Document 93Kd9KM41xwQVrqZ1155k0dY3

UO- LOCuttoui 9r(jCJl~ UNION CARBIDE CHEMICALS AND PLASTICS COMPANY INC. Law Department 39 Old Ridgebury Road 203/794-5531 Danbury, CT 06817-0001 April 11, 1991 Susan L. Parsons, Esq. Nutter, McClennen & Fish One International Place Boston, MA 02110-2699 Re: Alice L. Warren i Dear Susan: Attached please find complete sets of the documents you requested. I am sorry for the inconvenience; those front and back pages gets you every time. If I can be of further assistance please let me know. Very truly yours, PRIVILEGED AND "CONFIDENTIAL MATERIAL SUBJECT TO PROTECTIVE ORDER" UCC 080865 NUTTER, McCLENNEN 8c FISH ONE INTERNATIONAL PLACE BOSTON, MASSACHUSETTS 02110-2699 TELEPHONE; 617 439-2000 FACSIMILE: 617 973-9748 April 11, 1991 18371-1 L<' . DIRECT DIAL NUMBER: (617)439-2382 John R. Downey, Esquire Union Carbide Chemicals and Plastics Company, Inc. 39 Old Ridgebury Road Danbury, CT 06817-6269 Mary Sundt, Esquire The Dow Chemical Company D30 Willard H. Dow Center Midland, MI 48674 Judith Elledge, Esquire Conoco Inc. 600 North Derry Ashford Post Office Box 2197 Houston, TX 77252-2197 PRIVILEGED AND SUBJPr-fTMAL MATERIAL SUBJECT TO PROTECTIVE ORDER" Re: Alice L. Warren, Administratrix v. The Dow Chemical Company, Union Carbide, et al.: Your File No. D-16183 Dear Counsel: On April 9, 1991, I attended the depositipn of Carlton Rehm ("Rehm") at his home in Holyoke, Mass. He has been confined to his home for the most part due to severe emphysema. He is permanently hooked to an oxygen tank, and he cannot leave the house for more than four hours at a time. The following is a brief summary of the salient points of his deposition testimony. Rehm is a 65 year old retired Monsanto employee. He was employed by Monsanto at Indian Orchard between 1956 and 1982. Between 1956 and 1972, he worked as a foreman in the PVC production area. Specifically, he was a shift foreman and a day foreman in the PVC polymerization buildings 84, 88 and 92. John Warren worked on the "B" crew in building 92, and Rehm was his direct supervisor between 1956 and :u?60. As a\ shift t UCC 080866 HYANNIS, MASSACHUSETTS COUNSEL: AMSTERDAM LONDON TOKYO m'6 j. R. DO'NNPf * NUTTER, McCLENNEN & FISH April 11, 1991 Page 2 foreman, Rehm would shift between various crews. He was assigned to the "B" crew for the above-mentioned four years and he also worked for the "D" and "C" crews. During the four years he supervised Warren, he estimated that he spent approximately two hours in direct contact with Warren during each eight hour shift. The two hours were not, however, consecutive. The PVC operation at Monsanto occurred 24 hours a day, seven days a week. Rehm believed that buildings 84, 88 and 92 were built early in 1956, and the PVC production process took place in all three buildings until 1972 when building 92 was converted for production of another product. After 1972, Rehm had no position involving PVC or VCM. Warren worked primarily in building 92, and he was the lead kettle operator on that floor. Rehm described the layout of building 92 as containing eight reactors in the kettle area and four holding tanks ("slurries"), which were used for holding the product after the polymerization process. The tank farm was approximately 500 yards away and the VCM was stored in six tanks. The VCM would be channeled to building 92 or to the other two buildings through various pipes. Rehm described the PVC polymerization process in detail. Basically, there were three common ways a worker was exposed to VCM during the polymerization process. The first instance was after the reaction process was complete, and the manholes to the kettles were opened. When this occurred, there was still residual VCM in the reactor. When the kettle was opened, monomer fumes escaped and typically the worker could smell it. Moreover, the worker could see what appeared to be "waves" of fumes (monomer) coming out of the manhole. The manhole covers themselves would remain open for approximately two hours because it took this long to dump the kettles. Rehm stated that he saw Warren exposed to VCM repeatedly in this manner. The second manner in which a worker was exposed to VCM was when the operator cleaned the kettle. Again, residual VCM remained in the kettle, and no protective clothing was worn. The kettles were cleaned approximately every tenth batch. Rehm confirmed, however, that Warren was not responsible for cleaning the kettles as this was accomplished by a separate cleaning crew. The third manner in which workers were exposed to VCM was when there was a spill or an accident of some kind (which was rare). Rehm cited two instances of Warren's involvement in such an accident. The first instance was when Warren attempt d to rescue another **--who fell into a kettle. Warren pass d "nnwV^V,LEGED AND SSWjyss*- ORDER" UCC 080867 NUTTER, McCLENNEN Se FISH April 11, 1991 Page 3 out from the fumes. Rehm confirmed that he was not present when this occurred and that he only heard of the occurrence through other people. y The second instance was when the "sight glass" shattered. This sight glass was used in building 92 so that the workers could see the VCM going through the pipes into the reactors. Apparently, the gasket fractured and this resulted in VCM escaping into the building. Rehm and Warren had to valve off each part of the sight glass and let the VCM "bleed out." The entire process from start to finish took approximately an hour. There were six fans in the building for ventilation. There were four normal vent fans and two emergency vent fans. The emergency vent fans could change the air in the buildings in three minutes. Rehm did not know how quickly the air could circulate with the normal vent fans. There were also windows on three of the four sides of the building -- although they typically remained closed most of the time because it was easier to vent the air using the fans with the windows closed. No protective clothing was worn by the workers in building 92 or the other buildings. Coveralls and gloves were available, and workers occasionally wore the gloves when they were in the process of "dogging" the kettles down (locking the manhole covers on the kettles). This was done to protect them from cuts and scratches andvhad nothing to do with protecting them from VCM exposure. Monsanto provided Scot Airpacks to the employees, and the ' employees were taught how to use them. Rehm maintained that the employees were not, however, required to use them. Monsanto only recommended the use of such Airpacks in the event of a spill. Rehm admitted that it was a violation of safety procedure not to use the Scot Airpacks during the sight glass incident. Monsanto had safety meetings every month at which different topics were discussed. Rehm could not recall specific discussions about VCM. All employees were required to attend safety meetings. There were also safety manuals provided in the buildings themselves. Rehm admitted that workers were encouraged to read those manuals although he did not know specifically what the manuals contained and did not know whether Warren read the manuals himself. Rehm knew that he could be "anesthetized" from VCM fumes and that the fumes could cause him to feel "woozy." He knew in PRIVILEGED AND "CONFIDENTIAL MATERIAL SUBJECT TO PROTECTIVE ORDER" XJCC 080868 NUTTER, McCLENNEN & FISH April 11, 1991 Page 4 those circumstances that the best thing to do was to get out of the "bad air" area. He also was aware of the explosive potentials of VCM and that exposure to VCM in liquid form could cause "frostbite". Rehm had never heard of MSDSs. He was not aware of any other hazards of VCM. Rehm stated that he never witnessed any other workers experiencing adverse symptoms, and he stated that Warren never complained to him about feeling ill. Rehm stated that building 92 only smelled at certain times. The traditional "sweet smell" of VCM occurred primarily when the kettle was being dumped. Typically, five kettles were dumped every shift. Rehm estimated that approximately 1,450 gallons of VCM was needed for every 10,000 pounds of PVC. Rehm was aware that Monsanto produced its own VCM. He also mentioned Union Carbide's and Dow's VCM, but he confirmed on direct examination that he only knew that Union Carbide and Dow were suppliers through "scuttlebutt" and bits and pieces he heard from other people. He stated that once in a while the technical man would mention that "they were on Union Carbide's vinyl chloride now" or "they were on Dow vinyl chloride now." On cross-examination he confirmed that anything he knew about Union Carbide and Dow came solely from what others had told him and that he had no personal knowledge of same. He confirmed that there was no way of telling during the PVC production process whose vinyl chloride,was being used; that he had no need to know whose VCM was being used; and that there was no way of telling whose VCM workers were being exposed to. He further confirmed that he could not ascertain the particular suppliers when VCM was being drawn from the tank cars themselves. Rehm also stated that he never heard Conoco being mentioned as a possible supplier. He also stated that he never heard of Goodrich being mentioned as a possible supplier. Rehm discussed the various job responsibilities of the employees in building 92. Basically, there was the control operator (John Warren), two kettle operators and an assistant operator. The assistant operator's limited responsibilities were dumping and charging the kettle (loading it with VCM), weighing out raw materials, assisting in dogging down the kettle's manhole (closing it and clamping it), dumping the kettles, and bringing up raw materials from the warehouse. The kettle operator was able to do everything the assistant operator could do. His primary responsibility was charging th kettle, and he would also check and control the instruments for PRIVILEGED AND "CONFIDENTIAL MATERIAL SUBJECT TO PROTECTIVE ORDER" UCC 080869 NUTTER, McCLENNEN & FISH April 11, 1991 Page 5 pressure and temperature. The responsiblity of the control operator was to oversee the operations of the kettle operators and assistant operators. The control operator was the most experienced operator and he was able to do all phases of the polymerization process. Rehm recalled that there was some testing for air quality done at Monsanto but he did not recall the exact date. He also stated that all employees were required to have periodic health checkups and these records were kept at the Indian Orchard infirmary. He specifically remembered that he was given chest x-rays. He did not know the purpose for the health checkups. Overall, it was clear that Warren certainly was exposed to VCM on many occasions while in building 92. Nevertheless, it was equally as clear that Rehm could not state whose VCM Warren was exposed to during the entire time period. Once the transcript is received, it will be forwarded to you for your review. Please also note that Sharon and I had interviewed Mr. Rehm by telephone the day before his deposition, and his deposition testimony was fairly consistent with what he stated to us in the interview. Plaintiff's counsel did not ask Rehm whether he spoke to us prior to his deposition. As always, we will continue to keep you advised of further developments as they occur. Very truly yours SLP:ncg 1202i Susan L. Parsons cc: Ms. Yolanda Jackson (File No. H105L-76-034969) Ms. Kelly Tubman (File No. 808 ERBY 225 33J) PRIVILEGED AND "CONFIDENTIAL MATERIAL SUBJECT TO PROTECTIVE ORDER" UCC 080870 NUTTER, McCLENNEN & FISH ONE INTERNATIONAL PLACE BOSTON, MASSACHUSETTS 02110-2699 TELEPHONE: 617 439-2000 FACSIMILE: 617 973-9748 April 10, 1991 18371-1 DIRECT DIAL NUMBER: (617) 439-2460 John R. Downey, Esq. Union Carbide Chemicals and Plastics Company, Law Department 39 Old Ridgebury Road Danbury, CT 06817-0001 Inc. Mary Sundt, Esq. The Dow Chemical Company idl"nd'aM?ohigan"48674er PRIVILEGED AND "CONFIDENTIAL MATE SUBJECT TO PROTEC Re: ORDER" Alice L. Warren, Administratrix v. The Dow Chemical Company, Union Carbide, et al Dear John and Mary: Cl il I enclose a copy of Plaintiff's Motion to Vacate Protective Order for Conoco, Inc. I have communicated separately with Judy Elledge about this, aqd intend to oppose it on behalf of Conoco. The opposition will raise some of the issues relating to product identification, about which we have all spoken. Please call if you have any questions. Best regards. Sharon R. Burger SRB/jlf enclosure , ap.t cc: Judith Elledge, Esq. Ms. Yolanda Jackson (File No. H105L-76-034969) Ms. Kelly Tubman (File No. #808 ERBY 225 33J) p 5178i/36 i9s HYANNIS, MASSACHUSETTS COUNSEL: AMSTERDAM LONDON TOKYO UCC 080871 44 3 6 NUTTER, McCLENNEN & FISH ONE INTERNATIONAL PLACE BOSTON, MASSACHUSETTS 02110-2699 TELEPHONE: 617 439-2000 FACSIMILE: 617 973-9748 DIRECT DIAL NUMBER: (617)439-2382 April 8, 1991 18371-1 BY FEDERAL EXPRESS Clerk, Civil United States District Court District of Massachusetts Western Section Federal Building and Courthouse 1550 Main Street Springfield, MA 01103-1422 Re: Alice L. Warren, Administratrix v. The Dow Chemical Company, Union Carbide, et al.; Your File No. D-16183 Dear Sir/Madam: Enclosed for filing is an original and one copy of Assencea to Motion to Admit Susan L. Parsons to Appear As Counsel Pro Hac Vice in the above-captioned case. 'V' Please time stamp the copy of the Assented to Motion and return to this office in the enclosed, self-addressed stamped envelope. Thank you for your attention to this matter. Very truly yours, SLP:ncg 1148i Enclosures cc: James H. Tourtelotte, Esq. Joseph E. Rendini, Esq. Susan L. Parsons RECEIVED APR U 1991 l R. DOWNEY bcc: John H; Downey, Esq Judith Elledge, Esq. Mary Sundt, Esq. Ms. Yolanda Jackson (File No. H105L-76-034969) Ms. Kelly Tubman (File No. 808 ERBY 225 33J) UCC 080872 4^? NUTTER, McCLENNEN & FISH H' ONE INTERNATIONAL PLACE BOSTON, MASSACHUSETTS 02110-2699 TELEPHONE: 617 439-2000 FACSIMILE: 617 973-9748 DIRECT DIAL NUMBER: (617)439-2382 April 5, 1991 18371-1 VIA FEDERAL EXPRESS Office of the Civil Clerk United States District Court Federal Building and Courthouse 1550 Main Street Springfield, Massachusetts 01103-1422 Re: Alice L. Warren, Administratrix v. The Dow Chemical Company, Union Carbide, et al.; Your File Mo. D-16183_______________ Dear Sir/Madam: Enclosed for filing are an original and one copy of each of the following documents in the above case: 1. Answer of Defendant Conoco, Inc. to Second Amended laint. A' 2. Answer of Defendant The Dow Chemical company to Second ded Complaint. 3. Answer of Defendant Union Carbide Chemicals and tics Company, Inc. to Second Amended Complaint. Please time stamp a copy of each answer and return same to this office in the enclosed, self- addressed stamped envelope. HYANNIS, MASSACHUSETTS COUNSEL: AMSTERDAM LONDON TOKYO g. a Down UCC 080873 NUTTER, McCLENNEN & FISH April 5, 1991 Page Two Thank you for your attention to this matter. Very truly yours, SLP:ncg 1087 i Susan L. Parsons Enclosures cc: James H. Tourtelotte, Esq. Joseph E. Rendini, Esq. bcc; . ,,. Esq. Judith Elledge, esq. Mary Sundt, Esq. Ms. Yolanda Jackson (File No. H105L-76-034969) Ms. Kelly Tubman (File No. 808 ERBY 225 33J) UCC 080874 NUTTER, McCLENNEN & FISH ONE INTERNATIONAL PLACE BOSTON, MASSACHUSETTS 02110-2699 TELEPHONE: 617 439-2000 FACSIMILE: 617 973-9748 April 5, 1991 18371-1 DIRECT DIAL NUMBER: (617)439-2382 R. Nicholas Wheeler, Jr. 1912 Shady Branch Trail Richmond, VA 23233 Re: Alice L. Warren, Administratrix v. The Dow Chemical Company, Union Carbide, et al.; Your File No. D-16183___________ Dear Nick: I enclose a document which you provided to us in response to plaintiff's request for production of documents. I am at a loss as to what this document is. Thus, if you could review same and give me a call, I would very much appreciate it. Very truly yours SLP:ncg 0995i Enclosure Susan L. Parsons PRIVILEGED AND "CONFIDENTIAL MATERIAL SUBJECT TO PROTECTIVE ORDER" HYANNIS, MASSACHUSETTS COUNSEL: AMSTERDAM LONDON TOKYO UCC 080875 U C C 080876 ANALYSIS NUMBPH ANALYSIS NUMBER SAMPLE OF SAMPLE FROM SAMPLED BY HOUR DATE ;r<~ </' </*, ** -** '/s~< *&*/< <- /orS**',*' /f* s.<sir KfVs~ '+ > f'f ^ i'*iL^y/c y~j?z3 .i j frf&SCH'Y /^/MS A? **-S . ZIKMlL ~3?~ * VTsA'/J'/crsrJs ><y. / / /9/Ssy___________ J/S? /Z3 -------- - - <T'ss SS ' / fyssx' '?'/*'? /Crs/s'S' ^ ?S /*>{' / ^ - .",: t?s/ y<r/^ * <, '*'s? srfss's',s^rs*~&''' \* "*'? ,, ,. k APR 05 1973 R. N. WHELLER. JR, N ANALYSIS BY I DATE te- \ ' ------------------ -- - - -------------- /^7'4z4ufi J -3 -X ?