Document 35JGbkY9MOE8ddkgzr9JD58E

THE SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF SAN FRANCISCO ******************************************************** ROERT GRAHN, ET AL., * VS. ' * NO. 922682 ABEX CORPORATION, ET AL., * ******************************************************** Gerald Grahn vs. Abex Corp., Et A1. John Purcell vs. Abex Corp., Et Al. Gertrude Ross vs. Abex Corp., Et Al. Fern Smothers vs. Abex Corp., Et Al. Wanda Bright vs. Abex Corp., Et Al. D. Jennings vs. Abex Corp., Et Al. Lavon Banks vs. Abex Corp., Et Al. A. Lecce vs. Abex Corp., Et Al. Eli Waller vs. Abex Corp., Et Al. No. 982678 No. 925509 No. 889978 No. 863042 No. 931047 No. 910359 No. 915341 No. 920265 No. 934412 DEPOSITION OF JAMES HAMMOND . VOLUME IV October 14, 1992 Exxon Company USA 1600 Milam, Suite 123 h < f. ' Houston, Texas COr \ NELL MC CALLUM & ASSOCIATES, INC. EXX-MOR-003652 1 Reported by: 2 Linda S. Towery 3 Texas CSR No. 2413 4 Nell McCallum & Associates, Inc. 5 2900 Smith, Suite 104 6 Houston, Texas 77006 7 (713) 523-3767 8 9 APPEARANCES: 10 For the Plaintiffs! 11 FRANK A. GROVE, ESQ. 12 Brayton, Gisvold & Harley 13 999 Grant Avenue 14 P.O. Box 2109 15 Novato, California 94948 16 17 For the CSR Defendants: 18 MEL D. BAILEY, ESQ. 19 DeHay & Elliston, L.L.P. 20 1500 Maxus Energy Tower 21 717 North Harwood Street 22 Dallas, Texas 75201-6508 23 24 25 2 NELL MC CALLUM & ASSOCIATES, INC. EXX-MOR-003653 3 1 For the Defendant Mine Safety Appliances Company 2 (Smothers Case Only); 3 CHARLES S. BISHOP, ESQ. 4 Jedeikin, Green, Sprague & Bishop 5 ` 300 Montgomery Street 6 Suite 450 7 San Francisco, California 94104 8 9 For the Defendant Exxon Company USA; 10 GLENNA M. KYLE, ESQ. 11 Exxon Company USA 12 800 Bell Street . 13 P.O. Box 2180 * 14 Houston, Texas 77252-3180 15 16 For the Defendant Plant Insulation Company; 17 BRUCE G. CHUSID, ESQ. _ 18 Jackson & Wallace 19 33 New Montgomery Street 20 18th Floor 21 San Francisco, California 94105 22 23 24 25 NELL MC CALLUM & ASSOCIATES, INC. EXX-MOR-003654 4 1 For the Defendant Oscar E. Erikson, Inc., and 2 C.F. Braun: 3 LOU ANN CLOY, ESQ. 4 Benckenstein, Oxford & Johnso, L.L.P. 5 Third Floor First 6 Interstate Bank Building 7 P.O. Drawer 150 8 Beaumont, Texas 77704 9 10 For the Defendants Shell Oil Company, Chevron USA, 11 and Phillips Petroleum: 12 BERRIDGE R. MARSH, ESQ. 13 Sedgwick, Detert, Moran & Arnold - 14 One Embarcadero Center, Sixteenth Floor 15 San Francisco, California 94111-3765 16 17 For the Witness: 18 DAVID LEDYARD, ESQ. 19 Strong, Pipkin, Nelson & Bissel 20 595 Orleans Street 21 14th Floor 22 San Jacinto Building 23 Beaumont, Texas 77701-3255 24 25 ******** NELL MC CALLUM & ASSOCIATES, INC. EXX-MOR-003655 5 1 Deposition of JAMES HAMMOND, taken on 2 October 14, 1992, at Exxon Company USA , 1600 Milam, 3 Suite 123, Houston, Texas, commencing at 10:00 a.m., 4 before Linda S. Towery, CSR No. 2413 in and for the 5 State of Texas, pursuant to Notice 6 7 - ******** 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 18 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 NELL MC CALLUM & ASSOCIATES, INC. EXX-MOR-003656 6 1 2 EXAMINATION BYs 3 Mr. Grove INDEX PAGE 7 4 Mr. Bailey 86 5 Mr. Bishop 105 6 Mr. Chusid 7 142 8 EXHIBITS 9 10 NO. DESCRIPTION PAGE 11 16 A one-page letter to C.B. Moore from 48 12 13 17 James W. Hammond, dated January 15, 1974 A three-page memorandum to J.W. Hammond 73 14 from F.S. Venable, dated 3-9-72 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 NELL MC CALLUM & ASSOCIATES, INC. EXX-MOR-003657 7 1 JAMES HAMMOND, 2 being previously sworn, testified as follows: 3 4 EXAMINATION BY MR. GROVE: 5 Q. Good morning. Professor. 6 A. Good morning. 7 Q. You understand you're still under oath today? 8 A. I do. 9 Q. Okay. 10 Yesterday, I didn't go through all of the 11 instructions that normally are gone through in a 12 deposition? but you were given some instructions before 13 your deposition several months ago regarding not . 14 speculating, making sure you understand the question 15 before you answer. If you need me to repeat the answer 16 (sic), I'11 do so. 17 Do you recall those types of instructions that 18 you were given before your deposition? 19 A. I do. 20 Q. And you also understand that your deposition is 21 going to be prepared into a transcript which will be in 22 a booklet form and you'll be given an opportunity to 23 review that booklet? 24 A. I do. 25 ' Q. Would you agree with me. Professor, that the NELL MC CALLUM & ASSOCIATES, INC. EXX-MOR-003658 8 1 risk of developing asbestos-related diseases, cancer and 2 mesothelioma, are inherent in working around 3 asbestos-containing products? 4 A. No, I wouldn't. 5 MR. CHUSID: Objection. It's 6 vague -- 7 A. It depends on many -- 8 MR. LEDYARD: Wait a minute. He's -- 9 excuse me. He's making an objection. 10 MR. CHUSID: Let me interpose my 11 objection, and then I'll give you a chance 12 to go for it. 13 Again, that question is vague, ' 14 ambiguous, and unintelligible as to the 15 word "inherent." 16 MR. BISHOP: In -- 17 MR. CHUSID: Go ahead. -- 18 MR. BISHOP: In addition, it calls 19 for expert opinion and, to that extent, is 20 an incomplete hypothetical. 21 Q. (By Mr. Grove) You can go ahead and answer, 22 please. 23 A. I don't agree. 24 Q. Would you agree with me that unless special 25 precautions are taking -- are taken that the risk of NELL MC CALLUM & ASSOCIATES. INC. EXX-MOR-003659 9 1 developing asbestos-related diseases is inherent in 2 working around asbestos-containing products? 3 MR. LEDYARD: Let me -- -- 4 MR. BISHOP: Same obj ection. 5 MR. LEDYARD: Let me interpose an 6 obj ection 7 Counsel, as you know, he has been 8 listed as a fact witness. He is here to 9 give his testimony as to, I thought, 10 the -- his knowledge of the Benicia 11 refinery and the working conditions at 12 that refinery. I thought that yesterday 13 the questioning, for the most part, kept 14 things pretty factual. 15 If it is your intent today to ask 16 expert opinion kinds of questions, then, 17 we're going to be having a lot of-. 18 objections and possibly instructions not 19 to answer the questions. I don't know if 20 you've just got one or two of that nature. 21 MR. GROVE: This is a very brief line 22 of questioning. I mean, it's not going to 23 take long. If you'd just allow him to 24 answer the question, we'll be moving right 25 along. NELL MC CALLUM & ASSOCIATES, INC. EXX-MOR-003660 10 1 MR. LEDYARD: Well, again, any 2 questions that are going to attempt to 3 elicit expert testimony from this witness, 4 I think, are improper, beyond the scope of 5 what we're doing here today. 6 MR. GROVE: Are you going to instruct 7 the witness not to answer the last 8 question? 9 MR. LEDYARD: I don't even remember 10 the last question now. 11 MR. GROVE: Could you read it back 12 for me? 13 (THE FOLLOWING WAS READ BY THE 14 REPORTER: 15 Question: Would you agree with me 16 that unless special precautions are . 17 taking -- are taken that the risk-of 18 developing asbestos-related diseases is 19 inherent in working around 20 asbestos-containing products?) 21 MR. LEDYARD: Well, I'll object to 22 the -- to the form of the question as to 23 what is inherent, what are special 24 precautions. Many of the terms that 25 you've asked in your question are not NELL MC CALLUM & ASSOCIATES, INC. EXX-MOR-003661 11 1 defined or ill-defined. 2 With that. Professor, if you feel 3 comfortable in answering that question, 4 you can do so. 5 Q. (By Mr. Grove) You can go ahead and answer the 6 question. 7 A. No. 8 Q. You do not agree with that statement? 9 A. No. 10 Q. Okay. 11 When you were at Exxon, you felt it necessary 12 to take precautions to reduce the risk of developing 13 asbestos-related disease? is that correct? 14 A. When I was at Exxon, we had a very strong, 15 positive preventive program. 16 Q. And that program related to controlling 17 potential exposures to asbestos; is that correct? 18 A. I don't agree with you. 19 Q. You had no program that related to controlling 20 potential exposures to asbestos? 21 A. My program was comprehensive. 22 Q. Did a component of that program include 23 preventing potential exposures to asbestos? 24 A. As well as all other occupational hazards. 25 Q. And was the reason that a component of your NELL MC CALLUM & ASSOCIATES, INC. EXX-MOR-003662 12 1 program included precautions to avoid exposure to 2 asbestos because of the risks that were inherent in 3 being exposed to asbestos? 4 MR. CHUSID: Again, let me object to 5 that question on the grounds that it's 6 vague and ambiguous as to risks and 7 inherent. 8 A. I can't answer that question. 9 Q. What didn't you understand about my question? 10 MR. LEDYARDs He didn't say he didn't 11 understand anything about your question. 12 He said he couldn't answer your question. 13 Q. Did you understand my question? 14 A. Yes. 15 Q. Okay. 16 Why is it that you cannot provide an answer to 17 that question? 18 A. Well, it's not definite; and it's not a concise 19 question in which we could answer you. 20 Q. In any event, at Exxon, you did feel it 21 necessary to take precautions to reduce the potential 22 risk of exposure to asbestos; is that correct? 23 A. I did not separate asbestos from all other 24 hazardous materials that we handled. 25 Q. Okay. But subject to that qualification, NELL MC CALLUM & ASSOCIATES, INC. EXX-MOR-003663 13 1 though, is my statement correct? 2 A. I did not make any special attempt to answer 3 your question in that regard. It's just we had a 4 comprehensive, good program and covered all hazardous 5 materials. 6 Q. Okay. 7 Professor, are you familiar with the use of 8 asbestos-containing gaskets and packing materials? 9 A. In what application of that? 10 Q. Well, it could -- at any -- any application 11 within the refinery. 12 A. I'm familiar with the use of asbestos in every 13 application and the problem that might be associated,' 14 yes. 15 Q. Okay. 16 What problems were you aware of that might be 17 associated with the use of asbestos-containing gaskets 18 and packing materials? 19 MR. CHUSID: I'll just object to that 20 . question on the grounds that it's 21 overbr oad. 22 A. That would require an opinion, and I don't have 23 an opinion today. 24 Q. Well, as the director of the industrial hygiene 25 department at Exxon, it was your job to be aware of NELL MC CALLUM & ASSOCIATES, INC. EXX-MOR-003664 14 1 potential risks ? is that correct? 2 A. I've answered that already. 3 Q. Okay. 4 Well, what I want to know is: At Exxon, what 5 risks were you aware of of potential exposures to 6 asbestos when using asbestos-containing gaskets and 7 packing material? 8 MS. KYLE: I'm going object to lack 9 of foundation. I don't think the 10 Professor has testified there was a risk 11 associated with asbestos gaskets and 12 whatever was in the question. 13 MR. GROVE: If that's his answer,' he 14 can certainly answer in that fashion. 15 MS. KYLE: I'm not telling him what 16 his answer is. I'm saying there's a lack 17 of foundation for your question. If the 18 Professor feels like he can answer the 19 question and his attorney says he can do 20 so, that' s f ine. 21 A. At Benicia, we w ere conscious of every 22 precaut i on that should be taken in our ope rations there, 23 as well as any repairs in Benicia, yes 24 Q. I* m not limiti ng the scope of my question to 25 Benicia . I 'm asking: At Humble and Exxon in general. NELL MC CALLUM & ASSOCIATES, INC. EXX-MOR-003665 15 1 what risks were you aware of relating to the use of 2 asbestos-containing gaskets and packing materials, if 3 any? 4 MR. CHUSID: Same objection as 5 previously stated, as to lacking 6 foundation, overbroad, and vague. 7 A. I would have to have you to define the 8 particular operation, particular site, and other details 9 that you haven't done to be able to answer you. 10 Q. Okay. 11 If somebody -- at the Benicia refinery, if an 12 employee is removing flanges on a pipeline and there's a 13 gasket material in there, are you of whether -- are you 14 aware of whether or not there's a potential for the 15 release of asbestos fibers relating to the repair of 16 that gasket? 17 MS. KYLE: Vague and ambiguous. We 18 have not talked about what type of gasket, 19 how any asbestos in that gasket would be 20 . encased, enclosed, secured. Generally 21 lacking foundation. And there again, 22 that's for the Professor. 23 Q. You can go ahead and answer the question. 24 A. Depends entirely on what material we're dealing 25 with and how we're going to do it and many details that NELL MC CALLUM & ASSOCIATES, INC. EXX-MOR-003666 16 1 you haven't incorporated in your question. I can't 2 answer it. 3 Q. Well, my question previous to that has assumed 4 asbestos-containing gasket material. 5 Are you familiar with a process whereby an 6 employee needs to scrape off old gasket material in 7 order to replace that? 8 A. No, not in that terms. 9 Q. Have you ever heard of anybody at Exxon or 10 Humble having to use compressed air to blow off or clean 11 the area where old gasket material has been removed? 12 A. I'm not familiar with that. 13 Q. You've never been told that such work has been 14 done at the refineries? 15 A. I'm not in a position to answer your question. 16 Q. I'm just asking if you've ever been told that 17 that type of work was done at the refineries. 18 A. I don't recall of anyone ever telling me what 19 to do about it. 20 Q. Have you ever been told of any work at the 21 refineries involving the removal of packing material 22 around valves? 23 MR. LEDYARD: Are you asking if he 24 knows that packing material around valves, 25 at any time, has ever been removed? NELL MC CALLUM & ASSOCIATES, INC. EXX-MOR-003667 17 1 MR. GROVE: Yeah, if he's ever heard 2 of that ever happening at the refineries. 3 A. In the operation of the refinery, I know that 4 they have to make repairs to all of those joints and 5 also the valves. Yes, I know that. 6 Q. Okay. 7 In the course of repairing valves, isn't it 8 true that they have to remove old packing material and 9 replace that packing material? 10 A. That is not as important as knowing how to 11 control the dust exposure that might be associated with 12 that. 13 Q. I'm sorry. Did you say it' s not im -- that was 14 not impor tant? 15 A. The nature of the ma terials is not as important 16 as knowing how to control the -- the operation. 17 Q. The nature of the ma terials are not important 18 in knowing how to control? 19 MR. LEDYARD: No. I think he said 20 that the nature of the materials, which 21 you have not defined or described, was not 22 as important as trying to -- knowing how 23 to control any dust that might be 24 generated by that process. 25 MR. GROVE: Okay. NELL MC CALLUM & ASSOCIATES, INC. EXX-MOR-003668 18 1 Qo (By Mr. Grove) Are you aware that some packing 2 materials that were used in valves contained asbestos? 3 A. I'd have to have you define which valves and 4 which material you're talking about. 5 Q. I'm just asking if you're aware that any types 6 of packing materials in any types of valves used on the 7 refineries contained asbestos. 8 A. Yes. 9 Q. Okay. 10 Are you aware that, in order to remove the 11 packing material in the gas -- in the valves, an 12 employee sometimes has to scrape or blow out the old 13 packing material? ' 14 A. No. 15 Q. You've never been told that that occurs? 16 A. No. 17 Q. Have you ever been told that there's potential 18 release of asbestos fibers when replacing packing 19 materials in valves? 20 A. No. 21 Q. Did Exxon ever have any policies or procedures 22 for controlling potential exposures to dust when 23 replacing packing materials? 24 MR. CHUSIDs Objection. Assumes 25 facts not in evidence. NELL MC CALLUM & ASSOCIATES, INC. 19 1 MR. GROVE: I'm just saying dust. 2 A. We had a comprehensive program to control all 3 hazardous materials in our refinery operations. 4 Q. Was there any specific policy or procedure 5 relating to performing work, removing and replacing 6 valve packing material? 7 A. If the operation required procedures, we had 8 them. 9 Q. Are you aware of any specific procedures that 10 related to that operation? 11 A. We made no exception to the material, because 12 we didn't think that was comprehensive enough. We did 13 it on all materials that were there, involved. * 14 Q. But my question is a little more specific. And 15 that iss Are you aware of any specific procedures that 16 were used in relation to performing valve repair work? 17 A. We took whatever safety measures were .required, 18 and we used those all the time. 19 Q. Who determined what safety measures were 20 necessary when doing that type of an operation? 21 A. I did. 22 Q. What safety measures did you determine were 23 necessary when removing and replacing valve packing 24 material? 25 ' A. I have answered that several times already. NELL MC CALLUM & ASSOCIATES, INC. EXX-MOR-003670 20 1 Depending on -- depending on the operation and the 2 material, the nature of it, and the size of the 3 operation, all of these would be determined and be taken 4 into consideration to prevent any exposures. 5 Q. And was that taken into determine -- into 6 consideration on a case-by-case basis depending on the 7 specific operation that was being performed? 8 A. Once the program was established and put in 9 effect, it was strictly enforced throughout. 10 Q. Was there ever a specific program enacted 11 relating to replacing -- removing and replacing valve 12 packing materials; or was that simply part of your 13 overall, comprehensive program? . 14 A. It was part of the overall, comprehensive 15 program. 16 Q. So, there were no specific rules relating 17 solely to replacing and removing valve packing _ 18 materials; is that correct? 19 MS. KYLE: I'm going to object to the 20 question as being vague and ambiguous. 21 You are speaking to specifics, Frank; but 22 you are not saying if we're talking about 23 a written procedure relating specifically 24 to packing material or if you're speaking 25 about the guidelines of the program that NELL MC CALLUM & ASSOCIATES. INC. EXX-MOR-003671 21 1 Dr. Hammond's described.. 2 Q. (By Mr. Grove) You can go ah ead and answer the 3 question , sir. 4 A. We made no exception for any operation if there 5 was any potential problem -- health pr oblem involved. 6 Q. I understand that, as part of your prior 7 answer, that --that this was part of a comprehensive 8 pr ogram. 9 My question is simply; Were there any specific 10 rules, whether written or oral, or any specific 11 guidelines regarding precautions to take when replacing 12 and removing valve packing materials? 13 A. That was like all other potential hazards in 14 refineries and chemical plants. It was handled in 15 accordance with prevention of any exposure. 16 Q. Have you ever witnessed the removal of valve 17 packing materials? 18 A. I don't recall that detail. 19 Q. Have you ever had that operation described to 20 you by anybody? 21 A. I don't recall any discussion with anybody. 22 Q. Have you ever discussed with anybody specific 23 procedures to be used during that operation? 24 A. I don't recall if we ever did. 25 Q. Are you aware of the use of asbestos-containing NELL MC CALLUM & ASSOCIATES, INC. EXX-MOR-003672 22 1 blankets at the Humble refineries during your career? 2 A. No, I don't recall that we were still using 3 asbestos blankets in any operation that you might have 4 in mind, certainly not at Benicia. 5 Q. I want to make sure I understand. 6 Is it your understanding that asbestos blankets 7 were not used after the time the Benicia refinery came 8 into operation? 9 A. To my knowledge, they were not used. 10 Q. Okay. 11 Prior to that time, were asbestos blankets used 12 at any Humble refineries? 13 A. I'm not in a position to answer that. I don.'t 14 know everything about it. 15 Q. Have you ever heard of asbestos-containing 16 blankets being used at any Humble refinery at any time? 17 A. I don't recall that I ever discussed it, with 18 anyone. But again, the precautionary measures were 19 used; and all of that would be covered by our 20 comprehensive program and enforced by the safety 21 inspectors. 22 Q. Have you ever seen any air sampling tests that 23 were performed relating to dust levels from 24 asbestos-containing blankets? 25 A. No, I never did remember any data of that type. NELL MC CALLUM & ASSOCIATES, INC. EXX-MOR-003673 23 1 Qo How about asbestos-containing gloves, do you 2 ever recall those being used at any Humble refineries? 3 MR. BISHOP: I'll object to the 4 question as overbroad to the extent that 5 it inquires into the presence of 6 asbestos-containing gloves at any location 7 other than the Benicia refinery after it 8 opened. 9 Q. You can go ahead and answer. 10 A. I don't have any information for you on that. 11 Q. Have you ever heard of the use of 12 asbestos-containing gloves at any Benicia refinery? 13 MR. BISHOP: I'm sorry. Do you mean 14 any Exxon refinery or any Benicia 15 refinery? 16 Q. Oh, I'm sorry. Any Humble re -- Humble or 17 Exxon refinery. 18 MR. BISHOP: Same objection. 19 A. The comprehensive program covered gloves and 20 blankets and all other equipment of that type if it 21 would contained hazardous material. 22 Q. So, I take it from that answer that there has 23 been, on occasion, the use of asbestos-containing gloves 24 at Humble/Exxon refineries. 25 A. If they used it is what I said. NELL NIC CALLUM & ASSOCIATES, INC. EXX-MOR-003674 24 1 Q. If they used them, then, it would have been 2 covered under the comprehensive policy that you've 3 described previous? 4 A. It was. 5 Q. Okay. 6 My question is still a little bit more 7 specific. And that is: Have you ever heard that those 8 types of asbestos-containing gloves were, in fact, used 9 at any Humble refinery? 10 MR. BISHOP: Frank, can we just 11 make -- rather than continue this 12 objection -- 13 MR. GROVE: Yes, you can have a - 14 continuing objection. 15 MR. BISHOP: My objection being 16 continuing as to any location other than 17 Benicia. -- 18 MR. GROVE: That's fine. 19 A. I don't recall. 20 Q. Have you ever seen any results of air sampling 21 done relative to asbestos-containing gloves? 22 A. No. 23 MR. CHUSID: Objection. Assumes 24 facts not in evidence. 25 MR. BISHOP: It's also vague as to NELL MC CALLUM & ASSOCIATES, INC. EXX-MOR-003675 25 1 gloves insofar as there are many types. 2 Q. Have you ever been told of any air sampling 3 tests that have been done relative to 4 asbestos-containing gloves? 5 A. No. 6 MR. BISHOP: Same objections. 7 Q. Are you aware that Humble and Exxon used 8 refractory contractors at its refineries over the years? 9 A. No. 10 Q. Do you know what a refractory contractor is? 11 A. No. 12 Q. If I were to represent to you that refractory 13 contractors worked on boilers of -- boilers of, well, 14 any types of plant actually, but including refinery 15 operations, are you familiar with that type of work? 16 A. That's out of my field. . 17 Q Are you aware that any insulation -- 18 asbestos-containing insulation materials are used inside 19 of boilers in refineries? 20 A. The products of any nature would be covered by 21 the comprehensive protective program. 22 Q. My question -- my question. Professor, is 23 simply whether or not you're aware that those types of 24 products are used in boilers in refineries. 25 MR. LEDYARD: What kinds of products? NELL MC CALLUM & ASSOCIATES. INC. EXX-MOR-003676 26 1 MR. GROVE; Asbestos-containing 2 insulation products. 3 MS. KYLE: In any refinery? 4 MR. GROVE: In any refinery at any 5 time. 6 A. I have no specific injformat ion on any oper ation 7 specific -- particu lar operation of that type. 8 Q. (By Mr. Gr ove) I'm not ask ing about any 9 spec ific operation. Professor. I'm just asking whether 10 or not y ou have ever been made aware tha t 11 asbestos -containing insulation mater ials are used in 12 boiler s of refineri es. 13 A. No. 14 Q. Professor, what -- as the d irec tor of 15 industrial hygiene at Humble and Exxon, it was your job 16 to be aware of all potential operations that could 17 result in exposure to any hazardous materials; is that 18 correct? 19 A. I had to cover all products and all substances 20 that might.be hazardous. 21 Q. My question was different than that. Professor. 22 I'm asking whether or not it was your job at Humble and 23 Exxon to be aware of operations that may involve 24 exposures to potentially hazardous substances. 25 A. My program covered all of those potentials. NELL MC CALLUM & ASSOCIATES, INC. EXX-MOR-003677 27 1 Q. And, so, you were aware of all those potential 2 operation -- all those operations that -- that covered 3 potential exposures to hazardous materials? 4 MR. LEDYARD: Well, I'm going to 5 ' object to the form of the question. I 6 mean, are you asking whether he knew, day 7 in, day out, every job in every particular 8 refinery in every location that might be 9 going on; or are you asking him generally? 10 MR. GROVE: More general. Generally 11 speaking, the types of operations. 12 ' MR. LEDYARD: Well, I think he's -- 13 he's told you ten times that he was aware 14 of situations that could cause dust and, 15 when there was a dust-created situation, 16 that there was a policy or procedure to 17 take care of it. __ 18 MR. GROVE: But I don't think I've 19 been getting an answer to my question, 20 which was: Was it his job to be aware of 21 those op -- those operations which could 22 involve exposure to potentially hazardous 23 substances? All he has indicated is that 24 his program covered them. So, I'd like an 25 answer to that question. NELL MC CALLUM & ASSOCIATES. INC. EXX-MOR-003678 28 1 A e I had a oppor tunity to develop a c ompreh ens ive 2 program that we've bee n discussing , and tha t took care 3 of all of those potent ial problems 4 Q. (By Mr. Grove ) Professor , I belie ve you -- you 5 tes tified yesterday that, when Exx on used c ontrac t or s, 6 they were educated as to potential hazards of exp osure 7 to asbest os prior to b eing allowed to perform wor k at 8 the Exxon facilities. Is that cor rect? 9 MR. LEDYARD: I don't be lieve that 10 was his testimony, e specially if th ose 11 contract ors were not going to have 12 anything to do with any kind of ins ulation 13 or asbes tos procedur e. Your questi on * 14 implies that every contractor that ever 15 came -- 16 MR. GROVE: Tha t's true. 17 MR. LEDYARD: - - into th at pj.a nt -- 18 MR. GROVE: Tha t's true. And I'll 19 limit my question to contract ors wh o would 20 potentia lly be doing work inv olving or 21 around asbestos-containing products. 22 A. The foremens or supervisors of the workers were 23 the ones that were educated as to potential hazards 24 associated with any operation they might be doing for 25 ust that is, Exxon. NELL MC CALLUM & ASSOCIATES, INC. EXX-MOR-003679 29 1 Q* And I believe you also testified that *-- well, 2 let me just ask you the question. 3 Isn't it true that potentially hazardous levels 4 of asbestos can be in the air and not be visible to the 5 eye? ' 6 MR. LEDYARD: That was discussed 7 yesterday. Counsel. 8 MR. GROVE! Well, I didn't want to 9 misstate his testimony from yesterday? so, 10 I want to ask the question prior to moving 11 to my next question. 12 Q. Isn't that true. Professor? 13 A. Now, come again with your question wanting a 14 particular answer. 15 Q. I believe you testified yesterday that 16 potentially hazardous levels of asbestos can be in the 17 air and not be visible to the eye. Is that correct? 18 A. I testified yesterday there is only one way to 19 tell for sure whether you're in a safe environment with 20 dust of any type, is by collecting samples. 21 Q. And that's because there may be levels of dust 22 present in the air that are hazardous but not be able to 23 see them? isn't that correct? 24 A. That wasn't my answer. I was satisfied only 25 with data as to the concentration involved. NELL MC CALLUM & ASSOCIATES, INC. EXX-MOR-003680 30 1 Q. Isn't it true, though. Professor, that levels 2 of asbestos can be above acceptable limits and yet not 3 be visible to the eye? 4 MR. BISHOP: As to the term 5 "acceptable," vague and ambiguous. 6 A. Well, I consider that to be an opinion 7 question. 8 Q. Well, at Exxon, you had established a policy to 9 not allow exposures to essentially any levels of 10 asbestos dust. Isn't that true? 11 A. That's true. 12 Q. And, so, you felt that exposure to any level of 13 asbestos dust was an unacce ptabl e level. I s that tr ue? 14 A. That 's true. 15 Q. Isn' t it pos sible. Pr of essor, that there could 16 be 1ev els of asbestos above what you consid ered at Exxon 17 to be acc epta ble and yet no t be visible to the .ye ? 18 MR . CHDS ID: Objection. Calls f or 19 speculation. 20 MR. LEDYARD: Well, it also calls for 21 an opinion. And what is acceptable, you 22 know, the standards have changed over the 23 years. Your question has not -- 24 MR. GROVE: I just asked -- 25 MR. LEDYARD: -- put any kind of time NELL MC CALLUM & ASSOCIATES, INC. EXX-MOR-003681 31 1 frame on it. 2 MR. GROVE: I just asked him what 3 level was acceptable at Exxon, and he 4 testified. And, so, I'm using his own 5 standard of acceptable at Exxon. 6 A. No level. Even the: streets out here is covered 7 with asbestos from the car brakes, and that wouldn't be 8 acceptable in our operations. 9 Q. You learned of the potential for asbestos to 10 cause a disease called mesothelioma in the 1960's; is 11 that correct? 12 A. It was during the vicinity of 1966. 13 Q. Is that approximately when you learned about 14 that? 15 A. My knowledge of that was somewhat earlier, from 16 having read foreign literature. 17 Q. Okay. 18 And -- 19 A. But that was long before we had a Benicia 20 refinery. 21 Q. So, you were aware of the potential for 22 asbestos to cause -- cause mesothelioma prior to the 23 building of the Benicia refinery, correct? 24 A. I was. 25 Q. Okay. NELL MC CALLUM & ASSOCIATES, INC. EXX-MOR-003682 32 1 And you were also aware, weren't you, that the 2 quantity of asbestos to which a worker needed to be 3 exposed in order to develop mesothelioma was far less 4 than would -- may be necessary to cause a disease called 5 asbestosis? 6 MR. CHUSID: Objection. Incomplete 7 hypothetical, vague and ambiguous. 8 You may answer, sir. 9 MS. KYLE! I would ask that the 10 question be repeated. Would you please 11 tell us what it was. 12 (THE FOLLOWING WAS READ BY THE 13 REPORTER: . . 14 Question: Okay. 15 And you were also aware, weren't you, 16 that the quantity of asbestos to which a 17 worker needed to be exposed in order to 18 develop mesothelioma was far less than 19 would -- may be necessary to cause a 20 . disease called asbestosis?) 21 MR. LEDYARD: And I'll join in the 22 objection, then. We can agree that it is 23 vague and ambiguous and ill -- and poorly 24 defined. 25 MR. BISHOP: And I will add the NELL MC CALLUM & ASSOCIATES, INC. EXX-MOR-003683 33 1 objection that that question has been both 2 asked and answered by Plaintiffs8 counsel 3 during the May -- or during the earlier 4 sessions of this same deposition. 5 Q'. (By Mr. Grove) You can go ahead and answer, 6 Professor. 7 A. That's strictly a professional opinion. 8 Q. Professional opinion in terms of a medical 9 opinion? 10 A. Industrial hygiene, too, both. 11 MR. GROVE: Are you instructing him 12 not to answer the question? 13 MR. LEDYARDs Given the fact that 'the 14 Professor thinks that question is calling 15 for his expert opinion, yes, I'm 16 instructing him not to answer that 17 question. _ 18 Q. (By Mr. Grove) Professor, isn't it true, by 19 the late 1960's, Humble was contracting out more and 20 more of the insulation and refractory work at its 21 refineries? 22 A. That was completely out of my field. 23 Q. You were never made aware of that by anyone 24 within Humble and Exxon? 25 A. There are others that are so much better NELL MC CALLUM & ASSOCIATES, INC. EXX-MOR-003684 34 1 authorities in the facts on that that I would give over 2 to them to let them answer that one. 3 Q. Okay. 4 I'm just asking whether or not anybody has ever 5 discussed that with you. 6 MS. KYLE; I'm going to object that 7 the question is vague and ambiguous as to 8 "more and more." I don't quite understand 9 it. 10 MR. GROVE; Okay. Let me clarify it 11 for counsel. 12 Q. Have you ever been told by anyone that, by the 13 late 1960's, Exxon or Humble was contracting more of" its 14 insulation and refractory work than it was prior to the 15 late 1960's? 16 MR. CHUSID; Let me object to that 17 question on the ground that it's_vague and 18 ambiguous insofar as there's no 19 distinction between construction of a new 20 . refinery, major repairs, or additions to a 21 refinery or simple insulation work or 22 routine insulation work in a refinery. 23 Q. You can go ahead and answer. Professor. 24 A. I'll refer that question to Mr. Naugle, if 25 you'll ask him. NELL MC CALLUM & ASSOCIATES. INC. ' EXX-MOR-003685 35 1 Q. I'm not limiting it just to the Benicia 2 refinery, sir. I'm asking if anyone has ever discussed 3 that with you. 4 A. I don't recall any such discussion. 5 Q. When a contractor was on Exxon premises, I 6 believe you indicated that you felt it was your 7 responsibility as the director of industrial hygiene to 8 see that precautions were taken with respect to 9 potential exposures to asbestos by contract employees, 10 as well, correct? 11 A. Not correct. The correct answer is that they 12 were required to meet all of the precautionary measures 13 and comply with them the same as our full-time . 14 employees. And that was enforced by the safety 15 engineers that were on the sites at the time. 16 Q. And, so, Exxon enforced those policies the same 17 with respect to contract employees? -- 18 A. We did. 19 Q. Okay. 20 Are you familiar with -- with latency as it 21 relates to asbestos-related disease and cancers? 22 A. Yes, I am. And I also would like for 23 someone -- layperson to understand it. It's the same as 24 smoking cigarettes. You don't generally have any 25 disabling illness or disability or death from cigarettes NELL MC CALLUM & ASSOCIATES, INC. EXX-MOR-003686 36 1 until after 35 years. So that if you start smoking at 2 15, you can expect that the victim of cigarette smoke 3 would be affected by the time he's 50; and it would 4 increase as he grows older and older. 5 And, so, that's a good example for latency 6 period. And that applies to many substances and many 7 other exposures of that type, such as smoking. 8 Q. Including asbestos; is that correct? 9 A. I -- I think that answers my question relative 10 to any occupational, long-range, chronic exposures. 11 Q. Okay. 12 While you were at Exxon, did you ever hear that 13 asbestos-related cancers do not generally appear until 14 20 to 40 years after initial exposure? 15 MR. CHUSID: Objection. Vague as to 16 the term "asbestos-related cancers." 17 A. That would be a professional opinion on my 18 par t. 19 Q. Okay. 20 Sir, I want to show you a -- I don't know what 21 I did with it. I believe you produced at your initial 22 deposition an exhibit which has been marked 4A, which is 23 a letter from a Lucian or Lucian Renes to a Nathan Van 24 Hendricks, dated April 13, 1965. 25 Do you recall seeing that letter, sir? NELL MC CALLUM & ASSOCIATES, INC. EXX-MOR-003687 37 1 A, Now, what's the question about the letter? 2 Q. First, do you recall seeing that letter? 3 A. I don't right off. But I suppose I might have 4 seen it. 5 Q. Okay. 6 There's a report that's attached to that 7 letter, if you'll just turn the page, that I believe Mr. 8 Renes presented to the API medical committee. 9 A. I was not a part of that committee, no. 10 Q. Professor, I believe that you produced this 11 document at your first session of your deposition. 12 Was this a document that you maintained in your 13 own files? . 14 A. I don't remember ever having it in my file. I 15 don't know where you got the document. 16 Q. Well, I believe it was produced by you, sir. 17 MS. KYLE; That's the first-batch of 18 documents. He's saying this is the first 19 batch of documents you produced. 20 Q. I would ask you to read the last sentence of 21 the very first paragraph on Page 2 of that document, 22 which begins, "An important finding is..." 23 A. Yes. What's the question? 24 Q. Does that refresh your recollection as to 25 whether or not you ever heard the latency period for NELL MC CALLUM & ASSOCIATES, INC. EXX-MOR-003688 38 1 asbestos-related cancers is 20 to 40 years? 2 A. I used the example of cigarette smoking as a 3 good example of latent period. And many of these 4 occupational health problems follow the same pattern. 5 Q. Including asbestos; isn't that correct? 6 A. Depends entirely on your operation and 7 exposures. 8 Q. In some instances, would you agree that there's 9 a latency period of 20 to 40 years after initial 10 exposure to asbestos? 11 MR. CHUSIDs Objection. Vague and 12 ambiguous, incomplete hypothetical. 13 MR. LEDYARD-: Again, I think it also 14 calls for an opinion on his part. If 15 you're asking whether or not he has seen 16 reports of other people who have given 17 - that opinion, then, I think his response 18 was he doesn't recall seeing this 19 particular statement. He doesn't recall 20 being on a committee that -- in which that 21 was studied. 22 MR. GROVE: Number one, his knowledge 23 as the director of industrial hygiene at 24 Exxon is clearly relevant; and it's -- 25 what he knows or what he knew in 1965 is NELL MC CALLUM & ASSOCIATES, INC. EXX-MOR-003689 39 1 clearly not an opinion. He produced this 2 document from his own files. I' m -- I 3 mean, I was simply trying to establish a 4 foundation of fact before I moved on. 5 But, I mean, I'm not trying -- 6 THE WITNESS s I don't recall it. 7 MR. GROVE: -- to argue with the 8 witness or elicit an opinion on this line 9 of questioning. I'm simply asking if he 10 ever came to learn that information which 11 is contained in documents that he produced 12 from his own files. I don't believe 13 that's an improper question. - 14 A. I don't recall the document in my files. 15 Q. Okay. Let's -- let's move on. 16 MR. BISHOP: I -- I'm not sure that 17 your premise is correct, that the_ document 18 was produced from Professor Hammond's 19 files. I could be mistaken, Frank. 20 . MR. GROVE: That was my 21 under standing. I mean.. 22 MR. BISHOP: Okay. 23 Q. (By Mr. Grove) In any event. Professor, you've 24 already test ified regarding the necess ity of a medical 25 surveillance program to ensure that your industrial NELL MC CALLUM & ASSOCIATES. INC. EXX-MOR-003690 40 1 hygiene program was -- was working effectively; isn't 2 that true? 3 A. I do. 4 Q. You agree with that statement? 5 MR. LEDYARD: That he has testified 6 before about medical surveillance 7 programs? 8 Q Well, do you agree that a medical surveillance 9 progr am is necessary? 10 A. That's a professional opinion that I do not 11 want to -- 12 Q. At Exxon, did you believe that a medical 13 surveillance program was necessary to ensure that your 14 program was working effectively? 15 MR. LEDYARD: Professor, you can 16 testify as to your programs at Exxon and 17 what you were doing -- __ 18 A. We did have a - 19 MR. LEDYARD: -- and what you thought 20 . at the time. 21 A. -- medical surveillance program. 22 Q. And you felt that that program was necessary; 23 isn't that correct? 24 A. The program was developed comprehensively by me 25 with the assistance of physicians; and it included those NELL MC CALLUM & ASSOCIATES, INC. EXX-MOR-003691 41 1 type of details, yeah. 2 Q What type of medical surveillance was done 3 regarding asbestos-related diseases at Exxon? 4 A. We never did differ -- differentiate asbestos 5 separately. We treated these workers uniformly with 6 surveillance, medical surveillance. 7 Q. Okay. 8 Did -- what type of surveillance was -- was 9 given to the workers? 10 MR. BISHOP; That -- this has been 11 asked and answered in the previous 12 deposition transcripts in considerable 13 detail. That's an objection. 14 Q. You can go ahead, sir. 15 A. Again, that's a medical profession as to 16 medical and industrial hygiene opinion as to when -- 17 when and where these examinations should be done. 18 Q. Did you ever receive any information from the 19 medical department at Exxon relative to the surveillance 20 done on the workers? 21 A. I did. 22 Q. And did you receive any specific information 23 regarding surveillance done relative asbestos -- 24 relative to asbestos exposure? 25 A. I don't know that we ever had any particular NELL MC CALLUM & ASSOCIATES, INC. EXX-MOR-003692 42 1 material separated from the other in name -- by name of 2 the substance in that way. 3 Q. Did you ever come to learn of any asbestos 4 levels at any Humble refineries that were above what you 5 considered to be acceptable levels as director of 6 industrial hygiene? 7 A. Any exposure was unacceptable to me. 8 Q. Did you ever learn of any such unacceptable 9 exposures? 10 A. I did. 11 Q. Where did you -- which refineries did you learn 12 of unacceptable exposures at? 13 A. I did not learn of any of them that existed . 14 other than at the time of the tests. And then 15 protective, precautionary measures were taken 16 immediately to correct that. 17 Q. At which refineries? 18 A. At any and all of them that may have found a 19 higher than acceptable level, which was zero. 20 Q. Would that include the Baton Rouge refinery? 21 A. It would have included the Baton Rouge refinery 22 after it came under my immediate super -- supervision. 23 Q. And what year was that? 24 A. 1960. 25 Q. Do you recall Mr. Venable ever reporting to you NELL MC CALLUM & ASSOCIATES, INC. EXX-MOR-003693 43 1 levels of -- of asbestos at the Baton Rouge refinery 2 that you considered unacceptable? 3 A. I think he made some tests in which he found 4 higher than what would be permissible to us without 5 specifying whatever other precautions might have been 6 taken to protect the employees. But I don't recall any 7 further discussion. 8 Q. Did you ever learn of any information from the 9 medical surveillance of any conditions of your employees 10 that may relate to exposure to asbestos? And by that, I 11 mean medical conditions. 12 MS. KYLE: Would you repeat question. 13 (THE FOLLOWING WAS READ BY THE * 14 REPORTER: 15 Question: Did you ever learn of any 16 information from the medical surveillance 17 of any cone3 i t i ons of your employees that 18 may relate to exposure to asbestos? And 19 by that, I mea n me dical conditions.) 20 You ' re speaking of the Benicia refinery? 21 (By Mr. Grove) No. Of any relfineries wi thin 22 Exxon. 23 A. It was really very consoling to me that none of 24 the X-rays of the chest and other types of surveillance 25 tests ever showed any exposures to asbestos material in NELL MC CALLUM & ASSOCIATES, INC. EXX-MOR-003694 44 1 my 31 years of supervising. 2 Q. So, it's your understanding that none of the 3 X-rays taken at Exxon during your 31 years ever showed 4 any evidence of exposure to asbestos? 5 A. I do. 6 Q. Did you ever hear of any instances of 7 mesothelioma of any refinery workers at Humble/Exxon? 8 MR. BISHOP: Specifically asked and 9 answered. 10 A. Not before my retirement. But since then, I've 11 heard of... 12 Q. And when did you initially hear of that? 13 A. I don't recall the time. And, also, I do -- of 14 course, mesothelioma occurs naturally and from 15 unexpected causes. And I never saw a statistical study, 16 an epidemiological study to show that the mesothelioma 17 that was reported was out of proportion what ttve 18 human -- the common community population has. I never 19 saw any evidence that it was related to asbestos. 20 . MR. GROVE: Okay. I'll just object 21 and move to strike that as nonresponsive. 22 Q. (By Mr. Grove) Since you've retired, have you 23 learned any other information regarding any medical 24 conditions of Exxon employees that may be related to 25 exposure to asbestos? NELL MC CALLUM & ASSOCIATES, INC. EXX-MOR-003695 45 1 Ae NO 2 Q. Just the instances of mesothelioma you just 3 discussed? 4 A. The rare cases that have occurred among the 5 hundreds of employees in the mechanical groups would be 6 naturally normal for asbes -- for mesothelioma to occur. 7 Whether it came from their jobs or not, whether it was 8 related to being any higher incident anywhere has never 9 been shown. 10 Q. And do you recall how many instances of 11 mesothelioma you learned of? 12 A. Two, I'm thinking, out of -- 13 Q. And did -- . 14 A. -- out of -- let me explain. 15 That two out of several thousand of people who 16 served as insulators, laborers, and mechanics in the 17 operation of the refineries over the last 70 years is 18 not out of line with what I'm sure the population would 19 show if you were to analyze it. 20 Q. Professor, are you familiar with any types of 21 sprayed-on asbestos products? 22 A. No, I'm not familiar with that operation. 23 Q. When you were at Exxon or Humble, did you 24 consider it improper from an industrial hygiene 25 standpoint to spray on asbestos-containing products? NELL MC CALLUM 4 ASSOCIATES. INC. EXX-MOR-003696 46 1 A. I considered it improper to be exposed to any 2 materials, whether asbestos or any other material, 3 without proper measures or procedures or protection. 4 Q. Are you aware that any asbestos-containing 5 products were ever sprayed at any Humble/Exxon 6 refineries during your tenure there? 7 A. No. 8 Q. So, it's your understanding that Humble never 9 sprayed on asbestos-containing products? 10 MR. LEDYARD: I don't think that's a 11 fair characterization of what he said. 12 MR. GROVEs Well, he's capable of 13 clarifying if that's incorrect. 14 MR. LEDYARD: Well , he -- -- the 15 que stion was was he ever aw are of i t 16 happenin g; and he said. "No n And your 17 next que stion was: So, you 're say. ing that 18 it never happened? And tha t ' s not what he 19 said. 20 MR. GROVEs I ' m as king if tha t ' s his 21 under standing. 22 not know of any operati ons that we ever 23 to be u sed. 24 ou give any direct ions that it not be 25 used? NELL MC CALLUM & ASSOCIATES, INC. EXX-MOR-003697 47 1 A. No, I didn't have to. There was a part of the 2 control program included that type of operation. 3 Q. So, the control program that was in place when 4 you arrived at Exxon included the prohibition of 5 spraying on asbestos-containing materials? 6 A. I never looked into that. I do not know. 7 MR. LEDYARD: It's been about an 8 hour. This is probably a good time to 9 take a break. 10 (RECESS FROM 10:59 TO 11:13 A.M.) 11 Q. (By Mr. Grove) Okay. Professor, we were 12 talking about asbestos-containing spray products. 13 Isn't it true that Humble's Billings refinery 14 had a Limpet unit? 15 A. I don't recall that. Again, Mr. Naugle would 16 be able to tell you that. 17 Q. Was Mr. Naugle in charge of the Billings 18 refinery? 19 A. Billings? 20 Q. Billings. 21 MR. CHUSID: Is that in Montana? 22 MR. GROVE: I believe so. 23 A. I don't -- I don't know if he ever, but -- he 24 was at many refineries, but I don't know specifically if 25 he was there or not. NELL MC CALLUM & ASSOCIATES. INC. EXX-MOR-003698 48 1 MR. LEDYARD : I'm not sure he 2 understood your first question about 3 Billings. Why don't you ask that again. 4 Q. Isn't it true that Humble had a Limpet unit at 5 its Billings refinery? 6 A. I don't recall that. But I'm also sure Mr. 7 Naugle, who was the specialist in operations of the 8 refinery, would be able to answer that. 9 Q. Professor, isn't it true that, as late as 1973, 10 there was no safe asbestos policy in effect at the 11 Benicia refinery? 12 A. I'm not aware of any failure on their part of 13 having a -- a program. ' 14 MR. GROVE: I want this document 15 marked as whatever's next in order. Would 16 it be 16? 17 (HAMMOND EXHIBIT NO. 16 WAS-MARKED 18 FOR IDENTIFICATION) 19 (DISCUSSION OFF THE RECORD) 20 Q. (By Mr. Grove) Professor, have you had a 21 chance to read this document that's been marked Exhibit 22 16? 23 A. I have. 24 MR. GROVE: And just for the record, 25 it's a January 15, 1973, letter from NELL MC CALLUM & ASSOCIATES. INC. EXX-MOR-003699 49 1 Professor Hammond to a C.B. Moore. 2 Q. First of all, who is Mr. Moore? 3 A. He was an operating manager of the Benicia 4 refinery, I assume. However, he may have had a lower - 5 this was in headquarter refining; so, he would have been 6 in the headquarters department of the company here in 7 Houston. s 8 Q. Okay. 9 A. And he was probably manager of manufacturing or 10 refining. 11 Q. Okay. 12 The first sentence indicates, "Imply -- in 13 reply to your recent question." - 14 Do you recall what question Mr. Moore asked of 15 you that this letter is in reply to? 16 A. I don't recall his particular call to me or 17 asking me; but I do recognize from this that he~'was 18 interested in a written policy for all of the 19 refineries, that would be satisfactory to meet OSHA's 20 requirement in this field. The paper work then became 21 important, not whether or not we didn't have the program 22 and ongoing; but it was that we had to have the paper 23 work associated with compliance with the OSHA standards, 24 OSHA requirements. 25 Q. Okay. NELL MC CALLUM & ASSOCIATES, INC. EXX-MOR-003700 50 1 First of all. Professor, did you write this 2 letter? 3 A. I would assume. I don't recall personally that 4 I did; but with all of this bottom down here, I assume I 5 did. It would be a type of letter I would have written 6 in request from Mr. Moore that we get written policies 7 from all of the refineries, that would be satisfactory 8 to me. 9 Q. So, you have no reason to believe that this is 10 not a letter that you actually wrote? 11 A. I assume that we can, I think, with confidence, 12 that this was a letter that I wrote to him. 13 Q. Okay. 14 In the first full paragraph, you indicate that 15 the Billings and Benicia refineries have less formalized 16 programs and seem to depend more on contractors to , 17 follow safe practices. ~ 18 Do you see that reference? 19 A. I see that reference to the employees. 20 Q. And was that actually the case in 1973? 21 A. Not to my knowledge. It was just a matter that 22 I wanted to clover -- cover these employees thoroughly, 23 as well as our own employees, in regard to the handling 24 of these materials and to meet the requirements of OSHA 25 that we had included all of those people in our policy. NELL MC CALLUM & ASSOCIATES, INC. EXX-MOR-003701 51 1 Q. Isn't it true, though, that, in 1973, Humble 2 and Exxon did, in fact, depend on contractors to follow 3 safe practices in the Benicia refinery? 4 A. They were required to do so. 5 Q`. Okay. 6 But you indicate in this letter that you 7 depended upon them to do so. Is it not true, then, that 8 they were left to their own -- 9 A. No. It's just -- 10 Q. -- own decisions in terms of how to do work 11 that involved potential exposures to asbestos? 12 A. The -- what we didn't have in our hands and 13 what I didn't have and I needed was a written policy of 14 how they were carrying out all of these activities. It 15 wasn't a question about them doing it, just that we 16 didn't have a formal policy, written program. That was 17 what I was searching for. __ 18 Q. Okay. 19 Down in the second to the last paragraph, 20 there's a sentence that reads, "If either Billings or 21 Benicia have established a safe asbestos policy, we have 22 not seen it." 23 A. Well ~ 24 Q. You have underscored portions of that sentence, 25 including the last phrase, "We have not seen it." NELL MC CALLUM & ASSOCIATES. INC. EXX-MOR-003702 52 1 A. And that -- 2 Q. Is that correct? 3 A. That would be a written policy, and that -- I 4 refer, not to the practices, but to the -- having it in 5 in hand, a written, formal program policy. And we 6 didn't have one in our files. If they did theirs, we 7 had it for the other refineries. 8 Q. You' ve underscored the phrase "we have not seen 9 that because you consider that to be impor tant? 10 MS. KYLE: I'm going to obj ect. Lack of foundation. I don't know that the 12 Professor has testified that he 13 underscored the material that you're . 14 talking about, Frank. 15 A. Going back to the original -- the purpose of 16 this letter was to get a written document in my hands. 17 And when I talk about policy, I was looking for--not what 18 they did or wasn't doing. It was what they had actually 19 put down on paper, as required by OSHA, to meet OSHA's 20 requirements. 21 The paper work really bothered us a great deal, 22 from OSHA, because even though we had an excellent 23 program, as all of our medical examinations and other 24 checks on it prove, but we didn't have it all written 25 out as to the degree that the bureaucrats wanted it. NELL MC CALLUM & ASSOCIATES, INC. EXX-MOR-003703 53 1 So, this requires -- 2 MR. LEDYARD: Professor, reference 3 has been made as to whether or not, when 4 you wrote this letter, you underlined 5 those words or if it's possible those 6 words were underlined sometime later by 7 somebody else. Do you recall one way or 8 the other? 9 THE WITNESS: No, I do not. 10 Q. (By Mr. Grove) Do you have any reason to 11 believe that you did not underscore those words when you 12 wrote this letter? 13 A. No, I do not think that I would have gone to 14 that particular emphasis. I don't think it would have 15 been necessary. I think my letter -- words would have 16 been sufficient. And I think someone else has 17 underscored those letters. 18 Q. Who are the initials RA? Do you see those down 19 in the very bottom, where it says, "JWH slash RA." 20 A. Yeah. 21 Q. Was that your secretary? 22 A. That would have been a secretary/stenographer 23 that took my dictation on it. 24 Q. Would the steno -- would your secretary 25 normally emphasize words in letters that you hadn't NELL MC CALLUM & ASSOCIATES, INC. EXX-MOR-003704 54 1 indicated to be emphasized? 2 A. I don't think that -- I don't think that would 3 be true. 4 Q. Okay. 5 A. But this obviously is just a copy, and it could 6 have been unscored by many other people. 7 Q. Okay. 8 Professor, isn't it true that Exxon or Humble 9 did not do any testing of dust levels of construct -- of 10 contract workers in Benicia until 1975? 11 A. No, that is not true. There's a letter that 12 indicated Mr. Meyer -- I told you that he was out there 13 several times. But one of them was as early as 19 -- 14 1970. And... 15 Q. But was that testing done in relation to 16 contractor workers or Exxon employees? 17 A. All -- all potentially exposed employees. We 18 made no distinction. 19 Q. Are you aware of any testing that was ever done 20 regarding dust levels of refractory workers in the 21 Benicia refinery? 22 A. In application to asbestos, yes, there were 23 tests made there. 24 Q. Relative to refractory workers in particular? 25 A. We didn't distinguish between the -- our NELL MC CALLUM & ASSOCIATES. INC. EXX-MOR-003705 55 1 employees, insulators, and the ones that we brought in 2 by contractor, no. We never did differentiate to leave 3 them out or to permit them to do any operation that we 4 wouldn't feel safe doing ourself. 5 Q. Okay. That wasn't exactly my question. 6 Have you ever seen any test results relating to 7 testing done while refractory workers were working on 8 boilers at the Benicia refinery? 9 A. I don't recall having seen any specific data 10 that would reply to that particular type of worker that 11 you mentioned because we wouldn't have -- differentiate 12 regardless of whether he was on our payroll or someone 13 else's payroll. . 14 Q. In any event, you don't recall any specific 15 data relating to refractory work on boilers at the 16 Benicia refinery? 17 A. I don't remember any such designation, no. 18 Q. Okay. 19 The next document that I want you to refer to 20 has been marked previously as Exhibit 12, I believe. 21 And up at the top, it refers to Humble dash ENJAY safety 22 regulations. 23 Have you seen that exhibit before or that 24 document before? 25 A. I don't recall it. I'd have to review it. NELL MC CALLUM & ASSOCIATES, INC. EXX-MOR-003706 56 1 THE WITNESS: See, now, this is in 2 compliance with the federal regulations 3 that had just come out. 4 MR. LEDYARD: Why don't you just take 5 a minute to look at it. Professor. 6 THE WITNESS: Uh-huh. I'm looking at 7 it to see... 8 MR. LEDYARD: I don't know what that 9 i s. 10 Q. (By Mr. Grove) Have you seen that document 11 before. Professor? 12 A. I don't recall the specific document under the 13 ENJAY safety regulation. That was a subdivision of the 14 company that manufactured chemicals specifically. 15 Q. Were you, as the industrial hygienist at 16 Humble, also responsible for industrial hygiene matters 17 at ENJAY facilities? __ 18 A. We were after 1960. ' 19 Q. So, the date of that document, I believe, is in 20 June of 1972. Is that correct? 21 A. It is, uh-huh. 22 Q. So, during that time period, you would have 23 been responsible for the ENJAY? 24 A. Yes. 25 Q. Okay. NELL MC CALLUM & ASSOCIATES, INC. EXX-MOR-003707 57 1 A. And this is putting it down in, as I said, a 2 policy -- written policy that we were following already. 3 Q. These were guidelines that were supposed to be 4 observed when people were working with asbestos in the 5 field? 6 A. It -- they were already being observed, but 7 they just -- we never put them down so that any new 8 employee or new supervisor coming on that had the 9 responsibility would have it as his Bible. 10 Q. So, your testimony is that this is nothing 11 different from what was happening at Humble already? 12 A. No. That's right. I -- this is our policy 13 already. It was in practice. . 14 Q. I'd like you to read the last sentence of the 15 kind of introductory paragraph underneath the heading. 16 There's a -- 17 A. "The following are areas of good safety 18 practices which are --" 19 MR. LEDYARDs Just the last sentence, 20 . I think. 21 A. Oh. "These should not be given -- these should 22 now be given special emphasis in our normal working 23 practices." Yes. 24 Q. Okay. 25 Why -- if these were practices that were NELL MC CALLUM & ASSOCIATES, INC. EXX-MOR-003708 58 1 already in effect, why, then. Professor, did you use the 2 phrase "these should now be given special emphasis"? 3 A. Because they'd become under the OSHA and under 4 federal regulations and we had to have -- they had to 5 have the paper work necessary to prove that when we had 6 inspectors come in and that would require to be shown 7 these type of -- of guidelines for handling asbestos. 8 Q. Isn't it true. Professor, that the -- these -- 9 some of these measures were new policies that were 10 implemented by Exxon as of the date of the OSHA 11 regulations? 12 A. No. I don't see anything new here than what we 13 were already practicing and using, such as we ' 14 underscored, "Do not drive, sweep, or blow with 15 compressed air." That would answer your previous 16 question about our policy. We were -- and, "Asbestos 17 material should not be applied by spray methods*" 18 Q. Did you prepare this document that's already 19 been marked as Exhibit 12? 20 A. I did not prepare it, but I approved it. 21 Q. And I believe you already indicated that these 22 were guidelines that were supposed to be followed in the 23 field when using asbestos-containing products? 24 A. Let me emphasize they were the guidelines that 25 we were already using. But now we had to put it down NELL MC CALLUM & ASSOCIATES, INC. EXX-MOR-003709 59 1 and have it in a document. We had it as a policy and 2 formalized so that any OSHA inspector would be able to 3 be supplied with a copy of this without him having to go 4 over every question. It was here. 5 Q. Okay. 6 Isn't it true. Professor, that the document and 7 those guidelines say nothing about wetting insulation 8 material -- materials when applying them? 9 A. I haven't read it that carefully. 10 Down at the end, "All cleanup of asbestos dust 11 shall be performed by vacuum cleaners." 12 You asked about the method we got rid of them? 13 and those were approved vacuum cleaners, all wet 14 meth ods. 15 Q. Can I see the document, please? You got a 16 copy? Thanks. 17 A. Seemed to be a very com -- very good program. 18 I see no particular problems in it, except medical 19 surveillance. 20 Q. Sir, you've just referenced the -- the 21 reference in Section 3E of the guidelines, that 22 indicates all cleanup shall be performed by vacuum 23 cleaners or wet methods? Is that what you were 24 referencing just a moment ago? 25 A. That was No. 4. Well, also, yeah, at the NELL MC CALLUM & ASSOCIATES, INC. EXX-MOR-003710 60 1 bottom 2 MR. LEDYARD:Three. 3 Q. Three, right. 4 A. -- the vacuum cleaners or wet method. 5 Q. Doesn't that -- 6 A. It doesn't need to be -- 7 Q. I'm sorry. I didn't mean to interrupt. Are 8 you finished? 9 A. Yes. 10 Q. Doesn't that simply apply to the removal of 11 asbestos? Isn't that what Section 3 applies to? 12 A. No. Any asbestos, new asbestos or any other 13 asbestos, would be cleaned up by wet methods or vacuum 14 cleaners only. . 15 Q. But it says nothing whatsoever about applying 16 asbestos by wet methods, does it? 17 A. In some cases, it was preformed and all ready, 18 that you didn't have to have any dust or any cleanup 19 after that, no. 20 Q. And it also doesn't say anything about using 21 wet methods to remove any jacket paper from insulation, 22 does it? 23 A. The OSHA requirement didn't go into that 24 matter, and we were just trying to get this so we would 25 be in compliance with OSHA. NELL MC CALLUM & ASSOCIATES, INC. EXX-MOR-003711 61 1 And they were weak compared to our program, in 2 asbestos as well as many other substances. We didn't 3 learn a thing from OSHA but paper work. 4 Q. And the last number on that memorandum or 5 guidelines or whatever the document is called is No. 4. 6 It says, "Asbestos materials should not be applied by 7 spraying methods." 8 A. That was our policy. 9 Q. Isn't it true that, prior to that time. Humble 10 did spray asbestos products? 11 A. Not -- 12 MS. KYLE; Objection. Asked and 13 answered earlier this morning. 14 A. I think I've answer that before. No. We 15 already had a policy -- we already had a program against 16 that, and this is just emphasizing. 17 Q. Yesterday I asked you some questions r-egarding 18 the identities of some people you knew over the years 19 through your affiliations with various organizations. 20 I've come across the names of a few more individuals 21 that I'd like to run by you. 22 Do you know who a Dr. Woody is? 23 A. Yeah. He was a medical director, I believe, 24 from Esso Eastern Company, part of the Standard Oil, 25 ENJAY. NELL MC CALLUM & ASSOCIATES, INC. EXX-MOR-003712 62 1 Q. Was he -- well, what period of time was he 2 employed by Esso Eastern? 3 A. He was -- I just can speak since '47. Now, he 4 was well established and quite a senior member of the 5 physicians when I came to work in that organization, 6 broad organization. And he didn't work much longer 7 after I came before he retired. 8 Q. Was he a member of the -- the medical -- 9 medical and health -- medical advisory committee? 10 A. Committee of the API, yes. That's where I knew 11 him, yes, sir. 12 Q. And you attended meetings of the -- I -- of 13 that committee, as well, did you not? . 14 A. Well, it was joint committee meetings; but we 15 separated during the conference into individual -- I 16 mean, into specialized fields, such as industrial 17 hygiene and medical. But we were also, a good -part of 18 the time, jointly together -- 19 Q. Okay. 20 A. --r as a group. 21 Q. Okay. 22 The next person is Clyde Berry? 23 A. Clyde -- Dr. Clyde Berry was with the public 24 health service, and I enticed him to come out of the 25 public health service to go to work for the Esso Eastern NELL MC CALLUM & ASSOCIATES, INC. EXX-MOR-003713 63 1 Company. And he was with us four or five years, from 2 about 1947 -- no. Excuse me -- 1949 to '54 or '55. 3 Q. And was he also a member of the medical 4 advisory committee? 5 A. Yes, he was. 6 Q. How about Herschel Hobson? 7 A. Herschel Hobson's a newcomer in the field of 8 industrial hygiene. He came, about 1970, from the 9 University of Oklahoma; and he's -- he did his Doctor's 10 degree there in industrial hygiene at -- under a Dr. 11 Nau. And Dr. Nau called me and told me he was coming to 12 work for Texaco and asked if I'd take him in hand and 13 give him an orientation in the petroleum industry, kind 14 of an internship. So, he worked with me for several 15 days and several weeks maybe. I don't recall. 16 Q. And that was sometime in the early 1970's? 17 A. Yes, about that period. 18 Q. So, then, you attempted to essentially show Mr. 19 Hobson the ropes, so to speak? 20 A. I gave him an internship before he really 21 reported over to Texaco, yes. 22 Q. As part of that internship, was there any 23 discussion relating to the potential health hazards of 24 asbestos, in controlling asbestos in the field? 25 A. I'm sure that it was covered. The nature of NELL MC CALLUM & ASSOCIATES, INC. EXX-MOR-003714 64 1 our orientation of him was to get him into refineries 2 and see what the programs were. 3 MR. LEDYARD: I think you need to 4 depose Dr. Hobson and find out exactly 5 what he knew and when he knew it. 6 Q. How about a Mr. Henry Burgess? 7 A. I don't believe I know him. 8 Q. Maybe a Dr. Burgess. I don't know off the top 9 of my head. 10 You don't recognize the name? 11 A. I don't recognize the name. 12 Q. Okay. 13 How about George Wilkening? - 14 A. George Wilkening worked with the Esso 15 development research group in the area of reviewing 16 refineries worldwide for a while, and then he came to me 17 and my assistant or associate director of indusirial 18 hygiene at Humble. And he was with me about five years. 19 And then Bell Telephone people said, "We need a man to 20 head up our program"? and, so, they enticed him to go to 21 Murrayhill, New Jersey, and take over the Bell 22 laboratories. And he retired from that a couple of 23 years ago. 24 Q. How about W.H. Meyer or Meyer? 25 A. Meyer. He was with the organization up at the NELL MC CALLUM & ASSOCIATES, INC. EXX-MOR-003715 65 1 medical research department and, again, doing work like 2 George Wilkening, worldwide, with refineries and 3 establishing programs. And then, after George left. 4 Bill Meyer came and took his place with me and was 5 assistant -- 6 Q. Is that -- 7 A. -- industrialhygiene director. 8 Q. I'm sorry. I didn't mean to interrupt. 9 Is that the same Mr. Meyer that we spoke of 10 earlier, who actually made trips out to the Benicia 11 refinery? 12 A. That was him. 13 Q. Wendell Ward? . 14 A. Yes, I remember that name. He did not work for 15 me, but I know that name. It's familiar, but I don't 16 recall in what capacity. 17 Q. Jack Spence? 18 A. Jack Spence was theStandard of California, 19 which is now Chevron, industrial hygienist. And, again, 20 he was trained -- after he'd been with that company 21 quite awhile, he was trained at Harvard in industrial 22 hygiene. He came and spent several days with me in our 23 orientation. And he went to San Francisco, and Dr. 24 Curtis was medical director then and took over that 25 program. NELL MC CALLUM & ASSOCIATES, INC. EXX-MOR-003716 66 1 Qo And Dr. Curtis was a -- 2 A. Medical director. 3 Q. Medical director at -- 4 A. Chevron. 5 Q. Okay. 6 Was Dr. Curtis a member of the API medical 7 advisory committee? 8 A. He was. 9 Q. From what time forward? 10 A. He was from 1948 or so until he retired. I 11 don't know whether he retired before I did or I retired 12 before he did, but that duration until '78 with me. And 13 he may have been there almost that full time. 14 Q. And Mr. Spence, was he a member of that 15 committee? 16 A. Yes, he was after he came on board. 17 Q. From what time? Do you recall when he-----18 A. I -- I think that his would have been in the 19 late fifties. 20 Q. And what time did -- during what time did he 21 train with you? 22 A. In -- even before he put his program in effect. 23 He trained with me right out of having got his degree in 24 industrial hygiene at Harvard under Drinker. And he 25 came to me and spent -- I don't remember -- days or NELL MC CALLUM & ASSOCIATES, INC. EXX-MOR-003717 67 1 weeks. But, anyway, it was quite a little while. 2 Q. Was that in the 1950's sometime? 3 A. Oh, yes. That would have been the same time he 4 came to work for Chevron. 5 Q. How about a C.W. Smith? 6 A. I don't remember him. 7 Q. How about an R.W. Black? 8 A. I don't recall Black. 9 Q. Did Humble or Standard Oil of New Jersey attend 10 any of the national cancer conferences to your 11 knowledge? 12 A. We had Dr. Eckardt. And he was director of 13 medical research division? and he was located up at 14 Florham Park in New Jersey, at Linden, New Jersey. And 15 he did go worldwide on -- attendant of the cancer 16 research group, yes. 17 Q. From what -- what time period did he begin 18 attending these conferences? 19 A. I don't know about the attendance of any 20 specific time when he first went, but he started as this 21 position in 1950 or '51. 22 Q. Okay. 23 Okay. We discussed yesterday your affiliation 24 with the API medical advisory committee and the ACGIH 25 and the A -- the Associate -- American Industrial NELL NIC CALLUM & ASSOCIATES, INC. EXX-MOR-003718 68 1 Hygienists Association? 2 A. American Industrial Hygienists. 3 Q. And you attended those conferences -- 4 A. I did. 5 Q. -- regularly, correct? 6 A. I did. 7 Q. And at those conferences, isn't it true that 8 health hazards of asbestos were discussed from time to 9 time? 10 A. I never -- 11 MR. LEDYARD: Object to the form of 12 the question. Are you talking about 13 discussed as an agenda item or discusse'd 14 by two people that may have attended these 15 conferences or -- 16 MR. GROVE: I'm talking about 17 discussed as a topic at the confej.ence. 18 A. I didn't attend any of them, but I'm sure they 19 were on the program. You usually had a choice of about 20 six different papers being given at the same time, you 21 know. 22 Q. Okay. 23 A. And you would select the one that was of most 24 interest to you at the time. 25 Q. But in any event, it's your understanding that, NELL MC CALLUM & ASSOCIATES, INC. EXX-MOR-003719 69 1 at least at some of these conferences, that subject was 2 discussed? 3 MR. LEDYARD: Well, Professor, I'd 4 caution you not to assume anything. 5 Either you know that it was discussed or 6 you don't know it was discussed. 7 A. I don't know. 8 Q. Okay. 9 I just want to go back. When you first came to 10 Humble, do you recall what air monitoring activities 11 were being done? 12 A. Yes. The dust, including asbestos, was done on 13 a regular basis by technicians that had been trained* 14 under Mr. Bonsib and others. And we were using the 15 midget impinger. It was an official method that was 16 recognized by the industrial hygiene division of the 17 United States Public Health Service. We used that 18 procedure, and we had trained technicians that collected 19 samples and made the counts and so forth. 20 Q. Okay. 21 And was there there a regular time period -- 22 was there a periodic schedule that you would do this 23 testing? 24 A. It was a ongoing program that -- it was the 25 combination of industrial -- industrial hygiene and NELL MC CALLUM & ASSOCIATES, INC. EXX-MOR-003720 70 1 safety or -- orientation that we asked for these. Where 2 we didn't have the data, we'd ask for the data to be 3 collected for certain operations. 4 So, it was ongoing in 1947, when I came. And I 5 looked at it and went over the methods and the 6 procedures that we used and approved it and said, "Carry 7 on 8 Q. So, in other words, you just basically 9 continued with the same type of monitoring that had been 10 going on prior to your coming to Humble? 11 A. I did. 12 Q. And my prior question was a little more 13 specific than I think your answer was. And I'm asking 14 if you recall if there was any specified time periods 15 that you would conduct tests. I mean, did you do it 16 every six months? Did you do it every year? Did you do 17 it on certain operations more than others? Was_.there a 18 schedule that was -- that was utilized? 19 A. It was done whenever there was either a new 20 operation or there was an unusual job that we didn't 21 have the previous data on. And they were available at 22 any time to be called out by the safety department or by 23 medical or by myself -- 24 Q. Okay. 25 A. -- to go out and make those tests. NELL MC CALLUM & ASSOCIATES, INC. EXX-MOR-003721 71 1 Q Did you keep all the data that you obtained 2 through those tests? 3 A. I did not personally in the medical files in 4 headquarters, but they were kept in the refineries where 5 the work was done. 6 Q. Did you share any of the results of your 7 testing with other individuals in the petroleum 8 industry? 9 A. Yes. We had no secrets from any of the other 10 companies that were interested in seeing our data. 11 MR. LEDYARD: Well, I think he's 12 asking you if you did specific sampling 13 that you recall specifically sharing with 14 somebody else as opposed to just generally 15 not having any secrets. 16 A. Well, the data was -- whatever data we had was 17 always available to anyone who inquired to see Jt. 18 MR. LEDYARD; Well, the question was: 19 Do you recall actually giving it to 20 anybody? 21 A. No. I don't have that, no. 22 Q. You don't recall -- 23 A. I can't recall that type of detail now. 24 Q. You don't recall anybody specifically 25 requesting any type of test sampling data? NELL MC CALLUM & ASSOCIATES, INC. EXX-MOR-003722 72 1 A. I do not recall that. 2 Q. But if somebody were to ask for it, you would 3 have no qualms in giving it to them? 4 A. No, I did not. And I shared it with any 5 public -- both officials that were in Texas or anyplace 6 else that wanted to see it. It was always available. 7 Q. Okay. 8 Now, isn't it true that Humble never posted 9 signs specifically warning of asbestos until after the 10 OSHA regulations came into effect in the early 1970's? 11 A. Again, that was paper work that we were 12 required to do so by OSHA. So, we began to comply with 13 that -- that written requirement. . 14 Q. But prior to that time, no such warning signs 15 had been posted in any Humble refineries? 16 A. I don't recall that we found it necessary. 17 Q. Okay. 18 I asked you some questions yesterday about the 19 memorandum from Mr. Venable to Dr. Jones, and I 20 under stand.that you indicated that you did not recall 21 seeing that memorandum prior to being shown it. 22 My question now is: When you worked at Exxon 23 in 1974, does that -- is that memorandum of the same 24 form that was utilized by Exxon during that period of 25 time? NELL MC CALLUM & ASSOCIATES, INC. EXX-MOR-003723 73 1 A. I don't recall it, any such form as that. 2 Q. Who was Dr. Jones? 3 A. Dr. Jones was the medical supervisor for the 4 Baton Rouge refinery, that was actually Mr. Venable's 5 director or supervisor. 6 Q. So, Mr. Venable -- 7 A. Reported to him. 6 Q. -- would have had responsibility for collecting 9 data and reporting that data to Dr. Jones; is that 10 correct? 11 A. I do not know the -- you know, what the 12 relationship in that regard was; but I'm sure Mr. 13 Venable had the freedom to go to Dr. Jones with ' 14 information of any type that he thought was -- no 15 restriction on that type of communication. 16 Q. Was it your understanding that Dr. Venable 17 reported -- or Mr. Venable reported to Dr. Jones? 18 A. He could, yes. 19 Q. Okay. 20 The next document that I want to show you is a 21 memorandum from Mr. Venable to yourself, which I believe 22 we had copied yesterday and I'd like to have marked 23 as -- I guess we're on No. 17 now. 24 (HAMMOND EXHIBIT NO. 17 WAS MARKED 25 FOR IDENTIFICATION) NELL NIC CALLUM & ASSOCIATES, INC. EXX-MOR-003724 74 1 MR. GROVE; Can I get you to look on 2 the other one? 3 Q. (By Mr. Grove) Professor, do you recognize the 4 document that's been marked Exhibit 17? 5 MR. LEDYARD: Well, let's take the 6 time to -- I don't know if you've looked 7 at this before this morning or yesterday, 8 but let's take a minute to look at it. 9 MR. GROVE; Actually, it was not my 10 intent to have the letter that's attached 11 to the end of this as part of this. I 12 think it's a completely separate document. 13 I don't have any problem with it being* 14 on -- I didn't know that it was copied is 15 my -- 16 MR. LEDYARD; Well, why don't you 17 just pull it off of the back; and-we'll... 18 MR. GROVE: Okay. 19 MR. LEDYARD: It's about lunchtime. 20 Are you going to ask him questions about 21 that document? 22 MR. GROVE: Yeah. Not very many, 23 though. 24 MS. KYLE: Why don't we take a break, 25 then. NELL MC CALLUM & ASSOCIATES, INC. EXX-MOR-003725 75 1 MR. LEDYARD: You want to take a 2 break, and he can read it over lunch? And 3 then we'll come back -- how much more do 4 you think -- 5 MR. GROVE; I don't have very much 6 more after this, I don't think. So... 7 MS. KYLE; Before we go off the 8 record, I would like to clarify a few 9 issues, one particular issue that was 10 brought up yesterday afternoon. And that 11 concerned the Exxon noticed trial 12 preservation testimony of Professor 13 Hammond that was begun earlier this year 14 and has yet to be concluded. 15 Exxon certainly recognizes and 16 invites other Codefendants, Plaintiffs to 17 examine Professor Hammond concerni-ng that 18 testimony. However, I do want to stress 19 that there is absolutely no agreement, 20 Exxon is not agreeing to allowing general 21 discovery on examination as relates to 22 that Exxon noticed trial preservation 23 testimony. 24 We expect that any examination of 25 Professor Hammond relating to that NELL MC CALLUM & ASSOCIATES, INC. EXX-MOR-003726 76 1 testimony would be in the scope of the 2 direct, and I would like to make it very 3 clear that any questions exceeding the 4 scope of the direct testimony will be 5 objected to by Exxon. 6 MR. BISHOP: You mean at the 7 conclusion of that deposition or -- you 8 don't mean today? 9 MS. KYLE: No. I'm just -- I'm just 10 referring to that deposition when it -- 11 that tran -- that preservation -- excuse 12 me. It is not a discovery deposition. It 13 is a videotaped * testimony from Professor 14 Hammond for trial purposes. 15 When it is continued, we expect that 16 any examination will fall within the scope 17 of the direct that Professor Hamm-ond gave 18 several months ago. Any other questions 19 falling outside the scope of that direct 20 testimony will be objected to by Exxon. 21 MR. BAILEY: I'm not that familiar 22 with the deposition. Is it planned to be 23 used in Texas in state court, or do you 24 know? 25 MR. GROVE: It's noticed in NELL MC CALLUM & ASSOCIATES, INC. EXX-MOR-003727 77 1 Calif ornia * 2 MS. KYLE: It is noticed in 3 California. It is noticed in re 4 California asbestos litigation. 5 MR. BAILEY: Okay. 6 MS. KYLE: Okay? 7 MR. BAILEY: Thank you. 8 MR. GROVE: I don't have any 9 objection to you putting it on the record 10 of this deposition. I just don't quite 11 understand what it has to do with this 12 deposition. 13 MS. KYLE: If -- it is to clarify the 14 issues for the various counsel here and to 15 also put them on notice, if they have 16 discovery issues they wish to pursue with 17 Professor Hammond, they need to do it in 18 another arena, not in that testimony. 19 MR. GROVE: And with that, are we 20 adjourned for lunch? 21 MS. KYLE: Yes. 22 (RECESS FROM 11:58 TO 1:03 P.M.) 23 (MR. MARSH IS NO LONGER PRESENT) 24 Q. (By Mr. Grove) Professor, while we were off 25 the record at lunch, did you have a chance to look at NELL MC CALLUM & ASSOCIATES, INC. EXX-MOR-003728 78 1 this memorandum from Mr. Venable to yourself? 2 A. I did. 3 Q. Do you recall seeing that memorandum? 4 A. I am sorry to say 20 years ago. But I don't 5 recall actually receiving it or seeing it or going over 6 it. 7 Q. Do you remember having any discussions with Mr. 8 Venable at or about that time period regarding the 9 recommendations of the Department of Labor's advisory 10 committee? 11 A. No, I do not. This was one that came, I 12 suppose, to mey but I don't have any recollection of 13 ever responding to it or taking any action on it or * 14 any -- any other. I'm sorry. But 20 years, you just 15 don't -- it doesn't come to me at all. 16 I had several people working on this type of a 17 written program at the same time? and, so, I knew about 18 them and their production. 19 Q. Was Mr. Venable one of the individuals who was 20 working on that program? 21 A. Well, I see from this, if this is his -- to me 22 and -- it covered the same that Mr. Diserens' letter to 23 me and... 24 MR. LEDYARD: Professor, don't assume 25 any thing from this document. Just NELL MC CALLUM & ASSOCIATES, INC. EXX-MOR-003729 79 1 independently of this document, do you 2 recall Fred Venable working on -- 3 THE WITNESS: No, I don't. 4 MR. LEDYARD: -- the advisory 5 committee's recommendations? 6 A. That's what I say. I just don't recall any 7 actions -- 8 Q. Okay. 9 A. -- of either. 10 Q. Does that memorandum refresh your recollection 11 as to whether or not Mr. Venable may have been working 12 on that project? 13 A. I -- I'm really not in a position to identify 14 this, this being Mr. Venable's letter, because he's not 15 here to tell us. And I just don't -- don't know whether 16 this came to me from him as it's written up here. I 17 just don't know. ~. 18 Q. Do you have any reason to believe that you did 19 not receive that memorandum from Mr. Venable at or about 20 the time that it was prepared? 21 A. I do not have any proof that I didn't receive 22 it, no. 23 Q. Do you have any reason to -- any reason 24 whatsoever to believe that you would not have received 25 that memorandum? NELL MC CALLUM & ASSOCIATES, INC. EXX-MOR-003730 80 1 A. I just don't recall it, and I don't know what 2 reaction I might have had to it if I did. 3 Q. Okay. 4 I have one further question on the memorandum 5 that's from Mr. Venable to Dr. Jones. It's undated. 6 And I refer you to the second to the last paragraph of 7 that memorandum. That is Exhibit 15 that's been 8 previously marked. The second to the last memo -- 9 paragraph of that -- do you not have a copy of that? 10 A. We had it out here yesterday. 11 MR. LEDYARD: I don't see -- 12 MR. GROVEs That's not it underneath 13 the letter that you just -- that's it . 14 right there. 15 Q. (By Mr. Grove) Okay. On the second page of 16 that memorandum, the second to the last paragraph 17 begins, "While we initially..." 18 Could you read that paragraph. 19 A. Yes, I read it. 20 Q. Do you recall ever having any discussions with 21 anyone at Exxon or Humble regarding whether or not the 22 initial asbestos control program of Humble was embarked 23 on with some degree of complacency? 24 A. I do not have that impression at all. 25 Q. I'm asking if you had -- ever had any NELL MC CALLUM & ASSOCIATES, INC. EXX-MOR-003731 81 1 discussions with any individuals within Humble or Exxon 2 regarding that subject. 3 A. Not of any failure on our part to comply with 4 all of the restrictions that were to -- issued out in 5 any any public -- ours was more restrictive than 6 this. 7 Q. Now, there -- at the end of that paragraph, 8 there's a reference to two cases of mesothelioma. 9 Do you see that reference at the end of that 10 sentence? 11 A. Yes, at the last sentence. Uh-huh. 12 Q. Are those the instances of mesothelioma that 13 you recalled when you were testifying earlier? ' 14 MR. LEDYARD: I'm going to object to 15 the form of the question in that the 16 Professor would have no way of knowing 17 which two are being referenced. _ 18 MR. GROVE: You're right. Can I 19 rephrase my question? 20 Q. Dp you believe that those two cases of 21 mesothelioma that are referred to in that paragraph are 22 the same cases that you learned of later, after you left 23 Exxon? 24 MR. LEDYARD: Well, Professor, again 25 ` I would -- counsel, when we started these NELL MC CALLUM & ASSOCIATES. INC. EXX-MOR-003732 82 1 depositions this morning, told you not to 2 speculate. And I would caution you not to 3 speculate. If you know whether those are 4 the same two, fine. If you don't know, 5 then, I would suggest you not answer the 6 question. 7 A. I do not know whether they were related at all. 8 Q. Okay. 9 If I understood your prior testimony correctly, 10 you -- you had no conversations with anyone within Exxon 11 concerning cases of mesothelioma prior to your leaving 12 the company? 13 A. I never did, no. - 14 Q. Okay. 15 One more question regarding that paragraph. 16 The first portion of it indicates, "...while we 17 initially embarked upon the asbestos control program 18 with some reservation concerning its real significance." 19 Do you ever recall any discussions regarding 20 that subject with any individuals within Humble or 21 Exxon? 22 A. No, I do not. And I don't know the purpose of 23 him putting it down, if he did do it. 24 Q. Did you regard Mr. Venable as a good employee 25 of Exxon? NELL MC CALLUM & ASSOCIATES, INC. EXX-MOR-003733 83 1 A. That's rather broad. In what field? In what 2 area? 3 Q. In the fields in which he practiced. 4 A. He was an excellent -- very jealous of his 5 covering of every employee. He took them on as a 6 individual responsibility of his; and I had no more 7 conscientious employee, in my knowledge, as I've ever 8 worked with. 9 Q. Okay. 10 I previously asked you about what has been 11 marked Exhibit 4a, and I believe you indicated that you 12 didn't recall that. That was the April 13, 1964, cover 13 letter from Mr. Lucian Renes to Nathan Van Hendricks. . 14 And I believe you indicated you didn't recall that 15 letter or the report that's attached to it? 16 A. No, I do not. 17 Q. Okay. _ 18 My question to you now is simply: Who is 19 Lucian Renes? 20 A. He was an industrial hygienist for Dr. Keith 21 Davis of the Phillips Petroleum Company. 22 Q. Did you know Mr. Renes? 23 A. I did. 24 Q. And did he -- was he part of the medical 25 advisory committee? NELL MC CALLUM & ASSOCIATES. INC. EXX-MOR-003734 84 1 A. He was a member after he came aboard of 2 Phillips. 3 Q. Do you recall during what time period he became 4 a member? 5 A. No, I do not. But I'd estimate it was in the 6 mid-fif ties. 7 Q. Okay. 8 Professor, during the depositions that you gave 9 back in May, I believe you indicated that you were being 10 compensated for your time by Exxon. Is that correct? 11 A. I am as a fact witness. 12 Q. And are you still being compensated during 13 these sessions of deposition? 14 A. I hope so. 15 Q. And do you know at what rate you're being 16 compensated? 17 A. $200 an hour. __ 18 Q. Do you know if your attorney, Mr. Ledyard, is 19 also being paid by Exxon to appear here today on your 20 behalf? 21 MR. LEDYARD: Counsel, I'm going to 22 object to the question. Not only is it 23 not relevant, but it's none of your 24 business as far as my relationship with my 25 client. And I would instruct the witness NELL MC CALLUM & ASSOCIATES, INC. EXX-MOR-003735 85 1 not to get involved in such questions and 2 answer s. 3 MR. GROVE: I don't want to argue# 4 but -- and I don't even dispute that, if 5 ' you have a relationship with the 6 Professor, that's protected by the 7 attorney-client privilege. My question 8 had to do with your relationship to Exxon, 9 which I don't believe is covered by any 10 privileges that's in this deposition. And 11 I -- 12 MR. LEDYARD: Other than it's 13 completely irrelevant, but... . 14 MR. GROVE: Okay. 15 MR. LEDYARD: Do you have any idea 16 one way or the other? 17 THE WITNESS: No. I don't hjive any 18 concern about your affairs with Exxon. 19 You're my lawyer. 20 Q. Do you have -- do you have any knowledge 21 whatsoever regarding who is paying Mr. Ledyard for being 22 here? 23 A. I sure don't. 24 MR. GROVE: Okay. I believe that's 25 all I have. Professor. And I thank you NELL MC CALLUM & ASSOCIATES. INC. EXX-MOR-003736 86 1 for your time. 2 3 EXAMINATION BY MR. BAILEY: 4 Q. Professor -- 5' MR. LEDYARD: Feel free to jump in. 6 Q. Professor, my name is Mel Bailey? and I've sat 7 through five or six days now of depositions and never 8 had the opportunity to ask you any questions. I have 9 just a few. 10 What I want to focus on is your thought process 11 in the late thirties, the early forties, and into the 12 fifties. Okay? 13 A. All right. ' 14 MR. LEDYARD; Would you just state 15 for the record, so the Professor will 16 know, who you represent. 17 Q. I'm here on behalf of Onion Carbide, among 18 other defendants that -- ' 19 A. Yes, X see. 20 Q. Different defendants in different cases. 21 Tell me a little bit about your relationship, 22 if you would, with Philip Drinker. 23 A. Philip Drinker. Well, I went with the United 24 States Health Service; and I was in Bethesda, Maryland 25 Institute of Health. But I wasn't there very long NELL MC CALLUM & ASSOCIATES, INC. EXX-MOR-003737 87 1 before, in 1941, they said, "We're going to send you to 2 the Division of Occupational Diseases in the Department 3 of Labor of Massachusetts. And you'll be working there 4 with many trained people, like Dr. Elkin and Hemeon and 5 others. And we think this will be a fine orientation 6 for you to be. And, also, you have privilege to attend 7 the lectures at Harvard under Dr. Drinker." 8 So, that was my beginning with him, in 1941. 9 And I was privileged to attend lectures, because Dr. 10 Hemeon and also Elkin were adjunct professors that 11 lectured over there regularly for the school in 12 industrial hygiene. 13 Q. I had seen prior deposition testimony where -you 14 said you attended classes. You weren't physically -- 15 A. That's what -- Q. -- enrolled at Harvard, but you went to classes 17 there? ___ 18 A. I did -- I would go with Dr. Elkin and Mr. 19 Hemeon and others in the department. Like Dr. Tabershaw 20 was a member of that team of people at Massachusetts 21 Division of Occupational Disease. And I'd go with those 22 and attend the classes. But I didn't actually register 23 for a degree, no. 24 Q. Now, you -- one of the reasons you went to 25 attend classes at Harvard, though, was to study under NELL MC CALLUM & ASSOCIATES, INC. EXX-MOR-003738 88 1 Philip Drinker? 2 A. That's true. He was a outstanding worldwide 3 industrial hygienist and engineer, and it was certainly 4 a great privilege to be working under him or with him 5 and... 6 Q. And part of his focus was in 7 asbestos-related -- well, strike that. 8 Part of his focus was industrial hygiene and 9 how asbestos related to industrial hygiene; is that 10 tr ue? 11 A. He taught that. And, also, he was quite an 12 authority on the relation with silica and silicosis and 13 producing operations in mining and other operations. 14 Q. Okay. 15 At that time, in the forties, the early 16 forties, were you of the opinion that he was one of the 17 foremost industrial hygienists in the world? -- 18 A. He was. And he and Hatch -- Theodore Hatch and 19 he wrote a book on industrial dust, and that was mor e or 20 less a Bible for this field. And that was written i n 21 '34, *36, and published in that period. And then he 22 wrote a revised edition in the early 1950's, second 23 edition. 24 Q. Now, his paper you're referring to in 1936, 25 that he wrote with Professor Hatch, generally discussed NELL MC CALLUM & ASSOCIATES, INC. EXX-MOR-003739 89 1 dust and pneumoconiosis - 2 A. It did. 3 Q. -- and industrial hygiene, correct? 4 Did you become personal friends with Philip 5 Drinker during the forties and fifties? 6 A. Yes, I did to the extent that I was assigned 7 then to the State Department of Health that established 8 a program for the state of South Carolina. And he came 9 to visit us as a guest of the department, and I asked 10 him about enrolling to finish out my degree and get -- 11 actually get a degree from them. I already had three 12 degrees, but none of them under Drinker. 13 So, he says, "Jim," says, "you know all that 14 we're teaching, anyway." Said, "Why in the world you 15 want to waste your time?" So... 16 Q. Is there any doubt in your mind Philip Drinker 17 played a major role in your development as an industrial 18 hygienist in the forties? 19 A. Oh, yes. And we maintained, until he retired, 20 a close relationship, with various meetings and 21 conferences and -- and correspondence. 22 Q. Now, when you were running the symposium, for 23 lack of a better term, at Rice in the forties, late 24 forties, you invited Dr. Drinker to come down and speak 25 to that group? NELL MC CALLUM & ASSOCIATES, INC. EXX-MOR-003740 90 1 A. He did. He spoke. 2 Q. And I think that was around 1947. Is that your 3 recollection? 4 A. Well, the first one was in *48. I came in '47? 5 and it took me about a year to get it organized and to 6 get speakers such as Jack Bloomfield, who was also an 7 outstanding authority in the public health service 8 field, and Drinker. And I don't remember if Hatch came, 9 whether he actually came during the eleven -- ten years 10 or so we ran the program. But we were in correspondence 11 with him. 12 We also had distinguished people from England 13 to come to our conference here. The equivalent of . 14 secretary of- labor in terms of standards came over as 15 one of my guests from England, and he stayed with me for 16 a day or two after the conference. We visited the 17 refineries, like Baytown. 18 Q. Professor, you've referred in several of your 19 depositions to what your thought process was or what 20 information or beliefs you developed with respect to 21 asbestos in the forties and in the fifties and in the 22 sixties. 23 My question to you is this: Hav e you made any 24 effort. since the time that you retireJd, to go back and 25 collect medical articles, rejvie w what sta te of the NELL MC CALLUM & ASSOCIATES, INC. EXX-MOR-003741 91 1 knowledge was with respect to asbestos? or are the 2 opinions you give based solely on your recollections of 3 articles you read at the time? 4 A. I know I have not. I've been invited to do 5 that for the "Journal of the American Industrial Hygiene 6 Association." And I'm guilty of being too -- well, I 7 excuse myself. I'm still busy. But I have been invited 8 to do that very thing that you have -- not only for 9 dust, but also for many of the other common occupational 10 hazards of that type. 11 And I was fortunate to -- in South Carolina, to 12 be associated very closely with a Dr. Lynch. And Dr. 13 Lynch taught me that, in the textile industry, where * 14 they used asbestos as they would cotton to weave it into 15 cloth and so forth, that sometime the lint in the air 16 would get so thick until it looked like a fog. And it 17 was from -- Dr. Lynch had a big plant there, and. he 18 talked about that caused asbestosis. And he didn't see 19 any reason for me to be upset, unless it was danger of 20 asbestosis, about the cancer -- carcinoma of the lung. 21 Q. Okay. 22 While you're talking about milling and mining 23 and that process, is it true that the articles that you 24 were beginning to read and accumulate in the early 25 forties with respect to asbestos-related disease were NELL MC CALLUM & ASSOCIATES. INC. EXX-MOR-003742 92 1 stud -- either case studies or epidemiological studies 2 in the milling and mine atmosphere as opposed to with 3 insulators or end users? 4 A. Yes. I talked a lot to Lynch in regard to what 5 degree of protection I should insist upon; and he told 6 me to protect them from asbestosis and, as far as he 7 knew, that would be sufficient to protect them from 8 other things. 9 Q. Really, what I'm focusing on is that this was 10 an evolutionary process, the development of knowledge in 11 relation with asbestos and industrial hygiene. Is that 12 true? 13 A. Yes. I'm very fortunate that I grew up with 14 it. 15 Q. Right. 16 And what you grew up with in the forties was 17 either case studies or epidemiological studies 18 addressing textile workers in much heavier levels of 19 exposure than in normal end user trades. Is that true? 20 . MR. GROVE: I'm going to interpose an 21 objection in that I don't know that that 22 is all the types of articles that he has 23 testified to. I think you limited your 24 question just to textile workers, and I 25 think he's testified in the past to NELL MC CALLUM & ASSOCIATES, INC. EXX-MOR-003743 93 1 reading more articles than simply textile 2 articles. 3 Q. (By Mr. Bailey) Okay. Go ahead. I'm talking 4 about case studies, reports of incidence -- increased 5 incidence of disease. 6 Is it true that during the early forties that 7 certainly the papers you were referring to and reading 8 were discussing millers, miners, textile industry as 9 opposed to end users? 10 A. I never did get involved with the mining 11 industry and manufacturers of asbestos. I was more in 12 the application of it as a test -- textile operation, 13 you know. And I'm not an authority at all on the mining 14 and handling of it at the age of manufacturing. 15 Q. But you were -- the studies you were referring 16 to then were of employment situations such as you 17 discussed earlier with Dr. Lynch, heavy -- heavy, levels 18 of continuous exposure in the textile industry. Is that 19 true? Early studies, in the forties. 20 A. Yes. Emphasis was on prevention of asbestosis. 21 Q. In 1946 or 1947, Professor Drinker wrote his 22 article, the Fleisher-Drinker study. 23 Do you recall that article being published? 24 A. And that dealt with the shipbuilding operation, 25 I remember. NELL NIC CALLUM & ASSOCIATES, INC. EXX-MOR-003744 94 1 Q. Yes, sir. 2 You've testified before that you've seen that 3 article, and I have it here if you want to look at it. 4 A. Yes, I have -- I have seen it. I'm well 5 familiar with it. 6 Q. I guess my first question is: Prior to the 7 publication of the Fleisher-Drinker study, had you ever 8 read any other case study or epidemiologic study 9 following end users, insulators and things of that 10 nature? 11 A. Not that I recall. 12 Q. Did you ever discuss the Fleisher-Drinker study 13 with Philip Drinker? 14 A. Not with Dr. Drinker, but with some of the men 15 that were -- actually did their investigation in the -- 16 in the naval yards. But not with him, I don't recall. 17 Q. The Fleisher-Drinker study was commiss-ioned by 18 the United States Navy for the purpose of determining 19 whether there was a difference in the incidence of 20 disease in.textile situations and in that of end users, 21 being insulators and pipe fitters; is that right? 22 A. I don't know of that. I'm sorry. I just don't 23 know that much about the -- 24 Q. Okay. 25 A. -- original study, the purpose and all. NELL MC CALLUM & ASSOCIATES, INC. EXX-MOR-003745 95 1 Q. Did you recognize in the forties that the 2 Fleisher-Drinker study was, at the time that you first 3 became familiar with it, the first study of insulators 4 to see whether or not they had an increased incidence of 5 disease? 6 A. I don't recall any other study that I was -- 7 before that. 8 Q. Did you, between 1946 or '47 and Dr. Selikoff' s 9 study at the end of 1964, ever see any other case study, 10 epidemiological study, case report criticizing the 11 findings in the Fleisher-Drinker study, criticizing 12 their conclusions? 13 A. I don't recall when I first saw that critical 14 (sic) . 15 Q. In your opinion, in 1946 and '47, was Philip 16 Drinker qualified, based on his reputation and your 17 relationship, to conduct a study to determine whether or 18 not end users were at an increased risk for developing 19 asbestos-related disease in the forties? 20 MR. GROVE: I want to interpose an 21 objection. That calls for speculation. 22 A. I know of no other person better qualified than 23 he. 24 Q. Did you rely on Professor Drinker's teachings 25 and findings as an industrial hygienist in implementing NELL MC CALLUM & ASSOCIATES. INC. EXX-MOR-003746 96 1 your plan for Exxon Corporation or Humble? 2 A. It was part of my basic foundation and 3 education. 4 Q. Were you -- 5 A. His teachings and his writings. 6 Q. Do you think it would be reasonable for other 7 companies in similar situations to rely upon Professor 8 Drinker and his findings in formulating their beliefs in 9 their industrial hygiene programs? 10 A. In my contacts, most of the industrial 11 hygienists at that time, in practice, were 12 Dr inker-trained individuals or the people that were 13 trained by his -- his former graduates. * 14 Q. So -- 15 MR. LEDYARD: I'm going to also make 16 the objection that asking this witness to 17 assume what other people of the time may 18 have known or may have thought, I think, 19 does subject this witness to having to 20 speculate. 21 Q. (By Mr. Bailey) That's the difficulty of state 22 of the art, and that's why I'm glad I get to visit with 23 you. And we will -- I will try to limit my questions to 24 your experience, your beliefs as we came through. 25 You said you visited with people regarding the NELL MC CALLUM & ASSOCIATES, INC. EXX-MOR-003747 97 Fleisher-Drinker study. Do you recall any of those 2 conver sations? 3 A. Ege, John Ege was one of those people. He and 4 I worked together in Massachusetts. So, normally, when 5 we'd see each other at the conferences, we usually had 6 lunch and dinner together; and we usually discussed 7 whatever he'd been doing and whatever I'd been doing. 8 Q. Did any of the people that you discussed the 9 Fleisher-Drinker study with criticize either the 10 scientific data used or the conclusions drawn in 11 connection with that study? 12 A. I don't recall that I ever discussed that 13 Drink -- I mean that particular study with anyone 14 individually and separate. 15 Q. As an industrial hygienist, do you use case 16 studies and epidemiologic studies in your capacity as a 17 hygienist; or do you let the medical section rely upon 18 them? 19 A. I'm not at all a specialist in epidemiology, 20 and all of the studies I did were our own plants. I 21 always had an epidemiologist work along with me and -- 22 and furnish that part of the information. 23 Q. When you, in the forties or fifties, heard of a 24 reported case of a particular disease, be it a cancer, 25 whatever, and it was limited to one case study, as an NELL MC CALLUM & ASSOCIATES, INC. EXX-MOR-003748 98 1 industrial hygienist, would you feel as though that one 2 finding in a case report was sufficient to establish a 3 cause and effect relationship? 4 A. I don't ever remember making that type of 5 application to exposure. 6 Q. Would you generally, then, apply or require 7 epidemiological studies before you would draw a 8 conclusion of a relationship between disease and 9 exposure to a particular mineral or product? 10 A. I didn't attempt to do that. I was only 11 interested if there were a exposure determination been 12 made on the individual that was involved. And how much 13 and how long he was exposed and things of that type were 14 much more interesting to me than the individual medical 15 finding of one case or two cases or whatever. 16 Unless I had supporting data that this was a 17 suspicious correlation between exposure and -- _and the 18 disease and was far beyond -- out beyond the 19 epidemiological likelihood that it would occur normally 20 among the general population, I ignored it. 21 Q. Right. That's what you were talking about 22 earlier with two reports or allegations of mesothelioma 23 among all of your Exxon employees. What you were saying 24 was that's not outside what you would expect in the 25 general population; so, maybe it's not of sig -- of NELL MC CALLUM & ASSOCIATES, INC. EXX-MOR-003749 99 1 significance in determining the cause and effect. Is 2 that what you're saying? 3 A. Absolutely. 4 I had a very close friend of mine 30 years, and 5 he died 85 years old of epidem -- the epithelioma. And 6 I don't know where in the world he could have gotten it. 7 He was chairman of the board of a utility company for 8 many years and president before that and was strictly an 9 executive as far as I know. And, yet, he died of 10 epithelioma. And that was -- in six months, he was gone 11 after they discovered it. He was 85 years old. 12 Now, how could I go back and tie that in to any 13 occupational report? 14 Q. And that's what I was getting at with respect 15 to your job as an industrial hygienist. You didn't . 16 necessarily -- because you read a case report in the 17 forties that said there was a report of cancer .among an 18 asbestos worker, you didn't necessarily, at that time, 19 believe that there was a direct correlation, cause and 20 effect, between asbestos and cancer. You'd seen a case 21 report; is that right? 22 A. I didn't -- I didn't read those case reports. 23 Q. Epidemiological studies followed much later, in 24 the sixties and seventies, didn't they, with respect to 25 cancer? NELL MC CALLUM & ASSOCIATES, INC. EXX-MOR-003750 100 1 A. I was not familiar with them until after '65. 2 Q. After Dr. Selikoff's study; is that right? 3 A. (Nodding head) 4 Q. Lastly, did you play any role in the 5 development of threshold limit values for the state of 6 Texas and the adoption in the statute? 7 A. For asbestos? 8 Q. Yes, sir. 9 A. No. 10 Q. Can you tell me briefly what a threshold limit value is and how you use it as an industrial hygienist? 12 A. Well, it's a guideline where at you would want 13 to maintain exposures below that level and not even * 14 permit them to get up to that level if you could do 15 better, was my theory. And I looked at an operation; 16 and I'd say to myself, when I see the employees working 17 there, "Would I be willing to spend 40 years at this 18 job? Would I feel perfectly safe, with no danger of my 19 developing a disease or problem?" 20 Q. I-guess that's what I'm getting at with respect 21 to the TLV's and your opinion in connection with relying 22 on the TLV's, first off. But before we get to that 23 point, what is a time-weighted average? 24 A. That would be the concentration that an 25 employee, in eight hours, might be exposed to over -- NELL MC CALLUM & ASSOCIATES, INC. EXX-MOR-003751 101 1 one day or over a week of 40 hours. 2 Q. It's the theory that you can be exposed to 3 levels of -- or to certain levels or less eight hours a 4 day, five days a week, and still be safe. Is that the 5 theory of a time-weighted average and a TLV? 6 A. When -- 7 Q. Whether or not you agree with it, is that the 8 theory? 9 A. Well, let me tell you. They have to be applied 10 and used by a professional industrial hygienist. They 11 can't be used by lay people. 12 Q. Well, no question about that. I'm just going 13 into what the thought process was as we developed the 14 TLV's. And that was the thought, is we're going to make 15 a determination with respect to what level below which a 16 worker can work eight hours a day, five days a week, and 17 be safe from becoming increased likelihood of developing 18 disease. Is that the thought of a TLV? 19 A. That was based upon the United States Public 20 Health Service recommendation and Department of Labor, 21 too. 22 Q. Okay. 23 Now, I understand you did not always agree with 24 the application of TLV's. You were much more 25 conservative, I think, from what I've heard you testify. NELL MC CALLUM & ASSOCIATES, INC. EXX-MOR-003752 102 1 Is that right? 2 A. I was conservative to do the best control that 3 we could, and -- and nothing less than that would 4 satisfy me. 5 Q. Was it reasonable to rely upon the TLV's as 6 they were published at 5 million particles per cubic 7 foot, for example, at the time that they were originally 8 published in the forties? 9 A. That involves a lot of -- of professional 10 explanation to you about why and how you apply that, 11 because it depended on the composition that you were 12 looking at, the size of particles you were looking at, 13 and who was doing the work and so forth. 14 Q. Well, the TLV's, as later adopted by the ACGIH, 15 defined the size of particles relevant to the 16 measurement of 5 million particles per cubic foot. . 17 A. But that came very late, like in 1970And we 18 had to operate before that. 19 Q. Okay. 20 A. And we used the total count rather than the 21 fibers. 22 Q. When was the first time you saw any suggestion 23 with respect to TLV's for asbestos? 24 A. That was -- next door to us in Massachusetts 25 was Warren Cook. And Warren Cook came out with a list NELL MC CALLUM & ASSOCIATES, INC. EXX-MOR-003753 103 1 of about 35 or 40 substances, chemicals and material, in 2 1940, '39 or '40. So, about 1940, I became familiar. 3 Q. And it wasn't until '46 that the ACGIH finally 4 established what we knew as the original TLV's; is that 5 right7 6 A. I -- it was about that time, yeah. I don't -- 7 Q. Now, how long -- the original TLV's, as 8 established by the ACGIH, were 5 million particles per 9 cubic foot; is that true? 10 A. Total particles. And that included -- maybe 90 11 percent of those particles were not related at all to 12 asbestos. 13 Q. When you say they were not related at all, it 14 was specifically addressed in the ACGIH of how many 15 particles of asbestos would be allowed. 16 A. No. No, that didn't have application to that. 17 You might only have 10 percent asbestos particle.s in 18 that total 5 million particles. So, you'll -- your 19 protection was pretty keen at that because the nuisance 20 dust and the other dust particles in there didn't have 21 any effect on it. 22 Q. When was it that the ACGIH finally changed 23 their original TLV of 5 million particles? 24 A. About 1970. 25 Q. Did you play any role in that at all? NELL MC CALLUM & ASSOCIATES. INC. EXX-MOR-003754 104 1 A. No. That was a different group. I was -- no, 2 I didn't have any part to do with it. 3 Q. When did Texas first adopt the TLV's? Was it 4 1957? 5 A. Approximately. 6 Q. Did you play any role in that at all? 7 A. No, I didn't. They took that from the ACGIH. 8 It was just a copy of the ACGIH list. 9 Q. In your role as industrial hygienist for Exxon, 10 did you ever criticize the TLV's by written editorials 11 or anything of that nature? 12 A. No, I did not. And I'm glad I didn't because, 13 when I went back to teaching in 1978, I was immediately 14 placed in charge of the chemicals and the subsection of 15 the TLV committee to set on most chemicals, and which I 16 was chairman of that subcommittee for the next ten 17 years, 12 years. -- 18 Q. So, as the chairman of the subcommittee to 19 develop TLV's, you have an appreciation as to the 20 responsibility. 21 A. I do. 22 Q. And you understand that, when you set a TLV, 23 the rest of the industry is going to rely on that TLV. 24 That's the thought, isn't it? 25 A. Yeah. Not only did the United States rely on NELL MC CALLUM & ASSOCIATES, INC. EXX-MOR-003755 105 1 it, but Canada, Germany, West Germany, England, and many 2 other nations adopted our TLV's. 3 Q. Okay. 4 MR. BAILEY: Professor, I think 5 that's all I have. Thank you very much. 6 7 EXAMINATION BY MR. BISHOP: 8 Q. Professor Hammond, my name is Charles Bishop. 9 We've met. I represent a company named Mine Safety 10 Appliances Company, and they're involved also. I 11 previously told you that. 12 I'd like to ask you a few more questions about 13 TLV's generally. And I'd like to ask you a few othef 14 questions about respirators. 15 You were just asked -- Mr. Bailey asked you 16 what the purpose of TLV's, and I -- I didn't -- I'm not 17 sure I quite understood your answer. And let me ask it 18 another way. 19 Is the purpose of a TLV to establish a safe 20 level? 21 A. No, it was not. It was a guideline for 22 professional industrial hygienists to use. And i t 23 had -- and except for a few states that made it legal, 24 we didn't have any enforcement, so to speak, nationwide 25 on TLV's. It was a voluntary thing NELL MC CALLUM & ASSOCIATES, INC. EXX-MOR-003756 106 1 Q. Right. 2 But aside from enforcement, what -- what's the 3 purpose of establishing a TLV? 4 MR. GROVE; I'm going to object to 5 that. It calls for speculation. 6 A. Strictly as a guideline, in my opinion. 7 Q. A guideline to help people in industry 8 determine what is a safe level? 9 MR. GROVE; Same objection. 10 A. No. Guideline to protect most everybody that 11 would work and normally exposed to no greater than that 12 concentration over a period of a lifetime of 30 or 40 13 years. - 14 Q. That is its intent, then? 15 A. That intent. 16 Q. That -- the concept of TLV's has been around in 17 the medical literature since 1938, hasn't it? 18 A. That was about the time that Warren Cook came 19 out with the first list. 20 Q. And in 1938, Dr. Dreesen conducted a study to 21 determine a safe level of exposure to asbestos, correct? 22 A. He did that on a research basis for individual 23 substances and compounds. I didn't remember that he did 24 it on asbestos per se, but I know he did on many other 25 products. NELL MC CALLUM & ASSOCIATES, INC. EXX-MOR-003757 107 1 Q. Have you -- have you read Dr. Dreesen's 1938 2 article? 3 A. I -- I think I did, just -- you know, that 4 would have been 50 years ago, 55. I'm familiar with him 5 as an individual. I saw him a good many times. 6 Q. You've worked with Dr. Dreesen? 7 A. Yes. When I first reported to the United 8 States Public Health Service division of industrial 9 health, he was active there at NIOSH in research on -- 10 on these matters and had been for several years. Yeah. 11 Q. He was one of the most knowledgeable people in 12 the country concerning that subject, was he not? 13 A. I'm not qualified to say that. Because of the 14 age I knew him, I was so inexperienced I wouldn't be 15 able to say. 16 Q. Do you recollect if Dr. Dreesen concluded in 17 1938 that, if asbestos exposure was beneath 5 million 18 particles per cubic foot of air, he would not expect to 19 see asbestos disease? 20 A. I .-- I do not know about that. I'm sorry. 21 Q. Okay. 22 Are you familiar with a 1953 study by Dr. 23 Harriett Hardy with Doctors Isselbacher and Klaus? 24 A. I knew Dr. Hardy, but I don't remember the 25 particular study. Now, she was at MIT at that time, I NELL MC CALLUM & ASSOCIATES, INC. EXX-MOR-003758 108 1 think. And she was also affiliated with us in 2 Massachusetts Department of Labor, occupational 3 diseases. But I didn't have knowledge of her work, 4 knowledge intimately of her work. But I saw her 5 frequently and heard her papers, but I didn't know her. 6 Q. As part of your work as the chief industrial 7 hygienist for Exxon -- and let me just interject this. 8 Will you agree with me that if I refer to Exxon that we 9 will mean Exxon and its predecessors? 10 A. I will. 11 Q. Okay. 12 During the course of your work with Exxon, you 13 made it your business to keep up with the -- with the 14 literature pertaining to industrial hygiene, did you 15 not? 16 A. I attempted to, yes. 17 Q. And attend the seminars and so forth? _ 18 A. Dh-huh. I did. And I say -- express it this 19 way: "Alice in Wonderland." You had to run as fast as 20 you could to stay in one place it was moving upwards so 21 fast. 22 Q. And do you recall whether, in 1953, Dr. Hardy 23 concluded that exposure to asbestos of 5 million 24 particles per cubic foot of air was a safe working 25 environment? NELL MC CALLUM & ASSOCIATES. INC. EXX-MOR-003759 109 1 A. No, I'm not familiar with that particular 2 study. 3 Q. You don't recall that? 4 A. No, I do not. 5 Q. Did you -- do you believe you've read Dr. 6 Hardy's major articles? 7 A. I -- I don't recall that I did. That was 40 8 years ago, and I don't remember. 9 Q. Do you recall -- it wasn't until approximately 10 1970 that the ACGIH lowered its standard, its TLV, from 11 5 million particles per cubic foot of air, wasn't it? 12 A. It was in that period range of -- but I don't 13 remember whether it was '70 or '72 or "73. 14 Q. And it was not until approximately that time 15 that the Walsh-Healey Act established federal standards, 16 wasn't it? Well, let me -- that's a terrible question. 17 Let me rephrase it. -- 18 The Walsh-Healey Act, which first established 19 federal standards for exposure to asbestos, simply 20 adopted the ACGIH standards, did it not? 21 A. It did, yes. 22 Q. Do you recall when that was? 23 A. It was early in the sixties they adopted those 24 standards, but I don't remember just which year. 25 Q. And at that time, the ACGIH standard, which was NELL MC CALLUM & ASSOCIATES, INC. EXX-MOR-003760 110 1 adopted as federal law, was 5 million particles per 2 cubic foot of air, correct? 3 A. That's what I recall. 4 Q. And prior to that, there were no federal 5 standards, were there? 6 MR. LEDYARD: I'm going to object to 7 the form of the question -- 8 A. 1 don't -- 9 MR. LEDYARD; -- as being outside 10 the -- 11 A. Yeah. I don't know -- 12 MR. LEDYARD; -- his knowledge. 13 A. -- that much about everything. * 14 Q. Yeah. No. I -- 15 A. Because they had a standard -- the Bureau of 16 Standards in the Department of Labor, and they were 17 coming out with standards and recommendations. _,,They 18 didn't have any enforcement features to them federally, 19 but some of the states adopted those. 20 Q. Some -- some states had their own standards, 21 correct? 22 A. Yes, California, Ohio, New York. 23 Q. New York, Massachusetts, and Connecticut all 24 had a 5 million particle per cubic foot of air standard 25 at this time, didn't they? NELL MC CALLUM & ASSOCIATES, INC. EXX-MOR-003761 111 1 A. I don't recall. 2 Q. Okay. 3 You mentioned -- I forget when. I think it 4 was -- I think it was yesterday -- that in approximately 5 1942/ you first became aware of the fact that there may 6 be a relationship between cancer and asbestos. 7 That was -- that knowledge came to you by way 8 of your colleague Dr. Lynch, correct? 9 A. That's true. 10 Q. And that was his -- his study of autopsies? 11 A. Autopsies of textile mill workers that used an 12 asbestos for fibers. 13 Q. And all of those autopsies were of people who 14 had asbestosis, correct? ; 15 A. All of those people in which he found any 16 carcinoma, yes. 17 Q. Correct. -- 18 But there were -- he studied no cancer cases in 19 that study which were not also people who had 20 asbestosis. Is that true? 21 A. He published only those cases that were 22 asbestos and cancer. 23 Q. Asbestosis? 24 A. Asbestosis and cancer. Did I -- and the 25 particular paper I had. And that came out in the NELL MC CALLUM & ASSOCIATES, INC. EXX-MOR-003762 112 1 "National Journal of Cancer." I guess the proper name 2 would be the -- it was national, but I don't think that 3 word appeared in the title. It was cancer -- cancer 4 journal -- cancer journal of the NIH, which was the 5 organization that he represented. 6 Q. Dr. Lynch's premise was that if you -- and 7 conclusion -- his conclusion was that if you eliminated 8 the dust concentration that would cause the asbestosis, 9 you would eliminate the cancert is that correct? 10 A. He put it to me in a little different light 11 because I was interested in what concentration I had to 12 protect the workers so that they didn't end up with 13 carcinoma. And he says, "You prevent --" he just said, 14 "Well, if you prevent them from developing asbestosis, 15 you won't have -- be bothered by the carcinoma." 16 Q. And that was the first study that had ever --> 17 or first published material that ever drew a cox-relation 18 between cancer and exposure to asbestos, wasn't it? 19 A. There was some publications over in England, 20 but the first American publication. But I didn't know 21 about the English publications until later. But there 22 are some dated a little ahead of his. 23 Q. When -- do you recollect when you did learn 24 about the English publications? 25 A. I do not recall. But it was after his NELL MC CALLUM & ASSOCIATES, INC. EXX-MOR-003763 113 1 publication came out in "35. It was maybe around * 40 or 2 42, while I was with Massachusetts Division of 3 Occupational Disease. Of course, we had textile mills 4 up there using asbestos. 5 Q. I'm -- I'm sorry. What -- did you believe that 6 Dr. Lynch's publication on the relationship between 7 asbestosis and cancer was published in 1935? 8 A. That's my memory. 9 Q. You mentioned the 1964 Selikoff study in prior 10 testimony? and that was a study of insulators, was it 11 not? 12 A. I -- I don't recall who all they included 13 occupationally. It was an epidemiological study. I 14 guess that was Selikoff and Hammond, wasn't it? Yeah, 15 the epidemiologist with him. 16 Anyway, Hammond published a lot relating 17 asbestosis or cancer and smoking. It wasn't me------ it 18 wasn't I, rather. He was an epidemiologist. 19 Q. Up until at least 1970, based upon the Dreesen 20 study, the state standards that we've discussed, the 21 ACGIH standard that we've discussed, the federal 22 standard that we've discussed, and the available medical 23 literature, do you believe that it was reasonable to 24 assume that a level of exposure up to 5 million 25 particles per cubic foot of air was reasonably safe? NELL MC CALLUM & ASSOCIATES, INC. EXX-MOR-003764 114 1 MR. LEDYARD: I'm going to object to 2 the form of the question. That 3 necessarily calls for an expert opinion, 4 an expert conclusion on the part of this 5 witness. 6 MR. GROVE: And I'm -- I'm sorry. I 7 didn't mean to interrupt. 8 MR. LEDYARD: Okay. 9 MR. GROVE: I'm going to further 10 object that it calls for speculation and 11 it's also overbroad and that it doesn't 12 limit the scope to any particular area 13 of -- of anything, actually. 14 Q. (By Mr. Bishop) Okay. They're just talking to 15 a judge. Professor. You can go ahead and answer now. 16 MR. LEDYARD: No. We're doing more 17 than that. 18 MR. BISHOP: Okay. 19 MR. LEDYARD: He has, again, not been 20 designated as an expert witness. He is 21 not here as an expert witness. He's not 22 going to give expert testimony. And I'll 23 instruct him not to answer that question 24 or any other question that calls for a -- 25 for him to assume facts or otherwise NELL MC CALLUM & ASSOCIATES, INC. EXX-MOR-003765 115 1 calling f or purely an expert opinion. 2 MR. BISHOP: Okay. 3 Q. (By Mr. Bishop) Professor, you were 4 instrumental in establishing safe working conditions at 5 Exxon, were you not? 6 A. That's a very broad subject. You're talking 7 about safety conditions. Strictly limiting my specialty 8 as occupational health disease control. 9 Q. Okay. 10 MR. BISHOP: Can we just go off the 11 record a second? 12 MR. LEDYARD: Sure. It's been about 13 an hour. Let's take a break, anyhow. * 14 (RECESS FROM 1:54 TO 2:00 P.M.) 15 (MR. BAILEY IS NO LONGER PRESENT) 16 Q. (By Mr. Bishop) Professor Hammond, you've 17 testified that some concentrations of asbestos "fibers in 18 air are invisible. 19 Do you have any knowledge of what 20 concentrations must be in the air for asbestos dust to 21 become visible? 22 A. No, I do not know. 23 Q. Do you know if you ever had such knowledge and 24 just don't recollect it now? 25 A. I have made such statements as it would be NELL MC CALLUM & ASSOCIATES. INC. EXX-MOR-003766 116 1 greater than some number, but I don't know what the 2 range would be. I've seen that -- some attempt to 3 determine that, but it depends on the nature of the 4 materials and colors and so many things. 5 Q. Exhibit 4A to this deposition, at Page 3, says 6 it's important to point out that dust concentrations 7 below about 5 million particles per cubic foot of air 8 are generally invisible to the naked eye. 9 Are you prepared to adopt that statement? 10 A. If the particles are less than 1 micron in the 11 air and so forth. And again, if you're dealing with 12 chicken feathers, you'd have quite a different picture. 13 Q. So, it's possible, in your view, that there'may 14 be up to 5 million particles per cubic foot of air -- of 15 asbestos dust in the air and those fibers still be 16 invisible to the naked eye, correct? 17 MR. GROVE: I'm going to objB-ct to 18 this as ambiguous. 19 A. No, I won't make that type of supposition. No, 20 I wouldn't want to confirm or deny that. 21 Q. Do you recall whether you've testified on that 22 subject in the past? 23 A. As I said, I made a general statement that, if 24 you're visible and met all the criteria that I point out 25 about size and limitations there and being silica or NELL MC CALLUM & ASSOCIATES. INC. EXX-MOR-003767 117 1 other minerals of this type, it would have to be quite 2 high. And I give you a rough-hand -- I might have given 3 a rough-hand estimate that it would be quite high. 4 Q. Are you able to -- you'd agree with me that 5 it's possible for some number of fibers to be in the air 6 and be invisible to the naked eye? We can get that far, 7 you and I, today, here, can't we? 8 A. I would say to you, you go out here on the 9 street and you're exposed to asbestos fibers. But you 10 don't -- you're not aware of them. You don't see them. 11 Q. Sure, because we're all exposed to asbestos 12 fibers every day, correct? 13 A. Well, you wouldn't notice them in the air is14 what I mean. 15 MS . KYLE: Not in th is building. 16 A. Wouldn't be a fog or anything like that. 17 MS. KYLE: Not with him sitting here. 18 Q. It's just a f act of life that there are 19 asbestos fibers in the air and they can't all be seen, 20 correct? 21 A. I never noticed one in my own eye. 22 Q. Because you can't see them, right? 23 A. I'm sure that fibers have stuck in my eye, but 24 I didn t notice them. I didn't recognize them. I 25 didn ' t see them. NELL MC CALLUM & ASSOCIATES, INC. EXX-MOR-003768 118 1 Q. Sure. Are you able to give me any kind of an estimate 3 at all of the number of fibers per cubic foot of air or 4 cc., if you're more comfortable with that measurement, 5 that would be necessary for those fibers to be seen 6 visible to the naked eye? 7 MR. GROVEi I'm going to object as 8 ambiguous. And it's not clear if you're 9 talking about a hundred percent asbestos 10 fibers or asbestos fibers in conjunction 11 with some other type of dust. 12 Q. And in response to that, I say whichever you 13 like. Just let me know. 14 A. I could -- I could give you no help on that. 15 Q. Okay. 16 Will you -- I'd like to talk about respirators 17 f or a few minutes. _ 18 Will you agree with me that the best respirator 19 in the world isn't going to do any good in protecting a 20 person if that person doesn't wear it? 21 A. Sounds like a sure thing, doesn't it? 22 Q. And I was pretty sure you and I could agree on 23 that much. It's after that that it gets more difficult. 24 MS. KYLE: It was lunch. 25 Q. Would you agree that it is necessary to a NELL MC CALLUM & ASSOCIATES, INC. EXX-MOR-003769 119 1 successful program which involves the use of respirators 2 that workers be educated in the necessity of -- of using 3 respirators? 4 A. Come again with the conditions you put on that 5 question, please. 6 Q. Yeah. 7 If --if a part of your program is -- is having 8 workers wear respirators, do you believe that education 9 of that worker in the necessity for and use of 10 respirators is important? 11 A. I don't think you're going to get satisfactory 12 cooperation from the workers unless you do that. And 13 first, you've got to make sure you've eliminated every 14 practical condition that would generate exposure by 15 engineering means, other practical means of substitution 16 or whatever. And then, once they get confident you've 17 got -- you have their health only in -- their health as 18 number one, then, they will cooperate with you to do 19 whatever necessary without much complaint. 20 Q. Do you believe that in elimination of hazards 21 relating to asbestos dust that the use of a respirator 22 is the last line of defense? 23 A. To get workers' cooperation is essentially 24 that. 25 Q. Is that -- did you agree with me, with ray NELL MC CALLUM & ASSOCIATES, INC. EXX-MOR-003770 120 1 premise that the use of respirators is probably the last 2 line of defense after elimination of the hazards by 3 other methods if possible? 4 A. I think I made that point yesterday. Our 5 program included everything else before we asked them to 6 wear a respirator. 7 Q. The --: the Bonsib report that's been 8 discussed -- it's been marked as Exhibit 6 to your 9 deposition -- indicates at -- I'm sorry. The top page 10 is cut off on my copy. The Bates stamp number is 1540 11 hyphen 4 -- indicates, in response to dust respirators 12 and air masks, that control of the dust hazard by means 13 of respiratory protective equipment is effective * 14 provided that the equipment is efficient and provided 15 that it is worn continuously. 16 Do you agree with that statement? 17 MR. GROVE: I can show him mine. 18 A. No, I don't... 19 MR. LEDYARD: You need to look at 20 this? 21 THE WITNESS: I don't think so. 22 MR. GROVE: It's right down there 23 where the little numbered paragraphs are 24 at the bottom of the page. 25 A. Provided that it's protective, is efficient, NELL MC CALLUM & ASSOCIATES, INC. EXX-MOR-003771 121 1 and -- and it is worn continuously during the period of 2 exposure was what you -- I read into that. But I don't 3 know what your question is in regard to that or any -- I 4 don't know that I would have any reason to discuss Mr. 5 Bonsib's decision. 6 Q. Do you agree with that view, though? That's my 7 question. : 8 A. You have to read the rest of that paragraph 9 to -- to really appreciate where I am. 10 Q. We'll, let me -- let me break it down a little 11 bit. 12 Do you agree that, in order for the use of a 13 respirator to be effective, it must be worn continuously 14 during times of exposure to hazardous dusts? 15 A. We have to read on. Efficient equipment is 16 available; but the continued use day to day, this method 17 of control cannot be depended upon to provide the first 18 line of defense and so forth. That's Mr. Bonsib's own 19 words. And I'd hate to just take a little bit out of 20 context. 21 Q. Do you believe that -- well, let me rephrase 22 this. 23 A respirator that's worn 50 percent of the time 24 in conditions involving exposure to asbestos dust is not 25 going to do much good, is it? NELL MC CALLUM & ASSOCIATES. INC. EXX-MOR-003772 122 1 MR. LEDYARD: I think we're beating a 2 dead, obvious horse. He's already 3 testified that, if you don't wear the 4 respirator, it can't help you. 5 Q. (By Mr. Bishop) Was it important to you to 6 establish that workers using respirators at Exxon wore 7 their respirators continuously during periods of 8 exposure to asbestos dust? 9 A. That's a very broad question you're asking. I 10 can't answer that well. 11 Q. Did Exxon ever -- to your knowledge, did Exxon 12 ever reprimand a worker for failure to wear a mask? 13 A. I wouldn't know the answer to that detail. 14 Q. Okay. 15 I'd like to ask you a couple of questions about 16 Exhibit 7 to your deposition, which is a report dated 17 September 1, 1972, authored by you, entitled "A'3'bestos 18 Handling Guidelines." 19 A. What year was this written? 20 Q. It's dated September 1, 1972. 21 A. And this was written to comply with OSHA? 22 MR. LEDYARD: He hasn't asked you the 23 question, yet. 24 THE WITNESS: Oh. Excuse me. I'm 25 asking him. NELL MC CALLUM & ASSOCIATES. INC. EXX-MOR-003773 123 1 Q. Professor, you wrote it; and, so, you know a 2 lot more about it than I do. I'm going to try and get 3 you to help me out a little bit about it, though. 4 Do you believe that this report was written in 5 response to OSHA requirements? 6 A. I'm sure it was. 7 Q. Who was this -- this set of guidelines given 8 to? 9 A. Through -- throughout the company, all 10 operating management. 11 Q. Were all employees given a copy of this? 12 A. Not individual employees. They wouldn't -- no. 13 To the management who had supervision over the employees 14 to make sure that all of these things were carried out. 15 Q. Did -- was a copy of this sent to each 16 refinery? 17 A. Every refinery and many up and down in-.terms of 18 management above the operating manager and down below to 19 supervisors of mechanical departments and so forth and 20 engineering departments and purchasing departments. 21 Q. Were Exxon employees directed to comply with 22 these guidelines? 23 A. They were actually required to do that before 24 these were put out. And it was nothing new to them to 25 have these additional because this involved mainly paper NELL MC CALLUM & ASSOCIATES, INC. EXX-MOR-003774 124 1 work. 2 Q. I understand that there may have been guide -- 3 that you've testified there were guidelines in effect 4 before this. 5 Was this the first written set of guidelines? 6 A. As -- as comprehensive as these are and in 7 detail to comply with OSHA. And that was the purpose of 8 writing it up this way. 9 Q. And this set of guidelines was written before 10 the Benicia refinery ever opened, correct? 11 A. No, I don't think that's true. 12 Q. They had been opened? 13 A. I think they had been open about four to five 14 y e ar s. 15 Q. Oh. I beg your pardon. I wasn't trying to be 16 tricky. I guess I was just being stupid. 17 A. You thought I had gone to sleep, I guees. 18 MR. GROVE: So stipulated. 19 Q. You expected Exxon personnel to comply with 20 these written guidelines, did you not? 21 A. Explain the group you're talking about 22 complying, please. 23 Q. Well, all employees who -- who handled asbestos 24 were expected to comply with these asbestos handling 25 guidelines, were they not? NELL MC CALLUM & ASSOCIATES, INC. EXX-MOR-003775 125 1 A. I can't overemphasize we had a program where 2 they were complying with these requirements many, many 3 years before OSHA was ever thought of. 4 Q. Right. 5 Although that was -- there was no written set 6 of guidelines, correct, prior to this? 7 A. Different types of written, but not in . 8 compliance with OSHA's specific requirements. We no 9 longer had our own independent program that we could 10 carry out that wasn't on paper. We now had to put it 11 all down just as they wanted us to do to comply with the 12 bureaucrats. 13 Q. And was this the first written set of 14 comprehensive asbestos handling guidelines which Exxon 15 had? . 16 A. This was a first that -- a advisory group of 17 OSHA worked quite awhile, maybe a year or two, "getting 18 up these lists. And then there -- until 1972, there was 19 no such list that had to be complied with. 20 Q. Okay. 21 And after this list, after these guidelines 22 went out, you expected Exxon employees who handled 23 asbestos to comply with these asbestos handling 24 guidelines, true? 25 A. Well, primarily it was for the purpose that, NELL MC CALLUM & ASSOCIATES. INC. EXX-MOR-003776 126 1 when OSHA inspectors showed up, wanted to know how we 2 were handling asbestos, we could show him these 3 guidelines. But the employees were already following 4 the program for the last 20 or 30 years out there in the 5 plants, if it had been in existence that long. 6 Q. I understand that there were previous 7 guidelines. I just want to ask you this -- I'm going to 8 try one more time with this question. 9 You already had previous guidelines. I 10 understand that. After these guidelines went to 11 Benicia, did you expect Benicia employees to comply with 12 these guidelines? 13 A. I expected these guidelines to be enforced by 14 the management of the Benicia or Billings refinery. 15 That's the reason I wrote them the letter that we don't 16 know what you're doing because you haven't given us this 17 policy back in writing. 18 Q. Do you know if, after 1972, either addenda to 19 this set of guidelines or a subsequent edition of these 20 guidelines was sent to the refineries? 21 A. If there -- these guidelines were amended by 22 OSHA, we then brought these guidelines in compliance 23 with the OSHA's requirements. 24 Q. Do you have any recollection of that ever 25 happening, of either amendments, addenda, or subsequent NELL MC CALLUM & ASSOCIATES, INC. EXX-MOR-003777 127 1 editions being sent out? 2 A. I don't recall. 3 Q. Okay. 4 In 1972, according to this set of guidelines at 5 Page 11, Exxon was using disposable, valveless-type 6 respirators. 7 Do you recall if -- if such respirators were 8 actually used in the refineries? Your guideline calls 9 for their use. 10 A. I notice that these were approved respirators 11 only. They had to be approved by OSHA, NIOSH, or your 12 Bureau of Mines. Up until OSHA became in being, it was 13 always the Bureau of Mines approved respirators. 14 MR. LEDYARD: Was your question 15 simply whether or not dispose -- does he 16 know if disposable dust masks were being 17 used in Benicia? -- 18 MR. BISHOP: Right. 19 A. I do not know. I didn't check in on the 20 manufacturing, model, and type that they were 21 purchasing. 22 Q. Did you write this report, or does it simply 23 bear your name? 24 A. It was a combination of us, a team that wrote 25 this report. NELL MC CALLUM & ASSOCIATES. INC. FXX-MOR-nr)377R 128 1 Now, in regard to the respirators, we likely 2 took that from a list that was published by the 3 OSHA-NIOSH group. 4 Q. Okay. 5 A. Whether we ever bought any of these or not, I 6 don't know. 7 Q. But this was sent out to Benicia, correct? 8 A. To the managers of the various departments and 9 plants. 10 Q. Page 7 of that report. Section I, concerns 11 its -- well, actually. Section I goes over to Page 7, 12 Page -- begins on Page 7, goes through Page 8 and into 13 Page 9, and concerns itself with employee education. 14 Do you recollect if you actually wrote that 15 part of the guidelines? 16 A. It -- I don't remember whether those are my 17 words or not. But, anyway, those are my thoughts in 18 regard to the use and continued use of asbestos products 19 if they could substitute new material. 20 Q. Out in the refineries such as Benicia, who did 21 you anticipate would conduct that employee education? 22 A. You discuss that with Mr. Naugle, who was our 23 operations manager at that time and -- and would know 24 all about -- answers to all those questions, just who 25 did that. I have an impression, but I'm not sure. NELL MC CALLUM & ASSOCIATES, INC. EXX-MOR-003779 129 1 Q. I understand that Mr. Naugle would know, more 2 than you, the nuts and bolt details of how that 3 education took place. I'd like you to tell me what your 4 anticipation was when you sent this report out. 5 A. That it be complied with completely. 6 Q. And did you have any notion of who would 7 conduct the employee education that you've referred to 8 at Pages 7, 8, and 9? 9 A. Not at -- not at any particular location. But 10 generally, it was carried out with the safety department 11 in regard to these matters? and they had training 12 personnel in connection with the safety department as 13 well as other training specialists for the operation of 14 the plant. 15 Q. The people who trained the employees -- and let 16 us say in connection with the use of respirators -- did 17 they themselves receive any training? -- 18 A. They did. There were professionals, safety 19 specialists or engineers? and they had been through 20 schools and were well prepared to do that. 21 Q. Did they go through Exxon schools for that 22 purpose? 23 A. Some of them did. Others went through schools 24 that were conducted on a regional basis by the safety 25 engineering groups and industrial hygiene groups. And NELL MC CALLUM & ASSOCIATES, INC. EXX-MOR-003780 130 1 sometimes we brought in specialists that spent full time 2 on respiratory protection and training programs. We had 3 several of them right here in -- in our School of Public 4 Health during my teaching ten years that we taught 5 there. That was beginning 1978. 6 Q. That was when you were teaching at the 7 University of Texas? 8 A. School of Public Health, 1978 through 1987. 9 Q. The reason I raised the subject is that, in 10 that slightly more than two-page discussion of employee 11 education, I see no reference to education in the proper 12 use of respirators. 13 Can you address that omission? ' 14 A. No. It was just the fact that we were well 15 established and had been for years, that the safety 16 department training and safe -- and respirators were an 17 essential part of the program and they trained -t-he 18 employees. 19 Also, the care and protection of the 20 respirators by bringing them in, washing them, cleaning 21 them, and repairing them and then reissuing them again 22 to the next user as if they were new respirators was all 23 well established when I came in '47. 24 Q. And that would apply to cartridge types of 25 respirators only, correct? NELL MC CALLUM & ASSOCIATES, INC. EXX-MOR-003781 131 1 A. Well, most everything that was -- I didn't know 2 of any disposable respirators that were approved before 3 about 1960's. I didn't hear of them. 4 Q. Well, to your knowledge, Exxon never reused a 5 disposable respirator, did it? 6 A. Not to my knowledge, it never bought any. It 7 was always the type -- but I'm sure they may have since 8 I -- maybe they did since I left. ' 9 MR. LEDYARD: I think his question 10 was -- 11 THE WITNESS; I didn't hear it. 12 MR. LEDYARD; His question was not 13 whether they bought them, but whether or 14 not Exxon would have ever reused a 15 disposable mask. 16 A. Did you ask about reuse of them? ' 17 Q. (By Mr. Bishop) Yeah. That would -- you'd 18 agree that that would be inappropriate, correct, to 19 reuse' a disposable -- 20 A. Never would have been thought of. And, 21 actually, we never issued respirators without bringing 22 them back in and reexamining them and resupplying the 23 cartridges and everything else, washing them, 24 sterilizing them, and put it in a box and reissue them. 25 Q. Do you know if that was done at Benicia? NELL MC CALLUM & ASSOCIATES. INC. EXX-MOR-003782 132 1 A. I do not know about Benicia's particular 2 program on that. But the people who were out there in 3 charge, like Don Fields and Jim Owens, had been 4 accustomed to that from the refineries they went -- went 5 from.' 6 Q. Was Fields in charge of employee education on 7 the use of respirators at Benicia? 8 A. He was -- he was responsible for it. Whether 9 he did it himself or brought in a professional trainer, 10 I do not know about that. 11 Q. Do you believe that each Exxon employee who was 12 required in the course of his duties to use respirators 13 received such training? 14 A. They did. 15 Q. And do you believe that, in order for them to 16 be protected, it was essential that they receive such 17 training? _ 18 A. It was just not a point of -- essential to -- 19 in my opinion? but it was just the proper means to go 20 about training them before you issued them respirators, 21 because it's so many limitations in proper use of 22 respirators. And proper fits and all was such a likely 23 thing if you didn't actually have somebody in charge 24 that would issue with the proper fit to- the man's shape 25 and face and so forth. NELL MC CALLUM & ASSOCIATES, INC. EXX-MOR-003783 133 1 Q. Do you have any understanding whether a medical 2 examination was required for clearance to wear a 3 respirator ? 4 A. I don't recall. 5 Q. Do you know if Exxon required -- imposed those 6 same requirements on independent contractors who worked 7 at the Benicia refinery, if any? 8 A. I'm not familiar with that enough to answer 9 your question. We did it for respirators -- contract 10 workers when they had to enter an operation we felt 11 necessary. And if they didn't have their respirators 12 with them, we'd furnish them respirators. 13 Q. The Exhibit No. 12 to this deposition is the 14 doc that -- document dated June 5, 1972, entitled 15 "Bumble ENJAY Safety Regulations." 16 What does the number two on that page indicate, 17 up in the right-hand corner? __ 18 A. I am not familiar with why this was not number 19 one, what it followed behind. I don't recall. 20 Q. Did this -- was this document sent to all 21 refineries? 22 A. It was specifically ENJAY safety regulations. 23 That was chemical operations at Humble. That was a 24 subdivision, a small department of Humble. 25 'Q. Okay. NELL MC CALLUM & ASSOCIATES, INC. EXX-MOR-003784 134 Do you have -- do you believe that this was not 2 sent to refineries? 3 A. This was incorporated in everything that was 4 sent to refineries, as you -- I pointed out already by 5 the big -- big procedure that was sent out to them. 6 Q. I'm sorry, Professor. I'm sure -- well, I'm 7 not positive; but I suspect that you were asked this 8 question. I simply don't remember your answer or didn't 9 take note of it. 10 Did you write -- did you author this -- this 11 exhibit? 12 A. I don't remember writing the wording in this 13 exhibit. I approved it, though* . 14 Q. In -- in 1972 -- well, this -- let me -- I'll 15 just tell you what I'm trying to figure out. 16 This document seems to indicate to me that, in 17 1972, single use dust respirators were in effec,t 18 disposables. And I'm specifically looking at Paragraph 19 1 of the exhibit. 20 My question to you is: Was a separate document 21 ever sent out to the refineries specifying the use of 22 nondisposable cartridge respirators? 23 A. I think that we have looked at that already; 24 and we've found it over there in part of the extensive, 25 many-page document we sent out to the refineries. NELL MC CALLUM & ASSOCIATES, INC. EXX-MOR-003785 135 Q. Well, we were just looking at -- at that 2 document; and it, too, specified the use of disposable 3 respiratory protection. 4 And my question is; Do you recall ever sending 5 out or there ever being sent out by someone else a 6 document to the refineries specifying that only reusable 7 cartridge respixators were authorized for use? 8 A. No. Again, let me point out that these were 9 written in anticipation of when an OSHA standard was 10 coming out in which they spelled out these types of 11 respirators being available and not for people who were 12 well established in using the cartridge type that we 13 were and set up to handle them. It was trying to make 14 the use of them, I think, available to the small type of 15 one or two-man job. And we were trying to anticipate 16 what they would require and meet their standard and have 17 them available if they were required. 18 MR. LEDYARD: I'm going to object to 19 the form of the question if you assumed in 20 your question that Exhibit 7 specified 21 that only disposable-type respirators 22 could be used. 23 MR. BISHOP; I didn't. I said that 24 Exhibit 7 appears to authorize. 25 MR. LEDYARD; Okay. Then, I stand NELL MC CALLUM & ASSOCIATES, INC. EXX-MOR-003786 136 1 corrected. 2 Q. (By Mr. Bishop) There's another document 3 that's not in my book, which is just as well, because my 4 book's falling apart. And that was one that we first 5 looked at yesterday. And it's a memorandum which 6 purports to be from Venable to yourself, dated March 7 9th, 1972. I do not recollect what the exhibit number 8 is 9 MR. GROVE: It's Exhibit 17. I think 10 it was just marked today, actually. 11 Q. (By Mr. Bishop) That memorandum indicates at 12 Page 2, Paragraph 3, that, as of March 9, 1972, the 13 first priority would be to require the immediate use`of 14 approved single use or reusable filter respirators for 15 all asbestos work pending development and acquisition of 16 more acceptable supplied air respirators. 17 MR. LEDYARD: Do you see whex-e he's 18 reading? 19 THE WITNESS: Uh-huh. I hear. 20 MR. LEDYARD: No. Do you see where 21 he's reading on this? 22 We got lost. Where were you? Page 23 2 ~ 24 MR. BISHOP: Page 2, Paragraph 3 25 is is under "Priority I." NELL MC CALLUM & ASSOCIATES, INC. EXX-MOR-003787 137 1 MR. LEDYARDs Okay. 2 Q. And it indicates one of -- and I don't mean to 3 imply that this is the only Priority I or even that it's 4 the first Priority I, but it's a Priority I item 5 requiring the immediate use of approved single use or -- 6 et cetera. 7 Do you see that? 8 A. Uh-huh. 9 MR. LEDYARDs What's the question? 10 Wait a minute. 11 Q. I just wanted you to identify the section 12 first. 13 Now, looking at that, do you know when 14 acquisition of an air supplied respirator was achieved 15 by Exxon? 16 MR. LEDYARDs Well, I'm going to 17 object to the form of the question if it 18 assumes through this that it was not 19 already in place at the time this was 20 written. 21 Q. Okay. Well, it appears to me from this 22 document that Mr. -- Dr. Venable is saying, "We're going 23 to use this kind of respirator pending development and 24 acquisition of more acceptable supplied air 25 respirators." NELL MC CALLUM & ASSOCIATES. INC. EXX-MOR-003788 138 1 MR. LEDYARDs I think -- 2 Q. To me, that means that, in 1972, March of 1972, 3 you weren't using air supplied respirators. 4 A. Well, you go back to the first paragraph of the 5 first -- in this letter. You see why this was written? 6 Q. I do. 7 A. The U.S. Department of Labor's advisory 8 committee has made recommendations to the Secretary of 9 Labor on many phases. Those items included in the 10 report of -- and so forth cover monitoring. Later 11 reports will cover final recommendations of the advisory 12 committee on the subject. 13 At this time, we are not certain what those are 14 going to be; but they include all of this. And we 15 wanted to be in compliance with the office's 16 bureaucratic requirement. Not that we weren't doing a 17 better job and had better equipment and better -- 18 supervision of our respirators, but we didn't want 19 our -- any of our management to be embarrassed by the 20 fact that they didn't have at least what the 21 department -- OSHA required, you see. 22 So, you do -- you can't apply this to our 23 application, what we were doing or wasn't doing. 24 Q. Well -- 25 A. It has no -- it has no connection to our NELL MC CALLUM & ASSOCIATES, INC. EXX-MOR-003789 139 1 program. It only tells us what the minimum 2 requirement's going to be when OSHA comes out finally 3 with this type of a document. 4 Q. There are no factual misstatements in this that 5 you're aware of, are there? 6 A. Only -- these are statements that would be 7 found in OSHA's to be announced later specifications for 8 compliance. 9 Q. Are any of these statements untrue, to your 10 knowledge? 11 A. Some of them are much less than what we were 12 already requiring. 13 Q. In other words, Exxon may have provided far 14 more protection than -- 15 A. Absolutely. 16 Q. -- provided for in here? 17 A. Absolutely. We didn't have to change Uur 18 program the least bit, except the paper work. 19 Q. But none of these statements are false? 20 A. I don't -- 21 Q. You just did a better job? 22 A. I didn't analyze it in that respect. 23 Q. Do you know whether, in 19 -- in March of 1972, 24 a supplied air respirator had been developed and 25 acquired which was acceptable to Exxon? NELL MC CALLUM & ASSOCIATES. INC. EXX-MOR-003790 140 1 A. We used many of those type of respirators for 2 the last 40 years. 3 Q. The last document that I want to ask about 4 is -- I believe it's the exhibit immediately following 5 the one that we just discussed. And it purports to be a 6 memorandum from Dr. Venable to Dr. Jones -- 7 MR. LEDYARD: Is that it? 8 Q. -- undated, regarding the subject of asbestos 9 exposure. 10 MR. GROVE; Just for the record, that 11 is Exhibit 15. 12 MR. BISHOP: Okay. 13 MR. GROVE; The other one was 17. * In 14 case anyone's looking for an exhibit 15 following 17, they won't find it. 16 MR. BISHOP: Oh. Thanks. 17 Q. (By Mr. Bishop) We don't know when this 18 document was prepared; but we do know that it was 19 prepared sometime after October of 1974, true? 20 A. That's what it says on here. 21 Q. This document indicates that, in October of 22 1974, an Exxon insulator was wearing a Welsh disposable 23 dust respirator. 24 Do you know when the use of disposable 25 respirators was discontinued by Exxon altogether? NELL MC CALLUM & ASSOCIATES, INC. EXX-MOR-003791 141 1 A. No, I do not know about discontinuing 2 disposable respirators. 3 Q. And I mean by that question in connection with 4 asbestos dust. 5 A. I notice that this was at -- you didn't read 6 the rest of it, disposable dust respirator approved for 7 concentration up to ten times the limit of a hundred 8 fibers per cc. and so forth. That was the limit at that 9 time. It's different now. And, so, I would assume that 10 it met that requirement. 11 Q. And I didn't mean to -- to mislead or to imply 12 that it wasn't approved. I was just attempting to see 13 if this could jog your memory on the subject of when'the 14 use of disposable respirators was discontinued 15 altogether. And it did not, I gather. 16 A. I do not know. 17 Q. Okay. 18 MR. BISHOP: Well, I took a little 19 longer than I anticipated I would? and I 20 appreciate your assistance. That's all I 21 have. 22 MS. CLOY: I know you're going to be 23 upset. I'm going to reserve my questions. 24 And I have no questions at this time. 25 MR. LEDYARD: We demand you ask NELL MC CALLUM & ASSOCIATES, INC. EXX-MOR-003792 142 1 questions. 2 THE WITNESS: Well, we have one other 3 choice. 4 5 EXAMINATION BY MR. CHUSID: 6 Q. Professor Hammond, my name is Bruce Chusid. I 7 represent Plant Insulation Company. And I'd like to ask 8 you a couple of questions about the Exxon refinery in 9 Benicia. 10 Yesterday you had stated that you were there 11 twice in the year 1967, and you were also there in the 12 year 1969. 13 Do you recall that? 14 A. Yes, I do. 15 Q. When is the last time that you visited the 16 Exxon Benicia refinery? 17 A. I know I was there in '75. I don't knjp.w 18 whether I was there after that or not. I've forgotten. 19 But I was there in '75 for a week or so. 20 Q. Was there a specific purpose for your week-long 21 visit in 1975? 22 A. No. Only to review the program and its 23 success. 24 Q. The program being the safety program? 25 A. Mainly the occupational disease prevention NELL MC CALLUM & ASSOCIATES, INC. EXX-MOR-003793 143 1 program, industrial hygiene program. 2 I had noticed that Mr. Meyer was there in 1970. 3 And he was back there again in '73, I believe. Mr. 4 Diserens was there one year, and Mr. Eric LeBroc was 5 there another year, in addition to my -- and they're all 6 members of my immediate staff. 7 Q. And these were the associated industrial 8 hygiene directors? 9 A. They were -- they were there to work with Mr. 10 Fields and Mr. Owens. 11 Q. Were you at the Exxon Benicia refinery between 12 1969 and the week-long visit in 1975? 13 A. I was -- I was there in '67 and in '69, twice 14 '67, '69. I don't, at this moment, remember how many 15 times I might have gone in between that period. But I 16 know my other -- the other members of my staff went. 17 Q. Those being Mr. Diserens, Meyer, and LeBroc? 18 A. Yes. And they left sampling equipment and 19 sampling instructions with Mr. Owens to collect samples 20 and send them to us, which he did. 21 Q. And these samples are air samples, dust 22 samples? 23 A. They were air samples, asbestos and other types 24 of... 25 Q. When -- what year was the first time that you NELL MC CALLUM & ASSOCIATES, INC. EXX-MOR-003794 144 1 had an opportunity to either test the air samples 2 yourselves or have one of your associates test the 3 samples coming from the Exxon Benicia refinery? 4 A. When was the very first time? 5 Q. Or what year -- approximately what year was the 6 first time that you or your associates tested the dust 7 samples or air samples from Exxon Benicia? 8 A. I know that Mr. Meyer collected samples in '70. 9 I guess that was the first -- first time after my visit 10 in '69. 11 Q. Now, did you -- I believe that you testified 12 yesterday that you -- that you never observed any 13 insulation work being done, either application or . 14 removal, while you were at the Exxon Benicia refinery. 15 Is that correct? 16 A. I never did, no. 17 Q. And that would go for all.-- 18 A. In my memory, I don't remember seeing it done, 19 no. 20 Q. That would be from the first time you were 21 there in 19 -- early 1967 until your last visit in 1975? 22 A. Personally, I don't remember seeing any. 23 Q. Do you have any personal knowledge, other than 24 your own witnessing of it, of any -- of the conditions 25 of either the installation or the removal of any NELL MC CALLUM & ASSOCIATES, INC. EXX-MOR-003795 145 1 asbestos insulation? And I mean either pipe insulation 2 or vessel insulation, tank insulation. 3 A. I just make sure that we have the best 4 information possible to us. I would like for you to 5 discuss that with Mr. Naugle, operation manager even 6 during the construction period and during any repair and 7 expansion of the refinery after we got it. And Mr. 8 Naugle... 9 Q. So, I understand that Mr. Naugle would have 10 more direct knowledge of the conditions under which 11 insulation was either applied or removed at Exxon at 12 Benicia. 13 My question is: Do you have any specific 14 recollection of Mr. Naugle relaying to you any of the 15 conditions at the refinery under which insulation was 16 either applied or removed? 17 A. I -- as I said, that would have been unexpected 18 and just odd type of emergency jobs that might have 19 developed, that I wouldn't know about. And it might 20 happen in the middle of the night or some other period 21 that I wouldn't have been there, anyway. 22 Q. Did any of this information ever get back to 23 you from Mr. Naugle or -- or any of your associates? 24 A. Yeah. When I went out there, I discussed all 25 these matters with Mr. Naugle. They were pleased that NELL MC CALLUM & ASSOCIATES, INC. EXX-MOR-003796 146 1 everything was running in accordance with our program. 2 Q. Do you know the identity of any of the 3 insulation subcontractors that performed any work at the 4 Exxon Benicia refinery from the initial stages of 5 construction through the -- through, I guess, your 6 retirement? 7 A. I recall that I've heard Mr. Naugle mention the 8 names of these organizations, but -- contractors. But I 9 don't remember any of them by name. 10 Q. Sir, do you have any formal training in the 11 field of epidemiology? 12 A. That's not one of my specialties. No, I always 13 had -- I did look at the cancer rates in our refineries 14 from 1918 through 1960. And we looked at all the death 15 certificates and so forth, and we determined that our 16 cancer rate was only 50 percent of what was expected. 17 And I had a doctor -- epidemiologist assisting j\e at 18 that time. But I never did -- I don't claim to be a 19 specialist in that field. 20 But this study's at the Baytown refinery, for 21 example, of several hundred employees. At that time, we 22 had up to 2 -- 2,000 employees there. And we looked at 23 all of the death certificates and all of the other 24 information we had, and we found that we only had 50 25 percent of the expected rate of cancer in our employees. NELL MC CALLUM & ASSOCIATES, INC. EXX-MOR-003797 147 1 MR. GROVEs I'm going to object and 2 move to strike as nonresponsive except to 3 the extent that he indicated that he was 4 not a specialist in the field. 5 Q. (By Mr. Chusid) Was that study of the Baytown 6 refinery ever published in -- 7 A. Yes, it was. It was published by a medical 8 bulletin. And there were three of us authors of that, a 9 Hammond and Baird and Bertner, I believe his name was, 10 B-e-r-t-n-e-r, Bertner. And then that was given 11 internationally at the petroleum medical conference over 12 in London. And Dr. Baird, one of the authors, gave it 13 there. And it was published in the "Industrial Medical 14 Journal of America"; and that would have been about 15 1967, '8, or '9. 16 MR. GROVE; Can I just clarify one 17 thing? __ 18 You said Baird, Hammond. And who was 19 the other? 20 - THE WITNESS: Dr. Bertner, 21 B-e-r-t-n-e-r, Bertner. 22 (DISCUSSION OFF THE RECORD) 23 MR. CHUSID: Okay. We're back on the 24 record now. 25 Q. (By Mr. Chusid) Professor Hammond, you've NELL MC CALLUM & ASSOCIATES, INC. EXX-MOR-003798 148 1 located in your CV a cite to the article concerning 2 cancer rates that you just previously mentioned. Can 3 you just -- why don't you just read the title of that 4 article and the authors. 5 A. J.W. Hammond? Dr. V.C. Baird, B-a-i-r-d; and 6 Dr. B.E. Bennison, B-e-n-n-i-s-o-n. And the title, "An 7 Analysis of Cancer Mortality in Employees and Annuitants 8 of an Oil Company and/or Pipeline Company." The 9 publication, "The Medical Bulletin," Volume 18, No. 1, 10 March of 1958. 11 MR. BISHOP: Is that No. 2? My copy 12 of your CV indicates that it's No. 2, and 13 I think you read -- 14 THE WITNESS: Well, that's another 15 article. But it's not the same. It 16 doesn't deal with this epidemiological 17 study of the cancer that we're talking 18 about. 19 A. The only -- and that same -- but that -- and 20 you will not find my name on the V.C. Baird publication 21 that occurred in "Industrial Medicine" because that was 22 given in Europe and that was an amended study that went 23 on for another ten years beyond '58. And it would have 24 been published about 1968. But Baird would be the 25 author. NELL MC CALLUM & ASSOCIATES, INC. EXX-MOR-003799 149 1 Q. Sir, are you familiar with an Exxon employee in 2 Benicia by the name of N.W. Benetti, B-e-n-e-t-t-i? 3 A. No, I'm not. 4 Q. How about DickBenetti? 5 A. No, I don't know that. 6 Q. You're not familiar with that name; or you 7 don't associate that name with an employee at the Exxon 8 Benicia refinery, do you? 9 A. No, I don't. 10 Q. What is a PCLA as far as -- as far as a 11 description of a unit at a refinery? 12 A. Let's see. Polymerized catalytic -- I think 13 I'll defer to Mr. Naugle about that because I haven't.-- 14 I'd only have to go by the words and what they might 15 stand for. But I wouldn't be accurate enough that I 16 could tell you. But Mr. Naugle would know. 17 Q. What is your understanding of what a turnaround 18 is at a refinery? 19 A. Generally, it is a maj or overhaul of a unit 20 that's been operating for some time. 21 Q. So, the unit itself is shut down and 22 overhauled? 23 A. Yes. It's cleaned out and then opened up and 24 re -- repaired or redone. 25 Q. Does the length of this overhaul, is that NELL MC CALLUM & ASSOCIATES. INC. EXX-MOR-003800 150 1 determined by what type of unit is being turned around? 2 A. And how complex it is, yes. 3 Q. Are you familiar with the mineral zeolite? 4 A. Yes, I am. 5 Q. Do you know of any uses of zeolite at any of 6 the Humble or Exxon refineries during your career? 7 A. I know it's used sometime in treating certain 8 oil streams or petroleum streams. 9 Q. What form of the zeolite is used to treat the 10 oil or petroleum streams? 11 A. The general mine and refine -- the mine product 12 that's found natural in nature. 13 Q. So, is that product in powder form? * 14 A. It's generally a very finely divided material. 15 MR. CHUSID: Those are all the 16 questions I have. Thank you, sir. 17 MR. LEDYARDs Anybody else have 18 anything? 19 MR. GROVE: No, I don't have anything 20 . else. 21 MR. LEDYARD: That's it. 22 (DEPOSITION CONCLUDED AT 3:02 P.M.) 23 24 25 NELL MC CALLUM & ASSOCIATES, INC. EXX-MOR-003801 151 1 SIGNATURE OF WITNESS 2 3 I, JAMES HAMMOND, solemnly swear dr affirm, 4 under the pains and penalties of perjury, that the 5 foregoing 150 pages contain a true and correct 6 transcript of the testimony given by me at the time and 7 place stated, with the corrections, if any, and the 8 reasons therefor noted on a separate sheet of paper and 9 attached hereto, and that I am signing this before a 10 Notary Public. 11 12 13 JAMES HAMMOND 14 15 THE STATE OF TEXAS] 16 17 Subscribed and sworn to before me, tJb.e 18 undersigned authority, by the said JAMES HAMMOND on this 19 the _____ day of , 1992. 20 21 22 23 Notary Public in and for 24 the State of Texas 25 NELL MC CALLUM & ASSOCIATES, INC. EXX-MOR-003802 152 1 THE STATE OP TEXAS: 2 I, LINDA S. TOWERY, Certified Shorthand 3 Reporter, hereby certify that the foregoing testimony 4 was given before me after the Witness had been first 5 duly sworn. 6 I further certify that this deposition was 7 prepared under my direction and is a complete and 8 correct transcript of the proceedings and that the 9 original is being delivered to Frank A. Grove. 10 I further certify that I am neither attorney 11 for, related to, nor employed by any of the parties to 12 the lawsuit in which this deposition was taken. 13 Further, I am neither related to nor employed by any 14 attorney of record in this cause? nor do I have a 15 financial interest in this matter. 16 GIVEN UNDER MY HAND AND SEAL OF OFFICE in . 17 Houston, Texas, on this the 23rd of October, 12.92. 18 19 20 21 22 23 My Certificate Expires December 31, 1993. 24 25 NELL MC CALLUM & ASSOCIATES, INC. EXX-MOR-003803 EXX-MOR-003804 January 18* ;1973 C. B. Moors Dq. Refining Boon 3621 lai Refinery Programs for Hindi init. Asbestos - Charles: In reply to your recent question. Attached la a safe handling guldo sheet from Daton Bouts Refinery. The Davtown program was given aa a sodol In the asbestos guide. Jlnyvny has a similar program. IULl'lnga. and Benicia hnve lens formalized programs and soon to dopend store on Contractors to follow cafe practices. Bayway, Baton Rou.70 and Baytown supervise the 'Asbestos practices through the OSUA Steering Consltteos. Their chief concerns aro that Exxon enploycea follow the regulations while ' doing small Jobs in tho units. Those jobs night bo done by Insulators, mechanics, laborers and/or operators. The big Jobs aro generally done by Contractors. Housekeeping and^ disposal of the scraps are practices seeding close supervision. These roflncrles have been held back in the substitution of all non-asbestos insulation by not having avallnblo unlimited amounts of suitable replacements. As shown by tho attached , Johno-Uanvillo Conpany's technical sheet* this situation la improving. ' . Although each location in the past has been following its own' standard* the three large refineries have had the same basic policies. If either BlllinTS or Benlcln have established a safe asbeutos policy we have not seen it. If 110 Rofinlnr Banrurencnt were to-crephaelse-the-lmportancff of supervisor--imipipz_lh gjr,,cnalpy.c.c.n_j>n<UJ)pn_cafpxcIngLito POL regulatory tractlcta. this would assure there, ahou^ bgjnio EllAllon from vlola 11 one. _ . JWl/rs Attachments James T. Hammond 18-0000738 510 EXX-MOR-OOSftnc; EXX-MOR-003806 ruo memorandum TO Mr. J. W. Hammond ftUftjCCT ..... ....... ............... Asbestos Hazard Control Program .... * ^F. S. Venable ^ DATS 3/9/72 baton rougc. la. The U. S. Department of Labor 's Advisory Committee on Asbestos has made recommendations to the Secretary of Labor on many phases of the proposed asbestos hazard control program. Those items included in the report of February 23, 1972, cover monitoring and records. Later reports will cover final recommendations of the Advisory Committee on the subject of asbestos standards. At this time, we are not absolutely certain as to the scope of the Comnittee's final recommendations to the Secretary of Labor, nor can we be certain as to which of these specific recommendations will be adopted by the Secretary. There is good indication, however, that most of the recommendations of the Committee will be adopted without change. A minority of the Committee has objected to certain requirements concerning details.of sampling and fre quency of monitoring, and the requirement for protective clothing when dust concentrations exceed 10 times the limit has been termed "unnecessarily restrictive" by two members of the five man Committee. However, the Committee unanimously agreed on the recommendations for respiratory protection and two members also called for "registration", presumably a program of registering all asbestos users. It is not yet certain as to the final values of permissable dust counts (fibers greater than 5 microns in length per cc of air). The Secretary may begin with 5 and within several years lower this to 2. There is no indi cation as yet as to the timing of, or effective date for, meeting the various requirements. It would appear desirable, however for Humble to initiate a program for controlling asbestos dust exposures without delay, emphasizing compliance with certain recommendations which appear to be incontrovertable. This program should employ a stepwise approach and, depending upon the effective dates specified by USDL, work toward a complete company-wide program. Three priority classifications are suggested and are outlined below. Priority I . 1. Eliminate, or use substitutes for, all asbestos-containing materials possible. Minimize or eliminate the use of talc, asbestos in sulation materials, building and construction materials (except floor tiles containing asbestos! asbestos fire blankets, etc. DEPOSITION EXHIBIT f^Qp-.^ONJP ) EXX-MOR-003807 Pg. 2 J w 2. Identify all materials purchased or used which contain more than 1 4 asbestos fibers. If dust concentrations of 1000 particles/cc of air are generated then one per cent asbestos material would theoretically ] yield 10 fibres/cc, the upper limit for use of single use valveless filter respirators. A figure of 54 asbestos content may be more reasonable and might be adopted if subsequent dust level studies prove concentrations to be ] low enough to permit filter type respirators. 3. Require iirenediate use of approved single use or reusable ] filter respirators for all asbestos work pending development and acquisition of more acceptable supplied air respirators. 4. Iumediately initiate cleanup operations around asbestos work. ] Employ wet cleanup and prompt removal of asbestos scrap to minimize attri tion from traffic. , I 5. Rope off or restrict areas where asbestos dust is generated. Use signs stating "Keep Out" until final wording of caution signs is issued by USDL. ] 6. Compile a list of all asbestos exposed employees with estimates of the number of years of exposure whenever possible. ' 3 Priority II 1. Evaluate typical jobs involving the use of asbestos. Obtain representative fiber counts for such operations as rip-off, cement mixing, i installation of piping insulation, hand cutting or sawing, warehouse handling of asbestos materials and asbestos cleanup operations. ' 3 2. Develop as rapidly as possible the use of advanced types of respiratory protective devices. Particularly needed is a low pressure, air supplied respirator with positive pressure in the face piece. 3 3. Begin vacuum clean-up procedures for removal of asbestos dust as an alternative to wet clean-up methods. ] 4. Set up a protective clothing program for employees exposed to dust concentrations greater than 10 times the permissable limit. 5. Obtain pulmonary function studies and chest x-rays on all "insulators" and other employees exposed to asbestos dust. . Priority III I 1. Establish a regular monitoring program for all operations involving asbestos. Obtain breathing 2one samples according to the schedule established by USDL. Obtain samples on all representative jobs and from representative work groups. EXX-MOR-003808 2. Reduce asbestos dust levels by all feasible engineering means. Provide adequate dust collection and air cleaning facilities for all shop machinery (saws etc.) working asbestos materials. * 3. Obtain and post approved warning signs for asbestos areas. 4. Restrict the total number of employees working with asbestos insofar as possible. 5. Carry out preplacement examinations on all employees newly assigned to jobs involving exposure to asbestos dust. Establish periodic examination program as outlined by USDL. You may wish to add to or shift the items listed under each priority. This may depend upon the regulations as finally adopted, or upon certain factors within the company, such as the problems peculiar to refining, pipeline or production units. Mr. Don Hyde should be alerted to the probable influx of dust samples for evaluation. Also, some education and training in the proper procedures for dust sampling may be desirable in the case of safety personnel in remote operations where monthly monitoring is required. We should not overlook the fact that employees must be informed of the asbestos health problem, their responsibilities for good work practices and the need for their cooperation in every operation involving asbestos dust exposure. EXX-MOR-003809 Transcript Quality Assurance Checklist Deposition scheduled by: Notice prepared by: Subpoena prepared by: Subpoena served by: '* Setting confirmed by: Deposition reported by: nv-tR__________________ Deposition videoed by: Transcript edited by: Transcript proofread by: Transcript copied by: Exhibits prepared by: Transcript bound by: tJ_________________ Li................... Mr..... ..............; j________ n i+ ~ Transcript page--checked by: Transcript billed by: CiA2 Transcript packaged by: Transmitted for signature by: Certified Mail and Notice to opposing counsel by: QAMj (Ma/^ Transcript delivered by: Nell McCallum & Associates, Inc. EXX-MOR-003810