Document X7x82pqdD52ZvoKNkX90KjDZJ

URL 06824 1 2 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO 3 WESTERN DIVISION 4 MARY A. DENDINGER, et al.. 6 Plaintiffs, 7 -vs- 8 THE B.F. GOODRICH COMPANY, FIRESTONE TIRE & RUBBER 9 COMPANY, CONOCO, INC,, UNIROYAL, INC., UNION 10 CARBIDE CORPORATION, TENNECO, INC., TENNECO 11 POLYMERS, INC., TENNECO RESINS, INC., OCCIDENTAL 12 CHEMICAL CORPORATION, and MAXUS ENERGY, 13 Defendants. 14 Case No. C87-7117 15 16 Examination of CARL ZENZ, taken at the 17 instance of the Plaintiffs, pursuant to the provisions of 18 Section 804.05 of the Wisconsin Statutes, pursuant to 19 stipulation by respective counsel, before TERESE M. 20 SCHIEBENES, a Notary Public in and for the State of 21 Wisconsin, at the offices of Dorothy M. Wagner and Assoc 22 iates, Court Reporters and Notaries Public, Suite 400, 23 135 West Wells Street, Germania Building, Milwaukee, 24 Wisconsin, on the 13th day of October, 1988, beginning 25 at 10;00 a.m. DOROTHY M. WAQNtR * ASSOCIATES COURT REPORTERS MILWAUKEE 1 2 APPEARANCES: 3 4 \ 5 6 MURRAY & MURRAY CO. , L.P.A. Represented by KIRK J. DELLI BOVI, Attorney for the Plaintiffs. FULLER & HENRY, Represented by ROBERT A. BUNDA, Attorney for the Defendants. 7 8 THEREUPON, the following proceedings were held: 9 10 CARL ZENZ, having been first duly sworn, 11 was examined and testified as follows: 12 13 EXAMINATION BY MR. DELLI BOVI: 1 ""l -- " 14 Q Dr. Zenz, would you state your full name, please? 15 A Carl Zenz. 16 Q Your home address? 17 A 2418 Root River Parkway, West Allis, 53227. 18 Q What is your currentoccupation? 19 A I'm a consultant in occupational medicine. 20 Q Who do you consult to? 21 A I would consult to Industry, attorneys sometimes, 22 private individuals,-National Safety Council, and 23 others who have an interest in occupational health 24 matters. 25 <z CO CO DOROTHY M, WAGNER t ASSOCIATES COUNT R6PONT6PS MILWAUKEE 2 i-'iiSfc.-d-..- And you have been a private consultant in occupational i medicine since 1977? Yes, sir. How many times have you testified in court? Excluding worker's comp.? Yes, sir. In what span of time? Since 1977? I would say no more than a dozen times. Did any of the worker's compensation cases in which you testified involve occupational cancers? Yes. Did any of the worker's compensation cases in which * you testified involve exposure to vinyl chloride? I don't recall for certain, but I don't think so. In the worker's compensation cases in which you testi fied involving occupational cancers, what chemicals 18 were involved? 19 I'll try to go back chronologically if memory serves 20 me well as far as I can go in this regard. Asbestos 21 fibers, a mixture of chemicals, of course, solvent 22 exposures such as trichloroethylene and similar solvent^, 23 methylene chloride perhaps, silica exposure. 24 Q Silica dust? 25 A Silica dust, right. Nickel, nickel compound. I can't DOROTHY M. WAGNER A ASSOCIATES COURT REPORTERS MILWAUKEE 3 93890 in n URL 06827 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 A 10 Q 11 12 A really recall any specific substances. In those worker's compensation cases in which you testified that involved occupational cancers, who did you testify on behalf of? It would be a mixture. In behalf of a worker or an organization, an industry. What about the asbestos case, who did you testify on behalf of in that case? That was a worker. The cases involving solvent exposure, the trichloro ethylene and methylene chloride? Also for workers. 13 Q 14 A The silica dust case? Let me reflect a moment on this. fc 15 Q Certainly. 16 A I think a few were for workers. The majority of silica 17 cases would have been for industry. 18 When you say a few were for workers, do you mean a few 19 of the silica dust cases or a few of the workers? 20 A A few of the cases. 21 Q And the case or cases involving nickel compounds? 22 A For the worker. 23 Q 24 In those occupational cancer cases in which you testified on behalf of the worker, was it your opinion 25 that the worker's occupational exposure to the chemical DOROTHY M. WAGNER ft ASSOCIATES COURT REPORTERS MILWAUKEE 4 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 0 a 9 10 n A 12 .0 13 A 14 0 15 16 17 18 0 19 A 20 21 22 23 24 A 25 Most of the epidemiologic studies we look at always talk about exposure, but never quantify. That's the fault I see with all the documents in front of me. With exceptions, exposures only indicate they were working with something, and that's not enough for me to go on. Do you know what the cause was of the greater than 100 percent increase in observed versus expected cancers in the lob categories at Chrysler in which Dendinger and Wallace were employed? Did X here 100 percent increase? Yes, sir. Could you point that out to me again, please? Sure. I'm going to hand you what's previously been marked Plaintiff's Exhibit Dahl 3. MR, BUNDA: This Is the char.t that you made up. BY MR, DFLLI BOVI: From Dr. Shindell's data. I recall reviewing, lust looking at it and thinking about it, of course. MR. BUNDA: I also ob.lect to the question on the basis that it's a inlscharacteriration of evidence. There is no 100 percent increase, That's the problem I have, too. This Is really incomplete data you're giving me. URL 06928 DOROTHY M. WAONtR A AMOCIATKS COURT REPORTER* MILWAUKEE 105 62890 ia n 1 medical and scientific literature? 2 A Of course. 3 Q Did you base your opinions in any of those worker's 4 compensation cases involving occupational cancers .in 0 which you testified on behalf of the claimant solely 6 on the epidemiologic literature, or did you take all 7 of these factors into account in rendering your 8 opinion? 9 A All of these factors were the prime sources of my 10 opinion. However, when I began testifying, say in the 11 early '60's -- this is going beyond the 10-year period 12 you mentioned to me earlier -- epidemiology in 13 occupational medicine was an unknown science. 14 Q Is It your opinion that in order to render competent 15 medical opinions on the link or possible link between 16 an occupational exposure and a cancer is that all of 17 these factors you have listed must be taken into 18 account? 19 A Yes. And probably factors I haven't listed. 20 Q Are there any that you can recall for me that you 21 haven't listed that you feel should be taken into 22 account, and let me run through what you've testified 23 to already. 24 You talked about the medical history of 25 the individual, physical examinations, medical records, OOftOTHV M. WAONEft ASSOCIATES COURT RERORTERS MILWAUKEE DEAR CUSTOMER DUE TO A CLERICAL ERROR, THERE ARE NO ORIGINALS FOR THE BATES RANGE SHOWN [}(- L Qj'E3 i to --_______________ Photocopying Digital Printing Document Imaging Management Services 1 cases render an opinion to a reasonable degree of 2 professional certainty that the occupational exposure 3 to the chemical in question did not cause the worker's 4 cancer? 5 A Yes. 6 Q And in rendering that opinion, did you consider the 7 same list of factors that you've given to me that you 8 testified -- I don't mean testified -- that you took 9 into account in rendering your opinions on behalf of 10 the claimant in the other cases? 11 A Essentially yes. But I would have, of course, consid 12 erable body of data collected by other people, other 13 professionals, either locally, nationally, or inter 14 nationally, which I would, of course, had a chance 15 to review and study. 16 Q Is it your opinion, therefore, that in order to 17 render competent medical testimony as to the absence 18 of a causal connection between an occupational 19 exposure and a cancer in the worker that you likewise 20 have to consider all of the factors that you've 21 enumerated and cannot rely exclusively on one or two 22 of those factors? 23 MR. BUNDA: I'll object to the question on the 24 basis that it's vague. 25 BY MR. DELLI BOVI: URL 06331 DOROTHY M. WAQNIR * ASSOCIATE* COUNT REPORTERS MILWAUKEE g 1 Q You can go ahead and answer. A I'll try. Let me collect ray thoughts on this. It's 3 a real complicated question you've tossed at me. 4 Q Certainly. * 5 A Well, in this respect, let me say that if I were aware 6 of working conditions and had available the environ mental monitoring data by certified.or noncertified 8 Industrial hygiene people or other scientific persons 9 that made determinations of contaminents or exposure 10 levels in the work area or off the work area, hobbies 11 for example, and external causes away from work, and 12 these exposures were found to be far below any 13 internationally accepted norms or limit, guidelines, I 14 would base my opinion and judgment on these measurable 15 microscopic values that there could not be sufficient 16 quantity to cause a reaction in the body such as a 1? cancer. 18 Is It your opinion, therefore, that there is a no 19 effects level of exposure to a carcinogen? 20 A Yes. Otherwise we wouldn't be here, any of us. 21 Q You believe that there is a level of exposure to a 22 carcinogen at which no individual will develope a 23 cancer? 24 A Probably, but I can't be 100 percent certain on that. 25 Q Have you ever expressed that opinion on any of your . URL 0683i OORQTHY M. WAGNER A ASSOCIATES COURT REPORTERS MILWAUKEE 9 1 A 3 4 Q 5 A Q 8 9 10 n A 12 13 Q 14 A 15 Q 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 Q 25 publications? I'd have to refresh myself to answer that question. That's a difficult memory retrieval matter. Have you reviewed, in connection with this case, the correspondence of Mr. Peterson to Dr. Shlndell? Yes. I have seen that. Are you aware from Dr. Peterson's letter to Shindell of the airbom levels of vinyl chloride reported in the Chrysler plant as the result of testing conducted In and after April of 1974? I'm aware, but I would like to quickly refresh myself, if I may, please? Certainly. Thank you. I'm going to hand you Peterson's April 7, 1987, letter to Shindell. I would just like you to focus on. Dr. Zenz as you're going through that, on the vinyl chloride that's discussed about solvents. We'll get into that later. I just found what I was trying to refresh myself on. Thank you. I'm skipping the other solvents now. Let me look at this graph presentation again. Thank you. Appreciate the review again. Certainly. You are familiar then with the findings of Mr. Shindell that were reported of Mr. Peterson -- URL 068 OJ _o DOROTHY M. WAGNER A ASSOCIATES COURT REPORTERS MILWAUKEE 10 K W O 'W i- 1 2 3 A 4 0 5 6 7 A 8 9 Q 10 11 A 12 Q 13 14 15 A 16 Q 17 18 19 20 A 21 Q 22 23 A 24 Q 25 A excuse me -- that were reported to Shindell in April of 1987? Yes, sir. Have you been furnished with any other information regarding the airborn levels of vinyl chloride at the Chrysler facility other than this document? Yes. I recall seeing documents prepared by the hygienist from the Ohio Occupational Health Group. Do you mean the Ohio Group or the Chrysler Industrual Hygiene Group? Both, I think. Do you know whether or not it was on the basis of his analysis of that data that Mr. Peterson prepared his April 7, 1987, letter to Shindell? Yes. I believe he did do just that. You're aware then that in 1974, there was air monitoring conducted at the Chrysler facility to determine the airborn concentrations of vinyl chloride in atmospheres that the Chrysler employees would be working in? Yes. Have you seen prior to today what has been marked as Exhibit Peterson 2? I don't recall seeing this. May I look at it, please? Certainly. May I ask who derived this and prepared this? DOROTHY M WAQNER * ASSOCIATES COllAT REPORTERS MILWAUKEE 11 1 Q Certainly. This was derived by Mr. Peterson. He 2 testified yesterday that he took the data that was 3 supplied to him by Mr. Bunda, determined arithmetic 4 and geometric means, and calculated standard deviations I 5 from those figures. i 6 A Based on air sampling analyses by other people such 7 as Chrysler Hygienists and Division of Health in Ohio? 8 Q I know it was based on Chrysler IH air sampling. 9 Whether it also included State of Ohio, I'm not sure, 10 but Mr. Peterson did testify yesterday that it was from ! j 11 this data, that is, Peterson Exhibit 2, that was based ! 12 j on the information supplied to him by Mr. Bunda that 13 he prepared April 7, 1987. 14 A I see. 15 Q Looking at Exhibit 2, which summarizes the data 16 collected from the Chrysler facility as a result of 17 air sampling in '74, is it your understanding that the 16 air sampling done in the blender/calender area 19 revealed airbom vinyl chloride monomer concentrations 20 as high as 29 parts per million? 21 MR. BUNDA: I'm going to object to that. 22 What you're asking is his understanding, and then 23 you're pointing to a number on Exhibit 2 which is 24 derived from other materials, I think that if you're 25 asking him to read that, that has no relevance to this URL 06835 DOROTHY M. WAGNER % ASSOCIATES COURT REPORTERS Milwaukee ^2 I Q 2 3 A 4 Q 5 6 7 A S Q 9 A 10 11 12 13 14 15 A 16 Q 18 19 20 21 22 23 A 24 25 Q And is that one of the documents that was provided to you by Mr. Bunda? i j Yes, I think so. I All right. For purposes of your opinions that you*will express in this case, did you assume that that was a valid sample or an invalid sample? Looking at all of the findings, I assumed it was valid, i i Now, let's go next to the receiving/storage area. Excuse me. May I have that previous document back with Mr. Broady's name on it. I .lust want to check and see who long -- whether there was a one-hour sample or four-hour or eight-hours. It doesn't give that data, here at all. MR. BUNDA: That's an indication-- This is incomplete. I only have Page 2. BY MR. DELLI BOVI: If we move down to the receiving/storage category. do you see levels reported there in May and November of 1974 of 29, 27, 22, 17, and 50 parts per million? MR. BUNDA: Same objection. I think that we ought to look at the underlying documents to understand those figures. Within that same month, there are exposure levels reported of 0.60 parts per million. Yes, sir. I understand that. URL 06836 DOROTHY M- WAGNER ft ASSOCIATES COURT REPORTERS MILWAUKEE 14 1 2 A 3 4 6 A 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 A 14 15 Q 16 IT 18 A 19 20 Q 21 22 23 24 25 A case. That could be an analytic error if you look at the whole picture. MR. BUNDA: To be accurate, we need to go back to look to the exposure levels. And figure how that figure came to be and what time of the day and who did the analysis and so forth. The sample could have been contaminated. It's a common problem in collecting samples in working areas is contamination. MR, BUNDA: Especially since none of the other exposures approach that. t j ! That's right. BY MR. DELLI BOVI: Did you assume, Dr. Zenz, when you reviewed the air g --OJJ sampling that was done by Chrysler that the results were valid or invalid? I had to assume that they were reasonably scientifically valid, made by competent personnel. Let me hand you Page 2 of a data sheet from the Chrysler facility that refers to a sampling taken on May 9 and May 10, 1974, and refers to a Jim Broady loading/blender of 29 parts per million; do you see that, sir? Yes, sir, I do. DOROTHY M. WAONCfl ASSOCIATES couni ntnontgns MILWAUKEE 13 r 1i A o Q 3 A 4 Q 3I 6 A Q 8 9 A 10 i i 11 Ii 12 13 14 15 16 17 Q 18 A 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 I'd have to look at all this in total. Fine. Here it is. May I? Sure. You were suoplied with all those documents by Mr. Bunda, correct? j i Yes. Would you look at the data that reports these levels, receiving/storage, May 10, 1974. (Witness complies.) Sampling rate was meteamin (phon etic), which is typical, and for the most part, ten minutes duration. This is a report, a letter of February 11, 1974. f .` This is what I'm trying to determine, whether or not this Is a peak instantaneous sample for a short duration of time or a sample for the entire day. That's very important to me. Why would that be important to you? Well, any of us can be exposed to a spill, for i I example, of isotone In the bathroom and have a heavy exposure to 200 parts per million for minutes, and that could be tested for and reported as heavy exposure, but it would be just that one moment. A ten minute test period from my point of view is not good industrial hygiene technique. Is it your opinion that the sampling that was done at URL 06338 DOROTHY M. WAQNCn * AMOCIATKt COuftT ftEPOATEflS MILWAUKEE 15 URL 06839 1 Chrysler in 1974 and thereafter is or is not represent 2 ative of the employee exposures to vinyl chloride at 3 that plant? 4 A Fairly representative from what you've given me, from 5 what I've read. Considering the era, fifteen years 6 ago, I'm surprised at the good industrial workmanship 7 performed by Ohio and Chrysler. I'm pleased. 8 Q Are you aware of any sampling done by Chrysler or the 9 State or the Federal Covemment at the Chrysler facil 10 ity prior to 1974 for vinyl chloride? 11 A Yes. In the documents provided by Mr. Bunda. 12 Q And where is that information? ? 13 -- A You've just given me a copy. Of course, dated in 14 1968. Unfortunately, I can't read all of the copies, 15 but I note that in December of 1968, vinyl chloride 16 was reported as a trace at all calendering stations. 17 Of course, I can't be aware of other 18 studies made at earlier dates at Chrysler Corporation; 19 that would be beyond the scope of my information. 20 Q Well, I'd like you.to assume that Chrysler didn't 21 operate or own the facility prior to 1968. Are you 22 aware of any reported levels of workers exposure to 23 vinyl chloride at the Chrysler plant prior to the 24 data that was collected in and after 1974? 25 MR. BUNDA: I'll object. I think that that DOROTHY M. WAQNCR A AttOCIATIS COURT RfROTf*s MILWAUKEE 16 2 2 3 4 Q o 6 7 A 8 9 Q 10 A 11 Q 12 13 14 A 15 16 Q 17 IA i 18 19 20 Q 21 A 22 23 24 25 was asked and answered. He's indicated they found a trace in 1968. BY MR. DELLI BOVI: * Are you aware of any other tracing between 1968 and 1974 of vinyl chloride levels in the Chrysler plant other than that reported in 1968 correspondence? Well, the inform*tion given me has been directed for this episode today antidates 1968. That's all I have. Postdates 1968? Postdates, excuse me. And my question is are you aware of any other sampling other than that reported in the 1968 correspondence sfor vinyl chloride at Chrysler between 1968 and 1974? I'd have to look at the Ohio documentation once again, please, if I may? Certainly. They stated in a report in February of '74 -- that is the Ohio personnel. State of Ohio -- they made previous studies in the '60's at Chrysler's request. Does it refer to vinyl chloride? I'm hoping to find that. They mention other solvents, of course. All right. Here we come to the main production lines. I would have to refer to the American Conference of Governmental Industrial Hygienists URL 06840 OOROTHV M. WAONCR i ASSOCIATES COURT REPORTERS MILWAUKEE J tt-890 1Hn 1 threshold limited values document of the '60's and '70's. They are published annually, and if I recall, 3 at that time vinyl chloride probably was in the range 4 of 200 parts per million or above. 3 There was an ACGIH TLV for vinyl chloride prior to 6 *74 time frame of 500 parts per million. 7 A Thank you for refreshing me. 8 Q Certainly. 9 A In reviewing the documentation and studies of the plant 10 facility by the Ohio Health Personnel, State of Ohio 11 Health Personnel, they may have been more concerned 12 with other solvants than vinyl chloride at that time, 13 and this is why I find that this scant information-on 14 vinyl chloride at present, but I must pursue this a 15 bit further, please. 16 Q Sure. 17 A No. I have no further information regarding studies 18 performed prior to 1968. 19 Q 20 A 21 22 Or between 1968 and 1974? Only what has been provided by you or Mr. Bunda at this point. Other than the reference to vinyl chloride in the 23 correspondence in 1968, you were not aware of any 24 testing done at Chrysler to determine airbom levels 25 of vinyl chloride prior to April of 1974? DOROTHY M. WAQNIR ft ASSOCIATES count newrim MILWAUKEE ]^g 1 A 2 3 4 Q 5 A 6 Q 7 A 8 0 9 10 11 i 12 I A 13 Q 14 15 16 17 A 18 Q 19 20 21 A 22 23 24 25 No. That's not so. I mentioned moments ago that one of the division of health from Ohio reported trace levels. In 1968? Yes, sir. And that was recorded in correspondence in 1968? Yes, included with the recent materials. Certainly. My question. Dr. Zenz, is except for that reference, are you aware of any testing done at Chrysler for airbom levels of vinyl chloride prior to April of 1974? No. f -_t Now, you indicated earlier that you regarded the testing that Chrysler Initiated in April of 1974 and thereafter for airbom levels of vinyl chloride as good Industrial hygiene? Right. Yes, sir. Was it good industrial hygiene not to test at all for airbom levels of vinyl chloride at the plant between 1968 and April of 1974? It might have been, because they might have had good Perhaps for other materials, if we control the solvent emission, say, for methyl ethyl ketone, by proper industrial hygiene and engineering control, all other solvents ought to be controlled simultaneously. URL 06842 DOROTHY M. WAONKR ft AMOCIATIS C0UT MPOATEM MILWAUKEE 19 1 Q Is vinyl chloride a solvent? A Yes, sir. Well, vinyl chloride monomer is gas. 3 Q Are you aware or have you been furnished with any 4 documentation indicating excessive solvent levels in the Chrysler plant on the mezzanine level in the ink room? I'd have to refresh myself, please. Certainly. May I ask why you mentioned a mezzanine level? Because that is an area of concern In this case. All right. Thank you. I could understand if you asked me about the basement levels. -- What I would like to do to speed it along is ask you whether you've been shown any documentation of 15 citations to Chrysler in 1976 for excessive levels of 16 solvent exposure in the ink room or the mezzanine area IT of the ink room? 18 A You say citations? 19 Q Yes, sir. 20 A By OSHA? 21 Q OSHA. 22 A In the *70's? 23 Q In 1976. 24 A I'm not aware of citations as such, sir. 25 q All right. Are you aware of any testing for vinyl URL 06843 DOROTHY M. WAGNER ft ASSOCIATES COUNT NEPOtTtftS Milwaukee 20 1 chloride at the Chrysler facility that was ever done 2 on the mezzanine level of the ink room at any time? 3 A I don't recall that, no, sir. 4 Q You indicated earlier that one of the reasons that 5 there may not have been testing for vinyl chloride 6 prior to 1974 was because there were no reported 7 excursions of the TLV's for other materials, correct? 8 A Not entirely correct. What I meant was that other 9 solvents were of greater concern than vinyl chloride. 10 The main concern in those days against vinyl chloride 11 as an exposure was its inflammability and explosivity. i 12 Q Is it your testimony here today that the only concern 13 of the PVC industry prior to 1974 relating to vinyl 14 chloride was with its explosivity? 15 A 16 17 No. I didn't mean that. MR. BUNDA: I'm going to obejct to the question. I think it's an unfair question. We've been discussing 18 the conditions of the PVC fabriacting plant of Chrysler. 19 Now, if you're going to expand it to all the PVC 20 Industry including the monomer of vinyl chloride and 21 the manufacturing of polyvinyl chloride, then I think 22 the witness is going to have to recognize that you're 23 changing the scope of your question. 24 BY MR. DELLI BOVI: 25 Q Let's talk about Chrysler then. Is it your testimony URL 06344 DOROTHY M. WAGNCII ASSOCIATtt COUflT flfPOftTCRS MILWAUKEE 21 URL 06845 2 3 4 5 6 A 8 iQ t 9 ij 10 ! A 11 Q i 12 ! 13 14 A 15 Q 16 ; A 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 today that one of the reasons Chrysler may not have performed testing for vinyl chloride monomer between 1968 and April of 1974 is because they had no reason to be concerned about health effects relating to vinyl chloride exposure other than explosivity? No, sir. I didn't say that, nor did I intend to give that impression. Well, I'd like you to assume they didn't between 1968 and April of 1974. If you wish me to, I can assume that, yes, sir. You indicated that that may have been good industrial hygiene practice not to have tested for vinyl chloride - fr during that six-year time frame? I might have been. Why? In the processes of manufacturing these products, many chemicals are used in great quantities far exceeding that of vinyl chloride, like materials and solvents that cause acute and rapid effects. If these are controlled or were controlled, and I assume that they may well have been controlled, then the judgment of the industrial hygienist or the physician in charge of the program would feel comfortable with that in controlling the top-most irritative or toxic materials would Include the lesser and least dangerous OOROTHY M. WAQNCR ft AMOClATi* COURT REPORTERS MILWAUKEE 22 1 materials as well. 2 I can't very well go into a plant and say, 3 "test for everything, 400 substances." "I know you 4 are using 50 in this process, let's check out the most o troublesome areas first, and if these are under control, 6 fine." 7 Q What about chemcials that are used in a facility that i 8 contain known or suspected carcinogens; is it good 9 industrial hygiene practice to test for the levels 10 of those known or suspected carcinogens? 11 A Yes. But I must back off to qualify my answer. 12 One would have to''*know the precise amount of the 1 - 13 substance present in that particular compound or mixture 14 first of all. 15 Q And where would one get that information, if you were 16 Chrysler? From the manufacturer of the product? 17 A If I were at that time with Chrysler, the first step 18 is to get the material safety data sheet from the 19 manufacturer, the provider of the product. 20 Q And you, in fact, in 19-- 21 A But wait. I haven't finished. That material safety 22 data sheet may not be as thorough as I would have 23 wished at the time, because a supplier may not have been 24 the manufacturer, so I would go further and ask for the 25 manufacturer to give me the material safety data sheets URL 06846 DOMOTHV M. WAQNEfl 4 ASSOCIATES C0UT (*tfOT6AS MHWAUCiE 23 URL 06847 1 for all the ingredients put into those products, and 2 then I would have store analyses of the quantification 3 of the materials present. 4 This could involve one's own internal 5 laboratory in the research department, the quality 6 control laboratory, or to send a sample to an accredited 7 lab at a hospital or at a private laboratory and so 8 forth, and even ask the government people to use their 9 own laboratory for these tests. 10 These are the results I would then look at, 11 not singly, but there may be half a dozen of such data 12 sheets that I would be Interested in. - 13 - I would order my own analyses and decide 14 what steps to take from there. 15 I want to put you in the shoes now, if I may, of an 16 occupational health physician or an industrial hygien 17 ist at Chrysler between 1968 and the public announcement 18 of the Goodrich angiosarcoma deaths in early 1974. 19 Why during that '68 to '74 time frame would 20 you be requesting material safety data sheets from your 21 suppliers? 22 I have a privilege of amplifying my answer, and I'll do 23 just that. I was the only physician present for the 24 NIOSH Consulting and Review Committee, which formulated 25 the material safety data sheets, so I was one of the DOROTHY M. WAONCR ASSOCIATE* COURT REPORTERS MILWAUKEE 24 URL 06848 1 2 Q 3 A 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 Q 18 A 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 founders of that particular systematic process. I understand that from your resume. Thank you. So 1 have a keen interest in good material safety data sheets, and I know what needs to be done to produce a good MSDS. I hope this helps in my forthcoming answer. Nevertheless, I do and would have relied on laboratory data of direct analyses quantification of a lab test, and I would request external verification as I always have in the past from one or more labora tories . What information does a material safety data sheet give the recipient with regard to the hazards, health hazards associated with the product that it refers to? Unfortunately, the worst scenario. We'd never anticipated that. What did you anticipate? 1 had anticipated an even-handed neutral report with ample references and documentation to back up any statements produced on these data sheets, good human responses, good industrial hygiene responses to be attached. Unfortunately, and I must say this in front of two attorneys who are dealing with these matters nowadays, the material safety data sheets now DOROTHY M. WAONIR ft ASSOCIATES COURT REPORTERS MILWAUKEE 25 1 2 3 4 o Q 6 7A 6 Q 9 10 11 13 14 15 16 17 18 Q 19 A 20 Q 21 22 23 A 24 Q 25 or for many years have had to state worst case obser vations, worst possibilities, and these are dictated by corporate lawyers rather than scientific and even- handed reports. You were involved in 1975 as a consultant reviewing the NIOSH criteria documents for the MSDS? Right. Was it the intended purpose of the MSDS to make the recipient of that document a full disclosure concerning the potential health ramifications of exposure to the product? Of course. Excuse me. It was before '74. That , involved over 456 compounds listed by the ACGIH, and I probably reviewed one-third of those personally, and I believe that period of time was in the early ' 70's. I can't be precise as to the year, perhaps '71, '72 through '74, '75. Do you recall whether you reviewed vinyl chloride? I can't recall the specific materials, no. Have you been provided by Mr. Bunda with any MSDS authored by any PVC manufacturer prior to the public announcement of the Goodrich angiosarcoma deaths? I havenot. Have you ever seen any MSDS for any PVC resin published prior to February of 1974? URL 06849 DOROTHY M. WAONIR ft AMOCIATIS COURT REPORTERS MILMAUCH 26 URL 06850 1 A Widespread use of these data sheets didn't really take o place until after those dates in the mid to later 3 *70'a, if I recall correctly. No, I was not. 4 Q Isvit the responsibility of a manufacturer of a 5 chemical to disclose any of the material safety data 6 sheets, any of the hazardous components of that mater ial? 8 A Yes, it is. 9 Q Do you regard vinyl chloride as a hazardous material? 10 MR. BUNDA: You're talking about today? 11 MR. DELLI BOVI: Yes, today. 12 MR. BUNDA: Or 1974? [ -- 13 MR. DELLI BOVI: Let's talk about 1974-. 14 MR. BUNDA: Well, you've got two questions. 15 Which do you want to talk about? 16 BY MR. DELLI BOVI: 17 q Let's talk about 1974. In 1974, did you regard vinyl 13 chloride as hazardous material? 19 A If you tell me the concentrations and durations of 20 exposure, I can answer that. 21 Q Did you regard vinyl chloride in 1974 as a carcinogen? 22 A Yes. But that was based on heavy work exposures for 23 a long period, many years of high concentrations in 24 the thousands of parts per million. 25 Q If a manufacturer's product contains a known carcinogen OOHOTHY M. WAQNfft AMOCIATft count MILWAUKEE 27 1 In measurable quantity, is the manufacturer obligated 2 in your opinion to disclose the existence of that 3 carcinogenic component in its MSDS? 4 A I'll try to answer that question based on the 5 present actions in the USA. I believe the concentra 6 tion would have to be based on the suspect carcinogen 7 and the concentration of that substance or the amount 8 in that particular material, its component. 9 You may know the law better than I do. 10 It may be under one percent, if I recall, a mention 11 may have to be made on that material. But if we take 12 our children's plastic Lego toys or our grandchildren's 13 --- fc Lego toys, the components there individually would b:e 14 considered extremely dangerous. 15 Q What components? 16 A Butadiene, extirene (phonetic), to say nothing of the 17 lanolin dyes or other inorganic dyestuffs to color 18 these toys. And they are made by the billions each 19 year, and millions of children are playing with these 20 every day, every moment. 21 We couldn't very well say that these toys 22 contain such and such chemicals to produce these 23 beautiful colors and beautiful products. It would 24 scare the pants off everybody. No. You can't put 25 this down every substance, because it's no consequence. 06851 OOROTHY M. WAQNCR ft ASSOCIATES COUNT MPONTENS MILWAUKEE 8 1 2 3 4 o Q 6 7 A 8 Q 9 10 i li A 12 Q 13 14 15 16 17 A 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 Q 25 The process of manufacturing may eliminate the potential for any exposure. Like this table top, for example, is a \ styrene compound. It's harmless. Have you seen any MSDS for any PVC resin published after February of 1974? Probably, yes. And did those MSDS published after February of 1974 that you've seen disclose the existence of residual vinyl chloride monomer in the resin? Yes. They should have mentioned that. >, 'f Are you aware today of any documents published by Goodyear, Conoco, Tenneco, Firestone, Union Carbide,' Uniroyal, or Diamond Shamrock disclosing to any of its PVC resin customers prior to 1974 that the resin contained inreacted vinyl chloride monomer? The reason I hesitate to answer you immediately and so positively is that in reviewing material safety data sheets, and I see these frequently, I may only make a cursory glance at its source, for example, whether It's Union Carbide or Occidental or Shell, whatever it may be. And this does not stick in one's memory, so I can't answer that. I don't know. Let me ask it another way then. Are you aware of any MSDS published by any PVC resin manufacturer prior to URL 0685 i ro i DOflOTHY M. WAONIft * ASSOCIATES COUNT ftEPONTENS MILWAUKEE 29 1 February of 197A disclosing that its resin contained 0 unreacted vinyl chloride monomer? 3 A I can't answer that. I don't recall that. j | Q When were you first aware of any studies in animals j o reporting the development of cancers following exposure i 6 to vinyl chloride? A X believe it would be when I heard of the forthcoming 8 publication by Johnson and Kretch (phonetic) on the 9 angiosarcoma cases which may have been in '74, *75, 10 something on that order. 11 How did you find out about that before their work was 12 published? < 13 I was on the editorial board of the Journal and, of 14 course, we had periodic meetings of the editorial 15 Journal Board of Occupational Medicine, and I also knew 16 Dr. Johnson personally. 17 How long were you on the editorial board of the Journal 18 of Occupational Medicine? 19 A At least ten years. 20 Q Prior to 1974? 21 A Yes. At least until '78 or *79. 22 Q So you had been on that board since the mid to late 23 1960's? 24 A Yes, sir. 25 Q And at no time prior to your communication with URL 06853 DOROTHY M. WAGNER * ASSOCIATES COURT REPORTERS MILWAUKEE 30 URL 06854 1 Johnson, which occurred shortly prior to the publica 2 tion of his article in J0Mf were you aware of any 3 reports concerning the development of cancers in 4 animals exposed to vinyl chloride? 5 A 6 Q I was not at the time. So the first thing you knew as an editor of the Journal 7 of Occupational Medicine about the potential carcino 8 genicity of vinyl chloride was Johnson's communication 9 regarding his findings concerning angiosarcomas among 10 the Goodrich work force? n A Yes, sir. 12 Q :f Do you know as you sit here today whether or not the 13 PVC resin industry, prior to Johnson's communication 14 to you was, in fact, aware of animal experimentation 15 revealing the generation of cancers in animals exposed 16 to vinyl chloride? 17 A Yes, sir. 18 (Pending question read.) 19 Q What do you know about that? 20 A Immediately his report generated extreme Interest 21 and the literature searches were made and documents 22 were copied from journals and so forth. 23 Q And what did that reveal to you concerning the knowledge 24 that the PVC industry had prior to 1974 concerning 25 animal studies and vinyl chloride carcinogenicity? DOROTHY M. WAONEft ASSOCIATES COURT RCRORTIRS MlkWAUMf 31 1 A The industry as such had periodic meetings about many 2 matters, including this one I'm sure, for national 3 organizations. They probably had information yj 4 available published inthe literature and oral j 5 communication and so forth and the scientific meetings, 6 which may or may not have been published in transactions! ji later on, and of course, we all would have access to 8 that. g Theinterested industryrepresentatives i j ii I j 10 i would probably have access to some of the documents i li I perhaps a bit earlier than I would have had in some 12 s Instances. For example, when Viola made a report Oij -- 13 his animal study in Tokyo, I attended a congress. 14 I was the first to do human experimenta 15 tion, and I presented that, but at that time I had no 16 interest in listening to his dissertation in rat 17 exposures. This would not a problem for six months to j 18 a year later for general scientific dissemination. 19 Q So you were at the conference in Tokyo in *69? 20 A That was the National Congress of Occupational Health. 21 Q Occupational Health Congress? 22 A Right. 23 Q In 1969, July? 24 A September. 25 Q Where Viola presented the results of his experimentation URL 06855 DOROTHY M. WAONCR 0 ASSOCIATES COURT REPORTERS MILWAUKEE 32 URL 06856 with rats in which he demonstrated the development of cancer following exposure of vinyl chloride? A Yes, sir. Q Did you attend his presentation? A I did not. I don't recall that at all. Q Did you receive a copy of any written report of his presentation? 8 Not directly. 1 purchased several copies of the 9 complete transactions, including my own. 10 Q Do you still have those? 11 A I do. 12 Q Do you have a copy of that portion of that documents 13 you purchased that relates to Viola's presentation?* 14 I would think so, but I would have to check the book 15 and the reference index. 16 Have you furnished a copy of that Viola presentation IT to Mr. Bunda? 18 A I have not. 19 Q Would you kindly check for me either today or tommorrow 20 and see if you can find that reference, and if you 21 would forward a copy to Mr. Bunda -- 22 MR. BUNDA: No, no. Wait a minute. You can 23 ask him questions here. We've gone through this whole 24 case and there have been question of witnesses to 25 present things. I've lost track of them quite frankly. OOROTHV M. WAGNER * AMOCtATES C0U*T M*0*TfNS MILWAUKEE 33 *1 and I'd ask you to do a formal Request for them so 2 that that way it's on the record, and we can establish 3 what's record and what's not to be produced subsequent 4 to the deposition, I don't want to be accused later 5 of not producing something that I've simply forgotten 6 or not determined that we have to make a presentation, 7 because I haven't reviewed the deposition transcript. 8 MR. DELLI BOVI: I'll be glad to do it by 9 a formal Request. I just want to make sure Dr. Zens 10 is agreeable to do that. I would be glad to pay you 11 for your time and photocopying expenses in collecting 12 that and transmitting it to Mr. Bunda. . 13 MR. BUNDA: I don't think we have a problemT 14 BY MR. DELLI BOVI: 13 Q I'm just asking you because I've not been able to get 16 it from my other sources. 17 A I'm surprised, because of the beautiful Japanese 18 publication, they did an extremely fine job compared 19 to other country's reporting proceedings. I can get 20 that. I can see it on the shelf. 21 Please understand that during a conference 22 of this sort, there may be hundreds of papers presented, 23 and there are many interesting things to do and people 24 to meet, and it's impossible to cover all topics. 25 Q When did you first see a copy of Dr. Viola's article URL 06357 DOROTHY M. WAGNER * ASSOCIATES COURT REPORTERS MILWAUKEE 34 1 3 4 A 5 6 7 Q S 9 A 10 i i 11 i iQ 12 i A i 13 Q 14 15 16 17 A 18 19 20 21 22 23 Q 24 25 A that appeared in 1970 in March in Medicina De La Vora, and I'll hand you a copy of that, a translation of that,1 if you would like to take a look at that. I have a copy of this, and it was given to me by Mr. Bunda. However, I was aware of this publication long ! before I knew of Chrysler or you folks. Were you aware of that publication prior to Johnson's communication to you concerning the angiosarcoma deaths?: You mean the Journal of Occupational Medicine form report? Yes, sir. No, I was not. i f -t When were you first aware of the presentation that Dr, Viola made to the International Cancer Congress in Houston in May of 1970, and I'll hand you a document that relates to that presentation? I'd like to clarify my answer. Probably in '73 or '74, because at that time I was preparing a chapter for the textbooks of Occupational Medicine on vinyl chloride, and I probably smbmitted that chapter to the publisher in '74, so it's sometime in '74, and I did have almost all these references available to me. Did you begin work on that publication prior to or following Johnson's communication to you? That's a close one. Probably before, and of course, URL 06858 DOROTHY M. WAONCR ASSOCIATES COUflT AtPOBTfKS MHWAUUE 35 URL 06859 1 2 3 O 4 5 A 6 7 8 Q 9 A 10 i n ;i Q 12 13 14 15 A 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 when this was formally published in the literature, I recall addin? it to the chapter post haste. What was your initial reason for preparing the chapter on vinyl chloride? I was preparing the chapter on the occupational health aspects of toxics in rubber manufacturing, and this would have been one of the subjects included. Was that study or that paper sponsored by anyone? Well, just a publisher, of course, medical text publisher. And were you aware when-you started -- Were you not aware when you started that work of the reports of 1 --i carcinogenicity in either humans or animals exposed: to vinyl chloride? That book contained thousands of references, and I have copies of most of them, so X can't answer you. I may have Included some of these even before the Johnson and Kretch report came out, as a matter of complete necessity, for the sake of complete necessity. When were you first aware of the article published by Viola in cancer research in 1971 entitled, "Oncogenic Response of Rat Skin, Lungs, and Bones to Vinyl Chloride"? It might have been in 1973, because at that I was DOROTHY M WAQNER ft ASSOCIATES COURT *PCTAS MilWAUKK 36 URL 06860 1 2 3 4 o 6 7Q 8 9 10 li i A Q 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 Q 20 A 21 Q 22 23 3* 25 actively engaged in producing this textbook. Because of the lead time required by the publisher to put out a book at a certain date meant that I had to prepare things in advance. All of the contributors had to do that, so it was in '73, and no more than *74. Do you know whether it was before or after your communications with Johnson? I can't be sure of that. Did you regard Dr. Viola's presentation at the International Congress on occupational health in 1969 ;f as an important presentation? MR. BUNDA: I'm going to object to that, because I think he's already testified he doesn't recall being there when the presentation was made. Nevertheless, you can answer. I was not present at the conference. BY MR. DELLI BOVI: Did you read his paper? Well, perhaps some years later. Do you have any recollection of reading Viola's paper that was given at the 1969 conference in Tokyo prior to 1973 or 1974 when you began work on that book chapter? I can say with some certainty that I probably read OONOTHY M. WAONfft ASSOCIATE! COURT REPORTERS MILWAUKEE 3J URL 06861 2 3 4 Q 6 8 A 9 Q 10 n; A 12 13 14 15 16 17 Q 18 A 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 excerpts or abstracts. One would need to do that to make certain the reference was worthy of including in the chapter of a text. Do you recall whether or not following your review'1 of Viola's presentation at the 1969 International Congress on Occupational Health you regarded that paper as an Important one? Probably not. What about his 1979 publication in Medlcina De La Vora? '79? '70. I'm sorry. MR. BUNDA: Well again, I'm not sure that * we've established that he read that publication, so I think there's a lack of foundation. BY MR. DELLI BOVI: Well, have you read it? I glanced through it, of course. His studies, of course, dealt with animals, rats, and so on, and naturally we look at these things but they are not high on my occupational health priority list. And the animal experiments, these were done by the thousands all over the world with thousands of substances, and let me say this, that the smaller the species of animal, the greater chance of finding OOftOTHY M. WAGNER ASSOCIATES COURT REPORTERS MILWAUKEE 38 1 tumors without finding exposure to anything, just 2 during their natural short lifetimes. 3 Q Are you sware of the incidence of naturally occurring 4 cancers in rats? 5 A Not specifically, no. 6 Q What about Dr. Viola's presentation at the International 7 Cancer Congress in Houston in 1970, have you reviewed 8 that paper prior to today? 9 A Yes. I have reviewed that in the past months. 10 Q Do you recall reviewing either that presentation or 11 the Medicina De La Vora article in 1973 or 1974, 12 when you were working on that book chapter? r 13 A I could better answer if I had the book in front of'me. URL 0686 14 I recall the Viola reference alphabetically, but I 15 can't say mroe than that. ro 16 Q Did you regard Viola's presentation in Houston after 17 you read it as an important presentation? 18 MR. BUNDA: You mean after he read it a 19 couple months ago? 20 BY MR. DELLI BOVI: 21 Q When you first read it? 22 A I can't answer that. 23 Q What about his publication in cancer research in 1971, 24 did you regard that as an important publication, an 25 important article? OOROTHY M. WAOMtR ft AftftOCIATM COURT REPORTERS MILWAUKEE 39 'l A 2 3 n| 12 13 14 15 Q 16 A IT 18 19 20 21 A 22 Q 23 A 24 I would have to say that nearly all articles published in that esteemed journal should be regarded with some great value. Why? And I want to focus specifically on Viola's article. Why was that article, when it was published in 1971, important? MR. BUNDA: Well, I don't think that's what he testified to. Let's back up for a second. If you want me to give a review of a paper, I could do that, but this report is based to a large extent on his earlier reports as many papers are. It's still with rats. Heavy exposures-- Heavy exposures again. Please rephrase your question, sir. .* BY MR. DELLI BOVI: Do you know who sponsored Dr. Viola's work? No. I would assume his institute bore his salary and so forth and expenses. Do you know whether his research dealing with vinyl chloride exposure to rats was sponsored by the European PVC industry? 1 couldn't be sure of that. Have you reviewed prior to today Dr. Dahl's testimony? Yes, sir. (Short recess taken.) BY MR. DELLI BOVI: URL 06863 DOROTHY M. WAONKR ft ASSOCIATES count nsnofttcns MILWAUKEE 40 1 Q Dr. Zenz, my question before the break was whether or not you regarded Dr. Viola's 1971 article in cancer 3 research after you read it as an Important article. 4 MR. BUNDA: I'm going to object to the question. 5 I don't think there's a foundation laid as to exactly 6 when he read it, and I guess my objection also goes to i the point in time. Did he consider it important when 8 he read it in view of everything else he knew, or did 9 he consider it important when it first came out In 1971, 10 looking for hindsight. 11 A Could we temporarily go off the record? 12 (Discussion off the record.) - -- 13 A Assuming that I did review a summary and abstract or. 14 excerpts of the Viola publication on animal.experimenta 15 tion, I probably considered it of importance, yes. 16 BY MR. DELLI BOVI: 17 Q But -- 18 A But more so from the animal results chat I could then 19 extrapolate to man. That was my concern throughout 20 my career as to the validity of animals transposed to 21 a worker, a human. 22 Q Obviously you can't do the exposure studies on humans 23 in terms of what Viola did. You can't put humans in 24 a chemical chamber exposing them to 30 parts per 25 million of PVC and see whether or not humans get cancer. W890 itii'i OOflOTHV M. WAONCN ft AMOCIATCft COUftT HEPOATfUS MILWAUKEE 41 IJRL06365 1 A 2 0 3 4 A 6 7 8 9 10 11 Q 12 13 14 15 A 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 It's an animal statistic level naturally. So one of the tools that researchers use to determine the potential carcinogenicity of chemicals in man is to do animal research, correct? Certainly, with this admonision: I prefer to see studies for occupational purposes done with animals as large as possible, and that would include the primates, which would include then dogs, young and large adults, monkeys, all the way up and including baboons, if available. Are you aware of any study sponsored by any U.S. PVC resin manufacturer or any trade association of U.S. f - to PVC manufacturers dealing with the exposure of any animals to vinyl chloride? I'll have to clarify my response to your question in this manner: In reading a paper of any type, which includes some of my publications, often an acknowledg ment footnote is present either in the beginning of the first page or at the end of the text matter for the references. We would say this study was supported in part by the St. Luke's Hospital Research Foundation, this study was supported in part by the American Cancer Society or the Red Cross. But, again, when I read these reports and put them into my mental memory bank, we tend not to put DOROTHY M. WAGNER ASSOCIATES COURT RSROT|RS MIlWAUKEf 42 1 that portion of the report in one's mind, so I'm not 2 aware of the sponsorship of many of the scientific 3 reports published in the literature. 4 It may have been a cursory glance where it was 5 presented or sponsored in part or all of it, and this 6 is my explanation to your question. 7 Q Let me ask the question then, Doctor, in a broader 8 context. Other than the studies done by Viola and i i i 9 Maltoni and prior to 1974, are you aware of any 10 studies conducted anywhere in North America in which j 11 rats or other animals were exposed to vinyl chloride 12 ; f in an attempt to determine whether or not the material 13 was carcinogenic? 14 A I've refreshed myself. Yes. I was aware of these 15 studies, and prominently among these would be one of 16 my friends who is probably still with Dow Chemical as 17 their chief toxicologist. 18 They did many animal, and listing refer- - 19 ences of these documents you've given me and others 20 that I've seen, his animal experimentations stand out 21 prominently. So yes, I was aware, but not in great 22 detail or for your purposes today. 23 Q I'd like to read you a question and answer from Dr. 24 Dahl's deposition, and ask you if you agree with his 25 answer to the question: URL 06866 DOROTHY M. WAQNCR AMOCIATKS COURT IMPORTERS Milwaukee 43 URL 06867 1 MR. BUNDA: I'm going to object to this on the 2 grounds that it's irrelevant and improper. First of i j 3 all, I'm also going to object on the basis that it's 4 a vague question. Are you asking him whether he's* agreeing that you read the question correctly? 6 MR. DELLI BOVI: No. I'm asking whether or not 7 he agrees with the answer Dr. Dahl gave to the question. a BY MR. DELLI BOVI: i i 9 "Q Do you regard those documents, Dr. Dahl, 10 and that refers to these three Viola papers 11 that you have before you, as documents 12 calling into serious question the -, 13 carcinogenicity of vinyl chloride? 14 A I regard the one in 1971 in cancer research 15 as so doing. The others I regard as 16 preliminary reports, and I think one would 17 be unwise to draw any conclusions, any 18 important conclusions from them, but the 19 paper in 1971 by Viola, Maltoni, and Kaputa 20 is certainly an important paper to which 21 attention should be made." 22 Do you agree with Dr. Dahl's assessment of Dr. Viola's 23 1971 article? 24 A I can hardly disagree. He's the world's most prominent 25 epidemiologist in the field, and I've listened to his OOROTMY M. WAQNfR * AMOC1ATCS COUftT ftEPOHTENS Milwaukee 44 lectures, and I know of him. He's the foremost epidemiologist in the broad sense. I'm not certain what experience he has in the r occupational medical sense directly. He probably has reviewed more papers than I have on tumors, cancers. I would have to go along with his assessment, of course. Q Is there any testimony that you recall reading in Dr. Dahl's deposition with which you disagree? MR. BUNDA: Again, I'm going to object. Dr. Dahl's deposition took over three hours. If you want to point him to a specific passage, I think ;r that's perfectly reasonable, but to ask him to agre% with the entire deposition, I think is unfiar. BY MR. DELLI BOVI: Q All right. Would you prefer that I do it that way. Dr. Zens? A If I have a choice, of course, I'd Insist that you would, please. Q Do you recall Dr. Dahl testifying -- and this is Page 107 of his deposition. I'll be glad to give you that reference if you would like. A I may have to refer to it because it took me over three hours to go through it, and I can't recall all the numerical sequences of the questions and answers. If I may say so, this is a complete seminar on DOROTHY M. WAQNCR 4 AtSOCIATKt COURT REPORTERS MILWAUKEE 45 URL 06369 \ 2 3 4 3 Q 6 8 9 10 I 11 i I 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 epidemiology. MR. DELLI BOVI: I move to strike the answer as non-responaive. i i BY MR. DELLI BOVI: The testimony on Page 107, beginning at Line 7: "A The working rule is to assume that there is an effect proportional to dose down to vanish ingly low levels, given that the material is a mutagen. If it is not a mutagen, then my | working rule would be that is probably not the case and there would be a threshold below which it had no effect." - Q Vinyl chloride is a mutagen? A Yes. Q Therefore, your working rule is what? A My working rule is that you would assume there was an effect proportional to dose down to vanishingly msall levels, a vanishingly small effect, but an effect." Do you agree with Dr. Dahl's testimony In that regard? MR. BUNDA: I'm going to object to the question because it unfairly characterizes Dr. Dahl's opinion on this. If you were to show him on Page 106 where the question was asked about whether he has an opinion, I think you also have to read to Dr. Zens the fact OOKOTHV M. WAQNCR * ASSOCIATES COURT IMPORTERS MILWAUKEE 46 1 that Dr. Dahl Indicated that he does not have an 2 opinion, and he wished he could. Rather, he has a 3 working rule that he goes on until he gets additional i 4 information which permits him to form an opinion. j o So Dr. Zenz, why don't you read 106 in conjunc- | 6 tion with 107. I think that will more fairly character-j 7 lze It. 8 A On through the question to Dr. Dahl was: 9 "Q Is it your opinion that for any human I i j 10 carcinogen including vinyl chloride, there is 11 a safe level of exposure at which no potential 12 ~V carcinogenic effects will occur? - 13 A That is something that I wish I could answer. 14 I really have not got an opinion on that. 15 In cancer research, we work on the assumption 16 that unless there are strong reasons otherwise, 17 we postulate that an effect is produced 18 proportional to dose down to vanishingly 19 small levels. 20 Whether this is so or not is a matter of 21 great debate, and which we really have no firm 22 "" scientific evidence one way or another. We 23 act on the assumption In the same way as we 24 are acting on the assumption now that other 25 people's tobacco smoke in a room will cause a URL 06870 0OMOTHY M. WAQNffl * ASSOCIATES COURT REPORTERS Milwaukee 47 1 risk to all the people who are not smoking. ? But the scientific proof that this is so is 3 I such that I really have not got an opinion. 4 I have a working rule, but not an opinion.*" 5 BY MR. DELLI BOVI: 6 Q Is it your opinion that for any human carcinogen, 7 including vinyl chloride, there is a save level of 8 exposure at which no potential carcinogenic effects 9 will occur? 10 A I certainly do. This is true for most substances 11 used known to man, Including ionizing radiation, and 12 I can't argue with Professor Dahl. He's the most r 13 eminent authority. .* - 14 My only puzzlement with his expression is the 15 vanishingly small levels for man so precise that it 16 struck me as rather odd, but to me, that would be 17 parts per billion I would assume he's discussing. 18 Q So it's your testimony today that at least at levels 19 above parts per billion-- 20 A I'm sorry. Parts per million, correct, parts per 21 million. Not for any specific material, however. 22 Q Let's talk about vinyl chloride. Is It your opinion 23 that there is a safe level of exposure to vinyl 24 chloride at which no potential carcinogenic effects 25 will occur? DOROTHY M. WAGNER A ASSOCIATES COURT REPORTERS MILWAUKEE 48 URL 06872 Yes. And there is strong support for my opinions. And what is your opinion as to that level of exposure ! to vinyl chloride below which no potential carcinogenic : effects will occur? Naturally I can't give you a precise level. However, I can amplify my answer and refer to the established documents provided by the American Conference of Industrial Hygienists, the ACGIH, NIOSH, and other eminent institutional reports worldwide. 10 When guidelines or standards are set, what we determine threshold limit values or allowable 12 f concentrations for workers per shift, per week, per-* 13 year, or per lifelong exposure, the safety factors are 14 built into these levels. She safety factors for 15 adults may very well be four to ten to one hundred 16 times above that published figure. So in the event 17 that we have a fifty parts per million exposure, 18 allowable mean exposure for a lifetime of work with 19 vinyl chloride, that is a very, very low figure, 20 for safeness, which would not produce any pathologic 21 findings in a worker day in and day out. 22 So my answer is yes, that there are safe 23 levels established, and! feel very comfortable that if 24 these are followed by industry, tumors will not be 25 produced in man. DOROTHY M. WAONSft ft ASSOCIATES COURT RC*0TEIt5 MILWAUKEE URL 068 1 Q 2 3 4 A 5 6 7 8 Q 9 A 10 11 12 13 Q 14 A 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 Q 23 24 25 A Are you aware of reports by Maltoni of the generation of tumors in rats exposed to concentrations ov vinyl chloride at the 50 parts per million level? % Yes, sir. I'm also aware of other unpublished studies where baboons exposed to 20 parts per million for i j I i j I long periods of time and liver biopsies were made and no changes were found. How large a study was that? Well, considering baboons are such troublesome creatures, so expensive, I would say a dozen baboons for a period of a couple years, but I can't tell you more than that. i Who was the author of the study? An eminent physiologist who was the consultant for the Chambers of Mines of South Africa, who is now retired. He's well known to Professor Dahl and all the people in the field. I'm not sure if the study was published. It could have been. I could search for it, but I recall visiting his experimental laboratory and seeing these animals exposed to vinyl chloride. Well, can you tell me either the name of the author or the title of his publication or the journal in which that publication occurred? I can't instantaneously, but let me think about it. OONOTHY M. VVAONIR ft ASftOCIATIft count M*OAT*S Milwaukee 50 URL 06874 01 2 A 3 4 5 A 6 8 Q 9 A 10 11 ! i 12 13 A 14 Q 15 A 16 Q 17 18 19 A 20 Q 21 22 23 24 25 Certainly. I'm sorry. His name just doesn't come to me right now. MR. BUNDA: We'll supply you with that informa tion. He's published many, many articles. Now, whether or not this baboon study was published, I can't answer that without checking the literature. Have you read the paper that he authored? No. I heard him give a presentation on the subject while I was visiting his institute. Do you know whether or not a paper reporting his work exists? I can't answer that, don't know. -[ -* *= When was his work conducted? '82, '83, '84. And your understanding is that he exposed twelve baboons to vinyl chloride concentrations of 20 parts per million? Yes. Many baboons and 20 parts per million. So in order for him to generate any cancer in any of those baboons, the vinyl chloride at 20 parts per mill ion would have to be capable of generating cancer in -- Strike that. The one in eight percent at minimum of those baboons exposed at that level? MR. BUNDA: I'm sorry. I don't understand that. DOROTHY M. WAONER ft AftftOCIATKS COURT REPORTERS MILWAUKEE 51 URL 06875 2 3 4 Q 5 6 8 9 10 i t 11 j 12 13 14 15 16 IT 18 A 19 20 21 22 Q 23 24 25 A To some extent I do. Probably, but don't hold me to that. BY MR. DELLI BOVI: Do you know of any material that has been established to generate cancers -- Strike the question. I want to go back to my prior question that dealt with safe level exposure to vinyl chloride. What is your opinion as to the level of exposure to vinyl chloride below which no potential carcinogenic effects will occur? MR. BUNDA: I'll object. That's been asked and answered. { MR. DELLI BOVI: All I want is a number or a range of numbers. MR. BUNDA: I think he gave that to you in his previous answer. MR. DELLI BOVI: I never received a number. I couldn't give you -- In fact, it was probably in the thousands of parts per million for many years exposure. BY MR. DELLI BOVI: Why did OSHA set it-- Do you know what the current OSHA TLV for vinyl chloride is? MR* BUNDA: Actually it doesn't set TLV's. That's using the ACGIH level of *69, '74, but it's DOROTHY M. WAONKH AMOCtATEt COURT R6RORT8RS MILWAUKEE 52 1 probably in the order of 50 parts per million, if I 2I recall, but that has a huge safety factor, as I 'j 3 mentioned earlier. 4 Most of the TLV's do consider the factor 5 safety into their considerations deliberation. It's 6 not a precise figure. These are merely guidelines. 7 BY MR. DELLI BOVI: 8 Q Let me talk about current OSHA permissible exposure 9 limits on a time weighted average basis for vinyl 10 chloride. What is your opinion as to what that level j 11 or permissible exposure limit is? 12 ^ A It's about ten parts per million right now. ;f ,- 13 0 Have you reviewed any studies reporting the induction 14 of liver angiosarcomas in employees working in PVC 15 fabrication facilities? 16 A Yes. 17 Q Have you reviewed, prior to today, any reports of liver 18 angiosarcomas in people living in neighborhoods adjacent 19 to PVC production facilities? 20 A Yes. I've seen these reports, but I must add that 21 angiosarcomas were found in the general population 22 long before vinyl chloride was known to man, which 23 came about sometime in the '30's or '40's. 24 Q Do you have an opinion today as to what the rate of 25 liver angiosarcoma cancers are in the general population!? URL 06876 DOROTHY M. WAGNER ft ASSOCIATES COUNT NSPONTINS MILWAUKEE 53 URL 06877 2 3 4 5 6 7Q 6 9 10 A nQ 12 A 13 14 15 Q 16 17 18 A 19 20 21 22 23 24 Q 25 In the U.S. and approximation, yes. It would be exceedingly rare in the cases per millions of people. The figures I've seen are something on j i ! the order of -- I can't recall. It varies so much from person to person. It's an exceedingly rare type of tumor, probably one of the rarer forms. Do you have an opinion as to the number of parotid gland cancers in the U.S. in terms of per hundred thousand or per million people? No. I don't have that. Is parotid.gland cancer a rare cancer? That's more commonly seen. I'd have to check the tymor > e registry or local hospitals which are published annually, but I've not looked for that specifically. Do you have an opinion as to what the levels of exposure i to vinyl chloride were in the Chrysler plant prior to 1974? I can make a guess based on my experiences in the various industries that I've visited. I'll make this attempt: Since they didn't manufacture vinyl chloride monomer and purchased materials made by other manufac turers, I would imagine the exposures were very lower, below acceptable standards as we regard them today. Have you been furnished with any data indicating the concentrations of residual vinyl chloride monomer OOROTHV M. WAGNER t ASSOCIATE! COuAT AETOATEAS MILWAUKEE 54 I 0 3 A 4 Q 5 6 8 9 A 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 iI it i 18 19 Q 20 21 22 23 24 A 25 in the resins produced by the PVC manufacturers who are defendants in this case prior to 1974? No, I have not. ! Do you have an opinion as to whether the levels of i residual vinyl chloride monomer in PVC resins were higher after 1974 than they were before 1974, were lower after 1974 as opposed to prior to 1974, or were the same after 1974 as opposed to prior to 1974? I think I can answer that with some degree of certainty. When the polyvinyl chloride plastics are produced and stored, shipped, packaged, and so forth, the concei^- * -* a trations of residual monomer, VC monomer, would be probably the same today as they were in the mid-'70's and when it was produced first in the ' 50's and *60's. The chemical physical characteristics of the substances cannot be altered by one, two, three, four, five years in packaging, storage, shipping, so forth. Well, is it your opinion today that the levels of vinyl chloride, of residual vinyl chloride monomer in the PVC resins produced by the defendants in this case were the same in the '70's, the late '70's and the '80*8 as they were in the early '70's and '60's? I'd have to ask you if the factory in any way changed its procedures or methods of getting materials. URL 06878 DOROTHY M. WAGNER ASSOCIATE! COU*T Rl*0T{*S MILWAUKEE 55 URL 06879 1 I assume everything was stable at the factory? 2 Q I just want to know what your understanding is and , 3 what you now, coming into this deposition today, what 4 your understanding or what your assumption is? 5 A Probably the same, that is, very low concentrations. 6 Q Have you ever reviewed the article published by R. N. 7 Wheeler in Environmental Health Perspectives in 1981, 8 dealing with the residual vinyl chloride monomer concen 9 trations in certain PVC resins, and I'll hand you a 10 copy of his article. 11 A Thank you. Yes. I think so. Before I met Mr. Bunda, 12 that was probably part of my general reference -f -- 13 collection for my chapters on the plastics industry.. 14 Q Thank you. Have you reviewed the deposition testimony 15 of any witness in this case or any party in this case 16 other than Dr. Dahl? 17 A Yes. There was a physician who I did. Was it you 18 or Mr. Bunda that questioned? I forget his name. 19 Q Dr. Kelly? 20 A Yes. 21 Q Whose testimony have you reviewed other than Dr. 22 Dahl's and Dr. Kelly's? 23 A Did you provide me with the worker's testimony? 24 I've forgotten now. I've got so many cases to review 25 with depositions, I have to refresh myself in all OOROTHY M. WAQNER ft AMOCIATEt COUHT HEPOntERS MILWAUKEE 56 1 these things. 2 MR. BUNDA: In this material, I think there was ; 3 a summary of the testimony of the workers. ) ; 4v A Let me see the comments again, please. I must say, I j 5 yes, I have, but It's been many, many months ago that 6 I did this. 7 Q My question, Dr. Zenz, is not whether you reviewed 8 summaries prepared by Mr. Bunda or his office of the 9 testimony of the witnesses or parties, but whether 10 you reviewed their actual testimony? Now, did you 11 revi-w the testimony of Dr. Kelly and Dr. Dahl, or ;i 12 did you review a summary? 13 A I reviewed the actual typed pages, yes. 14 Q What about any other witnesses or party to this case 15 other than Dr. Dahl and Dr. Kelly? 16 A Dr. Peterson, Dr. Shindell. 17 Q Well, you couldn't have-18 A This entire document was reviewed by me at one time, 19 but X can't recall the authors of each chapter here. 20 Q You couldn't have reviewed Dr. Peterson's testimony, 21 because that was just given yesterday. 22 A Not his testimony, his report. 23 Q I'm asking about testimony, questions and answers under 24 oath? Whose testimony have you reviewed other than 25 Dr. Dahl and Dr, Kelly? URL 06880 DOROTHY M. WAONIR AtSOCIATit COUNT ftCNONTENS MllVVAUKtC 57 URL 06881 1 A Then I've not other than deposition summaries. Q 3 So when you refer to Dr. Shindell, you reviewed his epidemiologic study? 4 A Yes. 5 Q But not his sworn testimony? 6 A No, sir. i Q And the same is true with Dr. Peterson, you reviewed 8 his two letters? 9 A Yes, sir. 10 Q But not his sworn testimony? 11 A Right. Q12 You have not reviewed the sworn testimony of either 13 of the plaintiffs in this case, either Mr. Dendinget* 14 or Mr. Wallace? 15 A I have not. 16 Q You haven't reviewed the testimony of Mr. Fergeson at Chrysler? IS A No, sir. 19 Q Or Mr. Schloter, the chemist at Chrysler? 20 A No. 21 Q Can you tell me today, Dr. Zenz, in what areas of the 22 Chrysler plant Mr. Dendinger or Mr. Wallace worked? 23 The -- Let me see if I can give you exact terminology. 24 If memory serves me right, the plastics fabrication 25 area where they made the internal components for some DOROTHY M. WAONKH A ASSOCIATES COUNT NENONTgRS MILWAUKEE 58 1 2 3 4 5 Q 6 A 7 Q 8 9 A 10 Q 11 12 13 A 14 Q 15 16 17 A 18 Q 19 20 21 A 22 Q 23 24 A 25 of their vehicles, and the finishing area, where they probably were prepared for shipment out. I'd have to review the documents to give you the exact terminology of the company's areas. Have you ever visited the Chrysler plant? No. I have not. Have you reviewed the work histories of Mr. Dendinger and Mr. Wallace? I have. Are you aware from your review of their work histories I of their occupational exposure to any carcinogens other than vinyl Chloride? I'm not. -? . *fc. Have you reviewed what you referred to early in your testimony as genetic factors for either Mr. Wallace or Mr. Dendinger? That would be guess work on my part. I have not. 1 take it that you have reviewed certain medical records and laboratory histological and pathological reports relating to both Mr, Dendinger and Mr. Wallace? Yes, sir. So you know the type of cancer that Mr. Dendinger died from and the type of cancer Mr. Wallace died from? Yes. I'd have to go back and recollect the pathologist's report, of course. 8290' m OOKOTMV M. WAONIR ASSOCIATES count ncnoftTEfts MILWAUKEE 59 URL 06383 1 Q 2 3 4 A 5 6 Q 7 S 9 A 10 11 12 Q 13 A 14 15 Q 16 A 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 Q 24 A 25 Q Did you attempt to determine prior to today what type of respiratory protection was provided either to Mr. , | Dendinger or to Mr. Wallace? Yes, Indeed. I looked for that almost immediately when I was given the Peterson report. And what type of respiratory protection was provided to either Mr. Wallace or Mr. Dendinger at any time that they worked at the Chrlyser facility? I'd like to refresh myself, because I have some impressions I could give you if I could please see the documents. You would like Peterson's letter? Please, thank you. I would also need to refresh my/elf with the State of Ohio's reports, please. Certainly. Yes. 1968 report from the Health Division of the State i of Ohio indicates that the company did provide self breathing equipment, and this is the reason I had to dig into the document, because it's obscure in the report. And also that their conclusion was that no health hazards due to vinyl chloride exposure were found. What year? '68. When did Mr. Wallace first begin working at the Chrysler OOHOTHY M. WAONIR A ASSOCIATES COURT REPORTERS MILWAUKEE 60 1 2 A 3 Q 4 5 6 i 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 A 20 Q 21 22 23 A 24 Q 25 plant? I can't answer that precisely. What type of respiratory protection does that letter refer to? Self-contained breathing apparatus, self-breathing equipment. That would be an air supply tank or a hose connected to a safe source of air. Do you have any evidnece or have you seen any evidence that Mr. Wallace or Mr. Dendinger ever wore an air- supplied respirator or were ever given an air supplied respirator? I would suspect not, because they had sufficient [_ -* engineering exhaust control measures in this plant, * judging from the Division of Health reports and Depart ment of Health; And, of course, I look for these details rather early when I review a report of this sort Were you aware of the 1976 OSHA citation for excessive solvent levels? No, I'm not. Were any of the levels reported as a result of Chrysler testing in 1974 above the current PEL for vinyl chloride exposure on a time weighted average basis? PEL? Yes. MR. BUNDA: I'm going to object to the question, URL 06884 DOROTHY M. WAQNKR A ASSOCIATES COUST UPOflTERS MILWAUKEE 61 URL 06885 2 3 4 5 6 7 6 Q 9 10 I \ 11 ; 12! A 13 14 15 16 i 17 i 16 Q 19 20 21 22 A 23 24 Q 25 because I think we've already established that these readings of -- what were they, ten minute readings -and the permissible exposure limit is one part per million on an eight-hour time weighted average, and I'm not sure you can make that correlation. I'm objecting to the question. BY MR. DELLI BOVI: Are you aware of any attempts made in or after 1974 to determine the time weighted average exposures of Dendinger and Wallace as to vinyl chloride? Only what you've provided me, or what I have been provided by you gentlemen. These were rather short ^ periods of measurements, and I would not say they represent actual PEL'S. MR. BUNDA: Kirk, do you mean other than that '5 parts per million that Wallace showed? BY MR. DELLI BOVI: No. I mean anything. Are you aware of any attempt by Chrysler or any attempt by anyone in or after 1974 to determine the time weighted average exposures of Wallace and Dendinger to vinyl chloride? Yes. The hygienists, of course, routinely make TWA, time weighted average reports. And are any of these reports that you've been furnished with time weighted average reports? DOROTHY M WAGNER ASSOCIATES COURT MRORTIRS MILWAUKEE 62 URL 06886 1 A For shore periods, yes. 2 Q Do you believe that that data can be extrapolated 3 to determine a time weighted average concentration 4\ over an eight-hour work day? 5 A In view of the general spectrum of low level analytic 6 results presented to me, yes. These are more studies 7 than industry normally performs for this sort of 8 operation. They amount to hundreds, if I just cursorily 9 add this up, and this gives me a good picture of the 10 lack of exposure I see in this particular operation. 11 Q Is it your opinion or do you have an opinion as to 12 whether or not Wallace and Dendinger were exposed tfo 13 vinyl chloride monomer during the course of their 14 employment at Chrysler? 1 15 A Yes. They probably had a lower level exposure as did 16 most of the workers there. 17 Q Is vinyl chloride a mutagen? 18 A In some animal systems, yes, some organisms, yes. 19 Q Do you have an opinion as to whether there is a level 20 of exposure to a mutagen below which no mutations will 21 occur? 22 MR. BUNDA: You're speaking specifically of 23 vinyl chloride or generally? 24 A That troubles me, because I knew you were asking for 25 general, and these could run from analine to zirconium. DOROTHY M. WAQNIfl ft AtSOCtATKS COURT REPORTERS MHWMJKEE 63 URL 06887 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 n 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 Q 19 20 21 A 22 Q 23 24 A 25 I'm trying to give you an answer to this vexing question that everybody wants to know the answer to. I'll try to answer this by using a very I contemporary and current example. Astronauts going into outer space are bombarded by heavy neutrons and other extreme gamma radiation. Ionizing radiation pass right through the body, through vital organs. And these actions damage cells and the contents of human cellular components, but due to the regeneration capabilities of man, nothing will happen. And this is something that humans are exposed to from conception on. I can't answer this/ question. I don't think anyone can answer it today,. There are a thousand substances one could look at substance by substance, and the answers would vary from negative to positive, and depending on the species of the creature examined. Dr. Dahl was asked on Page 107 of his deposition, "Is vinyl chloride a mutagen?" His answer, "Yes." Do you agree with his testimony? Yes, I do. Why do you regard Viola's 1971 publication in cancer research as an important paper? Well, for many reasons, and on reflection now with everything recently behind us and present and so forth, DOROTHY M. WAQNER ASSOCIATES COURT REPORTERS MILWAUKEE 64 2 3 4 5 6 i 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Q 16 IT 18 19 20 21 22 A 23 Q 24 26 it was accepted by an eminent journal, so it had to be reviewed by experts in the field, and his institute ' is quite well regarded in the world. Exposed the ani- i i | mals for 12 months, which is quite a lengthy exposure | ! for rats. It's difficult to do. He made a nice report. It was readable, and timely, I should say. j And at the concentrations he used, almost all the j animals developed bone tumors. And in his discussion, he indicated that there are some questions even in j his mind about which is a susceptible system in the animals. But furthermore, in closing on this brief review of his paper, it set people to thinking about related studies that should be done. Now, let me put you back in the position of an industrial hygienist and a corporate occupational health physician, ID but this time for a PVC resin manufacturer. In 1971, would you as an industrial hy- j CCTOi 0*1 glenist and an occupational health physician for PVC resin manufacturer want to know about the existence of this article? Yes. Do you know whether or not the U.S. PVC manufactuers and the Manufacturing Chemists Association were aware in 1971 of this article by Viola? DOROTHY M. WAQNER ASSOCIATES COUflT M*0TENS MHWMJKCE 65 URL 06389 1 A I can't speculate, but I would hope so. o 0 You were not aware of it, however, in 1971? 3 A No. j 4 Q Let me go back again and put you in the shoes of the | 5 occupational health physician for the PVC manufacturers. 6 Why would you have wanted to know in 1971 about the ! 7 existence of that article? 8 A Now you're talking to me? Because in my natural 9 curiosity to have complete information as to the 10 work I'm doing, and also in view -- and looking back 11 wards now as you're asking me to do -- the tremendous 12 usage of these compounds worldwide and in factories, 13 - * and the exposure levels reported in the '40's and '4 50's. 14 And I would, of course, be concerned with 15 control measures and therefore, all information we 16 would constantly -- I would have been literature 17 searches manually probably in those days, as I did in 18 my work, by the way, when I was in the era that you 19 are presenting to me. 20 Q You know today that PVC resin in the '60's and in the 21 *70's -- at least the first half of the '70's -- 22 contained residual levels of vinyl chloride monomer? 23 A Yes, I do know. 24 Q Now, I'm going to switch your hat again and have you put 25 on the hat of a corporate occupational physlclal and DOROTHY M. WAGNER ASSOCIATE! COUNT n(PO"T(H$ MILWAUKEE 66 industrial hygienist for a user of PVC resin. Would you in that capacity have wanted to know about this 3 article in 1971, when it was published? 4 MR. BUNDA: You're asking him as a user of the 5 resin? 6 BY MR. BELLI BOVI: 7 Q Yes. 8 A But in an industry, 1 take it? 9 Q Yes. 10 A As a medical director or hygienist for the corporation? 11 Q Certainly, yes. 12 A Yes, I would. You're speaking to one Individual in 13 the field, and my method of work was different than 14 many of my counterparts elsewhere. 15 Q What I'm asking you today about Is your opinions and 16 your beliefs. 17 Dr. Zens, why as an occupational health 18 physician and an industrial hygienist with PVC resin 19 customers would you want to know about the existence 20 of Dr. Viola's 1971 article? 21 MR. BUNDA: I'll object on the basis of 22 speculation. 23 A Well, typically In a larger manufacturing organization 24 of sufficient size to employ me as physician or 25 hygienist to give advice regarding occupational health 06890ia n DOROTHY M. WAGNER ASSOCIATES COURT REPORTERS MILWAUKEE 67 URL 06891 1 o 3 4 o 6 8 9 I 10 I 11 i 12 j I 13 I !i o 14 I i 15 16 A IT . Q 18 1 19 20 21 22 A 23 24 25 and working conditions and improvement and also maintenance of a good health for workers, I would be asking the librarian to provide me with pertinent documents from time to time as they come across in the journals. I'd probably subscribe to -- In fact, I have until this date subscribed to many of the journals that you've given me references for, but not to cancer research as such. I would have said, "Look, any materials that we're handling, our workers are working with, I want to be aware of published reports." Now, you're not aware of any document prior to 1974. disclosing to the PVC resin customer that there was, in fact, residual monomer in the resin, are you? I can't recall that for certain, no, sir. Would that be, again, putting your hat on as working for the PVC resin customers, important for you to have known in 1971 that there was, in fact, residual vinyl chloride monomer in the resin that your company was receiving? Yes. But equally important would be other materials as well. I was always interested in the composition of materials and the conditions under which they are used, whether it's under extreme heat or cold or high OOROTHY M. WAGNER A ASSOCIATES COUNT ft{0*TE*S MILWAUKEE 63 1 2 3 4 5 6 7Q 8 9 10 11 A 12 Q 13 A humidity or lack of ventilation or hard, heavy muscular work on the part of the men, and the extent of the working ho.urs, whether it would be eight hours a d.ay, ten hours a day, six days a week. All of these factors would have been and are of great interest to me in the proper protection of workers' health. Would you and do you rely on the-- Strike that. Do you serve as a consultant to companies that use raw materials furnished to them by supplies accompanied by MSDS? Yes. How long have you been doing that? At least ten or twelve years. 14 Q Do the companies that you work for rely on the MSDS 15 supplied to them by the suppliers and the manufacturers? 16 A Many of the smaller concerns naturally must. Many of 17 the larger concerns re-review documentation submitted 18 to them internally. 19 So there is a broad mixture of response 20 to the material safety data sheets. More and more 21 the data sheets are more detailed. Often they, in the 22 past, have been rather1 loosely prepared and vague. 23 I've helped, of course, prepare data 24 sheets for employees, say, in agricultural chemical 25 manufacturing to make them understandable to the URL 06892 DOROTHY M. WAONCft * ASSOCIATES COURT REPORTERS MILWAUKEE URL 06893 1 worker, and we give them to all workers. It is a 2 rule we have that nothing Is to be kept from a worker. 3 I have been doing this for some of the 4 companies at least since 1977. 5 Do you have an opinion as to whether or not the PVC 6 resin manufacturers, assuming they were aware in 1971 7 of this article by Violar had an obligation No. 1, 8 to tell their resin customers that there was residual 9 vinyl chloride monomer in the resin; and 2, to inform 10 those customers of the research and the report done by 11 Dr. Viola? 12 MR. BUNDA: I'm going to object on the basis 13 . * that it calls for a legal conclusion, but you can go 14 ahead and answer. 15 I'll try to answer this in the context that these 16 types of documents and reports were published, probably 17 in the numbers of thousands of different substances, 18 materials, combinations of materials on animals 19 throughout the world. Short and long reports. 20 That would have been insufficient evidence for me to 21 say you've got to put this on your material safety 22 data sheet. 23 It would be insufficient. It would have 24 been insufficient for me, so my answer to you regarding 25 the question whether Industry should have reacted DOROTHY M. WAONCR t AMOCIATft COURT REPORTERS MILWAUKEE 70 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 Q 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 A 23 24 25 Q immediately to this would be that I think Industry j responded rationally and began studies. I'm sure, throughout the country and initiated and requested epidemiologic studies, animal studies to verify some of these things. The intent of a scientific report of this sort is to get other people to become interested and continue studies and take off from what has been reported and perhaps evaluate other avenues, go in different directions, not necessarily on the same substances and the same techniques. But it stimulated the people to say, "Why don't we look at our workers and do a broad scale study here and there?" Do you have an opinion as to whether or not, assuming that PVC resin manufacturers were aware of Viola's 1971 publication as to whether or not they had an obligation to disclose to their customers that there was residual vinyl chloride monomer in their resins? MR. BUNDA: I'm going to object to the question, because it presumes that the customers didn't know that, and I think that's an improper statement. I can't answer that question of jurisdictional authority on this question about whether they had an obligation. BY MR. DELLI BOVI: Do you have an opinion as a physician in occupational URL 06894 DOROTHY M. WAONCft AtAOClATIS COUNT MN0NTJNS MILWAUKEE 71 URL 0639' health and a consultant In occuDational health with the background in industrial hygiene as to whether they had an obligation? In some instances, yes. But I would have to be alerted to Che quantification of the potential residual components. Well, you've seen R. N. Wheeler's article that dealt 8 with that issue, have you not? 9 A Yes, sir. 10 Q Have you been furnished with any document that indi 11 cates to you that the PVC industry and its trade 12 organizations were aware in 1971 of Dr. Viola's work? 13 Yes. I was given some copies of documentation of who 14 were representatives of some of the industries who were cn 15 present. I've forgotten the dates of that, but that 16 was sometime in the mid-'70's. 17 Did you receive any-- I'm going to hand you a document 18 consisting of six pages authored on November 23, 1971, 19 by R. N. Wheeler. Do you know R. N. Wheeler? 20 A No, I don * t. 21 Q You've never spoken to him at all? He worked for 22 Union Carbide. 23 I may have met him. He's a hygienist or toxicologist, 24 I think. 25 Would you take a look at this November 23, 1971 memo of DOROTHY M. WAQNKft * ASSOCIATtt C0U"T E**0*TE*S MILWAUKEE 72 URL 06896 1 R. N. Wheeler and Cell me whether you've ever seen that 2 document before today? 3 A You provided that document to me, Mr. Bunda, in the 4 batch of materials, I believe. 5 MR. BUNDA: That comes as a surprise to me, 6 but if you've seen it, you've seen it. 7 A Let me go through this again. 6 MR. BUNDA; 1 think where you might have seen 9 it is in Dr. Dahl's deposition. 10 A That's where I saw it, yes. But I would not have 11 seen this in the *70's, I can say that. 12 Well, something struck me in this document, 13 and I'd like to bring out, if I may please, and it's 14 very important and germane to our discussion today and .15 the things you're asking me. 16 The industry has*a responsibility to its 17 employees and customers to take any necessary action 18 to protect them. Union Carbid's corporation is a 19 responsible name of that industry and will bear its 20 share of cost. 21 Union was one of the leaders in the 22 occupational medical affairs, at least it had been up 23 until now. 24 Q Can you tell me or cite-- 25 MR. BUNDA: Wait a minute. OOIIOTMV M. WAONSM ASSOCIATE* COUNT NEPORftftS MILWAUKEE 73 URL 06897 1 BY MR. DELLI BOVI: 2 Q Are you finished? 3 A No. 4 Q Please go ahead. 5 A To answer your question, I have seen this document only 6 recently in the past weeks, but I would not have seen this document in my career ten years ago or five years 8 ago, no. 9 Q So the first time you saw that document was when it 10 accompanied the copy of Dr. Dahl's deposition that 11 you received? 12 A Yes, sir. 13 Q And that was within the last couple of weeks? * 14 A Yes, sir. I should also remind you that the Manufac 15 turing Chemists Association as well as the Chemical 16 Manufacturer's Association, the Plastics Association, 17 the American Patroleum Institute, there are many, 18 many so-called institutes including the Formaldehyde, 19 constantly has ongoing committees, and I've attended 20 some of these committees, and.they're based on sub 21 stance to substance, material to material, and their 22 intent Is to provide documentation on data, education 23 and information to the body of people concerned with 24 all of these materials. 25 Q Including their customers? DOROTHY M. WAONKR A ASSOCIATES COURT REPORTERS MILWAUKEE 74 1 A 2 0 That's right. Can von cite me anv document or anv niece of evidence 3 prior to the public announcement of the Goodrich 4 angiosarcoma deaths indicating that anv PVC manufacturer 5 ever told Chrysler, No. 1, that there was residual 6 vinyl chloride monomer in the resin; No. 2, that the 7 RVCM concentrations in the resin were; or 3, of the 8 work done by Viola published in 1971; or 4, of any 9 research indicating the potential carcinogenicity of 10 vinyl chloride? 11 BUNPA: I 'm going to object to the form 12 of the Question on the basis that it presumes that 13 there was some dutv-- Dr. Viola's article was published 14 and onen to the public including the auestion about 15 whether residual vinyl chloride monomer levels were 16 exposures is a complex Question, which I don't think 17 legally gives rise to a duty, and I think the 18 presumption that it does is an improper one, and I'll 19 oblect on that basis. 20 BV mr . DEIZI BOVI: 21 0 22 Co ahead and answer. Are vou aware o^ anv such disclosures by the PVC industry to Chrysler? 23 A I'll take the prerogative that vou tossed upon my 24 shoulder in the area of being in tbe corporate 25 medical director hygienist's shoes. I would hope that DOROTHY M. WAONCR ft ASSOCIATES COUMT flEPORTfHS MILWAUKEE 75 URL 06899 \ out o* scientific curiositv and eood practice that the 2 air sampling would have included the containers when j 3 thev were open and dunked and shinned throughout a 4 factorv of materials that are purchased and used, oi and that industrial hvgienist would look at all aspects i 6 of materials within his Hirisdictional domain. 7 Therefore, I would have honed that in mv 8 industry, we would have looked at residual components ! 9 emanating from a substance such as olastics, whether 10 thev are coming in fresh from the boxcar or drums ! 11 or cardboard boxes or cloth hags. and so forth. One 12 should know whether or not there are leakages of mater- -* 13 ials, whether thev are solid, liouid, or gaseous or 14 vapor. 15 I would hope that, hut I have no documenta 16 tion what a comnanv did ten or fifteen years ago if 17 I had not been present. 18 I would assume thev had some ideas of all 19 their components of the materials and exposure level. 20 If they had hvgienists in dutv, that's their dutv to 21 determine these things, but T can't answer for them now. 22 (Lunch break taken.) 23 BV MR. DELLI P-OV1: 24 O Dr. 7enx, one of the publications of vour's that ?!r. 25 Bunda has given me is entitled "Occupational Cancer DOROTHY M. WAQNCR ft ASSOCIATES COURT REPORTERS MILWAUKEE 76 f 1I 2 A 3 o 4 A 5 6 7 0 8 A 9n 10 11 A 12 0 13 14 15 A 16 17 0 18 A 19 20 21 22 23 0 24 A 25 Risks'*: is that correct? ves, sir. % And in what book did that ^articular article aonear? i This chanter 52 appeared in the book called Occupation al "edicine Principles and Practical Applications, 2d, 188 bv vear Book Medical Publishers of Chicago. And vou were the editor of that book? I was the editor o* that book, ves, sir. Thank vou. This particular article did not deal with vinvl chloride in particular, did it? No, sir. Have you ever authored anv scientific or medical loumal articles dealing in particular with vinvl chloride and the risks associated with exposure to it? ves, I did. In 1P7A, as T mentioned earlier *or Occupational Medicine, 1st edition. That was in JOM? No. That was the vear Pook Medical Publishers text book on occupational medicine. Now, I co-authored that chanter, the earlier one with the senior industrial hygienist for the United Rubber Worker's Union. Who is Vernon Doddson? (phonetic) Professor of Medicine and Preventative Medicine at the University of Wisconsin. URL 06900 DOROTHY M. WAONCR ft AftSOCIATCS coui MPoaun MILWAUKEE 77 URL 06901 1 0 o 3 4 0 6 7 11 A 12 13 14 15 16 17 A IS 19 20 n 21 22 23 A 24 25 O In the sunmarv to your article, vou indicate, ''It is believed that a high proportion o* all cancers are caused bv 'extra frenetic' ractors, including personal behavior Patterns fe.fr. cifraret smoV.i.nfr, alcohol and i j J i drug use, and sexual activities) and toxic environmental exposures in the work place and the community. '* Is that vour ooinioo? Essentially, yes. Do you have an opinion as to the noroortion of total cancers that are caused bv extra frenetic factors? I do, and I'll give vou this approximation. It's in the order of for the U.F. population as a whole, orobablv less than three percent, non-occuoational. MR. BtTT^A: I'm sorrv. Me're eettinfr confused here. 97 percent are non-occuoational. That's what I meant to sav. Bv MR. DELLI BOVI: But I'd like vou to answer mv ouestion. My ouestion Is what is your opinion as to the proportion of all cancers caused by extra frenetic factors? Oh, excuse me. **av I see that paragraph again in its total context, Please? Certainly. DOROTHY M. WAONtft * ASSOCIATES COURT REPORTERS MILWAUKEE 78 1 Thank vou. This is alreadv ^ave Q?P, so let re ouicklv j look at this. 0 TTell, it's *?P of the text, it's not $2^ of this article. Thank vood.ness. Okav, thank vou. Please reohrase vour miestion or have it read to me 6 n 9 10 11 ! 12 ! 13 14 again. Certainly. TThat is vour oninion as to the proportion of all cancers caused bv extra genetic factors? MR. BUNDA: vour first miestion was percentage, vou're changing it to nronortion. EV VR, DELLI BOVI: Percentage or nronortion, however vou want to exoress it. A It's verv small. O whv do you use the term "high proportion'' in your 18 19 20 21 0 22 A sumnarv? PTiNDA: T-Tell, let's let him see what vou're reading Prom. Bv MR. DELLI BOVI: Sure. ves. Ve emphasize cigaret smoking, alcohol/drug use, 23 and so forth. 24 0 Those are all extra genetic factors? 25 A ves, sir. 3069o ia n DOROTHY M. WAQNIR * ASSOCIATES COURT REPORTERS MILWAUKEE 79 URL 06903 1n 2 TJhat makes up the whole set o* cancers other than extra genetic factors? What els Is there? 3 Is there genetic and extra genetic? 4 A Sometimes thev are mixed, course. A tynical ertamnle 5 being cigaret smoking and lung cancer and asbestos. 6 0 Let me ask the question another wav then. What is your 7 oninion as to the total Percentage of total cancers 8 caused bv genetic factors? 9 A As *ar as is known todav, nrobahlv verv high. I can't 10 give vou an exact figure. 11 O And in order to assess for anv given individual 12 whether or not his cancer might be peneticallv 13 caused, what would you look to? 14 We would look to in as much detail as physically 15 possible the familiar characteristics as far back as 16 possible. 17 There are some unknown diseases, of course, 18 that are trulv genetic in origin. We would look at 19 population studies, of course, where there is a stable 20 population unchanged, unmixed is another wav to do it. 21 But in general, to state that something Is environmental 22 or genetic or occupational, are, I would sav, broad 23 guesses. 24 0 Have vou nroir to today attempted to determine whether 25 or not the cancers from which Mr. Wallace and Mr. DOROTHY M. WAONIA ft ASSOCIATES C0U*T AAOATSA$ MllWAUKti 80 URL 0b904 1 Hendineer died were genetically caused or had a orenetic 2 etioloqy? 3 A These identical 'thoughts occurred through nv find as 4 I vas reading through the materials, but it would be 5 impossible to anvone to sav todav what the cause of 6 their cancer was. T couldn't sav. i O Do you have a range of Percentages as to the percentage 9 or proportion of all cancers that are genetically 9 caused? 10 A I do not. 11 0 If you don't have a ranee of percentages as to the 12 percentages of cancers eeneticallv caused, how can you 13 determine a ranee of percentages of total cancers that 14 are extra eeneticallv caused? 15 A Bv looking at the present documentation as refined in 16 past literature, in recent literature, which includes IT many epidemiologic studies in the Past ten, twenty 18 years. Bv looking at medical records of cancer 19 registries in the various areas of the country and 20 nationally and internationally. And then we end up 21 with a good scientific intuitive guess. 22 And I'm not sneaking only for myself, but 23 I'm sure some of mv colleagues would share mv thoughts. 24 O vou Indicate-- TThat is vour oninion as to the percen 25 tage of total cancers that are occunationallv caused or DOROTHY M. WAONCR * ASSOCIATES COURT REPORTERS MILWAUKEE 81 URL 0690' 1 result fron occupational exposures? 2 A I've indicated that's approximately three percent 3 more or less. Again, this would varv ^rom country to 4 country and place to place. 5 0 What about the United States? 6 A About that. 0 Now, in your article you published this vear-* 8 ?'R. BUNDA: Again, it's not an article, but a 9 chapter from a book. 10 Bv MR. DEI,LI BOVI: 11 o Chapter vou published this vear, vou report, do you 12 not, that the ''despite the shortcomings, various 13 attempts have been made to estimate the proportion of 14 cancers related to occupation. These estimates span 15 a broad range from less than four percent to more than j i 16 20 percent. While these estimates were innrecise, 17 little doubt remains that certain occupational factors 18 are significantly related to an increased risk of 19 cancer. 20 Moreover, in certain groups of workers 21 exposed to specific carcinogens, the proportion who 22 ultimately develone occupational cancer may be large.'' 23 Is this what you wrote in your chapter 24 this year? 25 A Ves, sir, I did. DOROTHY M. WAONER ft ASSOCIATE* COURT REPORTERS MILWAUKEE 82 1I O 91 3i A 4 o: i 6i n 8i A 9 Do vou personally side with the ^our percent group rather than the 2^ nercent *rour>? % ves, sir, less than four percent as a matter of fact. In the past manv decades, this figure has been \ becoming increasingly smaller *rom An percent, 3H percent, now down to under *ive percent. T7hv is that? Ouite honestly, occupational cancers are becoming very rare. URL 06906 13 14 i 15 I O 16 IT 18 A 19 n 20 21 22 A 23 n 24 A 25 !,Thv? Because of educational processes and control measures, good industrial hygiene, good occupational medicine and so forth. Also, aging of the population, other cancers come out. Is it your opinion then in past decades, the percentage of occupationally related cancer was higher than it is today? ves, sir. You cite twice in your chanter on occupational cancer risks articles published bv Thomas Mankuza (phonetic) of the University ^ittsburg School of ^ublic Health? Yes, sir. Have vou worked with Dr. Mankuza before? No. But I know him, and I've attended some of his lectures, and he has spent manv years in the field of DOROTHY M WAGNER ASSOCIATE* coukt Kfpomns MILWAUKEE 83 URL 06907 1 epidemiology and occupational health. 2 0 Do vou regard him as an authoritv in that area? 3 A I do, ves. 4 O Mow, one of the citations vou make to Dr. Mankuza Is o testimony that he gave at the Department of Labor 6 hearings on vinvl chloride in 1974? 7 A ves, sir. 8 o I take it that prior to citing that reference, you 9 read his testimony before the Department of Labor in 10 197* on vinyl chloride? 11 A I can't recall that, sir. No, I can't be that Precise, 12 sir. 13 o I would like to read you, Dr. Zenz, and exernt from*' 14 Dr. Mankuza's testimony at those hearings and ask you 15 whether or not you agree with it. 16 '"Further, the skin tumors freouently 17 develone rear the ear and submaxillarv or the same 18 areas as the salivary glands. It was postulated by 19 original investigators that vinvl chloride mav enter 20 the salivary gland system. 21 If this is subseauentlv confirmed, it 22 raises the question whether tumors of the parotid 23 gland can also occur, as has been demonstrated in the 24 rubber industry, and this has been confirmed now by 25 the testimony this morning that cancer of the parotid DOROTHY M. WAONCft ft ACSOCfATCS COURT REPORTERS MILWAUKEE SA 1 2 3 4 A 5 6 o 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 0 15 16 17 18 19 A 20 21 22 A 23 24 0 25 A gland has been observed in animals.1' Do vou share Dr. '-ankuza's oninion as I*ve Quoted it from those hearings? 1 might if I could see his references that he alludes to in that naragraoh. I don't have with me his references. MR. BUNDA: Thev don't exist. MR. DELLI BO'TI: TTell, vou mav argue thev don't exist, Mr. Bunda. MR. BUNDA: vou've never been able to show us that thev have created cancers in the narotid glands of animals. Bv MR, PELT,I ROVI: Do vou agree or disagree with the opinions exoressed by Dr. Mankuza at those hearings? MR. BUNDA: Mhy don't vou show him the ooinion, because I'm not Quite sure the oninion that he's expressing. Before I do that, I'd like to see something as I look at references. I might have to use a svstem here. MR. BUNDA: This is Dr. Dahl's deposition. Okay. I'm not looking at Mankuza's stuff then? BV MR. DELLI BOVI: No. I'm sorry. URL 06908 DOROTHY M. WAONIft A$OCIATtt COURT RERORTfRS MILWMUKff 85 URL 06909 1 o 2 3 4 5 6 7 A 8 9 10 o 11 12 13 14 A 15 16 0 17 18 19 20 21 A 22 23 24 25 I didn't brine the OBFA hearings with me because they are 4,000 nases lone, and nhvsicallv I couldn't carrv them, so I'm referring vou to ^r. Dahl's testi mony that vou reviewed several weeks aeo. MR. BUNDA: There's no oninion beine expressed there. He's renortine on what he did. Are vou asking me a similar ouestion vou asked Dr. Dahl about whether or not this can hanoen? ves> pv MR, DELLI B0VI: MR. BUNDA: I lust want the ouestion to be clear about what oninion vou're discussing. TThat oninion was expressed by Dr. Mankuza? The opinion that's stated there. Bv "R. DKLT.I PrtVT: Do you agree with Dr. Mankuza's statement as I've ouoted it *ron his testimonv at the OSFA hearings? MR. BUNDA: I'm coins to object. He annarentlv, Dr. Mankuzo is making a reference to some studies that Dr. Viola did. This is what my impression was, too. But may I say something, sir, about Dr. Mankuzo*s testimony in this particular paragraph expression? The salivary gland system is an excretory gland constantly excreting saliva, and it's not an operative type situation. OOAOTHY M. WAONCR A ASSOCIATES COURT MROftTCftS MILWAUKCC 86 1 2 3 4 5 0 6 A 7 n 8 A 9 10 0 11 12 A 13 O 14 15 A 16 0 17 18 19 A 20 21 0 22 23 A 24 25 0 It's an excretorv viand constant!v excreting fluid, so it's not a gland that will take un something. It is the intent of the eland to exrete -- V salivarv material to heir* digestion processes. i>That feeds the salivarv glands? vou mean feeds the salivarv glands? Sure. ITiat makes them operate? The circulatory svstem, the lvmphatic svstem, as all are. Do vou have an opinion as to whether or not vinvl chloride enters the human circulatorv svstem? It does. Can. And the circulatorv svstem feeds, in turn, the parotid gland? f^oes to the brain, heart. Do you know whether or not Dr. villa, when he started doing his research in Italv, be*?an working with primates? I can't answer that. I don't know what animals he began working with. Is one of the reasons for working with mice and rats rather than primates of the cost involved? Partly the cost and convenience, life span, short life span. Have you worked on anv cases involved in litigation URL 06910 DOROTHY M. WAONCR ft AStOCIATtS COURT REPORTERS MILWAUKEE 37 URL 06911 ] with Dr. Shindell? o A ves. As the opposing nhvsician. 3 0 Did you do anv work in the Sterling versus Velsicol 4 case in Tennesee? 5 A I was consultant to ^elsicol, but I was not involved 6 with the Sterling case, and I believe that was 7 environmental contamination. I was not called in to 8 give an opinion on that. 9 0 Mho hired vou as consultant *rom ,relsicol? 10 A The Director of Knvironmental Health and Hveiene at 11 the time with the approval of the present chaiman. 12 O And who was that at the time? 13 A I can't recall the names. That was in *77 or '78. 14 Q Have vou had any correspondence concerning this case 15 with Dr. Shindell or Mr. peterson? 16 A Today's case may I ask? 17 O In relationship to this case? 18 A Not with Dr. Shindell. Onlv in the fact that I saw 19 his report, part of the documents provided me bv Mr. 20 Bunda, and the report provided bv Mr. "Peterson in 21 his report to Mr. Bunda. 22 O There has been no exchange then of correspondence 23 directly between vou and Dr. Shindell and Mr. peterson? 24 A No, sir. 25 0 Prior to-- OOROTHV M. WAONfN ASSOCIATE* COURT REPORTERS MILWAUKEE 88 1 MR. FUTTDA: Dr. Peterson. 2 Bv *!R. HELLI BOVT : 3 O Prior to appearing todav, what studies have you 4 reviewed concerning PVC fabrication workers as opposed 5 to pVC resin manufacturing workers or vinvl chloride 6 monomer manufacturing workers? 7 A To seoarate this in mv mind, in other words, the 8 manufacturer of nolwinyl monomer from the raw 9 materials into rolyvinvl chloride plastic, and 10 thereafter into Plants that fabricate goods from the 11 nlastic? 12 0 That's correct. 13 A It's a separation of two processes, two industries. 14 0 ves, sir. And my auestion is what studies have you 15 looked at prior to today that concern pVC fabrication 16 workers? 17 A First, I should add that I visited various factories 18 in different narts of the world that make a vinlv 19 chloride monomer in plastic, and also have visited and 20 inspected factories that make a varietv of plastic 21 products. 22 One could not say those are studies as 23 such to be published, but add to my general knowledge 24 of these materials. But I have seen the vast body of 25 literature pertaining to workers engaged in these URL 06912 OOROTHV M. WAONEft ft ASSOCIATES COURT REPORTERS MILWAUKEE 89 URL 06913 a > H amt Va)t o o p 3 c i t e me as vou s i t h e re to d a v one s tu d v th a t Xat p * c *H (0 P X4) P b 4, c x> PrV-)f a fH > c H > O IJ (a0t rp<-0l at P uH (0 ro--1 cc cH Eat > pP V) TrJl X3 P4) *3-! x4) at PHcc - 16 a5>t U c-4 Pi Pi o3 4) >> c3 Xcd 4-. CJ (tJo O > p C"* Pa)i P(0 O 3 4X1 x H p o 42 O X<a 30 4) u 4) 43 <0 3 4) > 4) <6 P 4: O P M-, 4) XX ti P E p*-( a3tot at P c rU->4 at > u to 4) X P P at OS O p 4) (0 EX p taot > >X (P401 PP (0 p>. i--1 H 0 4) Eat E x *3-4 > XXI. EV 4j X Mp a> --1 p Ecd aXt at 3 0 w bi O *--4 1O-4 Eat x H Pat. p 3cd H>aatt P pCO 0 E at X p 09 <d p <0 X p raCOt Xp ct>d cboi at P CHO X p O3 0 >p HX > x p3 3 pcn A< at Xp p 03 3 H P P H 0) O E pm P - at at O 3 CO X <a p 4) P P 0 CHO Xp p0 p 3cd > 4) CO -- pH 0>c3n p C 3 3at P4) XP c > 3cd E 4) Pcd PO3at P -CO Hr--1 at xt 3 t-4 X p-4 at 0 Uj at P (0 cd tp-i M P Pat X X3 p aCOt XCaOt X Ptcidt at p 3cd > 4) r--l 3CCdJ at X r-5 CaOt X at p at P pp3 x t--i 3 3O? M H>. Xt&4 3cd r->a4t 4) XP p cd pParlt H 10 P P O 3at P T0-i bi rOH 10-4 XEaHt 3at pat Xp c > c3d 4C at pcd Scd 3 O > at <p Q) OCO *--l *-l ja X 3Cd bp4)i 3H X 3at r. X 0H X & Hc Pr4 rH *H 4OC.d at X p *3H P 4) > O O 3 H Pcd iH H 5 CO p 3 X CO aHt POP Cl cd 4. H cd CHl P XH3at e-- H> Xat > H Pcd H0 1(00 3. at Eat 0at at 3 pat p 0 > >at- Xp X > 3co E 3cd Pat c co p X P 0 3at Hc3d be p at a<0t X p U3 3at X at 3at X>I. at co 3H at > a-4t M3 Oat . 10 3 at >X . CO Xat pp 0 43 at p 3 4) 1a0t 3 4) P at 4) 3cd pat < 05 E & C3 4-, O H cd 3 P 3O X at X p 4- 0 P 0 -pH Xat at Xp f-l rH co 0at P n cn cd > bL p at 3H X Xcd a3t E 0 p p49 X5 3 1-1 X3 at 3H >cd Xin >H PO at X p Pat Xa) <0 9 aPt X t-t > tp4 at OP w > X X 3cd X p 0 4-1 CO at P at 3H cd c > P i-Ol X C3O XH at cHd H <0 H 3 i-04 P P O P H X at 0 H bC r0-l OH cd at p. X 3p Eat X 0 0 O 3 0 3at- c cr> <c >o to t- oo 05 o < o< CO as 005 m b<> 0 8 MSO 1%T 3 > $ s , 11 i URL 06914 1 2 0 3 4 5 6 A 7 8 9n 10 A 11 o 12 13 14 15 16 17 A 18 19 20 o 21 A 22 0 23 A 24 25 The Plastics Association. My Question is whether vou're aware of any other epidemiologic studies of the Chrvsler plant and the Chrysler work ^orce In Eanduskv, Ohio other than Dr. Phindell's? Ves^ I think the Environmental Health Associates in San Francisco or Oakland, Dr. barton's group made the studv, I believe, of the Chrysler Corporation riant. Have you seen that? Isn't it in the group that vou've given me, Mr. Bunda? If you are familiar with that, Dr. Zenz, I would like to see it? MR. BUNDA: But one, are vou referring to the Tabershaw study, Coooer studv? He's trying to draw an artificial distinction here. Just a study of the Chrysler Plant. Perhaps I have it mixed up with another series of cases. Excuse me lust a minute, please. BV MR. DELLI BOVI: I know it's not in there. Dr. Zenz. Then it came to mind somewhere else. I don't want to confuse you. That's easy to do under the circumstances, Mr. Delli Bovi. Give me a while to reflect on your Question. I'd like to say that I read practically everything DONOTHY M. WAONIN b AMOCIATI* COURT RfPORTCM MILWAUKEE 91 URL 0691T* 1 Tabershaw and Coorer et al. have published and nrobablv 2 have the conies of the publications. 3* I've read considerable publications by 4 Leonard Chia2i whom I know. And, of course I have 5 read the report in 19*4 bv Heldus. (phonetic) He's 6 a Norwegian investigator. I'm familiar with Dr. 7 Gustov Muleana. I know him personally. We studied 8 in Sweden. 9 ves. I've read these records, indeed 10 I have. But what can I sav about them? 11 n My question isn't about those reports. My ouestion is 12 whether you're aware of any epidemiologic study 13 .* concerning workers at the Chrysler plant in Sandusky, 14 Ohio other than that conducted bv Shindell? 15 Mv apologies, sir. The ouestion is clear to me now. 16 No, I'm not. 17 O What was that study or that name you had given me 18 before? 19 W-h-o-r-t-e-n. He's the physician associate with the 20 Environmental Health Associates in Oakland, and they 21 do many studies for industry, countrywide. I may have 22 confused his study with some other work I'm doing, 23 so I'd like to retract that, nlease. I don't want to 24 further confuse us. 25 voufve never seen anything published bv Whorten? DOROTHY M. WAONfft AMOCIATtt COUNT ftENOATIK MILWAUKEE 92 URL 06916 1 A For the Chrvsler nlant? 2 0 Or relating to vinvl chloride in general? 3 A Ves, I have, but it has nothing to do with Chrysler. 4\ O Vhat did you see from Shorten? Is it in those mater 5 6 A ials? I was in error. I'm sorry about that. I was in error. 7 I'm sorry. That had nothing to do with your work. 8 0 Did it have anvthing to do with vinyl chloride? g A ves, I think so. 10 n Where did vou get the document from? n A I could have gotten it from Shorten directlv sometime 12 ago. 13 0 Do you have the document? 14 A I think so. 15 O Was it an epidemiologic study? 16 A ves, sir. 17 n Did it involve vinvl chloride? 18 A I think so, but I'm not certain. 19 n Was it conducted within the last two years? 20 A I can't be sure of that date. 21 0 Was it conducted within the last five years? 22 A Probably, ves. 23 MR. DELLI BOVI: Mr. Bunda, can you tell me 24 whether or not any of the defendants in this case have 25 retained Whorten to conduct any studies relating to DOROTHY M. WAONCH ft AfttOCtATCt COURT REPORTERS MH.WAUCM 93 vinvl chloride or the work force at the Chrvsler facilitv in Fanduskv? BTTTDA: Tor the nurooses of this case? No. I have no knowledge of his studv at anv time. I don't know whether thev've retained him for somethine else or not. I've got nine defendants that I've been representing, and thev've got lots o* nlants. I've never heard of the studv, however, I'm interested to see them. Bv . DELL! BOVI: T-7ould vou make a coov that studv? ves, sir. If I can *ind it. I'll be nleased to do that. But olease understand it's not unusual to have copies of reports and naners mixed with somethine else. What is this individual's full name? Donald Shorten. ?*R. BUTTDA: Again, we'll sunnlv it, if a formal reouest is made. Bv MR. DELLI BOVI: And who does he work for? He works as a consultant. It's called Environmental Health Associates, and he's one of the leaders in the field. I regard him verv highly. And Environmental Health Associates is based in Oakland, California? OONOTHV M. WAONCR fc AMOCIATH COUNT NENONTCNS MKWAUKCC 94 1 A Ves, sir. I don't have the exact address. 2 O Have vou had any discussions in the last wo vears -- 3 Is this Dr. Whorten? 4 A ves, sir, Vf.D. 5 0 --with Dr. Whorten concerning vinvl chloride in general 6 or the Chrvsler ^acilitv in particular? 7 A I have not. 8 o Have you been in communication or had anv communication 9 directlv with anv representatives of anv of the 10 defendants in this case other than Mr. Punda and 11 members of his firm? 12 A Hone whatsoever. Excuse me, but I have met with Mr. 13 Peterson. 14 MB.. BITNDA: His question was have vou had any 15 contact with defendants. 16 A Defendants, no, I have not. 17 n Have you had anv meetings with Dr. Fhindell? 18 A No. 19 O ^hen did you meet with Dr. Peterson regarding this 20 case? 21 A A week ago or something. 22 MR. BUHDA: For the record, let's be accurate 23 on this. Dr. Zenz. We didn't meet with Dr. Peterson 24 for purposes of this case. We got together for lunch. 25 A I met him because I hadn't seen him for manv, many St690 1bf DOROTHY M. WAQNlfl AMOCIATKt COURT RiPORTCHS Milwaukee 95 URL 06919 1 2 3 4 n 5 6 A 7 n 8 9 A 10 0 11 A 12 13 O 14 A 15 0 16 A 17 18 19 0 20 21 A 22 23 0 24 A 25 years. It was a social visit. ?'d like to make that very clear. BV MR. DELLI BOVI: vou have had no discussions concerning this case either with ^eterson or with Bhindell? I have not. Fould you tell me what the basis is unon which you're rendering services in this case? vou mean my fee? ves, sir. I don't know what that is at the moment. It would be a fee for services as a orivate nracfitioner. Do you do that on an hourly basis? .* No, sir. How is vour fee determined? It Is determined on the time involved and comnlexitv and the stress I'm nut under and how much material I need to review and how much time awav from home. Have you rendered any hill vet to Mr. Bunda or his firm or any of his clients for services rendered to date? I think I probablv sent out one bill to Mr. Bunda1s firm. Do you recall when that was or what the amount was? The amount was about $800, and I don't recall when it was. OOflOTHV M. WAONtff ft AftfOClATCC GOUflT REPORTERS MILWAUKEE 96 1 0 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 o 18 19 20 A 21 0 22 A 23 O 24 A 25 0 Would you explain to roe, Hr. 7enz, exactlv what you have been asked to do in this case by Mr. Bunda in the wav of rendering? opinions or Riving? testimony? MR. BUNDA: I'm going to object to that. That Rets into attorney work product privilege, and I'm eoine to object. BY MR. DKLLI BOVI: What is your understanding, Dr. 7enr, as to what-I'll ask the auestion another wav. Assuming this case was set for trial tomorrow, what opinions would you anticipate giving at the trial? I'd be p.lad to trv to answer that immediately. That the tumors found in these workers couldn't have been caused from their work exposures, if.indeed there was such exposure to vinvl chloride as such. That would be my answer to vou. And what assumptions have you made regarding the levels of exposure that Mr. Wallace and Mr. Dendinger were sublected to during their employemnt at Chrysler? They were verv low. Below the present TWA pEL for vinyl chloride? Yes. At all times during their employment? Essentially, yes. What is your opinion as to the latency period for URL 06920 DOROTHY M. WAONI* % AMOCIATtt count MIUWAOCtl 97 URL Q6Q21 1 2 3 4 5 A 6 7 o 6 9 10 11 A 12 O 13 A 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 O 22 23 A 24 0 25 A occupational cancers? MR. BUNDA: I'm going to object to that on the basis that it's overbroad and vague. Can you answer that for all cancers? That's impossible. BV MR. DELLI BOVI: Well, did you say in the summarv of your chanter, "Occupational cancer usuallv becomes evident lone after initial exposure to the carcinogen. This interval may vary from five vears to more than forty vears." That's right. Is that your belief? ves, sir. That's verv general, however. MR. BUNDA: I'm inserting an oblection on the record. This case involved claims of cancer arising from vinyl chloride. Ouestions as to all cancers are irrelevant. vou want to address vour cancers to vinyl chloride, I'm sure Dr. Zens will be happy to answer. BY MR, DELLI BOVI: Do you have an opinion as to the latency period as to vinyl chloride-induced cancers? Yes. What is your opinion? The inducement is dependent on massive heavy long-term DOROTHY M- WAQNBR AMOCIATIt COURT MRORTtU MILWftUKtf 98 1 2 3 4 5 6 A 7 8 0 9 10 11 12 A 13 O 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 A 25 exposures, and bv that T mean thousands of narts ner million for tnanv vears, and this would not occur in all workers. And what is your opinion regarding the latency neriod for vinyl chloride-induced cancers? Probably 15 to 20 vears under those conditions of continued heavy massive uncontrolled exoosure. And is it your opinion that all of those individuals who have develoned angiosarcomas while employed in the PVC resin industry have been subjected to continued massive uncontrolled exposures to vinyl chloride? Very likely. URL 0692 What about those employees who developed angiosarcomas working in the pVC fabrication facilities? Do you believe, or Is it your opinion that those employees r-o were sublect to continued massive uncontrolled exposures to vinyl chloride? MR. RUNDA: I'm going to oblect. What employees are we talking about here? MR. DELLI BOVI: Those covered bv the Molene article in 1984. MR. BUMDA: If you understand the specific reference then to the Italian article. There was a Swedish study, even though Molene was Columbian and Mexican, but I have a feeling that was DOROTHY M. WAONtfl ft AMOCIATM court unrin WHWMJIK 99 URL 06923 1 2 3 O 4 5 6 7 8 A 9 0 10 A 11 12 A 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 0 onlv one *actorv. Bv ,fR. DELLI Bnvi: I'm talking about the article Published in 19*34 in the American Journal of Industrial wedicine entitled "Two Cases of Liver Angiosarcoma Among ^olyvinvl Chloride Extruders of an Italian Factory producing PVC Bags.and Other Containers." That's Maltoni. Would you like to answer mv nuestion now? Would vou read it please? (pending ouestion read.) If I had been the editor or reviewer of that article, I would not have accented it for Publication as submitted, as it gives no idea whatsoever of the historv. One worked in the laundrv for a period, and it also gives not the vaguest idea of what the exposures hapoen to be in terms of ciuantitv other than to say that was an extruding operation, and that is not enough for me to form mv opinions. That paper should have been expanded. Measurements should have been made in the factory. They had ample time to do that. There's no reason why the inspectors couldn't have repeated that extrusion operation and made air samples. Do you subscribe to the Americal Journal of Industrial DOflOTHV M. WAQNCfl ASSOCIATE COURT REPORTERS MILWAUKEE 1Q0 1 Medicine? 2 A Yes. It's not high on mv list of journals, but it's 3 being published. 4 O We've discussed the workers compensation cases in which 5 you've testified. What other non-worker's compensation 6 cases have you given expert testimony in? 7 A S In chlordane exposures in homes, the use of respirators In hazardous waste sites, decontamination of hazardous 9 waste sites, chlordane, again, environmental exposures 10 to chlordane, dioxin exposures, general environmental 11 contamination, formaldehyde exposures for mobile 12 homes and homes. That's about it in recent years. 13 Q Did Dr, Shindell do work for Allis Chalmers while you 14 were employed there? 15 A No, 16 0 If you are doing an epidemiologic study to determine 17 whether or not a narticular work force is contracting 18 cancers at a higher rate than the general population 19 because of exposure to vinyl chloride, what is the 20 significance of incorporating into that study workers 21 who have been employed by that factory for as little as 22 three months prior to the cut off date of the study? 23 MR, BUNDA: I'm going to object to the question. 24 I'm not offering Dr. Zenz as an epidemiologist. We're 25 going to have three epidemiologists testifying on this, 69o ian DOROTHY M. WAGNER 0 ASSOCIATES COUHT MMBTMS MUMMWCCf 101 URL 06925 1 A vou'll set three different answers, too. 2 If you insist. I'll trv and answer that. 3 *TR. BUMDA: vou can <?o ahead and answer the 4 truest ion. I think he's making snecific reference to 5 6 A the Shindell studv. I'm not going to sav I disagree with Professor or 7 Dr. Shindell or anyone else. Let's ^ust sav for the 8 sake of convenience, the longer the interval one 9 chooses for a beeinning point, the easier the study is. 10 There are a great bulk of emnlovees who 11 work less than a vear because of personal reasons. 12 They nuit, and it makes a vast studv population of 13 movement. It's difficult to trace neoole down in our 14 countrv. T-Te don't have very accurate registries in 15 the United States, and I'm familiar with the State 16 of Wisconsin Registers because I've been on the 17 committee for two vears or so. 18 The shorter interval of tine from onset 19 of employment for selection, the more difficult the 20 study will be and the more uncertain the exposures are 21 of any tvne. So I would prefer to see a little longer 22 neriod of time, say six months, nine months, or a year 23 for long-term studies. But that's sublect to 24 epidemiologic discussion and arguments worldwide. 25 0 Uhat effect does a latency period of five years or DOROTHY M. WAONKR A ACSOCIATKt COURT REPORTERS MILWAUKEE 102 ten vears or nore have on a studv that enconnasses workers who worked at a particular factorv -For as little as three months hefore the cutoff date of the studv? MR. BUNDA: Do vou understand that ouestion? A I'll trv. MR. BUNDA: I don't, but if you do-A It's a difficult ouestion you asked me. Bv MR. DFLLI BOVI: O Let me ask the ouestion another wav. If the latency period for a particular cancer is ten vears or more and you include in vour studv a significant number of of emnlovees who prior to the cutoff date have had less than ten vears elanse between initial exposure and that cutoff date, what effect does that have on the studv as a whole? A It could have a big effect. It mav not, though. MR. BUNDA: Let me interpose an oblection here. I don't think that the ouestion makes any sense, and I think he's confusing the terms latency period and exposure period, but I'm not going to tell him how to answer his ouestion. I'm oblecting on the basis that it's a nonsensical ouestion. Bv MR. DELLI BOVI: 0 Do you understand the question, Dr. Zenz? A I think so. Let me reflect on your Question lust a URL 06926 DOROTHY M. WAONCIt A AMOCIATM COURT REPORTERS Milwaukee 103 URL 06927 moment more, please. Fee, most epidemiologic studies for occupational purposes are fraught with many, many * errors. This is in contrast to studies of, say,` ineffective processes such as T.B. malaria, and so on and so forth, the classic studies of the past. There are so many other factors involved besides one organism, and I'm getting to the point where we're very much concerned about quanitites and doseages of expousre. If you send workers to work in a foundry or a factory that thev have to shovel silica sand in enclosed spaces without ventilation or protective eouipment, they may develope silicosis * within a year or could. And if they quit their lobs, they may not develope it forever. Now, if you consider young fellows in a similar situation with no occupational exposure who are heaw smokers, and you disregard that, that's another factor of latency. So you're giving me a question containing latency, but I'm interested to know the components or the make up of the substances or the materials as well as the potential dose or exposure during that period which to me are most important components rather than exactly the cutoff date. DOROTHY M. WAGNER * ASSOCIATES COURT REPORTERS MILWAUKEE 104 URL 06928 Most of the epidemiologic studies we look at always talk about exposure, but never quantify. That's the fault I see with all the documents in front of me. With exceptions, exposures only indicate they were working with something, and that's not enough for me to go on. 0 Do you know what the cause was of the greater than 100 percent increase in observed versus expected cancers in the lob categories at Chrysler in which Dendinger and Wallace were employed? A Did I here 100 percent increase? 0 Ves, sir. A Could you point that out to me again, please? 0 Sure. I'm going to hand you what's previously been marked Plaintiffs Exhibit Dahl 3. MR. BUNDA: This is the char.t that you made up. BY MR, DFLLI BOVI: Q From Dr. Shlndell's data. A I recall reviewing, lust looking at it and thinking about it, of course. MR. BUNDA; I also object to the question on the basis that It's a mischaracterization of evidence. There Is no 100 percent Increase. A That's the problem I have, too. This is really incomplete data you're giving me. DOROTHY M. WAGNER ft ASSOCIATES COUAT MAOATMS M'UWUJKff 105 URL 06929 1 2 0 3 4 A 5 Q 6 7 8 9 A 10 11 12 0 13 A 14 O 15 16 17 18 A 19 0 20 A 21 22 0 23 A 24 0 25 A BY HR. DFLLI BOVI: | Let's take the lob category of Dendinger and Wallace. You see those? Yes, sir, coating and finishing and inspection. And determine the total number of cancers on those two groups. Does that yield the total of 14 observed cancers in the two lob categories in which Mr. Wallace and Mr. Dendinger were employed? Apparently with this admonision, that we don't know the total number of workers or the total time span or how old they were and so forth and their exposure. That's because you haven't seen Dr. Shindell's raw data? That's right. But you're aware from reviewing his report that in the lob categories in which Wallace and Dendinger would have been, there was a total of 14 observed cancer deaths? So reported. Versus an expected number of cancer deaths of 6.99? Seven. So this is why you confront me with the term 100 percent. Yes. Thank you. Is that a fair characterization? It's a common finding in these types of studies OOftOTHY M. WAGNER A ASSOCIATES COUNT AEPORHNS WIIWAUKM 106 1 2 0 3 4 5 6 7 A 8 9 O 10 11 A 12 worldwide, Do you have any opinion as to the reason why there were 14 cancer deaths in the lob categories in which Wallace and Dendinger worked versus the 6.99 expected deaths? MR. BUNDA: Again, I'm going to object to the question as being an inaccurate characterization. I can't answer that. BV MR. DELLI BOVI: Do you know whether or not Dr. Shlndell was ever asked to account for that difference? I can't say that. I don't know. MR. DELLI BOVI: That's all I have. Dr. Zenz,. 13 Thank you. 14 15 EXAMINATION Bv MR. BtJNDA: 16 17 0 IS 19 20 A 21 0 22 23 24 25 A Vou were asked some ouestions about residual chloride monomer in the polyvinyl chloride resin used at the Chrysler Sandusky plant. Do you recall those questions? To some extent, yes. And you were asked some hypothetical questions or at least some questions about whether you knew the level of residual vinyl chloride monomer before and after 1974 used at that plant. Do you recall those questions? Yes, sir. URL 06930 DOROTHY M. WAONER ASSOCIATES COUflT HEPORTtftS MILWAUKEE 107 URL 06931 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 S 9 10 I 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 o 23 A 24 25 Doctor, I'd like vou to presume ^or purposes my nuestion that the residual vinvl chloride monomer found in some of the pVC resin used at that nlant in 1974 was higher than the residual vinvl chloride * monomer level which mav have existed in those resins after 1974, and I'd also ask you to oresume that the exposure levels that you saw in the industrial hygiene survevs which were done In 1974 of the workers at the Chrysler nlant came as a result of using that resin that had the higher residual vinvl chloride mono mer levels. Civen those oresumntions, is your con- . elusion that vou've expressed the same concerning the low levels of exposure at the nlant? MR. DELLI BOVI: I'm objecting to the auestion. vou go ahead and answer, Doctor. **R. BUNDA: Basis of vour objection? MR. DELLI BOVI; The basis of mv objection is that I don't believe your question contains facts that are supported or will be supported bv the evidence. BY MR. BUNDA: Okay. vou can go ahead and answer the question. To simplify the answer to a complex question, I would say that in my mind, the exposure levels under both circumstances are very low. OOAOTHY M. WAGNER A ASSOCIATES COUNT RiPONTfNS MILWAUKEE 108 '1 0 All right. vou expressed some impression earlier that 2 the residual vinvl chloride monomer levels mav have 3 remained constant on or before 197A. 4 Regardless of whether or not that's 5 true, the exposure levels that you saw in 197* to 6 the workers were consistent with vour opinions expressed 7 concerning the fact that they were low exposures; is 8 that right? 9 A Absolutely. 10 0 Also to clarify one other thing. vou expressed an 11 opinion that the permissible exposure level for 12 exposure to vinyl chloride todav is ten parts per 13 million. Is that vour understanding that that's 14 incorrect? 15 A That was my error, T*Te were talking about so many 16 numbers. It should be one. 17 O One part per million? 18 A ves. 19 Q Thank you. 20 21 EXAMINATION MR. DELLI BOVI: 22 23 0 And you discussed those matters that Mr. Bunda just 24 inquired during your lunch with him, did you not, sir? 25 MR. BUNDA: Objection, sir. Don't answer that. URL 06932 DOROTHY M. WAQNKH AMOCIATKt COUNT NINONTMt MILWAUKEE 109 URL 06933 1 That's an inauirv into discussion between the attorney j 2l and his exnert, and you don't have to answer. 3 Bv MR. DELLI BOVI: 4 0 Doesn't make any difference whether it's a sublect 5 between the discussion vou and he. I want an answer 6 to that ouestion. Did you discuss those matters with 7 Mr. Bunda over lunch and change your opinions as a 8 result of those discussions? I didn't change my opinions of anything. vour opinion this morning was that the PEL for vinyl 11 chloride at the Present time was ten parts per million. 12 A I must have erred. *EL is different than TLV. y. 13 *- 0 I understand that you testified this morning it was 14 ten. 15 A Yes. 16 0 vou testified this afternoon that it's one? 17 A ves. 18 O VThat caused you, between this morning and this after 19 noon to change your opinion? 20 MR. BUNDA: I think he lust explained for the 21 record. 22 It was an error. I apologise for that error. 23 BV MR. DELLI BOVI: 24 0 And that was something you discussed with Mr. Bunda over 25 lunch hour, and it was as a result of that discussion DOROTHY M. WAONCR ft ASSOCIATES COURT RfRQRTCRS MIlWAlKii ^10 1 that you're changing vour answer? 2 A No. 3 MR, FtJNDA: I'll Instruct this witness not to 4 answer. 5 MR. NELLI BOVI: T^ine. Then we'll come back 6 and get an answer later. 7 BV MB., NELLI BOVI: 8 O I take it, Dr. Zenz, that you're going to follow Mr. 9 Bunda's Instruction and not respond to my Question? 10 A Right. n n And if you are instructed by the court reporter to 12 respond, vou will follow **r. Bunda's recommendation 13 and not answer the Question? 14 MR. BUNDA: That's right. 15 A Yes. 16 MR. NELLI BOVI; All right. Thank vou. 17 18 * 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 URL 116934 OOROTHT M. WAONtA A AMOCIATtt COuftT imnu UlkWAUtil 111 URL 0693' 1 2 STATE OF WISCONSIN ) ) FF. 3 NILWAUKEE COUNTV ) 4 I, TERESE M. FCHIEBENEF, a Notary Public 5 in and for the State of Wisconsin, and a Certified 6 Professional Reporter, do hereby certify that I sat in 7 the offices of Dorothy M. Wagner and Associates, Court 8 Reporters and Notaries Public, on the 13th dav of October, 9 1938, and was attended bv Kirk J. Delli Bovi, Attorney 10 for the Plaintiffs, and Robert A. Runda, Attorney for the 11 Defendants, in the foregoing entitled matter, taken 12 pursuant to the provisions of Section 304.05 of the 33 Wisconsin Statutes. 14 That before the examination was commenced, 15 the witness was duly sworn bv me to testify the truth, the 16 whole truth, and nothing but the truth, relative to 17 said cause. 18 19 That as a Certified Professional 20 Reporter, with offices located at Suite 400 Oermania 21 Building, 135 West Wells Street, Milwaukee, Wisconsin, 22 I hereby certify that T took In machine shorthand the 23 foregoing proceedings and the same is true and coreect 24 as contained in my original machine shorthand notes 25 taken at said time. DOROTHY M. MTAONfft AMOCIATES COURT REPORTERS MILWAUKEE 112 URL 06936 1 2 That I am not a relative or employee 3 or attorney or counsel of anv of the parties, nor am 4 I a relative or ertnlovee of such attomev or counsel, 5 nor am I financiallv interested in the action. 6 7 Dated this 12th dav of November, 19RR. 8 9 c/mj M~yyi. jJb/t/LJvhj/i 10 Notary Public in ana for the 11 State of V'isconsin. My Commission Expires: 2/25/90/ 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 DOROTHY M. WAONIR * AMOCIATKS COW*T MILWAUUi 113