I just locked the guy out. He went aflame on me. I shouldn't have called him a dork. I deleted my comment; sorry for being honest. For chrissakes, I remember Kibbel talking about this stuff at least 20+ years ago, and everyone I know in the biz knew about this stuff sometime back in the mid 80's. We have the misfortune of working in a profession where useful and accurate knowledge can be superseded by just about anyone. The whole question of "may contain" or "does contain" gets lost in the general hysteria. Couple that to the secondary, tertiary, 4 layers, 5, 6, 7, and 8 layers of subrogated asbestos litigation, and the whole thing gets pretty squirrely. Drive down the Tri State and every 3rd billboard is some PI attorney advertising for mesothelioma legal services. It doesn't make me want to get very authoritative about asbestos, that's for sure. The EPA even states on their own handout that the information is in flux and they're working on getting it right. So, what are we supposed to tell folks? That's what I was trying to get at with the guy, and he took it as folks in here not knowing anything.