Document om4oKLv1wwX41qwjJx5N4jqXE

FILE NAME: Exxon (EXX) DATE: 1993 Sept 27 DOC#: EXX054 DOCUMENT DESCRIPTION: Legal - Deposition of James Hammond with BC Notes ^ /// O f S S ^ A > ^ ^ ^ - a - ^ z ^ <Z?^ ^ p "~3> ? ':? in /cy (y / s y J*-?clY yyj0 ss-z^^y- 3 3 *2-7 VS'C-V^^' P-7, - ^ ^ . / ' f" T^^T) Z7SA* /C , vf(t'; * r /^f- / _,T,y*r ,,/ / - ., . .... _ 5 yy^t^-^ y y /fatuta ^ , y / y <**2*-e~e<& /y : ^ ^f: y 7 $ <77 y~s so%ogrz~ -y^s^iy y*~~/~ yy>c^ri*^r^/*?si^ s-<^s&<-T3^. a s y> *yy. etc? /7 /^yyy^j'r\) ^r^-g> sjrr y ? t/yy "j2.~~)j nj^ ^ r ^ *' *ss* '-- - ^ W ' -- / y f **^A~ sts*/ ,^ > y/y <^t^*txi <*c-Zsz~*> A / ? y y ^ y^-AkAzy. ss, ^ cb-c~s>. ~v s&ee^fo s yy*-*? " /py~ rstSys ^ -FY* ~ -7 .' \ 7.-^e// * ^ ^5-- A P / 8 / y w 0 `4*n*cb~j^/ryf yfsfy?/`3-it,yia _ / y y / y y</'& <yys.^? y>y^s7^<, ^ S ' 2~ A? y ^ 5~T~ ic/SS^i^r^^er &^. y y 'j^y^-i^'- y jSo s^>. -y .w'; 7/ ^ ^.,*>% <$> ^ r \ (/96) % y feAt^x ^ s^ s~2> y#7 -^^'-4<^` -7 / / y a^c>yof Tt-s/ci^ ,'o'/5 TL^Z/nVc j*Usi 7 W V C ^ A d L S t `-t^&aSy (MA>99i) V ,s-- V JOSEPH L. HEBERT AND MARIE HEBERT vs. No. 92-6203 HIGMAN BARGE LINES I N C ., ET AL 1 ] 14TH JUDICIAL DISTRICT ] ] ] PARISH OF CALCASIEU ] ] ] STATE OF LOUISIANA VIDEOTAPE DEPOSITION OF PROFESSOR JAMES HAMMOND i ... V Between the h o u r & 50 a.m. and 1:50 p.m. Septemfiirr'"2'7 ,*1993 Marriott, Houston intercontinental Airport Houston, Texas R E C E I V E D OCT 1 1993 Shawn Kelley, Texas CSR No. 3448 Nell McC allum & Associates Inc. 2900 Smith, Suite 104 Houston, Texas 77006 (713) 523-3767 nma COPY SHAWN KELLEY, TEXAS CSR 3448 NELL MC CALLUM & ASSOCIATES, INC. 2 INDEX - SEE LAST PAGE OF TRANSCRIPT APPEARANCES For the Plaintiffs: W i lliam B. Baggett Attorney at Law Baggett, McCall & Burgess P. 0. Drawer 7820 Lake Charles, Louisiana 70606 For the Defendants Amoco Oil Company, Et A 1 : Kenneth R. Spears Attorney at Law Jones, Tete, Nolen, Hanchey, Swift & Spears P. 0. Box 910 Lake Charles, Louisiana 70602 SHAWN KELLEY, TEXAS CSR 3448 NELL MCC ALLUM & ASSOCIATES, INC. 3 For the Defendant Higman Barge Lines, Inc .: Mark Freeman Attorney at Law Wells, Peyton, Beard, Greenberg, Hunt & Crawford P. 0. Box 3708 Beaumont, Texas 77704-3708 v s For the Defendant Koch Industries: Robert T. Myers Attorney at Law 1515 Energy Centre 1100 Poydras Street New Orleans, Louisiana 70163 Also present : Jeff McClain, Videographer SHAWN KELLEY, TEXAS CSR 3448 NELL MCCALLUM & ASSOCIATES, INC. 4 1 V I D E O G R A P H E R : On the record, it's 12 2 minutes before 10 o'clock, September 27, 1993, 3 92-6203, Joseph L. and Marie Hebert versus Higman 4 Barge Lines, Inc., et a l , 14th Judicial District 5 Court, Parish of Calcasieu, State of Louisiana. 6 We're here for the dep os iti on of Professor James 7 Hammond. If the court reporter will swear in the 8 witness, we'll have counsel state their H N 9 appearances and we'll begin with this deposition. 10 [The witness was sworn] 11 MR. BAGGETT: This is W i lliam B. 12 Baggett, and I represent the Plaintiffs Joseph 13 Hebert and his wife. 14 MR. FREEMAN: This is Mark Freeman, and 15 I represent Higma n Barge Lines. 16 MR. SPEARS: This is Kenneth Spears, and 17 I represent all of the oil company defendants in 18 this case with the exception of Koch Industries. 19 MR. MYERS: And my name is Robert Myers. 20 I represent Koch Industries. 21 MR. BAGGETT: Ken, for the -- for the 22 record, I really think I need you to -- here's 23 a list of the companies that are involved in the 24 litigation, and I'd like for you to state for 25 the record -- here's some more of them -- your SHAWN KELLEY, TEXAS CSR 3448 NELL MCCALLUM & ASSOCIATES, INC. 5 1 appearances. 2 MR. SPEARS: All right. Again, this 3 is Ken Spears, and I'm listing the oil company 4 defendants whom I represent in connection with 5 the Joseph Hebert case. First of all is Amoco 6 Oil Company; Atlantic Richfield Company; Oxy 7 Oil & Gas USA, Inc.; Canadian Oxy Offshore 8 Production Company; Coastal Corporation; s 9 Crown Central Petroleum Corporation; Gulf Oil 10 Corporation; Koch Industries; Marathon Oil 11 Company; Mobil Corporation; Phillips Petroleum 12 Company; Shell Oil Company; Sun Oil Company; 13 Texaco, Inc.; Union Oil Company of California; 14 Conoco, Inc.; Monsanto Company; ARCO Chemical 15 Company; with the un de rs tanding that these names 16 may have changed since we filed the pleadings, 17 and I'm not verif yi ng that these are -- these are 18 the correct names of these companies as they are 19 k n o w n . 20 MR. BAGGETT: Fine. 21 MR. SPEARS: Okay. 22 MR. BAGGETT: Thank you. 23 Gentlemen, is this deposition -- can we 24 agree that this deposition is being taken pursuant 25 to notice and that it's to be governed under the SHAWN KELLEY, TEXAS CSR 3448 NELL MC CALLUM & ASSOCIATES, INC. 6 1 rules of the Louisiana Code of Civil P r o c e d u r e , 2 and can we stipulate that -- that in accordance 3 with those rules that all objections are reserved 4 except those relative to the form of question or 5 the responsiveness of the answer? 6 MR. MYERS: That's agreed on behalf of 7 Koch. 8 MR. FREEMAN: That's fine. s 9 MR. SPEARS: That's fine with me. 10 MR. BAGGETT: And I ask that a copy of 11 the notice of the deposition m a rked Plaintiff l 12 for identifica tion be attached and made a part 13 of the deposition. 14 15 16 PROFESSOR JAMES HAMMOND. 17 being first duly sworn or affirmed, testified as 18 follows : 19 20 EXAMINATION BY MR. BAGGETT 21 22 Q. Professor Hammond, state your full name, 23 please, sir. 24 A. James W i lliam Hammond, Sr. 25 Q. And where do you reside, sir? SHAWN KELLEY, TEXAS CSR 3448 NELL MCCALLUM & ASSOCIATES, INC. 7 1 A. I live at -- in Houston, Texas, and 2 that's located 1010 Townplace. 3 Q. And what is your profession, sir? 4 A. I'm an industrial hygienist. 5 Q. Would you tell us, if you would, what is 6 an industrial hygienist? 7 A. An industrial hygienist is a scientist 8 that recognizes potential hazardous materials in s 9 industry, and then he developed methods of 10 evaluating the degree of hazard and then designs 11 the control measures that may be required to 12 protect employees that are handling these 13 substances or materials. 14 Q. Would you tell the Court or jury how old 15 you are today, sir? 16 A. Well, I am over 80 years of age. 17 Q. All right, sir. And where were you born? 18 A. I was born in Winona, Mississippi. 19 Q. You're retired, are you not, sir? 20 A. I am retired, yes, sir. 21 Q. Did you ever teach? 22 A. Yes, I have taught for many years. 23 Beginning back with the university system, I was 24 teaching as early as 1936. 25 Q. And could you tell us some of the places SHAWN KELLEY, TEXAS CSR 3448 NELL MCCAL L U M & ASSOCIATES, INC. 8 1 where you taught? 2 A. Well, for the Un iv er sity of Tennessee and 3 Un iversity of South Carolina, Georgia Tech, and I 4 taught then at Baylor School of Medicine here in 5 Houston, I taught in Oklahoma at the Un iv er sit y of 6 Oklahoma at Norman, and I taught at Wi chita State 7 University. 8 Q. That's in Kansas? ' \ 9 A. That's in Kansas, yes, sir. And then I 10 retired and began teaching for nine years in the 11 Medical Center at the Universi ty of Texas in 12 Houston. And I retired from there in 1987, I 13 t h i n k . 14 Q. You retired from the University of Texas, 15 Medical Center teaching in 1987? 16 A. That was my memory, yes, sir. 17 Q. And that was preceded by nine years as 18 a teacher there? 19 A. Yes, because I retired from the Humble 20 Company in 1978. 21 Q. All right, sir. Now, if you would, 22 and I'm not going to make this long as I could, 23 because of your di st in guished past, but if you 24 would, would you tell us something about your 25 education and training, Professor? SHAWN KELLEY, TEXAS CSR 3448 NELL MCCALLUM & ASSOCIATES, INC. 9 1 A . Y e s . Well, I have two degrees from 2 Miss issip pi s tate University. One of them's in 3 the field of physics and chemistry, the other 4 o n e 's a chemi cal engineering degree. Then I have 5 a masters deg ree in bi ochemistry and toxicology 6 from L S U . Th en I did graduate work at MIT and I 7 did graduate work at the Uni ve rsi ty of South 8 Carolina, Ric e University, Uni ve rsi ty of Houston s s 9 and probably one or two other universities that 10 I've fo rgotte n the names, which ones. 11 Q. Well , did you do any - - did you have - - 12 further your education at Harvard? 13 A. Yes , I did. I never registered as a 14 full-time stu dent there, because I was working 15 an inte rnship under the teachers of the Harvard 16 Univers i t y , p arti cularly I recall Harvey Elkins, 17 Dr. Elk i n s , a nd also Wesl ey Hemeon, and they both 18 taught at -- and also I took courses at - - in - - I 19 sat in course s that were taught by Phil Drinker, 20 among othe r s . 21 Q. Phil Drinker, is he recognized in any 22 part i cu lar fi eld as one of the leading experts? 23 A. Y e s , he was -- really started degree 24 giving in the Unive rsi ty of -- Harvard University 25 in the field of industrial hygiene, and he himself SHAWN KELLEY, TEXAS CSR 3448 NELL MCC ALLUM & ASSOCIATES, INC. 10 1 was a chemical engineer. He's most noted, I 2 guess, worldwide because he developed the 3 artificial lung for polio victims. It was his 4 department that did it. 5 Q. Professor, after your education period, 6 when did you begin work? 7 A. Yes, I did -- I began work for the 8 chemical engineering department of the University 9 of Tennessee July the 1st, 1936. 10 Q . Okay. And what was the nature of that 11 work? 12 A. That work was associated with the toxic 13 gases and fumes that were being produced by the 14 Muscle Shoals operation under the Tennessee Valley 15 Authority in their electric furnace decomposition 16 of apatite, which is one of the forms of the 17 phosphates that was being converted into soluble 18 and edible materials, and they lost to the air 19 fluorine, particularly was the hazardous 20 materials, and I was working on a method of 21 capturing those materials as well as protecting 22 the employees in the plant, to remove it from the 23 air because it was -- it was harmful to vegetation 24 that came downwind from that plant. It would 25 cause - - SHAWN KELLEY, TEXAS CSR 3448 NELL MCCAL L U M & ASSOCIATES, INC. 11 1 Q. So your first employment commenced in 2 1936 and to -- would you, if you could, briefly, 3 and I know this is covered in your resume, which 4 I'm going to ask be attached to the deposition, 5 but would you carry us briefly through your 6 employment after you had worked - - went to the 7 Universi ty of Tennessee to work? 8 A. Yes, after being there five years I 9 accepted a commission in the United States Health 10 Department and went to the Institute of Health at 11 Bethesda, Maryland, and started in the Division of 12 Industrial Hygiene there under the public health 13 service activities and with -- associat ed with the 14 people that were working industrial hygiene there, 15 and then they shortly assigned me to the Division 16 of Occupational Diseases in the Department of 17 Labor for Massachusetts, where I spent 1941 and 18 1942, and that gave me an op po rtunity to work 19 for and with the teachers at Harvard, such as 20 Dr. Elkins and Hemeon and Dr inker and so forth. 21 Q. Now, was that -- Ha rvard University in 22 the early 4 0 ' s, was that the seat of industrial 23 hygiene engineering and industrial hygiene 24 training in the United States? 25 A. Yes, it was recognized as one of the SHAWN KELLEY, TEXAS CSR 3448 NELL M C C A L L U M & ASSOCIATES, INC. 12 1 pioneers, if not the outstanding pioneering school 2 worldwide. It was the school that all of us had 3 ambition to attend if we wanted to make a career 4 in this field. 5 Q. Did you -- did you further your education 6 then under recognized experts such as Hatch and 7 Drinker? 8 A. I did. Hatch had already left there as a 9 professor at the time, but I had many associations 10 and contact with him, because he moved into the 11 army development of controlled conditions and 12 tanks and army equipment, and that's where he 13 spent the next four or five years during the 14 world war, but then later on I met him up again 15 when he began to teach at the University of 16 Pittsburgh and worked for the -- that school and 17 univers ity as well as Malone School of Technology. 18 Q. Sir, how did you get into the petroleum 19 industry? 20 A. Well, I was the associate director of 21 industrial health in the state of Georgia in the 22 Department of Public Health there in Atlanta, and 23 I was called one day by a medical director of 24 Exxon, which was the n Humble Oil & Refining 25 Company, and asked -- and that was the last of SHAWN KELLEY, TEXAS CSR 3448 NELL M C C ALLUM & ASSOCIATES, INC. 13 1 March of 1947, and he asked me to come over here, 2 D r . Ba ird, and he was a member of the medical 3 adviso ry committee, and I came ov er in the first 4 part o f April of 1947 and then ac cepted the 5 positi on that he offered me. 6 Q. And that was at -- 7 A. H u m b l e . 8 Q. -- Humble Oil over he re in Houston where ' S 9 you we nt to work as an industr ial hygienist and 10 sanit ry engineer? 11 A. I did. 12 Q. I think that you have heretofore 13 furnished everybody with your curriculum vitae or 14 resume. And for the -- because it's customarily 15 done and because it will complete the record, I 16 ask that this be marked Plaintiff's Exhibit No. 2 17 for identification and attached to the deposition. 18 Sir, in this resume is there a list of - 19 list of all of the articles that you've written 20 over the years? 21 A. It's a list of almost all of them, but 22 there were some that are missing from that, and 23 sometimes they were like the lack of publication 24 publicly, but I had all of my publications with me 25 at the School of Public Health at the University SHAWN KELLEY, TEXAS CSR 3448 NELL MCCALLUM & ASSOCIATES, INC. 14 1 of Texas here, and I left them there after I 2 retired, beca use I had about 18 boxes of them and 3 I didn't have time to remove them. I went back a 4 few months later to get them and move them to my 5 home where my office was, and somebody had found 6 those and over the bookcase that I had them on and 7 taken every one of the publications, so I don't 8 have any other than the ones that are listed off. 11 s 9 I don't even have all the copies of those maybe. 10 Q. How many -- about how man y articles, just 11 for completeness of the record, have you written 12 over the years? 13 A. In counting them, I believe I've 14 estimated that I've writt en more than -- well - 15 Q. It's over a hundred? 16 A. Well, a hundred. I would say that I have 17 surely written more than 80 that's available, have 18 been available, but it was more than that, but I 19 don't remember how many more, but we'll say over 20 80 . 21 Q. Sir, you served at Humble Oil, what, in 22 the capacity as industrial hygienist and sanitary 23 engineer from about '47 to '57 -- or '59, rather? 24 A. Before i was promoted? 25 Q . Yes, sir. SHAWN KELLEY, TEXAS CSR 3448 NELL MCC ALLUM & ASSOCIATES, INC. 15 1 A. Yes, and I yes, and then I was made 2 director of the division 3 Q. Now, could you just 4 A. for the last 5 Q. briefly tell us about the history 6 of Humble and Exxon and bring us up to your 7 retirement? What was the -- what was your job 8 with those companies? 9 A. I inherited these other companies that 10 were affiliates of Standard of New Jersey when 11 the name became -- well, Humble for a while. In 12 1960 or '61 we became countrywide -- nationwide 13 as Humble, and I inherited all of the staffs that 14 were with these other companies as well as the 15 responsibili ty for the health exposure or the 16 occupational exposure problems that were 17 associated with the ma nu fa cturers in these other 18 refineries and - 19 Q . At some -- 20 A. -- chemical plants. 21 Q. At some point in time is it correct that 22 you became the head of the industrial hygiene 23 program and chief industrial hygienist for Exxon 24 USA? 25 A. Yes, in all 50 states. SHAWN KELLEY, TEXAS CSR 3448 NELL MC CALLUM & ASSOCIATES, INC. 16 1 Q. And how many facilities, roughly, were 2 there in that - - in Exxon USA? 3 A. I'd have to estimate. One time we had 4 well over 60,000 employees. I don't remember the 5 number of employees. There were more than 6 60,000. And they represented so many plants and 7 so forth I just couldn't estimate for you the - 8 with any accuracy the number of actual plants s 9 there were. 10 Q. All right, sir. And one of them was 11 over in Baton Rouge, was it not, sir, that was 12 in your - - 13 A. The Baton Rouge refinery, yes. And then 14 there were several gas plants and other plants of 15 that nature that were out -- scattered throughout 16 the producti on area in Louisiana as well as 17 Mississippi and Alabama and Florida and Texas and 18 O k l a h o m a . 19 Q. Sir, when was it that -- did you hire for 20 that plant in Baton Rouge an industrial hygienist 21 to go to work there? 22 A. Yes, I did, and he was a graduate of 23 Harvard school under Phil Drinker, and his name 24 was Fred Venable. 25 Q. And what year did you do that? SHAWN KELLEY, TEXAS CSR 3448 NELL MCCALLUM & ASSOCIATES, INC. 17 1 A. Well, I had to wait on him until after I 2 had located him and he was with the Texas State 3 Department of Health, and he was obligated to work 4 for them for so many years after he had finished 5 his graduate work at Harvard, and so he came 6 onboard about 1950 or '51. 7 Q. And one of the -- one of the facilities 8 that was under your supervision was over at the 9 Baytown refinery in this area? 10 A. Yes, it was. 11 Q . Sir -- 12 A. Beginning in 1947 I had the 13 responsib ility over Bayto wn and all the other 14 plants that Humble Oil & Refining Company had 15 throughout T e x a s . 16 Q. Sir, to move on, you were a member of 17 the America n Petrol eu m Institute, were you not? 18 A. I was a member of the medical advisory 19 committee and never had a mem be rsh ip as such 20 individually in the API, but I began to attend 21 the medical adviso ry committee as advisor and 22 consultant to my member, which was Dr. Baird in 23 1947 . 24 Q. All right, sir. Now, I'll show you a 25 document that I've marke d 2-A for identification SHAWN KELLEY, TEXAS CSR 3448 NELL MCCALLUM & ASSOCIATES, INC. 18 1 and ask you if that reflects your American 2 Petroleum Institute assignments, this first one 3 from 1947 to 1965, and then the second page covers 4 it from 1965 to '67? Does that reflect your 5 memberships in the American Petroleum Institute? 6 1 ask that that be attached to the deposition as 7 2 -A for identification. 8 A. I recognize all of these. 9 Q. As positions that you held? 10 A. Operations that I partic ipa te d in, yes. 11 Q. Sir, tell me this, Professor, and just 12 briefly what are some of the professional 13 associations that you belong to? 14 A. I belong to the Texas Public Health 15 Asso ciati on here in Texas, and we joined it in 16 1947. I belong to the National Public Health 17 Associati on from earlier than that. I had joined 18 that in 1942. And I had membership, of course, in 19 the America n Industrial Hygiene As so ciation from 20 beginning in 1942 -- 3, I'm not clear right now 21 which of those years, but anyway, from that time 22 on. Then, of course, I was medical advisory 23 committee of the API group and -- as you see, 24 and then I was also representative on the 25 Chemical M a n ufacturing Associ at ion for SHAWN KELLEY, TEXAS CSR 3448 NELL MCCALLUM & ASSOCIATES, INC. 19 1 precautionary labeling, and I represented the 2 company begin ning -- and attended those meetings 3 as early as 1950 to '55, and beginning in 19 - 4 associated with the representative from the Esso 5 group. I was -- also became the company 6 representative on the Manufacturing Chemical 7 Association for writing a manual on precautionary 8 labels in 1958 and remained in that capacity for N. 9 the rest of my career. 10 Q. Professor, your resume that's attached to 11 the deposition marked Plaintiff's Exhibit No. 2 12 for identification, sets forth, does it not, the 13 professional associations that you belong to? 14 A. It does. 15 Q. Does it also set forth the awards and 16 honors that you received in your professional 17 work? 18 A . It d o e s . 19 Q. Just briefly, the Henry Case award, what 20 is that, sir? 21 A. Henry K. Smith award, well, that -- he 22 was an outstanding authority in the field of 23 industrial hygiene from the University of 24 Pennsylvania back in the early 1 9 2 0 ' s, nine, 25 twenty -- I'm not sure which year he began, but SHAWN KELLEY, TEXAS CSR 3448 NELL M C C ALLUM & ASSOCIATES, INC. 20 1 in that range of the late 1920's. And he actually 2 did a survey of the Baton Rouge refinery. I've 3 seen copies of his survey made in 1928 or '29 for 4 the Baytown -- for the Baton Rouge refinery. So 5 he would then join the University of Pittsburgh 6 school and taught industrial hygiene there and was 7 a -- also a consultant to the Malone School of 8 Technology in this field. 9 Q. Sir, is there any -- the Henry F. Smith - 10 A. And then -- yes, and that was the 11 associ ation of -- Am erican Industrial Hygiene 12 As so ciation recogni ze d him as one of the 13 pioneering authorities, so they es ta blished an 14 award for him, and I was fortunate enough to be 15 selected to receive that award, the second one 16 given in the nation, and that year was in 17 eighty -- 18 Q. Your -- your resume says '82. 19 A. In '82. 20 Q . Was that -- 21 A. That's the second one. 22 Q. In your opinion is that the greatest 23 honor that you can receive as an industrial 24 hygienist in America? 25 A. It is, in my profession. SHAWN KELLEY, TEXAS CSR 3448 NELL MCCALLUM & ASSOCIATES, INC. 21 1 Q. Now, after your teaching career here at 2 the Universi ty of Texas School of Public Health, 3 did you -- did they establish a James W. Hammond 4 award to the outstanding graduate of Texas A&M or 5 the Universi ty of Texas public school in your 6 honor? 7 A. They did, and it's continued on, even 8 this year. That award is pr esented every year by ' s, 9 the Gulf Coast section of the Ame ri can Industrial 10 Hygiene Association. 11 Q. The reference has been made to the 12 American Petroleum Institute during this earlier 13 testimony. Could you tell the Court or jury what 14 is the America n Pe troleum Institute? 15 A. Well, that is a member of all of the 16 companies that are concerned with the commercial 17 produc tion of gas and oil, and many of the other 18 companies that have joined or are eligible are the 19 people who manufa ct ure equipment or methods that 20 are used by that industry. 21 Q. Is that recognized as a trade association 22 for the petroleum industry? 23 A. It is, and the affiliate companies would 24 be concerned with making -- supplying either 25 materials or mechanical equipment or chemicals to SHAWN KELLEY, TEXAS CSR 3448 NELL MCCALLUM & ASSOCIATES, INC. 22 1 the production and operation of the petroleum 2 industry. 3 Q. Sir, have you partici pa te d extensively 4 throughout your professional career in educational 5 seminars, lectures in an effort to spread the word 6 about industrial hygiene? 7 A. Yes, beginning in 1947 I was invited to 8 be on an advisory board to the Houston Chamber of 9 Commerce Industrial Committee, and the interest 10 was in both the air and water pollution as well as 11 in industrial health and safety, and so I was 12 elected to be the chairman of a committee that put 13 on a progr am begin ni ng 1948 at the Rice Hotel and 14 invited all of the people that are concerned with 15 the industry throughout this area that ran a - 16 the publicity went out all the way from we'll say 17 New Orleans and as far north as Chicago and as 18 far west as old Mexico. And we had 11 of those 19 conferences annually along about this time of year 20 or a little later, in October, that met first at 21 the Rice and then later at the Shamrock that ran 22 for 11 years, and we'd have an average attendance 23 of 300 people. Most of these persons were 24 concerned with either occupational health and 25 medicine and hygiene, and they were also concerned SHAWN KELLEY, TEXAS CSR 3448 NELL MCCALLUM & ASSOCIATES, INC. 23 1 with public health. They were concerned primarily 2 as safety, industrial safety, and they were 3 members of the -- of the -- and they were all 4 invited, and they usually came. And in addition 5 there was an organization of personnel managers 6 and nurses as well as doctors. They were all 7 invited, and that made up about an average of 8 the 11 years for three -- attendance, 300. It 11 s. 9 ran generally from Thursday, Friday and Saturday, to 10 three days a week, and we invited the best 11 authorities nationwide and even we had them to 12 come from the Department of Labor and from England 13 and visited our -- vi si te d our conference more 14 than once. It would be what would be the 15 equivalent of our Secretary of Labor. 16 MR. BAGGETT: Gentlemen, I tender 17 Professor Hammond as an expert in the field of 18 industrial hygiene with extensive experience in 19 the petroleum industry. 20 MR. SPEARS: Well, this is Ken Spears. I 21 deposed Mr. Hammond, and we've been involved with 22 him on several cases, and I accept his 23 qualifications. I think he's very well respected 24 as a former industrial hygienist in the petroleum 25 i n d u s t r y . SHAWN KELLEY, TEXAS CSR 3448 NELL MCCALLUM & ASSOCIATES, INC. 24 1 MR. BAGGETT: Thank you, sir. 2 Anybody else have any questions? 3 MR. FREEMAN: It's my understanding we're 4 reserving all objections except as to form and 5 responsiveness, so I'll abide by that agreement. 6 7 8 9 VOIR DIRE EXAMINATION BY MR. MYERS 10 11 Q. I'll just have a couple of questions. 12 Professor Hammond, did you ever receive your 13 P h . D . ? 14 A. No, I never did. I had the three degrees 15 I had, and I had a certificate from MIT, and I had 16 a certificate from Rice University, but never 17 actually concentrated on getting a Ph.D. 18 Q. Have you been out of the field of 19 industrial hygiene since your retirement? 20 A. No, since my retirement I taught for nine 21 years industrial hygiene, I taught about a hundred 22 graduate students. There were 130, I believe, 23 attended my course and classes. And then I -- as 24 I am involved today, I kept up with the 25 developments of the field. SHAWN KELLEY, TEXAS CSR 3448 NELL MCCALLUM & ASSOCIATES, INC. 25 1 Q. You have testified as an expert 2 previously in this particular field? 3 A. Several times, yes, sir. 4 Q. When was the last time you testified in 5 court? 6 A. I've given depositions recently, but I 7 think most of the cases I've been involved in have 8 not reached court stage. Most of them have been sS 9 settled outside of court, I believe. 10 Q. Have you ever been denied qualification 11 in a field of expertise for which you have been 12 tendered? And I realize you said you've been 13 qualified as an expert in industrial hygiene, but 14 have you ever been tendered as an expert in 15 chemistry or any other field? 16 A. I have never been accepted as an expert 17 in that field, no. 18 Q. All right. I take it that you've been 19 tendered as an expert in and you hold yourself out 20 as an expert in industrial hygiene? 2 1 A. I do. I remember a court -- a case that 22 John O'Quinn brought against Monsa nt o in 19 87 or 6 23 or somewhere like that, and I did testify in that 24 particular case, I recall. 25 MR. MYERS: Okay. That's all I have. SHAWN KELLEY, TEXAS CSR 3448 NELL M CCALLUM & ASSOCIATES, INC. 26 1 Thank you. 2 3 4 CONTINUED EXAMINATION BY MR. BAGGETT 5 6 Q. Professor Hammond, in the conduct of the 7 industrial hygiene program that you participated 8 in with your first employer starting in the 40's, 9 did you have a goal to develop a program designed 10 to eliminate any benzene exposure? 11 MR. FREEMAN: Objection as leading. 12 MR. BAGGETT: That objection is - 13 MR. SPEARS: I object to the form of the 14 question. 15 MR. MYERS: Join in. 16 MR. BAGGETT: Fine. 17 Q. You can go ahead, Professor, and tell us 18 when you first started to work, what did you do, 19 if anything, about the industrial hygiene program 20 as relates to bone -- to benzene exposure. 21 MR. SPEARS: Again, I object to the form 22 of the question. You're talking about where, 23 Bill? 24 MR. BAGGETT: I'm talking about when he 25 said he started to work in 1947 and in his SHAWN KELLEY, TEXAS CSR 3448 NELL M C C A L L U M & ASSOCIATES, INC. 27 1 capacity as an industrial hygienist. So I wanted 2 to know what he did, if anything, with reference 3 to benzene - - the benzene program, exposure 4 program. 5 MR. SPEARS: At Exxon or Humble we're 6 talking about? 7 MR. BAGGETT: Yeah, at Humble. 8 A. In 1947 I was clearly sat upon a program ' s 9 to eliminate any exposures at all to our employees 10 in the Humble Oil & Refining Company and 11 substitute other materials where possible or those 12 that did have necessary exposure to control them 13 carefully to come up with the zero level of 14 occupational exposure. 15 MR. BAGGETT: 16 Q. Professor, how did you -- how did you 17 accomplish -- accom pl is h a -- accomplish a program 18 that was designed to eliminate exposures to 19 benzene to zero? 20 A. First and foremost, there were many 21 operations that were commonly used in both the 22 laboratory and also associated with purification 23 of petroleum products in which we could substitute 24 other materials, nonasbestos -- nonbenzene and get 25 rid of the potential exposures completely as we SHAWN KELLEY, TEXAS CSR 3448 NELL M C C ALLUM & ASSOCIATES, INC. 28 1 did in many places. And then next was that we 2 enclosed all operations that they have to use it, 3 for example, as a chemical process in the 4 laboratory by enclosing and putting it under the 5 hood that was w e l l -exhausted with adequate air 6 flow-through to protect the employees. And when 7 we couldn't do that, the short-term exposure 8 outside we used an appro ve d type of respiratory ' s 9 protection such as respirators and gas masks or * 10 air supplies to supply them. 11 Q. All right, sir. Sir, you have prepared 12 a report for me, have you not, or at my request 13 that's been furnished to opposing counsel that's 14 dated back in January 16th, 1991, entitled, "The 15 history of recognition, evaluation, control, 16 chemistry of industrial toxicology of hazards of 17 benzene (benzol) vapors and liquids in the 18 petroleum, petrochemical and related industrial 19 activities," have you not, sir? 20 A. I have. 21 Q. And, Professor, in connection with that 22 report, did you review some of the safety, labor 23 and industrial hygiene literature that was used 24 early on in your professional career? 25 A. Yes, in a way, but I didn't find it SHAWN KELLEY, TEXAS CSR 3448 NELL MCCALLUM & ASSOCIATES, INC. 29 1 necessary to review any extensive literature, 2 because this was my program, and I had had a 3 part in developing the program with the various 4 agencies I had been associated with beginning 5 1941 with the Division of Occupational Diseases 6 with the Department of Labor up in Boston, and 7 I was familiar with all of the knowledge and 8 foundation that had been prepared at that time. 11 s 9 And so I wrote this more or less from my own 10 knowledge as I have of the field. 11 Q. Sir, could you tell us whether or not 12 by 1947 when you went to work with Humble there 13 was extensive literature available in medical, 14 safety, industrial hygiene, labor, governmental 15 and occupational medicine fields that concerned 16 the relationship between benzene exposure and 17 disease? 18 MR. SPEARS: I'd object to the form of 19 the question as being -- not only is it vague, 20 it's compound. I'm not sure what he's going to 21 answer to. 22 MR. BAGGETT: 23 Q. Well, I'll repeat it, Doctor - 24 Professor, subject to that objection, so that 25 there's no misunderstanding. By 1948 was there SHAWN KELLEY, TEXAS CSR 3448 NELL MCCALLUM & ASSOCIATES, INC. 30 1 extensive literature available in medical, safety, 2 industrial hygiene, labor, governmental and 3 occupational medicine that concerned the 4 relationship between benzene exposure and disease? 5 A. There was. 6 Q. And did that -- did that literature 7 address such things as the toxicity and the 8 precautions that should be taken to protect ' V 9 one from -- who had potential exposure to 10 benzene vapors? 11 A. It did. 12 Q. And in your report, which I will mark 13 as P-3 for identifi ca ti on and ask that it be 14 attached to the deposition, this is the report 15 dated January 16th of 1991 - 16 MR. MYERS: I'm going to make an 17 objection to the attachment of the report to the 18 deposition in that I believe he's going to testify 19 on it, and his testimony will be the best evidence 20 of his o p i n i o n s . 21 MR. SPEARS: I'd join in that objection, 22 Bill.- I'd like to ask the pr ofessor a question 23 about this report before you introduce it. 24 MR. BAGGETT: Well, you'll have an 25 opportunity on cross-examination. I just ask that SHAWN KELLEY, TEXAS CSR 3448 NELL M C C ALLUM & ASSOCIATES, INC. 31 1 it be attached in case somebody -- as part of the 2 record. And if you want to ask him questions 3 about it, whether or not it goes into evidence, 4 that objection has been preserved by Mr. Myers. 5 MR. SPEARS: Right. I preserve my 6 objections, and I do object to it being attached 7 to the deposition. 8 MR. BAGGETT: Fine. N s. 9 Q. Professor, to substantiate your statement 10 about 1948, that there was literature available 11 that concerned the relationship between benzene 12 exposure and disease, have you not furnished us 13 with a report from the Division of Labor 14 Standards, Department of Labor, dated 1935? 15 A. I have. 16 Q. I ask that this -- is this a copy of the 17 report that I will mark as P-4 for identification? 18 Is that a copy of the report that you have 19 furnished to us? 20 A . It is . 21 Q. Also, to illustrate the availability of 22 literature, did you furnish us with a report dated 23 1938 from the Industrial -- from the Division of 24 Labor Standards, U. S. Department of Labor, which 25 I will mark as P-5 for identification and ask you SHAWN KELLEY, TEXAS CSR 3448 NELL MCCALLUM & ASSOCIATES, INC. 32 1 if that is the document that you supplied us? 2 A. Yes, this is the document, and I think 3 the date may be 1939. 4 Q. All right, sir. Fine. Sir, also did 5 you furnish us with the National Safety Counsel 6 pamphlet No. 14 that I will mark as P-6 for 7 identification, and this is dated in 1931 that 8 concerns benzol, and ask you if that's a copy of 9 the document that you furnished us to illustrate 10 the type of literature that was available at that 11 time set? 12 A. Yes, and this seemed to be a very 13 comprehensive discussion of the problems 14 associated with handling benzene and the medical 15 surveillance and the other matters that were 16 associated with it. 17 Q. All right, sir. P-7 for identification 18 can best be described as a Chemical Safety Data 19 Sheet SD No. 2 dated -- well, adopted '46, revised 20 '48, second edition revised 1956, entitled 21 properties and essential information for safe 22 handling and use of benzene published by the 23 Manufacturers Chemical Association, Inc. I've 24 marked that P-7 and ask you if that is one of 25 the types of literature that was available that SHAWN KELLEY, TEXAS CSR 3448 NELL MCCALLUM & ASSOCIATES, INC. 33 1 concerned the relationship between benzene 2 exposure and disease? 3 A . It i s . 4 Q. Sir, these -- these documents that have 5 just been described and are marked P-4, 5, 6 and 6 7, did they have a common thread running through 7 each of them, and that is that they address the 8 toxicity of benzene, the nature of the disease and ' s 9 precautions to be taken to limit exposure? 10 MR. SPEARS: Object to the form of the 11 question. The documents are going to speak for 12 themselves, and it's a compound question again, 13 Bill . 14 MR. FREEMAN: Same objection. 15 MR. MYERS: Join in. 16 MR. BAGGETT: Fine. Gentlemen, I'll 17 agree with y'all that objection by one is 18 considered to be objection for all, and we can 19 then avoid that. 20 A. Yes, it did, and they usually all 21 stressed the importance of recognizing exposures 22 and responses by certain individuals was based 23 upon susceptibility to this material, and that was 24 one of the bases that I decided that In early 25 times, 1940's, it was necessary to have zero SHAWN KELLEY, TEXAS CSR 3448 NELL MCCALLUM & ASSOCIATES, INC. 34 1 concentration for everybody, because of its 2 susceptibility - 3 MR. SPEARS: I object to the answer now 4 as being nonresponsive to the question. 5 MR. BAGGETT: 6 Q. Sir, was there literature such as this 7 widely known and commented upon in the petroleum 8 industry when you went to work with the company? 9 A. It w a s . 10 Q. Was this literature by the Chemical 11 Manufacturing Association, the National Safety 12 Counsel and the Department of Labor, were those 13 easily acceptable and available to anyone desiring 14 to obtain that information -- type of information? 15 A. They were readily available. 16 Q. Sir, these documents that have -- these 17 are copies of them that have been attached to the 18 deposition. When you rendered your report and 19 when you testified in the Ellis case, these same 20 documents were identified, were they not, sir? 21 A. They were. 22 Q. And at that time you had the originals of 23 those documents that had been maintained in your 24 files, did you not, sir? 25 A . I did. SHAWN KELLEY, TEXAS CSR 3448 NELL MC CALLUM & ASSOCIATES, INC. 35 1 Q. And these are copies of them? 2 A. They are. 3 MR. MYERS: I will make a general 4 objection to the attachment of those documents. 5 Granted I'll probably be able to see some other 6 documents that will change my position, but at 7 this point, since I haven't seen them before. 8 MR. BAGGETT: Gentlemen, I'll assure ' s 9 you that any document that's produced will either 10 be authenticated in this production or will be 11 authenticated before trial. 12 Q. Professor, is there any -- to your 13 knowledge is there any publication that is more 14 circulated or certainly -- let's put it this way, 15 is not the Journal of the American Medical 16 Association one of the most widely circulated 17 medical journals or journals in the world? 18 A . It is . 19 Q. I want to show you a document that I will 20 mark as P-8 for identification, which purports to 21 be an editorial from the Journal of the American 22 Medical Association dated November 1944, and ask 23 you if you would -- dealing with environmental 24 cancer, and ask you if the statement that is 25 contained here that the agents known or suspected SHAWN KELLEY, TEXAS CSR 3448 NELL MCC ALLUM & ASSOCIATES, INC. 36 1 to cause occupational cancer are arsenic, 2 chromates, nickel, carbon, radium, mesothorium, 3 asbestos, crude and possessed mineral oils and, 4 on over up at the top here, benzene? 5 A. Yeah. 6 Q. Substances -- this was an early 7 recognition by the AMA in 1944 that benzene could 8 cause occupational cancer - s 9 MR. SPEARS: I object to the form of the 10 q u e s t i o n . 11 MR. BAGGETT: 12 Q. -- is it not, sir? 13 A. It is true . 14 MR. BAGGETT: I ask that that be attached 15 to the deposition as P-8. 16 MR. MYERS: Same ob jection as previous 17 MR. BAGGETT: 18 Q. Sir , moving on, P-9 for identification 19 can best be described as the API toxicological 20 review on benzene dated September of 1948. Have 21 you seen and studied that document before, sir? 22 A. I have. 23 Q. Actually in -- after your employment 24 could you tell us whether or not that -- that 25 publication was widely circulated within the SHAWN KELLEY, TEXAS CSR 3448 NELL MCCAL L U M & ASSOCIATES, INC. 37 1 petroleum, safety and health community? 2 A. It was available and publicity was given 3 to its availability, because the API medical 4 advisory committee was commissioned at Harvard 5 under Dr. Drinker's supervision to prepare these 6 reports. And benzene was just one of many 7 different substances that were - 8 Q. Professor, I - - at the time that this s s. 9 is displayed to the Court or the jury, I'm going * 10 to either have a blowup or have it on video, the 11 forward here, and I'd like for you to read that 12 into the record here, the forward on P-9. 13 A. All right. "This review summarizes the 14 best available information on the properties, 15 characteristics and the toxicology of benzene. 16 It offers suggestions intended to recommendation 17 pertaining to medical treatment, medical 18 examination and precautionary measures for workers 19 who are exposed to benzene. It was prepared at 20 the Harvard School of Public Health, Boston 21 Massachusetts, under the direction of Professor 22 Phil Drinker. The review has been accepted for 23 publication by the medical advisory committee of 24 the American Petroleum institute. Anyone desiring 25 to submit additional information or proposed SHAWN KELLEY, TEXAS CSR 3448 NELL MCCALLUM & ASSOCIATES, INC. 38 1 changes for consideration prior to reissuance of 2 this review is requested to send them to the 3 American Petroleum Institute. This review was 4 prepared by Marshall Clinton, M.D." 5 Q. Did you know this is the Phil Drinker 6 that you studied under and worked with at Harvard? 7 A. Yes, and also happened to know Marshall 8 Clinton as a friend, associate, peer. 11 s. 9 Q. Sir, in this document that we've just 10 referred to, would you please tell me, sir, if 11 at the time that this was published was it known 12 within the safety and health community of the 13 industry that you were involved in that chronic 14 benzene poisoning resulted from repeated or 15 continuous exposure to relatively low 16 concentrations of benzene vapors? 17 MR. SPEARS: Object to the form of the 18 question if you're asking this man to testify 19 about what somebody else knew other than himself. 20 MR. BAGGETT: Well, fine. Your objection 21 is noted, sir. 22 A. It was well accepted by me as well as 23 others in the field as being a very hazardous 24 m a t e r i a l . 25 MR. BAGGETT: Professor, what, if SHAWN KELLEY, TEXAS CSR 3448 NELL MC CALLUM & ASSOCIATES, INC. 39 1 anything, did this document or did the -- strike 2 that. Let's go off the record just a minute. 3 V I D E O G R A P H E R : Off the record, 20 minutes 4 before 11 o'clock. 5 [Discussion off the record] 6 VIDEOGRAPHER: On the record, 15 minutes 7 before 11 o'clock. 8 MR. BAGGETT: S 9 Q. Professor Hammond, the American Petroleum 10 Institute toxicological review on benzene that was 11 published in September of '48, while the document 12 will speak for itself, for the record would you 13 tell us whether or not that document addressed the 14 properties and characteristics of benzene? 15 A. It did. 16 Q. Was one of those characteristics that it 17 had a pleasant odor? 18 A. It did. 19 Q. Sir, the toxicology of it, the acute 20 effects and the chronic effects, was that also a 21 matter of information that was passed along by 22 this review? 23 A. They were. 24 MR. SPEARS: Object to the form of the 25 q u e s t i o n . SHAWN KELLEY, TEXAS CSR 3448 NELL MCC ALLUM & ASSOCIATES, INC. 40 1 MR. BAGGETT: Y'all keep objecting to the 2 form of the question. If you would, would you 3 please articulate what's wrong with the form of 4 my question so I can try to correct it? 5 MR. SPEARS: The question was vague. I 6 didn't understand it. 7 MR. BAGGETT: 8 Q. Okay. Sir, when your dealing with 9 chronic affects of an exposure to benzene, what 10 influence of the -- what part of the organs of 11 the body did the benzene have effect upon, if any? 12 A. The chronic effects were generally 13 associated primarily with the bone marrow. 14 Q. And in that would be a part of the 15 blood-forming organs of the body? 16 A. Yes, that is the organ that forms the 17 b l o o d . 18 Q. Okay. Sir, did -- is there any 19 characteristic of benzene and its health effects 20 that relates to individual susceptibility? 21 A. It is related to susceptibility on the 22 part of the employees or the persons exposed to 23 i t , y e s . 24 Q. And was that any factor that you 25 considered in adopting an industrial hygiene SHAWN KELLEY, TEXAS CSR 3448 NELL MCCALLUM & ASSOCIATES, INC. 41 1 program or enforcing one with your employer 2 starting in '47? 3 A. It certainly was. 4 Q. Did you recognize in your practice the 5 statement that is obtained -- that is contained 6 on page 4 of P-8 at the bottom, left-hand side, 7 "Inasmuch as the body develops no tolerance to 8 benzene and there is a wide variety in individual s 9 susceptibility, it is generally considered that 10 the only absolutely safe concentration for benzene 11 is zero"? 12 MR. SPEARS: I object to that question, 13 Bill, as being vague, and also the document speaks 14 for itself. Now you're asking him to read - 15 repeat into the record what's already printed in 16 those documents. 17 MR. BAGGETT: I think the objection is 18 wrong, because what I asked him is if in his 19 practice and in the program at your company or 20 with your employer did you recognize this in 21 trying to put in a program? 22 A . I did. 23 MR. BAGGETT: 24 Q. Sir, even at that time, what if 25 anything -- and, here again, the document does SHAWN KELLEY, TEXAS CSR 3448 NELL MCCALLUM & ASSOCIATES, INC. 42 1 speak for itself, but I want you to state for the 2 record, because I will have this section No. 3 3 dealing with safe limits shown to the Court, if 4 you will, please read what it says here in 5 paragraph 3 under safe limits. 6 MR. FREEMAN: What exhibit is t h a t , 7 please? 8 MR. B A G G E T T : This is P -- 9 THE WITN ES S: 9 . 10 MR. B A G G E T T : P-9, y e a h . 11 MR. S P E A R S : T h a t 's the API tox review? 12 MR . B A G G E T T : Yeah, u h -h u h . 13 MR. M Y E R S : Let me make a general 14 objection to him repe ating whatever the exhibit 15 is itself as not being a form of basis of his 16 o p i n i o n , but yet an opinion of someone else. 17 MR . BAGGETT: 18 Q. Would you go ahead and read for the 19 record paragraph 3 entitled "Safe limits"? 20 A. "The American Standards Association and 21 most of the states has set an arbitrary limit of 22 100 parts per million as a maximum permissible 23 benzene concentration to workers exposed to this 24 substance during an eight-hour period. 25 Massachusetts and Oregon has set limits of" -- SHAWN KELLEY, TEXAS CSR 3448 NELL MCCAL LUM & ASSOCIATES, INC. 43 1 it's a blank here -- "parts per million, whereas 2 New York considers 50 parts per million as the 3 highest permissible level. Inasmuch as the body 4 develops no tolerance to benzene and as there is a 5 wide variation in individual susceptibility, it is 6 generally considered that the only absolutely safe 7 concentration for benzene is zero. The inadequacy 8 of a limit of a hundred parts per million are ' s, 9 indicated by well authenticated reports of at 10 least two cases of benzene poisoning following 11 exposure to only 75 parts per million. A limit 12 of 50 parts per million or less is strongly 13 recommended, particularly where exposures are 14 recurrent. Skin contact should be avoided." 15 Q. All right, sir. Professor, tell me 16 what -- at this time what did you consider that 17 the API Toxicological Review was recommending so 18 far as medical examinations? 19 A. It seemed to be fairly adequate and would 20 be what I would recommend primarily even today. 21 Q. And that was preemployment physicals and 22 also regular examinations of those people with 23 potential exposure to benzene? 24 A. A regular basis or periodic reexamination 25 of the people. SHAWN KELLEY, TEXAS CSR 3448 NELL MCCALLUM & ASSOCIATES, INC. 44 1 Q. What precautionary measures were 2 recognized in your profession by people in 3 petroleum industry, precautionary measures 4 were recognized to assist in limiting benzene 5 exposure? 6 MR. FREEMAN: I'm going to object to 7 the form of the question as the term petroleum 8 industry -- do you, by that term, refer to marine 9 transportation industry as well? 10 MR. SPEARS: I join in that objection and 11 add to that another objection is I'm not sure if 12 you then indicated what time frame he's talking 13 a b o u t . 14 MR. BAGGETT: 15 Q. I'm talking about in 1948 when this 16 bulletin came out, sir, what were the 17 precautionary measures that were recommended be 18 taken to limit or prevent the exposure to benzene 19 poisoning that -- that were utilized in your 20 profession as an industrial hygienist? 21 A. I would start out by listing first 22 education of the workers as to the hazards 23 associated with benzene. 24 Q. Would the -- would the fact that there is 25 a latency period involved in the development of SHAWN KELLEY, TEXAS CSR 3448 NELL MCCALLUM & ASSOCIATES, INC. 45 1 disease following long exposure to low dosages be 2 one of the facts that you think would need to 3 be -- the employee would need to know about? 4 A. That should be emphasized, yeah. 5 Q. Would one of the safety measures that - 6 that was recognized in 1948 be that for the 7 prevention of benzene poisoning that the -- all of 8 the measures should be designed to prevent the s 9 inhalation of benzene vapors? 10 A. That would be the only method that could 11 be used to protect the employees, yes. 12 Q. And how would you do that? Would that 13 involve engineering, sir? 14 A. That would involve the enclosure and 15 preventing of escaping of any gas into the 16 breathing zone of the employee. 17 Q. If excessive concentrations were 18 unavoidably encountered in any operation, what 19 was done by - - recommended by your company that 20 you worked for in the period 1948? 21 A. By both preemployment examination of each 22 employee that was going to be potentially exposed 23 and then reexamination whenever they had a 24 suspicious, supposedly exposure that came to the 25 e m p l o y e e . SHAWN KELLEY, TEXAS CSR 3448 NELL MCCALLUM & ASSOCIATES, INC. 46 1 Q. All right, sir. Was ther e a respiratory 2 protection program in place or rec ognized in the 3 4 0 's where you might have an exces sive exposure? 4 A. To prevent any exposure to the employee, 5 then respiratory protection of app roved 6 respirators and approved masks wou Id be used 7 thoroughly and enforced. 8 Q. Sir, in the -- in the 30' s and the ' > 9 40's would you tell us whether or not there 10 was equipment available that could measure the 11 concentrations of benzene vapors in the air? 12 A. There were analytical pro cedures that 13 could be used and were being u sed by evaluation 14 of these concentrations in the air 15 Q. When you went to work in 1947, was that 16 equipment available to measure the concentrations 17 of benzene vapors in the air? 18 A . It w a s . 19 Q. Was it used at your facil ity where you 20 worked? 21 A. We did. 22 Q. And that way were you able to keep up 23 with the -- well, is there any way that you can - 24 strike t h a t . 25 Was there any way, without measuring the SHAWN KELLEY, TEXAS CSR 3448 NELL MCCALLUM & ASSOCIATES, INC. 4 7 1 concentrations of benzene vapor in the air, that 2 you could determine the level of exposures? 3 A. Yes, we used that biological testing of 4 the urine by determining the urinary sulfate ratio 5 in the urine, and that was directly related to the 6 concentration of benzene in the air that he had 7 been exposed to, whether he knew he was being 8 exposed or not. But we could detect that, and 9 we used that until 1960's, and then it became a 10 more -- an easier and more accurate procedure to 11 use the phenolic concentration in the urine for 12 that evaluation. 13 Q. Was that medical examination in addition 14 to the measuring of benzene vapors in the air? 15 A . It w a s . 16 Q. Sir, attached to this report from the 17 American Petroleum Institute is a bibliography of 18 some 25 articles. I assume that that summarizes 19 the best -- that is the best available information 20 on the properties, characteristics and toxicology 21 of benzene as referred to in the forward of this 22 document. Do you recognize any of the authorities 23 that are cited in this bibliography? 24 A. Of the Americans, I recognize 25 approximately 50 percent of these people that I SHAWN KELLEY, TEXAS CSR 3448 NELL M C C A L L U M & ASSOCIATES, INC. 48 1 knew personally. 2 Q. E. T. Hunter, Chronic Exposure, 1939 in 3 the Journal of Industrial Hygiene, which is item 4 No. 11 on this bibliography, were you familiar 5 with that? Did you become familiar with that in 6 your professional work in the 40's? 7 A. I knew Dr. Hunter. He was an internist 8 that worked in the Massachusetts General Hospital 9 in 1941 and 2 when I was there, and I got to know 10 him personally and knew about this article as 11 w e l l . 12 Q. Okay. In the bibliography, article No. 1 13 by E. Browning, "Toxicity of industrial organic 14 solvents," published in the Industrial Health 15 Research Board report No. 80 in London in 1937, 16 was that a document or the type of document that 17 you would have reference - - have reference to in 18 the performance of your work? 19 A. Yes, and Ethyl Browning was an English 20 physician, and she published a book which 21 contained this information about benzene, and 22 it was available to me back in 1941, too. 23 Q. Sir, as a result of this report published 24 by the API, did you consider that it was essential 25 in - - strike that. Not as a result of this SHAWN KELLEY, TEXAS CSR 3448 NELL M C C ALLUM & ASSOCIATES, INC. 49 1 report, but even by the time this report came out 2 in 1948, did you consider that it was essential 3 that you try to maintain absolutely safe 4 concentration of benzene at a zero level? 5 A. That was my goal throughout my career, 6 beginning in 1941. 7 MR. BAGGETT: Sir, do you, in connection 8 with -- I ask that P-9 be attached to the 9 deposition. 10 MR. MYERS: Same objection as previously 11 n o t e d . 12 MR. BAGGETT: 13 Q. Sir, P-10 for identification can best 14 be described as the article referred to in the 15 bibliography by Francis T. Hunter entitled 16 "Chronic exposure to benzene, benzol," No. 2, 17 "The clinical affects," published in the Journal 18 of Industrial Hygiene and Toxicology in 1939. 19 Were you familiar with this work that I'll show 20 you that's marked P-9 for identification, sir? 21 MR. FREEMAN: P-10? 22 MR. BAGGETT: 23 Q. P-10, I'm sorry. Were you familiar with 24 that when you started your practice in '47 at 25 Humble ? SHAWN KELLEY, TEXAS CSR 3448 NELL MC CALLUM & ASSOCIATES, INC. 50 1 A. Oh, yes, I was familiar with it after 2 I met him and was associated with some of his 3 coworkers, daily almost, in 1941. 4 Q. Well, this was published, it shows here, 5 in July of 1939. Do you know whether or not 6 Dr. Hunter was of the opinion that the only safe 7 exposure -- safe concentration to benzene was 8 zero? 9 MR. MYERS: Object to the form of the 10 question. Asking for an opinion of someone else. 11 MR. BAGGETT: , 12 Q. Well, I ask you then to look at page 13 344 . 14 A. He gave that in his papers. 15 Q. On page 344 of this report, "Since the 16 respired benzene is carried by the bloodstream and 17 reaches the marrow before going to the liver, it 18 would seem that the only really safe concentration 19 is zero." That was an opinion that you shared, 20 was it not? 21 A. Yes, it was. He was one of my teachers. 22 Q. That's P-10 for identification. P-12 23 for identification -- I'm sorry, P-11 for 24 identification, I want to show you is entitled 25 "Occupational Tumors and Allied Diseases," by SHAWN KELLEY, TEXAS CSR 3448 NELL M CCALLUM & ASSOCIATES, INC. 51 1 W. C. Hueper, M.D., dated 1942. Are you familiar 2 with that piece of literature, sir? 3 A . I am. 4 Q. Is it not correct that -- that this is 5 the same Dr. Hueper who was a member -- worked 6 with the American Petroleum Institute? 7 A. He did. He also was with the United 8 States Public Health Service, of which I was 9 associated. 10 Q. Sir, I'd like for you to look at page 11 598. This was the type of literature, and this 12 shows on the front of it that it came from the 13 library of the American Petroleum Institute, a 14 document dated in 1942, and I will want this to 15 be shown to the Court or jury by a blowup; 16 therefore, I ask that you read, if you will, for 17 their benefit, from page 598, this paragraph that 18 I will point to here, sir, on - 19 A. The second paragraph on this page says, 20 "The combined clinical and experimental evidence 21 presented concerning the causative 22 interrelationship between occupational exposure 23 of benzol and the development of leukemia seem to 24 indicate that such a connection is merely" - 25 Q . Is n o t . SHAWN KELLEY, TEXAS CSR 3448 NELL MC CALLUM & ASSOCIATES, INC. 52 1 A. "Is not merely possible, but a great 2 probability and even an actuality. There occurs 3 evidently a marked variation in the individual 4 susceptibility and reactivity to benzol. This 5 fact may account in part for the different types 6 of hemopoietic tissue response to this substance. 7 The dose, the duration of exposure and interval 8 between the individual exposure are obviously of s 9 great significance." 10 Q. For the benefit of the court, would you 11 go ahead and read the next paragraph dealing with 12 preventive, precautionary, technical and sanitary 13 effects, the first sentence or two? 14 MR. MYERS: Let me make a general 15 objection as to him reading from another report if 16 he has not adopted it and to the authenticity of 17 the report. Go ahead, subject to the objection. 18 A. "From the evidence presented and the 19 conclusion drawn, the indication for strict 20 medical supervision of a large group of workers' 2 1 occupational exposure to benzol is inescapable. 22 This surveillance should be constant and 23 unremitting and should include periodic blood 24 examination for the presence of quantitative 25 and qualitative changes of the various blood SHAWN KELLEY, TEXAS CSR 3448 NELL MCCALLUM & ASSOCIATES, INC. 53 1 consistencies. It may be advisable to examine 2 the urine for the presence of etherosulfates 3 or benzol utilizing the Obermayer method for 4 indication and determining the inorganic sulfate 5 portion according to the procedure Schrenk, Yant 6 and S a l e s ." 7 MR. BAGGETT: 8 Q. Thank you, sir. Sir, what I want to ask ' s 9 you is was the recommendations that are cont ained 10 in the American Petroleum Institute 1948 11 Toxicological Review on benzene consistent with 12 what Dr. Hueper was recommending in this paper or 13 periodical back in 1942? 14 A. They were comparable. 15 Q. And did you recognize and carry out these 16 preventive, precautionary, technical aspects 17 that -- of surveillance, medical surveillance on 18 the workers at your refinery that had potential 19 benzene exposure? 20 A. With the cooperation of my medical staff 21 we were able to accomplish all of this as a team. 22 Q. Fine. 23 MR. FREEMAN: Could I see that last 24 exhibit, please? 25 MR. BAGGETT: Yeah. SHAWN KELLEY, TEXAS CSR 3448 NELL MC CALLUM & ASSOCIATES, INC. 54 1 Q. Sir, P-12 for identification can best be 2 described as portions of a book from Principals of 3 Internal Medicine in which T. R. Harrison was the 4 editor in chief published in 1950 and will be 5 authenticated as coming from the University of 6 Buffalo library. I'll show you this. Have you 7 seen this before, sir? 8 A. I have. 1 s 9 Q. P-12? If you will, Professor, would you 10 turn to page -- the section dealing with page 731 11 of that book, chemical agents, page 92 -- chapter 12 92 by Marshall Clinton? 13 A . Yes. 14 Q. Who was Marshall Clinton? 15 A. Well, he was a student at Harvard when 16 I was there, and he was the one that prepared the 17 review for the API on toxic -- toxicity of benzene 18 and that we have now in the exhibits. 19 Q. Sir, on page 738 under the subject 20 benzene poisoning, if you would, look at that 21 section and tell me if you accepted this principal 22 in the performance of your duties, and that was 23 that benzene is cheap and is an excellent solvent, 24 it has been used extensively in the rubber, paint 25 and printing industry and may be present in motor SHAWN KELLEY, TEXAS CSR 3448 NELL MCC ALLUM & ASSOCIATES, INC. 55 1 fuels. Did you understand that? 2 A. I do. 3 Q. And did you also understand that and 4 accept that the hazards that benzene presents 5 were now well-known and its use curtailed or 6 controlled by statute; unfortunately, however, 7 occasional cases of benzene poisoning continue to 8 occur? You recognized that, did you not, sir? 's. 9 A. I practice that in my own program, to 10 prevent that type of exposure. 11 Q. On down on page 738, he comments on 12 chronic benzene poisoning. Is it not correct 13 that this is another authority that at that time, 14 in 1950, stated, "Inasmuch as the body develops no 15 tolerance to benzene, it is generally considered 16 that the only absolutely safe concentration for 17 benzene is zero"? 18 A. Yes, and that's in agreement with his 19 earlier publication with the API. 20 Q. And that's in agreement with your 21 practice as an industrial hygienist at -- at 22 Humble and at Exxon, is it not, sir? 23 A . It i s . 24 Q. Sir, in that -- in that connection, is it 25 correct that in 1958 that Exxon issued a - - or SHAWN KELLEY, TEXAS CSR 3448 NELL MCCALLUM & ASSOCIATES, INC. 56 1 Esso issued a Toxigram on benzene, which has been 2 heretofore identified by you? And I'll mark this 3 as P-13 and ask you if you recognize that exhibit, 4 sir? 5 A. I do. 6 Q. Professor, does -- is this -- were you 7 involved in any way in the approval or -- of this 8 Toxigram? ' s 9 A. I was given the opportunity to review it 10 and make comments before it was published, yes. 11 Q. Among other things, you were -- you were 12 aware when this was published in 1958 that the 13 greatest hazard associated with benzene exposure 14 is an insidious destructive effect on blood and 15 blood-forming organs? 16 A. I did. 17 Q. And that's reporte d here, is it not? 18 A. Y e s , it is . 19 Q. What was meant by insidious as used with 20 benzene in reporting on its toxicity or chronic 21 toxicity? 22 A. There are several factors, physical 23 characteristics of it, such as the fact that it is 24 very volatile, it can be in concentrations without 25 easy detection that would be very harmful to the SHAWN KELLEY, TEXAS CSR 3448 NELL MCCALLUM & ASSOCIATES, INC. 57 1 employee. It has no - - and physiologically it has 2 no particular offensive odor or irritating effect 3 on the worker, and he's quite satisfied to work in 4 concentrations that could be very dangerous and 5 very harmful to him. 6 Q. Unless he knows that he is being exposed 7 to it and has been educated on this characteristic 8 of it; is that correct? ' s. 9 A . T h a t 's r i g h t . 10 Q. Did you -- in the performance and 11 adoption of a benzene control program in 1940's 12 and early 5 0 ' s, did you recognize this insidious 13 nature of the benzene? 14 A . I did. 15 Q. And this was recognized in your training 16 programs ? 17 A . It w a s . 18 Q. Sir, this document -- incidentally, what, 19 to your knowledge, was the Toxigram which is 20 marked P-13? How was it utilized by Esso? 21 A. Primarily to educate our purchasers or 22 our clients that were buying the products from us. 23 Q. Was this -- was this the -- was it the 24 custom and practice as you know it of Esso to send 25 this Toxigram along with any purchase of benzene? SHAWN KELLEY, TEXAS CSR 3448 NELL MCC ALLUM & ASSOCIATES, INC. 58 1 A. It wa s , and ac tual iy i t was usually sent 2 prior to th e t ime in wh ich we s ent it, enclosed it 3 at the time of a quotat ion of a purchase price 4 before we sold it to th e m . 5 Q. Si r , as a part of this , was this Toxigram 6 cons is tent in you r opin ion with the 1948 API 7 toxicological review on benzene ? 8 A . It is. s> 9 Q. Did you also still con tinue to report in 10 1958 that most authorities agre e that in light of 11 the present knowledge the only level which can be 12 considered absolutely safe for prolonged exposure 13 is zero? 14 A . I did. 15 MR. BAGGETT: I ask that P-13 be attached 16 to the deposition. I ask that all of the exhibits 17 up to this point that have been identified and 18 numbered be attached to the deposition, if I 19 haven't previously asked that. 20 MR. MYERS: And I'll make a general 21 objection to all of those as previously mentioned 22 as to authenticity of the documents. 23 MR. SPEARS: Same objection. 24 MR. BAGGETT: 25 Q. Professor, so that there's no SHAWN KELLEY, TEXAS CSR 3448 NELL M C C A L L U M & ASSOCIATES, INC. 59 1 misunderstanding, we have Exhibit No. 9 2 recognizing that the only safe concentration for 3 benzene exposure was zero. That was confirmed 4 by Hunter in 1939, it was confirmed by Hueper in 5 1942, it was confirmed in the Clinton Marshall in 6 his article in '50, and it was also confirmed by 7 Esso in your Toxigram; is that correct, sir? 8 MR. SPEARS: I object to the form of the s 9 question. That's not what he said, and that's not 10 what you asked him earlier. Your question earlier 11 was the only absolute safe concentration was 12 prolonged exposure to the benzene, not just -- you 13 forgot to mention prolonged. 14 MR. BAGGETT: The record will speak for 15 itself. 16 Q. Doctor, were these -- Professor, were 17 these authorities, Hunter, Hueper, Clinton 18 Marshall and the Esso Toxigram consistent with 19 the API recommendation, and that is that -- that 20 in light of the present knowledge the only level 21 which can be considered absolutely safe for 22 prolonged exposure is zero? 23 A. They are consistent. 24 Q. All right, sir. Now, Professor, the - 25 who was Clyde Berry? SHAWN KELLEY, TEXAS CSR 3448 NELL MCCALLUM & ASSOCIATES, INC. 60 1 A. Clyde Berry was a peer of mine, and he 2 was an associate -- he worked with Exxon -- Esso 3 Eastern Petroleum Division of the same company, 4 the Standard of New Jersey, and he also was an 5 associate of mine in periods when I was -- we were 6 both commissioned in the United States health 7 public -- Public Health Service and in the 8 Division of Industrial Hygiene together. 9 Q. Was he an industrial hygienist that you 10 knew to be associated with the American Petroleum 11 Institute? 12 A . He w a s . 13 Q. Who was Dr. Woody? 14 A. Dr. Woody was the medical director that 15 he reported to in the area or the particular 16 division called the Esso Eastern. 17 Q. Sir, I want to show you a document that's 18 marked P-14 for identification, which can best be 19 described as a memorandum dated November 22nd of 20 1948, subject, paper read by Dr. W. C. Hueper on 21 the subject of occupational cancer before the 22 APHA.- The letter is from Clyde M. Berry, 23 Industrial Hygienist, to Dr. Woody, and ask you, 24 sir, if you've seen that document before? 25 A. Yes, I have. SHAWN KELLEY, TEXAS CSR 3448 NELL MCCALL UM & ASSOCIATES, INC. 61 1 Q. Sir, I ask you to assume that this was 2 authenticated by the deposition of Dr. Eula 3 Bingham, who has testified in the Allen case and 4 the -- and authenticated the minutes and records 5 of the Medical Advisory Committee of the American 6 Petroleum Institute, and subject to that 7 authentication I'm going to ask you some questions 8 about this v Would the delivery by Dr. Hueper of a 9 paper before the 76th annual meeting of the APHA - 10 A. That's the American Public Health 11 Association. 12 Q. This reports, does it not, that there 13 was an audience of 200 to 300 people were in 14 attendance in November of '48, does it not? 15 A . It does. 16 Q. And, sir, at that time is not -- 1948, is 17 not the industrial hygienist Clyde Berry writing 18 to Dr. Woodard reporting on -- Woody reporting on 19 this speech by Dr. Hueper and recognizing that 20 there was a strong link between environmental and 21 cancer incidents? 22 A. That's his report, uh-huh, Dr. Hueper's 23 p a p e r . 24 Q. And among other things, does he point 25 out the idealistic approach to the control of the SHAWN KELLEY, TEXAS CSR 3448 NELL MC CALLUM & ASSOCIATES, INC. 62 1 problem and set out the points that should be 2 utilized in the industry, the petroleum industry, 3 to help control the problem of benzene exposure? 4 MR. MYERS: I'm going to make an 5 objection. I don't believe he's ever identified 6 when he saw that paper, whether he saw it last 7 week or last year, whether or not he saw that 8 paper in 1948, whether or not it was transferred 9 among members in 1948. 10 MR. BAGGETT: Fine. 11 Q. Professor, you saw this yesterday, did 12 not ? 13 A. Yes, I had seen it in l 948 . 14 Q. All right, sir. 15 A. And possibly I was pres ent, because I had 16 heard Dr. Hueper give this paper, and I might have 17 been present at that same meeting, but I don't 18 recall for sure. 19 Q. The point that I want to make, sir, is 20 that in November of 1948 these controls that he 21 mentions in this paper, in this letter that is 22 confirming what Hueper had reported in the 23 presence of two or three hundred people, are the 24 type of controls that you recognized in setting 25 up a benzene exposure control program at Exxon? SHAWN KELLEY, TEXAS CSR 3448 NELL M C C ALLUM & ASSOCIATES, INC. 63 1 A. They do. 2 MR. BAGGETT: I'd ask that that be 3 attached as P-14. 4 MR. MYERS: Same objection. 5 MR. BAGGETT: 6 Q. Incidentally, sir, I'll show you another 7 document that - - a series of pages of documents 8 that I will mark P-15 for identification, which 9 could best be described as a letter to members and 10 associates of the Medical Advisory Committee on 11 American Petroleum Institute letterhead dated 12 January the 18th, 1949, from D. V. Stroop, 13 S-t-r-o-o-p, Director, with copies going to the 14 safety committee of the board of directors and 15 naming one, two, three, four, five, six, seven, 16 eight such people, attached to it bearing -- this 17 document bears Bates number 000997 through 01302, 18 and ask you if this is not a document that you saw 19 ye sterday for the first time? 20 A. I did see this yesterday, but I don't 21 recall whether I saw it when it was issued in 22 1949 . 23 Q. All right, sir. 24 A. Because I was active in this organization 25 at that time. SHAWN KELLEY, TEXAS CSR 3448 NELL MCCALLUM & ASSOCIATES, INC. 64 1 Q. Professor, what I'd like for you to do is 2 tell us out of -- I ask you to assume that this 3 document was a u t h enticated in the deposition of 4 Dr. Eula B i n gham in the Hicks and Allen case 5 pending in Jeffe rso n County as the custodian of 6 the Ame rican Petroleum Institute minutes of the 7 Medical A d v isory Committee. Sir, attached to 8 this is a list of different physicians, different 9 industrial hygienists that were membership -- that 10 had membership on the Medical Advisory Committee 11 of the America n Petro le um Institute in the years 12 1949, 1950 and 1959. Did you know many of the 13 members of that Medical Advisory Committee? 14 A. I did, a ma jority of them. 15 Q. Dr. Bill Crookshank from Lake Charles, 16 did you know him? 17 A. I knew him well. 18 Q. Burt Delon, a safety man from Lake 19 Charles, did you know him? 20 A. I didn't know him personally, but I knew 21 of him. 22 Q. Dr. W. 0. Ar mstrong from Continental Oil 23 Company, did you know him? 24 A. Well. 25 Q. Dr. Clinton Marshall, Sohio Vacu um out of SHAWN KELLEY, TEXAS CSR 3448 NELL MCCALLUM & ASSOCIATES, INC. 65 1 Buffalo, did you know him? 2 A. I did. He prepa re d that report from 3 Harvard. 4 Q. Did you know Dr. T. J. Kelly from Shell 5 Oil in Wood River, Illinois? 6 A. I d i d . 7 Q. Sir? 8 A. Ye^ . s. 9 Q. Did you know Dr. W. R. Levis with Sun Oil 10 out of Pennsylvania? 11 A. I didn't know him very w e l l , but I knew 12 he was on the committee. 13 Q. Did you know a doctor J. W. Long from 14 Gulf Oil Corp oration in Port Arthur? 15 A. I did. 16 Q. Did you know Dr. W. A. Morrison, an M.D. 17 From Union Oil Company in California? 18 A. I don't remember him, but -- I don't 19 recall him. 20 Q. Did you know a Dr. Allan E. Dooley from 21 The Texas Company? 22 A. I did. I knew his background, field of 23 industrial hygiene. 24 Q. Sir, consistent with your knowledge of 25 the customs and practices that prevailed in the SHAWN KELLEY, TEXAS CSR 3448 NELL MCCA LLU M & ASSOCIATES, INC. 66 1 American Petroleum Institute concerning 2 distribution of relevant documents, such as the 3 API 1948 Toxicological Review on Benzene, do you 4 know of any reason why members of the Medical 5 Advisory Committee wouldn't have been furnished 6 with those type of documents? 7 A. No, I -- it's my impression they were 8 all furnished that was members of any of these 9 committees that you've named and the persons on 10 them were -- all received a copy when they were 11 p u b l i s h e d . 12 Q. Sir, in the field of safety, occupational 13 medicine and industrial hygiene was it well 14 recognized by 1948, by the time of that review, 15 that there was a causal relationship between 16 exposure to benzene and a serious disease or 17 injury to the blood-f or min g organs? 18 A. In all cases wherever the people in my 19 category or the medical directors, yes, it was 20 well available. How far down it went in the 21 company, I wouldn't happen to have that 22 inf o r m a t i o n . 23 Q. Sir, I want to show you another document 24 that I will mark as P-16 for identification, which 25 could best be described as a New York State SHAWN KELLEY, TEXAS CSR 3448 NELL MCCALLUM & ASSOCIATES, INC. 67 1 Occupational Safety -- I'm sorry, New York State 2 Occupational Cancer Committee paper entitled 3 "Occupational Cancer, a Challenge to the 4 Physician," copyr ig ht ed in '49 by the New York 5 State Department of Hea lth and ask you if back 6 in that time set, in the 40's and 50's, were you 7 familiar with, No. 1, that committee, and, No. 2, 8 this particular type of literature? 9 A. I was familiar with it and the activities 10 of this committee at that time, but I did not 11 participate personally. , 12 Q. Sir, the mem be rsh ip that is shown on 13 page -- of the New York State Occupational Cancer 14 Committee that's shown on page 5, if you would - 15 A . Yes. 16 Q. Did you happen to know Conrad Dobriner, 17 D - o - b - r - i - n - e - r , an M.D. with the Sloan Kettering 18 Institute? 19 A. What number is that? Dobriner? Sloan 20 Kettering? I didn't pe rs on ally know him, no. 21 Q. Okay. What about - 22 A. He was an autho ri ty on cancer, medical 23 authority on cancer. 24 Q. What about Dr. G. H. Germen, 25 Manu facturing Chemists Association? SHAWN KELLEY, TEXAS CSR 3448 NELL MCCALLUM & ASSOCIATES, INC. 68 1 A. Yeah, he was at that time chairman of the 2 Medical Advisory Committee to the Manufacturing 3 Chemists Association, and Dr. Germen was 4 associated with one of the major national 5 petro l e u m -- no, excuse me, chemical manufacturing 6 companies, but I don't recall which one he was. 7 Q. All right, sir. What about Arthur E. 8 Hogg, M . D . ,.member of the American Petroleum 9 Institute? 10 A. Yes, and Dr. Hogg was medical director 11 for one of the major oil companies, and I think it 12 was Amoco. 13 Q. What about W. C. Hueper, U.S. Public 14 Health Service, that's the doctor we've referred 15 to earlier, is it not? 16 A. Y e s . 17 Q. Sir, at this -- at this time of 18 publication, on page 9 they refer to a table as 19 a guide to the physician who for purposes of 20 prevention is interested in investigating the 21 role of occupation in cancerous and precancerous 22 lesions presented by a patient. They list two 23 tables there. And table No. 2 lists 24 alphabetically, for reference purposes, some of 25 the more common substances or conditions in the SHAWN KELLEY, TEXAS CSR 3448 NELL MCCALLUM & ASSOCIATES, INC. 69 1 occupational environment which are recognized as 2 being cancer producing or suspect. I ask you to 3 look at -- they go ahead and point out there 4 that those that are designated with an E are 5 established relationship, and I ask you if you 6 could tell me on page 13 if in table 2 -- not page 7 13 . 8 A . Yes. 9 Q. On page 14 under table 2, under benzol, 10 do they not report that benzol is a substance that 11 attacks the blood-forming organs or system and 12 they report that as an E, which means established 13 causal relationship? 14 A. Yes, and I see that same information on 15 the bones and bone m arrow diseases discourages 16 benzol and derivative radioactives and so forth 17 are causing blood dyscrasia. 18 Q. By the time that this article was 19 published in 1950, sir, did you accept in the - 20 '49, did you accept in your work at Exxon the fact 21 that benzene was recognized to be an established 22 carcinogen so far as damage to the blood-forming 23 organs? 24 A . I did. 25 Q. And you enacted -- put in a benzene SHAWN KELLEY, TEXAS CSR 3448 NELL MCCALLUM & ASSOCIATES, INC. 70 1 control program consistent with that recognition? 2 A. I did. 3 Q. P-16 for identification, I'd ask that it 4 be attached. Incidentally, attached to that, is 5 it not, a bibliogr ap hy of many articles to support 6 these findings, is it not, sir? 7 A. There is a - - there's references. 8 MR, MYERS: Same objection as to the N. 9 admissibil ity of the document. 10 MR. BAGGETT: 11 Q. Sir, the next document that I will 12 present to you is Plaintiff's Exhibit No. 17 dated 13 September the 7th, 1943, authored by M. H. Soley, 14 Univer sity of California Medical School, entitled 15 "Report to Shell Development Company on Benzene, 16 Nitrobenzene, Anilines and Xylenes (They're Toxic 17 Effects and Suggested Safeguards in Manufacturing 18 Practices)." Page 2 bears the stamp "received, 19 Shell Deve lopment Corporation, September 7th, 20 1943." I ask you if you've ever seen that before 21 yesterday, sir? 22 A. I don't recall this particular 23 publication, having seen it, until yesterday. 24 Q. Subject to this document being 25 authe ntica ted by Shell Oil Company -- and for the SHAWN KELLEY, TEXAS CSR 3448 NELL MC CALLUM & ASSOCIATES, INC. 71 1 record, I can state that this was delivered to me 2 and Herschel Hobson at a restaurant two years ago 3 in Beaumont by Shell's attorney. This may have 4 to be taken out of the deposition, but it was 5 pursuant to considerable motions to compel. 6 MR. FREEMAN: Who was their attorney, 7 Bill? 8 MR BAGGETT: I think - 9 Q. Sir, this article is entitled, on the 10 second page, "Report to Shell Their -- on Benzene, 11 Their Toxic Affects and Safeguards," and it's 12 labeled "confidential." I ask you if this 13 article, as an industrial hygienist, to you, does 14 it not support the recognition by this researcher 15 in 1943 that exposure to benzene vapors is 16 dangerous, particul ar ly if the exposure is 17 prolonged? 18 MR. MYERS: I'm going to make a general 19 objection, since he did not rely on that at the 20 time he was formulating his opinions many years 21 ago. He just recently seen this -- had an 22 opportunity to see the document. 23 MR. BAGGETT: Fine. 24 Q. Go ahead, if you will. I'm saying does 25 not a review of this document indicate under SHAWN KELLEY, TEXAS CSR 3448 NELL MCCALLUM & ASSOCIATES, INC. 72 1 benzene -- 2 A. Y e s . 3 Q. -- that there is a recognition that 4 exposure is particu la rl y dangerous if it's 5 prolonged? Sir - 6 A. This -- may I summarize by saying this 7 paper is in agreement with what I know about it 8 and have seen in many other publications. s. 9 Q. Okay. While you didn't rely on this 10 paper in putti ng in your program, is this not a 11 confidential -- indicated, if it's authenticated, 12 to be a confidential co mm un ication to Shell 13 recognizing the toxicity of benzene and reporting 14 that while prolonge d exposure to any concentration 15 to benzene is dangerous, there is a marked 16 variation in suscepti bi li ty of individuals so 17 that some, for unkn ow n reasons, are particularly 18 resistant while others are quite susceptible? 19 A. This is in keeping with Hunter's and the 20 other exhibits that we have before us and no 21 c o n f l i c t s . 22 Q. In fact, this article, this paper, this 23 document, sites Hunter with approval, does it not? 24 A. It -- he's given as a reference. 25 Q. Sir, P-19 for identification, which can SHAWN KELLEY, TEXAS CSR 3448 NELL MC CALLUM & ASSOCIATES, INC. 73 1 best be described as a document dated April 28th, 2 1950, on the letter -- having the letterhead of 3 Shell Development Company, "To: K-r-e-d-l-u" - 4 blank, blank, I can't make that out, "from C. H. 5 Hine, M.D., Consulting Toxicologist, subject: 6 Certain problems of environmental cancer in the 7 petroleum industry." First let me ask you, did 8 you know Charlie Hine? 9 A . I did, well. 10 Q. C. H. Hine? 11 A. Socially as well as professionally. 12 Q. Sir? 13 A . I knew him not only professionally but 14 also socially. 15 Q. You have had an opportunity to review 16 this document dated April the 28th, 1950, have 17 you not, sir? 18 A. I have. 19 Q . And -- 20 MR. MYERS: If I could ask when, sir. 21 THE WITNESS: Back in the early days of 22 Dr. Hine came on the -- on the committee about 23 1952, or 1 or 2, in that period, and he -- we 24 discussed this paper at that time. 25 MR. MYERS: Okay. Thank you. SHAWN KELLEY, TEXAS CSR 3448 NELL MCCALLUM & ASSOCIATES, INC. 74 1 MR. BAGGETT: 2 Q. Sir, on the first page did you agree with 3 his report that only relatively few instances can 4 the origin of environmental cancer be traced to 5 contact with well-defined chemical agents 6 possessing established carcinogenic qualities. 7 Among such compounds are arsenic, benzol and 8 aromatic amines, in addition to radioactive 9 elements ? to 10 A. Those were ones that were recognized 11 as being directly related to workers' exposure. 12 Q. Sir, attached to this report - 13 incidentally, he sites with approval -- on the 14 second page of the report, he sites Hueper with 15 approval, does he not? 16 A . He d o e s . 17 Q. As an authority? 18 A . He d o e s . 19 Q. And in a table attached to this, does 20 he not present all of the known and commonly 21 suspected chemical agents causing cancer that are 22 pr esented in the oil industry? 23 A. He has that list. 24 Q. And in those tables attached do they not 25 list benzol as a substance and benzol derivatives SHAWN KELLEY, TEXAS CSR 3448 NELL MCCALLUM & ASSOCIATES, INC. 75 1 as a substance causing damage to the blood-forming 2 organs? 3 A. He does. 4 Q. And also attached to there is another 5 table dealing with precancerous reactions, and in 6 this table does he not indicate that benzol and 7 derivatives could -- are responsible for blood 8 conditions and disorders to the bone marrow that s 9 are precancerous lesions? 10 A. He does. 11 Q. Was this consistent with the state of the 12 art knowledge that existed in the 1950 period in 13 the field of toxicology, industrial hygiene and 14 occupational medicine? 15 A. It was. 16 Q. Sir, the next document that I will mark 17 as P -- 18 MR. FREEMAN: I think you skipped 18. 19 MR. SPEARS: Do you have an 18, Bill? 20 MR. MYERS: Yeah, you skipped 18. 21 MR. SPEARS: The last one you're talking 22 about is a Shell document. It was 19. I see a 23 17 . 24 MR. BAGGETT: Let's go off the record. 25 V I D E O G R A P H E R : Off the record, 18 minutes SHAWN KELLEY, TEXAS CSR 3448 NELL M CCALLUM & ASSOCIATES, INC. 76 1 before 12. 2 [Discussion off the record] 3 V I D E O G R A P H E R : Beginning of tape No. 2, 4 we're on the record, 14 minutes before 12 noon. 5 MR. BAGGETT: 6 Q. Professor Hammond, I've renumbered the 7 document from -- on Shell Oil Company from 8 Charlie, C.^ H. Hine, M.D., with certain problems % 9 of environmental cancer in the pe troleum 10 industry. It should be P-18, and I ask that 11 that be attache d to the deposition. 12 P-19 for identification can best be 13 described as a document dated January 1954 14 entitled "Benzene Physiological Properties," 15 from Allan E. Dooley to Dr. W. E. Kuhn, K-u-h-n. 16 Professor, you saw that yesterday for the first 17 time, did you not? 18 A. I did. 19 VIDEOGRAPHER: Mr. Baggett, your 20 microphone, please, sir. I'm hearing you fine, 21 but let's hear you better. 22 MR. BAGGETT: 23 Q. Subject to this being authenticated as 24 being a document of Texaco -- or Texas Company, 25 you did know Alla n E. Dooley to be a toxicologist SHAWN KELLEY, TEXAS CSR 3448 NELL MC CALLUM & ASSOCIATES, INC. 77 1 for - 2 A. He was the chief industrial hygienist 3 for -- 4 Q. Industrial hygienist. 5 A. For Texaco. 6 Q. Sir, this document that I've just 7 presented to you, among other things, recognizes 8 that chronic? benzene poisoning can result from 9 repeated and continuous exposure to relatively 10 low benzene vapor concentrations, does it not, 11 sir? 12 A . It d o e s . 13 Q. Does it not also, among other things, 14 recognize that you can have chronic poisoning by 15 subthreshold exposure? 16 A. It d o e s . 17 Q. I will want the Court or jury to see this 18 as a blowup. Would you please read what Allan 19 Dooley reports here to Dr. Kuhn concerning chronic 20 poisoning by subthres ho ld exposure 21 MR. MYER: Object to this witness 22 commenting on correspondence from one party to the 23 other which he obviously did not see at the time 24 that it was written. 25 MR. SPEARS: Same objection? SHAWN KELLEY, TEXAS CSR 3448 NELL MCCALLUM & ASSOCIATES, INC. 78 1 A. "Threshold limit values represent the 2 highest concentration of material to which groups 3 of p hysiologically normal workers should be 4 exposed for prolonged periods with reasonable 5 expectation that as a group they would not suffer 6 health damage. A threshold limit value does not 7 imply warranty of a safe working environment. The 8 difficulty i^s that there are no adequate means of 9 determining who are the physiologically normal 10 person insofar as exposure to a particular toxic 11 material is concerned. Dev iat io n from the 12 physiological norm will constitute individual 13 susceptibility." End of paragraph. 14 Q. Do you agree and did you agree with and 15 recognize this when you were in charge of the 16 industrial hygiene p r ogram at Humble in '47 17 through the years that you were employed by Esso? 18 A. I took all of these characteristics into 19 consideration when I established the zero limit as 20 being the only safe one for all people. 21 MR. SPEARS: Object to that question -- I 22 mean,- object to the answer as not being responsive 23 to the question. 24 MR. BAGGETT: 25 Q. Well, let me ask the question again then. SHAWN KELLEY, TEXAS CSR 3448 NELL MCCALLUM & ASSOCIATES, INC. 79 1 Did you accept this principal that chronic 2 poisoning by subthreshold exposures can occur in 3 the adoption of your pr og ram at Humble and at 4 Esso? 5 A. I did. 6 Q. Sir, this is a recognition, is it not, 7 by Dooley and yourself that there's no warranty of 8 safe working^ conditions simply because you comply 9 with the threshold limit value? 10 MR. SPEARS: Objection. That question 11 is -- now you're characterizing somebody else's 12 statements as to Dooley, who I don't think this 13 witness can testify to. 14 MR. BAGGETT: Would you read back my 15 question, please, sir? 16 MR. SPEARS: My objection is based on the 17 fact that you're asking him about Mr. Dooley. 18 MR. BAGGETT: Okay. 19 Q. Is that your interpretation of what 20 Dooley is saying here? 21 A. I find no objection to what Dooley says, 22 and I would say that this factor of many 23 conditions were taken into consideration by myself 24 regarding benzene as well as some other five or 25 six hundred materials that we had to evaluate. SHAWN KELLEY, TEXAS CSR 3448 NELL MC CALLUM & ASSOCIATES, INC. 80 1 Q. Sir, looking -- well, let me ask you 2 this. When you adopted a program that has been 3 spelled out here early on in your deposition and 4 in the Toxigram where you recognizee that most 5 authorities agree that in light of the present 6 knowledge the only level which can be considered 7 absolu tely safe for pr olonged exposure is zero, 8 is one of the reasons because you can have chronic 9 poisoning by subthreshold exposures? 10 A. I do. 11 Q. Now, the last parag ra ph of Mr. Dooley's 12 letter or memo dated Ja nuary of '54 refers to the 13 API toxicological review on benzene, gives a good 14 summary of the physiological affects of this 15 material. I believe that sets of these reviews 16 are at Port Arthur, at Beacon and in your library. 17 I'm asking you this, at the time that these 18 reviews were rendered by the A m e rican Petroleum 19 Company, were copies of the reviews in your 20 offices and in the offices of Humble Oil Company 21 and Esso? 22 A. Yes, they were . 23 Q. And would one of the reasons be because 24 that such articles as that were wid ely circulated 25 in the America n Pe troleum Institute? SHAWN KELLEY, TEXAS CSR 3448 NELL MCCALLUM & ASSOCIATES, INC. 81 1 A. They were available to the pe troleum 2 industry broadly. 3 Q. Sir, does good -- skipping to another 4 subject, but it may be referred to in this memo, 5 does good employee education program involve 6 educating them on the delayed effects that can 7 result from chronic exposure? 8 A. It's parti cu lar ly important to do that s 9 for employees on insidious materials. 10 Q. It's because they could be exposed at a 11 time and not really if -- incidently, particularly 12 one that is -- that the vapors are pleasant, their 13 respiratory system doesn't act as an alarm to 14 protect them from -- or set off an alarm that 15 they're smelling an irritant, does it? 16 A. That's true. That's true. 17 Q. And if they go through pleasant 18 experiences with smelling benzene or a pleasant 19 odor, they could be being injured and not even 20 know it? 21 A. They could. 22 Q. And that is the reason why you felt it 23 was important to educate your people to that fact? 24 A . It w a s . 25 Q. Sir, the -- one of the -- P-20 for SHAWN KELLEY, TEXAS CSR 3448 NELL MCCALLUM & ASSOCIATES, INC. 82 1 identification can best be described as a 2 memorandum from E. W. Midlam, dated August the 3 30th of 1960, to several people, one of which 4 was W. M. Cock, the other one was J. W. Crookshank, 5 another one was H. R. Smith, bearing Bates numbers 6 EW 0037252 through EW 0037259, and I ask you if - 7 well, I doubt that you've seen the first page of 8 that before yesterday, but attached to that do you 9 recognize the API toxicological review on benzene 10 dated in 1960? 11 A. This was the second edition of the one 12 we had in 1948, I believe, yes. 13 Q. Well, I'm not going to go into the 14 contents of the second edition of the API, but 15 basically did it also cover the toxicity, the 16 toxicology, the chronic effects, the precautionary 17 measures and the medical examinations that were 18 recommended for b e n z e n e -p o t e n t i a l l y -exposed 19 employees ? 20 A. Yes, it did. 21 Q. Do you know who H. R. Smith was back in 22 1960? 23 A. Yes, he was a medical investigator for 24 the Kettering laboratory in Cincinnati, and we 25 gave him remedial projects to review for us, some SHAWN KELLEY, TEXAS CSR 3448 NELL MCC ALLUM & ASSOCIATES, INC. 83 1 of them which was a carry -f or war d from the work 2 that was done by Harvard under Dr. Drinker and 3 Dr. Clinton. 4 Q. Sir, I want you to know that evidence 5 will show that H. R. Smith was the plant manager 6 for Cities Service that was involved in other 7 litigation that you've been in. Was there a 8 Mr. Smith that was at the Kettering Institute? ' s. 9 A. No, it was a Dr. Smith that - 10 Q. Dr. Smith. This is an H. R. Smith. You 11 did not know him? 12 A. I did not know him. 13 MR. BAGGETT: Okay. P-20, I ask that it 14 be attache d to the deposition. 15 MR. MYERS: Same objection. 16 MR. BAGGETT: Well, I don't understand 17 what your same objection is. 18 MR. MYERS: Same objection is that the 19 documents have not been authenticated. And I 20 realize that you may have done it on another 21 proceeding, but I'm not familiar with that. 22 MR. BAGGETT: Okay. Fine. Sir - 23 MR. MYERS: And that would hold true for 24 all the objections that I've made on this. 25 MR. BAGGETT: SHAWN KELLEY, TEXAS CSR 3448 NELL MCCALLUM & ASSOCIATES, INC. 84 1 Q. Sir, I want to show you a document I will 2 mark P-21 for identification dated November 16th, 3 1970, entitled "Essential Information for the Safe 4 Handling and Use of Benzene by Operating, 5 Maintenance and Laboratory Personnel," Cities 6 Service Oil Company, Lake Charles Operation, bears 7 Bates numbers EW 0009900 through EW 0009912. This 8 is a document that's been authenticated in other ' s 9 litigation involving Cities. I ask you if you 10 have not seen that document previously, maybe in 11 connection with the Ellis case? 12 A. I also saw this document yesterday. 13 Q. All right, sir. Sir, the point that I'd 14 like to ask you about is, is not this a document 15 setting up a benzene exposure pr og ra m in 1970 that 16 was consistent with what was known and knowable by 17 the mid, early 50's or by the mid-50's, insofar as 18 safety and health was concerned? 19 A. I did not find any new material in here 20 that wasn't available in the early 1950's to the 21 petr oleum industry. 22 Q. In fact, sir, I'll show you a document 23 that you've heretofore identified and produced 24 with your deposition in the Ellis case, a 25 three-page document entitled "Benzene Exposure SHAWN KELLEY, TEXAS CSR 3448 NELL MCCALLUM & ASSOCIATES, INC. 85 1 C o n t r o l " -- excuse me just a second Let me get 2 my -- 3 MR. BAGGETT: Mr. Court Reporter, could 4 you give me a stamp there? 5 MR. MYERS: 22, I t h i n k . 6 MR. BAGGETT 7 Q. I'm going to mark this document P -22 for 8 identifie ation and a sk you if you recogniz e that 9 document entitled " enzene Exposure Contro 1 "? 10 A. Y e s , it wa one that I or my assi stant 11 p r e p a r e d , and i t wa distributed to all pe ople 12 i n v o l v e d . 13 Q. It says in the corner here, and it looks 14 like that it might be -- 15 A. T h a t 's my - - 16 Q. -- your writing, "This control pr ogram 17 was in op eration by 1955 for Baytown Refinery of 18 Humble Oi 1 & Refining Company." 19 A. It w a s . 20 Q. Is that a fact, sir? 21 A. Yes, it is. 22 Q. And this program addressed control 23 measures in the ma nu facturing units? 24 A. It d i d . 25 Q. They're spelled out and numbered in this SHAWN KELLEY, TEXAS CSR 3448 NELL MCCALLUM & ASSOCIATES, INC. 86 1 document, are they not, sir? 2 A. They are. 3 Q. It spelled out control measures for 4 limiting exposure in the shipping areas? 5 A . It d o e s . 6 Q. Did it also spell out in the refinery 7 streams that you determined the benzene percentage 8 in selected streams? 9 A. We did. 10 Q. Did you also, by 1955, determine for 11 streams with 5 percent or more benzene that you 12 recommended the control items that are set forth 13 here for the benzene unit? 14 A. I did. 15 Q. Did you also for streams with 2.5 to 5 16 percent benzene investigate and determine exposure 17 potential ? 18 A. We did. 19 Q. And then, of course, you directed -- as 20 a part of this control you had routine control of 21 samples in the laboratory, and you spelled out how 22 you did that, did you not? 23 A. We did. 24 Q. When it came to medical and industrial 25 hygiene, you spelled out, did you not, the SHAWN KELLEY, TEXAS CSR 3448 NELL MCCALLUM & ASSOCIATES, INC. 87 1 physical examinations, the preemployment and the 2 periodic examinations afterwards? 3 A. All of those employees was on that list 4 for a special examination. 5 Q. And that included ur inary phenols and who 6 was subjected to those type of regular studies? 7 A. They were. 8 Q. And also you had air monitoring in the s. 9 different areas, and you covered the frequency 10 that that would be done and how it would be done? 11 A . It w a s . 12 Q. Sir, I guess what I'm asking you is, is 13 this, in your opinion -- did it represent a state 14 of the art prog ram for the control of benzene 15 exposure that was in effect and that you had put 16 in effect by 1955? 17 A . It d i d . 18 Q. Do you see anything -- a reason why or do 19 you know of any reason why any person involved in 20 the refinery business would not have been able to 21 comply with those practices and standards that 22 you've set out in that document? 23 MR. SPEARS: I object to that question, 24 Bill. That's calling for speculation to what 25 persons you're talking about. You're asking him SHAWN KELLEY, TEXAS CSR 3448 NELL MCC ALLUM & ASSOCIATES, INC. 88 1 to speculate about what other companies could or 2 could not do. 3 MR. BAGGETT: 4 Q. Well, based on the state of the knowledge 5 that was available through the American Petroleum 6 Institute and in the petroleum industry, do you 7 know of any reason why any refinery wanting to 8 protect their employees from benzene exposure S 9 could not have adopted a prog ram as set forth 10 there? 11 A. I do not know any reason why they 12 couldn't have adopted it. 13 Q. Sir, in your opinion by 1955 was the 14 type of prog ram that you have set forth in this 15 document - - did it comply with the industrial 16 standards that were recognized in your profession? 17 A. Yes , those -- they did c o m p l y . 18 Q. Were they state of the art standards? 19 A. They were state of the art, yes. 20 Q. N o w , is this - - this pr og ra m that is set 21 out there , in addition to that, did it involve 22 education ? 23 A. It did. 24 Q. And it certainly, as you said while ago, 25 it involved measuring the concentrations of vapor SHAWN KELLEY, TEXAS CSR 3448 NELL MCCALLUM & ASSOCIATES, INC. 89 1 in the air, that that should be checked regularly 2 in locations where the pos sib il ity of excess 3 exposures may have been encountered? 4 A. Y e s , it d o e s . 5 Q. And in your opinion, sir, if a company 6 did not educate its employees of the adverse 7 health effects of benzene and the hazards of 8 benzene by the mid-50's, did they fail to comply 11 s 9 with the recognized health and safety standards 10 of that time? 11 A. I do not know of any me th od they could 12 have complied with this state of the art without 13 being -- carrying out this much of a progr am for 14 the control and education of the employees. 15 Q. All right, sir. If the -- if a company, 16 in your opinion, did not do mea sur in g of air 17 concentrations of vapor in the -- I mean, of 18 benzene vapor in the air regularly in locations 19 where the possib il ity existed of excessive 20 exposures, in your opinion were they -- did 21 they fail to comply with the recognized health 22 and safety standards of that time? 23 A. They were in -- yes, they were in fault 24 or error not doing that. And also I would like 25 to emphasize that it's necessary to do urinary SHAWN KELLEY, TEXAS CSR 3448 NELL MCCALLUM & ASSOCIATES, INC. 90 1 sulfate ratios or ur in ar y phenols to be able to 2 make sure that there wasn't some unknown sources 3 of exposure. 4 MR. MYERS: I'm going to object to his 5 comment as to fault and comment as to what he 6 believes should be the standard. The fault is 7 up to the trier of fact. 8 MR. SPEARS: I agree with that. The s 9 same objection, and I also object to the 10 nonr esponsiveness of the answer. 11 MR. BAGGETT: 12 Q. Well, let me just ask you this. You have 13 set out what your benzene control program was in 14 1959 at the Baytown Refinery, and that included 15 design, that included deter mi na tio n of benzene 16 percentage in selected streams, it included 17 control measures for the laboratory, it included 18 medical and industrial hygiene, which included 19 the phenols and the air monitoring. Sir, in your 20 opinion if any company did not do those things set 21 forth in P-22 by the mid-55's were they failing to 22 comply with the state of the art knowledge that 23 existed in the petro le um industry? 24 A. They were deficient. 25 Q. Now, and by 1960 if a company were SHAWN KELLEY, TEXAS CSR 3448 NELL MCC ALLUM & ASSOCIATES, INC. 91 1 subject to the Department of Health -- Department 2 of Safety and Health regulations of the 3 Wa lsh-Healey Act, if they were not complying with 4 these benzene exposure controls that you had in 5 1950, in your opinion were they failing to comply 6 with the provisions of the Walsh-H ea le y Act? 7 MR. SPEARS: I'll object to that question 8 as being extremely vague as to -- Bill, you're not 9 indicating what part of the Wa ls h- Hea le y act is he 10 talking about. You're not indicating that this 11 man even knows what the Walsh-H ea le y Act is. 12 MR. BAGGETT: 13 Q. Sir, do you know whether or not the 14 Walsh-Healey Act required air monitoring in places 15 where people have potential exposure to benzene? 16 A. They required that you be completely 17 aware of all exposures and the extent of the 18 exposure which would require air monitoring. 19 Q. And if you didn't do air monitoring and 20 didn't have the facilities or equipment to do it, 21 didn't have the personnel to do it, then you 22 couldn't comply in 1960 with those provisions of 23 the Walsh-Healey Act, could you? 24 A. In my opinion I don't see how they could 25 have . SHAWN KELLEY, TEXAS CSR 3448 NELL MCCALLUM & ASSOCIATES, INC. 92 1 Q. And the same thing would comply in 1972 2 with the Walsh -- with the OSHA regulations, if 3 you didn't have air monitoring of potentially 4 exposed people, there was no way that you could 5 know what they were being exposed to, could you? 6 A. There was no other metho d I could think 7 of . 8 Q. Sir, did you warn business guests of the ' s 9 presence of benzene vapors in areas where they may 10 be encountered at your facility? 11 A. We actually put them in the classrooms if 12 they were going to come in to work for us as 13 contract employees and gave them the same type of 14 education that we gave our own employees. And our 15 safety inspectors also enforced that type of 16 action and safety precautions on that -- on the 17 part of the contractor. 18 Q. This Toxigra m dated in 1958 marked 19 Plaintiff's Exhibit No. 13, was that the type of 20 warning that you issued to purchasers of benzene 21 product? 22 A. This was pr imarily made for the education 23 of the purchase rs that were inquiring about buying 24 benzene from us. 25 Q. Finally, sir, I'd like your opinion based SHAWN KELLEY, TEXAS CSR 3448 NELL M C C ALLUM & ASSOCIATES, INC. 93 1 on the American Petroleum Institute data, the 2 safety data, the chemical manufacturing data that 3 we've referred to, did you -- do you have an 4 opinion whether or not those are notices that 5 should have triggered warnings to the users and 6 manufacturers of chemicals containing benzene that 7 there was a hazard associated with those products? 8 A. It,'s very clearly po in te d out by those 9 organizations that it's -- as well as many others, 10 such as governmental agencies, that it's a very 11 dangerous operation. 12 Q. And back before 1955 that literature was 13 readily accessible and widely distributed among 14 the American Petroleum Institute members, was it 15 not ? 16 A. It was. 17 MR. BAGGETT: I have no further 18 q u e s t i o n s . 19 MR. FREEMAN: Are we going to get lunch, 20 or what's you gentlemen's pleasure? It's 12:11. 21 MR. BAGGETT: We're off. 22 V I D E O G R A P H E R : Off the record, 12 minutes 23 after 12 noon. 24 [Discussion off the record] 25 VIDEOGRAPHER: On the record, 20 minutes SHAWN KELLEY, TEXAS CSR 3448 NELL MCCALLUM & ASSOCIATES, INC. 94 1 after 12 noon. 2 MR. BAGGETT: Gentlemen, I've got two 3 other questions I need to ask the professor that 4 I thought of before I - - 5 Q. Professor, bac k in the 40's was 6 industrial hygiene audits or surveys available to 7 members of the A m e r i c a n Petroleum Institute or to 8 anyone, so far as that's concerned, that you know 9 of? 10 A. I assume they would be consultant firms. 11 Q . Y e s , sir. 12 A. Such as the Industrial Hygiene Foundation 13 that was establ ish ed at Malone Institute by 14 Dr. Drinker, and they had some qualified people. 15 One of my former teachers from Harvard, Wesley 16 Hemeon, was there, and he headed up that group. 17 And associat ed with him was several good 18 industrial hygienists, and they did extensive 19 surveys of the p e t r oleum industry. For example, 20 they did the surveys for the Standard Oil of New 21 Jersey, not only for the American refineries, 22 except for ours in Baytown. They did it for 23 Baton Rouge and Bayonne and Everett and Charleston 24 that I know about, and those pu blications are 25 available. And some of them, the last one I SHAWN KELLEY, TEXAS CSR 3448 NELL MCCA L L U M & ASSOCIATES, INC. 95 1 suppose that was done was in the year of 19 2 Baton Rouge in 1949. 3 Q. Sir, in that connection have you 4 not previous ly furnished to us a copy of the 5 industrial hygiene survey of the Baton Rouge 6 refinery dated April of -- February and April 7 1949 rendered by the Industrial Hygiene Foundation 8 of America for your company? 9 A. Yes, for the Esso Eastern Company. 10 Q. I ask that that be marked P -- what's the 11 next document? 12 MR. FREEMAN: 23. 13 MR. MYERS: 23. 14 MR. BAGGETT: 15 Q. P-23 for identification. You recognize 16 that, sir, as being a voluminous - 17 A. Comprehensive. 18 Q. -- comprehensive industrial hygiene 19 survey that was made before -- this was probably 20 before you were able to hire or had a resident 21 industrial hygienist at -- 22 A. This was before Mr. Venable reported 23 there. Now, the individual who came down because 24 they were friends as well as peers of mine, Hemeon 25 and Morgan, they came down and spent two or three SHAWN KELLEY, TEXAS CSR 3448 NELL MCCALLUM & ASSOCIATES, INC. 96 1 weeks with me regarding industrial hygiene 2 problems that I had uncovered in the Baytown 3 refinery and how I was handling them before they 4 started out in 1948, to make the survey. 5 Q. Sir, the point I want to make is, is 6 that anybody - - was it known by you that the 7 services of industrial hygiene audits or surveys 8 was available through -- through the American 9 Petroleum Institute? 10 A. The Medical Advi sor y Committee discussed 11 these individual surveys from time to time. 12 Q. All right, sir. Sir, finally in 13 connection with the insidious nature of benzene 14 as a toxic product, is there a recognition on 15 your part as an industrial hygienist that even 16 utilizing a T L V , whether it be -- that the odor 17 threshold before one can even begin to detect the 18 presence of benzene, that the odor threshold is 19 higher than the TLV's were, say, in the 50' s when 20 they were 35 parts per million or 50 parts per 21 million? 22 A. Yes, that was true, that they were 23 dangerous exposures without the workers being 24 in any way alerted to the fact that they were 25 being exposed to dangerous concentrations. SHAWN KELLEY, TEXAS CSR 3448 NELL MCCALL UM & ASSOCIATES, INC. 97 1 MR. BAGGETT: Thank you. I have no 2 further questions. 3 MR. FREEMAN: Before we start, can you 4 read back that last answer? I had a little 5 difficulty following it, please. 6 [The record was read as requested] 7 8 9 10 EXAMINATION BY MR. SPEARS 11 12 Q. Professor Hammond, I introduced myself 13 earlier. I'm Ken Spears. I represent several of 14 these oil companies in connection with this case. 15 First of all, Professor Hammond, let me -- let's 16 go back a bit in your work history. I'd like to 17 ask you some questions. And I have -- I've read 18 all the depositions that you've given before, 19 Professor Hammond, so I'm somewhat familiar with 20 your work history, but I want to ask you in 21 Massachusetts, when you worked in Massachusetts, 22 what year was that? 23 A. '41 and '42. 24 Q. And who were you working for? 25 A. I was working for the Divis io n of SHAWN KELLEY, TEXAS CSR 3448 NELL MCCALLUM & ASSOCIATES, INC. 98 1 Occupational Diseases in the state labor 2 department. 3 Q. All right. And in connection with 4 working for that company, there was established - 5 A. It was a state organization. 6 Q. I'm sorry. In connection with working 7 for that state organiz ati on at that particular 8 time, there was established, was there not, a TLV 9 for benzene of a hu ndred ppm; is that correct? 10 A. That was suggested, yes, by an 11 organization of the Amer ica n Standards Association 12 and others that had looked at the these v a l u e s . 13 And particular ly down in Connecticut there was a 14 fellow by the name of Warren Cook and you'll find 15 that he had issued a list of chemical substances 16 and suggested TLV for them, and that -- that was 17 the prevaili ng value. 18 Q. For the benefit of the Court, the jury or 19 the Court, would you tell us what a TLV is, sir? 20 A. TLV stands for threshold limit value that 21 is described as being the concentration of vapor 22 in the air that should not ever be exceeded by -- 23 to exposure to any employee. 24 Q. Okay. And it's your testimony that when 25 you went to work for this agency in Massachusetts, SHAWN KELLEY, TEXAS CSR 3448 NELL MCCALLUM & ASSOCIATES, INC. 99 1 the general recognized TLV in the industry as such 2 among people like yourself was 100 ppm for 3 benzene; is that correct? 4 A. That was the goal that we had in working 5 t h e r e . I was just telling you that it was hard to 6 get the industry to attain those l e v e l s . 7 Q. All right. 8 A. Even then. ' \ 9 Q. O k a y . 10 A. At that time. 11 Q. Nevertheless, that was your goal and the 12 goal of the agency that you worked for, to get to 13 a TLV of 100 ppm; is that correct? 14 MR. BAGGETT: Jim, we're talking about in 15 1937 . 16 MR. SPEARS: Wh en he went to work - 17 A. 1941. 18 MR. SPEARS: 19 Q. '41? 20 A. No, because my supervisor was Dr. Harvey 21 Elkins, and he had made enough measurements both 22 in terms of air concentrations and also the 23 urinary sulfate ratio that he was suggesting a 24 m a x imum of 75 parts per million. And also 25 Dr. Hunter worked with us and because we did some SHAWN KELLEY, TEXAS CSR 3448 NELL MCCALLUM & ASSOCIATES, INC. 100 1 of his field work investigating exposure, and he 2 was already written that for susceptible people 3 it had to be down to zero to protect them. I 4 was aware of it, and that is when I formed my 5 foundation and my position on concentrations. So 6 I didn't accept the TLV value as being acceptable. 7 Q. All right. Professor Hammond, just for 8 clarification, when you went to work in the 1940's 9 for this agency in Massachusetts, am I correct in 10 stating that the agency's posi tio n on acceptable 11 TLV's for benzene was a hundred ppm; is that 12 correct ? 13 A. That was the lowest value that the state 14 department of labor could enforce. 15 Q. All right, sir. And someone you 16 mentioned had indicated in an article that a 17 hundred ppm was too high and perhaps 75 ppm would 18 be more acceptable; is that correct? 19 A. Yeah, just from reasoning that they had 20 seen some -- he had seen some cases where in 21 measuring the conc en tration in the plants he had 22 also seen some damage that had occurred where the 23 average concentration had only been 75 parts per 24 million, but he saw -- Dr. Harvey Elkins and 25 his -- and I,was one of his members of his team -- SHAWN KELLEY, TEXAS CSR 3448 NELL MC CALLUM & ASSOCIATES, INC. 101 1 had actually measu re d 75, but we also found some 2 medical cases where there had been injury by that 3 concentration. 4 Q. All right, sir. And when -- again, for 5 the benefit of the court and for laypeople on the 6 jury, when you're talking -- when we're talking 7 about a hundred ppm TLV or 75 ppm T L V , we're 8 talking about an eight-hour work exposure; is that ' s 9 correct? 10 A. That's a co nc en tration that's really 11 valu ed on an average throughout a 40-hour week. 12 Q. All right. It's based on a 40-hour week 13 of continuous exposure of a certain ppm; is that 14 correct ? 15 A. Not to exceed that amount. Now, this 16 exposure, as you know, in practice would vary up 17 to 75 and then also wave on down so that your 18 average - - we found that if you should analyze it 19 average would be about 60 percent, would be more 20 likely the actual 40-hour week. 21 Q. Okay. 22 A. Because of the varia ti on in the 23 concentration. 24 Q. Again, and I guess I'm not making myself 25 very clear, Professor Hammond, but correct me if SHAWN KELLEY, TEXAS CSR 3448 NELL M C C A L L U M & ASSOCIATES, INC. 102 1 I'm wrong, it's true, is it not, that when we're 2 discussing threshold limit values, TLV's and ppm's 3 for workers in the workplace, we're talking -- at 4 least in the 4 0 's when you were working in 5 Massachusetts we're talking about individuals who 6 came into contact with benzol on a regular basis 7 for a 40-hour week; is that correct? 8 A . T h a t 's r i g h t . 9 Q. All right, sir. In other words, even 10 in 1947 when you were working in Massachusetts, 11 whatever year that was - - 12 A. '42 . 13 Q. '42. Thank you, sir. 14 A. Yeah. 15 Q. A person such as myself or you or any 16 ordinary individual, if he happened to walk - 17 walk near an area where there had been a benzol 18 spill and for one or two minutes was exposed to 19 say a hundred ppm and then walked off and did the 20 rest of his job, that was not the type of exposure 21 that would give you any concern, was it? 22 A. It would not have if he had no further 23 e x p o s u r e . 24 Q. Okay. In other words, the TLV and the 25 ppm deals with chronic exposure, as opposed to SHAWN KELLEY, TEXAS CSR 3448 NELL MCCALLUM & ASSOCIATES, INC. 103 1 acute exposure; is that correct? 2 A. Ordinarily the chronic exposure produces 3 this irreversible damage to bone marrow, whereas 4 you don't get that effect in just one short-term 5 exposure. 6 Q. Okay. After you left the agency in 7 Massachusetts, is that when you went to work at 8 Humble? ' s. 9 A. No, I didn't go there. I was a 10 commissioned officer in the United States Public 11 Health Service, and I served during the years 12 of -- the war years at assignment, and usually I 13 was assigned to some state or some agency such 14 as that to enforce -- help them enforce the 15 regulations that they had pertaini ng to control 16 of exposure. 17 Q. All right, sir. Can you tell me -- tell 18 the Court, please, how the TLV of benzene evolved, 19 please, from a hundred ppm when you went to work 20 in Massach usett s to what it was when you -- what 21 was accepted in the industry, what was the 22 standard when you went to work for Humble? 23 MR. BAGGETT: Excuse me, Ken. This may 24 be of help to you, this document, but you're 25 referring to a TLV in '46 and in the 40 's when SHAWN KELLEY, TEXAS CSR 3448 NELL MC CALLUM & ASSOCIATES, INC. 104 1 there was no such thing. It was a maximum 2 allowable concentrate, I believe. 3 THE WITNESS: Well, m a x i m u m is what 4 I'm speaking of, because that was a ma ximum 5 concentration. 6 MR. BAGGETT: This may be of some help 7 to you if you want to use it. It sets out the 8 history of the threshold limit values. s. 9 MR. SPEARS: But -- thank you, Bill. 10 MR. BAGGETT: And I'm sorry if I'm 11 interrupting you. 12 MR. SPEARS: That's okay. 13 MR. BAGGETT: I'm just trying to be of 14 h e l p . 15 MR. SPEARS: 16 Q. And when I asked you the question about 17 in Massachusetts, when I used the term T L V , that's 18 how you unde rstood it in Massachusetts in the 19 4 0 ' s , is it not? 20 A. No, I answered more M.A.C., ma xi mu m 21 allowable concentration. That was what we - 22 now, this is very important, because the state 23 department of labor could not enforce a 24 concentration less than what they have there, 25 and it was therefore -- the importance was in SHAWN KELLEY, TEXAS CSR 3448 NELL MCCA LLU M & ASSOCIATES, INC. 105 1 po llution -- I mean, in enforcement, such as 2 you would have with setting a speed limit and 3 enforcing it as being one or another. Now, they 4 might -- as you know, it might be that you 5 wouldn't be able to drive as fast as your -- as 6 the speed limit would be, but they couldn't - 7 and if you drove faster than what was actually 8 safe, but they couldn't enforce that patrol, and ' s 9 that's the same way with the state department of 10 h e a l t h . 11 Q. Well, Professor Hammond, when you went to 12 work with Humble -- 13 A. 1947. 14 Q. -- what was the generally accepted TLV or 15 M.A.C. for benzene among your peers, any agency 16 that you recognize among your peers? What was 17 that ? 18 A. Does that not show you the year that it 19 was reduced to 35? 20 Q. I'll show you the document. 21 A. Let's see, I think it's taken from the 22 TLV. 23 MR. BAGGETT: I'll ask that this be 24 marked P-24 for identification. 25 MR. MYERS: Let's identify what it is. SHAWN KELLEY, TEXAS CSR 3448 NELL M C C A L L U M & ASSOCIATES, INC. 106 1 MR. SPEARS: 2 Q. Do you recognize that document? 3 A. Threshold limit values, TLV's, and 4 this was the Occupational Safety and Health 5 Administration, and it was established by the 6 American Conference of Governmental Industrial 7 Hygienists. 8 Q. All right, sir. 9 A. And in 1947 it would have been 50 parts 10 per million, and 1948 it was cut to 35 parts per 11 m i l l i o n . 12 Q. All right, sir. The document that's been 13 marked 24, I believe, by Mr. Baggett makes 14 reference to the A C G I H , does it not? 15 A. America n Conference of Government 16 Hygienists, yes. 17 Q. All right. The Ameri ca n Conference of 18 Governmental Industrial Hygienists, also known as 19 the ACGIH, is a very w e l l -respected organization, 20 is it not? 21 A. It was the best -- best of the industrial 22 hygiene group organizations, yes. 23 Q. In other words, this organization was 24 made up of people like yourself. Weren't you a 25 member? SHAWN KELLEY, TEXAS CSR 3448 NELL M C C ALLUM & ASSOCIATES, INC. 107 1 A. Yes, I was a member after I had gone to 2 teaching in the last - - so that would have been in 3 the year of 19 -- I became eligible, and these 4 were all governmental or educational, nonindustry 5 members, and I became eligible in 1978 and took 6 part in it. 7 Q. Okay, sir. But when was the American 8 Conference of Governmental Industrial Hygienists 5 s 9 formed? 10 A. It was formed in 1936, I think, or '37. 11 Q. All right, sir. And those -- those 12 individuals who formed that agency and today, up 13 until today, are industrial hygienists; is that 14 correct ? 15 A. Along with -- let me supplement to say 16 there a lot of physicians that are members of 17 that, and they're looking at it from a medical 18 standpoint, and there are a lot of strictly 19 toxicologists who are experimenting and they are 20 not industrial hygienists inasmuch as they do not 21 go out into plants and fields and make tests. 22 They actually work with animals primarily. 23 Q. Is it safe to say that the ACGIH was 24 composed of individuals who were dedicated to 25 informing industry about the dangerous SHAWN KELLEY, TEXAS CSR 3448 NELL MC CALLUM & ASSOCIATES, INC. 108 1 propensities of various chemicals or toxic agents? 2 A. They were the best authorities we had. 3 Q. All right. And this 100 M.A.C. that we 4 referred to when you were working in Massachusetts 5 in the 4 0 ' s , that was es ta blished based on input 6 from the ACGIH, was it not? 7 MR. BAGGETT: Well, I think to be precise 8 we would have to refer to 1946. And this is a 9 document that will be authenticated by Frank 10 P a r k e r . 11 MR. SPEARS: 12 Q. Well, my question, Doctor -- Professor 13 Hammond, you understood what I was asking you, do 14 you not? 15 A. Not in terms of -- you were giving them 16 certain authoritative -- giving them authoritative 17 type of government enforceable limits, and these 18 are the limits that would be enforceable by the - 19 a state agency, wh ether it's the department of 20 health in some states and department of labor in 21 some states, that they could actually take an 22 employer to court and force him to reduce the 23 concentration if it didn't come down to a hundred 24 parts per million, and that was for that 25 particular year. Then as it came on down, the SHAWN KELLEY, TEXAS CSR 3448 NELL MCCALLUM & ASSOCIATES, INC. 109 1 more restrictive, then that was what the 2 inspectors from the government agency could 3 enforce, and that's where it came about. 4 Q. Professor Hammond, what I'm trying to 5 emphasize, and correct me if I'm wrong, but the - 6 either the threshold limit value or the maximum 7 allowable concentration for benzene vapor for a 8 worker in a 4 0 -hour week has evolved downward s. 9 since 1941, has it not? 10 A. It surely has, down to zero now. 11 Q. All right, sir. Well, I want to ask you 12 that, sir. What does the Ame ri can Conference of 13 Go vernmental Industrial Hygienists recommend as of 14 today, sir, for threshold limit value ppm for 15 benzene on an eight-hour day? 16 A. In the 1993 booklet it's one part per 17 m i l l i o n . 18 Q. All r i g h t . So it's not zero, is it? 19 A. W e l l , y o u 've got -- 20 Q. Is it zero? 21 A. W e l l , it's not zero , because that cannot 22 be detected in - - normally in the air such as this 23 room or out there in the street we're going to 24 have around one part per million. 25 Q. The fact of the matter, Professor SHAWN KELLEY, TEXAS CSR 3448 NELL MCCALLUM & ASSOCIATES, INC. 110 1 Hammond -- 2 A. It's the least detectable amount. 3 Q. The fact of the matter, you cannot reduce 4 benzene exposure to zero in any work environment, 5 can you, sir? 6 A. No more than the fact that we still have 7 some cases of leukemia and people don't have any 8 record of having ever worked in benzene exposures. s ' 9 MR. SPEARS: I object to the answer as 10 not being responsive. 11 Q. I'm going to ask you again, Professor 12 Hammond. In the workplace, and I'll give you the 13 Exxon refinery as the workplace that you're very 14 familiar with, is it possible to reduce benzene 15 exposure to zero to every worker in that work 16 place, based on the technology that you know of? 17 A. You have just stated a basic fact, and 18 the other answer to that is that's the reason 19 you have to have medical surveillance of these 20 employees, because there's so much difference in 21 their susceptibility, and if you find a person 22 that has none detectable exposure as far as the 23 instrumentation is concerned, and he shows changes 24 in the blood picture and he's an employee where 25 he might have some benzene around, unusual, then SHAWN KELLEY, TEXAS CSR 3448 NELL M C C ALLUM & ASSOCIATES, INC. 111 1 you have to remove him to some other position, and 2 we did that regularly. 3 MR. MYERS: Let me object to the 4 responsive nature of the question. 5 MR. SPEARS: W i t h all due respect, sir, I 6 would object to the responsiveness of the 7 question. I'm going to ask you - 8 MR. BAGGETT: Well, gentlemen, I've got s s. 9 to say if y'all are going to put that type of 10 comment onto the record, I think it is responsive 11 and I think he's entitled to explain his answer. 12 MR. SPEARS: 13 Q. Professor Hammond, I'm going to ask you 14 to give me a yes or no. 15 MR. BAGGETT: You don't have to do that. 16 A. I can't do that. I can't do that. 17 MR. BAGGETT: I want to object to that 18 i n s t r u c t i o n . 19 A . I c a n 't do i t . 20 MR. BAGGETT: He can give a yes or no and 21 then explain it, and that's just what he did. 22 MR. SPEARS: Well, let me explain it - 23 let me get this on the record. Are you telling 24 this witness not to answer me yes or no, Bill? 25 MR. BAGGETT: I'm saying that he doesn't SHAWN KELLEY, TEXAS CSR 3448 NELL MCCALLUM & ASSOCIATES, INC. 112 1 have to, that he can answer you yes or no and then 2 explain it. 3 MR. SPEARS: Under what provision of the 4 Louisiana Code of Civil Procedure are you telling 5 me that this witness cannot answer yes or no? 6 MR. BAGGETT: I didn't say that he 7 doesn't have to answer you yes or no. 8 MR. SPEARS: Thank you. 9 MR. BAGGETT: I'm saying that he's 10 entitled to explain it. 11 MR. SPEARS: 12 Q. Professor Hammond, if the question is 13 capable of a yes or no answer, will you give me 14 a yes or no answer, sir? 15 A. If that's the only thing required without 16 an explanation. 17 Q. All right, sir. 18 A. The jury must understa nd what we are 19 discussing and what the problems is, and I'm 20 trying to think of them and -- 21 Q. Well, Professor Hammond, you just answer 22 my questions, please, and we'll let the jury 23 decide what they want to be decided. Try not to 24 be an advocate, if you would. Just answer the 25 q u e s t i o n s . SHAWN KELLEY, TEXAS CSR 3448 NELL M C C ALLUM & ASSOCIATES, INC. 113 1 MR. BAGGETT: I'm going to object to your 2 comments. 3 MR. SPEARS: All right. 4 Q. Professor Hammond, when you went to work 5 at Exxon -- and what year, sir, was it? 6 A. 1947. 7 Q. All right, sir. Was there benzene 8 present in the Exxon operations when you went to 1 s 9 work at Exxon? 10 A. There was. 11 Q. All right, sir. Tell me every place that 12 benzene was in at the Exxon facility when you went 13 to work. List them for me. 14 A. When I went through making a 15 reconnaissance survey, which is a walk-through, I 16 discovered that the benzene was being used in 17 dewaxing of oils, and that was the method at the 18 ketone benzene procedure that had been developed 19 by Texaco . And to do that, use their method, we 20 had to us e whatever they re commended or else they 21 w o u l d n 't guarantee it. S o , but I immediately saw 22 it, and I went directly to my management and said 23 we cannot use that benzene as a product, because 24 we 're not going to be able to control i t . 25 Q. All right, sir. SHAWN KELLEY, TEXAS CSR 3448 NELL MCCALLUM & ASSOCIATES, INC. 114 1 A. And so, let me tell the you the rest of 2 the story. It's real important. They began in 3 research and they found out that toluene would do 4 just as effective as benzene and even better. 5 Q. I'm going to stop you now, Professor 6 Hammond, because my question - 7 A. And we never - 8 Q. Professor Hammond, listen to me. 9 A. I'm just saying - 10 Q . N o . N o , sir. 11 A. I'm giving you the answer. 12 Q. I understand. My quest io n to you was 13 where in the Exxon refinery was benzene? I'm not 14 asking you about toluene or what you did. Do you 15 understa nd my questions? 16 A. I told you. 17 Q. Am I -- am I not being clear when I ask 18 you? Tell me if it's not clear. Okay, sir? 19 Where was benzene present at the Exxon refinery 20 when you came to work? 21 A. I've already answered you. 22 Q. You said the dewaxing unit? 23 A. T h a t 's r i g h t . 24 Q. Is that the only place, sir? 25 A. That's the only place that was SHAWN KELLEY, TEXAS CSR 3448 NELL M C C ALLUM & ASSOCIATES, INC. 115 1 detectable. 2 Q. All right, sir. Did Exxon refine crude 3 oil, sir? 4 A. They did. 5 Q. Was there benzene in crude oil when you 6 went to work for Exxon, sir? 7 A. I'm sure that there was. It depended on 8 the par ticul ar field you produ ce d it from. 11 s 9 Q. How would you know if there was? 10 A. Well, we me asured and we developed 11 techniques to measure it everywhere. 12 Q. When you went to work at Exxon, were 13 you aware that there was benzene in crude being 14 refined by Exxon? 15 A. Not in any concentration that would be 16 where it -- because it was internal and inside or 17 enclosed equipment it wasn't vent ed out in the 18 a i r . 19 Q. I didn't ask you whether it was vented in 20 the air, sir. I'm asking you were you aware when 21 you went to work for Exxon for the first time that 22 Exxon crude oil products contained benzene, yes or 23 no? Were you aware of it? 24 A . Oh, I was. 25 Q. How were you aware of it, sir? SHAWN KELLEY, TEXAS CSR 3448 NELL MCC ALLUM & ASSOCIATES, INC. 116 1 A. Because I talked to the laboratory people 2 that were making an analysis of these crudes, and 3 they could tell me - 4 Q. All right, sir. 5 A. -- which one was higher and which one was 6 lower or which one was negative. 7 Q. And what was the benzene content of the 8 crude oil being used by Exxon at the refinery, 9 say, in Baytown? 10 A. I don't have any answer to that. We used 11 crude from hundreds of fields and foreign crude as 12 well as domestic crude, and you'd have to ask me 13 which par ticul ar field, which particular -- and if 14 that record would be back in the laboratory, I 15 would refer you to go back there. 16 Q. Well, do you recall what percent of 17 benzene was contained in any particular crude 18 being used by Exxon at the time that you started 19 working there? 20 A. It would never be mea su red in percent. 21 It would be measured in terms of parts per 22 million. 23 Q. All right, sir. Do you recall any of 24 those? 25 A. No, I do not. ' SHAWN KELLEY, TEXAS CSR 3448 NELL MCCALLUM & ASSOCIATES, INC. 117 1 Q. Wou ld a -- when you went to work for 2 Exxon, did you consider an individual working in 3 the refinery who may be handling the crude oil as 4 being a person potentially exposed to benzene, 5 sir? 6 A. Not unless I was aware of the area he was 7 working in, how he could have been working with 8 fractions of the crude oil and all that, but we ' *v 9 went through the refinery and analyzed all that 10 and you'll find it in my -- my pu bl ication there 11 that I summarized. 12 Q. Well, I looked at your publication, but 13 that's dated 1955. 14 A. I say we were doing that already in 1955 15 and before, but I just brought it together in 16 about that time to say these are definitely what 17 we wanted all employees to know and all management 18 to know at that time. That was for their 19 education, not for mine. 20 Q. All right. There was -- when you went 21 to work at Exxon, Exxon was using benzene as a 22 solvent ? 23 A. Never been used as a solvent except for 24 this patented process that Texaco put in, and we 25 didn't do it after I went in and went through the SHAWN KELLEY, TEXAS CSR 3448 NELL MCC ALLUM & ASSOCIATES, INC. 118 1 plant. We didn't buy any more benzene. 2 Q. When you arrived at Exxon - 3 A . T h a t 's r i g h t . 4 Q. -- you deter mi ne d that Exxon was using 5 benzene as a solvent in its operations and you 6 eliminated it, is that what you're saying? 7 A. Yeah, and that was a brand new unit, 8 probably hadn't been operating over a month or so 9 when I got there. 10 Q. So the people that -- the people that 11 initiated that process of using benzene as a 12 solvent before you got there were doing something 13 that you thought was dangerous; is that correct? 14 A. I put a stop to it, too. 15 Q. So Exxon was acting dangerously before 16 you got there; is that what you're saying? 17 A. Well, yes, and I contribute that to the 18 people who developed the process, which is Texas 19 Company, Texaco. 20 Q. But who was the industrial hygienist that 21 was there when you got there, sir? 22 A. There was none. I started the first 23 industrial hygiene pr ogram in the world in the 24 petroleum industry. 25 Q. Well, who was acting as that, as an SHAWN KELLEY, TEXAS CSR 3448 NELL M C C ALLUM & ASSOCIATES, INC. 119 1 industrial hygienist? 2 A. E. Q. Camp had a group of chemical 3 engineers and chemists that worked on these 4 problems, because during the war we produced a 5 lot of toluene, we prod uce d a lot of xylene and 6 synthetic rubber and so forth and all of those 7 people had a potential exposure to aromatics, and 8 to cover the case they were all included in the s 9 same program that we had now for benzene, because 10 they thought all aromatics, such as toluene and 11 xylene and related materials, were as dangerous as 12 b e n z e n e . 13 Q. All right, sir. 14 A. And I straigh te ne d them out on that. 15 Q. Okay. When you started work for Exxon - 16 I'm going to go back to this -- you men tio ne d the 17 dewaxing unit as being a source of benzene. Is 18 this the process that you're talking about that 19 Texaco initiated or gave to Exxon? 20 A. That's right. That'scorrect. 21 Q. All right, sir. 22 A. But if you go through the world today 23 and look at those units, none of them use benzene, 24 because we demonst rat ed that you could substitute 25 a safe material for that. SHAWN KELLEY, TEXAS CSR 3448 NELL MCCALLUM & ASSOCIATES, INC. 120 1 Q. Okay, sir. How many employees are 2 employed say at the Baytown refinery when you 3 were working for Exxon, sir? 4 A. At one time there were in the range of 5 fifteen to sixteen thousand employees. 6 Q. All right, sir. Now, other than office 7 personnel, sir, I'm not asking you about office 8 personnel, of the fifteen to sixteen thousand of 9 them, how many of those people actually worked * 10 what I would call inside the area of the refinery 11 at any part of the refinery? 12 A. It would be strictly a guess on my part. 13 Q. A p p r oximately how many, sir? 14 A. I'd estimate at t h r e e -fourths of those 15 would have been in the plant from day to day, 24 16 hours a day, seven days a week. 17 Q. About 10,000 people roughly? 18 A. 12,000, I would say. 19 Q. All right, sir. In your opinion, sir, 20 while you were working for Exxon, were all 12,000 21 of those individuals who worked inside your 22 refinery exposed to unsafe levels of benzene? 23 A. I would say there would be -- the group 24 that was working in the dewaxing program would 25 have been -- the m a ximum would have been 25 SHAWN KELLEY, TEXAS CSR 3448 NELL MCCALLUM & ASSOCIATES, INC. 121 1 people. 2 Q. Okay, sir. 3 A. That's the only ones that had any 4 hazardous exposure. 5 Q. Okay, sir. 6 MR. FREEMAN:Excuse me, you said 25 7 people? 8 THE WITNESS: 25 people. 's 9 MR. SPEARS: 10 Q. And that's -- thank you, Professor 11 Hammond. That's the point I was making, of the 12 ten or twelve thousand people working in the 13 Baytown refinery, the people that you would be 14 concerned with as far as for exposure to benzene 15 were the 25 some-odd people wo rking in the 16 dewaxing unit; is that correct? 17 A. At that time, yes, but we expanded the 18 operations so that it became several hundred. 19 Q. Okay, sir. At no time did you feel that 20 all ten or twelve thousand people working in your 21 refinery were exposed to unsafe levels of benzene, 22 did you? 23 A. I'll go back to my original statement, 24 that these were the only ones I detected by 25 w a l k - t h r o u g h . SHAWN KELLEY, TEXAS CSR 3448 NELL MCCALLUM & ASSOCIATES, INC. 122 1 Q. Okay, sir. Wh en you walke d through your 2 refinery, who were the people that you determined 3 might be exposed to benzene vapors? Now, you 4 mentioned the people in the dewaxing unit. Who 5 were the people or what work craft would you 6 consider as being a craft that would be 7 potentially exposed to benzene vapors as you 8 walked through a refinery? And I'm talking about 9 your refinery, the Exxon refinery. 10 A. Only that one unit. 11 Q. All right, sir. And which unit was that? 12 A. A dewaxing unit. 13 Q. You were not concerned, were you not, 14 with, say, pipe fitters or boilermakers who were 15 working in other units other than the dewaxing 16 unit about their levels of exposure to benzene, 17 were you? 18 A. To answer you to say that to be able to 19 walk through and make an evaluation of an exposure 20 you have to be professionally trained in this 21 field. 22 Q. Yes, sir. Yes, sir. My question - 23 A. So I was trained in the field, and I knew 24 what to -- what to look for and what to expect, 25 and I knew the operations of the plant, what the SHAWN KELLEY, TEXAS CSR 3448 NELL MCCALLUM & ASSOCIATES, INC. 123 1 intermediate compounds were, what the finished 2 products were and where the original exposure or 3 the feed products came from, and I was able to 4 evaluate them. 5 Q. All right, sir. In layman's terms, 6 Professor Hammond, and tell me if I'm not being 7 clear, what I'm trying to get at, and tell me if 8 that's not correct, is that everyone who worked % 9 in your refinery -- not everyone was exposed to 10 benzene; is that correct? 11 A. I think that 12 answering. 13 Q. Well, I want 14 A. Well, no, th 15 Q. O k a y . 16 A. They d i d n 't 17 Q. All right. 18 A. How would a 19 and so forth who neve 20 Q. All right, sir. 21 A. - - i n the place -- let me explain it to 22 you, and you can put this down as my answer. I 23 walked through the plant, I looked at the 24 operations and materials they were handling, how 25 they were being exposed. If I was not satisfied SHAWN KELLEY, TEXAS CSR 3448 NELL MC CALLUM & ASSOCIATES, INC. 124 1 that I would be willing to work for a career of 2 35, 40 years in that particul ar location where 3 they were working, I then took measurements, and 4 I took measures to improve it to the point where 5 I would. 6 Q. Y e s , s i r . 7 A. Okay? 8 Q. I und erst an d that. When you walked 9 through the refinery at Exxon, did you feel safe 10 walking through that refinery? 11 A. Perfectly safe, and if I didn't, then 12 just like I did in this room and there was some 13 operations that I wasn't pleased with and I 14 wouldn't be willing to work in for the rest of 15 my life, and I got busy and we tended to them. 16 Q. All right, sir. 17 A. And I used that policy all the way 18 through until my son came about 15 or 16 years old 19 and I began to worry about his occupation, I began 20 to apply that same judgment to whether or not I'd 21 want my son to go to work in that job for the rest 22 of his life. And that was the criteria I used. 23 That's the reason zero was a natural thing for me 24 for benzene. 25 Q. Does your son work in a refinery? SHAWN KELLEY, TEXAS CSR 3448 NELL MCCALLUM & ASSOCIATES, INC. 125 1 A. He never did work in a refinery, no. 2 Q. Did you ever take him in the refinery 3 with you? 4 A. As a visitor. 5 Q. All right, sir. Were you concerned when 6 you took him in as a visitor that he might be 7 exposed to benzene by just being in the refinery? 8 A. I was -- I had already been in there, and V 9 I was not exposed to - - I was not -- I was not 10 concerned about my own exposure, and I said that 11 my first criteria, but when he came along he 12 so precious to me - - 13 Q. Sure . 14 A. - - I w o u l d n 't want to expose him to say 15 now you go to work in this plant or that plant or 16 this operation or that operation, you see? 17 Q . Sure. 18 A. The TLV's didn't mean a thing to me. 19 Q. I've been in many refineries, Professor 20 Hammond. Not nearly as many as you, sir. But 21 when I walk through a refinery I get a smell. 22 It's just a -- I can't tell you what it is. I 23 just call it a hydrocarbon smell of a refinery 24 operation. Do you know what I'm talking about? 25 A. Yes, I do, surely do. SHAWN KELLEY, TEXAS CSR 3448 NELL MCCALLUM & ASSOCIATES, INC. 126 1 Q. Is there any danger in breathing that 2 when you're walking around in a refinery? 3 A. I don't see how you would be exposed to 4 any more than just passing through, no. 5 Q. In other words, just walking through a 6 refinery, whether it's Exxon's refinery or anybody 7 else, and getting a smell of - - a hydrocarbon 8 smell doesn't necessarily mean you're being v s 9 exposed to benzene, correct? 10 A. Well, today, because of the control group 11 about air pollution and so forth, you wouldn't 12 have that smell anymore. You don't get that. 13 Q. Are you telling me you could walk through 14 Exxon's Baytown refinery today and not smell any 15 hydrocarbons, Professor Hammond? 16 A. Yes,, I do. 17 Q. You could do that today? 18 A. Yes,, you can. 19 Q. And you could do that when you retired? 20 A. Oh, not -- not that long ago, but within 21 the last ten years they've had to tighten it up. 22 I'll just give you some idea about how important 23 this is. When I retired professi on al ly there were 24 15 of us looking after all the refineries and some 25 60,000 or more employees throughout the 50 SHAWN KELLEY, TEXAS CSR 3448 NELL MCC ALLUM & ASSOCIATES, INC. 127 1 states. Today they have like 80 to 90 industrial 2 hygienists doing the same job with less employees 3 than we had -- 4 Q. Okay. 5 A. -- when I was working for them. 6 Q. Okay, sir. Professor Hammond, what I'm 7 saying is that when you retired, which was in what 8 year, sir? 9 A . '78. 10 Q. Okay. So whe n you retired, at least up 11 in that point in time if you walked through the 12 Exxon refinery you would smell a hydrocarbon 13 smell, would you not? 14 A. I could detect it, yes, at certain 15 l o c a t i o n s . 16 Q. But it was not something to be concerned 17 about, was it? 18 A. Not at all. 19 Q. All right, sir. Likewise, a boilermaker 20 or a pip efitt er or any other craft who is not 21 working in the units, the dewaxing unit or the 22 benzene unit, has nothing to fear about the fact 23 that he is working in the refinery about being 24 exposed to benzene, does he? 25 MR. BAGGETT: You're talking about at his SHAWN KELLEY, TEXAS CSR 3448 NELL M C C ALLUM & ASSOCIATES, INC. 128 1 refinery? 2 MR. SPEARS: Yes, sir. 3 A. Well, I think I can answer that by saying 4 after 1948, by that time we had controlled 5 exposures to lead among the painters, we've never 6 had any symptoms or any complaints of an 7 occupational disease among our many employees over 8 that 30-year period. s 9 MR. SPEARS: 10 Q. Were you answering my question, Professor 11 Hammond, or just talking? 12 A. I was just giving you an answer to your 13 question about not being -- not -- people not 14 getting any danger or not being necessarily afraid 15 to be in the refinery. 16 Q. Okay. So it's nothing -- there's nothing 17 unusual about a boi ler ma ker just doing his job in 18 a refinery. As long as he's not around the 19 dewaxing unit or the be nzene unit he's not going 20 to be exposed to benzene, is he? 21 MR. BAGGETT: Excuse me, you're still 22 confining your questions not to Cities Service - 23 MR. SPEARS: I'm talking about his 24 r e f i n e r y . 25 MR. BAGGETT: -- but to his refinery. SHAWN KELLEY, TEXAS CSR 3448 NELL MCCALLUM & ASSOCIATES, INC. 129 1 MR. SPEARS: Yes, sir. 2 A. I would limit it to the fact that he 3 could work in any of our facilities, including 4 the benzene plant, without any danger of exposure. 5 MR. SPEARS: 6 Q. All right, sir. All right. Likewise, 7 did Exxon have vessels, ships? 8 A. They had -- they had tankers. ' s 9 Q. All right, sir. Did they have tug boats? 10 A. In what particular facility and which 11 operation? 12 Q. Did Exxon have any tug boats that you 13 were aware of that plied the inland waters of the 14 Gulf Coast? 15 A. I don't know that we had any tug boat 16 operators. We had tanker operators, and they came 17 in for special examinations and so forth, but tug 18 boats, I think we contracted most of them. 19 Q. Okay, sir. All right. Did -- have you 20 been told by Mr. Baggett or anybody else what this 21 particular case is about that we're here today 22 for, that being the Joseph Hebert lawsuit, sir? 23 A. No, I'm not familiar wit h it. 24 Q. All right, sir. No one told you that 25 Joseph Hebert was a boat captain, a tug boat SHAWN KELLEY, TEXAS CSR 3448 NELL MCC ALLUM & ASSOCIATES, INC. 130 1 captain for most of his life who plied the waters 2 of the Gulf Coast? 3 A. I didn't know any more than he was a 4 captain on what I would call marine operations 5 and so forth. 6 Q. Were you aware, sir, that he picked up 7 and loaded and off-loaded crude oil products, 8 condensate and sometimes gasoline from various 9 ports of call all along the Gulf Coast? 10 A. N o . 11 Q. Were you aware that he also visited the 12 Exxon fa cility in Houston, sir? 13 A. N o . 14 Q. No one told you that? 15 A. No . 16 Q. Were you aware that Higman did business 17 with Exxon's refinery in Baton Rouge and picked up 18 crude oil products? 19 A. No, I didn't know where they operated. I 20 haven't -- haven't looked into any of that field 21 operations. 22 Q. All right, sir. The whole time that you 23 were an industrial hygienist up until the time 24 that you retired, sir, did you know of any need to 25 warn people like Mr. Hebert who might be tug boat SHAWN KELLEY, TEXAS CSR 3448 NELL MCCALLUM & ASSOCIATES, INC. 131 1 captains picking up Exxon crude oil products from 2 the dangers of benzene? 3 A. Well, let me ask that and say our 4 practice was to have our tug boat employees that 5 were loading or unloading -- we'll say loading 6 products of ours into the barges were under our 7 supervision and they wore the respirators when 8 they needed them. If it was topping off or doing 9 some job of that type or closing a hatch, things 10 of that type, well, they did wear -- and they were 11 under the medical surveillance program, too, as 12 far as benzene was concerned. 13 Q. All right, sir. I understand that. And 14 maybe I got off track again. Were you aware, sir, 15 that Mr. Joseph Hebert, in his entire career, 16 never hauled benzene? 17 A. No, I -- I didn't know anything about his 18 operation and products. 19 Q. All right, sir. Well, take this as a 20 given. Based on the information that we know, 21 Professor Hammond, Mr. Hebert was a tug boat 22 captain for most of his life plying the waters 23 of the Gulf Coast. Okay, sir? You understand 24 me so far? 25 A. I hear you. SHAWN KELLEY, TEXAS CSR 3448 NELL MCCALLUM & ASSOCIATES, INC. 132 1 Q. All right. And the products that he 2 pushed or pulled in the barges consisted of crude 3 oil, condensate and sometimes gasoline or like 4 products but no benzene. Okay? Do you follow me 5 so far? 6 A. So far. 7 Q. All right, sir. And he was not an 8 employee of Exxon, sir. Do you understand that? 9 A. Y e s . to- 10 Q. If Mr. Hebert had arrived at an Exxon 11 dock, and he said he did, to pick up crude oil - 12 MR. BAGGETT: Wait a minute, who said he 13 did? 14 MR. SPEARS: Mr. Hebert did, he said he 15 visited the Exxon dock. 16 MR. BAGGETT: Whereabouts. 17 MR. SPEARS: In Houston. 18 Q. If he arrived at the Houston dock to pick 19 up crude oil products, just crude oil, would he 20 have received any sort of warning from you or any 21 Exxon official about the products that he was 22 about to load into his barge, if it was crude oil? 23 A. I do not know about his operations enough 24 to be able to help you on that. 25 Q. All right. Professor Hammond, you were SHAWN KELLEY, TEXAS CSR 3448 NELL MCCALLUM & ASSOCIATES, INC. 133 1 the chief industrial hygienist for Exxon; is that 2 right? 3 A . I was. 4 Q. You were responsible to determine if 5 there was any exposure to harmful chemicals or 6 substances to any employee or visitor at the Exxon 7 refinery; is that correct? 8 A. Not -- not in - - not in that type of 9 detail, individual,. I'm just speaking for the 10 main tenance and the safety measures from an 11 industrial hygi enist's standpoint that we took 12 and I -- all of our employees that worked at the 13 docks were all trained and trained by classes in 14 a lecture room type as to the dangers of having 15 all of the products that we had, when to wear 16 respirators or approved types of masks. 17 Q. All right, sir. Were you - 18 A. And so they wo ul d have been a good 19 example for any contract barge operator and so 20 forth to have seen them if they had been handling 21 any materials that were hazardous. 22 Q. Well, I'm asking you now based upon your 23 work experience at Exxon, sir, did you initiate 24 any type of p r ogram to warn tug boat operators or 25 crew members about the dangers, if any, of Exxon SHAWN KELLEY, TEXAS CSR 3448 NELL MCCALLUM & ASSOCIATES, INC. 134 1 crude products that they may be loading or 2 unloading? 3 A. I do not know of any for the crude oil. 4 If he just stuck to crude oil, that would have 5 been less likely that we would have taken him 6 apart for -- taken him aside for that particular 7 training. 8 Q. And the bot tom line, Professor Hammond, 9 do you know of any danger of contracting acute 10 myel ogenous leukemia from anyone who handles crude 11 oil products only? 12 MR. BAGGETT: That, of course, 13 hypo thetically is not consistent with the evidence 14 in this case and is therefore objectionable. 15 A. I do not know enough about his work and 16 the materials that you menti on ed earlier, what 17 concentrat ion of benzene that might have contained 18 and so forth. 19 MR. SPEARS: 20 Q. Well, what -- what concentration of 21 benzene were in your Exxon crude oils, sir? 22 A. We didn't have any concentrations to 23 speak of. The crude oil had other types of gases 24 that would have been diluted with the benzene so 25 as to reduce it. It's very unlikely that there SHAWN KELLEY, TEXAS CSR 3448 NELL M C C ALLUM & ASSOCIATES, INC. 135 1 would have been very much benzene coming out per 2 se from the -- you see, the more volatile 3 materials in crude than those found in benzene 4 would have been predominantly in the vapors that 5 come out, and that kind of a fractionation-type 6 evaporation and very little of the thing is high 7 boiling as that. Your propane, butane, pentane 8 and so forth would have been the gases that you'd ' s 9 have been concerned about, and you'd have been 10 concerned unless you control it that you might 11 have a fire problem, fire hazard, or explosion. 12 Q. Well, it was a very long answer, 13 Professor Hammond. 14 A. Well, it was necessary. 15 Q. Yes, sir. And I'm asking you. Now you 16 said there was - - in your answer you said your 17 crude oil did not have much benzene in it - - 18 A. Not coming out, that would have been 19 exposed to the air. Just pure benzene -- just 20 pure petroleum crude, I don't know of any 21 situation where you would have had hazardous 22 concentration of benzene per se. 23 Q. That's what I'm asking you, sir. 24 A. I just don't -- I just don't know what 25 materials he handled. SHAWN KELLEY, TEXAS CSR 3448 NELL MCCAL LUM & ASSOCIATES, INC. 136 1 Q. Right. 2 A. But I'm sure that the investigations of 3 these materials, because we know that when we were 4 handling products containing benzene we had to put 5 in very strict control measures, including medical 6 surveillance, including urinary phenols and other 7 control measures, but just the un ce rtainty of what 8 type of product you're talking about, but crude 9 oil only is not -- I'm not able to help up with 10 t h a t . 11 Q. Well, I'm going to ask you, sir, 12 Professor Hammond. As an industrial hygienist, 13 based on your work experience, do you know of any 14 incidents where acute my el ogenous leukemia has 15 been associat ed with handling crude oil products 16 only? 17 MR. BAGGETT: That, of course, is 18 irrelevant in this case. 19 A. Well, not only - 20 MR. SPEARS: 21 Q. Do you know that, sir? 22 A. I know that we had none - 23 Q. All right, sir. 24 A. -- in all of our people. 25 Q. Have you ever heard of any? SHAWN KELLEY, TEXAS CSR 3448 NELL MCC ALLUM & ASSOCIATES, INC. 137 1 A. I have not heard of any, and I have not 2 had one case, because we had a good control 3 program -- 4 Q. All right, sir. 5 A. -- all this time. Unless you had that, 6 I'd say you were negligent in knowing what 7 exposure he might have been having. 8 Q. Who's negligent? ' s 9 A. Anyone who had the supervision over the 10 potential exposure that he had. 11 Q. What exposure did he have, Professor 12 Hammond? 13 A . I d o n 't k n o w . 14 Q. Well, why did you make a statement like 15 negligent, Professor Hammond? 16 A. Well - 17 Q. You don't even know his exposure. 18 A. Because I don't know how you'd know 19 that he didn't have exposure unless you had him 20 under - - 21 Q . Why -- 22 A. -- surveillance. 23 Q. -- in the world - 24 MR. BAGGETT; Wait a minute. 25 MR. SPEARS: -- would you make a statement SHAWN KELLEY, TEXAS CSR 3448 NELL M CCALLUM & ASSOCIATES, INC. 138 1 like that? 2 MR. BAGGETT: Wait. Wait a minute. I 3 object to you interrupting the professor. 4 MR. SPEARS: All right. 5 Q. Professor Hammond, why would you make a 6 statement about he was negligent or somebody was 7 negligent when you don't even know what the man's 8 exposure was? Tell me. \s 9 A. That's right, I don't know what his 10 exposure w a s . 11 Q. Well, why do you make a statement 12 about - - 13 A. Had he been wo rk in g for us, I'd have 14 known about it. 15 Q. If he had been working for you, you'd 16 have known what? 17 A. I'd have known if he had any exposure or 18 not to benzene. 19 Q. And how's that, sir? 20 A. Because of the medical surveillance and 21 testing -- testing urine and other means of 22 determining it. 23 Q. Exxon did not test every employee in that 24 refinery, did they, sir? 25 A. I don't see how that had any relation SHAWN KELLEY, TEXAS CSR 3448 NELL MCCA LLU M & ASSOCIATES, INC. 139 1 to a -- 2 Q. Yes or no? Did Exxon - 3 A. -- barge operation. 4 Q. Did Exxon test every employee of their 5 refinery, urinary or phenol or anything? 6 A. No, because we had a good, intelligent 7 program going -- 8 Q. Okay. s 9 A. - - t o protect them. 10 Q. All right, sir. So not every employee 11 was exposed to benzene; is that correct? 12 A. Unfo rtunately not every industrial 13 operation by -- has been evaluated by other 14 people, professionals. 15 Q. Professor Hammond, not every employee at 16 Exxon was exposed to benzene; is that correct? 17 A. I don't -- I don't think so. I don't see 18 what that has to do with this particul ar case. 19 Q. Well, I'm asking you, was every employee 20 at Exxon exposed to benzene, yes or no? 21 A. W e l l , n o . 22 Q. All right, sir. So if Mr. Hebert was 23 handling crude oil products and he was a boat 24 captain, do you have any knowledge about whether 25 he would be exposed or not? SHAWN KELLEY, TEXAS CSR 3448 NELL MCCALLUM & ASSOCIATES, INC. 140 1 A. I do not know. 2 Q. Would you expect him to be exposed if he 3 was a captain of a vessel? 4 A. I wouldn't know what products he's 5 handling. 6 Q. Crude oil products, Exxon crude oil 7 products. 8 A. Show me an analysis of the crude oils ' "v 9 that he handled, and then I'll be able to give 10 it to you - - 11 Q. Well, I'm going to give it back to you. 12 Professor Hammond. Is there -- was there, on your 13 watch at any time while you were working for 14 Exxon, was there any crude oil products -- I'm 15 talking about crude oil now, that was considered 16 hazardous in the sense that individuals who 17 handled, loaded or unloaded your crude off and 18 on a barge had to be medic al ly monitored? 19 A. Depending on what other products that 20 might have been handled - - 21 Q. I'm limiting it to crude oil. 22 MR. BAGGETT: I'm going to object to you 23 interrupting the doctor - 24 MR. SPEARS; Well, go ahead and object. 25 I'm trying to get the guy to answer a question. SHAWN KELLEY, TEXAS CSR 3448 NELL MC CALLUM & ASSOCIATES, INC. 141 1 [Court reporter stopped proceedings] 2 MR. BAGGETT: Extend to this man, please, 3 the courtesy of letting him answer before you 4 interrupt. 5 MR. SPEARS: I'll extend him the courtesy 6 if he extends the same courtesy of answering my 7 question. We won't be here very long, 8 Professor Hammond, if you'd just answer my 9 question, quit trying to be an advocate and simply * 10 answer the question. 11 MR. BAGGETT: I object to your side bar 12 comments on this record. 13 A. I guess you've been to the docks and you 14 know that there are man y products being handled 15 sometimes at the same time. 16 MR. SPEARS: 17 Q. You're not answering the question now. 18 I've not been to the docks. 19 A. I ' m - - 20 Q. Don't assume I've been to the docks. 21 Okay? 22 A. All r i g h t . Well -- 23 Q. My question - - 24 A . All I'm saying is that -- 25 Q. Let me ask -- let me ask you a question SHAWN KELLEY, TEXAS CSR 3448 NELL MCCALLUM & ASSOCIATES, INC. 142 1 and you give me an answer. Did you monitor - 2 while you were at Exxon did you medically monitor 3 all of your employees at the Exxon docks in 4 Houston, yes or no? 5 A. Has no relation to any matter of whether 6 they were in danger or not whether I monitored all 7 of them or not. The mai n thing was - 8 MR. SPEARS: Professor Hammond, it was a ' v 9 simple question. 10 No, Bill, I'm not. He's going to go off 11 on something else. 12 Q. At your dock at Houston, at your dock on 13 your watch did you me dically monit or all of your 14 Exxon employees working at your docks, yes or no? 15 A. N o . 16 Q. All right. 17 A. But it depends on - 18 MR. BAGGETT: You can explain it. 19 A. What else they were handling at the same 20 time, even though crude oil was on one barge, but 21 were they putting some product that contained 22 benzene on other barges. 23 MR. SPEARS: I object to that question - 24 that answer as not being responsive to my 25 q u e s t i o n . SHAWN KELLEY, TEXAS CSR 3448 NELL MCC ALLUM & ASSOCIATES, INC. 143 1 MR. B A G G E T T : Well -- 2 It 's the only way to ex plain your 3 MR . SPEARS: 4 NO, sir, it's n o t . 5 A. -- s i t u a t i o n . 6 Q . It's n o t . 7 A. It depend ed on what else that were 8 happening at that dock at the same time. I don't 9 know. I wasn't ever with Mr. Hebert and 10 procedure -- 11 Q. I'm not talking about Mr. Hebert, 12 Professor Hammond. I'm talking about your job - 13 A. Well, I thought you said you wanted to 14 talk about him only handling crude, but he could 15 have handled only crude and been exposed to 16 b e n z e n e . 17 MR. SPEARS: I object to this line of 18 just talking, Professor Hammond. I'm not 19 interested in you reciting what Mr. Baggett's may 20 have told you yesterday about this case. 21 MR. BAGGETT: Well, I'm not interested in 22 hearing you testify either. And if you -- you 23 asked him a question about monitori ng people at 24 the docks of his refinery, and he is telling you 25 situations where he would do that. SHAWN KELLEY, TEXAS CSR 3448 NELL MCCALLUM & ASSOCIATES, INC. 144 1 MR. SPEARS: That's not the question. 2 I'm not asking about situations. The question 3 was, did you moni tor all of your employees at the 4 docks, yes or no? 5 MR. BAGGETT: And he's entitled to 6 explain. 7 MR. SPEARS: Right. 8 A. Y e s . 9 MR. SPEARS: 10 Q. Yes, you did? 11 A. Y e s . Y e s , I did. 12 Q. You monitored - - you monitored all the 13 Exxon employees at the docks ? 14 A. Yes, I did. 15 Q. When did that s t a r t , sir? 16 A. All the time, because I could look at the 17 operations and know what was going on around about 18 them, whether it was a particul ar material or 19 wh ether it was other materials and know whether 20 they needed to be monitored. 21 Q. When did you start the monitoring 22 program? 23 A. 1947. 24 Q. All right. From 1947 until the time you 25 retired all of the Exxon employees who worked at SHAWN KELLEY, TEXAS CSR 3448 NELL MCCALLUM & ASSOCIATES, INC. 145 1 the docks were medically monitored, sir? 2 A. If they needed to be. 3 Q. And how did you determine if they needed 4 to be? 5 A. By being pr ofessionally trained to know 6 how to recognize the materials that may lead to 7 exposure. 8 Q. All right, sir. And if they were -- and ' s 9 which materials were that, sir? 10 A. Any type of material that you were - 11 de pending on what par ti cul ar hazard you were 12 looking at. Benzene would be a good example. 13 Q. That's the one I'm looking for, benzene. 14 A. All right. 15 Q. How did you determine whether an employee 16 should be monitore d at the docks in relation to 17 benzene? 18 A. Well, any products on the docks are being 19 handled or loaded or unloaded at the same time 20 that you were handling crude oil might contain 21 b e n z e n e . 22 Q. All right, sir. That would be the only 23 time, sir? 24 A . Sure. 25 Q. How about if you were just handling crude SHAWN KELLEY, TEXAS CSR 3448 NELL MCCAL L U M & ASSOCIATES, INC. 146 1 oil that did contain benzene? 2 A. I do not know the situation where you'd 3 just be handling crude oil without other 4 operations going on. 5 Q. You've never heard of a situations where 6 a barge pulled up at your dock and off-loaded 7 crude oil? 8 A. I cannot answer you on a particular 9 problem. I never was there every moment. 10 Q. I understand that. 11 A. Okay. 12 Q. But you were responsible for the 13 industrial hygiene at that plant, weren't you? 14 A. Well, we have never had any occupational 15 health hazard and diseases after I went to work 16 and had the situation under control. 17 Q. Say that again. 18 A. Never did have any occupational diseases 19 develop in our employees after I went to work in 20 1930 -- 47 and got the few conditions we had under 21 cont r o l . 22 Q. Are you telling me that Exxon has never 23 been sued for occupational disease occurring while 24 you were working for Exxon? 25 MR. BAGGETT: I object to -- that isn't SHAWN KELLEY, TEXAS CSR 3448 NELL MCCALLUM & ASSOCIATES, INC. 147 1 his -- that's an improper and an unfair 2 su mmarization of his prior testimony and is, 3 therefore, objectionable as to form. Whether 4 they've been sued since then has no relevancy to 5 the answer that he gave you, which was an answer 6 to your question. 7 MR. SPEARS: 8 Q. Has Exxon been sued, sir, that you ' s. 9 know of -- has Exxon been sued for occupational 10 illnesses occurring while you, sir, were chief 11 industrial hygienist? 12 A. I never heard of it. 13 Q. You never heard of any? 14 A. No, not while I was industrial - 15 director of industrial hygiene. 16 Q. Is there any asbestos suits pending 17 against Exxon, sir? 18 A. Well, that's not the question you asked 19 m e . 20 Q. You don't consider asbestosis an 21 occupational disease? 22 A. Oh, I'm -- I'm -- if you want to get into 23 that field, I'll tell you I was trained by 24 Dr. Kenneth Lynch, and he was the first American 25 to write about cancer from asbestos. SHAWN KELLEY, TEXAS CSR 3448 NELL MCC ALLUM & ASSOCIATES, INC. 148 1 Q. Do you consider asbestosis as an 2 occupational disease, yes or no? 3 A. Yes, never had -- we never had a case 4 of symptoms -- we took x-rays of all of our 5 p o t e n t i a l ly-exposed people, but never one of 6 them had any evidence of asbestosis. 7 Q. Professor Hammond, we're going to be 8 here a long time if you don't answer my s. 9 questions. 10 A. Yeah, I'm not going to answer them like 11 you want them. I'm going to tell you the truth. 12 T h a t 's all I'm - - 13 Q. T h a t 's what I'm asking, sir. 14 A. You want to get me -- 15 Q. N o . 16 A. - - to break down -- 17 Q. N o . 18 A. -- and tell you -- 19 Q. N o , I 'm not 20 A. - - anything that is not true. 21 Q. No, I'm not . Do you consider 22 MR. BAGGETT : Excuse me. For 23 I want to object to the basic principal that 24 you're proceedi ng on. He has testified that 25 during his employment there there was no SHAWN KELLEY, TEXAS CSR 3448 NELL MC CALLUM & ASSOCIATES, INC. 149 1 occupational disease, and you're trying to refer 2 to occupational disease that may have been 3 discovered since he worked there, and, therefore, 4 you're being unfair to him unless -- unless you 5 delineate what period of time you're talking 6 about. 7 MR. SPEARS: 8 Q. Professor Hammond, do you consider \s. 9 asbestosis as being an occupational disease, yes 10 or no? 11 A. Well, that's been known for 45, 50 years. 12 Q. All right, sir. It is an occupational 13 disease ? 14 A. Why, sure. Silicosis is an occupational 15 d i s e a s e . 16 Q. All right, sir. Has - 17 A. And lead po isoning is an occupational 18 d i s e a s e . 19 Q. Has Exxon been sued, that you're aware 20 of, for -- by people saying they contracted an 21 occupational illness called asbestosis as a result 22 of working at the refinery and their work was on 23 your watch? 24 A. Not to my knowledge, no. 25 Q. So you are not aware of any such suits? SHAWN KELLEY, TEXAS CSR 3448 NELL MCCALLUM & ASSOCIATES, INC. 150 1 A. No, no, I don't believe there have been 2 any asbestosis cases filed against us. 3 Q. Against Exxon? 4 A. Yeah. 5 Q. You're not aware of any asbestos cases 6 filed against Exxon? 7 A. I didn't say asbestos. I said 8 asbestosis . 9 Q. All right, sir. You're not aware of any * 10 asbestosis lawsuits filed against Exxon as we sit 11 here today? 12 A. Not at a l l . 13 Q. Is that correct? 14 A. Not at all . 15 Q. And you never have been; is that correct? 16 A . T h a t 's r i g h t . 17 Q. All right, sir. You're not aware of any 18 lawsuits filed by any former employees of Exxon 19 alleging mesothelioma, are you? 20 A. I know that there have been some, but I 21 don't -- they're all since I left the company. 22 Q. All right, sir. 23 A. I heard about that. 24 Q. Okay. 25 A. But asbestosis and mesoth eli om a are SHAWN KELLEY, TEXAS CSR 3448 NELL MCCALLUM & ASSOCIATES, INC. 151 1 entirely two different diseases. 2 Q. Yes, sir. Yes, sir. Professor Hammond, 3 we got off track here, sir, but you testified, did 4 you not, in the Skeen case, did you? 5 A. Yeah, I did. 6 Q. You testified by depositi on and at trial, 7 did you not? 8 A. I did. 9 Q. All right, sir. That was a benzene 10 exposure case, was is it not, sir? 11 A. Yes, it was. 12 Q. All right, sir. And in that case, sir, 13 isn't it true that you testified that at the time 14 of your testimony 10 parts per million, ppm, is a 15 satisfactory and safe level of exposure to 16 benzene? 17 A. Under some conditions. 18 Q . All right. 19 A. For some people. 20 Q. All right. So under some conditions and 21 for some people you believe that 10 ppm would be a 22 satisfactory and safe level; is that correct? 23 A. T h a t 's r i g h t . 24 Q. All right, sir. 25 A. But to some people that are SHAWN KELLEY, TEXAS CSR 3448 NELL MCC ALLUM & ASSOCIATES, INC. 152 1 hypersensitive, it's not. 2 Q. All right. And what was the T -- the 3 time-weighted average for exposure to benzene 4 vapors established by the ACGIH in 1960, sir? 5 A. Right here we have that. In - - the last 6 one we had was '58, and that was less than 25 7 parts per million M.A.C. Now, as I said, the 8 M.A.C. would indicate a TLV of somewhere like 60 s s. 9 percent of that. 10 Q. All right, sir. Well, what was the TLV 11 accepted by the ACGIH, sir, in 1960 for ppm levels 12 of - - 13 A. 25 parts per million. 14 Q. 25 parts per mi ll io n - 15 A . T h a t 's r i g h t . 16 Q. -- benzene? That was accepted by the 17 ACGIH, sir; is that correct? 18 A. That was -- that was the number they 19 published, yes. 20 Q. All right, sir. And, again, you feel 21 that the ACGIH is a ver y w e l l -respected 22 worl d-renowned organization; is that correct? 23 A. They're not the ultimate authority on the 24 matter, as they will tell you that you shouldn't 25 try to interpret these matters except by a SHAWN KELLEY, TEXAS CSR 3448 NELL MCCALLUM & ASSOCIATES, INC. 153 1 pr ofessional industrial hygienist. Now, if you 2 tried to interpret - - 3 Q. My question is they are a w e l 1-respected 4 organization, correct? - 5 A. They certainly have recognized status, 6 yeah. 7 Q. Do you feel that you know more about 8 the safe level of exposure to benzene, you as an ' s 9 individual, than the entire compilation of the 10 A C G I H , sir? 11 A. I certainly do. In fact, I was on the 12 committee that voted against it, 25 parts per 13 million. Because it's a democratic group and 14 the majorit y wins, I couldn't get my level to - 15 Q. So you feel that you know more about it 16 than - - 17 MR. BAGGETT: Wait a minute. You just 18 let him finish, please. I object on the record 19 to you continuing to interrupt Professor Hammond. 20 MR. SPEARS: 21 Q. Professor Hammond, do you feel like you 22 know more about the safe level of exposure to 23 benzene as an individual than the ACGIH itself? 24 A. Very definitely. 25 Q. All right, sir. SHAWN KELLEY, TEXAS CSR 3448 NELL MCC ALLUM & ASSOCIATES, INC. 154 1 A. And not only that, but, see, we have in 2 our records a letter that I wrote Mr. Wrightman 3 saying in 1948 we discussed this matter, and I 4 said that zero level was the only one that was 5 acceptable unless you put the men -- people under 6 medical surveillance. 7 Q. All right, sir. 8 A. In 1947 I was -- '48 I was discussing and 1 s 9 disagreeing with the TLV. 10 Q. All right, sir. Now, you had -- you 11 wrote a paper on how to design a benzene unit, 12 did you not? 13 A. I did. 14 Q. And you're very proud of that paper, 15 aren't you? You're very proud of that paper, 16 a r e n 't you? 17 A. Well, no one had ever written one before. 18 Q. No, are you very proud of that paper? 19 A. Well, I'm not apologizing for it. 20 Q. Okay, sir. All right. And in that paper 21 that you wrote, did you design that system so that 22 there would be absolutely zero level of exposure 23 to benzene for everybody who worked in that -- 24 that unit? 25 A. So far as practical, we did, but we also SHAWN KELLEY, TEXAS CSR 3448 NELL MCCALLUM & ASSOCIATES, INC. 155 1 said that that's not enough, you've got to have 2 all of these other comporting programs to go with 3 it, medical surveillance, ur inary phenols and 4 blood counts and all of those matters had to be 5 part of the progr am and had to do that 6 periodically to find out whether or not you had 7 everything under control. 8 Q. Right, sir. 9 A. And we publi sh ed the results after four 10 or five years of operation and showed you where in 11 the beginning we had some operations that had more 12 than we wanted, more than zero. 13 Q . Right. 14 A. And then we got it all worked out, and we 15 feel very satisfactory that we have no significant 16 exposures to anyone in that -- in that plant. 17 Q. Well, you know, Professor Hammond, you 18 used two different terms. And correct me if I'm 19 wrong, we're talking about -- when I asked you 20 earlier if you could design and operate a benzene 21 unit or benzene plant so that there was absolute 22 zero exposure to individuals, we got off on a 23 tirade, and I apologize if I started on the 24 tirade, but my question was, and tell me, it's not 25 possible, is it, not possible to design and to SHAWN KELLEY, TEXAS CSR 3448 NELL MCCALLUM & ASSOCIATES, INC. 156 1 operate a benzene unit so that there will be zero 2 level of exposure at all times to all of your 3 employees, is there? 4 MR. BAGGETT: For the record, before 5 you answer that, I want to object to the 6 testifying of counsel, to his sidebar comments 7 and to his summary of prior testimony which is 8 objectionable as to form. 9 MR. SPEARS: 10 Q. Okay, sir. 11 A. What was your question? 12 Q. All right, sir. Is it possible, sir, to 13 design and operate a benzene unit so that there is 14 zero exposure to the individuals working in that 15 unit? 16 A. Well, my answer to you is why do we go to 17 try to - - get to that type of expensive control 18 when outside the air you have to breathe in this 19 room and elsewhere contains one or two parts per 20 mi llion of benzene. 21 Q. We're on the same unit now, sir. Now 22 we're working together. In other words, everybody 23 in the world - - 24 MR. BAGGETT: I'm going to object to your 25 comments about where we were, because I don't SHAWN KELLEY, TEXAS CSR 3448 NELL MCCAL LUM & ASSOCIATES, INC. 157 1 think you are on the same units, and I can make 2 that statement, too. 3 MR. SPEARS: 4 Q. Professor Hammond, what I'm saying is 5 that you cannot design a unit, nor can you operate 6 a benzene unit which would prevent exposure and 7 bring it down to zero of benzene from the unit 8 itself? 9 A. Well, just from a professional 10 standpoint, how ridiculous would I have looked in 11 trying to design something where the air that you 12 have in this room and everywhere else contains 13 some benzene. 14 Q. All right, sir. 15 A. And I look at the people smoking 16 cigarettes - - 17 Q. Right, sir. 18 A. -- and I know that every puff they take 19 will have up to a hundred parts per million of 20 benzene in i t . 21 Q. Professor Hammond, you're getting way 22 ahead of me, but you're absolutely right. As you 23 face this camera today, every lawyer sitting in 24 this room and every one of us as we leave here is 25 going to breathe in a certain amount of benzene SHAWN KELLEY, TEXAS CSR 3448 NELL MCCALLUM & ASSOCIATES, INC. 158 1 because they're in Houston; is that correct? 2 MR. BAGGETT: Objection to your testimony 3 instead of a question that was preceded by a 4 question. 5 A. I don't know why you'd have to go to 6 Houston, because if you went up in the hill 7 country around Kerrville and that area where the 8 cedar trees are, you'd have more than you would 9 have in Houston. 10 Q. All right, sir. In other words, every 11 American, every living, breathing American on 12 this planet who takes a breath is going to have 13 some exposure to benzene; is that correct? 14 A. And we have resistance to those types of 15 concentrations, because over the centuries and all 16 the people have de veloped a tolerance to that type 17 of an exposure. And so it's not significant, what 18 you're talking about. 19 Q. I'm going to ask you again. Does every 20 American who lives and breathes on this planet 21 breathe in benzene as he takes - - he or she takes 22 a breath, yes or no? 23 A. Well, they -- I've al ready answered it. 24 Q. No, sir, you haven't. 25 A. That you can't live in an atmosphere SHAWN KELLEY, TEXAS CSR 3448 NELL MC CALLUM & ASSOCIATES, INC. 159 1 t h a t 's not some benzene, period. 2 Q. All right. 3 A. I've never heard of it. 4 Q. So when you breathe in, when you take a 5 breath you take in benzene; is that correct? 6 A. That requires no professional - 7 Q. I'm asking you; is that correct? 8 A. Well, I'm not going to answer that 9 question. 10 Q. Well, I'm asking you the answer. When 11 you breathe in today, are you breathing in benzene 12 vapors ? 13 A. You're not br eathing in vapors. You may 14 be breathing in benzene in some small amount, but 15 it's not of significance. 16 Q. All right. 17 A. N o w , you don't want to add -- what I 'm 18 saying is you do not want to add any amount to 19 that what you naturally have and y o u 've deve loped 20 it. 21 Q. All right, sir, but when you took - - when 22 you drink water from Houston, the water that we're 23 drinking here today contains some amount of 24 b e n z e n e , does it not? 25 A. P o s s i b l y . SHAWN KELLEY, TEXAS CSR 3448 NELL MCCALLUM & ASSOCIATES, INC. 160 1 Q. You're not aware of that, sir? 2 A. I haven't ever tested the water for 3 benzene. 4 Q. Do you believe there's any benzene in 5 the water that you drink in Houston? 6 A. I have no proof of it being there. 7 Q. All right, sir. Now, what's -- what is 8 the major source of benzene exposure in our 1 s 9 environment today, Professor Hammond, other than 10 a petrochemical or occupational exposure? What is 11 it, sir? 12 A. I don't know what -- I never have looked 13 into that part, that extensive part. 14 Q. It's smoking, isn't it, Professor 15 Hammond? 16 A. Could be smoking, but also it should be 17 combustible products from stacks. 18 Q. From stacks or automobiles? 19 A. Well, I imagine that there's some benzene 20 in that, too. 21 Q. Tell me what you know, sir, about benzene 22 exposure to someone who smokes. 23 A. Very little. 24 Q. What kind of -- benzene is part of the 25 chemical that comes off of the smoke in cigarette SHAWN KELLEY, TEXAS CSR 3448 NELL MCCALLUM & ASSOCIATES, INC. 161 1 smoke? 2 A. Yeah, there was experiments that were 3 carried out at Harvard where - - and discovered 4 that it would run up to a hundred parts per 5 million, but I didn't do the tests. I depended 6 on my teachers to tell me about it. 7 Q. You're aware then of some experiments 8 dealing with cigarette smoke that indicated there s 9 were a hundred parts per mi llion exposure t:o the 10 person smoking the cigarette; is that correct? 11 A . T h a t 's r i g h t . 12 Q. All right, sir. And, of course, 13 secondhand smoke, in other words, if someone is 14 not smoking but in a room with someone who is 15 smoking, would also be exposed to benzene, would 16 he not? 17 A. I assume he would. 18 Q. All right, sir. And every day as you and 19 I drive along the interstate or the highways and 20 byways of this country, we're exposed to some 21 benzene coming from the exhaust of the automobile, 22 are we not? 23 A. I assume we are. 24 Q. Okay, sir. That's true, is it not? 25 A. I'm not saying it's true, because I SHAWN KELLEY, TEXAS CSR 3448 NELL MCCALLUM & ASSOCIATES, INC. 162 1 haven't made the tests. 2 Q. All right, sir. When you or I or 3 any member of -- John Q. Public goes up to a 4 self-service station and pumps gasoline, that 5 person is going to be exposed to some levels of 6 benzene from the vapors of the gasoline; isn't 7 that true? 8 A. I assume they would. 9 Q. And you would expect that? 10 A. In a short -t er m exposure of five minutes 11 or so OSHA has never seen necessary to put up any 12 restrictions on self-service stations and never 13 has set a standard on that - - 14 Q . And short -- 15 A. -- for combustible engines. 16 Q . I'm sorry. 17 A. Fuel for combustible engines are not 18 c o n t r o l l e d . 19 Q. Right. But short-term exposure to 20 benzene has never been considered a serious health 21 hazard, has it? 22 A. How often are these short term occur. 23 Depends on how often. 24 q . All right. I'll give you an example. 25 That's a fair comeback. Someone who would, say, SHAWN KELLEY, TEXAS CSR 3448 NELL MCC ALLUM & ASSOCIATES, INC. 163 1 be exposed to benzene in a paint solvent or a 2 paint thinner as he washed out his brush or 3 something and his tools and then went back to 4 work, maybe did that once a week or something 5 like that or once a month, would you consider 6 that to be a serious exposure? 7 A. It could be, yeah. I had a secretary 8 who's father was a barber, and he had decided to ' s 9 refinish the furniture in his house, and so he 10 got some solvent that contained, say, 15 percent 11 benzene, and he died from leukemia and problems 12 associ ated with the benzene. That is all he did, 13 he was just a barber, but he -- his hobby was 14 refinishing furniture, and he used some benzene 15 on his -- it's a very hazardous, dangerous 16 material, and the doctors couldn't tell him what 17 was wrong until I went and evaluated all the 18 materials he had used and discover ed this 19 s u b s t a n c e . 20 MR. SPEARS: I'll object to the 21 nonrespo nsive ness of that. 22 Q. Are you finished? Professor Hammond, are 23 you finished? 24 A. Yeah. 25 MR. SPEARS: I'll just object to the SHAWN KELLEY, TEXAS CSR 3448 NELL MCCALLUM & ASSOCIATES, INC. 164 1 nonresponsiveness of the question. 2 Q. But does Exxon gasoline products contain 3 benzene, sir? 4 A. I'm not familiar with the concentrations. 5 If so, what they are and where they come from, 6 which ones do and which ones not. I don't know. 7 Q. Well, I know you may not know now, 8 because you've left Exxon, but surely as a chief 9 industrial hygienist for Exxon part of your duties 10 would be to know whether or not Exxon gasoline 11 contained benzene; is that correct? 12 A. I would recommend that you read on the 13 pumps of every gasoline station, Exxon, what the 14 warning is about your health hazards. 15 Q. Well, you didn't put those pumps until 16 1958, those warnings, did you? 17 A. Was it 1958? 18 Q . Y e s , sir. 19 A. You mean 1968 or 1978 or what? 20 Q. When did you first put -- Exxon first put 2 1 a warning on the gasoline pumps about the content 22 of benzene in its gasoline? 23 A. It was after I left there. I don't know 24 when it w a s . 25 Q. And you left when? SHAWN KELLEY, TEXAS CSR 3448 NELL MCCALLUM & ASSOCIATES, INC. 165 1 A. '78. 2 Q. Okay, sir. But you were aware while you 3 were at Exxon that the gasoline products contained 4 benzene, were you not? 5 A. I was aware that you didn't have any 6 hazardous operations if you just filled the 7 gasoline tank occasionally like we do once a 8 week or once a month or whatever time you have ' s. 9 to buy gasoline. 10 MR. SPEARS: I object again, Professor 11 Hammond, to the no nresponsiveness of my question. 12 Q. I'm going to ask you again. Were you 13 aware as chief industrial hygienist of Exxon, 14 while you were working, that Exxon gasolines 15 contained some amount of benzene? 16 A. I knew -- I knew they had some amount. 17 Q. All right, sir. Now, why, sir -- while 18 you were chief industrial hygienist, why did you 19 not initiate a progr am to put warnings on the 20 pumps so that the public would be aware that when 21 they pumped Exxon gasoline that they might be 22 exposed to this benzene? 23 A. Well, I didn't have overall authority 24 throughout the company to do that type of thing. 25 I just had to protect the employees, and I did, SHAWN KELLEY, TEXAS CSR 3448 NELL MCCALLUM & ASSOCIATES, INC. 166 1 and that was my main job. And so the public also 2 was under the supervision of the United States 3 Public Health Service the state health departments 4 and many other agencies, and they never saw fit to 5 warn the public about that. 6 Q. Are you saying basical ly you were worried 7 about Exxon employees but the public be damned 8 about the products? ' s 9 A. I didn't say that at all. 10 MR. BAGGETT: I object to your 11 summarization of what he just said. It speaks 12 for itself. 13 MR. SPEARS: 14 Q. Well, Professor Hammond, were you - 15 did you feel that the public who was pumping Exxon 16 products into their pump would or would not be 17 exposed to some amount of benzene? 18 A. That's not a clear question. 19 Q. All right. While you were chief 20 industrial hygienist at Exxon, we've already 2 1 established that you were aware that the Exxon 22 gasolines contained some amounts of benzenes. 23 You knew that? 24 A. Right. 25 Q. And you knew that that gasoline -- SHAWN KELLEY, TEXAS CSR 3448 NELL M C C ALLUM & ASSOCIATES, INC. 167 1 A. Trace. 2 Q. -- was going out to the public and was 3 being pumped into cars as self-service gasolines, 4 true? 5 A. I brought it myself. 6 Q. All right, sir. All right. 7 A. I was not under any concern about my 8 health from buying it to go in my car and using ' s 9 it at the -- at self service in my car. to 10 Q. Did you feel that any person in the 11 public should have a right to know and determine 12 whether he or she wants to pump that gas, should 13 know that there's benzene in that gasoline? 14 A. Well, that wasn't my duty to make that 15 type of decision about the public. 16 Q. Well, whose duty was it? 17 A. The health department and the states and 18 EPA and others. 19 Q. But it was Exxon p r o d u c t s , Professor 20 H a m m o n d . 21 A. Yeah, I know. 22 Q. Are you saying that if Exxon products 23 were hazardous and they went out into - - 24 A. I didn't say they were hazardous. I 25 would say that if you went to the Exxon pump SHAWN KELLEY, TEXAS CSR 3448 NELL MC CALLUM & ASSOCIATES, INC. 168 1 you've got less likely to have benzene in it 2 than the other pump across the street. 3 Q. Why is that, sir? 4 A. Because we extracted all of our benzene 5 we possibly could get and sold it as benzene in 6 concentrated form rather than letting it get in 7 gasoline which sold for much cheaper. For 8 example, one time we could get $2 a gallon for ' s- 9 benzene, and we could only get 20 cents for the 10 gasoline. Why should we let that go out if 11 there's any amount of benzene in it? 12 Q. Isn't it true that the benzene content of 13 Exxon gasoline increased preci pi to usl y when the 14 lead was taken out of gasoline? 15 A. That was all after I left. I do not know 16 t h a t . 17 Q. Okay. I don't want to talk about what 18 Exxon did or didn't do after you left, Professor 19 H a m m o n d . 20 A. T h a t 's r i g h t . 21 Q. I just want to talk to you about what you 22 did and what your duties and responsibilities were 23 at E x x o n . 24 A. Well, let's talk about Exxon employees 25 and what I did to protect them. SHAWN KELLEY, TEXAS CSR 3448 NELL MCCALLUM & ASSOCIATES, INC. 169 1 Q. Professor Hammond, we're not going to - - 2 we're never going to get out of here if you start 3 asking questions and directing this. You let me 4 ask the questions, please. If you want to take a 5 break, I'll be happy to give you a break, but 6 we're not going to get anywhere if you start 7 trying to tell me what I should ask. Okay, sir? 8 MR. BAGGETT: I'm going to object to your s 9 comments. 10 A. I didn't say you didn't have that right, 11 but I just said my duties were to protect the 12 employees of Humble and Exxon, and I did a good 13 job, and I dare anyone to show me where I failed. 14 Q. Did your duties also include protecting 15 people who went into your refinery who were not 16 your employees? 17 A. I don't know what you mean. You mean a 18 salesman go to the office? 19 Q. Well, we're going to start off with your 20 duty was to protect Exxon employees. I understand 21 that. My question is, was it also your duty to 22 protect the safety and health of anybody who went 23 into your refinery? 24 A . N o , it w a s n 't . 25 Q. It was not part of your duties, sir? SHAWN KELLEY, TEXAS CSR 3448 NELL MCCALLUM & ASSOCIATES, INC. 170 1 A. Not -- not my duties. I know we've 2 been -- you're talking about people bringing 3 suits, I'll tell you, a salesman came into our - 4 MR. SPEARS: Professor Hammond, I'm going 5 to object again. This is n o n r e s p o n s i v e . 6 A. Well, I have to explain to you - 7 MR. SPEARS: 8 Q. I'm not talking about - 9 A. - - s o we can confine ourselves to the 10 problems I was responsible for. 11 MR. S P E A R S : I'm going to object to th 12 venes s of the q u e s t i o n . Go ahead , sir. 13 And this sal esman came in maybe once a 14 month, maybe once every few months and went to 15 the purchasi ng department, and he came back and 16 brought a suit against us for having exposed him 17 to some condition in the refinery. 18 Q. Okay. Professor Hammond, what do you 19 envision or what did you envision your duty as 20 chief industrial hygienist for Exxon was to, say, 21 contract workers who worked in your refinery? 22 They were not Exxon employees, but they were 23 contract workers. What duty did you have to 24 protect them from toxic substances? 25 MR. BAGGETT: You're asking him what he SHAWN KELLEY, TEXAS CSR 3448 NELL MCCALLUM & ASSOCIATES, INC. 171 1 considered. Of course, the duty is a question of 2 the law -- 3 MR. SPEARS: Yeah, I'm asking his duty. 4 MR. BAGGETT: -- in all of this. 5 MR. SPEARS: Right. 6 Q. What duty did you have, Professor 7 Hammond, to protect contract workers from exposure 8 to toxic substances if they worked in the Exxon % 9 refinery? 10 A. That -- that's not a pertinent question 11 in my profession. 12 MR. BAGGETT: It may -- it may be more 13 relevant, and I object to you asking him what 14 was his duty. You may think it would be more 15 appropriate to ask him what he did in the 16 performance of his work. 17 MR. SPEARS: Well, Bill, you certainly 18 can ask him the question if you want to. 19 Q. But you were chief industrial hygienist 20 for Exxon; is that correct? 21 A. You said that a dozen times. 22 Q. Right. And as chief - 23 A. I don't disagree with you. 24 Q. And you had a duty and that job to 25 protect the employees of Exxon to make sure SHAWN KELLEY, TEXAS CSR 3448 NELL MCC ALLUM & ASSOCIATES, INC. 172 1 that they didn't come into contact with toxic 2 substances or certain levels of toxic substances; 3 is that correct? 4 A. That's my duty. 5 Q. All right, sir. Now - 6 A. Let's leave it at that. 7 Q. No, I'm not, sir. What was your duty in 8 regard to a contract worker who was working side 4 s 9 by side with the Exxon employee? 10 A. They had to comply with all of our rules. 11 The -- I'm just telling you what we did, I'm not 12 saying my duty, but I'm saying that they had to 13 comply with all the regulations in regard to 14 control as far as exposure that any of our 15 employees had. 16 Q. All right, sir. 17 A. And our safety inspectors were there on 18 the job, and if a contractor was going into an 19 area where our people needed protection, extra 20 protection, we took them into the classroom and 21 explained to them what they had to do and what 22 they had to wear and how they had to perform. 23 And also our employees made sure that they didn't 24 do anything diffe re nt ly that would expose them 25 without warning. SHAWN KELLEY, TEXAS CSR 3448 NELL MCCA LL UM & ASSOCIATES, INC. 173 1 Q. Did you -- as chief industrial hygienist 2 for Exxon, did you or were you aware of any 3 program that Exxon had in place while you were 4 there to monitor -- medic al ly monit or contract 5 workers ? 6 A. Not r e g u l a r l y , 7 Q. I 'm sorry? 8 A. No, because we ad employees -- the 9 contract worker come in and maybe work for us for 10 a few months, but we had the employees doing the 11 same job we let them do that worked there 40 years 12 without any problem. Why should we worry about a 13 person who wasn't overexposed more than our own 14 employees, should be worried about him working a 15 week or day or ten days or so. 16 Q. Okay. All right. So -- and maybe I got 17 this in a roundabout way -- what you're saying 18 is that any of your employees who worked in the 19 refinery on a regular basis and were not 20 monitored, medically monitored, because of 21 their job, then you didn't do any more when the 22 contractor came in to do that same type of job? 23 A. We just saw that this contract worker 24 didn't violate our regulations and rules over 25 doing it. If he did, he didn't stay in there very SHAWN KELLEY, TEXAS CSR 3448 NELL MCCALLUM & ASSOCIATES, INC. 174 1 long. He was dismissed. 2 Q. Did you, as chief industrial hygienist 3 for Exxon, or at any time while you were there, 4 did Exxon implement any type of program, random 5 checking -- for lack of a better description, I'm 6 going to call random checking of contract workers 7 to see if maybe they had been exposed to some 8 products and, you know, phenol testing of some 9 sort like that? Did you do anything like that? 10 A. We didn't have to do that. 11 Q. Why is that? 12 A. Because we had workers that we were 13 checking regularly, and we found they had no 14 exposure, and if the contractor helper would 15 help working with our people and doing the same 16 job, they had no chance of being exposed doing 17 t h a t . 18 Q. Okay, sir. All right. And so if an 19 individual -- if an individual like Mr. Hebert, 20 Joseph Hebert, pulled up to your dock at Exxon 21 and just so happened that it was his shift change, 22 and he walked through the refinery with his wife 23 or drove through the refinery to go back home, 24 would you moni tor those types of people? 25 A. Why would I do? SHAWN KELLEY, TEXAS CSR 3448 NELL MCCALLUM & ASSOCIATES, INC. 175 1 Q. All right. W ould you expect them to be 2 exposed to any levels of chemicals that need 3 monitoring? 4 A. How could they be when our own people 5 were there 24 hours a day and never had any 6 exposure ? 7 Q. Okay, sir. At the docks? 8 A. Whereve r you're talking about Exxon *v 9 people work. 10 Q. Okay. 11 A. You pick out your place. 12 Q. Okay, sir. The literature - 13 A. My time's about up for you now, I'm 14 telling you. I don't usually stay on deposition 15 longer than four hours at each - - at a time. 16 Q. Well, Professor Ha mmond - 17 A. Do you want to come bac k tomorrow? 18 Q. -- I want you to know -- no, sir, I don't 19 want to come back tomorrow, and I want you to know 20 in all honesty and candor to you, sir, there was 21 never repr esented to me that there was going to be 22 a time limit on this deposition. If it was 23 re pr esented to you, it wasn't represented to me. 24 MR. BAGGETT: Then I've let -- I've let 25 the profe ssor down, because he asked me to do that SHAWN KELLEY" TEXAS CSR 3448 NELL MCCALLUM & ASSOCIATES, INC. 176 1 before we started, and I thought that there was no 2 way that we'd be here over four hours and I should 3 have let you know at the half - - 4 THE WITNESS: If you want to come back 5 tomorrow, I'll be glad to -- 6 MR. SPEARS: No, sir. 7 THE WITNESS: -- come bac k and discuss 8 these matters with you. 9 MR. BAGGETT: Well, we'll see. How far 10 are we along? 11 MR. SPEARS: I just want to go over some 12 of his testimony in the Skeen case and a couple of 13 others, and then I'll be finished with him. 14 THE WITNESS: What about the other 15 people? 16 MR. MYERS: I don't expect to be more 17 than about 20 minutes. 18 MR. FREEMAN: I've got probably 20 19 minutes, 30 minutes maybe. 20 THE WITNESS: Well, let's have a little 21 lunch. Can we? 22 MR. SPEARS: Sure. 23 THE WITNESS: Because it's 2 o'clock. 24 VIDEOGRAPHER: End of tape N o . 2, w e ' 25 off the record. It's about 2 O 'clo c k . SHAWN KELLEY, TEXAS CSR 3448 NELL MCCALLUM & ASSOCIATES, INC. 177 1 [Recess] 2 MR. SPEARS: The parties have agreed 3 that -- 4 MR. BAGGETT: Wait a minute. While we're 5 all here, I want us to agree when to continue it. 6 MR. SPEARS: I don't have any calendar 7 here now, Bill. I can't give you that. I mean, 8 if I give you a date, I swear I don't have any 9 calendar with me, so - 10 MR. FREEMAN: I w o u l d n 't be adverse to 11 doing it on a Saturday 12 MR. SPEARS: N o , no more S a t u r d a y s . 13 MR. BAGGETT: All I want is an agreement 14 that we will do it wit hin the next 30 days. 15 MR. SPEARS: No problem. 16 MR. MYERS: That's an agreement. I will 17 agree to that. 18 MR. SPEARS: We will do this again within 19 30 days. Mr. Baggett will contact Professor 20 Hammond and will arrange a convenient time and 21 place to do it. Meanwhile, the deposition is 22 r e c e s s e d . 23 24 25 SHAWN KELLEY, TEXAS CSR 3448 NELL MCCAL L U M & ASSOCIATES, INC. 178 1 SIGNATURE OF WITNESS 2 3 I, Professor James Hammond, solemnly 4 swear or affirm, under the pains and penalties of 5 perjury, that the foregoing contains a true and 6 correct transcript of the testimony given by me at 7 the time and place stated, with changes, if any, 8 and the reasons therefor noted on a separate sheet ^ s 9 of paper and attached hereto, and that I am 10 signing this before a Not ary Public. 11 12 13 Professor James Hammond 14 15 16 THE STATE OF TEXAS] 17 18 Subscribed and sworn or affirmed to 19 before me, the unde rsi gn ed authority, by Professor 20 James Hammond on this the _____ day of 21 22 23 24 Notary Public in and for 25 the State of Texas SHAWN KELLEY, TEXAS CSR 3448 NELL MCCALLUM & ASSOCIATES, INC. 179 1 STATE OF TEXAS] 2 3 COURT REPORTER'S CERTIFICATE 4 5 I, Shawn Kelley, a Certified Shorthand 6 Reporter within and for the State of Texas, hereby 7 certify that the foregoing proceedings occurred 8 before me. , 9 I fur ther certify that the foregoing is 10 a true and cor rect copy of the transcript of the 11 proceedings to the best of my ability. 12 I fur ther certify that I am neither 13 attorney for, rela ted to nor employed by any of 14 the parties or any attorney of record in this 15 cause, nor do I have a financial interest in the 16 m a t t e r . 17 18 19 20 Shawn Kelley, Texas CSR 3448* 2 1 Nell McCallum & Associates 22 2900 Smith, Suite 104 23 Houston, Texas 77006 24 (713) 523-3767 25 *My Certificate Expires January 1, 1995 SHAWN KELLEY, TEXAS CSR 3448 NELL MC CALLUM & ASSOCIATES, INC. 180 1 INDEX 2 3 EXAM INATI ON BY MR. B A G G E T T ....................... 6 4 VOIR DIRE EXAMIN ATI ON BY MR. M Y E R S .............. 24 5 CONTINUED EXAMIN ATI ON BY MR. B A G G E T T ........... 2 6 6 EXAMINATI ON BY MR. S P E A R S ....................... 9 7 7 8 Exhibit 1. ....................................6 ' N 9 Exhibit 2 ....................................... 13 10 Exhibit 2 ....................................... 19 11 Exhibit 2 - A ..................................... 17 12 Exhibit 3 ....................................... 30 13 Exhibit 4 ....................................... 31 14 Exhibit 5 ....................................... 31 15 Exhibit 6 ....................................... 32 16 Exhibit 7 ....................................... 32 17 Exhibit 8 ....................................... 35 18 Exhibit 8 ....................................... 41 19 Exhibit 9 ....................................... 36 20 Exhibit 9 ....................................... 49 21 Exhibit 9 ....................................... 59 22 Exhibit 1 0 ...................................... 49 23 Exhibit 1 1 ...................................... 50 24 Exhibit 1 2 ...................................... 54 25 Exhibit 1 3 ...................................... 56 SHAWN KELLEY, TEXAS CSR 3448 NELL MCCALLUM & ASSOCIATES, INC. 181 1 Exhibit 1 3 ................................... 2 Exhibit 1 4 ...................................... 60 3 Exhibit 1 5 ...................................... 63 4 Exhibit 1 6 ...................................... 66 5 Exhibit 1 6 ...................................... 70 6 Exhibit 1 7 ...................................... 71 7 Exhibit 1 8 ................................... 7 6 8 Exhibit 1 9 ..................................... 72 9 Exhibit 2 0 .................................. 81 10 Exhibit 2 0 ..................................... 83 11 Exhibit 2 1 ..................................... 84 12 Exhibit 2 2 ..................................... 85 13 Exhibit 2 2 .................................. 90 14 Exhibit 2 3 .................................. 95 15 Exhibit 2 4 .....................................105 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 SHAWN KELLEY, TEXAS CSR 3448 NELL MCCALLUM & ASSOCIATES, INC. Transcript Quality Assurance Checklist Deposition scheduled by: ___ Notice prepared by: _______ Subpoena prepared by: ____ Subpoena served by: ______ Setting confirmed by: _____ Deposition reported by: ____ Transcript edited by: ______ Transcript proofread by: ___ Deposition videotaped by: __ Transcript copied by: _____ Exhibits prepared by: _____ Transcript bound by: ______ Transcriptpage-checked by: _ Transcript billed by: ______ XT t Transcript packaged by: ___ Transmittedfo r signature by: _ Notice to opposing counsel by: Transcript delivered by: ___ NELL McCALLUM & ASSOCIATES, INC. Cu a a , A A a . u ivi e No. 92-6203 J23 1 JOSEPH L. HEBERT AND MARIE HEBERT V. HIGMAN BARGE LINES, ET AL. ] 14TH JUDICIAL DISTRICT COU ] ] PARISH OF CALCASIEU ] ] STATE OF LOUISIANA VIDEOTAPE DEPOSITION OF PROFESSOR JAMES HAMMOND VOLUME 2 November 18, 1993 Between the hours of 10:00 AM and 2:00 PM fouston Airport Marriott Hot^el > s ... . . . ; . Houston, Texafiti,ii- S ? v&fd ' ! '3Xa; : * f. Wanda G. KeLley, Court`Reporter* Nell McCaLl^um & Associates Inc; 2900 -Smith, Suite 1Q4,. Houston, Texas" -77p06 (713) 5 S 3-- 376 7 1 13 1994 NMA ORIGHNAt :r. ^ WANDA G .~ KELLEY, CSR_ NELL MCCALLUM Sr ASSOCIATES', ~ . INC' 123 1 TABLE OF CONTENTS 2 EXAMINATION BY MR. SPEARS........ 188 3 EXAMINATION BY MR. FREEMAN....... 262 4 EXAMINATION BY MR. MYERS......... 294 5 FURTHER EXAMINATION BY MR. BAGGETT 306 6 FURTHER EXAMINATION BY MR. FREEMAN 320 7 FURTHER EXAMINATION BY MR. BAGGETT 325 8 9 10 EXHIBITS 11 MjQ_t______________ DESCRIPTION______________ IDENTIFIED 12 D-l Document dated February 13, 1958, 13 addressed to Mr. T. S. Howell at 14 Baytown............................... 220 15 D-2 Exxon Chemical Company USA Industrial 16 Hygiene Study of the Aromatics 17 Extraction Unit at the Baytown 18 Chemical Plant........................ 227 19 D-3 Excerpt from testimony in the case 20 of Skeen versus Monsanto.............. 243 21 22 P-25 Safety manual of Continental Oil 23 Company marked dated July 1, 1953 24 be attached to the deposition as 25 Plaintiffs Exhibit No. 25............ 319 WANDA G. KELLEY, CSR NELL MCCALLUM & ASSOCIATES, INC. 1 1 APPEARANCES 2 3 For the Plaintiffs: 4 Mr. William B. Baggett 5 Attorney at Law 6 Baggett, McCall & Burgess 7 P. O. Drawer 7820 8 Lake Charles, Louisiana 70606-7820 9 10 11 For the Defendants Amoco Oil Company, Arco 12 Chemical Company, Atlantic Richfield Company, 13 Canadian Oxy Offshore Production Co., Chevron 14 U.S.A., Inc., The Coastal Corporation, Conoco, 15 Inc., Crown Central Petroleum Corporation, 16 Marathon Oil Company, Mobil Oil Corporation, 17 Monsanto Company, Phillips Petroleum Company, 18 Shell Oil Company, Sun Company, Inc. (R & M) , 19 Texaco, Inc., Union Oil Company of California: 20 Mr. Kenneth R. Spears 21 Attorney at Law 22 Jones, Tete, Nolen, Hanchey, Swift, 23 Spears & Massey 24 P. O. Box 910 25 Lake Charles, Louisiana 70602 WANDA 6. KELLEY, CSR NELL MCCALLUM & ASSOCIATES, INC. 1 APPEARANCES 2 3 For the Defendant Higman Barge Lines, Inc.: 4 Mr. Mark Freeman 5 Wells, Peyton, Beard, Greenberg, 6 Hunt & Crawford 7 P. 0. Box 3708 8 .Beaumont, Texas 77704-3708 s 9 10 11 For the Defendant Koch Industries, Inc.: 12 Mr. Robert Myers 13 Attorney at Law 14 1515 Energy Centre 15 1100 Poydras Street 16 New Orleans, Louisiana 70163 17 18 19 Also Present: Keith Parks 20 Phil Shedd - Videographer 21 22 23 24 25 WA N D A G. KELLEY, CSR NELL MCCALLUM & ASSOCIATES, INC 1 MR. BAGGETT: Gentlemen, by agreement -- 2 this is a different date, and by agreement, is it 3 understood that this is a continuation of the 4 previous deposition taken -- started on September 5 27th, #93, and that the same stipulation pertains to 6 continuation? 7 MR. MYERS: Agreed. 8 MR. SPEARS: It's agreed. 9 MR. FREEMAN: Yes. 10 MR. BAGGETT: And all parties are 11 represented that were here at the previous 12 deposition. 13 MR. SPEARS: That's correct. 14 MR. BAGGETT: Only thing that I would say, 15 representing the plaintiff Joseph Hebert and 16 presenting Professor Hammond to you or having taken 17 his deposition, is that I reiterate our position of 18 the previous tender that we made, acknowledge that 19 he is not a medical doctor, that he's not an 20 epidemiologist, that he's not a toxicologist, he's 21 not a hematologist, that the purpose of his 22 testimony was to present state-of-the-art evidence 23 concerning what was known and knowable about benzene 24 and when it was known and knowable. 25 VIDEOGRAPHER: On the record, 10:12. WANDA G. KELLEY, CSR NELL MCCALLM & ASSOCIATES, INC. ir? 1 1 THE WITNESS: I'll have a chance to review 2 all of this, will I? 3 MR. BAGGETT: Yes. The original he has not 4 had a chance to review, but he did catch one error 5 that I want to call to your attention. And it's an 6 error apparently in the typing where they typed 7 millions instead of billions. And it was on page -- 8 I think it was on page 156 of the -- and you may s. - 9 want to look at that, where he was talking about 10 ambient air, they made a mistake of putting per 11 million when it was per billion, b i l l i o n . 12 MR. FREEMAN: I don't see it on 156. 13 MR. BAGGETT: It's on page 156. On line 14 19, page 156 of his original transcript. Otherwise, 15 I will submit the entire deposition to him for 16 reading and signing. It hasn't been done as yet. 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 W A N D A G. KELLEY, CSR NELL MCCALLUM & ASSOCIATES, INC. 1 PROFESSOR JAMES HAMMOWn 2 being previously duly sworn, continued to 3 testify as follows: 4 5 6 EXAMINATION BY MR. SPEARS 7 8 Q Professor Hammond, just continuing in my 11 s 9 line of questioning, I've got a few questions I want 10 to ask you to follow up, please, and then I'll 11 tender you to these other lawyers here. 12 Can you tell me, what is an MSDS sheet? If 13 you're familiar with that terminology. 14 A Material -- material data safety -- it is a 15 material safety data sheet pertaining to the health 16 and safety hazards of product. 17 Q All right, sir. On the MSDS sheet, what 18 kind of information is usually contained therein? 19 A Information, data, is what the chemical and 20 physical properties and characteristics of a 21 substance, and then it deals with the problems 22 associated with safety, handling and use of the 23 material from the standpoint of fire and combustible 24 qualities. And then it has the health aspects as 25 far as chronic and acute exposure, concentrations WANDA 6. KELLEY, CSR NELL MCCALLUM & ASSOCIATES, INC. 1 that would be Important. 2 Q All right, sir. And an MSDS sheet is 3 usually sent out when? 4 A It's generally sent out in the time of when 5 a customer expresses an interest in the product, and 6 it goes along with other pertinent sales information 7 dealing with the cost and so forth. But it goes out 8 early to the customer. 9 Q All right, sir. In your work experience 1 10 working for Exxon, did Exxon utilize MSDS sheets? 11 A We had our own, yes, we did, and we started 12 this before it became a legal requirement. 13 Q All right, sir. And you've previously 14 testified, and I won't go back over that, but you 15 previously testified when you started work for 16 Exxon. But my question to you, sir, is when you 17 started work for Exxon, at that point in time was 18 Exxon utilizing an MSDS sheet or anything similar to 19 that? 20 A I'm trying to remember. Yes, there were 21 sheets that were already prepared and available when 22 I arrived in 1947. 23 Q All right, sir. Did you -- in your 24 capacity as an industrial hygienist for Exxon, did 25 you take part in creating additional MSDS sheets or W A N D A 6. KELLEY, CSR NELL MCCALLM & ASSOCIATES, INC. W 1! 1 updating the MSDS sheets that presently existed at 2 the time that you came to work for Exxon? 3 A Yes, I did. I was chairman of that 4 committee that was responsible for those sheets. 5 Q All right:, sir. Did you -- when I said 6 "you," I meant Exxon. Did Exxon send out an MSDS 7 sheet for all of the products that it sold in the 8 stream of commerce while you were employed at s s. 9 Exxon? 10 A That's too broad for me to tell you that we 11 did but we tried to get them all and I'm not aware 12 of any omissions that we had. 13 Q All right, sir. For example, take benzene, 14 for example. At some point in time Exxon sold 15 benzene -- and benzene we're talking about is pure 16 benzene -- to various customers. Is that correct? 17 A Not in small containers that would be of 18 consumer product, no. 19 Q All right, sir. And I didn't mean to limit 20 it to small containers, Professor Hammond. At some 21 point in time, did Exxon sell benzene to other oil 22 companies or industrial customers in large volumes? 23 A We did. 24 Q All right, sir. And at what point in time, 25 to the best of your recollection, did Exxon begin W A N D A G. KELLEY, CSR NELL MCCALLUM & ASSOCIATES, INC. m 1 1 selling these large volumes of benzene to industrial 2 customers? 3 A At the completion of our benzene extraction 4 plant, and that was in the early parts of 1950, we 5 began to sell the products. 6 Q All right, sir. Immediately upon selling 7 this large volume of benzene to industrial 8 customers, did Exxon also accompany those shipments s, 9 with what we talked about earlier, MSDS sheets? 10 A The MSDS sheets were not appropriate 11 because these went out in volumes, such as pipeline 12 operations, and there were letters in all of the 13 pertinent materials that we knew about from a health 14 standpoint sent along with that, early letters 15 before we sold any of these products to the 16 customer. 17 Q And I'm confused, Professor Hammond, and 18 perhaps it's the awkward way I've asked the 19 question. And clarify for me, will you. When Exxon 20 sold -- and I'm just using an example. If Exxon 21 sold benzene through a pipeline to, say, Shell, for 22 lack of a better word, would Exxon send an MSDS 23 sheet to Shell or any of its customers at some point 24 in time after the sale of the benzene even if it was 25 transported in pipeline? W A N D A G. KELLEY, CSR NELL MCCALLUM & ASSOCIATES, INC. m 1 A We did that beforehand. Whenever they 2 inquired as to availability of benzene or interest 3 in purchasing benzene, we generally had a very close 4 conference with them and shipped it to them with 5 their full understanding of all the hazards and how 6 to use it. 7 Q Okay, sir. Are you telling me -- and I 8 don't want to put words in your mouth, but you tell 9 me if I'm wrong here. Are you saying that when 10 Exxon sold benzene to industrial customers that they 11 did not always send what is known as an MSDS sheet 12 to those industrial customers? Is that correct? 13 A No, that's not right. 14 Q All right, sir. 15 A We included the material safety data sheets 16 along with it, but that was not sufficient selling 17 benzene. We generally had to have a one-to-one 18 customer contact with us as the seller, by oral and 19 telephone and letters, and we were very careful not 20 to sell it to anyone who didn't understand all the 21 hazards and being capable to adopt the measures that 22 needed to be made. 23 Q Okay, sir. Well, then the opposite would 24 be true, then, so that when you did sell benzene, 25 pure benzene to industrial customers, is it your WANDA 6. KELLEY, CSR NELL MCCALLUM & ASSOCIATES, INC. R3 19 1 testimony that Exxon always sent out an MSDS sheet 2 along with other letters to those industrial 3 customers? 4 A The material safety data sheets was just 5 part of the whole package that we sent to them and 6 did not reflect the conferences we had with them, 7 and we were very careful not to sell to anyone that 8 didn't have the knowledge, the technical and medical 9 knowledge, industrial hygiene knowledge to be able 10 to handle it safely. 11 Q All right, sir. But if we can limit it 12 just to the MSDS sheet, an MSDS sheet from Exxon 13 always went to the customers of Exxon who were 14 buying benzene in large volumes? Is that correct? 15 A There were also -- in additional to the 16 MSDS sheets, there were also the precautionary 17 labeling that went along to them, and it covered the 18 same area but not as much in detail as we felt was 19 necessary, so we always had to have either telephone 20 or personal conferences with them or send them 21 additional letters and materials. 22 VIDE06RAPHER: We need to go off the record 23 for a second. Off the record 10:24. 24 [Recess] 25 VIDEOGRAPHER: On the record, 10:40. WANDA G. KELLEY, CSR NELL MCCALLM & ASSOCIATES, INC. M 1 1 MR. SPEARS: 2 Q Professor Hammond, I was asking you about 3 an MSDS sheet. And I don't want to belabor the 4 point here, but what I would like -- and I certainly 5 don't want to be zirgumentative with you. But if 6 it's possible, if you can give me a yes or no answer 7 to my question, if it's possible I would ask that 8 you please do that. You have a right to explain it, 11 s 9 but if you can give me a yes or no answer to this 10 question, I would appreciate it. And what I'm 11 asking you is: Yes or no, did Exxon send out an 12 MSDS sheet to all of the customers who purchased 13 benzene during your time at Exxon? 14 A Yes, they did. If someone missed it, it 15 was purely by accident and some problem that I 16 wouldn't know about. 17 Q All right, sir. And your knowledge of 18 benzene, Professor Hammond, and the dangers of 19 benzene, have you learned anything in the last few 20 years that you didn't already know? 21 A I'm not aware of anything that was 22 pertinent to the control and use of benzene. 23 Q All right, sir. Did -- who made the 24 decision at Exxon -- and if it was one person or a 25 committee, I would like for you to tell me. Who W A N D A G. KELLEY, CSR NELL MCCALLUM & ASSOCIATES, INC. 195 \ 1 made the decision to either send out an MSDS sheet l 2 or not send out an MSDS sheet, depending upon the 3 product that was being sold? In other words, who i 1 4 made the decision whether an MSDS sheet was 1 5 appropriate for a particular product that Exxon was 6 marketing? r 7 A That would be too wide because we were 8 involved with several hundreds of people, 1 i 9 salespeople, and if someone should violate the rules to- f 10 of the standard, I wouldn't know about it for that 11 particular person and that product. f . 1 12 Q All right, sir. Is it safe to say that at 13 least while you were working for Exxon, the company ) i 14 always sent out an MSDS sheet accompanying a product / lj 15 that you thought the customer needed to be aware of 16 about the dangers and health hazards and stuff? li i. 17 A That was a company-wide policy and we did 18 that and if there was any violation it was a 1 19 violation and not known to the company itself. 20 q All right, sir. Let me ask you, among some ! 21 of the products that Exxon sold to various 22 industrial customers, was crude oil a product that i 23 Exxon sold? 1 24 A I'm not in a position to answer you about 1 ^ 25 that. That was already established before I came, \ i W A N D A G. KELLEY, CSR NELL MCCALLUM & ASSOCIATES, INC. I 19(0 1 1 and it was handled by the marketing department early 2 on and I wouldn't know. 3 Q How long did you work for Exxon, Professor 4 Hammond? 5 A From April of 1947 until February 1978. 6 Q And it's your sworn testimony today that 7 during that time frame that you worked for Exxon you 8 were not aware of the fact that Exxon was selling s, 9 crude oil? 10 A No, you misstated me. I didn't say they 11 didn't sell it. They had their customers long 12 before I came; and what they told them in the 13 beginning, I couldn't answer it for you. 14 Q Yes, sir. Professor Hammond, what I want 15 to know, sir, is while you were working for Exxon, 16 between the time you went to work and the time that 17 you retired, were you, Professor James Hammond, 18 aware of the fact that Exxon was selling crude oil 19 to various customers? 20 A Yes, I was. 21 Q All right, sir. Did Exxon send out an MSDS 22 sheet to the various customers who purchased Exxon 23 crude oil? 24 A Not that I'm responsible for. I did not 25 prepare one. W A N D A 6. KELLEY, CSR NELL MCCALLUM & ASSOCIATES, INC. m i 1 Q All right, sir. If an MSDS sheet would 2 have accompanied a sale of a product, an Exxon 3 product, would you have had any input on how that 4 MSDS sheet was phrased, during your time frame with 5 Exxon? 6 A Yes, but I don't know of any situation 7 where that might have occurred. 8 Q While you were working for Exxon, sir, 9 between the time that you went to work there and the 10 time that you retired, were you aware of any need to 11 send out an MSDS sheet with a crude oil shipment? 12 A No, not any particular shipment 13 specifically, I would not have been aware of that. 14 Q All right, sir. It's true, is it not, 15 Professor Hammond, that crude oil contains some 16 trace of benzene? Is that correct? 17 A That, I'm not able to answer, no, because 18 there is such a wide variation in the fields in 19 which crude oils are produced, it's not practical 20 for me to tell you as a firsthand knowledge of just 21 how much and where it was. I didn't look into that 22 part for any particular customer. 23 Q Professor Hammond, maybe I misphrased my 24 question. I wasn't asking you to be specific about 25 the percent, the trace percent of benzene in various 1 W A N D A 6. KELLEY, CSR " NELL MCCALLUM & ASSOCIATES, INC. 198 1 crude oil products coming from various fields. I 2 was just asking you, based on your knowledge and 3 your experience while working for Exxon, were you 4 aware that crude oil contained a trace amount of 5 benzene in general? 6 A Yes, I know most crude oils have trace 7 amounts of benzene as well as many other. 8 Q All right, sir. How did Exxon ship its 9 crude oil to various customers, Professor Hammond? 10 Was it by pipeline, barge, or both? 11 A Yes, by all means. Much of the crude oil 12 was brought from overseas in tankers. 13 q All right, sir. Would it also mean that 14 there were times when Exxon employees in various job 15 classifications would be called upon to handle the 16 transportation of Exxon crude oil? 17 A Yes, there would have been those occasions. 18 q All right, sir. While you were working for 19 Exxon, did you ever feel that your employees who 20 were engaged in the transportation of crude oil, 21 Exxon crude oil, were being exposed to levels of 22 benzene that could be considered as a health 23 hazard? 24 A No, because we measured the operations, and 25 we knew what they were handling, our employees, and W A N D A G. KELLEY, CSR NELL MCCALLUM & ASSOCIATES, INC. 1 1 we protected them. 2 Q All right, sir. The employee for Exxon who 3 was driving a tanker truck during your watch while 4 you were working for Exxon, the employee who was 5 driving a tanker truck just loaded with crude oil 6 and nothing else, what safety measures did Exxon 7 take to protect that employee, if any, from exposure 8 to the crude oil? ' s 9 A I cannot answer you, no, I do not know. 10 Q Would that be something that was part of 11 your job, Professor Hammond, to know what rules and 12 regulations were being implemented by Exxon to 13 protect the health, and safety of its employees? 14 A No. That individual tank driver and his 15 knowledge of the crude oil would not have come to my 16 attention. 17 Q All right, sir. My question, sir, was: 18 How would the driver of the tank truck who was 19 hauling Exxon crude oil, how would he be informed by 20 Exxon, if at all, that the crude oil which he was 21 transporting carried some percent of benzene? 22 A N o , I wouldn't have had that type of 23 intimate knowledge of the driver and his load. 24 Q Well, did Exxon make it a policy -- while 25 you were working for Exxon, did they make it a W A N D A 6. KELLEY, CSR NELL MCCALLUM & ASSOCIATES/ INC 200 1 policy to notify all of their drivers who were 2 transporting crude oil products of the fact that 3 there was some trace amount of benzene in the 4 crude? 5 A No, not to my knowledge, I do not know. 6 Q All right, sir. The individuals who were 7 handling the transportation of crude on barges for 8 Exxon, what information, if any, would be conveyed 9 to those Exxon employees who were handling crude oil 10 for Exxon on barges about the fact that the crude 11 may have some trace amounts of benzene? 12 A It was covered by our policy that all of 13 the employees associated with dock operations, 14 including barges and tankers and so forth, were 15 under the medical surveillance program all the time. 16 Q All right, sir. And I gather that the 17 drivers of the tank truckswho were carrying crude 18 oil were not under a medical surveillance program 19 similar to the one that you had for the dock 20 workers. Is that correct? 21 A No, not to my knowledge. However, their 22 truck drivers all were subject to periodic physical 23 examinations to determine if they had any changes. 24 It would have been indicated that they were being 25 exposed. W A N D A G. KELLEY, CSR NELL MCCALLUM & ASSOCIATES, INC. 00! i Q Are you saying that all of the Exxon truck 2 drivers who transported crude oil were periodically 3 tested for exposure to benzene? 4 A They had medical examinations that did 5 cover the blood picture, and any changes in the 6 blood picture would have been detected for them. 7 Q Professor Hammond, throughout your 8 career -- and it's been a very distinguished career, 9 and I agree -- throughout your career with Exxon, 10 were you aware of: any literature indicating that a 11 person could contract a leukemia because of exposure 12 to trace amounts of benzene? 13 A I cannot answer, no, I cannot answer you 14 positively. 15 HR. BAGGETT: Unless you define trace 16 amounts. And I think you do need to define that, 17 for that question to have any relevancy. if it's 18 synonymous with low dosage exposure, then it becomes 19 relevant in '48 or earlier. So I'm saying that 20 you've got to define that, for it to be relevant. 21 MR. SPEARS: 22 Q Professor Hammond, did you understand my 23 question? 24 A No, I did not. I don't know what you mean 25 by trace amounts, nor the condition in which the W A N D A G. KELLEY, CSR NELL MCCALLUM & ASSOCIATES, INC. Sb0 3 , . 2 < 1 worker was working. I do know that they were all 2 under medical surveillance for any changes that 3 would have been significant for that product, 4 benzene, or for any other chemical that they might 5 be handling. 6 Q Professor Hammond, have you yourself ever 7 used the word trace amount of benzene in any 8 testimony, in any deposition? ' v 9 A I may have, and that would be referring to 10 materials that were less than one part per million 11 or less than detectable amounts. 12 Q Do you consider the amount of benzene in 13 crude oil that Exxon marketed to be trace amounts of 14 benzene? 15 A I cannot answer that, no. 16 Q Would that be something that was within 17 your job classification to know whether there was -- 18 what percent of benzene was in Exxon crude? 19 A No, it surely would not have been because 20 of the thousands of sources of the crude oil and 21 including overseas operations. 22 Q Well, Professor Hammond, you stated earlier 23 in your deposition that you never considered any 24 level of benzene exposure as being safe. Is that 25 correct? W A N D A 6. KELLEY, CSR NELL MCCALLUM & ASSOCIATES, INC. 03 2 1 A That's true, zero for everybody because of 2 susceptibility. But you can collect those people, 3 identify those people easily by a good program, 4 medical surveillance, every annual examinations. 5 Q My question was: If you felt, while you 6 were working for Exxon, that there was no safe 7 amount of exposure to benzene except zero, are you 8 telling the court today that you were not aware of ' s 9 the percent of benzene in the various Exxon crudes 10 that was being marketed by Exxon? 11 A Yes, I would want the court, the jury, to 12 understand that we didn't take any chances on 13 letting crude or any other product be handled by our 14 employees without knowing its effect upon them, and 15 we could detect that because we had a good medical 16 surveillance program that was ongoing with all of 17 these employees. 18 Q Well, what percent -- don't you need to 19 know the percent of benzene in crude in order to 20 make a reasonable determination of whether that 21 percent of benzene constitutes a health hazard, 22 Professor? 23 A No, you do not. You have to be backed up 24 by the medical surveillance examinations that would 25 detect any sign of benzene exposure and to warn you W A N D A G. KELLEY, CSR NELL MCCALLUM & ASSOCIATES, INC 20+ 2- 1 because of the thousands of different locations of 2 fields and different composition of the crude oil 3 you might run into. 4 Q So it's your testimony as a chief 5 industrial hygienist for Exxon, you were not 6 concerned with the various percents of benzene in 7 crude oil? It didn't concern you to even know 8 whether it contained a certain percent or not? 9 A I would restate, my position was to protect . 10 all employees from exposures that would be 11 significant. And the way that I had, the method of 12 detecting that was by the physical examinations that 13 were being performed on these individuals every year 14 as to whether or not there was any blood changes 15 that could be associated with benzene. That would 16 be the practical etnd only way you could really set 17 up a program as I set up to handle the protection of 18 the employees. 19 Q Professor Hammond, tell me if I'm stating 20 this awkwardly. And if I am, I'll try to rephrase 21 it. My question to you is: In order to determine 22 if a product constitutes a health hazard -- and I'm 23 talking about an Exxon product -- isn't the first 24 thing you have to know is what percent of benzene is 25 in that product before you can determine if it is or WA ND A G. KELLEY, CSR NELL MCCALLM & ASSOCIATES, INC. CO S' 2 1 is not a health hazard? 2 A Yes, you are talking about products that we 3 would be selling to the public or to the market. We 4 analyzed every potential material, that would go 5 out, for benzene concentration. And there must be 6 25 or 30 of those, and we tabulated that in terms of 7 the quantity of benzene in them, and that was mailed 8 out with our material safety data sheet. And I 9 thought possibly you already have a copy in your 10 files. I would hope you might have. 11 Q Okay. Professor Hammond, while you were 12 working for Exxon, did you ever consider the percent 13 of benzene in Exxon crude to be of any concern from 14 a health and safety standpoint? 15 A No, because there is no safe concentration 16 of benzene that you can handle in the field without 17 control; and you have to be able to detect the 18 employees, whether or not they are being exposed, by 19 some other means than going out and sampling every 20 batch of crude oil that you might be shipping. And 21 if you don't have that types of means of medical 22 surveillance, you really are not meeting your 23 requirements of protection of the employees. We did 24 have that program established and we worked at it 25 very earnestly and very hard and as a result we W A N D A 6. KELLEY, CSR NELL MCCALLUM & ASSOCIATES, INC. 2i 1 never had any problems with benzene. 2 Q Did Exxon do blood tests on all of the 3 employees of Exxon, every single one of them, every 4 year? 5 A Not every single one. If they were young 6 and had no potential exposure to chemical products 7 of any nature of that type, we didn't do that, but 8 about once every three years we would give the ' s 9 physical. But all the people who were handling k * 10 products that you have enumerated here would be 11 under that program at least once a year. 12 Q It's your testimony today that all of the 13 Exxon employees who handled the transportation of 14 Exxon crude oil products regularly took blood tests 15 as part of their physical? 16 A They did. 17 Q All right, sir. At what percent -- and I'm 18 going to use Exxon crude for an example. At what 19 percent do you consider the benzene content to be 20 trace amounts, if we're talking about Exxon crude? 21 A Anything above zero. 22 Q All right, sir. So you're saying that any 23 benzene content at all in crude oil products 24 constitutes a trace amount? 25 A I did not say that. Anything above zero in W A N D A G. KELLEY, CSR NELL MCCALLUM & ASSOCIATES, INC. 20' 1 the crude, and there may be products of crude oil 2 that do not have any benzene in them. 3 Q Are you saying that Exxon had crude oil 4 products -- we're talking about crude oil. I 5 misspoke. Did Exxon have crude oil in its process 6 that contained no benzene at all? 7 A I do not know. 8 Q The term Toxigram has come up a few times, 9 Professor. What is a Toxigram? _ 10 A That was a name we gave to our . 11 precautionary labeling sheet and where we explained 12 the reasons for the cautions that need to be taken 13 in handling a product or need to be made aware to 14 the customer or to the employee to protect them. 15 Q What's the difference -- and tell me if 16 there is a difference -- between an MSDS sheet Exxon 17 and a Toxigram Exxon? 18 A The sheet is really described legally by 19 the federal, state people, and that just briefly 20 outlines the particular characteristics of a product 21 that would cause you to be safety conscious or 22 healthwise concerned about their product, but it 23 doesn't tell you anything more than the very 24 basics. Whereas, the material safety -- our 25 Toxigram went into full details to disclose all that WA ND A G. KELLEY, CSR NELL MCCALLUM & ASSOCIATES, INC. 20; 1 were known, in a very brief summary, of the 2 hazardous nature of the material and how to protect 3 it and how to prevent it and much else. 4 Q Can you tell me what point in time the 5 Exxon Toxigram appeared in correlation with the 6 Exxon MSDS sheet? Which one came first? 7 A The precautionary labeling came first. 8 Q That would be the Toxigram? 9 A And that would -- and the Toxigram became . 10 available about 1951 or '2 - 11 Q All right, sir. So the MSDS - 12 A -- to my knowledge. 13 Q The MSDS sheet came first, and then the 14 Toxigram came about in the Fifties? 15 A Early Fifties, yes. 16 Q All right, sir. Professor, as part of your 17 job description as an industrial hygienist, is it 18 fair to say that you try to keep up with the 19 literature dealing with health hazards in the 20 industry? 21 A Yes. And I don't know what particular 22 health hazards you're looking for. 23 Q I didn't try to make it too broad, and I 24 apologize if I did, professor. I was saying that in 25 your job capacity as chief industrial hygienist for W A N D A 6. KELLEY, CSR NELL MCCALLUM & ASSOCIATES, INC. 00*1 2 1 Exxon, did you feel it part of your job duties to 2 keep up with the medical literature in general 3 dealing with health and safety hazards in the 4 petroleum industry? 5 A I did. 6 Q All right, sir. Are you aware of any study 7 written by any individual indicating that a person 8 who handles crude oil, in the transportation of v s 9 crude oil, is susceptible to leukemia or any disease 10 at all? 11 MR. BAGGETT: I'm going to object to that 12 unless you make the hypothet complete and say crude 13 oil containing percentages of benzene because the 14 benzene is where the warning has been made. I 15 object. And certainly it will be proven, if it 16 hasn't been proven already, that it's common 17 knowledge in the industry that crude oil contains 18 benzene. So I object to your hypothetical question 19 as being incomplete. 20 MR. SPEARS: Fine. Your witness indicated 21 earlier that not all Exxon crude oil contained 22 benzene, Bill. 23 A No, I did not. I'm not aware of any that 24 did not contain benzene. 25 Q I'm sorry. Are you saying that all of W A N D A G. KELLEY, CSR NELL MCCALLM & ASSOCIATES, INC. QJO 21 1 Exxon crude oil contained benzene? Is that your 2 statement today? 3 A There may be -- not to my knowledge, but it 4 may be that there was some field or some area where 5 benzene didn't occur. 6 Q Is it a safe assumption to assume that 7 most, if not all, crude oil that comes from the 8 ground contains some percent of benzene? '' s 9 A Contains some amount of benzene? 10 Q Some percent. 11 A Any percent? I'm not sure where your 12 percent starts and stops. 13 Q I wasn't trying to quantify it, sir. I 14 just asked you: Is it a fair statement to say that 15 most, if not all, crude oil contains some percent of 16 benzene? 17 A The reason it's so difficult, I might 18 explain to you that one percent benzene is 10,000 19 parts per million, and certainly that would be 20 considered a very hazardous material, if not handled 21 properly. 22 Q I'm going to ask you again, Professor, and 23 tell me if you can answer this. Is it fair to state 24 that most, if not all, crude oil contains some 25 percent of benzene? WANDA 6. KELLEY, CSR NELL MCCALLUM & ASSOCIATES, INC. sn i 21 1 A To my knowledge, I would not know which 2 particular product, and I can't be specific to you 3 to tell you with all authority of the world that I 4 would like to, yes, there is some materials in the 5 form of crude oil that does not contain benzene, but 6 I don't know of those. 7 Q All right, sir. Is it fair to state that 8 while you were working for Exxon and your knowledge S- 9 of the crude oil that Exxon marketed, that all of 10 the Exxon crude contained some percent of benzene? 11 A No, no, I cannot tell you that. 12 Q You cannot say that? 13 A No, I cannot tell you. 14 Q So are you saying, then, there is some 15 crude oil products that does not contain benzene? 16 A I do not know of them, and I would want -- 17 wouldn't want to exaggerate. I'm not aware of any 18 benzene-free products. 19 Q All right, sir. Going back to my original 20 question, then, and Mr. Baggett has made his 21 objection. Are you aware of any articles written in 22 the literature indicating that a person who handles 23 crude oil, in the transportation of crude oil, is at 24 a higher risk of contracting leukemia? 25 MR. BAGGETT: I still come back and say W A N D A G. KELLEY, CSR " NELL MCCALLUM & ASSOCIATES, INC. m b 2 1 i t ' s not a complete question unless you enumerate 2 whether or not it contains benzene and the 3 percentages that it contains. 4 MR. SPEARS: The objection is made. 5 Q Professor, can you answer my question? 6 A Repeat your question. 7 Q Yes, sir. Are you aware of any literature 8 while you were working for Exxon or any literature s v 9 that you have read up until today indicating that a 10 person or persons who handles the transportation of 11 crude oil is at a higher risk of contracting 12 leukemia? 13 A Yes, I would just relate to you what we 14 considered was a minimum safe program to have all of 15 our dock workers and other handling, loading and 16 unloading cars, trucks, and so forth, with any 17 regularity or with any routine practice to be under 18 the benzene control program. 19 Q I'm going to respectfully object to your 20 answer, Professor Hammond, as not being responsive 21 to my question. My question to you, sir -- and tell 22 me if I'm not being clear. I'll try to be clear. 23 Are you aware of any literature, medical articles, 24 while you were working for Exxon or any articles 25 that you have read since leaving Exxon, indicating W A N D A 6. KELLEY, CSR NELL MCCALLM & ASSOCIATES, INC 13 2 1 that a person or persons who handles crude oil, in 2 the transportation of crude oil, is at a higher risk 3 of contracting leukemia? 4 MR. BAGGETT: Same objection I made 5 earlier. 6 MR. SPEARS: All right, sir. 7 Q Are you eiware of any such literature, 8 Professor? 9 A To my knowledge, it was necessary to 10 consider these people handling any crude oil or any 11 other petroleum products that there were benzene 12 present and we needed to take the precautions to 13 have them on the program. 14 Q Professor, we're going to be here a long 15 time, sir, if you don't answer my question. And I 16 don't want to be eirgumentative with you. I'm asking 17 you about literature. Do you understand what a 18 medical article is? 19 A Yes, I do, and we prepared our materials 2C out in advance of any other. So I already knew what 21 you were asking as being necessary to be done. 22 Q I'm going to try to take it step by step. 23 MR. BAGGETT: Ken, I'm going to object to 24 you pursuing this line unless you tell him whether 25 or not the crudes involved contains benzene or not. W ANDA G. KELLEY, CSR NELL MCCALLUM & ASSOCIATES, INC. ' ` 1 You are trying to delineate it to crude, quote, and 2 you can't do it without knowing what the components 3 of crude are for it to have any relevance to this 4 litigation. 5 MR. SPEARS: Bill, I appreciate your 6 objection. I really don't believe the professor is 7 answering my question, so I'm going to try to pursue 8 that. ' s 9 Q While you were working for Exxon, Professor 10 Hammond, did you read medical articles or literature 11 from various medical publications? Yes or no. 12 A No. In regard to what you're getting at, I 13 do not understand the question. But, no, I didn't 14 read any such articles. 15 Q Now, tell me how you can operate as a chief 16 industrial hygienist for Exxon without reading 17 medical articles and literature. 18 MR. BAGGETT: I think his answer, you 19 missed -- your question is objectionable to form 20 because you misstate what he has responded, and you 21 missed -- you are not articulating it correctly. He 22 said which you are referring to, which is crude, 23 whether or not it contains benzene. It's the same 24 argument we're facing. 25 MR. SPEARS: W A N D A G. KELLEY, CSR ' NELL MCCALLUM & ASSOCIATES, INC. 21 1 Q My question didn't say anything about 2 crude, Professor. I want to take it step by step 3 with you. While you were working for Exxon as chief 4 industrial hygienist, did you or did you not read 5 medical articles and medical literature dealing with 6 the safety and health hazards of products in the 7 petroleum industry? Yes or no. 8 A Yes. And I think that I should explain ' s 9 that. It would average between 30 and 40 journals a to 10 month and covered all hazardous materials in the 11 nature of occupational diseases. 12 Q All right, sir. 13 A There were none, neither English, nor 14 French, nor Italian, or German that came to my 15 attention that I didn't get a translation and read, 16 if it was something new. 17 Q All right, sir. Now -- excuse me. Are you 18 finished? 19 A As well as English. 20 Q All right, sir. Now,referring to all of 21 those articles that you just articulated, all of the 22 articles that you have read during your career with 23 Exxon, do you recall reading any article indicating 24 that a person or persons who are in the business of 25 transporting crude oil are at a higher risk of WA ND A G. KELLEY, CSR NELL MCCALLUM & ASSOCIATES, INC. 1 contracting leukemia? SUV 2 2 A No, I don't remember that detail. 3 Q All right, sir. In the articles that you 4 have written -- I mean read and just articulated, 5 are you aware of any articles from that literature 6 indicating that a person or person who transports 7 gasoline is at a higher risk of contracting 8 leukemia? ' s. 9 A No, at this time I don't remember any 10 specific article. 11 Q All right, sir. When you were working for 12 Exxon, did Exxon send out an MSDS sheet to the 13 customers who purchased gasoline, sir? 14 A Yes, we did, regularly, and it was a well 15 established program. 16 Q Was that something that was established 17 after you came to Exxon, or was that something that 18 was already implemented when you came to Exxon? 19 A It was already an ongoing program. 20 Q So each customer who purchased Exxon 21 gasoline would have received an Exxon MSDS sheet. 22 Is that correct? 23 A I cannot answer that, no, because there 24 were millions and millions of people buying gasoline 25 that I wouldn't know about. And I haven't taken an W A N D A G. KELLEY, CSR NELL MCCALLUM & ASSOCIATES, INC. an 2 1 interview with all of them. 2 Q I understand, sir, and it wasn't -- maybe I 3 didn't articulate my question. It was Exxon's 4 policy, then, to send out an MSDS sheet accompanying 5 all gasoline shipments to customers. Is that 6 correct? 7 A Again, that's too broad for me to be able 8 to answer it, because all shipments, and it might 9 have been some that were shipped that they did not 10 follow the policy of the company. 11 Q Did each product that Exxon used an MSDS 12 sheet with, did each such product also have a 13 Toxigram accompanying it when the Toxigram policy 14 came into effect? 15 A No. 16 Q How would you make a determination about 17 whether a particular product had an MSDS sheet that 18 went with it but not a Toxigram? 19 A By knowledge of the particular hazardous 20 nature of the material. If it was just strictly 21 limited to explosion and fires, we would not put out 22 a Toxigram on it. 23 Q Did Exxon send out a Toxigram on crude oil 24 that it marketed to its various customers, to your 25 knowledge? WANDA G. KELLEY, CSR NELL MCCALLUM & ASSOCIATES, INC. ai? 2 1 . A I can't remember that we did. 2 Q All right, sir. Would that be something 3 that would have been within your department to know 4 if such Toxigrams were or were not being sent while 5 you were working for Exxon? 6 A No, it was never brought to my attention. 7 But had it been a material of a hazardous nature 8 other than the ones I mentioned, I'm pretty sure ' s 9 that my committee would have been the one to devise 10 such a Toxigram if we needed it. 11 Q As part of your work with Exxon, did you 12 from time to time actually go out into the various 13 physical plants belonging to Exxon or Humble to do 14 surveys? 15 A I did. 16 Q All right, sir. Did you go to the Baytown 17 facility on occasion? 18 A I did. 19 Q All right, sir. When you went to the 20 Baytown facility, did you take readings of, for 21 example, benzene in theatmosphere? 22 A In some time,where it was indicated. 23 Q All right, sir. When you visited the Exxon 24 facility in Baytown and specifically took readings 25 for the benzene content in the atmosphere, do you W A N D A G. KELLEY, CSR NELL MCCALLUM & ASSOCIATES, INC Ol*\ 1 recall if you ever found any benzene present at 20 2 to 30 ppm? 3 A I don't think I was ever there when that 4 type of concentration was created, no. 5 Q Would you consider that to be a high 6 concentration of benzene in the atmosphere, sir, or 7 a low concentration? 8 A Anything above zero levels of benzene s. 9 persisting in the air where employees might be 10 exposed is entirely too high. 11 Q All right, sir. If there were readings at 12 the Exxon facility in Baytown of 20 to 30 ppm of 13 benzene at various times, would you consider that to 14 be a violation of Exxon policy? 15 A It would be very strictly a violation, and 16 the individuals that had a potential exposure would 17 always be under our medical surveillance program and 18 the biotesting program of urinary phenols and other 19 measures that we take. 20 Q All right, sir. You consider, Professor 21 Hammond -- and correct me if I'm wrong. You 22 consider the benzene facility that was constructed 23 at Baytown, when it was constructed, to be, quote, 24 state of the art as far as safety? 25 A It was an advanced pioneering plant that W A N D A 6. KELLEY, CSR NELL MCCALLUM & ASSOCIATES, INC. 2 1 was constructed with the best procedures we could 2 devise and think of. And all of this was published 3 and you have copies, I'm sure. 4 Q Yes, sir. 5 A But no secrets about any of our exposures 6 nor how to control them that we knew about. That 7 was clearly brought out to me the first two or three 8 months I was with the company, that we had no secret ' N. 9 on health and safety matters, from our competitors 10 or anyone else. 11 Q All right, sir. I want to show you a 12 document, Professor, that I'm going to mark as 13 D-l It's dated February 13, 1958, addressed to 14 Mr. T. S. Howell at Baytown. Who was Mr. T. S. 15 Howell? 16 A Dr. Howell, he was a physician in the 17 medical department. 18 Q All right, sir. Take a second to read 19 that, Professor. 20 A All right. 21 Q All right, sir. 22 MR. BAGGETT: Excuse me. May I see that? 23 MR. SPEARS: 24 Q Professor Hammond,specifically with 25 Exhibit D-l, dated February 13, 1958, this indicates W A N D A G. KELLEY, CSR NELL MCCALLUM & ASSOCIATES, INC OH 22 1 to me that this was a written -- you memorialized 2 one of your visits to the Baytown facility at which 3 time you participated in some air sampling. Is that 4 correct? 5 A I don't recall the details of that safety 6 trip, no. 7 MR. BAGGETT; Of course, I object to what 8 it appears to you. The document speaks for itself, ' v 9 once it's authenticated. 10 MR. SPEARS: 11 Q Professor Hammond, this document which is 12 D-l, and I'll quote from it, indicates that -- it 13 said: We found that the concentration at the eye 14 wash fountain near the oil separator at breathing 15 level was 20 to 30 ppm. Is that what the document 16 says? 17 A Yes. 18 MR. BAGGETT: Excuse me. Just so my 19 objection is reserved until that document has been 20 authenticated to be what it purports to be, and then 21 it would speak for itself. I just want to reserve 22 my objection. 23 MR. SPEARS: Do you have any reason to 24 believe that this is a false document? 25 MR. BAGGETT: I have no reason to believe WA ND A G. KELLEY, CSR NELL MCCALLM & ASSOCIATES, INC. 3 2 s2: } 1 anything about it because the proper foundation 2 hasn't been laid for reference to it. And you can 3 question him about it; but until it's authenticated, 4 then I've got to object, Ken. I'm sure you will do 5 what you've got to do to get it into evidence, if 6 it's relevant. 7 HR. SPEARS: 8 Q N All right, sir. This document that is 9 Exhibit D-l indicates that the ppm concentration of 10 benzene at the breathing level near the eye wash 11 fountain was 20 to 30 ppm. Is that correct? 12 A No, it doesn't tell me how long it had been 13 20 to 30. A leak had just developed, apparently, at 14 that area and they had to do some plumbing to 15 correct it, to close the leak. 16 Q Let me read it to you, Professor, and tell 17 me if I'm reading this wrong. It says: We found 18 that the concentration range at the eye wash 19 fountain near the oil separator at breathing level 20 was 20 to 30 ppm. Is that what it says? 21 A It says more than that, to me. It says 22 that we were on the job, and as soon as the leak had 23 developed that we were on top of it to take care of 24 it. And it was an ongoing program, and we didn't - 25 as you see, we didn't tolerate it to be there. And W A N D A G. KELLEY, CSR NELL MCCALLUM & ASSOCIATES, INC. 22 1 the people that were exposed to that, potentially 2 exposed to that, was under medical surveillance, and 3 it tells me that we run urinary phenol on the people 4 and make sure, medically supervision of it, that 5 they would be examined to make sure they hadn't been 6 exposed to any benzene. It just further expands 7 what I've been trying to tell you. We had an 8 airtight, gastight ongoing program for our company. 9 We were very proud of that letter. Glad you brought 10 it up. The jury would understand that we were on 11 the job and we had a program to take care of any 12 situation that might develop. 13 Q Then you recognize this letter as a letter 14 that you would have generated as part of your 15 surveillance of the Baytown refinery? 16 A I generated that letter and am very proud 17 of it. 18 MR. BAGGETT: Then I withdraw the 19 obj ection. 20 MR. SPEARS: 21 Q Okay. Professor Hammond, then, this -- and 22 correct me if I'm wrong, but -- and I would like for 23 you to tell me, if you can, in a yes or no answer, 24 does this letter state, yes or no, that a 25 concentration of 20 to 30 ppm of benzene was found WAN DA G. KELLEY, CSR " NELL MCCALLUM & ASSOCIATES, INC. ^4 2; 1 at the eye wash fountain near the oil separator at 2 breathing level? Yes or no. 3 MR. BAGGETT: Ken, that letter speaks for 4 itself. I've already said that. If you're trying 5 to attach some significance to it because of taking 6 something out of context, not listening to the 7 doctor's -- professor's testimony, then that's not 8 fair to him. And he's explained that letter, what 9 it means to him, and you're taking something out of . 10 context which speaks for itself. 11 MR. SPEARS: 12 Q Can you answer my question, Professor? 13 A Repeat your question. 14 Q Does the letter, that you said you are very 15 proud of, indicate that you participated in air 16 monitoring and found a 20 to 30 ppm level of benzene 17 at the breathing level at the Baytown refinery near 18 the oil separator? 19 A Yes, and it illustrates how alert we were 20 to be on the job to make sure that no one was 21 exposed to that. And we have no proof until we run 22 our medical surveillance and urinary phenol whether 23 anyone might have been exposed to any 24 concentration. And the matter of them drinking 25 water at that fountain would be maybe not long W ANDA G. KELLEY, CSR NELL MCCALLUM & ASSOCIATES, INC. , 2 1 enough for then to show up in any picture, but we 2 corrected it without any assurance that anybody had 3 ever been exposed. 4 Q Does this letter that I have narked as 5 Exhibit D-l indicate also that there were two or 6 three other locations where you found leaks, such as 7 dripping sanpling cocks? 8 A It does. And that, again, it tells you how 9 strong and strict our progran was, how thorough it 10 was, how we were on the -- daily we were on the job, 11 and we just didn't let people be exposed to 12 benzene. We felt that zero level was the only one 13 that was safe for then. 14 Q How nany tines did you go to the Baytown 15 facility to take such tests as exhibited in D-l, on 16 a weekly basis, Professor? 17 A Entirely depends upon the need for ny 18 presence. 19 Q Did you have to be there for this sanpling, 2C air sanpling to take place, or sonebody else could 21 do it? 22 A I had a Fh.D., Dr. Hernan was there on the 23 job 24 hours a day, as far as the need, and he was 24 thoroughly capable of -- as well as several other 25 people in the refinery -- to nake sanples and take W A N D A 6. KELLEY, CSR NELL MCCALLM & ASSOCIATES, INC. 22 1 samples. 2 Q Well, thank you, Professor. 3 Who is J. A. Allen, Hr. Hammond? 4 A Where did you find out Hr. J. A. Allen, and 5 what occasion? 6 Q I'm asking you, do you know a J. A. Allen? 7 A Well, I know Allens. I don't know if it's 8 J. A. specifically, but there are a lot of Allens in ' s. 9 this world. 10 Q You do not recall the name J. A. Allen? 11 A I do not recall that individual. 12 Q Do you recall a Hr. E. F.LeBrocq? 13 A Yes. 14 Q Who is he, sir? 15 A He was an assistant industrial hygienist 16 that worked at the Baytown refinery some, as well as 17 other locations, yes. 18 Q And who was Hr. B. 6. Simpson, sir? 19 A He also was an associate for Hr. LeBrocq, 20 and they worked together. And I have it in mind 21 they were stationed for a while at the Baytown 22 ref inery. 23 Q All right, sir. I'm going to show you a 24 document, professor Hammond, that I've marked D-2, 25 which on the cover sheet indicates it's an Exxon WANDA 6. KELLEY, CSR NELL HCCALLUH & ASSOCIATES, INC. ms 2: 1 Q But on page 1 of the document, Professor 2 Hammond, does it not indicate that there was ^ / 3 significant potential for exposure to benzene to ( 4 some of Exxon employees? 5 A It does not say anything about whether 6 were really exposed, it just said potentially 7 exposed. And also, they probably had to be wearing 8 respiratory protection while they were doing that, s \ 9 as a general practice. 10 HR. SPEARS: I'm not finished. I want to 11 ask him some more questions. 12 MR. BAGGETT: Has that been marked for 13 identification? 14 MR. SPEARS: D-2. 15 Q These type of surveys were done routinely 16 within the Exxon plant, were they not? 17 A That's right. It illustrates -- what year 18 was that? 19 Q 1975, sir. 20 A Well established program had been running 21 for more than 20 years, and those individuals were 22 tested regularly. 23 Q Professor Hammond, again on page 1 of 24 Exhibit D-2, which is the industrial hygiene study 25 of the aromatics extraction unit at the Baytown W ANDA G. KELLEY, CSR NELL MCCALLUM & ASSOCIATES, INC. 22 1 chemical plant, dated October 1975, does it not 2 indicate that high concentrations of benzene were 3 found coming from open sewer grates in the facility 4 and that this study recommended that introduction of 5 aromatics to the sewer should be eliminated? Is 6 that not what it says? 7 A It does that. And, again, it illustrates 8 how carefully we were monitoring at the refinery and 9 all the operations ongoing because the people who 10 worked at that unit had been on our medical 11 surveillance program for at least 20 years and it 12 was probably due to -- and that had been surveyed 13 many times without finding a condition. Indicates 14 that there had been somewhere a cross connection or 15 a leak that developed and needed to be corrected, 16 getting into storm sewers. 17 Q All right, sir. And does the report 18 indicate how long this particular problem was 19 allowed to go on? 20 A You have the report. That was a violation 21 of our rules if it was knowingly allowed to go even 22 for one day, that would have been in serious 23 violation of our standards. And that was the reason 24 it was so interesting to me t h a t t h e y h a d found 25 probably a brand new leak, a development shortly WANDA G. KELLEY, CSR NELL MCCALLUM & ASSOCIATES, INC. a sc 2 1 after it had developed and never did show up in any 2 of the medical finding and medical surveillance that 3 was ongoing for our people. Those persons working 4 in that unit had been on -- about 1975, they had 5 been on 30-odd years at least, maybe 40, of the 6 medical surveillance for indications of benzene 7 exposure. 8 Q Professor Hammond, in 1975, what did you 's 9 consider to be the threshold limit value of exposure 10 to benzene? 11 A Zero. 12 Q All right, sir. And was that a company 13 policy, sir? 14 A That was a company policy since 1947. 15 Q All right, sir. 16 A That I know about. 17 Q All right, sir. Let me show you page 6 of 18 Exhibit D--2 where there is a specific date of 19 October 7, 1975, indicating a sample location and 2C benzene being found, and there is a threshold limit 21 value put next to it in another column. What is the 22 threshold limit value of benzene in that document, 23 sir? 24 MR. MYERS; What is it? 25 MR. SPEARS: W A N D A 6. KELLEY, CSR NELL MCCALLUM & ASSOCIATES, INC. n \ 2 1 . Q Yes, what number is it, sir? 2 A 10. 3 MR. BAGGETT: And he can explain that if he 4 wants to. 5 A And they talked about the air contamination 6 level, parts per million. We measured one part per 7 million, see, it shows here, but 10 would have been 8 legally acceptable if the NIOSH people or the OSHA ' s. 9 people, they come in, or the state Department of 10 Health, anyone in enforcement. That's the only 11 reason that's put there. Just shows how much better 12 we ran our company. I'm very proud of that. 13 MR. SPEARS: 14 Q All right, sir. And this document, if one 15 would look at it, it's an Exxon document and it does 16 say on its face the threshold limit value of 10 ppm 17 for benzene. Is that correct? 18 MR. BAGGETT: Ken, that's misstating and 19 that's really misleading. The man has said that was 20 the legal TLV, but he said Exxon's TLV was zero by 21 their policy. And that's been spelled out. And 22 what you are trying to do is put something contrary 23 in the record. The document speaks for itself, and 24 it's been explained. So I object as to the form of 25 the question because it's an improper summation of W A N D A G. KELLEY, CSR NELL MCCALLUM & ASSOCIATES, INC. 232 1 what's previously been said. 2 MR. SPEARS: 3 Q All right, sir. Professor Hammond, subject 4 to that objection, this Exxon document D-2, does it 5 not state, where my finger is, Threshold Limit Value 6 (ppm)? Is that correct? 7 A The purpose of that is not that we were 8 using that value as a health measure, but to let the 's 9 supervisors and management know that if someone came 10 in, an officer came in from either NIOSH or from the 11 State Health Department or the County Health 12 Department, that we would not be charged with a 13 legal violation of the OSHA or the State Department 14 of Health. That's all, just for management and 15 supervisors' knowledge. They maybe didn't know what 16 it might be, whether that one part per million was 17 in violation or not. 18 Q All right, sir. I'm going to ask you the 19 question again, Professor Hammond. The document at 20 page 6, Exhibit D-2, does it not state Threshold 21 Limit Value? Is that correct? 22 A No, it only states what the legal 23 enforcement level of the product would have been. 24 Q I'll ask it this way, Professor Hammond. 25 Would you read to me what I've highlighted in yellow W ANDA G. KELLEY, CSR ' NELL MCCALLUM & ASSOCIATES, INC. 23 1 on page 6 of the document? 2 A No, I see no purpose in my reading that. 3 MR. BAGGETT: It speaks for itself. He's 4 explained it a thousand times. 5 MR. SPEARS: Well, he's done a lot of 6 things, but explaining it he's not. 7 MR. BAGGETT: He has explained it. He's 8 explained that the paper has a threshold limit value s. 9 of 10, why it's there, for management, and what it 10 is, is the legal limit. And it's not inconsistent 11 for him to say that Exxon's adopted standard was 12 zero. 13 MR. SPEARS: We're going to get to that in 14 a minute, but right now I want to talk to him about 15 what the document says. 16 Q Does the document say threshold limit value 17 10 ppm, Professor Hammond? 18 A I agree he read that into the record. 19 Q And I read it from the document? You can't 20 read that, Professor Hammond? 21 A I see no purpose inmy reading it. 22 Q Can you read it? 23 A What part? 24 Q The part that I havehighlighted in 25 yellow. WA ND A G. KELLEY, CSR NELL MCCALLM & ASSOCIATES, INC. 23U 1 . HR. BAGGETT: Sir, we'll stipulate that 2 subject to his explanation which has been given 3 umpteen times that the document says threshold limit 4 value 10. We'll stipulate to that. 5 HR. SPEARS: All right, sir. 6 THE WITNESS: Very proud of that. 7 HR. SPEARS: 8 Q I'm going to show you -- refer you to page v s 9 12 of this document, Professor Hammond, which is the 10 1975 industrial hygiene study of the aromatics 11 extraction unit at the Baytown chemical plant. I'm 12 going to ask you if it does not state that the 13 allowable standard for short-term exposure to 14 benzene is 25 ppm? 15 A The allowable standard for law enforcement, 16 yes, is 25 parts per million. 17 Q Is that what the document states? 18 A Not necessarily, but that's there because 19 we have basically the zero control for our standard, 20 and everyone knew it, even a new employee like 21 Simpson and LeBrocq. 22 Q On page 6, where you and I got into an 23 argument, and I apologize for you, you wanted to 24 tell me that 10 -- 25 A You don't need to apologize to me. WANDA G. KELLEY, CSR NELL HCCALLUH & ASSOCIATES, INC. 1 Q Well, when I asked you what the threshold 2 limit value was of 10, you said the significance of 3 that was 10 was the legal limit. And on page 12 of 4 the same document, it says the allowable standard is 5 25 ppm, does it not? 6 A Let me explain to you. For short-term 7 exposure is five, from five to 15 minutes. And that 8 is part of the problem with you not being ' s 9 professionally trained trying to interpret the ACGIH to 10 standard. And that has definite meaning of the 11 purpose of having it 25 parts per million. 12 Q Well, are you telling me that there was a 13 10 ppm legal limit that you understood and then 14 there was a 25 ppm allowable standard? Is that what 15 you are saying? 16 A Do you know what the 10 parts per million 17 covers, what period it covers, and how you go about 18 determining that? 19 Q Let me ask the questions, Professor 20 Hammond, please. 21 A Well, I'm trying to get you to understand 22 what I'm saying. We had a zero level, and we were 23 putting down here the OSHA and the State levels that 24 would be enforceable by law if you violated them. 25 Q Well, the level that you were concerned W A N D A G. KELLEY, CSR NELL MCCALLUM & ASSOCIATES, INC. 2 1 about enforcement, was it 10 ppm or 25 ppm, in 2 1975? 3 A Neither one for our purposes. This is an 4 internal report that was going to people who were 5 knowledgeable and knew what the program was. 6 Q Does this document at page 12, which is the 7 industrial hygiene study of the aromatics extraction 8 unit, Baytown chemical plant, dated October 1975, 9 indicated that one of the practices that you 10 discovered or was discovered in this survey was 11 exposure to benzene caused by flushing sample lines 12 to the pad in the unit? 13 A That says that should be corrected, that be 14 stopped. Who set up the method of flushing sample 15 lines, I do not know. But anyway, my industrial 16 hygienists detected it, and they put a practice, a 17 stop to it. 18 Q Okay, sir. 19 A Again, we had an alertteam, andwe didn't 20 let any of those type of conditions exist. So it's 21 another proof of our good program. 22 Q Well -- 23 A And all of those --point outagain, all of 24 the operators that worked around that unit were on 25 our benzene exposure medical surveillance list. W A N D A G. KELLEY, CSR NELL HCCALLUM & ASSOCIATES, INC. 2 1 Q Professor Hammond, while you were working 2 for Exxon, certainly in the early years, say, in the 3 Forties, Fifties and Sixties, Exxon had or the 4 company had company-owned service stations, did they 5 not, throughout the country? 6 A They did. 7 Q All right, sir. And most of those what we 8 used to call full-service service stations have just ' s 9 about disappeared by now, have they not? 10 A I am not able to make any intelligent 11 evaluation of that. 12 Q What I meant was that there seems to be a 13 proliferation of self-service service stations now; 14 but back in the Forties and Fifties and Sixties, 15 there were very few self-serve service stations, 16 weren't there? 17 A I'm not aware of the numbers. Today most 18 would have several pumps that might be full service; 19 you can get all of the red carpet treatment you want 20 if you stop in there, sir. 21 Q While you were working for Exxon during the 22 time frame when they had full-service Exxon service 23 stations, did you consider the person or persons who 24 were p u m p i n g g a s in the c a r s on a regular basis to 25 be at a risk of contracting a leukemia or a cancer? W A N D A 6. KELLEY, CSR NELL MCCALLUM & ASSOCIATES, INC. L S i 2: 1 A I did not because that had been studied by 2 the United States Public Health Service and various 3 state organizations, and they did not ever classify 4 it as being hazardous. 5 Q Okay, sir. Were you aware, when these 6 self-service service stations were using Exxon gas 7 in the Forties and Fifties and Sixties, that those 8 Exxon gasoline products contained some amount of ' s. 9 benzene? 10 A No, I could not give you any amount or help 11 you in that question. 12 Q I didn't ask you an amount, Professor, and 13 maybe I awkwardly phrased my question again. While 14 you were chief industrial hygienist for Exxon, 15 during your watch, were you ever aware that Exxon 16 gasoline contained any amount of benzene? 17 A No, I was not. 18 Q You were not aware of that? 19 A No, because we had extracted every drop of 20 benzene we could possibly get from these potential 21 gasoline products before they got to the gasoline 22 stage, and selling them as fuel was a money losing 23 proposition if we could extract it out. 24 Q So it's your testimony here today that to 25 the best of your knowledge, the Exxon gasoline that W A N D A G. KELLEY, CSR NELL MCCALLUM & ASSOCIATES, INC. 3 3 l 2: 1 was sold during your tenure contained zero percent 2 of gasoline -- of benzene? 3 A No, I could not say that. I never did see 4 an analysis of all the gasolines that we sold. 5 Q Well, were you aware of the fact that Exxon 6 gasoline, In the Forties, Fifties and Sixties, 7 contained any amount of benzene whatsoever, 8 Professor Hammond? ' s 9 A N o , I was not aware of it. 10 Q Is that something that you should have been 11 aware of? 12 A No, it would not have been my 13 responsibility. That was a public health problem. 14 Q Why would you consider it a Public Health 15 problem? 16 A Because they were all over the outside and 17 many owned their own stations and we had no either 18 privilege nor authority to investigate them; 19 whereas, the Public Health people were responsible 20 for that. 21 Q It's true, is it not, that many of the 22 service stations that Exxon owned in the Forties and 23 Fifties and Sixties were owned by Exxon? 24 A They were. 25 Q All right, sir. And the employees at those WANDA G. KELLEY, CSR NELL MCCALLUM & ASSOCIATES, INC. s4o 2 1 service stations were Exxon employees? 2 A Some of them were. 3 Q All right, sir. You did not consider the 4 fact that those Exxon employees were pumping 5 gasoline that contained some amount of benzene as 6 being a possible safety hazard? 7 A Ho, and I doubt if they ever had any 8 exposures. ' *v 9 Q Why do you say that, Professor? 10 A Because the nature of the material we sold. 11 Q I thought you weren't aware of the benzene 12 content at all of the gasoline that you sold. 13 A I'm not aware of all of them, and I'm only 14 speaking for the Public Health aspects of it that 15 they were never brought to anyone's attention that 16 it was a hazardous operation. 17 MR. SPEARS: Take a break for a second. 18 VIDEOGRAPHER: Off the record, 11:48. 19 [Recess] 20 VIDEOGRAPHER: On the record, 11:54. 21 MR. SPEARS: 22 Q Professor Hammond, I was asking you, just 23 before the break, about the Exxon service stations 24 in the F o r t i e s and F i f t i e s and S i x t i e s that w e r e 25 owned by Exxon and run by Exxon employees, and if we W A N D A G. KELLEY, CSR NELL MCCALLUM & ASSOCIATES, INC 9fit 24 1 can limit my question just to those service 2 stations. Did you consider the fact that those 3 Exxon employees were pumping gas on a daily basis 4 into cars as being a source of potential health 5 hazard for those employees? 6 A That was not my responsibility. 7 Q All right, sir. And why was it not your 8 responsibility? And I'm limiting it just to the ' s. 9 Exxon service stations owned by Exxon, run by Exxon 10 employees. 11 A Those particular individuals came under our 12 contract -- I mean usual program and were examined 13 every year or more often. 14 Q The individuals whom I'm speaking of would 15 be Exxon employees. You understand that? 16 A Yes, I do. 17 Q And they would be pumping gas into cars. 18 Do you understand that? 19 A I do. 20 Q All right, sir. Based on your knowledge 21 and experience, do you consider the fact that these 22 individuals pumped gas in cars on a daily basis as 23 being a source of a potential health hazard? 24 A No. 25 Q All right, sir. And theliterature, W A N D A G. KELLEY, CSR NELL MCCALLUM & ASSOCIATES, INC. 9 f^ 2. 1 Professor Hammond, that we spoke about earlier in 2 your deposition, I'm talking about the literature in 3 the Forties and Fifties and the Thirties and 4 Forties, back then, that dealt -- that spoke in 5 terms of low concentrations of benzene. It's true, 6 is it not, that 40 years ago a low concentration of 7 benzene was close to 100 parts per million? 8 MR. BAGGETT: I'm going to object to that 9 unless you can point me to something that says that, . 10 that's in the API, which is completely contrary. I 11 don't know how you can define low concentration 12 without defining it for him. 13 MR. SPEARS: I appreciate your objection, 14 Bill, but I believe the Professor understands what 15 I'm asking. And if you don't, you can tell me, 16 Professor. 17 Q But it's true, is it not, that the 18 literature that spoke in low concentrations, 40 or 19 50 years ago, the low concentrations that they were 20 talking about were in the neighborhood of 100 ppm? 21 Is that correct? 22 A No. 23 Q Sir? 24 A No. 25 Q That's not correct? WANDA G. KELLEY, CSR NELL MCCALLUM & ASSOCIATES, INC. ft 4 3 1 A No. 2 Q All right, sir. 3 A I do not know what the definition for low 4 concentration was. 5 Q Let me show you an exhibit, Professor, that 6 I'll mark as Exhibit D-3 which is an excerpt from 7 your testimony under oath in the case of Skeen 8 versus Monsanto. Do you recall testifying in that N. 9 case, Professor? 10 A I do. 11 Q You did testify? 12 A I did. 13 Q All right, sir. At page 13 of the 14 transcript, the question was asked of you: 15 "What is a small amount, 40 or 50 years 16 ago, what was a small amount of the low 17 concentration of benzene?" 18 And your answer was: "Forty or fifty years 19 ago, the criteria was that we would get it down to 2C below a hundred parts per million." 21 A That was the legal value. 22 Q Was that your answer in the Skeen case, 23 sir? 24 A It was, and it applied to a legal 25 responsibility. W A N D A 6. KELLEY, CSR ' NELL MCCALLUM & ASSOCIATES, INC. 24 1 MR. BAGGETT: Taking something out of 2 context, I'm going to object to it until I review 3 the entire deposition, but the Professor has 4 explained it. 5 MR. SPEARS: 6 Q All right, sir. Let me ask you again, sir, 7 and this is at page 14 of the transcript of the 8 Skeen testimony. And I'll read you the question s 9 verbatim, Professor, from the Skeen transcript. 10 "So in the literature 40 or 50 years ago, 11 if they discussed low concentrations or small 12 amounts, you could safely assume that they are 13 talking about something in the range of a hundred 14 parts per million; isn't that right?" 15 And your answer, under oath, was, "Yes." 16 Correct, sir? 17 A The legal application did not apply until 18 you had gotten above a hundred parts per million. 19 That's what my answer to that is. It doesn't ask 20 what my personal threshold limit value. 21 Q No, sir. The question that was asked of 22 you is the same question I'm asking of you -- 23 A It was a legal question. 24 Q 40 or 50 years ago, when you read the 25 documents that are 40 years ago and they talk about WANDA G. KELLEY, CSR NELL MCCALLUM & ASSOCIATES, INC. 1 low concentration, 40 or 50 years ago, low *^24 2 concentration back then was a hundred parts per 3 million? 4 A Less than a hundred parts per million. 5 Q Around that area, right? 6 A No, not necessarily. 7 Q Between 75 and a hundred? 8 A I cannot answer you any better than it was N s. 9 less than a hundred parts per million, legally. 10 Some of the states had adopted 75, and some had 11 adopted 50 - 12 Q Well, Professor Hammond - i 13 A - - a t that time. But legally, Texas, I 14 don't know what it was at that time, I wasn't here. 15 Q I'm going to refer you again, in the Skeen 16 testimony, under oath at trial -- 17 A That's right. 18 Q -- you were asked: You could safely 19 assume, 40 or 50 years ago when they were talking 20 about low concentrations, they were talking about 21 something in the range of a hundred parts per 22 million; isn't that right? And your answer was 23 yes. Is that correct? 24 A Yes, legally, yes, that was right. And -- 25 Q Are you aware, based on your experience, WA ND A G. KELLEY, CSR NELL MCCALLM & ASSOCIATES, INC. 9th 2 1 knowledge, Professor Hammond, of any article 2 indicating that benzene is a human leukemogen at a 3 level of 10 parts per million or below? 4 A Yes, there is a great deal in the 5 literature about that. 6 Q And how long have you known that, 7 Professor? 8 A Since 1942. 9 Q All right, sir. Again, Professor, I'm . 10 going to refer you to page 20 of the transcript of 11 the Skeen testimony where this question was asked of 12 you: 13 "Is benzene a human leukemogen; that is, 14 does it cause leukemia in humans at the level of 10 15 parts per million?" 16 And your answer, under oath, was: "I'm not 17 aware of any experiences or cases where it was 18 proven that 10 parts per million caused that." 19 MR. BAGGETT: I'm going to object to the 20 manner in which you have approached that because 21 your prior question does not allow or serve as a 22 foundation for approaching him with a document that 23 way. What you've asked him a question on and what 24 you just read to him are entirely two different 25 things. So I object to the manner and foundation. W A N D A G. KELLEY, CSR NELL MCCALLUM & ASSOCIATES, INC. 9f?\ 2A 1 MR. SPEARS: All right, sir. 2 Q When you testified in the Skeen case, you 3 testified under oath that you were not aware of any 4 cases or anything in the literature proving that 5 benzene was a leukemogen at 10 parts per million. 6 Is that correct? 7 A I did not have information personally, and 8 that was a medical question I would rather somebody ' s 9 else answer. 10 Q You have already testified that everything 11 you have known about benzene you have known in the 12 last 40 years, 50 years? 13 A 50. 14 Q You haven'tlearned anything new in the 15 last few years. Is that correct? 16 A Not that changed my zeroconcentration 17 necessary to keep - 18 Q So when you testified under oath in the 19 Skeen case that you were not aware of any 20 experiences or cases where it was proven that 10 21 parts per million caused leukemia, you were 22 testifying truthfully, were you not? 23 A I did not know of any tests where they had 24 air samples or any other proof of the exposure 25 level, and I still don't have that information. W A N D A G. KELLEY, CSR NELL MCCALLUM & ASSOCIATES, INC. &41 24 1 Q My question was: When you testified that 2 you were not aware of any experiences or cases where 3 it was proven that 10 parts per million caused 4 leukemia, were you testifying truthfully? 5 A Yes. You would have to have the case 6 leukemia and you would have to have his work period 7 and concentrations as to how much he was exposed for 8 40 hours a week throughout his lifetime, maybe 40 9 years, and I didn't know of any case like that. 10 Q What is the ACGIH, Professor? 11 A American Conference of Governmental 12 Industrial Hygienists. 13 Q Are you a member, sir? 14 A No, not today. 15 Q Were you a member? 16 A I was. 17 Q Is it a very well respected organization? 18 A It has its good membership. And in what 19 way or where, who respects it and so forth, would 20 you ask me the question? 21 Q Just generally in the industry, is the 22 ACGIH respected as being consisting of people like 23 yourself, when you were a member, of knowledgeable 24 people in the industry? 25 A Generally that was a value that was adopted WA ND A G. KELLEY, CSR NELL MCCALLUM & ASSOCIATES, INC. a^ 2 1 legally and enforced by some states, counties, 2 cities and nation, is what I know about it. 3 Q Well, when you were a member of the ACGIH, 4 sir, is it true that the ACGIH classified benzene as 5 a suspected human carcinogen? 6 A I remember that term and I objected to it 7 but I was just one member of the team. Like all 8 committees, everybody had a vote, and I was s. 9 outvoted. 10 Q But my question to you, sir, was, the 11 ACGIH, while you were a member, classified benzene 12 as a suspected human carcinogen. Is that correct? 13 A I explained it, yes, that's correct. And I 14 explained what it was, where it got there, not that 15 I approved of it. And we didn't have it in Exxon 16 Company. Another good illustration of how we just 17 stepped out ahead and began, in 1947, to enforce a 18 one -- zero concentration as far as our work period. 19 Q Are you saying, Professor, that the 20 ACGIH -- and I don't want to put words in your 21 mouth, you tell me -- but the ACGIH classified 22 benzene as a suspected human carcinogen, but that 23 was not your opinion? Is that what you're saying? 24 A I thought it was very definitely a 25 carcinogen. WANDA G. KELLEY, CSR NELL MCCALLUM & ASSOCIATES, INC V oO 2i 1 Q So when in the Eighties, in '86, when the 2 ACGIH classified benzene and kept the classification 3 of benzene as being a suspected human carcinogen, 4 your opinion was it was a known human carcinogen. 5 Is that what you are saying? 6 MR. BAGGETT: I object to the form of that 7 question until the statement counsel has made is 8 proven. 9 MR. SPEARS: 10 Q What was the classification of the ACGIH 11 for benzene, sir, in 1980? Wasn't it suspected 12 human carcinogen? 13 A As I recall that criteria was behind the 10 14 parts per million, and a question mark was raised. 15 Q And it was still called a suspected human 16 carcinogen by the ACGIH, is that correct, in the 17 Eighties? 18 A Not the entire membership. 19 Q No, sir. 20 A But a majority of the members. 21 Q The membership -- I understand there were 22 votes taken, and the ACGIH had to have a policy. 23 And the statement made by the ACGIH in the Eighties 24 was that benzene was a suspected human carcinogen. 25 Is that correct? WANDA G. KELLEY, CSR NELL MCCALLUM & ASSOCIATES, INC 25 1 A That was in the TLV handbook, yes. 2 Q All right, sir. But it's your opinion that 3 despite the fact that the ACGIH said suspected, you 4 knew all long that it was a human carcinogen. Is 5 that what you are saying? 6 A I had enough information in 1942, by the 7 diagnosticians, to indicate that some people were 8 susceptible at any concentration above zero and ' s. 9 would be subject to leukemia and other diseases. 10 Q Is it your testimony, Professor Hammond, 11 that by the mid 1970s, certainly, or I think - 12 correct me if I'm wrong -- scratch that. 13 Is it a correct statement to say that by 14 the time you went to work for Exxon, the very first 15 time, that you were of the opinion that benzene was 16 a known human carcinogen? 17 A I was. 18 Q All right, sir. And that has always been 19 your policy? 20 A No exception. 21 Q All right, sir. In1977, Exxonhad a 22 material safety data sheet for benzene, did it not, 23 sir? 24 A It did. 25 Q All right, sir. And it's true, sir, is it W ANDA G. KELLEY, CSR NELL MCCALLH & ASSOCIATES, INC. 2 5; 1 not, that in that material safety data sheet, which 2 you signed, it states that benzene is a suspected 3 human carcinogen? 4 A That is the term that was used with the 5 threshold limit value. 6 Q All right, sir. Now, you're telling me 7 under oath that you knew most definitely that 8 benzene was a known human carcinogen since 1940, and '' s. 9 yet you allowed a 1977 Exxon material safety data 10 sheet, which you authored, to go out with the term 11 suspected human carcinogen? Is that what you're 12 saying? 13 A I did. 14 Q So you just followed what the AC6IH had 15 been doing, suspected human carcinogen. Is that 16 correct? 17 A That was going out to be utilized by people 18 in the legal manner, that they did not violate the 19 TLVs that had been approved by the AC6IH. I had no 20 authority to override them on these material safety 21 data sheets. 22 Q Who sent out the material safety data sheet 23 for Exxon? Was it the ACGIH or Exxon? 24 A Exxon. 25 Q And who was in charge of the policy W A N D A G. KELLEY, CSR NELL M C C A L L U M fit ASSOCIATES, INC. 253 1 Implementing MSDS sheets? Was it Jim Hammond or the 2 ACGIH? 3 A Our Toxigrams speak for themselves on that 4 matter. Do you have a copy of that? 5 Q Professor Hammond, who was in charge of the 6 MSDS sheets and the language contained therein for 7 Exxon in '77? It was Jim Hammond, wasn't it? 8 A Not Jim Hammond alone. We had a s 9 committee. And I had to, again, have the problem of 10 being a minority member that believed it should be 11 definitely spelled out, but I didn't have the vote 12 on the committee to see that it was. 13 Q. Well, once you got away from the committee, 14 when you were allowed to send out an MSDS sheet to 15 the people who were buying benzene, in 1977, you put 16 suspected human carcinogen. Is that correct? 17 MR. BAGGETT: Wait a minute. You have said 18 an awful lot there that I object to the form of the 19 question, until that is proven that until he got 20 away from the committee, et cetera. I don't know 21 that that's a fact, so I object to the form of the 22 question. 23 MR. SPEARS: 24 Q Answer the question, Professor. 25 A My answer is that the sheet went out that WANDA G. KELLEY, CSR NELL MCCALLUM & ASSOCIATES, INC. 25 4 1 way, and it went out because it had legal 2 obligations to meet and that was in compliance with 3 the legal. But the people who interpreted that 4 should be qualified professional people who knew the 5 background and the knowledge. And it was quite 6 plainly in literature that susceptible people were 7 not to be exposed to anything above zero. And that 8 was our internal company policy. 9 Q But if someone were to read your 1977 MSDS . 10 sheet authored by Jim Hammond and it said on there 11 suspected human carcinogen, would they be allowed? to 12 assume that Jim Hammond was telling them the truth? 13 A You surely would because that should alert 14 them to go and make the investigation to find out 15 how, why and what risk they would be taking by 16 adopting that susceptible - 17 Q But -- 18 A That's a weasel word. 19 Q But truth and fact, Jim Hammond was not 20 saying the truth in that 1977 - 21 A I was not -- I was saying -- I was saying 22 susceptible is acceptable in that particular case, 23 but it wasn't my opinion. 24 Q You were saying, in the 1977 MSDS sheets 25 sent out by Exxon, which you signed, that benzene is W A N D A 6. KELLEY, CSR NELL MCCALLUM & ASSOCIATES, INC. 2 1 a suspected human carcinogen, while at the same time 2 you knew, in your own mind, you were convinced it 3 was a known human carcinogen. Is that correct? 4 A I applied the known wherever I had the 5 authority to do it. But only -- as I said, the only 6 thing that ACGIH 10 parts per million told you was 7 susceptible but not that I approved of it. 8 Q Professor Hammond, it's true that while you s, 9 were working for Exxon, you never recommended or * 10 worked towards a goal of zero exposure to benzene. 11 Is that correct? 12 A Wrong. Do you have a copy of my letter of 13 1953 to Mr. Wrightman? It should be part of all of 14 our exhibits here. Wrightman and I told them in 15 1948, and if you didn't have zero concentration you 16 must put in all the medical surveillances and 17 monitoring and so forth to make sure the people 18 wasn't susceptible to it. 19 Q professor Hammond, my question to you, in 20 the real world it was not practical to work towards 21 a zero exposure level of benzene, was it? 22 A Yes, it was. We did. 23 Q And that's always been your position? 24 A That's been my position ever since I have 25 been -- 1942. WANDA G. KELLEY, CSR NELL MCCALLUM & ASSOCIATES, INC 25 1 Q Professor Hammond, I'm going to refer you 2 to page 74 of your sworn testimony under oath in the 3 Skeen case. You recall testifying in that case, 4 sir? 5 A I do. 6 Q All right, sir. And the question was asked 7 of you at page 74: 8 "'The statement has been made informally 9 that the maximum allowable concentration for benzene 10 should be zero.' Do you remember that?" 11 And your answer was, "I heard that." 12 And the question was, "You don't agree with 13 that," do you? 14 And your answer was, "I don't think that's 15 practical that you can live that way." 16 "No. I don't recommend zero as a limit." 17 MR. BAGGETT: Wait just a second. You 18 asked him a question and then propose to present him 19 a document. You asked him one question which is not 20 contrary at all, and you're suggesting that now he 21 said something different. He hasn't. The proper 22 foundation hasn't been laid for the way that you 23 have proceeded here. You asked him one question and 24 then present an answer to the other. 25 MR. SPEARS: Thank you, Bill. WANDA G. KELLEY, CSR NELL MCCALLUM & ASSOCIATES, INC S') 2E 1 MR. BAGGETT: And so I object to the form 2 of your question. 3 MR. SPEARS: 4 Q Under oath, when you testified in the Skeen 5 case in 1986, you testified under oath that you did 6 not recommend zero ppm as a limit. Is that correct, 7 sir? 8 A No, not that way you have stated it, no. ' s 9 Q Read it, sir. 10 MR. BAGGETT: That's great, read it " 11 because, Ken, you are saying that you recognize 12 maximum as a limit, and that isn't what he says. 13 MR. SPEARS: No, no. 14 MR. BAGGETT: It speaks for itself. Go 15 ahead, and I'll straighten it out when I get him. 16 It doesn't matter. 17 MR. SPEARS: 18 Q Professor Hammond, I want to refer you to 19 your testimony that you gave in the Skeen case. Did 20 you say that, "I do not recommend zero as a limit"? 21 Yes or no. 22 A Under what conditions? Why didn't I 23 recommend it? 24 Q I'm just reading the question and answer to 25 you. WANDA G. KELLEY, CSR NELL MCCALLUM & ASSOCIATES, INC. 2 1 A No, you didn't read all of it. You just 2 read part of it. 3 Q I'll start again, Professor. 4 A Read the whole thing. 5 Q The statement -- this is a question to 6 you. 7 "'The statement has been made informally 8 that the maximum allowable concentration for benzene ' s. 9 should be zero.' Do you remember that?" 10 And your answer was, "I heard that." 11 Are you following me so far, sir? 12 A Go ahead. 13 Q And the next question was, "You don't agree 14 with that?" 15 And your answer was, "I don't think that's 16 practical that you can live that way." 17 Next question, "And you weren't trying to 18 tell the jury that Monsanto should have known that 19 zero was the exposure level in '50 or even today?" 20 "No. I don't recommend zero as a limit." 21 "I think 10 parts per million and less is 22 sufficient." 23 Is that what youtestified to - 24 A I did. 25 Q -- in 1986? W A N D A G. KELLEY, CSR NELL MCCALLUM & ASSOCIATES, INC 259 1 A And with that, I had already testified that 2 they had to have medical surveillance programs and 3 control, and you just read part of it. But the jury 4 already knew that I recommended if you didn't have 5 zero, then you had to put all these medical 6 surveillance programs into the program to be sure 7 you took care of the susceptible people. And you 8 never know who is susceptible. And all of that had 9 been explained to the jury. 10 Q What we do know -- - 11 MR. BAGGETT: Excuse me just a second. I 12 want to articulate my objection on the record right 13 now. 14 MR. SPEARS: Objection to what? 15 MR. BAGGETT: My objection to the -- to 16 what you are improperly inferring in the record by 17 the method in which you have proceeded. You refer 18 to legal limits and adoption of legal limits and 19 suggest to the jury that the doctor -- Professor has 20 testified to something different than that, which is 21 completely erroneous. What he has testified to is 22 there is a difference between legal limits, 23 enforceable limits in the work place and the policy 24 which he had of attempting to be zero, which is the 25 same policy that I'll show that Conoco had in 1953 W A N D A G. KELLEY, CSR NELL MCCALLUM & ASSOCIATES, INC. 260 1 that they announced, it's the same policy that he 2 has -- that the API suggested in 1948, is that you, 3 because of individual susceptibility, that you shoot 4 for zero. You may have different maximum allowables 5 or TLVs for legal enforcement. And there is a 6 difference and you have not -- you have tried to 7 avoid that distinction in the way that you have 8 proceeded with your interrogation. And the whole ' s 9 form of your interrogation has been misleading and 10 confusing to the jury. And I will ask that it be 11 stricken. 12 MR. SPEARS: Bill, for the record - 13 MR. BAGGETT: I just want to -- while I'm 14 thinking about it. 15 MR. SPEARS: For the record, of course, I 16 object to your pontificating and stating -- it's not 17 an objection, you were testifying. So for that -- 18 the court will figure out whether the objection is 19 valid or not, but I object to your statements in the 20 record. 21 Q It's true, Professor Hammond, that in 1986 22 you thought 10 parts per million of benzene was 23 sufficient? 24 MR. BAGGETT: Sufficient for what? I 25 object. Sufficient for what? I object. It's not a W A N D A G. KELLEY, CSR NELL MCCALLUM & ASSOCIATES, INC. 1 complete question. 2 Jj>\ 2 2 MR. SPEARS: 3 Q The question was, in the light of this 4 ridiculous statement about zero, absolute zero, 5 Professor, truth in fact, you never worked for an 6 absolute zero because you knew that absolute zero is 7 just not attainable. Is that correct? 8 A If you had used part of the exhibit 9 there -- do you have Wrightman, the letter I wrote 10 to Mr. Wrightman in 1953, discussing what we decided 11 upon as policy in the company in 1948, that we would 12 have said that if you do not have zero, you have to I 13 put all of these medical surveillance and monitoring 14 programs such as urinary sulfates, urinary phenol, 15 and you have to do medical examinations on all these 16 employees periodically, starting out frequently, to 17 see which one is susceptible so you can remove those 18 susceptible individuals out of further exposure. 19 And you just have part of your -- my testimony in 20 that particular -- 21 MR. SPEARS: Professor, thank you, but I 22 object to your answer as not being responsive to my 23 question, with all due respect to you, sir. 24 Attach Exhibit D-3 to the deposition. 25 That's all I have, Professor. Thank you WANDA G. KELLEY, CSR NELL MCCALLUM & ASSOCIATES, INC 26 1 for your patience. 2 MR. BAGGETT: Do you want to break for 3 lunch? 4 THE WITNESS: I guess we better. It's now 5 12:20. 6 MR. FREEMAN: I've just got a few 7 questions, probably 10 or 15 minutes worth. 8 MR. BAGGETT: Have you got many. Bob? s \ 9 MR. MYERS: About 15. * 10 MR. BAGGETT: You want to go ahead, and 11 then we'll have lunch afterward? 12 THE WITNESS: Sure. 13 VIDEOGRAPHER: Off the record, 12:20, to 14 change tape. 15 [Recess] 16 VIDEOGRAPHER: On the record, 12:22. Tape 17 number two. 18 19 20 EXAMINATION BY MR. FREEMAN 21 22 Q Mr. Hammond, you have mentioned a couple of 23 times, in response to Mr. Spears' questions, a 1953 24 letter that you wrote to a Mr. Wrightman? 25 A Yes. W A N D A G. KELLEY, CSR NELL MCCALLM & ASSOCIATES, INC 2 ^ 3 26 1 Q Do you have a copy of that letter with you 2 here today? It was not attached as an exhibit. 3 MR. BAGGETT: I hope it's attached to one 4 of the earlier depositions. And I may have it out 5 in the car. I'll try to get it as soon as you 6 finish here. 7 MR. FREEMAN: Good. 8 Q But as far as you're concerned, ' N 9 Professor Hammond, you don't have it personally with , 10 you here today? 11 A No. 12 Q You have indicated several times about a 13 medical surveillance program that you were involved 14 in some fashion with initiating at either Humble or 15 Esso or Exxon at some point in time. As far as 16 those Exxon employees that were working on the dock 17 that were involved in the marine transportation 18 aspects as well as those employees that were the 19 truck drivers of the Humble tanker trucks, can you 20 detail for me what exactly that medical surveillance 21 program included for those type of workers? 22 A Yes, but I would refer you to one of my 23 publications in which I spelled that out very 24 clearly. And it's about seven, eight different 25 items. And if you have any of my exhibits, in 1958, W A N D A G. KELLEY, CSR NELL MCCALLUM & ASSOCIATES, INC. 26 1 '59, Dr. Herman and I published a report covering 2 that. So I would rather refer you to that, if you 3 will accept the reference. 4 Q This is a document other than your 1955 5 benzene exposure control document? 6 A Yes. 7 Q So it's a separate piece of paper? 8 A It came out after we had five years of N s. 9 experience with controlling benzene and the way we 10 did it. 11 Q Just so as I understand, Exhibit 22 to your 12 deposition is what I understand to be a three-page 13 or a four-page document that you put together in 14 1955. Mr. Baggett is showing you a copy of Exhibit 15 22. You authored Exhibit 22? 16 A On page 3 beginning with V, Medical and 17 Industrial Hygiene -- 18 COURT REPORTER: I'm sorry, beginning with 19 v -- 20 A V. 21 MR. FREEMAN: 22 Q Roman Numeral V? 23 A On page 3 and Roman Numeral, yeah, Medical 24 and Industrial Hygiene. 25 Q So are these the details of the medical WA ND A G. KELLEY, CSR NELL MCCALLUM & ASSOCIATES, INC. 26 1 surveillance programming? 2 A That's right. 3 Q If you would. Professor Hammond, just 4 explain what those are or list those for the court 5 so we don't have to refer back to this exhibit 6 necessarily. 7 A I think most of them speak for themselves. 8 And the medical examination would be a ' s 9 preplacement. And covering the preplacement on the 10 potential employee to work at the plant would be a 11 complete blood count, exclude the people with 12 evidence or history of simple anemia or other blood 13 cell diseases, C, consider any chronic condition 14 involving liver or kidneys for exclusion. 15 Q Preplacement examination, that is before 16 they're employed? 17 A Before they go to work on a benzene unit or 18 a unit that has benzene concentrations. 19 Q And then at least once a year to do some 20 sort of a urinary phenol examination of the urine? 21 A We then began down there measuring phenol. 22 COURT REPORTER: I'm sorry. I can't 23 understand you. 24 A Measure phenol in urine by the G.C. That's 25 a gas chromatograph, is really what it is, but G.C., WANDA G. KELLEY, CSR NELL MCCALLUM & ASSOCIATES, INC. 26 1 according to the method of Haaften & sie, and he 2 gives a volume of second Industrial Hygiene Journal, 3 Volume 26, No. 1, pp 52-58, January-February of 4 1965 . 5 Q So do I understand, then, that as far as 6 the medical testing itself, the primary test is a 7 urinary phenol examination? 8 A No. This is done in industrial hygiene ' s, 9 laboratory where we have specialists that know how 10 to handle the analysis of these samples. 11 Q Again, these questions are very basic, but 12 is the urinary phenol a test that's performed on an 13 employee's urine? 14 A That's right, and it reflects a way of 15 monitoring the potential exposure that the employee 16 might have had during the period of eight hours 17 before the sample was collected. 18 Q Any other industrial hygiene or medical 19 biological testing on the individual employee other 20 than the urinary phenol, pursuant to this program in 21 1955? 22 A Not from that standpoint of being able to 23 evaluate their prior exposure to the last work 24 shift, for example. 25 Q You indicated that the preplacement W A N D A G. KELLEY, CSR NELL MCCALLUM & ASSOCIATES, INC. 26^ 1 physical examination would be before an individual 2 is placed into some sort of a unit or some sort of a 3 possible exposure location? 4 A Where he might have a potential exposure, 5 yes. 6 Q If an individual is going to be hired to 7 work on the docks loading and discharging barges or 8 hooking up hoses, would that require such a % 9 preplacement physical examination? 10 A It did. We do. 11 Q How about for a truck driver that's 12 carrying crude oil? 13 A Not unless we knew that he had had exposure 14 to the area, but he would be picked up also by the 15 medical surveillance program because when he came up 16 for his physical examination, of course, the 17 complete blood count is part of that examination, 18 and that would detect any potential change in the 19 blood. 20 Q Same question for a gasoline pumper at an 21 Exxon retail gasoline station in the Fifties or 22 Sixties. Would he be required to go through a 23 preplacement physical examination? 24 A If he was an Exxon employee, he would. 25 Q If you would, Professor Hammond, flip over W A N D A G. KELLEY, CSR NELL MCCALLUM & ASSOCIATES, INC 1 to the Esso Toxigram which has been marked as 2 Plaintiff's Exhibit 13 in that volume you have 3 there. 4 A Yes. 5 Q You were employed or with the company known 6 at this particular time known as Esso? 7 A No, not that particular time. It was 1958, 8 I see, and at that time we had not united between ' s. 9 Humble and Esso to form the Exxon Company. ^ 10 Q Were you involved in any fashion with 11 review or authoring this particular Toxigram at 12 about the time it was being put together either by 13 Exxon or Esso? 14 A I was. 15 Q At that time in the spring of '58 or 16 preceding that period, at that time you knew in your 17 mind, it was your opinion, was it not, that benzene 18 was a known human carcinogen? 19 A Yes. I think thatjustified this 20 statement. May I read it? 21 Q Yes. 22 A "Most authoritiesagree that in light of 23 present knowledge, the only level which can be 24 considered absolutely safe for prolonged exposure is 25 zero." WANDA G. KELLEY, CSR NELL MCCALLUM & ASSOCIATES, INC. UA 26 1 Q It doesn't say anything in there about your 2 opinion that it causes cancer? 3 A That reflects my opinion. 4 Q You had indicated earlier today that the 5 legal standard for short-term exposure at some point 6 in time to benzene was 25 parts per million? 7 A I remember that was the acceptable TLV 8 listed by the ACGIH. s. 9 Q For short-term exposure, and I believe you 10 defined short term to be five to 15 minutes? 11 A I did. 12 Q How many times per day would an individual 13 be allowed to be exposed to that short-term 14 concentration for that short amount of time and 15 still be within the eight-hour TLV? 16 A Oh, that would only allow the person to be 17 exposed -- they have spelled that out. I don't 18 remember whether it was three times a day or so many 19 minutes, but it was probably expressed in that term, 20 either the number of minutes in an eight-hour time 21 or the number of times at, we'll say, less than 15 22 minutes for that period. But it's all spelled out 23 in the ACGIH standard. 24 Q So it is likely, then, that an individual 25 could be exposed to the short-term limit more than WANDA G. KELLEY, CSR " NELL MCCALLUM & ASSOCIATES, INC. 1 one period a day and still be within the ano 27 2 time-weighted average for an eight-hour day? 3 A Yes, for legally speaking that, again, 4 permitted them to transfer some benzene from one 5 container to another, for example, in the laboratory 6 or something. 7 Q You had earlier indicated that you chaired 8 Exxon's committee that had the oversight 9 responsibilities for the MSDS sheets. Do you recall 10 that testimony, sir? 11 A Yes, I do. 12 Q At what period of time did you chair that 13 committee? 14 A I was secretary in 1948, and then that same 15 year I became chairman in 1948, and I was still 16 chairman when I retired in1978. 17 Q 1970? 18 A '8. 19 Q 1978? So for 30 years, you chaired that 20 committee? 21 A I did. 22 Q Again, inresponse to some of Mr. Spears' 23 earlier questions concerning what Exxon may or may 24 not have done when Exxon was selling large 25 quantities of benzene to Exxon's industrial WAN DA 6. KELLEY, CSR NELL MCCALLUM & ASSOCIATES, INC. fin l 27 1 customers, you had indicated that when that shipment 2 occurred through a pipeline, that in addition to the 3 MSDS there would be a -- and you used the words a 4 very close conference with that benzene customer, 5 and then paraphrasing it, to make sure that they 6 understood the dangers. Do you recall that 7 testimony? 8 A Yes, I do, and that means that we would ' s 9 confer with the physician, if they had a physician . 10 on board, or if they had an industrial hygienist we 11 would bring him into it. And also, if not, we 12 sometimes dealt with the head of the safety 13 department, safety engineers. 14 Q I'm assuming that your reference to 15 pipeline transportation was merely an example of the 16 various types of transportation modes when Exxon 17 utilized this sort of communication between Exxon's 18 customers and Exxon. 19 A Yes, but actually at Baytown, for example, 20 across the ship channel, we had, and probably still 21 do, an arrangement with Du Pont to use our product. 22 Q Excuse me. Go ahead. 23 A Before they built the unit down at the 24 Monsanto chemical plant in Texas City, we had a line 25 that ran directly that was just dedicated to benzene W A N D A G. KELLEY, CSR NELL MCCALLUM & ASSOCIATES, INC. 2 7; 1 to them and others such as that. I don't remember 2 whether Carbide, Union Carbide had that arrangement 3 with us or all of them. I don't remember all of 4 them, but the principle was the same. 5 Q So the same policies or the same Exxon 6 procedures would be in effect if the delivery route 7 did not involve a pipeline but involved a ship? 8 A Barge. 9 Q A barge? So the same arrangement would 10 have occurred for maritime transportation? 11 A Would have occurred for marine operation. 12 Q Can you recall any instance where you were 13 involved for Exxon with one of these large customers 14 involving bulk sales of benzene where the shipper 15 was involved within this Exxon notification 16 procedure to the Exxon customer? 17 A I don't recall any particular shipper. We 18 did tests on our own people that were loading the 19 barges that were measuring, sampling the degree of 20 filling and so forth. We had them, and they would 21 very much come under the same control program we had 22 for the employees in the plant, the medical 23 surveillance, medical selection. 24 Q Mr. Hammond, are you aware today, sitting 25 here, of any warnings that were issued by Exxon to WANDA G. KELLEY, CSR NELL MCCALLUM & ASSOCIATES, INC 27 1 Higman Barge Lines or Higman Towing Company 2 concerning the dangers of benzene? 3 A I don't recall that name, no, in any 4 details. I am not -- I was not familiar with them 5 coming and receiving our product, personally, I 6 don't know. 7 Q That's all I'm asking is your personal 8 knowledge, your personal opinions here today. Same 9 question as far as Humble warnings to Higman Towing . 10 Company? 11 A No. 12 Q Same question as far as Esso's warnings 13 concerning benzene to Higman Towing Company? 14 A I don't have any individual knowledge of 15 that. 16 Q Those questions related specifically to 17 benzene warnings. Do you have any knowledge 18 concerning the same type of warnings given either by 19 Exxon, Humble or Esso to Higman Towing Company 20 concerning the dangers of crude oil exposure? 21 A No, I do not. The signs and warnings that 22 were posted for our own people were available to 23 them on the docks and in that area, and our 24 requirements in regard to the use of gas masks and 25 other type respiratory equipment would apply to them WA ND A G. KELLEY, CSR NELL MCCALLUM & ASSOCIATES, INC. p * 2' 1 as far as any information that they received from 2 our people using the right devices and so forth. 3 And again, our people working on those areas, the 4 docks areas, were under our medical surveillance and 5 testing program. 6 Q You mentioned some warnings, apparently a 7 sign or some sort of a physical board on the dock? 8 A Yes. 9 Q Do you recall what those said? 10 A Most of them pertained to explosive and 11 fire hazardous nature, but sometimes we had them 12 there that referred to the particular compound that 13 would be like in the classification of benzene. 14 Q Do you recall any of those warnings, those 15 placards placed on the dock referring explicitly to 16 the dangers of inhaling crude oil vapors? 17 A No, I do not have that detailed information 18 in front of me. I don't have it in my mind. 19 Q Are you aware today of any warnings, any 20 warnings that were issued either by Exxon, Humble or 21 Esso to Higman Towing company or Higman Barge Lines 22 concerning the dangers or the possible exposure 23 dangers of crude oil? I've already asked you the 24 crude oil, but gasoline, aviation gas or diesel? 25 A No, I don't have any knowledge of field WANDA G. KELLEY, CSR NELL MCCALLUM & ASSOCIATES, INC. 1 operation. ^ 27 2 Q Earlier in your testimony you had indicated 3 that the Exxon employees that were working on the 4 dock wore respirators or breathing protection when 5 it was necessary. When, in your opinion, 6 Mr. Hammond, was it necessary for those type of 7 employees to wear a respirator? 8 A It was necessary whenever they had to open 11 s 9 the hatch on a barge or on a tanker and also . 10 particularly when they were sampling the level of 11 filling or measuring the quantity of benzene in the 12 tank at the time or gasoline at the tank. 13 Q so anytime when an Exxon employee would 14 open the hatch of a barge carrying benzene, they 15 were required to wear respirators? 16 A They were. And also even gasoline and 17 other volatile material such as benzene. 18 Q Did those other volatile materials, in your 19 mind, include crude oil? 20 A It could, depending upon the oil, but I 21 don't know of any specific field operation where I 22 saw them wearing them. 23 Q When they were handling crude oil? 24 A Yeah, I don't remember. I just wasn't on 25 the barges that much. WANDA G. KELLEY, CSR NELL MCCALLUM & ASSOCIATES, INC. 27 1 Q So, as a general statement, the usual, 2 customary practice of the Exxon employees on the 3 dock would not be to wear a respirator when they 4 were opening the hatches of a barge carrying crude 5 oil? 6 A Oh, you had very hazardous material there, 7 in many cases sour crude, for example, hydrogen 8 sulfide, and that certainly was deadly poison that 9 had to be protected. And anytime the safety and 10 fire department people thought that we needed 11 respirators, they were always available and used by 12 the people. 13 Q If we remove the H2S danger, the hydrogen 14 sulfide danger, the sour crude from that type of 15 cargo -- my question is a general type question, 16 Professor Hammond -- as a general statement, wasn't 17 it true that when the Exxon employees popped open 18 the hatch covers, dipped or gauged the tanks, 19 checked the ullages on a barge carrying normal crude 20 oil, that they were not required by your department 21 to wear respirators or other respiratory protective 22 equipment? 23 MR. BAGGETT: I want to object to that 24 until you define what is normal crude oil and 25 specify whether or not it contains benzene and the WANDA G. KELLEY, CSR NELL MCCALLUM & ASSOCIATES, INC. 2 1 percentages of benzene. 2 MR. FREEMAN: 3 Q Normal crude oil, anything other than sour 4 crude containing excessive amounts of hydrogen 5 sulfide? 6 MR. BAGGETT: Object to form. It's not a 7 complete hypothet. 8 MR. FREEMAN: s 9 Q You can go ahead and answer the question, 10 Mr. Hammond. 11 A I cannot imagine them opening up any barge 12 on sampling or else measuring without the person 13 wearing a full respiratory protective equipment 14 because of the volatile materials that normally 15 would be there, the other materials that might be 16 generated in the barge by content or what it had had 17 before in it before it was an empty barge, a filled 18 barge. They wore respiratory protection until they 19 had monitored the tank or the barge and tanker, yes, 20 it was general practice. And also had a combustible 21 gas indicator to determine what the danger from fire 22 and explosion was. 23 Q Assume with me, Professor Hammond, that 24 there is not going to be entry into a tank by man. 25 Assume with me further that there is not going to be WA ND A G. KELLEY, CSR NELL MCCALLUM & ASSOCIATES, INC 27 1 any hot work performed in a tank. Under any of 2 those circumstances, is there any reason to sniff it 3 with a combustible gas meter? 4 A Absolutely. 5 Q There is? 6 A Yes, and that's just a quickoverall test 7 for presence of gas of any nature that might be 8 there that's combustible. 9 Q I need to makesure Iunderstand you? 10 testimony, Mr. Hammond. So it's your testimony 11 today that as a general matter, Exxon employees 12 working on the dock when they checked the tank tops 13 or opened up a barge containing crude oil, normal 14 crude oil, excluding excess amounts of hydrogen 15 sulfide, that they wore full protective gear 16 including respirators? 17 MR. BAGGETT: I think the testimony was 18 that they should have. I don't know whether -- 19 you're asking him to testify as to what they did for 20 30 or 40 years. I think it's objectionable. 21 MR. FREEMAN: I'm asking about his 22 understanding of the general practices of the Exxon 23 employees. 24 MR. BAGGETT: That's different. 25 A It was our general practice they did wear W A N D A G. KELLEY, CSR NELL MCCALLUM & ASSOCIATES, INC. 27 1 respirators. 2 MR. FREEMAN: 3 Q For crude oil barges? 4 A For crude oil barges. 5 Q Even if the Exxon personnel were satisfied 6 the benzene content of that crude oil was less than 7 2.5 percent? 8 A No, we had no such tests made on the 9 product before in terms of benzene concentration. 10 Q Would it have made any difference to you as 11 chairman or head of the industrial hygiene 12 department if you knew for certain that each crude 13 oil coming in on that barge, each load of crude oil 14 contained less than 2.5 percent benzene by volume? 15 A No. The other materials, all the 16 hydrocarbons that would be there, all of the 17 volatile material would be respiratory -- dangerous 18 to be inhaled or to be breathed, and so it put no 19 criteria that we had to analyze every batch before 20 we did anything. We just took precautions in the 21 beginning. 22 Q My question was not what you did to 23 actually determine it, but would it be important to 24 you as the head of the IH department to know if it 25 was below that certain level of 2.5 percent WANDA 6. KELLEY, CSR NELL MCCALLUM & ASSOCIATES, INC. 28 1 benzene? 2 A No, it would have had no effect. I've 3 assumed it was bad from the beginning. 4 Q Do you recall participating in some sort of 5 a study at the request of either Union Carbide or an 6 attorney representing Union Carbide in the mid to 7 late Eighties? 8 A I do. 9 Q What was the subject of that particular 10 study, the workers or the employees that were the 11 subject of that study? 12 A Those particular barges was hauling 13 products up to their companies' plants in West 14 Virginia, and they had to go through some locks on 15 the Ohio River. So I flew up there and rode the 16 barges through and made measurements to see if there 17 was any particular occasion where inside the locks 18 that the vapor pressure -- the vapors themselves 19 might have moved above the normal. And these 20 particular barges were all sealed and there was no 21 gas leak and there was no occasion or no way for 22 them to have lost gases. Their question was just 23 a safety measure to make sure that there wasn't 24 some -- because it was in that lock and in a closed 25 system that there wasn't some way gas could build up WA ND A G. KELLEY, CSR NELL MCCALLUM & ASSOCIATES, INC 28 1 in there. But in my particular case, I didn't find 2 any leaks around the barges, and the seals were all 3 good and tight and so on. There was no exposure. 4 Q Do you recall what year you did your field 5 work for that study? 6 A I don't recall for sure, but it was in the 7 1980s. I don't recall the year, '85 or '87, 8 somewhere in that period. % s. 9 Q Who retained you to do that work? 10 A The Union Carbide people did. That was for 11 Union Carbide products, wasn't it? I thought you 12 had the name of the company there that I worked 13 for. It was Union Carbide, I believe. 14 Q Do you recall whether or not the contact 15 came to you from West Virginia or -- 16 A No, it came from locally here, from the 17 medical department or the personnel department for 18 the company. 19 Q Did you prepare a written report and then 20 forward that report to the same person that hired 21 you to do the study? 22 A I wrote him a letter. That was all the - 23 no formal report other than just a letter telling 24 them that the barges were all sealed and I didn't 25 find, detect any gases. WANDA G. KELLEY, CSR NELL MCCALLUM & ASSOCIATES, INC. 28 1 Q Do you recall that man's name you sent that 2 letter to? 3 A No, I don't recall. 4 Q But he was with Union Carbide here in the 5 Houston area? 6 A Yes, he was. 7 Q In the medical department? 8 A I don't know. It might have been the s 9 personnel department that handled safety and medical 10 for the company. 11 Q Were you in the field only for that one 12 occurrence to see what was going on on those barges 13 through the particular Ohio locks? 14 A That particular one, yes, was the only time 15 I rode the barge. 16 Q What was the cargo in the barges at that 17 time? 18 A I don't recall. 19 Q You don't recall if it was crude oil? 20 A No, I don't recall what it was. 21 Q Could it have been benzene? 22 A It was some of their products that they 23 generate in Texas City and went for utilization in 24 the plant in West Virginia. But I don't recall. It 25 was a volatile material, but what it was, I don't W A N D A 6. KELLEY, CSR NELL MCCALLUM & ASSOCIATES, INC. 28 1 recall. 2 Q Do you have a copy of that letter or that 3 report that you sent to whomever hired you? 4 A I don't think I have. I think it's been 5 maybe used in some exhibits, some trial or 6 something, but I don't have a copy. 7 Q Can you recall where that report was used, 8 either at the courthouse or in a deposition? s. 9 A No, I don't. It's beyond me. I don't 10 recall. 11 Q Do you recall any of the lawyers that may 12 have been involved in that litigation involving that 13 study? 14 A There wasn't any lawyers involved. This 15 was a precautionary measurement, evaluation and 16 monitoring before they had any problems. I 17 understood there were no problems, no personnel 18 problems. 19 Q Have you participated in any other studies, 20 examinations, industrial hygiene surveys in any 21 fashion at any time in your career, other than this 22 one that you have just mentioned, involving marine 23 transportation workers? 24 A No, x don't recall. I had several 25 associates and assistants that rode the tankers and WANDA G. KELLEY, CSR NELL MCCALLUM & ASSOCIATES, INC 28 1 rode the barges, but I didn't personally do that. 2 Q That was when you were still with Exxon? 3 A Yes. It was back at the beginning of 4 1950s, and over a period of 20 years until I retired 5 we did that several times. 6 Q If you would, Mr. Hammond, turn over to 7 Exhibit No. 3 in that volume in front of you. I 8 believe that's your letter to Mr. Baggett at some 9 point in 1991. 10 A Oh, yes, all right. 11 Q You have already - 12 A I remember this. 13 Q You've already gone over that letter in 14 some detail when Mr. Baggett was asking you the 15 questions. Even though that letter was written 16 several years ago, almost four years ago, three 17 years ago now - 18 A What, this letter? 19 Q Is it dated in 1991? 20 A Oh, yes. Oh, yes. Excuse me, go ahead. 21 Q Is it still -- does it still fairly state 22 your opinions as detailed in that letter, or has 23 anything occurred since you wrote that letter that 24 would cause you to modify any of the statements 25 contained in Exhibit 3? W A N D A 6. KELLEY, CSR NELL MCCALLUM & ASSOCIATES, INC 28 f 1 A No, I think this letter is still pretty 2 much sound, and I haven't made any - 3 MR. BAGGETT: Gentlemen, I see that 4 attached to the -- to this Exhibit No. 3 was the 5 February 23rd, 1953 letter that came from the safety 6 department's file, and it described in summary 7 recommendations for hazard to benzene exposures and 8 their control in certain operations in the petroleum \s. 9 industry in '48. I see that I did not bring that . * 10 as an exhibit. It may be in my car. I'm going to 11 go try to get it when we take a break, if I've got 12 it. 13 MR. FREEMAN: 14 Q Mr. Hammond, if you would, turn over to 15 Exhibit 9 in that same volume, which I understand to 16 be the API Toxicological Review concerning benzene. 17 Again, a great deal of time was spent going over 18 this document with you earlier. But as far as a 19 general statement, would you agree that at the time 20 this document was written, at that time API was 21 strongly recommending 50 parts per million as an 22 allowable safe exposure limit? 23 MR. BAGGETT: Wait a minute. The document 24 speaks for itself as to what the -- and what you 25 refer to as allowable safe limit is misleading, WANDA G. KELLEY, CSR NELL MCCALLUM & ASSOCIATES, INC. 28 1 unless you describe what you're talking about. 2 MR. FREEMAN: 3 Q Professor Hammond, would you agree that the 4 general majority view among the API members was that 5 50 parts per million should be, at the time the 6 document was written, 50 parts per million? 7 A Again, that goes back to the regulatory 8 agencies ;that was trying to enforce some level of 9 exposure. _ 10 Q I appreciate that response, Professor 11 Hammond, but I need to object to the responsiveness 12 of it. Again, the question was: Do you agree that 13 it was the majority view of the API members in 1948 14 that 50 parts per million was the strongly 15 recommended safe allowable limit? 16 A No, I don't know what the persons, the 17 group there, the people's opinion was. I didn't 18 talk to any of them individually. 19 Q You were a member of a number of API 20 committees, were you not? 21 A I was. 22 Q You wereactive inthe API for many years? 23 A Yes. 24 Q You chairedcertaincommittees or 25 subcommittees at specific times in your WA ND A 6. KELLEY, CSR NELL MCCALLUM & ASSOCIATES, INC. 28 7 1 distinguished career, did you not? 2 A I did. 3 Q And you are unable to give us your opinion 4 as to what the majority view of the API members were 5 in 1948 concerning allowable limit of benzene 6 exposure? 7 A No, I wouldn't be able to even estimate 8 that for you. 9 Q There on the first page past the cover 10 page, which is a Bates stamp of triple ought two, 11 0002, there is a Section 3, Roman Numeral III, where 12 this API documents talks about probable sources of 13 contact. Do you see the section of the document I'm 14 referring to, Mr. Hammond? Lower -- 15 A I see under that, yes. 16 Q It talks about the extensive use of benzene 17 in the petroleum industry, talks about how it's 18 blended into gasolines. Do you have any explanation 19 today, Professor Hammond, why that a probable source 20 of contact such as inhalation of crude oil fumes is 21 not discussed here in this document? 22 A Benzene was used in that period, 23 apparently, but not in the United States as it was 24 commonly used in Europe where they had a lot of 25 distillation of coal. The source at that time was WAN DA G. KELLEY, CSR NELL MCCALLUM & ASSOCIATES, INC. 288 1 primarily in the coking operations where they 2 collected the vapors from coke and condensed it down 3 into benzene, and it was blended with petroleum 4 products into gasoline, particularly in Europe, but 5 not much that we knew about in the United States. I 6 think that applied to the European practice. 7 Q A couple of last questions, Professor 8 Hammond. If you can turn over to Exhibit 22, which, 9 again, is your 1955 benzene exposure control 10 document. I believe you have already explained to 11 us, when either Mr. Baggett or Mr. Spears was asking 12 the questions, that this document applied to 13 processes involving, number one, pure benzene? 14 A Yes. 15 Q Like 1-A, thebenzene plant? 16 A Yes. 17 Q There on the first page. But did it apply 18 to other process streams or other possible sources 19 of exposure? 20 A Yes. 21 Q I believe those aredetailed at Roman 22 Numeral Section III on page 2 of thisdocument? 23 A Yes. 24 Q Particular concern isdetailed for those 25 streams at the refinery containing 5 percent or more WA ND A G. KELLEY, CSR NELL MCCALLUM & ASSOCIATES, INC. 28 1 of benzene. Do you agree? 2 A I see that is with five or more, recommend 3 appropriate control - 4 COURT REPORTER: I'm sorry. Five or 5 more -- 6 A Five percent or more benzene, recommend 7 appropriate control items under 1-A unit and VB, 8 capital VB, medical. 9 MR. FREEMAN: 10 Q So for process streams involving 5 percent 11 or more by volume of benzene in that product steam, 12 you're recommending the same engineering practices, 13 the same medical surveillance practices as the 14 benzene unit? 15 A As pure benzene. 16 Q Then for those process streams, refinery 17 streams involving 2-1/2 percent to 5 percent 18 benzene, you were requiring some particular 19 investigation to determine the type and the quantity 20 of exposure. Is that true? 21 A As you see there, investigate and determine 22 the potential exposure. 23 Q But in 1955, you were not recommending 24 either a full medical surveillance program, such as 25 was in place for the benzene unit workers, nor were WANDA G. KELLEY, CSR NELL MCCALLUM & ASSOCIATES, INC. 29( 1 you recommending investigation for those people that 2 were exposed to the process streams or the refinery 3 streams less than 2-1/2 percent by volume of 4 benzene? Agree? 5 A This applies to 2-1/2, investigate and 6 determine exposure potential for all of those 7 particular ones. some of them was so locked in and 8 gastight t^hat there wasn't any particular -- you 9 didn't find any potential exposure. You would. . 10 maybe -- you would ignore those that are inside, and 11 some of them would even be destroyed. The streams 12 would be destroyed before they came out into a 13 finished product that might be released. 14 Q You said a lot right there, and I didn't 15 quite follow. But you indicated you would ignore 16 those, and is it my understanding that you would 17 ignore those employees exposed to less than 2-1/2 18 percent benzene concentration? 19 A No. All of those streams were carefully 20 investigated and a potential exposure were 21 determined on them and the employees were being 22 examined and checked periodically. 23 Q So for the employees that were exposed to 24 refinery streams containing between 2-1/2 percent 25 and 5 percent benzene by volume -- W A N D A 6. KELLEY, CSR NELL MCCALLUM & ASSOCIATES, INC. 29 1 A Well -- 2 Q It was your -- let me finish the question. 3 It was your recommendation in 1955 that those 4 employees would be investigated, the exposure 5 routes, the concentrations were to be investigated 6 to determine additional data? Is that a correct 7 statement? 8 A No. We had at least a dozen streams that 9 are not recorded here, and many of them were below 10 the 2-1/2 percent. And they were also treated, 11 employees were treated if they were exposed to 100 12 percent benzene, anything where there was benzene 13 that could get in the air. But we required first 14 and foremost that the higher streams be the ones 15 that we would investigate and determine first. 16 Q You've already testified, Mr. Hammond, that 17 the benzene unit that was brought on-line by Exxon 18 at the Baytown facility in the mid Fifties was a 19 state-of-the-art production facility? Correct? 20 A It was a production facility for benzene 21 manufacturing. 22 Q It was also state of the art as far as 23 engineering controls which you had a direct hand in 24 implementing as far as to reduce the possible 25 benzene exposure to those employees that worked at WANOA 6. KELLEY, CSR NELL MCCALLUM & ASSOCIATES, INC. 29 1 that state-of-the-art production unit. Agree? 2 A It did, and it's spelled out in this 3 exposure control manual. 4 Q And your benzene exposure control which you 5 had a direct hand in authoring, which is identified 6 as Exhibit 22, Plaintiff's Exhibit 22, that also was 7 a state-of-the-art exposure control policy procedure 8 or protocol? You agree with that statement? 11 s 9 A It was for that purpose. ^ 10 Q And there is nothing in Exhibit 22, this 11 document, indicating any special treatment for those 12 employees of Exxon that are exposed to refinery 13 streams of less than 2-1/2 percent benzene 14 component? 15 A That decision was made after we had 16 investigated the operations, and sometimes even a 17 tenth of a percent was not permitted without putting 18 them under medical surveillance programs. We just 19 worked it from the top down, that we worked from 5 20 percent down and treated 5 percent as a pure benzene 21 and worked it on down, depending on how they were 22 handling it, how much exposure potential it had, and 23 put the men under the medical surveillance and 24 phenol biology examination, depend on what we saw 25 out there in the field. WA ND A 6. KELLEY, CSR NELL MCCALLUM & ASSOCIATES, INC 29 1 Q The first page of my copy of Exhibit 22 has 2 a handwritten note up in the upper right-hand 3 corner. Does your copy also have that handwritten 4 note? Is that your handwriting, sir? 5 A Yes, it is. 6 Q Could you read it for me? I can't quite 7 read it. 8 A This control program was in operation by 9 1955, Baytown refinery and HO&R, Humble Oil 10 Refining Company. 11 Q What's the word separating 1955 and 12 Baytown? 13 A "In," just the word in Baytown refinery. 14 Q You testified earlier, Mr. Hammond, about 15 some opinions concerning the Walsh-Healey Act. Do 16 you have an opinion today, sir, whether or not the 17 Walsh-Healey Act applied to either Higman Towing 18 Company or Higman Barge Lines? 19 A I wouldn't be qualified to answer that. 2 0 MR. FREEMAN: Thank you. I don't have any 21 other questions. 22 23 24 25 WANDA G. KELLEY, CSR NELL MCCALLUM & ASSOCIATES, INC. 29 1 EXAMINATION BY MR. MYERS 2 3 Q Professor Hammond, have you met Joseph 4 Hebert, the plaintiff in this case? 5 A Oh, no. 6 Q No? 7 A No. 8 Q Have you read his deposition? s 9 A No. 10 Q Do you know what type of work he did? 11 A No, I don't know what he did. I'm leaving 12 . up to someone else. 13 Q You have no indication at this point as to 14 the type of employment he was engaged in for the, 15 oh, 37 or so years he worked for Higman Barge 16 Lines? 17 A I understand he was an operator on the 18 barge. 19 Q During your period of employment with 20 Exxon, you were concerned about potential exposure 21 of benzene to employees of Exxon? 22 A I was. 23 Q Did you ever write or author any article, 24 paper, i n t e r n a l m e m o r a n d u m with E x x o n , w h e n y o u w e r e 25 the chief industrial hygienist for that company, W A N D A 6. KELLEY, CSR NELL MCCALLUM & ASSOCIATES, INC. 295 1 specifically addressing Exxon employees handling of 2 crude oil? 3 A I don't remember any publication. I 4 participated in seminars within the company on that 5 subject, but I didn't write it up. No, I don't have 6 anything written. 7 Q Did you ever address any memorandums, any 8 directives to subordinates within the company 9 concerning potential exposure to benzene products to . 10 Exxon employees that were handling crude oil 11 products? 12 A The letter that I referred you to, 13 Mr. wrightman was addressed on that matter. It was 14 a pipeline handling of crude oil in Wyoming in which 15 they were making tests on that oil to determine how 16 much BS&W it had in it, and I wrote -- that letter 17 would explain my position on that. 18 Q What was your position? 19 A That any amount of benzene that was present 20 would require that the employee be placed under a 21 medical surveillance test and the program that we 22 had for benzene handlers. 23 Q Did you implement any program while at 24 Exxon so that the products, the crude oil products 25 that the employees of Exxon were handling would be W A N D A G. KELLEY, CSR NELL MCCALLUM & ASSOCIATES, INC. 29 1 tested to determine how much benzene was contained 2 in those products? 3 A I never did that type of examination. 4 Q How would you know that an employee was 5 exposed to benzene by handling Exxon crude oil if 6 the crude oil was not tested? 7 A The crude oil was tested by other 8 individuals and by the laboratories that -- service ' Sr 9 laboratories that did that type of work. 10 Q Did you get the results of those tests? 11 A I did, whenever they contained any -- 12 Q Did you ever, after receiving the results 13 of those tests, implement any program to have the 14 employees that were handling the crude oil placed on 15 medical surveillance? 16 A I did. 17 Q You are certainabout that? 18 A I do. 19 Q All right. And when we talk about medical 20 surveillance, sir, what are we talking about? How 21 often? 22 A At the first,forexample, the concentrate, 23 we started out on a weekly basis, and then we 24 expanded that for these employees as we had more 25 confidence that they did not show any deterioration WANDA G. KELLEY, CSR NELL MCCALLUM & ASSOCIATES, INC 29 1 or any hypersensitivity. And finally with that, 2 three months range, and then later on it was a 3 half -- six months, and then a year, once a year, 4 but never longer than a year afterwards, so long as 5 they worked in potential exposure to benzene. 6 Q Do you have any opinion, sir, as to how 7 much exposure to benzene it takes to have a positive 8 result in the urine test that you would give, for s. 9 example? ,, 10 A I don't have that value in mind, but it has 11 been determined. 12 Q And what is it? 13 A I say I don't have it. 14 Q You don't know? 15 A Well, I knew at the time, but right today I 16 don't remember. 17 Q You have gone over the history of the 18 identification of problems associated with exposure 19 to benzene and you have given your opinions based on 20 your participation in the petroleum institute, as a 21 member, and also a member of the ACGIH. Is it 22 correct to say, sir, that as early as 1940, when the 23 knowledge of potential problems with benzene first 24 became discussed in the industrial hygienist 25 community, that the acceptable level at that period WANDA G. KELLEY, CSR NELL MCCALLUM & ASSOCIATES, INC. 29 1 of time for exposure was 100 parts per million? 2 A Federally, I don't remember that there was 3 any established. The State of Massachusetts and the 4 State of Mew York about that period developed a 5 recommended level for their department of labor to 6 enforce, and I don't remember the exact 7 concentration. 8 Q ,But suffice it to say, and I think you will 9 testify to this, that from that point, whatever it 10 was, it became lower and lower and lower from the 11 various agencies over a period of 50 years. Is that 12 correct? 13 A I think they had settled, by 1970, on a 10 14 parts per million. 15 Q Ten parts per million? 16 A And then -- 50 years was a little too 17 long. I think it was more like 25 years. 18 Q What is the acceptableregulatory exposure 19 level right now? 20 A One tenth of a part per million. 21 Q All right. What was it five years ago? 22 A Which agency? 23 Q ACGIH. 24 A Ten partsper million, I believe. And 25 OSHA, too. But OSHA had recommended one part per W A N D A G. KELLEY, CSR NELL MCCALLUM & ASSOCIATES, INC. 29 S 1 million back in 1978, and the Supreme Court threw it 2 out. So they went back to the 10 parts per million. 3 Q And you were of the belief that no parts 4 per million is the acceptable level. Is that 5 correct? 6 A Because there are certain -- yes, because 7 there are certain sensitive people that even 8 Dr. Hunter, in 1939, and his diagnostic finding was N. 9 that he reached that conclusion and published it in . 10 the medical literature from Boston General 11 Hospital. Fortunately, I was working there in 1941, 12 M2, and got to know Dr. Hunter, and he convinced 13 me from his -- his finding with patients that only 14 zero, and he recommended it in his article of 1939 15 that for some people only zero concentration was 16 safe . 17 Q But you can't reach zero concentration 18 levels, can you? 19 A Well, you can substitute -- in addition to 20 getting them as low as practical, you can then 21 substitute your medical surveillance and pick up 22 those hypersensitive people before they go beyond a 23 certain point in their blood changes and rescue 24 them, so to speak. 25 Q What's the concentration of benzene in the WAN DA G. KELLEY, CSR NELL MCCALLUM & ASSOCIATES, INC. 30 1 air outside, in your opinion? 2 A Here in Houston, Harris County? 3 Q Yes. 4 A Not greater than one -- average of one part 5 per billion. 6 Q Billion or million? 7 A Billion. 8 Q Are there areas in South Texas that are one 9 parts per million in air concentration? k 10 A I don't know of any that I have seen the 11 results. I have seen some alleged concentrations, 12 but the EPA and the Texas Board of Air Pollution 13 Control would have all that information available by 14 district, county, cities and counties, but I don't 15 have it. 16 Q And I believe you mentioned in your earlier 17 testimony that there are extremely high 18 concentrations of benzene in cigarette smoke. Is 19 that correct? 20 MR. BAGGETT: I'm going to object to your 21 references to, quote, extremely high, unless you -- 22 MR. MYERS: I'll rephrase the question. 23 Q That per puff, for cigarette per puff the 24 concentration is in the area of 100 parts per 25 million? W A N D A G. KELLEY, CSR NELL MCCALLUM & ASSOCIATES, INC. 30 1 A That is the value that was available to me 2 in 1941 while I was associated with Harvard School 3 of Public Health. And Dr. Drinker's students made 4 those tests. I did not make them, so it's hearsay 5 to me. But I have no reason not to think that 6 Dr. Drinker and his group, being the authorities 7 that they were on method, were able to detect that 8 much. And that was reported to me as a student. s s. 9 Q And you believe that report that you read 10 as to the 100 parts per million per puff? 11 A I did at that time. Now, of course, I 12 recognize that the tobacco companies may have 13 changed the composition of the tobacco, and that may 14 not be the same value that was found in 1930s. 15 Q And then, of course, with the concentration 16 of benzene in cigarette smoke, you would, I take it, / 17 reasonably conclude that secondhand smoke, that is, 18 people that are exposed to smoke that are in a 19 general, an area of the smoker would be exposed to 20 high concentrations of benzene, wouldn't you? 21 A I do not have that information. I have 22 curiosity to know just what it might be, but I don't 23 know how to go about getting it. 24 Q Exxon did not provide its subcontractor 25 employee or subcontractor employees with respiratory W A N D A G. KELLEY, CSR NELL MCCALLUM & ASSOCIATES, INC. 30 1 equipment when moving crude oil, did they? 2 A It depended entirely on whether they had 3 their own or what they were doing. And our safety 4 department served as safety officers, and if they 5 were doing anything different than what we would 6 have been doing under the circumstances, handling 7 the materials they were handling, they would have 8 had to have had respiratory protection. Even we 9 would furnish it to them, if they needed it. 10 Q Of course, you implemented a program when 11 you were at Exxon to make sure that these 12 subcontractors employees that were hauling crude oil 13 for Exxon would be provided with respiratory 14 equipment, didn't you? 15 A Only when we figured -- only when we 16 analyzed the exposure and thought that they would 17 be -- our employees would be wearing respiratory 18 protection, we also insisted on them doing that. 19 Q And do you have any documents or any 20 memorandums that you wrote to set up this particular 21 program that you just mentioned to give respiratory 22 equipment to subcontractor employees? 23 A No. I didn't remember putting it in a 24 formal report, no, i don't recall I did. 25 Q Did you provide respiratory equipment to WANDA G. KELLEY, CSR NELL MCCALLUM & ASSOCIATES, INC 30 1 Exxon employees that worked at service stations in 2 the Forties and Fifties and Sixties that were direct 3 employees of Exxon to protect them while they were 4 pumping gasoline and petroleum products into 5 customers' tanks? 6 A No, I don't remember we ever found that 7 necessary. 8 Q Would you admit with me, sir, here today in 9 this deposition under oath that those employees 10 would be exposed to benzene vapor? 11 A No, I couldn't have any -- I don't have any 12 information that would help you on that. 13 Q You don't know one way the other, then? 14 A I do not have any information. 15 Q Do you have any opinion, sir, as to what 16 the concentration of benzene is in crude oil, any 17 crude oil you can dream up? 18 A No. I understand others have looked into 19 this but I never did do any personal investigation 20 and I don't have any ways to limit it, what range it 21 was. 22 Q I take it, then, when you were at Exxon, 23 your concern over the benzene exposure with various 24 employees was due to the concentration of the 25 substance benzene itself, once it was taken and WANDA G. KELLEY, CSR NELL MCCALLUM & ASSOCIATES, INC. 3 0 ^ 1 extracted from other products and put into one final 2 product? Is that what your major concern was, the 3 exposure to the benzene product itself after it was 4 purified for sale? 5 A No. The light streams that we had in the 6 refinery, many of those employees that had to do 7 sampling and other things had to be included in our 8 medical surveillance program. And they didn't have 9 benzene in any particular concentration that I , 10 recall, but they were just included because they 11 worked around the unit that potentially might have 12 products that would be in the boiling range of the 13 characteristics of benzene. And so we put them in 14 the program, too. 15 Q Would you expect that an employee working 16 on the inland waters or on the high seas 17 transporting crude oil on tankers or barges would be 18 required to walk around with a respirator on? 19 A I do not know about the conditions well 20 enough to know. You're speaking of conditions that 21 would be equally important, how well the barge seals 22 were to prevent leaks and any escaping materials and 23 so forth. All of those other factors of great 24 concentration -- I mean great importance as well as 25 the equal concentration of the benzene that they WA ND A G. KELLEY, CSR NELL MCCALLUM & ASSOCIATES, INC. 30 1 would be handling. 2 Q Are you a direct employee of Exxon at this 3 point? Are you a salaried employee? 4 A No. I've been retired since '78. 5 Q You receive a retirement -- 6 A 65, when I retired. 7 Q You receive retirement benefits from Exxon? 8 A I'm annuitant. I accumulated pension. I 9 was there 31 years. 10 Q Are you familiar with Koch Industries, Koch 11 Oil Company? 12 A Koch Oil? 13 Q Oil Company, Koch Industries? Have you 14 ever heard of it? 15 A Huh-uh, I don't guess I have. I know coke 16 was the primary source of benzene in our country for 17 many years in the steel manufacturing, where they're 18 coking the coal and they capture the vapors and 19 fumes and recover it, distill it to get benzene, 20 toluene, xylene. 21 Q Out of coal? 22 A Out of coal, soft coal. 23 Q That's not the company, though, that's the 24 product? 25 A That was the nature of the product that W A N D A G. KELLEY, CSR NELL MCCALLUM & ASSOCIATES, INC 30 1 they had to have for steel manufacturing, coke. 2 HR. MYERS: That's all I have. Thank you. 3 4 5 FURTHER EXAMINATION BY MR. BAGGETT 6 7 Q Professor, reference has been made to 8 Exhibit No. -- Plaintiff's Exhibit No. 22, which has s. 9 been referred to as the benzene exposure control 10 program that was in place by '55. I direct your 11 attention to part No. 2, page 2, dealing with truck 12 transportation, railcars and barges. Now, I ask you 13 if this part of your report relates to engineering 14 controls and means by which loading of barges can 15 be -- the benzene exposure can be limited? 16 A Yes. You see, we didn't make any exception 17 of truck or barge or railcars and so forth. Down 18 here now, when you get down to the potential 19 exposure, number K, you make sure that you follow 20 those. One place in here where it mentioned that 21 sampling, gauging the barges and others to be 22 accomplished with respiratory protection and 23 neoprene gloves. 24 Q Yes, sir. When you were asked about this 25 report, there was no reference to the barge WA ND A G. KELLEY, CSR NELL MCCALLUM & ASSOCIATES, INC 30: 1 controls. This sets out, does it not, how product 2 is to be drained, how waste is recovered, how you 3 have dripless valves and how you have automatic 4 cutoff valves to prevent overflow, you have 5 mechanical seals on pumps, you have calibrated probe 6 with nitrogen for gauging during the filling. All 7 of these were recognized back in the early Fifties 8 as means where barge employees could be protected, s. 9 were they not? , 10 A We did. 11 Q Also, you were not asked about this, but 12 look over on paragraph 5 on page 3. Were not 13 product shipping employees, such as gaugers, truck, 14 railcar, barge and tanker loaders, were they not 15 involved in your medical and industrial hygiene 16 urinary phenol program? 17 A They were, and they received periodic 18 examination to determine if there were blood changes 19 and so forth. 20 Q Sir, did you make it clear, when you were 21 asked that -- was your -- when you were questioned 22 about the refinery streams and the investigating and 23 determining exposure potential for streams with 2.5 24 to 5 percent b e n z e n e , did X understand you to say 25 that after that was done you moved on to the other WANDA G. KELLEY, CSR NELL MCCALLUM & ASSOCIATES, INC. 30; 1 process streams in the refinery to determine benzene 2 content? 3 A Yes, yes, we did. 4 Q You didn't just stop because of 2.5 5 percent? 6 A Not at all. 7 Q Sir, going back when we began this 8 deposition, you were questioned on state-of-the-art 9 things that were known and knowable, and you __ 10 referred to exhibits that are numbered in your 11 deposition that show going back to the Thirties. 12 A Yes. 13 Q Was it not recognized back as late as the 14 Thirties that if you had exposure, potential 15 exposure to benzene and if -- you determined that, 16 in the first instance, by monitoring. Is that 17 correct? 18 A Yes. 19 Q And if you've got potentialexposure to 20 benzene, then it has been long recommended that you 21 should be a part of a medical surveillance program? 22 A It has in thesearticles that were 23 published back in the Thirties and even in the 24 1920's by the American safety Council. 25 Q All right, sir. And looking as early as WANDA G. KELLEY, CSR " NELL MCCALLUM & ASSOCIATES, INC. 30 1 1948 at the API bulletin, doesn't it tell you that 2 chemically benzene is the simplest of the aromatic 3 hydrocarbons? 4 A Yes. 5 Q Chemically, that's what it is. What is 6 petroleum? What is crude? Isn't it hydrocarbons? 7 A It's hydrocarbons,but different 8 configuration as far as the molecules and so forth ' s. 9 are concerned. 10 Q But the aromatic hydrocarbons has been 11 known, has it not, to be a part of a crude product? 12 A It has been known, yes. 13 Q And in 1948, did they not point out that 14 benzene was used extensively in the petroleum 15 industry? Is that correct, sir? 16 A It was. It had certain characteristics 17 that were good for solvents. And, for example, you 18 would take a potential lube oil and you would 19 extract all the wax out of that lube oil with using 20 a mixture of methyl ethyl ketone and benzene. And 21 they were doing that in a plant that had been 22 designed for our refinery in Baytown when I came. 23 But we were able to substitute toluene rather than 24 benzene, and we never bought any more benzene - 25 Q Professor Hammond W A N D A G. KELLEY, CSR " NELL MCCALLUM & ASSOCIATES, INC. 31 1 A-- for that purpose. 2 Q -- to illustrate what was available in the 3 petroleum industry in the Forties in the way of an 4 industrial hygiene survey, you have testified about 5 Exhibit P23, did you not? 6 A I did. 7 Q Sir, you have testified as to what was 8 known and knowable, and that was the primary purpose s 9 for your testimony by the plaintiffs. You also have 10 testified as to what the program was in place at 11 Exxon during your stay as an industrial hygienist? 12 A I did. 13 Q Efforts were made, obviously, to question 14 the validity of the Exxon program by Defendants' 15 Exhibits 1 and 2. Can you tell me what these 16 exhibits reveal so far as your program, industrial 17 hygiene program at Exxon? 18 A The first one in 1958, and it's Dr. Howell 19 who did all the examination for us of these 20 employees with potential exposure. So we worked 21 with him on the chemical plant, on the benzene plant 22 as well as others, and he is well familiar with it. 23 So when we went into the refinery and we had any 24 type of i n f o r m a t i o n t h a t w o u l d be n e w or o r i g i n a l to 25 add to his knowledge, we would inform him. If he WAN DA G. KELLEY, CSR NELL MCCALLUM & ASSOCIATES, INC 3i: 1 saw some question in an employee that was 2 questionable in his mind and he came from a certain 3 unit, well, then he would let us know so that we 4 could go back and make a survey of that unit to see 5 how he could have been exposed to benzene. 6 Q Are these two documents just part of 7 documents that show an ongoing industrial hygiene 8 program that you put into place, and that is once ' s. 9 you determined something was happening to result in . 10 a potent -- or to create a potential exposure, that 11 steps were taken immediately to eliminate that? 12 A That was our program, yes. 13 Q And D No. 2 is actually one of the 14 industrial hygiene surveys that were made back in 15 1975? 16 A It was. 17 Q Sir, the reference to a TLV or a maximum 18 concentrate by reference to the industrial hygiene 19 standards or by reference to the TLVs adopted by 20 OSHA, those are for regulatory purposes, are they 21 not, to set legal limits? 22 A They are what we know, and I used to work 23 with the Department of Labor and others, that they 24 w e r e e n f o r c e a b l e l i m i t s . In o t h e r w o r d s , if t h e 25 employer did not correct the problem, they could be WANDA G. KELLEY, CSR NELL MCCALLUM & ASSOCIATES, INC. 31: 1 taken to court and fined for violation. 2 Q All right, sir. And when you look -- when 3 you look back as early as 1948 at the API, when you 4 look at Exhibit No. 9 on page 004 of the exhibit, it 5 refers, does it not, to maximum permissible benzene 6 concentration standards, whether they be the state 7 standards or TLVs in effect back in the Forties. is 8 that correct? 9 A Yes, they did. 10 Q But still it concludes, does it not, and 11 recognize early on that inasmuch as the body 12 develops no tolerance to benzene and there is a wide 13 variation in individual susceptibility, it is 14 generally considered that the only absolutely safe 15 concentration for benzene is zero? 16 A That is true. 17 Q And that is the standard that you tried to 18 adopt and recognized as being applicable to protect 19 the employees of Exxon? 20 A We followed that. 21 Q And if legally you could notaccomplish 22 that, how did you make sure that they were safe? 23 A Well, we did it by double-checking on them 24 and biological testing in which we used the employee 25 to make sure that his exposure had been zero or W A N D A G. KELLEY, CSR NELL MCCALLUM & ASSOCIATES, INC. 31 1 undetectable. And we could run that on the phenol 2 urine sulfate test. And so we did all of that plus 3 the medical surveillance that they did with blood to 4 determine if we saw any bad effects. 5 Q So in your testimony in Skeen and here 6 today, are you recognizing a difference between, 7 quote, what is safe because of individual 8 susceptibility, and what is, quote, legally 9 enforceable under a TLV or a maximum - 10 A Allowable. 11 Q -- maximum permissible benzene 12 concentration? 13 A That's right. 14 Q There is a difference, is there not? 15 A There is. 16 Q And there is no inconsistency in what you 17 have testified to when you refer to one as being a 18 legal limit and the other one being what you as an 19 industrial hygienist have recognized as being a safe 20 exposure or limit? 21 MR. SPEARS: Object to the form of the 22 question. 23 A Yes. We might use the word legal limit or 24 biological unit. And mine was a biological unit for 25 all people. And the control program included, when WANDA G. KELLEY, CSR NELL MCCALLUM & ASSOCIATES, INC. 317 1 safety manual and quoting from the API toxicological 2 review of 1948 would not put in the safety manual a 3 warning about the chronic benzene poisoning that can 4 result from repeated or continuous exposure to 5 relatively low concentrations of benzene vapor? Do 6 you know of any reason why? 7 A I would not know. 8 Q And if that section dealing with benzene s. 9 and reporting to an employee that the only safe to- 10 level is zero because of individual susceptibility, 11 can you think of any reason why that would be 12 omitted from subsequent safety manuals of Conoco? 13 MR. SPEARS: Object to the form of the 14 question. 15 A No, I couldn't contribute anything to that. 16 MR. BAGGETT: Or Continental Oil Company. 17 Can we go off the record, and let me run 18 out to the car and see if I can get that '53 letter, 19 and that will be it. 20 MR. SPEARS: It's in there, Bill. Didn't 21 you say it was in there? 22 MR. BAGGETT: No. He refers to it in the 23 report. 24 VIDEOGRAPHER: Off the record, 1:38. 25 [Recess] WANDA G. KELLEY, CSR NELL MCCALLUM & ASSOCIATES, INC. 3 1 1 VIDEOGRAPHER: On the record, 1:45. 2 MR. BAGGETT: 3 Q Professor Hammond, reference has been made 4 in your report, which is Exhibit P3, to a letter of 5 February 25th, '53 by you that you discovered in the 6 safety department of Exxon. Can you tell me what 7 that letter -- I thought I had it with me today; I 8 don't. It's attached to the deposition in the s. 9 Norman Ellis case and in the Steve Leblanc casp and 10 both of which involve Mr. Spears. I will produce a 11 copy to all counsel. But could you tell me what 12 that letter described? 13 A Yes. It described a visit I made to a 14 pipeline station located up in Wyoming which I 15 discovered that they were using benzene as a solvent 16 to extract the BS&W from oil bottoms that came out 17 of their pipeline storage tanks and that this was 18 being done in an unventilated area that was only a 19 one person and open shop, so to speak. But I said 20 that we could substitute a nonhazardous material 21 relatively for the benzene and get rid of it. And 22 then, if not, we would have to put in the medical 23 surveillance program for all the employees that 24 w o r k e d in t h a t a r e a a n d u s e d t h e b e n z e n e . 25 Q And, sir, that was consistent with what you W ANDA G. KELLEY, CSR NELL MCCALLUM & ASSOCIATES, INC 31' 1 have testified here today, and that is, so far as 2 safety is concerned, you tried to accomplish zero 3 exposure to benzene? 4 A Otherwise, that we would put in the medical 5 surveillance for all those employees that worked in 6 that area, and the only way we would make sure that 7 they were not being exposed to danger or risk that 8 we wouldn't want them to be with benzene. 9 MR. BAGGETT: I ask that this safety manual 10 of Continental Oil Company marked dated July 1, 1953 11 be attached to the deposition as Plaintiff's Exhibit 12 No. 25. 13 MR. MYERS: I'm going to object to the 14 attachment of it. I have not seen it yet. 15 MR. FREEMAN: How about a couple of 16 questions, Professor Hammond, while Mr. Spears is 17 looking through that document. 18 First off, let me reserve cross 19 examination, Mr. Baggett, for this witness after 20 today concerning his 1953 letter that was attached 21 to Exhibit 2. Higman has not been a party to those 22 prior testimonies. Higman has not been provided 23 with a copy of that letter. 24 COURT REPORTER: Can I mark that real 25 quick, before it gets away? WA ND A G. KELLEY, CSR NELL MCCALLUM & ASSOCIATES, INC. 3 2 ( 1 MR. FREEMAN: Yes. 2 MR. BAGGETT: Or I take it that I'm not - 3 that the testimony about that exhibit would be 4 excluded, if you're not satisfied with it. 5 6 7 FURTHER EXAMINATION BY MR. FREEMAN 8 9 Q Mr. Hammond, Exhibit 22, there has been a 10 great deal of discussion about your benzene control 11 exposure document, three pages. To put this 12 document into context, isn't it true that the 13 company, Exxon, which you chaired the IH department, 14 was greatly concerned about the possibility of 15 benzene exposure to their employees in the mid 16 Fifties because this benzene plant unit was 17 preparing to go on-line at the Baytown facility? 18 A I can understand your question, and I will 19 say that that did accelerate our concern. But this 20 letter that was written in 1953 that explained what 21 our agreements were with the operating people in 22 1948 would clarify that, that we already had the 23 program that zero levels was the only acceptable 24 levels, wherever we could reach that, and otherwise 25 that we needed the education and medical WANDA G. KELLEY, CSR NELL MCCALLUM & ASSOCIATES, INC. 323 1 benzene, is there? 2 A Yes. 3 Q Within thisdocument itself? 4 A Yes. We already had put into the 5 surveillance and dealing with the barge operators 6 and any of the dock workers and others that were 7 handling the hydrocarbons. 8 MR. FREEMAN: object to the responsiveness ' s 9 of the answer. 10 MR. BAGGETT: Oh, I think it was 11 responsive, very much. 12 MR. FREEMAN: 13 Q Professor Hammond, can you show me within 14 Exhibit 22 where it specifically makes this 15 procedure benzene exposure control applicable to 16 crude oils less than 2.5 percent benzene? 17 MR. BAGGETT: First of all, that was not 18 the question that you had asked awhile ago and the 19 answer that you got. 20 A I don't see it here what I'm looking for. 21 We covered that by saying and listed all of the 22 potential exposures and others, because there were 23 so many we didn't - 24 MR. FREEMAN: 25 Q Are you referring to someplace in Exhibit WANDA G. KELLEY, CSR NELL MCCALLUM & ASSOCIATES, INC. 32 1 22 where it says "and others"? 2 A I thought it was in 22. 3 MR. BAGGETT: It has been referred to, 4 Counsel. 5 A Yeah, refinery streams. Look under III A, 6 IV, that covers it, on page 2. 7 MR. FREEMAN: 8 Q That's the only place within this document? 9 A Well, it covered all those others. 10 Q Mr. Baggett asked you some questions 11 concerning the distinctions in your opinions, 12 Mr. Hammond, concerning legal limits and safe 13 limits. Now, the ultimate purpose of the legal 14 limit is not to satisfy the arbitrary whims of a 15 state or federal bureaucrat, is it, Professor 16 Hammond? One of the ultimate purposes of those 17 legal limits, is it not, to not necessarily to 18 guarantee but designed to protect the vast majority, 19 the health and the welfare of people who are exposed 20 to this particular harmful substance? 21 MR. BAGGETT: Excuse me. I object to that 22 question. The effect of the legal limits is a 23 question of law in which the jury or the court will 24 determine, like the Walsh-Healey Act is a question 25 of law and like TLVs will be -- legal effect of them WANDA G. KELLEY, CSR NELL MCCALLUM & ASSOCIATES, INC. 325 1 will be a question of law. 2 MR. FREEMAN: 3 Q Professor Hammond, were not the legal 4 limits, whatever those legal limits would have been 5 at the time and however you define those legal 6 limits at whatever level, were they not designed to 7 protect the majority of the health and welfare of 8 the workers? 9 A Yes. They spell that out in the TLV 10 booklet that you can apply these limits and it will 11 protect most of the people but not all of them, and 12 that the few, whether it was 10 percent or 12 13 percent, I was just equally concerned about their 14 welfare as I was about the 80 and 90 percent that 15 this would protect. 16 MR. FREEMAN: Thank you. 17 18 19 FURTHER EXAMINATION BY MR. BAGGETT 20 21 Q Professor Hammond, within the four corners 22 of the document P23, where they had sampling and 23 gauging of barges and tanks to be accomplished with 24 respiratory protection and neoprene gloves and these 25 other engineering controls, was there anything, was WANDA G. KELLEY, CSR NELL MCCALLUM & ASSOCIATES, INC. 326 1 that applicable to barges that came in with 2 hydrocarbons? 3 A It was. 4 Q When you had monitoring under the medical, 5 industrial hygiene program where you had urinary 6 phenols administered to product shipping employees 7 such as gaugers, truck, railcar, barge and tanker 8 loaders, was that applicable to people, barge and 9 tanker loaders involving hydrocarbons? 10 A It was. 11 Q And that includes crudes? 12 A All products. 13 MR. BAGGETT: Fine. 14 VIDEOGRAPHER: Off the record, 1:57. 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 WANDA G. KELLEY, CSR NELL MCCALLUM & ASSOCIATES, INC. 32 1 SIGNATURE OF WITNESS 2 3 I, PROFESSOR JAMES HAMMOND, solemnly s 4 or affirm, under the pains and penalties of perjury, 5 that the foregoing contains a true and correct 6 transcript of the testimony given by me at the time 7 and place stated, with changes, if any, and the 8 reasons therefor noted on a separate sheet of paper s 9 and attached hereto, and that I am signing this 10 before a Notary Public. 11 12 13 PROFESSOR JAMES HAMMOND 14 15 16 THE STATE OF TEXAS] 17 18 Subscribed and sworn or affirmed to before 19 me, the undersigned authority, by PROFESSOR JAMES 20 HAMMOND on this t h e _____day o f _____________, 21 22 23 24 Notary Public in and for 25 the State of Texas WANDA G. KELLEY, CSR NELL MCCALLUM & ASSOCIATES, INC. 328 1 STATE OF TEXAS] 2 3 COURT REPORTER'S CERTIFICATE 4 5 I, Wanda G. Kelley, a Certified Shortha 6 Reporter within and for the State of Texas, hereby 7 certify that the foregoing proceedings occurred 8 before me. 9 X' further certify that the foregoing is 10 a true and correct copy of the transcript of the 11 proceedings to the best of my ability. 12 I further certify that I am neither 13 attorney for, related to nor employed by any of 14 the parties or any attorney of record in this cause, 15 nor do I have a financial interest in the matter. 16 Witness my hand November 23, 1993. 17 18 19 20 Wanda G. Kelley, T e ^ CSR 2007* 21 Nell McCallum & Associates Inc. 22 2900 Smith, Suite 104 23 Houston, Texas 77006 24 (713) 523-3767 25 *My Certificate Expires December 31, 1994 WANDA G. KELLEY, CSR NELL MCCALLUM & ASSOCIATES, INC. JOSEPH L. HEBERT AND MARIE HEBERT VS HIGMAN BARGE LINES ET AL NO. 92-6203 * 14TH JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT * * PARISH OF CALCASIEU * STATE OF LOUISIANA On November 24, 1993, PROFESSOR JAMES HAMMOND vas notified by and through CERTIFIED MAIL SERVICE, by Mr. William B. Baggett, that the deposition taken in connection with the above cause vas rfeady for inspection and signature as evidenced by the copy of said correspondence attached hereto and made a part hereof. As of this the 10th day of January, 1994, PROFESSOR JAMES HAMMOND has failed to appear for the purpose of reading and signing said deposition; therefore, in accordance vith the Texas Rules of Civil Procedure, said deposition is being tendered to Mr. William B. Baggett. Witness my hand on this the 1994 Eileen Walton NELL McCALLUM & ASSOC HOUSTON, INC. 2613 Calder, Suite 111 Beaumont, Texas 77702 (409)838-0333 Facsimile (409) 832-:4501 2900 Smith. Suite 104 Houston. Texas 77006 (713)523-3767 Facsimile (713) 323-1541 Nell McCallum & Associates, Ine. November 24, 1993 WILLIAM B. BAGGETT, ESQ. Baggett, McCall 7 Burgess P.0. Drawer 7820 Lake Charles, LA 70606-7820 CM/RRR # P 921 297 171 S RE: NO. 92-6203 HEBERT V. HIGMAN BARGE LINES - Dear Mr. Baggett: Enclosed please find the original signature page from the deposition of PROFESSOR JAMES HAMMOND VOLUME 2 taken on November 18, 1993, in the above-referenced cause. Please have the witness read your copy of the deposition, mark any corrections on the sheet provided and sign the original signature page before a notary public. If the signature certificate page is not returned to the above Houston office within twenty <20) days, the transcript will be handled as though signed. Thank you for your assistance in this matter. INC. Enclosures cc: Robert Myers, Esq. Mark Freeman, Esq. Kenneth R. Spears, Esq. CM/RRR # P 921 297 173 CM/RRR # P 921 297 172 CM/RRR # P 921 297 174 COPY HUXELS OIL k r e f i n i n g c o m p a n y Er. ?. S. Howell Bayzovn This confirms our conference between you, Albert Mcskovitz, S. D. Bozich and myself on the benzene plant and potential exposure to benzene. Afterward,' Albert, Sam and I visited the plant. We found that the concentration range at toe eye wash fountain near the oil separator *t breathing level was 20-30 ppm. These lov results compared to previous values were due to the unusually high wind from the north which was about UO F. that morning. At two or three othe. spots downwind from leaks, such as a dripping sampling cock, the average atmos pheric concentration of benzene was 10 ppm. We recognized that this was a good day for lov concentration because of the unusually low temperature and high wind. Sam and Albert proposed several corrective changes. The oil separator will be covered with a solid cover and vented through a stack above the second floor platform. A steam exhaust Jet to accelerate the draft in this vent stack will'' be installed if there is no unforeseen problem to this addition. Sampling cocks will be re-piped so as to give a discharge point for flushing of the lines and potential leakage directly into a drain. A skimming line is to be re-routed from a drain on the ground platform to the oil separator. The product tacks have tvo potential problems which are being studied. One of 7 these problems will be solved easily b y the insertion of an oil seal in the v ~=atlc gauge line. The seal will prevent benzene vapcrs escaping through automatic gauge. The other problem involves sampling through the manhole v.. top of the tank. In the warm summer months it is pr: cable that large amounts of benzene vapor would be present in the breathing zone of the gauger under the present arrangement. This is a point where acute exposure is :ctentlally dangerous under all weather conditions and adequate venting or a recovery system should be installed for three product tanks and one high benzene rundown tank. he laboratory ventilation was adequate. ''h e men complained of the handicap of the use of gas masks with the full face piece, hey reported that this equipment obstructed their vision, added to the amount of uenzese lost at the time of sampling and increased their danger of falls. In view of the short period required to sample the products, it -is suggested that chemical artridge organic vapor respirators would serve as needed in this operation. The _is mask should.be held in readiness for emergency use as required for units handling highly volatile materials. -ine specimens were to be collected at 2 P.M. February 11. Mr. George Taylor reported he was in position to analyze samples for two of the three shifts be ginning with those of the 11th. He will test the other samples after he has i ne a little exploratory investigation of the best method of preserving those L~ich the employees leave at 2 P.M. T e unit is producing at about 901> design capacity with quality of the product ! r''"'"' tely satisfactory. medical division Original signed: J. V. Hammond Industrial Hygienist -- flwl4 1 ____ ___i t--cm 1ond/or 2 tor i a F W >ee "eue e id tte i on the lew rw d the torn ? 'Stock to torm to toe front d 0 * ntototoco. or on the e to n e 5toum Heoeipt Requeued* on toe wmptooe below e tom Rebm Heoeipt Fee w t provide you 0 * agnm ro ol T S SI totootdefcsry a Addressed to: eo Ihto *e cw itoum mi* ewd beck H epeoo dooe no permit. the _____ peraon detoerea to end the 4a. I also wish to receive the following services (for an extra 1. Addressee's Address 2. Restricted Delivery Consult postmaster for fee. Article Number fee): M XLLXA M B . 1XO O BTT B a ^ g t t t i M c C a ll B u rg a a a 9 .0 . D ra w e r 7 8 2 0 ' L a k e C h a r la * , LA 7 0 4 0 6 -7 8 2 0 P T21 4b. Service Type 2T? 171 C E R T IF IE D 1 S-^jorature - (Addressee) / & A ddresse s Address (ONLY if requested and tee paid) PS Form 3 8 1 1 , November 1990 D O M E S T IC R E T U R N R E C E IP T PLACE STKJRBR AT TOP OF ENVELOPE TO THE RIGHT OF RETURN ADDRESS. r-q pr=t cart rr=ut r CL IMPORTANT! INDUSTRIAL HYGIENE HEALTH SERVICES EXXON CHEMICAL COMPANY U. S. A INDUSTRIAL HYGIENE STUDY OF AROMATICS EXTRACTION UNIT BAYTOWN CHEMICAL PLAN T EXHIBIT Study By: M r. J. A. Allen . Mr. E. F. LeBrocq M r. B . G. Simpson Report By : M r. B . G. Simpson Date of Study: .October 1975 Table of Contents I. Summary II. Introduction III. P ro cess Description A . Arom atics E xtraction Unit (AXU) B . Hexane E xtraction Unit (HXU) C . AXU/HXU Flow Plan IV. Unit Evaluation A . M aterials B . A ir Contaminants 1. A rea Samples . 2. Personal Samples 3. Laboratory Quality Control Samples 4. Short T erm Samples (Grab) . 5. Conclusions 6. Recommendations C . Biological Samples D . Hearing Conservation 1. Noise Survey ` 2. Employee Exposure Evaluation 3. Conclusions 4. Recommendations E . Equipment Identification F . Safety Equipment G. Housekeeping P ftge No. 1 2 3 3 3 4 5 5 . 6 6 10 12 12 13 14 14 16 16 18 19 19 ' 19 19 20 SAL 000018813  V . Appendix A . T oxicity Data Sheets 1. Benzene 2. Toluene 3. Xylene . 4. Hexane 5. Monoethanolamine/Diethanolamine 6. Sulfolane 7. B reaxit $014 B . A rea Sample Location Plot C . Hearing Conservation Data 1 . Noise Survey Data Sheets 2. Noise Survey P lot Plan/Hazardous Noise A rea D . Equipment Schedule ' Page No. 22 23 28 32 36 38 40 44 46 48 49 51 52 < SAL 000018814 I I I. Summary Environmental health conditions w ere evaluated at the AXU/HXU during O ctober and November 1975.. Results of this study show: P ro cess technicians are'not excessively exposed to high noise levels. Significant exposure to benzene and toluene is possible when em ployees are collecting quality control sam ples and changing rich solvent 's. filte r s . Installation of a closed sampling loop should elim inate excessive exposure during sample collection. Em ployees should wear supplied air resp irato rs or organic vapor chem ical cartrid ges when changing the rich solvent filters. High concentrations of benzene and toluene w ere found coming from open se w e r g ra te s. Employee exposure to these vap o rs would exceed allow able lim its. Introduction of arom atics to the sew er should be elim inated. Housekeeping on the unit was good. - Safety show ers, eyew ash ers, and safety equipment a re w ell located. -1- aal5 11. Introduction This report is part of the ongoing environmental health program for Exxon Chem ical Company U. S. A . , Baytown Chem ical Plant. Industrial hygiene studies m easure the working environment to determ ine the presence of toxic ch em icals and p h ysical agents, and evaluate em ployee exposure. Samples w ere co llected that represent both actual and potential exposure. . # Exposure date is evaluated b y com parison with recognized standards that con sid er such factors as frequency of con tact, duration and nature of exposure. - . Industrial hygiene studies evaluate current environmental health conditions and provide a baseline to com pare future operations. < -2- SAL 000018816 # III. Process Description A . A rom atics Extraction Unit The A rom atics E xtraction Unit (AXU) is a U niversal Oil Products Company (UOP) p ro cess designed to extract high-purity arom atic fractions at high reco veries from a hydroform er feed con taining m ixed arom atics and p araffin s. Sulfolane, a solvent, is used to extract the arom atics (benzene, toluene, xylene) from the hydroform er feedstock. Raffinate from the extraction tower is returned to tankage after solvent separation. The arom atic rich solvent, containing dissolved nonaromatic hydrocarbons, proceeds to a solvent stripper tower fo r rem oval of nonaromatics. From the bottom of the solvent strip p er tower the arom atic rich solvent is pumped to the reco very tow er for separation of the arom atics. The aromatics are sent to tankage prior to final finishing and the dilute solvent stream s return to the w ater stripper and solvent regenerator. B . Hexane E xtraction Unit ' . The Hexane Extraction Unit (HXU) is co-located with the AXU. Feedstock fo r this unit is a pow erform er stream from the LEFU , which ` h as been fractionated to produce a hexane-octane rich cut. The HXU uses a sulfolane process to extract the benzene from the feed. The extraction tow er rides "piggyback" on the AXU lean and rich solvent stream s. The wash w ater system is common to both units. Extracted benzene proceeds from the HXU to the solvent strip p er tower in the AXU. 3- SAL 000018817 gxeaioooo IV. Unit Evaluations A . M aterials Feedstock, products, and m a teria ls n ecessary to operate the AXU/HXU are listed below. T oxicity data sheets for the m aterials a re found in Appendix A . Percent . 1. Feedstock ` Nonaromatic \ Benzene 21.4 13.7 Toluene . 25.5 6g Aromatics . 30. 7 Cg Aromatics Raffinate N on arom atics - Benzene Toluene 8.7 93.4 0.0 0.1 Cg Aranatics 1.9 Cg Aromatics Extract N on arom atics Benzene Toluene 4.4 2 15.4 29.9 Cg Aromatics 42.8 Cg Aromatics 9.9 < -5- SAL 000018819 4. Additives e . B re a x it 8014 (Exxon Chem ical) - D em ulsifier . Sulfolane (Shell Chem ical) - Solvent M AZU DF 100S (Mazu C hem icals Inc, ) - Antifoam Agent Diethanolamine (Union Carbide C o rp . ) - pH Control Monoethanolamine (McKesson C h em ical C o. ) - pH Control B . A ir Contaminants , Employee exposure to toxic substances in air was determined ' b y unit area saznples. personal m onitoring sam ples and short-term grab sam ples. . - 1. A re a Samples These samples show the exposure employees would receive if they w ere working at the monitored location. This type sample is a lso used to evaluate unit "tightness" and provide a baseline fo r future reference. A unit plot plan showing sample locations is in Appendix B . AXU A rea Samples Date Sample Location Location A ir Contaminant Threshold L e v e l. P a rts/ M illio n (ppm) Lim it Value (ppm) 10/7/75 1 5* N. E410B Benzene - 1 10 10/7/75 Toluene - T ra ce* Xylene - T ra ce* Hexane - N. D. 2 15' S. P451A Benzene - 1 Toluene - T ra ce* Xylene - T ra c e * Hexane N. D. 100 100 100 10 100 100 100 < T ra c e - L e s s than 0.1 ppm. 6- SAL 000018820 Sample Air Contaminant Threshold Date Location Location Level (ppm) Limit Value, (ppm) 10/13/75 3 2' S. P434A Benzene - 1 10 Toluene - 1 100 Xylene - 1 ` 100 Hexane - N. D. 100 10/13/75 4 1 S. P420A Benzene - T r a c e * 10 Toluene - T ra ce* 100 Xylene - T race* 100 Hexane - N. D. 100 10/13/75 5 1 S. P432B Benzene - T r a c e * 10 Toluene T ra ce* 100 Xylene - T race* 100 Hexane - T race* 100 10/13/75 6 1 ` S. P422B Benzene - T ra ce* 10 Toluene - T ra ce * 100 Xylene - T race* 100 Hexane - T ra ce* 100 10/14/75 7 W. E461A Benzene - 1 10 Toluene - T ra ce * 100 Xylene - 1 100 Hexane - N. D. 100 10/14/75 8 W. E461A Benzene - 1 10 Toluene - T ra ce* 100 X ylene - 1. 100 Hexane - N. D. 100 * Trace - Less than 0.1 ppm. ` . < stL ooooieMi Sample Air Contaminant Threshold Pate Location Location Level (ppm) Limit Value (ppm) 10/14/75 9 W. E461A Benzene - 1 10 Toluene - T race* 100 Xylene - 1 100 Hexane - N. D. 100 10/14/75 10 S. P433A Benzene - T ra c e * 10 Toluene - T race* 100 Xylene - T race* 100 ' s Hexane - N. D. 100 10/15/75 11 W. D450 Benzene - T r a c e * 10 2nd F lo or Toluene - T race* 100 Xylene - T race* 100 Hexane - N. D. 100 10/15/75 12 S.E.E420B Benzene - T ra ce* 10 * Toluene - T race* 100 X ylene - T r a c e * * 100 Hexane - N. D. 100 10/15/75 13 S. T420 Benzene - 1 10 ~ 2nd F lo or Toluene - T race* 100 Xylene - 1 100 Hexane - N. D. 100 10/15/75 14 S. T420 Benzene - T ra ce * 10 Toluene - T race* 100 Xylene - T race* 100 Hexane - N. D. 100 '*Trace - Less than 0.1 ppm. -8 SAL 000018822 Date Sample Location Location 10/22/75 15 S. P464A 10/22/75 16 W. P413 s s 10/22/75 17 W. P413 10/22/75 18 W. P461 10/22/75 19 W. D461 . ' A ir Contaminant L e v e l (ppm) Threshold L im it Value (ppm) Benzene - Trace* 10 Toluene - T race* 100 Xylene - T race* 100 Hexane - N. D. 100 Benzene - T race* 80 Toluene - T race* 100 Xylene - T race* 100 Hexane - N. D. . 100 Benzene - T race* 10 , Toluene - T race* 100 Xylene - T race* 100 Hexane - N. D. 100 Benzene - T race* 10 Toluene - T race* 100 Xylene - T race* 100 Hexane - N. D. 100 Benzene - T race* 10 Toluene - T race* 100 Xylene - T race* 100 Hexane - N. D. 100 V T r i c r : L e s s than 0.1 ppm. Results of area sampling show employee's exposure during a full eight-hour shift should be less than 10 percent of the allowable standard. < SAL 000018823 2. Personal Samples P ersonal samples w ere collected on process technicians. T hese sam ples m easure actual em ployee exposure during an eight ' hour shift. AXU PERSONAL SAMPLING DATA Date 10/7/75 E m ployee Shift B a tiste 7-3 A ir Contaminant Threshold L ev el (ppm) L im it Value (ppm) Benzene-Trace* Toluene -T race * 10 100 Comments . X ylen e-T ra ce* 100 > Hexane-N. D. 100 10/13/75 F razier 7-3 Benzene-Trace* 10 m Toluene-Trace* . 100 X ylen e-T race* 100 Hexane-N. D. 100 10/15/75 F razier Benzene-Trace* 10 7-3 Toluene-Trace* 100 X ylene-Trace* 100 Hexane-N. D. 100 10/28/75 F ra zier Benzene-Trace* 10 3-11" Toluene-Trace* 100 ' Xylene-Trace* 100 m Hexane-N. D. 100 10/29/75 B atiste Benzene - 4. 38 10 7-3 Toluene - 15. 84 ioo Collected simulated quality X ylen e-T ra ce* 100 control samples (feed, raffinate. Hexane-N. D. 100 extract). * T ra ce - L e s s tnau o. l ppm. . 1 0 H 1 ( SAL 000018824 Date Employee A ir Contaminant Threshold Shift L e v e l (ppm) Lim it Value (ppm) Comments 10/29/75 Allen Benzene- 2.27 10 3-11 Toluene- 1.12 100 X ylen e- 4.00 100 Hexane- N. D. 100 10/30/75 Burns 11-7 Benzene- 4.23 Toluene - 7.61 X ylene- 1.93 10 . 100 100 Collected quality control sam ples (feed, raffinate, and extract). Hexane- N. D. 100 10/30/75 Batiste 7-3 B en zen e- 1. 71 Toluene- 1.93 . 10 100 Xylene- Trace* 100 H exane- N. D. 100 10/30/75 Batiste 7-3 Benzene- 20.33** Toluene- 4.67 X ylen e- 2.93 10 . Simulated quality control 100 sam ples (feed, raffinate, and 100 extract). Hexane- N. D. 100 11/4/75 Batiste - Benzene- 6.30 Toluene- 5.65 X ylene- 6.51 Hexane- N. D. 10 Peak sam ple- simulated quality 100 control sample collection (feed, 100 raffinate, and extract). 100 * T ra c e - L e ss than 0.. 1 ppm. ** Employee also changed rich solvent filter. Short Term Samples. See additional data under -11- SAL 000018825 3. Laboratory Quality Control Sampling Personal a ir sam ples were collected while employees were sampling the feedstock* raffinate and extract. Q uality control sampling takes place on the graveyard shift and req u ires a total of five minutes to com plete. Sample lines are flushed to the pad allowing significant potential for high employee exposure. The allowable standard for short term exposure to benzene is 25 ppm. M aximum sh o rt term exposure to toluene is 125 ppm. ' s * SAMPLE RESULTS Date P e a k `E xposure Standard Name Benzene (ppm) Toluene (ppm) Benzene/Toluene (ppm) 10/30/75 Batiste 1 .7 1 1.29 25/125 11/4/75 Batiste 6.3 . 3.78 25/125 Although the peak exposure values do not exceed allowable lim its, unnecessary exposure is caused by flushing sample lines to the pad. Flushing of arom atic hydrocarbons to the pad is not a desirable work practice. Short Term Samples (Grab) Grab sam ples are used to determine employee peak exposure to transient vapors and during interminent operations. Samples were measured by use of D rager Detector Tubes, charcoal tubes and a portable hydrocarbon analyzer. ( 12- SAL 000018826 Date Location P ak Exposure Standard Benzene Toluene Benzene /Toluene 10/20/75 Sewer E ast T-440 60 ppm 400 ppm 25/125 ppm 10/20/75 10 Ft. Downwind 10 ppm of Sewer T-440 25/125 ppm 10/20/75 East E461 25 ppm 25 ppm 25/125 ppm 10/20/75 Downwind E461 10 ppm 10 ppm 25/125 ppm 10/20/75 Roadway Between Pumps and Furnace N. D. N. D. 25/125 ppm 0 10/20/75 P420B N. D. N. D. 25/125 ppm 11/4/75 Sample Point (Feed. Raffinate. Extract) 3 ppm 2 ppm 25/125 ppm 11/4/75 11/4/75 Column C -4 Sewer Column C-5 Sewer . 210 ppm 200 ppm 150 ppm 150 ppm 25/125 ppm 25/125 ppm 11/13/75 Changing Rich . 30 ppm Solvent F ilter C artrid ges (20 MPH Wind) .. 25/125 ppm 11/13/75 Still A ir in Trash Barrel for Used F itters 2 1 Q ppm 400 ppm 25/125 ppm 5. Conclusions Employee exposure to a ir contaminants based on eight hour tim e weighted average w as found to be within standards fo r all samples collected except one. The sample in question was collected October 30. and w as tw ice the allowable standard of 10 ppm benzene. Investigation showed the em ployee had changed the filt e r elem ents on .the rich solvent filte r . A ir sam ples of this operation were collected on November 13 and showed high le v e ls of benzene during filte r replacement. 13 < SAL 000018827 Employee exposure (eight hour time weighted average) was higher when quality control sam ples w ere collected. Exposure to arom atic vapors from the sew er system is another point of contact lik e ly to have caused higher exposure than would be expected from the data on unit area sam ples. 6. Recommendations a. Elim inate introduction of arom atics to sew er. b. Install a closed loop sam pling line at each quality control sample point. c . Ensure filte r is w ell flushed p rior to opening the rich solvent * line. d. Use D rager tubes to check for benzene when.changing filters or breaking open lin es. ' e. Em ployees should w ear supplied a ir resp irators or organic vapor chem ical cartridges when benzene concentrations exceed 10 ppm. Biological Samples Potential employee exposure to benzene can be determined by the use of area and personal a ir sampling, however, the final m easure is the degree of actual employee exposure. The human body m etabolizes benzene to phenol which is excreted in the u rin e. T h ere is a d irect correlation between benzene exposure and urinary phenol le v e ls. The norm al range of phenol in urine for unexposed people is 5-20 m g/liter. . . E xcessive benzene exposure is represented by urinary phenol concentrations of 80 m g /liter o r g rea ter. Samples on the following page a re identified as A . beginning of shift, and B . end of sh ift. R esults of sam ples show no significant employee exposure to benzene. < -14- SM- OOOO1 8 028 D. Hearing Conservation t 1 Noise Survey . Sound level m easurem ents w ere made at sp ecific locations on the AXU (see Noise P lot P lan in Appendix C). Potential hearing lo ss is based on the intensity and duration of noise exposure. The table below lists noise levels m easured at specific locations i and allowable unprotected exposure tim e. OSHA P e rm is s ib le Noise Exposures (Table G - 16 29CFR 1910. 95 [a]) ' S' . Duration P er Day. Hours 8 6 4 3 Sound L e v e l dBA Slow Response ~ 90 92 95 97 2 100 1 1/2 102 1 105 1/ 2 . 110 1/4 or Less 115 ` AXU Noise Survey Location No. Location Allowable Exposure N oise L e v e l (dBA) Tim e (Hours) 1 S. W. C orn er of Unit 79 8 2 P462 90 8 3 P440 CD O 8 4 P460A 93 51/2 -1- SAL 000016830 COST $_________ PAID BY PLF. DEF. TBA No_________ r IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS GALVESTON DIVISION EXHIBIT SAMMIE JOE SKEEN, INDIVIDUALLY AND AS NEXT S FRIEND OF ROCKY NEAL SKEEN AND ASHBY HOPE SKEEN, S MINORS, As Administratrix S of the Estate of,WILBUR S JACK SKEEN, Deceased, and JOE LYNN TAYLOR, JILL S MARY CROOK, JOHN MATHEW SKEEN, and JACK CHRIS S SKEEN, HAZEL SKEEN VS. S MONSANTO COMPANY, ITS S SUBSIDIARIES OR AFFILIATES S C. A. NO. G-82-468 PROCEEDINGS BEFORE THE HONORABLE HUGH GIBSON ON-LINE TRANSLATION SEPTEMBER 30, 1986 V J < * MS-1047 P.O.Box 58170 Houston,Tsxs*77258 (713)2800015 Page 13 1 not be cured if you're not detected early. 2 Q. What disease was that? 3 A. Basically by the attack on the bone marrow which 4 destroyed -- which produced the -- and destroyed that, 5 which was the organ that produced the blood supply. 6 Q. Was there a name for the disease? 7 A. There was a name of the disease, depending upon the 8 particular stage in which you caught it or found it. 9 Q. Can you giv us some examples? 10 A. Simple anemia was evidence of it. 11 Q. Now, you've testified now that in small amounts, low 12 concentrations, for prolonged periods of time, 40 or 50 13 years ago, benzene was known to cause anemia at least; is 14 that correct? 15 A. Capable of being able to cause anemia. 16 Q. Didn't cause it in everybody? 17 A. Did not c_ause it, because of the known difference in 18 susceptibility of individuals. 19 Q. What is a small amount, 40 or 50 years ago, what was a 20 small amount of the low concentration of benzene? 21 A. Forty or fifty years ago, the criteria was that we 22 would get it down to below a hundred parts per million. 23 Q. Forty or fifty years ago, a hundred parts per million 24 was considered to be a low concentration; isn't that right? 25 A. Depending somewhat upon the technique you went about Emanuel "Kym" Fontana, Jr. AC:!5l PniiT** RpnnrtpT Page 14 1 evaluating it or monitoring it. Many researchers and 2 people who studied carefully found that they could measure 3 it much below that and still were getting problems. 4 Q. We'll get to the measurement, but my question is: As 5 far as health hazards, what was a low concentration 40 or 6 50 years ago? It was a hundred parts per million, wasn't 7 it? 8 A. That was about the level at which they could adequately 9 or quantitatively measure or monitor the product. s. 10 Q. So in the literature 40 or 50 years ago, if they 11 discussed low concentrations or small amounts, you could 12 safely assume that they are talking about something in the 13 range of a hundred parts per million; isn't that right? 14 A. Yes. And if you examine the literature very carefully, 15 you realize that they really didn't have very good 16 information about what the concentrations were. 17 Q. Do you know what the mechanism for causing leukemia is? 18 A. Not entirely. It's a medical question that I would 19 like to pass over. I 'm not a qualified physician. 20 Q. Do you pass that on to somebody that is, like a 21 hematologist? 22 A. I would pass that on to a specialist other than in the 23 field of industrial medicine. 24 Q. Would a hematologist qualify? 25 A. I not qualified to answer that, because I 'm not Emanuel "fCym" Fontana, Jr. Offirial rnurt Pfor>rt.fr Page 20 1 could occur to someone being exposed over some lengthy 2 period of time to 10 parts per million? 3 A. The first symptoms that we could expect to look for, if 4 there were symptoms of some damage, would be in the blood 5 system or in the blood counts that we measure. 6 Q. Is it your testimony that an individual exposed to 10 7 parts per million of benzene over some prolonged period of 8 time would have some reflection of that in his blood 9 picture? 10 A. Not unless he's gotten some damage. It would be - 11 reflected and you could measure it easily by measuring the 12 phenol content of urine or the urinary sulfate ratio, which 13 would be my approach to the problem rather than the medical 14 approach, which is blood. 15 Q. Is benzene a human leukemic, that is, does it cause 16 leukemia in humans at the level of 10 parts per million? 17 A. I 'm not aware of any experiences or cases where it was 18 proven that 10 parts per million caused that. 19 Q. In fact, when I asked you in March if you had an 20 opinion about the levels at which benzene is a human 21 leukemogen as known today, that's March 1986, do you recall 22 your answer is, the best information that we've been able 23 to establish would be 35 to 40 parts per million and above? 24 A. That's the human cases that have come to my attention. 25 Q. Yes, sir. And you certainly wouldn't be prepared^to Emanuel "FCym" Fontana, Jr. Official Court Reporter Page 26 1 Q. Does the ACGIH also discuss substances that are known 2 or suspected to be carcinogens? 3 A. They do. 4 Q. And leukemia is a cancer and, therefore, leukemogens 5 are carcinogens; is that correct? 6 A. Yes. That's another definition the same way. 7 Q. Do you know what the ACGIH classifies benzene as 8 today? Is it a known or a suspected human carcinogen, 9 according to the ACGIH? 10 A. It probably defines it as suspected human carcinogen. * 11 Q. And it's never classified it as a known human 12 carcinogen, has it? 13 A. That is true, I believe. 14 Q. And you've been on that committee since '77 or '78? 15 A. '77, '78, yes. 16 Q. You've not made that change in the recommended or in 17 the TLV booklets, have you? 18 A. I have not. However, I -- even though I might have 19 voted against not including it as a human carcinogen, I was 20 outvoted, because in our company's operations we always 21 practiced using it as a human carcinogen and my operations 22 and my recommendations to the company and the protection of 23 my people was always assume it was. 24 Q. These other experts in the ACGIH committee on which you 25 sit overruled you; is that what you're saying? Emanuel "Kym" Fontana, Jr. Court ReDorter Page 45 1 value. 2 Q. In any event, what was the date on the one you signed, 3 the Exxon sheet? 4 A. That one was the 10th month, '77, October 1977. 5 Q. What did Exxon's Material Safety Data Sheet on benzene look like in 1969 and 1970? 7 A. I don't remember, but we had them. But I don't recall. 8 Q. Do you remember that you had this third page? 9 A. We had that^information available in some form or 10 another. Whether it was the third page or actually typed t_ 11 in on the form, I don't recall. 12 Q. Your sworn testimony is that in 1969 you were advising 13 folks that you gave these material safety data sheets all 14 of the same information that you were in '77? 15 A. Or the equivalence, yes, sir. 16 Q. Is it the same or the equivalent? 17 A. Yes. It may not have been the same wording, but it was 18 to tell them that prolonged exposure would cause bone 19 marrow injury leading to severe or fatal blood disorders, 20 yes. 21 Q. You also told us today that in your position on the 22 Committee on Airborne Contaminants with the ACGIH, that 23 your position was that benzene should be listed as a known 24 carcinogen; is that correct? 25 A. I voted for that. Emanuel "Kym" Fontana, Jr. Official Court Reoorter Page 46 1 Q. Yes, sir. In the 1977 Materials Safety Data Sheet 2 which you signed -- 3 A. Yes. 4 Q. -- how do you list benzene, under "Chronic," the last 5 page? 6 A. Benzene is increasingly suspected as a carcinogenic 7 chemical in man by reason of an association with leukemia 8 in some instances of excessive occupation exposure. s, 9 Q. So the Materials Safety Data Sheet which you signed in 10 1977 listed benzene as a suspected carcinogen? 11 A. Yes. 12 Q. And is there an explanation for that since you told us 13 it was your view? 14 A. This is for the public or the customer, which is the 15 general public, that bought the product. And with that 16 information on there, I dare say that anyone that was going 17 to be using the product certainly would come back for more 18 definite information about the product. It was to 19 stimulate and raise a red flag for them that they had a 20 very hazardous, dangerous material. 21 Q. But even though you thought it was a known carcinogen, 22 you said it was a suspected carcinogen because they'd come 23 back to you, that would raise a red flag? 24 A. I would certainly have expected them to ask me for the 25 evidence and the data. * Emanuel "Kym" Fontana, Jr. Page 50 1 Q. A n d w h a t e x p o s u r e w o u l d it take to lower, see any 2 effect in the urine, assuming there were no dietary 3 interferences at all, no other interferences, how much 4 benzene would you have to have to show any difference at 5 all? 6 A. Mr. S c o t t , w e p r e s e n t e d t h a t y e s t e r d a y o n a t a b l e of 7 the significance of what the exposure would be when the 8 r a t i o o f t h e s u l f a t e f e l l b e l o w 80, a n d I 'll r e f e r y o u b a c k 9 to t h a t i n f o r m a t i o n t h a t 's b e e n a l r e a d y entered. ' s 10 Q. That's something you w o u l d have to look at the books to 11 tell you? 12 A. T h a t 's true. 13 Q. I t 's n o t t h e k i n d of t h i n g t h a t a n y of us w o u l d 14 remember? 15 A. L e t me m e n t i o n a n d e m p h a s i z e again, t h a t I indiv i d u a l l y 16 l o oked at anything s u spiciously if it was less than 80 17 percent, and found out how and why there was a change in 18 this ratio. 19 Q. I s n 't it t r u e t h a t y o u h a d to h a v e e x p o s u r e s g r e a t l y in 20 excess of 10 parts per m i llion to a f f e c t the urine sulfate 21 ratio at all? 22 A. Y o u 'r e v e r y n e a r t h e b r e a k p o i n t a t 10 p a r t s p e r 23 million. 24 Q. It has to be at least 10 p arts per m i l l i o n ? 25 A. Y es. Y o u 're v e r y n e ar, as I say, a l i t t l e a b o v e m a y Emanuel "Kym" Fontana, Jr. Official Court Reporter Page 73 1 levels these folks had during those years, can you? 2 A. I would like for the jury to know that if we kept the 3 TWA down below 10 parts per million throughout their 4 workday, throughout their week and throughout their career, 5 they are not going to have any significant problems in any 6 of their life. And if we have hypersensitive people that 7 that would be affected, they'd be detected the very first 8 week or two that they working there, and they'd be moved to 9 some safe operation. And they were, I'm sure, but I don't 10 know of anyone that we -- we didn't have enough people to 11 run into that one in a thousand or one in a hundred 12 thousand that you might have. 13 Q. My point is that you can't tell this jury that the 14 Exxon folks were exposed only to one part per million or 15 two parts per million. All you can say is, it was less 16 than 10, correct? 17 A. We were only working to that goal of 10 parts per 18 million. 19 Q. All right. 20 A. I'm still convinced there's no problem under 10 parts 21 per million. 22 Q. All right. I want to ask you about that, because 23 yesterday Mr. O'Quinn showed you an article by Lamson 24 Blaney, which you've described as one of the medical 25 directors of Monsanto in Massachusetts. One of the first Emanuel "Kym" Fontana, Jr. Official Court Reporter Page 74 1 statements that he read to you -- one of the first 2 statements he read to you was right here at the top of the 3 page of Exhibit No. 1680, Plaintiffs, ''The statement has 4 been made informally that the maximum allowable 5 concentration for benzene vapors should be zero." Do you 6 remember that? 7 A. I heard that. 8 Q. You don't agree with that? 9 A. I don't think that's practical that you can live that 10 way. - 11 Q. And you weren't trying to tell this jury that Monsanto 12 should have known that zero was the exposure level in 1950 13 or even today? 14 A. No. I don't recommend zero as a limit. 15 Q. All right. 16 A. And I think 10 parts per million and less is 17 sufficient. _ 18 Q. Now, on the hypersusceptibility question, what test can 19 you do on a pre-employment physical to determine whether an 20 individual is going to be hypersensitive or 21 hypersusceptible to benzene? 22 A. Only by the history, his history, in regard to whether 23 or not he's been exposed to benzene or some concentration 24 of benzene in the past and had any particular reaction. 25 That's brought out by careful medical history of him. ( Emanuel "Kym" Fontana, Jr.  N V % \ y* * N . CONFIDENT. ; - t t5"U INDUSTRIAL HYGIENE FOUNDATION OF AMERICA, Inc. 4400 FIFTH AVENUE PITTSBURGH. PA INDUSTRIAL HYGIENE SURVEY of the Baton Rouge Refinery LOUISIANA DIVISION ESSO STANDARD OIL COMPANY Baton Rouge. La. February - April. 1949 I 72 table of contents Pages INTRODUCTION ........................................ i : SU M M ARY .................................................. ii-xiv : PROCESS WORKERS .......................... 1_50 CHEMICAL PRODUCTS DIVISIOH ............................... . 1-18 1 CRACKING DEPARTMENT ...................................... 1-5 Paracril Plant ........................................ 1-3 Steam Cracking Plants,No. 1 and N o . 2 ..... ........... 3 Jv Butadiene Extraction Plants ................ .......... tv-5 Isobutylene Extraction Units Nos. 1, 2, and 5 ......... Diolefin Extraction Unit ............ ...... .......... BUTIL RUBBER UNITS ......................................... Materials and Process ................................. Exposures ............................................. ALCOHOL PLANTS ........................................... Accident Hazard ............................... 5 5 6-T 6 7-11 11-12 11 Blending Agents .................................... . 11 Carcinogenic Problem .............. ................ 1.. 12-15 ' CATALYST PLANT ............................................ 15-18 Toxicity of Some Chemicals Used in the Catalyst Plant .. 15-18 PETROLEUM PRODUCTS DIVISION .................................. 19-50 ; REFINING AND OIL MOVEMENT .................... ........... 19-21 Distillation .............................. ........... 19-20 1 No. 2 D. & S. and Hydrogen Sulfide Recovery Unit ...... 20-21 ; Oil Movement ........................................... 21-23 LUBRICATING AND PARAFFINDEPARTMENT 2k-38 Wax Presses ........................................... 2U-27 Plate Shop ............................................ 27-28 : Refrigeration Unit ..................................... 28 Crude Scale Wax Sweaters .............................. 28 Refined Wax Sweating > .................................. 28 Propane De-vaxlng, Propane De-oiling, and Propane : De-asphaltlng .................... 29 . MEK Plant ............................................. 29-32 Wax Filtering ......................................... 32 ; Lube Filter Plant ......................... ............. ^3 Phenol Plant .............................. 3^-35 ; Lube Oil Treating ...................................... 38 Lube Oil Blending ..................................... 38-37 Grease Manufacture .................................... 3T ; Inhalation of Mists .................................... 3T | Inhalation of Dust ..................................... 38 l Skin Contact ........................................... 38-39 CRACKING DEPARTMENT ...................................... [ Thermal Crack-trig .......................................... l0-|v3 } 1,000-pound Colls: No. 21 and No.22 Units ............. l0-*2 l 750-pound Coils: No. 19 and No. 20Units ............... ^2-1*3 \ Conclusions Regarding Exposures of Men ................. ^3 Steam Cracking .................................. ^ Process ..................................... W*-^5 Catalytic Cracking ........ ....................... **5-^ Materials and Process .... ............................ *5 Significant Exposures .................................. *5-*l 74 TA'RT-^ OF CONTENTS (Continued) UTILITIES AND LIGHT ENDS ................................. Light Ends ............................................... Petroleum Vapor ....................................... Hydrogen Sulfide ...................................... Acid Recovery Plants ........................ ......... Boiler Houses and Power Houses .............. .......... MAINTENANCE ANDC O N S T R U C T I O N .......... PIPE DIVISION ................................................ Catalytic Cracking Units ....... *..................... Alkylation Units ...................................... Wax Manufacture ....................................... Phenol Plants ......................................... Barisol Plant ........ ................................ Lube^ Treating Area .................................... Alcohol Plants ................................. ...... M. & C. Machinists ...................................... Outside Machinists .................................... MEK Plant ....... .............. ...................... Phenol Treating Units ................................. Paraffin Wax Presses ....... .......................... Butyl Rubber Reactorsand FinishingBuilding ............ Paracrll Plant ............................. .......... Gas Compressors ....................................... Contact with Heavy Catalytic Cycle Gas Oil and OLA Tars .. Machine Shop .................................... Main Shop ............................................. Disassembly and Reassembly Shop ....................... Metal Spraying ........................................ bohermaxer division ........................................ Riggers .... .......................................... Welders and Burners ....... Pipe Shop, Chemical Products Division ................. Boilermaker Shoo. "Old Boiler Shop." ................. Welders at Catalytic Cracking Uhlt Turnaround ......... Lead Burners ............................................. Lead Burner Shop at N o . 3 Acid Plant .................. Lead Burning Shop in Crafts Building in Chemical ProductsArea ........... Outside Lead Burning wr|d Bonding ....................... Medical Control Measures ............................... Utility of Lead Urinalysis ............................ METER AND INSTRUMENT DIVISION ............................... Shops .............................. Outside Men ....... Shift Men .......... ................................... ELECTRICAL DIVISION ......................................... Line Gang ............................................. Electricians Assigned to Process Units, Laboratories, andOffices ......... Main Electrical Shop ...... Pages U8-50 U8-50 k8-h9 9 h9 50 5I-85 51-59 52-53 53 53 53 5h 5^ 5^ 55-58 55 55-56 56 56-57 57 57 57-58 58 58-59 58 58-59 59 60-67 60 60-63 63-6^ 6**-- 65 65-66 66-6 9 66 66 66 67 67-69 70-72 70-71 71-72 72 73-75 73 73 7^75 I 75 table of contents (Continued) Skin Contact vlth Suspected Carcinogens ............... Underground Lead Work ................................. Occurrence of nitrogen Oxides ......................... MASON DIVISION .............................................. Masons ................................................ Concrete and Sandblast ................................ Brick and Asbestos Grinding ........................... Insulators ............................................ GENERAL LABOR ............................................... Refinery Disposal Dump ................................ Ethyl Lead Tanks Cleaning ............................. Exposure to Ponder Catalyst Dust. Cleaning Reactor Chamber (PCLA) ... Cleaning Bubble Towers ......................... Cleaning Reactors, Light Ends Plant ................... Tank Cleaning ............. ........................... Tube and Soaker Cleaning .......................... T.. Cleaning Soaking Drums at Thermal Cracking Units ...... Dismantling Condenser Boxes ........................... Exposures to Heavy Aromatics .......................... CARPENTER AND PAINTER DIVISION .............................. Paint Shop ............................................ Painters .................................. ........... MISCELLANEOUS ...................................... LABORATORIES ................................................ Refinery Laboratory ...................................... Aniline ..................................... Mercury Vapor ......................................... PRINTING STANDARDS .......................................... Materials Handled ..................................... Ventilation ........................................... ASPHALT PLANT ............................................... APPENDIX .................................... PREVENTION OP EXPOSURE TO HIGH BOILING AROMATICS ............ BENZOL EXPOSURES ............................................ Pages 75 75 75 76-79 76-77 77-78 79 79 8o-8k 80 80 80-81 8l 81-82 82 82 83 83-8h 8h 85 85 85 86-91 86-88 86-88 86 86-88 89-90 89 89-90 91 92-95 92-9^ 95 f 76 T.Tgq ffl? Tft-RTJa Table I. Table I I . Table H I . Table IV. Table V. Table 1. Table 2. Table 3* Table 1(. Table 3 Table 6. Table 7 Table 8. Table 9 . Table 10. Table 11. Table 12. Table 1 3 . Table lW. Pages Hazardous Exposures to Materials of Known Toxicity . Exposures to Hazardous Materials Judged to be Within Safe Limits ................. ...... Exposures Classified as Suspicious But About Which Exposure and/or Toxicity Bata are Incomplete .. Exposures of Lcnr Intensity to Materials of a Lew Order of Toxicity ......................... Recommendations for Mechanical Improvement of Conditions ................................. It . v-vi yii-x xi-xii xiil-xlv Bust Concentration-- Talc Bust In Butyl Rubber Finishing Building ........................ 10 Chemicals other Rear Materials Used at - Catalyst Plant During Last Five Tears Petroleum Vapor Measurements in Bo. 16 and ..... 16 Ho. 17 Battery Still Bousea ............... 19 Oil Droplet Counts-- Paraffin PresB Building ....... 26 Measurement of Solvent Vapor in MEE Plant ....... 30 Results of Urine Sulfate Ratio Measurement for MEE Plant Workers ................. ....... 31 Dust Counts at Lube Filter Plant ............... 33 Phenol Measurements ............................ 35 Concentration of Oil Mist in Vicinity of Pumps at Thermal Cracking Unit ......... 1(0 Concentration of Oil Mist in Vicinity of Pumps at i'hwinwi Cracking Unit .......... 1(3 Results of Determinations in Urine of Lead Burners and Helpers ............... 67 Mercury Vapor Measurements-- Meter and Instrument Shops ..... ............................... 71 Dust Concentrations in Vicinity of Sandblast Shed .. 78 Mercury Vapor Determinations-- Laboratories .... 88 INDUSTRIAL HYGIENE SURVEY HADE FOR ESSO STANDARD OIL COMPANY BATON ROUGE, LOUISIANA FEBRUARY 23 - APRIL 20, 19^9 Arrangements for this surrey were made in 19W through the office of Dr. R. C. Page, General Medical Director, Standard Oil Company (H.J.). It Is a part of a larger study which will include four plants of the Esso Standard Oil Company, Sarnia Refinery of Imperial Oil Limited, and the Aruba Refinery of Lago Oil and Transport C o m p a n y . Field work at all the plants will have been complet ed before the submission of this report. The field work at Baton Rouge embraced the period February 23 to April 20, 19^9 Mr. J. F. Morgan was present at the refinery for the entire period of the work, Mr. W. C. L. Hemeon spent two weeks at the refinery, and Mr. George F. Haines, Jr., of the Foundation staff, assist ed during a period of two weeks. Persons in Standard Oil Company (N.J.) directly concerned with the work are Dr. Joseph P. Holt and Mr. N. V. Hendricks; in the Esso Standard Oil Company headquarters, Dr. John S. Denholm and Dr. Clyde M. Berry. At Baton Rouge, the official contact was Dr. Howard Hansen. During the course of the surrey, close association was established with Mr. E. Stauverman, Jr., Mr. Roy E. Brady, and Mr. Stanley Day, of the Safety Department. ' The important conclusions of the surrey are highlighted in the "Summary" section of the ensuing pages. I 78 SUMMARY There are four principal classes of materials of significance in the present considerations. (1) Materials vhich are known from experience to cause slowly develop log toxic effects when workers are chronically exposed to atmospheric concentra tions above certain levels, as lead dust, silica dust, benzol vapor, and the Ilk The severity of exposure to this class in conventional manufacturing processes in factory buildings can usually be appraised quantitatively by analys of the workroom air. Situations in the oil refinery where this could be done . were few. (2) Materials whose primary action is acute poisoning from short-time exposures. The acute poisoning may be effected by a single exposure incident. They usually have no chronic effects at lover concentrations. Carbon monoxide is an example. Asphyxiant or narcotic concentrations of carbon dioxide and aliphatic hydrocarbon vapors are in this category. (3) Materials, as acid gases, which are irritating to breathe, re pulsive, and hence, obvious in their presence; therefore, "these warning proper ties tend to discourage exposures to injurious concentrations, except as they occur in accidents. (!*) Materials as FEN, C^, and related aromatics which, because of their physical or chemical relationship to classes of known physiologically active materials, may be suspected of haying deleterious health effects but about vhich there is no evidence from human exposures to permit of their accurate classification. la the following tables, exposures of refinery employees to materials which are classified above are separated according to the evaluation arrived 70 ill. at in the course of the survey. Table I summarizes the exposures where it was possible to conclude that a definite health hazard existed. Table II sumnsrizes potential exposures to substances definitely known to be harmful, but where our observations indicated the intensity of exposure to be within safe limits. Table III describes the largest and most important class of exposures where there is no experience to guide one to any definite conclusion, but wherein by Inference (necessarily somewhat tenuous), we are led to suspect the possibility of hazardous conditions. In these cases, medical supervision of workers is indicated, so that by m* of periodic examination of special design, any incipient health effects will be detected before widespread development occurs. We have inclnrM in Table H I the already recognized potential car cinogen hazards in exposures to the high boiling cut from catalytic cracking, wax pressing, OLA. tars, nr>^ uxdmovn substances from alcohol manufacture. Hot heretofore recognized is the possibility of oil mist inhalation in various localities. Some measurements of oil droplet concentrations in atmospheric suspension have been TMde in various locations. Table IV summarizes exposures to materials which are conservatively estimated to be innocuous or of negligible toxicity at the levels of concen tration encountered in practice. Table V sunnarizes recommendations far mechanical improvement of con ditions 1m several locations. In general, and to the credit of the executive attitude at this refinery toward safety and health, many of the hazards discussed in this report hurl already been recognized. Corrective measures have been instituted widely. 80 iv. Table I HAZARDOUS EXPOSURES TO MATERIALS OF KZT0HN TOXICIT Operation or Location Substances or Conditions Employee Group Affected Paracril Plant Catalyst Plant 'S. Sandblast Sheds Pipe Shop in Chemical Pro ducts Division Brick grinding Shed. Acrylonitrile-- by inhalation in vicinity of latex and coagulation pots. Chromic oxide, various other raw materials and products-- by inhala tion and skin contact. Silica dust-- by inhalation. Metal fumes have produced symptoms of metal fume fever. Silica dust enters shed from sandblast. One or two process men. The 13 catalyst plant workers. Sandblaster helpers Boilermakers, welders, and burners. One man of Mason Department. t 81 V. Table H EXPOSURES TO HAZARDOUS MATERIALS JUDGED TO BE WITHIN SAFE LIMITS Operation or Location Substances or Conditions Employee Group 1 Affected 1 Butyl Rubber Butyl Rubber Finishing Building > Butyl Rubber Reactors Alcohol Plant Anti-freeze production in Alcohol Area. Methyl chloride in vicinity of reactors and in finishing building. Safe usage by reason of process control, ventilation, and daily air analysis. Tale dust at packaging. Aluminum chloride exposure is controlled by wearing respirators. Inhalation of acetaldehyde is at present prevented by use of respirators. Methyl alcohol exposures are con trolled by informed personnel and natural ventilation. Paracril Plant Acrylonitrile-- in control rooms and in finishing building beyond coagulation pots. Light Oil Treating Plant Lead-- mist at ground level from aeration in doctor regeneration. Shell Still Batteries No. 16 and No. 17. Hydrogen sulfide exposures slight in receiving houses. No. 2 D. & S., Hydrogen Sulfide Recovery Unit Leakage of hydrogen sulfide is effectively prevented in the process equipment. Tetra Ethyl Lead Blending Plant Tetra ethyl lead-- satisfactory control measures are practiced. Gasoline anti-oxidants-- 6kin contact is unlikely in present mode of handling. Process and mech- 1 anical workers in 1 these areas. I Packers 1 Process"workers in the reactor area. A few process work-J era in alcohol denaturing. Process workers and pipe-fitters assigned to the area. Machinists, pro cess workers, except attendants at latex and co agulation pots. Process workers at ground level. Still operators and helpers at the units. Blending plant em ployees, machinist pipefitters, and laborers. 82 Table U (Continued) Operation or Location Substances or Conditions Employee Group 1 Affected Wax Presses-- Plate Repair Shop Method of removing suspected carcino genic material from plates before re pair acts to prevent skin contact. Plate shop personnel Wax Presses-- Re frigeration Unit Paraffin Distillate, Foots O i l no Important exposures occur. Process workers Grease Manu facturing Plant Dust of dry grease ingredients. Sot significant by reason of lew toxicity or infrequent occurence of exposures. Light Ends Plant Hydrogen sulfide is generally not a and Gas Com chronic toxic hazard at those places - pressor Houses vhere it occurs in the process streams because of the degree of confinement and the ventilation of such places. Machine Shop Metal spray and nitrogen oxides, safe by reason of infrequent use of toxic metals and outdoor location. Machinists Lead Melting Pot (portable) Insignificant exposure by reason of lov frequency. 1 Boilermaker helper. General, at Process Units Mercury, vlth reference to skin contact vlth liquid. M. & I. workers Underground Lead- Lead fumes. Infrequent occasion sheathed conduits far fume evolution. Electricians General, in fur naces of process units rad boiler houses. Silica dust in furnace breakdown and repair. Masons, Laborers Underground Pipes Heavy aromatics boiling above 700*F, vhere digging is skin contact. required to locate leaks. Barges, repair of Lead fumes from welding. Laborers-- exposures are fairly well eliminated by pre sent control * practices. Welders Tanks in Tetra Tetra Ethyl Lead and residues. Ethyl Lead Service Refinery Lab. Aniline. Mercury vapor. Printing Standards Volatile solvents and process liquids. Laborers Lab. personnel Machine operators 83 1 87 :riv. Table V (Continued) Operation or Location Substances or Conditions Remarks Type of Mechanical Remedy Applicable Sandblast Sheds Silica dust. For protection of sandblast helpers and others In vicinity. Confinement.of silica dust. Faint Shop ' s Paint removers likely to contain benzol. Exhaust booth. Pipe Shop, Chemical Products Area Metal fumes. Welding non Local exhaust ferrous alloy system. - pipes. Catalytic Crachlng Units Catalyst With reference to welders * work at turnaround. Respirator should be worn beneath welder's hood. Lead Burners Shops? at No. 3 A d d Plant and In Chemical Products Area Lead fumes General room ven tilation does not effect dilution of fumes between torch and burner's nose. Local exhaust system. Refinery Laboratory: Gas Analysis Room Mercury vapor Inprove floor surface to facilitate cleaning. Old Boiler Shop Fumes from pre heating Hastelloy D tubes. Question of nickel carbonyl forma tion. Extension of hood over furnace. t 88 PROCESS WORKERS CHEMICAL PRODUCTS DIVISION CRACKING DEPARTOENT Paracril Plant. The principal process involved here is the polymerization of butadiene and acrylonitrile. Other substances besides the reactants are: Daxad 11 EX hkl (di-tertiary-butyl-para-cresol) '> Caustic soda Acetic acid Lorol mercaptan Hydroxylamine hydrochloride Superloid Humber of Tfrimloyees and Their Princinal Stations. In the finishing building, three or four men per shift spend most of their tine at the station alongside the drying oven. One or two men are active at the conveyor line where rubber enters the drying oven. Three or four men are engaged fairly steadily at the packaging end of the conveyor. One man intermittently tends the control panel behind the coagulation pot. It is estimated that he is in this locality approximately Hal-r of the time. Reactor Control Room. One man per shift works here fairly steadily. Control Room Over Strippers. One man works here full-time per shift. In addition to the above locations, there is intermittent attendance by the per sonnel already mentioned to the reactors, pumps, refrigeration unit, feed drums, storage shed, etc. Exposures Tnr.ident to HorTMl Operation. Attention was directed prin cipally to the possibility of inhalation of vapors of acrylonitrile. This was done for two reasons: First, the probable toxicity of acrylonitrile to mac, as t 89 2. indicated "by an-t-mal experiments, Is greater than vith other materials present in this plant; secondly, the properties and the quantities of acrylonitrile, and the conditions of its use in the process, indicate a greater chance for adsorp tion. of this substance by the men than for the other substances used. Appreciable concentrations of acrylonitrile are most Likely in the vicinity of the coagulation pot in the finishing building, because at this point the product and reactants first reach an unenclosed vessel. An exhaust hood stands several feet over the top of the pot. Measurements of acrylonitrile vapor on the platform near the control panel shoved 90-180 parts per million in samples collected over a period of several hours on two different days. Samples collected in the following locations shoved negligible or trace amounts of acrylonitrile vapor in air: (1) control room at reactors (2) control room over strippers (3) entrance end of drying oven in finishing building (**) operator's desk in finishing building Concentrations at other, outdoor locations, such as the vicinity of re cycle pumps, charge pumps, knock-out drums for compressors, and charge drums would also be expected to be negligibly lov. The question of the possibility of fairly high exposures at repeated intervals in the act of sampling the reaction mixture for completeness remains open. Sampling commences at the reactors about four to five hours after the start of reaction and continues thereafter for the duration of the reaction. Samples are taken vith increasing frequency until the rate of once every 20 minutes is reached. We obtained an estimate of an average frequency of approximately once an hour. There is undoubtedly some vapor expos ure at sampling, as evidenced by the strong odor in the vicinity of the sampling Zr/jss-, , 90 TotalPackage7 & n 35-1/1130 ,/9. 10 7 i 7 in* Information is lacking on the effects of prolonged or repeated inhala tion of acrylonitrile in known concentration ranges by can. The published maxim m allowable concentration for this substance is 20 parts per million, t m <? figure was arrived at after mr?mai experimentation by the U. S. Public Health Service. Guinea pigs and other species showed kidney damage. An observation was made that the action of acrylonitrile resembled that of inorganic cyanides for which 20 p.p.m. bad previously been accepted as the limit. We conclude from our observations at this plant that there is some possibility of chronic intoxication from prolonged work in the vicinity of the latex and coagulation pots. Extension of the exhaust hood face to the level of the top of the pot would effectively reduce acrylonitrile concentrations on the working platform. Close medical supervision of men working in this area is ad visable . Steam Cracking Plants, Ho. 1 and Ho. 2 . Material s and Processes. Gas oil is cracked in the presence of steam, to produce ethylene, propylene, butadiene, an aromatic disCillate_sontaini2_ isoprene, aromatic tar, heavy fuel oil, gas oil, and some residual gas. A clay treating plant at OLA-2 removes a gummy polymer from the aromatic distillate. Exposures. In the routine operation of these units, exposures to in halation of vapor are infrequent. The men spend most of their time in and around the control houses which are isolated from process materials.. The necessity for collecting samples, TM THng valve adjustments, inspecting equipment, and making changes in operation takes the wen to areas where vapors may occur. This process equipment is out-of-doors. spent in such areas is of short duration. Vapor exposures are of short duration and infrequent. Skin contact with the process material does cot occur in normal 92 t 93 1. operation.. Unusual events nay cause spills and leaks necessitating contact, principally with the hands and feet. Significance of Exposures. The aromatic distillate is important toxi cologically because it contains benzene, toluene, and xylene to the extent of approximately 29 volume per cent. Another 12 per cent of the fraction consists of aromatics boiling between 302 F. and approximately U50F. It is impossible to obtain a knowledge of concentrations of these substances in air which may be encountered in those infrequent occasions when exposures occur because of their transitory nature. Since benzene is the most toxic and most volatile compound in this group, evaluation of exposures to it is of paramount importance. Eval- uation under the supervision of the medical department, on the basis of urine sulfate ratio determinations for the group of process people most likely to be exposed is recommended. A discussion of this evaluating technique occurs in the appendix. The aromatic tars produced at these units are included in the program for control of suspected carcinogenic materials. Pumps, vessels, and lines con taining the tars have been labeled and precautions have been put in force. Con tact with these tars by process people is infrequent, according to our observatic of normal processing activity. Butadiene Extraction Plants. Material g and Processes. A'product 3tream from steam cracking con taining C* mono and diolefins goes to butadiene extraction units 1 and 2 for re moval of butadiene. The process includes the preparation of cuprous anmonlurn acetate, its reaction with the hydrocarbons, and the subsequent separation of butadiene. One a-mmon-ia refrigeration unit serves the two extraction plants. Tertiary butyl catechol is added to butadiene as it goes to storage ' 94 y * in the following manner: The inhibitor is removed from the can or fiber drum in which it is received; it is melted in a pressure drum, dissolved in butadiene tc make a concentrated solution, and is then metered into the butadiene on its way to storage. A control house for the extraction plant is isolated, materials of great toxicity are not present, and exposures of men by skin, contact or inhala tion are not frequent in normal operation. Isobutylene Extraction Units Nos. 1, 2. and 5 - Materials and Process . Butylene streams from the petroleum products division and from the butadiene extraction units undergo sulfuric aoid extrac tion . Isobutylene and butylene are the products. Exposures. Prolonged vapor exposures do not occur in the normal opera 4 tion of this plant. Signifjcftnre of 'ffyposures. The feed stock and produces are simple asphyxiants and anesthetics. Very high concentrations for a prolonged period would be necessary for the anesthetic effect to be noticed. Health hazards at these plants consist only of the accident hazard connected with the handling of sulfuric acid. Extensive precautions are taken. Diolefin Extraction Pnit. Aromatic distillate discussed under the heading "cracking plant" is treated at this unit for the removal of isoprene. It will be recalled that in this stream, benzene, toluene, and xylene make up a fraction amounting to 29 volume per cent of the total. Opportunities for exposure are approximately the sane as at the cracking plant. Similar medical control is recommended for the men who work here. Vapor concentrations in the air at breathing level of worker an the unit are too transitory to permit appraisal of the hazard on the basis ci ff- in n f 1*0. S D / y j . 95 6. BUTIL HUBBER UNITS ii There are three similar polymerization units, two of vhich are operat ing. One finishing building is in operation. Materials and Process. Isobutylene and isonrene are polymerized to form butyl rubber. Al^inum obipride is used as a catalyst. Spent catalyst is hydro- lized, neutralized, and discarded (2,000 pounds of aluminum chloride are received and used every 10 days). Methyl chloride: This solvent finds large scale use as a carrier _ for the reactants and as a solvent for the catalyst. Methyl chloride is stripped.' from the polymer slurry, purified, and reused. (Loss of methyl chloride is in the range of 12,000 to 15,000 pounds per day. Of this amount, k,000 pounds re presents the unaccounted-for loss.) Cn-ngtic solution: Caustic is used in neutralization of hydro chloric acid. 7.1nc stop-rate: Zinc stearate is formed at the plant from stearic acid, zinc sulfate, and caustic. Its production is on a small scale, amounting to six batches in a 2^-hour period. 7.1ne stearate for both polymerization units is formed in one location. Phenyl-beta-rthyiamine is added as an inhibitor. It is re ceived as a dry powder and about six times a day, a solution containing six * ./V shovelfuls of powder is prepared. Its use amounts to about 180 pounds a day. Xylyl mPT-caotan is used as a plasticizer. It is made up in kero sene solution and is added to the rubber at the extruders in the finishing build ing. _ Talc is dusted onto the finished product prior to packaging. - 9R 7- ExDosures. 1. Control houses for the two polymerization units are isolated from the process units. The 12 men per shift who control the polymer units spend the greater part of the time in around the control houses. They are, therefore, isolated from exposures to vapors escaping from the units. Instruments in the control house are of the receiver type except for the spectrophotometer room in each house, which has stream lines bringing small amounts of the volatile re action mixture into the instruments. These rooms are well-ventilated by both \*v exhaust and supplied air systems. 2. Manufacture of zinc stearate. This batch-wise process is perform ed twice a day by one man. Technical stearic acid and zinc sulfate are added by shovel to a reactor. Stearic acid is non-toxic and non-dusty. The technical grade contains other fatty acids as Impurities. They are likewise non-toxic. Zinc sulfate is a material of low toxicity. The actual time spent in moving it to a reactor is so short that, even if dust arose, exposure time would be practi- cally negligible. 3- Preparation of PBH solution. ^ d fi Twice per shift one man moves six shovelfuls of the powder into a solution drum. It might be expected that in so doing there would be some contact between the material and the skin, and that he might inhale some dust. PBH itself bws not caused any acute toxic effects at this installation. The possibility that one or more of its cancer-forming homo logues might be present as an impurity is sufficient to make advisable the use of a respirator during the time the material is being transferred. h. Preparation of aluminum chloride solution. This irritating and . dusty operation, for which a respirator is worn, is performed by one man in abouu 10 minutes every third day. ffanHUng this material is a nuisance, but not a health hazard. .< 97 vui. Operation or Location Table III (Continued) Substances or Conditions Employee Group Affected Hature of 'Possible Effects Wax Presses Wax, Paraffine Distillate, Foots-- Oil, Pressed Oil-- as liquid or in the form of mists. Lube and Paraffine employees, machinista, and pipefit ters assigned to this area. Cancer (?) Wax Presses-- Refrigeration Unit Paraffine Distil late, a suspected carcinogen. Machinists and pipefitters in repairing coolers. Cancer(?) Crude Scale Wax Sweaters Crude scale wax and oil, possibly carcinogenic, de pending on prior treatment of the stock. Pipefitters. Caacer(?) Solvent de-waxing (MBS) Plant Vapor of benzol, "? occurs in lev con centrations in working areas. Process workers, machinists and pipefitters as signed to the unit. Upset of urine sulfate ratio in simple exposture cases; blood e h n rtg P R in c a s e s of intoxication. Grease Manufac turing Plant Inhalation of mists and skin contact with grease ingredients and products. Grease Plant employees. Unknown Lube Oil Treating Sulfur dioxide or sulfuric acid mist. The problem of irritation may be critical in employees in agitator area having unusual pre-disposition. Abnormal tooth decay; upper re spiratory irritation. Phenol Treating Plants Phenol vapor Workers at Phenol Unknown ___ Plant, especially sample takers and pipefitters. ! Thermal Cracking | Units i Oil mist and vapor, including clarified oil from catalytic cracking. Sample takers and other process people, pipe fitters assigned to the units. _ Cancer (?) H ce.fr O. QR Total Package" B n e l _ 35-1/1130 ________________________________________ \ $ 1 r 1 0 7 1 7 In ' 99 Operation or Location Table I H (Continued) Substances or Conditions ^Employee Group Affected Nature of Possible Effects Steam Cracking Units in Petro leum Products Aromatic distillate because of benzol content. Sample takers and other process people, pipefitters assigned to the units. The same signs of exposure nd in toxication outlined for benzol previously. Aromatic tars and clarified oil from catalytic cracking. Cancer (?) Catalytic Clarified Oil and Process people and Cancer (?) Cracking Units'' slurry oil when mechanical crafts encountered either assigned to these as liquid or as units, especially mist at hot oil pipefitters. pumps. ' SUlca-alumina catalyst-- dust inhalation, also entry into eyes. Significant for pipefitters, velders, masons, and laborers. Eye irritationy lung abnormali ties (?) Fover and Boiler Houses Noise Full-time employ ees of these places. Impairment of hearing Barisol Plant Carbon tetrachlor ide, ethylene dichloride. Former process workers and pipe fitters and machinists former ly assigned here. Liver abnormalities Machine Shop. Disassembly to re-assembly Shop Pipe Shop in Petroleum Pro ducts Division Aromatic tars and oils boiling above 7 0 0 % spilled from undrained equipment and ac cumulating an the ground. Machinists. Lead fumes may be encountered in future vork on bonded lead pipe. Boilermakers, velders, and burners. Cancer (?) Increased lead in urine and blood as evidence of exposure. t 100 Total Package- J 35-1/1130 19-- _1JP ' \ 10 ? 17 l"1 101 Table H I (Continued) Operation or Location Substances or Conditions Employee Group Effected Nature of Possible Effects Lead Burners Shops at No. 3 Acid Plant and in Chemical Products Area Lead fumes, espec Lead burners and ially from bonding. helpers. Main Electric Shop Varsol and Xylenes Shop electricians General, through out r e f i n e r y Solvent vapors from cements for insulating materials. Insulators. Disposal Dump Oil smoke, fumes, and mist. (Heavy aromatic wastes) Laborers Bubble Tower3 throughout refinery Hydrocarbons from Laborers gas oil to heavy tar. Skin contact. Tube Cleaning, general Coke dust Laborers Vertical Soaking Drums at Thermal Cracking Units Skin contact vith tar and coke from thermal cracking. Laborers Condenser Boxes at Thermal Cracking Units Skin contact vith, tar. Laborers Paint Shop Inhalation of ben zol in use a t paint remover. Frequency is . unknown. ' Painters General Benzol occurring in other paint products. Asphalt Processing Mists and vapors Painters Asphalt workers Increased lead in urine and blood as evidence of ex posure. Irritation of eyes and cose, nervousand. digestive dis orders . Cancer (?) Skin effects. Cancer (?) Respiratory disorders Skin effects. Cancer (?) Skin effects. Cancer (?) Upset urine sulfate ratio in simple exposure cases. Upset urine sulfate ratio in simple exposure cases. Cancer (?) 02 xi. Table 17 EXPOSURES OF LOW HJTEHSITT TO MATERIAIS OfP A -LOW ORDER QP TCKICITI Operation or Location Substances or Conditions Employee Group Affected Paracril Plant Butadiene vapor Butadiene Extrac Mono- and di-olefins tion Unit Isoprene Extrac tion Unit Butylenes ' Diolefin Extrac Acetone tion Unit Butyl Rubber plants Zinc sulfate, stearic acid, and zinc stearate. Alcohol Plants Hydrocarbon feed stocks and lowmolecular weight products and by-products. Light Oil ' Treating Plant Petro Green D Dye. Tetra Ethyl Lead Blending Plant Petroleum dyes Propane de-waxing, Propane de-oiling, de-asphalting. W ax Filter Plant Bauxite Lube Filter Building Dust of Attapulgus clay. Specialty Stills (1929 Plant) Petroleum vapors Generally, throughout refinery. Welding fumes Generally, throughout refinery. Fumes from bunting coke deposits. Good ventilation is provided. Process and mechanical. Process and mechanical. Process workers in reactor group. Process and mechsrrt cal. Treating Plant porters. Blending Plant workers. Welders and burners Welder3 f 103 TABLE 17 (Continued) Operation or Location Catalytic Cracking Unit Substances or Conditions Asbestos M. & I. Shops Varsol vapor UOP Poly Plant ' Hi Sil Dust Railroad Car Unloading Brick Dust Bricklaying sites Brick Dust x. Employee Group Affected Placed in this table vith. reference to exposures at turnaround for velders, masons, laborers. Laborers Laborers _ Masons 104 Table V RECOMMENDATIONS FOR MECHANICAL IMPROVEMENT OF CONDITIONS Operation or Location Substances or Conditions R em arks Type of Mechanical Remedy Applicable Paracril Plant Acrylonitrile vapor Improved hood over coagulation pot. Butyl Rubber PEN Plant Inhalation of dust during preparation of solution. Dust respirator on exposed worker. Butyl Rubber Finishing Building Talc dust. At packaging of finished product. Improved hoods to capture dust at scales. Catalyst Plant Dust of chromic Multiple dust oxide and a variety sources throughout of other materials. the building. An extensive ex- .^ haust ventilation , system for the plant. Tetra Ethyl Lead Blending Plant, Gasoline dyes. !)usty for short periods during preparation of solution. Use of respirator by the one person who shovels dry " dye. Grease Manufac turing Plant Mist of grease in gredients and products. Improved hoods over heating, saponification, and m-iying kettles. Lube Oil Blending PX V n Disagreeable odors and mist at solution prepara tion. Exhaust hood. Machinists' -purtp Disassembly Reassembly Shop !Liquid material spilled from pumps, etc., some of which may be carcinogenic M. & I. Shops Spilled mercury Exposure not hazardous at present. Chance for future accumulation. Installation of floor drain beneath disassembly loca tion. Improved floor surfaces to facili tate cleaning. Main Electric Shop ^Vargjnl, and Xylol vapors ( j y ' Exhaust hood for spraying. 105 a. 5- Supervision of reactor performance requires periodic visits several times per shift on the part of the process men to the pump nri reactor areas. The pucm areas have roofs, hut no side vails. The reactors were formerly en closed in a building. These buildings have had a section of the side vails re moved for increased ventilation- At the time vhen ve vere searching for areas of possible high methyl chloride concentrations, there vas great air movement through these reactor buildings, -which precluded the possibility of accumulation of high concentrations. 6 . Finishing building. . (a) Attendants at Oliver filters and vibrating screens: This is the location where one would expect most intimate association of men with the vapor of methyl chloride. Vapor concentrations are controlled by proper vacuum on strippers preceding this step in the process, and by exhaust ventilation over each filter and screen. Two per shift spend part of their time at a distance of about 30 feet from the H n of filters and screens. Occasionally each day, men mount the platform at each of the units. Routine spot checks by the chemi cal products laboratory and our own analysis of the samples collected over one and one-half hour periods showed less than 1 0 p.p.m. in the immediate area of screens and filters. We are satisfied that the efforts which were made to control methyl chloride vapors, after the poisoning cases of 1 9 ^3 -^j are effectively operating today. (b) Tunnel dryers. These are exhausted and vapors discharged outside the building. In our experience, men are seldom close to the dryers. (c) Extruders g-pfl milling machines. There is full-time attendauc by several men at these machines. Visible atmospheric contamination probably consists of water vapor,, oil mist, FB1I fumes, and possibly kerosene and xylyl r.ercnuusn. 106 9- A deposit of scum was observed on the overhead roof structures in this vicinity, representing the accumulation since the plant was put in operation. Examination of the scum by the chemical products laboratory showed it to consist essentially of phenyl beta-naphthylamine. To -obtain an estimate of the amount that might be put into the air by sublimation from the extruders in the course of a day, we learned that 180 pounds per day are used. Of this amount, the major portion leaves the product in water drainage to the sever from water-rubber slurzy and by separation of fine particles for subsequent burning. The loss by subli mation is considered by the process heads to be minor, probably less than 1 per cent of the amount added, or 1 . 8 pounds per day-- equivalent to 500-700-milli grams per minute. Considering the vastness of the room, the exhaust ventilation at some points of escape, Td the convection currents from the hot machinery and materials that would tend to remove sublimed material from the breathing zone of workers, it is difficult to believe that vapor exposures are significant. Yet the demonstrated carcinogenicity of several aromatic amines closely related in structure and physical properties to phenyl-beta-napbthylamine, specifically 3-naphthylamine, and the possibility that some of these may occur as impurities in the commercial product, it advisable that this situation be carefully evaluated. In medical examination of workers from this section, particular at tention should be directed to detection of cancerous or pre-cancerous manifesta tions of bladder abnormalities, until it is finally clear that no such hazard exists. (d) Talc dusting and rubber packaging. About five time on the packaging line. There is a dust exposure on the part of the men who remove slabs of rubber from the conveyer to the paper cartons. Concentrations were found to be in the range of 9 to 16 million particles per cubic foot. Hood' provided for this job are ineffective because of their size and contour; for ex ample, each man must weigh each package as it is filled. 'Tie scale is r.ct 10. enclosed in the hood. He nust frequently add a piece of rubber to the package on the scale. Talc dust is dispelled into the air by this operation and is not captured in the exhaust line. The results of dust counts from samples collected at the breathing level of each of the packagers are tabulated in the Table. Table 1 DOST COHCEHTEUTI01T-- TALC DOST HI BOTH. RUBBER m iSHB E BUILDISG sample Designation Elapsed Time Sampling Location Concentration | Million narticl per cubic.foot 63 8 min. At breathing zone of 3rd packer in 16 line of 3 , packing at normal rate. 6k 5 min. At breathing zone of 2nd packer in 12 line of 3 , packing at normal rate. 65 6 min. At breathing zone of 1st packer in 8 .6 U n c of 3 , packing at normal rate. 66 k min. At breathing zone of man dusting cut 8.5 slabs of rubber for re-run through extruder, dusting by means of broom dipped in dust. There are k men working together, dusting and sawing slabs of rubber. This is about 60 feet from the talc dusting machine. 67 5 min. General air sample throughout the area 2 .6 described in 6 6 . It is probable that concentrations of talc dost which were found in this locality constitute only a nuisance. It is true that there have been re ports of pneumoconiosis from inhalation of dust in talc mining and milling, but concentrations responsible for these occurrences were in a much higher range than those we found. Some state codes require that concentrations of talc dusr be kepi below 15 n.p.c.f. Elimination of the nuisance by improvement in vennilncitr. '1 0 8 11. (e) Utility men. Several men work at such jobs as preparing stock for re-run. They are frequently in the immediate vicinity of the dusting and machines. (f) Miscellaneous groups of supervisors, physical and chpnrtcal testing men, etc., work at various planes around the vest end of the finishing building. Their exposures to dust, mist, and vapors would be infrequent and of short duration because most of their time is spent in areas remote from the processes. ' ALCOHOL PLANTS Complete protection of the health of workers in the production of ethyl and propyl alcohol requires that three separate and distinct problems be recog nized, evaluated, and controlled. Accident ffnrard. The first of these is an obvious accident hazard connected with the use ^ng of large quantities of sulfuric acid. This problem is well understood at the plant. Effective controls are practiced. They consist of provision of protective clothing, safety showers, and certain mechani cal features of process units. Blending Agents. The second problem is connected with the use of cer tain toxic materials as blpnd-tng agents dnaturants. Acetaldehyde is the principal dnaturant for ethyl alcohol produced at this plant. It is irritating to the mucous membranes when inhaled as a vapor and, for this reason, will not be tolerated by men for periods long enough to give any evidence of systemic damage. . Denaturing with acetaldehyde takes place in a building under govern ment supervision. We did hot see the denaturing process during the course, of our * f 12. for use in the building, -which has only natural ventilation. We believe that use of respirators is sufficient precaution against inhalation of acetaldehyde vapor. Methyl alcohol is used occasionally as the denaturant for ethyl alco hol and is used quite frequently as a blending agent with iso-propyl alcohol in manufacture of antifreeze. Continued exposure to vapors of methyl alcohol may lead to chronic poisoning which is characterized by irritation of the mucous membranes, possibly leading to bronchitis and pulmonary affections which may be associated with headache, tinnitus, tremors, local and multiple neuritides, and more or less severe visual disturbances (Flury and Zeraik, 1931) The toxicity of methyl alcohol is well-respected in 'this plant. We saw the precautions which are provided at the blending site and at the loading racks. Most of the work connected with blending and loading of methyl alcohol takes place out-of-doors. The possibility of prolonged inhalation of signifi cant concentrations of methyl alcohol is remote. The hydrocarbon feed stock for both alcohol plants and the principal products of these plants are toxicologically in the class of narcotics. Inhala tion of concentrations necessary for narcotic action does not occur. There is no evidence of systemic poisoning from ethylene and propylene or from the alco hols and ethers which are derived from them. Carcinogenic Problem. The third problem at these plants is one which has risen in the Bayway alcohol plant and in the plant of one other company manufacturing iso-propyl alcohol from propylene. Statistical studies have re vealed an abnormally high incidence of cancer among men who have worked in these plants for more than ten years. Cancers of larynx, pharynx, .and nasal sinuses have occurred. The locations of these lesions suggest that there might be some t ,, " '.. ........... "' ' " n o 13- way In this company nd in one other company to determine, if possible, what substances in the occupational environment may be the carcinogenic agents re sponsible for these lesions. Without going into details of these research pro grams, it will suffice to mention that the possibility of air-borne tH cVp! car bonyl having its origin in some of the nickel alloys in the process equipment is being investigated. Another path of the investigation leads to an attempt to identify certain poly-cyclic hydrocarbons which are known as carcinogenic agents in the by-products of the action of sulfuric acid on propylene. The current problem at the Baton Rouge a.leny>i plant is to determine, if possible, whether the same conditions which give rise to atmospheric contaminants in the working environment at the Bayway alcohol plant exist at Baton Rouge. Several notable differences are readily apparent. For example, the propylene stream coming to the Baton Rouge alcohol plant is TMir>i purer than the stream processed at Baysray, at present and in the past. Secondly, a lower concentration of sulfuric acid is used at Baton Rouge. 'Phia results in a lesser amount of high molecular weight side products. Thirdly, the physical arrangements of the plant at Baton Rouge, which is a new modern plant incorporating all improvements in design up to seven years ago, are completely different from Bayway's plant. The matter of the en closure of process equipment is the most striking difference. Whereas at Baton Rouge we find a mini m m of enclosure, Bayway has all processing equipment follow ing the hydrolysis step indoors. At Bayway, the control rooms and stations for performing tests on product and reactants axe in much closer proximity to strip ping stills than at Baton Rouge. Maintenance at Baton Rouge is more successful in keeping the process materials in closed systems because of the newness and improved quality of the equipment. These remarks serve only to illustrate the kind of differences that might be significant in the final determination of whether`two plants have a 1 1 1 14. If, indeed, the cancer problem at Baywsy has an occupational origin, the condi tions which, permitted its occurrence may hare existed in the earlier years of alcohol operations at Bayway, miA changes in equipment and process material over the years may have eliminated the causative factors. Occupational cancer mare frequently than not requires a long period of time to reach the stage where it is recognized clinically. Even if there are conditions at Baton Rouge favorable to the development of cancer, it cannot be eaqpected to be recognized clinically at this time. Investigation now far possible causative factors is aimed at the pre vention of illness in future years. Success, even if completely attained, will not be known. On the basis of our observations at both Bayvay and Baton Rouge, we can suggest that certain steps be taken: First, that investigation of alloys in use at the plant, their products of corrosion, and the possibility of air-borne nickel carbonyl be carried on si multaneously at Baton Rouge. Second, we recommend that close attention be paid to the manner of drawing samples at the various sarmling locations at the alcohol plants. Because of the frequency of drawing sarmies and the obvious splashing that occurs, we con sider the sampling act to be one of the most important sources of contact between operating personnel rid the materials that are being processed. High tempera tures and obvious splashing suggest the existence of mist and vapors at the sampling locations. Third, frequent physical examinations of all the employees at the alco hol plants and selective placement of men are essential. What is apparently a localized site of attack suggests that persons with upper respiratory affections and chronic sinusitis are unacceptable for work at the alcohol plants. 112 The fourth suggestion is that the medical department establish close ' 15- cancer problem would have been greatly facilitated had the medical deoartment, upon becoming cognizant of the problem, had recourse to a log of process and equipment changes over the course of the years. At Baton Rouge, it is still early enough to establish a system whereby all important changes which might have a bearing on future health problems can be made available for Joint study by the medical department nfl the process heads. . ( CATALYST PLAHT This plant is engaged in the batchvise production of a variety of solid, granulated, powdered, and pellet products for catalysis of reactions carried out in several refineries. TH* type of product depends upon current demand. Produc tion of a specific catalyst may last for several days, several weeks, or several months. About a dozen are employed in the plant. A list of chemicals and other raw materials used at the catalyst plant during the last five years appears as Table 2, below. A brief discussion of the toxicity of several of these compounds follows. Toxicity of Some Chp^Hcalg Used in the Catalyst Plant. . Molybdenum TrioxLde, -powder: Ingestion, injection, and inhalation experiments have indicated that acute toxicity of molybdenum compounds, including molybdic oxide, is appreciable, but fairly low. Its toxicology in industrial use has not been sufficiently well studied to warrant an assumption that it is non hazardous. Uncontrolled dustiness of this compound should not be permitted. r Tungstic Acid: Ingestion and injection experiments with mrtmals have led to the conclusion that this metal is more toxic than molybdenum. Toxi cological data from industrial dust exposures to tungsten compounds is lacking. Uncontrolled dust exposures shnnl.fl be avoided on the basis of uncertainty of 113 16. Material Table 2 CHEMTCJIT.S AND oh'HKR SAW MATERIALS USED AT CAIALTST PLANT DURING LAST FIVE TEARS Approximate Weight of Materials Used Activated Alumina, 2-4 Mesh Iron Oxide, Powder Chromic Acid, Flakes Chromium Nitrate, 50 Percent Concentration Activated Carbon, Pellets Molybdenum Trioxide, Powder Superfiltrol Clay Ball Clay Nickel Nitrate, Crystals Nickel Carbonate, Powder Tungstic Acid Hydrofluoric Acid, 60 Percent Magnesium Oxide Phosphoric Acid, 85 Percent Cobalt Sulphate, Crystals Naphthenic Acids Nickel Sulphate, Crystals Anhydrous Ammonia Sulphuric Acid, 98 Percent Sodium Hydrosulphide, 1*5 Percent Solution Potassium Fluoride, Crystals Caustic Soda, 100 Percent NaOH Copper Nitrate, Crystals 1,500,000 1*0 0 ,0 0 0 30,000 50,000 100,000 200,000 100,000 60,000 80,000 20,000 100,000 15 ,0 0 0 15 ,0 0 0 15 ,0 0 0 80,000 130,000 15 0 ,0 0 0 50,000 75,000 1*5 0 ,0 0 0 500 25,000 7 ,5 0 0 Lbs. Lbs. Lbs. Lbs. Lbs. Lbs. Lbs. Lbs. Lbs. Lbs. Lbs Lbs Lbs Lbs * Lbs. Lbs. Lbs. Lbs Lbs. Lbs Lbs. Lbs * Lbs. Nickel Salta: Animal experiments hare shown definite toxicity of nickel salts. They cause inhibition of growth of young animals, changes in the _ \ pancreas, effects on the respiratory and cardiac nerve centers, and liver and kidney damage. On the basis of lethal doses in injection experiments, nickel is about 50 per cent more toxic than cobalt. Cobalt suinhtt-fcp Cobalt salts are recognized as skin irritants. Toxic manifestations following ingestion \-nAt* abnormalities in the blood forming organs. Effects of prolonged exposure to cobalt dusts free from other toxic metals have not been sufficiently well studied to be' understood. No oer114 17. Chromic A d d : Dermatitis, chrome ulcers, and perforation of the nasal septum have long been recognized as being incident to exposures to hesa- valent chromium compounds. Beeexrtly, a high incidence of lung cancer was dis covered among workers in a plant mmrrfcttiri ng these compounds. Eiposures for prolonged periods to low concentrations of dost and short-time exposures to >ng>i concentrations are to be scrupulously avoided. Die maxi,mm allowable concentra tion on the basis of injury to the nasal tissues has been established at 0 .1 milligram per cubic meter of air. There is good evidence in the recent occurrence of nosebleed wmnwg several employees that the catalyst plant is in need of effective dust control equipment. At the time of the nosebleeds, the plant vas engaged, in the produc tion of a converter catalyst from chromic acid flakes and iron oxide powder. Die principal dust sources are the dry grinding and mixing vessel on the third floor, the ball mill in which i eet pellets are ground for re-extrusion, and the various operations of drying and screening the pellets. In the case of the chromic acid, the irritant effects became apparent in a matter of a few weeks after the production of this catalyst vas begun. ' Effects of Inhalation of dust of other chemicals over a period of a few veeks or a few Ttirm-hha may not always be so apparent as in the case of the chromic acid. More subtle effects could go undetected until serious illness and dis ability resulted. Additional evidence of the need for a permanent exhaust ventilation system for dust control is the amount of settled dost on overhead structures throughout the building. The present use of propeller fans in wall installations is ineffective. use of respirators is impractical because of the discomfort associated with continued wearing through the often prolonged cycle of a dust- producing operation. 115 18. Skin Contact. Irritation of the akin of workers by chemicals used in this plant has occurred In the past. Effective dost control vill greatly reduce the amount of skin contact with these materials. At the present time, skin con tact occurs even in the locker roam used by these workers because of the inva sion of dust into all quarters of the building. Hie use of protective gloves and jackets is effective in preventing skin contact utile actually transporting materials. 116 19. PETROLEUM PRODUCTS DI7ISI0H HHVi N'mi AHD OIL MOVEMENT Distillation. This department operates pipe stills and. two shell still "batteries; 96 men are employed in erode distillation and some 68 on re-ran. There is no in dication of any potential health, hazard in the routine operation of refinery pipe stills. '> . Attention was drawn to the possibility of petroleum vapor or "hydrogen sulfide exposure on the part of the operators of Still Batteries Ho. 16 Ho. 17* Three or four per shift operate each of these batteries. At these loca tions, product streams flow through the still house which is the principal statiai of the operating personnel. Look boxes are provided for each stream. There is a possibility of leakage of vapors from the look boxes or their lines. On two occasions, we were wnwhlg to detect the presence of petroleum vapor with a sensi tive combustible gas indicator. Details of these tests are given in the follow ing Table. Date V6/U9 h /S /b s ` Table 3 PETROLEUM VAPOR MEASUREMENTS IH HO. 16 AHD HO. 17 BaTTOBT snLL HOUSES Location and Ooeratians Ho. 17 Battery Still House. Ho. 1 system charging after fanvurmrmfl Ho. 2 system running crude; Ho. 3 system rnnniTig mixed gas oil. Several measurements made. Concentration (p.p.m.) Less than 10 Ho. 16 Battery Still House. Ho. 1 system running mixed gas oil from separators. Ho. 2 and Ho. ^ systems hnrtdUng I mr octane distillate feed: Ho. 3 BTstn -rrmn-fng ng oil. Tests made at 6 locations among the look boxes. 0 -10 117 20. Plans are underway rd work has already started on providing an en closure for operating personnel separate from the location of the look boxes. Side walls will he removed item the present enclosures. This is in keeping with the general tendency to open 151 buildings where there are sources of from process equipment. Other examples are various pusp roams that have been opened up and some gas compressor houses from which the side walls have been removed. In the case of So. 16 and So. 17 Battery Still Houses, execution of these pi a should result in complete elimination of any potential health or safety hazards from vapor or hydrogen sulfide. No. 2 D . & S. and Hydrogen Sulfide Recovery Unit. These two units are under the direction of the same operators. Hydro gen sulfide comes to the recovery unit from various sources. Prom this unit, tri-potassium phosphate solution is pimped to Ho. 3D . A S., operated by the Light Ends Department, for use there in scrubbing gas. Die hydrogen sulfide-laden solution is sent back to the recovery plant for regeneration. Biere is no pump VmndUng the spent solution, therefore, leak age at pumps does not put hydrogen sulfide into the air. Diis scrubbing unit is exceptionally tight. Ho odor of hydrogen sulfide was detected. At the base of the flare stack, there is a water seal drum to prevent flash back. Tinder the operating conditions that we saw, there is same spillage and leakage from this water-seal drum, permitting an appreciable escape of hydrogen sulfide at ground level. This was formerly In an isolated area, but now the new Light End a Plant stands in close proximity to the source of leakage. A high, local concentration of hydrogen sulfide seems possible under weather condi tions producing little air movement. We consider this the most important poten tial site in.the refinery for acute accidental or chronic exposure to hydrogen S U i f i d g ffS LS . 4 r r l i ^ . + o l u -- ~ 118 21. persons entering the immediate vicinity of the flare stack base to perform mechanical vork- Sub-acute effects, such as conjunctivitis or upper respiratory irritation might he suffered, by process people constantly in the nearby Light Ends Plant. Oil Movement. Oil Movement has control of pumps, gauges, pipe lines, storage tanks, barge loading, car loading, 7 a tetra-ethyl blending, use of inhibitors, and dyes. S- Tetra-ethyl lead This operation is performed under safe practice rules, prescribed by 14 suppliers of tetra-ethyl lead. Medical control by the refinery Medical Department is rigid. Protective equipment and clothing, as veil as facilities for personal sanitation, are provided the employees. Two men are employed per shift. Aside from the normal routine of blending lead tetra-ethyl into gasoline, there are periodic calls far cleaning of tanks, pumps, and pipe lines. These Jobs are done under the supervision of the suppliers' safety people. Equipment is itiutinely flushed with lead-free gasoline before it is turned over to the ea.1 department. We knew of no additional precau tions or changes in procedure that are necessary in the handling of tetra-ethyl lead. AdfHtion of Dye to F^niahed GasoHug- Two men vork on each shift. A dye solution is prepared from the dry dye about three times in 2 k hours. The dye is removed from the drum in ^hich it is received by means of a scoop. It is ' weighed and scooped into the solution drum. It is a dusty Job, as shown by the - deposit of dye on structures in the-room. Infrequency and short duration of the dust-producing Job suggests the use of dust respirators far the prevention f dust inhalation. Prevention of inhalation is desirable, since the esact effects f such inhalation, -where a variety of dye materials are used, are difficult to ...... ' 119 22. Addition a f Tnh-rbi-fcor to Gasoline. The Inhibitors that are currently in use are TJQP-5 DuPont-5 Inhibitor is drawn by vacuum from the drum in 'which, it is received into and metering drums and from there is bled into the streams. This procedure offers only the remotest chance for a to came in direct contact with the inhibitor. Light Oil Treating. fP M g fnriuflga acid and treating, calcium hypochlorite treating, and doctor sweetening. Of these processes, only the doctor sweetening involves the use of materials or processes that are of interest from the standpoint of employee--health. Litharge TfanflUng. Fresh litharge is added to regenerated doctor solu tion by dumping directly from drums into the open regenerator tanks. The size of the tank and the location of the platform and crane prevent free movement to the windward side while dumping. Hespiratars are w arn by men doing the dumping for . the prevention of inhalation of fine lead dust. All litharge dumping is done by ' two porters on "A" shift, with a frequency somewhat less than once a day. These men are on the Medical Department's schedule for twice-yearly examination. Doctor solution regenerator tanks are in a crowded area in this refin ery, differing in this respect from the situation at Aruba. With the thought that employees in the treating plant, other than those who actually dump litharge may be exposed to toxic amounts of lead as dust or as a mist from tanks being aerated for doctor regeneration, we sought to learn the concentration of lead in the mist escaping at the top of the tank. The opportunity to make such measurements pre sented itself at Sarnia, t'h results showed that two samples of air, collected in the heaviest concentration of mist at the tank top on the downwind side during aeration following litharge addition, contained 0.17 and 0 .2 7 milligrams of lead per cubic meter, respectively. If we consider lead in a range of 0.1 to 0:5 milligrams per cubic meter to be present at the tank top, we may safely assume that,with dilution occurring before it reaches ground level, and with variation 120 23. in wind direction, that no p*^ are constantly exposed to concentrations of lead likely to produce symptoms of le M poisoning. The validity of this assumption might he tested hy performing urinary lead determinations far the granp of exposed persons. Such measurements will serve to indicate, far better than atmospheric sampling and analysis at this outdoor location, whether lewd absorption is occurring in these individuals. Addition of Dye to Tractor Fuel. The treating of tractor fuel includes the addition of a dye known as Petro Green D Dye, which Is a product of Patent Chemicals Coapauy,sPatterson, Pew Jersey. The same two porters who handle litharge and doctor sweetening occasionally make up two-pound packages .from the 'bulk dye In drums. A inch of dye deposit on the floor and structural members of the room in which this pcVng^wg is performed indicates a low order of dustiness in the performance of the job. 121 2k. LDBHICATUC AHD PAHAFFTB3 DEPARPCTT Wax Presses. . *'/' . * She fact that there is a statistically significant high incidence of cancer among wax press cleaners was demonstrated in another refinery. Cases of scrotal cancer have been discovered among the press cleaners at Baton Bonge. In vestigations are now underway by the company to identify a specific carcinogenic agent or agents in the material which enters the presses. Immediate steps were taken to prevent any further contact with the material that may be responsible far the pathologic changes in the men. The first step was logically to prevent the obvious contact between the skin of the pressmen and machinery or Implements on which there was a deposit of paraffine distillate, paraffine wax, or foots oil. One particular zone of con tact to which attention was directed is the anterior surface of the t-M ghs and the pubic region. This was based, on the observations that pressmen sometimes lean forward against a waist-high, horizontal bar that runs the length of each press on both sides, and that some of the cancers occurred on the scrotum. To prevent such contact, all press cleaners are now provided with clean work clothes rid aprons for shift and are required to take a shower daily before leaving the plant. These precautions are effective in preventing this particular type of contact. A shower room for press men is conveniently located and maintained in a sanitary condition. Other skin contacts with wax and pressed oil must have taken place in past years, in the cellars where press cleaners go daily to clean the floors, remove sawdust, etc. preparatory to the entry of pipefitters and machinists. In spite of the precautions taken to date, there remains full-time op portunity for absorption of materials through the skin.of the press cleaners' 122 25. bands. Such absorption cannot be ruled out as a mode of entry of the suspected carcinogen. Its prevention has not been effected because of an inability to find a satisfactory glove material that will exclude the contaminant from the and, at the same time, permit efficient manipulation of the flat steel blade with which vax is removed from the presses. Frequent trashing and wiping with clean cotton waste are temporary, but not wholly satisfactory, precautions. Another mode of entry of carcinogenic material into the body of w m is by absorption through the lungs following inhalation. Following inhalation of chromic acid, cancers were formed in the lung itself. Inhalation of beta- fiapbthalmirf'no results in the formation of bladder tumors. Skin cancers have occurred in workers with arsenic, where at least a part of the exposure has been to inhalation of arsenic compounds as dust. With this thought in mind, an effort was made to learn whether oil mist might be present in the air in wax press rooms in sufficiently fine particle size to permit of passage to the deeper portions of the lung. Samples of the air were collected by means of the midget impinger with water as the collecting medium. Microscopic examination of the water suspension definitely showed the presence of oil droplets of less than 5 microns diameter. Table k, which followB, shows the locations where samples were collected and a rough aprprm rtwwMrm of quantities present, on the basis of counts that were made in a Tnarmpr analogous to that used in making dust counts. As shown in the Table, mist was discernible in rooms with both door3 closed and filtration in progress, and also in with doors open and actual press cleaning taking place. A demonstration of the presence of oil droplets in the air in wax press rooms is significant of the fact that inhalation of a potentially carcinogenic material occurs. The importance of this occurrence in relation to the present cases of. illness n* to the prevention of future cases is a matter that can be wiiraroJ rmiv a W n a H *m a s t i c a t i o n into the reasons for mist formation, the 123 2b. { Table k OIL EBGFLET CODHES -- PAEAEFIH HTESS BOHJ2IHG Sample Humber Sampling Time Location Evaluation (Particles per cubic centimeter of air) - 77 10 min. In "Lot" press rooms Ho b . 5# .^# ami 3# in -which, the pressure is on. Ho men marking 11.3 in these mmiii during the sampling time. Sample vhile walking around the filter presses. 78 1 0 min. "hot" press rooms Hos. 13 and 1^, pressure 2 1 .2 on. Ho men working. 79 8 min. In "cold" wax press rooms Hos. 30 and 31# 0 .0 ^ pressure on. Ho men -working. At conclusion of sanple period, too pressmen entered for the purpose of cleaning the presses. 8o 1 1 min. "Cold" press rooms Hos. 30 and 51# daring 6A beginning stage of press cleaning, starting when pressure is -withdrawn and ending -with four minutes of actual presB cleaning. 81 7 min. Outdoor sample in vicinity of lube agitators 7.8 directly north of tank 3 3 1 # wind of moderate velocity from the south-east. 68 10 min. In "hot" press room Ho. 11. Pressure on. 7.1 69 10 min. In "hot" press room Ho. 9* Pressure on 2 .8 Many visible oil-wax leaks. 70 10 min. In "hot" press room Ho. 6 , shortly after 0 .0 presses have been cleaned. Both doers open. 71 1 0 min. In "cold" press room Ho. 18. Pressure on. l.V 72 1 0 min. In "cold" press room Ho. 2^. Pressure on. 7-1 73 1 0 min. In "hot" press room Ho. 9 daring cleaning of 2 .8 the filter presses. Both doors open. 7^ 10 min. Outdoor sample in vicinity of lube oil agita 0 .0 tor tanks. 124 27. nature of the material in droplet form, its carcinogenic activity under experi mental conditions, pi^Vim^g of nw H Tig exposures to inhalation of the mist Same observations vere made at the wax presses in the Bayonne Refinery for the purpose of ennrpm-ttig conditions there "with those at Baton Rouge. It was noted that maintenance efforts at Baton Rouge are more successful in preventing leakage of material fro" the presses. Gross leakage, in the form of voluminous sprays against the press room vails ceiling vere seen at Bayonne, but not at Baton Rouge. The nature of the wax-containing stock and the percentage recovery of wax that is desired have, of course, been the factors that govern the extent of the maintenance effort nfl may account in whole for this observed difference in performance. ffknrrHng of Fan Joaquin distillate, responsible at Bayonne for most of the press room contamination, has not been undertaken at Baton Rouge. Another notable difference in the operations at the two plants is the fact that Baton Rouge but one press per room, while Bayonne, has some multiple installations. This nay that Bayonne press cleaners experience a contact with material as a mist, spray, or leak from presses adjoining the one on which they are working which is 1firing in the Baton Rouge operation. These differences, both of which would seem to indicate less intimate contact of men with material at Baton Rouge, may or may not be significant when applied to forecasting cancer incidence. They may assume some meaning when the identity of the carcinogenic material and its mode of entry are better understood. Plate Shop. Across the road from the wax press rooms i3 a shop consisting of one room in which plates rirt filters are cleaned by means of steam, and two other rooms in whjrh repairs are to the canvas filters. About 8 men work in this shop on day shift. Filters are brought by the press cleaners to the cleaning room. They are placed on a rack, the room is closed, and live steam is turned ' 125 28. onto tlie filters on the racks nd left cm overnl ght. As each filter is put on the rack for cleaning, the others which hare been exposed to steam are pushed dcvn toward the far end. In this of rotation, "by the time a filter reaches the end of the rack It has been cleaned and is ready for repair. T h e time actu ally spent in the cipwntng room is only the time required to remove a clean filter from a rack na the time required to turn on or shut off the steam line. Exposure of men to the vapor and mist arising from the steam cleaning is, there fore, infrequent. The actual work of repairing filters occasions no contact with contaminating wax or oil. Refrigeration Unit. - U ^ >. ... _ \ At this unit, actual contact with the materials being handled is limited to the machinists pipe fitters. Ho hazardous exposures on the part of the process operators can be foreseen. Cr"ud1e1...Scale Wax Sweaters. . v-.-w- V Peed for the crude scale wax sweaters consists of wax and oil after pressing removed some oil, flash-topping at Ho. 1 vacuum pipe still has re moved still more oil, acid treating and caustic neutralization has improved it. Men are not exposed to the nriirtwre in the sweating room daring actual opera tion. Maintenance TMt do ra m * in contact with the material when effecting repairs. These will be discussed elsewhere. Refined Wax Sweating. p m * process is similar to that described above but bandies wax with such lower oil content. 12G 127 29. Profane De-vaa-tnq, Bregmi* De-o-`Hnff. and Propane De-asuhalting. These three processes of the lube and paraffine department appear to have no health significance. There is intermittent exposure to propane in un known concentrations. Son-volatile materials at these units consist of lube stocks for further treatment a the residues -which are wax, oil for cracking feed, and asphalt for fuel. Occasions for contact -with these materials are infrequent in m m i operation. There is no evidence of danger from gV-tn contact, however frequent. MEK Plant. 1/ v c *A l \ V ' Processing materials- The solvent employed in this process consists of methyl ethyl ketone benzene 30$, and toluene 20$. The solvent is stripped from the oil and returned for reuse. The separation of precipitated warn from the oil solution is accomplished in six large rotary filters. Since this is a low temperature process, the filters are enclosed as completely as possible and sur rounded by insulating material. The refrigerant is propane. Personnel. This unit is operated by five men per shift. One of these men spends his full time in a gmall room in the filter building. The remainder divide their time between the isolated control house and various parts of the plant. Control of Exposures. The extremely toxic character of benzene and its volatility make its complete control a prime concern in the operation of this plant. Protection against accumulation of solvent vapor was built into this plant by design engineers. Storage ts.iiVs and pumps stand in the open air, leaving the filter room as the only enclosure for benzene vapors. A phase of operating procedure which is of great significance in the control of solvent exposures, al though it probably had cririn ~-- -- - 30. tiie draining of units prior to repair or replacement and their flushing with inert gas prior to disconnecting. . The ventilation system in the filter building has recently been nade the subject of a thorough investigation by the Petroleum. Technical Service. The survey indicated, that solvent vapor concentrations (as measured with the JEA Benzol Vapor Indicator) in excess of 100 parts per million could not be detected and that the most commonly encountered value was 20 part3 per million. In view of these results,and our own which are similar and appear in Table 5 (following), we conclude that in the present mode of operation of this plant, loss of solvent to the atmosphere in the places where men w o rk does not result in excessively higi concentrations in the breathing level. Table 5 MEASUREMENT OF SGLVEHT VAPOR HI MKK PLABT Date h /5 /b 9 k /3 /h 9 b /5 /b 9 V 5A9 V 5A9 VW56AA99 V6/U9 V6A9 V.6A9 y/j9 k /6 /b 9 b /lM b flfb 9 Location 1 Result * Lower level of filter building, 10 feet inside the S.W. door. On steps of West ladder to upper level. Beneath Filter H o . 1. On steps of Bast ladder to upper level. In filter room control room where the filter operator spends most of his time. Lower level; over drain to sump. Beneath Filter Ho. 2, near sump At prmp handling rar-solvent from Ho. 2. Beneath Filter Ho. 2. At southernmost sump. At suma beneath Ho. 5 filter. On upper level. Ves-fc side. Inside operators shack. At 10 locations on. lower level beneath filters. At base of pipe discharging waste to sump, not at man's breathing level. 20 0 Less than 20 Less than 20 15 - 20 30 Less than 10 20 0 0 10 0 0 -2 0 100 - 200 * Total vapor, in ppm. 129 31. Urine samples from a group of five process men vere examined during our survey and showed nnwini Talues for the sulfate ratio. The results are given in Table 6 , which follows: . Sample Humber 12007 i5to 5?bo 1137^ 12279 Table 6 RESULTS OF U R U E SULFATE RATIO MRAsrnB,P3dl<!l^il FOR MET H A S T WORKERS Ratio of Inorganic Sulfate to Total Sulfates V 0.85 0 .8 k 0 .9 0 0 .8 k 0.90 Organic S03 go/liter 0.259 0 .2 69 * 0 .110 0 .1*00 0.273 The M gh degree of toxicity of benzene and the fact that leakage of solvent does occur, requires that continuing checks be made on the concentrations In the air. The FTS proposal that routine measurements with the Benzol Vapor In dicator be made is a sound one. The frequency of the measurements should be fixed through correlation with the production schedule and results obtained. The in strument itself is satisfactory, provided that it is checked about once a month against known concentrations of the solvent mixture in a test chamber. It is desirable also to periodically examine the urine of the 21 pro cess people at the unit and mechanical people regularly assigned to the unit to detect any variation of the ratio of inorganic to total sulfate from the normal range. Such a variation will be detectable In advance of symptoms of poisoning, should excessive exposures occm; and will supplement the atmospheric tests as a 130 32. method of measuring exposures. A discussion of urine sulfate ratio determina tions as a TMnnn of evaluating benzene exposures is included in the Appendix. Wax Filtering. In this process of filtering vax through bauxite and bauxite roasting, a dust source Is the base of the regenerator tubes, "where the heated bauxite falls to a conveyor belt is carried to the hopper. The only excursions into this dusty area are for the purpose of replacing "wooden pegs on the shake-out - ... 'V . _ apparatus and for loading fresh bauxite from sacks to hopper. The former re quires about five minutes several times per shift, possibly hourly. The*"latter is done infrequently and requires relatively few minutes. Occasional inspection of the operation and replacement of belts accounts for other trips into the dusty places. The regenerator runs 2^ hours to fill one charge. Two 2lv-hour re generator periods may follow one another closely and then not again for the re mainder of the week. About seven or eight ^ are present at this unit during a 2*1--hour period. They spend most of their time in the room on the northwest comer of this building, ground floor. t m room is closed off from the dusty area of the building, but some dust enters to settle on desk, ledges, instruments, etc. Typical dust counts are: 1. At base of bauxite chutes during regeneration: 23 m.p.c.f. 2. In control room, immediately after blowing out the chutes with compressed air: k m.p.c.f. 3. In room containing hopper to receive new bauxite, during regeneration1 1 m.p.c.f. 'fhi^ dust contains no crystalline free silica, therefore, no silicosis hazard exists. Dust concentrations where the men spend the major part of thezr ' 131 33. Lube Filter Plant. Filtration of lube stocks through, fixed beds of Attspulgos clay and the regeneration of the clay by the downward passage through a kiln is a process which has no industrial health BlgrvHMrwneg- Clay dust occurs in some parts of the buildings which house the two filter plants and the clay regenerator. This dust contains no crystalline free silica. There is no silicosis hiwwft. our observa tions and dust counts in the plant show a lov degree, of dustiness most of the tine. Concentrations are not sufficient to constitute & nuisance. Results of the dust counts are given in the Table that follows. Sample Eumber Table T DOST COURTS AT LUBE FILIER BLAST Sampling 1 Time 1Location Bust Counts (m.p.c.f.)* 79 5 min. Sample taken at level of elevator motor in 1.0 regenerator building. So men working in this area at this time* except two carpen ters at a lower level. 80 1 0 min. On floor level beneath regenerative furnaces, 0 .0 around the base of Bo. 2 furnace. 82 8 min. General air sample on level around top of 0 .1 filters. Bo visible dust sources. 83 6 min. sniimlfl nn level around base of 0 .0 lube oil filters. Bo visible dust sources. . 132 3^. Phenol Plant. ' '' i . * y ^ ^ .> <*-w* .* \ j" \y :V` . At the Phenol Plant, adequate precautions far the prevention of elcfn contact with phenol are in effect. They consist of provision of all the neces sary protective clothing emergency showers. The personnel at the plant are aware of the accident hazards. Our attention was drawn to the existence of phenol vapor in certain areas of the plant, as evidenced hy the odor. Chronic phenol poisoning from prolonged inhalation of low concentrations of vapor has teen de monstrated in ftn-fmai experiments. It results In respiratory difficulty, diges tive disturbances, and central nervous system disorders. Damage to liver and kidney also occurs. Toxicological data for man from Industrial exposures are lacking. It is difficult to say, on the basis of available information, what con centrations of phenol In the air of work places can canse chronic illness. The principal sources of phenol vapor are leakage at prams fresh phenol feed, de-phenolizer feed, etc., and a tank which collects drainage from all sources of liquid leakage. The need for heating the leakage as it is collected and drained from the units, in order to keep it liquid, causes greater vaporization than would be expected from cold phenol. Exese sources of phenol leakage are outdoors. Two rows of prams which serve these plants are in open areas adjacent to the control room. Eight men per shift operate the two phenol plants. They spend y n r p rrri -- y equal time in areas where phenol vapor is noticeable. In ~n cases, the time amounts to approximately no more than one hour per shift. Most of their time is spent in the control roams which have fresh air supplies and in outdoor locations around the plant, remote from the sources of phenol vapor. Die following table shows the results of measurements of phenol vapor in the air in various locations. 133 Sample Number 66-6k 71-67 73-72 1 2 35. Location Table. 8 phenol measurements Date Phenol Concentration (parts per milUnn in air) South pump group No. 2 plant. At drain to sump. No. 1 plant. Control room. No. 1 plant. South pump area. No. 1 plant. Same as 1. k/k/U9 k/k/k9 k /k /k 9 V 8A 9 h/a/h.9 11 6 . In air samples collected at a point "between two pumps which were visi bly leaking hot phenol mixtures, concentrations were fo u n d to be in the range of 6 to 11 parts per million. These concentrations exist in the area where the greatest amount of phenol would be expected- On the basis of these results, one can reason that in the control house, where the men are present for most of the working day, the concentration of phenol vapor will not exceed 1 or 2 parts per million. The occurrence of detrimental effects from continued inhalation of this range of concentration would not seem possible when one considers the ability of the normal frmnwn body to detoxify phenol by means of sulfates and glycuronic acid. Severer, it is advisable that close medical supervision of these men be exercised. Any nervous disorder or history of chronic digestive or respiratory difficulties among the phenol plant workers should be sufficient to raise the question of occupational origin. 134 36. Lube Oil Treating. The plant area containing a d d agitators; sludge kettles, caustic wash, and vater wash vessels is noted for the presence of sulfur dioxide and sulfuric acid mist. It is evident that the treaters* exposure is the greatest ..of all per sonnel, for they must supervise the treating and sludge hydrolysis. They are re quired by these duties to mount several times a day to the top of the agitator vessels. In so doing, they cannot always remain to the windward side. Their re action is typical of personnel at operations cf this kind They become inured to ' irritant concentrations that would offend persons not constantly exposed. As a group, if there are effects on their health, these might be expected to manifest themselves as increased incidence of tooth decay and upper respiratory affections of an acute nature superimposed on predisposing conditions, such as asthma, ca tarrh, etc. Permanent systemic damage from such exposures are not known. The other category of exposed persons, those who work in the neighbor hood and are intermittently exposed to somewhat lesser concentrations, are more apt to be irritated by occasional high-exposure incidents. These exposures are nuisances rather than health hazards, except in cases of individuals made highly susceptible by predisposing illness affecting the respiratory or heart functions. Such individuals are known in other refineries. They can suffer respiratory dif ficulties and distress bordering on prostration. Their transfer to plant areas uncontamdLnated by acid gases is the simplest solution to their difficulties. Lube Oil Blend? w g . The manner of transfer of lube oil additives from tank car, to storage, to blending tanks by pumps does not furnish occasions for intimate contact of these substances with the men. An exception is the weighing and addition of ^ ,- P X - ^ l to small batches of heated oil to make a concentrated solution. The high * 135 temperature causes tu a s evolution is disagreeable. Installation of a can opy exhaust hood over the tank vould eliminate the obvious cause for com plaint in this operation, which is performed frequently. Grease Manufacture. Exposures on the part of the five to eight men per shift who operate the grease manufacturing plant consist of: (1) inhalation of mists rising from heating tanks, and with,,steam from saponification kettles, and mixing kettles; (2) inhalation of dust during the receipt, storage, and addition of dry ingred ients; (3) skin contact with grease ingredients and products. The evaluation of these exposures must take into consideration the fact that many products are pro duced only occasionally with great variation in amounts. Inhalation of Mists. Much of the mist arising from heating of the starting materials in grease manufacture is traceable to tanks containing purified vegetable oils and Rn-tTnw-1 fats. For such exposures, there is no indication of hazard. The saponi fication reactants likewise are regarded as insignificant. At the mixing tanks, there is occasion for entry into the air of some of the large variety of chemicals and additives. la many cases, these are harmless. An exception if that of the suspected carcinogenic agent whose presence is known to the medical department. These exposures are 30 unpredictable in duration that medical experience with the men involved will have to he the basis far their evaluation. It is a fact, as illustrated in other grease plants within the company, that ari.st escaping from saponification nfl Trying kettles can be effectively captured by properly designed -"ft fi^ll-maintained exhaust ventilation systems, vihere such systems exist, inhalation of mist becomes negligible in the plant. .136 38- Inhalation of Dust. Dost exposures In grease manufacture axe of mlnor importance because the dusty material 'which is handled, most constantly and. in greatest amount (lime) is non-toxic in quantities absorbed as dust and other materials of higher potential toxicity (lead, asbestos, mica) are handled either in wnwll amounts with negli gible frequency or in a w n w that does not cause the dispersion of great quan tities In the atmosphere. Asbestos, for example, after receipt and storage, Is s added to grease hatches with a frequency that was estimated at 6 to 8 times per month. Its burning does not require violent tearing apart in the dry state with consequent dispersion of dust. Occasional exposure to the moderate dustiness of normal bwn^Ung g ^ t the type of exposure that is Imown to have caused asbes- tosis in workers of other industries. Red lead comes in man, cans and is added infrequently to grease batches. The act of dunning from the can into the nixing vessel is the only dust dispers ing operation in its handling. It is difficult to conceive of toxic amounts being absorbed by any workman in thi3 manner. Skin Contact. Contact of the ingredients "d products with the skin of the hands, arms, and faces of the workers in the plant occurs frequently. Its occurrence is due chiefly to deposits of these materials on equipment from misting. Dele terious effects from such skin contact cannot be predicted merely from a know ledge of -the effects of the individual compounds on the skin of man for, in the case of a grease mixture, the inclusion of the additives and chemicals in a matrix of soaps nd oils makes the chance of their unobstructed contact with the skin questionable. Evaluation of the dermatitis hazard rests, therefore, in the 137 39- department. In the absence of 007 evidence from this source, it is safe to assume that no problem ^ t8 Ttfl that the company meets its responsibility to its workers by pcrnriHdiTig them with adequate cleansers and washing facilities. I 138 CRACKEHG DEPAR3WEDT I!herTM*-1 Cracking 1,000 pound Colla; Ho. 21 and No. 22 Units. Materials and Process. Feed, stock is gas oil ftroa various sources, clarified oil frcrn PCLA, sod pitch 'bottoms (from, pipe stills). Products are gas (C-l to C-k), naphtha, cycle gas oil, sad tar. Exposures. Exposures to inhalation of vapor and mist from the mater ials that are being processed he expected to occur in the act of saimling process material, in the neighborhood of pumps vhere leakage occurs, and in the neighborhood of pumps which give rise to oil mist. Such exposures are signifi cant health-vise vhen the material consists of clarified oil or the tar produced from cracking clarified oil. Biese are suspected carcinogenic agents. The con trol of oil mist inhalation in a program for complete prevention of occupational tumor formation is discussed in the section dealing vith Hax Press Rooms. Collection of oil mist in an impinger and evaluation of the results by a procedure analogous to that used in dost counting gave the following results: Table 9 COHCEHTOATIOg OF OIL MIST IH YICINITT OF POMPS AT THERMAL CRACKING ONIT Droplets per Sample Sampling Cubic Centi Number Time Location meter of Air 6k 8 min. No. 21 - 1,000-pound cracking colls, in doorway to control house near hot pitch feed pump. 65 k Min. Adjacent to hot pitch feed pump, two feet from shaft which appears to be chief source of oil mist. 1.59 0 .0 130 hi. These evaluations serve only to demonstrate the presence of oil mist in the location cited. . Ntmber of Men. Operating personnel consists of six men per shift. Location and Features of Control House. The control house in vhich the men spend most of their time consists of two roams adjacent to one another and close to puaps. Mist from hot oil pumps can enter through open door on vest side of control room. Pump site is covered by a roof and enclosed on two sides. Be- flux pumps handling light fractions (naphtha) have fair amount of leakage, but are located good distance from control house and are not enclosed. Materials for measurement are brought into the control house (no transmitter-receiver type instruments here). Activation of recorders is by means of natural gas. Brown and Foxboro instruments in shop bleed tests shoved escape of 0.02 and 0.32 cubic feet per minute respectively. There is an estimated total of 15 such instruments for the Ho. 21 and Ho. 22 units. Tests with benzol vapor indicator gave no de flection around the instrument panel. Full scale reading was obtained when the intake was placed at the meter face. The location of hot oil pumps Just outside the door of this enclosed control house affords the opportunity for the entrance of fairly high concentra tions of oil mist vapor of varying composition and of unknown significance health-wise. Escape of vapor and gas from instrument lines inside the house is thought to he of Insignificant importance because of the amount of leakage that can be tolerated item the standpoint of process control. gfurml-fnpr. Helper at the unit takes a sample from the "hot bottoms" line about four times per shift. The line must be bled for several minutes be fore drawing the sample. The person drawing the sample cannot always stand to windward side because of the location of the drav-off pipe over the drain to the sewer. 140 kz. 'PH* three-sided shed where the gravity test is made,.,effectively en closes vanors from the hot oil `being tested, causing Increased concentrations in the operator's `breathing level. The location of the end of the draw-off line, with respect to the. open ing to the sever line And. to the position that most be taken by the man prior to and during sampling, affords too great an opportunity for splashing and volatili zation of the material that is being drasm. Less confinement at the site of gravity testing is desirable. Since sampling *nA testing are the acts providing the most intimate contact of process vith the material, an effort towards Improvement of these arrangements is suggested. 750-pound Coils; No. 19 and go. 20 Units. Process. Peed stock and products are similar to those of Ho. 21 and No. 22 units. (Note: When clarified oil from PCLA is used as feed, it is sup plied under sufficient pressure by pumps at PCLA. We have inferred from this that there is no pump here handling unaltered clarified oil-- hence, no mist of this substance as received.) Number of Mu. About nine men per shift operate 17, 18, 19, and 20 cracking coils. Location and Features of Control Souse. The control area is not as completely enclosed as that at No. 21 and No. 22. Instrumentation is the same. Proximity of pumps And invasion of mist from hot oil pumps through open doorway is about equal. Besults of oil mist counts are as follows: l-u *3- Table 10 CONCENTRATION OF OIL MIST IN 7ICINITI OF PUMPS AT THERMAL CRACKING UNIT Sample Humber Sampling Time Location Droplets per Cubic Centi meter of Air 66 10 min. No. 20, 750-pound cracking coil, near hot oil pimm Vm-nrH-fng gas oil fl'OJii various sources. 67 8 min. No. 20, 750-pound cracking coil, adjacent to pump h*nrTMog eald gas oil and another running pitch bottoms. Wind is from north-east some mist from hot oil pump may reach this position through the open doorway. 68 7 min. No. 20 unit, in doorway between hot oil pump room control room, directly down wind from hot oil pumps. 7.1* 1.23 7 .1* Conclusions Regarding Exposures of Men. Exposures by skin, contact and inhalation of mist or Tapor Is possible at sampling locations. Th- sites were not inspected, nor was the frequency noted; this is, therefore, an inference from, observations at other units. Mist from the hot oil pumps to the north was found to invade the space (send.-enclosed) where process men spend most of their time reading instruments and filling out charts and data sheets. This is not a continual exposure, depend ing on wind from the northern quarter or lack of wind. Unusual situations, one of which we witnessed, such as a broken valve, occasionally w i n cause spillage or 1 *aka that result in skin contact before re pairs can be effected by the pipe fitters. 142 kh Steam. Craciri,!^ Process. Feed stock for this process Is 71x8111 heavy naphtha. The products cor sist of a dilute butadiene stream, an aromatic distillate, residue gas, aromatic tar, fuel oil, and a Cs cut 7111011 goes to isoprene extraction. Clarified oil from PCLA is used as a quenching agent. Number of Men, H r e e men per shift spend most of their time in the control house vhich is closely associated with the feed and vater puhps. Association with Toxic Substances. The substances at this unit vhich. deserve closest scrutiny are the tar bottoms, clarified oil, and the aromatic distillate. The tar fraction and the clarified oil are included in the suspected carcinogenic materials for vhich special precautions against skin contact have been planned. They are discussed separately. The aromatic distillate is described as containing 56 per cent aromat ics. Initial boiling point of the fraction is 300*F. and final boiling point, VT5F. Leaving the cracking coils, this distillate is handled by a pump near th control house. It undergoes fractionation at No. b D & 3; after separation here it is put through a clay treating process similar to that at OLA 2, in the cal products area. It finally goes to Tank 9^1 on the v estem side of the rundovn tank area. The boiling range of this fraction includes the boiling points of Cg and higher mono-nuclear aromatics. Any problem of toxicity of this fracti would be of the order of toxicity of cumenes, etc. and not of the type of benzen toluene, and xylenes. Observations at this unit and at Tank 96I failed to dis close any occasion for prolonged breathing of this fraction. There are several reasons why the operations at these units are of i interest to those concerned, vtth the maintenance of employee health:. (1 ) Chron toxic effects of Cg and related, aromatic hydrocarbons are cot sufficiently veil.understood; (2 ) the exact extent of occasionally repeated vapor exposures of me: at these units could not, of course, be determined in the course of this survey; (3) the process is similar to that at OLA-1 and OLA-2. There is no assurance th changes in feed stock or processing conditions will cot result in the production of the more volatile aromatics of the type of benzene. ' s - Catalytic Cracking Scree catalytic cracking units are operated. Ho. 1 is the first fluid catalytic cracking unit to be pub in operation anywhere and tH rrr< radically in design and operation from.Ho. 2 Ho. 3, which ore identical. Materials and Process. Feed stocks for the catalytic cracking units include reduced crude fro: end-fired stills, virgin gas oil from crude distillate, various residual stocks from the production of lubricating oil, and cycle gas oil from thermal cracking . Products are gas (to C4), light naphtha, heavy naphtha, and heavy cycle gas oil. A finely-powdered HUfft-oTimrin. catalyst is handled as a fluid. Hi-rmher of Men. 90 persons are employed on three shifts in the operati of the three catalytic crackers. Significant Sroosurea. ' (1) Catalyst dust: of fresh catalyst from the cars in wfaic. it is received is a relatively dust-free job. Twenty-seven to thirty carloads c: catalyst per month are received. Removal from storage and return of regeneratec. b6. units themselves when the high velocity of the catalyst stream causes corrosion, in pipe lines. This occurrence is not infrequent, especially on the Ho. 1 FCLA. When leakage occurs, exposure to the dust is suffered, mainly by maintenance men who are called upon to repair the lines. The toxicological information new available indicates that this mater ial is unlikely to cause silicosis. may be dne to its being so lean in very fine dust fractions compared with naturally produced doatj or to its relatively high rate of solubility. In any case, we conclude that any exposures we learned about are of no significance health-wise. (2) Heavy catalytic cycle gas oil: H i s fraction occurs in two forms at the unit. The first is known as slurry oil and contains catalyst in suspen sion. The second is clarified oil which is the same oil stock after removal of catalyst. These substances are the principal materials involved in the program for control of skin contact with carcinogenic oils. H i s phase of their activity Is discussed in a separate section. Two other factors concerning the handling of these oils are worthy of consideration. The first is the existence of fine mist in the vicinity of hot oil pumps carrying either slurry or clarified oil. We demonstrated the existence of such a mist and observed that there is occasion for men to spend at least short Intervals of time in areas where mist is present. An air sample collected by means of an impinger at PCLA Ho. 1, three feet from the shaft of & pump 'hnnriUng hot clarified oil was evaluated in a manner- analogous to dust counting "T>d showed 2 1 .3 droplets per cubic centimeter. At the time of sampling, there was a visible mist arising from the shaft of the pump with each stroke. Mist also arose from the cylinder block upon which oil had been spilled from a sampling line. Inhalation of oil mist affords equally good opportunity for contact as ' 145 vr. carcinogenic agent that may "be present into the body of a man. A careful review of all the where such misting .occurs and the correlation of this oc currence with the presence of seems to he warranted. The remaining consideration is the immediate formation of blisters upon skin of men where spillage of fflvr**y oil occurred. It is true that in many cases, these blisters would appear to be thermal blisters from hot oil. There is good evidence, however, that some of the properties of the oil may be responsible. In those cases where heat c*m he ruled out as a cause of blister formation, ques tion arises as to whether this is a unique effect of slurry oil or whether it is a manifestation common to several other petroleum fractions, notably kerosene. An associated question is whether this occurrence of blisters may be related to the irritant effects on eyes and respiratory system following exposure to catalyst dust, a possible relationship lying in the adsorbed oil on spent catalyst. 9 14(5 w. dtelitees aed l i g h t bet T.-tght Bads Petroleum Vaaor. Die principal effect of the inhalation of vapors of saturated and vin- saturated light hydrocarbons is narcosis from prolonged breathing of concentra tions in the range of a few thousand parts per million. We know from refinery surreys that such concentrations do not prevail. for prolonged periods in areas where men work. However, indnstrial hygiene codes of same states the nation al Conference of Industrial Hygienists Include tolerable limits of 500 or 1,000 parts per million as definitive of good working conditions. It is a matter of interest, therefore, to obtain same estimation of concentrations that are encountered in the light ed plant of this refinery. Fear this purpose, the 1929 Gas Absorption Plant, whose units are new used as specialty stills, was chosen. Die control house of this plant was described to us by personnel of the light ends dirision as the most "gassy" in the refinery, the reason being its location in the midst of the process units. Die fractionation towers at the 1929 Gas Absorption Plant handle prln1 cipally -virgin heavy naphtha, separating C3 and C4 from Cs and heavier; they also were handling propylene polymer, separating a small amount of C4 from the remain ing heavier polymer. Headings in the range of 25 to 50 parts per million were obtained downwind from a sewer opening beside water cooling coils with a sensi tive combustible gas indicator. Elsewhere about the plant, in the control bouse, at the base of Ho. h Specialty Still, at Ho. 5 Bectifier, and downwind from a leaking valve 50 yards from the control house, readings were essentially zero. These readings show the effect of the mild breeze, which was blowing on the day the measurements were made (Anril 12, 19^9), in diluting the vanor soon after it " 147 **9. The examples typify our findings of petroleum vapors around outdoor process equipment. - Hydrogen Sulfide. ; In the compression wfl distribution of gases containing hydrogen sul fide and their subsequent recovery' for use, the hazard has been recognized and effective precautions to prevent its escape In places vhere men work are gener ally quite good. A fairly recent development has been the removal of sections of side trails at Ho. 1 and So. 2 Gas Compressor houses. Ventilation thus provided is in addition to the local exhaust ducts at the compressors. At the various units of the light ends plant, when men encounter hydro gen sulfide it is most often as a barely perceptible amount in outdoor pump loca tions -where natural ventilation and lack of confinement prevent its accumulation. If ve disassociate from our consideration the necessary precautions against acci dental inhalation of amounts sufficient to cause immediate symptoms of acute poisoning, such as would occur in equipment failure, it would seem that there is no problem of hydrogen sulfide poisoning. So areas where men work for prolonged / * periods in amounts sufficient to cause chronic poisoning could be noted in this ' " survey, except as noted in the discussion of the flare stack adjacent to the newlight ends plant. Acid Recovery Plants. The processes of hydrolyzing acid sludge, recovering weak acid, and . concentrating this acid to 8 5-O per cent by vacuum distillation is associated with the obvious possibility of accidental acid burns for which the proper pre cautions have long been practiced. There is nothing else significant to employee health about this type of work. < 148 50. Boiler Homes and. Power Houses. . The heat approach to the question of possible damage to hearing in places where high noise levels exist, such aa the power houses, Is to male a hearing inventory among the th" who are exposed., in order to detect any changes vlth the passage of time. Measurements of noise levels in the worh places do not give a satisfactory basis for predicting damage to hearing. Satisfactory standards do not exist, chiefly because of great variation in response between individuals at given'noise levels. matter can be resolved by determining the state of a person's in a pre-placement examination and determining in subsequent yearly examinations any changes that occur. i 140 51. M A I E T E E A I T C E AID C 0 IS TS DC II 0 I PITS Division The Pipe Division of H. & C. Department was subjected to careful study In the course of the survey because personnel of the division forms a numerically large segment of the plant population *nd because the performance of the func tions of the division places its men in intimate contact with process material. Pipefitters comprise 23 per cent of M. A C . employment and about 9 per cent of the total refinery personnel. After the General Labor Division, it is" the next largest M. A C. division. The Pipefitters enter into nearly every phase of processing from the ^ initial Installation of a unit through its normal operation, routine maintenance and general inspection, turnaround, dismantling, or change of design. In their work of blanking off U n for removal or repair of pieces of equipment, they can suffer an exposure to whatever material is in the unit. The magnitude of the exposure is dependent chiefly on the effectiveness of draining or flushing by the process people before the unit is released to the pipefitters. Typical exposures of this nature range from the short-time breathing of gasoline vapors in an in stance where a pump or valve on a gasoline line is removed from service to an occasion where pipefitters render prolonged assistance in removing a large number of heating tubes from a crude reboiler in acid service at the alcohol plant. The former is typical of an exposure where the hazard to health is of a low order of magnitude, the latter, one of doubtful or uncertain magnitude. Of the 76 5 men employed in Pipe Division, close to 200 are regularly assigned to process units. These m**n have fairly steady assignments and are sub ject to fairly steady environmental conditions. Turnaround work and shifting de mands of building and reconstruction gives to most of th men in the Division a 150 57. tiiose two who were formerly assigned (those with the longest tenure can he identified hy the machinist foreman) should he given the routine physical exami nation required of the press cleaners. Equal facilities for the practice of personal hygiene are necessary for the maintenance machinists. Butyl Rubber Reactors and Finishing There is a low Incidence of exposures to methyl chloride hy the machinists. In the reactor building, natural ventilation through the open side valla is usually good. In the finishing building, routine greasing of the screen shakers and the filter mechanisms requires exposures of short duration. Repair work an these units is performed while the flow of materials is shut down and while the ventilation system is still operating. Paracrll Plant. Exposure of machinists to acrylonitrile and other volatile substances in the paracrll plant do not exceed those of the operating personnel, which were shown hy air analysis to he within acceptable limits, except in the vicin ity of the latex pot the coagulating pot. Gas Compressors. Since maintenance of gas compressors in various parts of the Petroleum Products Division and the Chemical Products Division accounts for a large part of the total time spent hy maintenance machinists, there is a certain degree of importance attached to the possibility of gas inhalation at these units. In our examination of the compressor buildings, we failed to see any localities where accumulation of amounts of gas sufficient to produce chronic intoxication was a likely occurrence. There undoubtedly have been some exposures in the past and may he occasionally at the present time. Most of the obviously dangerous 15U 58. exposures have been eliminated, either by providing exhaust systems over the escape points or b y opening up the building to permit natural ventilation. Methyl chloride nd hydrogen sulfide concentrations have been reduced by these two methods, respectively. A review of all such Installations from the stand point of chronic exposures to low concentrations of gas Is recommended. Contact with Heavy Catalytic Cycle Gas Oil and OLA Tars. The machinists are ring the crafts which have had and will continue to have opportunity in the dally performance of their duties at the process units which handle these materials at field tank pumps for contact with these substances. Future contact Is regulated as & part of the general program. Ho unusual or unforeseen Incidents relating to contact were obaerred in this study. Machine Shop Main Shoo. The mn-fn shop was found to be without any apparent industrial health problems. Lighting nd sanitation facilities are excellent. Use of solvents is limited to Varsol, which is handled in such a way that, even though its toxicity and volatility were great, exposures would not be significant. Disassembly and Reassembly Shoo. Pieces of equipment come to this location directly from the process units or from an Oakite cleaning in the tanks of the heat exchanger cleaning shop. Those pieces of equipment which hare been in service at units handling the heavy catalytic cycle gas oil, OLA tar3 , or re-run tars bear a special t 157 59. identification tag. When they are disassembled, some of this suspected car cinogenic material may he released. We sav slurry oil spill out of a slurry pump which had been through the Oakite cleaning. There is a problem of its disposal. The nearest drain to the sever is about 60 feet from the place where heavy equipment is disassembled. - .w > Metal Spraying. About 15 different types of metal are sprayed in a shed with open sides near the machine shop. Stainless and mild steel vires are most frequent ly used. The amount of lead spraying seems to be too small to be of any *im- ~ ' portance toxicologlcally. It was described to us as consisting of about one small Job a month for a part of acid service at the Chemical Products Area. Bronze is no longer used. Incidents of poisoning by nitrogen oxides generated by the heat of the spraying torch,that are described in the literature, have occurred in enclosed spaces uhere it has been possible for concentrations of these gases to accumulate over a prolonged period. It is safe to assume that such accumu lations could not occur in this open shed. t 158 milT.KWwaineR |i|u i'htowt 60. Riggers. The vark of the riggers, vho numbered 6 7 in. the entire plant, did not ccane in for close scrutiny in this survey. It was Adjnflgod that in the perform ance of their mission of moving and erecting heavy equipment, their exposures to toxic and hazardous material are slight. Riggers are not active on a job until after process men have taken a given piece of equipment off stream and pipefitters s s. < have blanked it off from the flow; actual close vark vith the equipment is of short duration. Opportunity for skin contact vith acids or high-boiling aromatic hydro carbon exists. For protection, riggers are furnished protective clothing, which they carry vith them to a job. Contaminated riggers' clothing is laundered by the refinery in accordance vith the general program for prevention of prolonged contact vith substances implicated as possible cancer-formers. Welders and Burners. _ .. / 106 velders include 98 electric velders and 8 gas velders. All of these men are first class mechanics <ynfl their vcrk is limited to velding. Fitting of parts to be veided is done by other crafts. The burners number 66, consisting entirely of first class mechanics. Work inside drums, tovers, etc. amounts to a considerable percentage of the total work of velders and burners. An Important aspect of this inside vork is that pieces of equipment in -which inside vark must be done are routinely cleaned by sandblasting before the velders and burners enter. HrLs practice effectively limits their inhalation of atmospheric contaminants to those products of the velding or burning process, i.e., fumes or gase3 from the base metal, velding ' ' 159 61. Welding on ordinary structural grades of steel with coated electrodes results In the escape to the atmosphere of fumes containing Iron mnA oxides of several metals found in the electrode coating. Manganese, titanium, wfl sili con are common. gaseous products consist of carbon dlcod.de, carbon aoncQd.de, water, and nitrogen oxides. These fumes and gases originate In the extreme heat of the arc and are thus given an velocity upwards that tends to disperse them to less than haxmful concentrations In any but the moat confined spaces. Given a falx sized enclosure a some natural movement of unccntasdsated air from outside the contaminants will disperse in a satisfactory manner . In cases where the welding is performed In a confined space with no ventilation the symptoms are primarily thoae of nose nfl throat irritation, and cough. In welding on galvanized steel, the proportion of zinc oxide In the total fume is greater than that of Iron oxide. Metal fume fever may result unless total fume concentrations are kept at a lover level than is necessary in the case of welding on uncoated steel. Good ventilation of the space is effective in preventing the occurrence of metal fume fever. Welding on or cadmium-coated base metal may constitute major health hazards. Cadmium fumes are not believed to constitute a chronic poisoning hazard, but do represent a very serious accident hazard where concentrations are high dse to poor ventilation. Exposures of only a few hours duration are sufficient to cause serious involvement and even death. Protection may be provided either in the farm of local exhaust ventilation or the wearing of a fume respirator be neath the welder's face shield. Ho Instances of these types of welding were toted in the refinery. Welding on stainless steel involves exposures to fluorides from the rod ' coating. Excessive exposure to these fumes causes irritation of the nasal pass- es, and not Infrequently nosebleed, I'M-a Is generally believed to be caused by formation of hydrofluoric acid. In our ouinion. there/ is no nv.n^nnn 1 6 0 62. flunro8ls fromsuch. exposures. Fluorosis la a development of bone abnormalities resulting from. many years exposure to large cccocezrtra'tloius of fluorides. Ve sere to obtain a first-hand im p r e s s io n of fame conditions in any of this welding work. However, the exposure being basically of n u is a n c e type, scientific evaluation, Is sot required and ordinary inquiry will suit all purposes. Ventilation far Inside welding work Is provided by Lush "air siphons" .. furnished by the boilermakers and installed by pipefitters. As estimated 30 or bo "siphons" are available In the entire refinery. Surfaces painted with red lead are encountered In minor repair work cm * barges, an infrequent job, and on new structural steel, also Infrequent. An el- _ ectrlc blower Is provided to furnish, local exhaust on the barge work. Hed lead is removed from,new structural steel by burning and brushing prior to welding. The short duration of these jobs and their lack of frequency make it unlikely that there la any hazard to burners or welders Cram h rm o f lead fume Cram work on. steel that has been painted with, red lead. Protective clothing Is provided for work in a d d areas. It la stored In division tool -rr* vmn cor kept personally by Individual welders . Coke deposits are sometimes cut Cram Inside equipment by burners' torch. Ventilation equipment la called for and used because of the smoke and heat In confined quarters. Cutting *na i -M-ng of scrap la done by one man with a portable lead pot, working occasionally at various locations. Several efforts to witness this job failed because of its dincontinuous operation. This man should be in cluded In physical -rm rrin-Hrm schedule for lead burners. . The Pipe Shop (Petroleum Products Division) la operated jointly by pipefitters and. welders. Pipe welding Is done In a structure haring open sides. An estimated 95 per cent of the work is on new pipe, limiting fume exposures to the innocuous type of black Iron welding. Lead-lined pine is not sen at this IB i shop. Fume exposures sre not serious at this shop at this time, although cer tain positions may put a Trailer's head Tocr a time in the region at heavy fume from the arc. This assume a more serious nature if In the future the nev pipe containing a hooded lead lining, which was described to us at the acid ... plant, should be brought to this shop far cutting or veiling of flanges. Provi- ' sion of local exhaust equipment far removal of the fumes from their point of origin to a distance from the welder's breathing zone vould then become neces sary . Boilermaker Shop, 572 Area, In Chemical Products Division north of Ho. 4 Finishing Building, employs one velder and one burner, d e r e vas nothing in the layout of the shop nor In the description ve obtained of its vork to sug gest the existence of occupational disease hazards. Pine Shop. Chemical Products Division. * gsz:~' . . . / . " V. . At the welding shop, ffhenricAl Products Division, vest of Ho. 1 Alcohol plant, five welders and three burners, all on "A" shift, are employed at fabri cating and repairing pipe sections. Fume exposures are limited mainly to fumes from the metal being welded the rod and coating. Ho estimate could be ob tained of the relative p roportions of work on nev and used pipe.. It vas ascer tained that residual Bacterial In used pipe vaa removed by burning at a point re mote from the shop and* In a TM n nw -that results in no fume or vapor exposure to the man doing the burning. In this shop, velders complained of illness..from w e l d ing on certain types of alloys described as "Bed Copper," "Bed Erass," and . "Everdnr." In welding such material, heat is applied by means of a carbon elec- ^ ' ** . trcde in the usual welder's electrode holder. Pipe sections undergoing this pro-,,_ cess are of such sizes shapes'that it is impossible for a welder to always stay out of the zone of most dense fume from the arc. 1G2 6k. The Illness they described Is suggestive of metal fume fever, being an acute illness having Its onset several hours after work has ceased, and being characterized by chills, fever, vomiting, and headache. The Everdur alloys contain copper, 95 to 98 per cent; silicon, 1 .5 to ^ per cent; and about 1 per cent manganese. Bed Brass usually contains 85 per cent copper and 15 per cent zinc. There are no chronic effects from-metal fume fever. The acute illness can be prevented by installation of a local exhaust system in this shop to carry sway the fumes from their points of origin. Boilermaker Shop. "Old Boiler Shoo." *: . ' Activities In this shop consist of: Electric welding-one or two arc welders perform various repair Jobs. Burning-- three M m burners work In this shop full time. A veri- able number of torch burners are present. Gas welding-- the gas welding shop In this building Is the site of em ployment of the eight gas welders In the employment list for the Boiler makers Division. The work consists of cccy-acetylene welding of non-ferrous alloy parts, using principally un-coated rods of composition similar to the base metal. A considerable preportion of the work load consists of effecting repairs to Has t e n oy D heating tubes used in acid service at the alcohol plants, H A units, and acid concentrating plants. The shop is provided with a local exhaust system for removal of fumes from the actual welding. Hastelloy D tribes which contain 85 per cent nickel must be pre-heated to about 600*F. in a furnace at the shop before welding. Some 20 heating tubes per month, are handled here, and three is the maximum number in any one day. When these tubes come to the shop with a coating of same residue of carbonaceous material from the unit from which it was removed, there is an . IB 3 65. evolution of fumes,' at least In the first stages of ng to the correct tem perature for velding. The possibility of the formation, under these conditions of combustion, of nickel carbonyl has been raised. Hickel carbonyl, a volatile material posess- ing & high degree of acute toxicity, has been responsible for the development of lung cancer in the nickel refining Industry. We are not In a position to comment on the possibility of its presence In the fumes from heating these tubes. Inhale* tion of these fumes can be greatly diminished by the installation of a hood over the furnace port. Welders at Catalytic Cr^e^ea* Unit Turnaround. '> At turnaround, of catalytic cracking units, the servicea of velders and. burners are required, for about 3 /5 of the turnaround period. Welders vork three shifts & day, six days a veek, *riA burners on two shifts, 6 days a veek. An estimated sixty per cent of the vork Is inside vork an^ of this, forty per cent Is considered dusty vork. A high proportion of the vork Inside Is on stainless and chrome steel. Dust sources are residual catalyst, especially In the preci pitators vhere it is easily disturbed from its resting places on the shakers, refractory Insulation dust In the regenerators, and settled dust remaining after sandblasters have left the tover. Dost elimination efforts have gone a long vay toward elwt-ng up -the veasela for the turnaround mechanics. Additional protection from 1 nh*i m+A rm of these dusts can be offered these velders and burn ers by p-rrnHrt-tng them with a filter-type respirator designed for dust and fume. Types that will fit beneath the welder's hood are available. Th<> danger of contracting illness from inhalation of these dusts in the concentrations p e n-t U n g during the turnaround is thought to be rather small for the following reasons: ' (1) Exposure time for an individual welder or burner over the course ' 164 66. o f & year vili a m m . to probably no more than one month. (Susre are about four turnaround periods of about 1 5 days normal duration on the three units.) a n boilermaker crafts are rotated an catalytic cracker turnaround; (2) Catalyst dust and most of the refractory dust that is encountered is relatively son-hazardous by reason of Its composition and particle size. Lead Burners Lead Burner Shop at Ho. 3 Acid Plant. ' V - About four vork part-time In a shop which Is open on three sides. t'm a affords good ventilation and prevents accumulation of lead fuses in the lead shop. It does not prevent the inhalation of fumes rising directly from the burning or bonding torch. Measurements of atmospheric lead during bumiTtg and banding at Aruba shoved that concentrations In sir at the nose of the man can exceed the recommended limit even In.outdoor locations, because of the proximity of the m an*8 nose to the source of fume. With this experience and vlth the results of the urine i-- ^ determinations that vere made at Aruba, ve recommend that some exhaust ventilation be provided for lead burning In this shop. Lead Burning Shoo In Crafts m Chemical Products Area. Three men vork about half-time In this shop. This room has fairly good natural ventilation. Tfce same remarks regarding Inhalation of fumes coming direct ly from the torch apply here. Outside Lead Burning rid Bonding. About bui-f of the time of the seven lead burners and seven helpers is spent performing Jobs at the process units. Many of these Jobs require vork In spaces somewhat more confined than the shops themselves. Examples are re--boilers at the alcohol plants. ; 165 67. Lead burners and their helpers are examined twice yearly by the Medical Department for symptoms of l e M poisoning. We snggest that the w m i m ^ w M be supplemented vlth urinary determinations, so that evidence of absorption say be detected before symptoms of poisoning occur. As & part of this survey, we ob tained urine specimens from 12 lead burners and helpers. As a group, these wwn showed normal excretory values. The results are shown in the following Table. lame Chapman Cbrlstof EUcLns Tiaher Kelley, B. A. Kelley, B. F. Kelley, 0. D. Martin Nettles Thomas Whittey Willlams Table 11 WTCSrTT.TC oy TWAT) Hgt'HRMTTTA'rTQHS IN TTRTTTR OF LSAZ) BURNEBS AND EELESES Sample Number Amount (Cubic Cent.) Specific Gravity 3016 32^ 1330 3093 328 1030 251 1372 3 0 12 2k6k 13fc 230 no 155 n5 380 295 295 175 180 93 95 *75 1.0 2 0 1.0 2 8 1.0 2 5 1.027 1.0 10 1.0 12 1.023 1.0 3 0 1.0 2 0 1.0 2 6 1.0 2 6 1 .00* Concentration (Milligrams of Lead per liter j .1 7 0 .097 .12 0 .132 055 .0 5 8 .0 9 8 .153 .215 .192 .10 2 .095 Periodic urinary lead determinations will reveal any changes in the ex posures, which at the present time are not excessive. Utility of Lead Urinw-iysis. measurement of the mm -m -fc of lead excreted in the urine is a useful mwina of evaluating exposure to lead and, therefore, a valuable adjunct to medi cal techniques in supervising the health of lead, workers . n-*-t->>-- - 68. respiratory systems of the members of the group of exposed persons as r-niVrHng devices for the lead In the atmosphere. By its mcchani mn of collection it eli minates any forms of in air that do not contribute to actual lead absorp tion, such as coarse dost particles. Furthermore, it averages out exposure vith time, eli-minuting the intermittent high or lew concentrations that might be found in sporadic air sampling and analysis. Bte amount excreted In the urine is pro portional to the amount absorbed within certain limits of individual variation. The influence of individual variation makes it necessary to use urin ary lead concentrations as measures of group exposures rather than as measures of Individual exposures. The knowledge of exposure obtained from urinary lead de terminations can be utilized to point out the need for environmental control of the contaminant, *na for indicating the frequency of, or even need for, medical examinations in the detection of early signs of lead poisoning. Xarmal urine, from persons with no industrial exposure to lead, con tains 0 .0 2 to 0 .1 0 milligrams of lead per liter, dependent largely on the dietary Intake, mounts of in the range 0 .1 5 to 0 .2 0 milligrams per liter are con sidered indicative of exposure at a borderline level of actual toxicity, with a probable degree of safety. Extensive experience indicates that the collection and analysis of "spot" samples of urine, rnw+jHrHwg about 10 0 ml., is a satisfactory procedure for determination of exposure. It an advantage over the collection of 2 k - hour specimen in that its collection can generally be closely supervised and the danger of contamination of the sample lessened. Precautions against contamination are the use of chemically clean vessels nfl stoppers -d scrupulous cleanliness during voiding of the saaple. In a 100 ml. saaple, containing 0.15 g- of lead per liter, the analyst will have to work with only 15 micrograms of lead. The possible influence of dust or other foreign matter in the saaple is obvious. 1G7 69. We were told at the a d d plant of the coxrtenplated use of steel pipe I E3 vlth. bonded lining. use of this pipe nay Introduce t j< to lead fanes because it "Hill sot be possible to remove the lead Utrtwg at prior to malting changes Is the shape or length of pipe sections, as can be vlth the lead Inserts now used. Ibe urinary lead determinations will be valuable in determining whether this expected increase of exposure actually occurs. 168 70. HEXES AHD IESTHtMEHT EIVTSIQN Shops. ^ .p The shop men routinely overhaul, clean, and repair meters and instru ments. There Is & main shop In the Petroleum Products Area and a shop in the Crafts Building of the Chemical Products Area. Smaller shops are located in the East and West Esso laboratories Areas, and in the BLA Mechanical Shops. In the shop vurk, mercury is the principal hazardous material encounter, ed. Measurements vere TMd of the concentration of mer cury Taper in the air of each of these shops, except the BLA Mechanical Shop. In none could ve find con centrations as great as 0.1 mg. per cubic meter of air, a concentration consider ed a safe upper limit for 8-hour daily exposure. Besults of all measurements are shown in Table 12 (page 71). The main Meter and Instrument Shop, vixich handles the greatest volume of mercury, has a system far collection and recovery of spilled mercury, the ef fectiveness of which is shown by the absence of visible deposits on the benches or floor and by the extremely low atmospheric concentrations found. Th* trial of this system in the main shop is expected to lead to simi lar installations in the other shops. Diere is need of such a system in the Chemical Products Area Crafts Building and In the East and West Esso Laboratories shops. Although low atmospheric concentrations vere found in these places, the difficulty of removing spilled merem y from this type of floor Bakes it appear that sufficient accumulations may occur to give rise to higher concentrations v1h the passage of time. It is veil to remember that the occurrence of mercury vapor in hazardous concentrations in laboratories and. shops is mere likely to result from, evaporation of spilled mercury having extremely large surface area, than from the actual mani pulations vith liquid mercury in the shop or laboratory "work ' 1GU 71. Sample Humber Location Table 12 MEECBI VAPOR MBASSEMSRTS-- M lgl'K R ffiT I T T tH ^ T lM riil'l1 SHOPS Air Volume (Cu.Ft.) Mercury Concentration (Mg./cu.m.) 1 Main Hater and Instrument Shop. In vicinity 20 of meter racks. Sasple intake near floor. 2 Main Meter Tnnf-riTm^nt. shop. In room 26 used as office nfl storeroom. Visible de posits of pillmA i w f.wy rm floor. Sample inlet at clerk's desk. 3 Shop in East Pilot Plant Area. Hev location 15 far this shop. So visible deposits on this rough concrete floor. Sanple intake on top of vork bench at "workers' breathing level. k Shop in Vest Esso Laboratories Area. Shop 10 located here far 3 months. of spill age around, mercury reservoir under bench. Rough concrete floor. Ho floor drain. Sarnie intake, moved flyrring' mpUng to three locations at breathing level. 6 Shop in Cruft* UrrH fling in Products 20 Area. Visible deposits of spilled mercury on rough concrete floor. Floor drain has no trap for recovery of mercury. 0 .0 8 0 .0 8 trace * trace 0 .0 8 The use of Varsol far einjuring purposes in these shops is not considered hazardous in view of the ammounts used and lov volatility of this product. Outside Men. The principal dirties of the outside men are inspection of thermocouple veils and orifice plates, trouble shooting at instrument locations, including re pair at the site, nd inspection nfl repair at -time of turnaround. These routine duties take the meter and instrument men into areas of 170 72. exposure to process material of highly diversified character. Quantitatively, their exposures are considered somewhat less than that of process operators at the respective units. They are furnished protective clothing to prevent shin contact with. heavy aromatic distillate, acids, and alkali. That they are same- times exposed accidentally to high vapor concentrations is evident from the ac count of a "fainting" incident that occurred in the KBS plant and the fact that cases of poisoning vith methyl chloride occurred among meter and instrument men vhea its use vas nev. Exposure to vapor in confined spaces by outside M & X men is not steady enough to cause any concern. STrtn contact vith liquid mercury occurs on meter and instrument repair jobs. The frequency of its occurrence vas not ascertained. It is not a serious potential source of industrial disease, because (1 ) the supervisors and the men know that it should be avoided *nfl do so as much as is possible; (2 ) gashing facilities are available and are used after encountering liquid mercury on the Job. Shift Men. Shift of -the Meter and Instrument Division verb out of the main shop and the Chemical Products Area Craft Building Shop and on the current turn around jobs. Th1 r work does not differ from that of the straight day men in the same area. 73. ELBCaSICAL DIVISION Qie greater part of the time of these men Is spent sway from the proxi mity of process material. Repair of refrigeration units, as in drinking foun tains and air conditioning equipment, wiring and lamp replacements in the offices, maintenance of power lines overhead and `beneath the ground are Jobs that require no consideration in a review of health factors. In work at the units, such as Installation of lamps, maintenance and replacement of motors, temporary power and light wiring at turnaround, etc. the electricians1 contact with process material is generally neither intense nor prolonged. They work out of the ww-t* shop and way stations. Two or three men at a unit turnaround is the usual number. 4 Line Gang. The H t>a gang is composed of 13 rated men and one laborer. Die work is mostly outdoors on overhead lines. Occasionally they are employed at pulling cable in underground conduits and, in bad weather, they may be employed at lamptrig in And, around process units. Dieir employment is non-hazardous from the in dustrial health standpoint. Electricians signed, to Rrocess TTtvtts, Laboratories, and Offices. Five flww are regularly assigned to process units, two at the catalytic cracking units wnd three at butyl rubber polymerization. Twelve electricians are assigned to laboratories and offices. They may "be excluded from consideration o health. hazards. t 7*. Main Electrical Shoo. Four men are present full time at the main electrical shop. Their work is primarily that of motor cleaning and repairing. Approximately 100 motors per month are handled in this shop. Tarsal is the regularly used cleaning agent. Its use in this shop is probably the greatest opportunity that eadsts in the re finery for toxic manifestations from repeated daily inhalation and skin contact, should there he any such r n a n - f rmtt from this substance. According to a description furnished by the Refinery Laboratory, Vsrsol consists of a narrov cut fraction boiling between J00 and boo degrees Fahrenheit. Its .aromatic content was given as follows: _ Yarsol B (105) Tarsol C (106) Hi Flash Tarsol (107) 15.5* 15.536 13.0* This boiling range would indicate that benzene, the most toxic of the aromatic hydrocarbons, is absent that tolnene and Xylenes are also absent. Aromatic substance in the analysis would presumably consist of ethyl benzene, propyl benzene, isopropyl benzene (cumene), ethyl toluene, etc. These compounds are in a class shout which little is known tcxicologi- cally, except for the acute effects of single large doses. It would seem that tie low aromatic content, low volatility, and natural ventilation at the shop would result in a toxic vapor exposure of a low order of magnitude. Determination of just what the exposure amounts to and what its effects may be on the men as de termined by close observation would be desirable undertakings. Pedigree Products So. 150 t m t TM is used in the shop to the extent of about five gallons per week as a thinner for insulating paints and varnishes which are sprayed, for ^i th ng spray equipment, and far cleaning the bands . This product is described by its manufacturer as consisting of commercial xylenes. Its use constitutes an exposure of undetermined toxicological significance. Although 173 75. the toxicity and volatility of xylenes are lev, spraying of paints containing then as a thinner wwfl intimate contact in washing the nay produce un desirable effects in the men. Respiratory protection for the operators of spray equipment and substitution of a less Irritant skin cleansing agent are logical starting points far of any hazard that exists. In periodic medical examinations of these vorkers, attention should he directed at discovering any eye irritation, dermatitis, or central nervous system changes. Skin Contact vith Suspected Carg^'nngena. 11 s Skin contact with heavy aromatic oils and other petroleum products from ViandHrig contaminated extension cords and floodlights that have seen service at process units is avoided hy routine t ng vith steam hy one man on "B" shift at the electric shop. The regular duties of electrical maintenance men do not subject them to contact vith acids or heavy aromatic oils and tar. Any contact is accidental, involuntary, and infrequent. Underground Lead Work. Lead h-- in underground electrical conduits is relatively scarce in this refinery, being used for one voltage. Maintenance -work on lead sheathing in nndprrgvri'Twri conduits is done by one man. It vas estimated that he is engaged for no more than one veek per year at this type of vork. Because of its infrequent occurrence and the nature of the vork, no lead poisoning hazard can be farseen in this vork. Occurrence of Nitrogen Oxides. Vacuum tube rectification at the catalytic cracking units eliminates -ti possibility of exposure tc nitrogen oxides, -which is said to occur in other plants. 174 MASON DIVISION 76. V. ( This division workers, and 7 2 insulators. 6 3 brick masons, 36 concrete and sandblast Masons. The tearing down removal, of furnace "brick at the No. 22 thermal cracking unit was observed In order to determine the degree o f intensity of dust exposure in this type of work. Four dust counts made In the breathing zone of nan performing this work shoved concentrations ranging from 0 .1* to 2 .3 million particles per cubic foot, which are beneath hazardous levels. In work of this kind, there is usually same degree of natural ventilation. The work is inter mittent. Some unit turnarounds require a minor amount of brick replacement. Dust encountered- in this work would be expected to contain free silica to the extent of 25 to 30 per cent, as found in the Aruba survey. The Job, therefore, is not considered to constitute a positive silicosis hazsrd. Laying o f new brick requires same cutting to shspe at the site. For this purpose, the division has three clipper sa8 . They are equipped with dust exhaust but no collectors. The dust is discharged to the air at the rear of the apparatus. effectively prevents the prolonged inhalation of dust by the operator. Persons in the area are, of course, exposed to the discharged dust. Their exposure is occasional since the saw is portable. The new type of saw with wet dust suppression, which is on order, will effectively prevent this nuisance practice of discharging dust to the air. Eie replacement of brick in the catalyst regenerators in fluid cata- lytic cracking units is known as a dusty Job. The greatest source of dust is the disturbance of residual catalyst in the chamber Of secondary importance is 175 77. asbestos dust, "which is present to an unknown extent. It Is probably minor be cause there is no process whereby the asbestos is broken down to fine particle size. The overhanging "Jointless" firebricks used. In this installation can be excluded from consideration as an important source of dust for the method of in stalling them is not dust producing. Bie longevity of the brick in this service, and the normal frequency of four turnarounds per year serve to classify this dust exposure as occasional. Replacement nd iwytng of brick in acid areas constitutes a large part of the brick masons' employment. Bie brick has a lov free silica content. Cut ting and flhnp-ttig is flffne mainly outdoors. The dust exposure is not considered hazardous. Use of Basalite adhesive can result in exposure to irritant fumes, unless precautions are taken. irritant property of the fume is so intense _ that chronic exposures are necessarily avoided by the men thesselves. Concrete and. Sa-ndhiast. There is an interchange of between concrete and sandblasting Jobs vhjeh twOo it difficult to determine Just how many persons in the course of a year spend sufficient time in the vicinity of sandblasting to require physical examination by the Medical Depaxtmeut. Bie tendency toward increasing require ments for Hn<Thi<hh ng inside process equipment prior to mechanical work at unit turnarounds makes it necessary that a continuing check on exposed, personnel be kept by or for the Medical Department. At units where we observed sandblasting inside towers, drums, or other equipment, the dust was well ennngH confined so that only the man handling the blasting hose was in a gV> concentration- He is, of course, protected with an approved supplied-air ttpv -nrt helmet. There, nay "be, and probably axe, occasions where escape of dust is in the direction of attendants at the sand blast machines. 176 78. This is a situation which can only be evaluated by repeated observation and measurements at the scene. . At the sandblast shed next to the salvage yard, blasting of small parts from the process units, such as bubble caps, is done almost dally. The open sheds provided for this work provide no confinement of the dust. shed where men must stand to attend the machines is sufficiently close to the blasting to receive at most times a high dust concentration. The attendants use no respira- JL. tccry protection. Dust counts in this area, as shown in Table 13, which follows, ' i1 / ranged from four to lk million particles per cubic foot. These concentrations/***'; are excessively high for free silica dust. Attendants at these units should be required to vear dust respirators during the -whole time that sandblasting is being done. A sere satisfactory long-range solution to the problem will be to provide a m o d e m enclosed sand-blast shed -with dust recovery system at the pro posed nev location at the Mechanical Crafts nev buildings. Table 13 DUST COHCEKJRAIIOHS m YICHUTT OF s a h u h l a s t s h e d Sample Sampling Humber Time Location J '-r ^ Dust Count (Million particles per cu.ft.) 68 5 min. Around perimeter of "brick-crushing shed. 7.k 69 3 min. At entrance to shed Just east of sandblasting lk shed. is -the regular station of the man -hPTtfHrig -fch- TimeMne for the sandblasters. 77 5 min. Inside the shed mentioned in Ho. 6 9 . lk 78 7 min. Same location as Ho. 77* 82 5 min. Along side the eastern-most sandblast shed. Ho blasting being done in this shed at this time. Dust cornea from two sandblasters working in the other shed. ; 7.3 k. 2 177 T9. Brick and Afibeatoa rc-HnrH-ng. \A t* . < In. & vah adjacent to the sandblast Bhed, a crushing is used several days each month to provide ground bxick to he used as aggregate. Its use fox grinding asbestos was described to us as very Infrequent. Although an ex haust fan and duct are connected to this machine, there is considerable escape of fine dost within. the room during Its operation. Another important source of dust at this location la the sandblast shed next door. We feel that even in times past, when brick grinding vas a continuous dally Job to keep the polymer pl&nt s. catalyst tower supplied, the frigfr silica dust from sandblasting could have been a score important factor than the occasional asbestos dust and brick dust In this shed. Use of a dust respirator la the brick grinding shed should be re quired. __ ,,/. * ` ' ' ' Insulators. >. We saw no operations In the refinery where insulators would be errosed to high concentrations of dust, harmless or otherwise, from the material with which they work. They do use a large variety of cements, thinnera, solvents, and adhesives of unknown composition. There are some occasions where high concentra tions of volatile constituents of these products will be encountered. The MedicsL Deuartment have same Tn^*r|a of acquiring knowledge of the particular pro ducts that are ^r> use what the principal constituents are, so that proper medical control can be exercised. I 178 8o. fl^whiRATi TABOR Refinery Disposal Dump. ix'*> > -> 'r y S' Fourteen h*ti are enployed azui.the majority hare varied here mare than ten years. All types of liquid and solid vastes from refinery processes, to the extent o f 1 0 0 -1 5 0 truckloads daily are disposed of here by open pit burning of combustibles. Since combustion is only of bon-fire type, considerable gmnV re- sult% and there is undoubtedly opportunity far major vaporization of materials surrounding the area of the actual fire. Bumping of heavy aromatics is said to be one of vaate materials, vt this suggests the good possibility of exposure of men to smokes containing injurious materials in vapor or mist form. Obviously, the vill attest to take advantage of uind direction to avoid smoke, but this redeeming feature vas minimized by our informants. At the time of our inspection the vlnd vas favorable for avoidance of smoke. The variety of vaste materials handled nfl atmospheric conditions makes it impossible to appraise these condi tions on a scientific basis, beyond the suggestions outlined above. General Labor supervisors rate the occupation as one of the verst problems they have. Ethyl Lead Tanks d^rrin^. T M a hazard is recognized and precautions taken to comply vith require ments n<nTTTm<.n(Tfltlori8 of the Ethyl Corporation (as veil as duPont), vhich in cludes gas testing before entry into tanks, use of special protective clothing, supplied-air respirators, periodic medical examination. Exposure to Pavder Ca^^yst Dust. Cleaning Reactor Chamber (PCIA.). A number of are exposed for an estimated average of three months per year. Die dust is very irritating to the upper respiratory tract and to the eyes. 1 7firi 81. It was generally agreed that men near the respirators provided, faithfully, and this is a good Index of the irritating qualities of the dust-- -since voluntary wear of respirators is only done where discomfort it imposes is of lesser extent. Goggles provided are worn, bxrt not as faithfully as respirators and,frequently, minor eye injury cases are reported to the Medical Department. Cleaning Bubble Towers. Inspectors, as well as laborers, cannot totally avoid shin exposures to various deposits in bubble tower and plate cleaning and Inspecting, even though they wear rubber suits. These men literally must lie In the material where space is often no more than 15 Aye-hm* deep. Some examples of this type of exposures are in the bubble towers of Cracking units 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, and 22, Pipe stills 1-8, PCIA 1, 2, and J, ALA. 1, 2, and 3, etc. The deposits encountered in such places consist of a wide variety of materials from gas oil rid Tmph-th used far flushing prior to entry to heavy polymers and coke deposits of unknown composition. Exposures of this type to shin contact with materials of unknown com position and toxicity constitute one of the category of exposures of question^ able Importance. Puller Tma-ya-famiHng of the effects of such exposures can only come with continued observation. The desire for complete health protec tion of refinery personnel dictates the necessity for avoidance of such exposures as Tiroch as possible and 'HTtrt-Mrtg the occurrence of possible ill effects by re storing cleanliness of person nfl clothing Immediately following each exposure incident. Cleaning Seactora. Tdefot 'grids Plant. Renewal of polymerization catalyst occurs at a rate of about once in three months and lasts for about two days. The job is performed by a group of 179 .82 tea men at cm out-of-doors location. The material they encounter is coarse and granular, hence nan-dusty. No significant exposures can he seen in the perform ance of these duties. Tank Cleaning. A certain amount of unavoidable akin contact occurs when laborers enter a tank to remove sediment remaining after pmp-ing out the tank. These exposures are In the same category with those described in the section above, entitled Cleaning Bubble Towers. Respiratory protection is afforded by the use of hose masks. Spent clay from the lube filters is used to "dry up" the last of the sediment to_ facilitate its removal by wheelbarrow. This practice constitutes no dust hazard by reason of the gm p"1 "T* form of the material used. Tube and Soaker Cleaning. An important segment of the duties of general labor consists of clean ing tubes at the furnaces of the various refining units. Some eighty men are employed on this Job ,,over three daily shifts. There is no doubt that this is a dust-producing operation. It is likewise evident that there is no accumulation of dust concentra tion at the breathing level of the cleaners, because their position is open to the outside air an three sides above. There is usually a fair amount of air movement about their position. When dust production ceases, dust at the breath ing level is quickly dissipated. Th* production of dust is fairly constant after the tubes have been opened *nd cleaning equipment has been put in place. Total exposure time, as for most M A C operations outside of shops, is variable and, hence, rmVnovn.. The effects on health from inhalation of these dusts, if and when it occurs, are likewise unknown. 180 83- Cleanng_SQRlr1npr TtWTma a t Thermal rVwrWrig^Tftrt^g^- Cleaning out vertical soaking drum at cracking coll Ho. 22 was fry means of a mechanical anger inserted from the bottom. Hater wash flows down through the drum. This c l f i n i n g rig is used on 19, 20, 21, and 22 coils. Four laborers comprise its crew. There is no dust exposure because of the use of water. There is op portunity for skin contact with materials la the drum while fitting the bit and while cleaning the sludge a coke away from the rig. He were told that one M n is sometimes put into the drum from the top for scaling with a frwfl tool. - These contacts would be an Important exposure In cases where the unit has been feeding clarified from catalytic cracking. There is an opinion In same quarters that the aromatics boiling over 700*F. are not destroyed, but con centrated, in the heavy tar fraction when clarified oil is fed to thermal crack ing colls. This opinion fronta be tested by means of same mat toxicological experiments. Dismantling Conanwer Boxes. Four laborers were engaged In dismantling a condenser box on the Ho. 22 unit. There was a copious flow of heavy tar from the colls as end-connections were removed. RTHn contact was plentiful. Seme pipefitters were also Involved la this occurrence, which was described as unusual by the pipe-fitter foreman, as gas oil is usually encountered in nmmtling these colls. In this instance, the tar may or may not be considered potentially carcinogenic, depending upon its source and prior treatment. The occurrence serves to point up the necessity for establishing some procedure whereby every unexpected incident that results in prolonged contact of material over a large area of men's bodies shall be re ported to the Safety Department or some other responsible agent for determination 181 ah. of 'whether the regulations concerning clothing, showers, and medical examination, for potential carcinogens halt he applied. Exposures to Heavy Ari*tTTBatics. General Labor foremen have given earnest consideration to Abe problem. A question vas raised that, In rHgg-tng ditches to uncover pipeline leaks, the w m may encounter a deposit of aromtica seepage. Alertness to this occurrence, which obviously exists in the division, Is essential to success of the program for pre vention of contact,. Actual supervision of the use of protective boots wfl gloves that are provided for such occurrences is the other essential for success. - Another question Is that of replacement of work clothing which men will wear for long periods In normal practice. t h a is one of the many details that must he worked out in the pTn for pr m rtaiTTg clean work clothes when there has been contact with suspected carcinogenic material. svt-n contacts with heavy aromatics, on the part of general yard labor, has been considerably lessened by the provisions for flushing out lines before work is done on the catalytic cracking units. Similar provisions are being ar ranged at thermal cracking units where clarified oil is cracked. r .182 " nST5 Total Package" l l 2 , 35-1/1130 1/ .... 1 0 7 17 in' 183 85. CAREHTER AED PALETTES EI7ISI0H Paint Shop. The use of paint remover for stripping office furniture and other items occurs with sufficient frequency to require precautions against injurious inhala tion of vapor. It is urged that special ventilation he provided for this verb. It can he arranged hy inn-hnna-h-ton of a large propeller exhaust fan, e.g., 2^" to 30" diameter, and ng o f 0 1 paint remover work immediately adjacent to this fan. The present system of placing furniture outdoors for removing paint is not an assurance of safety nt 47ginTA4AQn of the vap ors of or chlorinated hydrocarbons which may he present because it depends on the vagar ies of the winds and is not at n practical during extended rainy periods. punters. The relatively Trrt-nrrr role of painting hy refinery personnel is indi cated by the fact that about 32 men actually do painting. Of this number, five or six are part-time spray painters. (Major paint jobs on new construction, tanks, Ttfl process equipment is done by contractors.) Bespiratars are provided for indoor spray work, which is very infrequent. Ho red lead is sprayed by refinery personnel. An item of major interest to the Medical Department is the possibility of the occurrence of benzol in some of the formulations used. Since the sources of paint product^ even the composition of products from the same source, are subject to variation, a on benzol exposures can best be obtained by random application of urine sulfate measurements to the members of the group. 184 86. MISCELLANEOUS Aniline. LABORATORIES Refinery Laboratory Daily routine aniline point tests are made. We could see no practice in the conduct of these tests that would result in breathing appreciable amounts of aniline vapor or any skin contact with aniline, except, perhaps, accidentally. The amount of aniline required for a teat (approximately 10 c.c.) is drawn from a reservoir in an exhaust hood. It 1s mixed with material being tested on a laboratory bench away from the hood. After the test, used aniline is discarded, there being no facilities for re-distillation. Our only suggestion regarding the protection of workers from aniline is that the physical examination of these people be increased in frequency from once to twice a year, to conform to prac tice in the other refineries that we have seen. Mercury Vapor. __ _ ' Those laboratories In which metallic mercury is used were visited in company with Mr. Day, of the Safety Department, for the purpose of observing the extent and manner of use and,the disposition of spilled mercury . Hygienic prac tice in the use of marcnry consists of controlling accumulations of vapor or dust in the working environment, t m s can 'be accomplished by providing a reasonable amount of room ventilation and in keeping the floors and work benches free of spilled mercury. Evaporation place from finely divided droplets dispersed on a floor surface at a greater rate than it will from mercury reservoirs on laboratory apparatus, because of the greater surface exposed to the air. The American Standards Association adopted the value of 0.1 milligram per cubic 185 87- meter of air as the TM n w n m permissible concentration. It constitutes a good bench mark for control of mercury Taper exposures. It egresses an easily at tained level of control. *rhe results of ttt*"girrmmmrrt n m aA * in the various laboratories are fcnown to the Safety Department. They are summarized in the Table below (page 88) far convenience. Only the Gas Analysis Boom of the Refinery Laboratory showed a con centration bordering on the level of what constitutes good practice. In this instance, replacement of the contaminated floor mats and cleaning and painting of the contaminated tH~n effectively reduce the atmospheric concentration to the level prevailing in the other laboratories. The Gas Analysis Room of the fffrgm-tcal Products Laboratory is in a worse condition as regards spilled m^rruT-y on the floor and beneath the work benches, but accumulation of concen trations in the air is prevented by the excellent ventilation system. 18G Sample Humber 5 7 8 9 10 11 88. Table lAMERCURY YAPCR lOSTESMISATZOaSS-- LABORATORIES Location Refinery laboratory. Gas Analysis Roam. Fairly smooth concrete floor. Rubber mats. Rot much ventilation. Sanple Intake at breathing level in two locations. Plancor 572 Lab. Sample at breathing level near ROD apparatus. Ro visible spilled mercury. Refinery Laboratory. Leonard's Lab. Small use of mercury. Good ventilation. Ro visible deposits. Distillation Group Laboratory: (a) Rear vacuum still (b) Rear glass still Fuel Products Lab. Mercury is -washed here far -use in test at treating plant. Sample taken near washing apparatus in open cage locker. Chemical (a) (b) (c) (d) Products Wai-n Laboratory: Analytical Lab. In vicinity of Polarimeter at breathing level Gas Analysis Lab. Visible deposits of spilled 'iiMnu'-ui'y an the floor, on rubber mats, underneath laboratory benches. jM* exhaust ducts with <-n+.v one foot off floor, good air supply to roam. Sample taken at breathing level. Special Problems Lab. B. Small use of mercury; good air movement. Special Problems Lab. A. Small use of mercury. Mercury Concentration (Mg. per cu.m.) 0.18* Greater than 0.1 Less than 0.02* 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 * Results obtained by a method utilizing absorption in iodine wfl a H -tc determination. Air volume 20 cubic feet. All other results vere obtained by use of the General Electric Mercury Vapor- Detector. ' ' i t 187 89. E B i m r o STANDARDS __ Vi-" The shop, <*>gn section, end office of this division employ about 33 persons in a one-story frame building. Materials Handled. The use of AzO dyes in the Ozalld process and of photographic chemicals constitute possible sources of dermatitis in susceptible Individuals with eh the Medical Director is fully swore. There are several solvents and process liquids in use which are of interest because of the livelihood that these, and similar preparations that stay come into use from, time to time, contain substances of > n m m toxic properties, such as methyl alcohol and carbon tetrachloride. Ihose currently in use are: . Ditto Direct Process Liquid Multilith Blankrola MultUith Bepelex Multilith Bepelex Multilith Plates Multilith Deexit Ventilation. Besides the doors T>ri windows which are usually open, ventilation of the working space is furnished by a l*8-inch attic fan, a wall exhaust fan at the location of the photographic reproducer, and the exhaust fan connected with the hood over the Ozalid Process. It is estimated that the ventilation rate exceeds 12,000 to 15 ,0 0 0 cubic feet per minute. *Wr<B ventilation rate will suffice to keep concentrations of vapor of liquids commonly used in formulations of this M n A below 100 parts per million in the air, should the total evaporation rate amount to as as 2.5 ion per hour. According to our observations of the processes, the evaporation rate of liquids in this shop is much below this 188 90. figure. Concentrations of vapor in the air are thus maintained at a level safely below that which would cause harm to the personnel. Xf there were acute exposures to high local concentrations of harmful solvents at any of the machines, these would have manifested themselves by symp toms of nausea, dizziness, or Irritability. 189 91. 1 ASEHATP PLAIT We did not Kww. . 5ti-c 7 a study of the facilities at this refinery far oxidiz ing, blending, and packaging asphalt. In flew of the experiences at other refineries vithin the ccngjany, it vould be advisable to exnari-ne these facilities from the standpoint of production of vapors or mists in aromatic vapors In cutback >iwrung, nA asphalt mist at drum filling, viicrever such atmospheric contaminants may 1 for extended periods in areas uhere men are at vork. \ 190 92. APPENDIX PHEVEHTHM CP EXPCSDEE TO iTTr^r RDTT.TNrt ABnMArnT?g Ve hare reviewed the basic infcarnation which indicated, the necessity far a program of control of exposure to catalytic cracking or steam cracking fractions boiling above 700*?.; ve are also acquainted vith the exposition of this program to employees on February 23 and. 2b-, 19^9, and. with the general rules far personal conduct nfl hygiene vith respect to persons encountering these frac tions in the course of their duties. We have reviewed the Safety Department's survey of exposures to high boiling aromatics in the refinery, which includes recommendations for action and additional precautionary measures. Bieae studies Indicate that the Befinery is in a favorable position vith respect to prevention of skin contact vith these oils by employees and early detection of any skin changes brought about b y contact. Die first most im portant favorable point is that the employees are fully informed of the reasons far precautions. They have thus been put in a questioning frame of mind. Pos sibilities for exposure that were overlooked in the original directives and survey have been suggested ari^ vill cazrtlnne-to be brought out by the several hundred alert supervisors *** workers that are affected. The list of proposed improvements in the Safety Department's survey contains several examples, not ably the necessity far prw tfltTig better means far flushing out slurry heat ex changers and steam generators at the catalytic cracking units, especially those that must be worked an vh-n* a unit is in operation. Seme details of procedure still remain to be accomplished. Slurry pumpa, in present practice, are not satisfactorily drained of the before removal to the shop for dis assembly. There seems to be a chance for m m l l parts from service in heavy aromatic oils to reach the sand blast shed for. cleaning without warning labels. ' 191 93. With widespread, knowledge of the problem, the prospects are excellent for the development in time of totally effective procedures. The a A e g m u rj q facilities for taking ahovers and for provision of protective elotMtig assumes & great importance in this program for prevention of shin contact. We find that the refinery is veil-equipped with shower roans that they are veil-distributed for easy accessibility by those who may be in need of such facilities flr-tng & working day or at the end of the vorfcLng day. Any tendency toward further centralization will have a detrim ental effect on the ready accessibility of the rooms after the occurrence of a spill or a splash of the oil fractions that are to be avoided. Maintenance of these shower roans In a clean and sanitary condition ia generally quite good. Biere are a fev excep tions: (1) file colored room at the road oil stills. The location of this washroom under a water tank light and ventilation a difficult problem but maintenance on a par with facilities elsewhere could still make it a good place to take a bath. (2) The colored room, beneath tank Ho. 291 (next to Po. 2 boiler bouse) is likewise Ill-kept. (3) The colored room at the Plate Shop suffers from overcrowding. General Labor foremen say that 99 plus per cent of Segro laborers take showers on their own time at the end of the working day. Tftiia habit should be encouraged In every way. Good of the shower rooms is most important. In the matter of dividing potentially exposed personnel into frequent and 4 Trfr-- rrfc groups, ve question the inclusion of nearly all process employees at PCLd units, QBIA, and CHA in the frequent category, while the number or Mechanical --- ploy-- is minimised. In our experience, the process esployeea 192 spend more time at places vfaere these oils are handled hut experience less *- contact than Mechanical employees vho may less frequently be in areas of ex posure but mare often are exposed. A slsple time study on these grape clarify the respective exposures. ' In addition to that has been dene to lessen shin contact vlth these high boiling aromatic oils, ve propose that a complete program far prevention of exposure should Include the prevention of Inhalation of vapor or mist of these fractions. Ve vere able to demonstrate the presence a t o i l mist In the vicinity of hot clarified oil pumps at the catalytic cracking units. Ve feel s ;-v that there should he a concerted effort to Identify and evaluate every occurrence of oil mist In places vhere men verb and vhere the stock consists of oils that are presently Included In this program for prevention of akin contact, fixe toxicological potentialities of Inhalation of a mist of a substance that Is potentially carcinogenic cannot at present be adequately defined but seems to deserve a great degree a t important consideration. Initial efforts should be directed to the areas of slurry and clarified oil pumps at catalytic cracking units; feed pumps at t***'TM*! cracking units receiving clarified oil; quench oil pumps at steam cracking units; the tar product props of steam cracking units; and the use a t steam lines for flushing aaray surface deposits that have resulted from spills or leaks. A n sampling locations at units handling these oils should be examined far the purpose of ascertaining vhether the person vho drams the sample can accomplish his mission vitheut suffering exposure to mist or splashes of the stock he is sampling. 193 95EEHZGL ESPOSnEES While potential exposures to "benzol in various locations (Busmerized below) may have been over-enphasized, the uniquely toxic character of the Taper warrants special attention. Various investigatlona in the consuming industries, especially in coated fabrics plants, where enclosure of equipment and ventilation vere thought to be good, disclosed cases of benzol poisoning at concentrations of 75-100 p.p .a. The action is particularly Insidious; many fatalities from chronic ex posure to lot concentrations are known. _ Time for the survey did not permit detailed appraisal of this hazard in the several possible exposure locations. We did not feel that any vere par ticularly significant, especially for average individuals in good'health. file possibility of unfavorable developments, however, in an occasional susceptible individual could not be ruled oat, and this is the reason for the general recom mendation for medical supervision far workers potentially exposed. Urine Sulfate Test. TVHa test provides a convenient method far measuring1the degree of a worker's exposure to benzol vapors during a given day, and is particularly ap plicable to -ng the exposures of workers in the listed locations. Smmary of Potential Benzol Exposure Areas. Solvent De-waxing (MEK) Plant Steam Cracking Plants Ho. 1 and Ho. 2 . Diolefin Extraction tbit QBXJL Steam Cracking Coils Paint Shop t 194 E X H I B I T # 16 195 Transcript Quality Assurance Checklist Deposition scheduled by: __ N otice prepared by: _______ Subpoena prepared by: ____ Subpoena served by: ______ Setting confirmed by: Deposition reported by: ____ Transcript edited by: ______ Transcript proofread by: ___ Deposition videotaped by: __ Transcript copied by: _____ Exhibits prepared by: _____ Transcript bound by: ______ a i_ JA Transcript page-checked by: _ Transcript billed by: ______ Transcript packaged by: ___ Transmittedfo r signature by: _ Notice to opposing counsel by: Transcript delivered by: ___ NELL McCALLUM & ASSOCIATES, INC.