Document 3QzJbmNGv20295xj3bNxyy9o3

235 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA ............................... ....................................................-..............................x IN RE: ASBESTOS PRODUCTS LIABILITY Civil LITIGATION (NO. VI) MDL 875 .......................................................................................................................... Thia Document Relates to: UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FIFTH DIVISION DISTRICT OF MINNESOTA .......................................................................................................................... CONWED CORPORATION, ' Plaintiff, 5-92-88 - against - UNION CARBIDE CHEMICALS AND PLASTICS COMPANY, INC., (f/k/a Union Carbide Corporation), - and- Defendant, UNION CARBIDE CHEMICALS AND PLASTICS COMPANY, INC. (f/k/a Union Carbide Corporation), - against - OWENS-CORNING FIBERGLAS CORPORATION, et al., WALKER JAMAR COMPANY, A.W. KUETTBL & SONS, INC., API, INC., and MacARTHUR COMPANY, Third-Party Defendants. ......................................................................................................................x October 18, 1994 HILTON C. LEWINSOHN (Cont'd) Doyle Reporting, Inc. CERTIFIED STENOTYPE REPORTERS Total Litigation Support WALTER SHAPIRO. CSR CHARLES SHAPIRO. CSR 369 LEXINGTON AVENUE NEW YORK. N Y. 10017 (212) 867 8220 UCAREF00011740 236 October 18, 1994 9:30 a.m. Continued deposition of HILTON C. LEWINSOHN, taken by Plaintiff, pursuant to adjournment, at the offices of Kelley, Drye & Warren, Esqs., 101 Park Avenue, New York, New York, before Paul Kirschen, a Certified Shorthand Reporter and Notary Public within and for the State of New York. *** UCAREF00011741 237 Appearances: KELLY, DRYE & WARREN, ESQS. Attorneys for Union Carbide 101 Park Avenue New York, New York BY: ALAN J. GERSON, ESQ., Counsel FOLEY & LARDNER, ESQS. 777 E. Wisconsin Avenue Milwaukee, Wisconsin 53202 BY: TREVOR J. WILL, ESQ., Of Counsel STICH, ANGELL, KREIDLER & MUTH, P.A Attorneys for Conwed Corp. 250 2nd Avenue South Minneapolis, Minnesota 55401 BY: ROBERT D. BROWNSON, ESQ., Counsel RUDNICK & WOLFE, ESQS. 203 N. LaSalle Chicago, Illinois 60601 BY: MICHAEL R. GOLDMAN, ESQ., Of Counsel *** UCAREF00011742 1 238 2 HILTON C. LEWINSOHN, 3 resumed, having been duly re-sworn by 4 Paul Kirschen, Notary Public, was 5 examined and testified as follows: 6 MR. BROWNSON: This is a 7 continuation of a prior deposition. 8 EXAMINATION (Continued) 9 BY MR. BROWNSON: 10 Q. Good morning, Dr. Lewinsohn. We are 11 continuing the deposition that we left off some 12 time ago in this case of Conwed versus Union 13 Carbide. 14 I would like to try to get this 15 finished up this morning. I think we can move 16 fairly rapidly here. We can finish this up. 17 First of all, you recall the case, 18 Conwed versus Union Carbide? Do you have that in 19 mind? 20 A. Could you just briefly restate it? 21 Q. O.K. This is the case involving the 22 Conwed ceiling tile plant in Minnesota at which 23 various workers have had various asbestos related 24 diseases which they allege were as a result of 25 their exposure in their plant. Conwed is suing DOYLE REPORTING, INC. (212)867-8220 UCAREF00011743 1 Lewinsohn 239 2 Union Carbide as a result of that exposure. That 3 is the case. 4 Does that bring it back to mind? 5 A. Yes. 6 Q. Since the first session of your 7 deposition in this case, have you had a chance to 8 go back and read your testimony or review it in 9 any way? 10 A. Just briefly before this deposition. 11 Q. O.K. Before we started here today? 12 A. Right. 13 Q. Yesterday or something? 14 A. This morning. 15 Q. O.K. And have you reviewed any other 16 materials in connection with the deposition here 17 today? 18 A. No. 19 Q. Since we broke from the first session 20 of this deposition until today, have you gone back 21 to review any materials, that came up in the first 22 session of the deposition to refresh your 23 recollection or update yourself in any way? 24 MR. WILL: You mean go back and 25 reread the exhibits? DOYLE REPORTING, INC. {212)867-8220 UGAREF00011744 1 Lewins ohn 240 2 MR. BROWNSON: Not necessarily . 3 exhibits to the deposition, but any 4 materials. 5 A. Well, I have had another deposition 6 in another case since this. 7 I guess a lot of the similar material 8 to that which we discussed last time was referred 9 to. 10 Q. This other case, was this a case 11 involving asbestos related disease? 12 A. A case involving Turner & Newall, my 13 former employer. 14 Q. And was this a personal injury case? 15 A. No. This was a property damage 16 situation. 17 Chase Manhattan Bank. 18 Q. O.K. And some lawyer for Chase 19 Manhattan Bank took your deposition? 20 A. Yes. 21 Q. Was thathere in New York? 22 A. Yes. 23 Q. Do you remember who that lawyer was? 24 A. I rememberthe first lawyer's name. 25 The deposition was in two phases. The first one DOYLE REPORTING, INC. (212)867-8220 UCAREF00011745 1 Lewinsohn 241 2 was Mr. Connor. 3 I do not remember the second lawyer's 4 name. I think it was Mr. Leonard, but I am not 5 sure . 6 Q. And when did that deposition take 7 place? 8 A. Probably two or three months ago. 9 Q. And in connection with the 10 preparation for that deposition, did you go back 11 and review some materials concerning the workers 12 at the Turner & Newall plant at Rochdale, or what 13 were you looking at? 14 A. I was shown various documents from 15 Turner & Newall's files. 16 Q. Let me shift gears to Union Carbide. 17 Since the last session of your 18 deposition in this case, have you had occasion to 19 review any of the materials or any materials which 20 would pertain to the issue of Union Carbide 21 Calidria asbestos? ' . 22 A. No, I haven't. 23 Q. Have you had occasion, since the 24 first session of your deposition in this case, to 25 review any materials on the issue of chrysotile DOYLE REPORTING, INC. (212)867-8220 UCAREF00011746 1 Lewinsohn 242 2 asbestos, an asbestos related disease? 3 A. Well, once again, in the course of 4 preparation and being deposed in the other cases, 5 that issue has come up, yes. 6 Q. How would the issue of chrysotile 7 asbestos and disease come up with the issues in 8 that case. 9 Didn't that case involve Olympus? 10 A. Yes, but one discusses all forms of 11 asbestos, other phases. 12 Q. O.K. So in that deposition, did you 13 testify or discuss all forms of asbestos fiber and 14 health effects? 15 A. To the best of my recollection. 16 Without going back to look at the 17 deposition, I can't be any more specific. ` 18 Q. Let me direct your attention to this 19 particular case, the case of Conwed versus Union 20 Carbide. 21 It is my understanding that Union 22 Carbide intends to elicit from you some opinion 23 testimony in this case. 24 Can you tell us as you sit here today 25 what you understand the opinions are that you DOYLE REPORTING, INC. (212)867-8220 UCAREF00011747 1 Lewmsohn 243 2 would render in this particular case? 3 MR. GERSON: I need to object to the 4 form of the question. 3 5 We have designated Dr. Lewinsohn as 6 a potential witness without committing 7 ourselves at this stage. We reserve the 8 right to elicit his testimony or not to. 9 MR. BROWNSON: O.K. I understand 10 that he may or may not be called. 11 What I am wondering is - - let me 12 rephrase. 13 MR. WILL: Without the preamble. 14 Q. O.K. What I am wondering. Dr. 15 Lewinsohn, is do you know as you sit here today 16 what opinions you would have to offer in this 17 lawsuit? 18 A. I have no opinions specifically. 19 briefed or informed by Union Carbide as to how 20 they would use my testimony. 21 Q. O.K. Have you had a chance to read 22 the disclosure that counsel for Union Carbide made 23 in this case about areas that you might testify 24 about ? 25 A. No. DOYLE REPORTING, INC. (212)867-8220 UCAREF00011748 1 Lewinsohn 244 2 Q. Let me just show it to you. I would 3 like to run through these things and ask you some 4 questions about them. 5 And what I am showing the witness, I 6 am not going to make this an exhibit because I 7 just brought my copy. It's the experts' 8 disclosure of Union Carbide in this case, and 9 served on February 1994. 10 (Discussion off the record) 11 MR. BROWNSON: The copy. 12 (Discussion off the record) 13 MR. BROWNSON: Let's make this page 14 Exhibit 8. Back on the record. I will 15 make an exhibit of this page. We will mark 16 this Exhibit 8. Disclosure by counsel to 17 Union Carbide in this case. 18 (Disclosure by counsel to Union 19 Carbide marked as Exhibit 8 for 20 identification, as of this date.) 21 BY MR. BROWNSON: 22 Q. Have you had a chance to read Exhibit 23 8? 24 A. Very quickly, yes. 25 Q. Why don't you just take a moment to DOYLE REPORTING, INC. (212)867-8220 UCAREF00011749 1 Lewins ohn 245 2 read through it and I will ask you some questions 3 about it. 4 A. A11 right. 5 Q. First of all, have you had a chance 6 to re view any materials relating to the Conwed 7 plant at the present time? 8 A. No. 9 Q. Have you been advisedthat you will 10 be sh own any materials with respect to t he Conwed 11 plant 12 A. No. 13 Q. It also indicates in the disclosure, 14 you may review materials or review materials 15 relating to Calidria asbestos. 16 Can you describe for me what 17 materials you reviewed relating to Calidria 18 asbestos ? 19 MR . GERSON: During what time? 20 MR . WILL: Since he left Union 21 Carbide. 22 Q. Well, asking the question generally. 23 Let me break the question down. 24 Have you reviewed any mineralogical 25 reports, articles, literature, analyses of DOYLE REPORTING, INC. (212)867-8220 UCAREF00011750 1 Lewinsohn 246 2 Calidria asbestos at any time? 3 A. Yes. 4 Q. And can you tell us what it is that 5 you reviewed? 6 A. Not specifically, but I have 7 reviewed, particularly while I was at Union 8 Carbide, various reports that came my way from 9 time to time on those particular subjects. 10 Q. And do you recall any of them being 11 from Dr. Mumpton, reports from Dr. Mumpton? 12 A. I had seen a report from Dr. Mumpton. 13 I can't say I reviewed it. I know of 14 its existence. 15 Q. As far as any opinions you would be 16 prepared to offer, as you sit here today, 17 concerning Calidria asbestos, would it be fair to 18 say then that those opinions would not be based 19 upon the writings of Dr. Mumpton, or would they 20 be? 21 A. Well, if I was going to be questioned 22 as a witness about my opinions on Calidria 23 asbestos, I would prepare myself for that. 24 And at this moment in time, I can't 25 tell you what particular writings I would refer to DOYLE REPORTING, INC. (212)867-8220 UCAREF00011751 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 a 9 10 n 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 Lewinsohn 247 in order to do that. If there were writings by Dr. Mumpton that were relevant, yes, I would look at them and review them. Q. But in order for you to render opinions about Calidria asbestos, would it be fair to say you would have to go back and review writings by Dr. Mumpton? In other words, you don't have those in mind as you sit here today, do you? A. I don't have any particular reference in mind as I sit here today. Q. Are you familiar with Robert Woolery? A. I don't know. Q. Do you recall having ever reviewed a paper authored by Dr. Woolery called, "Asbestos in the Paper Making Process"? A. Not offhand. Q. Let's go back to thesubject of Calidria asbestos. In your mind, is there any distinction -- strike that. Let me back up. Are you familiar with the fact that the Calidria brand asbestos sold by Union Carbide DOYLE REPORTING, INC. (212)867-8220 UCAREF00011752 1 Lewinsohn 248 2 comes from this deposit in New Idria, California? 3 A. Yes . 4 Q. I-d-r-i-a? 5 A. Yes . 6 Q. Have you ever been there at the mine? 7 A. I have been to the King City mine. 8 Q- You have been to the mine in King 9 City or the mill ? 10 A. The mill. 11 Q. Have you ever been up to the mine up 12 on the mountain? 13 A. No. 14 Q. Now are you familiar with the fact 15 that there is at least two other, or have been 16 historically at least two other operating mines in 17 that deposit , one by Atlas Asbestos and one by 18 Johns -Manville? 19 A. I think I may have heard that there 20 were. 21 Q. And in your mind, do you know of any 22 distinction between the asbestos mined in those 23 three mines? 24 A. No. 25 Q. As far as you know, do you consider DOYLE REPORTING, INC. (212)867-8220 UCAREF00011753 1 Lewinsohn 249 2 that to be the same asbestos? 3 A. From my perspective and from my 4 knowledge, yes. 5 Q. Going back to the Calidria asbestos, 6 have you seen any medical record or medical data, 7 or medical information concerning miners at the 8 Calidria mine? 9 MR. WILL: Are you talking about the 10 Union Carbide mine? 11 MR. BROWNSON: Right. 12 A. Well, I am not quite sure how best to 13 answer that question, because mining really 14 utilized very few people as I understand it. 15 And in my review that I undertook at 16 one time, they. King City Mill, I don't know 17 whether, without looking to see what people's 18 occupations were, whether I also reviewed miners. 19 But there were very few miners, to my 20 understanding, because of the nature of the mining 21 process. 22 Q. O.K. And would it be fair to say 23 that, over the years, there has really only been a 24 relatively handful of people who actually worked 25 up at the mine? DOYLE REPORTING, INC. (212)867-8220 UCAREF00011754 1 Lewinsohn 250 2 A. That is what I understood. Yes. 3 Q. And when you have reviewed such 4 medical information as you have seen about Union 5 Carbide employees in King City, you didn't 6 specifically break out and review the miners as a 7 separate group, did you? 8 A. I don't believe I did. 9 Q. Now, let me broaden the question and 10 ask you, have you ever reviewed the medical 11 record, reports, or medical information concerning 12 employees at any of the King City facilities, the 13 mine, the mill, the truckers, any of the employees 14 associated with that asbestos production facility? 15 A. Shortly, I think I told you this last 16 time, shortly before - 17 MR. WILL: Are you asking 18 differently than what you covered before? 19 Go ahead. 20 A. I think I told you this last time. 21 That is that shortly before the buyout by the 22 management of the King City Mine & Mill, I went to 23 King City and reviewed, I think, without seeing my 24 report, I don't know the exact numbers now, but I 25 think about 100 individuals' x-rays to determine DOYLE REPORTING, INC. (212)867-8220 UCAREF00011755 Lewinsohn 251 2 whether there were any obvious asbestos related 3 changes noticed in those films. 4 That was the only review I made. 5 Q. O.K. And just so I am clear on this, 6 what you reviewed then was the actual x-ray films? 7 A. I reviewed, I went down there, and I 8 went to the local hospital, where the x-rays had 9 been taken. And they made available to me from a 10 list that was provided by the mine, by the mill, 11 rather, the x-rays of workers. 12 And I am not quite sure what the 13 relation was of the workers that I reviewed. And 14 I looked, if I remember correctly, I looked at the 15 first available x-ray, I looked at the last and 16 most recent x-ray, and I probably looked routinely 17 at the one before that. 18 And if I had any suspicions, I would 19 look back further. 20 Q. Other than looking at the x-ray 21 films, did you see any other medical record or . 22 medical information concerning workers? 23 A. Not at this moment in time that I can remember. Q. Have you ever seen any medical DOYLE REPORTING, INC. (212)867-8220 UCAREF00011756 1 Lewinsohn 2 52 2 record, medical reports, medical information, or 3 x-rays, concerning any workers at either the 4 Johns-Manvi11e or the atlas facilities at New 5 Idria, California? 6 A. No. 7 Q. Have you ever heard or been told what 8 the health experience of those workers has been? 9 A. No. I am not aware of the health 10 experience of those workers. 11 Q. Going back to your review of the 12 x-rays of the workers at the King City asbestos 13 facility, do you know whether these x-rays that 14 you reviewed included the x-rays of all workers 15 who worked at the mine and mill at King City since 16 the production started in 1963? 17 A. I honestly don't remember what the 18 selection criteria were. 19 I would have to look at my report. 5 20 which I assume, which I hope will be able to 21 enlighten me on that. 22 But at this moment in time, I just 23 don't remember the selection criteria. I am 24 sorry. 25 Q. Do you have a copy of the report? DOYLE REPORTING, INC. (212)867-8220 UCAREF00011757 1 Lewinsohn 253 2 A. I do, but not with me. 3 Q. I would like to get a copy of the 4 report, Dr. Lewinsohn'8 report of his x-ray 5 review. 6 MR. WILL: We will take it under 7 advisement. 8 Q. First of all, would the report tell 9 us, if we looked at it, if it included all workers 10 who had worked at the mine and mill since 11 production began? 12 A. It should tell you which workers were 13 looked at. 14 Q. Do you remember if there was any 15 breakdown by occupation among those workers? 16 A. To the best of my recollection, there 17 was no breakdown by occupation. 18 Q. Was this a reading which was a blind 19 type of reading - - 20 A. Yes. 21 Q. -- where you just had a bunch of 22 films and you didn't know, before you read them. 23 where these people had worked in particular? 24 A. Correct. 25 Q. Did you become aware of that DOYLE REPORTING, INC. (212)867-8220 UCAREF00011758 Lewinsohn 254 information after you read the films? A. I don't believe so. Q. Now I take it, you have toured the mill at King City? A. On that occasion, when I went down yes . Q. And when was that again? About '85? A. Just before the buyout took place. the divestiture. Q. Do you recall, when you toured the mill on that occasion in about '84, '85, '86, in that time period, were you shown the area where the baggers worked in that mill? A. I saw all the operations at that mill. Q. And do you know if your report of the x-rays you reviewed of those workers would tell us which of the workers worked in the bagging area? A. I don't think so. Q. Do you recall that information ever coming to your attention? Do you recall learning, in connection with your review of x-rays, which of those workers had worked in the bagging area? DOYLE REPORTING, INC. (212)867-8220 UCAREF00011759 1 Lewinsohn 255 2 A. No. 3 Q. So as far as you know, that is 4 something that was never specifically looked at 5 separately or broken out? 6 A. I didn't do it. I don't know whether 7 anyone else did. 8 Q. In addition to the x-rays that you 9 looked at personally, did you review any other 10 data concerning the King City workers, that is, 11 reviewed by any other doctors, any other record 12 concerning the health of the King City workers? 13 A. I don't think so. 14 Q. Do you know whether any of the 15 workers at King City Hospital, x-rays you looked 16 at, had been exposed to levels of asbestos in 17 their employment that exceeded the OSHA level, or 18 whether they were all below the OSHA level? 19 A. I can't answer because I don't think 20 that any correlation was done between dust levels 21 and occupation. 22 Q. In connection with your review of the 23 x-rays, did you see any dust level or exposure 24 data? 25 A. I don't believe. DOYLE REPORTING,.INC. (212)867-8220 UCAREF00011760 1 Lewinsohn 256 2 Q. Do you know if you have ever seen any 3 dust level data in the King City mine or mill? 4 A. At this moment in time, I don't 5 remember. 6 Q. Do you know if you have ever seen any 7 dust level or exposure data from either the Atlas 8 one, or the Johns-Manvi1le mines in that same 9 asbestos deposit? 10 A. I don't believe I would have had any 11 reason to. 12 Q. Have you seen any dust level or 13 exposure data from any workers in plants similar 14 to the Conwed plant, customer plants, where the 15 Calidria asbestos was used in manufacturing 16 processes ? 17 A. Again, I must answer, I don't 18 remember. 19 Q. Are you familiar with a program that 20 Union Carbide undertook, beginning in about '72, 21 '73, where they would send industrial hygienists 22 out to Calidria customers' plants and take air 23 samples ? * 24 A. I didn't join Carbide until '82. So 25 I don't know about that. DOYLE REPORTING, INC. (212)867-8220 UCAREF00011761 1 Lewinsohn 2 57 2 Q. I understand that. 3 But in connection with your work at 4 Union Carbide, did you become familiar with that 5 program? 6 A. Not specifically, no. 7 Q. And do you recall ever reviewing data 8 generated by that program, that is, dust counts 9 done at plants of customers using Calidria 10 asbestos ? 11 A. No. I don't. 12 Q. In connection with your work at any 13 time, whether at Union Carbide or since that time, 14 have you ever seen the medical records, medical 15 reports, x-rays, or medical information concerning 16 workers at customers plants who used Calidria 17 asbestos in manufacturing processes? 1 18 A. I really don't know. 19 From time to time, people like Alan 20 Gerson would contact me for my thoughts or my 21 opinions on a particular case. 22 But that is as far as it went. 23 Q. Have you ever done a review of a 24 group of workers similar to what you did at the 25 King City x-rays from a customer plant where you DOYLE REPORTING, INC. (212)867-8220 UCAREF00011762 1 Lewinsohn 258 2 looked at a large number of x-rays? 3 A. No . 4 Q. So what you have done is done some 5 consulting with Union Carbide lawyers on a 6 particular lawsuit involving a particular worker? 7 A. From time to time, yes. 8 Q. And did you do that work while you 9 were at Union Carbide, or is that the work you 10 have done since you left Union Carbide? 11 A. No. I have done that at Union 12 Carbide. 13 Q. And since you have leftUnion 14 Carbide, have you done any of that consulting in 15 connection with cases of workers who claim to have 16 been exposed to Calidria asbestos at some 17 customers' plants? 18 A. I don't know. 19 Q. In terms of the consulting or the 20 review that you have done in connection with 21 particular cases of workers here and there, do you 22 know if any of those have involved a Conwed worker 23 from the Conwed plant in Cloquet, Minnesota? 24 A. That I don't remember. 25 Q. Would you happen to remember actual DOYLE REPORTING, INC. (212)867-8220 UCAREF00011763 1 Lewinsohn 259 2 names of any of those people? 3 A. No. 4 Q. If I threw a couple of names at you 5 of Conwed workers - - 6 A. You could try. 7 Q. O.K. I will give you the name of 8 James Manisco. 9 A. That doesn't ring a bell. 10 Q. Is that a case you looked at in any 11 way? 12 A. It doesn't ring a bell. 13 Q. Have you ever seen any published 14 data, whether it was in your review of literature 15 or anywhere else, about any surveys or reviews or 16 studies of any group of workers in any plant 17 setting that used Calidria asbestos? 18 A. Not that I am aware of. 19 Q. Are you aware if any such published 20 data exists? 21 A. No. 22 Q. At the time you were at Union 23 Carbide, did you ever make any recommendations of 24 any type that any such survey be done of workers 25 in plants where Calidria asbestos was used? DOYLE REPORTING, INC. (212)867-8220 UCAREF00011764 1 Lewinsohn 260 2 A. I, personally? No. 3 Q. Are you aware of anyone at Union 4 Carbide, at any time, I guess up to the present 5 time, as far as you know, suggesting or initiating 6 any review or survey of workers in customer plants 7 where Calidria asbestos was used? 8 A. No. 9 Q. Did it ever come to your attention 10 that anyone else outside of Union Carbide was 11 proposing or actually engaging in any such surveys 12 of workers in customer plants where Calidria 13 asbestos was used? 14 A. No. 15 Q. Are you familiarwith the 16 International Paper Workers Union? Have you ever 17 heard of them? 18 A. Not really, no. 19 Q. You have never done any work for them 20 in any connection, I take it? 21 A. No. 22 Q. Have you ever seenany of the - 23 strike that. 24 Have you ever heard that the 25 International Paper Workers Union did a screening, DOYLE REPORTING, . INC. (212)867- 8220 UCAREF00011765 1 Lewinsohn 261 2 a medical screening, with x-rays, and other 3 reviews, of workers at the Conwed plant who used 4 Calidria asbestos? 5 A. I don't know. 6 The reason I am hesitating is because 7 I can remember, some time back, seeing a brief 8 report in the Bureau of National Affairs of the 9 Occupational Health Reporter, that publication, 10 which related to Conwed workers. But I don't 11 remember the context of it. 12 Whether that referred to it or not, I 13 do not remember. 14 Q. Do you recall if that came to your 15 attention while you were working for Union 16 Carbide, or is that something you saw since that 17 time? 18 A. I don't know. 19 Q. At the time that report in the 20 Reporter came to your attention, did you know that 21 the Conwed workers had been exposed to the . 22 Calidria asbestos? 23 A. I don't know when that report came to 24 my attention. 25 I can't answer that. DOYLE REPORTING, INC. (212)867-8220 UCAREF00011766 1 Lewinsohn 262 2 Q. As you sit and think about it now, do 3 you recall if the report said anything about the 4 type of asbestos to which those workers were 5 exposed? 6 A. No. I am sorry I raised it. It was 7 just from my memory. I remembered seeing it. 8 Q. Do you recall ever seeing or 9 reviewing a report by the Minnesota Department of 10 Health concerning the Conwed workers at the 11 Cloquet, Minnesota plant? 12 A. No, I had not. 13 Q. And while you were at Union Carbide, 14 do you know if you were ever contacted, or did you 15 ever discuss with any other researchers whether 16 from the Minnesota Department of Health or Paper 17 Workers Union or anywhere else, concerning any 18 surveys or reviews of workers at the Conwed plant? 19 A. No. 20 Q. Looking back now atExhibit 8, the 21 disclosure. 22 First of all, have you ever seen this 23 particular disclosure before the deposition here 24 today? 25 A. No. DOYLE REPORTING, INC. (212)867-8220 UCAREF00011767 1 Lewinsohn 263 2 Q. If you look inthe first paragraph, 3 it says, "Dr. Lewinsohn may be asked to give 4 opinions about the ability of Calidria asbestos to 5 cause diseases in workers under the conditions," I 6 am sorry, "under the conditions during which it 7 was used at the Conwed plant." 9 Do yousee that reference? 9 A. I do. 10 Q. And is that an opinion that you would 11 be prepared to give in this case, as far as you 12 know? 13 MR. GERSON: At this time? 14 MR. BROWNSON: Well, yes. 15 A. Not at this moment in time, no. 16 Q. In order for you to give that 17 opinion, what further information would you need 18 to review? 19 A. I would need to review all the 20 information pertaining to the use of Calidria 21 asbestos in the Conwed plant, the circumstances 22 under which it was used, any relevant industrial 23 hygiene surveys that were conducted, any health 24 record of employees that were available. And, in 25 general, review the literature available on DOYLE REPORTING, INC. {212)867-8220 UCAREF00011768 1 Lewinsohn 264 2 Calidria asbestos. 3 It would require preparation. 4 (Telephone interruption) 5 (Recess) 6 BY MR. BROWNSON: 7 Q. Dr. Lewinsohn, you just told us, in 8 order to render an opinion about the ability of 9 Calidria asbestos to cause disease in workers 10 under the conditions used in the Conwed plant, you 11 would need to review a number of different things. 12 I understood you would not be able to 13 render an opinion without reviewing those 14 materials. Is that correct? 15 A. Not necessarily correct. If I were 16 to render an opinion specifically related to those 17 circumstances involving that particular group of 18 employees, I would need a lot more information. 19 Q. O.K. Are you prepared to render any 20 opinions, in general, concerning Calidria asbestos 21 and its ability to cause disease in workers in 22 manufacturing plants? 23 A. I think so. Yes. 24 Q. Can you tell us what your opinions 25 are in that regard about the ability of Calidria DOYLE REPORTING, INC. (212)867-8220 UCAREF00011769 1 Lewins ohn 265 2 asbestos to cause disease among workers in 3 manufacturing plants? 4 A. Yes. In my opinion, Calidria 5 asbestos is unlikely to cause the asbestos - related 6 diseases which have been described in connection 7 with the use of other asbestiform minerals. 8 Q.. Are you saying - - strike that. 9 Let's take the disease of asbestosis. 10 I am talking now about clinical asbestosis which 11 would show up on an x-ray as interstitial 12 fibrosis. Okay? 13 A. Yes. 14 Q. Is it your opinion that Calidria 15 asbestosis unlikely to cause that disease among 16 workers in a manufacturing plant? 17 A. In general, yes, that is my opinion. 18 Q., Now is your opinion is based, in 19 part, upon the dose of Calidria which would be 20 required to cause such a disease? 21 A. It's based in part on that, but it's 22 based largely, I think, on the fact that this 23 fiber is so different from the other fibers which 24 have been associated with the disease. 25 Q. Well, let me ask you some questions DOYLE REPORTING, INC. (212)867-8220 UCAREF00011770 1 Lewinsohn 266 2 about that. 3 First of all, you are not saying, are 4 you, that Calidria is absolutely unable, under any 5 circumstances, to cause asbestosis among workers? 6 A. No. I said unlikely. 7 I don't believe that I could make 8 that statement that, under any circumstances, 9 would not cause disease. 10 Q. O.K. So as I understand your 11 opinion, what you are saying is Calidria is less 12 likely to cause the disease asbestosis than other 13 asbestos type fibers in the setting of a 14 manufacturing plant where workers are using it? 15 A. Depending upon the working 16 conditions, and the exposure of those workers, 17 yes . 18 Q. And let me ask you this question. 19 All other things being equal, in 20 terms of working conditions and exposure, are you 21 saying that Calidria is less likely to cause . 22 asbestosis than other types of asbestos? 23 A. I think so, yes. 24 Q. And would you agree that the converse 25 of that also is true, that if Calidria is used DOYLE REPORTING, INC. (212)867-8220 UCAREF00011771 1 Lewinsohn 2 67 2 where there are higher levels of exposure and more 3 dusty working conditions that it could be more 4 likely to cause diseases than some other types of 5 asbestos at lower exposure? 6 A. I don't follow that argument. 7 Q. Well, let me ask you this question. 0 Would you agree with me that if 9 people using Calidria asbestos were exposed to 10 enough of it for long enough in a manufacturing 11 plant, they could get asbestosis? 12 A. I would say that if the exposure were 13 overwhelming, and were of such magnitude as to 14 overwhelm the primary defense mechanism that the 15 human body has to prevent that type of fiber from 16 causing health effects, then under such 17 circumstances, it would be possible to develop 18 pulmonary fibrosis. 19 Q. In laymen' s terms, asbestosis? 20 A. Asbestosis 21 Q. Now, as I understand your opinion, 22 what you are saying is that the Calidria asbestos 23 is different than other types of asbestos, which 24 makes it less likely to cause asbestosis, is that 25 correct? DOYLE REPORTING, INC. (212)867-8220 UCAREF00011772 1 Lewinsohn 2 68 2 A. I think so. 3 Q. Now what are the specific differences 4 which, in your view, make it less likely to cause 5 asbestos - related disease? 6 1 A. It's basically the physical property, 7 you know, the fiber is a fibril. It is not a 8 bundle of fibril. But fiber itself is fibril. 9 It's very short, by which I mean it's 10 usually around about 5 microns in length, and it's 11 of small diameter. 12 Such fibers, are readily engulfed by 13 the macrofaces, which are the scavenger cells in 14 the lungs, and can be eliminated from the lungs, 15 either in sputum or through the lymphatic chain. 16 Or even if swallowed would be eliminated through 17 the gastroendosinal tract. 18 So the possibility for these fibers 19 to dwell for long enough in the lungs to produce 20 their fibrotic effect, I think is vastly 21 diminished by the physical properties of the 22 fiber. 23 Q. So what you are saying is because of 24 the physical characteristics of these fibers being 25 short, small diameter, they are more easily DOYLE REPORTING, INC. (212)867-8220 UCAREF00011773 1 Lewinsohn 269 2 cleared out of the lungs? 3 A. I think so. Yes. 4 Q. And would you agree that if, in a 5 given case, they were not cleared out of the 6 lungs, and they remained in the lungs in 7 sufficient quantities, then they could cause 8 disease? 9 A. For long enough? 10 Q. Right. 11 A. That is your guess is as good as mine 12 under those circumstances. 13 Q. Well - 14 A. I can'tgive you a definitiveanswer. 15 Q. Have you ever seen lung tissue fiber 16 burdened studies or analyses of workers exposed to 17 Calidria asbestos? 18 A. No . 19 Q. So as you sit here today, do you have 20 any actual data or information as to what the lung 21 tissue Calidria fiber burden is in workers exposed 22 in manufacturing plants? 23 A. No. I don't know that anybody has. 24 Q. And you have anticipated my next 25 question. DOYLE REPORTING, INC. (212)867-8220 UCAREF00011774 1 Lewins ohn 270 2 Are you aware of any of any such 3 information in the possession of anyone at Union 4 Carbide? 5 A. No. 6 Q. And are you aware of any studies 7 Union Carbide or people on behalf of Union Carbide 8 have ever undertaken to try to find that out, do 9 lung tissue fiber burden studies of people exposed 10 to Calidria in manufacturing plants? 11 A. I am not aware of that. 12 Q. Have you seen any published data on 13 that point? 14 A. No. 15 Q. I am going back through this 16 disclosure here of your opinions, Exhibit 8. 17 One of the things it says you will 18 make comment on is the scientific literature 19 regarding the ability of chrysotile and short 20 fibered chrysotile to cause disease. 21 I take it, that is generally what we 22 were just talking about? 23 A. Generally, yes. 24 Q- Are you aware of any particular 25 scientific literature that discusses the ability DOYLE REPORTING,. INC. (212)867-8220 UCAREF00011775 - 9 ' 1 Lewinsohn 271 2 of Calidria asbestos fiber to cause disease? 3 A. No. At this moment in time, I am not 4 aware of that. 5 Q. And are you aware of any literature 6 that discusses the ability of the New Idria 7 asbestos fiber in general, whether it came from 8 one of these other two mines of Atlas or 9 Johns-Manville, to cause disease? 10 A. Again, I must say that as I sit here 11 now, I can't give you any specific instance. 12 Q. Now, it also says on this disclosure 13 statement 8, that you may be asked about the 14 appropriateness of steps taken by Conwed 15 management, from an occupational health 16 standpoint, in light of the knowledge available to 17 them. 18 I take it, as you sit here today, you 19 have no specific information as to what knowledge 20 was available to Conwed and what steps they took? 21 A. No. .1`have had no preparation . 22 whatever for my -- by Union Carbide counsel for 23 any testimony I would offer. 24 Therefore, I haven't been provided 25 with all the facts in this case. DOYLE REPORTING, INC. (212)867-8220 UCAREF00011776 1 Lewins ohn 272 2 Q. Let me back up a little bit. 3 When you told us earlier about your 4 general opinions that Union Carbide asbestos is 5 less dangerous than some other types, because you 6 gave us a number of factors, you said the fact 7 that it's fibril, short, small diameter, in your 8 view does the pelletized form of the asbestos bear 9 any relationship to its abilities to cause 10 disease? 11 A. I would say it does, in that the 12 pelletized form of asbestosis is likely to be far 13 less dust producing than loose fibers being 14 pelletized. 15 Q. Do you know if that is why Union 16 Carbide pelletized the Calidria in the first 17 place, to make it less dusty? ' 18 A. I don't know why they selected that 19 method of producing their final product, whether 20 it was health represented or whether that was the 21 most appropriate way in which to package it. 22 Q. Have you seen any experiments that 23 anyone at Union Carbide did where Calidria 24 asbestos was placed inside a closed chamber to 25 create an aerosol or a dust to determine how dusty DOYLE REPORTING, INC. (212)867-8220 UCAREF00011777 1 Lewinsohn 2 73 2 it might be? 3 A. I don't recollect seeing that. 4 Q. Do you have any specific data in 5 terms of the dustiness of Calidria asbestos in an 6 experiment of that type, or where someone actually 7 tests to see what sortof dust it willproduce? 8 A. I don't. No. 9 Q. Have youseen any experiments showing 10 the relative dustiness of pelletized versus 11 non-pelletized Calidria asbestos? 12 A. No. 13 Q. Would you agree with me that whatever 14 advantage there is to the pelletized form of the 15 Calidria asbestos in terms of being less dusty, 16 that that advantage is lost once the pellets are 17 opened and fiberized? 18 A. Once they are opened and fiberized, 19 could you tell me what you mean by that? 20 Q. Well, if the pellets are crushed and 21 broken apart so they are no longer pellets, but 22 now they are just loose fiber? 23 A. Obviously, if you take pellets and 24 crush them and fiberize them, you are reducing 25 them back down to a state of being fibril, which DOYLE REPORTING, INC. (212)867-8220 UCAREF00011778 1 Lewinsohn 274 2 if they were allowed to escape into the air, would 3 be dustier than lying there compacted in pellets. 4 Q. O.K. Do you recall ever seeing any 5 information or data about the shipping of Calidria 6 asbestos in terms of broken bags, if whether the 7 bags break, if so, how many, that sort of thing? 8 A. No. I have no information on that. 9 Q. Do you recall ever seeing any 10 information of complaints by customers that when 11 they received Calidria asbestos, that bags were 12 broken and it was dusty, that sort of thing? 13 A. No. 14 Q. Looking at Exhibit 8, the disclosure 15 as to things you might testify, it also says you 16 might be asked to give an opinion as to the extent 17 to which alleged health problems in former Conwed 18 workers are attributable to factors other than 19 asbestos. 20 Again, I take it, you have no 21 specific information in that regard at the present 22 time? 23 A. That's correct. 24 Q. And as far as you know, have you been 25 asked at this point to educate yourself on that? DOYLE REPORTING, INC. (212)867-8220 UCAREF00011779 1 Lewinsohn 2 75 2 A. I have not. 3 Q. And if you were asked to educate 4 yourself on that point so that you could render an 5 opinion in this case, what information would you 6 need to see? 7 A. I would need to know all the 8 information about the use of the Calidria fiber by 9 Conwed in addition to what other fibrogenetic or 10 carcinogenetic materials may have been present in 11 the workplace at the same time. 12 And whether any admixture of those 13 materials took place in the formulation which went 14 into the final product, which I would like to know 15 what the conditions were under which these other 16 materials were used and the industrial hygiene 17 data relating to them. 18 Q. At the present time, you don't have 19 any information in that regard? 20 A. I don't. 21 Q. Do you know if there is any 22 synergistic effect of any sort between Calidria 23 asbestos and cigarette smoking? 24 A. Calidria asbestos has really not been 25 segregated epidemiologically to any extent that I DOYLE REPORTING, INC. (212)867-8220 UCAREF00011780 1 Lewinsohn 276 2 am aware. I have no knowledge chat there is any 3 deleterious effect. 4 Q. So would that mean, in order to 5 render an opinion, like we are just talking about, 6 that you would not be interested in cigarette 7 smoking data among these workers, or would that be 8 something that would interest you? 9 A. It would interest me because 10 cigarette smoking per se causes lung cancer. 11 Q. And would it also interest you 12 because it could be possible that there is a 13 synergistic effect between Calidria asbestos and 14 cigarette smoking? 15 A. I would have to study that. 16 Q. You don't know one way or another? 17 A. I don't think anybody does. 18 Q. Would you agree that that is a 19 possibility, however, that I guess that would bear 20 study? 21 A. I guess if Calidria asbestos possesss 22 the ability to damage the lungs, in the same way 23 as other forms of chrysotile asbestos have been 24 shown to do, then it would probably have the same 25 synergistic effect with tobacco smoke as other DOYLE REPORTING, INC. (212)867-8220 UCAREF00011781 1 Lewins ohn 2 77 2 forms of chrysotile have. 3 But I have no information, no 4 scientific information specifically on that fact 5 relating to Calidria. 6 Q. And when you said that in order to 7 render an opinion as to whether health approximate 8 in former Conwed workers are attributable to 9 factors other than asbestos, you would want the 10 information about what other materials these 11 workers were exposed to. 12 Can you give me examples of what sort 13 of materials would concern you in that regard? 14 A. Well, yes. 15 Was Calidria the only asbestiform 16 material that was used in the manufacture of 17 tiles? Were other forms of asbestos used? Were 18 other fibrogenetic dusts present? Silica 19 containing dust, for example. 20 Q. These other fibrogenetic -- you have 21 mentioned, first of all, other types of asbestos 22 could be fibrogenetic? 23 A. Yes. 24 Q. Silica dust could be fibrogenetic? 25 A. Yes . DOYLE REPORTING, INC. (212)867-8220 UCAREF00011782 1 Lewinsohn 278 2 Q. I understand, as you sit here today, 3 you have no specific information about the other 4 types of asbestos used at Conwed? 5 A. That is not strictly true because in 6 conversation, I have gathered that amosite was 7 also used. 8 Q. So you are aware that some amosite 9 was used at Conwed? 10 A. I am aware that some was used. I am 11 not sure how or in what quantity. 12 Q. How about silica? Do you know if any 13 silica was used at Conwed? 14 A. I don't know. 15 Q. Other than other types of asbestos 16 and silica, are there other types of fibrogenetic 17 types of dust that you would look for that could 18 be a factor in spreading disease among these 19 workers? 20 A. There aren't too many other 21 significant fibrogenetic dusts besides those I 22 have mentioned. 23 Q. Those are really the only two, 24 asbestos and silica? 25 A. I guess so. Unless some of the DOYLE REPORTING, INC. (212)867-8220 UCAREF00011783 1 Lewinsohn 279 2 employees happen to be coal miners or coal 3 workers. 4 Q. Coal is a fibrogenetic dust? 5 A. Yes . 6 Q. Black lungdisease? 7 A. Right. 8 Q. Are you familiar with thestudies by 9 Dr. Demenc and others of textile workers in 10 Charleston, South Carolina? 11 A. Yes. 12 Q. Is it your view, do you have an 13 opinion as to whether the results of those studies 14 have any bearing on or illustrate anything about 15 disease that may occur among Conwed workers as a 16 result of exposure to Calidria asbestos? 17 A. The study in Charleston? 18 Q. Right. 19 A. I don't see what bearing those 20 specifically have. 21 Q. Why do you think they would have no 22 bearing on the experience of workers at Conwed? 23 A. I didn't say they had no bearing. 24 I just don't see what bearing they 25 would have, because the workers in Charleston were DOYLE REPORTING, INC. (212)867-8220 UCAREF00011784 l Lewinsohn 280 2 textile workers, using chrysotile fiber, which was 3 totally different from the Calidria fiber in the 4 physical properties. 11 5 Q. Are you aware of Dr. Demenc's study 6 of chrysotile? 7 A. I was the corporate medical director 8 for Raybestos Manhattan at the time those studies 9 took place that was at that plant, and provided 10 Dr. Demenc with the opportunity of going there. 11 Q. You are familiar with the fact there 12 were elevated rates of lung cancer found? 13 A. Certainly. Yes. 14 Q. And it's your view, however, as I 15 understand it, that that cannot be translated to 16 the experience of the Conwed workers because this 17 is a different type of manufacturing process and a 18 different type of chrysotile? 19 A. That is my belief, yes. 20 Q. What is it that is different about 21 the chrysotile in the textile plant in Charleston, 22 South Carolina from what was used at the plant at 23 Conwed? 24 A. The fiber in the textile plant at 25 Charleston is a spinning grade of chrysotile DOYLE REPORTING, . INC. {212) 867- 8220 UCAREF00011785 1 Lewinsohn 2 81 2 asbestos, which is mined under very different 3 circumstances and produced under very different 4 circumstances from Calidria asbestos. 5 The fiber itself, in order to be a 6 spinning grade fiber, has to be long and flexible. 7 It has to be very similar to cotton in other 8 respects, so it can pass through the process, the 9 textile process, of opening, carting, spinning, 10 winding. 11 We have gone through all the things 12 that were done with that fiber. Calidria can't do 13 that. Calidria is a little fiber, short thing. 14 Q. Would you say then, if we could try 15 to sum this up in laymen's terms as a general 16 proposition, the longer fibers are more dangerous 17 than the shorter fibers? 18 A. In very general terms, yes. 19 Q. And if we were to try to summarize 20 the difference in general terms between the 21 chrysotile that caused disease in the Charleston, 22 S.C. textile plant, and the Calidria at Conwed, 23 it's your view the chrysotile in Charleston was 24 quite a bit longer and was a spinning grade? 25 MR. WILL: I want to object to the DOYLE REPORTING, INC. (212)867-8220 UCAREF00011786 1 Lewinsohn 282 2 question. 3 I don't think the doctor ever 4 concluded that the disease that was caused 5 in Charleston was, in fact, due to the 6 asbestos and not some other compounding 7 factor. 8 But in any event - - 9 MR. BROWNSON: Okay. 10 MR. WILL: -- he indicated there was 11 an excess rate of lung cancer found in the 12 study in the plant that was using the long 13 chrysotile. 14 BY MR. BROWNSON: 15 Q. I understood you concurred with the 16 conclusion, I guess, generally reached about those 17 workers, that that chrysotile had something to do 18 ' with the increased rate of lung cancer? 19 A. I think the way it is said, there was 20 an excess incidence of lung cancer associated with 21 exposure to chrysotile asbestos in the textile 22 plant in Charleston, South Carolina. 23 Q. O.K. 24 And what I am trying to do is fill 25 this out in general terms. Maybe it can't be DOYLE REPORTING, INC. (212)867-8220 UCAREF00011787 1 Lewinsohn 283 2 done . 3 But as I thought I understood it, it 4 is your view that the reason that chrysotile may 5 be associated with more disease than what you, Dr. 6 Lewinsohn, would expect to see with Calidria was 7 because, as a general proposition, of this longer 8 spinning grade of chrysotile, and Calidria is 9 short ? 10 A. That is one of the reasons, yes. 11 Q. Is that the main reason? 12 A. It is a very significant reason. 13 Q. Have you seen published fiber size 14 distribution data concerning the chrysotile 15 asbestos at Charleston, South Carolina? 16 A. I want to say probably, but I don't 17 recollect precisely. 18 Q. Have you seen publicizeddistribution 19 data with respect to Calidria chrysotile? 20 A. Yes. 2 1 Q. Have you seen such data which has 22 been generated by transmission electromicroscopy? 23 A. I don't remember the details of the 24 fiber size distribution data that I've seen, but I 25 know I have seen it. DOYLE REPORTING, INC. (212)867-8220 UCAREF00011788 1 Lewinsohn 284 2 Q. Going back to Exhibit 8, the final 3 area of opinions you might be asked that I would 4 like to ask you about, is what is described here 5 as the role of amosite. 6 You see that about the middle of the 7 paragraph? It says, "The Role of Amosite"? 8 A. Yes. 9 Q. Do you have any opinions as you sit 10 here today as to what role, if any, any amosite 11 asbestos played in the disease of workers at 12 Cloquet? 1^ 13 A. As I sit here today, I don't have any 14 specific opinion but other than to state that 15 amosite is known to result, following adequate 16 exposure, in the development of asbestosis, lung 17 cancer and mesothelioma. 18 Again, without knowing the specific 19 circumstances surrounding its use at Conwed, I 20 can't venture any further opinion. 21 Q. Would it be fair to say that one of 22 the things you would need to know is the levels of 23 exposure to amosite dust? 24 A. Yes. I need to know the levels of 25 exposure to amosite dust. DOYLE REPORTING, INC. (212)867-8220 UCAREF00011789 1 Lewinsohn 285 2 Q. Would you agree with me that the 3 relationship between amosite asbestos and disease 4 is dose dependent? 5 A. The relationship between amosite 6 asbestos, and the production of asbestosis and 7 probably lung cancer, I would say is dose 8 dependent. 9 I think that the relationship between 10 amosite and development of mesothelioma is also 11 dose dependent, but I think that dose is one which 12 has not yet been determined. 13 Q. If we can put that opinion in 14 laymen's terms, the greater the dose of amosite 15 asbestos, the greater the relationship between 16 asbestos - related disease and, on the other hand, 17 the less the dose, the less the relationship. 18 Would that be fair to say? 19 A. If you define dose as concentration 20 and time, because dose depends upon the 21 concentration and the time, the amount, that of 22 exposure, and the time frame over which that 23 exposure occurs. 24 Q. So again, to try to put this in 25 laymen's terms, the more amosite asbestos you are DOYLB REPORTING, INC. (212)867-8220 UCAREF00011790 1 Lewinsohn 286 2 exposed to for a longer time, the more likelihood 3 there is of asbestos-related disease? 4 A. Well, I hate to be too pedantic. 5 MR. GERSON: You are the expert. Be 6 as pedantic as you want to be. 7 A. The concept is, exposure is the 8 concentration and time. So the dose might be a 9 lower concentration over a longer time, or a 10 higher concentration over a shorter time. 11 Q. 0.K. So the two things that are 12 important in determining the dose is the amount 13 dust a worker is exposed to and how long? 14 A. And how long. 15 Q. 0. K. 16 And there is one other factor, and 17 that is, that the development of the disease is 10 often delayed. 19 And so, therefore, there is a lapse 20 interval between the first exposure and the 21 recognition of any health affects. 22 That is what is known as the latency? 23 A. Yes. That is not synonymous with the 24 length of exposure because exposure may have 25 ceased. DOYLE REPORTING, INC. (212)867-8220 UCAREF00011791 1 Lewinsohn 287 2 Q. And do you have any opinion as to 3 whether the latency of exposure from amosite 4 asbestos is related to the dose? 5 In other words, if you get a higher 6 does, is the latency in any way shortened? 7 A. I would like to think that would be a a simple explanation for it, but I have no 9 scientific evidence or epidemiological evidence to 10 confirm that theory. 11 Q. The final disease you mentioned of 12 mesothelioma, it's your opinion that mesothelioma 13 is also related to the dose of amosite asbestos, 14 but you don't have information exactly what the 15 dose is that causes mesothelioma? 16 A. I think the mesothelioma, the jury is 17 still out as to what the level of exposure is 18 required with any of the forms of asbestos to 19 produce that particular form of malignancy. 20 Q. Is that also true of Calidria 21 asbestos, the jury is still out in your view as to 22 what dose would be necessary to cause 23 mesothelioma? 24 A. I think jury is still out with 25 Calidria asbestos as to whether it can cause any DOYLE REPORTING, INC. (212)867-8220 UCAREF00011792 1 Lewinsohn 2 88 2 form of asbestos - related diseases. 3 Q. In your view? 4 A. In my view. 5 Q. And again, from the time you began at 6 Union Carbide to the present time, did you ever 7 initiate any research or studies to try to answer 8 that question? 9 A. No. 10 (Recess) 11 MR. BROWNSON: We have no other 12 questions. 13 MR. WILL: I have a couple of 14 questions I want to ask. 15 EXAMINATION BY 16 MR. WILL: 17 Q. Mr. Brownson asked you if you were to 13 18 give an opinion about amosite, the role of amosite 19 in causing a disease in workers, what you would 20 want to know. 21 And you said, one of the things you 22 would want to know was the level of exposure. 23 If there are no dust counts done in 24 the plant when the amosite was in use, would that 25 prevent you from giving opinions about any role DOYLE REPORTING, INC. (212)867-8220 UCAREF00011793 1 Lewinsohn 289 2 that amosite may have played? 3 MR. BROWNSON: I am going to object 4 to the form of the question. 5 Go ahead. 6 A. If there are no dust counts? 7 I think it might still be possible to 8 render an opinion, providing there was comparative 9 data available in terms of other measurements that 10 might have been made or in terms of descriptive, 11 descriptions of the dustiness of the operation. 12 Q. Would it be helpful to know how much 13 amosite had been used in a plant, kind of 14 consumption? 15 A. It would be helpful to know, if one 16 also knew how much amosite went into the process. 17 Q. Last time, last time being February, 18 1994, you were questioned by Mr. Brownson about - 19 I want to make sure I characterize this accurately 20 so I don't get an objection. 21 In the February session of your 22 deposition, you were asked a question by Mr. 23 Brownson, the gist of which was that, will people 24 be at risk from getting an asbestos - related 25 disease, even if they were are not working DOYLE REPORTING, INC. (212)867-8220 UCAREF00011794 1 Lewinsohn 290 2 directly with the asbestos in any product? 3 Do you recall that generally? 4 A. Give it to me again. 5 Q. Well the question, I will refer to it 6 specifically, referring to page 171, and 172 of 7 the deposition, and your answer to the question, 8 which had to do with Dr. Selicoff's statement that 9 asbestos fibers didn't respect job 10 classifications, Mr. Brownson said: 11 "In other words, they could float 12 adrift around in the work area?" 13 And in responding to that, you 14 referenced the work of Dr. Wagner, the work of 15 Molly Newhouse, and a paper by McCaughey, Wade & 16 Elms, and you talked about something that you 17 said, there had been instances of asbestos disease 18 occurring in people that had pure environmental 19 exposure. 2 0 And my question was, what did you 21 mean when you referred to asbestos - related disease 22 occurring in people with pure environmental 23 exposure? To what were you referring? 24 MR. BROWNSON: I will object to the 25 f orm. DOYLE REPORTING, INC. (212)867-8220 UCAREF00011795 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 Lewinsohn 291 Go ahead and answer. A. Yes. There was an awareness that developed that people who had been exposed, living in the vicinity of an asbestos manufacturing facility, or a mine, could also develop the asbestos - related diseases. And the instances that, the two instances that are best known are the domestic exposure that Molly Newhouse described, and then what I would call the environmental exposures that Dr. Wagner has described in the Northwest Province in South Africa, in this little town of Kuruman, and where the mine tailings were used for road building. People paved their driveways with it. School playgrounds were made from this material, tennis courts. It was used for all sorts of purposes. And mesothelioma developed in the community in that little town, who had never ever had any occupational exposure. That is what I would call environmental exposure. Q. What type of asbestos fiber was DOYLE REPORTING, INC. (212)867-8220 UCAREF00011796 1 Lewinsohn 292 2 involved in Kuruman? 3 A. Kuruman was crocidolite fiber. 4 Q. In yourfirst deposition, Mr. 5 Brownson asked you about the first case of 6 mesothelioma that that you recall seeing. 7 You mentioned that was a person at 8 the Ferrado plant? 9 A. Yes. 10 Q. Do you know the name of that 11 individual? 12 A. Yes. Archibald Vernon. 13 Q. And to what type of fibers had Mr. 14 Vernon been occupationally exposed? 15 A. Mr. Vernon worked at that plant, had 16 been exposed to chrysotile fibers, but he was one 17 of a number of workers who had worked in one area 18 of the plant, where -- and they all worked in 19 close proximity - - where they had manufactured a 20 special, I think it was a railroad brake block, 21 which was for some mid-European country's 22 railroads, that was specifically made out of 23 crocidolite asbestos. He was exposed to 14 24 crocidolite. 25 Q. You also made reference to the fact DOYLE REPORTING, INC. (212)867-8220 UCAREF00011797 1 Lewinsohn 29 3 2 there was some type of ownership relationship 3 between Bell Mines and Turner & Newall. 4 Do you know the specifics of that 5 relationship? 6 A. You mean the business relationship? 7 No. I don't know the specifics. 8 Q. Or the particular legalities of the 9 way it was organized? 10 A. No. I wasn't particularly interested 11 in it. 12 Q. You mentioned something in the first 13 deposition, something called a scheduled area 14 under the asbestos regulations that applied in 15 England after 1931. 16 And briefly, what was the scheduled 1 7 area? 18 A. I am relying now on my memory of sort 19 of a complex regulatory issues. 20 But as I remember it, the asbestos 21 industry regulations in the United Kingdom were 22 promulgated in 1931 and took effect in 1933. 23 Also, they did not stipulate any 24 exposure levels or regulate any particular 25 processes, as far as I can recollect. They also DOYLE REPORTING, INC. (212)867-8220 UCAREF00011798 1 Lewinsohn 294 2 didn't stipulate any medical surveillance that 3 should be conducted. 4 But at the same time those 5 regulations took effect, the silicosis and 6 asbestosis medical arrangement team of 1931 was 7 introduced. And the silicosis medical boards, 8 which subsequently became like pneumoconiosis, 9 like pneumonia, pneumoconiosis panel, had the 10 responsibilities for conducting medical 11 surveillance examinations on asbestos workers and 12 the way in which the asbestos workers were, who 13 they were to examine were categorized according to 14 the type of work they did and the areas in which 15 they worked. 16 And so those areas, which came under 17 the surveillance of the pneumoconiosis medical 18 panel were the scheduled areas. 19 Q. For example, in the Turner & Newall 20 Rochdale plant, was the entire plant where 21 asbestos was used considered a scheduled area? 22 MR. BROWNSON: I object to the form 23 of the question. 24 A. No. 25 Q. And were all of the workers in the DOYLE REPORTING, INC. (212)867-8220 UCAREF00011799 1 Lewinsohn 295 2 entire plant required to be monitored? 3 MR . BROWNSON: I object to the fo 4 A. Not by the pneumoconiosis medical 5 panel, no. 6 Q For asbestos ? 7 A. For asbestos. Right. 8 Q. Finally, whose responsibility was 9 to see that the regulations were followed in 10 England in the Rochdale plant. 11 A. Whose responsibility? 12 Q. Under the British regulations, what 13 entity had the responsibility for seeing that the 14 asbestos regulations were complied with? 15 A. That was a factory inspection. 16 Q. Was it the job of, I mean which 17 private entity was the company charged with that? 18 MR. BROWNSON: I will object to the 19 form. 20 I think he has already answered. 21 Q. Is the factory inspector an arm of 22 the government? 23 A. Yes. 24 Q. They were in charge of enforcing the 25 regulations? DOYLE REPORTING, INC. (212)867-8220 UCAREF00011800 1 Lewinsohn 2 A. Correct. 296 3 Q. What private entity had 4 responsibility for complying with the regulations? 5 A. The employer. 6 MR. WILL: Thank you. 7 MR. GERSON: Wait a minute. e (Discussion off record) 9 BY MR. WILL: 10 Q. Mr. Brownson askedyou questions 11 about the fact that there were three mines in the 12 New idria area, J-M, Atlas and Union Carbide. 13 And you indicated that, as far as you 14 were concerned, there was no difference between 15 the mines, is that correct? 16 A. Yes. 17 Q. Now my question is, do you know, for 18 example, what processes were used at the other 19 mines? 20 A. No. 21 Q. Have you ever done any studies to see 22 whether there were any differences between the 23 fibers from the other mines and the Union Carbide 24 fiber? 25 A. No. DOYLE REPORTING, INC. (212)867-8220 UCAREF00011801 1 Lewmsohn 297 2 Q. Do you know, in terms of the health 3 history, at Johns-Manville and Atlas, do you know 4 what process was used in the milling that was done 5 at Johns-Manville or Atlas? 6 A. No. 7 Q. Did you understand that Union Carbide 8 used a wet mill process? 9 MR. BROWNSON: I object to the form 10 of the question. 11 MR. WILL: I will withdraw the 12 question. 13 Q. Is it possible that the method of 14 milling used at Atlas or Johns-Manville would have 15 some impact on the health history of its 16 employees? 17 A. I would have to know what the m'ethod 18 of milling was. 19 I can't answer. 15 20 Q. Let me ask the question a little 21 differently. 22 Would the industrial hygiene 23 practices followed have some impact on the health 24 history of the workers? 25 A. (No verbal response). DOYLE REPORTING, INC. (212)867-8220 UCAREF00011802 1 Lewinsohn 298 2 Q. You don't know anything about it? 3 A. No. 4 Q. All right. I will withdraw that 5 quest ion. 6 To your knowledge, was any tremolite 7 ever found in Calidria asbestos? 8 A. Not to my knowledge. 9 Q. Would that have any impact on its 10 ability to cause disease vis-a-vis other types of 11 chrysotile? 12 A. It is my understanding that the 13 recent medical literature reports have appeared 14 which indicate that asbestos which is contaminated 15 with tremolite is more likely to be the cause of 16 lung cancer and mesothelioma and possibly other 17 asbestos - related effects. 18 Q. Are you talking about chrysotile 19 asbestos ? 20 MR. BROWNSON: Objection to the form. 21 A. I am talking about chrysotile 22 asbestos which is not pure and which may have been 23 contaminated by tremolite. 24 MR. WILL: That is all. 25 BY MR. BROWNSON: DOYLE REPORTING, INC. (212)867-8220 UCAREF00011803 1 Lewinsohn 299 2 Q. Dr. Lewinsohn, you said there have 3 been recent reports in the medical literature 4 saying asbestos contaminated with tremolite might 5 be more dangerous than asbestos without tremolite. 6 Are you aware of any reports which 7 have actually compared the two, asbestos with 8 tremolite, and asbestos without tremolite? 9 A. No. I think I misspoke. I shouldn't 10 have said it in that manner. 11 The reports indicate -- let me just 12 think a moment. 13 MR. GERSON: Take your time. 14 A. What I am trying to say is that the 15 reports in the recent literature indicate that 16 chrysotile asbestos contaminated with tremolite 17 has been found to be the most probable cause of 18 malignancies that have arisen in workers exposed 19 to that type of fiber. 20 Q. And are you aware that reports have 21 also appeared in the medical literature that have 22 said that tremolite is not a factor and that it's 23 the chrysotile itself that causes the disease? 24 MR. GERSON: I object to form. 25 A. I haven't seen that. DOYLE REPORTING, INC. (212)867-8220 UCAREF00011804 1 Lewinsohn 300 2 Q. Are you aware of a paper by Dr. 3 William J. Nicolson and Philip L. Andrigan, of 4 Mount Sinai, which takes that position, published 5 in 1994? 6 A. I haven't seen that. 7 Q. Let me just ask you a couple of other 8 things. 9 You mentioned earlier, Mr. Will asked 10 you about the first worker you ever saw when you 11 were back at England that had mesothelioma. 12 What was the name of that worker? 13 A. Mr. Archibald Vernon. 14 Q. Archibald Vernon? 15 A. V-e-r-n-o-n. 16 Q. And you said that Mr. Vernon was 17 exposed to crocidolite asbestos during his work? 18 A. Yes. 19 Q. Is it also true he was exposed to 20 chrysotile asbestos? 21 A. Yes, I said that. 22 Q. Do you know if the chrysotile 23 asbestos which Mr. Vernon was exposed to contained 24 tremolite or not? 25 A. No. I don't. DOYLE REPORTING, INC. (212)867-8220 UCAREF00011805 1 Lewinsohn 301 2 Q. You mentioned a minute ago about 3 these British asbestos regulations. 4 I believe you told us that these went 5 into effect in 1931? 6 A. They were promulgated in 1931. They 7 took effect in '33. 8 Q. And at that time, was the government 9 agency in England, called the factory inspector, 10 charged with going around the different factories 11 and enforcing the asbestos regulations in England? 12 A. Yes. 13 Q. And when you came to Union Carbide, I 14 think in '82 - - 15 A. ' 82 . 16 Q. -- were you aware that Union Carbide 17 at that time had British subsidiaries? 18 A. At that time? No. 19 I probably learned about them 20 subsequently. 21 Q. Did you learn that Union Carbide had 22 had British subsidiaries going back historically 23 before that time? 24 A. I don't understandwhat you mean. 25 Q. Well, did it come to your attention DOYLE REPORTING, INC. (212)867-8220 UCAREF00011806 1 Lewinsohn 302 2 that Union Carbide had a subsidiary called Union 3 Carbide U.K. that it had owned for some years 4 before 1982? 5 A. I assumed that they had owned it for 6 some time. 7 Q. Do you know how long they had owned 8 it? 9 A. No. 10 Q. Do you know that it was at least back 11 into the 1960's, if not before? 12 A. I don't know. 13 Q. Did you ever see, while you were at 14 Union Carbide, did you ever see any letters or 15 reports from the Union Carbide subsidiary in 16 England called Union Carbide U.K. that came back 17 to the medical director's office at Union Carbide 18 in New York City about asbestos and health? 19 A. I know I saw some. There was some 20 correspondence that took place when I was at Union 21 Carbide with that entity, but I don't remember 22 what it was in relationship to. 23 Q. Do you know if it had anything to do 24 with asbestos and health? 25 A. I don't remember. DOYLE REPORTING, INC. (212)867-8220 UCAREF00011807 1 Lewinsohn 303 2 Q. Do you have any information at the 3 present time as to the type of amosite used at 4 Conwed? 5 A. Type? 6 Q. Type. Where it came from? 7 A. I am aware amosite only comes from 8 one place. 9 Q. That is South Africa? 10 A. From the Northeastern Transvaal in 11 South Africa 12 Amosite stands for Asbestos Mines of 13 South Africa . It is an acronym. 14 Q. So your understanding is amosite 15 would have c ome from South Africa? 16 A. Yes . 17 Q. Do you know what grade it was? 18 A. No. 19 Q. And do you know, do you have any 20 information at the present time as to the time 21 period that this amosite was purchased by Conwed 22 for its use out there and the amount? 23 A. No. 24 Q. You mentioned a minute ago, in 25 response to a question by Mr. Will, about these DOYLE REPORTING, INC. (212)867-8220 UCAREF00011808 1 Lewinsohn 3 04 2 environmental exposures to asbestos down in South 3 Af rica. 4 Have you ever seen any published 5 studies in this country about environmental 6 exposures in the U.S. to spouses of workers in 7 asbestos plants, manufacturing plants? 8 A. Yes. 9 Q. One of those Tunarco plants in 10 Patterson, New Jersey? 11 A. That wasn't one that I have seen. 12 Q. Which ones can you recall? 13 A. I can recall a publication I was 14 involved in, in Raybestos, Manhattan. 15 Q. And in that particular study, was 16 there any disease at all shown among the spouses 17 of the workers in the Raybestos Manhattan plant 18 related to asbestos? 19 A. We thought that we had, my co-worker 20 and I thought that we found some cases of 2 1 relatives who had lived with a worker who had 22 worked in that Raybestos plant. 23 He developed asbestos - related health 24 factors. 25 Q. Which particular Raybestos plant was DOYLE REPORTING, INC. (212)867-8220 UCAREF00011809 1 Lewinsohn 305 2 this? 3 A. Stratford, Connecticut. 4 Q. And this is published? This is work 5 you did at the time you were working for Raybestos 6 Manhattan Company? 7 A. Correct. 8 Q. Are you aware that the Minnesota 9 Department of Health screened the spouses of 10 Conwed workers at Cloquet, Minnesota to see if 11 they had asbestos - related disease? 12 A. No. I am not. 13 Q. Are you aware of what the current 14 OSHA standard is in the U.S. for exposure to 15 chrysotile asbestos in workplaces? 16 A. It has gone down to 0.1, I believe. 17 Q. Are you aware that it has been 18 reduced to .05 fibers per CC of air? 19 A. Well, then it has just gone down. It 20 has been reduced within the last month. 21 Q. Are you aware of the new OSHA 22 asbestos standards that came into effect in August 23 1994? 24 A. August '94? 25 Q. Right. DOYLE REPORTING, INC. (212)867-8220 UCAREF00011810 1 Lewinsohn 3 06 2 A. That is what we are just referring 3 to. 4 Yes. I haven't read it. 5 Q. O.K. And are you aware that that 6 applies equally to chrysotile asbestos as to 7 amosite or crocidolite? 8 A. Yes. OSHA has never recognized the 9 dif ference, in spite of the rest of the world 10 having done so. 11 Q. You are aware that OSHA is the U.S. 12 Government agency that regulates hazards in the 13 workplace like factories? 14 A. Yes . 15 Q. And this particular OSHA standard 16 deals with exposure to asbestos in the workplace 17 such as factories that use asbestos in 18 manufacturing processes? 19 A. Correct. 20 Q. And I take it that you disagree with 21 OSHA's position as to how they regulate chrysotile 22 asbestos in relation to other fiber types in the 23 workplace? 24 MR. GERSON: Objection to form. 25 A. I didn't say that. DOYLE REPORTING, INC. (212)867-8220 UCAREF00011811 1 Lewinsohn 307 2 MR. BROWNSON: That is all I have. 3 EXAMINATION BY 4 MR. WILL: 5 Q. Doctor, one follow-up. 6 To your knowledge, did Union Carbide 7 U.K. British subsidiary have any involvement with 8 asbestos? 9 A. My knowledge? 10 Q. To your knowledge. 11 A. At this moment in time, I really 12 don't know. 13 MR. WILL: O.K. That is all I have. 14 MR. BROWNSON: I will say, for the 15 record, as we have done in the past, I will 16 take charge of the original transcript and 17 file it with the court, and then I also 18 want a copy. 19 (Continued on next page.) 20 21 22 23 24 25 DOYLE REPORTING, INC. (212)867-8220 UCAREF00011812 1 Lewinsohn 3 08 2 17 MR. WILL: Dr. Lewinsohn will wane 3 to read it and sign the deposition, as he 4 did with his first one. 5 (Time noted: 11:40 a.m.) 6 7 Subscribed and sworn to before me 8 this______day of, 1994. 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 DOYLE REPORTING, INC. <212)867-8220 UCAREF00011813 1 309 2 CEaXiFiCATE 3 STATE OF NEW YORK ) 4 ) SS . : COUNTY OF NEW YORK ) 5 I, PAUL KIRSCHEN, a Certified 6 Shorthand Reporter and Notary Public 7 within and for the State of New York, do 8 hereby certify that I reported the 9 proceedings in the within-entitied matter, 10 and that the within transcript is a true 11 record of such proceedings. 12 I further certify that I am not 13 related, by blood or marriage, to any of 14 the parties in this matter and that I am 15 in no way interested in the outcome of 16 this matter. 17 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 UCAREF00011814 1- 2 November 18, 1994 3 INDEX 4 WITNESS 5 Hilton C. Lewinsohn (Resumed) 6 7 EXH.Xai.T5. 8 EXHIBIT 98 10 Disclosure by counsel to Union Carbide 11 12 DOCUMENT REQUEST 13 Page Line 253 3 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 * ** 21 22 23 24 25 3 10 PAGE 238 FOR IDENT. 244 DOYLE REPORTING, INC. (212)867-8220 UCAREF00011815 I bSA CONWED v UNION H. Lewinsohn - 10/18/94 Page 235 (1) (2) I" r* UNITES STATES DISTRICT COURI T0> THE EASTERR RESTRICT OF RCMISYLVAAIA IR REi ASBESTOS RROOUCTS LIABILITY r*) LITIGATION (NO. VI) Civil Wl 875 (S) Thu Oocmrnt delete* to. IRUTED STATES 0! STRICT COUtl (6) flFTH Division DISTRICT Of HlmESOlA CSWEQ COflPOttTlQR, ( PUintiff, (9) -peiltSt(10) UIIOR CAR8I0E CHEMICALS AW rustics cawun, tut., (ea/. (III tftiion Corbide Corporation), 021 Defendant, 5-92-86 03) UNttt CMBtOe CNEWCALS AND (j4| plastics ommr, inc. {mu Unton Cortid* Corporation), OS) 01) OWCNS-CORNINC flKKLAS CBWOMTIOII, 00 at 4l.t HAUSR JAWS WANT, A.W. nCTTCL I SONS* IK.. AM. INC.. 00) and MacASTNUR COWARY, 09) Thtrd-fart/ Defeftdwits. () October 18, 1994 (71) HILTON c. LEVtNSOW (Cont-d) <(<f2au4)})) ((?J)) (03)) fS) (> to mw 0000?)))) <0!3)] ns) OS) (I?) {0!1)) (20) 031 (<a)) ((?)) Page 237 Appaaroncar KELLY, Ct A WARREN, SQS. Attorney* far Unton Corbide 101 Park Avenue lev York, New Tork BY: ALAN J. GER50N, C$q., roar I LAAONEB, ESQS. VI E. Hisconst 1* Avenue Milwaukee, Wisconsin $320? BY; TREVOR J WILL, ESQ., of Counsel STICK, ANGEll, KREIDLER I NUTN, P.A. Attorneys tor Co*d Corp. 250 End Avenue Sooth Niimaopo)is, HinnesoU S5401 IT: RCEfT 0. BROWNSON. ESQ.. *ndftUMIOf 4 WOLFE, ESQS. 203 ft. USolla CM rape, II)tnois 60601 BTt MICHAEL A. GOUMUt, ESQ., of Ceunsal of Counsal XMAX( l) Page 236 October 18, 1994 9:30 .. Continued deposition of HILTON C. lEVIRSOW, taken by Plaintiff, porsoent to odjoentnt. at the offices of Kelley. Orye I Worran, Esqj. 101 Perk Avenue, Nee York, New York, before Peel Kirschan, e Certified Shorthand Reporter end Notary Public within end for the State of Nev fork. Oonnf) 00m(14))) (a) <(2ai] fa) Page 238 O) (2) HILTON C. LEWINSOHN, 0) resumed, having been duly re-swom by (4)Paul Mrschen, Notary Public, was (!) examined and testified as follows: (6) MR. BROWNSON: This is a (7) continuation ofa prior deposition. (8) EXAMINATION (Continued) (?) BY MR BROWNSON: (10) Q. Good morning, Dr. Lewinsohn. We are (11) continuing the deposition that we left off some (12) time ago In this case of Conwed versus Union (13) Carbide. (M) 1 would like to try to get this (15) finished up this morning 1 think we can move (16) fairly rapidly here. We can finish this up. (17) First of all, you recall the case, (18) Conwed versus Union Carbide? Do you have that in (19) mind? (20) A. Could you just briefly restate ft? (21) Q. OX This is the case invoking the (22) Conwed celling tile plant in Minnesota at which (23) various workers have had various asbestos related (24) diseases which they allege were as a result of (25) their exposure in their plant Conwed is suing DOYLE REPORTING, INC. 212-867-8220 Page 235 to Page 238 UCAREF00011816 BSA CONWED v UNION - H. Lewiraohn - 10/18/94 Page 239 (1) (2) Union Carbide as a result of that exposure. 'Chat (3) is the case. (4) Does that bring it bade to mind? (5) A. Yes. (6) Q. Since the first session of your (7) deposition in this case, have you had a chance to (8) go hack and read your testimony or review it in (9) anyway? (10) A. Just briefly before this deposition. (it) Q. OX Before we started here today? (12) A. Right (13) Q. Yesterday or something? (14) A. This morning. (15) Q. O K And have you reviewed any other (16) materials in connection with the deposition here (17) today? (18) A. No. (19) Q. Since we broke from the first session (20) ofthis deposition until today, have you gone bade (21) to review any materials, that came up in the first (22) session of the deposition to refresh your (23) recollection or update yourself in any way? (24) MR WILL You mean go back and (25) reread the exhibits? Page 241 0) (2) was Mr. Connor. (3) I do not remember the second lawyer's (4) name. I think it was Mr. Leonard, but lam not (5) sure. (6) Q. And when did that deposition take (7) place? (8) A. Probably two or three months ago. (9) Q. And in connection with the (10) preparation for that deposition, did you go back (it) and review some materials concerning the workers (12) at the Turner & Newall plant at Rochdale, or what (13) were you looking at? (14) A. I was shown various documents from (15) Turner & Newall's files. (16) Q. Let me shift geats to Union Carbide. (17) Since the last session ofyour (18) deposition in this case, have you had occasion to (19) review any of the materials or arty materials which (20) would pertain to the issue of Union Carbide (2t) Calidria asbestos? (22) A. No, I haven't (23) Q. Have you had occasion, since the (24) first session ofyour deposition in this case, to (25) review any materials on the issue of chrysocile XMAX<2) Page 240 (1) (2) MR BROWNSON: Not necessarily (3) exhibits to the deposition, but any (4) materials. (5) A. Well, I have had another deposition (6) in another case since this. (7) I guess a lot of the similar material (8) to that which we discussed last time was referred (9) to. (IQ) Q. This other case, was this a case (11) involving asbestos related disease? (12) A. A case involving Turner & Newall, my (13) former employer. 04) Q. And was this a personal injury case' (15) A. No. This was a property damage (16) situation. (17) Chase Manhattan Bank (18) Q. OX And some lawyer for Chase 09) Manhattan Bank took your deposition? (20) A.Yes. (21) Q.Wasthat here in NewYork? (22) A. Yes. (23) Q. Do you remember who that lawyer was' (24) A. I remember the flist lawyer's name. (25) The deposition was in two phases. The first one Page 242 0) (2) asbestos, an asbestos related disease? (3) A. Well, once again, in the course of (4) preparation and being deposed in the other cases, (5) that issue has come up, yes. (6) Q. How would the issue of chrysotile (7) asbestos and disease come up with the issues in chat case. (9) Didn't that case involve Olympus? (io> A. Yes, but one discusses all forms of (11) asbestos, other phases. (12) Q. OX So in that deposition, did you (13) testify or discuss all forms of asbestos fiber and (14) beahh effects? (15) A. To the best ofmy recollection. (16) Without going back to look at the (17) deposition, I can't be any more specific (19 Q. Let me direct your attention to this (19) particular case, the case ofCottwed versus Union (20) Carbide. (21) It is my understanding that Union (22) Carbide intends to elicit from you some opinion (23) testimony in this case. (24) Can you tell us as you sit here today (25) what you understand the opinions are that you DOYLE REPORTING, INC. 212-867-8220 Page 239 to Page 242 UCAREF00011817 8SA CONWED v UNION - H. Lewinsohn - 10/18/94 XMAX(J) Page 213 a) (2) would render in this particular case? (3) MR. GERSON-1 need to object to the (4) form of the question. (5) We have designated Dr. Lewinsohn as (6) a potential witness without committing (7) ourselves at this stage. We reserve the (8) right to elicit his testimony or not to. (9) MR BROWNSON: OKI understand (10) that he may or may not be called. (11) What I am wondering is - let me (12) rephrase. (13) MR WILL Without the preamble. (H) Q. O K What I am wondering. Dr. (15) Lewinsohn, is do you know as you sit here today (16) what opinions you would have to offer in this (17) lawsuit? (18) A. I have no opinions specifically, (19) briefed or informed by Union Carbide as to how (20) they would use my testimony. (21) Q. O.K Have you had a chance to read (22) the disclosure that counsel for Union Carbide made (23) in this case about areas that you might testify (24) about? (25) A. No. Page 24 5 (1) (2) read through it and I will ask you some questions (3) about it (4) A. All right (5) Q. First of all, have you had a chance (6) to review any materials relating to the Conwed (7) plant at the present time? (8) A. No. (9) Q. Have you been advised that you will 00) be shown any materials with respect to the Conwed (U) plant (12) A. No. (13) Q. It also indicates in the disdosure, (14) you may review materials or review materials (15) relating to Calidria asbestos. (16) Can you describe for me what (17) materials you reviewed relating to Calidria (18) asbestos? (19) MR GERSON: During what time? (20) MR WILL Since he left Union (21) Carbide. (22) Q. Well, asking the question generally. (23) Let me break the question down. (24) Have you reviewed any mineralogical (25) reports, artides, literature, analyses of Page 244 (1) (2) Q. Let me just show it to you. I would (3) like to run through these things and ask you some (4) questions about them. (5) And what I am showing the witness, I (6) am not going to make this an exhibit because I P) just brought my copy. It's the experts' (8) disclosure of Union Carbide in this case, and (9) served on February 1994. (10) (Discussion offthe record) (U) MR BROWNSON: The copy. (12) (Discussion off the record) (13) MR BROWNSON: Let's nuke this page (14) Exhibit 8. Bade on the record. I will (15) make an exhibit ofthis page. We will mark (16) this Exhibit 8. Disclosure by counsel to (17) Union Carbide in this case. (18) (Disdosure by counsel to Union (19) Carbide marked as Exhibit 8 for (20) identification, as ofthis date.) (21) BYMR BROWNSON. (22) Q. Have you had a chance to read Exhibit (23) 8? (24) A. Very quickly, yes. (25) Q. Why don't you just take a moment to Page 246 CD (2) Calidria asbestos at any time? (3) A. Yes. (4) Q. And can you tell us what it is that (5) you reviewed? (6) A. Not specifically, but 1 have (?) reviewed, particularly while I was at Union (8) Carbide, various reports that came my way from (9) time to time on those particular subjects. (10) Q. And do you recall any ofthem being (11) from Dr. Mumpton, reports from Dr. Mumpton? (12) A. [ had seen a report from Dr. Mumpton. (13) 1 can't say 1 reviewed it I know of (14) its existence. 05) Q. As hr as any opinions you would be (16) prepared to offer, as you sit here today, (17) contreming Calidria asbestos, would tt be fair to 08) say then that those opinions would not be based (19) upon the writings of Dr. Mumpton, or would they (20) be? (21) A. Well, ifI was going to be questioned (22) as a witness about my opinions on Calidria (23) asbestos, 1 would prepare myself for that (24) And at this moment in time, 1 can't (25) tellyou what particular writing I would refer to DOYLE REPORTING, INC. 212-867-8220 Page 243 to Page 246 UCAREF00011818 CONWED v UNION - H- Lewinsohn - 10/18/94 (1) (2) in order to do chat Page 247 (3) If there were writings by Dr. Mumpton (4) that were relevant yes, I would look at them and (5) review them. (6) Q. Bet in order for you to render (7) opinions about Calidria asbestos, would it be fair (8) to say you would have to go back and review (9) writings by Dr. Mumpton7 (10) In other words, you don't have those (i l) in mind as you sit here today, do you? (12) A. I don't have any particular reference (13) in mind as I sit here today. (14) Q. Are you familiar with Robert Wooiery? (15) A. I don't know. (16) Q. Do you recall having ever reviewed a (17) paper authored by Dr. Wooiery called, "Asbestos in (18) the Paper Maldng Process'? (19) A. Not oflhand. (20) Q. Let's go back to the subject of (21) Calidria asbestos. (22) In your mind, is there any (23) distinction - strike that Let me bade up. (24) Are you familiar with the fact that (25) the Calidria brand asbestos sold by Union Carbide Page 249 (1) (2) that to be the same asbestos? (3) A. From my perspective and from my (4) knowledge, yes. (5) Q. Going back to the Calidria asbestos, (6) have you seen any medical record or medical data. (7) or medical information concerning miners at the (8) Calidria mine? (?) MR. WILL Are you talking about the (10) Union Carbide mine? (11) MR BROWNSON: Right (12) A. Well, I am not quite sure how best to (13) answer that question, because mining really (14) utilized very few people as I understand it (15) And in my review that 1 undertook at (16) one time, they, King City Mill, I don't know (17) whether, without looking to see what people's (18) occupations were, whether 1 also reviewed miners. (19) But there were very few miners, to my (20) understanding, because of the nature of the mining (21) process. (22) Q. O.K. And would it be fair to say (23) that, over the years, there has really only been a (24) relatively handful of people who actually worked (25) up ar the mine? XMAX(4> Page 248 m (2) comes from this deposit in New Idrb, California? (3) A. Yes. (4) Q. I-d-r+a? (5) A. Yes. (6) Q. Have you ever been there at the mine? (7) A. I have been to the King City mine. (8) Q. You have been to the mine in King (9) City or the mill? (10) A. The mill. (11) Q. Have you ever been up to the mine up (12) on the mountain? (13) A. No. (14) Q. Now are you familiar with the fact (15) that there is at least two other, or have been (16> historically at least two other operating mines in (17) that deposit, one by Arias Asbestos and one by (18) Johns-Manville? (19) A. I think I may have beard that there (20) were. (21) Q. And in your mind, do you know of any (22) distinction between the asbestos mined In those (23) three mines? (24) A. No. (25) Q. As far as you know, do you consider Page 250 0) (2) A. That is what 1 understood. Yes. (3) Q And when you have reviewed such (4) medical information as you have seen about Union (5) Carbide employees in King City, you didn't (6) specifically break out and review the miners as a (7) separate group, did you? (8) A. I don't believe I did. (9) Q. Now, let me broaden the question and (10) ask you, have you ever reviewed the medical (11) record, reports, or medical information concerning (12) employees at any ofthe King Cky facilities, the 03) mine, the mill, the truckers, any of the employees (14) associated with that asbestos production facility? (15) A. Shortly, I think 1 told you this last (16) time, shortly before (17) MR WILL Are you asking (18) differently than what you covered before? (19) Go ahead. (20) A. 1 think I told you this last time. (21) That is that shortly before the buyout by the (22) management of the King City Mine & Mill, I went to (23) King City and reviewed, I think, without seeing my (24) report, I don't know the exact numbers now, but 1 (25) think about 100 individuals' x-rays to determine DOYLE REPORTING, INC. 212-867-8220 Page 247 to Page 250 UCAREF00011819 BSA CONWED v UNION - H. Lewinsohn - 10/18/94 Page 251 0) (2) whether there were any obvious asbestos related 0) changes noticed in those films. (4) That was the only review I made. (5) Q. OR And just so I am dear on this, (6) what you reviewed then was the actual x-ray films? (7) A. I reviewed, I went down there, and 1 (8) went to the local hospital, where the x-rays had (9) been taken. And they made available to me from a (to) list that was provided by the mine, by the mill, (11) rather, the x-rays ofworkers (12) And I am not quite sure what the (13) relation was of the workers that 1 reviewed And (14) I looked, if I remember correctly, 1 looked at the (15) first available x-ray, I looked at the last and (16) most recent x-ray, and I probably looked routinely (17) at the one before that (18) And if1 had any suspicions, 1 would (19) look bade further. (20) Q. Ocher than looking at the x-ray (21) films, did you see any other medical record or (22) medical information concerning workers? (23) A. Not at this moment in time that I can (24) remember. (25) Q. Have you ever seen any medical Page 253 (1) (2) A. 1 do, but not with me. (3) Q. 1 would like to get a copy of the (4) report Dr. Lewinsohn's report of his x-ray (5) review. (6) MR WILL We will take it under (7) advisement. (8) Q. First of all, would the report tell (9) us, if wc looked at it, if it included all workers (10) who had worked at the mine and mill since (U) production began? (12) A. It should tell you which workers were (13) looked at (14) Q. Do you remember if(here was any (15) breakdown by occupation among those workers? (16) A. To the best of my recollection, there (17) was no breakdown by occupation. (18) Q. Was diis a reading which was a blind (19) type of reading (20) A. Yes. (21) Q. - where you just had a bunch of (22) films and you didn't know, before you read them, (23) where these people had worked in particular? (24) A. Correct (25) Q. Did you become aware of that VMAMSt Page 252 0) (2) record, medical reports, medical information, or (3) x-rays, concerning any workers at either the (4) Johns-Manville or the arias facilities at New (5) Idria, California? (6) A. No. (7) Q. Have you ever heard or been told what <8) the health experience of those workers has been? (9) A. No. I am not aware of the health (10) experience of those workers. (11) Q. Going back to your review ofthe (12) x-rays of the workers at the King City asbestos 03) facility, do you know whether these x-rays that (14) you reviewed included the x-rays of all workers (15) who worked at the mine and mill at King City since (16) the production started in 1963? (17) A. I honestly don't remember what the 08) selection criteria were. 09) I would have to look at my report, (20) which I assume, which 1 hope will be able to (21) enlighten me cm that (22) But at this moment In time, I just (23) don't remember the selection criteria. I am (24) sony. (25) Q. Do you have a copy of the report? (2) information after you read the films? (3) A. I don't believe so. (4) Q. Now I take it, you have toured the (5) mill at King City? (6) A. On that occasion, when I went down (7) there, yes. (8) Q. And when was that agiin? About '85? (9) A. Just before the buyout took place, 0Q> the divestiture. 01) Q- Do you recall, when you toured the (12) mill on dot occasion in about '84, '85, '86, in 03) that time period, were you shown the area where 04) the baggers worked in that mill? (15) A. 1 saw all the operations at that (16) mill. 07) Q. And do you know ifyour report of the 09 x-rays you reviewed of those workers would tell us 09) which of the workers worked in the bagging area? (20) A. I don't think so. (21) Q. Do you recall that information ever (22) coming to your attention? (23) Do you recall learning, in connection (24) with your review ofx-rays, which ofthose workers (25) had worked in the bagging area? DOYLE REPORTING, INC. 212-867-8220 Page 251 to Page 254 UCAREF00011820 BS* CONWED v UNION - H. Lewinsohn - 10/18/94 Page 255 A. No. Q- So as far as you know, that is something that was never specifically looked at separately or broken out' A. 1 didn't do it I don't know whether anyone else did. Q. In addition to the x-rays that you looked at personally, did you review any cither data concerning the King City workers, that is, (11) reviewed by any other doctors, any other record (12) concerning the health of the King City workers? (13) A. I don't think so. (14) Q. Do you know whether any of the (15) workers at King City Hospital, x-rays you looked (16) at, had been exposed to levels ofasbestos in (17) their employment that exceeded the OSHA level, or (18) whether thqr were all below the OSHA level' (19) A. 1 can't answer because 1 don't think (20) that any correlation was done between dust levels (21) and occupation. (22) Q. In connection with your review of the (23) x-rays, did you see any dust level or exposure (24) data? (25) A. I don't believe. Page 257 fi) (2) Q. I understand that 0) But in connection with your work at (4) Union Carbide, did you become familiar with that (5) program' (6) A. Not specifically, no. (7) Q. And do you recall ever reviewing data. (8) generated by that program, that is, dust counts (9) done at plants of customers using Calidria (to) asbestos? (U) A. No. 1 don't (12) Q. In connection with your work at any (13) time, whether at Union Carbide or since that time, (14) have you ever seen the medical records, medical (15) reports, x-rays, or medical information concerning (16) workers at customers plants who used Calidria (17) asbestos in manufacturing processes? (18) A. I really don't know. (19) From time to time, people like Alan (20) Gerson would contact me for my thoughts or my (21) opinions on a particular case (22) But that is as far as it went. (23) Q. Have you ever done a review of a (24) group ofworkers similar to what you did at the (25) King City x-rays from a customer plant where you Page 256 <i) (2) Q. Do you know ifyou have ever seen any (3) dust level data in the King City mine or mill? (4) A. At this moment in time, I don't (5) remember. (6) Q. Do you know ifyou have ever seen any (7) dust level or exposure data from either the Adas (8) one, or theJohns-Manville mines in that same (?) asbestos deposit' (10) A. I don't believe I would have had any (U) reason to. (12) Q. Have you seen any dust level or (13) exposure data from arty workers in plants similar (14) to the Corrwed plant, customer plants, where the (15) Calidria asbestos was used in manufacturing (16) processes? (17) A. A^in, 1 must answer, I don't (18) remember. (19) Q. Are you familiar with a program that (20) Union Carbide undertook, beginning in about 72, (21) 73. where they would send Industrial hygienists (22) out to Calidria customers' plants and take air (23) samples? (24) A. I didn't join Carbide until '82. So (25) I don't know about thar Page 258 (1) (2) looked at a large number ofx-rays? (3) A. No. (4) Q. So what you have done is done some (5) consulting-with Union Carbide lawyers on a (6) particular lawsuit involving a particular worker? (7) A. From time to time, yes. (8) Q. And did you do dot work while you (9) were at Union Carbide, or Is that the work you (10) have done since you left Union Carbide? (11) A. No. I have done that at Union (12) Carbide. (13) Q. And since you have left Union (14) Carbide, have you done any of that consulting in (15) connection with cases ofworkers who claim to have (16) been exposed to Calidria asbestos at some (17) customers' plants? (18) A. I don't know. (19) Q. In terms of the consulting or the (20 review that you have done in connection with (21) particular cases ofworkers here and there, do you (22) know ifany ofthose have involved a Conwed worker (23) from the Conwed plant in Cloquet, Minnesota? (24) A. That I don't remember. (25) Q- Would you happen to remember actual DOYLE REPORTING, INC. 212-867-8220 Page 255 to Page 258 UCAREF00011821 COtYWED v UNION H. Lewinsohn - 10/18/94 Page 259 (1) (2) names of any of those people? 0) A. No. (4) Q. If I threw a couple of names at you (5) of Conwed workers (6) A. You could try. (7) Q O.K I will give you the name of (8) James Manisco. (9) A. That doesn't ring a bell (10) Q. Is that a case you looked at in any (i i) way? d2) A. It doesn't ring a bell. (U) Q Have you ever seen any published (14) data, whether it was in your review of literature (15) or anywhere else, about any surveys or reviews or (16) studies of any group ofworkers in any plant (17) setting that used Calidria asbestos' (18) A. Not that I am aware of. (19) Q. Are you aware if any such published (20) data exists? (21) A. No. (22) Q. At the time you were at Union (25) Carbide, did you ever make any recommendations of (24) any type that any such survey be done of workers (25) In plants where Calidria asbestos was used? Page 261 (1) (2) a medical screening, with x-rays, and other (3) reviews, of workers at the Conwed plant who used (4) Calidria asbestos' (5) A. I don't know. (6) The reason 1 am hesitating is because (7) I can remember, some time back, seeing a brief (8) report in the Bureau of National Afiairs of the (9) Occupational Health Reporter, that publication. (10) which related to Conwed workers. But I don't (11) remember the context of it (12) Whether that referred to it or not, I 03) do not remember. (14) Q. Do you recall if that came to your 05) attention while you were working for Union (16) Carbide, or is that something you saw since that 07) time? 08) A. I don't know. (19) Q. At the time that report in the (20) Reporter came to your attention, did you know that (21) the Conwed workers had been exposed to the (22) Calidria asbestos? (23) A. I don't know when that report came to (24) my attention. (25) I can't answer that VMA\<7| Page 260 (1) (2) A. I, personally? No. (3) Q. Are you aware of anyone at Union (4) Carbide, at any time, I guess up to the present (5) time, as far as you know, suggesting or initiating (6) any review or survey ofworkers in customer plants (7) where Calidria asbestos was used? (8) A. No. (9) Q. Did it ever come to your attention 00) that anyone else outside ofUnion Carbide was (it) proposing or actually engaging in any such surveys (12) ofworkers in customer plants where Calidria (13) asbestos was used? (14) A. No. (15) Q. Are you Euniliar with the (16) International Paper Woricen Union? Have you ever (17) heard of them? (18) A. Not really, no. (19) Q. You have never done any work for them (20) in any connection, I take it? (21) A. No. (22) Q. Have you ever seen any of the (23) strike that (24) Have you ever heard that the (25) International Paper Workers Union did a screening, Page 262 0) (2) Q. As you sit and think about it now, do (3) you recall if the report said anything about the (4) type ofasbestos to which those workers were (5) exposed? (6) A. No. I am sorry I raised it It was (7) just from my memory. 1 remembered seeing it (8) Q. Do you recall ever seeing or (9) reviewing a report by the Minnesota Department of (10) Health concerning the Conwed workers at the (11) Cloquet, Minnesota plant' (12) A. No, I had not (13) Q. And while you were at Union Carbide, (14) do you know ifyou were ever contacted, or did you (15) ever discuss with any other researchers whether (16) from the Minnesota Department of Health or Paper (17) Workers Union or anywhere else, concerning any (18) surveys or reviews ofworkers at the Conwed plant' (19) A. No. (20) Q. Looking back now at Exhibit 8, the (21) disclosure. (22) First of all, have you ever seen this (23) particular disclosure before the deposition here (24) today? (25) A. No. DOYLE REPORTING, INC. 212-867-8220 Page 259 to Page 262 UCAREF00011822 8SA CONWED v UNION - H. Lewinsohn - 10/18/94 Page 263 (0 Q. Ifyou look in the first paragraph, it says, "Dr. Lewinsohn may be asked to give opinions about the ability of Calidria asbestos to (5) cause diseases in workers under the conditions," 1 (6) am sorry, "under the conditions during which it (7) was used at the Conwed plant." W Do you see that reference? (?) A. I do. (IQ) Q. And is that an opinion that you would (ID be prepared to give in this case, as far as you (12) know? (13) MR. GERSON: At this time? (14) MR- BROWNSON: Well, yes. (15) A. Not at this moment in time, no. (16) Q. In order for you to give that (17) opinion, what further information would you need (18) to review? (19) A. 1 would need to review all the (20) information pertaining to the use of Calidria (21) asbestos in the Conwed plant, the circumstances (22) under which it was used, any relevant industrial (23) hygiene surveys that were conducted, any health (24) record of employees that were available. And, in (25) general, review the literature available on Page 265 (1) (2) asbestos to cause disease among workers in (3) manufacturing plants? (4) A. Yes. In my opinion, Calidria (5) asbestos is unlikely to cause the asbestos-related (6) diseases which have been described in connection (7) with the use ofother asbestiform minerals. (8) Q. Are you saying - strike that. (?) Let's take the disease ofasbestosis. (10) 1 am talking now about clinical asbestosis which (11) would show up on an x-ray as interstitial (12) fibrosis. Okay? (13) A. Yes. (14) Q. Is it your opinion that Calidria (1$) asbestosis unlikely to cause that disease among (16) workers in a manufacturing plant? (17) A. In general, yes, that is my opinion. (18) Q. Now is your opinion is based, in (19) part, upon die dose of Calidria which would be (20) required to cause such a disease? (21) A. It's based in part on that, but it's (22) based largely, I think, on the fact that dlls (23) fiber is so different from the other fibers which (24) have been associated with the disease. (23) Q. Well, Jet me ask you seme questions CMAX<8) Page 264 Calidria asbestos. It would require preparation. (Telephone interruption) (Recess) BY MR BROWNSON: Q. Dr. Lewinsohn, you just told us, in order to render an opinion about the ability of Cabdria asbestos to cause disease in workers under the conditions used in die Conwed plant, you (11) would need to review a number of different things. (12) I understood you would not be able to (13) render an opinion without reviewing those (14) materials. Is that correct? 05) A. Not necessarily correct If I were (16) to render an opinion specifically related to those (17) circumstances involving that particular group of (18) employees, I would need a lot more information. a?) Q. OX Are you prepared to render any (20) opinions, in general, concerning Calidria asbestos (21) and its ability to cause disease in workers in (22) manufacturing plants? (23) A. I think so. Yes. (24) Q. Can you tell us what your opinions (25) are in that regard about the ability of Calidria Page 266 (1) (2) about that 0) First ofall, you are not saying, are (4) you, that Calidria is absolutely unable, under any (3) dreumstanoes, to cause asbestosis among workers? (6) A. No. I said unlikely. (7) I don't believe that 1 could make (8) that statement that, under any circumstances, (?) would not cause disease. (10) Q. OJC So as I understand your (it) opinion, what you are saying is Calidria is less (12) likely to cause the disease asbestosis than other (13) asbestos type fibers in the setting ofa (14) manufacturing plant where workers are using it? (13) A. Depending upon the working (16) conditions, and the exposure of those workers, (17) yes. (18) Q. And let me ask you this question. (19) All other things being equal, in (20) terms ofworking conditions and exposure, are you (21) saying that Calidria is less likely to cause (22) asbestosis than other types ofasbestos? (23) A. I think so, yes. (24) Q. And would you agree that the converse (23) of that also ts true, that ifCalidria is used DOYLE REPORTING, INC. 212-867-8220 Page 263 to Page 266 UCAREF00011823 HSA CONWED y UNION H. Lewinsohn - 10/18/94 XMA.M9) Page 267 0) (2) where there arc higher levels of exposure and more CJ) dusty working conditions that it could be more (4) likely to cause diseases than some other types of Page 269 0) (2) cleared out of the lungs'1 (3) A. I think so. Yes. (4) Q- And would you agree that if, in a (?) asbestos at lower exposure? (6) A. 1 don't follow that argument (7) Q Well, let me ask you this question (8) Would you agree with me that if (9) people using Calidria asbestos were exposed to (10) enough of it for long enough in a manufacturing (11) plant, they could get asbestosis' (12) A. I would say that ifthe exposure were (13) overwhelming, and were of such magnitude as to (5) given case, they were not cleared out of the (6) lungs, and they remained in the lungs in (7) sufficient quantities, then they could cause (8) disease? (9) A. For long enough? 00) Q- Right. (11) A. That is your guess is as good as mine (12) under those circuinstances. 03) Q. Well - (M) overwhelm the primary defense mechanism that the (15) human body has to prevent that type of fiber from (i6> causing health effects, then under such (17) circumstances, it would be possible to develop (18) pulmonary fibrosis. (19) Q. In laymen's terms, asbestosis' (20) A. Asbestosis (21) Q Now, as I understand your opinion, (22) what you are saying is that the Calidria asbestos (23) is different than other types of asbestos, which (14) A. I can't give you a definitive answer (15) Q. Have you ever seen lung tissue fiber 06) burdened studies or analyses of workers exposed to (17) Calidria asbestos? (18) A. No. (19) Q. So as you sit here today, do you have (20) any actual data or information as to what the lung (21) tissue Calidria fiber burden is in workers exposed (22) in manufacturing plants? (23) A. No. I don't know that anybody has. (24) makes it less likely to cause asbestosis, is that (2?) correct? (24) Q. And you have anticipated my next (25) question. a> (2) A. I think so. Page 268 (3) Q. Now what are the specific differences (4) which, in your view, make it less likely to cause (5) asbestos-related disease? (6) A. It's basically the physical ptopeity, (7) you know, the fiber is a fibril. It is not a (8) bundle offibril. But fiber itself is fibril. (9) It's very short, by which 1 mean it's (10) usually around about 5 microns in length, and it's (U) of small diameter. (12) Such fibers, are readily engulfed by (13) the macrofices, which are the scavenger cells in (14) the lungs, and can be eliminated from the lungs, (15) either in sputum or through the lymphatic chain. (16) Or even if swallowed would be eliminated through (17) the gastroendosinal tract (18) So the possibility for these fibers 09) to dwell for long enough in the lungs to produce (20) their fibrocic effect, I think is vastly pi) diminished by the physical properties of the (22) fiber. (23) Q. So what you are saying is because of (24) the physical characteristics of these fibers being (25) short, small diameter, they are more easily Page 270 0) (2) Are you aware of any of any such (3) information in the possession ofanyone at Union (4) Carbide? (5) A. No. (6) Q. And are you aware ofany studies (7) Union Carbide or people on behalf of Union Carbide (8) have ever undertaken to try to find that out, do (9) lung tissue fiber burden studies of people exposed (10) to Calidria in manufacturing plants? (11) A. I am not aware ofthat. (12) Q. Have you seen any published data on (13) that point? (14) A. No. (15) Q. I am going bark through this (16) disclosure here ofyour opinions, Exhibit 8. (17) One of the things it says you will (18) make comment on is the scientific literature (19) regarding the ability of chrysodle and short (20) fibered duysotile to cause disease. (21) I take it, that Is generally what we (22) were just talking about? (23) A. Generally, yes. (24) Q. Are you aware ofany particular (25) scientific literature that discusses the ability DOYLE REPORTING, INC. 212-867-8220 Page 267 to Page 270 UCAREF00011824 ESA CONWED v UNION * H. Lcwinsohn - 10/18/94 XMAX(IO) Page 271 (1) (2) of Calidria. asbestos fiber to cause disease' (3) A No. At this moment in time, 1 am not (4) aware ofthat (5) Q, And are you aware of any literature (6) that discusses the ability of the New Idria (7) asbestos fiber in general, whether it came from <8) one of these other two mines ofAdas or (9) Johns-Manvilk, to cause disease? (id) A Again, I must say that as 1 sit here (U) now, 1 can't give you any specific instance. (12) Q. Now, it also says on this disclosure (13) statements, that you maybe asked about the <14) appropriateness of steps taken by Conwed d$) management, from an occupational health (16) standpoint, in light of the know!edge available to (17) them. (18) I take it, as you sit here today, you (19) have no specific information as to what knowledge (20) was available to Conwed and what steps they took? (21) A. No. I have had no preparation (22) whatever for my-by Union Carbide counsel for (23) any testimony I would offer. (24) Therefore, I haven't been provided (23) with all the facts in this case. Page 273 0) (2) it might be? (3) A I don't recollect seeing that (4) Q. Do you have any specific data in (5) terms of the dustiness of Calidria asbestos in an (6) experiment of that type, or where someone actually (7) tests to see what sort of dust it will product' (8) A 1 don't No. (9) Q. Have you seen any experiments showing (10) the relative dustiness of pelletized versus (it) non-peiletized Calidria asbestos? (12) A No. (13) Q. Would you agree with me that whatever (14) advantage there is to the pelletized form of the (13) Calidria asbestos in terms ofbeing less dusty, (16) that that advantage is lost once the pellets are (17) opened and fiberized? (18) A Once they are opened and fiberized, (19) could you tell me what you mean by that? (20) Q. Well, ifthe pellets are crushed and (21) broken apart so they ate no longer pellets, but <22) now they axe just loose fiber? (23) A Obviously, ifyou take pellets and (24) crush them and fiberize them, you are reducing (25) them back down to a state of being fibril, which Page 272 a) (2) Q. Let me back up a litde bit (3) When you told us earlier about your (4) general opinions that Union Carbide asbestos is (5) less dangerous than some other types, because you (6) gzve us a number of factors, you said the fact (7) that it's fibril, short, small diameter, in your (8) view does the pelletized form of the asbestos bear (9) any relationsh^ to its abilities to cause (10) disease? Oh A I would say it does, in that the (12) pelletized form of asbestosIs is Ukety to be far 03} less dust producing than loose fibers being 04) pelletized. (15) Q. Do you know Ifthat is why Union (16) Carbide pelletized the Calidria in die first 07) place, to make it less dusty? 08) AI don't know why they selected that 09) method ofproducing their final product, whether (20) it was health represented or whether that was the (21) most appropriate way in which to package ft (22) Q. Have you seen any experiments that (23) anyone at Union Carbide did where Calidria (24) asbestos was placed inside a dosed chamber to (25) create an aerosol or a dust to determine how dusty Page 274 0) (2) ifthey were allowed to escape into the air, would (3) be dustier than lying there compacted in pellets. (4) Q. O K. Do you recall ever seeing any (3)information or data about the shipping of Calidria (6) asbestos in terms of broken bags, ifwhether the (7) bags break, ifso, how many, that sort of thing' (8) A No. I have no information on that (?) Q. Do you recall ever seeing any (10) information of complaints by customers that when (it) they received Calidria asbestos, that bags were (12) broken and it was dusty, that sott ofthing? (13) A No. (14) Q. Looking at Exhfok 8, the disclosure (13) as to thirty? you might testify, it also says you (16) might be asked to give an opinion as to die extent (17) to which alleged health problems in former Conwed (18) workers are attributable to factors other than (19) asbestos. (20) Again, I take it, you have no (21) specific information in that regard at the present (22) time? (23) A That's correct (24) Q. And as far as you know, have you been (23) asked at this point to educate yourself on that? DOYLE REPORTING, INC. 212-867-8220 Page 271 to Page 274 UCAREF00011825 CONWED v UNION . H. Lewinsohn - 10/18/94 XMAX(J 1) Page 275 (0 <2) A. I have not 0) Q. And ifyou were asked to educate (4) yourself on that point so that you could render an Page 277 0) (2) forms of chrysotile have. (3) But I have no infotmation, no (4) scientific information specifically on that fact (5) opinion in dils case, what Information would you (6) need to see? (7) A. I would need to know all the (8> information about the use of the Calidria fiber by (9) Conwed in addition to what other fibrogenetic or (10> caranogenetic materials may have been present in (it) the workplace at the same time. (12) And whether any admixture ofthose (5) relating to Calidria. (6) Q. And when you said that in order to (7) render an opinion as to whether health approximate (8) in former Conwed workers are attributable to (9) factors other than asbestos, you would want the (10) information about what other materials these (11) workers were exposed to. (12) Can you give me examples ofwhat sort 03) materials took place In the formulation which went (14) into die final product, which 1 would like to know (15) what the conditions were under which these other (13) of materials would concern you in that regard' (14) A. Well, yes. (15) Was Calidria the only asbestiform (16) materials were used and the industrial hygiene (17) data relating to them. (16) material that was used in the manufacture of (17) tiles? Were other forms ofasbestos used? Were (18) Q. At the present time, you don't have 09) any information in that regard? (20) A. 1 don't (18) other fibrogenetic dusts present? Silica (19) containing dust, for example. (20) Q. These other fibrogenetic - you have (21) Q. Do you know ifthere is any (22) synergistic effect ofany sort between CaMria (21) mentioned, first of all, ocher types ofasbestos (22) could be fibrogenetic' (23) asbestos and curette smoking? (24) A. Calidria asbestos has really not been (25) segregated epidemiologically to any extent that I (23) A. Yes. (24) Q. Silica diet could be fibrogenetic? (25) A. Yes. Page 27^ 0) (2) am aware. I have no knowledge that there is any (3) deleterious effect. (4) Q. So would that mean, in order to (5) render an opinion, like we are just talking about, (6) that you would not be interested in cigarette (7) smoking data among these workers, or would that be (8) something that would interest you? (9) A. It would interest me because (10) dgareae smoking per sc causes lung cancer. (11) Q. And would It also Interest you (12) because it could be possible that there is a (13) synergistic effect between Calidria asbestos and (14) cigarette smoking? (15) A. 1 would have to study that. (16) Q. You don't know one way or another? 07) A. I don't think anybody does. (18) Q. Would you agree that that is a (19) possibility, however, that I guess that would bear (20) study? (21) A-1 guess if Calidria asbestos possesss (22) the ability to damage the lungs, in the same way (23) as ether forms of chtysodlc asbestos have been (24) shown to do, then it would probably have the same (25) synergistic effect with tobacco smoke as other Page 278 0) ' (2) Q. I understand, as you sit here today, (3) you have no specific information about the other (4) types of asbestos used at Conwed? (5) A. That is not striedy true because in (6) conversation, I have gathered that amosite was (7) also used. (8) Q. So you are aware that some amosite (9) was used at Conwed? (10) A. I am aware that some was used. I am (11) not sure how or In what quantity. (12) Q. How about silica? Do you know ifany (13) silica was used at Conwed? (14) A. I don't know. (15) Q. Other than other types of asbestos (16) and silica, are there ocher types of fibrogenetic (17) types ofdust that you would look for that could (18) be a factor in spreading disease among these (19) workers? (20) A. There aren't too many other (21) significant fibrogenetic dusts besides those I (22) have mentioned. (23) Q. Those are really the only two, (24) asbestos and silica? (25) A. I guess so. Unless some ofthe DOYLE REPORTING, INC. 212-867-8220 Page 275 to Page 278 UCAREF00011826 BSA CONWED v UNION - H. Lewinsohn - 10/18/94 Page 279 0) , P) employees happen to be coal miners or coal (3) workers. (4) Q. Coal is a fibrogenetic dust' (5) A. Yes. (6) Q. Black lung disease? (7) A. Right (8) Q. Are you familiar with the studies by (9) Dr. Demenc and others of textile workers in (10) Charleston, South Carolina? (U) A. Yes. (12) Q. Is it your view, do you have an (13) opinion as to whether the results of those studies (14) have any bearing on or illustrate anything about 05) disease that may occur among Conwed workers as a 06) result of exposure to Calidria asbestos? (17) A. The study in Charleston? 08) Q. Right 09) A. l don't see what bearing those (20) specifically have. (21) Q. Why do you think they would have no (22) bearing on the experience ofworkers at Conwed? (23) A. 1 didn't say they had no bearing (24) 1 just don't see what bearing they (25) would have, because the workers in Charleston were Page 281 0) (2) asbestos, which is mined under very different (3) circumstances and produced under very different (4) circumstances from Calidria asbestos. (5) The fiber itself in order to be a (6) spinning grade fiber, has to be long and flexible. (7) It has to be very similar to cotton in other (8) respects, so it can pass through the process, the (9) textile process, of opening, carting, spinning, (10) winding (11) We have gone through all the things (12) that were done with that fiber. Calidria can't do (13) that. Calidria is a little fiber, short thing (14) Q. Would you say then, ifwe could tty (15) to sum this up in laymen's terms as a general (16) proposition, the longer fibers are more dangerous (17) than the shorter fibers? 08) A. In very general terms, yes. (19) Q. And if we were to tty to summarize (20) the difference in general terms between the pi) chrysodle that caused disease in the Charleston, (22) S.C. textile plant, and the Calidria at Conwed, P3) it's your view the chtysodle In Charleston was (24) quite a bit longer and was a spinning grade? P5) MR. WELL I want to object to the XMAX(12J Page 280 0) (2) textile workers, using chrysodle fiber, which was (3) totally different from the Calidria fiber in the (4) physical properties. (5) Q Are you aware of Dr. Demcnc's study (6) of chrysodle? (7) A. I was the corporate medical director (8) for Raybestos Manhattan at the time those studies (9) took place that was at that plant, and provided 0Q) Dr. Demenc with the opportunity of going there. (11) Q You are familiar with the faa there (12) were elevated rates ofhing cancer found? 03) A. Certainly. Yes. 04) Q- And it's your view, however, as I 05) understand it, that that cannot be translated to OQ the experience ofthe Conwed snorters because this 07) is a different type of manufacturing process and a (18) different type of chtysodle? 09) A. That is my belief yes. (20) Q. What is it that is different about pi) the chrysodle in the textile plant In Charleston, (22) South Carolina from what was used at the plant at (23) Conwed? (24) A. The fiber in the textile plant at (25) Charleston is a spinning grade of chrysodle Page 282 0) P) question. (3) I don't think the doctor ever (4) concluded that the disease that was caused (5) in Charleston was, in fret, due to the (6) asbestos and not some other compounding (7) factor. (8) But In any event (9) MR BROWNSON: Okay (10) MR WILL-be indicated there was (11) an excess rate of lung cancer found in the (12) study in the plant that was using the long (13) chtysodle. (14) BY MR BROWNSON: 05) Q. I understood you concurred with the 06) conclusion, I guess, generally reached about those (17) workers, that that chtysodle had something to do 08) with the increased rate of lung cancer? 09) A. I think the way it is said, there was po) an excess incidence oflung cancer associated with pi) exposure to chrysodle asbestos In the textile (22) plant in Charleston, South Carolina. P3) Q. OJt p4) And what 1 am trying to do is fill P5) this out In general terms. Maybe It can't be DOYLE REPORTING, INC. 212-867-8220 Page 279 to Page 282 UCAREF00011827 USA CONWED v UNION - H. Lewinsohn - 10/18/94 XMAX(lj) Page 283 (!) (2) done. (3) But as I thought I understood it, it (4) is your view that the reason that chrysotile may (5) be associated with more disease than what you, Dr. (6) Lewinsohn, would expect to see with Calidria was (7) because, as a general proposition, of this longer (8) spinning grade of chrysotile, and Calidria is (9) short? (10) A. That is one ofthe reasons, yes. (U) Q. Is that the main reason? (12) A. It is a very significant reason. (13) Q Have you seen published fiber size (14) distribution data concerning the chrysotile (15) asbestos at Charleston, South Carolina? (16) A. 1 want to say probably, but I don't (17) recollect precisely. (18) Q Have you seen publicized distribution (19) data with respect to Calidria chrysotile? (20) A. Yes. (21) Q. Have you seen such data which has (22) been generated by transmission electromicroscopy? (23) A. I don't remember the details of the (24) fiber size distribution data that I've seen, but I (25) know I have seen it Page 285 (1) (2) Q. Would you agree with me that the (3) relationship between amosite asbestos and disease (4) is dose dependent'' (5) A. The relationship between amosite (6) asbestos, and the production ofasbestosis and <T> probably lung cancer, 1 would say is dose (8) dependent (9) I think that the relationship between (10) amosite and development of mesothelioma is also (11) dose dependent, but I think that dose is one which (12) has not yet been determined. 03) Q.Ifwc can put that opinion in (14) laymen's terms, the greater the dose of amosite 05) asbestos, the greater the relationship between (16) asbestos-related disease and, on the other hand, (17) the less the dose, the less the relationship. 08) Would that be fair to say? 09) A. Ifyou define dose as concentration (20) and time, because dose depends upon the (21) concentration and the time, the amount, that of (22) exposure, and the time frame over which that (23) exposure occurs. (24) Q. So again, to try to put this in (25) laymen's terms, the more amosite asbestos you are Page 284 (0 (2) Q. Going back to Exhibit 8, the final (3) area of opinions you might be asked that I would (4) like to ask you about, is what is described here (5) as the role ofamosite. (6) You see that about the middle ofthe (7) paragraph? It says,'The Role ofAmosite'? (8) A. Yes. (9) Q. Do you have any opinions as you sit (10) here today as to what role, if any, any amosite (11) asbestos played in the disease ofworkers at (12) Cloquet? (13) A. As I sit here today, I don't have any (14) specific opinion but other than to state that (15) amosite is known to resuk, following adequate (16) exposure. In the development ofasbestosb, lung (17) cancer and mesothelioma. (18) Again, without knowing the specific (19) circumstances surrounding its use at Conwed 1 (2p) can't venture any further opinion. (21) Q. Would it be fair to say that one of (22) the things you would need to know is the levels of (23) exposure to amosite dust? (24) A. Yes. I need to know the levels of (25) exposure to amosite dust Page 286 (1) (2) exposed to for a longer time, the more likelihood (3) there is of asbestos-related disease? (4) A. Well, 1 hate to be too pedantic. (5) MR GERSON: You are the expert Be (6) as pedantic as you want to be. (7) A. The concept is, exposure is the (8) concentration and time. So the dose might be a (9) lower concentration over a longer time, ora (10) higher concentration over a shorter time. (11) Q. OJC So die two things that are (12) important in determining the dose is the amount of (13) dust a worker is exposed to and how long? (M) A. And how long (15) Q. OJC (16) 4* And there is one other foctor, and (17) that is, that the development of the disease is (18) often delayed 09) And so, therefore, there Is a lapse (20) interval between the first exposure and the (21) recognition ofany health affects. (22) That is what is known as the latency? (23) A Yes. That is not synonymous with the (24) length ofexposure because exposure may have (25) ceased DOYLE REPORTING, INC. 212-867-8220 Page 283 to Page 286 UCAREF00011828 ESA______________________________________________________ CONWED v UNION - H Lewinsohn 10/18/94 XMAX(U) Page 287 0) (2) Q. And do you have any opinion as to 0) whether the latency of exposure from amosite (4) asbestos is related to the dose? Page 289 (i) ) that amosite may have played7 0) MR BROWNSON: I am going to object (4) to the form of the question. (5) In other words, ifyou get a higher (6) does, is the latency in any way shortened? (7) A. I would like to chink that would be a (8) simple explanation for it, but 1 have no (9) scientific evidence or epidemiological evidence to (to) confirm that theory. (5) Go ahead. (6) A. If there are no dust counts? (7) I think it might still be possible to (8) render an opinion, providing there was comparative (9) dan available in terms of ocher measurements that (10) might have been made or in terms of descriptive, (it) Q. The final disease you mentioned of pi) descriptions of the dustiness of the operation. 02) mesothelioma, it's your opinion that mesothelioma (12) Q. Would it be helpful to know how much (13) is also related to the dose of amosite asbestos, (13) amosite had been used in a plant, kind of (M) but you don't have information exactly what die (15) dose is that causes mesothelioma? 04) consumption? (15) A. It would be helpful to know, if one (16) A. 1 think the mesothelioma, the jury is (16) also knew how much amosite went into the process. (17) still out as to what the level of exposure is (17) Q. last time, last time being February, (18) required with any of the forms ofasbestos to (19) produce that particular form of malignancy. (20) Q. Is that also true of Calldria (21) asbestos, the jury is still out in your view as to (22) what dose would be necessary to cause (23) mesothelioma? 08) 1994, you were questioned by Mr. Brownson about 09) 1 want to make sure 1 characterize this accurately (20) so 1 don't get an objection. (21) In the February session of your (22) deposition, you were asked a question by Mr. (23) Brownson, the gist ofwhich was that, will people (24) A. I think jury is still out with (25) Calidria asbestos as to whether it can cause any (24) be at risk from getting an asbestos-related (25) disease, even if they were are not working Page 288 (1) (2) form ofasbestos-related diseases. 0) Q. In your view? (4) A. In my view. (5) Q. And again, from the time you began at (6) Union Carbide to the present time, dkl you ever <7) initiate any research or studies to try to answer B> that question? (9) A. No. (10) (Recess) 01) MR. BROWNSON: We have no other (12) questions. (13) MR. WILL I have a couple of (14) questions I want to ask. (15) EXAMINATION BY (16) MR. WILL 07) Q. Mr. Brownson asked you ifyou were to 08) give an opinion about amosite, the role ofamosite 09) in causing a disease in workers, what you would (20) want to know. (21) And you said, one ofthe things you (22) would want to know was the level of exposure. (23) If there are no dust counts done in (24) the plant when the amosite was in use, would that (25) prevent you from giving opinions about any role Page 290 0) (2) directly with the asbestos in any product? 0) Do you recall that generally? (4) A. Give it to me again. (5) Q. Well the question, I will refer to it (6) specifically, referring to page 171, and 172 of (7) the deposition, and your answer to the question, <8) which had to do with Dr. Selicoffs statement that (9) asbestos fibers didn't respect job (10) Hassiflcadons, Mr. Brownson said: (11) "In other words, they could float (12) adrift around in the work area?" 03) And in responding to that, you 04) referenced the work of Dr. Wagner, the work of 05) Molly Newhouse, and a paper by McCaughey, Wade & 06) Elms, and you talked about something that you 07) said, there had been instances of asbestos disease 08) occurring in people that hod pure environmental 09) exposure. (20) And my question was, what did you (21) mean when you referred to asbestos-related disease (22) occurring in people with pure environmental (23) exposure? To what were you referring7 (24) MR BROWNSON: I will object to the (25) form. DOYLE REPORTING, INC. 212-867-8220 Page 287 to Page 290 UCAREF00011829 CONWEP V UNION - H. Lewinsohn 10/18/94 Page 291 (1) (2) Go ahead and answer. <3) A. Yes. There was an awareness that (4) developed that people who had been exposed, living (5) in the vidnity ofan asbestos manufacturing (6) facility, or a mine, could also develop the (7) asbestos-related diseases. (8) And the instances that, the two (9) instances that are best known are the domestic (10) exposure that Molly Newhouse described, and then (11) what I would call the environmental exposures that (12) Dr. Wagner has described In the Northwest Province (13) in South Africa, in this little town of Kuruman, (14) and where the mine tailings were used for road (15) building. (16) People paved their driveways with it (17) School playgrounds were made from this material, (18) tennis courts. It was used for all sons of (19) purposes. (20) And mesothelioma developed in the (21) community In that little town, who had never ever (22) had any occupational exposure. (23) That is what I would call (2<) environmental exposure. (25) Q. What type of asbestos fiber was Page 293 (1) (2) there was some type of ownership relationship (3) between Bell Mines and Turner & Newall. (4) Do you know the specifics of that (5) relationship? (6) A. You mean the business relationship5 (7) No. 1 don't know the specifics. (8) Q. Or the particular legalities of the (9) way it was organized? (10) A. No. I wasn't particularly interested (11) in it. (12) Q. You mentioned something in the first (13) deposition, something called a scheduled area (14) under the asbestos regulations that applied in (15) England after 1931. (16) And briefly, what was the scheduled (17) area? (18) A. I am retying now on my memory of sort (19) ofa complex regulatory issues. (20) But as 1 remember it, the asbestos (21) industry regulations in the United Kingdom were (22) promulgated In 1931 and took effect in 1933. (23) Also, they did not stipulate any (24) exposure levels or regulate any particular (25) processes, as far as I can recollect. They also X>IAX(I5) Page 292 0) (2) involved in Kuruman? (3) A. Kuruman was aocidolite fiber. (4) Q. In your first deposition, Mr. (5) Brownson asked you about the first case of (6) mesothelioma that that you recall seeing. (7) You mentioned that was a person at (8) the Fenado plant? (9) A. Yes. (10 Q. Do you know the name of that (11) individual? (12) A. Yes. Archibald Vernon. (13) Q. And to what type of fibers had Mr. (14) Vernon been occupationally exposed? (15) A. Mr. Vernon worked at that plant, had (16) been exposed to chrysodJe fibers, but he was one (17) of a number of workers who had worked in one area (18) of the plant, where - and they ail worked in G9) dose proximity - where they had manufactured a (20) special, I think it was a railroad brake block, (21) which was for some mid-European country's (22) railroads, that was specifically made out of (23) crodddite asbestos. He was exposed to (24) aocidolite. (25) Q. You also made reference to the ux Page 294 w (2) didn't stipulate any medical surveillance that (3) should be conducted. (4) But at the same time those (5) regulations took effect, the silicosis and (6> asbestosis medical arrangement team of 1931 was (7) introduced. And the silicosis medical boards, (8) which subsequently became like pneumoconiosis, W like pneumonia, pneumoconiosis panel, had the (10) responsibilities for conducting medical (lb surveillance examinations on asbestos workers and (12) the way in which the asbestos workers were, who (13) they were to examine were categorized according to (14) the type ofwork they did and the areas in which (15) they waked. 00 And so those areas, which came under (17) the surveillance of the pneumoconiosis medical 08) pand were the scheduled areas. (19) Q. For example, in the Turner & Newall (20) Rochdale plant, was the entire plant where (21) asbestos was used considered a scheduled area? (22) MR. BROWNSON: I objea to the form (23) of the question. (24) A. No. (25) Q. And were all ofthe workers in the DOYLE REPORTING, INC. 212-867-8220 Page 291 to Page 294 UCAREF00011830 CONWED v UNION - H. Lewinsohn - 10/18/94 XMAXttb, Page 295 Page 297 0) <2) entire plant required co be monitored? (3) MR BROWNSON. 1 object to the form (4) A. Not by the pneumoconiosis medical (5) panel.no. (6) Q For asbestos? (7) A. For asbestos. Right 0) (2) Q. Do you know, in terms of the health (3) history, atJohns-Manviile and Adas, do you know (4) what process was used in the milling that was done (5) atJohns-Manviile or Arias? (6) A. No (7) Q. Did you understand that Union Carbide (8) Q. Finally, whose responsibility was it (9) to see that the regulations were followed in (10) England in the Rochdale plant. (U) A. Whose responsibility? (12) Q. Under the British regulations, what (8) used a wet mill process? (9) MR BROWNSON-1 object to the form (10) of the question. (11) MR WILL 1 will withdraw the G2) question. (13) entity had the responsibility for seeing that the (14) asbestos regulations were complied with? (15) A. That was a factory inspection. (13) Q. Is it possible that the method of (14) milling used at Adas orJohns-Manville would have (15) some impact on the health history of its (t6) Q. Was it the job of, I mean which (17) private entity was the company charged with that' (18) MR BROWNSON: I will object to the 06) employees? (17) A. I would have to know what the method (18) of milling was. (19) form. (19) I can't answer. (20) I think he has already answered. (20) Q. Let me ask the question a little (21) Q. Is the factory inspector an arm of (21) differently. (22) the government? (23) A. Yes. (24) Q. They were in charge of enforcing the (22) Would the industrial hygiene (23) practices followed have some impact on the health (24) history of the workers? (23) regulations? (25) A. (No verbal response). a) (2> A. Correct. Page 296 (3) Q. What private entity had (4) responsibility for complying with the regulations? (5) A. The employer. (6) MR WILL-Thank you. (7) MR GERSON: Walt a minute. (8) (Discussion off record) (9) BY MR WILL- GO) Q. Mr. Brownson asked you questions (i about the fact that there were three mines in the (12) New Idria area, J-M, Adas and Union Carbide. G3) And you indicated that, as far as you (14) were concerned, there was no difference between (15) the mines, b that correct? (16) A. Yes. (17) Q. Now my question is, do you know, for U8) example, what processes were used at the other (19) mines? (20) A. No. (21) Q. Have you ever done any studies to see (22) whether there were any differences between the (23) fibers from the other mines and the Union Carbide (24) fiber? (25) A. No. Page 298 0) (2) Q. You don't know anything about it' 0) A. No. (4) Q. All right I will withdraw that (5) question. (6) To your knowledge, was any tremolite (7) ever found in Calidria asbestos? (8) A. Not to my knowledge. (9) Q. Would that have any impact on its (10) ability to cause disease vis-awb other types of Gi) chtysotile? (12) A. It is my understanding (hat the G3) recent medical literature repons have appeared 04) which indicate that asbestos which is contaminated 05) with tremolite is more likely to be the cause of (16) lung cancer and mesothelioma and possibly other 07) asbestos-related effects. 08) Q. Are you talking about chrysotile (19) asbestos? (20) MR BROWNSON: Objection to the form. (21) A. I am talking about chrysotile (22) asbestos which is not pure and which may have been (23) contaminated by tremolite. (24) MR WILL That is all. (25) BY MR BROWNSON: DOYLE REPORTING, INC. 212-867-8220 Page 295 to Page 298 UCAREF00011831 CONWED v UNION - H. Lewinsohn - 10/18/94 Page 299 (?) Q. Dr. Lewinsohn, you said there have been recent repons in the medical literature saying asbestos contaminated with uemolite might (5) be more dangerous than asbestos without tremolite. (6) Are you aware of any reports which (7) have actually compared the two, asbestos with (8) tremolite, and asbestos without tremolite? (9) A. No. I think I misspoke. I shouldn't (10) have said it in that manner. 00 The reports indicate - let me just 02) think a moment 03) MR GERSON: Take your time. 04) A. What 1 am trying to say is that the 05) reports in the recent literature indicate that (16) chrysotile asbestos contaminated with tremolitB 07) has been found to be the most probable cause of 08) malignancies that have arisen in workeis exposed 09) to that type of fiber. (20) Q. And are you aware that reports have (20 also appeared in the medical literature that have (22) said chat tremolite is not a factor and that it's (23) the chrysotile itself that causes the disease? (24) MR GERSON: I object to form. (25) A. I haven't seen that. Page 301 0) (2) Q. You mentioned a minute ago about <3) these British asbestos regulations. (4) I believe you told us that these went (5) into effect in 1931? (6) A. They were promulgated in 1931. They (7) took effect in 33. (8) Q. And at (hat time, was the government (9) agency in England, called the factory inspector, (10) charged with going around the different factories (11) and enforcing the asbestos regulations in England? (12) A. Yes. (13) Q. And when you came to Union Carbide, 1 (14) chink in '82 (15) A. '82. (16) Q. - were you aware that Union Carbide (17) at that time had British subsidiaries? (18) A. At that time? No. (19) 1 probably learned about them (20) subsequently. (21) Q. Did you learn that Union Carbide had (22) had British subsidiaries going back historically (23) before that time? (24) A. I don't understand what you mean. (25) Q. Well, dkl it come to your attention XMAX( 17) Page 300 (1) (2) Q. Are you aware of a paper by Dr. (3) William J. Nicolson and Philip L Andrigan, of (4) Mount Sinai, which takes that position, published (5) in 1994? (6) A. I haven't seen that (7) Q. Let me just ask you a couple ofocher (8) things. OT You mentioned earlier, Mr. Will asked (10) you about the first worker you ever sawwhen you (11) were bock at England that had mesothelioma. (12) What was the name ofthat worker? (13) A. Mr. Archibald Vernon. (14) Q. Archibald Vernon? (15) A. V-e-r-n-o-n. (16) Q. And you said that Mr. Vernon was (17) exposed to croddoUtc asbestos during his work? (18) A. Yes. (19) Q. Is it also true he was exposed to (20) chrysotile asbestos? (21) A. Yes, I said that (22) Q. Do you know ifthe chrysotile (23) asbestos which Mr. Vernon was exposed to contained (24) tremolite or not? (25) A. No. 1 don't Page 302 (1) (2) that Union Carbide had a subsidiary called Union (3) Carbide UJC that it had owned for some years (4) before 1982? (5) A. I assumed that they had owned It for (6) sometime. (7) Q. Do you know bow long they had owned (8) it? (9) A. No. (ip) Q. Do you know that it was at least back (11) into the 1960's, ifnot before? (12) A. I don't know. (13) Q. Did you ever see, while you were at (14) Union Carbide, did you ever see any letters or (15) reports from the Union Carbide subsidiary in (16) England called Union Carbide UJC that came back (17) to the medical director's office at Union Carbide (18) in New York dry about asbestos and health? (19) A. I know I saw some. There was some (20) correspondence that took place when 1 was at Union (21) Carbide with that entity, but I don't remember (22) what it was in relationship to. (23) Q. Do you know if it had anything to do (24) with asbestos and health? (25) A. I don't remember. DOYLE REPORTING, INC. 212-867-8220 Page 299 to Page 302 UCAREF00011832 USA CONWED V UNION - H. Lewinsohn - 10/18/94 Page 303 (1) (2) Q. Do you have any information at the 6) present time as to the type of amositc used at (4) Conwed' (5) A. Type? fC) Q Type. Where it came from' ft) A. I am aware amositc only comes from (8) one place. W Q. That is South Africa' (10) A. From the Northeastern Transvaal in (it) South Africa 02) Amosite stands for Asbestos Mines of (13) South Africa It is an acronym. (14) Q. So your understanding is amosite (15) would have come from South Africa? (16) A. Yes. (17) Q. Do you know what grade it was? (18) A. No. (19) Q. And do you know, do you have any (20) information at the present time as to the time (2t) period that this amosite was purchased by Conwed (22) for its use out there and the amount' (23) A. No. (24) Q. You mentioned a minute ago, in (25) response to a question by Mr. Will, about these Page 305 (1) (2) this? (3) A. Stratford, Connecticut (4) Q. And this is published? This is work (5) you did at the time you were working for Raybcstos (6) Manhattan Company? (7) A. Correa (8) Q Are you aware that the Minnesota (?) Department of Health screened the spouses of (10) Conwed workers at Cloquet Minnesota to see if (11) they had asbestos-related disease? (12) A. No. 1 am not (13) Q Are you aware ofwhat the current (14) 05HA standard is in the U S. for exposure to (15) chrysotile asbestos in workplaces? (16) A. it has gone down to 0.1,1 believe. (17) Q. Are you aware that it has been (18) reduced to .05 fibers per CC ofair? (i?) A. Well, then it has just gone down. It (20) has been reduced within the last month. (21) Q. Are you aware of the new QSHA (22) asbestos standards that came into effect in August (23) 1994? (24) A. August '94' (25) Q. Right. Page 304 (1) (2) environmental exposures to asbestos down in South (3) Africa. (4) Have you ever seen any published (5) studies in this country about environmental (6) exposures in the U.S. to spouses ofworkers in <7) asbestos plants, manufiuturing plants? (8) A. Yes. (?) Q. One of those Tunarco plants in (10) Patterson, NewJersey? (11) A. That wasn't one that I have seen. (12) Q. Which ones can you recall? 03) A. I can recall a publication I was (14) involved in, in Raybcstos, Manhattan. (15) Q. And in that particular study, was (16) there any disease at all shown among the spouses (17) of the workers in the Raybcstos Manhattan plant (18) related to asbestos? (W) A. We thought that we had, my co-worker (20) and I thought that we found some cases of (21) relatives who had lived with a worker who had (22) worked in that Raybcstos plant (23) He developed asbestos-related health (24) factors. (25) Q. Which particular Raybcstos plant was Page 306 (i) (?) A. That is what we are just referring (3) to. (4) Yes. I haven't read It (5) Q. O ft And are you aware that that (6) applies equally to chrysotile asbestos as to (7) amosite or croddolite' (8) A Yes. OSHA has never recognized the <9) difference, in spite of the rest of the world (10) having done so. Ob Q. You are aware that OSHA is the US. 02) Government agency that regulates hazards in the 03) workplace like factories? 00 A. Yes. 05) Q. And this particular OSHA standard 06) deals with exposure to asbestos in the workplace 07) such as factories that use asbestos in (18) manufiuturing processes? (19) A. Correct. (20) Q. And I take it that you disagree with (21) OSHA's position as to how they regulate chrysotile (22) asbestos in relation to other fiber types in the (23) workplace? (24) MR. GERSON: Objection to form. (25) A. 1 didn't say that DOYLE REPORTING, INC. I 212-867-8220 Page 303 to Page 306 UCAREF00011833 307 Lewinsohn MR. BROUNSON: That is all 1 have. EXAMINATION BY MR. WILL: Q. Ooctor, one follow-:?. To your knowledge, did Union Carbide U.K. British subsidiary have any involvement with asbestos? A. My knowledge? 0. To your knowledge. A. At this moment in time, I really don't know. MR. WILL: O.K. That is all I have. MR. BROUNSON: I will say, for the record, as we have done in the past, I will take charge of the original transcript and file it with the court, and then I also want a copy. (Continued an next page.) DOYLE REPORTING, INC. - 212-867-8220 308 1 Lewinsohn 2 MR. WILL: Dr. Lewinsohn will want 3 to read it and sign the deposition, as he 4 did with his first one. 5 (Time noted: 11:40 a.m.) 6 7 Subscribed and sworn to before me a this day of, 1994. 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 DOYLE REPORTING, INC. - 212-867-8220 309 1 2 CERTIFI.CAII 3 STATE Of NEU YORK 4 COUNTY Of NEW YORK ) ) **" 5 6 I, PAUL KIRSCHEN, a Certified Shorthand Reporter and Notary Public 7 8 within and for the State of New York, do hereby certify that I reported the 9 10 proceedings in the within-entitled matter, and that the within transcript is a true 11 12 record of such proceedings. I further certify that I am not 13 related, by blood or marriage, to any of 14 the parties in this matter and that I am 15 in no way interested in the outcome of 16 this matter. 17 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto 18 set ay hand this_____ day of, 19 1994. 20 21 ---------PAUL KIRSCHEN, LSK------------- 22 23 24 25 DOYLE REPORTING, INC. - 212-867-8220 1 j November 18, 1994 INDEX WITNESS Hilton C. Lewinsohn (Resuaed) 7 8 EXHIBIT 98 10 11 12 13 14 IS 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 EXHIBITS Disclosure by,cornel to union Carbide DOCUMENT REQUEST & ys 310 PAGE 238 FOR IDENT. 244 DOYLE REPORTING, INC. - 212-867-8220 UCAREF00011834 Base Systems Applications Look-See Concordance Report UNIQUE WORDS'. 968 TOTAL OCCURRENCES: 3,387 NOISE WORDS: 385 TOTAL WORDS IN FILE: 11,014 SINGLE FILE CONCORDANCE CASE SENSITIVE PHRASE WORD LIST(S): PHRASE.PHS NOISE WORD UST(S): NOISE.NOI Cover pages = 3 includes only Text of: questions answers colloquy PARENTHETICALS EXHIBITS Dates off IGNORES PURE NUMBERS Possessive forms off ~ 11:40 [i] 3085 -1 - - A- am ji) 308.5 in 2729 ability p) 2624; 264:8, 21, 25; 270:19, 25; 271.6; 27222 29&10 able 12] 25260 264:12 absoluMy [i| 266:4 according [1] 294:13 accuaMy [1] 28219 acronym [i] 30213 actual (3) 251.6; 25325; 26920 addition [2] 255-8 2759 adequate (i) 28*75 admixture [i] 275:12 adrlt [i) 290:12 advantage [2] 27214, 16 advised (i] DOYLE REPORTING, INC. CONWED v UNION - H. Lewinsohn -10/1B/94 245.9 advisement [1] 253:7 aerosol [i] 27225 Afters |i] 261:6 affects |i| 28321 Africa [6] 291:13 3039, 11, 73 75; 304:3 agency p] 3016 30312 agree [6] 266:24; 267:8; 269:4; 27313 276:12 285:2 air |3] 25822 274-2; 305:18 Aian[i| 257:19 aBege(i] 23224 alleged m 274:17 slowed [1] 27412 Amoeba |2] 284:7; 30212 amosto f2SI 2722 22845,10, IS, 23, 25; 28&2 2 10, 14, 25; 287:2 12 28212 24; 2892, 12 12 3023 7, 14, 21; 3027 amount [3| 28221; 286:12; 303:22 analyses [2] 24222269:16 Andriganll] 300:3 answer [9] 24213 25219; 25217; 251125; 269:14; 2827; 290:7; 29112; 297:19 answered (i) 29520 anticipated (i) 26934 anybody p) 2692327217 anywhana [2] 259:15; 262:17 apart |i] 27321 appeared [2] 29213 299:21 teiplied[ii 29274 apples [i] 3085 appropriate ti] 27221 appropriateness (i | 271:14 approximate (i] 277:7 Archtaid [3] 232:12; 300:13 74 area [10] 254:13 19, 25; 284:3 29012; areas [4] 243-23- 294:14, 78 18 aren't [1] 27820 argument [1] 2676 arisen [i] 299:16 arm [i] 29521 anangement |1| 294.5 articles [i] 24525 asbastifonu |2] 2657; 277:15 Asbestos [3] 247:17; 24217; 30312 asbestos [127] 23623 240:11; 241:21; 242.2, 7, 11, 13 24515, 132462, 17, 23 247:7. 21, 25; 24322; 2492, 5; 250.14; 2512; 252:12; 25513 2539, 15; 257:10, 17; 25313 239:17,25 260:7, 13 261:4, 22; 2634; 2634, 21; 264.2, a 20 2652, 5; 268-13 22; 2675, 9, 22,23 269:17; 271.2 7; 272:4, 3 24; 2735 11, 152746, 11, 19; 275:23 24; 276:13 21, 23 2773, 17, 21; 2734, 15 24; 279:15 2812 4; 2626, 21; 28315; 284:11; 285:3 3 15, 25; 287:4, 13 18, 21, 25 290:2 9. 17; 2916 25 292:23 29314, 20, 294:11, 12 21; 2956 7, 14; 2937,14, 19, 22 299:4, 5 7 8 13 30017. 20,23 301:3 77; 20218,24; 2042 7 13 30515 22 3066 16 17, 22 307:8 asbeetosHetated [11] 2655 2635 28515 2833 2832 28924; 29021; 291:7; 29317; 30423 306:11 Asbestosis [i] 26720 asbestosis |13) 2659, 16 152655 1222 267:11, 19,24; 27212 264:15 28532946 asking [2] 24522230.17 associated [4] 25014; 26524; 28220; 2835 assume [i] 25220 assunsd [i] 3025 Ate [7] 24317; 2557; 271:5 29312 297:3,5 14 ate[i] 2524 attention m 24215 234:22 2609; 261:15 26 24; 301.-25 attributable [2] 292:17; 293:13 17; 294:21; 296:12 274:15 277:8 August p) Concordance by Look-See(2> 305:22 24 authored [i] 247:17 available [7] 2579, 15; 263:24, 25; 271:16, 20; 289:9 aware [26] 2529; 253-25; 259:78 79; 2603 270:2 6, 11, 24; 271:4, 5; 2752 2758 280:5; 2996 20 3002 301:16; 303:7; 305:8 73 17, 21; 306:5, 77 awareness [1] 291:3 -B- baggersp] 254:14 bagging [2] 254:79, 25 bags pj 2746 7, 11 Bank [2] 240:17, 19 based [4] 246:15 265:13 21,22 basically (1) 2685 bear [2] 2725 276:79 bearing [5] 279:14, 19, 22 23 24 behalf [i| 270:7 belief [1] 260:19 believe [7] 2505 254:3; 25525; 256:10; 266:7; 301:4; 305:16 Bali [1] 2933 bell [2] 259.-9, 72 besides [1] 27321 b* [2] 2722 281:24 Black [i] 279.5 bind [1] 25318 block [1] 29220 boards [1] 294:7 body [i] 267:15 brake [i] 29220 brand [i] 247:25 break [3] 24523 2906; 274:7 breakdown [2] 253-75, 17 brief [i| 261:7 briefed [1] 24319 bristly [3] 212-867-8220 From 11:40 to briefly UCAREF00011835 Bmc <CTfcarm____________________^ 23820: 239:10; 29316 British [5) 295:12 301:3, 17, 22 307:7 broaden [t] 250$ broke (t] 239:10 broken [4] 255$; 27321; 274$, 12 BROWNSON [23] 238-6; 9f 2402 243$; 244:11, 13 21; 249:11; 26314; 2646; 282$, 14; 28811; 2833 29024; 294:22 2983 18 297$, 29820, 28 3072 14 Brownson [6| 28817; 289:18 23 290:10; 2933 29810 building [1] 291:15 bunch (1) 25321 bundle [i| 2688 burden (2) 269:21:270$ burdened [i] 269:16 Bureau [i] 261:8 bushess(t) 2936 buyout [21 250:21; 254$ -c- Caiidria [67] 24121; 24815, 17; 2462, 17, 23 247:7, 21, 25; 249:5 8 256:15, 23 257$ 16; 25816 259:17, 28 2637, 13261:4, 23 X34, 20; 264.2, 8 20, 28 2684, 14, 1$ 266:4, 11, 21, 28 267$ 23 26817, 21; 27816 271327316 232738 11, 18 274:5 11; 275$ 22,24; 276.13 21; 277$ 15; 279:16 280$ 281:4, 13 13 23 2836 8 16 287.20. 28 2987 Cafitomia [2) 2483 2535 ca (21 291:11,23 cancer [8] 2781$ 28612 28311, 16 26, 284:17; 2887; 29816 Carbide [S3] 23813 182393241:16 26 24320, 23 24319,23 244$ 17, 1$ 24821; 246$ 24738 249:1$ 2568 25820, 24; 257:4, 132586 9, 10,1Z 14; 259:2$ 2664, 16,251:18 26313 2764, 7; 271:23 2734, 16 23288829813 23 297:7; 301:13 16 21; 3033 3 14, 16 16 17,21:3076 carchogenetic [1] 275:10 Carofina{4] DOYLE REPORTING, INC. CONWED v UNION - H. Lewtnsohn -10/18/94 _____________ Canoottna Cy Locfc-S*B2) 279:10; 28623 28222; 283:15 carting [t| 281$ [28] 238:13 17, 21; 239:3, 7; 240$ 10, 12 14; 241:16 24; 2438 5 Cloquet [4] 25823 26311; 284 12; 305:10 closed [i] 27324 co-worker [i] 304:19 2686 Connor [i] 2413 consider |i] 24825 considered [i] 19,23:2433 23 244$ 17; 25721; 25610; 26311; 2665; 271:25; 275$ 2935 cases [4] Coal (1) 279:4 coal [2) 2793 29431 consulting [3| 2585 H 19 consumption (i) 2424; 258:15, 21; 304:20 comrig [ij 289:14 categorized [i] 294:13 caused [2] 28121; 2834 CC[1] 305:18 ceased [1] 286:25 ceilng [1] 254:22 comment [i] 270:18 commttng [i] 2426 comminty HI 29131 compacted |1) 2743 contact (i] 25730 contacted [1] 1 26214 contained (if 30033 contalnhg (i| 277:19 contenthated [4} 23822 cads [1] 268-13 chan [1] 26815 chanther [i] 27224 chance [4] 239:7; 24321; 244:23 2485 changes [i] Company [i] 3086 company [1] 29817 comparative [i] 289:8 compared [i] 2967 complahts [1] 274:10 29814, 23299:4, 16 context [1] 261:11 continuation [i] 2387 Conthued [2) 238$ 307:19 continuing [i| 23811 conversation [i] 251:3 complex (ij 2786 characteristics [i] 26824 29319 compled [i| convene [t] 26634 characterize |i] 295:14 Ponwod 1361 28619 charge [21 29824; 307:16 charged [2) 29817; 301:10 Charleston [io| 279:10,17,28286.21,28 28121, 23 2836 23 28315 Chaae [2] complying [1] 2964 compoundrig [ij 2826 concentration [5] 28619, 21; 2888 9. 10 concept [i| 3987 concern [1) 23812 18 22,2824319; 2486, 16, 25814; 25823 23 259$ 261:3 1ft 21; 26310, 16 2637, 21; 264:10; 271:14, 26 274:17; 2786 277$ 2784, 9, 13 27615 23 280:16 23; 28133 28416 3034, 21; 305:10 copy [S] 24617, 18 chryaotiie [31] 277:13 concerned [1] 244:7, 11; 25325:2533 307:18 24128 242$ 27619, 26 2782327732863 613 21, 28 28121, 23 28313 17, 21; 283:4,8 14, 19; 29316 29811,18 21; 299:16 23 30626 23 30818 306$ 21 doandi f41 27823276$ 16 14 cimmstances [9] 29814 concerning [13] 241:11; 24817; 2467; 25611; 251:23 2533 255:1ft 12 257:1826316 17; 26436 28814 concluded [1] 2834 conclusion [i] corporate [i] 280:7 correctly (i| 251:14 correlation [i] 25820 correspondence [t] 30320 cotton [i] 26321; 264:17; 266$ $ 28316 281:7 267:17;26613281$4; conctrred [1) rruntel (4) 284:19 Cly [16J 28315 conditions [7] 24323244:16, 1627132 cointry [2] 2487, 9; 24616 250$ 13 22 23 25312 18 254$ 255:1ft 12 16 2563 25736 30318 darn [i] 25815 2636 6 26*10; 25816 26 267:327815 conducted [2] 26323 294:3 conducting [i] 29321; 304.6 counts p] 257$ 28833 2866 **>* PJ 259:4,- 28813 300:7 dassMcations [i] 294:10 couas[i) 29610 confirm [i] 2433 dear(i] 287:10 court [i] 251.5 Connecticut [i] 307:17 cleared [2] 269:2 5 j 305:3 I connection (10) courts [i] 291:18 cflnical [t] 26810 23616 241$; 254:23; 256:23 I 2573 13 25815 26 26030; covered |i] 250:18 212-067-8220 From British to covered UCAREF00011836 9qbc Sywmj A&caam create (1) 27225 criteria [2] 25219,23 crockJoUte [5] 2923, 23, 24; 300:17; 306:7 crush [1] 273:24 crushed [1] 27320 ctrrerit (1) 305:13 customer [4] 256:14; 257.25; 260$, 12 customers |5] 256.22 257$, 16; 25217; 274:10 - D- damage (2) 240:15; 276.22 dangerous [3] 2725 281:16; 299:5 data |aa] 249:5, 255:10, 24; 2553 7, 15 257:7; 259:14, 20; 28920; 270:12; 273:4; 2745; 27517; 2757; 283:14, 19, 21, 24; 289.9 d^|i) 244:20 deals [i] 30516 defense [ij 267:14 define [i] 28519 definitive (1] 269:14 delayed [i] 28518 detotarious [1] 276.3 Damenc [3] _ 2799; 2855 10 Department [3] 2629, 153059 dependent (3] 2854, 8 11 Dependsig[i| 26515 depends (1) 28520 deposed [i] 2424 deposit [3] 2452 17; 2569 deposition [23] 2357, 11;239:7, 10, 15 20,22; 2409, 5 19, 25; 2419, 10, 18 24;242:12 17; 262-23; 28922; 290:7; 2924; 29313; 3083 descrt>e(i] 245:16 described [4] 2655 284:4; 291:10, 12 descriptions [i] 289:11 descriptive [1] 289:10 designated [1] DOYLE REPORTING, INC. CONWED v UNION - H. Lewinsohn - 10/18/94 2435 detais [1] 28323 cfetermre [2] 250:25; 27225 determined [1] 285:12 determining [1| 28512 develop [2] 267:17; 2916 developed [3] 291:4, 20; 30493 development PI 284:15 28513 286:17 diameter [3] 26511, 25 272:7 diterance [3] 28193 29514; 3059 dlfersneas [2] 265329522 differently [2] 250:18; 297.21 dsnteished [1] 26821 dhect [1] 24318 dkector [2) 2837:302:17 disagree [i| 30620 Djadosue fZj 244:15 18 disciose[8] 24322 244:5 24513 26221, 23 27315 271:12 274:14 discuss [2] 24213 26215 discussed [i] 240:8 discusses |3] 24210; 27095; 2716 Discussion [3] 244:13 122958 24311; 2422 7; 2649, 21; 2652 9 15 23 24:2669, 12 2655 2635 27020; 271:2 9 27210; 27515 2796,15 281.21; 2824; 2835; 284:11; 2853 152853 17; 287:11; 28519 28925 29317, 21; 29513 29923 304:16; 30511 dtosaess [q 23524; 2636; 2655 267:4; 2852291:7 distinction |2) 2872324522 distribution (3| 28314,15 24 dlveatitue [1] 254:10 Doctor [i] 3076 doctor [i] 2823 doctors (1] 25511 documents [i| 241:14 doesn't t3 259:9, 12 domestic [1] 2919 dose [15] 265:19; 285:4, 7, 11, 14, 17, 19, 20; 286:5 13 267:4, 13 15 22 Dr [23] 23510; 2435 14; 246:11, 12 19; 247:3 9, 17; 2534; 2633 264:7; 2799; 280:5, 10; 2835; 290:8 14; 291:12; 2993 3032 3052 driveways [i] 291:16 due [1] 2825 duly [ij 2353 dust [18] 25520 23' 256-3 7, 12 257:8 27313 25 2737; 277:19, 24; 27517; 2794; 284:23 25; 28513 28523 2896 dustier [1] 274:3 dustiness [3] 273-5 1328911 dusts (2) 277:18 27521 dusty [51 267:3 27317, 25; 27315; 274:12 dwell [1] 26519 -E- aasiy[il 26525 educate [2] 274:25 2753 effect (10] 26523 27523 2753 13 25; 29323 294:5; 301.5 7; 30522 effects (3] 24314:267:1529517 otoctremicroacopy [1] 28322 elevated [i| 28312 elicit [2] 242232438 aimhated [2] 26514, 16 Qns[i] 290-16 employees [7] 2505 1Z 13 26324; 264:13 2793297:16 employers 24313 2955 employment [i] 25517 enferctog PI 29524:301:11 engaghg [i] 26311 England [6] 29315 29510; 300:11; 3019, 11; 30316 engulfed [i] CcnccwJaxe Lcc*-SeeC3) 268:12 enlighten [1] 25221 ertety[4l 295.13 17; 296:3 302:21 envtonmental [6] 290:18 23 291:11, 24; 304:3 5 epidemiological [U 2879 epidemiotogicalty [i] 275-25 equal [1] 266:19 equally [ij 3056 escape [i] 2742 event [i] 2838 evidence [2] 2879 exact [i] 25024 exacBy(i] 287:14 BCAMINATON [3] 2358 28515 307:3 examinations [i] 294:11 camtoa(i| 294:13 examined [1] 2355 example [3] 277:19 294:19 296:18 examples [1] 277:12 exceeded [i] 25517 excess [2] 28311.20 Fxhtott 181 244:14, 18 19,2325320; 270:15 274:14; 284:2 eoMrit [2] 2446, 15 ExM>K8 [8] 244.14, 18 19,2326320; 27315 274:14; 284.2 exhbks [2] 239.25; 240:3 existence [i] 24514 existe(l] 259.20 expect [1] 2835 esqMrience [4] 2538 1327923 28316 experiment [1] 2736 experiments [2] 273232739 expect [i] 2855 experts [i] 244:7 explanation [i] 287:8 eoqiosed [19] 255-16; 25515 261:21; 2625; 212-867-8220 From create to exposed UCAREF00011837 8aac 9ygr Jpptatens 267:9; 269:16, 21; 2709; 277:11; 266:2, 13; 291:4; 292:14, 16, 23; 299:18; 300:17, 19,23 exposure [32] 238:25; 239:2; 255:23; 256:7, 13; 266:16, 20; 267:2 5, 12 279:16; 28221; 284:16, 23, 25; 28622 23; 296:7, 20,24; 287:3, 17; 288:22 290:19, 26 291:10, 22 24; 293:24; 305:14; 30616 exposures [3] 291:11; 304:2 6 extent (2) 274:16 27625 -F- factlrtiea [2] 250:122524 facility |3| 290:14; 252:13; 291:6 bet [9] 247-24; 248:14; 26622 2726 277:4; 280:11; 2825; 29225; 296:11 factor |4] 278:18; 2827; 28616; 299:22 factories [3] 301:10; 30612 17 factors (4) 2726 274:16 2779; 30424 factory [3] 295:75, 21; 3019 facts [11 271:25 fas [5] 246:17; 247:7; 249:22 28421; 28618 fairly [1] 23616 famllar [8] 247:14, 24; 24614; 25619; 257:4; 260:15; 279.6 280.11 February |3] 2449 289.17, 21 Fetrado [l| 292:0 ffoer [27] 24216 26526 267:15 2667, 6 22 26915 21; 2709; 271:2 7; 27322 2756 280:2, 5 24; 281.5 6 12 12 28615 24; 29125; 2965 29624; 299:19, 30622 ftMtad [1] 27020 fbertzs]i] 273.-24 ftoertzBd [2] 27617, 18 fibers (13) 26525 266:15 268:12, 15 24; 27615281:15 17; 2902; 29615 16; 29525 30518 ffcrfl [5] _ 265-7, 6 2767; 27625 fibrogenetic [6] 2759; 277:18 20, 22, 24; 27616 21; 279:4 CONWED v UNION - H. Lewinsohn 10/18/94 fibrosis [2] 257:8; 28622 265-16 267:18 fibrotic |i] 268:20 file Ml 307:17 GERSON [8] 243:3; 245:19; 263:16 286:5; 296:7; 299:13 24; 306:24 Gerson (i| 257:20 files Ml 241:15 gist [i] 289:23 fill Ml 28624 Give [1] 2904 films (5] 251:5 6, 21; 25622; 254:2 trial [4] give (91 2597;2633 77, 16; 269.14; 271:11; 274:16; 277:15 28618 272:19; 27514; 284:5 287:11 find |i] given [i] 269-5 270:8 finish Ml giving Ml 28625 23616 Government [i] finished Ml 30512 238:15 government [2] First [5] 23617: 245:5 253:5 26625 29525 301:8 grade [5) 266:3 fast [16] 2396', 19, 21; 24024, 25; 280:25; 281:6 24; 2866 30617 greater [2] 241:24; 251:15 2665 27615 28514, IS 277:21; 286:20; 2964, 5; group [4] 29615 30010; 3064 2507; 257:24; 259:76; 264:17 Itaodbte [1] guess (7] 207.6 2407; 260:4; 269:11; 276:19, float Ml 21; 275-25; 28516 290:7/ follow Ml -H- 267.6 faBow-up [1] 307:5 toSowed |2| 295.9; 297:23 foOowiig [i] 284:15 follows [i| 238:5 farm (15] 2464;2756 1527614; 287:19, 2865 2894; 290.25 294:25 2953 79; 2979; 29620; 29924; 306:24 former [3] 240-/3; 274:17; 277:8 forms [6] 24510, 16 276:26 277:5 17; 287:18 formulation [i| 275-73 fouid [5] 280.15 28511; 2967; 29917; 30420 frame |i] 28522 hand ft] 285:76 handful Ml 249:24 hate [1| 286:4 haven't [5] 24155 271.24; 299:25 3006; 306:4 hazards Ml 306-12 Health |4] 261:9;26510, 15 3059 health [17] 24514; 252-0 9; 25515 26626 267:16 277:70- 27520, 274:17; 277:7; 28521; 297:5 70 26 30516 24; 304:23 heard [4] 24619; 2557; 260:17, 24 hefrrful |2] 289:15 15 hesftating [i] 267.6 higher [3] 267:5 28510; 2875 -G- historically [2] 245-76; 301:22 gastroendosinai [i| history (3] 26617 297:3 15 24 gathered ]i] honestly ]i] 2756 25517 gave[i] 2726 hope Ml 25220 gears [1) 241:16 Hospfral |i| 255:15 generated (2) hospital [1] Ccrrcroan by Lx**-See4) 251:8 human [ij 267:15 hygiene [3] 263:23; 27516; 297:22 hygienists Ml 256:27 -I- I've Ml 58624 t-d-r-Fa [i] 245-4 identification Ml 244:20 kkfa[4| 2465 252-5; 277.6; 296:12 illustrate (ij 279:14 impact (3] 297:15 26 298:9 important (1) 20672 incidence [ij 28220 included [2] 25514; 2539 increased Ml 28518 indicate [3] 29674; 299:7 7, 15 indicated [2] 28510; 296:13 indicates [i] 245:13 individual [i] 29511 individuals [i] 25025 industrial (4] 256:21; 263:25 275:16; 297:22 industry [i] 293:27 information ]28) 249:7; 250:4, 11; 251:25 2555 254:2, 21; 257:15; 26617, 20; 264:16 269:20; 270:3; 271:19; 274:5 8, 10, 21; 275:5, 0 79; 277:3 4, 10; 278:3 287:14; 3062,20 informed [i] 24619 initiate [i] 2867 initiating [ij 260:5 injury Ml 240.14 hside [i] 27524 inspection ]i| 295:15 inspector [21 29521; 301:9 instance [i] 277:77 instances |3] 290.17; 291:8, 9 intends [1] 24522 DOYLE REPORTING, INC. 212-867-3220 From exposure to intends UCAREF00011838 Shk Systvre Af**c2crs interest p) 2766 9, ft interested [2] 276:6: 29610 International [2] 260:16,25 frXemption (i| 264.4 interstitial [i] 26811 htervalfi] 286:20 introduced fi| 294:7 involve (il 242-9 nvolved [3] 25822; 2320; 304:14 frwolvement [ij 307:7 nvoMng PI 23821;240:11. 12; 258.6; 264:17 issua Ml 24120, 25; 242:5 6 issues [2] 2427; 29319 - J- J-M til 296:12 James li] 259:8 Jereeym 304:10 jotopq 2902; 296:16 Jotns-Wanvile [7] 24318; 2524; 256:8; 271$ 237:3 5 14 joh|l] 25624 WP1 287:16, 21, 24 - K- Wng[i5] 248-7, 8 249:16; 2506,12 22 23:25212 15; 254:5; 256:10, 12 15; 2583 257:25 Kkigdom (i] 29321 Kkschan |1J 2364 knowfrig [1] 284:18 knowledge [9] 249:4; 271:16,12, 2782 2986, 8 3076,9 10 Kirunan [3] 231:132922 3 - L- lapss{i] 28819 [1] 2582 largely [i] 26822 DOYLE REPORTING, INC. CONWED v UNION - H. Lewinsohn -10/18/94 Last [1] 289:17 last [7] 240:8; 241:17; 250:75, 20; 251:13 289:17; 305:20 latency [3] 28522- 287:3 6 lawsuit (2) 243:17; 2586 lawyer {4] 240:13 23 24; 241:3 lawyers [1J 2585 laymen [4| 267:19, 281:19 285:14, 25 team |1| 301:21 loaned [i] 301:19 learning [i] 254:23 legalities (ij 293:8 length [2] 26818 286:24 Leonard [i] 247:4 letters (1) 302:14 level (8) 25817, 18 23 2583 7, 72 287:77; 28822 levels [6] 25818 28 267:8 28428 24; 23824 Lewitsohn [S] 23818 2436 15; 2534; 2633 264:7; 2838 299$ 3082 Bflhtll] 271:16 rsBuodll] 2862 Mil] 251:10 Utetalise(io] 24828 25914; 26328 270:78 28 271:8 29813 2993 15 21 Iwd (11 30421 Drtigli] 291:4 local |1] 251:8 loose p] 2781327322 27316 M|2] 2487; 264:18 lower [2] 267:5 286.9 lung 112] 289:15 28 2789 27818 2798 28818 28811,18 28 284:18 2857; 29816 lungs [7] 26814, 19,2698 827522 Vlng [1] 274:3 lymphatic [i] | 26675 ---------------- ---------------- - M- macrofaces [1] 26813 magnitude [1] 267:13 main (i] 28811 malignancies (i] 29918 malignancy [1] 287:19 management [2] 25028 271:15 Manhattan [6| 240:17, 19 280:8 304:14, 17; 3056 Manfsco [i] 2598 manner (1) 29970 manufacture [i] 277:16 manufactured |i| 29219 manufacturtig {13] 256 75; 257:17; 264:28 2653 18 26814; 267:10; 26928 27810; 26817; 291:8 304:7; 30818 mark [i] 244:15 matted [ij 244:19 material [3] 2487; 277:16; 291:17 M8] 23918 21; 2484; 241:11, 19, 282458 18 H 17; 264:14; 27518 13 18 277:10, 13 McCaughey [i| 29815 mean 23924; 2689 273-19 2784; 29821; 2936; 29818 301:24 meaauements |i] 2899 mechanism [i] 267:14 medical [as] 2498 7; 2684, 18 11; 25121, 28282588257:14,15 261$ 2887; 294.8 8 7, 10, 17; 2984; 29813 299:3 21; 30817 memory [2] 2687;29318 mentioned [a] 27721; 27828 287:11; 2987; 29318 3089 301$ 30324 maaothefoma (it] 284:17; 28818 287:12 18 18 23 29128 2988 29818 30811 method [3] 27819 297:13 17 microns [i] 26810 mid-European [i] 212-867-8220 Concofdaxa by Los*-Se<25) 29821 middle [i] 2846 MO [2] 24918250:22 mil [12] 2489, 18, 250:13 251:10; 25818 25318 254:5 12 14, 16; 2583 297:8 miffing |3| 297:4, 14, 18 mind |6] 23818 2394; 247:11, 13 28 24821 M<ne(i| 25822 mine [15] 2488 7, 8 11; 249:8 f8 25; 250:13 251:18 25818 25310; 2583 26911; 2916, 14 mfried (2) 24828 281:2 mInaralogleal [i] 24524 mfrwrals[i] 2687 miners (5) - 2497, 13 182506:2792 Mines (2) 293330312 mines [8] 24818 23 256:8 271:8 29811, 18 19, 23 minfrig [2] 24913 20 Mfrsiaaota [7] 23822 25623; 2689, 11, 18 3088 10 minute [3] 2987; 301$ 30324 misspoke [i] 2999 Mofry [21 29818291:10 moment [9] 244.-25 246:24; 251:23 2532$ 2584; 26315; 271:3 299:18 307:11 monitored (i) 2982 month [i] 30820 months [i] 247:8 morning (3] 236-70, 15; 239:14 Mount [i] 3084 mocntafri [1] 24812 move [1] 23675 Mumpton [6] 24811, 18 19; 247:3 9 myself [1] 24623 -N- name [5] 24824; 241:4; 2597; 29810; From interest to name UCAREF00011839 Bac 3--t *a*cmn 300:12 names [2] 259:2, 4 National [i| 261:8 natue [i] 249:20 Newrail [5] 240:12; 241:12, IS; 233:3; 234:19 Newhouse(2] 290:1S;291:10 Nioobon (i| 300:3 norvpetatized |i) 273:11 Northeastern [ij 30370 nonnwesi pj 291:12 Notary |i| 238:4 noted [i| 308:5 noticed (i) 251:3 number Ml 2582; 264:11; 2726; 292:17 issnbera[i] 25024 - o- O.K. [19] 23821; 239:11, 15; 24018; 242:12; 2439, 14, 21; 24922; 251:5; 2SBc7; 264:19; 26010, 274:4:28223:286:11, 15; 306:5; 307:13 [9] 243:3; 28125; 289:3; 29024; 23422; 295:3, 18; 2979, 29924 Objection [2] 2982930624 objection [1] 28920 obvious [i] 2512 Obviously [i] . 27323 occasion |4] 241:18, 23; 2546, 12 occupation p] 253:15, 17;2SS21 OceuMdonal |i] 2619 occupational [2] 271:1529122 ocajwtionaiy [1] 292:14 oc4>ations [i] 249:18 occtrn] 27915 oectntig [2] 290:18 22 oceu(i] 28523 offer [3] 243:18 246:19 271:23 DOYLE REPORTING, INC. CONWED v UNION - H. Lewinsohn -10/18/94 offhand [i] 247:79 office [1] 302-77 Okay [2] 265:72 282:9 Olympus [i] 2429 onas[i] 304:12 opened [2] 273:17,18 opening [1] 281.9 operattigjij 248:16 operation [i] 28911 operations |1] 254:15 opinion [24] 24222; 263:10, 17; 264:8 13 182654 14, 17, 1826511; 26721; 274:18 2755 2785 277:7; 27813; 284:14,20, 285132879. 1228518 2898 opinions [is] 2429524315 1824815 13 22 247:7; 25721; 2634; 26820 24; 27018 272:4; 284:8 9; 28525 opportenity [i] 28010 aider [7] 2472,8 26318 264:8 276:4; 2776; 281:5 organized [i] 2939 ohgteai [1] 307:16 OSHA [8] 25517, 18 30514, 21; 3068 11, 1521 ouraeNes[i] 243:7 outside [1] 260.10 ovanehebn [1] 267174 ovsnNheknkig [1] 267:13 owned p] 3023,57 ovwwshy [i] 293.2 -P- package [i] 27227 244:13 15 2906; 307:79 panel p] 2949 182955 Paper [4] 247:18 26015 25 26916 **247:17; 290:15 3002 paragraph [2] 2622284:7 Part (2] 265:7ft 27 Ps [1] 281:8 Patterson [1] 304:10 Paul [1] 238.-4 paved [i] 291:16 pedantic [2] 2854, 6 penalized [6] 2798 72 14, 15 27310, 14 petals [5] 27318 20, 21,23 2743 People [1] 291:16 people [13] 24014, 17, 24; 25323 257:13 2592; 267.9; 270:7, 9; 289:23 290.18 29 291:4 period [2] 254:1330321 person [1] 2997 personal [i] 240.14 personal [2] 25532602 2433 Porta* [1] 241.20 PortaMng [i] 26320 Phases [2] 2402524911 PhUHi] 3003 physical [4] 2686,21, 24; 280.4 place [7] 247:71- 254,-ft: 27917; 27513 2803 30923 3038 placed [i] 27224 ptart[37] 23822 25 241:18 2457, 11; 25514; 257:25; 25823 2S315 261:3 26911,18 2637, 21; 264:18 26516; 26514; 267:11; 2809,21, 22 24; 28129 28918 28 28824; 28313 2924 7ft 18 29420; 2958 18 304:17, 22 25 plants [is] 25513 14,22 2571-ft 18 25817; 25325 2685 18 28428 2553 26928 27818 304:7, 9 ptayedp] 284:77; 2832 playgrounds [1] 291:17 pnaumoconiosis [4] 2941-4 ft 77; 295-4 pneumonia [1] 2949 point [3] 270:13 27425; 275:4 Concodaitc ty lo*-See<26} position [2] 300:4; 306:21 possession [i| 270:3 possesss (i| 276:27 possfeilty [2] 268.-74 27&79 potential [i] 2436 practices [1] 29723 preamble [i] 24313 precisely [i] 28317 preparation [4] 241:10; 2484; 264:3; 271:21 prepare [i] 24623 prepared [3] 246-18 26311; 264:19 present [9] 245 7; 2604; 274:21; 275:10, 18 277:18 2886; 3033 20 prevent [2| 267:15; 28825 primary (11 267:14 prior [1] 2387 private (21 29517; 296:3 probable [i] 29317 problems [i] 274:17 Process [1] 247:18 process [7] 24321; 28017; 281:8 3 28318297:4,8 processes [5] 25518 267:17; 29325 296:18 30518 produce [3] 2657ft 2737; 287:19 produced [i] 281:3 produc*g [2] 27913 79 product [3] 2727ft 27514; 290.2 production [4] 25014; 25918 25311; 2856 program [3] 2557ft 257-5 8 promUgatsd [2] 293293016 properties [21 26821:2804 property [2] 240:752686 proposing [i] 26011 propostion [2] 287:75 283:7 provided [3] 257:7ft 27124; 2809 provHkig [i] 2838 212-867-8220 From names to providing UCAREF00011840 8c Oygr* Apdcatora________________ Province [i] 291:12 proximity |i] 292:19 PubUc [1) 238:4 publcation p] 267.9: 304:13 publicized [i| 283:18 published [7] 259:13, 19; 27912 28513 3004; 304:4; 305:4 P^monayfi] 267:18 purchased [1] 30321 puCT 290:18, 2% 29822 purposes [I] 291:19 -Q- quantttfes [1] 269:7 quandty[i] 278:11 question [22] 2434; 24522,23; 249:13; 250$ 2851% 267:7; 289:25 2822; 2855 2854,22; 2905 7, 25 294:25 29517; 237:10, 12, 25, 298.5 30525 questioned [2] 24521:28518 questions [6] 244:4; 2452; 28525 28512, 14; 29510 quickly (i| 244:24 - R- 292.-20 raiboads [1] 29222 raised [i] 282.-6 rapidly [1] 23516 rate[2| 282:11, 18 rates [1] 28512 Raybastos [6) 285% 304:14, 17, 22, 25 3055 re-sworn [1] 2353 read [8] 2358 24521; 24432; 2452; 25522; 254:2; 3054; 3053 readly [i] 26512 readbig [2j 25518 19 reason [5] 25511; 261.-5 2854, 11, 12 reasons [i] 28510 recall [16] CONWED v UNION - H. Lewinsohn 10/18/94 238:17; 246:10; 247:15 254:11, 21, 25 257:7; 261:14; 2623 8 274:4, 9; 290:3 2926; 304:12 13 received [i| 274:11 recent [4] 251:16; 29513 299:3 15 Recess [2] 264:528510 recognition [1J 28621 recognized [i] 3058 recollect (3| 2753 28517; 29525 recollection [3] 23925 24218 25516 recommendations [i[ 25923 record [11) 244:10, 12 14; 2496; 250:11; 25121; 2522 255:11; 263:24; 296:8 307:15 records (1) 257:14 reduced [2] 30&1820 reducrig |i) 27324 refer [21 246:25 2906 reference [3] 247:12263829225 referenced [i| 290:14 referred [3] 2458 261:12 290:21 refanvig [3] 2906, 23 3052 refresh [1] 23922 regard [4] 26425f 27421; 27519, 277:13 reganttig |ij 27519 regulate [2] 29524; 30621 regutates(i) 30512 regulations [icq 29514,21; 2946; 295.9, 1% 14, 282354; 301:3 11 rotatory [ij 29519 iniiiferl [S] 23825 240:11; 2422; 251$ 261:19264:15287:4, 15 304:18 nUbg [5] 2458 18 17; 27817; 277.5 relation [2] 251:13 30522 relationship [io] 2729 2853 8 9,13 17; 29525830222 relative [1] 27510 reiativsly [ij 24924 relatives [i] 30421 relevant [2] 247:4; 26522 relying [i| 29518 remained [i] 2696 remember [19] 24523 24; 241:3; 251:14, 24; 25217, 23; 25314; 2555, 18 25524,25:261:7, 11, 18 28523 29520; 30221, 25 remembered (i| 2627 render [io] 2452 2476; 264:8 13 18 18 2754; 276:5; 277:7; 289:8 rephrase [1] 24512 report [13] 24512 25524; 25519, 25; 2554, 8 254:17; 261$ 19, 25 2623 9 Reporter [2] 261.9, 20 fannftl f131 24525; 2458 11; 255.11; 252$ 257:15; 29813 2993 8 11, 15 20; 30215 represented [i] 27220 requfre[i| 264:3 required [3] 26829 287:18 2952 reread [1] 239.25 resoarch [i] 2657 resaarchera [i] 26215 raierve [i| 2457 "*2481828312 2999 respects [1] 281:8 responding [i] 29913 response ]2] 29728 30325 respondblBes (i| 294:70 reaponaliWy [4] 295:3 11, 132954 rest[i] 306.9 restate (11 na-an reauftHI 23524; 2392 279:15 284:15 resutis]i] 279:13 resumed [i] 2353 review [26] 2398 21:241:11, 19,28 2488 74; 247:5 8 249:15; 2506; 251:4; 25211; 2558 25424; 255.9, 22 257:23; 25529 269:14; 2608 26518 Caxotarct oy Looh'SeeCT) 19,28 264.11 reviewed [17] 239:75 245:17, 24; 246:5 7, 13 247:16; 24918; 2593 10, 232518 7, 13 25214; 254:18 25811 reviewing [3] 257:7; 2623 254:13 reviews [3] 259:75 261:3; 26218 Right [7] 23912 249:11; 269:10; 279:7, 18 2987; 33825 right [3] 243.8 2484; 2954 ring PI 2599, 12 >fek|i] 28924 road [i] 291:14 Robert [i] 247:14 Rochdale [3) 241:12 294:29 29810 Role [1] 284:7 rob [4] 284:5 19 28518 25 routinely [i] 257:76 tun [11 2443 -S- S.C. [1] 267:22 sample* [i] 25523 saywig[7] 2688 2653 11, 21; 267:22 265232994 scavenger [i] 26513 scheduled [4] 293-73 15294:18 21 School [1] 291:17 scientific [4] 270:18 25; 277:4; 2873 screened [1] 3089 ecreenlnfl [2] 28928 2813 se(l] 27510 second [i] 247.-3 aagregrt8d[l] 27825 sofected [i] 27218 .refection [2] 25218 23 Sefcoff ]i) 2998 send [i] 25521 separate |i] 2597 DOYLE REPORTING, INC. 212-867-8220 From Province to separate UCAREF00011841 Bnc QyiWT Accteacna separately (i] 2555 served [i| 2449 inninn 161 239.5, 7ft 22; 241:17,24; 28921 setting (2) 2S9:17;266:13 sh*(i| 241:16 shlpphgfi] 274,5 shortened [i] 2875 show [2] 2442; 265:11 showtog [2] 244.5; 2733 sign (1) 308:3 signBcant p] 27821; 283:12 SBcap] 2771ft 24 sOca (4) 278:12, 13, 1ft 24 sicosispl 294:5 7 sample (i] 287:8 Stoai [i] 300.4 sra 24224; 24315; 246:16; 247:11, 13 2622; 269:19; 271:10, 1ft 2782; 2843, 13 situation [1] 240:16 mb PI 28313 24 smoke [i] 27625 smoking (4) 27523 276:7, 1ft 14 sold [1] 24725 someone [i] 2735 sony p| 25224; 2625; 2636 sort [SI 2737;274:7, 1327522; 277:13 29318 sorts [i] 291:18 SoUh[lO| 27313 28023 28323 28315; 291:133033, 11, 13 1ft 304.2 specW(i) 29220 "aSVasftft27i.li, 7ft 2734; 27421; 2733 284:14, 78 spodlcsBy [iq 24313 2466; 250ft- 2S5:4' 257ft 264 7ft 277-4; 279:2ft 29Cft- 29222 specfles [2] 2934, 7 DOYLE REPORTING, INC. CONWED v UNION - H. Lawirisohn -10/18/94 spinning [5) 280:2ft- 287ft ft 24; 2838 spto[l] 306.-9 spouses pi 304ft 16; 3063 sprsadhig [1] 27318 sputun [i] 26315 stage |1] 243-7 standard pj 30314; 30315 standards [i] 30322 standpoint [i| 271:16 stands [i] 30312 started (2] 239.11; 252:16 statop] 27325; 284:74 stateaneid p] 266ft 277:7ft 299.8 steps [2] 277:74, 20 stipulate (2) 29323 294:2 Stratford [1] 305:3 strictly (i) 2735 strto [3] 2472ft- 260:2ft 265:8 studiss [10] 25913 26913 2706 ft 279:ft 7ft 2898 2837; 29321; 3045 study [6] 27ft 7ft 2ft 279.17; 2806 282:12 304:75 subjsct[ij 24720 sU>jscls(lJ 2469 subsequently [2] 294:ft 307.20 subsidiaries [2J 307:17.22 subsidiary pi 3022 1ft 307.7 sufficiant [1] 2897 suggested [i| 2605 a*BMI 23825 sun [11 287:75 sunmariz[i] 287:79 stanxnfing [t) 284:19 suvaasncep) 294ft 17, 77 strvey [2[ 25924:2605 SLiveys [4] 25&-7ft- 260:7 7; 2627ft 26ft23 suspicions [i| 257:78 swallowed [i[ 26a-76 synergistic [3] 275:22 27313 25 synonymous [i] 28323 -T- talings [1] 291:14 S[1J 3094 tatksd [i] 29916 talcing [6] 249.ft 265-70; 270:22 2735 29318 21 team [i| 294.5 Tslsphone [i| 264:4 tennis [I] 291:18 terms [15) 25319, 26320; 267:7ft 273:5, 15-274ft 287:75 7ft 20; 2822ft 285-74, 25; 2899, 19, 2972 testified [1] 2385 testify [3] 242:13; 243:23; 274:16 testimony [5] 2393 242.2ft 24ftft 2ft 277.23 tests [i] 2737 textile [7] 279,-ft 2802 27, 24; 287.9,2ft 282.27 Ihwtk [1) 2965 teory [i] 287:10 thoughts [i] 25720 three p] 241:3 24323 29311 threw [i] 2594 tile [i| 23322 B8[1J 277:77 tissue p] 269:75 27; 2709 tobacco [i] 27625 tetelyfij 2893 toured [2] 254:4 77 town [2] 297:7ft 27 tract [i] 26317 transact [i) 307:16 translated [i] 212-867-8220 Orcmm tif Lu*-Se*CS) 280:75 transmission [i] 28322 Transvaal [i) 303-70 tiemofito [io] 2986 7ft 2ft 299:4, ft ft 7ft 22;300:24 truckars [i] 25913 true [4] 26326 2735; 287:20; 309.19 Turarco(l] 3049 Tienar (5) 24912 241:12 15; 2983; 294:19 Typ|21 3035, 6 type [14} 25319 259:24; 2624; 26313: 267:13 2736; 280:17, 7ft 29725; 2927ft 293ft 294:14; 29919;303:3 typeapij 26322267:4,232725 27721; 2734, 7ft 7ft 17; 298:7ft 306:22 -u- U.K.P1 302ft 76; 307:7 UAP| 304.6 305:14; 30311 enable [i] 2634 understand not 2422ft- 2432 249.14; 257:2 26319, 26721; 2732 28915; 297:7; 30124 understandtog [4] 24221; 24920; 29312 30314 indetstood [4] 250,-ft 264:12 28215; 2833 undertaken [i] 2798 mdertook [2] 24915 25320 Union [55] 238.-72 7ft- 239ft; 247:7ft 2ft 242:7ft 27; 24ft7ft 2ft 244:8 17, 7ft 245.2ft 246:7; 247:25; 24913 2594; 25320; 257:4, 132586 2 10,11,13 25922 2693 10, 7ft 25; 261:15 26213 17; 2793 7; 277.2ft- 2724, 7ft 23 2836 29312 23 297:7; 301:13 7ft 21; 3022 14 7ft 76,77, 2ft 3076 United [1] 29327 unBcely p] 265.6 7ft- 2666 update [i] 23923 utifaed [i] 24914 - V- From separately to utilized UCAREF00011842 Sytn <COK3pr______________________ V-e-f-o-o-n [i] 300:15 vasay|i) 268:20 venture |i) 284:20 verbal (i] 29735 Vernon (7] 292:12, 14, 15; 300:13, 14,16 23 versus [4] 238:12, 18; 242:19; 273:10 vicMty (i| 291:5 view [9] 368:4; 2728; 279:12; 280:14; 28123; 283:4; 287.21; 288:3,4 VtM-VtS[1] 29810 - w- Wade [i] 290:15 Wagner {2] 290:14; 291:12 Wdt[1) 296:7 **[1) 297:8 Wiliam [i] 300:3 winding |i] 281:10 withdraw [2] 297:11; 2964 2436; 2445 24622 24311, 14 Wootory [2] 247:14, 17 words |3] 247:13 2875 290:11 work [11] 257.-3.12; 2566 3 26319; 290:12 14; 294:14; 300:17; 305:4 worked (12) 24924; 25215 25310, 23 254:14,19 25 29215 17.16 29415 30422 worker [6] 2588 23 28613 300:10, 12 30421 Workers [3] 260:162526217 workers |es] 23823 241:11; 251:11, 1322 2523 5 16 12 14; 2539 12 15254:16 19 24; 25516 12 15 25613 257:16 24; 25615 21; 2565 16 24; 2805 12 261:3 16 21:2624 16 16 2635 2849,21; 2652 16 2665 14, 1526616 21; 274:16 2767; 277:6 11; 276162793 9 1522 25 2803 1528217:284:11; 28616 29217; 294:11, 12 25 CONWED v UNION - H. Lewinsohn -10/18/94 297:24; 299:18; 304:6, 17; 305:10 wotksig (6] 261:15; 266:15, 20; 287:3; 289:25; 3055 workpiece [4) 275:11; 30613, 16,23 workplaces [1J 30515 world (1) 3069 writings [4] 24619, 25; 247:3, 9 -X- x-ray[6| 251.6, 15 15 20; 253:4; 265:11 x-rays [is] 25025-251:8 11; 252:3, 12 13 14; 254:16 24; 255:6 15 23 257:15 25 2582 2612 - Y- yeera[2] 249233023 Yesterday [i) 239:13 Yorttpl 24021; 30218 youraeff (3| 23923 27425 2754 Cu uioaq by lflok-S**GSj DOYLE REPORTING, INC. 212-867-8220 From V-e-r-n-o-n to yourself UCAREF00011843 CONWED v UNION - H. Lewinsohn 10/18/94 Page 235 to Page 310 DOYLE REPORTING, INC. 212-867-8220 CONDENSED TRANSCRIPT AND CONCORDANCE PREPARED BY: UCAREF00011844 1 NO*fsi <M*0 o C C/) e s. Os o IT) <n on < tui3/ii CD ZU oa: < IA in < 2 Z 0hL"ft o--nI 0m K oQJ Ui UHi Q -j Z < u. O Volume I Pages 1 to 139 Exhibits 1-13 IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF COOK COUNTY, ILLINOIS COUNTY DEPARTMENT, LAW DIVISION -....................................................................................... -x BOARD OF EDUCATION OF CITY OF CHICAGO, :. :S Plaintiff, :/ : No. 9 2 L 9934 vs. : Judge : Michael Gallagher A, C, and S, INC., et al., Defendants. : : ............................................................................................... x EVANSTON COMMUNITY CONSOLIDATED : SCHOOL DISTRICT NO. 65, et al., : Plaintiffs, : vs NO. 92 L 9933 A, C, and S, INC., et al., Defendants. .......................................................................BOARD OF EDUCATION OF SCHOOL DISTRICT NO. 211, et Plaintiffs, - - -x : al., : : vs NO. 92 L 9932 ABITIBI ASBESTOS MINING CO., et al . , < Defendants. BOARD OF TOWNSHIP et al. , EDUCATION HIGH SCHOOLS Plaintiffs, x vs . No. 92 L 9927 A, C, and S, INC., et al., Defendants. x DORIS 0. WONG ASSOCIATES UCAREF00011845