Document VG2rwQQmynkyJ9OrG9q11OoLK

FILE NAME: Texaco (TEX) DATE: 2003 Aug 19 DOC#: TEX002 DOCUMENT DESCRIPTION: Legal - Deposition of Ronald Richards with Barry Castleman Notes /fifi ----- --- y s z s r a ^ C ^zs -'--- - - - / y r ----- C - - _/( ^ n r / s y & & &pf/fi V. /9 3 's fi^>) $ L x f i / f i f i f i J 'U s / f if i* ^ / / u ^ - J 2 < sySnfiu< > < & & - & . Ie- /Z - t e ///? < /7 ' - e ' / / ? s ? & s f p' a - ? ( - i- ir ' <? J { jl^>!/% ^ <C^u 4****%~>*&ZL > * - f S ^ - r? 3> ~7 yU- f i fi f i fiu < ^ y ^ s i*szU-k / 9 > f i u y f i - y t - t f i i ! i * f i f i / f i ^ ^ S Y ' JT&x o ! * ^ ' / / & ~7 J * - / 3 c ^ f i/ r /^ ' ^ V -- / ' / ^7 fy h 'T ' f s ^ y y h ^ iA ^ o `> f iF 3 ^~ < ?i^ y jfi n < f/ /9 Z H st*Y ^' * / ` ^ / yf i M ^ y > ^ 1y y f i y / / fi f f y 7- f i f i $ / f i f i ) f i 5Y ^ t ^ v ) __ _ ___^ 7 t ^ < t < ! ^ V l'l* y L jfix ^ y y ^ y fi^ z -* ^-v y // < ? / / J/ s ? S 'c ^ . t l9` '7 '3 1' '& u 4**t> < f if if ii< 7 f i C f i f i f i / f i r r s & fifz p & rx < ^ e ^ H > ~ ^ C ^ - <a^/ im/jr-lm^ s* s iff/i/ /i/f? tir f i'3& i > ^ r y c. n * * * * i 23s*. `^ Jf'<*^=> / / f i f i ^ e ^ / ^ s z t u f i f i '/^j-jp " {\4-apQ y $ V - S \- / C f ix z ^ o s 9 & ^ p p - f i`C+o~T~p /}~ -- - *b*> & e*f~ ' /$~ ? / 6 f i f i 7' y rj*~ ~ ( f i 1 / U 4y t < 9 j 71^ m vTM ? f i L ^ *!> r^ L ^ ? a ^ - ^Z r*< - ^ < f i f i - ^ * ^ c ^ r y r~ / * ' . // S / ? / ^ t^ ^ ^ ** * ^ ** 7 ^s4~ / ? 7 4 w g ffe r> . . , a c s r& * y c' . . S - ^ l-- - n p U + tstsr H ^ y^ % /** . - > / ^ 1 IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF WASHINGTON IN AND FOR THE COUNTY OF SKAGIT i ' ; v i r g i n i a i a m e s o n , individually) and as Personal Representative) of the Estate of r a y i a m e s o n , ) . Plaintiffs, ) vs. ) No. 02-2-01069-8 SABERHAGEN HOLDINGS, INC., ) et al., ) Defendants. ) . Videotaped Deposition Upon Oral Examination of RONALD RICHARDS 8:37 a.in, August 19, 2003 1420 Fifth street suite 4100 Seattle, Washington Cheryl Macdonald, CCR Court Reporter 2 APPEARANCES EXAMINATION BY MR\^ FROCKT: BY MR. MARKS: . BY MR. MESHER: EXHIBITS MARKED Exhibit NOS. 1 - 4 Exhibit No. 5 .... Exhibit 6 ....... Exhibit 7 ....... Exhibit 8 ....... Exhibit 9 Exhibit 10 Exhibit 11 Exhibit 12 Exhibit 13 Exhibit 14 Exhibit 15 Exhibit 16' Exhibit p Exhibit;/18 Exhibit 19 Exhibit 20 Exhibit 21 w in r\j,\-n/-\r\i/j \ INDEX PAGE 5, 222, 236^ 194 234 PAGE 5 7 27 41 51 56 78 87 89 100 122 125 128 133 135 140 150 152 4 - I N D E X (cont'd.) FOR THE PLAINTIFF: and OAVID FROCKT Attorney at Law 17530 vashon Highway SW vashon, Washington 98070 DAVID BENINGER Attorney at Law 701 Fifth Avenue Suite 6700 Seattle, Washington 98104 FOR SEQUOIA VENTURES CHRISTOPHER S. MARKS Attorney at Law 601 union street suite 4100 Seattle, Washington 98101 EXHIBITS MARKEO Exhibit 22 ............................ Exhibit 2 3 ..................... ..... .... Exhibit 24 ............................ Exhibit 25 ............................ Exhibit 26 ............................ Exhibit 27 ..................... ...... PAGE 164 f o r t e x a c o and THE w i t n e s s : and BARRY N. MESHER Attorney at Law 1420 Fifth Avenue suite 4100 Seattle, Washington 98101 STEVEN I. FRENKEL Attorney at Law 107 Elm street Stamford, Connecticut 06902 FOR SABERHAGEN HOLDINGS: ALSO PRESENT: NEAL J. PHILIP Attorney at Law . 700 Fifth Avenue suite 5800 Seattle, Washington 98104 PETER KOSLIK. Videoaraoher MOBURG & ASSOCIATES, INC. (206)622-3110 Pages 1 to 4 5 1 RONALD RICHARDS, witness herein, having been first duly sworn by the Notary, deposed 2 and said as follows: 3 4 (Marked Deposition Exhibit 1-4.) 5 EXAMINATION 6 BY MR. FROCKT: 7 q . Morning, Mr. Richards. 8 A. Morning. 9 Q. My name 1s David Frockt. we've met before? 10 A. That's correct. 11 Q. I wanted to ask you first, can you tell me what 12 you've done in preparation for your deposition testimony 13 here today? 14 A. I've gone through severaldocuments that were 15 sent to me back 1n Surprise, Arizona, and we met with Barry 16 on Sunday afternoon, and then we met with both Steve 17 and Barry yesterday for the better part of the day. 18 ' Q. And by "we" I assume you mean your attorneys and 19 yourself? 20 A. That's correct, myself. 21 Q. what documents did you look at? 22 A. oh, we had several binders about that thick 23 (Indicating) that we went through, paged through. There 24 were some API documents, American Petroleum Institute 25 documents. There were some documents regarding some KAJIN K U 1 A K U b 7 1 MR. f r o c k t : Sir, I 'm going to hand you what 2 we'll mark as Exhibit 5. 3 (Marked Deposition Exhibit 5.) 4 Q. Sir, 1s that a document that you looked at In 5 preparation for your deposition testimony here today? I 'm 6 sorry, please take a few minutes to look through 1t. I 7 don't want to -- I want you to look at the document, 8 obviously. 9 a . I think we looked at something similar to this. 10 it could have been this document. I did not go through in 11 complete detail. I don't recognize this particular cover 12 page, and I don't remember this cover page. I think maybe 13 the first couple of pages are either a document I looked at 14 yesterday or something similar to a document I looked at 15 yesterday. 16 MR. MARKS: What exhibit number is this? 17 MR. FROCKT: This 1s No. 5. 18 q . sir, you stated that Texaco -- 1t was Texaco's 19 understanding that they were a member of the a p i beginning 20 1n 1948 or '49. That's what you just said a minute ago; Is 21 that right? 22 A. That's what I think the attorneys have 23 determined. 24 Q. Sir, can you take a look at the top of that 25 document. Do you see the name M. N. Newquist there under 8 1 Industrial hygiene surveys that were done back In the '70s 1 members? 2 at Anacortes. Let's see. There were other memorandums and 2 A. Yes, or. Newquist. 3 things of that particular assortment, but 1t was a big thick 4 11st, and I can't remember everything we looked at. I guess 5 my earlier deposition that we took in, what, February, I 6 guess 1t was. 7 Q. It was 1n February, yeah. 8 A. we looked at that, too. 9 q. what API documents did you look at? 10 A. Oh, there were some from the '40s, and I don't 11 remember the exact context of them, perhaps some from the 12 '50s. 13 q. Any particular documents that you recall sitting 3 q. what's the date of that document? 4 A. May 7 or 8, 1945. 5 q. And that is the minutes of a meeting of the 6 Medical Advisory committee of the American petroleum 7 institute, Isn't 1t? 8 A. That's correct. 9 q. So what was -- do you know who Mr. Newquist was? 10 A. I had never met Dr. Newquist, but he was the ~ X 11 think h1s title was chief medical officer prior to Dr. 12 Curtis Baylor, and we've talked about Dr. Baylor before. 13 q. who did Mr. Newquist -- who did Dr. Newquist work 14 here right now that you looked at? 14 for? 15 A. No. They were ones I had not seen before. 16 q. were they meeting minutes? 17 A. Yes, they were. They were minutes of certain 18 meetings, that's correct. 19 q. Sir, can you tell me was Texaco -- was Texaco a 20 member of the American petroleum institute? 21 A. All I know 1s that I guess the attorneys have 22 traced back a membership as far as 1949 or 1948, something 23 in that particular time frame. I don't know anything beyond 24 that. I don't know anything before that. They were 25 certainly a member when I arrived at Texaco 1n 1969. 15 A. I have no Idea, 16 q. was he a Texacoemployee? 17 A. Oh, yes. But I thought you meant who he reported 18 to. He was a Texaco employee, and I think his title was 19 chief medical officer at the time. 20 q. That document would seem to Indicate that or. 21 Newquist was a -- was on this Medical Advisory Committee 1n 22 1945, doesn't 1t? 23 A. Yes. 24 q. And Dr. Newquist was the medical director for 25 Texaco at that time; is that correct? MOBURG & ASSOCIATES, INC. (206)622-3110 Pages 5 to 8 i * j L-- I M L 1 9 A. or chief medical officer, whatever the title was. 2 q. chief medical officer for Texaco; is that 3 correct? 4 A. Yes. 5 q. I believe there's another individual from the 6 Texas Company that's listed there, H. R. Warrick, do you see 7 that? 8 A. Yes. 9 q. And is it designated there that he's also from 10 the Texaco company? Texas Company, I apologize. 11 A. The Texas company, New York, uh-huh. 12 recognize that name at all. Idon't 13 q. So, would you agree with me that that document 14 would seem to indicate that Texaco was, in fact, a member of 15 the American petroleum institute at least as early 1945? 16 A. Not necessarily. I know that I've been a member 17 of certain committees and associations without being an 18 actual -- without the company being a member of that 19 particular firm. So again, all I know 1s what I was told, 20 and that was that they can trace back their membership 21 to 1948 or 1949. 22 q. so you're saying that it's the official 23 membership of the Texas company in the American Petroleum 24 Institute beginning in 1948 or *49? 25 A. Well, that's what they can trace back. KUN RICHARDS 1 A. No. what I'm saying is you asked me a question 2 as to whether this demonstrates that Texaco was, in fact, i 3 member of the API in 1945. And what I'm saying is that thi 4 document to me does not necessarily demonstrate that Texaco 5 was a member of the API or not in 1945 in that the 6 documentation we can find only goes back as far as '48 or 7 '49. That's all I'm saying. 8 q. And sir, would you agree with me, however, that 9 certainly from the face of that document it would appear 10 that Dr. Newquist was a participating member of the Medical 11 Advisory Committee insofar as he was listed there as a 12 member who attended a meeting for the -- 13 A. Yes. I have no dispute about that. 14 Q. Can I take a look at the document? . 15 A. sure. 16 Q. sir, I'm going to direct your attention to the 17 third page of the document, if you could read there, down 18 at the bottom, No. 1, or actually that bottom paragraph, 19 please. 20 A. "contribution and dissemination of information,' 21 is that the one? 22 Q. Yes, sir. 23 A. Contribution of the literature revie*s were 24 contributed to the committee by the following: Library of 25 the Technical and Research Division of Texas Company, "The 10 1 q. so are you saying, then, it's your belief that 2 Dr. Newquist was a member 1n his individual capacity, a 3 nonmember -- as a representative of the Texas company at 4 that time? 5 a . I think what I'm saying is that this document 12 1 Carcinogenicity of Bituminous Compounds." April 30, 1945. 2 Two of the chemical divisions, socony-vacuum oil Company, 3 Inc. Carcinogenic hydrocarbons, April 27, 1945. would you 4 like me to go on? Oh, that's it. 5 q. That'sit right there. Sir, that paragraph that 6 doesn't necessarily demonstrate to me that in fact since Dr. 7 Newquist was on this particular committee that 1n fact the 6 you just read would seem to indicate that there was a 7 contribution by the Texas Company to this organization to a 8 corporation was a member of the API, in the absence of other 8 literature review that they were undertaking, would that be 9 documentation that we have that indicates that we can trace 10 back a membership as far as 1948 or 1949. That's all I'm 11 saying. 12 q. You believe that -- 1s it normal for -- when you 13 were working for Texaco as an industrial hygienist, was it 14 normal for you to be a member -- in an organization . 15 individually and not in your capacity as a representative of 16 the Texas company? 17 A. Yes. 18 q. What organizations were you a member of? 19 A. Well, that's the American industrial Hygiene 20 Association. I was a member and secretary/treasurer of the 21 New York chapter, and Texaco was not a corporate member of 22 the a x h a . so, i mean, another one that comes to mind is the 23 Manufacturing chemist's Association. 24 q. so is it Texaco's position then they were not a 25 member of the American Petroleum institute in 1945? 9 a fair statement? 10 A. That's hat the document seems to say, yes. 11 q. would it be normal forthe Texas Company to 12 contribute literature reviews of various subjects relating 13 to Industrial health to organizations that they were not a 14 member of in 1945? 15 A. oh, yes. 16 Q. it ould? 17 A. Uh-huh. 18 Q. hat makes you say that? 19 A. well, on many occasions I'm familiar *ith some of 20 the ork in the committees I was on where companies have 21 contributed literature information data, and they ere not a 22 corporate member of that particular organization. 23 q. All right. 24 A. I mean, to me in my profession this is not 25 unusual. MOBURG & ASSOCIATES, INC. (206)622-3110 Pages 9 to 12 u n u u i M i n v i L . l l f L- i n L . 13 1 MR. FROCKT: I can't seem to find my copy. Can I 2 borrow that one back unless you guys really need it? Thank 3 you. I think it will make it go a little faster. 4 Q. You would agree with me that this document 5 certainly seems to Indicate that the Texas company 6 contributed this document called "The Carcinogenicity of 7 Bituminous Compounds" to this Medical Advisory Committee of 8 the American Petroleum institute at that time7 9 A. Yes. That's certainly what the document seems to 10 say. 11 Q. Why don't you turn to page 3AM 014848, please. 12 A. 0148? 13 Q. It's about three pages down. . 14 A. okay, I have that. 15 Q. And if you could go ahead and just read through 16 the document for me. 3ust read it Into the record. 17 MR. m e s h e r : You want him to read the entire 18 document? 19 MR. f r o c k t : No, no. 3ust the cover page. 20 A. okay. 21 Q. Okay. If you could just read it out loud, 22 please. 23 A. oh, from the top7 24 Q. Yes. 25 A. There are some notes that i can't necessarily KUIN K IL H A K U b 1 field has been covered, either in the report itself or in 2 one of the bibliographical references given 1n the appendix 3 referred to at the bottom of page 1. And then it's signed 4 by M. P. Doss, d o you see that7 5 A. Yes. 6 Q. Was Mr. Doss or m s . Do s s a Texaco employee? 7 A. I have no Idea. 8 Q. Did you ever meet anyone named M. P. d o s s ? 9 A. NO. 10 Q. Did Texaco have a library of the -- have a 11 technical and research division that had a library? 12 A. I don't really remember. There were -- at that 13 time Texaco would have been in the Chrysler building. They 14 were one of the first tenants. They occupied four floors, 15 22 through 26, and I was only really only familiar with the 16 21st floor. That's the location I worked at. 17 I think they had an engineering department there, 18 and they had a couple of representatives from the technical 19 and researdt division at that location, but I 've never heard 20 this designation before. 21 Q. okay. You're not denying, though -- 22 A. No. 23 Q. Let me finish my question. You're not denying 24 that the Texas Company in 1945 had a library in their 25 technical and research division, are you? 14 1 make out on the upper ~ 2 Q. How about just the typewritten part7 3 A. sure. For Information only, dash, not for 4 publication. The contribution of Information to members of 5 the API Medical Advisory committee, 6-13-45. "The 6 carcinogenicity of Bituminous compounds." Literature 7 review, April 30, 1945. The Library of the Technical and 8 Research Division of the Texas Company, New York City, and 9 that's the typewritten Information. 10 Q. And then that would seem to be the same document 11 that's referenced earlier in the minutes; Isn't that 12 correct? 13 A. What page? 14 q. well, the page that we just talked about a few 15 minutes ago, the third page there where you read the title. 16 A. Yes. That seems to be the same document. 17 Q. And then I 'll go ahead, and 1f you turn the page 18 the second page says: Note, in view of the Immense amount 19 of published Information on various phases of the cancer 20 problem, it should be emphasized that this literature 21 review gives only a rapid survey of developments 1n the 22 field of cancer research as applied directly to the 23 petroleum, coal tar, oil shale and allied industries, while 24 1t 1s far from being complete, yet it is believed that the 25 most -- that most of the important work in this particular 16 1 A. No, certainly. That's what the documentsays. 2 Q. sure. Now, it saysthere -- it refers to the 3 bibliographical references given 1n the appendix referred to 4 at the bottom of page 1. d o you see that7 5 MR. MESHER: Excuse me, what page? Can you -- 6 MR. FROCKT: 3AM 014849. 7 A. Yes. 8 q. so this document 1s -- it would appear to be both 9 a literature review about bituminous compounds and 10 carcinogenicity as well as bibliographical references that 11 are given. Does that seem like a fair statement? 12 A. seemsto be, yes. 13 q. if you turn to the very last page. 14 A. The last page of the whole document? - 15 q. Yeah, it's 014871. Down at No. 48. 16 A. okay. 17 q. There's a reference there to Dr. Hueper, do you 18 see that7 W. C. Hueper? 19 A. Yes. 20 q. sir, and this would -- would you agree with me 21 that this would appear to be a part of the bibliography of 22 the document? 23 A. It's obviously an abbrevi*a\ted one because we're 24 missing one -- I guess we have one, two, three, and then 43 25 through 49. so there's several pages missing, but it would MOBURG & ASSOCIATES, INC. (206)622-3110 Pages 13 to 16  U l h . W V l l V *mJ y r v u i . l \ l i n V ] L I 1 | I - I M L . 17 1 appear to be. 2 q . sure, right, could you go ahead and read into 3 the record, please, the text of the No. 48 there. 4 A. "Owing"? Is that what you -- 5 Q. Yes, "owing." 6 A. owing to industrial developments, the general 7 population of factory workers in particular are exposed to 8 many new environmental factors, many of which are 9 disease-producing, occupational cancers are caused by 10 numerous chemicals and physical agents. Among them are the 11 heavy metals, nitrates, aromatic ammonia compounds -- 12 pardon me -- aromatic amino compounds, benzol, asbestos, 13 mineral oil, soot, radioactive substances, ultraviolet 14 radiation and x-rays. The author cites statistics taken 15 mainly from the records of industrial concerns but points 16 out their shortcomings. 17 Q. so certainly the summary here that you just read 18 is Indicating that this text by Dr. Hueper, by w. c. Hueper, 19 points to asbestos as a carcinogen, would you agree with 20 that? 21 A. It points out that he has some data that would 22 indicate that, and it looks like it's an article from a 23 journal, not a text. But it says what 1t says. 24 q. sure. And this was a bibliographic reference to 25 a document that the Texas Company contributed to the KUIN K JLU IA K U b 19 l A. Well, again, you said that it was in the 2 interrogatories that we admitted to that but we gave no 3 date, so... 4 Q. d o you have any information that would allow you 5 to deny that the Texas company was a member of the National 6 Safety Council in the 1930s? 7 A. NO. 8 q. Do you have any information that would allow you 9 to deny the Texas Company was a member of the National 10 safety Council in the 1940s? 11 A. No. 12 Q. And same question with regard to the National 13 Safety council in the 1950s. 14 A. No. IS q. Sir, when you were -- when you joined the company 16 In, 1 think it was, 1969 -- 17 A. correct. 18 q. -- do you ever recall seeing any documents from 19 the National Safety council? 20 A. Not really. 21 Q. Did you everattend anymeetings? 22 A. No. . 23 Q. Anyone, to yourknowledge, in the Texas Company 24 ever attend any meetings? 25 A. It could be safety was a separate entity within 18 1 American Petroleum Institute and Medical Advisory Committee, 20 1 the corporation during the full time I was there, so, they 2 is it not? 2 certainly could have. I just don't know personally one way 3 A. That's what it appears to be. 3 or the other whether they did or not or who it would have 4 q . we'll come back to the API a little bit later, 4 been. 5 sir, thank you. S Q. Sir, who was Allan Dooley? 6 sir, did you review Texaco's answers to 6 A. Allan Dooley was my predecessor, d o you want a 7 interrogatories in this case as part of your preparation? 7 bibliography? 8 A. I certainly glanced through them, but not that I 8 Q. Go ahead, if you could give us a little 9 studied them, no. 9 something. 10 . Q. Sir, was Texaco a member of the -- or the Texas 10 A. Basically from my recollection, Allan started in 11 Company a member of the National Safety council? 11 industrial hygiene with the state of Pennsylvania in the 12 A. personally I don't know. 12 30s. He moved on to the -- he worked 1n the Medical corps. 13 q. would you be Interested to know that Texaco has 13 They had an Industrial hygiene division during world War n . 14 admitted 1n their answers to Interrogatories that they were 14 He worked on tanks and aircraft exposures. 15 a member of the National Safety Council? 15 in 1947 he joined Texaco, Inc. as, i guess, . 16 A. I think I remember it now that you mention it, 16 supervisor of industrial hygiene and toxicology. That was 17 yeah. 17 later changed to manager of Industrial hygiene and 18 q. But there was no date or time frame given in 18 toxicology. He retired from Texaco in the fall of 1971 with 19 their answers to.interrogatories to that question. 19 that particular title. That's his background as far as I 20 A. Unless.you remember something, I don't know. 20 can remember. 21 q. i don't remember seeing anything like that. 21 q. Did you ever talk to him about -- you worked with 22 a . n o , I don't know. I was never involved with the 22 him for three or four years? 23 National safety council during my tenure with the company. 23 a . i knew Allan before I joined the company, and 24 q. it's true that Texas Company was a member of the 24 then obviously we spent a lot of time together between '69, 25 National safety council in the 1930s; isn't that correct? 25 July of '69, when I joined the company and when he retired MOBURG & ASSOCIATES, INC. (206)622-3110 Pages 17 to 20 1 in the fall of '71. -- I I lk> 21 2 q. Did he ever talk to you about his background 3 prior to coining to Texaco? 4 a . Prior to coming to Texaco? 5 q. Yes, sir. 6 A. I think it was more of a social meetings, 7 get-togethers, gatherings. Not a lot of detail. 8 q. Now, were you aware that Mr. Dooley was a . 9 co-author when he was working for the state of Pennsylvania 10 on a study that pertained to asbestos hazards in textile 11 mills in the state of Pennsylvania? 12 A. Yeah. I've heard that at some point in time. 13 q. Have you ever seen that study? 14 A. No. 15 q. Did he ever refer to that study? Did he ever 16 discuss that study that he participated in with you? 17 a . Not that I recall one way or the other. 18 q. Were you aware that that study reported that 25 19 percent of the workers that were surveyed in those textile 20 plants had clinical evidence of asbestosis? 21 A. Again, I never read the study. I don't recall 22 discussing with him, but i mean, if that's what 1t says, 23 that's what it says. 24 q, You have no reason to believe that that's not 25 accurate, do you? I\V JIV M L n H M O 1 Q. 1947 to 1971. 23 2 A. in other words -- I guess I don't understand the 3 question. Let me try and break it up and see if I do 4 understand 1t. Are you asking me 1f that one particular 5 study, knowledge of the one particular study, would be 6 relevant to a brand-new Industrial hygienist starting with . 7 new company in 1947, is that your question? 8 q. well, not a brand-new industrial hygienist, one 9 who has already worked 1n Industrial hygiene. 10 A. in a brand-new location in 1947. 11 q. Uh-huh. 12 A. And if we're referring to Allan Dooley? 13 q. Yeah. 14 A. He certainly was familiarwith itsince he 15 authored it in the 30s, when he joined the company 1n '47. 16 q. Well, let me ask you, 1f you had been the author 17 of a study such as the one, just based on what I representec 18 to you, is that something that you would take Into a new 19 environment or a new job and be concerned about that, 20 asbestos 1s an industrial health hazard? 21 A. Well, knowing Allan as I did -- 22 q. what aboutyou? I'mtalking about you. 23 A. Talking about me? 24 q. Yeah. 25 A. Now, are you talking about if I was aware of an 1 A. No. And I've been 1n some of those locations. I 1 article in '33 if I joined the company in '47, or are you 2 can just understand that there could be some asbestos 2 talking about an article in the 30s when I joined the 3 exposure 1n that type of setting. 4 q. Do you believe that that study -- well, you've 5 never looked at that study? 6 A. No. 7 q. Do you think informationin a study like that 8 would be relevant to an industrial hygienist coming into an 9 organization, insofar as they were trying to evaluate what 10 potential industrial health hazards might be in existence in 11 the workplaces that they were supposed to be responsible 12 for? 13 A. I guess I don't -- well, could you maybe either 14 repeat that or break that up a little bit? Seemed to be 15 rather convoluted. 16 q. Do you think that a study such as the one that 17 Mr. Dooley -- 18 a . Such asthat one particular study? 19 q. Yes. 20 -- such as the one that Mr. Dooley participated 21 in, or co-authored, I should say, 1n the 1930s, 1s something 22 that should be relevant to an Industrial hygienist when they 23 were evaluating Industrial health hazards at, for example, a 24 new work environment? 25 A. Well,what time frame? 3 company in '697 I guess that's the part I don't understand, 4 because by 1969 I had gotten a graduate degree. I studied 5 under the experts 1n pneumoconiosis-producing dust. A study 6 back 1n '33, a particular study, may have lost its relevance 7 1n compiling all the other types of data about asbestos, and 8 I studied under Mr. Hatch in '63, '64. I also had 9 experience 1n the state of Pennsylvania, '61 through '69. I 10 had been through asbestos plants. I was part of the BOSH 11 Study of asbestos plants. 12 . So I don't know that that one particular study 1n 13 '33 would have been particularly relevant to my background 14 when I joined the company 1n '69, because I think I would 15 have covered that and much more, if that's your question. 16 q. Let me ask you this: If a study that you 17 participated 1n concluded that 25 percent of workers who 18 were exposed to asbestos had clinical evidence of 19 asbestosis, would that lead you to think that asbestos was a 20 health hazard? 21 A. well, when I joined the company In 1969 I had no 22 doubt that asbestos was a health hazard from the standpoint 23 of asbestosis, and again, we're talking about a difference 24 1n settings. we're talking about a textile type of setting 25 1n Pennsylvania, similar to the textile types of settings 1n MOBURG & ASSOCIATES, NC. (206)622-3110 Pages 21 to 24 _ - - - ---------- ------ , -- . ----- ' 25 1 England where there were a lot of studies made, and these 1 started, no." i %v i * \ j . i n \ l/ 27 2 were enclosed environments where they were weaving asbestos 2 A. Well, okay. 3 fibers, taken from the actual fiber to a thread type of 3 Q. And so I guess my question to you is -- I'll ask 4 material and then weaving the thread into a narrow fabric. /5 so we're not talking about an outdoor 4 you again -- was Texaco a member of the Industrial Hygiene 5 Foundation at any time, to your knowledge? 6 environment. We're talking about an enclosed environment 6 A. The answer is the same: i don't know, because 7 with -- in the 30s I'm sure with little if no ventilation. 7 you're talking about involvement, and now you asked me a 8 Q. The issue, the industrial health issue -- hazard, 8 question about membership. So we're going back to the po1n 9 I should say -- in asbestos textile plants would be in 9 I had earlier in the deposition. There are all sorts of 10 asbestos dust; isn't that correct? ' 10 instances where Texaco was involved with these types of 11 A. That's correct. 11 organizations and the corporation was not a formal member. 12 Q. And asbestos dust can be present in other 12 And I don't want to quibble, but I'm trying to answer the 13 environments; isn't that correct? 13 question you just asked me versus the question you asked me 14 A. That's correct. But they are other environments. 14 in February, which I had a different answer because you IS And so there are other factors to be considered. 15 asked me a different question. 16 Q. sure, right. Sir, I want to ask you a question. 16 MR. FROCKT: Let's mark this as Exhibit 6, pleas 17 You stated in your last deposition that you were aware that 17 (Marked Deposition Exhibit 6.) 18 the Texas Company had been a member -- strike that. Let me 18 MR. m a r k s : what are the Bates numbers? 19 just start over with this. 19 MR. FRENKEL: 3AM 022172. 20 Was Texaco a member of the industrial Health 20 MR. m a r k s : Through? 21 Foundation, the industrial Hygiene Foundation, I should say? 21 MR. FRENKEL: I don't know if 1t's complete or 22 A. I don't know that for a fact one way or the 22 not. 23 other. I mean, all this was covered in the interrogatories 23 MR. FROCKT: Through 022245. 24 at some point in time, but I don't recall that. 24 MR. m e s h e r : Are these consecutive numbers, 25 Q. Sir, I'm going to read to you from page 126 of 25 because the last document wasn't consecutive? y H 26 28 1 your previous deposition. Question was -- sorry, starting 1 . MR. FROCKT: These are consecutive. 2 on page 125. My question to you was: 2 MR. m a r k s : Thank you. 3 "So Mr. Dooley was at a meeting of the industrial 3 Q. Sir, this is an exhibit -- 4 Hygiene Foundation sometime in the 1960s when you were 4 A. I don't have it in front of me. 5 working for the state of Pennsylvania? 5 Q. Oh, I 'm sorry. Sir, I'm going to represent to 6. "a n s w e r : i sort of recall that, you know, seeing 6 you that this is an exhibit from a deposition of a woman 7 him there. Yeah. 7 named sally Wilkie who was a records custodian for the 8 "q u e s t i o n : Okay. And he was working for Texaco 8 industrial Health Foundation, the successor to the 9 at that time? 9 industrial Hygiene Foundation. 10 "a n s w e r : Absolutely. 10 A. Okay. 11 "q u e s t i o n : And were there other Texaco officials 11 Q. The deposition was given in the year 2000, and 12 at that meeting? 13 "a n s w e r : i don't know. 14 "q u e s t i o n : okay. And at that particular meeting 12 this was an exhibit that she produced, or I should say 13 authenticated, whatever it might be, in response to the 14 requests 1n the deposition. 15 that you recall seeing him, what were the topics that the 15 A. Okay. 16 Industrial Hygiene Foundation were discussing? 16 Q. If you could turn to page 022231. 17 "We're going back to '63 and '64 and I just 17 A. 022 - 18 -- 18 Q. 231. 19 "well, I understand. 19 A. it has "Foundation Facts" at the top there? 20 "a n s w e r : T o o far in the background." 20 Q. Yes. could you go ahead and just read the title 21 And I said, "Fair enough. And do you know 1f 21 there and the first part of that paragraph, the first 22 Texaco was involved how far back Texaco's Involvement with 23 the industrial Hygiene Foundation went?" 24 Your answer was not I don't know that they were 22 paragraph there? 23 A. Foundation facts. John f . McMahon, I guess it 24 is, managing director, industrial Hygiene Foundation. 25 even in it. Your answer was: "I don't know when it 25 Membership. "The following companies and organizations MOBURG & ASSOCIATES, lN C. (206)622-3110 Pages 25 to 28 29 1 affiliated or re-affiliated with industrial Hygiene 2 Foundation during 1949." Deere and Company, Socony-Vacuum, 3 Texas Company, sylvania Electric Products Company, 4 Doehler-Jarvis corporation, Lever Brothers Company, Jeffrey 5 Manufacturing company, Rome Cable Company, Metal and Thermit 6 Corporation, south Mica Company, West Virginia Manufacturers 7 Association, East India Railroad. So 1 guess in 1949 the 8 Texas Company was a member of the Industrial Hygiene 9 Foundation. 10 Q. Certainly according to this document that the 11 Industrial Hygiene foundation, I'll represent to you, 12 produced in a deposition? 13 A. Yes. 14 q . d o you have any idea for how long the Texas 15 Company was a member of the industrial Hygiene Foundation? 16 a . No, I do not. This is brand-new information to 17 me. 18 q . sir, are you aware that in response to some 19 requests for admissions in this case the Texas Company 20 answered 18 times that they had no information that would 21 allow them to determine if they were even a member of the 22 industrial Hygiene Foundation between 1949 and 1966? Were 23 you aware of that? 24 A. 1 think I vaguely recall that, but I'm sure they 25 did a diligent search and Were not able to determine KUIN KJU-MAKUiJ 31 1 but -- I just don't know. 2 Q. What's your understanding of the development of 3 the body of knowledge about the hazards of asbestos, 4 beginning, let's say, from the turn of the century. 5 a . Well, when I started in industrial hygiene, I 6 think the association between asbestos and asbestosis was 7 clearly established. Certainly I was given instructions 8 along those lines. That was reaffirmed when I was at the 9 University of Pittsburgh in graduate school, in the mid 10 '60s there were indications about concerns over asbestos a m 11 incidents of cancer, primarily in the insulating -- I guess 12 Dr. Selikoff was starting to do some studies with the 13 insulators in New York City, and there were various 14 permutations of that. 15 I met with Dr. selikoff in the early '70s. a 16 group of us went out to Mount Sinai and had an open 17 discussion with him in his laboratory. And the particular 18 emphasis was on the fact that these insulators he was 19 dealing with early on were in an enclosed type of setting. 20 They were spraying insulating on steel beams, girders, in 21 skyscrapers, and they had closed down the ends of the 22 building, which was not yet finished, and so the spraying 23 was going on in an enclosed area. And the workers were 24 highly exposed to asbestos fiber spray on insulation. 25 But there were various permutations during the 30 1 anything other. 2 Q. Sir, in fact, the industrial Health Foundation, 3 or the Industrial Hygiene Foundation, I should say, has 4 produced documents in other depositions that indicate that 5 the Texas Company was a member, at least, of the Industrial 6 Hygiene Foundation from 1949 to 1959. Were you aware of 32 1 '60s. Initially they thought it was a combination, a 2 definite combination of the exposure to the fiber along with 3 cigarette smoking. If you recall, there was, I guess, a Mr. 4 Hammond or Dr. Hammond -- I don't recall what his title was 5 -- associated with Selikoff, and he had been working on the 6 smoking issue for a number of years. And so they thought 7 that? 7 there was a definite t1e-1n, that the asbestos fiber 8 A. No. 9 Q. Do you have any information, as you sit here 10 today, that would allow you to deny that the Texas Company 8 actually was absorbing some of the, I guess, carcinogenic 9 materials of the smoke. And it was only this combination of 10 the fiber absorbing this carcinogenic properties of the 11 was a member of the Industrial Hygiene Foundation during 12 that period 1949 to '59? 13 A. No, I do not. 14 MR. FROCKT: Let's take a break for a minute. 15 t h e w i t n e s s : Sure. 16 t h e v i d e o g r a p h e r : The time is 9:14 a.m. we'll 17 be taking a break in testimony. 18 (Recess.) 19 t h e v i d e o g r a p h e r : The time is 9:28 a.m. and 20 we're now back on the record. 21 BY MR. FROCKT: 22 q. sir, you're aware that there were studies going 23 as far back as 1898 that showed asbestos to be a health 24 hazard to its workers? Do you agree with that? 25 a . well, I don't know that for a fact particularly 11 smoke caused the cancer. 12 But I guess later they were moving to other 13 theories. As we moved along through the '60s and getting 14 into the '70s, they were moving along to the theory that it 15 was perhaps some of the trace metal contents of the fiber, 16 nickels and things of that particular sort, but I think they 17 disproved that. 18 The only thing I can remember -- and of course 19 I 've been out of this since the '80s -- is that it 1s the 20 physical size, length, and aspect ratio, diameter, of the 21 fiber and its physical capabilities of reaching certain 22 parts of the lungs that may be causing the -- may have 23 caused the carcinogenicity. 24 But until the '70s, I think, at least in my mind, 25 and going through some papers we saw the other day, it MOBURG & ASSOCIATES, INC. (206)622-3110 Pages 29 to 32 v j . j M D c r x n M U U ' i , EL I A L 1 wasn't until the '70s until you had some sort of consensus 2 that, in fact, there was ah association between asbestos 3 fiber exposure and cancer. 4 Q. so is it Texaco's position that there was no 5 association between asbestos and cancer until the 1970s7 6 A. No. I think the -- there were case reports. In 7 fact, I guess one of our physicians had published a case 8 report, a or. Wilson. I guess that was around '60 or 9 something like that. But you had a series of case reports, 10 and it wasn't until, let's say, in my mind, just beyond 1970 11 where you had sort of some consensus or, if you will, 12 demonstrable proof that, in fact, there was an association. 13 Prior to that time you had case reports, but they were not 14 able to prove. 15 q . so -- 16 a . in fact one of the -- I think the API was -- and 17 I just learned this -- I think the API was pretty 18 straightforward in going out and looking at their workers, 19 in, I guess, the mid '60s, and were not able to find a 20 statistical association between the two. 21 Q. Now, you stated that -- when did you get 22 Industrial health training? 23 A. You mean my formal master's degree or -- 24 Q. Yes. 25 A. That was '63, '64. RON RICHARDS 1 and prove it or disprove it. And what I'm saying is you ha 2 case reports, you developed a hypothesis, which selikoff di 3 in the '60s, but you had no statistical proof until you 4 reach the '70s. 5 Q. so is it your belief that selikoff studies in th 6 1960s -- specifically I think it was 1963 or '64 -- that he 7 reported to the Mount sinai conference -- are you familiar 8 with that conference? 9 A. NO. 10 Q. Well, you mentioned selikoff studies in the U 1960s. Is it your belief that the selikoff studies in the 12 1960s were merely case reports? 13 A. Well, I think he was dealing with a specific 14 industry also, and a specific association. And again, the 15 theories were, well, it's smoking and asbestos, it's not 16 asbestos. It's smoking and asbestos. And it took that 17 decade to work through these particular permutations until 18 you reached a, to me, a state where you could say there's an 19 association or causation effect. 20 q. n o w , you're aware that or. Wilson and or. 21 Eisenstadt in that 1960 study that you referred to a minute 22 ago, they stated at the end of the study that they knew that 23 there was an association between asbestos and mesothelioma, 24 and that alerted them to the issue with respect to the one 25 insulator, the refinery foreman who was a Texaco employee. 34 36 1 Q. And so what you're saying, then, is it was your i that they were reporting on. 2 understanding at that time that there was an association 2 so, i mean, are you saying that or. Wilson was 3 between asbestos and asbestosis; is that right7. 3 not correct, that there was no association between asbestos 4 A. clear association, yes. 4 and mesothelioma in 1960 when he participated in that 5 Q. And it's not your belief, then, that there was 5 article? 6 any association between asbestos and lung cancer prior to 6 A. okay, i think we have to agree that, first of 7 that time7 7 all, you said study, and I think we agreed it's an article. 8 A. There was not any proven association. There were 8 It was a paper. He and or. Eisenstadt wrote a paper and 9 case reports. There may be research studies, but I mean, 9 they had two case reports, I gather an employee from Texaco 10 you're also looking at the fact that in 1968 and *69 I was 10 and an employee from Gulf, and that was merely a case 11 on the ACG'S TLV committed, and we reviewed every substance 11 report. I spent many a time after that with or. Wilson, and 12 on that list annually, and we did not see fit to change the 12 he knew my particular area of expertise and background, and 13 standard because of any particular concerns at that 13 this was not -- nothing that he felt Important enough to 14 particular point. 15 Q. Now -- 16 MR. FRENKEL: I don't know If he's finished his 14 discuss in a refinery setting. 15 so you're dealing with case reports, you're 16 dealing with a hypothesis. You're dealing with statistical 17 answer. 18 MR. m e s h e r : y o u have a right to finish your 17 proof, and then you are dealing with association of 18 causation at the end of that particular set of procedures. 19 answer. 19 Q. Dr. Wilson was the -- was a medical doctor for 20 A. I want to clearly differentiate between case 20 Texaco at the Port Arthur plant; isn't that correct? 21 reports and a proven association or causation. I think you 21 A. well, he was at the Port Arthur plant, and then 22 had case reports 1n the '60s, maybe prior to the '60s, but 22 when I met him in '69 he had moved over to the Houston 23 they were merely case reports. A case report is an item 23 office. 24 that you build an hypothesis around, and then you take that 24 Q. But in 1960, when he and Dr. Eisenstadt published 25 hypothesis, and you go through statistical studies to try 25 this article entitled "primary Malignant Mesothelioma of the MOBURG & ASSOCIATES, INC. (206)622-3110 Pages 33 to 36 ~j ni'ii__>wiN v j , J r t D C I \ n M t l N , t l A l _ 1 Pleura" in the Journal Lancet, November I960, I believe it 2 was, he was a Texaco employee; is that correct? 3 A. That's correct. 4 Q. n o w , I'm going to read to you a quote from the 5 end of the article and then ask you a question about it. 6 Says here, "The etiologic association of asbestos and 7 malignant mesothelioma has been repeatedly discussed in the KUN RICHARDS 39 1 Also in the '50s and the '60s, Allan took on the 2 role of looking at certain product safety aspects, the 3 composition of the products, how they were being made, and 4 the proper warnings and labels that would go on those 5 particular products. So Allan had a broad range of 6 responsibilities in the '50s and the '60s. 7 Q. Was one of the purposes of the industrial hygien< 8 literature." Then it says, "Not all investigators agree 9 that exposure to asbestos predisposes to malignancy of the 10 pleura. However, such history alerted the suspicion of the 11 authors in the second case." 12 Do you recall reading that sentence, those 13 sentences from the article? You said you reviewed it. 14 A. No. I reviewed 1t with -- what I said was Dr. 15 Wilson and I have sat down on many occasions and discussed 16 items of mutual interest. I don't know the last time I 17 specifically sat down and read that chapter and word verse. 18 But I'm familiar with the paper, and I'm familiar with the 19 fact that to me that is a case report. 20 And from what you read, it continues to convince 21 me that we have another 1n a series of case reports that 22 have to go through the procedure of generating hypothesis, 23 conduct your statistical analysis, and at the end of that 24 particular thing you either have a causation or you don't 25 have a causation. 8 department at Texaco 1n the '50s and '60s the promulgation 9 of the health and safety of Texaco's workers? 10 A. The promulgation? 11 Q. Yeah, promote the promotion of health and safetj 12 of Texaco workers, isn't that the ultimate goal of the 13 industrial hygiene department? ` 14 A. in a general sense,yes. 15 Q. And certainly there's probably other departments 16 at Texaco that that was the goal as well, right, the safety 17 department? 18 A. Sure. 19 Q. Now, Dr. Wilson states 1n this article, "The 20 etiologic association of asbestos and malignant mesothelioma 21 has been repeatedly discussed in the literature." At what 22 point does it become incumbent upon the industrial hygiene 23 department of a company like Texaco to take an association 24 like that that he's reporting on in his own article into 25 consideration in terms of in order to promote the health and . -- 1 Q. what was the role of the industrial hygiene 1 safety of their workers? 2 department at Texaco in the 1950s and '60s? What was the 2 A. Let's go back to my earlier discussion. We have 3 purpose of it? 3 case reports. The API -- and I 've only recently become 4 A. i think it had many purposes, one was going out 4 familiar with this in some detail -- the a p i went out and 5 to looking at the different types of operations that Texaco 5 looked at a broad range of their insulators. They gathered 6 had, in the united states primarily, and reviewing that from 6 data, and they found that there was insignificant or 7 the standpoint of industrial hygiene, let's say proper 7 insufficient, pardon me, insufficient data to prove the 8 process procedure. I guess -- let me back up a minute. 8 hypothesis one way or the other. 9 Industrial hygiene is basically observation, evaluation and 9 And at that particular point -- but the API 10 control. i think those sort of put 1t into a short summary 11 statement. 10 looked within Its operations, looked at the health of their 11 employees and were not able to prove an association at that 12 so in the case of Allan Dooley 1n the '50s and 12 particular point, and that was probably, what, '65, '66. 13 the '60s, he would have gone out to the different plants, 13 Q. But Dr. Wilson is reporting on an association 1n 14 and the '40s, i think we have some surveys by Allan in the 14 this literature right here. So you're saying the API study 15 '40s. He would have gone out to the different plants 15 that you're -- is this the API study in '65/66 that you're 16 looking at the different operations, observed them. Based 16 referring to? 17 on his knowledge of industrial hygiene, his background and 17 A. Yes. 18 experience, he would either decide, based on the materials 18 Q. So you're saying that afterDr. Wilson, Texaco's 19 present, whether it needed further evaluation by 19 own doctor, reports in 1960 and states In his article that 20 Instrumentation, or whether he could recommend control 20 he co-authored that there was an association between 21 measures or needed control measures at that point. But then 22 after a formal evaluation process he might recommend certain 21 malignant mesothelioma and asbestos, you're saying that the 22 API went out and did a study that disproved the exact 23 control measures. And they could take a wide range of 23 association that Texaco's own doctor reported on? 24 primers from respiratory protection to ventilation to 24 A. I don't recall that article 1n sufficient detail 25 different sorts of control measures you might want to apply. 25 to remember whether he used the word association or not. I MOBURG & ASSOCIATES, INC. (206)622-3110 Pages 37 to 40 I 41 1 think he talks about -- to me that is a case report, plain 2 and simple. 3 Q. But he's -- well, let me -- 4 A. If you'd like me -- if you want to go through and 5 read certain items, I'd like to read the article and make 6 sure we're not taking things out of context. 7 q . sure. Let's take a look at the article. 8 (Marked Deposition Exhibit 7.) 9 MR. f r e n k e l : Do you have an extra copy? 10 MR. f r o c k t : Yeah, i do. 11 API '65/66 study in a bit. we'll get back to the 12 MR. MESHEr : d o you want him to read the article? 13 MR. f r o c k t : sure. Read the article. 14 MR. m e s h e r : Do you want him to read the entire 15 article? 16 MR. f r o c k t : Go ahead and read it. 17 MR. f r e n k e l : i don't know if he wanted to read 18 it. He was just commenting. 19 MR. m e s h e r : He wanted it in front of him when 20 questions -- 21 MR. b e n x n g e r : He didn't want to do any of that, 22 we can read the record back and get his exact words, x 23 recall his exact words: if you're going to ask him more 24 questions I 'd like to see it so I make sure things weren't 25 taken out of context. And x said to David, let him see it. H V I 1 l\o.\-- I l/"U\U J 1 note in opening up this discussion that he clearly 2 identifies these two as case reports. 3 Q. Do you think I took something out of context as 4 was referring to it? 5 A. No. You were discussing certain things about 6 association. ^ 7 Q. Sure. 8 A. I didn't recall that. I did recall the case 9 reports aspect of 1t. so you were talking about 10 association. I wanted to look at where you were reading anc 11 read that for myself. 12 Q. Right. And i was reading from the end of the 13 article, page 514. Maybe you could read that, that last 14 paragraph on the first column, the last complete paragraph. 15 A. You mean the summary? 16 Q. n o , no, not the summary, in theleftcolumn 17 where it starts "our second case." 18 A. okay, our second case is particularly 19 interesting because of the history of long-term exposure to 20 asbestos and the discovery of asbestos bodies 1n the lung 21 biopsies -- pardon me -- the discovery of asbestos bodies in 22 the lung biopsy specimen. The etiologic association of 23 asbestos and malignant mesothelioma has been repeatedly 24 discussed 1n the literature. Not all investigators agree 25 that exposure to asbestos predisposes to malignancy of the 1 That's fine. 42 44 1 pleura. However, such history alerted the suspicions of the 2 MR. MESHER: I 'm just trying to find out -- 2 authors in the second case. 3 A. You want me to read it in its entirety or discuss 3 Q. Now, you would agree with me that he's not 4 -- 4 referring -- he's referring to the studies that associate 5 MR. f r e n k e l : it's your deposition. We'll do 5 asbestos with mesothelioma in that paragraph, wouldn't you 6 whatever you want. 6 agree with that? 7 A. -- certain items that i can read in context? 7 A. It says, "The etiologic association of asbestos 8 Q. Have you read the article before? 9 A. it's perhaps been a very long time. 10 Q. You didn't read it directly in preparation for 8 and malignant mesothelioma has been repeatedly discussed." 9 I don't see association, "...repeatedly discussed in the 10 literature. Not all Investigators agree that exposure to 11 your testimony today? 11 asbestos predisposes to malignancy of the pleura." I don't 12 A. No, I did not. 12 see the word association. 13 Q. Well, X don't have a problem. Go ahead and read 13 Q. There's a number of -- do you see there's some 14 it. Read the article. Take five minutes and read the 14 citations 11 to 15 -- 15 article. 15 A. sure. 16 MR. b e n x n g e r : whatever you want to do. Let 16 Q. -- that were cited there? 17 David know when you're finished. 17 A. Okay. 18 A. 19 discuss -- whatever you'd like me to do. Do you want to 18 Q. And sir, I don't know if you're aware of this, 19 but Dr. Baylor in his testimony in, I think, 1990 stated 20 Q. No, no, x want you to read the article. Go ahead 20 that the etiologic association of asbestos and mesothelioma 21 and read the article. 22 A. I'm going to run through this clinical stuff 21 was known prior to his writing, contributing to this 22 article, were you aware of that? 23 because I m not a medical doctor. 24 Q. Do whatever you need to do. 25 A. Okay. I've been through the article, and I do 23 A. No. 24 Q. Now, here we have an article that Dr. Wilson, a 25 Texaco employee, co-authored? MOBURG & ASSOCIATES, INC. (206)622-3110 Pages 41 to 44 W f I M *mm \ ) M ! , \ J k l l J i _ i n L 45 1 A. correct. 2 Q. And my question to you is: What actions did 3 Texaco take, 1f any, after this report was published 1n a 4 very reputable journal, the Lancet, 1n terms of protecting 5 Its workers from asbestos hazards? 6 A. I know I'm here as a Texaco witness, but I was 7 not at Texaco between 1960 and the start of the API 8 Investigation study. I don't know what specifically was 9 done. I have discussed 1n general with Dr. Wilson 10 Industrial hygiene concerns and matters when he was 1n the 11 Houston office. I am aware that we had two case reports. 12 I'm also aware that Dr. Wilson was Involved In the gathering 13 of the data for the API study. So as to what happened 14 between '60 and '63, '64, '65, I don't have any specific 15 knowledge. 16 q . Are you aware of whether Texaco did any testing 17 of air -- any testing of air sampling at all for asbestos 18 dust in the their various work environments in their 19 refineries In response to this study? 20 A. I'm not aware one way or the other. 21 Q. Have you ever seen any report or any survey from 22 the early 1960s that would indicate that Texaco did any kind 23 of studies pertaining to asbestos dust hazards that might be 24 1n the air in the 1960s -- 25 A. Yeah. KVJIN K J .U 1AKU: 1 that there was a contract between Texaco and Kettering labs 2 to do the studies. They had a chief Investigator there, 3 several Individuals who went out and did studies 1n Texaco 4 locations. I don't remember the time frame. I don't 5 remember the substances, I don't remember the exact 6 location. But I remember they were done. And beyond that : 7 can't... 8 Q. I think you mentioned something a few minutes agi 9 in your testimony about developing a hypothesis. 10 A. Correct. 11 Q. Can you repeat that again to me, what you were 12 referring to? 13 A. Basically -- and I'm not an epidemiologist 14 either. I don't want to hold out myself as an 15 epidemiologist, but basically to go from -- first of all, 16 you'll have case reports, in this case you have a case 17 report that seems to show, seems to show -- I want to be 18 very clear 1n my words -- seems to show some possibility of 19 an association between asbestos and mesothelioma. 20 Based on these case reports -- and 1t could be 21 one, two, three, four, any number -- you will develop a 22 hypothesis. That hypothesis would be, let's say 1n this 23 particular case, 1s there or 1s there not an association 24 between asbestos and mesothelioma. That's your hypothesis. 25 Then you'll go to some statistical study where*1 . ' 46~ 1 Q. -- in response to this report? 2 A. No. I think in an earlier discussions we talked 3 about I am aware of some contractor studies that were 4 conducted for Texaco, but I don't recall the time frame and 5 I don't recall the substances. I just don't remember those 6 In any kind of detail. 7 Q. who conducted those studies? . 8 a . Again, they were done by a doctor -- well, they 9 were done out of the Kettering Laboratories 1n Cincinnati 10 contracted for Texaco. 11 q . And these were -- 12 A. These were not API studies. These were Texaco- 13 contracted studies, but I don't remember the time frame. I 14 don't remember the location, and I don't remember the 15 substances. I remember seeing them. 16 Q. When did you see them? 17 A. Oh, going through the files, probably 1n the '70s 18 sometimes. 19 Q. Did those studies deal with asbestos 1n any way? 20 A. I don't recall. . 21 Q. we've never had any of those documents produced 22 to us 1n this case. I don't know 1f you knew that. 23 A. I am aware of that', yes. 24 Q. Do you recall when the studies took place? 25 A. No, I don't recall the time frame. All I know 1s : -- 1 you will attempt to prove that one way or the other, in 2 some cases you will have sufficient data to either prove or 3 disprove 1t. In other cases you may not have sufficient 4 data because you're dealing with a comparison between your 5 population In the case reports and some other population 6 that perhaps is not exposed at all so you can get some 7 comparison. 8 But a case report develops a hypothesis, and then 9 you have to go the next step to either prove or disprove 1t. 10 Q. And what hypothesis did Texaco develop, 1f any, 11 after Dr. Wilson's report 1n 1960 1n regards to asbestos 12 hazard? 13 A. I don't know one way or the other, but the 14 hypothesis 1n the group out there 1s, let's see 1f we can 15 prove or disprove that this is the case 1n a refinery 16 setting. . 17 Q. And so 1t's Texaco's position that there was no 18 evidence, no body of knowledge at all, that proved that 19 asbestos was a hazard, was a cancer hazard at all, prior to 20 when? 21 A. I guess I don't know understand your question. 22 Q. When did Texaco develop any hypothesis at all, or 23 any understanding at all, that asbestos was a cancer hazard 24 to Its -- 25 for Its workers? MR. f r e n k e l : Are you asking 1n a refinery MOBURG & ASSOCIATES, INC. (206)622-3110 Pages 45 to 48 - - -- --- . . w ^ o u u . i \ i 1r~ 1 v J L . 1 1 i L i n i-- 49 1 setting or in general? 2 MR. b e n i n g e r : He's got the question. 3 q. in general. 4 A. in general I think the '70s. 5 q. You understand there's a distinction between lung 6 cancer and mesothelioma, don't you7 7 A. Yes. 8 q. 9 that? They're different diseases, would you agree with 10 A. I'm not a clinician, but sure, yes, they're 11 different diseases. 12 q. And sir, were you aware that in 1949 the Journal 13 of the American Medical Association published an editorial 14 that stated that the studies of the day concluded that 15 asbestos was related to lung cancer? 16 a . I am not aware of that. 17 q. And were you aware that that study or that 18 editorial, of I should say a synopsis of that editorial, was 19 reprinted in the industrial Hygiene Digest in 1949? 20 a . I'm not aware of that, no. Again, I'm dealing 21 with what I was taught in graduate school by the experts in 22 the field, and to me an editorial could be another case 23 report. 24 q. The Journal of the American Medical Association 25 is not a very respected journal, is it? KUIN K IL H A K U b 1 medical histories, of these individuals to the API for 2 analysis. 3 So I think Texaco acted very promptly 1n trying 4 to work together to get a large enough population to either 5 prove or disprove the hypothesis. 6 q. . what years did Texaco conduct that -- gather tha' 7 Information? 8 A. I think 1t was either '63 or '64. I don't recal 9 exactly. 10 q. Did any of the data that they gathered show that 11 any of their workers had either had or died of mesothelioma' 12 A. I don't recall. I would have to go through the 13 entire document. It was a long 11st. 14 MR. f r o c k t : Let me see if i can find a couple o1 15 documents. 16 (Marked Deposition Exhibit 8.) 17 q. Now, just so you know, Mr. Richards, the person 18 at issue in this case, Ray Jameson, worked at the Texaco 19 Anacprtes refinery between 1958 and 1966. I don't know 1f 20 you knew that. 21 A. That's correct. 22 q. Can you identify this document for me? 23 A. Yes. it's a letter of Lucien Renes to the 24 members of the central committee on medicine and health and 25 technical advisors. It looks like a January '65 letter. 50 1 A. I didn't say that. I said an editorial could be 2 another c u e report. 3 q. But you don't believe that if a journal like the 4 -- the journal of the American Medical Association publishes 5 statements saying that asbestos is related to lung cancer 6 that that should have any bearing on what a company like 7 Texaco should do in response to their industrial hygiene 8 practices? 9 A. I have not read the article. I'm not familiar 10 with the article, and 1t could be related to another case 11 report. I don't know what they're basing their statement 12 on. 13 q. well, let me ask you this: what statistical 14 analysis of its workers did Texaco do 1n response to Dr. 15 Wilson's report 1n 1960 in terms of their asbestos hazards? 16 A. well, when you're doing an epidemiology study, 17 when you're trying to prove or disprove a hypothesis, you 18 need a large enough population group. And I think they, in 19 conjunction with the other members of the API, tried to put 20 together a large enough population group. 21 Texaco, if I can recall correctly, in looking at 22 the data recently, was one of the first companies to 23 contribute to the API a long 11st, over 100 I think, or 24 close to 100 different individuals who have been identified 25 as insulators. And they submitted the histories, the 52 1 q. What does the letter communicate? 2 A. Would you like me to read it or paraphrase it7 3 q. Paraphrase it. 4 A. Let's see. Lucien, who was with Phillips 5 Petroleum, has been asked to contribute data regarding the 6 use of asbestos 1n petroleum Industry, environmental health 7 experience, and they can send the data to Lucien, and he was 8 going to be gathering the data. And he says unless two or 9 more companies can offer some definite data on information 10 the survey will consist of review of the literature. 11 q. so this Is a -- correct me if I'm wrong. This 1s 12 sort of an opening letter from Mr. Renes, who was, as I 13 understand 1t, Industrial hygienist for Phillips - 14 A. That's correct. 15 q. -- to members of this API committee on medicine 16 and health. And it's copied, 1t would appear, to the 17 Initials AED. That would appear to be the Health Division, 18 New York, Allan E. Dooley? 19 A. That was the health division stamp, NewYork. 20 q. Right. So AED, we can agree thatthat's Allan 21 Dooley who was copied? 22 A. That's Allan Dooley, yes. 23 q. So this is a letter communicating what the API 1s 24 proposing to study; 1s that correct? 25 A. That's correct. And this looks like '65 instead MOBURG & ASSOCIATES, INC. (206)622-3110 Pages 49 to 52 _____> -_1 i_ _w _v__1 1___V_k_J ._______L_. I_V_n_/ '_A _V _J C_l_N_ f 1 Of '63. C -- I-___M_L ___ 53 2 Q. So the API begins a study between January 15 and 3 January 1965? 4 A. Uh-huh, formally begins it, right. . 5 q . Are you aware of what precipitated the API 6 beginning this study, what reasons they decided to do it? 7 a . No, I'm not. . 8 Q. so between the case report in 1960 and the 9 beginning of the study in 1965, that's roughly a five-year 10 span, right? 11 A. could be. 12 Q. Roughly. 13 A. Roughly, yeah. 14 q . what did Texaco do as part of this study? 15 a . Dr. Baylor went out to the doctors, the plant 16 physicians at the different locations, and solicited data to 17 be returned to him, and then forwarded to the API listing IS the experience that they saw in their insulators at the 19 different locations. 20 Q. so Dr. Baylor was at the head of the study, 21 essentially, for Texaco, right? He was the one gathering 22 all the data, correct? 23 A. Yes. 24 Q. And he was relying on his -- 25 A. Plant physicians. KUN RICHARDS 55 1 A. NO. 2 Q. -- they were not completed, because in the 3 subsequent interrogatories it was stated -- I should refer 4 to your deposition testimony, but I don't think you've ever 5 been asked the question. 6 A. Well, actually, I just learned about this study, 7 I guess, in depth recently. I didn't see this 8 correspondence before, I think, our earlier conversations ii 9 February, and I guess I heard about the study back in the 10 '90s at some point in time, but I don't have any more 11 information than what we had available. 12 Q. Now, we can agree that while this study, while 13 this data that Texaco is gathering is going on -- at the 14 same time that Texaco is gathering this data in 1965, that's 15 contemporaneous to the period that Ray Jameson was working 16 for Texaco. Do you agree with me on that? 17 A. 1 think that's correct. 18 Q. And how many years did the study go on? 19 A. h o w many years? 20 Q. Yeah. How long did it take? 21 A. oh, well, we don't know what the conclusion was 22 or when it was stopped, but it looks like it was '65/66 time 23 frame. I mean, as best as I can recall. I'm off a date 24 here already. 25 Q. Sure. Well, let's mark this one, this document, 54 1 Q. -- plant physicians and associates out at the 2 various refineries to supply him with the data? 3 A. That's correct. 4 Q. And there was a man named Howard Tigh who was 5 involved in this gathering some of the data; is that 6 correct? 7 A. Well, the way it worked with the refinery 8 department is that requests for information would be 9 coordinated through the refinery department Houston, and so 10 he would be the gathering point for the refinery department 11 Houston. And then he would relay that data back to -- I 12 don't know how it went -- to or. Baylor or -- but it would 13 go through the plant managers, and that was just a normal 14 procedure for Texaco. 15 Q. So Mr. Tigh, then, was sort of gathering this 16 data as a point person and was going to relay it to Dr. 17 Baylor, correct? 18 A. He was the point person within the refinery 19 department. This would probably be a very good description 20 of his role in this case. 21 Q. Okay, incidentally, the interrogatory answers in 22 this case state that the study was never completed, were 23 you aware of that? 24 A. That's as much as I know, too. ` 25 Q. Do you have any knowledge about why -- 56 1 NO. 9. 2 (Marked Deposition Exhibit 9.) 3 A. Do you want me to read through the whole thing? 4 Q. why don't you just go ahead and take a look at 5 it, and I'm going to ask you to identify the document and 6 the attachments. And it is document WA-TEX 3844 to 3857. 7 a . Yes. I 've seen this document recently. 8 Q. when did you last see it? 9 A. I think in our review yesterday we might have 10 gone through it. Sometime, you know, 1n the last... 11 q . can you tell me what the document is? 12 A. Well, 1t appears to be a memorandum of 13 correspondence between e . w. McNealy -- Ed is McNealy who 14 was at the Port Arthur plant ~ and Harold Tigh, who was 1n 15 the Houston office, transmitting the Information that Dr. 16 Baylor had requested. And i guess it's -- it looks like 17 there was a tabulation broken down into two of the following 18 parts, one was Insulators and services on 3-1-65 and 19 Insulators retired during the past five years. 20 And apparently this was reviewed with or. Wilson 21 who made some comments regarding the data, and then there's 22 a tabulation of, I guess, might be described as a summary of 23 the medical history or findings of certain Individuals who 24 were identified as insulators in the port Arthur plant. 25 q. So these are insulators, their data is being MOBURG & ASSOCIATES, INC. (206)622-3110 Pages 53 to 56 jn u L i\n n u L lY HL 57 1 gathered in respect to insulators at the Port Arthur plant 2 in just -- this document is just insulators at the port 3 Arthur plant? 4 A. That's correct. There would be similar documents 5 for the different other plants, right. 6 Q. And do you know about how many people's medical 7 records, how many Insulators were surveyed here? 8 A. No. I didn't do a count. 9 q. I counted it at about 70. Does that sound about 10 right to you? 11 A. That could be. There's no uniform number per 12 page. 13 Q. Right. We'd have to just go in andrecount. 14 A. 70 is good enough for me. 15 Q. 1 think that's accurate. 16 MR. FROCicr: I'm sure your counsel will correct 17 me 1f I'm wrong. 18 MR. m e s h e r : Do you want me to count them and 19 correct you or do you want to go on? 20 MR. f r o c k t : i'll tell you what. Let me go on 21 and if you feel the need to go ahead and count and if I have 22 68 or 69 or 71, let me know. Thank you. 23 Q. Now, what I'd like you to do is read into the 24 record the last -- so let me go back for a second. This is 25 a letter from E. W. McNealy to Mr. Tigh who is gathering the KUIN R I C H A R D S 59 1 this area and consider it to be a nonspecific in etiology. 2 'For additional follow-up we have included those 3 who have retired during the past five years, in the 4 combined group two malignancy deaths have occurred. L. a . 5 Broussard died 7-29-63 of a gastrointestinal tract carcinoma 6 associated with chronic regional ileitis, peter cappadonna, 7 a foreman who had been an insulator for many years, died May 8 10, 1960 of widespread malignancy secondary to mesothelioma 9 of the pleura. 1 should mention a third individual joe" -- 10 I can't pronounce his name -- Pecorino or junior or 11 something. 12 MR. Fr e n k e l : Pecorino. 13 A. "pecorino, Jr., who is in terminal malignancy 14 state. He was found to have widespread seeding of the 15 peritoneum with a highly anaplastic neoplasm suspected of 16 being mesothelioma." - 17 Q. so, in this report, Dr. Wilson is reporting two 18 additional insulators at Texaco? 19 a . 1 don't know that they're additional, 20 Q. is one of them the same guy that was reported in 21 1960? 22 A. I don't know. 23 Q. is it possible that that's who it 1s? 24 A. It's possible. 25 Q. So is it -- if that was correct, that would seem 58 60 1 data that's then going to be transmitted to Dr. Baylor? to be -- 2 A. That's correct. 3 Q. Do you know who Mr. McNealy was? 4 A. Ed McNealy was -- he was either the plant manager 5 or probably an operations manager at the plant. I don't 6 recall his exact title. I ran into Ed at the Bayonne 7 refinery in, I think, '69 or '70. 8 Q. 1 appreciate you telling me that because we asked 9 Texaco in our interrogatories last August, about a year ago, 10 who he was, and I don't think we ever got a response. 11 a . I can picture him. 12 q. So he was an official at the Port Arthur plant? 13 A. Yeah. He was somewhere in management and then he 14 went on to Bayonne. 15 Q. n o w , can you read into the record, please, the 16 last two paragraphs on the first page? 17 a . y o u mean the comments by Dr. Wilson? 18 Q. Yeah. And the quotes. Let's start with "After 19 reviewing." Go ahead. 20 a . "After reviewing the entire data Dr. F. W. Wilson 21 made the following comments: 'y o u will note that the 22 majority of them show few specific changes. A few show 23 calcific pleural plaques and/or pleural adhesions, several 24 show varying severity of diffuse pulmonary fibrosis. 25 However, we find this type of fibrosis to be frequent in A. if which was correct? q. if 1t is correct that one of these people is the guy who was reported 1n the 1960 article, that would probably be Peter Cappadonna because he died in 1960? A. All right. I've heard that name, q. is it Texaco's position that -- what is Texaco's view of these reports of two mesotheliomas among the insulating crew at Port Arthur? A. Again, I wasn't there at that particular point in time. Q today. I'm asking you as Texaco's representative here A I'm trying to answer that question, Q sure. A in other words, I can't speak firsthand, but I guess what we have here is another case report, possible case report seems to be, and we are right in the middle of getting this study going to either prove or disprove the hypothesis. q . d o you think two out of 70-or-so insulators having mesothelioma at the Port Arthur plant, would you characterize that as statistically significant or statistically insignificant? A. I have no idea. I mean, I'm not a statistician. MOBURG & ASSOCIATES, INC. (206)622-3110 Pages 57 to 60 I i \ w n i\j.\_ni\L/o 1 Q. You would agree with me that mesothelioma 1s a 2 pretty rare disease, right? 3 A. I think we saw earlier or. Wilson's statement 4 that It was uncommon but maybe not as uncommon as people 5 thought. I think that's what he said. 6 q . what did Texaco do in response to this, this 7 report of two mesotheliomas among Its insulating crew at 8 Port Arthur, to provide any protection for Its workers who 9 might have been exposed to asbestos after this report was 10 provided to or. Baylor? 11 A. I don't know. 12 Q. oid you ever find any Indication -- you've 13 testified roughly 100 times, right, for Texaco? 14 A. Well, maybe that needs a little clarification. 15 We sat down after that deposition, and I guess we tried to 16 count the number of depositions I 've actually been Involved 17 in. I think that's closer to six, but there's probably been 18 100 different involvements like requests for information, 19 answering Interrogatories, and I probably - 20 Q. Well, I appreciate that, because when you said 21 100 times I thought, my Lord, that's a lot of depositions 22 and I know you were tired. 23 A. But anyways, in clarification it was probably a 24 half a dozen, but go ahead, I'm sorry. 25 Q. And some of those were asbestos cases, right, 1 Insulators to start wetting down Insulation before they wer 2 going to strip it off of pipelines, right? 3 A. No, that wasn't until later. 4 Q. And Texaco didn't do anything in response to th1: 5 API study 1n 1965 that would specifically call for the use 6 of substitute materials instead of asbestos-containing 7 materials; is that right? 8 A. That's correct. But again, we're dealing with a 9 situation where we're putting together the data to take a 10 look at this particular situation. 11 Q. Old you advise your plant safety managers that 12 the study was even going on? 13 A. All the plant managers knew about 1t because the) 14 participated in gathering the data. 15 Q. What about the safety supervisors at the 16 particular plants? 17 A. I don't know. I don't know how the Individual 18 plant manager would have handled this with the company 19 doctor. 20 Q. We deposed a man named lack Drummond. Do you 21 remember lack Drummond? 22 A. Yeah. 23 Q. lack was the safety supervisor at Texaco 24 beginning In 1967. 25 A. I think I met with him when I was up 1n the '70s,1 _ ; 62 1 that you testified on? 2 A. That's correct, right. 3 Q. And I assume in some of those cases youhad to 4 review documents, you were asked to review documents so you 5 could be prepared to testify? 6 A. That's correct. 7 Q. old you ever see any document 1nanything that 8 you've ever reviewed for Texaco as a testifying witness that 9 Indicated any specific response that Texaco took as a result 10 of a report of two mesotheliomas among Insulators at Port 11 Arthur plant In the mid 1960s? 12 A. And I don't recall seeing anything, but, you 13 know, again, we are trying to test a hypothesis. I think 14 we're also dealing with expertise that did not feel we were 15 dealing with a particular problem based on their experience 16 and knowledge, but we were going to try and prove 1t to the 17 best of our ability by gathering a large enough body of data 18 to look at this thing one way or the other. 19 But as far as specific changes at the plant 20 level, other than the protection against asbestosls, which 21 we were already doing -- I think, you know, some of these 22 medical findings were a part o f pur medical monitoring 23 program, other than that, I don't think we made any other 24 changes at that particular point In time. 25 Q. So 1n 1965 Texaco didn't do anything like advise . --- 1 that's correct. 2 Q. And he testified In his deposition couple of 3 months ago that he recalls seeing nothing 1n any files that 4 he reviewed or any -- that would Indicate that there was 5 even any such study like this going on at all prior to the 6 time that he got there. Does that surprise you? 7 A. It doesn't necessarily surprise me. 8 Q. Do you think it would be, you know, important for 9 a guy like that, the safety supervisor, to know that Texaco 10 had had some reports of mesothelioma among Its workers? 11 A. Well, all I can say 1s the documents speak for 12 themselves. I mean, essentially we had the case reports, we 13 took the opportunity along with the API to look at a large 14 enough database to try and make some determination one way 15 or the other. Apparently we did not have sufficient 16 statistical data to make any association one way or the 17 other, and we went on from there. 18 MR. FRENKEL: David, when 1t's appropriate I need 19 to have a break. 20 MR. FROCKT: Absolutely. Take one right now. 21 THE v i d e o g r a p h e r : The time 1s 10:19 a.m. This 22 concludes tape No. 1 In the deposition of Ronald Richards. 23 (Recess.) 24 MR. MESHER: Would you note on the record Mr. 25 Benlnger has left. MOBURG & ASSOCIATES, INC. (206)622-3110 Pages 61 to 64 1 (Recess.) I 65 2 t h e v i d e o g r a p h e r : The rime 1s 10:39 a.m. we're 3 now back on the record. This begins tape No. 2 in the 4 deposition of Ronald Richards. 5 Q. Mr. Richards, you said a few minutes ago that one 6 of the things you would do 1n response to Information that 7 -- 1n response to what you would want to be good Industrial 8 hygiene practice would be to observe, evaluate and control 9 exposures to the harmful substances; 1s that right? 10 A. Well, I think I said that as a summary of what a 11 role of an industrial hygienist would do. 12 Q. Okay. 13 A. And observe 1s the wrong word. 14 Q. well, what's the right word? 15 A. I can't remember. 16 Q. Are you getting that from part of your training 17 or something? 18 A. Yes. it's 1n the preface of some books or 19 something. Evaluation, control, or recognition. I'm sorry. 20 Recognition, evaluation and control. 21 Q. Recognition, evaluation and control. 22 A. lust snapped back 1n there. 23 Q. Would you characterize that as being sort of a 24 method of operations that 1s generally thought to be how 25 Industrial hygienists should evaluate particular workplace v u i i i\ x v .i i n i \ u ^ 67 1 A. Yeah. 2 Q. You're familiar with that study I'm referring to' 3 A. Generally, but I'd have to look at it again to 4 make sure we're talking about the same ones. 5 Q. Now, this 1s a quote from the study, and this was 6 written by Allan Dooley, correct, from the survey? 7 MR. MESHER: Do you want to show him that? 8 Q. well, I'm just saying Allan Dooley did a survey 9 in 1949, correct? . 10 A. That's correct. 11 Q. what he wrote was, "Asbestos dust, 1fInhaled 1n 12 sufficient amounts and for a prolonged period, will cause a 13 lung fibrosis termed asbestosls." Now, my question to you 14 1s: Does that statement connote a recognition of an actual 15 hazard or a potential hazard by Mr. Dooley? 16 A. Actually, that paraphrases thepreamble of the 17 threshold of limit values, so 1n other words, i think you 18 have to have a recognized hazard. You have to have exposure 19 for a prolonged period of time at excessive concentrations. 20 So he's merely paraphrasing what I think a lot of 21 (Inaudible) would do, because 1n looking at 1t from a 22 standpoint of a threshold limit value, and I'm sure the OSHA 23 standards, 1s that these are not fine lines that when you 24 Immediately go beyond the line by small measure you have a 25 hazard, because most of them have very large safety factors 1 hazards? 68 66 1 built Into them, at least when I was on the TLV committee 1n 2 A. it's pretty much standard, generalized procedure, 2 '68, '69. And so you're looking at excessive exposures for 3 right, you go 1n and you see if you can recognize any 3 a very'prolonged period of time. 4 potential hazard, evaluate those that you think may be 4 q. And so to determine if an exposure 1s excessive 5 causing a problem, and then if you find a problem, then 5 you would have to do some sort of evaluation of what the 6 control it further. 7 Q. when, 1n your mind, does a potentialhazard 6 exposure was, do you agree with that? 7 A. well, evaluation could take many different forms. 8 become a hazard? 8 I mean, you could -- 1f there's instrumentation available, 9 A. Potential hazard become a hazard? 9 you could measure it. You could look at what sort of 10 Q. Yeah, become an actual hazard. . 10 ventilation has been applied to a particular type of 11 A. I guess there's just too many variables that 11 operation and evaluate the ventilation that goes 1n there. 12 would pertain to a particular situation. Let's take a 12 For Instance, natural ventilation, outdoor ventilation, many 13 substance that could be airborne, well, you can measure an 14 airborne concentration and compare 1t with a -- i may use an 15 old term, a t l v , threshold limit value. I guess now 1t 16 would be an OSHA standard, but, you know, a TLV. You'd also 17 have to look at it from the standpoint 1s that material 18 also going to be absorbed through the skin. 19 And so I mean, there's so many variables 1n 20 trying to evaluate a potential hazard that you'd have to 21 take a lot of things Into consideration. I couldn't just 22 give you a nice, quick, simple answer. 23 Q. Right. Now, you're aware and were aware of a 13 times can be a very sufficient control measure for materials 14 that right generate a dust, because 1t doesn't accumulate, 15 1t doesn't gather, it's not confined to a particular space. 16 so, i mean, there's a lot of different ways to 17 control and evaluate a hazard. So there's a lot of 18 expertise and experience that goes Into this thing, the type 19 of expertise and experience that Allan had and brought to 20 the company when he came there 1n '47. 21 Q. What methods to evaluate the hazard of asbestos j 22 dust did Texaco undertake after Allan Dooley wrote this - 23 that statement 1n this Industrial hygiene survey that you're 24 study or, I should say, an Industrial hygiene survey that 25 Allan Dooley did at the Port Arthur works 1n 1949? 24 aware of? 25 A. You mean -- let ie see 1f I understand the MOBURG & ASSOCIATES, INC. (206)622-3110 Pages 65 to 68 -- . , 69 1 question, what methods of evaluation did Texaco -- maybe we 2 should repeat the question. I sort of didn't follow it. 3 Q. Let me rephrase it. After Allan Dooley wrote in 4 1949 that asbestos dust, if inhaled in sufficient amounts 5 and for a prolonged period, will cause a lung fibrosis 6 caused asbestosis, what, if anything, did Texaco do to 7 evaluate the hazard that asbestos dust might cause to its 8 workers who were working With or around it? 9 A. Well, now, we're talking about a particular 10 survey and a particular -- I think that was a Port Arthur 11 survey, and he was looking at all of the aspects of 12 operations in port Arthur, in this particular case, if I 13 remember correctly, he was in a shed or an enclosure that 14 was used to do something with asbestos piping. Don't 15 remember the exact details. And so he would have visualized 16 what the insulators were doing, and I guess he had a concern 17 at that particular point in time whereas, based on his 18 experience and training and expertise, that was the only 19 point in the insulation process of Port Arthur that we 20 thought there could have been a problem. 21 i mean, you have a person here who 1s very 22 familiar with asbestos and asbestosis in the *30s, 23 apparently wrote a paper, detailed paper. Comes to the 24 company, goes out and looks at their largest, most complex 25 plant, and in looking at those operations, including1 \WI *J_ I/"II\L/^ 1 looked at the insulation operations, and said the only thini 2 I have a problem with in this type of setting is Inside thai 3 shed. Everything else 1s fine as far as I'm concerned. 4 Q. So you don't think that he had any concern at al' 5 for workers who were out Insulating, stripping off asbestos 6 insulation perhaps from a pipeline or from pipes around a 7 boiler in a particular refinery, he would have no concern al 8 all for those workers breathing dust from those operations, 9 would he? 10 A. I think he would have ~ and again, we're really 11 second-guessing Allan at that point because neither one of 12 us were there, but knowing Allan's method of operation, I 13 think he would have looked at these processes, as I would 14 have looked at them when I got there, and said this is 15 outdoor ventilation. This is intermittent, we're not going 16 to have a problem here, but the only problem I have is 17 inside that shed and I want you to correct it. 18 Q. So the only problem -- 19 A. That he saw at Port Arthur. 20 Q. well, did he ever do any kind of observation of 21 asbestos hazards at any other refinery that you're aware of? 22 A. Sure. 23 Q. when? 24 A. Well, he may not have documented it but when I go 25 out to a plant -- -- 1 insulation, he decides that the only area that needs further 2 work is an area inside an enclosed area where I think they 3 were grinding up asbestos piping to make cement. 4 Q. Do you believe that when Allan Dooley wrote the 5 sentence that I've been quoting that he recognized that 6 asbestosis was a hazard of workers who were working a -- 7 strike that. Do you believe that Allan Dooley -- let me try 8 and rephrase that one more time. 9 Does the fact that Allan Dooley wrote that 10 asbestos dust, 1f inhaled admittedly for sufficient -- in 11 sufficient amounts and for a prolonged period will cause a 12 lung fibrosis termed asbestosis, do you believe that 13 connotes a recognized hazard that Texaco would have to take 14 into consideration to protect the health and safety of its 15 workers from that point forward? 16 A. Well, not only do I think that that was the case, 17 but I think Allan did that. I think what Allan was doing 18 was quoting chapter and verse his real beliefs that asbestos 19 under certain conditions with excessive exposure can cause 20 asbestosis, and that looking at the insulation operations of 21 Port Arthur plant, the only area he had any kind of concern 22 about was Inside a small shed. 23 So looking at -- based on his expertise, h1s 24 experience, his knowledge in the industry, the fact he wrote 25 a paper, he went down there and looked at Port Arthur, 1 Q. I'm asking what he did not what you did. 2 A. I 'm going to tell you. when I go out to a plant 3 it's the same thing Allan did and the same thing that people 4 work for me. y o u look at everything, because there could be 5 something different at one plant versus another. Typically 6 not. I mean, a process is a process, and it runs pretty 7 much the same from one plant to the other, but Port Arthur 8 being the most complex operation 1n the united states for 9 Texaco, if he goes there and he says I've looked at this 10 Insulation procedure and I don't think it's a problem 11 because you're working outside -- I think he looked at that 12 at other locations. He went around to make sure there 13 wasn't some material difference, and he said I don't think, 14 based on my experience, based on my knowledge, based on my 15 contacts with other people in the industry and beyond, I 16 don't think we have a problem with insulators in Texaco, 17 other than that shed at Port Arthur, doing that operation, 18 and I want you to correct it. 19 q . And can you give me a time frame from which he 20 must have thought that -- he thought that there was no 21 problem? Was that from 1949 until he retired 1n 1972 or was 22 it more limited than that? 23 A. well, I think you have to look at the checks and 24 balances, okay. I think that's what he thought in '49. I 25 think that's what he felt through the '50s. when they got MOBURG & ASSOCIATES, INC. (206)622-3110 Pages 69 to 72 i_i m . 1 to the '60s and said, all right, you know, let's take a look 2 at this thing in a broader aspect, let's take a look at this 3 thing epidemiologically, I don't think there's a problem 4 there, because what we're seeing in the way of problem areas 5 are far different than this type of exposure, we're seeing 6 it -- maybe Selikoff has seen it in these enclosed areas 7 where they're spraying asbestos all over the place. But I 8 don't think we have a problem there because we have an 9 outdoor environment. It's done very Intermittently, we have 10 good natural ventilation, the wind is blowing through, okay. 11 But w e 'll take a look at it from another aspect. Let's take 12 a look at it from the medical aspect. 13 And in essence, I think the summary of the 14 information that we just put in there -- we had one 15 mesothelioma that was reported as case report in '60. we 16 had one suspected mesothelioma, and this was in 65 out of 70 17 people. And I still don't see a problem, because I think 18 visually we don't have a problem there, but w e 're going to 19 keep looking. We're not just going to let this thing go 20 away. And Allan is not jumping up and down about this. 21 Frank Wilson is not jumping up and down about this and 22 Curtis Baylor is not jumping up and down about this. . 23 Q. What did Mr. Dooley do to ever determine if a 24 work environment for an insulator was -- if that insulator 25 was inhaling asbestos dust in sufficient amounts for a KUM K i U l A K U S 1 Q. Let me ask the question this way. h o w can any 2 industrial hygienist ever know if a situation of environmen' 3 is excessively dusty so as to be hazardous if they don't 4 actually measure the dust in the air? 5 A. I 've done it all the time. 6 Q. Okay. How do you do that? 7 a . Experience, knowledge, look at the ingredients. 8 Look at the way they're doing things. I was trying to thinl 9 of an analogy in a law firm, but I can't come up with 10 anything right now. 11 Q. Do you think that's the most effective way to 12 measure -- to determine if a work environment is excessively 13 dusty so as to be hazardous to one's health? 14 A. well, I think you have to look at the proper, 15 efficient use of resources. And I could have taken a sample 16 at every place X went in my 38 years in Industrial hygiene 17 and related jobs, but I think based on my training and 18 experience I could do a very, very good job of evaluating or 19 recognizing where there was a potential, evaluating that 20 particular operation, either by looking at the ventilation 21 applied, by actually taking measurements if they were 22 appropriate, and I think you get a good feel for it. 23 Q. X mean, it would have -- you said something about 24 efficient use of resources, what do you mean by that? 25 A. Well, when I was with the state of Pennsylvania, 1 prolonged period? what specifically did he ever do to make 2 that determination between 1949 and 1972? 3 A. I don't know whether we did any actual-- Allan 4 did any actual measurements. I 'd have to go back and look 5 at all the reports and whatever we have. I know we did some 6 measurements in some locations, and I don't recall In '49 if 7 he did a measurement there at that location or not. It 8 could have been visual and he said I don't like what I see. 9 But I think having -- X don't know if he made any physical 10 measurements with the limitations at the time in measuring 11 things. 12 X think you had a midget Impinger, you had a 13 midget impinger with a liquid 1n it that you can't attach to 14 anybody because 1t's going to spill, y o u needed a vacuum 15 source. It wasn't a breathing zone sample and it was only 16 -- it was really the Tate '60s when you started getting 17 portable pumps. And in '70, '71 you had the Monitalre 18 filter which allowed you to do personal monitoring. 19 So x don't recall any specific monitoring that he 20 did, but I think based on his expertise, skills and 21 experience he didn't think there was a problem. He may hot 22 have measured It, but he didn't think 1t was a problem. 23 Q. How could he possibly know if it was a problem 1f 24 he didn't ever measure it? 25 A. well -- 1 and I'd take a sample -- taken a sample at every place I 2 went, and every location within that place that I went, I 3 think the state would have been out of patience. So you are 4 trained to go through visually, try to recognize a potential 5 hazard, evaluate those areas that you will have any kind of 6 concern about, and then, based on that evaluation, recommend 7 adequate controls if they are necessary. 8 Q. The fact is, Mr. Richards, in your work for 9 Texaco, and in your several times you've testified for 10 Texaco, you've never seen a single document that 11 demonstrates that Allan Dooley did any dust sampling 12 whatsoever to determine if a work environment was 13 excessively dusty so as to be hazardous to a worker's 14 health; isn't that fight? 15 A. You're talking about all dust? 16 Q. Let's make it asbestos dust,. 17 A. Well, I don't recall any specific samples that 18 Allan did for asbestos dust, but X know he measured other 19 kinds of dust. 20 Q. But you're not denying that there are no such 21 sampling reports that Allan Dooley ever did? 22 A. Well, I guess I'm not denying or x'm not being 1n 23 the affirmative either. I just don't recall of any. 24 Q. You don't have any Information that would allow 25 you to deny that there are any such reports? MOBURG & ASSOCIATES, INC. (206)622-3110 Pages 73 to *f6 k .1 % 1 II % \J h .1 1 I 77 1 A. Not at my fingertips certainly. 2 q . Have you ever seen any such information? 3 A. I mean, we're going back 30 years, more than 30 4 years. 5 q . sure. I mean, when we deposed Jack Drummond he 6 indicated that at Anacortes, when he came in in 1967, there - 7 were no such reports at all about dust counts or anything 8 like that in place. I mean, would that be consistent With 9 what you're telling me about Mr. Dooley's efforts to take 10 dust counts? 11 A. Well, in fact, Allan did visit the Anacortes 12 plant I think on more than one occasion. He evaluated noise 13 exposures there, and Allan wasn't the type of guy to say, 14 all right, let's go in and look -- let's look at that little 15 point there where you want to look at. He would have walked 16 through the whole plant, and I think if he would have saw a 17 problem, he would have come back and evaluated it. That's 18 the kind of person Allan was. 19 And so yes, I can understand where Jack says, 20 Jack Drummond says, I can't find any dust samples, but I 21 mean, he didn't start there until '67. could have been done 22 before then. Maybe there wasn't in the files. Or Allan may 23 have not felt they were necessary at Anacortes based on his 24 walk-through of the plant and his background and knowledge 25 at the other locations that he visited in the course of his IN.UIN K X U 1A K U S 79 1 MR. FROCKT: if you want to go off the record we 2 can. 3 MR. FRENKEL: I don't want to interrupt your 4 deposition. 5 MR. MESHER: If we want to go off the record we 6 have to go off the tape. 7 MR. frocict: Let's go off the record and off the 8 tape. - 9 t h e VIDEOGRAPHER: The time is 11:01 a.m. w e 'll 10 be taking a break. 11 (Recess.) 12 t h e VIDEOGRAPHER: The tine is 11:03 a.m. we're 13 now back on the record. ' 14 MR. MESHER: Do you want to look at a copy that 15 has a better top to the page? 16 THE VIDEOGRAPHER: The time is11:03. we're off 17 the record. 18 (Discussion off the record.) 19 THE VIDEOGRAPHER: The time is 11:04 a.m. We're 20 now back on record. 21 Q. Mr. Richards, this is Exhibit 10? 22 A. 10. 23 q . And the cover page is -- itsays, "Safety and 24 Industrial Hygiene Asbestos Study 1965." 25 A. That's correct. 78 1 career with the company. 2 q . Do you think that's good industrial hygiene 80 1 Q. And the number on the bottom is WA-t e x 013774, 2 and the documents run consecutively to 013785. Do you see 3 practice to make an evaluation that a situation is not 4 excessively dusty so as to be hazardous to one's health 5 without actually taking a dust count? 6 A. I've done it many times. 7 Q. Do you think that would be the consensus view 8 among industrial hygienists? 9 A. Absolutely. I guess to clarify, I'm not saying 10 that it's required at every particular point in time. By 11 training and experience you can look at an area and make a 12 determination as to whether you need sampling or not. 13 (Marked Deposition Exhibit 10.) . 3 that? 4 MR. m e s h e r : Excuse me, counsel. At the break 5 you may have part of our -- I think an exhibit you gave to 6 us. From page 779 to the end. Do you have an extra copy of 7 those pages over there? 8 MR. FROCKT! I don't think so, Barry. 9 MR. m e s h e r : That's fine. That's fine. 10 MR. FROCKT: d o you want to use one of their 11 copies? 12 MR. m e s h e r : Go ahead. 13 A. In answer to your question, I have that document, 14 Q. Let's turn back to the document No. 10. Can you 14 yes. And it goes from 74 -- 774 to 785. 15 Identify this document? 16 a . I think I saw it before, but there was a 17 different aspect to it. Maybe 1t was turned differently or 18 photocopied differently or something like that. I don't 19 know 1f I recognize this particular one. 20 Q. well, this was produced to us by Texaco. 21 A. Yeah. 22 t h e w i t n e s s : I'm looking to my -- was this -- 23 did we see this printed in a different fashion? 24 MR. FRENKEL: I haven't been sworn in. 25 A. I'm sorry, I don't recognize it this way. 15 q . Now, sir, can you describe for me what your 16 understanding of what this document appears to be? 17 A. Well, I really don't know. The printing is very, 18 very, fuzzy. It seems to be some sort of compilation, and I 19 guess 1t was produced as something from our files, but I 20 really don't know anything beyond that. It's some sort of 21 compilation. 22 q . Sir, do you think this document has anything to 23 do with the 1965 API study that we've been talking about at 24 some length today? 25 A. it certainly may have, but I -- this is illegible MOBURG & ASSOCIATES, INC. (206)622-3110 9 a I 81 1 in certain spots for me to say that one way or the other. 2 But it could be. it could not be. I don't know. I just 3 don't know. 4 Q. Now, if you could turn to page 013781. 5 A. 7817 6 Q. Yeah. 7 a . Okay. 8 q. Now, it says in the middle of the page there, 9 "nonnegative as of March 1965." 10 A. I see that. 11 Q. And sir, would you agree with me that this 12 document appears to be a handwritten compilation of some of 13 the data from the 1965 Texaco asbestos study? 14 a . This is just Texaco or is it -- it's certainly a 15 compilation of some of the data that could have gone into 16 that API '65 study. And I see some Texaco plant names on 17 here, but some I can't identify, so i don't know if it goes 18 beyond Texaco or 1s strictly Texaco. 19 Q. d o you have any Idea whose handwriting this 1s? 20 A. n o , I do not. No. 21 q. The document lists a number of -- and there's an 22 age column and then a -- looks like something that looks 23 like a year, YRS. Do you see that? 24 A. w e 're still on 81, right? 25 q. Yeah. TWO columns. IMJIN KJ-V-flAKUS 83 1 A, Are we done with this? 2 q. Yes. Do you think that in 1965 insulators for 3 Texaco would have been interested to know that Texaco had 4 data that at least two Insulators had contracted 5 mesothelioma? 6 A. Perhaps. I don't know that for a fact one way oi 7 the other, but I don't know what someone would do with it. 8 q. n o w , Mr. Richards, when in 19 -- you came out of 9 the company in 1969, right? 10 A. correct, in July. 11 q. some of the documents that were produced in this 12 case seem to indicate that there was sort of -- and you can 13 characterize this differently if you'd like, but in my 14 review of them there was a more systemic testing process for 15 dust hazards after you came on board in the 1970s; is that 16 right? 17 A. There was an expansion of staff and there was 18 more sampling. We added staff primarily because of the -- 19 well, the OSHA standard required periodic monitoring at 20 certain locations, and we've certainly had to comply with 21 those particular requirements, among other reasons we added 22 to the staff. 23 q. And what was -- can you describe for me -- I 24 mean, did you leave the efforts to take more dust samples so 25 you could determine exactly what would -- what people were 1 A. I see age, years. 82 84 1 and were not being exposed to 1n the work environment there? 2 q. Medical status? 2 A. That might be a fair characterization, yeah. I 3 A. Medical status, right, correct. 3 managed the program at that particular point 1n time. 4 q. And wouldn't you agree with me that this would 4 q. can you describe for us what you did? 5 appear to be some Indication of nonnegative -- of a 5 a . Regarding -- 6 nonnegative medical status as It relates to the 1965 API 6 q. in regards to that program that I asked you 7 study? 7 about. 8 A. Well, I guess, yes, and -- yes, but maybe with a 8 A. Just the dust monitoring? 9 clarification. There may be some positive findings or 9 q. well, just 1n general, can you just kind of give 10 something different than the usual findings, but not 10 us a description of what you did? 11 necessarily tied to asbestos exposure, I mean, but I have 11 a . when Dooley retired 1n November of '71, shortly 12 not read this and some of this i can't read, but 1t says 12 after that we added a second Industrial hygienist of Jim 13 nonnegative as of March '65, but I don't know nonnegative of 13 Llcata. He was a trained Industrial hygienist, came to us 14 what. 14 from Liberty Mutual insurance company, and I think Jim was 15 q. But Texaco was conducting their -- was gathering 15 the first person on my staff to visit the Anacortes plant. 16 their data for the API study 1n March of 1965, right? 16 in *73 we added Herschel Hobson in the Houston office, and I 17 A. That's correct. 17 think he was the second person to visit the Anacortes plant. 18 q. I mean, do you have any Information that would 18 He went 1n there, I think, '73, '74, something like that. 19 Indicate that this 1s not part of that data that was 19 But as we added staff beyond Herschel, we got 20 gathered 1n 1965? 20 into a more definitive monitoring program at the different 21 a . I don't have any Indication one way or the other. 21 locations, we added to the sampling capability of the 22 I know it was produced by the company, and 1t seems to have 22 company with regard to -- I mean, at that particular point 23 some association, but beyond that I don't know. 24 q. Sir, do you think that Insulators for the company 25 -- 23 1n time they had these personal monitoring pumps. They had 24 more media where you could take personal monitoring samples, 25 breathing zone samples. And we started computerizing the MOBURG & ASSOCIATES, INC. (206)622-3110 Pages 81 to 84 y 85 1 data developing a sampling data sheet, and went from there, 2 I guess. I could go on, but I don't know if you want me to 3 go on. 4 Q. what did you find with respect to the exposures 5 to asbestos the workers were having at that time? 6 A. well, the earliest exposures that we measured, we 7 were doing two sorts of things, we were training personnel 8 at the Port Arthur plant. Those were, I think, the first 9 couple of ones we did, and, although we collected those 10 samples for experience for those particular individuals, I 11 think we treated that more as a training experience than a 12 true measuring experience, we also tried to pick out the 13 worst case areas. 14 in other words, I think one of the first areas we 15 went to had been fire-damaged, and so the Insulation had 16 been damaged in the course of the heat and the fire, and we 17 were measuring hat happened tyhen you stripped at that 18 particular type of insulation, which was -- I would 19 characterize it as far dustier than hat you might find in a 20 normal stripping operation, but in essence I think we found, 21 for the most part, the normal stripping operation for 22 asbestos pipe was ithln OSHA standards, and again, the 23 **orst cases may have been somevhat different. 24 We found that 1n a lot of cases the personnel 25 were using respiratory protection, we developed standards IWIN l\X\.nMI\LiO 1 between asbestos and mesothelioma, and so we were taking th< 2 extra steps. One of the techniques for control 1n 3 Industrial hygiene 1s substituting a less hazardous 4 material. 5 Q. Now, there were some Texaco plants that prior to 6 1972 were using nonasbestos-containing materials for their 7 insulation; 1s that right? 8 A. I think in many of the Installations, depending 9 on the temperature requirements, they could have been using 10 things like mineral ool, fiberglass, but that was not true 11 1n all particular type of situations because asbestos was 12 required pretty much by the contractor to maintain heat 13 balance in certain areas. 14 Q. I'm looking for a document here. 15 (Marked Deposition Exhibit 11.) 16 Q. Can you identify this document, sir? 17 A. Yes. It's a memorandum I wrote in June of '72. 18 Q. And it states, "Of special note should be the 19 fact that no asbestos-containing Insulation material has 20 been used at lap for a number of years." Did lap refer to 21 the Los Angeles plant? 22 A. That's correct. 23 Q. so according to this memo that you wrote in 1972, 24 the Los Angeles plant had converted to nonasbestos 25 insulation for several years before; isn't that right? 86 1 to reduce, minimize those exposures by developing a 2 procedure to wet don the insulation before 1t was removed, 3 barricade off the area *ith tape. There were certain 4 disposal situations that we had to take care of. Certain 5 bags, labeling things of that particular sort. 6 Q. How about substituting with nonasbestos- 7 containing products? 8 a . You picked up the one I missed, and that was in 9 1972 we adopted a policy here we m u l d only use 10 nonasbestos-containlng Insulation for new construction, and 11 did go out to the contractors ho ere constructing units 12 for us that we were insisting only on nonasbestos-containlng 13 Insulation on that new construction. And the policy was 14 also adopted here we m u l d only purchase nonasbestos- 15 containing Insulation for maintenance operations, and that 16 in all Instances e did not Immediately have available 17 substitutes, but for most things, for the pipe, preset 18 length of pipe, we could get substitutes pretty shortly, and 19 so we adopted that particular policy and carried through 20 rith it. 21 q. isn't It true that the policies that you've just 22 described were adopted specifically in response to OSHA 23 regulations that came out 1n the early 1970s? 24 a . I think there ere to situations there, not 25 necessarily OSHA, but also you now had the association 88 1 a . Let me read the hole thing. 2 Q. Sure. 3 A. That seems to indicate that they had been able to 4 use nonasbestos-containing Insulation for a number of years, 5 that's correct. 6 Q. hy? 7 a . I don't know hy. I 'm not a control engineer, 8 process control engineer. 9 Q. certainly the document m u l d seem to Indicate 10 that at least somebody In the Texaco system knew that 11 nonasbestos-containlng Insulation material as available for 12 use. Would you agree 1th that? 13 a . oh, on this particular Instance 1t may have fit 14 their particular operating parameters. I don't know that, 15 beyond that. 16 Q. Do you know if their operating parameters 17 differed significantly from other -- 18 a . I'm not a process engineer. 19 q . certainly the document indicatesthat there were 20 asbestos substitutes available for at least some operations 21 and refinery operations; Isn't that correct? 22 a . That's correct. 23 Q. Do you have any Idea how far back 1tm s that the 24 Los Angeles plant had converted to nonasbestos-containlng 25 Insulation cement? MOBURG & ASSOCIATES, INC. (206)622-3110 Pages 85 to 88 > . w v i i v a ta/fw k . i \ i ir>\j L.I l j 1 A. n o , I do not. a., i r \ u 89 2 Q. or materials, I should say. 3 A. n o , I do not. 4 Q. was there a safety man down there that you recall 5 working with? 6 a . There was certainly a safety supervisor down 7 there, but I don't remember h1s name. 8 q . But clearly, according to this document at least 9 that you wrote 1n 1972, Los Angeles plant was using 10 nonasbestos materials prior to the passage or the effect of 11 o s h a , and the asbestos regulations that went Into effect 12 with o s h a ; Isn't that right? . 13 a . The document says that they've been using it for 14 a number of years. 15 (Marked Deposition Exhibit 12.) 16 q . Mr. Richards, have you had a chance to take a 17 look at Exhibit n o . 12? 18 A. Yes, I have. 19 Q. And can you Identify the document for me? 20 a . It's a memorandum from me dated May 9, 1972 to 21 F. d . Dorr who was the plant manager at the Port Arthur 22 plant. 23 Q. Now, can you describe for me what this document 24 is? 25 A. This is a report of a -- we started numbering r\L/iv i\.xi .n M f\LO 91 1 that correct? 2 A. That would be a logical conclusion, right, we 3 would have been counting fibers. 4 Q. Well, you're testing for asbestos fibers? 5 a . Yeah, right. 6 Q. Now, manual -- do you agree with me that manual 7 sawing, cutting and fitting preformed Insulation was an 8 activity that was Undertaken by insulators at refineries all 9 over the Texaco system? 10 A. Correct. 11 Q. Do you think that was something that was done at 12 Anacortes, for example? 13 a . it could have been done at Anacortes, correct. 14 Q. Do you have any reason to believe that that was 15 not done at Anacortes? 16 a . No. But we'd have to go back to the sampling 17 data sheets to know. 18 Q. If I could ask the question, I'm sorry. Now, the 19 document goes on and says, "Except for A4, all samples were 20 at or exceeded the acceptable OSHA limits for asbestos 21 fibers of five fibers per milliliter for an eight-hour 22 exposure. All the above samples represent exposure during a 23 15-minute period. The 15-minute sampling period should be 24 continued. 25 "Based on the above, use of respiratory 90 1 samples, we didn't go back and number anything previous to 92 1 protection during insulation and Insulation stripping will 2 that that might have been taken but we started -- and this 2 have to continue. More definitive recommendations will 3 is A1 through A10 would have been the first 10 asbestos 3 await collection and analysis of further samples." Do you 4 samples we would have taken, and these are the ones I'm 4 see that? 5 referring to earlier. These were training samples we were 5 A. Yes. 6 using, safety personnel, and i was trying to train them to 6 Q. Did I read that correctly? 7 use the sampling pumps, the sampling techniques, make many 7 A. Yes. 8 notes and things of that sort. Also here we have this fire 8 Q. Now, the -- so there's no question, according to 9 damage Insulation that was being stripped as a worst case 9 this document -- and you've distinguished fire-damaged 10 type of situation. 11 Q. Well, that's part of the document, isn't 1t? I 10 Insulation as being more prone to give off asbestos dust 11 than, say, just regular Insulation, is that what you're 12 mean, there was something else that was tested as well, 12 saying? 13 Isn't that right, the manual cutting, sawing and fitting 13 A. That was general in asbestos dust, right, 1t's 14 preformed Insulation? 14 fire damaged. 15 A. Yeah, Al through 5, and then the worst case, 6 15 Q. Do you think that when you strip off asbestos 16 through 10. 16 Insulation that's not fire-damaged, did you have any 17 Q. And so the manual sawing, cutting and fitting 17 Information one way or another whether the dust that was 18 preformed Insulation, that did not refer to fire-damaged 18 released exceeded acceptable o s h a limits at that time? 19 Insulation? 19 A. At this time when I took these samples? 20 A. No. It was 6 through 10. 21 Q. So 1 to 5 was preformed Insulation, correct? I 22 just want to -- so I understand 1t. 23 A. Well, 1t's also muddlng with nonasbestos mud. 20 Q. Yeah. 21 A. I didn't have any definitive data, but visually 22 1t looked that way, and I think later we proved that was the 23 case. Fire-damaged, 1t actually damaged the matrix that 24 Q. Well, I assume 1f you were testing for asbestos 24 holds the fibers together. 25 dust that the preformed Insulation had asbestos 1n 1t; 1s 25 Q. You didn't understand my question. My question MOBURG & ASSOCIATES, INC. (206)622-3110 Pages 89 to 92 % i n u u i \ l in v jL .1 1 L_ | f~ \ L_ 93 1 was, when you stripped off nonfire-damaged Insulation -- did 2 you ever undertake that kind of activity? 3 A. Yes. I -- 4 Q. And that was -- 5 MR. MESHER: Let him answer, and then you're 6 going -- you're trying to answer when he's asking the next 7 question. 8 A. x don't know that I personally was involved in 9 that sampling, but yes, that sampling was done. 10 Q. Now, are you aware of any results that stated 11 that the stripping off of nonfi re-damaged insulation, 12 asbestos insulation, exceeded o s h a dust limits that were in 13 place at that time? 14 A. That seems to be a negative question. 15 Q. Probably is. 16 A. A backwards question. 17 m r . f r o c k t : can you repeat the question? I 18 didn't think it was that backwards. 19 (Record read as requested.) 20 A. in other words, are you asking me if when we 21 sampled nonfire-damaged asbestos insulation that that also 22 exceeded the standards? 23 Q. Yeah. 24 A. okay. I don't know specifically because it's 25 been a long time, but in the course of the last several tMJINI K X U IA K U ^ 95 1 A. That's right. I have no doubts about that. I'm 2 just saying that when we sit here in 2003 and go back to 3 1973 or '72, I think it was, you know, I think we're puttini 4 a lot of reliability in something that happened 30 years agi 5 that is not there. But I don't dispute the recommendation : 6 made to continue respiratory protection during stripping, 7 right. 8 Q. But as far as we know, there's not a single othei 9 sample that was taken for manual sawing, cutting and fittin; 10 preformed insulation at any time prior to this? 11 A. Prior to that? 12 Q. Yeah. 13 A. Other than what might havehappened with those 14 contractor samples that I don't know where they did and what 15 they did, you know. I mean, certainly with this technique, 16 which was the Monltaire pumps and the Millipore filters, 17 these were the first samples taken using that technique. 18 Any other technique would have been the midget impinger, and 19 these also would have been breathing zone samples, and the 20 other ones would have been aerated samples. 21 Q. Are you saying that you don't think this is a 22 particularly reliable sample? 23 A. I think we're putting a lot of faith inthe first 24 40 samples, now, 30 years later than really should be. 25 Q. So do you think that these -- taking samples like 94 1 months I remember seeing a chart that sort of summarized 96 1 this, like the one you took here, Al through 10, provides 2 asbestos sampling, and the vast majority did not exceed the 2 more specific information in regards to the hazard as 3 OSHA standard in place at that particular point in time. 3 opposed to just observing an operation in a given 4 Q. Now, with regard to the preformed insulation that 4 environment where you're taking no such samples? 5 was not fire-damaged -- 5 A. I don't think you can compare the two. 6 A. correct. 7 Q. -- that is reflected in this document -- 6 Q. why is that? 7 A. well, again, based on experience, based on other 8 A. 1 through 5. 8 factors, I don't think this is representative of the true 9 Q. -- it would appear that Al, A2 and A3 all were at 9 nature of this particular type of job that visually appeared 10 or exceeded the acceptable or the o s h a limits that were in 10 to Dooley and others 1n the '50s, '60s, whatever those 11 place in 1972; is that right? 11 particular time frames -- felt about this particular type of 12 A. Well, the number appears to do that, yes, but, 12 operation. 13 again, as I mentioned earlier before we saw this document, 13 what I'm saying 1s we'd have to go down to a 14 we were trying to train safety personnel 1n doing air 14 lower number of samples, 1n my estimation, to get something 15 sampling. And I would characterize this as the very first 15 a little more representative of that type of operation. 16 samples they ever took, and to me would be somewhat suspect 16 Q. So are you sayingthat the manual sawing,cutting 17 in its exact accuracy. I've seen these many times since 17 and fitting preformed insulation that you observed -- and 18 that. And I think we are -- you know, when we get down to 18 you took this sample, right? 19 numbers in the 40s I'd have more faith 1n their reliability 19 A. I was there while the other people took the 20 of the actual number. 20 sample. 21 Q. Well, certainly, according to this document, you 21 Q. Are you saying that the manual sawing, cutting 22 believed that this sample had some reliability because you 22 and fitting preformed insulation that you observed in May of 23 advised whoever you were advising that use of respiratory 23 1972 at Port Arthur differed materially from what you 24 protection during insulation and insulation stripping would 24 believe Allan oooley would have been observing, is that 25 have to continue? 25 what you're saying? MOBURG & ASSOCIATES, INC. (206)622-3110 Pages 93 to 96 VVI1 w m ^ r \U L .i\l j t . I A A I-- 97 1 A. n o . What I'm saying is these numbers represent 2 something that may or may not have been a true 3 representative case when we go down to a later, lower number 4 in the asbestos sampling, because I remember that curve 5 regarding the fiber counts and samples, and the vast 6.majority are much lower than this. 7 Q. So -- 8 a . I'm saying these may not be representative 9 samples of the true case going back in hindsight 30 years. 10 Q. so you don't think this is an accurate 11 representation of what an insulation worker in a Texaco 12 refinery would have been doing when they were manually 13 sawing, cutting and fitting preformed insulation? 14 A. These numbers are not a true representation, 15 that's what I'm saying. 16 Q. But of course we have no data prior to 1972 that 17 would indicate one way or another whether or not this number 18 is accurate; is that right? 19 A. Well, we have no data that we can produce, that's 20 correct. 21 Q. You have no data that you can produce? 22 A. That we can produce. 23 Q. what data do you have that you couldn't produce? 24 A. well, like I said, we held sampling done by 25 contractors at certain -- at locations I can't remember. I KUIN K IL H A K U b 99 1 asbestos dust? 2 A. I don't remember. 3 Q. So you can't say one way or the other that those 4 reports indicated that there was no hazard from asbestos 5 dust in Texaco operations, right? 6 A. That's correct. I can't say one way or the 7 other. 8 Q. Sir, is it possible that study was done by the 9 industrial Hygiene Foundation and not Dr. Kehoe, or would I 10 be mistaken? 11 A. That's not my recollection. My recollection 1s 12 clearly it was a contract between Kettering and Texaco. 13 m r . f r o c k t : Do you guys want to break for about 14 an hour for lunch? . 15 MR. m e s h e r : h o w long -- 16 MR. f r o c k t : I'm going to get done today. 17 MR. m e s h e r : We can go off the record. 18 THE v i d e o g r a p h e r : The time is 11:36 a.m. we'll 19 be taking a break. 20 (Lunch recess.) 21 THE v i d e o g r a p h e r : The time is 12:32 p.m. we're 22 now back on the record. 23 BY MR. FROCKT: 24 q . Mr. Richards, I want to turn back to the API 25 study that we've been talking about, we were talking about 1 remember seeing the reports. They did samples. I don't 2 remember what they sampled for, I don't know where they 3 sampled at, but apparently those reports can't be found 4 after diligent search of the files in Tulsa, and so we can't 5 produce them. I remember seeing them. I don't remember 6 what they said, but we can't produce them. 7 Q. Were those -- so, and is it your belief that 8 those -- well, what inspired Texaco to do those samples with 100 1 at some length, in 1965 or so and that Texaco participated 2 in. And hand you what's been marked as 13. 3 (Marked Deposition Exhibit 13.) 4 Q. If you could take a look at that document and the 5 attachment. 6 A. okay. Do you want me to read the attachment 7 detail or just -- 8 Q. Let me ask you, have you seen this document 9 the contractors that you're referring to? 10 A. inspired? I don't have any idea. 11 Q. What was the reason for it? 12 A. I don't know. 13 Q. How do you know about it? 14 A. Because I read them. 15 Q. When did you read them? 16 A. in the '70s. 17 Q. So you just saw these samples, these studies 18 that were done by some contractor, may have been or. Kehoe 19 from the University of Cincinnati? 20 A. It may have been him, right, or his associates, 21 that's correct, we had these industrial hygiene files by 22 plant in a particular file drawer, and in going through 23 those 1n the '70s I remember running across those particular 24 reports. 25 Q. What did the reports indicate with regards to 9 before? 10 A. Only 1n connection with studying -- or reviewing 11 documents for the case. First time I ever saw it. ' 12 Q. That was the first time you ever saw it? 13 A. Yeah, sometime this year, I think maybe the first 14 time we were -- in February, but I reviewed it this year for 15 the first time. 16 Q. Did you review 1t in preparation for coming here 17 today in giving your testimony again? 18 A. Yes, again. 19 Q. So you did look at it again, can you identify 20 the document for me? 21 A. It appears to be a letter, no letterhead on it, 22 but from Lucian Renes, who was with Phillips 66, to van 23 Hendricks, who was with Standard Oil, New Jersey, and 24 apparently 1t's a correspondence that Lucian was gathering 25 this information. You saw that in an earlier exhibit. He MOBURG & ASSOCIATES, INC. (206)622-3110 Pages 97 to 10C -- 'I 101 1 was going out to gather the information, but for some reason 2 or another at the spring committee meeting that they decided 3 to turn all this -- decided to turn this survey over to a 4 subcommittee. 5 Q. okay. And who is it copied to? 6 A. Allan Dooley and Art Pabst. 7 Q. And Allan Dooley, that would be Allan E. Dooley, 8 the same Allan Dooley who we've been talking about at some 9 length who was the industrial hygienist for Texaco in the 10 1960s? 11 ' A. That's right. 12 Q. And this document, cover, letter has a stamp on 13 it, Health Division New York? 14 A. That's correct. 15 Q. And I think you indicated earlier that was the 16 Health Division stamp, that was the stamp for incoming mail 17 for the Health Division at Texaco in New York; is that 18 right? 19 A. That's correct. 20 Q. And this seems to be a checkmark there for AED? 21 A. Which is Allan Dooley. 22 Q. Are there any other initials there that you 23 recognize? It's a little bit hard to see. 24 A. well, the first one is CHB. That's Baylor. 25 Q. so that would be Curtis Baylor, correct?1 i w i x r\xv.riMi\LO 103 1 a . I've glanced at it before. 2 Q. Do you feel comfortable giving me an analysis of 3 what you understand the attachment to be or would you like 4 to take a look through it in detail again? 5 A. I more or less focused on the summary, but -- art 6 these out of order? I don't know. Let's see. No, they 7 don't seem to be out of order, we got a summary up front. 8 MR. FRENKEL: Summary on page 2 and a conclusion 9 on page 3. 10 A. I'm more or less focused on the conclusion, but 11 more than that, I'd have to take a real close look at it. 12 Q. why don't we go ahead and look at some of it. 13 Why don't you start with the first sentence there. 14 A. "Recent reports describing a high incidence of 15 pulmonary neoplasms among asbestos workers has focused 16 attention on the health of refinery craftsmen engaged in 17 Insulation activities." 18 Q. n o w , 1t says going down to the second -- so that 19 would be sort of a general Statement of what the API study 20 was about; is that right? 21 A. The reason for it. 22 Q. Reason for it? 23 A. Yeah, sure. 24 Q. Now, looking at the second paragraph where it 25 says "historical." Can you read that paragraph for me? 1 A. Yeah, that's Curtis. ~ 1 102 2 Q. who was curtis Baylor? 3 A. He was at the time the chief medical officer of 4 the company. He had taken over for Newquist. And then the 5 next one down is Gene Staten, E. R. Staten, and he became 6 the chief medical officer, I guess, I'm thinking, '74-1sh 7 until he retired in the -- in, I think, the late '70s. I 8 don't recognize the other two. I don't recognize the last 9 one. 10 Q. so the stamp Indicates that the Health Division, 11 at least insofar as the markings on the letter, Incorporated 12 both the medical department and the industrial hygiene 13 department; is that right? 14 A. That's correct. 15 Q. And would you characterize the industrial hygiene 16 department as having a close working relationship with the 17 medical department or not? 18 A. They work within the same sectionof the 19 building, and structurally It was Curtis Baylor's office, 20 the secretary's office for Curtis, and Allan, and then 21 Allan's office. 22 q. Now, did you have a chance to orhave you 23 reviewed the attachment? 24 A. Not in any kind of detail. 25 Q. Have you seen it before? _ : ioT 1 A. You want me to read the first paragraph? 2 Q. sure. 3 A. For 50 years or longer asbestos has been 4 recognized in the united states as form of pneumoconiosis 5 resulting from exposure to asbestos dust. However, 1t was 6 not until joint medical and environmental studies were 7 conducted by official health agencies in the mills of 8 Pennsylvania and North Carolina about 30 years ago that the 9 relationship between dust concentrations, particle size, 10 years of exposure and definitive chest x-ray markings were 11 established -- was established. The lung field markings 12 were also shown to correlate well with certain subjective 13 reactions related to pulmonary function. 14 Q. Now, that paragraph references some medical and 15 environmental studies from the mills of Pennsylvania, North 16 Carolina? , 17 A. Correct. 18 Q. Sir, do you have an opinion as to whether or not 19 those studies were -- Included the study that Allan Dooley 20 participated 1n In 1930, 1n the mid 1930s, when he was 21 working for the state of Pennsylvania? 22 A. I think he would have been Involved 1n that 23 particular aspect, not North Carolina certainly. 24 Q. certainly. So this document 1s referencing 25 studies that Allan Dooley himself participated in in MOBURG & ASSOCIATES, INC. (206)622-3110 Pages 101 to 104 W ' / l ! I \ i i n v j 1 i % | ru - 105 1 Pennsylvania; is that correct? 2 A. Could have. I mean, I don't know for sure, but 3 it could have. 4 q. well, we know the document references studies 5 about 30 years ago, which would be about the time that Allan 6 Dooley was participating and co-authoring a study on 7 asbestos dust, correct? 8 A. Correct. 9 Q. in Pennsylvania. 10 A. in Pennsylvania. 11 q. Now, why don't you go ahead and read the next 12 couple of paragraphs for me, down to the summary of 13 findings. 14 MR. FRENKEL: Out loud? 15 MR. f r o c k t : Please. 16 a . important facts concerning the physical character 17 of the dust associated with the asbestosls were revealed 1n 18 these studies. Although asbestos fibers ranging 1n media 19 length from 7 to 16 microns were found in the air, these 20 long fibers were relatively few in number. The bulk of 21 suspended dust range from about 0.5 to 3 microns 1n length 22 and varied 1n concentration from as little as 1 or 2 23 millions of particles per cubic foot of air (m p p c f ) to 20 or 24 more m p p c f , depending on the mechanical operations Involved. 25 The correlations also showed that after 15 or more years of KUIN K IL H A K U b 107 i other Insulating materials, such as magnesia, calcium 2 silicate Insulating block and insulation cements containing 3 10 to 15 percent asbestos. No free silica was present and 4 asbestos appears to be the own biologically active material 5 in the exposure. This report seems to be free of the 6 statistical weakness and other valid criticisms of the 7 earlier reports. Since the date of that report, at least 8 three additional publications by other Investigators confirm 9 1n part, if not all, the findings of sellkoff and his 10 associates. An Important finding in these reports are that 11 these cancers are found some 20 to 40 years after Initial 12 exposure to asbestos, frequently after retirement from 13 active employment. 14 Q. Now, you testified previously a little bit about 15 your understanding of the Sellkoff reports 1n the mid '60s; 16 1s that correct? 17 a . correct. 18 Q. And remind me of what your understanding was of 19 the Sellkoff reports. 20 A. well, again, the time frame 1s sort of 21 compressed, but my understanding of the Sellkoff reports 22 were that the focus was on construction workers in the New 23 York city area, the high rise buildings, and that when we 24 had some discussions at Mount Sinai in early '70s, he was 25 discussing the enclosure of the floor, a s they were 106 1 exposure the dust reached about the same degree of ' 1 constructing the different floors in the high rise, they 2 advancement -- I 'm sorry, I misread that. That after 15 or 3 more years of exposure the disease reached about the same 4 degree of advancement, as evidenced by chest x-ray markings, 2 would move up with the steel construction, put 1n some sort 3 of flooring, and then spray all the structures before they 4 enclosed the outside with cement blocks or whatever, S regardless of the dust Intensity. 6 Continue? 7 q. Yes, please. 5 construction zone. 6 But 1n order to prevent the asbestos from going 7 out over the city, they would enclose the area around that 8 A. in these studies there seemed to be no evidence 8 particular floor 1n tarps or plastic or whatever, and then 9 of pulmonary or other thoracic neoplasms and no suggestions 9 spray the asbestos on the construction of steel as 10 of such findings. Subsequently, reports of the occurrence 10 fireproofing. 11 of lung cancer and other malignancies associated with 11 Q. Now, did you understand this -- 1s 1t your belief 12 asbestos employment began to appear 1n the literature. 12 that Sellkoff reports of the mid 1960s did not prove that 13 Although the number of such cases appeared large, some 13 asbestos causes cancer? Is that Texaco's position? 14 Investigators felt that the observations did not establish 14 A. I think Texaco's position 1s that we had these 15 an Increased Incidence of cancer and the association was 16 unproved. Many valid weaknesses were shown to exist In the 17 reports claiming lung cancer as a specific Industrial hazard 15 reports. They were coming out initially. They were not 16 particularly conclusive, but between the time frame of the 17 '60s, this was more or less confirmed in more settings than 18 of asbestos workers. However, 1n 1963, a report published 19 by Sellkoff, churg -- I guess it's Churg -- and Hammond, the 20 latter of the cigarette fame, described a significant 21 Incidence of lung cancer and other pleural tumors as well as 22 cancer of the stomach, colon and rectum, among asbestos 23 insulators 1n the construction Industry. These Insulators 18 just the type of settings that Sellkoff was Investigating. 19 Q. Now, here 1n this document, Mr. Renes, who was an 20 Industrial hygienist for an oil company -- 21 Correct? 22 a . correct. 23 Q. -- he 1s essentially commenting on the Sellkoff 24 were exposed to a variety of materials Including fibrous 24 studies. Would you agree with that? 25 glass, cork, and hair felts which contained no asbestos; 25 a . This may be h1s opinion, yes. MOBURG & ASSOCIATES, :n C. (206)622-3110 Pages 105 to 108 jfT i'iu jyn i v j , jMDC.I\nMV3Cni , Dl ML_ 109 1 Q. sure. And he's saying Selikoff studies in the 2 1960s were free of some of the statistical weaknesses in 3 previous reports that he says, you know, maybe didn't prove 4 that there was a conclusive link between cancer and 5 asbestos, d o you agree with that, that that's what he's 6 saying? 7 A. That seems to be what he's saying. 8 q. And he 1s advising Allan Dooley by h1s 9 circulation to Allan Dooley of this document that that's his 10 opinion, isn't he? 11 A. It seems to be. I think we better characterize 12 this as this is a transmission -- because Allan became the 13 subcommittee chairman and so this 1s transmission to Allan 14 as the subcommittee chairman who is going to take this and 15 pursue it further. 16 Q. But at least according to Mr. Renes, who was also 17 involved in the refining industry, he seems to think that 18 the selikoff studies are persuasive in terms of proving a 19 link between asbestos and cancer. 20 on that? Don't you agree with me 21 A. Let mego back and review that. I was reading 22 out loud and not necessarily following. 23 q. if you could answer my -- do you want to review 24 it and then answer my question? we'll wait. 25 a . it says this report seemed to be free of the KUN K1 LMAKU5 1 q. But in particular 1n regards to this document, d< 2 you agree that it's -- 3 MR. FRENKEL: Are you talking about this 4 paragraph or the whole document? 5 q. well, how about just the paragraph? Do you thlnl 6 the paragraph is open to different interpretations? 7 a . well, there's no way to confirm what Lucian was 8 writing, but to me it's open to different interpretations. 9 q. so one person might look at this paragraph and 10 say, well, I think this means that he's saying that this is 11 a very strong study, and it seems to point that there's a 12 link between asbestos and cancer and someone else might say 13 that looking at that paragraph that, well, no, it's not 14 really proven; is that right? 15 A. The only thing I can do is go back, this report 16 seems, seemed to be free, it seems to be free. 17 q. I guess I'm asking you If you think this report 18 1s open to different interpretations -- 19 A. Absolutely. 20 q. -- that paragraph? 21 A. Yeah. 22 q. Now, we'll note here, the last part of that . 23 paragraph says, "An important finding in these reports is 24 that the cancers are found some 20 to 40 years after initial 25 exposure to asbestos, frequently after retirement from 1 statistical weaknesses and other valid criticisms of the 2 earlier report, so "seems" I think is the operating word 3 there. 4 q. so you don't think he's actually saying here that 5 he thinks it's a solid report, do you? 6 a . No. I think the words are this report seems or 7 seemed to be free of statistical weaknesses. 8 q. And then he also says, he goes on to say, that 9 since the date of that report three additional publications 10 by other investigators confirm 1n part, if not all, the 11 finding of selikoff and his associates? 12 A. so they confirmed that 1t seems to be free of 13 statistical weakness. 14 q. well, no. Don't you think that sentence says 15 that they're confirming the findings of Dr. Selikoff? 16 A. I don't know what it says. I think it's there, 17 it says what it says. The document says what it says, and I 18 think it's open to a different interpretation, but to me 1t 19 says that this confirms that the earlier report seemed to be 20 free of the statistical weaknesses and other valid 21 criticisms of earlier reports. 22 q. so you think this document is open to different 23 interpretations? 24 A. I think any written document 1s open to different 25 interpretations. 1 active employment." Do you see that? 2 A. Yes, I do. 3 q. Now, you understand that Mr. Jameson had left 4 Texaco and actually had retired and then developed 5 mesothelioma. Did you know that? 6 A. If I recall. I don't recall his specific 7 diagnosis, but yeah. 8 q. I mean, would you agree with me that essentially 9 what Mr. Renes is saying 1n that last sentence 1s pretty 10 much exactly what happened to Ray Jameson, do you think? 11 A. well, I think the sentence speaks for Itself. 12 There's a latency period of 20 to 40 years after initial 13 exposure to asbestos and that the disease, the cancers, are 14 found frequently after retirement from active employment. 15 q. Sir, so Allan Dooley is given this interim 16 report, can we agree on that, that presumably he received it 17 because it was copied to him? 18 A. Yeah. I think -- wasn't there a title on here? 19 A preliminary audit, right, 1s what Lucian titled 1t. 20 q. Now, do you think that this document constitutes 21 recognition of a known hazard, that being asbestos, for 22 Industrial -- for insulators who are working with asbestos 23 in refineries? 24 A. From the stand of asbestosis, certainly. 25 q. From the standpoint of just it being a hazard to MOBURG & ASSOCIATES, INC. (206)622-3110 Pages 109 to 112 sa i j r v u u i M m u L . l i | l. a n u a rvuiN i\.x\_riMi\.LO 113 1 refinery Insulators. Do you think it would qualify as a 1 A. well, again -- and these are based on 2 document that would discuss an important study that seems to 2 discussions, plus review of Dr. sellkoff's update. Used to 3 say that there's a recognition that asbestos is a hazard to 3 publish, I think 1t was called, an update thing. But the 4 refinery insulators? Do you disagree with that or do you 4 situation for his construction workers was much more 5 agree with it? 5 confined. They were very excessive exposures in that they 6 MR. FRENKEL: Do you want him to read the whole 6 were spraying this asbestos fiber onto steel structures, ani 7 document? 1 don't think he's read the whole document. 7 the exposures to me were much more excessive than what we 8 h r . f r o c k t : sure. Absolutely. I certainly did 8 would find in a refinery setting where you had more -- more 9 not mean to -- it was my understanding that he had read it 9 units are open to the outside air, and you don't run Into 10 at one time. 10 the confinement problems that he had. 11 Q. Go ahead and read the whole thing. 11 Q. But of course Texaco has no information 12 A. in the context -- I want to go over your question 12 specifically on how much dust was in the air during those 13 again so I know what I'm reading for. So could we have the 13 outside operations that you're referring to because you 14 court reporter read the whole question? 14 never tested, did you? 15 (Record read as requested.) 15 A. well, now, wait. Let's go back to the fact that 16 MR. f r o c k t : Now that we're all clear on what my 16 we had contractors testing for substances at some point 1n 17 question is, why don't you go ahead and read the document, 17 time at some plant, and I don't know what those substances 18 and maybe I'll rephrase the question to make it a little bit 18 are. 19 clearer, would that be all right? 19 Q. But we don't know even know what the results of 20 MR. fRe n k e l : Read the document so you can read 20 those tests were, do we? 21 it all and have an understanding, and then Mr. Frockt will 21 A. n o , but we don't know what -- they could have 22 ask you questions. 22 been for asbestos. I mean, I don't know. 23 MR. m e s h e r : d o you want him to read it while the 23 Q. So Texaco has no knowledge one way or the other 24 camera is going? 24 of whether 1t did any testing for asbestos prior to the 25 MR. FROCKT: I don't care, lust leave it on, 25 early '70s, right?1 1 it's fine. 2 A. Okay, ' 3 Q. Yeah. __ n o w can we have the question again? Do you think that this document would 116 1 A. it has no knowledge that it can produce, but 2 again, I don't know what they did and did not do. I just 3 know they had studies done. 4 constitute a recognition of a known hazard for refinery 4 Q. But so in your view this document really doesn't 5 insulators? 5 mean -- let me ask you this: Do you think what Mr. Renes 1s 6 A. I think it demonstrates that there is a potential 6 conveying to Mr. Dooley 1n this document should have caused 7 for hazards to refinery workers, and this is the first stage 7 Allan Dooley or any Industrial hygiene department to sit up 8 In outlining the literature prior to conducting the more 8 and take notice and say, hey, we may be exposing our 9 formal survey to either prove or disprove the hypothesis. 10 Q. But so you think that this document only 9 refinery Insulators to something that's bad for them? d o 10 you think that's a reasonable interpretation of this 11 constitutes recognition of a potential hazard to Insulators? 12 A. Potential from the standpoint of any association 13 with cancer, yeah, x don't think it constitutes any 14 question that asbestos under excessive concentrations for a 11 document? 12 A. well, I think -- let me paraphrase what I think 13 you said. I think this document says that, hey guys, we've 14 seen a problem over here in this type of exposure setting. 15 prolonged period of time can cause asbestosis, which, you 15 So let's come over here, let's look at our medical data, our 16 know, we knew before. 17 Q. n o w , you're familiar, I assume, from your work 16 medical monitoring programs, and let's see 1f we have any of 17 this going on 1n our population, but so we're going to 18 1n the general kinds of things that refinery insulators do. 19 Is that a fair statement? 20 A. Generally, yes. 21 Q. d o you have any belief as to differences between 22 the work that refinery Insulators did and differences 1n 23 what the Insulators that Dr. Selikoff was referring to? 24 A. Oh, clearly. 25 Q. what were they? 18 generate this hypothesis, we're going to take all the 19 statistical data we can and bring it over here 1n a pot and 20 look at 1t. And I think that's what It says. 21 Q. So we're just going to keep on exposing our 22 workers, let them be sort of the proverbial guinea pigs to 23 see 1f they get sick. Is that what you're saying? 24 A. n o , I disagree with that. I think this 1s a very 25 proactive approach to look at the refinery department MOBURG & ASSOCIATES, INC. (206)622-3110 Pages 113 to 116  %l *J u i U7 1 workers knowing that people with expertise, knowledge and 2 experience have been out in the refineries and generally 3 feel that it's not a problem. So this is one way to look 4 and see if you have a problem. This is probably even better 5 than -- to me 1t's better than measurements because you're 6 looking at a history of what the employees have been 7 developing or not developing. 8 Q. But we already know that Allan Dooley recognized 9 that asbestos, if you inhale it in sufficient quantities, 10 could be a hazard, we know for a fact, because he wrote it 11 in one of his reports, and we know that Mr. -- that Dr. 12 Wilson had reported on a mesothelioma case from a Texaco 13 refinery worker in 1960. Don't we know those things for 14 facts? 15 A. well, again, if i may paraphrase what you're 16 saying. 17 Q. sure. 18 A. we had a case report in one Texaco worker. We 19 have Dooley who has said, and even, I guess, in the 1949 or 20 '52, whatever survey it was, that asbestos exposure -- 21 excessive asbestos exposure for prolonged periods of time 22 can cause asbestosis. And based on his long-term 23 experience, in all types of industries, he didn't feel that 24 the refinery department, as apparently from this article, 25 many other companies in the refining area didn't feel they rxwiv r\JLV.nr\uo 1 day that confirmed that consistency, that during the '60s, 2 '63 on, you had a lot of information coming out from 3 different people, pros and cons, controversial. You come 4 into 1968 and 1969, the TLV committee, filled with the 5 people a lot smarter than me, looking at these substances 6 every yeah, chooses not to change the standard, to keep the 7 standard exactly where it's been since 1942. And these are 8 medical people, these are industrial hygienists. 9 And so in 1970, '71 when OSHA comes out, X think 10 that's the point x feel is recognition on a consensus basis 11 that there is a problem, and there is an association betweer 12 cancer and asbestos, and they changed the standard and the 13 technique in the OSHA, I guess it was 1971 or something x 14 guess. 15 Q. Well, the threshold limit value didn't change, 16 did it, from 1971? wasn't it 5 million particles? 17 A. No. The OSHA standard came out. We're talking 18 about the TLV versus the OSHA, okay. The OSHA standard was 19 five fibers per CC of air greater than five microns in 20 length. And you could not use that standard with the old 21 sampling technique, so they changed techniques and they 22 changed standards, the OSHA did. They had the temporary 23 emergency standard and then they had the permanent standard. 24 Q. Maybe you can answer this question for me. why 25 is it that you seem to believe that health reports from one 118 1 had a problem in that particular type of setting, and so 2 they're going to go out and take a medical monitoring data 3 and look at It. 4 Q. Do you think that it was known at the time that 5 this -- Mr. Renes sent this report to Mr. Dooley, do you 6 think it was widely accepted in the medical and industrial 7 hygiene community that asbestos was a carcinogen? 8 A. No, sir. 9 Q. Yes or no? 10 A. No. 11 Q. So it's your contention that the selikoff reports 12 that were written prior to this memo being sent to Mr. 13 Dooley did not lead the medical and Industrial hygiene 14 community to conclude that asbestos was a carcinogen, zs 15 that your testimony? 16 A. That's my testimony. 17 Q. Do you think that's a majority view among 18 industrial hygiene professionals or do you think that's a 19 minority view? 20 A. z think -- and my testimony has been very 21 consistent In this regard. 22 Q. Sure, and x'm not saying 1t's not. 23 A. Oh, no. 24 Q. x'm not saying that atall. 25 A. But, and X think we saw a document just the other 120 1 industry that clearly state that asbestos is a hazard, 2 either in terms of giving persons asbestosis or having them 3 develop asbestosis or cancer, has very little application to 4 refinery insulators when they, too, are creating asbestos 5 dust? 6 a . I don't think x was saying that, what z was 7 saying 1s that during the '60s you had -- the Selikoff 8 report come out in, what, '63 and *64, and the Information 9 highway wasn't nearly as fast as 1t 1s today. So you have 10 this report coming out. You have other controversy back and 11 forth, and so the TLV committee in '68, which 1s not 12 concerned with the petroleum Industry necessarily, concerned 13 with all Industries, feels there's sufficient controversy 14 about that in '68/69 to not change the standards. 15 So z'm not just talking about one industry versus 16 another. X'm talking about all Industries. And then when 17 o s h a comes out 1n '71 with the emergency temporary standard 18 -- and I don't know when the permanent one was passed, '71, 19 '72, then you have a sea change, if you will, that covers 20 all industries. . 21 Q. Now, at the end of this document, it says here, 22 Mr. Renes writes: Based on some personal observations of 23 insulating activities, it is his opinion that the inhalation 24 exposure to asbestos among refinery Insulators is neither 25 minimal or insignificant, and x urge the medical and health MOBURG & ASSOCIATES, INC. (206)622-3110 Pages 117 to 120  i n \ j l .1i | nu 121 1 committee to continue to study on this potential for health 2 problems. Do you see that? 3 a . Yes, I do. 4 Q. so certainly this document would seem to be -- 5 Mr. Renes would seem to have a different opinion as to what 6 you believed, or what you've stated you thought Allan Dooley 7 must have believed, in that Mr. Renes seems to think that 8 the Inhalation exposure to asbestos among refinery 9 Insulators Is neither minimal nor Insignificant, and yet 10 you've testified that Mr. Dooley looked at Insulating 11 operations and didn't think there was any problem. 12 that right? Isn't 13 A. You know I don't like to get Into the 14 hypotheti cal -- 15 Q. Go ahead. 16 A. -- but let me approach 1t. 17 Q. sure. 18 a . And neither one of us can go back to Lucian and 19 see what he meant. But 1t's Interesting to say that Lucian 20 says that we should continue to study. It doesn't say we 21 should go out and sample, it says we should continue this 22 epidemiology study. So that's the point I'm going to make. 23 And again, neither one of us know exactly what he meant. 24 Q. But sometimebetweenthis study and 1972 your Los 25 Angeles plant went completely asbestos free; Isn't that1 KUIN K l U I A K U b 123 1 A. It appears to be a compilation -- abstracts, I 2 guess, might be another way to put 1t -- of presentations 3 that were made before the New York Academy of sciences 4 section of Biological and Medical sciences, Two Hast 63rd 5 Street New York, New York, 1n October of '64. 6 Q. Okay. And so what does 1t say up at the top 7 there? It says -- 8 A. From L. E. Anderson, MD, American Petroleum 9 Institute, for your Information. 10 Q. So that would appear to be a stamp that it was 11 circulated by the American petroleum institute. Do you 12 agree with that? 13 A. it would appear to be. 14 q . And Texaco was a member of theAmerican petroleun 15 Institute at that time, was 1t not? 16 A. From '48, '49 on, yes. 17 Q. Do you have any reason to believe -- 18 MR. MESHER: Excuse me. Could you read back th 19 last question, please. 20 (Record read as requested.) 21 MR. FRENKEL; The one before that. 22 (Record read as requested.) 23 Q. It was the practice of the American Petroleum 24 institute to circulate documents like this to Its members, 25 wasn't it? 1 right? 122 124 1 A. I think yes and no. I mean, it's not out of the 2 A. And again we discussed the fact that their 2 ordinary for them to circulate documents. I don't know, you 3 processes could have been different, their engineering could 3 know, exactly where they drew the line or didn't draw the 4 have been different, and I'm not an expert to tell you why 4 Une. 5 there was a difference between the LA plant and the other 5 q . You don't have any information to believe that 6 locations. 6 this document was not circulated to Texaco, do you? 7 Q. So do you have any Information that would allow 7 a . n o , I do not. However, i don't know the date 1t 8 you to sit here today and deny that the LA plant converted 8 was received by Texaco. 9 to asbestos-free Insulation solely because of process Issues 9 Q. sure. And do you recall receiving 1t when you 10 and not for health concerns? 11 A. I can neither deny 1t nor make it affirmative. I 12 don't know. I'm not a process engineer. 10 got to the company in 1967? 11 A. y o u mean receiving it or having 1t In the file or 12 13 Q. sure, okay. Let's get away from that document 13 Q. well, either. Do you recall receiving 1t when 14 for a while. You would agree -- let me ask you this: Did 14 you got there and, 1f not, do you recall seeing it in the 15 Texaco receive copies of the abstracts from the symposium on 15 file when you got there? 16 asbestos that Dr. Sellkoff was participating in in 1964? I 16 A. Neither. 17 think a good way to phrase 1t would be the Asbestos 17 Q. so you don't recall itone way orthe other? 18 Symposium, New York Academy of sciences, summer of 1964. 18 A. That's correct. 19 A. i don't know. 20 Q. I'm going to give you a document that was 21 produced to us by Texaco 1n this case. 22 (Marked Deposition Exhibit 14.) 23 a . i'll just page through the attachments. 19 Q. But of course 1t was produced to us by Texaco in 20 this case? 21 A. That's correct. 22 q . You're aware thatAllan Dooley andCurtis Baylor 23 were on the distribution 11st for documents and circulars 24 Q. That's fine. Can you Identify what that document 24 from the Medical Advisory Committee of the American 25 1s? 25 Petroleum institute, aren't you? MOBURG & ASSOCIATES, INC. (206)622-3110 Pages 121 to 124 % m v i u i i j /-it-- 125 1 A. certain documents, correct. 2 Q. What certain documents werethey? 3 A. Well, I was not a member of those associations. 4 Q. Sure. 5 A. I mean, yes, it would be circulated. You might 6 have selected circulation. They might have had limitations 7 on -- i just don't know the exact method of circulation in 8 1964. But yes, they would have gotten some documents from 9 the API. 10 MR. FROCKT: Let's make this No. 15. 11 (Marked Deposition Exhibit 15.) 12 Q. Mr. Richards, i'll represent to you that Exhibit 13 15 is.supplemental responses from chevron USA in an asbestos 14 case in Texas, and they've attached a number of documents. 15 Do you see that? 16 A. Yes. 17 Q. If you turn to page chevron BB 015798 and 99? 18 A. 015798 and 99. 19 Q. can you.read, as best you can, from the top what 20 No. 98 says? 21 A. well, I can't read the very top. Looks like 22 department of maybe technical something. Mailing list for 23 mimeographed communications and circulars of the Medical 24 Advisory committee. 25 Q. Turn to the next page. IMJIN K-LUIAKLO 1 that Texaco was on this receiving list for certain 2 documents from the API? 3 A. Certain mimeographed communications and 4 circulars. 5 Q. Do you think that only was true for 1959 or do 6 you think that was likely true for other periods that Texaci 7 was in the API? 8 A. well, I don't know. We only have a document thai 9 says '59, and we're talking about mimeographed 10 communications and circulars. 11 Q. well, if you had to -- do you have an opinion on* 12 way or the other? what do you think? 13 A. well, I think that this indicates there was 14 certain communications, because at this day and age we 15 didn't have all the nice copying machines and all of this 16 kind of stuff, and so you mimeographed it. So the API woulc 17 mimeograph certain typed documents they would type, 18 communications, and send it out to this particular mailing 19 list. Now, what I'm saying is, the document here in '64 1s 20 not mimeographed, it's photocopied. So I don't necessarily 21 tie this thing in '59 to this document in '64. 22 Q. But I didn't ask you to tie the documents. 23 A. I know you didn't. 24 Q. I just asked you if you thought they were on the 25 circulation list.1 126 1 A. okay. 2 Q. says here -- identifies CurtisBaylor, Allan 3 Dooley, l . c. Kemp and F. E. Rosenstiehl as being on the 4 circulation list for the mimeographed communications and 5 circulars from this particular committee? 6 A. correct. 7 Q. Do you agree with me that that's what 1t says? 8 A. Yes, I do. 9 Q. Do you think this -- do youhave anyopinion as 10 to whether or not this document would seem to Indicate that 11 Texaco was on the members -- persons at Texaco were on the 12 circulation list for documents circulated by the Medical 13 Advisory committee of the API? 14 MR. FRENKEL: In 1959? 15 MR. f r o c k t : understand that. 16 A. Do we have a date? No. *59 1s down here, well, 17 it seems that 1n 1-29-59 we have a mimeographed 18 communications and circulars listing that lists Curtis 19 Baylor and Allan Dooley, and I think 1t was Les Kemp, and I 20 don't remember who Rosenstiehl was, but then in 1964 we have 21 22 Q. I didn't ask you anything about the 1964 23 document. I just asked you if that's what 1t says. 24 A. That's what this says., correct. 25 Q. So certainly this document would seem to indicate 128 1 A. i know you didn't ask me. I'm merely making an 2 observation. 3 MR. m e s h e r : counsel, I'd appreciate it if you 4 let him finish his answer before you interrupt. 5 MR. FROCKT: Sure. 6 Q. Do you have any information that would lead you 7 to the conclusion that Texaco did not regularly receive 8 documents pertaining to Industrial health that were 9 circulated from the Medical Advisory Committee of the 10 American Petroleum Institute? 11 A. Again, I don't know whatever limitations might 12 have been on that circulation, but, yes, I know they would 13 have received documents. 14 Q. Thank you. 15 (Marked Deposition Exhibit 16.) 16 MR. MARKS: Before you ask, may I ask a 17 procedural point? The notice of deposition for today 18 incorporated the order from Judge cook about this being 19 objection-free. I 'm not sure at the beginning of this 20 deposition today you stated that, but I've been operating 21 under that assumption based on your notice, is that 22 correct? 23 MR. FROCKT: Yes. 24 MR. FRENKEL: Do you think we'd be so quiet? 25 MR. PHILIP: Just wanted to make sure. MOBURG & ASSOCIATES, INC. (206)622-3110 Pages 125 to 128 129 1 Q. Can you identify what the first two pages of this 2 document are? 3 A. what they seen to be 1s a note from somebody. We 4 had these memo pads, so it was a G44 memo pad. And this is 5 a note from somebody with the initials, I think, vrc to 6 Harold Tigh. we saw M s name before. He was 1n the Houston 7 department, I mean the refinery department in Houston, and 8 it's a note attaching some newspaper article, apparently 9 dated in '65. At least that's the date stamp they used in 10 the refinery department, and the inquirer staff. I don't 11 know what newspaper it's from, oh, Philadelphia inquirer, 12 March of '65. 13 q . sir, i'll represent to you that third page is a 14 copy that we obtained from the Philadelphia Inquirer of the 15 same article that's reflected 1n the second -- on the second 16 page, it's just a better copy so that you can read 1t. 17 A. okay. 18 q . so that's why I have that attached. Now, the 19 memo says: in view of Dr. Baylor's recent inquiry, i 20 thought the attached article from Sunday's edition might 21 interest you. I know it will be noted by our union boys. 22 Do you see that? 23 A. Correct. 24 Q. You don't know who vrc would stand for, do you? 25 A. I have no idea. rvvJIN n . J H _ n M K U i 131 1 q . And that Texaco had arefiningdepartment in 2 Houston in March of 1965, didn't it? 3 A. Correct. 4 Q. So -- and I'll represent to you, sir, that in 5 Texaco's interrogatory answers they stated that these two 6 documents seem to go together. 7 A. okay. 8 mr. frockt: what's that? 9 m r . f r e n k e l : I just don't recall it. 10 MR. f r o c k t : I can read 1t to you and show it to U you if you want. I mean, that's an accurate statement. 12 MR. FRENKEL: It's your deposition. 13 Q. And the article itself Includes a report on an 14 asbestos study that was being done in New York and New 15 Jersey at the time concerning mesothelioma; is that correct? 16 A. Right. 17 Q. And 1tstates: m another report, a NewJersey 18 medical team reported evidence that exposure to asbestos, 19 even in fairly small amounts, is making a rare type of 20 cancer more common. The cancer 1s mesothelioma which 21 affects the lining of the abdomen and chest. The high 22 Incidence of the cancer is found in asbestos insulation 23 workers employed in the construction Industry, New Jersey, 24 New York. However, the doctors said it is possible that 25 even mild exposures to asbestos could cause an increase in 130 132 1 Q. And the date on the memo is March of 1965? 1 the cancer among the general public. 2 A. Correct. 2 Do you see that? 3 Q. And March of 1965 was approximately the same time 3 A. Yes. 4 that Texaco was -- that Dr. Baylor had sent out a request 4 q . d o you know if Texaco incorporated this report 5 asking for Texaco officials to start compiling this health 5 into any efforts that it took to protect its insulators from 6 data for their refinery insulators; isn't that right? 6 smaller amounts of asbestos exposure? 7 a . That's correct. That's about the same time 8 frame. 9 Q. So it would be reasonable to infer that what was 10 being referred to here 1n this memo was pertaining to Dr. 11 Baylor's inquiry at that time as it regarded asbestos. 7 A. I don't get that connection. I mean, this looks 8 like a newspaper article that is paraphrasing some of the 9 information coming out of Selikoff's studies, and I know 10 selikoff at one point in time was concerned about 11 environmental exposure to people surrounding these 12 Would you agree with that? . 12 sprayed-on asbestos type of Insulations. 13 A. At least VTC seems to think there was some 13 Q. Certainly the report, as 1t's conveyed inthe 14 relationship, yes. 15 Q. Sure. And that memo went to Mr. Tigh? 16 A. Correct. 17 Q. And Mr. Tigh was the person whom Dr. Baylor was 14 popular press here, says that the -- that even small amounts 15 of asbestos exposure could make a rare type of cancer more 16 common, and that cancer is mesothelioma, correct? 17 a . Well, you're tying the two together. Now, what 18 counting on to accumulate all this data and provide him with 19 the data on the health reports that pertain to refinery 18 do they mean by fairly small? I mean, it's undefined. 19 Q. Sure. Well, it's a newspaper article. 20 Insulators 1n the Texaco system, right? 21 a . I think we said earlier that Tigh seemed to be 22 the point person in the refining department to gather all 20 a . It's a newspaper article. 21 q . That's just how every day people would get their 22 information perhaps about things that might be hazardous to 23 this data together, correct. 24 q . And certainly there's a stamp on the second page? 25 A. Refinery department, Houston. 23 them; is that correct? 24 A. They may. But it Is a newspaper article. 25 THE viDEOGRAPHER: Excuse me. The time is 1:24 MOBURG & ASSOCIATES, INC. (206)622-3110 Pages 129 to 132 i m m i v b i i j| L I AU 133 1 p.m. This concludes tape No. 2 in the deposition of Ronald 2 Richards. 3 (Recess.) KUIN KXl_HAKU^ 1 kind of things, and if you had two fibers clumped together 2 you wouldn't count them at all. And it was very much art 3 attached to the counting technique. 4 t h e v i d e o g r a p h e r : The time is 1:32 p.m. This 4 q. So, I mean, it sounds to me like you're saying 5 begins tape No. 3 in the deposition of Ron arrested 5 that fiber counting is a fairly technical endeavor; is that 6 Richards. 6 right? 7 MR. frocict: I want to go back and just clarify 8 one thing, I think x indicated to you, Mr. Richards, that 9 the document WA-TEX 013571 and 013570 were appended were -- 10 produced in conjunction together when Texaco produced those 11 documents to the plaintiffs in this case about a month ago. 12 And, in fact, I want to be clear so that there's no mix-up, 7 A. well, 1t's art as well as science, in other 8 words, knowing how to prepare the slides and then count the 9 slides, what you count, what you don't count. 10 q. And you mentioned the word round robin, can you 11 explain again what that referred to? 12 A. Okay. Well you'd have, 1n this case, one, two, 13 what's indicated in the interrogatories -- I should say the 13 three, four, five, six, seven companies, and you would have 14 production log -- from Texaco on page 33 -- this is on July 14 the samples fixed, in other words, rather than taking a 15 16 -- it says March 10, 1965 memorandum from VTC to Tigh 15 slice -- couple of slices of samples, Esso Research was 16 presumably enclosing document 013570. so i just want to 16 going to fix nine samples exactly the same. And then we'd 17 clarify that so that there's no misunderstanding about what 18 x understood the scope of production to be in this case. . 19 q. Mr. Richards, have you ever heard of something 20 called the asbestos counting red ~ round robin? 21 A. If sounds vaguely familiar, but maybe you have to 17 send these samples around to the seven companies 18 participating and see what kind of count each laboratory had 19 gotten, and then look at the variability between the 20 counting and see 1f we could tighten 1t down a little bit, 21 1f 1n fact 1t needed It. 22 give me a few more details. 23 Q. well, let me give you a document, 24 1972. 25 (Marked Deposition Exhibit 17.) it's from 22 q. Well, here's another document that would appear 23 to be related to that first one. 24 (Marked Deposition Exhibit 18.) 25 A. Uh-huh. 1 q. Have you had a chance to look at that document, 2 sir? 3 A. Yes, I just started. 4 q. Okay, I'm sorry, go ahead. 5 A. Okay. 6 q. can you identify the document for me? 7 A. Yes. This is a memorandum from me to F. M. 8 Roberts, who was at Beacon, New York. And at this 9 particular point 1n time our asbestos samples were being 10 sent to Beacon, New York for counting. He was In the phase 11 contrast microscope. Beacon had been or was 1n the process 12 of being certified by the -- I believe it was the a i h a had a 13 laboratory certification program with the a c g i h , and we 14 wanted to be certified to make sure our counts were 15 accurate. 16 But apparently -- and this brings more back to 17 mind as x read it. Since the counting technique has 18 considerable art, not just science attached to it, we were 19 going through our round robin of prepared samples, fixed 20 samples by Esso Research. And we would come up with our 21 numbers and compare them and see 1f we could perhaps better 22 refine the counting method, because 1t was a lot of art. I 23 mean, you're sitting there with a microscope and looking 24 over lots of samples and trying to count the fibers and 25 determine their length and the diameter and all the other . ----- 1 q. This is a document dated February 19, 1975. 2 A. correct. 3 q. Asbestos counting round robin, can you explain 4 to me what this document is referring to? 5 A. Well, looks like we're going to have another 6 round of -- another round of round robin counting. 7 Apparently Texaco did not fare as well as the other 8 companies. They were more of an outlier than the other 9 companies during the first round. 10 q. Well, when you say not fare as well, what do you 11 mean by that? 12 A. well, you have variabilities, in other words -- 13 and again, I don't remember how they analyzed this stuff, 14 particularly going back 30 years, but you would have had a 15 media or median established by the seven companies, and then 16 you would have the variance from the median for the 17 different counts, and apparently Texaco had more variance 18 than the other companies. 19 q. A median for what? what were you counting? 20 A. well, you were counting fibers. 21 q. And where were the fibers taken from? 22 A. in this case 1t was a fixed sample prepared by 23 Esso Research and Engineering. 24 q. what was the sample of? 25 A. it could have been asbestos, it could have been MOBURG & ASSOCIATES, NC. (206)622-3110 Pages 133 to 136 ir~ W J L .il | 1- I M L 137 1 some sort of fiber that -- in other words, they had to be 2 able to reproduce a particular sample, and I don't know what 3 they might have used, but this was in connection with 4 counting asbestos fibers, the technique for counting KUI\ K l L H A K U i 1 undertook a company-wide policy to take precautions, 2 specific precautions, for asbestos hazards that were in the 3 workplace at the refineries? 4 A. a company-wide policy? 5 asbestos fibers. So they could have used asbestos fibers as 6 long as they would appear and as long as they have something 7 that was fixed and wouldn't move around. 8 Q. Well, what it says, "if you recall, Texaco's 9 counts in the first round robin were the worst of all who 10 cooperated in the study." i guess what I don't understand 11 and what I 'm trying to find out is worst is sort of a 5 Q. Yes. 6 A. Maybe you could better define that for me. 7 Q. A policy that the company was instituting from 8 the top down from corporate management that was to go out t< '9 all of the plant managers and supervisors and so forth that 10 instructed them to take precautions in regards to the use oi 11 asbestos. 12 normative term, is it the most Inaccurate? is that what 13 they're saying or what is it saying? 14 A. oh, no. To me 1t's they had the mostvariance 15 from the norm, from the median. 16 Q. who set the median? 17 A. The median was set by allthe counts, in other 18 words, you'd have the seven companies or eight companies, 19 whatever it was, seven companies do the counts, and then you 20 would develop a median, or mean, whichever the case may be. 12 A. I guess you're not giving me enough information 13 to come up with an approximate date. I mean, in Texaco 14 there were certain groups that could issue policies and 15 certain groups that could Issue standards, and I 'm not 16 trying to mince words, but the nomenclature for these 17 particular things were somewhat specific within Texaco. 18 And so I can't really come up with a time frame 19 without more information. You're asking for a company-wide 20 policy, but also you're talking about refineries, so are we 21 I don't know how this was analyzed. And then you would look 21 talking about a company-wide policy in the refining 22 at the variance of the various companies from the particular 22 department, which would be a refining department policy, or 23 mean of all -- in this case nine samples. Texaco had the 24 highest variance. 25 Q. what was the purpose of participating in this 23 are we talking about a company-wide policy for the whole 24 company? And I really can't answer your question without 25 more information. . 1 round robin? 1 138 2 A. The second or the first? 3 Q. Either. 4 A. Well, the second was to look at the program and 5 maybe we could close the variance. 6 Q. why would that be important? 7 A. well, again, consistency. 8 Q. consistency of what? 9 A. Of counting. 10 Q. Counting dust fiber's? 11 A. Correct. 12 Q. So did you have a concern at thistime thatyour 13 methods that Texaco was using for counting dust fibers was 14 not accurate or consistent? 15 A. You mean '75? 16 Q. Yeah. 17 A. No. i think what we saw was based on the results 18 of *72, we had the highest variance 1n the round robin, so 19 we took steps at that particular point in time to tighten 20 things down, and so we're going to go through the second 21 round. Now, I don't know if you have the results of the 22 second round, but I guess personally I would be interested. 23 Q. I just have what I was given 1nthedocuments. I 24 don't recall seeing anything else. 25 Sir, when was the first time that Texaco . ---- 1 q. in the early 1970s, did Texaco undertake any kind 2 of policy that was directed from corporate management down 3 for its refinery managers and plant supervisors to take 4 precaution in regards to the use of asbestos insulation? 5 A. I'm sure there was something done in the '70s. I 6 can't pinpoint a date. 7 Q. were you involved in the development of that 8 policy? 9 A. More than likely. 10 Q. You don't have anyrecollection of it as you sit 11 here today? 12 A. Not any specific dates and not any specific 13 details. I mean, it could have been fairly broad. Could 14 have been fairly narrow. You're taxing my memory, 31 years. 15 Q. Sir, I want you to take a look at this document, 16 and we'll see if this kind of provides any recollection for 17 you. 18 (Marked Deposition Exhibit 19.) 19 A. Is this the complete document? Seems to bethe 20 first page of -- 21 q. That's what I have right now. 22 A. I've read what you've handed me. 23 Q. Does this trigger your memory at allinterms of 24 when Texaco began a company-wide policy that made asbestos, 25 quote, a target health hazard? MOBURG & ASSOCIATES, INC. (206)622-3110 Pages 137 to 140 l a I M l / n v i bail 1 J 141 1 m r .m e s h e r : Excuse me, counsel. Document 2 013022 was produced along with 013023. 3 MR. FROCKT: 4 have a copy of 23? Okay. And you've only -- do you 5 m r .m e s h e r : well, not with me here, but if you . 6 want to take a break, you will see that that document was 7 at least two pages were produced, if you'd like me to get 8 you a copy of that second page at the next break, I'd be 9 more than happy to. 10 Mr .f r o c k t : Let me just look 1n my stuff, and 11 hopefully I have it. what's the date on 1t? 12 THE WITNESS: April 17th. 13 MR. FRENKEL: '72. 14 MR. f r o c k t : Are there any other pages with it? 15 MR. m e s h e r : Those were the only pages that - 16 t h e w i t n e s s : I've focused on the asbestos. 17 MR. f r o c k t : i only have what you guys gave me. 18 MR. MESHER: I understand. That's the 19 production, that's all that we -- 20 MR. FROCKT: 21 second page. Let me just take a look at the 22 23 asbestos. t h e w i t n e s s : I mean, I've only focused on the 24 m r . f r o c k t : understand. 25 q. sir, do these two documents reflect any kind of IX V /M IX O .V -1 i n i A U J . , 143 1 correct? 2 a . No, I don't believe that. To me the -- the way : 3 would interpret this document is that, yes, the author of 4 this particular document, and that's not identified, is 5 going on to plant managers, superintendents, refining 6 department U.S., reporting on the results of this particulai 7 two-day interdivisional meeting. 8 And they're pointing out that based on the 9 pending regulations and -- OSHA generally sends out a 30 proposed regulation and then goes through a period of, 1 11 guess, comment would be the best way to describe it. And 12 they are defining that there -- basically the choices for 13 compliance will include the following. So, I mean, as we 14 moved ahead the choices for compliance could Include any on 15 of those particular three. 16 Now, I think there are other documents that go tc 17 your particular question, but these are not the documents 18 that establish policy. 19 q. Certainly this document seems to say that one of 20 the things a company like Texaco can do to help ensure the 21 safety of its workers in regards to asbestos is to 22 substitute a nonasbestos-containing product; isn't that 23 correct? 24 A. well, it says basically your choices for 25 compliance will include the following. 142 1 company-wide policy in regards to asbestos hazards in 1972? 2 A. These two documents donot. 3 q. oh, they don't? 4 A. NO. 5 q. Let me ask you this: what do they do in regards 6 to the subject of asbestos? What do they indicate? 7 A. on many occasionsTexaco would bring together key 8 individuals from the different operating departments to 9 review pending legislation, pending regulation, things of 10 that particular sort. And we would review those from the 11 standpoint of industrial hygiene, health, other matters, 12 labor relations matters, and look to see how that might 13 impact certain operations so we could anticipate, get ready, 14 go for them. 15 so this is not a policy letter. This is a 16 memorandum regarding this interdivisional meeting that was 17 held in Houston on April 6th and 7th of 1972, and the topics 18 were NIOSH. NIOSH had identified asbestos as a target 19 health hazard. Also noise and personal protection. 20 q. so this document, though, is advising plant 21 managers and superintendents in the refining department of 22 Texaco that asbestos was a target health hazard, according 23 to NIOSH at least, and that there were certain measures that 24 Texaco wanted its plant managers and superintendents to take 25 to -- in regards to that target health hazard; isn't that 144 1 q. what was the point of compliance? what do you 2 think the point of compliance with these guidelines was? 1 3 mean, isn't the point of compliance to help ensure the 4 safety of workers? 5 A. I thought your questions went to the purpose of 6 this document. 7 q. I just asked you a question. Answer that 8 question, please. 9 THE WITNESS: Let's have the court reporter read 10 it back. 11 (Record read as requested.) 12 a . This document points out that there are pending 13 regulations or soon to be pending regulations regarding 14 asbestos to be proposed by OSHA, and that, among other 15 things, the plant managers should be alerted to the fact 16 that there would be choices allowed for a compliance with 17 these pending regulations, which we don't know what they're 18 going to exactly be at this particular point in time, but 19 they should be alerted that the choices will include 20 substitute with a nonasbestos-containing product, provide 21 engineering controls for employer protection where 22 substitutes are Impractical, and provide respiratory 23 protection for all affected employees. 24 q. Those would be good things to do from an 25 industrial hygiene point of view, wouldn't they, in order to MOBURG & ASSOCIATES, INC. (206)622-3110 Pages 141 to 144 W* v r i b a t a ^ V I I IM* k /n w u iM i n u u n i ) l_ I n u rc.uii MV , n a i \ u o 1 help prevent asbestos-related illnesses? 1 of these are preventive measures, along with the contractor 2 a . You're going to have to give me more parameters 2 who could have been out doing monitoring for us. 3 than that. I mean, these are some of the many steps one 3 q. And Allan Dooley is making recommendations and 4 could take to control exposures. 4 industrial hygiene surveys that nobody has at this point in 5 q. what are some of the other things you could do 5 time, right? 6 besides these three? 7 A. Ventilation, 8 controls. . other types of engineering 6 A. 7 q. 8 right? We have the '49 document. . But we don't have anyother documents after that, 9 q. How about wetting down insulation before you 9- A. '52. There's other -- there's a '60 in 10 remove it? 11 A. sure. I mean, like I said, this is the choices, 10 Anacortes. 11 q. That's a noise survey. That has nothing to do 12 some of the choices. That's all I read into this particular 12 with dust, right? 13 document. But I say the document you're looking for was 13 A. No, but you talked about all these monitoring 14 about the same time frame, but it was not these two pages- 15 Q. Does Texaco's policy they developed in regards to 14 documents. 15 q. xn that 1960 survey he didn't do anything in 16 asbestos hazard incorporate any of these advisories, these 16 respect to -- 17 choices for compliance that are indicated here? 18 A. Around the same time frame I can -- and again, 17 A. I didn't say that. 18 q. You said as a general statement he was going 19 we're going back 31 years, but I recall reviewing some 19 around making -- 20 documents that clearly used these particular types of 20 A. You said where are all these other documents, and 21 control measures in the documents that did convey the 21 X 'm pointing out there are other survey documents that we 22 corporate policy. 23 Q. what document was that? 24 a . well, like r said, there was a document around 25 this time, and I don't know if it was slightly before,1 22 have provided. That's all. 23 q. well, i'll represent to you that there's not a 24 single other survey, industrial hygiene survey, that the 25 plaintiffs have been provided in this case that's dated __ 1 slightly after. Licata alludes to it in his '72 survey 2 report in Anacortes. And then there was a -- there was a 3 document from the Health Division which essentially 4 established policy in this regard. 5 q. certainly by 1972 It's your view that Texaco was 6 taking steps on a company-wide basis to prevent their 7 employees from being exposed to asbestos dust; is that 8 correct? 9 A. Well, to certainly control exposures below the 10 allowable standards, that's correct. 11 Q. well, below the allowable standards would be, 1n 12 your view, to a safe level, right? 13 A. At that time, yes, that's correct. 14 q . so it was at that time that Texaco was trying to 15 prevent asbestos hazards to its workers that might cause 16 them to become ill; isn't that correct? 17 A. I disagree in that Texaco prevented before then. 18 q. What did Texaco do before that? 19 A. Well, there were certain locations where you have 20 respiratory protection 1n use on a consistent basis. You 21 have your medical monitoring program, which also allows you 22 to minimize and prevent disease, so there were many 23 methods, and of course you have Allan Dooley going around 24 and Inspecting particular locations and making 25 recommendations where he thought it was appropriate. So all 1 prior to 1972 that have anything to do with asbestos dust 2 other than the one in 1949, and I'm not even sure that the 3 one in 1952 mentions the word asbestos. I'm not saying they 4 were withheld. I'm just saying there's no other documents 5 that would Indicate, at least that I've seen in this case, 6 that would indicate there was anything done in terms of 7 evaluating asbestos dust hazards prior to 1972. is that an 8 Incorrect statement? 9 A. Yes. 10 Q. Okay. 11 A. Allan's practice, mypractice,Licata's practice, 12 Herschel and right on down the line, when you went to a 13 location where you did an evaluation, you reviewed the 14 previous report, so what I see is Allan in '49 evaluating 15 the insulation situation in port Arthur, making a 16 recommendation regarding one particular location. I see him 17 going back in '52 and reviewing the insulation in that 18 particular location to make sure things were complied with, 19 and I see Allan when he's there for other particular 20 purposes reviewing all aspects of what's going on at that 21 particular plant. 22 Q. Now, you said aminute ago that Texacowas at 23 certain locations -- you used the word certain locations -- 24 taking measures that involved respiratory protection; is 25 that right? . MOBURG & ASSOCIATES, INC. (206)622-3110 Pages 145 to 148 a r-u -ii_ > /v il V tj mutni > C. I ML . 149 1 A. At least the ones I was aware of, yes. I mean, I 2 didn't get to all of them when I first joined the company. 3 Q. Now, sir, in this case, lack Drummond has 4 testified that when he got there in 1967, as the incoming 5 safety supervisor at Texaco, that insulators and men working 6 around insulators were not using any respiratory protection 7 whatsoever, were you aware of that? 8 a . I'm not aware of his deposition, no. 9 q . And you don't have any information thatwould 10 contradict Mr. Drummond, do you? 11 A. I can neither deny nor affirm what he said, no. 12 Q. But you don't have any information that you're 13 privy to that would allow you to deny what Mr. Drummond was 14 saying? 15 a . No. 16 q . so it would appear, at least according to Mr. 17 Drummond, that the Anacortes location was one of the 18 locations where, at least in 1967, there was no respiratory 19 protection being taken? 20 a . For asbestos? 21 Q. For asbestos, right. 22 A. And I guess all we had to go on is lack 23 Drummond's deposition. I mean, I observed respiratory 24 protection in other locations. That's why I said a certain 25 location. I didn't observe them in all locations because I KV/IN KL.liAKUb i document reflect a stamp that would have been placed on it 2 by Texaco? 3 A. I don't know, it says "received maintenance" a m 4 there's no other indication. 5 Q. Do you have any reason to believe that Texaco di< 6 not receive this document? 7 A. Well, at some point in time it could have been 8 received, but I certainly don't know when or where. 9 Q. But you're not privy to any information that 10 would allow you to deny that Texaco received this document, 11 right? 12 A. NO. 13 Q. And you don't have any Information to say that 14 Texaco didn't receive this document in the 1940s or '50s, dc 15 you? 16 A. There's nothing to say It was received at some 17 other point 1n time. I mean, it's just not there. 18 Q. But you don't have any Information thatwould 19 allow you to deny that it was received at that time? 20 A. or affirm. 21 Q. Now, sir, I want to turnback to theindustrial 22 Hygiene Foundation for a minute. 23 A. okay. 24 Q. Were you awarethat Dr.Melvin Newquist was at 25 one point in time appointed to the medical committee of the 150 1 wasn't around at that particular time. 2 Q. You weren't working for the company in 1967? 3 A. That's correct. 1 industrial Hygiene Foundation? 2 A. We glanced at some documents yesterday, but I 3 don't recall in detail what they said. 4 Q. So you would have never observed respiratory 4 5 protection at the Anacortes refinery, say, between 1958 and 5 (Marked Deposition Exhibit 21.) MR. m e s h e r : i don't see our stamp number on it. 6 1967, right? 6 Is 1t on there? 7 A. It would have been impossible. 7 MR. FROCKT: This is a document that we provided 8 Q. Because you weren't working for the company? 9 A. Correct. 8 to you on the disks back in March. 9 MR. MESHER: But I just wanted to confirm that 10 Q. Sir, I'm going to hand you another document here. 10 this wasn't part of our production to you. 11 (Marked Deposition Exhibit 20.) 11 m r . f r o c k t : No, it was not part of your 12 A. 13 on? is there any particular area you want me to focus 12 production, that's correct, counsel. 13 Q. Mr. Richards, are you done looking at it? 14 Q. I just want to ask you a little bit about the 15 document. Have you ever seen 1t before? 16 A. Absolutely not. 17 Q. Never seen it before today? 18 A. Never seen it before today. 19 Q. This document was produced to us by Texaco in 20 this case? 21 A. okay. That's indicated. 22 Q. it appears to be Issued by the U.S. Department of 23 Labor? 24 A. Uh-huh, in 1947. 14 ' A. Yeah. 15 Q. Sir, did you ever meet Dr. Newquist? 16 A. No. 17 Q. Was he -- had he died by the time that you got to 18 the company? 19 A. I don't really remember. I just don't remember 20 ever meeting him. 21 q . Now, would you agree with me that this document 22 seems to indicate that Dr. Newquist became a Member of the 23 medical committee of the industrial Hygiene Foundation in 24 July of 1955? 25 Q. 1947. Sir, does the stamp on the front of the 25 A. it Indicates that, yes. j MOBURG & ASSOCIATES, I NC. (206)622-3110 Pages 149 to 152 .. u . f k f v n _ j n L M . l \ l l/-\\Jl_ni , . l_ I M L : 15B 1 Q. And when he joined that company or joined that 2 committee, some other members of the committee Included Dr. 3 Norbert Roberts, medical director of the Pennsylvania 4 Railroad; and Dr. Kenneth smith, medical director of the 5 Johns-Manv i n e Corporation? 6 a . That's what It said. 7 Q. sir, 1nanything you've ever reviewed have you 8 ever seen any documents from the industrial Hygiene 9 Foundation that related at all to Dr. Newqulst's service on 10 this medical committee? 11 A. No. 12 Q. Do you have any Idea what I'm talking about 1n 13 terms of the documents? I mean, do you even know what this 14 1s? 15 A. This documenthere? 16 Q. No, no, just 1n general. Do you know what the 17 industrial Hygiene Foundation 1s? 18 A. Yes. 19 MR. FROCKT: Let's take a break for about 10 20 minutes. 21 t h e v i d e o g r a p h e r : The time 1s 2:09 p.m. we'll 22 be taking a break 1n testimony. 23 (Recess.) 24 t h e v i d e o g r a p h e r : The time is 2:2S. We're now 25 back on the record. _____________________________ K U I N K J . C H A K U S _________ 155 1 He's saying phase them out; 1s that right? 2 A. He's saying phase them out, right. 3 q. And at this time, 1n August of '72, did Texaco 4 have 1n place a policy that only nonasbestos Insulation was 5 to be used? 6 a . on new construction, I'm sure that was 1n place 7 on new construction at this particular point. He points oul 8 that Bechtel has been advised, as will all other contractor: 9 henceforth doing work for Texaco, to Install only asbestos- 10 free Installation, but I think the word was let's not -- 11 let's phase out any remaining stock of Insulation that mlghi 12 contain asbestos. In some cases they could go Immediately 13 to nonasbestos-containing Insulation depending on delivery 14 times, but he points out that the demand time for this 15 Insulation has extended the delivery times considerably, so 16 1t wasn't always available the next day. 17 q. And that's the reason that this was termed as a 18 phase-out? 19 A. correct. It wasn't readily available in all 20 cases. 21 q. so in all -- so Texaco would just continue 22 phasing out and using certain stocks of asbestos insulation 23 simply because they didn't have a nonasbestos-containing 24 readily available for the operations they needed; 1s that 25 correct? 154 1 (Marked Deposition Exhibit 22.) 2 MR. FROCKT: I know it's hard to read. 3 MR. m e s h e r : d o you have another? 4 MR. FROCKT: Yeah, I'm sorry. 5 t h e w i t n e s s : okay. 6 q. sir, can you identify what this document 1s from 7 the top? I know 1t Isn't a very good copy. 8 A. it's a memorandum from d . l ..chase. He was 1n 9 the refining department -- I think he was 1n the refining 10 department In Houston, but he could have been at the Port 11 Arthur plant. I guess he was. It's memorandum, plant 12 managers and superintendents, refining department U.s., and 13 1t's dated August 7, 1972. 14 q. And Mr. Chase, was he a plant manager at Port 15 Arthur? 16 A. n o . Actually, as 1t's becoming more clear, he 17 was 1n Houston, and he's writing to the different 18 refineries, and this happens to be Port Arthur's copy. 19 That's what 1t 1s. 20 q. And as I understand this document, am I correct 21 that he is advising plant managers and superintendents to 22 begin phasing out remaining stocks of 1nsulat1on-conta1n1ng 23 asbestos fibers; 1s that right? 24 A. That's correct. 25 q. Now, he's not saying here just throw it away. MOBURG & ASSOCIATES, I 1S6 1 A. In some cases 1t was two different things. One 2 case they Had some very intricate pieces that fit certain 3 parts, and they were not readily available, but in general 4 the standard pipe insulation -- I guess 1t's four feet long 5 or three-fbot-long lengths, whatever 1t happened to be - 6 that they had extended some of the delivery times, and so 7 that was more of a phase-out. 8 q. certainly by 19 -- by August of '72, Texaco was 9 aware that asbestos caused cancer, right? 10 A. I think by that time that's correct. 11 q. And yet this document does not reflect a 12 directive to plant management/superintendents to just stop 13 using 1t, period, it says phase 1t out, right? 14 A. well, you have to be realistic. Do you want to 15 stop the operations or do you want to phase 1t out? n o w , 16 there are companion documents to this that talk about 17 wetting, talk about respiratory protection, talk about 18 barricading, and this 1s only one document of a series of 19 documents that go to the same Issue. 20 q. Well, this 1s certainly a memorandum that stands 21 alone. I mean, 1t's a letter essentially, Isn't 1t? 22 A. Yeah. But what I'm saying 1s 1t has to be read 23 1n conjunction with other documents. 24 q. And so If there were other documents that 25 Indicated that 1t was okay for persons of various -- plant C. (206)622-3110 Pages 153 to 156 jr u 'iL .J V / P I -> . J D tl\n M V 3 tn i /A L. 157 1 managers and so forth to use up their existing stocks of 2 asbestos-containing cements and insulation, in your view 3 that would be an acceptable thing to do even though it was 4 known at this time that asbestos caused cancer, according to 5 your testimony? 6 . A. 1 didn't say that. What I said was there are 7 other documents that talk about going as soon as possible to 8 asbestos-containing -- nonasbestos-containing insulation, 9 where at all possible, what this 1s coming back to point 10 out is that, yes, you are to go to that as soon as possible, 11 but because of extended delivery times you may have to phase 12 out what you have. 13 Q. Why not just stop doing any insulating activities 14 until all the stock of asbestos-containing insulation could 15 be replaced? 16 A. in other words, turn off all the refineries in 17 the united States and have a big gas shortage? 18 Q. I'm not asking you -- that's the logical -- 19 because of the insulating work; is that correct? 20 a . Refineries runon temperature control, 21 temperature balance, y o u cannot make the insuline out of 22 crude oil without heating it and distilling it, and you need 23 proper temperature control and balance to do that, so if 24 you had -- let's say you had a leak 1n a steam line and you 25 had to change out the insulation, you're telling me that we 159 1 particular line when it has a leak and sort of work around 2 the problem? 3 A. No way. 4 Q. No engineer would ever testify that there's ways 5 to do that, right? 6 A. Well, I'm not a process engineer.I don't know 7 where every steam line goes. I'm giving you example as best 8 I can why you cannot say, all right, no more Insulation wort 9 until six months from now, period. 10 Q. But you're not a process engineer and yet you're 11 offering the opinion to cause -- to go completely 12 asbestos-free and just not -- just hold off doing insulatior 13 work until you could get the asbestos-free insulation, that 14 would cause everything in the country to shut down 1n terms 15 of gas? 16 A. Could. 17 Q. Could? 18 A. Could. 19 q . But you're not an engineer, you're an industrial 20 hygienist, right? 21 A. I'm not an engineer. 22 Q. Now, it says here that Bechtel has been advised, 23 as will all other contractors henceforth doing work for 24 Texaco, to Install only asbestos-free insulation. Do you 25 see that? 158 1 should stop that whole unit down because we didn't have 2 nonasbestos-containing insulation 1n stock for that one 3 particular piece, when, in fact, using proper respiratory 4 protection, using proper labeling and disposal techniques, 5 it could be safely worked with at that particular point in 6 time, but the ultimate goal was let's get rid of it. 7 Q. so certainly the safest, the absolutely safest, 8 thing that could be done would be to just not use It at all, 9 right? 10 A. When? 11 Q. I'm asking you, the number one thing -- I mean, 12 there would be no chance of anyone having exposure from new 13 insulation if you just didn't use asbestos Insulation at 14 all, right? 15 a . That was the ideal situation, sure. 16 Q. Right. And in your view, 1f there had been an 17 instruction like that, that would have caused a gas shortage 18 in the United States? 19 a . well, you're saying if we would have stopped -- 20 q . Yeah. 21 a . -- all theunits should some steam lines spring a 22 leak, I think that would have been radical and beyond 23 practicality because you could safely work with it under 24 proper conditions. 25 Q. y o u don'tthink there's ways toisolate a 160 1 A. That's correct. 2 Q. what is your understanding of the role of Bechtel 3 in supplying insulation to Texaco? 4 A. When this particular document was written Bechtel 5 was Involved in building a unit, I think, at Lawrenceville 6 or some location. They were already to start, and so we 7 advised Bechtel ahead of time, since they were just already 8 to start new construction that, all right, that 9 construction, all asbestos-free insulation, period. 10 And we were advising the other contractors that 11 as they came Into new construction they would also be 12 required to use nonasbestos-containlng insulation for 13 construction of new units. 14 Q. When was the Los Angeles plant constructed? 15 A. That goes back quite a number of years, and 16 there's been some major modifications to LA. I just don't 17 remember when all the units were put together. 18 Q. According to that document we looked at 19 previously, the Los Angeles plant was not using asbestos- 20 containing Insulation for some number of years prior to 21 1972; 1s that correct? 22 A. That's correct. That's what the memo said. 23 Q. And that was not new construction, right? 24 A. In some cases it was, 1n some cases it wasn't. 25 Q. What was being constructed that was new there? MOBURG & ASSOCIATES, INC. (206)622-3110 Pages 157 to 160 w w i 'a v i m v j L P i j u i ini- 161 1 A. There was some new units that went on line about 2 this time. There was a major expansion on the one side. I 3 don't remember what the particular units were. 4 Q. Do you know if Los Angeles plant converted to 5 asbestos-free insulation for repair work on its pipelines 6 and steam lines and so forth? 7 A. I don't know. 8 Q. so you don't know for sure if the asbestos-free 9 insulation was used either for new construction or for just 10 repair and maintenance, do you? 11 A. At what location? 12 Q. At Los Angeles. 13 t h e w i t n e s s : would the court reporter repeat 14 that? 15 (Record read as requested.) 16 A. n o ,I don't. 17 Q. sir, let me ask you this. I want you to assume 18 that in the usage of some of this asbestos insulation that 19 was to be phased out but not just completely eliminated, I 20 want you to assume that there was some worker that was 21 exposed to asbestos in 1972, asbestos dust, and breathed in 22 enough to cause him harm by having him develop cancer some 23 20 to 40 years later. Can you assume that for me? 24 A. No. 25 q . why not? KUIN KJLCHAKL/5 1 that we're talking about. And do you think that it would bi 2 an acceptable risk for Texaco to phase out its insulation 3 while exposing this worker to potentially a very harmful 4 substance? 5 A. I think that's so hypothetical I don't want to 6 assume that. To me, the way the company worked, When you 7 get memos like this from the top of the house in Houston 8 refinery, they were followed. 9 Q. 100 percent down the line? 10 A. I wasn't at every refinery at every day in my 11 life to assure that, but knowing the way the refinery 12 department worked, these guys were very, very high on the 13 list, and if you violated what they were telling you, you 14 went down, the chain. 15. Q. Was 1t your understanding that Bechtel was a 16 supplier of asbestos-containing Insulation to Texaco? 17 A. My basic understanding was that they were a 18 contractor who would be used 1n making new construction. 19 That was my understanding, put it that way. 20 Q. Certainly this memo reflects somebody's idea that 21 Bechtel had something to do with what was the type of 22 insulation that was supplied to Texaco, right? 23 A. No. what this memo represents is that Bechtel 24 had already had a contract to build this new unit in 25 Lawrenceville, and they were going to be instructed very 1 A. Because at this particular point in time we would 2 have taken -- we would have assured the steps would have 3 been in place to minimize any type of exposure of that sort. 4 Q. so there's no way that someone who was working 1n 5 1972 at one of these refineries could possibly have been 6 exposed, is that what you're telling me? 7 A. When I'm saying is that I, sitting here, cannot 8 assure you that 100 percent because I could not be in all 9 refineries at the same time, what I'm saying is there were 10 Instructions out by this particular point in time that to me 11 would have given very good assurances that that would have 12 happened at those locations. 13 Q. Assuming that was being conveyed to all the 14 refineries, right? 15 A. Yes. 16 Q. And you're certain that it was at that time; is 17 that right? 18 A. Again, we're compressing '72 very, very tightly 19 here, and if we had the other document when it was issued, I 20 could give you even better assurances. 21 Q. well, I don't have the other document with me, so 22 I'm not sure what you're talking about, but I'm just asking 23 you to -- let's just do this. Let's assume that those 24 Instructions to take the other precautionary measures that 25 you identified were not taken for this hypothetical worker 1 specifically that the new unit was to be constructed with 2 asbestos-free insulation. 3 Q. So I'm correct 1n the premise of my question, 4 which was, Bechtel had something to do with the type of 5 Insulation that was being supplied, for example, at this new 6 construction in Lawrenceville? 7 A. But you didn't add the new construction until 8 later. Yeah, they had something to do with the new 9 construction. 10 Q. I think you're parsing my words out, and I really 11 didn't mean 1t to be a question that had to be parsed so 12 cleanly. 13 A. . I like to be as accurate as I can. 14 Q. I'm sure Mr. Marks appreciates that. Bechtel's 15 lawyer. 16 I'm going to hand you a series of documents that 17 are clipped together. 18 (Marked Deposition Exhibit 23.) 19 MR. f r o c k t : Do you have a question? i just want 20 to give Mr. Richards a chance to look through it. 21 A. There's some duplicates in here, but that's okay. 22 Q. Sir, have you ever seen these documents before? 23 A. I've looked at a lot of API documents -- I'm sure 24 it's an API document -- yesterday, we looked at so many I 25 don't know one from the other. MOBURG & ASSOCIATES, INC. (206)622-3110 Pages 161 to 164 < ^ n u L .i\i in v ju .l1 165 1 Q. well, m represent to you that this is an API 2 document, and it appears to be from November 11, 1948, 3 minutes from the subcommittee on carcinogenicity. Am I 4 reading that correctly? 5 A. That's correct. 6 Q. And Dr. Newquist, M. N. Newquist and H. R. 7 Warrick are identified as members present at the meeting; 1s 8 that correct? 9 A. That's correct. 10 q . And Dr. Newquist or M. N.Newquistwas, as we've 11 talked about before, was a medical official for Texaco at 12 that time? 13 A. Chief medical officer, medicaldirector, whatever 14 they called them at that time. 15 Q. Certainly this document would seem to reflect the 16 fact that he was a participating member on the subcommittee 17 on carcinogenicity? 18 A. in 1948. 19 Q. in 1948. is that correct? 20 a . That's what it would seem to indicate. 21 Q. Do you have any Information that would lead you 22 to believe that he was not participating a member? 23 A. No. 24 Q. Do you know any of the other names that are 25 listed there on the front first page? rvwiN KltnAKUa 167 1 chairman of the subcommittee on carcinogenicity of the a p i ' 2 Medical Advisory Committee in 1948. 3 A. is he listed on the front? 4 Q. He's listed at the end of theminutes there as 5 chairman. 6 a . okay. okay. 7 Q. Now, in this memo, Mr. Berry isreporting to Dr. 8 woody on a paper that was presented by or. Hueper, chief of 9 the environmental cancer section, cancer control branch, 10 National Cancer Institute, Bethesda, Maryland before the 11 industrial hygiene section and subcommittee of medical care 12 in the American Public Health Association. The National 13 Cancer Institute 1s a fairly important Institute, 1s It not, 14 in terms of studying causes and treatment of cancer? 15 A. Cancer research, things of that sort. 16 Q. It's associated with the federal government; is 17 that right? 18 A. Yeah. 19 q . Have you heard of it before? 20 A. Yes. 21 Q. Now, this document would seem to indicate, or I 22 should read from It: "in his preliminary remarks" -- seconc 23 paragraph -- "Dr. Hueper indicated that research on the 24 etiology of cancer indicated a strong link between 25 environment and cancer incidence. Recent evidence has 166 1 A. Well, Dooley's name is there. 2 Q. Oh, yes, you're correct. And so there were three 3 members listed there from the Texas Company, right? 4 A. I recognize the name Kehoe -- 5 Q- sure. 6 A. -- but I don't really recognize the other names 7 as I go through them quickly. 8 Q. I'd like you to turn to document that's attached, 9 1AM 016578. 10 A. okay. 11 Q. Have you ever read this, those two pages, 78 and 12 79 before? Have you ever seen this that document? 13 A. I don't believe so. 14 Q. Why don't you take a look at it. 15 A. okay. 16 Q. Have you had a.chance to read that part of the 17 document? 18 A. This looks like a memo from Clyde Berry to Dr. 19 woody. 20 Q. sir, do you know who or. Clyde Berry was? 21 A. I remember the name. I don't think I ever met 22 the gentleman. 23 Q. Do you know who Dr. woody was? 24 A. NO. 25 Q. Sir, Dr. woody, i'll represent to you, was the 168 1 pointed out a definite correlation between cancer incidence 2 and exposures to ultraviolet radiation, asbestos, benzol, 3 certain organic amines, paraffin oils, as well as heavy 4 petroleum distillates and degradation products such as tars, 5 cokes and pitches." 6 So according to this document, Dr. Hueper 7 believes that there is a definite correlation between cancer 8 -- strike that -- a strong link between environment and 9 cancer incidence, including a definite correlation between 10 cancer incidence and asbestos. . 11 d o you agree with me that that's what this 12 document would seem to be indicating? 13 A. That's what this document states. 14 Q. Now, I believe you've stated previously that it's 15 your opinion, as Texaco's corporate representative, that 16 there was no link between cancer and asbestos exposures 17 until the 1970s; is that right? 18 A. That's correct. 19 Q. So I take it, then, that Texaco woulddisagree 20 with the conclusions of Or. Hueper, at least as represented 21 1n this memorandum, correct? 22 a . Well, again, not being around much in 1948, I 23 don't know what Texaco believed or didn't believe, but we 24 were talking about my opinion. 25 q . Well, it was Texaco's opinion. You're Texaco's MOBURG & ASSOCIATES, INC. (206)622-3110 Pages 165 to 168 j r u ' i u J V I X V J i J r t D t l M I M U U ' l , CI MU 169 1 representative, right? 2 A. That's correct. But my opinion that the 3 causation link was not proven until the 1970s. 4 q . Clearly, Dr. Hueper would probably disagree with 5 that 1f he were here today talking to us? 6 A. He could. He might have gotten more Information 7 that Indicated 1t was or 1t wasn't. I don't know. 8 Q. The document then goes on to state, "He then 9 discussed an Idealized approach to the control of the 10 problem which would Involve the following points." And 1t 11 goes on and 1t lists a number of things that should be done 12 to evaluate the problem of environment and cancer. 13 Do you agree with that, that that's essentially 14 what the document says? 15 A. Well, I think to me the governing points here are 16 an Idealized approach. 17 Q. Let me ask you about what's listed there under 18 No. 5. 19 A. okay. 20 Q. can you read that part of It, please. 21 a . "initiate preventive measures as soon as possible 22 since the Identification of the offending agent 1s not 23 necessary, industrially the approach would be as follows: 24 Through technical control aim at the complete elimination of 25 the exposure; or, minimize the exposure by seeking Improved KUN KJLLHAKUb 171 1 eliminating something that is, in fact, helpful. If you 2 throw out the whole ball of wax there might be something 1n 3 the ball of wax that actually is not detrimental. 4 Q. That's helpful to yourhealth? 5 A. Could be. 6 Q. Like what? . 7 A. Trace -- well, let'stake chromium, chromium in 8 large concentrations 1n the proper radical size, I think 9 hexavalent chrome can cause cancer, chromium 1s very 10 Important for metabolism 1n your body of fats. 11 Q. You think there's a distinction between you 12 taking like a chromium pill to help you metabolize fats -- 13 do you think there's a distinction between that and the use 14 of chromium 1n heavy industry? I mean, don't you think 15 they're two totally different things? 16 A. Well, I'm quibbling with the fact that 17 Identification of the offending agent 1s not necessary. I 18 think the Identification of the offending agent 1s necessary 19 before you start going through all of these Idealized 20 approaches to perform whatever goals he's trying to reach. 21 Q. So you don't think that -- at least according to 22 Dr. Hueper, you would disagree with his approach which might 23 call for the complete elimination of asbestos from a 24 refinery, from use in a refinery? 25 a . n o , i didn't say that, what I'm pointing out is 170 1 Industrial apparatus such as leak-proof equipment, closed 2 systems, et cetera. Provide suitable personal protective 3 equipment such as gloves, boots, impervious clothing, et 4 cetera. Provide adequate sanitary facilities. This would 5 require an expansion of the locker facilities 1n most 6 existing plants, instruct the workers on the proper use of 7 the protective measures provided and tell them why their 8 cooperation 1s required. For certain operations 1n Industry 9 exposure may be minimized by the use of teams trained to 10 perform their dutieswith a minimum of exposure and provided 11 with special safeguards." 12 q . s i r , as an Industrial hygienist here testifying 13 for Texaco, 1s there anything 1n that 11st that you've just 14 read from No. 5 that you disagree with that.would -- 1n 15 terms of using those measures to help prevent exposure to a 16 hazardous substance like asbestos? 17 A. As an Idealized approach, as he puts 1t, I don't 18 particularly quibble with any of them, but again, 1t 1s an 19 Idealized approach. I do have a difference with him where 20 he points out Initiate preventive measures as soon as 21 possible since Identification of the offending agent 1s not 22 necessary. 23 Q. What's your quibble with Dr. Hueper? 24 A. Well, I think Identification of the offending 25 agent 1s necessary at some point 1n time. You could be 172 1 that this Idealized approach, at least in this sentence 2 about Identification of the offending agent is not 3 necessary, Is swatting the fly with a sledgehammer, at least 4 in today's -- now, you know, back 1n 1948 they didn't have 5 the chemical ability to Isolate certain things, and so maybe 6 back 1n '48 that was an Idealized approach. But I think now 7 with all that of our fancy Instrumentation, we don't have to 8 take that sledgehammer approach. We can Identify offending 9 agents. 10 Q. Did they have respirators 1n 1948 that would 11 have, for example, helped control the dust that someone 12 breathed 1n when they were working with asbestos Insulation? 13 a . Yes. 14 q . Did they have water hosesthatsomeone could take 15 and wet down a piece of Insulation before they cut Into it 16 to help control the dust that was created when they cut Into 17 the Insulation? 18 a . They wore hoses, yes. 19 Q. Sure, would there havebeen an ability to,for 20 example, Isolate a particular part of an Insulation at a 21 refinery so as to, you know, wrap 1t 1n sort of a plastic 22 tent or something like that to help prevent dust from 23 leaking out? 24 A. I don't know how much of the nice, flexible, 25 plastic tarps they had available in '48. MOBURG & ASSOCIATES, INC. (206)622-3110 Pages 169 to 172  1X1 U - I U L . I 1 J 173 1 Q. was there an ability to take -- touche, was 2 there an ability to take dust counts in 1948 so that you 3 could determine how much dust was in the air where someone 4 was cutting into asbestos Insulation? 5 A. I really don't know the Industrial hygiene 6 expertise 1n '48 capabilities. 7 Q. 8 1948? Was there a threshold limit value In place in 9 A. 10 Q. 11 off. I think that started in '42, so could have been. I'm sorry, go ahead. I didn't mean to cut you 12 A. it could have been that they had a technique 13 available. I'm just not familiar with what they had 14 available 1n '48. 15 Q. so there was a threshold limit value in place 1n 16 1942, right? 17 a . I think the first one was '42. 18 Q. So the fact that there was a threshold limit 19 value in place would seem to Indicate that there was some 20 way to count the number of dust particles 1n the air at that 21 time; 1s that right? 22 A. it would seem to Indicate that. I'm just saying 23 I'm not familiar rith what they had available in '48. 24 Q. But at least as early in 1942 -- I'm sorry, did 25 you want to complete your sentence? IWIX IUVnHI\U3 175 A. A different one? Q. Yeah. (Marked Deposition Exhibit 24.) A. Okay. Q. Sir, have you had a chance to review the documen' 6 dated July 19, 1972 and the attachments? ' 7 a . Correct. 8 Q. Can you identify -- can you tell me a little bit 9 about what this document is? 10 A. Well, these are documents that I authored for Dr. 11 Baylor's signature and distribution and including the 12 attached form. And it concerned medical monitoring 13 requirements as per the standard for exposure to asbestos 14 dust, as published in Federal Register, Wednesday, June the 15 7th, 1972. And becoming effective July 7, 1972. 16 Q. So you actually helped draft these documents, is 17 that what you're saying? 18 A. Yeah. 19 Q. And so -- and. as Iunderstand it, then, andthese 20 documents relate to the medical examination guidelines that 21 Texaco was putting in place for asbestos workers beginning 22 1n 1972; is that right? 23 A. That's correct. 24 Q. what was 1n place for asbestosworkersprior to 25 1972 when you drafted this document? 174 1 A. At least in 1942 apparently there was a threshold 2 limit value, right. 3 q. That had to be determined by somebody somewhere 4 taking some kind of dust count to find out how much dust was 5 in the air right? 6 A. Yes. 7 q. Any reason to think that that technology would 8 not have been available to Texaco at that time? 9 A. in '48? 10 q. Yeah. 11 A. No. But again, let's get back to the expertise, 12 experience and knowledge of Allan Dooley, who came rith the 13 knowledge that asbestos can cause asbestosls. visited the 14 plants starting 1n 1949, viewed these operations, and 15 determined that it was not a perceived problem. 16 q. Based on his observations, right? 17 A. Based on h1s observations and experience. 18 q. Which, of course, you weren't there in 1948 rith 19 him, right? 20 A. No, I was not. 21 q. y o u didn't even know Mr. Dooley until 1960 22 something, right? 23 A. Early '60s. But I did know he was a caring, 24 conscientious Individual. 25 q. Ask you a few questions about this document. 176 1 A. Except for the lung function testing part, I 2 think many of these items were in place. The pre-placement 3 certainly was in place at most locations that I can attest 4 to. It could have been at all locations, but there was a 5 pre-placement. First of all, with Texaco everyone took a 6 pre-employment. So everyone was examined prior to 7 employment. 8 q. When did that begin? 9 A. ray back when, it goes backfurther than I can 10 remember. So you had the pre-employment. Then 1f they were 11 placed 1n certain jobs, job classifications, certain job 12 titles, they would get a pre-placement examination before 13 going into that particular function. And then, depending on 14 that job title, they would get an annual or a periodic 15 examination that could or could not Include a chest x-ray. 16 q. Now, are you referring to the program that was 17 put in place as a result of this memo or what was 1n place 18 prior to this memo? 19 a . That was 1n place prior. 20 Q. so there was some workers,then, who hadtheir 21 chest x-rays regularly taken at Texaco's direction? 22 a . on some periodic basis, yes. 23 q. What kind of Individuals -- what kind of job 24 classifications would those individuals have had? 25 A. You'd have to go back to some of that earlier -- MOBURG & ASSOCIATES, INC. (206)622-3110 Pages 173 to 176 J / T I'IL . j i / i v v j . J/-\L) c r\ n rt\ jC .IN C I HL , 177 1 Q. Well, can you give me your best recollection? 2 HR. MESHER: Excuse me. He didn't finish his 3 answer. 4 A. Well, we'd have to go back to some of the other 5 deposition information if we wanted to be exact in all the 6 particular job titles, because the job titles varied from 7 place to place as to what somebody did at one place versus 8 another place, in general, sandblasting, insulation, an 9 insulator would be in place like that. There could have 10 been other classifications that got chest x-rays. There 11 were other classifications that got other pre-employment 12 rather than pre-placement and other periodics, but let's not 13 go into that. 14 Q. why were sandblasters and insulators being ' 15 directed to have chest x-rays prior to the initiation of 16 this program? 17 A. Again, I think we saw it in the medical 18 monitoring results that were provided to Dr. Baylor as 19 results of that API request. There were chest x-rays listed 20 there at some of the particular locations. Sandblasting had 21 exposure, well, potential exposure to silica dust. They 22 didn't do sandblasting at all of the plants. 23 somewhat unique to the larger facilities. That was 24 Q. Why were insulators included in that category of 25 workers who should have their chest x-rayed? KUIN K I C H A R D 5 . 179 1 q . n o w , were there any changes that went into place 2 as a result of this policy that you initiated in 1972 that 3 you helped author? 4 A. Certainly the lung function testing went into 5 effect, and that was new to most locations, some places hat 6 the. smaller lung function tests. There's the portable type; 7 you might have used 1n your own periodic physicals, but this 8 was a more elaborate piece of equipment. A Jones 9 pulmonometer that was eventually provided to all the 10 locations. 11 And there could have been some other things here. 12 I have to go through this 1n detail to decide what was -- 13 try and ascertain what was new. I think n o . 1, pre- 14 placement, other than the forced expiratory volume, that was 15 all primarily in place. And then, again, I think Item No. 16 2, other than the forced expiratory volume, the pulmonary 17 function test was in place. The termination of employment 18 physical I think probably was 1n place for the most part, 19 except for the pulmonary function tests. So I think that -- 20 pulmonary function tests seems to be the key additional 21 thing that was added. 22 Q. Did this medical program encompass any 23 information that Texaco would be providing to workers who 24 were -- asbestos workers who were terminating their 25 employment that they might have had exposure to something , 178 1 A. Again, it was a medical monitoring technique that 2 one would apply to minimize ill health because of asbestos. 3 Q. And but you can't give me a date that that 4 medical monitoring program began precisely; isn't that 5 right? 6 A. Some of those chest x-rays went back into the 7 '50s. could have gone beyond that. I just don't have an 8 exact date for when that started. 9 q . Does the fact that Texaco was conducting chest 10 x-rays of its insulators who were working with asbestos 11 insulation Indicate to you that there was at least a 12 recognition of some possible deleterious health effects 13 among that population of workers from having been exposed to 14 asbestos? , 15 a . No. It Indicates to me a concern about the 16 workers and another evaluation technique to minimize 17 disease. 18 Q. well, what were you -- why were you concerned 19 about the workers? 20 A. well, with exposure to asbestos dust that could 21 cause asbestosis, we wanted to monitor the workers to see if 22 there were any undue exposures that we might have been 23 missing by other techniques. And it's a very typical type 24 of industrial health procedure and technique, medical 25 monitoring. 180 1 that could cause them problems down the road? 2 A. Not specifically, but it was my finding in 3 visiting with the plant physicians that certainly during the 4 pre-placement and the annual physicals, there was discussion 5 of, you know, I mean, breathe Into this machine or take this 6 x-ray. Well, they've explained to them why they were doing 7 it. So to me this was part of the hazard warning system is 8 that the doctors or the nurses who were conducting these 9 particular tests would discuss with individual why he was 1n 10 there getting tested. 11 Q. So a plant physician who was in there getting 12 tested, pulmonary function tests or x-ray, would be advised 13 -- would advise a worker that they might have been -- might 14 have exposure to something that could be harmful to them 15 like asbestos, right? 16 A. well, they'd advise them that they might have 17 some exposure to asbestos, and this 1s why we're doing this 18 medical monitoring program. 19 Q. And would those physicians be in a position to 20 advise those workers to take any precautions in terms of 21 respiratory protection, things of that nature? 22 A. I think the nurses did a lot of that particular 23 work. The doctor did the overview, but the nurses were key 24 to the x-rays and the lung function testing program. I've 25 met many nurses that were familiar with that and would have MOBURG & ASSOCIATES, INC. (206)622-3110 Pages 177 to 180  ia .h ^ W fl W iw w > n u i _ i \ | I/-V V J L _1T , l_ AAI-- 1 discussed that with the employees as to why they were doing 2 these particular things. 3 Q. Old you ever meet any of the nurses who worked up 4 at Anacortes? 5 A. oh, yeah. It was my policy and the policy of 6 other Xhs that when you went to a plant you visited the 7 medical department. You stopped and you talked to the 8 doctor, if he was there that particular day, or you met him 9 for dinner at night and you talked with the nurses. 10 q. Have you talked to any of those nurses recently? 11 A. NO. 12 q. n o w , it sayshere, "since Dr.Wilson has 13 Initiated some work 1n this area, he is requested to 14 complete a canvass of all plant doctors to determine how 15 many lung function testing units will be required." Do you 16 see that? 17 A. Yes. 18 q. Did you write that sentence forDr. Baylor or was 19 that Dr. Baylor's sentence? 20 A. No, that was mine. I think by this particular 21 time Dr. Wilson was over -- 22 q. I just want to ask you who wrote the sentence. 23 MR. FRENKEL: I think he's finishing his answer 24 to your question, so if he may. 25 A. Dr. Wilson was over 1n Houston and worked very rvwiN K I L M A K U S 1 medical examinations for asbestos workers; 1s that right? 2 A. That's correct. 3 q. So are you saying, then, that Dr. Wilson had 4 Initiated some work solely 1n lung function testing or 1n 5 -- as it related to asbestos and health? J 6 a . No. I think he was surveying the lung function 7 testing capabilities 1n the different a r e of where you hac 8 a refinery, and was asked to make the determination of buy 9 1t for Port Arthur, buy 1t for LA and Eagle Point, which was 10 near Philadelphia, that was a definite. But he was asked tc 11 determine the capabilities at the other locations working 12 with the local hospitals and clinics and the plant 13 physicians, and my recollection was he came back and said, 14 well, buy them 1n all the places, and that's what we did. 15 q. so the work that Dr. Wilson supposedly Initiated 16 had nothing to do with asbestos, 1s that what you're saying 17 1n regards to this document? 18 A. That's correct. His work -- the work I was 19 referring to here, as best as I can remember 31 years ago, 20 1s that he was lining up how we were going to -- to make 21 sure we had capabilities for 14 by 17 x-rays, and to make 22 sure we had Capabilities for the forced expiratory volume 23 requirements. 24 THE WITNESS; When we reach a break point ~ 25 MR. FROCKT: Let's take a break. Go ahead. 1 closely with the refining department and was asked to make 2 this particular determination, and my recollection 1s we 3 bought them for all locations. 4 q. What work are you referring to that Dr. Wilson 5 had initiated? 6 A. I don't remember. 7 q. so you have no Idea what work you're referring 8 to? 9 A. NO. 10 q. We know that Dr. Wilson authored an article that 11 went Into the Lancet 1n 1960, right? 12 A. Yeah, 12 years priorto this time. 13 q. is It plausible that that's part of the work 14 that you were referring to? 15 A. I don't believe so. 16 q. why not? 17 A. i just don't believe so. I believethat he 18 conducted some work 1n determining how many employees might 19 need lung function testing at what locations, and so he was 20 to advise at what locations we were going to buy equipment, 21 what locations would use outside equipment like 1n a 22 hospital, but my recollection 30 years back 1s that we wound 23 up buying lung function testing and training the nurses at 24 all locations. 25 q. But these documents deal specifically with 1 THE v i d e o g r a p h e r : The time is 3:12 p.m. we'll 2 be taking a break 1n testimony. 3 (Recess.) 4 THE VIDEOGRAPHER: Time 1s 3:19 p.m. We're now 5 back on the record. 6 q. Mr. Richards, we were talking a little bit about 7 the medical monitoring program that was put 1n place in 8 1972. Now, did that medical monitoring program extend to 9 recently retired employees from Texaco? 10 A. I don't have the document any more. Recently 11 ret1red? 12 q. Yeah. 13 A. n o . I think 1t talks about a termination 14 physical, but not retired personnel. 15 q. in fact, Texaco had no program 1n place at all to 16 advise workers who had left Texaco after their employment 17 period to advise those workers that they might have had 18 some exposure to asbestos dust; Isn't that correct? 19 A. I believe that's correct. 20 q. is there any particular reason why Texaco did not 21 have any such program like that? 22 A. No, not that I know of. 23 q. Sir, were you aware that 1n 1981 the Eagle Point 24 plant was required by OSHA to contact retired employees, 25 whose chest x-rays were Included 1n some group that OSHA was MOBURG & ASSOCIATES, INC. (206)622-3110 Pages 181 to 184 185 1 reviewing, because we were uncertain -- because they were 2 uncertain whether or not the results were previously made 3 known to those employees. And Dr. Stanton, apparently, 4 proposed to advise them using a letter, a draft letter, that 5 they had had some exposure to asbestos and that they might 6 have some problem in their chest x-rays? 7 A. I'm not familiar with -- I may be once I see it. 8 (Marked Deposition Exhibit 25.) 9 A. Okay. 10 Q. Have you ever seen that document before? 11 A. I don't recall that I have, no. 12 Q. Did i sort of summarize what it seemed to -- what 13 it seems to reflect correctly in my question? 14 A. Maybe if we could have the court reporter read it 15 back. 16 Q. We can do that or I can just ask you a few 17 questions about it. 18 A. whatever you prefer. 19 Q. Let's do it that way. so you've looked at the 20 document. Can you identify what it appears to be? 21 A. it appears to be a memorandum from Gene Stanton 22 to Fischbach, I think was the plant manager at the time. 23 Jack Grant , I think, was employee relations. I don't recall 24 the other -- John Tuohy was employee relations. I don't 25 recall the other two guys. And apparently in the response \w u i\x v - i in iX L /J 1 that even if they couldn't find the forwarding address for 2 that person. For example, they might have been able to lool 3 up someone like Mr. Jameson's address in the phone book, 4 couldn't they? 5 A. Well, you know, you're dealing with an issue tha* 6 I don't know how you locate people. I know how you can get 7 on the internet and find almost anybody. 8 Q. Well, I mean, sure. 9 MR. m e s h e r : Did you finish your answer? 10 A. I don't know that that's practical in all cases. 11 It is now. It maybe wasn't then. The other thing is that 12 in 1966, at the time frame you're talking about, Texaco did 13 not consider those individuals to be at risk, and, in fact, 14 I don't think Mr. Jameson was identified as someone with 15 asbestos exposure as an insulator. 16 Q. Actually the time frame I was talking -- 17 MR. m e s h e r : Excuse me. He didn't - 18 A. well, I mean, you said from when he retired on, 19 so I'm talking about even in 1966 when he left employment, 20 Texaco did not consider him a person at risk. 21 Q. Actually, the time frame I referred to was from 22 1972 on. I didn't say advise him from 1966 on. I said 23 after Texaco recognized -- and you've acknowledged that 24 Texaco recognized that asbestos was a cancer hazard in 1972, 25 by 1972, and that's the period I was referring to. 1 to a settlement agreement with OSHA concerning certain 2 chest x-ray findings. And I really have no feel for that at 3 all. I don't recall anything like that. And the possible 4 relation to past asbestos exposures. I guess within the 5 settlement agreement Texaco agreed to advise certain 6 employees of their chest x-ray findings for the previous 7 five years or something like that. I may not be 8 paraphrasing that right. 9 Q. is there anything, to your knowledge, in Texaco's 10 procedures or policies that would have prevented Texaco from 11 writing a letter to someone, for example, like Ray Jameson 12 1n this case who had left Texaco's employment in 1966, and 13 advised that person that, you know, you may have had some 14 exposure to asbestos. You ought to get your lungs checked 15 every year. Just be advised that this is a hazardous 16 substance, is there anything that would have prevented 17 Texaco from undertaking that sort of activity? 18 A. Do you have any time frame? 19 Q. sure. Say from 1972 on. 20 A. well, certainly one of the potential problems 21 with something like that is that people move and you don't 22 get forwarding addresses. I mean, that's always a blip 23 there, but there wouldn't be any -- I can't think of any 24 reason why you couldn't do that. 25 Q. Certainly Texaco could have made an effort to do 188 1 A. okay. 2 Q. so does that change your answer at all? 3 A. n o . other than the problems of trying to locate 4 people. 5 Q. you're not aware of any such efforts that Texaco 6 ever made 1n that regard to any of its employees who were 7 exposed to asbestos? 8 A. well, we moved out of the Health Division in '79, 9 and so they certainly could have taken place, and I would 10 not have been aware of it, particularly 1n 1982 when I left 11 Industrial hygiene and moved on to environmental, so, I 12 mean, they could be. I just am not aware of them one way or 13 the other. . 14 Q. But certainly, according to this document, it 15 would appear that the Eagle Point plant was -- had the 16 capacity to contact retired Insulators; isn't that right? 17 A. Looks like there were four. 18 Q. sure. 19 A. Four individuals. 20 - Q. could be a handful of people or 1t could be 10 or 21 20 people that might have left Texaco's employment at 22 Anacortes between say 1966 and `72, right? 23 A. It could be. 24 Q. could be 100? 25 A. Could be. MOBURG & ASSOCIATES, INC. (206)622-3110 Pages 185 to 188 V ta/ ^ ; r i u i . i \ i i r v v j U I I i l. i n i - KUIN K-LCMAKUb 1 Q. Or it could be five? 189 1 A. For me, a key, in my walk-around Inspections was 2 A. Could be. 2 if I saw poor housekeeping, I would look more closely at th> 3 q . And, of course, there could be even a lesser 3 control measures 1n place, and you might have to go the 4 number of men who worked in the maintenance department at 5 Anacortes in 1966, right? 6 A. I'm not familiar with the employment numbers back 7 then. 8 (Marked Deposition Exhibit 26.) 9 A. okay. 10 Q. Sir, have you had a chance to look at this 4 extra mile to satisfy me and the other IHs that might come 5 around by doing air sampling that control measures were in 6 place. I didn't mean to Imply that they weren't in place a- 7 this particular point, but the housekeeping needed 8 improvement. 9 Q. Now, did you have any proof that adequate contro' 10 of employees' exposures to asbestos was being provided at 11 document? 12 A. Yes, I have. 11 that time? 12 A. in 1971? 13 Q. can you Identify 1t for me? 13 Q. Yes. 14 a . Yes. It's a memorandum from me to W. R. 15 Sorenson, who was probably the plant manager at the Port 14 A. I think 1n 1971 and 1972 we started initiating 15 the program to measure those exposures. 16 Arthur chemical plant that was within the Port Arthur 16 q . How aboutprior to1971? 17 complex but a different unit, and dated May 19, 1971. 18 Q. And 1t states 1n the second paragraph: with the 19 Federal occupational Safety and Health Act of 1970 now 1n 20 force, we should be prepared to prove that adequate control 21 of employees' exposures to potentially hazardous substances 22 is provided, part of this proof can be obtained in 23 developing data on airborne concentrations of contaminants 24 in the workplace to demonstrate that exposures are less than 25 the permissible limits. Further proof can be demonstrated 17 A. We'd have to go back and rely on Allan's 18 experience, expertise, knowledge, caring to make that 19 determination. 20 Q. So 1s that -- 1s your answer, then, that you 21 can't think of any specific controls that were in place at 22 that time? 23 A. For which location? Are we talking about the 24 petrochemical plant? 25 Q. Throughout theTexaco refinery system.1 . igo - 1 by maintaining adequate housekeeping standards for spillage 1 a . All substances? I mean -- 2 of potentially hazardous substances. Do you see that? 2 Q. Asbestos. We're talking about asbestos today. 3 A. Yes. 3 A. well, you generalize and then you go back to the 4 q . is that a general statement of what you felt at 5 that time to be a necessary thing that Texaco needed to do 6 to make sure that they were 1n compliance with the o s h a act 7 or the federal occupation and Safety Health Act of 1970? 8 A. n o . Actually, I got there and the housekeeping 9 program was less than adequate, and so I thought I would put 10 Mr. Sorenson on notice that part of the techniques 1n i h s , 11 if you're going around and looking at different units, poor 12 housekeeping 1s usually a sign of perhaps some other 13 potential problems. And so I put him on notice that let's 14 get adequate housekeeping standards for the spillage, and 15 you may have to be prepared as part of the proof of -- by 16 doing air measurements -- 17 Q. So -- 18 A. -- or at least exposure measurement. 19 q . so when you say, "We should be prepared to prove 20 that adequate control of employees' exposures to potentially 21 hazardous substances 1s provided," are you saying 22 that there was already adequate control 1n place at that 23 time? 24 A. There could have been. 25 Q. Well, were there? 4 specifics, so maybe we could repeat the question or focus on 5 asbestos. 6 Q. As I understand your answer, you're saying that 7 the adequate control measures were whatever Allan Dooley had 8 in place 1n regards to asbestos; 1s that right? 9 A. Allan felt that 1n the refining setting that the 10 control measures that were 1n place, primarily respiratory 11 protection at that particular point 1n time, were adequate 12 for the control of exposure to asbestos. 13 Q. But there was no overall policy that Texaco had 14 1n place 1n 1971, correct, to require respiratory protection 15 for workers being exposed to asbestos, right? 16 A. I found 1n making my visits -- and now we're 17 talking about 1n '71, *72 -- that respirators were being 18 used at those locations. 19 Q. why would you need to prove that you had adequate 20 controls 1n place at that time? 21 A. well, you're dealing with the Occupational safety 22 and Health Act. They're OSHA Inspectors. OSHA inspector 23 comes around and he sees poor housekeeping, like I 24 observed, he's going to say: I don't know if your control 25 measures are adequate, so get your housekeeping up to date, MOBURG & ASSOCIATES, INC. (206)622-3110 Pages 189 to 192 w / - \ w t _ i x i i r ^ N J L .1 1 i I-- I /"V L . 193 1 and if necessary we'll take air samples, but the burden of 2 proof could be on you. I think your control measures may be 3 okay, but let's get things up to snuff. 4 Q. Mr. Richards, Texaco acknowledges that there were 5 reports about the hazards of asbestos dust having some 6 harmful effect on the lungs that dated all the way back to 7 the early 1900s. Is that true? 8 m r . f r e n k e l : where are you getting this from? 9 m r . f r o c k t : I'm just asking him the question. 10 A. well, would you like to show me that? 11 q. Well, I don't have any particular documents. I'm 12 just talking about general industrial hygiene, industrial 13 health. . 14 A. Well, maybe let's go over the question again, 15 then. Maybe i didn't understand it. 16 q. Well, let me ask it this way. when was the first 17 time -- do you have any idea the first time that asbestos 18 was acknowledged to be harmful to human lungs? 19 A. In any situation? 20 q. sure. 21 A. First time I had personalknowledge? 22 q. n o . well, you as --you're Texaco's corporate 23 representative. 24 A. well, I mean, I can specifically point to Allan 25 Dooley's coming to Texaco in '47 and the knowledge he KUN RICHARDS J 195 1 a . No, I do not. 2 Q. And you don't have any specific knowledge, 3 personal specific knowledge, about any asbestos material 4 required by Bechtel, if any, correct? 5 a . No. 6 Q. I threw in a "correct" there at the end, and 7 probably threw off my question. At the Texaco facility hen 8 in Anacortes, the subject of this case, you don't have any 9 personal Information about any asbestos materials that were 10 required by Bechtel, correct? 11 A. No, I do not. 12 Q. One other point here. You talked about a 13 contractors that had done -- had done testing for asbestos. 14 You were referring to industrial hygienists that had been 15 contracted by Texaco, correct? 16 A. Industrial hygiene contractor services. Texaco 17 contracted to bring the m s In from Kettering, that's 18 correct. 19 Q, You weren't talking about any construction 20 contractors at the Anacortes facility, correct? 21 a . Not Involving that particular point, no. 22 MR. MARKS: That's all the questions I have. 23 Thank you, sir. 24 25 194 1 brought with him. I mean, 1t could be earlier, but I mean, 2 that would be at least one point in time that I could focus 3 on. 4 MR, f r o c k t : Let's take a about a five-minute 5 break, and then i'll see if there's anything else I have. 6 THE v i d e o g r a p h e r : I'm going to bring this tape 7 to a close. The time now is 3:37 a.m. This concludes tape 8 No. 3 in the deposition of Ronald Richards. 9 (Recess.) 10 t h e v i d e o g r a p h e r : The time is 3:55 p.m. This 11 begins tape No. 4 1n the deposition of Ronald Richards. 12 13 EXAMINATION 14 BY MR. MARKS: 15 Q. Hi, sir, Christopher Marks, i introduced myself 16 at the beginning of the deposition. I represent sequoia 17 Ventures in this matter. Couple of questions to clarify 18 some points that were brought up by Mr. Frockt. 19 You testified, if I understood you correctly, 20 earlier today that you believed that some asbestos may have 21 been required by contractors as part of the maintenance for 22 heat balance, y o u don't have any particular -- strike that. 23 You don't have any personal knowledge, do you, 24 about any contractor-supplied insulation, including asbestos 25 insulation, at the Anacortes facility in this case? asA M i A 196 1 2 EXAMINATION 3 BY MR. MESHER: 4 Q. Mr. Richards, do you feel like answering a few 5 more questions before we finish? 6 A. I'm ready. 7 q. Great. Mr. Frockt made certain representations 8 about what lack Drummond said or didn't say in his 9 deposition. Do you recall in general, terms that, that Mr. 10 Frockt raised the subject of Mr. Drummond's deposition with 11 you? I'm sorry, not the deposition, what Mr. Drummond 12 testified to concerning respirators. Do you recall that 13 just in general terms? 14 A. in general terms, yes, I do. 15 q. Did Mr. Frockt tell you when he was asking you 16 questions that Mr. Drummond testified in response to 17 questions from Mr. Frockt on page 39 of h1s deposition 18 starting on U n e 8: 19 "sir, are you familiar with what a respirator is? 20 "a n s w e r : Yes. 21 "QUESTION: h o w is it you became familiar with 22 what a respirator is? 23 "a n s w e r : Well, through training and through my 24 job as safety supervisor respirators were used throughout 25 the refinery considerably, in a considerable amount." I/* /T A rN m " J1 1 A 9 A ^riwh.i\i i n v i u i i l L. I A-VL- a KUIN KlLHARDb ~ 197 199 1 Mr. Frockt never told you that that's part of 1 your beginning 1967 forward? 2 what Mr. Drummond said, 1s 1t? 3 A. No, it's not. 4 Q. Did Mr. Frockt tell you that Mr. Drummond also 5 testified when Mr. Frockt asked him a question on page 39, 6 starting on line 15: 2 "ANSWER: Yes." 3 Did Mr. Frockt tell you that? 4 A. No, he did not. 5 Q. Did Mr. Frockt also tell you that Mr. Drummond 6 testified as follows in his deposition on page 65 starting 7 "Were they" -- being the respirators -- "Were 8 they 1n use 1n 1967 when you took over as safety supervisor? 9 "ANSWER: Yes. 10 "QUESTION: What were the respirators used for in 11 1967?" 12 Again, this is Mr. Frockt asking Mr. Drummond 13 these questions. 14 And Mr. Drummond responded on page 39, lines 19 15 through 22: 16 "We had several different types there. You had 17 respirators that were used for dust. You had respirators 18 that were used for gaseous situations. You had Scott air 19 packs that were used in extreme gaseous situations." 20 Did Mr. Frockt ever tell you that that's what Mr. 21 Drummond responded in questions that Mr. Frockt asked him in 22 the deposition? 23 A. No, he did not. 24 q . Now, also in the deposition Mr. Frockt asked Mr. 25 Drummond if he had a recollection as to whether or not 7 on line 8. These are again questions from Mr. Lester, p m 8 Northwest's attorney. 9 "Did you take that as one of your personal 10 concerns to make sure that all the safety equipment was 11 available 1f somebody wished to use it. 12 "a n s w e r : Yes. 13 "why would that beimportant? 14 "The Instructions at that period of time that 15 you're talking about, the instructions were there on the 16 usage of these respirators, and that 1t was my 17 responsibility to oversee the whole program." 18 Did Mr. Frockt tell you that that's part of what 19 Mr. Drummond testified to 1n his deposition? 20 A. No, he did not. 21 Q. . No. And there was also -- Mr.Drummond went on 22 to say that the person -- supervisor who was supervising the 23 men also had some responsibility along with the safety 24 department. Did Mr. Frockt tell you that? 25 A. No, he did not.1 198 1 respirators were used specifically with asbestos as opposed 2 to dust in general, and Mr. Drummond 1n his deposition 3 testified that he didn't recall, he didn't recall one way or 4 another, as to whether or not they were used. Did Mr. 5 Frockt tell you that as to part of the deposition testimony 6 of Mr. Drummond? 7 A. No, he did not. 8 - Q. Now, 1n response to some questions by PM 9 Northwest's attorney, Mr. Lester, did Mr. Frockt tell you 10 that 1n response to questions from Mr. Lester that Mr. 11 Drummond responded as follows to questions concerning 12 respirators starting on page 64, line 18: 13 "q u e s t i o n : During your tenure as safety 14 supervisor were safety equipment Items such as respirators 15 readily available to most employees? 16 "a n s w e r : Yes. 17 "were employees encouraged or discouraged from 18 the use of any of these safety equipment items? 19 "ANSWER: They were instructed to use them. 20 "q u e s t i o n : i believe Mr. Frockt asked you about 21 when they were instructed or when they were merely 22 available, and my question relates to when they were just 23 merely available; were there sufficient respirators on site 24 in the different departments so that 1f somebody wanted to 25 use one or have access they could get one, basically from __ 1 Q. And did Mr. Frockt also tellyou thatMr. 2 Drummond testified in his deposition in response to a 3 question from me on page 71, starting on line 7: 4 Now, you were asked some questions about the 5 respiratory -- respirators at the refinery, and i believe 6 that you indicated that respirators were generally available 7 to all employees. Do you recall that? 8 "ANSWER: I recall, yes." 9 Mr. Frockt never told you about that in his 10 questioning, did he? 11 A. No, he did not. 12 Q. In fact, Mr. Frockt made certainrepresentations 13 that Mr. Drummond said that there weren't respirators, 14 respirators were not available. Do you recall that? 15 A. That's what I recall, yes. 16 Q. Now, let's talk about another area of questioning 17 that Mr. Frockt asked you about. Has to do with questions 18 concerning asbestos exposure and asbestosls, and he asked 19 you some questions about when was it clearly established or 20 words to that effect. In what type of settings were you 21 referring to when you were talking about any type of 22 association between asbestos or asbestos exposure and 23 asbestosls? 24 A. well, I was referring to therefinery type 25 setting where you had a very open environment. MOBURG & ASSOCIATES, INC. (206)622-3110 Pages 197 to 200 j/-vrii_jvyix V O . O M D t r v n M V J I Z I N , ELI M L ~ : 201 1 Q. Now, at one point you had a discussion about 2 threshold limit values. Do you recall that? 3 A. Yes, I do. 4 q. h o w does the threshold limit value come into play 5 with any association between asbestos exposure and 6 asbestosis? 7 A. Well, generally, the preamble for the TLV 8 committee indicated that this was for 40-hour week exposure, 9 day after day, for a prolonged period of time. So you had 10 to have excessive exposures the full 40-hour week, in other 11 words, a continuous type of exposure over the t l v for many, 12 many years in order to be at the threat, the mere threat of 13 developing some disease. That doesn't mean that everyone in 14 that particular category - - i n fact, we've seen with some of 15 the medical data that people exposed as insulators worked 16 30, 40 years with no ill effects. 17 q. Now, you mentioned the TLV committee. What 18 group or association are you referring to with the t l v 19 committee? 20 a . This was the American Conference of Governmental 21 Industrial Hygienists, the TLV committee. It carried a lot 22 of stature because it was made up of strictly of people from 23 universities and government. So there was no threat of 24 influence from industries to try and change the standard to 25 improve their working capabilities, but, in other words, the KUN KILHAKUb 1 q. Here is my copy of Exhibit 8, and could you just 2 identify that for the record? 3 A. Again, this is a letter from Lucian Renes to the 4 members of the central committee on medicine and health and 5 technical advisors on Phillips Petroleum department 6 letterhead dated January, and I can't make out the 7 year, can't make out the exact day of January, but 1965. 8 Date stamped into the Health Division, New York City, 9 Texaco, January 15, 1965. 10 q. Now, would Mr. Renes have sent out such a letter 11 requesting certain information without there having been an> 12 type of discussion of the committee? 13 a . well, my experience with the committee -- and I 14 started serving on the committee in '71 -- is that there 15 would have been some long, serious discussion about 16 particularly how to do it, not necessarily why to do it but 17 how to do it, and that would have taken at least probably a 18 year for the API to make some decision about how to go ahead 19 with this particular type of survey so they could get an 20 accurate result and an accurate representation. 21 q. And Mr. Frockt asked you certain questions about 22 the Wilson and Eisenstadt article. Do you recall when that 23 was published in the Lancet? 24 A. Well, it was '60 but I don't recall the exact 25 day. . 2o2 1 input was from and the data was solicited from research 1 q. Exhibit 7, and I'll just show you my copy. 2 personnel, university personnel, and governmental personnel. 2 MR. MESHER: If that's all right, counsel? Do 3 Q. How do you know that, that there was no threat 3 you have an objection? 4 from industry because -- . 5 A. well, I served on the committee for a year and a 4 MR. f r o c k t : No, go ahead. 5 q. Exhibit 7 makes reference to a reprint from the 6 half. I saw none of that. And Herb stokinger, who was the 6 journal Lancet November 1960. 7 secretary to the committee at the time, was very strict in 7 8 how he would solicit data, and then how that committee would 8 A. November of 1960, right. q. So the period involved between -- well, strike 9 interpret data. And they looked at the heat substance every 9 that. 10 year, 1n a review process, and decided in '68, *69, that 10 n o w , Mr. Frockt asked you certain questions in 11 there was no need to change the t l v for asbestos at that 11 response to what Mr. Renes sent out on Exhibit 8, asked you 12 time. 13 q. In fact, that was the same TLV standard that was 14 implemented in what year, what was it, in the '40s? 12 certain questions about the Exhibit 9, which is a letter 13 from E. W. McNealy to Mr. H. G. Tigh, T-I-G-H, dated March 14 11, 1965. And again, I'll hand you my copy. Do you have 15 A. I think it was in the '40s, correct. 15 that 1n front of you? 16 q. Now, Mr. Frockt asked you certain questions about 16 A. Yes, I do. 17 the API, and in particular, if you could turn to Exhibit 8, 17 q. could you just read the documentnumber on the 18 please. And I believe that is the letter from Renes to the 18 fi rst page at. the bottom? 19 members of a certain committee. If you could pull out -- 20 a . I'm getting close, I think. 21 q. I'd be more than happy to provide you with my 22 copy if that would assist. 23 m r . m e s h e r : counsel, do you have an objection 19 A. W A-T E X 003844. 20 q. Mr. Frockt made numerous -- asked numerous 21 questions indicating that there were two cases of 22 mesothelioma that were reported in Exhibit 9. Did you find 23 that there were two cases of mesothelioma or was 1t one case 24 with that if I show him my copy? 25 m r . frockt: no. 24 and a reference to a suspected mesothelioma? 25 A. well, I think the second one was a suspected MOBURG & ASSOCIATES, INC. (206)622-3110 Pages 201 to 204 ^ni'iu.jv/ii vj JMDt.l\nn\]UM, C. I 1 case. And the first case, a Peter Cappadonna was a rtL i 205 2 confirmed case, but the second case he referred to was a 3 suspected case. 4 Q. okay, n o w , Mr. Frockt asked you a series of 5 questions concerning Mr. Dooley and Mr. Dooley didn't sample 6 asbestos dust. In the time that Mr. Dooley was associated 7 with the Texaco, Texaco -- the TLVs, did they talk about 8 asbestos dust or total dust concentrations? 9 A. No. You actually sample for total dust, and the 10 method that you used and the comparison that you used 11 eliminated counting of any fibers, so you were sampling 12 total dust in the environment, y o u were not sampling 13 asbestos fibers in the environment. 14 Q. n o w , Mr. Frockt asked you a series of questions 15 asking you to assume if Texaco knew that two insulators had 16 mesothelioma. And let me ask a question to you this way, 17 that if Texaco knew that two of its -- two insulators had 18 mesothelioma or one insulator had mesothelioma and one 19 insulator was suspected of having mesothelioma, as Mr. 20 McNealy was reporting in the March 11, 1965 memorandum to 21 Mr. Tigh, how would Texaco have treated that? 22 a . Well, again, this was part of a process where you 23 had generated a hypothesis, and so now you were going into 24 the study stage to review the data and either confirm or not 25 confirm or disprove the hypothesis that was being generated. KUIN KILtlAKUS 1 health committee is inadequate to resolve the question as ti 2 the degree of hazard which asbestos poses to refinery 3 insulators." 4 Q. And Mr. Renes was, what, urging the medical 5 committee because of that opinion to continue studying this 6 potential health problem, what he reported on page 4 of this 7 document; is that correct? 8 A. Yeah, continue studying this potential health 9 problem, that's correct. 10 Q. Potential health problem, was that what he 11 reported? 12 A. That's the words he used were this potential 13 health problem. 14 Q. Now, Mr. Frockt asked you a series of questions 15 concerning the use of asbestos and asbestos products after 16 1972. Do you recall questions along those lines? 17 A. Along those lines, correct. 18 Q. Are you familiar with a gasket that is used on, 19 what, on pipes? 20 A. well, the flanges where they bring two pipes 21 together will have a flange, and they use a gasket in 22 between to seal the pipes when they put the bolts together. 23 Q. Are you familiar with how long that those gaskets 24 were sold in the open market without a warning on them? 25 A. Well, I think it was perhaps into the '80s. 206 208 1 So Texaco participated very early on in that study and l Q. Do you know whether or not our united states 2 provided all the data that they had to that API study. 2 government after 1972 and, say, up to 1980 required any type 3 Q. Mr. Frockt asked you certain questiohs about 3 of warning on a product such as an asbestos-containing 4 that, the 1965 and on, API study. Do you recall that in 4 gasket? 5 general terms? 6 A. In general terms, yes. 7 Q. Exhibit 13, if you have that In front of you, I 'd 5 A. I don't believe they did, no. 6 Q. And those gaskets -- well, strike that, n o w , 7 let's talk a minute about -- you were asked certain 8 appreciate you pulling it out. Otherwise I'd be more than 8 questions about Dr. selikoff's findings in your discussion 9 happy to share mine. 9 with Dr. selikoff and refinery workers, were you actually 10 A. 14, 15. 10 at the refinery in Anacortes? 11 MR. Fr e n k e l : Check on the bottom of the other 11 A. Yes, I was. 12 pile. 12 Q. When were you there? 13 Q. Exhibit 13 is a letter from Lucian Renes to -- 13 A. I believe it was '75. 14 what is 1t -- Nathan Hendricks? 14 q . would you tell us, please, how you believe -- 15 A. It was Van Hendricks. He went by Van Hendricks, 15 well, first, do you believe that there were differences 16 V-A-N Hendricks. 17 Q. April 13, 1965; 1s that correct? 16 between the exposures that Dr. selikoff was reporting as 17 opposed to what you saw in the refinery in Anacortes for, 18 A. correct. 18 say, Insulation workers? 19 Q. And you and Mr. Frockt went over certain portions 19 A. Oh, to me very clearly. I mean, Dr. Selikoff 20 of the enclosure to this document, but 1f you could turn to 20 referred to the enclosed type of situation that the workers 21 that, please, and the conclusion on page 3, what are the 22 conclusions stated on the middle of page 3? 23 A. You want me to read the two paragraphs? 21 in his study were exposed to, the fact that they were 22 spraying insulation material containing asbestos, and were 23 really creating quite a cloud 1n that confined, enclosed 24 Q. No, no, just the first sentence. 24 area. When you compare that with Anacortes, which 1s 25 A. "The data obtained to date from the medical and 25 sitting on the point up there, my experience, although 1t MOBURG & ASSOCIATES, INC. (206)622-3110 Pages 205 to 208 v j i oMDtrvnrtvjciN, c I Ml-. 209 1 was very short, is that that was a quite airy, windy, open 2 situation. Host new refineries are built 1n a very open 3 pattern, and allows for a lot of air circulation. That 4 particular point up there probably is fairly windy most 5 days. 6 Q. You actually met with Dr. Selikoff; is that 7 correct? 8 A. That's correct. We had a group that visited him 9 in his laboratory at Mount s1na1 Hospital. 10 Q. okay. And what group was this that met with Dr. 11 Selikoff? 12 a . it was the metropolitan section of the American 13 Industrial Hygiene Association, and we went up to spend an 14 afternoon with him, in probably about 1970, I would judge,. 15 and he went -- he reviewed -- he introduced us to h1s 16 associates, and we reviewed his facilities there, and then 17 he spent several hours discussing his findings with us 18 regarding h1s studies and the insulating -- the construction 19 insulating workers that he was looking at. 20 Q. Now, I note that you Indicated that you have a 21 master's degree; is that correct? 22 A. That's correct. 23 q. And who were some of your professors in that 24 program? 25 A. well, the lead professor in my particular program 1 012414? KUN KlLMAKUb 211 2 A. 021 - 3 Q. 02414. 4 A. okay, okay, I have that. 5 Q. This 1s something that Mr. Frockt showed you; is 6 that correct? 7 A. That's correct. 8 Q. And I think you indicated in response to Mr. 9 Frockt that this 1s the first time that you saw this was 10 today; is that correct? 11 A. That's correct. 12 Q. Now, there's a section on -- that talks about 13 asbestosis. Do you see that about the middle of the column 14 on the right? 15 A. Yes, I do. 16 Q. Can you just read that first sentence, please. 17 A. "Asbestosis -- confined to a limited and 18 specialized group of industries -- is due to the Inhalation 19 of dust of a fibrous mineral, chiefly chrysotile, in the 20 manufacture of nonflammable textiles, insulation materials, 21 brake and clutch linings, asbestos-cement sheets, tiles, 22 electric conductors, cables, and molded goods." 23 Q. Any of those areas cover a refinery that you've 24 just read? 25 A. No. 210 1 was Ted Hatch, and he had written many books and articles, 2 world renowned in the area of pneumoconiosis-producing dust. 3 I think he was one of the experts in the field about that 4 particular matter. 5 one of the other professors was a Dr. Paul Gross, 6 and he was also interested in the field of pneumoconlosls- 7 producing dust. There was a professor Horace Belding, and 8 he was more in the physiology area than in the actual 9 Industrial engineering area. But there were other 10 professors that come to mind. Emil pfitzer was another one, 11 but there were several. 12 q. And your knowledge of asbestos and any -- the 13 asbestosis that you talked about in response to Mr. Frockt 14 and any other diseases that may or may not be associated 15 with asbestos exposure, did that come in part from Mr. 16 Hatch? 17 a . Belding discussed the physiology of the lung and 18 how that worked, and then Hatch would concentrate on 19 particle size In the case of fiber length, aspect ratios, 20 how a fiber would or how a particle would come into the 21 lungs and then either leave or stay, and he was the 22 engineering side and clearly the expert on pneumoconiosis- 23 producing dusts of all types. 24 Q. d o you have Exhibit 20, and if you could just 25 turn to that for a moment, please, could you turn to page 212 1 q. n o w , could you turn to the next page, please. 2 012415. 3 A. Okay. / 4 q. And I know the writing is small, but if you look 5 at footnote -- and I think it might be 12. There's a 6 reference to Drinker and Hatch. Do you see that? 7 a . Yes. 8 q. was that the Hatch that you were referring to? 9 A. Yes, it was. 10 q. That's someone that you received some instruction 11 from in graduate school; is that correct? 12 A. Oh, quite a bit of instruction. 13 q. Now, I apologize for going back, but when we were 14 talking about the differences between with what Dr. selikoff 15 had discussed concerning the exposures there as opposed to 16 Anacortes, were you also, for example, at the Texaco's Port 17 Arthur refinery? 18 A. Yes, I was. 19 q. Could you just tell us, please, and describe the 20 differences that you recall concerning the type of facility 21 and 1n the setup at Port Arthur as opposed to Anacortes, 22 just in general terms? 23 A. Sure. And actually I'd like to throw in two 24 plants. Convent, Louisiana and Anacortes were the last two 25 refineries built for Texaco. The concept was much more MOBURG & ASSOCIATES, INC. (206)622-3110 Pages 209 to 212 j m ' i l - J U l x V J . O H D C I M I M V l D M , H I M l ---. - 1 different than that at Port Arthur. The units were very 2 open. You had long runs to the cooling towers so you 3 weren't confined in by those, but it was just a very open, 4 airy concept that you didn't find at port Arthur, which was 5 built in sections, many, many years before that. Not that 6 the Port Arthur refinery wasn't closed, but the units could 7 have been closer together, and you didn't get the same 8 openness that you got in some of the units like was more 9 typical in Anacortes. 10 Q. Now, Mr. Frockt asked you some certain questions 11 about Texaco's awareness that asbestos caused cancer, and I 12 think he asked you some questions about that, was there a 13 threshold limit value that was in place 1n 19727 Did OSHA 14 have a t l v ? 15 A. Yeah. Actually, I think they promulgated a 16 emergency temporary standard, which was probably good for 17 six months, and then they would have promulgated a permanent 18 standard for asbestos, and 1 think that was somewhere around 19 *72. Could have been beginning, end, but somewhere 1n that 20 time frame. 21 q . How do those levels ofexposure through the t l v 22 affect any statements that you've given concerning any 23 awareness that asbestos might cause cancer? 24 A. Maybe could you repeat that. 25 Q. sure. Mr. Frockt asked you certain questions1 . 214 1 concerning when Texaco was aware or might have been aware 2 that asbestos caused or may cause cancer, and what type of 3 levels or exposures or does the t l v take -- come into play 4 when you were responding to Mr. Frockt's questions? 5 A. okay, t o me you had a sea change with regard to 6 the concerns about asbestos 1n 1970, '71, '72, and that sea ' 7 change went from a concern over asbestosls looking at the 8 TLV, the ACGXH's TLV, which was the total dust, five 9 millions of particles per cubic foot of air where you did 10 not measure fibers, to the OSHA standards, which I think 11 went to two fibers per CC or five fibers per CC greater than 12 five microns in length initially. 13 And 1n that case you were looking to protect both 14 from asbestosis and from any potential causes of cancer. So 15 there was a dramatic difference in the standard that was 16 applied, and the technique that you would use to measure 17 that particular -- those types of exposures. 18 Q. Now, Mr. Frockt asked you certain questions 19 concerning Mr. Jameson and his work at the refinery. And 20 you've reviewed certain records that we produced to the 21 plaintiffs, part of his personnel files; 1s that correct? 22 A. That's correct, yes. 23 Q. Do you recall whether or not Mr. Jameson was 24 classified as an Insulator? 25 A. I don't recall that he was ever classified as an K U N K-LUIAKU: 215 1 insulator through his eight years with the company. 2 Q. Now, Mr. Frocktread toyou aportion of Mr. 3 Dooley's 1949 industrial hygiene study, d o you recall him 4 reading to you part of it? 5 A. Generally. 6 Q. Okay. Generally, he read toyou aportion that 7 stated in part: Asbestos dust, if inhaled in sufficient 8 amounts and for a prolonged period, will cause a lung 9 fibrosis termed, quote, asbestosls, close quote. The max -- 10 I'm not sure 1f he read this or not. The maximum allowable 11 concentration of asbestos dust 1n the breathing zone of 12 workers has been set at 5 million particles per cubic feet 13 of air. Naturally, the percentage of asbestos in the dust 14 to which the employee was exposed during crushing and 15 bagging of insulation would be low because of the high 16 magnesia content of the material. Even so, assuming that 17 the dust contained 15 percent asbestos, the exposure during 18 the crushing and bagging of insulation were 1n excess of the 19 maximum allowable concentration. 20 A. okay. He did not read that whole statement, no, 21 he did not. 22 Q. Now there was a research to 5 million particles 23 per cubic feet of air. Was that the t l v that we've been 24 talking about7 25 A. That's correct. __ 1 Q. Now, Mr. Dooley also initiated another report 2 after 1959; is that correct -- I'm sorry, '49. 3 A. '49, report in 1952, that'scorrect. 4 Q. And in '52, you're familiar with that in general 5 terms; is that right7 6 A. That's correct. 7 Q. And in general terms did that '52 report -- what, 8 if anything, did that say concerning asbestos or asbestos 9 exposure? 10 A. It did not address asbestos, which to me U Indicated very clearly, based on Allan's practices, my 12 practices, and subsequent iHs 1n the Texaco program 13 practices -- when you went to a plant you pulled that 14 previous report or reports, and you specifically looked at 15 those particular areas to make sure that compliance had been 16 achieved with your recommendations. So in the absence of 17 saying anything about asbestos, I'm sure that particular 18 location was corrected to Allan's satisfaction. 19 Q. Now, Mr. Frockt asked certain other questions 20 about what mR. Dooley knew or did or didn't do at the 21 refinery in Anacortes, and I don't recall 1f he showed you 22 today the response from the Anacortes refinery to the a p x 23 requests for Information on insulators, d o you recall? 24 A. No. We only looked at the Port Arthur response. 25 Q. d o you recall that there was a response from the MOBURG & ASSOCIATES, INC. (206)622-3110 Pages 213 to 21C JMMC.3V7IN V3. 1 Anacortes refinery? ^AtStKMAVjtlN , 1 ML. 217 2 A. Yes, I do. 3 Q. Who was it? Dr. Noble? 4 A. Dr. Noble put that report together, correct. 5 Q. Was Mr. Jameson listed in that, do you recall? 6 A. No. No, he was not. 7 q . d o you recall generally what those findings were? 8 A. They were negative. I think they reported on two 9 employees who had been Involved In insulation for a number 10 of years, and other than some short-term absences there was 11 no -- there are no unique findings regarding those two 12 employees. 13 Q. At the Anacortes? 14 A. At the Anacortes refinery, correct. 15 q . Now, do you know whether or hot Mr. Drummond ever 16 spoke with Dr. Noble about Dr. Noble's findings? 17 A. it would not be unusual for that conversation to 18 take place. The safety supervisor worked very closely with 19 the doctors and the medical department, and conversations 20 would have taken place almost on a dally basis. 21 q. when you were at the refinery, do you recall 22 meeting with the medical personnel? 23 A. Yes, I do. 24 Q. when you had a -- your meeting in the refinery, 25 that's the Anacortes refinery? KUIN K I C H A K U S 219 1 (Recess.) 2 THE VIDEOGRAPHER: The time is 4:38 p.m. We're 3 now back on the record. 4 BY MR. MESHERt 5 Q. Mr. Richards, just a few follow-up questions, wi 6 had talked about -- you had talked about Mr. Dooley. Are 7 you aware that in 1960 that there was a potential noise 8 issue at the refinery in Anacortes in certain correspondence 9 with Mr. Dooley? 10 A. I recall that he had scheduled a visit, yes. 11 q . How did that letter affect Mr. Dooley's schedulec 12 visit to the refinery? 13 A. well, actually, I guess his -- he initially 14 scheduled it, I think, for early '61, but he found an IS opening several months prior to that time and went out there 16 sooner than he originally planned to address the issue. 17 Q. Did that surprise you at all that Mr.Dooley 18 altered his schedule in response to this correspondence fron 19 the Anacortes refinery indicating a potential noise problem? 20 A. No. in fact, I saw Allan do that on other 21 occasions where we advanced our particular schedule to visit 22 something because of someone expressing a concern. And so 23 this didn't surprise me at all. He was a very conscientious 24 guy, and if he thought that someone had a concern, he would 25 try to address it as soon as possible. 218 1 A. That's correct. 2 q . Do you recall being advised, or what if anything 3 did the medical personnel up in Anacortes tell you about 4 asbestos in the refinery? 5 A. well, by 1975 we were fairly along in the 6 program, and we would have discussed lung function testing 7 findings, we probably would have discussed x-ray findings 8 in a general sense. We were not privy to personal medical 9 records, but it would have been a general sense of how is. 10 the program working, how is the medical monitoring going, 11 and are things 1n place and calibrated and the way they 12 should be. so these were typical topics, particularly 13 around that time frame when we got to those different 14 plants. 15 Q. Were you advised by any of the doctors at 16 Anacortes that there was any problem related to the health 17 of any of the workers at that refinery associated at all 18 with asbestos or asbestos exposure? 19 A. As best I can recall, absolutely not. And I 20 think 1n that time frame I would have remembered something 21 that if 1t would have been of some concern. 22 MR. MESHER: Let me just take a break. I think 23 Mr. Frenkel has a question, we'll go off the record. 24 t h e v i d e o g r a p h e r : Certainly. The time 1s 4:32. 25 we're taking a break in the testimony. 220 1 Q. Not just a noise concern but -- 2 A. No. And of course when he was there it's not 3 unusual to walk around the whole plant, and I'm sure if he 4 had seen something else that would have concerned him at all 5 he would have mentioned it 1n his report, y o u don't go 6 there for one thing. I mean, while you're there, take a 7 walk around. 8 Q. is that part of training as an Industrial 9 hygienist to look around and see what's there to be seen? 10 a . Well, 1t seems -- I was trained that way. I 'm 11 sure Dooley was trained that way. The other people with 12 other backgrounds, whether 1t was Jim Licata or Herschel 13 Hobson, all seemed to follow the same sort of procedures. 14 So when you were there you took a look at everything, and if 15 something perked your interest you'd stay a little while 16 extra or come back and take a look at it. 17 Q. Now, Mr. Frockt asked you certain questions about 18 sampling and words to the effect or questions, why was there 19 more sampling 1n 1971 or '72 or that time frame or 20 thereafter, what, if anything, did the evolution of 21 knowledge in the field of asbestos have to do with this 22 sampling or change in the frequency of sampling? 23 A. Well, certainly you had developed a much simpler 24 technique where you could really get in there and take 25 breathing zone samples so you could evaluate the individual MOBURG & ASSOCIATES, INC. (206)622-3110 Pages 217 to 220  v > i n v i -- i b y iw ii i\ x v i m i w ^ 1 not only in his breathing zone where he was exposed to for 2 short terns, long terms, but also now you were actually 3 evaluating the asbestos concentration. You weren't dealing 4 with total dust. 5 So I think there was an interest in getting many 6 samples after that technique changed and the TLV or the OSHA 7 standard was changed to allow you to use that different 8 technique, so, there was a, I'd characterize it, a flurry 9 of sampling by many in the early '70s. 10 Q. Now, Mr. Jameson testified in his deposition and 11 in responses to interrogatories that starting in about 12 September of 1972 through June of 1995 that he worked as a 13 high school teacher in the Eatonville School District. Let 14 me have you just assume that. 15 A. Okay, I think I sort of remember something along 16 those lines. 17 q . And that prior to that time he was an instructor, 18 at least starting from January of '71 through June of '71 19 and June of *71 through June of '72 with skagit valley ' 20 College in Mount Vernon, Washington. Do you recall 21 reading that? 22 A. Well, I sort of remember it, yes. 23 Q. y o u also recall at a period of time that there 24 were certain governmental regulations or certain regulations 25 that pertained to asbestos 1n the schools? 1 contractor studies, and you referred to it, I believe, as 2 the Kettering studies that some contractors did for Texaco? 3 A. Oh, well, the studies I remember reading, Texaco 4 contracted with Kettering Laboratories in Cincinnati to do 5 studies within the Texaco refineries. Again, I don't 6 remember the exact locations, the substances or the time 7 frame. It would have been sometime probably in the '60s, 8 but that was a specific contract between Texaco and 9 Kettering. 10 Q. So you're not aware -- you said the substances. 11 You're not aware if the contracting, the contracts in that 12 -- from those studies called for Kettering to evaluate 13 asbestos exposures at Texaco; 1s that right? 14 A. I'm not aware either way, so I can neither deny 15 it nor affirm it, but I know they did studies, I think 1n 16 several locations, and for several substances. 17 Q. But you're not aware if they did any testing for 18 asbestosis specifically? You just don't know; is that 19 correct? 20 A. I'm not aware either way, that's correct. 21 Q. Now, Mr. Mesher asked you about the two 22 insulators that were reported in the API study from -- that 23 were from Anacortes. Do you recall that? 24 A. Correct. 25 Q. Certainly you would not agree that -- I mean, you1 ---- 1 A. Well, certainly the e p a got involved in the 2 situation, and they tore out a lot of acoustical tile, some 3.schools from the standpoint weren't able to open on time 4 because of the replacement of acoustical tile that may have 5 contained some asbestos. So I'm sure there was a lot of 6 public knowledge going on at that time about the concerns 7 over asbestos. 8 Q. So the EPA had Indicated that there was a concern 9 about asbestos exposure from people who. were in the schools; 10 is that correct? 11 A. That's correct, yes. 12 Q. Not just from ceiling tiles but from -- 13 A. From other materials that might be used, yeah. 14 Made a lot of press in our papers. 15 MR. m e s h e r : i have no additional questions at 16 this time. 17 MR. FRENKEL; He asked my questions. 18 MR. f r o c k t : You're not going to ask any? 19 MR. f r e n k e l : No, he asked mine. 20 MR. f r o c k t : i have a couple. 21 22 EXAMINATION 23 BY MR. FROCKT: 24 q . sir, I want to clarify something. In response to 25 -- Mr. Marks asked you a couple of questions about the __ - 224 1 don't believe that two insulators is a statistically 2 significant sample from which you can make a determination 3 one way or the other that a particular activity in regards 4 to insulation at Anacortes was safe or not, do you? 5 A. well, that's why you were joining all of the 6 Texaco locations and, in fact, the other petroleum companies 7 into a study where you could reach, if it was there, some 8 statistical significance. No, I would not draw any 9 conclusion from two Individuals. I would not draw 10 conclusions from two case studies of any type, but you 11 gather these -- the cohort, if you will -- that's what it's 12 called-- together to test the hypothesis that you want to 13 test. 14 Q. And I think we talked about this before, but that 15 the API 1965 study that Texaco participated in was never 16 completed; is that right? 17 A. Not to my knowledge, no. 18 Q. so there,were no conclusions drawn, is that what 19 you're saying? 20 A. The only conclusion I can think of is, even with 21 the additional data that was drawn in on the second request, 22 it was, I guess. Inconclusive one way or the other. 23 Q. But I thought you said it was never completed. 24 a . Well, I never saw a formal report of the 25 completion of the study. MOBURG & ASSOCIATES, INC. (206)622-3110 Pages 221 to 224 y j. j n u L m i /-a v j l _ i y , c I m . . 225 1 Q. What leads you to believe that it was 2 Inconclusive? 3 A. I think knowing Les Levin, vho was on the 4 subcommittee, knowing Bob Dlakun, and even before he left -- 5 he left the state of Pennsylvania to go to Exxon. Those are 6 the kind of people that would finish something 1f they had 7 some results to report. And in the absence of some sort of 8 formal report -- and this 1s hypothetical -- I feel they did 9 not have sufficient data to reach some sort of conclusion. 10 Q. so you're sort of speculating? 11 a . I'm speculating on that, yes, x am. 12 q. You don't know for a fact what the reason the 13 study was not completed? 14 A. No, x didn't. 15 q. Because I asked you that previously and you said 16 you didn't know? 17 A. That's right, x did not know. 18 q. Now, did you read Mr. Jameson's deposition? 19 A. I don't recall, x could have looked at excerpts, 20 but I don't recall 1t 1n any kind of detail. 21 q. Am I incorrect? x thought Mr. Mesher just asked 22 you 1f you recalled certain things from Mr. Jameson's 23 deposition. 24 A. I recall certain things, but, you know, x 25 couldn't quote chapter and verse what he said. rwjiN rs.iV-nMiMJ'o 227 1 q. Are you aware of the fact that Insulators had 2 craft helpers specifically assigned to help them? Did you 3 know that that was how they were structured at Anacortes? 4 A. No, I don't recall that. 5 q. Well, let me show you a document. 6 MR. f r o c k t : And x apologize, x only have one 7 copy of this. 8 (Marked Deposition Exhibit 27.) 9 MR. m e s h e r : Let me just take a look at it. d o 10 you mind If we take a quick look at 1t, counsel? 11 MR. f r o c k t : n o , of course. 12 MR. m e s h e r : Thank you. 13 q. Do you want to take a look through 1t, Mr. 14 Richards? 15 A. (Complying.) 16 q. Mr. Richards, I realize it's a very long 17 document, and -- 18 a . Just paging through. 19 q. Let me see 1f x can kind of shorten this up. xf 20 your counsel wants to ask you some questions about it after 21 I'm done he will certainly have an opportunity to do that. 22 A. Sure. 23 q. See, this document, No. 27 -- 24 A. Exhibit 27. 25 q. Exhibit 27. 226 1 q. So you didn't read all the deposition, right? 2 A. x read some, but it was a while ago. 3 q. old you read the part where he talked about him 4 personally working with asbestos Insulation as a craft 5 helper? 6 A. I could have read it. I don't recall in detail 7 what 1t said. - 8 q. And even though he may not have ever been 9 classified formally by Texaco as an Insulator, you're not 10 saying, to your knowledge, that he didn't work as a craft 11 helper, are you, based upon what you reviewed? 12 A. Well, his job title 1n the personnel files was 13 craft helper. Now, what that encompassed could have varied 14 from location to location. I'm not specifically 15 knowledgeable about what M s duties were at Anacortes. 16 q. so you would certainly concede that 1t would be 17 possible for a craft helper to work directly handling, 18 cutting, knocking off asbestos Insulation from a flange or 19 pipe with a wrench, which are some of the things x recall 20 that Mr. Jameson testified about. You're not saying that 21 that's Impossible for somebody who is classified as he was 22 to do, are you? 23 a . it's not Impossible, but I think the plant looked 24 at someone who was doing Insulation on more or less a 25 full-time type of basis classified as an Insulator. 228 1 -- would you agree with me that it appears to be 2 a training manual for insulators from the Puget Sound plant? 3 a . insulator, Insulator trainee 1n parentheses. 4 q. And 1t's dated June 18,1973; is thatcorrect? 5 A. That's correct. ' 6 q. And as you go 1nafter the basic training Index, 7 beginning on page No. 5 there's a date there that says April 8 3, 1973? 9 A. 10 q. correct. Now, I'm just giving you this document just as 1t 11 was produced to us in this case. These are all 1n sequence 12 as far as x know. Turn to page 6. says there, on the last 13 paragraph: "Since the Insulator's work may Involve other 14 crafts or affect several operating departments, 1t 1s 15 essential that he closely coordinate h1s work and cooperate 16 with others in order to do a safe, workmanlike job." 17 clearly, that sentence would seem to imply that 18 Insulators had work that would Involve any number of crafts 19 that were working at the Anacortes refinery, would you 20 agree with me on that? 21 a . well, to me X read that as other crafts could be 22 1n the area where he's particularly working. 23 q. so we can agree, then, that other craftsmen could 24 be in the area where an insulator would be working? 25 a . could be. Again, x don't know at which time MOBURG & ASSOCIATES, INC. (206)622-3110 Pages 225 to 226 1 frame. -- * 229 2 q. well, this document -- that paragraph I read you 3 certainly doesn't say anything about time frame. 4 a . By time frame I mean if the insulator was at that 5 point stripping or adding new stuff or just putting some 6 metal lath on. You know, it may involve other crafts 1n the 7 area to me at selected times. 8 Q. Now, it says if you turn to the next page, page 9 7, it says at No. 6: "It is an insulator's responsibility 10 to see that his job progresses in a safe, working manner, 11 keep his helpers lined up and working, and to know where his 12 helpers are at all times." 13 A. I'm on page 7. Where are you at? 14 <* Page 7, No. 6. 15 A. okay. 16 q. Would you agree with me that that statement right 17 there certainly Implies that an insulator is going to be 18 working very closely with his helper, an insulator helper; 19 isn't that correct? 20 a . it may or may not imply that. 21 q. You don't think that that's what that statement 22 implies? 23 A. I don't know what that statement says. The 24 statement is in this document, and I think it's open to 25 interpretation whether he's doing a supervisory type of \ v i i i \ j . v . i i n i w ^ 1 whenever so assigned by his supervisor." Do you see that? 2 A. Yes, I do. 3 q. Certainly it would seem, according to that 4 paragraph, that it would be specifically contemplated that i 5 craft helper who was assigned to an insulator might end up 6 doing some of the exact same things that an insulator did. 7 Do you agree with that? 8 A. That could imply that because it talks about his 9 trade. I mean, the words "his trade" could imply to the 10 trades that the craft helper does or the trainee does, or il 11 could apply to the insulator's trade. 12 q. well, there's a lot to go through in this 13 document, but I'm not going to do it today. I would note, 14 however, Mr. Richards, that the date of April 3, 1973, am I 15 correct that that's after Texaco came out with its directive 16 for refineries to try to convert to asbestos-free materials? 17 A. That would be after the date, yes. 18 MR. m e s h e r : Can I just take a look, counsel? 19 You don't mind if we look at this, do you? 20 MR. FROCKT: No , of course not. 21 q. Mr. Mesher asked you some questions about the 22 testimony of lack Drummond and some of my questions 23 pertaining to that testimony. You recall that, I assume, 24 because he raised his voice quite loudly when he was asking 25 you those questions. 1 situation where he has his helpers lined up in some area In 2 making sure they're going ahead or whatever. 3 q. n o w , at No. 8 it says, "Instruct his helpers of 4 proper tool handling and work procedures on the job." 5 Certainly you would agree with me there that that would seem 6 to imply that an insulator would have some close contact 7 with his own helper? I mean the helper is there to help the 8 insulator; isn't that right? 9 A. Again, I don't see that as necessarily the 10 situation, it talks about instructing his helpers in the 11 proper handling of tools and work procedures. 12 q. so you think that you could -- that this document 13 may mean that the Insulator might be instructing the helper, 14 but he really wouldn't have any close contact with the 15 helper? 16 A. I mean, it could imply other things, but the 17 document speaks for itself and is open to interpretation. 18 q. Well, I'm asking what your views of the document 19 are -- 20 A. Well, okay. 21 q. -- since we had some questions about what Mr. 22 Jameson did. 23 n o w , on page 8, No. 13, states there that "It is 24 an insulator's responsibility to train and instruct a craft 25 helper or trainee in the methods and procedures of his trade 1 A. Well, I think he was just speaking for emphasis. 2 q. okay, speaking for emphasis, fine. Now, sir, I 3 will say to you, I certainly was not -- had no intention to 4 misstate something that was in Mr. Drummond's testimony. 5 His testimony will speak for itself, obviously. 6 A. That's correct. 7 MR. FRENKEL: Is that a question? 8 MR. FROCKT: Can I just do my thing here? 9 A. okay. 10 q. So if for some reason you feel that I misstated 11 something or if I did misstate something, it certainly was 12 not intentional, so I want to apologize for that if I did 13 misstate something. 14 ' Having said that -- I want to point out a couple 15 of things that Mr. Mesher did not ask you. 16 on page 42, Mr. Mesher did not read to you the 17 question that I asked Mr. Drummond where I asked him: "What 18 about with respect to insulating activities? were there 19 regulations that respirators needed to be used during 20 insulating activities?" 21 After his objection the answer from Mr. Drummond 22 was: "I don't recall 1n 1967 that there were." 23 Next question: was there -- were there any point 24 in time, in any time specifically with regard to insulating 25 activities during your tenure as safety supervisor? MOBURG & ASSOCIATES, INC. (206)622-3110 Pages 229 to 232 JAME.31HN V 3 . ^APHKnAVjC.I>l , HI M L . - 1 "a n s w e r : Yes. 233 1 A. That's what I recall, yes. 2 "when did those come into play? 2 Q. And so whether or not there were -- there was an 3 "ANSWER: Those came into play after the asbestos 3 emphasis on asbestos dust, the TLVs didn't address asbestos 4 problem came to light and specific instructions were given 4 dust 1n 1966, did they? 5 at that time. 5 A. No. They talk about total dust. 6 Question was: "Can you tell me what year that 6 Q. so if the Texaco refinery 1n Anacortes through 7 was, sir? 7 Mr. Drummond and otherwise were making respirators available 8 "ANSWER: I can't recall the year. Again, this 8 for all of their own employees for all dusts, was that in 9 is sometime in the mid 1970s, as I recall." 9 compliance with what was the thinking of the time concerning 10 Mr. Mesher didn't advise you that those were some 10 the TLVs and dust? 11 of the questions that I asked Mr. Drummond either, did he? 11 a . It certainly could have been. It could have beer 12 A. No, but it's interesting to note that lack 12 one of the control measures that was applied. 13 Drummond said he didn't recall. To me that's one way or 13 q . so that when Mr. -- when Mr. Drummond responded 14 the other. 14 to certain questions -- and frankly, I thought I did ask the 15 Q. Then on page 56, I asked Mr. Drummond: "sir, in 15 one question when Mr. Drummond said "I don't recall," and he 16 1967, are you aware of any safety measures whatsoever that 16 didn't recall one way or another on a threshold limit for 17 were In place that pertained to asbestos hazards at the 17 asbestos in 1967. Mr. Drummond in fact, 1f you recall, in 18 Anacortes refinery? His answer was, "No, I don't." 18 h1s deposition said that respirators were used for dust 1n 19 Did Mr. Mesher advise you that Mr. Drummond had 19 1967. Do you recall that? 20 answered in that way? 21 A. No, he did not. 22 MR. f r o o c t : No further questions. 23 MR. MESHER: lust a couple of follow-up. 24 20 A. Yes, I do. 21 Q. And when respirators were used for dust, that 22 would Include asbestos dust; is that correct? 23 A. That's correct. 24 MR. MESHER: Thank you. I have no additional 25 25 questions.1 , -- -- 1 2 EXAMINATION 3 BY MR. MESHER: 4 Q. The document that Mr. Frockt was -- 5 MR. m e s h e r : I'm sorry, did you guys have any 6 questions? lust a couple of follow-up questions. 7 Q. The document that Mr. Frockt was referring to, 8 Exhibit 27, that's dated lune 18, 1973; 1s that correct? 9 A. That's correct. 10 Q. And It's your understanding that Mr. lameson 11 resigned from Texaco 1n September of 1966; 1s that correct? 12 A. I recall that, yes. 13 q . so do you know whether or not what 1s contained 14 1n Exhibit 27 was 1n effect back in 1966? 15 A. I don't know one way or the other, but 1t might 16 be unlikely. 17 q. Now, prior to 1972, was there -- the threshold 18 limit values, did they have an emphasis on asbestos dust or 19 total dust? 20 A. Prior to 1972 the TLV -- the ACGIH TLV, the 21 emphasis was total dust, control of total dust, and more 22 than likely you w in control the asbestos dust. 23 Q. And the refinery 1n Mr. Drummond's deposition _ 1 EXAMINATION 2 BY MR. FROCKT: 3 Q. is it your testimony that there was no -- that 4 prior to 1972 there were no threshold limit values in place 5 whatsoever that pertained specifically to asbestos dust? 6 A. The TLV 1n place prior to 1972 was a measurement 7 of the total dust, and the feeling was -- the collective 8 expertise was if you controlled the total dust that you were 9 measuring to 5 millions of particles per cubic feet of air, 10 you would In fact control the asbestos dust within that 11 overall picture, because what you measured 1n the midget 12 1mp1nger was you measured total dust. You specifically did 13 not count any fibers that were present 1n that sample. So 14 you were measuring total dust using that as a surrogate to 15 control the asbestos dust. 16 q. so 1f the Industrial Hygiene Digest routinely 17 published threshold limit values that specifically said 18 asbestos dust, that what the TLV was for asbestos dust, say 19 1n the 1950s, 1s 1t your opinion that that's not stating an 20 accurate TLV? 21 A. That certainly was the t l v for asbestos dust, but 22 what I'm saying 1s you measured total dust, and you 23 specifically did not count the asbestos fibers that were 24 made respirators available for persons who were exposed to 25 dust of any type; 1s that correct? 24 present. 25 MR. f r o c k t : n o further questions. MOBURG & ASSOCIATES, INC. (206)622-3110 Pages 233 to 236 J/-IC.JUIN VO J / - \ L > l _ l \ l l / - \ L 3 l _ I N , C . /-\L - . 237 X HR. MESHER: I have no further questions. For 2 the record, all objections including to the form of the 3 question and the response and anything having to do with any 4 of the exhibits are specifically not to be interjected into 5 this deposition. Anyone reading this deposition or the use 6 in any other case or any other time should be aware of the 7 fact that there have been no objections based on court S order, and that if anyone intends to use this deposition at 9 any time in any location in any jurisdiction that they need 10 to be aware that all of the objections need to be asserted 11 prior to such use. Thank you. 12 t h e v i d e o g r a p h e r : if there are no further 13 questions, I'll bring this tape to a close and we'll go off 14 the record. The number of tapes used in today's deposition 15 were four. This concludes today's deposition of Ronald 16 Richards. We are going off the record. The time is 5:06 17 p.m. 18 (Deposition concluded at 5:06 p.m.) 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 i \ u n r v x v - i i/A r\i- j 1 CERTIFICATE 2 3 STATE OF WASHINGTON ) 4 ) SS. 5 COUNTY OF KING ) 6 7 I, the undersigned Notary Public in and for the 8 State of Washington, do hereby certify: 9 That the annexed and foregoing deposition of each 10 witness named herein was taken stenographically before 11 me and reduced to typewriting under my direction; 12 I further certify that the deposition was 13 submitted to each said witness for examination, reading 14 and signature after the same was transcribed, unless 15 indicated in the record that the parties and each 16 witness waive the signing; 17 I further certify that all objections made at the 18 time of said examination to my qualifications or the 19 manner of taking the deposition, or to the conduct of 20 any party, have been noted by me upon said deposition; 21 I further certify that I am not a relative or 22 employee or attorney or counsel of any of the parties 23 to said action, or a relative or employee of any such 24 attorney or counsel; 25 I further testify that I am not in any way 1 AFFIDAVIT 238 1 financially interested in the said action or the outcome 2 3 STATE OF WASHINGTON ) 4 ) SS. 5 COUNTY OF KING ) 6 7 I declare under penalty of perjury that I have 2 thereof; 3 I further certify that each witness before 4 examination was by me duly sworn to testify the truth, 5 the whole truth and nothing but the truth; 6 I further certify that the deposition, as 7 transcribed, is a full, true and correct transcript of 8 read my within deposition, and the same 1s true and 9 accurate, save and except for changes and/or 10 corrections, if any, as indicated by me on the 11 correction sheet hereof. 12 13 ' ------------------ 14 RONALD RICHARDS 8 the testimony, including questions and answers, and all 9 objections, motions, and exceptions of counsel made and 10 taken at the time of the foregoing examination. 11 12 i n WITNESS w h e r e o f , I have hereunto set my 13 hand and affixed my official seal t h i s _______day of 14 _, 2003. 15 15 16 16 17 17 18 18 19 19 20 Dated this ________day o f ----------- - 2003. 20 21 21 22 22 23 23 24 24 CHERYL MACDONALD License No. 2498 Notary Public 1n and for the State of Washington, residing at Seattle. 25 25 MOBURG & ASSOCIATES, INC. (206)622-3110 Pages 237 to 24C  DEAN MOBURG & ASSOCIATES COURT REPORTERS 1201 THIRD AVENUE, SUITE 2760 SEATTLE, WA 98101 206-622-3110 / \ I-- 241 PLEASE MAKE ALL CHANGES OR CORRECTIONS ON THIS SHEET, SHOWING PAGE, LINE, AND REASON, IF ANY. SIGN THIS SHEET, SIGN THE ACCOMPANYING SIGNATURE SHEET AND RETURN AS PER INSTRUCTIONS IN COVER LETTER. PAGE LINE CORRECTION AND REASON v u ii i \ x \ . i i m \ L / ^ SEE WA. REPORTS 34A, RULE 30(E) USCA 28, RULE 30(E) REPORTER: CHERYL MACDONALD (SIGNATURE) 242 MOBURG & ASSOCIATES court Reporters 1601 FIFTH AVENUE. SUITE 860 SEATTLE, HA 98101 (206) 622-3110 FAX (206) 343-2272 E-mail: MoburgReport1ng6aol.coM d a t e : August 26, 2003 TO: BARRY MESHER 1420 Fifth Avenue Suite 4100 Seattle, HA 98101 IN RE: JAMESON VS. SABERHAGEN, ET AL. DEPOSITION(S) OF: RONALD RICHARDS d a t e o f d e p o s i t i o n : August 19, 2003 Enclosed 1s your copy of the deposition of the above-named deponent plus a correction sheet and signature page. Please have the deponent read the deposition, sign the correction sheet and signature page. The signed correction sheet and signature page should then, within 30 (thirty) days be forwarded to: DAVID FROCXT 17530 vashon Hwy sw vashon, HA 98070 who 1s retaining the original of the deposition. Sincerely, MOBURG & ASSOCIATES BY: CHERYL MACDONALD, CCR CC: David Frodct Christopher Marks MOBURG & ASSOCIATES, IN (206)622-3110 Pages 241 to 242 JMIMLOUIN V3. OMDdI\.nMV3CIN , Cl ML KUIN K 1 L M A K U 3 0 0.5 105:21 003844 204:19 012414 211:1 012415 013022 013023 013570 013571 013774 013781 212:2 141:2 141:2 133:9, 133:9 80:1 81:4 133:16 013785 80:2 0148 13:12 014848 13:ll 014849 16:6 014871 16:15 015798 125:17, 125:18 016578 166:9 02-2-01069-8 1:7 021 211:2 022 28:17 022172 27:19 022231 28:16 022245 27:23 02414 211:3 06902 2:20I I 3:8, 11:18, 15:3, 16:4, 64:22, 90:21, 94:8, 105:22, 179:13 . 1-29-59 126:17 1-4 5:4 10 3:14, 59:8, 78:13, 78:14, 79:21, 79:22, 90:3, 90:16, 90:20, 96:1, 107:3, 133:15, 153:19, 188:20 100 3:17, 50:23, 50:24, 61:13, 61:18, 61:21, 162:8, 163:9, 188:24 107 2:19 10:19 64:21 10:39 65:2 II 3:15, 44:14, 87:15, 165:2, 204:14, 205:20 11:01 79:9 11:03 79:12, 79:16 11:04 79:19 11:36 99:18 12 3:16, 89:15, 89:17, 182:12, 212:5 1201 241:2 122 3:18 125 3:19, 26:2 126 25:25 128 3:20 12:32 99:21 13 3:17, 100:2, 100:3, 206:7, 206:13, 206:17, 230:23 133 3:21 135 3:22 14 3:18, 122:22, 183:21, 206:10 140 3:23 1420 1:17, 2:15, 242:7 15 3:19, 44:14, 53:2, 105:25, 106:2, 107:3, 125:10, 125:11, 125:13, 197:6, 203:9, 206:10, 215:17 15-minute 91:23, 91:23 150 3:24 152 3:25 153 4:4 16 3:20, 105:19, 128:15, 133:15 1601 242:2 164 4:5 17 3:21, 133:25, 183:21 175 4:6 17530 2:4. 242:17 17th 141:12 18 3:22, 29:20, 135:24, 198:12, 228:4, 234:8 185 4:7 186 4:8 1898 30:23--------------- 19 1:16, 3:23, 83:8, 136:1, 140:18, 156:8, 175:6, 189:17, 197:14, 242:11 1900s 193:7 1930 104:20 1930s 18:25, 19:6, 22:21, 104:20 194 3:4 1940s 19:10, 151:14 1942 119:7, 173:16, 173:24, 174:1 1945 8:4, 8:22, 9:15, 10:25, 11:3, 11:5, 12:1, 12:3, 12:14, 14:7, 15:24 1947 20:15, 23:1, 23:7, 23:10, 150:24, 150:25 1948 6:22, 7:20, 9:21, 9:24, 10:10, 165:2, 165:18, 165:19, 167:2, 168:22, 172:4, 172:10, 173:2, 173:8, 174:18 1949 6:22, 9:21, 10:10, 29:2, 29:7, 29:22, 30:6, 30:12, 49:12, 49:19, 66:25, 67:9, 69:4, 72:21, 74:2, 117:19, 148:2, 174:14, 215:3 1950s 19:13, 38:2, 236:19 1952 148:3, 216:3 1955 152:24 1958 51:19, 150:5 1959 30:6, 126:14, 127:5, 216:2 1960 35:21, 36:4, 36:24, 37:1, 40:19, 45:7, 48:11, 50:15, 53:8, 59:8, 59:21, 60:4, 60:5, 117:13, 147:15, 174:21, 182:11, 204:6, 204:7, 219:7 1960s 26:4, 35:6, 35:11, 35:12, 45:22, 45:24, 62:11, 101:10, 108:12, 109:2 1963 35:6. 106:18 1964 122:16, 122:18, 125:8, 126:20, 126:22 1965 53:3, 53:9, 55:14, 62:25, 63:5, 79:24, 80:23, 81:9, 81:13, 82:6, 82:16, 82:20, 83:2, 100:1, 130:1, 130:3, 131:2, 133:15, 203:7, 203:9, 204:14, 205:20, 206:4, 206:17, 224:15 1966 29:22, 51:19, 186:12, 187:12, 187:19, 187:22, 188:22, 189:5, 234:11, 234:14, 235:4 1967 63:24, 77:6, 124:10, 149:4, 149:18, 150:2, 150:6, 197:8, 197:11, 199:1, 232:22, 233:16, 235:17, 235:19 1968 34:10, 119:4 1969 6:25, 19:16, 24:4, 24:21, 83:9, 119:4 1970 33:10. 119:9, 189:19, 190:7, 209:14, 214:6 1970s 33:5, 83:15, 86:23, 140:1, 168:17, 169:3, 233:9 1971 20:18. 23:1, 119:13, 119:16, 189:17, 191:12, 191:14, 191:16, 192:14, 220:19 1972 72:21, 74:2, 86:9, 87:6. 87:23, 89:9, 89:20, 94:11, 96:23, 97:16, 121:24, 133:24, 142:1, 142:17, 146:5, 148:1, 148:7, 154:13, 160:21, 161:21, 162:5, 175:6. 175:15, 175:15, 175:22, 175:25, 179:2, 184:8, 186:19, 187:22, 187:24, 187:25, 191:14, 207:16, 208:2, 213:13, 221:12, 234:17, 234:20, 236:4, 236:6 1973 95:3, 228:4, 228:8, 231:14, 234:8 1975 136:1, 218:5 1980 208:2 1981 184:23 1982 188:10 1990 44:19 1995 221:12 1:24 132:25 1:32 133:4 161:23, 201716------- 40-hour 201:8, 201:10 40s 6:10, 38:14, 38:15, 94:19, 202:14, 202:15 41 3:11 4100 1:18, 2:12, 2:16, 242:8 42 173:9, 173:17, 232:16 43 16:24 47 23:15, 24:1, 68:20, 193:25 48 11:6. 16:15, 17:3, 123:16, 172:6, 172:25, 173:6, 173:14, 173:23, 174:9 49 7:20, 9:24, 11:7, 16:25, 72:24, 74:6, 123:16, 147:6, 148:14, 216:2, 216:3 4:32 218:24 4:38 219:2 2 65:3, 103:8. 105:22, 133:1, 179:16 20 3:24, 105:23, 107:11, 111:24, 112:12, 150:11, 161:23, 188:21, 210:24 2000 28:11 2003 1:16, 95:2, 238:20, 240:14, 242:5, 242:11 206 242:3, 242:3 206-622-3110 241:3 21 3:25, 152:4 21st 15:16 22 4:4, 15:15, 154:1, 197:15 222 3:3 227 4:9 23 4:5, 141:4, 164:18 231 28:18 234 3:5 236 3:3 24 4:6, 175:3 2498 240:21 25 4:7, 21:18, 24:17, 185:8 26 4:8, 15:15, 189:8. 242:5 27 3:10, 4:9, 12:3, 227:8, 227:23, 227:24, 227:25, 234:8, 234:14 2760 241:2 28 241:23 2:09 153:21 2:25 153:24 3 103:9, 105:21, 133:5, 194:8, 206:21, 206:22, 228:8, 231:14 3-1-65 56:18 30 12:1, 14:7, 77:3, 77:3, 95:4, 95:24, 97:9. 104:8, 105:S, 136:14, 182:22, 201:16, 242:15 30(E 241:23, 241:23 30s 20:12, 23:15, 24:2, 25:7, 69:22 31 140:14, 145:19, 183:19 33 24:1, 24:6. 24:13, 133:14 343-2272 242:3 34a 241:23 38 75:16 3844 56:6 3857 56:6 39 196:17, 197:5, 197:14 3:12 184:1 3:19 184:4 3:37 194:7 3:55 194:10 4 3:8, 194:11, 207:1 40 95:24, 107:11, 111:24, 112:12, 5 3:3, 3:8, 3:9, 7:2, 7:3, 7:17. 90:15, 90:21, 94:8, 119:16, 169:18, 170:14, 215:12, 215:22, 228:7, 236:9 50 104:3 50s 6:12, 38:12, 39:1, 39:6, 39:8, 72:25, 96:10, 151:14, 178:7 51 3:12 514 43:13 52 117:20, 147:9, 148:17, 216:4, 216:7 56 3:13. 233:15 5800 2:24 59 30:12, 126:16, 127:9, 127:21 5:06 237:16, 237:18 6 3:10, 27:16, 27:17, 90:15, 90:20, 228:12, 229:9, 229:14 6-13-45 14:5 60 33:8, 45:14, 73:15, 147:9, 203:24 601 2:11 60s 31:10, 32:1, 32:13, 33:19, 34:22, 34:22, 35:3, 38:2, 38:13, 39:1, 39:6, 39:8. 73:1, 74:16, 96:10. 107:15, 108:17, 119:1, 120:7. 174:23, 223:7 61 24:9. 219:14 622-3110 242:3 63 24:8, 26:17, 33:25, 45:14, 51:8, 53:1, 119:2, 120:8 63rd 123:4 64 24:8, 26:17, 33:25, 35:6, 45:14, 51:8, 120:8, 123:5, 127:19, 127:21, 198:12 65 40:12, 45:14, 51:25, 52:25, 73:16, 81:16, 82:13, 129:9, 129:12, 199:6 65/66 40:15, 41: U , 55:22 66 40:12, 100:22 67 77:21 6700 2:8 68 57:22, 68:2, 120:11, 202:10 68/69 120:14 69 20:24. 20:25. 24:3, 24:9, 24:14, 34:10, 36:22, 57:22, 58:7, 68:2, 202:10 6th 142:17 7 3:9, 3:11, 8:4, 41:8, 105:19, 154:13, 175:15, 200:3, 204:1, 204:5, 229:9, 229:13, 229:14 7-29-63 59:5 70 57:9, 57:14, 58:7, 73:16, 74:17 70-or-so 60:21 700 2:23 701 2:7 70s 6:1, 31:15, 32:14, 32:24, 33:1, 35:4, 46:17, 49:4, 63:25, 98:16, 98:23, 102:7, 107:24, 115:25, 140:5, 221:9 71 21:1, 57:22, 74:17, 84:11, 119:9, 120:17, 120:18, 192:17, 200:3, 203:14, 214:6, 221:18, 221:18, 221:19 72 87:17, 95:3, 120:19, 138:18, 141:13, 146:1, 155:3, 156:8, 162:18, 188:22, 192:17, 213:19, 214:6, 220:19, 221:19 73 84:16, 84:18 74 80:14, 84:18 74-1sh 102:6 75 138:15, 208:13 774 80:14 779 80:6 78 3:14, 166:11 781 81:5 785 80:14 79 166:12, 188:8 7th 142:17, 175:15 ~8" 8 3:12, 8:4, 51:16, 196:18, 199:7, 202:17, 203:1, 204:11, 230:3, 230:23 80s 32:19, 207:25 81 81:24 860 242:2 87 3:15 89 3:16 8:37 1:15 9 3:13, 56:1, 56:2, 89:20, 204:12, 204:22 90s 55:10 98 125:20 98070 2:4, 242:18 98101 2:12, 2:16, 241:2, 242:2, 242:8 98104 2:8, 2:24 99 125:17, 125:18 9:14 30:16 9:28 30:19 A-T 204:19 a.m 1:15, 30:16, 30:19, 64:21, 65:2, 79:9, 79:12, 79:19, 99:18, 194:7 Al 90:3, 90:15, 94:9, 96:1 A10 90:3 A2 94:9 A3 94:9 A4 91:19 abbreviated 16:23 abdomen 131:21 ability 62:17, 172:5, 172:19, 173:1. 173:2 able 29:25. 33:14. 33:19, 40:11, 88:3, 137:2, 187:2. 222:3 above-named 242:13 absence 10:8, 216:16, 225:7 absences 217:10 absolutely 26:10, 64:20, 78:9, 111:19, 113:8,----150:16, 158:7, 218:19 absorbed 66:18 absorbing 32:8, 32:10 abstracts 122:15, 123:1 Academy 122:18, 123:3 acceptable 91:20, 92:18, 94:10, 157:3, 163:2 accepted 118:6 access 198:25 ACCOMPANYING 241:5 according 29:10, 87:23, 89:8, 92:8, 94:21, 109:16, 142:22, 149:16, 157:4, 160:18, 168:6, 171:21, 188:14, 231:3 accumulate 68:14, 130:18 accuracy 94:17 accurate 21:25, 57:15, 97:10, 97:18, 131:11, 134:15, 138:14, 164:13, 203:20, 203:20, 236:20, 238:9 ACG'S 34:11 ACGIH 134:13, 234:20 ACGIH's 214:8 achieved 216:16 acknowledged 187:23, 193:18 acknowledges 193:4 acoustical 222:2, 222:4 across 98:23 act 189:19, 190:6, 190:7, 192:22 acted 51:3 action 239:23, 240:1 actions 45:2 active 107:4, 107:13, 112:1, 112:14 activities 103:17, 120:23, 157:13, 232:18, 232:20, 232:25 activity 91:8, 93:2, 186:17, 224:3 actual 9:18, 25:3, 66:10, 67:14, 74:3, 74:4, 94:20, 210:8 add 164:7 added 83:18. 83:21, 84:12, 84:16, 84:19. 84:21, 179:21 adding 229:5 additional 59:2, 59:18, 59:19, 107:8, 110:9, 179:20, 222:15, 224:21, 235:24 address 187:1. 187:3, 216:10, 219:16, 219:25, 235:3 addresses 186:22 adeguate 76:7, 170:4, 189:20, 190:1, 190:9, 190:14, 190:20, 190:22, 191:9, 192:7, 192:11, 192:19, 192:25 adhesions 58:23 admissions 29:19 admitted 18:14, 19:2 admittedly 70:10 adopted 8f>:9, 86:14, 86:19, 86:22 advanced 219:21 advancement 106:2, 106:4 advise 62:25, 63:11, 180:13, 180:16, 180:20, 182:20, 184:16, 184:17, 185:4. 186:5. 187:22, 233:iO, 233:19 advised 94:23, 155:8, 159:22, 160:7. 180:12, 186:13, 186:15, 218:2, 218:15 advising 94:23, MOBURG & ASSOCIATES, INC. (206)622-3110 Pages 1 to 242 V D . O M D C ItT IM V a C IN , L I M L KUIN K l U I A K U b "109:8. 14 2:20.------ 154:21. 160:10 advisories 145:16 advisors 51:25, 205:5 Advisory 8:6, 8:21, 11:11, 13:7, 14:5, 18:1. 124:24, 125:24, 126:13, 128:9, 167:2 AEO 52:17, 52:20, 101:20 aerated 95:20 affect 213:22, 219:11, 228:14 affected 144:23 affects 131:21 affiliated 29:1 affirm 149:11, 151:20, 223:15 affirmative 76:23, 122:11 affixed 240:13 afternoon 5:16, 209:14 against 62:20 age 81:22, 82:1, 127:14 agencies 104:7 agent 169:22, 170:21, 170:25, 171:17, 171:18, 172:2 agents 17:10, 172:9 agree 9:13, 11:8, 13:4, 16:20, 17:19, 30:24, 36:6, 37:8, 43:24, 44:3, 44:6, 44:10, 49:8, 52:20, 6558::162,, 815:51:11,6, 826:14:,1, 88:12, 91:6, 108:24, 109:5, 111029::189,, 111121::126,, 113:5, 122:14, 123:12, 126:7, 130:12, 152:21, 168:11, 169:13, 223:25, 228:1, 228:20, 228:23, 229:16, 230:5, 231:7 agreed 36:7, 186:5 agreement 186:1, ahead 13:15, 14:17, 17:2, 20:8, 28:20, 41:16, 42:13, 42:20, 56:4, 57:21, 58:19, 61:24. 80:12, 103:12, 105:11, 113:11, 113:17, 121:15, 134:4, 143:14, 160:7, 173:10, 183:25, 203:18, 204:4, 230:2 AIHA 10:22, 134:12 aim 169:24 airborne 66:13, 66:14, 189:23 aircraft 20:14 airy 209:1, 213:4 al 1:8, 242:9 alerted 35:24, 37:10, 44:1, 144:15, 144:19 Allan 20:5, 20:6, 20:10, 20:23, 23:12, 23:21, 38:12, 38:14, 39:1, 39:5, 52:18, 52:20, 52:22, 66:25, 67:6, 67:8, 68:19, 68:22, 69:3, 70:4, 70:7, 70:9. 70:17, 70:17, 71:11, 72:3, 73:20, 74:3, 76:11, 76:18, 76:21, 77:11, 77:13, 77:18, 77:22, 96:24, 101:6, 101:7, 101:7, 101:8, 101:21, 102:20, 104:19, 104:25, 105:5, 109:8, 109:9, 109:li, 109:13, 112:15, 116:7, 117:8, 121:6, 124:22, 126:2, 126:19, 146:23, 147:3, 148:14, 148:19, 174:12, 192:7, 192:9, 193:24, 219:20 Allan's 71:12, 102:21, 148:11, 191:17, 216:11, 216:18 allied 14:23 allow 19:4, 19:8, 29:21, 30:10, 76:24, 122:7. 149:13, 151:10, 151:19, 221:7 allowable 146:10, 146:11, 215:10, 215:19 allowed 74:18, 144:16 allows 146:21, 209:3 alludes 146:1 alone 156:21 already 23:9, 55:24, 62:21, 117:8, 160:6, 160:7, 163:24, 190:22 altered 219:18 although 85:9, 105:18, 106:13, 208:25 Am8e:r6i,ca9:n155,:249,:236,:20, 10:19, 10:25, 13:8, 18:1, 49:13, 49:24, 50:4, 123:8, 123:11, 123:14, 123:23, 124:24, 128:10, 167:12, 201:20, 209:12 amines i68:3 amino 17:12 ammonia 17:11 among 17:10, 60:8, 61:7, 62:10, 64:10, 78:8, 83:21, 103:15, 106:22, 118:17, 120:24, 121:8, 132:1, 144:14, 178:13 amount 14:18, 196:25 amounts 67:12, 69:4, 70:11, 73:25, 131:19, 132:6, 132:14, 215:8 Anacortes 6:2, 51:19, 77:6, 77:11, 77:23, 84:15, 84:17, 91:12, 91:13, 91:15, 146:2, 147:10, 149:17, 150:5, 181:4, 188:22, 189:5, 194:25, 195:8, 195:20, 208:10, 208:17, 208:24, 212:16, 212:21, 212:24, 213:9, 216:21, 216:22, 217:1, 217:13, 217:14, 217:25, 218:3, 218:16, 219:8, 219:19, 223:23, 224:4, 226:15, 227:3. 228:19, 233:18, 235:6 analogy 75:9 analysis 37:23, 50:14, 51:2, 92:3, 103:2 analyzed 136:13, 137:21 anaplastic 59:15 and/or 58:23, 238:9 Anderson 123:8 Angeles 87:21, 87:24, 88:24. 89:9, 121:25, 160:14, 160:19, 161:4, 161:12 annexed 239:9 annual 176:14, 180:4 annually 34:12 answered 29:20, 233:20 answering 61:19, 196:4 answers 18:6. 18:14, 18:19. 54:21. 131:5, 240:8 anticipate 142:13 anyways 61:23 API 5:24, 6:9, 7:19, 10:8, 11:3, 11:5, 14:5, 18:4, 33:16, 33:17, 40:3, 40:4, 40:9, 40:14, 40:15, 40:22, 41:11, 45777 45:13, 46:12, 50:19, 50:23, 51:1, 52:15, 52:23, 53:2, 53:5, 53:17. 63:5, 64:13, 80:23, 81:16, 82:6. 82:16, 99:24, 103:19, 125:9, 126:13, 127:2, 127:7, 127:16, 164:23, 164:24, 165:1, 177:19, 202:17, 203:18, 206:2, 206:4, 216:22, 223:22, 224:1S API's 167:1 apologize 9:10, 212:13, 227:6, 232:12 apparatus 170:1 apparently 56:20, 64:15, 69:23, 98:3, 100:24, 117:24, 129:8, 134:16, 136:7, 136:17, 174:1, 185:3, 185:25 appear 11:9, 16:8, 16:21, 17:1, 52:16, 52:17, 82:5, 94:9, 106:12, 123:10, 123:13, 135:22, 137:6, 149:16, 188:15 APPEARANCES 2:1 appeared 96:9, 106:13 appears 18:3, 56:12, 80:16, 81:12, 94:12, 100:21, 107:4, 123:1, 150:22, 165:2, 185:20, 185:21, 228:1 appended 133:9 appendix 15:2, 16:3 application 120:3 applied 14:22, 68:10, 75:21, 214:16. 235:12 25' appointed 151:25 appreciate 58:8, 61:20. 128:3, 206:8 appreciates 164:14 approach 116:25, 121:16, 169:9, 169:16, 169:23, 170:17, 170:19, 171:22, 172:1, 172:6, 172:8 approaches 171:20 appropriate 64:18, 75:22. 146:25 approximate 139:13 approximately 130:3 April 12:1, 12:3, 14:7, 141:12, 142:17, 206:17, 228:7, 231:14 areas 73:4. 73:6, 76:5, 85:13, 85:14, 87:13, 183:7, 211:23, 216:15 aren't 124:25 Arizona 5:15 aromatic 17:11, 17:12 arrested 133:5 arrived 6:25 art 101:6, 134:18, 134:22, 135:2, 135:7 Arthur 36:20, 36:21, 56:14, 56:24, 57:1, 57:3, 58:12, 60:9, 60:22, 61:8, 62:11, 66:25, 69:10, 69:12, 69:19, 70:21, 70:25, 71:19, 72:7, 72:17, 65:6, 69:21, 96:23, 146:15, 154:11, 154:15, 183:9, 189:16. 189:16, 212:17, 212:21, 213:1, 213:4. 213:6. 216:24 Arthur's 154:18 article 17:22, 24:1, 24:2, 36:5, 36:7, 36:25, 37:5, 37:13, 39:19, 39:24, 40:19, 40:24, 41:5, 41:7, 41:12, 41:13, 41:15, 42:8, 42:14, 42:15, 42:20, 42:21, 42:25, 43:13, 44:22, 44:24, 50:9, 50:10, 60:4, 117:24, 129:8, 129:1S, 129:20, 131:13, 132:8, 132:19, 132:20, 132:24, 182:10, articles 220130::212 asbestos 17:12, 17 19, 21:10, 22:2, 23 20, 24:7, 24:10, 24 U , 24:18, 24 19, 24:22, 25:2, 25 9, 25:10, 25:12, 30 23, 31:3, 31:6, 31 10, 31:24, 32:7, 33 34 26, , 33:5, 34:3, 35:15, 35:16, 35 37 166,, 373:59:.23,39:3260:,3, 40 21, 43:20, 43 20, 43:21, 43 23, 43:25, 44:5, 44 7, 44:11, 44:20, 45 5, 45:17, 45:23, 46 19, 47:19, 47 24, 48: U , ' 48 19, 46:23, 49 52 165,, 615:09:5,, 615:02:51,5, 67 11, 66:21, 69:4, 69 7, 69:14, 69:22, 70 3, 70:10, 70:18, 71 5, 71:21, 73:7, 73 25, 76:16, 76 16, 79:24, 81 13`, 82:U, 85:5, 85 22, 87:1, 87:11, 88 20, 89:U, 90:3, 90 91 2240,, 90:25, 92:10, 9"1:4, 92 13, 92:15, 93 93:21. 94:2, 97 * .99:1, 99:4, 103 i s , 104:3, 104 5, 105:7, 105 18, 106:U, 106 18, 106:22, 106 25, 107:3, 107 4, 107:12, 108 6, 108:9, 108 13, 109:5, 109 19, Ul:12, 111 25, U2:13, 112 21, U2:22, 113 3, U4:14, U S 6, 115:22, 115 24, U7:9, 117 20, 117:21, U S 7, US: 14, 119 12, 120:1, 120 4, 120:24, 121 8, 121:25, 122 16, 122:17, 125 13, 130:U, 131 14, 131:18, 131 22, 131:25, 132 6, 132:12, 132 15, 133:20, 134 9, 136:3, 136 25, 137:4, 137 5, 137:5, 139 2, 139:U, 140 4, 140:24, 141 16, 141:23, 142 1, 142:6, 142 l 142:22, 143 21 144:14, 145 16 146:7, 146 15 148:1, 148 149 2 148:7, 149:21, 154 23 155:9, 155 12 155:22, 156 157:4, 158 l 160:9, 161 16 161:21, 161 168 2101 168:2, 166:16, 170 172 1126 171:23, 173:4. 174 13 175:l, 175 21 175:24, 178 178:10, 178 h 176:20, 179 24 160:15, 180 17 163:1, 163 183:16, 184 l . 165:5, 1 8 6 :4 , 186:14,----- 187:15, 187:24, 188:7, 191:10, 192:2, 192:2, 192:5, 192:8, 192:12, 192:15, 193:5, 193:17, 194:20, 194:24, 195:3, 195:9, 195:13, 200:18, 219080::12,2, 200:22, 201:5, 202 :U, 205:6, 205:8, 205:13, 207:2, 207:15, 207:1S, 208:22, 210:12, 210:15, 213:11, 213:18, 213:23, 214:2, 214:6, 215:7. 215:li, 215:3, 215:17, 216:8, 216:8, 216:10, 216:17, 218:4, 218:18, 218:18, 220:21, 221:3, 221:25, 222:5, 222:7, 222:9, 223:13, 226:4, 226:18, 233:3, 233:17, 234:18, 234:22, 235:3, 235:3, 235:17, 235:22, 236:5, 236:10, 236:15. 236:18, 236:18, 236:21, 236:23 asbestos-cement 2U:21 asbestos-contai n 63:6, 87:19, 157:2, 157:8, 157:4, 163:16, 208:3 asbestos-free 122:9, 159:12, 159:13, 159:24, 160:9, 161:5, 161:8, 164:2, 231:16 asbestos-related 145:1 asbestosis 21:20, 24:19, 24:23, 31:6, 34:3, 62:20, 67:13, 69:6, 69:22, 70:6, 70:12, 70:20, 105:17, U2:24, 114:15, U7:22, 120:2, 120:3, 174:13, 178:21, 200:18, 200:23, 201:6, 210:13, 2U:13, 2U:17, 214:7, 214:14, 215:9, 223:18 ascertain 179:13 asking 23:4, 48:25, 60:12, 72:i, 93:6, 93:20, 111:17, 130:5. 139:19, 157:18, 158:li, 162:22, 193:9, 196:15, 197:12, 205:15, 230:18, 231:24 aspect 32:20, 43:9, 73:2, 73:U, 73:12, 78:17. 104:23, 210:19 aspects 39:2, 69:U, 148:20 asserted 237:10 assigned 227:2, as23s1i:s1t, 220321:2:25 assodate 44:4 associated 32:5, 59:6, 105:17, 106:il, 167:6, 205:6, 210:14, 218:17 associates 54:1, 98:20. 107:10, U0:li, 209:16, 241:1, 242:1, 242:21 association 10:20, 10:23. 29:7, 31:6, 33:2, 33:5, 33:12, 33:20, 34:2, 34:4, 34:6, 34:8, 34:21, 35:14, 35:9, 35:23, 36:3, 36:17, 37:6, 39:20, 39:23, 40:li, 40:13, 40:20, 40:23, 40:25, 4J:b 43:10, 43:22, 44:7, 44:9, 44:12, 44:20, 47:19, 47:23, 49:13, 49:24, 50:4, 64:16, 82:23, 86:25, 106:15, 114:12, U 9 : U , 167:12, 200:22, 201:5, 201:18, 209:13 associations 9:17, U5:3 assortment 6:3 assume 5:18, 62:3, 90:24, 114:17, 161:17, 161:20, 161:23, 162:23, 163:6, 205:15, 221:14, 231:23 assuming 162:13, 215:16 assumption 128:21 assurances 162:U, 162:20 assure 162:8, 163:11 assured 162:2 attach 74:13 attached 125:14, 129:18, 129:20, 134:18, 135:3, 166:8. 175:12 attaching 129:8 attachment 100:5, 100:6, 102:23, 103:3 attachments 56:6, 122:23, 175:6 attempt 48:1 attend 19:21, 19:24 attended U : 1 2 attention U:16, 103:16 attest 176:3 attorney 2:3, 2:7, 2:U, 2:15. 2:19, 2:23. 198:9, 199:8, 239:22, 239:24 attorneys 5:18, 6:21, 7:22 audit 112:19 August 1:16, 58:9, 154:13, 155:3, 156:8. 242:5, 242:li authenticated 28:13 author 17:14, 23:16, 143:3, 179:3 authored 23:15, 175:10, 182:10 authors 37:U, 44:2 av6a8i:l8a,bl8e6:1565,:U8,8: U , 88:20, 155:16, 155:19, 155:24, 156:3, 172:25, 173:13, 173:14, 173:23, 174:8. 198:15, 198:22, 198:23, 199:U, 200:6, 200:14, 234:24, 235:7 Avenue 2:7, 2:15. 2:23, 241:2, 242:2, 242:7 await 92:3 awareness 213: U , 213:23 B background 20:19, 21:2, 24:13, 26:20, ba3c6k:1g2r,oun3d8s:172.207:172:24 backwards 93:16, 93:18 bad U 6 : 9 215:15` bags 86:5 balance 87:13, 157:21, 157:23, 194:22 balances 72:24 ball 171:2, 171:3 barricade 86:3 barricading 156:18 Barry 2:14. 5:15, 5:17, 80:8, 242:7 bbaassiicca1l6l3y:1270,:1022,8:6 38:9, 47:13, 47:15, 143:12, 143:24, 198:25 MOBURG & ASSOCIATES, INC. (206)622 Pages 1 to 242 JMIMCOUIN VO. OMDCKnMVatlN , C. I ML. KUIN K-LV-HAKLO basing 50:11 Bates 27:18 Baylor 8:12, 8:12, 44:19, 53:15, 53:20, 54:12, 54:17, 56:16, 58:1, 61:10, 73:22, 101:24, 101:25, 102:2, 124:22, 126:2, 126:19, 130:4, 130:17, 177:18, 181:18 Baylor's 102:19, 129:19, 130:11, 175:11, 181:19 Bayonne 58:6, 58:14 BB 125:17 Beacon 134:8, 134:10, 134:11 beams 31:20 bearing 50:6 became 102:5, 109:12, 152:22, 196:21 Bechtel 155:8, 159:22, 160:2. 160:4, 160:7, 163:15, 163:21, 163:23, 164:4, 195:4. 195:10 Bechtel's 164:14 be6c6o:m8e, 39:22, 40:3, 66:9, 66:10, 146:16 becoming 154:16, 175:15 begin 154:22, 176:8 beginning 7:i9, 9:24, 31:4, 53:6, 53:9, 63:24, 128:19, 175:21, 194:16, 199:1, 213:19, 228:7 begins 53:2. 53:4, 65:3, 133:5, 194:11 Belding 210:7, 210:17 belief 10:1, 34:5, 35:5, 35:11, 98:7, 108:11, 114:21 beliefs 70:18 believed 14:24, 94:22, 121:6, 121:7, 168:23, 194:20 believes 168:7 Benlnger 2:6, 41:21, 42:16, 49:2, 64:25 benzol 17:12, 168:2 Berry 166:18, 166:20, 167:7 besides 145:6 best 55:23, 62:17, 125:19, 143:11, 159:7, 177:1, 183:19, 218:19 Bethesda 167:10 . better 5:17, 79:l5. 109:11, 117:4, 117:5. 129:16, 134:21, 139:6, 162:20 beyond 6:23, 33:10, 47:6, 67:24, 72:1, 80:20, 81:18, 82:23, 84:19, 88:15, 158:22, 178:7 bibliographic 17:24 bibliographical 15:2, 16:3, 16:10 bibliography 16:21, 20:7 binders 5:22 Biological 123:4 biologically 107:4 biopsies 43:21 biopsy 43:22 bit 18:4, 22:14, 41:11, 101:23, 107:14, 113:18, 135:20, 150:14, 175:8, 184:6, 212:12 bituminous 12:1, 13:7, 14:6, 16:9 blip 186:22 block 107:2 blocks 108:4 blowing 73:10 board 83:15 Bob 225:4 bodies 43:20, 43:21 body 31:3, 48:18, 62:17, 171:10 boiler 71:7 bolts 207:22 book 187:3 books 65:18, 210:1 boots 170:3 borrow 13:2 BOSH 24:10 bottom 11:18, 11:18, 15:3, 16:4, 80:1, br20a4k:e182,112:2061:11 branch 167:9 brand-new 23:6, 23:8, 23:10, 29:16 break 22:14, 23:3, 30:14, 30:17, 64:19, 79:10, 80:4, 99:13, 99:19, 141:6, 141:8, 153:19, 153:22, 183:24, 183:25, 184:2, 194:5, 218:22, 218:25 breathe 180:5 breathed 161:21, 172:12 breathing 71:8, 74:15, 84:25, 95:19, 215:11, 220:25, 221:1 bring 116:19, 142:7, 194:6, 195:17, 207:20, 237:13 brings 134:16 broad 39:5, 40:5, 140:13 broader 73:2 broken 56:17 Brothers 29:4 brought 68:19, 194:1, 194:18 Broussard 59:5 build 34:24, 163:24 building 15:13, 31:22, 102:19, 160:5 buildings 107:23 built 68:1, 209:2, 212:25, 213:5 bulk 105:20 burden 193:1 buying 182:23 Ccaabbllees292:151:22 calcific 58:23 calcium 107:1 calibrated 218:11 camera 113:24 can't 6:4, 13:1, 13:25, 47:7, 59:10, 60:16, 65:15, 74:13, 75:9, 77:20, 81:17, 82:12, 97:25, 98:3, 98:4, 98:6, 99:3, 99:6, 125:21, 139:18, 139:24, 140:6, 178:3, 186:23, 191:21, 203:6, 203:7, 233:8 cancer 14:19, 14:22, 31:11, 32:11, 33:3, 33:5, 34:6, 48:19, 48:23, 49:6, 49:15, 50:5. 106:11, 106:15, 106:17, 106:21, 106:22, 108:13, 109:4, 109:19, 111:12, 114:13, 119:12, 120:3, 131:20, 131:20, 131:22, 132:1, 132:15, 132:16, 156:9, 157:4, 161:22, 167:9, 167:9, 167:10, 167:13, 167:14, 167:15, 167:24, 167:25, 168:1, 168:7, 168:9, 168:10, 168:16, 169:12, 171:9, 187:24, 213:11, 213:23, 214:2, 214:14 cancers 17:9, 107:11, 111:24, 112:13 cannot 157:21, 159:8, 162:7 canvass 181:14 capabilities 32:21, 173:6, 183:7:-----183:11, 183:21, 183:22. 201:25 capability 84:21 capacity 10:2, 10:15, 188:16 Cappadonna 59:6, 60:5, 205:1 carcinogen 17:19, 118:7, 118:14 carcinogenic 12:3, 32:8, 32:10 carcinogenicity 12:1, 13:6, 14:6, 16:10, 32:23, 165:3, 165:17, 167:1 carcinoma 59:5 care 86:4, 113:25, 167:11 career 78:1 caring 174:23, 191:18 Carolina 104:8, 104:16, 104:23 carried 86:19, 201:21 case 18:7, 29:19, 33:6, 33:7, 33:9, 33:13, 34:9, 34:20, 34:22, 34:23, 34:23, 35:2, 35:12, 36:9, 36:10, 36:15, 37:11, 37:19, 37:21, 38:12, 40:3, 41:1, 43:2, 43:8, 43:17, 43:18, 44:2, 45:11, 46:22, 47:16, 47:16, 47:16, 47:20, 47:23, 48:5, 48:8, 48:15, 49:22, 50:2, 50:10, 51:18, 53:8, 54:20, 54:22, 60:17, 60:18, 64:12, 69:12, 70:16, 73:15, 83:12, 85:13, 90:9, 90:15, 92:23, 97:3, 97:9, 100:11, 117:12, 117:18, 122:21, 124:20, 125:14, 133:11, 133:18, 135:12, 136:22, 137:20, 137:23, 147:25, 148:5, 149:3, 150:20, 156:2, 186:12, 194:25, 195:8, 204:23, 205:1, 205:1, 205:2, 205:2, 205:3, 210:19, 214:13, 224:10, 228:11, 237:6 cases 48:2, 48:3, 61:25, 62:3, 85:23, 85:24, 106:13, 155:12, 155:20, 156:1, 160:24, 160:24, 187:10, 204:21, 204:23 category 177:24, 201:14 causation 34:21, 35:19, 36:18, 37:24, 37:25, 169:3 cause 67:12, 69:5, 69:7. 70:11, 70:19, 114:15, 117:22, 131:25, 146:15, 159:11, 159:14, 161:22, 171:9, 174:13, 178:21, 180:1, 213:23, 214:2, 215:8 caused 17:9, 32:11, 32:23, 69:6, 116:6, 156:9, 157:4, 158:17, 213:11, 214:2 causes 108:13, 167:14, 214:14 causing 32:22, 66:5 cc 119:19, 214:11, 214:11, 242:24 CcCeiRl1i:n2g4,22224:122:22 cement 70:3, 88:25, 108:4 cements 107:2, 157:2 central 51:24, 203:4 century 31:4 certain 6:17, 9:17, 32:21, 38:22, 39:2, " 41:5, 42:7,"43:5; 56:23, 70:19, 81:1, 83:20, 86:3, 86:4, 87:13, 97:25, 104:12, 125:1, 125:2, 127:1, 127:3, 127:14, 127:17, 139:14, 139:15, 142:13, 142:23, 146:19, 148:23, 148:23, 149:24, 155:22, 156:2, 162:16, 168:3, 170:8, 172:5, 176:11, 176:11, 186:1, 128060::51,2,19260:27:,16, 202:19, 203:11, 203:21, 204:10, 204:12, 206:3, 206:19, 208:7, 213:10, 213:25, 214:18, 214:20, 216:19, 219:8, 220:17, 221:24, 221:24, 225:22, 225:24, 235:14 certainly 6:25, 11:9, 13:5, 13:9, 16:1, 17:17, 18:8, 20:2, 23:14, 29:10, 31:7, 39:15, 77:1, 80:25, 81:14, 83:20, 88:9, 88:19, 89:6, 94:21, 95:15, 104:23, 104:24, 112:24, 113:8, 121:4, 126:25. 130:24, 132:13, 143:19, 146:5, 146:9, 151:8. 156:8, 156:20, 158:7, 163:20, 165:15, 176:3, 179:4, 180:3, 186:20, 186:25, 188:9, 188:14, 218:24, 220:23, 222:1, 223:25, 226:16, 227:21, 229:3, 229:17, 230:5, 231:3, 232:3, 232:11. 235:11, 236:21 certification 134:13 certified 134:12, 134:14 certify 239:8, 239:12, 239:17, 239:21, 240:3, 240:6 cetera 170:2, 170:4 chain 163:14 chairman 109:13, 109:14, 167:1, 167:5 chance 89:16, 102:22, 134:1, 158:12, 164:20, 166:16, 175:5, 189:10 change 34:12, 119:6, 119:15, 120:14, 120:19, 157:25, 188:2, 201:24, 202:11, 214:5, 214:7, 220:22 changed 20:17, 119:12, 119:21, 119:22, 221:6, 221:7 changes 58:22, 62:19, 62:24, 179:1, chapter 12038::291,, 241:4 37:17, 70:18, 225:25 character 105:16 characterization 84:2 characterize 60:23, 65:23, 83:13, 85:19, 94:15, 102:15, 109:11, 221:8 chart 94:1 Chase 154:8, 154:14 CHB 101:24 Check 206:11 cchheecckkemdar1k8160:11:420 cchheemcikcsal72:1223:2, 172:5, 189:16 chemicals 17:10 Chemist's 10:23 Cheryl 1:24, 240:20, 241:25. 242:22 chest 104:10, 106:4, 131:21, 176:15, 176:21, 177:10, 177:15, 177:19, 177:25, 178:6, 178:9, 184:25, 185:6, 186:2, 186:6 Chevron 125:13, 125:17 chief 8:11, 8:19, 9:1, 9:2, 47:2, 102:3, 102:6, 165:13, 167:8 chiefly 211:19 choices 143:12, 143:14, 143:24, 144:16, 144:19, 145:11, 145:12, 145:17 chooses 119:6 Christopher 2:10, 194:15, 242:25 chrome 171:9 chromium 171:7, 171:7, 171:9, 171:12, 171:14 chronic 59:6 Chrysler 15:13 ehrysotile 211:19 Churg 106:19, 106:19 cigarette 32:3, 106:20 Cincinnati 46:9, 98:19, 223:4 circulars 124:23, 125:23, 126:5, 126:18, 127:4, 127:10 circulate 123:24, 124:2 circulated 123:11, 124:6. 125:5, 126:12, 128:9 circulation 109:9, 125:6, 125:7, 126:4, 126:12, 127:25, 128:12, 209:3 citations 44:14 cited 44:16 cites 17:14 city 14:8, 31:13, 107:23, 108:7, 203:8 claiming 106:17 clarification 61:14, 61:23, 82:9 clarify 78:9, 133:7, 133:17, 194:17, 222:24 classlfi cations 176:11, 176:24, 177:10. 177:11 classified 214:24, 214:25, 226:9, 226:21, 226:25 cleanly 164:12 clear 34:4, 47:18, 113:16, 133:12, 154:16 clearer 113:19 clearly 31:7, 34:20, 43:1, 89:8. 99:12, 114:24, 120:1, 145:20, 169:4, 220100::1292,, 208:19, 216:11, 228:17 clinical 21:20, 24:18. 42:22 clinician 49:10 clinics 183:12 clipped 164:17 close 50:24, 102:16, 103:11, 138:5, 194:7. 202:20, 215:9, 230:6, 230:14, 237:13 closed 31:21, 170:1, 213:6 closely 182:1, 191:2. 217:18, 228:15, 229:18 closer 61:17, 213:7 clothing 170:3 cloud 208:23 cclluutmcphed211315:2:11 Clyde 166:18, 166:20 ccoo--aauutthhoorre2d1:292:21, 40:20/44:25------- co-authoring 105:6 coal 14:23 cohort 224:11 cokes 168:5 collected 85:9 collection 92:3 ccoolllleegceti2ve212:2306:7 colon 106:22 column 43:14, 43:16, 81:22, 211:i3 columns 81:25 combination 32:1, 32:2, 32:9 combined 59:4 comes 10:22, 69:23, 119:9, 120:17, 192:23 comfortable 103:2 c2om2i:n8g, 21:3, 21:4, 100:16, 108:15, 119:2, 120:10, 132:9, 157:9, 193:25 comment 143:11 commenting 41:18, 108:23 comments 56:21, co5m8m:1i7t,tee588:2:61 , 8:21, 10:7, 11:11, 11:24, 13:7, 14:5, 18:1, 34:11, 51:24, 52:15, 68:1. 101:2, 119:4, 120:11, 121:1, 124:24. 125:24, 126:5, 126:13, 128:9, 151:25, 152:23, 153:2, 153:2, 153:10, 167:2, 201:8, 201:17, 201:19, 201:21, 202:5, 202:7, 202:8, 202:19, 203:4, 203:12, 203:13, 203:14, 207:1, 207:5 committees 9:17, 12:20 common 131:20, 132:16 communicate 52:1 communicating 52:23 communications 125:23, 126:4, 126:18, 127:3, 127:10, 127:14, 127:18 community 118:7, 118:14 companies 12:20, 28:25, 50:22, 52:9. 117:25, 135:13, 135:17, 136:8, 136:9, 136:15, 136:18, 137:18, 137:18, 137:19, 137:22, 224:6 companion 156:16 company 9:6, 9:10, 9:10, 9:11, 9:18, 9:23, 10:3, 10:16, 11:25, 12:2, 12:7, 12:11, 13:5, 14:8, 15:24, 17:25, 18:11, 18:23, 18:24, 19:5. 19:9, 19:15, 19:23, 20:23, 20:25, 23:7, 23:15, 24:1, 24:3, 24:14, 24:21, 25:18, 29:2, 29:3, 29:3, 29:4, 29:5, 29:5, 29:6, 29:8, 29:15, 29:19, 30:5, 30:10, 39:23, 50:6, 63:18, 68:20, 69:24, 78:1, 82:22, 82:24, 83:9, 84:14, 84:22, 102:4, 108:20, 124:10, 139:7, 139:24, 143:20, 149:2, 150:2. 150:8, 152:18, 153:1, 163:6, 166:3. 215:1 company-wide 139:1, 139:4. 139:19. 139:21, 139:23, 140:24, 142:1, 146:6 compare 66:14. 96:5, 134:21, 208:24 MOBURG & ASSOCIATES, INC. (206)622= n n r Pages 1 to 242 J r t l'IL J U I'l V O O rtD t.r v n rtV 3 t.iN , 1 1 r t t rv u iN i \ x t n r t r \ D o comparison 4B:4, 48:7. 205:10 compilation 80:18, 80:21, 81:12, 81:15, 123:1 compiling 24:7, compiete 7:11, 14:24, 27:21, 43:14, 140:1$, 169:24, 171:2$, 173:25, 181:14 completed 54:22, 55:2, 224:16. co22m4p:l2e3t,el2y251:2113:2S, 159:11, 161:19 completion 224:25 complex 69:24, 72:8, compliance 143:13, 143:14, 143:25, 144:1, 144:2, 144:3, 144:16, 145:17, 190:6, 216:15, 235:9 complied 148:18 comply 83:20 Complying 227:15 composition 39:3 compounds 12:1, 13:7, 14:6, 16:9, 17:11, 17:12 compressed 107:21 compressing 162:18 computerizing 84:25 concede 226:16 concentrate 210:18 concentration 66:14, 105:22, 215:11, 215:19, 221:3 concentrations 67:19, 104:9. 114:14. 171:8, 189:23, 205:8 concept 212:25, 213:4 concern 69:16, 70:21, 71:4, 71:7, 76:6, 138:1$, 178:15, 214:7, 218:21, 219:22, 219:24, 220:1, 222:8 concerned 23:19, 71:3, 120:12, 120:12, 132:10, 175:12, 178:18, 220:4 concerning 105:16, 131:15, 186:1, 196:12, 198:11, 200:18, 205:5. 207:15, 212:15, 212:20, 213:22, 214:1, 214:19, 216:8, 235:9 concerns 17:15, 31:10, 34:13. 45:10, 122:10, 199:10, 214:6, 222:6 conclude 118:14 concluded 24:17, 49:14. 237:18 concludes 64:22, 133:1, 194:7, 237:1$ conclusion 55:21, 91:2, 103:8, 103:10, 128:7, 206:21, 224:9, 224:20, 225:9 conclusions 168:20, 206:22, 224:10, 224:18 conclusive 108:16, 109:4 conditions 70:19, 158:24 conduct 37:23, 51:6, 239:19 conducted 46:4, 46:7, 104:7, 182:18 conducting 82:15, c1o1n4d:u8c,tor1s78:291,1:21280:8 conference 35:7, 35:8, 201:20 confined 68:15, 115:5, 208:23, 211:17, 213:3 confinement 115:10 confirm 107:8, 110:10, 111:7, 1 5 2 :9 , 205:24,------ 205:2$ confirmed 108:17, 110:12, 119:1, 205:2 confirming 110:15 confirms 110:19 conjunction 50:19, 133:10, 156:23 Ccoonnnneeccttiiocnut102:02:100, 132:7, 137:3 connote 67:14 connotes 70:13 cons 119:3 conscientious 174:24, 219:23 consecutive 27:24, 27:25, 28:1 consecutively 80:2 consensus 33:1. 33:11, 78:7, 119:10 consider 59:1, 187:13, 187:20 considerable 134:18, 196:25 considerably 155:15, 196:25 consideration 39:25, 66:21, 70:14 considered 25:15 consist 52:10 consistency 119:1, 138:7, 138:8 consistent 77:8, 118:21, 138:14, 146:20 ccoonnssttiittuuttees111142:4:20, 114:11, 114:13 constructed 160:14, co16n0s:t2r5u,cti1n6g4:186:11, 108:1 construction 86:10, 86:13, 106:23, 107:22, 108:2, 108:5, 108:9, 115:4, 131:2$, 155:6, 155:7, 160:8, 160:9, 160:11, 160:13, 160:23, 161:9, 163:18, 164:6, 164:7, 164:9, 195:19, 209:18 Cont'd 4:1 contact 184:24, 188:16, 230:6, 230:14 contacts 72:15 contain 155:12 contained 106:25, 215:17, 222:5, 234:13 containing 86:7, 86:15. 107:2, 160:20, 208:22 contaminants 189:23 contemplated 231:4 contemporaneous 55:15 content 215:16 contention 118:11 contents 32:15 context 6:11, 41:6, 41:25, 42:7, 43:3, 113:12 continue 92:2, 1924:12:51,. 9152:16:,201.06:6, 121:21, 155:21, 207:5, 207:8 continued 91:24 ccoonnttiinnuuoeuss 327:0210:11 contract 47:1, 99:12, 163:24, 223:8 contracted 46:10, 46:13, 83:4, 195:1$, 195:17, 223:4 contracting 223:11 contractor 46:3, 87:12, 95:14, 98:18, 147:1, 163:18, 195:16, 223:1 contractor-suppl 194:24 contractors 86:11, 97:25, 98:9, 115:16, 155:8, 159:23, 160:10, 194:21',' 195:13;----- 195:20, 223:2 contracts 223:11 contradict 149:10 ccoonnttrriabsutte13412:1:112, 50:23, 52:5 contributed 11:24. 12:21, 13:6, 17:25 contributing contribution 4141::2210, 11:23, 12:7. 14:4 control 38:10, 38:20, 38:21, 38:23, 38:25, 65:8, 65:19, 65:21, 6656::260,, 68:13, 6888::187,, 14857::42,, 88:7, 145:21, 146:9, 157:20, 157:2$, 167:9, 169:9. 169:24, 172:11, 172:16, 189:20, 190:20, 190:22, 191:3, 191:5, 191:9, 192:7, 192:10, 192:12, 192:24, 193:2, 234:21, 234:22, 235:12, 236:10, 236:15 controlled 236:8 controls 76:7, 144:21, 145:8, 191:21, 192:20 ccoonnttrroovveerrssiyal12011:910:3, 120:13 Convent 212:24 conversation 217:17 conversations 55:8, 217:19 convert 231:16 converted 87:24, 88:24, 122:8, 161:4 convey 145:21 conveyed 132:13, 162:13 conveying 116:6 convince 37:20 convoluted 22:15 Cook 128:18 cooling 213:2 cooperate 228:15 cooperated 137:10 cooperation 170:8 coordinate 228:15 coordinated 54:9 copied 52:16, 52:21, 101:5, 112:17 copies 80:11, 122:15 copying 127:15 ccoorrpkor1a0t6:e2510:21, 12:22, 139:8, 140:2, 145:22, co16r8p:o1r$a,tio19n3:1202:8, 20:1, 27:11, 29:4, co2r9p:6s, 2105:132:5 co6:r1r8e,ct85:8:1,0,8:255:,20, 9:3, 14:12, 18:25, 19:17, 25:10, 25:11, 25:13, 25:14, 36:3, 36:20, 37:2, 37:3, 45:1, 47:10, 51:21, 52:11, 52:14, 52:24, 52:25, 53:22, 54:3, 54:6, 54:17, 55:17, 57:4, 57:16, 57:19, 58:2, 59:25, 60:2, 60:3, 62:2, 62:6, 63:8, 64:1, 67:6, 67:9, 67:10, 71:17, 72:18, 79:25, 82:3, 82:17, 83:10, 87:22, 88:5. 88:21, 88:22, 90:21, 91:1, 91:10, 91:13, 94:6, 97:20, 98:21, 99:6, 101:14, 101:19, 101:25, 102:14, 104:17, 105:1, 105:7. 105:8. 107:16, 107:17, 108:21, 108:22, 124:18, 124:21, 125:1, 126:6, 126:24, 128:22, 129:23, 130:2, "130:7, 130:16,------ 130:2$, 131:3, 131:15, 132:16, 132:23, 136:2, 138:11, 143:1, 143:23, 146:8, 146:10, 146:1$, 146:16, 150:3, 150:9. 152:12, 154:20, 154:24, 155:19, 155:25, 156:10, 157:19, 160:1. 160:21, 160:22, 164:3, 165:5, 165:8, 165:9, 165:19, 166:2, 168:18, 168:21, 169:2, 175:7, 175:23, 183:2. 183:18, 184:18, 184:19, 192:14, 195:4, 195:6, 195:10. 195:15, 195:18, 195:20, 202:15, 206:17, 206:18, 207:7, 207:9, 207:17, 209:7, 209:8, 209:21, 209:22, 211:6, 211:7, 211:10. 211:11, 212:11, 214:21, 214:22, 215:25, 216:2, 216:3, 216:6, 217:4, 218:1, 221272::1140,, 222:11, 223:19, 223:20, 223:24, 228:4, 228:5, 228:9, 229:19, 231:15, 232:6, 234:8. 234:9, 234:11, 234:25, 235:22, 235:23, 240:7 corrected 216:18 correction 238:11, 241:7, 242:13, 242:14, 242:14 corrections 238:10, 241:4 correctly 50:21, 69:13, 92:6, 165:4, 185:1$, 194:19 correlate 104:12 correlation 168:1, 168:7, 168:9 correlations 105:25 correspondence 55:8, 56:13, 100:24, c2o1u9l:d8n,'t21696::1281, 97:23, 186:24, 187:1, 187:4, 225:25 Council 18:11, 18:15, 18:23, 18:25, 19:6, 19:10, 19:13, 19:19 counsel 57:16, 80:4, 128:3, 141:1, 152:12, 202:23, 204:2, 227:10. 227:20, 231:18, 239:22, 239:24, 240:9 count 57:8, 57:18, S7:21, 61:16, 78:5, 134:24, 135:2, 135:8, 135:9. 135:9, 135:18, 173:20, 174:4, 236:13, 236:2$ counted 57:9 counting 91:3, 130:18, 133:20, 134:10, 134:17, 134:22, 135:3, 135:5, 135:20, 136:3, 136:6, 136:19, 136:20, 137:4, 137:4. 138:9, 138:10. 138:1$, 205:11 counts ?7:7, 77:10, 97:5. 134:14. 136:i7, 137:$, 137:17, 137:1$, 173:2 COUNTY 1:2, 238:5, 239:5 couple 7:13, 15:18, 51:14, 64:2, 85:9, 105:12, 135:15, MOBURG & ASSOCIATES, INC. (206)622 194:17, 222:20, 222:25, 232:14, 233:23, 234:6 course 32:18, 77:25, 85:16, 93:25, 97:16, 115:11, 124:1$, 146:2$, 174:18, 189:3, 220:2, 227:11, 231:20 court 1:1, 1:25, U3:14, 144:9, 161:13, 185:14. 237:7, 241:1, 242:1 cover 7:11, 7:12, 13:19, 79:23, 101:12, 211:23, 241:6 covered 15:1, 24:15, 25:23 covers 120:19 craft 226:4, 226:10, 226:13, 226:17, 227:2, 230:24, 231:5, 231:10 crafts 228:14. 228:18, 228:21, 229:6 craftsmen 103:16, 228:23 created 172:16 creating 120:4, 208:23 crew 60:9, 61:7 criticisms 107:6, 110:1, 110:21 crude 157:22 crushing 215:14, 215:18 cubic 105:23, 214:9, 215:12, 215:23, 236:9 Curtis 8:12, 73:22, 101:25, 102:1, 102:2, 102:19, 102:20, 124:22, 126:2. 126:18 curve 97:4 custodian 28:7 cut 172:15, 172:16, 173:10 cutting 90:13, 90:17, 91:7, 95:9, 96:16, 96:21, 97:13, 173:4, 226:18 D daily 217:20 damage 90:9 damaged 85:16, 92:14, 92:23 dash 14:3 data 12:21. 17:21, 24:7, 40:6, 40:7, 45:1$, 48:2, 48:4, 50:22, 51:10, 52:$, 52:7, 52:8, 52:9, 53:16, 53:22, 54:2, 54:5, 54:11. S4:16, 55:1$, 55:14, 56:21, 56:25, 58:1, 58:20, 62:17, 63:9, 63:14, 64:16, 81:13, 81:15, 82:16, 82:19, 83:4, 85:1, 85:1. $1:17, 92:21, 97:16, 97:19, 97:21, 97:23, 116:15, 116:1$, 118:2, 130:6, 130:18, 130:1$, 130:2$, 189:23, 201:15, 202:1 , 202:8 , 202:9, 205:24, 206:2, 206:25, 224:21, 225:9 database 64:14 date 8:3, 18:18, 19:3, 5$:23, 107:7, 110:$, 124:7, 126:16, 129:$, 130:1, 139:13, 140:6, 141:11, 178:3. 178:8. 192:2$, 203:$, 206:25, 228:7. 231:14, 231:17, 242:5, 242:11 dated 9:20, 129:9, 136:1, 147:25, 154:1$. 175:6, 189:17, 193:6, 203:6, 204:13,------ 228:4, 234:8, 238:20 dates 140:12 David 2:3, 2:6, 5:9, 41:25, 42:17, 64:18, 242:16, 242:24 deal 46:19, 182:25 dealing 31:19, 35:13, 36:15, 36:16, 36:16, 36:17, 48:4, 49:20, 62:14, 62:1$. 63:8 187:5, 192:2i, 221:3 DEAN 241:1 deaths 59:4 decade 35:17 decide 38:18, 179:12 decided 53:6, 101:2, 101:3, 202:10 decides 70:1 decision 203:18 declare 238:7 Deere 29:2 Defendants 1:9 define 139:6 defining 143:12 definite 32:2, 32:7, 52:9, 168:1. 168:7, 168:$, 183:10 definitive 84:20, 92:2, 92:21, 104:10 degradation 168:4 degree 24:4, 33:23, 106:1, 106:4. 207:2, 209:21 deleterious 178:12 delivery 155:13, 155:15, 156:6, 157:11 demand 155:14 ddeemmoonnssttrraatbele1033::61,2 11:4, 189:24 demonstrated demonstrates 11819:2:2,5 76:11, 114:6 deny 1$:5, 19:9, 30:10, 76:25, 122:8 , 122:11, 149:11, 149:1$, 151:10, 151:19, 223:14 denying 15:21, 15:23, 76:20, 76:22 department 15:17, 38:2, 39:8, 39:13. 39:17, 39:23, 54:$, 54:9, 54:10, 54:19, 102:12, 102:13, 102:16, 102:17, 116:7. 116:25, 117:24, 125:22, 129:7, 129:7, 129:10, 130:22, 130:25, 131:1, 139:22, 139:22, 142:21, 143:6, 150:22, 154:9, 154:10, 154:12, 163:12, 181:7, 182:1, 189:4, 199:24, 203:$, 217:19 departments 39:15, 142:8. 198:24, 228:14 depending 87:8, 105:24, 155:1$, 176:13 deponent 242:13, 242:14 deposed 5:1, 63:20, deposition 1:11, 5:4, 5:12, 6:5, 7:3. 7:5, 25:17. 26:1, 27:9, 27:17. 28:6, 28:11, 28:14, 29:12, 41:8, 42:5. 51:16, 55:4, 56:2. 61:15, 64:2, 64:22, 65:4, 78:13, 79:4, 87:1$, 89:1$, 100:3, 122:22. 125:ll, 128:1$, 128:17, 128:20, 131:12, 133:1, 133:5, 133:25. 135:24, 140:1$, 149:8, 149:23, 150:11, 152:4, 154:1, 164:18, Pages 1 to 242 J r tl'IC O U IN V " 1/5:3, 177:5,-----185:8, 189:8. 194:8, 194:li, 194:16, 196:9, 196:10, 196:11, 196:17, 197:22, 197:24, 198:2, 198:5, 199:6, 199:19, 200:2, 221:10, 225:18, 225:23, 226:1, 227:8, 234:23, 235:18, 237:5, 237:5, 237:8, 237:14, 237:5, 237:18, 238:8, 239:9, 239:12, 239:19, 239:20, 240:6, 242:11, 242:13, 242:14, 242:19 DEPOSITION(S 242:10 depositions 30:4, 61:16, 61:21 depth 55:7 describe 80:15, 83:23, 84:4, 89:23, 143:11, 212:19 de8s6c:r2i2,bed1065:6:2202, describing 103:14 description 54:19, 84:10 designated 9:9 designation 15:20 detail 7:11, 21:7, 40:4, 40:24, 46:6, 100:7, 102:24, 103:4, 152:3, 179:12, 225:20, 226:6 detailed 69:23 details 69:15. 133:22, 140:3 determination 64:14, 74:2, 78:12, 182:2, 183:8, 191:19, 224:2 determine 29:21, 29:25, 68:4, 73:23, 75:12, 76:12, 83:25, 134:25, 173:3, 181:14, 183:ll determined 7:23, 174:3, 174:15 determining 182:18 detrimental 171:3 develop 47:21, 48:10, 48:22, 120:3, 137:20, 161:22 developed 35:2, 85:25, 112:4, 145:15, 220:23 developing 47:9, 85:1, 86:1, 117:7, 117:7, 189:23, 201:13 development 31:2, 140:7 developments 14:21, 17:6 develops 48:8 diagnosis 112:7 Dlafcun 225:4 diameter 32:20, 134:25 didn't 41:21, 42:10, 43:8, 50:1, 55:7, 57:8, 62:25, 63:4, 69:2, 74:21, 74:22, 74:24, 77:2, 90:1, 92:21, 92:25, 93:18, 109:3, 117:23, 117:25, 119:15, 121:11, 124:3, 126:22, 127:15, 127:22, 127:23, 128:1, 131:2, 147:15, 147:17, 149:2, 149:25, 151:14, 155:23, 157:6, 158:1, 158:13, 164:7, 164:11, 168:23, 171:25, 172:4, 173:10, 174:2, 177:2, 177:22, 187:17, 187:22, 191:6, 193:15, 196:8, 198:3, 198:3, 205:5, 213:4. 213:7, 216:20, i . iM D t l\ n M V 3 C :lN , L I M L . KUN K IL H A K U S " 219:23, 2Z5-T4';----- 225:16, 226:1, 226:10, 233:10, 233:13, 235:3, 235:16 died 51:11, 59:5, . 59:7, 60:5, 152:17 differed 88:17, 96:23 difference 24:23, 72:13, 122:5. 170:19, 214:i5 differences 114:21, 114:22, 208:15, 212:14, 212:20 differentiate 34:20 differently 78:17, 78:18, 83:13 diffuse 58:24 Digest 49:19. 236:16 diligent 29:25, 98:4 dinner 181:9 direct 11:16 directed 140:2, 177:15 direction 176:21, 239:11 directive 1S6:12, 231:15 directly 14:22, 42:10, 226:17 director 8:24, 28:24, 153:3. 153:4, 165:13 disagree 113:4, 116:24, 146:17, 168:19, 169:4. 170:14, 171:22 discouraged 198:17 discovery 43:20, 43:21 discuss 21:16, 36:14, 42:3, 42:19, 113:2, 180:9 discussed 37:7, - 37:15, 39:21, 43:24, 44:8, 44:9, 45:9. 122:2, 169:9, 181:i, 210:17, 212:15, 218:6, 218:7 discussing 21:22, 26:16, 43:5, 107:25. 209:17 discussion 31:17, 40:2, 43:1, 79:i8, 180:4, 201:1. 203:12, 203:is, 208:8 discussions 46:2, 107:24, 115:2 disease 61:2, 106:3, 112:13, 146:22, 178:17, 201:13 dlsease-produtfn 17:9 diseases 49:8, 49:11, 210:14 disks 152:8 disposal 86:4, 158:4 disprove 35:1, 48:3, 48:9, 48:15, 50:17, 51:5, 60:19, 114:9, 205:25 disproved 32:17, 40:22 ddiisspseumtien1a1t:i1o3n, 119:52:05 distillates 168:4 distilling 157:22 distinction 49:5, 171:11, 171:13 distinguished 92:9 distribution 124:23, 175:11 District 221:13 division 11:25, 14:8, 15:11, 15:19, 15:25, 20:13, 52:17, 52:19, 101:13, 101:i6, 101:17, 102:10, di14v6i:s3i,ons18812:8:2, 203:8 doctor 36:19, 40:19, 40:23, 42:23, 46:8, 63:19, 180:23, 181:8 . doctors 53:15, 131:24, 180:8, 181:14, 217:19, 218:15 document 7:4, 7:7, 7:10, 7:13, 7:14, 7:25, 8:3, 8:20, 9:13, 10:5, 11:4, 11:9, 11:14, 11:17, 12:10, 13:4, 13:6, 13:9, 13:16, 13:18, 14:10, 14:16, 16:1, 16:8, 16:14, 16:22, 17:2S, 27:25, 29:10, 51:13, 51:22, 55:25, 56:5, 56:6, 56:7, 56:11, 57:2, 62:7, 76:10, 78:14, 78:i5, 80:13, 80:16, 80:22, 81:12, 81:21, 87:14, 87:16, 88:9, 88:19, 89:8, 89:13. 89:19, 89:23, 90:ll, 92:9, 94:7, 94:13, 94:21, 100:4, 100:8, 100:20, 101:12, 104:24, 105:4, 108:19, 109:9, 110:17, 110:22, 110:24, 111:1, 111:4, 112:20, 113:2, 113:7, 113:7. 113:17, 113:20, 114:3, 114:10, 116:4, 116:6, 116:11. 116:13, 118:25, 120:21, 121:4, 122:13, 122:20, 122:24, 124:6, 126:10, 126:23, 126:25, 127:8. 127:19, 127:2i, 129:2, 133:9. 133:16, 133:23, 134:1, 134:6. 135:22, 136:i, 136:4, 140:15, 140:19, 141:1, 141:6, 142:20, 143:3, 143:4, 143:19, 144:6. 144:12, 145:13, 145:13, 145:23, 145:24, 146:3, 147:6, 150:10, 150:15, ISO:19, 151:1, 151:6, 151:10, 151:14, 152:7, 152:21, 153:15, 154:6, 154:20, 156:11, 156:18, 160:4, 160:18, 162:19, 162:21, 164:24, 165:2, 165:15, 166:8, 166:12, 166:17, 167:21, 168:6, 168:12, 168:13, 169:8, 169:14, 174:25, 175:5, 175:9, 175:25, 183:17, 184:10, 185:10, 185:20, 188:14, 189:11, 204:17, 206:20, 207:7, 227:5, 227:17. 227:23, 228:10, 229:2, 229:24, 230:12, 230:17, 230:18, 231:13, 234:4, 234:7 documentation 10:9, 11:6 documented 71:24 documents 5:14, 5:21, 5:24, 5:25, 5:25, 6:9, 6:13, 19:18, 30:4, 46:21, 51:15, 57:4, 62:4, 62:4. 64:11, 80:2, 83:li, 100:U , 123:24, 124:2-, 124:23, 125:1, 125:2, 125:8, 125:14, 126:i2, 127:2, 127:17, 127:22, 128:8, 128:13, 131:6, 133:11, 138:23, 141:25, 142:2, 143:16, 143:17, 145:20, 145:21, 147:7, 147:14, 147:20, 147:2i, 148:4, 152:2, 153:8, 153:13, 156:16, 156:19, 156:23, 156:24, "157:7, 164:16:----164:22, 164:23, 175:10, 175:16, 175:20, 182:25, 193:11 Ddooeehslne'rt-l8a:r2v2i,s1029::64, 64:7, 68:14, 68:15, 116:4. 121:20, 201:3, 229:3 Dooley 20:5, 20:6, 21:8, 22:17, 22:20, 23:12, 26:3, 38:12, 52:18, 52:2i, 52:22, 66:25, 67:6, 67:8, 67:15, 68:22, 69:3, 70:4, 70:7, 70:9, 73:23, 76:11, 76:2, 84:1, 96:10, 96:24, 101:6, 101:7, 101:7, 101:8, 101:21, 104:19, 104:25, 105:6, 109:8, 109:9, 112:1S, 116:6, 116:7, 117:8, 117:19, 118:5, 118:13, 121:6, 121:10, 124:22, 126:3, 126:19, 146:23, 147:3, 174:12, 174:21, 192:7, 205:5, 205:5, 205:6, 216:1, 216:20, 219:6, 219:9, 220:11 Dooley's 77:9. 166:1, 193:25, 215:3, 219:U Dorr 89:21 Doss 15:4, 15:6, 15:6, 15:8 doubt 24:22 doubts 95:1 dozen 61:24 Dr 8:2, 8:10, 8:11, 8:12, 8:13, 8:20, 8:24. 10:2, 10:6, 11:10, 16:17, 17:18, 31:12, 31:15, 32:4, 33:8, 35:20, 35:20, 36:2, 36:8, 36:11, 36:19, 36:24, 37:14, 39:19, 40:13, 40:18, 44:19, 44:24, 45:9, 45:12, 48:11, 50:14, 53:15, 53:20, 54:12, 54:16, 56:15, 56:20, 58:1, 58:17, 58:20, 59:17, 61:3, 61:10, 98:18, 99:9, 110:1S, 114:23, 11S:2, 117:11, 122:16, 129:19, 130:4, 130:10, 130:17, 151:24, 152:15, 152:22, 153:2, 153:4, 153:9, 165:6. 165:10, 166:8, 166:20, 166:23, 166:25, 167:7, 167:8, 167:23, 168:6, 168:20, 169:4, 170:23, 171:22, 175:10, 177:18, 181:12, 181:18, 181:19, 181:21, 181:25, 182:4, 182:10, 183:3, 183:15, 185:3, 208:8, 208:9, 208:16, 208:19, 209:6, 209:10, 210:5, 212:14, 217:3, 217:4, 217:16, 217:16 draft 175:16, 185:4 drafted 175:25 dramatic 214:15 draw 124:3, 224:8, 224:9 drawer 98:22 drawn 224:18, 224:21 drew 124:3 Drinker 212:6 Drummond 63:20, 63:21, 77:5, 77:20, 149:3, 149-.0, 149:13, 149:17,---196:8, 196:11, 196:16, 197:2, 197:4, 197:12, 197:14, 197:21, 197:25, 198:2, 198:6, 198:11, 199:5. 199:19, 199:2i, 200:2, 200:13, 217:15, 231:22, 232:17, 232:21, 233:11, 233:13, 233:15, 233:19, 235:7, 235:13, 235:15, 235:17 Drummond's 149:23, 196:10, 232:4, 234:23 due 211:18 duly 5:1, 240:4 duplicates 164:21 dust 24:5, 25:10, 25:12, 45:18, 45:23, 67:11, 68:14, 68:22, 69:4, 69:7, 70:10, 71:8, 73:25, 7S:4, 76:li, 76:15, 76:16, 76:18, 76:19, 77:7, 77:10, 77:20, 78:5, 83:15, 83:24, 84:8, 90:25, 92:10, 92:13, 92:17, 93:12, 99:1, 99:5, 104:5, 104:9, 105:7, 105:17, 105:21, 106:1, 106:5, 115:12, 120:5, 138:10, 138:13, 146:7, 147:12, 148:1, 148:7, 161:21, 172: , 172:16, 172:22, 173:2, 173:3, 173:20, 174:4, 174:4, 175:14, 177:21, 178:20, 184:18, 193:5, 197:17, 198:2, 205:6, 205:8, 205:8. 205:9, 205:12, 210:2, 210:7, 211:19, 214:8, 215:7, 215:11, 215:13, 215:17, 221:4, 234:18, 234:19, 234:2, 234:21, 234:22, 234:25, 235:3, 235:4, 235:5. 235:10, 235:8, 235:21, 235:22, 236:5, 236:7, 236:8, 236:10, 236:12, 236:14, 236:15, 236:18, 236:18, 236:21, 236:22 dustier 85:19 dusts 210:23, 235:8 dusty 75:3, 75:13, 76:3, 78:4 duties 170:10, 226:15 E-mail 242:3 Eagle 183:9, 184:23, 188:15 earlier 6:5, 14:11, 27:9, 40:2, 46:2, 55:8, 61:3, 90:5, 94:13, 100:25, 101:15, 107:7, 110:2, 110:19. 110:21, 130:2i, 176:25, 194:1, 194:20 earliest 85:6 East 29:7, 123:4 Eatonville 221:13 Ed 56:13. 58:4, 58:6 edition i29:20 editorial 49:13, 49:18, 49:18, 49:22, 50:1 effect 35:19, 89:10, 89:11, 179:S, 193:6, 200:20, 220:18, 234:14 effective 75:11, 175:15 effects 178112,----- 201:16 efficient 75:15, 75:24 effort 186:25 efforts 77:9, 83:24, 132:5. 188:5 eight i37:18, 215:1 eight-hour 9i:2l Eisenstadt 35:21, 36:8, 36:24, 203:22 either 7:13, 15:1, 22:13, 37:24, 38:18, 47:14, 48:2, 48:9, 51:4, 51:8, 51:11, 58:4, 60:19, 75:20, 76:23, 114:9, 120:2, 124:13, 138:3, 161:9, 205:24, 210:2i, 223:14, 223:20, 233:11 elaborate 179:8 electric 29:3, 211:22 eliminated 161:19, 205:11 eliminating 171:1 elimination 169:24, 171:23 Elm 2:19 emergency 119:23, 120:17, 213:16 Emil 210:10 emphasis 31:18, 232:1, 232:2, 234:18, 234:21, 235:3 emphasized 14:20 employed 131:23 employee 8:16, 8:18, 15:6, 35:25, 36:9, 36:10, 37:2, 44:25, 185:23, 185:24, 215:14, 239:22, 239:23 employees 40:11, 117:6, 144:23, 146:7, 181:1, 182:18, 184:9, 184:24, 185:3, 186:6, 188:6. 189:21, 190:20, 191:10, 198:15, 198:17, 200:7, 217:9, 217:12, 235:8 employer 144:21 employment 106:12, 107:13, 112:1, 112:14, 176:7, 179:17, 179:25, 184:16, 186:12, 187:19, 188:21, 189:6 enclose 108:7 enclosed 25:2, 25:6, 31:19, 31;23. 70:2, 73:6, 108:4, 208:20, 208:23, 242:13 enclosing 133:16 enclosure 69:13, 107:25, 206:20 encompass 179:22 encompassed 226:13 encouraged 198:17 endeavor 135:5 ends 31:21 engaged 103:16 engineer 88:7. 88:8, 88:18, 122:12, 159:4, 159:6, 159:10, 159:19, 159:21 engineering 15:17, 122:3, 136:23, 144:2i, 145:7, 210:9, 210:22 England 25:1 ensure 143:20, 144:3 entire 13:17, 41:14, 51:13, 58:20 entirety 42:3 entitled 36:25 entity 19:25 environment 22:24, 23:19, 25:6, 25:6, 73:9, 73:24. 75:2, 75:12, 76:12, 84:1, 96:4, 167:25, 168:8, 169:12, 200:25, 205:12, 205:13 environmental 17:8, MOBURG & ASSOCIATES, INC. (206)622^ I W Pages 1 to 242 I 52:6, 104:6,--------104:15, 132:11, 167:9, 188:11 environments 25:2, 25:13, 25:14, 45:18 EPA 222:1, 222:8 epidemiological! epidemiologist 47:13, 47:15 epidemiology 50:16, 121:22 equipment 170:1, 170:3, 179:8, 182:20, 182:21, 198:14, 198:18, 199:10 essence 73:13, 85:20 essential 228:15 essentially 53:21, 64:12, 108:23, 112:8, 146:3, 156:21, 169:13 Esso 134:20, 135:15, 136:23 establish 106:14, 143:18 established 31:7, 104:11, 104:11, 136:15, 146:4, 200:19 Estate 1:5 estimation 96:14 et 1:8, 170:2, 170:3, 242:9 tiologie 37:6, 39:20, 43:22, 44:7, 44:20 etiology 59:1, 167:24 evaluate 22:9, 65:8, 6658::2151,, 66:4, 66:20, 68:17, 68:21, 69:7, 76:5, 169:12, 220:25, 223:12 evaluated 77:12, 77:17 evaluating 22:23, 75:18, 75:19, 148:7, 148:14, 221:3 evaluation 38:9, 38:19, 38:22, 65:19, 65:20, 65:21, 68:5, 68:7, 69:1, 76:6, 78:3, 148:13. 178:16 eventually 179:9 everyone 176:5, 176:6, 201:13 everything 6:4, 71:3, 72:4, 159:14, 220:14 evidence 21:20, 24:18, 48:18. 106:8, 131:18, 167:2$ evidenced evolution 120260::24 0 exact 6:11, 40:22, 41:22, 41:23, 47:5, 58:6, 69:15, 94:17, 125:7, 177:5, 178:8, 203:7, 203:24, 223:6, 231:6 exactly 51:9, 83:25, 112:10, 119:7, 121:23, 124:3, e1x3a5m:i1n6a,ti1o4n4:11:811. 3:2, 5:5, 175:20, 176:12, 176:15, 194:13, 196:2, 222:22, 234:2, 236:1, 239:13, 239:18, 240:4, 240:10 examinations 183:1 examined 176:6 example 22:23, 91:12, 159:7, 164:5, 172:11, 172:20, 186:11, 187:2, 212:16 exceed 94:2 exceeded 91:20, 92:18, 93:12, 93:22, 94:10 except 91:19, 176:1, 179:19, 238:9 exceptions 240:9 excerpts 225:19 excess 215:18 * u n u u iM in t u ii y l i n u i l\UN K.JLV_l1MK.LO excessive 67:19, 68:2. 68:4, 70:19, 114:14, 115:5, 115:7, 117:21, 201:10 excessively 75:3, 75:12, 76:13, 78:4 Excuse 16:5. 0:4, 123:18, 132:25, 141:1, 177:2, 187:17 exhibit 3:8, 3:9, 3:10, 3:11, 3:12, 3:13, 3:14, 3:15, 3:16, 3:17, 3:18, 3:19, 3:20, 3:21, 3:22, 3:23, 3:24, 3:25, 4:4, 4:S, 4:6, 4:7, 4:8, 4:9, 5:4, 7:2, 7:3, 7:16, 27:16, 27:17, 28:3, 28:6, 28:12, 41:8, 51:16, 56:2, 78:13, 79:21, 80:5, 87:15, 89:15, 89:17, 100:3, 100:25, 122:22, 125:11, 125:12, 128:15, 133:25, 135:24, 140:18, 150:11, 152:4, 154:1, 164:18, 175:3, 185:8, 189:8, 202:17, 203:1, 204:1, 204;5, 204:11. 204:12, 204:22, 206:7* 206:13, 210:24, 227:8, 227:24, 227:25, 234:8, 234:14 exhibits 3:7, 4:3, 237:4 eexxiisstten1c0e6:1262:10 existing 157:1, 170:6 expansion 83:17, 161:2, 170:5 experience 24:9. 38:18, 52:7, 53:18, 62:15, 68:18, 68:19, 69:18, 70:24, 72:14, 74:21, 75:7, 75:18, 78:11, 85:10, 85:11, 85:12, 96:7, 117:2, 117:23, 174:12, 174:17, 191:18, 203:13, 208:25 expert 122:4, 210:22 expertise 36:12, 62:14, 68:18, 68:19, 69:18, 70:23, 74:20, 117:1, 173:6, 174:11, 191:18, 236:8 experts 24:5, 49:21, expiratory 179:14, 179:16, 183:22 explain 135:11, explained 180:6 exposed 17:7, 24:18, 31:24, 48:6, 61:9, 84:1, 106:24. 146:7, 161:21, 162:6, 178:13, 188:7, 192:15. 201:15, 208:21, 215:14, 221:1, 234:24 exposing 116:8, 116:21, 163:3 exposure 22:3, 32:2, 33:3, 37:9. 43:19, 43:25, 67:18, 4648::140,, 68:6, 70:19, 73:5, 82:11, 91:22, 91:22, 104:5, 104:10, 106:1, 106:3. 107:5, 107:12. 111:25. 112:13. 116:14, 117:20, 117:21, 120:24, 121:8, 131:18, 132:6, 132:11. 132:15, 158:12, 162:3, 169:25, 169:25, 170:9. 170:10, 170:15, MOBURG & T 7 5 : 1 3 ; " 1 7 7 : 7 i----- 177:21, 178:20, 179:25, 180:14, 180:17, 184:18, 185:5, 186:14. 187:15, 190:18, 192:12, 200:18, 200:22, 201:5, 201:8, 201:11. 210:15, 213:21, 215:17, 216:9, 218:18, 222:9 exposures 20:14, 65:9, 68:2, 77:13, 85:4, 85:6, 86:1, 115:5, 115:7. 131:25, 145:4, 146:9, 168:2, 168:16, 178:22, 186:4, 189:21, 189:24, 190:20, 129011::1100,, 191:15, 208:16, 212:15, 214:3, 214:17. 223:13 expressing 219:22 extend 184:8 extended 155:15, 156:6, 157:11 extra 41:9, 80:6, 87:2, 191:4, 220:16 extreme 197:19 Exxon 225:5 fabric 25:4 face 11:9 facilities 170:4, 170:5, 177:23, 209:16 facility 194:25, 195:7, 195:20, 212:20 factors 17:8, 25:15, 67:25, 96:8 factory 17:7 facts 28:19, 28:23, 105:16, 117:14 fair 12:9, 16:11, 26:21, 84:2, 114:19 fairly 131:19, 132:18, 135:5, 140:13, 140:14, 167:13, 209:4, 218:5 ffaalilth209:41:81,9, 2915::123 fame 106:20 familiar 12:19, 15:15, 23:14, 35:7, 37:18, 37:18, 40:4, 50:9, 67:2. 69:22, 114:17, 133:21, 173:13, 173:23, 180:25, 185:7, 189:6, 196:19, 196:21, 207:18, 207:23, 216:4 fancy 172:7 fare 136:7, 136:10 fashion 78:23 fast 120:9 faster 13:3 fats 171:10, 171:12 FAX 242:3 February 6:5, 6:7, 27:14, 55:9, 100:14, 136:1 federal 167:16, 175:14, 189:19, 190:7 feel 57:21, 62:14, 75:22, 103:2, 117:3, 117:23, 117:25, 119:10, 186:2, 196:4, 225:8, 232:10 feeling 236:7 feels 120:13 felt 36:13, 72:25, 77:23, 96:11, 106:14, 190:4, 192:9 felts 106:25 fiber 25:3, 31:24, 32:2. 32:7. 32:10, 32:1$, 32:21, 33:$, 97:5, 115:6. 135:5, 137:1, 210:19, 210:20 fiberglass 87:10 fibers 25:3, 91:3, 91:4, 91:21, 91:21, 92:24, 105:18, 105:20, 119:19';----134:24, 135:1, 136:20, 136:21, 137:4, 137:5. 137:5, 138:10, 138:13, 154:23, 205:11, 205:13, 214:10, 214:11, 214:11, 236:13, 236:23 fibrosis 58:24, 58:25, 67:13, 69:5, 70:12, 215:9 fibrous 106:24, 211:19 field 14:22, 15:1, 49:22, 104:11, 210:3. 210:6, 220:21 Fifth 1:17, 2:7, 2:15, 2:2$, 242:2, 242:7 file 98:22, 124:11, 124:15 files 46:17. 64:3, 77:22, 80:19, 98:4. 98:21, 214:21, 226:1$ filled 119:4 filter 74:18 filters 95:16 financially 240:1 finding 107:10, 110:11, 111:2$, 180:2 findings 56:23, 62:22, 82:9, 82:10, 105:1$, 106:10, 107:9, 110:15, 186:2, 186:6, 208:8, 209:17, 217:7, 217:11, 217:16, 218:7, 218:7 fine 42:1, 67:23, 71:3, 80:9, 80:9, 114:1, 122:24, 232:2 fingertips 77:1 finish 15:23, 34:18, 128:4, 177:2, 187:9, 196:5, 225:6 finished 31:22, 34:16, 42:17 finishing 181:23 fire 85:16, 90:8, 92:14 fire-damaged 85:15. 90:18, 92:9, 92:16, 92:23, 94:5 fireproofing 108:10 firm 9:19, 75:9 firsthand 60:16 Fischbach 185:22 fit 34:12, 88:13, 156:2 fitting 90:13, 90:17, 91:7, 95:9, 96:17. 96:22, 97:13 five 42:14, 56:19, 59:3, 91:21, 119:19, 119:19, 135:13, 186:7, 189:1. 214:8, 214:11, 214:12 five-minute 194:4 five-year 53:9 fix 1$S:16 fixed 134:19, 135:14, 136:22, 137:7 flange 207:21, 226:18 flanges 207:20 flexible 172:24 floor 15:16, 107:25, 108:8 flooring 108:3 floors flurry 1252:11:84, 108:1 fly 172:3 focus 107:22, 150:12, 192:4, 194:2 focused 103:5. 103:10, 103:15, 141:16, 141:22 follow 69:2. 220:13 follow-up 59:2, 219:5, 233:23, 234:6 followed 163:8 follows 5:2, 169:23, 198:11, 199:6 foot 10$:23, 214:9 ASSOCIATES, INC. C206)622 footnote 212:5 force 189:20 forced 179:14. 179:16, 183:22 foregoing 239:9, 240:10 foreman 35:25, 59:7 formal 27:11, 33:23, 38:22, 114:9, 224:24, 225:8 formally 53:4, 226:9 forms 68:7 forth 120:11, 139:9, 157:1, 161:6 forward 70:15, 199:1 forwarded 53:17, 242:15 forwarding 186:22, 187:1 foundation 25:21, 25:21, 26:4, 26:16, 26:23, 27:5, 28:8, 28:9, 28:19, 28:23, 28:24, 29:2, 29:9, 29:11, 29:1$, 29:22, 30:2, 30:3, 30:6, 30:11, 99:9, 151:22, 152:1, 152:23, 153:9, 153:17 frame 6:23, 18:18, 22:25, 46:4, 46:13, 46:25, 47:4, 55:23, 72:19j 107:20, 108:16, 130:8, 139:18, 145:14, 145:18, 186:18, 187:12, 187:16, 187:21. 213:20, 218:13, 218:20, 220:19, 223:7, 229:1, 229:3, 229:4 frames 96:11 Frank 73:21 frankly 235:14 free 107:3, 107:5, 109:2, 109:25, 111100::72,0,11101:11:21,6, 111:16, 121:25, 155:10 Frenkel 2:18, 27:19, 27:21, 34:16, 41:9, 41:17, 42:5, 48:25, 59:12, 64:18, 78:24, 79:3, 103:8, 105:14, 111:3, 113:6, 113:20, 123:21, 126:14, 128:24, 131:9, 131:12, 141:1$, 181:23, 193:8, 206:11, 218:2$, 222:17, 222:19, 232:7 frequency 220:22 frequent 58:25 frequently 107:12, 111:25. 112:14 Frockt 2:3, 3:3, 5:6, 5:9, 7:1. 7:17, 13:1, 1$:19. 16:6, 27:16, 27:2$, 28:1, 30:14, 30:21, 41:10, 41:1$, 41:16, 51:14, 57:16, 57:20, 64:20, 79:1, 79:7, 80:8, 80:10, 93:17, 99:1$, 99:16, 99:23, 105:15, 113:8, 113:16, 113:21, 113:2$, 125:10, 126:15, 128:5, 128:23, 131:8, 131:10, 133:7, 141:3, 141:10, 141:14, 141:17, 141:20, 141:24, 152:7, 152:11, 153:19, 154:2, 154:4, 164:19, 183:25, 193:9, 194:4, 194:18, 196:7, 196:10, 196:15, 196:17. 197:1. 197:4, 197:5, 197:12, 197:20, 197:21, 197:24, 198:5, 198:9, 198:20, 199:$. 199:5, 199:18, 199:24, 200:1, 200:9, 200:12, 200:17," 202:16,----202:25, 203:21, 204:4. 204:10, 204:20, 205:4, 205:14, 206:3, 206:19, 207:14, 210:13, 211:5, 211:9, 213:10, 213:25, 214:18, 215:2, 216:19, 220:17, 222:18, 222:20, 222:23, 227:6, 227:11, 231:20, 232:8, 233:22, 234:4 234:7, 236:2, 236:2$, 242:16, 242:24 Frockt's 214:4 front 28:4, 41:19, 103:7, 150:25, 165:2$, 167:3, fu2l0l4:1250,:12,062:071:10, 240:7 full-time 226:25 function 104:13, 176:1, 176:13, 179:4, 179:6, 179:17, 179:19, 179:20, 180:12, 180:24, 181:15, 182:19, 182:23, 183:4, 183:6, 218:6 fuzzy 0:18 G44 129:4 gas 157:17, 158:17, 159:15 gaseous 197:18, 197:19 gasket 207:18, 207:21, 208:4 gaskets 207:23, 208:6 gastrointestinal 59:5 gather 36:9, 51:6, 68:15, 101:1, 130:22, 224:11 gathered 40:5, 51:10. 57:1, 82:20 gathering 45:12, 52:8, 53:21, 54:5, 54:10, 54:15, 55:13, 55:14, 57:25, 62:17, 63:14, 82:15, 100:24 gatherings 21:7 gave 19:2, 80:5, 141:17 Gene 102:5, 185:21 general 17:6, 39:14, 45:9, 49:1, 49:3, 49:4. 84:9, 92:1$, 103:19, 114:18, 132:1, 147:18, 153:16, 156:3, 177:8, 190:4, 193:12, 196:9. 196:13, 196:14, 198:2, 206:6, 220162::52,2, 216:4, 216:7, 218:8. 218:9 ggeenneerraalliizzeed16926::23 generally 65:24, 67:3, 114:20, 117:2, 143:9, 200:6, 201:7, 215:5, 215:6, 217:7 generate 68:14, 116:18 generated 205:23, 205:25 generating 37:22 gentleman 166:22 get-togethers 21:7 girders 31:20 given 15:2, 16:3, 16:11, 18:18, 28:11, 31:7, 96:3, 112:1$. 138:23. 162:11, 213:22, 233:4 gives 14:21 living 100:17, 103:2, 120:2, 139:12, 159:7, 228:10 glanced 18:8, 103:1, -3110 Pages 1 to 242 W V II 152: Z-------------glass 106:25 gloves 170:3 goal 39:12, 39:16, 158:6 ggooaelss1117:16:,2068:11, 68:18, 69:24, 72:9, 80:14, 81:17, 91:19. 110:8, 143:10, 159:7, 160:15, 169:8, 169:11, 176:9 gone 5:14, 38:13, 38:15, 56:10, go8o1:d1s5,2111:7282:7 gotten 24:4, 125:8, 135:19, 169:6 governing 169:15 government 167:16, go20v1e:r2n3m,ent2a0l8:2201:20, 202:2, 221:24 graduate 24:4, 31:9, 49:21, 212:li Grant 185:23 greater 119:19, 214:11 grinding 70:3 Gross 210:5 group 31:16, 48:14, 50:18, 50:20. 59:4, 184:2s, 201:18, 209:8. 209:10, 211:18 groups 139:14, 139:15 guess 6:4, 6:6, 6:21, 16:24, 20:15, 22:13, 23:2, 24:3, 27:3, 28:23, 29:7, 31:11, 32:3, 32:8, 32:12, 33:7, 33:8. 33:19, 38:8, 48:21, 55:7, 55:9. 56:16, 56:22, 60:17, 61:15, 66:11, 66:15, 69:16, 76:22, 78:9, 80:19, 82:8, 85:2, 102:6, 106:19, 111:17, 117:19, 119:13, 119:14, 123:2, 137:10. 138:22, 139:12, 143:11, 149:22, 154:11, 156:4, 186:4, 219:13, 224:22 guidelines 144:2, 175:20 guinea 116:22 Gulf 36:10 guys 13:2, 99:13, 116:13, 141:17, 163:12, 185:25, 234:5 H hair 106:25 half 61:24, 202:6 Hammond 32:4, 32:4, 106:19 handed 140:22 handful 188:20 handled 63:18 handling 226:17, 230:4. 230:11 handwriting 81:19 handwritten 81:12 happened 45:13, 85:17, 95:4, 95:13, 112:10, 156:5, 162:12 happens 154:18 hagj>ygl41:9, 202:21, harm'161:22 harmful 65:9, 163:3, 180:14, 193:6, 193:18 Harold 56:14. 129:6 Hatch 24:8, 210:1, 221102::166,, 221120:8:18, haven't 78:24 having 5:1, 60:22. 17240:9:.2,851:254,:111,02:16, 158:12, 161:22, 178:13, 193:5, 203:11, 205:19, 232:14, 237:3 hazard 23:20, 24:20, ^ r x u u iv i ir\vju.ll i C, I M L KUIN KJLLHAKUb 24:22, 25:8; '30:24, 48:12, 48:19, 6468::71,9, 6468::82,3,66:696,:4, 66:9, 66:10, 66:20, 67:15, 67:15, 67:18, 67:25, 68:17, 68:21, 69:7, 70:6, 70:13, 76:5, 96:2, 99:4, 106:17, 112:21, 112:25, 113:3. 114:4, 114:11, 117:10, 120:1, 140:25, 142:19, 142:22, 142:25, 145:16, 180:7, 187:24, 207:2 hazardous 75:3, 75:13, 76:13, 78:4, 87:3, 132:22, 170:16, 186:15, 189:21, 190:2, 190:21 hazards 21:10, 22:10, 22:23, 31:3, 45:5, 45:23, 50:15, 66:1, 71:21. 83:15, 114:7, 139:2, 142:1, 146:15, 148:7, 193:5, 233:17 he's 9:9. 34:16, 39:24, 41:3, 44:3, 44:4, 49:2, 67:20, 93:6, 109:1, 109:5, 109:7, 110:4, 111:10, 113:7, 148:19, 154:17, 154:25, 155:1, 155:2. 167:4, 171:20, 181:23, 192:24, 228:22, 229:25 health 12:13, 22:10, 22:23, 23:20, 24:20, 24:22, 25:8, 25:20, 28:8, 30:2, 30:23, 33:22, 39:9, 39:11, 39:25, 40:10, 51:24, 52:6, 52:16, 52:17, 52:19, 70:14, 75:13, 76:14, 78:4, 101:13, 101:16, 101:17, 102:10, 103:16, 104:7, 111291::215,, 112220::1205,, 128:8, 130:5, 130:19, 140:25, 142:11, 142:19, 142:22, 142:25, 146:3, 167:12, 171:4, 178:2, 178:12, 178:24, 183:5, 188:8, 189:19, 190:7, 192:22, 193:13, 203:4, 203:8, 207:1, 207:6, 207:8. 207:10, 207:13. 218:16 heard 15:19, 21:12, 55:9, 60:6, 133:19, 167:19 heat 85:16, 87:12, 194:22, 202:9 heating 157:22 heavy 17:11, 168:3, 171:14 held 142:17 helped 172:11, 175:16, 179:3 helper 226:5, 226:11, 226:13, 226:17, 229:18, 229:18, 230:7. 230:7, 230:13, 230:15, 230:25, 231:5, 231:10 helpers 227:2, 229:11, 229:12, 230:1, 230:3, 230:10 helpful 171:1, 171:4 henceforth 155:9. 159:23 Hendricks 100:23, 206:14, 206:15, 206:15, 206:16 Herb 202:6 here's 135:22 hereby 239:8 herein 5:1, 239:10 Hereof 238:11-----hereunto 240:12 Herschel 84:16, 84:19. 148:12, 220:12 hexavalent 171:9 hey 116:8, 116:13 Hi 194:15 highest 137:24, 138:18 highly 31:24, 59:15 highway 2:4, 120:9 himself 104:25 hindsight 97:9 historical 103:25 histories 50:25, 51:1 history 37:10, 43:19, 44:1, 56:23, 117:6 Hobson 84:16. 220:13 hold 47:14, 159:12 HOLDINGS 1:8, 2:22 holds 92:24 hopefully 141:11 Horace 210:7 hoses 172:14, 172:18 hospital 182:22, hospitals 183:12 hour 99:14 hours 209:17 housekeeping 190:1, 190:8, 190:12. 190:14. 191:2, 191:7, 192:23, 192:25 Houston 36:22, 45:11, 54:9, 54:11, 56:15, 84:16, 129:6, 129:7, 130:25, 131:2, 142:17, 154:10, 154:17, 163:7, 181:25 Howard 54:4 however 11:8, 37:10, 44:1. 58:25, 104:5, 106:18, 124:7, 131:24. 231:14 Hueper 16:17. 16:18, 17:18, 17:18, 167:8, 167:23, 168:6, 168:20, 169:4, 170:23, 171:22 human 193:18 Hwy 242:17 hydrocarbons 12:3 hygiene 6:1, 10:19, 20:11, 20:13, 20:16, 20:17, 23:9, 25:21, 26:4, 26:16, 26:23, 27:4, 28:9, 28:24, 29:1, 29:8, 29:11, 29:15, 29:22, 30:3, 30:6, 30:11, 31:5, 38:1, 38:7, 38:9, 38:17, 39:7, 39:13, 39:22, 45:10, 49:19, 50:7, 65:8, 66:24, 68:23, 75:16, 78:2, 79:24, 87:3, 98:21, 99:9, 102:12, 102:15, 116:7, 118:7, 118:13, 118:18, 142:11, 144:25, 147:4, 147:24, 151:22, 152:1, 152:23, 153:8, 153:17, 167:11, 173:5, 188:11, 193:12, 195:16, 209:13, 215:3, 236:16 hygienist 10:13, 22:8, 22:22, 23:6. 23:8, 52:13, 65:11, 75:2, 84:12, 84:13, 101:9, 108:20, 159:20, 170:12, 220:9 hygienists 65:25, 78:8, 119:8, 195:14, 201:21 hypothesis 34:24. . 34:25, 35:2, 36:16, 37:22, 40:8, 47:9, 47:22, 47:22, 47:24, 48:8, 48:10, 48:14, 48:22, 50:17, 51:5, 60:20, 62:13, 114:9, 116:18, 205:23, " 205725; 224712----hypothetical 121:14, 162:25, 163:5, 225:8 idea 8:15, 15:7, 29:14, 60:25, 81:19, 88:23, 98:10, 129:25, 153:12, 163:20, 182:7, 193:17 ideal 158:15 idealized 169:9, 169:16, 170:17, 170:19, 171:19, 172:1. 172:6 identification 169:22, 170:21, 170:24, 171:17, 171:18, 172:2 identified 50:24, 56:24, 142:18, 143:4, 162:25, 165:7. 187:14 Identifies 43:2, 126:2 identify 51:22, 56:5, 78:15, 81:17, 87:16, 89:19, 100:19, 122:24, 129:1, 134:6, 154:6, 172:8, 175:8, 185:20, 189:13, 203:2 IHs 181:6, 190:10, 191:4, 195:17, 216:12 II 20:13 ileitis 59:6 ill 146:16, 178:2, 201:16 illegible 80:25 illnesses 145:1 immediately 67:24, 86:16, 155:12 immense 14:18 impact 142:13 impervious 170:3 impinger 74:12, 74:13, 95:18, 236:12 implemented 202:14 implies 229:17, 229:22 imply 191:6. 228:17, 229:20, 230:6, 230:16, 231:8, 231:9 impossible 150:7, 226:21, 226:23 impractical 144:22 Improve 201:25 improved 169:25 improvement 191:8 Inaccurate 137:12 Inadequate 207:1 Inaudible 67:21 Incidence 103:14, 106:15, 106:21, 131:22, 167:25, 168:1, 168:9, 168:10 incidentally 54:21 incidents 31:11 Include 143:13, 143:14, 143:25, 144:19, 176:15, 235:22 Included 59:2, 104:19, 153:2, 177:24, 184:25 Includes 131:13 including 69:25, 106:24, 168:9, 175:11, 194:24, 237:2, 240:8 incoming 101:16, 149:4 inconclusive 224:22, 225:2 Iinnccoorrppoorraatteed14105:21:611, 128:18, 132:4 incorrect 148:8, 225:21 increase 131:25 Increased 106:15 Incumbent 39:22 index 228:6 India 29:7 indicate 8:20, 9:14, 12:6, 13:5, 17:22, 30:4, 45:22, 64:4, 82:i9, 83:12, 88:3, 88:9, 97:17, 98:25, 126:10, 126:25, 142:6, 148:5, 148:6, 152:22. 165:20, 167:21, 173:19, 173:22, 178:11 indicated 62:9, 77:6, 99:4, 101:15, 133:8, 133:13, 145:17, 150:21, 156:25, 167:23, 167:24, 169:7, 200:6. 201:8. 209:20, 211:8, 216:11, 222:8, 238:10, 239:15 indicates 10:9, 88:19, 102:10, 127:13, 152:25, 178:15 indicating 5:23, 17:18, 168:12, 204:21, 219:19 Indication 61:12, 82:5, 82:21, 151:4 Indications 31:10 individual 9:5, 10:2, 59:9, 63:17, 174:24, 180:9, 220:25 Individually 1:4, 10:15 individuals 47:3, 50:24, 51:1, 56:23, 85:10, 142:8, 176:23, 176:24, 187:13, 188:19, 224:9 industrial 6:1, 10:13, 10:19, 12:13, 17:6, 17:15, 20:11, 20:13. 20:16, 20:17, 22:8, 22: 10, 22: 22, 22:23, 23:6, 23:8, 23:9, 23:20. 25:8, 25:20, 25:21, 26:3, 26:16, 26:23, 27:4, 28:8, 28:9, 28:24, 29:1, 29:8, 29:11, 29:15, 29:22, 30:2, 30:3, 30:5, 0:11, 31:5, 33:22, 38:1, 38:7, 38:9, 38:17, 39:7, 39:13, 39:22, 45:10, 49:19, 50:7, 52:13, 65:7, 65:11, 65:25, 66:24, 68:23, 75:2, 75:16, 78:2, 78:8, 79:24, 84:12, 84:13, 87:3, 98:21, 99:9, 101:9, 102:12, 102:15, 106:17, 108:20, 112:22, 116:7, 118:6, 118:13, 118:18, 119:8, 128:8, 142:11, 144:25, 147:4. 147:24, 151:21, 152:1, 152:23, 153:8,153:17. 159:19, 167:11, 170:1, 170:12, 173:5. 178:24, 188:11, 193:12, 193:12, 195:14, 195:16, 201:21, 209:13, 210:9, 215:3, 220:8, 236:16 industrially 169:23 Industries 14:23, 117:23, 120:13, 120:16, 120:20, 201:24, 211:18 Industry 35:14, 52:6, 70:24, 72:15, 110260::213,, 112009::1127,, 120:15, 131:23, 170:8, 171:14, 202:4 infer 130:9 influence 201:24 Information 11:20, 12:21, 14:3, 14:4, 14:9, 14:19, 19:4, 19:8, 22:7, 29:16, 29:20, 30:9, 51:7, 52:9, 54:8, 55:11, 56:15, 61:18, 65:6, 73:14, 76:24, 77:2, 96:2, 100:25, 101:1, 115:11, 119:2, 120:8, 122:7, 123:9, 124:5 128:6, 132:9. 132:22, 139:12, 139:19, 139:25 149:9, 149:12, 151:9, 151:13, 151:18, 165:21, 169:6, 177:5, 179:23, 195:0, 203:11, 216:21 Ingredients 75:7 inhalation 120:23, 121:8, 211:18 Inhale 117:9 inhaled 67:11, 69:4, 70:10, 215:7 inhaling 73:25 initial 107:11, 111:24, 112:12 initially 32:1, 108:15, 214:12, 219:13 initials 52:17, 101:22, 129:5 initiate 169:21, 170:20 Initiated 179:2, 181:13, 182:5, 183:4, 183:15, 216:1 initiating 191:14 initiation 177:15 input 202:1 Inquirer 129:10, 129:11, 129:14 ig ui rj 129:19, inside 70:2, 70:22, 71:2, 71:17 insignificant 40:6, 60:24, 120:25, 121:9 insisting 86:12 insofar 11:11, 22:9, 102:11 inspecting 146:24 inspections 191:1 inspector 192:22 Inspectors 192:22 inspired 98:8, 98:10 install 155:9, 159:24 Installation 155:10 Installations 87:8 instance 68:12, 88:13 Instances 27:10, 86:16 Instead 52:25. 63:6 institute 5:24, 6:20, 8:7, 9:15, 9:24, 10:25, 13:8, 18:1, 123:9, 123:11, 123:15, 123:24, 124:25, 128:10, 167:10, 167:13, 167:13 Instituting 139:7 Instruct 170:6, 230:3, 230:24 instructed 139:10, 163:25, 198:19, 198:21 instructing 230:10, 230:13 instruction 158:17, 212: 10, 212:12 instructions 31:7, 162:10, 162:24, 199:14, 199:15, 233:4, 241:6 instructor 221:17 instrumentation 38:20. 68:8, 172:7 insufficient 40:7, 40:7 insulating 31:11, 31:20, 60:9, 61:7, 71:5. 107:1, 107:2. 120:23, 121:10, 157:13, 157:19, 209:18, 209:19, 232:18, 232:20, 232:24 insulation 31:24, 63:1, 69:19, 70:1, 70:20, 71:1, 71:6, 72:10, 85:15, 85:18, 86:2, 86:10, 86:13, 86:15, 87:7, 87:19, 87:25, 88:4, MOBURG & ASSOCIATES, INC. (206)622= 3 m r Pages 1 to 22 "->/vn * _> k/nui.r\nn\]tN C. I ML I KUN RICHARDS 88:11, 8:25, 90:9, 90:14, 90:18, 90:19, 90:21, 90:25, 91:7, 92:1, 92:1, 92:10, 92:11, 92:16, 93:1, 93:11, 93:12, 93:21, 94:4, 94:24, 94:24, 95:10, 96:17, 96:22, 97:11, 97:13, 103:17, 107:2, 122:9, 131:2$, 140:4, 145:9, 148:15, 148:17, 155:4' 1SS-.11, 155:1$, 155:15, 155:22, 156:4, 157:2, 157:8, 157:14, 157:25, 158:2, 158:13, 158:13, 159:8, 159:12, 159:13, 159:24, 160:3, 160:9, 160:12, 160:20, 161:5, 161:9, 161:18, 163:2, 163:16, 163:22, 164:2, 164:5, 172:12, 172:5, 172:17, 172:20, 173:4, 177:8, 178:11, 194:24, 194:25, 208:22, 220181::1280,, 215:15, 215:18, 217:9, 224:4, 226:4, 226:18, 226:24 1nsulat1on-conta 154:22 Insulations 132:12 Insulator 35:25, 59:7, 73:24, 73:24, 177:9, 187S5, 205:18, 205:19, 214:24, 215:1, 226:9, 226:25, 228:3, 228:3, 228:24, 229:4, 229:17, 229:18, 230:6, 230:8, 230:13, 231:5, 231:6 Insulator's 228:13, 229:9, 230:24, 231:11 Insulators 31:13, 31:18, 40:5, 50:25, 53:18, 56:18, 56:19, 56:24, 56:25, 57:1, 57:2. 57:7, 59:18, 60:21, 62:10, 63:1, 69:16, 72:16, 82:24. 83:2, 83:4, 91:8, 106:23, 106:23, 112:22, 113:1, 113:4, 114:5, 114:11, 114:18, 114:22, 114:23, 116:9, 120:4, 120:24, 121:9, 130:6, 130:20, 132:5, 149:5. 149:6, 177:14, 177:24, 178:10, 188:16, 201:15, 205:15, 205:17, 207:3, 216:23, 223:22, 224:1, 227:1, 228:2, 228:18 Insuline 157:21 insurance 84:14 Intends 237:8 Intensity 106:5 Intention 232:3 Intentional 232:12 Interdi visional 142:16, 143:7 Interest 37:16, 129:21, 220:15, 221:5 Interested 18:13, 83:3, 138:22, 210:6, 240:1 Interesting 43:19, 121:19, 233:12 Interim 112:15 Interjected 237:4 Intermittent 71:15 Intermittently 73:9 internet 187:7 Interpret 143:3, 202:9 Interpretation 110:18, 116:10, 229:25, 230:17 Interpretations 110:23, 110:25, 111: 6, 111: 8, 111:18 Interrogatories 18:7, 18:14, 18:19, 19:2, 25:23, 55:3, 58:9, 61:19, 133:13, 221:11 Interrogatory 54:21, 131:5 Interrupt 79:3, 128:4 Intricate 156:2 Introduced 194:15, 209:15 Investigating 108:18 Investigation 45:8 Investigator 47:2 Investigators 37:8, 43:24, 44:10. 106:14, 107:S, 110:10 Involve 169:10, 228:13, 228:18, 229:6 Involved 18:22, 26:22, 27:10, 45:12, 54:5, 61:16, 93:8, 104:22, 105:24, 109:17, 140:7, 148:24, 160:5, 204:8, 217:9, 222:1 Involvement 26:22, 27:7 Involvements 61:18 Involving 195:21 Isn't 8:7, 14:11, 18:25, 25:10, 25:13, 36:20, 39:12, 76:14, 86:21, 87:25, 88:21, 89:12, 90:11, 90:13, 109:10, 121:11, 121:25, 130:6, 142:25, 143:22, 144:3, 146:16, 154:7, 156:21, 178:4. 184:18, 188:16, 229:19, 230:8 Isolate 158:25, 172:5, 172:20 Issue 25:8, 25:8, 32:6, 35:24, 51:18, 139:14, 139:15, 156:19, 187:5, 219:8, 219:16 Issued 150:22, 162:19 Issues 122:9 Item 34:23, 179:15 Items 37:16, 41:5, 42:7, 176:2, 198:14. 198:18 Itself 15:1, 112:11, 131:13, 230:17, 232:5 lack 63:20, 63:21. 63:23, 77:5. 77:19, 77:20, 149:3, 149:22, 185:23, 196:8, 231:22, 233:1$ 2AM 13:11, 16:6, 27:19, 166:9 Jameson 1:4. 1:5, 51:18, 55:15, 112:3, 112:10, 186:11, 187:14, 214:19, 214:23, 217:5, 221:10, 226:20, 230:22, 234:10. 242:9 Jameson's 187:3, 225:18, 225:22 January 51:25, 53:2, 53:3, 203:6. 203:7, 203:9, 221:18 Jeffrey 29:4 Jersey 100:23, 131:15, 131:17, 131:23 Jim 84:12, 84:14, 220:12 job 23:19, 75:18, 96:9, 176:11, " 176:11, 176:14;---176:23, 177:6, 177:6, 196:24, 226:12, 228:16, 229:10, 230:4 jobs 75:17, 176:11 Joe 59:9 John 28:23. 185:24 Johns-mamrille 153:5 joined 19:15, 20:15, 20:23, 20:25, 23:15, 24:1, 24:2, 24:14, 24:21, 149:2, 153:1, 153:1 joining 224:5 joint 104:6 Jones 179:8 journal 17:23, 37:1, 45:4, 49:12, 49:24, 49:25, 50:3, 50:4, 204:6 Jr 59:13 judge 128:18, 209:14 July 20:25, 83:10, 133:14, 152:24, 175:6, 175:15 jumping 73:20, 73:21. 73:22 Ju2n2e1:1827:,172,21:11785,:14, 221:19, 221:19, 228:4, 234:8 Junior 59:10 jurisdiction 237:9 ...... K Kehoe 98:18, 99:9, 166:4 Kemp 126:3, 126:19 Kenneth 153:4 Kettering 46:9, 47:1, 99:12, 195:17, 223:2, 223:4, 223:9, 223:12 key 142:7. 179:20, 180:23. 191:1 kinds 76:19, 114:18 KING 238:5, 239:5 knocking 226:18 knowing 23:21, 71:12, 117:1, 135:8, 163:11, 225:3, 225:4 knowledge 19:23, 23:5, 27:5, 31:3, 38:17, 45:15, 48:18, 54:25, 62:16, 70:24, 72:14, 75:7, 77:24, 115:23, 116:1, 117:1, 174:12, 174:13, 186:9, 191:18, 193:21, 193:25, 194:23, 129150::21,2 , 19252:03:,2 1 , 222:6. 224:17, 226:10 knowledgeable 226:15 known 44:21, 112:21, 114:4, 118:4, 157:4, 185:3 KOSLXK 2:25 LA 122:5, 122:8, 160:16, 183:9 labeling 86:5, 158:4 labels 39:4 labor 142:12, 150:23 Laboratories 46:9, 223:4 laboratory 31:17, .134:13, 135:18, 209:9 labs 47:1 Lancet 37:1, 45:4, 182:11, 203:23, 204:6 LAP 87:20, 87:20 larger 177:23 ' largest latency 61192:2:142 later 18:4, 20:17, 32:12, 63:3, 92:22, 95:24, 97:3, 161:23. 164:8 lath 229:6 latter 106:20 law 2:3, 2:7, 2:11, 2:15, 2:19, 2:23, 75:9 Lawrencevi 'IIe 160:5, 163:25, 164:6 lawyer 164:15 lead 24:19, 118:13, 128:6, 165:21, 209:25 leads 225:1 leak 157:24, 158:22, 159:1 leak-proof 170:1 leaking 172:23 learned 33:17, 55:6 least 9:15, 30:5, 32:24, 68:1, 83:4, 88:10, 88:20, 89:8, 102:11, 107:7, 109:16, 129:9, 130:13, 141:7, 142:23, 148:5, 149:1, 149:16, 149:18, 168:20, 171:21, 172:1, 172:3, 173:24, 174:1, 178:11, 190:18, 194:2, 203:17, 221:18 leave 83:24, 113:25, 210:21 legislation 142:9 le8n6g:1t8h, 3120:200:,1,80:24, 101:9, 105:19. 105:21, 119:20, 134:25, 210:19, 214:12 lengths 156:5 Les 126:19, 225:3 less 87:3, 103:5, 103:10, 108:17, 189:24, 190:9, 226:24 lesser 189:3 Lester 198:9, 198:10, 199:7 let's 6:2, 27:16, 30:14, 31:4, 33:10, 38:7, 40:2, 41:7, 47:22, 48:14, 52:4, 55:25, 58:18, 66:12, 73:1, 73:2, 73:11, 76:16, 77:14, 77:14, 78:14, 79:7, 103:6, 115:15, 116:15, 116:15, 116:16, 122:13, 125:10, 144:9, 153:19, 155:10, 155:11, 157:24, 158:6, 162:23, 162:23, 171:7, 174:11, 177:12, 183:25, 185:19, 190:13, 193:3, 193:14, 194:4, 200:16, 208:7 letter 51:23, 51:25, 52:1, 52:12, 52:23, 1507:12:51,2,10100:22:11,1, 142:15, 156:21, 1 185:4, 185:4, 186:11, 202:18, 203:3. 203:10, 204:12, 206:13, le2t1t9:e1r1h,ead24110:06 :21, 203:6 level 62:20, 146:12 levels 213:21, 214:3 Lever 29:4 Levin 225:3 Liberty 84:14 library 11:24, 14:7, 15:10, 15:11, 15:24 Licata 84:13, 146:1, 220:12 Llcata's 148:11 License 240:21 likely 127:6, 140:9, 234:22 limit 66:15, 67:17, 67:22, 119:15, 173:7, 173:15, 173:18, 174:2, 201:2, 201:4, 213:13, 234:18, 235:16, 236:4, 236:17 limitations 74:10, 125:6, 128:11 limited 72:22, 211:17 limits 91:20, 92:18, 93:12, 94:10, 189:25------------ lined 229:11, 230:1 lines 31:8, 67:23, 158:21, 161:6, 197:14, 207:16, 207:17. 221:16 lining 131:21, 183:20 linings 211:21 link 109:4, 109:19, 111:12, 167:24, 168:8, 168:16, 169:3 liquid 74:13 listed 9:6, 11:11, 165:25, 166:3, 167:3, 167:4, 169:17, 177:19, 217:5 listing 53:17, 126:18 lists 81:21, 126:18, 169:11 literature 11:23, 12:8, 12:12, 12:21, 14:6, 14:20, 16:9, 37:8, 39:21, 40:14, 43:24, 44:10, 52:10, 106:12, 114:8 local 183:12 locate 187:6, 188:3 location 15:16, 15:19, 23:10, 46:14, 47:6, 74:7, 76:2, 148:13, 148:16, 148:18, 149:17, 149:25, 160:6, 161:11, 191:23, 216:18, 226:14, 226:14, 237:9 locations 22:1. 47:4, 53:16, 53:19, 72:12, 74:6, 77:25, 83:20, 84:21, 97:25, 122:6, 146:19, 146:24, 148:23, 148:23, 149:18, 149:24, 149:25, 162:12, 176:3, 176:4, 177:20, 179:5, 179:10, 182:3, 182:19, 182:20, 182:21, 182:24, 183:11, 192:18, 223:6, 223:16, 224:6 locker 170:5 log 133:14 logical 91:2, 157:18 long-term 43:19, 117:22 longer 104:3 looking 33:18, 34:10, 38:5. 38:16, 39:2, 50:21, 67:21, 68:2, 69:11, 69:25, 70:20, 70:23, 73:19, 75:20, 78:22, 87:14. 103:24, 111:13, 117:6, 119:5, 134:23, 145:13, 152:13, 190:11, 209:19, 214:7, 214:13 looks 17:22, 51:25, 52:25, 55:22, 56:16, 69:24, 81:22, 81:22, 125:21, 132:7, 136:5, 166:18, 188:17 Lord 61:21 Los 87:21, 87:24, 88:24, 89:9, 121:24, 160:14, 160:19, 161:4, 161:12 lost 24:6 lots 134:24 loud 13:21, 105:14, 109:22 loudly 231:24 Louisiana 212:24 low 215:15 lower 96:14, 97:3, 97:6 Lucian 100:22, 100:24, 111:7, 112:19, 121:18, 121:19, 203:3, 206:13 Lucien 51:23, 52:4, 52:7 lunch 99:14, 99:20 lung 34:6, 43:20, 43:22, 49:5, 49!l5, 50:5, 67:13. 69:5, 70:12, 104:il, 106:li, 106:17, 106:21, 176:1, 179:4, 179:6, 180:24, 181:is, 182:19, 182:23 183:4, 183:6, 210:17, 215:8, 218:6 lungs 32:22, 186:14, 193:6, 193:18, 210:21 M Macdonald 1:24, 240:20, 241:25, 242:22 machine 180:5 machines 127:15 magnesia 107:1, 215:16 mail 101:16 mailing 125:22, 127:18 mainly 17:15 maintain 87:12 maintaining 190:1 maintenance 86:15, 151:3, 161:10, 189:4. 194:21 major i60:16, 161:2 majority 58:22. 94:2, 97:6, U 8 : 1 7 makes 12:18, 204:5 making 128:1, 131:19, 146:24, 147:3, 147:19, 148:15, 163:18, 192:16, 230:2, 235:7 malignancies 106:11 malignancy 37:9, 43:25, 44:11, 59:4, 59:8, 59:13 malignant 36:25, 37:7, 39:20, 40:21, 43:23, 44:8 managed 84:3 management 58:13, 139:8, 140:2 management/supe r 156:12 manager 20:17, 58:4, 58:5. 63:18, 89:21, 154:i4, 185:22, 189:15 managers 54:13, 631, 63:13, 139:9. 140:3, 142:2i, 142:24, 143:5, 144:15, 154:12, 154:2i, 157:1 managing 28:24 manner 229:10, 239:19 manual 90:13, 90:17, 91:6, 91:6, 95:9, 96:16. 96:21. 228:2 mmaannuufaalcltyur9e7:12211:20 Manufacturers 29:6 Manufacturing 10:23, 29:5 March 81:9, 82:13, 82:16, 129:12, 130:1, 130:3, 131:2, 133:15, 152:8. 204:13, 205:20 mark 7:2, 27:16, 55:25 marked 3:7, 4:3, 5:4, 7:3, 27:17, 41:8. 51:16, 56:2, 78:13, 87:15, 89:15, 100:2, 100:3, 122:22, 125:11, 128:15, 133:25, 135:24, 140:18, 150:11, 152:4. 154:1. 164:18, 175:3, 185:8, 189:8, 227:8 mmaarrkkientgs20170:224:11, 104:10, 104:11, 106:4 MOBURG & ASSOCIATES, INC. (.206)622-3110 Pages 1 to 242 l> * J JMDtl\riMV]U>l I C. I H L KUN RICHARDS Marks 2:10, 3:4, 7:16, 27:18, 27:20, 28:2. 128:16. 164:14, 194:14, 194:15, 195:22, 222:25, 242:25 Maryland 167:10 master's 33:23, 209:21 material 25:4, 66:17, 72:13, 87:4, 87:19, 88:11, 107:4, 195:3. 208:22, 215:16 materially 96:23 materials 32:9, 38:18, 63:6, 63:7, 68:13, 87:6. 89:2, 89:10, 106:24, 107:1, 195:9, 211:20, 222:13, 231:16 matrix 92:23 matter 194:17, 210:4 matters 45:10, 142:11, 142:12 max 215:9 maximum 215:10, 215:19 maybe 7:12, 22:13, 34:22, 43:13, 61:4, 61:14, 69:1, 73:6, 77:22, 78:17, 82:8, 100:13, 109:3, 113:18, 119:24, 125:22, 133:21, 138:5, 139:6, 172:5, 185:14, 187:11, 192:4, 193:14, 193:15, 213:24 McMahon 28:23 McNealy 56:13, 56:13, 57:25, 58:3, 58:4, 204:13, 205:20 MmeOan1s23:1181:10 meant 8:17, 121:19, 121:23 measure 66:13, 67:24, 68:9, 68:13, 74:24, 75:4, 75:12, 191:15, 214:10, 214:16 measured 74:22, 76:18, 85:6, 236:11, 236:12, 236:22 measurement 74:7, 190:18, 236:6 measurements 74:4. 74:6, 74:10. 75:21, 117:5, 190:16 measures 38:21, 38:21, 38:23, 142:23, 145:21, 147:1, 148:24, 162:24, 169:21, 170:7, 170:15, 170:20, 191:3, 191:5, 192:7, 192:10, 192:25, 193:2, 233:16, 23S:li measuring 74:10, 85:12, 5:17, 236:9. 236:14 mechanical 105:24 media 84:24, 105:18, 136:15 median 136:15. 136:16, 136:19, 137:15, 137:16, me1d3i7c:a17l, 81:367,:820:11, 8:19, 8:21, 8:24, 9:1. 9:2, 11:10, 13:7, 14:5, 18:1, 20:12, 36:19, 42:23, 49:13, 49:24, 50:4, 51:1. 56:23, 57:6, 62:22, 62:22, 73:12, 82:2, 1802:23:,6,8210:62,:1210,2:3, 102:17. 104:6. 104:14, 116:1$, 116:16, 118:2, 118:6, 118:13. 119:8, 120:25, 123:4. 124:24, 125:23, 126:12, 128:9, 131:18, 146:21, 151:25, 152:2a, 153:3, 153:4, 153:10, 165:11, 165:1$, 165:13, 167:2, 167:11, 175:12, 175:20, 177:17, 178:1, 178:4, 178:24, 179:22, 180:18, 181:7, 183:1, 184:7, 184:8, 201:15, 206:25, 207:4, 217:19, 217:22, 218:3, 218:8, 218:10 medicine 51:24, 52:15, 203:4 meet 15:8, 152:15, 181:3 meeting 6:16, 8:5, 11:12, 26:3, 26:12, 26:14, 101:2, 142:16, 143:7, 152:20, 165:7, 217:22, 217:24 meetings 6:18, 19:21, 19:24, 21:6 Melvin 151:24 member 6:20, 6:25, 7:19, 9:14, 9:16, 9:18, 10:2, 10:8, 1100::1240,, 1100::1281,, 1101::2150,, 1111::31,2,11:5, 12:14, 12:22, 18:10, 18:11, 18:15, 18:24, 19:5, 19:9, 25:18, 25:20, 27:4, 27:11, 29:8, 29:15, 29:21, 30:5, 30:11, 123:14, 125:3, 152:22, 165:16, 165:22 members 8:1. 14:4, 50:19, 51:24, 52:15, 123:24, 126:11, 153:2, 165:7, 166:3, me2m0b2:e1r9s.hip2063::422, 9:20, 9:23, 10:10, 27:8, 28:25 memo 87:23. 118:12, 129:4. 129:4. 129:19, 130:1, 130:10, 130:15, 160:22, 163:20, 163:23, 166:18, 167:7, 176:17, 176:18 memorandum 56:12, 87:17, 89:20. 133:15, 134:7, 142:16, 154:8, 154:11, 156:20, 168:21, 185:21, me1m8o9r:1a4n,dum2s05:62:20 memory 140:14, 140:23 memos 163:7 mention. 18:16, 59:9 mentioned 35:10, 47:8. 94:13, 135:10, 201:17, 220:5 mmeenrteio2n0s1:11248:3 merely 34:23, 35:12, 36:10, 67:20. 128:1. 198:21, 198:23 Mesher 2:14, 3:5, 13:17, 16:S, 27:24, 34:18, 41:12, 41:14, 41:19, 42:2, 57:18, 64:24, 67:7, 79:5, 79:14, 80:4, 80:9, 80:12, 93:5, 99:15. 99:17, 113:23, 123:18, 128:3, 141:1, 141:5, 141:15, 141:18, 152:5, 152:9, 154:3, 177:2. 187:9. 187:17, 196:3, 202:23, 204:2, 218:22, 219:4. 222:15, 223:21, 225:21, 227:9, 227:12, 231:18, 231:21, 232:15, 232:16, 233:10, 233:19 ,"233:23,---- 234:3, 234:5. 235:24, 237:1, 242:7 mesothelioma 35:23, 36:4, 36:25. 37:7, 39:20, 40:21, 43:23, 44:5. 44:8, 44:20, 47:19, 47:24, 49:6, 51:U, 59:8, 59:16, 60:22, 61:1, 64:10, 73:15, 73:16, 83:5. 87:1, 112:5, 117:12, 131:15, 131:20, 132:16, 204:22, 204:23, 204:24, 205:16, 205:18, 205:18, 205:19 mesotheliomas 60:8, 61:7, 62:10 met 5:9, 5:15, 5:16, 8:10, 31:15, 36:22, 63:25, 166:21, 180:25, 181:8, 209:6, 209:10 metabolism 171:10 metabolize 171:12 metal 29:5, 32:15, 229:6 metals 17:11 method 65:24, 71:12, 125:7, 134:22, 205:10 methods 68:21, 69:1, 138:13, 146:23, 230:25 metropolitan 209:12 Mica 29:6 microns 105:19, 105:21, 119:19, 214:12 microscope 134:11, 134:23 mid 31:9. 33:19, 62:11, 104:20, 107:15, 108:12, 233:9 middle 60:18, 81:8, 206:22, 2U:13 midget 74:12, 74:13, 95:18, 236:11 mild 131:25 mile 191:4 milliliter 91:21 million 119:16, 215:12, 215:22 millions 105:23, 214:9, 236:9 Mlllipore 95:16 mills 21:11, 104:7, 104:15 mimeograph 127:17 mimeographed 125:23, 126:4, 126:17, 127:3, 127:9, 127:16, 127:20 mince 139:16 mind 10:22, 32:24, 33:10, 66:7, 134:17, 210:10, 227:10, 231:19 mine 181:20, 206:9, 222:19 mineral 17:13, 87:10. 211:19 minimal 120:25, 121:9 minimize 86:1, 146:22, 162:3, 169:25, 178:2, 178:16 minimized 170:9 minimum 170:10 minority 118:19 minute 2:20, 30:14, 35:21, 38:8, 148:22, 151:22, 208:7 minutes 6:16, 6:17, 7:6, 8:5. 14:11, 14:15, 42:14, 47:8, 65:5. 153:20, 165:3, 167:4 mmiissrseeadd8160:86:2 missing 16:24. 16:25, 178:2$ misstate 232:4, 232:11, 232:1$ misstated 232:10 mistaken 99:10 misunderstanding 133:17 m1x-up 133:12 MOBUhG 241:1, 242 fTT 242:21 Mobur^j reporting mmoolddiefdica2tUio:2n2s 160:16 moment 210:25 Mon1ta1re 74:17, 95:16 monitor 178:21 monitoring 62:22, 74:18, 74:19, 83:19, 84:8. 84:20, 84:23, 84:24, 116:16, 118:2, 146:21, 147:2, 147:13, 175:12, 177:18, 178:1, 178:4, 178:25, 180:18, 184:7, 184:8, 218:10 month 133:11 months 64:3, 94:1, 159:9, 213:17, 219:15 Morning 5:7, 5:8 motions 240:9 Mount 31:16, 35:7, 210271::2204, 209:9, move 108:2, 137:7, 186:21 moved 20:12, 32:13, 36:22, 143:14, 188:8, 188:11 moving 32:12, 32:14 MPPCF 105:23. 105:24 Mr.Dooley 219:17 mud 90:23 muddlng 90:23 mutual 37:16, 84:14 myself 5:20, 43:11, 47:14, 194:15 N named 15:8. 28:7, 54:4, 63:20, 239:10 names 81:16, 165:24, 166:6 narrow 25:4, 140:14 Nathan 206:i4 National 18:11, 18:15, 18:23, 18:25, 19:5. 19:9, 19:12, 19:19. 167:10, 167:12 natural 68:12, 73:10 Naturally 215:13 nature 96:9, 180:21 NEAL 2:22 nearly 120:9 necessarily 9:16. 10:6, 11:4, 13:25, 64:7, 82:11, 86:25, 109:22, 120:12, 127:20, 203:16, 230:9 necessary 76:7, 77:23, 169:23, 170:22, 170:25, 171:17, 171:18. 172:3, 190:5, 193:1 needed 38:19. 38:21, 74:14, 135:21, 155:24, 190:5, 191:7, 232:19 needs 61:14, 70:1 negative 93:14, 217:8 neither 71:11, 120:24, 121:18, 112211::92,$, 122:11, 124:16, 149:11, 223:14 neoplasm 59:15 neoplasms 103:15, 106:9 Newquist 7:25, 8:2, 8:9. 8:10, 8:13, 8:1$, 8:21, 8:24, 10:2, 10:7, 11:10, 102:4, 151:24, 152:15, 152:22, 165:6, 165:6. 165:10, 165:10 Newqulst's 153:9 newspaper 129:8, 129:11, 132:8, 132:19, 132:20, 132:24 nice 66:22, 127:15, 172:24 nickels 32:16 nine 135:16, 137:23 n i o s h 142:18, 142:18, 142:23 nitrates 17:11 Noble 217:3, 217:4, 217:16 Noble's 217:16 nobody 147:4 noise 77:12, 142:19, 147:11, 219:7, 219:19, 220:1 nnoonmaesnbcelsattousre8163:69:,16 86:14, 87:24, 89:10, 90:23, 155:4 nonasbestos-cont 86:10, 86:12, 87:6, 88:4, 88:11, 88:24, 143:22, 144:20, 155:13, 155:23, 157:8, 158:2, no1n6e0:12202:6 nonfi re-damaged no93n:f1l,am9m3a:b1l1e, 29131::2201 nonmember 10:3 nonnegative 81:9, 82:5, 82:6, 82:13, 82:13 nonspecific 59:1 nor 121:9, 122:11, 149:11, 223:15 Norbert 153:3 norm 137:15 normal 10:12, 10:14, 12:11, 54:1$, 85:20. 85:21 normative 137:12 North 104:8, 104:15, 104:23 Northwest's 198:9, 199:8 Nos 3:8 Notar^5:l, 239:7, note'l4:18, 43:1, 58:21, 64:24, 87:18, 111:22, 129:3, 129:5, 129:8, 209:20, 231:1$, 233:12 noted 129:21, 239:20 notes 13:25, 90:8 nothing 36:13, 64:3, 147:11, 151:16, no18t3i:c1e6,il624:08:,5 128:17, 128:21, 190:10, 190:13 November 37:1, 84:11, 165:2, 204:6 204:7 numbering 89:25 numbers 27:18, 27:24, 94:19. 97:1, 97:14, 134:21, 189:6 numerous 17:10, 204:20, 204:20 nurses 180:8, 180:22, 180:23, 180:25, 181:3, 181:9, 181:10, 182:2$ 0 objection 202:23, 204:3. 232:21 objection-free 128:19 objections 237:2, 237:7, 237:10, 239:17, 240:9 observation 38:9, 71:20, 128:2 observations 106:14, 120:22, 174:16, 174:17 observe 65:8, 65:13, 149:25 observed 38:16, 96:17, 96:22, 149:2$, 150:4, 192:24 observing 96:3, 96:24 obtained 129:14, 189:22. 206:25 obviously 7:8, 16:23, 20:24, 232:5 occasion 77:12 occasions 12:19, 37:15, 142:7, 219:2l Occupation iso: 7 occupational 17:9, 189:19, 192:21 occupied 15:14 occurred 59:4 occurrence 106:10 October 123:5 offending 169:22, 170:21, 170:24, 171:17, 171:18, 172:2, 172:8 offer 52:9 offering 159:11 office 36:23, 45:11, 56:15. 84:16, 110022::1291, 102:20, officer 8:11, 8:19, 9:1, 9:2, 102:3, 102:6, 165:13 official 9:22, 58:12, 104:7. 165:11, 240:13 officials 26:11, 130:5 oil 12:2, 14:23, 17:13, 100:23, 108:20. 157:22 oils 168:3 one's 75:13, 78:4 ones 6:15, 67:4, 85:9, 90:4, 95:20, 149:1 onto 115:6 open 31:16, 110:18, 111101::262., 111110::82.4, 111:18, 115:9, 200:25, 207:24, 209:1, 209:2, 213:2, 213:3, 222:3, 229:24, 230:17 opening 43:1' 52:12, openness 213:8 op8e8:r1a6t,ing11088::21,4, 128:20, 142:8, 228:14 operation 68:11, 71:12, 72:8, 72:17, 75:20, 85:20, 85:21, 96:3, 96:12, 96:15 operations 38:5. 38:16, 40:10, 58:5, 65:24, 69:12, 69:25, 70:20, 71:1, 71:8, 86:15, 88:20, 88:21, 99:5, 105:24, 115:13, 121:11, 142:13, 155:24, 156:15, 170:8, 174:14 opinion 104:18, 108:25, 109:10, 120:23, 121:5, 126:9, 127:11, 159:11, 168:15. 168:24, 168:25, 169:2. 207:5, 236:1$ opportunity 64:13, opposed 96:3, 198:1, 220182::1271, 212:15, oral 1:11 order 39:25, 103:6, 103:7, 108:6, 122081::1182,, 144:25, 228:16, 237:8 ordinary 124:2 organic 168:3 organization 10:14, 12:7. 12:22, 22:9 organizations 10:18, 12:13, 27:11. 28:25 original 242:19 originally 219:16 OSHA 66:16, 67:22, 83:19, 85:22, 86:22, 86:25, 89:11, 89:12, 91:20, 92:18, 93:12, 94:3, 94:10, 119:9, 119:13, 119:17, 119:18, 119:18, 119:22, 120:17, 143:9, 144:14, 184:24, 184:25, 186:1, 190:6, 192:22, MOBURG & ASSOCIATES, INC. (206)622-3110 Pages 1 to 242 "192:22, 213:13;----214:10, 221:6 others 96:10, 228:16 otherwise 206:8, 235:7 ought 186:14 outcome 240:1 outdoor 25:5, 68:12, 71:15, 73:9 outlier 136:8 outlining 114:8 outside 72:11, 108:4. U S : 9, 115:13, 182:21 overall 192:13, 236 : U oversee 199:17 overview 180:23 owing 17:4, 17:5, p.m 99:21, 133:1, 133:4, 153:21, 184:1, 184:4, 194:10, 219:2, 237:17, 237:18 Pabst 101:6 packs 197:19 pad 129:4 pads 129:4 paged 5:23 pages 7:13, 13:13, 16:25, 80:7. 129:1, 141:7, 141:14, 141:15, 145:14, 166:11 paging 227:18 papers 32:25, 222:14 paraffin 168:3 paragraph U:18, 12:5, 28:21, 28:22, 43:14, 43:14. 44:5 103:24, 103:25, 104:1, 104:14, Ul:4, Ul:5, 111:6, Ul:9. 111:13, 1U:20, 111:23, 167:23, 189:18, 228:13, 229:2, 231:4 paragraphs 58:16, 105:12, 206:23 parameters 88:14, 88:16, 145:2 paraphrase 52:2, 5275, U6:12, U 7:i5 paraphrases 67:16 paraphrasing 67:20, 132:8, 186:8 pardon 17:12, 40:7, 43:21 parentheses 228:3 parsed 1 6 4 : U parsing 164:10 participated 21:16, 22:20, 24:17, 36:4, 63:14, 100:1, 104:20, 104:25, 206:1. 224:15 participating U:10, 105:6, 122:16, 135:18, 137:2$, 165:16, 165:22 particle 104:9, 210:19, 210:20 particles 105:23, 119:16, 173:20, 214:9, 215:12, 215:22, 236:9 particular 6:3, 6:13, 6:23, 7:11, 9:19, 10:7, 12:22. 14:25, 17:7, 20:19, 22:18, 23:4, 23:5, 24:6, 24:12, 26:14, 31:17, 32:16, 34:13, 34:14, 35:17, 36:12, 36:18, 37:24, 39:5, 40:9, 40:12, 47:23, 60:10, 62:15, 62:24, 63:10, 63:16, 65:25, 66:12, 68: 10, 68:15, 69:9, 69:10, 69:12, 69:17, 71:7, 75:20, 78:10, 78:19, 83:21, 84:3, 84:22, 85:10, 85:18, 86:5. 86:19, 87:U, 88:13, 88:14, 94:3, 96:9, ^n if ft inv/ii r v x v . n M [ \ u j 9 6 :1 1 , 96:11,------98:22, 98:23, 104:23, 108:8, 111:1, 118:1, 126:5, 127:18, 134:9, 137:2, 137:22, 138:19, 139:17, 142:10, 143:4, 143:6, 143:15, 143:17, 144:18, 145:12, 145:20, 146:24, 148:16, 148:18, 148:19, 148:21, 150:1, 150:12, 155:7, 158:3, 158:5, 159:1, 160:4, 161:3. 162:1, 162:10, 172:20, 176:13, 177:6, 177:20, 180:9, 180:22, 181:2, 181:8, 181:20, 182:2, 184:20, 191:7. 192 :U, 193:11, 194:22, 195:21, 201:14, 202:17, 203:19, 209:4, 209:25, 210:4, 214:17, 216:15, 216:17, 219:21, 224:3 particularly 24:13, 30:25, 43:18, 95:22, 108:16, 136:14, 170:18, 188:10, 203:16, 218:12, 228:22 parties 239:15, 239:22 party 239:20 passage 89:10 passed 120:18 past 56:19, 59:3, 186:4 patience 76:3 pattern 209:3 Paul 210:5 Pecorlno 59:10, 59:12, 59:13 penalty 238:7 pending 142:9, 142:9. 143:9, 144:12, 144:13, 144:17 Pennsylvania 20:11, 21:9, 21:U, 24:9, 24:25, 26:5, 75:25, 104:8, 104:15, 104:21, 105:1, 105:9, 105:10, 153:3. 225:5 people's 57:6 per 57 :U, 91:21, 105:23, 119:19, 175:13, 214:9, 214:U, 214:U, 215:12, 215:23, 236:9, 241:5 perceived 174:15 percent 21:19, 24:17, 107:3, 162:8, 163:9, 215:17 percentage 215:13 perform 170:10, 171:20 perhaps 6:U, 32:15, 42:9, 48:6. 71:6, 83:6, 132:22, 134:21, 190:12, 207:25 period 30:12, 55:15, 67:12, 67:19, 68:3, 69:5, 70:U, 74:1, 91:2$, 91:23, 112:12, U4:15, 143:10, 156:13, 159:9, 160:9, 184:17, 187:25, 199:14, 201:9, 204:8, 215:8, 221:23 periodic 83:19, 176:14, 176:22, >179:7 periodlcs 177:12 periods U7:21, 127:6 peritoneum 59:15 perjury 238:7 perked 220:15 permanent 119:23, 120:18, 213:17 permissible 189:25 permutations 31:14, 31:25, 35:17 personal 1:4, 74:18, 84:23, 84:24, 120:22, 142:19, 170:2, 193:21, 194:23, 195:3, 195:9, 199:9, 218:8 personally 18:12, 20:2, 93:8, 138:22, 226:4 personnel 85:7, 85:24, 90:6, 94:14, 184:14, 202:2, 202:2, 202:2, 214:21, 217:22, 218:3, 226:12 persons 120:2, 126:11, 156:25, 234:24 persuasive 109:18 pertain 66:12, 130:19 pertained 21:10, 221:25, 233:17, 236:5 pertaining 45:23, 128:8, 130:10, 231:2$ Peter 2:25, 59:6, 60:5, 205:1 petrochemical 191:24 petroleum 5:24, 6:20, 8:6, 9:15, 9:23, 10:25, 13:8, 14:2$, 18:1, 52:5, 52:6, 120:12, 123:8, 123:11, 123:14, 123:2$, 124:25, 128:10. 168:4, 203:5, 224:6 pfitzer 210:10 phase 134:10, 155:1, 155:2, 155:11, 156:1$, 156:15, 157:11, 163:2 phase-out 155:18, 156:7 phased 161:19 phases 14:19 phasing 154:22, 155:22 Philadelphia 129 :U, 129:14, 183:10 PHILIP 2:22, 128:25 Phillips 52:4, 52:13, 100:22, 203:5 photocopied 78:18, 127:20 phrase 122:17 physical 17:10, 32:20, 32:21, 74:9, 105:16, 179:18, 184:14 physicals 179:7, 180:4 physician 1 8 0 : U physicians 33:7, 5$:16, 53:25. 54:1, 180:3, 180:19, 183:1$ Physiology 210:8, pick*85:12 picked 86:8 piece 158:3, 172:15, 179:8 pieces 156:2 pigs U6 :2 2 pile 206:12 pill 171:12 pinpoint 140:6 pipe 85:22, 86:17, 86:18. 156:4, 226:19 pipeline 71:6 pipelines 63:2, 161:5 pipes 71:6, 207:19, 207:20, 207:22 piping 69:14 , 70:3 pitches 168:5 Pittsburgh 31:9 placed 151:1, 1 7 6 : U placement 179:14 places 179:5, 183:14 plain 41:1 PLAINTIFF 2:3 plaintiffs 1:6, 133:U, 147:25, 214:21 planned 219:16 plant 36:20, 36:21, ~ T 3 n 5 T 53 :'257T4:r, 54:13, 56:14, 56:24, 57:1, 57:3, 58:4, 58:5, 58:U, 60:22, 62:11, 62:19, 63:11, 63:13, 63:18, 69:25, 70:21, 71:25, 72:2, 72:5. 72:7, 77:12, 77:16, 77:24, 81:16, 84:15, 84:17, 85:8, 87:21, 87:24, 88:24, 89:9, 89:21, 89:22, 98:22. U S : 17, 121:25, 122:5, 122:8, 139:9, 140:3, 142:20, 142:24, 143:5, 144:15. 148:21, 154:11, 154:11, 154:14, 154:21, 156:12, 156:25, 160:14, 160:19, 161:4, 180:3, 180:11, 181:6, 181:14, 183:12, 184:24, 185:22, 188:15, 189M5, 189:16, 191:24, 216:13, 220:3, 226:23, 228:2 plants 21:20 , 24:10, 24:U, 25:9, 38:13, 38:15, 57:5, 63:16, 87:5, 170:6, 174:14, 177:22, 212:24, 218:14 plagues 58:23 plastic 108:8, 172:21, 172:25 plausible 182:13 play 201:4, 214:3, 23$:2, 233:3 please 7:6, U:19, 13:11, 13:22, 17:3, 27:16, 58:15, 105:15, 106:7, 123:19, 144:8, 169:20, 202:18, 206:21, 208:14, 210:25, 2U:16, 212:1, 212:19, 241:4, 242:13 pleura 37:1, 37:10, 44:1, 44:U, 59:9 pleural 58:23, 58:23. 106:21 plus 115:2, 242:13 p m 198:8, 199:7 pneumoconiosis 104:4, 210:6, 210:22 pneumoconios1s-p 24:5, 210:2 point 21:12. 25:24, 27:8, 34:14, 38:21, 39:22, 40:9, 40:U, 54:10, 54:16, 54:18, 55:10, 60:10, 62:24, 69:17, 69:19, 70:15, 71:U, 77:15, 78:10, 84:3, 84:22, 94:3, 121:11, U5:16, 119:10, Ul:22, 128:17, 130:22, 132:10, 134:9, 138:19, 144:1, 144:2, 144:3. 144:18, 144:25, 147:4, 151:7, 151:17, 151:25, 155:7, 157:9, 158:5, 162:1, 162:10, 170:25, 183:9, 183:24, 184:2$, 188:15, 191:7, 192:U, 193:24, 194:2, 195:12, 195:21, 201:1, 208:25, 209:4, 229:5, 232:14, 232:23 pointed 168:1 pointing 143:8, 147:2l! 171:25 points 17:15, 17:19, 17:21, 144:12, 155:7, 155:14, 169:10, 169:15, 170:20, 194:18 policies 86:21, ~ 139:T4V 186:10----policy 86:9, 86:13, 86:19, 139:1, 139:4, 139:7, 139:20, 139:21, 139:22, 139:23, 140:2, 140:8. 140:24, 142:1, 142:15, 143:18, 145:15, 145:22, 146:4, 155:4, 179:2, 181:5. 181:5, 192:1$ poor 190:U, 191:2, 192:23 popular 132:14 population 17:7, 48:5, 48:5, 50:18, 50:20, 51:4, 116:17, 178:13 Port 36:20, 36:21, 56:14, 56:24, 57:1, 57:2, 58:12, 60:9, 60:22, 61:8, 62:10, 66:25, 69:10, 69:12, 69:19, 70:21, 70:25, 71:19, 72:7, 72:17, 85:8, 89:21, 96:23, 148:15, 154:10, 154:14, 154:18, 183:9, 189:15, 189:16, 212:16, 212:21, 213:1, 213:4, 213:6, 216:24 portable 74:17, 179:6 portion 215:2, 215:6 portions 206:19 poses 207:2 position 10:24. 33:4, 48:17, 60:7, 108:13, 108:14, 180:19 positive 82:9 possibility 47:18 possible 59:23, 59:24. 60:17, 99:8, 131:24, 157:7, 157:9, 157:10, 169:21, 170:21, 178:12, 186:3, 219:25, 226:17 possibly 74:23, 162:5 pot U 6 :1 9 potential 22:10, 66:4. 66:7. 66:9, 66:20, 67:15, 75:19, 76:4, U4:6, U4:li, U4:12, 121:1, 177:21, 186:20, 190:1$, 207:6, 207:8. 207:10, 207:12, 214:14, 219:7, 219:19 potentially 163:3, 189:21, 190:2, 190:20 practical 187:10 practicality 158:23 practice 65:8. 78:3, 123:23, 148:11, 148:11, 148:11 practices 50:8, 216: U , 216:12, 216:13 pre 179:13 pre-employment 176:6. 176:10, 177:11 pre-placement 176:2, 176:5, 176:U, 177:12, 180:4 preamble 67:16, 201:7 precaution 140:4 precautionary 162:24 precautions 139:1, 139:2. 139:10, 180:20 precipitated 53:5 precisely 178:4 predecessor 20:6 predisposes 37:9. 43:25, 4 4 : U preface 65:18 prefer 185:18 preformed 90:14, 90:18, 90:21, 90:25, 91:7, 94:4, 95:10, 96:17, 96:22, 97:13 preliminary 112:19" 167:22 premise 164:3 preparation 5:12, 7:5, 18:7, 42:10, 100:16 prepare 135:8 prepared 62:5, 134:19, 136:22, 189:20, 190:15, 190:19 present 2:25, 25:12, 38:19, 107:$, 165:7. 236:13, 236:24 presentations 123:2 presented 167:8 preset 86:17 press 132:14. 222:14 presumably 112:16, 133:16 prevent 108:6, 145:1, 146:6. 146:22, 170:15, 172:22 prevented 146:17, 186:10, 186:16 preventive 147:1, 169:21, 170:20 previous 26:1, 90:1, 109:3, 148:14, 186:6, 216:14 previously 107:14, 160:19, 168:14, 185:2, 225:15 primarily 31:U , 38:6, 8$:18, 179:15, 192:10 Primary 36:25 primers 38:24 printed 78:23 printing 80:17 prior 8:U, 21:3, 21:4, 33:13, 34:6, 34:22, 44:21, 48:19, 64:5, 87:5, 89:10, 95:10, 95:11, 97:16, U4:8, U5-.24, U8:12, 148:1, 148:7. 160:20, 175:24, 176:6, 176:18, 176:19, 177:15, 182:12, 191:16, 219:15, 221:17, 234:17, 234:20, 236:4, 236:6. 23 7: U privy 149:13, 151:9, 218:8 proactive U6 :2 5 probably 39:15, 40:12, 46:17, 54:19, 58:5. 60:5, 61:17, 61:19, 61:23, 93:15, U7:4, 169:4, 179:18, 189:15, 195:7, 203:17, 209:4, 209:14, 213:16, 218:7, 223:7 problem 14:20, 42:13, 62:15, 66:5, 66:5, 69:20, 71:2, 71:1$, 71:1$, 71:18, 72:10, 72:16, 72:21, 73:3, 73:4, 73:8, 73:17, 73:18, 74:21, 74:22, 74:23. 77:17, U6:14, U7:3, U7:4, U8:l, 119:11, 121:11, 159:2, 169:10, 169:12, 174:15, 185:6, 207:6, 207:9, 207:10, 207:13, 218:16, 219:19, 233:4 problems U S : 10, 121:2, 180:1, 186:20, 188:$, 190:13 procedural 128:17 procedure 37:22. 38:8. 54:14, 6fe:2. 72:10, 86:2, 178:24 procedures 36:18, 186:10, 220:13, 230:4 , 230:U, 230:25 process 38:8, 38:22, 69:19, 72:6, 72:6, MOBURG & ASSOCIATES, INC. (206)622 Pages 1 to 24z .W .W v ii t ^ t a n x ju il , nu . KUIN K IL M A K L /5 83:14, 88:#, 88:18, 122:9. 122:12, 134:11, 159:6. 159:10, 202:10, 205:22 processes 71:13, 122:3 produce 97:19, 97:21, 97:22, 97:23, 98:5, 98:6, 116:1 produced 28:12, 29:12, 30:4, 46:21, 78:20, 80:19, 82:22, 83:11, 122:21, 124:19, 133:10, 133:10, 141:2. 141:7, 150:19, 214:20, 228:11 producing 210:7, 210:23 product 39:2, 143:22, 144:20, 208:3 production 133:14, 133:18, 141:19, 152:10, 152:12 products 29:3, 39:3, 39:5, 86:7, 168:4, 207:is profession 12:24 professionals 118:18 professor 209:25, 210:7 professors 209:23, 210:5, 210:10 program 62:23, 84:3, 84:6, 84:20, 134:13, 138:4, 146:21, 176:1$, 177:16, 178:4, 179:22, 180:18, 180:24, 184:7, 184:8, 184:15, 184:2i, 190:9, 191:15, 199:1$, 209:24, 209:25, 216:12, 218:6, 218:10 program 116:16 progresses 229:10 prolonged 67:12, 67:19, 68:3, 6:5, 70:11, 74:1, 114:15, 117:21, 201:9, 215:8 pronote 39:11, 39:25 pronotion 39:11 promptly 51:3 promulgated 213:15, promulgation 39:8, 39:10 prone 92:10 pronounce 59:10 proof 33:12, 35:3, 36:17. 189:22, 189:25, 190:15, 191:9, 193:2 proper 38:7, 39:4, 75:14, 157:23, 158:3. 158:4, 158:24, 170:6, 171:8, 230:4, 230:li properties 32:10 proposed 143:10, 144:14, 185:4 proposing 52:24 pros 119:3 protect 70:14, 132:5, 214:13 protecting 45:4 protection 38:24, 61:8, 62:20, 85:25, 92:1, 94:24, 95:6, 142:19, 144:21, 144:23, 146:20, 148:24, 149:6. 149:19, 149:24, 150:5, 156:17, 158:4, 180:21, 192:11. 192:14 protective 170:2, 170:7 prove 33:14, 35:1, 40:7, 40:li, 48:i, 48:2, 48:9. 48:15, 50:17, 51:5. 60:19, 62:16, 108:i2, 109:3. 114:9, 189:20, 190:19, 192:19 proved 48:18, 92:22 proven 34:8, 34:21, 111:14, 169:3 proverbial 116:22 provide 61:8, 130:18, 144:20, 144:22, 170:2, 170:4, 202:21 provided 61:10. 147:22, 147:25, 152:7, 170:7, 170:10, 177:18, 179:9, 189:22, 190:2i, 191:10, 206:2 provides 96:1, 140:16 providing 179:23 proving 109:18 public 132:1, 167:12, 222:6, 239:7, 240:22 publication 14:4 publications 107:8, 110:9 publish 115:3 published 14:19. 33:7, 36:24, 45:3, 49:13, 106:18, 175:14, 203:23, 236:17 publishes 50:4 Puget 228:2 pull 202:19 pulled 216:13 pulling 206:8 pulmonary 58:24^ 103:15, 104:13, 106:9, 179:16. 179:19, 179:20, 180:12 pulmonometer 179:9 pumps 74:17, 84:23, 90:7, 95:16 purchase 86:14 purpose 38:3, 137:25, 144:5 purposes 38:4, 39:7, 148:20 pursue 109:15 puts 170:17 putting 63:9, 95:3, 95:23, 175:21, 229:5 qualifications 239:18 qualify 113:1 quantities 117:9 questioning 200:10, 200:16 quibble 27:12, 170:18, 170:23 quibbling 171:16 quick 66:22, 227:10 quickly 166:7 quiet 128:24 quite 160:15, 208:23, 209:1, 212:12, 231:24 quote 37:4, 67:5, 140:25, 215:9, 215:9, 225:25 quotes 58:18 quoting 70:5, 70:18 radiation 17:14, 168:2 radical 158:22, 171:8 radioactive 17:13 Railroad 29:7, 153:4 raised 196:10, 231:24 ran 58:6 range 38:23. 39:5, 40:5, 105:21 ranging 105:18 rapid 14:21 rare 61:2, 131:19, 132:15 rather 22:15, 135:14, 177:12 ratio 32:20 ratios 210:19 Ray 1:5, 51:18, 55:15, 112:10, 186:li RE 242:9 re-affiliated 29:1 reach 35:4, 171:20, 183:24, 224:7, 225:9------------reached 35:18, 106:1, 106:3 reaching 32:21 reactions 104:13 readily 155:19, 155:24, 156:3, 198:15 reading 37:12, 43:10, 43:12. 109:2i, 113:i3, 165:4, 215:4. 221:21, 223:3, 237:5, 239:13 ready 142:13, 196:6 reaffirmed 31:8 real 70:18, 103:11 realistic i56:14 realize 227:16 really 13:2, 15:12, 15:15, 19:20, 71:10, 74:16, 80:17, 80:20, 95:24, 111:14, 116:4, 139:18, 139:24, 152:19, 164:10, 166:6, 173:5, 186:2, 208:23, 220:24, 230:14 reason 21:24, 91:14, 98:11, 101:1, 103:2i, 103:22, 123:17, 151:5, 155:17, 174:7, 184:20, 186:24, 225:12, 232:10, 241:5, 241:7 reasonable 116:10. 130:9 reasons 53:6, 83:21 recalled 225:22 recalls 64:3 receive 122:15, 128:7, 151:6, 151:14 received 112:16, 124:8, 128:13, 151:3, 151:8, 151:10, 151:16, 151:19, 212:10 receiving 124:9, 124:11, 124:13, 127:1 recent 103:14, 129:19, 167:25 recently 40:3, 50:22, 55:7, 56:7, 181:10, 184:9, 184:10 recess 30:18, 64:23, 65:1. 79:11, 99:20, 133:3, 153:23, 184:3. 194:9, 219:1 recognition 65:19, 65:20, 65:21, 67:14, 112:2i, 113:3, 114:4, U4:li, 119:io, 178:12 recognize 7:11, 9:12. 66:3, 76:4, 78:19, 78:25, 101:23, 102:8, 102:8. 166:4, 166:6 recognized 67:18, 70:5, 70:13, 104:4, 117:8, 187:23, 187:24 recognizing 75:19 recollection 20:10, 99:11. 99:11, 140:10, 140:i6, 177:1, 182:2, 182:22, 183:13, 197:25 recommend 38:20, 38:22, 76:6 recommendation 95:5, 148:16 recommendations 92:2, 146:25, 147:3, 216:16 record 13:16. 17:3, 30:20, 41:22, 57:24, 58:15, 64:24, 65:3, 79:1. 79:5, 79:7. 79:13, 79:17, 79:i8, 79:20, 93:19, 99:17, 99:22, 113:15, 123:20, 123:22, 144:11, 153:25, 161:15, 184:5, 203:2, 218:23, 219:3,-- 237:2, 237:14, 237:16, 239:15 records 17:15, 28:7, 57:7, 214:20, 218:9 recount 57:13 rectum 106:22 red 133:20 reduce 86:1 reduced 239:11 refer 21:15, 55:3, 87:20, 90:i8 reference 16:17, 17:24, 204:5, 204:24, 212:6 referenced 14:11 references 15:2, 16:3, 16:10, 104:i4, 105:4 referencing 104:24 referred 15:3, 16:3, 35:21, 130:10, 135:11, 187:2i, 205:2, 208:20, 223:1 referring 23:12, 40:16, 43:4, 44:4, 44:4, 47:12, 67:2, 90:5, 98:9, 114:23, 115:13, 136:4, 176:16, 182:4, 182:7, 182:14, 183:19, 187:25, 195:14, 200:21, 200:24, 201:18, 212:8, 234:7 refers 16:2 refine 134:22 refineries 45:19, 54:2, 91:8, 112:23, 117:2, 139:3, 139:20, 154:i8, 157:16, 157:20, 162:5, 162:9. 162:14, 209:2, 212:25, 223:5, 231:16 refinery 35:25, 36:14, 48:15, 48:25, 51:19, 54:7, 54:9, 54:10, 54:18, 58:7, 71:7. 71:21, 88:21, 97:i2, 103:16, 113:1, 113:4, 114:4, 114:7, 114:18, 114:22, 115:8, 116:9, 116:25, 117:13, 117:24, 120:4, 120:24, 121:8. 129:7, 129:10, 130:6, 130:19, 130:25, 140:3, 150:5. 163:8, 163:10, 163:11, 171:24, 171:24, 172:21, 183:8, 191:25, 196:25, 200:5, 200:24, 207:2, 208:9, 208:10. 208:17, 211:23, 212:17, 213:6, 214:19, 216:2i, 216:22, 217:1, 217:14, 217:2i, 217:24, 217:25, 218:4, 218:17, 219:8, 219:12, 219:19, 228:19, 233:18, 234:23, 235:6 refining 109:17, 117:25, 130:22, 131:1. 139:21. 139:22, 142:2i, 143:5, 154:9. 154:9, 154:12, 182:1, 192:9 reflect 141:25, 151:1, 156:11, 165:15, 185:13 reflected 94:7, 129:15 reflects 163:20 regard 19:12, 84:22, 94:4. U8:2i. 146:4, 188:6, 214:5, 232:24 regarded 130:11 regarding 5:25, 52:5, 56:21, 84:5, 97:5, 142:16, 144:i3, 148:i6, 209:18, 217:U regardless lob:s regards 48:11, 84:6 96:2, 98:25, U l : l 139:10, 140:4, 142:1, 142:5, 142:25, 143:21, 145:15, 183:17, 192:8, 224:3 regional 59:6 Register 175:14 regular 92:11 regularly 128:7, 176:21 regulation 142:9, 143 M 0 regulations 86:23, 89:11, 143:9, 144:13, 144:13, 144:17, 221:24, 221:24, 232:19 relate 175:20 related 49:15, 50:5, 50:10, 75:17, 104:13, 135:23, 153:9, 183:5, 218:16 relates 82:6, 198:22 relating 12:12 relation 186:4 relations 142:12, 185:23, 185:24 relationship 102:16, 104:9, 130:14 relative 239:21, 239:23 relatively 105:20 relay 54:11, 54:16 released 92:18 relevance 24:6 relevant 22:8, 22:22. 23:6, 24:13 reliability 94:19, 94:22, 95:4 reliable 95:22 rely 191:17 relying 53:24 remaining 154:22, 155:11 remarks 167:22 remembered 218:20 remind 107:18 remove 145:10 removed 86:2 Renes 51:23, 52:12, 100:22, 108:19, 109:16, 112:9, 116:5, 118:5, 120:22, 121:5, 121:7, 202:18, 203:3. 203:10, 204:11, 206:13, 207:4 renowned 210:2 repair 161:5, 161:10 repeat 22:14, 47:11, 69:2, 93:17, 161:13, 192:4, 213:24 repeatedly 37:7, 39:21, 43:23, 44:8, 44:9 rephrase 69:3, 70:8, replaced 157:15 replacement 222:4 report 15:1, 33:8, 34:23, 36:11, 37:19, 41:1, 45:3, 45:21, 46:1, 47:17, 48:8, 48:11, 49:23, 50:2, 50:11, 50:15, 53:8. 59:17, 60:17, 60:18. 61:7, 61:9, 62:10, 73:15, 89:25, 106:18, 107:5, 107:7. 109:25, 110:2, 110:5, 110:6, 110:9, 110:19, 111:15, 111:17, 112:16, 117:18, 118:5, 120:8, 120:10, 131:13, 131:17, 132:4, 132:13, 146:2, 148:14, 216:1 216:3. 216:7. 216:14, 217:4, 220:5, 224:24, 225:7, 225:8 reported 8:17, 21:18, 35:7, 40:23, 59:20. 60:4, 73:15, 117:12, 131:18, 204:22, 207:6, 207:11, '217:8,----223:22 reporter 1:25, 113:14, 144:9, 161:13, 185:14, 241:25 Reporters 241:1, 242:1 reporting 36:1, 39:24, 40:13, 59:17, 143:6, 167:7, 205:20, 208:16 reports 33:6, 33:9, 33:13. 34:9, 34:2. 34:22, 34:2$, 35:2 35:12, 36:9, 36:15: 37:21, 40:3, 40:19, 43:2, 43:9, 45:11, 47:16, 47:20, 48:5, 60:8, 64:10, 64:12, 74:5, 76:21, 76:25, 77:7, 98:1, 98:3, 98:24, 98:25, 99:4, 103:14, 106:10, 106:17, 107:7. 107:10, 107:15, 107:19, 107:21, 108:12, 108:15, 109:3, 110:21, 111:23, 117:11, 118:11, 119:25, 130:19, 193:5, 216:14, 241:23 represent 28:5, 29:11, 91:22, 97:1, 125:12, 129:13, 131:4, 147:23, 165:1, 166:25, 194:16 representation 97:11. 97:14, 203:20 representations 196:7, 200:12 representative 1:4, 10:3, 10:15, 60:12, 96:8, 96:15, 97:3, 97:8, 168:15, 169:1, 193:23 representatives 15:18 represented 23:17, 168:20 represents 163:23 reprint 204:5 reprinted 49:19 reproduce 137:2 reputable 45:4 request 130:4, 177:19, 224:21 requested 56:16, 93:19. 113:15, 123:20, 123:22, 144: U , 161:15, 181:13 requesting 203:11 requests 28:14, 29:19. 54:8, 61:18, 216:2$ require 170:5, 192:14 required 78:10, 83:19. 87:12, 160:12, 170:8, 181:15, 184:24, 194:21, 195:4, 195:10, 208:2 requirements 83:21, 87:9, 175:13, 183:23 research 11:25, 14:8. 14:22, 15:11, 15:19. 15:25, 34:9, 134:20, 135:15, 136:23, 167:15, 167:23, 202:1, 215:22 residing 240:24 resigned 234:11 resolve 207:1 resources 75:15, 75:24 respect 35:24, 57:1, 85:4, 147:16, 232:8 respected 49:25 respirator 196:19, 196:22 respirators 172:10, 192:17, 196:12, 196:24, 197:7, 197:10, 197:17, 197:17, 198:1, 198:12, 198:14, MOBURG & ASSOCIATES, INC. (206)622 ^ n t r Pages 1 to 242 *i iw v M V 1 3 5 1 2 1 7 1 9 9 : 1 6 ; ---200:5, 200:6, 200:13, 200:14, 232:19, 234:24, 235:7, 235:18, 235:21 respiratory 38:24, 85:25, 91:25, 94:23, 95:6, 144:22, 146:20, 148:24, 149:6, 149:18, 149:23, 150:4, 156:17, 158:3. 180:21, 192:10, 192:14, 200:5 responded 197:14, 197:21, 198:11, 235:13 responding 214:4 response 28:13, 29:18, 45:19, 46:1, 50:7, 50:14, 58:10, 61:6, 62:9, 63:4, 65:6, 65:7, 86:22, 185:25, 196:16, 198:8, 198:10, 200:2, 204:U , 210:13, 211:8, 216:22, 216:24, 216:25, 219:18, 222:24, 237:3 responses 125:13, 221:11 responsibilities 39:6 responsibility 199:17, 199:23, r2e2s9p:o9n,si2b3l0e:2242:11 result 62:9, 176:17, 179:2. 203:20 resulting 104:5 results 93:10, 115:19, 138:17, 138:21, 143:6, 177:18, 177:19, 185:2, 225:7 retaining 242:19 retired 20:18, 20:25, 56:19, 59:3, 72:21, 84:11, 102:7, 112:4. 184:9, 184:11, 184:14, 184:24, 187:18, 188:16 retirement 107:12, 111:25, 112:14 RETURN 241:5 returned 53:17 revealed 105:17 review 12:8, 14:7, 14:21, 16:9, 18:6, 52:10, 56:9, 62:4, 62:4, 83:14, 100:16, 109:21, 109:23, 115:2, 142:9, 142:10, 175:5, 202:10, 205:24 reviewed 34:11, 37:13, 37:14, 56:20, 62:8, 64:4, 100:14, 102:23, 148:13, 153:7, 209:15, 209:16, 214:20, 226:11 reviewing 38:6, 58:19. 58:20, 100:10, 145:19, 148:17, 148:20, 185:1 reviews 11:23, 12:12 Richards 1:13, 5:1, 5:7, 51:17, 64:22, 65:4, 65:5, 76:8, 79:21, 83:k. 89:16, 99:24, 125:12, 133:2, 133:6, 133:8. 133:19. 152:13, 164:20, 184:6, 193:4. 194:8, 194:11, 196:4, 219:5, 227:14, 227:16, 231:14, 237:16, 238:14. 242:10 rid 158:6 rise 107:23, 108:1 risk 163:2, 187:13, 187:20 road 180:1 Roberts 134:8, 153:3 robin 133:20, 134:19, 135:10, ^ n u u i M muu^l C I ML 136:3, I357F,----- 137:9, 138:1, 138:18 role 38:1, 39:2, 54:20, 65:U, 160:2 Rome 29:5 Ron 133:5 Ronald 1:13, 5:1, 64:22, 65:4, 133:1, 194:8, 194:11, 237:15, 238:14, 242:10 Rosenstlehl 126:3, 126:20 roughly 53:9, 53:12, 53:13j 61:13 round 133:20, 134:19, 135:10, 136:3, 136:6, 136:6, 136:6, 136:9, 137:9, 138:1, 138:18, 138:21, 138:22 routinely 236:16 RULE 241:23, 241:23 run 42:22, 80:2, 115:9, 157:20 running 98:23 runs 72:6, 213:2 SABERHAGEN 1:8, 2:22, 242:9 safe 146:12, 224:4, 228:16, 229:10 safeguards 170:11 safely 158:5, 158:23 safest 158:7, 158:7 safety 18:11, 18:15, 18:23, 18:25, 19:6, 19:10, 19:13, 19:19, 19:25, 39:2, 39:9, 39:11, 39:16, 40:1, 63:11, 63:15, 63:23, 64:9, 67:25, 70:14, 79:23, 89:4, 89:6, 90:6, 94:14, 143:21, 144:4, 149:5, 189:19, 190:7, 192:21, 196:24, 197:8, 198:13, 198:14, 198:18, 199:10, 199:23, 217:18, 232:25, 233:16 Sally 28:7 sample 74:15, 75:15, 76:1, 76:1, 94:22, 95:9. 95:22, 96:18, 96:20, 121:21, 136:22, 136:24, 137:2, 205:5, 205:9, 224:2, 236:13 sampled 93:21, 98:2, 98:3 samples 76:17, 77:20, 83:24, 84:24, 84:25, 85:10, 90:1, 90:4, 90:5, 91:19, 91:22, 92:3, 92:19, 94:16, 95:14, 95:17. 95:19, 95:20, 95:24, 95:25, 96:4, 96:14, 97:5, 97:9, 98:1, 98:8, 98:17, 134:9. 134:19, 134:20, 134:24, 135:14, 135:15, 135:16, 135:17, 137:23, 193:1, 220:25, 221:6 sampling 45:17, 76:11, 76:21, 78:12, 83:18, 84:21, 85:1, 90:7, 90:7, 91:16, 91:23, 93:9, 93:9, 94:2, 94:15: 97:4, 97:24, 119:21, 191:5, 205:11, 205:12, 220:18, 220:19, 220:22, 220:22, 221:9 sandblasters 177:14 sandblasting 177:8, 177:20, 177:22 sanitary 170:4 sat 37:15, 37:17, 61:15 satisfaction 216:18 satisfy 191:4 save 238:9 sawing 90:13, 90:17, 91:7, 95:9, 96:16, 96:21, 97:13 saying 10:5, 190:2:21,1,10u::1l,, 11:3, 11:7, 34:1, 35:1, 36:2, 40:14, 40:18, 40:21, 50:5, 67:8, 78:9. 92:12, 95:2, 95:21, 96:13, 96:16, 96:21, 96:25, 97:1. 97:8, 97:15, 109:1, 109:6, 109:7. 110:4, 111:10, 112:9, 116:23, 117:16, 118:24, 112180::262,, 120:7, 127:19, 135:4, 137:13, 137:13, 148:3, 148:4, 149:14, 154:25, 155:1, 155:2, 156:22, 158:19, 162:7, 162:9, 173:22, 175:17, 183:3, 183:16, 190:21, 192:6, 216:17. 224:19, 226:10, 226:20, 236:22 says 14:18, 16:1, 16:2, 17:23. 17:23, 21:22, 21:23, 37:6, 37:8, 44:7, 52:8, 72:9, 77:19, 77:20, 79:23, 81:8, 82:12, 89:13, 91:19, 103:18, 103:25, 109:3, 109:25, 111100::186,, 11101:01:41,?, 110:17, 110:17, 110:17, 110:19, 111:23, 116:20, 112160::1231,, 121:20, 121:21, 123:7, 125:20, 126:2, 126:7, 126:23, 126:24, 127:9, 129:19, 132:14, 133:15, 137:8, 143:24, 151:3! 156:13, 159:22, 169:14, 181:12, 228:7, 228:12, 229:8, 229:9, 229:23, 230:3 schedule 219:18, 219:21 scheduled 219:10, 219:11, 219:14 schools 221:25, 222:3, 222:9 science 134:18, 135:7 sciences 122:18, 123:3. 123:4 scope 133:18 Scott 197:18 sea 120:19, 214:5, 214:6 seal 207:22, 240:13 search 29:25, 98:4 Seattle 1:19, 2:8, 2:12, 2:16, 2:24, 240:24, 241:2, 242:2, 242:8 second-guessing 71:11 secondary 59:8 sseeccrreettaarryy's20120:72:20 secretary/treasu 10:20 section 102:18, 123:4, 167:9, 167:11, 209:12, 211:12 sections 213:5 seeding 59:14 seeing 18:21, 19:18, 26:6! 26:15, 46:15, 62:12, 64:3, 73:4, 73:5, 94:1, 98:1, 98:5. 124:14, 138:4 seeking 169:25 seem 8:20, 9:14, 12:6, 13:1. 14:10, 16:11, 59:25, 83:12, 88:9, 103:7, 119:25, 121:4, 121:5, 126:10, 126T257'129:J;---- 131:6. 165:15, 165:20, 167:21, 168:12, 173:19, 173:22, 228:17, 230:5, 231:3 seemed 22:14, 106:8, 109:25, 110:7, 110:19, 111:16, 130:21, 185:12, 220:13 seems 12:10, 13:5, 13:9, 14:16, 16:12, 47:17, 47:17, 47:18, 60:18, 80:18, 82:22. 88:3, 93:14, 101:20, 107:5, 109:7, 109:11, 109:17, 110:2 , 110:6 . 110:1 2 , 111:1 1 , 111:16, 111:16, 113:2, 121:7, 126:17, 130:13, 140:19, 143:19, 152:22, 179:20, 185:13, 220:10 sees 192:23 selected 125:6, 229:7 selikoff 31:12, 31:15, 32:5, 35:2, 35:5, 35:10, 35:11, 73:6, 106:19, 107:9, 107:15, 107:19, 108:12, 110078::2118,, 108:23, 109:1. 109:18, 110:11, 110:15, 114:23, 118:11, 120:7, 122:16, 132:10, 208:9, 208:16, 208:19, 209:6, 209:11, 212:14 Sell toff's 115:2, 132:9, 208:8 send 52:7, 127:18, 135:17 sends 143:9 sense 39:14, 218:8, 218:9 sent 5:15, 118:5, 118:12, 130:4. 134:10, 203:10, 204:11 sentences 37:13 separate 19:25 September 221:12, 234:11 sequence 228:11 Sequoia 2:10, 194:16 series 33:9, 37:21, 156:18, 164:16, 205:4. 205:14, 207:14 serious 203:15 served 202:5 service 153:9 services 56:18, 195:16 serving 203:14 setting 22:3, 24:24, 31:19, 36:14, 48:16, 49:1, 71:2, 115:8, 116:14, 118:1, 192:9, 200:25 settings 24:24, 24:25, 108:17. 108: 18, 200:20 settlement 186:1, s1e8t6u:p5212:21 seven 135:13, 135:17, 136:15, 137:18, 137:19 several 5:14, 5:22, 16:25, 47:3, 58:23, 76:9, 87:25, 93:25, 197:16, 209:17, 210:11, 219:15, 223:16, 223:16, 228:14 severity 58:24 shale 14:23 share 206:9 shed 69:13, 70:22, 71:3, 71:17. 72:17 sheet 85:1. 238:11, 241:4, 241:5, 241:5, 242:13, 242:14, 242:14 sheets 91:17, 211:21 short 38:10, 209:1, MOBURG & ASSOCIATES, INC. (206)622 RUN RICHARDS 221:2 " --------------------------------------- short-term 217:10 shortage 157:17, 158:17 shortcomings 17:16 shorten 227:19 shortly 84:11, 86:18 showed 30:23, 105:25, 211:5, 216:21 SHOWING 241:5 shown 104:12, 106:16 shut 159:14 sick 116:23 sign 190:12, 241:5, 241:5, 242:14 signature 175:11, 239:14, 241:5, 241:22, 242:13, 242:14. 242:15 signed 15:3, 242:14 significance 224:8 significant 60:23, 106:20, 224:2 significantly 88:17 signing 239:16 silica 107:3, 177:21 silicate 107:2 similar 7:9, 7:14, 24:25, 57:4 simple 41:2, 66:22 simpler 220:23 simply 155:23 Sinai 31:16, 35:7, 107:24. 209:9 Sincerely 242:20 single 76:10, 95:8, sit 30:9, 95:2, 116:7, 122:8, 140:10 site 198:23 sitting 6:13, 134:23, 162:7, 208:25 situation 63:9, 63:10, 66:12, 75:2, 78:3. 90:10, 115:4, 148:15, 158:15, 193:19, 208:20, 209:2, 222:2. 230:1. 230:10 situations 86:4, 86:24, 87:11, 197:18. 197:19 six 61:17, 135:13, 159:9, 213:17 size 32:20, 104:9, 171:8, 210:19 Skagit 1:2, 221:19 skills 74:20 skin 66:18 skyscrapers 31:21 sledgehammer 172:3, 172:8 slice 135:15 slices 135:15 slides 135:8, 135:9 slightly 145:25, smalier 132:6, 179:6 smarter 119:5 Smith 153:4 smoke 32:9, 32:11 smoking 32:3, 32:6, 35:15! 35:16 snapped 65:22 ssoncuifafl 19231::63 Socony-vacuum 12:2, 29:2 ssoolleilcyit12220:29:8, 183:4 so2l0i2c:i1ted 53:16, ssoolmiedbo1d1y0:858:10, 129:3, 129:5, 174:3, 177:7, 198:24, 199:11, 226:21 somebody's 163:20 someone 83:7, 111:12, 162:4, 172:11, 172:14, 173:3, 186:11, 187:3, 187:14. 212:16, 219:2?, 219:24, 226:24 sometime 26:4, 56:10, 100:13, 121:24, 223:7, 233:9 somewhat 85:23, 94:16, 139:17, 177773------------- somewhere 58:13, 174:3, 213:18, 213:19 sooner 219:16 soot 17:13 Sorenson 189:15, 190:10 sorry 7:6, 26:1, 28:5, 61:24, 65:19, 78:25, 91:li, 106:2, 134:4, 154:4, 173:10. 173:24, I96:li, 216:2, 234:5 sort 26:6, 32:16, 33:1, 33:11, 38:10, 52:12, 54:15, 6659::223,, 8608:1:58,, 68:9, 80:20, 83:12, 86:5, 90:8, 94:1, 103:19, 107:20, 108:2, 116:22, 137:1. 137:11, 142:16, 159:1, 162:3, 167:15, 172:21, 185:12, 186:17 220:13, 221:15, 221:22, 225:7, 225:9, 225:10 sorts 27:9, 38:25, 85:7 sounds 133:21, 135:4 source 74:15 South 29:6 space 68:15 span 53:10 sgeak^60:16, 64:11, sgeaklng 232:1, speaks 112:11, 230:17 special 87:18, 170:11 specialized 211:18 specific 35:13, 35:14, 45:14, 58:22, 62:9, 62:19, 74:19, 76:17, 96:2, 106:17, 112:6, 139:2, 139:17. 140:12, 140:12, 191:21, 195:2, 195:3, 223:8, 233:4 specifically 35:6, 37:17, 45:8, 63:5, 74:1. 86:22, 93:24, 115:12, 164:1, 180:2, 182:25, 193:24, 198:1, 216:14, 223:18, 226:14, 227:2, 231:4, 232:24, 236:5, 236:12, 236:17, 236:23, 237:4 specifics 192:4 specimen 43:22 S|eculat1ng 225:10, spend 209:13 S09t17:24' 36 :U" spill 74:14 sgjllage 190:1, spoke 217:16 spots 81:1 $8^31:24, 108:3, sprayed-on 132:12 spraying 31:20, 31:22, 73:7, 115:6, 208:2? pring 101:2, 158:21 ss 238:4, 239:4 staff 83:17. 83:18, 83:22, 84:15, 84:19, 129:10 stage 114:7, 205:24 Stamford 2:?0 stamp 52:19, 101:12, 101:16, 101:16, 102:10, 123:10, 12:, 130:24, 150:25, 151:1, 152:5 stamped 203:8 stand 112:24. 129:24 standard 34:13. 66:2, 66:16, 83:19, 94:3, 100:23, 119:6, 119:7, Pages 1 to 242 119:12, 119:17, 119:18, 119:20, 119:23, 119:23, 120:17, 156:4, 175:13, 201:24, 202:13, 213:16, 213:18, 214:15, 221:7 standards 67:23, 85:22, 85:25, 93:22, 119:22, 120:14, 139:15, 146:10, 146:11, 190:1, 190:14, 214:10 standpoint 24:22, 38:7. 66:17, 67:22, 112:i5, 114:12, 142:11, 222:3 stands 156:20 Stanton 185:3, 185:21 start 25:19, 45:7, 58:18, 63:1, 77:21, 103:13, 130:5, 160:6, 160:8, 171:19 started 20:10, 27:1, 31:5, 74:16, 84:25, 89:25, 90:2, 134:3, 173:9, 178:8, 191:14, 203:14 starting 23:6, 26:1, 31:12, 174:14, 196:18, 197:6, 198:12, 199:6, 200:3, 221:11, 221:18 starts 43:17 state 1:1, 20:11, 21:9, 21:11, 24:9, 26:5, 35:18, 54:22, 59:14, 75:25, 76:3, 104:21, 120:1, 169:8, 225:5, 238:3, 239:3, 239:8, 240:23 stated 7:18, 25:17, 33:21, 35:i2, 44:19, 49:14, 55:3, 93:10, 121:6, 128:20, 131:5, 168:14, 206:22, 215:7 statement 12:9, 16:11, 38:11, 50;11, 61:3, 67:14, 68:23, 103:19. 114:19, 131:11, 147:18, 148:8, 190:4, 215:20, 229:16, 229:21, 229:23, 229:24 statements 50:5, 213:22 Staten 102:5, 102:5 states 38:6, 39:19, 40:19, 72:8, 87:18, 104:4, 131:17, 157:17, 158:18, 168:13, 189:18, 208:1, 230:23 stating 236:19 statistical 33:20. 34:25, 35:3. 36:16, 37:23, 47:25, 50:13, 64:16, 107:6, 109:2, 110:1, 110:7, 110:13, 110:20, 116:19. 224:8 statistically 60:23, 60:24, 224:1 statistician 60:25 statistics 17:14 stature 201:22 status 82:2, 82:3, 82:6 stay 210:21, 220:15 steam 157:24, 158:21, 159:7, 161:6 steel 31:20, 108:2, 108:9, 115:6 stenojraphlcally step 48:9 steps 87:2. 138:19, 145:3, 146:6, 162:2 Steve 5:16 STEVEN 2:18 stock 155:11, 157:14, 158:2 stocks 154:22, 155:22, 157:1 I-VWIX l \ X V n M I \ U J stoKinger 202:6 stomach 106:22 stop 156:12, 156:15, 157:13, 158:1 stopped 55:22, 158:19, 181:7 straightforward 33:18 street 1:17, 2:11, 2:19, 123:5 strict 202:7 strictly 81:18, 201:22 strike 25:18, 70:7, 168:8, 194:22, 204:8, 208:6 strip 63:2, 92:15 stripped 85:17, 90:9, 93:1 stripping 71:5, 85:20, 85:21, 92:1, 93:11, 94:24, 95:6, 229:5 strong 111:11, 167:24, 168:8 structurally 102:19 structured 227:3 structures 108:3, 115:6 studied 18:9, 24:4, 24:8 studies 25:1, 30:22, 31:12, 34:9, 34:25, 35:5, 35:10, 35:11, 44:4, 45:23, 46:3, 46:7, 46:12, 46:13, 46:19, 46:24, 47:2, 47:3, 49:14, 98:17, 104:6, 104:15, 104:19, 104:25, 105:4, 105:18, 106:8, 108:24, 109:1, 109:18, 116:3, 132:9, 209:18, 223:1, 223:2, 223:3. 223:5, 223:12, 223:15, 224:10 studying 100:10, 167:14, 207:5, 207:8 stuff 42:22, 127:16, 136:13, 141:10, 229:5 subcommittee 101:4, 109:13, 109:14, 165:3, 165:16, 167:1, 167:11, 225:4 subject 142:6, 195:8, 196:10 ssuubbjjeeccttsive121:1024:12 submitted 50:25, 239:13 subsequent 55:3, 216:12 Subsequently 106:10 substance 34:11, 66:13, 163:4. 170:16, 186:16, 202:9 substances 17:13, 46:5, 46:15, 47:5, 65:9, 115:16, 115:17, 119:5, 189:21, 190:2, 190:21, 192:1, 223:6, 223:10, 223:16 substitute 63:6, 143:22, 144:20 substitutes 86:17, 86:18, 88:20, 144:22 substituting 86:6, 87:3 successor 28:8 sufficient 40:24, 48:2, 48:3, 64:15, 67:12, 68:13, 69:4, 70:10, 70:11, 73:25. 117:9, 120:13, 198:23, 215:7, 225:9 suggestions 106:9 suitable 170:2 suite 1:18, 2:8, 2:12, 2:16, 2:24, 241:2. 242:2, 242:8 summarize 185:12 summarized 94:1 summary 17:17, 38:10, 43:15, 43:16, 56:22, 65':107 73:13,-----103:5, 103:7, 103:8, 105:12 summer 122:18 Sunday 5:16 Sunday's 129:20 superintendents 142:21, 142:24, 143:5, 154:12, 154:21 SUPERIOR 1:1 supervising 199:22 supervisor 20:16, 63:23, 64:9, 89:6, 149:5, 196:24, 197:8, 198:14, 199:22, 217:18, 231:1. 232:25 supervisors 63:15, 139:9. 140:3 supervisory 229:25 supplemental 125:13 sullied 163:22, supplier 163:16 supply 54:2 supplying 160:3 supposed 22:11 supposedly 183:15 surprise 5:15, 64:6, 64:7, 219:17, 219:23 surrogate 236:14 surrounding 132:11 survey 14:21, 45:21, 52:10, 66:24, 67:6, 67:8. 68:23, 69:10, 69:11, 101:3, 114:9, 117:20, 146:l! 147:11 147:15, 147:21, 147:24, 147:24, 203:19 surveyed 21:19, 57:7 surveying 183:6 surveys 6:1, 38:14, 147:4 suspect 94:16 suspected 59:15, 73:16, 204:24, 204:25, 205:3, 205:19 suspended 105:21 suspicion 37:10 suspicions 44:1 SW 2:4, 242:17 swatting 172:3 sworn 5:1, 78:24, 240:4 Sylvanla 29:3 s ^ o s i u m 122:15, synopsis 49:18 system 88:10, 91:9, 130:20, 180:7, 191:25 systemic 83:14 systems 170:2 T-I-G-H 204:13 tabulation 56:17, 56:22 taken 17:14. 25:3, 41:25, 75:15, 76:1, 90:2, 90:4, 95:9, 95:17, 102:4, 136:21, 149:19, 162:2, 162:25, 176:21, 188:9. 203:17, 217:20, 239:10, 240:10 taking 30:17, 41:6, 75:21, 78:5, 79:10, 87:1, 95:25, 96:4, 99:19, 135:14, 146:6, 148:24, 153:22, 171:12, 174:4, 184:2, 218:25. 239:19 talks 41:1, 184:13, 211:12, 230:10, 231:8 tanks 20:14 tape 64:22, 65:3, 79:6, 79:8, 86:3, 133:1, 133:5, 194:6, 194:7, 194:11. 237:13 tapes 237:14 tar 14:23 target 140:25, 142:18, 142:22, 142:25 tarps 108:8, 172725 tars 168:4 taught 49:21 taxlhg 140:14 teacher 221:13 team 131:18 teams 170:9 technical 11:25, 14:7, 15:11, 15:18, 15:25, 51:25, 125:22, 135:5, 169:24, 203:5 technique 95:15, 95:17, 95:18, 119:13, 119:21, 134:17, 135:3, 137:4, 173:12, 178:1. 178:16, 178:24, 214:16, 220:24, 221:6, 221:8 techniques 87:2, 90:7, 119:21, 158:4, 178:23, 190:10 technology 174:7 Ted 210:1 telling 58:8, 77:9, 157:25, 162:6, 163:13 temperature 87:9, 157:20, 157:21, 157:23 temporary 119:22, 120:17, 213:16 tenants 15:14 tent 172:22 tenure 18:23, 198:13, 232:25 term 66:15, 137:12 termed 67:13, 70:12, 155:17, 215:9 terminal 59:13 terminating 179:24 termination 179:17, 184:13 terms 39:25, 45:4, 50:15, 109:18, 120:2, 140:23, 148:6, 153:13, 159:14, 167:14, 170:15, 180:20, 196:9. 196:13, 196:14, 206:5, 206:6, 212:22, 216:5, 216:7, 221: 2 , 221:2 test 62:13, 179:17, 224:12, 224:13 tested 90:12, 115:14, 180:10, 180:12 testified 61:13, 62:1, 64:2, 76:9, 107:14, 121:10, 149:4, 194:19, 196:12, 196:16, 197:5, 198:3, 199:6, 199:19, 200:2, 221:10, 226:20 testify 62:5, 159:4, 239:25. 240:4 testifying 62:8, 170:12 testimony 5:12, 7:5, 30:17, 42:11, 44:19, 47:9, 55:4, 100:17, 118:15, 118:16, 118:20, 153:22, 157:5, 184:2, 198:5, 218:25, 231:22, 231:23, 232:4, 232:5, 236:3, 240:8 testing 45:16, 45:17, 83:14, 90:24, 91:4, 115:16, 115:24, 176:1, 179:4, 180:24, 181:15, 182:19, 182:23, 183:4, 183:7, 195:13, 218:6, 223:17 tests 115:20, 179:6, 179:19, 179:20, 180:9, 180:12 Texaco 2:14, 6:19, 6:19, 6:25, 7:18, 8:16, 8:18, 8:25, 9:2, 9:10, 9:14. 10:13, 10:21, 11:2, 11:4, 15:6, 15:10, 15:13, 18:10, MOBURG & ASSOCIATES, INC. (206)622 18:13, 20:15,-----20:18, 21:3, 21:4, 25:20, 26:8, 26:11, 26:22, 27:4, 27:10, 35:25, 36:9, 36:20, 37:2, 38:2. 38:5, 39:8, 39:12, 39:16, 39:23, 44:25, 45:3, 45:6, 45:7, 45:16, 45:22, 46:4, 46:10, 46:12, 47:1, 47:3, 48:10, 48:22, 50:7, 50:14, 50:21, 51:3, 51:6, 51:18. 53:14, 53:21, 54:14, 55:13, 55:14, 55:16, 58:9, 59:18, 61:6, 61:13, 62:8, 62:9, 62:25, 63:4, 63:23, 64:9, 68:22, 69:1, 69:6, 70:13, 72:9, 72:16, 76:9, 76:10, 78:20, 81:13, 81:14, 81:16, 81:18, 81:18, 82:15, 83:3, 83:3, 87:5, 88:10, 91:9, 97:11, 98:8, 99:5, 99:12, 100:1, 101:9, 101:17, 112:4, 115:11, 115:23, 117:12, 117:18, 122:15, 122:21, 123:14, 124:6, 124:8. 124:19, 126:11, 126:11, 127:1, 127:6, 128:7, 130:4, 130:5, 130:20, 131:1, 132:4, 133:10, 133:14, 136:7, 136:17, 137:23, 138:13, 138:25, 139:13, 139:17, 140:1, 140:24, 142:7, 142:22, 142:24, 143:20, 146:5, 146:14, 146:17, 146:18, 148:22, 149:5, 150:19, 151:2, 151:5, 151:10, 151:14, 155:3, 155:9, 155:21, 156:8, 159:24, 160:3, 163:2, 163:16, 163:22, 165:11, 168:19, 168:23, 170:13, 174:8, 175:21, 176:5, 178:9, 179:23, 184:9, 184:15, 184:16, 184:20, 186:5, 186:10, 186:17, 186:25, 187:12, 187:20, 187:23, 187:24, 188:5, 190:5. 191:25, 192:13, 193:4, 193:25, 195:7, 195:15, 195:16, 203:9, 205:7, 205:7, 205:15, 205:17, 205:21, 206:1, 212:25, 214:1, 216:12, 223:2, 223:3, 223:5, 223:8, 223:13, 224:6, 224:15, 226:9. 231:15, 234:11, 235:6 Texaco's 7:18, 10:24, 18:6, 26:22, 33:4, 39:9, 40:18, 40:23, 48:17, 60:7, 60:7, 60:12, 108:13, 108:14, 131:5, 137:8, 145:15, 168:15, 168:25, 168:25, 176:21, 186:9, 186:12, 188:21, 193:22, 212:16, 213:11 Texas 9:6, 9:10, 9:11, 9:23, 10:3, 10:16, 11:25, 12:7, 12:11, 13:5, 14:8, 15:24, 17:25, 18:10, 18:24, 19:5, 19:9, 19:23, 25:18, 29:3, 29:8, 29:14, " 29:19, 30:5, 30:10, 125:14, 166:3 text 17:3, 17:18, 17:23 textile 21:10, 21:19, 24:24, 24:25, 25:9 textiles 211:20 thank 13:2, 18:5, 28:2, 57:22, 128:14, 195:23, 227:12, 235:24, 237:11 themselves 64:12 theories 32:13, 35:15 theory 32:14 there's 9:5, 16:17, 16:25, 35:18, 39:15, 44:13, 44:13, 49:5, 56:21, 57:11, 61:17, 66:11, 66:19, 68:8, 68:16, 68:17, 73:3, 81:21, 92:8, 95:8, 111:7, 111:11, 112:12, 113:3, 120:13, 130:24, 133:12, 133:17, 147:9, 147:9, 147:23, 148:4, 151:4, 151:16, 158:25, 159:4, 160:16, 162:4, 164:21, 171:11, 171:13, 179:6, 194:5, 211:12, 212:5, 228:7, 231:1$ thereafter 220:20 thereof 240:2 Thermit 29:5 they'd 180:16 they're 49:8, 49:10, 50:11, 59:19, 73:7, 75:8, 110:15, 118:2, 137:13, 143:8, 144:17, 171:15, 192:22, 230:2 they've 89:13, 125:14, 180:6 thick 5:22, 6:3 thing 32:18, 37:24, 56:3, 62:18, 68:18, 71:1, 72:3, 72:3, 73:2, 73:3, 73:19, 88:1. 111:15, 113:11, 115:3, 127:21, 133:8, 157:3. 158:8, 158:11, 179:21, 187:11, 190:5, 220:6, 232:8 thinking 102:6, 235:9 thinks 110:5 third 11:17, 14:15, 59:9, 129:13, 241:2 thirty 242:15 thoracic 106:9 though 15:21, 142:20, 157:3, 226:8 thread 25:3, 25:4 threat 201:12, 201:12, 201:23, 202:3 three-foot-long 156:5 threshold 66:15, 67:17, 67:22, 119:15, 173:7, 173:15, 173:18, 174:1, 201:2, 201:4, 213:13, 234:17, 235:16, 236:4. 236:17 threw 195:6, 195:7 throughout 191:25, 196:24 throw 154:25, 171:2, 212:23 tie 127:21, 127:22 tie-1n 32:7 tied 82:11 Tlgh 54:4, 54:15, 56:14, 57:25, 129:6, 130:15, 130:17, 130:21, 133:15, 204:13, 205:21 tighten 135:20, 138:19 tightly 162:18 Pages 1 to Al W I 1 l\-L V -l i r v i \ u J tile 222:2, 222:4--tiles 211:21, 222:12 tired 61:22 title 8:11, 8:18. 9:1, 14:15, 20:9, 28:20. 32:4, 58:6, 112:18, 176:14, 226:12 :l9, titled 112:19 titles 176:12, 177:6, 177:6 TLV 34:11. 66:15, 66:16. 68:1, 119:4, 119:18, 120:11, 201:7, 201:11, 201:17, 201:18, 201:21, 202:11, 202:13, 213:14, 213:21, 214:3, 214:8, 214:8, 215:23, 221:, 234:20, 234:20, 236:6. 236:18, 236:20, 236:21 TLVs 205:7, 235:3, 235:10 today 5:13, 7:5, 30:10, 42:11, 60:13, 80:24, 99:16, 100:17, 120:9, 122:8, 128:17, 128:20, 140:11, 150:17, 150:18, 169:5, 192:2, 194:20, 211:10, 216:22, 231:13 today's 172:4, 237:14. 237:15 tool 230:4 tools 230:11 top 7:24, 13:23, 28:19, 79:15. 123:6, 125 125:21, 139:8, 1S4:7, 163:7 topics 26:15, 142:17, 218:12 tore 222:2 total 205:8, 205:9, 205:12, 214:8, 221:4, 234:19. 234:21, 234:21, 235:5, 236:7, 236:8, 236:12, 236:14, 236:22 totally 171:15 touche 173:1 towers 213:2 toxicology 20:16, 20:18 trace 9:20, 9:25, 10:9, 32:15, 171:7 traced 6:22 tract 59:5 trade 230:25, 231:9, 231:9, 231:11 trades 231:10 train 90:6, 94:14, 230:24 trained 76:4, 84:13, 170:9, 220:10, 220:11 trainee 228:3, 230:25, 231:10 training 33:22, 65:16, 69:18, 75:17, 78:11, 85:7, 85:11, 90:5, 182:23, 196:23, 220:8, 228:2, 228:6 transcribed 239:14, 240:7 transcript 240:7 transmission 109:12, 109:13 transmitted 58:1 transmitting 56:15 treated 85:11, 205:21 treatment 167:14 tried 50:19, 61:15, 85:12 trigger 140:23 true 18:24, 85:12, 86:21, 87:10. 96:8, 97:2. 97:9, 7:14, 127:5, 127:6, 193:7, 238:8, 240:7 truth 240:4, 240:5, 240:5 lulsa 98:4 tumors 106:21 Tuohy 185:24 turn 13:11, 14:17, 1 5 7 1 3 , 28:16, 31:4, 78:14, 81:4, 99:24, 101:3, 101:3, 125:17, 125:25, 151:21, 157:16, 166:8. 202:17, 206:20, 210:25, 210:25, 212:1, 228:12, 229:8 turned 78:17 two-day 143:7 tying 132:17 type 22:3, 24:24, 25:3, 31:19, 58:25, 68:10, 68:18, 71:2, 73:5, 77:13. 85:18, 87:11, 90:10, 96:9, 96:11. 96:15, 108:18, 116:14, 118:1, 127:17, 131:19, 132:12, 132:15, 162:3, 163:21, 164:4, 178:23, 200:20, 200:21, 200:24, 201:11, 203:12, 203:19, 208:2. 208:20, 212:20, 214:2, 224:10, 226:25, 229:25, 234:25 typed 127:17 types 24:7, 24:25, 27:10, 38:5, 117:23, 145:7, 145:20, 179:6, 197:16, 210:23, 214:17 typewriting 239:11 typewritten 14:2, typical 178:23, 213:9. 218:12 Typically 72:5 u U.S 143:6, 150:22, 154:12 uh-huh 9:11, 12:17, 23:11. 53:4, 135:25, 150:24 ultimate 39:12, 158:6 ultraviolet 17:13, 168:2 uncertain 185:1, 185:2 uncommon 61:4, 61:4 undefined 132:18 undersigned 239:7 understand 22:2, 23:2, 23:4, 24:3, 26:19, 48:21, 49:5, 52:13, 68:25, 77:19, 90:22, 92:25, 103:3, 108:11, 112:3, 126:15, 137:10, 141:18, 141:24, 154:20, 175:19, 192:6, 193:15 understanding 7:19, 31:2, 34:2, 48:23, 80:16, 107:15. 107:18, 107:21, 113:9, 113:21, 160:2, 163:15. 163:17, 163:19, 234:10 understood 133:18, 194:19 undertake 68:22, 93:2, 140:1 undertaken 91:8 undertaking 12:8, 186:17 undertook 139:1 undue 178:22 uniform 57:11 union 2:11, 129:21 unique 177:23, 217:11 unit 158:1, 160:5, 163:24, 164:1, 189:17 United 38:6, 72:8, 104:4, 157:17, 158:18, 208:1 units 86:11, 115:9, 158:21, 160:13, 160:17, 161:1, 161:3. 181:15, 190:11, 213:1, 213:6, 213:8 universities 201:23 university 31:9, 98:19, 202:2 unless 13:2, 18:20, 52:8, 239:14 unlikely 234:16 unproved 106:16 unusual 12:25. 217:17. 220:3 update 115:2. 115:3 upon 1:11, 39:22, 226:11, 239:20 upper 14:1 urge 120:25 urging 207:4 USA 125:13 usage 161:18, 199:16 USCA 241:23 using 85:25, 87:6, 87:9, 89:9, 89:13, 90:6. 95:17, 138:13, 149:6, 155:22, 156:13, 158:3. 158:4, 160:19, 170:15, 185:4, 236:14 usual 82:10 usually 190:12 V V-A-N 206:16 vacuum 74:14 va^uel^ 29:24, valid 106:16, 107:6, 110:1, 110:20 Valley 221:19 value 66:15, 67:22, 119:15, 173:7, 173:15, 173:19, 174:2, 201:4, 213:13 values 67:17, 201:2, 234:18, 236:4, 236:17 van 100:22, 206:15, 206:15 variabilities 136:12 variability 135:19 variables 66:11, 66:19 variance 136:16, 136:17, 137:14, 137:22, 137:24, 138:5, 138:18 varied 105:22, 177:6, 226:13 variety 106:24 various 12:12, 14:19, 31:13, 31:25, 45:18, 54:2, 137:22, 156:25 varying 58:24 Vashon 2:4, 2:4, 242:17, 242:18 vast 94:2, 97:S ventilation 25:7, 38:24, 68:10, 68:11, 68:12, 68:12, 71:15, 73:10, 75:20, 145:7 ventures 2:10, 194:17 Vernon 221:20 verse 37:17, 70:18, 225:25 versus 27:13, 72:5, 119:18, 120:15, 177:7 videographer 2:25, 30:16, 30:19, 64:21, 65:2. 79:9, 79:12, 79:16, 79:19, 99:18, 99:21, 132:25, 133:4, 153:21, 153:24, 184:1, 184:4, 194:6, 194:10, 218:24, 219:2, 237:12 videotaped 1:11 view 14:18, 60:8, 78:7. 116:4, 118:17, 118:19, 129:19, 144:25, 146:5, 146:12, 157:2, 158:16 viewed 174:14 views 230:18 violated 163:13 Virginia 1:4, 29:6 visit 77:11, 84:15, 84:17, 219:10. 219:12, 219:21 visited 77:25, 174:13, 181:6, 209:8 visiting 180:3 visits 192:16 visual 74:8 visualized 69:15 visually 73:18, 76:4, 92:21, 96:9 voice 231:24 volume 179:14, 179:16, 183:22 VTC 129:5. 129:24, 130:13, 133:15 w WA 241:2, 241:23, 242:2, 242:8, 242:18 WA-TEX 56:6, 80:1, 133:9 wait 109:24, 115:15 waive 239:16 walk 220:3, 220:7 walk-around 191:1 walk-through 77:24 walked 77:15 wanted 5:11, 41:17, 41:19, 43:10. 128:25, 134:14, 142:24, 152:9, 177:5, 178:21, 198:24 wants 227:20 war 20:13 warning 180:7, 207:24, 208:3 warnings 39:4 warrlck 9:6, 165:7 Washington 1:1, 1:19, 2:4, 2:8. 2:12, 2:16, 2:24, 221:20, 238:3, 239:3, 239:8, 240:23 wax 171:2, 171:3 wa^| 68:16, 158:25, w e 'd'57:13, 91:16, 96:13, 128:24, 135:16, 177:4, 191:17 w e 'H 7:2, 18:4, 30:16, 41:10, 42:5, 73:11, 79:9, 99:18, 109:24, 111:22, 140:16, 153:21, 184:1, 193:1. 218:23, 237:13 we're 16:23, 23:12, 24:23, 24:24, 25:5, 25:6, 26:17, 27:8, 30:20, 41:6, 62:14, 63:8, 63:9, 65:2, 67:4, 69:9, 71:10, 71:15, 73:4. 73:5, 73:18, 73:19, 77:3, 79:12, 79:16, 79:19, 81:24, 95:3, 95:23, 99:21, 113:16, 116:17, 116:18, 116:21, 119:17, 127:9, 136:5, 138:20. 145:19, 153:24, 162:18, 163:1, 180:17, 184:4, 192:2, 192:16, 218:25, 219:2 we've 5:9. 8:12, 46:21, 80:23, 83:20, 99:25, 101:8, 116:13, 165:10, 201:14, 215:23 weakness 107:6, 110:13 weaknesses 106:16, 109:2, 110:1, 110:7, 110:20 weaving 25:2, 25:4 Wednesday 175:14 week 201:8, 201:10 weren't 41:24, 150:2, 150:8, 174:18, 191:6, 195:19, 200:13, 213:3. 221:3, 222:3 west 29:6 wet 86:2, 172:15 ettlng 63:1, 145:9, 156:17 what's 8:3, 31:2, 65:14, 100:2, MOBURG & ASSOCIATES, IN O (206)622 ""Til: 8.1.33:13,-- 141:11, 148:20, 169:17, 170:23, 220:9 whatever 9:1, 28:13, 42:6, 42:16, 42:18, 42:24, 74:5, 96:10, 108:4. 108:8. 117:20, 128:11, 137:19, 156:5. 165:13, 171:20, 185:18, 192:7, 230:2 whatsoever 76:12, 149:7, 233:16, 236:5 whenever 231:1 whereas 69:17 WHEREOF 240:12 whether 11:2, 20:3, 38:19, 38:20, 40:25, 45:16, 74:3, 78:12, 92:17, 97:17, 104:18. 115:24, 126:10, 185:2, 197:25, 198:4, 208:1. 214:23, 217:15, 220:12, 229:25, 234:13, 235:2 whichever 137:20 whoever 94:23 whole 16:14. 56:3, 77:16, 88:1, 111:4, 113:6, 113:7. 113:11, 113:14, 139:23, 158:1, 171:2, 199:17, 215:20, 220:3, 240:5 whom 130:17 whose 81:19, 184:25 ride 38:23 widely 118:6 ridespread 59:8, 59:14 Wilkie 28:7 Wilson 33:8, 35:20. 36:2, 36:11, 36:19, 37:1, 39:19, 40:13, 40:18, 44:24, 45:9, 45:12, 56:20, 58:17, 58:20, S9:17, 73:21, 117:12, 181:12, 181:21, 181:25, 182:4, 182:10, 183:3, 183:15, 203:22 Wilson's 48:11, 50:15, 61:3 wind 73:10 windy 209:1, 209:4 rished 199:11 rithheld 148:4 within 19:25, 40:10, 54:18, 76:2, 85:22, 102:18, 139:17, 186:4, 189:16, 223:5, 236:10, 238:8, 242:15 ritness 2:15, 5:1, 30:15, 45:6. 62:8, 78:22, 141:12, 141:16, 141:22, 144:9. 154:5, 161:13, 183:24, 239:10, 239:13, 239:16, 240:3, 240:12 woman 28:6 woody 166:19, 166:23, 166:25, 167:8 wool 87:10 wore 172:18 worker 97:11, 117:13, 117:18, 161:20, 162:25, 163:3. 180:13 worker's 76:13 orkers 17:7, 21:19, 24:17, 30:24, 31:23, 33:18, 39:9, 39:12, 40:1, 45:5, 48:24, 50:14, 51:11, 61:8, 64:10, 69:8, 70:6, 70:15, 71:5, 71:8, 85:5, 103:15, 106:18, 107:22, 114:7, 115:4, 116:22, 117:1. 131:23, 143:21, 144:4, 146:15, 170:6, 1 7 5 :21, '175:24,----- 176:20, 177:25, 178:13, 178:16 178:19, 178:21, 179:23, 179:24, 180:20, 183:1, 184:16, 184:17, 192:15, 208:9, 208:18, 208:25, 209:19, 215:12, 218:17 wrkmanlike 228:16 wrkplace 65:25, 139:3, 189:24 workplaces 22:11 vorks 66:25 worst 85:13, 85:23, 90:9, 90:15, 137:9, 137:11 wouldn't 44:5, 82:4, 135:2, 137:7, 144:25, 186:23, 230:14 wound 182:22 wrap 172:21 wrench 226:19 writes 120:22 writing 44:21, 111:8, 154:17, 186:11, 212:4 written 67:6, 110:24, 118:12, 160:4, 210:1 wrong 52:11, 57:17, 65:13 wrote 36:8, 67:11, 68:22, 69:3, 69:23, 70:4, 70:9, 70:24, 87:17. 87:23, 89:9, 117:10, 181:22 x-ray 104:10, 106:4, 176:15, 180:6, 180:12, 186:2, 186:6, 218:7 x-rayed 177:25 x-rays 17:14, 176:21, 177:10, 177:15, 177:19, 178:6. 178:10, 180:24, 183:21, 184:25, 185:6 yeah 6:7, 16:15, 18:17, 21:12, 23:13, 23:24, 26:7, 39:11, 41:10, 45:25, 53:13, 55:20, 58:13, 58:18, 63:22, 66:10, 67:1, 78:21, 81:6, 81:25, 84:2, 90:15, 91:S, 92:20, 93:23, 95:12, 100:13, 102:1. 103:23, 111:21, 112:7, 112:18, 114:3, 114:13. 138:16, 152:14, 154:4, 156:22, 158:20, 164:8, 167:18, 174:10, 175:2, 175:18, 181:5, 182:12, 184:12, 207:8, 213:15, 222:13 yesterday 5:17, 7:14, 7:15, 56:9, 152:2, 164:24 yet 14:24, 31:22, 121:9, 16:11, 159:10 York 9:11, 10:21, 14:8, 31:13, 52:18, 52:19, 101:13, 101:17, 107:23, 122:18, 123:3, 123:5, 123:5, 131:14, 131:24, 134:8, 134:10, 203:8 you'd 41:4, 42:18, 66:16, 66:20, 83:13, 135:12, 137:18, 141:7, 176:25, 220:IS you'll 47:16. 47:25 yourself 5:19 y r s 81:23 Pages 1 to 242