Narcogun MCD-344 Spray Fireproofing

Product Description

Narcogun MCD-344 was a spray-applied fireproofing material manufactured by Narco and produced from approximately 1964 through 1977. The product belonged to a category of construction materials designed to provide passive fire resistance to structural elements, particularly steel beams, columns, and decking in commercial, industrial, and institutional buildings constructed or renovated during that era.

Spray-applied fireproofing products like Narcogun MCD-344 were widely adopted during the mid-twentieth century because they offered a cost-effective and efficient method of meeting fire codes that required structural steel to maintain load-bearing capacity for specified durations during a fire event. The material was applied using specialized spray equipment, allowing crews to coat large surface areas of structural steel quickly. Once cured, the applied layer formed an insulating barrier intended to slow heat transfer to the underlying steel.

The years during which Narcogun MCD-344 was produced — 1964 to 1977 — correspond broadly to a period when the construction industry relied heavily on asbestos-containing materials before regulatory changes led manufacturers to phase them out. Buildings constructed or renovated during this window may contain Narcogun MCD-344 or similar asbestos-bearing fireproofing materials on structural elements, particularly in areas that were not subsequently remediated.

Asbestos Content

Narcogun MCD-344 contained chrysotile asbestos as a component of its formulation. Chrysotile, sometimes referred to as white asbestos, is the most commercially prevalent form of asbestos and was widely used across the construction, shipbuilding, and manufacturing industries throughout the twentieth century. It belongs to the serpentine mineral group and is characterized by long, curly fibers.

Although chrysotile has at times been described by some industry sources as less hazardous than amphibole asbestos varieties, regulatory agencies including the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) have determined that no form of asbestos is safe at any level of exposure, and chrysotile is classified as a known human carcinogen. Chrysotile fibers, when inhaled, can become lodged in lung tissue and in the lining of the chest and abdominal cavities, where they may cause disease decades after exposure.

In spray-applied fireproofing formulations, chrysotile asbestos provided thermal resistance, bonding strength, and structural cohesion to the applied material. The asbestos fibers were integrated throughout the product matrix, meaning that any activity that disturbed, abraded, cut, or removed the cured material could release respirable asbestos fibers into the surrounding air.

How Workers Were Exposed

Industrial workers generally represent the primary population documented as having been exposed to Narcogun MCD-344 during the product’s years of production and application. Exposure occurred across several distinct phases of the product’s lifecycle, including application, building maintenance, renovation, and demolition activities.

During the application phase, spray operators and nearby tradespeople were potentially exposed to airborne asbestos fibers generated by the high-pressure spraying process. Spray-applied fireproofing work is inherently dusty, and the act of atomizing the wet material and directing it at structural surfaces created airborne particulates in the immediate work environment. Workers who mixed the dry material before spraying also faced direct contact with the bulk product.

Beyond initial application, workers in industrial facilities where Narcogun MCD-344 had been installed faced ongoing exposure risks whenever the applied fireproofing was disturbed. Routine maintenance activities — including overhead pipe work, electrical work, mechanical repairs, and the installation or removal of ductwork — could dislodge or abrade the applied fireproofing, releasing fibers into the breathing zone of workers below or in adjacent areas.

Demolition and renovation work presented particularly high-risk exposure scenarios. Removing or modifying structural elements coated with spray-applied fireproofing containing asbestos — particularly before asbestos awareness and abatement practices were standardized — could generate substantial concentrations of airborne fibers.

OSHA’s construction industry standards, codified at 29 CFR 1926.1101, recognize spray-applied surfacing materials as a class of asbestos-containing material that warrants specific handling, monitoring, and abatement protocols. The EPA’s Asbestos Hazard Emergency Response Act (AHERA) likewise identifies spray-applied surfacing materials as a regulated asbestos-containing material category requiring inspection and management in school buildings, a framework that has informed broader building management practices across commercial and industrial settings.

Because Narcogun MCD-344 was applied to the structural bones of buildings, it was often located in overhead spaces — above drop ceilings, in mechanical rooms, and in open industrial bays — where workers could be exposed without necessarily being aware that asbestos-containing material was present overhead or nearby.

Narcogun MCD-344 does not have an associated asbestos bankruptcy trust fund. There is no dedicated trust established by Narco for the payment of asbestos injury claims related to this product. As a result, individuals who allege injury from exposure to Narcogun MCD-344 have pursued compensation through civil litigation in the tort system rather than through an administrative claims process.

Litigation records document claims brought by industrial workers and others who alleged exposure to asbestos-containing spray fireproofing materials, including products of this type, during the course of their employment. Plaintiffs alleged that manufacturers of asbestos-containing fireproofing products knew or should have known of the health hazards associated with asbestos exposure and failed to adequately warn workers, employers, or the public of those risks.

Plaintiffs alleged that this failure to warn, combined with the continued manufacture and sale of asbestos-containing products after safer alternatives became available or asbestos hazards became more widely documented within industry, constituted negligence and products liability actionable under state tort law. Litigation records document that such claims have proceeded in jurisdictions throughout the United States where industrial use of spray-applied fireproofing was common.

Individuals who believe they may have been exposed to Narcogun MCD-344 and who have subsequently been diagnosed with an asbestos-related disease — including mesothelioma, asbestosis, lung cancer, or pleural disease — are advised to consult with an attorney experienced in asbestos litigation. Because statutes of limitations vary by state and typically begin running from the date of diagnosis or discovery of the disease rather than from the date of exposure, timely legal consultation is important.

Documentation that may support a legal claim includes employment records, union records, Social Security earnings histories, coworker testimony, building records identifying the materials used in construction or renovation projects, and medical records establishing diagnosis and the physician’s assessment of causation.

Legal counsel can assist in identifying all potentially liable parties, which in asbestos cases often extends beyond the product manufacturer to include distributors, contractors, premises owners, and other entities in the chain of supply or control.