Document EB87gORBeEqQazJJqBZYYEL4

pg 67, 73 Deposition of Charles W. Lehnert taken on June 27, 1988, in Glandon v. GAF Corporation, et al. , Civil Action No. 87-742-E in the United States District Court for the District of Nebraska, and in Sager v. Owens-Corning Fiberglas Corporation, et al., Civil Action No. 87-742-E in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Iowa, along with all exhibits thereto i ft 61 1 A. We had one member of our group who did 2 not, was not located in Tigard, but he worked for us 3 and he did, he took a course on doing the air 4 sampling with the pumps. 5 Q. How long was that course? i! 6 A. Oh, I don't know. 7 Q. A day or two? 8 A. I have no idea. 9 Q. How many facilities did Georgia Pacific I 10 have at that time that were using asbestos? 11 A. I believe there were five. i 12 Q. Was he the person that was responsible 13 for monitoring asbestos at all five facilities? 14 A. It may have been handled by other people 15 that were trained by him at some times. 16 Q. He never took a certification course or 17 anything like that? z i 18 A. No, he merely learned how to use the ' 19 pumps. 20 Q. To your knowledge, did Georgia Pacific at 21 that time have any certified industrial higienists 22 that were available to do that work? 23 . A. I am not aware of anyone that we might ii 24 have had at that time. 25 Q. Were you aware of any toxicologists that 62 1 were working for Georgia Pacific who could have done 2 that work? 3 A. No, I am not. 4 Q. Your group just ended up getting stuck 5 with it, I guess, is that it? 6 MR. PARNELL: Object to the form of the 7 question as argumentative. 8 A. Are you asking me a question? 9 Q. Yeah, did your group just accept getting 10 stuck with it because nobody could do it? 11 MR* PARNELL: Same objection. 12 A. No, I don't think so, that's correct. 13 Q. How did it come about? 14 A. We determined that it would be less 15 expensive for us to do it than to have an outside 16 consultant do it. 17 Q. So you were trying to save money, so you 18 had one of your own people do -- 19 A. We also felt that we could do a more 20 thorough job and it would be closer to the 2 1 monitoring. We also had someone trained in the 22 counting of asbestos fibers. 23 . - Q, Was that the same person who did the 24 testing? 25 A. No, it was not. 63 1 Q. What was the name of the person who did 2 tlhe air s ampling? i 3 i A. George Fuller. 4 iii Q. How much of his time was spent between 5 1*97 0 and 1975 doing air sampling? i 6 I A. I have no idea. 7 Would it have been less than 10 percent? 9 I think so. 9 Q. Who was doing the counting? 10 A . George Green. 11 wajs How much of his time between 1970 and '75 12 js spent doing counting? Was it less than 5 13 percent? 14 It probably wasn't very much, because we 15 had a technician learn how, we taught a technician 16 how to do the counts, we hired a separate person 17 part time to do that. ://^^Q. So you had one fellow part time doing the 18 / 19 counting, you had one guy spending less than 10 or 20 ^5 percent of his time doing sampling; was that the \ 2 1 extent of the staff? 22 I A. To do the monitoring? 23 i. Q Yes. 24 \ A. Yes, it was. 25 \ Q. That was company-wide for gypsum? I i 64 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 A . Yes, that's correct. (A recess was taken.) MR. BARON: We're ready. Mr. Lehnert, let me switch fields for just a moment. When did you first become aware that asbestos was capable of causing damage to humans? MR. PARNELL: Object to the form of the question. There is no testimony that he has ever become aware. Have you ever become aware that asbestos is capable of causing harm to humans? I am not aware of any specific evidence that asbestos will harm humans. Do you honestly mean that as of right now as sit here today you are not aware of any evidence that asbestos is harmful to humans; is that right ? A. I've seen studies with asbestos and cigarette smoking and I don't know, I can't determine whether the asbestos or cigarette smoking was responsible for the problems that we detected. Are you familiar with the disease entity asbestos is ? A. I've heard of asbestosis. Q. ^ To your knowledge, is that related in any S 65 1 way to asbestos inhalation? 2 ^1 an* not a medical expert and I couldn't i 3 tfestify on that at all. / 4 ! Q. So you are really not an expert on i 5 ajsbestos and its capability of causing disease? 6 'v-- A. That's correct. 7 Q. And any advice that you give to anyone 8 would be just pure speculation on your part as to 9 the hazards of the - 10 MR. PARNELL: Object to the form. The 11 jury and the judge will have to determine whether 12 that's true. Go ahead. 13 Q. Is that right? 14 I have no training on hazards of 15 asbestos. 16 And you are not somebody who would want 17 to give out information about the hazards of 18 asbestos then; is that right? 19 A. I would have no reason to give that 20 information out. 2 1 MR. BARON: Next number, please. 22 (Document was marked for identification 23 . as Plaintiff's Exhibit PX-23.) 24 Mr. Lehnert, I have in front of me a 25 document that has been marked PX-23, it is an inter- I 66 1 ' departmental communication on Georgia Pacific 2 stationery dated June 19, 1973, from C. W. Lehnert 3 to Mr. John Woodsmall; subjects Asbestos fiber in 4 I joint compounds. First thing I would like to do is 5 have you take a look at this document and see if 6 i that is your initials at the bottom and if that's 7 1 your signing next to your initials and if you are 8 the author of it? Is that a document that you 9 lauthored? 10 A. Yes, it is . \ 11 j Q. Let me ask you a question or two about / 12 Xt. Who is Mr. John Woodsmall? 13 A. I believe he's the salesman or was a 14 salesman in the Detroit market. 15 Q. Do you recall what prompted you to write 16 this memoranda? i 17 ^ A. No, not specifically. 18 / Q. Let's see if I can refresh your 19 recollection. The memo starts as follows: Quote, 1 20 will try to respond to your customers' concern about 21 asbestos fiber prompted by our labeling of joint 22 system bags. Does that ring a bell to you? 23 x . A. I assume that the customer when we put 24 warning labels, the customer had some concern as to 25 what the warning labels were all about. 67 X Q. And was this memo then your answer to 2 Mr. 'Woodsmall as to what to tell his customer? 3 A. Yes. 4 Q. You state as follows: Quote, this \ 5 caution~label is required by the Occupational Safety 6 and Health Administration. We have always used 7 asbestos fiber in our joint system products, so if 8 there is a hazard, it is no different today than it 9 has been in the past. The hazard is the inhalation 10 of asbestos fiber. 11 What was the basis for that statement by 12 you that the hazard is in the inhalation of asbestos 13 f ibe-Z_^~ 14 j A. Looking back I probably shouldn't have 15 made that comment. 16 Q. Well you did though, didn't you? 17 ^ A. Yes, I did. I guess I assumed that if 18 you breathed straight asbestos fiber, it would be 19 more harmful than breathing joint compound which had 20 small quantities of asbestos. I was speculating. 21 Q. Is that statement wrong? 22 _ A. I can't recall precisely why I said 23 that. I was trying to respond to the man's concern 24 so that he could have something to give his 25 customer. i 1 68 1 Q. Mr, Lehnert? 2 A. Looking back I probably shouldn't have 3 worded it in that fashion. 4 Q. Mr. Lehnert, you just testified not more 5 than three or four minutes ago that you did not have 6 any information that asbestos could cause harm in 7 humans, that you considered to be valid information; 8 is that right? 9 A. That's correct. 10 ^----- Q. You then state in this memo,quote, the 11 degree of hazard would depend on the concentration 12 of asbestos fiber in the air and in duration of 13 ex^erslTre^ to that air? 14 L A. That's assuming there was a hazard. 15 Q. You assumed here that there was a hazard, 16 so would it be fair to say you assumed there was a 1 7 hazard in 1973? 18 A. It would be fair to say that I assumed 19 wrong. 20 Q. So you thought there was a hazard in 1973 2 1 bu^. you don't think there is a hazard now, is that 22 what you are telling the jury? 23 ' . A. No, I don't think -- I am not telling the 24 yury~~arny t hing . 25 Q. Well -- I 1 s t 69 1 A. Are we in court. 2 iI Q. We will be very rapidly? If 3 i A. But are we in court today. 4 j Q. This deposition will be read to a jury. 5 ! A. Okay. /i1 6 1 Q. V Does that change the way you want to 7 testify? 8 A. I can't tell you what I thought in 1973. i I 9 I was only trying to furnish the customer some 10 information, and I probably -- looking back, I 11 probably did it incorrectly. 12 ; Q. You then state, quote, the health 13 pro/Dlems associated with asbestos have occurred in 14 situations where workers have been exposed to high 15 concentrations of asbestos fiber over a period of 16 years.H Where did you get that information? 17 ) A. Presumably from a periodical that I read. 18 / Q. Is that wrong? 19 1 A. I don't know. That was quoting from a 20 periodical. 21 | Q. Again, a couple of moments ago you 22 iestified that as of today you did not believe there 23 was any hazard related to exposure to asbestos? 24 a. T believe I testified that I don't have 25 any evidence of any hazard. 4/1 ot>M) JOUHNAl M f CO C M C M fO H bObO/ 1 BOO l6Jb tN II l J: 11 I i 70 1 Q. Have you read the OSHA regulations? 2 A. r have read some of them. 3 Q. You read the ones back in 1972, didn't 4 ydu, you reviewed them for the company? 5 t A. Yes. 6 Q. Those regulationsdescribe in great 7 detlail the hazards of inhalation of asbestos, do 8 they not? 9 ji A. I don't think so. i 10 Q. You don't think they do? i 11 A. NO. 12 Q. Do you have any earthly idea why OSHA j 13 r4.gu-La-fees asbestos? 14 MR. PARNELL: Object to the form of the 15 question as argumentative. You may answer. 16 I assume that OSHA regulates asbestos 17 feel that there is some hazard, 18 pote^tb.ial hazard. 19 Q. inj- Now in your letter here, you say "the 20 lustry is currently planning tests to determine 2 1 tl^e level of airborne asbestos during the mixing and 22 sanding. In the meantime, it would probably be 23 advisable for workers engaged in these operations to 24 wfear respirators." Why did you say that? j 25 ; A. If there was a problem, a respirator I 71 1 would certainly help. 2 Q. You state up here the hazard is the 3 inhalation of asbestos fiber, do you think that's 4 the reason why it would be a good idea to wear a 5 respirator? 6 A. I think it would be a good idea to wear a 7 respirator regardless of what kind of dust you were 8 breathing. 9 Q. You then go on to say one solution of the 10 asbestos fiber problem for all concerned is to 1 1 eliminate it from our products. Do you think that 12 was the best way to deal with it? 13 A. Certainly. 14 Q. Even though you have not been given any 15 evidence that it's dangerous? 16 A. There was enough concern over the 17 regulations in trying to comply with them that that 18 would be the best solution for us. 19 f Q. So in other words, do you feel like the 20 reason that asbestos was removed was not because it 2 1 w|s dangerous but because the government made you do 22 23 A. Well, it was because if there were any 24 potefTtTal hazard -- and I have no hard evidence that 25 there is - we were doing the right thing by taking i 72 1 it out . 2 Q. Did you ever do any research on the 3 hazards of asbestos? 4 : A. No. 5 \Q. Have you ever looked in any book at all 6 to look up hazards of asbestos? 7 A. No. 8 ' Q. Have you ever read articles in the 9 new$paper about the hazards of asbestos? 10 ! A. I have read some periodicals about the 11 hazards of asbestos. I 12 ; Q. Do you just not accept that as believable i 13 information? 14 : A. Those articles dealt with products other 15 than the ones that we manufactured, the ones I read. 16 I Q. Well, the question I have for you, 17 thjough, iss Is asbestos hazardous to humans? / 18 ' A. I am not a medical expert on that, the 19 uke or breathing of asbestos, I couldn't testify to 20 /that. 2 1 Q. So I guess what you're trying to tell the 22 jury is that you were responsible for formulating 23 and making these products but you are just not 24 responsible at all for whether they are safe? 25 MR. PARNELL: Object to the form of the I 73 1 question as not before the jury. It's 2 argumentative. I move to strike. You may answer. 3 A. I think I testified as to what I am 4 responsible for. 5 Q. Are you responsible for the safety of the 6 products that you formulate? 7 A. I am not the safety supervisor. 8 Q. Are you responsible in any way for the 9 safety of the products that you formulate? 10 A. I am responsible for the development of 11 the products and the technical applications. I am i 12 no( responsible for safety. 13 ! Q. Are you familiar with the set of books 14 caljled the Encyclopedia Brittanica? 15 \ A. Yes. 16 J Q. Do you have a set in your house? 17 A. No. 18 Q. Do you have a encyclopedia in your home? 19 : A. No. j20 Q. Have you ever had access to the Encyclopedia Brittanica? 21 22 / A. Yes. I 23 . \ Q. Have you ever looked up asbestos? 24 I might have. 25 Did you find out about its hazardous 1 i 74 1 qualities in there? 2 A. I don't recall ever seeing any hazardous 3 qualities in the periodicals I looked at. 4 Q. I am talking about Encyclopedia 5 Brittanica. 6 At I don't recall ever looking at 7 Encyclopedia Brittanica. 8 Q. What periodicals have you looked at 9 concerning asbestos? 10 I've read some of the articles by Paul 1 1 Brodeer in the New Yorker. I have read some other 12 articles that you have indicated, Walls and l 13 Ceilings, I've also read some articles, an article, 14 ^obably several, in Asbestos Abatement Magazine. 15 Q. Do you think the Gypsum Association is 16 generally a good organization? 17 A. Yes. 18 Q. Do you feel like the quality of their 19 research has been good? 20 A. The Gypsum Association doesn't do any 2 1 reseaxcJi 22 ( Q. I have in front of me a document that has 23 beerKSvpj:evIously identified as Plaintiff's Exhibit 24 No. 15? which is entitled A Valuation of Exposure to 25 Asbestos During Mixing and Sanding of Joint i 75 1 Compounds by the Gypsum Association, Denver, 2 Colorado, November 19, 1973. 3 Have you ever seen this before? 4 A. Yes, I've seen this. 5 Q. That was a research project carried on by 6 the Gypsum Association, was it not? 7 A. I beg to differ? this was not a research 8 project . 9 Q. What was it? 10 A. This was just a normal project carried on 11 by the association at the request of some of the 12 members. 13 Q. Georgia Pacific was one of the members 14 that requested it, was it not? 15 A. I am not sure about that. I was not on 16 the safety committee which would have generated the 17 interest in that, so I can't be sure. We did have a 18 person that attended the tests that were conducted 19 however. 20 / QA Let me ask you if you agree with your 2 1 stuor this project that was done by the Gypsum 22 Association, some of the things they say about it. 2 3 1^ says quote. The potential health hazard 24 associated with exposure to asbestos is that of 25 inhalation of airborne fibers resulting in a type of 76 1 pneumoconiosis referred to as "asbestosis." 2 Does that sound like a true statement +o 3 you? 4 A. I would have no idea of where that came 5 f:Tom or what the basis for it was. 6 Q. They then go on to say, quote. Small 7 asbestos fibers can pass readily through the upper 8 respiratory tract and be deposited in the terminal 9 bronchioles of the lung. 10 ^ Do you have any information about that? 11 i 12 ; A. No, I do not. Q. If sufficient quantities of fibers are 13 inhaled over an extended period of time, a 14 generalized diffuse peribronchiolar fibrosis can 15 develop." i 16 Do you have any information about that? 17 A. I am not a medical expert, Mr. Baron. I 18 can't testify on these contentions by someone else. 19 Q. You were on the Board of Directors of 20 this group, were you not? 2 1 MR. PARNELLs Object to the form of the 22 question. He never said he was on the board. 23 . Q. You were on the technical committee of 24 the Gypsum Association, right? 25 \ A. Yes. T 77 1 Q. And the Gypsum Association is a group of 2 manufacturers such as Georgia Pacific who make 3 products containing gypsum? 4 \ A. That's correct. 5 And the Gypsum Association's report says 6 inhalation of asbestos can cause asbestosis? 7 A. That is not true. 8 Q. It doesn't say that? 9 A. It is not the Gypsum Association's 10 report. 11 Q. Whose report is it under title Gypsum 12 Association? 13 A. This is a report. 14 NR. PARNELL: One at a time. 15 A. Let's see. This was a report of George 16 D. Clayton & Associates conducted and it may have 17 been put on a Gypsum Association letterhead, but the 18 report was prepared by Robert D. Soule, who I never 19 heard of. 20 Q. The report says Gypsum Association/ and 21 it is signed by Robert D. Soule, Vice-President, 22 Industrial Hygiene Services? 23 . A. He has never been associated with the 24 Gypsum Association. 25 Q. So even though the Gypsum Association I 78 1 paid for this report, it is on Gypsum Association 2 stationery, you believe it's wrong? is that right? 3 A. The report was done for the Gypsum 4 Association by Clayton and Associates, and it was up 5 to the member companies to accept it or not accept 6 it . 7 Q. So the Gypsum Association paid for the 8 'report, the report came back, and it says that 9 asbestos causes asbestosis, but you refuse to accept 10 i that; is that correct? 11 ! A. I don't think we know the basis for the 12 ^tat^nents in there, and the Clayton and Associates 13 was retained strictly to conduct the study on the 14 joint compounds and anything else that they may have 15 added was extra. 16 Tell the jury yes or no. Do you have 17 Reason to accept this report that says that asbestos 18 cWu^s^asbestosis on the letterhead of the Gypsum 19 Association? 20 MR. PARNELL: Object to the form of the 2 1 question as argumentative. You can answer yes or no 22 if you^ean. If you can't, you don't have to. 23 ./ A. I don't have any evidence to support 24 whafrtL' s^contended in that report, so I can't really 25 testify on that. I 1 79 1 (Document was marked for identification 2 as Plaintiff's Exhibit PX-24.) 3 Q. I am going to hand you a document marked 4 PX-24 and ask if you can identify that, sir. 5 A. I may have seen this document. 6 Q. It has your name on the bottom of it, 7 does it not? 8 A. Yes, I guess I did see it. 9 MR. PARNELL: Just one second for me. ^^^MR. BARON: PX-24 is a copy of an article 10 11 from the Evening Times, Trenton, New Jersey, Friday, 12 August 29, 1975, and it shows a copy of this article i 13 was isent to you, does it not? 14 A. Yes. 15 ! Q. Do you believe that you probably received 16 it? 17 A. Yes, I did. 18 The title of the article is Spacklina Mav 19 Harbor Dangerous Asbestos Levels. The very first 20 paragraph says, quote, Doit-yourselfers who repair 2 1 their own plaster or plasterboard walls should be 22 aware of recent research indicating that some 23 commonly available speckling compounds contain 24 asbestos, a substance that has been linked to fatal 25 cancers and serious lung diseases." I 1 80 1 You obviously must have had the 2 opportunity to read that, did you not, sir? 3 A. Yes. 4 ^ MR. PARNELL: I object to all of the 5 preamble up to the question, "You obviously must 6 have had a chance to read that." Move to strike. 7 / Q. When you read this, did it concern you i 8 thikt^_tjiere might be customers out there using 9 Georgia Pacific products who could develop fatal 10 cancers and serious lung diseases? 11 MR. PARNELL: Object to the form of the 12 question. There is nothing in that article that has 13 anything to do with any Georgia Pacific product 14 whatsoever. You may answer. 15 A. Not only does it not have anything to do L 16 wibvh^our product, but it only says that there is 17 asbestos in joint compounds and we already knew 18 that .__. /" 19 / Q. Well, when you read this sentence, 20 "coiikwrly available spackling compounds contain 2 1 asbestos, a substance that has been linked to fatal 22 cancers and lungs diseases," did that cause you any 23 concern? 24 A. It didn't say that the fatal lung 25 disV^ws and cancers were linked to joint compounds. 1 81 1 Q. Bottom line is this didn't bother you at 2 all, did it? 3 A. The article did not speak to joint 4 compounds except to say they contained asbestos. 5 / Q. The question I have for you, sir, that I 6 wiri-.asjs, one more time, is: Did this article bother 7 you in any way? 8 MR. PARNELL: Object to the form of the 9 question. It is irrelevant whether it bothered him 10 or not. Go ahead. 11 I have no idea how I felt about it back 12 er year that was. 13 1975. i/ 14 V A. But certainly I recognized that we had 15 asbesbw^ln joint compounds, that was not news to 16 me . 17 /qT' And the fact that the article says that / 18 asbestos is a substance that has been linked to 19 fatal cancers and serious lung diseases, that didn't 20 cause you any -- 2 1 A. I don't know what the basis for that 22 23 So you disregarded it? is that right? 24 I don't know if I disregarded it, but we 25 wer ^taking asbestos out of joint compounds. i 82 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 Q. So you weren't concerned? A. At the time. witness. MR. PARNELL: Object. Badgering the / A. If we weren't concerned, we wouldn't have bejen taking asbestos out of the joint compounds. Q. What's your present title with the company, sir? 1 A. Manager ofproductdevelopment and technical service for the gypsum and roofing division. (^<3. Sir, are you still the person in charge ofjdeveloping new products for the gypsum division of ^Georgia Pacific? \ A. Yes. Today do you look at the safety of a product that you develop before you recommend that it be put into production? MR. PARNELL: Object to the form of the question. Move to strike it. You may answer. I would say that there is more concern about safety today than there was perhaps back in the early '70s. Q. Do you have any responsibilities at Georgia Pacific for the safety of the products that 83 1 you develop? 2 A. No. My responsibility is to develop new 3 products. 4 Q. Your responsibility is not to determine 5 whether they are safe; is that right? 6 A. I wouldn't say it is totally not my 7 responsibility, I suppose there is some area of e responsibility, but my primary area of 9 respXLS^ibility is to develop the new products. 10 / Q. Do you have any responsibility at all to n detViTrrtTie whether those new products that you 12 deve^-oi? are safe? 13 A, I would say there is some responsibility, 14 yes>^to_Jie sure that we don't develop products that 15 are goring to cause harm. 16 | Q. What do you do to fulfill that 17 responsibility? 18 ^ A^ I suppose X work with other people who 19 are knowledgeable about hazards and things of this 20 nature. 2 1 QDo you think that's a good idea? 22 MR. PARNELL: I don't know what, is what 23 a . good idea ? 24 What are we talking now? 25 MR. PARNELL: What's your pronoun? I ' 84 1 Q. Do you think it's a good idea to work 2 with people who have knowledge about hazardous i 3 mjaterials when you are developing new products? 4 \ A. Yes. 5 Q. Would it have been a good idea 20 years 6 ago? 7 A. Twenty years ago I don't think we had the 8 awareness that we have today about various materials 9 that weren't even, they weren't talked about, there 10 was no knowledge about it at that time. ^ That's not the question I asked you. The 11 12 queV^ip^ I asked you: Would it have been a good 13 idea 20 years ago to have consulted with somebody 14 that knew about hazardous materials while you were 15 developing products? 16 MR. PARNELL: I object to the form of the 17 question. It calls for speculation and hypothetical 18 quesX-ion, but you can answer. 19 All right. I can't say what I should hav^a--f^lt 20 years ago. 20 2 1 So you have no regrets that no one 22 bobbejre^a to find out whether asbestos was hazardous 23 or not before they put it in this product? 24 MR. PARNELL: I object to the form of the 25 question and instruct this witness not to answer. 85 1 MR. BARONs Answer the question. 2 MR. PARNELL: Do not answer the question. 3 I take the responsibility for your nonanswer. 4 The question is patently objectionable. 5 Q. Did you have the ability to consult with 6 people who knew about the hazardous properties of 7 materials while you were formulating products 20 or 8 30 years ago? 9 A. We consulted with the suppliers of the 10 asbestos and they never at any time indicated that 11 there was any hazard whatsoever with asbestos. 12 Q. So did you advise your customers that 13 th^re was any hazard with your products? 14 A. The customers never asked us. 15 Q. Did you ever ask the asbestos companies? 16 A. I don't recall whether anyone asked the 17 asbestos companies or not, but I am sure that they 18 neyer advised us. 19 Q. Just like? 20 A. Of any problem, in fact, even after there 21 wad an awareness that there were perhaps some 22 potential problems in certain areas, the asbestos 23 companies still did not give us any information 24 insofar as potential hazards wereconcerned. 25 Q. Did you ask for any? I I I 86 1 A. I am not sure whether anyone asked for 2 any or not, I don't recall. / 3/ Q. You sure didn't, did you? 4 A. I don't recall, Mr. Baron. 5( Q. Did you? Do you recall whether you went i 6 cut and looked in a book to find out? 7 ^ A. I wasn't aware of any books that 8 contained studies on asbestos. 9 Q. That was by 1970? 10 A. Yes, sir. 1 1 MR. BARON: That's all I have. 12 MR. PARNELL: Mr. Erickson. 13 MR. ERICKSON: I just have a few 14 questions 15 EXAMINATION 16 BY MR. ERICKSON: 17 Q. Who were your suppliers of asbestos? 10 A. I believe I have testified to that 19 already, but it is Phillip Carey Company, John 20 Mansfield and Union Carbide were the primary 21 suppliers. 22 Q. Did you use asbestos from different 23 companies for different products at different times? 24 A. Yes. 25 Q. What suppliers supplied the asbestos 87 1 which went into your texture products? 2 A. I believe most of the asbestos that was 3 used in texture was supplied by Phillip Carey. 4 Q. What about the asbestos which went into 5 your joint compound? 6 A. Most of it was Phillip Carey, at one 7 period of time we used asbestos from Union Carbide 8 as well. 9 Q. Were there periods of time when virtually 10 all of the asbestos which you purchased for your 11 joint compound or your texture products was supplied 12 by Phillip Carey? 13 A. I don't completely understand the 14 question. 15 Q. Was there a period of time when Phillip 16 Carey was basically the sole supplier of asbestos 17 fibers used in your joint compound or your texture 18 products ? 19 A. 1 believe there was. 20 Q. What period was that? 21 A. I don't recall. 22 Q. Would your products' formulas provide 23 that information? 24 A. They would if they were available. 25 Q. Are they available? i 88 1 A. I don't have them -- back that far. I 2 may have some formulas, but I don't know that I 3 would have enough formula information to answer your 4 question precisely. 5 Q. Can you approximate what years Phillip 6 Carey supplied fibers for your joint compounds and 7 your texture products? e A. Approximately. 9 Q. What years was that? 10 A. Up until about the 1950's most of the ii asbestos was furnished by John Mansfield 12 Corporation, and somewhere in the middle '50s we 13 began to purchase most of our requirements from 14 Phillip Carey. Later on we also purchased asbestos 15 from Union Carbide, but it was used in conjunction 16 with asbestos from Phillip Carey. 17 Q. When you say later on,what time was 18 that ? 19 A. I don't recallspecifically, but it was 20 on into the '70s. 2 1 Q. So would it be fair to say from the 22 '60s on, Phillip Carey supplied you almost all of 23 the asbestos that went into your joint compound and 24 texture products? 25 A. Yes. i i 89 1 MR. ERICKSON: That's all I have. 2 MR. PARNELL: Anything further? 3 MR. BARON: No. 4 MR. PARNELL: Thank you. Anybody else? 5 MR. BARON: Thank you very much. 6 (Deposition concluded at 4:45 p.m.) 7 8 (Whereupon, the reading and signing of 9 the deposition by the witness was reserved.) 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 I 90 1 2 3 CERTIFICATE 4 5 STATE OF GEORGIA: 6 COUNTY OF FULTON: 7 I hereby certify that the foregoing 8 transcript was taken down, as stated in 9 the caption, and the questions and answers 10 thereto were reduced to typewriting under 11 my direction? that the foregoing pages 1 12 through 89 represent a true, complete, and 13 correct transcript of the evidence given 14 upon said hearing, and I further certify 15 that I am not of kin or counsel to the 16 parties in the case; am not in the regular 17 employ of counsel for any of said parties; 18 nor am I in anywise interested in the result 19 of said case. 20 This, the 8th day of July, 1988. 21 22 23 COLLEEN B. SEIDL, RPR, CCR-B-1113 My commission expires on the 24 13th day of October, 1990. 25 i 91 1 DEPOSITION OF CHARLES W. LEHNERT/CBS I do hereby certify that I have read all 2 questions propounded to me and all answers given by me on June 27, 1988, taken before 3 Colleen B. Seidl, and that: 4_ 1) There are no changes noted. _ 2) The following changes are noted: 5 Pursuant to Rule 30 (7)(e) of the Federal 6 Rules of Civil Procedure and/or Georgia Code Annotated 81A-130 (B)(6)(e), both of which read in 7 part: Any changes in form or substance which you desire to make shall be entered upon the 8 deposition...with a statement of the reasons given...for making them. Accordingly, to assist you 9 in effecting corrections, please use the form below: 10 Page No.____ Line No.___ should read: 11 12 And the reason for the change is: 13 Page No.____ Line No.___ should read: 14 15 And the reason for the change is: 16 17 Page No.____ Line No.___ should read: 18 19 And the reason for the change is: 20 Page No.____ Line No.___ should read: 21 22 And the reason for the change is : 23 24 Page No. Line No. should read: 25 l 1 92 1 DEPOSITION OF CHARLES W. LEHNERT/CBS And the reason for the change is:______________ 2 Page No.____ Line No.___ should read: 3 4 And the reason for the change is: 5 6 Page No.____ Line No.___ should read: 7 8 And the reason for the change is: 9 Page No.____ Line No.___ should read: 10 11 And the reason for the change is: 12 13 Page No.____ Line No.___ should read: 14 15 And the reason for the change is: 16 Page No.____ Line No.___ should read: 17 18 And the reason for the change is: 19 20 Page No.____ Line No.___ should read: 21 22 And the reason for the change is: 23 Page No.____ Line No.___ should read: 24 25 T ' 93 1 DEPOSITION OF CHARLES W. LEHNERT/CBS And the reason for the change i 8 3 2 Page NO , Line No. should read: 3 4 And the reason for the change is : 5 6 Paae No. Line No. should read: 7 8 And the reason for the change is : 9 Paae No. 10 Line No. should read: 11 And the reason for the change is : 12 13 Page No. Line No. should read: 14 15 And the reason for the change is : 16 Page No. 17 Line No. should read: 18 And the reason for the change is : 19 20 Page No. Line No. should read: 21 22 And the reason for the change is : 23 Page No. 24 Line No. should read : 25 94 1 DEPOSITION OF CHARLES W. LEHNERT/CBS And the reason for the change i s : 2 Page No ., 3 Line No * -- should read: 4 And the reason for the change is : 5 6 If supplemental or additional pages are necessary, 7 please furnish same in typewriting annexed to this deposition. 8 9 Charles W. Lehnert 10 Sworn to and subscribed before me, 11 this the ____ day of * 1988. 12 Notary Public. 13 My commission expires: 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 ^feorgia-teciffc ^ Iracompany memo ' ' Hr*- G- L. Vllaot * tarrr 0. ff* Bank * n*t*t ASBZSTOr - JT OBUHT FBODPCTS *- * * ioeswr toatot dm - - foftUai Fortlasd Ker 17* IB74 Atticbod appurad la the Vail* A Coiling* oagaalno, Kay laauov Ihl* 1* th* r*e da* Z ban aaoa. actual earn reported* QD/l O.r.B* CC Maaara: C* V* Lahaan -- Tigard. Lab J* Bard; -- Foreland H* risk Tigard. Lab 0* C- CorkUl* Fort! inrf in d maoww * ; i %CPSC A Steeper? Tile tie idee what erao ever the that the Occupational Safety Shalt* Act waa passed by I* due count. 03HA. into * mainr cource of ail contractors. Tvarybody's witty. of course. tad few panic of the federal law* ^ouid. made vary much difference ini ducting* business. It's, made athole ed * big difference Gangra* baa erected anothof ku which han't received a great of attention. Maybe U have tee mueh impact on tioa. On the other hand, it come a bureauoetio giant ZTo the Consumer Product CommiErinn which believe* home ie tecood only to the automo bile aa the most dangerous. `product* on the market today. If CPSC in all that worried about home*, why not tea? The Commission reason* that since It ban Jurisdiction over appliancan it fellow* that it ha* authority over wiring. The wiring*, attached to structural framing a that too must one within their Jurisdiction; By type'of wall fedapchemthijpen, But then, thought OSHA. would. be- Aobesto* (anger Cted Thpiog and iparlrtlnr od in drywall flaidfef may ex works* to dangcroua level* of flhart, ccorriing to OSHA The wonting feQowod an nation at IT aemberaof a Hew York Qty painter* local. Tama Plowed the hang* of nine painter* had X-ray evidence of fibroMn or cseenive * cretion build-up la the lung*. Employer group* end tininne are being aaked. t* alert worker* to the potential hazard* aid. federal afety Moosbruggar Panes longtimeioWCC member Louie J. Mnnihnigger died In Lake Worth* Florida, in February. Be founded Northwestern Plastic Art, MUwauken in MX and developed the Nu Stone syvaa of emulated stone masonry evecuted in plaster: North* weetem Ptastlo Art II Nu-Stone Cou. Ian, i* sow beaded. by hi* an* Hobart Wfceir fireproofing witfr ZMOf/fe > MONO-KOTE for th+ best r*su!tx use . . "K* BALLS Mode especially lor Nathan Klmmei, Inc. longer lasting urethnnematerial. Will Ilf Thomson and Essick plastering gun* . NATHAN K1MMEL, INC 121$ Sooth Santo P* Avenue lae Angeles, CeDfemia 90021 013) 42T-ISSA SeiMufring isgitot-beotod Kraft paper-backed Self-furred asphalt-backed Asphalt paper-backed SAVE MATERIAL, TIME AND MONEY the ceco corporatian SeOI W. S6TH STREET. CHICAGO. ILL. 60630 PLAINTIFFS EXHIBIT g* - l-T EVALUATION OF EXPOSURE TO ASBESTOS DURING MIXINC AND SANDING OF JOINT COMPOUNDS GYPSUM ASSOCIATION Denver, Colorado November 19, 1973 j * i 1 7 T 4 T P f EVALUATION OF EXPOSURE TO ASBESTOS DURINC MIXING AND SANDING OP JOINT COMPOUNDS errSUM ASSOCIATION Denver, Colorado . INTRODUCTION The Gypsum Association rctilaid Gtorga D. Clayton and Asaoelataa to<r conduct an lnduatrlal hygiene survey at a teat eite located la Den* ver, Colorado. The purpose of the aurvey vea to deteralne the eon* ceotrstlons of airborne aabeatoa to which workers were exposed dur ing mixing and sanding of joint cement compounds and to interpret the results in terns of potential health hazards with particular refer* eoce to regulations promulgated under authority of the Occupational Safety and Health Act of 1970. This study was conducted on November 19, 1973 by Mr. Robert D. Soule of Clayton and Associates. Result* of that study are reported herein. - < . BACKGROUND 4. The Cypsua Association, located at 1603 Orrlngton Avenue in Evans Jon, Illinois is a trade association which represents ten to fifteen lf* dustrlal companies which are engaged In the manufacture of products Incorporating gypsum or gypsua-llke materials. As with aost Indus* trlsl concerns, the activities of the Gypsum Association have becoms more broad with the pesssge and implementation of federal regulations such as the Metal and Non-Metalllc Mine Safety Act end the Occupa tional Safety and Health Act. Technical committees composed of per sonnel froa companies comprising the Cypsua Assoc 1st Ion have been es tablished with particular interast in tha occupational safety and health field. Of particular eoncern In thla respect'vaa the poten tial hazard associated with exposure of workers to airborne asbestos durl.ig mixing and sanding of compounds usad to ssal cracks and Joints formed during Installation of vallboard material. Although the spe cific formulations used by the various companies manufacturing and supplying the Joint compound vary,It la understood that essentially all of them Incorporate asbestos In tha product whether as a dry com pound or a ready-alx product. In order to evaluate the exposure of workers to asbestos during han dling and use of tha Joint compound produets, the Gypsum Association decided to undertake a test prograa during which several products would be alxsd and sanded. George D. Clayton and Associates was re tained to collect and analyse samples which would represent the ex posure of workers engaged in the study. The tests were performed on November 19, 1973 in a development of tovnhouees known as King's Mill Townhouse*, which were under construction in a suburban area north of Denver, Colorado. POTENTIAL HEALTH HAZARD ASSOCIATED WITH EXPOSURE TO ASBESTOS Asbestos is a generic term referring to various mineral silicates. ( The types used most widely in industrial applications include chrysotile, or "white asbestos" (s hydrated magnesium silicate), amoslte, 2 - or "grey asbestos" (an Iron aasnealun silicate), erocidollte, or "blue asbestos" (a sodium Iron slllcata), tremollte (a calcium mag nesium lilicata), and anthophyllIte (another iron aagncaiua *111- ate). Of these, chryaotlle accounts for over 90 percent of the ___total usage of asbestos in this country, with amoslte and crocido- lite being the only other types used to any significant extent* Asbestos exists naturally In bundles of extremely fine fibers vhlch * eta be subdivided easily into many smaller fibers* The potential health hazard associated with exposure to asbestos la that of inhala tion of airborne fibers resulting lo`a type of pneumoeoalosla referred to as "asbestosls.M Smell asbestos fibers cam pass readily through the upper respiratory tract and be depoelted in the terminal bronchi oles of the lung. Thera, they produce a local irritation vhlch the j body attempts to overcome by initiating a tissue response resulting In the encapsulation of the fibers and consequent formation of "as bestos bodies*" If sufficient quantities of fibers are Inhaled over;* an extended period of time, a generalized diffuse peribronchiolar fibrosis can develop. This pulmonary fibrosis can Impair the crans- fer of oxygen across the aveolar membranes and result in respiratory Insufficiencies, or even cardlae failure* Zt has baan determined, * through toxicological and epldamiologleal studies, that long fibars, 20 to 50 micrometers In length, are most active in the production of the fibrosis. Fibers shorter then about two micrometers In length, are practically without an irritating affect* Thera la soma evidanca that other minerals having fibrous characteristics can produce elml- lar reactions. - any recent studies have Indicated an association between exposure to asbestos in both industrial and urban atmospheres and an Increase In a relatively rare type of lung cancer known as mesothelioma. Al though it has not been possible to establish a connection with asbes tos in all cases of this disease, there la a strong correlation be tween exposure to croeldollte and occurrence of mesotheliomas* Other types of asbestos have been implicated to a much lesser extant. How- ever, this "new hazard1* has received much public attention because It has been suggested that vary minimal, noa-occupatlonal exposure ean be sufficient to produce the disease In some Individuals* - For many years the American Conference of Governmental Industrial Hy gienists has recommended a-threshold limit value (T1.V) of five mil lion particles per cubic foot of air (mppcf) for qll types of asbes tos-bearing dusts containing less than one percent crystalline silica. The threshold limit value is defined as the concentration of an air borne contiolninc to vhlch it Is believed that nearly all workers can be exposed for continuous and repeated work days without experiencing adverse effects. The TLV of five mppcf was based on the lmpinger sam pling technique which was selected as the standard method in the early epidemiological studlas of occupational exposure to asbestos* With this method, sir is drawn through an lmpinger containing water and the totsl particles (both grains and fibers) In an aliquot of the *ample,are counted using Ught-fleld microscopic techniques. Vlthln recent years, because of the Increasing concern about asbestos ' the environment and the resulting need for a more relevant sam . ilng method, the American Conference of Governmental Industrial Hygienists hn proposed s TLV of five fibers (greeter th' meters in length) per cubic centimeter of sir. This standard Is based a the membrane filter technique with actual microscopic fiber count ing at 400-450X magnification using phase contrast Illumination, ae Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSKA) has estab lished the above concentration (five fibers, greater than five micro meters in length, per cuble centimeter of air) ae an emergency stand ard and have announced that, effactlva July 1, 1976, the acceptable Unit for an el;ht-hour* time-weighted average exposure vill be re- j'ncsi :: :r: fibers Zz eiiirirr. JfSA has established the c.*s- eeatratloB of ten fibers (greater than five mtcronetere in length) per cuble centimeter of air as an acceptable celling concentration. Workers shall not be exposed .to concentrations of asbestos in excess of this value, regardless of duration of exposure. : SAMPLING AND ANALYTICAL METHODS The air sampling conducted to eveluate exposures of workers to asbes tos was all of the "breathing rone" type. These samples were collected by drawing air through 37-mm diameter membrane filters (M11Z1pore Type AA) at a rata of about two liters per minute using smell, battery-operated pumps (Mine Safety Appliances Company, Model C) The sampling units were worn by tha workers engaged in either mixing or sanding the Joint compound; the pump was attached to the belt and the sampler head fastened on the outside of the worker* shirt at approximate breathing zone height. Thus, these samples were repre- ntatlve of the time-weighted average conditions to which the men * e exposed during the sampling period. The sampling heed consisted a three piece cassette (Milllpore); during sampling the fees eep was removed and tha filter was used In an "open face" mode.with the filter positioned slightly downward so ae to minimise dust falling iirectly onto the filter. * * Sampling was conducted for the entire duration of the mixing opera tions but because of the higher anticipated concentrations associ ated with sanding of tha joint compounds It was decided to change filters approximately every tea minutes. Sampling during the sand ing on the various joint compounds was conducted over a total period of sixty minutes. Therefore six consecutive ten-minute samples vers obtained for each sanding last. In addition to tha ten-minute testa, samples were collected over thirty-minute periods as well, l.e., two consecutive 30-oinute samples for each eandiiig test; After collec tion of each sample the filter cap was replaced and the cassette, or sampler head, was seeled Immediately and prepared for transfer to the analytical laboratory. The method of counting asbestos fibers was essentially the same as that used by the U.S. Public Health Service for the enumeration of asbestos dust onseabranc filters. The description of this method first appeared in an article written by C.H. Edwards and J.K. Lynch and appeared in the Annals of Occupational Hygiene. Volume 2, pages 1-6 (1968). w a i'j i -AJiT* i n -4 *n luaotry, the method conalBCed of the following steps. KLAINTIFPS EXHIBIT I MeZICS) A ple-aheped section of each sample was mounted on a standard microscope slide using a high viscosity solution of membraae filter in a 1:1 mixture of diethyl oxalate and dimethyl phtba' late to render the filter transparent. The asbestos fibers which were on the surface of the filter vers then counted using - a 10X eyepiece and a 40X objective with phase contrast illumine* tlon. /P I- A number of fields, selected at random across the sample, suf ficient to reveal a minimum of 100 flbere were examined and * fibers grseter than five micrometers in length were counted. Any particle having an aspect ratio of thrao or greater was con- j sldered to bo a fiber. Although it was conceivable that there would be fibers of paper or other materials prtiant on the fll- ' ters which would hive been dislodged from the vallboerd during 1 the sanding operation It did not appaar that these were of any adverse eonsequenee during the analysis of the samples. Although ' It Is realized that ths counting technique la not specific la 1 terms of being able to Identify tha chemical nature of the fibers ! present in the sample, all of tha fibers observed in these sem- j pits appeared to have physical features characteristic of asbes tos fibers ` ' For those samples collected over a thirty-minute period, and which were too- heavily loaded to evaluate directly under the , microscope, the collected material on the filters vas dislodged in a highly purified distilled water bach using an ultrasonic unit (Dynasonlc Corporation, Modal C6 generator and Model T6 tank) and diluted to one liter. An aliquot of the resulting suspension vas drawn, passed through a membrane filter (Mllll- pore Type BA ) end was then analysed according to the procedure described above. PRESENTATION OF RESULTS A total of four joint compound products were used during this study. These products (two dry mix and two "ready mix") were supplied by ' two manufacturers whose Identities were not known to the investigetor. The products were identified by code (2D, 2R, 4D and 4R), a number referring to tha supplier and the letter Indicating whether the product vaa a "dry" or "ready-mix" compound. The results of the sampling program conducted during the mixing of the two dry mix products and sanding tests on all four joint com pounds ire presented in Tables I through XV. Examination of these data reveals the- following: 1. During mixing of Joint Compound 2D, the worker vas exposed to a concentration of 31.4 fibers, greater then five micro meters In length, per cubic centimeter of air. 2. The amount of total particulate generated during the sand ing operation on Joint Compound 2D was so great that direct 1 j-5 EXHIBIT ILrtlUr) analysis of the ten-minute samplesvaa"1!?!1 possible. Anal ytic of the thirty-minute samples, which were redeposited. Indicated an average concentration of 39*4 fibers, greater than five micrometers la length,per cubic centimeter of air . 3. The results of analysing four of the six tan-minute samples collected during sanding on Joint Compound 21 indicated an average concentration of 4.2 fibers per cubic centimeter; * two of the samples were too heavily loaded to analyse di rectly. Results of analysis of the tvo thirty-minute * sam ples collected during the sanding on Joint Compound 2S indi cated an average concentration of 11.1`flbera per cubic cen timeter, e factor of over 2.5 times as high as the average obtained from analysis of the ten-minute samples. 4. The sample obtained during the mixing of Joint Compound. 4D indicated a concentration of 7.6 fibers, greater then five micrometers la leagth, per cubic centimeter of elr. 5. Results of analyzing four of the six ten-minute samples col lected during the sanding on Joint Compound 4S Indicated an average concentration of 4.4 fibers per cubic centimeter. Analysis of the tvo thirty-minute samples, which were sub jected to the redeposltlng procedure, Indicated an average concentration of 14.6 fiber# per cubic centimeter, a factor of 3.4 times as high as results obtained Iron the ten-minute * samples. 6. Tht results of analysis of five of the six samples obtained during the sanding on Joint Compound 4R Indicated nrt aver age concentration of 10.6 fibers per cubic centimeter. Re sults of analysis of the tvo thirty-minute samples Indicated en average concentration of 9.7 fibers per cubic centimeter, a value essentially the seme as that obtained from analysis of the ten-minute samples. 7. Six of the thirteen ten-minute eemples obtained during send ing on the four Joint compounds Indicated concentrations in excess of five fibers per cubic centimeter. Both nixing operations generated asbestos concentrations in excess of five fibers per cubic centimeter. . 8. Tvo of the thirteen ten-minute samples collected during the sending teats Indicated conctncntIons In excess of ten fibers par cubic centimeter, the acceptable celling concen tration. One of the tvo mixing operations generated en ssbestos-ln-alr concentration in excese of ten fibers per cubic centimeter 9. Of the four products tested, sending on 2R and 4X> resulted In concentrations less than, but approaching, the current acceptable limit for continuous exposure of workers, five fibers per cubic centimeter* product 4R consistently pro duced very high concentrations of total dust which obscured the asbestos fibers on the eemples. -6. PLAINTIFFS EXHIBIT /LT7/n) . CONCLUSIONS following conclusion* arc preieoCcd on the bade of observations aud measurements msds during the study reported herein. 1. Bssed on the results of the ten-minute epleiv It Is epper- ent that the exposures of workers engaged In mixing end sand* ' lag of the various Joint compound! used during this test would be to concentrations approeehlng or exceeding five fibers, greater than five micrometers In length, per cubic centimeter of air. .* 2. It Is clear that persons engaged In the mixing end sanding of j Joint compounds similar to those used during this test would ; be exposed to concentrations of airborne asbestos In excess * of two fibers per cubic centimeter during the entire course < of their work. This value Is the proposed acceptable limit for an eight-hour time-weighted average exposure to asbestbs which Is scheduled to become effective July 1, 1976. 3. With the exception of the tests conducted during sanding on Joint compound 4R the results of analysis of the thirty-mlaute samples, .using the redeposltlon technique, were consist ently higher than those obtained by direct analysis of the ten-mlnute samples by a factor of 2-1/2 to 3-1/2. Therefore, It appears chat use of the redeposltlon technique would re- . suit in the apparent concentrstlons of asbestos in air being higher than actually present and would therefore err on the "conservative" side. 4. Discounting the results obtained by analysis of the thlrty. minute samples, for which ehe redeposltlon technique was used, three of the samples collected (mixing of 2D end send ing on 4R) indicated concentrations In exceaa of tan flbara par cubic cantlmatar and ara therefore a concern ea peek exposures. Vlth those exceptions, tho problem Is ons of con trolling the time-weighted average exposures of worksrs to asbestos. In that respeet. It must be pointed out that tha sampling results reported herein are Indicative of the expo sures of workers during the mixing or sanding operation! and not their time-weighted average exposure for i full workday. RECOMMENDATIONS 1. The results of ssmpllng reported herein should be analysed in conjunction with a study of tha work practices and routine of persons engaged In mixing, sanding or otherwise being exposed to Joint compounds similar to thoaa uaad in this study. In this way a true evaluation of the tlae-velghtmd average exposure of . such workers to asbestos cm be made. 1/ it ie true that, as reported by workers used during this test, it-^womld be unlikely for so Individual to mix or sand on the Joint cospounJTTor greater than two hours par workday,then tha time-weighted * aver age exposure of such workers to asbestos likely would be-within acceptable limits. Of course, the problem of controi~HnI 4-HY 1 exposures to below ten fiber* per cubic centlaecer would still have to be contended with. 2. from the standpoint of being able to eliminate or nlnlalse the ___ problem of excessive concentrations of asbestos being generated by handling and usa of the Joint compounds* consideration should be given to the following aspects. a. The aost effective seats of eliminating the asbestos prob lem obviously would he to cllalnate asbestos from the Joint compound formulations If this is feasible.. Although the spe cific role that asbestos plays In the Joint coapound formu lations Is not clear it Is understood that manufacturers of Joint compounds consider It necessary that asbestos be In the foraulatIons . b. From an engineering standpoint It may be neeessary to Imple ment the following measures In conjunction with mixing and * sanding of the joint compounds containing asbestos. 1. . Mixing of the Joint compounds could be done In such a way that the material is more effectively wetted as It is reaoved from the containers or could be done within an enclosure* with or without mechanical ventilation* so as to minimise the amount of asbestos fibers released Into the breathing tone of the workers. 11. Although the results of the air sampling reported herein indicate concentrations of asbestos fibers In excess of acceptable Halts* either those currently enforced or those proposed to be made effective in July* 1976* It was obvious during the study that the sanding process In general has associated with It exposure of the worker to tremendously high concentratl.ona of total dust. There fore* If means were Implemented to maintain the exposure of the workers to total particulate to within acceptable limits there would be an Inherent control of the asbestos problem as veil. Although more extensive in nature* en gineering control of the total dust generated by the sand ing operations Is feasible. Sueh control techniques would - Include* but not be limited to, the use of a vet sanding technique and/or use of a portable local exhaust ventila tion system incorporating* as the air moving device* a unit similar to common industrial vacuum cleaners and bag collectors. The next phase of the testing program to control workers' expo sures to asbestos during use of the Joint cement compounds logi cally would be evaluations of the various potential engineering control concepts Indicated or Inferred above. 'port prepared by_____________ Robert D. Soule* ?. Vice-President* Industrial Hygi*n* Servlces i AebeeCo* M a te ria l IN D U S T R IA L NYGIEUE SAMPLING SUMMARY GEORGE O , CLAYTON A ASSOCIATES-- o u X M9 e w eo XUo --Uc >e * c^ O wO w r u a ^> o o9 9cr e c0 ozu o p e 0s ox > eo o e ** 6U x as 0W uz X >* 0X XX 0e 0o 0> o U UH z as U b0 ^ Wb <HN ^ ew *oo Wo X X ** 00 0*X9 9 0 * 0X yw 0*0 0 c r 0 ae xi 909 0** ZM aO u a <*4 8ft* u' o * x * O 0 O c *- .09 99 " 0 o 0* a b O 0a ma u> ,HQ 0 0-0 0 ^ 0 ^-o -c5 ^** -^^ *X>4 H0O 8W JO*0 e v 9s 9 o e *1 0e w u s0 *M4 X0 ^M W 0 0* O >* %4 a ** 00o o > > oo M te r lil on filte r 1 (W&T 1I91HX3 SJJIlNIVld I ^ . 44 * C lliA t C ypiutt lit o e U t lo n i A a b e a to s GEORGE 0 * CLAYTON A ASSOCIATES IN D U S T R IA L HYGIENE SAM PLING SUMMARY H ater le i - e o * p w c o c ou opu > .A 'fl m* a fM VI A . *4 0 o. 9 0 *4 o v% > m u 4 *4 *3 * '* <n N 0 0 C4 * *e 0 * n *4 o * oO N C4 oe C4 0 o <4 o C4 o N w 4 .9 O. M 0 *4 0 0a> 0 a 00 0 *4 0 C4 n 0 * 0 "O o *4 M o *4 VI 4 *4 *4 4 >4 ^4 4 4 0 *4 *4 a. w 0 O* M u* p AJ m t m *4 0 *4 0 m in 0 e * 0m* 00 ^4 . *4 00 ^4 r- 00 C4 n 00 *4 * _ * J O IN T COMPOUND 2R ** 0 O 4 U flu 4 u u 0 JX 0 0 9 'O flu 0 o J M 0 49 0 0 WA 0 0 9 O a 0 O 0 0 4 0 0 * 0 ^ 0 0 9 O 0& O u 0 0 4 0 0 0 *4 & 00 01 0 *4 M f> V) 0 0 01 1 1 a* 0 r4 C4 M A 00 0 0 99 OO fi 0 . *0. OO o tt 0 .0 00 4 00 00 00 A w 0 a 9 O a. 0 o o 0 9 4 0 o 0 A 0 e 9 O & 0 O (1 0 6 4 0 e 0 .9 W 0 e 9 O a. 0 o O 0 e 4 0 a 0 0 1 00 1 *% 0 (A 0 0 0 0 01 1 0 0 1 0 0 f4 M N *4 N ' 0 000 00 *> r* hi 4 a 4 *4 >4 *< 4 4 *4 *4 % *4 4 4 *4 4 4 *4 4 % ' . m* S3 14 M ** 0 14 0 80^ C* - a 9 A 4 44 .r* 0 44 sg O 2-5 9 o 2* > M e < 3 o M >* 0 OM - 0 W r p- srw u^5af 0r X 0 0 w0 4J 44 09 o 5-* 9 o 2 4 0 SLa 9 * P 4 9 U V 0 50 w a. O afifi*5. oC P oB. *J *2 oef 0 3 1* S'JjS -SS- oJ < wH J .9 44 O 9 0 0 e . e o 4 m e ' 41 m& 4 9 > c uO mg 04 4J oe PA 4 0 44 Po >> %4 a -0 p e 0uM 0*4 0 *K44 90#0a >** -- 4 0 a b e> own o yIm * 1 i tt <T it i 1 (% C lie n t C ypaum la to o l * t Io n . s *. GEORGE D . CLAYTON A ASSOCIATES - IN D U S T R IA L UYCIEUE SAM PLING SUMHART C lia n t C yptua A s s o c ia tio n , ..*-*""* ' M a t e r ia l _________A s b c s to a e o ej u e uo A 0 a. /\ to fl a -4 ao l > ttoo to fi &0 aa I r: a to - 44 # Xm a0 o OI o IN | IN a* fb S ff -5 * *4 *4 *9 a -4 44 * t [f o *a O9 a_ to <g to -4 TJ 0C *4 m .* to ` u ... a * a oo a >* au CT0 w- * U a 5 x 04 a o6 -- 43 to o I *4 . 0 6w 6u 0 4 - a 44 ^ n9 e o a. uo 0 to 14 X X u 0 >.^ >* % a w 44 aa to a . c a c 8o oo a to 4*.^ a 0a a >4 aa 03 to 9 0 o- a a0 0 a to to w^ O a oaa tf 0*0 e r a e * 9 * to 0 99 O9 Uo Ok a ^ u fl u o & to to O N 0 a eu e 0 O9 9 a . u o 9 e, O" -4 * i -4 a ' *' . c i. 9 a pN 0 0' a 0 o to a 0 a a o -4 -a a9 >S a *4 ao C to a0 *4 44 U0 aa u ji a 0 to a . --4. to* a o a >* %4 9 to a 0 to C a aa 0 to a * oN o to *4 %4 P* ^ "** i r r t* r 4* ik ;: k J*-\ 1* r to . to to>- o a >4 0 0 > & o` 9 8 0 9 aa o a 9 0 04 s 0 -e toX ^ A9 e * to O --4 to > to to aa a to o i* * L* I. to * 9 0 9 to *-4 0 a o 9 <XHH . j- to au to a a to 0 aa 7 a t (nJE&u j II8IHX3 1 1 \ r r V l 15 f5 Ij' m OEQRQIA-PACIFIC lWTt*DCPAHTMfNTAL COMMUNICATION TO* PNOM: ft * SUBJICTi 1t * ec: Mr. Mo Veodanell C. IT. Uhnert ASBESTOS gl XU JOXHT CQgCOBM Mr. 0* f. Burch Porting Hr. T. W. ft1shards - ft|iH Nr. T. B. Godfrey - Portland1 5* OATH June 19, 1973 LOCATIONS Bttrolc I4U1 LOCATION! Tl|lH Lob P b Z will try to respond to your autoMri' concsn about ubiiUi fiber pranpted by our labeling of joist syttM bags. Tbit ceutloa label 1 reculrnd by tho Occupational Safety ud lee1th Administration (OCHA). Wo have always used asbestos flbor to our joint system products, 00 If there U 0 hesard, it la 00 different today choc it boo boos lo tho pest. Tho hamsrd la the Inhalation of asbestos flbor. Tho degree of hosord would dopood ou tho coocaotratloa of ssbostoo flbor la tho sir oad duration of expoeum to that air. Tho aaaltb pr00Laos aasoclstod with ssbostos have occurrad la situations dora workers bays boon exposed to high concentrations of asbaatos fiber 00ar a period of years. Joint confounds coocala relatively snail percentages (2*91) of asbestos fiber. OSHA has Inposad a nuaber of stringent standards on plants where products are oanufacturad containing asbestos fiber. These include limltaclone an the concentration of flbor In the air, procedures far handling tho atbeacoe fiber, use of protective devices (res pirators), periodic nodical exealnations, and labeling of all producta containing aaboscoa fiber. X an not aware of any OSMA regulations for tho uoo of Joint syaten products. Bownvar, It la recognised that there lo sane exposure during tho nixing of dry producta mod the sanding of Joints after the Joint aaapouada have boon applied. Tho level of aebeetee fiber caaooatration at theaa tinea la not presently known, the inducts? is currently planning taste to determine the level of airborne asbestos during the ate log and sanding. In the onantian, it would probably bo advleable for uorkers eagaged la these operate to wear re spiretore. Coca ninad or wetted, the ssbestee flbor la act enbjOct to becanlng airborne end, therefore, la ao longer hasardoae. For evsnple, ready nixed preduett would procent no prebloo other thoa perhaps the sand lag. s 2 PLAINTIFF'S EXHIBIT I Received by MHll Wl afsmmiaoa 1 '*' Hr* Ma Voadiaall Jum It, 1973 Om HUtlfla af tbo aibatcei fikr probloa for oil coaesrooW lo to sllalnnto It iron our products. Wo oro cngogoW U 0 prograa to floW viyi to Wo this. Our first offorts van with Joint systoa torCaros boccuoo wo folt thu sprsy application presented sobs poelol problons. At this tins wo oro shout 901 coovortoW to ooo-sobootos tortaro fomulce. Wo oro now W1rootlog our ottoatloo to our Wry soW rood? nlroW Joint compounds* X hops this Inforastlon will cnowor our custoaors* quostlons eonoornlng tbo posslblo boaorWo of osbostoa flbor oaW the octlous bolog token to olinlooto or nininiso thoso hoscrds* CVL:ols T > core'-Corporation D 06, VardvWo Branch -- ..NiwJtrtiy 06620 609/565-1100 c r& e i. <<* ,c*T c. ^ tin:i;wai\i;riMi*xtiiiatmvvj..riiii>\v. M'i;i!STni*tw 1 i GpacMing may fearbor ' c'crcgermas asbestos level By FRANCES CERRA . New Ytrk Timet Service NEW YORK - Doit-youmlfers vhrr repair their own platter or plat'erlKa-d walls should be aware of re it-* -o*e?rch indicating that some commonly available speckling 'v-*r:-H?nd* contain asbestos, a stibo *v * that hat been linked to fatal t, -cv-n and serious lung diseases. The Environmental Sciences I-ihorstory st Manhattan's Mount Sinai Hospital under the direction of Dr. Irving J. Selikoff, recently i e'eased the results of tests of 15 i: *'% of sr>acklc that had been pur chased in New York City. Five were to contain appreciable amounts of asbestos. (Some of the samples were duplicate brands biragbl at dif ferent times.) . According to Dr. Selikoff. the union of Drywall Tspem and Paint ers of Greater New York called hit silent ion to the possibility that the sparkle might contain asbestos. John Alfaronc. an official of the union, said some of the members became ID and were found to be suffering from asbestos-caused diseases. ^ AS A RESULT of Dr. SellkofTs findings, he said, his onion members' will no longer work with any speckle .hat contains asbestos, and will only Kind the dried tpackle if they ore | prwiriH with masks. The asbestos in | twit!? i released Into the oir. ac11 r'-ding to Dr. Selikoff. when the dry (i *--n-H ;** mixed u,s n'.er to make a paste and when any form of epochIt is sanded. Dr. David Rail, director of the`Na tional Institute of Environmental Health Sciences, said it was doubtful that someone doing a small amount of sparkling work at home was in any danger. But he said that some one redoing the walls of an entire house might be taking Man unneces sary risk." ' Extensive raaearefa an the results af long-rants* low-lev^) asbostos exposure is in progress, he saM. . A spokesman for Ui. Gypsum, the manufacturer of one of the sparkling brands found to contain asbestos, said the company was phasing sut .the production of speckles with ssbeatoa. A spot chock of several Manhattan paint stores found cans of U.S. Gypsum's TexoUte, which con tains from f to 10 percent asbestos, still on the market. Also found was another U.S. Gypsum product called Durabond Paste Speckling, which . was labeled: "Caution: Contains asbestos fibers. Avoid creating dust. Breathing asbestos dust may cause serious bodily harm.** THE OTHER PRODUCTS found by J)r. Selikoff to contain asbestos were "Pert A Tape. Metro and Arvon The Pert A Tape was counted twice h> Dr. Selikoff, because it was pur chased and tested twice, only in-<972 or earlier, and later in January. 1174. Products found to be without asbes tos were Red Top, Muralo. Patch Paste, Schalk, U-G-L Certex Hex. New Kex end Dap, Dr. Selikoff cau tioned that the products on the mar ket today might contain different ingredients. Persons wishing to minimise any risk should use only paste spacklc and should wear a mask when sand ing. Most labels on speckle products do not disclose the constituent that went into them. ' cbdl SmtJfy Corhh'll * $11 ner't I 1 1 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEBRASKA 2 NATHLEEN G. GLANDON, As ) 3 Personal Representative of the) Heirs and Estate of FRANCIS R. ) 4 MCDONALD, deceased, ) ) 5 Plaintiff, ) CIVIL ACTION 6 vs . ) FILE NO. 86-0-841 ) 7 GAF CORPORATION, ET AL., ) ) ) 8 Defendants. 9 10 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 11 FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF IOWA 12 LAVERN I. SAGER AND LORETTA SAGER, 13 Plaintiffs, 14 vs . 15 OWENS-CORNING FIBERGLAS 16 CORPORATION, ET AL., 17 Defendants. 18 ) ) ) ) CIVIL ACTION ) FILE NO. 87-742-E ) ) ) ) ) ) 19 DEPOSITION OF CHARLES W. LEHNERT 20 21 22 23 BROWN R EPORTING, INC. 24 1100 SPRING STREET, SUITE 750 ATLANTA, G E O R GIA 25 (404 ) 876-8 1 2 1 IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF DALLAS COUNTY 2 191ST JUDICAL DISTRICT STATE OF TEXAS 3 PAUL WOODS, ET AL., ) 4) Plaintiffs, ) CIVIL ACTION 5 ) FILE NO. 88-04640-J vs . ) 6) ARMSTRONG WORLD INDUSTRIES, ) 7 INC., ET AL., ) ) 8 Defendants. ) 9 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 10 FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA 11 RALPH WESTON, et al., ) ) 12 Plaintiffs, )CIVIL ACTION FILE )NO. 87-076 1-CIV-ATKINS 13 vs . ) ) 14 ARMSTRONG WORLD INDUSTRIES, ) INC., et al., f/k/a ARMSTRONG ) 15 CORP. COMPANY, a Pennsylvania ) corporation, et al., ) 16 ) Defendants. ) 17 18 19 Deposition of CHARLES W. LEHNERT, taken on 20 behalf of the Plaintiffs, pursuant to agreement of 2 1 counsel, in accordance with the Federal Rules of 22 Civil Procedure, before Colleen B. Seidl, Certified 23 Court Reporter and Notary Public, at 2800 First 24 Atlanta Tower, Atlanta, Georgia, on the 27th day of 25 June, 1988, commencing at the hour of 2:45 p.m. 1 3 1 2 3 4 INDEX TO EXHIBITS 5 6 Plaintif f ' 8 7 Exhibit TABLE OF CONTENTS Description Pace 8 9 PX-14 5/17/74 Georgia-Pacific intracompany memo to Mr. G.B. Wilson from 0. E. Burch, 10 Subject: Asbestos- JT Cement Products MW -- 53 11 PX-15 11/19/73 Evaluation of Exposure to 12 Asbestos During Mixing and Sanding of Joint Compounds, Gypsum Association, 13 Denver, Colorado MW -- 74 14 PX-23 6/19/73 Georgia-Pacific Interdepartmental Communication to John Woodsmall from 15 C. W. Lehnert, Subject: Asbestos Fibers in Joint Compounds ML -- 65 16 PX-24 8/29/75 excerpt of the Evening Times, 17 Trenton, N. J., entitled: Speckling May Harbor Dangerous Asbestos Level. ML-- 79 18 CODE : 19 MP -- Marked in deposition of R. B. Pamplin, but 20 first referred to on Page 21 MW -- Marked in deposition of Glenn E. Wilson, but first referred to on Page 22 ML -- Marked in deposition of Charles W. Lehnert 23 24 25 I 4 1 APPEARANCES OF COUNSEL: 2 On behalf of Georgia Pacific: 3 ALBERT H. PARNELL, Esq. 4 On behalf of the Plaintiffs: FRED M. BARON, Esq. 5 LISA BLUE, Esq. CHARLES P. ERICKSON, Esq. 6 MARY ROSE KORNREICH, PhD, Esq. 7 On behalf of the 8 De f endant, Owens-Corning 9 Fiberglas Corp.: MARK T. MILLKEY, Esq. WILLIAM V. CUSTER, Esq. 10 On behalf of Asbestos Claims Facility: FREDERICK A. BADING, Esq. 11 On behalf of Combustion 12 Engineering: MARY ANN HATCH, Esq. 13 On behalf of Eagle Picho: KATHLEEN C. SMITH, Esq 14 Also Present on behalf 15 of Georgia Pacific: Mr. STEPHEN MAASSEN, Esq. Mr. CALVIN CARLYSLE, Esq. 16 Ms. LISA BOARDMAN, Esq. 17 18 (Whereupon, it was agreed by and between 19 counsel for the respective parties that the 20 stipulation governing the taking of the deposition 21 of R. B. Pamplin will likewise govern the taking of 22 the deposition of Charles W. Lehnert.) 23 CHARLES W. LEHNERT, 24 having been first duly sworn, was examined and 25 testified as follows: i 5 1 EXAMINATION 2 BY MR. BARONs 3 Q. Would you state your name for the record, 4 pie 5 Charles W. Lehnert. 6 Q. Spell your last name, please. 7 A. L-e-h-n-e-r-t. 8 Q. Mr. Lehnert, what is your current 9 address ? 10 A. 5046 Wind Point, two words, Stone 11 Mountain, two words, Georgia, 30088. 12 Q. How are you presently employed? 13 A. I am employed by Georgia Pacific 14 Corporation. 15 ^~Q Mr. Lehnert, my name is Fred Baron, I am 16 an attorney from Dallas, and I am here today 17 representing some individuals who have filed 18 lawsuits against Georgia Pacific. I am going to be 19 taking your deposition. Have you ever given a 20 deposition before? 21 A. Yes. 22 Q. On about how many occasions? 23 . A. About eight or ten. 24 Q. Do all of those depositions involve 25 issues concerning asbestos? 1 6 1 A. No. 2 Q. How many of them do, do you think? 3 A. Possibly eight. 4 Q. Then you are generally familiar with the 5 deposition process, I take it, by now? 6 A. Yes. 7 Q. If at any time I ask a question of you 8 that you don't understand, please let me know that 9 so I can attempt to rephrase a question to make sure 10 we're communicating. All right, sir? 11 A. Yes. 12 Q. We got a lot of folks in back of the room 13 here and we have to speak up a little bit. 14 Mr. Lehnert, what is your present job 15 description at Georgia Pacific? 16 I am the manager ci product development 17 and technical service. 18 Q. What is it that you do in that position? 19 ^^A^^ I oversee the development of good 20 products, improvement of existing products, 2 1 provision of technical services to the sales 22 department, division of technical services to the 23 manufacturing department, representing Georgia 24 Pacific on industry associations and providing 25 services to the legal department as I am doing i 7 1 today. 2 Q. Tell me about providing services to the 3 legal department, does that mean that you 4 participate in defending lawsuits against Georgia 5 Pacific? 6 A. It means that I give depositions when 7 called upon, provide affidavits when called upon. 8 Q. Is that generally concerning the asbestos 9 products or is that regarding all products of 10 Georgia Pacific? 11 A. It concerns the products of the gypsum 12 portion of the gypsum and roofing division. 13 Q. Would it be fair to say you are the point 14 man for Georgia Pacific to deal with the legal 15 department on product liability claims? 16 MR. PARNELL: Object to the form of the 17 question, there is no foundation. You may answer. 18 A. Would you ask the question again, 19 please? 20 ([Q[* I In terms of the gypsum division, I guess 2 1 I should limit it to that with Georgia Pacific, are 22 you the liaison between the legal department and the 23 rest of the organization concerning legal problems 24 with product use? 25 MR. PARNELL: Same objection. l 8 1 A. I wouldn't characterize my responsibility 2 in that fashion. 3 Q. You say you are responsible for providing 4 assistance to the legal department, what does that 5 really involve, just giving depositions? 6 A. It also involves patent work. 7 Q. What else? 8 A. Those are the only things I can think of. 9 Q. So you give depositions and you help them 10 with patent problems? 11 A. No. 12 Q. What else? 13 A. We prosecute patents. 14 Q. Prosecute patents? 15 A. Yes. 16 Q. Are you a lawyer, Mr. Lehnert? 17 A. I am not. 18 Q. I take it you've spent a great deal of 19 your time with lawyers? 20 A. Yes . 2 1 Q. How much of your time? 22 A. At the present time? 23 Q. Yes . 24 A. I would say 10, 15 percent. 25 Q. So at least once or so a week perhaps on 9 1 the average you have to deal with lawyers from 2 Georgia Pacific? 3 A. That would be a close estimate. 4 Q. How long has that been the case? 5 A. I would say for the past several years. 6 Q. Let me ask you about your background, do 7 you have college training? 8 A. Yes. 9 Q. In where? 10 A. I graduated fromGrove CityCollege in 11 Pennsylvania. 12 Q. What year? 13 A. 1950. 14 Q. Your voice is dropping off just a little 15 here, you have to speak loud. 16 A. I graduated in 1950 from Grove City 17 College in Pennsylvania. 18 Q. With what degree? 19 A. Bachelor of Science degree, major in 20 chemical engineering. 2 1 Q. Have you had additionalcollegetraining? 22 A. No. 23 Q. When you finished your degree, did you go 24 into private employment at that time? 25 A. Yes. I 1 10 1 Q. With whom? 2 A. I worked for a small rubber company 3 called Continental Rubber Works. 4 Q. Where was that located? 5 A. Erie, Pennsylvania. 6 Q. What was your job? 7 A. I was a chemist. 8 Q. What type of work were you doing as a 9 chemist for them? 10 A. Formulating mechanical rubber products. 11 Q. How long did you stay in that position? 12 A. One year. 13 Q. Where did you go from there? 14 A. I went to Certainteed Products 15 Corporation. 16 Q. Where was their headquarters? 17 A. ' At that time their headquarters was, 18 their laboratory was in Chicago, Illinois. 19 Q. Were their headquarters there as well as 20 their laboratory? 2 1 A. No, their headquarters is not. 22 Q. Where were their headquarters? 23 A. Headquarters was in Ardmore, 24 Pennsylvania. 25 Q. But you went to work in a laboratory in 11 1 Chicago? 2 A. yes. 3 Q. What was your job? 4 A. I was a chemist. 5 Q. What areas did you work in? 6 A. In Chicago? 7 Q. Yes, what did you do for them? 8 A. I started out in analytical chemistry and 9 then progressed into product development projects. 10 Q. When you say analytical chemistry, was 1 1 that merely testing? 12 A. That was analyzing gypsum for purity. 13 Q. So I take it that Certainteed was in the 14 gypsum business? 15 A. Yes, they were. 16 Q. Where was theirsourceof gypsum? 17 A. I believe they had five plants at the 18 t ime . 19 Q. And when you would test the gypsum, what 20 were you looking for? 21 A. Impurities. 22 Q. Contamination by other minerals 23 primarily? 24 A . Yes. 25 Q. Do you know where the gypsum was mined? i i 12 1 Yes . 2 Where ? 3 The locations were Acme, Texas; Blue 4 Rapids, Kansas; Fort Dodge, Iowa; Akron, New York; 5 and Grand Rapids, Michigan. 6 Q. They had manufacturing facilities at 7 those five locations, did they not? 8 Gypsum manufacturing facilities. 9 Q. Yes, and did they also have their mines 10 at those facilities as well or quarries? 1 1 A. Either mines or quarries. 12 Q. Is gypsum something that is -- it is not 13 something that is mined; it is quarried, is it not? 14 A. It can be either mined or quarried. 15 Q. How long did you stay in the analytical 16 end of the business? 17 A. About six months. 18 Q. Where did you go from there? 19 A. Then I began to do project work on 20 various development projects that they had. 2 1 Q. In the analytical chemistry business, 22 what type of contaminants would you normally find in 23 the gypsum that you wanted to be aware of? 24 A. Salt. 25 Q. Salt. Is that the only thing you were i 13 1 looking for? 2 A. That'8 the primary thing, other than the 3 fact that we were interested in the purity of the 4 product. 5 Q. When you were doing analytical chemistry, 6 did you actually do tests on finished products or 7 was it merely the mineral before it was used for the 8 manufacturing process? 9 A. Mainly it was on the rock deposits from 10 our various plant locations. We did do analyses on 11 other products. 12 Q. Did you ever do analytical work on joint 13 compounds ? 14 A. Not at that time. 15 Q. Then you went into product development, 16 that would have been about 1952? 17 A. That's still 1951. 18 Q. '51? 19 A. Yes. 20 Q. What was your specific assignment in 2 1 product development? 22 A. I didn't have aspecific assignment. 23 Q. Were you just given free reign? 24 A. No, I worked with other project engineers 25 and so I was assisting them. i" 14 1 Q. what was their project? 2 A. There were several projects. 3 Q. Can you describe them for me? 4 A. Yes. One was development of acoustical 5 tile. Another project was valuation of glass fibers 6 in gypsum products, and the development of fire 7 rated gypsum products. 8 Q. How long did you stay working in those 9 three areas? 10 A. Well, accoustical tile project was on and 11 off for some number of years. The firestop project 12 continued on for many years. 13 Q. What about the glass fibers? 14 A. The glass fibers continued on for some 15 time . 16 Q. Tell me about the fire rated gypsum 17 products project, what did that involve? 18 A. That involvedthe introduction of glass 19 fiber into gypsum board to allow it to perform 20 better in a fire situation than a board without 21 glass fiber would. 22 Q. Did you experiment at all with the use of 23 agbestos fibers in gypsum board at thattime? 24 A. Yes. 25 Q. When did that begin? I r i 15 1 A. That was in 1951. 2 Q. Who was the project manager of that 3 particular project, the use of asbestos fibers with 4 gypsum? 5 A. Clarence Shuttleworth. 6 Q. Do you know whether he's still alive 7 today ? 8 A. Yes, he is. 9 Q. Does he still work for the company? 10 A. He does not. 11 Q. Do you know where he is? 12 A. Yes. 13 Q. Where? 14 A. St. Petersburg, Florida. 15 What was the project specifically with 16 asbestos ? 17 MR. PARNELL: That particular project? 18 MR. BARON: Yes. 19 A. The idea in using asbestos was to see if 20 it would perform in a fire better than a gypsum 21 board product without asbestos. G? What did you find? 22 23 ^A.^ That it did perform better. CV.24 As a result of that were products made 25 that contained asbestos? 16 1 , A. NO . 2 . Why not? 3 Because glassfiber was found to be far 4 superior to asbestos, and so asbestos was never 5 commercially manufactured. 6 Q. Did Certainteed ever make asbestos 7 products to your knowledge? 8 A. Certainteed? 9 Q. Yes, that's who youwere working for at 10 that time? 1 1 A. Yes. At that time? 12 Q. When did you leave Certainteed I guess I 13 should ask you that? 14 A. When did I leave Certainteed, I never 15 left Certainteed. Certainteed -- 16 Q. Left you, I guess? 17 A. -- spun off Best Wall Gypsum Company, 18 gypsum division which became Best Wall Gypsum 19 Company in 1956. 20 Q. Prior to 1956 do you know whether 21 Certainteed had ever utilized asbestos fibers in any 22 of its commercial gypsum products? 23 A. Gypsum products? 24 Q. Yes. 25 A. Prior to 1956? I i 17 1 Q. Yes. 2 A. I believe that it was one, you say gypsum 3 products, that's a product, will you tell me what 4 gypsum product you are talking about? 5 Q. Well, a product that was being 6 commercially manufactured by Certainteed that 7 utilized gypsum. 8 A. That contained gypsum? 9 Q. Yes. 10 A. I don'tthink there were any prior to 11 that time. 12 Q. Do you know of any products that 13 Certainteed made prior to 1956 that contained 14 asbestos ? 15 A. Yes . 16 Which ones? 17 A. Certainteed was in the asbestoscement 18 industry and I know we made those products. 19 Q. Did you have anyresponsibilities on the 20 asbestos on that end of the business? 21 A. None whatsoever. 22 QDuring the period of time prior to the 23 spinoff of Best Wall, did you do any research about 24 joint compound products? 25 A. Yes. i I 18 1 Q. What type of research did you do? 2 A . Formulated joint compound products to 3 improve" them. 4 Prior to 1956, how was Best Wall related 5 to Certainteed? 6 fA. Best Wall was the gypsum division of 7 CertaTriteed . 8 Q. And were the joint compound products that 9 you were working on prior to 1956 within the gambit 10 of the gypsum division? 11 A. Yes . 12 Q. But they are not actually gypsum products 13 as such, are they? 14 A. Yes and no. 15 Q Yes and no? 16 A. Some of them are and some of them 17 aren't. Are you talking about right now or back in 18 '56? In '56 none of them were gypsum products. 19 Q. But they were making joint compounds that 20 did not contain gypsum that did apparently contain 2 1 asbestos; is that right? 22 A . Yes . 23 Q- Do you know when asbestos was* introduced 24 into the Certainteed joint compound products? 25 A. Well, before my time. ! 19 1 Q. Did you have any input on whether 2 asbestos should be used in joint compound products 3 prior to 1956? 4 A. Asbestos had been used in joint compound 5 products I believe as far back as 1937, so it was 6 already in the joint compound products before I came 7 to work for Certainteed. 8 what was the purpose of using asbestos e9 in joint compound? 10 /^A^v Primarily to control the viscosity and 11 workVfe-fci ity. 12 /Q. Viscosity for us laymen means texture or 13 consistaucy? 14 i^XT Consistency, yes. 15 Q. Did I understand you that prior to 1956 16 you did some research on trying to improve joint 17 compound products? 18 A. Yes. 19 Q. What was the research project that you 20 were involved with? 21 A. There were several depending on the 22 product. 23 Q. Joint compounds? 24 A. Joint compounds. To improve the 25 workability of the joint compounds, to improve the i 20 1 -- at that time we're talking, 1956, at that time 2 all the joint compounds were dry joint compounds, 3 and so we tried to improve their mixing properties 4 so that they would mix easily, their application so 5 they would apply easier, its sanding so it would 6 sand easier, their shrinkage properties so they 7 would shrink Less. 8 Q. In order to accomplish those things, did 9 you decide that you needed to add more asbestos to 10 the mix? 11 A. No. 12 Q. Take away some of the asbestos? 13 A. The asbestos usually remained about the 14 s ame. 15 Q. Was there a change in the type of 16 asbestos that's used in the product? 17 A. No. 18 Q. Well, then, would it be fair to say that 19 you really didn't tinker with that end of it, you 20 were just looking at other aspects of the product? 2 1 A. Yes. 22 Now, in 1956 Certainteed had spun off BesV""Wall, did they not? 23 24 Yes . 25 Did you stay with Best Wall? 21 1 A. YYeess. . 2 Q. When Best Wall was spun off, did 3 CertVtfi'teed still own the stock of Best Wall? 4 A . Yes, there were three companies, 5 CertVtfrteed, Best Wall, and a third company called 6 Best Wall Certainteed Sales Corporation that sold 7 the products of both companies. 8 Q. But following the spinoff, Best Wall was 9 stir-i--a wholly owned subsidiary of Certainteed, but 10 was now a separate entity? 11 A . It was separate stock. 12 Q. It was separate stock? 13 A. Yes . 14 Q. Who owned that stock, do you know? 15 A. Stockholders. 16 Q. Who are the stockholders? 17 A. They were the Certainteed stockholders at 18 the time of the spinoff, I can't tell you that by 19 name . 20 Q. So in other words, the shareholders of 2 1 Certainteed were given additional shares in Best 22 wall Corporation? 23 MR. PARNELL: I've got to object. I 24 don't think he really knows. 25 MR. BARON: I think he does. 22 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 MR. PARNELLs I think he doesn't, I mean we're on a big board, do you know the ins and outs of the stock transfers? A. I got some of the stock. knows. MR. PARNELL: Go ahead, to the extent he Q. So the corporation which spun off and the shares of Best Wall were given to the shareholders, to the existing shareholders of Certainteed, is that the way it was done? A. Yes. Q. Then it became a publicly traded corporation? A. Yes . Q. Was it controlled in any way by Certainteed after it was spun off? A. Yes. Q. In which ways was it controlled? A. By the top management. Q. So your people at Best Wall reported to Certainteed? A. The top management of Best Wall was the same top management at Certainteed. Q. Did that remain the same until it was subsequently sold to Georgia Pacific? 23 1 A . Yes . 2 Q . Let's talk about this research center in 3 Chic'a^o", about how many people were employed there? 4 A. I don't remember the exact number. 5 Q. Not the exact, but was it more than a 6 thousand, more than a hundred, how many people were 7 involved ? 8 f A. Less than 2 5. 9 Q. Less than 25. Was it in its own building 10 or did it have, did it share offices with other 11 Certainteed divisions? 12 A. There were no other divisions in that 13 particular laboratory. 14 Q. Did you have a library of reference 15 materials in the research building? 16 A. I don't recall a separate library at that 17 particular -- 18 Q. Did you have access to research material 19 concerning the components of the various products 20 that Certainteed was having tested at that 2 1 laboratory? 22 A . I don't recall any library. Or any 23 documents that they had of that nature. 24 Q. Who was in charge of the laboratory? 25 A. John Lizars. I 24 1 Q. Was that also the corporate headquarters 2 of Best Wall when Best Wall was spun off? 3 A. No. In 1952 the Chicago laboratory was 4 relocated to Paoli, Pennsylvania. 5 Q. Okay. And was it in the same building 6 that subsequently became the corporate headquarters 7 of Best Wa11? 8 A. Yes . 9 Q. When the laboratory moved to Paoli, did 10 it share space with other Certainteed operations or 11 was it only the gypsum division that was there? 12 A. No, it was also the roofing division. 13 Q. Did the roofing division get spun off or 14 did that stay with Certainteed? 15 A. That stayed with Certainteed. 16 Q. When Certainteed had spun off Best Wall, 17 did roofing move out of that building or did they 18 remain there? 19 A. They remained there until, I can't 20 remember the date, and then they moved out. 21 Q. When you were in the building in Paoli, 22 do you recall whether or not there was a library 23 resource available to you in that laboratory? 24 A. I don't recall a library. 25 Q. Did the number of employees in the I i 25 1 research department increase when you moved to Paoli 2 or did it remain constant? 3 A. There was no research department at that 4 time as such. 5 Q. So who were you working for then? 6 A. I was working for plant Shuttleworth. 7 Q. And you were doing research? 8 A. I was doing some research, yes. 9 Q. What else were you doing? 10 A. Process control things, projects. 11 Q. What does that involve? 12 A. Oh, that might involve handling 13 complaints, might involve going to plants to help 14 solve manufacturing problems. 15 Q. Had you ever been, again prior to the 16 spinoff of Best Wall in '56, had you been to the 17 Acme facility? 18 A. Yes. 19 Q. Had you ever observed the use of asbestos 20 in the manufacture of joint compound at Acme? 2 1 A. Yes. 22 Q . Prior to '56 ? 23 . A. Yes. 24 Q. Did you ever have any job 25 responsibilities as to the manufacture of joint 26 1 compound? 2 A. Yes. 3 / Q' What were those job responsibilities? / 4 i A. I wasresponsible forformulation of all 5 the joint compounds after about 1955. 6 Q. Did the formulation change from time to 7 t ime ? 8 A. Yes. 9 Q. Whatwould makeit change, whywould you 10 want to make it change? 11 A. To improve the characteristics. 12 ( Q. What materials, what raw materials would 13 go IrtZo the manufacture of joint compound? 14 Limestone, clay, mica, celulosic 15 thic'l^epers, starches, casein, alkalies, 16 preservatives, wetting agents, fillers of various 17 kinds, asbestos, later on gypsum. 18 Q. Did you ever get involved in reviewing 19 whether there were health hazards associated with 20 any of the components of the joint compound? 21 A. Did X get involved with the health 22 hazards? No, I did not. 23 Q. In other words, whenever you would make a 24 decision to add a new product to the joint compound 25 or a new component to the joint compound, and I take 27 1 it that happened from time to time, did it not? 2 A. Yes. 3 Before you made the decision to add that 4 component to the joint compound, did you research 5 the component to determine whether there were any 6 associated health risks with the component? 7 A. No. 8 . Was there any particular reason why you 9 did not do so? 10 /a. We didn't seeany need to do that. 11 /Q. There are many books and have beenfor 12 yearffr^liave there not, about toxic properties of 13 various types of chemical components and mineral 14 components, you are aware of those books, are you 15 not ? 16 /'"X\ No, I am not aware, what books are you 17 speaking of? 18 Qi If you wanted to find out whether silica 19 could pose a hazard to workers, back in the '50s you 20 could have looked in a book and found the answer to 21 that, could you not have? 22 A.' I don't know. 23 Q. You don't know? 24 A. No . 25 Q. , You never tried? 1 28 1 /A. I never tried. 2 Did it ever dawn on anybody that it might 3 be a good idea to go back and take a look to see 4 whether there were hazardous components to the 5 materials that you were putting in this joint 6 compound ? 7 MR. PARNELL; I object to the form of the 8 question. Mr. Lehnert can't in my judgment answer 9 whether it dawns on anybody or not, he can certainly 10 discuss whether it dawned on him or not. 11 ZjQ . Did it dawn on you? 12 ry A. No, we were never advised by the 13 suppliers of these materials that there was ever any 14 problem, so we assumed there was no problem. 15 Q. What was your source of supply of 16 asbestos ? 17 A. We purchased asbestos from Phillip Carey, 18 John Mansfield and Union Carbide at various times. 19 Q. What about the other components, 20 limestone and all of the other things, did anyone do 2 1 any research to determine whether those materials 22 might be hazardous to the consumer? 23 A. No, I am not aware of any. 24 Q. How long did you remain in that position 25 of being person in charge of the formulation of I l I 29 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 joint compound? A. Until 1960. Q. Until 1960? A. Yes. Up to 1960 did you yourself do any research at all on whether there were health hazards associated with any of the components of joint compound? I was an unaware of any health hazards. That wasn't the question. The question you do any research? I did not. Q. Do you know of anyone associated with either Certainteed or Best Wall who did such research? A. I am not aware of anyone who did any research. Q. What was your job change in 1960? A. I became group leader of a product development, small product development organization. Q. Was that associatedwith Best Wall? A. Yes. Q. What was it called? A. It was called the productdevelopment 30 1 group. 2 Q. It wasn't a separate entity, it was 3 within Best Wall? 4 A. Yes. 5 Q. What was the charge of the product 6 development group? 7 MR. PARNELL: That charge, you mean 8 direction? 9 MR. BARON: Yes. 10 A. To develop, to concentrate on new 11 products as opposed to working on existing problems 12 and quality problems and so forth. 13 Q. How long did you stay in that position? 14 A. That position expanded to the job I have 15 today and the group expanded. 16 MR. PARNELL: Would you speak up, 17 please ? 18 Q. From 1960 when you took that position 19 until~~the present, did you ever work on development 20 of new products that would have contained asbestos? 21 Yes . 22 When was the first time? 23 A. I don't recall exactly when my first time 24 would be, first day of 1960 perhaps. 25 Q. What type of a product was it? i" 31 1 A, One of the first projects we had was 2 developed a ready-mix joint compound. 3 Q. Did you yourself participate in the 4 formulation of that product? 5 A. I was a manager of the group that worked 6 on the formulation. 7 Q. Was that a new product for Best Wall? 8 A. Yes. 9 Q. In developing thatproduct that was 10 subsequently marketed, I take it it was subsequently 1 1 marketed, was it not? 12 A. Yes. 13 Q. Was the decision made toinclude asbestos 14 in that product? 15 A. Yes. 16 Did anyone do any research as to whether C17 ht present a health hazard to a consumer 18 before asbestos was placed in the mix? 19 MR. PARNELL: Object to the form of the 20 question. He can testify what he knows. 2 1 Did I know of any research that was 22 23 Yes 24 No, I don't know of any research that was 25 1' 32 1 /'Q In 1965 , I believe, Best Wall was taken 2 over^Ey^Georgia Pacific; is that right? 3 i A. ^ Yes . 4 / Q* Did you remain in Paoli? 5 / A. In '65? i 6 ! Q- Yes . 7 A. Yes . 8 Q. How long did you remain there? 9 A. For two years. 10 Q. Where did you go from there? 11 A. We relocated to the Portland, Oregon 12 aijea, specifically Tigard. 13 / Q. What type of facility did Georgia Pacific 14 Have for you there? i 15 A. We built a new laboratory facility in 16 Tigard. \ 1 7 Q. Was it a well equipped laboratory? 18 A. It was well enough equipped to do what we ( 19 wanted to do. 20 Q. What did you want to do? 2 1 , A. We wanted to develop a new gypsum 22 23 Q. When Georgia Pacific took over Best Wall, 24 was there a great deal of change in the management 25 of the Best Wall group? Or did it pretty well stay i" 33 1 the same? 2 A. No, there was a change. 3 Q. What was the change? 4 A. I can't recall the people, but there were 5 some numbers of people that changed during that 6 period of time and eventually Glenn Wilson took over 7 the management responsibility for that division. 8 Q. Would it be fair to say that within a 9 year after the acquisition Georgia Pacific was 10 really running the company now and their executives 11 were in charge? 12 A. They were running the company the day 1 3 they purchased it. 14 Q. Now they moved you to Tigard, to a new 15 facility and research department and product 16 development department; is that right? 17 A. Yes, sir. 18 Q. Were you actually the person in charge of 19 research and product development? 20 j<aT^ Yes, sir. 21 Did you participate in the design of that 22 lab(braary facility? 23 A.. Yes. 24 Q. How many people were employed at the 25 TigarcT^facility after it got into operation? i 34 1 A. I would say about twelve people. 2 Q. All of those people were in research and 3 product development 7 4 A . NO . 5 . How many were in research and product 6 development ? 7 A. About six were R&D and about six were 8 involved in technical service process control. 9 Q. Did you have access to written materials 10 to do research at that facility? 11 A. I don't know what kind of written 12 materials you have in mind. 13 Q. Engineering manuals, things of that 14 nature. 15 A. We did have some manuals by that time. 16 We had collected some manuals and did have a 17 combination library and conference center. 18 So you had a library at that time? 19 / A. Yes. 20 Did the library contain books that dealt 21 wirh-^he hazardous properties of certain materials? 22 No, I don't recall any periodicals 23 deal lYrg ith hazardous materials. 24 Q. Do you know of Thesach's manuals? 25 A. I am not familiar with them at all. 35 1 Q. Was there anyone in the corporation, 2 Georgia Pacific, who you knew of back at that time 3 who was experienced in toxicology? 4 / A. Not to my knowledge. 5 Q. Was there anyone at Georgia Pacific who 6 was experienced in industrial hygiene that you were 7 aware of? 8 I assume that our safety manager was. 9 Do you know whether he actually was or 10 not ? 11 / A. Ido not. 12 / Q. Was there any researching going on at 13 Georgia Pacific about potential hazards involving 14 their gypsum products and joint compound products in 15 1966 ^nd '67? 16 ( A. No . 17 Q. How big a corporation was Georgia Pacific 18 in 1966 or '67, how many employees did it have? 19 A I don't know. 20 Approximately? 21 30-, 40,000. 22 They had offices all over the world, did 23 the^ not? 24 A. All over the United States. 25 Q. For the 30- or 40,000 employees of I 36 1 Georgia Pacific back in 1966 or '67, was there more 2 than one research center or was that Tigard center 3 the only one? 4 A. No, they had a research facility in 5 Billingham, Washington, and let me see, also shortly 6 thereafter they built a research facility in 7 Decatur, Georgia. 8 Q. Do you know whether either of those 9 facilities were equipped to determine whether 10 Georgia Pacific products were hazardous to 11 consumers ? 12 MR. PARNELL: Object to the form of the 13 question. You can answer. 14 A. Not to my knowledge. 15 Q, Your group certainly didn't have that 16 ability, did it? 17 A. We did not. 18 Q. You stayed at Tigard at least through 19 1976, did you not? 20 A. We were at Tigard until 1982. 21 Did you participate in the reformulation 22 of joint compound to remove asbestos? 23 24 When did you begin that project? 25 In 1970. I i }i 37 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 Q. When was the project concluded? A. To remove asbestos? Yes . XT I don't know if it was ever concluded. Actually all the asbestos was removed from all joint compounds in May of 1977. Q. The last one to have asbestos removed was the Ready-Mix joint compound; is that right? A. Yes. Q. That was in May of '77? A. Yes. Q. What about the dry joint compound, when was that removed? A. All the dry except for one product, one type of product, was removed by about 1975 or '76. Q. Between 1970 and 1975, did you do anything other than work on removal of asbestos from joint compound? A. Yes. Q. How much of your time was spent on the removal project? A. It would have varied and certainly as we got closer to the point where we realized that there would be a ban and also to the point where we realized that the regulations may be so stringent we I I 38 1 couldn't comply, we devoted more and more time. 2 Q. Then would it be fair to say that when 3 you began the project in the '70s, it was something 4 of a back burner project and then as the regulations 5 changed by '73 and '74 it became higher priority? 6 A. It was never a back burner project. It 7 simply gathered momentum as the time between 1977 e and 19 -- 1970 and 1977 came about. In other words, 9 it expanded, we added more people and so on as we 10 needed to try to get the last product asbestos free. 11 Q. How did you go about making the products 12 asbestos free, what did you substitute for the 13 asbestos? 14 A. There was no single product we could find 15 that was a direct replacement for asbestos. So we 16 had to rely on combinations of materials. 17 Q. About how many people worked on that 18 pro j ec t ? 19 A. At what time? 20 Q. 1970. 2 1 A. In 1970 we probably had one person 22 working on it, because we only had one person 23 working on joint compounds. 24 Q. Who was that one person? 25 A. Let's see. At the time his name and 39 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 several people over a period of time, period of years, one person, G-e-t-t-e-1, Bill Gettel, and another person was Michael Robinson. Later on we may have had other people working with those people or having additional people to the project. Q. Would it be fair to say that Bill Gettel and Mike Robinson did 80 or 90 percent of the work? A. I don't recall what percent any one person did, we had some number of people, there were some other people that worked on it too, but I would have a hard time -- we worked on many projects and to try to remember what exact percentage of time was spent on each project would be very -- I just can't do it. Q. It is true, isn't it, that between 1970 and say 1973, the total amount of time that Mr. Gettel and Mr. Robinson spent on this project was 25 percent of their own time? A. At one point Mr. Gettel spent 100 percent of his time on the project. Q, What point was that, 1975? A. I don't recall the exact year, but I would guess it was somewhere around 1974, '75. Q. My question was between 1970 and 1974, you had maybe two people spending about 10 or 15 1' 40 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 percent of their time? MR- PARNELL: Is that the question? MR. BARON: Is that true? A. No, I don't think that's necessarily true. I don't think I cited a percentage, I gave you a approximate figure perhaps, but -- I don't understand what your question is. f Q. I want to know how many people of the 4 0, OO^employees of Georgia Pacific were working on taking asbestos out of joint compound between 1970 and 1974? MR. PARNELL: Object as argumentative. MR. BARON: How much time was being spent otherwise? MR. PARNELL: You can answer. / A. Originally we had one person and he worked on textures and removing it from textures and then we added other people to work on joint compounds and I don't recall specifically what percentages of their time in .1970 was devoted to that, but I can tell you that we had all the asbestos removed from all the textures by 1971, and so whatever time was spent was certainly spent efficiently. Mr. Gettel later on became involved in the Ready-Mix, and that became an all consuming 1 \ 41 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 project and he spent 100 percent of his time. Q. As far as the accoustical material, the plaster, how did you describe it, the texture product? A. The texture? Q. As far as the texture product was concerned from the time the research began until asbestos was removed was in the range of a year, less than a year? A. About two years. Q. About two years? A. Yes. Q. Was it full-time research for two years by one person or was that just a part time? A. I don't recall what percentage of the time, but it wasn't 100 percent of anybody's time, we had other projects. Q. Would it be fair to say that it wasn't all that complicated of a problem to remove asbestos from the dry cement, from the dry joint compound and from the textures? A, Extremely difficult to find a substitute for asbestos, because there was none. There was no exact replacement, and as a matter of fact you mentioned dry products, one of the dry products we I 42 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 were never able to successfully develop an asbestos free product and in 1977 we discontinued that product. Georgia Pacific sells dry joint compound tight now, do they not? A. Yes, we do. Q. They sell a lot of it in fact, all over /the United States? A. I don't know what you call a lot, we don't sell very much. Q. Millions of dollars worth of product? A. But I don't know what our sales are ^annually. 1 Q. And the product doesn't have asbestos in i it anymore, does it? i [ A. That's correct. Q. And it works fine, doesn't it? A. I think it does. Q. You mean to tell me that that product couldn't have been developed 30 years ago? MR. PARNELL: Object to the form of the question as argumentative. You can answer. * A. I don't know about 30 years ago, but when we se^'--dut to develop the products, the main adhesive used in joint compounds was Casein, l 43 1 C-a-s-e-i-n, we were never able to successfully 2 remove asbestos from Casein products, therefore it 3 was necessary to find a new binder, and that 4 initially there were no new, there were no vinyl 5 binders which are used today; so when the vinyl 6 binders came along, that gave us the ability to 7 develop dry asbestos-free products. 8 Q. Mr. Lehnert, if you had been hired in 9 1955 by Best Wall and told to remove asbestos from 10 their joint compound, you mean to tell me you 11 wouldn't have been able to do it? 12 MR. PARNELL: I object to the form of the 13 question, calls for speculation about what he might 14 have been able to do 30 years ago. You can answer. 15 A. It would have been extremely difficult. 16 Q. Why more difficult then than now? 17 A. There are more substitute products now. 18 Asbestos had been used since the inception of joint 19 compounds back into the '30s, and there was no known 20 substitute up to that point and there still isn't 21 today. 22 Q. There isn't a substitute known today? 23 . A. That's correct. 24 Q. So the situation is the same today as it 25 was 30 years ago? 44 1 A. No, that's not true. 2 Q. You just said there wasn't asubstitute 3 now and there wasn't a substitute then? 4 A. Yes, but there have been many thickeners 5 and adhesives developed that were not available at 6 that time. 7 Q. Because nobody bothered to develop them? 8 MR. PARNELL: I object to the form of the 9 question as argumentative. 10 Q. Isn't that true? 11 A. I can't say what the chemical companies 12 were doing, you would have to ask them. 13 Q. Bottom line to it, sir, is that within a 14 couple of years of the time that your two or three 15 people were told to remove asbestos from joint 16 compounds it was done? 17 A. No * 18 Q It wasn't? 19 A. No , it was seven years. 20 Q It was seven years of full-time work for 2 1 a lot of people, is that what you're trying to tell 22 the jury? 23 * MR. PARNELL: He is not trying to tell 24 the jury anything. He's trying to answer your 25 question, sir. 45 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 Q. Would it be fair to say that two or three people worked on this project, they worked on it every once in a while, maybe 10 or 15 percent of their time, until things got pretty heavy in 1974 and then they were able to come up with a different product, is that really what happened? MR. PARNELL: I am sorry, that's an absolute misstatement. He said, as a matter of fact, that in 1970/1971 so far as textures are concerned, Mr. Gettel devoted 100 percent of his time. I don't mind you asking questions, Mr. Baron, but when you absolutely mischaracterize his testimony, I object to it. A. Would you please repeat the question? MR. PARNELL: Read it back. (The record was read by the reporter.) A. No, that's not really what happened. What did happen was we concentrated our efforts on the textures because we felt it was perhaps more important to take it out of them first, and then we went from the textures to the dry joint compounds and then from the dry joint compounds to the ready-mixes, so different people worked on these projects, they worked on them diligently, and you have to recognize that the product -- you couldn't I 46 1 just formulate a product and begin to market it, it 2 had to be field tested and market tested and this 3 was a long arduous process. 4 Q. And so to go through this entire process 5 for three separate product groups, is that what 6 happened ? 7 A. There were more than three separate 8 product groups. 9 Q. You had the dry compound, you had the wet 10 compound, and you had the texture? 11 A. No, that's not correct. 12 Q. Isn't that what you just testified? What 13 else was there? 14 A. Those are general product categories and 15 we had individual products within those categories, 16 Mr. Baron. 17 f Q. The bottom line is that your group was 18 ablefo accomplish the removal of asbestos from each 19 of these products? 20 /A. In 19 -- by 1977. 2 1 By 1977 the last of them, which was the 22 which was the hard one, was accomplished? 23 It was accomplished, but it wasn't 24 totVlly^ success ful. 25 Q. Well, is it still marketed today? 1~ 47 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 Yes, it is still marketed today. fy o m it? \ \ A. You get product complaints all the time No, but we lost considerable market rshlare . Q* Bottom line is you lost money while this prflocess was going on? Right? A. No, we lost market share. Q Market share is money, is it not? A. (No response.) Q. Isn't it? A. Yes . Q * So it cost Georgia Pacific part of their mar jket share, i.e. money, i.e. profits, to go th ijough this process, did it not? ( A. I would say yes. y q. Mr. Lehnert, you have been involved with the Gypsum Association, have you not? A. Yes. Q. When did you first become involved? A. In the late 1950's. Q. What was your involvement? A. With the technical committee. Q. Did you ever involve yourself with the s afl^ty^committee? i 48 1 A. No. 2 Q. Did you know Mr. Fink? 3 / A. Yes. 4 ' He was involved with the Gypsum 5 Association as well, correct? 6 A. Yes, he was. 7 Q. But he was on the safety committee? 8 A. That's correct. 9 Q. Did you and he visit from time to time 10 about Gypsum Association activities? 11 A. No. 12 Q. Never talked to him? 13 A. Rarely. 14 Q. He worked for the same company you did, 15 did he not? 16 A. Yes, he did. 17 Q. He was in the same Gypsum Association 18 group generally that you were on, but you didn't 19 talk to him? 20 A. No, he was on the safety committee, I was 2 1 on the technical committee. We met at different 22 times. 23 Q. You were not given any information about 24 what the safety committee was doing? 25 A. That's correct, I was not. 49 1 Q. Why is that? Didn't you think it was 2 important to know what the safety committee of the 3 association was doing, and to help you with your 4 work on the technical group? 5 MR. PARNELL: Object to the form of the 6 question. That's two questions. The first is why 7 was that, and the second question is didn't you 8 think. If you want to answer them, you can, but 9 answer them in order if you will, please. 10 A. The first question was - 11 MR. PARNELL: Why was that? 12 A. That I didn't? My responsibilities were 13 to develop products and not the safety of products. 14 Q. Would you read that answer back for me? 15 (The record was read by the reporter.) 16 Q. It's fair to say then what you were 17 supposed to do is develop the products and you were 18 not concerned about the safety of the products; is 19 that right? 20 A. No, I don't think that I wasn't -- I was 2 1 concerned about the safety of the products, but I 22 wasn't responsible. I think that was your question, 23 Mx. Baron. f 24 Q. ) So as far as you were concerned, you were respiqnsir^le for creating the products, developing 25 50 1 them, but you had no responsibility for their 2 safety? 3 A. I don't know how to respond to that 4 qiV\ies t ion . 5 \ Q. How about a yes or no? \ 6 | A. I was responsible for the development of I 7 th4^ products and my primary responsibility certainly \ 8 wasn't the safety of the products. 9 Q. Was it your secondary responsibility? 10 MR . PARNELL: Would you let him finish 11 his answer, please? 12 MR . BARON: I am sorry. 13 Q. Was it your secondary? 14 MR . PARNELL: Please let him finish his 15 answer. 16 MR . BARON: He did. 17 MR. PARNELL: He did not. Did you have 18 anything else ;you were adding? 19 A. I lost may train of thought. 20 MR. PARNELL: Please don't interrupt him. 2 1 Was your secondary responsibility safety, 22 your mary was not? 23 A. I No, I can't say where that fell in order 24 of rities with responsibilities. It was not my 25 major responsibility, Mr. Baron. I i * 51 1 Q. Was it your minor responsibility, did it 2 fall anywhere on the list of responsibilities that 3 you ; had 7 4 1 A. I can't characterize to what degree I 5 woulid be responsible for the safety of the product. 6 Onlyj to the extent that if there was a problem with 7 the ^product, I would perhaps assist someone else. 8 /i1 Q. And you would have found out about a 9 prob/lem with a product only after the problem 10 occurred? 11 A. Yes. 12 Q. You found out about problems with the 13 asbestos products after they occurred, did you not? 14 \ A. I am not aware of any problems with the \ 15 asbestos products. i 16 j Q. Still today? 17 A. Still today. 18 Q. So as far as youare concerned, there has 19 ne^er been a problem with Best Wall or Georgia 20 Pacific asbestos products? 2 1 < A. Well, it is Best Wall jointcompounds, 22 textures. 23 . Q. Right? 24 A. We did not manufacture asbestos. 25 Q. Best Wall manufactured products that 52 1 contained asbestos, correct? 2 A. Best Wall manufactured products that 3 contained small quantities of asbestos, I think 4 would be a better characterization. 5 Q. Is 25 percent a small quantity? 6 A. There was only one product that contained 7 that much asbestos, and we were only in that 8 business for a very short period of time, the 9 product was never successful, it was never marketed 10 successfully, and it was out of the market within a 11 matter of two years. 12 Is 10 percent a substantial quantity? 13 I don't think so. 14 Who at Best Wall was responsible for the 15 safety of the products? 16 \ A. I assume the top management would be 17 responsible for the products that are being shipped 18 to, they would have the ultimate responsibility for 19 products that were being marketed. 20 Q. What about at the time you were at 21 Georgia Pacific, who was responsible for the safety 22 of the joint compound products? 23 . A. There was no one that was designated as 24 responsible for the safety of joint compound 25 products. i 53 1 Q. Can you point to any one of the 40,000 2 people in Georgia Pacific who was responsible for 3 th|e safety of the joint compound products? 4 A. No. 5 JiSL PARNELL: Object as argumentative. 6 MR BARON: What was the answer? 7 A. No. 8 Q. Mr. Lehnert, I am going to show you a 9 memo dated May 17, 1974, which has been previously 10 marked as Plaintiff's Exhibit 14. And it is an 11 intercompany memo from G. E. Wilson to 0. E. Burch 12 with a copy to you and ask if you can recall having 13 seen this before with its attachment? 14 MR. PARNELL: Is that 14? 15 MR. BARON: 14. 16 A. Yes, I obviously saw it. 17 Q. This is an article that appeared in Walls 18 and Ceilings magazine. What is Walls and Ceiling, 19 were you familiar with that generally? 20 A. Yes, it is an industry magazine, 2 1 published by the drywall industry. Contractors. 22 Q. Was it something that you had generally 2 3 been familiar with before May of 1974? 24 A. Yes. 25 Q. In the article that's attached it talks 54 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 abotfl: taping and spackling compounds used in drywall finishing. Did Georgia Pacific make such products? i A. Drywall compounds? i Q. Yes. A. Yes. Q. In the article it says therewas a arning about asbestos fibers because following an jxamination of 17 members of a New York City sinters local, tests showed that the lungs of nine E the painters had x-ray evidence of fibrosis. Did that concern you at all? MR. PARNELL: Object to the form of the question and the preamble. You may answer. Q. Did that bother you? A. We were already in the process of removing asbestos, and I never saw the study, so I j really couldn't comment on the validity of the study o^: anything of that nature. |___^jQ.^ The question I had, did this article concern you at all that nine of 17 painters who were using joint compound had developed fibrosis of the lung, did that bother you? . MR. PARNELL: I don't think that's what it says. Just a minute, let me look and see. / A. X don't recall that study specifically 55 1 and I can't recall what I might have felt at that 2 time. We were doing everything we could to get 3 ^^sbestos out of our products, and - 4 MR. PARNELL: I've got to object to the 5 form of the last question. There is nothing in this 6 article that indicates that the painters had any 7 exposure to drywall products. e Q. Is spackling a drywall product? 9 A. Some people refer to it as spackle. 10 Q. So it is your testimony that Georgia n Pacific was doing everything it possibly could to 12 get asbestos out of its products at that time? 13 A. Yes. 14 Q. And that involved the use of two people 15 on a part-time basis to do the research? 16 MR. PARNELL: Object to the form of the 17 question as a mischaracterization of the witness' 18 testimony. 19 Q. Is that correct or not? 20 MR. PARNELL: Document will speak for 2 1 itself. Were you through with your answer? 22 A. No. 23 . Q. In 1974, in May of 1974, when you 24 received this memo, how many people were working 25 full time on removing asbestos from joint compound 1 56 1 at ^ _ 2 A. I can't be sure, but we only had six 3 people, and we were devoting what some people 4 thought was a disproportionate amount of time for 5 thfe project, so I was giving it all the effort that ii 6 wej could give it. I 7 I Q. Now there were 40,000 people in Georgia I 8 Pacific's corporation and six of them were in the 9 research department and is it fair to say that it 10 was only those six people who had responsibility in 11 this area to develop a new product? 12 NR. PARNELL: I object as argumentative. 13 Is that true? 14 i A. ) There were fewer than six people that 15 would have had the ability to be able to work on the 16 project. \ 17 Q. Of the six people how many of them were 18 ev^n able to work on this project? 19 A. Possibly only three. 20 Q * Would that have been the maximum number? 2 1 A. Yes . 22 Q. Might have been two? 23 A. Might have been two. 24 Q. So of the 40,000 employees of Georgia it25 Pacific you had two and maybe three people when you 1 57 1 received this document in 1974 working on removing 2 asbestos from joint compound? is that correct? 3 ------- --MR. PARNELL: Object as argumentative. 4 You may answer. 5 A. Well, I've already testified how many 6 people we had working on it. 7 Q. That was two or three? 8 A. That's all the people we had. 9 Were these two or three working full time 10 on that project? 11 By 1974 we probably had at least one of ii 12 theii working full time on the project. 13 / Q. Did you consider that to be a major 14 priority project of Georgia Pacific Corporation? 15 A. We considered it to be a high priority 16 Pq oject, yes. 17 ^i Q. Even though 1/4 0,000 of the work staff 18 wa BL^working on it? 19 MR. BARON: Object as argumentative. 20 A. It is 40 or 50 percent of the work force 2 1 we had. 22 MR. PARNELL: You need to speak up. I 23 c$n hardly hear you. 24 A. It was 40 or 50 percent of the people we 25 had available to work on them. I 58 1 Q. If you had wanted to hire 20 people to 2 work on this project, who would you have gone to? 3 A. My budget wouldn't permit me to hire one 4 or two people, let alone hire 20 people, plus we 5 didn't have the facilities for 20 people, so it 6 would be out of the question. 7 Cq. What was your budget that year for the 8 entire research and development department? 9 ! ?/<- H 10 11 I have to guess at it. 12 Give me a ballpark. 13 $100,000. 14 Do you know what the gross sales of 15 Georgia Pacific were? 16 No . 17 Q. Was it in excess of 5 billion that year? 18 I don't know. 19 $100,000 included everybody's salary 20 including your own? 21 A. Yes. 22 Q. There was no other group atGeorgia 23 Pacific that was charged with this project? 24 A. That's correct. 25 Q. Who was your supervisorduring that 1' 59 1 period of time? 2 A. Glenn Wilson. 3 Q. Did you ever go to Mr. Wilson and request 4 additional funds for the project? 5 A. I don't recallany specific instance. 6 Q. Did he ever ask you whether you needed 7 additional funds? 8 A. I don't recall that either. 9 Q. Were you aware that OSHA had issued 10 jations to some of the Georgia Pacific facilities, 11 icularly the one in Akron, New York and the 12 oth^r one in Marietta, Georgia? 13 MR. PARNELL: Object to the form of the 14 question. No foundation. 15 In the early 1970s pertaining to asbestos 16 17 I recall such an instance. 18 Do you generally know why those citations 19 wefe issued? 20 A. Not necessarily. 21 Q. Are you aware that it had to do with 22 asbestos exposure? 23 i A. knew it had something to do with 24 akbaafogf not exposure, but asbestos measurements. 25 Airborne asbestos that is. I i~ 60 1 Q. Did your group have any responsibility 2 for monitoring airborne asbestos at any of the 3 Georgia Pacific facilities? 4 A. What time period are we talking about? 5 Q. Any time period. 6 A. Not during that time period. We did 7 later after the OSHA regulations were in effect. 8 Q. What time period are you talking about? 9 A. 1973 , 1974 . I believe they came i.. 10 effect. 11 Q. Did you actually go down and do air 12 sampling? 13 A. No . 14 Q * Somebody from your group did? 15 A. Yes . 16 Q. This would have been one of those six 17 people was doing this? 18 A. Yes. 19 Q. Did they do air sampling? 20 A. Yes. 2 1 Q. Was someone in your group a certified 22 industrial hygienist? 23 . A. No. 24 Q. Was someone in your group fully trained 25 on how to use air quality testing equipment? I 1