Document 7M5o8nJpL1XebZ22wyDLmbr4o

OFFICIAL TRANSCRIPT PROCEEDINGS BEFORE THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA THE 3250 WILSHIRE BOULEVARD BUILDING, et al. Plaintiff, vs. METROPOLITAN LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY, et al. Defendants.. X No 87-06048 WMB (GHKx) X Deposition of RALPH J. BRAGG Detroit, Michigan December S, 1988 ALDERSON REPORTING COMPANY 20 F Street, N.W. Washington, D. C 20001 (202) 628-9300 (8C0) 367-3376 RALPH J. BRAGG 1 1 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 2 FOR THE CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 3 3250 WILSHIRE BOULEVARD BUILDING, ) et al., ) 4) Plaintiffs, ) 5) vs. ) Case No.87-06 6 } WMB (GHKx) METROPOLITAN LIFE INSURANCE ) 7 COMPANY, et al., ) ) 8 Defendants. ) ) 9 Detroit, Michigan 10 Friday, December 9, 1988 11 Deposition of RALPH J. BRAGG, a witness herein, 12 called for examination by counsel for 3250 Wilshire 13 Boulevard Building, et al in the above-entitled matter, 14 pursuant to notice, the witness being duly sworn by 15 CATHY SILVERMAN, a Notary Public in and for the State of 16 Michigan, taken at the offices of Dickinson, Wright, Moon, 17 Van Dusen 6 Freeman, 800 First National Building, Detroit, 18 Michigan at 9:00 a.m., Friday, December 9., 1988 and the 19 proceedings being taken down by Stenotype by CATHY 20 SILVERMAN and transcribed under her direction. 21 22 *rtr* RALPH J. BRAGG 2 1 APPEARANCES: 2 3 On behalf of the Plaintiffs, 3250 Wilshire Boulevard 4 Building et al.; 5 RAYMOND P. BOUCHER 6 Sayre, Moreno, Purcell & Boucher 7 10866 Wilshire Boulevard, 8 Fourth Floor 9 Los Angeles, California 90074 10 11 12 On behalf of Defendant W. R. Grace-Con; 13 THOMAS R. JONES & ROBERT A. ALESSI 14 Cahill, Gordon & Reindel 15 80 Pine Street 16 New York, New York 10005 17 18 19 20 21 22 TAPPERT COURT REPORTING cmTrp T VT n RALPH J. BRAGG 3 1 APPEARANCES: (Continued) 2 3 On behalf of Defendant W. R. Grace-Con; 4 F. JOHN NYHAN 5 Pillsbury, Madison & Sutro 6 515 South Flower Street 7 Suite 3300 8 Los Angeles, California 90071 9 10 11 12 On behalf of Defendant, Metropolitan Life 13 Insurance Company; 14 KEVIN L. SMITH 15 Dewey, Ballantine, Bushby, Palmer & Wood 16 333 South Hope Street 17 Los Angeles, California 90571 18 19 20 21 22 TAPPERT COURT REPORTING SEPVTCE- IN C. RALPH J. BRAGG 4 1 CONTENTS 2 3 THE WITNESS 4 5 EXAMINATION BY COUNSEL FOR 6 3250 WILSHIRE BOULEVARD BUILDING, ET AL 7 8 By Mr. Boucher 5 9 10 E X H I B I T S 11 12 Deposition Exhibit No. 1152 24 13 Deposition Exhibit No. 1153 27 14 Deposition Exhibit No. 1154 28 15 Deposition Exhibit NO. 1155 29 16 Deposition Exhibit No. 1156 30 17 Deposition Exhibit No. 1157 30 18 Deposition Exhibit No. 1158 19 Deposition Exhibit NO. 1159 32 33 20 Deposition Exhibit No. 1160 36 21 Deposition Exhibit NO. 1161 41 22 Deposition Exhibit No. 1162 45 T'tDOPpI' rntiPT PPPnPTTMr CPPVTPP Twr RALPH J. BRAGG 5 1 C 0 N T E N S (continued) 2 3 Deposition Exhibit No. 1163 4 Deposition Exhibit No. 1164 5 Deposition Exhibit No. 1165 6 Deposition Exhibit NO. 1166 7 Deposition Exhibit No. 1167 8 Deposition Exhibit NO. 1168 9 Deposition Exhibit No. 1169 10 Deposition Exhibit NO. 1170 11 Deposition Exhibit No. 1171 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 50 59 65 70 73 77 81 82 85 TAPPERT COURT REPORTING SERVICE, INC. RALPH J. BRAGG 6 1 PROCEEDINGS 2 Whereupon/ Ralph J. Bragg, business address at 7133 3 Cortland Avenue, Allen Park, Michigan (313), 386-8807, was 4 called as a witness by counsel for Plaintiffs, and having 5 been duly sworn by the Notary Public, was examined and 6 testified as follows: 7 EXAMINATION BY COUNSEL FOR 8 3250 WILSHIRE BOULEVARD BUILDING, ET AL 9 BY MR. BOUCHER: 10 Q Good morning Mr. Bragg, how are you today? 11 A Good morning. 12 Q Let me go through some admonitions with you, and 13 introduction. You have had your deposition taken before; 14 have you not? 15 A Yes. 16 Q You have had these admonitions, but let me go 17 briefly through them with you. Do you understand you're 18 under oath? 19 A I do. 20 Q Do you understand it's the same oath you would 21 take in a court of law? 22 A Yes. TAPPERT COURT REPORTING SERVICE, INC.. RALPH J. BRAGG 7 1 Q Do you understand the penalties of perjury attach 2 to your testimony here today? 3 A I do. 4 Q Is there any reason why you can't go forward with 5 your deposition? 6 A No. 7 Q You're not taking any kind of medications that 8 would affect your ability to recall or recollect or 9 anything? 10 A No. 11 Q Can you please give me your work history from the 12 time that you first began working for W. R. Grace to the 13 present time? 14 A I was hired by the Zonolite Company which was 15 later purchased by Grace in August of 1959 and from that 16 time until 1967, I worked in the Midwest, both in the 17 Evanston, Illinois and Skokie, Illinois laboratories. 18 In February '67, I transferred to the Dewey and 19 Almy Chemical division of W. R. Grace which later split 20 off a group became the Construction Products Division of 21 Grace and in September 1, 1987, I retired from the Grace 22 Company. TAPPERT COURT REPORTING SERVICE, INC. RALPH J. BRAGG 9 1 control job outside of Massachusettes, then returned to 2 research. 3 Q What were your job responsibilities as group 4 leader of research between '69 and '73? 5 A As I indicated before, I did not have continuous 6 research responsibility through that whole period, but my 7 primary responsibility in '69 I would say was the 8 reformulation of MK-3. 9 Q Who did you have working for you between 1969 and 10 whatever up through 1963 -- excuse me, 1973 where your 11 primary responsibility was the responsibility of 12 Mono-Kote 3? 13 MR. JONES: Object to form, you can answer. 14 A As I recall, there were about ten or eleven 15 people involved, there was two persons down in Washington 16 Research Center which is the Grace Corporate Research 17 Laboratory and there were one or two people in Travelers 18 Rest, South Carolina. We had an outside consultant and 19 the balance of the roughly ten or eleven people would have 20 been made up of individuals assigned to research in 21 Cambridge. 22 BY MR. BOUCHER: TAPPERT COURT REPORTING SERVICE, INC. RALPH J. BRAGG 8 1 Q When did you say that the Construction Products 2 Division split off from Dewey and Almy, what years was 3 that? 4 A I would guess that it was in early '69, but I'm 5 not sure. 6 Q Beginning in February of 1967, what were your job 7 responsibilities with Dewey and Almy? 8 A I was a chemist and assigned work in ad mixtures 9 for concrete and cement block. That was my initial 10 assignment. 11 Q Did your assignment at some point in time change? 12 A Yes, gradually I assumed research projects or 13 tasks which were related to the old Zonolite product 14 requirements. 15 Q Did you have any additional job responsibilities 16 other than those that you've outlined between the years 17 1969 and 1973? 18 A My responsibilities increased between 1967 and 19 *69 to the point that I was promoted to group leader of 20 research and I was given the assignment of reformulating 21 Mono-Kote. Then before 1973, and I don't recall the date, 22 I was removed from research for half a year, quality TAPPERT COURT REPORTING SERVICE, INC. RALPH J. BRAGG 10 1 Q Who were the individuals in the Washington 2 Research Department that were working on the reformulation 3 of Mono-Kote 3? 4 A I can only recall one individual, John Kraus, 5 K-R-A-U-S. 6 Q Who was at Traverlers Rest that you can recall 7 working on the reformulation of Mono-Kote 3? 8 A Walter Payment and William Sims who is deceased. 9 Q Who was the outside consultant? 10 A I don't recall his name. 11 Q Do you recall what company? 12 A He was an individual working for himself. 13 Q What research individuals from Cambridge can you 14 remember? 15 A It was Larry Shoe, Bob Stierli, S-T-I-E-R-L-I, 16 John Colaneri, C-O-L-A-N-E-R-I, and that's about all I 17 remember. 18 Q What to the best of your recollection were the 19 dates wherein your primary responsibility was the 20 reformulation of Mono-Kote 3? 21 A I think it began in late '69, but I don't know 22 when it ended. TAPPERT COURT REPORTING SERVICE, INC RALPH J. BRAGG 11 1 Q You don't know whether it ended prior to 1973 or 2 not? 3 A It did end prior to '73, but I don't recall 4 exactly when. 5 Q Did Rothfelder do any work on the reformulation 6 of Mono-Rote 3 with you? 7 A He had the original idea of the substitution of 8 the fiber and throughout the period that 1 was involved in 9 reformulation, he assisted with advice and I think on a 10 couple of occasions, he sent in samples of formulated 11 candidate material for tests. 12 Q Is he the individual that came up with the idea. 13 of using cellufloc? 14 A Yes, sir. \ 15 Q Are there any other individuals that are in the 16 capacity or a similar type work arrangement as Ray 17 Rothfelder in terms of his assisting in the reformulation 18 of Mono-Rote 3 that you haven't already mentioned? 19 A As I indicated, I don't have a good memory and I 20 have forgotten. 21 Q What was Walt Payment's job responsibilities at 22 W. R. Grace as best you can recall during the period of TAPPERT COURT REPORTING SERVICE. INC. RALPH J. BRAGG 12 1 time that he was assisting in the reformulation of 2 Mono-Kote 3? 3 A His responsibilities in this particular 4 assignment included the manufacture of trial batches of 5 new compositions, the application of same, and the 6 fire-testing of these compositions. 7 Q What individual or individuals did you have 8 primary reporting responsibility to with respect to the 9 reformulation of Mono-Kote 3? 10 A My directsupervisor wasKeith Cranker, 11 C-R-A-N-K-E-R, his title was Assistant Director of 12 Research and he reported to Dr. Vance Dodson, D-O-D-S-O-N, 13 who was Director of Research. 14 Q Did you have responsibility for reporting the 15 progress being made by you in the team working on the 16 reformulation of Mono-Kote 3 to anyone aside from Mr. 17 Cranker or Mr. Dodson? 18 A Yes. 19 Q Who else? 20 A On request, I wasexpectedto report to the 21 marketing division. 22 (Discussion off the record.) TAPPERT COURT REPORTING SERVICE, INC. RALPH J. BRAGG 13 1 BY MR. BOUCHER: 2 Q You mentioned that upon request, you were 3 expected to report to marketing division with respect to 4 the progress being made on the reformulation of Mono-Rote 5 3, what do you mean by request? 6 A During the reformulation effort, it was made 7 clear to me that we would have routine review meetings in e which research personnel and those of other groups within 9 the division would be present and it was my job to bring 10 the status of the research up-to-date. 11 Q How routine would it be during that period of 12 time? 13 MR. JONES: Objection as to form, you can answer. 14 THE WITNESS: I don't recall. 15 BY MR. BOUCHER: 16 Q Do you recall who was -- were there a regular 17 group of people who were present during these routine 18 meetings? 19 A I would say that generally there was the product 20 Manager of Fireproofing, and then there would be the 21 Director and Assistant Director of Research, myself, and 22 anyone of the facts group that I deemed necessary to i'Iccpbt rnnPT REPORTING SERVICE. INC. RALPH J. BRAGG 14 1 attend. 2 MR. JONES: Could I have the answer read back, 3 please? 4 (Record read.) 5 BY MR. BOUCHER: 6 Q Who was the Product Manager of Fireproofing at 7 that period of time? 8 A It was Thomas Egan. 9 Q Did that ever change during the time that you 10 were working on the reformulation of Mono-Kote 3? 11 A No. 12 Q When youmentioned earlieryou were upon request 13 expected to report to marketing division, was Tom Egan the 14 person in the marketing division that you were to report 15 to? 16 A Yes. 17 Q Is there anyone else other than Tom Egan in the 18 marketing division that you requested to report to? 19 A No. 20 Q Anyone else within W.R.Grace who you were 21 requested to report to on the progress being made on the 22 reformulation of Mono-Kote 3 other than those that we have TAPPERT COURT REPORTING SERVICE, INC. RALPH J. BRAGG 15 1 discussed? 2 A Not that I recall except there is one little 3 change and that is that Vance Dodson at some point in time 4 was replaced as Director by a Hr. Powell, David Powell, 5 and I don't recall whether it was during the reformulation 6 effort or not. 7 Q During the meetings that took place where you 8 discussed the status of the reformulation of Mono-Kote 3, 9 were any of those meetings tape recorded to your 10 knowledge? 11 A Not to my knowledge. 12 Q Did you take any notes during the course of the 13 meetings where you discussed the reformulation of 14 Mono-Kote 3? 15 A I probably did. 16 Q Was it your normal practice during that period of 17 time to take notes during those types of meetings? 18 A Yes. 19 Q Did you keep a file on the notes that you took 20 during meetings where you discussed the reformulation of 21 Mono-Kote 3? 22 A No, I did not. RALPH J. BRAGG 16 1 Q Did you have a regular practice of dictating the 2 notes that you took during the meetings where you 3 discussed the reformulation of Mono-Kote 3? 4 A No. 5 Q Did you have anyone type your notes for you? 6 A No, I did not. My practice would have been to 7 write a report on the meeting and have that be typed. 8 Q Did you keep a file with the reports that you 9 wrote concerning the meetins? 10 A No, I had correspondence files and project files 11 while I was working for the Grace Company and probably 12 copies of those are here on the table, but I have retained 13 no documents in retirement. 14 Q While you were at Grace, did you have a separate 15 file folder where you kept the reports that came out of 16 the reports that you dictated as a result of the meetings 17 where you discussed the reformulation fo Mono-Kote 3? 18 A Yes. 19 Q Was there a headinggiven to that file? 20 A I don't recall. 21 Q The reports that youdictated after the meetings 22 where you discussed the reformulation of Mono-Kote 3, who I m * T) T> c* w r*r> tt t>rn t> t n crDUTr*r r vr / RALPH J. BRAGG 17 1 were they generally sent to? 2 A First of all, I did not dictate them, I indicated 3 before I wrote them and had them typed. They would have 4 been sent to my immediate supervisor with a copy to his 5 supervisor; that is, to Cranker and Dodson and a copy, 6 because of the interest involved, would have been sent to 7 Egan. 8 Q Approximately how many reports, if you can give 9 me an approximation, did you write up? 10 A I cannot, I don't recall how many reports. 11 Q Do you have any recollection that these meetins 12 took place on at least a monthly basis? 13 A I think they were at least a monthly basis. 14 Q Can you tell me when the first time you recall 15 being requested by anyone to look into the possibility of 16 reformulating Mono-Kote 3? 17 A No. 18 Q Do you remember what year it was? 19 A I'm guessing 1969 -- wait a second, there were 20 previous experiences of reformulating, but not for the 21 purpose of the 1969 work. 22 Q When you say not' for the purpose of the 196 9 RALPH J. BRAGG 18 1 work, you're talking about reformulating in such a manner 2 as to take out the asbestos that was added to the product? 3 A Yes, sir. 4 Q Do you remember who requested you initially to 5 look into reformulating Mono-Kote 3 to remove the 6 asbestos? 7 A Through the chain of command it was probably 8 Keith Cranker. 9 MR. JONES: Only what you recall. 10 THE WITNESS: That's what I recall. 11 BY MR. BOOCHER: 12 Q Is he the person who you usually received job 13 assignments or requests from? 14 A Yes. 15 Q During that period of time 1968 through 1973, did 16 you ever receive a request directly from somebody in the 17 marketing division of W. R. Grace to do any type of work 18 that did not go through Mr. Cranker? 19 MR. JONES: Objection as to form. Are you 20 changing the time period now because you have been '69 to 21 '73. Are you going a year earlier? 22 MR. BOUCHER: '68 through '73. T* * ^ m nrT300^TMr CPOTTTrr Tvr RALPH J. BRAGG 19 1 THE WITNESS: Could you repeat the question? 2 BY MR. BOUCHER: 3 Q Between the period 1968 through 1973, was there 4 ever any period where you can recall where somebody fram 5 the marketing division of W. R. Grace requested that you 6 perform some task where that request didn't go directly 7 through Mr. Cranker? 8 A No. 9 Q When you first received the request from Mr. 10 Cranker, do you recall in what form the request was made? 11 A It was his habit to present a new idea verbally, 12 but it was also his habit to document it and once 13 agreement was reached as to whether or not we could handle 14 this work. 15 Q Once it was agreed that you could handle the 16 work, in what way would Mr. Crankerdocument his request? 17 A Generally, by memo. 18 Q Was there a general formwhichthe memo took? 19 A Only in that it would have been addressed to me 20 in this particular place with a copy to his supervisor and 21 other interested people. 22 Q When you were first requested to look into the RALPH J. BRAGG 20 1 possibility of reformulating Mono-Kote 3 so as to remove 2 the asbestos, do you recall what priority was given to 3 that work task? 4 A I recall it -- 5 NR. JONES: Objection as to form, priority as to 6 what, his other tasks? 7 NR. BOUCHER: As to any other tasks. 8 HR. JONES: The world at large, object to the 9 form, you can answer if you can. 10 THE WITNESS: I recall it was relatively high. 11 BY HR. BOUCHER: 12 Q When you say you recall that it was relatively 13 high, how do you recall that it was relatively high, do 14 you recall that? 15 A In view of subsequent activities. 16 Q Did you ever gain an understanding as to why the 17 reformulation of Hono-Kote 3 so as to remove the asbestos 18 was a relatively high priority for you? 19 A Yes. 20 Q When did you gain that understanding? 21 A It was through a period of time that I became 22 aware that asbestos was somewhat of an emotional issue and r* rr r* r> RALPH J. BRAGG 21 1 that it was a decision by C.P.D. to remove themselves from 2 this problem if possible. 3 NR. BOUCHER: Can you read back the last part of 4 the answer, please? 5 (Record read.) 6 BY MR. BOUCHER: 7 Q What was your understanding as to why it was a 8 high priority to remove asbestos from Mono-Kote? 9 HR. JONES: Objection as to form. He didn't 10 testify it was a high priority. 11 BY MR. BOUCHER: 12 Q Relatively high priority? 13 A In comparison with the other research work that I 14 have had done previously, I could tell that it was higher 15 priority. 16 Q Did you gain an understanding as why it was a 17 higher priority other than asbestos being an emotional 18 issue? 19 A No. 20 Q Did the issue of the potential health hazard to 21 individuals who were exposed to Mono-Kote 3 as a result of 22 the contents of asbestos, play any role in your RALPH J. BRAGG 22 1 understanding as to why it was a relatively high priority? 2 A Would yourepeat that question? 3 Q Did anyone ever indicate to you that the 4 potential health affect of exposure to asbestos from 5 Mono-Kote 3 was one of the reasons why it was a 6 realatively high priority for you to reformulate 7 Mono-Kote 3? 8 A Can we go off the record? 9 Q Sure. 10 (Discussion off the record.) 11 MR. BOUCHER: Can we have the question read back? 12 (Record read.) 13 THE WITNESS: Yes, and I emphasize the word 14 potential. 15 BY MR. BOUCHER: 16 Q Who at Grace indicated to you that the potential 17 health hazard from exposure to asbestos contained in 18 Mono-Kote 3 was one of the reasons why it was a relatively 19 high priority for you to reformulate Mono-Kote 3? 20 MR. JONES: Objection as to form, misstates the 21 prior testimony. You can answer. 22 THE WITNESS: I think Mr. Egan had written a memo TAPRERT COURT REPORTING SERVICE, INC. RALPH J. BRAGG 23 1 which referred to a perceived health hazard. 2 BY MR. BOUCHER: 3 Q Do you recall approximately when during the 4 course of the reformulation work that you were doing on 5 Mono-Kote 3, the memo from Tom Egan was written? 6 A No, I do not. 7 Q Was it during the beginning, middle or end, if 8 you can recall? 9 A I don't recall. 10 Q At the time that you had received the memo frm 11 Mr. Egan, had you done any independent research into the 12 medical or scientific literature with respect to the 13 potential health hazards from exposure to asbestos? 14 A First of all, I don't recall when I received the 15 memo, and secondly, such research is not in my field. 16 Q So you have never or had never conducted any 17 independent research yourself and to the medical 18 scientific literature with respect to potential health 19 hazards from exposure to asbestos? 20 A No, sir. 21 Q Did anyone else at Grace ever discuss with you, 22 any potential health hazards associated with exposure to RALPH J. BRAGG 24 1 asbestos as a result or from asbestos contained in 2 Mono-Kote 3? 3 A Not to my recollection. ; 4 Q Were you ever asked to make any -- let me 5 rephrase it. 6 Were you ever asked to conduct any tests in order 7 to determine the friability of Mono-Kote 3 with respect to 8 asbestos? 9 MR. JONES: Objection as to the form of the 10 question. You can answer it if you can. 11 THE WITNESS: Would you repeat the question? 12 MR. BOUCHER: You'd better read it back. 13 (Record read.) 14 THE WITNESS: I was not directly asked to do so, 15 but I do. know that through a request by the General 16 Services Administration, that high velocity air errosion 17 tests were run on MK-3 with extremely favorable results. 18 BY MR. BOUCHER: 19 Q Did you participate in any other tests that would 20 go to the issue of friability of Mono-Kote 3? 21 MR. JONES: Objection as to form, I don't know 22 what you mean by issue of friability, but if that has some T'JT3'DITD'T> BPB^O'T'Twr prpTTTflp RALPH J. BRAGG 25 1 meaning to you Mr. Braggr you can answer the question. 2 THE WITNESS: The word friability is a confusing 3 word. In my experience/ I have attempted to formulate 4 fireproofing compositions of proper density and hardness ,, 5 period. 6 BY MR. BOUCHER: 7 Q Let me go through some documents with you if I 8 can. Let's have marked as Exhibit 1152/ September 17/ 9 1985 memo submitted by R. J. Bragg entitled Surface 10 Hardness and Density of Zonolite Mono-Kote Sprayed 11 Fireproofing. 12 A Did you say '85? 13 Q Excuse mer *65. 14 (The document referred to wasmarked Deposition 15 Exhibit Number 1152 for identification.) 16 Q Have you had an opportunity to review Exhibit 17 1152? 18 A Yes. 19 Q Can you please tell us what1152corresponds 20 with? 21 MR. JONES: Objection' as to form. 22 THE WITNESS: I don't understand the question. RALPH J. BRAGG 26 1 BY MR. BOUCHER: 2 Q 1152 entitled Surface Hardness and Density of 3 Zonolite, what was the purpose of your writing Exhibit 4 1152? 5 A We had made efforts during the marketing of 6 Mono-Kote to maintain a certain hardness and density. The 7 two are directly related so that we would provide a 8 relatively hard membrane of fireproofing at the ceiling 9 level. This opposed to the sprayed fibrous materials 10 which tended to be lower in density and if you had used 11 the word friable before, much more friable, so this is an 12 indication of a particular Mono-Kote which has a dry 13 density of 23.2 pounds per cubic foot and a surface 14 indentation resistance of 414 P.S.I. 15 Q Were any dust studies done to determine the 16 amount of fibers that were released during the tests 17 performed as set out in 1152? 18 A No, sir. 19 MR. JONES: Could I hear the question back, 20 please? 21 (Record read.) 22 BY MR. BOUCHER: RALPH J. BRAGG 27 1 Q Can you tell me how the test was set up that was 2 conducted as reflected in 1152? 3 A Yes, the density would have been determined by 4 dimensioning or measuring the dimensions of a dry sample 5 of Mono-Kote obtaining its weight and then making the 6 calculation to derive the pounds per cubic foot. As far 7 as surface hardness, we had a device, which is called a 8 pocket contrometer spring-loaded device which was 9 depressed into the surface of the Mono-Kote and the force 10 necessary to press that one quarter of an inch into the 11 surface was recorded in pounds which is converted in the 12 instrument to P.S.I. 13 Q Were any comparisontests ever done with any 14 other type of spray-onfireproofing material todetermine 15 the relative surface hardness between Mono-Kote 3 and 16 other types of spray-on fireproofing? 17 A Yes. 18 Q Do you recall when those tests were performed? 19 A It was one of my responsibilities in research not 20 only for the Grace Company, but for whomever I worked to 21 run competitive testing on products and I would obtain, in 22 the case of the dry hose material, samples pretty much any RALPH J. BRAGG 28 1 way I could. I recall one time I walked onto a 2 competitive job and managed to get samples/ took them back 3 to the laboratory for tests, and invariably, these 4 materials are so much softer and they exhibit dustiness at 5 the time they're applied and at the time they're tested. 6 Q In testing these other materials, were you ever 7 able to duplicate this same procedure that you used when 8 you tested the surface hardness of Mono-Kote 3? 9 A Could you repeat the question, please? 10 (Record read.) 11 THE WITNESS: In general, I used the same 12 procedure. 13 Q Let's have marked as Exhibit 1153, the -- a 14 September 14, 1965 letter from Robert W. Hunt Company. 15 (The document referred to was marked Deposition 16 Exhibit 1153 for identification.) 17 Q Have you had an opportunity to review Exhibit 18 1153? 19 A Yes. 20 Q Are you familiar with Robert W. HuntCompany? 21 A Somewhat, yes. 22 Q Did you ever have any interaction, did you ever TAPPERT COURT REPORTING SERVICE, INC. RALPH J. BRAGG 29 1 work with them in any way in your capacity at W. R. Grace? 2 A I don't recall specifically, I do know I have had 3 some interaction with them. 4 Q Did you ever have any interaction with them with 5 respect to Mono-Kote 3? 6 A Not to my knowledge. 7 Q Have you ever seen Exhibit 1153 prior to today? 8 A I don't remember it. 9 Q Let me take you back to Exhibit 1152. Is that 10 your signature that appears on 1152? 11 A Yes. 12 Q Let me hand you a one-page article that appeared 13 in Walls and Ceilings in May of 1970 and have it marked as 14 Exhibit 1154 to see if you ever have seen it or reviewed 15 it before? 16 (The document referred to was marked Deposition 17 Exhibit 1154 for identification.) 18 MR. JONES: Is this the entire document as it 19 appearing in the files produced to you or are there other 20 things attached to it? 21 MR. BOUCHER: That is the entire document as it 22 appeared RALPH J. BRAGG 30 1 HR. JONES: Now, wait until he asks you a 2 question. 3 BY MR. BOUCHER: 4 Q Have you ever seen Exhibit 1154 before? 5 A No, I thought he asked if I read it. 6 HR. JONES: He nay have. 7 BY HR. BOUCHER: Let me hand you what we will 8 have marked as Exhibit 1155 and it is a 22-page document 9 which is a xerox copy of a report at large, the Magic 10 Mineral by Paul Brodeur, a reprint from the New Yorker 11 issue November 12, 1968. 12 (The document referred to was marked Deposition 13 Exhibit 1155 for identificaiton.) 14 Q Have you ever seen Exhibit 1155 prior to today? 15 A No, sir. 16 Q Have you ever heard of the article that appeared 17 by Mr. Brodeur in the New Yorker magazine? 18 MR. JONES: Please fix a timeframe. 19 BY MR. BOUCHER: 20 Q 1968? 21 A I've never heard of it. 22 Q Let me hand you what we'll have marked as Exhibit TAPPERT COURT REPORTING SERVICE. INC. RALPH J. BRAGG 31 1 1156 and it is the July 15, 1970 memo titled Asbesto Fiber 2 Concentrations in Air from Spray Fireproofing Operation 3 Using Zonolite Products and it appears to be five pages 4 long, 5 (The document referred to was mar iced Deposition 6 Exhibit 1156 for identification.) 7 Q Have you had an opportunity to review Exhibit 8 1156? 9 A Yes, sir, I have scanned it, I have not seen this 10 before. 11 Q Have you ever in your capacity at W. R. Grace, 12 did you have any interactions with Tabershaw and Cooper 13 and Associates? 14 A No. 15 Q Let me have marked as Exhibit 1157, an abstract 16 of tests report dated April 30, 1964 signed by Robert W. 17 T. Olson, P.E.. 18 (The document referred to was marked Deposition 19 Exhibit 1157 for identification.) 20 Q Have you had an opportunity to review Exhibit 21 1157? 22 A Yes. tjdcpot rnnD'T' cponoTTMC pppvrCF tnr. RALPH J. BRAGG 32 1 Q Have you seen Exhibit 1157 prior to today? 2 A I think so. 3 Q Do you recall when the last time you saw Exhibit 4 1157 was? 5 A Probably while 1 was still employed by the Grace 6 Company. 7 Q Did you have any interaction with Robert W. T. 8 Olson in your capacity while working at W. R. Grace? 9 A I don't recall his namer but I do remember that 10 we had interaction with Boyle Engineering Laboratory. 11 Q What would be the reason for you seeing a copy of 12 1157 while you were employed at W. R. Grace? 13 A I was probably involved in the preparation of the 14 sample which they report here. 15 Q Would you have been present during the time that 16 the test procedures were employed? 17 A No, sir. 18 Q Do you know whether or not any dust studies were 19 conducted after the test to determine whether any asbestos 20 fibers were emitted from the Mono-Rote that was being 21 tested? 22 A Could you repeat that question. TAPPERT COURT REPORTING SERVICE, INC. RALPH J. BRAGG 33 1 (Record read.) 2 THE WITNESS: No. 3 BY MR. BOUCHER: 4 Q To your knowledge, lid W. R. Grace commission any 5 tests similar to the test that is reflected in Exhibit 6 1157 on any sprayed-on asbestos fireproofing materials 7 that were manufactured or produced by any entities other 8 than W. R. Grace? 9 A Not to my knowledge. 10 Q Let me then hand you what we will have marked as 11 Exhibit 1158, it was a June 25, 1965 letter to Mr. Paul 12 Martin Malter from Robert W. T. Olson. 13 (The document referred to was marked Deposition 14 1158 for identification.) 15 Q You have had an opportunity to review Exhibit 16 1158? 17 A Yes. 18 Q Have you seen Exhibit 1158 prior to today? 19 A I don't remember it. 20 Q What was Martin Malter's position at Grace in 21 terms of his job responsibilities in 1965? 22 A His title in this memo is Manager of Plastics t'lDDPDT rnTTP'r pppofttnG PFPVTCF. TNG. RALPH J. BRAGG 34 1 Products which would have been the foam polystyrene 2 product line of Grace, but subsequent to that, he was 3 appointed Manager of Fireproofing Products proceeding Tom 4 Egan. 5 Q Let me hand you what we'll mark as Exhibit 1159, 6 it is a September 14, 1965 letter from Robert W. Hunt 7 Company to Mr. Martin Halter. 8 (The document referred to was marked Deposition 9 Exhibit 1159 for identificaiton.) 10 Q Have you had an opportunity to review Exhibit 11 1159? 12 A Yes. 13 Q Have you ever seen Exhibit 1159 prior to today? 14 A No, I have not. 15 Q Did you ever do any work with anyone fromRobert 16 W. Hunt Company? 17 A I recall that I have, but I don't remember 18 specifically what it was. 19 Q The Exhibit 1159reports bond testresults; is 20 that correct? 21 A Yes. 22 Q There is a column set out on line failure. TAPPERT COURT REPORTING SERVICE, INC. RALPH J. BRAGG 35 1 underneath it it indicates core broke. What does that 2 mean to your understanding? 3 A It means, according to this letter -- 4 NR. JONES: Not according to the letter, you have 5 never seen the letter. If you have an independent 6 understanding of what core broke means, you may testify to 7 it. 8 THE WITNESS: The core in this case is Mono-Kote 9 and the word core broke means that the material broke in 10 cohesion not at the interface wnich was being-tested and I 11 might also add that the failure, in looking at the column, 12 the second from the last of which is labeled powers per 13 square foot indicate that the failure is in excess of 14 eyeballing it a thousand pounds per souare foot which is 15 pretty good for material that can't weigh more than two 16 pounds a square foot. 17 MR. JONES: Are you going to move to a new 18 document at this point? 19 MR. BOUCHER: I think so. 20 BY MR. BOUCHER: 21 Q Do you know what the -- what were the 22 specifications, if you can recall, in 1965 for tensile TAPPERT COURT REPORTING SERVICE. INC. RALPH J. BRAGG 36 1 strength with respect to pounds per square foot for 2 Mono-Kote 3? 3 A I don't know if there was a specificaton for 4 tensile strength, I doubt that there was and in this 5 particular letter, they're referring to adhesive bond as 6 opposed to tensile strength. 7 HR. JONES: Can we break? 8 HR. BOUCHER: Let me ask one question. 9 BY HR. BOUCHER: 10 Q Did you ever -- I don't know if this is already 11 come up, did you ever do any work with or consult with 12 Werby Laboratories? 13 A No. 14 Q During your work at W. R. Grace,did you ever get 15 involved in air sampling or fiber counting with respect to 16 Hono-Kote 3? 17 A No. 18 HR. BOUCHER: Let's take a break. 19 (Recess.) 20 BY HR. BOUCHER: 21 Q Let me hand youwhat will bemarked as 1160. It 22 is a three-page. Hay 9, 1969 memo to R. W. Sterrett from TAPPERT COURT REPORTING SERVICE, INC. RALPH J. BRAGG 37 1 K. R. Cranker. 2 (The document referred to was marked Deposition 3 Exhibit 1160 for identification.) 4 BY MR. BOUCHER: 5 Q Have you had an opportunity to review Exhibit 6 1160? 7 A Yes, sir. 8 Q Have you receiveda copy of Exhibit 1160 prior to 9 today? 10 A Yes. 11 Q The date of thememo is May 9,1969, the first 12 paragraph indicates 13 Ralph Bragg and I have established priorities 14 on a list of projects to be worked on during the 15 rest of this year." 16 Was it your normal practice to set out priorities 17 for projects to be worked on during the course of a year 18 with Mr. Cranker? 19 MR. JONES: Objection as to form. This isn't Mr. 20 Bragg's memo, so why would it be his normal practice? 21 MR. BOUCHER: It says Mr. Bragg and I have 22 established. TAPPERT COURT REPORTING SERVICE, INC. RALPH J. BRAGG 38 1 MR. JONES: That's not your question. 2 BY MR. BOUCHER: 3 Q Go ahead. 4 A I would say it's Mr. Cranker's form to prioritize 5 projects. 6 Q So you didn't participate in the prioritization 7 of projects during the course of a year with Mr. Cranker? 8 A Yes, I did. 9 Q So it was your normal practice to participate 10 with Mr. Cranker in prioritizing projects that would be 11 worked on during the year? 12 A If he asked me. 13 Q The next paragraph indicates 14 "I am summarizing the projects in order of 15 importance." 16 As you sit here now, does the order of importance 17 as set out in this memo, appear to be correct as you 18 recall it? 19 MR. JONES: Objection as to form, what does 20 correct mean? Does he agree with the prioritization or 21 agree that he agreed with it at that time? 22 MR. BOUCHER: Is it accuarately set out? TAPPERT COURT REPORTING SERVICE, INC. RALPH J. BRAGG 39 1 HR. JONES: It's not his memo, Mr. Boucher, he 2 can't answer that question. 3 THE WITNESS: I agree that I agreed that this was 4 the right order of priority at the time of May 1969. 5 BY MR. BOUCHER: 6 Q What criteria, if you can recall, was used in 7 establishing the priorities, or the order of priorities, 8 for these projects, as set out in the memo of 1969? 9 A Actually, there the criteria are too numerous to 10 recall, but they would involve business decisions, 11 requests from the various product managers which 12 essentilly are business decisions. 13 Q The sixth priority is Mono-Kote. It appears on 14 the second page. Do you see that? 15 A Yes. 16 Q It indicates 17 We have one request to find a substitute for 18 asbestos in this compound." 19 Is that correct? 20 A Yes. 21 Q Do you know or recall who made the one request to 22 find a substitute for asbestos that is referred to in TAPPERT COURT REPORTING SERVICE, INC. RALPH J. BRAGG 40 1 Exhibit 1160? 2 A Not completely. I would expect it would have 3 come from the marketing group of fireproofing. 4 Q The memo is dated Hay 9, 1969. Does that refresh 5 your recollection as to when the first request was made to 6 your department to find an asbestos-free substitute for 7 Mono-Kote 3? 8 A Yes. 9 Q So that request would have been prior to May of 10 196 9? 11 A Yes, sir. 12 Q Do you have any recollection,having reviewed 13 Exhibit 1160, as to how many weeks or months prior to May 14 of 1969 that request would have been made? 15 A No. 16 Q The second sentence in thefirst paragraph on 17 page two under category 6 Mono-Rote reads 18 "Asbestos is a health hazard." 19 Is that something that you had discussed with Mr. 20 Cranker with respect to Mono-Kote? 21 A I don't believe so. 22 Q Is Mr. Cranker still alivetoday, do youknow? TAPPERT COURT REPORTING SERVICE, INC. RALPH J. BRAGG 41 1 A I don't know. 2 Q The next sentence reads 3 "We will assist only in an advisory capacity by 4 selecting possible substitutes." 5 What was your job responsibility with respect to 6 the advising capacity? 7 A I was responsible for determining potential 8 candidates for test at this time. 9 Q By candidates for test, do you mean substitutes 10 for asbestos? 11 A No, I would say I had total responsibility for 12 the composition. 13 Q What do you mean by candidates? 14 A If one removes one component, there is a certain 15 amount of readjustment that has to take place to come up 16 with a viable product. It's not simply a matter of 17 pulling out one ingredient and putting in another one. 18 Q The next sentence reads 19 It appears Chapin's lab will do the testing." 20 Do you see that? 21 A Yes, sir. 22 Q What was Chapin's lab, or who was Chapin, if you T&POPPT ronPT REPORTING SERVICE, INC. RALPH J. BRAGG 42 1 recall? 2 A W. R. Grace had at that time and still maintains 3 an application laboratory in the town of Travelers Rest, 4 South Carolina, and during this time period, Jim Chapin 5 was manager of that laboratory. 6 Q Do you recall how many meetings you had with Mr. 7 Cranker prior to May 9, 1969 where you discussed the 8 reformulation of Mono-Rote 3 to find a substitute for 9 asbestos? 10 A 1 don't, but I would have to assume that -- 11 MR. JONES: Don't assume. What do you remember? 12 THE WITNESS: Minimal 13 MR. JONES: Only what you remember, not what you 14 assume. 15 BY MR. BOUCHER: 16 Q Let me hand you a memo which will be marked as 17 Exhibit 1161 dated July 8, 1969 from W. R. Sterrett -- 18 excuse me, from G. S. Breslauer, B-R-E-S-L-A-U-E-R to R. 19 W. Sterrett, subject fine wood fiber. 20 (The document referred to was marked Deposition 21 Exhibit 1161 for identificaiton.) 22 Q Have you had an opportunity to review Exhibit TAPPERT COURT REPORTING SERVICE, INC. RALPH J. BRAGG 43 1 1161? 2 A Yes. 3 Q Did you receive a copy of 1161 prior to today? 4 A Yes. 5 Q Did you receive it at or about the time that the 6 memo was dated July of 1969? 7 A Yes. 8 Q Whatwas Mr.Breslauer's jobresponsiblity, if 9 you can recall, in July of 1969? 10 A As I recall, he was manager of the Permadeck 11 manufacturing facility in Brunswick, Georgia. 12 Q The first item of the memo indicates that, or 13 states 14 "In the search for a substitute fiber for 15 asbestos in Mono-Kote" 16 was Mr. Breslauer involved in research or aiding 17 you in finding a substitute for asbestos in Mono-Kote? 18 A Not directly. 19 Q The third paragraph, there is an underlined 20 sentence 21 "I personally doubt that the flammability of the 22 material would make any difference in the product." Tin pppp'p rnnon oppoot'Ttjc pppvrrp . tmt RALPH J. BRAGG 44 1 Did you underline that? 2 A Yes, I think I did. 3 Q What was the purpose for underlining that 4 sentence? 5 A It's an important concept. 6 Q How so? i j 7 A Well, at the time, we were doing reformulation on I 8 MK-3, the general belief was that we needed a reinforcing i 9 fiber in the composition which would withstand the high ! 10 temperatures of fire exposure. Now, all of a sudden, here 11 is an idea where a fiber is recommended which certainly 12 not would withstand those temperatures. 13 Q Did you agree with Mr. Breslauer that the 14 flammability of the material wouldn't make any difference 15 in the product at that time? 16 A Not at that time, but I had occasion to change my 17 mind once or twice since then. 18 Q What was the purpose served by the use of 19 asbestos in Mono-Rote 3? 20 A There were several purposes. First of all, the 21 wet mixing of Mono-Rote, it produced a homogeneous 22 product. Also, asbestos fiber has a large affinity for TAPPERT COURT REPORTING SERVICE, INC. RALPH J. BRAGG 45 1 water, and again, in the wet mixing to get proper 2 consistency, we have to add quite a bit of water which 3 also increases the yield of the product, makes it more 4 attractive to the contractor. Asbestos fibers of 5 pumpability aid, it reduces the friction through the long 6 hoses that the Mono-Kote has to traverse and then once in 7 place on the beam or column or deck, it has a reinforcing 8 role both during the drying of the Mono-Kote and in the 9 event a fire occurs. 10 Q You say reinforcing role, is that similar to the 11 role as a binder in the product? 12 A Yes, it's not the prime binder, it ties things 13 together. 14 Q Sort of weaves things together? 15 A Right. 16 Q Was fine wood fiber tested to determine whether 17 it could be used as a substitute? 18 A Yes, it was. 19 Q What was the results? 20 A As a matter of record, fine wood fiber, not the 21 form that was recommended in this particular memo, but a 22 more refined form did eventually replace asbestos and was m A T> r>orn n ott D m orisn DTTMr CPOUT^P Twr RALPH J. BRAGG 46 1 patented as Mono-Rote 4, and at that time, we concluded 2 pretty much the same as Mr. Breslauer that one did not 3 need an inorganic fiber, that a cellulosic was acceptable, 4 but events happened afterward which changed our thinking 5 on it. I won't say our, I'd say my thinking. 6 Q Let me hand you what will be marked 1162 which is 7 an October 1, 1961 -- October 1, 1969 memo, subject 8 Mono-Kote from R. J. Bragg to W. R. Payment at Traverlers 9 Rest. 10 (The document referred to was marked Deposition 11 1162 for identification.) 12 Q Have you had an opportunity to review Exhibit 13 1162? 14 A In general. 15 Q Is that your signature that appears on the second 16 page of 1162? 17 A Yes. 18 Q Why did you send a copy of 1162 to W. R. Payment? 19 MR. JONES: Object to the form, you can answer. 20 THE WITNESS: Evidently, I didn't review this 21 carefully enough. What is 1162? 22 Q It is this document that's before you. TAPPERT COURT REPORTING SERVICE, INC. RALPH J. BRAGG 47 1 A In the first paragraph, I state that 2 "I'm requesting that Hr. Payment run additional 3 tests" 4 So the reason is to outline what it is I'd like 5 him to do. 6 BY HR. BOUCHER: 7 Q As of October 1, 1969 then, had you been put in 8 charge of primary responsibility of finding an asbestos 9 substitute for Hono-Kote 3? 10 A I would say yes. 11 Q One of the cc's of Exhibit 1162 is to Ray 12 Rothfelder. Do you have any recollection as to why he 13 received a copy of Exhibit 1162? 14 A Yes, in the second paragraph, I indicated I'd had 15 a conversation with Ray and that I am writing to ask him 16 or provide him certain information and request present 17 status of his work. 18 Q Having reviewed Exhibit 1162 -- 19 A Again, that'js the number, okay. 20 Q Having reviewed Exhibit 1162, does it refresh 21 your recollection as to the role that Ray Rothfelder 22 played in the reformulation of Hono-Kote 3? TBUVPPT COURT REPORTING SERVICE. INC. RALPH J. BRAGG 48 1 A No, I Indicated before that he had the original 2 idea of paper fiber and that he had been of assistance in 3 subsequent months. 4 Q The first sentence indicates 5 Because of the urgency of Mono-Kote 6 reformulation, I have requested through T. Egan and 7 J. K. Chapin that you run additional tests." 8 Why did you use the term urgency of Mono-Kote 9 reformulation? 10 A That state of being was obviously passed on to me 11 through Mr. Cranker. 12 Q Do you have a recollection in what manner it was 13 passed on to you? 14 A No, I do not. 15 Q Do you recall approximately how many meetings you 16 had with Mr. Cranker between May of 1969 and October of 17 196 9? 18 A I don't recall, but our desks were almost side by 19 side, so there were numerous. 20 Q Did you receive any correspondence from Mr. Egan 21 between May of 1969 and October of 1969 that led you to 22 believe that there was some urgency in the reformulation TAPPERT COURT REPORTING SERVICE, INC. RALPH J. BRAGG 49 1 of Mono-Kote 3? 2 A Again, I don't recall. 3 Q Between Hay of 1969 andOctoberof 1969, did you 4 gain an understanding as to why there was an urgency for 5 the reformulation of Mono-Kote 3? 6 A Yes. 7 Q What was the understanding that you gained at 8 that period of time? 9 A That there was such an urgency. 10 Q Why? 11 A I would say that the fireproofing segment of 12 C.P.D. business was significant and also that I am 13 assuming our management considered that asbestos might be 14 a potential problem. 15 Q By October of 1969, hadn't Hr. Egan indicated to 16 you by correspondence or during conversation that he 17 viewed asbestos as being a potential problem in 18 Mono-Kote 3? 19 A He may have, but I don't have specific 20 recollection. 21 Q Having reviewed -- let me rephrase that. 22 Exhibit 1162 indicates that there has become some TAPPERT COURT REPORTING SERVICE, INC. RALPH J. BRAGG 50 1 urgency of Mono-Kote reformulation. Does that mean that 2 between May of 1969 and October 1 of 1969 that tasks that 3 were outlined in the memo which has been previously marked 4 as 1160/ were reprioritized and that Mono-Kote became a 5 higher priority than number six on the list? 6 A Certainly. 7 Q By October of 1969/ would you say that Mono-Kote 8 became the highest priority with respect to the tasks in 9 your work group? 10 A Yes, sir, I would. 11 Q The second paragraph indicates, there is a 12 sentence that starts off 13 "T. Egan has asked me to correlate all of this 14 work so that we now appear to have a trio involved here." 15 The trio that you're referring to would be 16 yourself, Mr. Payment and Mr. Rothfelder? 17 A Yes. 18 Q Do you have any recollection as to in what manner 19 Mr. Egan asked you to correlate all of the work on the 20 reformulation of Mono-Kote 3? 21 A I don't have a recollection. 22 Q As you sit here today, do you know whether or not TAPPERT COURT REPORTING SERVICE, INC. RALPH J. BRAGG 51 1 that request was made through Mr. Cranker or whether it 2 was made directly to you from Mr. Egan? 3 A I say that Egan has asked me, so it would have 4 been made direct to me. 5 Q Is that something unusual for somebody from 6 marketing to ask you specifically to do a task? 7 A Somewhat unusual, yes. 8 Q As you sit here, do you have any recollection or 9 understanding as to why Mr. Egan asked you to correlate 10 the work? 11 A No. 12 Q Let me hand you then what we will have marked as 13 1163. 14 (The document referred to was marked Deposition 15 Exhibit 1163 for identification.) 16 Q Have you had an opportunity to review Exhibit 17 1163? 18 A Yes. 19 Q Did you receive a copy of 1163? 20 A Yes. 21 Q Do you remember receiving a copy of that? 22 A I do now that I read this. TAPPERT COURT REPORTING SERVICE, INC. RALPH J. BRAGG 52 1 Q When is the last time you saw Exhibit 1163, if 2 you can recall? 3 A I would guess it's December 1, 1969, but I'm not 4 sure. 5 Q In what capacity was Mr. C. R. Babb working for 6 W. R. Grace at that period of time? 7 A As I recall, he was assitant to Mr. Sterrett and 8 Mr. Sterrett was the Vice-President, but I think that Roy 9 Babb had another title which I do not recall. He might 10 have been Marketing Manager. 11 Q Did you have any conversation with Mr. Egan about 12 the substance of what is discussed in Exhibit 1163? 13 A Yes, I did. I recall arguing with him about 14 products which have asbestos in free-form, for example, 15 the dry hose applied fireproofing materials versus 16 Mono-Kote 3 which had what I considered very tightly 17 encapsulated asbestos fibers and I had concern of why 18 Mono-Kote 3 would be grouped with fireprooging in general 19 when most of the fireproofing materials were of the dry 20 fiber type. 21 Q How many times did you argue with Mr. Egan on 22 that point? TAPPERT COURT REPORTING SERVICE, INC. RALPH J. BRAGG 53 1 A I wouldn't say it was an argument, I would say it 2 was a healthy discussion and perhaps at least half a 3 dozen. 4 Q What was Nr. Egan's reponse to you? 5 A I think it would have been pretty much as 6 outlined in this memo. 7 Q In other words, he had very strong feelings that 8 asbestos should be taken out of Mono-Kote; is that 9 correct? 10 A That's what he says here, yes. 11 Q That's what he said to you during thehealthy 12 discussions that you had with him on the subject? 13 A As I recall, he had a sympathetic ear for my 14 position, but I think he was driven by other 15 considerations which I probably was not aware of. 16 Q During the healthy discussions that you had with 17 Mr. Egan on this topic, he indicated to you, did he not, 18 that he felt the use of asbestos in Mono-Kote created a 19 health hazard? 20 A I don't think he put it that way, no. 21 Q What way did he put it? 22 A I think he said the use of asbestos was a T'lMSBrDw nnrTorn oPOno'TTWf; CFPVmr twp RALPH J. BRAGG 54 1 perceived health hazard and as of yet, had not been proven 2 at the levels that even the spray fibrous materials were 3 evolving. 4 Q Did he indicate to you why he felt that Grace had 5 an ethical obligation to get asbestos out of Mono-Kote 3? 6 A No. 7 Q Did you ask him what he meant by that? 8 A No. 9 Q What else did he say to you during these healthy 10 discussions that you had with him with respect to the 11 reformulation of Mono-Kote 3? 12 A I think most of the rest of the conversation 13 would have been what our progress was at the time on the 14 reformulation effort. 15 Q Did he ever indicate to you during these healthy 16 discussions that he felt it was taking too much time to 17 develop an asbestos-free substitute for Mono-Kote 3? 18 A I think it wasTom's normal manner to be anxious 19 to get jobs done. 20 Q Was the reformulation of Mono-Kote 3 one of the 21 jobs that he was anxious to get done? 22 A Yes, sir. TAPPERT COURT REPORTING SERVICE, INC. RALPH J. BRAGG 55 1 Q Did he indicate to you at various times that he 2 was -- that he believed it was taking tc-> much time to 3 develop an asbestos-free alternative to Mono-Kote 3? 4 HR. JONES: Objection, asked and answered. You 5 can tell him again. 6 THE WITNESS: Tom was very supportive of the work 7 I was doing and rather than be irritated, would offer all 8 help possible. 9 BY HR. BOUCHER: 10 Q I didn't mean to imply by my question that he was 11 irritated, but did he seem to be disappointed that it was 12 taking -- 13 A Not to my knowledge. 14 Q Was anyone else presentduring any of the healthy 15 discussions that you had with Hr. Egan on the 16 reformulation of Hono-Kote 3? 17 A Probably, but I can't recall who it was. 18 Q Did you ever take any notes during any of the 19 healthy discussions that you had with Hr. Egan with 20 respect to the reformulation of Hono-Kote 3? 21 A No. 22 Q During any of. the healthydiscussions that you TAPPERT COURT REPORTING SERVICE, INC. RALPH J. BRAGG 56 1 had with Mr. Egan on the reformulation of Mono-Kote 3, did 2 you discuss specifically the situation that was occurring 3 in Mew York and Philadelphia with respect to the use of 4 asbestos in spray fireproofing? we A No, because I had no knowledge of what was 6 happening in the field. 7 Q At the time that -- during the time that Mr. Egan 8 had these healthy discussions with you, did he indicate to 9 you a desire to develop an asbestos-free alternative to 10 Mono-Kote 3 or was it an asbestos-free substitute for 11 Mono-Kote 3? 12 MR. JONES: Obejection as to form. 13 THE WITNESS: I don't know the distinction 14 between alternative and substitute. 15 BY MR. BOUCHER: 16 Q Was it your understanding that Mr. Egan wanted to 17 take Mono-Kote 3 with asbestos off the market and 18 substitute an asbestos-free Mono-Kote in its place? 19 A It was my impression that Mr. Egan wanted to 20 replace Mono-Kote 3 with an asbestos-free Mono-Kote of 21 similar properties, one which would hopefully win the same 22 listings that Underwriter's Laboratories that MK-3 had TAPPERT COURT REPORTING SERVICE, INC. RALPH J. BRAGG 57 1 enjoyed for years. 2 Q The next-to-the-last paragraph indicates 3 "We need a realignment of work assignments so 4 that Ralph and/or others can get on this matter at 5 once"# underlining at once. 6 After the December 1, 1969 memo by Mr. Egan, was 7 there a realignment of work assignments to help you get 8 on this matter at once? 9 A I think that Egan was not aware at the time he 10 wrote this that we were on it at once, so this might be 11 after the fact. 12 Q So by the December 1, 1969 memo, it was already 13 the highest priority matter in your work group? 14 A Yes. 15 Q So the best you recall after December 1, 1969, 16 there was no further realignment of work assignments to 17 help get the job done? 18 A No, that's not correct. 19 Q Was there any realignment of work assignments to 20 help you get the work done after December 1, 1969? 21 A There was a continual review pretty much on my 22 part and reassignment of individuals for picking up new ^ P t*t p m t>T?Df>D'PTVTO OtTTMT T PP T MT RALPH J. BRAGG 58 1 people or dropping people as we went along as the needs 2 dictated. 3 Q So by December 1 of 1969, the importance of 4 reformulating Hono-Kote 3 was high enough that as work 5 assignments needed to be reassigned to help on the 6 reformulation efforts, those reassignments took place? 7 A Yes. 8 Q Again, in the next-to-the-last paragraph in 9 Exhibit 1163, the last sentence reads 10 It's been much too long already that we've been 11 looking at this problem." 12 As of December 1, 1969, did Hr. Egan indicate to 13 you that he felt it had been much too long that you had 14 been looking at the problem? 15 HR. JONES: Asked and answered twice, I'll 16 instruct the witness not to answer. 17 THE WITNESS: I don't choose to answer. 18 BY HR. BOUCHER: 19 Q Are you going to follow your attorney's 20 instructions and refuse to answer the question? 21 A Yes. 22 Q Having reviewed the last sentence in the 'fa d'dpd'T' rnriDT pptjoPTTNG SERVTCE- INC. RALPH J. BRAGG 59 1 next-to-the-last paragraph again, does it refresh your 2 recollection at all the fact that Hr. Egan had indicated 3 to you by December 1 or 1969 that it had been much too 4 long that the problem had been looked at? 5 A I might -- could I confer with counsel? 6 Q Sure. 7 HR. JONES: The question was? 8 HR. BOUCHER: Please read the question. 9 (Record read.) 10 THE WITNESS: Yes, it refreshes my memory. 11 BY HR. BOUCHER: 12 Q In what way does it refresh your memory? 13 In other words, by December 1 of 1969, having 14 reviewed the last sentence in the next-to-last paragraph, 15 does it refresh your recollection that in fact Hr. Egan 16 had indicated to you by that time he felt it was taking 17 much too long? 18 A I know that he is promising all the help possible 19 to let us go forward from here. 20 HR. BOUCHER: Let's take a couple minute break. 21 (Recess.) 22 BY HR. BOUCHER: RALPH J. BRAGG 60 1 Q Let me have marked as Exhibit 1164r this 2 hand-written memo dated 12/21/69 Re: Mono-Kote 3 reformulation to W. R. Payment from R. J. Bragg. 4 (The document referred to was marked Deposition 5 Exhibit 1164 for identificaiton.) 6 Q Have you had an opportunity to reveiw Exhibit 7 1164? 8 A Yes, I would say, though, it doesn't appear to be 9 complete, there is no signature and there might be 10 additional information on another page. 11 Q That's sort of my sense. 12 Is that your handwriting that appears on Exhibit 13 1164? 14 A Yes. 15 Q Was it your normal practice to sign hand-written 16 memos such as this one which is marked as 1164? 17 A Yes. 18 Q Does it appear that a page or so is missing from 19 1164? 20 A Certainly a signature. 21 Q The first paragraph reads 22 "As a result of this morning's meeting with K. 'Phvovv'v COOPT REPORTING SERVICE. INC. RALPH J. BRAGG 61 1 Harrison, R. W. Sterrett, V. H. Dodson, K. R. Cranker, 2 T. Egan and myself, the following decisions were 3 made." 4 I don't remember talking about Mr. K. Harrison. 5 Can you tell me what his job responsibilities were as of 6 12/69 to your understanding? 7 A At that point in time, he was Executive 8 Vice-President of C.P.D. 9 Q Who did he report to if you know, at that time? 10 A Mr. Vining. 11 Q Was it unusual for Mr. Harrison to participate in 12 a meeting with you with respect to your work at W. R. 13 Grace? 14 A With most of my work, but on Mono-Kote 15 reformulation it was not unusual. 16 Q Did he participate on a regular basis with you 17 during meetings that you had with others on the 18 reformulation of Mono-Kote? 19 A Either he or Mr. Vining, sometimes both. 20 Q Did you gain an understanding as to the reason 21 for Mr. Harrison's participation in these meetings? 22 A I think it had to do with the urgency of the 'T' b odpot rnriPT pppoRTTNG SERVICE. INC. RALPH J. BRAGG 62 1 situation. 2 Q Did he ever give you that indication? 3 A Yes. 4 Q What did he say or do to give you that 5 indication? 6 A I don't recall. 7 Q Did you have any understanding or gain any 8 understanding as to why Hr. Vining participated in these 9 meetings with respect to the reformulation of Mono-Kote 3? 10 A Yes. 11 Q What was that understanding? 12 A Urgency. 13 Q And from what did you gainthat understanding? 14 A Verbal comments made at openings of such 15 meetings. 16 Q By Mr. Vining or Mr. Harrison? 17 A By Mr. Vining, Ithink we're speaking of him. 18 Q What did Mr. Vining say interms of verbal 19 statements at the openings of meetings? 20 A I can't recollect. 21 Q Do you recall at all the substance or gist of his 22 comments? TAPPERT COURT REPORTING SERVICE, INC. RALPH J. BRAGG 63 1 A No. 2 Q Do you recall anything that Hr.Vining ever said 3 to you ir. substance with respect to the reformulation of 4 Mono-Kote 3? 5 A Not specifically, no. 6 Q But he did give you an indication that hefelt 7 there was some urgency to the reformulation process? 8 A Yes. 9 Q Did he give you the indication that he felt it 10 should be a top priority? 11 A Yes. 12 Q Did Mr. Harrison confirm that -- did Mr. Harrison 13 likewise indicate to you that the reformulation of 14 Mono-Kote 3 was a top priority? 15 A Yes. 16 Q Do you remember anything that Mr. Harrison ever 17 said to you during this period of time about the 18 reformulation of Mono-Kote 3 or the gist of his 19 conversations with you? 20 A No. 21 Q Did Mr. Vining or Mr. Harrison participate -- let 22 me rephrase that. TAPPERT court REPORTING SERVICE, INC. RALPH J. BRAGG 64 1 Did Mr. Vining or Mr. Harrison make any 2 suggestions to you during the courses of these meetings 3 that took place with respect to the reformulation of 4 Mono-Kote 3? 5 MR. JONES: Coulc I hear the question, please? 6 (Record read.) 7 MR. JONES: Any suggestions as to what he should 8 do? 9 MR. BOUCHER: Right. 10 THE WITNESS: I don't recall specific discussion. | 11 BY MR. BOUCHER: 12 Q The first paragraph of Exhibit 1164, the last 13 three words are 14 "Lower cost alternatives." 15 To what extent was cost a factor in the 16 development of an asbestos-free Mono-Kote product? 17 A Just in general, we knew that we could not j i j 18 introduce a product which would be out-priced in the 19 marketplace, there were other fireproofing materials 20 available, so we had to place this in a reasonable 21 position. Also, at that point, I had identified cellufloc ! 1 22 as a viable alternative. I knew the price of this, it was TAPPERT COURT REPORTING SERVICE, INC. RALPH J. BRAGG 65 1 expensive, and so, I'm thinking of looking for lower costs 2 than cellufloc alternative. 3 Q What is cellufloc? 4 A It's a highly refined sulfate pump fiber, a wood 5 fiber. 6 Q Similar to newspaper? 7 A Yes, but much more refined, much more expensive. 8 Q So by 12/21/1969, you were successful in finding 9 an asbestos-free alternative to Mono-Kote; is that 10 correct? 11 A Up to the point of bench research, but mind you, 12 one has to go beyond that in this type of research. We 13 had to confirm candidate compositions by pilot fire 14 testing, by certainly full-scali Underwriter Lab testing, 15 and this is a procedure that can spend ten to twelve 16 months. 17 Q So by 12/21/1969, there had been no UL testing on 18 the cellufloc alternative to Mono-Kote 3? 19 A I think that's correct. 20 Q Do you have any recollection of how soon after 21 12/21/1969 the first UL tests were performed on an 22 asbestos-free Mono-Kote? /*nrrT>*T uponow Twn cpouTpr TVtn RALPH J. BRAGG 66 1 A I don't have any fixed data in mind, but it seems 2 to roe that we would have had mother four or five, maybe 3 six months of pilot fire testing and additional laboratory 4 work before we were ready to go to UL. 5 Q Based on your-- let me rephrase that. 6 Did you gain an understanding from Mr. Vining 7 that he was interested in the development of an 8 asbestos-free replacement for Mono-Kote 3? 9 A I think that understanding was acquired sometime 10 before Mr. Vining got involved in review meetings. 11 Q Did he at any point in time confirm that 12 understanding? 13 A I believe that he did, but I can't specifically 14 recall how or when. 15 Q Let me hand you what will be marked as Exhibit 16 1165. It is a February 24, 1970 memo from Thomas Egan to 17 T. P. Feit re-equivalency at UL. 18 (The document referred to was marked Deposition 19 Exhibit Number 1165 for identification.) 20 Q Have you had an opportunity to review Exhibit 21 1165? 22 A Yes. TAPPERT COURT REPORTING SERVICE, INC. RALPH J. BRAGG 67 1 Q What was Mr. Felt's responsibilities at 2 W. R. Grace in February 1970, as best you can recall? 3 A I think he was Assistant Product Manager of 4 Fireproofing. 5 Q And what was his role, if any, in interacting 6 with you on the formulation of an asbestos-free Mono-Kote? 7 A He didn't have much of a role interacting with 8 me, but he did have interacting with the Underwriter's 9 Laboratories. 10 Q Do you remember receiving a copy of Exhibit 1165? 11 A Now that I see it in front of me, I do, yes. 12 Q What was Mr. Ottinger's role at W. R. Grace in 13 February of '70, if you can recall? 14 A John was a sales capacity in New York City 15 selling, among other things, Mono-Kote. 16 Q Did he have any interaction with you during this 17 period of time with respect to the reformulation of 18 Mono-Kote 3? 19 A No. 20 Q The first paragraph indicates that 21 "Spraydon has developed an asbestos-free assembly 22 and that Cafco has intimated that they have passed 'KBODPTsm rnncr opppiPTING SERVICE. INC. RALPH J. BRAGG 68 1 Underwriter Laboratory tests." 2 Is that information that you obtained from anyone 3 other than through this memo from Tom Egan? 4 A I think you're correct, I didn't -- did not 5 obtain it from anyone except through this memo. 6 Q Did anyone ever indicate to you that as a result 7 of the fact that Spraydon and Cafco had tested materialf 8 were about to test asbestos-free materials, that there was 9 any additional urgency to the reformulation of 10 Mono-Kote 3? 11 A I think this perhaps is Egan's way of reminding 12 me, and certainly Tom Feit, of the urgency. 13 Q The second sentence in the middle of the 14 paragraph indicates that 15 "It's important that we get an answer on 16 equivalency for fiber-free Mono-Kote." 17 Do you see that? 18 A Yes, sir. 19 Q What did -- what was your understanding of what 20 Mr. Egan meant there? 21 A There is a situation in UL where if one has 22 composition A, which I will call MK-1, for example, and TAPPERT COURT REPORTING SERVICE. INC. RALPH J. BRAGG 69 1 composition B, which might be MK-3, if you test the two of 2 them side by side on one identical panel and they behave 3 similarly, then you will be rewarded all of the listings 4 which compound A had for compound B. 5 Q In other words, compound B doesn't have to go 6 through all the same tests that compound B originally went 7 through? 8 A That's correct, and as a matter of record, that's 9 exactly what happened to give MK-3 all the ratings that 10 MK-1 had. We had quite a bit of problem trying to do this 11 with MK-4 using MK-3 as a control, in fact, it was not 12 done. 13 Q It was done on some, but not all of the -- 14 A Correct. 15 Q The statement "it's important that we get an 16 answer on equivalency for fiber-free Mono-Kote" does that 17 indicate to you or, having reviewed it, does it refresh 18 your recollection at all as to whether by February of 1970 19 there were UL tests done on the equivalency of Mono-Kote 20 4? 21 A In reading this memo, I would say that there were 22 not UL tests done on MK-4. T>* PPPP'T' rnnP'T' PPPnPTTWC QPPVTPP . TMP RALPH J. BRAGG 70 1 Q Reading this nemo, does it refresh your 2 recollection at all as to how soon after February 1970 UL 3 tests were done? 4 A No, this doesn't give any indication how soon it 5 would have begun. 6 Q Understanding that the Exhibit 1165 doesn't say 7 one way or the other when UL were begun, having reviewed 8 it and sitting here, do you independently recall how soon 9 after February 1970 the tests were begun, or was it soon 10 after or -- 11 A I would assume from this memo 12 HR. JONES: Don't assume. | 13 THE WITNESS: I am reasonably certain that we 14 would have asked Underwriter's Laboratores to construct j 15 the frames, the concrete back-up decks that we would think 16 that we would need in the future for qualifying HK-4, so 17 that's as far as I can go. I think that that work had 18 been initiated at this point in time. j 19 BY MR. BOUCHER: 1 i 20 Q By February of 1970, had Mr. Egan given you a 21 clear indication that he wanted to get the first 22 asbestos-free fireproofing material on the market? i tii TAPPERT COURT REPORTING SERVICE, INC. RALPH J. BRAGG 71 1 A I don't remember exactly, I think you showed me a 2 memo earlier this morning that indicated that he wanted 3 that, that it was one of his desires. I can't remember 4 exactly. 5 0 Let me hand you what will be marked as Exhibit 6 1166. For the record, 1166 is a March 16, 1970 memo to 7 K. R. Cranker from R. J. Bragg, subject Mono-Kote 8 reformulation. 9 (The document referred to was marked Deposition 10 Exhibit 1166 for identification.) 11 Q Have you had an opportunity to review Exhibit 12 1166? 13 A Yes. 14 Q Is thatyoursignature that appears on 1166? 15 A Yes. 16 Q Do you recall sending Exhibit 1166, the memo, to 17 Mr. Cranker? 18 A Yes. 19 Q The memoappears toconcern itself predominantly 20 with the issue of costs for Mono-Kote reformulation. Does 21 that provide you with any additional understanding or 22 information as to whether -- where you were with respect TAPPERT COURT REPORTING SERVICE. INC. RALPH J. BRAGG 72 1 to the reformulation of Mono-Kote 3 as of March of 1970? 2 MR. JONES: I object to the form, you can answer. 3 THE WITNESS: Regarding costs, that's a normal 4 part of industrial research, it has to be reported 5 especially if it varies from a standard product, but I am 6 reminded by this memo that we were zeroing in on a 7 composition which contained cellufloc as the fiber to 8 replace asbestos. 9 Q In other words, as of March 1970, you were pretty 10 close to a reformulation of Mono-Kote 3 with an 11 asbestos-free alternative? 12 A Yes. In fact, in the first paragraph, I have 13 indicated that we have had five successful successive fire 14 tests on material containing cellufloc. 15 Q The five successful successive fire tests, are 16 those fire tests that were performed in your laboratory as 17 oppossed to UL tests? 18 A Yes, these would have been small-scale four foot 19 by four foot panels. 20 Q The first sentence, the last fragment of the 21 sentence indicates "replacement of asbestos within trained 22 error or non-hazardous fibers". Why do you use the term TAPPERT COURT REPORTING SERVICE, INC. RALPH J. BRAGG 73 1 non-hazardous fibers? 2 A I think by that time it was general terminology 3 in this project. It does not reflect any personal 4 opinions. 5 Q So as of March 1970, you didn't have any personal 6 opinions one way or another whether or not asbestos was a 7 hazardous material? 8 A No, I did have an opinion, I think it's to the 9 degree how much asbestos fiber is hazardous and what the 10 risk is and so forth. 11 Q So as of March of 1970, it was your opinion that 12 asbestos was a hazardous fiber? 13 A Except that it wasn't quantified. 14 Q And the efforts you were taking as of March 16, 15 1970, which were successful, were with non-hazardous 16 fibers? 17 A They certainly were with non-asbestos fibers, 18 yes. In this case, we were working with cellulosic fibers 19 and looking at other types of fibers. 20 Q Let me hand you what will be marked as Exhibit 21 1167. For the record, it is a March 30, 1970 memo to 0. 22 F. Stewart from R.J. Bragg subject asbestos. 'ThtsuPOT rnriPT REPORTING SERVICE. INC. RALPH J. BRAGG 74 1 (The document referred to was marked Deposition 2 Exhibit 1167 for identification.) 3 Q Have you had an opportunity to review Exhibit 4 1167? 5 A Yes. 6 Q Is that your signature that appears on 1167? 7 A I'm not sure. I wrote the memo, but I think it 8 was signed by my secretary in my absence. 9 Q Do you recall writing the memo? 10 A Yes. 11 Q What was the purpose of sending the memo to 0. F. 12 Stewart? 13 A I asked him in the memo to give some expression 14 of whether or not asbestos-free Mono-Kote was free of 15 asbestos. 16 Q Did you have any understanding of -- strike that, 17 let me rephrase it. 18 What was your understanding of what was meant by 19 the term asbestos-free? 20 A My original understanding was free of added 21 asbestos and that was my assignment on the reformulation 22 work. TiPDfip? rnnPT REPORTING SERVICE . TNG. RALPH J. BRAGG 75 1 0 Did you come to a different understanding of what 2 was meant by the term asbestos-free at some point in time? 3 A 7. think that at the time this was written, the 4 specifications, the hazard specs had not been set yet, but 5 there was discussion on the fact that they would probably 6 be extremely low, in minimuros that is, and I wanted to be 7 assured that there was not a problem with the vermiculite 8 itself contained in asbestos. 9 Q What hazards specs are you speaking about? 10 A Although this was not in my sphere of 11 responsibility, I was aware that there were EPA 12 specifications and Federal specifications. I didn't know 13 their levels, but I did understand at the time that they 14 were being discussed, and they had not yet been set. 15 Q As of March of 1970, you understood, or knew, 16 that tremolite was a contaminant of vermiculite and that 17 vermiculite was being used in Mono-Rote 4? 18 A Yes, sir. 19 Q And so it was the tremolite aspect of Mono-Rote 4 20 that you were concerned with with respect to whether or 21 not it could be termed asbestos-free for you? 22 A Yes, that was my interpretation. TAPPERT COURT REPORTING SERVICE, INC. RALPB J. BRAGG 76 1 Q Did you, as a result of this memo, subsequently 2 gain an understanding from anyone at Grace whether or not 3 Mono-Kote 4 was "an asbestos-free" product despite the 4 presence of tremolite contamination in the vermiculite? 5 A I did not receive an answer to this memo. That's 6 not to say it wasn't sent, but I did not receive it. 7 Q Have you -- what is your present understanding of 8 what is meant -- let me rephrase that. 9 As of 1973, what was your understanding of what 10 the term asbestos-free meant? 11 HR. JONES: Objection as to form, meant where, 12 used in what context? 13 MR. BOUCHER: What was his understanding of the 14 term asbestos-free? 15 HR. JONES: You haven't located a term in use. 16 You mean just the word out of the context with nothing? 17 I'll instruct the witness not to answer, totally 18 improper question. 19 BY HR. BOUCHER: 20 Q Are you going to follow your attorney's 21 instructions? 22 A Yes, sir. TAPPERT COURT REPORTING SERVICE, INC. RALPH J. BRAGG 77 1 Q You had previously indicated an understanding of 2 the term asbestos-free and that understanding was of March 3 1970/ between March 1970 and the end of the year 1972. 4 Did that understanding of what is meant by asbestos-free 5 change? 6 MR. JONES: Do you mean what was meant in the 7 memo? 8 MR. BOUCHER: How he used the term asbestos-free. 9 MR. JONES: You may answer that question. 10 THE WITNESS: No, I had received no further 11 education than I was seeking in this memo. 12 BY MR. BOUCHER: 13 Q What was your understanding of the level of 14 contamination on a percentage basis of tremolite and 15 vermiculite that used in the reformulation of Mono-Kote 4? 16 A That it was very insignificant. 17 Q Do you have a percentage idea of the nature of 18 significance? 19 A No/ I do not. 20 Q Your understanding/ would it have been less than 21 1 percent? 22 A Certainly. A Ti T5 IT T> *ti DPOnU'TT V CrDTfTrr T\m RALPH J. BRAGG 78 1 Q Would it have been less than 5.5 percent? 2 A I'm reasonably sure, but beyond that, I can't 3 say. 4 Q The first sentence in Exhibit 1167 indicates 5 "We're coming down to the wire on our Mono-Kote 6 reformulation work." 7 What did you mean by coming down to the wire? 8 A I think what I meant is that we had probably 9 selected a composition and were either ready to spray it 10 on Underwriter Laboratory specimans or had recently done 11 so. 12 Q I'm going to hand you a document dated June 15, 13 1970 to T. Egan from R. J. Bragg with an attachment 14 entitled Problem with Mono-Kote. 15 (The document referred to was marked Deposition 16 Exhibit 1168 for identification.) 17 Q Have you had anopportunity toreview 1168, sir? 18 A Yes. 19 Q Is thatyour signature that appearson 1168? 20 A Yes. 21 Q A copy of Exhibit 1168 was sent to R. J. 22 Anderson. What was his job responsbility? 'T'BTJTsro'p rnrcr DrcnD^TMrt cPPUTrc . tw r RALPH J. BRAGG 79 1 A He was Product Manager of Roof Decks. 2 Q And it was also sent to W. R. Wright, why did Mr. 3 Wright receive a copy? 4 A General Manager ofProduction. 5 Q And D. G. Powell also received a copy, why would 6 he receive a copy? 7 A He was the new Director of Research. 8 Q J. N. Beveridge also received a copy, why would 9 he receive a copy? 10 A Nelson Beveridge was Product Manager of the foam 11 polystyrene products. 12 Q Exhibit 1168 refers to a copy of the status 13 report presented June 15 at the Zonolite research 14 committee meeting. What was the Zonolite research 15 committee as of June of 1970? 16 A I don't have a very good memory of this, but I 17 believe that these individuals who were copied, were 18 members of a committee who reviewed Zonolite-type research 19 in Cambridge as oppossed to the concrete and cement-type 20 research that other people did at Cambridge. 21 Q Attached to it is an outline entitled Problem 22 with Mono-Kote. Is that an outline that you drafted? T'B tjdc'D't' rnTTtjrr UPDOOTTNC qfBVTfP . TNC . RALPH J. BRAGG 80 1 A I believe I did. 2 Q Is that the topic headings that you discussed 3 with the committee? 4 A Yes, I believe so. 5 NR. JONES: Is this an entire document, counsel, 6 or is this an excerpt from it, do you know? 7 THE WITNESS: Just an outline. 8 HR. JONES: I'm saying that document as produced. 9 MR. BOUCHER: My understanding is it's the entire 10 document. 11 BY MR. BOUCHER: 12 Q Under Problem with Mono-Kote, the first sentence 13 indicates 14 "Contains asbestos alleged to be carcinogenic and 15 to cause asbestosis." 16 That was your understanding as of June, 1970? 17 A That was the allegation referring to asbestos per 18 se, not necessarily asbestos in Mono-Kote or in the ground 19 or any other place. 20 Q But it's under the title Problem with Mono-Kote 21 as of March -- as of June, 1970. It was your 22 understanding, was it not, that the problem with -- the m nnnnm r t r> T3 t* T5 O T X7C CPDTTTrt Twr RALPH J. BRAGG 81 1 perceived problem with Mono-Rote was that it contained 2 asbestos and that asbestos was an alleged carcinogen? 3 A Yes, sir. 4 Q And that that was the reasonwhy you were told to 5 work on a reformulation of Mono-Rote 3? 6 A That's correct. 7 Q To get the asbestos out of Mono-Rote 3 because it 8 was perceived as being a carcinogenic agent? 9 A Right. 10 Q And below that is the headingPerformance 11 Objectives and those were the objectives that you were 12 given with respect to the reformulation of Mono-Rote 3 in 13 light of the problem? 14 MR. JONES: Can I hear the question? 15 (Record read.) 16 MR. JONES: That's not the heading. You said the 17 heading was Performance Objectives, that is not the 18 heading. 19 MR. BOUCHER: Excuse me, thank you. 20 BY MR. BOUCHER: 21 Q Below that is a section entitled Reformulation 22 Objectives and those were the objectives you-had with tipdpbt rnnpT pppoottmc pppvTrF. tmp RALPH J. BRAGG 82 1 respect to the reformulation of Mono-Rote 3 in light of 2 the problem with Mono-Kote 3? 3 A Yes, they were the general objectives. 4 Q Let me hand you what will be marked as Exhibit 5 1169, it is dated September 21, 1970 to T. Peit from R. C. 6 Ericson subject UL procedures for MK-4 consisting of a 7 two-page letter with a two-page attachment. 8 (The document referred to was marked Deposition 9 Exhibit 1169 for identification.) 10 Q Have you had an opportunity to review Exhibit 11 1169? 12 A Yes, in general. 13 Q Do you recall receiving a copy of 1169? 14 A Not exactly, but I probably did. 15 Q It's the type of document you would have normally 16 received in the course of your work at W. R. Grace? 17 A Yes, sir. 18 Q Whenever documents were cc'd to individuals at 19 Grace, they were generally sent to and received by those 20 individuals in inter-office mail? 21 A Yes. 22 Q Having reviewed Exhibit 1169, does it aid you in r-i m r r* T3 D T V <7 tmp RALPH J. BRAGG 83 1 your ability to place when Mono-Kote 4 was first tested by 2 Underwriter's Laboratories? 3 A Somewhat. What Mr. Ericson is discussing is UL 4 procedures for Mono-Kcte 4. Now, it's typical, when a new 5 composition is submitted to Underwriter Laboratories, that 6 the formula is given to Underwriter Laboratories and at 7 that time, one discusses the formula and the variation 8 permissible in each component so that this document could 9 have been prepared before a fire test, but certainly after 10 commission of the formula to Underwriters. 11 Q Would the tests, the fire testing performed by 12 Underwriters, have been soon after September 21, 1970 13 based upon your previous experience with Grace? 14 A It would have been either slightly before or 15 slightly after this date of September 21st. 16 Q Let me have marked as Exhibit 1170, an August 14, 17 1970 memo to K. R. Cranker from R. J. Bragg subject Trip 18 Report. 19 (The document referred to was marked Deposition 20 Exhibit 1170 for identification.) 21 Q Have you had an opportunity to review Exhibit 22 1170? TAPPERT COURT REPORTING SERVICE, INC. RALPH J. BRAGG 84 1 A Yes. 2 Q Is that acopyof your signature? 3 A Yes. 4 Q The Exhibit1170 talks about a trip and sets out 5 the purpose of the trip and the work accomplished. In the 6 first paragraph, 7 The purpose of the trip to assist W. R. Payment 8 in implementing sample preparation of MK-3 and MK-4 9 as relates to our moderate risk Mono-Kote program.* 10 Moderate rist Mono-Kote program, was that a 11 program that MK-3 had been approved for, and you were 12 seeking to determine how MK-4 -- let me rephrase it. 13 What is meant by moderate risk? 14 A It's a rating of degree of technical success. It 15 can either be a low-risk, moderate-risk or high-risk 16 research program and here I'm talking about somewhere in 17 the middle, moderate-risk approach. 18 Q And you're trying to compare MK-4 performance 19 versus MK-3? 20 A Yes. 21 Q Do you hava any recollection of the results of 22 that comparison? mjnriFT)'" FO r O'" ePTJTTTl'P TUT/-' RALPH J. BRAGG 85 1 A No, this memo is sc general in nature that it 2 doesn't even mention what samples were prepared except 3 MK-3 and 4. 4 Q The next-to-the-last paragraph 5 "If it raises to that level is writing of 'white 6 paper' on Mono-Kote R & D." 7 Do you recall what white paper is? 8 A I think at one time I was asked to write a white 9 paper, but in effect, my memos and monthly reports 10 probably took care of the need, so -- 11 Q I take it from that statement that you didn't 12 subsequently write a separate white paper on research and 13 development with respect to Mono-Kote; is that true? 14 A Not to my recollection. 15 Q Let me hand you a letter from R. Ericson to -- 16 strike that, from W. R. Payment to R. Ericson dated 17 February 3, 1971. It is a letter with an attachment, the 18 attachment is a bar graph and in addition, we will attach 19 a clearer copy of the February 3, 1971 letter which 20 unfortunately does not have the beginning part legible on 21 it, so we will make all three of them Exhibit 1171. 22 (The document referred to was marked Deposition ^ r> TV T? T> TM rsri OC'DTTT^r Tvrr* RALPH J. BRAGG 86 1 1171 or identification.) 2 Q There is no need to read the whole thing, I just 3 have a couple of brief questions about it. 4 Have you had an opportunity to review Exhibit 5 1171? 6 A Yes. 7 Q Do you recallreceiving a copy of Exhibit 1171? 8 A Yes, I do. 9 Q In the Exhibit, it talksabout JM asbestos 10 fibers. Do have a recollection of the grade of asbestos 11 fibers that was being used in Mono-Kote 3 as of February, 12 1971? 13 A No, I do have a recollection that there were a 14 group of asbestos fibers permissible to be used in MK-3 at 15 that time, and they were generally classified as asbestos 16 shorts. 17 Q Would a seven series fiber be classified as 18 asbestos shorts? 19 A Yes. 20 Q Let me have marked as Exhibit 1172 a two-page 21 letter with two attachements dated June 26, 1973 from 22 H. C. -- from J. C. Yang to H. C. Duecker otherwise known RALPH J. BRAGG 87 1 as Duke Duecker. 2 (The document referred to was marked Deposition 3 Exhibit 1172 for identification.) 4 Q Have you had an opportunity to review Exhibit 5 1172? 6 A Just generally. 7 Q Have you seen Exhibit 1172 prior to today? 8 A No. 9 Q Let me just ask you one question about it. If 10 you look at the first paragraph/ first sentence indicates 11 "Vermiculite contains a small amount of asbestos 12 in the range of 0.5." 13 Does that -- is that an accurate reflection to 14 the best of your recollection of the amount of asbestos 15 found in vermiculite? 16 A Actually/ this area is beyond my expertise. 17 MR. JONES: I would point out of the record/ 18 though/ that your prior question to himr though/ involved 19 the percentage of the product/ not vermiculite. 20 MR. BOUCHER: I understood that. 21 BY MR. BOUCHER: 22 Q Mr. Bragg, it has been a pleasure, I appreciate RALPH J. BRAGG 88 1 your time, I've got no other questions. 2 MR. SMITH: I have no questions. 3 MR. JONES: I have no questions. 4 (Proceedings concluded at 12:10 p.m.) 5 6 Signature of Witness 7 8 Subscribed and sworn to before me this day of 9 , 19. 10 11 12 My Commission expires Notary Public 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 j n ^^^ n r>\ T* <--> n m T rrpTTT^r RALPH J. BRAGG 89 1 I do hereby certify that the witness whose 2 attached deposition was taken before me, in the 3 above-entitled matter, was by me first duly cautioned and 4 sworn to testify the truth, the whole truth and nothing 5 but the truth in the cause aforesaid; that the testimony 6 contained in said deposition was by me reduced to writing 7 in the presence of said witness by means of stenography, 8 and afterwards transcribed upon a typewriter. The said 9 deposition is a true and correct transcript of the whole 10 of the testimony given by the said witness as aforesaid. 11 I do further certify that I am not connected by 12 blood or marriage with any of the parties or their agents, 13 and that I am not an employee of either of them, nor 14 interested, directly or indirectly, in the matter of 15 controversy, either as counsel, attorney, agent or 16 otherwise. 17 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand 18 and affixed my notarial seal at Detroit, County of Wayne, 19 State of Michigan, this day of /L 1988. 20 21 CATHY SILVERMAN Notary Public, Oakland County, Michigan 22 My commission expires s. w 7f */;/ . A ft " -> ZONOLITE DIVISION w. R. GRACE & CO. aSsEaacm uaoaatoar Htl !! fc. SD5FACS ZS33KT2S ASD 0ET5Z77 OF ZCSDLITS V2S3-ZG7S SP2AI2D ?EUSnOCF:XG September 17, 1955 .Tut depart No. 1319 Laboratory Data 3ook Ho. 72, pp. 5S()ll9, 129, 123 & 129 t Cork done by: ftalpb J. Braes \ Dork requested by: H. Walter Abstract: Surface bardnoas of a granular trpo sprayod fireprooxiag naterial aueb as Zonollte's Mono-Kota is over 400 pal. Bata: typo of Material Tested Speelaea Density (pcf) Pressure acquired to Force: 1/20 sq. is. Flat Plunger 1/4 la. into Speciaen Seen-Kota 23.2 414 psl Bespectfully subaltted. L L. Pereiae Manager ,ic.. Skokie Laboratory 09586* rapirt>t<od / .-, . * ,-* ... . J- *-> * *.T. ~V,-' cr-v.* . v:%' tt -iV'''*-::.r - : < r.-r vw . 'i.,v !:- ' . ' ' *e*% ,, . **,,. * V . '* irr. - T ... J, . . ' .r i ''. _ * SOBSST W. HUNT COKF4HT. m-i 1-U03 September U, 1965 r~r, 1 ; S0o5n5oLleltweuChoamiapaAnvyrst: Saida, Illinois 60076 GaUmi . Va hare node Salt Spray Taat oa tlx (6) 12* * 12* steal panala pre pared and sutalttad by pan. Area (3) et tha ataai panala bad. baas Sirenized and eoatad idth jour *2anelita tbnotete*, tha other three ) ataai panala had a prime coat and tha "Zenolita Nonotote", which la a eaaantatlesa sLxture for fireproofing. tha alz (6) panala ware tented In a Salt Spray Cabinet In aeeordanea idth ASBi B 117-61. The taat was conducted for 210 hour*. m . it tha conclusion of tha teat,* tha eaaantatious natarial mb runrul . iron tha peaala and surface underneath obeereed. flfc--mtlanat - f Galraalza tasting on outer adfaa. light rusting an panala. Mae Ooat tasting on outer edfea. No rusting on Trine Ooat. SSiia-3 Respectfully submitted, bobot v. man cowant Chemical laboratory Dtrisloa V7 .'rl-'TT ** ; * * : - * sT * . l `;r., 095828 i V / .' * ,\ .. ;* r ~*X - >*;- it,.i 1* . -. * v..`. -V '.'v^- . . . f . * \f . * v ' v.f > :**" - r^ rz :. ;. ..* a *. . W /J'* -'i-" *-:*>> .* -*';">t'v'.- .'?-..'>* .; T;" s' , '* ;-r ` "? 4.. .. - i': -4 Sprayed Asbestos Viewed With Growing Alarm Cwtai praylaa ad Mai ft tba t w M tt 4 ar 11 4 <l--ii taaanabty m tba h-- ft par* la Kaw Tart Oty. O-- tba Oban |M la-- tba hia--. thara i so way -- --Mi -a-- aad tbay cannot ba dl-nltrail. ha --a--a-- Daat aauan --kaa Aral aabaatna Hirtrutf lb *aw *w --a ardar ad tt-aa itaa normal aaausr at lor Oban a-- Mt laaaa an pPtfpl aa. ara eftan i bmlMma'i circulation ft tba buildmi -- cob* Dr. batikal!. lar pa----1-- ta arappaa --tlalaciary baa pi baaa tba only i-- ft tba popu- u ti ad laa-- aaat--uL Wa aaa panaasaa --aaaa at < praaaillai ciaaa-up aa ara armrnad -- alarm-- apply --a- -- cnralully > -- poaatbla a (bar* i Dr. Sallkett. "thnan paaauim* lar aa tbarauaniy aala method i yl baaa lauad -- aonl--1 tba baaarda int--lvod is --y ippllratiaa pi'll! t. mam after tba aatanal i ara &a -- th--atifbly contaminate a aad iaduasy -- ataw this I--adlua --aaaa far eonbaaarda -- --ilUaaa af laaaeaat atuetu.' 015831 r V. r / * > I Ii iii i sii11 *3 sumli miM1is?s ih'i * i l it liti*: j S i * 4 i < * iili ii ] 095833 `111*# ilii uim Ii 09583* 11-5 hJiM- 095435 095836 % :> y '2 T n ;^ - *ti is'! ! 112 I s i;i J ! t ii f i-1 fi-S Si; i=sm *^ * iHiijj 1= L^-Si - fe i 42 ii ji']f,i] a-4JJSj1i - ! * * * lir5 3 1'i=-.*j,|sa>ssj: rrir^^i! Hs:?is a nfrjr : * j ; I -* iUiiS hiu i li: i i -2 `i' "J-s =ih* i **t i s Ji * *** * - J V*' V.-. v ,,f .. - .*. 5 j* V V-, 71 ;*"* s i ' i-H : Ii.1 0*533? 09*0* ii ij.*-.. c^ 5 j J jj f JK Is 5! J-: Mir" 095839 VI I v 095640 --\ Ji 13^1141 if j !s]4 J4tiSr]f-"I1ffr *'5 y1'ljs,3i.ij lJ**l8j* CpJj.3, il i *ii; ;J I s iiliH ? ! ! i li si ' Up; iLi 's< 095S*3 / : i i i9r"W ZCNOLITE eoNXisoRXON ntoaccxs smtON Taieri.'-.sv-Cjrpar Aita^cii '.i;::: Utld July 13, 13 70 fi A53ZS70S mi* coxgxttutioxs is m nra s??ay nsr?2ocr;xc 0FE2ATI0XS CSZCC 20S01ITI FFJJ3UCTS Za order so dataralae concentrations of airborne asbastor "Jurist and afeor Sho application of vtraieulite-aabeatoa cent utirltli is the firsproofis; of etrucraral steal, observations vara vacs a: shraa construction il:n in San Fraadsco on Say 2d, May 2( and June 4, 1970. Censiiftrstion vaa gives to tha actual and potential expesuraa of (a) vorieran carrying out cba spray operation, (b) vorkars la silled sradas aaarby, ed (e) tha general public. lisas studlsd. Zbrea spray oparaeioaa vara surveyed: (1) the Saberradars Castar, va:re Mr. 6. Coaaall vaa spray coosracsor; (2) tha 9.6. aid . Headquarters SulIdlas, vhara sba spray contractor vaa C i t Flasearing, Zac. (Mr. Xasauassa); and (3) cha Hilton Tovars, soars Mr. C. Conns11 was also tha contractor. Methods. Airborne fiber coneancratloas vara daceteinad by droving air through MilUpora type U f11tars, vitb O.Su naan pora sisa. Sanplas vara takan la tha breathing sonas (3s) of nan vorklng vith tha notarial and at varlena locations surrounding tha oparations. Air tlmn ranged fren 0.11 cable -fast par nlnuto (cia) in breathing ronoo so 1.3 cfa in arsar normdistant. Fortions of the filters vars aeuntad on slidoa, and eha fiharvtia 100'microscopic fialda counted, nalng phase contrast aieroseopylac_a nagniflcstloo of 430x. The nvabers of asbestos fibers toon vars convertad ta eoncancraciona, expressed la fibers par aillilltar f air, by eaklag late account tha area countad, tha flev rata, and tha saapUng tine. 099852 ; : it. s / I . - : ssascjosb crm?. a:?. saiit-is Scpli Seit: 51 (A) 51 (A) 19 (A) 47 (A) 2219 (3) 2230 (C) 36 (D) ;i (I) Area Spray operator's 32 m mm " " " (Said soar back of head to protect fact of filter) Stage never's 32 Area near spray (1-50 feet dis sent, seas direct spray on filter) Xackground area, 43rd floor (air flew past sptay-oncrusted drapes) Investigator'a 12 Siring Operator's BZ A>31k:i fitirs total f/el f/nl (> 5 )- 7.96 2.S3 f.5i 2.18 3.36 1.36 0.030 0.020 0.79 0.775 3.13 1.35 o.;:s 0.016 9.50 0.710 *?resent tn:ulTi occupational threshold Halt valua of J f/ml i* bt*t4 on fibers greatar-xhae 3 ! crooners la length. 1s- .* T ' * . - < v* * r.. r*rr-t *. r . :. ;> V `A T*' * 095453 09585* tasti ::: Hr.:::: rxrr?.s xzx sjuciis Se?i< Aru A>ti::s Total f/si f/al* ( > I --) <2 (a) 6i (5) ::si (C) 2262 (C) 73 ) 2229 (2) 37 (?) 69 (?) 63 (C) Sprsr opKitor'i 32 Eei C*rritrs' 32 rjviud of i;i(i Denolnd of i:i|i Cpvlad of 33th floor - Baeicgrouad (?rob. noe-lso-kinirie flow as filter flu; validity as a final caasure of fiber background level?) Oouvlad of ITch floor (four floors below spray operators) Sizing operator's 32 Sizing operator's 32 Mixing Area 2.18 0.15 0.0007 0.0217 noat a 0.0017 1.61 0.35 0.13 2.20 0.22 0.CCS7 0.0237 aorit Mir. 0.3*2? 2.42 0.5C 3.3S *Saa neta tabla 1.--4 n. *J / r . ' r - ` ' :: ` = / * i. . -- -,v.- '*`i . -c **e. . - v- ..." ..v. Vr;4*; ' - * f * .. . . s'.':";: ' '-11 . ^vm: > . .. " ~ `e ' * `.TkK ?'-.vv .* >***,. , V :: :ie*yi 7**Y.V** *.r.-tV-;*' < Karrisj iu:iM(rr Moviat Afternoon S:i:iosir7 Kevins TA211 IV Air iiq'.'.si iesulu 'fibers/ai) Cpviod Sensitivity* Douavlad 0.024 0.003 0.014 0.003 0.016 0.042 0.077 0.009 0.339 0.003 0.0X3 0.003 Sesjitivi :y* C.015 0.C09 0.003 0.003 Mininas flier csacaatratloa ea filler it X flier per X00 fields observed. Sensitivity it inversely prrporriaaal to tie voltxae of air passed tirouia the filter. 'K' V ' W%. . i *.Vf* ; .v v *. : y v.- r 095556 a* f BOYLE ENGINEERING LABORATORY -------------------------------- CONSULTING AND EXPSIMHMTAL ENGINEERING ------------------------------- 7380 W. DEVON AVBWE CHICAGO 31, ILL PHONE ROdiwy 3-8579 SUBJECT: Abstract or Zest Report, April 30, 1964 TITLE: Report on Effect of High Velocity Air Streaa opon the Surface of Mono-Rote Material. TEST PERFORMED FOB: Zomollte, Division of W. R. Grace & Company. OBJECTIVE: TEST SPECIMENS: Determine if high Telocity air stream floving parallel to and over the surface of Mono-Rote Material would erode surface of Mono-Rote. .4 Three (3) flat aluminum pans, 10$"V x 1$$"L x$ 3/4 "D filled with Mono-Rote Material haring a density of approximately 26.84 lbs. per eu. ft. Surfaces had machine texture finish. TEST CONDITIONS: Air velocity * 104.8 MPH Air temperature * 79F (dry bulb) Mono-Rote exposed to air stream for 87 hours. PROCEDURE: RESULTS: Test specimens oven dried for six (6) hours at 118F to eliminate moisture and then weighted. Test specimens mounted in cut-outs in a triangular shaped duct so that surface of Mono-Rote was flush ^ With duct wall. Velocity traverse taken and test a?^^pecimens exposed to air streaa for 87 hours. Specimens oven dried for seven (7) hours at 115F t^and rewelghed to determine if erosion of Mono-Rote ?*ba& occurred. -VT ''-A % Ho erosion of Mono-Rote as indicated by no weight change in test specimens. B03LZ EHGIHEERIJG LABORATORY K, ------- I EXHIBIT NO. C. SILVERMAN Robert V. T*. Olson, P.E. BOYLE ENGINEERING LABORATORY iwion or hothcm bowoiiim compact. m. ------------------------------- CONSULTING AND EXPERIMENTAL ENGINEERING 7280 W. DEVON AVB^UE CHICAGO 31, ILL PHONE ROdney 3-8579 June 25, 1965 Zonollte Division of W. R. Grace & Company 8055 Lawndale Avenoe Skokie, Illinois 60C76 Inhibit JILVERMam Attention: Mr. Martin Malter, P.E. Manager, Plastic Products Dear Mr. Malter: At your request I have reviewed the requirements of the General Services Administration Specification designated as "Sprayed Fire Protection, Section 30, Materials, Paragraph 30-05" which describes an air velocity-dusting test for Sprayed Fire Protection Materials. Requirements indicate that dusting of material shall not exceed 0.01 grams per square foot when exposed to an 800 foot per minute air velocity for 24 hoars. * The air velocity-dusting test Boyle Engineering Laboratory performed on Mono-Xote in April of 1964 (Report on Effect of High Velocity Air upon the Surface of Mono-Xote Material, Project 8528) for Zonollte exposed this material to an air velocity of 9200 feet per minute (104.8 MPH) for 87 hours with no erosion of Mono-Xote material, or measureable loss in weight of test specimens. It Is the opinion of the writer that the air velocity-dusting test performed by Boyle Engineering Laboratory is equivalent to or a more severe test than required by the aforementioned General Services* Administration Specification. Yours very truly, BOYLE ENGIHEERIHG LABORATORY RWTOsvh nobert W. T. Olson, P.E. Chief Engineer ty-- 095869 rout IT. 10UU 3JU* runwui BOBXST w. HUNT OOMPAJTT, Srooroii 0MIO4OO T. 1U0OU 1301-1 -4403 September 14, 1965 , . 23214 1 Zenolite Division of V. R. Grace & Co. 8055 Lawndale Avenue Scokie, Illinois, 60076 Attention: Mr. Martin Halter As authorized by you, vg hare made bend tests of "Zonolite, Mono Rote," a cementatious mixture for fireproofing. BOND TESTS Bend tests were made en 15, approximately 2" x 2*, samples and tested in accordance with ASTM specification C 297. The following results were obtained: Designation Lab Marks UC SC s 1 2 3 A 5 1 2 3 jA C^ v- i \ 1'. r.v 2 ** i*. t'* A--V ' 3 4 5 Tensile Strength P.3.1. LSaL. 8.35 7.88 8.42 7.80 6.85 3202 1134 1213 1123 986 9.1C 7.05 8.63 8.82 11.9 1310 1015 1242 1270 1735 8.20 7.83 8.96 8.12 7.30 1180 1126 3289 1170 1051 failure Core broke Core broke Core broke Core broke Core broke Core broke Core broke Core broke Cere broke Core broke Core broke Core broke Core broke Core broke Core broke WE CERTIFT THAT the above is a true record of tests performed by us in our laboratory. Respeetfully submitted, RD/es-3 Physical Laboratory Division 095871 f tu v. Miiitn L L flMkv . I. Moot. 1. J. fcig \ J X* 9hjAS| 9. 1969 - i t lalgfc Irate aai X hr** MtOllMl prlorltloo a* a UM f prtjttto to ho nM as twlog tho rwt of tfclo jmr. H ham mrltmd ml of thorn projects vtUi brlm M and umi u oooritlwrut MU' offer* vlUi tta b ooruia ibMM of uo work. X MMBrlslag tt* la irttr of tayarluo* (i Mart Vr Mr NsnmllMf vlU Zomllt* imacMl). Xf 7 Hto Mfto optoim twnrmutm jvojMt priority, in hav* t vtlX tfa art also pi flag to Isat far aov am fer Qri^i XS mndmllto data tho nwmi of udt #** ax* otor Vbw rtlila tot*, tit an* torn a llttlo mtk vltl unrtaillto far flrvplnoo loga hut bar** sot trlai 1000 Ormp XXX. Ho Hafclagtaa >mnl Xnbo hart pwn mrtlag tith wvladlrt m Urn til allot prtVIm oM aloo hrr* a araraMBt aariroct %a flai a my to tat mndoollt* la rtou*oi/ of xx. we Vt art gDlag to try to aaalrt Iraalanor an any r*March wiiil to roiuoo hit JMC. High hrm oao la kworlik U<1 ml aoi atalotod 'laoaJdag a tarlta of pilot nao oalag ao dllorto, m oalaim otlOfUo, at alllaato or ahlorl&a, aai oo alllaata or ahlarlio vltl Oaooral Hrtlaai Mcilttil art omant la piano of ^fpo X aooost. Hat! tort aadt tad rill ho oast to ua for toatlag. H addition, t run of too paaala tat atdo oalag 0.01* aultl-typt wood ahlpa that it am afaaapor tta tho axotltlor. 305)2 ns?i / ..-s , tu v. fterrrtt S *7 9, 1969 p. -rf XmIIw kl os FLoter'i wmrah ylointni mtiai^ m 40X04 to Mcitnot four root doofci1 U our took jmr4 boat MMi< #f9* Star roof vlll bo 00 fallout (1) wood yluk boot, torrlrtlk, Qarfb-- vltk jrotootlfo 0001104, {*) lnonmo LL^Umi^it oaaortto, terrlotll, tftom lao 0001104, > (l) &Mnti ilik. Ixviatlk. fioAas vltt --tiatlia <<m Mi MlU 00 oporrto Mtt teroyor oaf swlov nrmt Utorrturo aad fUli doto laUaUi otter foaflitlm fbaa* ttet ogr1 tite ff>CI ^^teoSraol ft** iiOTlir^ohoul1 jht lifooi pmi. Utootao U 1 0OTI00X7 eopoolty b7 1 vlll do too tOOUM. . VO vlll 1 U IMi oobooljr lB OB ChoplB'i lob * PLAINTIFF EXHIBIT l 3 9, 1969 nr. ww (1) Imllu ui tta Tiwiffiim lutltutg mull LUb to toi ao auefi balp aa jmiUIi la tba rarlav tad asatrastlan of full bob la fix* taat apariaBrn (* bars fillad bobb rtoant tou ufalafljr 4ob to faulty taat doaloa). felpa fe*g ball rarlav daalgia. (S) fta Tiralcrt lMt'Utevt7 vill iMutf tto mpotollUltr of too applieBtloa of tba flaaproaflai^tarlal, tad will tot vara aabad V J. Chapia to dlwiM tto auiawaakB of flo. k Bad 5 tondnilto at *U*^7i ftor tharatl adwllvltjr. V* urn to eoctBBt rfcrlflo Cutlia (auatoatr) to ttodr raprl raaai1 to ad tbaa BpproMto tbB Ifcnatoak 0*17. of ka., to do tfea Jarllta la Morally aara iffMUto tbaa aandatdlta bat tfao itouitoMii of Ua parlitB partial# bao flitaitil tha &ata*tr7 aad tbaqr art daalrmia of takla< a look at iaia1aallta* MtoBttto af MtaetttUr an lOfaaatoA m aid on vanlaullta aitb 1$ aoiotaxa. *qr aandoauti # PLAINTIFF'S EXHIBIT _ ST- - * * t CONCRETE PRODUCTS DIVISION TO R. W. Sterrec: - Cambridge OATE July 8, 1969 FROM C. S. Breslauer -60: ''"RalpITBragg -'CambfTdge"^' SU8JECT Fine Wood Fiber Dear Bob, In the search fora substitute fiber for Asbestos and Mono-kote, I know that wood fiber has been looked at -- among otherjhings -- but this* idea has been discarded due to the fact that a proper size fiber could not be located.. The thought has occurred to me that the same type of fine fiber now being manufactured and utilized.around.thejeountry.in the. various flake board mills could be the type of fiber you are looking for. This siaterial is made in hugh quantities at many different: locations and I would guess that a suitable supply poinecould be found if it was useable. A wood fiber would be hardly more flammable than most of the synthetics and would probably do the Job. I personally doubt_ that the flammability of the material would wait* As far as wood fiber and gypsum are concerned, they have been used together for many years and are certainly compatible. I would like to suggest that someone from Cambridge make the telp to 4b.. F.lake boars! ComPAflv. Limited * Mllltown t flew Bmnswigk^ Canada and see that operation. Mr. Jim Chandler, the Flant Manager,, has invited us to visit with him at any time and I thlnk.it would be a worthwhile trip. The process used in the manufacture of (lake board is similar in many respects to the one you described for the manufacture of the French board. Some good ideas could be picked up from such a visit and.at the same time, ( am sure that he wotflrprovide you with an adequate sample of the fine wood fibers tha^/are usea\ln the process for experimental work in Mono-kote. CSB:lv . S. Breslauer 030 0321; < CAMBRIDGE TO: **<* X. raysent/Traveiers Best date.- Ccto-er 1, left fROM: Sragg \ SUSJSCT: CC: V*. R. Dodson. V 9. jT^Tchepir.. Jr./^vflsrs Best 77.. r. 2. Bothfelder (Sex *1CT7) **' Because of -he urgency of "nno-Xote reforsulation, I have requested, through T. Zgaa end J. X. Chapin that you run additional tests. * This request Is also related to the results of our present series; vhile cot yet concluded, they don't sees to offer such precise of elimination of asbestos. Also, Z had a conversation vlth Bay Hothfelder last veek. He is currently ateespting to refomulate Mono-Xote vith paper fiber. T. Igan. has ashed se to correlate all of this vorh, so that ue nov appear to have a trio involved here. I as vriting to Hay to provide * his certain data and to request the present status of his vorh. You viil receive cosies of all sueh cotsunications. At this tine Z believe you should broaden your investigations to . forsulate, nix, spray, cure and fire test the following conpcsi- tions. Three sixes using paper fiber: Ve vill obtain the fiber fren Bay Bothfelder, and test at his reconsended concentration as veil as 15% above and below this concentration. Do not start this vrrh until Bay gives his reconnendation. V-o asbestos win be used in these sixes. Two sixes using fibered gypstca fres USD or rational to' replies cur conventional 2CU: . I suggest you nahe up one nix, using the sane forsuia as !OC-3, oaitting asbestos end the other six, replacing .. asbestos vith an equal volute (not '-eight) of vemiculite. V.s a third approach, I would like to see sone lean sir.as vi fiber ositted, but with a high strength Sinter. These * v a * alpha rpsus to replace ZOU. Both U3 Gypsus and Certa provide such a binder. To offset the increased cost o * w try progressively leaner nines sueh cs 1:3 as a contro > t 1 and 1:1!*. 2ase your Duponal content an the gypsus cor. ftll 1:12 on. 0S220  V. R. Payment Cetoi c?c I suggest you sake up a* couple of >K-- control samples f-r the above variations on Mono-/5oce. Please handle procurement of the fibered o*psa and the alpha gypsum. In your-vork vith alpha, be particularly careful of vater requirement since this grade needs such less vate-r than ZOU. ' *W er -- a |I p >--i^ HP y-- If you or Jls Chapin have additional ideas, please try then. Also, trait, Z would appreciate a status, report as'soon as possible on your present series of six sixes. The report she--Id include all data on composition, set tiss, v/e, yield, etc. X 082202 re V. H. Dodson r.:*.rr December 1, 1969 ^C.v. T. F. Egan CT: R. W. Sterrett C. R. Babb i'JCTUTCrlifiJUccees R. J. Brag THIS COPY for] Vance: Knowing the building pressure against the use of asbestos in sprayed fireproofing, particularly in the New York, Philadelphia area, and with concern spreading rapidly throughout the country, there are two prime reasons we should get asbestos out of Mono-Kote. They are: 1. We are going to get included in the indictment since we have asbestos in Mono-Kote. * ^ 2. Mono-Kote without asbestos would give us a tremendous sales increase at once. Also, we have an ethical obligation to get it out. We need a realignment of work assignments so that Ralph and/or others can get on this matter at once. It's been much too long already that we've been looking at tKxs problem. Let everyone know what you need so .we can get it behind us. TFE:dlc t ottciRAi. scats st: THOMAS f. CBAH T. F. Egan \nc^ | EXHIBIT NoiM. C. SILVERMAN Tc? ft/- W7\r..H. '' /^frCC . _____ \DL rGi Ar &H--------r--------p------i< Kt &L&U rfJ 4^ h* a. /Z-2J-J? _ _______ Arfrnc -Jfrz^k--^eJeiytu.cl rr r /tbl Jfe'&cftrt**-*f Jcc-t*u<~,< * +<rfrue 'U y*d MAfyAJ*asuM wrft(?S-*SyL. ^ dou .Jrd'^zi&Jh.s+n y&^Ji as**. jmJ .^ilLpi .^Jb*k_ zz *d?U^4 . SrSQrfi.i 2- 0SlC*. 0$P S\jL$A*C>*rr*%^ S*P*c*rtZSl d A'l Sy^dL\ l<f' /fKOXL ^ "............. T. P. Feit T. F. tgan R. J. *L*Jt this copy February 24, 1970 equivalency at UL -Wear Toro: > John Ottinger has related that Spraydon has sprayed at Underwriters' Laboratories, Inc. and Underwriters' Laboratories of Canada an asbestos free assembly. Also, Cafco has intimated that they have passed Underwriters' Laboratories, Inc. test on C.F. (Ceramic Fiber product). This neans that equivalency tests are or have been for mulated with Underwriters' Laboratories. I remember your statement about comments with R. Parks that there is much to be gained from small-scale studies along -- with-a- full-scale.test,, and. it's important that we get an answer on equivalency for fiber free Mono-JCote.~ ~~ This is the only positive goal. Please remove H. H. Robertson from any consideration unless to include them -be *to our^^efimiae advantage -on -the equivalency-.-'. test. Maybe we can.include this as some small-scale study. s " Sincerely, 4MK mmo or BMWS P. fCAN Thomas F. Egan " ~~ TFE/jac t. . 09dtH l CC: H. Dodson T. F. Egan To d&te ve have approached the subject in tvo aanners: replacement ' of asbestos vith entrained air or vith non hazardous fibers. Con cerning the latter program, our efforts have been rewarding at lov density vith five successive successful fire tests on compositions containing Georgia-Pacific P-32 unbleached cellulosie fiber. During a meeting vith high ranking officers of Canadian JohnsManville Co., Ltd., Asbestos Fibre Division on 3/10/70 in South Carolina, Z learned the cost figures ve had used in our previous costing-were lov. For exeagle, I v&s given a lald-dovn cost in Travelers Rest of $.0260/lb. for asbestos. Actually the correct cost is #.03625/lb. ~ In addition", MrT Payment `and I" made "a" substitution of'air entrain- stent, ng from Du Port's Duponal VA Dry 9 $.U8o/lb'. to half again as such Proctor & Garble's Orvas A B Granules 9 i.185/lb. This results in a savings per bag of Mono-Kote (i.e. AEA substitution) of $.025/bag. Coshining both of these changes, ve nov have a formulation using Cellufloc P-32 and Orvus A B which costs $.02lh7/lb., vith a DMC of $1.3735 oer 50 lb. baa. The DMC of standard Mono-Kcte containing asbestos is $1.3860 per 50 lb. bag. Strangely enough, because of a cornetitire situation on the West Coast vhich led Johns-Manville to provide freight equalized shipments 'to California, our Los Angeles plant pays less for asbestos than our South Carolina plant ($.02975/13) Again, using the new costs for -asbestos, and Orvus, -oi> Mono-lote out 'of Los-Angeles is $1.27/ _50 lb. bag.._________________ ___________ . " I believe since ve ere lover in cost (l eents/bag) in* Travelers Rest. (new formula vs. old) and since I don't have accurate aggregate costs out of Los Angeles, that ve should ask Jin Zissen to cost out the new formula at severs! points in the U.5. An important consideration here is that the West Coart area should be able to buy Celluflcc at a lover cost than the Eastern 1\S. RJBtalr OJ CAM3RIDGZ TO: 0. ?. Steve- FROM: R. J. Bragg IIT Hoiik.^ Cj\ LVERMAN CC: V. H. Dodson H. A. Brown . X. R. Cranker --------g. P. Sgea.----- C. . Parker W. R. Wright OATS: SUBJECT: *f - A. bestos We ere coming "down to the wire"'on our Mcno-Xote reformulation work, whose chief dbject is the ellaination of asbestos from the product. At this point, our most premising formula utilizes an organic fiber. r,,,r Ti "Tom'EgenV in preparation uorprcmbtionJof"the~new product ,~nas" ?! to be concerned about the emphasis which may be used on elimina tion of asbestos. Whether he calls Mono-Xote "asbestos-free", or some other adjective, he-needs to be sure that it is in in deed free of asbestos.*- With .the elimination of asbestos fiber - - which we have added in our blending plants, the remaining worry is the amount of asbestos that may be present in expended ver- miculite. ` >. -A < *A .live.advised that_we_use .wet separation in both benefieiation mills and that it is highly isprobeble'that" detectable levels of asbestos could remain on' the ore concentrate. Z also expect that whatever minute quantities of asbestos remained on the ore, . they would be eliminated by the actions of air separation and stoner activity in our expanding plants. RJB:mlr 09d< ;j CAT. J a i i o rROM. R. J. Br* d.\*t r Subject CC: 9. C. Powell J. I.*. Beveridge v. R. Vrirftt K. R. Crenfcer 7. ?. Pelt R. J. Anderson J. X. Chapin, Jr ./Travelers Reft Status Report Kono-Xote P ^ 1? COttIRUCliCKPRO H. A. Attached find a copy ef the status report presented Jme 15 at the Zcnclite Research Cor=ittee ceeting. 3UB:slr m Attaehmat !_>>< f \ Ralph J. 9r*. ,\ \ \ 092336 PR05LS?* WITH K9X0-K0TS COJ.TAIKS ASBESTOS, ALLEGE) TO EE CARCBCOGSSIC ALT TO CAUSE ASBESTOSES. ' RgCKClATIOS OBJECTIVES ELUOATE ASBESTOS. rLTrrAr: ?Risrr: yield, rav material cost, AST rSYSZCAL ?R2RTIES. CBTAZK OXDSVRITDIS LABORATORIES LABEL SER VICE ON NEW COMPOSITION JX REGARDS TO FORMDLATIO!.*, APPLICATION, SURFACE FLMMB&ITY, CONiTUmriAL CAMBRIDGE 770020 TO: T. Felt FROM: R. C. Ericson OATE: September 21, 1970 SUBJECT: UL Procedures for MX k CC: R. Beveridge R. Bragg E. Brown X. Cranker T. Egan D. Powell V. Wright YiiMrA EXHIBIT NO^ik ^jjr^vEgM^ ^ SEP 2 2 1970 CAMBRIDGE We have discussed at length the Importance of rpotaetiwg the fozsulatlon flexibility required by aaBufscturlngto permit u> to produce a finished Mono Xote to proposed standard finished product characteristics. Basically this flexibility is required to handle the inherent variations In several of the rev materials used in Mono Xote and most especially to accommodate the range of Veraleullte aggregates ve must use. At our last meeting Z stated that the "ncainal percentage by weight analysis" you presented to UL with a 2$ tolerance on Gypsum and a - 0.5$ tolerance cm P-20 fiber gave manufacturing a flexibility at least equal to the felxibility In corporated In the MX 3 procedure. Hr teatvork to date Indicates that the NX 3 UL procedure can handle the variables Z have encountered so far. However, Z have no experience In the plant with the MX k formulation. This formulation is higher In the percentage of Vermlcullte. Therefore, It seems reasonable that Vermleullte variations will be even more apparent la the formu lated product properties. Z am hoping that the degree of fle^blllty which was Incorporated in the Initial proposal to UL will be sufficient with MX k. Z feel that the research department should have this on their agenda as something that needs to be cheeked out. We have discovered that our initial proposal to UL was la error to the extent that it bad included the concept of a fixed Vermlcullte content. This is mathenatlcslly incomputable with the * 2% Gypsum tolerance which ve thought ve had. Z feel ve must now spell It out that the resulting Vermlcullte tolerance is * 1.5 % by weight of the formulation. You are eoneemed about the UL acceptance of our proposal if ve do spell this out. You asked me to draft a proposal for what would be Section Z, Page 1A and 2 of a MX k UL procedure. A copy of this Is attached. Z would like to point out that la drafting this procedure Z attempted to make as few changes a s possible in the layout end wording of these pages on the premise that fever changes generate fever questions. Z would also like to point out that the aev section headed "Proportioning of Ingredients" really tightens^ the procedure significantly as compared to the latitude possible with the MX 3 format. Z also FN <3 )J t r T. Felt coBrnofgiAL -2- 77002 September 21, 1970 deliberately worded the sestenee at the bottom of this Motion to say. "Eaeh batch will contain ingredients within the percentage by weight proportions specified above." In other words, we are empha sizing that there is a new concept here, control by weight percentage. Z would hope that this emphasis would more than balance the fact of disclosing a 1.5^ tolerance in Veraiculite weight. Finally, note the ihet that the nnmlnsl formula is written for a Vexmiculite density of 6.5 #/cu.ft., which is exactly at the mid point of the recaneaded range, 5 to 8. This range is slightly tighter then the old Mk 3 range of k*5 to 8.0. BCZ/Vbb /*. / C R. C. Ericson Attachment 098J62 cum-TDarriAL MAJro?ACTORIHC PROCESS; 77G022 The vexsieulite ore is expanded in a furnace and is held in inventory (for later addition to the Mono Kote sixer) la hulk storage silo's or la 1 cu. ft. unsarked hags. All lagredlexrts are then added to a sixer and blended for approsdnately 5 sisutes until the mixture is ualfois throughout. FOHMJIATIDW: Ingredient Function Aggregate Binder Fiber Air artminlng Agent Base of Ingredient Expanded Vemiculite Gypsta Cellulose Fiber (P-20) Dupanal WA Dry/ Duponal ME Dry/ Orvus AS Tolerances i by Weight of Batch - 1.5 * 2.0 - 0.5 Proportioning of Ingredients Batch Size - 19 Begs (Approx. 6l Cu. Ft.) M0KZXAL [Flatrhlng Quantity As Measured into Mixer Cu. Ft. Analysis Vol. * By Wt. Vcmieulite Fiber P-20 Dupanal WA? 501 50 38.00 500.0 10 58.00 3I.0 1 1.00 -lil- -- 0.17 TOLERANCE Low High Gvpsub * By Wt. Gyosub *By wt. 39.50 56.00 1.50 0.17 36.50 60.00 3.50 0.17 863.5 61 100.17 100.17 100.17 1 Versiculite #6.5 #/eu. ft. density 2 Alternate air entraining agents peraitted Duponal WA Dry Duponal ME Dry Orvus AB 0.75 - 2.0 0.50 2.0 2.00 - 3*0 The size of the batch say vary. However, each batch vlll contain ingredients vlthia the i by weight proportions specified above. 098363 coflymmriAL iimimjisjj HMwi'inicAKOii: 77C02 Rame of XnfEredients Venaleulite #3 or Grade Gypsum Cellulose Description and Specifications Fine granules, uneoeted end free fra organic substances. Density 6.5 #/cu. ft. - 1.5 A white Powder. Sags shall be marked for hand or machine application and/or ZOU Fine white powder. Container shall identify Ingredient as Duponal WA or ME, manufactured hr E.X. Dupont Co. Lie. K PRODUCT: Det Ur/Bag Unit Weight Ash Content Inmlnal - 3# 13 - 17 #/cu. ft. Minimum 90^ 093364 TO: X. It* Cracker /FROM: It. J. Bragg CC: 0. G. Povtll OAT*: Purpose of Trip: To Assist V. R. Fayaeat la iapiexeatleg saxple preparation of KK-3 sad MX-U as relates to our "Moderate Fisk" Xono-Xoet prograa. Work Accomplished: Thorough d*a-up of fire test station, to pexsit acre efficient operation. Formulation, sad spraying of three hatches each of KX-3 and X-k plus preparation of required test ( sables of each of these six hatches. Writing of "vhite paper" on Kcco-Xcte MS. Assistance to J. X. Chapin, JT. la hasle planning of JU3:alr ZONOUTZ DIVISION 4 S7J TO* JU.Ericicson, Cambridge - Fabruary 3, 1971. FBCOMHIsT. f iWf;; Faymaatr.r-EJU; - - " *> ; ' -l*.-" *.' . " -.r `.V*'*- *' ce : R.j.3ragg, 'Cambridge- ;.=. KiR.Cm*r _.V.' :SV ; *' ;** - " **. j .' v-'.';.' -1nuLirun "7; 1 :,u - '.-. -The.rlO jggaa/SSb.rccyV^t^tJ^Zonoiito-Ma^^ . bat' do sndt -l&siimmn.'tfitiVtwo1 ' ~p^js .evident^franj[Jfchevuse - isr'h* substantial'^lifference' inisobers .vUle nathbd'pqts^bastos tng in a' 'acre-' rwasopaS1 e ranga. .(60^S>Q5C) ; it ao't:lBhw.3tha~,diffagenca .between -the-two that. the finishad MK mix gzaas/2000 ce.V-iihd-^.0Ti^varsloarvirLth a oaa honx reading. .Tha. -'"results are 'qti^ 'l^rTba^/shb^'a 'lazgw spraad-; (11.59C]^thaa tha QAiJA tart. Tha QAMA.test eallr. for ~3Q invarsions -par ;minuta/ ona hour u-L tii'ii i--1-r -!"TT~rv:-- 33ju33xS5: . O uH^ t_ -- ! M j-r t M ! t uh,; 1 i u. 1 `"T^T H1 i \ H- .t1 i , TT _uor I . '* * : --:i - t - T~t Trir g. w, , !f *----^--r- --* i * - - --r~ -t* **------, . iIim|, QO,1 J.., .........................................................................................................mil-l-Tt&l ' o'; ---'^g fWit e^bridog 'JBLL 1J ?-rr2r^ 'rsr^*or---rr , - . ; ---|B * f> > 4> I I- !: i- roZZl t;: I-- : " '"VI -- I<l..~......:rg$r-;*: - iiinniinniiininiiniimnnniiniimiiinnHimMiniinnmnud-: ~ n--n ---30--99" -- -t- 1 --- TO- rr-- -x-o...-. >< m ' .1 nr - niiimmiiimnii -- -i N --V.Z l.gj ! -- - Sj fiumniiuimiiHHiiiiiiiy # a . I 4 *b*i g r-~1-< m .--b-n*"aI ----r-j>cTIO- _ ~ I--0- --Q- f^e * n :3--*:*"| "ki ' *r* I "t- r i i I nTTTniiuuiiiiiiiiimnmTTtTm ) M * * 1 o ------SM* 5 ---------7-- ---#ma iiah *gai- s --r -- *' * " *" > ;**Q r?f. j 5I5.T rrp - J // . .'ilcV.r I-S-cr l/: jA . . ', 1 7. i*\ : . . #"'<1 .* \r " fr cc: R.J.Brsog, Cambridce J. Sawyer X.R.CranVer R.Rothfelder, L.A. J.K.Chapin, Jr., r.R. Sear Bob t Attached la a graph representing bv latest test work with twe types of asbestos. Those samples were provided by J. Sawyer, and I believe were the same as tested in January at T.R. and Cambridge (shown on the graph). The 10 grasi/2S0 cc. tests (&onolite Method) are reasonably consistent but do not differentiate between the two. It is evident from the use of these siaterials in MX mixes that there a substantial dirference in MX handling and performance when JM7MC-2 is used in place of this particular Rational 7RS-2 asbestos. The California test (12.5 grams/500 cc.) was not conducted because of a lack of sample, and Janice could run such a teat to plug the nosber: into this graph. But having done so previously, Z*ve found that while method puts asbestos settling in a more reasonable range (60-90*), it does not how the difference between the two that the f ini she'4 MX mix does, in this particular case. Z triad a short-cut on the .`AMA Test, running the proper ratios (20 grams/2000 cc.) and 10 inversions with a one hour reeding. The results are quite low, but show a larger spread (11.5*) than the AKA teet. The CANA teat calls for 30 Inversions per minute, one hour standing and 30 more inversions per minute,with a reading one hour later. The spread here was 8.5%. Z do not understand the difference shown by National Tests (19%). Were the samples actually the sane as mine, or simply the same deeignation? National Asbestos has always varied substantially from shipment to shipment within the same grade. Zf they tested a differen samples Z could understand ay high results. Very truly yuours. WRP/tr b i* TO: 3. C. Suechcr CAM332SGS 02015536 OATE: June 26, 1973 FROM: J. C. Yang CC: ]y|T6. -m/ll EXHIBIT NO.jiZi:| 12^!^ C. SILVERMAN 7 9A r-S***V A. K. Tlosenberg B. 5. Williams J. L. Wright SUBJECT: ph-- poSSlbl# OCCUTsncS oJ Asbestos is Mocohote ' ?HS: 500 Asb. Seta. RECEIVED JUL2 1973 >IUCM HSS^Sn *M*a N. A. A Impended Vermiculite samples and Konobote products iron various ajnir.g locations aad pleats haTe been analyzed since Dq. 1972, b7 quantitative X-ray diffraction method (developed by Arthur D. Little, Inc.). ihis is supplemented by optical microscopy (dispersion staining techniques developed by Arthur 0. Little, Inc.), transmission electron aicroscopy (rub-out cethod, developed by Jbhns-anville, but used ourselves at ERC) and scanning electron microscopy vith X-ray fluorescence analysis attachments (Arthur 2. Little, lac.). Based ea the eageriacatal results collected up to data, tentative con clusions and case ants ere strsarised as follovs: 1. Vermiculite eeatains a snail anouat of asbestos in the range of 0.3p. Die only asbestos species detected is tremolite; it can be either la platy or fibrous acrphnlcgy. The analyses ere presented in Table 1. 2. Stapling technique for the analysis is extremely inporiart all the analytical techniques stationed above require very small specimens. Because of the heterogeneous cattcrc of ain.rral species present, difference in density and forms, segregation, tends to occur. Representative analysis of a `brace aiasral in this aaterial ean be achieved only -by collecting a large msber of samples, perhaps 10 or aore readonly aad average the findings. Repetitions sampling (in Sables 1 aad 2) show the variations in the determinations. 3. itoickotc product contains approximately a aarinua of 33& expanded vsrmicnlite, 5e--jC gypsa and a ninor emsunt (fc) of organic materials. Die only asbestos containing ingred ient Is vermiculite. Since the tremolite contest of the expanded vermiculite is about 0.5ft, Mcnohste products vill have less than 0.2> tresolite by computation. Laboratory analysis shown in Table 2 confirms the computed results. 02015537 h. fs ore continuously iryavlsg the techniques far these eaalycts rash as to detsmine the ratio of platy ism vs. fibrous Tots of trcwlite, ta dictiayniah the fibrads trsnolite vs. other fibraus-libs riaarsis such as hars- - blende sad costaninarts wish nay lead ta sere accurate resolutions and identifications.. In addition, ve are tryia* to determine ths s=bor of scrplss required to jive a. statistically reliable analysis. / JCZivdb ^. 4^- e / . . _ . lei- 02015538 Tibia-1 - Analysis of Issasded yamioslite ro Identification la: Dascriutios of Sarnies losasiaa of Ora loa3.xio.s3 or Ispr--:-1.;-.? rv*.*--i i-( All 1 22233-2 South Carolina Trenton 0.33 2 22209-9 Astana Last Hasptoa 0.23 3 22209-13 U 22209-11 Moataaa South Carolina leaver Little 3och' 0.c5 <*0.2,0.45 5 22209-12 South Carolina Sssree <0.2 Average: All JU Tbtel O.U3 0.33 Table 2 - Analysis of Monohote Products Q* Idestifiaatias 2d. n . 22203-9 12 22203-10 12 22233-H lh 22233-12 %*m* 21279-1 1* 22239-?. 17 22209-2 Description of Sarnies loasaias cf .Ore location of Ilanu. Montana leaver Montana Jiontasa Los Angeles tV-l-Vf-ii. Montana Oregon Montana Ssst Hcsptsn Montana leaver Sotxth Caroliss Littla Koch TTs: Anally- sed 3y . AIL 0 0 0 0 c.3 0 <0.2 0.3,<3 Average Total: 0.2 02005538 rails-1 of Znpaaded 7: .isolita To. Identification "o-. 1 22233-2 2 22209-9 3 22203-10 U 22203-11 5 22203-12 . Descriociaa of Sendee iocaciaa of Ore locations ax' Zaorndi-j5 South Ceralira Trenton cft 3 CC- Aa=JLi*asa. All Jli 0.30 - Montana Last Seapton o.So 0 Montana 4 South Carolina Oenver Little Sock' 0.c5 - <T0.2,0.i>5 South Cora! ae <0.2 0 Average: A2IL JI4 Total O.U>3 0.33 0 Table 2 - Analysis of Monohote Products Description of Sardes Identification 2b. Location of Ore Lotatioa ox' liana. n 22203-3 Montana Denver TTesolite Center* Analyzed 2y: ADL 0- 12 22203-10 . Montana Los Angeles 0- *-ii iOdl CM 13 22203-11 lh 22203-12 %^ Montana Montana Montana Oregon last Htrptsn 00- c.3 0 It 22203-?. Montana Denver <0.2 - 17 '22203-2 South Carolina Little Koch 0.3,<0.2 - Average - Total: 0.2