Document dYxnyXmXVZ8VRLE2NXoY8Gxz9

RIDER Re: Maliko, et al vs. Union Carbide, et al Interrogatory No. 1: (continued) n^ - (H Cl| !I -c---- c- -and Copolymer 11 (H HJ nh fll cll H if 11 i !_ -C -- c ---- ----- --------- C------ c- ------- 11 L HJ a 1I oj 1bJ C---0 K------ c --H 1 H The average number of vinyl chloride molecules in tne homopolymer resin molecules. a/b- The ratio of vinyl chloride molecules to a molecule- of comonomer. nc - The average number of vinyl chloride - comonomer groups in the copolymer molecule. Interrogatory No. 2: The average monthly shipments of all resins containing vinyl chloride (which average was compiled from available documents) were as ;follows: YR lbs/month YR lbs/month 1960 1961 1962 1963 No shipments No shipments No shipments 4,750,000 1964 1965 1966 1967 6,083,300 5,608,331 6,099,975 4,599,998 RNW 0450 Rider to Supplemental Interrogatories Re: Maliko, <et al vs. Union Carbide Page 2 YR 1968 1969 1970 1971 lbs/month 5,841,660 6,166,640 6,416,600 5,841,660 YR 1972 1973 1974 lbs/month 5,466,660 4,416,665 3,724,998 Interrogatory No. 13: Essentially all vinyl resins were shipped to ATC in large closed1 aluminum boxes holding approximately 1400-1500 cubic feet of resin, which weighed approximately 35,000-50,000 pounds. This resin | was repackaged by ATC in bags or bulk containers such as closed ; hopper trucks or closed rail cars. Most of the resin bagged ; (solvent and non-solvent) contained little or no residual vinyl ! chloride monomer. i i Interrogatory No. 21: _j i The polyvinyl chloride suspension resin as well as all other ( j I vinyl resins shipped to ATC showed no known toxic effect on | human tissue. Insofar as the interrogatory requests information ! regarding products other than those shipped to ATC, Union Carbide objects to the interrogatory as being irrelevant to the subject \ matter of the suit and, insofar as the interrogatory requests I expert opinion. Union Carbide objects on the grounds set forth in the answer to Interrogatory 20. Interrogatory No. 26: Union Carbide assumes that this interrogatory is requesting the ' individual or collective conclusions contained in the list of References and Other Data Sources. Those conclusions can be determined by a reading of the papers by the plaintiffs, their attorney or their experts and it is improper, burdensome and harassing to request Union Carbide to set forth those conclusions. RNW 0451 Rider to Supplemental Interrogatories Re: Maliko, et al vs. Union Carbide Page 3 Interrogatory No. 27: Union Carbide objects to this interrogatory on the ground that it is improper because it is irrelevant to the subject matter of the Complaint, which is concerned with injuries to the plain- i tiffs allegedly sustained as a result of certain working con- < ditions at ATC. Therefore, the working conditions at Union Car-j hide's plants are not subject to discovery. Notwithstanding j this objection, but without waiving same. Union Carbide answers j as follows. Union Carbide's practice has been to minimize employ ee exposure to any chemical. On the completion of the MCA aero-] osteolyses study Union Carbide subscribed to a target concentra tion of 50 ppm VCM maximum in the work space air. Analytical , techniques to measure this level were not perfected until 1972 ' but best efforts were made to minimize exposure and to measure | such exposure. ! Interrogatory No. 29: ! Union Carbide objects to this interrogatory on the same ground as it objects to Interrogatory 27. Notwithstanding this ob jection, but without waiving same, Union Carbide answers as follows; Protective clothing was used as protection against corrosive or irritating chemicals as a matter of good practice since approximately 1940. It was not specifically provided for vinyl 1 chloride or PVC protection. Similarly self-contained breathing apparatus was provided for plant emergencies for all types of exposure. Hose fed respirators were provided for tank entry and other activities where oxygen might be deficient or acute chemical exposure could disable the employee. This too was considered good practice. Specific respirator protection against low limits of VCM (over 50 ppm) was not started until 1974 at Texas City, Texas and South Charleston, West Virginia, plants. These respirators were generally hose fed half or full face masks. RNW 0452 Rider to Supplemental Interrogatories Re: Maliko, et al vs. Union Carbide Page 4 Interrogatory No. 31: In 1962 the American Congress of Governmental Industrial Hy- j genienists (ACGIH) recommended that vinyl chloride exposure for j workmen not exceed 500 ppm for an eight-hour time weighted aver age. Limits are set at concentrations believed to cause no adverse effect with repeated exposure. In 1963 the ACGIH changed their recommendations to a 500 ppm threshold limit value. On October 18, 1972, the Occupational Safety and Health Ad ministration set the vinyl chloride exposure limit at a ceiling | value of 500 ppm (1300 mg/m3). j In 1972 the ACGIH lowered its recommended vinyl chloride ex- j posure limit to 200 ppm TLV. OSHA made no change in its stand- ; ard. j On April 5, 1974, OSHA set its temporary Vinyl Chloride Standard^ limit at 50 ppm ceiling. On April, 1975, the OSHA permanent standard became effective, lowering the vinyl chloride exposure limits to 1 ppm maximum for an eight-hour time weighted average or 5 ppm maximum for any period not exceeding fifteen minutes. j i | j i RNW 0453 /5 1 ca vO <T\ - .. . ... .3* vD cn . LA NO cr\ CO (AMN cn CA ca o ca LA o O cm ca ca ___ vO in -- cr\ LA o co m o CO o M lAO -- -- .- o <n ca LA LA NO -- -- NO o cn m rsco -- NO -3- o -- -- r^ -------3" LA CO CM O NO NO CA - ca rv vfi N n<tn --=r vo t J VO VO ,cn ca m cn no * CA cn no -3- CM o CM n cn N CM CM -- - --i - - ( t1 vo .......... --"*---VO w-- cn LA O CM O o I-* ( *1 <Ji> 1j ' j cn i CO NO ;C\ CM O OO CM ,wmm CM CM ** p< ovco VO coco CO CM oo CA LA cn -- -- CO CM -3* <1 CM vO vO C-J .-- -- CA cm la r*- `NO vo CM O -3* LA CM CA LA VO LA -- NN O cm -3" r^. * 5 i ~i-- ~ I ; CTN 3> ! O NO cn CC . x h~ 1 o < UJ h<T x (/> CD zU o X h- X <a: oa. cc o o uj --a ca C <u z: o; cn -- ----- -- cn CM r*. o% ca cn -- -3* cni 0'0~ -- CO r-** vo CM NO CM cn LA LA --o -- -- CM CM -3* O CM NO r^.co o n vD -- CO -3" LA -- CM co P"* NO -a-' "* cm Ntn LA VO -- LA CA CM cn -- CA m sO i no cn LA OO 3* NO CA LA CM -3- cn cn LA I i CA -- -3* no ^L3A* nO LA CM CM -- cn CM -3- 1 1 CO -3* n1--o LA -3* O cn CM -3* NO* O -3* cn -3* CACArv NOD O capn n. CACAN O -- -- -- cn o fOfAN -3* CM NO CO N IA CM CA NO m l-- o CM O CA ----- LA m-a- r-- CM CM -3" -- CA -3* z=5 -3 LA _. . oo CA <n CM o LA cn CM i Ow-- vo cn cn CM o CM O wo-- . 1 <n 'N ii 1 it 1 it I ii 1 ii 1 ii 1 ii 1 " ii 1 CM NO NO -- PH LA CM CA CM _CM no CA NO CM cn CM ' *- ' O CA CA CM cn cn CM * LA LA -3" CA ii 1 3* NO o o o w-- CA CM LA *3- O -3" CM -- CM CA OO ' i"- -3CA -- CM LA r*-. cn CM -3*' NO CA CA CM LA 3T CA cn NcOn CA -- -- --" a UJ, a. 0-' -- X to _J CC LU 1-- .< X CO O ZD CC 1-- </> E o3 L. UJ to O z cc 3 LU --J CO z < o V ---- tn C7> in OO --1 o < J- X CD cc <3 c AJ O H LU CD o h- ' , tu -J CL 4-1 JC \>- < Q. u ,o1 LU CO O X O LA <0 o 3 CD V- C/> O ZD * CC LU K O --o CC o to CC X< o o in U) --J -J cC Q < >- UJ 00 h z CL o o-- O. =*t5 1- >O >- X LA o Q_ .V - -- UJ Z -j LU < cc H >- O H- f-- to >--J o Cl to OX cO o Z5 jC oc CL I- > X to o u to "O cc > < X o to _i LU O < *3" Z cC < h- '--< LU CD O in -- xo CL D. H- CD DC O O 1 Q. X LA CM CM < o 1- o z < cc CD RNW 0454 \ CERTIFICATION I certify that the foregoing statements made by me are , true. I am aware that if any of the foregoing statements made i by me are willfully false, I am subject to punishment. ] i \ ! | DATED: i i | i November 29, 1977 i jj /?-?? t I RNW 0455