Document 0LKYe4B3gkqmw5RBVOaQaOE1m

PLAINTIFFS EXHIBIT wefa^iQA gl*l na jo cOn Ci n 50 t-3 zmO o> M o-- **> js c^ X Mtr1 W w t1 Oz>K cWL|cn I volume I Pages 1 to 37 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEBRASKA C.A. No. 86-0714 MAX G. WILLIAMS and MAUREEN D. WILLIAMS v. NATIONAL GYPSUM COMPANY, ET AL i DEPOSITION of JULIE C. YANG, a witness called on-behalf of the Plaintiffs, taken pursuant to the Rules of Civil Procedure of the United States District Courts, before Linda A. Johnson, Registered Professional Reporter and Notary Public in and for the Commonwealth of Massachusetts, at the offices of Casner, Edwards & Roseman, 30 Federal Street, Boston, Massachusetts, on Friday, March 18, 1988, commencing at 11:15 a.m. APPEARANCES: BARON & BUDD (by Fred Baron, Esq., and Lisa A. Blue, Esq.), 8333 Douglas Avenue, 10th Floor, Dallas, Texas 75225, for Max G. Williams and Maureen D. Williams. CASNER, EDWARDS & ROSEMAN (by Robert S. Kutner, Esq., Donna B. MacKenna, Esq.), 30 Federal Street, Boston, Massachusetts 02110, for W. R. Grace & Co. and FRANCES M. CAWLINA ASSOCIATES Certified Shorthand Reporters 34 Emerson Place Boston, Massachusetts 02114 (617) 227-0777 APPEARANCES . ccr. t 1a cross, melcp, *:Avrr::.-. ' *n"" jri T ;. I Ccn-31-ci-: -CC J , rederal "over t 'r.ahe / * U ..---' Cr' .race a ^o ^.4 . w Ni 'RITE, 7AEDEM-AN. fc SEALmO'- (by Cithi J. Mw'nMaj / n -_ c--.. a- * **s~ r. w T*--- C.* ^v. -- V- tjr t Missouri 64112, ~/ for Rational Cyrsuir. Contrary ar.c U.3. Cyrrai.. - or.par y A - il..f ^ s v r..' - _ r. , _ r U i'v.'r.o , r 6 -\ :_ . ... x , * w (by Million. A. Baillargeon, Esq.), Cne Moodward Avenue, Detroit, Michigan 4222?, for Oweno-Coi v: ing Fiberglas. MAT AM AND MAE AM (by Richard .7. Conner, Esc., and Jeffrey W. Armstrong, Esq.), Cne Post Office Square, Poston, Massachusetts for Prcr'.o industries. FRANCES M. CANLIINA ASSOCIATES INDEX Testimony of: Julie C. Yang Examination by Mr. Baron 3 P.aqg 4 Pxhi-bita Plaintiffs 1 Exhibit No. Description 18 12/13/72 memo from J. C. Yang to H. C. Duecker 19 12/19/72 memo from J. C. Yang to H. C. Duecker 20 6/26/73 memo from J. C. Yang to H. C. Duecker 21 7/26/73 memo from H. C. Duecker to H. A. Brown 22 8/31/73 memo from J. C. Yang to 0. F. Stewart For Iden 29 29 35 35 35 FRANCES M. CAWLINA ASSOCIATES 4 1 JULIE C. YANG. 2 a witness called on behalf of the plaintiffs, first having 3 been duly sworn, on oath deposes and says as follows: 4 Examination by Mr. Earon 5 Q If you would, state your name for the record, please. 6 A Julie C. Yang, Y-a-n-g. 7 Q My name is Fred Baron. I'm here representing the 8 plaintiff in some cases that have been filed against W. R. 9 Grace Company, for whom you are testifying today, as I 10 understand it. You are employed by W. R. Grace, are you 11 not? 12 MR. KUTNER: Can we just incorporate the same 13 objections to the deposition notices as we asserted in the 14 deposition of Mr. Cintani? 15 MR. BARON: Certainly we can. As I understand, 16 you're objecting to all of them except the Williams case. 17 MR. KUTNER: Yes. 18 MR. ARMSTRONG: As is Proko. 19 MR. BARON: That's fine. 20 Q It's Dr. Yang, isit not? 21 A Yes. 22 Q Dr. Yang, how are you presently employed? . 23 A I'm employed by W. R. Grace as a manager in research, 24 material research, in the Analytical Department, heading FRANCES M. CAWLINA ASSOCIATES 1 the department. 2 Q How long have you been employed by w. R. Grace? 3 A Since November, '82. '72. 4 Q If I could, I'd like to go over your background briefly 5 with you. Where did you attend undergraduate school? 6 A I went to graduate school first at University of Indiana, 7 or Indiana University, in Bloomington, Indiana. I have a 8 master degree from Indiana University in--let me think 9 about a year. 10 Q Sometime way back, then? 11 A Way back. '52, I think. Then I went to University of 12 Illinois, Urbana, Illinois. I have my Ph.D. in chemistry, 13 1955. 14 Q Okay. Following obtaining your Ph.D. in chemistry in 1955 15 from the University of Illinois, did you take employment 16 with anyone? 17 A Yes. I wasemployed at Johns-Manville inthe corporate 18 basic research group at the researchcenter as a senior 19 research chemist, and then promoted to a research 20 associate. I stayed with Johns-Manville until 1972. 21 Q Okay. And were you working in the New York office or did 22 you ever go out to the Denver office? 23 A Neither. 24 Q Which one? FRANCES M. CAWLINA ASSOCIATES 6 1 A I worked in Manville, New Jersey, the research center. 2 Q What was your primary responsibility in Manville, New 3 Jersey? 4 A I was in basic research as a silicate chemist. I worked 5 with all kinds of minerals and synthetic materials which 6 contain silicates. 7 Q Did any of your research involve materials that would be 8 asbestiform in nature? 9 A Yes, because all-- 10 MR. KUTNER: You've answered the question. 11 Q Okay. Why? 12 MR. KUTNER: I'll object. 13 MR. BARON: She was answering the question. 14 Q Why don't you go ahead. 15 A Well, all the asbestos are silicates. 16 Q Would it be fair to say, then, from the time that you 17 joined Johns-Manville in--1955, was it? 18 A '55, yes. 19 Q --'55 until the time that you left in 1972, your work 20 included research on asbestos fibers? 21 MR. KUTNER: Objection. 22 A Work included asbestos fibers? 23 Q Yes. 24 A Work included asbestos. I would qualify that answer. FRANCES M. CAWLINA ASSOCIATES 1 Q What's the difference between asbestos and asbestos 2 fibers? j 3 A I am talking about in a general sense of all the asbestos . j i 4 minerals. j 5 Q Right. 6 A Rather than-- i i 7 Q The five crystalline forms. 8 A Rather than just fibers. j 9 Q All right. Are there forms of asbestos that are hot 10 fibrous? 11 A Yes. 12 Q What form? 13 A Massive. 14 Q Which one? 15 A I said, massive forms. They are--all the asbestos 16 minerals has the massive form and fibrous forms. | I 17 Q Well, for us poor laymen, you're familiar withsomething j I 18 called chrysotile asbestos, are you not? j 19 A Yes. 20 Q What is chrysotile asbestos? 21 A Chrysotile asbestos is a magnesium silicate hydrate with 22 34 Mg 0.2 SiO 02.2 H20. 23 Q Did you during your career with Johns-Manville have the 24 opportunity to do studies on chrysotile asbestos? FRANCES M. CAWLINA ASSOCIATES 8 1 A Chrysotile asbestos? Yes, I do. Did. 2 Q In fact, Johns-Manville was the owner of a very large Tine 3 that mined chrysotile asbestos in Canada, did it not? 4 MR. KUTNER: Objection. 5 A Yes. 6 Q Did you ever visit that mine in Jeffrey? No, it's in 7 Asbestos, isn't it. 8 A Yes. 9 Q On numerous occasions? 10 A No. 11 Q How many times? 12 A Twice. 13 Q And during what years, do you recall? 14 A In the '50s, early '50s. 15 Q Now, are wetalkingabout the mine inAsbestos, Quebec? 16 A Yes. 17 Q Is that known as the Jeffrey Mine? Is that what it's 18 called? 19 A Yes. 20 Q The mineral that is extracted from the ground that is 21 milled at the Johns-Manville facility there in Asbestos 22 would be called chrysotile asbestos, correct? 23 A Yes. 24 Q The chrysotileasbestos as it came out of themill was FRANCES M. CAWLINA ASSOCIATES c 1 packaged in bags and sold to customers throughout the 2 world, right? 3 MR. KUTNER: Objection. 4 A That's an observation. I don't know whether that's all 5 the case or not. 6 Q Well, you knew they were in the business of selling it, 7 didn't you? 8 A Yes, but I don't know how they pack it. 9 Q You never saw a bag of asbestos that was coming out of the 10 mine? 11 A I did. 12 Q It was packaged in either a burlap or a kraft bag, was it 13 not? 14 A I didn't remember. 15 Q Okay. Do you understand what tremolite is? 16 A Yes. 17 Q What is tremolite? 18 A Tremolite is also a magnesium silicate hydrate. 19 Q Very similar crystalline structure, is it not, to 20 chrysotile? 21 MR. KUTNER: Objection. 22 A No, one is amphibole, one is serpentine. 23 Q Did you ever do any research pertaining to tremolite 24 contamination of chrysotile while you were at FRANCES M. CAWLINA ASSOCIATES 10 1 Johns-Manvilie? 2 A No. 3 Q Do you know whether Johns-Manville conducted research on 4 tremolite contamination of chrysotile? 5 A No. -;"` 6 Q What type of research did you do onchrysotile? 7 A I make synthetic chrysotile. 8 Q You were attempting to make synthetic chrysotile? 9 A Yes. 10 Q Was that accomplished? 11 A Yes. 12 Q What year? 13 A Probably in the '50s. I don't remember the exact year. I 14 have the publication. 15 Q What was the purpose of making synthetic chrysotile? 16 A We will, the company's basic interest is, since they have 17 a lot of chrysotile in the mine, they want to know the 18 formation, how it can be done, and what size we can make 19 it into and what type of cost we have to make the 20 material. 21 Q And particularly on the issue of cost, were you able to 22 determine whether synthetic chrysotile was an economically 23 viable product? 24 MR. KUTNER: Objection. FRANCES M. CAWLINA ASSOCIATES 11 1 A No. 2 Q Why not? 3 A It costs us many--because chrysotile is not a very easy 4 mineral to make, since the fiber doesn't grow very fast; 5 and it's in submicroscopic lens, so the characterization 6 needs electromicroscopy to see it. Then the cost is very 7 high. 8 Q Very high. Would it be fair to summarize in layman's 9 terms that one of the reasons that Johns-Manville never 10 got into the synthetic-chrysotile business was because 11 chrysotile breaks down into such small fibrils that in 12 order to make a synthetic material it would be too 13 expensive? 14 MR. KUTNER: Objection. 15 A That's not my decision what to do. 16 Q No, I didn't ask you whether that was your decision, but 17 did you understand that that was the basis for the 18 economic decision? 19 MR. KUTNER: Objection. 20 A I don't understand what's the company's decision. 21 Q But is it fair to say that chrysotile breaks down into 22 fibers, or is fibrous, and that those fibers break down 23 into fibrils that are extremely small in size? 24 MR. KUTNER: Objection. FRANCES M. CAWLINA ASSOCIATES 12 1 A That has nothing to do with the synthetic-material 2 comparison. 3 Q All right. Let's put the synthetic material aside. What 4 I want to know is: Chrysotile is generally a fibrous 5 material, is it not? 6 A Yes. 7 Q When I say it's a fibrous material, what do you define the 8 term "fibrous" to mean? 9 A When you look under the microscope, it has the fibrous 10 morphology. 11 Q Now, do you know what the term "fibril" means? 12 A Yes. 13 Q What does it mean? 14 A It means small, individual fiber. 15 Q The product of the fibers is the fibrils, correct? 16 MR. KUTNER: Objection. 17 A The product of the fibers-- 18 Q --is fibrils. In other words, the fibrils band together 19 to form the fiber. 20 A But the fibers are a product too. 21 Q They are indeed. But the fibrils come from the fibers? 22 A But you cannot classify fibrils as product. I would say 23 fibers are product. 24 Q Fibrils have very little commercial significance, I FRANCES M. CAWLINA ASSOCIATES 1 understand that, in terms of the commercial sense cf 2 fibers. But when we're talking about a fibril, a fibril 3 results from the use of fibers? 4 MR. KUTNER: Objection. 5 Q It may not be a commercially viable material, but it's 6 what comes off of the fibers, is that right? 7 A Yes. 8 Q Okay. When I talk about fibrils from chrysotile, what 9 size dimension are we generally talking about? Less than 10 five micrometers? 11 A Not necessarily. 12 Q What size? 13 A It can be that. Can be less. 14 Q Generally is, is it not? 15 A The fibrils? 16 Q Yes. 17 A Will be less, yes. 18 Q They're almost exclusively less than five, are they not? 19 A I don't know, because I never looked at so many of them to 20 tell you whether it's an exclusive or net. 21 Q All right. Well, when fibrous chrysotile is mixed and 22 stirred up with another product, you'll find an escape of 23 fibrils from the fibers, will you not? 24 MR. KUTNER: Objection. FRANCES M. CAWLINA ASSOCIATES 1 A Wait a minute. I have nothing to do with the mining or -> the forming of any cf the products whatsoever. 3 C All right, I understand you don't. Eut I'm asking you, as 4 somebody who is an expert in the area of asbestos fibers, 5 would you not expect that the by-product of the mixing cf 6 chrysotile fibers would be at least some concentration cf 7 fibrils? 8 MR. KUTNER: Objection. 9 A I have to classify your question first, because I'm not an 10 expert in the asbestos fibers. 11 Q All right. Let's talk about that. You are not an-expert 12 on asbestos fibers? 13 A I'm an expert in silicate chemistry. 14 Q Now, the question was: Are you an expert on asbestos 15 fibers? 16 MR. KUTNER: Objection. 17 A No. 18 MR. KUTNER: Are you asking in the sense-- 19 MR. BARON: She just answered. 20 MR. KUTNER: Well, I was asserting an objection. 21 Are you asking in the sense of a legal conclusion as to 22 expertise for purposes of testifying? If so, I object to 23 the question on that basis. 24 MR. EARON: Finished? FRANCES M. CAWLINA ASSOCIATES 15 1 MR. KUTNER: Yes . 2 HR. BARON: Okay. 3 Q Why are you not an expert on asbestos fibers? 4 MR. KUTNER: Objection. Same objection. 5 A Because if you are talking about a general term about 6 asbestos fibers, it includes the fibers' in-the-air 7 properties and, you know, its airborne properties and 8 other things. I'm not a CIH. I cannot answer that area. 9 Q All right. So you're really not an expert on dust? 10 A Correct. 11 Q And you're not an expert on how fibers break into fibrils 12 and get airborne? 13 MR. KUTNER: Objection. 14 Q Is that right? 15 A Correct. 16 Q Now, would it be fair to say that from the day that you 17 began working with Johns-Manville Corporation in 1955, you 18 were aware that asbestos had been associated with lung 19 diseases? 20 A No. 21 Q When did you first become aware of that? 22 A When the Mount Sinai people. Dr. Selikoff and Nicholson 23 and Art Langer and Arthur Rowe, came to give a 24 presentation at Johns-Manville. That's in the early '70s. FRANCES N. CAWLINA ASSOCIATES 16 1 Q All right. So you worked for Johr.s-Manv ille from 1955 until the early 1970s and never knew that asbestos would cause lung problems? 4 MR. KUTNER: Objection. I think the question's 5 argumentative. 6 Q Is that right? 7 A I may read something somewhere else, but it's not 8 conclusive of anything. 9 Q All right. So as far as you were concerned,--and I'm only 10 asking you about you, not anybody else--as far as you were 11 concerned, you yourself up at least until 1970 had -formed 12 no opinion as to whether asbestos was hazardous to human 13 beings? 14 MR. KUTNER: Objection. 15 Q Is that right? 16 A Yes. 17 Q Okay. Who didyou work for at Johns-Mar.ville? 18 A I worked for Fred Pansuk. 19 Q Oh, you worked for Fred Pansuk, who was the president at 20 one time at Johns-Manville? 21 A He was head of the basic research section, too, 22 or iginally. 23 Q All right. And did he ever discuss with you health 24 effects of asbestos? FRANCES M. CAWLINA ASSOCIATES 17 1 A No. 2 Q Who else did you work with? 3 A Sid Spiel. 4 Q Okay, I don't know him. Who else did you work with? 5 A Jim Lineweber. 6 Q Have you read any of the books on Johns-Manville's 7 activity with asbestos-related disease prior to 1970? 8 A No. 9 Q So as oftoday, you knowvery little about what 10 Johns-Manville knew about asbestos prior to 1970? 11 MR. KUTNER: Objection. 12 Q Is that right? 13 A Correct. 14 Q Let me suggest to you that there are some very fine 15 studies about the people that you worked with and that you 16 would recognize very much, one a book called Outrageous 17 Misconduct. Have you seen that book? 18 A No. 19 Q Never ever seen it? 20 A No. 21 Q Don't knowanything about it? 22 A No. 23 Q Mr. Pansuk is very graphically described in that book,-- 24 MR. KUTNER: Objection. FRANCES M. CAWLINA ASSOCIATES 18 1 Q --and the work that he did at Johns-Manville,-2 MR. KUTNER: Objection. 3 C --and I would recommend it to you. 4 MR. KUTNER: I would caution Mr. Baron not to 5 suggest that the witness do anything that may impair the 6 witness's abilities to testify on behalf of Grace. 7 MR. BARON: Okay. 8 Q So I take it you were not involved in any of the animal 9 experiments that were going on at Johns-Manville from 10 about 1952 forward concerning asbestos inhalation? 11 A No. 12 Q If you worked at the Manville New Jersey facility, then 13 you must have known Hugh Jackson. 14 MR. KUTNER: Objection. 15 A Hugh Jackson? 16 Q Who was the head of safety at the New Jersey Manville 17 facility. Do you recall him? 18 A I don't think he was the head of that at that time. I 19 don't know that group at all. 20 Q You know Cliff Sheckler? 21 A No. 22 Q Okay. Who was plant manager atManville? 23 A I don't know that either. 24 Q Okay. Did you ever knowKenneth Wallace Smith? FRANCES M. CAWLINA ASSOCIATES 7 r> 1 A Kenneth Wallsce-Q Wallace Smith, Or.KennethWallace Smith,-A Me. 4 C --who is medical director of Johns-Manville Ccrpora;ion? 5 A Mo, I don't. 6 (Mr. Conner replaced Mr. Armstrong at the 7 deposition.) 8 Q And I take it you also did not know Vandever Brown, who is 9 general counsel of Johns-Manville? 10 A Never heard of him. 11 Q Really? You've never heard thatname? 12 A No. 13 Q That's incredible. 14 MR. KUTNER: Only attorneys know him. 15 Q Wow! Did you ever know of the Serenac Laboratory for 16 Study of Tuberculosis? Do you ever do any studies with 17 Serenac Laboratory? 18 A I know a former colleague's worked for Serenac. 19 Q Who is that? 20 A Don Bailey. 21 Q Were you aware that in the 1930s, Johns-Manville was 22 conducting dust experiments at the Serenac Laboratory to 23 determine the hazards of asbestos? 24 A I have no slightest idea. FRANCES M. CAWLINA ASSOCIATES - 1 Q Did any of your studies while you were at Jchre-Mar.v ille pertain to the health effects cf asbestos? 3 A No. Q Would it be fair to say that all of yourstudies vers 5 centered around product development? 6 MR. KUTNER: Objection. 7 A My studies was mostly on cement chemistry. 8 Q Okay. Now, I think you indicated that you left there in 9 '72? 10 A Correct. 11 Q Why did you leave? 12 A Because the company moved to Denver. 13 Q Movedoutside of Denver, actually, in the weeds. But you 14 were in Kanville, not in New York? 15 A Correct. 16 Q The Manville plant did not close and did not move, did it? 17 A But we never worked in the Manville plant. Manville plant 18 and the research center are two entirely separate 19 identities. 20 Q So the research centerdid move to outside of-21 A The whole research movedto Littleton. 22 C Right, Littleton. 23 C And was it purely an issue that you didn't want to go to 24 Littleton, Colorado? FRANCE? CAWLINA ASSOCIATES 21 1 A Correct. 2 Q Is that the reason why yo'u didn't move? 3 A That's my personal reasons. 4 Q I understand. How did you work out employment with 5 W. R. Grace? Who contacted you, or how did you contact 6 somebody? 7 A Grace contacted me, because I worked in a lot of 8 committees on cementitious material. I'm in the basic 9 research on cement and concrete in National Science 10 Academies Committee. 11 Q Was that the National Academy of Sciences? 12 A Yes. 13 Q By the way, were you a member of the New York Academy of 14 Sciences? 15 A No. 16 Q So you served on committees in the National Academy of 17 Sciences on cement-type materials? 18 A Cement and concrete, yes. 19 Q Did any of those committees involve discussions of the 20 health effects of cement or concrete materials? 21 A No. 22 Q Did you ever study any aspect of the health effects of 23 cement or concrete? 24 A No. FRANCES M. CAWLINA ASSOCIATES i 1 Q So again, so we can be sure we've covered the ball park, would it be fair to say that before you went to work at W. R. Grace, you had never had any direct ir.vclverr.er.t in 4 ascertaining the safety of materials that you worked with? c MR. KUTNER: Objection. 6 A Officially, yes. What you said is true. But cf course, 7 when you work with chemicals, regardless what kind cf 8 chemicals, a chemist has to be careful what he works with. Q Q That's true, and you worked with asbestos from time to 10 time, did you not? 11 A Very rarely. 12 Q Let's talk about that. Prior to 1972, when you came to 13 Grace, what percentage of your total employment with 14 Johns-Manville was spent working with asbestos? 1L. -cJ A Five percent. 16 C When you worked with asbestos, would you work with raw 17 fibers? 18 A I don't work with raw fibers or asbestos. I wcrk with 19 synthetic material. 20 C Okay. So let's try to be even narrower. At any time 21 prior to 1972, did you ever work with natural, naturally 22 occurring asbestos fiber? 23 A Sometimes. 24 Q When? FRANCES M. CAWLINA ASSOCIATES 1 A I really don't rerr.eir.ber the years. 2 Q Okay. As a percentage cf your 17 years with 3 Johns-Manville, what percent of your tiir.e was spent 4 working with naturally occurring asbestos fibers? 5 MR. KUTNER: Objection. 6 Q Less than one percent? 7 A I would say a little bit more than that. 8 Q And was that exclusively with chrysotile, or did you work 9 with other crystalline structures of asbestos? 10 A With chrysotile only. 11 Q So you never worked with tremolite? 12 A No. 13 Q When you went to work for W. R. Grace in 1972, when was it 14 that you began? 15 A November. 16 Q November of '72? 17 A Yes. 18 Q And what division of W. R. Grace did you go to work for? 19 A Construction Product Division, in the research, R & D. 20 Q And who was your supervisor? 21 A Dr. H. C. Duecker, D-u-e-c-k-e-r. He is the vice 22 president in charge of R & D. 23 Q What was your first project for W. R. Grace? 24 A My position hired at W. R. Grace was a senior group leader FRANCES M. CAWLINA ASSOCIATES 1 in charge of rcck-processing chemicals, which means the 2 cement and concrete additives. That's what I was working 3 on. 4 Q At any time while you have been with W. R. Grace has your 5 worked involved chrysotile asbestos? 6 A No. 7 Q So from today backwards, you've never worked with 8 chrysotile asbestos? 9 MR. KUTNER: With Grace? 10 MR. BARON: With Grace. 11 A No. 12 Q With any other company from 1972 to the present? 13 A No. 14 Q You've been with Grace consistently, have you not? 15 A Yes. 16 Q Any other form of asbestos that you've worked with? 17 A Tremolite. 18 Q Okay. When did you begin working with tremolite? 19 A Maybe '74. 20 Q And what was the reason that you began your work with 21 tremolite? 22 A I was shown some of the impurities, contaminants, in Libby 23 vermiculite. 24 Q By whom? FRANCES M. CAWLINA ASSOCIATES 25 1 A By Dr. Duecker. i 2 Q And did he tell you why h`e was showing you the tremolite 3 contamination of the vermiculite? 4 A He didn't tell me the reason, but they were trying to cut 5 down all the impurities present in vermiculite in order to 6 get a better yield from their mined product. 7 Q Did he ever at any time mention to you the reason they 8 were trying to cut out the tremolite was because they were 9 concerned about claims for asbestos exposure? 10 MR. KUTNER: Objection. 11 A I think he did. 12 Q Was that back then in '74 or was that later? 13 A Maybe '73, maybe '74. I don't remember the exact date, 14 because it's a long time ago. 15 Q Now, did he ever show you documents--and I'll hand them to 16 you--the first one is PX-1, which is a study from the 17 Montana State Board of Health, Division of Disease 18 Control, concerning a report on industrial hygiene at 19 Zonolite in Libby, Montana. Have you ever seen that one, 20 PX-1? 21 (Witness examined document.) 22 A No. I never did. 23 Q What about PX-2, which is the same report again in January 24 of 1959? FRANCES M. CAWLINA ASSOCIATES 26 1 (Witness examined document.) 2 A No. Never saw these before. 3 Q The report from Mr. Gaudin, who is a consulting 4 metallurgist in Cambridge, Massachusetts, which is PX-3, 5 pertaining to asbestos in the Libby ore, have you ever 6 seen that report? 7 (Witness examined document.) 8 A No. 9 Q Here's PX-4, which is a letter from a physician to the 10 manager of Zonolite in Libby pertaining to people who have 11 asbestosis who work at the Zonolite mine. Did you -ever 12 see that? 13 MR. KUTNER: Objection. 14 (Witness examined document.) 15 A No. 16 Q Here's another one, PX-7, which is an industrial-hygiene 17 study of the Zonolite Company mine in Libby pertaining to 18 asbestos exposure in 1962. Did you ever see that one? 19 MR. KUTNER: Objection. 20 (Witness examined document.) 21 A No. 22 Q Here's another one, PX-10, industrial hygiene study of the 23 Zonolite Company in Libby, Montana, concerning tremolite 24 asbestosis. FRANCES M. CAWLINA ASSOCIATES 27 1 MR. KUTNER: Objection. 2 A No. 3 C Have you ever seen any of those? 4 A No. 5 Q Have you ever been told at any time--well, first of all, 6 you know where Libby, Montana is? You know that 7 W. R. Grace has a mine there? 8 A Sure. 9 Q And that mine produces vermiculite, does it not? 10 A Yes. 11 Q And when you were studying the tremolite contamination of 12 vermiculite, you would get samples from Libby, would you 13 not, from time to time? 14 A Yes. 15 Q Did anyone ever tell you at any time, even up through 16 today, that there were employees of Zonolite's vermiculite 17 mine in Libby who were developing asbestosis from working 18 with the material? 19 MR. KUTNER: Objection. I think Dr. Yang has 20 testified of her areas of responsibility, and her areas 21 didn't include the health consequences of exposure to any 22 element, material, product, or whatever. So I object to a 23 question that, first, has no foundation, and secondly, 24 suggests that the witness should know something that is FRANCES M. CAWLINA ASSOCIATES 28 1 beyond her job duties. 2 Q Okay. Now you can answer the question. 3 A I don't know it at all. 4 Q So you've never heard anything from anyone that people at 5 the Libby mine were developing asbestosis from the 6 tremolite contamination of the vermiculite? 7 MR. KUTNER: Objection. 8 Q Is that right? I just want to be sure you understood my 9 question. 10 MR. KUTNER: Objection. 11 A Of course you hear about it, but not necessarily from any 12 fixed source. 13 Q All right. So you've heard rumors that people out in 14 Libby were developing asbestosis, but you've never 15 received anything from W. R. Grace, is that right? 16 MR. KUTNER: Objection. 17 A Not rumors. You have certain publications by various 18 people showing that's what's happening. 19 Q Okay. What publications are you referring to? 20 A McDonald's paper. 21 Q What is McDonald's paper? 22 A It's on the health effect of tremolite. 23 MR. BARON: Let me have the reporter mark these. 24 We can do them seriatim to the other ones. This would be FRANCES M. CAWLINA ASSOCIATES ?o 1 18 and 19. 2 (Documents referred to above narked Plaintiffs' 3 Exhibits 18 and 19 for identification.) 4 Q Dr. Yang, I'm going to hand you a document that, for the e record here, is dated December 13, 1972. It shows a 6 received stamp dated December 15, 1972, on the 7 Construction Products Division. It's a memo to H. C. 8 Duecker, D-u-e-c-k-e-r, from Julie Yang,-- 9 A Yes. 10 Q --"Subject: Comments on the Report"--I think this word 11 should be "Carcinogenic," should it not?"--Screening of 12 Vermiculite." 13 (Witness examined document.) 14 A Oh, yes. 15 Q It's misspelledthere, is it not? 16 A Yes. 17 Q Is this a report that you yourself wrote, and is that your 18 signature on that report, PX-18? 19 A Yes. 20 Q Do you recallwriting this? 21 A Yes, I did. 22 Q Now, so that everybody can follow along with me, the 23 subject of the report were your comments on the report of 24 carcinogenic screening of vermiculite by Huntington FRANCES M. CAWLINA ASSOCIATES 20 1 Research Center in Huntington, England? 2 A Yes. 3 Q What was that? 4 A That's a report when I first went to Grace, they showed it 5 to me because they said, "You have some minerclogy 6 background," and it's a test done on South African 7 vermiculite. They're animal studies done on South African 8 vermiculite at Huntington Research Center in England. 9 Q All right. Now, the report is not attached here, but you 10 talk about photomicrographs of the thin-tissue sections of 11 the animals suffering from mesothelioma. 12 A Yes. 13 Q Can you describe what that report found generally? 14 MR. KUTNER: Objection. 15 A If you have the report,--we can produce the report, if you 16 want to. Then we will have their conclusion on what has 17 been done. 18 MR. BARON: All right. Well, we have a large 19 number of requests for production that you all have 20 answered that you would produce here in Boston, and we'll 21 get to that. 22 MR. KUTNER: Let me just state, the agreement was 23 that apparently your sister would review documents 24 yesterday. FRANCES M. CAWLINA ASSOCIATES 31 1 MR. BARON: No. 2 MR. KUTNER: And the arrangement was that they 3 would be available, and she never contacted us to make any 4 other arrangements. She failed to appear. 5 MR. BARON: Well, we read your answers to our 6 requests for production to be that you said that you would 7 produce them at the proper time, that such records will be 8 produced. 9 MR. KUTNER: And an agreement was reached that that 10 would be the proper time. 11 MR. BARON: No, no. An agreement was reached that 12 records might be reviewed, and we understand from visiting 13 with other counsel that you have about 120 boxes of 14 records. That's not what I'm referring to. I'm referring 15 to our request for production where you have specifically 16 stated that certain documents that we listed would be 17 produced by W. R. Grace. But we'll get into that later. 18 Q Now, what generally was the report of the Huntington 19 Research Center 20 MR. KUTNER: Objection. 21 Q Give us a summation of it. 22 MR. KUTNER: Objection. 23 A The summation of the Huntington report is it says that 24 South African vermiculite has no ill health effect on the FRANCES M. CAWLINA ASSOCIATES ? 1 animals. 2 Q All right. What about the animals that developed 3 mesothelioma 4 MR. KUTNER: Objection. 5 A 1 don't remember. 6 Q Okay, you don't remember. So that the animals that 7 developed mesothelioma from exposure to vermiculite had no 8 ill health effects? 9 MR. KUTNER: Objection. 10 A You'll have to ask a medical doctor's opinion, because I 11 can't answer that. 12 Q I see. But weren't you asked tostudy that? 13 A It doesn't matter. I can give them my chemical opinion, 14 but that doesn't mean I know the medical opinion. 15 Q In other words, you were the person given charge of 16 determining whether this medical study was valid, but you 17 have no expertise in that area. Would that be a fair 18 summation? 19 MR. KUTNER: Objection. 20 A I think they gave the medical expert to look at that 21 report before they give it to me. 22 Q Who was the medical expert? 23 A I don't know. 24 Q So you don't know what became of that? FRANCES M. CAWLINA ASSOCIATES 1 A No, I don't. -s C Now, I'll show you FX-19, which is a Terre dated1 3 December IS, 1972, "Subject: Commercial Products 4 Containing Asbestos," from Julie Yang to K. C. Duecker, 5 and ask you again if that's a memo that you wrote, and is 6 that your signature? 7 (Witness examined document.) 8 A Yes, that's what I wrote. o Q Okay, take a look at it for a moment, and I'll ask you 1C some questions. 11 (Witness examined document.) 12 A Fine. 13 C What you've done here is stated as follows: "The 14 following is an attempt to tabulate the commercial 15 products containing asbestos. If you have any further 16 information, please let us know, and it will be added to 17 this list," and then there's a list of products that 18 contain asbestos. What was the purpose of the exercise? 19 A I was asked by Dr. Duecker to give him a very general 20 scope of what materials, what product on the market has 21 asbestos in it. 22 Q Why would he ask you to do that? 23 KR. KUTNER: Objection. 24 A I don't know. He asked me, so I gave it to him. FRANCES K. CAWLINA ASSOCIATES 1 Q All right. Did you know at that time that w. R. Grace was 2 involved with products that contained asbestos? 3 A I don ' t. 4 C You didn't know at that time? 5 A No. 6 Q Do you know now whether they ever sold asbestos products? 7 A Yes, I do. 8 Q What product did they sell? 9 A Mono-Kote 3 and some of the acoustic materials. 10 Q When did you find that out? 11 A It's after I changed the responsibilities. 12 Q Okay. But at this time, in December of 1972, you did not 13 know that Grace was involved in the manufacture of 14 asbestos products? 15 A No, I don't. No. 16 Q Did you have any earthly idea why he would have wanted 17 this? 18 MR. KUTNER: Objection. 19 A I have no idea. You'll have to ask Dr. Duecker. 20 Q So you went out and did a project, and you had no idea why 21 you did it? 22 MR. KUTNER: Objection. You're asking her to 23 analyze what somebody else intended when he wrote this 24 memo. FRANCES M. CAWLINA ASSOCIATES 35 1 A I don't. | 2 Q You haveno idea? 3 A No. ! ! 4C 5 MS.DEAN: 1 | I don't want to interrupt, but I'c like i 6 for the exhibits to be attached to the transcript. 7 MR. BARON: They will be. 8 Let's mark this one as the next number, and then 9 these two. 10 (Documents referred to above marked Plaintiffs' 11 Exhibits 20 through 22 for identification.) 12 Q Again, back to PX-18, so I can be sure I understand what 13 we're talking about, in PX-18, which is your comments on 14 the carcinogenic screening of vermiculite, you were aware, 15 were you not, that mesothelioma had been found in animals? 16 MR. KUTNER: Objection. I believe that's a 17 mischaracterization. 18 MR. BARON: That's why I asked her. 19 A Let me read that thing again. 20 (Witness examined document.) 21 A Because it's very muddled, I don't understand that very 22 clearly. So that's what I said. I think you need more 23 study or give it to somebody with more expertise in that 24 area. FRANCES M. CAWLINA ASSOCIATES 36 1 Q So you were convinced that somebody needed to look into 2 this-3 A Right. 4 C --to see if vermiculite was really causing problems? 5 MR. KUTNER: Objection. 6 C Right? 7 A Correct. 8 Q To your knowledge, was that ever done? 9 A Yes. 10 Q By whom? 11 A By Dr. Smith of Farley-Dickinson Laboratory. 12 Q When was that done? 13 A '73, '74, in that time. 14 Q Is he an M.D. or a Ph.D.? 15 A He is an M.D.. 16 Q And what did he do? 17 A He injected vermiculite with tremolite in the hamsters and 18 did an animal study. 19 Q And what was his conclusion? 20 A His conclusion, you'll have to read the report. I didn't 21 know the exact conclusions. It's a lot of medical terms 22 in it. 23 Q Did you understand it was safe or hazardous? 24 MR. KUTNER: Objection. FRANCES M. CAWLINA ASSOCIATES i- 1 A Well, tremolite is hazardous, according to his conclusion. 2 Q All right. Do you have a copy of Dr. Smith's report? 3 A We may have it in the file. I don't know whether I have 4 one personally or not. 5 MR. EARON: Well, I would hereby request a copy of 6 Dr. Smith's report. 7 MS. MacKENNA: Fine. 8 MR. KUTNER: We acknowledge your request, and we 9 will respond accordingly. 10 MR. BARON: Okay. 11 Q Now, I have in front of me a document entitled "PX-20," 12 which is a memo dated June 26, 1973, to H. C. Duecker from 13 J. C. Yang, "Subject: The possible occurrence of asbestos 14 in Mono-Kote." Are you the author of this document? 15 (Witness examined document.) 16 A Yes. 17 Q Okay. Now, first, would it be fair to say that we are 18 talking about MK-4 or -5, one of the products that did not 19 have added asbestos fibers? 20 A I would like to look at this experiment first. 21 Q Go right ahead. 22 (Witness examined document.) 23 A In this report, it didn't state which Mono-Kote it is. It 24 just shows you how much I know about Mono-Kote. But I FRANCES M. CAWLINA ASSOCIATES 38 1 would assume it is-- 2 MR. KUTNER: Well, don't assume. I want you to 3 answer it only if you know. 4 THE WITNESS: I don't. 5 Q All right. Would it be fair to say you're not an expert 6 on Mono-Kote? 7 MR. KUTNER: Objection. 8 Q Is that true? 9 MR. KUTNER: Objection. 10 A I'm an expert on analysis of Mono-Kote, but I'm not an 11 expert in developing Mono-Kote product or their research 12 and development. 13 Q All right. Have you ever done any work with a product 14 called MK-3, Mono-Kote 3? 15 A I have anything done with it? 16 Q Have you ever done any research projects or analysis of 17 MK-3? 18 A I have done a lot of analysis on the material that's 19 already been applied as Mono-Kote 3, but not as virgin "0 Mono-Kote 3 from the bag. 21 Q So you have never taken a piece of Mono-Kote 3 from the 22 bag before it was mixed and done any research on that 23 product, is that right? 24 A Yes. FRANCES M. CAWLINA ASSOCIATES 1 Q Okay. So the only research you have acre cr. "K-3 is or material that was already in place and has beer, removed? 3 A Correct. 4 0 Have you ever done research on the atmosphere around the Zf installation of J-xK ~ 3 ? 6 MR. KUTNER: Objection. 7 A Since I wasn't at Grace at that time, so whatever they 8 did, the air analysis is not--I don't know anything about 9 at all. 10 C Okay. Well, then, so I can be sure I understand your 11 areas of expertise, or at least the things that you've 12 done work on, the only work you've done with MK-3 is on 13 material that has been removed that was previously 14 installed? 15 A Correct. 16 C Okay. Now, in this document right here, you did some work 17 to determine tremolite contamination of vermiculite? 18 A I was asked to interface with Arthur E. Little to carry 19 out the analytical work. 20 Q Okay. Are youa minerolcgist? 21 A No, I'm a chemist by training. 22 C All right. Mir.erolcgy, is that an area that you profess 23 some expertise in? 24 A Yes. FRANCES M. CAWLINA ASSOCIATES A 1 Q And did you feel comfortable doing an analysis of the 2 vermiculite to determine-how much tremolite or asbestos 3 was in it? 4 A Do I feel comfortable? 5 Q Yes. 6 A What do you mean by that? 7 Q In other words, this project that is the subject of this 8 memo describes the possible occurrence of asbestos in 9 Mono-Kote; and after reading it, it would appear that 10 somebody asked you to review the nature of 11 asbestos/tremolite contamination of vermiculite. D'id you 12 feel that that was within your area of expertise to 13 accomplish? 14 MR. KUTNER: Objection. 15 A Yes. 16 Q And your report indicates that the vermiculite was in fact 17 contaminated with asbestos. 18 MR. KUTNER: Objection. 19 A Yes, that's based on the analysis made by the Arthur D. 20 Little Company. 21 Q Did you do any of the work or are you merely repeating 22 back what Arthur D. Little found? 23 A I am repeating the Arthur D. Little work. I had done 24 nothing at that time. FRANCES M. CAWLINA ASSOCIATES 41 1 Q Okay. And I take it you have a copy of Arthur Little's I 2 report? ; 3 A Yes, I do. 4 MR. BARON: Again, we'dmake a request for you to j 5 produce that. iI ; 6 Q Now, the next one is PX-21, and it is a memo to ii 7 H. A. Brown, dated July 26, 1973, "Subject: Asbestos in 8 Vermiculite and Mono-Kote," referencing your earlier memo. 9 This is signed by Mr. Duecker. Have you seen this 10 document before? 11 (Witness examined document.) i ! 12 A I probably did, because I remember Dr. Duecker discussed 13 this with me, but I didn't remember whether I saw that 14 exactly or not. 15 Q Okay. The last paragraph says: "In conclusion, it is our 16 opinion that Libby and Enoree"--E-n-o-r-e-e--"Mono-Kote 17 may contain trace amounts of fibrous tremolite at 18 concentrations less than the limit of detection using the 19 X-ray diffraction technique. Enoree Mono-Kote may also 20 contain platy tremolite. The average content of the total 21 tremolite in Mono-Kote is about .2 to .5 percent." But it 22 says that "Individual samples may give higher values, but 23 an entire bag of Mono-Kote probably never contains more 24 than .2 to .5 percent total tremolite." FRANCES M. CAWLINA ASSOCIATES 42 1 Was that the end of the investigation? 2 MR. KUTNER: Objection. 3 A I don't remember exactly what happened to it. 4 Q What is platy tremolite? 5 A Actually, it's massive. It's not platy. 6 Q Okay. We heard testimony a little earlier from a 7 Mr. Cintani. Do you know him, James Cintani? 8 A Yes. 9 Q He said that Mono-Kote 3, which contained asbestos, did 10 not contain fibrous material. Do you know what he was 11 talking about? 12 MR. KUTNER: Objection. 13 A What's this? 14 MR. KUTNER: I believe that you're 15 mischaracterizing the testimony. 16 Q Chrysotile asbestos is always, in.its commercial form, 17 fibrous, is it not? 18 A Chrysotile asbestos in commercial form, it is fibrous. 19 Q I'm going to show you PX-22, which is a memo to 20 Mr. 0. F. Stewart at Enoree, South Carolina, dated 21 August 31, 1973, from Julie C. Yang, "Subject: Treomlite 22 Determination in South Carolina Vermiculite Ores." Is 23 that a document that you authored? 24 (Witness examined document.) FRANCES M. CAWLINA ASSOCIATES 1 A Yes. 2 Q Is that your signature? 3 A Yes. 4 Q Now, Dr. Yang, you have been listed as a witness in the 5 case of Max G. Williams versus W. R. Grace, and it states 6 that "Dr. Yang will testify regarding the chemical 7 composition of Mono-Kote, and she will further testify 8 regarding the testing of Mono-Kote." 9 First of all, were you aware that you had-been 10 listed as a witness? 11 A Yes. 12 Q Have you discussed your testimony in the Max Williams case 13 with anyone? 14 A Max Williams, case? I don't-- 15 Q The one in Omaha, Nebraska, that you've been listed on. 16 A No. 17 Q Okay. Didyou intend to testify regarding the chemical 18 composition of Mono-Kote 3? 19 MR. KUTNER: Objection. 20 A Raw materialor finished product? 21 Q Let's talk about raw material as it is being installed. 22 A I cannot testify that, because I'm not here at--I was not 23 at Grace at that time. 24 Q But you're not going to testify based on studies of FRANCES M. CAWLINA ASSOCIATES 44 1 others, is that right? 2 MR. KUTNER: Objection. 3 A What do you mean, "study of others"? 4 C In other words, you're not planning to say, "Oh, I read a 5 study about MK-3 that was done before I got here, and 6 here's how I interpret it." 7 MR. KUTNER: Objection. 8 Q Are you planning to do that? 9 MR. KUTNER: Objection. 10 A I don't understand the question that well. I'm sorry. 11 Q Let me be sure that we're on the same track. In this 12 particular case, Mr. Williams's case, I'm talking about, 13 at this point, there will be testimony that Mr. Williams 14 worked around the installation of MK-3. 15 MR. KUTNER: Objection. 16 Q There will be testimony that he worked around the 17 installation of MK-3 and was exposed to asbestos emanating 18 from MK-3 as it was being installed. Do you expect to 19 give any testimony pertaining to the installation of MK-3? 20 MR. KUTNER: Objection. 21 A No. 22 Q Okay. Now, it says that you will further testify 23 regarding the testing of Mono-Kote. Do you expect to give 24 testimony pertaining to the testing of MK-3 at any point? FRANCES M. CAWLINA ASSOCIATES 45 1 A If you get the MK-3 product, I would analyze. Or I look 2 at other people's analysis, can make comments on it. 3 Q All right. Have you yourself tested MK-3 product? 4 A What do you mean by that? 5 Q Product in place. 6 A Product in place? 7 Q Right. 8 A Taken down for sample analysis? 9 Q Yes. 10 A Yes. 11 Q And what types of analysis have you made on the MK-3 12 product that's been taken down from a job site and 13 analyzed? 14 A Litigation cases-- 15 Q Okay. 16 A --and other cases which our product manager asked me to 17 do. 18 Q So the work that you have done has been exclusively 19 centered around defending W. R. Grace in product-liability 20 cases? 21 A No. 22 MR. KUTNER: Objection. 23 Q What else has there been? 24 A Well, if a customer is interested in whether he has FRANCES N. CAWLINA ASSOCIATES 46 1 asbestos or whether he has Mono-Kote 3 on the ceiling or 2 as a fireproofing material, they ask Grace either as a 3 favor or they are thinking about removal, they ask us to 4 do it. Not necessarily in litigation cases. 5 Q Okay. In other words, if a prior customer comes in and 6 wants to know what it is they've got on the I beams, you 7 make an analysis? 8 A Maybe. 9 Q When did you begin to make analyses on MK-3? 10 A Probably in the'70s. 11 Q Late '70s? 12 A I don't recall the exact year. 13 Q Okay. Was the first time that you did it for litigation 14 purposes? 15 A No. 16 Q What was the first time that you did it? 17 A I don't remember, but it's in the documents. 18 Q All right. Dr. Yang, have you done chemical-composition 19 analysis of MK-3? 20 A As a product, finished product. 21 Q Yes. 22 A Yes. 23 Q Have you been ableto determine what is the average 24 concentration of asbestos fiber in MK-3? FRANCES M. CAWLINA ASSOCIATES 1 MR. K"T!'EP: Objection. A Yes. 3 C And what isthat? * A It's between 11 to about 13 percent, in that range. 5 C All right. So the material that has beer, taker, dcwr. from, 6 wherever it was installed and analyzed by you, that it, 7 KK-3, generally contains somewhere between 11 and 13 8 percent asbestos by weight? 9 A Ey weight. 10 MR. KUTNER: Objection. 11 A But I have to make--the classified answer is: Wherv the 12 material is being analyzed, they have the right ingredient 13 as Mono-Rote 3. They may have--the weight percentage 14 resembles Mono-Kote 3, but I don't know if it's really 15 Mono-Kote 3 or not. 16 Q Because it doesn't have a label on it? 17 A Not only that. I understand there are ether companies 18 making similar material with similar composition at that 19 time. 20 Q So you really, there's no way to know whether it's really 21 MK-3, because they were all fairly generic? would that be 22 a fair statement? 23 MR. KUTNEP.: Objection. 24 A That, I don't know. But I know there are materials FRANCES K. CAWLINA ASSOCIATES 48 1 available that are like that. 2 Q Now, the 11 to 13 percent is by weight? 3 A By weight. 4 Q What about by volume? 5 A It's difficult to judge by volume. Depends on the 6 application methods. 7 Q Okay. What have you found in terms of a range by volume? 8 MR. KUTNER: Objection. 9 A We always do it by weight. 10 Q You've never done it by volume? 11 A I don't do it by volume. 12 Q It would be much higher by volume because of the 13 inherently light weight of asbestos fibers, would it not? 14 MR. KUTNER: Objection. 15 Q Isn't that true? 16 A No. 17 Q Would it be smaller by volume? 18 A I don't know, because you have to go through a lot of 19 series of compilations on density of different materials 20 to be present and the way they have been applied. If you 21 sprayed it on, you will have a lot of high pressure and 22 low pressure; you will end up with a very different 23 density of the material. 24 Q Okay. Well, Dr. Yang, I recently took the deposition of FRANCES M. CAWLINA ASSOCIATES 49 1 the plant manager of the W. R. Grace facility in North 2 Little Rock, who was the'individual -- his job initially was 3 making Mono-Kote 3, and he said that he used about i 4 25 percent asbestos by volume in the manufacture of MK-3. i j 5 Do you know whether that's in the ball park or not in the j 6 ball park? 7 MR. KUTNER: Objection. | 6 A I have no idea what he's talking about, because I don't j 9 know the volume percent. ! 10 Q So have you ever seen the formula for how MK-3 is made? 11 A I saw the mixing record from some plants, but that's in 12 weight percent. 13 Q So you've only seen it by weight; you've never seen it by 14 volume? 15 A Grace formula is by weight percent. 16 Q Now, what else have you determined from youranalysis of 17 MK-3 other than the percentage by weight of asbestos 18 fiber? 19 A We study every component present in the Mono-Kote 3. We 20 break it down all in weight percentage. 21 Q Other than doing an analysis of the composition ofMK-3, 22 have you done other analyses of MK-3? 23 A Other-- 24 Q Let me make it clearer. You've told us that you have done FRANCES M. CAWLINA ASSOCIATES 50 1 analyses of the material by weight of MK-3. 2 A Yes. 3 Q Have you done any other analysis of MK-3? 4 A Such as what? 5 C Such as anything other than determining its chemical 6 composition by weight. 7 A I don't think so. 8 Q Have you determined the movement of asbestos fibers within 9 the material that is called MK-3 that has been taken off, 10 the migration of the material? 11 MR. KUTNERs Objection. 12 A The migration? 13 q Do you understand my question? 14 A Is that--you are talking about air sampling? 15 Q Yes. Have you done any of that work? 16 A As I told you, in Mono-Kote 3, because I think when I 17 joined Grace, I don't have anything to do with the air 18 counting sample until several years later. So I would say 19 I have no knowledge on the air counting, air sampling, of 20 Mono-Kote 3. 21 Q All right. Well, would it be fair to say, then, that your 22 testimony pertaining to Mono-Kote 3 will be limited to its 23 chemical composition by weight? 24 MR. KUTNER: Objection. FRANCES M. CAWLINA ASSOCIATES si 1 A I would say if people are removing some material called 2 Mono-Kote 3, from Grace data, Grace record, it was 3 Mono-Kote 3. If they remove it, if they took air samples, 4 the counting, the counting of the fibers will be dene, was 5 done, by my laboratory. 6 Q All right. So you are going to testify, then, on air 7 sampling for the removal of MK-3? 8 MR. KUTNER: Objection. 9 Q Do I understand that to be your testimony? 10 A We are doing it only mechanically on counting it, but we 11 gave the data to the CIH, and they do the final reports. 12 Q Okay. 13 A So I have nothing to do with the actual evaluation of the 14 final data. 15 Q Okay. And you do not intend to express any opinions at 16 this trial, do you, on the airborne concentrations of 17 asbestos from MK-3? 18 MR. KUTNER: Objection. 19 A Correct. 20 Q Again, I want to be specific here. Other than testifying 21 on the chemical composition of MK-3 by weight, do you know 22 of any other testimony that you will offer pertaining to 23 MK-3? 24 A I don't think so. FRANCES M. CAWLINA ASSOCIATES 52 1 Q Okay. What about the nonasbestos Mono-Kote? Do you 2 expect to offer testimony onthe nonasbestos-containir.g i 3 Mono-Kote product? j i i 4 MR. KUTNER:Objection. | | i 5 A What do you mean, nonasbestos-containing Mono-Kote? Would j ! 6 you specify what you are talking about? 7 Q All right. There has been testimony in this case-- 8 MR. KUTNER: Can I just interrupt here to provide a 9 statement. To the extent that there have been discussions 10 with any of the Grace witnesses concerning expected 11 testimony, those discussions would have occurred with 12 their attorneys, and to the extent now that you're asking 13 about conversations that may have occurred with Grace 14 attorneys, certainly the witnesses are not going to 15 provide any information, and that has been the case with 16 Ms. Yang's prior testimony. 17 MR. BARON: Okay. 18 Q Have you ever testified in a trial before? 19 A Not in court. 20 Q Okay. Just by deposition? 21 A Yes. 22 Q Have each of those depositions been depositions where the 23 opposing lawyer such as myself has asked you questions? 24 A Yes. FRANCES M. CAWLINA ASSOCIATES 53 I 1 Q Have you ever given testimony for use in trial by a Grace j 2 lawyer? 3 A What do you mean by that? 4 Q In other words, have you ever had a W. R. Grace lawyer 5 question you as if you were in court for use in court? 6 A You mean following the deposition directly or in a 7 separate case? 8 MR. BARON: Let me ask you, Mr. Kutner: Has she 9 ever given an evidence deposition or are they all 10 discovery depositions? 11 MR. KUTNER: We don't distinguish, because they all 12 can be used in evidence. 13 MR. BARON: Certainly they can, but do you recall 14 any deposition she's given where the Grace lawyer has gone 15 through her testimony with her? 16 MR. KUTNER: I don't have any specific 17 recollection, but that's not to say that there isn't. 18 MR. BARON: All right. 19 Q Do you have any opinion as to whether MK-3 is hazardous to 20 the health of human beings? 21 MR. KUTNER: Objection. 22 A I dor.' form any health opinion, since I am not an M.D. 23 Q Has anybody ever told you or given you information that 24 would indicate that MK-3 was a product that was not FRANCES M. CAWLINA ASSOCIATES 34 1 hazardous to human beings? 2 MR. KUTNER: Objection. 3 A You are asking a negative question. Would you repeat 4 that? 5 Q Okay. Have you ever been given any information by anyone 6 that MK-3 was not hazardous to human beings? 7 MR. KUTNER: Objection. 8 (There was discussion off the record.) 9 A I don't recall what I was told in such a long time I have 10 been with Grace. 11 Q All right. Do you have any knowledge as to whether- MK-3 12 can cause lung problems in human beings? 13 MR. KUTNER: Objection. 14 A It must be; otherwise they don't change into a nonasbestos 15 product. 16 MR. KUTNER: I'll move to strike. 17 Q And do you understand that that's the reason they went to 18 a nonasbestos product? 19 A I don't. 20 MR. KUTNER: Objection. 21 C Have you ever seen a package of MK-3? 22 A A package? What do you mean, "a package"? 23 Q Unused MK-3 that was still in a bag. 24 A No. FRANCES M. CAWLINA ASSOCIATES 1 MR. BARON: You're free to go. Thank you. 2 (Deposition concluded at 12:30 p.m.) 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 FRANCES M. CAWLINA ASSOCIATES CERTIFICATE COMMONWEALTH OF MASSACHUSETTS ) SS COUNTY OF ESSEX I, Linda A. Johnson, Notary Public in anc for the Commonwealth of Massachusetts, do hereby certify: That JULIE C. YANG, the witness whose deposition is hereinbefore set forth, was duly sworn by me and that the foregoing transcript is a true record of the testimony given by such witness, to the best of my knowledge, skill, and ability. I further certify that I am not related to any of the parties in this matter by blood or marriage and that I am in no way interested in the outcome of this matter. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed my seal this 22d day of March, 1988. My commission expires May 9, 1991 LINDA AA . JOHNS Notary Public FRANCES M. CAWLINA ASSOCIATES ! y/U- / <:- TO: H. C. Duecker CAMBRIDGE RECtlVED DEC 1 31972 DATE: Dec. i3, awe*"" Mcouets* . a. e. ow**o' FROM: Julie Yang CC: _H. Brpwa-- A. M. Rosenberg SUBJECT: Comments on the Report Carcluoger Screening of Vermicuiite by Huntington Research Center Huntington, England The report has offered valuable information for environmental health hazard studies on the South African vermicuiite. Unfortunately, it was presented solely from a medical point of viev, and no information on the chemical compositions, geological formations with the associated minerals of the vermicuiite or asbestos were given. If ve are interested in running a parallel'study on our vermicuiite, I would propose studing the following: 1) vermicuiite from the Montana mine. 2) vermicuiite from the South Carolina mine 3) a synthetic composite made of a pure vermicuiite and a known amount of tremolite, preferably in two levels covering the range: of the tremolite content in our mines. U) chrysotile asbestos control. The injection of a suspension of 25 mg material in 0.2 ml physiological saline solution is the UICC (Uhion Internationale Contre le Cancer) standard test employed for animal study. In addition to all the des criptive histology and the macroscopic pathology studies of the testing animals. I would think that a few photomicrographs of the thin tissue sections of the animals suffering from mesothelioma and the ones injected with vermicuiite for comparison will be more illustrative to laymen. JCY:Jmh Q. f J. C. Yang Q EXHIBIT CAMBRIDGE RECEIVED TO: H. C. Duecker DEC 2 0 1972 DATE: Dec. 19, 197^.^ FROM: Julie Yang CC: a. M. Rosenberg T. P. Felt J. L. Wright / B. R.sWilliams H. A, grown SUBJECT: Commercial Products Containing Asbestos The following is an attempt to tabulate the conmerical products containing asbestos. If you have any further information, please let us know and it will be added to this list. A. Mineral Products without Commercial Asbestos 1. Dusting powder (talc) 2. Mold releasing agent (talc) B Composite Materials containing Commercial Asbestos 1. Brake lining - automobile and railroad 2. Roofing shingles 3. High temperature gaskets - with metal, impregnated in rubber like material 4. Ropes, tapes, gloves, suits, curtains and fabrics 5. Insulation Material - rigid blocks, hot pipe covers, tapes 6. Acoustical materials 7. Floor tile - vinyl asbestos and asbestos asphalt tiles 8. Asbestos cement products - pipes, boards, extruded foxms, laboratory bench tops, sinks JCTrJmh (P----- fy 3. C. Yang 0 2 EXHIBIT * * _ ' ** ^ CAMBRIDGE TO: H C. Duecker FROM: J. C CC: K. A. Brarm T. ?. Felt A. M. Rosenberg 3. R. Williams J. L. 1/'right DATE: June 26, 1973 SUBJECT. The possible occurance of asbestos in .Vonckose Fill: 500 Asb. Detn. E-vpanied Vcrmiculite samples and Monokote products from various mining locations and plants have been analyzed since Dec.. 1972, by quantitative X-ray diffraction method (developed by Arthur D. Little, Inc.). Hide is suppl/'mented by -nude ml microseoyy (dispersioa staicing techniques da.*sloped by Arthur D. Little, Lie.), transcission electron microscopy (rub-cut method, developed by Johns-Manville, but used ourselves at '.TRC) and scanning electron microscopy vith X-ray fluorescence analysis attachments (Arthur D. Little, Inc.). Based on the e:<perine.ntal results collected up to date, tentative con clusions and comments are summarized as fcilovs: 1. Vermiculite contains a small amount of asbestos in the range of 0.%. The only asbestos species detected is trar.olite; it can be either in ?laty or fibrous mor phology. The analyses ere presented in Table 1. 2. Templing technique for the analysis is extremely important all the analytical techniques mentioned above require very small specimens. 3ecause of the hetercgenecus nature c: mineral species present, difference in density ar.d forms, segregation, tends to occur. Representative analysis of a trace mineral in t'.iis material can be achieved only by collecting a large number of samples, perhaps 10 or more randomly and average the findings. Repetitious sampling (in Tables 1 and 2) shov the variations in the determinations. Monohoii product contains approximately a naninvc of 3?": u-.-sd vomiculite, ry?sum and c minor mtcunt ) of - unic materials. The only asbestos containing i.nrrc.:- i.* veruiculite. Since the tremolite content of sh? c.r.u .-'c vc: < r. out 0.7(J, yo.nohote pretue: have 1 :ns than O.o tremclite by cmnputation. Lac crater oral :i~ shm: in Tnble 2 confirms the cornered res.Its. U. vie Lr e continuously inprovir.g the techniques for those analyses such as to daterrir.e the ratio of platy fora vs. fibrous fora of translate, to distinguish the fibrous tranolite vs. other fibrous-lihe nir.arals such as horn blende and contaainar.ts vhich nay lead to core accurate resolutions and identifications. La addition, ve are trying to ceteraine the r.under of sanples required to give a statistically reliable analysis. / C. zb Table 1 - Analysis of .anded Verniculite :!o. Identification !To. 1 22203-2 2 22209-9 3 22202-10 1 22209-11 5 22209-12 Dascriotion of Sarnies Locacio.n o: Ore Locations of liromlinsj (S) Trnnolita Content Analysed Ly: ADL J!I South Carolina Trenton C.3D East Hanoton 0.80 0 Honoana South Carolina Denver Little P.ocSc 0.2? <0.2,0.'~5 - South Carolina Snaree <0.2 0 Avira^.: ADI jk Total 0.`<J 0.23 6 Table 2 - Analy onc osuets fn 22203-9 22202-10 22203-U Hi 22203-12 15 22209-1 Ssscrictic.n of Sanoies Location of Cre Location of Han. Denver Los Arjeles ::uir:oir:-. Ors.-or. 0 C o 0 CC.2 "\ C /'Z * A) TO: H. A. Brown FROM: H. C. Duecker CC: M* Vining CAMBRIDGE Received JUL31 15/3 '='1 DATE: 505673 SUBJECT: Asbestos in Vermiculite and MONO-KOTE* Ref: Yang's 6/26/73 memo. Brown's 7/10/73 memo Normally, the analyses of tremolite in MONO-KOIE and vermiculite are given only by ore sources. Yang's memo of June 26, 1973 was a compilation of data to be submitted to the EPA with the intention of showing that MONO-KOTE contained no more than trace quantities of tremolite. To be accurate, all analyses had to be considered. The picture regarding the relative tremolite contents of Enoree and Libby vermiculite is not clear to us at this time and the data were purposely presented as they were in view of the following facts: 1. Using our x-ray diffraction technique, tremolite has thus far been detected only in M0N0-K0TE made with Enoree vermiculite. No tremolite has been detected in any analysis of M0N0-K0TE made with Libby vermiculite.(Correction: 1 sample with tremolite.) 2. Microscopic examination of the Enoree MONO-KOTE samples which contain tremolite shows that at least some of this tremolite is present in the fiber form. of platy to fibrous tremolite within a sample of MONO-KOTE or vermiculite, and therefore cannot make further statements in scientific confidence. It is our opinion that: a. The platy tremolite of the Enoree deposit is higher than the platy content of the Libby deposit. b. Platy tremolite is more difficult to separate from platy ver miculite (in the milling process) than is fibrous tremolite. c. The platy tremolite has some tendency to fragment upon expan sion, giving some tremolite falling within the fibrous defini tion. However, we believe that the majority of the tremolite remains in the platy form. In conclusion, it is our opinion that Libby and Enoree MONO-KOTE may contain trace amounts of fibrous tremolite at concentrations less than the limit of detection using the x-ray diffraction technique. Enoree MONO-KOTE may also contain platy tremolite. The average content of the total tremolite in MONO-K0IE is about 0.2-0.5^. (Due to the inhomogenity of the product and day to day variation, individual samples may give higher values, but an entire bag of MONO-KOTE probably never contains more than 0.2-0.5^ total tremolite.) HCD:mlr H. C. Duecker ; EXHIBIT IPX- 21 ;; S8 '*i X:` P Y TO: CAMBRIDGE 0. F. Stewart, Znoree, S.C.date:. August 31, 1973 29526 FROM: Julie C. Yang CC: R. M. Vinning H. A. Brown / T. Lyall W. F. McCord J. L. Wright H. C. Dueckar A. M. Rosenberg SUBJECT: -------- - Trenolite Determination la South Carolina VeraiCulite Ores T" FILE: 150 - Asbestos Deteraination in Versiculite Ores table of corrzzrrrs: Objective Sunnary Material Received Experimental Work Discussion of Results Conclusion Recomnendations for Added Study Appendix 1 Table 1 Figures i to 5 OBJECTIVE: To determine the trenolite content in S.C. vemiculite ores at various locations. SUMMARY: Instrumental means were employed to determine the asbestos content in. S.C. ores. The findings are listed as follows: 1. There are asbestiforn fibers present in S.C. ores, but mostly very fine and snail. All the identifiable fibers are hornblende, an alioinun-rich anphibole. So far no information has been published to indicate whether this material is detrimental to health or not, as of other types of amphibolcs (trenolite, crocidolite and amosite) and chrysotile asbestos. 2. The only detectable difference between Allen and Waldrup type specimens from the same location (Poole fr7) is that the Allen type has relatively higher talc and hornblende contents than the Waldrup sample. 2 EXHIBIT K- 22 ju j fa 'H-ii Jjj MATERIALS RECEIVED: The following samples were submitted from 0. F. Stewart, Ecoree, S.C. at R. M. Vihning'3 request for trenolite analysis: Semple No. Deposit Type 22210-1 2 3 k 5 6 7 8 Poole {ft Poole ift Allen Poole #3 Burns Meadows Yarborough Lanford Allen Waldrup Allen Waldrup Waldrup Waldrup Waldrup EXPERIMENTAL WORK: Instnraental Methods Employed X-Ray Diffraction A rapid, non destructive method to identify crystal line materials such as mineral species Scanning Electron Microscooe (SEM) Optical Microscopy To study the morphology of particules To identify individual particules by its optical properties Electron Probe Analysis (EPA) To analyze the elements present and the relative quantities of them DISCUSSION OF RESULTS: The instrumental analyses were done at Arthur D. Little, Inc. by Dr. E. Peters and his colleagues, the interpretations were made by J. C. Yang in collaboration with S. Peters. 1. X-Ray Diffraction Data The ore samples as receivad shewed an intense x-ray diffraction peak at 20-23.5*. The position employed for our previous quantitative measurement of trenolite in KonokoteM end expanded vermiculite frem Libby mine. Attempts were made to expand tha vermiculite 1) chemically with cone, hydrogen peroxide and 2) thermally for 3 minutes at l^CO"7. but in the expanded samples tha unwanted peak at 23.5 persisted. It -J- oaxxc c. long 2952S was then decided to perform the x-ray diffraction analysis to provide Identification and quantitative estimates of the mineral species present, and to examine the fibers in several samples by scanning electronraicroscope. If fibers were present, they would be identified by the optical properties and electron probe analysis for its elemental ratio. The mineral species in the samples were analyzed and tabulated in Table 1. All the samples were found to have x-ray diffraction peaks that correspond to hornblende or trcaolite. Based upon the diffrac tion peak at 8.40 A hornblende line, the quantity of hornblende in various samples were estimated and corporated with other results in Table 1. The distinction between hornblende and tranolite, as veil as whether they are in platy or fibrous fora was then detemlned by SOI and EEA. 2. Scanning Electron Microscopic (SEM) Examination and Electron Probe Analysis (EPA) A few representative photographs and profiles for the elements present are shown in Figs. 1 to 5. Elements corresponding to various peak position are: Mg 1.25 A1 1.47 Si 1.75 K 3.30 Ca 3.70 Ca 4.05 Ti 4.55 Fe 6.40 Fe 7.05 Several fibrous particles were observed in each sample by SEM. The chemical composition by the probe analysis showed that the ele mental ratio of 5Mg-lAl-l6Si-4Ca, whereas the tremolite standard from Libby yielded a relative ratio of 5Mg-20Si-lX-3Ca. It thus appeared the analyzed fibers were hornblende instead of tremolite as we suspected. Other non-fibrous particles showed the typical ratio of 2Mg-lAl-5Si (Veraiculitc) with occasional replacement of sane or all of the Mg by K (hydrobiotite). 3. Optical Examinations Two of the samples 22210-2, Poole {ft (Waldrup) and 22210-6, Meadows (Waldrup) were examined by optical microscope, utilizing the Montana tremolite sample as a standard. Observed fibers were found to have the refractive indices in the range of those of horn blende (measure h.~ 1.623, 1.648) which are considerably higher than the values for tremolite ( V, 1.599> 1.625). 4. Chemistry of Hornblende 29529 Hornblende series is a family in the aaphibole asbestos group which shows a considerable variation in composition. The principle features of the composition are the presence of both Ca and Ha or K, the former dominating, the A1 is partially substituted for Mg and Si, and most of the members ore deficient in silica. The composition of the series nay be expressed by the two end members: CauH2Mg10Al2Sil404U(OH, P)4 edenite Ca^KagO-Ig, Fe)gAl^Si124li^0?I hastingsite Compared with tremolite CagMg^SigOg^OHjg. Fluroine commonly enters into the composition to replace OH in part, Mg by Fell, A1 by Fc-^I, as do Ti and Mu for cations. Such as Pargasite (Na,K) Ca2Mg4Al^Sig022(0H)2 and Barroisite (Ca,Na)22g(Mg,Fe,Al)^ 15(Si,Al)Q022(0H)2 are the intermediate members. These minerals are monoclinic in crystal structure, and have fiber-like appearance but usually very chunky (low aspect ratio). These or<*> easily ^ulvsri^iblc ^ from either the harsh Mg-amphibole, tremolite; Fe-anphibole, crociiolite and Fe-Mg amphibole, anosite or from the silty, flexible chrysotile asbestos fibers. Wo known literature published to date has baen found discussing the effect of hornblende to health. C0NCLU3I0:;S: 1. All the S.C. ore samples analyzed are very similar in mineral compositions. All of them are rich in vemiculite and hydrobiotite with minor amounts of hornblende, talc and quartz. 2. All samples examined contain asbestiform fibers that have been identified as hornblende, an Al-rich amphobile, which are fiberlike under light and electron microscope. This material is, at this time, an unknown health hazard. 3* The difference of Allen & Waldrup type specimens from the same location is the relative talc and hornblende content. Allen type seems to be richer in both. U. The SE1 preparation procedure tends to emphasize the smallest size particles, so that the method is not quantitative. Of an these samples examined, 22210-2, Poole i-7 (w'alarup) appeared to contain the largest fraction of fibers. RECOMMENDATIONS FOR ADDED STUDY: 29530 V Since hornblende is a fibrous anphibole, the carcinogenic potential of this material has not yet been found in any literature, but it may be questioned in the future because of composition and structure closely associated with tresolite and other eaphiboles. It is suggested to contact outside agencies to have on animal study made on the potential carcinogenic effects of horblende, compared with treaolite and chrysolite fibers. Usually, the test will take one to two years, but by then we will know for sure whether this material exhibits any cancer-inducing potential. Agencies and Institutions equipped to do this type of work: 1. Huntingdon Research Center Huntingdon, England - where the carcinogenic screening of verniculite (S.A.) was done in 1970-1972. 2. Dr. Lewis J. Cralley Occupational Health Program National Center for Urban and Industrial Health Public Health Serivce 101U Broadway Cincinnati, Ohio U5202 - previous contact, had studied emohiboles and chrysotile of various length, pure synthetic cnrysotiie end chrysotile with added Ni, Fe, Co, etc. in the structure. 3. Dr. Paul Gross M.D. Industrial Hygiene Research Unit Dept, of Occupational Health Graduate School of Public Health University of Pittsburgh Pittsburgh, Pa. 15213 - previous contact, did similar studies as Dr. Cralley. Julie C. `.CABLE 1 determination of mineral components present Hi SOUTH CAROLINA VBIMICULITE CHE (BY X-RAY DIFFRACTION METHOD) W :i/ t J v 29531 SAMPLE NO. 22210-1 2 3 4 6 DESCRIPTION Poole (5*7 (Allen) VERMICULITE 444 Poole #7 (Waldrup) ++ Allen (Allen) +++ Poole #3 444 Meadows (Waldrup) ++ HYDROBI0TIT5 444 444 444 444 444 HORNBLENDE TOEMOLITE TALC +4 (10-20$)* 44 + (2-5$) 7 + (5-10$) 444 + (2-5$) +4 (10-20$) 44 QUARTZ 4 Trace - 4 Trace Legend: + Major (> 50$) + Intermediate (10-40$) 4 Minor (1-9$) ? Doubtful (<1$) - None * The percentage of hornblende in the parenthesis was deteroined by the intensity of 2 <? 8.1*0 A*. Figure 1 0/31/73 v SEW AND ELECTRON PROBE ANALYSIS OF SAMPLE 22210-1 29532 Poole #7, S.C. (Allen) (1000 X) Figure 2 / ->-/ V SE1 AM) ELECTION FR03E AIIALY3I3 OF SAMPLE 22210-2 2953 Poole S.C. (Waldrup) Figure 3 SEM a:ID ELECTRO!I IttOaE A.'IAIYOIJ CF SAHFLE 22210-j v Allen, S.C. (Allen) 29534 UMPV&I <V JJ./ ' j Figure 4 SEW AND ELECTRON PROBE ANALYSIS OF SAMPLE 22210-6 Meadows, S.C. 2953 Figure 5 t/ SEM AMD ELECTRON PROBE ANALYSIS OF SAMPLE 22210-8V Lanford, s.C. (Waldrup) 29536