In
re MDL Electronic Books Antitrust Litigation, Civil Action No. 11-
md-02293 (DLC), can be found on Public Access to Court Electronic
Records (PACER).  While it is not possible to predict with any
degree of certainty the ultimate outcome of these class actions,
HarperCollins believes it was compliant with applicable antitrust
and competition laws.

Following an investigation, on April 11, 2012, the Department of
Justice (the "DOJ") filed an action in the U.S. District Court for
the Southern District of New York against certain publishers,
including HarperCollins, and Apple, Inc.  The DOJ's complaint
alleges antitrust violations relating to defendants' decisions to
begin selling eBooks pursuant to an agency relationship.  This
case was assigned to Judge Cote.  Simultaneously, the DOJ
announced that it had reached a proposed settlement with three
publishers, including HarperCollins, and filed a Proposed Final
Judgment and related materials detailing that agreement.  Among
other things, the Proposed Final Judgment requires that
HarperCollins terminate its agreements with certain eBook
retailers and places certain restrictions on any agreements
subsequently entered into with such retailers.  On September 5,
2012, Judge Cote entered the Final Judgment.  A third party has
filed a motion to intervene in the case for the purpose of
appealing Judge Cote's decision entering the Final Judgment to the
U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit.  Additional
information about the Final Judgment can be found on the DOJ's Web
site.

Following an investigation, on April 11, 2012, 16 state Attorneys
General led by Texas and Connecticut (the "AGs") filed a similar
action against certain publishers and Apple, Inc. in the Western
District of Texas.  On April 26, 2012, the AGs' action was
transferred to Judge Cote.  On May 17, 2012, 33 AGs filed a second
amended complaint.  As a result of a memorandum of understanding
agreed upon with the AGs for Texas and Connecticut, HarperCollins
was not named as a defendant in this action. Pursuant to the terms
of the memorandum of understanding, HarperCollins entered into a
settlement agreement with the AGs for Texas, Connecticut and Ohio
on June 11, 2012. By August 28, 2012, forty-nine states (all but
Minnesota) and five U.S. territories had signed on to that
settlement agreement.  On August 29, 2012, the AGs simultaneously
filed a complaint against HarperCollins and two other publishers,
a motion for preliminary approval of that settlement agreement and
a proposed distribution plan.  On September 14, 2012, Judge Cote
granted the AGs' motion for preliminary approval of the settlement
agreement and approved the AGs' proposed distribution plan.
Notice was subsequently sent to potential class members, and a
fairness hearing scheduled for February 8, 2013.  If the
settlement agreement receives final approval, it would resolve all
damage claims of individual citizens from those states and
territories, including those represented in the purported class
actions.

While the settlement agreement with the AGs is still subject to
final approval by the court, the Company believes that the
proposed settlement, as currently drafted, will not have a
material impact on its results of operations or financial
position.  However, the Company can make no assurances that the
proposed settlement will receive final approval.

On October 12, 2012, HarperCollins received a Civil Investigative
Demand from the Attorney General from the State of Minnesota.
HarperCollins complied with the Demand on November 16, 2012, and
is cooperating with that investigation.  While it is not possible
to predict with any degree of certainty the ultimate outcome of
the inquiry, HarperCollins believes it was compliant with
applicable antitrust laws.

The European Commission conducted an investigation into whether
certain companies in the book publishing and distribution
industry, including HarperCollins, violated the antitrust laws by
virtue of the switch to the agency model for eBooks.
HarperCollins settled the matter with the European Commission on
terms substantially similar to the settlement with the DOJ.  On
December 13, 2012, the European Commission formally adopted the
settlement.

Commencing on February 24, 2012, five purported consumer class
actions were filed in the Canadian provinces of British Columbia,
Quebec and Ontario, which relate to the decisions by certain
publishers, including HarperCollins, to begin selling their eBooks
in Canada pursuant to an agency relationship.  The actions seek as
relief special, general and punitive damages, injunctive relief
and the costs of the litigations.  While it is not possible to
predict with any degree of certainty the ultimate outcome of these
class actions, especially given their early stages, HarperCollins
believes it was compliant with applicable antitrust and
competition laws and intends to defend itself vigorously.

In early July 2012, HarperCollins Canada, a wholly-owned
subsidiary of HarperCollins, learned that the Canadian Competition
Bureau ("CCB") had commenced an inquiry regarding the sale of
eBooks in Canada.  HarperCollins currently is cooperating with the
CCB with respect to its inquiry.  While it is not possible to
predict with any degree of certainty the ultimate outcome of the
inquiry, HarperCollins believes it was compliant with applicable
antitrust and competition laws.

The Company is not able to predict the ultimate outcome or cost of
the HarperCollins matters.  During the year ended June 30, 2012,
the legal and professional fees and settlement costs incurred in
connection with these matters was approximately $30 million.
These costs are included in Selling, general and administrative
expenses in the Company's combined statement of operations.  As of
June 30, 2012, the Company has provided for its best estimate of
the liability for these matters and has accrued approximately $25
million.

New York-based New Newscorp LLC is a Delaware limited liability
company and a wholly-owned subsidiary of News Corporation.  The
Company will hold these Parent's businesses: newspapers,
information services and integrated marketing services, digital
real estate services, book publishing, digital education and
sports programming and pay-TV distribution in Australia.


NEW NEWSCORP: Still Awaits Ruling on Bid to Dismiss "Wilder" Suit
-----------------------------------------------------------------
New Newscorp LLC is still awaiting a court decision on its motion
to dismiss a securities class action lawsuit pending in New York,
according to the Company's April 26, 2013, Form 10-12B/A filing
with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission.

On July 19, 2011, a purported class action lawsuit captioned
Wilder v. News Corp., et al. was filed on behalf of all purchasers
of News Corporation's ("Parent's") common stock between March 3,
2011, and July 11, 2011, in the U.S. District Court for the
Southern District of New York.  The plaintiff brought claims under
Section 10(b) and Section 20(a) of the Securities Exchange Act,
alleging that false and misleading statements were issued
regarding alleged acts of voicemail interception at The News of
the World.  The lawsuit names as defendants Parent, Rupert
Murdoch, James Murdoch and Rebekah Brooks, and seeks compensatory
damages, rescission for damages sustained, and costs.

This litigation and certain other Parent stockholder lawsuits are
all now before the same judge.  On June 5, 2012, the court issued
an order appointing the Avon Pension Fund ("Avon") as lead
plaintiff in the litigation and Robbins Geller Rudman & Dowd as
lead counsel.  Thereafter, on July 3, 2012, the court issued an
order providing that an amended consolidated complaint was to be
filed by July 31, 2012.  Avon filed an amended consolidated
complaint on July 31, 2012, which among other things, added as
defendants the Company's subsidiary, NI Group Limited, and Les
Hinton, and expanded the class period to include February 15,
2011, to July 18, 2011.  The Defendants filed their motion to
dismiss on September 25, 2012, and the parties have completed
briefing on the motion.  The court has not yet set a date for oral
argument.

Parent and the Company's management believe these Parent
stockholder claims are entirely without merit, and the Company
intends to vigorously defend this action.

New York-based New Newscorp LLC is a Delaware limited liability
company and a wholly-owned subsidiary of News Corporation.  The
Company will hold these Parent's businesses: newspapers,
information services and integrated marketing services, digital
real estate services, book publishing, digital education and
sports programming and pay-TV distribution in Australia.


NEW YORK, NY: Class Action Challenges "Operation Lucky Bag"
-----------------------------------------------------------
Associated Press reports that the New York Police Department's
practice of leaving wallets, cash and bags in plain sight to tempt
thieves was challenged on May 20 in a lawsuit that claims the
anti-crime tactic is unconstitutional.

Lawyers who filed the lawsuit in Brooklyn federal court said
they'll seek class-action status so they can represent innocent
individuals swept up in a practice meant to entice thieves.

Dubbed "Operation Lucky Bag," the police department places the
items in high-theft areas such as subway platforms, park benches
and cars, hoping to attract the attention of thieves interested in
cash or cellphones.

The lawsuit seeks to have the tactic declared in conflict with
existing law.  The city law department said it was waiting to
receive a copy of the lawsuit before commenting.

"Though the policy and practice is purportedly intended to catch
thieves and deter crime, it is overbroad and treats honest
individuals acting as good Samaritans as criminals," the lawsuit
said.

The lawsuit was brought on behalf of Spiridon Argyros, a Queens
resident.  It said Mr. Argyros saw an unattended backpack on a
sidewalk and picked up the bag, which had a wallet sticking out of
one pocket.

According to the lawsuit, Mr. Argyros planned to bring the items
to his apartment and identify the owner, but he was arrested and
charged with petit larceny instead.


RICHMOND SCHOOL OF HEALTH: To Settle Former Students' Class Action
------------------------------------------------------------------
Michael Schwartz, writing for Richmond BizSense, reports that a
local for-profit college might be close to ending a two-year legal
battle against its former students.

A settlement has been proposed in the class action lawsuit between
the Richmond School of Health and Technology Inc. and students who
claim the school used deceptive practices to lure them in while
allegedly not providing adequate education.

The case, filed in federal court in 2011, claimed Richmond School
of Health and Technology carried out a scheme that targeted
African American people in low-income areas of Richmond in an
attempt to profit from federal financial aid dollars.  The school
advertised classes for careers for surgical technicians, medical
assistants, massage therapists and others.

"RSHT is a sham," the initial suit claimed in 2011.  "It exists to
make money without any regard for the education its students
receive in exchange."

According to the terms of the proposed settlement, which received
initial approval last month in federal court, RSHT would pay $5
million to a pool of potentially any students who were enrolled at
the school between July 1, 2004, and Feb. 28, 2013.  That could be
as many as 4,000 students, depending on how many make a claim.

The Washington law firm that is representing the students has been
running ads and attempting to contact the students for
participation in the settlement.

"We're trying to inform people through the ad and also by sending
out mail notices to all the individuals based on the school's
records we believe are members of the class," said Glenn
Schlactus, an attorney with Relman, Dane & Colfax.

There is a three-month notice period in order to give class
members a chance to respond, and a hearing will then be held in
July for final approval.

The $5 million mark was agreed upon during a mediation process
last fall that included the school, the plaintiffs' attorneys and
the school's insurer, Mr. Schlactus said.

The proposed settlement allows the school to put an end to the
suit without admitting any wrongdoing. And the school has
continued to deny the allegations.

RSHT is now known as Chester Career College.  The school rebranded
this year, according to an employee at the school.  It is under
new management but has the same owner.  It is down to one
classroom building at 751 West Hundred Road.  It previously also
had a large office at Willow Lawn.

A message left at the school for Margaret Knight, who founded it
originally in 1997, was not returned by press time.

Ted Brenner, the school's attorney with Richmond firm Brenner,
Evans & Millman, declined to comment beyond what's in the court
filings.

The suit against the school claims breach of contract, fraudulent
inducement and violations of the Equal Credit Opportunity Act and
the Virginia Consumer Protection Act.

According to the suit: "Among other failings, RSHT does not
prepare its students to take and pass certification tests that
they must pass to be licensed; does not provide adequate
externships to students who require externships for licensing;
does not provide adequate equipment to train students properly;
and does not always provide teachers for its classes."

The school charged students $10,000 to $20,000 for tuition, which
was often paid for with financial aid.

That aid totaled more than $5 million a year, or 86 percent of the
school's revenue, the suit claimed.

"RSHT treats the Department of Education as its source for cash,
with the students serving unwittingly as the means by which RSHT
enriches itself at the expense of both the students and the
public."

Other for-profit colleges and vocational schools across the
country have been caught up in lawsuits in recent years.
Allegations range from deceptive recruiting practices to fraud
against U.S. taxpayers.


SALMOLUX: Clarifies Cold Smoked Salmon Products Recall
------------------------------------------------------
Salmolux issued a clarification update to its press release
announcing its voluntary recall of certain cold smoked salmon
products.  This update does not add to the total pounds recalled,
but merely adds clarifications on description of products and one
more UPC code only.

On May 25th, 2013, Salmolux of Federal Way, Washington,
voluntarily recalled certain of its cold smoked salmon products
because of the potential to be contaminated with Listeria
monocytogenes, an organism which can cause serious and sometimes
fatal infections in young children, frail or elderly people, and
others with weakened immune systems.  Although healthy individuals
may suffer only short-term symptoms such as high fever, severe
headache, stiffness, nausea, abdominal pain and diarrhea, Listeria
infection can cause miscarriages and stillbirths among pregnant
women.

No confirmed illnesses have been reported.

Products affected by this recall are:

Size    Product Description    Lot No   Brands
----    -------------------    ------   ------
4 oz    Sockeye Nova Lox       10803    Jensen's Old
                                         Fashion Smokehouse
UPC: 6 33243 24684 5
Form: Frozen

500 g   Smoked Wild Sockeye    10803    No brand - Food Service
         Salmon (Nova Lox)

UPC: No UPC
Form: Frozen

4 oz    Nova Lox               10803    Raley's

UPC: 0 46567 50029 4
Form: Fresh

1 lb    Alaskan Smoked Salmon  10803    Sea Passion
         (Nova Lox)

UPC: 0 16468 44294 8
Form: Frozen

2 lb    Wild Keta Smoked       10803    Sea Passion
         Salmon (Nova Lox) Trim

UPC: No UPC
Form: Frozen

2 lb    Lox Trim               10803    Sea Passion
UPC: No UPC
Form: Frozen

2 lb    Sockeye Smoked         10803    Sea Passion
         Salmon Trim

UPC: No UPC
Form: Frozen

3 oz    Wild Alaskan Smoked    10803    Sea Passion
         Salmon

UPC: 0 16468 44543 7
Form: Frozen

3 lb    Smoked Salmon Nova     10803    Sea Passion
         Lox (pre-sliced)

UPC: 0 16468 42072 4
Form: Frozen

4 oz    Smoked Salmon          10803    Sea Passion
         (Nova Lox)

UPC: 0 16468 44305 1
Form: Frozen

8 oz    Norwegian Smoked       10803    Sea Passion
         Salmon (Nova Lox)

UPC: 0 16468 44328 0
Form: Frozen

4 oz    Smoked Sockeye         10803    Sea Passion
         Salmon (Nova Lox)

UPC: 0 16468 44900 8
Form: Frozen

A total of approximately 4,930 lb of the products were distributed
in AZ, CA, ID, MI, NV, NY, OH, TX, WA states through retail
stores.  The product distributed in Texas was limited to Sea
Passion brand, Wild Alaskan Smoked Salmon, 3 oz.

Salmolux has completed its recall protocol.

The product is packed in vacuum bags and lot number information is
on the back of the pack.  Pictures of the recalled products'
labels are available at:
http://www.fda.gov/Safety/Recalls/ucm354855.htm

The recall was the result of a routine sampling program by FDA
which revealed that the finished products contained the bacteria.
Salmolux has voluntarily initiated the recall and is continuing
its investigation.  The Company is currently contacting its
customers who are affected by this recall.

Consumers who have purchased the products are urged to return it
to the place of purchase for a full refund.  Consumers with
questions may contact the Company at 253.874.2026 (Business hours:
Monday - Friday, 7:30 - 4:30 Pacific Standard Time).


SEI INVESTMENTS: Appeal From ETF-Related Suit Dismissal Pending
---------------------------------------------------------------
An appeal from the dismissal of a class action lawsuit related to
leveraged exchange traded funds remains pending, according to SEI
Investments Company's April 26, 2013, Form 10-Q filing with the
U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission for the quarter ended
March 31, 2013.

One of SEI's principal subsidiaries, SEI Investments Distribution
Co., or SIDCO, has been named as a defendant in certain putative
class action complaints (the Complaints) related to leveraged
exchange traded funds (ETFs) advised by ProShares Advisors, LLC.
The first complaint was filed on August 5, 2009, and the
subsequent cases were all consolidated in the Southern District of
New York.  The Complaints are purportedly made on behalf of all
persons that purchased or otherwise acquired shares in various
ProShares leveraged ETFs pursuant or traceable to allegedly false
and misleading registration statements, prospectuses and
statements of additional information.  The Complaints name as
defendants ProShares Advisors, LLC; ProShares Trust; ProShares
Trust II, SIDCO, and various officers and trustees to ProShares
Advisors, LLC; ProShares Trust and ProShares Trust II.  The
Complaints allege that SIDCO was the distributor and principal
underwriter for the various ProShares leveraged ETFs that were
distributed to authorized participants and ultimately
shareholders.  The Complaints allege that the registration
statements for the ProShares ETFs were materially false and
misleading because they failed adequately to describe the nature
and risks of the investments and claim that SIDCO is liable for
these purportedly material misstatements and omissions under
Section 11 of the Securities Act of 1933.  The Defendants moved to
dismiss the amended complaint filed by the plaintiffs, and on
September 7, 2012, the District Court for the Southern District of
New York issued an opinion dismissing with prejudice the
plaintiffs' amended complaint.

The Plaintiffs filed with the Second Circuit Court of Appeals a
notice of appeal of the District Court's decision.  The
Plaintiffs-appellants filed their brief on December 17, 2012, and
later filed a corrected brief on January 3, 2013.  The brief of
defendants-appellees was filed on February 1, 2013.

While the outcome of this litigation is uncertain given its early
phase, SEI believes that it has valid defenses to plaintiffs'
claims and intends to defend the lawsuits vigorously.

Based in Oaks, Pennsylvania and founded in 1968, SEI Investments
Co. -- http://www.seic.com/-- is a publicly owned investment
manager.  The firm provides wealth management and investment
advisory services to its clients through its subsidiaries.


SEI INVESTMENTS: Awaits Ruling in Stanford-Related Class Suit
-------------------------------------------------------------
SEI Investments Company is awaiting a court decision on a motion
to vacate a conditional transfer order in the class action lawsuit
related to the role of its subsidiary in providing back-office
services to Stanford Trust Company, according to the Company's
April 26, 2013, Form 10-Q filing with the U.S. Securities and
Exchange Commission for the quarter ended
March 31, 2013.

SEI has been named in six lawsuits filed in Louisiana.  Five
lawsuits were filed in the 19th Judicial District Court for the
Parish of East Baton Rouge, State of Louisiana.  One of the five
actions purports to set forth claims on behalf of a class and also
names SEI Private Trust Company, or SPTC, as a defendant and was
certified as a class in December 2012.  Two of the other actions
also name SPTC as a defendant.  All five actions name various
defendants in addition to SEI, and, in all five actions, the
plaintiffs purport to bring a cause of action against SEI and SPTC
under the Louisiana Securities Act.  The putative class action
originally included a claim against SEI and SPTC for an alleged
violation of the Louisiana Unfair Trade Practices Act.  Two of the
other five actions include claims for violations of the Louisiana
Racketeering Act and possibly conspiracy.  In addition, another
group of plaintiffs have filed a lawsuit in the 23rd Judicial
District Court for the Parish of Ascension, State of Louisiana,
against SEI and SPTC and other defendants asserting claims of
negligence, breach of contract, breach of fiduciary duty,
violations of the uniform fiduciaries law, negligent
misrepresentation, detrimental reliance, violations of the
Louisiana Securities Act and Louisiana Racketeering Act and
conspiracy.  The underlying allegations in all the actions are
purportedly related to the role of SPTC in providing back-office
services to Stanford Trust Company.  The petitions allege that SEI
and SPTC aided and abetted or otherwise participated in the sale
of "certificates of deposit" issued by Stanford International
Bank.

Two of the five actions filed in East Baton Rouge were removed to
federal court and transferred by the Judicial Panel on
Multidistrict Litigation to United States District Court for the
Northern District of Texas.  On August 31, 2011, the United States
District Court for the Northern District of Texas issued an order
and judgment that the causes of action alleged against SEI in the
two removed actions were preempted by federal law and the court
dismissed these cases with prejudice.  The Plaintiffs appealed
this ruling, and on March 19, 2012, a panel of the Court of
Appeals for the Fifth Circuit reversed the decision of the United
States District Court and remanded the actions for further
proceedings.  On July 18, 2012, SEI filed a petition for
certiorari in the United States Supreme Court, seeking review of
the decision by the United States Court of Appeals in the Eleventh
Circuit to permit the claims against SEI to proceed.  SEI believes
that the trial correctly concluded that the claims against SEI
were barred by the federal Securities Litigation Uniform Standards
Act and is requesting that the Supreme Court reinstate that
dismissal.  On January 18, 2013, the Supreme Court granted the
petition for certiorari, and the court will consider the case in
the fall of this year.

The case filed in Ascension was also removed to federal court and
transferred by the Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation to
the Northern District of Texas.  The schedule for responding to
that complaint has not yet been established.  The plaintiffs in
the remaining two cases in East Baton Rouge have granted SEI and
SPTC an extension to respond to the filings.  SEI and SPTC filed
exceptions in the class action pending in East Baton Rouge, which
the Court granted in part and dismissed the claims under the
Louisiana Unfair Trade Practices Act and denied in part as to the
other exceptions.  SEI and SPTC filed an answer to the East Baton
Rouge class action, plaintiffs filed a motion for class
certification; and SEI and SPTC also filed a motion for summary
judgment against certain named plaintiffs which the Court stated
will not be set for hearing until after the hearing on the class
certification motion.  The Court in the East Baton Rouge action
held a hearing on class certification on September 20, 2012.  By
oral decision on December 5, 2012, and later entered in a judgment
signed on December 17, 2012, that was subsequently amended, the
Court in East Baton Rouge certified a class to be composed of
persons who purchased any Stanford International Bank certificates
of deposit (SIB CDs) in Louisiana between January 1, 2007, and
February 13, 2009; persons who renewed any SIB CD in Louisiana
between January 1, 2007, and February 13, 2009; or any person for
whom the Stanford Trust Company purchased SIB CDs in Louisiana
between January 1, 2007, and February 13, 2009.

On January 30, 2013, SEI and SPTC filed motions for appeal from
the judgments that stated SEI's and SPTC's intention to move to
stay the litigation.  On February 1, 2013, the plaintiffs filed a
motion for Leave to File First Amended and Restated Class Action
Petition in which they ask the Court to allow them the petition in
this case to add additional facts that were developed during
discovery and adding claims against certain of SEI's insurance
carriers.  On February 5, 2013, the Court granted two of the
motions for appeal and the motion for leave to amend.  On February
15, 2013, SEI filed a motion for new trial, or, in the
alternative, for reconsideration of the Court's order allowing
amendment.  On February 22, 2013, SEI filed a motion to stay
proceedings in view of the pending Supreme Court case.  On
February 28, 2013, SEI responded to the First Amended and Restated
Class Action Petition by filing an exception.

On March 11, 2013, the insurance carrier defendants filed a notice
of removal removing the case to the Middle District of Louisiana
and on March 18, 2013, the insurance carrier defendants filed
answers.  On March 13, 2013, SEI notified the Judicial Panel on
Multidistrict Litigation (MDL) of this case as a potential tag-
along action.  On March 18, 2013, the insurance carrier defendants
filed answers.  On March 19, 2013, the plaintiffs filed a motion
to remand, a motion for expedited briefing schedule, expedited
status conference and expedited consideration of their motion to
remand, a motion for leave to file under seal and a motion for
order pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 1447(b) requiring removing defendants
to supplement federal court record with certified copy of state
court record.  These motions are now fully briefed.  On March 25,
2013, SEI filed a motion that the court decline to adopt the state
court's order regarding class certification, which the court
dismissed without prejudice to renew upon a determination of
removal jurisdiction in an
April 12, 2013 order that also dismissed without prejudice a
motion to dismiss for lack of jurisdiction and improper venue
filed on April 9, 2013, by one of the insurers.  On April 1, 2013,
the Louisiana Office of Financial Institutions (OFI) filed a
motion to remand and sever claims and a response to that motion by
the insurers and opposition to that motion by the plaintiffs were
filed on April 22, 2013.

Along with the briefing in the Middle District of Louisiana, on
March 13, 2013, SEI notified the Judicial Panel on Multidistrict
Litigation (MDL) of this case as a potential tag-along action.  On
March 19, 2013, the plaintiffs notified the MDL that they had
filed a motion to remand and asking the panel to decline to issue
a conditional transfer order.  On March 29, 2013, the MDL issued a
conditional transfer order (CTO), which both plaintiffs and OFI
oppose.  On April 18, 2013, OFI filed a motion to vacate the CTO
or, in the alternative, stay any ruling to transfer the matter
until after the Middle District of Louisiana rules on OFI's motion
to remand and sever.  The Plaintiffs filed a motion to vacate the
CTO on April 19, 2013.  SEI's response to those motions was due on
May 9, 2013, and May 10, 2013, respectively.

While the outcome of this litigation is uncertain given its early
phase, SEI and SPTC believe that they have valid defenses to the
plaintiffs' claims and intend to defend the lawsuits vigorously.
Because of the uncertainty of the make-up of the classes, the
outcome of the proceeding in the United States Supreme Court, the
specific theories of liability that may survive a motion for
summary judgment or other dispositive motion, the lack of
discovery regarding damages, causation, mitigation and other
aspects that may ultimately bear upon loss, the Company is not
reasonably able to provide an estimate of loss, if any, with
respect to the lawsuits.

Based in Oaks, Pennsylvania and founded in 1968, SEI Investments
Co. -- http://www.seic.com/-- is a publicly owned investment
manager.  The firm provides wealth management and investment
advisory services to its clients through its subsidiaries.


SIBANYE GOLD: To Oppose Suits Over Silicosis and Lung Diseases
--------------------------------------------------------------
Sibanye Gold Limited said in its April 26, 2013, Form 20-F filing
with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission for the year
ended December 31, 2012, that it will oppose the class action
lawsuits filed against it related to the contraction of silicosis
and other occupational lung diseases.

On August 21, 2012, a court application was served on a group of
respondents that included Sibanye Gold (the "August Respondents").
On December 21, 2012, a further court application was issued and
was formally served on a number of respondents, including Sibanye
Gold, (the "December Respondents" and, together with the August
Respondents, the "Respondents") on January 10, 2013, on behalf of
classes of mine workers, former mine workers and their dependents
who were previously employed by, or who are currently employed by,
amongst others, Sibanye Gold and who allegedly contracted
silicosis and/or other occupational lung diseases (the "Classes").
The court application of August 21, 2012, and the court
application of December 21, 2012, are together referred to as the
"Applications".

These Applications request that the court certify a class action
to be instituted by the applicants on behalf of the Classes.
These Applications are the first and preliminary steps in a
process where, if the court were to certify the class action, the
applicants may, in a second stage, bring an action wherein they
will attempt to hold the Respondents liable for silicosis and
other occupational lung diseases and resultant consequences.  In
the second stage, the Applications contemplate addressing what the
applicants describe as common legal and factual issues regarding
the claim arising from the allegations of the entire Classes.  If
the applicants are successful in the second stage, they envisage
that individual members of the Classes could later submit
individual claims for damages against the respective Respondents.
The Applications do not identify the number of claims that may be
instituted against the Respondents or the quantum of damages the
applicants may seek.

With respect to the Applications, Sibanye Gold has filed notice of
its intention to oppose both the Applications and has instructed
its attorneys to defend the claims.  Sibanye Gold and its
attorneys are engaging with the applicants' attorneys in both
Applications to try to establish a court-sanctioned process to
agree the timelines, (including the date by which Sibanye Gold
must file its papers opposing the Applications) and the possible
consolidation of the separate applications.  At this stage,
Sibanye Gold cannot quantify its potential liability from this
action.

Sibanye Gold Limited -- http://www.sibanyegold.co.za/-- formerly
GFI Mining South Africa (Pty) Limited, is a producer of gold in
South Africa.  Westonaria, South Africa-based Sibanye Gold is
primarily engaged in underground and surface gold mining and
related activities, such as gold extraction and processing.


STORM FINANCIAL: Premium May Prompt Self-Funded Class Actions
-------------------------------------------------------------
Leanne Mezrani, writing for Lawyers Weekly, reports that the award
of a premium to Storm Financial victims who bankrolled part of a
class action against Macquarie Bank could encourage self-funded
group litigation, a Brisbane silk has claimed.

Douglas Campbell SC was briefed by Queensland-based firm Levitt
Robinson, which represented 315 investors who paid AUD5.5 million
towards the cost of legal proceedings.

These group members will recover 42% of their lost investments,
taking into account a 'funder's premium' of 35%.  Plaintiffs who
did not finance the class action will receive a 17.6% return.

Mr. Campbell told Lawyers Weekly that the premium could prompt a
rise in self-funded class actions.

He admitted, however, that regularly requesting money from a
client "puts lawyers in a difficult situation".  So, too, does
making a proposal that favors some clients over others, he added.

"[The plaintiffs] were constantly asked for more money . . . and
the result was that not all group members wanted to give money,"
he said.  "Then the challenge of how to compensate those who
contributed and those who didn't."

Mr. Campbell claimed the settlement terms were necessary to ensure
a fair outcome for all group members.  But the Australian
Securities and Investments Commission (ASIC) argued that the 35
per cent premium was "arbitrary".

Mr. Campbell said he was not surprised by ASIC's objections, which
were rejected by Federal Court judge John Logan.

"It was proper action for ASIC to take . . . [the regulator] was
not unduly aggressive," said Mr. Campbell.  "I think ASIC took a
view that their duty as a public authority was to ensure the best
interests of the group members."

In the decision, Judge Logan said the AUD82.5 million settlement
was "fair and reasonable" and would avoid an appeals process that
could have dragged on until 2016.

Levitt Robinson claimed the decision was a blow to litigation
funders.  However, Mr. Campbell said it could encourage litigation
funders to back an open class action and claim a larger slice of
the compensation awarded.

"Currently, litigation funders only represent people who agree to
pay their costs and it becomes a closed class," he said.  "This
decision might open the way for litigation funders to fund action
that is open and claim fees from people who didn't sign up with
them."

The decision affects a total of 1050 Storm clients who had taken
out about AUD275 million worth of high-risk margin loans.

Macquarie Bank has not admitted liability under the terms of the
settlement.

Levitt Robinson launched the class action in late 2010, accusing
the bank of alleged breach of contract, unconscionable conduct and
liabilities as a linked credit provider.


TNUVA FOOD: Admits Abusive Practices at Bet She'an Slaughterhouse
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Ilan Lior, writing for Haaretz Daily Newspaper, reports that in
its response to two requests to file class action suits against
the company, heard on May 20 in Jerusalem District Court, Tnuva
Food Industries was surprisingly upfront about the practices at
its Bet She'an slaughterhouse.

The suit applications follow a televised investigation on Israeli
television several months ago with disturbing images from the
slaughterhouse.

"Whereas the purchasers of other consumer goods could believe
their production does not entail causing suffering and harm to the
workers who participate in it," Tnuva said in its statement to the
court, "the consumer of meat products cannot make a similar
assumption about the animals from whose flesh they are produced,
since slaughtering by its very nature causes the animals great
suffering."

On May 20, the court was scheduled to debate the merit of the
actions ahead of deciding whether one or both may go forward.

In separate applications, Ruth Kolian and Perach Amzaleg argue
that Tnuva has deceived consumers by creating a false impression
of strict regulations and fair treatment of the animals, while in
reality the production of meat at the slaughterhouse, which is
sold under the Adom Adom label, involves great suffering for them.

The claims are based on an investigative report broadcast in
December 2012 on Israel Channel 2 television's Kolbotek.

The segment was produced by Ronen Bar, a journalist and animal
rights activist who worked at the slaughterhouse for a month and a
half while secretly documenting its practices.

In the broadcasted scenes, workers are seen hitting calves and
lambs with sticks and electric shockers, holding animals by one
leg and dragging them with a forklift, throwing lambs into the air
and hanging the animals upside down, still alive and conscious,
after slaughter.

Both lawsuit applications cite consumer deception as the legal
basis for the action.  Ms. Kolian and Ms. Amzaleg say Tnuva has
profited illegally from many consumers who would not have bought
its products had they been aware of the practices at the
slaughterhouse.

Ms. Amzaleg is requesting damages of NIS200 million for the
plaintiffs she plans to represent, which she says includes anyone
who purchased Adom Adom brand products and suffered emotional
distress after seeing the Kolbotek segment.  Ms. Kolian seeks
NIS100 million in damages -- NIS500 for each of the estimated
200,000 consumers who were affected.  Both Ms. Amazaleg and Ms.
Kolian say they would donate any compensation awarded in the suit
to an animal welfare organization.

Attorney Aviad Amzaleg, who is representing his wife, Perach, in
the suit, said Tnuva "did not act in good faith when it depicted
itself as abiding by hygiene and quality regulations.  The
investigative report proved that Tnuva's advertisements are
blatantly untrue.  Not only is the slaughter process at the plant
not of high quality, it is also not under the supervision of
inspection agencies and is in violation of regulations."

Aviad Amzaleg told Haaretz that his wife, Perach, decided to file
a class action after being horrified by what she saw on Kolbotek
and after realizing, from comments on social network sites, that
many other Israelis were also horrified.

"It is important to stress that the damage was the result of what
was exposed in the investigative report, and not of the report
itself," Aviad Amzaleg said.

Kolian, who is an ultra-Orthodox Jew, took the additional step of
obtaining from Shlomo Yosef Mahfoud, a Sephardi rabbi, and the
Ashkenazi Eda Haredit slaughter board, rabbinical rulings
declaring that unnecessary cruelty to animals would render any
meat so produced unkosher.  "We have a holy Torah," says
Ms. Kolian, "and it explicitly prohibits animal cruelty."

In its response to the court Tnuva said that all slaughter
involves cruelty that would horrify any viewer.  "There is no
reason to assume the claimed damage of 'profound shock, anger,
repugnance and sadness' would not have been caused to consumers
even if what had been documented and broadcast had been the usual,
violent procedure in accordance with the regulations concerning
the animals at the time of their slaughter, the legality of which
is not in dispute."

The document Tnuva submitted to the court describes in detail the
banality of the slaughter process: "It suffices to mention that in
order to slaughter the animals, when they are fully conscious and
sometimes die of fright, they are put into a facility called the
holding chamber, in which arms that seize them press hard on their
heads and bodies.  Then, together with the chamber they are turned
180 degrees and as they are held their neck are slit and they
bleed until they lose consciousness.  It is indisputable that
broadcast of a film documenting these actions 'proper under the
regulations' would horrify most meat-eating consumers, even though
this is absolutely legal behavior."

Tnuva rejected arguments that it has a duty to inform consumers
about how its products are made, saying customers would not want
to be exposed to this information.

"Is information provided to consumers, for example, about the
processes involved in manufacturing sneakers, or breakfast
cereals, or toilet paper? How much more so in the case of meat
products: This is exactly the sort of information consumers want
to be concealed from them, so as to enable them to enjoy the
product while repressing the thought that their enjoyment entails
causing suffering to a living creature," Tnuva's response to the
court said.

To exemplify this, the document mentions the popular Internet
video "Fresh Pork Sausage prank," which "documents the reactions
of supermarket shoppers who happily sample fresh pork sausages"
until, when supplies run out, a live piglet is brought out as if
it is intended to provide them with more sausages, at which point
shoppers "react with horror, disgust and even aggression."

Tnuva argued that the prank "proves it suffices to expose
consumers of meat products to an entirely 'clean' fictional
process (without blood, bleats or the images of slaughter) of
transforming an animal into sausage to cause them profound horror,
anger and disgust.  The usual and regulated process animals
undergo when they are slaughtered at a slaughterhouse is much more
violent and shocking than putting an animal into a closed box and
turning the crank on its side," as in the video.

In its response Tnuva also admitted that kosher slaughter
practices do not conform to international animal welfare
standards: "All the instructions of the OIE-World Organization for
Animal Health concerning the stun methods that can be used on
animals prior to slaughter to reduce their suffering in the
slaughter process . . .  are incompatible with the Jewish kashrut
laws requiring the animal to be fully conscious at the time of
slaughter and which Tnuva observes so that the factory's products
can be sold as kosher," the response said.

Kolian argues that the harm to the animals at Tnuva's
slaughterhouse should horrify every observant Jew.  Officials in
Israel's Chief Rabbinate, after watching the video from the
Kolbotek segments and discussing its implications for animal
welfare and kashrut issue, decided not to withdraw the plant's
kashrut certification on the basis of the images.

In a response to Haaretz, Tnuva said: "The incident occurred a
number of months ago.  Adom Adom condemned the actions and took
immediate and significant steps in full coordination with the
regulators in Israel and . . . regrets the incident and is acting
to ensure the quality of its products."


UNITED STATES: Tea Party Group File Class Action v. IRS
-------------------------------------------------------
Nate Raymond, writing for Reuters, reports that a California-based
Tea Party group sued the U.S. Internal Revenue Service on May 20
in what marked the first lawsuit to stem from an investigation
finding the agency singled-out conservative organizations.

In a lawsuit filed in U.S. District Court in Cincinnati, the
NorCal Tea Party Patriots accused the IRS of violating its
constitutional rights due to the "intensive and intrusive
scrutiny" it received while seeking tax-exempt status.

The lawsuit sought class action status on behalf of all
conservative and libertarian groups -- such as those associated
with the Tea Party movement -- that were targeted by the IRS for
extra scrutiny from March 2010 through the middle of May.  Tea
Party groups call for reduced federal spending and taxation.

The lawsuit has the backing of a group calling itself Citizens for
Self-Governance, a group launched by the co-founder of the Tea
Party Patriots, Mark Meckler.

"We stand shoulder to shoulder with all those known and unknown
who have been abused by a federal government run amok,"
Mr. Meckler said in a statement.

Representatives of the IRS did not respond to a request for
comment on May 20 after normal business hours.

The lawsuit came as the Senate Finance Committee and House of
Representatives Oversight and Government Reform Committees
prepared to hold hearings on the IRS scandal, which cost acting
IRS commissioner Steven Miller his job.

Lois Lerner, chief of the IRS tax-exempt unit, was set to testify
on May 15 before an investigative committee of the House of
Representatives, along with other officials.

A White House spokesman told reporters May 20 that two senior
aides to President Barack Obama knew weeks ago about a report by
the U.S. Department of Treasury's Inspector General for Tax
Administration about the IRS's targeting of conservative groups.

The lawsuit was filed in Cincinnati, home to the field office at
the center of the storm, by the NorCal Tea Party Patriots, a group
based in Colfax, California.

On its website, NorCal says its volunteers "simply love their
country and want to save it from a tyrannical takeover."

In the lawsuit, NorCal said it had first sought tax-exempt status
in March 2010.  The group said due to an "unjustifiable delay," it
did not receive approval for tax-exempt status until August 2,
2012.

"The IRS engaged in a tactic of suffocating NorCal Tea Party
Patriots and other similarly situated groups with requests that
were so searching and extensive that they would have presented a
serious challenge even for sophisticated businesses," the
complaint said.

The lawsuit seeks unspecified monetary damages for the IRS's
alleged violation of the Privacy Act of 1974 and the First and
Fifth Amendments of the U.S. Constitution.

Exactly how many groups could qualify to be members of the class
if a federal judge certified it is unclear.  The inspector
general's report reviewed 296 applications.


* Customers in Waikato to Join NZ Bank Fee Class Action
-------------------------------------------------------
Jenna Lynch, writing for Fairfax NZ News, reports that bank
customers in the Waikato have had enough and they're taking their
case to court.

Since March more than 1660 people in the Waikato region have
signed up with 22,000 other Kiwis to participate in the class-
action suit against unfair bank fees.

The battle could be the largest group litigation in New Zealand's
history, according to Fair Play on Fees, the law consortium
leading the charge.

Kiwis are often stung with fees twice as much as Australians,
sometimes more, with the average charge of NZD15 for overdrafts,
bouncing checks or late credit card payments.

Hamilton nursing student Stephane Steele signed up for the class-
action suit after an experience with Westpac left her $1500 in
debt and struggling to pay it back.

Ms. Steele had a NZD100 direct debit set up on her account with
Westpac, but when she wound up in hospital and her student
allowance stopped, the direct debit did not.  And neither did the
NZD15 overdraft fees.

"I thought it would just default if there was no money in the
account," she said.

But Ms. Steele was wrong.  She received a phone call from Westpac
three months later demanding a NZD1500 payment within seven days
for an unarranged overdraft.

Ms. Steele had to secure a personal loan from a finance company to
keep her credit rating intact.

"I believe I was unfairly treated," she said.

"They blamed me and said I needed to be more responsible with my
money."

The Fair Play on Fees campaign was kicked off in March by Auckland
lawyer Andrew Hooker, Australian legal heavyweight Slater & Gordon
and litigation funder Litigation Lending Services.

The lawsuit will operate on a no-win, no-fee basis and will extend
back the maximum six years that claims can be made under the
statute of limitations.

The litigation funder will take a 25% cut of the proceeds if the
case is successful.  The group says Kiwis have been charged at
least $1 billion of unfair default fees from the major banks.

In a press release, Mr. Hooker said default fees shouldn't be a
source of profit for the banks.

"They must be in line with what the cost is to facilitate the
transaction.  The millions of dollars that the banks make every
year from these fees is wrong and it's not just us who says so,
the law does too," he said in the release.

Mr. Hooker says the class action will be an opportunity for Kiwis
to force banks into a position where they cannot take advantage of
their customers.

"Until now, banks have been sitting in a privileged position.
Customers have had minimal opportunity to challenge the fees and
banks have open access to their accounts.  This class action will
change things."


* Number of Class Actions Increasing for Businesses, Survey Says
----------------------------------------------------------------
Jane Meinhardt, writing for Tampa Bay Business Journal, reports
that the number of class action lawsuits is increasing for
businesses, but the cost per suit is decreasing.

The 2013 Carlton Fields Class Action survey of more than 360
general counsel and chief legal officers found that determining
potential financial exposure through case assessment and modeling
reduces costs.

Businesses using this strategy spend 38% less per class action and
42% less on outside counsel than companies that fail to do risk
assessment.

Respondents in the law firm's survey reported class actions are
increasing by 16 percent, while costs per lawsuit are down about
14 percent, from 2011 to 2012.

Carlton Fields is the largest law firm in Tampa.

                       Asbestos Litigation

ASBESTOS UPDATE: Precision Castparts Had 65 Pending PI Lawsuits
---------------------------------------------------------------
There were approximately 65 lawsuits pending against Precision
Castparts Corp. alleging personal injury as the result of exposure
to particulates, including asbestos, according to the Company's
Form 10-K filing with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission
for the fiscal year ended March 31, 2013.

As of March 31, 2013, there were approximately 65 lawsuits pending
against the Company alleging personal injury as the result of
exposure to particulates, including asbestos, integrated into our
premises or processes or into certain historical products. It is
frequently not possible at the outset of a case to determine which
of the plaintiffs actually will pursue a claim against the
Company. Typically, that can only be determined through discovery
after a case has been filed. Thus, in a case involving multiple
plaintiffs, unless otherwise expressed in the pleadings, the
Company accounts for the lawsuit as one claim against it. For the
Fiscal Year ended 2013, there were 22 new claims filed, 21 claims
disposed of, and no settlement payment for these claims.

The Company considers that all such claims are tort claims while
noting that some claims, such as those filed in West Virginia,
were historically common law "employer liability" cases and are
now based on a statutory definition of requisite intent.
The particulates in question are no longer incorporated into our
products, and we have implemented safety protocols to reduce
exposure to remaining particulates in the workplace. Based on the
information available to us at the date of filing of this report,
we believe, based on our review of the facts and law, that the
potential exposure from the resolution of any or all of these
matters will not have a material adverse effect on our
consolidated financial position, results of operations, cash flows
or business.

Precision Castparts Corp. (PCC) is a manufacturer of metal
components and products, provides investment castings, forgings
and fasteners/fastener systems for critical aerospace and
industrial gas turbine (IGT) applications. It also provides aero-
structures for the aerospace industry, and investment castings and
forgings for general industrial, armament, medical and other
applications. It manufactures metal components and products in
three principal business segments: Investment Cast Products,
Forged Products and Fastener Products. On July 22, 2011, it
acquired the assets of the Rollmet business (Rollmet) from
Rockwell Collins. On August 9, 2011, the Company acquired Primus
International (Primus). In August 2012, the Company acquired the
Aerostructure and Industrial Products operations of Heroux-Devtek
Inc. In January 2013, PCC acquired Titanium Metals Corp.


ASBESTOS UPDATE: Joy Global Continues to Defend Liability Suits
---------------------------------------------------------------
Joy Global, Inc., continues to defend lawsuits alleging asbestos-
related product liability, according to the Company's Form 10-Q
filing with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission for the
quarterly period ended April 26, 2013.

The Company states: "We and our subsidiaries are involved in
various unresolved legal matters that arise in the normal course
of operations, the most prevalent of which relate to product
liability (including approximately 2,800 asbestos and silica-
related cases), employment, and commercial matters. Also, as a
normal part of operations, our subsidiaries undertake contractual
obligations, warranties, and guarantees in connection with the
sale of products or services. Although the outcome of these
matters cannot be predicted with certainty and favorable or
unfavorable resolutions may affect the results of operations on a
quarter-to-quarter basis, we believe that the outcome of such
legal and other matters will not have a materially adverse effect
on our consolidated financial position, results of operations, or
liquidity.

On April 26, 2013, we were contingently liable to banks, financial
institutions, and others for approximately $342.8 million for
outstanding standby letters of credit, bank guarantees, and surety
bonds securing performance of sales contracts and other guarantees
in the ordinary course of business. Of the $342.8 million,
approximately $14.5 million relates to surety bonds and $7.5
million relates to outstanding letters of credit or other
guarantees issued by non-U.S. banks for non-U.S. subsidiaries
under locally provided credit facilities.

From time to time we and our subsidiaries become involved in
proceedings relating to environmental matters. We believe that the
resolution of such environmental matters will not have a
materially adverse effect on our consolidated financial position,
results of operations or liquidity."

Joy Global Inc. is a manufacturer and servicer of high
productivity mining equipment for the extraction of coal and other
minerals and ores. The Company's equipment is used in mining
regions throughout the world to mine coal, copper, iron ore, oil
sands, and other minerals. The Company's underground mining
machinery segment (Joy Mining Machinery) is a manufacturer of
underground mining equipment for the extraction of coal and other
bedded minerals and offers service locations near mining regions
worldwide. The Company's surface mining equipment segment (P&H
Mining Equipment) is a producer of surface mining equipment for
the extraction of ores and minerals and provides operational
support for many types of equipment used in surface mining. During
the fiscal year ended October 28, 2011, the Company completed the
acquisition of LeTourneau. On December 30, 2011, it acquired
approximately 41.1% of Int'l Mining Machinery Holdings Limited's
common stock to 69.2%.


ASBESTOS UPDATE: Dust-Up Overcooked as Pollies Turn Up Heat
-----------------------------------------------------------
Tony Wright, writing for The Age, reported that there was a time
when asbestos was much prized for its fireproofing ability.

It has, of course, fallen drastically out of favour, and its
ability to reduce the scorching of politicians has plummeted, too,
the report said.

The report added that Prime Minister Julia Gillard and the
Minister for Workplace Relations, Bill Shorten, took much fevered
umbrage at the opposition trying to put them to the flame over the
national broadband network and Telstra's difficulties in digging
up asbestos while trying to lay cables.

Opposition Leader Tony Abbott set the furnace glowing by demanding
of Ms. Gillard whether the millions spent advertising the benefits
of the NBN wouldn't have been better directed towards keeping
citizens and workers safe from asbestos.

Ms. Gillard fired up. No one, she opined, should be surprised at
Mr. Abbott politicising such a serious subject when he had
insulted asbestos victim and campaigner Bernie Banton while he was
on his deathbed. Mr. Abbott, you may recall, found himself
required to apologise after he said of the dying Mr. Banton that
"just because a person is sick doesn't necessarily mean that he is
pure of heart in all things".

Mr. Abbott's colleagues were unabashed by Ms. Gillard's reminder
of Mr. Abbott's lack of tact, and led by Malcolm Turnbull, turned
the heat on Mr. Shorten, who fairly sizzled at the idea asbestos
should be politicised.

Asked whether he had ever met Telstra to discuss asbestos problems
in NBN pits and ducts, Mr. Shorten said he'd written to the
company in 2009 and had been told Telstra had it under control.

"What is it about asbestos that you want to pollute with your
political palaver?" demanded Mr. Shorten. It wasn't long before he
was claiming only Labor and the trade union movement had been
serious about asbestos, which sounded suspiciously as if he was
not above a spot of red-hot politicising himself.

The opposition dropped the subject like a baked potato when Mr.
Shorten and his ministerial colleague Greg Combet began frying
deputy Liberal leader Julie Bishop for having represented CSR in
its dealings with victims of asbestosis when she was a lawyer many
years ago.


ASBESTOS UPDATE: Appeals Court Sharpens Schmidheiny Sentence
------------------------------------------------------------
SwissInfo.ch reported that an Italian appeals court has handed
down a longer prison sentence to Swiss industrialist Stephan
Schmidheiny for his role in factory deaths caused by asbestos
exposure. He has indicated plans to take the decision to Italy's
highest court.

According to the report, the appeals court in Turin convicted
Schmidheiny, aged 65, to 18 years in prison. The court also
dropped charges against his business partner Jean-Louis Marie
Ghislain de Cartier because the Belgian baron died May 21 at the
age of 92.

Schmidheiny was not present in the courtroom when the sentence was
read, and his Zurich-based spokesperson said at a press conference
that he intends to appeal the decision and take it to Italy's top
court in Rome, the report related.

The Swiss billionaire and de Cartier used to be the majority
shareholders in Eternit Genova, a firm that owned four asbestos
factories in Italy, the report recalled. They were held
responsible for the deaths of almost 3,000 people because they had
allowed toxic asbestos dust from the production of roofing
materials and pipes to circulate on the factory floor.

In February 2012, the court in Turin had sentenced Schmidheiny and
de Cartier to 16 years in prison and fined them millions of euros
in punitive damages for involuntary manslaughter, the report said.
The courts accused the managers of knowing about the dangers of
asbestos but not taking the necessary measures to protect those
who were either employed by Eternit or living in the vicinity of
the factories.

The men appealed the original court decision, saying that the
ruling was incomprehensible, the report added. They had argued
that they were not directly responsible for the management of
Eternit Italy, which went bankrupt in 1986, six years before
asbestos was banned.

Although it is known today that exposure to asbestos causes
cancer, victims and their families have faced hurdles in bringing
proceedings against companies or their former owners because it
can take as long as 40 years for the disease to develop, the
report further related.

The Swiss Federal Court threw out charges of manslaughter, murder
and bodily harm against the former Eternit owners in 2008, arguing
that the statute of limitations of ten years had passed, the
report said.

The Italian court, however, last year convicted the businessmen
and sentenced them to pay significant punitive damages to towns in
the Piedmont region as well as to Italy's national accident
insurer, other organisations and the victims themselves.

Hundreds of people gathered in Turin on Monday for the appeals
court verdict, many of them from Casale Monferrato, a village in
the Piedmont where one of the affected factories was located.

While the Turin appeals court verdict ends another chapter in
finding those responsible for the asbestos deaths, it is unlikely
to end the Eternit legal saga as Schmidheiny is expected to
further appeal the decision.


ASBESTOS UPDATE: Welsh Treatment Cost Recovery Bill is Postponed
----------------------------------------------------------------
Toby Mason, writing for BBC Wales, reported that the bill which
would recover the costs of treating Welsh asbestos patients from
insurers has been withdrawn two days before it was due to be voted
into law.

According to the report, AMs were due to vote on June 5 on whether
the legislation, which could raise up to GBP1m a year for the
Welsh NHS, should be passed.  The vote has now been postponed
until the middle of next month.

The AM behind the bill, Labour's Mick Antoniw, has cited
"technical reasons" for the last minute postponement, the report
related.

Had a majority of AMs voted for it on June 5, it would have become
law following Royal Assent.

The bill would have meant that insurers for those suffering
asbestos-related diseases would have been liable to pay
compensation towards their treatment by the NHS.  But there have
been repeated questions about whether the bill is within the
assembly's powers.

Presiding Officer Rosemary Butler certified in December that it
was, but admitted it was a "finely balanced" decision on some
aspects of the bill.

The Association of British Insurers (ABI) has written to her and
the secretary of state for Wales with a number of what it calls
"serious concerns" about the bill's lawfulness.

The association says that clause 15, which relates to financial
services and insurance, is clearly outside the scope of the
assembly's current powers.

Sensitive

The ABI also warns that, in its view, the bill would give Welsh
ministers "a general tax raising power" which is outside the
current devolution settlement.

This is because the legislation does not specify that the money
raised must be spent on the NHS.

It is understood that the Wales Office has also asked for further
information about the operation of the bill within the last couple
of weeks.

Mr Antoniw's office said the Bill would now proceed to its final
stages on 10 July.

The issue of whether an assembly bill is within the scope of its
powers is a highly sensitive one after the first law passed after
further powers were granted to Wales in 2011 was referred to the
Supreme Court by the UK government.

The Supreme Court judges found after a two day hearing that the
Local Government Byelaws Bill did come within the devolution
settlement.


ASBESTOS UPDATE: Toxic Fibro Found at 3 Queensland NBN Sites
------------------------------------------------------------
The Australian Associated Press reported that asbestos has been
discovered at three national broadband network (NBN) work sites in
Queensland.

According to the report, the hazardous material was water-blasted
on to the faces of workers at an underground Telstra pit in
Brisbane, and asbestos dust at a Mackay site was left unattended
for five days, the Queensland government says.

State Attorney-General Jarrod Bleijie says federal Workplace
Relations Minister Bill Shorten needs to take responsibility,
following the discoveries by Queensland's Workplace Health and
Safety agency, the report said.

"This is an absolute botched debacle again by a federal
government," Mr. Bleijie told reporters in Brisbane.  "We saw it
with the home insulation debacle we had a few years ago.  I'm
concerned about the workers in Queensland who may be unprotected
and may not have the necessary training to deal with asbestos
issues."

Mr. Bleijie said a class action could be launched against the NBN
Co or the commonwealth as a national asbestos register is
established, the report related.

Mr. Bleijie has written to Mr Shorten pointing out the workplace
safety breaches.

"I've asked for an immediate update with respect to what the
federal government are doing," he said.

"My major concern is for the workers."

In a breach discovered in early March, asbestos was water-blasted
onto the faces of two workers at Carseldine in Brisbane's north.

In Mackay, in central Queensland, asbestos dust was left for five
days after a concrete pipe was cut in April.

Asbestos was also left on a nearby footpath, and workers wore the
wrong masks.

Two weeks ago, two workers were found to have used respirators
wrongly at a Banyo site, in northern Brisbane.

The breaches occurred as underground Telstra pits were widened to
install NBN cables, but Mr. Bleijie was unable to say if work had
been suspended at the sites by contractor Silcar.

"We have no option now but to look at all the sites of the NBN
across Queensland."


ASBESTOS UPDATE: Fibro Management Task Force Set Up
---------------------------------------------------
The Australian Associated Press reported that a taskforce will be
set up to monitor the prevention of exposure, training and
supervision of contractors working on the national broadband
network rollout, the federal government says.

According to the report, Workplace Minister Bill Shorten says the
taskforce will include senior Telstra representatives and
officials from commonwealth regulators.

"We will invite state regulators to be party to this important
group," he told reporters in Canberra.

The report said the announcement of the taskforce comes after Mr.
Shorten and Communications Minister Stephen Conroy met with
Telstra executive David Thodey and members of his management team,
representatives from network building NBN Co and others.

The meeting, which follows the discovery of asbestos during
construction work for the NBN, also supported government moves to
set up a national asbestos register for anyone wanting to advise
about possible exposure to asbestos, the report related.

Mr. Shorten said Telstra had accepted it had "ultimate
responsibility" for the condition of its pits and ducts and had
undertaken to be more transparent.

While some of those at the meeting wanted to discuss the
establishment of a fund for people exposed to asbestos during the
work, others didn't and there was no final proposition.

"We have a sad corporate history in Australia where too many
corporations -- of course James Hardie comes to mind, but not just
them -- have tried to play a legal approach saying you have to
prove that it was our bit of asbestos-containing material that has
killed you," the minister said.

"So there is a legitimate concern by asbestos victims groups and
unions that they don't want companies walking away from their
responsibility."

He said Mr. Thodey had said words to the effect 'we accept
responsibility here'.

"They are chastened," Mr. Shorten added.

But asbestos was not just a Telstra issue.

The hazardous material will kill nearly 700 people in Australia
this year.

"This is not acceptable," Mr. Shorten said.

Mr. Shorten also said Mr. Thodey had expressed "disappointment"
over the way Telstra had handled matters.

"What I do know is, this is frustrating," he said.

"People in streets, in the suburbs in Australia are feeling an
anxiety which they shouldn't have to feel.

"The training standards which were promised have not been
delivered in all cases; the protocols which were promised around
safety do not appear to have been honoured in all cases.

"Promises that have been made have not been kept."

Mr. Shorten said the government would work with all parties to
make sure asbestos exposure "does not occur".

Asked about NBN Co, Senator Conroy said the network builder had
not sought to dodge responsibility.

"They take asbestos issues very seriously," he said.

Asked where Telstra's responsibilities end and NBN Co's begin,
Senator Conroy said it was when Telstra handed its pits over to
NBN Co.

He said Telstra had agreed to remediate the infrastructure before
NBN Co takes possession.


ASBESTOS UPDATE: Asbestos Bill Invades Privacy of Victims
---------------------------------------------------------
Susan Vento, writing a commentary on the proposed asbestos bill,
related to Roll Call:

"My husband was the late Congressman Bruce F. Vento, who served
for more than 24 years in the House of Representatives
representing our home state of Minnesota. Bruce died from pleural
mesothelioma, a cancer of the lining of the lung caused by
exposure to asbestos, on Oct. 10, 2000, just eight months after
being diagnosed and despite receiving excellent medical care at
the Mayo Clinic. He would be very disappointed that his colleagues
on the House Judiciary Committee voted to send HR 982, the
Furthering Asbestos Claim Transparency Act, to the floor.

Since at least the early 1900s, the lethal risks of asbestos
exposure have been known -- and intentionally hidden from --
American workers and their families by companies of all sorts
whose bottom lines were more important than the well-being and
very lives of their workers.

For many years, asbestos companies have lobbied at the state and
federal levels to erode the constitutional and legal rights of
those workers diagnosed with mesothelioma, asbestosis and cancers
caused by asbestos. Now they are lobbying Congress once again to
delay and deny medical bill payments to those who are sick and
dying.

The FACT Act is not about transparency at all. It requires the
unbelievable disclosure on a public website of asbestos victims'
personal information, including the last four digits of their
Social Security numbers, information about their finances, their
children and other sensitive material that could subject them to
identity theft and possible criminal mischief. The bill is
completely one-sided -- asbestos companies have no such
"transparency" requirements.

The House Judiciary Committee voted 17-14 to pass this bill,
despite bipartisan opposition, without ever hearing from the
victims affected by it.

Subcommittee Chairman Spencer Bachus, R-Ala., postponed the
subcommittee vote to hear testimony from asbestos victims and
their families, but unfortunately that did not occur. Instead we
were offered a closed-door meeting with staff only and were told
we could offer written comments away from the press and the public
open hearing we were promised.

The asbestos companies got their day on the Hill. How can the
asbestos victims be denied the same transparency in a bill that
supposedly is about transparency?

The U.S. Chamber of Commerce, American Legislative Exchange
Council and Georgia Pacific -- a company owned by the Koch
Brothers, who are pushing this bill -- claim it is needed to
prevent fraud by asbestos victims when filing claims to company
trusts. The asbestos company trusts were structured to enable the
companies responsible for poisoning their workers to use
bankruptcy reorganization to continue operating. But notably the
Government Accountability Office analyzed many company trusts and
found no evidence of fraud. A recent newspaper investigation of
claims found 0.35 percent of "anomalies" that included clerical
errors by the claims administrators of the company trust. Yet
somehow asbestos victims have ripped off the system.

Some rip-off. The Rand Institute found that median payments to
asbestos victims are 25 cents on the dollar, and some are as low
as 1.1 percent of the claim filed. Hardly a windfall, and hardly a
reason to victimize the sick and dying once again.

Many of those who would see their last four digits of their Social
Security numbers revealed are veterans who served our country
honorably. Surely Congress will understand the FACT Act is a
violation of privacy for those who have already been victimized."


ASBESTOS UPDATE: Register for Asbestos Very Important
-----------------------------------------------------
The Australian Associated Press reported that Telstra boss David
Thodey says anyone concerned about being exposed to asbestos
following work on the company's communications pits and ducts can
"ring us now".

According to the report, Mr. Thodey was speaking after a meeting
in Canberra with the federal government, union leaders and
representatives from asbestos safety groups.

The gathering, which included Communications Minister Stephen
Conroy and Workplace Minister Bill Shorten, follows the discovery
of asbestos in Telstra pits being prepared for the rollout of the
national broadband network (NBN), the report related.

"Anyone who has any concerns about being exposed to asbestos ring
us now," Mr Thodey told reporters.

"Anyone who has seen any instances where they think it has not
been well handled should get in touch with us."

The government has set up a register for people to lodge claims
about possible exposure to asbestos.

Concerns were raised last week after the discovery of the building
material at a Telstra pit in Penrith in Sydney and more issues
which arose at telecommunications works in Ballarat, Perth,
Adelaide and Tasmania.

Mr. Thodey said he had good discussions with unions and workplace
safety agency Comcare at the meeting and stressed the telco
giant's long experience in dealing with the hazardous material.

"I am very clear, whenever we take on the responsibility of
remediation, Telstra is responsible, no questions asked," he said.

He dismissed suggestions Telstra had cut corners when remediating
the pits for the NBN builder NBN Co, which is rolling fibre optic
cable through the infrastructure.

Mr. Thodey said six pits in Penrith had been cleared, with 14 more
to go.

Telstra had literally "hundreds of thousands of pits to remediate"
over the life of the NBN project, he added.

Labor's $37.4 billion NBN is to deliver fibre optic cable to
around 11 million premises, schools and businesses across
Australia by June 2021.


ASBESTOS UPDATE: Pittsburgh Corning's Legal Woes Grinding On
------------------------------------------------------------
Joyce Gannon, writing for Pittsburgh Post-Gazette, reported that
late on the Friday that launched the Memorial Day holiday weekend,
a judge approved a plan that will finally allow glass and
insulation maker Pittsburgh Corning Corp. to emerge from a 13-year
stint in bankruptcy.

But that development wasn't enough to stir celebration of a
conclusion in the case involving hundreds of thousands of lawsuits
alleging that insulation the Plum company produced decades ago
contained asbestos that caused deadly cancers and other diseases,
according to the report.

"No doubt there will be objections and appeals," Edwin Beachler,
an attorney with Downtown law firm Caroselli Beachler McTiernan &
Conboy who served as local counsel to a Texas law firm involved in
the case, told the news agency.

The reorganization plan signed May 24 by U.S. Bankruptcy Court
Judge Judith Fitzgerald clears the way for creation of $3.5
billion trust that will assume Pittsburgh Corning's asbestos-
related liabilities and pay out the claims, the report noted.  The
two companies that own Pittsburgh Corning -- PPG Industries and
Corning Inc. -- will contribute millions of dollars to the trust
and eventually give up their stakes in the company.

Mr. Beachler and other attorneys say it's likely that insurance
companies for Pittsburgh Corning will appeal before a U.S.
District Court judge gives the plan final confirmation, meaning
victims will wait even longer for payments expected to cover about
37 percent of their claims, the report noted. Some victims have
already died, lawyers said.

"Before it's all resolved . . . it could ultimately extend into
2014," Mr. Beachler said.

Though it has taken more than a decade for the case to get this
far, that's not unusual in asbestos-related bankruptcies, said
James Restivo, an attorney with Reed Smith who is part of a team
representing Pittsburgh Corning, the report related. He has worked
on several other asbestos bankruptcies, including one involving
Pittsburgh-based Harbison-Walker which is now part of ANH
Refractories.

Asbestos is a fire-resistant mineral that was used in many
building and industrial applications until the 1970s when it was
phased out because of documented health hazards. Medical experts
realized in the early 1900s that exposure to asbestos can cause
respiratory diseases and cancer including mesothelioma, a rare
form of cancer that attacks the lungs and linings of the heart and
abdomen.

The claims against Pittsburgh Corning involve pipe insulation
called Unibestos that was manufactured from 1964 to 1972 at plants
in Tyler, Texas, and Port Allegany, Pa., in McKean County, the
report said. The Texas plant was shuttered in 1972 after the
federal Occupational Safety and Health Administration found it
extremely hazardous.

More than 400,000 asbestos-related lawsuits named the company as a
defendant. Pittsburgh Corning settled about 200,000 before it
filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy in 2000, saying the remaining
cases could exhaust its assets.

Like other asbestos-related bankruptcies, Pittsburgh Corning's was
prolonged by the sheer number of victim claims being processed and
a long list of objections, motions and appeals -- many of them
from insurance companies ultimately responsible for paying the
victims.

Of 40 insurance companies involved in the case, only two were
still filing objections when lawyers filed into Judge Fitzgerald's
courtroom May 23 to ask for final revisions to the reorganization
plan.

"Appeals, unfortunately, have been standard in these cases, which
further holds things up," Mr. Restivo said.

As Barry Bressler, an attorney with Schander Harrison Segal &
Lewis' Philadelphia office, put it, "In setting up the trust, the
insurers want to put in as little as they can, the debtor
generally wants to put in as little as it can, and the claimants
are looking for as much as they can get. So you have competing
interests."

Under the final plan proposed for Pittsburgh Corning, PPG would
pay about $825 million to the trust through 2023 along with 1.4
million shares of PPG stock or the cash equivalent. Corning would
pay $290 million for the next six years. Their insurers would kick
in $1.7 billion.

More than 60 such trusts have been created to resolve asbestos
lawsuits, including those formed to handle claims in prominent
bankruptcy cases such as Johns Manville and one set up for
Harbison-Walker.

For Pittsburgh Corning -- probably better known for its glass
block windows used in homes and commercial buildings -- an exit
from bankruptcy isn't likely to have a dramatic effect on day-to-
day operations.

Since joining the company as chief executive and chairman eight
years ago, Phillip Martineau said he has managed it with a "focus
on what we could control: how we treat customers, stakeholders and
the people we work with and we try to continually improve that."
The company generates about $300 million in annual revenues and
has 1,500 employees in North America, Europe and Asia.

Post-bankruptcy, the company will have a new board of directors
and Mr. Martineau will continue as chairman. Currently the board
includes representatives of PPG and Corning.

"We are very private and have been" since Corning and PPG founded
Pittsburgh Corning as a 50-50- joint venture in 1937, Mr.
Martineau said. "Part of our private nature is due to the legal
restrictions we have in Chapter 11.

"We are highly profitable and growing. We are absolutely a success
story that's underneath the radar in Pittsburgh."

A number of local attorneys have helped steer the Pittsburgh
Corning case through the court over the past 13 years.

Among the Pittsburgh-based firms involved are: Reed Smith, counsel
for Pittsburgh Corning; K&L Gates which represents PPG; Buchanan
Ingersoll & Rooney, which represents insurance companies; Campbell
& Levine, which represents asbestos claimants; Leech Tishman
Fuscaldo & Lampl, which represents trade creditors; Clark Hill
Thorp Reed, which represents Corning; Tucker Arensberg,
representing insurance underwriters; and Dinsmore & Shohl,
representing future claimants.


ASBESTOS UPDATE: Telstra Faces Giant Asbestos Liability
-------------------------------------------------------
Marcus Priest and Jenny Wiggins, writing for Financial Review,
reported that one of Australia's leading asbestos lawyers believes
Telstra faces a massive unquantifiable liability from the removal
of ageing asbestos lining from hundreds of thousands of
telecommunications pits and pipes.

According to the report, Turner Freeman managing partner Armando
Gardiman said Telstra had been long aware of its potential
exposure to liability for asbestos-related claims arising from the
pits, as it had been paying out former lines workers who
contracted the deadly mesothelioma disease since the mid-1980s.

Telstra chief executive David Thodey will meet Federal Workplace
Relations Minister Bill Shorten, Communications Minister Stephen
Conroy, NBN Co and unions in Canberra, the report related.  They
will debate calls for an asbestos compensation fund sparked by
claims that residents and workers have been exposed to asbestos in
the construction of the national broadband network.

But in a sign the telecoms group is worried by the financial and
reputation risks associated with its handling of asbestos
exposure, it has appointed PwC to provide advice on its asbestos
systems and processes, the report related.  As well, it has put
PwC's executive director of network construction, John Gibbs, in
charge of asbestos management.

AFR Weekend reported there had been claims of potential asbestos
exposure in suburban areas in NSW, Western Australia, South
Australia and Tasmania associated with the NBN rollout, the report
said. There were also claims truckloads of toxic material had been
dumped in Black Hill, Ballarat in Victoria.

Mr. Shorten has expressed some support for a special fund to be
established, similar to the funds set up by building materials
groups James Hardie and CSR, to compensate workers.

Mr. Gardiman said many Telstra pits made by James Hardie and CSR
subsidiary Wunderlich contained all three forms of asbestos --
including the most deadly blue type from Wittenoom.

           'HUNDREDS OF THOUSANDS OF PITS IN PLACE'

"For nearly three decades, the Postmaster General, and then later
Telecom, used asbestos cement pits and asbestos cement pipes in
order to run telephone wires and connect domestic users all over
the country," Mr. Gardiman said.

"There must be hundreds of thousands of pits in place and tens of
thousands of kilometres of conduit in the ground. Unless it is
handled within the code of practice [for handling hazardous
material] every employee or contractor will have a risk of
contracting diseases that won't manifest for 20 or 40 years."

The asbestos that had been used was now old and would crumble
easily, he added.

"If the contractors are disturbing material by removing existing
pipes or pits and leaving it lying around, they are exposing
community members to risk, particularly kids.

"If the facts as being presented now are as bad as alleged, then
Telstra conceivably faces community claims for the first time in
its history, and given they own the pits and the pipes, then
conceivably it's their liability."

As well as calling for a compensation fund, the Communications,
Electrical and Plumbing Union (CEPU) has criticised NBN Co for not
doing enough to ensure workers on the broadband network were
better trained to deal with asbestos.

"They've [NBN Co] failed in their obligation to ensure there's a
safe workplace and they've certainly got to pick the ball up,"
said Allen Hicks, the CEPU's assistant secretary .

"Senior management, in our view, need to be held to account."


ASBESTOS UPDATE: Sick Driver Appeals to Bradford Ex-Workmates
---------------------------------------------------------------
Dolores Cowburn, writing for Telegraph & Argus, reported that a
father-of-three suffering from a deadly lung disease is appealing
for ex-colleagues to come forward with information about working
practices at his former employers.

According to the report, Kenneth Kell, from Allerton, a former
heavy machine operator, was diagnosed with incurable pleural
thickening, which is linked to asbestos exposure and causes the
lining of the lungs to thicken resulting in serious breathing
difficulties, in 2011.

The 52-year-old, who is known as Kenny to his family and friends,
worked as a machine operator and driver for Gomersall Demolition,
who were based at Marshfield Street in Bradford, the report said.

Kenny worked for them for approximately two years from 1979 to
1981/82 and can recall regularly coming into contact with the
deadly asbestos dust whilst working for the company.

It involved him undertaking demolition work at various mills,
garages and factories throughout West Yorkshire, including a
Harvesters restaurant in Bradford.

He also remembers regularly coming into contact with asbestos
sheets and insulation boards which he removed from buildings and
broke down into pieces before they were disposed of.

He has now instructed specialist industrial disease lawyers at
Irwin Mitchell and together they are appealing for Kenny's ex
colleagues to come forward with information about the working
conditions at Gomersall Demolition and key information about the
firm's insurance company.

Nicola Handley, an industrial disease expert from Irwin Mitchell's
Leeds office, said: "Pleural thickening is a serious illness which
can be very distressing for victims like Kenny and their families.
More than 2,000 people die from asbestos-related illnesses every
year despite the fact employers knew how dangerous it was.

"Kenny wasn't given any protective clothing or warned about the
dangers of working with asbestos during his career. It is awful
that he is now ill simply because he went to work every day."

The 52-year-old only realised that he was seriously ill when he
collapsed whilst at work in October 2011.

He underwent a bronchoscopy, a biopsy and drainage of a pleural
effusion at St James Hospital in Leeds before he was diagnosed
with the debilitating condition.

He said: "My job at Gomersall Demolition involved driving heavy
construction vehicles, which had a pulveriser or a breaker on the
end to demolish the old factories, mills and garages we worked on.

"Most of the time I carried out my work outside of the factories
or mills we were demolishing but sometimes I had to drive into the
premises and work from the inside, which created an even dustier
environment.

"I regularly used the machines to break up large asbestos sheets
before they were disposed off in skips.

"It was incredibly dirty and dusty work and I got covered in dust
every day. Even though I was sat in my cabin. I couldn't help but
breathe it in, particularly when it was warm when I left the
windows of my cabin open. I was never warned about how dangerous
asbestos could be for my health or given a mask to wear to protect
me from the worst of it.

"It's absolutely devastating to think that I could be suffering
from this terrible illness simply because I went to work every day
all those years ago.

"I hope my ex workmates will come forward with information about
the working conditions I endured and who the firm's insurance
company is so that I can get answers to the many questions I have
and get the justice I deserve before it's too late."

Anyone with information about the working conditions at Gomersall
Demolition, or the company's insurers, should contact Nicola
Handley at Irwin Mitchell's Leeds office on (0113) 220 6233 or
e-mail nicola.handley@irwinmitchell.com


ASBESTOS UPDATE: Researcher Named West Australian of the Year
-------------------------------------------------------------
Robyn Preston, writing for WAToday, reported that ground-breaking
asbestos cancer researcher and author Professor Bruce Robinson was
named West Australian of the Year at a gala ceremony at Crown's
Grand Ballroom.

According to the report, professor Robinson was recognised for
work in founding a clinic to care for patients and a community
project aimed to connect children with father figures.

As co-founder of award winning Fathering Project, he has also
written three books based on research into the reduction of youth-
based substance abuse and crime through strong father figures, the
report said.

Professor Robinson noted his personal philosophy was to turn
compassion into action -- an outlook that likely led to his
expansive accomplishments in caring for asbestos victims and
leading a team which discovered new treatments, the report
related.

Celebrate WA Chairman John Poynton said the awards were an
opportunity to acknowledge the contribution extraordinary people
are making to the State, the report further related.

"There are many people making a significant contribution to
communities across Western Australia; raising our potential and
increasing our profile both nationally and internationally," he
said.

Renamed from WA Citizen of the Year Awards, the 2013 Western
Australian of the Year Awards, recognise achievements across a
broad cross-section of the community.

Nineteen finalists were chosen across six categories, among them
well known faces Matthew Pavlich, Dale Alcock and Johnny Young.

"It's an exciting time to be a Western Australian and I'm proud to
be part of such an important celebration, which recognises
homegrown talent and dedication," Mr Poynton said.


ASBESTOS UPDATE: Horsham Family Angered at Asbestos Discovery
-------------------------------------------------------------
The West Sussex County Times reported that a family from Horsham
were shocked to discover asbestos in their home, two years after a
house survey which should have identified it.

According to the report, Dad Colin Smith told the County Times
they will have to move into a hotel for five nights while the
asbestos is removed.

"It's not so easy when you've got three children," he told the
news agency, "to be stuck in the one room for five days. I keep
asking why it was overlooked in the first place."

They moved into the Saxon Weald home several years ago, after
arranging a mutual exchange, the report related.

A house survey should have revealed the asbestos, but instead it
was found in the eaves by Mr Smith while he was clearing space for
contractors to get in and look for the cause of a damp problem,
the report added.

He realised what it was because he has spent much of his life
working as a building labourer -- Mr Smith pointed out that
another person in that situation might not have recognised it.

He immediately stopped what he was doing and notified Saxon Weald.

"They asked: 'Can you not just work around it?', which I thought
was just absolutely disgraceful really," said Mr Smith.

"It's not just what's happening to me and my family -- it's what
could have happened.

"I want them to realise it, to look at what could have happened
because they haven't done their jobs properly."

When a sample was sent off for testing, it proved to be a white
and brown mix.

'Brown' asbestos, sometimes known by the trade name Amosite, is
regarded as one of the most dangerous types, and was among the
first to be banned in the UK.

"I just want our complaint to be heard," Mr Smith said, adding:
"It's not as if we're moaning, groaning tenants who complain about
every tiny little thing."

He said they can't afford to pay up front for legal help, but
they'd be glad to hear from any lawyer who might be able to help.

Saxon Weald have been approached for a comment.


ASBESTOS UPDATE: Syracuse Grand Jury Investigating Projects
-----------------------------------------------------------
Kristen Griffin, writing for Mesothelioma.com, reported that on
June 1, federal and state agents, clad in hazmat gear, raided
Hilton Center in Rensselaer, New York while a Grand Jury in
Syracuse is investigating asbestos projects connected to the
property. According to a subpoena acquired by the Albany Times
Union, the Grand Jury is investigating "asbestos related projects"
conducted at Hilton Center.

In April, the city of Rensselaer shut down the property because it
was unsafe, according to the report. Further, Arthur Hilton, the
owner of Hilton Center, was illegally renting out the space.

Renovated into a "professional center," the former mill site now
is a host to various arts organizations, the report said. During
the renovation, Arthur Hilton pled guilty to removing asbestos
from the property illegally which is in direct violation to the
Clean Air Act. The illegally abated asbestos was subsequently
dumped near the border of Massachusetts instead of being properly
disposed of at a hazardous materials collection site.

State and federal officials first took notice of Hilton's
construction practices back in 2000 when heating insulation and
plumbing materials containing asbestos were found in bags near the
property.

Asbestos is a highly toxic carcinogen, responsible for several
serious medical conditions including asbestosis, lung cancer and
mesothelioma cancer. Though a popular misconception, asbestos is
not a manmade, manufactured material; in fact, asbestos is a set
of naturally-occurring minerals mined for its durability, flame
resistance and insulating properties. Asbestos, however, was often
combined with other materials during manufacturing such as cement,
metals and fibers typically for construction use.

Due to its toxicity, removing asbestos without following proper
protocols or safety procedures is potentially lethal not only to
the workers but also to anyone in the area. Improperly containing
asbestos may lead to air or environmental contamination. Breathing
in this toxic air can lead to immediate and long-term health
conditions including mesothelioma.

At this point, the State Department of Environmental Conservation,
Environmental Protection Agency or the United States Attorney's
Offices are not commenting on the on-going investigation into
Hilton Center or Arthur Hilton. Hilton did not know why state and
federal officials raided his property.


ASBESTOS UPDATE: Free School in Wembley Hit with Asbestos Claims
----------------------------------------------------------------
Matt Dathan, writing for Brent & Kilburn Times, reported that
worries have been raised about possible asbestos in a new free
school in Wembley Park which opponents say isn't needed anyway.

Michaela Community School, approved by the Department of
Education, plans to open at Arena House in North End Road in
September next year, the report said.

The founding governors have been announced and are holding an
information event on June 15 at Brent Town Hall to boost intake,
the report related.

The school, which was originally to open in South London but was
twice rejected, has faced opposition from Wembley residents and
parents and teaching unions due to the high number of secondary
schools in the area, the report related. There are also concerns
over the suitability of the building.

Jean Roberts, London executive for the Association for Teachers
and Lecturers, said: "We're almost certain the building has
asbestos and it's right next to the railway line."

She added: "There's simply no need for the school in Wembley Park.
It's in completely the wrong place; it would be competing with
schools in an area where there are plenty, rather than actually
adding to the community.

"It's also looking to get a fairly exclusive group of children
there; it's not like your ordinary children because it's going to
be more academic."

However, the school's chair of governors, Suella Fernandes, said
the school's focus on academic excellence would make a positive
contribution to the area.

She said: "Michaela will be a school that expects excellence and
only 'outstanding' will do."

A spokesman for MCS said about 200 parents had registered an
interest.

He said: "We are awaiting the results of an asbestos survey to
reveal whether there is any asbestos in the building.

"If the survey does reveal incidences of asbestos on site, it will
be dealt with in accordance with all health and safety
legislation."

He added: "The building has been used as a former college and has
been approved for use by the DfE, the Education Funding Agency and
the Michaela Community School Trust."


ASBESTOS UPDATE: $600,000 Roof Job to Change Ash Street Jail
------------------------------------------------------------
Simon Rios, writing for SouthCoast Today, reported that roofers
are fast at work on top of the Ash Street Jail, four weeks into a
$600,000 project slated to be finished at the end of June.

According to the report, Ed Nicolau, director of facilities for
the Bristol County Sheriff's Department, said planning began a
year ago to reshingle the 22,500-square-foot roof which had leaks
and falling tiles.

"We had repairs maybe (two) years ago, and found there was more
and more repairs that were needed, and then they decided to just
do the roof," he told the news agency.

Nicolau said the state Division of Capital Asset Management and
Maintenance, which funded the project, conducted a study on the
130-year-old building and concluded the work was necessary.

In spite of the shingles' slate-like appearance, Nicolau said
"slate wasn't even a consideration." The asphalt shingles were
chosen for their 50-year warranty in addition to matching the
existing decor of the building. They are rated for hurricane-force
winds.

Although builders don't know the vintage of the asbestos shingles
that were removed, a roofer on the site estimated the roof was
last shingled in the 1920s or 1930s, when the style was common.

According to the National Park Service, asbestos shingles came
into fashion in the early 20th century, and were preferred for
being lightweight, cheap and fireproof.

After an open bidding process, a contract was awarded to Mill City
Construction, with an array of subcontractors handling roofing,
carpentry, masonry and asbestos removal.

The job also entails brickwork on the roof and carpentry on the
cupolas. Nicolau said the wood underneath the shingles wasn't in
need of replacement, nor were the copper gutters surrounding the
roof's edge.

The Ash Street Jail has been an occasional source of controversy
in recent years, with some calling for the facility to be retired
as a prison.

"In days gone by, people were saying that he should build a new
jail," said Bernie Sullivan, a spokesman for the sheriff's
department.

"And (Sheriff Tom Hodgson) said, 'Would you rather I built a jail
or a school for children?'"

Peggi Medeiros, a New Bedford historian, said she was glad to hear
of the upgrade to the historic building, describing it as one of
the most important in the city. "You could trace the entire
history of New Bedford by tracing the history of the Ash Street
Jail," she said.

Medeiros said the investment suggests that the building won't be
going away any time soon. "Not having to worry about that one is
good news," she said. "I'm not sure how delighted all the inmates
are with it . . ."

The Ash Street Jail was built in 1888 at the approximate cost of
$80,000. The jail's most famous inhabitant was Lizzie Borden, the
Fall River woman acquitted in the axe-murder of her father and
stepmother in 1892.

Serving State Police and local departments, today the jail's 220
cells are occupied mostly by detainees with pending criminal
cases.


ASBESTOS UPDATE: The Block Sky Criticised by Law Firm Over Fibro
----------------------------------------------------------------
Colin Vickery, writing for The Herald Sun, reported that a leading
law firm has accused the makers of The Block Sky High of not
broadcasting warnings about asbestos.

The fourth episode of the Channel 9 renovation series showed
contestant Jarrod Coppock removing vermiculite, which can contain
asbestos, according to the report.

Slater & Gordon asbestos lawyer Margaret Kent said the show sent
the wrong message by repeatedly showing Coppock creating clouds of
dust while using power tools to remove the textured ceiling
material.

Footage shows him declaring he would use a jackhammer to remove
the vermiculite from the ceiling before setting to work without a
face mask. Dust is seen floating through the room, occupied by a
camera crew and tradesmen.

Ms Kent acknowledges that the show's website highlights the
potential dangers of disturbing vermiculite. But she said these
were not pointed out to viewers of the May 15 episode.

"That The Block's website discusses the potential for vermiculite
to contain asbestos probably indicates that the material had been
analysed and deemed safe," she said.

"Anyone watching that footage in isolation will just assume that
vermiculite is safe to disturb without wearing protective clothing
or having to seek professional advice."

Nine confirmed a hazardous materials audit was done on all
properties on The Block before any work. Official tests for
asbestos were conducted on the vermiculite at the former motel in
South Melbourne.

"Nine did not consider it was appropriate to include an asbestos
warning in relation to the vermiculite removal given (it) did not
contain any asbestos," Nine's Victoria Buchan said.

Researchers are concerned that there will be a "third wave" of
asbestos victims: DIY home renovators who become exposed to
potentially deadly mesothelioma-causing asbestos fibres, present
in many homes built before 1987.

"It is not reasonable to expect a prime-time TV audience will go
online after the show to verify the safety of the contestants'
activities," Ms Kent said. "People need to know that even a single
exposure to asbestos can cause a deadly disease like mesothelioma
for which there is no known cure."


ASBESTOS UPDATE: Asbestos Compensation Fund Gets AUD185MM Payment
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Bridget Carter, writing for The Australian, reported that a
compensation fund set up for asbestos victims received $177.5
million or AUD184.7 million payments from James Hardie during the
12 months to March.

According to the report, the Asbestos Injuries Compensation Fund
was set up in 2007 to compensate sufferers of asbestos-related
disease.  So far, James Hardie has contributed AUD599.2 million to
the fund.


ASBESTOS UPDATE: Chrysotile Variety, An Ideal Roofing Option
------------------------------------------------------------
The Hindu Business Line reported that asbestos Cement Products
Manufacturers Association has said that the chrysotile variety
used in India is safe for roofing and piping.

According to the report, asbestos cement is the most ideal roofing
sheets for warehouse, factory or low-cost housing, a spokesperson
for the association said.

The report related that asbestos industry had received a big boost
when the Punjab High Court ruled in its favour, refusing to ban
its application and use in the country, he added.

The order was delivered on February 6, 2012, by the High Court of
Punjab Haryana in the Gobind Thukral and others Vs Union of India
in Writ no. 21166 of 2011.

Earlier in January 2011, the Supreme Court also had refused to ban
manufacturing and use of asbestos products.

Asbestos is a naturally occurring mineral found in almost two-
thirds of the earth's crust. Depending on the region, every
individual breathes in about 10,000 to 15,000 asbestos fibres each
day.

There is no risk in living or working under chrysotile asbestos
cement roof as the fibers are bonded and completely locked-in with
cement, the spokesperson said.

These products have been in use in the country for over 75 years
now. They are practically ageless and maintenance-free whereas
metal sheets corrode and deteriorate with age and exposure.

They are also easy-to-install, strong and durable, apart from
being cost-effective for weaker sections of society.

Russia, China, Thailand, Brazil, Mexico, Ukraine and other
emerging nations are among largest users of asbestos cement
products, the spokesperson added.

As regards claims linking materials containing asbestos with cause
health hazards, he clarified that various studies by official
agencies of the Government have proven otherwise.

Issues reported in the West in the past on extensive and
uncontrolled usage at that time of the blue and brown varieties of
asbestos, production and usage of which has since been banned all
over the world.


ASBESTOS UPDATE: Fly-tipper Fined for Dumping in Medway
-------------------------------------------------------
Joe Bill, writing for Kent News, reported that a careless fly-
tipper has been ordered by a court to pay more than GBP2,000 after
dumping asbestos sheeting between two houses.

According to the report, Lee Terry, 34, of Mierscourt Road, also
in Rainham, had offered to get rid of the sheeting from his father
in law's house as a favour.  But when he was unable to leave the
hazardous material at a waste site, he decided to drop it
illegally.

The tipper then dumped the asbestos among 40 bags of rubbish left
between two houses in Roberts Road and Century Road, Rainham, the
report said.  However, Terry was spotted by an eagle eyed resident
who noted the telephone number on the side of his van.

This resident then telephoned Terry and complained that one of his
vans had dumped waste. Terry returned and removed most of the
waste, which he then arranged to be disposed of properly.

But a small amount of the material was left behind and laboratory
tests showed it was Chrysotile Asbestos, a known cancer causing
substance.

Medway Council prosecuted and Terry appeared before Medway
Magistrates Court on Tuesday, May 21.

He admitted he knew he was dumping asbestos, but said he did so
after becoming "embarrassed" when he could not dispose of it as he
had promised his father in law he would.

The court told Terry this was a serious matter and that such a
penalty could involve imprisonment but in view of his early guilty
plea, he was instead fined GBP1,000 plus a GBP100 victim
surcharge.

He was ordered to pay Medway Council GBP1,028 in costs.

Community safety chief Cllr David Carr, said: "Fly-tipping is
irresponsible and thoughtless at the best of times.

"That is particularly so when you are dumping a hazardous material
such as asbestos. I am pleased this person has been been made to
see the error of his ways and hope this sends a strong message to
others."


ASBESTOS UPDATE: No Answers for Gosforth Mum Exposed to Asbestos
----------------------------------------------------------------
Chronicle Live reported that an inquiry into why a pregnant mum
was left with exposed asbestos in her home has concluded -- but
will not be made public.

According to the report, having carried out its own investigation
establishing what happened at the house in Gosforth, Newcastle
City Council will not be revealing its findings.

This blanket block on information stretches to mum Michelle Lee
who first flagged up the issue believing there had been a
potentially dangerous lapse in safety procedure at her home, the
report said.

A city council spokesman said the investigation was "internal at
this stage" and was carried out ahead of a follow up investigation
next month by the Health and Safety Executive.

Feeling in the dark about the ongoing situation Michelle, 28, who
lives in Jubilee Crescent with her seven-old daughter Regina,
said: "No one has contacted me to let me know what is going on, I
didn't even know an investigation had been carried out. I feel as
if I've been left in the lurch and am still trying to get the
money needed to cover the cost of items removed from my home in
case they were contaminated."

The ordeal for Michelle began last month when contractors City
Build, part of Newcastle City Council, visited the Your Homes
Newcastle (YHN) managed property to replace a fire.

During the job a plasterer disturbed potentially dangerous
asbestos spores, releasing them into Michelle's living room.

With the plasterer leaving the job unfinished Michelle says she
immediately reported the discovery to City Build and while a
senior staff member visited her no action was taken to clear up
the dust and debris or seal the suspected site of the asbestos.

It was only three days later that staff returned, sealed the area
and then that week stripped the house of any furnishings that
could have been potentially contaminated.

Clothes, trainers, the laundry basket, sofas, dining room chairs,
carpets, blinds and curtains were all removed. Both YHN and the
council say the appropriate air tests have been carried out and
findings were "well below any level that might be harmful . . ."

However importantly for Michelle, who was living with Regina in
the house for three days before the asbestos was sealed, it is not
yet known when the tests were carried out.

Having so far been offered only a fraction of the GBP4,000-plus
total of her destroyed items and furnishings Michelle is still
battling to be fully compensated and has hired a solicitor to help
fight her corner.

Now four months pregnant she said: "I've been getting anxiety
attacks and migraines but, being pregnant, I can't take anything
for it. I'm still trying to get the amount needed to replace like-
for-like the items they took from the house."

A Newcastle City Council spokesman said: "The council is currently
investigating Miss Lee's case and the actions of its officers. As
well as this internal process, the Health and Safety Executive
will launch its own investigation into the case.

"It would be inappropriate to comment further at this stage."


ASBESTOS UPDATE: QEII Track Reopened After Asbestos Scare
---------------------------------------------------------
Scarlett Cvitanovich, writing for New Zealand News, reported that
the public walking track near north east Christchurch's QEII
Stadium, which was part of an asbestos scare, has now reopened.

According to the report, the Canterbury Earthquake Recovery
Authority advised that a small amount of asbestos piping was
recently found at the QEII site during the demolition.

After testing of the area, it has been confirmed there is no risk
to the public, the report said.

Further testing is still ongoing at the site for the next five to
six weeks.


ASBESTOS UPDATE: Homes Evacuated as Fire Sparks Fibro Scare
-----------------------------------------------------------
STV News reported that several homes near a country park have been
evacuated amid fears that a fire in a disused tin factory could
have released asbestos into the air.

According to the report, firefighters were called to Eglinton
Country Park, near Irvine, after reports that a large heap of
rubbish was on fire.

A plume of thick smoke rose up from the building as specialists
investigated reports that the building contained asbestos
sheeting, the report said.

The park was cordoned off by police and residents living nearby
were removed from their homes as a precaution, a spokesman for the
Scottish Fire and Rescue Service said.

A woman was taken to Crosshouse Hospital, near Kilmarnock,
suffering breathing difficulties, but she is not believed to be
seriously ill.

Scientific advisers set up a mobile laboratory at the scene to
analyse debris from the fire for traces of asbestos.


ASBESTOS UPDATE: Fibro Link Ruled Out in Ex-Dockyard Worker Death
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Daily Echo reported that a former dockyard worker's fatal lung
cancer was not asbestos-related, an inquest heard.

According to the report, Peter Pawling, of April Grove, Sarisbury
Green, died aged 69 at Countess Mountbatten House hospice, West
End, on December 30 last year.

The report related he was a chartered accountant but worked at
Portsmouth Docks as an apprentice for five years from 1958-1963,
where he was regularly exposed to asbestos. However, no fibres
were found in a postmortem examination or histology tests, his
inquest in Winchester was told.

A verdict of death due to natural causes was recorded, the report
said.


ASBESTOS UPDATE: Riverside Residents Living on "Death Row"
----------------------------------------------------------
Driffield Times & Post reported that residents in the Riverside
area of Driffield fear they are living on death row because land
near their homes is polluted by toxic waste and asbestos.

According to the report, repeated calls for action to clear up the
site over the past three years have fallen on deaf ears, according
to town councillor Kevin Stack.

The report related that he claimed that the former East Riding of
Yorkshire Council owned depot at Riverside was insecure, overgrown
and was a magnet for fly tippers, attracting rats.

And he said that children regularly broke into the site to play
there -- putting themselves and other at risk by stirring up the
asbestos, which sends the deadly fibres into the air.

On Tuesday, Coun Stack made an impassioned address to his fellow
town councillors who agreed that ERYC should be asked to clear the
site and make it safe.

"I have been campaigning now for three years to have the former
council depot cleaned up because of toxic waste and asbestos, said
Coun Stack. "There are piles and piles of asbestos, which is
potentially lethal."

He said he had liaised with the East Riding Council many times but
nothing had been done.

"Asbestos is a killer and the residents on Riverside feel like
they are living on death row, "he said. "Children are playing with
the contaminated waste on the land and the council and the owners
have failed to secure the old depot -- there is just a little lock
on it and kids have ripped it off.

"I don't just mean kids at Riverside because the area is a magnet
for kids from all round Riverhead.

"Asbestos when manufactured in its whole form is relatively safe
but it is when it is broken it exposes its deadly fibres into the
area, Asbestos sheets are made up of many fibres but it only takes
one rogue fibre to enter the human lung to set off a chain
reaction which can result in asbestosis and cancer and an
agonising death. These fibres are being blown around in the air
around Riverhead."

Coun Stack said those at risk include tourists who visit the area
in large numbers, residents, skate park users, business park
workers and children at a nursery -- which are all close to the
old depot.

"Residents are also complaining that there is an increase in rats
coming from the waste land through waste which has been dumped on
the old depot which is likely to increase because of the
introduction of fortnightly bin collections.

"Residents also say that overgrown weeds are also encroaching from
the land into their well maintained gardens."

"I feel, as a councillor, it is time to take action and I ask all
councillors for their full support so that all residents can live
in a safe environment.

Coun Joyce Fletcher said: "The best thing we can hope for is to
make it safe and try and discourage people from going in there."

Coun Phil Stocker said: "Our local MP says the East Riding Council
has the power to send in a team, clean it up and then charge the
landowner. They should get their finger out and so it."

Coun Steve Poessl said: "Get the health and safety down there and
environmental health, embarrass the East Riding into doing
something."


ASBESTOS UPDATE: Toxic Dust Taken and Found from Newport Market
---------------------------------------------------------------
South Wales Argus reported that asbestos has been found and
removed from Newport Market.

But Newport council said there was no risk to the health of
shoppers or traders while the removal was carried out, according
to the report.

"Asbestos-containing material" was discovered during refurbishment
works being carried out at the shopping venue, according to the
authority.

A spokeswoman said work was immediately stopped until a specialist
firm could be brought in to remove the material safely.

"As this area was already closed off because of the refurbishment
work, there was no risk to the health of shoppers or traders while
the removal was carried out," the spokeswoman said.

Work is now complete and although it did cause a delay the Newport
Market project is due for completion this summer.

Costs for removing the asbestos will be covered by the budget for
the scheme -- said in 2012 to be GBP750,000.

A formal written answer to David Fouweather from Newport cabinet
members John Richards and Mark Whitcutt said the health and safety
executive had to be notified, adding a four week delay.

He was told it was "highly unlikely" any more asbestos will be
found in the market, and that the project is due for completion in
mid-July.

He was told there had been structural issues that had slowed down
the progress within the market, as well as the discovery of
asbestos.

Traders have been informed the reasons for the delays, Cllr
Fouweather was told.

"The architects and engineers produced what they thought were
suitable plans for particular areas of the market," the cabinet
members said.

"However upon breaking out these areas, they have discovered a
number of surprising elements of design, which has subsequently
led to a re-design by the architects and engineers."

The market refurbishment aims to regenerate the High Street end of
the city centre, enhance the grade-II listed building with new
units to encourage restaurants and cafes to move in.


ASBESTOS UPDATE: Daughter of Exposure Victim Appeals for Info
-------------------------------------------------------------
Sam Chetwynd, writing for Worksop Guardian, reported that the
daughter of a former sweet factory worker who died of an asbestos-
related disease is appealing for her mother's former colleagues
and neighbours to share information as they may hold vital clues
as to how and why she came into contact with the deadly dust.

According to the report, inquest was adjourned so that Linda
Hunt's family could carry out further investigations as to why she
died from asbestos-related cancer, mesothelioma, aged 66, in
December last year.

Her daughter Joanne Lowde, 42, has instructed specialist
industrial illness lawyers at Irwin Mitchell to investigate and
help provide answers as to exactly how her mother became exposed
to deadly asbestos dust, the report said.

Linda, whose maiden name was Dent, started working at the Trebor
sweets factory in Chesterfield after she left school although very
little is known about the working conditions and whether there was
asbestos present in the building.

When Linda was around 20 years old, she moved to the Creswell
Model Village where she lived until around 1975 and then again
from 1979 to 1992. The Model Village was built in 1895 by the
Bolsover Colliery Company to house the workers of the Creswell
Colliery and their families.

When Linda moved to the Model Village, she was married to a miner,
but they later separated. In the early 1970s, new kitchens and
bathrooms were fitted in the houses in the Model Village. It is
believed that the previous kitchens and bathrooms, which were
replaced in 2001, may have contained asbestos materials.

Joanne and her lawyers at Irwin Mitchell are now appealing for
Linda's ex-colleagues and neighbours to come forward to help piece
together information about the conditions at the Trebor factory
and during refurbishments at the Creswell Model Village.

Joanne, who still lives in Creswell, said: "My mother was hard
working, and always looking out for others. She became very ill so
quickly. She only found out that it could be asbestos-related
shortly before she died and wasn't strong enough to help figure
out where she had been exposed."

"Hopefully people will be able to help us and anyone with any
information should get in touch with Irwin Mitchell so that we can
try and get answers about how she was exposed to asbestos."

Simone Hardy, from Irwin Mitchell's Sheffield office, said:
"Asbestos-related diseases can take decades after exposure to the
harmful material to fully develop. This can make it difficult to
pin-point exactly how and where people were exposed, although
often it is via their place of work or property refurbishments."

"Unfortunately, very little is known about Linda's exposure to
asbestos, but it is hoped that her ex-colleagues at Trebor in
Chesterfield and her neighbours in Creswell can help shed some
light on how she came into contact with the deadly dust."

Anyone with information about the working conditions at the Trebor
factory in Chesterfield in the 1950s and 1960s and about the
possible use of asbestos in the Creswell Model Village in the
1970s should contact Simone Hardy at Irwin Mitchell on 0114 274
4420 or e-mail simone.hardy@irwinmitchell.com.


ASBESTOS UPDATE: Man in Court on School Asbestos Charges
--------------------------------------------------------
Sam Chetwynd, writing for Retford Today, reported that a South
Leverton man has admitted a dozen charges relating to the removal
of asbestos at a former Retford school.

According to the report, James Roger Carlton pleaded guilty at
Worksop Magistrates' Court to charges which relate with
disregarding the presence of asbestos insulation board at the site
of the former King Edwar VI School, on London Road.

The case was sent to Nottingham Crown Court for sentencing on 17th
June, the report said.


ASBESTOS UPDATE: Mesothelioma Experts Present New Findings
----------------------------------------------------------
An international roster of experts on malignant pleural
mesothelioma (MPM) gathered on Saturday, May 18, in Santa Monica,
Calif., to discuss their latest research findings on new lung-
sparing therapies for MPM, a rare form of cancer that results from
exposure to asbestos and commonly affects the pleura, the lining
of the chest.

Hosted by UCLA and the Pacific Heart, Lung and Blood Institute,
the 3rd Annual International Symposium on Lung-Sparing Therapies
for Malignant Pleural Mesothelioma focused on research aimed at
preserving vital lung function in MPM patients. Mesothelioma
experts now agree that extrapleural pneumonectomy, which involves
removal of the lung and surrounding diseased tissues, does not
have a place in treatment of patients with this asbestos-related
problem. Presentations included the latest surgical techniques for
removal of cancerous tumors and a variety of adjunctive
techniques.

Symposium leader, Robert B. Cameron, MD, FACS, Director of the
UCLA Mesothelioma Comprehensive Research Program and Chief of
Thoracic Surgery at the West Los Angeles VA Medical Center,
presented treatment strategies and results of multimodality
treatment of patients with sarcomatoid-type MPM, the fastest
spreading and most difficult to treat form of the disease. He also
discussed current thermal research at UCLA and the effectiveness
of cryoablation in killing MPM cancer cells.

The symposium's distinguished faculty included Joseph S.
Friedberg, MD, of the University of Pennsylvania, who presented
promising new photodynamic therapy results using light to directly
kill cancer cells; Olga Olevsky, MD, of UCLA Medical Center, who
discussed results of a variety of novel treatment strategies;
Italian Radiologist Marco Trovo, MD, who presented the early
results of tomotherapy techniques following pleurectomy; and
Raffit Hassan, MD, of the National Cancer Institute, who discussed
anti-mesothelin agents for mesothelioma therapy.

"There were a number of incredibly exciting studies that far
exceed what we've seen before," said Dr. Cameron. "All of our
collective efforts are finally beginning to pay off in new
treatments that truly affect patients."

This CME-granting event, which was held at the Sheraton Delfina
Hotel, was attended by physicians, nurses, other medical
professionals, as well as mesothelioma patients and others with an
interest in advances in MPM treatments.

About The Pacific Meso Center

The Pacific Meso Center (PMC) is a division of the Pacific Heath,
Lung & Blood Institute, a 501(c)3 nonprofit medical research
institute established in 2002, which is focused on the treatment
and prevention of malignant pleural mesothelioma (MPM). The
exploration of innovative ideas forms the foundation of PMC's
unique research program and provides the promise of future
treatment breakthroughs. PMC is dedicated to educating the public
on asbestos-related disease and informing them of their treatment
options. PMC also connects newly diagnosed patients with patients
that have been trough treatment and provides assistance and
emotional support.

For further information, please contact:

Robert B. Cameron, M.D.  Professor of Cardiothoracic Surgery and
Surgical Oncology Director, UCLA Comprehensive Mesothelioma
Program David Geffen School of Medicine at UCLA 10780 Santa Monica
Boulevard Suite 100 Los Angeles, CA 90025-7613 (310) 470-8980
(voice) (310) 470-3742 (fax) Email

Contact:  Clare Cameron 310-478-4678


ASBESTOS UPDATE: Asbestos Bill Ignores Justice for Vets, Citizens
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Rep. Nick Milroy wrote to Superior Telegram on the proposed
asbestos legislation.  He stated, "[H]onoring and protecting
Wisconsin's veterans should always be a shared value among
Wisconsin legislators, regardless of party. As a veteran, I've
seen firsthand the sacrifices these brave men and women make every
day to serve our country and keep us safe.

That is why I am so troubled by the actions of my Republican
colleagues in the state Assembly who knowingly voted to take vital
protection away from veterans. After hearing moving testimony from
veterans, they decided to make it more difficult for patients,
including veterans, who have been diagnosed with mesothelioma to
get justice after they have been exposed to asbestos.

I'm particularly disappointed by the Republican legislators who
chose to ignore the strong opposition to this bill by veterans'
advocacy groups, such as the Wisconsin Veterans of Foreign Wars
and the Military Order of the Purple Heart.

On a party line vote, they even chose to abolish an amendment that
would have granted an exemption for veterans who were exposed to
asbestos while serving their country.

Veterans make up just eight percent of the population -- but 30
percent of people who suffer from mesothelioma are veterans. Many
Wisconsin veterans were exposed to asbestos during their military
service. And many others were exposed to asbestos while working
civilian jobs in factories, plants, shipyards and mills. Veterans
who are suffering from this deadly disease have already been
through enough -- we shouldn't be putting more obstacles in their
way.

Unfortunately, these kinds of anti-citizen proposals are all too
common in the Legislature lately.

Republicans are now pushing a budget measure that would make it
easier for predatory rent-to-own companies to take advantage of
consumers by no longer requiring them to disclose their interest
rates. These companies, along with payday lenders, are notorious
for setting up shop outside military bases.

These callous measures should not be our focus. We need to be
working on important issues, such as helping to create jobs,
reforming our troubled jobs agency and rebuilding Wisconsin's
middle class. This pattern of attacking workers, families and our
most vulnerable citizens needs to end now.

We must stand up and fight for Wisconsin veterans. They have
worked hard and given so much to protect us. It is our duty to
protect them as well."

Rep. Nick Milroy, D-South Range, represent the 73rd Assembly
District, which includes most of Douglas County.


ASBESTOS UPDATE: US Calls on High Court to Snub Pfizer Case
-----------------------------------------------------------
Greg Ryan of BankruptcyLaw360 reported that the U.S. solicitor
general told the Supreme Court that it should refuse to review the
Second Circuit's ruling that a ban on asbestos claims during
bankruptcy proceedings does not apply to allegations brought by
Baltimore Orioles owner Peter Angelos' law firm against Pfizer
Inc.

According to the report, Pfizer petitioned the Supreme Court in
September to overturn the decision, which held that the company
must face asbestos litigation related to its bankrupt subsidiary
Quigley Co. Inc.

                        About Quigley Co.

Quigley Co. was acquired by Pfizer in 1968 and sold small amounts
of products containing asbestos until the early 1970s.  In
September 2004, Pfizer and Quigley took steps that were intended
to resolve all pending and future claims against the Company and
Quigley in which the claimants allege personal injury from
exposure to Quigley products containing asbestos, silica or mixed
dust. Quigley filed for bankruptcy in 2004 and has a Chapter 11
plan and a settlement with Chrysler.

Quigley filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection (Bankr.
S.D.N.Y. Case No. 04-15739) on Sept. 3, 2004, to implement a
proposed global resolution of all pending and future asbestos-
related personal injury liabilities.

Lawrence V. Gelber, Esq., and Michael L. Cook, Esq., at Schulte
Roth & Zabel LLP, represent the Debtor in its restructuring
efforts.  Elihu Inselbuch Esq., at Caplin & Drysdale, Chartered,
represents the Official Committee of Unsecured Creditors.  When
the Debtor filed for protection from its creditors, it disclosed
$155,187,000 in total assets and $141,933,000 in total debts.

In April 2011, the bankruptcy judge approved a plan-support
agreement with Pfizer and an ad hoc committee representing 30,000
asbestos claimants.

A May 20, 2011 opinion by District Judge Richard Holwell concluded
that Pfizer was directly liable for some asbestos claims arising
from products sold by its now non-operating subsidiary Quigley.


ASBESTOS UPDATE: Asbestos Trustees Need to Open the Books
---------------------------------------------------------
The Madison-St. Clair Record reported that at a time of heightened
concern over terrorist attacks, it's appropriate to have a
national debate about the extent of, and legitimate limitations
on, our personal right to privacy.

According to the report, with security cameras nearly omnipresent
in many public places and drones likely to proliferate in coming
years, it behooves us to consider how much scrutiny we're willing
to tolerate before it becomes too pervasive.

Surely citizens of a free country have a right to know when we're
being watched, and by whom. Perhaps most important, we need to
know that someone trustworthy is watching the watchers, to ensure
that they don't abuse their snooping privileges.

We should be especially wary of surveillance agents and advocates
who resist having their own activities monitored, the report
added.

For that matter, any person in a position of authority or
performing a public role of any kind should expect to operate in
the open with all permissible transparency (excluding delicate
personnel matters, proprietary interests, genuine national
security secrets, etc.).

Though asbestos trusts perform an essentially public or quasi-
public function, its transactions too often are shrouded in
secrecy.

While we can think of numerous nefarious reasons for an asbestos
trustee to prefer dealing in the darkness, we've yet to hear a
laudable justification for this opacity, the report said.

We're not the only skeptics, the report added.

"With dozens of asbestos-related manufacturers forced into
bankruptcy, a burgeoning swath of the legal action has shifted out
of the courtroom and into a nebulous world of trusts that evaluate
claims and authorize payouts with little outside scrutiny," the
Wall Street Journal noted in a March report. "By design, many are
guided by teams of plaintiffs' lawyers -- the very group that
seeks money for clients and has earned billions of dollars in fees
on payouts through the years."

Just this week, the U.S. House Judiciary Committee approved
legislation requiring certain asbestos trusts to disclose claim
information quarterly and respond to information requests from
asbestos litigators, the report related.  We can't wait to hear
the objections from opponents.


ASBESTOS UPDATE: Winchburg Asbestos Disposal Fears are Baseless
---------------------------------------------------------------
The Linlithgow Gazette reported that grave concerns have been
sparked in Winchburgh after asbestos removal fears have surfaced
as new homes are built.

Acccording to the report, the Winchburgh development is one of the
UK's largest mixed use projects, with the first phase of 550 homes
being built over five separate plots. The first has been secured
by Barratt and Miller homes, currently building on site.

But Raymond McCabe, chair of Winchburgh Community Council,
believes the developers have put locals at risk, the report said.

He said: "I was informed around Christmas by members of the
community that asbestos was discovered where the house building is
now taking place, and that it was moved from the field to a
storage area adjacent to Auldcathie Landfill. The asbestos was
transported by dump trucks, uncovered, across a busy main road
where traffic was stopped to allow them to cross. Loads were
driven up a public right of way to the storage point. This
continued for weeks, if not months."

Raymond wants an investigation into what has been happening, and
for the site to be locked down.

But a spokesperson for Regenco Ltd, managers of the Winchburgh
Development said the allegations had no foundation saying: "We
have investigated these allegations in relation to the disposal of
asbestos and there is absolutely no substance to them whatsoever.
All operations on the Winchburgh Development are governed by
strict processes and procedures all in line with all health and
safety requirements."

A Scottish Environment Protection Agency (SEPA) spokesperson said
they were investigating.


ASBESTOS UPDATE: Pittsburgh Corning Plan Order Revised
------------------------------------------------------
On May 16, 2013, Judge Judith Fitzgerald of the U.S. Bankruptcy
Court issued a Memorandum Opinion and Interim Order confirming
Pittsburgh Corning Corporation's Third Amended Plan of
Reorganization, and provided interested parties the opportunity to
file motions for reconsideration so that the Court could correct
any typographical or scrivener's errors or any omissions or
inaccuracies.  Mt. McKinley Insurance Company and Everest
Reinsurance Company and Certain Underwriters at Lloyd's, London
and Certain London Market Insurers filed motions for
reconsideration.  A third motion for reconsideration was filed
collectively by the Debtor, the Asbestos Creditors' Committee, the
Future Claimants' Representative, Pittsburgh Plate Glass Company
and Corning Glass Works.  A hearing was held on May 23, 2013, and
the Court, in a revised memorandum opinion dated May 24, 2013,
revises in part the Interim Memorandum Opinion and Interim Order
to correct typographical and scrivener's errors and to make
certain of the changes requested by the parties.  Any change
requested in a motion for reconsideration not specifically
referred to herein or in the Confirmation Order is, to the extent
and in the form that a change requested by a party appears herein,
accepted by the Court.

In its motion for reconsideration Mt. McKinley argues that the PPG
and Corning Trust Funding Agreements are not signed and therefore
binding commitments to fund the Plan do not exist.  However, the
obligation to fund is dependent on entry of a final non-appealable
order confirming the Plan, the Court pointed out. Thus, any
commitment to fund is conditional on occurrence of that event and
only those parties who do fund will receive the benefit of the
channeling injunction, the Court said.

Judge Fitzgerald ruled that Mt. McKinley is not harmed by the
Plan.  Despite its protestations to the contrary, its burdens are
not increased and its rights under the subject insurance policies
are not impaired, Judge Fitzgerald said.

Mt. McKinley repeatedly argues the import of In re Global Indus.
Technologies, Inc., 645 F.3d 201 (3d Cir. 2011) ("GIT"), and its
applicability to Mt. McKinley's situation but the Plan does not
increase Mt. McKinley's burdens as identified in GIT, Judge
Fitzgerald said.  The GIT Court opined that the insurer's "quantum
of liability" may be affected as the result of what it perceived
to be a huge increase in silica claims and its concern that they
also may have alleged asbestos injuries, Judge Fitzgerald noted.
Moreover, Judge Fitzgerald pointed out that, (1) the case does not
involve silica at all; and (2) the number of asbestos claims
against the Debtor has not "exploded" postpetition.

A full-text copy of Judge Fitzgerald's Decision is available at
http://is.gd/syn0hGfrom Leagle.com.

                    About Pittsburgh Corning

Pittsburgh Corning Corporation filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy
protection (Bankr. W.D. Pa. Case No. 00-22876) on April 16, 2000,
to address numerous claims alleging personal injury from exposure
to asbestos.  At the time of the bankruptcy filing, there were
about 11,800 claims pending against the Company in state court
lawsuits alleging various theories of liability based on exposure
to Pittsburgh Corning's asbestos products and typically requesting
monetary damages in excess of $1 million per claim.

The Hon. Judith K. Fitzgerald presides over the case.  Reed Smith
LLP serves as counsel and Deloitte &Touche LLP as accountants to
the Debtor.

The United States Trustee appointed a Committee of Unsecured Trade
Creditors on April 28, 2000.  The Bankruptcy Court authorized the
retention of Leech, Tishman, Fuscaldo&Lampl, LLC, as counsel to
the Committee of Unsecured Trade Creditors, and Pascarella&
Wiker, LLP, as financial advisor.

The U.S. Trustee also appointed a Committee of Asbestos Creditors
on April 28, 2000.  The Bankruptcy Court authorized the retention
of these professionals by the Committee of Asbestos Creditors: (i)
Caplin&Drysdale, Chartered as Committee Counsel; (ii) Campbell &
Levine as local counsel; (iii) Anderson Kill &Olick, P.C. as
special insurance counsel; (iv) Legal Analysis Systems, Inc., as
Asbestos-Related Bodily Injury Consultant; (v) defunct firm, L.
Tersigni Consulting, P.C. as financial advisor, and (vi) Professor
Elizabeth Warren, as a consultant to Caplin&Drysdale, Chartered.

On Feb. 16, 2001, the Court approved the appointment of Lawrence
Fitzpatrick as the Future Claimants' Representative.  The
Bankruptcy Court authorized the retention of Meyer, Unkovic&
Scott LLP as his counsel, Young Conaway Stargatt& Taylor, LLP, as
his special counsel, and Analysis, Research and Planning
Corporation as his claims consultant.

In 2003, a plan of reorganization was agreed to by various
parties-in-interest, but, on Dec. 21, 2006, the Bankruptcy Court
issued an order denying the confirmation of that plan, citing that
the plan was too broad in addressing independent asbestos claims
that were not associated with Pittsburgh Corning.

On Jan. 29, 2009, an amended plan of reorganization (the Amended
PCC Plan) -- which addressed the issues raised by the Court when
it denied confirmation of the 2003 Plan -- was filed with the
Bankruptcy Court.

As reported by the TCR on April 25, 2012, Pittsburgh Corning
Corp., a joint venture between Corning Inc. and PPG Industries
Inc., filed another amendment to its reorganization plan designed
to wrap up a Chapter 11 begun 12 years ago.

The Company's balance sheet at Sept. 30, 2012, showed
$29.41 billion in total assets, $7.52 billion in total liabilities
and $21.88 billion in total equity.


ASBESTOS UPDATE: Horror Movie Right in the CBD
----------------------------------------------
The Australian News reported that the owner of Piccadilly Cinemas
has branded the heritage-listed building "totally unsafe" after
two ceiling collapses that "narrowly missed the customers."

But operator Cyril Watson, who is in dispute with the building's
owner, has refused to shut the doors on the business, which has
also been ordered by WorkSafe to undertake a risk assessment on
its "flaking" asbestos roof, the report said.

The 66-year-old veteran cinema operator admitted to The Sunday
Times he was afraid the ceiling would cave in again the next time
it rained heavily because the old roof and leaking box gutters had
not been replaced. A section of the ceiling in Cinema 1 last
collapsed in June last year.

In a recent statement prepared by Mr Watson for his lawyer, he
said: "Now it is totally unsafe to operate this cinema at all.

"The ceiling has collapsed in different parts on two different
occasions in Cinema 1 whilst people have been watching films. When
it does drop it is like a bomb going off. Each time it has
narrowly missed the customers sitting in the cinema.

"When the winter starts again, which is not very far away, the
cinema will flood again . . . If the ceiling falls on top of
anybody they will be killed as it is a very heavy ceiling . . .
The ceiling has been fixed twice to a very good standard . . . It
is the roof and box gutters that need fixing and sealing, not the
ceiling."

In the statement, Mr Watson complained that rain also resulted in
water running down the walls "like a waterfall, which goes over
electrical plugs, which we have to tape up to stop the water
fusing all the lights." He complained that films had been
destroyed by water damage.

He also acknowledged he had been warned by a roof plumber that the
asbestos sheeting was in dangerously poor condition.

"My electrician will not go into the ceiling to change the light
bulbs because of the asbestos fibres floating around," he said.

The Sunday Times has also seen a letter sent by Mr Watson's lawyer
in February to the agents for the landlord reminding them urgent
attention was needed to waterproof the roof and "safeguard and
suppress the asbestos materials used in the roof". The matters had
been earlier raised in a face-to-face meeting last November.

In a separate interview, Mr Watson accused the overseas owners of
the Piccadilly Arcade of letting the art deco building go to "rack
and ruin".

He said he hadn't closed the doors on the cinema because he feared
being sued by the owners for walking out on the lease.

For months he has been locked in a dispute with the owners over
rent arrears close to $400,000 and Mr Watson's claim for
compensation for loss of business when the cinema was closed for
numerous repairs. He is also challenging "excessive" overheads he
claims he and other arcade tenants are charged.

The lease for the Piccadilly, which opened in 1938 and is
considered the grand dame of cinemas in Perth, was taken up by Mr
Watson in March 2005. The previous tenant was notorious paedophile
Dennis John McKenna, who left the cinema in 2004 with large debts
and a trail of angry creditors, including film distributors.

Worksafe inspectors visited the Piccadilly last week and issued 14
improvement notices.

One notice stated the cinema was in breach of Occupational Safety
and Health Regulations for failing to have an asbestos register.
Mr Watson has been given until August 9 to complete an
identification and risk assessment on the asbestos and to record
all information on an onsite register.

It's another headache for the cinema operator, who had to deal
with a costly bedbug infestation at the cinema last year. More
recently, pest controllers were brought back to deal with rodents.

A spokesman for the arcade owners told The Sunday Times there were
plans to replace the roof, but not immediately.

"As a result of this building being heritage-listed we had a
conservation architect prepare a conservation plan for the
building which was completed in April 2012," the spokesman said.

"Since that time we have had preliminary plans prepared by the
conservation architect for the arcade and theatre to understand
what can and cannot be done to the building. In respect of the
asbestos roof . . . sheet asbestos roofing is a stable form of
asbestos in particular when painted. Many schools in WA have this
form of roofing. That is not to say we will not be replacing it
when we renovate the arcade, but it is not at the point where it
should be replaced immediately."

But WA Asbestos Diseases Society president Robert Vojakovic called
on the Health Department urgently to investigate the situation in
order to give cinema workers and patrons some peace of mind.

After studying close-up photos of the cinema roof Mr Vojakovic
said it was in a very poor state and appeared to be "friable" in
places. "If the dust can reach the cinema then there is a risk,"
he said. "The Department of Health or Perth City Council need to
have a look at the situation. It's a public facility; it must be
free of risk."

Roof plumber Rick Rogers, the owner of Millenium Plumbing and
Roofing, inspected the roof last year and found it was flaking. He
had warned the cinema the roof was dangerous and needed replacing.

"It is in poor condition, it's quite flaky," he said. "My old man
died of asbestosis at 48. You are talking to a guy who is pretty
paranoid."

A Worksafe spokeswoman said inspectors didn't see any cause for
concern on the inside of the cinema because the asbestos roof is
on the outside of the building.

A Department of Health spokeswoman said its officials were unaware
of any issues at the Piccadilly. "Issues regarding the management
of asbestos in the workplace should be directed to the Department
of Commerce (WorkSafe WA)," she said. "When required, the
department will assist WorkSafe by providing toxicology advice and
public health risk assessments."


ASBESTOS UPDATE: Jarrow MP Claims Mesothelioma Bill Denies Justice
------------------------------------------------------------------
Chronicle Live reported that hundreds of mesothelioma victims will
be denied justice under new legislation, it is claimed.

According to the report, the Mesothelioma Bill, which had its
second reading in Parliament, was designed to make it easier for
people with the killer asbestos cancer to get compensation.  But
the TUC Northern Asbestos Support and Campaign Group in Wallsend
said it will leave out many people while short-changing others.

GMB union organiser Michael Blench, who is chair of the group,
said: "The Government has received a fair bit of praise since it
published the Mesothelioma Bill. It's understandable that those
diagnosed with this terrible disease, and the loved ones of those
who have died, would welcome any initiative aimed at helping
victims to recover compensation.

"But it's important to look at the detail of the bill and to see
that it is not the act of benevolence it has been portrayed as."

As reported in The Chronicle, the Government announced plans for a
new law allowing victims to claim compensation even if they cannot
trace a solvent employer or insurer.

But this will only apply to people who were diagnosed with the
condition later than July last year.

Hundreds of people diagnosed before that date who are still unable
to trace their employer's insurer will lose out ? while those who
can claim will receive compensation which falls 30% below the
average, it is claimed.

Jarrow MP Stephen Hepburn has already criticised the bill in
Parliament, claiming victims are being denied compensation because
of "leeches in the insurance industry".

And Chris Knighton, who runs the Mick Knighton Mesothelioma
Research Fund in Wallsend, labelled the measures "a drop in the
ocean".

She said: "People will benefit from compensation, but it leaves an
awful lot of others who still wont be compensated because of the
time limit. It is a good start, but it doesn't go far enough and
there is a long way to go yet."

Now, the TUC group has called for the bill to be amended so it
applies to those diagnosed as far back as 2010 - when consultation
on the bill began. And it wants the bill to ensure that the amount
of compensation paid to mesothelioma sufferers is 100%.

"The Government delayed announcing the scheme for over two years
while it worked on a deal with the insurance industry which would
protect it from having to pay compensation in full," added Mr
Blench.

"That delay means hundreds of people will be excluded.

"And there is no excuse for the scheme paying less than 100%
compensation. The victims should not be short-changed because the
insurers lost or destroyed their policies."

Ian McFall, head of asbestos litigation at Newcastle's Thompsons
Solicitors, said: "Unless the bill is improved to provide better
protection and full compensation for victims and their families it
will let insurers off the hook for losing or destroying the
policies they profited from for decades."


ASBESTOS UPDATE: Christchurch Call for Tighter Rules on Asbestos
----------------------------------------------------------------
Olivia Carville, writing for Stuff.co.nz, reported that officials
are calling for tighter health and safety regulations for the
Christchurch rebuild after asbestos-contaminated material rained
down into a tradesman's face and a bureaucratic muddle left
authorities in the dark.

According to the report, a young plasterer, standing on a ladder
and wearing no protective gear, used a paint scraper to
unknowingly remove material riddled with asbestos from a textured
ceiling in Cashmere and a government department is questioning why
it was not told.

The companies involved both claim to have acted within safety
protocols.

The incident has unveiled a worrying loophole in which
tradespeople are being sent into earthquake-damaged homes to work
with potentially contaminated material before it is tested.

The Ministry of Business, Innovation and Employment (MBIE) is
calling for all employers to test for asbestos before sending
workers on-site and said it would be making "preliminary
inquiries" into the Cashmere incident.

Exterior building firm Goleman, which is at the centre of a
government investigation into the handling of asbestos-
contaminated material at Christchurch Hospital, was the contractor
appointed to manage the Cashmere job on behalf of Fletcher EQR.

Former Goleman employee Evan Hyett, 52, witnessed a young
plasterer scraping ceiling material containing friable asbestos
while wearing no protective gear at the site last October.

"He had it in his eyes, in his mouth and all over his face," Hyett
said.

Goleman general manager Luke Goleman said employees raised
concerns and a sample of the material was tested and came back as
positive for white asbestos.

Work on the site halted immediately and Fletchers was informed, he
said.

"The issue was dealt with in full accordance with Fletcher EQR's
health and safety guidelines."

Goleman did not tell the ministry because it was a subcontractor
to Fletchers, he said.

A Fletchers spokesman said testing showed asbestos was present in
the building material but not on the workers' clothing or
equipment.

The ministry was not informed because "there is no compulsory
requirement for the company(ies) involved to notify MBIE".

However, MBIE Canterbury Rebuild health and safety programme
director Kathryn Heiler said the ministry should have been told
"when the employer became aware that asbestos may have been
present in the workplace".

Under the 1998 Asbestos Regulations, the handling, demolition or
maintenance of any part of a building containing friable asbestos
requires notification to MBIE.

"This situation highlights the need for employers and employees to
be aware that repair, maintenance and building work being done in
Canterbury may contain asbestos. Hazards should be identified and
appropriate controls put in place before any work commences to
ensure it is undertaken safely."

The emphasis should be on identifying asbestos before the work
begins, Heiler said.

Fletchers health and safety protocol states all damaged properties
suspected of containing asbestos, or built between 1940 and 1990,
require mandatory testing.

The tests could be ordered by a Fletchers contract supervisor or
the site contractor, a Fletchers spokesman said.

Fletchers was aware of previous incidents where asbestos was found
after work had begun on homes and the spokesman was not sure at
what point asbestos tests were expected to be conducted.

Canterbury District Health Board medical officer of health Dr
Ramon Pink said the health risks of dealing with white asbestos
mostly centred on the long-term exposure to future homeowners,
rather than the short-term exposure to tradespeople. Prolonged,
chronic exposure can cause lung diseases, including cancer.

Pink supported the Government's calls to test potentially
contaminated material prior to workers being sent in.

"If the risk of exposure is there, then we need to minimise it . .
. it cannot be a retrospective thing."

WORKERS RESIGN OVER ASBESTOS SCARE

Contractors who raised the alarm over potentially exposing
patients to asbestos at Christchurch Hospital are taking their
employer to court for negligence.

Exterior building firm Goleman was last week informed another two
of its employees had quit over the asbestos saga and that they
would be pursuing a personal grievance over the company's alleged
health-and-safety breach.

The contractors were exposed to white asbestos while working on
the roof of the hospital's earthquake-damaged Parkside building in
early April and raised public concerns over the way Goleman
allegedly failed to warn its staff and put patients at risk to the
hazardous material.

The Press published the employees' concerns early this month.

Two days after the story ran, industrial abseilers Liam Milner,
24, and Neil Silcock, 27, were summoned to a disciplinary meeting
with Goleman for breaching their contracts by talking to the
media.

The meeting was held earlier this month and Milner and Silcock
attended along with their lawyer, David Beck.

They received no disciplinary action.

Beck, of SB Law, wrote a letter to Goleman last week informing it
that both Milner and Silcock were resigning and pursuing a
constructive dismissal case against the firm.

"They have decided to resign on the basis that they do not believe
their employer can guarantee their health and safety," Beck said.

The pair will be seeking distress damages for a loss of wages and
good references for future employment.

Goleman manager Luke Goleman said he could not comment as the
incident was under investigation by the Government.

Test results confirming the presence of asbestos on the hospital
work site were obtained by the Canterbury District Health Board
(CDHB) on April 2 and Goleman was advised to stop work
immediately.

The four contractors maintain they were not told about the risk
and continued to wander through the hospital unknowingly wearing
potentially contaminated material until Fletcher EQR shut the site
down eight days later.


ASBESTOS UPDATE: Fibro Contamination Hinders Buffalo Redevelopment
------------------------------------------------------------------
Kristen Griffin, writing for Mesothelioma.com, reported that
asbestos contamination and rodents, along with a hefty price tag,
are what stands in the way of a necessary redevelopment of an
abandoned former Buffalo-area school that could potentially
reinvigorate the community's struggling business district.

According to the report, the Village of Silver Creek, nestled on
the shores of Lake Erie and located just outside of Buffalo, New
York, is currently examining plans to either redevelop the former
school building into apartments or raze the structure completely
to make room for brand new commercial development.

However, the bigger picture remains that of economics: what is the
best way to jumpstart the otherwise struggling business district?
The abandoned, asbestos contaminated and rodent infested school is
just the tip of the proverbial economic iceberg. Abandoned since
1979, the former school is a health threat in its current
condition.

Before any work or redevelopment begins, the building must be
decontaminated, asbestos removed and rendered safe for
contractors. Not surprisingly, the indoor air quality has been
compromised. Breathing in air contaminated with small asbestos
particles can lead to several serious, oftentimes, lethal medical
conditions including asbestosis, lung cancer and mesothelioma
cancer. Further, breathing in air heavy with rodent droppings also
poses significant risks to respiratory health.

According to Nick Piccolo, Mayor of the Village of Silver Creek,
the cost with razing the school and preparing the property for a
new build is roughly $4.5 million. Though investors are also
eyeing the dilapidated school building for redevelopment into
apartments, the cost of that project may be a hindrance to growth.

Silver Creek is facing an upward economic battle on a more global
scale. With large corporations threatening to shut down local
operations, potentially irrevocably damaging the area economy,
Silver Creek must look to the future.

Perhaps the redevelopment of the former school is just the tipping
point to inject necessary capital into the local economy that
could lure additional investments from outside of the Village and
spur investments by local business owners.


ASBESTOS UPDATE: New Bill Will Help Asbestos Cancer Victims
-----------------------------------------------------------
Newbury & Thatcham Chronicle reported that a Newbury solicitor has
welcomed a new parliamentary Bill which will ensure compensation
for victims of asbestos-related cancer.

According to the report, if it becomes law it will be good news
for Mesothelioma sufferers who in the past might have had trouble
tracing their employer's insurers because of mistakes in records
or a lack of contact details.

Brigitte Chandler, from Charles Lucas and Marshall Solicitors in
Bartholomew Street, has represented hundreds of sufferers and is
glad people will receive justice at last, but she is disappointed
the Government will only consider claims diagnosed after July 25
last year, the date it announced its intention to set up the
scheme, the report said.

Ms Chandler said: "It is particularly unfair to those diagnosed
during the two years after the Government consulted on the
proposals. We now hope the legislation reaches the statute book as
soon as possible."

She added: "This new Bill will ensure that many people who were
previously denied access to compensation, because the insurance
industry could not trace details of their employer's insurance
policy, will now receive justice."

The Mesothelioma Bill will compensate anyone diagnosed after last
July, potentially thousands nationwide, but excludes anyone whose
diagnosis was made before that.


ASBESTOS UPDATE: NZ Gov't. Says Onus on Employers to Detect Fibro
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Radio New Zealand News reported that the Government says it is up
to employers to determine if hazards such as asbestos are present
in a workplace before work begins.

According to the report, contractors Liam Milner and Neil Silcock
say they were exposed to asbestos on the roof of Christchurch
Hospital and a co-worker was covered in the material while working
at a house as part of the city's rebuild -- but nothing was done
about it.

Employment law specialist David Beck is representing the
contractors who he says told their employer, Goleman Ltd, about
asbestos falling onto a co-worker at a Cashmere house in October
2012, but were ignored, the report said.

Mr Beck told the news agency that government regulations are not
being enforced properly.

"The regulatory framework of the Ministry of Business and
Innovation is just hopelessly under-resourced and has not been
very active in this area around the rebuild, particularly around
asbestos-related claims.

"They don't appear to have taken a very rigid approach to this."
The Ministry of Business, Innovation and Employment said it is up
to employers to identify such hazards before any work starts.

The ministry's Canterbury rebuild health and safety programme
director, Kathryn Heiler, says if work has already started when
asbestos concerns are raised, then the work must stop and tests
must be done to establish whether the substance is present or not.

Fletcher Earthquake Recovery says it is investigating a workplace
incident involving a contractor in the Canterbury home repair
programme, but won't comment further until the investigation is
finished.

Continued inhalation of asbestos particles can cause terminal lung
disease.


ASBESTOS UPDATE: Lack of Training Possible in Asbestos Incidents
----------------------------------------------------------------
Newstalk ZB reported that the Canterbury Builders Association says
it could be a case of a lack of training in assessing whether a
building has an asbestos risk.

According to the report, the Council of Trade Unions wants the
contract between EQC and Fletcher Building reviewed after two
serious asbestos workplace incidents in Christchurch.

It was reported that two workers were dangerously exposed to the
substance on Fletcher EQR sites after a failure to properly test
for it, the report said.

Canterbury Master Builders Association President Clive Barrington
says its concerning, but it may come down to lack of training.

He says some builders do need more training on how to identify
asbestos, but there should be a mentality that if there's any
doubt, test it.


ASBESTOS UPDATE: School Board Considers Asbestos Issues in Schools
------------------------------------------------------------------
Colin McEwen, writing for Brecksville Patch, reported that the
Brecksville-Broadview Heights School Board is considering some
work at Chippewa Elementary School and at the middle school that
would require about $120,000 in asbestos removal.

According to school officials, the asbestos doesn't currently
present a health hazard to students or staff, but law requires the
district to -- very carefully -- remove the material during any
renovation or demolition, the report related.

"Many of the schools built in the 1950s used asbestos as a
building material," Larry Tomec, the district's business manger,
told the news agency. "Often when any renovations occur the
asbestos has got to go."

At Chippewa Elementary district officials are considering new
lighting and complete ceiling -- which would automatically trigger
asbestos abatement, expected to cost about $73,200, the report
said. The middle school needs tile replacement, and the asbestos
removal would cost an expected $44,630.

"We are running new wiring in the ceilings for a PA system and
computer/security networks," Tomec told the news agency.

The board is expected the issue further at an upcoming meeting.


ASBESTOS UPDATE: Greens Want Answers on ASIO HQ
-----------------------------------------------
The Australian Associated Press reported that the Australian
Greens are demanding answers from federal government about the
"sorry saga" surrounding Canberra's new ASIO headquarters.

According to the report, leader Christine Milne is calling for an
inquiry into the construction of the spy agency's office, after
revelations of espionage, cost blowouts and failure to pay
contractors.

"I think there can be a proper investigation, an independent
investigation, into this sorry saga of the ASIO building," she
told reporters in Canberra.

An inquiry could also look at why asbestos at the site was not
identified as part of standard planning processes, and which have
partially led to a budget blowout of some $170 million, she told
the news agency.

"It's a legacy of the Howard government and it's been carried on
under this government," Senator Milne said of the planning and
construction process for the building.

"This has ramifications at the top level for national security."

Chinese hackers stole top secret blueprints to the building, which
stands close to completion in the nation's capital, according to
an ABC Four Corners report.

This has raised concerns the building might have to be gutted and
reconfigured because its security has been compromised.

"Before we go stripping it and then doing something else, we need
to get to the heart of how we got to this mess in the first
place," Senator Milne said.

Up to 100 subcontractors are believed to be awaiting payment from
a managing contractor which has entered receivership.


ASBESTOS UPDATE: Portsmouth Schools to Use Up Rest of Surplus Fund
------------------------------------------------------------------
Sarah Hutchins, writing for The Virginian-Pilot, reported that the
hoarded construction fund that brought school officials under
scrutiny should be empty by the end of the year, Superintendent
David Stuckwisch told School Board members recently.

According to the report, the board passed two resolutions to
transfer money to the city for two projects: asbestos abatement at
a preschool and the construction of additional bus bays at the
city garage. Once that's completed, the fund will be nearly empty,
Stuckwisch said.

"That should clear up some of these issues we've had," the
superintendent said.

For years, school officials transferred millions in surplus funds
into the account to pay for construction and maintenance projects
without council approval.

The fund became the subject of a grand jury investigation. A
report, released in February, found that while school officials
didn't act illegally, they did violate state and local legal
requirements by carving out $52 million over several years for
building projects instead of returning the money to the city at
the end of each fiscal year.

About $519,500 still in the fund will pay for asbestos removal and
construction at Olive Branch Preschool Center. The school division
had already approved a contract with a company to remove asbestos
from the ceilings and replace them. The building's roof also needs
patching, Stuckwisch said.

Stuckwisch told the board that in "the spirit of openness and
cooperation," the school division will transfer money for the
project to the city, which will then pay the contractor out of its
budget. The division will retain control of the project, he said.

During a board meeting, two members voted against the resolution
to transfer money for the Olive Branch project. Keith Nance Sr.
and Claude Parent voiced concerns that, after the transfer, the
city might not pay the contractor.

"I don't feel comfortable with this because we are legally
responsible for this work, but somebody else is paying the bill,"
Parent said.

Nance put it more simply: "I don't trust these people."

The resolution passed with a 5-2 vote.

"This is the correct way to move forward with this project,"
Stuckwisch said. "I have no qualms the city will pay for this
project."

The division also will transfer $590,000 to the city to pay for
the new bus bays. Stuckwisch said the city will take over bus
service, saving the division about $86,000 a year. The division
will pay the city $759,377 for annual maintenance.

In previous years, money from the construction fund was used to
build gyms and renovate parking lots at Churchland and James Hurst
elementary schools, Stuckwisch said.

One of the most expensive projects was renovating Churchland
Primary, which got a new gym, library, geothermal heating system
and bathrooms, he said.

The construction fund and grand jury report have haunted school
officials, especially as the board and the council worked to
finalize a budget for next year. The council ultimately voted to
cut funding to the schools.

During a recent budget discussion, Stuckwisch told board members
the division will be able to undertake only emergency repair and
maintenance projects next year.


ASBESTOS UPDATE: NEIC Appeal from Allocation Decision Denied
------------------------------------------------------------
The Appeals Court of Massachusetts, Suffolk, issued an order that
answers the central issue whether the pro rata time-on-the-risk
allocation method adopted by the Supreme Judicial Court in Boston
Gas Co. v. Century Indem. Co., 454 Mass. 337 (2009) (Boston Gas),
should be applied to determine the extent of indemnity coverage
owed by Liberty Mutual Insurance Company for claims brought
against its insured, New England Insulation Company, Inc., for
asbestos-related injuries.

In the case NEW ENGLAND INSULATION COMPANY, INC., vs. LIBERTY
MUTUAL INSURANCE COMPANY, NO. 11-P-1617 (Mass. App.), NEIC
appealed from the dismissal of its complaint against Liberty,
which sought damages and declaratory relief on the premise that
the Boston Gas allocation method was not applicable because of
differences in wording between the Liberty policies and those
construed in Boston Gas.  A judge of the Superior Court concluded
that those differences were not significant and that Boston Gas
was controlling.  Accordingly, the judge dismissed the complaint
for failure to state a claim upon which relief may be granted.

NEIC took an appeal from the ensuing judgment, but argued error
only in the judge's determination that Liberty did not breach its
contractual duty to indemnify by deciding, in June, 2010, that it
would apply the Boston Gas allocation method to future indemnity
payments and allocate shares of losses to NEIC for periods when it
did not have coverage.

The Appeals Court affirmed the Superior Court's decision holding
that NEIC offers no persuasive reason why the pro rata method
articulated in Boston Gas should not control in the instant case.
Insofar as they bear on the question of allocation, the terms of
the Liberty policies are not meaningfully different from the terms
of the policies at issue in Boston Gas, the Appeals Court said.
Like the policies analyzed in Boston Gas, the Liberty policies
unambiguously limit the promised "all sums" coverage to injuries
that occur "during the policy period," thus supporting the use of
pro rata allocation, the Appeals Court noted.  Furthermore, the
public policy considerations relied upon in Boston Gas are equally
relevant in the instant case.


                             *********

S U B S C R I P T I O N  I N F O R M A T I O N

Class Action Reporter is a daily newsletter, co-published by
Bankruptcy Creditors' Service, Inc., Fairless Hills, Pennsylvania,
USA, and Beard Group, Inc., Washington, D.C., USA. Noemi Irene
A. Adala, Joy A. Agravante, Valerie Udtuhan, Julie Anne L. Toledo,
Christopher Patalinghug, Frauline Abangan and Peter A. Chapman,
Editors.

Copyright 2013. All rights reserved. ISSN 1525-2272.

This material is copyrighted and any commercial use, resale or
publication in any form (including e-mail forwarding, electronic
re-mailing and photocopying) is strictly prohibited without prior
written permission of the publishers.

Information contained herein is obtained from sources believed to
be reliable, but is not guaranteed.

The CAR subscription rate is $775 for six months delivered via
e-mail. Additional e-mail subscriptions for members of the same
firm for the term of the initial subscription or balance thereof
are $25 each. For subscription information, contact
Peter A. Chapman at 215-945-7000 or Nina Novak at 202-241-8200.



                 * * *  End of Transmission  * * *