Document QgGemMLBBb2vGNyVy5Q1bB5BE

1 1 N0. 90-3696 2 NORMAN W. ELLIS, 14TH JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT 3 ET AL 4 VS. PARISH OF CALCASIEU 5 INSURANCE COMPANY OF 6 NORTH AMERICA, ET AL STATE OF LOUISIANA 7 8 DEPOSITION OF 9 10 OTTO WONG, ScD., F.A.CE. 11 VOLUME I OF II 12 13 December 11, 1991 14 333 Market Street, 29th Floor 15 San Francisco, California 16 17 18~ 19 20 Reported by: 21 JAMES G. ELLIS, CSR 22 Nell McCallum & Associates, Inc, 23 2615 Calder, Suite 111 24 Beaumont, Texas 77702 25 (409) 838-0333 2 1 INDEX 2 PAGE 3 APPEARANCES 03-04 4 STIPULATIONS 04-05 5 EXAMINATION BY MR. HYDE 06 6 7 EXHIBIT INDEX 8 9 WONG EXHIBIT N0. 1 10 WONG EXHIBIT N0. 2 11 WONG EXHIBIT N0. 3A. 12 WONG EXHIBIT N0. 3B. 13 WONG EXHIBIT N0. 4 14 WONG EXHIBIT N0. 5 15 WONG EXHIBIT N0. 6._ 16 WONG EXHIBIT N0. 7_____________ _ 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 HELL MC CALLUM & ASSOCIATES, INC. 3 1 APPEARANCES: 2 For the Plaintiffs: 3 MR. J. KEITH HYDE 4 of the Law Firm of 5 Herschel L. Hobson 6 2190 Harrison Street 7 Beaumont, Texas 77701 8 9 For the Defendant Lloyd's of London: 10 MS. BARBARA L. ARRAS 11 of the Law Firm of 12 Phelps, Dunbar, Marks, Claverie & Sims 13 Texaco Center 14 400 Poydras Street 15 New Orleans, Louisiana 70130-3245 16 17 For the Defendant Insurance Company of 18 North America: 19 MR. WILLIAM T. McCALL 20 of the Law Firm of 21 Guillory & McCall 22 901 Lakeshore Drive, Suite 836 23 P. 0. Drawer 1607 24 Lake Charles, Louisiana 70602-1607 25 NELL MC CALLUM & ASSOCIATES, INC. 4 1 For the Defendant CanadianOxy 2 Offshore Products: 3 MR. KENNETH SPEARS 4 of the Law Firm of 5 Jones, Tete, Nolen, 6 Hanchey, Swift & Spears 7 First Federal Building 8 1135 Lakeshore Drive 9 P.O. Box 910 10 Lake Charles, Louisiana 70602 11 12 13 14 Deposition of OTTO WONG, ScD., F.A.C.E., 15 called by Plaintiffs on December 11, 1991, at 16 333 Market Street, 29th Floor, San Francisco, 17 California, at 10:00 a.m., before JAMES G. ELLIS, 18 CSR, Texas No. 3004, in and for the State of 19 Texas, pursuant to notice and the following 20 stipulations: 21 THE REPORTER: For the record, we 22 are here pursuant to what? 23 MR. HYDE: Notice. 24 THE REPORTER: Stipulations? 25 MR. HYDE: According to the NELL MC CALLUM b ASSOCIATES, INC. 5 1 Louisiana Rules of Civil Procedure, 2 reserving objections except as to form 3 and responsiveness. 4 MR. McCALL: I'm sorry? 5 MR. HYDE: According to Louisiana 6 Rules, reserving objections except as to 7 form and responsiveness. 8 MR. McCALL: Okay. Is he going to 9 read and sign, Barbara? 10 MS. ARRAS: He is going to want to 11 read and sign. 12 THE WITNESS: I want to read it. 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 NELL MC CALLUM de ASSOCIATES, INC. 6 1 OTTO WONG, ScD., F.A.C.E., 2 having been duly sworn, testified as follows, 3 to-wit: 4 (WONG EXHIBIT NOS. 1 AND 2 WERE MARKED) 5 EXAMINATION BY MR. HYDE: 6 Q. Would you please introduce yourself. 7 A. I'm Otto Wong. 8 Q. That's Dr. Wong? 9 A. Yes. 10 Q. Ph.D.? 11 A. Doctor of Science. 12 Q. Dr. Wong, what is your business address? A. 181 Second Avenue, Suite 628, San Mateo, California 94401. 15 Q. What is your business phone number? 16 A. (415) 347-7898. 17 Q. How are you presently employed? 18 A. I'm the principal at Applied Health 19 Sciences. 20 Q. How long have you been with that firm? 21 A. One year. 22 Q. How long have you been a principal of 23 that firm? 24 A. One year. 25 Q. What is the background behind the NELL MC CALLUM & ASSOCIATES, INC. 7 1 designation 'principal'? What does that basically 2 mean? 3 A. "Principal," meaning I'm the owner of 4 the firm. 5 Q. Dr. Wong, how old a man are you? 6 A. 44. 7 Q. Dr. Wong, you and I have met before. 8 Matter of fact, we met in Houston in November of 9 1991; isn't that correct? 10 A. Yes. When I was 43. 11 Q. Happy birthday. And you were giving a 12 deposition in the Ray Wing case; is that right? 13 A. Yes, sir. 14 Q. And you understand today that you're 15 under oath to tell the truth? 16 A. Yes, sir. 17 Q. It's just like you were in front of the 18 Judge and jury in the Calcasieu Parish area; do 19 you understand that? 20 A. Yes, sir. 21 Q. Have you ever been to Calcasieu Parish, 22 Louisiana? 23 A. No. 24 Q. If you don't understand the question, 25 please don't attempt to answer it. Would you do NELL MC CALLUM & ASSOCIATES, INC. 8 1 that? 2 A. I will try. 3 Q. Dr. Wong, what were you hired to do for 4 these defendants in this case? 5 A. I was asked to look at employment 6 history, look at deposition transcripts, and look 7 at epidemiologic studies pertinent to these cases 8 and form an opinion on these cases. 9 Q. Who first contacted you? 10 A. Barbara Arras. 11 Q. When did Ms. Arras contact you? 12 A. Back in -- I believe around March or 13 April of this year. 14 Q. What were you first told by Ms. Arras 15 relative to this case? 16 A. I received a call from her. She told me 17 she was coming out to San Francisco for a meeting 18 and she had several cases and asked me if I would 19 be interested in talking to her. 20 Q. Did she tell you anything else about the 21 cases, the type of diseases involved, anything 22 such as that? 23 A. I don't remember exactly. She might 24 have. 25 Q. Did she tell you benzene was involved? NELL MC CALLUM 3 ASSOCIATES, INC. 9 1 A. I don't remember. Are you talking about 2 the first conversation? 3 Q. Yes. 4 A. I don't remember exactly what she said 5 in the first conversation. 6 Q. When did you agree to be an expert in 7 this lawsuit? 8 A. I think most likely it was after our 9 first meeting in San Francisco. 10 Q. When was that first meeting?. 11 A. Around April. 12 Q. Where in San Francisco did y'all meet? 13 A. I went to her hotel and we sat at the 14 bar for an hour or so and then we went to dinner. 15 Q. Were there any other attorneys with 16 Ms. Arras? 17 A. No. 18 Q. Were any other people with Ms. Arras 19 other than yourself? 20 A. No. 21 Q. Do you know Mr. McCall? 22 A. Yes, I do. 23 Q. When did you first meet Mr. McCall? 24 A. In September. 25 Q. Where did you meet Mr. McCall? NELL MC CALLUM & ASSOCIATES, I NC. 10 1 A. At a hotel near -- or not so near -- the 2 Stapleton Airport in Denver. 3 Q. I take it that was a meeting of several 4 experts relative to this lawsuit; is that right? 5 A. The September meeting? 6 Q. Yes. 7 A. I was the only expert. 8 Q. Dr. Irons wasn't there? 9 A. No, he was not. 10 Q. Now long did you meet with Nor. McCall 11 during that meeting? 12 A. The meeting lasted three hours or so. 13 Q. What were you doing in Denver? Just to 14 go to this meeting? 15 A. Just to go to that meeting. 16 Q. Do you know Mr. Spears? 17 A. Yes, sir. 18 Q. When did you first meet Mr. Spears? 19 A. The same meeting. 20 Q. Have you seen or talked to Mr. Spears 21 after that initial meeting in September? 22 A. There was another meeting in the hotel 23 there in Denver last month. 24 Q. Mr. Spears was at that meeting? 25 A. Yes, sir. NELL MC CALLUM & ASSOCIATES, INC. 11 1 Q. Was Mr. McCall at that meeting? 2 A. Yes, sir. 3 Q. Was Ms. Arras at that meeting? 4 A. Yes, sir. 5 Q. Was Mr. Hall at that meeting? 6 A. Yes, sir. 7 Q. Was Mr. Hall at the second meeting in 8 Denver? You had two meetings in Denver? 9 A. Correct. 10 Q. Okay. At the first meeting in Denver, 11 was Mr. Hall present at that meeting? 12 A. No. 13 Q. Was Mr. Belfour present at any of these 14 meetings? 15 A. No. Who is he? 16 Q. A lawyer. 17 Now, in your first meeting with 18 Ms. Arras in San Francisco, did Ms. Arras give you 19 any documents at that point in time? 20 A. No. 21 Q. In your meeting in Denver with 22 Ms. Arras, Mr. Hall and Mr. Spears and Mr. McCall, 23 were you given any documents at that meeting? 24 A. I remember receiving a map from 25 Ms. Arras A big map. NELL MC CALLUM & ASSOCIATES, INC. 12 1 Q. A plot plan of the plant? 2 A. Right. 3 Q. Did you get anything else? 4 A. That's all I can remember. 5 Q. And the third meeting in Denver, when 6 was that? It was the third meeting that you had 7 with the various attorneys in this lawsuit. The 8 second meeting in Denver, when was that meeting? 9 A. That was September 10 MR. McCALL: Wait. Keith 11 A. September 12 MR. McCALL: I'm not sure I 13 understand your question. 14 BY MR. HYDE: 15 Q. Your first meeting in Denver with all 16 the attorneys, when was that meeting held? 17 A. Let me look at my notes. 18 Q. Sure. 19 A. The first meeting in Denver was on 20 September the 19th, I believe. 21 Q. What did all of y'all talk about during 22 that meeting of September 19th? 23 MR. McCALL: At this point, 24 Dr. Wong, I'm going to object. Keith, 25 as to your getting into an area -- you're NELL MC CALLUM de ASSOCIATES, INC. 13 1 getting into an area of communication 2 between attorneys and the expert insofar 3 as may involve work product. I'm going 4 to instruct Dr. Wong not to answer 5 unless we know what particular -- you 6 know, in general, if you want to ask 7 what was talked about, what things were 8 discussed. But if you want to discuss 9 things that involve attorney work 10 product between expert and witness, I 11 object to that. 12 MR. HYDE: I am going to have to 13 call Bill, then, because I'm uncertain 14 as to whether you have any privilege 15 between you and your experts. 16 MR. McCALL: If that is not the 17 case, then we have things that Nancy 18 Culver has done for you and prepared for 19 you for purposes of this litigation that 20 are also not privileged that we have 21 talked about. 22 MR. HYDE: Let me call him. 23 (DISCUSSION OFF THE RECORD) 24 MR. HYDE: I'll get the court 25 reporter to mark that question. We'll NELL MC CALLUM de ASSOCIATES, INC. 14 1 come back to it. 2 BY MR. HYDE: 3 Q. During your meeting 4 (BRIEF INTERRUPTION) 5 BY MR. HYDE: 6 Q. Dr. Wong, what were you told out at the 7 meeting in Denver on September 19th that assisted 8 you in the formation of your opinions relative to 9 this lawsuit? 10 MR. McCALL: Counsel by that, are 11 you asking what was he told in the way 12 of facts or documents? I think you can 13 ask about that. But if your question is 14 to the extent that it gets into attorney 15 work product, trial product, trial 16 strategies, I object to it. If you want 17 to ask him about facts and documents 18 that he may have relied upon in his 19 opinion, I don't have a problem with 20 that. 21 MR. HYDE: I'm going to leave it 22 the way I asked it. If you're going to 23 instruct him not to answer, then 24 MR. McCALL: I would instruct him 25 not to answer the question. I object to NELL MC CALLUM & ASSOCIATES, INC. 15 1 the form of the question on the basis 2 that it's too broad, and the scope of 3 the question goes into -- by its very 4 nature, it's broadly worded and goes 5 into areas that would consist of 6 attorney work product and may involve 7 discussions between attorneys and 8 experts. 9 BY MR. HYDE: 10 Q. Dr. Wong, are you going to answer my 11 question? 12 A. No. 13 Q. You're not going to answer my question 14 based on advice of Mr. McCall; is that correct? 15 A. Yes, sir. 16 MR. HYDE: For the record, then, 17 we're going to probably seek a Motion to 18 Compel on this point and probably seek 19 costs for having to come out an redepose 20 Mr. Wong. 21 MR. McCALL: That will be fine. 22 Court reporter, while we're on the 23 record, we're also going to make -- put 24 Counsel on notice that should Counsel 25 pursue this, we will also seek to pursue NELL' MC CALLUM &ASSOCIATES, INC. 16 1 the same information from your experts, 2 particularly the documents that were 3 discussed in the Nancy Culver deposition 4 which Plaintiff's counsel took work 5 product privilege on and instructed us 6 not to ask about. 7 Let's proceed. 8 BY MR. HYDE: 9 Q. What did you do on September 19th with 10 these attorneys? 11 A. As I said, we had a meeting. 12 Q. Well, what did you meet about? 13 A. We talked about the cases. I gave a 14 summary of some of the papers that I have been 15 reviewing. 16 Q. Was that summary in the form of a 17 presentation? 18 A. No. 19 Q. Was it a written summary? 20 A. No. 21 Q. You did this all orally by memory; is 22 that correct? 23 A. Right. 24 Q. You had no written notes or anything 25 such as that to assist you in the summary that you NELL MC CALLUM & ASSOCIATES, INC. 17 1 presented to these attorneys? 2 A. That's right. 3 Q. Then you later met with these same 4 attorneys in Denver; is that correct? 5 A. Yes, sir. 6 Q. What was the date of that meeting? 7 A. It was November 21st. 8 Q. And as it concerns this lawsuit and your 9 opinions in this lawsuit, what were you told by 10 these attorneys that form a basis or support your 11 opinions relative to this matter? 12 MR. McCALL: Counsel, let me, 13 again, enter an objection to the 14 question, to the form of the question, 15 as to its vagueness and broadness 16 insofar as it may impinge on attorney 17 work product between expert and 18 witness. 19 Dr. Wong, to. the extent that that 20 does, I would instruct you not to answer 21 it. I think you can certainly answer 22 Mr. Hyde's question as to any facts or 23 documents that you were presented with 24 that you may have considered in the 25 . formulation of any opinions in this NELL MC CALLUM & ASSOCIATES, INC. 18 1 case. To that extent 2 MS. ARRAS: I'd like to join in 3 Mr. McCall's motion -- both the prior 4 objection and this objection, also. 5 BY MR. HYDE: 6 Q. Are you going to answer my question, 7 Dr. Wong? 8 A. No. 9 Q. Are you not going to answer my question 10 based on the advice of Ms. Arras and Mr. McCall? 11 A. Yes, sir. 12 MR. McCALL: Counsel, if you want 13 to rephrase it and ask him about facts 14 or documents that he may have been 15 presented with at that meeting that he 16 may have used in relying upon or 17 formulating any opinions, I'm 18 certainly -- you can ask that question 19 and go into it. I'm in no way 20 prohibiting you from doing that. The 21 scope of your question broadly 22 encompasses an area that constitute work 23 product between an expert and a witness, 24 and that's what I don't want to get into 25 with the -- the nature of the question as NELL MC CALLUM & ASSOCIATES, INC. 19 1 it is worded is too broad and gets into 2 those areas. 3 BY MR. HYDE: 4 Q. Were you told anything at that meeting 5 that you understand to be privileged or work 6 product of these attorneys? 7 MS. ARRAS: I'm going to object. 8 It calls for a legal conclusion on the 9 part of the expert witness. 10 MR. HYDE: He can't answer legal 11 questions at all? 12 MS. ARRAS: He's not an attorney. 13 MR. McCALL: No. He's not an 14 attorney. 15 MS. ARRAS: We're not presenting 16 him as an expert in legal matters. 17 MR. McCALL: The determination, 18 Counsel, of what constitutes a legal 19 privilege is up to the Court and up to 20 the attorneys to argue that point. 21 BY MR. HYDE: 22 Q. What facts were you told at the meeting 23 of November 21st relative to this lawsuit? 24 A. A description of the facility, some of 25 the employment histories of the Plaintiffs. NELL MC CALLUM & ASSOCIATES, INC. 20 1 That's pretty much the facts of the discussion. 2 Q. Which of the attorneys gave you a 3 description of the facility? 4 A. I think all of them talked at different 5 times or talked at the same time. 6 Q. Was there a chemical engineer or process 7 engineer also at that meeting that explained to 8 you the chemical processes involved at the 9 facility where the Plaintiffs worked? 10 A. Which meeting are you talking about? 11 Q. The November 21st meeting. 12 A. An engineer, did you say? 13 Q. Yeah. 14 A. No. 15 Q. Who else was present at the November 16 21st meeting? 17 A. Ben Thomas, Richard Irons, Ralph 18 Wallerstein. There was another oncologist from 19 Louisiana. I don't remember his name. 20 MR. McCALL: Dr. Bickers. 21 BY MR. HYDE: 22 Q. Anybody else present? 23 A. I think we mentioned Stephen Hall 24 before. 25 Q. At your September 19th meeting, were NELL MC CALLUM do ASSOCIATES. INC. 21 1 there any other experts in this lawsuit at that 2 meeting? 3 A. The second 4 Q. The first Denver meeting. 5 A. The first one? I want to make a 6 correction. 7 Q. Okay. 8 A. Mr. Belfour was at that meeting. 9 Q. Mr. Belfour was at which meeting? 10 A. The first -- September 19th.meeting. 11 MR. McCALL: The second meeting. 12 Counsel, for the record 13 THE WITNESS: I'm getting confused. 14 MR. McCALL: -- Mr. Belfour and 15 Mr. Hack were present at the November 16 meeting. 17 MR. HYDE: At the November meeting? 18 MR. McCALL: Correct. 19 BY MR. HYDE: 20 Q. Dr. Wong, I think you have indicated you 21 might -- you have a little confusion right now. 22 And I would like to stop for a second, and let's 23 huddle up here and see if we can straighten this 24 out. 25 On September 19th you had a meeting in NELL MC CALLUM & ASSOCIATES, INC. 22 1 Denver. And let me see if I have this right. Ken 2 Spears, Bill McCall, Barbara Arras, Steve Hall, 3 Greg Belfour 4 MR. SPEARS: (Shakes head) 5 MR. HYDE: No? 6 A. No. 7 BY MR. HYDE: 8 Q. So, these were November. 9 MR. HYDE: Because you just told 10 me September, I thought. Dial you have 11 it wrong? 12 MR. McCALL: If I used the date 13 September on my last discourse, that 14 meant November. I thought I said 15 "November." 16 Sorry, Counsel, if I used the 17 wrong -- I thought I said "November." 18 BY MR. HYDE: 19 Q. Let's just go, who was present at the 20 September 19th meeting, which was the second 21 meeting with Barbara Arras and the first meeting 22 with all of the attorneys in general in this case, 23 except for the Plaintiffs' attorneys. 24 At that meeting, Ken Spears, Bill 25 McCall, Barbara Arras, Stephen Hall NELL MC CALLUM & ASSOCIATES. INC. 23 1 A. No, Stephen Hall wasn't there. 2 Q. Stephen Hall was not present at that 3 meeting? 4 A. Right 5 Q. Just the three attorneys in this room 6 were present at your September 19th meeting; is 7 that correct? 8 A. Right. 9 Q. Were there any other experts present at 10 that meeting on September 19th in Denver? 11 A. No. 12 Q. Do you know whether they met with any 13 experts before they met with you on September 19th? 14 A. I don't know. 15 Q. Did you hear that, that they had met 16 with other experts on September 17 A. I did not hear anything. 18 Q. Now on November 21st -- let's see if we 19 can get the cast correct here -- Ken Spears, Bill 20 McCall, Barbara Arras, Stephen Hall, Greg Belfour, 21 and Ed Hack were present. Those were the 22 attorneys, is that right 23 A. Right. 24 Q. -- for the November 21st meeting? 25 A. Right NELL MC CALLUM & ASSOCIATES, INC. 24 1 Q. Also present on the November 21st 2 meeting was Ben Thomas, Richard Irons, Ralph 3 Wallerstein, Dr. Bickers, and yourself? 4 A. Yes, sir. 5 Q. Now, where was this meeting held in 6 Denver, what hotel? 7 A. Stoffer Hotel. 8 Q. How long did this meeting last? 9 A. We started around 9:00 o'clock and 10 finished about 2:00 or -- around 3:OO.o'clock or 11 so. 12 Q. Did Ben Thomas give a presentation 13 during that meeting on November 21st? 14 A. A presentation? 15 Q. Yes. 16 A. I don't think so. 17 Q. Did Dr. Irons give a presentation during 18 the meeting on November 21st? 19 A. No, sir. 20 Q. Did Dr. Wallerstein give a presentation 21 on November 21st? 22 A. No, sir. 23 Q. Did Dr. Bickers give a presentation on 24 November 21st in that meeting? 25 A. No, sir. NELL MC CALLUM & ASSOCIATES, INC. 25 1 Q. Basically it was a roundtable 2 presentation, and it was just a discussion of the 3 facts associated with this lawsuit; is that 4 correct? 5 A. It was kind of an unstructured 6 discussion. 7 Q. As I said it, the attorneys basically 8 gave you a description of the facility as it 9 pertains to the Cities Service refinery and the 10 associated PCI complex; is that correct? 11 A. Yes, sir. 12 Q. Which of the attorneys gave you the 13 presentation concerning the employment history of 14 the Plaintiffs? 15 A. I think they all did. 16 Q. Now, since November 21st, have you had 17 any meetings with any of the attorneys in this 18 room or Mr. Belfour or Mr. Hall? 19 A. No. 20 Q. Have you had telephone conversations 21 with any of those individuals since November 21st? 22 A. I don't think so. 23 Q. Other than the phone call just to be 24 here today? 25 MR McCALL: Counsel, I'm sure NELL MC CALLUM & ASSOCIATES, INC. 26 1 that -- Dr. Wong -- I don't know that 2 I've spoken to him, but I'm sure there 3 were phone calls made between offices 4 concerning the deposition. Wouldn't 5 Ms. Arras, wouldn't that be 6 MS. ARRAS: Oh, yes. 7 THE WITNESS: I'm not so sure I 8 talked to you 9 MR. McCALL: Right. 10 THE WITNESS: -- to Barbara, per 11 se. 12 MR. McCALL: Right. 13 A. I think Barbara talked to my office and 14 reminded me to show up at the deposition. But I 15 don't remember any conversation. 16 BY MR. HYDE: 17 Q. Did you write a report in this case? 18 A. A report? 19 Q. Yes. 20 A. In these cases? 21 Q. Yes. 22 A. No. 23 Q. Now, you're not going to testify in the 24 area of industrial hygiene; is that correct? 25 A. Heaven forbid. I am not an industrial NELL MC CALLUM do ASSOCIATES, INC. 27 1 hygienist. 2 Q. You're not going to give -- be an expert 3 in this case as it relates to safety and warnings; 4 is that right? 5 A. No, sir. 6 Q. Okay. Well, I said that wrong. I'm 7 sorry. 8 A. Double negative. 9 Q. Yes. Are you going to be an expert in 10 the area of safety and warnings relative to this 11 matter? 12 . A. No, I'm not. 13 Q. Are you going to be an expert in this 14 lawsuit relative to chemistry or process 15 engineering? 16 A. No, sir. 17 Q. Are you going to render any expert 18 opinions in this matter relative to toxicology? 19 A. No, sir. 20 Q. Are you going to render any opinions in 21 this matter relative to emission modeling, 22 fugitive emissions, or any of those kinds of 23 subjects? 24 A. No, sir. 25 Q. Are you going to render any opinions in NELL MC CALLUM A ASSOCIATES, INC. 28 1 this matter as it concerns hematology? 2 A. No, sir. 3 Q. Are you going to render any opinions in 4 this matter relative to oncology? 5 A. No, sir. 6 Q. Are you going to render any opinions in 7 this matter as it relates to management functions 8 or business management? 9 A. No. 10 MR. McCALL: Counsel, let me ask 11 you to -- I'm going to object to the 12 form of the question as vague without 13 further clarification. 14 BY MR. HYDE: 15 Q. Are you going to render any opinions as 16 to what the managers at the Cities Service 17 refinery, or PCI complex, what their 18 responsibilities were in general to the workers at 19 that plant and the operation of that plant? 20 A. No, sir. 21 Q. That's what I meant by an expert in 22 business management or just management in 23 general. You're not going to render that type of 24 an opinion? 25 A. No. NELL MC CALLUM & ASSOCIATES, INC. 29 1 Q. Have you been given adequate time in 2 this litigation matter to adequately research all 3 the topics and form your opinion? 4 A. Yes, sir. 5 Q. So, as we sit here today, you don't need 6 any additional time, is that correct, in the 7 formation of your opinion? 8 MR. McCALL: Counsel, let me say 9 for the record that we may have 10 additional tasks for Dr. Wong to 11 perform, just like your experts have 12 done so; and we reserve the right to do 13 that. But I think he's here today and 14 has an opinion. 15 BY MR. HYDE: 16 Q. I guess what I'm asking, you haven't 17 been rushed to come up with this opinion; you've 18 had plenty of time to do your research; is that 19 right? 20 A. Yes, sir. 21 Q. Do you know the names of the Defendants 22 who are involved in this lawsuit? 23 A. Yes, sir. 24 Q. Would you please tell me who they are? 25 A. Let me look at my notes. NELL MC CALLUM A ASSOCIATES, INC. 30 1 MR. McCALL: Defendants or 2 Plaintiffs? 3 MR. HYDE: Defendants. 4 A. Oh, Defendants. I'm sorry. Good 5 question. I have been provided with that 6 information. I might have left it in my office. 7 BY MR. HYDE: 8 Q. You understand that Oxy, or CanadianOxy, 9 is one of the Defendants in this lawsuit based on 10 its liabilities for the Cities Service refinery; 11 do you understand that? 12 A. No, I don't. 13 Q. And do you understand that also 14 Ms. Arras and Mr. McCall work for insurance 15 companies who are defending this lawsuit; do you 16 understand that? 17 A. Yes, sir. 18 Q. Have you ever been employed directly by 19 the Insurance Company of North America before? 20 A. No. 21 Q. Have you ever consulted on behalf of the 22 Insurance Company of North America before? 23 A. No. 24 Q. Have you ever testified as an expert on 25 behalf of the Insurance Company of North America? NELL MC CALLUM & ASSOCIATES, INC. 31 1 A. No. 2 Q. Have you ever testified on behalf of 3 Lloyd's Insurance? 4 A. No. 5 Q. Have you ever been an expert to Lloyd's? 6 A. No. Other than this case? 7 Q. Yeah. All this is other than this 8 case. 9 Have you ever testified on behalf of 10 Cities Service refining or any of the Oxy 11 companies before, other than this case and the 12 Ray Wing case? 13 A. I don't know for sure. They could have 14 been one of the many, many defendants in some of 15 the cases that I worked on. 16 Q. If you would, take a second to think 17 back and see if you can recall either the name 18 Occidental Petroleum, Oxy Chem, Oxy Petrochemicals, 19 CanadianOxy, Oxy U.S.A. Do any of those names 20 sound familiar to you as it concerns any of your 21 past litigation work? 22 A. It doesn't ring a bell. 23 Q. And what is your understanding of the 24 facilities where the Plaintiffs worked, who are 25 the Plaintiffs in this lawsuit? NELL MC CALLUM 8 ASSOCIATES, INC. 32 1 A. Can you be more specific than that? 2 Q. Sure. Where did Mr. Lilly work? 3 A. You mean the exact location? 4 Q. No. Just the plant. 5 A. Cities Service complex in Lake Charles. 6 Q. Did the rest of the Plaintiffs also work 7 in that same facility? Is that right? 8 A. Right. 9 Q. Have you ever worked with Ms. Arras 10 before on any litigation matter? . 11 A. No, sir. 12 Q. Have you ever worked with Mr. McCall in 13 any litigation matter? 14 A. No. 15 Q. Have you ever worked with Mr. Spears in 16 any litigation matter? 17 A. No. 18 Q. Have you ever worked with Mr. Belfour in 19 any litigation matter? 20 21 MR. HYDE: Off the record. 22 (DISCUSSION OFF THE RECORD) 23 MR. McCALL: We were on Belfour. 24 BY MR. HYDE: 25 Q. Have you ever-worked with Mr. Stephen NELL MC CALLUM de ASSOCIATES. INC. 33 1 Hall in any litigation matters? 2 A. No. 3 Q. Did Ms. Arras tell you how she came to 4 learn about you as an expert? 5 A. I don't know. 6 Q. You don't recall how she learned about 7 you? 8 A. I don't. 9 Q. Well, seeing as how you never worked for 10 any of these people before, have you ever declined 11 to work for any of those attorneys that I have 12 named; in other words, you refused to take a case 13 that they had? 14 A. Can you repeat your question? 15 Q. I sure will. 16 You indicated that you have never worked 17 with any of the attorneys that we have previously 18 mentioned. I don't think I need to go through all 19 the names again. But my question is, have they 20 ever asked you to participate as an expert witness 21 and then you declined to work with them because of 22 either the facts of the case or you were too busy 23 or something such as that? 24 A. No. 25 Q. For the record, we've marked the notice 34 1 to take deposition by video, which we're not 2 taking by video today; but that's been marked as 3 Deposition Exhibit 1. Did you see this, Dr. Wong, 4 just the notice? 5 A. I don't think I've seen this one. 6 Q. Well, did you see the subpoena duces 7 tecum relative to your deposition today, which we 8 have had marked as Deposition Exhibit No. 2? Did 9 you see this document? 10 A. Yes. 11 Q. When did you receive this document? 12 A. December 9th. 13 Q. Who sent it to you? 14 A. Ms. Arras. 15 Q. Did you discuss this document, 16 Deposition Exhibit No. 2, with Ms. Arras? 17 A. No. Her office faxed a copy of that 18 letter to me. 19 Q. Did you discuss Deposition Exhibit 20 No. 2 -- the request for documents there, did you 21 discuss that with any of the attorneys associated 22 with this lawsuit? 23 A. I did put together all the documents 24 and -- we had a meeting yesterday and we go through 25 the documents, make sure we have all the NELL MC CALLUM & ASSOCIATES, INC. 35 1 documents. 2 Q. So, you did discuss this request with 3 the attorneys; that's correct? 4 A. Yes, that is correct. 5 MR. McCALL: To the extent your 6 question refers to all of us, I was not 7 here yesterday. To let the record be 8 clear. 9 BY MR. HYDE: 10 Q. So, you met with Ms. Arras and 11 Mr. Spears yesterday? 12 A. Yes, sir. 13 Q. Y'all went through this request for 14 documents, and you showed them what documents you 15 were going to bring with you today? 16 A. Right. 17 Q. Did you bring any documents to your 18 meeting yesterday that they told you not to bring 19 today? 20 A. No, sir. 21 MR. HYDE: Off the record. 22 (DISCUSSION OFF THE RECORD) 23 BY MR. HYDE: 24 Q. Dr. Wong, as it concerns Deposition 25 Exhibit No. 2, which is a subpoena duces tecum NELL MC CALLUM A ASSOCIATES. INC. 36 1 which requests you to bring certain documents, I 2 would like to go over each one of the requests 3 with you at this time. Are you prepared to do 4 that? 5 A. Yes, sir. 6 Q. Request No. 1 7 MS. ARRAS: I would like to just 8 go on the record at this point and say 9 we are voluntarily complying with the 10 subpoena duces tecum because it was 11 never, according to the first paragraph 12 of the letter addressed to Mr. Andrews, 13 the Clerk of Courts for the 14th JDC in 14 Lake Charles, I was to be served with a 15 subpoena to bring these records. I was 16 never served with a subpoena, nor was I 17 provided with a copy of that letter 18 directly from Plaintiff's counsel. It 19 was sent to me by another attorney in 20 this case. And I just want the record 21 to reflect that we're complying 22 voluntarily with the notice of subpoena. 23 MR. HYDE: Will there be any 24 documents that you will be withholding, 25 even though you're voluntarily NELL MC CALLUM d, ASSOCIATES, INC. 37 1 complying? 2 MR. McCALL: I don't think so. 3 MS. ARRAS: I don't believe so. 4 MR. McCALL: The argument will 5 come if you make a move to hold us in 6 contempt or something. We just never 7 got served with it. We're here today to 8 try and give you all the documents, 9 Keith. 10 BY MR. HYDE: 11 Q. Dr. Wong, we've asked you to bring 12 today, based on No. 1 of this subpoena duces 13 tecum, any and all correspondence, pleadings, 14 medical and/or scientific articles, depositions, 15 medical records, written instructions, 16 photographs, videotapes, audio tapes, and/or 17 documents of any kind which Dr. Otto Wong has 18 received from Defendants, Defendants' Counsel, or 19 any employee, agent, or representative of 20 Defendants' counsel in this case. 21 What did you bring with you that is 22 responsive to Request No. 1? 23 A. I have a couple of folders that would 24 fit into the first three categories. 25 Q. Okay. I'm going to go ahead and read NELL MC CALLUM 8 ASSOCIATES, INC. 38 1 No. 2 and 3, then. 2 A. Okay. 3 Q. No. 2 requests that you bring any and 4 all notes, memoranda, correspondence, reports, 5 written opinions, and/or documents of any kind 6 which you have provided to Defendants, Defendants' 7 counsel, or any agent, employee, or representative 8 of Defendants' counsel in this case. 9 And No. 3 request you to bring any and 10 all notes, memoranda, reports, correspondence, 11 summaries, and/or documents of any kind which 12 evidence or reflect your factual observations 13 and/or expert opinions in this case. 14 And what do you have that is responsive 15 to Request No. 1, 2, and 3? 16 A. Here they are (tendering). 17 MR. HYDE: James, what I'd like to 18 do is have these two folders marked as 19 Exhibits 3A and 3B. 20 (WONG EXHIBIT NOS. 3A AND 3B WERE MARKED) 21 (DISCUSSION OFF THE RECORD) 22 BY MR. HYDE: 23 Q. Dr. Wong, all documents that you have as 24 it concerns Request Nos. 1, 2, and 3 on the 25 subpoena duces tecum, which is Deposition-Exhibit NELL MC CALLUM & ASSOCIATES, INC. 39 1 No. 2, those documents are all contained in Wong 2 Deposition Exhibits 3A and 3B; is that correct? 3 A. Yes, sir. 4 Q. No. 4 of the subpoena duces tecum 5 requests you to bring copies of any and all 6 medical or scientific books, articles, abstracts, 7 or documents of any kind which form the basis in 8 whole or in part for any opinions you may render 9 in this case. What do you have that is responsive 10 to Request No. 4 of the subpoena? . 11 A. I have a number of folders, studies that 12 I am going to rely on. And this would most likely 13 fit your categories 4, 5, 6, and 8. 14 Q. Okay. So, I would like to go ahead and 15 put on the record Nos. 5, 6, and 8, which are 16 copies of any and all medical or scientific books, 17 articles, abstracts, or documents of any kind 18 which directly or indirectly demonstrate a causal 19 association between any chemical agent exposure 20 and the development of non-Hodgkin's lymphoma; 21 that's No. 5. 22 No. 6 is copies of any and all medical 23 or scientific books, articles, abstracts, or 24 documents of any kind which, in your opinion, 25 demonstrate the Plaintiffs' level of exposure to NELL MC CALLUM a ASSOCIATES. INC. 40 1 any chemical agent, including but not limited to 2 benzene, 1,3-butadiene, and/or ethylene oxide. 3 And No. 8 is your most recent 4 bibliography of studies involving non-Hodgkin's 5 lymphoma. 6 Could I see what documents you have 7 responsive relative to those requests? 8 A. (Tendering) 9 MR. HYDE: James, I want to go 10 ahead and mark this as No. 4. 11 (WONG EXHIBIT N0. 4 WAS MARKED) 12 BY MR. HYDE: 13 Q. Are all the documents that you have 14 responsive to Request No. 4, 5, 6, and 8 of the 15 subpoena duces tecum contained in what's now been 16 marked as Wong Deposition Exhibit No. 4? 17 A. Yes, sir. 18 Q. No. 7 requests you to bring your most 19 recent curriculum vitae; is that right? 20 A. I have it here (tendering). 21 MR. HYDE: Let's go ahead and mark 22 that. 23 (WONG EXHIBIT N0. 5 WAS MARKED) 24 BY MR. HYDE: 25 Q. Would you please identify what's been NELL MC CALLUM & ASSOCIATES. INC. 41 1 marked as Deposition Exhibit No. 5? 2 A. My CV. 3 Q. Is this an up-to-date CV? 4 A. Most recent one, yes. 5 Q. Is there anything you need to add to 6 this CV that would make it more accurate? 7 A. No. 8 Q. When was the last time you updated your 9 CV, or what is the date of this CV (tendering)? 10 A. Probably about three or four months old. 11 Q. We have already covered No. 8. Now, as 12 it pertains to Request No. 9 of the subpoena duces 13 tecum, we requested you to bring your entire file 14 concerning this case and your work on this case 15 including any retainer agreement you have with the 16 Defendants or Defendants' counsel. What do you 17 have relative to that? 18 A. This is a letter agreement (tendering). 19 MR. HYDE: Mark that, please, 20 No. 6. 21 (WONG EXHIBIT N0. 6 WAS MARKED) 22 BY MR. HYDE: 23 Q. Let me see if I can help you out here. 24 Now, as it relates to all the exhibits, this also 25 represents your file; is that correct? NELL MC CALLUM & ASSOCIATES. INC. 42 1 A. That's right. 2 Q. Would you please identify what's been 3 marked as Deposition Exhibit No. 6, please. 4 A. It's the letter agreement between the 5 Applied Health Sciences and Ms. Arras' law firm. 6 Q. Do you have an agreement with Mr. Spears 7 or Mr. McCall, like the one you have with Ms. Arras? 8 A. No, sir. 9 Q. No. 10 requests you to bring any and all 10 documents which evidence or reflect the amount of 11 time and expense you have incurred in relation to 12 your work in this case. What do you have 13 responsive to that request? 14 A. I have all the invoices that I sent to 15 Ms. Arras on this -- four or five cases. We 16 started with five case. The Crosby case was later 17 on taken out from this group. 18 Q. What you have handed me is also 19 responsive to Request No. 11, which requests you 20 to bring any and all documents of any kind which 21 evidence or reflect payment made to you by or on 22 behalf of Defendants or Defendants' counsel in 23 this case; is that correct? 24 A. Well, those are invoices. I think all 25. the invoices have been paid except maybe the last NELL MC CALLUM & ASSOCIATES, INC. 43 1 one. 2 MR. HYDE: Would you go ahead and 3 mark this, please. 4 (WONG EXHIBIT N0. 7 WAS MARKED) 5 BY MR. HYDE: 6 Q. Dr. Wong, would you please identify 7 what's been marked as Deposition Exhibit No. 7? 8 A. These are copies of invoices on these 9 cases. 10 Q. These are copies of invoices from your 11 company, Applied Health Sciences, to Ms. Arras; is 12 that correct? 13 A. Yes, sir. 14 Q. All the expenses or charges on these 15 invoices reflect your work in the Ellis, et al, 16 case; is that right? 17 A. In those four -- well, we started with 18 five cases, as I- said. Later on we have four 19 cases. 20 Q. These invoices reflect total charges by 21 you and your firm to Ms. Arras from 33 to $35,000; 22 is that right? 23 A. Around that area. 24 MS. ARRAS: I'd like to reflect 25 the fact that they're not bills NELL MC CALLUM & ASSOCIATES, 44 1 submitted to me personally. They're 2 submitted to my client. 3 BY MR. HYDE: 4 Q. Dr. Wong, I would like to start with 5 your past work history as it pertains to your 6 professional work history. From 1981 to 1990 you 7 indicate that you were executive vice-president, 8 chief epidemiologist or biostatistician with ENSR; 9 is that correct? 10 A. Yes, sir. . 11 Q. What was the time frame, respective time 12 frames, that you were a biostatistician with ENSR? 13 A. Can I have the question back? 14 Q. Sure. It appeared that there are three 15 job titles that you held with ENSR; is that 16 correct? 17 A. I thought two. 18 Q. Chief executive -- excuse me, executive 19 vice-president and chief epidemiologist, is that 20 one job title? 21 A. Can I take a look at it? 22 Q. Sure can. Do you have one over there? 23 A. The two titles are executive 24 vice-president as one. The second one is chief 25 epidemiologist/biostatistician NELL MC CALLUM d ASSOCIATES. INC. 45 1 Q. Can you tell me what the respective time 2 periods were that you were the chief 3 epidemiologist/ biostatistician? When were you in 4 that position? 5 A. For the entire period. 6 Q. At what point in time did you then 7 become executive vice-president for ENSR? 8 A. For the entire period. I had two titles 9 at the same time. 10 Q. Formerly ENSR was Environmental Health 11 Associates; is that right? 12 A. I think we should be clear. When you 13 say ENSR, I take it that you mean ENSR Health 14 Sciences. 15 Q. Right. I do. 16 A. Okay. If that's the case, then it's 17 true; yes. 18 Q. Who were the owners of Environmental 19 Health Associates? 20 A. "Who were"? Did you say "were"? 21 Q. Yes. 22 A. Past tense? 23 Q. Well, are they still the owners of 24 Environmental Health Associates? 25 A. No. NELL MC CALLUM S ASSOCIATES. INC. 46 1 Q. Who were the owners of Environmental 2 Health Associates when it was called Environmental 3 Hearth Associates? 4 A. Dr. Morgan -- Robert Morgan, Dr. Don 5 Whorton, W-h-o-r-t-o-n, and myself. 6 Q. Was the interest in that company equal? 7 Each one of y'all-l owned a third? 8 A. Yes, sir. 9 Q. Where is Dr. Morgan now located? 10 A. He has an office in Redwood .City, 11 California, in the Bay area. 12 Q. Who does he work for? 13 A. He has his own company. 14 Q. Dr. Whorton, where is he now located? 15 A. He's still at ENSR Health Sciences in 16 'Alameda. 17 Q. With ENSR Health Sciences, or 18 Environmental Health Associates, what was your 19 principal job duties as the executive 20 vice-president? 21 A. Basically I was responsible for running 22 the epidemiologic program, also participate in 23 administration, business development of the 24 company. Those are the things that I can think of 25 now. NELL MC CALLUM b ASSOCIATES. INC. 47 1 Q. As it concerns business development, 2 what type of activities were you involved in as it 3 concerns business development with ENSR Health 4 Sciences or Environmental Health Associates? 5 A. When I say "business development" we 6 really mean to have professional exposure such as 7 giving talks or papers on projects, technical 8 issues, writing papers in journals, that kind of 9 thing. 10 Q. Did Environmental Health Associates have 11 a brochure or a pamphlet? 12 A. At different times, yes, we had some 13 kind of booklet on capabilities that we had. 14 Q. What were your administrative duties as 15 executive vice-president with Environmental Health 16 Associates, or ENSR Health Sciences? 17 A. Good question. In terms of hiring 18 people in the division of epidemiology and 19 biostatistics, participate in business decisions, 20 general business decisions of the company. 21 Q. Dr. Morgan, Dr. Whorton, or yourself, 22 did any of you three ever testify on behalf of a 23 plaintiff in any litigation matter? 24 A. I think Dr. Morgan did that several 25 times. Dr. Whorton also did that, I'm sure. And NELL MC CALLUM do ASSOCIATES, INC. 48 1 I, myself, have been a consultant to a plaintiff 2 lawyer. 3 Q. But you've never testified on behalf of 4 a plaintiff? 5 A. Testify meaning 6 Q. In court. 7 A. No. 8 Q. Or in deposition? 9 A. No. 10 Q. Was it one of the general business 11 decisions of Environmental Health Associates or 12 ENSR Health Sciences not to testify on behalf of 13 plaintiffs? 14 A. No, sir. 15 Q. Who were the epidemiologists that worked 16 for you at the Environmental Health Associates or 17 ENSR Health Sciences? 18 A. Over the entire ten years? 19 Q. Yes. All you can remember. 20 A. Some of the names I can recall, 21 Lisa Trent, T-r-e-n-t; Fran Harris; Nancy Gordon; 22 Leeka Kheitfets, L-e-e-k-a, K-h-e-i-t-f-e-t-s. 23 Those are the ones I can remember right off the 24 top of my head. 25 Q. Where is Ms. Trent now located? NELL MC CALLUM 3 ASSOCIATES. INC. 49 1 A. She is still at ENSR Health Sciences. 2 Q. Where is Harris located? 3 A. She's -- I think she left ENSR several 4 months ago. I don't know where she is now. 5 Q. San Francisco area? 6 A. She is still in the Bay area. I don't 7 know which company or whether she is still working 8 or not. 9 Q. Nancy Gordon, where is she located? 10 A. I think she is still with ENSR Health 11 Sciences. 12 Q. Leeka Kheitfets? 13 A. Leeka Kheitfets, she's now with the 14 Electrical Power Research Institute down in 15 Palo Alto, in the Bay area. 16 Q. Your next position you were director of 17 occupational research at the Biometric Research 18 Institute; is that correct? 19 A. That's right. 20 MS. ARRAS: Keith, you're going in 21 reverse order? 22 MR. HYDE: Yeah. 23 MS. ARRAS: All right. 24 BY MR. HYDE: 25 Q. And. you were the senior epidemiologist/ NELL MC CALLUM A ASSOCIATES, INC. 50 1 biostatistician? 2 A. Yes, sir. 3 Q. What were your principal job duties in 4 that position? 5 A. To run a couple of projects on 6 epidemiology and biostatistics, provide 7 technical -- you know, input to those projects. 8 Q. Who were the principal customers of 9 Biometric Research Institute? 10 A. They specialize in clinical .trials; so 11 it would be pharmaceutical companies. 12 Q. Who were the principal customers of 13 Environmental Health Associates or ENSR Health 14 Sciences during the period when you were the 15 executive vice-president? 16 A. Petroleum companies, chemical companies, 17 paper products companies. We also have a couple 18 of projects from the government, and also 19 universities, as well. 20 Q. Which universities did you do work for 21 when you were with Environmental Health Associates 22 or ENSR Health Sciences? 23 A. I remember specifically University of 24 California, the Berkley campus; and also 25 University of California, San-Francisco campus. NELL MC CALLUM 8 ASSOCIATES. INC. 51 1 Q. What were the projects involved with 2 those universities? 3 A. I was not involved in those projects, 4 but my understanding was we did some safety audit 5 for those two campuses. 6 Q. Did you participate in any of the 7 projects for the government when you were with 8 Environmental Health Associates or ENSR Health 9 Sciences? 10 A. Well, some of my own projects were 11 funded by the government. 12 Q. What were they? 13 A. Being a consultant to the government. 14 Q. In what areas were you a consultant to 15 the government as it pertains to your employment 16 with Environmental Health Association or ENSR 17 Health Sciences? 18 A. I was a consultant to Occupational 19 Health and Safety Administration, OSHA, to testify 20 on their behalf on the benzene issue, the benzene 21 hearing. 22 Q. How much did OSHA pay Environmental 23 Health Associates or ENSR Health Sciences for your 24 work relative to that project? 25 A. I think it was several days' time. NELL MC CALLUM a ASSOCIATES, INC. 52 1 Q. Did you issue any kind of report or any 2 kind of summary of your work as it pertains to 3 this work with OSHA on the benzene standard? 4 A. I submitted a statement to the hearing. 5 Q. Do you still have a copy of that 6 statement? 7 A. It may be somewhere in the file. 8 Q. I take it you didn't include that 9 statement in any of the exhibits that you have 10 brought with you today; is that correct? 11 A. No, I have not. 12 Q. You didn't rely upon your own summary 13 that you conducted with OSHA; you didn't rely upon 14 that in any way in the formation of your opinions 15 in this case? 16 A. A lot of the things that I said in this 17 statement I also said elsewhere in my papers, and 18 I did bring copies of my papers today. 19 Q. I take it that you conducted an adequate 20 amount of research before you testified on behalf 21 of OSHA as it concerns the benzene standard? 22 A. I was asked mainly to talk about the 23 study that I did on chemical workers exposed to 24 benzene. And, remember, that was back in 19 -- I 25 forgot the exact year. But that was about seven 53 1 or eight years ago. And as much as what the 2 literature said at that time, I did look at the 3 literature at that time. 4 Q. And the benzene standard came out in 5 1986, the OSHA benzene standard; is that right? 6 A. Right. 7 Q. And approximately when did you testify 8 on behalf of OSHA relative to the benzene standard? 9 A. I would say probably a year before that. 10 Q. Sometime in 1985? 11 A. Yes, sir. 12 Q. And my question was, did you adequately 13 research the subject area of benzene before you 14 presented your paper to the OSHA administrative 15 law judge or whoever the hearing officer was? 16 A. I was not asked to present a 17 comprehensive analysis on all the papers on 18 benzene. My focus at that time was to present my 19 study. 20 Q. Well, was there anything about the 21 summary that you presented relative to the OSHA 22 benzene standard that was wrong? 23 MS. ARRAS: Do you mean wrong at 24 the time that he testified? 25 MR, HYDE: Yeah. NELL MC CALLt1M 1e ASSOCIATES. INC. 54 1 A. I won't say there was anything I said 2 was wrong. Depending on -- I haven't looked at my 3 statement for some time. Depends on what we're 4 talking about. Between then and now, there have 5 been new studies, you know, new information. 6 Things might have changed. 7 BY MR. HYDE: 8 Q. What do you understand the purpose of 9 your testifying on behalf of OSHA -- relative to 10 the benzene standard, what do you understand your 11 purpose was in that area? 12 A. To explain my study. That was the main 13 focus. 14 Q. And to present accurate information to 15 the hearing officer; is that right? 16 A. On my study. 17 Q. On your study? 18 A. Right. 19 Q. My question is, did you do that? 20 A. No, your question was, did I do a 21 thorough research on the subject. That's a very 22 comprehensive statement. 23 Now I -don't understand your question. 24 Q. I'll try to rephrase it, try to break it 25 up a little bit. NELL MC CALLIIM I6 ASSOCIATES. INC. 55 1 What is your understanding of the 2 purpose of the hearings that were conducted 3 relative to the benzene standard where you 4 testified? 5 A. I don't understand the question. 6 Q. Why were those hearings held; in other 7 words? 8 A. In general? 9 Q. In general. 10 A. To allow people to express their opinion 11 on that subject. 12 Q. And was it for the purpose of OSHA to 13 allow them to accurately understand all the 14 scientific information in order to make safety 15 regulations for the workers? 16 MR. McCALL: Keith, let me object 17 to the form of the question insofar as I 18 think it's vague. Are you asking him 19 what OSHA was doing or what his 20 understanding was 21 MR. HYDE: What his 22 understanding 23 MR. McCALL: -- as opposed to what 24 OSHA was 25 MR. HYDE: What his understanding NELL MC CALLUM & ASSOCIATES, INC. 56 1 was of why OSHA was holding 2 these hearings. 3 MR. McCALL: Why he was there 4 and 5 MR. HYDE: Why he was there, yeah. 6 A. Why I was there? 7 BY MR. HYDE: 8 Q. Well, you've already explained that. I 9 understand that. But why was OSHA holding these 10 hearings? What is your understanding? 11 A. I thought I answered that question. To 12 allow different people to express their opinion on 13 the subject. 14 Q. So that OSHA could get all this 15 information and issue a regulation; is that right? 16 A. I'm not Mr. OSHA. I don't know what 17 they do with the information. 18 Q. Well, do you disagree with what I just 19 indicated? 20 A. I'm not agreeing or disagreeing with 21 that statement. 22 Q. When was the last time you read your 23 statement that you gave to OSHA relative to the 24 benzene standard? 25 A. I haven't-seen that statement for a long 57 1 time. 2 Q. Did you ever write OSHA and tell them 3 that your statement was wrong, if, indeed, it was 4 wrong? 5 A. I never said it was wrong. 6 Q. Well, if it's wrong today, did you ever 7 go back and say, "OSHA, I made a mistake; and my 8 statement that I gave you in 1985 was incorrect"? 9 Did you ever write them a letter? 10 MR. McCALL: Let me object to the 11 form of the question insofar as it 12 implies that there's something wrong 13 with what he did back in 1985, and I 14 object to that. 15 MS. ARRAS: I object, too. Are 16 you asking him a hypothetical question? 17 MR. HYDE: I just asked him a 18 question. 19 BY MR. HYDE: 20 Q. I'll rephrase it just to deal with the 21 defendants' attorneys. 22 As you think back about your paper, is 23 there anything that is now inaccurate about that 24 paper that you presented at the OSHA hearing on 25 benzene? . 58 1 MS. ARRAS: Okay. I'm going to 2 object to the form in the sense that I'm 3 not -- it's not clear in terms of the 4 foundation whether he presented a paper, 5 per se, or he presented testimony 6 regarding a paper that had been 7 previously published. I'm unclear as to 8 what exactly his testimony was. And, 9 so, I think you need to lay more of a 10 foundation. 11 BY MR. HYDE: 12 Q. Can you answer my question? 13 A. No. 14 Q. Okay. Did you testify at the OSHA 15 hearings associated with the benzene standard that 16 was issued sometime in 1986 or '87? 17 A. Yes, sir. 18 MR. McCALL: '86 or '87? 19 MR. HYDE: Yeah, whatever year it 20 was. 21 MR. McCALL: Are you talking about 22 the '85 23 MS. ARRAS: Are you talking about 24 the final report? 25 MR- McCALL: -- report? 59 1 BY MR. HYDE: 2 Q. The standard was '86 or '87; is that 3 right? 4 A. Yes, sir. 5 Q. Did you testify in 1985 with respect to 6 the proposed benzene standard? 7 A. I don't remember the exact time. It 8 must be within a year before the new standard was 9 set. 10 Q. Sometime in the mid-eighties; is that a 11 fair statement? 12 A. Very good. 13 Q. Okay. Sometime in the mid-eighties, did 14 you testify live in front of a hearing officer 15 relative to the proposed OSHA benzene standard? 16 A. Live as opposed to 17 Q. Just having a paper being read or a 18 paper 19 A. No. I was there in person. 20 Q. Where was this held at? 21 A. In Los Angeles. 22 Q. Did you also submit a paper for the 23 docket? 24 A. Not a paper. We called it a statement. 25 Q. A statement. But that statement was NELL MC CALLUM & ASSOCIATES. INC. 60 1 included in the docket for the benzene standard; 2 is that -3 A. That's correct. Yes, sir. 4 Q. Now, we have established that your paper 5 was part of the benefit docket for the benzene 6 standard and that you testified live in front of a 7 hearing officer sometime in the mid-1980's 8 relative to the OSHA benzene standard; am I 9 correct? 10 A. Can we use the terminology "-statement" 11 as opposed to "paper" 12 Q. Yes. 13 A. -- because "paper," to me, refers to a 14 publication in general. 15 Q. Statement. We'll use the term 16 "statement." That's fine. 17 A. Okay. Then I will agree with you. 18 Q. Okay. 19 A. Statement. 20 Q. Is there anything about that statement 21 that you gave to OSHA and the hearing officer 22 that's included in the docket of the benzene 23 standard that you now consider incorrect? 24 MS. ARRAS: I'm going to object 25 because the witness has testified that NELL MC CALLUM & ASSOCIATES, INC. 61 1 he's not familiar at this point in time 2 with the statement that he made five or 3 six years ago. He has indicated that he 4 has not reviewed that transcript and 5 that testimony at any point in recent 6 time and is not prepared from his 7 present memory to comment as to the 8 exact or precise wording with respect to 9 what he testified to at the time. 10 So, I feel that it's unfair to ask 11 him a question about something he 12 doesn't know or remember unless you have 13 with you a copy of the transcript and 14 can give him an opportunity to refresh 15 his recollection. 16 BY MR. HYDE: 17 Q. Can you answer my question, Dr. Wong? 18 A. She took the words out of my mouth. 19 Q. You're not prepared to discuss your 20 statement that you gave in 1985? 21 A. If you want to ask me questions on that, 22 I think it's only fair for me to look at what I 23 wrote six or seven years ago. 24 Q. Who was your key contact with OSHA when 25 you developed this Statement? NELL MC CAI_1_iiM 16 ASCAMATES. INC. 62 1 A. Dr. Infante. 2 Q. Did you and Dr. Infante have any 3 correspondence between you concerning your 4 statement? Did he send you a letter saying, 5 "Would you please testify on behalf of OSHA,' and 6 then you sent him a letter back saying, "Yes, I 7 will"? Was there any documents such as that? 8 A. There must have been some correspondence 9 similar to what you just described. 10 Q. Do you have any of that correspondence? 11 A. I don't think so. 12 Q. If that correspondence still existed and 13 you wanted to go look for it, where would you 14 begin to look for that? 15 A. One place I can think of would be what 16 we call the crone (phonetic) file at ENSR. I'm 17 sure they would have destroyed those -- you know, 18 correspondence files that old. Another place is 19 to ask Dr. Infante. He might have a better filing 20 system than I do. 21 Q. Did you do any other work for OSHA or 22 any other government projects during the time you 23 were working for ENSR Health Sciences or 24 Environmental Health Associates? 25 A. I was an external reviewer for a project NF11 Mr rALL11M X ASSOCIATES. INC. 63 1 at NIOSH, the National Institute for Occupational 2 Safety and Health. 3 Q. Was this on a continuing basis for those 4 nine years, or just certain periods? 5 A. I think that took place on and off over 6 a period of maybe like two or three years. 7 Q. As we sit here today, can you recall any 8 of the matters or studies that you reviewed for 9 NIOSH during the 1981 to 1990 time period? 10 A. There was one study that I Gust 11 mentioned that I was a consultant to at NIOSH on a 12 specific study. 13 Q. Okay. That's what I want to -- I was a 14 little bit confused. You indicated that you were 15 consulting for OSHA; but, in fact, you were 16 consulting for NIOSH? 17 A. No. No. No. No. 18 MR. McCALL: The government 19 MS. ARRAS: Government -- well, 20 NIOSH. 21 MR. McCALL: Just projects for the 22 government. 23 MR. HYDE: Well, yeah. But 24 earlier, you know, we were asking all 25 about his OSHA work. Now we went to 64 1 NIOSH. 2 BY MR. HYDE: 3 Q. And I'm trying to find out, was your 4 benzene work that you did as pertaining to 5 providing a statement to OSHA, was that on behalf 6 of NIOSH or was it on behalf of OSHA? 7 A. The consulting that's related to the 8 benzene hearing was through OSHA. I thought we 9 finished talking about that. You asked me the 10 question 11 Q. Right. 12 A. -- was there any other project or 13 consulting that I did for OSHA or other government 14 agencies. And I gave you another example of my 15 consulting with NIOSH. 16 Q. That's what I want to know about. The 17 other work with NIOSH, what did that entail? 18 A. I was an external reviewer for a project 19 that Dr. Rinsky was doing. And we had periodic 20 meetings to review the progress of the project. 21 Q. So, you've worked with Dr. Rinsky 22 before? 23 A. I've worked for him or worked with him? 24 Q. With him. 25 A. With him, yes, sir. 65 1 Q. And I suppose you find him to be a 2 competent epidemiologist? 3 MR. McCALL: Counsel, are you 4 . referring -- let me object to the form of 5 the question as being vague. Are you 6 referring to a specific study, or are 7 you talking about in general? 8 MR. HYDE: Just as an 9 epidemiologist. 10 BY MR. HYDE: . 11 Q. Is there anything about his work that 12 you feel is inaccurate? 13 A. I agree with him on some issues, and I 14 disagree with him on some other issues. 15 Q. Sometimes there is scientific 16 disagreements between you and Dr. Rinsky -- I mean 17 Mr. Rinsky; is that right? 18 A. I think he got a Ph.D. later on. 19 Q. Well, my question is 20 A. I don't know. You asked me a couple of 21 questions. I answer one of them. 22 Q. I first asked you, do you think he's a 23 competent epidemiologist? 24 MR. McCALL: And I think that's 25 been asked and answered. 66 1 MR. HYDE: Well, he never answered 2 it. 3 MS. ARRAS: He said he agreed with 4 him in 5 MR. McCALL: Some respects. 6 MS. ARRAS: -- some respects and 7 disagreed with him with others -8 MR. McCALL: On other issues. 9 MS. ARRAS: -- on other issues. 10 (DISCUSSION OFF THE RECORD) 11 BY MR. HYDE: 12 Q. Back to your work as it pertains to 13 NIOSH. Can you tell me the projects that you 14 performed with NIOSH? 15 A. They were doing a study, an 16 epidemiologic study of some Union Carbide 17 employees in West Virginia. And I was asked to 18 look at the study protocol, attend progress 19 meetings, so on. 20 Q. What were the chemicals or chemical 21 processes of interest as it pertains to the Union 22 Carbide West Virginia plant? 23 A. Oh, they have all kinds of chemicals 24 there. 25 Q. Well, were there any of specific NFI 1 MC CAI 1-11ROI A ASSOCIATES. INC. 67 1 interest? 2 A. I don't recall. 3 Q. Were there any disease processes or 4 physical conditions that were of significant 5 interest as it pertains to that study of Union 6 Carbide?. 7 A. It was a -- what we call a cohort study. 8 So, it's quite comprehensive in terms of health 9 end points. 10 Q. Is benzene a material that was used at 11 the Union Carbide West Virginia facility? 12 A. I'm pretty sure benzene was one of the 13 chemicals there. 14 Q. Was butadiene one of the chemicals that 15 was used at that facility? 16 A. I'm not sure about that. 17 Q. Was ethylene oxide a material that was 18 used at the Union Carbide West Virginia facility? 19 A. I think ethylene oxide was one of the 20 chemicals, yes. 21 Q. Was there an excess cancer indicated 22 from the epidemiological study of the Union 23 Carbide West Virginia facility? 24 A. I don't know the result of that study. 25 Q. Well, what exactly did you do-for NIOSH 68 1 as it pertains to that study? 2 A. As I said, I looked at the protocol; I 3 attended several progress meetings. 4 Q. Did you issue any reports or anything 5 such as that? 6 A. No. 7 Q. Was there any other work you did with 8 NIOSH between 1981 and 1990? 9 A. I can't think of any other. 10 MR. McCALL: Off the record. 11 (DISCUSSION OFF THE RECORD) 12 BY MR. HYDE: 13 Q. Who was your supervisor at the Biometric 14 Research Institute, Inc.? 15 A. My supervisor? 16 Q. Yes. Between 1980 and 1981, who did you 17 report to? 18 A. I reported to Frank Hurley, H-u-r-l-e-y. 19 Q. Where is Mr. Hurley now? 20 A. He's still at Biometric Research 21 Institute. 22 Q. Did the Biometric Research Institute do 23 any work with API or CMA? 24 A. I have no idea. 25 Q. Now, in .1.978 through 1980, it indicates 69 1 on your CV that you were director of epidemiology 2 with Tabershaw Occupational Medicine Associates; 3 is that correct? 4 A. Yes, sir. 5 Q. Did you work directly for Dr. Tabershaw? 6 A. Yes, sir. 7 Q. And were you involved in any 8 epidemiological studies of the chemical or 9 refining businesses in your role as director of 10 epidemiology at Tabershaw? . 11 A. Yes, sir. 12 Q. Okay. Would you tell me about those 13 studies of oil companies, refineries, or chemical 14 companies as it pertains to epidemiological 15 studies? 16 A. I was in charge of the benzene study 17 sponsored by the Chemical Manufacturers 18 Association at Tabershaw. 19 Q. How many companies were originally in 20 the Tabershaw CMA benzene study? 21 A. Six or seven. 22 Q. How many companies actually completed 23 the epidemiological study that was started? 24 A. I don't remember the number. 25 Q. Well, there were some companies that NELL MC CALLUM 3 ASSOCIATES, INC. 70 1 initially participated in the CMA benzene 2 epidemiological studies but did not finish the 3 study; is that right? 4 A. There was one, yes. 5 Q. What company was that? 6 A. Arco. 7 Q. Why didn't Arco do it? 8 A. The data was not adequate. 9 Q. Was there any other reasons? Did you 10 ever hear any other reasons why Arco pulled out 11 o f 12 A. That's the only reason I know. 13 Q. Who told you that? 14 A. No. We looked at some of their records 15 ourselves. 16 Q. There were no other companies that 17 pulled out of the study; is that correct? 18 A. No, sir. 19 Q. Again, you worked directly for 20 Dr. Tabershaw; is that right? 21 A. He was my boss. 22 Q. Did you know Dr. McClellan at the Gulf 23 Oil Company? 24 A. I might have met him once or twice at 25 meetings and so on, but I don't know him that NELL MC CALLUM 8 ASSOCIATES, INC. 71 1 well. 2 Q. Was Cities Service Corporation or any of 3 the other Cities Service companies, were they ever 4 involved in any of the benzene studies, 5 epidemiological studies conducted by Tabershaw? 6 A. Not that I know of. 7 Q. Back during the period 1978 through 8 1980, had you ever even heard of Cities Service 9 Refining Corporation or Cities Service 10 MR. McCALL: What was the date 11 again, Keith? 12 BY MR. HYDE: 13 Q. During the 1970's, early 1980's, had you 14 ever heard of Cities Service Refining Corporation? 15 A. I'm pretty sure I have heard about that 16 company. 17 Q. Did you ever meet with any physicians 18 from Cities Service Corporation, either in Tulsa 19 or in Louisiana? 20 A. I know someone who used to be there. 21 Q. Okay. Who is that? 22 A. Dr. Yates. 23 Q. Is that Dr. Veronica Yates? 24 A. Yes, sir. 25 Q. How do you know Dr. Veronica Yates? NEIL MC CALLUM PC ASSOCIATES, INC. 72 1 A. I must have met her at some meetings, or 2 she could have come to Dr. Tabershaw's office and 3 I met her there. 4 Q. Is that the extent of your knowledge of 5 Dr. Yates, that you met her on one or two 6 occasions, maybe at Dr. Tabershaw's office; is 7 that it? 8 A. Or at professional meetings. 9 Q. Have you and Dr. Yates ever corresponded 10 by letter or anything such as that? 11 A. No. 12 Q. Have you ever talked to Dr. Yates on the 13 telephone? 14 A. I don't think so. 15 Q. Have you ever talked about doing an 16 epidemiological study with Dr. Yates? 17 A. No. 18 Q. Did you ever suggest to Dr. Yates that 19 an epidemiological study be conducted of the 20 Cities Service facilities? 21 A. No. 22 Q. What kind of conversations did you have 23 with Dr. Veronica Yates? 24 A. Probably small talk, just, "Hi, how are 25 you doing?"- It was not any*substantial NELL MC CAI I VIM X ASSOCIATES, INC. 73 1 conversation. 2 Q. But you think Dr. Veronica Yates may 3 have visited Tabershaw Occupational Medicine 4 Associates in Rockville, Maryland; is that 5 correct? 6 A. I don't know for sure. So many people 7 walked through Dr. Tabershaw's office during those 8 years. 9 Q. You can't be any more definite than 10 that, I take it? 11 A. That's correct. 12 Q. Who were your co-worker epidemiologists 13 at Tabershaw? 14 A. Well, there was another epidemiologist 15 there, Dr. Steve Lamb. But he was not involved in 16 epidemiologic studies. He was in charge of the 17 Occupational Medicine Program at Tabershaw. 18 Q. Where is Dr. Steve Lamb now? 19 A. He's in Washington, D.C. 20 Q. What does he do there? 21 A. I think he has his own company. 22 Q. What's the name of that company? 23 A. I don't know. I don't remember. 24 Q. Why did you leave Dr. Tabershaw's 25 company in 1980? 74 1 A. I don't remember. 2 Q. 1977 through 1978 you were the manager 3 of the epidemiological department for Equitable 4 Environmental Health, Inc.; is that correct? 5 A. Yes, sir. 6 Q. What was your principal job duties as 7 the manager of the epidemiological department at 8 Equitable Environmental Health, Inc.? 9 A. Quite similar to what I did at 10 Tabershaw. I was in charge of several. 11 epidemiologic programs. 12 Q. What programs were being conducted at 13 Equitable Environmental Health during the time 14 period that you were there? 15 A. I can't recall the specific projects off 16 the top of my head. 17 Q. Well, were there any epidemiological 18 studies associated with benzene, butadiene, or 19 ethylene oxide conducted back during that time 20 period that you were associated with while you 21 were at Equitable Environmental Health, Inc.? 22 A. I'm pretty sure we did not study any of 23 those three chemicals that you just mentioned. 24 Q. What kind of work was being conducted at 25 Equitable Environmental Health? Was it NELL MC CALLUM s ASSOCIATES. INC. 75 1 pharmaceuticals or was it work for the chemical 2 industry? 3 A. Some of their largest projects were what 4 we call criteria documents, in the seventies. And 5 NIOSH funded those documents. And I participated 6 in some of the work in those documents. 7 Q. Which criteria documents did you 8 participate in? 9 A. I don't remember specific chemicals. 10 Q. Could it have been ethylene dibromide, 11 because I see that you wrote a paper around 1978 12 concerning ethylene dibromide. I was just 13 curious. 14 A. Right. That was one of the projects 15 that I worked on. But that was not part of the 16 criteria document. 17 Q. Your next position was assistant 18 professor, Division of Biostatistics and 19 Epidemiology at the Georgetown University School 20 of Medicine in Washington, D.C.; is that correct? 21 A. Yes, sir. 22 Q. What did you teach at that school? 23 A. Epidemiology and biostatistics. 24 Q. Who was the head of the department at 25 that time when you were assistant professor? 76 1 A. Well, I was in a division of 2 biostatistics and epidemiology. And Dr. Chiazze, 3 C-h-i-a-z-z-e, was, still is, the head of that 4 division. 5 Q. Why did you leave that position in 1978? 6 A. I don't remember. 7 Q. What were the principal responsibilities 8 you had as an assistant professor at Georgetown 9 University School of Medicine between 1975 and 10 1978? 11 A. I would say the major focus of my job 12 there was to teach. 13 Q. Did you have any other responsibilities? 14 A. Research. 15 Q. What kind of research did you do during 16 that three-year period while you were at 17 Georgetown? 18 A. We did some -- what we call 19 methodological research in terms of biostatistics 20 and epidemiology. There were a couple of projects 21 that Dr. Chiazze had at that time and I 22 participated in those studies. 23 Q. Are you a nosologist? 24 A. No, I'm not. 25 MR- HYDE: Off the record. NELL MC CALLUM a ASSOCIATES, INC. 77 1 (DISCUSSION OFF THE RECORD) 2 BY MR. HYDE: 3 Q. In 1975 through 1978, I see that you 4 were also director of the epidemiology and 5 statistics unit for the Lombardi Cancer Center; is 6 that correct? 7 A. At Georgetown, yes, sir. 8 Q. What were your duties in that position? 9 A. When I joined Georgetown, the Lombardi 10 Cancer Center just started. So, I provided some 11 input in terms of how to set up the data system to 12 keep track of patients and so on so that we can 13 generate statistical reports out and, to some 14 extent, use the data for any potential 15 epidemiologic analysis. 16 Q. So, in other words, you developed forms 17 for work history and identification of different 18 diseases by using some class of code or 19 classification numbers; and then using this 20 information, you would be able to do some type of 21 epidemiological study in the future; is that 22 right? 23 A. That was the general idea, yes. 24 Q. This was not as it pertains to an 25 epidemiological study of the Georgetown University NELL MC CALLUM a ASSOCIATES, INC. 78 1 workers, but more of the patients; is that 2 correct? 3 A. The patients who go to the hospital. 4 Q. Were there any studies that were 5 completed during that time period at the Lombardi 6 Cancer Center as it pertains to epidemiology of 7 cancer? 8 A. I don't think so. 9 Q. Has there ever been any reports issued 10 from Lombardi Cancer Center as it pertains to 11 cancer and epidemiology from 12 A. I did not keep track of them. I mean, 13 it's a huge place. 14 Q. Well, what happened to the program that 15 you set up back in 1975 through 1978 as it 16 pertains to epidemiology? 17 A. I did not set up a program, per se. I 18 was involved in the implementation of it. 19 Certainly I would not say I set up a program 20 there. And I really don't know what happened to 21 the Lombardi Cancer Center. 22 Q. Have you ever seen any studies from the 23 Lombardi Cancer Center relative to cancer 24 epidemiology? 25 A. Off the top of my head, I don't remember NELL MC CALLUM & ASSOCIATES, INC. 79 1 seeing any. 2 Q. And between 1972 to 1975 you were a 3 NIOSH fellow in industrial biostatistics; is that 4 correct? 5 A. At the University of Pittsburgh. 6 Q. Basically NIOSH was paying you to go to 7 school; is that what it amounts to, you to do 8 research? 9 A. There was some duties involved. 10 Q. What were your duties as a NIOSH fellow 11 in industrial biostatistics at the University of 12 Pittsburgh? 13 A. One thing I remember very clearly and 14 painfully was I spent three months in Washington, 15 D.C., copying all the employment records of 16 30-some thousand United Mine Workers Union members 17 by myself. 18 (DISCUSSION OFF THE RECORD) 19 BY MR. HYDE: 20 Q. Who were you reporting to or answering 21 to as a NIOSH fellow at the University of 22 Pittsburgh? 23 A. I would say Dr. Enterline. 24 MR. HYDE: We can go ahead and 25 take our lunch break. NELL MC CALLUM & ASSOCIATES, INC. 80 1 (LUNCH BREAK TAKEN AT 12:30 P.M.) 2 BY MR. HYDE: 3 Q. Dr. Wong, I would like to go over with 4 you some of the professional affiliations that you 5 have mentioned on Page 2 of your CV. In 6 particular, you indicate that you have an 7 affiliation with the American Medical Record 8 Association; is that correct? 9 A. Yeah, I was a member of that association 10 for some time. 11 Q. What was your membership status? Were 12 you a full member, an associate member, something 13 such as that? 14 A. I don't even remember whether they have 15 such a distinction. 16 Q. Did you belong to any committees or did 17 you hold any offices within that organization? 18 A. No. 19 Q. When were you last a member of the 20 organization? 21 A. Probably four or five years ago when 22 someone forgot to pay my membership fee. 23 Q. So, as it stands right now, you're not a 24 member of this organization? 25 A. I don't think so. 81 1 Q. Now, the American Public Health 2 Association, what is your membership status with 3 that organization? 4 A. I was a member for quite a long time. 5 Q. Were you a full member, an associate 6 member, or anything such -- what was your 7 membership status? 8 A. Just a regular member. 9 Q. Did you belong to any committees or did 10 you hold any offices within that association? 11 A. I belonged to a small section which is 12 mentioned later on, Caucus of Asian-American 13 Health Workers. That was part of that 14 association, as well. I was a member of that 15 caucus for about -- oh, a couple of years, I 16 believe. 17 Q. Are you a member of that organization 18 right now? 19 A. .No, I'm not. 20 Q. When was the last year that you were a 21 member of the American Public Health Association? 22 A. Probably several years ago. 23 Q. The American Statistical Association, 24 are you still a member of that organization? 25 A. Yes, sir. 82 1 Q. And what is your membership status. Is 2 it associate member, full member? 3 A. A full member I would say. 4 Q. Have you held any offices within that 5 organization? 6 A. No. 7 Q. Have you been on any committees within 8 that organization? 9 A. I don't recall. 10 Q. When is the last time you attended a 11 meeting of the American Statistical Association? 12 MR. McCALL: American? 13 MR. HYDE: Yes. 14 A. Many years ago. I don't remember. 15 BY MR. HYDE: 16 Q. What are the requirements to be a member 17 of the American Statistical Association? 18 A. I don't know the exact requirements. 19 Q. What is the purpose of the American 20 Statistical Association? What is it that this 21 organization does? 22 A. They put out a journal, a very good 23 journal, called "Journal of the American 24 Statistical Association." They have one big 25 meeting every year and other small meetings, as NELL MC CALLUM 8 ASSOCIATES, INC. 83 1 well. And they also sponsor some educational 2 programs, scholarships for students in statistics. 3 Q. Are you currently a member of the 4 Biometric Society? 5 A. Yes, sir. 6 Q. What is the Biometric Society? What's 7 the purpose of that group? 8 A. It's along the same line as the American 9 Statistical Association. The emphasis of that 10 society would be on statistics applied in the 11 biological or the medical disciplines. 12 Q. Have you held any offices within that 13 organization? 14 A. No. 15 Q. What is your membership status within 16 the Biometric Society? 17 A. I'm a regular member. 18 Q. When was the last time you attended a 19 meeting of the Biometric Society. 20 A. I don't think I have attended any 21 meetings. 22 Q. Do you get any kind of publication from 23 the Biometric Society? 24 A. Yes. They have a journal called 25 "Biometrics." And I receive that on a regular NELL MC CALLUM & ASSOCIATES, INC. 84 1 basis. 2 Q. When did you first become a member of 3 the Biometric Society? 4 A. 12, 15 years ago. 5 Q. Do they have an annual meeting or 6 anything such as that? 7 A. I think so. 8 Q. You don't recall ever attending any of 9 those meetings? 10 A. No. 11 Q. The Caucus of Asian American Health 12 Workers, I think you indicated was a part of the 13 American Statistical Association? 14 A. Right. 15 Q. What is the purpose of the Caucus of 16 Asian American Health Workers? What did that 17 group do? 18 A. Just like any other group. We felt an 19 urge to form our own little group and communicate 20 with each other within a much bigger organization, 21 American Public Health Association. 22 Q. Can you give me the names of any other 23 members of the Caucus of Asian American Health 24 Workers that you can recall? 25 A. I cannot. NELL MC CALLUM & ASSOCIATES, INC. 85 1 Q. Are you still a member of that caucus? 2 A. No, since I'm no longer a member of the 3 American Public Health Association. 4 Q. Are you still a member of the Human 5 Biology Council? 6 A. Yes, sir. 7 Q. I see that you're a fellow in that 8 organization? 9 A. Yes, sir. 10 Q. What does the designation "fellow" mean 11 as it pertains to the Human Biology Council? 12 A. On the average, they're older than the 13 regular members. I really don't know what 14 requirements they have. But I submitted my 15 application several years ago, and they give me 16 the "fellow" designation. 17 Q. How long have you been a member of the 18 Human Biology Council? 19 A. Five or six years. 20 Q. Are you on any committees or do you hold 21 any offices within that organization? 22 A. No. 23 Q. Have you ever attended a meeting at the 24 Human Biology Council? 25 A. No. NELL MC CALLUM & ASSOCIATES, INC. 86 1 Q. Do you receive any publications from the 2 Human Biology Council? 3 A Yes. 4 Q. What is the name of that publication? 5 A. "Human Biology." 6 Q. What type of subjects are discussed 7 within that publication? 8 A. From time to time they have papers on 9 demographies and on biology related to human 10 populations, some articles in between-biology and 11 medicine, some applications of statistics in 12 biology and that kind of thing. 13 Q. Describe for me your association and 14 affiliation with the New York Academy of Sciences. 15 A. I belonged to that for a few years. 16 Q. When did you first belong to that 17 organization? 18 A. Probably in the mid-eighties, 1980's. 19 Q. Are you still a member of that 20 organization? 21 22 Q. Do you know what year you quit being a 23 member of the New York Academy of Sciences? 24 A. Probably in the late eighties. 25 Q. Did you hold any offices or were you on 87 1 any committees within the New York Academy of 2 Sciences? 3 4 Q. Did you attend any meetings of the 5 New York Academy of Sciences? 6 A. I cannot recall. 7 Q. Are you presently a member of the 8 Washington Statistical Society? 9 A. No, not since I left the Washington, 10 D.C. area. 11 Q. What was your membership status with the 12 Washington Statistical Society when you were in 13 that organization? 14 A. I was a regular member. 15 Q. How long were you a member of the 16 Washington Statistical Society? 17 A. I guess four years or so when I lived in 18 the Washington, D.C. area. 19 Q. Did you ever attend any meetings of the 20 Washington Statistical Society? 21 A. There was a symposium sponsored by that 22 society in the late 1970's. I went to that 23 meeting. 24 Q. So, you recall going to one symposium of 25 the Washington Statistical Society; is that it? NELL MC CALLUM & ASSOCIATES, INC. 88 1 A. Right. 2 Q. Would you describe for me your 3 affiliation with the Society for Clinical Trials? 4 A. I was a member of the Industrial Society 5 when I was at Georgetown University and then also 6 when I was at Biometric Research Institute. 7 Q. I take it that you are no longer a 8 member of that society; is that correct? 9 A. No, because I'm not doing any clinical 10 trials. 11 Q. I'm sorry. That was a double negative. 12 Are you a member of the Society for Clinical 13 Trials? 14 A. No, I'm not. 15 Q. What was the last year you were a member 16 of the Society for Clinical Trials? 17 A. I would say in 1981. 18 Q. Did you ever attend any meetings of the 19 Society for Clinical Trials? 20 A. No. 21 Q. Did you hold any offices or were you on 22 any committees within the Society for Clinical 23 Trials? 24 A. No. 25 Q. Would you please describe for me your NELL MC CALLUM A ASSOCIATES, INC. 89 1 affiliation with the Society for Epidemiologic 2 Research? 3 A. I have been a member for about 12 years 4 in that society. 5 Q. What is your current membership status? 6 A. Full member. 7 Q. Have you ever been a member of any 8 committee or hold any office within the Society 9 for Epidemiologic Research? 10 A. No. 11 Q. Have you ever attended a meeting of the 12 Society for Epidemiologic Research? 13 A. I have attended several meetings 14 sponsored by that organization. 15 Q. When was the last meeting of the Society 16 for Epidemiologic Research that you attended? 17 A. I would say the last meeting was in 18 June, 1991. 19 Q. About how often on an annual basis have 20 you attended Society for Epidemiologic Research 21 meetings or functions? 22 A. They have one conference every year. 23 And I think within the last few years, I have been 24 going to those yearly conferences. 25 Q. Of the 12 years that you have been a NELL MC CALLUM 8 ASSOCIATES, INC. 90 1 member of the Society for Epidemiologic Research, 2 how many of the annual conferences have you 3 attended? 4 A. Maybe five or six times. 5 Q. And other than the yearly conferences, 6 have you attended any other meetings of the 7 Society for Epidemiological Research? 8 A. I think that's the only conference they 9 have on a yearly basis. 10 Q. Would you please describe for me your 11 affiliation with the Society for Occupational and 12 Environmental Health? 13 A. I'm a member of that society. 14 Q. How long have you been a member of that 15 organization? 16 A. I was a member for quite a few years in 17 the late 1970's and early eighties. And I joined 18 again maybe a year ago. 19 Q. So, you joined sometime in 1990 or '91? 20 A. Maybe early '91. 21 Q. So, you rejoined the Society for 22 Occupational and Environmental Health sometime in 23 early 1991? 24 A. Yeah. 25 Q. And your membership status is full 91 1 member? 2 A. Well, you keep using the terms "full 3 member" and "associate member." I'm not so sure 4 I mean, I have never looked at it that way. I 5 don't know whether they call it full member or 6 half member or quarter member. 7 Q. Well, the reason I ask is because in the 8 Human Biology Council, you're a fellow. And I'm 9 just curious as to what your membership status is 10 in all these organizations. And if that's unclear 11 whether you're a member or an associate member, 12 just give me your best answer. 13 A. I'm a regular member, as far as I know. 14 MR. McCALL: Or whether it exists, 15 huh? 16 THE WITNESS: I don't know whether 17 it exists. That's why I have a problem 18 with the question. 19 MR. McCALL: Yeah. 20 BY MR. HYDE: 21 Q. What is the purpose of the Society for 22 Occupational and Environmental Health? What's the 23 charge of this organization? 24 A. I think they have yearly conferences, 25 and they also have a journal. NELL MC CALLUM & ASSOCIATES. INC. 92 1 Q. When is the last time you attended a 2 yearly conference of the Society for Occupational 3 and Environmental Health? 4 A. The one that I can remember was eight or 5 nine years ago. 6 Q. When is the last time you attended any 7 meeting for the Society for Occupational and 8 Environmental Health? 9 A. Wait a minute. Is this the same 10 question or 11 Q. Well 12 A. What was the previous one? 13 Q. The previous one was: When was the last 14 time you attended the yearly conference of the 15 Society for Occupational and Environmental 16 Health? You said eight or nine years ago. Is 17 that right? 18 A. Right. 19 Q. My next question: When was the last 20 time you attended any meeting of the Society for 21 Occupational and Environmental Health? 22 A. That would be the same answer. 23 Q. Have you ever served on any committees 24 or held any offices within the Society for 25 Occupational and Environment Health? NELL MC CALLUM & ASSOCIATES. INC. 93 1 A. No. 2 Q. Would you please describe for me your 3 affiliation with the Society for Risk Analysis? 4 A. I'm a member in that organization. 5 Q. How long have you been a member of the 6 Society for Risk Analysis? 7 A. Three or four years. 8 Q. Do you hold any special membership 9 status for that organization? 10 A. My answer is no, and I don't know 11 whether they have special memberships. 12 Q. When was the last time you attended a 13 meeting of the Society for Risk Analysis? 14 A. I have never gone to any meetings 15 sponsored by this society. 16 Q. Have you ever held any offices or worked 17 on any committees within the Society for Risk 18 Analysis? 19 A. No. 20 Q. Are you still a consultant with the 21 Tabershaw Occupational Medicine Association, P.A.? 22 A. No, I don't think Tabershaw Occupational 23 Medicine Associates exists anymore. 24 Q. Are you still a consultant to the 25 Chemical Industry Institute of Toxicology? NELL MC CALLUM a ASSOCIATES. INC. 94 1 A. No. 2 Q. Are you presently a consultant with 3 Velsicol Chemical Corporation? 4 A. No. 5 Q. Are you presently a consultant to 6 Professional Consultants and Occupational Health, 7 Inc.? 8 A. No. 9 Q. Are you presently a consultant with 10 Union Carbide Corporation? 11 A. No. 12 Q. Are you presently a consultant with 13 Health Industry Manufacturers Association? 14 A. No. 15 Q. Are you presently a consultant to the 16 American Paper Institute of National Forest 17 Product Association? 18 A. No. 19 Q. Describe for me the nature of your 20 consulting work as it pertained to the Union 21 Carbide Corporation. 22 MS. ARRAS: You mean past tense 23 MR. HYDE: Yes. 24 MS. ARRAS: -- pertained to? 25 A. Over the years I worked on a-number-of NELL MC CALLUM & ASSOCIATES, INC. 95 1 projects for them. Some examples would be 2 reviewing some studies that they had finished, 3 looked at their computerized employee health 4 data. That's pretty much the nature of my work 5 with them. 6 BY MR. HYDE: 7 Q. When was the last time you did any 8 consulting work with Union Carbide Corporation? 9 A. Three or four years ago maybe. 10 Q. Describe for me the nature of your 11 consulting work with Velsicol Chemical Corporation 12 when you were a -consultant with that group. 13 A. I think the nature of the work that I 14 did for Velsicol would be similar to what I 15 described for Union Carbide. 16 Q. Did your work center around chlorodane 17 and those type of materials? 18 A. No, that -- we never worked on that 19 chemical. 20 Q. Did you work with Dr. Carl Zentz as it 21 concerns any of your work with Velsicol Chemical? 22 A. No. 23 Q. Describe for me the nature of your 24 consulting work with the Chemical Industry 25 Institute of Toxicology? NELL MC CALLUM a ASSOCIATES, INC. 96 1 A. I was asked to work with their chief 2 epidemiologist many years ago on some statistical 3 programs that we can use in epidemiologic research. 4 Q. Is there anything else you did with the 5 Chemical Industry Institute of Toxicology other 6 than that work? 7 A. No. 8 Q. Describe for me your consulting work 9 relative to the psychiatry department of the 10 Fairfax Hospital. 11 A. I was working with a psychiatrist who 12 was on the staff of Fairfax Hospital, but who was 13 also a faculty member at Georgetown. And we wrote 14 a couple of papers based on some psychiatric data 15 that he had from Fairfax Hospital. 16 Q. I may have overlooked it, but you 17 haven't placed in here consultant to Mobil Oil 18 Corporation. Haven't you before been a consultant 19 to that company? 20 A. Our relationship, meaning the 21 relationship we had at ENSR Health Sciences, or, 22 you know, Medical Health Associates, was not so 23 much in terms of consulting, but a lot of 24 projects. We had two or three studies, not 25 consulting activity, with Mobil. NELL MC CALLUM 8 ASSOCIATES, INC. 97 1 Q. What is the nature of your consulting 2 work as it concerns the Motor Vehicle 3 Manufacturers Association? 4 A. That must have been when I was at 5 Georgetown. Dr. Chiazze, my boss, former boss at 6 Georgetown, he did a lot of work for Motor Vehicle 7 Manufacturers Association. And I was asked to 8 participate in some of those projects. 9 Q. Do any of those studies or work stick 10 out right now as to what it was you were doing 11 with that organization? 12 A. I think we might have published a paper 13 or two as a result of our work. And that should 14 be in my CV (reviewing document). 15 Q. Did it pop out? 16 A. No, I didn't see that, either. I 17 thought we wrote a couple of reports. I don't 18 know whether Dr. Chaizze submit that for 19 publication. 20 Q. I see also that you were a consultant 21 for the Organization Resource Counselors; is that 22 correct? 23 A. Right. 24 Q. What time period were you a consultant 25 for that organization? NELL MC CALLUM a ASSOCIATES. INC. 98 1 A. That was when I was at Georgetown. So, 2 it's got to be between '75 and '78. 3 Q. What type of consulting work did you do 4 with the Organization Resource Counselors, Inc.? 5 A. The ORC had a contract to do some 6 studies, and they hired a group at Georgetown to 7 be their chemical consultants. And I was one of 8 them. 9 Q. Did you have your own contract as a 10 consultant with ORC, or was your work-as a 11 consultant consumed within a group from 12 Georgetown? How was that 13 A. It was an agreement between ORC and 14 Georgetown University. 15 Q. So, it was not a specific agreement 16 between you, personally, and ORC? 17 A. No. 18 Q. Tell the jury who makes up the ORC, as 19 far as the member companies. 20 A. I don't know. 21 Q. Isn't it true that the ORC is primarily 22 a group of oil and chemical companies? 23 A. I don't know. 24 Q. Isn't it also true that the ORC is -- one 25 of their -primary purposes is to affect regulations 99 1 and litigation coming from Washington, D.C.? 2 A. I don't know. 3 Q. In there you also indicate that you were 4 a consultant with OSHA on the benzene standard 5 hearing. Again, your consulting work was only 6 limited to the mid-1980's for that one standard; 7 is that right? 8 A. Yes, sir. 9 Q. And that was a matter of a couple of 10 days' worth of work? 11 A. Several days. 12 Q. Several. And as it pertains to your 13 consulting work with the National Institute for 14 Occupational Safety and Health, again, you're 15 talking several days or several weeks' worth of 16 work; is that correct? 17 A. No, I would say two to three days, 18 whenever we had a meeting. And that happened 19 several times over a period of two or three years. 20 Q. You indicate you were a member of the 21 Site Visit Team, Smoking and Health Program, 22 National Cancer Institute. What did you do as a 23 member of that group? 24 A. One site visit that I remember 25 specifically was to .the American Health Foundation 100 1 in New York City. At that time they had a 2 continuing contract from the National Cancer 3 Institute to do different kinds of research 4 projects on the health effects of smoking. And I 5 was asked by NCI, the National Cancer Institute, 6 to review the proposal, to listen to the 7 presentation in New York City, and basically, you 8 know, make a recommendation to NCR whether to fund 9 activity or not. 10 Q. Have you ever been employed .by any 11 tobacco industry as a consultant? 12 A. No. 13 MR. McCALL: Your answer was 14 "no"? 15 THE WITNESS: "No." 16 BY MR. HYDE: 17 Q. Did you do anything else other than 18 visit the American Health Foundation one time as 19 it pertained to your work on the Smoking and 20 Health Program, Site Visit Team, for the National 21 Cancer Institute? 22 A. They sent me quite a few proposals 23 asking for research money, but that was the only 24 site visit. 25 Q. The next-entry on your CV indicates a 101 1 proposal reviewer for the Smoking and Health 2 Program, National Cancer Institute. What were you 3 doing for that group? 4 A. Where are you now, in the middle of the 5 page? 6 Q. Page 4, proposal reviewer. 7 A. Right. 8 Q. And my question, what were you doing as 9 a proposal reviewer for the Smoking and Health 10 Program, National Cancer Institute? 11 A. Basically, as I say, you know, looked at 12 the proposals, asked some questions, and make a 13 recommendation to NCI regarding whether they 14 should fund the study or not. 15 Q. And up on the third from the top, it 16 says "grant application reviewer," Safety and 17 Occupational Health Study Section, National 18 Institute of Health. What were you doing as a 19 grant application reviewer? 20 A. I was one of the committee members for 21 NIH. They divide their review process into 22 different sections. And I was a committee member 23 for that Safety and Occupational Health Study 24 Section. Basically, again, we looked at grant 25 applications from universities or other private NELL MC CALLUM & ASSOCIATES, INC. 102 1 research organizations. 2 Q. How long were you a grant application 3 reviewer for the National Institute of Health? 4 A. A year or two. 5 Q. What was the time period? 6 A. Late eighties. 7 Q. As it concerns your work with the 8 National Cancer Institute, what was the respective 9 time frame for your work with that organization? 10 A. Either late seventies or early 11 eighties. 12 Q. Have you ever consulted with any labor 13 union? In other words, has any labor union ever 14 employed you to do any type of epidemiological 15 work? 16 A. Well, as I mentioned earlier, when I was 17 a student at the university, I participated in 18 that United Mine Workers Union study. So, that's 19 one that I can think of. There was another one 20 that 21 MS. ARRAS: Dr. Wong, which 22 university and at what point in time? 23 THE WITNESS: The University of 24 Pittsburgh, '72 to '75. 25 NELL MC CALLUM & ASSOCIATES, INC. 103 1 BY MR. HYDE: 2 Q. But your participation in that study was 3 to Xerox union records; is that right? 4 A. No. I only told you about the less 5 glamorous part of that. I also worked on the 6 statistical part and so on. In fact, I was going 7 to write my thesis based on that data. Otherwise, 8 I would not have gone down to Washington for three 9 months. But it turns out that there was some 10 holdup and I could not use the data in time for my 11 thesis. And I used something else instead. 12 I also worked on another project that 13 the union also participated in the study. I'm 14 trying to find the publication. 15 Publication 37. Okay. We did a study 16 in conjuction with a union to study members of 17 what they called the Heavy Construction Equipment 18 Operators Union, to study the mortality of their 19 members. 20 Q. What were your findings from that study? 21 A. I don't remember anything outstanding. 22 I just don't recall the detailed results, but 23 certainly not something that sticks in my mind. 24 Q. Do you know C.P. Wen? 25 A. Yes, I do. 104 1 Q. On Publication 31, what was the extent 2 of your participation as it concerns Publication 3 No. 31? 4 A. When I was employed by Tabershaw, we did 5 a study for -- I guess at that time the company 6 was called Gulf, Gulf Oil Company -- of the 7 employees at Port Arthur refinery. And we wrote a 8 report after we finished the study. Based on that 9 data, plus some other data that they have 10 in-house -- "in-house" meaning within the company 11 the people at Gulf wrote a report combining some 12 of the results that we had in our epidemiologic 13 study that I finished at Tabershaw. So, it was a 14 joint paper. 15 Q. You actually participated in writing 16 that paper? 17 A. Not the manuscript, per se; but I 18 believe some of the writing in that paper was 19 taken out from the report that I -- that we 20 submitted at Tabershaw. 21 THE REPORTER: Let me change this 22 paper. 23 (DISCUSSION OFF THE RECORD) 24 BY MR. HYDE: 25 Q. On Publication No. 29, would you tell me 105 1 about your participation in that study and 2 publication? 3 A. I think 29 and 31 are more or less the 4 same publication. 29 was presented at a symposium 5 and published as part of the proceedings of that 6 symposium. And 31 was a formal paper published in 7 the journal. 8 Q. On Publication No. 36, what was your 9 participation in that study and publication? 10 A. Again, that paper was based on the study 11 or on the data that we created for Gulf while I 12 was at Tabershaw. And, subsequently, they analyzed 13 the data. That's what we had done, and we wrote a 14 paper together. 15 Q. You actually helped write that paper? 16 A. Part of it, yes. 17 Q. On No. 72, Publication No. 72, you wrote 18 an article "Epidemiology and Toxic Torts," Texas 19 Bar Journal. What caused you to write that 20 particular article? 21 A. Scientists always want to publish. 22 Q. What was the basic focus of that 23 particular article? 24 A. Basically educate lawyers on some basic 25 concepts of epidemiology. 106 1 Q. To an extent, would that be kind of a 2 marketing tool for your business, this particular 3 presentation? 4 A. I resent that implication. I don't need 5 any marketing. 6 Q. No. 74, Publication 7 A. That's all the questions you have on 72? 8 MR. HYDE: Off the record. 9 (DISCUSSION OFF THE RECORD) 10 BY MR. HYDE: 11 Q. Publication No. 74, an article 12 concerning "Exposure to Ethylene Oxide and 13 Hematopoietic Cancer," you indicate is to appear 14 in the New England Journal of Medicine; is that 15 correct? 16 A. Well, actually it has appeared. It was 17 published in the October issue. And I have 18 included that in the package that I handed over to 19 you this morning. 20 Q. I take it that you found no increased 21 incidence of hematopoietic cancer for workers 22 exposed to ethylene oxide; is that correct? 23 A. Why do you say that? 24 Q. Am I right? 25 A. There was an increase of non-Hodgkin's 107 1 lymphoma among the male workers but not the among 2 female workers. 3 Q. When you say 'increased,' how elevated 4 was the non-Hodgkin's lymphoma in male workers? 5 A. I don't remember the numbers. Are you 6 asking me for numbers specifically? 7 Q: Well, just generally. 8 A. There was an increase statistically 9 significant, but I don't remember the exact 10 numbers. 11 MR. HYDE: Off the record. 12 (DISCUSSION OFF THE RECORD) 13 BY MR. HYDE: 14 Q. Dr. Wong, as it concerns the level of 15 ethylene oxide exposure to the workers listed in 16 Publication No. 74, what was the range of ethylene 17 oxide exposure to those workers? 18 A. I better look at the report before I 19 answer your question. I just don't remember that. 20 Q. On No. 76 it indicates that you 21 conducted a nested case-control study of lung 22 cancer with a couple of other authors. Would you 23 define what a nested case-control study i.s? 24 A. Well, let's first talk about what a 25 case=control study is. 108 1 Q. Okay. 2 A. A case-control study is one in which you 3 compare the exposure history or employment history 4 of cases of patients with a certain disease that 5 you want to study to expose the histories or 6 employment histories of people without such 7 disease but otherwise comparable. We call those 8 people control. So, that would be a case-control 9 study. 10 A nested case-control study .is one that 11 you select both your cases and controls within a 12 cohort. A cohort is a group of people with some 13 common exposure, such as employees of a certain 14 company. 15 Q. What is the value of performing a nested 16 case-control study? 17 A. Can you be a little more specific? 18 MR. McCALL: As compared to what, 19 Keith? 20 BY MR. HYDE: 21 Q. Why do you conduct a nested case-control 22 study? 23 A. Using Publication 76 as an example, when 24 we started that project at that time, there was 25 several cohort studies in the literature reporting 109 1 that there was a small increase of lung cancer 2 among workers exposed to man-made fiber or slag 3 wool fibers. But in those studies, in cohort 4 studies, usually we do not have information on 5 smoking. And cigarette smoking is certainly a j 6 major confounder in any lung cancer study. 7 And at the same time, we did not -- not 8 "we" -- in those studies, those cohort studies 9 did not have any information on contamination such 10 as asbestos or arcenic in some of the man-made 11 fiber. 12 On the other hand, if you use a 13 case-control study, the numbers of those subjects 14 would be much smaller. With a smaller number, we 15 can go out and collect information on smoking, on 16 lifestyle, and other confounding exposure. 17 THE REPORTER: "Confounding"? 18 THE WITNESS: Right. 19 BY MR. HYDE: 20 Q. So, really, a nested case-control study 21 allows you to conduct further analysis and more 22 specific analysis when the study -- when the 23 cohort study needs such an analysis; is that 24 right? 25 A. That's true. NELL MC CALLUM & ASSOCIATES, INC. 110 1 Q. So, nested case-control studies 2 certainly have a value; and sometimes they're very 3 valuable studies; would you agree to that? 4 A. If they are properly done, yes. 5 Q. Are you familiar with the nested 6 case-control study conducted by Matanoski and 7 others relative to butadiene? 8 A. I heard they conducted case-control 9 analysis of the same data subsequent to the 10 cohort -- the publication of the cohort study. I 11 don't think that has been published, the 12 case-control analysis. 13 Q. You're not familiar with any nested 14 case-control study by Matanoski associated with 15 the chemical butadiene; is that correct? 16 A. I have not seen a publication. 17 Q. When we get to Publication 74, I may 18 have some questions on that. You have indicated 19 that Publication No. 74 is included in the 20 documents that you've utilized as a basis for your 21 opinion; is that correct? 22 A. Yes, sir. 23 Q. Were you told not to write a report as 24 it relates to this case? 25 A. I was not told either way. NELL MC CALLUM b ASSOCIATES. INC. 111 1 Q. Do you normally write a report when 2 attorneys ask you to provide expert opinions? 3 A. Only if they ask me. 4 Q. Have you talked with any of the other 5 defendant experts in this case other than Ben 6 Thomas, Dr. Wallerstein, Dr. Irons, and, I believe, 7 Dr. Bickers? Have you talked with any other 8 experts in this matter? 9 A. At that meeting, at that November 10 meeting. 11 Q. Well, what I'm asking you -- I think the 12 defendants have some other experts, don't you, 13 other than -- and my question is: Have you talked 14 to any of those other experts? 15 A. No. 16 Q. How long have you known Dr. Wallerstein? 17 A. The first time I heard about him was 18 through a case that I worked on, the Hanson versus 19 Chevron case. He was also an expert in that case, 20 but I didn't talk to him then. 21 Q. So, you met Dr. Wallerstein through 22 other litigation; is that correct? 23 A. No, I did not meet him. I met him for 24 the first time in November. 25 Q. And you do know Dr. Irons; isn't that NELL MC CALLUM de ASSOCIATES, INC. 112 1 correct? 2 A. Yes, sir. 3 Q. How long have you known Dr. Irons? 4 A. Three years. 5 Q. Did you first meet Dr. Irons in the 6 Skeen versus Monsanto case? 7 A. Yes, sir. 8 Q. Before that you had not met Dr. Irons; 9 is that right? 10 A. No. _ 11 Let me just clarify that. I have seen 12 his name before, but not know him, per se. 13 Q. Did you tell Ms. Arras about Dr. Irons 14 and his expertise in toxicology? 15 MS. ARRAS: I am going to object 16 to the form of the question. 17 BY MR. HYDE: 18 Q. You may answer the question. 19 A. She may have asked me some questions 20 about Richard Irons. 21 Q. Other than the meeting that was held, I 22 believe November 21st, have you talked with 23 Dr. Irons relative to this lawsuit? 24 . A. No. 25 Q. Have you talked to Dr. Thomas about this NELL MC CALLUM & ASSOCIATES, tNC. 113 1 lawsuit, other than on November 21st? 2 A. No. 3 Q. Other than the meeting on November 21st, 4 have you talked with Dr. Wallerstein concerning 5 this lawsuit? 6 A. No. 7 Q. Do you recall a meeting at John Tyler's 8 law offices in 1989 in which the Skeen case was 9 discussed? 10 A. You were there, weren't you? 11 Q. No. I was asking you a question. 12 MS. ARRAS: I am going to object 13 as being vague. I mean, that's kind a 14 non-specific question. 15 BY MR. HYDE: 16 Q. Were you at a meeting in John Tyler's 17 office in Houston, Texas, sometime in 1989 where 18 the Skeen case was discussed? 19 A. I was at a meeting. I don't know 20 whether that was the only subject of the meeting. 21 Q. Did you receive any kind of handouts or 22 information that was passed out at that meeting? 23 A. No. 24 Q Did you meet with Dr. Irons or did you 25 talk with Dr. Irons when that meeting was held in NELL MC CALLUM a ASSOCIATES. INC. 114 1 John Tyler's office in 1989? 2 A. I don't remember talking to him about 3 that. 4 Q. Who paid your fee for attending that 5 meeting in John Tyler's office in 1989 relative to 6 discussing Skeen and benzene in general? Did 7 John Tyler 8 MS. ARRAS: I am going to object. 9 There is no foundation laid that benzene 10 was discussed at the meeting. 11 BY MR. HYDE: 12 Q. Dr. Wong, was benzene discussed at the 13 meeting at John Tyler's office in Houston, Texas, 14 in that meeting that was held in 1989? 15 A. I believe we talked about benzene. 16 Q. My question was, did the Chemical 17 Manufacturers Association pay you to attend that 18 meeting, or did John Tyler pay you to attend that 19 meeting? 20 A. I know for sure CMA did not pay for me 21 to go to that meeting. You ask a very good 22 question. In fact, I don't know. I don't 23 remember anybody paying me to go down there. 24 Q. Were you reimbursed for your expenses 25 for attending-that meeting? NELL MC CALLUM 8 ASSOCIATES, INC. 115 1 A. I don't even remember that. It may have 2 been an occasion that I was down in the Houston 3 area and they asked me to go to the meeting. 4 Q. Have you added any more employees to 5 your Applied Health Sciences, or are you still the 6 only employee? 7 A. Since the last time I talked to you 8 Q. Yes. 9 A. -- no. 10 Q. You're still the only employee; is that 11 correct? 12 A. Yes. 13 MR. McCALL: You're talking about 14 since the Wing deposition? 15 MR. HYDE: Yes, since the Wing 16 deposition 17 A. I said "no." 18 BY MR. HYDE: 19 Q. You're still the only employee? 20 A. Right. 21 MS. ARRAS: You're the only 22 full-time employee? 23 THE WITNESS: Right. 24 BY MR. HYDE: 25 Q. As we sit here today, Applied-Health NELL MC CALLUM & ASSOCIATES, INC. 116 1 Sciences, are they performing any work for the 2 API? 3 A. I have a contract with ENSR Health 4 Sciences to finish a study that I was working on 5 for API for the last five, six years when I was at 6 ENSR. 7 Q. That was the transportation of petroleum 8 products, that EPI study associated with those 9 individuals? 10 A. The study of what we call distribution 11 workers. 12 Q. And has that study been released yet? 13 A. We submitted a draft report to API in 14 October. And we have received some comments back, 15 and I'm in the process of revising the report. 16 Q. Are you relying upon that study 17 involving the distribution workers, funded by the 18 API, in any way relative to the opinions you have 19 formed in this lawsuit? 20 A. Depends on whether there is the need to 21 rely on that study, depends on the questions that 22 I'm going to be asked. 23 Q. Well, obviously, you've formed opinions 24 about causation and epidemiology relative to the 25 four plaintiffs; is that correct? NELL MC CALLUM & ASSOCIATES, INC. 117 1 A. Yes, sir. 2 Q. And my question is: Has the 3 distribution workers API study in any way formed a 4 basis of your opinions relative to the four 5 plaintiffs in this lawsuit? 6 A. At this point, no. 7 Q. Do you have any other contracts or work 8 with the API? 9 A. No. 10 Q. Are you presently doing any .work with 11 the Chemical Manufacturers Association? 12 A. No. 13 Q. Has Applied Health Sciences done any 14 work for the CMA since the formation of Applied 15 Health Sciences? 16 A. No. 17 Q. Is Applied Health Sciences presently 18 doing any work for any of the oil and chemical 19 companies? 20 MR. McCALL: Keith, let me ask you 21 to clarify that a little bit more. I 22 mean 23 MR. HYDE: No problem. 24 MR. McCALL: -- by "doing any 25 work" -HELL MC CALLUM 8 ASSOCIATES. INC. 118 1 BY MR. HYDE: 2 Q. Any kind of epidemiological work or any 3 kind of studies that your business conducts which, 4 I believe, includes risk analysis; is that right? 5 You do do risk analysis? 6 A. Depends on how you define "risk 7 analysis." How do you define "risk analysis"? 8 Q. I think you have indicated in the Wing 9 deposition that your company does do some type of 10 risk analysis. 11 A. Well, to me some of the epidemiology 12 work is risk analysis. 13 Q. Whatever that risk analysis work is, are 14 you doing any risk analysis work or 15 epidemiological work for any of the oil and 16 chemical companies? 17 A. Again, there are a couple of things that 18 I was working on when I was at ENSR Health 19 Sciences, and I continued to, you know, work on 20 those projects. 21 Q. Through 22 A. ENSR Health Sciences. 23 Q. What are those projects? 24 A. One example is Chevron is in the process 25 of updating a number of projects that I started NELL MC CALLUM do ASSOCIATES. INC. 119 1 many years ago. And they asked me to look at some 2 of the analyses, look at the draft reports and so 3 on. 4 Q. Any other projects involving oil or 5 chemical companies that Applied Health Sciences is 6 presently doing? 7 A. Working with Mobil, reviewing some of 8 their internal studies and so on. 9 Q. Any others? 10 A. Those are the ones I can think of. 11 Q. Has Applied Health Sciences, or is 12 Applied Health Sciences doing any work for the 13 EPA, OSHA, or NIOSH? 14 A. No. 15 Q. Is Applied Health Sciences doing any 16 work for Cal-OSHA? 17 A. No. 18 Q. Is Applied Health Sciences presently 19 or in the past, has Applied Health Sciences worked 20 with any agency of any Federal, state, or local 21 government as it concerns epidemiological work? 22 A. No. 23 Q. Is Applied Health Sciences doing any 24 work for IARC? 2.5 A. I was contacted by someone in IARC. NELL MC CALLUM a ASSOCIATES, INC. 120 1 They asked me whether I would be interested in 2 working -- let me take a look at my CV. 3 IARC is thinking of doing a major study 4 on lead. And I have published some articles on 5 that. And they asked me whether I would be 6 interested in working with them, sharing the data 7 and so on. Still in the discussion stage. 8 MS. ARRAS: That was with whom? 9 THE WITNESS: International Agency 10 for Research on Cancer. 11 MS. ARRAS: Okay. 12 BY MR. HYDE: 13 Q. Are you doing any other work with IARC 14 other than the preliminary discussions on lead? 15 A. No. 16 Q. Are you presently doing any work for any 17 insurance companies? And this is Applied Health 18 Sciences. 19 A. Insurance companies? 20 Q. Yes. 21 A. No. I mean 22 MR. McCALL: Are you talking 23 about 24 BY MR. HYDE: 25 Q. Non-litigation work for insurance NELL MC CALLUM a ASSOCIATES, INC. 121 1 companies, is Applied Health Sciences doing that 2 kind of work? 3 A. No. 4 Q. Presently how does Applied Health 5 Sciences advertise? How does your business 6 advertise? 7 A. We don't advertise. 8 MS. ARRAS: Objection. No 9 foundation. 10 BY MR. HYDE: _ 11 Q. Does Applied Health Sciences advertise? 12 A. It does not. 13 Q. You have no pamphlets or brochures? 14 A. We do not. 15 Q. You send out no letters to potential 16 clients explaining your services? 17 A. We don't. When people call us up, we 18 may tell them what we do. But we don't make cold 19 calls, if that's what you asked., 20 MR. HYDE: Off the record. 21 (DISCUSSION OFF THE RECORD) 22 BY MR. HYDE: 23 Q. Dr. Wong, I have already looked at your 24 contract; and I believe you're charging Ms. Arras 25 $280 an hour; is that -- well; Ms. Arras' client NELL MC CALLUM 9 ASSOCIATES, 1NC. 122 1 $280 an hour; is that right? 2 A. Yes, sir. 3 Q. And that's for deposition time, as well 4 as research time? 5 A. Yes, sir. 6 Q. The $280 an hour, is your fee different 7 for non-litigation matters versus litigation 8 matters? 9 A. No, there is no difference. 10 Q. And, obviously, you have a contract with 11 Ms. Arras' law firm 12 (DISCUSSION OFF THE RECORD) 13 BY MR. HYDE: 14 Q. Dr. Wong, what is your understanding as 15 to what the other attorneys will be paying you? 16 Is it your understanding that they're going to be 17 paying you a portion of your fees relative to this 18 lawsuit? 19 A. I don't know that arrangement. 20 Q. What were your final charges as it 21 concerns the Carter case, which was in Virginia? 22 Do you remember that? 23 A. No, I don't. 24 Q. Do you have a ball-park figure, 25 approximately how much you charged 'in the Carter 123 1 case? 2 A. Some of the work I did on those cases 3 was done when I was at ENSR. After I left ENSR 4 and started at Applied Health Sciences, I would 5 say about $20,000 or so. 6 Q. And as it concerns the Wing case, what 7 are your charges to-date in that matter? 8 A. I think the number is still about the 9 same as I gave you last time at the deposition for 10 the Wing case. 11 Q. Now, as it concerns other testimony that 12 you have given -- not in deposition or trials, but 13 in hearings in front of hearing officers or in 14 front of regulatory agencies or legislatures or 15 Senates or anything such as that, can you tell me 16 what testimony you have given under those 17 situations? In other words, can you tell me about 18 all the times you've ever testified in front of 19 any Senate sub-committee or anything such as that? 20 MS. ARRAS: I'm going to object to 21 the compoundness of the question. 22 There's about four questions in there. 23 What do you want him -- I think 24 you need to lay a foundation. I'm going 25 to object to a lack of foundation and NELL MC CALLUM & ASSOCIATES. INC. 124 1 object to the compoundness 2 MR. HYDE: I just thought it would 3 be a little bit easier if I phrased it 4 that way. 5 BY MR. HYDE: 6 Q. Have you ever testified in front of any 7 Senate sub-committee 8 A. No. 9 Q. -- national? 10 A. No. 11 Q. Have you ever testified in front of any 12 House of Representatives sub-committee? 13 A. No. 14 Q. Have you ever testified in front of any 15 state Senate sub-committee of any state? 16 A. No. 17 Q. You were never involved in any of the 18 Proposition 65 hearings out in California; is that 19 correct? 20 A. No. 21 Q. Did you provide any comments relative to 22 Proposition 65 out here in California? 23 A. No. 24 Q. Have you ever testified in front of any 25 state legislature sub-committee? NELL MC CALLUM 8 ASSOCIATES. INC. 125 1 A. No. 2 Q. Have you ever testified in front of any 3 state agency, such as Cal-OSHA or any state 4 environmental agency within any state? 5 A. No. 6 Q. Have you ever testified under oath in 7 front of any county government? 8 A. No. 9 Q. Have you ever testified in front of any 10 proceeding involving any city government, 11 including cities, municipalities, even parishes, I 12 suppose? 13 MR. McCALL: Parishes are 14 counties. 15 MR. HYDE: Yeah, I understand 16 that. But I didn't put them as 17 counties. 18 A. No. 19 BY MR. HYDE: 20 Q. And you have testified in an OSHA 21 hearing before; that's correct, we've already 22 discussed that? 23 A. Yes, sir. 24 Q. Is that the only OSHA hearing you've 25 ever testified in .at that time? 126 1 A. No. There was another one that I 2 testified on behalf of the American Paper 3 Institute. 4 Q. That involved the wood dust? 5 A. Yes, sir. 6 Q. And you testified on behalf of industry; 7 is that correct? 8 A. For the American Paper Institute. 9 Q. Did the American Paper Institute oppose 10 the wood dust standard suggested by OSHA? 11 A. I don't know whether they opposed it or 12 not. 13 Q. Well, what was the subject of your 14 testimony? 15 A. My focus was to go over some of the 16 findings on my opinion on the epidemiologic 17 studies of employees in that industry. 18 MR. HYDE: James, can you read 19 that last answer back, please? 20 (THE PENDING ANSWER WAS READ) 21 BY MR. HYDE: 22 Q. What were your opinions that you 23 expressed in front of OSHA concerning the proposed 24 standard on wood dust? 25 A. I don't remember exactly what I -- what NELL PAC CALLUM 9 ASSOCIATES, INC. 127 1 my statement was. 2 Q. Since November in the Wing deposition, 3 have you given any other depositions relative to 4 any type of case? 5 A. No. You were the last one. You asked 6 me some tough questions. 7 Q. Are you presently retained as an expert 8 in any other cases other than the Wing case and 9 this Ellis case? 10 MS. ARRAS: Do you mean for 11 anybody in the world? 12 MR. HYDE: Yeah. 13 A. Yeah, I'm retained in a number of 14 cases. 15 BY MR. HYDE: 16 Q. And which of those cases have you been 17 designated as a testifying expert? 18 A. I don't know. 19 Q. You have not been told that you would be 20 expected to testify in any of the cases that 21 you've been retained as an expert? 22 A. I just don't recall whether I've been 23 told specifically or not. 24 Q. Any of the cases that you're presently 25 retained as an expert in, do they involve benzene, 128 1 butadiene, or ethylene oxide? 2 A. There is one ongoing case that involves 3 ethylene oxide. 4 Q. Is that one of the sterilization 5 companies that have retained you? 6 A. Yes, sir. 7 Q. Is the alleged disease leukemia? 8 A. No. 9 Q. Is that some sort of neurological 10 disorder? 11 A. Yes, sir. 12 Q. Have you ever testified on behalf of 13 Ashland Oil? 14 MR. McCALL: In litigation, Keith? 15 MR. HYDE: Yeah. I suppose it 16 would have to be litigation because 17 MR. McCALL: Because it was 18 eliminated. Okay. 19 BY MR. HYDE: 20 Q. Have you ever testified on behalf of 21 Ashland in any litigation matter? 22 A. I gave a deposition in that Carter case, 23 and Ashland was one of the defendants. 24 Q. Any other cases other than Carter that 25 you have testified on behalf of Ashland? NFL I Ref' ref I 11M x ASSOCIATES, INC. 129 1 A. That's the only one I can think of. 2 Q. Have you ever testified on behalf of 3 Amoco in any litigation matter? 4 A. Not that I know of. 5 Q. Have you ever testified on behalf of 6 Arco in any litigation matter? 7 A. No. 8 Q. Have you ever testified on behalf of 9 British Petroleum in any litigation matter? 10 A. No. . 11 Q. Have you ever testified on behalf of 12 Fina in any litigation matter? 13 A. I don't know. They may be a co-defendant 14 in some of the cases that I worked for. But I 15 have not worked with them directly. 16 Q. Have you ever testified on behalf of 17 Goodyear in any litigation matter? 18 A. No, not that I know of. 19 Q. Have you ever testified on behalf of 20 B.F. Goodrich in any litigation matter? 21 A. No. 22 Q. Have you ever testified on behalf of 23 Ameripol-Synpol in any litigation matter? 24 A. Never heard of them. 25 Q. Have you ever testified on behalf of 130 1 Uniroyal in any litigation matter? 2 A. No. 3 Q. Have you ever testified on behalf of 4 Exxon in any litigation matter? 5 A. Not directly. Again, unless they were 6 one of the co-defendants in some of the cases that 7 I worked for. 8 Q. Have you ever testified on behalf of 9 Texaco in any litigation matter? 10 A. Not that I know of. . 11 Q. Have you ever testified on behalf of 12 Mobil Oil or Mobil Chemical in any litigation 13 matter? 14 A. I don't know. 15 Q. Do you think you might have? 16 A. I don't pay attention to the list of 17 defendants in the cases I work on. Sometimes 18 there may be a co-defendant and they may be part 19 of the group who retained me. But if they didn't 20 really specify that, I may not have known. 21 Q. Have you ever testified on behalf of 22 Unocal or Union Oil in any litigation matter? 23 A. Well, Unocal for sure, because they were 24 a party in the Carter case. 25 Q. Any others? NELL MC CALLUM a ASSOCIATES, INC. 131 1 A. That's the one that I can think of. 2 Q. Have you ever testified on behalf of 3 Occidental Petroleum, Oxy Chem, Oxy Petrochemical, 4 or any of the Oxy corporations? 5 A. Not that I know of. 6 MR. HYDE: Obviously, without 7 thinking about this case. 8 MR. SPEARS: Okay. Thank you. 9 MR. McCALL: Thank you, Keith. 10 MR. HYDE: Off the record. 11 (DISCUSSION OFF THE RECORD) 12 BY MR. HYDE: 13 Q. Have you ever testified on behalf of 14 Cities Service in any litigation matter? 15 A. Not that I know of. 16 Q. Have you ever testified on behalf of 17 Firestone in any litigation matter? 18 A. No. 19 Q. Have you ever testified on behalf of 20 Shell in any litigation matter? 21 A. The Carter case. 22 Q. Any others? 23 MR. McCALL: Who is the company, 24 Shell? 25 MR. HYDE: Shell. 132 1 A. I have worked for Shell on a couple of 2 DPCT cases. 3 BY MR. HYDE: 4 Q. What was the alleged illnesses as a 5 result of exposure to DPCT? 6 MS. ARRAS: Can you repeat the 7 question? I didn't hear it. 8 BY MR. HYDE: 9 Q. What were the alleged illnesses 10 associated with exposure to DPCT? 11 A. One case was a gastric cancer. 12 Q. Did you find any association between the 13 gastric cancer and exposure to DPCT? 14 A. No, not according to the study that we 15 did. 16 Q. Do you recall testifying on behalf of 17 Shell in any other litigation matters? 18 A. I can't think of any. 19 Q. Have you ever testified on behalf of 20 Marathon in any litigation matter? 21 A. No. 22 Q. You have testified on behalf of Monsanto 23 in litigation matters; is that correct? 24 A. Yes, sir. 25 Q. And that was the Skeen case? NELL MC CALLUM 8 ASSOCIATES, INC. 133 1 A. Yes, sir. 2 Q. Have you been retained as an expert in 3 any other matters involving Monsanto? 4 A. I've been retained to work on one case. 5 Q. Is that the Walker case? 6 A. No. 7 Q. What case have you been retained to work 8 on? 9 A. I forget the name of the plaintiff, but 10 the case was on hold; so we're not doing anything 11 at this point. 12 Q. Is that case out of Houston? 13 A. Yes, sir. 14 Q. Was that a case with Dan Goforth, 15 Bob Scott, and Carlene Lewis? 16 A. No. 17 Q. Who are the defense attorneys that 18 you're working with in that case? 19 A. Larkin, Akin, Prim, Hall and something. 20 Q. Woodard, Prim & Hall? 21 A. I can't remember all those names. 22 Q. You don't recall what the case was? 23 A. No, I don't. 24 Q. Was it the Thomas case? 25- A. No, not Thomas. 134 1 Q. Was it the Bickham case? 2 A. No. 3 Q. Have you ever testified on behalf of 4 PPG? 5 A. No. 6 Q. Have you ever testified on behalf of 7 Olin in any litigation matter? 8 A. What? What's that? 9 Q. Olin. 10 A. No. . 11 Q. Have you ever testified on behalf of 12 Gulf Chemical in any litigation matter, or Gulf 13 Oil or Chevron in any litigation matter, other 14 than, I believe you said, the Larson case? 15 A. What case is that? 16 Q. Didn't you say Larson? 17 MR. McCALL: Wait. You just said 18 Gulf and then Chevron. I realize they 19 merged, but 20 BY MR. HYDE: 21 Q. Okay. Let's start over. I was trying 22 to save time. 23 Have you ever testified on behalf of 24 Gulf Oil or Gulf Chemical in any litigation 25 matter? 135 1 A. No. 2 Q. Have you ever testified on behalf of 3 Chevron or Chevron Chemical in any litigation 4 matter? 5 A. Yes. 6 Q. And that was a benzene case; isn't that 7 correct? 8 A. The Ryan case. 9 Q. And the alleged illness was acute 10 myelogenous leukemia? . 11 A. Yes, sir. 12 Q. Have you worked with Chevron in any 13 other litigation matters other than that case? 14 A. No. 15 Q. Have you ever testified on behalf of 16 Eastman Kodak in any litigation matter? 17 A. No. 18 Q. Have you ever testified on behalf of 19 Tennessee Eastman in any litigation matter? 20 21 Q. Have you ever testified on behalf of 22 Rohm & Haas in any litigation matter? 23 A. No. 24 Q. Have you ever testified on behalf of 25 Conoco in any litigation matter? 136 1 A. No. 2 Q. Have you ever testified on behalf of 3 DuPont in any litigation matter? 4 A. No. 5 Q. Have you ever testified on behalf of 6 .Allied Chemical in any litigation matter? 7 A. No. 8 Q. Have you ever testified on behalf of 9 Union Carbide in any litigation matter? 10 A. No. . 11 Q. Have you ever testified on behalf of 12 Mitsubishi on any litigation matter involving 13 toxic tort? 14 A. No. 15 (DISCUSSION OFF THE RECORD) 16 BY MR. HYDE: 17 Q. Dr. Wong 18 MS. ARRAS: I would just like to 19 clarify that the doctor testified 20 earlier that he's not sure of all the 21 named defendants in any particular 22 case. So, these are based on his 23 recollection of the actual testimony for 24 particular clients or defendants as 25 opposed-to -- it's possible that some of 137 1 these defendants may have appeared on 2 the caption or been part of some type of 3 group defense effort that he's not aware 4 of. I just want to clarify that. 5 BY MR. HYDE: 6 Q. Okay. 7 A. At least those were not parties 8 directly -- the ones that I worked with directly. 9 Q. Back on the Monsanto case that you're 10 presently involved in, what was the alleged 11 chemical to cause whatever disorder was involved? 12 A. Paint. 13 Q. What's the alleged disease or problem 14 with the plaintiff? 15 A. Leukemia. 16 Q. Do you have a percentage of the amount 17 of time you have testified for defendants versus 18 plaintiffs, like 99 to 1 or something like that? 19 MS. ARRAS: Could you clarify 20 "testify"? Do you mean at depositions 21 or at trial? 22 MR. HYDE: Depositions or at 23 trial. 24 A. I have not given any deposition or trial 25 testimony for plaintiffs at this point. 138 1 BY MR. HYDE: 2 Q. Have you ever testified that a 3 plaintiff's condition was caused by the work 4 environment or chemical agent that he was alleged 5 to have been exposed to? 6 A. Yeah, there was one case that I worked 7 on several months ago. The conclusion was the 8 medical condition was caused by the exposure. 9 Q. What was the alleged exposure? 10 A. He was exposed to some cleaning fluids. 11 Q. What was the alleged disease? 12 A. Pulmonary irritation. 13 Q. But in that case you did not testify; is 14 that correct? 15 A. No. I don't know what happened. I 16 think they settled the case or whatever. 17 Q. So, as it comes down to testifying, you 18 have never testified that a plaintiff's condition 19 was caused by a work environment? 20 A. That was my answer to you. 21 Q. Well, you provided expert opinions to 22 attorneys. But my question is, did you ever 23 testify that a plaintiff's condition was caused by 24 a work environment? 25 A. My answer is no. 139 1 Q. Dr. Wong, let's go over again your 2 definition of 'epidemiology." Would you give it 3 to me? 4 A. 'Epidemiology" is the study of the 5 distribution and determinants of diseases in human 6 populations. 7 Q. What is the purpose of conducting an 8 epidemiological study? 9 A. Well, as the definition implies, the two 10 major components in any epidemiologic-research, 11 one is to identify the high risk group in the 12 population with certain disease, find out the 13 distribution of the disease in the population. 14 The second component is to determine the 15 risk factors responsible for the high rate of 16 disease in that particular population. 17 Q. And why would someone want to identify 18 risk factors in a population? 19 A. So we can reduce the risk factor. 20 Q. Therefore, epidemiology is a very 21 important tool in public health? 22 A. Absolutely. 23 Q. Have you ever suggested that a company 24 perform an epidemiological study of its work force 25 and then that stud-y not be conducted? 140 1 MS. ARRAS: If you know. 2 A. No, I cannot think of any examples. 3 (DISCUSSION OFF THE RECORD) 4 BY MR. HYDE: 5 Q. Dr. Wong, I would like to start with the 6 exhibits listed in Deposition 3A. Would you 7 please read for the record what documents are 8 contained in Deposition 3A? And when you come to 9 correspondence from the attorneys, if you just 10 want to say "correspondence from attorneys," 11 that's fine. We don't have to go any further than 12 that. 13 A. Mostly they are correspondence letters. 14 There are some notes that I made to myself on this 15 case, some notes that I took during phone 16 conversations. That's some sub-parts in 3A. 17 Q. I see a butadiene reference. Is this a 18 list of references that you put together? 19 A. No. This is a list that I received from 20 Barbara Arras. Actually, I think it's an exhibit 21 of Dr. Gardner. 22 Q. So, you might have received this 23 document from John Tyler as it concerns the Wing 24 case; is that right? 25 A. I-don't remember. NELL MC CALLUM b ASSOCIATES, INC. 141 1 Q. Dr. Wong, would you please read the 2 exhibits that are included in Deposition Exhibit 3 Wong 3B? 4 A. 3B? 5 Q. Yes. 6 A. Basically, there are two reports from 7 Nancy Culver, dated October 4th, 1991, and then 8 another one dated September 9th, 1991. And then 9 there is -- on top of that there is also a map. 10 (DISCUSSION OFF THE RECORD) 11 BY MR. HYDE: 12 Q. Did you read Nancy Culver's report? 13 A. I did read through them. 14 Q. Did you see anything in Nancy Culver's 15 report that you disagree with? 16 A. I don't have any foundation to disagree 17 with her report. But I don't find her report very 18 informative, either. 19 Q. Dr. Wong, please go on over with the 20 names of the papers that are included in 21 Deposition Exhibit No. 4. 22 A. How do you want me to do this? 23 Q. Just give the names of all the articles 24 that are contained in Deposition Exhibit No. 4. 25 Just read them out. NELL MC CALLUM s ASSACIATFS. Mr. 142 1 A. Just the authors' names? 2 Q. No. No. Just the title 3 A. The title? 4 Q. Yes. 5 A. There's a lot of them. 6 Q. There's a lot of authors, too. Which 7 would you rather do? It doesn't matter to me. 8 A. I think it would be easier just to 9 just the title. 10 Q. Well, give me the title and the first 11 author. 12 A. Okay. "Lymphocytic Leukemia and 13 Exposures to Benzene and Other Solvents in the 14 Rubber Industry," by Arp, A-r-p, 1983. 15 Q. Go ahead and give me the date, too. 16 Next article? 17 A. The next one is just a couple of pages 18 from the nosology book published by the U.S. 19 National Center for Health Statistics on the ICT 20 code for lymphatic and hematopoietic cancer. 21 Q. Okay. The next paper? 22 A. The next one is a chapter titled 23 "Non-Hodgkin's Lymphoma and Mycosis Fungoides," 24 published by -- the author is Greene, G-r-e-e-n-e. 25 The next one is an article titled 143 1 "Ionizing Radiation and Drugs in the Pathogenesis 2 of Lymphoid Neoplasia." The author is Finch. 3 Q. Now, I've got something that, in my 4 order, there was a "Non-Hodgkin's Lymphoma and 5 Mycosis Fungoides." I think they're split in two. 6 Is 7 A. No, it's just the same thing. This 8 would be one chapter. 9 Q. And I think the "Ionizing Radiation and 10 Drugs and Pathogenesis of Llymphoid Neoplasia" by 11 Finch, you already listed that document? 12 A. Yes. 13 Q. The next article? 14 A. The next one entitled is "Critical 15 Review of Cancer Epidemiology in Petroleum 16 Industry Employees, with a Quantitative 17 Meta-Analysis by Cancer Site." The first author 18 is Wong. 19 The next one is "An Industry wide 20 mortality study of chemical workers occupationally 21 exposed to benzene. I General Results," by Wong. 22 Q. Hold on a minute. Let me separate 23 these. 24 The next article, please. 25 A. The next one is the same article, NELL MC CALLUM & ASSOCIATES, INC. 144 1 Part II of that article for nDose Response 2 Analyses," by Wong. 3 The next one, "Leukemia in Benzene 4 Workers," by Rinsky. 5 Next one, "Benzene and Leukemia, an 6 Epidemiologic Risk Assessment," by Rinsky. 7 The next paper is "Mortality among 8 Chemical Workers Exposed to Benzene and other 9 Agents," by Pierre Decoufle. 10 Q. Next article, please. 11 A. The next one is titled "Benzene and 12 Lymphoma," by Neal Young. 13 Then I have one piece of paper 14 summarizing some of the studies that I looked at. 15 Q. And this is a document that you put 16 together; is that correct? 17 A. Yes, sir. 18 Q. When did you put this document together? 19 A. Within the last month or two. 20 Q. You put it together as it concerns this 21 lawsuit and this is why you did it? 22 A. Yes, sir. 23 Q. The next article, please. 24 .A. The next article is "A Death-Certificate 25 Case-Control Study of Non-Hodgkin's Lymphoma and NELL MC CALLUM & ASSOCIATES. INC. 145 1 Occupation in Men in North Carolina". The first 2 author was Schumacher. 3 Q. That's a 1988 publication? 4 A. Yes, sir. 5 Q. What's the next article? 6 A. "Non-Hodgkin's Lymphoma: Case-Control 7 Epidemiological Study in Yorkshire, by Cartwright. 8 Q. That was a 1988 publication? 9 A. Yes, sir. 10 Q. Next article? 11 A. "Lymphatic and Hematopoietic Tissue 12 Cancer in a Chemical Manufacturing Environment," 13 by Ott, 1989. 14 Q. Next article? 15 A. "The Epidemiology of Non-Hodgkin's 16 Lymphoma in the Northeast of Italy: A 17 Hospital-Based Case-Control Study." The first 18 author is Francheschi. 19 Q. 1989 publication? 20 A. Yes. 21 Then, again, I have notes summarizing 22 one study. 23 Q. That was a study you put together 24 relative to this lawsuit? 25 A. Yes, sir. NELL MC CALLUM 8 ASSOCIATES, INC. 146 1 Q. What is the next study? 2 A. Right after that there is a short 3 article entitled "Benzene and Lymphomas," by 4 Smith. 5 Q. What's the next article? 6 A. The next article is called "Lymphomas 7 and Occupational Benzene Exposure," by Vianna and 8 Polan. 9 Q. What is the date of that publication? 10 A. '79. 11 The next article is "Farming and 12 Mortality from Non-Hodgkin's Lymphoma: A 13 Case-Control Study." And Cantor is the author. 14 Next, "Farming Occupations and Mortality 15 from Non-Hodgkin's Lymphoma in Utah, a 16 Case-Control Study," by Schumacher. 17 Q. Next study? 18 A. "A Cancer Registry-Based Study of 19 Occupational Risk for Lymphoma, Multiple Myeloma, 20 and Leukemia," by Brownson and Reif. 21 The next one is "Selected Cancer 22 Mortality and Farm Practices in Iowa." And the 23 author -- the first author is Burmeister. 24 The next one is an abstract or Ph.D. 25 Thesis entitled "A Case-Control Study of NELL MC CALLUM & ASSOCIATES, INC. 147 1 Non-Hodgkin's Lymphoma,' by McDonald. 2 Q. A 1986 publication? 3 A. The thesis was dated 1986, but the 4 abstract appeared in 1987. 5 Q. Next article, please. 6 A. "Assessment of 1,3-Butadiene 7 Epidemiology Studies," by Ott, 1990. 8 Q. Have you ever worked with Mr. Ott? 9 A. Dr. Ott? 10 Q. Dr. Ott. _ 11 A. Worked with him? 12 Q. Yes. 13 A. What do you mean by, "work with him"? 14 Q. Worked with him in any capacity as in 15 being employed in the same company? 16 A. No. 17 Q. Have you ever worked with Dr. Ott in 18 your work with ENSR Health Sciences or 19 Environmental Health Associates? 20 A. No. 21 The next one is "Mortality of a Cohort 22 of Workers in the Styrene-Butadiene Polymer 23 Manufacturing Industry, (1943-1982)," by 24 Matanoski. 25 Next article, Future Directions in NELL MC CALLUM & ASSOCIATES. INC. 148 1 Epidemiologic Studies of 1,3-Butadiene-Exposed 2 Workers," by Acquavella. 3 Q. Do you know John Acquavella? 4 A. I know him, yes. 5 Q. Did you ever do any work for 6 John Acquavella when he was at Exxon? 7 A. No. 8 Q. Have you ever done any work with John 9 Acquavella since he has been employed by Monsanto? 10 A. No. 11 Q. How do you know John Acquavella? 12 A. I run into him at meetings, you know, 13 meetings that are sponsored by the Society for 14 Epidemiologic Research. 15 Q. Have you ever discussed 1,3-butadiene 16 epidemiological studies with John Acquavella? 17 A. No. 18 Q. Have you ever discussed any 19 epidemiological studies associated with benzene 20 with John Acquavella? 21 A. No. 22 Q. What's the next document? 23 A. "Mortality of Workers in 24 Styrene-Butadiene Polymer Production," by 25 Matanoski, 1987. NELL MC CALLUM & ASSOCIATES, INC. 149 1 Next one, 'The paradox of butadiene 2 epidemiology," by Acquavella. 3 Q. I'm sorry. I don't have 4 A. You don't have that one? 5 Q. Let me find it real quick. I seem to 6 have a -- after the Matanoski study, I have a 7 study by Ted Meinhardt? 8 A. I'm sorry. I missed that one. 9 Q. Okay. What's the title of that 10 document? . 11 A. Okay. The title of that document is 12 "Environmental epidemiologic investigation of the 13 styrene-butadiene rubber industry." 14 Q. And it's by Meinhardt? 15 A. Right. 16 Q. And the date of that publication is? 17 A. '82. 18 Q. Then the next document is the "Paradox 19 of butadiene epidemiology"? 20 A. Right. 21 Q. That, again, is by Acquavella? 22 A. Right. 23 Q. What is the date of that document? 24 A. '89. 25 Q. What's the next document? NELL MC: CALLUM a ASSOCIATES. INC. 150 1 A. The next one is 'An Update of 2 Mortality among Workers at a 1,3-Butadiene 3 Facility - Preliminary Results," by Divine. 4 Q. And you know Dr. Divine, don't you? 5 A. Yes, sir. 6 Q. Describe your work with Dr. Divine over 7 the years. What have you done with her? 8 MS. ARRAS: If you have done any 9 work with Dr. Divine. 10 A. Specifically for Texaco we -.- when I was 11 at ENSR -- I believe it was the last year -- Barbara 12 Divine was doing a study, an internal study. And 13 they asked us to run some names that they have, 14 check against some database that we have at ENSR, 15 to determine the vital status of those employees. 16 That was a very limited project. 17 But Dr. Divine was the chairperson at 18 the epidemiologic sub-committee at API. So, she 19 goes to all the API meetings for the project I'm 20 working on. 21 Q. And the next set of documents? 22 A. Okay. The title is "A cohort study of 23 mortality and cancer incidence in ethylene oxide 24 production workers," by Hogstedt, 1979. 25 The next one is "Mortality Among NELL MC CALLUM 3 ASSOCIATES, INC. 1 Ethylene Oxide Workers," by Robert Morgan. 2 Q. You used to work with Dr. Morgan, didn't 3 you? 4 A. Yes, sir. 5 Next one, "Mortality Study on Employees 6 Exposed to Alkylene Oxides, (Ethylene 7 Oxide/Propylene Oxide) and their Derivatives," by 8 Thiess. 9 Next one, "A Cohort Study on Cancer 10 Mortality of Ethylene Oxide Workers", by Bisanti. 11 Next one, A multicentre mortality study 12 of workers exposed to ethylene oxide," by 13 Kiesselbach. 14 The next one, "Workers exposed to 15 ethylene oxide: A follow-up study," by Gardner. 16 Q. 1989 publication? 17 A. Yes, sir. 18 Next study, "Men assigned to ethylene 19 oxide production or other ethylene oxide related 20 chemical manufacturing: A mortality study by 21 Greenberg. 22 Next study, "An epidemiological study of 23 cancer risk among workers exposed to ethylene 24 oxide using hemaglobin adducts to validate 25 enviromental exposure assessments," by Hagmar. NELL MC CALLUM b ASSOCIATES. INC. 152 1 The next one is called 'Mortality Among 2 Workers Exposed to Ethylene Oxide." First author 3 is Steenland, 1991. 4 Next one is called "Mortality Among 5 Workers Exposed to Ethylene Oxide," by Wong. 6 Then there is a response to that by 7 Steenland. We have two copies of the same thing 8 (indicating). 9 Q. Okay. 10 A. The last document is a report. The 11 title is "A Cohort Mortality Study of Workers 12 Potentially Exposed to Ethylene Oxide." The first 13 author is Wong. 14 Q. Is this the Publication No. 74 in your 15 curriculum vitae? 16 A. This is the one -- 74 -- this is a 17 publication. This is the report (indicating). 18 MR. HYDE: Off the record. 19 (DISCUSSION OFF THE RECORD) 20 BY MR. HYDE: 21 Q. Dr. Wong, the articles that we just went 22 over and various other documents in Wong 23 Deposition Exhibits 3A, 3B, and 4. Do those make 24 up all of the documents that form a basis of your 25 opinions relative. to this matter? NELL MC CALLUM 8 ASSOCIATES. INC. 153 1 A. Yes, sir. 2 Q. Are there any other documents that need 3 to be added to this list or to this stack as it 4 pertains to your opinions in this matter? 5 A. No, other than some general publications 6 or books on general concepts of epidemiology. 7 Q. What would those books be, if you could 8 tell me, the ones that may be -- books that 9 would 10 A. It may be 11 Q. -- form the basis of your opinion 12 A. -- textbooks of epidemiology or basic 13 statistical textbooks. 14 Q. Do any of those books' titles or authors 15 come to mind? 16 A. No. 17 MR. HYDE: Now, I would like to 18 ask this question one time and go 19 through the companies once again. But 20 instead of having to ask the entire 21 question, which would be, "Have you ever 22 done any epidemiological studies with 23 any of these companies," such as A, B, 24 C, and D, if I could just say the 25 question one time, list the companies, NELL MC CALLUM & ASSOCIATES. INC. 154 1 and have him say "yes" or "no" would 2 that be okay with y'all? 3 MS. ARRAS: You asked him if he 4 consulted with any of these companies; 5 you asked him if he testified for any of 6 these companies. I don't really see the 7 distiriction between performing an 8 epidemiologic study as separate from 9 consulting. 10 MR. HYDE: Well, there is a 11 difference in that I don't believe I 12 went over a list that may help him 13 recall, such as when we were talking 14 about oil companies, he just said that 15 he had done work with Texaco when I ran 16 across this article concerning Barbara 17 Divine. 18 So, that's why, in order to be a 19 little more accurate, I would like to 20 ask the question one time and then go 21 over these 22 MR. McCALL: As part of the 23 question you will list all of the oil 24 companies and let him follow and at the 25 end -NELL MC CALLUM 8 ASSOCIATES. INC. 155 1 MR. HYDE: Oil and chemical. 2 MR. McCALL: -- and at the end he 3 can respond? 4 MR. HYDE: Yeah. 5 MR. McCALL: I got you. It will 6 save time. 7 MR. HYDE: Yeah, save time. 8 BY MR. HYDE: 9 Q. And if we get lost in here and you want 10 to stop, then, you know, let me know 11 MS. ARRAS: Did you want to make a 12 note, then -- if you're just going to run 13 through this, do you want him to stop at 14 the point in time when he can say "yes" 15 and we discuss it, or do you want 16 MR. HYDE: He can say "yes" or 17 "no" to each name. How's that? 18 MS. ARRAS: All right. 19 BY MR. HYDE: 20 Q. Dr. Wong, have you ever worked with any 21 of the following companies concerning any 22 epidemiological study, or any of these particular 23 companies' workers? I'm just going to list the 24 names of these companies. 25 Ashland Oil? NELL MC CALLUM 3 ASSOCIATES, INC. 156 1 MS. ARRAS: Before you go on, I 2 would like to clarify the question. You 3 said worked with as it concerns 4 epidemiologic studies. Do you mean, did 5 Dr. Wong actually perform an 6 epidemiologic study for these people? 7 MR. HYDE: Or do any kind of 8 analysis of epidemiologic information or 9 assist them in developing an 10 epidemiological study. 11 MS. ARRAS: All right. 12 BY MR. HYDE: 13 Q. So, I will phrase the question. I'm 14 going to list various companies. And I would like 15 to know, "yes" or "no," whether you have worked 16 with any of these companies in any type of 17 epidemiological work. 18 Ashland Oil? 19 A. Not with Ashland Oil directly. Many 20 years ago when I was worked for Dr. Tabershaw, he 21 had a project from API. And Ashland was one of 22 the participants in that study. 23 Q. Amoco? 24 A. No. 25 Q. Arco? NELL MC CALLUM 3 ASSOCIATES. INC. 157 1 A. Arco was a participant in the CMA 2 benzene study for a little while. 3 Q. British Petroleum? 4 A. No. 5 Q. Fina? 6 A. No. 7 Q. Goodyear? 8 A. No. 9 Q. B.F. Goodrich? 10 A. No. 11 Q. Uniroyal? 12 A. No. 13 Q. Exxon? 14 A. Exxon is part of the API study that I'm 15 working on now. 16 Q. On the distribution workers? 17 A. Yes, sir. 18 Q. Texaco? 19 A. Other than that example I gave you. 20 Q. Mobil Oil or Mobil Chemical? 21 A. We have done a couple of epidemiologic 22 studies for Mobil in the past. 23 Q. Unocal? 24 A. No. 25 Q. Occidental Petroleum or any of the Oxy NELL MC CALLUM a ASSOCIATES, INC. 158 1 companies? 2 A. No. 3 Q. Cities Service? 4 A. No. 5 Q. Firestone? 6 A. No. 7 Q. Shell? 8 A. We have done a number of projects for 9 Shell. 10 Q. Did any of those projects involve the 11 chemical benzene or butadiene? 12 A. No. 13 Q. Marathon? 14 A. No. 15 Q. Monsanto? 16 A. No. 17 Q. Wasn't Monsanto part of the CMA study? 18 A. Oh, I'm sorry. Monsanto was. Monsanto 19 was one of the participants of the CMA benzene 20 study. . 21 Q. Other than the CMA benzene work with 22 Monsanto, have you conducted any other work with 23 Monsanto? 24 A. No. 25 Q PPG? NELL MC CALLUM & ASSOCIATES. INC. 159 1 A. Yes. 2 Q. What kind work have you done with PPG? 3 A. We are in the final stage of mortality 4 study for of PPG employees. 5 Q. Gulf? 6 A. Yes. 7 Q. That was the study that we have already 8 talked about 9 A. Yes, sir. 10 Q. -- with C.P. Wen? 11 Chevron? 12 A. Yes. 13 Q. Eastman Kodak or Tennessee Eastman? 14 A. No. 15 Q. Rohm & Haas? 16 A. No. 17 Q. Conoco? 18 A. No. 19 Q. DuPont? 20 A. DuPont was one of the participants in 21 the CMA benzene study. 22 Q. Allied? 23 A. No. 24 Q. Union Carbide? 25 A. Yes. NELL MC CALLUM 8 ASSOCIATES. INC. 160 1 Q. Mitsubishi? 2 A. No. 3 (BRIEF RECESS) 4 BY MR. HYDE: 5 Q. Dr. Wong, earlier, I asked you what the 6 purpose was for conducting epidemiological 7 studies. And you indicated that one of the 8 reasons, the purposes, was to identify risk 9 factors associated with a disease in a population; is that right? 11 A. Yes, sir. 12 Q. What are the risk factors associated 13 with non-Hodgkin's lymphoma? 14 A. I did some research on that. I have 15 summarized what I found in one of the documents in 16 Exhibit 3A -- it's probably the third or fourth 17 group of papers. You see some of this like 18 spreadsheet (indicating). 19 Q. Okay. Is it in that group where the 20 spreadsheet is? 21 A. Yes. 22 Q. What are the risk factors associated 23 with non-Hodgkin's lymphoma? 24 A. There is a page, says "Risk Factors of 25 Non-Hodgkin's Lymphoma." Farming has been found NELL MC CALLUM & ASSOCIATES, INC. 161 1 to be a risk factor in several studies. Family 2 history of cancer has also been identified as a 3 risk factor in a couple of studies. Smoking is 4 another risk factor. In terms of the three 5 chemicals that we are interested in in these 6 cases, none of them turned out to be a risk 7 factor. 8 Q. How about butadiene? 9 A. I said for all the three chemicals. 10 Q. Okay. Are there any drugs or 11 pharmaceuticals that you believe serve as a risk 12 factor for the development of non-Hodgkin's 13 lymphoma? 14 A. There is some discussion of that. I 15 took a quick look, but I didn't pay much attention 16 to that. That was in one or two articles that I 17 included in the folder labeled as non-Hodgkin's 18 lymphoma, non-occupational exposures. 19 Q. What is the disease process of 20 non-Hodgkin's lymphoma? 21 A. I am not an expert in that area. 22 Q. Do you know of any similarities between 23 non-Hodgkin's lymphoma and chronic lymphocytic 24 leukemia? 25 A. I don't know. HELL MC CALLUM & ASSOCIATES. INC. 162 1 Q. Do you know of any similarities between 2 non-Hodgkin's lymphoma and multiple myeloma? 3 A. They are different diseases. 4 Q. Do you know whether or not the disease 5 derives from the same cell type as it pertains to 6 the cells within the blood, such as "B" cell line 7 or anything such as that? 8 MR. McCALL: Counsel, the 9 disease -- again, can you specify 10 MR. HYDE: Non-Hodgkin's lymphoma 11 and multiple myeloma. 12 MR. McCALL: Could you repeat the 13 question again for me, please? 14 BY MR. HYDE: 15 Q. Do you know of any similarity between 16 non-Hodgkin's lymphoma and multiple myeloma? 17 A. I don't know of any. And as an 18 epidemiologist, we will analyze those two as two 19 separate diseases. 20 Q. Is race a risk factor associated with 21 non-Hodgkin's lymphoma? 22 A. There may be some difference in terms of 23 non-Hodgkin's lymphoma rates between white and 24 non-white, as well as between male and female. In 25 the same package, there is a graph on the age HELL MC CALLUM 8 ASSOCIATES, INC. 163 1 specific rates of non-Hodgkin's lymphoma for those 2 four race, sex groups. 3 Q. In the CMA benzene study, do you recall 4 whether there was an increased incidence of 5 non-Hodgkin's lymphoma as result of the CMA 6 benzene epidemiological studies? 7 MR. McCALL: Counsel, could you 8 define for me so that I understand what 9 you mean by "increased risk"? 10 MR. HYDE: "Increased risk" being 11 that greater than one. 12 MR. McCALL: Thank you. 13 A. Okay. In that study we analyzed the 14 data in a number of ways. In one analysis we have 15 the ICD code 200, which is lymphosarcoma. Then we 16 also have a separate group called "other lymphatic 17 tissue cancer," which we include 202, 203, and 18 208. And 203 is, of course, multiple myeloma. 19 But based on that particular program, I 20 would not be able separate 203. So, I lumped 203 21 with 202 and 200. Okay. So, there is not -- what 22 most other people would call non-Hodgkin's 23 lymphoma, per se. 24 Q. So, what's the answer to my question? 25 A. The answer to your question is: If we NELL MC CALLUM & ASSOCIATES. INC. 164 1 look at -- if we do not look at the group together 2 with multiple myeloma, which is clearly not part 3 of non-Hodgkin's lymphoma, if we look at 4 lymphosarcoma, per se, there was no increase for 5 that. There was no increase for lymphosarcoma. 6 Q. That's with categories 202, 203, and 7 what? 8 A. No. No. No. Lymphosarcoma is 200. 9 Q. Okay. Now, what about the categories 10 that lump 202 and 203 -- and I believe. there was 11 one other category. Is there an increased 12 incidence of diseases of those categories? 13 A. There was an elevation, but the increase 14 was not statistically significant. 15 Q. What was the elevation? 16 A. The number of groups within the study, 17 depending on which group you are talking about. 18 Q. Well, what was the number that reflects 19 an elevation in-the diseases of those categories? 20 A. That was looking at the group that was 21 exposed to benzene on a continuous basis. The 22 SMR, standardized mortality ratio, for that group 23 for the category of other lymphatic tissue cancer 24 was .144 -- or 144 percent. 25 Q. What was the "P" number there on that NELL MC CALLUM S ASSOCIATES. INC. 165 1 study? 2 A. I did not calculate the "P" value for 3 that specifically. But a 95 percent confidence 4 limit ranged from 39 to 370. 5 Q. Most likely is the "P" value .05? 6 A. It was not significant. Therefore, it 7 has to be greater than .05. 8 Q. Still, when you say elevated and was 9 144, you had 44 percent more incidence of that 10 classification of disease than was expected; is 11 that correct? 12 A. Right, based on very small numbers. 13 Q. Well, that was a CMA study, wasn't it? 14 A. Yes. 15 Q. It was certainly a large study, wasn't 16 it? 17 A. Large in terms of the number of people. 18 But for this particular disease, there were only 19 four deaths in that group. 20 Q. Well, certainly in one of the studies 21 that you referred to as chemical workers at Union 22 Carbide by Ott, certainly there were more chemical 23 workers involved in the CMA study than there were 24 in Ott's study at Union Carbide? 25 MR. McCALL: That's a question? NELL MC CALLUM 8 ASSOCIATES, INC. 166 1 MR. HYDE: Yes. 2 A. That's a question? 3 BY MR. HYDE: 4 Q. Yes. 5 A. No. 6 Q. You mean there were more man hours or 7 person hours in the Union Carbide Ott study than 8 there was in the CMA study? 9 A. I don't know what you mean by "man 10 hours." But the important thing to look at when 11 you compare how big a study is, you have to 12 specify what disease you're interested in. 13 In the example I just gave you, in my 14 study, in that continuously exposed group, I only 15 have four other lymphatic tissue cancer deaths. 16 And then on top of that, I have three 17 lymphosarcomas. So, altogether, including 18 multiple myeloma and ICD 208, I only have seven, 19 compared to 52 in the table that I gave you from 20 the Ott study. 21 Q. And the CMA studies were approximately 22 seven to eight companies or plants involved in the studies; is that correct A. Yes. Q. -- seven or eight plants? NELL MC CALLUM & ASSOCIATES, INC. 167 1 A. Yes. 2 Q. And out of seven or eight chemical 3 plants where benzene was manufactured, there were 4 only four lympho -- what was the exact title? 5 A. Other lymphatic tissue cancers. 6 Q. There were only four other lympho 7 A. Lymphatic tissue cancers. 8 Q. -- lymphatic tissue cancers; is that 9 right? 10 A. Right. 11 Q. And yet at Cities Service, which is one 12 plant, there are four lymphatic cancers, being 13 these four men that we have talked about here that 14 are Plaintiffs; that's correct, isn't it? 15 A. Yes. 16 Q. Does that strike you odd as an expert in 17 the field of epidemiology? 18 MR. McCALL: Let me object to the 19 form of the question. Without 20 consideration of other confounding 21 factors or other risk factors being 22 taken into consideration in the total 23 picture -- I think limiting it solely to 24 employment history without 25 considerations of other facts is NELL MC CALLUM 8 ASSOCIATES, INC. 168 1 misleading and I object to the form of 2 the question. 3 A. The question is misleading from the 4 epidemiologic point of view. The study that I did 5 was based on mortality, death certificates. The 6 four cases that you mentioned, as far as I know, 7 out of the four, only one have passed away. So, 8 had we done a study for Cities Service, we would 9 have counted only one. 10 BY MR. HYDE: 11 Q. You don't think any of these people are 12 going to survive this disease, do you? 13 A. I don't know. But you don't count that 14 until the death occurs. And by then you have a 15 lot more person years. It's not a matter of how 16 many people you have in the study. It's also a 17 function of how long you follow those people. 18 Q. Let me see if I understand this 19 correctly. So, right now the only statistic that 20 would have been counted would have been 21 Mr. Talbott, and you would not have counted 22 Mr. Lilly, Mr. LeBlanc, and Mr. Ellis; is that 23 correct? 24 A. If we were going to do a mortality 25 study, yes. NELL MC CALLUM & ASSOCIATES, INC. 1 Q. Have you ever studied a plant or a group 2 of plants where you have identified four 3 non-Hodgkin's lymphomas in that particular plant, 4 be they dead or alive? 5 MR. McCALL: Counsel, once again, 6 you're excluding any other factors that 7 these people may have other than 8 employment at one location? 9 MR. HYDE: Yes. 10 MR. McCALL: I want to object to 11 the form of the question as misleading 12 again. 13 Go ahead and answer it, if you 14 can, Dr. Wong. 15 A. When you say I have done a study, you 16 mean -- you've limited that to studies that I have 17 done? 18 BY MR. HYDE: 19 Q. Yeah, that you've participated in. 20 A. The study that I did for Chevron out 21 here in the Bay area, the refinery out here in the 22 Bay area, plus the refinery down in the Los 23 Angeles area, we observed 17 lymphosarcomas. 24 Q. Was that an excess number? 25 A. Well, 17 compared to an expected of NELL MC CALLUM A ASSOCIATES. INC. 170 1 13.4. 2 Q. So, what do you have, about a 25 percent 3 excess? 4 A. So, there was slight excess. But that 5 was not statistically significant. 6 Q. Why did you not include that study in 7 your analysis that I'm looking at in Exhibit 3A, 8 which is the spreadsheet, it looks like from Lotus 9 or something such as that? 10 A. Oh, I have that. It's on a separate 11 piece of paper. 12 Q. But when it goes to risk factors, you 13 don't have benzene -- under the benzene category, 14 you don't list the Chevron study that you just 15 referred to. Why is that? 16 A. Because that's -- there are about 20 or 17 so studies. And there's no way I can fit all of 18 that in there. 19 Q. Well, did you only pick the low ones to 20 put in the risk factor analysis under benzene or 21 A. No. If you look at this table -- this is 22 part of the paper that I wrote in 1989, the meta 23 analysis, summarized all the studies on refinery 24 workers. That is a separate analysis. 25 Q. That's Page 305? NELL MC CALLUM & ASSOCIATES, INC. 171 1 A. 302. 2 Q. Okay. Let me turn to that page real 3 quick. 4 On Page 302 from the Wong and Raab 5 study, there's one, two, three, four, -- five 6 studies that indicate an increased incidence of 7 lymphosarcoma; is that right? 8 A. Yeah. And there were nine that show a 9 deficit. 10 Q. Okay. Then on the next page is 11 mortality from other lymphatic tissue. 12 A. Right. 13 Q. And on that -- what do you consider other 14 lymphatic tissue cancer? What would that include? 15 A. As I told you, that would include ICD 16 code 202, 203, and 208. 17 Q. And that would include non-Hodgkin's 18 lymphomas; is that right? 19 A. 203 -- no. 202 is part of non-Hodgkin's 20 lymphoma. 203 is multiple myeloma. And 208 is 21 miscellaneous categories. 22 Q. As far as the disease multiple myeloma, 23 you don't know whether that disease derives from 24 the same cell type, B-cell line of 25 A. No, I don't know; but nobody count that NELL MC CALLUM S ASSOCIATES, INC. 172 1 as part of non-Hodgkin's lymphoma. 2 Q. But on Page 305 of the Cancer 3 Epidemiology and Petroleum Industry, there are 4 one, two, three -- thirteen studies of which ten of 5 those studies indicate an elevated incidence of 6 deaths from lymphatic tissue cancer; isn't that 7 right? 8 A. Yes. But the proper way to look at that 9 table is to look at the bottom line, 1.15. That 10 is the overall SMR when you combine all those 11 studies. 12 Q. Still, the incidence is increased over 13 what was expected as it relates to the total 14 number of lymphatic tissues cancers in the 15 petroleum industry? 16 A. It's a non-significant increase. 17 Q. Just by chance? 18 A. In other words, that small increase 19 could have been due to chance. 20 Q. And that small increase was reflected in 21 ten separate studies; is that right? 22 A. I'm not so sure you can argue it that 23 way. When you combine the result, there is more 24 increase. 25 Q. Now, looking at -- this is your meta NELL MC CALLUM a ASSOCIATES, INC. 173 1 analysis; is that right? 2 A. Yes, sir. 3 Q. Do you know Kaplin, who is noted on the 4 third report from the top? Do you know that 5 investigator? 6 A. I know Dr. Kaplin, yes. 7 Q. Have you ever talked with Dr. Kaplin 8 concerning the use of his study in any meta 9 analysis? 10 A. No. 11 Q. Do you know Hanis, H-a-n-i-s? 12 A. I know her, yes. 13 Q. Is it a doctor? 14 A. Yes. 15 Q. Have you ever discussed with Dr. Hanis 16 your use of her study, or Exxon's study, in your 17 meta analysis? 18 A. No. 19 Q. Next is Dr. Wen at Gulf Oil, or now 20 Chevron. Have you ever discussed with Dr. Wen the 21 use of his report in your meta analysis? 22 A. No. 23 Q. The next study is the Enterline, 24 Henderson study. Have you ever discussed with 25 them your use of their report in meta analysis? NELL MC CALLUM & ASSOCIATES, INC. 174 1 A. No. 2 Q. The next study is McGraw of the Shell 3 refinery at Wood River. Have you ever discussed 4 with McGraw the use of that report in your meta 5 analysis? 6 A. No. 7 Q. The next study is Joyner, of the Shell 8 Deer Park refinery. Have you ever discussed with 9 Joyner the use of their report in your meta 10 analysis? 11 A. I did not use that report in the meta 12 analysis. 13 Q. I'm sorry. 14 A. There was a blank entry. 15 Q. The next two are two studies by Divine, 16 et al. Have you ever discussed with Dr. Divine 17 the use of those studies in meta analysis? 18 A. No, sir. 19 Q. The next study was by Rushton and and 20 Alderson. Do you know those authors? 21 A. I know Dr. Rushton. 22 Q. Have you ever discussed with Dr. Rushton 23 the use of this study in your meta analysis? 24 A. No, I have not. 25 Q. The next study was with Christie in the NELL MC CALLUM 3 ASSOCIATES, INC. 175 1 facility in Australia. Do you know Christie? 2 A. No. 3 Q. So, therefore, you've never discussed 4 with Christie the use of their study in your meta 5 analysis? 6 A. No, sir. 7 Q. Who else has published a meta analysis 8 as it pertains to epidemiology in the petroleum 9 and chemistry industry, other than yourself? 10 A. I don't know of any. 11 Q. Where else has meta analysis been used 12 in epidemiology? 13 A. There are quite a few examples in the 14 literature. 15 Q. Wouldn't you agree with me that meta 16 analysis is still an experimental technique? 17 A. Oh, no. It has been used for a long, 18 long time, accepted by the community, scientific 19 community. 20 Q. Do you know of any epidemiologists who 21 disagree with the use of meta analysis 22 A. I'm sure 23 Q. -- and its validity of -- of meta 24 analysis? 25 A. See, when you say -meta analysis," it NELL MC CALLUM 8 ASSOCIATES, INC. 176 1 means different things to different people. There 2 is some misuse of, you know, meta analysis. But 3 the way I use meta analysis is perfectly 4 acceptable. 5 To give you an example, Sir Richard Dahl 6 used the same procedure that I use, except I used 7 the procedure a couple of years before he did 8 the grandfather of epidemiology. 9 Q. What were the criteria for inclusion of 10 workers in Barbara Divine's study of the Texaco 11 facility? In other words, how long did an 12 employee have to work at the Texaco plant before 13 that employee would be counted in the 14 epidemiological study? 15 MS. ARRAS: Which study are you 16 referring to? 17 THE WITNESS: (Indicating) 18 A. They had two -- the Texaco group has two 19 studies that I included in the meta analysis. One 20 was on refinery; and entry criteria was five 21 years, at least five years of work. The other 22 study, the second study, was on production and 23 pipeline workers. And the entry criteria was six 24 months'. 25 NELL MC CALLUM A ASSOCIATES. INC. 177 1 BY MR. HYDE: 2 Q. So, right there, just within those two 3 studies, you have different parameters associated 4 with the population that was studied; that's 5 correct, isn't 6 A. But that's -- that happens all the time, 7 even within a single study. You have people who 8 worked there for a year. You have people who 9 worked there for five years or 20 years or 10 30 years. 11 Q. But I guess if you have a study group in 12 one study that only includes workers that worked 13 there for five years and another study that only 14 includes workers who worked more than six months, 15 then you're going to exclude some workers in the 16 second study who may have worked at the plant 17 three and a half years and been exposed to 18 benzene; that's correct, isn't it? 19 A. Yes. 20 Q. Now, the Mobil study concerning 21 epidemiology and the refinery or petrochemical 22 plant required -- isn't it just up one day in the 23 facility? 24 A. Did you say Mobil? 25 Q. Mobil. Wasn't that the requirement? NELL MC CALLUM 8 ASSOCIATES, INC. 178 1 A. One year. 2 Q. One year. 3 Have you ever seen any studies that 4 would allow persons in the study population who 5 have just worked one day in the plant? 6 A. I think Dr. Rinsky's study use a very 7 short definition. It may be one day. 8 Q. Any others? 9 A. I can't think of any studies that would 10 have such a short employment requirement. 11 Q. With the different parameters that these 12 studies, these each individual studies utilize, 13 doesn't it become a factor of mixing apples and 14 oranges at some point in time when you start doing 15 this meta analysis? 16 A. Oh, absolutely not, because you have 17 that same kind of difference in length of 18 employment within any single study. 19 Q. Don't you have different levels of 20 chemical exposures in different plants? 21 A. That's also true within a study. 22 Q. Don't you have some plants that include 23 administrative personnel that were not exposed to 24 benzene? 25 A. By and large, most of those studies NELL MC CALLUM & ASSOCIATES, INC. 179 1 would include blue-collar workers. 2 Q. But don't some of the studies include 3 administrative personnel who are not exposed to 4 benzene? 5 A. Well, remember, we're talking about 6 studies of refinery workers. Some of them might 7 not have been exposed to benzene to start with. 8 Q. And they're included in the study? 9 A. Oh, yeah. 10 Q. And I guess what I'm saying is, for 11 every one of the studies that you included, how 12 did you determine whether administrative workers 13 were included in the survey, by just reading the 14 survey? 15 A. By reading the paper. 16 Q. But you didn't have the raw data; is 17 that right? 18 A. No, we did not have the raw data. 19 Q. Has there ever been any letters to the 20 editors of any journal that you have published, or 21 meta analysis, wherein your meta analysis was 22 criticized? 23 A. There was a letter to the editor 24 - commenting on some aspects of the study, the 25 analysis. NELL MC CALLUM a ASSOCIATES, INC. 180 1 Q. Did you write a letter back to the 2 editor pointing out why your study was correct; in 3 other words, disagreeing with the person who 4 disagreed with you? 5 A. I responded to that letter, yes. 6 Q. Who paid for you to do the meta analysis 7 that's included in Attachment 3A, which you and 8 Jerry Raab wrote? Who actually funded that study? 9 A. That research was partly funded by 10 Mobil. But I also put in a lot of my .own time. 11 Q. Other than the second largest oil 12 company, Mobil, funding this publication and 13 study, was there anybody else who assisted in 14 funding? 15 MR. McCALL: Let me object to the 16 form of the question insofar as it 17 implies that Mobil -- you failed to 18 include "partially funded" in your 19 question and you leave the implication 20 that it was funded totally. And I 21 object to the question again as 22 misleading. 23 BY MR. HYDE: 24 Q. And my question is: Was there anybody 25 else who provided funding for the study, this meta NEIL M(` CAUM A ASSOCIATES. INC. 181 1 analysis? 2 A. No, sir. 3 Q. Now, you put in some time in the study 4 that you were not compensated for; is that 5 correct? 6 A. I put in some of my own time writing a 7 paper and so on. 8 Q. What percentage of your time did you 9 receive compensation for relative to the meta 10 analysis that you and Jerry Raab published? 11 A. I cannot tell you. 12 Q. Well, would 90 percent of your time have 13 been compensated by Mobil? 14 A. I don't know. 15 Q. Well, would it be fair to say that a 16 majority of your time was compensated by Mobil; in 17 other words, 50 percent of your time? 18 A. I don't know. I cannot give you an 19 estimate. 20 Q. You were working for ENSR Health 21 Sciences at that time? 22 A. Yes, sir. 23 Q. -- when you published this 24 If Dr. Raab has testified that Mobil 25 funded this study, do you disagree with his NELL MC CALLUM S ASSOCIATES. INC. 182 1 testimony? 2 MR. McCALL: Let me object to the 3 form of the question insofar as it 4 assumes facts that are not yet in 5 evidence. And to that extent, I will 6 object to it. 7 You can answer it if 8 A. What was the question? 9 BY MR. HYDE: 10 Q. Do you have any reason to disagree with 11 Dr. Raab if Dr. Raab has testified under oath 12 before that Mobil funded that meta analysis that 13 was written by you and Jerry Raab? 14 MR. McCALL: Same objection. Go 15 ahead and answer. 16 A. I did say that Mobil funded the project, 17 but I also put in a lot of my own time. That's 18 what I said. 19 BY MR. HYDE: 20 Q. How much money did Mobil spend for the 21 meta analysis that you and Jerry Raab authored? 22 A. I don't remember. 23 Q. Several hundred thousand, wasn't it? 24 A. Oh, no. 25 Q. Was it more than $100,000? NELL MC CALLUM 8 ASSOCIATES. INC. 183 1 A. Less. 2 Q. Do you know whether it was more than 3 $50,000? 4 A. Most likely it's around that area. I 5 don't remember the number exactly, but certainly 6 less than 100,000. 7 Q. Now, on these studies of non-Hodgkin's 8 lymphoma from the North Carolina plant, the 9 Schumacher studies, do you know whether benzene is 10 a product that is utilized at any of the 11 facilities where these North Carolina workers were 12 employed? 13 A. I think you're confused there. It's not 14 a study of only workers. It's what we call a 15 population based case control study. 16 Q. Well, what I'm asking you is, can you 17 name me one refinery or chemical plant that has a 18 benzene unit in North Carolina? 19 MS. ARRAS: I'm going to object 20 because it assumes facts -- it assumes 21 that the only source of benzene exposure 22 would be a chemical plant or a refinery. 23 BY MR. HYDE: 24 Q. Dr. Wong, you can answer. 25 A. I don't know of any, and I don't think NELL MC CALLUM 8 ASSOCIATES, INC. 184 that question makes much sense in this case, in 2 this study, because it's a population based case 3 control study. Those people could have been 4 exposed to benzene in Beaumont and then later on 5 moved to North Carolina and lived there and died 6 there. So, that's not very meaningful. 7 BY MR. HYDE: 8 Q. But you don't know that any of these 9 North Carolina workers or individuals were exposed 10 to benzene, do you? 11 A. According to the paper, yes, they were. 12 Q. What level of benzene were these workers 13 exposed to? 14 A. I don't know what level. 15 Q. Is that important for you to know what 16 level of benzene these people were exposed to? 17 A. Well, that would be the next level of 18 questions. Number one, you find out whether there 19 is an association with certain exposure or not. 20 And if there is, then you would like to get a dose 21 response relationship. But in this case there is 22 no relationship between benzene exposure and 23 non-Hodgkin's lymphoma, period. 24 Q. My question is, in identifying a risk 25 factor, don't you have to know whether or not NELL MC CALLUM 3 ASSOCIATES, INC. 185 1 these workers were ever exposed to benzene? 2 A. She did look into that. 3 Q. My question is, what did the author find 4 as it concerns the level of benzene exposure to 5 these workers? 6 MR. McCALL: Counsel, again, we're 7 talking about Schumacher? 8 MR. HYDE: Yes. 9 A. She did not find any increased risk 10 among people whose occupation would expose -- would 11 exposed them to benzene, and she stopped there. 12 BY MR. HYDE: 13 Q. Would you agree with me that these 14 workers in North Carolina were not pipefitters, 15 boilermakers and operators in refineries and 16 chemical plants where benzene, butadiene, and 17 ethylene oxide is present? 18 A. No. They might as well be some of them. 19 Q. But you don't know the level of 20 exposure; isn't that right? 21 A. No, I don't. 22 Q. Are we comparing apples and oranges when 23 we compare workers in North Carolina to workers in 24 the Calcasieu Parish, Louisiana, as it pertains to 25 the level of benzene exposure, butadiene exposure, NELL MC CALLUM dr ASSOCIATES, INC. 186 1 and ethylene oxide exposure? 2 MR. McCALL: Let me object to the 3 form of the question insofar as your use 4 of Calcasieu Parish. It implies that 5 there's a study in there. And I think 6 the question is misleading and wrong and 7 objectionable as to form. 8 MS. ARRAS: I'll object also in 9 the sense that we don't have any data on 10 Calcasieu Parish workers as-a group; so 11 there is no way to make the comparison. 12 BY MR. HYDE: 13 Q. Okay. You can still answer my 14 question. 15 A. Yeah, I can answer that question. 16 As I said a few minutes earlier, some of 17 the people who died in North Carolina could have 18 worked at refineries elsewhere. I want to make it 19 very clear so that you will not mislead me again. 20 Q. And they could have been astronauts who 21 went to the moon, couldn't they 22 A. Yes. Yes. 23 Q. -- for all we know? 24 A. Oh, yeah. 25 (DISCUSSION OFF THE RECORD) NELL MC CALLUM 3 ASSOCIATES. INC. 187 1 BY MR. HYDE: 2 Q. Okay. I would like to go with you 3 through the various facts that you have relative 4 to Misters Lilly, Talbott, LeBlanc, and Ellis. 5 And I think you have a document somewhere that 6 might be of assistance to you? 7 A. Right. 8 Q. How old is Mr. Lilly? 9 A. He was born in 1927. At 6:00 o'clock I 10 will not do a simple calculation. 11 Q. Mr. Talbott, how old was he when he 12 passed away? 13 A. When did he pass away, last month? So, 14 1991 he passed away. He was born in 1919. So, 15 that makes him 42 now -- I can't think straight 16 anymore. 17 MR. HYDE: I won't ask ages. 18 MS. ARRAS: Don't ask -- I mean, 19 the information is contained on an 20 exhibit that's marked in the record and 21 filed. So, I really don't think that 22 he -- I object to 23 THE WITNESS: And my blood sugar 24 is running very low. 25 (DISCUSSION OFF THE-RECORD) NELL MC CALLUM d ASSOCIATES, INC. 188 1 A. He was 72. 2 BY MR. HYDE: 3 Q. And the age of Mr. LeBlanc? 4 A. He was born in 1925. 5 Q. And the age of Mr. Ellis? 6 A. He was born in 1923. 7 Q. And were any of these -- of course, you 8 realize these are the Plaintiffs involved in this 9 lawsuit? 10 A. Yes, sir. 11 Q. And are any of these individuals -- well, 12 let's say, what is the race of Mr. Lilly? 13 A. He's black. 14 Q. How about Mr. Talbott? 15 A. White. 16 Q. Mr. LeBlanc? 17 A. White. 18 Q. And Mr. Ellis? 19 A. White. 20 Q. What is your understanding of the 21 smoking history for Mr. Lilly? 22 A. There was a range in terms of pack 23 years, somewhere between 79 to 106 pack-years. 24 Q. Between 79 and 106 pack-years? 25 A. Pack-years. NELL MC CALLUM 3 ASSOCIATES, INC. 1 Q. And what was the smoking history 2 associated with Mr. Talbott? 3 A. 15 pack-years. 4 Q. Would you consider Mr. Talbott a smoker? 5 A. Yes. 6 Q. At what level do you consider an 7 individual a smoker based on pack-year history? 8 A. In most epidemiologic studies, if 9 someone smoked more than 100 cigarettes in his or 10 her lifetime, he or she would be considered as a 11 smoker, or former smoker if he or she quit. 12 Q. At what point in time -- in other words, 13 after how many years after a person quit smoking 14 do you consider that person to be a non-smoker? 15 A. Never. 16 Q. What was the smoking history associated 17 with Mr. LeBlanc? 18 A. More than 43 pack-years. 19 Q. And what was the smoking history for 20 Mr. Ell is? 21 A. 60 to 90 pack-years. 22 Q. What is your understanding of Mr. Lilly's 23 occupation or craft? 24 A. At Cities Service? 25 Q. Yes. NELL MC CALLUM 8 ASSOCIATES, INC. 190 1 A. He was a boilermaker. 2 Q. Anything else? 3 A. That's all I have. That's all I put 4 down. 5 MR. McCALL: Counsel, let me 6 BY MR. HYDE: 7 Q. You do not have that Mr. Lilly was a 8 laborer at the Cities Service refinery? 9 MR. McCALL: Counsel, let me 10 interject at this time. There is going 11 to be some information provided to him 12 prior to trial concerning employment 13 histories on some of these individuals. 14 I'm just telling you right now. 15 BY MR. HYDE: 16 Q. Dr. Wong, do you have any information to 17 indicate that Mr. Lilly was a laborer at the 18 Cities Service refinery? 19 A. I might have it in the materials that 20 was provided to me. 21 Q. Well, do you have it on your sheet right 22 there? 23 A. No, I don't have that. 24 Q. Did you read Mr. Lilly's deposition? 25 A. I have read -- I don't remember. NELL MC CALLUM A ASSOCIATES, INC. 191 1 Q. Well, you didn't 2 A. I must have. 3 Q. Okay. You didn't bring with you today 4 any depositions in any of the exhibits that I saw; 5 that's correct, isn't it? 6 A. Yes, sir. 7 MS. ARRAS: I'd just like to 8 clarify for the record that for the sake 9 of the burdensomeness of bringing the 10 documents themselves, there are indexes 11 to various things that he has contained 12 in the exhibits so that you can 13 determine what he actually has received. 14 BY MR. HYDE: 15 Q. Did you read Mr. Lilly's deposition? 16 A. I must have. 17 Q. Did you put together that chart that's 18 in front of you right now? 19 A. Yes. 20 Q. What did you use to put together that 21 chart? 22 A. I read the deposition of -- different 23 pieces of paper. I made notes, and this is a 24 summary. 25 Q. Do you know whether Mr. Lilly ever NELL MC CALLUM 8 ASSOCIATES, INC. 192 1 worked in the laboratory? 2 A. Yes. 3 Q. Do you know what he did in the 4 laboratory? 5 A. He washed test tubes or containers that 6 they put samples in. 7 Q. He washed lab bottles; is that right? 8 A. Yes. 9 Q. Do you know that he washed a safety 10 man's shirt in pure benzene? 11 MR. McCALL: Let me object to the 12 form of the question. It assumes facts 13 that are not yet in evidence. 14 A. I don't know. 15 BY MR. HYDE: 16 Q. You never knew that? 17 A. No. 18 Q. Now, I would like for you to tell me 19 what your assumption was as it pertains to 20 Mr. Lilly's exposure to benzene at the Cities 21 Service refinery. 22 A. I have not made any assumptions. 23 Q. Do you know whether he was exposed to 24 benzene at the Cities Service refinery? 25 A-. To form my opinion, I don't need to make NELL MC CALLUM A ASSOCIATES. INC. 193 1 that assumption. 2 Q. Dr. Wong, you don't know what the 3 exposure level to benzene was in the Schumacher, 4 North Carolina epidemiological study; am I 5 correct? 6 A. Correct. 7 Q. Yet, there were at least 17 studies of 8 which most of those studies indicated an increased 9 incidence of lymphatic cancer. And you know that 10 these workers were exposed to benzene;. isn't that 11 right? 12 A. No, that's not right. We should never 13 have let lawyers interpret epidemiologic studies. 14 (DISCUSSION OFF THE RECORD) 15 BY MR. HYDE: 16 Q. Dr. Wong, isn't it a fundamental 17 parameter of an epidemiological study to know what 18 the cohort was exposed to? 19 A. Yes. 20 Q. Have you conducted any kind of analysis 21 of the incidence of non-Hodgkin's lymphoma at the 22 Cities Service refinery? 23 A. No, sir. 24 Q. Were you asked to do that? 25 A. No, sir. HELL MC CALLUM & ASSOCIATES, INC. 1 Q. Is that something that would assist you 2 in forming your opinions relative to the causation 3 of Misters Lilly's, Talbott's, LeBlanc's and 4 Ellis' non-Hodgkin's lymphoma? 5 MR. McCALL: I'm going to object 6 to the form of the question insofar as 7 it implies facts that -- at least two of 8 the Plaintiffs worked at the Cities 9 Service refinery, which I think is not 10 the case. It's objectionable as to form. 11 BY MR. HYDE: 12 Q. The Cities Service complex, we'll change 13 it that way, including PCI, have you done any 14 analysis of the Cities Service complex relative to 15 the incidence of non-Hodgkin's lymphoma amongst 16 the workers at that complex? 17 A. No, sir. 18 Q. Is that something that would assist you 19 in forming your opinion relative to this lawsuit? 20 A. Not necessarily. 21 Q. Why not? 22 A. Because we have quite a large number of 23 studies of people with similar exposure. 24 Q. And of those large numbers of studies, 25 most of those studies indicated an increased NELL MC CALLUM & ASSOCIATES, INC. 195 1 incidence of lymphatic cancer amongst the workers? 2 A. No, sir. That's not true. 3 Q. I've missed that? I'm wrong? Is that 4 right? 5 A. Yes, you are wrong. 6 Q. Okay. Let's go back to your meta 7 analysis paper again. 8 (DISCUSSION OFF THE RECORD) 9 BY MR. HYDE: 10 Q. You indicated you would not need to do 11 an epidemiological analysis of the Cities Service 12 complex and it probably would not be helpful to 13 you because of the large number of studies 14 associated with refinery and petroleum employees; 15 is that right? 16 A. I said it was not necessary to do a 17 study at the Cities Service complex in order to 18 arrive to an opinion in this case. 19 Q. Why? 20 A. Because there are studies, much larger 21 studies, of people with similar exposure. 22 Q. And those would be on Table XIV of your 23 study with Jerry Raab; is that correct? 24 A. Not just Table XIV, but Table XII on 25 Page 302. NELL MC CALLUM A ASSOCIATES. INC. 196 1 Q. Which category does non-Hodgkin's 2 lymphoma fall into, lymphosarcoma or lymphatic 3 tissue cancer? 4 A. Well, let me go over this one more 5 time. Lymphosarcoma is ICD code 200. Other 6 lymphatic tissue cancer includes ICD code 202, 7 203, and 208. Non-Hodgkin's lymphoma is the 8 combination of 200 and 202. 9 Q. Isn't it more specifically the classification code 202, though? 11 A. No. 200 is more -- the major component 12 of non-Hodgkin's lymphoma is 200. 13 Q. But you will agree with me that other 14 lymphatic tissue cancer is also a category in 15 which non-Hodgkin's lymphoma falls into? 16 A. One small component of that. 17 Q. And of the 13 studies that you list in 18 Table XIV, 10 of those studies indicate an excess 19 of lymphatic tissue cancer? 20 A. That's. the way I teach my students not 21 to interpret literature review. Do not count how 22 many positive studies and how many negative 23 studies, because some studies are much larger than 24 the other and you don't give the same weights to 25 each study. NELL MC CALLUM dr ASSOCIATES. INC. 197 1 Q. Well, you do that in your meta analysis. 2 A. No, I do not. I told you before, to 3 look at the bottom line. There is a summary, 4 standardized mortality ratio. That standardized 5 mortality ratio gives you the proper weights to 6 each study. 7 Q. And for Table XIV you have a 15 percent 8 increase in lymphatic tissue cancer; that is 9 correct? 10 A. That is correct. 11 Q. Okay. But you're saying it's not 12 statistically significant? 13 A. That's correct. 14 Q. At what "P" value would 1.15 SMR be 15 statistically significant? 16 A. For any SMR where the "P" value is less 17 than .05, then it becomes significant. 18 Q. Well, can you not adjust the "P" value? 19 If you're looking at the power -- if your "P" 20 value, let's say, was .40, would 1.15 then be 21 could it be statistically significant? 22 A. I don't understand your question. 23 Q. Okay. Strike that. 24 Are you familiar with the 25 epidemiological studies associated with NELL MC CALLUM 3 ASSOCIATES, INC. 198 1 angiosarcoma? 2 MS. ARRAS: In what? 3 BY MR. HYDE: 4 Q. In vinyl chloride. 5 A. Which study? 6 Q. Any studies. 7 A. The one that I did, yes, I am familiar. 8 Q. The very first study, which I don't 9 remember the author's name right now 10 A. Johnson? 11 Q. I don't remember. 12 MS. ARRAS: Are you talking first 13 chronologically? 14 MR. HYDE: Yes, chronologically. 15 BY MR. HYDE: 16 Q. -- that indicated a statistically 17 significant increase in deaths from angiosarcoma 18 from vinyl chloride, wasn't that from one 19 facility, one plant? 20 A. I don't know. 21 Q. Wasn't the initial questions about vinyl 22 chloride causing angiosarcoma the result of 23 questions from one physician concerning an excess 24 number of angiosarcoma deaths in a vinyl chloride 25 plant? NELL MC CALLUM & ASSOCIATES, INC. 199 1 A. I think you're getting into the area of 2 the utility of case reports. I would certainly 3 agree that case reports serve a very useful 4 purpose of setting priority of what your research 5 efforts should be. Looking back, you can always 6 choose some examples, saying that, see, we knew 7 that long before we do any epidemiologic studies. 8 But there are also counter-examples. In 9 those cases, subsequent epidemiologic studies 10 refute the earlier causation or association 11 suggested by case reports. We all have a 20/20 12 hindsight. 13 Q. As an epidemiologist, is it your opinion 14 that there is nothing significant or questionable 15 about four working men who have been diagnosed 16 with non-Hodgkin's lymphoma, all of whom worked at 17 the Cities Service complex? 18 A. Associated with that question, you have 19 got to ask yourself a whole bunch of other 20 questions; such as: How many people are involved, 21 how long a period you are looking at, how many 22 other confounding exposure these four people might 23 have in common, how many other work sites they 24 have been to. 25. Q. And those kind of questions could be NELL MC CALLUM 8 ASSOCIATES. INC. 200 1 answered by some type of mathematical analysis or 2 epidemiological-study; isn't that right? 3 A. Depending on what kind of data you 4 have. Some of those questions can be answered by 5 epidemiologic research. 6 Q. But you did not do any of that research 7 relative to these four working men's situations 8 and conditions out at the Cities Service complex; 9 isn't that right? 10 A. No, I did not. 11 (BRIEF RECESS) 12 BY MR. HYDE: 13 Q. Now, do you understand Mr. Lilly was a 14 boilermaker at Cities Service and a laborer and a 15 laboratory worker; you now understand that as part 16 of his occupational history? 17 A. Right. 18 Q. Do you have any opinion as to the level 19 of benzene exposure that Mr. Lilly would have had 20 in his work as a boilermaker at the Cities Service 21 complex, to benzene now? 22 A. Personal exposure? 23 Q. Yes. 24 A. No, sir. 25 Q. Do you have -NELL MC CALLUM 8 ASSOCIATES, 1NC. 201 1 MS. ARRAS: Excuse me. You said 2 as a boilermaker? 3 MR. HYDE: Yes. 4 MS. ARRAS: Okay. That's fine. 5 BY MR. HYDE: 6 Q. You did say that he was a boilermaker, 7 didn't you? 8 A. According to the notes I have, yeah. 9 Q. And your notes just didn't reflect his 10 laborer work, as well as his laboratory work? 11 A. It does. 12 Q. Oh, it does? 13 A. It does (indicating). 14 Q. But you have no opinion as to his extent 15 of benzene exposure while he was a boilermaker; is 16 that correct? 17 A. No. 18 Q. No, it's not correct? 19 A. Don't ask a double negative question. 20 Ask again. 21 Q. Do you have an opinion as to Mr. Lilly's 22 benzene exposure during the time when Mr. Lilly 23 was a boilermaker? 24 A. No, other than in general terms his 25 exposure would be similar to maintenance workers NELL MC CALLUM & ASSOCIATES, INC. 202 1 at a refinery. 2 Q. Other maintenance workers at that 3 refinery? 4 A. Not at that refinery, maintenance 5 workers at refineries in the petrochemical 6 industry. 7 Q. So, is it your opinion that Mr. Lilly's 8 benzene exposure as a boilermaker would be the 9 same as a boilermaker's benzene exposure at the 10 Exxon Baton Rouge or Baytown refinery?. 11 A. I won't pick that particular refinery. 12 I would say his exposure would be similar to the 13 average exposure of all the maintenance workers in 14 the studies that I rely on. 15 Q. Well, would Mr. Lilly's benzene exposure 16 be similar to a boilermaker's benzene exposure at 17 the Mobil refinery in Beaumont? 18 A. You're still picking one or two 19 particular refineries in the entire industry. I'm 20 not relying on one or two studies. I'm relying on 21 all the studies that have been published out there 22 in the literature. So, my database is much bigger 23 than just one or two refineries. 24 Q. Looking on Page 305 of your "Cancer 25 Epidemiology and Petroleum Industry," written by. NELL MC CALLUM 8 ASSOCIATES, INC. 203 1 you and Dr. Raab, the Beaumont refinery had an 2 SMR for lymphatic tissue cancer of 1.57, yet the 3 Exxon facilities had lymphatic tissue SMR's of 4 less than '1. How can you account for that? 5 A. That tells you occupational exposure is 6 most likely not a factor. There are other 7 confounding factors. 8 Q. Why would that tell you that? 9 A. Because it's not consistent. Had that 10 been a relationship between occupational exposure 11 in the industry, and that particular disease, then 12 you would expect to see a certain consistent 13 pattern. 14 Q. Isn't it also possible that the Exxon 15 facility used state-of-the-art engineering 16 controls, whereas the Mobil refinery did not use 17 state-of-the-art engineering controls and 18 . industrial hygiene practices relative to worker 19 exposure to benzene at the refineries? Couldn't 20 that be a factor? 21 A. I didn't know of that. And, remember, 22 we are talking about cohort studies, which we 23 include people exposed to the general environment 24 at the refinery all the way back to the 1920's 25 or '30's. NELL MC CALLUM & ASSOCIATES, INC. 204 1 Q. But you don't know the engineering and 2 industrial hygiene practices associated with the 3 Exxon facility versus those of the Mobil facility, 4 do you? 5 A. Not specifically, no. 6 Q. You don't know the difference of 7 exposure levels to the workers at the Mobil 8 refinery versus the workers at the Baton Rouge or 9 Baytown or Exxon refineries, do you? 10 A. I don't know specifically. .I don't 11 think that it's a major difference between the 12 refineries. 13 Q. You're assuming that, aren't you? 14 A. I have read a couple of reports talking 15 about exposure levels in the industry. 16 Q. Okay. Do you have an opinion as to 17 whether or not the workers at the Exxon refinery 18 were exposed to less benzene than the Mobil 19 workers at the Beaumont facility -20 A. Are we talking 21 Q. -- as reflected by the Hanis studies of 22 1982 and 1985? 23 A. Are you talking about time-weighted 24 average? 25 Q. Time-weighted average, part per million NELL MC CALLUM & ASSOCIATES, INC. 205 1 years, however you would like to express it. Is 2 there a difference between those two populations' 3 benzene exposure? 4 A. And how big a difference is a 5 difference? I mean 6 Q. I want to know if you recognize that 7 there is any difference. 8 A. I'm sure there is always a small 9 difference, you know, even within the refinery 10 itself. It's a matter of how big a difference 11 you're talking about. 12 Q. Did you know that Exxon in the 1940's 13 employed industrial hygienists at their 14 refineries? 15 A. I don't know -- I don't know the date. 16 Q. Did you know that the Beaumont Mobil 17 refinery did not have an industrial hygienist at 18 its refinery until the 1970's; did you know that? 19 A. I didn't know that. 20 Q. Which of those two refineries, the 21 Beaumont Mobil refinery or the Exxon Baytown 22 refinery, do you think had the lower benzene 23 exposures? 24 A. I don't know. 25 Q. Isn't that important for you to know NELL MC CALLUM & ASSOCIATES, INC. 206. 1 when evaluating two studies like you've done in 2 your meta analysis? 3 A. No. I'm talking about an average of the 4 entire industry. 5 Q. Doesn't your average, through meta 6 analysis, basically just dilute those studies that 7 indicate a higher incidence of disease such as 8 lymphatic tissue cancer? 9 A. No. 10 Q. Looking at the Morgan and Wong Beaumont 11 refinery study results for lymphatic tissue 12 cancer, there indicates an SMR of 1.57. Does that 13 mean that there is a 57 percent increase in the 14 expected numbers of lymphatic tissue cancer? 15 A. No. 16 Q. Over expected? 17 A. No. The interpretation of that study 18 was an increase, that the increase could have been 19 due to chance. It was not statistically 20 significant. 21 Q. You expected to see 7.62 deaths, but 22 actually there was observed 12 deaths from that 23 refinery? 24 A. And the difference could have been due 25 to chance. NELL MC CALLUM & ASSOCIATES, INC. 207 1 Q. Could have been due to chance? 2 A. Right. 3 Q. It's also possible that it could not 4 have been due to chance? 5 A. There could be other confounding 6 exposures. 7 Q. Isn't it also possible that because of 8 the higher benzene levels at the Beaumont refinery 9 as compared to the Exxon refineries, that is an 10 explanation of why there is an increase incidence 11 of lymphatic tissue deaths at the Beaumont 12 refinery? 13 A. I didn't know there was -- that exposure 14 level at Beaumont was higher. 15 Q. Do you have any opinion as to 16 Lilly's exposure to benzene, those levels, 17 during the time when Mr. Lilly was a laborer at 18 the Cities Service complex? 19 A. Again, I would put that into the broad 20 category of maintenance workers. That's how we 21 classify workers in the industry. 22 Q. At many refineries, would you agree with 23 me that laborer work is performed by contract 24 employees? 25 A. I don't know. NELL MC CALLUM & ASSOCIATES. INC. 208 1 Q. Would you agree with me that not one 2 study in Table XIV involving lymphatic tissue 3 cancer includes contract employees in that study? 4 A. These studies consist of employees of 5 companies. Some of them might have been 6 contractors. I don't know. 7 Q. Well, it's true that none of these 8 companies would keep morbidity and mortality 9 information on contract employees, now, would 10 they? 11 A. No. 12 Q. So, more than likely, none of these 13 studies include contract workers; is that correct? 14 A. Not if they have not worked as an 15 employee of the company. 16 Q. And you have no background relative to 17 what jobs at a refinery are typically given to 18 contract workers; that's a correct statement, 19 isn't it? 20 A. Can you say that again? 21 Q. You don't have the industrial experience 22 to rely upon as it concerns the utilization of 23 contract workers at a refinery or petrochemical 24 plant? You don't know how they're utilized, do 25 you? NELL MC CALLUM & ASSOCIATES, INC. 209 1 MS. ARRAS: I'm going to object as 2 being vague in the sense -- you're trying 3 to have him draw a conclusion as to 4 every petrochemical plant company in the 5 United States? 6 MR. HYDE: The industry in 7 general. 8 MS. ARRAS: I think that's pretty 9 broad. 10 MR. HYDE: Well, let Kim answer 11 it, then. 12 A. I can't answer your question. My 13 understanding is, their job functions would be 14 similar to those of maintenance workers, 15 maintenance employees. 16 BY MR. HYDE: 17 Q. And you have gained your knowledge 18 relative to contractors and the type of work they 19 may or may not do from the epidemiological studies 20 that have been conducted by the various oil 21 companies, or American Petroleum Institute or 22 Chemical Manufacturers Association; is that right? 23 A. Yes. 24 Q. If you assume with me that in most 25 refineries contract workers do the common laborer NELL MC CALLUM S ASSOCIATES, INC. 210 1 work, then these studies would not reflect, 2 generally, common laborer disease history? 3 A. I don't think it's a fair statement to 4 make. 5 Q. Why not? 6 A. Because in the studies that I included 7 in our paper, we do have maintenance employees. 8 And in that group of employees, we do have people 9 with the job title laborer. So, we do have those 10 people. But they are on the payroll of the 11 company, per se. 12 Q. You understand that Mr. Lilly is a black 13 man? 14 A. Yes. 15 Q. Do you know what kind of work a black 16 man was given at the Cities Service refinery in 17 the 1940's, 1950's? 18 MS. ARRAS: I'm going to object to 19 this. It calls for assumptions on his 20 part. It's very vague. 21 MR. SPEARS: Well, the question 22 is, what does he know. And I'm not sure 23 he wouldn't know that. But you can 24 answer. 25 NELL MC CALLUM & ASSOCIATES, INC. 211 1 BY MR. HYDE: 2 Q. Let's strike that and go to a new 3 question. 4 What do you know about the type of work 5 Mr. Lilly performed in the 1940's and 1950's, 6 given the fact that he was a black man working at 7 that refinery? 8 A. Well, we discussed earlier, he washed 9 bottles in the lab. 10 Q. Did you also read where he would also 11 shovel out the bottoms from tanks and work in the 12 sewer systems? Did you read that in his 13 deposition? 14 .MR. McCALL: Counsel, once again, 15 are you referring to the forties and 16 fifties in terms of his work 17 MR. HYDE: Yes. 18 MR. McCALL: -- as opposed to his 19 later work? 20 MR. HYDE: Yes. 21 A. Yeah, I read that. 22 BY MR. HYDE: 23 Q. Would you say that Mr. Lilly probably 24 was exposed to significant amounts of benzene as a 25 laborer in the Cities Service complex during the NELL MC CALLUM & ASSOCIATES, INC. 212 1 1940's and 1950's? 2 A. I have no information on that. 3 Q. Do you have any opinion as to the extent 4 of exposure to benzene Mr. Lilly had when he would 5 clean someone's shirt with benzene? 6 A. I didn't know that. 7 Q. As an epidemiologist knowledgeable of 8 benzene epidemiology, would you recommend that a 9 person ever wash a shirt in pure benzene? 10 MR. McCALL: As an 11 epidemiologist? 12 MR. HYDE: Yeah, as an 13 epidemiologist, knowledgeable in the 14 literature associated with benzene. 15 MR. McCALL: I'll object to the 16 form of the question as the question 17 itself calls for something beyond this 18 man's field of expertise in this case. 19 It's objectionable. 20 BY MR. HYDE: 21 Q. Will you answer that question? 22 A. I don't recommend -- make recommendations 23 on work practice, per se. 24 Q. As a scientist knowledgeable of the 25 epidemiological studies concerning benzene, would NELL MC CALLUM & ASSOCIATES, INC. 213 1 you ever suggest to any of your clients that they 2 permit their employees to wash clothing in benzene? 3 MR. McCALL: I'm going to object 4 to the form of the question, assuming 5 facts that are not in evidence. 6 Go ahead, Dr. Wong, if you can 7 answer it. 8 A. I think you're getting into an area of 9 what I would say is decision making or policy 10 making. I am not an expert on policy making, 11 other than within my household. I certainly make 12 a policy of forbidding my kids to smoke even one 13 single cigarette. 14 But if you give me a patient who has 15 lung cancer and his exposure to cigarettes was 16 only one -- you know, he smoke only one cigarette 17 in his lifetime, as a scientist, I cannot put any 18 relationship between that single cigarette smoking 19 and his lung cancer. But 20 BY MR. HYDE: 21 Q. You 22 A. It's a little story just to tell you 23 that I'm not a policy maker. 24 Q. But the point is, for someone you care 25 about, you wouldn't want them smoking even one NELL MC CALLUM & ASSOCIATES, INC. 214 1 cigarette; is that correct? 2 A. For one thing, I don't like cigarette 3 smoke in the house. 4 Q. But I'm correct, you wouldn't want 5 anybody that you cared about to even smoke one 6 cigarette? 7 A. That's right. 8 Q. Anybody who you cared about, you would 9 not want them to wash a piece of clothing in 10 benzene; is that a fair statement? . 11 MR. McCALL: Once again 12 A. I did not say that. 13 MR. McCALL: -- let me object to 14 the form of the question, Counsel. It's 15 facts not in evidence. If you are 16 talking about 17 A. I did not say that. 18 BY MR. HYDE: 19 Q. Well, are you saying that it wouldn't 20 bother you if someone who you cared about washed 21 their clothes, shirt, in benzene? 22 A. I have no information on the health 23 effects of washing clothes in benzene. 24 Q. Doesn't just general concept of that 25 offend you as an epidemiologist knowledgeable of NELL MC CALLUM & ASSOCIATES, INC. 215 1 the epidemiological studies associated with 2 benzene? 3 A. Offend me -- I have no idea what -- what 4 the procedure would be -- what the exposure level 5 would be. 6 Q. Do you think it's a prudent procedure 7 for someone to be allowed to wash their shirt in 8 benzene? 9 MR. McCALL: We're talking about 10 in general now? 11 MS. ARRAS: We're talking about 12 doing it once? 13 A. Once, twice, three times? 14 BY MR. HYDE: 15 Q. One time. Is it prudent for someone to 16 wash a shirt in benzene one time? 17 A. I would not do it myself. 18 Q. Why wouldn't you do it yourself? 19 A. I would probably throw away the shirt. 20 Q. But you wouldn't use the benzene because 21 it's a health hazard; isn't that right? 22 A. No. 23 Q. You wouldn't do it because benzene is a 24 carcinogen; isn't that correct? 25 A. I have no access to benzene to-start NELL MC CALLUM & ASSOCIATES. INC. 216 . 1 with. 2 Q. I'm giving you a hypothetical. If you 3 had benzene, would you wash your shirt in it? 4 A. I guess it depends on what other 5 alternatives there are and what else I'm going to 6 do with the shirt. 7 Q. There's no alternatives. Either throw 8 the shirt away or wash it in benzene. Would you 9 wash it in benzene? 10 MR. McCALL: And, Counsel, we're 11 talking about today 12 MR. HYDE: Today. Right now. 13 MR. McCALL: -- what he knows 14 today. 15 MS. ARRAS: In 1991. 16 BY MR. HYDE: 17 Q. What you know today. 18 A. I would not. 19 Q. And why? 20 A. Because there is no need for me to, I 21 guess. I don't know how else I can answer that 22 question. 23 Q. It's also because you don't need to 24 expose yourself to benzene; isn't that 25 A. Exactly. NELL MC CALLUM 6 ASSOCIATES, INC. 217 1 Q. -- correct? _ 2 And you don't need to expose yourself or 3 you don't want to expose yourself because benzene 4 is a health hazard? 5 A. At high enough level, it can cause acute 6 myelogenous leukemia. Let's be very specific. 7 When you say "health hazard," you are making some 8 blanket statement, which I would not agree to. 9 Q. On your chart that you put together 10 relative to risk factors associated with 11 non-Hodgkin's lymphoma, I see that you did not 12 include any of Rinsky's studies. That's correct, 13 isn't it, as it pertains to benzene and 14 non-Hodgkin's lymphoma? 15 A. Did Rinsky talk on non-Hodgkin's 16 lymphoma? 17 Q. Did he? 18 A. No. 19 Q. He's never talked about non-Hodgkin's 20 lymphoma? 21 A. No. 22 MR. HYDE: Off the record. 23 (DISCUSSION OFF THE RECORD) 24 MR. HYDE: For the record, we are 25 going to stop right now. It's NELL MC CALLUM 8 ASSOCIATES. INC. 218 1 approximately 6:45 We have been going 2 for a long time. The witness is tired, 3 and the attorneys are tired. 4 We are going to have an agreement 5 that we will continue Dr. Wong's 6 deposition by telephone. But this 7 transcript is not to be transcribed and 8 no parties except Dr. Wong are to have 9 access to the exhibits until right 10 before the deposition -- the. telephone 11 deposition starts back, which will 12 more than likely, the attorneys will get 13 together in Lake Charles to complete the 14 deposition. 15 It's further agreed that since 16 this is a continuation of the 17 deposition, that Dr. Wong will remain 18 under oath as it pertains to this 19 deposition and will not need to be 20 re-sworn at the time when the telephone 21 deposition is -- is that agreeable? 22 MR. McCALL: Sure. 23 MR. SPEARS: Right. 24 MR. McCALL: Are you going to 25 arrange, as per Mr. Baggett's NELL MC CALLUM s ASSOCIATES, INC. 219 1 insistance, that a court reporter be 2 with Dr. Wong on this end next time 3 around? 4 MR. HYDE: No. We'll just have 5 the court reporter with us. Is that 6 agreeable to y'all? 7 MR. McCALL: Just the problems 8 that we've had with that in the past. 9 That's. why we have gone to court 10 reporters with the deponent 11 MR. HYDE: Well, I mean 12 MR. McCALL: I'll work with you 13 whichever way, but that's become a 14 problem in the past. 15 MR. HYDE: I will agree to have 16 the court reporter in Lake Charles with 17 the attorneys, if that's agreeable to 18 y'all. 19 MR. SPEARS: Sure. 20 Do you have a fax machine in your 21 office, Dr. Wong, just in case y'all 22 want to send something back to look at? 23 MS. ARRAS: As far as the exhibits 24 are concerned, as we did with 2.5 Dr. Bingham, they'll be sent by Federal NELL MC CALLUM 8 ASSOCIATES, INC. 220 1 Express 2 -MR. McCALL: To the wrong 3 address. 4 MS. ARRAS: -- they'll be sent by 5 Federal Express the day before the 6 deposition is to recommence. 7 MR. HYDE: Well, he can just bring 8 them with him during the deposition. 9 But certainly we should not have them 10 until the day before. 11 MS. ARRAS: Right. The court 12 reporter is charged with the duty of not 13 making the exhibits available to any 14 party until 24 -- approximately 24 hours 15 before the deposition. 16 However, if he potentially brings 17 them with him to the deposition, I don't 18 know that that doesn't pose a bit of a 19 problem. 20 MR. HYDE: Dr. Wong has his 21 exhibits with him. 22 MS. ARRAS: All right. Then 23 you'll bring them to the deposition when 24 it recommences. 25 MR. SPEARS: We're going to have NELL MC CALLUM & ASSOCIATES, INC. 221 1 to be with him and the court reporter 2 because they're going to have their set 3 of exhibits. 4 MS. ARRAS: I know. 5 MR. SPEARS: So, wherever that 6 is. Dr. Wong will be here, but we'll be 7 together, somewhere. 8 MS. ARRAS: Unfortunately. 9 MR. HYDE: Does that reflect all 10 our agreements? 11 MS. ARRAS: I believe so. 12 MR. HYDE: And we'll try to 13 complete this deposition within the next 14 two weeks, then? 15 MR. SPEARS: At least. Sometime 16 when we don't have any other 17 depositions. 18 MS. ARRAS: The problem is the 19 holidays. I don't know that anybody is 20 going to be available to go to Lake 21 Charles. 22 THE WITNESS: Do you want to pick 23 a date now? 24 MR. HYDE: I don't have my 25 calendar with me. NELL MC CALLUM 8 ASSOCIATES, INC. 222 1 Let's go off the record now 2 well, let's say this, are there any 3 other agreements associated with the 4 continuation of Dr. Wong's deposition 5 that we need to get on the record? 6 MS. ARRAS: Well 7 MR. McCALL: That's fine. 8 MS. ARRAS: Let's go off record. 9 (DISCUSSION OFF THE RECORD) 10 (THE DEPOSITION WAS ADJOURNED AT 7:00 P.M.) 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 NELL MC CALLUM 8 ASSOCIATES, INC. 223 1 THE STATE OF TEXAS XX 2 COUNTY OF JEFFERSON XX 3 I, JAMES G. ELLIS, a Certified Shorthand 4 Reporter, hereby certify that theforegoing 5 testimony was given before me after the witness 6 had first been duly sworn. 7 I further certify that this deposition was 8 prepared under my direction and is a complete and 9 correct transcript of the proceedings and that it 10 is being given to MR. J. KEITH HYDE. 11 I further certify that I am neither attorney 12 for, related to, nor employed by any of the parties 13 to the lawsuit in which this deposition was taken. 14 Further, I am neither related to nor employed by 15 any of the attorneys of record in this cause; nor 16 do I have a financial interest in the matter. 17 GIVEN UNDER MY HAND AND SEAL OF OFFICE in 18 .Beaumont, Texas, on this the day of 19 1991. 20 21 JAMES G. ELLIS, CSR 22 Texas CSR No. 3004 (Expires 12-31-93) 23 Nell McCallum & Associates, Inc. 24 2615 Calder Avenue, Suite 111 25 Beaumont, Texa.s 77702 NELL MC CALLUM A ASSOCIATES. INC.