Document k9zvJ2jX5wGYVpro4o0kpnmoV

IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF COMMON PLEAS CUYAHOGA COUNTY, OHIO - - - - -- - - - - - -x AARON WEBB, Executor of the Estate of CHARLES WEBB, et al., Plaintiffs, vs. Case No. CV-08-659360 GOODYEAR TIRE & RUBBER CO., et al., Defendants. - - - - -- - - - - - -x Tuesday, August 11, 2009 Baltimore, Maryland Deposition of SHELDON H. RABINOVITZ, Ph.D., CIH, the witness, called for examination by counsel for the plaintiffs, pursuant to notice, held at the Four Points By Sheraton BWI Airport, 7032 Elm Road, Baltimore, Maryland 21240, beginning at 2:06 p.m., before Kelly Susnowitz, a Notary Public in and for the State of Maryland, when were present on behalf of the respective parties: DEPOSITION OF SHELDON H. RABINOVITZ, Ph.D., CIH CONDUCTED ON 8/11/2009 2 1 APPEARANCES 2 For the Plaintiffs via phone: 3 JOHN D. MISMAS, ESQUIRE 4 Bevan and Associates 5 10360 Northfield Road 6 Northfield, Ohio 44067 7 mismas1@aol.com 8 330-467-8571 9 10 For the Defendants: 11 KEVIN C. ALEXANDERSEN, ESQUIRE 12 Gallagher & Sharp 13 1501 Euclid Avenue 14 6th Floor 15 Cleveland, Ohio 44115 16 kalexandersen@gallaghersharp.com 17 216-241-5310 18 19 20 21 2 1 CONTENTS 2 Examination by Counsel 3 Witness Page 4 SHELDON H. RABINOVITZ, Ph.D., CIH 5 6 By: 7 Mr. Mismas 5 8 9 EXH I B ITS 10 Exhibit No. Marked 11 1 Notice of Deposition 7 12 2 Files of Materials that were Reviewed 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 7 4 1 For the Defendants via phone: 2 BRENT C. TAGGART, ESQUIRE 3 Vorys, Sater, Seymour and Pease, LLP 4 P.O. Box 1008 5 52 East Gay Street 6 Columbus, Ohio 43216-1008 7 bctaggart@vssp.com 8 614-464-8330 9 10 For the Defendants via phone: 11 R. STEVEN PORRECA, ESQUIRE 12 Kelley, Jasons, McGowan, Spinelli & 13 Hanna, LLP 14 Two Liberty Place Suite 1900 15 50 South 16th Place 16 Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19102 17 sporreca@kjmsh.com 18 267-809-8708 19 20 21 3 1 ST I P U LATI O N S 2 It is hereby stipulated and agreed by and 3 between counsel present at this deposition and by 4 the deponent that the reading and signing of this 5 deposition is not waived. 6 Thereupon 7 SHELDON H. RABINOVITZ, Ph.D., CIH, 8 the witness, called for examination by counsel for 9 the plaintiffs, and after having been first duly 10 sworn by the Notary Public, was examined and 11 testified as follows: 12 EXAMINATION BY COUNSEL FOR THE PLAINTIFFS 13 BY MR. MISMAS: 14 Q. Good afternoon, Dr. Rabinovitz. 15 A. Good afternoon. 16 Q. My name is John Mismas and I represent the 17 plaintiff in this case. You've given some 18 depositions before, I take for granted? 19 A. I have. 20 Q. Do I need to go over the rules a bit or do 21 you think you will be okay? 5 PRECISE REPORTING SERVICES (301) 210-5092 (877) 4 A STENO DEPOSITION OF SHELDON H. RABINOVITZ, Ph.D., CIH CONDUCTED ON 8/11/2009 3 1 A. I think I'll be okay. 2 Q. I might lose my train of thought. I just 3 deposed Mr. Boulder for two and a half hours, so 4 if you don't understand my question or something, 5 just let me know. Okay? 6 A. Okay. 7 Q. Can you state your full name for the 8 record, please? 9 A. Sheldon H. Rabinovitz. 10 Q. Where do you currently live, sir? 11 A. I live in North Potomac, Maryland. 12 Q. And what's your date of birth? 13 A. September 2nd, 1944. 14 Q. So that makes you 61? 15 A. That makes me just about 65. 16 Q. I'm sorry. I told you I'm a little off 17 right now. Did you bring your file with you 18 today? 19 A. I did. 20 Q. Can you identify what's in your file? 21 A. Yes. I have -- the file material is the 6 1 take and -- would that include the CV, the bills, 2 do you want to keep that separate? 3 MR. MISMAS: Put it all in the file. 4 That's fine. 5 THE WITNESS: And also I have a list of 6 references that I didn't include in my reports, so 7 I'll put that in as part of the file, too. 8 MR. MISMAS: Thank you, Doctor. 9 BY MR. MISMAS: 10 Q. Doctor, are there any correspondences 11 between you and any of the defendants or defense 12 counsel in your file? 13 A. I'll have to look. Yes. 14 Q. What's the date -- is there more than one 15 or just one? 16 A. I only see one, and it is dated May 14th, 17 2009. 18 Q. Okay. So was that them sending you all of 19 the information for the report? 20 A. Yes. They sent me the information for me 21 to evaluate the situation. 1 report I wrote in this case, notice of deposition, 2 material regarding motion for summary judgment 3 from Gallagher Sharp, some additional information 4 on that, the deposition of Mr. Aaron Webb, medical 5 records regarding Charles Webb, and in addition, 6 in response to information you requested, I 7 brought a list of my deposition and trial 8 testimony. I brought the bill that was sent out 9 by Sandler Occupational Medicine, in this case, 10 and I brought a copy of my resume. 11 Q. Okay. 12 MR. MISMAS: Madam court reporter, can you 13 mark the notice of deposition as Exhibit 1 and 14 just mark his file as Exhibit 2. 15 (Deposition Exhibit Nos. 1 and 2 were 16 marked for identification.) 17 MR. ALEXANDERSEN: And the file -- John, 18 did you want it -19 MR. MISMAS: Have it all marked as 2. I 20 don't need it separated. 21 MR. ALEXANDERSEN: So I'm just going to 7 1 Q. Did they send you a summary of any of the 2 deposition testimony or anything? 3 A. No. 4 Q. And you issued a report on June 4th, 2009; 5 is that correct? 6 A. Let me look. June 4th, yes. 7 Q. Instead of me asking you about 800 8 questions about your educational background, can 9 you just give me your educational background, 10 Doctor? 11 A. Yes. My educational background is a 12 bachelor's degree of chemistry, masters of science 13 degree in occupational and environmental health or 14 industrial hygiene and a Ph.D. from medical 15 school, the Department of Physiology and 16 Pharmacology, in cooperation with the Department 17 of Occupational and Environmental Health, where 18 the formal degree is in physiology and 19 pharmacology, but the work also revolved around 20 toxicology, so I consider myself having a major in 21 toxicology. PRECISE REPORTING SERVICES (301) 210-5092 (877) 4 A STENO 8 9 DEPOSITION OF SHELDON H. RABINOVITZ, Ph.D., CIH CONDUCTED ON 8/11/2009 4 1 Q. What year did you get your Ph.D. and from 2 what school? 3 A. 1972, Wayne State University, Detroit, 4 Michigan. 5 Q. And what year and what college did you get 6 your undergraduate degree from? 7 A. Also Wayne State University. 8 Q. What year was that? 9 A. 1966. 10 Q. What was your first job as a certified -11 you are a certified industrial hygienist? 12 A. I am. 13 Q. You had to take an exam for that? 14 A. Yes. 15 Q. What year did you take your exam? 16 A. 1974, I think. 17 Q. Did you pass it the first time? 18 A. Yes. 19 Q. And what was your first job in the 20 industrial hygiene field? 21 A. I was an industrial hygiene chemist while 6 < CD 10 1 Q. And what year did you leave BASF? 2 A. 1973. 3 Q. And where did you go from there? 4 A. Ford Motor Company. 5 Q. Detroit? 6 A. Dearborn. 7 Q. And how long were you with Ford Motor 8 Company? 9 A. About five years. 10 Q. So that takes us to '78, '79? 11 A. Yes. 12 Q. And you were an industrial hygienist for 13 Ford? 14 A. Yes. 15 Q. Were you the head industrial hygienist? 17 Q. What were your responsibilities at Ford? 18 A. Just responsibility for evaluating 19 employee work environments, to make sure employees 20 were working in a healthful environment. 21 Q. And what year did you leave Ford? 1 in undergraduate school. 2 Q. And where was that at? 3 A. It was at the Department of Occupational 4 Environmental Health, Wayne State University 5 Medical School. 6 Q. And how long did you hold that position 7 for? 8 A. It was part-time, and I held it, I think, 9 about three years. 10 Q. Okay. What was your first job out of 11 college? 12 A. My first job out of college was with BASF 13 Wyandotte Corporation as an industrial hygienist 14 and toxicologist. 15 Q. You were responsible for the health and 16 safety of employees at BASF? 17 A. Yes. 18 Q. Did you have any formal training in 19 asbestos, at that time? 20 A. I had some. My education involved some 21 work with asbestos. 11 1 A. '78. 2 Q. And where did you go from there? 3 A. I went to Science Applications 4 International, which actually was a subsidiary at 5 that time. It doesn't exist now, which was 6 called, JRB, and that was a consulting company in 7 the Washington, D.C. area. 8 Q. And how long were you there? 9 A. About six years. 10 Q. About '84? 11 A. Towards the end of '83. 12 Q. When you were at that consulting firm, did 13 that have anything to do with litigation support 14 or anything like that? 15 A. I did do a little litigation support, but 16 not much. 17 Q. What was your main job duties there? 18 A. Main job duties were doing industrial 19 hygiene consulting to companies, also working on 20 company contracts that it had with OSHA and the 21 National Institute for Occupational Safety and PRECISE REPORTING SERVICES (301) 210-5092 (877) 4 A STENO 12 13 DEPOSITION OF SHELDON H. RABINOVITZ, Ph.D., CIH CONDUCTED ON 8/11/2009 5 1 Health, NIOSH, and for the Consumer Product Safety 2 Commission and for the Environmental Protection 3 Agency. 4 Q. Okay. When you said you did a little 5 litigation support, what sort of litigation 6 support did you do? 7 A. And this, we're talking about the science 8 application, right? 9 Q. Just in that time period, sir. 10 A. I remember some carbon monoxide cases. 11 There were some other things. It was not 12 asbestos. 13 Q. Okay. Really, that's all I wanted to 14 know. And what was the next job that you had 15 there, after you left? 16 A. I left and went to the National Institute 17 for Occupational Safety and Health, where I was a 18 senior scientist. 19 Q. How long were you a senior scientist 20 there? 21 A. About three years. 14 1 Q. You said you were there a couple of years 2 and then you went part-time; is that right? 3 A. Yes. 4 Q. What did you do that you were only working 5 part-time there? 6 A. I started with Sandler Occupational 7 Medicine Associates. 8 Q. Are you still with them? 9 A. No, I am not. 10 Q. How long were you with them? 11 A. I was with them until June 30th -- yeah, 12 30th of this year. 13 Q. And that's what your report says, that's 14 why I was wondering, it says SOMA at the top. And 15 what did they do? 16 A. Are you talking about Sandler? 17 Q. Yeah. 18 A. Occupational health consulting. 19 Q. And how much of that was devoted to 20 litigation? 21 A. You know, I don't know how much the 1 Q. And after you left, where did you go? 2 A. The United States Environmental Protection 3 Agency in Washington, D.C. 4 Q. How long were you there? 5 A. I was there two years full-time and stayed 6 an additional three years part-time. 7 Q. And what were your job duties when you 8 were with EPA? 9 A. I was the head manager of health and 10 safety, responsible for the health and safety of 11 EPA employees and I also was involved in some EPA 12 projects. 13 Q. What kind of projects were you involved 14 in? 15 A. One was the Office of Toxic Substance that 16 I was on the Asbestos Action Committee. I also 17 did work in hazardous waste and I also did work in 18 evaluating employee, potential employee, exposures 19 to asbestos and designing and managing asbestos 20 removal projects within the Environmental 21 Protection Agency. 15 1 company, itself, did in the field of litigation. 2 Q. How much did you do? 3 A. That changed with time. 4 Q. Was it more at the beginning or less at 5 the beginning and more at the end? 6 A. Less at the beginning and more at the end. 7 Q. So when you started, what do you think 8 your percentage of litigation was? 9 A. Probably less than 50 percent. 10 Q. What was it when you left? 11 A. Approaching 90 percent. 12 Q. And were you paid a salary when you worked 13 there? 14 A. I was. 15 Q. Did you have any ownership in the company? 16 A. Yes. 17 Q. And what percentage did you own? 18 A. Fourteen percent. 19 Q. And did they buy that back when you left? 20 A. I would like them to. 21 Q. And you got a salary when you were there? PRECISE REPORTING SERVICES (301) 210-5092 (877) 4 A STENO 16 17 DEPOSITION OF SHELDON H. RABINOVITZ, Ph.D., CIH CONDUCTED ON 8/11/2009 6 1 A. Yes. 2 Q. Did you get bonuses, too? 3 A. Yes. 4 Q. What were your bonuses based on? 5 A. The goodness of the owner's heart. 6 Q. I know the feeling. 7 A. There was no formula. There was no 8 agreement. It really was dependent on what they 9 would give me. 10 Q. And I know the feeling, Doctor. What was 11 your salary when you left? 12 A. $165,000 a year. 13 Q. Do you know what your bonus was from last 14 year? 15 A. You know, that's kind of -- I'm not 16 exactly sure. 17 Q. Is it more than 50,000? 18 A. Yes. 19 Q. Is it more than 100? 20 A. You know, I don't really know exactly. 21 There's been some discrepancy, so right now, I 6 < CM 18 1 defending companies in asbestos litigation? 3 Q. What percentage of it is? 4 A. You know, I don't know what the percentage 5 is. Right now, it's a goodly percent, but I don't 6 know exactly how much. 7 Q. Let me reask that a different way. Not 8 asbestos litigation, but what percentage of your 9 business now is devoted to litigation? 10 A. Right now, at this moment, it's all 11 litigation. 12 Q. It's 100 percent litigation? 13 A. At this moment. 14 Q. And at this moment, do you represent 15 anybody that is acting as a plaintiff in a 16 lawsuit? 17 A. Well, let's see. I've been asked to work 18 on a criminal case, but I guess, the criminal will 19 still be the defendant, so I guess not. 20 Q. That's right. And how much do you charge 21 per hour for this consulting business that you 1 can't say. 2 Q. So for all purposes, they were over 3 50,000, right? 4 A. Yes. 5 Q. So in June of this year, June 30th of this 6 year, you started your own company? 7 A. I'm trying to. 8 Q. You started a consulting business? 9 A. Yes. 10 Q. Does it have a name? 11 A. I haven't incorporated yet. 12 Q. So you're like a solo rider, right now? 13 A. Yes. 14 Q. Do you work out of your home? 15 A. Yes. 16 Q. This business that you started, it's a 17 consulting firm, right? 18 A. Yes. 19 Q. Is it 100 percent devoted to litigation? 20 A. At this moment, yes. 21 Q. And is 100 percent of it devoted to 19 1 have? 2 A. That's kind of unclear, because I'm trying 3 to work out a noncompete arrangement with Sandler. 4 So right now, I'm working under a subcontract to 5 him until we're able to work out a final 6 arrangement. 7 Q. So you're working as an independent 8 contractor, basically? 9 A. Yes. 10 Q. And how much are you getting paid as this 11 independent contractor? 12 A. I'm being paid $200 an hour to review 13 materials and $275 to provide testimony. 14 Q. And do you know what they're charging for 15 your time? 16 A. I know what they were charging for my time 17 when I left on June 30th. 18 Q. And how much were they charging at that 19 point in time? 20 A. $310 an hour for preparation and $425 an 21 hour for testimony. PRECISE REPORTING SERVICES (301) 210-5092 (877) 4 A STENO 20 21 DEPOSITION OF SHELDON H. RABINOVITZ, Ph.D., CIH CONDUCTED ON 8/11/2009 7 1 Q. Okay. So I'm going to ask you a little 2 bit about the background of your report. Did 3 anybody help you prepare your report? 4 A. Yes. 5 Q. Who helped you? 6 A. I don't remember the name of the person, 7 unfortunately. I can find out, but I just don't 8 know it off the top of my head. 9 Q. Who did they work for? 10 A. They worked for Sandler. 11 Q. And how did they help you? 12 A. They did an initial review of the material 13 and they helped put some of the background 14 material together. I, then, reviewed what they 15 put together and went back to the original 16 deposition to read it. They, then, put in some 17 standard sections that might apply to this report 18 and then I went and modified those sections to 19 make it an individualized report that would fit my 20 evaluation of what happened. 21 Q. Okay. Did somebody summarize the facts of 22 1 change for certain situations that might stay the 2 same, but those are all written by me to begin 3 with anyway. And so, they may have been put in by 4 someone else, but essentially, I write it. For 5 example, there's a part that talks about my 6 background at the end of the opinion section and 7 that sometimes may not change from one report to 8 another, other than that, it is all customized by 9 myself. 10 Q. Thanks, Doctor, that's all I needed to 11 know. Have you ever testified for a plaintiff in 12 an asbestos case? 13 A. Not in an asbestos case. 14 Q. So 100 percent of your testimony in 15 asbestos cases had been on behalf of asbestos 16 defendants, correct? 17 A. When I have testified, that is correct. 18 Q. And what about your consulting, have you 19 ever consulted for a plaintiff in an asbestos 20 case? 21 A. I have evaluated situations where I needed 1 the deposition for you? 2 A. Well, again, they put some initial 3 material summaries of what was in the deposition. 4 I used that, along with reviewing the deposition 5 myself, to finalize what was in the background 6 material. 7 Q. Okay. I just want to know what percentage 8 of this report did you write and what percentage 9 did somebody else write? 10 A. By and large, if you would look at all of 11 the changes that I made, you might have difficulty 12 in even thinking that it was written by anyone but 13 me. I made a lot of changes to what's put in, so 14 I would have to say that I really wrote the 15 report. 16 Q. But the majority of the skeletal outline 17 of the report was written by someone else, other 18 than you, correct? 19 A. Again, the background material is 20 summarized by someone else, but then I change it. 21 There are certain pieces that actually don't 23 1 to or the people wanted to know whether there was 2 a potential asbestos hazard and sampled for 3 asbestos, but it didn't involve litigation. 4 Q. I just thought that maybe someone that's 5 been diagnosed with an asbestos related disease, 6 have you ever consulted on behalf of them? 7 A. You know, I might have been contacted by a 8 plaintiff's attorney and asked to review material, 9 but it never led to actually doing a case. 10 Q. So by and large, that's pretty rare, is it 11 not? 12 A. Pretty rare for me to actually have done a 13 case for a plaintiff? 14 Q. Or just even consulted or reviewed or 15 anything? 16 A. I would say, based on all the work I have 17 done, it's not unreasonable to use the term 18 "rare." 19 Q. And who retained you in this case? 20 A. The law firm of Gallagher and Sharp. 21 Q. And who is it that you understand they PRECISE REPORTING SERVICES (301) 210-5092 (877) 4 A STENO 24 25 DEPOSITION OF SHELDON H. RABINOVITZ, Ph.D., CIH CONDUCTED ON 8/11/2009 8 1 represent? 2 A. Burnham Corporation. 3 Q. And has anybody else retained you in this 4 case? 5 A. Not that I'm aware of. 6 Q. How much have you billed, to date, on this 7 case? 8 A. We have sent in one bill and I believe 9 that it was for $4,400. 10 Q. And how many hours have you dedicated to 11 this case so far? 12 A. I have probably put in about eight hours. 13 Q. Okay. And how -- you know, I don't have 14 your CV, so I'm just going to ask you these couple 15 of quick questions. How many articles have you 16 published in literature on asbestos? 17 A. Zero. 18 Q. Okay. And if I'm correct, you are not a 19 pathologist? 20 A. No, I'm not. 21 Q. And you're not an epidemiologist? 26 1 Q. Tell me your feelings on chrysotile in 2 causing mesothelioma? 3 A. In the field of asbestos, we have the 4 luxury of having a fair amount of epidemiology 5 studies and if you look at the epidemiology 6 studies, specifically some of the larger cohort 7 studies that essentially involve chrysotile 8 exposure, you will see a few cases of 9 mesothelioma. If you can explain those cases of 10 mesothelioma not being caused from exposure of 11 chrysotile, then you can come to the conclusion 12 that chrysotile does not likely, at any exposure, 13 does not likely increase the risk of mesothelioma. 14 If you're not able to explain the cause of those 15 few mesothelioma cases from something other than 16 chrysotile, then you would have to conclude that 17 chrysotile does have some potential for increasing 18 the risk for getting mesothelioma, but it will 19 require an extremely high dose. If we look at, 20 for example, the Quebec studies and the textile 21 studies, we do see, for example, in the Quebec > o 1 A. No, I'm not. 2 Q. You are a toxicologist, aren't you? 3 A. Yes. 4 Q. And you are not a certified B-reader? 5 A. No, I'm not. 6 Q. And you're not qualified to render an 7 expert medical opinion on the causation of 8 Mr. Webb's mesothelioma, are you? 9 A. As a toxicologist, I talk about dose 10 response and risk, but I'm not a clinician, so I 11 don't render opinions regarding the actual 12 specific plaintiff conditions. 13 Q. And you're not a biologist? 14 A. No, I'm not a biologist. 15 Q. And you're not a cellular biologist, 16 either, are you? 18 Q. Is it your opinion that chrysotile does 19 not cause mesothelioma? 20 A. It's actually not that -- I don't think 21 you can answer that yes or no. 27 1 studies, where you see these mesothelioma cases, 2 they work in veins of the mines where there's 3 tremolite contamination and, further, at the 4 Jeffrey's mine there was an asbestos plant that 5 utilized amphiboles, so it is possible that we 6 could explain those cases of mesothelioma as 7 actually being caused by amphibole asbestos and in 8 the textile studies, while the predominant fiber 9 used in textiles is chrysotile, they do use some 10 amphiboles. So while we may not completely tease 11 out the cause of every mesothelioma in those 12 cohorts, it is possible that we can explain them 13 as having been caused from exposure to amphibole. 14 So having said all that, my bottom line is, it is 15 possible that chrysotile does not cause 16 mesothelioma, but if it does, it would require a 17 high dose. 18 Q. Have you read the article, Access of 19 mesotheliomas after exposure to chrysotile in 20 Balangero, Italy? Have you read that article by 21 Mirabelli? PRECISE REPORTING SERVICES (301) 210-5092 (877) 4 A STENO 28 29 DEPOSITION OF SHELDON H. RABINOVITZ, Ph.D., CIH CONDUCTED ON 8/11/2009 9 1 A. You know, I don't remember. 2 Q. It's in the Occupational Environmental of 3 Medicine, published on June 4, 2008. In that 4 article, they did a study of a tremolite-free 5 chrysotile mine in Italy, and what they found was 6 that there were six mesotheliomas from that mine 7 and it was only expected to be 1.5. So you take 8 that 1.5, you get 6, when you multiply it by 4, so 9 the rate of mesothelioma was 4 times higher than 10 what it should have been. So is that evidence to 11 you that chrysotile does cause mesothelioma? 12 MR. ALEXANDERSEN: Objection. He doesn't 13 have the article in front of him. 14 MR. MISMAS: I can send it to him right 15 now, if you like? 16 MR. ALEXANDERSEN: Well, you know what, he 17 doesn't have it in front of him. That's one 18 article, so I object. I mean, it's not fair to 19 ask him a question out of context and have him put 20 a spin on it without him having it in front of 21 him. 30 1 Q. You know what, don't worry about it. But 2 I mean, let me just put it this way to you. As a 3 hypothetical, hypothetically, if there was a study 4 that went on in a chrysotile mine, and it was pure 5 chrysotile, with no tremolite in it, and they 6 found that the rate of mesothelioma was four times 7 higher than what it should have been, would that 8 be evidence, to you, that chrysotile does, in 9 fact, cause mesothelioma? 10 MR. ALEXANDERSEN: Objection. Incomplete 11 hypothetical, improper question. Doctor, if you 12 can answer it, go ahead. 13 A. You know, there are many epidemiology 14 studies and you have to read the whole study, you 15 have to know the power of the study, you have to 16 know the confounding factors, you can't just talk 17 about the results of a study and assume that they 18 are correct. So again, I would have to review it 19 and digest it and come to some sort of conclusion 20 about the strength of the opinions. 21 Q. Have you read Suzuki's? 1 MR. MISMAS: I understand that. I said, 2 do you want me to send it to you? 3 MR. ALEXANDERSEN: I don't know. Do you 4 want him to sit and review it and offer his 5 opinions on it? 6 MR. MISMAS: I don't know. I'm asking the 7 question. 8 MR. ALEXANDERSEN: Well, what I'm saying 9 is, it's an improper question because he doesn't 10 have the article. 11 MR. MISMAS: That's fine. No speaking 12 objections. Thanks. 13 MR. ALEXANDERSEN: No, no. You don't 14 understand. Unless he has the article, he's not 15 going to answer the question. 16 BY MR. MISMAS: 17 Q. Doctor, are you there? 18 A. Yes, I am. 19 Q. Would you like me to send you the article? 20 A. You will have to give me time to 21 completely review it and digest it. 31 1 A. I have read some things that he has 2 published, yes. 3 Q. Have you read the article, Short, thin 4 asbestos fibers contributes to the development of 5 human malignant mesothelioma: Pathological 6 evidence? 7 A. You know, I know I have read some things 8 where he has drawn that type of conclusion. I 9 think it was regarding the finding of some 10 chrysotile fibers in the peripheral of the lung. 11 My recollection was that, that alone was not 12 enough to permit one to conclude that chrysotile 13 increased the risk of causing mesothelioma. 14 Q. That's fair. Do you consider Suzuki to be 15 reputable? 16 MR. ALEXANDERSEN: Object to form. 17 A. He's a pathologist at Mount Sinai. You 18 know, there are some things I've read that I don't 19 know if I necessarily agree with it. You know, 20 I've never looked at his qualifications or 21 everything that he's done, so I don't know if I'm PRECISE REPORTING SERVICES (301) 210-5092 (877) 4 A STENO 32 33 DEPOSITION OF SHELDON H. RABINOVITZ, Ph.D., CIH CONDUCTED ON 8/11/2009 10 1 in the best position to sit in judgement of him. 2 Q. Okay. Have you, yourself, conducted any 3 study in which you studied the effects of 4 chrysotile in human tissue? 5 A. No, I have not. 6 Q. Can you cite to me any studies that you've 7 read that chrysotile can cause mesothelioma? 8 MR. ALEXANDERSEN: Objection. 9 A. Well, again, I know that there are animal 10 intubation studies that have shown chrysotile 11 resulted in mesothelioma, but that was not a 12 normal inhalation study and I know that there are 13 some epidemiology studies that make such claims, 14 but again, I'm looking -- the studies I'm relying 15 on have large power and I'm also reviewing some 16 articles by other scientists who have done many 17 studies and, basically, show a fair amount of 18 evidence that chrysotile has little, if any, 19 potential for increasing the risk of causing 20 mesothelioma. 21 Q. Can you point me to any cohort that was 34 1 numbers of mesothelioma compared to what would be 2 expected. 3 Q. Would you agree with me that the dose 4 required to contract mesothelioma is much lower 5 than that required to cause lung cancer or 6 asbestosis? 7 MR. ALEXANDERSEN: Objection to form. 8 A. Again, I think we also have to look at it 9 in terms of fiber type, but if you're talking 10 about amphiboles, then, yes, with amphibole 11 exposure it requires less of a dose to cause 12 mesothelioma than asbestosis or lung cancer. 13 Q. Okay. Can you tell me what OSHA's 14 position is on chrysotile causing mesothelioma? 15 A. You know, OSHA is a regulatory body and 16 they have to make regulations that they can 17 enforce and they have certain limitations on what 18 they can do and they have not attempted to make 19 separate regulations for different forms of 20 asbestos. That is certainly a different issue 21 from whether there is a different level of 1 ever studied, epidemiological study, that pure 2 chrysotile exposure -- I'm sorry. Let me start 3 over. Can you point me to any cohort that was 4 ever studied, any epidemiological study, that 5 shows that pure chrysotile exposure does not 6 increase the risk for mesothelioma? 7 A. You know, I can't. And again, the main 8 studies that I referred to, did have some 9 mesothelioma cases in the cohort. 10 Q. Are you aware that most cohort studies are 11 mixed cohorts, in terms of amphibole and 12 serpentine? 13 A. Well, I know it is sometimes difficult to 14 have a pure chrysotile cohort. 15 Q. And which cohort shows the highest level 16 of meso, is it pure chrysotile, pure amphibole or 17 mixed cohort? 18 MR. ALEXANDERSEN: Objection to form. 19 A. You know, I've never attempted to look at 20 it just that way, but obviously, I have seen epi 21 studies involving amphiboles and seeing elevated 35 1 toxicity associated with different forms of 2 asbestos which has, I think, overwhelmingly, been 3 shown to be true. 4 Q. Okay, Doctor, thank you for that, but what 5 is OSHA's position on whether chrysotile causes 6 mesothelioma or not? 7 MR. ALEXANDERSEN: Objection. Asked and 8 answered. You can answer it again. 9 A. My understanding is that OSHA has not 10 decided to treat different types of asbestos 11 differently in terms of regulation, and so, it's 12 my understanding, they suggest that the forms of 13 asbestos they regulate have the potential to cause 14 various types of asbestos disease. But again, 15 what OSHA is doing is, is a regulation, it is not 16 pure science. 17 Q. I'm not disagreeing with that, but what 18 I'm asking is, is it OSHA's position that 19 chrysotile can potentially causes mesothelioma? 20 MR. ALEXANDERSEN: Objection. Asked and 21 answered. PRECISE REPORTING SERVICES (301) 210-5092 (877) 4 A STENO 36 37 DEPOSITION OF SHELDON H. RABINOVITZ, Ph.D., CIH CONDUCTED ON 8/11/2009 11 1 A. Based, as I stated, because of the way 2 they do their regulation, they are implying that 3 chrysotile can cause mesothelioma, but they're 4 doing that from a regulation standpoint. 5 Q. Thank you. Thank you, Doctor. And the 6 EPA, what is their position in regards to whether 7 chrysotile can cause mesothelioma or not? 8 MR. ALEXANDERSEN: Objection. 9 A. Well, the EPA, on their website, had a 10 draft, final document by Berman and Crump, which 11 essentially provided the same information that I 12 have said and, in that document, they say that it 13 is possible that chrysotile does not cause 14 mesothelioma, at all. And the EPA is doing a 15 reevaluation of asbestos because they do recognize 16 there is sufficient information now that you just 17 can't treat all forms of asbestos the same from a 18 toxicological standpoint. 19 Q. Doctor, you know that the EPA rejected 20 Berman and Crump, right? 21 A. My understanding is that they did not 38 1 Q. Thank you, Doctor. You said they are 2 reevaluating that, but they haven't come out with 3 the position that said chrysotile does not cause 4 mesothelioma, has the EPA? 5 MR. ALEXANDERSEN: Objection. 6 A. I do not believe they have done it. 7 Q. Thank you. Do you know what the World 8 Health Organization's position is on chrysotile 9 causing mesothelioma? 10 A. Again, there are a number of organizations 11 that either they have not reevaluated or are in 12 the process of reevaluating. They have, in the 13 past, suggested that chrysotile causes 14 mesothelioma, but you know, you have to look at 15 the science to make a determination, not go to an 16 outdated regulatory or some oral body's statement. 17 Q. Do you know what NIOSH's position is on 18 the capability of chrysotile causing mesothelioma? 19 A. All I can tell you, from when I was there, 20 NIOSH's position was that there was no threshold 21 for an exposure to a carcinogen that did not have 1 publish it. It doesn't mean that they rejected 2 it. 3 Q. Well, if they didn't publish it, it's not 4 any part of the EPA's views, now is it? 5 MR. ALEXANDERSEN: Objection. 6 A. I believe, my understanding is that it is 7 not on their website anymore. 8 Q. So if it's not on their website, they're 9 not endorsing it anymore, are they? 10 MR. ALEXANDERSEN: Objection. 11 A. You know, I don't know, internally, how 12 they're dealing with it. 13 Q. Is it the EPA's position that chrysotile 14 can potentially cause mesothelioma or not? 15 MR. ALEXANDERSEN: Objection. 16 A. As I mentioned, in the past, they have 17 held that, but they're reevaluating it, in light 18 of the knowledge today that there is a significant 19 amount of evidence to show that it must be treated 20 differently than for amphiboles with regard to 21 potential for causing mesothelioma. 39 1 some increased risk and, because of that, they 2 would only recommend the most protective 3 respirators for carcinogens. I can tell you that 4 they made a change and they now recommend 5 respiratory protection for carcinogens based on 6 protection factors, rather than on the theory that 7 any exposure can cause cancer. Therefore, based 8 on their change on respiratory recommendations, I 9 can only conclude that they have changed their 10 thinking in thresholds for carcinogens. 11 Q. I thank you for your answer, Doctor, but 12 you didn't answer my question. My question was: 13 Do you know what NIOSH's position is on the 14 capability of chrysotile causing mesothelioma? 15 MR. ALEXANDERSEN: Objection. Asked and 16 answered. 17 A. Again, in the past, they did not 18 differentiate, if you look at a lot of the work 19 NIOSH has done and sometimes budget constrictions 20 prevent them from doing all the things they want. 21 But again, I believe that they reviewed all the PRECISE REPORTING SERVICES (301) 210-5092 (877) 4 A STENO 40 41 DEPOSITION OF SHELDON H. RABINOVITZ, Ph.D., CIH CONDUCTED ON 8/11/2009 12 1 current information, some of the positions they 2 have had in the past will change, and some of the 3 positions they had in the past, they have not 4 differentiated between different forms of asbestos 5 and its potential for causing mesothelioma. 6 Q. So it's not a position that chrysotile 7 causes mesothelioma? 8 MR. ALEXANDERSEN: Objection. 9 A. Again, in the past, they have said that, 10 but I believe they have reevaluated or are in the 11 process of reevaluating those positions. 12 Q. Has NIOSH come out and said, at any point 13 in time, that chrysotile does not cause 14 mesothelioma? 15 A. I have not seen that. 16 Q. So by and large, my understanding is that 17 chrysotile can potentially cause mesothelioma; is 18 that correct? 19 MR. ALEXANDERSEN: Objection. Asked and 20 answered. 21 A. Again, what I said was, that was in the 42 1 know he has done work in asbestos. I have 2 reviewed some of his papers and so I think we 3 definitely would have to say he has knowledge on 4 the medical aspects of asbestos. 5 Q. And do you know that it is Dr. Roggli's 6 opinion that chrysotile can cause mesothelioma? 7 MR. ALEXANDERSEN: Objection. 8 A. Well, again, it's kind of interesting 9 because he's also written some papers showing how, 10 in virtually all the mesothelioma cases that he 11 has had some evaluation of, that there is 12 amphiboles found in the lungs. 13 Q. Would that be tremolite? 14 A. Not necessarily tremolite, but he, I 15 believe, I was under the impression that he felt 16 that amphiboles were a very strong factor in 17 causing mesothelioma. 18 Q. What about Dr. Hammer, do you know who 19 Dr. Daniel Hammer is? 20 A. Yes. 21 Q. Would you agree with me that he is a 1 past and there are changes occurring and so it is 2 possible now that the thinking in NIOSH has 3 changed. 4 Q. But you haven't seen any evidence that it 5 has changed? 6 A. I have not seen them come out with a final 7 position. I believe they are working on it. 8 Q. And so, in your opinion, is the EPA, NIOSH 9 and OSHA wrong, that chrysotile doesn't cause 10 mesothelioma? 11 MR. ALEXANDERSEN: Objection. 12 A. I'm not saying they're wrong. I think you 13 have to look at it in what their mandate is and 14 how they're approaching it and the fact that they 15 are reevaluating. 16 Q. Do you know Dr. Roggli? 17 A. I know of him. I have seen him. I don't 18 believe I have ever been introduced to him. 19 Q. Do you believe he's a highly respected 20 pathologist and expert in asbestos medicine? 21 A. I know that he has good credentials. I 43 1 highly respected pathologist and expert in 2 asbestos medicine? 3 MR. ALEXANDERSEN: Objection. 4 A. Well, again, I understand he's a 5 pathologist and has knowledge and has studied 6 asbestos issues. I understand he now also 7 believes that there is a threshold for which you 8 have to be exposed, an excessive threshold of 9 asbestos, before you're at increased risk of 10 getting an asbestos related disease. I'm not sure 11 if that's a change in his position, but that's my 12 understanding. But I do believe we differ on what 13 that threshold would be. 14 Q. And are you aware that he believes that 15 chrysotile can cause mesothelioma? 16 MR. ALEXANDERSEN: Objection. 17 A. You know, that wouldn't surprise me. 18 Again, I did not say that I know for a fact that 19 chrysotile cannot cause mesothelioma. 20 Q. Is it your opinion that you don't believe 21 that it does or it has to be in very high levels; PRECISE REPORTING SERVICES (301) 210-5092 (877) 4 A STENO 44 45 DEPOSITION OF SHELDON H. RABINOVITZ, Ph.D., CIH CONDUCTED ON 8/11/2009 13 1 is that correct? 2 A. Well, certainly, if it does, it has to be 3 at very high levels. What I'm saying is, there is 4 a body of evidence that it is possible that it may 5 not cause it. 6 Q. How many fiber years would someone have to 7 have an exposure to chrysotile for that to cause 8 mesothelioma? 9 A. Well, I don't think we have enough data to 10 put a number on it, but if we look at the low 11 number of mesotheliomas in these cohorts, it 12 certainly would be a number, probably, 13 significantly above the threshold for causing 14 asbestosis and lung cancer. 15 Q. Wait a minute. So you're saying you would 16 have to be more exposed to chrysotile to cause 17 mesothelioma than you would have to be exposed to 18 chrysotile to cause asbestosis or lung cancer? 19 A. Yes. 20 Q. Can you cite me to anything that supports 21 that position? 46 1 A. I don't know if they were looking for 2 that. 3 Q. You would agree with me that mesothelioma 4 is an extremely rare disease? 5 A. In general, yes. 6 Q. Do you know anyone that shares that 7 opinion that you have, that you have to be exposed 8 to more chrysotile to get mesothelioma than any 9 other asbestos disease? 10 MR. ALEXANDERSEN: Objection to form. 11 A. I've seen many articles where experts in 12 the field have actually said that. 13 Q. It's actually published that, as saying 14 that? 15 A. I have seen it. I don't know if it's 16 published or been reports, but I see that over and 17 over again. 18 Q. What I'm trying to figure out is, are you 19 coming to this opinion from extrapolating that 20 data from that article or is that article 21 specifically written on the topic of someone needs 1 A. Well, all you have to do is look at these 2 big epidemiology studies and you'll see more 3 asbestosis in lung cancers in the cohorts. 4 Q. I'm telling you, can you cite me to a 5 study that backs that position up? 6 A. I'm saying that those studies would back 7 that position. 8 Q. What studies? 9 A. For example, right now, McDonnell, some of 10 the studies of Quebec and the textile studies. 11 Q. Can you show me, anywhere in those 12 articles, where it states that exact opinion that 13 you have, that you would have to be more exposed 14 to chrysotile to get mesothelioma than you would 15 to get asbestosis or lung cancer? Is it even in 16 those articles, saying that? 17 MR. ALEXANDERSEN: Objection. Asked and 18 answered. Go ahead and tell him again. 19 A. I think if you would look at the incidence 20 ratios that's in those studies, it's quite clear. 21 Q. Were they looking for that? 47 1 to be more exposed to chrysotile to cause 2 mesothelioma than asbestosis or lung cancer? 3 MR. ALEXANDERSEN: I'll object to the form 4 of that question. 5 A. I'm not sure what you're saying. 6 Q. Okay. What I'm saying is this, you're 7 looking at the data of these articles and saying, 8 there are fewer mesotheliomas in more asbestotics; 9 therefore, you have to be exposed to a higher 10 level of chrysotile, correct? 11 A. Right. You mean, if you're looking at 12 dose response and based on the numbers, the 13 incidence of asbestosis and lung cancer, where we 14 have some feel for what is required to increase 15 the risk, and you see relatively few 16 mesotheliomas, that would suggest that it would 17 take a higher exposure to cause the mesotheliomas 18 or you would see more mesotheliomas. 19 Q. In Libby, Montana, how many mesotheliomas 20 have come out of Libby, Montana? 21 MR. ALEXANDERSEN: Objection. PRECISE REPORTING SERVICES (301) 210-5092 (877) 4 A STENO 48 49 DEPOSITION OF SHELDON H. RABINOVITZ, Ph.D., CIH CONDUCTED ON 8/11/2009 14 1 A. I don't know the number. 2 Q. How many asbestotics have come out of 3 Libby, Montana? 4 MR. ALEXANDERSEN: Objection. 5 A. I don't know the number. 6 Q. Are there more asbestotics or more 7 mesotheliomas out of Libby? 8 MR. ALEXANDERSEN: Objection. 9 A. I just said, I don't know the number. 10 Q. Okay. What about in the crocidolite mines 11 in Australia, were there more asbestotics or 12 mesotheliomas? 13 MR. ALEXANDERSEN: Are you talking based 14 on a study or just in general? 15 MR. MISMAS: Don't worry about it. 16 MR. ALEXANDERSEN: What do you mean, don't 17 worry about it? It's not a relative question. 18 John, take a deep breath for a minute and let me 19 pose my objection. Because it's irrelevant. 20 You're talking about Libby, Montana from some time 21 immemorial? It just doesn't make sense. If 50 1 chrysotile and now you're switching gears. 2 Q. I know. I'm just asking you. 3 A. Okay. I don't know the specific numbers. 4 Q. Okay. Any other asbestos mines? 5 A. What? 6 Q. Any other asbestos mines, that you know 7 of, that were studied, that show a higher level of 8 asbestotics than mesothelioma? 9 MR. ALEXANDERSEN: Objection. 10 A. I mean, it depends on the fiber type. I 11 don't know what you mean. 12 Q. I'm just asking, are there any other 13 studies that you know of? 14 A. I would have to think back and look 15 through, off the top of my head, no, I can't think 16 of any. 17 Q. Okay. That's a perfectly fine answer. If 18 you don't know, just tell me you don't know. 19 Would you agree with me that the TLV in place for 20 OSHA was for asbestosis and not cancer? 21 A. The TLD? 1 you're referencing some study out of Libby or 2 you're referencing some study out of Quebec, 3 reference it. How the heck is he suppose to know? 4 MR. MISMAS: Are you done? 5 MR. ALEXANDERSEN: Well, no. I guess if 6 you can ask a kosher question, ask it. 7 MR. MISMAS: I'm trying to. 8 MR. ALEXANDERSEN: Then go ahead, ask it. 9 Ask something that makes sense. 10 MR. MISMAS: Okay. Are you done? 11 MR. ALEXANDERSEN: Well, now I am. Ask 12 something proper and we can get on. 13 MR. MISMAS: Are you done? 14 MR. ALEXANDERSEN: Well, we can go on and 15 on, just a question. 16 BY MR. MISMAS: 17 Q. Doctor, out of the crocidolite mines in 18 Australia, were there more asbestotics or more 19 mesotheliomas? 20 MR. ALEXANDERSEN: Objection. 21 A. First of all, we were talking about 51 1 Q. Yes. 2 A. Yes. 3 Q. And would you agree with me that the TLV 4 in place for OSHA was a guideline and should not 5 be used in determining safe or unsafe levels of 6 asbestos exposure? 7 A. Well, now you're using some of the 8 language of the ACGIH and what you are suggesting 9 is that the professional industrial hygienist or 10 toxicologist needs to know how to properly use 11 those numbers in providing healthful work places 12 for employees, and so, yes, these numbers are not 13 magic numbers. 14 Q. Has there ever been a TLV for 15 mesothelioma? 16 MR. ALEXANDERSEN: Objection. 17 A. I am not aware of a specific standard 18 based on a specific fiber type for a specific 19 asbestos disease. There have been ACGIH standards 20 for different fiber types, but I'm not aware of a 21 standard that subdivides fiber types and fiber 52 53 PRECISE REPORTING SERVICES (301) 210-5092 (877) 4 A STENO DEPOSITION OF SHELDON H. RABINOVITZ, Ph.D., CIH CONDUCTED ON 8/11/2009 15 1 disease and asbestos diseases. 2 Q. Do you know if there has ever been a PEL 3 for mesothelioma? 4 A. Well, I just got finished saying -- now, 5 PEL is a specific standard made by OSHA. 6 Q. I know. 7 A. And clearly, we know OSHA has never even 8 had a standard that is specific to a fiber type, 9 let alone a disease. 10 Q. Is there any safe levels of asbestos 11 exposure below which mesothelioma will not occur? 12 MR. ALEXANDERSEN: Objection. 13 A. Yes. 14 Q. And what is that? 15 A. First of all, you need to talk about fiber 16 type. 17 Q. For any fiber type? 18 A. Well, for chrysotile, we have a number of 19 epidemiology studies that have shown that at 20 levels below .1, you do not see an increase for 21 asbestos related disease. Now, it's possible you 54 1 brake when it's in use? 2 MR. ALEXANDERSEN: Objection. 3 A. Yes. 4 Q. And that is chemically changed into 5 forsterite, right? 6 A. You know, the bulk of that is chemically 7 the same and loses the water of hydration. 8 Q. Okay. I just want to ask your opinion. 9 Do you believe that the changing of brakes, 10 asbestos containing brakes, can cause or can 11 substantially contribute to someone's 12 mesothelioma? 13 MR. ALEXANDERSEN: Objection. This is 14 outside the scope of his report. I just note an 15 objection, but if you can answer that -- are you 16 just talking, in general, you're not giving him -17 MR. MISMAS: I just want his opinion, 18 whether he believes it can or cannot cause 19 mesothelioma? 20 MR. ALEXANDERSEN: I'll object, but if you 21 can answer in those confines. 1 may not see an increased risk of asbestos related 2 disease at even higher numbers, but we don't have 3 the epidemiology data to support that. So at 4 least at .1 for chrysotile, we know that that is a 5 safe dose. 6 Q. All right. Do you know what forsterite 7 is? 8 A. Yes. 9 Q. What is it? 10 A. It is, chemically, the same composition as 11 chrysotile asbestos, but without the waters of 12 hydration and it becomes a morphias. 13 Q. Now, can forsterite cause asbestos related 14 disease? 15 A. It is not thought that forsterite causes 16 asbestos related disease. 17 Q. And where do you most likely see 18 forsterite? 19 A. Well, you will certainly see forsterite 20 when you thermally decompose asbestos. 21 Q. And is forsterite formed on an automobile 55 1 THE WITNESS: You're asking me if 2 forsterite can cause mesothelioma? 3 BY MR. MISMAS: 4 Q. I'm asking you if changing brakes, whether 5 it's one brake or a thousand brakes on an 6 automobile, can cause or substantially contribute 7 to someone's mesothelioma? 8 MR. ALEXANDERSEN: Objection. 9 A. If you look at the percentage of asbestos 10 in brake testing and if you look at the exposures 11 associated with changing brakes, if you look at 12 the epidemiology studies that involve mechanics, 13 the answer is that changing brakes, as is normally 14 and foreseeably done, does not increase the risk 15 of getting any asbestos related disease. 16 Q. How about the same question, with regard 17 to asbestos clutch disks? 18 MR. ALEXANDERSEN: Objection. 19 A. And basically, you are going to generate 20 similar temperatures so you will have forsterite 21 formed. In addition, in general, the time you're PRECISE REPORTING SERVICES (301) 210-5092 (877) 4 A STENO 56 57 DEPOSITION OF SHELDON H. RABINOVITZ, Ph.D., CIH CONDUCTED ON 8/11/2009 16 1 going to replace the clutch, the rear main oil 2 seal with have decomposed to some extent and you 3 will form some oil in the bell housing which will 4 cause the residual dust to cake inside of the bell 5 housing and so, it is unlikely that you can get a 6 dose of asbestos from changing clutches that could 7 increase the risk of getting any asbestos related 8 disease. 9 Q. Is that a no? No, it wouldn't cause or 10 substantially contribute to someone's 11 mesothelioma? 12 A. Again, as foreseeably done, that is 13 correct. 14 Q. How about cutting an asbestos sewer pipe 15 that contained crocidolite, could that cause or 16 substantially contribute to it -17 MR. ALEXANDERSEN: Objection. I didn't 18 hear the question. It cut off. 19 Q. I said, how about cutting an asbestos 20 sewer pipe that contained crocidolite, could that 21 cause or substantially contribute to someone's 58 1 conditions, the size of the cutting device on the 2 band saw, the size of the pipe, the percentage of 3 the asbestos, how many times it was done. There 4 are a number of things that have to be determined 5 to reconstruct the dose. 6 Q. Let's take five minutes and I'm going to 7 get all those things for you. Okay? 8 A. Okay. 9 MR. ALEXANDERSEN: Are we off of the 10 record? 11 MR. MISMAS: Yes. 12 (Brief recess.) 13 BY MR. MISMAS: 14 Q. Doctor, have you talked to anybody on 15 break? 16 A. Yes. 17 Q. Who did you talk to? 18 A. I talked to Kevin. 19 Q. What did you talk about? 20 A. We went to the bathroom together. 21 Q. Did you have any conversations about this 1 asbestos related disease? 2 MR. TAGGART: Objection. 3 MR. ALEXANDERSEN: I'll note an objection. 4 If you can answer in that context, go ahead. 5 A. As you're describing it, you're not 6 providing enough information to give an answer. 7 Q. Let me put it this way. Hypothetically, 8 you have an asbestos sewer pipe, okay? 9 A. Okay. 10 Q. And that sewer pipe contains crocidolite, 11 if someone cuts that with a band saw, which 12 creates visible dust in that air, and they breathe 13 that dust, could that cause or substantially 14 contribute to someone developing mesothelioma? 15 MR. TAGGART: Objection. 16 MR. ALEXANDERSEN: Object to the 17 hypothetical. 18 A. You still haven't given me enough 19 information. 20 Q. What more information would you need? 21 A. Just to start off with, the ventilation CO > o 59 1 case? 2 A. He just said, you know, just keep 3 answering his questions. 4 Q. Anything specific about the case? 5 A. No, but I understood he talked to another 6 attorney. 7 Q. And any specifics about what testimony 8 you're about to give? 10 Q. That's all I need to know. Do you do dose 11 reconstruction? 12 A. Yes. 13 Q. What's the minimum amount of information 14 you need to have to do a dose reconstruction? 15 MR. ALEXANDERSEN: Objection. 16 A. That is -- you know, you take the 17 information you have and sometimes it's enough to 18 let you come up with a fairly specific dose. 19 Sometimes you'll get a range. Generally, you'll 20 get a range and the amount of information you have 21 will permit you to set boundaries to the range. PRECISE REPORTING SERVICES (301) 210-5092 (877) 4 A STENO 60 61 DEPOSITION OF SHELDON H. RABINOVITZ, Ph.D., CIH CONDUCTED ON 8/11/2009 17 00 >> oO 1 So in other words, the less information you have, 2 the larger the range may be. 3 Q. But what is the very bare minimum amount 4 of information you need for a dose reconstruction? 5 A. Again, depending on what you're attempting 6 to establish as your range. 7 Q. I'm going to give you an example. 8 Hypothetically, you have a 75-year-old woman 9 diagnosed with mesothelioma, but you have no 10 evidence of exposure or anything else, where she 11 works or nothing like that, all you know is she's 12 75 and she was diagnosed with mesothelioma. Can 13 you do a dose reconstruction based on that? 15 Q. What if I told you she lives in the State 16 of Ohio, could you do a dose reconstruction based 17 on that? 19 Q. What if I told you she lives in the State 20 of Ohio and she works at a gas station, could you 21 do a dose reconstruction on that? 62 1 mesothelioma, would that be enough information for 2 you to do a dose reconstruction that would be to a 3 reasonable degree of scientific probability? 4 MR. ALEXANDERSEN: Objection. 5 A. You mean, given those pieces of 6 information only and then for me to generate a 7 dose number? 8 Q. Yes. 9 A. Then I couldn't do that. 10 Q. Let's say that they did brakes there. 11 Could you do a dose reconstruction based on that? 12 MR. ALEXANDERSEN: Objection to the 13 question, basis. 14 A. Based on that being the only information 15 and you're telling me I can't make any assumptions 16 about anything else, no. 17 Q. Okay. Do you know Mark Corn? 18 A. Yes. 19 Q. Do you find him to be a reputable 20 industrial hygienist? 21 MR. ALEXANDERSEN: Objection. 1 A. Well, you know, you can make some 2 assumptions. If that's the only information you 3 had and you couldn't make assumptions, then, no. 4 Perhaps if you were able to make some assumptions, 5 then you could do something. 6 Q. What assumptions would you need to make? 7 A. Assumptions like, no other exposures and 8 then make assumptions of what went on at the gas 9 station and then you can start talking about 10 exposure. 11 Q. That would be, sort of, conjecture, would 12 it not? 13 A. Well, sounds like this whole conversation 14 is conjecture. 15 Q. Well, I know. I'm just trying to figure 16 out where the whole process of going through 17 reconstruction, where it starts and what's 18 information and what's not. That's what I'm 19 trying to find out. So I mean, with the 20 information that you have, that she was 75 and she 21 lived in Ohio and worked in a gas station and had 63 1 A. Yes. He has a long and distinguished 2 career. He's certified. He's educated. He's 3 done a lot in the field. I have read things he 4 has done and certainly agree with many things he's 5 done. You know, but I haven't agreed with 6 everything he's done. 7 Q. Can you tell me something you don't agree 8 with that he's done? 9 A. There was one study he published, and I 10 don't remember the specifics. It was actually an 11 asbestos article. I think it was regarding 12 schools. I just remember not agreeing with 13 everything he said. 14 Q. Okay. Ever been to the American 15 Industrial Hygiene Conference? 16 A. Yes. 17 Q. Did you go in 2002? 18 A. Do you know where it was? 19 Q. I don't. It was in 2002? 20 A. I'm pretty sure I was, yes. 21 Q. Did you hear Mark Corn speak there? PRECISE REPORTING SERVICES (301) 210-5092 (877) 4 A STENO 64 65 DEPOSITION OF SHELDON H. RABINOVITZ, Ph.D., CIH CONDUCTED ON 8/11/2009 18 1 A. I don't think so. 2 Q. Did you know that Mark Corn said that dose 3 reconstruction wasn't science? 4 A. He said it wasn't science? 5 Q. This isn't science. 6 A. Pardon? 7 Q. He said, this isn't science. 8 A. Well, you see, I think it depends on how 9 much information you have. I think if you have 10 enough information, it could be science. I mean, 11 he certainly may be right if you're talking about 12 not having sufficient amount of information. 13 Q. What about Allen Rogers, do you know Allen 14 Rogers? 15 MR. ALEXANDERSEN: Objection. 16 A. I don't. 17 Q. Do you know of him? 18 MR. ALEXANDERSEN: Objection. 19 A. No, I don't. 20 Q. Do you do dose reconstruction in Navy 21 cases? 66 1 Q. Did you find Balzer to be reputable? 2 MR. ALEXANDERSEN: Objection. 3 A. I would have to review his credentials, 4 you know, to talk about him. 5 Q. Did you ever use that article, The work 6 environment of insulating workers as any of the 7 basis for your opinions in those reconstruction 8 Navy cases? 9 MR. ALEXANDERSEN: Objection. 10 A. I don't recall doing that. 11 Q. All right. When we're talking about 12 asbestos lead pipe -13 A. Yes. 14 Q. Remember that? 15 A. Yes. 16 Q. I want you to assume the following facts: 17 The pipe is 20 inches long and 6 inches in 18 diameter and you're cutting it with a 2 point 19 horsepower electric handsaw with a masonry blade 20 that is 7 inches in diameter. The pipe is 20 21 percent chrysotile and 1 percent crocidolite. 1 A. Have I done -- I couldn't hear you. 2 Q. I'm sorry. Have you done dose 3 reconstruction in Navy cases? 4 A. Yes. 5 Q. Did you ever use the article by William 6 Marr called, Asbestos exposure during naval vessel 7 overhaul, in 1964? 8 MR. ALEXANDERSEN: Objection. 9 A. You know, I don't think I did. 10 Q. Okay. Do you know who Leroy Boelter is? 11 MR. ALEXANDERSEN: Objection. 12 A. You know, I think he's written something 13 on exposures associated with ships or navy or 14 something like that. 15 Q. Do you know the article of Balzer and 16 Cooper, The work environment of insulating 17 workers, from the American Industrial Hygiene 18 Association from 1968? 19 A. You know, I think I have seen it, but it's 20 been a while. I would have to reread it to talk 21 about it. 67 1 A. Okay. 2 Q. And it takes approximately five minutes to 3 make the cut. 4 A. Okay. 5 Q. Would cutting that, five minutes and the 6 one cut, would that release enough asbestos to 7 cause and substantially contribute to someone's 8 mesothelioma? 9 MR. ALEXANDERSEN: Objection. 10 MR. TAGGART: Objection. 11 A. Now, first of all, are you asking me about 12 how much is emitted or how much someone doing that 13 might have breathed? 14 Q. Both. 15 MR. TAGGART: Objection. 16 A. First of all, I can't say anything about 17 what someone might have breathed, because you 18 didn't say anything about the environmental 19 conditions. 20 Q. Outside, in a 2-mile an hour wind and he's 21 not wearing a mask. PRECISE REPORTING SERVICES (301) 210-5092 (877) 4 A STENO 68 69 DEPOSITION OF SHELDON H. RABINOVITZ, Ph.D., CIH CONDUCTED ON 8/11/2009 19 1 A. Well, what was the direction of the wind? 2 Q. East. 3 MR. TAGGART: Objection. 4 A. Well, how was he standing? 5 Q. Huh? 6 A. You know what, what we're talking about is 7 that there are a lot of variables and as you start 8 to try to make up specifics, I would have to sit 9 down and take each one of them. I would have to 10 possibly look up some literature to get comparable 11 numbers from similar situations. This really 12 isn't something I can do sitting here in a 13 deposition. 14 Q. Okay. That's fair. How about somebody in 15 a basement, mixing five pounds of raw asbestos 16 fiber with water to seal joints on a boiler? 17 MR. ALEXANDERSEN: Objection. 18 Q. And they've done that 50 to 100 times, 19 it's chrysotile, would that be a cause and a 20 factor to causing someone's mesothelioma? 21 MR. ALEXANDERSEN: Objection. 70 1 there could be some emission, but because of the 2 limited duration, because of the fiber type, it is 3 highly unlikely that such a situation could lead 4 to a dose to increase a risk of getting 5 mesothelioma. 6 Q. Would it be over the PEL? 7 MR. ALEXANDERSEN: Objection. 8 A. Again, you know, I would have to know more 9 specifics about the material, about the size of 10 the work practice, of how he dumped it, how fast. 11 I mean there are just many more things I would 12 have to look at and then I would probably come up 13 with a range and, you know, we would have to look 14 at all of that and see if that range went over the 15 OSHA limit or not. You know, I just can't tell 16 you that by sitting here. 17 Q. Can you tell me, sanding asbestos cement, 18 could that release levels above the PEL? 19 MR. ALEXANDERSEN: Objection. 20 A. Again, you're not giving me enough 21 specifics. 1 A. First of all, you're talking about 2 chrysotile. Secondly, when you pour an asbestos 3 powder into a container, there is some, depending 4 on the mesh and the treatment and the preparation 5 of the material and whether it's coated or 6 combined with anything else, there can be some 7 dust emissions, once the water is added. Usually 8 there is no more emissions for the rest of the 9 use. Usually the time period, when there are some 10 emissions, is quite small compared to the whole 11 day's event and, again, you didn't tell me 12 anything about environmental conditions. 13 Q. It's in a basement, so there is no 14 ventilation. 15 A. There's basements and then there's 16 basements. 17 Q. I just told you that it's in a basement 18 with no ventilation. 19 MR. ALEXANDERSEN: Objection. 20 A. Well, you didn't tell me the size of the 21 basement. What I'm going to tell you is that 71 1 Q. What more do you need? 2 A. Type of sandpaper, how long, what kind of 3 cement, fiber type, conditions. I mean, you name 4 it, you got to start going over all of it. 5 Depending on how much information you have, you 6 are going to wind up generating a range rather 7 than a specific number and whether that range 8 could extend above any limit. You know, you have 9 to sit down and work it out. 10 Q. Well, you came up with an opinion in your 11 report about it for Mr. Webb? 12 A. Because I sat down and worked out some 13 conditions and came up with a conclusion. 14 Q. You didn't have the size of the basement, 15 did you? 16 A. I made some assumptions. 17 Q. You didn't have what the ventilation was 18 like, did you? 19 MR. ALEXANDERSEN: Objection. 20 A. I told you, I made some assumptions. 21 Q. You didn't have the type of sandpaper he PRECISE REPORTING SERVICES (301) 210-5092 (877) 4 A STENO 72 73 DEPOSITION OF SHELDON H. RABINOVITZ, Ph.D., CIH CONDUCTED ON 8/11/2009 20 1 used, did you? 2 MR. ALEXANDERSEN: Objection. 3 A. I told you, I made some assumptions. 4 Q. You didn't know the duration, did you? 5 A. I told you I made some assumptions. 6 Q. How come when I give you my hypothetical, 7 you can't make assumptions? 8 MR. ALEXANDERSEN: Objection. Yours is a 9 hypothetical. His is based on facts that were 10 presented in the case. They are two randomly 11 different things. 12 MR. MISMAS: It's not based on any facts, 13 at all. 14 MR. ALEXANDERSEN: It was based on what 15 the deposition testimony was, what the evidence 16 was presented in the case, that's what his 17 opinions in his report were offered on, not 18 hypotheticals. 19 MR. TAGGART: Who is that? 20 MR. ALEXANDERSEN: This is Kevin 21 Alexandersen. So that's my objection. 74 1 MR. ALEXANDERSEN: I'll note an objection. 2 Again, it's an incomplete hypothetical and it's 3 not related to the facts in this case, but go 4 ahead. 5 A. If you compare it to studies of wire 6 brushing of gasketing material, you can see that 7 the exposures are very low. 8 Q. What studies are you referring to? 9 A. Mangold studies. He did specific studies 10 with wire brushing. 11 Q. Okay. What kind of gaskets did he use? 12 A. They were flange gaskets. 13 Q. Did they contain asbestos? 14 A. Yes. 15 Q. And do you know what percentage asbestos 16 they were? 17 A. I would have to reread the study. I don't 18 remember the percent. 19 Q. Would it make a difference depending on 20 the amount of asbestos that were in the gasket? 21 A. You know, it could make some difference, 1 BY MR. MISMAS: 2 Q. What about gaskets, removing gaskets in 3 boilers? 4 A. What about it? 5 Q. What would you need to know to tell me 6 what the exposure level would be? 7 A. Well, what did he do? 8 Q. He removed gaskets from boilers with a 9 wire brush. 10 A. With a wire brush. You know, are we 11 talking about flange gaskets or are we talking 12 about sealing, such as between the firebox and the 13 boiler? 14 Q. Between the firebox and the boiler. 15 A. Well, generally, at that point, you don't 16 need to do wire brushing because you don't need a 17 perfect seal. You're not talking about high 18 pressures. 19 Q. Well, I didn't ask you whether if he, 20 generally, needed to do it or not, I asked you 21 what would happen if he did. 75 1 but my recollection was, is that it was a 2 significant amount of asbestos. Again, I don't 3 remember the exact amount and, yes, it could make 4 some difference, but we still would be in the same 5 ballpark of being able to draw conclusions 6 regarding whether a harmful dose could be 7 generated. 8 Q. Okay. If someone were to wire brush a 9 flange that had a gasket in it and the total 10 fibers were CC, point 004, would you agree with me 11 that it would not be a substantial factor 12 involving an asbestos related disease? 13 A. Say that again. 14 Q. If someone were to hand wire an asbestos 15 brush and produce -16 A. Hand wire an asbestos brush? 17 Q. I'm sorry. Scrape a gasket with a wire 18 brush. 19 A. How do you scrape with a brush? 20 Q. Wire brush. 21 A. Okay. But I usually scrape with a PRECISE REPORTING SERVICES (301) 210-5092 (877) 4 A STENO 76 77 DEPOSITION OF SHELDON H. RABINOVITZ, Ph.D., CIH CONDUCTED ON 8/11/2009 21 1 scraper. 2 Q. What would you call it if you use a wire 3 brush on a gasket? 4 A. I'll call it brushing or attempting to 5 remove residual gasketing material on a sealing 6 surface. 7 Q. Okay. It's a matter of semantics. If 8 someone was brushing a flange face and it had an 9 asbestos gasket stuck to it and it had total 10 fibers of point 004 fibers per CC, would that -11 and if they did eight gaskets over an eight-hour 12 time limit average, would that be above the TLV? 13 MR. ALEXANDERSEN: Objection. 14 A. So you're saying it was point 04 -- are 15 you saying that somebody took an airborne 16 measurement in the breathing zone of someone that 17 was doing that cleaning operation? 18 Q. Yeah, point 004. 19 A. Point 004, and they made that measurement 20 while they were doing that work? 21 Q. And they were doing eight gaskets at that. 78 1 A. A drop more. I mean, you're still talking 2 about a whole bunch of zeros and a long ways away 3 from the OSHA limit. 4 Q. Really? 5 A. Yeah. 6 Q. Did you know that Fred Boelter did the 7 same thing and these are his numbers and he sent 8 OSHA a letter and OSHA sent him a letter back 9 saying it would be above the CLV and the gaskets 10 couldn't be exempt from labeling. Are you aware 11 of that Dr. Rabinovitz? 12 A. He sent them a letter saying that someone 13 would only be exposed to point 004 fibers per CC 14 for 10 minutes, per gasket cleaning, and they did 15 ten and they did eight per day? 16 Q. Yes. 17 A. Well, I'm telling you what the eight-hour 18 time weighted average would be from that and it's 19 a long way from the OSHA limit. I mean, that's 20 just pure math. I mean, that's not very 21 technical. 1 A. And how long did it take them to do it per 2 gasket? 3 MR. ALEXANDERSEN: Objection. 4 A. How long did it take them to do it per 5 gasket? 6 Q. I'm working on it. 7 A. Okay. 8 Q. Eight gaskets for over a period of eight 9 hours. 10 MR. ALEXANDERSEN: Objection. 11 A. Well, I need to know how long that 12 exposure of point 004 fibers per CC occurred. 13 Q. Say ten minutes. 14 A. Ten minutes, and that happened eight 15 times. 16 Q. Uh-huh. 17 A. Okay. So the concentration, the 18 eight-hour time weighted average concentration, 19 would be in the neighborhood of point 00006 fibers 20 per CC. 21 Q. And how about ten gaskets? 79 1 Q. Now, in your opinion -- correct that, the 2 vertical boilers could not be a substantially 3 contributing factor in Mr. Webb's mesothelioma; is 4 that correct? 5 MR. ALEXANDERSEN: Object to form. Those 6 are your words. Have you any references reporting 7 what his specific opinions were? 8 MR. MISMAS: Do you want to let me ask the 9 questions and you stop doing the speaking 10 objections? 11 MR. ALEXANDERSEN: I can't hear. You're 12 not speaking up here. I just asked a question to 13 you and I can pose whatever objection I want. So 14 what's your question? 15 BY MR. MISMAS: 16 Q. Doctor, is there little or no exposure 17 associated with a premixed cement to seal a boiler 18 section, what's the basis on that opinion? 19 A. I did a study where I took furnace cement 20 and applied it on piping and then cleaned the 21 instruments used to apply it and took air samples PRECISE REPORTING SERVICES (301) 210-5092 (877) 4 A STENO 80 81 DEPOSITION OF SHELDON H. RABINOVITZ, Ph.D., CIH CONDUCTED ON 8/11/2009 22 1 and found no airborne asbestos fibers, doing this 2 in an enclosed chamber, finding no asbestos fibers 3 based on the limited detection. 4 Q. And when did you perform this test? 5 A. I think about three or four years ago. 6 Q. Where did you perform it at? 7 A. I performed it at the SOMA exposure 8 chamber that we had in our facility. 9 Q. What were the controls? 10 A. The controls were that we did it in a 11 sealed chamber with no ventilation. 12 Q. What kind of filter did you use? 13 A. MCEF. 14 Q. And what was the air flow rate? 15 A. Around two liters a minute. 16 Q. And how long did it take you to do this? 17 A. I think I did it for an hour or so. 18 Q. And how big was the chamber? 19 A. The chamber was about seven feet high, 20 ten feet long and about eight feet wide. 21 Q. And what brand of furnace cement did you 82 1 A. I believe I do. 2 Q. Could you tell me where? I just don't 3 remember seeing it. 4 A. If you look at the paragraph above 5 conclusions, it says, I have tested premixed 6 furnace cement and found no measurable fiber 7 emissions from the application and troweling of 8 the content on a section of flute pipe. 9 Q. Did you sand it? 10 A. No, I did not sand it because there was no 11 reason to sand it. 12 Q. Well, you do know that people that sand 13 old boilers, will sand it, correct? 14 MR. ALEXANDERSEN: Objection. 15 A. I have read a number of depositions of 16 people who were working with and installing 17 boilers and furnaces and I believe this is only 18 the second time someone suggested that they did 19 some sanding and it's curious, because when you 20 apply this cement, it's pliable, so you can't sand 21 it until after it hardens, which takes some time, 1 use? 2 A. Hercules. 3 Q. Did you test it beforehand to see what the 4 percentage of asbestos was? 5 A. I did not, because the furnace cement that 6 was supplied to me was made specifically for 7 testing, by a company that certified that they put 8 in asbestos into making the formulation. 9 Q. Well, how much asbestos did they put in? 10 A. I don't remember. It was whatever 11 Hercules said was the normal percentage of 12 asbestos put in their product during the time 13 period they made asbestos containing furnace 14 cement. 15 Q. Do you have a copy of this study? 16 A. You know, I was looking for it, but 17 because I don't have access to my old SOMA office, 18 I wasn't able to find it. I have contacted them 19 and asked them to help me find a copy of it. 20 Q. You don't mention that study in this 21 report anywhere, do you? 83 1 so it's really -- I don't understand that. 2 Q. But you didn't do any test on the sanding 3 of furnace cement, correct? 4 MR. ALEXANDERSEN: Objection. 5 A. I couldn't sand it. You can't sand it 6 after you apply it. 7 Q. What I'm asking you now is, you did not do 8 any sanding of furnace cement, you can't opine as 9 to fiber release from sanding furnace cement, can 10 you? 11 MR. ALEXANDERSEN: Objection. Asked and 12 answered. 13 A. I could still opine if I have some 14 information. Again, it would probably not allow 15 me to generate a specific number, but it might be 16 able to generate some range of numbers. 17 Q. In this case, in your report, you have not 18 opined as to the fiber release from Charles Webb 19 sanding furnace cement, have you? 20 MR. ALEXANDERSEN: Objection. 21 A. I have not, because as I mentioned, you PRECISE REPORTING SERVICES (301) 210-5092 (877) 4 A STENO 84 85 DEPOSITION OF SHELDON H. RABINOVITZ, Ph.D., CIH CONDUCTED ON 8/11/2009 23 1 can't sand it after you apply it. 2 Q. There is no number here about fiber 3 release from sanding furnace cement, is there? 4 MR. ALEXANDERSEN: Objection. Asked and 5 answered. 6 A. I just told you, I didn't do it because 7 you can't sand it after you apply it. 8 Q. Now, have you ever smashed a boiler with a 9 sledgehammer? 10 MR. ALEXANDERSEN: Objection. 11 A. I have not. 12 Q. Have you ever seen it done? 13 A. I have not. 14 Q. Have you ever read any studies about fiber 15 release from smashing a boiler with a 16 sledgehammer? 17 A. I have not. 18 Q. So you cannot opine, one way or the other, 19 about fiber release from a boiler that contains 20 asbestos being smashed with a sledgehammer, can 21 you? 86 1 Q. What's your number? 2 A. Well, I didn't do it to get a number. I 3 just did it to the point of getting an opinion. 4 Q. Well, don't you need a number to say 5 whether it's above ground and whether it's above 6 the CLV and whether that in turn would apply, 7 whether it would be a substantially contributing 8 factor in his disease? 9 A. You don't have to get a number. You have 10 to get a top range number that would be 11 sufficiently low, such that -- and you don't even 12 need a number, you just need to get the ballpark 13 to be sufficiently low so that it couldn't be a 14 contributing factor. 15 Q. Well, what's the ballpark on this one? 16 A. Well, the ballpark on this one was that 17 the dose, the fiber of your dose, would have been 18 extremely insignificant. 19 Q. Okay. Well, what's the number? 20 A. You know, I didn't generate a number. I 21 just did the evaluation and it was so low, I 1 MR. ALEXANDERSEN: Objection. 2 A. No, I believe I can talk about that 3 situation. 4 Q. And based on what? 5 A. Based on the events, talking about what 6 was done. 7 Q. And what would you base the release 8 numbers on? What studies, specifically? 9 MR. ALEXANDERSEN: Objection. 10 A. Well, again, it would be based on how the 11 work was done to make a determination of the 12 disturbance of asbestos containing materials and 13 then attempt to extrapolate similar studies to 14 generate a concentration. 15 Q. You have not done this, in this case, have 16 you? 17 A. I have done it in the case. 18 Q. In this case? 19 A. Yeah, I have done it in this case. 20 Q. You have or you have not? 21 A. I have. 87 1 didn't have to attempt to come up with a number. 2 Q. Well, if it's so low, you should have a 3 number, shouldn't you? 4 MR. ALEXANDERSEN: Objection. Asked and 5 answered. 6 A. I don't have to have a number. I just 7 have to say it was sufficiently low. I don't have 8 a specific number. I can just tell you it was 9 quite low. 10 Q. Okay. Well, go through the process of how 11 you did this for me. I want to know how you did 12 this without a number. 13 A. So now, you're moving into this specific 14 case and what happened to Charles Webb? 15 Q. Yes. 16 A. My understanding, from reading his son's 17 deposition, that he may have removed some burning 18 boilers and that some of the burning boilers may 19 have been sufficiently large, that he wanted to 20 break some of the cast iron sections to facilitate 21 the removal, and based primarily on what his son PRECISE REPORTING SERVICES (301) 210-5092 (877) 4 A STENO 88 89 DEPOSITION OF SHELDON H. RABINOVITZ, Ph.D., CIH CONDUCTED ON 8/11/2009 24 1 said, and by the way, his son said sometimes he 2 did use the actual sledgehammer and not his 3 father, which would further reduce any potential 4 exposure, but he said, primarily, you needed to 5 crack the cast iron section and to do that, you 6 had to have access to the cast iron sections and 7 you would remove the cover. And so you would then 8 be hitting the sections, the cast iron sections, 9 so you wouldn't be contacting any insulation, 10 there may be some disturbance of some gasketing 11 rope or even cement, and based on the limited 12 breakage of some of that cement, because you're 13 only attempting to break the cast iron, you're not 14 breaking of any rope or tearing of rope or tearing 15 of rope or the breaking of any cement is like 16 collateral damage, and the emissions from that 17 would be low and it would be chrysotile and 18 there's only a description of a limited number of 19 times this happened, so you're just not going to 20 get a significant dose. 21 Q. Doctor, you know the seam, where the 90 1 what an electrical panel is going to be like and 2 what asbestos cement is going to be like, don't 3 you think? 4 MR. ALEXANDERSEN: Objection. 5 A. Again, what I said was, I did testing on 6 breaking these arc chutes and so breaking them 7 into pieces, similar to what would occur from the 8 breaking of cement materials in the boilers. In 9 addition, I've also taken air samples during 10 asbestos removal projects, where sometimes some 11 asbestos containing hardened materials were broken 12 and actually broken in many more pieces and much 13 more surface area than what would occur from 14 breaking the cast iron sections and, even there, 15 the exposures were usually limited to a few fibers 16 per CC. So if you extrapolate to just a small 17 amount of breakage, because only a small amount of 18 cement is used to seal sections, and the time that 19 that is done, again, you wouldn't even come 20 close. And the fact that he only did a limited 21 number of these burning boilers, you're just not 1 boiler is put together, where it was sealed 2 together with asbestos rope and asbestos cement? 3 A. You're talking about the sections? 4 Q. Yes. 5 A. Yes. 6 Q. So are you telling me that when you 7 smashed into those to break it up, that no 8 asbestos would be released? 9 A. I didn't say that. 10 Q. How much asbestos would be released? 11 A. Actually, free airborne asbestos, it would 12 probably be not that high of an amount. 13 Q. And what studies are you basing that on? 14 A. Well, I'm basing that on studies I did 15 with arc chutes, which was a hard cementious 16 asbestos containing material, where I broke the 17 pieces and there was very little asbestos emitted. 18 Q. What is an arc chute used for? They are 19 used in elevators, aren't they? 20 A. Well, they're used in electrical panels. 21 Q. Okay. But there is a difference between 91 1 going to get a fiber dose that's significant. 2 Q. When you say you saw asbestos removal, did 3 you ever see asbestos removal and have numbers on 4 a home boiler being removed? 5 A. I have done asbestos remediations where 6 boiler insulation was removed but not where the 7 sections were broken. 8 Q. Okay. And this arc chute, who made the 9 arc chute that you were testing? 10 A. The arc chutes that I tested were made by 11 General Electric, Westinghouse and Eden, Cutler, 12 Handler. 13 Q. And were these arc chutes made with 14 melamine resin? 15 A. No. These were -- there are some arc 16 chutes that are made with melamine resins. I 17 believe the ones I tested were inorganic, which 18 would be more similar in nature to furnace cement. 19 Q. What percentage of asbestos were they? 20 A. I think around 30 to 40 percent, but I'm 21 guessing there. PRECISE REPORTING SERVICES (301) 210-5092 (877) 4 A STENO 92 93 DEPOSITION OF SHELDON H. RABINOVITZ, Ph.D., CIH CONDUCTED ON 8/11/2009 25 1 Q. What if the asbestos cement is 100 percent 2 asbestos, with asbestos and water mixed together, 3 would your exposure be a lot higher? 4 MR. ALEXANDERSEN: Objection. 5 A. Again, I'm not saying -- I'm not 6 attempting to give exact numbers. What I'm 7 attempting to get here is a ballpark and the 8 ballpark of the exposure dose of breaking a few 9 boiling burners from any emissions that would 10 occur from collateral breakage of furnace cement 11 or rope is just so small that you could take those 12 numbers, double them, triple them and you would 13 still be below an exposure dose for chrysotile 14 asbestos that could have any influence in 15 increasing the risk of getting mesothelioma. 16 Q. Let me ask you another question. Say 17 we're not talking about a burning boiler. Say 18 we're talking about another boiler, and the 19 process is the same of smashing the boiler with a 20 sledgehammer, okay? 21 A. Okay. 94 1 exposure be in that scenario? 2 MR. ALEXANDERSEN: Objection. Complete 3 hypothetical. 4 A. You know, first of all, I guess that 5 would -- first of all, usually you want to still 6 hammer the sections. I would think that you would 7 probably remove the cover, prior to using the 8 sledgehammer, in general. 9 Q. But that's not my hypothetical. My 10 hypothetical is that there is a boiler, it's a 11 sectional boiler and it's covered with one and a 12 half inches of asbestos cement and insulation. 13 They're tearing it apart and beating it with a 14 sledgehammer. Now, what would the exposure be, at 15 that point? 16 MR. ALEXANDERSEN: Objection. 17 A. You know, you've now described a situation 18 where there's probably going to be more exposure 19 but I would have to sit down, again, the 20 ventilation, the size of the basement, how many 21 times he hit it. I mean, I just can't give you a 1 Q. And say the boiler is covered with one and 2 a half inches of asbestos mixed with water that 3 then hardened to make cement, okay? And now, 4 we're smashing the sections of that boiler up, 5 would you expect the exposure to be a lot higher? 6 MR. ALEXANDERSEN: Objection. 7 A. Wait. I'm getting a little confused now. 8 So what you're saying is, they are sealing the 9 sections of the boiler with one and a half inches 10 of cement? 11 Q. No. They're covering it as insulation. 12 A. Oh, you are now talking about, not furnace 13 cement, you now moved away from that and you moved 14 into the area of insulation? 15 Q. Yeah. I'm saying -- okay. You have a 16 boiler, okay? And it's insulated on the outside 17 of it with one and a half inches of asbestos mixed 18 with water that then hardened, okay? 19 A. Okay. 20 Q. And say, Mr. Webb comes in and smashes it 21 with a sledgehammer to break it up, what would the 95 1 number. 2 Q. I understand. But you said, with certain 3 information, you can give me a range. Can you 4 give me a range? 5 A. Well, what you suggested would we a higher 6 exposure than what we talked about from some 7 collateral breakage of some furnace cement between 8 sections. 9 Q. Would the range, at the high end of the 10 range, would it be over point one fibers per CC? 11 A. Again, we're talking about a bunch of 12 variables and I'm not just going to just throw out 13 numbers. I would have to think about it. I would 14 have to look at all the information that's 15 available, related to other sampling jobs I've 16 done of asbestos remediation, and then try to 17 come up with some range of numbers. I'm not just 18 going to give you numbers off the top of my head. 19 I have to be more thoughtful and try to be more 20 exact. 21 Q. Okay, Doctor. I think I'm done. I'm PRECISE REPORTING SERVICES (301) 210-5092 (877) 4 A STENO 96 97 DEPOSITION OF SHELDON H. RABINOVITZ, Ph.D., CIH CONDUCTED ON 8/11/2009 26 1 going to let you go. Thanks for your time. 2 MR. MISMAS: Anybody else have any 3 questions? 4 (The deposition was concluded at 3:52 5 p.m.) 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 98 1 CERTIFICATE OF NOTARY PUBLIC 2 I, Kelly Susnowitz, the officer before whom 3 the foregoing deposition was taken, do hereby 4 certify that the witness whose testimony appears 5 herein was duly sworn by me; that the testimony of 6 said witness was taken by me in shorthand and this 7 transcript typed under my direction; that said 8 transcript is a true record of the testimony given 9 by said witness; that I am neither counsel for, 10 related to, nor employed by any of the parties to 11 the action in which this deposition was taken; 12 and, further, that I am not a relative or employee 13 of any attorney or counsel retained by the parties 14 hereto, nor financially or otherwise interested in 15 the outcome of the action. 16 17 Notary Public in and for the 18 State of Maryland 19 20 My commission expires: 21 June 13, 2012 1 CERTIFICATE OF DEPONENT 2 3 I hereby certify that I have read and 4 examined the foregoing transcript, and the same is 5 a true and accurate record of the testimony given 6 by me. 7 8 Any additions or corrections that I feel 9 are necessary, I will attach on a separate sheet 10 of paper to the original transcript. 11 12 13 Sheldon H. Rabinovitz, Ph.D., CIH 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 99 PRECISE REPORTING SERVICES (301) 210-5092 (877) 4 A STENO 100 DEPOSITION OF SHELDON H. RABINOVITZ, Ph.D., CIH CONDUCTED ON 8/11/2009 27 <1 OD O CD $ $165,000 18:12 $200 21:12 $275 21:13 $310 21:20 $4,400 26:9 $425 21:20 0 00006 79:19 004 77:10 19 79:12 80:13 04 78:14 1 1 4:11 7:13,15 54:20 55:4 68:21 1.5 30:7,8 10 80:14 100 18:19 19:19,21 20:12 24:14 70:18 94:1 1008 3:4 10360 2:5 11 1:11 13 100:21 14th 8:16 1501 2:13 16th 3:15 1900 3:14 19102 3:16 1944 6:13 1964 67:7 1966 10:9 1968 67:18 1972 10:3 1973 12:2 1974 10:16 2 2 4:12 7:14,15,1 9 68:18 2:06 1:18 20 68:17,20 2002 65:17,19 2008 30:3 2009 1:11 8:17 9:4 2012 100:21 21240 1:18 216-2415310 2:17 267-8098708 3:18 2-mile 69:20 2nd 6:13 3 3:52 98:4 30 93:20 30th 16:11,12 19:5 21:17 330-4678571 2:8 4 4 30:3,8,9 40 93:20 43216 1008 3:6 44067 2:6 44115 2:15 4th 9:4,6 5 5 4:7 50 3:15 17:9 70:18 50 000 18:17 19:3 52 3:5 6 6 30:8 68:17 61 6:14 614-464- 8330 3:8 65 6:15 6th 2:14 7 7 4:11,12 68:20 7032 1:17 75 62:12 63:20 75-year-old 62:8 78 12:10 13:1 79 12:10 8 800 9:7 83 13:11 84 13:10 9 90 17:11 A Aaron 1:4 7:4 able 21:5 28:14 63:4 77:5 83:18 85:16 access 29:18 83:17 90:6 accurate 99:5 ACGIH 53:8,19 acting 20:15 action 15:16 100:11,15 actual 27:11 90:2 actually 13:4 23:21 25:9,12 27:20 29:7 48:12,13 65:10 91:11 92:12 added 71:7 addition 7:5 57:21 92:9 additional 7:3 15:6 additions 99:8 afternoon 5:14,15 Agency 14:3 15:3,21 ago 82:5 agreed 5:2 65:5 agreeing 65:12 agreement 18:8 ahead 32:12 47:18 51:8 59:4 76:4 air 59:12 81:21 82:14 92:9 airborne 78:15 82:1 91:11 Airport 1:17 al 1:5,8 Alexanderse n 2:11 7:17,21 30:12,16 31:3,8,13 32:10 33:16 34:8 35:18 36:7 37:7,20 38:8 39:5,10,1 5 40:5 PRECISE REPORTING SERVICES (301) 210-5092 (877) 4 A STENO DEPOSITION OF SHELDON H. RABINOVITZ, Ph.D., CIH CONDUCTED ON 8/11/2009 28 41:15 42:8,19 43:11 44:7 45:3,16 47:17 48:10 49:3,21 50:4,8,13 ,16 51:5,8,11 ,14,20 52:9 53:16 54:12 56:2,13,2 0 57:8,18 58:17 59:3,16 60:9 61:15 64:4,12,2 1 66:15,18 67:8,11 68:2,9 69:9 70:17,21 71:19 72:7,19 73:19 74:2,8,14 ,20,21 76:1 78:13 79:3,10 81:5,11 84:14 85:4,11,2 0 86:4,10 87:1,9 89:4 92:4 94:4 95:6 96:2,16 Allen 66:13 allow 85:14 alone 33:11 54:9 am 10:12 16:9 31:18 51:11 53:17 100:9,12 American 65:14 67:17 amount 28:4 34:17 39:19 61:13,20 62:3 66:12 76:20 77:2,3 91:12 92:17 amphibole 29:7,13 35:11,16 36:10 amphiboles 29:5,10 35:21 36:10 39:20 44:12,16 animal 34:9 answer 27:21 31:15 32:12 37:8 41:11,12 52:17 56:15,21 57:13 59:4,6 answered 37:8,21 41:16 42:20 47:18 85:12 86:5 89:5 answering 61:3 anybody 20:15 22:3 26:3 60:14 98:2 anymore 39:7,9 anyone 23:12 48:6 anything 9:2 13:13,14 25:15 46:20 61:4 62:10 64:16 69:16,18 71:6,12 anyway 24:3 anywhere 47:11 83:21 apart 96:13 appears 100:4 application 14:8 84:7 Application s 13:3 applied 81:20 apply 22:17 81:21 84:20 85:6 86:1,7 88:6 approaching 17:11 43:14 approximate ly 69:2 arc 91:15,18 92:6 93:8,9,10 ,13,15 area 13:7 92:13 95:14 aren't 27:2 91:19 arrangement 21:3,6 article 29:18,20 30:4,13,1 8 31:10,14, 19 33:3 48:20 65:11 67:5,15 68:5 articles 26:15 34:16 47:12,16 48:11 49:7 asbestos 11:19,21 14:12 15:16,19 20:1,8 24:12,13, 15,19 25:2,3,5 26:16 28:3 29:4,7 33:4 36:20 37:2,10,1 3,14 38:15,17 42:4 43:20 44:1,4 45:2,6,9, 10 48:9 52:4,6 53:6,19 54:1,10,2 1 55:1,11,1 3,16,20 56:10 57:9,15,1 7 58:6,7,14 ,19 59:1,8 60:3 65:11 67:6 68:12 69:6 70:15 71:2 72:17 76:13,15, 20 77:2,12,1 4,16 78:9 82:1,2 83:4,8,9, 12,13 86:20 87:12 91:2,8,10 ,11,16,17 92:2,10,1 1 93:2,3,5, 19 94:1,2,14 95:2,17 96:12 97:16 asbestosis 36:6,12 46:14,18 47:3,15 PRECISE REPORTING SERVICES (301) 210-5092 (877) 4 A STENO DEPOSITION OF SHELDON H. RABINOVITZ, Ph.D., CIH CONDUCTED ON 8/11/2009 29 49:2,13 52:20 asbestotics 49:8 50:2,6,11 51:18 52:8 aspects 44:4 associated 37:1 57:11 67:13 81:17 Associates 2:4 16:7 Association 67:18 assume 32:17 68:16 assumptions 63:2,3,4, 6,7,8 64:15 73:16,20 74:3,5,7 attach 99:9 attempt 87:13 89:1 attempted 35:19 36:18 attempting 62:5 78:4 90:13 94:6,7 attorney 25:8 61:6 100:13 August 1:11 Australia 50:11 51:18 automobile 55:21 57:6 available 97:15 Avenue 2:13 average 78:12 79:18 80:18 aware 26:5 35:10 45:14 53:17,20 80:10 away 80:2 95:13 B bachelor's 9:12 background 9:8,9,11 22:2,13 23:5,19 24:6 backs 47:5 Balangero 29:20 ballpark 77:5 88:12,15, 16 94:7,8 Baltimore 1:12,18 Balzer 67:15 68:1 band 59:11 60:2 bare 62:3 base 87:7 based 18:4 25:16 38:1 41:5,7 49:12 50:13 53:18 62:13,16 64:11,14 74:9,12,1 4 82:3 87:4,5,10 89:21 90:11 basement 70:15 71:13,17, 21 73:14 96:20 basements 71:15,16 BASF 11:12,16 12:1 basically 21:8 34:17 57:19 basing 91:13,14 basis 64:13 68:7 81:18 bathroom 60:20 bctaggart@v ssp.com 3:7 beating 96:13 becomes 55:12 beforehand 83:3 begin 24:2 beginning 1:18 17:4,5,6 behalf 1:20 24:15 25:6 believe 26:8 39:6 40:6 41:21 42:10 43:7,18,1 9 44:15 45:12,20 56:9 84:1,17 87:2 93:17 believes 45:7,14 56:18 bell 58:3,4 Berman 38:10,20 best 34:1 Bevan 2:4 bill 7:8 26:8 billed 26:6 bills 8:1 biologist 27:13,14, 15 birth 6:12 bit 5:20 22:2 blade 68:19 body 36:15 46:4 body's 40:16 Boelter 67:10 80:6 boiler 70:16 75:13,14 81:17 86:8,15,1 9 91:1 93:4,6 94:17,18, 19 95:1,4,9, 16 96:10,11 boilers 75:3,8 81:2 84:13,17 89:18 92:8,21 boiling 94:9 bonus 18:13 bonuses 18:2,4 bottom 29:14 Boulder 6:3 boundaries 61:21 Box 3:4 brake 56:1 57:5,10 brakes 56:9,10 57:4,5,11 ,13 64:10 brand 82:21 B-reader PRECISE REPORTING SERVICES (301) 210-5092 (877) 4 A STENO DEPOSITION OF SHELDON H. RABINOVITZ, Ph.D., CIH CONDUCTED ON 8/11/2009 30 27:4 break 60:15 89:20 90:13 91:7 95:21 breakage 90:12 92:17 94:10 97:7 breaking 90:14,15 92:6,8,14 94:8 breath 50:18 breathe 59:12 breathed 69:13,17 breathing 78:16 BRENT 3:2 Brief 60:12 bring 6:17 broke 91:16 broken 92:11,12 93:7 brought 7:7,8,10 brush 75:9,10 77:8,15,1 6,18,19,2 0 78:3 brushing 75:16 76:6,10 78:4,8 budget 41:19 bulk 56:6 bunch 80:2 97:11 burners 94:9 Burnham 26:2 burning 89:17,18 92:21 94:17 business 19:8,16 20:9,21 buy 17:19 BWI 1:17 C cake 58:4 cancer 36:5,12 41:7 46:14,18 47:15 49:2,13 52:20 cancers 47:3 capability 40:18 41:14 carbon 14:10 carcinogen 40:21 carcinogens 41:3,5,10 career 65:2 case 1:7 5:17 7:1,9 20:18 24:12,13, 20 25:9,13,1 9 26:4,7,11 61:1,4 74:10,16 76:3 85:17 87:15,17, 18,19 89:14 cases 14:10 24:15 28:8,9,15 29:1,6 35:9 44:10 66:21 67:3 68:8 cast 89:20 90:5,6,8, 13 92:14 causation 27:7 cause 27:19 28:14 29:11,15 30:11 32:9 34:7 36:5,11 37:13 38:3,7,13 39:14 40:3 41:7 42:13,17 43:9 44:6 45:15,19 46:5,7,16 ,18 49:1,17 55:13 56:10,18 57:2,6 58:4,9,15 ,21 59:13 69:7 70:19 caused 28:10 29:7,13 causes 37:5,19 40:13 42:7 55:15 causing 28:2 33:13 34:19 36:14 39:21 40:9,18 41:14 42:5 44:17 46:13 70:20 CC 77:10 78:10 79:12,20 80:13 92:16 97:10 cellular 27:15 cement 72:17 73:3 81:17,19 82:21 83:5,14 84:6,20 85:3,8,9, 19 86:3 90:11,12, 15 91:2 92:2,8,18 93:18 94:1,10 95:3,10,1 3 96:12 97:7 cementious 91:15 certain 23:21 24:1 36:17 97:2 certainly 36:20 46:2,12 55:19 65:4 66:11 CERTIFICATE 99:1 100:1 certified 10:10,11 27:4 65:2 83:7 certify 99:3 100:4 chamber 82:2,8,11 ,18,19 change 23:20 24:1,7 41:4,8 42:2 45:11 changed 17:3 41:9 43:3,5 56:4 changes 23:11,13 43:1 changing 56:9 57:4,11,1 3 58:6 charge 20:20 charging PRECISE REPORTING SERVICES (301) 210-5092 (877) 4 A STENO DEPOSITION OF SHELDON H. RABINOVITZ, Ph.D., CIH CONDUCTED ON 8/11/2009 31 21:14,16, 18 Charles 1:5 7:5 85:18 89:14 chemically 55:10 56:4,6 chemist 10:21 chemistry 9:12 chrysotile 27:18 28:1,7,11 ,12,16,17 29:9,15,1 9 30:5,11 32:4,5,8 33:10,12 34:4,7,10 ,18 35:2,5,14 ,16 36:14 37:5,19 38:3,7,13 39:13 40:3,8,13 ,18 41:14 42:6,13,1 7 43:9 44:6 45:15,19 46:7,16,1 8 47:14 48:8 49:1,10 52:1 54:18 55:4,11 68:21 70:19 71:2 90:17 94:13 chute 91:18 93:8,9 chutes 91:15 92:6 93:10,13, 16 CIRCUIT 1:1 cite 34:6 46:20 47:4 claims 34:13 cleaned 81:20 cleaning 78:17 80:14 clear 47:20 clearly 54:7 Cleveland 2:15 clinician 27:10 close 92:20 clutch 57:17 58:1 clutches 58:6 CLV 80:9 88:6 CO 1:8 coated 71:5 cohort 28:6 34:21 35:3,9,10 ,14,15,17 cohorts 29:12 35:11 46:11 47:3 collateral 90:16 94:10 97:7 college 10:5 11:11,12 Columbus 3:6 combined 71:6 comes 95:20 coming 48:19 commission 14:2 100:20 Committee 15:16 COMMON 1:1 companies 13:19 20:1 company 12:4,8 13:6,20 17:1,15 19:6 83:7 comparable 70:10 compare 76:5 compared 36:1 71:10 Complete 96:2 completely 29:10 31:21 composition 55:10 concentrati on 79:17,18 87:14 conclude 28:16 33:12 41:9 concluded 98:4 conclusion 28:11 32:19 33:8 73:13 conclusions 77:5 84:5 conditions 27:12 60:1 69:19 71:12 73:3,13 conducted 34:2 Conference 65:15 confines 56:21 confounding 32:16 confused 95:7 conjecture 63:11,14 consider 9:20 33:14 constrictio ns 41:19 consulted 24:19 25:6,14 consulting 13:6,12,1 9 16:18 19:8,17 20:21 24:18 Consumer 14:1 contacted 25:7 83:18 contacting 90:9 contain 76:13 contained 58:15,20 container 71:3 containing 56:10 83:13 87:12 91:16 92:11 contains 59:10 86:19 contaminati on 29:3 content 84:8 context 30:19 59:4 contract 36:4 contractor 21:8,11 contracts 13:20 contribute 56:11 57:6 58:10,16, 21 59:14 PRECISE REPORTING SERVICES (301) 210-5092 (877) 4 A STENO DEPOSITION OF SHELDON H. RABINOVITZ, Ph.D., CIH CONDUCTED ON 8/11/2009 32 69:7 contributes 33:4 contributin g 81:3 88:7,14 controls 82:9,10 conversatio n 63:13 conversatio ns 60:21 Cooper 67:16 cooperation 9:16 copy 7:10 83:15,19 Corn 64:17 65:21 66:2 Corporation 11:13 26:2 correct 9:5 23:18 24:16,17 26:18 32:18 42:18 46:1 49:10 58:13 81:1,4 84:13 85:3 corrections 99:8 corresponde nces 8:10 counsel 1:15 4:2 5:3,8,12 8:12 100:9,13 COUNTY 1:2 couple 16:1 26:14 court 1:1 7:12 cover 90:7 96:7 covered 95:1 96:11 covering 95:11 crack 90:5 creates 59:12 credentials 43:21 68:3 criminal 20:18 crocidolite 50:10 51:17 58:15,20 59:10 68:21 Crump 38:10,20 curious 84:19 current 42:1 currently 6:10 customized 24:8 cut 58:18 69:3,6 Cutler 93:11 cuts 59:11 cutting 58:14,19 60:1 68:18 69:5 CUYAHOGA 1:2 CV 8:1 26:14 CV-08 659360 1:7 D D.C 13:7 15:3 damage 90:16 Daniel 44:19 data 46:9 48:20 49:7 55:3 date 6:12 8:14 26:6 dated 8:16 day 80:15 day's 71:11 dealing 39:12 Dearborn 12:6 decided 37:10 decompose 55:20 decomposed 58:2 dedicated 26:10 deep 50:18 defendant 20:19 defendants 1:9 2:10 3:1,10 8:11 24:16 defending 20:1 defense 8:11 definitely 44:3 degree 9:12,13,1 8 10:6 64:3 Department 9:15,16 11:3 dependent 18:8 depending 62:5 71:3 73:5 76:19 depends 52:10 66:8 deponent 5:4 99:1 deposed 6:3 deposition 1:13 4:11 5:3,5 7:1,4,7,1 3,15 9:2 22:16 23:1,3,4 70:13 74:15 89:17 98:4 100:3,11 depositions 5:18 84:15 described 96:17 describing 59:5 description 90:18 designing 15:19 detection 82:3 determinati on 40:15 87:11 determined 60:4 determining 53:5 Detroit 10:3 12:5 developing 59:14 development 33:4 device 60:1 devoted 16:19 19:19,21 20:9 diagnosed 25:5 62:9,12 diameter 68:18,20 differ 45:12 difference 76:19,21 PRECISE REPORTING SERVICES (301) 210-5092 (877) 4 A STENO DEPOSITION OF SHELDON H. RABINOVITZ, Ph.D., CIH CONDUCTED ON 8/11/2009 33 77:4 91:21 different 20:7 36:19,20, 21 37:1,10 42:4 53:20 74:11 differentia te 41:18 differentia ted 42:4 differently 37:11 39:20 difficult 35:13 difficulty 23:11 digest 31:21 32:19 direction 70:1 100:7 disagreeing 37:17 discrepancy 18:21 disease 25:5 37:14 45:10 48:4,9 53:19 54:1,9,21 55:2,14,1 6 57:15 58:8 59:1 77:12 88:8 diseases 54:1 disks 57:17 distinguish ed 65:1 disturbance 87:12 90:10 Doctor 8:8,10 9:10 18:10 24:10 31:17 32:11 37:4 38:5,19 40:1 41:11 51:17 60:14 81:16 90:21 97:21 document 38:10,12 done 25:12,17 33:21 34:16 40:6 41:19 44:1 51:4,10,1 3 57:14 58:12 60:3 65:3,4,5, 6,8 67:1,2 70:18 86:12 87:6,11,1 5,17,19 92:19 93:5 97:16,21 dose 27:9 28:19 29:17 36:3,11 49:12 55:5 58:6 60:5 61:10,14, 18 62:4,13,1 6,21 64:2,7,11 66:2,20 67:2 72:4 77:6 88:17 90:20 93:1 94:8,13 double 94:12 Dr 1:14 4:4 5:7,14 43:16 44:5,18,1 9 80:11 99:13 draft 38:10 draw 77:5 drawn 33:8 drop 80:1 duly 5:9 100:5 dumped 72:10 duration 72:2 74:4 during 67:6 83:12 92:9 dust 58:4 59:12,13 71:7 duties 13:17,18 15:7 E East 3:5 70:2 Eden 93:11 educated 65:2 education 11:20 educational 9:8,9,11 effects 34:3 eight 26:12 78:11,21 79:8,14 80:15 82:20 eighthour 78:11 79:18 80:17 either 27:16 40:11 electric 68:19 93:11 electrical 91:20 92:1 elevated 35:21 elevators 91:19 Elm 1:17 else 23:9,17,2 0 24:4 26:3 62:10 64:16 71:6 98:2 emission 72:1 emissions 71:7,8,10 84:7 90:16 94:9 emitted 69:12 91:17 employed 100:10 employee 12:19 15:18 100:12 employees 11:16 12:19 15:11 53:12 enclosed 82:2 endorsing 39:9 enforce 36:17 environment 12:20 67:16 68:6 environment al 9:13,17 11:4 14:2 15:2,20 30:2 69:18 71:12 environment s 12:19 EPA 15:8,11 38:6,9,14 ,19 PRECISE REPORTING SERVICES (301) 210-5092 (877) 4 A STENO DEPOSITION OF SHELDON H. RABINOVITZ, Ph.D., CIH CONDUCTED ON 8/11/2009 34 40:4 43:8 EPA's 39:4,13 epi 35:20 epidemiolog ical 35:1,4 epidemiolog ist 26:21 epidemiolog y 28:4,5 32:13 34:13 47:2 54:19 55:3 57:12 ESQUIRE 2:3,11 3:2,11 essentially 24:4 28:7 38:11 establish 62:6 Estate 1:5 et 1:5,8 Euclid 2:13 evaluate 8:21 evaluated 24:21 evaluating 12:18 15:18 evaluation 22:20 44:11 88:21 event 71:11 events 87:5 everything 33:21 65:6,13 evidence 30:10 32:8 33:6 34:18 39:19 43:4 46:4 62:10 74:15 exact 47:12 77:3 94:6 97:20 exactly 18:16,20 20:6 exam 10:13,15 examination 1:15 4:2 5:8,12 examined 5:10 99:4 example 24:5 28:20,21 47:9 62:7 excessive 45:8 Executor 1:4 exempt 80:10 Exhibit 4:10 7:13,14,1 5 exist 13:5 expect 95:5 expected 30:7 36:2 expert 27:7 43:20 45:1 experts 48:11 expires 100:20 explain 28:9,14 29:6,12 exposed 45:8 46:16,17 47:13 48:7 49:1,9 80:13 exposure 28 :8, 10, 1 2 29 :13 ,19 35 :2, 5 36 :11 40 :21 41 :7 46: 7 49 :17 53 :6 54 :11 62 :10 63 :10 67 :6 75: 6 79 :12 81 :16 82 :7 90: 4 94 :3, 8,13 95 :5 96 :1, 14, 1 8 97: 6 exposures 15:18 57:10 63:7 67:13 76:7 92:15 extend 73:8 extent 58:2 extrapolate 87:13 92:16 extrapolati ng 48:19 extremely 28:19 48:4 88:18 F face 78:8 facilitate 89:20 facility 82:8 fact 32:9 43:14 45:18 92:20 factor 44:16 70:20 77:11 81:3 88:8,14 factors 32:16 41:6 facts 22:21 68:16 74:9,12 76:3 fair 28:4 30:18 33:14 34:17 70:14 fairly 61:18 fast 72:10 father 90:3 feel 49:14 99:8 feeling 18:6,10 feelings 28:1 feet 82:19,20 felt 44:15 fewer 49:8 fiber 29:8 36:9 46:6 52:10 53:18,20, 21 54:8,15,1 7 70:16 72:2 73:3 84:6 85:9,18 86:2,14,1 9 88:17 93:1 fibers 33:4,10 77:10 78:10 79:12,19 80:13 82:1,2 92:15 97:10 field 10:20 17:1 28:3 48:12 65:3 figure 48:18 63:15 file 6:17,20,2 1 7:14,17 8:3,7,12 Files 4:12 filter PRECISE REPORTING SERVICES (301) 210-5092 (877) 4 A STENO DEPOSITION OF SHELDON H. RABINOVITZ, Ph.D., CIH CONDUCTED ON 8/11/2009 35 82:12 final 21:5 38:10 43:6 finalize 23:5 financially 100:14 finding 33:9 82:2 fine 8:4 31:11 52:17 finished 54:4 firebox 75:12,14 firm 13:12 19:17 25:20 first 5:9 10:10,17, 19 11:10,12 51:21 54:15 69:11,16 71:1 96:4,5 fit 22:19 five 12:9 60:6 69:2,5 70:15 flange 75:11 76:12 77:9 78:8 Floor 2:14 flow 82:14 flute 84:8 Ford 12:4,7,13 ,17,21 foregoing 99:4 100:3 foreseeably 57:14 58:12 form 33:16 35:18 36:7 48:10 49:3 58:3 81:5 formal 9:18 11:18 formed 55:21 57:21 forms 36:19 37:1,12 38:17 42:4 formula 18:7 formulation 83:8 forsterite 55:6,13,1 5,18,19,2 1 56:5 57:2,20 Fourteen 17:18 Fred 80:6 free 91:11 front 30:13,17, 20 full 6:7 full-time 15:5 furnace 81:19 82:21 83:5,13 84:6 85:3,8,9, 19 86:3 93:18 94:10 95:12 97:7 furnaces 84:17 G Gallagher 2:12 7:3 25:20 gas 62:20 63:8,21 gasket 76:20 77:9,17 78:3,9 79:2,5 80:14 gasketing 76:6 78:5 90:10 gaskets 75:2,8,11 76:11,12 78:11,21 79:8,21 80:9 Gay 3:5 gears 52:1 general 48:5 50:14 56:16 57:21 93:11 96:8 generally 61:19 75:15,20 generate 57:19 64:6 85:15,16 87:14 88:20 generated 77:7 generating 73:6 getting 21:10 28:18 45:10 57:15 58:7 72:4 88:3 94:15 95:7 given 5:17 59:18 64:5 99:5 100:8 giving 56:16 72:20 goodly 20:5 goodness 18:5 GOODYEAR 1:8 granted 5:18 ground 88:5 guess 20:18,19 51:5 96:4 guessing 93:21 guideline 53:4 H half 6:3 95:2,9,17 96:12 hammer 44:18,19 96:6 hand 77:14,16 Handler 93:12 handsaw 68:19 Hanna 3:13 happen 75:21 happened 22:20 79:14 89:14 90:19 hard 91:15 hardened 92:11 95:3,18 hardens 84:21 harmful 77:6 haven't 19:11 40:2 43:4 59:18 65:5 having 5:9 9:20 28:4 29:13,14 30:20 66:12 hazard 25:2 PRECISE REPORTING SERVICES (301) 210-5092 (877) 4 A STENO DEPOSITION OF SHELDON H. RABINOVITZ, Ph.D. CONDUCTED ON 8/11/2009 CIH 36 hazardous 15:17 head 12:15 15:9 22:8 52:15 97:18 health 9:13,17 11:4,15 14:1,17 15:9,10 16:18 40:8 healthful 12:20 53:11 hear 58:18 65:21 67:1 81:11 heart 18:5 heck 51:3 held 1:16 11:8 39:17 help 22:3,11 83:19 helped 22:5,13 Hercules 83:2,11 hereby 5:2 99:3 100:3 herein 100:5 hereto 100:14 he's 31:14 33:17,21 43:19 44:9 45:4 65:2,4,6, 8 67:12 69:20 high 28:19 29:17 45:21 46:3 75:17 82:19 91:12 97:9 higher 30:9 32:7 49:9,17 52:7 55:2 94:3 95:5 97:5 highest 35:15 highly 43:19 45:1 72:3 hit 96:21 hitting 90:8 hold 11:6 home 19:14 93:4 horsepower 68:19 hour 20:21 21:12,20, 21 69:20 82:17 hours 6:3 26:10,12 79:9 housing 58:3,5 Huh 70:5 human 33:5 34:4 hydration 55:12 56:7 hygiene 9:14 10:20,21 13:19 65:15 67:17 hygienist 10:11 11:13 12:12,15 53:9 64:20 hypothetica l 32:3,11 59:17 74:9 76:2 96:3,9,10 hypothetica lly 32:3 59:7 62:8 hypothetica ls 74:6,18 I identificat ion 7:16 identify 6:20 I'll 6:1 8:7,13 49:3 56:20 59:3 76:1 78:4 I'm 6:16 7:21 18:15 19:7 21:2,4,12 22:1 26:5,14,1 8,20 27:1,5,10 ,14 31:6,8 33:21 34:14,15 35:2 37:17,18 43:12 45:10 46:3 47:4,6 48:18 49:5,6 51:7 52:2,12 53:20 57:4 60:6 62:7 63:15,18 65:20 67:2 71:21 77:17 79:6 80:17 85:7 91:14 93:20 94:5,6 95:7,15 97:12,17, 21 immemorial 50:21 implying 38:2 impression 44:15 improper 31:9 32:11 inches 68:17,20 95:2,9,17 96:12 incidence 47:19 49:13 include 8:1,6 incomplete 32:10 76:2 incorporate d 19:11 increase 28:13 35:6 49:14 54:20 57:14 58:7 72:4 increased 33:13 41:1 45:9 55:1 increasing 28:17 34:19 94:15 independent 21:7,11 individuali zed 22:19 industrial 9:14 10:11,20, 21 11:13 12:12,15 13:18 53:9 64:20 65:15 67:17 influence 94:14 PRECISE REPORTING SERVICES (301) 210-5092 (877) 4 A STENO DEPOSITION OF SHELDON H. RABINOVITZ, Ph.D., CIH CONDUCTED ON 8/11/2009 37 information 7:3,6 8:19,20 38:11,16 42:1 59:6,19,2 0 61:13,17, 20 62:1,4 63:2,18,2 0 64:1,6,14 66:9,10,1 2 73:5 85:14 97:3,14 inhalation 34:12 initial 22:12 23:2 inorganic 93:17 inside 58:4 insignifica nt 88:18 installing 84:16 Instead 9:7 Institute 13:21 14:16 instruments 81:21 insulated 95:16 insulating 67:16 68:6 insulation 90:9 93:6 95:11,14 96:12 interested 100:14 interesting 44:8 internally 39:11 Internation al 13:4 introduced 43:18 intubation 34:10 involve 25:3 28:7 57:12 involved 11:20 15:11,13 involving 35:21 77:12 iron 89:20 90:5,6,8, 13 92:14 irrelevant 50:19 isn't 66:5,7 70:12 issue 36:20 issued 9:4 issues 45:6 Italy 29:20 30:5 I've 20:17 33:18,20 35:19 48:11 92:9 97:15 J Jasons 3:12 Jeffrey's 29:4 job 10:10,19 11:10,12 13:17,18 14:14 15:7 jobs 97:15 John 2:3 5:16 7:17 50:18 joints 70:16 JRB 13:6 judgement 34:1 judgment 7:2 June 9:4,6 16:11 19:5 21:17 30:3 100:21 K kalexanders en@gallag hersharp. com 2:16 Kelley 3:12 Kelly 1:19 100:2 Kevin 2:11 60:18 74:20 knowledge 39:18 44:3 45:5 kosher 51:6 L labeling 80:10 language 53:8 large 23:10 25:10 34:15 42:16 89:19 larger 28:6 62:2 last 18:13 law 25:20 lawsuit 20:16 lead 68:12 72:3 least 55:4 leave 12:1,21 led 25:9 Leroy 67:10 less 17:4,6,9 36:11 62:1 let's 20:17 60:6 64:10 letter 80:8,12 level 35:15 36:21 49:10 52:7 75:6 levels 45:21 46:3 53:5 54:10,20 72:18 Libby 49:19,20 50:3,7,20 51:1 Liberty 3:14 light 39:17 likely 28:12,13 55:17 limit 72:15 73:8 78:12 80:3,19 limitations 36:17 limited 72:2 82:3 90:11,18 92:15,20 line 29:14 list 7:7 8:5 literature 26:16 70:10 liters 82:15 litigation 13:13,15 14:5 16:20 17:1,8 19:19 20:1,8,9, 11,12 25:3 little 6:16 13:15 14:4 22:1 34:18 81:16 91:17 PRECISE REPORTING SERVICES (301) 210-5092 (877) 4 A STENO DEPOSITION OF SHELDON H. RABINOVITZ, Ph.D., CIH CONDUCTED ON 8/11/2009 38 95:7 live 6:10,11 lived 63:21 lives 62:15,19 LLP 3:3,13 long 11:6 12:7 13:8 14:19 15:4 16:10 65:1 68:17 73:2 79:1,4,11 80:2,19 82:16,20 lose 6:2 loses 56:7 lot 23:13 41:18 65:3 70:7 94:3 95:5 low 46:10 76:7 88:11,13, 21 89:2,7,9 90:17 lower 36:4 lung 33:10 36:5,12 46:14,18 47:3,15 49:2,13 lungs 44:12 luxury 28:4 M Madam 7:12 magic 53:13 main 13:17,18 35:7 58:1 major 9:20 majority 23:16 malignant 33:5 manager 15:9 managing 15:19 mandate 43:13 Mangold 76:9 mark 7:13,14 64:17 65:21 66:2 marked 4:10 7:16,19 Marr 67:6 Maryland 1:12,18,2 0 6:11 100:18 mask 69:21 masonry 68:19 masters 9:12 material 6:21 7:2 22:12,14 23:3,6,19 25:8 71:5 72:9 76:6 78:5 91:16 materials 4:12 21:13 87:12 92:8,11 math 80:20 matter 78:7 may 8:16 24:3,7 29:10 46:4 55:1 62:2 66:11 89:17,18 90:10 maybe 25:4 McDonnell 47:9 MCEF 82:13 McGowan 3:12 mean 30:18 32:2 39:1 49:11 50:16 52:10,11 63:19 64:5 66:10 72:11 73:3 80:1,19,2 0 96:21 measurable 84:6 measurement 78:16,19 mechanics 57:12 medical 7:4 9:14 11:5 27:7 44:4 medicine 7:9 16:7 30:3 43:20 45:2 melamine 93:14,16 mention 83:20 mentioned 39:16 85:21 mesh 71:4 meso 35:16 mesotheliom a 27:8,19 28:2,9,10 ,13,15,18 29:1,6,11 ,16 30:9,11 32:6,9 33:5,13 34:7,11,2 0 35:6,9 36:1,4,12 ,14 37:6,19 38:3,7,14 39:14,21 40:4,9,14 ,18 41:14 42:5,7,14 ,17 43:10 44:6,10,1 7 45:15,19 46:8,17 47:14 48:3,8 49:2 52:8 53:15 54:3,11 56:12,19 57:2,7 58:11 59:14 62:9,12 64:1 69:8 70:20 72:5 81:3 94:15 mesotheliom as 29:19 30:6 46:11 49:8,16,1 7,18,19 50:7,12 51:19 Michigan 10:4 mine 29:4 30:5,6 32:4 mines 29:2 50:10 51:17 52:4,6 minimum 61:13 62:3 minute 46:15 50:18 82:15 minutes 60:6 69:2,5 79:13,14 80:14 Mirabelli 29:21 Mismas 2:3 4:7 5:13,16 7:12,19 8:3,8,9 30:14 31:1,6,11 ,16 50:15 51:4,7,10 PRECISE REPORTING SERVICES (301) 210-5092 (877) 4 A STENO DEPOSITION OF SHELDON H. RABINOVITZ, Ph.D., CIH CONDUCTED ON 8/11/2009 39 ,13,16 56:17 57:3 60:11,13 74:12 75:1 81:8,15 98:2 mismas1@aol .com 2:7 mixed 35:11,17 94:2 95:2,17 mixing 70:15 modified 22:18 moment 19:20 20:10,13, 14 monoxide 14:10 Montana 49:19,20 50:3,20 morphias 55:12 motion 7:2 Motor 12:4,7 Mount 33:17 moved 95:13 moving 89:13 multiply 30:8 myself 9:20 23:5 24:9 N National 13:21 14:16 nature 93:18 naval 67:6 navy 66:20 67:3,13 68:8 necessarily 33:19 44:14 necessary 99:9 neighborhoo d 79:19 neither 100:9 NIOSH 14:1 41:19 42:12 43:2,8 NIOSH's 40:17,20 41:13 noncompete 21:3 nor 100:10,14 normal 34:12 83:11 normally 57:13 North 6:11 Northfield 2:5,6 Nos 7:15 Notary 1:19 5:10 100:1,17 note 56:14 59:3 76:1 nothing 62:11 notice 1:16 4:11 7:1,13 O object 30:18 33:16 49:3 56:20 59:16 81:5 objection 30:12 32:10 34:8 35:18 36:7 37:7,20 38:8 39:5,10,1 5 40:5 41:15 42:8,19 43:11 44:7 45:3,16 47:17 48:10 49:21 50:4,8,19 51:20 52:9 53:16 54:12 56:2,13,1 5 57:8,18 58:17 59:2,3,15 61:15 64:4,12,2 1 66:15,18 67:8,11 68:2,9 69:9,10,1 5 70:3,17,2 1 71:19 72:7,19 73:19 74:2,8,21 76:1 78:13 79:3,10 81:13 84:14 85:4,11,2 0 86:4,10 87:1,9 89:4 92:4 94:4 95:6 96:2,16 objections 31:12 81:10 obviously 35:20 occupationa 1 7:9 9:13,17 11:3 13:21 14:17 16:6,18 30:2 occur 54:11 92:7,13 94:10 occurred 79:12 occurring 43:1 offer 31:4 offered 74:17 office 15:15 83:17 officer 100:2 Oh 95:12 Ohio 1:2 2:6,15 3:6 62:16,20 63:21 oil 58:1,3 okay 5:21 6:1,5,6 7:11 8:18 11:10 14:4,13 22:1,21 23:7 26:13,18 34:2 36:13 37:4 49:6 50:10 51:10 52:3,4,17 56:8 59:8,9 60:7,8 64:17 65:14 67:10 69:1,4 70:14 76:11 77:8,21 78:7 79:7,17 88:19 89:10 91:21 93:8 94:20,21 95:3,15,1 6,18,19 97:21 old 83:17 84:13 ones 93:17 operation PRECISE REPORTING SERVICES (301) 210-5092 (877) 4 A STENO DEPOSITION OF SHELDON H. RABINOVITZ, Ph.D., CIH CONDUCTED ON 8/11/2009 40 78:17 opine 85:8,13 86:18 opined 85:18 opinion 24:6 27:7,18 43:8 44:6 45:20 47:12 48:7,19 56:8,17 73:10 81:1,18 88:3 opinions 27:11 31:5 32:20 68:7 74:17 81:7 oral 40:16 organizatio ns 40:10 Organizatio n's 40:8 original 22:15 99:10 OSHA 13:20 36:15 37:9,15 43:9 52:20 53:4 54:5,7 72:15 80:3,8,19 OSHA's 36:13 37:5,18 otherwise 100:14 outcome 100:15 outdated 40:16 outline 23:16 outside 56:14 69:20 95:16 overhaul 67:7 overwhelmin gly 37:2 owner's 18:5 ownership 17:15 P p.m 1:18 98:5 P.O 3:4 Page 4:3 paid 17:12 21:10,12 panel 92:1 panels 91:20 paper 99:10 papers 44:2,9 paragraph 84:4 Pardon 66:6 parties 1:21 100:10,13 part-time 11:8 15:6 16:2,5 pass 10:17 past 39:16 40:13 41:17 42:2,3,9 43:1 Pathologica l 33:5 pathologist 26:19 33:17 43:20 45:1,5 Pease 3:3 PEL 54:2,5 72:6,18 Pennsylvani a 3:16 people 25:1 84:12,16 per 20:21 78:10 79:1,4,12 ,20 80:13,14, 15 92:16 97:10 percent 17:9,11,1 8 19:19,21 20:5,12 24:14 68:21 76:18 93:20 94:1 percentage 17:8,17 20:3,4,8 23:7,8 57:9 60:2 76:15 83:4,11 93:19 perfect 75:17 perfectly 52:17 perform 82:4,6 performed 82:7 Perhaps 63:4 period 14:9 71:9 79:8 83:13 peripheral 33:10 permit 33:12 61:21 person 22:6 Ph.D 9:14 10:1 pharmacolog y 9:16,19 Philadelphi a 3:16 phone 2:2 3:1,10 physiology 9:15,18 pieces 23:21 64:5 91:17 92:7,12 pipe 58:14,20 59:8,10 60:2 68:12,17, 20 84:8 piping 81:20 places 53:11 plaintiff 5:17 20:15 24:11,19 25:13 27:12 plaintiffs 1:16 5:9 plaintiff's 25:8 Plaintiffs 1:6 2:2 5:12 plant 29:4 PLEAS 1:1 please 6:8 pliable 84:20 point 21:19 34:21 35:3 42:12 68:18 75:15 77:10 78:10,14, 18,19 79:12,19 80:13 88:3 96:15 97:10 Points 1:17 PORRECA 3:11 pose 50:19 81:13 PRECISE REPORTING SERVICES (301) 210-5092 (877) 4 A STENO DEPOSITION OF SHELDON H. RABINOVITZ, Ph.D., CIH CONDUCTED ON 8/11/2009 41 position 11:6 34:1 36:14 37:5,18 38:6 39:13 40:3,8,17 ,20 41:13 42:6 43:7 45:11 46:21 47:5,7 positions 42:1,3,11 possible 29:5,12,1 5 38:13 43:2 46:4 54:21 possibly 70:10 potential 15:18 25:2 28:17 34:19 37:13 39:21 42:5 90:3 potentially 37:19 39:14 42:17 Potomac 6:11 pounds 70:15 pour 71:2 powder 71:3 power 32:15 34:15 practice 72:10 predominant 29:8 premixed 81:17 84:5 preparation 21:20 71:4 prepare 22:3 present 1:20 5:3 presented 74:10,16 pressures 75:18 pretty 25:10,12 65:20 prevent 41:20 primarily 89:21 90:4 prior 96:7 probability 64:3 probably 17:9 26:12 46:12 72:12 85:14 91:12 96:7,18 process 40:12 42:11 63:16 89:10 94:19 produce 77:15 product 14:1 83:12 professiona l 53:9 projects 15:12,13, 20 92:10 proper 51:12 properly 53:10 protection 14:2 15:2,21 41:5,6 protective 41:2 provide 21:13 provided 38:11 providing 53:11 59:6 Public 1:19 5:10 100:1,17 publish 39:1,3 published 26:16 30:3 33:2 48:13,16 65:9 pure 32:4 35:1,5,14 ,16 37:16 80:20 purposes 19:2 pursuant 1:16 Q qualificati ons 33:20 qualified 27:6 Quebec 28:20,21 47:10 51:2 question 6:4 30:19 31:7,9,15 32:11 41:12 49:4 50:17 51:6,15 57:16 58:18 64:13 81:12,14 94:16 questions 9:8 26:15 61:3 81:9 98:3 quick 26:15 quite 47:20 71:10 89:9 R Rabinovitz 1:14 4:4 5:7,14 6:9 80:11 99:13 randomly 74:10 range 61:19,20, 21 62:2,6 72:13,14 73:6,7 85:16 88:10 97:3,4,9, 10,17 rare 25:10,12, 18 48:4 rate 30:9 32:6 82:14 rather 41:6 73:6 ratios 47:20 raw 70:15 reading 5:4 89:16 really 14:13 18:8,20 23:14 70:11 80:4 85:1 rear 58:1 reask 20:7 reason 84:11 reasonable 64:3 recall 68:10 recess 60:12 recognize 38:15 recollectio n 33:11 77:1 recommend 41:2,4 recommendat ions 41:8 reconstruct 60:5 PRECISE REPORTING SERVICES (301) 210-5092 (877) 4 A STENO DEPOSITION OF SHELDON H. RABINOVITZ, Ph.D., CIH CONDUCTED ON 8/11/2009 42 reconstruct ion 61:11,14 62:4,13,1 6,21 63:17 64:2,11 66:3,20 67:3 68:7 record 6:8 60:10 99:5 100:8 records 7:5 reduce 90:3 reevaluated 40:11 42:10 reevaluatin g 39:17 40:2,12 42:11 43:15 reevaluatio n 38:15 reference 51:3 references 8:6 81:6 referencing 51:1,2 referred 35:8 referring 76:8 regard 39:20 57:16 regarding 7:2,5 27:11 33:9 65:11 77:6 regards 38:6 regulate 37:13 regulation 37:11,15 38:2,4 regulations 36:16,19 regulatory 36:15 40:16 rejected 38:19 39:1 related 25:5 45:10 54:21 55:1,13,1 6 57:15 58:7 59:1 76:3 77:12 97:15 100:10 relative 50:17 100:12 relatively 49:15 release 69:6 72:18 85:9,18 86:3,15,1 9 87:7 released 91:8,10 relying 34:14 remediation 97:16 remediation s 93:5 remember 14:10 22:6 30:1 65:10,12 68:14 76:18 77:3 83:10 84:3 removal 15:20 89:21 92:10 93:2,3 remove 78:5 90:7 96:7 removed 75:8 89:17 93:4,6 removing 75:2 render 27:6,11 replace 58:1 report 7:1 8:19 9:4 16:13 22:2,3,17 ,19 23:8,15,1 7 24:7 56:14 73:11 74:17 83:21 85:17 reporter 7:12 reporting 81:6 reports 8:6 48:16 represent 5:16 20:14 26:1 reputable 33:15 64:19 68:1 requested 7:6 require 28:19 29:16 required 36:4,5 49:14 requires 36:11 reread 67:20 76:17 residual 58:4 78:5 resin 93:14 resins 93:16 respected 43:19 45:1 respective 1:21 respirators 41:3 respiratory 41:5,8 response 7:6 27:10 49:12 responsibil ities 12:17 responsibil ity 12:18 responsible 11:15 15:10 rest 71:8 resulted 34:11 results 32:17 resume 7:10 retained 25:19 26:3 100:13 review 21:12 22:12 25:8 31:4,21 32:18 68:3 reviewed 4:12 22:14 25:14 41:21 44:2 reviewing 23:4 34:15 revolved 9:19 rider 19:12 risk 27:10 28:13,18 33:13 34:19 35:6 41:1 45:9 49:15 55:1 57:14 58:7 72:4 PRECISE REPORTING SERVICES (301) 210-5092 (877) 4 A STENO DEPOSITION OF SHELDON H. RABINOVITZ, Ph.D., CIH CONDUCTED ON 8/11/2009 43 94:15 Road 1:17 2:5 Rogers 66:13,14 Roggli 43:16 Roggli's 44:5 rope 90:11,14, 15 91:2 94:11 RUBBER 1:8 rules 5:20 S safe 53:5 54:10 55:5 safety 11:16 13:21 14:1,17 15:10 salary 17:12,21 18:11 sampled 25:2 samples 81:21 92:9 sampling 97:15 sand 84:9,10,1 1,12,13,2 0 85:5 86:1,7 sanding 72:17 84:19 85:2,8,9, 19 86:3 Sandler 7:9 16:6,16 21:3 22:10 sandpaper 73:2,21 sat 73:12 Sater 3:3 saw 59:11 60:2 93:2 scenario 96:1 school 9:15 10:2 11:1,5 schools 65:12 science 9:12 13:3 14:7 37:16 40:15 66:3,4,5, 7,10 scientific 64:3 scientist 14:18,19 scientists 34:16 scope 56:14 scrape 77:17,19, 21 scraper 78:1 seal 58:2 70:16 75:17 81:17 92:18 sealed 82:11 91:1 sealing 75:12 78:5 95:8 seam 90:21 second 84:18 Secondly 71:2 section 24:6 81:18 84:8 90:5 sectional 96:11 sections 22:17,18 89:20 90:6,8 91:3 92:14,18 93:7 95:4,9 96:6 97:8 seeing 35:21 84:3 seen 35:20 42:15 43:4,6,17 48:11,15 67:19 86:12 semantics 78:7 send 9:1 30:14 31:2,19 sending 8:18 senior 14:18,19 sense 50:21 51:9 sent 7:8 8:20 26:8 80:7,8,12 separate 8:2 36:19 99:9 separated 7:20 September 6:13 serpentine 35:12 seven 82:19 sewer 58:14,20 59:8,10 Seymour 3:3 shares 48:6 Sharp 2:12 7:3 25:20 sheet 99:9 Sheldon 1:14 4:4 5:7 6:9 99:13 Sheraton 1:17 she's 62:11 ships 67:13 Short 33:3 shorthand 100:6 showing 44:9 shown 34:10 37:3 54:19 shows 35:5,15 significant 39:18 77:2 90:20 93:1 significant ly 46:13 signing 5:4 similar 57:20 70:11 87:13 92:7 93:18 Sinai 33:17 sir 6:10 14:9 sit 31:4 34:1 70:8 73:9 96:19 sitting 70:12 72:16 situation 8:21 72:3 87:3 96:17 situations 24:1,21 70:11 six 13:9 30:6 size 60:1,2 71:20 72:9 73:14 96:20 skeletal 23:16 sledgehamme r 86:9,16,2 PRECISE REPORTING SERVICES (301) 210-5092 (877) 4 A STENO DEPOSITION OF SHELDON H. RABINOVITZ, Ph.D., CIH CONDUCTED ON 8/11/2009 44 <1 OD 0 90:2 94:20 95:21 96:8,14 small 71:10 92:16,17 94:11 smashed 86:8,20 91:7 smashes 95:20 smashing 86:15 94:19 95:4 solo 19:12 SOMA 16:14 82:7 83:17 somebody 22:21 23:9 70:14 78:15 someone 23:17,20 24:4 25:4 46:6 48:21 59:11,14 69:12,17 78:8,16 80:12 84:18 someone's 56:11 57:7 58:10,21 69:7 70:20 son 89:21 90:1 son's 89:16 sorry 6:16 35:2 67:2 77:17 sort 14:5 32:19 63:11 sounds 63:13 South 3:15 speak 65:21 speaking 31:11 81:9,12 specific 27:12 52:3 53:17,18 54:5,8 61:4,18 73:7 76:9 81:7 85:15 89:8,13 specificall y 28:6 48:21 83:6 87:8 specifics 61:7 65:10 70:8 72:9,21 spin 30:20 Spinelli 3:12 sporreca@kj msh.com 3:17 standard 22:17 53:17,21 54:5,8 standards 53:19 standing 70:4 standpoint 38:4,18 start 35:2 59:21 63:9 70:7 73:4 started 16:6 17:7 19:6,8,16 starts 63:17 state 1:20 6:7 10:3,7 11:4 62:15,19 100:18 stated 38:1 statement 40:16 states 15:2 47:12 station 62:20 63:9,21 stay 24:1 stayed 15:5 STEVEN 3:11 stipulated 5:2 stop 81:9 Street 3:5 strength 32:20 strong 44:16 stuck 78:9 studied 34:3 35:1,4 45:5 52:7 studies 28:5,6,7, 20,21 29:1,8 32:14 34:6,10,1 3,14,17 35:8,10,2 1 47:2,6,8, 10,20 52:13 54:19 57:12 76:5,8,9 86:14 87:8,13 91:13,14 subcontract 21:4 subdivides 53:21 subsidiary 13:4 Substance 15:15 substantial 77:11 substantial ly 56:11 57:6 58:10,16, 21 59:13 69:7 81:2 88:7 sufficient 38:16 66:12 sufficientl y 88:11,13 89:7,19 suggest 37:12 49:16 suggested 40:13 84:18 97:5 suggesting 53:8 Suite 3:14 summaries 23:3 summarize 22:21 summarized 23:20 summary 7:2 9:1 supplied 83:6 support 13:13,15 14:5,6 55:3 supports 46:20 suppose 51:3 sure 12:19 18:16 45:10 49:5 65:20 surface 78:6 92:13 surprise 45:17 Susnowitz PRECISE REPORTING SERVICES (301) 210-5092 (877) 4 A STENO DEPOSITION OF SHELDON H. RABINOVITZ, Ph.D., CIH CONDUCTED ON 8/11/2009 45 1:19 100:2 Suzuki 33:14 Suzuki's 32:21 switching 52:1 sworn 5:10 100:5 T TAGGART 3:2 59:2,15 69:10,15 70:3 74:19 talk 27:9 32:16 54:15 60:17,19 67:20 68:4 87:2 talked 60:14,18 61:5 97:6 talking 14:7 16:16 36:9 50:13,20 51:21 56:16 63:9 66:11 68:11 70:6 71:1 75:11,17 80:1 87:5 91:3 94:17,18 95:12 97:11 talks 24:5 tearing 90:14 96:13 tease 29:10 technical 80:21 temperature s 57:20 ten 79:13,14, 21 80:15 82:20 term 25:17 terms 35:11 36:9 37:11 test 82:4 83:3 85:2 tested 84:5 93:10,17 testified 5:11 24:11,17 testimony 7:8 9:2 21:13,21 24:14 61:7 74:15 99:5 100:4,5,8 testing 57:10 83:7 92:5 93:9 textile 28:20 29:8 47:10 textiles 29:9 thank 8:8 37:4 38:5 40:1,7 41:11 Thanks 24:10 31:12 98:1 theory 41:6 therefore 41:7 49:9 there's 18:21 24:5 29:2 71:15 90:18 96:18 Thereupon 5:6 thermally 55:20 they're 21:14 38:3 39:8,12,1 7 43:12,14 91:20 95:11 96:13 they've 70:18 thin 33:3 thoughtful 97:19 thousand 57:5 threshold 40:20 45:7,8,13 46:13 thresholds 41:10 throw 97:12 TIRE 1:8 tissue 34:4 TLD 52:21 TLV 52:19 53:3,14 78:12 today 6:18 39:18 top 16:14 22:8 52:15 88:10 97:18 topic 48:21 total 77:9 78:9 Towards 13:11 Toxic 15:15 toxicity 37:1 toxicologic al 38:18 toxicologis t 11:14 27:2,9 53:10 toxicology 9:20,21 train 6:2 training 11:18 transcript 99:4,10 100:7,8 treat 37:10 38:17 treated 39:19 treatment 71:4 tremolite 29:3 32:5 44:13,14 tremolitefree 30:4 trial 7:7 triple 94:12 troweling 84:7 true 37:3 99:5 100:8 try 70:8 97:16,19 trying 19:7 21:2 48:18 51:7 63:15,19 Tuesday 1:11 turn 88:6 type 33:8 36:9 52:10 53:18 54:8,16,1 7 72:2 73:2,3,21 typed 100:7 types 37:10,14 53:20,21 U Uh-huh 79:16 unclear 21:2 undergradua te 10:6 11:1 understand 6:4 25:21 PRECISE REPORTING SERVICES (301) 210-5092 (877) 4 A STENO DEPOSITION OF SHELDON H. RABINOVITZ, Ph.D., CIH CONDUCTED ON 8/11/2009 46 31:1,14 45:4,6 85:1 97:2 understandi ng 37:9,12 38:21 39:6 42:16 45:12 89:16 understood 61:5 unfortunate ly 22:7 United 15:2 University 10:3,7 11:4 Unless 31:14 unlikely 58:5 72:3 unreasonabl e 25:17 unsafe 53:5 usually 71:7,9 77:21 92:15 96:5 utilized 29:5 V variables 70:7 97:12 various 37:14 veins 29:2 ventilation 59:21 71:14,18 73:17 82:11 96:20 vertical 81:2 vessel 67:6 via 2:2 3:1,10 views 39:4 virtually 44:10 visible 59:12 Vorys 3:3 vs 1:7 W Wait 46:15 95:7 waived 5:5 Washington 13:7 15:3 wasn't 66:3,4 83:18 waste 15:17 water 56:7 70:16 71:7 94:2 95:2,18 waters 55:11 Wayne 10:3,7 11:4 ways 80:2 wearing 69:21 Webb 1:4,5 7:4,5 73:11 85:18 89:14 95:20 Webb's 27:8 81:3 website 38:9 39:7,8 weighted 79:18 80:18 we're 14:7 21:5 68:11 70:6 94:17,18 95:4 97:11 Westinghous e 93:11 whatever 81:13 83:10 whether 25:1 36:21 37:5 38:6 56:18 57:4 71:5 73:7 75:19 77:6 88:5,6,7 whole 32:14 63:13,16 71:10 80:2 whom 100:2 whose 100:4 wide 82:20 William 67:5 wind 69:20 70:1 73:6 wire 75:9,10,1 6 76:5,10 77:8,14,1 6,17,20 78:2 witness 1:15 4:3 5:8 8:5 57:1 100:4,6,9 woman 62:8 wondering 16:14 work 9:19 11:21 12:19 15:17 19:14 20:17 21:3,5 22:9 25:16 29:2 41:18 44:1 53:11 67:16 68:5 72:10 73:9 78:20 87:11 worked 17:12 22:10 63:21 73:12 workers 67:17 68:6 working 12:20 13:19 16:4 21:4,7 43:7 79:6 84:16 works 62:11,20 World 40:7 worry 32:1 50:15,17 write 23:8,9 24:4 written 23:12,17 24:2 44:9 48:21 67:12 wrong 43:9,12 wrote 7:1 23:14 Wyandotte 11:13 Y yet 19:11 you'll 47:2 61:19 Yours 74:8 yourself 34:2 you've 5:17 34:6 96:17 Z Zero 26:17 zeros 80:2 zone 78:16 PRECISE REPORTING SERVICES (301) 210-5092 (877) 4 A STENO