Document k6ygr9X0Qo6N8KdnY7QZnywd0

FILE NAME: General Electric (GE) DATE: 2004 DOC#: GE093 DOCUMENT DESCRIPTION: Legal - Deposition of Marjorie Drucker Vol IV SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK ALL COUNTIES WITHIN NEW YORK CITY I n Re: NEW YORK CITY ASBESTOS LITIGATION Continuing Videotaped D e p o sitio n Under Oral Examination o f MARJORIE A. DRUCKER VOLUME IV PRIORITY-ONE COURT REPORTING SERVICES, 899 Manor Road S t a t e n I s l a n d , New York 10314 (718) 761-0527 INC. Priorit-.v-One Court Reporting (718) 761-0527 Page 738 1 Transcript o f the continuing videotaped 2 deposition o f MARJORIE A. DRUCKER, called for 3 Oral Examination in the above-captioned matter, 4 said deposition being taken pursuant to the 5 Federal Rules o f Civil Procedure by and before 6 Victoria Rohl, Court Reporter and Notary Public 7 in and for the State o f New York; taken at the 8 Westin La Paloma Hotel, 2800 East Sunrise, 9 Tucson, Arizona, on August 20,2004, commencing 10 at 9:08 a.m. 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 DAVID P. SCHAFFER, ESQ. MALABY, CARLISLE & BRADLEY, LLC 150 Broadway, Suite 600 New York, New York 10038 Appearing telephonically for the Defendants Viacom, Inc. and Warren Pumps DAN LARSEN, ESQ. SNELL & WILMER, LLP 15 West South Temple, Suite 1200 Salt Lake City, Utah 84101 Appearing for the Defendants 7 Ford and GM 8 ANNA DILONARDO, ESQ. L'ABBATE, BALKAN, COLAV1TA & CONTINI, LLP 9 1050 Franklin Avenue Garden City, New York 11530 10 Appearing for the Defendants Peerless, BMCE, Okonite and Lockheed 11 DIANE MILLER, ESQ. 12 MCGUIRE WOODS 1345 Avenue of the Americas, 7th Floor 13 New York, New York 10105 Appearing telephonically for the Defendants 14 American Standard and ITT 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 Page 739 Page 740 Page 741 1 APPEARANCES: 2 LARAINE PACHECO. ESQ LAW OFFICE OF LARAINE PACHECO 3 Special Master 3748 East Gisson Mountain Place 4 Tucson, Arizona 85718 5 JERRY KR1STAL, ESQ WE1TZ & LUXENBERG 6 210 Lake Drive East Cheny Hill, New Jersey 08002 7 Appearing for the Plaintiff 8 DAVID SPEZIALI. ESQ. SPEZIALI, GREENWALD & HAWKINS 9 1081 Winslow Road P.O.Box 1086 1 0 Wifliamstown, New Jersey 08094 Appearing for the Defendant 1 1 General Electric 1 2 TIMOTHY KAPSHANDY, ESQ SIDLEY, AUSTIN, BROWN & WOOD 1 3 Bank One Plaza 10 South Dearborn Street 14 Chicago, Illinois 91356 Appearing For die Defendant 1 5 General Electric 1 6 MICHAEL TANENBAUM, ESQ. SEDGWICK, DETERT, MORAN & ARNOLD, LLP 17 Three Gateway, 12th Floor Newark, New Jersey 07102 1 8 Appearing for the Defendant General Electric 19 BILL SILVERMAN, ESQ. 2 0 GREENBERG TRAURIG, LLP 885 Third Avenue 2 1 New York, New York 10022 Appearing for the Defendant 2 2 Robert A. Keasbey Company 2 3 PHILLIP MARRONE, ESQ. LEADER f t BERKON, LLP 2 4 630 Third Avenue, 17th Floor New York, New York 10017 2 5 Appearing for die Defendant IMO Industries ___________ 1 IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED AND 2 AGREED by and between the attorneys 3 for the respective parties hereto 4 that filing, sealing and 5 certification o f the within 6 Examination Before Trial be waived; 7 that all objections, except as to 8 form, are reserved to the time o f 9 trial. 10 IT IS FURTHER STIPULATED AND 11 AGREED that the transcript may be 12 signed before a Notary Public with 13 the same force and effect as if 14 signed before a Clerk or Judge o f the 15 Court. 16 IT IS FURTHER STIPULATED AND 17 AGREED that the within examination 18 may be utilized for all purposes as 1 9 provided by the CPLR. 2 0 IT IS FURTHER STIPULATED AND 21 AGREED that all rights provided to 2 2 all parties by the CPLR shall not be 2 3 deemed waived and the appropriate 2 4 sections o f the CPLR shall be 2 5 controlling with respect thereto._________ 2 (Pages 738 to 741) P a h v-t- R o n n r H n n (7 1 R j 761 -- 0527 Page 742 Page 744 1 IT IS FURTHER STIPULATED AND 2 AGREED by and between the attorneys 3 for the respective parties hereto 4 that a copy o f the Examination shall 5 be furnished, without charge, to the 6 attorney representing the witness 7 testifying herein. 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 1 A. Yes, I did. 2 Q. And did you discuss your testimony 3 yesterday with the General Electric lawyers? 4 A. I, I did discuss some aspects o f some 5 o f the papers that we had gone over. 6 Q. And did you discuss other papers which j 7 we haven't gone over? 8 A. No. 9 Q. I mean, any papers that the General 10 Electric lawyers showed you, discussed with you. 11 A. No. 12 Q. Okay. How many hours did you meet with \ 1 3 the General Electric lawyers between the time we 14 broke yesterday and this morning? 15 MR. SPEZIALI: Counting dinner, Jerry? 1 6 BY MR. KRISTAL: 17 Q. We can start with the total number o f 1 8 hours. 19 A. Well, I had dinner with Mr. Kapshandy 20 and the legal assistant, and that was about an 1 21 hour and a half. And then I met after that with 22 Mr. Kapshandy and Mr. Speziali for about 2 3 forty-five minutes. 24 Q. Okay. We were discussing some o f the 2 5 Industrial Medicine journals yesterday, and I'd ? Page 743 Page 745 ! 1 THE VIDEOGRAPHER: My name is Mark 1 2 Gonsalves with video -- Certified Video 2 3 Productions, Incorporated. Also with me is Roy 3 4 Plisko o f Green Legal Video. Our court reporter 4 5 is Vicki Rohl representing Priority One 5 6 Reporting Services, Inc. 6 7 We are at 3800 East Sunrise Drive, 7 8 Tucson, Arizona to take the deposition o f 8 9 Marjorie Drucker, continuing deposition, volume 9 10 four on behalf of the Plaintiffs. The date is 10 11 August 20th. Counsel present will be reflected 11 12 on the written record. Witness is already sworn 12 1 3 in. On the record. The time is nine o eight 13 14 a.m. 14 15 15 16 CONTINUING EXAMINATION BY MR. KRISTAL: 1 6 17 17 18 Q. Good morning, Ms. Drucker. This is 18 19 Jerry Kristal again. How are you? 19 20 A. Fine. Good morning, Mr. Kristal. 20 21 Fine, thank you. How are you? 21 2 2 Q. Good. Thank you. We broke at around 22 2 3 five p.m. last evening, and we were resuming 23 24 this morning. Between then and now, did you 24 25 meet with the General Electric lawyers? 25 like to mark as Exhibit 57 one which is Industrial Medicine, volume 4, number seven from 1935. I don't have an additional copy. Let me give you my copy. A. Thank you. i (Whereupon, Exhibit 57, Industrial Medicine, volume 4, number seven from 1935, was ' then received and marked for identification.) M R KRISTAL: This is on our state-of-the-art exhibit list number 329. MR. KAPSHANDY: Just so the record is clear, it's not something the witness has reviewed or been provided previously. MR. KRISTAL: When you want to ask a question, you can go ahead and ask a question. MR. KAPSHANDY: I'm asking you to cooperate and please let us know where this came from. There's sixteen boxes o f materials here. Out o f fairness to the witness, letting her see whether she remembers having reviewed something in the last several months, that's only fair. MR. KRISTAL: As soon as the witness has a chance to look at it, I'll ask my questions. MR. KAPSHANDY: So you're refusing to 3 (Pages 742 to 745) Priority-One Court Reporting (718) 761-0527 Page 746 Page 748 1 tell us whether that's something that we 1 MR. KAPSHANDY: I've asked him to - 2 provided to you; some materials that she's 2 you know, in fairness to him and the witness and 3 reviewed. 3 the record, it isn't clear whether it's 4 MR. KR1STAL: It's on my 4 something that's coming from the GE files. 5 state-of-the-art exhibit list. I don't know if 5 She's here testifying on behalf o f GE as to what 6 you provided it to us. I don't know if you 6 GE knew at certain points in time, and we're 7 provided it to the witness or not. I have no 7 starting a question with the presumption this is 8 idea what you provided to the witness. 8 something that's part o f that exercise. 9 MR. KAPSHANDY: We've told you. It's 9 THE SPECIAL MASTER: That's absolutely 10 everything in the sixteen boxes provided to you 10 not the presumption, and there is no requirement 11 on disc, and if you want to play a memory game 11 that Mr. Kristal show the witness documents 12 as to whether it's in there and want to waste 12 she's already seen. He has every right to show 1 3 the witness's time as to whether -- 13 her documents she's never seen before. 14 THE SPECIAL MASTER: Okay. I'm going 14 And when it's your turn to ask 1 5 to stop the conversation on this. He has no 15 questions, if you want to clarify which o f 1 6 obligation to tell you whether you gave him the 1 6 the -- you can go through every single exhibit 17 document or not. If you want to know whether or 17 if you want to and ask the witness whether you 18 not you produced the document, you should have 18 ever showed her that exhibit, but he has no 1 9 Bates stamped the documents. Either she has an 19 obligation to tell her --to tell the witness 20 independent recollection o f having reviewed the 20 where the document came from. 21 document or she doesn't. 21 MR. KAPSHANDY: Because there's only 22 You don't need to say it came out o f a 22 one copy, in fairness to us, we'd like to know 2 3 box to trigger the recollection. The witness 2 3 what the witness -- 24 can look at the document --excuse me, the 24 MR. KRISTAL: Dave just reviewed it, 2 5 witness can simply look at the document and 2 5 and if you just listen to my questions, I think Page 747 Page 749; 1 either she remembers having seen it or she 1 you'll probably be satisfied and your concern 2 doesn't. All right. 2 will be ameliorated. 3 MR. KAPSHANDY: With all due respect, 3 BY MR. KRISTAL: 4 Laraine, we've got sixteen boxes o f materials. 4 Q. Ms. Drucker, have you seen Exhibit 57 5 This is not a memory game. We have asked, and 5 before? 6 yesterday he did cooperate and let us know in 6 A. N ot that I recall. 7 advance if these were materials --because what 7 Q. There is an article entitled Pulmonary 8 the witness is going to need to do is take time 8 Asbestosis, is there not? 9 and have to go and look through the boxes to see 9 A. There's a subheading on a page that 10 if it's something that she even reviewed before. 10 says pulmonary asbestosis, yes. 11 She hasn't memorized all sixteen boxes -- 11 Q. And in that first paragraph, and if you 12 THE SPECIAL MASTER: She doesn't 12 look at the highlighted paragraph on the next 13 need --if she remembers having seen it, she 13 page, in that article - 14 will say so. The mere fact it came out o f a box 14 MR. SPEZIALI: Jerry, let me ask this. 15 doesn't mean she remembers having seen it 15 Let's identify for the record what we're looking 1 6 either. You have sixteen boxes here. All 1 6 at. 17 right. It's simply her independent recollection 17 MR. KRISTAL: I did. 18 o f whether she remembers having seen the 18 MR. SPEZIALI: You said Industrial 1 9 document. 1 9 Medicine. Is it 1955 o r '35? My eyes aren't 20 MR. KAPSHANDY: But my problem is then 20 that good. Is i t '35? 21 we proceed on the record on video with some sort 21 MR. KRISTAL: It's'35. 22 o f assumption that this is something that she's 22 MR. SPEZIALI: The article appears on 2 3 reviewed or is relying upon or came from the GE 23 page three hundred seventy-eight or six o f the 24 files. 24 journal. 25 THE SPECIAL MASTER: I don't think so. 25 THE WITNESS: Thank you. 4 (Pages 746 to 749) Prioritv-One Court Reporting (718) 761-0527 Page 750 Page 752 >; 1 MR. KRISTAL: In the first paragraph o f 2 the article Pulmonary Asbestosis, and again on 3 the second page, part o f what the article is 4 discussing is that asbestos dust not only 5 affects the lung itself, but also affects die 6 pleura, the lining o f the lung; is that correct? 7 THE WITNESS: I'd like to take some 8 time and look at this. 9 MR. KAPSHANDY: For the record, 10 Counsel, this is a fairly lengthy article, and 11 she said she's not seen it. In fairness to the 12 witness, let her read it. 13 MR. KRISTAL: I didn't say she 14 couldn't. And as I said yesterday, you don't 15 have to ask. If you need to sit and read, take 1 6 as much time as you need. I don't want you to 17 answer a question unless you feel comfortable 18 that you've read the information. 19 THE WITNESS: Thank you. 20 MR. KRISTAL: And it's not a fairly 21 lengthy article. 22 THE WITNESS: Sometimes I say it so 2 3 that it w ill reflect that Fm looking down at 24 the article. 25 MR. KRISTAL: That's fme, and you 1 fibrosis, end quote. Do you see that sentence j 2 that's highlighted there? 3 THE WITNESS: I see the sentence, yes. 4 MR. KRISTAL: And pleurisy is an 5 inflammation o f the pleura, is it not? 6 MR. SPEZIALI: I object to the use o f 7 this article. Move to strike with respect to 8 this witness. 9 THE WITNESS: I'm not a doctor, and I'm 10 really not familiar with the medical definition 11 o f what pleurisy is. 12 MR. KRISTAL: Well, o f the sixteen 1 3 boxes o f documents that the General Electric 14 lawyers supplied to you, a lot o f the articles 15 had medical terms, didn't they? 4 16 MR. SPEZIALI: Objection. Move to i 17 strike the question as to this witness. 18 BY MR. KRISTAL: 19 Q. Didn't a lot o f the articles have 20 medical terms? 21 A. Yes, they did. 22 Q. And did you not understand those 2 3 medical terms? 24 A. Well, as part o f m y - - yes, in general 2 5 as part o f my training as a certified industrial j Page 751 Page 753 1 should feel free to say it i f you feel 2 comfortable saying it. I'm just saying you 3 don't have to say it. 4 THE WITNESS: Thank you. Okay. And 5 the date on this I can't read. 6 MR. SPEZIALI: 1935. 7 THE WITNESS: Okay. Thank you. 8 M R KRISTAL: My question is, the 9 article discusses, in a few places, the fact 10 that there is involvement o f the pleura with 11 respect to asbestosis, does it not? 12 MR. SPEZIALI: Objection. 13 THE WITNESS: Can I see that again, 14 please? 15 MR. KRISTAL: Sure. 16 THE WITNESS: Thank you. In the 17 mention o f pleura, there are some medical 18 descriptions. I don't know how else to 1 9 characterize that. 20 MR. KRISTAL: Well, in the second 21 paragraph o f the article, it says, quote, the 22 principal pathological findings are pleurisy, 23 expansive fibrosis in the parenchyma o f the 24 lung, usually over the mid portions and bases, 2 5 and the contraction o f the lungs due to this 1 hygienist I have some training in medical ; 2 terminology. The specifics about certain types 3 o f diseases, Fm not a doctor or toxicologist. 4 Q. A ll right. Nor am I asking you about 5 the specifics o f certain types o f diseases. 6 MR. SPEZIALI: Objection. Move to 7 strike. The record will speak for itself ; 8 MR. KRISTAL: Do you know whether or ? 9 not, do you know whether or not pleurisy is an 10 inflammation o f the pleura? 11 MR. SPEZIALI: Objection. Move to 12 strike the question as to this witness. 13 THE WITNESS: No. 14 BY MR. KRISTAL: 15 Q. Did you do anything when you came 1 6 across -- strike that. 17 Were there any medical terms in any o f 18 the other articles that you read that you didn't 1 9 understand? 20 A. Well, I had to look at different 21 articles. A s I said, in my background and 22 training I have general understanding in 23 training, but Fm not a doctor. 24 Q. I'm asking you as you sit here, in all 2 5 o f the articles that you read that were provided 5 (Pages 750 to 753) Priority-One Court Reporting (718) 761-0527 Page 754 Page 756 1 to you by the General Electric lawyers whether 2 or not there were any medical terms in those 3 articles that you read that you didn't 4 understand? 5 MR. SPEZIALI: Objection. 6 THE WITNESS: There may have been. 7 BY MR. KRISTAL: 8 Q. When there were, what did you do to try 9 to understand what you were reading? 10 A. Sure. It would depend on the article. 11 So in the absence o f something in particular, I, 12 I, I would just be guessing. 13 Q. Well, was there an occasion when you 14 didn't understand a medical term in the 1 5 literature that you read supplied to you by the 1 6 General Electric lawyers? 17 A. There may have been, yes. 18 Q. When you say there may have been, I'm 1 9 not asking about possibilities. I'm asking if 20 there was an occasion when that occurred. 21 A. As I sit here right now, I don't 22 recall. 23 Q. Okay. Now, on the second page o f the 24 article, in the second column, it says, quote, 2 5 evidence o f pleuritic involvement is often 1 the abdominal cavity. I know that in general. 2 What we read here seems to be a very detailed 3 medical description. 4 MR. KRISTAL: And when it says 5 pleuritic involvement, are you saying that you 6 don't have an understanding that that's talking 7 about involvement o f the pleura? 8 MR. SPEZIALI: Objection. Move to 9 strike. 10 THE WITNESS: Well, if we're just 11 looking at those words, sure, but we were 12 reading it in the context o f this sentence which 13 I said was a detailed medical description. 14 MR. KRISTAL: Okay. But you would 15 agree, would you not, that that article is 1 6 discussing the fact, in part, that asbestosis 17 also involved the pleura? 18 MR. SPEZIALI: Objection. 19 THE WITNESS: Well, the word is in 20 here, and when you're saying it describes it, I 21 don't know what you mean by that. The word --I 22 see the word on the article. 2 3 BY MR. KRISTAL: 24 Q. You see the words "evidence o f 2 5 pleuritic involvement"? Page 755 Page 757 1 indicated by obliteration o f the costo-phrenic 1 A. You're taking that out o f context o f 2 angles and flattening or peaking o f the 2 the entire article. It discusses - this 3 diaphragm, end quote. Do you see that? 3 article discusses a variety o f things. There 4 MR. SPEZIALI: Objection. 4 are many medical and other things that they're 5 THE WITNESS: Yes, you read that 5 talking about in this. 6 correctly. 6 Q. That's right. 7 MR. KRISTAL: Okay. What does 7 A. You're taking two words and you're 8 "evidence o f pleuritic involvement" mean to you? 8 saying it characterizes the whole article. It 9 MR. SPEZIALI: Objection. Move to 9 doesn't. 10 strike as to this witness. 10 Q. I'mjust asking you if, in part, the 11 THE WITNESS: To me, it's a general 11 article discusses the fact that asbestosis 12 description about things going on in the lung. 12 involved the pleura; not the whole article, not 1 3 I, I - that's how I read that. 13 the main part o f the article, not everything in 14 MR. KRISTAL: Pleuritic involvement 14 the article. 15 means lung to you? 15 MR. SPEZIALI: Objection. Move to 16 THE WITNESS: Well, I know what the 1 6 strike the question as to this witness. 17 pleura are. 17 THE WITNESS: Well, in this sentence it 18 MR. KRISTAL: So what does the word 18 doesn't say it that way, no. 1 9 pleuritic mean? 19 MR. KRISTAL: It doesn't say what in 20 MR. SPEZIALI: Objection. Move to 20 that way? 21 strike. 21 MR. SPEZIALI: Objection. Move to 22 THE WITNESS: Well, in this sentence ~ 22 strike. You're now harassing the witness. 2 3 and o f course, we're looking at an article from 23 MR. KRISTAL: You're objecting to me 2 4 over sixty-five years ago --there are pleura. 24 trying to understand what the witness's answer 2 5 There's pleura in the chest cavity and around 25 was? 6 (Pages 754 to 757) Prinritv-One Court Reporting (718) 761-0527 Page 758 Page 760 ? 1 MR. SPEZIALI: No. I'm objecting to 1 time is nine forty a.m. 2 the fact that you're trying to ask this 2 BY MR. KRISTAL: 3 industrial hygienist questions o f physicians 3 Q. Ms. Drucker, was it known by General 4 that you know are coming to trial, and you know 4 Electric in the 1930s that asbestosis not only 5 that article is a state-of-the-art article and 5 involved the lung but also involved the pleura? 6 has nothing to do with this witness. 6 A. I don't know. I don't know if that was 7 It's abusive, ifs harassing, and I 7 known at the time. And you said the early 8 don't see why we're having to create a record on 8 1930s? 9 video that the jury may see on some crap shoot 9 Q. I said the 1930s. 1 0 that you may not --that you may get lucky and 10 A. Okay. Okay. Let me break that out a 1 1 the judge isn't going to strike this. It's 1 1 little. As we know, the disease was first 1 2 totally improper with this witness. 1 2 coined in 1927. In the early 1930s, around 13 MR. KRISTAL: Can we have a ruling that 1 3 1934, GE was aware o f a case. They would have 14 there should be no speaking objections? 14 been aware at that point. I don't know if they l 15 MR. SPEZIALI: You asked me, and I told 1 5 knew that involved -- 1 6 you. I have not made a single speaking 16 THE SPECIAL MASTER: I'm going to 17 objection until you asked me. 17 direct the witness to answer the question. 18 THE SPECIAL MASTER: All right. Let's 1 8 MR. SPEZIALI: She just said 1934. She 19 just clarify that Mr. Speziali has a continuing 19 tried to give the exact year. 2 0 objection to this line o f questioning about this 20 THE SPECIAL MASTER: H eask ed aveiy ; 2 1 article. It's noted for the record. That will 2 1 precise question. I'd like the question read 2 2 be for the judge to decide whether this is 2 2 back to the witness. 23 proper, and Mr. Kristal may continue his line o f 2 3 (Whereupon, the above-requested 24 questioning. 2 4 question was then read by the reporter.) 25 MR. KRISTAL: Could you read back the 25 THE WITNESS: My answer was trying to jj Page 759 Page 761 \ 1 witness's last answer? 1 2 (Whereupon, the above-requested answer 2 3 was then read by the reporter.) 3 4 BY MR. KRISTAL: 4 5 Q. Tm asking what do you mean by that? 5 6 A. Well, could we have the question read 6 7 back -- 7 8 Q. My question was -- 8 9 A. - - prior to that answer? 9 10 Q. My question was whether in part the 10 1 1 article discusses the fact that there is 11 1 2 involvement o f the pleura in asbestosis. 12 13 A. You're taking a couple words out o f 13 14 this whole thing, and there's a whole medical 14 15 description in a variety o f ways. The question 15 16 that you asked me prior was that was there 16 17 pleuritic involvement in asbestosis, and you 17 18 highlighted this sentence. It doesn't say that, 18 19 so I said no. 19 20 THE SPECIAL MASTER: I'd like to go off 2 0 2 1 the record. O ff the record and off the video. 21 22 THE VTDEOGRAPHER: O ff the record. The 2 2 2 3 time is nine twenty-seven a.m. 23 24 (Whereupon, a recess was then taken.) 24 25 THE VIDEOGRAPHER: On the record. The 2 5 put some context in the period 1930s. And -- ; THE SPECIAL MASTER: Anytime in the } 1930s was it known? THE WITNESS: Is that what it means, \ anytime in the 1930s? THE SPECIAL MASTER: Yes, yes. That could be from 1930 through 1939. THE WITNESS: I don't know. MR. KRISTAL: Certainly that article from 1935 in the Industrial Hygiene Journal indicates that there was involvement o f the pleura in asbestosis, does it not? THE WITNESS: This is an article from Industrial Medicine in 1935, and -- THE SPECIAL MASTER: I want you to - I'm going to take a little bit more active participation here because I want to get to the answers to the questions. He asked you whether --this is a yes or no question. Does this article demonstrate or state that ~ this article from 1935, that asbestosis involved the pleura? THE WITNESS: And I'm having difficulty with a yes or no because it's really not a yes or no answer. This isn't like a scientific 7 (Pages 758 to 761) Priority-One Court Reporting (718) 761-0527 Page 762 Page 7 64 1 article. It looks like an excerpt from 2 something, and it - it's - 1don't see it 1 microscopic particles of asbestos. 2 THE WITNESS: At any time in 1930s? 3 signed. It's just something - - 1 don't know 3 Yes, that would have been known. 4 enough about it to give you a yes or no. 5 THE SPECIAL MASTER: Just review the 4 THE SPECIAL MASTER: Are you satisfied, 5 Mr. Kristal? 6 article. Did you just review the article? 7 THE WITNESS: 1 looked it over, yes. 8 THE SPECIAL MASTER: Does it say 6 (Whereupon, Exhibit 58, October 1935, 7 volume four, number ten o f Industrial Medicine, 8 an article entitled Dusty Death, was then 9 anything about asbestosis involving the pleura 10 in it? 11 THE WITNESS: Well, does it say 9 received and marked for identification.) 10 MR. KRISTAL: Well, and it was also 11 stated --if you could show the witness Exhibit 12 anything? Yes. 12 58, and this is -- 13 THE SPECIAL MASTER: Does it say 13 THE WITNESS: This is different? 14 there's involvement o f the pleura in asbestosis? 14 MR. KRISTAL: Yes. This is from 15 THE WITNESS: It says that there may 15 October 1935, another volume four, number ten of 1 6 be, so - 16 Industrial Medicine, and there's an article 17 THE SPECIAL MASTER: It says there may 17 entitled Dusty Death. It is one, two --two 18 be involvement o f the pleura in asbestosis? 18 pages or so. I'd like you to take a look at it, 19 THE WITNESS: I f - y e s , it does. It 19 and I'm going to ask you whether or not that 20 has -- 20 article notes that asbestosis is caused by the 21 THE SPECIAL MASTER: Is that 21 inhalation o f microscopic particles o f asbestos 22 satisfactory, Mr. Kristal? 22 dust? 23 MR. KRISTAL: Yes. 23 THE WITNESS: Okay. 24 THE SPECIAL MASTER: Okay. Let's move 24 MR. SPEZIALI: What's the page, Jerry? 2 5 on. 25 MR. KRISTAL: Excuse me? Page 763 Page 765 1 BY MR. KRISTAL: 2 Q. Would you agree in the 1930s that it 3 was known that asbestosis was caused by the 4 inhalation o f microscopic particles of asbestos 5 dust? 6 A. In the 1930s we're talking about the - 7 if we're talking about the entire span --I 8 don't know how else to answer except to say no, 9 at certain times. Yes, possibly later on. 10 Q. So you're saying at some point in the 11 1930s it wasn't known that asbestosis was caused 12 by the inhalation o f microscopic asbestos dust, 13 but at some point in time it was known in the 14 1930s? 15 A. That's not what I said. And I'm having 16 difficulty in giving you answers that aren't 17 natural to the way I'm trying to answer in terms 18 of what I know about the subject and the 19 context. 20 THE SPECIAL MASTER: Well, do you know 21 whether at anytime in the 1930s -- 22 THE WITNESS: At any time? 23 THE SPECIAL MASTER: At any time in the 24 1930s means 1930 to 1939 whether it was known 2 5 that asbestosis involved the inhalation of 1 MR. SPEZIALI: The article the page 2 number appears on in the journal. 3 MR. KRISTAL: Five hundred and 4 sixty-five, and the - what I'm talking about 5 appears in the one, two, three, four - the 6 fifth paragraph o f the article. 7 THE WITNESS: Okay. Okay. And the 8 question? 9 BY MR. KRISTAL: 10 Q. The question was whether the article 11 notes that asbestosis is caused by the 12 inhalation o f microscopic particles o f asbestos. 13 A. Well, this again, I don't - it doesn't 14 look like a scientific article, but in this - 1 5 what we're looking at literally on the page, it 1 6 says asbestosis is caused, as the name implies, 17 by the inhalation o f microscopic particles o f 18 asbestos dust. 19 Q. And Industrial Medicine, the journal 20 itself, was the official journal o f the American 21 Association o f Industrial Physicians and 22 Surgeons, is it not? 23 A. I'mjust checking. This is a bulletin. 2 4 I don't know if this is the journal itself, but 2 5 it says it's the American Association of 8 (Pages 762 to 765) Priority-One Court Reporting (718) 761-0527 Page 766 Page 768 : 1 Industrial Physicians and Surgeons. 2 Q. Okay. Have you --did the General 3 Electric lawyers provide you with a - strike 4 that. 5 The General Electric lawyers provided 6 you with a number o f different historical 7 textbooks on the subject o f industrial hygiene 8 and industrial toxicology, did they not? 9 A. Y es, some were provided. Some I had. 10 Q. And were you provided with a textbook 11 entitled Silicosis and Asbestosis which was 12 published in 1938? 13 A. I'd have to check my listing on the 14 index o f articles. 15 Q. Okay. 16 A. Are you saying that's a book? 17 MR- SPEZIALI: Did we give it to them? 18 MR. KAPSHANDY: I don't believe so. 19 (Whereupon, Exhibit 59, an April 1940 20 portion o f Industrial Medicine, was then 21 received and marked for identification.) 22 MR. KRISTAL: Td like to show you 23 Exhibit 59. This is an April 1940 portion o f 24 Industrial Medicine. 25 THE WITNESS: Yes. 1 Electric? i 2 A. I would assume so. 3 Q. And if you turn to the page before 4 that, listed as advertising in the journal is 5 the General Electric X-ray Corporation, right? 6 A. Yes. It looks like they had --they 7 were an advertiser. 8 Q. And above that is a portion o f the 9 table o f contents, and it has under book reviews 10 one o f the books that was reviewed, Silicosis 11 and Asbestosis edited by AJ Lanza, correct? jj 12 A. Yes, that's what it says. 13 Q. And then if you turn to the last page 14 that you were looking at earlier, it's entitled 1 5 Silicosis and Asbestosis, a book review by CO { 1 6 Sappington, MD, Dr. PH. Do you see that? 17 A. That's on the partial two ten page, 18 yes. I see a few paragraphs under that heading. | 19 Q. What do you mean the partial two ten 20 page? j 21 M R SPEZIALI: Ifs cut o ff We can't 22 read it. 23 THE WITNESS: See here, on this page. 24 BY MR. KRISTAL: 25 Q. All right. So you can't read \ Page 767 Page 7 6 9 ' 1 MR. KRISTAL: And i f you look at the 1 2 next to the last page first -- 2 3 MR. SPEZIALI: What page is that in the 3 4 journal? 4 5 MR. KRISTAL: Page six. 5 6 MR. SPEZIALI: I have page two hundred 6 7 and ten. Am I looking at the wrong page? The 7 8 top left comer? 8 9 MR. KRISTAL: The next to the last 9 10 page. 10 11 THE WITNESS: It partially looks like 11 12 page two ten. 12 13 BY MR. KRISTAL: 13 14 Q. That's because you're partially looking 14 15 at the page which is the last page, not the next 15 16 to last page, and it has the heading Industrial 16 17 Medicine, American Association o f Industrial 17 18 Physicians and Surgeons, and then in the right 18 19 it has BL Vosburgh, MD, who again is on the 19 20 committee o f records and medical procedures. Do 20 21 you see that? 21 22 A. Maybe you could show me. 22 23 Q. Right there. BL Vosburgh, MD? 23 24 A. Y es, I see that. 24 25 Q. And that's Dr. Vosburgh from General 25 exactly --the page number is slightly cut off. Is that what you're saying? i A. Yes. Q. Okay. And it has a review, does it not, o f the book Silicosis and Asbestosis? ; A. Yes. f Q. And it reads, quote, this volume represents the first concerted effort to bring together the knowledge o f the above subject in | an organized fashion for those who need authoritative material. In other words, this can be considered the first American textbook on the subject, end quote. Correct? A. That's right. That's what it says. Q. Now, at this time period o f time certainly in 1940 General Electric had, in different locations, medical libraries, did they not? A. Td say the different medical facilities, Tm sure, had reference texts o f some sort. Q. Okay. Did you ask any o f the GE employees or former GE employees whether or not this textbook was in any o f their medical libraries historically? 9 (Pages 766 to 769) Priority-One Court Reporting (718) 761-0527 Page 770 Page 772 ( 1 A. No. 1 BY MR. KRISTAL: 2 Q. Did you review any indices, card 2 Q. So certainly you would agree the 3 indexes or computer indexes o f the various 3 textbook Silicosis and Asbestosis would have 4 General Electric libraries historically to see 4 been available to General Electric? 5 what texts they did have? 5 A. I would think if it was published in 6 A. Did I review any indices? Yes, 1 think 6 the open press and put out to the public, yes. 7 we talked about before, I went to the General 7 Q. Okay. And I'm going to mark as Exhibit 8 Electric research and development libraiy in 8 60 that text, and I have some questions about 9 Schenectady, and I searched for different 9 it. 10 materials, and there were searches that had been 10 (Whereupon, Exhibit 60, the textbook 11 done on computerized databases, and yes. 11 Silicosis and Asbestosis, was then received and 12 Q. Okay. So other than the one library in 12 marked for identification.) 13 Schenectady, did you go to any other GE medical 13 MR. KRISTAL: I have portions o f it 14 library to search to see what was available 14 which I'll mark just presently for the witness, 15 there? 15 and we can make a copy o f the entire text as 16 MR. SPEZIALI: Objection. 1 6 part o f the record. 17 THE WITNESS: Yes. When I was in 17 MR. SPEZIALI: And I object to the use 18 Bridgeport, Connecticut, and 1was in actually 18 o f this document. 1 9 former offices o f where I had worked out of, I 19 THE SPECIAL MASTER: Objection noted. 20 looked for texts and other materials in 20 Objection noted. 21 Bridgeport, as well. 21 MR. SPEZIALI: What is this that she 22 MR. KRISTAL: Did you look for any 22 has? That is part o f that, Jerry? 2 3 indices o f what GE had, not for the books 23 MR. KRISTAL: Yes. 24 themselves? 24 MR. KAPSHANDY: You're going to supply 25 MR. SPEZIALI: Objection. Asked and 2 5 the whole thing? Page 771 Page 773 1 answered. 1 MR. KRISTAL: Yes. 2 THE WITNESS: And if you're talking 2 MR. KAPSHANDY: Thank you. 3 about indices, maybe you could describe that. 3 THE WITNESS: As part o f my index, I do 4 What do you mean by an indice? 4 recall an article or something with this title, 5 MR. KRISTAL: When you were in 5 and without looking at my index, I don't know if 6 Bridgeport, did you physically look for books or 6 it's the same thing or not. So I'll just say 7 did you look for some catalogue or index which 7 that. 8 would list what books GE had had historically? 8 BY MR. KRISTAL: 9 MR. SPEZIALI: Objection. Asked and 9 Q. So what you're- - let me see if I'm 10 answered. 10 understanding what you're saying. As part o f 11 THE WITNESS: I don't know what we 11 your search of the General Electric libraries 12 could have found so many years later. I don't 12 you may have come across this text? 13 recall indices. I was looking at books and 13 A. No. Actually, as part o f the articles 14 articles and anything that I could find. 14 that I was provided in these many boxes here, 15 THE SPECIAL MASTER: Ms. Drucker, did 15 fifteen or so boxes, I recall something with 1 6 you find or look for any list o f any books that 1 6 this title. Whether it's the same thing, 1 17 may have been owned by General Electric during 17 don't know. I'd have to check. 18 that time in any form? 18 Q. So you may have been provided with this 19 THE WITNESS: I suppose, yes, in terms 1 9 textbook by the General Electric lawyers? 20 o f my general search in Schenectady and 20 A. I could look at the index if you'd like 21 Bridgeport. 21 me to check. As I said, as I sit here right now 22 THE SPECIAL MASTER: Did you find any 22 this title is somewhat familiar. 2 3 list o f books that were owned by General 23 THE SPECIAL MASTER: We're going to go 2 4 Electric or kept in their libraries? 24 off the record for a second, please. 25 THE WITNESS: Not that I recall. 25 THE VIDEOGRAPHER: O ff the record. The 10 (P a g e s 770 t o 773) P r i n r i l v - O n p Court Reoortina (718) 761-0527 Page 774 Page 776 1 time is nine fifty-five a.m. 1 2 (Whereupon, a recess was then taken.) 2 3 THE VIDEOGRAPHER: On the record. The 3 4 time is ten o three a.m. 4 5 MR. KRISTAL: Ms. Drucker, we had a 5 6 veiy brief discussion o ff the record before we 6 7 were back on the video. Would you agree that 7 8 the General Electric lawyers had provided you 8 9 with correspondence from General Electric noting 9 10 that GE had received the book Silicosis and 10 11 Asbestosis, but that you've been unable to 11 12 locate a copy o f that book? 12 13 MR. KAPSHANDY: Excuse me, Jeny. I 13 14 misspoke. There are other publications from the 14 15 '30s on silicosis that I thought were this 15 1 6 document. So I have not been able to locate it. 16 17 I can't say that's not the case. 17 18 MR. KRISTAL: Okay. 18 19 MR. KAPSHANDY: I apologize for 19 20 misleading you. 20 21 THE WITNESS: There may be. As I said, 21 22 this title rings a bell. 22 2 3 BY MR. KRISTAL: 23 24 Q. Okay. Now, we looked yesterday in the 24 2 5 American Ceramic Society, one of those documents 2 5 Page 775 for everybody. On page one hundred and sixty-six which you have there, okay - A. Yes. i Q. -- there is a heading on the middle o f the left side o f the page, Asbestosis. Do you see that? A. Yes. Q. And then on page one sixty-seven in the ij middle o f the top paragraph on the right-hand side, do you see the word numerous there? A. I see the word, yes. } Q. Okay. Let me read the sentence to you. Quote, numerous articles have appeared on the subject during the past four years, end quote. 1 Do you see that? j A. Yes. 1 Q. So in 1938 Dr. Lanza in the text said that there had been numerous articles in the literature between 1934 and 1938, correct? MR. SPEZIALI: Objection. \ THE WITNESS: Yes, that's what he said. MR. KRISTAL: Are you disagreeing with that? MR. SPEZIALI: Objection. MR. KAPSHANDY: She agreed. Page 111 1 with that lengthy bibliography that went up to 2 1933. Do you recall that yesterday? 3 A. Yeah. I don't remember the year it 4 went up to, but it was a lengthy bibliography. 5 Q. Would you agree between 1934 and 1938 6 that there were numerous articles that appeared 7 on the subject o f asbestosis? 8 A. Between 1934 and 1938, yeah, there were 9 articles published on that. 10 Q. The question is whether there were 11 numerous articles? 12 MR. SPEZIALI: Objection. 13 THE WITNESS: What do you mean by 14 numerous? What's your ballpark there? 15 MR. KRISTAL: Well, you can either 16 agree or disagree. 17 MR. SPEZIALI: Objection. I object. 18 BY MR. KRISTAL: 19 Q. Okay. Exhibit 60 is the textbook 20 Silicosis and Asbestosis by Lanza published in 21 1938, is it not? 22 A. It appears to be a portion o f that, 23 yes. 24 Q. Yes. We're going to substitute the 25 full one. I iust didn't bring complete copies 1 THE WITNESS: W e ll - 2 MR. SPEZIALI: She just asked and 3 answered. 4 THE SPECIAL MASTER: Excuse me. You 5 made your objections. The witness still has to 6 answer the question. 7 THE WITNESS: I'm sorry. Your question 8 again? 9 BY MR. KRISTAL: 10 Q. The question is whether you're 11 disagreeing with that statement in the 1938 text 12 or not. 13 A. Well, that's what it says, so 14 apparently that's what the author thought. 15 Q. And I'm asking you, well, do you have 1 6 any basis upon which you can agree or disagree 17 with that? 18 A. Do I have any basis -- 19 Q. It's either you agree or you disagree 20 or you don't know. 21 MR. SPEZIALI: Let her answer the 22 question. 23 THE WITNESS: Sure. Numerous articles 24 had- 25 BY MR. KRISTAL: 11 (P a g e s 774 t o 777) Priority-One Court Reporting (718) 761-0527 Page 778 Page 780 ; 1 Q. And then it goes on to say, quote, the 2 most comprehensive one has been that o f 3 Merewether and Price, and it cites to number 4 seventy-nine in the reference. Let me just show 5 you. It will be quicker. Number seventy-nine 6 is the Merewether report - 7 A. Thank you. 8 Q. -- that we saw and reviewed yesterday, 9 correct? 10 A. Yes. 11 Q. Would you agree that that report was 1 2 the most comprehensive one, at least as o f 1938, 13 on the subject o f asbestosis? 14 A. As o f 1938, it was one o f them. 15 Q. So you would disagree with Lanza who 1 6 said that it was the most comprehensive one? 17 A. Well, o f course, he's not mentioning 18 Dreessen. I don't know whether - because o f 1 9 when this was written that he had had access to 2 0 it, but certainly Merewether was one. Dreessen 2 1 at '38 was another. 22 Q. Okay. So if it wasn't the most 2 3 comprehensive, it was in the top two, the 24 Merewether report? 25 A. I'd say it's in the -- right up there. 1 that both the occupation and quantity o f dust 2 inhaled was important because individuals may 3 not have been engaged in very dusty duty, but 4 may be working in a room made dusty by other 5 procedures in the manufacturing process? That 6 was known in 1938? 7 MR. SPEZIALI: Objection. 8 THE WITNESS: I missed the first part. 9 If you'd kindly repeat that. I think you're 1 0 reading from here. I can follow it along. 11 THE SPECIAL MASTER: Just ask your 12 question, Jerry. 13 MR. KRISTAL: Sure. 14 Would you agree that the occupation and 15 quantity o f dust inhaled, it was known in 1938 16 that both o f those were important because there 17 were --may be individuals who were engaged in 18 activities that were not very dusty but may be 19 working in a room that was made very dusty by 2 0 other procedures in the same room? Was that 2 1 known in 1938? 22 THE WITNESS: When you're talking about 2 3 dusty, you're talking what kind o f dust --lots of 24 dust. People can be exposed to lots o f dust in 25 industries surrounding where they are. It could Page 779 Page 781 : 1 Q. Okay. I want to talk a little bit 1 be any number o f things. 2 about the onset o f asbestosis. Would you agree 2 MR. KRISTAL: And the thrust o f my 3 that it was known by 1938 that the onset was 3 question is it was known in 1938 that somebody may 4 variable and depended upon the exact occupation 4 be working in a not very dusty job, but could be 5 and quantity o f dust inhaled? 5 inhaling dust by working in a room made dusty by 6 MR. SPEZIALI: Objection. 6 other people who were doing jobs that were 7 THE WITNESS: Are we saying as what was 7 dustier. 8 known back then from what we know now, or what 8 MR. SPEZIALI: Objection. 9 is your framework o f your question? 9 THE WITNESS: Well, I'd say in general 1 0 BY MR. KRISTAL: 1 0 as an IH principle back then, we're talking 11 Q. As o f 1938. 1 1 about dust in general, sure. 12 A. Okay. And again, as o f 1938 was it 1 2 BY MR. KRISTAL: 13 known - 13 Q. And specifically with respect to 14 Q. That the onset o f asbestosis was 14 asbestos dust? 1 5 variable and depended upon the exact occupation 15 A. Specifically what? I'd like the whole 1 6 and quantity o f dust inhaled. 16 question so I'm answering exactly what you're 17 A. Well, that was part o f it; quantity, 17 asking. 18 duration. They knew the fact that it went into 18 Q. Why don't you look at page one 19 dose. 19 seventy-one. 20 Q. In 1938? 20 A. Thank you. Okay. 21 A. Well, as a -- yeah, Dreessen, as far as 21 Q. There's a subsection entitled Onset. 22 duration, exposure, concentration. 2 2 Do you see that? 23 Q. Okay. 23 A. Yes. 24 A. That's what it was known at the time. 24 Q. And it says, quote, this is variable 25 Q. Okay. And it was known at that time 2 5 and depends upon the exact occupation and the 12 (P a g es 778 t o 781) D r i /''.-K- -i f ^ r - D n o P n i i r l " R p n o r l i n n (718) 761.- 0527 Page 782 Page 784 1 quantity o f dust inhaled. Both are important, 2 for the individual may not be engaged in a very 3 dusty duty, but may be working in a room made 4 very dusty by another procedure in the 5 manufacturing process, end quote. Do you see 6 that? 7 A. Yes, you read that. 8 Q. So in 1938 that was known and published 9 in this text? 10 A. Okay. That meaning that just general 11 dust because that's all I see here. I'm not 12 looking at the rest o f the article. Yeah, that 13 was known. 14 Q. Well, they're talking about asbestos 15 and asbestosis in this section, are they not? 16 A. I haven't read the whole thing. All 17 he's saying here is dust, and I'm agreeing with 18 you, yeah. 19 Q. Go back to page one sixty-six. 20 A. Okay. 21 Q. And that's where it starts - there's a 22 section that says Asbestosis, right? 23 A. Yes, that's the heading. 24 Q. And then there's a subheading that says 25 The Asbestos Industry, correct? 1 about different categories under those headings? 2 A. Sure. 3 Q. Okay. Would you agree that anorexia 4 was a symptom that was known o f asbestosis in 5 1938? ; 6 A. Let me just look at this, please. 7 Well, as o f 1938, i t it lists that in this 8 book. 9 Q. Well, it says, quote, as a subheading 10 under asbestosis under symptomology anorexia, { 11 does it not? ;i 12 A. R ight it does say that. j 13 Q. It says, quote, this is a rather 14 constant late symptom. Haddow, H-A-D-D-O-W, \ 1 5 regards it as an indication to stop work. 1 6 Individuals may then live for several years but t 17 become progressively weaker, more emaciated and J 18 exhausted until pneumonia or bronchitis brings 1 9 death, end quote. Do you see that? 20 A. Yes. | 21 Q. So it was also known in 1938 that the i 22 symptom o f anorexia would progress or could 2 3 progress in certain individuals even after they 2 4 stopped working? ? 25 A. It was, it was known that - well, Page 783 Page 785 i 1 A. Yes. 1 this -- what this tells me is that that's what 2 Q. And then if you go to one sixty-eight, 2 this author is laying out. Whether it was 3 the next subheading is Autopsy, right? 3 generally known, I don't know. That's something 4 A. Yes. 4 that at that point in time I hadn't run across 5 Q. And then one seventy, the next 5 very much in the literature. 6 subheading is Symptomology, correct? 6 Q. Well, this is the first American text 7 A. Yes. 7 on silicosis and asbestosis, right? 8 Q. And under Symptomology as a subheading 8 A. I don't know. 9 under the major heading Asbestosis, it says 9 Q. Well, when you said this was something 10 Onset, correct? 10 you haven't come across in your review o f die 11 A. Just checking. Right Under 11 literature, you mean that the literature that 12 Symptomatology one o f the subsets is Onset. 12 the GE lawyers sent to you? 13 Q. And the sentence I read about someone 13 A. Well, I've been studying asbestos for 14 being engaged in not very dusty duty but working 14 over thirty years in my career going to my 15 in a room made dusty by others is under the 1 5 graduate days at Harvard. And as I said, going 16 heading Asbestosis which begins on page one 1 6 back to then, that's not something that I had 17 sixty-six, correct? 17 come across --that I recall coming across as 18 A. Yes. 18 something mentioned back in the '30s. 19 Q. Okay. So they're talking about 19 Q. And had you ever seen this textbook 20 asbestos and asbestos dust? 20 before? 21 A. Well, he doesn't say that but --and 21 A. I don't know. I may have. I don't 22 not having read i t but it appears under that 22 know. 2 3 heading, yes. 23 Q. Would you regard it as important to try 24 Q. And you're familiar textbooks are laid 2 4 to see all the material that was published on 2 5 out with headings and subheadings, and they talk 2 5 the subject o f the historical knowledge o f the 13 (Pages 782 to 785) Priority-One Court Reporting (718) 761-0527 Page 786 Page 788 : 1 hazards o f asbestos? 1 2 MR. SPEZIALI: Objection. 2 3 THE WITNESS: Well, with regard to my 3 4 project, I wasn't asked to look at all the 4 5 literature in all the world relating to 5 6 asbestos. I was asked to look at GE's knowledge 6 7 that would have related to what they were doing 7 8 at the time. 8 9 MR. KRISTAL: Okay. And this book was 9 1 0 reviewed in a journal that would have been sent 1 0 1 1 to General Electric in 1940 as we saw from the 11 1 2 prior exhibit, correct? 12 13 MR. SPEZIALI: Objection. 13 14 THE WITNESS: It may have been. 14 15 BY MR. KRISTAL: 15 16 Q. It may have been what? 16 17 A. Your question is was it sent. I said 17 18 it may have been. 18 19 Q. Well, in the standard operating 19 2 0 procedure, the journal --the official journal 20 2 1 o f the American Association o f Industrial 21 2 2 Physicians and Surgeons was sent to the members, 2 2 2 3 correct? 23 24 A. Most likely. 24 25 Q. Okay. And Dr. Vosburgh, who was the 25 Page 707 o f the symptoms o f asbestosis was dyspnea, D-Y-S-P-N-E-A, correct? A. Yes. Q. And dyspnea means shortness o f breath. Do you know that or not? A. Ido. Q. Okay. And would you agree that dyspnea with respect to asbestosis, shortness o f breath with asbestosis, it was known that it was progressive in 1938? A. I'm going to read this for a second, please. Okay. Was dyspnea known to be progressive in 1938 with regard to high levels o f asbestos exposure, long durations o f time? Yes. Q. Okay. And move to strike the non-responsive portion o f that answer. Let me read what it says here in the textbook from 1938, page one seventy-one. Under : the heading Symptomology, under the major heading Asbestosis, it lists, it lists dyspnea, does it not? A. Yes. Q. And it says, quote, this is the most striking symptom and practically the most Page 789 1 head o f medicine or the medical director at 2 Schenectady at that time, was on the committee 3 o f that association, correct? 4 A. Yes. 5 Q. So most likely he received the copy o f 6 the Industrial Medicine, correct? 7 A. Most likely he received the journal, 8 sure. 9 Q. Okay. So you're saying maybe he didn't 1 0 read it? 11 A. Well, I wasn't there with Dr. Vosburgh, 1 2 so I can't -- 13 MR. SPEZIALI: Objection. 14 MR. KRISTAL: It was certainly sent to 15 him. If he had the inclination to read it - 16 MR. SPEZIALI: Objection. Asked and 17 answered. 18 THE WITNESS: I f h e h a d - I - w a s it 1 9 sent to Dr. Vosburgh? Is that what you're 2 0 asking? It may have been. That's what I said. 2 1 BY MR. KRISTAL: 22 Q. And it was likely that it was sent? 23 A. He was on the board, yeah. 24 Q. Okay. Now, if you look on page 25 seventy-one, it was also known in 1938 that one 1 important one. It is progressive, as in other 2 forms o f pneumoconiosis, whether the individual 3 stops work or not, unquote. Do you see that? 4 A. Yes. 5 Q. So that was known in 1938, was it not, 6 with respect to asbestosis? 7 A. Yes. 8 Q. It doesn't say anything about high 9 levels over long periods o f time, does it? 10 A. Well, that was what was known at the 1 1 time, so that's the context o f the entire 1 2 article. 13 Q. Okay. Then it goes on to say, quote, 14 Wood and Gloyne speak o f it as a terrible 15 tightness o f the chest which is very expressive, 16 end quote. Do you see that? 17 A. Yes. 18 Q. Did you read those Wood and Gloyne 19 articles? 20 A. As I recall, I did. There were some 2 1 Wood and Gloyne articles in the materials, and I 2 2 think I'd seen them over the course o f thirty 23 years. 24 Q. And those were from the 1930s? 25 A. I'd have to check. Since he's -- it's 14 ( P a g e s 786 t o 789) n v ,' v i f u_r\nQ r ' n n r f R o n n r t i nrr ( 7 1 R) 7 6 1 --0 5 2 7 t Page 790 Page 792 ; 1 written in 1938, there must be some Wood and 1 asbestosis were weight loss and emaciation, 2 Gloyne that was written by then because he's 2 1938? ^ 3 saying that here. 3 Q. Right. That was known by 1938? 4 Q. And it was known in 1938 with respect 4 A. Yes. 5 to dyspnea from asbestosis that it was due 5 Q. Now, it was known by 1938 that 6 primarily to inelasticity o f the lungs, correct? 6 individuals were getting exposure to asbestos 7 MR. SPEZIALI: Objection. 7 dust not only in factories, but also through the 8 THE WITNESS: It was known - wait. If 8 use o f asbestos-containing products. Would you 9 I could have the whole question. 9 agree with that? 10 MR. KRISTAL: Sure. It was known by 10 A. Wait. Could you repeat that, please? 11 1938 that the dyspnea that was caused by 12 asbestosis was due to the inelasticity o f the 11 Q. Sure. It was known by 1938 that 12 individuals were getting exposure to asbestos 13 lungs. 13 dust not only from work in factories, but also | 14 THE WITNESS: Well, I think medical and 14 through exposures from the use o f \ 15 scientific literature would have had that. That 15 asbestos-containing products. 5 1 6 would have been known by health safety and 16 A. Yeah, certain products. 17 medical professionals. 17 Q. Well, products such as 18 MR. KRISTAL: It was also known that 18 asbestos-containing insulation for boilers, | 19 the dyspnea or shortness o f breath with 1 9 engines, pipes and other parts, other equipment? | 20 asbestosis was slow and insidious in development 20 A. Well, it would depend on the 21 until the lungs were able to accomplish no more 21 application, but in 1938 there wasn't as ' 22 than just sufficient oxygenation o f the blood to 22 widespread use as occurred later on. 2 3 sustain life. That was known in 1938, right? 23 THE SPECIAL MASTER: I'm going to 24 MR. SPEZIALI: Objection. 24 direct the witness to answer the question. Read 25 THE WITNESS: If you're reading from 2 5 the question back; the last question asked by Page 791 P a g e 7 9 3 ;; 1 the next sentence, the next page, one 2 seventy-two -- 3 B Y MR. KRISTAL: 4 Q. Pmjust asking you if it was known by 5 1938 what I just said. 6 A. Well, apparently in the medical 7 literature, yes. That's what it says here. 8 Q. The next symptom that's listed is 9 cyanosis, correct? 10 A. Yes. 11 Q. And cyanosis is blueness o f the skin 12 because o f lack o f oxygen. You know that, 13 right? 14 A. Yes. 15 Q. So you know that medical term? 16 A. Yes. 17 Q. Okay. And that was also known to be 18 associated with asbestosis in the 1930 --in 19 1938? 20 A. That in 1938, yeah, according to this 21 author he lists this as one manifestation, yes. 22 Q. And it was also known with respect to 23 asbestosis that other symptoms were weight loss 24 and emaciation by 1938, right? 25 A. That other symptoms related to 1 Mr. Kristal. 2 (Whereupon, the above-requested 3 question was then read by the reporter.) 4 THE WITNESS: Okay. 1938. Yes. 5 BY MR. KRISTAL: 6 Q. And it was known that there were 7 exposures from those products in individuals who 8 were employed in handling and applying them in 9 buildings and in ships in the course o f 10 construction or repair in 1938? i 11 A. It was known --well, the medical and 12 scientific community would have been aware, 13 yeah, that in certain situations that may occur. 14 Q. And that information was contained in 15 this text, was it not? Look at page three 1 6 eighty-seven. If you want to start at three 17 eighty-five so you understand the category that 1 8 we're in, there's a heading - another heading 19 entitled Asbestosis. 20 A. Thank you. Okay. I see the heading on 21 three eighty-five. 22 Q. Right. And then on the bottom o f three 2 3 eighty-six they say, quote, other branches o f 2 4 the industry are connected with building, 2 5 engineering and shipping and are spread over the 15 (P a g e s 790 t o 793) Priority-One Court Reporting (718) 761-0527 Page 794 1 centers where these are carried on. Do you see 1 2 that? 2 3 A. No. Could you - where is it? 3 4 Q. Sure. 4 5 A. Okay. I see that sentence. 5 6 Q. And then it goes on to list a number o f 6 7 different non-textile asbestos-containing 7 8 products that were being manufactured as o f that 8 9 time, correct? 9 10 A. I'm just going to look at this whole 10 1 1 paragraph. Okay. And the question, please? 11 12 Q. There's a discussion there o f a variety 12 13 o f non-textile asbestos-containing products, is 13 14 there not? 14 15 A. Yes. 15 16 Q. And the last sentence on page three 16 17 eighty-six reads, quote, mixtures o f asbestos 17 18 with magnesia, kieselguhr and other materials 18 1 9 are used as cements or fillings from insulating 19 20 boilers, engines, pipes and other parts. Many 20 21 persons are employed in handling and applying 21 22 these mixtures in buildings and ships in the 22 2 3 course o f construction or repair, end quote. Do 23 24 you see that? 24 25 A. Yes. 25 Page 795 1 Q. So that was known in 1938? 1 2 A. Yes. 2 3 Q. Now, it was also --by 1938 there was 3 4 some discussion as to whether or not asbestos 4 5 caused cancer. 5 6 A. Is there a question? 6 7 Q. Yeah. I'm asking if that's correct. 7 8 A. Could you repeat that, please? 8 9 MR. SPEZIALI: I didn't understand. 9 10 THE WITNESS: I didn't hear the 10 11 question. 11 12 THE SPECIAL MASTER: I thought it was a 12 1 3 statement, Jerry. 13 14 MR. KRISTAL: It had a question mark at 14 15 the end o f it. 15 16 THE SPECIAL MASTER: Only in your head. 16 17 BY MR. KRISTAL: 17 18 Q. Would you agree that by 1938 there was 18 1 9 a discussion that had begun as to whether or not 19 20 asbestos could cause cancer? 20 21 A. By 1938, generally, well, at that point 21 22 there, there may have been some, some 22 2 3 discussion, totally with lack of consensus and 23 24 certainly related to underlying asbestosis. 24 25 Q. Okay. So by 1938 there was a 25 Page 796 ; discussion about whether or not asbestos was causing lung cancer at that time although there was no consensus o f opinion? A. Well, when you're saying there was a discussion, there were a few -- there might have been one or two or something like that articles at the time. That's pretty early in the game. Q. Well, why don't you turn to page two forty-four o f Exhibit 60. A. We're missing so many pages in this excerpt. Q. Here. Here's one through two hundred and forty-three. A. Thank you. Q. Sure. A. Okay. And you said page two forty-four. Q. Right. And here's two forty-eight to the end o f the book so I can have the two pages at hand. You have two forty-four, two forty-five in the excerpt that you have. Okay. A. This one stops at two forty-three, so -- Q. Right. Now, you've got two forty-four, two forty-five, two forty-six, two forty-seven. Page 797 Now you've got the whole book. A. Okay. Sure. Q. Do you need time to read the whole book? A. Well, it depends on what your question is. Q. Okay. My question is can you turn to page two forty-four? A. Okay. Q. And there's a heading that says Complications and Sequelae. Do you see that? A. Yes. Q. And sequelae in medical language you understand to mean complications or things that happen as a result o f a disease? A. Yeah, things that happen after something else is sequelae. Q. And the first sentence says, quote, the chief complications and sequelae o f pulmonary asbestosis are as follows. Do you see that? A. Yes. Q. And it lists a number o f things. And then on the next page two forty-five it has item F, and there's a discussion in that paragraph about carcinoma and whether or not it's related 16 (Pages 794 to 797) Priority-One Court Reporting (718) 761-0527 Page 798 Page 800 s 1 to asbestos -- asbestosis, correct? 1 BY MR. KRISTAL: 2 A. Well, Fll read that. It says - could 2 Q. Now, you're familiar with a group 3 I read these first two sentences? What it says 3 entitled the National Safety Council? \ 4 is that carcinoma has been found in six cases 4 A. Yes. 5 5 examined by the writer at autopsy and until more 5 Q. And the General Electric lawyers had 6 statistics are available, it is impossible to 6 sent you some documents that were articles 1 7 draw any definite conclusions as to the relation 7 published in National Safety Council 8 of the two diseases. 8 publications. Is that fair to say? 9 Q. So you would agree there was a 9 A. Yes, 10 discussion going on at the time as to whether or 10 Q. And General Electric, you're aware, was 11 not cancer was a complication o f asbestosis? 11 a charter member o f the National Safety Council I 12 MR. SPEZIALI: Objection. Asked and 12 in 1913? | 13 answered twice. 13 A. That's right. 14 THE WITNESS: There was -- well, they 14 Q. And George Sanford, who was a safety l 15 didn't know. They didn't know. So it - they 1 5 engineer at General Electric, had been a f 16 were ~ it was maybe a possibility. You can 1 6 president o f the National Safety Council, \ 17 tell here that he said it's impossible to draw 17 correct? 1 18 any definite conclusions. 18 A. I'd have to double-check it. It rings 19 THE SPECIAL MASTER: I think we can 19 a bell, but to be certain I'd have to look at a 20 move on, Jerry. 20 document. I 21 (Whereupon, Exhibit 61, a document 21 Q. Well, do you recall that he was also a 22 dated March o f 1944, Industrial Medicine 22 member o f the National Safety Council, what's 23 journal, was then received and marked for 2 3 called the administrative council? 24 identification.) 24 A . r d have to look at the document. I 25 MR. KRISTAL: Okay. Exhibit 61 is 2 5 don't recall that. \ Page 799 Page 801 ' 1 dated March o f 1944. It's another Industrial 2 Medicine journal. And I only have one question, 3 and which is by this time in 1944 ~ if you turn 4 to the third page o f the document --I'mjust 5 asking about Dr. Vosburgh. 6 MR. SPEZIALI: The membership stuff? 7 MR. KRISTAL: Right. 8 MR. SPEZIALI: Okay. 9 BY MR. KRISTAL: 10 Q. There's a column that lists the 11 officers and directors o f the American 12 Association o f Industrial Physicians and 13 Surgeons. Do you see that? 14 A. You're --yes, I think we're on page 15 three? Yeah. I see a column officers and 1 6 directors, yes. 17 Q. And it notes that between 1943 and 1945 18 Dr. Vosburgh, General Electric Company, 19 Schenectady, N ew York was a director o f that 20 association at that point in time. 21 A, Sure, along with people from all the 22 other major companies. 23 MR. SPEZIALI: He just wants to know 24 about Vosburgh. Just answer yes or no. 25 THE WITNESS: Yes. 1 (Whereupon, Exhibit 62, a document 2 dated June 4th, 1932, the subject is Report on 3 Health Protection in Sandblasting and Metal 4 Abrasive Blasting, on General Electric 5 letterhead, from NJ Darling to the president o f 6 General Electric, Mr. Swope, was then received 7 and marked for identification.) 8 MR. KRISTAL: Let me mark as Exhibit 9 62, this is a document dated June 4th, 1932. 10 The subject is Report on Health Protection in 11 Sandblasting and Metal Abrasive Blasting. It's 12 on General Electric letterhead, and it is from 13 NJ Darling to the president o f General Electric, 14 Mr. Swope. 15 THE WITNESS: Is this from the GE 16 documents? 17 MR. SPEZIALI: It doesn't matter. 18 THE WITNESS: Oh, okay. It's a letter 19 on GE stationery to Mr. Swope from Mr. Darling, 20 yes. 21 BY MR. KRISTAL: 22 Q. And if you take a minute to read it. 23 A. Okay. 24 Q. Well, have you read this before? Do 25 you know? 17 (Pages 798 t o 801) Priority-One Court Reporting (718) 761-0527 Page 802 1 A. I don't recall it. 1 2 (Whereupon, Exhibit 63, a June 1st, 2 3 1932 memo from EH Ballard regarding the report 3 4 o f the committee o f the National Safety Council 4 5 on health protection in air pressure blasting, 5 6 was then received and marked for 6 7 identification.) 7 8 BY MR. KRISTAL: 8 9 Q. I'm also going to mark as Exhibit 63 a 9 10 June 1st, 1932 memo from EH Ballard regarding 10 11 the report o f the committee o f the National 11 12 Safety Council on health protection in air 12 13 pressure blasting which was one o f the 13 14 attachments to the letter that you're reading 14 15 now. 15 16 A. Okay, I've looked it over. 16 17 Q. And if you look over the next document 17 18 as well so I can try to ask some more general 18 19 questions. 19 20 A. Sure. Okay. Thank you. 20 21 Q. And first o f all, just to put these two 21 22 in context, would you agree that the two 22 2 3 documents relate to a study that had been done 23 24 by two physicians on the health protection in 24 25 sandblasting, and that study was being reviewed 2 5 Page 803 1 by the administrative council o f the National 1 2 Safety Council to see whether or not the 2 3 National Safety Council would publish it or not? 3 4 A. Well, it was authored by, right, two 4 5 doctors, and the second part, second part o f the 5 6 question? I'm Sony. 6 7 Q. The letter is discussing the letter 7 8 from Mr. Darling, and he was the manager o f the 8 9 West Lynn, L-Y-N-N, General Electric facility at 9 10 that time, correct? 10 11 A. Yeah. I recall his name, and I think 11 12 he was manager. He was, yes, in management. 12 13 Q. And what he was writing to the 13 14 president o f General Electric was about the 14 15 report by these two doctors and the discussion 15 16 that was going on at the National Safety Council 1 6 17 as to whether or not it should be published, 17 18 correct? 18 19 A. Yes. 19 20 Q. And there was a concern by a group 20 21 called The National Foundry Association - 21 22 Founders Association as to whether or not that 22 2 3 should be published because they were concerned 23 24 about its effect on lawsuits at the time. 24 25 MR. SPEZIALI: Objection. 25 Page 804 ; THE WITNESS: It doesn't say they were - it mentions lawsuits. They might have been concerned about the, the entirety o f the study. It does mention that there were lawsuits involved. There could be lawsuits involved. MR. KRISTAL: And the report had come up for review by the administrative council in March o f 1932, and Mr. Sanford from General Electric was on the administrative council, and it notes that he was instrumental in, at that point in time, not getting the report published. j MR. SPEZIALI: Objection. THE WITNESS: I don't know if he was instrumental. I can tell you just what it says in the letter. MR. KRISTAL: Well, look at Exhibit 63 - THE WITNESS: Yes. MR. KRISTAL: --which is the enclosure that --one o f the enclosures Mr. Darling sent to Mr. Swope, correct? THE WITNESS: Yes. MR. KRISTAL: The last paragraph says, quote, have talked with Mr. - MR. SPEZIALI: Wait, wait. You're Page 805 looking at sixty-three? MR. KRISTAL: Yes. MR. SPEZIALI: The last paragraph. THE WITNESS: Okay. MR. KRISTAL: Quote, have talked with Mr. GE Sanford in Schenectady this morning who has the report, and is in full accord with the above suggestion that report should not be published. In fact, he was a prime mover in holding it up in March this year. He is to abstract the report and present it to Mr. Simmons for his use. Incidentally, Mr. Sanford is a past president o f the NSC and a member o f the administrative council, end quote. Do you see that? THE WITNESS: Yes. MR. SPEZIALI: Objection. MR. KRISTAL: So at that time Mr. Sanford was on the administrative council o f the National Safety Council? THE WITNESS: Yes. MR. KRISTAL: And had been a past president o f the National Safety Council, correct? THE WITNESS: According to this. 18 (P a g es 802 t o 805) Priority-One Court Reporting (718) 761-0527 Page 806 1 MR. KRISTAL: And he had been a prime 1 2 mover in holding up the publication o f the 2 3 report by the two physicians with respect to 3 4 sand blasting? 4 5 MR. SPEZIALI: Objection. 5 6 THE WITNESS: W e ll- 6 7 MR. KRISTAL: That's what it says. 7 8 THE WITNESS: That's all I can go on. 8 9 MR. SPEZIALI: Is that what it says? 9 10 THE WITNESS: Whether that's the case 10 11 or not, it does say he's a prime mover. 11 12 MR. KRISTAL: Have you seen anything or 12 13 read anything or heard anything that would cause 13 14 you to disagree with the statement that 14 15 Mr. Ballard wrote in his memo that was forwarded 15 1 6 to the president o f General Electric that 16 17 Mr. Sanford was a prime mover in holding up the 17 18 publication o f this report? 18 19 THE WITNESS: On this report on 19 20 silica --silicosis, no. 20 21 (Whereupon, Exhibit 64, a document from 21 22 the National Safety Council entitled 22 23 transactions, 1932,21st Annual Safety Congress; 2 3 24 October 3rd to October 7th, 1932, was then 24 2 5 received and marked for identification.) 25 Page 807 1 BY MR. KRISTAL: 1 2 Q. Okay. Pm going to mark as Exhibit 64 2 3 a document from the National Safety Council 3 4 entitled transactions, 1932,21st Annual Safety 4 5 Congress. It's from October 3rd to October 7th, 5 6 1932. 6 7 Now, are you aware that there were 7 8 yearly congresses, as they were called, o f the 8 9 National Safety Council, and then the papers and 9 10 speeches that were given were published and sent 10 11 to the members in text form? Are you aware o f 11 12 that? 12 13 A. I'm aware that they had annual 13 14 meetings, and I don't know whether they printed 14 15 up and sent out all the documents in text form. 15 16 Q. W ell, have you read National Safety 16 17 Council transactions, as they were called, sent 17 18 to you by the General Electric lawyers? 18 19 A. Hooked them over, yes. 19 20 Q. And did you have an understanding that 20 21 those transactions were the published 21 22 proceedings o f the conferences for that year? 22 23 A. Fd have to look at one to refresh 23 24 myself. 24 25 Q. Well, you're looking at one. 25 Page 808 ; A. Thank you. Okay, yes, I see that these I are transactions. Q. And they represent the publication o f 1 the various proceedings that occurred at the animal congresses o f the National Safety :i Council. Is that fair to say? A. It appears to be the case from this, | yeah. | Q. And if you look at the first page o f 1 the document, there's a listing. It says I executive committee, Mr. Sanford from General 1 Electric was on the executive committee 1932 to 1933 o f the National Safety Council? Ifs I alphabetical fortunately. f A. Where? i Q. Under S for Sanford. I A. You're on the next page. Okay. | Mr. Sanford, yes, was on the executive committee, '32, '33. | Q. And he was also a director o f the National Safety Council from 1932 to 1933? A. Let me just check. There are so many f names here. Yeah, one o f a couple hundred, sure; o f two hundred. Q. Move to strike the non-responsive ; Page 809 portion o f that answer. On page fifty o f the full book the transactions, which is part o f this, there's a j publication, the Effects o f Inhaled Mineral Dust \ by Leroy Gardner. Do you see that? } A. Yes. Q. And that's the Dr. Gardner we mentioned yesterday who was the expert on dust diseases? \ A. Yes. t Q. And if you turn to the third page o f his article from 1932 -- A. Is that page fifty-two? Q. Yes. A. Okay. Q. And the paragraph that talks about asbestos dust. Do you see that? A. Yes. Q. Okay. It was known and published and distributed to the members of the National Safety Council at that time that asbestos dust could form leather-like scars in the lungs? A. I'll just look this over. Yes. (Whereupon, Exhibit 65, an August 1933 document, National Safety News from the National Safety Council, was then received and marked for 19 (Pages 806 t o 809) Priority-One Court Reporting (718) 761-0527 Page 810 1 identification.) 1 2 BY MR. KRISTAL: 2 3 Q. I'm going to show you Exhibit 65 which 3 4 is a 1933 document, August 1933, National Safety 4 5 New s from the National Safety Council. 5 1 6 A. Thank you. 6 7 Q. And generally, if you need to look at 7 8 the second page up top where it says National 8 9 Safety News, the National Safety News was a 9 10 separate publication o f the National Safety 10 11 Council that was published monthly and sent to 11 12 members; is that correct? 12 13 A. Yes. 13 14 Q. And in the table o f contents for August 14 15 1933, there's an article entitled Mechanical 15 1 6 Control o f Occupational Disease? 16 17 A. Yes. 17 18 Q. And it again, in the right-hand column 18 1 9 under executive committee, it lists Mr. Sanford, 19 20 General Electric Company? 20 21 A. Under executive committee, right. 21 22 Q. And then if you turn the next page, a 22 2 3 copy o f the article The Mechanical Control of 23 2 4 Occupational Diseases. Do you see that? 24 25 A. Yes. 25 Page 811 1 Q. And they're talking about a number o f 1 different occupational diseases and mention 2 2 asbestosis and other pneumoconioses? 3 3 4 A. I'mjust looking at it. Okay. Yes. 4 5 Q. And it was known at that time in 1933 5 6 that medical research had shown that the dust 6 that was most dangerous was dust that was so 7 7 small that the individual particles were 8 8 invisible, correct? 9 9 A. Yes. He's really talking about silica 10 10 dust, but it does say that dust most dangerous 11 11 is so small that the individual particles are 12 12 invisible. 13 13 Q. Well, he lists - in the first column 14 14 he's talking about pneumoconiosis, generally 15 15 discussing insurance compensation at that point 16 16 in time, and liability, correct? 17 17 MR. SPEZLALI: Objection. 18 18 19 BY MR. KRISTAL: 19 20 Q. Isn't that what he's talking about in 20 21 that paragraph there? 21 22 A. He's talking about, right, insurance 22 2 3 compensation and liability business for 23 24 industrial disease, right. 24 125 Q. And one o f the industrial diseases that 25 Page 812 he's talking about are pneumoconiosis, correct? A. Yes. Q. And in parentheses he says, including silicosis, asbestosis, et cetera, right? A. Right. Q. And then in the paragraph at the bottom o f that he says, we will accordingly look at the subject from the standpoint o f these few important causes, bearing in mind that the most important o f all is covered by the general heading o f pneumoconiosis or diseases caused by dust, correct? A. Yes. Q. So he's talking about pneumoconiosis generally, not just silicosis, right? A. Right. Q. Then in the next column he says, quote, when the subject o f dust is mentioned, most o f us probably think o f visible particles. In fact, much o f the dust removal work, even by companies specializing along this line in the past, has been directed at this form o f dust. Medical research has shown us, however, that the dust that is most dangerous through its deep inhalation into the lungs is so small that the Page 813 indivisible (sic) particles are invisible and can only be seen by the naked eye if they were gathered in a dense cloud which may have the appearance of a gray fog, end quote. Do you see that? A. That's right. That's what it says here. Q. So that was known and written about and distributed to members o f the National Safety Council in 1933? MR. SPEZIALI: Objection. THE WITNESS: Well, when you're saying that was known, this in particular with regard to all his --his general discussion o f pneumoconiosis, yeah, that was known. MR. KRISTAL: And he specifically includes in that group in this article asbestosis? THE WITNESS: He does mention that, right. MR. KRISTAL: Off the record for a moment. THE SPECIAL MASTER: O ff the record, please. THE VIDEOGRAPHER: O ff the record. The 20 (Pages 810 to 813) Priority-One Court Reporting (718) 761-0527 Page 814 Page 816 ; 1 time is ten fifty-two a.m. 1 Occupational Diseases. Do you see that? 2 (Whereupon, a recess was then taken.) 2 A. Yes. 3 THE VIDEOGRAPHER: On the record. The 3 Q. And on page twenty-five, Dr. Gardner, | 4 time is eleven thirteen a.m. 4 at the conference and then later published and \ 5 (Whereupon, Exhibit 66,1934 National 5 sent to members, noted that, quote, the only 1 6 Safety Council transactions from October 1st to 6 other type o f dust which is generally recognized | 7 October 5th, 1934, was then received and marked 7 as a cause o f severe pulmonary injury is 8 for identification.) 8 asbestos. Do you see that? 9 MR. KRISTAL: Marked as Exhibit 66, 9 A. Yes. 10 1934 National Safety Council transactions from 10 (Whereupon, Exhibit 67, a copy o f the 11 October 1st to October 5th, 1934. And if you 11 National Safety New s from September 1935, was 1 12 would look four pages in, Mr. Sanford is listed 12 then received and marked for identification.) J 13 as being on the executive committee for that 13 BY MR. KRISTAL: 14 year. That's page five. And then on page 14 Q. Exhibit 67 is a copy o f the National 15 seven -- 15 Safety News from September 1935. We have the i 16 THE WITNESS: Yes. 1 6 stipulation regarding Mr. Sanford. There was an l 17 MR. KRISTAL: --he's listed again as a 17 article entitled No Halfway Measures o f Dust 18 director o f the National Safety Council for that 18 Control. 1 19 year. 19 A. Yes. 20 THE SPECIAL MASTER: Is there some way 20 Q. And on the second page there's a 21 we can get a stipulation -- 21 heading called Measuring the Hazard. 22 MR. SPEZIALI: I think we have. 22 A. Right. 23 THE SPECIAL MASTER: - as to what 23 Q. And if s talking about silicosis, but 24 years Mr. Sanford was an executive committee 24 ifs mentioning the five million particles per 25 member and a member -- 2 5 cubic foot o f air standard. Do you see that in Page 815 Page 817 1 MR. KAPSHANDY: Let me clarify. We've 1 the first column? 2 answered in interrogatories that GE was a 2 A. Yeah, I guess. Ifs underlined. 3 founding member o f the National Safety Council 3 Q. And if s noted that five million 4 and has been a member since its inception. 4 particles o f cubic foot --strike that. 5 THE SPECIAL MASTER: Then I think all 5 It notes that five million particles 6 o f these questions are unnecessary. 6 per cubic foot o f air o f particles less than ten 7 MR. KRISTAL: If we get an agreement 7 microns is not visible to the naked eye, does it 8 because I have documents that show at least 8 not? 9 through 1940 that Mr. Sanford was on the 9 A. I'mjust checking. He says five 10 executive committee, and a director, and that 1 0 million is tiny, yes. 11 beginning, at least as far as I know, in 1938, 11 Q. He says five million particles o f dust 12 Mr. Vosburgh was also on the executive committee 12 is tiny, and he writes, quote, we know it is 13 with Mr. Sanford and was also a director. Can 13 invisible to the naked eye because it takes 14 we get a stipulation? 14 fifteen to twenty times that much to produce a 15 THE SPECIAL MASTER: You'll get a 15 haze, and even that is invisible as particles o f 16 stipulation. 16 materials, end quote. Do you see that? 17 MR. KAPSHANDY: No problem. 17 A. Yes. 18 THE SPECIAL MASTER: No problem. Let's 18 (Whereupon, Exhibit 68, the last o f the 19 move on. We can eliminate this whole group o f 1 9 National Safety Council documents, the 20 questions. 20 transactions from the year 1938 Silver Jubilee 21 BY MR. KRISTAL: 21 o f the Safety Congress, was then received and 22 Q. If you look at Exhibit 66, in 1934 22 marked for identification.) 2 3 there was another presentation in October that 2 3 BY MR. KRISTAL: 2 4 was published and sent to the members by 24 Q. Exhibit 68 is the last o f the National 2 5 Dr. Gardner entitled Types o f Dust That Cause 2 5 Safety Council documents, and it is the 21 (Pages 814 to 817) Priority-One Court Reporting (718) 761-0527 Page 818 Page 820 1 transactions from the year 1938 Silver Jubilee 1 point. I'm just going to hand you the pages 2 o f the Safety Congress. 2 that I Xeroxed here today. 3 A. Yes. 3 (Whereupon, Exhibit 69, the Industrial 4 Q. And w e have the stipulation about 4 Toxicology, Alice Hamilton and Dr. Hardy, second 5 Mr. Sanford and now Dr. Vosburgh. And if you 5 edition, 1949, was then received and marked for 6 turn to what is page two sixteen and two 6 identification.) 7 seventeen, the lower right-hand comer o f two 7 BY MR. KRISTAL: 8 sixteen, the paragraph that begins "perhaps". 8 Q. And if you would verify that's the 9 A. T w o --okay. 9 Industrial Toxicology, Alice Hamilton and 10 Q. It's in pen. 10 Dr. Hardy, second edition, if you turn to the 11 A. Okay. 11 next page, it's 1949, correct? 12 Q. Upper left-hand comer. 12 A. Yes. 13 A. This one? 13 Q. Now, Dr. Hamilton was considered 14 Q. Okay. The paragraph is talking about 14 somewhat of an expert on industrial cancers? 15 dust diseases generally and mentions asbestosis, 15 A. I'm sure industrial diseases, yes, she 16 silicosis, does it nbt, just in that paragraph 1 6 was the leading expert in the country. 17 i f you look at it? 17 Q. And specifically she was considered an 18 A. Okay. Yes. It mentions pneumoconiosis 18 expert with respect to industrial cancers, was 19 including silica asbestosis, yes. 19 she not? 20 Q. And on the next page paragraph that 20 A. Well, that was part o f it. She was an 21 begins, "One fact stands out clearly." Do you see 21 expert on all kinds o f industrial diseases. 22 that? 22 That would have included cancers. 23 A. Yes. 23 Q. Right. So the answer to the question 24 Q, The last sentence o f that page notes, 24 is yes? 25 and it was published and sent to the members in 25 A. Sure. Page 819 Page 821 1 1938, that fibrosis o f the lungs, once it's - 2 once it is acquired, is permanent, incurable and 3 not susceptible to any medical treatment once 4 you have fibrosis o f the lungs, correct? 5 A. Yes. 6 Q. And briefly turn to the question o f 7 cancer. Exhibit 54 we had marked yesterday. 8 It's the January 12th, 1951 letter to the 9 General Electric nurse in Lowell, Massachusetts, 10 and one o f the texts that was recommended for 11 addition to the GE medical library on the second 12 page was the industrial toxicology text by 13 Dr. Hamilton and Dr. Hardy from 1949, correct? 14 A. I see the text. I don't see the date. 15 Q. Okay. It's the second edition that's 16 noted there. 17 A. Yes. 18 Q. All right. Did you --have you seen 19 that text? Was that provided to you by the 20 General Electric lawyers? 21 A. I don't recall it having been provided, 22 but I do recall having seen it over the course 23 o f my career. 24 Q. Okay. And I will mark the entire text 25 as Exhibit 69, and we'll replace it at some 1 Q. Okay. If you turn to, in your section, 2 page four forty-seven, and it's a chapter on 3 cancer o f the lung, correct? 4 A. Yes. 5 Q. And there's a heading that says, quote, 6 Association o f Lung Cancer with S ilicosis and 7 Asbestosis, end quote. Do you see that? 8 A. Yes. 9 Q. And it was known at that time in 1949 10 that the incidence o f cancer o f the lung among 11 asbestos workers was fairly high, correct? 12 A. It was known--just for a second. 13 MR. SPEZIALI: What page, Jerry? 14 MR. KRISTAL: Four forty-seven. 15 THE WITNESS: That's what it says here, 1 6 right, the incidence o f cancer among asbestos 17 workers is fairly high, and she's talking 18 about, right, pneumoconiosis. 1 9 BY MR. KRISTAL: 20 Q. Well, she's not talking about 21 pneumoconiosis. Let's read it. The paragraph 22 begins with the name o f an author. It says, 2 3 quote, Teleky, T-E-L-E-K-Y, reviewing the 24 subject in 1939 found that the connection 25 between silicosis and lung cancer is very 22 (P a g es 818 t o 821) Priority-One Court Reporting (718) 761-0527 Page 822 Page 824 ? 1 dubious as shown by statistics. On the other 1 A. I'll just read that. 2 hand, the incidence o f cancer o f the lungs among 2 Q. Sure. 3 3 asbestos workers is fairly high, end quote. 3 A. I think you're referring to the next j 4 That's what she wrote, right? 4 paragraph? 5 5 A. Yes. 5 Q. Yes. 6 Q. So she was very specific with respect 6 A. Right. 7 to the exposure being to asbestos and lung 7 Q. And that was Dr. Gardner's group that l 8 cancer? 8 we had spoken about earlier at the Saranac 9 A. Yes. In that, sure. 9 laboratory? ;? 10 Q. And then the next sentence says, and 10 A. Yes, Dr. Gardner was there. 11 it's the name o f another author, quote, LeCoeur, 11 Q. Okay. I 12 L-E capital C-O-E-U-R, discussing lung cancer o f 12 (Whereupon, Exhibit 70, an editorial 13 occupational origin says that in a lung with 13 from tiie Journal o f the American Medical i 14 asbestosis it takes some twelve years for a 14 Association from 1949, was then received and 't 15 cancer to develop. Islands o f cancer cells are 1 5 marked for identification.) 16 deeply embedded in fibrous tissue which also 1 6 BY MR. KRISTAL: 17 surrounds the lymph glands and contains 17 Q. Now, I'm going to mark the next exhibit 18 particles o f asbestos, end quote. Do you see 18 as Exhibit 60 --I'm sorry, as Exhibit 70, and 19 that? 1 9 if s an editorial from the Journal o f the 20 A. Yes. 20 American Medical Association from 1949, and ; 21 Q. So what she's reporting there is the 21 you've seen this before. That was provided to 22 work o f another author who was finding asbestos 22 you by the lawyers for General Electric, was it 23 particles themselves in the lung cancer in the 2 3 not? 24 tumor tissue? 24 A. Yes. 25 A. Yes. 25 Q. And there's an editorial entitled Page 823 Page 825 1 Q. She then goes on to quote or to mention 1 Asbestosis and Cancer o f the Lung, is there not? 2 the research o f two other researchers, Lynch and 2 A. Yes. 3 Smith, who describe two cases o f pulmonary 3 Q. And in this editorial, the Journal o f 4 cancer associated with asbestosis, one case o f 4 the American Medical Association is stating that 5 squamous metaplasia o f the bronchial epithelium 5 up until recently there was a question about 6 with asbestosis which they tentatively present 6 asbestosis and lung cancer, but now the evidence 7 as a precancerous condition, right? 7 establishes that asbestosis and lung cancer are 8 A. Yes. 8 related, correct? 9 Q. And then she quotes or cites to another 9 A. That in some cases, yes, it was 10 author named Welz, W-E-L-Z, and she writes, 10 related. 11 quote, Welz attributes to the irritating action 11 Q. Well, let's read it then. 12 o f asbestos two cases o f lung cancer which will 12 A. Thank you. 1 3 complicate with asbestos or with asbestosis, 13 Q. It says, quote, until recently, the 14 correct? 14 co-existence o f asbestosis and cancer o f the 15 A. Yes. 1 5 lung was considered by many investigators a 16 Q. And on the next page she cites works o f 1 6 coincidence. Since 1935, twenty-three such 17 other authors noting cancer o f the lung in 17 cases were recorded by American, English and 18 asbestos workers, correct? 18 German physicians. Wedler, W-E-D-L-E-R -- 19 A. Another case o f cancer o f the lung, 1 9 actually pronounced Wedler, but it would be 20 right, yes. 20 difficult for the reporter to get the W -- 21 Q. A ll right. And she does note that with 21 Wedler noted fourteen cases o f asbestosis cancer 22 respect to animal experiments in Saranac, there 22 in a series o f ninety-two necropsies on patients 2 3 was some question as to whether or not the 2 3 with asbestosis or about fifteen percent o f 24 irritating property, the mechanical irritation 24 cancer o f the lung in persons who died from this 25 o f asbestos was setting up the cancer. 2 5 industrial disease, end quote. Do you see that? 23 (Pages 822 to 825) Priority-One Court Reporting (718) 761-0527 1 A. Yes. 1 the series o f asbestosis cancers reported from 2 Q. And necropsies is another word for 2 England. The male/female sex ratio is two point 3 autopsies, right? 3 four to one, while it is five to one for cancers 4 A. Yes, on tissue, right. 4 o f the lung in general. This shift indicates 5 Q. Quote, the exposure time ranged from 5 that an environmental and evidently occupational 6 three to twenty-seven years, average fifteen 6 carcinogen was active in the asbestosis group 7 years. The ages in seventeen cases were 7 tending to equalize the incidence rate o f cancer 8 thirty-five to seventy-five years, average fifty 8 o f the lung for both sexes, unquote. Do you see 9 years. Until now, the question o f a causal 9 that? 10 relationship between asbestosis and cancer o f 10 A. Yes. 11 the lung has been an open one. The 11 Q. So what they're saying there is because 12 recently-published annual report o f the chief 12 the lung cancer rate in men and women who had 13 inspector o f factories in England for 1947 13 asbestosis was smaller, the ratio o f men to 14 provides additional data on the actual existence 14 women was two point four to one whereas in the 15 o f such interrelations, end quote. 15 general population it was five to one, this 16 And that's the same chief inspector o f 16 indicated to them one piece o f evidence that 17 factories department that Dr. Merewether in 1930 17 asbestosis was causing the cancer, right? 18 was working for, correct? 18 A. Yes. 19 A. I would assume so, yes. 19 Q. Then they go on to other evidence. 20 Q. Okay. Quote, during twenty-three 20 Talking about experimental evidence that 21 years, 1924 to 1946 inclusive, two hundred and 21 supported the interpretation o f the clinical 22 thirty-five deaths either caused by asbestosis 22 evidence in asbestosis and cancer o f the lung, 2 3 or in which asbestosis had been established at 23 right? 24 necropsy were reported to the chief inspector. 24 A. Right. 2 5 Cancer o f the lungs or pleura was found in 25 Q. Then the last page, the second page of Page 827 Page 829 ; 1 thirty-one o f these cases, thirteen point two 1 the editorial it says, quote, since some twenty 2 percent. Do you see that? 2 thousand workers are employed in the 3 A. Yes. 3 asbestos-producing industries o f this country 4 Q. So it was not only cancer o f the lungs 4 and Canada, and many additional thousands in 5 that was being reported in association with 5 various asbestos-consuming industries, increased 6 asbestosis, but also cancer o f the pleura, as 6 attention to this probable occupational hazard 7 well? 7 o f cancer o f the lung by the medical profession 8 A. Yes. 8 is desired, unquote. Do you see that? 9 Q. And that came to be known as 9 A. Yes. 10 mesothelioma, correct? 10 Q. So the Journal o f the American Medical 11 A. Yes. 11 Association published that at that point in time 12 Q. Then it goes on to discuss the 12 asbestos as an occupational hazard o f cancer o f 13 comparison between men and women and their 13 the lung was probable? 14 percentages o f cancer o f the lung, correct? 14 A. Yes, as an -- 15 A. Yes. 15 Q. N ow another group? 16 Q. And then the sentence says, quote, a 16 A. Associated with asbestosis in that 17 causal relation between asbestosis and cancer o f 17 case. 18 the lung is supported by the following 18 Q. Another group that General Electric was 1 9 observations: The incidence rate o f cancer o f 19 a member o f in an association was called the 20 the lung in this group is excessive since the 20 Industrial Hygiene Foundation. Are you aware o f 21 normal death rate from cancer o f the lung among 21 that? 22 adults examined at necropsy at present is about 22 A. Yes. 2 3 one percent o f all necropsies. 23 Q. And General Electric was a member as o f 24 Moreover, there is a distinct shift in 24 1947, correct? 2 5 the sex distribution o f cancer o f the lungs in 25 A. Right. 24 (Pages 826 to 829) Priority-One Court Reporting (718) 761-0527 Page 834 Page 836 j 1 Q. And it just has a summaiy o f that 1 2 article, right? 2 3 A. Yes. 3 4 Q. And that was - in the regular course 4 5 o f business it would have been sent to General 5 6 Electric? 6 7 A. To medical people, industrial hygiene, 7 8 yes. 8 9 Q. At General Electric? 9 10 A. At General Electric. 10 11 Q. Exhibit 75 is a September 1955 11 12 Industrial Hygiene Digest. 12 13 (Whereupon, Exhibit 75, a September 13 14 1955 Industrial Hygiene Digest with an abstract 14 15 o f an article entitled Mortality From Lung 15 16 Cancer in Asbestos Workers by Dr. Doll, was then 16 17 received and marked for identification.) 17 18 BY MR. KRISTAL: 18 19 Q. And that has an abstract o f an article 19 20 entitled Mortality From Lung Cancer in Asbestos 2 0 21 Workers by a Dr. Doll, D-O-L-L. 21 22 A. Right. 22 23 Q. And there's a paragraph summarizing 23 24 that article by Dr. Doll, correct? 24 25 A. Yes. 25 Page 835 1 Q. And the summaiy notes that from the 1 2 data that was presented in Dr. Doll's paper, it 2 3 is concluded that lung cancer is a specific 3 4 hazard o f asbestos workers, correct? 4 5 A. That's what it says. 5 6 Q. And that would have been, in the 6 7 regular course o f business, sent to General 7 8 Electric? 8 9 A. Sure. 9 10 Q. Exhibit 76, another Industrial Hygiene 10 11 Digest from July 1955. 11 12 (Whereupon, Exhibit 76, an Industrial 12 13 Hygiene Digest from July 1955, was then received 13 14 and marked for identification.) 14 15 BY MR. KRISTAL: 15 16 Q. And one o f the articles abstracted on 16 17 the third page is entitled Primary Cortical Cell 17 18 Tumor o f the Peritoneum in a Case o f Asbestosis, 18 19 and it's just an English summary o f a German 19 20 article, correct? 20 21 A. Right. 21 22 Q. And it discusses the fact that the 22 23 person had asbestosis and also had a flat tumor 23 24 half the size o f a hand and one centimeter in 24 25 thickness attached to the peritoneum on the 25 underside o f the diaphragm. Do you see that? A. Yes. ?; Q. And I think you mentioned earlier that \ the pleura not only - or the pleural tissue not f only lines the lung and the chest cavity, but ) also lines the abdominal cavity or what's known 1 as the peritoneum, direct? A. Right. Q. And that's known as peritoneal mesothelioma? A. Right. f Q. And in this particular case, it's a J report o f someone with asbestosis and a cancer o f the peritoneum, the lining o f the abdominal cavity, and it notes in the summary that there was asbestos itself found in the tumor, does it f not? ; A. Yes. It says it here. It was found in tumor tissues, right. Q. It says, quote, asbestos was found in the tumor tissues by x-ray defraction, end quote? A. Yes. Q. And it says, quote, it is uncertain how the asbestos reached the peritoneal cavity. The i Page 837 ^ most probable route was thought to be by direct penetration o f the asbestos fibers from the lung through the pleura and thence through the diaphragm, end quote. D o you see that? A. Yes. Q. And this abstract, in the regular course o f business, would have been sent to General Electric? ? A. Yes. f Q. Exhibit 77 is dated February 21st, 1973. It's entitled Environmental Newsletter, Subject Asbestos, and it is from the medical director o f the General Electric components and materials group to all department managers, components and materials group. And that would have been sent to you by the General Electric lawyers? (Whereupon, Exhibit 77, a document dated February 21st, 1973, entitled Environmental Newsletter, Subject Asbestos, was then received and marked for identification.) MR. KRISTAL: I think it's E-26. MR. KAPSHANDY: Thank you. MR. KRISTAL: It says it on it. That's the only reason that I know. 26 (Pages 834 to 837) Priority-One Court Reporting (718) 761-0527 Page 838 Page 840 - 1 THE WITNESS: Yes, it was provided. 2 BY MR. KRISTAL: 3 Q. And you read that before? 4 A. Yes. 5 Q. And in the second --it encloses a 6 Times article. It encloses two articles about 7 asbestos, correct? 8 A. Yes. 9 Q. And in the second paragraph 10 Dr. Martelon wrote -- 11 A. Martelon. 12 Q. Martelon, thank you. Oh, I was 13 transposing the L and the T. My apologies to 14 Dr. Martelon. Quote, the very important point 15 is made that the time o f exposure and the level 1 6 o f exposure to asbestos need only be very small 17 to precipitate rather disastrous results, end 18 quote. Do you see that? 19 A. Yes. 20 Q. Now, have you seen other statements 21 similar to that in the materials that you 22 reviewed that were sent to you by the General 2 3 Electric lawyers? 24 A. I haven't seen that particular wording. 25 I'd say that when this was written in 1973, post 1 results? 2 Q. Not the exact words, but the concept 3 that small doses o f asbestos could lead to 4 disastrous results. 5 A. Sure. I'd have to look in the 6 documents. 7 Q. Okay. I have a couple o f questions 8 generally. I just want to mark these two. 9 These are the deposition notices for this 10 deposition. I just want to make them part o f 11 the record. I've marked those as 78 and 79. 12 (Whereupon, Exhibits 78 and 79, the 13 deposition notices for the deposition, was then 14 received and marked for identification.) 15 BY MR. KRISTAL: 16 Q. I have a general question. Yesterday 17 you gave your address as a post office box. Was 18 that the address o f your - the Drucker Safety 19 and Health Management? 20 A. Yes. 21 Q. Is there a street address for that? 22 A. Yes. 23 Q. And is that the same as your home 24 address? 25 A. Yes. Page 839 Page 841 : 1 OSHA, Td say that that was the tenor in many o f 2 the documents. 3 Q. Okay. When was it, if you know --can 4 you tell us the earliest time that General 5 Electric knew that only very small exposures to 6 asbestos could precipitate rather disastrous 7 results? 8 MR. SPEZIALI: Objection. 9 MR. KRISTAL: Do you have a specific 10 document that could pin this to the earliest 11 point in time? 12 MR. SPEZIALI: Asked and answered. 13 THE WITNESS: Well, I'd say that kind 14 o f information was generally post OSHA, so I'd 1 5 have to look at some documents involving '70, 1 6 '71. 17 BY MR. KRISTAL: 18 Q. Okay. Well, sitting here, can you tell 1 9 us when General Electric knew that for the first 20 time, or you're unable to do that without 21 looking at documents? 22 A. That I'm unable to --and you're 2 3 directing it specifically to that - - 1just want 24 to get the wording right --that they'd only be 2 5 very small to precipitate very disastrous 1 Q. So you operate your business out o f 2 your home? 3 A. I do. 4 Q. Now, the amount of income that you've 5 earned for your litigation work since 1984 has 6 steadily increased, has it not, to the present? 7 A. Since 1984? 8 MR. SPEZIALI: Did you say '84? 9 BY MR. KRISTAL: 10 Q. Right. You started your Drucker Health 1 1 and Safety Management in 1984, correct? 12 A. Yes. 13 Q. And since that time the amount o f 14 income that you've earned from litigation work 15 has steadily gone up, has it not? 16 A. Yes. It was very little to none in the 1 7 beginning, and yes, it has gone up. 18 Q. And beginning in around 1999, year 2000 19 you were starting to earn in the range o f fifty 20 thousand dollars a year for your litigation 21 work, correct? 22 A. In the range, yes, around that time. 23 Q. Okay. Subject to questioning by other 24 attorneys, those are all the questions I have 25 right now. Thank you. 27 (Pages 838 to 841) Prioritv-One Court Reporting (718) 761-0527 Page 842 Page 844 . 1 A. Thank you. 1 EXAMINATION BY MR. SPEZIALI: ! 2 MR. KRISTAL: O ff the video record. 2 3 MR. SPEZIALI: No, no, wait a minute. 3 Q. Ms. Drucker, as you know, my name is 5 4 Do any o f the other counsel -- 4 Dave Speziali. I'm here for General Electric, 5 THE SPECIAL MASTER: O ff the record, 5 and I'm going to ask you some follow-up 6 please. 6 questions, some o f those pertaining to the | 7 THE VIDEOGRAPHER: This is the 7 questions that you were asked for the last few i 8 conclusion o f tape number one, volume four o f 8 days, and some o f those unfortunately Til have 9 the continuing deposition o f Marjorie Drucker. 9 to refer back to questions that you were asked ? 10 O ff the record. The time is eleven forty-two 10 on the other two days o f deposition. 11 a.m. 11 A. Yes. | 12 MR. SPEZIALI: On the record, will any 12 Q. You, you received your BA in 1967 and 1 3 o f the other counsel have questions? 13 your Master's o f Science in 1969; is that | 14 MS. DiLONARDO: I would think it would 14 correct? 1 5 depend on what you were going to do. 15 A. Yes. 16 MR. SPEZIALI: You'll have - 16 Q. And what did you get your Master's in " 17 MR. KRISTAL: So the answer is maybe. 17 Science in? 18 MS. DiLONARDO: At this point. 18 A. I got my Master o f Science in 19 THE SPECIAL MASTER: Not based on 1 9 environmental health sciences from Harvard 20 Jerry's questions. 20 University. 21 MR. SPEZIALI: Does anybody have 21 Q. And when you came out o f Harvard in 22 questions based on what the Plaintiff has, 22 '69, what did you do? Tell us about your career 2 3 either today or yesterday or I don't know? 2 3 path. 24 MR. KRISTAL: Or the other two days. 24 A. Yes. When I graduated from Harvard, I 25 MR. SPEZIALI: Or the other two days 2 5 went to work as an instructor o f public health Page 843 Page 845 J 1 that were not videotaped. 1 at Yale University in Connecticut, and I was 2 THE SPECIAL MASTER: That's a no. 2 there for about two years. 3 MR. SPEZIALI: Sounds like a no. 3 Q. Okay. What happens after that? 4 MR. KRISTAL: Well, just for the 4 A. After that I went to work for the 5 record, so it's clear, nobody responded 5 General Electric Company, and that was the 6 affirmatively. 6 period around 1971,1972. 7 THE SPECIAL MASTER: Okay. Dave, how 7 Q. Okay. And then what? 8 much time do you need because -- off the record. 8 A. And then I went to work for the US 9 (Discussion o ff the record.) 9 Environmental Protection Agency in their Boston 10 MR. KRISTAL: I just assume we have the 10 office. 11 same agreement, that I only have to make 11 Q. And when you worked at the EPA in 12 objections to form, everything else is 12 Boston what was the time frame? 13 preserved? 13 A. I was at EPA in Boston around 1972 to 14 THE SPECIAL MASTER: It's the same 14 1976. 1 5 deposition. Why would it change? 15 Q. Okay. What did you do for the EPA in 16 MR. KRISTAL: I just want that to be 16 Boston? 17 very clear. 17 A. I had a few jobs. I got promoted and I 18 THE SPECIAL MASTER: It's the same 18 started out as an air program specialist and 1 9 deposition, just a different person asking 1 9 ended up as a research and development program 20 questions. 20 specialist in their R&D office. 21 THE VIDEOGRAPHER: This is the 21 Q. Okay. What happens after that? 22 beginning o f tape number two, volume four of the 22 A. After that I transferred in the 2 3 continued deposition o f Maijorie Drucker. On 23 government and I became the, the industrial 2 4 the record. Th time is one o three p.m. 2 4 hygienist for the Long Beach Naval Shipyard in 25 2 5 Long Beach, California. 28 (Pages 842 to 845) Priority-One Court Reporting (718) 761-0527 Page 846 Page 848 1 Q. Okay. And was that a government 1 A. I got that around 1978. 2 facility owned by the United States, operated by 2 Q. All right. And the other --the last 3 the United States Navy? 3 one, REA? What is that? 4 A. Yes, yeah. 4 A. It's a registered environmental 5 Q. Okay. 5 assessor. It's a designation by the State of 6 A. United States Navy. 6 California. 7 Q. And is there a difference between a, a 7 Q. Okay. Are you a medical doctor? 8 government Navy shipyard and a private shipyard? 8 A. No. 9 A. Yes, there are some differences. 9 Q. Okay. Has anybody ever asked you to 10 Q. What are the differences? 10 render any opinions in litigation pertaining to 11 A. Well, the government --US Navy 11 asbestos-related issues with respect to the 12 shipyard is run by the United States Navy and 12 diagnosis o f asbestos-related disease? 13 under its command as opposed to a private 13 A. No. 1 4 shipyard. That would be under other non-Navy. 14 Q. Has anybody asked you to do any 15 Q. Okay. And what year did you leave that 15 exhaustive search in the medical and scientific 1 6 position? 16 literature so you can come into a court and 17 A. I left there in 1977. 17 explain to a jury the nuances o f pleural 18 Q. Right. Okay. And then what? 18 thickening or asbestosis from a physician's 19 A. And then I went to work at Northrup 1 9 standpoint? Has anybody asked you to do that? 20 Corporation in California, and I was their 20 A. No. 21 corporate administrator o f occupational health 21 Q. Okay. There was an indication that 22 and safety. 22 going into practice in '84, and you must 23 Q. And until when? 2 3 remember Mr. Kristal asking about your income 24 A. Until about 1984. 24 from '84 through the present with respect to 25 Q. And then what? 25 litigation. Page 847 Page 84 1 A. And then I started my own consulting 2 business. 3 Q. And you've been in the private 4 consulting business ever since? 5 A. Yes. 6 Q. The --when did you --does --I'm 7 looking at your CV. It says you're a CIH? 8 What's a CIH? 9 A. That's a certified industrial 10 hygienist. 11 Q. Is that a licensing requirement, a 12 test? What is that? 13 A. It's a two-day - it was a two-day 14 test, and it is a very stringent certification 1 5 requirement. They have to meet certain 1 6 education, experience, requirements and take a 17 test. 18 Q. When did you achieve that? 19 A. I have two certifications in industrial 20 hygiene that I achieved in 1976. 21 Q. Okay. And then there's a CSP. What 22 does that one stand for? 23 A. That stands for certified safety 24 professional. 25 Q. And what did you get that at? 1 A. Yes. 2 Q. Okay. Do you remember Mr. Kristal 3 asking you at the very first day o f the 4 deposition when you first got involved with 5 litigation? 6 A. Yes. 7 Q. Okay. Did you tell Mr. Kristal that 8 you got involved with litigation in 1984? 9 A. Yes, around -- yeah, late '80s, 10 something like that. 11 Q. Late '80s. Okay. When you first got 12 involved in asbestos-related litigation, who -- 13 did General Electric ask you to testify, very 14 first involvement? 15 A. No. 16 Q. Who approached you to ask you to get 17 involved in asbestos-related litigation? 18 A. Various Plaintiff attorneys. 19 Q. Whereat? 20 A. In California. 21 Q. The State o f California? 22 A. Yes. 23 Q. Okay. And how many different cases -- 24 and when did that first occur? 25 A. So that would have been starting maybe 29 (Pages 846 to 849) Priority-One Court Reporting (718) 761-0527 Page 850 1 late '80s into mid '90s, 1 2 Q. Into mid '90s. And how many Plaintiffs 2 3 were you asked to get involved on behalf of? 3 4 A. Oh, over the course o f that amount, 4 5 Plaintiffs maybe thirty, forty, something like 5 6 that. 6 7 Q. And what was the nature o f those 7 8 assignments that you were asked to do on behalf 8 9 o f Plaintiffs' attorneys? 9 10 A. M y understanding was that it was 10 11 personal injury and health-related things. 11 12 Q. Dealing with what? Medicine? 12 13 A. Asbestos. 13 14 Q. Okay. Were you asked to render medical 14 15 opinions in those cases? 15 16 A. No. 16 17. Q. Were you asked to render any opinions 17 18 perhaps dealing with sandblasting and sand in 18 19 those cases? 19 20 A. No. 20 21 Q. Were you asked to render any opinions 21 22 dealing with lead paint exposures in any o f 22 23 those cases? 23 24 A. No. 24 25 Q. Okay. The opinions that you were asked 25 Page 851 1 to render dealt with asbestos-related issues? 1 2 A. Yes. 2 3 Q. Okay. Were those issues with respect 3 4 to industrial hygiene or medicine? 4 5 A. Industrial hygiene. 5 6 Q. Okay. And do you recall in the course 6 7 o f those Plaintiffs' attorneys who retained you 7 8 whether they asked you to look at exhibits that 8 9 they had involved in those cases? 9 10 A. Some exhibits, sure. 10 11 Q. Okay. And in those cases, were you 11 12 asked to testify at depositions such as this? 12 13 A. Yes. 13 14 Q. Okay. And did you charge the 14 15 Plaintiffs' attorneys like you charged General 15 16 Electric? 16 17 A. Yes, by the hour. 17 18 MR. KRISTAL: Objection. 18 19 BY MR. SPEZIALI: 19 20 Q. Okay. Did, did any o f the Plaintiffs' 20 21 attorneys suggest that you were --you should 21 22 not work for them anymore because you weren't 22 23 credible? 23 24 A. No. 24 25 Q. Okay. Did any courts suggest or strike 25 Page 852 i your testimony when you worked for the Plaintiffs' attorneys because you were not credible? A. No. Q. Okay. When did you --and Mr. Kristal pointed it out, but just to get us back in focus, when did General Electric's attorney | first approach you about getting involved? A. September o f '03, last year. Q. Okay. What did you understand to be the nature o f that assignment? A. My understanding o f the nature o f the assignment was to look at GE documents and other 1 information with regard to the health and safety jj issues, historical aspects related to asbestos. 3 Q. Okay. Did anybody ask you to take a look at the history o f General Electric i documents dealing with sandblasting? A. No. Q. How about with respect to the history o f General Electric documents dealing with sand * exposures that perhaps may result in certain diseases including silicosis? Anybody ask you to look at that? * A. No. i Page 853 j Q. Did anybody ask you to do a detailed analysis o f the General Electric documentation so you could address medical issues dealing with I think they're called phagocytes that are little things that are down in the lung to ] capture fibers? Did anybody ask you to do that? A. No. Q. How many boxes o f -- w e had the boxes in the room. How many boxes o f documents did you look at? A. About fifteen. Q. Okay. Did anybody ever tell you that you weren't permitted to see any particular 3 documents with respect to your project? A. No. Q. Okay. And besides looking at the ? sixteen boxes o f documents, did you, did you i also undertake some independent investigation to determine what you could find out about GE's role with respect to health and safety in asbestos? A. Yes. Q. What did you do? Tell the jury. ; A. Well, I did a few things. One thing was that I spoke to several people who had been 30 (Pages 850 to 853) Priority-One Court Reporting (718) 761-0527 Page 854 Page 856 1 working in occupational medicine and industrial 1 handling asbestos or around it because it had 2 hygiene at GE over various periods o f time, 2 been there. I was going on the ships, doing 3 going back as far as I could find them. 3 surveys, making recommendations as a field 4 Obviously people from way back, '20s 4 industrial hygienist. 5 and '30s, are no longer with us. So I tried to 5 Q. Did you ever recall any work while you 6 find people, many o f whom I've known over these 6 were working for the EPA or for the United 7 last thirty or so years. I knew them at GE, and 7 States Navy at the shipyard --do you ever 8 I recontacted them recently with regard to this. 8 remember a point in time where they said take a 9 I also reviewed a lot o f industrial 9 look at the asbestos literature but we really 1 0 hygiene documentation, studies that were done 1 0 think you should look at the literature dealing 1 1 throughout GE facilities and visited certain 11 with sandblasting because that may help you 1 2 locations as part o f the project. 12 protect the sailors? Do you remember them 13 Q. Okay. How many transcripts would you 13 talking about that? 14 say you've reviewed overall o f prior deposition 14 A. No. 1 5 testimony that may somehow have related to 15 Q. Did they ever tell you, well, maybe you 1 6 General Electric? 16 should take a detailed look at the medical 17 A. Transcripts o f prior testimony, I'd 17 literature dealing with phagocytes because that 18 estimate ten or so. 18 may help protect the sailors? Do you remember 19 Q. Okay. Were there both living and 19 those discussions ever happening? 2 0 deceased individuals that you had read testimony 2 0 A. No. 2 1 of? 21 Q. Never. Now, besides looking at the 22 A. Yes. 2 2 many documents that you were asked to see, 23 Q. Okay. Is there also something known as 23 besides going down to the libraries and looking 2 4 generic state-of-the-art medical and scientific 24 at the documents at the libraries, besides 2 5 literature dealing with issues related to 2 5 interviewing the, the corporate officials, Page 855 Page 857 1 asbestos? 1 besides reading the prior transcripts, were you 2 A. Yes. 2 also aware that the Plaintiffs attorney in this 3 Q. Okay. Did you --had you been familiar 3 case had a very extensive exhibit list, a couple 4 with a lot o f -- any o f that literature prior to 4 o f which he showed you today? 5 working with General Electric on this project? 5 A. No. 6 A. Yes. 6 Q. You were not aware that he had an 7 Q. Okay. And in fact, did you say that -- 7 exhibit list? 8 did I understand you to say that you had 8 A. No. 9 actually been involved with asbestos-related 9 Q. Okay. Were you, were you aware o f an 1 0 issues for over thirty years? 1 0 individual by the name o f Dr. Barry Castleman as 11 A. Sure, going back to my graduate student 1 1 being a witness in this case on behalf o f the 1 2 training at Harvard. One o f my teachers was one 1 2 Plaintiffs attorneys? 13 o f the authors o f the Fleischer Drinker study. 13 A. I'm aware o f Dr. Castleman, and I 14 Q. Did --when you were working for the 14 really don't know if he was an expert in this or 15 Environmental Protection Agency and for the 15 in this particular matter. 1 6 United States Navy at Long Beach Naval Shipyard, 1 6 Q. Okay. I want you to assume that 17 did you also get involved with asbestos-related 17 Dr. Castleman is the Plaintiffs expert in a 18 issues? 18 case called Roth, a case called Campo, a case 19 A. Mostly when I was at the shipyard. It 19 called Zatz, and a case called Renow. I want to 2 0 was almost exclusively asbestos, yes. 2 0 assume that. Okay? 21 Q. And your involvement was what, to 21 A. Yes. 2 2 design programs to protect members o f the United 2 2 Q. Do you know who Dr. Castleman is? 2 3 States Navy? 23 A. Yes. 24 A. To civilian people, the civilian 24 Q. Who's Dr. Castleman as you understand 2 5 workers in the shipyard, right. You were 2 5 it? 31 (Pages 854 to 857) Priority-One Court Reporting (718) 761-0527 Page 858 Page 860 1 A. Dr. Bariy Castleman is an author o f 2 several editions o f a book on asbestos and 3 disease. And it's my understanding he spent a 4 lot o f time going through different studies and 5 studying the history o f asbestos and things like 6 that. 7 Q. And is Dr. Castleman -- have you read 8 Dr. Castleman's latest edition o f his book, the 9 fourth edition? 10 A. Yes. 11 Q. Okay. And in that book what are some 12 o f the things he addresses regarding 13 corporations that he talks about in that book? 14 A. Well, in some instances he addresses 15 corporations that he thought were at fault in 16 certain types o f situations where people were 17 exposed to asbestos, and he goes into different 18 corporate histories and companies that he 19 thinks, kind o f paraphrasing it, but they 20 weren't good. 21 Q. Okay. Did you also read 22 Dr. Castleman's deposition testimony at all? 23 A. Yes. 24 Q. Okay. And in those depositions did he 25 talk about companies? 1 he's researched and, and provided documentation | 2 for. 3 Q. Okay. Do you recall whether in the 4 fourth edition o f his book whether Dr. Castleman 5 ever indicated, based upon all the information 6 he had seen, ever indicated that the General 7 Electric Corporation had acted inappropriately s 8 with an eye towards hurting workers with respect 9 to the use and sale o f asbestos? 10 A. No. 11 Q. Okay. You don't recall or he didn't 12 say that? 13 A. He didn't say that. I looked for that. 14 Q. Okay. In fact, o f all the companies 15 that he talked about as having improper and bad 1 6 conduct, did he, did he at once suggest anything 17 in there that General Electric did bad or 18 improper at all? 19 MR. KRISTAL: Objection. Form. 20 BY MR. SPEZIALI: i 21 Q. Did he ever say? 22 A. No. 23 Q. Okay. And let me take it a step 24 further. You have reviewed documents, many o f 25 which --very few o f which Mr. Kristal mentioned jj Page 859 Page 861 J 1 A. Yeah, he talks about some things in 2 general. 3 Q. Okay. Do you recall whether or not 4 Dr. Castleman indicated that one o f the major 5 sources o f information that he was using when 6 talking about companies and their role o f 7 asbestos was information he was getting from 8 Plaintiffs' attorneys such as Mr. Kristal? Do 9 you recall him saying that? 10 MR. KRISTAL: Objection. Form. 11 THE WITNESS: Yes. 12 MR. SPEZIALI: Okay. Well, let me 13 re-ask it so there's no objection. D o you 14 recall whether Dr. Castleman had gotten any 15 information from litigation-related sources? 16 MR. KRISTAL: Objection. Form. 17 THE WITNESS: Yes. 18 BY MR. SPEZIALI: 19 Q. Okay. What was one o f the 20 litigation-related sources? 21 A. What was one o f them? 22 Q. What was one o f the sources, yes? 23 A. Yes. Well, it's my understanding that 24 he works with a lot o f Plaintiffs' attorneys on 25 a continuing basis, and a lot o f his material 1 to you going back to the 1920s. You've 2 interviewed former corporate people with the 3 corporation. You've reviewed historical and 4 scientific literature. 5 In the period o f time --if you go 6 back, and let's use 1920 to today, which would 7 be eighty-four years, do you know o f anybody who ! 8 has ever written an article, published a 9 statement, given a speech, perhaps even in this i 10 day and age wrote an e-mail, do you know o f 11 anybody who has ever suggested that the General | 12 Electric Corporation acted with malice and 13 intention to try to hurt workers with respect to 14 the sale and use o f asbestos? Do you know 15 anybody who's ever said that? 16 A. No. 17 MR. KRISTAL: Objection. Form. 18 MR. SPEZIALI: Do you know o f any 1 9 document which would ever support such an 20 outrageous accusation? 21 MR. KRISTAL: Objection. Form. 22 THE WITNESS: No. 23 MR. SPEZIALI: Do you - you talked 24 about Dr. -- you talked about Alice Hamilton -- 25 Dr. Alice Hamilton, right? 32 (Pages 858 t o 861) Priority-One Court Reporting (718) 761-0527 Page 862 1 THE WITNESS: Yes. 1 2 MR. SPEZIALI: Okay. Let me ask you 2 3 this: There was a exhibit in - - 1just ask the 3 4 jury to bear with me for one second while I pull 4 5 it out. It is -- 5 6 THE SPECIAL MASTER: Do you want us to 6 7 go off camera? 7 8 MR. SPEZIALI: You know, it's only going 8 9 to take me one second assuming that I'm --it's 9 1 0 Exhibit 42. Let's see how good my notes are. 10 11 Exhibit 42, Mr. Kristal showed this to 11 12 you. It's a letter December 14th, 1933 by 12 13 Dr. Hamilton to Dr. Gerard Swope, the president 13 14 o f General Electric. Take a quick look. Do you 14 15 remember seeing that? 15 16 MR. KRISTAL: Object to the form. 16 17 THE WITNESS: Yes. 17 18 BY MR. SPEZIALI: 18 19 Q. Okay. Let me ask you this: Were you 19 2 0 asked to review documents as part of your 20 2 1 project with General Electric? 21 22 A. Yes. 22 23 Q. You were. Okay. And in addition to 23 24 reviewing documents that General Electric had 24 2 5 asked you to look at, did you do your own 25 Page 863 1 independent research regarding Dr. Hamilton? 1 2 A. Yes, I did. 2 3 Q. Tell the jury what you did. 3 4 A. W ell, what I did was including reading 4 5 her extensive reports on her visits to GE 5 6 facilities, I went to Harvard and Radcliffe 6 7 libraries, and I looked at her original papers. 7 8 I also saw some copies o f her original papers at 8 9 the Schenectady museum. So I independently 9 1 0 reviewed her original documents. 10 11 Q. Okay. Did you - prior to undertaking 11 1 2 your review of, o f Dr. Hamilton or your review 12 13 o f the General Electric documentation, did you 13 14 know who Dr. Hamilton was? 14 15 A. Oh, yes. 15 16 Q. Okay. How did you know who she was? 16 17 A. W ell, I knew about her from Harvard. 17 18 Q. Okay. It's something that you were 18 19 taught about? 19 20 A. Sure, she was -- 20 21 Q. We'll get to that in a minute who she 21 2 2 was. But I want to read to you a paragraph from 2 2 23 Exhibit 42 that Mr. Kristal read to you written 23 24 by Dr. Hamilton. And it's about asbestos, and 24 2 5 it says in the middle o f the second paragraph, 25 Page 864 this is the question o f asbestos dust, and she's talking about coming back in, in -- beginning the project after the Depression. A. Right. Q. Okay. And we'll have this for the jury to see blown up so everybody can read along during the trial. It has lately come into prominence because a combination o f not very scrupulous lawyers and doctors have been pushing civil suits against certain companies for alleged injuiy from asbestos. Johns-Manville Company and Multibestos have had a great deal o f trouble from such claims. Many o f them, I believe, quite justified but not all. Next paragraph. Now you have asbestos dust in Bridgeport and York. I think you told me that the York plant was destined to be closed in the near future. Still that would not prevent the bringing o f suits. I think the only safe thing to do is to leave the situation looked over by Philip Drinker and dust counts made so that if suits do develop and you will be prepared in advance, perhaps you will take this up with Philip Drinker. Page 865 ' Now, do you remember Mr. Kristal reading that? A. Ido. Q. Tell the jury - MR. KRISTAL: Weil, object to the form, if that's the question. MR. SPEZIALI: Well, that was the question. MR. KRISTAL: Okay. MR. SPEZIALI: Tell the jury who Philip Drinker was. THE WITNESS: Philip Drinker was a pioneer in industrial hygiene. He was a professor at Harvard, and he specialized in different types o f industrial hygiene diseases and sampling methods, dust counting methods. He was, he was a real early pioneer in the field. MR. SPEZIALI: And in the 1940s when the United States government, particularly the United States Navy, wanted to know how asbestos was impacting the men and women fighting during World War II to protect our country, who did they turn to to research that subject? MR. KRISTAL: Object to the form o f the question. 33 (Pages 862 t o 865) Priority-One Court Reporting (718) 761-0527 Page 866 Page 868 ; 1 THE WITNESS: They - one o f the people 1 Kristal retained in these cases, being asked 2 they turned to was Phil Drinker. 2 what his opinion was o f Alice Hamilton? \ 3 MR. SPEZIALI: Did he publish, in fact, 3 THE WITNESS: Yes. 4 and advise the Navy? 4 MR. KRISTAL: Object to the form o f the 5 MR. KRISTAL: Object to the form of the 5 question. 6 question. 6 MR. SPEZIALI: Did, did he have S 7 THE WITNESS: He did, yes. 7 anything negative to say about Dr. Hamilton? 8 MR. SPEZIALI: Okay. And let me, let 8 THE WITNESS: No. 9 me ask you this: Based upon the documents you 9 MR. KRISTAL: Object to the form of the 10 reviewed and the research you did regarding 10 question. 11 Alice Hamilton, do you know o f anybody anywhere 11 MR. SPEZIALI: Okay. Can you think o f 12 at any time who would ever, ever attempt to 12 any respected industrial hygienist or physician 1 3 characterize Alice Hamilton as somebody whose 13 concerned with occupational health who knows the 14 concerns over worker health arise out o f 14 history o f occupational health who would 1 5 concerns over lawsuits? Do you know o f anybody 15 possibly have a negative thing to say about her? 1 6 who would dare to make such an accusation? 16 THE WITNESS: No, absolutely not. ? 17 THE WITNESS: Certainly not. 17 MR. KRISTAL: Object to the form o f the 18 MR. KRISTAL: Object to the form o f the 18 question. 1 9 question. 1 9 BY MR. SPEZIALI: 20 MR. SPEZIALI: Tell the jury who Alice 20 Q. And let's talk about what happens - 21 Hamilton was in the world of industrial hygiene 21 there were a lot o f documents when Mr. Kristal 22 and worker health. 22 talked to you about Alice Hamilton. Have you 23 THE WITNESS: Dr. Alice Hamilton was a 2 3 researched her history with respect to coming to 24 pioneer in occupational medicine and industrial 2 4 the General Electric Corporation and reviewing 2 5 hygiene. In fact, she's attributed to the start 2 5 its plants? 1 Page 867 Page 869 j 1 o f occupational medicine in this country. 1 2 Before her, there really was no person o f her 2 3 stature and training who went around and studied 3 4 the factories and saw how people could be 4 5 affected at work. 5 6 She was a unique, very highly qualified 6 7 and admirable person who really genuinely cared 7 8 about people in the factories that she went in, 8 9 and she -- I've read her autobiography, I've 9 10 read letters that she's written, and you can 10 11 just tell from her writing in her heart she 11 12 cares about people and their health. 12 13 And so what she did, one o f her unique 13 14 and wonderful things that she did was she worked 14 15 for the GE Company for about eleven, twelve 15 16 years as an industrial hygiene and medical 16 17 doctor consultant, went all through their 17 18 factories, did inspections at will, wasn't 18 19 hindered in any way, could go anytime, anywhere, 1 9 20 as many times as she wanted. And she went 20 21 through the factories, found certain things, 21 22 reported them directly to the company president, 22 23 and they were followed up on. 23 24 MR. SPEZIALI: And let me ask you this: 24 25 Do you recall Dr. Castleman, the expert that Mr. 25 1 A. Yes. Q. Okay. Tell the ju ry -a n d , and I know it was an eleven-year history. Try to shorten it if you can to a couple minutes. What, what J exactly was Dr. Hamilton --first off, did Dr. Hamilton work as an employee for the company i or an outside consultant? A. She was an outside consultant. Q. Okay. What, what was she doing in the early '20s when she was first approached by General Electric? A. Well, that's when she was actually hired as the first woman professor at Harvard, ; and she was hired by Harvard Medical School, and she taught the first course at that university in occupational medicine. Q. Okay. And, and her specialty was occupational medicine with respect to what? A. Occupational medicine with regard to any type o f occupational disease; different kinds o f chemical exposures, whatever. Q. Okay. It could be asbestos? A. It could be. Q. It could be that sandblasting that we heard about? 34 (Pages 866 to 869) Priority-One Court Reporting (718) 761-0527 Page 870 Page 872 ; 1 A. It could be, sure. 1 MR. KRISTAL: Object to the form o f the s 2 Q. It could be welding fumes? 2 question. 3 A. Yes. 3 THE WITNESS: Yes. 4 Q. Okay. And in the writings that you saw 4 MR. SPEZIALI: And from your review of 5 in the '20s, did those writings indicate whether 5 all the documents that you've looked at, from 6 she was pro worker health or against worker 6 whatever interviews you had, from actually going 7 health? 7 to Harvard or wherever else you did to review 8 A. She was most definitely pro worker 8 Dr. Hamilton's writings and publications, to 9 health. 9 this day has there ever --have you ever seen a 10 Q. And had she published prior to the time 10 single piece o f information to suggest that the 11 that General Electric had approached her? 11 recommendations that she made to the General 12 A. Had she published prior to the early 12 Electric Corporation were ignored and not 13 '20s? She might have written some articles. 13 carried out? 14 Subsequently she certainly was a vast publish -- 14 MR. KRISTAL: Object to the form o f the 15 Q. Who ~ what did you understand from 15 question. 1 6 your review o f the documents was the nature o f 16 MR. SPEZIALI: Have you ever seen 17 the project that General Electric approached her 17 anything that suggested that? 18 about? 18 THE WITNESS: No. 19 A. Oh, that GE approached her about? She 19 MR. SPEZIALI: Okay. Why, in 1920, 20 had an understanding with the president o f GE, 20 based upon what you saw, if you have an opinion 21 his name was Gerard Swope, that she would go 21 on this, why would in the world would a company 22 through all the factories o f GE, she would walk 22 as big as General Electric, even back then, be 2 3 through, she took as much time, a day, two days, 23 approaching somebody like Dr. Hamilton whose, 2 4 as many days as it took, and she looked at every 24 whose role and mission was to protect workers? 2 5 operation. 2 5 Why would General Electric be doing such a Page 871 Page 873 1 She noticed if there were health 1 thing? 2 problems, and she wrote to the president and 2 MR. KRISTAL: Object to the form o f the 3 said, you know, I noticed this, I noticed that, 3 question. 4 Td like to correct it. She came up with a 4 THE WITNESS: I can only imagine that 5 means so that diseases could be prevented. 5 they were truly interested in protecting the 6 Q. Was that with just asbestos or other 6 health and safety o f their workers. It was a 7 substances, as well? 7 unique and a wonderful thing by hiring her and 8 A. That was with the whole gamut o f things 8 having her expertise directed directly to the 9 that were prevalent in industry at that time. 9 president o f the company. 10 Q. Okay. And did she -- again, Mr. 10 MR. SPEZIALI: The jury is going to -- 11 Kristal showed you various --some o f the 11 I want to assume is going to hear about a lot o f 12 letters. Were there more letters than just the 12 other companies, and they're going to read about 13 ones he showed you? 13 a lot o f other companies. You saw lots o f names 14 A. Yes, there were four binders full that 14 in the ceramic organization and all those other 1 5 we have. 15 organizations, Industrial Health Foundation. 16 Q. Okay. And assume at some point the 16 Do you know o f any other company --and 17 jury will have an opportunity to see them. Let 17 take any period o f time you want to during 1 8 me ask you this: Tlie -- were there 18 Dr. Hamilton's career up until she passed away, 1 9 recommendations --we know that there were a 1 9 do you know o f any other company in corporate 20 couple years during the Depression that she did 20 America or outside o f America that retained 21 not consult, but for the periods that she did 21 Dr. Hamilton to do for them in terms o f the 22 consult, were, were there specific 22 projects and implementation o f recommendations 2 3 recommendations made by her as things that could 23 such as the General Electric Corporation did? 2 4 be done to protect workers at the General 24 THE WITNESS: No. 2 5 Electric facilities? 25 MR. KRISTAL: Object to the form o f the 35 (Pages 870 t o 873) Priority-One Court Reporting (718) 761-0527 Page 874 Page 876 ,? 1 question. 1 you want to call it. 2 Are you getting my objections, because 2 MR. SPEZIALI: Is that okay with you? 3 if not, we need to slow down? 3 MR. KRISTAL: I don't care what number 5 4 THE REPORTER: I'm getting them. I'll 4 you give it. 38-A? 3 5 let you know. 5 MR. SPEZIALI: I think 38-A would work 3 6 MR. KRISTAL: Thank you. 6 better because it's part o f it. 7 BY MR. SPEZIALI: 7 MR. KRISTAL: I don't care what you 8 Q. Mr. Kristal talked to you about - it 8 call it. ! 9 was a question I forgot to ask. How many visits 9 MR. SPEZIALI: You might care. You 10 did Dr. Hamilton make to the various General 1 0 haven't heard what I might call it. 11 Electric facilities, i f you recall? 11 MR. KRISTAL: I don't care how you 12 A. Oh, I'd say over the course o f her 12 number it. Let's put it that way. 13 eleven, twelve years, about two hundred or so 13 MR. SPEZIALI: 38-A. 14 visits. 14 (Whereupon, Exhibit 38-A, a cover ! 15 Q. Do you remember, and ballpark, how 1 5 letter for the report from Dr. Merewether, was 1 6 many --was there a report done each visit or 1 6 then received and marked for identification.) 17 how did that work? 17 BY MR. SPEZIALI: 18 A. Yeah, pretty much there was a report 18 Q. Have you seen 38-A before? 19 done by visit or summarized by visit, sure. 19 A. Yes. 1 20 Q. Mr. Kristal also talked to you about 20 Q. What is 38-A? 21 what was marked as Exhibit 38, basically known 2 1 A. 38-A is a cover letter for this report 22 as the Merewether report. Do you remember that? 2 2 from Dr. Merewether. 23 A. Yes. 23 Q. Okay. Does Dr. --based on what you 24 Q. Okay. And that was the report on 2 4 read in the report and, and in the cover letter, ? 25 effects o f asbestos dust done basically on 2 5 did Dr. Merewether draw any conclusions with J Page 875 Page 877 > 1 behalf o f the British government in 1930? 1 respect to health hazards related to exposure to ) 2 A. Yes. 2 asbestos? 3 Q. Okay. And were you familiar with this 3 A. Yes. 4 report? 4 Q. And what were his conclusions? 5 A. Yes. 5 A. Well, in general he said that high 6 Q. Okay. What is this report all about? 6 levels can cause asbestos disease. 7 A. This report is about Dr. Merewether 7 Q. Okay. And does he indicate in the 8 went into an asbestos textile factory and was 8 letter to --who's the letter addressed to and 9 looking at various types o f -- things that go 9 what's the date o f it? 10 on - went on in the factoiy to find out what 10 A. Let's see. It says it's for the home 11 was happening. You know, were certain things -- 1 1 department, and it is from the chief inspector 12 were certain levels -- dust levels high, were 12 o f factories in England. 13 certain - relative amounts o f dust o f different 13 Q. Okay. And it's dated March 17th, 1930? 14 operations. He was doing an exhaustive study 14 A. Yes. 15 for Britain. 15 Q. Okay. And, and i f you could look at 16 Q. Uh-huh. And I want to show you a 1 6 the second paragraph first, does he indicate 17 document which is --it was put -- it's not part 17 what he deems to be the solution to protecting 18 o f Exhibit 38, although it's ~ 18 workers from asbestos-related ailments and 19 MR. SPEZIALI: And I don't know how, 1 9 disease? 20 Mr. Kristal, how you want to handle this. 20 A. Yes. 21 MR. KRISTAL: Just mark it. 21 Q. What does he say? 22 MR. SPEZIALI: I'm suggesting we call 22 A. He says the remedy for the conditions 23 it 38-A. It's the cover letter to the Merewether 2 3 was - is suppression o f dust. 24 report. 24 Q. Okay. And he goes on to say, does he 25 MR. KRISTAL: You can call it whatever 2 5 not, that in the non-textile section o f the 36 (Pages 874 to 877) Priority-One Court Reporting (718) 761-0527 Page 878 Page 880 ; 1 industry no serious difficulties arise as 1 products, in the marketplace, anywhere, should 2 regards to the application o f exhaust 2 be banned because there was no way to protect 3 ventilation? 3 workers from it? Did anybody ever publish that? 4 A. Correct. 4 MR. KRISTAL: Object to the form o f the 5 Q. Okay. N ow , the idea o f suppression of 5 question. 6 the dust, did that become something - with 6 THE WITNESS: No. 7 respect to asbestos, did that become something 7 MR. SPEZIALI: Okay. If Merewether 8 to be recognized by the industrial hygiene 8 concluded that exposure to asbestos was 9 communities at some point in time? 9 dangerous, then how is it that, that asbestos 10 A. Yes. 1 0 was not banned from the marketplace? 11 Q. Okay. And explain to the jury what ~ 11 MR. KRISTAL: Object to the form o f the 1 2 how does suppression o f the dust from an 12 question. 1 3 industrial hygiene standpoint - let's use, for 13 THE WITNESS: Because what they 14 lack o f a better phrase, how does that work with 14 found --what they, what they knew at the time 1 5 respect to asbestos? 15 was that if you kept the levels down, you could 16 A. Yeah. It could work in a variety o f 16 work with the material safely. 17 ways. Basically it's ways to keep the dust 17 BY MR. SPEZIALI: 18 levels down, and so there are various things 18 Q. Okay. And this Merewether report that 1 9 that have evolved over the years in industrial 19 Mr. Kristal asked you to look at, do you know 2 0 hygiene. There are things like wetting methods. 20 where this was published? 2 1 There are things like local exhaust ventilation. 21 A. It's my understanding it was published 2 2 And in some instances maybe separation o f dusty 22 in England. 2 3 from non-dusty areas. A variety o f things. 23 Q. Okay. Do you believe that this was 24 Q. Okay. Let's step back a second so the 24 generally available in the medical and 2 5 jury gets a better grasp o f this. What is 25 scientific literature, whether it's 1930, '31 Page 879 Page 881 ' 1 asbestos? 1 but certainly sometime in the early '30s? 2 MR. KJRISTAL: Object to the form o f the 2 A. Yes. 3 question. 3 Q. And this is certainly something that 4 THE WITNESS: Asbestos is a mineral. 4 was available for General Electric to look at? 5 It happens to be in a fiber form. It's unusual 5 A. Yes. 6 in that regard, and it's found in the ground. 6 Q. This was something --was this 7 MR. SPEZIALI: Okay. And in the - 7 available for the rest o f the world to look at? 8 what do they do? They dig it out o f the ground? 8 MR. KRISTAL: Object to the form o f the 9 MR. KRISTAL: Object to the form o f the 9 question. 10 question. 10 THE WITNESS: Yes. 11 THE WITNESS: They dig it out. They 11 MR. SPEZIALI: Yes or no. Was this 1 2 mine it. They dig it out, right. 12 available for state and government agencies to 13 MR. SPEZIALI: Okay. And going back to 13 look at? 14 the 1930s, starting in the '30s and whatever 14 MR. KRISTAL: Object to the form o f the 15 articles came before that, and I want you to 15 question. 1 6 think about them all. I want you to think about 16 THE WITNESS: Yes. 17 those articles that came out o f Germany and 17 MR. SPEZIALI: Okay. Maybe I missed 18 France that Mr. Kristal talked to you about in 18 something. Was this some deep, dark secret that 1 9 the 1800s, talked about some articles that were 1 9 they found in the basement in Fairfield at the 2 0 published here in the United States in the 1900s 20 General Electric Corporate headquarters that 2 1 including Cook's article, all the articles, the 21 nobody knew until Mr. Kristal found it? 2 2 ones that coined the phrase asbestosis. 22 MR. KRISTAL: Object to the form of the 23 Up until Merewether published, 23 question. 24 including the Merewether report, did any 24 THE WITNESS: No. 2 5 researcher ever say that the use o f asbestos in 25 MR. SPEZIALI: No? Okay. Now, after 37 (P a g e s 878 t o 881) Priority-One Court Reporting (718) 761-0527 Page 882 Page 884 s 1 the Merewether report was published or sent to 2 Her Majesty in England - 1 think it says Her 3 Majesty -- did the British government do 4 anything to regulate control o f asbestos in its 5 country? 6 THE WITNESS: Yeah. They passed a 7 regulations in 1931. 8 MR. KRISTAL: Object to the form o f the 9 question. 10 BY MR. SPEZIALI: 11 Q. And did those regulations ban the use 12 o f asbestos? 13 A. No. 14 Q. How did the regulations work with 1 5 respect to the use o f asbestos starting in '31? 16 A. Well, starting in '31 what they did was 17 basically adopted the recommendation o f the 18 report in various ways to keep the dust levels 19 down. 20 Q. Now, Mr. Kristal talked to you about 21 some other articles or he referenced them in 22 some o f the citations that were in some o f the 2 3 documents in the '30s. Were there additional 24 articles dealing with asbestos-related health 2 5 issues in the '30s? 1 that you actually referenced earlier by the name 2 ofDreessen. Do you remember that? 3 A. Yes. 4 Q. And do you remember who Dr. Dreessen is 5 without me taking out the report? 6 A. Yes. 7 Q. Who was he? | 8 A. Dr. Dreessen was a doctor with the US i; 9 Public Health Service. 10 Q. And what was Dr. Dreessen asked to do 11 in 1938? 12 A. Dr. Dreessen was asked to study 13 asbestos, and he went into a textile mill, and 14 he did studies o f dust levels and disease. And 1 5 he came up with a level that he thought was a 1 6 basic cut-off ballpark level that he thought was 17 considered safe based on his research. 18 Q. Did Dr. Dreessen conclude that asbestos 1 9 could be dangerous to workers' health? i 20 MR. KRISTAL: Object to the form o f the 21 question. 22 THE WITNESS: Yes. 23 MR. SPEZIALI: Okay. Now, did 2 4 Dr. Dreessen believe that his dust level was 2 5 absolutely safe to be established -- | Page 883 Page 885 ; 1 A. Sure, yes. 2 Q. Okay. And in 1938 - and those --let 3 me say this to you, and those articles would 4 have been available for General Electric to know 5 about? 6 A. Sure. 7 Q. Would they have been generally 8 available to anybody who chose to look in the 9 medical and scientific literature? 10 MR. KRISTAL: Object to the form o f the 11 question. 12 THE WITNESS: Yes. 13 MR. SPEZIALI: By the way, did General 14 Electric have a mine o f asbestos that you're 15 aware of? 16 THE WITNESS: No. 17 MR. SPEZIALI: Okay. Did, did General 18 Electric have facilities that manufactured and 1 9 sold finished asbestos-containing pipe covering, 20 block or cements or sprays? 21 MR. KRISTAL: Object to the form o f the 22 question. 23 THE WITNESS: No. 24 BY MR. SPEZIALI: 25 Q. No. In 1938, there was a researcher 1 MR. KRISTAL: Object to the form o f the g 2 question. 3 MR. SPEZIALI: - - based on what he 4 published? 5 MR. KRISTAL: Object to the form o f the 6 question. 7 THE WITNESS: Not absolutely safe, no. 8 BY MR. SPEZIALI: 9 Q. What did he do, what did he do in terms 10 o f establishing dust level? 11 A. Well, what he did was he studied 12 different areas and found out where people were 13 getting sick or not sick. And he came up with a 14 level that he thought was a level that --below 15 which people would generally be safe based on 1 6 best available information at the time. 17 Q. Do you remember what the level was in 18 1938? 19 A. Yes. 20 Q. What was that? 21 A. It was five million particles per cubic 22 foot o f air. 23 Q. Okay. Did Dr. Dreessen or did anybody, 24 as a result o f Dr. Dreessen's report, publish 25 anything suggesting that the use o f asbestos in te a 38 (P ages 882 t o 885) Priority-One Court Reporting (718) 761-0527 I -"v ` v - - - 2 MR. KRISTAL: Object to the form o f the 2 3 question. 3 4 THE WITNESS: No. 4 5 MR. SPEZIALI: Okay. Through 1940 do 5 6 you --o f all the literature that you saw, the 6 7 documents that you saw, have you ever seen 7 8 anything in the industrial hygiene literature 8 9 that suggested that the use o f asbestos should 9 10 be banned because o f the high dangers to 10 11 workers' health? 11 12 MR. KRISTAL: Object to the form o f the 12 1 3 question. 13 14 THE WITNESS: No. 14 1 5 BY MR. SPEZIALI: 15 16 Q. Okay. Do you remember what year Pearl 16 1 7 Harbor got bombed? 17 18 A. Yes. 18 19 Q. When did that happen? 19 20 A. December 1941. 20 21 Q. A day, a day that will live in infamy. 21 22 A. Yes. 22 23 Q. And does that pinpoint the date that 23 2 4 the United States government entered World War 24 25 n? 25 Page 887 1 A. Yes. 1 2 Q. Okay. Did the, did the entry o f the 2 3 United States into World War II have an impact 3 4 on how asbestos was used in the United States? 4 5 A. Yes. 5 6 Q. How did that happen? 6 7 A. How did that happen? Well, it was 7 8 considered a material that was essential for the 8 9 defense o f this country because it was so 9 10 important to ships and how they could be 10 11 properly used, reliably used and what was 11 12 available to be used for the betterment -- 12 13 MR. KRISTAL: I'd like to just - when 13 14 you're done with your answer, I'd like to state 14 15 something. 15 16 THE WITNESS: -- for the betterment o f 16 17 the Navy and assurance that the ships would run 17 18 properly. 18 19 MR. KRISTAL: I'd like to state for the 19 20 record w e seem to have segued into Ms. Drucker 20 21 in her capacity as an expert because these were 21 22 areas in which Ms. Drucker was designated as an 22 2 3 expert. 23 24 So to the extent that this video is 24 2 5 going to be played back at some other point in 25 \ she's now testifying as an expert, and therefore, we'll be raising certain objections as to that. If that can be preserved to argue at a later time, then 1don't need to say anything else about it, but the Navy and those issues were not something she's designated to speak as as a GE representative. Is that okay? We can have that understanding? MR. SPEZIALI: No, You need to speak further. MR. KRISTAL: I'm going to ask the special master. I'm assuming that those objections would be reserved that it's beyond the scope o f her testimony as a GE designee. THE SPECIAL MASTER: Those will be left to the trial judge as to whether or not this testimony falls under what categoiy, whether it's admissible, et cetera. MR. KRISTAL: All I'm asking is I'm assuming I don't need to make every objection. THE SPECIAL MASTER: No, you do not. MR. KRISTAL: Okay. THE SPECIAL MASTER: However, we would Page 889 need to know when this objection ends at some point on the record so -- MR. KRISTAL: No, no. What I'm saying is I don't want necessarily a continuing objection, but any objection would be preserved at the time that I need to make it. THE SPECIAL MASTER: Yes, yes. MR. KRISTAL: Because this is not a form objection. THE SPECIAL MASTER: All objections are preserved except as to form. MR. KRISTAL: I just want that to be clear. THE SPECIAL MASTER: It's clear. MR. SPEZIALI: I do need to make a statement on the record because I hope I'm here forever but maybe I won't be available, so you have to understand two things. First off, this deposition is a continuation o f days one and two o f which some o f these questions addressed. Secondly, these questions are in her capacity as a 30(b)(6) witness because these cases -- the four cases that I'm familiar with, which were Roth, Campo, Renow and Zatz, all deal exclusively with Navy exposures. The, 39 (Pages 886 t o 889) Priority-One Court Reporting (718) 761-0527 Page 890 1 the use o f asbestos by the United States Navy 1 2 aboard their ships is part o f the GE historical 2 3 document story o f which she is a 30(b)(6) 3 4 witness particularly with respect to turbines 4 5 aboard Navy ships. 5 6 So -- so yes, there are two hats that she 6 7 would be wearing, but certainly it would be, and 7 8 absolutely not true, that the information she 8 9 knows about the United States Navy and its use 9 10 o f asbestos is not relevant to her 30(b)(6) 10 11 role, and B, it's relevant for all those Navy 11 12 documents. 12 13 THE SPECIAL MASTER: I think you both 1 3 14 made your record, and it's all preserved, and 14 15 the judge will decide. 15 16 MR. SPEZIALI: Now, I guess continuing, 1 6 17 when the United States Navy --let's strike that 17 18 and start it over. 18 19 You told us about the use of, o f 19 20 asbestos during World War n , and I'm not going 20 21 to get into a lot o f detail except to ask you 21 22 this: Did, did the General Electric Corporation 22 23 have involvement with supplying equipment to the 2 3 24 United Slates Navy as it constructed ships 24 25 during World War II? 25 Page 891 1 THE WITNESS: Yes. 1 2 MR. SPEZIALI: Okay. And without going 2 3 into a lot o f detail, was there actually books 3 4 published on General Electric Corporation's 4 5 contributions -- 5 6 THE WITNESS: Yes. 6 7 MR. SPEZIALI: --to this nation's war 7 8 effort and particularly with the United States 8 9 Navy? 9 10 THE WITNESS: Yes. 10 11 MR. KRISTAL: Object to the form o f the 11 12 question. 12 13 MR. SPEZIALI: Do you remember the name 13 14 o f the book? 14 15 THE WITNESS: There's a book that's 15 16 called Men and Volts At War which goes over the 1 6 17 many contributions o f GE to the war effort. 17 18 MR. KRISTAL: I also just want to put 18 19 on the record that when I was asking questions 19 20 about GE equipment, turbines, et cetera and 20 21 asbestos products, there was discussion that 21 22 there were other GE people who were most 22 23 knowledgeable and that was not within anything 2 3 24 that Ms. Drucker was being designated for, so 24 25 I'd like to preserve that objection. 25 Page 892 ? MR. SPEZIALI: And we maintain that position, and I'm not asking the engineering questions that you were asking. MR. KRISTAL: I was not asking any c engineering questions. ) MR. SPEZIALI: Okay. Another dispute that we have. 5 MR. KRISTAL: Just another o f many. MR. SPEZIALI: Let me ask, is there f anything that was in that book that was published that suggested that the General Electric Corporation acted improperly with respect to the sale o f its equipment to the j United States Navy during World War n? MR. KRISTAL: Object to the form o f the question. THE WITNESS: No. MR. SPEZIALI: Okay. Do you know o f any editorials or -- that were ever published to $ suggest that the General Electric Corporation's role in supplying the United States Navy during World War H was improper? MR. KRISTAL: Object to the form o f the question. THE WITNESS: No. | Page 893 \ MR. SPEZIALI: Okay. Did the Navy, as a result o f its use o f asbestos during World War II, do a study to determine how that use o f asbestos impacted the sailors aboard Navy ships? MR. KRISTAL: I need to just interrupt again. Can I have a ruling? Is a foundation objection form, because I don't believe it is. THE SPECIAL MASTER: No. MR. KRISTAL: Okay. MR. SPEZIALI: I'm sony. THE SPECIAL MASTER: Form is the form o f the question, whether the question would be objectionable; multiple, leading, all o f the kinds o f things that go into the form o f the question. MR. KRISTAL: That's fine. But I would have foundation objections, but if those are preserved too THE SPECIAL MASTER: Those are preserved. MR. KRISTAL: Okay. Thank you. MR. SPEZIALI: Go ahead. Did the Navy do a study to see how the use o f asbestos impacted the sailors in World War II? THE WITNESS: They did. 40 (Pages 890 t o 893) Priority-One Court Reporting (718) 761-0527 Page 894 Page 8 9 6 | 1 2 5 6 7 8 9 10 1 !. 2 13 4 !. 5 16 17 : .8 !. 9 2 0 21 22 23 24 2 5 MR. KRISTAL: Object to the form o f the question. MR. SPEZIALI: Okay. And who were the authors o f that study? THE WITNESS: The authors were Dr. Fleischer and then Dr. Drinker, who we mentioned a little while ago. MR. SPEZIALI: Okay. Well, you took the words - you stole my thunder, but is that the same Dr. Drinker that the General Electric ~ that Dr. Hamilton suggested getting involved in her work with respect to the General Electric Corporation? THE WITNESS: Yes. MR. SPEZIALI: And what year was that study published? THE WITNESS: 1946. MR. SPEZIALI: All right. And in that study, did the authors discuss the use of asbestos during World War II aboard Navy ships? MR. KRISTAL: Object to the form o f the question. THE WITNESS:Yes, yes. MR. SPEZIALI: Okay. And in that study did they draw any conclusions regarding the use 1 A. Yes. 2 Q. Okay. Did you ever hear o f an 3 organization called the American Conference of 4 Governmental Industrial Hygienists? 5 A. Yes. 6 Q. Who was - and they're known as the 7 ACGIH? 8 A. Right. 9 Q. Okay. Who is that organization? 10 A. Yes. The ACGIH is a group of, of 11 university and government people that study 12 different health effects or studies that were 1 3 done on health effects, and they come up with 14 levels that they think are safe. Those are 15 called threshold limit values. 16 Q. Okay. And did the ACGIH publish 17 threshold limit values with respect to asbestos 18 in 1946? 19 A. Yes. 2 0 MR. KRISTAL: Object to the form o f the 21 question. 22 (Whereupon, Exhibit 80, proceedings o f 2 3 the 8th annual meeting o f the ACGIH, was then 2 4 received and marked for identification.) 2 5 BY MR. SPEZIALI: Page 895 Page 897 1 o f asbestos as used aboard Navy ships for 2 insulation purposes? 3 MR. KRISTAL: Object to the form o f the 4 question. 5 THE WITNESS: Yes. 6 BY MR. SPEZIALI: 7 Q. What did they conclude? 8 A. They concluded that they --that 9 asbestos was a safe product if used properly. 10 Q. And used properly meaning what? 11 A. Keeping the dust levels down to below 1 2 the five million particles per cubic foot. That 1 3 was also mentioned in the Dreessen report you 14 mentioned earlier. 15 Q. Okay. Were there additional articles 1 6 published in the 1960s dealing with asbestos? 17 A. Yes. 18 Q. And asbestos health hazards? 19 A. Yes. 20 Q. Okay. And you had had a long 2 1 discussion with Mr. Kristal whether the 2 2 threshold levels for exposure to asbestos in the 2 3 '30s --or, Tm sorry, in the '40s and '50s and 2 4 '60s were total dust or asbestos dust? Do you 2 5 remember that? 1 Q. And I'm going to show you what I marked 2 as Exhibit 80 is the next exhibit; is that 3 correct? For some reason I thought we had an 4 80. Exhibit 80. These are the --three pages 5 from the proceedings. Have you seen these 6 before? 7 A. Yes. 8 Q. Two more pages. I'm sony. 9 A. Thank you. 10 Q. Okay. Can you g o - - what are those? 11 A. Theseare proceedings o f the 8th annual 12 meeting o f this group we're calling the ACGIH, 1 3 the government and the industry people. 14 Q. Okay. If you can - 15 A. I'm sorry. Government and university 16 people. 17 Q.Okay. The threshold limit values-- 18 did the ACGIH have threshold limit values just 1 9 for asbestos? 20 A. Oh, no. They had them for many 21 hundreds o f materials that could be used in 2 2 workplaces. 23 Q. Okay. And if you can go to the section 24 on mineral dust. Go to the next page. I 2 5 believe that's where it is. I know the print is 41 (P ages 894 t o 897) Priority-One Court Reporting (718) 761-0527 Page 898 Page 900 :< 1 small, and I can make it easy for you here. 1 2 A. Okay. 2 3 Q. I want to call your attention to the 3 4 asbestos line and the total dust line, if you 4 5 could. On this issue of asbestos dust and total 5 6 dust, did the ACGIH indicate whether there was a 6 7 threshold value for asbestos dust? 7 8 MR. KRISTAL: Object to the form o f the 8 9 question. 9 10 THE WITNESS: For asbestos dust, yes. 10 11 BY MR. SPEZIALI: 11 12 Q. What did they say? 12 13 A. That was the five million particles per 13 14 cubic foot. 14 15 Q. Okay. And did they have a separate 15 1 6 value for total dust? 16 17 A. They did. 17 18 Q. What was that? 18 19 A. That was fifty million particles per 19 20 cubic foot. 20 21 Q. Okay. And if we could mark as Exhibit 21 22 5 1 - - o r 81. I'm sorry. 22 23 (Whereupon, Exhibit 81, November 7th, 23 24 1955, Department o f Navy, Bureau o f Medicine and 24 25 Surgery, subject, threshold limit values for 25 Page 899 A. Yes. Q. And what was that? A. Fifty million particles per cubic foot. Q. Okay. Do you recall a discussion with Mr. Kristal regarding some answers to interrogatories by the General Electric 1 Corporation which were marked as Exhibit 56? | A. Yes. Q. Okay. And i f you could go to interrogatoiy answer number fifty-eight -- f A. Yes. \ Q. --if I could just lean over, and number fifty-eight, Mr. Kristal asked you, and | the question was, were the threshold limit } values -- were maximal allowable concentrations inquired about in interrogatory fifty-seven, and that's where they asked the threshold limits exist, were they for total dust and not asbestos i| dust alone. And the answer that Mr. Kristal read to 1 you, and i f you could read along and Til read it to the jury, GE understood that the units o f measure prior to the 1970s when electron { microscopy began to provide a means for specific \ counting o f asbestos fibers, measured \ Page 901 : 1 toxic materials, was then received and marked 1 asbestos-containing dust in millions o f : 2 for identification.) 2 particles per cubic foot without distinguishing 3 MR. KRISTAL: May I see that, please? 3 non-asbestos-containing particles. Do you 4 Thank you. 4 remember that discussion with Mr. Kristal? 5 MR. SPEZIALI: These are November 7th, 5 A. Yes. 6 1955, Department o f Navy, Bureau o f Medicine and 6 Q. My first question is, is there anything 7 Surgery, subject, threshold limit values for 7 in that answer which indicates that GE concluded 8 toxic materials. Have you seen these before? 8 that the threshold limit value was for total 9 THE WITNESS: I believe so. 9 dust and not asbestos dust? 10 MR. SPEZIALI: Okay. If you can go to 10 MR. KRISTAL: Object to the form o f the 11 the section that deals with threshold limit 11 question. 12 values for various substances, and if you 12 THE WITNESS: No. 13 could - if you want, I'll find it for you, but 13 BY MR. SPEZIALI: 14 there's going to be a mineral dust section. And 14 Q. Was there? 15 did the United States Navy, as o f 1955, 15 A. No, no. 16 recognize threshold limit values for asbestos? 16 Q. Okay. Let's, i f w e can, explain to the 17 MR. KRISTAL: Object to the form o f the 17 jury dust counting prior to 1970s which was -- 18 question. 18 which is mentioned in that answer. 19 THE WITNESS: Yes, they did. 19 A. W ell- 20 BY MR. SPEZIALI: 20 Q. Tell the jury, first off, what dust 21 Q. And what did they indicate were those? 21 counting is for asbestos? 22 A. Asbestos, five million particles per 22 A. Dust, dust counting is the means by 23 cubic foot. 23 which you basically capture some air so that you 24 Q. Did they have a separate value for 24 can find out how much o f any material is in 2 5 total dust? 25 there. 42 (Pages 898 to 901) Priority-One Court Reporting (718) 761-0527 Page 902 Page 904 1 So it's a way where you take a sample. 2 Back then they had old-fashioned pumps that 3 actually had little cranks, and you'd take a 4 sample o f the air, and it would go into a little 5 device, kind o f a little wet cylinder, and it 6 would capture everything that was in there in a 7 water solution. They'd take that to a lab, look 8 at it under a microscope, and you'd do some 9 counting. 10 Q. Well, let's see if we can --you're 11 talking back then. Let's talk about today. If 12 I wanted to go into a room and they were using 1 3 asbestos, and they were using silica, and they 14 were using lead and they were using numerous 1 5 things in the air that had dust, and I said give 1 6 me a total dust count, how would you do it 1 7 today? 18 A. Today? I would go in there and take a 1 9 sample, and I'd have it analyzed by different 20 means. We have very sophisticated analytical 21 methods now such as electron microscopy. 22 Q. Now , i f I said, Ms. Drucker, I want to 2 3 go in that same room but I don't want to know 2 4 everything that's in that air. I want to know 2 5 just how much asbestos is in that air. Could 1 A. Because the technology o f then. All we 2 could do is take samples again in these water 3 solutions which was the predominant method, and 4 thatjust captured everything that was in the 5 air, whether it was asbestos, lead, whatever 6 happened to be there. 7 It would all go in the same little 8 water pool, and then it would be looked at under 9 the microscope. 10 Q. So then if I said to you as an 11 industrial hygienist back in that era, I still 12 want to know --even though you have all the 13 dust collected, I still want to know just how 14 much asbestos is there and nothing else, how did 15 you do it back in those days? 16 A. Well, back in those days you take your 17 sample, but then when you look at it, the second 18 part, when you look at it under the microscope, 19 there was some means by which at that point you 20 could distinguish fibers, pardon me, fibers and 21 particles and things like that. So at that 22 point you could look at it and distinguish 23 asbestos from non-asbestos. 24 Q. Did Dr. Drinker and Dr. Fleischer, when 25 they did their study on behalf o f the United Page 903 Page 905 1 you do that today? 2 A. Today? Sure. 3 Q. How would you do it? 4 A. Today I would take a sample, again take 5 a sample o f air. W e have more sophisticated 6 little devices now. They're battery operated. 7 And I would take a sample on a little filter, 8 send it to a lab, and they'd look at it under 9 the electron microscope, and they could tell me 10 what asbestos was in there. 11 Q. Okay. N ow , let's go back prior to the 12 days o f OSHA, back into the '30s, the '40s, the 1 3 '50s, into the '60s. I f I wanted - into the 1 4 room and I wanted to know the total amount o f 1 5 the dust in the air from all kinds o f things, 1 6 asbestos, lead, again, all those things, even 17 sandblasting, could I do that? 18 A. Sure, total dust, yeah, that's what we 1 9 could do. 20 Q. Could I send you into that room as an 21 industrial hygienist back in that period o f time 22 and say all I want you to do is collect the 2 3 asbestos dust and nothing else? 24 A. No. 25 Q. Okay. Why is that? 1 States Navy, separate asbestos dust from total 2 dust in their report? 3 A. Yes. 4 Q. Okay. And do you recall how they did 5 it? 6 A. Yes, I do. 7 Q. Okay. Was it in the manner you just 8 described? 9 A. They used a little different device 10 that they --actually, it's called a coniometer, 11 but it was a means by which they could first 12 take the total, and then they looked at it under 13 the microscope, and they could distinguish out 14 the asbestos from the non-asbestos. 15 Q. And one last document on this subject, 16 it was Plaintiffs Exhibit 29. Do you recall 17 the, the --well, this is the complete thing 18 which we agreed we would attach. It's the 19 industrial hygiene booklet from 19 -- copyright 20 1956 from General Electric. Do you remember 21 this? 22 A. Yes. 23 Q. Okay. And I'm going to show you what 24 is indicated on page six o f the process 25 information page. Do you see the -- did General 43 (Pages 902 t o 905) Priority-One Court Reporting (718) 761-0527 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 Page 906 Page 908 ? Electric recognize the threshold limit values for mineral dust? A. Yes, they did. Q. In fact, they have numerous different things besides asbestos; is that right? A. Well, there are hundreds o f different things in here. Q. Okay. And tell the jury, did General Electric indicate a value just for asbestos? A. Yes, they did. Q. And what was that value? A. Five million particles per cubic foot. Q. Okay. And do they have a separate value for total dust? A. They do. Q. And what is that value? A. Fifty million particles per cubic foot. Q. Okay. And to go back to the preamble page again, I'm going to ask you this, this value -- these values o f five million particles per cubic foot, were they considered absolutely safe for workers' health with respect to asbestos? A. Absolute, no. They were best available. They were considered the general 1 General Electric Corporation have facilities and 2 plants in most o f those states which were l 3 adopting that threshold limit value for worker f 4 health in their occupational health codes? 5 THE WITNESS: Yes. 6 MR. SPEZIALI: Okay. Did you ever find 5 7 anything prior to the 30s, the '40s, the '50s, 8 the '60s to indicate that any o f those state 9 occupational health departments in those whether 10 ifs forty states, fifty states, whatever number 11 o f states General Electric had factories, had 12 come in and said, General Electric, you're in 13 violation, you're not protecting worker health 14 because you're not following that for asbestos 15 worker's health? $ 16 MR. KRISTAL: Object to the form. 17 BY MR. SPEZIALI: 18 Q. Did you ever find anything? 19 A. No. 20 Q. Anybody ever show you anything that 21 said that? 22 A. No. 23 Q. No? Okay. And how about the United 24 States government? In addition to die 1 25 recognition in the Fleischer Drinker report, was | Page 907 Page 909 * cut-off range. 1 there something known as the Walsh-Healey Act? \ Q. Okay. Did anybody ever write anything 2 A. Yes. i that you were aware o f in the industrial and 3 Q. Did --under the Walsh-Healey Act, did scientific literature --let me ask you this: 4 they address threshold limit values for lots o f ; How many times would you say in industrial 5 substances besides asbestos? scientific literature the threshold limit value 6 A. Yes. \ o f five million particles per cubic foot o f air 7 Q. Okay. And what did they see as the for asbestos was referenced between the time 8 number that they targeted for protecting Dreessen talked about it in '38 until the later 9 workers' health? \ '60s? How many times would you say? 10 A. For asbestos, five million particles A. Hundreds and hundreds. 11 per cubic foot. Q. Okay. How many different states' 12 Q. Okay. And in all the documents you occupational health departments would you say - 13 reviewed at General Electric and in the books let's take a period o f time after Alaska and 14 you read with respect to General Electric's f Hawaii joined the union. So we'll say fifty 15 involvement with the United States Navy and the \ states, sometime from the '50s on, if I got my 1 6 United States government during World War n and l history right. How many different states 17 later, to the extent that that involvement in actually adopted that threshold limit value as 18 any manner involved asbestos, was there anything \ part o f their state occupational health codes? 19 that ever said that General Electric was MR. KRISTAL: My foundation objections 20 violating any o f the rules and regulations are preserved? 21 implemented through the Walsh-Healey Act or any THE SPECIAL MASTER: They are. 22 other government regulation with respect to the THE WITNESS: I'd say the vast 2 3 use o f asbestos in protection of worker health majority. 24 in whatever target rates there were? MR. SPEZIALI: And by the way, did the 25 MR. KRISTAL: Object to the form o f the 44 (Pages 906 to 909) Priority-One Court Reporting (718) 761-0527 Page 910 Page 912 1 question. 2 THE WITNESS: No. 3 MR. SPEZIALI: Okay. Did you ever find 4 anything from the '30s through now OSHA that was 5 written that said asbestos should no longer be 6 used in the workplace because it can't be used 7 safely to protect worker health? 8 MR. KRISTAL: Object to the form o f the 9 question. 10 MR. SPEZIALI: Did you ever find 11 anything? 12 THE WITNESS: No. 13 MR. SPEZIALI: Let me -- are you 14 familiar -- 15 MR. KRISTAL: Just so the record is clear, 1 6 I have lots o f foundation objections to these 17 things, and I don't want to have to belittle the 1 8 record when I go, so I just want to let you know 1 9 that's coming at some point if you try to use 20 this. 21 MR. SPEZIALI: Sure. Similar to the 22 ones that I had this morning and yesterday on 2 3 yours. 24 BY MR. SPEZIALI: 25 Q. Did you ever find any documentation in 1 well. 2 MR. SPEZIALI: I don't know. 3 MR. KRISTAL: Well, it's not a form, 4 so. 5 MR. SPEZIALI: Uh-huh. 6 The - I'm going to get that document 7 in a second but I'm going to go on, and then 8 we'll segue right back to it. 9 In all the documents that you read with 10 respect to Dr. Hamilton and her interaction with 11 GE, whether it be asbestos, did you find 12 anything either at the Harvard library, the 13 other places that Dr. Hamilton's documents were 14 being kept or, o f course, in any o f the GE 15 documents that you reviewed where Dr. Hamilton 16 was ever told that she was not allowed to tell 17 the world about what she was learning regarding 18 substances at GE, particularly asbestos? 19 MR. KRISTAL: Object to the form o f the 20 question. 21 THE WITNESS: No. 22 BY MR. SPEZIALI: 23 Q. Nothing? 24 A. Nothing. 25 Q. Okay. Tell the jury who is Dr. Sax or Page 911 Page 913 ' 1 the General Electric documents that you looked 2 at dealing with interaction by General Electric 3 and the Pennsylvania Department o f Labor? 4 A. Yes. 5 Q. Okay. Could you tell the jury what 6 that was all about? First off, let's talk about 7 the year. 8 A. The year was in 1942. 9 Q. What was that all about? 10 A. It was, it was relating to a GE plant 11 in York, Pennsylvania where they were making 12 some wire that had asbestos as part o f it. And 13 what the Pennsylvania Department o f Health did 14 was they went in and they, they saw that this 1 5 program was absolutely premier. 16 They just said it was so great, what 17 they did was they adopted the policies and 1 8 procedures o f that York, Pennsylvania factory, 1 9 and they published it basically to the world and 20 said that this is state o f the art on how 21 asbestos is being handled in this facility, we 22 recommend that you do this. 23 Q. Uh-huh. 24 MR. KRISTAL: I have a best evidence 2 5 objection. I'm assuming that's preserved, as 1 Mr. Sax? Is it Mr. Sax or Dr. Sax? 2 A. Dr. Sax. 3 Q. S-A-X? 4 A. S-A-X. 5 Q. Who was he? 6 A. Dr. Sax was a toxicologist with the 7 research and development plant o f GE in 8 Schenectady, and he was an expert on a variety 9 o f industrial materials. 10 Q. Okay. And did Dr. Sax ever publish 11 anything in the world in scientific literature? 12 A. Y es, many times. 13 Q. Okay. And what did he publish? 14 A. Well, he first published his Handbook 15 o f Industrial Materials or Dangerous Materials 16 in 1951. And he listed hundreds, if not 17 thousands, o f substances that could be found in 18 all kinds o f factory situations, and he listed 1 9 safe levels and recommendations and precautions. 20 Q. Okay. Was Dr. Sax's book some deep, 21 dark secret at General Electric's headquarters 22 or was that disseminated for the world to see? 23 MR. KRISTAL: Object to the form o f the 24 question. 25 THE WITNESS: Dr. Sax's book is one 45 (P a g es 910 t o 913) Priority-One Court Reporting (718) 761-0527 Page 914 Page 916 * 1 o f - was then, and still is by many, 2 considered --o f course there have been various 3 editions over time --one o f the fundamental 4 books in industrial hygiene. 5 BY MR. SPEZIALI: 6 Q. Okay. 7 A. A s far as reference materials. 8 Q. And did Dr. Sax in that book include 9 any sections with respect to asbestos? 10 A. He did. 11 Q. Okay. W hat--let me just get the book 12 here. Okay. We'll mark this as 82. 13 (Whereupon, Exhibit 82, a copy o f 14 Dr. Sax's book in 1951, was then received and 15 marked for identification.) 16 MR. SPEZIALI: And that is the copy o f 17 Dr. Sax's book in 1951, is it not? 18 THE WITNESS: Yes, Handbook of 19 Dangerous Materials, right. 20 MR. SPEZIALI: Okay. Let me see if I 2 1 can find the section on asbestos. 22 MR. KRISTAL: Thirty-four. 23 BY MR. SPEZIALI: 24 Q. They tell me it's in alphabetical 25 order, but my ability to follow the alphabet has 1 A. Right. 2 Q. Okay. Did y o u - j 3 MR. KRISTAL: Object to the form o f the 4 question. ! 5 BY MR. SPEZIALI: 6 Q. And this particular section o f the f 7 book, was this included in the book as far as 1 8 you're aware that was published in the world and 9 medical and scientific literature back in the 1 0 '50s? 11 A. Yes. 12 Q. Nobody's ever told you that somehow 13 General Electric slipped that in there so we can | 14 defend lawsuits, did they? 15 A. No. j 16 MR. KRISTAL: Object to the form o f the \ 17 question. 18 (Whereupon, Exhibit 83, the report from 1 9 the State o f Pennsylvania, April 1942, was then i 2 0 received and marked for identification.) 2 1 BY MR. SPEZIALI: 22 Q. Okay. A n d Ifo u n d -n o w we'll mark 2 3 this as 83 --the report from the State o f I 24 Pennsylvania that you talked about, April o f 25 1942? Page 915 Page 917 f 1 been questioned by many. I'm showing you page 1 A. Yes. { 2 thirty-four and thirty-five. Do you see where 2 Q. Okay. And for reference purposes, why 3 it says under the heading asbestos particles and 3 was the State o f Pennsylvania writing that 4 asbestos dust? 4 report? 5 A. Yes,Ido. 5 A. Well, the State o f Pennsylvania, o f | 6 Q. Okay. And could I have that back real 6 course, had a, a program to go around and 7 quick? 7 inspect their factories in the state, and f- 8 A. Sure. 8 they --as part o f that, they were invited or | 9 Q. And in that discussion, he starts o ff 9 went into this plant o f GE's at York, 10 with threshold limit values of five million 10 Pennsylvania. And they found this program in 11 particles per cubic foot; is that right? 11 place at York that was so, so superior that they 12 A. Let me just take a look at that. 12 wanted to share it with the world. 13 Q. First sentence. 13 Q. Did they - bear with me. By the way, 14 A. A n d - 14 in this report, and Til just show you the first 15 Q. Very first sentence. 15 page --the second page actually, do they 16 A. Right. Five million particles per 16 actually point out that asbestos was being used 17 cubic foot. 17 in the facilities? 18 Q. He has a discussion, does he not, the 18 A. Yes. 19 hazardous properties o f asbestos? And Til say 19 Q. Okay. I'm not going to belabor this. 2 0 all these and let you see it, specific lung 2 0 That will be in evidence. Who was --is it 21 disease, asbestosis. This must be caused by 21 Dr. Grimaldi or Mr. Grimaldi? 22 this material, can cause chronic conjunctivitis, 22 A. Dr. Grimaldi. 23 if I said that correctly. And he goes through 23 Q. And who was Dr. Grimaldi? 24 to talk about some o f the history and the 24 A. Dr. Grimaldi is a safety expert, a 2 5 reports dealing with it; is that correct? 25 fca-jn'i:* safety professional. And as part o f his 46 (Pages 914 to 917) Priority-One Court Reporting (718) 761-0527 1t ; l o 11 i > 2 from the mid 1950s through the mid 1960s. 3 Q. And did Dr. Grimaldi publish anything 4 dealing with asbestos during his career with 5 General Electric, or after? 6 A. Yes, he did. 7 Q. Okay. And what did he do? 8 A. Dr. Grimaldi published a book. 9 MR. KRISTAL: Objection. 10 THE WITNESS: And it was on safety and 11 accident prevention, and he also mentioned 12 asbestos, among many other hundreds o f types o f 1 3 materials that could be found in factories, and 1 4 listed levels that he thought were safe. 15 MR. SPEZIALI: Was that book published 1 6 and just kept in the - for the General Electric 17 folks to work with, or was it published in the 1 8 general medical, scientific and industrial 1 9 hygiene literature? 2 0 MR. KRISTAL: Object to the form o f the 21 question. 22 THE WITNESS: It was published to the 2 3 world. 2 4 BY MR. SPEZIALI: 25 Q. Who was - is it Dr. Fawcett or Mr. 2 you're familiar with? 3 A. Yes. 4 Q. Okay. We'll justput that in evidence 5 without belaboring it. Just confirm for the 6 record, and page five twenty-nine was the 7 discussion o f asbestos; is that correct? 8 A. Yes, correct. 9 Q. Okay. And we'llget the Dr. Fawcett 1 0 information in one second, but I'll move on. 11 Oh, we have it. This would be Exhibit 85. 12 (Whereupon, Exhibit 85, a document 1 3 entitled Safety and Accident Prevention in 14 Chemical Operations by Dr. Howard Fawcett, 1 5 research lab, General Electric, publication 1 6 date, 1965, was then received and marked for 1 7 identification.) 1 8 BY MR. SPEZIALI: 19 Q. Safety and Accident Prevention in 2 0 Chemical Operations. It's by Dr. Howard 2 1 Fawcett, research lab, General Electric. And I 2 2 don't see the publication date, but I know it's 2 3 1965. Is that right? 24 A. Yes. 25 Q. I know it's here somewhere. Inany Page 919 Page 921 \ 1 Fawcett? 1 event, I'm not going to ask you to read it. You 2 A. Dr. Howard Fawcett. 2 can hold it up and let the jury see it. Is that 3 Q. Okay. And we're going to get the 3 the book that was published and disseminated by 4 Grimaldi book in a second. Who was Dr. Howard 4 the physician in 1965 that you've reviewed? 5 Fawcett? 5 A. Yes. 6 A. Dr. Fawcett was a toxicologist with GE, 6 M R KRISTAL: Object to the form o f the 7 and he also wrote a book on accident prevention 7 question. 8 in chemical operations in which he listed a 8 THE WITNESS: Yes, a Ph.D. 9 number o f types o f chemicals and other things 9 MR. SPEZIALI: Without wasting our 10 that could happen in factories and how you could 10 time, is there a section or piece in here on 11 prevent accidents. 11 asbestos? 12 Q. And did he provide any advice and 12 THE WITNESS: Yes. 1 3 guidance with respect to asbestos in his 13 MR. SPEZIALI: Okay. Now, let me ask 14 publication? 14 you this: After Dr. Sax, Grimaldi, Fawcett 15 A. Yes. 15 published their information and in that 16 Q. What year was that, if you recall? 1 6 indicated the things that we've talked about 17 A. Yes, that was 1965. 17 they indicated regarding asbestos, do you recall 18 (Whereupon, Exhibit 84, the cover page 18 whether or not the General Electric Corporation 1 9 o f Safety Management with the excerpt dealing 1 9 fired them because o f that? 20 with Dr. Grimaldi's book, was then received and 20 MR. KRISTAL: Object to the form o f the 21 marked for identification.) 21 question. 22 BY MR. SPEZIALI: 22 THE WITNESS: N o. 23 Q. I'm going to mark as Exhibit 84 the 23 MR. SPEZIALI: Okay. They did not or 24 1956 --this is the cover page o f Safety 2 4 you don't recall it? 2 5 Management with the, with the excerpt dealing 25 THE WITNESS: They did not. 4 7 (Pages 918 to 921) Priority-One Court Reporting (718) 761-0527 Page 922 Page 924 -> 1 MR. SPEZIALI: Okay. Well, why not? 1 that. Okay? 2 MR. KRISTAL: Object to the form o f the 2 A. Sure. 3 question. 3 Q. Okay. 4 THE WITNESS: Well, I think it goes 4 MR. KRISTAL: Objection to the form o f 5 back to the basic philosophy o f the company. 5 the question. i 6 The company cared about the health and safety o f 6 BY MR. SPEZIALI: 7 its workers, and as part of that, they had 7 Q. Okay. How many names? Ballpark it for 8 people who were very highly qualified on staff. 8 me. 9 And in this instance, three that we mentioned 9 A. Forty-ish. 10 have written books and shared that information 10 Q. Okay. Are you sure? Don't take my 11 with the rest o f the world. 11 number for it. Is it a good ballpark? | 12 MR. SPEZIALI: Okay. You worked on -- 12 A. Thirty, forty, forty-five. I don't 1 13 and I'll - again, bear with me for a moment. 13 know. 14 Maybe we should go off the record and I can 14 Q. Look at the right-side column, ballpark 1 15 organize the exhibits. 1 5 it, how many names o f different companies and 16 THE SPECIAL MASTER: Off the record, 1 6 individuals? 1 17 please. 17 A. Thirty or forty over there. s. 18 THE VIDEOGRAPHER: Off the record. The 1 8 Q. Okay. And, and if w e go to the next ) 1 9 time is two fifteen p.m. 1 9 page, the left column, by the way, that page was | 20 (Whereupon, a recess was then taken.) 20 the American Association o f Industrial 21 THE VIDEOGRAPHER: On the record. The 21 Physicians and Surgeons. The second, the second \ 22 time is two twenty-seven p.m. 22 list you gave was subcommittees. Ifyou look at 2 3 BY MR. SPEZIALI: 2 3 the next page, some o f which is repetitive, just 24 Q. Okay. Ms. Drucker, I'm going to try to 2 4 ballpark it, how many names o f different 2 5 go through this, and I want you to understand 2 5 organizations and physicians are there in this Page 923 Page 925 ) 1 I'm only going to ask you for estimates. I 2 don't want exact because we'll be here forever. 3 I want to go through some o f these 4 organizations that Mr. Kristal talks of, and so 5 what I've done is I've attempted to pull out 6 some o f the selected exhibits with these 7 organizational things on it. 8 Exhibit 61 was one of, not the only 9 one, it's just one, but I'm not going to do them 10 all, one o f the exhibits dealing with Industrial 11 Medicine. Do you remember all those 12 discussions? 13 A. Yes. 14 Q. Okay. And this particular exhibit had 15 attached to it a health article dealing with 1 6 asbestos. Do you remember that? 17 A. Yes. 18 Q. Okay. And I want you - and I don't 19 want you to count because we'll look at the left 20 column on the third page in. That doesn't have 21 a page number. And ballpark for me how many 22 different names --and I'm going to tell you -- 23 I'm going to suggest a number, for fear of 24 getting an objection, o f about forty names o f 2 5 different companies that are on the left side o f 1 organization? 2 A. A few hundred. 3 Q. Okay. Good enough. And General 1 4 Electric - 1 didn't even look, but Pm assuming 5 this is one o f the ones that General Electric 6 was mentioned; is that correct? 1 7 A. I'd have to check. Maybe. 8 Q. All right. If it was, you'd have no 9 dispute with it without us wasting time looking l 10 for it again? :! 11 A. No. 1 12 Q. All right. And let's look at what was 13 Exhibit 64. That was the National Safety 14 Council. And do you remember that there were 1 5 numerous - this isn't the only one. There were :5 1 6 numerous National Safety Council. 17 A. Yes. s 18 Q. All right. N ow , this list is 1 9 substantially longer, but when you look at the 20 list o f officers and members and companies, and 21 I'm not going to ask you to count them because 22 it goes on for multiple columns, it goes through 2 3 page six, ballpark it. 24 A. Okay. 25 Q. Give us an estimate. Tell the jury how 48 (Pages 922 to 925) Priority-One Court Reporting (718) 761-0527 Page 926 Page 928 : 1 many different organizations and individuals 2 were involved just at that particular year. 3 A. Four or five hundred. 4 Q. Okay. And General Electric is one o f 5 them, right? I mean -- 6 A. Yes. 7 Q. Do you recall that? Okay. And the 8 National Safety News was a subpublication o f the 9 National Safety Council; is that right? 10 A. Yes. 11 Q. All right. So we're not going to count 12 those again. And there was the IHF, Industrial 13 Hygiene Digest. I thought I had a membership 14 list for that, but I don't seem to see it. I 1 5 just have one particular document which talks 1 6 about a couple o f committees. 17 MR. SPEZIALI: Did we have the 18 membership list for the IHF, if you remember? I 1 9 thought you did mark it, but I don't see it. 20 B Y MR. SPEZIALI: 21 Q. Iju sth a v ea few . I mean, here's 22 Exhibit 72. Here's Exhibit 74. 23 A. Yes. 24 Q. Again, General Electric's a member, 2 5 right, as o f '47 or '4 9 ,1 believe it was; is 1 articles which were digest by the IHF, 2 Industrial Hygiene Digest, by the National 3 Safety Council and the other things that Mr. 4 Kristal had you read for the j ury? 5 MR. KRISTAL: Object to the form o f the 6 question. 7 THE WITNESS: Yes. 8 BY MR. SPEZIALI: 9 Q. And what's your opinion? 10 A. They would. 11 Q. And General Electric would? 12 A. Yes. 13 MR. KRISTAL: Object to the form o f the 14 question. Object to the prior question. 15 MR. SPEZIALI: Just for the other 16 people, not General Electric? 17 MR. KRISTAL: Yes. 18 MR. SPEZIALI: I got it. 19 MR. KRISTAL: With respect to form, 20 that's right. 21 MR. SPEZIALI: Okay. 22 BY MR. SPEZIALI: 23 Q. Did the, did the Industrial Hygiene 24 Foundation need to digest health articles 25 related to asbestos for the world medical, Page 927 Page 929 1 that right? 2 A. Right. '47. 3 Q. '47. And there are numerous other 4 members, but I don't see the others. 5 A. Yes. 6 Q. Let me make it easy. Ms. Drucker, 7 whether or not General Electric belonged to the 8 IHF, the National Safety Council, or those other 9 organizations that Mr. Kristal mentioned, 10 whether or not they did belong, do you have an 11 opinion from an industrial hygiene point o f view 12 whether or not General Electric should have 1 3 known about or did know about the various 14 publications that were digest by these 15 organizations and these documents that 1 6 Mr. Kristal showed you? 17 A. Yes. 18 Q. Okay. Whether or not any o f those 19 other six hundred entities or five hundred 20 entities or four hundred entities, regardless o f 21 how you count it, whether or not they were 22 involved with these organizations or not, do you 2 3 have an opinion from an industrial hygiene 24 standpoint whether those other entities would 2 5 have known about the various publications and 1 scientific and industrial hygiene community to 2 know that such articles were published? 3 A. No. 4 Q. Okay. Did the National Safety Council 5 need to do that? 6 A. No. 7 Q. Okay. Did any o f those organizations 8 that Mr. Kristal spoke to you about need to do 9 that? 10 A. No. 11 Q. Okay. Do you -- can you tell me 12 whether --and you've seen other publications by 13 the IHF, the National Safety Council and the 14 other publications Mr. Kristal told you about; 15 is that correct? 16 A. Right. 17 Q. Okay. Did you ever find a digest or an 18 abstract similar to the type that Mr. Kristal 19 talked to the jury about with you that, prior 20 to --or anytime during the '30s, the '40s, the 21 '50s, into the '60s, you know, up to the OSHA 22 era, so to speak, did you ever find anything 23 that was ever digest or abstract or that said 24 the use o f asbestos in the marketplace should be 25 banned because threshold limits thought to 49 (P ages 926 to 929) Priority-One Court Reporting (718) 761-0527 Page 930 Page 932 ? 1 protect workers are no good? 2 MR. KRISTAL: Object to the form o f the 3 question. 4 MR. SPEZIALI: Did you ever see 5 anything like that? 6 THE WITNESS: No. 7 MR. KRISTAL: Object to the form o f the 8 question. 9 MR. SPEZIALI: Forgetting about things 1 0 that maybe were digest, did you find anything in 11 the published literature along those lines o f 12 the thousands o f articles that were published? 13 THE WITNESS: No. 14 MR. KRISTAL: Object to the form o f the 15 question. 16 BY MR. SPEZIALI: 17 Q. Does asbestos exposure cause cancer 18 based on the industrial hygiene literature that 19 you reviewed? 20 A. Yes. 21 Q. Okay. And was that something that was 2 2 published in the literature similar to some o f 23 the articles that Mr. Kristal showed you in the 24 late '40s, and the '50s, into the '60s? 25 A. Yes. 1 BY MR. SPEZIALI: 2 Q. And finally, there was a lot of 3 discussion about a gentleman named Warren Cook. 4 A. Yes. | 5 Q. Do you know if Warren Cook had any * 6 involvement with threshold limit values back in 7 the '30s and '40s? S 8 A. Yes. He was very involved in setting l 9 them up. 1 10 Q. Okay. Was he a member of the ACGIH? . 11 A. Yes. | 12 MR. SPEZIALI: I think that's all I = 13 have. Thank you very much. 1 14 THE WITNESS: Thank you. I 15 MR. SPEZIALI: I know Mr. Kristal has f 16 some more questions. f 17 18 RE-EXAMINATION BY MR. KRISTAL: | 19 20 Q. Good afternoon, again, Ms. Drucker. 2 1 Jerry Kristal. 22 A. Hello. 23 Q. Hello. When Mr. Speziali was asking 24 questions early on in your testimony when he was 2 5 asking them, I think you said that no judge had Page 931 Page 933 1 Q. Was that some deep, dark secret that 1 ever stricken any testimony when you testified 2 was sitting in the basement o f General Electric 2 in court for Plaintiffs. Do you recall that? 3 Corporation? 3 MR. SPEZIALI: Object. I don't recall 4 A. No. 4 it. 5 MR. KRISTAL: Object to the form o f the 5 THE WITNESS: I don't remember the 6 question. 6 question, but if you say that's what was said. 7 BY MR. SPEZIALI: 7 MR. KRISTAL: Well, did you say 8 Q. Was that information generally known to 8 something to the effect that no judge had 9 the medical and scientific community? 9 stricken your testimony when you testified for 10 A. Yes. 1 0 Plaintiffs? 11 Q. And the industrial hygiene community? 11 MR. SPEZIALI: Objection. 12 A. Yes. 12 THE WITNESS: Testimony when I --yes, 13 Q. And how do you know that? 13 when I testified for Plaintiffs. 14 A. Because I, I reviewed materials over 14 BY MR. KRISTAL: 15 thirty years, and that kind o f information was 15 Q. Okay. The fact o f the matter is you've 16 thoroughly available. 16 never testified once in court for Plaintiffs, 17 Q. In file period o f time that you were 17 correct? 18 doing work at the request o f Plaintiffs' 18 A. Right. 19 attorneys, were you ever requested or shown at 19 Q. Now, you're a certified industrial 2 0 any time a document indicating that the General 2 0 hygienist, you instructed in public health at 2 1 Electric Company was a bad company with respect 2 1 Yale, you worked for the EPA, you were an 2 2 to the manner with which it used asbestos? 2 2 industrial hygienist at the Long Beach Naval 23 MR. KRISTAL: Object to the form o f the 2 3 Shipyard, correct? ' 24 question. 24 A. Yes. 25 THE WITNESS: No. 25 Q. You don't know what pleurisy means? 50 (Pages 930 to 933) Priority-One Court Reporting (718) 761-0527 Page 934 1 A. Well, I think from a medical 1 2 diagnostic, no. From a general standpoint, 2 3 yeah. 3 4 Q. What does it mean? 4 5 A. It means an abnormality or disease of 5 6 the pleura. 6 7 Q. Why didn't you say that this morning 7 8 when I asked you? 8 9 MR. SPEZIALI: Objection. 9 10 THE WITNESS: When you showed me the 10 1 1 article, it was more directed, I thought, to a 11 1 2 medical determination. And that's why I 12 13 answered the way I did. 13 14 MR. KRISTAL: Well, I asked what your 14 15 understanding o f pleurisy was, and you said you 15 1 6 didn't know this morning, correct? 16 17 MR. SPEZIALI: Objection. 17 18 THE WITNESS: If I did, I stand 18 1 9 corrected. 19 20 BY MR. KRISTAL: 20 21 Q. All right. On your curriculum vitae 21 2 2 that Mr. Speziali was asking you about, you list 22 2 3 yourself as president o f Drucker Health and 23 24 Safety Management? 24 25 A. Yes. 25 Page 935 1 Q. You're the only employee, right? 1 2 A. Currently, yes. 2 3 Q. Well, it's a current CV, isn't it? 3 4 A. It is. 4 5 Q. Merewether, in the 1930s, suggested 5 6 with respect to suppressing the dust to reduce 6 7 the hazard from asbestos I think you said 7 8 wetting the material, local exhaust and 8 9 separating more dusty processes from less dusty 9 10 or non-dusty processes? 10 11 A. Yes. 11 12 Q. That method o f suppressing asbestos 12 13 dust to reduce the risk o f asbestos disease was 13 14 known by General Electric in the 1930s, correct? 14 15 A. Yeah, I'd say, yeah, into the 1930s. 15 16 Q. And in the Merewether report, one o f 16 17 the suggestions he had for reducing the risk o f 17 18 asbestos disease is education o f the worker to a 18 1 9 sane appreciation o f the risk. Do you recall 19 20 that? 20 21 A. Td have to see the report. 21 22 Q. Let me hand you what was marked as 22 2 3 Exhibit 28. It's my copy, to move this along. 23 2 4 On page seventeen under preventive measures, if 24 2 5 you could read the third paragraph out loud. 25 Page 936 ; A. Thank you. Right -- oh, third under preventive -- okay. Q. Yeah, where it says they also include. A. They also include the education o f the individual as in other dangerous trades to a sane appreciation o f the risk and to his personal responsibility in the prevention and suppression o f dust. Q. So it was known in the 1930s that in order for a worker to protect him or herself, he or she needed to know that they were being exposed to something that was hazardous, right? A. Yes, as part o f an overall program, true. Q. And GE knew that in the 1930s? A. And GE knew that in the 1930s. Q. The Sax book from 1951, the section on asbestos doesn't mention cancer at all, does he? A. I'd have look at it again, but Q. Here it's page --Exhibit 82. 1think it's page thirty-four. A. Thank you. I don't see it in here. Q. And that was after GE knew that asbestos could cause cancer, right? A. That was --this book? Page 937 Q. 1951. A. 1951. Q. And we saw the JAMA article, we saw the Hamilton textbook from '49, the JAMA editorial from '49, the IHF abstract o f the JAMA editorial in '49 that was sent to GE, right? A. Well, you're saying that they knew. In terms o f the context o f the time, there was no consensus well into the '60s. There were some -as we talked about this morning, there were some case reports of cancer with underlying asbestosis, but as I've said to you in the past, there was no consensus o f opinion well into the '60s. Q. Didn't you just tell Mr. Speziali that it was known in the industrial and scientific communities that asbestos could cause cancer in the '40s, '50s and '60s? A. Yes. Q. Okay. So GE knew in the 1940s, the late 1940s that asbestos could cause cancer, right? A. Yes. Q. And it's not in the Sax book published in '51, right? 51 (P a g e s 934 t o 937) Priority-One Court Reporting (718) 761-0527 Page 938 1 A. Right. 1 2 Q. Okay. And the safety management book 2 3 by Grimaldi, the other GE employee, in 1956, yon 3 4 said there's a section on asbestos, right? 4 5 A. Yes. 5 6 Q. First o f all, how come you didn't ask 6 7 Mr. Speziali for the entire textbook when he was 7 8 questioning you about certain documents? 8 9 MR. SPEZIALI: Objection. 9 10 THE WITNESS: I was familiar with many 10 11 o f these documents from having looked over the 11 12 files. 12 13 MR. KRISTAL: So you were familiar with 1 3 14 the ones that Mr. Speziali was showing you, but 1 4 15 not with the ones that I was showing you? 15 16 MR. SPEZIALI: Objection to the ones 16 17 that she had reviewed in anticipation -- 17 18 MR. KRISTAL: If it's a form 18 19 objection just make -- 19 20 MR. SPEZIALI: Well, that's great. But 20 21 when you mislead everybody, I've got to be 21 22 more - 22 23 THE SPECIAL MASTER: Objection. No 2 3 24 speaking objections. 24 25 MR. SPEZIALI: It's not fair. 25 Page 939 1 MR. KRISTAL: Other than the fact that 1 2 the special master says you should be quiet. 2 3 THE SPECIAL MASTER: N o, I said - 1 3 4 didn't say keep quiet. Let's just limit our 4 5 objections to objection to form. All other 5 6 objections are preserved. Just say objection. 6 7 BY MR. KRISTAL: 7 8 Q. Why is it that with the documents that 8 9 the GE lawyers had shown you that I was asking 9 10 you about you wanted to see the full documents? 10 11 A. Well, when we went over the same 11 12 documents that we went over with you, I had seen 12 13 the full documents or asked for them. 13 14 Q. Well, Grimaldi wasn't one o f them, was 14 15 it? 15 16 A. No. 16 17 Q. Okay. The Grimaldi text, the section 17 18 on asbestos in 1956, GE didn't say anything 18 19 about cancer, did they? 19 20 A. HI just look it over. No. 20 21 Q. Exhibit 80 that Mr. Speziali showed you 21 22 was five pages o f something that's at least 22 23 three hundred and forty-four pages, correct? 23 24 A. It's part o f a larger text, yes. 24 25 Q. You didn't ask to see the whole text, 25 Page 940 j did you? A. No. 1 Q. And it mentions Warren Cook with i respect to his work with the threshold limit values or the MACs as they were called, does it not? \ A. I'm looking for that. Q. Let me show it to you so we can move it i along. A. Thank you. Q. They specifically reference in Exhibit | 80 Warren Cook and his work on the maximum allowable concentration o f air contaminants and specifically reference the Industrial Medicine Journal from 1945. > A. Thank you. Q. D o they not? It's the bottom o f die ? left-hand column, top o f the right-hand column. \ A. Yes, they do reference him. Q. So Warren Cook certainly at that time was an expert with respect to the maximum allowable concentrations and the threshold limit values, correct? : A. Sure, at that time. Q. And Warren Cook was the individual who ' Page 941 ; wrote the article in the Industrial Medicine Journal in April 1942 which is Exhibit 55 that I showed you, correct? A. Could you point that out? Q. Sure. A. Thank you. Q. First page, April 1942, Industrial Medicine Journal, Exhibit 55, right? A. Okay. Q. Article, Occupational Disease Hazard. Who's the author? A. That's right, it's Warren Cook. Q. And in this article in 1942 in the Industrial Medicine Journal Warren Cook said with respect to the five million particles per cubic foot o f air MAC for asbestos, quote, this is a very small concentration, so small, in fact, that the condition may look good even to a critical eye and still present an exposure greater than this low limit, end quote, correct? A. If you could just quickly point out what -- Q. Sure. A. Just point it to me. Thanks. Q. In the second paragraph. 52 (Pages 938 t o 941) Priority-One Court Reporting (718) 761-0527 Page 942 1 A. Yes, that's what it says. 1 2 Q. General Electric was not a defendant in 2 3 the particular Plaintiffs' cases that you had 3 4 been retained on in the late 1980s, early 1990s, 4 5 were they? 5 6 A. Not that I'm aware of. 6 7 Q. So there would have been no reason for 7 8 the Plaintiffs' attorneys to show you any 8 9 General Electric documents at that time, 9 10 correct? 10 11 A. Maybe, maybe not. 11 12 Q. Okay. But when Mr. Speziali asked you 12 13 if the Plaintiffs' attorney in those cases had 13 14 shown you any General Electric documents, when 14 1 5 you answered him, you knew that General Electric 15 16 was not a defendant in those cases? 16 17 A. Yes, as far as I recall. 17 18 Q, Mr. Speziali went over your career, and 18 1 9 fd like to ask you about some o f your 19 20 publications. Okay? 20 21 A. Yes. 21 22 MR. SPEZIALI: Objection. I didn't go 22 2 3 over publications. 23 24 BY MR. KRISTAL: 24 25 Q. You have not written any textbooks 25 Page 943 1 relating to the historical hazards of asbestos, 1 2 correct? 2 3 A. Correct. 3 4 Q. You have not written any portions of 4 5 textbooks on that subject, correct? 5 6 A. That's correct. 6 7 Q. You've not written any textbooks 7 8 relating to asbestos in any capacity, right? 8 9 A. Right. 9 10 Q. Or any portions o f textbooks that 10 11 relate to asbestos, right? 11 12 A. Yes, right. 12 13 Q. Do you know what a peer reviewed 13 14 journal is? 14 15 A. Yes. 15 16 Q. What's a peer reviewed journal? 16 17 A. That's a journal where other 17 18 professionals read over articles and comment 18 1 9 before they're published. 19 20 Q. You've never written any articles about 20 21 the historical hazards o f asbestos in any peer 21 22 reviewed journal, have you? 22 23 A. No. 23 24 Q. You've never written any articles about 24 2 5 asbestos in - relating to anything about 25 Page 944 = asbestos in any peer reviewed journal, correct? A. Correct. Q. And there are also non-peer reviewed journals, correct? A. Yes. Q. And what's a non-peer reviewed journal? A. That would be a journal where articles are published without necessarily being reviewed by other people in the field. Q. And these are medical, scientific, industrial hygiene journals? A. Sure, they can be, sure. Q. You've never written anything about the historical hazards o f asbestos in any non-peer reviewed journal, have you? A. No. Q. You've never written anything about asbestos at all in any non-peer reviewed journal, have you? A. No. Q. You've never had published anywhere at any time anything to do with the historical hazards o f asbestos, correct? A. Yes, correct. Q. And the only thing that's ever been Page 945 published that you wrote about asbestos was five sentences in a newspaper column that you wrote in 1994, right? A. Yes. Q. Have you ever published any articles in peer reviewed or non-peer reviewed journals relating to anything? A. I've had article - technical-like letters published and things like that. Q. Other than a technical letter have you ever had anything published in any peer reviewed or non-peer reviewed journal? A. No. Q. What's a technical letter? A. Oh, different letters briefing people on different updates and laws and things like that. Q. And how many times have you done that where it's been published? A. Oh, I'd say, estimate, six or eight times. Q. Nothing about asbestos? A. Not that I recall. MR. KRISTAL: Why don't we go o ff the record for a minute. 53 (Pages 942 to 945) Priority-One Court Reporting (718) 761-0527 Page 946 1 THE SPECIAL MASTER: Off the record, 1 2 please. 2 3 THE VIDEOGRAPHER: Off the record. The 3 4 time is two fifty p.m. 4 5 (Discussion off the record.) 5 6 THE VIDEOGRAPHER: On the record. The 6 7 time is two fifty-three p.m. 7 8 (Whereupon, Exhibit 86, a copy o f the 8 9 article from January 1946 referred to as the 9 10 Fleischer Drinker article, was then received and 10 11 marked for identification.) 11 12 BY MR. KRISTAL: 12 13 Q. Ms. Drucker, Jerry Kristal again. Tm 13 14 going to mark as 86 a copy o f the article from 14 15 January 1946 that you referred to as the 15 1 6 Fleischer Drinker article. 16 17 Before I ask questions about that, you 17 18 recall, do you not -- we can get it if we need 18 19 to -- the Alice Hamilton report regarding 19 20 x-raying workers in the York, Pennsylvania 20 21 General Electric plant with respect to the fact 21 22 that x-raying workers who had only worked there 22 23 for a few years wouldn't be helpful in 23 24 diagnosing asbestos disease, correct? 24 25 A. We --certainly I'd have to see it, but 25 Page 947 1 in general I recall something to that effect. 1 2 Q. And the thrust o f the discussion that 2 3 we had at that time was if you examined people 3 4 by x-ray before the appropriate latency period 4 5 for asbestosis, you're going to get a negative 5 6 report because there wasn't enough time for the 6 7 disease to develop? Is that generally your 7 8 understanding o f what she was saying? 8 9 A. Yes. 9 10 Q. Okay. If you look at table five o f the 10 11 Fleischer Drinker report - 11 12 A. Okay. 12 13 Q. --table five lists the different Navy 13 14 yards and contract yards, the four o f them that 14 15 were the subject o f this study in the left-hand 15 1 6 column, does it not? 16 17 A. It does. 17 18 Q. And then in the right-hand column it 18 19 says, years in pipe covering industiy. D o you 19 20 see that? 20 21 A. Yes. 21 22 Q. And it gives a breakdown o f years, 22 2 3 right? 23 24 A. It does. 24 25 Q. And then it tells you how many o f the 25 P age 948 ;; individuals in each Navy yard were exposed for \ different periods o f time, does it not? A. Yes. Q. And it tells you for each period o f time how many o f the workers were affected; j meaning had asbestosis, correct? A. Or what they're calling exposed, yes. Q. And they broke down the years o f | exposure zero to two years, three to five years, five to ten years, and ten plus years, correct? i A. Yes. | Q. Now, if asbestos had a latency period o f greater than five years, and you examined people who had been in the pipe covering industry five or less years, you wouldn't expect j to find asbestosis, right? S A. Generally, right. Q. Let's look at Navy yard A here. There were fifty people that were exposed to asbestos, correct? i A. Oh, about, yes. Q. And thirty-nine o f those had worked five or less years in the pipe covering 1 industry, correct? \ A. Right, in yard A. Page 949 | Q. And all thirty-nine o f those, their i x-rays were negative, correct? A. Yes. $ Q. Thafs not surprising given the latency period for asbestosis, is it? A. Well, generally not, no. Q. Okay. Next Navy yard B, there were seven hundred and forty-nine people that were exposed in that Navy yard, correct? A. Yes. Q. And they were examined with - by x-ray all seven hundred and forty-nine, correct? A. Right. Q. And six hundred and seventy o f those had worked five years or less, correct? A. Yes. Q. And in the yard C, contract yard C, there were a hundred and sixty-seven people that were exposed? A. Oh, all together? Q. Right. A. Right. Okay. Q. And a hundred and five o f those worked five years or less? A. Right. 54 (Pages 946 to 949) Priority-One Court Reporting (718) 761-0527 Page 950 Page 952 ;; 1 Q. And in contract yard D, there were a 2 hundred and fifty-eight workers exposed to 3 asbestos? 4 A. Yes. 5 Q. And a hundred and thirty-four o f those 6 worked five years or less, correct? 1 A. And a hundred and thirty-four - 8 Q. A hundred and forty-four o f those -- 9 A. Yes. 10 Q. - were exposed five years or less, 11 correct? 12 A. Yes. 13 Q. So it was no surprise in all o f these 14 people who worked five years or less that they 1 5 didn't see any x-ray evidence o f asbestosis, 1 6 correct? 17 A. Well, from what w e know now, yes. 18 Q. Well, w e knew about latencies back in 1 9 the '30s and '40s. The Hamilton letter, if you 20 need to see it, was from 1934, was it not? 21 A. Yes. 22 MR. KRISTAL: Those are all the 2 3 questions I have now subject to any other 24 questions. 25 1 Q. Frederick J. Viles, Jr., V-I-L-E-S. Who 2 was he? 3 A. He was a health consultant for the 4 United States Navy, and that was my former 5 professor at Harvard. 6 Q. Is that right? Is that Dr. Viles or 7 Mr. Viles? 8 A. It was Mr. He was a certified 9 industrial hygienist. 10 Q. And you taught under him in Harvard? 11 A. Yes. 12 Q. How old was he? 13 A. How old was he then? It's hard to tell 14 when you're young, but I'd say around forties 15 maybe. 16 Q. Okay. 17 THE SPECIAL MASTER: Very young. 18 BY MR. SPEZIALI: 19 Q. Robert L. Gade, G-A-D-E. Who was he? 20 A. Yes. Okay. So let's see, Robert Gade 21 was a health consultant, United States Navy. 22 Q. Okay. And the fourth person, Phil 2 3 Drinker who we told a little bit about already 24 to the jury. And what was his title at that 25 point in time? Page 951 Page 953 1 RE-EXAMINATION BY MR. SPEZIALI: 2 3 Q. I have just a couple follow-up 4 questions. Stay with the report since it's in 5 your hand, Plaintiffs Exhibit ~ what number is 6 that, 86? 7 A. Uh-huh. 8 Q. Go to the first -- the title page o f 9 the report. The title is Health Survey o f Pipe 10 Covering Operations in Constructing Naval 11 Vessels, is that right? 12 A. Yes. 13 MR. KRISTAL: Dave, if you want Vicki 14 to get this - 15 BY MR. SPEZIALI: 16 Q. In Constructing Naval Vessels. Okay. 17 It's --the author -- let's tell the jury who 1 8 wrote this article. William --Walter E. 1 9 Fleischer. Do you see the footnote there? 20 A. Yes. 21 Q. Go down to footnote one, on the bottom, 22 Commander, MC, United States Navy Reserve, 2 3 assistant chief health consultant; is that 2 4 right? 25 A. Yes, that's right. 1 A. Yes. Philip Drinker was chief health 2 consultant, US Maritime Commission. 3 Q. Okay. And the last page, conclusions 4 you talked to the jury about, but I want to talk 5 about conclusion four. I'm going to read it. 6 Okay? 7 A. Yes. 8 Q. Since each o f the three cases o f 9 asbestosis are work with asbestos pipe covering 10 in shipyards for more than twenty years, you 11 may - it may be concluded that such pipe 12 covering is not a dangerous occupation. Do you 13 remember that conclusion? 14 A. Yes. 15 Q. Now, given that so many o f the people 1 6 they looked at, as Mr. Kristal just pointed out, 17 had been exposed under the latency window as it 18 was recognized and understood back even when -- 1 9 the era o f World War D, prel946, do you have an 20 opinion from an industrial hygiene standpoint 21 whether Drs. Fleischer, Viles, Gade and Drinker 22 were perhaps attempting to manipulate the 23 literature for some reasons directed to them by 24 the United States Navy? 25 MR. KRISTAL: Object to the form o f the 55 (Pages 950 to 953) Priority-One Court Reporting (718) 761-0527 Page 954 1 question. 1 2 THE WITNESS: No. 2 3 MR. SPEZIALI: Why in the world would 3 4 these four individuals dare to have published 4 5 such a thing back in 1946 when, as Mr. Kristal 5 6 points out, it was so well known that this 6 7 article was flawed because so many people were 7 8 under twenty years latency? 8 9 MR. KRISTAL: Object to the form. 9 10 MR. SPEZIALI: Why would they dare do 10 11 such a thing? 11 12 MR. KRISTAL: Object to the form o f the 12 13 question. I also have a foundation question 13 14 objection. Go ahead. 14 15 THE WITNESS: Well, these kinds o f 15 16 people, the quality o f the researchers in this 16 17 investigation thought what they were doing was 17 18 valid and reflective o f the study they were 18 1 9 trying to find out about. 19 20 BY MR. SPEZIALI: 20 21 Q. Do you know o f anybody - oh, and by 21 22 the way, when they published this, if you can go 22 2 3 to the footnotes on the last page. There are 23 24 three. 24 25 A. Yes. 25 Page 955 1 Q. Do you see the first footnote Lanza, 1 2 Silicosis and Asbestosis? 2 3 A. Yes,Ido. 3 4 Q. Does that title in 1938 - do you have 4 5 an opinion whether that's the same reference -- 5 6 MR. KRISTAL: Til stipulate that's the 6 7 textbook we saw. 7 8 MR. SPEZIALI: Okay. Would that 8 9 suggest to you that that textbook was generally 9 10 available for the world to see and not just for 10 11 General Electric? 11 12 THE WITNESS: Yes. 12 13 MR. KRISTAL: Object to the form o f the 13 14 question. 14 15 BY MR. SPEZIALI: 15 16 Q. And I see the next one is the Dreessen 16 17 study in 1938 for the United States Public 17 18 Health Service; is that right? 18 19 A. Yes. 19 20 Q. Okay. And then the last one, are you 20 21 familiar with that one? Is it, Fahey, Ships in 21 22 the Aircraft, United States Navy fleet, second 22 23 war edition, 1944? 23 24 A. No. 24 25 Q. Okay. Do you know any o f --any 25 Page 956 j references in the world, medical and scientific f literature or industrial hygiene literature I prior to the days o f OSHA that was published l indicating that the Fleischer Drinker report 1 should be ignored as flawed because most o f the ; people studied had a latency period o f under twenty years? Do you know anybody that f published anything like that or did you see anything like that? A. No. Q. You were asked about your testimony in | the instances for the thirty or forty I Plaintiffs, whether it had been stricken. Do you remember that question? A. Yes. Q. And he asked you whether you ever testified at trial. Do you remember that question? A. Right. i Q. Okay. Did you ever testify at a deposition? A. Yes. Q. Okay. Did anybody ever make a motion to strike your testimony in those instances? A. Not that I recall. Page 957 ] Q. Okay. Did anybody ever make a motion while you were retained on behalf o f Plaintiffs' attorneys to strike you from a case as being unqualified? A. No. Q. And correct me if --well, let me ask you this: When you were retained by the Plaintiffs attorneys in those cases, did you have publications in those days that you didn't have or talk about today? A. No. Q. So back in - when you were obtained by the Plaintiffs' attorneys you had no publications in a peer reviewed journal? A. Right. Q. And today as we sit here do you still have no publications in a peer reviewed journal? A. Right. Q. And when you worked for the United States Environmental Protection Agency from 1972 to 1976 and did air monitoring programs, did you have publications in the scientific literature dealing with the topics you were dealing with? A. No. Q. And did anybody say to you in that era 56 (Pages 954 to 957) Priority-One Court Reporting (718) 761-0527 Page 958 1 o f time that you were unqualified to work for 1 2 the Environmental Protection Agency because you 2 3 didn't have publications? 3 4 A. No. 4 5 Q. Okay. And when you worked as an 5 6 industrial hygienist at the Long Beach Naval 6 7 Shipyard in California, did anybody tell you 7 8 that, that you were unqualified to do that work 8 9 because you had no publications? 9 10 A. No. 10 11 Q. Okay. And you were asked about the 11 12 cases that you had with the Plaintiffs' 12 13 attorneys, whether or not General Electric was a 13 14 party to those cases at the time. Do you 14 1 5 remember that? 15 16 A. Yes. 16 17 Q. Okay. And let me ask you this: In 17 18 those cases, were you asked to look at certain 18 1 9 industrial hygiene issues such as you've been 19 20 asked to look to today with respect to 20 21 state-of-the-art literature and topics dealing 21 22 with asbestos? 22 23 MR. KRISTAL: Object to the form o f the 23 2 4 question. 24 25 THE WITNESS: Yes. 25 Page 959 1 MR. SPEZIALI: And in that literature 1 2 and those searches that you did, even though 2 3 General Electric may not have been a party to 3 4 those cases, in looking at the literature did 4 5 anything ever pop up that suggested that the 5 6 General Electric Corporation had acted 6 7 improperly or was a bad company with respect to 7 8 the manner it managed asbestos? 8 9 THE WITNESS: No. 9 10 MR. KRISTAL: Object to the form o f the 10 11 question. 11 12 BY MR. SPEZIALI: 12 13 Q. Okay. And let me ask you, the General 13 14 Electric Company, those Plaintiffs' attorneys 14 1 5 that retained you in those cases, do you 15 1 6 remember who they were? 16 17 A. Some o f them. 17 18 Q. Okay. Did they have more than just a 18 1 9 few asbestos cases? 19 20 A. They had groups, yes, many cases. 20 21 Q. Did you respect those men as good - 21 22 and women as good attorneys? 22 23 A. Yes. 23 24 Q. Okay. If they had found anything in 24 2 5 the medical and scientific literature 25 Page 960 publications or, or documents by General Electric that suggested that General Electric was a bad company with respect to asbestos, do you have an opinion whether or not General Electric would have been a defendant in those cases? MR. KRISTAL: Object to the question. THE WITNESS: Yes. MR. SPEZIALI: And what's your opinion? THE WITNESS: It would have been. MR. KRISTAL: You're asking opinions about whether or not General Electric was in the case? MR. SPEZIALI: No, no, you asked that. I asked -MR. KRISTAL: No. I asked whether they were, and she said no. Now you're asking an opinion as to whether they were? I object. MR. SPEZIALI: Well, you apparently want to turn it into something that it's not. So if you do, that's the route we're going to go to. And, and finally, with respect to the publications by General Electric where Mr. Kristal points out that asbestosis was Page 961 talked about but not cancer, okay? THE WITNESS: Yes. MR. SPEZIALI: Okay. Do you know of anybody out there today who, who is of the opinion that they would -- that they, that they don't mind having a little dab of asbestosis but they just don't want any cancer? Do you know anybody like that? MR. KRISTAL: Object to the form o f the question. THE WITNESS: No. MR. SPEZIALI: In the medical and industrial hygiene community both pre and post OSHA, okay, did anybody ever suggest in any publication anywhere that it's okay to give a worker asbestosis as long as you don't give them cancer? MR. KRISTAL: Object to the form o f the question. THE WITNESS: No. MR. SPEZIALI: Do you know of anybody? THE WITNESS: No. MR. SPEZIALI: Okay. Do you know of anybody who would suggest that you should ignore protecting a worker for asbestosis because an 57 (P a g e s 958 t o 961) Priority-One Court Reporting (718) 761-0527 Page 962 P age 964 ah 1 article has been written that doesn't also 1 MR. SPEZIALI: By the way, objection to 1 2 mention cancer? 2 that. Improper. \ 3 THE WITNESS: No. 3 MR. KRISTAL: Are you saying that in s 4 MR. KRISTAL: Object to the form o f the 4 the late 1980s and 1990s you had an opinion on 5 question. 5 that subject? 1 6 MR. SPEZIALI: Okay. Sort o f like 6 THE WITNESS: Well, I'd say as part o f 7 saying it's okay to get a cold to avoid the flu. 7 die work that I was doing on those particular 8 MR. KRISTAL: Object to the form o f the 8 matters relative to that, yeah, at the time, 9 question. 9 sure. 10 THE WITNESS: Never saw it. 10 (Whereupon, the testimony was stricken \ 11 11 from the record.) 12 RE-EXAMINATION BY MR. KRISTAL: 12 MR. SPEZIALI: This is improper. 1 13 13 MR. KRISTAL: She just said she may | 14 Q. Ms. Drucker, are you saying to this 14 have to look. 15 jury that the cases in the late 1980s and early 15 MR. SPEZIALI: No, this is improper. ; 16 1990s when Plaintiffs' attorneys retained you 16 MR. KRISTAL: Okay. So make an 17 had to do with the state-of-the-art knowledge 17 objection. ; 18 about die hazards o f asbestos in terms o f your 18 MR. SPEZIALI: Well, it's more than an 19 role in those cases? 19 objection. We can't taint a record with 20 A. Part o f what I was hired to do was to 20 something as ridiculous as this. The question t 21 discuss --to study state o f the art and discuss 21 was is she being offered for that, and the 22 it, yes. 22 answer was no, and therefore, she had no 5 23 Q. In general. 2 3 opinion. That was my decision. That had i 24 A. In general. 24 nothing to do with her. 25 Q. Okay. I asked you June 3rd, 2004 at 25 THE SPECIAL MASTER: Let's go o ff the \ Page 963 Page 965 1 1 your deposition when you were under oath the 2 following question on page two thirty-eight. 3 Question, do you have an opinion as to 4 the state o f the art with respect to asbestos in 5 the scientific and industrial hygiene 6 communities, and in particular as to the 7 evolution o f knowledge regarding the effects o f 8 asbestos exposure and its control during the 9 period relevant to this case other than that 10 with respect to the Navy and GE? 11 And Mr. Speziali said, again, I'm not 12 going to ask her about that, Jeriy. 13 And then I asked, nor do you have an 14 opinion as you sit here today on that subject? 15 And your answer was, I've been asked to 1 6 concentrate on the Navy in this particular 17 instance. 18 And then I said, so you don't have an 19 opinion on that as you sit here today. 20 And could you read your answer, line 21 sixteen and seventeen on page two thirty-nine? 22 A. Sure. As I sit here today I have not 23 formulated one. 24 Q. Okay. So are you saying that on June 25 3rd, 2 0 0 4 - 1 record completely. 2 THEVIDEOGRAPHER: This is the 3 conclusion o f tape number two, volume four o f 4 the continuing deposition o f Maijorie Drucker. 5 O ff the record. The time is three ten p.m. 6 (Whereupon, a recess was then taken.) 7 THE SPECIAL MASTER: Right. We're 8 going to just strike the last question and 9 answer. Mr. Kristal's, Mr. Kristal's last 10 question and the witness's last answer will be 11 stricken. 12 THE REPORTER: Do you want me to 13 actually take it out o f the transcript? 14 THE SPECIAL MASTER: Yes. I want you 15 to take it out o f the transcript, and I want it 16 edited somehow out o f the tape. I don't know 17 how we do that, but that's your problem. Okay. 18 Now I think we can bring the witness back in and 19 go back on. 20 MR. KRISTAL: On the steno record, I'm 21 assuming, I'm assuming that GE is going to 22 provide full and complete copies o f all the 23 exhibits that are partial, and just as you asked 24 me to do. 25 MR. SPEZIALI: Uh-huh, yes. 58 (Pages 962 to 965) Priority-One Court Reporting (718) 761-0527 1 V i :'v. X \ . - l,l_) 2 MR. SPEZIALI: The answer is yes. 2 SS: 3 MR. KRISTAL: Okay. No more questions. 3 COUNTY OF ERIE) 4 THE SPECIAL MASTER: Back on the 5 record, please. 6 THEVIDEOGRAPHER: This is the 7 beginning o f tape number three, volume four o f 8 the continuing deposition o f Marjorie Drucker. 9 On the record. The time is three thirty-three 10 p.m. 11 MR. KRISTAL: Ms. Drucker, this is 12 Jerry Kristal. I have no further questions. 13 MR. SPEZIALI: And I think that will be 14 it unless any o f the other counsel, which I 1 5 doubt-- 16 MR. KRISTAL: N o one has any other 17 questions, therefore the deposition is over. 1 8 Thank you. 19 THE WITNESS: Thank you. 4 5 I, VICTORIA ROHL, a Notary Public 6 in and for the State of New York, County of 7 Erie, DO HEREBY CERTIFY, that the Examination 8 Before Trial of MARJORIE A. DRUCKER, was taken 9 down by me in a verbatim manner by means of 10 Machine Shorthand on August 20, 2004, that the 11 proceedings were taken to be used in the 12 above-entitled action. 13 I further CERTIFY that the 14 above-described transcript constitutes a true, 15 accurate and complete transcript o f the 16 testimony. 17 18 19 20 20 THEVIDEOGRAPHER: This is the end of VICTORIA ROHL 21 the deposition, and -- this is the end o f the 21 Notary Public 2 2 deposition and tape number three, volume four. 22 2 3 O ff the record. The time is three thirty-three 23 2 4 p.m. 24 25 * * # * * 25 Page 967 1 I hereby CERTIFY that I have read 2 the foregoing pages, and with the exception of 3 the changes on the errata sheet, that they are a 4 true and accurate transcript o f the testimony 5 given by me in the above-entitled action on 6 August 20,2004. 7 8 9 MARJORIE A. DRUCKER 10 11 Sworn to before me this 12 dayof ,2004. 13 14 15 16 Notary Public 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 1 INDEX 2 3 MARJORIE A. DRUCKER PAGE: 4 5 CONTINUING EXAMINATION BY 6 MR. KRISTAL 7 EXAMINATION BY MR. SPEZIALI 8 RE-EXAMINATION BY MR. KRISTAL 9 RE-EXAMINATION BY MR. SPEZIALI 10 RE-EXAMINATION BY MR. KRISTAL 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 743 843 932 951 962 59 (Pages 966 to 969) Priority-One Court Reporting (718) 761-0527 1 EXHIBIT INDEX 2 3 EXHIBITS: PAGE: 4 57, Industrial Medicine, volume 4, number 745 5 seven from 1935 6 58, October 1935, volume four, number ten of 764 Industrial Medicine, an article entitled 7 Dusty Death 8 59, an April 1940 portion of Industrial 766 Medicine 9 60, the textbook Silicosis and Asbestosis 772 10 61, a document dated March o f 1944, 798 11 Industrial Medicinejournal 12 62, a document dated June 4th, 1932, the 801 subject is Report on Health Protection in 13 Sandblasting and Metal Abrasive Blasting, on General Electric letterhead, from NJ Darling 14 to the president of General Electric, Mr. Swope 15 63, aJune 1st, 1932 memo from EH Ballard 802 16 regarding the report of the committee of the National Safety Council on health protection 17 in air pressure blasting 18 64, a document from die National Safety 806 Council entided transactions, 1932,21st 19 Annual Safety Congress; October 3rd to October 7th, 1932 20 65, an August 1933 document, National Safety 809 21 News from the National Safety Council 22 66,1934 National Safety Council transactions 814 from October 1st to October 5th, 1934 23 67, a copy of die National Safety News from 816 24 September 1935 25 EXHIBITS (CONT.) 68, the last o f the National Safety Council documents, die transactions from die year 1938 Silver Jubilee of the Safety Congress 5 69, the Industrial Toxicology, Alice Hamilton and Dr. Hardy, second edition, 1949 6 70, an editorial from the Journal of the 7 American Medical Association from 1949 8 71, Industrial Hygiene Digest from August of 1949 9 72, an EHF digest dated July of 1952 10 73, a September 1952IHF digest which notes 11 the General Electric vice-president as a keynote speaker 12 74, an Industrial Hygiene Digest from June of 13 1953 14 75, a September 1955 Industrial Hygiene Digest with an abstract of an article 15 entided Mortality From Lung Cancer in Asbestos Workers by Dr. Doll 16 76, an Industrial Hygiene Digest from July 17 1955 18 77, a document dated February 21st, 1973, entided Environmental Newsletter, Subject 19 Asbestos 20 78 and 79, die deposition notices for the deposition 21 38-A, a cover letter for the report from 22 Dr. Merewether 23 80, proceedings of the 8th annual meeting of the ACGIH 24 25 817 820 824 830 832 833 833 834 835 837 840 876 896 EXHIBITS (CONT.) 81, Novem ber 7th, 1955, Department o f N avy, 898 Bureau o f M edicine and Surgery, subject, threshold lim it values for toxic materials 82, a copy o f Dr. Sax's book in 1951 914 83, the report from the State o f 916 Pennsylvania, April 1942 84, the cover page o f Safety M anagement w ith 8 the excerpt dealing w ith Dr. Grimaldi's book 9 85, a document entitled Safety and A ccident Prevention in Chemical Operations by 10 Dr. Howard Fawcett, research lab, General Electric, publication date, 1965 11 86, a copy o f the article from January 1946 12 referred to as the Fleischer Drinker article 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 919 920 946 60 (Pages 970 to 972)