Document bjEj1aq473qnb8p5o6ZR3Ko0

MEMORANDUM TO: FROM: DATE: RE: Montante Fil 5212(a) DLK A ugust 8, 1384 Reconciliation of plaintiff* pqut fo r chloracn document on 219 people w ith Zack/Suskind M ortality Study C ohort Som months ago p la in tiffs supplemented a rqust fo r production of raw data of m o rta lity studies b y p ro vid in g a lis t of 219 names fo r whom th e y sought certain Inform ation, including any record showing th a t ach Prson had (1) a "tru e cat o f chloracn" as d fln*d fn the Zack/Suskind m ortality stud y, o r (2) a diagnosis of chloracn, rash o r 2 ,4 ,5 -T rath subsequent to March 8, 1949, through th and o f 1952. W do not know how tha p la in tiffs p u t together th lis t o f 219 (attached), b u t I do know that it includes: 1) 121 people from the Zack/Suskind co h o rt, the single exception being Nurse Ruth Morris. 2) 20 people on a lis t of names used as E x h ib it 5 to tha deposition o f Ju d y Zack oh March 1, 1984, Identified as "Deceased N ttro C lients," (attached). For purposes o f responding to the request, a "tru e case of ch lo racn *" was taken to be chloracn attrib u ta b le to the 1949 b lo w -o ff and immediate clean-up e ffo rts . A ccord ingly, attempts were made to reconcile documents from medical and workmen's compensation file s on these 219 people w ith th e ir Inclusion o r exclusion In the Zack/Suskind cohort o f 122. Listed below are Instances where the information obtained from a review of the medical and workmen's compensation flies does not line up w ith chlorecne as a re s u lt of exposure d u rin g the eccldent and clean-up and where SUBJECT TO P Cji'Vc 0 /D E R . C 04191 w w ill need to be prepared to explain why these people were not in the cohort. 1. W illard Forbea Medical Fite 1) 9427791 - Notice of Accident Treatment dated 5/7/49 show Dept. 34, re p o rt of rash on face and between legs 2) 9427782 - Notice of Accident Treatm ent dated 10/7/51 hows D ept. 34, re p o rt of 2 ,4 ,5 -T rash on face - some on body with date of in ju r y "oyer a year ago*1 In support o f his not being in the cohort, I d o n 't believe he was on the safety memos and a workmen's comp- claim (9427815) shows 3/26/50 data of in ju r y . We may have to explain the 5/49 rash, however, since it is similar to re ports fo r those who were in the cohort. O r perhaps the B34 Instead of B41 dasignation solvas tha problem. In our response to requeat fo r documents wa did not indicate th a t 9427791 supported a claim of a "tru e case of chloracne." 2. Charlea ft. Fowler Medical File 1) 9444339 - Notice of Accident Treatment dated 5/18/49 shows D ept. 41 re p o rt of derm atitis on face Workmen's Comp File 1) ' 9444340 - Workmen's Comp claim dated 2/13/50 says In ju ry was re p o rte d `5/18/49 and was "chemical rash on face" re su ltin g from "unexpected chemical reaction tibaratlng unknown products of decomposition" O ur response to request fo r documents listed these documents as showing a "tru e case o f chloracne." Jan Yung indicated th a t ha waa not included in the cohort on the basis of a memo dated A ugu st 22, 1949, from W. E. Chandler to D r. J . R. Durland stating th a t he had been exposed b u t had not developed derm atitis (9510339*9510340). We w ill need to be able to Justify his exclusin bated upon th a t memo In contradiction o f the re p o rt of derm atitis In his file . 3. Halley, Jease W. Medical Fite 2