Document VJKGRNyOZEkDE5qXVZeDM47ow

UNION CARBIDE CORPORATION olo ridgebury road, danbury. ct. 06817 LAW DEPARTMENT May 25, 1984 VIA EMERY F. Walter Conrad, Esq. Baker & Botts One Shell Plaza Houston, Texas 77002 Re: Dear Walter: Thelma 0. Kingsbury v. Union Carbide Corporation, et al. Enclosed is a copy of Service of Process Trans mittal Form, Summons and Plaintiff's Original Complaint in referenced litigation. Please defend our interests in this case. Plaintiff, Thelma Kingsbury, is the surviving wife of decedent Thomas Page Kingsbury, who allegedly died from brain cancer known as malignant astrocytoma, because of exposure to vinyl chloride which was manufactured and sold by the five defendants--Dow, PPG, Union Carbide, Stauffer and Diamond Shamrock. Plaintiff's primary allegation is that defendants failed to warn decedent of the dangers of vinyl chloride and that vinyl chloride caused brain damage and brain cancer to decedent resulting in his death. The complaint further states that decedent was an employee of Union Carbide from February 18, 1953 until January, 1983, and that Union Carbide failed: (a) to pro vide a safe place to work; (b) to warn; (c) to provide protective equipment, monitoring and medical surveillance; (d) to install proper ventilation; and, (e) to adopt a safety plan. Plaintiff further alleges that Union Carbide's negligence amounted to willful misconduct and evidenced a PRIVILEGED AND "CONFIDENTIAL MATERIAL SUBJECT TO PROTECTIVE ORDER" ucc 068887 F. Walter Conrad, Esq. Baker & Botts May 25, 1984 conscious indifference to decedent's welfare. Plaintiff seeks to recover punitive damages of $1,000,000 for Union Carbide's gross negligence but is not seeking actual damages from Union Carbide because of the Texas Workmen Compensation Laws. As we have also discussed, you will new represent only Union Carbide and none of the other defendants in this litigation. Please give me a call. Sincerely, PFD;oid Enclosures Peter F. Davey bcc j Mr. J. F. Skislock (w/o ends) Ms. C. E. Van Dyk (w/encls) Mr. E. D. DeLoughy (w/encls) Ms. E. M. Farah (w/o ends) Mr. L. A. Crisorio (w/encls) PRIVILEGED AND "CONFIDENTIAL MATERIAL SUBJECT TO PROTECTIVE ORDER" ucc 068888 PRIVILEGED AND "CONFIDENTIAL MATERIAL SUBJECT TO PROTECTIVE ORDER" CORPORATE COMMUNIC 270 PARK AVENUE. NEW Date: >~*tCNT / 'i To: J. W. Whittelsey - 46 From: Anne D. Haughton FYI Comment ----------------------------------------- Action , .............. *' / Vcj 1 l-- ^mUSrV PRIVILEGED AND "CONFIDENTIAL MATERIAL SUBJECT TO PROTECTIVE ORDER" ucc 068906 INTERNAL CORRESPONDENCE l / ue u.i SOLVENTS AND INTERMEDIATES DIVISION P. O. mOK *11, TEXAS City, TEXAS 77MO December 18, 1980 /aliflft To Mr. J. B. Browning Mr. A. G. Voress Mr. J. W. Whlcclesey Mr. L. A. Wilkinson Mr. R. L. Yelton Copy to: Attendees - December 3rd Meeting Mr. J. W. Thompson C CSIVED t-o.,.. JQQQ J. V*'. VVnJTJliSEY You are aware that a group of us met on December 3 to outline possible responses when NIOSH reports on the Texas City brain tumor study. These possible conclusions by NIOSH were examined: 1. No increased incidence or association 2. A. Increased incidence - no association B. Correlation with a specific chemical C. Correlation with two or more chemicals 3. Study inconclusive - NIOSH recommends further study 4. Government agencies split on conclusions 5. The two NIOSH studies (cohort and case control) are not released at same time 6. Report identifies another form of cancer We then moved to list logical actions for each of these eight possibilities. The list oL thirteen possible actions needs further refinement and annotation to make sense to you, and will be available later. However, we listed seventeen action steps that various attendees should undertake. Several of these are discussed briefly below: 1. An article for the Carbide World has been drafted by Ann Haughton. 2. A "backgrounder" paper for VCC personnel has been drafted. 3. An interim press release, to be continually updated, is being prepared by Cox and Ritchie. PRIVILEGED AND "CONFIDENTIAL MATERIAL SUBJECT TO PROTECTIVE ORDER" OCc 4. An update for plant employees was published on December 10 (copy attached). 5. A random low-key survey was made of employee attitudes. In general, all employees are concerned, with older employees trusting the Company, but young employees unsure whether to believe us, or the worst of the press statements. 6. A special adversary skills (Interviewing) workshop has been designed by Cox and is being evaluated. 7. A "Q & A" sheet is being prepared by Ann Haughton. 8. When NIOSH notifies us a report will be ready, a team will go to Cincinnati to "clear it for trade secrets" to shorten OSHA lead time they would otherwise enjoy with the press. 9. Texas State Health Commissioner Bernstein has agreed to come to Texas City in January for an update before he decides on involvement by his office. We will suggest he look at the "Blue Ribbon Panel" approach Governor Carey used in the Love Canal matter if he insists the State of Texas should do something. One of our most difficult problems is to keep the internal search for an answer moving along - that is, the scientific investigation, without aiding the plaintiff's lawyers in the "discovery" phase of the pending litigation. I am aware of the concern which Walter Conrad of Baker and Botts has and I do not want to weaken his position as our defense attorney. At the same time, we cannot place our Internal epidemiology studies in limbo until that litigation is completed. This issue will require continued helpful guidance from John Whittlesey. Overall, this is a very fluid situation. Something changes almost every day. For an update, please contact Dr. Austin, Ms. Haughton, Dr. Glenn, Ron Ritchie or me, as appropriate to your question. /cs Attachment PRIVILEGED AND "CONFIDENTIAL MATERIAL SUBJECT TO PROTECTIVE ORDER" ijCC 068908