Document rOpkoG0jE1KMaydpaQryrr5q

1 NO. 83-46309 2 LEE EATON, ET UX IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF 3 VS HARRIS COUNTY, TEXAS 4 CLEMTEX, INC. , ET AL 55TH JUDICIAL DISTRICT 5 5 7 8 DEPOSITION OF KENNETH SCHEEL 9 10 taken on the 21st day of March, 1985, beginning at 11 11:15 a.m., in the offices of Williams & Blizzard, 12 Lyric Centre Building, 440 Louisiana, Third Floor, 13 Houston, Texas, before Karen J. Ingrain, a Certified 14 Shorthand Reporter and Notary Public in and for the 15 State of Texas, pursuant to Notice and the Texas Rules 16 of Civil Procedure. 17 IT WAS AGREED by and between counsel that the 18 original of th_e deposition of Kenneth Scheel shall be 19 sent to Mr. Edward Blizzard for the purpose of 20 obtaining the signature of the witness thereon before 21 any Notary Public. 22 23 24 29 1 organization and into or to peopi^^hat are in the 2 corporate structure of 3M? What's the chaTrf?,^^~s~_, 3 reporting? 4 A It's through various levels of vice-presidents 5 going up to the president of the corporation. 6 Q As far as you know from working in your -- with 7 pressure-sensitive tape, did that division have a 8 research and development arm? 9 A The tape one you're talking about? 10 Q Yes. 11 A Yes, it did. 12 Q They had people who were hired specifically to do 13 research and develop new products that were made 14 into pressure-sensitive tape? 15 A Yes. 16 Q Is that basically and generally true of the other 17 divisions, that each division is responsible for 18 its own R&D work? 19 A Yes, basicallythat's true. 20 Q Does 3M consider research and development work to 21 be an important part of its corporate planning and 22 marketing strategy? 23 A Certainly. 24 Q I saw a television show the other night about how 25 3M had stumbled onto these new little yellow 1 stickums. 2 A Uh-huh. 3 MR. BLIZZARD: I thought we were 4 here to take his testimony, and I hear 5 yours.6 Q (By Mr. Crow) My question to you is: Sow much 7 emphasis does 3M put on its research and 8 development of new products based on your own 9 experience in several different divisions? 10 A Quite a bit. We have a very large research effort 11 in the corporation. 12 Q That's the impression I got from the T.V. show I 13 saw. What other divisions did you work in, and " 14 would you give me the dates you worked there 15 besides as a product development manager for the 16 pressure-sensitive tape division? 17 A Okay. I wasn't a product development manager for 18 the tape division. I started out as a product 19 development engineer in the Industrial Tape 20 Division in 1967, and I spent about one and a half 21 years doing that and then went to the Technical 22 Services Group of the Industrial Tape Division for 23 approximately another year and a half, almost two 24 years. 31 1 A Yes, correct, and then I tr ansf erfeS'-tothe 2 International Division of 3M as essentially a^*^ 3 process engineer for pressure-sensitive tapes and 4 did that for one year and then was transferred due 5 to internal realignment of the corporation to the 6 Commercial Tape Division of the company doing the 7 same job, process engineering work for 8 International; and I did that for essentially six 9 months, then again transferred to the Technical 10 Services Group of the Commercial Tape Division as 11 the supervisor of that group and continued on with 12 that until approximately 1975 when I went back 13 into the international technical work for 14 commercial tape again, and that was through 1976 15 when I transferred out of that division to 16 Occupational Health and Safety Products. 17 Q Can you tell me the reason or purpose of your 13 transfer out of the Industrial Tape Division into 19 the Occupational Health and Safety Products 20 Division? 21 A I didn't transfer from the Industrial Tape 22 Division in+-~ - 2 1 z APPEARANCES 3 4 5 COUNSEL FOR PLAINTIFFS: 6 Crawford, Grissom, Crow & Richards 3700 Montrose Boulevard 7 Houston, Texas 77006 by Mr. Carl V. Crow 8 Mr. David L. Grissom Mr. William S. Featherston 9 10 11 COUNSEL FOR MINNESOTA MINING & MANUFACTURING COMPANY: 12 Williams & Blizzard 13 Lyric Centre Building 440 Louisiana, Suite 1710 14 Houston, Texas 77002. by Mr. Edward Blizzard 15 16 and 17 Mr. Stephen j. Rowley 3M Center 18 P. O. Box 33428 St. Paul, Minnesota 55133 19 20 21 COUNSEL FOR TACKABERRY: 22 Talbert, Giessel, Stone, Barker & Lyman 2700 Two Houston Center 23 Houston, Texas 77010 by Mr. Jeffrey L. Scott 24 0 =i COUNSEL FOR LONE STAR INDUSTRIES' -> Whittington, Pfeiffer & Vacek Gill Savings Building 3 2600 South Gessner, Suite 400 Houston, Texas 77063-3291 4 by Mr. Michael R. Lipscomb 5 6 7 COUNSEL FOR FLEXO PRODUCTS: 8 Lorance & Thompson 303 Jackson Hill at Memorial 9 Suite 300 Houston, Texas 77007 10 by Mr. Frank B. Stahl, Jr. 11 12 13 COUNSEL FOR PENNSYLVANIA GLASS SAND CORP 14 Baker & Botts 3000 One Shell Plaza 15 Houston, Texas 77002 by Mr. Russell Pike 16 17 18 COUNSEL FOR BOB SCHMIDT, INC.: 19 Weitinger, Steelhammer & Tucker 1200 Cashco Tower 20 8 Greenway Plaza Houston, Texas 77046 21 by Mr. Terry G. Fry 22 23 24 25 4 1 COUNSEL FOR MINE SAFETY APPLIAN 2 Taylor, Hays, Price, McConn & Pickering 400 Citicorp Center 3 1200 Smith Street Houston, Texas 77002 4 by Mr. Allen R. Till 5 6 / COUNSEL FOR PULMOSAN: 8 Benckenstein, Norvell, Bernsen & Nathan 600 InterFirst Tower 9 P. 0. Box 551 Beaumont, Texas 77002 10 by Mr. Kent M. Adams 11 12 13 COUNSEL FOR PARMELEE IND., INC.: 14 Bean & Manning 1611 Weslayan Tower 15 2 4 Greenwav Plaza Houston, Texas 77046 16 by Mr. Derek R. Van Gilder 17 18 19 COUNSEL FOR E. D. BULLARD COMPANY: 20 Martin & Sperry 13 02 McGcwen 21 Houston, Texas 77004 by Mr. Steve Bryant 22 23 24 25 5 1 COUNSEL FOR SPECIALTY SAND CO?? 4Y: 2 Strong, Pipkin, Nelson & Bissell San Jacinto Building 3 Beaumont, Texas 77701 by Mr. William B. Coffey, Jr. 4 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 6 I (Whereupon, Sche'^S^E^hibit Nos, 2 1-60 were marked for identifi cation7 3 the court reporter.) 4 5 6 KENNETH LAURENCE SCHEEL, 7 having been first duly sworn on oath, testified as 8 follows : 9 10 EXAMINATION 11 12 BY MR. CROW: 13 Q Would you state your full name, sir. 14 A Kenneth Laurence Scheel. 15 Q And Mr. Scheel, where do you work? 16 A At 3M Company. 17 Q And what's the business address for your office? 18 A For the company or where I'm personally at right 19 now? 20 Q Where you work. 21 A Where I work? Right now, I'm working at 3M Far 22 East, Limited, in Hcng Kong. 23 Q And what is the business address there in Hong 24 Kong? 25 A The business address there is Victoria Center in 7 1 Causeway Bay. -- 2 Q Is that where 3M does most of its design, testiTr^ 3 and marketing of its respiratory equipment? 4 A No. 5 Q As you know, mv name is Carl Crow; and I'm here 6 today to take your deposition in a couple of cases 7 involving an injury to people who have silicosis. 3 We've asked for somebody who could best describe 9 the process of designing, testing and marketing 10 3M's respiratory equipment, especially these dust 11 masks. Are you that person? 12 A I believe so, yes. 13 Q Would you tell me the background you have at 3M 14 that causes you to think that you are that person? 15 A I have been in Occupational Health and Safety 16 Products Division for eight years now; and up 17 until last October, I had served in functions as 18 the R&D manager for development of our soft goods 19 which would be our respirators and as a technical 20 services manager for that division. 21 Q Do you have any formaltraining, formal 22 educational training? 23 A In what? 24 Q Well, do you have acollege degree? 25 A Yes, I do. and what was your major study? In 1967 in chemical engineering from Purdue University. And at that time, did you have any aspirations one way or the other as to what you thought you might apply that chemical engineering degree to? I don't understand what you mean by that. What did you plan to do with your chemical engineering degree? Well, at the risk of being flippant, get a job in the chemical industries using that knowledge. Okay. Who did you work for first after you got your chemical engineering degree? 3H. Have you been with 3M every since 1967? That's correct. Do you have any other formal education or training, for instance, classroom time or work towards a master's degree or Ph.D. degree? No. Have you been to any informal training programs to better help you design, test, manufacture and market respiratory equipment? No, I would say net. 9 1 Q I don't know very much about cheffl^tsUpngineer ing 2 or what it takes tc get a chemical engineering5'^-^^ 3 degree. What all is included in the broad term of 4 chemical engineering? 5 A The kind of course work do you mean? 6 Q Yes. 7 A Physical chemistry, inorganic chemistry, organic 8 chemistry, physics, mass transfer, unit 9 operations, heat transfer, that's basically it. 10 Q Host of the chemical -- the reason I ask you is 11 that most of the chemical engineers I've met end 12 up working in some field outside of respiratory' 13 equipment design, manufacture, testing and 14 marketing, for instance, like with Exxon Oil 15 Company. 16 A Huh-uh. 17 Q Do you see what I'm saying? Are there any formal 18 educational programs in colleges which in some, way 19 offer a degree which in some way requires course 20 study that actually involves the theory of the 21 design of respiratory equipment? 22 A Not that I'm aware cf, no. 23 Q After you went to work for 3M in '67, what sort of 24 work did you do for chem? 25 A Let's see, produce development engineer in the 1 Industrial Tape Division. 10 2 Q When you got your Bachelor of Science in 1 3 you ever designed a piece of respiratory 4 equipment? 5 A No. 6 Q Had you ever taken any courses in the design of 7 respiratory equipment? 8 A No. 9 Q How did the people at 3M, if you know, conclude 10 that you were the appropriate person to be placed 11 in charge of product development at 3M? 12 MR. BLIZZARD: I don't believe he's 13 ever testified that he was placed in 14 charge of product development. 15 Q (By Mr. Crow) Maybe I misunderstood you, Mr. 16 Scheel. If I did, I apologize. What, again, did 17 you start doing when you started with 3M? 18 A As a product development engineer for the 19 Industrial Tape Division. 20 Q For the Industrial Tape Division? 21 A Yes. 22 Q I see. When you are talking about tape, are you 23 talking about the kinds of tape you use for 24 videotape? 25 A No, pressure-sensitive tape. 1 Q Like Scotch ta 2 A Yes, like Scot 3 Q 3M does make products other than Scotch tape 4 don't they? 5 A Yes. 6 Q Can you name some of those products for us? -l1 A We make a whole range of electrical -- well, I 8 should back up. We make a whole range of 9 pressure-sensitive tapes, make a range of 10 electrical connectors and associated objects like 11 that, facsimile copying machines; business office 12 business machines essentially are made, a whole 13 line of medical and surgical products are produced 14 by the company, abrasives, which are sandpaper, 15 grinding wheels, things like that. Those are the 16 major areas that we deal in. 17 Q Well, do you make any protective equipment, 18 specifically respiratory protective equipment, at 19 3M? * 20 A Yes. 21 Q How long has 3M been in that business? 22 A Essentially for making respirators since 1972. 23 Q Well, did you make any respiratory equipment, 24 anything that a person might logically conclude 25 was to protect the human lung from contamination 12 1 in the work place before 1972? 2 A Nof we did not, not for protecting human lungsT'5^ 3 Q Did you make any dust masks such as the one I have 4 here on the table or such as the three that are on 5 the table at 3M before 197 2? 6 A Yes, we did. "17 Q But those were not for protecting human lungs? 8 A That's correct. 9 MR. BLIZZARD: Well, are you asking 10 about each one of them separately or as 11 a group or -- you've got three masks 12 sitting on the table, and I'm confused. 13 Q (By Mr. Crow) Okay. The question is: Are you 14 confused? 15 A No, I don't think so. 16 Q Ed's testimony, we can't rely on it-today because 17 he's not under oath; but if you ever get confused 18 during this deposition today, I want you to stop 19 me and tell me that you're confused. 20 A Oh-huh. 21 Q I won't necessarily know thatunless you tell me; 22 you understand that? 23 A Right. 24 Q You have the right tounderstand the questions 25 that I ask of you. 13 1 A Uh-nuh. 2 Q I don't expect you to have to try to answer 3 question you don't understand. 4 A Uh-huh. 5 Q So understanding that ifthere's any question in 6 your mind that you are a little bit hazy about my 7 question, you have the right to stop me and inform 8 me of that and ask me to repeat it or rephrase it, 9 okay? 10 A Right. 11 Q If you answer my questions, I'm going to hold you 12 to your answers. If you answer my question, I'm 13 going to assume you understood it, okay? 14 A S ur e. . 15 Q Can we worktogether on that basis? 16 A Sure, that's fine. . 17 MR. BLIZZARD: You can rely on the 18 fact that I will inform you if I'm 19 'confused by the question, and I think 20 the question that you asked may have 21 been misconstrued later to mean that all 22 three of the items now sitting in front 23 of you are not for respiratory 24 protection. I think the witness' 25 testimony is that one of the items is in 14 1 not for respiratory p?>qection. I want 2 to make sure the record's clear55^??^ 3 THE WITNESS: That's correct, yes. 4 Q (By Mr. Crow) Well, Mr. Scheel, I appreciate Mr. 5 Blizzard's comments and the edification they 6 provide all of us, particularly yours as the 7 witness. My original question to you was: When 8 did 3M start making respiratory equipment, and you 9 told me 197 2? 10 A You said specifically for protection of human 11 lungs, and I said 1972, that's correct. 12 Q If I understand your testimony, then, before 1972 , 13 3M did not make anything, whether it was a 14 negative-pressure respirator or a positive air 15 supplied respirator, which it designed, 16 manufactured, tested or marketed to protect the 17 human lungs from work place and environmental 13 contamination? 19 That is true because before 1972 we did not make 20 respirators. We only made a dust mask, and that 21 is not for protection of the human lung. 22 Q Maybe it's because I don't understand the 23 respiratory equipment business that I find that 24 such a fine distinction. If you didn't make the 25 dust masks at 3M before 1972 to protect the lung. 15 1 what did you make them for? 2 MR. STAHL: I'm going to""? 3 the form of the question because it has 4 Mr. Crow testifying as to the fine 5 distinction aspect; and in that aspect, 6 I'm going to object to the question. n/ (By Mr. Crow) Is he your lawyer? Have you ever 8 met him before? 9 MR. STAHL: I'm making objections 10 to the form of the question, Mr. Crow. 11 MR. CROW: And I can't stop you 12 from doing that. We're taking it by the 13 rules. 14 MR. STAHL: That's right, so you 15 may ask -- insofar as my client's 16 concerned, I object to the form of the 17 question as a fine distinction because 18 that is you testifying. 19 Q (By Mr. Crow) What did 3M intend these disposable 20 masks to do if not to provide either complete or 21 partial protection to the human lung? 22 A Which ones are you speaking of now? 23 Q The ones made before 1972. 24 A '72? They are designed strictly to offer relief 2 5 from an irritant value of nuisance dust. They 16 1 have nothing to do with protec human luna. 2 That's all we do. 3 Q If they were not designed to protect the lung, 4 were they designed to protect the nose, the mucous 5 membrane, the esophagus? What do you mean when 6 you say they were designed to protect only against -T did you use the word irritants? 8 A Yes. 0 MR. BLIZZARD: Wait, what's the 10 question? 11 Q (By Mr. Crow) What were they designed to do if 12 not to protect the lung? Can you elaborate on 13 that for me? 14 A It's designed to keep things that are called 15 nuisance dusts out of the upper airways, nose, 16 mouth that would cause people to be uncomfortable; 17 and as a result, they would offer relief from that 18 irritant. Irritant is maybe a bad word because it 19 can sometimes be construed as something harmful to 20 you. Not something harmful to you at all, just a 21 nuisance, simply a nuisance to have, and that 85 22 dust mask keeps that out of your nose and mouth. 23 Q Well, we have on the table for the record, because 24 the record sometimes is sightless, we have three 25 masks. One is the 8500 with the blue band, right? 1 A That's correct, yes, sir. 17 2 Q The other is the 8710, and it's got two'^i 3 rubber straps, right? 4 Correct. 5 Q Now, you mentioned the 8500. Is what you just, 6 told me about the 8710 true as well for -- 7 A I didn't tell you anything about the 8710. 8 Q Well, was this manufactured before 197 2? 9 A No. 10 MR. BLIZZARD: Wait a minute. When 11 you say this, what are you referring to? 12 MR. CROW: Well, I was holding the 13 8710. 14 MR. BLIZZARD: Well, you pointed 15 out the record is sightless, and it is 16 sightless. 17 Q (By Mr. Crow) All right. Let's go back over this 18 again. The 8500 was manufactured before 197 2? 19 A Yes. ' 2C Q When did you start manufacturing the 8710? 21 A In 1 97 2 . 22 Q There'sa yellow mask on the table, and it looks 23 like it says 3M No. 9910. 24 A Yes. 25 Q Is that, in fact, a 3M 9910? 1 A Yes, it is. 18 2 Q When did you start manufacturing it? 3 A It would have been about late 1977 , I believe, or 4 early '78. 5 Okay. Now, I take it from what you just told me, 6 3M did not intend, design, manufacture, test or / market the 8500 paper disposable mask to protect 8 the human lung in any way? 9 That is my opinion, yes. That is true, they did 10 not. 11 Were you at 3M when they decided to design, 12 manufacture, test and market this mask, the 8500? 13 A No, I was not* 14 Q Who was in charge of the 8500 project at 3M? 15 A Who is in charge of it? 16 Q Who was in charge of it at the inception? 17 A I don't know. 18 Q How long has the 8500 been manufactured at 3M? 19 A I think since about the early 196 0's. 20 Q Okay. Would you know any more specifically than 21 that? 22 A No, I don't. 23 Q Would it be safe to say sometime before 196 4, at 24 least? 25 A Yes, I would think. 19 1 And if you will, I had asked yhso^to elaborate on 2 what things this mask was designed to pt3 3 what it was marketed to protect, what it was 4 tested to protect against; and you didn't like the 5 word irritants because of your feeling that some 6 people might get the impression that irritants 7 might be harmful in some way. You like the word 8 nuisance dust, I think, or phrase? 9 Yes. 10 MR. BLIZZARD: Wait a minute. What 11 are you yes, sirring to? I'm not sure 12 what his question is. He started out 13 with one thing, and now he's gone 14 through two or three different subjects 15 before he's asked you something. 16 Q (By Mr. Crow) Would you tell me in your own words *? "7 what you think a nuisance dust consists of? 18 A A nuisance dust is a dust that you can breathe in 19 up to a certain quantity level that will not harm 20 you whatsoever. It will not cause any disease, at *7 7 least as is known today. 22 Q You said up to a certain quantity level? 23 A Yes. The government normally will say that if you 24 were above either 10 or 15 milligrams per cubic 25 meter of a nuisance dust, then, even so, you 1 should wear a true respirator 2 concentration of the material is so high 3 may cause some harm just from the pure quantity of 4 the material. 5 Q Well, I take it from what you just told me, then, 6 there are two factors you use in trying to /"7 evaluate whether or not some dust may or may not 8 be a nuisance. One of the facts you use is the 9 actual type of dust itself, the material that it's 10 made from; is that correct? 11 A Yes. 12 Q And the other factor that you would consider in 13 determining whether or not dust that this 8500 14 mask is designed to protect against is nuisance 15 dust is concentration? 16 A Yes. 17 Q Isn't it true that some substances which would be 18 considered toxic, isn't it true you would consider 19 some substance nuisance dust which might be 20 considered toxic in higher concentrations? 21 A Say that again. I don't understand that. 22 Q You mentioned the government generally says that 23 even for nuisance dust, if they're in higher 24 concentrations than 10 milligrams per cubic 2 5 meter 1 A Ten cr fifteen, yes. 21 2 Q -- then you should wear a respirator anywl^?1^^^ 3 A That's correct, yes. 4 Q Do I understand from that fact that there are 5 someplace dusts which the government considers 6 nuisance in low concentrations but possibly toxic 7 in higher concentrations? 8 A No, I don't believe that's the case at all. It is 9 simply a matter of not allowing loading up of the 10 dust into your lungs, even though it's nuisance, 11 of putting a purely physical mass of dust in your 12 lungs which is not a good idea to do that. 13 Q And that's common sense, isn't it? 14 A It's common sense, but it's not toxic in the sense 15 that it will cause disease. 16 Q I see. So in your mind and in 3M's mind, there 17 was a distinction between simply keeping dust 18 which would have a tendency to overload a person's 19 lungs in high quantities in a person's lungs and 20 keeping out certain substances which would be 21 considered by definition toxic; is that right? 22 A 3M -- say that again. 23 Q Yes. You said this mask wasdesigned simply to 24 prevent too much of these nuisance dusts from 25 getting in the lungs. 22 1 MR. BLIZZARD: whvqiimask are we 2 talking about? 3 Q (By Mr. Crow) The 8500. 4 A No, I didn't say that. The 8500 is designed to 5 keep it out of your nose and throat. It does 6 nothing about protecting your lungs at all. 7 That's what I said. 3 Q Not even from nuisance dust? 9 A That's correct, because it was not designed to 10 keep all things from or protecting your lungs. 11 It's nuisance dust alone. 12 Q Maybe it's my fault, but you would agree with me 13 that the 8500 was designed to keep nuisance dust 14 from reaching the nose and mouth of the wearer? 15 A Yes, true. 16 Q Now, you said that the purpose was to keep the 17 lungs from being I think your term was overloaded 13 or overburdened by some of these types of dusts. 19 How did you explain that a moment ago? 20 A No, that's not what I said. I said in very large 21 quantities of nuisance dusts, then you don't use a 22 nuisance dust mask. You go to a respirator to 23 keep the excess quantities of that material from 24 overloading your lungs and getting in, if you 2 5 will. That's why you use a respirator in that 23 1 case. 2 Q Because a true respirator, whatever that 3 would be more efficient than the 8500? 4 A In general, that's true, yes. 5 Q And I ask you that actually just trying to protect 6 your nose and mouth from these light -/? concentrations of nuisance dust, that's just 8 common sense, isn't it, so you don't irritate your a mucous membrane and get it in your nose and get it 10 in your mouth? 11 A It's common sense from, the point of view that if 12 it bothers you and someone walking around who has 13 allergies, let's say, it doesn't feel good to have 14 allergies; and if you can keep the materials out 15 of your nose and mouth, yes, that's common sense. 16 Q You don't have to have a Bachelor of Science 17 degree or a chemical engineering degree to know 18 ' that you might want to do something to keep some 19 of that dust out of your nose and mouth, do you, 2G sir? 21 A You don't have to have a chemical engineering 22 degree? No, not hardly. I wouldn't think so. 23 Q Eowever, there's a distinction in the types of 24 dust that are found in the work place. Some are 25 considered to be toxic, and some are considered to 1 2 3 4 would you please give me some idea of what types 5 of dusts are considered to be merely nuisance and 6 what types are considered to be toxic? 7 A Okay. The types that are nuisance, we have 8 several grain dusts that are that way. Wood dust 9 a lot of times is considered nuisance. Pure dirt 10 that's on the ground, unless it's contaminated 11 with something, but ordinarily it's normally a 12 nuisance. Pollen, things like this are nuisance 13 materials. Toxic materials would be things like 14 silica, coal, metal dusts of all sorts are usually 15 toxic to some degree. That's some broad examples 16 of them. 17 Q So if I understand what you're saying, you think 18 of dust in the air, like have you ever been out to 19 West Texas? 20 A No, I never have been to West Texas. 21 Q Have you ever seen pictures of a dust storm? 22 A Yes. 23 Q- We're talking about nuisance dust there, aren't 24 we? That's dust blown in the air? 25 A In general, I would say probably yes, it's a i nuisance. 25 2 Q Even though sometimes the air will be so ' 3 with dust you can't see 20 or 30 feet because if I 4 understand you, based on your training and c experience, you consider that to be a nuisance 6 dust situation, possibly severe, but nevertheless 7 a nontoxic nuisance situation? 8 A Probably, yes. 9 Q In working with wood that's being chipped into 10 small pieces, sometimes dust comes up from that, 11 and that's a nuisance dust? 12 A Depending on the type of wood, yes, normally it 13 is. 14 Q Are there any types of wood that give off toxic 15 dust? 16 A I believe there are some that are considered 17 borderline, look them up to make sure. 18 Q Okay. You said that in '67, you were a project 19 engineer for the pressure-sensitive tape? 20 A Product development engineer. 21 Q When did you move out of that and into respiratory 22 equipment? 23 A Well, I moved to several other jobs first before 24 respiratory equipment, but most of it all had to 25 do with tape like I was oricinallv. 1976 is when 26 1 I joined Occupational Health anS^afety Products. 2 Q From reading some of this literature, it 3 me that 3H's Occupational Health and Safety 4 Products Division is a separate little division from the company; is that correct, or am I 6 incorrect? 7 A It's a division of the company, yes, that's 8 correct. 9 Q Or, rather, is 3M broken down into a number of 10 divisible entities which each concentrates on 11 producing a specific product? 12 A Yes. 13 Q You named some of the products that 3M 14 manufactured to me a moment ago to help give me a 15 better understanding of what your company does. 16 A Uh-huh. . 17 Q Can you name for me some of the divisions that 3M 18 has, specific separate divisions? 19 A Just at random? Anyone you want? 20 Q How many are there altogether do you think? 21 A About forty. 22 Q Could you give me seme examples by division name 23 of some of the divisions that you have? 24 MR. BLIZZARD: What for? 25 MR. CP.CW; So I'll understand the 27 1 nature of the corporaD^^truct ur e and 2 the way the divisions report 3 MR. BLIZZARD: Well, you can ask 4 him how his division reports; but as to 5 how the rest of the company reports, 6 we're not going to go into that. The 7 deposition is going to be long enough as 8 it is. 9 Q (By Mr. Crow) Does the Occupational Health and 10 Safety Products Division of 3M have any connection 11 at all with the parent company? 12 A Well, yes. 13 Q What is the connection? 14 A We're part of the parent company. 15 Q Well, is there any communication between the 16 Occupational Health and Safety Products Division 17 of 3M and the rest of the company? 18 A I don't understand what you mean by that. 19 Q I mean, is the rest of the company aware of what 20 kind of products you're making in the Occupational 21 Health and Safety Products Division? 22 A The rest of the company meaning, what, the people 23 that work there? 24 Q Well, see, that's the problem I'm having trouble 25 getting a grip on because I haven't been allowed 28 1 even to this point to understariS^ijat the rest of 2 the company is. You have a corporation herl?yr,',^s~>5?. 3 don't you? 4 A Ye s. 5 Q What is the name of the main corporation? 6 A 3M Company. 7 MR. BLIZZARD: What do you mean the 8 main corporation? We've only been 9 talking about one today. 10 Q (By Mr. Crow) Is the Occupational Health and 11 Safety Products Division a separate corporation? 12 A No. 13 Q It's part of the same corporation? 14 A Yes. 15 Q And these other forty odd divisions are all part 16 of the same corporation? 17 A Yes. ie Q Does the Occupational Health and Safety Products is Division report back to somebody outside of the 2G division so that somebody has an overall picture 21 of what products are being made, designed, tested 22 and marketed? 23 A Yes, there's areporting structure. 24 Q Hew does the Occupational Health and Safety 25 Products Division report out of its own 1 n- 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 Q I sure do. A Okay. It's very opportunity to become the product development manager for the soft goods area, which would be known as the respirators like you have on the table here, in that division; so it was a promotion to go, plus it was work I was interested in doing. Q Okay. Up until 1976, had you ever designed a piece of respiratory equipment? A No. Q Had you ever manufactured a piece of respiratory equipment? A No. Q Ever tested a piece of respiratory equipment? A No. Q Ever attempted to determine what wasnecessary to properly and adequately market a piece of respiratory equipment? A No. Q By the way, does 3N alsoplace a great deal of emphasis on the marketing of its products? A Certainly we do. rS: \J 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 products? A No, we don't. Q All right. Does each division then have somebody responsible for marketing its own products? A Yes. " Q And if I understood your previous testimony, all of the research and development for the Occupational Health and Safety Products Division would occur inside of that division and not within the larger frame of a main corporation? A That's correct, yes, sir. Q How long has the Occupational Health and Safety Products Division been around? A It was made a division in 1977, as a division. It was a smaller entity before that. Q Before 1977 when it formally became a division, whatever that means as compared to the way it was before, how was it structured before then? A It was structured reporting to the vice-president of the Commercial Tape Division before that. Q Before 1977? A Yes. Q And who was the vice-president in charge of Commercial Tape? A When? In whattime? 4J/Z 34 1 Q In 1976 or '77 just before th^^ange-over 2 occurred where this Occupational Health a^fEF^S^e 3 Products Division became a separate division. 4 A An Ernie Moffet is his name. 5 Q Is he still at 3M? 6 A I don't really know if he is or not. 7 Q Well, prior to '76, '77, is that the way the 8 Occupational Health and Safety Products Division 9 reported to the persons higher up in the 10 corporation is through the vice-president of 11 Commercial Tape? 12 A Yes. 13 Q Did a lot Of other product lines also report to 14 him, as well, or was this just some sort of 15 anomaly? 16 A No, it was all the products of the product 17 structure of Commercial Tape reported to him, 18 also. 19 Q So we've got the Commercial Tape reporting to him 20 and the Occupational Health and Safety Products 21 reporting to him. Anybody else? 22 A No, I don't think so. 23 Q Do you know why before 1977 the vice-president in 24 charge of Commercial Tape was the person who was 25 basically overseeing the Occupational Health and r> o O 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 products? A No, we don't. Q All right. Does each division then have somebody responsible for marketing its own products? A Yes. ' Q And if I understood your previous testimony, all of the research and development for the Occupational Health and Safety Products Division would occur inside of that division and not within the larger frame of a main corporation? A That's correct, yes, sir. Q How long has the Occupational Health and Safety Products Division been around? A It was made a division in 1977, as a division. It was a smaller entity before that. Q Before 1977 when it formally became a division, whatever that means as compared to the way it was before, how was it structured before then? A It was structured reporting to the vice-president of the Commercial Tape Division before that. Q Before 1977? A Yes. Q And who was the vice-president in charge of Commercial Tape? A When? In whattime? r' 0 i' j 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 Safety Products line? A Yes. It was because the people who had for producing these products belonged to that division originally. Q And can you give me the names of the people who originally came up with the idea of designing, manufacturing, testing and marketing any kind of respiratory equipment at 3M? A When are you speaking of? Q The people who originally came up with the idea, and you pointed across the table at these masks. A The first ones you're talking about? Q The first ones. A I don't know. That was before my time. Q Okay. Whose names can you give me as being innovators in pushing for the design, manufacture, testing and marketing of respiratory equipment of any kind, whether it's the 8710 or some other more sophisticated piece of respiratory equipment? A I'm not sure what you're looking for. Say it again. Q You told me that the people who came up with the idea of marketing these things -- and you pointed across the table -- came out of the Commercial Tape Division? 36 1 A Yes. 2 Q Who were those people? 3 A I don't know. That was before my time. I don't 4 know who they are. 5 Q Before you joined the company or before you got 6 into the -- 7 A It would have literally been before I joined the 8 company. 9 Q So we're talking aboutpre-'67? 10 A Yes. 11 Q Do you have anydocuments at 3MCorporation which 12 would tell us when 3M first got in the business of 13 manufacturing masks or any type of respiratory 14 equipment? 15 A I don't know if we do or not. 16 Q Isthere anybody that's been around longerthan 17 you that you think would be better able to answer 18 that question? 19 A In the division now? 20 Q In or out of the division, can you give me a name? 21 A No, I don't think so. People that are in the 22 division now have only been there as long as I 23 have or less; so they wouldn't have any further 24 back memories than I would. 25 r viho was in charge of your division when you took x over ? 37 A You mean when. I joined Q-"<1 V o C 4 A Who was in charge of it? His name was Dan 5 McDonald. 6 n* Is he still at 3M? 7 A No. 8 Q Is he deceased? 9 A No. 10 Q Is he retired? 11 A Yes. 12 w Do you know where he's living now? 13 A No, I don't. 14 Can you tell me what the structure of the 15 Occupational Health and Safety Products Division 16 was at 3M in terms of the make-up? Were there 17 different levels within that organization of who IS reported to who? I'd like to have some idea of 1 9 the way things worked in the division when you 20 arrived. 21 A No, just Dan McDonald was the head of it, and we 22 just had a large group of laboratory people 23 working for him, and there was a group of &A marketing people working for him and a small sales 25 force when I arrived there. 1 "> 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 IS 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 38 a Okay. Has that changed since eh-=ui? A No, basically net. Just larger, that's terns of numbers cf people. Q Hew does the Occupational Health and Safety Products Division of 3M compare in size or revenues with any of the other divisions? A I really don't know compared to the others. Q Who at 3M would best be able from your understanding and contacts at the company to answer that question for us? A Probably the chief executive officer of the company would knew that for sure. Q Okay. I'm not trying to be flippant with you, but anybody else that you can think of other than him? A Public Relations Department maybe. Q Does the Public Relations Department have anything to do with marketing decisions of any of the divisions at 2M? ri No. Q Are all the marketing decisions for the Occupational Health and Safety Products Division made within the division? A Yes. Does anybody out side cf the division have veto power on market! ng decisions within that division? 1 2 3 4 C 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 13 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 39 A I don't know. I don't think Q Does anybody outside of the division h power or any power to alter decisions within the division as to respiratory product design, manufacture, marketing cr testing within the division? A Veto what? Q Well, can somebody outside of -- who's technically not a member of the Occupational Health and Safety Froducts Division of 3M, can somebody outside of that division say or have a say in whether or not a particular design respirator is manufactured or how it's manufactured or how it might be tested? A Mo. Q Sc the division is rather autonomous in the way it decides to R&D a product, design it, test it and market it? A Yes. ' Q As far as you knew, has that always been the case even before it became formally a design of 3M? A It depends what you mean by -- it wasn't -- before you are a division, if you're part of another division as a smaller project, then you're not autonomous in that sense. I mean, you have to 40 1 report to that division; but i?b?-L^e the parent 2 division, yes, it would be autonomous. 3 Q But before 1967 when this Occupational Health and 4 Safety Products group or line became a separate 5 division, did anyone outside of the division or 6 product line or croup have power to alter / decisions made within the product line or group 8 about what kind of respiratory equipment or masks o would be designed, how they'd be manufactured,, how 10 they'd be tested, how they'd be marketed? 11 A I don't believe so, no. 12 Q Is there anybody else at 3M who would be able to 13 give me any better an answer than you just gave me 14 who perhaps had been there in the division longer 15 than you? 16 A That kind of thing, a policy like that from 17 outside, a veto, would come from very high if it 13 even exists at all; so, again, the president of 1 9 the company would know that if that's true. 20 MR. BLIZZARD: I'm a little 21 confused by what you mean by veto power. 22 I mean, a chief executive officer could 23 probably fire anybody he wants to. That 24 would be an effective veto. You are 25 talking about some kind of system that 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 3 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 42 Q Do you know what the criteria iS^tjiat is used to determine whether or not a dust is either nuisance dust or a toxic dust? A The criteria for it? Q Yes. A Hew they decide whether it is or is not? Q Yes. A Mo, I don't knew exactly the criteria. It's done by epidemiologists, physicians, things like this decide hew that's done. How they actually do it I'm not aware of. Q Okay. But you knew and we were talking about there being a distinction between different kinds of dust, correct? A 3etweennuisance andtoxic? Q Yes. A Yes. Q Dees 3M Manufacturing Corporation rely solely on the United States Government to know which types of dust are toxic and which are nuisance? A Mot totally, no, because the American Conference of Hygienists is not exactlyr a government organization, and th ey list in a booklet toxic dusts and cases. And in their booklet, they make a distinction 1 9 3 4 5 5 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 IS 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 41 they pass along ver--aps MR. CROW: You're confuse* that? MR. BLIZZARD: I'm confused about what you mean by veto. Q (By Mr. Crow) That's one of the reasons I asked you the earlier question about the other divisions that I did. As I understand the corporate structure of 3M, each product division pretty much has all of the say in terms of what that product division does? A Yes. Q And that's one of the things that 3M Manufacturing Corporation prides itself in? A Yes. Q Mow, we were talking earlier about the distinction between nuisance dust, like the kind of dust you might see in a West Texas dust storm or from pollen or from wood being worked with in some fashion, and toxic dusts. Do you remember us talking about that? A Yes. Q There are, in fact, a number of dusts that are considered toxic by the federal government, right? A Yes. 43 1 between toxic dust, and nuilaX^dust? 2 A They describe what a nuisance dust isT^5^~~^ '^here 3 are none listed there. 4 Q When did you first become aware of the fact that 5 there were such things as dust particles which 6 could float around in the air and be toxic to a 7 human being? 8 A I don't really know. I certainly was aware of 9 that before I reached Occupational Health and 10 Safety Products, but I don't know exactly when 11 that would have been. 12 Q Do you think it might have occurred when you were 13 getting your degree in chemical engineering? 14 A I really don't know. I don't remember. 15 Q When is it you first learned that silica was toxic 16 to human beings? 17 A It would be shortly after I joined OH and SP. IS Q Shortly after you joinedwhat? 19 A OH and SP" isOccupational Health and Safety 2 0 Products. 21 Q OH ar.d SP? 22 A Tes. 23 Q Before that time, I take it you hadn't heard of 24 silica being toxic to animal life including human 25 beincs? y A Mo, I don't think so. 44 n Q Did it surprise you? 3 A Mg. 4 Q The problem that is caused by silica is rather 5 specific, isn't it? 6 A Yes. In general, yes. 7 Q What is the problem that is caused by silica dust? 8 A It causes silicosis. Q Q Okay. When did you firstlearn of that fact, that 10 silica dust causes silicosis? 11 A Shortly after joining OH and SP, I found that out. 12 Q So you didn't learn it in college? 13 A No. 14 Q And you didn't learn it while you were working 15 with the Scotch tape people or the 16 pressure-sensitive tape group? Whether it was 17 commercial or industrial, you didn't learn it 18 then, did you? 19 A Mo. ' 20 Q Howdid you learn it when you got to OHSP? Did 21 somebody tell it to you, or did they give you a 22 book to read? 23 A Mo, I think it was told to me originally. 24 Q Okay. Who told it to you for the first time? 25 A I ccn't even begin tc remember. 45 1 Q Dc you remember under what con&si you were told? 2 A I'd just be guessing. I don't remember 3 Q Do you, based on your association with OHSP, have 4 any idea of hew long medical science or for that 5 matter industrial hygienists have known that 6 silica dust causes silicosis? / A No, I don't know hew long that's been known. 8 Q Do you have a library at 3M? 9 A We have a lot of libraries at 3M, yes. 10 Q Separate libraries for separate divisions; is that 11 right? 12 A No, not specifically for divisions. They are 13 libraries by type. Technical libraries of one 14 sort or another, business libraries, we have 15 those. 16 Q When you say technical libraries, are there any 17 libraries or portions of a library dedicated to 13 information that's available on the disease of 19 silicosis, the mechanism in which it's caused and 20 its prevention? 21 A I 'would suspect so, probably, that we have that, 22 yes. 23 Q Well, I don't want you to have to suspect if we 24 can help it. Have you ever seen any literature at 2 5 3D. in the form of treatises, bocks, catalogs, 45 1 surveys, test data kept in suSS^a fashion that a z-"l common ordinary person might think of library and specifically dedicated the subject of 4 silicosis as the reason for it occurring and its prevention? 6 A A whole set of things just about silicosis, no, I 7 have never seen that personally. 8 Q Okay. If you wanted to go to better educate 9 yourself about the disease known as silicosis, 10 what causes it, how to prevent it, is there any 11 specific place at the 3M Company you'd go to? 12 A To learn about the disease, yes, I'd probably call 13 the Medical Department probably. 14 Q Why would you call them rather than looking for 15 some type of written reference material? 16 A Well, you asked me where I would go to read about 17 it. I said the Medical Department. They probably 18 would have books cn that sort of thing because it 19 is a medical problem. r Q Now, have you ever seen the books that the Medical 21 Department has? 22 A N o. 23 Q Is anybody in the CHS? responsible for staying 24 abreast of the information in the Medical 2 5 Department on silicosis? The reason I ask you that is because you know tha technology advances day to day, month to month, year zo year, right? Sur e. And humans' knowledge of the source of disease and cure and prevention advances year by year? Sure. Dc you have a policy within the OESP whereby somebody is supposed to keep their finger on, so to speak, new information that becomes available to help you better design, manufacture, test and market equipment against a specific hazard? A single person to do that? Yes. Not a single person, no. Then tell me how that's cone because surely you do Every per s on generally is expe cte d in thei r j ob keep a br ea St of new technoioci e s as it impinges their cw n j ob function. Okay. Tel 1 me how that occurs in real life ther w i th i n the OH SP? People go to seminars. They r eac trade 43 1 pushing ahead of, as you calx^<h. you knew, the frontier of technology going ahead. 3 0 When you first went to the OHSP, you didn't know 4 about silicosis or silica causing silicosis. You 5 told me that earlier. Would you answer the 6 question the same way if I asked you about 7 asbestosis? S A Yes, the answer would be the same. Yes. 9 Q When you got to the OHSP, how did you go about 10 trying to get a good solid foundation on the types 11 of diseases that these OHSP products were designed 12 to try to protect against? 13 A What do you mean by a solid foundation? 14 Q Weil, how did veu educate yourself? You certainly 15 recognized that understanding what causes 15 silicosis is one of the first logical steps to try i 7 to find out how to prevent it. 13 A Sure. 19 Q Same thing for asbestosis? 20 A Yes. 21 Q When you got to OHSP, what did you do to try tc 22 educate yourself cn what causes silicosis? 23 A It rook about three minutes. Inhalation of 24 silica. When that happens, if you do it long 25 enough, you may end up with silicosis. 49 1 Q Well, silica is one of the most abundant 2 the face of the earth, isn't it? 3 A Yes. 4 Q There are whole cultures that live in areas that 5 are very sandy, and that's silica, isn't it? 6 A Sand is silica, yes. 7 Q So are you saying that if you simply inhale enough 3 sand off the beach or in a desert area, you'll 9 develop silicosis? 10 A NO. . 11 Q Because that's not true, is it? 12 A No. 13 Q It's notall that simple, is it? 14 A Inhalation of silica is what causes silicosis. 15 Q But isn't theresomething else required other than 16 just the inhalation of silica? Isn't there 17 something else concerned like the particle size? 13 A Yes, it has to be respirable, yes. 19 Q What size does it have to be to be respirable? 20 A Generally 10 micr ons. 21 Q Is there any part icle size that you consider to 2 2 ultrahazardous or particularly hazardous? 23 A Me. 24 Q So it just has to be below 10 microns? 2 5 A To be respirable dust, yes. ------- -- . - - . 50 Q Are you saying that somebody cannot inhale particles or silica particles that are larger than 10 microns into their longs? 4 A It's a matter of how deep they'll get in the c lungs. If they're large, they ccn't get very far. 6 Q And you made the cutoff at 10 microns. Is there i something about particles smaller than 10 microns 8 in terms of their penetration into the lungs that 9 makes them particularly prone to cause silicosis 10 as compared to larger particles above 10 microns? 11 A It's the fact that they can get down into the deep 12 airways of the lungs that cause the problem, not 13 because of their difference in time. They're 14 still silica. It j ust depends on how far they get 15 into the lung. at' s all 16 rV The 1 arger part id e s th c.C den't get down as far 17 into the lungs, ar e th o se normally exhaled or 18 cough ed out? 1 9 A They can be , ye s. 20 Q I s th at th e r ea sen they 're not as hazardous as the 21 small er particl 9 s ? 22 ADAH : I object to what T 23 consi der th i s '.7 1 tness to be rende ring 24 medi c G.1 opini ens , and I object to this 25 compl o -r a 1 ine of questioning and 1 answering. 51 2 (By Mr. Crew) You tela me it takes about three minutes to understand what causes silicosis. It's A ** simple, inhalation of silica dust. MR. 3LI2 CARD: He didn't say that. 6 Q (By Mr. Crow) So what I'm trying to find out is what did you learn -- if you're going to develop a 8 product to prevent silicosis, what is it you c learned about free silica when you first came on 10 board with the OES? so that you understood the 11 mechanism by which free silica causes that 12 disease? 13 A I did not have to understand what the mechanism of 14 the disease, causation of the disease, is to 15 design a respirator at all. 15 G So to this day do you even know how free silica, 17 once it gets in the lungs, actually causes the disease of silicosis? 1 9 A That's correct, I don't. 2C r-- Dc you know if your predecessor knew that? 21 ** I have no idea. Q I'm not asking you to speculate. I want to know 23 if you ever had any conversations with him that 24 would lead you to believe he had a good grip on 25 h cw ree silica dust 1 uncs cause s 'OS'! ~r> 3 A As I said, I have no idea. I don't knew. Q Anc who was your predecessor again? A I don't even remember his name. I only met him D once. I can't recall what his name was. Q Sc if you don't know hew silica dust causes silicosis, biologically or however you want to describe it, you do knew that certain size c particles are the cr.es you want to protect 10 acainst? 11 A Yes. 12 Q You 're no t really cone:sr rled with 30 micr on size 13 sil ica pa r tides ; y ou ' r e co ncerned with those bel cw 1 0 mi crons in si z e ? 1 z, A In gene r a 1 f*1' - " f s k. r u e, ai though we're concerned 1 < abc ut a wl P<ar 11 cl e sac e s but especially tn o s e. a Thy esp ec ially th cse ? 13 A Be ca use <- n e y ' r e t he re spi i. Cl ble ones. Th ey're the 19 on 6 s th at car. get ccwr. de <=: ^ into the lun gs . 20 '%*. i*"ii^* m wo u la -t ce r air c O 5 ay they're not only the 21 one s th at can get down de sp into the air-ways of one lun cs but the ones me s t prone not to come back z j cut aga i n either by ex V- ^ * in c or coughing p 24 A mu " 1 C tr ue, that way, ye w So they stay there? 53 Vq c Q And whatever else they do -- and you don't know 3 the medical mechanism -- but whatever else they z do, they seem to cause the disease? 2. v a c 6 And that knowledge was at 3M when you came on board. I asked you earlier if you had any idea how long 3M has known that much about the Q mechanism of hew silicosis occurs, and your answer 10 was I don't know. 11 MR. BLIZZARD: Wait a minute. 12 That's about three or four questions in 13 one. 14 MR. CROW: I'm trying to speed up 15 the process. 16 MR. BLIZZARD: Well, I wish you 17 would, but it's not going to be 13 accomplished by asking four questions at 1 3 once . 20 CEy Mr. Crew) Your answer is, if I understand * your testimony sc far, you don't know how long 3K 22 has had an under standing of how silica dust causes 23 silicosis, either in particle size or -- 24 MR. BLIZZARD: I think you asked him about his predecessor and of 3M, 54 I and he can't answer qubr<diions for every employee of 3H. He can answer^q^^S^Msa^ 3 about himself. 4 r, CEy Mr. Crew) Ail right. Mr. Scheel, either from 5 talking with people at 3M in the OES? or from your 6 review of 3M literature that was actually printed 7 at the company or from your review of material S that obviously was at the company for seme period a of time prior to when you came on board, do you 10 have any idea or can you give me any estimate of 11 when 3M first came to understand that silica dust 12 causes silicosis? 13 A Mo, I don't know when that was. . 14 Q Okay. How would I find that out now? If not from 15 you, who would I go to? 16 A I have no idea. To knew when it was that 3M in 17 general knew that silica causes silicosis? I IS couldn't even begin to guess who that would be. 19 Q You gave me the name of the man in charge of the q product line when you were hired or you 21 transferred tc the product line, remember? 22 A Yes. /i*L. --\ How long was he there? 24 A You mean when did he start? 2 5 Hew long was he in that product line? You didn't 55 1 call it a division then. 2 A Seven years, something like that, total time that he was in. 4 C Sc we're talking about the time frame of something like '70 to '77? 6 A No, no. He overlapped. He was there when I got there, and he left after I got there. He retired 8 two years ago. Q C Earlier I asked you about the people who first 10 conceived the line of respirators or masks, and 11 you said you didn't know their names? 12 A That's correct. 13 G Is there anybody at 3M that would know their names 14 that you know of? 15 A Not offhand I could tell you for sure would know 16 who they are. 17 Q Eut you can go back to the company, and they can 18 cell you, and you can relay that information to 19 your attorney? 20 A I suppose I can try, yes. 21 Q Is there any man or group of men or women that 3M 22 generally acknowledges uc be the father, so to 23 speak, of the respiratory equipment line? 24 A Mo. 23 Q Or the person or persons who handled it in its 56 1 earlier stages and made it succeslb^uJJ.y grew into 2 the size it is today? *3 A I don't know because I don t knew who those people & were in the beginning. 5 Q Do you knew what they did in terms of deciding 6 what risks they were trying to avoid for the / workmen, deciding how to co about trying to avoid S chose risks, deciding how to test to see if their g decisions were correct and making whatever 10 decisions were necessary to get the product to the 11 workman so it would be properly used? Do you know 12 anything about how that process went along before 13 you came to the division in 1567, I mean, '77? 14 A '76 is when I came. No, I don't, did not know 15 those people, so I don't know what they did. Id Q How can I get that information now? Who would I 17 go to in the company? X1 w3 A I don't know. To tell you the truth, I don't 19 know. 20 Q And you told me earlier that everybody in your 21 division has only beer, around as long as you have? 22 A That's true. Ac the moment, that's right. 23 So as far as you know, there are no what you might 24 call old-timers chat nave been around for 30 years 25 who mient know hew the decision was made to get 57 into the respiratory equipment iTh'-sf' A Huh-uh. Q Or who was behind it cr in charge of R&D or any of 4 that information, right? A Mot that I knew of. I don't know anybody like 6 that in our crew. Q Mr. Scheel, if ycu need to take a break at any 8 time -- 9 A I'll tell you. 10 Q -- just say sc because we have -- in spite of the 11 fact that this is an important proceeding and we 12 intend to rely on the information you give us 13 today, we can certainly accommodate you or anybody 14 else. 15 A Okay. 16 Q We sent out a notice to take the deposition of a 17 designee or designees of the Minnesota Mining and 18 Manufacturing Company, and that designee was to be 1 Q a person cr persons best able to describe the -5 pU design, testing and marketing of the Minnesota 21 Mining and Manufacturing Company dust mask or 22 respirator series 8500, 3710 and 9910. Do you 23 know anything about the design process of the 2 4 3500? 25 A Yes, I dc. Hew did you find that cut? Yoii the time it was designed, well, ITm misunderstanding your design. You mean how it's made? Do you know who it was that came up with the idea for the 850C? A No, I don't. Q Do you know from your own personal knowledge what type of problem they were attempting to design the 10 8500 to protect against 11 A The nuisance dust as fa 12 Q That's as far as you kn 13 that information from? 14 A That is strictly just f: 15 Q with who? 16 A Just people in the divi: * J. / written down if that's v 1 C Anybody in particular? 15 A No, not that I can reca^ roo *- Anybody with an industr: 21 A I can't recall them, sc 22 that, either. 23 Have you ever seen the c 24 the 8500? 25 A The design specificatioi even to this day 59 hew to make it, yes, and I've 2 2 Has the design specification changed over' 3 years? 4 Not basically, no. The size and shape of it is still the same as it always was. cw r\ That about the material and the density? A Thao's stayed the same. 8 r\ Do you knew who was in charge of testing the 8500 q to see that it did what it was supposed to do? 10 A When are you speaking cf? 11 At any time in the past. 12 A Well, I knew in just the recent years who it was, 13 yes. It's the Quality Control Department. 14 Q Are they a part of the OHSP? 15 ri Yes. 16 And who's in charge of the Quality Control 17 Department? 18 It's really the manufacturing director who is in 19 charge of those people. 20 And what's his name? 21 His name is William Keyes at the moment. 22 Does it change frequently? 23 A No, not frequently. 24 "r How long has William Keyes been in charge of the 25 Quality Control Department? 60 A Like I said, he isn't in charge^t. it. It reports to him. He's the manufacturing director, __ last two and a half years. Q '.1 el 1, who's actually in charge of the department? A I really don't knew his name. It's somebody who is the supervisor of that group, but I don't know who it is. Q What is the group comprised of? A Quality control technicians and engineers to test 10 the product. 11 Q Is there anybody who's specifically studied 12 industrial hygiene in that group? 13 A I have no idea. 14 Q But William Keyes is the only name you can give me 15 right now? 16 A As far as who supervises that group, yes. i - Q You don't know any of the names of the members of 18 the group or the man in charge of the group, 19 actually in charge of the group, to ask them to do ~ n A or 3. You only knew the name of the man that she group reports to? 22 A That's right. 22 C And he has other responsibilities other than th a 7 i testing of the respiratory equipment? 2 5 A Ye s. 61 1 -7 xL He's in charge cf what? 04. Manufacturing. 3 -> Cf what line? ^ A A Of our respirators, all cf them. 5 Q Dc you have any idea hew many 8500's were marketed 6 before you came to the division? 7 A Me. 3 Q Dc you know anybody who would know that? q A Me. 10 Q Dc you have any idea of who the 8500's were 11 marketed for? 12 A Who they were marketed for? 13 Q Yes. Or do you know what they were marketed for 14 or who they were marketed to? Explain that to me. 15 A Well, there apparently is a confusing distinction. 16 A Ye s 17 MR. ADAMS: Probably marketed for IS the stockholders. 19 A Say it again. I don't understand. (By Mr. Crow) well, I guess that's true, the 8500 21 was indeed marketed for the stockholders, wasn't 22 i t ? 23 Since all of cur products are done that way, sure. 2 4 r- Mew, was the 3500 marketed zo be purchased and 2 5 used by a specific group or occupation? 52 1 A I don't think sc, no, not that x">Auk>w of. Q '/he would know the history of the marketing 8500 if you can't tell me? 4 A I don't know because I don't know who was there at 5 chat time. 6 Q Okay. So in terms of the decision to make that product, in terms of the person who designed it, 3 in terms of the person who made some marketing C decisions on that product, you really don't know 1C who did that? 11 A No, I don't. It was long before I got to the 12 company. 12 Q You don't know how many of them were sold? 14 A No. 15 Q You don't know the kinds or types of occupations 16 that bought and used it? 17 A No, not in the sense than you asked me was there a IS specific group, and I said no, I don't think so. 19 It was a general thing. 20 Q "as there any specific group targeted by your 21 marketing strategy? 22 A In theverybeginning? 23 Q -Tes. 24 A I don't knew because I wasn't there. 25 Q All right. When did you first become aware of 63 some specific groups seine targe 2 A I've never been aware of specific groups beir??!n>-^. 3 targeted. 4 Q Are you aware of any specific groups that were 5 expressly prohibited from purchasing the 3500? 6 A In the sense of people that are working in toxic / dust atmospheres, if you want to call that 8 prohibited, yes, we wouldn't sell the 85 -- we 9 would not recommend the 8500 for that type of use. 10 Q And I don't knew if it was a Freudian slip or not, 11 but are you saying that you would sell it to 12 occupations that work in a toxic dust atmosphere 13 but you wouldn't recommend it? 14 A No, the reason I stopped that is because we don't 15 sell direct. We only sell it through 15 distribution. 17 Q If you sell it through a distribution process, I 18 take it, then, that you wholesale products -like 1 9 the 850G to somebody outside of the 3M Company; 20 and they, in turn, resell the product to the 21 eventual purchaser and user of the product; is 22 that right? ' 23 A Yes. 24 Q Do you at 3M, especially from the OHS? Division, 25 rely on the incemediace buyer and reseller to 1 determine hew your product is to be proper! 2 and what croups could not properly use your 3 pr educes? 4 A We rely on them to decide that? 5 Q Yes. 6 A No. 7 Q I take it that the reason you don't do that is 8 because you at 3M and especially in the OHS? q Division, you know good and well the limitations 1C of your products, don't you? 11 A Ourselves personallyknow thelimitations? 12 Q Yes. 13 A Certainly. 14 G And you know that because you not only had some 15 idea of what the product was actually designed to 16 protect against but, therefore, what it would not 17 protect against from the very beginning of the 18 concept of the product, correct? 19 A I would have to say for a respirator, yes, that's 20 true. 21 Q And then you wouldconfirm that preliminary 22 opinion or assumption cr educated guess by 23 actually testing your product to see what its 24 limitations were? 2 5 A I'm sorry, with the cough in there, I missed it. 65 Say i c again. Q And I assume that you would not only, besides 3 having this preliminary concept of v/hat this d product was designed to do, you would test in some way to see if the product actually would do what it was designed to do, right? A Yes, we test certain -- a lot of aspects of the product, yes, we did. C And you would also as part and parcel of the 10 testing process determine what the product's 11 limitations were? 12 A Sure. 13 C Therefore, I take it that you at 3M and especially 14 in the OHSP Division consider yourselves to have 15 more knowledge about the purpose for which your i g products are intended to be used and their 17 limitations than the people that you wholesale i a your products to or even the eventual purchaser of 1 9 the product; is t nat correct? 20 A Certainly for che distributor we would k 21 that, not necessa riiy for the end purcha O 0 may be as kncwled geable as we ar e. 23 Q Tell me why you w odd say tha t. You'1 re 24 who conceived of one product; you're the 25 actually designed the product out of thi 66 conception; you're the ones who tested conceptual product to see if it's really going to work and what the parameters of its efficiencies * are; you're the ones that have a quality control system to see how many millions of these actual 6 products are going to work like they're supposed 7 to. Why is it you think the ultimate user of your product may have as much knowledge about your product's purpose and utilization than you would? 10 A That's a different question. I would say -- I 11 said the end user. The purchaser is not 12 ultimately the end user in most cases. 13 G What do you mean by that? 14 A What I meant by my previous response to the 15 question was that sometimes the purchaser, the person who makes the decision to buy the respirator, is, in feet, an industrial hygienist purchaser of the produce. He doesn't personally 19 use the product. The workers use the product. An 20 industrial hygienist can be very knowledgeable 21 about respiratory protection, and that's what I 22 meant by that. We don't always have a vast spread 23 between our knowledge and the purchaser of the 24 product. 25 q But I take it from, your answer -- and I think you've probably encountered this in your pa experience -- you know that some of your product line is going to reach a person who is not an industrial hygienist? Of course. Can you estimate for me based on your past experience and any surveys you've done in terms of marketing your respiratory products what percentage of your respirator products are purchased by industrial hygienists who have been trained formally to have a good understanding of work place hazards and what's required to protect against those hazards? . What percentage of people like that are -- Yes. C don't know. Don't have any idea? No. Cculc be 10 percent, could be 90 percent? Sure. I doubt if it's 90. lie, too. In fact, you would expect the percentage to be relatively small, wouldn't you? I don't knew what it would be. Well, you know you're selling your product to people who are not industrial hygienists. Would 68 1 ycu agree with me you know you're sellin^fA^j^^ <> product to people who do net have as much information about the product, what it's designed A to protect against and the product's limitations? A Say that again. 0 Q If you know that you're selling your respiratory products in this case to purchasers who are not 3 industrial hygienists by training, then would you y agree with me that you know as a manufacturer that 10 you are, indeed, selling your products to people 11 who do not have as much knowledge about the 12 purpose of the product, the risk to be protected 13 against and the limitations of the product to 14 protect them against that risk? .1X c. A Yes, I would agree we would probably know more 16 about that, yes. 17 C Consequently, I take it that as an essential part of veur product design and development and 19 marketing strategy, you provide information along 20 with your products so that people who are not 21 industrial hygienists can try to make an educated 22 determination as tc what risk this product will protect me against and what risk it will not 24 protect me against? 2 = A Yes, we provide information like that. 59 1 Q Did you do that for the 8500? 2 A When are you speaking of? 3 Q Before you came to the OHSP. 4 A I don't knew because I wasn't there. c n Who would know? 6 A Again, I don't knew because I don't know who the / people are that were there at that time. 8 I take it, then, that you don't rely on the g intermediate supplier to supply this knowledge, 1C and you don't necessarily rely on all ycur 11 purchasers being industrial hygienists. You take 12 an active effort to warn the purchasers of your 13 product about the risks and limitations? 14 A Yes, we have an active effort to do that. 15 And do you at 3M recognize that as being part of 16 your responsibility in the production of this 17 or cduct? 18 Sure, uh-huh. 19 Is ir as much a responsibility at 3H to provide 20 the information to the ultimate user on how to use 21 the product properly as to properly design the 22 product in the first place? 23 He, from the point of view we don't go to the 24 ultimate user wish the information. In general, we go to the people who are responsible for the 70 1 respirator pr car air. in the first place ^^iat^s^th^ 2 employer, and that's who we try to get our 3 information to. 4 Q So you don't really make an effort, then, to get the information on the limitations of your product to the actual user but rather simply to the 7 employer? 8 A "veil, not rather simply to the employer. The Q employer is the one who has the responsibility to 10 give that information to the end user; so, 11 therefore, we go to that person who has that 12 responsibility and give it to them. 13 Q Well, you say the employer has the responsibility? 14 A Yes, to provide the information to the workers on 15 what the proper respiratory protection is and also to inform him of what the hazard is he's working 17 in in the first place. 18 Q How did you determine it's the employer's 1 Q responsib'il ity ? A We didn't determine it at all. That's the way the 21 OSEA Act is written. 22 Q When did CSHA come into being? 23 A 197 0 , I believe. 24 q Before CSHA came into being, what federal law required employers to assume the responsibility 71 that you've just have? "3 A I don't know if 4 Q So before 1970 , 5 weren't you? 6 A Yes. 7 Q Did you simply p S and assume or he Q information woui 10 the actual user? 11 A I don't know bee, G Do you know anyb< 13 A Mo. 14 Q The products tha- 15 protect in terms 16 designed to prods 17 A Yes, that's true, IS Q The concept: of tlh' e 8710 and the 9 910 from the very 19 beginning was to protect lungs. That was the 2C whole idea? 21 A That's what a re: ipirator is for, yes. 22 n- It wasn't just rc 23 dust storm type : A against the toxic i nh r 2 3 That's correct;. 72 1 Q And what toxic dust was the / designed to protect agai nst? 3 A The 871C, you're speakin g of 4 cut cr new? 5 w Well, if it's changed, 1 et' s first came out. tfhat was the original concept? / Pneumoconiosis and fibrosis-causing dusts. S And these kinds of dusts are what? 9 Silica is an example. 10 Silica and what else? 11 Cotton dust, coal dust, things like that. 12 Q Asbestos? 13 A Yes. 14 Q Any other 15 originally a o A Almost any t_7 There's a 13 whole list 1 9 th en up. ' 20 2_ r WcS c 21 them up? 7 7 n* Industrial Q 'Then was t! 24 A I don't kn was something prior to 1972 25 V. . And you we - .71 a ------------------- 2 rV~. Mho was in charge cf the division, then, when 3 whoever it was originally conceived of the 8710? 4 A It wasn't a division. I think it was the same 5 .fellow I said before. Ernie Moffet was the VP of 6 Commercial Tape then. / Q Did Ernie come up with the idea for the 8710? cr> A I don't knew. 0 C Do you know who cid? 10 A No. li Q Was it first marketed in '72? 12 A Ye s. 13 nat And it was designed to protect against all of the 14 toxic dusts that were then listed in the 15 Industrial Hygienist Manual? 16 A Mo. 17 g Which ones was it not designed to protect against? 18 A Only designed for pneumoconiosis and 1 9 fibrinous-producing dust, that's it. 20 at Is there a hazard from inhaling too much cotton or 21 dusc? 2 2 > Ye s. 23 It's called brewn lung? 24 A, Ye s. w Can it be fatal? Did the 311 Company test the 8710 to see if it would protect against the risk of silicosis, asbestosis, brown lung, black lung, which is the coal dust problem, right? Ya s. Did you test to see if it actually protected the tester against these risks? Yes, we tested the product to see how it works, how it functions. (Whereupon, a lunch break was taken.) (3y Mr. Crow) Mr. Scheel, before we broke to have a bite to eat, I was asking you seme questions specifically about the 3710. Before I go any further with that, you told me earlier this morning what ycur job duties are in the OHSP. Would you tell me again, please? All the duties I've had since I got there? Mo, wha.t you're doing right now. I'm on a special assignment in Hong Kong, 3M Far Hast, Limited, as the marketing manager, program manager for cur insulated products, which is a 75 1 part cf our division. 2 2 That doesn't have anything to do with respiratory 3 equipment? 4 A No, this is something different. 5 Q r;lhat all have you done in the OHSP? 6 A I started out as research and development manager i for the respirators, as I said, and technical 8 services for all of the products of the division. 0 Those are the two things, major functions, I 10 perform. 11 c R&D manager? 12 A Yes, and technical services manager. 13 Q I7hat is the R&D manager's responsibility to the 14 CHS?? 15 A In the sense of products that I dealt with, which 16 were the respirators, it was to oversee the people 17 that were developing the actual products 18 themselves, the new products. 19 Q lid you have any component in the R&D end of it to 20 continually check the produces that have already 21 been marketed to see if they were doing what they 22 were intended to do? 23 A To, R&D does not do than. 24 Q So you were just involved in the designing of new 2 5 or cducts? 76 1 A Correct. 2 Q Did you actually design any products while you 3 were in charge of R&D? 4 A Myself personally or my group? 5 Q Well, let's start with you personally. 6 A No, I didn't personally, but my group did, yes. 7 Q What did your group design while you were in 8 charge of them? 9 A The 9900 and that one over there, the 9910. 10 Q Okay. Any others? 11 A No, not during the timethat I was there. 12 Q And then you got into technicalservices? 13 A Right. 14 Q I don't know what that means. Would you tell me 15 what sort of duties are involved when you become 16 in charge of technical services for OHSP? 17 A Sure. Technical services is essentially an 18 informational flow group that ties together our 19 own internal marketing and laboratory and sales 20 force and, also, our outside customers to make 21 sure that information about our products in both 22 ways, what we tell people goes out in the right 23 way and what they tell us back as far as our 24 products are working properly. I think in a broad 25 sense that's what we do back and forth. 77 7 Q But you say you tie in the marketing 2 laboratory and sales group 3 A Yes, from an informational point of view, yes, 4 technical information. 5 Q Well, I mean, I'm not clear, but is the purpose of 6 the technical services group to see to it that 7 adequate information about the OHSP products gets 3 out to the purchasers or users? 9 A Yes, sir, that's a good way to think of it 10 e xactly. 11 Q And hew long is that sort of -- before I ask you 12 that question, does 3M recognise the need for that 13 type of group in each product line, a group to 14 disseminate information about its product line? 15 A Are you asking do all the divisions have that kind 1 c of a function? 17 Q Vo Q 13 A I'm net certain that every last one of them do, 19 but most do. 20 Q And your group certainly does? u** u A Yes. 22 C How would the system in terms of getting the 23 technical information out typically work? Can you 24 give me a routine example of how you fulfill your 25 duties in that regard? 10 11 12 13 KJ _/ 13 1M. Q 20 21 "> ? A Yes, in the sense that a routine way t<5 would be to write a technical bulletin about something, and that is then disseminated to all of our distributors and all of our in-house sales force, and that information is passed along then to the customers as they are contacted by those gr oups. Q Well, would the technical bulletin be the very first piece of written information about a new product like the 8710? A No, not necessarily. A technical bulletin could be on anything in the sense of it doesn't have to be just about a new product at all. Q It can be about an existing product where some question has arisen about its proper use or improper use? A Yes, that's a possibility there could be. Q 'That other situations can we talk about in terms of disseminating additional information on a product that's already been marketed besides trying to give information that you now perceive to be necessary that wasn't given before or to correct a misuse or in some way to assist the user in tetter using a product? What other reasons would you send cut a technical bulletin on a n j g Q 10 11 12 13 14 _o 15 17 10 07 r0 ~4 79 product that's already been manuf actur distributed? MR. BLIZ2AF.D: All of that preliminary I'm not sure fairly characterises the witness' previous testimony. r\L\ (By Mr. Crow) Are you confused, Mr. Scheel? A Yes, I'll have to admit a little. That was a lot of words. Are you asking for examples? Would you agree with me part of why you do what you do is to prevent misuse of your product by purchasers or users? A The reason technical services does what it does is to prevent misuse?I I don't know that we would -- if we knew about it, I would say we'd make whatever moves possible to stop that. I don't knew that we do everything and try to imagine every possible use and block that because that's hard to do because you don't know what it is in advance. 'Jell, besides misuse -- and I'll come back to that in a minute -- I take it these technical bulletins that the technical services group puts out, they furnish additional information to your salesmen S Vvhat is the purpose of that additional information? Just to make them mere familiar with the attributes of the product itself, how it works, hew it functions. I understand additional information sort of speaks for itself in that regard. My question to you is: What purpose or purposes if there is more than one are you attempting to accomplish by disseminating additional information? Just the best understanding that people can have of our products, that's all. So ycu want to disseminate more information so people have a betrer understanding about (a) what the produce is designed to do? Yes, that's one possibility of a technical bulletin, v a s. And (b) what the product is not designed to do? I don't think we've ever written a technical bulierir. on than, but it's possible that you could, yes. You said that you felt like if it had come to the conscious level of 3Y that somebody was using one r' >.. , 3 4 5 5 7 8 o 10 11 13 14 75 16 21 22 24 o =; of its products r. a way ot intended, y immediately take steps tc try to correct that situation? A. No, I said we would do whatever was necessary to do that. I didn'o say it was written, a technical report. We might have to write a letter to the sales force. Q Do you know at 3M if that's ever happened? A You mean writing a letter to our sales force like I just described? Q No, technical letters or memos or information going out to your sales force where you recognize in a certain instance somebody was using one of your products other than originally intended? A We didn't do it in that way. We have gotten information to our sales representatives about that but not by written means, by verbal means. Q I was juse going to ask you how you do it, and you said verbal; sc -would there be any record of hew you've done this in the past? A I doubt it because it's given in the sense of verbal training to sales representatives. 0 Verbal training? A Uh-huh. Q Do you use films or audio tapes? Hew do you train your sales representatives? How do we do it? Ye s. '/Jell, threugn the technical services people, bring them to St. Paul and give them what we feel they need to know about making good decisions on recommending respirators to the buyers. And the reason you want your salespeople to be knowledgeable about your product line in terms of what each product can and cannot do, what each product was designed and not designed for is so they won't recommend, for instance, a mask or respirator that's designed to protect against vapo rs to a crew that does sandblas ting? Cert ainly that wc>uld be an objectiv e of it, yes. You wculdn ' t want: your sales force inadvertently by cmissi on, let' s say, misleading the ultimate pureHc.36 r or user: of yo ur equipment as to what it co ul c cr co ul d r. c;t do? The technical service group would not want that, no, that's true. And you also recognize your responsibility at 3H that if you should receive information that would pur you on notice that some people apparently have a misperception cf how your product can'ut,^ be used, you would try to take seme steps to correct that situation, wouldn't you? A We certainly feel that that's what we should do, yes, uh-nuh. Q Your group, did they design the 8710? A My group? Which one are you speaking of? ru The initial R&D group. The 8710 was designed before you came with the group? A Yes. Q 3ut the group that you eventually started working with, are they the ones that designed this 8710? A I don't think so. They were relatively new people. Q At that time, is the only disposable mask 3M had was the 3500? A /Then? Q Before any- otherdisposablemasks were produced, you just had one disposable mask? Yes, ju; tnat one. /-\ Th e 8500? A. Ye s '< We don11t know v r.en cr.s S 5 0 0 went in to p roducti on, but w heit is it caused 3n to de cide they nee dec anooner disposable m ask b esi ces the 850 0? 84 A Simply the fact that there is a user cf cT7js4'b>dusrt and cases for that matter, too, that a product like that is net usable for; so as a result, if you are going to market a full line of products for respiratory protection, you must design other o products, ones approved against that kind of 7 hazard. 3 Q Well, you said a full line of respiratory 9 products. Did you have ether respiratory products 10 in your market line before the 8710 and 9910 were 11 produced? 12 A No. Like I said, only the 8500 before the 8710, 13 that's all there was. 14 Q 3ut I mean were there any negative-pressure type masks like the MSA dust mask series, or were there -LO any positive air supplied masks while the 8710 was 17 being produced before 197 2? A No, not before 1972 . 19 Q So the only thing that 3M mace before 1972 that in 20 any way, shape cr form blocked any kind of dust 21 from reaching the nose and mouth of anybody was the 8500? A That's my belief, yes. c 4 G And you told me earlier the 0500 was never 25 intended or designed to provide projection for the human lungs? That is its function, right. . Can you tell me what it is about the 8500 that causes it bv its own design not to afford any respiratory protection whatsoever to the user? Well, first off, that's not a fair statement to say it doesn't afford any at all whatsoever because it does. It is a filter, but it does not afford enough to be classed as a respirator. I see. Well, I thought when I was talking to you earlier this morning -- and that's where I felt confused because of my just looking at this thing It looks like just a big old form filter paper with a little wire clip on the top and a blue rubberbanc sticking out from the edges, and this whole paper surface here is just a paper filter, isn't it? It's not paper. What is it? It's made out cf various fibers, polyester rayon types. I wasn't trying to be mean about the 85GO. I thought it looked like paper. It's not, though. But the whole white surface material, that is a r- 2 * r* ry *? * 11 12 o 12 14 ^ 16 27 18 IS o r- 22 24 ' "i =: filter? 86 ~^ A Yes. C I thought you told me eerlier this morning that it did not provide ar.y respiratory protection whatsoever? . A Mo, I said it was not designed for protecting your lungs which is hew you phrased things, and that's not what it was designed to do. Q It was designed just to keep nuisance things out of 2/o^r mouth and nose? A That's correct, yes. Q Did 3" do any testing on the 8500 to determine how well it worked to either keep things out of your mouth and nose or incidentally keep things out of your lungs during this process of keeping things cut of your mouth and nose? A In the beginning you're talking about? Q At any time in the past. A Certainly; yes, we do test it for its filtration efficienc;/, at least as of the time I've been with CESP, it's true. Before that, I couldn't tell you because I wasn't there. Q Well, do you even know if it was ever tested before you cane on beard with the OHS?? A I can't tell you that for a fact because I wasn't out WOU-! surprises Hell, surprising things occasionally occur. Have you seen any literature, any test documents, any documents, though obviously you did not prepare it, that were prepared before you came to the OHSP on the testing of these respirators? He, I have not seen any. Hell, do you happen to know from your knowledge and experience with the OHS? since you came on beard what sort of filtration efficiencies this particular product, the 85C0, does, in fact, achieve? Yes, I do know what that is. Okay. How can we talk about that in terms that we both will understand so we can communicate because it's important we communicate. You understand percent efficiency? Okav. As far as scrubbing out -- Can you tell me hew well this mask, the 8500, performs in terms cf percent of efficiency, how you've measured ia, hew you've determined it, what variables there might be? HP., BLIZZARD: Why don't we do it one at a time rather than as!; 38 five cuesticr.s at one time (By hr. Crow) :id I confuse you? NR. BLIZZARD: I'm confused. (By hr. Crew) Bow did you test the 8500, and what were r6su2.ts? For percent efficiency you would like to know? n Well, we can start there. That's logical. We test it with a dust. 10 rw\ What kind? A Calcium carbonate, magnesium dust. c Why did you choose those two types of dust? 1 2 A One, they're easy to get. They're nontoxic as far as they're not highly dangerous in a test atmosphere, and they do a good job of 16 characterizing the filtration efficiency of any type of respirator. Q Is it because of the particulate size or the characteristics of the dust itself? No, it's net the dust itself. The material ? doesn't care whac material is coming at it or not. Or silica? A No. C Or asbestos? A Right. It doesn't knew what it is, so you just ~\ 3 4 5 c 3 10 11 12 13 xo 17 iq 21 O -I n7 24 5J 25 choose the appropriate one based on the sizes'}-.^ want to use and things like whether they cake, caking cleaning it's easy to generate a dust clog, things having to do with controlling a dust clog. It's the same all the time. Then you challenge the mask in this case, not a respirator. You challenge it with a certain concentration of the dust at a certain flow rate, and you look for the percent penetration, how much is coming through the ether side. Q What did this mask show you when you did that test to it? A That one would have somewhere in the vicinity of 85, 30 percent efficiency against all dust sizes. Q When you say ail dust sizes, we were talking about microns earlier? A Ch-huh. Q And are you talking about particles larger and smaller than 10 microns? A Yes, right. C Aura as far as the dust, as far as the mask goes, this mask doesn't: care whether those particles are silica cr calcium carbonate? A From the view of its percent of efficiency, no. Q And you would assume with the test based on your r A 5 o C 9 10 12 11o -- I_ 21 99 23 -> j. r" i experience, this mask would filtrate 90 ^___ percent of the particles above and below 10 microns just like it does calcium carbonate? A In general, that would be true, yes. C Those tests have only been done since you've been with the OHSP? A Only chat I can absolutely tell you that it's been dene because I saw it. I know the test wasn't developed after I got there, so I'm assuming they were doing it all the time, all the way back to the beginning. G Can you tell me the name of the man you personally saw conduct the test and was responsible for setting it up to make sure the test was accurate? A No, I saw it out in cur factory. It was a quality control technician. I don't know who he was. C Can you tell me hew the test is actually run? A As I said, it's essentially a machine that generates- a dust cloud, and the dust cloud is controlled at a certain concentration; and then you have the respirator clamped in a holder, and you run the dust cloud with air through it so it has to go through the respirator mask itself, and you measure the concentration upstream and downstream. Let's start with the concentration. I7hat concentration cf calcium carbonate do you use upstream? To tell you the truth, I don't remember because I haven't looked at the test specification in a long t im e. Do you have any idea in terms of a general idea? How much it would be? Purely I would have to speculate. I wculc guess somewhere around maybe 50 milligrams per cubic meter, something like that. vlhen you say 50 milligrams, are you talking about 50 milligrams by weight in a certain volume of air? Right. And you say the mask is clamped down over a machine? Tell, it's part of it. It's put in a holder, yes. And are the edges sealed in some way during this Hew are they sealed? The holder just clamps down on the edges of them, on the edge cf the mask itself. none or tnis uos ccntaminan come m - 4 5 cC/ - 3 0 1C pi 12 13 o 14 and get downs the mask duri Ln~\ That's right. Q And then you to the back o contaminated material? A That's correc When that hap] through, that what is actual * That's right. Sc. Would it be s< particles in 3 atmespher e? What comes through is the smallest particles? Yes. Isn't than normally the case? normally, yes. And when'ycu are talking about toxic dust, the smallest particles are frankly the most dangerous? Right, but that has nothing to do with this because -- This is net a rescirater? - aU_j. cicatec wear you wen going to say, a: r\ Q 10 11 13 C 1d 7C Ji. ur 17 1c 1Q ?t 93 we're on the same wavelength there; but nevertheless, what this S5C0 is going to do if you tape the edges dcv/r. around a human face, it's going to filter out SO percent of the contaminated atmosphere, but the 10 percent that comes through is going to have generally the finest particulate contaminant come there through? There won't be ail of it in there, but it will tend to be the finer as opposed to big rocks. Q Now, 90 percent sounds like that's pretty big filtration to me. Why is it that 3M -- well, why is it that you say -- I won't say 3K -- why is it that you say the 3500 doesn't do good enough to be a respirator when it filters 90 percent of this contaminated atmosphere? A It has to do with the fact that a respirator, to actually market one in this country, you need to have an approval for it; and to gain NIOSE approval, in face, the percent efficiency level is a little over 99 percent minimum to be able to do that; so while SC percent sounds pretty good, it's not nearly what is required for a respirator. New, NIOSH has only been around since '71 or ' 7 2? Va c : or NlOf or cam nation . cn - regulated the s A Bureau cf nines - that was into t 4 o Do you know if - requirement you A Mo, I do n' t. 7 Q Before 1971 are n what is it that a a respirator ai< 1C A Say that again. 11 Q You've told me i 12 in your opinion why you didn't think this mask 7 7 isn't good enough to be used as a respirator 14 device even though its material filters out 90 1 3 percent of the contaminated atmosphere is because 16 NIGSH requires 99 percent efficiency? i r Yes. n Before I7I0SE came cut, 'was there anything that prevented 3M from selling this thing as a respiratory aid cr device? I don't know if there was or not. nh*. And do you know if they did cr not? 3M advertised that as a respiratory device? 0 Yes, before MIGSH came along. I don't know if thev did \ *3 A c \rj r C C 10 11 12 19 20 21 22 nt J, 25 95 Q If they did advertise it like that, they . misadvertising the product, weren't they? A ho, I wouldn't agree with that if they advertised it to be an actual respirator in terms of what an actual respirator is; but a respiratory product can be that, what ycu have in your hand, because it's keeping material cut of your respiratory tract. Q So if they advertised this as an aid in respiratory protection before NIOSH came along, you wouldn't necessarily think that was misleading advertising? A Mo, as long as it said fcr nuisance dusts. Q Did you knew what nuisance dust was before you went tc the OHS?? A Mo. w Did you ever buy any mask like this down at the hardware store when you were painting around the house before you went with OHS?? A Mo, I didn't. C Do you know if anyone else in the United States did? Uhat, bought those in a hardware store? n Ye s. A I would assume they have. Nuisance dust has a technical definition, does?. Yes. Do you know if 31! made any attempt to disseminate that technical information on the 9900 before NIOSH came along or afterwards? No. Do you know if 3M has mace any attempt to tell the people that buy the 8500 so that they will understand what this mask will and will not do? At what time frame are you talking about? Ever? Always ? Ever. Certainly have since I've been in. Before that, I don't know what they did. You can't speak about what they did before that, but you certainly can speak about what you've done since then? . vo s ( Can you tall me whether or not what you've done since then is at least as much and probably more than what you did before you came on board? I don't know. I couldn't tell you since I don't know what they did before. Nhat do you do to tell people that this mask -- r' 2 - 5 / a *! P 17 j. -- 12 12 O 14 15 17 1Q 21 what do you do specifically on the 8500 :o tell people what it can and can't be used for A Te tell them right on the box strictly for nuisance dust, not for toxic use, not for spray painting use, for example. It's printed on the boxe s. Q Is it on each individual mask? A. No, it's in the box. Q Do you sell them in individual masks? A No. 0 Hew do you group them? A They're grouped in boxes of 50 usually. r`x. So you put that information on the box? A Yes. n You do that anticipating that when the box with the actual mask gets to the user, the user will read the information on the box and understand this mask is not to be used in spray painting or toxic atmospheres? No, not at all. Te put that on the box for the purpose of the buyer who is the person who knows best the hazard in his work place, that he reads it and decides whecher or not that product is apropos to give no his workers or not. w Sc if you just pun nuisance dust, this mask will expertise tc know ahe difference? If he doesn't, he can find out from many sources including us. Hew would he find cut? Hhat sources would he go to to find out the technical definition of nuisance dust as compared to the technical definition of toxic dust? 10 He could go to the local OSHA office or local 11 Deparament of Health. V7e have an eight hundred 12 number printed right there on the box. 13 Hew long has that eight hundred number been 14 printed on the box? 1 e Hith the last six vears. 15 Q 37hy has it only been the last si x years you have i ~ the r.umbe r pr ina ed on the box? 13 X Because we didn' a n av e it before then. G Hell, 'was there a r ea sen why you put the eight hundred number s a e 0 box if the eight hundred 21 n'urnber has been ar cun c longer th an six years? 9 1 * ^0 c # Bid you come tc some r ealis ation at 3" there was unsophisticated purchaser: ss, easy access, to mere o C) r'-' 1: 12 11 o Yes, basically that's right. It's basically impossible for users to be in contact with one of our sales reps at all times; anc we wanted to make it easy for them to deal with us. n You already told me you knew a baseline fact that not everybody that would buy one of these would be an industrial hygienist? A S ur e. An industrial hygienist would know the technical difference between nuisance dust and toxic dust? Yes. n. But somebody with an 8th grade education might not know the difference, right? Ee might not knew the difference, yes. And if he wears your mask thinking it would protect him against what is technically a nuisance dust, he will, in fact, contract -- in an atmosphere that is technically called a toxic dust -- and I'm talking about the 8500 -- you knew that that person because of his or her ignorance very likely cculd contract the very disease that that toxic dust creates? You switched gears there. Ho, the buyer doesn't 7 o2 A 10 77 i ** *, 13 - 14 T5 1i / i 7 /*. _-- ur- -7 A 4 CO ()> 100 normally wear the product. The buybtv^gets the product and makes a decision of which one is the15' proper one to wear and then gives it to the user to wear; so since the buyer is given access to cur instructions and cur eight hundred number, they have ail the possibility to find out what the difference is that you're striving for, which is nuisance dust and toxic dust, and they do this. before they actually assign it to the actual person or worker that's going to wear it. 2 Let me ask you my original question again, and then we'll explore what you just answered. It's obvious, I think, but I'm going to ask you since you're knowledgeable about your respiratory equipment, if somebody mistakenly thinks this 8500 will protect their lungs against inhalation by the technical term cf toxic dusts and wears it as a result cf that ignorance, not as a commitment of suicide but cut cf ignorance, then you can foresee that than person through their ignorance can contract the very disease that toxic dust will in uiism? A I would say that is probably true. It possibly could happen. 2 And you told me a moment ago that in an effort to in 11 12 L! 1f ic products; is that right? Yes, we do. And in the last sin years, you've had an eight hundred number so if somebody has a question, they can call you directly? That's richt. G Do you know hew long eight hundred numbers have been around? A Do. r\ To back up and shift gears, which you told me I had done a moment ago, but to back up and actually shift gears, you told me you provide the information you do on your mask not to the user but to the buyer? the employer in the actual effect, uh-huh. c Do you not feel the need at 3D to provide he information to the person whose lungs are at risk? A That we feel we should do is give the information co the person best able to judge the risk to a set of lungs, and we don't feel that is the worker r- 1Z 11 12 13 o 14 13 102 himself. It is the employer who knoiTts^nd^ understands what the hazards are in his own work place. The workers there are not usually in a position to know that. C ''7hy is that? A Because normally they're not cognizant of what they're working on many times and don't know. The employer dees or at least he should find out, and that's why we think those people are the ones that are best able to choose what the proper respirator protection is because they know the work hazards in their work place or at least are responsible for finding that out; and based on the information we provide them, they can choose the proper respirator aid, whatever that may be. Q Sc you acknowledge the workers or users of your respiratory produces may not knew the risk involved of being around a certain toxic substance even if they knew what the toxic substance is? A Thao's correct, they may not know. C Sven if the employer's told them, for instance, they'll be using sand for sandblasting and they can see that's the case, you understand for a fact that there are mar.v workers in this country that net oncers: :he risk involved in blastir.c 2 5 1^ o 13 14 1" 1C ^ ,-k y' 23 24 r*. ^ * 103 with sand in conjunction with i nh al sand and wearing the proper respiratory device? ' A Are you asking re if I believe there are workers that don't know what the risk is? C Yes. . A Yes, I believe that would be true. Q And 3M's corporate policy is not to attempt to educate the lungs chat are at risk but rather to attempt to educate the employer who is paying the lungs that are at risk? MR. BLIZZARD: Well, I don't think that fairly characterizes what he said. He said chat the best way to get the information to the employee is through the employer. MR. CRCW: Well, I heard what he said. My ears aren't as bad as you think. C (By Mr. Crow) And if I heard what you said correctly -- and I want to be sure because there seems to be some confusion -- but you at 3M have intentionally decided as a corporate policy not to attempt to educate the human beings whose lungs are actually at risk as to the risk this device is to protect against and the proper selection of the c 4 Q 7 n C 1C 11 12 13 C 14 i =; 4y device and the 104 the device but, rather, yc information to n* Yes, because we the information Q And, of course, does not for win mi s ua cer s tan din > what you think : to the lungs that are actually at risk, then those people are going to get silicosis if they sandblast, aren't they? A I don't know. Q Well, it's at least possible they'll get silicosis; isn't that true? A Define what they're actually doing again. If they're sandblasting and not using the proper respirator device, they can get silicosis if they don't know what no use and what equipment to use or hew to use in, they can get that disease, right? Yes, that's possible. It's very logical. liner, did 3M cone up with this policy cf giving sene information to the employers and decicinc that fulfilled their responsibility created, so I'm going to object to that question because it assumes something that's net been testified to. You have asked him hew 32! feels it's best to be able to cet information to the worker. 9 He has testi 1C know how to I 1_ only the inf 12 bones but to 13 f A 13 I'm net goin 14 question tha 1 3 testified to 15 (By Hr. Crow) Yell, H i7 told me earlier -- and - !<- M 1 o court reporter's reccr *! o me earlier that was yc disseminate informatics 21 I never said the v;crdC ;OO i 1CV X GOn u ua!i n i-c # Tf- 22 cur way of doing it. : 23 by policy. If you m.ea: o * peper signed cy son.eon^ is the v;ay we do it. 1 n2 - c 0 10 112 13 O 1^ i- i ,-r 13 19 -- 'O 11 22 23 ~c And ic's the we 106 At least as len r\ And it's the wa f ut ur e ? Yes. ,`Then did this m trying to figur to the people's when did all of A Ho, it was ther know. ''2. How, at 3H, do ; yourselves or d. process whereby against hazards necessarily war: dangerous? Bo ;you under stand what I'm saying? n Ho. c At 3H, do you r< to the user or ; warn or instrucJ i Tns ---- L. Have you ever h; C Hot exactly tha' Hell, what I'n .nc co zinc our is tms 107 know, a product th o's designed to an life, mere thought would co into the design of that product than product that's simply a piece A of paper that you stick up on a wall? A Uh-huh. Wouldn't you agree with me on that? * In general, I guess so, yes. 3 And you net only give more thought to the design c of that product, but you recognize that even 1C though you may have designed an excellent product i i to protect that human life, if the human being 1 ? that's using it doesn't understand how to use it correctly, you've defeated the purpose of the design of the product? i s; A I don't understand. Even if you make a product that can save a human life, if you dor.' t provide enough instructions to somebody so they' 11 know how to use the product i o properly and, the refere, you haven't saved their life, you haven'c really accomplished anything othe c. aka the sales of the products? ^ wcuu; s right. You would certainly rave etiens on how to use the prccuct. And the greater the risk to the user of the r*' O 14 15 TO \J 108 product, the mere detailed, the more you would make your instructions and your warnings 7 Mot necessarily. Mot necessarily. 3c at 3" you don't necessarily have a policy or a procedure whereby if the risk is death, then extra steps will be taken to ensure the user uses the product correctly to prevent death as just compared to a bruised thumb? A I was going to say considering the fact nothing we make guards against, a bruised thumb, we treat all cur respirators the same as regards our warnings and instructions. - I understand you treat all of your respirators the same in terms of instructions and warnings. Is it true, sir, you give more attention to the instructions and warnings of the items you make at 3M that are destined tc protect human life than you would give :o your office products? I have no idea. I don't know what they do in the office products. I've never worked for them. oSi Do you know what they do in the commercial or industrial tape divisions? Ye s. You cot instructions on the side of vour Scotch n2 A 9 7 H 7 -> 1 "7 7A 7O 1s 20 O7 2^ O *7 tape, don't vou' 109 "ta c And somebody sat down and had tc think up those instructions, didn't they? They didn't appear on the package magically. MR. BLIZZARD: I don't understand. Q (By Mr. Crow) well, the container, the person who made up the package for 3M to put its Scotch tape in didn't decide what instructions to put on there, did they? A Say that again. n The people that provided the container for your Scotch tape to be marketed in, they didn't think of the instructions, did they? The people who provided the container? Q Yes, the Scotch tape holder. Mo, generally, that's true. The people who make the container don't make the instructions, no. r\ And you put instructions, you say, on the side of your 50-mask cones of 8500 masks, don't you? a At 2M, do you recognize any need to be more :ncr enens iv? in the warnings you put on products tha :ned tc save human lives than vou do on products like Scotch tape? no MR. BLIZZARD: I think the problem, Carl, is you're asking him to compare something he's familiar with with something he's not familiar with. G (3v Mr. Crow) I said Scotch tape. You told me you were involved in commercial and industrial pressure-sensitive tape? A Yes. Q So let me rephrase the question by simply substituting pressure-sensitive industrial and commercial tape. At 3M, do you feel like you need to be more comprehensive in the instructions and i -t warnings on the products you make that are designed to protect human life than on your 16 commercial or industrial pressure-sensitive tape products? IS A I would say no, and I will say no for this reason: Each different product has what we deem, after locking an each particular one, a certain set of instructions and warnings in its use; therefore, I think we would lock at all of our products in the ; .171 6 W V best instructions for that one, whether they be for Scotch tape very simplistic in and shore or instructions on the bones of cur 8710 T r- 2 * r 5 1 *3 o 1A 1C which are quite comp rehensive and comp2^- Ill 1 doesn't mean we care mere about one than the other; it just n:eans what' s required for one be mere or less Li.L"i ir*l4. what' s required for the other. At 3M, more emph a s i s is to be placed on instructions and warnings on a product line for disease and death than for -- MR. BLIZZARD: I think he's answered the question. Let's go on. (By Mr. Crow) And your answer is no? MR. BLIZZARD: His answer is what it is. He's already given it several times. Q (By Mr. Crow) If someone misuses your commercial or industrial pressure-sensitive tape, they're just going to waste tape? Quite possibly. I guess they could. If somebody misuses one of your respirator aids or cevices, to resuit m injury or S-.Cd LU I7e ' ve already discussed that? It's possible, yes. mTUhe S5C0, you said it had a 35 percent-filtering :iciencv n - 0 / 5 r* 10 ii 7/ 12 14 *16 i" 7r 7C ?0 21 respirators, new. ri, I see. 'veil, w1 r s1 going to talk about the 3710 in terms of pro tact.ion factors, ar en't we? A I don't know. Are you? Q Ivell, I hope sc A If you want to, uh- huh. nid The S5C0, if yo u w e re thinking of it as a respirator, wcu Id b e 10? A Yes, if you wer e th inking of it in terms of a respirator, it wcul d have 10, yes. 1C That would mean yo u were only brea thing one- tenth of the contamir.ia b n b atmosphere thr ouch y our 1 un gs ? A Ri ch t. q How does it acm t work out when you p ut i t on a human being's f:i w a ^ though, if you don't h av e the 6dee sealed b-v a rn<achine? r7\i - s-/ Mu t a^ aHave- ;--- ,, j--ut:,rac t-a" 'w -- * Q r 'J c --1. _". / i"^ C*ltVr nw .Ty7 rwi /~ ^****wi any testing at 3M on the 3500 to determine what happens to the protection factor when you don't have the :s nicelv sealed down ' a machine and vcu'rs just drawing throuch the f i 1 f-o r --ip -- or** a* A o 1n 13 i iu ic 17 io "r -> 7- 113 A 'To, because the C500 , it applies only ci? respirator, anc the S500 is net a respirator, n. And you don t know what it drops off to? A I don't know that it drops off. You've been in R~D and Technical Services. You knew there has no be seme leakage if you put it on the human face as compared to locking it down with a machine? A Yes, some. nv And you know for a fact the protection factor is going to drop off a little? A Yes. MR. VAN GILBSR: Carl, you're confusing the filtering efficiency with the pronectior. factor. Q (By Mr. Crew) Nell, the filtering efficiency' and the protection factor both deal with hew well the filtering material of the mask seals against the f ace ? A No, it aces non. Q The protection factor, then, in your mind only deals with the filtering material? A No. Q That does it mean to you? ?. It means only leakage from face leakage or valves, n 11 11 i^ i , caskets if the thing has pieces like 114 So you said awhile ago you consider this thing to have a 90 percent efficiency, and it would have a protection factor of 10. If you get face leakage, you put it on and actually wear it, if you know that's going to go down, does that mean the protection factor's going to go down? A Yes, but the protection factor has nothing to co with this product. n Because it's not a respirator? That's right. And you don't have any idea what the actual protection factor on the 3510 will go down to? 8500 you mean. c 3500 . "o. Ye never measured it.. In fact, you can't measure it on a product like that. Q Yhy net? A Because cf the way protection factors are run. You can't measure it on a product like that. I'm sorry, I don't understand. I heard you the first time, but I don't understand why you can't measure or. this tv me of product. Because of the fact vou can't convert that into a high efficiency filter. r\ Q 12 14 15 i5 i-- 7c 19 22 z_ *r ^C 115 You mean the mat erial this mask is That's right. Just the materia 1 itself won't provide enough filtering agent tc be high enough -- -- to run the te st, yes, that's right. (Thereupon, a short recess was taken.) Q (3v Mr. Crow) You just told me that this facial test -- dc you call it a facial test at 3M? A No, it's currently called a -- if you are talking about: protection factor, it's currently called fit factor. G Fit factor? A Yes, same thing, though. Q (veil, we know this thing theoretically has a theoretical proaection factor of about 10 if you seal the edges? A That's correct, if there's no leakage, you'd get a -- actually that's not quite right. That's definitional terms. If you're using the percentage of stuff coming through as trying to calculate a number and call it something, in that case where you have no edge leakage at all and are 116 1 strictly doing the calculation on what x^i^^inc^^ n out the filter, that's called total inward leakage factor. The computations of ccrainc up with the 4 number are the same. c C You know, what I'm trying to avoid is -- I want to 6 know -- if it's makes a difference, I want to know / what you call it or what we have to cc, the terms g we have to use, if it makes a difference; do you q understand? 1C A Sure. -i i Q And I'll ask you until I understand. 12 A rJh-huh. 13 Q If it doesn't make a difference, if we can talk 14 about protection factor interchangably, I'd like 15 to keep it as simple as we can. 16 A Fine. . 17 Q Theoretically if I understand what you are telling IS me, if the edges are sealed on this mask, you get 1 9 a protection factor of about 10? w nU Like I said, you'd get a total inward leakage 21 number of about 10. They are different. 22 r You call it a total inward leakage? 23 A That's right. 2 4 0 On your respiratory mask like the 8710, do you use she term total inward leakage? o i' 11, O 14 1c 1C 1" 4*5. r'w 21 *7 *7 22 J 117 A 'To, because you don't usually measurth are talking about protection factor. ~ n. On the 8710 and 9910? A.ny respirator, you do. n So we'll be talking about protection factor on these? Yes. 0 And if we're trying to compare the 8500 with these, as you've already told me, the protection factor is approximately 10, no edge leakage? A Mo, the total inward leakage is about 10. I don1- know the protection factor on that because you can't measure it. v You can't measure it because of the edge leakage? A Mo, because the filter is not nearly efficient enough to stop the material you use for the test challenge in a protection challenge test. Q What is it a hour the test challenge on a protect ion challenge test that makes this mask or the fil terir.g material on this mask inadequate? Is there s o much mere of it challenge'//i se? A Mo, not really. The concept is you' re trying to measur e only face leakage on the pro tection ?~ r- y . T* > j T* j that's all, just the leakage around the face. That means there's no oenetraticn thrcuah 1 7 .'i . 12 C 13 "O "> ,1 118 the filter; otherwise, you wouldn't be separate then. I already told you that product is noi !C oer< !f Cl' :ient against particulate challenges. As lenc as it's net, you cannot measure percent efficiency just by the very definition of the test, how it's cone. c So when you're measuring your protection factor, you're measuring face fit and not percent efficiency? ' Yes, that's what you're supposed to do. That's what protection factor is is to measure only face seal leakage. All right. You told me earlier that toxic dust this was not designed to protect including cotton dust? And this was n t to be used for spray painting? At least sprav paint toxic in nature, /Jhich spray pa nt is toxic, and which is nontoxic? Tonics may be water base with materials in it where the soli part is not toxic material, Stuff you ccul inhale and it wouldn't hurt you? That's right. But ether type of paint, non-latex base paint, nign t nave mat rials you 'would inhale and hurt r^. 1C o y 113 you Yes, especially if it's a solvent base, yes. And in those situations, you wouldn't want anybody thinking they could use this type of mask? 'To, we wouldn't want people thinking that's a spray paint mask. And you wouldn's want people using it where there's a lot of cotton dust? -To, we wouldn't. 0 And you wouldn't want people using it with sandblast metal using a sandblaster? Yes, that's correct. And because if they did that enough, they'd get silicosis? That's a possibility, yes. r\ Before I talk to you about these anymore, I want to knew do you really know what silicosis really is? You told me earlier you didn't knew the medical necnanssn oy wnuch tnese small sand particles get down in the lungs. Do you know what nappens to a numa 11 otr j. *!>-. w ace they contract it? Y.y under standing of it is it essentially blocks the small airways of the lungs, the alveoli, and inters eras wi` :ansfer of the blocd. It's essentially like losinc a Greater share of the li 12 > i j. 1^ ">" working area cf year lung to transfer 120 your blood. Has anyone ever explained to you the disease is progressive in nature? No, I've heard that, I think, but I've never had an explanation. NR. LIPS CONS: I object to the form of the question. I don't know what that has to do with the subject matter of this person. NR. CRCXI: I want to knew what 3M1 s designee knows. 0 (3y Nr. Crow) You know that it's fatal? A I know that it can be. ' Q Do you know that people can be disabled from it for long periods of time before they die from it? A Yes, I know that. Q Do you know that people in the terminal stages of silacos: . iter ailv soend all of their life's ist trvinc to aerate their lungs and their Oiooc? NR. LIPSC0N3: Objection to the VAN C-ILDS?.: Objection n- c o 10 71 10 13 14 1o 19 nn ? "7 77 25 TILL: You're testifvinc for the witness. C 'Ey Mr. Crow) I said did you knew that people in the terminal stages of silicosis literally have so much trouble breathing that their whole life's energy is directed toward taking a breath in and exhaling that breath? MR. TILL: Object to the form. Ar g ume n ta tiv e. MR. LIPSCOMB: Objection. Q (By Mr. Crow) Everybody object. How, answer the question. A Yes, I do knew that. 0 Do you know it's the slowest form of death a person could experience? MR. TILL: Objection, argumentative. MR. LIPSCOMB: Objection. A Ho, I can't say I did know it was one of the slowest forms. C (By Mr. Crow) Do you knew of any other forms? MR. VAM GILDER: The witness can't n 11 12 13 O 14 15 16 ie 15 20 21 22 jL j 20 J 2o answer medical opinions. 122 HR. CROW: I'm not asking medical. (By Mr. Crow) I want to know what you people at 3M think about the products that you are going to design, test, manufacture and market to people and represent what's going to protect them from it. Can you think of any other slower ways of dying other than silicosis? A Mo, I don't know of any other one. MR. TILL: What about living a normal healthy life? MR. LIPSCOMB: Put a running obj action. MR. BLIZZARD: He answered your cuestion. Q (By Mr. Crow) What's 8710 and the 8500 in filtration? . t\ The 3710, in face, ha the shell that causes sn aps. Q Okay, a filter web? A Yes. Is the inner paarrcr of the 8710 made out of the same i.idueriai aS ~zz~7- -:: . ^ ^ U vj ; 1C 1T 12 G 12 14 15 _L C g-7 13 10 -j r\ G 21 22 23 25 123 A :?c, net exactly. It's slightly different Q How is it different? A Just slightly different fiber blend. 0 Is the weave any tighter? -'-i i< o. G Hew does the slightly different fiber blend make it more efficient if it does make it mere efficient? A It doesn't, but the shell has nothing to do with the efficiency of the respirator. Q What is it that makes this so efficient you call it a. respirator but the 8500 is not a respirator? A The filter web. Q This outer portion? A It's actually between that p iece and the shell. 0 How many layers cf material do we have here? a We have three you're looking at there. /"N \J What is the outer sever made out of? ft outer cover is made of a polyester fiber. r' ~mVy inner cover, is that the web you talked about? * n He, the inner cover, what you're looking at -- Wo, the inner. A The inner, that's the filter media. 'xi Is t hat similar so the 8500? Wc, completely different:. - 6 8 9 10 11 12 13 O 14 15 16 17 16 22 /^ -5 Is that what makes this mask so 124 inner lininc we can't see riaht A That's right. That's this material on the inside, the part that fits against the person's face, what's it made out of? A Polyester. Q Similar to the 8500? A Similar. Q It has a little different weave you said? A No, I said it has a little different fiber. Q So you have the 85C0 is the inner material. In the 8710, is it the same thickness as the 8500 mask material? A Approximately they're the same, the two shells, then. Q Sc then you basically justadded two separate pieces of material on too ofan 8500 shell? A Yes, that's right. C I mean, I understand that you told me there's a slightly different composition of fiber of the inner shell of t r. 6 5710; but in simple terms, that's what y o u 1 V done is put bwo more layers of material on C Z the 8500 , and it looks to me this mask i s a 1 le bit bigger dimensionally, or 1 > 13 i- is that -- Thev're about the sane. So vou didn't even change the size of the mask in orce; improve face fit between the 2710 and the :5oc: That's assuming -- you're assuming there was poor face fit with the 3500 in the first place. lell, was there? Not chat we know of. You think you got good face fit? We think so. When you say good face fit, are you talking about a 55 percent face fit? That is the way face fit factors are defined. Do you get a 55 percent face fit factor with this 3500? I can't tell you that because we can't measure it You get so much naterial in there that ycu -- NT;. DLI3ZAP.D: Go on to seme thine else. Je've already talked about that. I T "I ri C J.U. :ay until you finish, but I'm not going 70! ;k the same cues tier. over < 1 n2 3 4 c 0 ou 0 10 11 12 c 13 14 15 IS 17 7O 10 23 9^ 22 23 24 G 25 q (By Mr. Crow) The little rubber str 125 700 , has it always been blue? * rt Mo. r> That color was it before? Mhite. r. Hew long was it white before it was blue? * It was white when I showed up in the division. Before that, I don't know how long before that it was white. rU> Well, we have a blue one here. Is this a real old one or a real new one? A No, that's current. It's blue new. o But can you tell me when it changed from white to blue? A About three years age, I think. Q And before that, as long as you know, it was whine? Yes, as long as I know. - Mas the rubber retaining device attached in approximately she same manner it is here on this one ? Yes. r And approximately the same place? Ti let me see. Yes, uh-huh. Q Did you always have the little logo 311 imprinted 1 o o A o p i9 12 i* ip 7o nn Pt 99P 127 on o little nose metal ci no, hat's recent. o How long has than been going on? A The last couple of years. .n* Before then, did you have any kind of logo information on the 8500? Tor a time, it was embossed right into the shell itself. C Did you ever have a different design shell for the S500 than what I'm holding in my hand? Maybe you had the filter material ribbed and running in a different direction? A Mot in a different direction than that, no, not to my knowledge. C And I want to clear up something. As far as you knew, the 3500 has never been improved or changed in ar.v wav? Mot since I've been in the division it hasn't been changed, nc. And you den't knev; about before then? Mo. 8710, this is seme chinc that was designed from the ground up, ever, though you started with the 2500 shell, to be a respirator? 1 n- 6 i S 9 :o ii , 17 1i 15 1" 15 ? f' "7 7 "7 7 0d > 25 against? Pneumoconiosis and fibrosis-producing dusts. V' 3 dust^^ We separate the pneumoconiosis dUStS because to dusts include metal dusts, and i-- Obc are not of the same category. 0 Like lead? A Lead. r\ What else? A Toxic dusts, lead, lead chrome, beryllium, all kinds of metal, sine. So if I understand what you are telling me, at 311 you have these three categories. You have category number one you call nuisance dust. That's ole West Texas dust; is that right? Ye s. 0 And your second category is pneumoconiosis dust? r\ 1S rv And that includes silica, cotton. Any others? ri Tobacco. r\ Tobacco ? v 3 What does tobacco give you besides cancer? r- - 4 5 5 7 S o 10 11 12 13 14 15 11 < % A I don't remember what the n n Then you have the third cab 129 tonic dust which includes 1 kinds of dust? A It includes metal dusts in < Q Iron, steel? n7> Any being that is considered under metal. Q Magnesium? A You want to bring out a TLV up. I don't remember them all by heart, but that's what they are. But when you think about what your respiratory products are for, you think of putting them in one of those three categories? Yes. Mot now we don't. tTe did then. In the beginning, you were talking about the 3710 when it was first brought cum. rw. You said in the beginning? Yes. To differentiate it from Genesis, are you talking about from 197 2? A Yes. When you got or. beard there with the OHSP in '76, did you still have these three categories in your 8 9 10 11 12 11 lJ 'i _o mind when you designed these kinds of g A Yes. 130 Q Or tested them? t V-! C Q Or marketed them? A Ye s. Q And as far as you know, that three-category system has gene back to the early '50's? A I don't know. MR. BLIZZARD: Carl, we were talking about the early '70s as the beginning. MR. CRCI7: Of the 8710? MR. BLIZZARD: I'm net sure what we 35.ic tnen. Q (By Mr. Crew) What did you call the group that built the 8500? For a while that was the only product they had. You said it was attached to the .ercial or industrial tape bunch? it was .ttached to the Commercial Tape Division, ves.I I think it was always called Occupational Health md Safety pro cut 'or a time, this was the only product they had, if r2 3 12 13 4 21 131 I remember right? A Yes. Q Did those folks think of designing, marketing, and testing respiratory equipment or masks in terms of those three categories of hazards, nuisance dust, pneumoconiosis and fibrosis-producing dust? A I don't know. I don't know them. Q In any event, you stopped me. The reason we got off on that is you stepped me because you didn't want me referring to the 8710 as being something that would necessarily prevent a person from being ill from the inhalation of toxic dust because that could include metal dust, right? MR. BLIZZARD: Well, why don't you just ask questions instead of characterizing previous testimony. Q (By Mr. Crew) The 8710 is not designed to protect against toxic metal dust, is it? A Let me back up and say when you were asking that cue s tion bef or $ f V 0 u were talking in 19ri?s of 1972 when the pr ecu C W *rV C. 3 first put out j and a a that time, it was s trictiy pr.eumoccnios i s an c fibrosis-procucinc dust. That's what it had its approval for. Thar's why I objected to the toxic dust in that time frame. Mow that is not true. n 10 77 15 The respirator is approved for those 132 also. Q Did the design of the respirator or the manufacturing process change in any way from 1972 when it first came cut and was only approved for pneumoconiosis and fibrosis-producing dust to now when it's approved for the third category which includes tonic metal dusts? A Yes, in has. Q What did you have to change about it so you could sell it for both of those last two categories? A lie essentially have changed the filtration efficiency of the filter media such that we maintain very high filter efficiency while keeping very low pressure drop, and hew we do that is a trade secret of 2M. . 0 Is chat the only chance that's occurred in the 8710? Basically, that's right. When you say basically, see, I always worry about people that qualify things. Okay. I didn't mean to. That's what has changed, !o new I could use this mask for nuisance dust. :ns umccona osi: icresis-prccucinc oust or o * O r-\ DC4 133 to;:ic dust? Thar's right. Then did the chance occur so that I could do that? 1981, I believe. Is that when the actual design chance occurred, or is that when the approval occurred? The whole thing -- well, the design change took a while to do, of course, tc develop, so we were starting on it prior to that; but when we were finished and could produce it, we submitted it for approval again. And you started marketing it with that change? Uh-huh. 14 MR. BLIZZARD: You're going tc have to say yes or no rather than uh-huh. Yes, that's when we started tc market it. r (By Mr. Crow) The 3710, is it a pretty good resciratorv device acainst silica dust? n VC' '* t -- 1 what makes vcu say that? That makes me say that is because it has very good filtration efficiency, and we believe it fits very well againsc the majority of human faces. Tell, new, it's get two bancs on it. Has it always had two bancs or. it? n r ij j I believe so. Yes. Yas that intentional to get a better face fit? MB. Bill ZAP.D : The color? (By Mr. Crow) Yes. The color of the bands, was that intentional co get a better face fit? The color of the bands doesn't have anything to do with face fit. How about two bancs on here, is that intentional design to get a better face fit? It was intentional because MIOSK requires you have two bands to even get an approval. I see. You told me it has high filtration efficiency and good face fit. That's what makes you think it's a good respiratory aid to protect the user's luncs. Ye're talking about lungs. Ye're not talking about noses, mouths, teeth, mucous membranes cr anything like that, lie' re talking about lungs, right? Bight. I assume you die something to test this thing so you can sit there end tell me, males that Certainly ir ;1 1 > c 1i 10 9~ 135 Before I ask you about your testing, to knew under what circumstances in terms cf pneumoconiosis-producing dust you can use the S710 in? Under what circumstances? Yes. Are there any concentration max in urns, for instance, silica concentrations, airborne silica concentrations, that this mask won't protect you against? Can you reach an upper limit of concentration that this mask is no longer effective? It's not a question of being effective. It is, in fact, mandated for respirators, dust respirators like this, negative-pressure half masks, that you don't use it past the threshold limit value of the substance you're working against. W Threshold limit value? A Yes. . r ted I bet vcu're ccinc to sav bv YICSH and OSHA, yes. is mat something cnat ya'il require tnac one user of this produce not use it above 10 times TLV? Yho's va'II? 'r.i sorry, that' s somethinc we sav here in Texas, 10 13 u 14 ** * 15 -13 19 d li -14 O r- I don't know what you say in Minnesol 136 MP. COFFEY: Youse guys. MP.. BLIZZARD: I don't think it was she ya'll he didn't understand. MP. COFFEY: Ye knew that. (By Mr. Crow) Dees 3K when it markets this 8710 specifically warn the user not to use this product in silica atmospheres of more than 10 TLV? A OHS? dees. 3M doesn't. Q How does OESP, the one who markets this product, hew do you do that? It's in the instructions. In the instructions? A Dh-huh. r-j Is that because of the MIOSH specification that half masks are net oo be used above 10 times TLV? A Yes, I believe sc, uh-huh. Q Mew, the reason I asked you that is because I wanted tc' know if you had done any testing -- by you, I mean 3M or OHS? -- had done any testing to determine at what point a mask's effectiveness gets overwhelmed t o the point the user is starting to geo tonic quant ioies of free silica in his I un g s . H av e y cu e ver done any tests of that? mn Ye rest uhe filoer efficiency of that, we do. C/* oL/ Q *! A *1 -1 12 13 13 21 n .< V 3 Tell me hew you test the filter efficii 137 3710 and hew it ' s nested against free silica, It's actually t eased against free silica, Ve're net talki;ng about calcium carbonate; we're talking about t]he real thine? Ye s . C Tell me how you do that. A A chamber filled up with 55 cubic meters of absolute pure quarts of silica. 0 Do you have any way of comparing or correlating 55 cubic meters of quarts of silica with TLV measurements? A I'd have to look it up in the TLV book. There's a threshold based on the -- fer whatever the contaminant is, for instance, sandblasting. Q Did you bring a bock with you? o Do you have an approximation of what 55 cubic meters would be in terms of TLV value? BLIZZARD: Don't guess. (By hr. Crew) I'm not talking about a pure guess. A minimum or a maximum is what I'm talking about. MB. 3LIIZATD: I don't want him to make anynhing close to a mure speculative guess. If it can be looked 5 6 7 OO 9 10 ! 2 12 13 14 15 16 l7 i t*\ n j pure quarts of silica other than comparing it to TLV? A Characterizing it i 0 I don't want to com there anything else it's a little mor e A Again, I'll ask in ' what you're asking. Q What I'm asking you what a TLV is, and : 100 times TLV is. ' this mask was speci: above 10 times TLV? A ya s # i-icc iTi6 dsyou tnis requires cr CSHA requires this mask be limited to in terms of TLV atmospheres that the wearer is to be enpcsed to in 'wearing the mask, have you done any testing at 3" Company to determine how high the TLV is in terms of contaminated atmosphere a wearer of this mask could encounter and not suck one more TLV of chat contaminated atmcsohere into ri' 2 o. 13 1o -"1 ^A \ , two tiiT.es TLV cr what? A Ho, I couldn't tell you exactly, no. o This Task is promoted to be used around sandblasting areas, isn't it? It depends on what the actual application is. Weil, you advertise it to be used around sandblasting areas, don't you? It can be depending on the concentration of sil ica. Let me rephrase i Maybe I'm net making myself clear. The face is t t you advertise the 8710 to ce used arouno sanccl ting; isn't that a fact? Do you know has 2!! dene any research, surveys, studies, testing to determine hew high air concentrations in and around sandblasting operations can be in terms of free silica concentration? I don't know if we have or nor. A C 0 n/ G-> O 10 g7 12 13 Q _o j. u G ~0 /\A/ VA . - ' re 140 .1 hun-'. If you were ccir.c to try to find out if 31! hac ever gone cut and tested atmospheric free silica concentrations ar ur.d sandblasting areas in terms cf multiples of T V, -where would you go look? I don1a know. n Mho would you ask? 1 I don't even know where I'd start to ask that because I don't think we've done it inside our division, so I doubt if anybody else has, either. n New, the testing that you did do with 55 milligrams per cubic meter, however that relates to TLV, what did it indicate or show? A It indicates or shows that we're greater than 93 percent efficient over that kind of challenge ever a 90-minute tesa scan. Now did you do the testing? Now do we do ia? *7e do it accorcina to 20 CFR 11. c: cl G u _ . 'OCT ecuir aments iow cc you do ia? A chamber cf 55 millimeters cf silica in it. You draw the silica through the respirator either in < straicht flow at 20 millimeters a minute or if machine, breathing cycle 40 x 11 o 1o on 141 millimeters a minute; and you do thi minutes and measure hew much silica came through versus what's on the other side. NIOSH doesn't convert it to the actual efficiency. It's the pure mass that comes through that determines if you're efficient or not, but if you meet the requirements, a little over 99 percent efficiency. n The particles, once again, that come through your mask are the smailest p;ar ti cl es as a rule? No, ther e' s a di stribut ion of them, but certai nly the smal ler ones would come through , yes. And th ey wc uId p reponde rate 0 I'm not sur e tha t's abs olut sly the case, meani ng that 90 per cant of them wo u Id be sm all. It depe nds on h ow y cu cefi ne big and 1 ittle, too. T mean, you v;ill get a distribution of particle sice coming through the other side. Certainly I would agree with you the very large sices will net come tnreuen. I: .s test, the size is verv controlled. There is no large amount of partial; variation in the test. It's al] amcrcuimateiv sin-tenths of a micron. The test is oniv run for 90 minutes? in _' :ow vcuuc on ' j efficiency of your mash change if n 11 b 14 13 16 o1 142 you kept it on for a full -3-hour shir your advertising indicates you could use it for? A Under the conditions - MR. BLIZZARD: Wait a minute. That question assumes some advertising that has not been shewn, has not been discussed, so don't answer the question. Listen carefully to what he's saying because he's repeating a lot of things and asking you a lot of things he hasn't asked you about. Q (By Mr. Crow) Do you advertise this mask to show that it's designed for the regular use of an 8-nour shift? A Ye s , we do . Q Was that such a secret to everybody? Is that a seer e t ? A N C. What happens to the efficiency of your mask if you continued this test process past the -0 -minute period that NICSH r squires and on into your regular 8-hour shif t period, you know. like wha t nappe ns ir you ^.erc it on for the other six and a half hours? On the test itself? It would just get bett er. 10 11 12 13 ^j 14 15 22 23 25 Q Because the filter would start A Yes. 143 0 And the breathing would become mere difficult? A Correct. Q What about the testing? You say you draw through the filter material with a. machine that's pulling either straight 30 millimeters a minute or is inhaling and exhaling in an artificial manner? A Yes, using a breathing machine. Q What do you do about the edges of the mask? A Edges of the mask are clamped into a holder under the NIOSH test. Q Dees face fit affect the performance of the KIOSE mandated testing? A Face fit has nothing to do with the NIOSH mandated tsEc'' nc Q You're only testing filter efficiency? A That's correct. 0 Of course, a human being wearing your mask in a contaminated atmosphere is not only going to be depending on filter efficiency but also face fit? A That's right. C And that's where we get into the protection factor business, right? A That's correct, yes. 144 1 0 Theoretically, he damned vc r<^J710 down around 2 his mouth and sucked air through it, he 3 have the crote ction factor of somewhere around 100? x A Are you asking me to guess what any one person is 0 going to have as a protection factor? Q lie. If you have a 9S plus efficiency of your wc material and you eliminate face fit as a variable s and just clamp it down and hold it down around 10 your mouth so that nothing, absolutely no air can 7_l --7 travel around the edge of the mask, then 12 theoretically this mask should provide a 13 protection factor of 100; is that right? 14 MR. BLIZZARD: I think the problem 15 is he told you protection factor _; 0r includes face fit in its definition. MR. CRCv`I: Let him testify, Ed. _7L cC He's doing a good job. He's doing a 19 'better job than you are. -* r> HR. BLIZZARD: Hell, I hope sc. .MR. CP.Civ: Let me ask him a 0 "? cue stic n. 23 3 (By Hr. Crew) Hes or no -- ~ x HR. BLIZZARD: If it can be * r- answerec yes or no. o 1 p Q 10 11 12 Xv Q *? A -5 "c -- - O1 22 ^* rith a 99 plus efficiency rating for the filtering >f material only, your protection factor should be 100? In tha t descripti 'v~i. f Z.LU1 d- JL-. ! s what most people ca n a work place fact or or wcr king f actor the se d ay s. Yes, that's right n ?7hat h appens when I put it on my face and try t 0 use it on a job? ?7e run i nto some edge leaka ge 9 n You mi ght. It's not a matter of y dene tests on how much S710, haven't you? i Sure. Yes, we dc. n You said you didr.'t dc the filter wasn't good * H* R . --nBJ 1tLj ^ItZ,i ZARD: Don't answer the question. Hi = already asked it. (By Hr. Crew) Bun you time s ? q The question is what? 9 How many times have yci the S71G to determine ; p 10 13 o 1! 23 r~j I don't know, test on the 8710 by year? Certainly we did it last year. I have not .been in the laboratory since last October, so I can't tell you about that. 77as it the policy within the OHSP to do it on a yearly basis? No, we didn't have a policy at all about doing it. You run protection factors or fit factors as a matter of research, not as a matter of policy. G Nell, what do ycur tests shew the. protection factor for the 3710 to be- once you start allowing the leakage tc cone into play? On an individual cr as a group of people? Nell, let's scart with an individual. Individual, I couldn't cell you that one. Thau one is individual. You would have tc literallv measure iu w n = - 1 U la. How abcuu on a group of people? I v/ould say in general we're above 70. That does it range from, from what to what? The range, probably 30, 40 up to several hundred, Sc depending cr. the contour of a person' s face 1 O2 =; o / Q 0 1C ii 7 "7 It 1O -p 17 /" they may get 3C from this mask, A I said several h right on the hea yes, uh-huh. Q Do beards interfere with face fit for this mask? A They interfere with any respirators as far as fit. To one recommends beards as far as respirators. 0 I'm sorry, does a beard interfere with the protection factor for the 8710? A Possibly, yes. Q You don't know forsure? A Mo, there are times that people have been measured with beards, and it's shown no effect. That's why I said possible. But we don't believe that and don't recommend to have beards with respirators. 0 Aside from contours and beards, is there anything else that affects the protection factor like smiling, 'frowning, coughing? Do you test for protection factor having a human being doing various things with their face? A Yes, you do. C That do you do? A You test uo-ar.d-down movements, side-tc-side movements, talking, smiling. It's a standardised r- ic 11 12 13 o 1 _o -s _ a ct c ry ? Yes, I would assume so because the material we would get would come from cur factory. Do you have any idea hew old it was? Do. ?7as that a factor in hew efficient or inefficient or hew much protection factor or new little protection factor an 3710 would provide you? What, age of the respirator? Age no. Is there any other factors other than age which can affect the protection factor rating of an S710 once it leaves the factory? . 3LIZZ ARD : I's not sure wha t - 'I'm confused because I thought he just said age doesn't matter, and you just turned that around and said is there anything aside from age, and I think you're assuming age does affect it. Ke just told you it doesn't. (By ;:r. Crooww) If age doesn;t affect the 1 c2 4 c 6 '7 a 9 10 11 12 O 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 7T 0d 0c 0 fell, will humidity affect the protec cf this mask? A No. - Q It will r.ot? A No. Q Moisture? A No. Q Would your answer be the same when the n first introduced in '72 in terms of humi A Yes,. I would say even then, the level yo1 moisture wouldn't do much to it. 0 Sc a mask that's been sitting in a wareho 90 or 12C days is going to be just as eff. a mask that just came off the assembly lir. as you know? A As far as I know. 0 Hew would we compare protection factors to A I don't knew. What kind of comparison, do to make? They're two different things. p Hell, when you say protection factor, does basically mean that if I'm wearing this ma 150 it fits me well enough to give me a prcte&^on^ factor of 30, that I can walk into a 30 TLV o atmosphere of free silica and only get one TLV S,1 either through the filter medium or around the edges of the mask to my lungs? 6 A Yes, that's what that would mean in the way you describe it, yes. r* C Q In order to achieve the kinds of protection factor results that you just told me about, 30 to several 10 hundred, do you have to go through any multistep 11 process in the fitting of the 3710? 12 A A multi -- 13 Q In order to achieve a good enough face fit on th 14 8710 to get the protection factor range that 15 you've just told me about, 3 0 to several nundr^ 16 do I have no go through some sort of fi tting * ~lj procedure wi nn the 8710 that involves m ul tip 18 steps, or do i just put it on my head? 19 You have to f cl 1 cw th e i nstructions of how 20 it on. That 1 -5 certainly tr ue and prcvi c;e c 21 instructions. Are those instructions provided to the e only, or are they provided to the user? They're -- in this case, they're prcvi '"70 fitting posters that we hang r 6 1 11 12 13 i& n Un-hun, yes. n. Why do you have posters about how workers should properly fit an 3710 instead of just dropping off a little brochure to the employer and letting him take care of his responsibility as you see it? What we're doing is actually helping the employer carry out his responsibility. We're giving him a poster to post cun in his area and the work area. o What I don't understand is before in terms of describing in some detail as you explained to me what your product can and can't do, you told me you relied on the employer and you furnished the information to the employer. You remember that line of questioning? I remember I said we felt the best way to get the informati'cn to them is to give the information to the employer. In this particular case, you're saying you're trying to help, hep - Bill SARD: Spell that h-e-p. (By hr. Crew) -- by providing posters to the enclave: than --ou know the workers will see? C ii U i/ \* 152 hv co you feel like it's sere impertant'T^s^. important to get a good face fit with the 0710 that you provide pesters that would communicate directly with the workers, but you wouldn't provide information directly to the workers about what this mask will and won't do? :'R. BLIZZARD: I don't think he ever testified to that. (Ey hr. Crow) Do you provide information directly to workers on the 3710 that details what this mask will and will not protect against? If we're allowed to get to the workers by the employers, we do offer that service, yes. Tie will train the workers directly. you must h av e had cases -- based on your you must have cases where an employer ycu aw ay from their workers? A T 7 ' " Ther e1 s sc me that will not take us urn reruse you a< ss to their 'workers? :ialiy, If they turn down cur offer, I cress ycu ccu^c sav t'n ` . lie offer it everv time, Dhev earner :r re-eci now co vou C o n 9 *! O "1 n c 153 A Our sales rep con es in a net caters a tr amine procram on the re spirator, how 10nc nas tear offer been outstandinc? A T * ~ c 'jr o tl*3 b 0 S there the whole tine I've been m me civision. before that, I don't know r-Jhc wo aid know ? A I don't remember his name. He would have been the sales manager at that tine, but I don't know the guy; so offhand, I can't remember. It would have been the sales manager of the thing at the time, '-fell, you don't normally deal with employers directly anyway, do you? ('Thereupon, a short recess was taken.) (By Hr. Cr ow) Hr. Scheel, we were talking before we moved up to Hr. 31iszar d * s office about why you folks felt it was so necessary to try to communicate directly with the workers with this po cr. fact me 3710 mask when you didn't communicate coarentiv had no intention of commun: direct!'; wi th e workers on iO 85C0. I wonder why the change. It's r.ot that we didn't have an intention of ccinc n c C "! r* 11 12 13 14 is i 'i T3 0O OA *^ employer because of him knowing what the hazard is; cut we will attempt to supply .materials on the hazard if we car., like I said, we will offer to train them and provide materials that gc up into the work place. Prather or not that always happens is up to the employer, whether he will allow us to do that; so it's not a sudden chance. It's just -You brought up this morning's testimony, ana I don't want to gc back through it, but this morning you told me you thought the best way to get information to the employees was to send it to the employer; and consequently, you did not make any attempt beyond that to get the detailed information to ore user. Mo, you didn't ask me that, if we ever tried to do that. You asked me what the best way was, and I still say that's true to go to the employer. Pe will attempt to and offer to train the employee directly if the employer 'will allow us to. Mow do you make this offer again? Through cur sales representatives. r- 8 9 10 11 12 13 ld 17 155 loyers, do you. A Yes, we dc. 'Tell, let me define this. The actual sale as far as the delivering and the payment mace, but our sales reps that work for the division do call them and inform them cf the product line we have and what they are useful for. Q And how dees an employer knew that service is available? A Which service is this? Q That they can get an actual 3M salesperson to come out and talk to their v;ork force if they desire. A Well, a sales representative when he's talking to an employer, if he has, in fact, sold the concept cf one of our products for use in their place, he will make the offer to do this. Q Mr. Scheel, what I'm talking about is your average run-of-the-mill painting contractor, not Exxon Refinery,' that you don't sell to directly, you have nc contact with whatsoever initially, your products pass through the hands cf another party, the suppliers, hew dees that painting contractor and its employees know that if they think it's necessary, they can call 3K in Minnesota and get a n 6 7 12 J**. -*J5 14 15 17 IS '9 20 21 09 23 24 c 15 5 contractor's place of businelks^nd have an in depth thorough discussion about your r7?pi-^tcry eq ui pm ent ? A They would do that by calling the eight hundred number that's listed in our literature or on the bones of the product itself. Q But there would be no -- unless they think they need that help, of course, they're net going to call the eight hundred number? A I suppose that's true, yes. Q And the eight hundred number hasonly been around for six years? A Right. Q And there would not be a personalsalesman contact from 3M unless it's a pretty big account, would there? A It doesn't hav have many leve. on* Q What percentag1 up again, what equipment is s directly from : t7r\\ As far as the < :ontact that's mace because remember it's -- Q 1C 11 1~ 13 o Td r" The amount of sales. All she sales are made through a distrf far as selling she product. If you're asking me how much of the total sales we make, what is the responsibility directly because of our sales force or the distribusion sales force, I don't know what that is. Do you have an estimate? No. Would you say the majority of your respirator equipment, the responsibility of the contact between the purchaser and the person they're buying it from, normally would be on the supplier? I don't knew. Besides your salesmen, if they do happen to make contact with a particular account, tell the painting contractor and his workmen that they can receive additional information from 3M if they desire, ahd besides the eight hundred number you put on your brochure since six years ago, hew else co you make an attempt to actually get the Particular resciratc me user? ;ther than the wavs ' uu cm en t to ve sate, wmen vculc oe r A. 5 7 p 10 o 158 the direct contact with the j>^Q^e^then I would, have to say what you have then is the instructional route rials that come with the respirator or what's printed cn the bc:c, literature that goes along with it, tn at in the har. ds of the employer himsal MJ1T. Q But not to the user? Dell, I do n't knew w!hether it would be. in that case where there is no direct contact, that's why we feel the best way is the employer, that he will pass that along to the user himself, Deli, what do you put cn the bon or on the mas!: itself so that you know it's going to get to the user ? Say that again. Do you put anything cn the mask itself that you knew is going to get to the user? On the mask itself? n ton me approval nutters, a-' veu triinK anycccy mat wears this mas,< is going knew what the approval number means? .v if he's told, I would assume, yes. ?hat amor oval number doesn't tell you what thi n o 13 I ol 159 "task can cr can's be used fd ir what air particular dust" i- can be safely used for, does it? If you knew the sequence of numbers, what they mean, yes, it will tell you that. If vcu're an industrial hvoienist cr vou have somebedv from GSHA talki ng so you or cr.e of your spail _ resentatives, they can explain it? A Vo c A But other than that, that's the only way? Only way for what? For you to understand what the number means. A Yes, you would have to have somebody tell you what it means who knows. Besides this number, do you put any ether information on the mask about what you can and can't use it for? Yell, j., :s and mists. That's English _ i_ c r . Does is have any limitation as to what kind of dusts or mists or what concentrations? .Again, if you knew the definitional terms of ill OSH approvals, you will knew what that means. :r IT I OSH approva. somewr.at tecnr.acai , O: .1 Lo. c "! r _ ii 1A _1 UO 1Q :c 160 Mot offhand, I weald s Do you think that tost sandblaster or contractor crews would know the technical language for TC-21C-13 2? MR. BLIZZARD: Don't answer that. You've already answered it. (By Mr. Crew) Have you done any surveys or studies at 3M to know whether or not the typical painting contractor or the typical sandblasting contractor knows what TC-21C-132 means? Mo, I con'a believe so. So based on that answer, you really don't knew what the folks cut there know that you're selling your mask to, do you? MR. BLIZZARD: Tell -- (3y Mr. Crow) Do you? MR. BLIZZARD: That is not what he sai d. MR. CRCM: That's exactly what I think he's going to say if you let him answer it; and to me, that's an importsno question. MR. BLIZZARD: That you always do is back up and say so what you're saying is, and that's not v;hat he said; sc n -1 o ia <i 1C1 vcu wan ask 'a^i^tion, fine, but if you wan: co back and r ehas^previous testimcr.y, dc it fairly. Q (Dy "r. Crew) Dc you knew what the typical sandblasting contractor or typical painting contractor knows, sir, in terms of the substance of ^C-DIC-13 2? A The contractors themselves? Q Yes. A They -would know from our sales representatives or people that contact them that that means that that is useful for pneumoconiosis, fibrosis and toxic dusts. Q We've been all through that. I know if your salespeople contact them or if they contact OSEA or "IOSH, they might find that cut. Ey question was dc you know - TU: T1j T1 f,n^ r'APir.L?/ T:'rO'"\Un * I*-c-a ^ - -what a mythical person, a typical painting contractor, might know. I don't knew that there is a typical painting contractor, and obviously you can't ask one -witness -what another person might knew; so I'm not going to let him answer questions about a typica. n 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 O T4 16 7 C7 '9 20 21 162 painting contract^s^r^what a typical painring contractor might C (By Mr. Crew) Mr. Scheel, you told me earlier that you felt like 3M had more knowledge than anybody else in terms of its use and misuse of its products. Do you remember that this morning? A Yes. Q A.side from what I mentioned a moment ago about your eight hundred number being in effect for the last six years, about your offer to let the salespeople talk to the painting contractor or sandblasting contractor, about the information you send to your suppliers, are there any other means that you use to get information directly down to the man who's lungs are at risk? A Yes, the instructional materials that are on the box b ecause many rimes the boxes of materials go right down to the end user. So th at's'one ether way? A Tn s'7 can read them, yes. r\ So if we can get some boxes from your 8710 series .tors going back to '72, we'd knew what you 7* ;U.* 7L--" n1 * i- H1 C.ifi'a"' .v 'That 7cu would home would cet down to the user? r - g 7 n0 a 10 -- 1 ') 77 L Yes. In s ome res;:irat S om a cr theni hav individuals. When they'r; pac kagec; ir.c:ivic do ce th a u f yes. n Whi ch re spir ar c r. you put an i nser i t-7 rl Cur gas and vapo 0 Why is i t you pu- and vapor re spir; respirator? Because of the packaging. It's impossible to stack dust and nisr respirators because of the size. Simply because of che size? Size and shape, yes. 'That type'of insert co you put in the gas and vapor respirators? A caraboar.; old- hat's vracced around it essentiallv ii;<e a Don. jes a t sav? 'That information dees i' :ce? The usace :n most or our srurr. r' 13 11 12 13 O lc O' O1 r. can11, h cw to Do you talk about warning people that this spray respirator can't be used for pneumoconiosis-producing dust, for instance? I'm trying to remember exactly because, you see, you can if you use pre-filters on them. They can be used that way. I'm trying to remember if it says that directly. I would say yes, it does, except in the case of using pre-filters. Do you warn them about using them in spray areas where the concentrations are so high that they . overwhelm the respirator? Oh, certainly. So you put that information in your spray respirator boxes? Yes. Has 3!! dene any studies or any evaluation of how much it would cost tc put, for instance, a small red paper or plastic tag on the G71G to give the same type of information to the ultimate user of this respirator in terms cf what you should not use this respirator for and in terms of what types of activities that might create such high concentrations cf a certain contaminant you should r2 A g 13 11 in 14 i* < V 155 use this s fray respirator was the questi on actually ualifier? rW\ Okay. Hav e you eve r cc ne any studies, surveys at 3Pi to find out h cw much it wo uld cost to put a small paper tag c n the rubber headband of the G710 to spe cif i cally ins truet and specifically warn about what thi s res pira u. ^ it ca n anc Cannot be u sed for? in. 0 . 1 c, I do n' t kn ow i f that has ever ha ppene1d. I don' t know. If you di d that, wo uld you agree with me, K r. Scheel , that you W 0 uld have a very high degree of probability of getting that information directly to the man who puts the respirator on his face? I would agree it would be in proximity to him. I don't know that he would read it. Bur at least you'd be giving him a chance to read it, wouidn't you? It would be the same chance ha has to get the material new by being told. By his emplcyer? By his employer, reading our literature, reading the stuff that's on the box. r7hen the issue .he n 4 6 c 1C '1 13 1* 166 kind of death we've talked about, whether or net it's made a study of how much it would cost to do so, ever talked about doing so regardless of the cost and simply addinc that to the purchase ;r i r* n rvo-ff the product? ho, I don't think so. At least not that I know of. r\ Do you put any tags on any of your respiratory equipment? Mo, r.ct tags, no. n Well, when you said no, not tags, no, do you use any kind of attachment or hang-on device that instructs or warns? No, not an attach or hang-on device, no. n Do you put any tags or attach devices of a similar type on any 3M products that you're aware of that are used for any purpose? You mean outside of cur division? Yes. ' I have no idea. I don't knew. Before you became a member of OHS?, cid you know what TC-21C-132 meant? Mo. Did you knew there were three different categories of dust wa talked about earlier? oo O 1Q 11 i ** C 1 *7 1^ 7 7A * 1" The knowledge that the users would have of that? Yes. Have you done any surveys? Have you gotten back information cards? Have you done anything at all to try to determine how much knowledge the people that use your respiratory equipment have so you would know how much information you need to give them and how much you don't have to give them? Mo, we haven't dene that specifically. So wouldn't you agree with me, sir, that a person -- you've been involved in the marketing aspect of these respiratory pieces of equipment, haven't vou? ''at crsctilv, Zn Tscl'inl :al Services. Yell, Technical Services has to coordinate between people. Ye've been VQ c 153 that whan you're selling a product to somebody wh cannot be used for, that you have to give that person mere information than you would somebody who's an industrial hygienist? Does 3M recognise that as a principle of its marketing operation? That you would have to give -- -- that person who's totally ignorant of what it 1G can or can't be used for more information than you 11 would have to give an industrial hygienist? 12 I don't really think so, I think unless you 13 assume the industrial hygienist already knew about 14 cur product, but then he'd have the same 15 informati on available t L Z user, e give ail info 17 SCSCU3. tc for people to IS CCS S dTiC does nor do. 1 5 C In c o n a bottom line ba 2C you give on these masks 9 ' slow and ultimately fat: . -- on these mas ks? MR. 3112 SARD: He's told you over the past half hour what information he's given, and now you're saying the only - 3 4 c p 7 3 g 10 11 12 13 14 15 01 \/ 15 9 thing he gives is what' s e mask. (By Mr. Crow) Do you have a picture of the bcxs'"`^ you send the 8710 cut in 7 A It might be in that pile . I don't know. I don't have one personally with me right now. Q Has your box changed any since 1972, the werding on the bo --p A I don't k new since f72. Since '76, it's basically been the same. Can you tell me what it does say on the 8710 bo: in '75? HR. BLIZZARD: If you're going to hold him to -- le: t m.e put it th i s way: I' m not going to let him cues s wh at's on the box. There's p lot of St uf f on the box, anc I'm net goi ng to let him guess what ' s t here. "P. COFFEY: Ca n we atta ch a copy of a 2 box as an exhibit? '7 ^ BLIZZARD : If it's h er e. M73 COFFEY: It ' s not he r s That's why I sa id if we can get one, can we do it? HR. CP.017: Let me clear this up. (By !:r Crew) You've been desianated as a n 13 14 7C r 170 A Q Can you tell me anything about what's on the bon for the 871C? A Certainly there's fitting instructions. n '/That else? Mannings where the respirator should not be used. Can you remember the substance of any of those warnings if not the enact wording of them? Typically not to be used in an oxygen-deficient environment and currently do not use higher than 10 times the threshold value of whatever the substance is they're dealing with; and then there's warnings about how you should know when the respirator should be disposed, whether you can taste or smell contaminant coming through, 'whether there's mechanical damage to the respirator, things like than. That's what's on it. You said'currently there's an item that says do not use higher chan 10 TLV of whatever it is this mask is to protecc against. That is currently? Today, now. (Bv :;r. Crew) BLIZZARD; Today. .11, you didn't get a chance tc r . o Q 1o 0 7d 15 16 _7_ 1/ 13 19 ~A 171 look at a bo:- todav before we starce did you? A :io, I didn't ock at a bo:-: today. ?7hen did 3M start putting the 10 times TLV warning on the bones of the 7 510? 7610? You said 7510. la's 8710. I'm sorry/. rAi Four years aco maybe. Four or five years back. r\ Before that warning was put on the bon, did 3M make an attempt in any of its literature that accompanied these masks, either on the bon or in inserts, to warn that these masks should not be used in concentrations of a contaminated atmosphere of above 10 TLV? A Before? Four years ago. - A Before four years age, did we do that? 0 A Me, because it wasn't allowed to be used in 10 TLV at that time. It was limited to five. Hell, did you warn four years ago not to use them more than five TLV? I don't believe it was specif cally or. the ben. r.ow iCuLiu on c.-fe tnar went w i th specifically warns that although this mask is designed to protect against pneumoconiosis and 0 fibrosis-producin c dus_s, there was a li.mit to the / concentration of the contaminant in the ai r thi G mask would protec t against? n A What's the cuesti on enactly? 10 x. Why did you start doing that? g g * I honestly can't tell you exactly why cther the n -2 just to update th e knowledge that we're trying to 13 give to the consuter of our products. 14 w Who made the deci sion to do it? 1 5 ' A I don't know who made the actual decision to do --i u that. *r 7 ;-\ Well, you were in OHS? at that time? 1 oo % 4.1. Sure. Yes. ' 9 Q Somebody In OHS? :made that decision at that tim e? no j *. ui course. Who 'would have ce en the person in the pc i wl cn to O o make that decisic r. even if you right new don t 4L-. -t .j know for sure whc actually made the deci sion 0 2 4 It would probably be a group of people a ct ua liy in - = truth. It would 'ce a group of people ba sec cn our p 10 11 1 -J 15 i_5 1 *> 12 l0 2** p pP p/ /hat you're trying to? Yes, at any one point in time what are we trying to project to the customer, which is always the most adequate warnings we can come up with. I'll come back to adequate warnings in a second, but can you give me the names of some of the people who would have formed this group who finally came up and said, "Hell, we need to include a contaminant concentration level for the atmosphere here so they'll know they can't use it in more than five ?LV," who came up with that? 'I?.. BLIZZARD: That assumes testimcr.y that 'wasn't given. He never said anybody did that. c (By Mr. C r o v/) Mho was it in the group that part icipated in the change of the warning? I do n't know. You asked me to speculate on how than might have happened. I said it probably wc ul d have been a group, but I don't knew that for sure . It wasn' I '**4. WV< W*1 (X 1 . r\ I'm r.cc comm uni caring with you very well right icw. It's my fade C* -- * k VGU n 10 12 b 17 14 16 Yes. And you've :hat that was the first time to your knowledge that 3" ever identified as a problem to the user of the mask using the mask in an atmosphere that was contaminated above 10 TLV? A Mo, I didn't say we identified it as a problem. I said we just decided as an ongoing forum to put out as much information as we can, and that's what we decided to do. Q 'Then you say we, now we're back to I don't know who. I'd like to depose whoever made that decision. If it's a group of people, give me their names. A I don't even knew. I was speculating with you it was a group of people. I guess I don't know who made the decision, so I'm not going to guess and give you names cf people I'm not sure will be the case. r^yf. net me rephrase tne question. ihatever reason you don't knew the name of the person who made uhe decision or the names of the persons who made decision, can you give me the names of likelv c *3 4 s 6 7 8 1Q H 12 ) 13 14 15 16 17 J7 O --7 n 20 21 ^ ''i 23 24 25 guessing. Me doesn't know, Carl. i-IP.. CRC7J: Jell, I'm asking a question that can lead to the discovery of admissible evidence, and you know that; and the guy is sitting here, and all I've heard is I don't know who did this and I don't know who did that. I've got one name today after several hours, and I'm net trying to be horsy, but I want to knew the names of people who either would have been good candidates to be responsible for changing the warnings or who would be in the chain of command and who would have consequently had to approve a change of warning. That's all I'm asking him for; and if it turns cut he gives me five 'names and only one of them counts. tn a t's rin e, cut r want s cme c h i n g besides what I gcc, which is nothing right now. UR. BLIZZARD: Uell, I don't know that -- we've been here for a long time. Let me cur it that ww aavv. If veu know 10 11 12 13 O 17 7G 19 20 21 22 c3 A 176 likely candidates, you ca7s~^iwer the question. There's only one person I know of that I can imagine that would know, and that would be our own in-house legal counsel. (By Hr. Crow) And who is that? Cel son Schmidt. Where is he at? Nelson Schmidt? St. Paul. Is he involved somehow in the marketing end of instructions and warnings of the OHS?? He looks at them and approves them, yes. Okay. How, I'm sorry, I didn't mean to be sharp a moment ago, but I needed somewhere to start. Anybody else within the actual CHS? group who traditionally four years ago in that time frame would have most proba the change in the wer A In would have been wh coordinator wc uld hav age, and I don't know7 same person it is tod HR. B3LIZ3ARD: Do you know who it is today? rTrcr Z VI zr , <= fellew named --i nu 12 13 C 14 'n 177 'ohn Cain, (Bv Hr. Crow) he in the OHSP four years acol Yes, he was a salesman then. He's in charge actually cf marketing within that group now? Me, no, he's marketing coordinator. He just has dust respirators as his responsibility. He doesn't do the marketing for the whole division. Including the S710? That's right. Vait a minute. I take that back. That's been changed. A brand-new guy's come in in the last few months. He used to do it. Cain used to dc it. There's another fellow that does it now. MR. COFFEY: Are we saying Cain as in C-a-i-n? THE WITHESS: Yes. HR. COFFEY: As in J. E. Cain? ' THE WITHESS : Yes. (Ey Hr. Crow) I'm going to ask this question again to avoid going back through the court reporter's notes oecause I don't think you answered this question when I asked it. Prior to four years ago when you put the TLV limitation on she bones, did vou provide information about a TLV r- 10 11 O J_ 3 13 3A O in a catalog^ r v'T7' r^h n:sr wav whatsoever before fouj years ago, whether to a supplier, an employer or an employee? A I don't think so. I'm not certain. Q See, now, once again, I need to ask you if not you, the only person that I have contact with at 3f!, who would I gc to in 3M to try to find out for s ur e? A Offhand I would say what you would do is just come up with some of the copies of the literature sheets from the coxes from six years ago, I'd say. It's either there or it isn't. That would make it very certain. I don't remember it being there. u kay. I don't, either, but I want to know the name of someooay, it you weren't sure, someooay around in the legal department or wherever that's been around long enough that we could get a for s ur e an swe r. I would suspect they'd be trying to remember just the same as me and tell you the same thing, lock U'iiC ' "_ C. x i V--' :u'd knew for certain. If there was no a c c...u. :: J -- j_ 'w * x t_ information in any term set or- 30---- 11 *X 173 HR. BLIZZARD: I thii^he MR. CP.CTJ: Let me finish mv cuestica. MR. BLIZZARD: All right. Hell, ms taming aoouc wricten mace rial. From the way he's answered the question, s what he's told you, and now you're chancing it to any information in any form (By Mr. Crow) Okay. He'll try it again. Before four years ago when you started printing 10 TLV maximum on your boxes, did you disseminate any information to suppliers, employers, employees or users of your 710 that there would be a maximum permissible concentration of the contaminated atmosphere that they could use the mask in if not in written form then in some ether form? Yes, in training, when you're training the people. you tell them that as :he us ace conditions or "hen people? res, un-nun. .cave veu ever tr p r.y people, any users of the mask? :ure. Yes, I he - n t f. 8 9 10 11 12 13 u r ' 14 15 15 17 130 - Pain ting contractors, " c . I don't thin!; thos most ly in my case. For the 8710 and the 9O 01 O'? Yes, cl us all the cthe too. r Gave you ever gone out tn a c has only four emp! on h ow to use the 8710 large chemical companies? MR. BLIZZARD: Why are we talking about these small companies? I think Mr. Gray worked for Smith Industries, and Mr. Eaton was working for somebody like Todd Shipyards. This deposition is not about anybody working for small painting contractors. (By hr. Crow) Besides the large chemical turers, s v__ ou eve: riec to tram any ether emolcvees my other businesses? *s u)srsoncHiy uns :nes I workJ\ tr s-i ^ . i. Besides what you chink would happen if a 2M salesperson had personal contact with the moievees of semebedv who purchased their 181 1 respiratory equipment, before four y^qps^aco, 2 you disseminate information to anybody, either 3 their suppliers, the employee and employer in oral A z or written form that there was a concentration of 5 contaminated air limit that this mask should be r 1 I think that's what I just tolc you. In training we would do that, yes. O I said besides the direct contact or communication . nu you might have on occasion with an employer or the i employees -- 2 Uh-huh. . 3 C -- was that information -disseminated in any way .1 oral or written before four years ago? 5 n VO, I don't think so. r\ Okay. Now, earli er I you if -- not if -- I asked you why you star c on the bones, and you 9 5 to 10 TLV, bur my real question is: Did something happen four years ago, five years ago that made 3N realise that people were by ignorance wearing the 8710 in atmospheres way above 10 TLV thinking that it would protect them and, i consequently, saw the need for this additional warning? n 2n 1 \^J 1 12 13 o 1 1c 16 * n *: q -- c. r. 132 A No. 0 Okay. Mot to your knowledgeanyway? A Categorically, no. Q You are telling me categorically you know that's net why it was put on there? A Ye s. Q Then you must know categorically expressly why it was cut on there. A I told unlike do was out to change there. let pe box. 0 well , I know y from 5 to 10, bu ai dr. put it on that 's the rea so. with you, but -- MR. 3LIZZARD: Nell, it sounds like it to me. (By Mr. Crew) -- s veur reason? That's the reason. 1 n2 o 7 o a 10 12 13 14 15 16 17 *1 oo 19 _j 183 MR. BLIZZARD: What?--71^thnk^he^' s tele yen the reason, but I'm not sure what you just sail there while I was making my objection. (3y Mr. Crow) When the 8710 was developed and you started marketing it in '72, in terms of what 3M understood internally within the OHS?, what was the maximum permissible multiple of TLV that the mask could safely be worn in? In terms of what? What OHS? thought? Yes. How, stop with me for a moment. We've talked about when you warned about there being a limitation on TLV? . A Yes. Q And why? A Yes. Q And if my calculations are correct, we're talking abourn somewhere around 1980 or '81; is that correct? The product came cut eight years earlier? Ye s. What was the internal under standing within the CHS? group as to what maximum multiple of TLV the 371C should or could be used in? n 10 11 12 13 U 14 15 16 17 id. *.R. BLIZZARD: Now, 184 >skmg ror -- m asking for the internal understanding over an 8-year period, you're asking for him to crawl into the minds of a large number of people. MR. COFFEY: If he doesn't know, Ed, he doesn't knew. MR. CROW: Well, I'll tell you why I'm asking the question. (By Mr. Crow) And I'll tell you why I'm asking the question. MR. BLIZZARD: Well, you don't have to tell me why you're asking the question. Just ask the question. r. (By Mr. Crow) I want to know what maximum or multiple TLV of free silica your design group or testing group or marketing group in 1272 knew this mask could or should be used in? In 1972, I couldn't tell you because I don't know7 those people. r Are there any written memoranda, documents of any kind which discuss or reflect an understanding within the OHS? group on that issue? I don't knew if "here are or net. Well, when you came on beard in 127S, what was one 1 n2 4 6 7 p Q 10 11 _ 7-- *J? 7i 15 7n * 185 currant wisdom? You know how phy abcuc current wisdom, and the wisdom chances? A Q That's true at 3fi, isn't it, as technology advances, your ideas about how you do things change, don't they? A Certainly. Q And that's one of the reasons you want to keep up with stuff? A Yes. g In 1975, four years before you made any dissemination, other than your oral sales talks as you've mentioned to me earlier of the fact that this mask had a maximum multiple TLV or usage in a contaminated atmosphere with a maximum multiple TLV, what was your understanding in '75 about that? A nen re, my understanding of that, after _ i ec ! of course, naturally, was that we consiuerec it unfair that a half mask respirator like chat was limited to a multiple of five. I7e always cc =a oe useruJ :en li war w a; oe< .use vou iur.c out from OHS? '7; you ana no before somebccy r 1 -3 o 14 15 ^c 17 i7 20 21 22 22 24 Sura, yes. And you -ace no written attempt tc warn anybody who bought this mask or used it for four years? Me written attempt, I guess that's right. It was not on cur bones. And co you know whether or not in '75 was the day that the skies parted at 3M and the sun shown brightly and everybody in the OHS? Division realised that people who bought this mask shouldn't be usinc it in contaminated atmospheres above 10 TLV in terms of free silica? * You want to say that again o Yes, I wi say it again. Do you know whe ther or not 197 5 wa s the year the skies parted and the sun sh own b ri ,-U, iL. ly rhreugh the skies radia ting down on :he CHS? group and you suddenly cot the knowledge than this particular mask, the 37 10, should not used in contaminanec atmospheres of free silica dust where the ccr.cen trations of the dust were above 10 CLV? A ^.o, there v/as ncunang magic about 1 27 S. :u know, that knowledge was in th< 1 ""S 3 f. 5 r n C 0 1C 11 1O o 13 i& 15 io o1 187 po ssession of 31' a, 5 early as 1972, it p A As far as I knew, xL- u.i at would be so, yes. r\ So from the time you introduced the 8710 i n 197 2 to 19Cl or whenev er you warned of the CO neentratiens th e m ask could s a r el y be us ed in. VO u never tried i n a ny written form to war n, did yc u? A To my personal kn owl edge, no. 0 Do you know hew m any masks you sold of 3710' 3 be-tween 1972 and ' 80 or '81 whe n yo u final iy did warn of that limitation? A ITo, I have no idea. 0 Do you recognize as a project engineer, as a -- what did you call yourself, a technical -- A In what time frame? 0 OHSP, a technical product development engineer? A I was a product development manager. I was never a product development engineer. 0 Okay. Did you recognize that if people through ignorance wore the 8710 in atmospheres of free silica that were 10C times TLV 'without the knowledge that 3'! had that there was a limitation on the contamir.aced atnoschere, they could A )ic _ nav; nwiecc UUUi C-. J-- 'J--- V1 -- *' would le true? Cj*' X 1 C. 1T c, 180 -- Yes. After coming to OHSP, I wcul* 'ell, I know you didn't know about free s ilica, about TLV di cn 11 know abc ut TLV' s . No, not before. Didn't know about any of that stuff that's _ _ technical until you came to OHSP. I think we kind of figured that out. Yes . You were in tapes before that? That's right. But after you got to OKS?, was it cocmcn knowledge within CilSP as best you could determine that if a person like Lesley Gray or Mr. Eaton wore an S710 in a contaminated atmosphere of free silica where the TLV was, for instance, 100 or higher, they would not have the protection from the 8710 and could contract a disease called silicosis? BLIZZARD: Do you understand that Icng-wincec question because I don't? You knew, Carl, if you're going to demand the right to ask as many cuesccons a s you want, I wish you'd mak; r and not go over the sane n V 6 -7 a IC11 12 O 13 14 15 n 139 sturf again and again. MR. CRCTJ: I'm net going over tf same snuff, and he's looking at me like he deesn'e understand the question. r<td qr T7 And so am I rh I was going to answer it in terms of yes, be common kn owiecce amongst us in OHS? th exposed to 100 times TLV of free silica using the S710, that that would be a misapplication of the product, yes, absolutely. Whether or not they would necessarily contract silicosis, we don't know. We're net: doctors, so we couldn't tell you that; but we would certainly say it's a misapplication of the product, that you shouldn't do that. (3y Mr. Crow) In terms of misapplication of the products, if veu didn't know what people knew about using your products because you never attempted to survey your user population, hew would you know hew to make sure -- how would you even make an attempt to see that your respirators were not misused in some way out of sheer ignorance? ttemnt to do that? A Again, through our sales force, in tal 190 2 many people as we could, through cur literature, the best information we could put our. & o do you have any -- I think you told me earlier that you don't have any information about what TLV 6 levels are of free silica around sandblasting 7 operations? Q A Not in my personal memory, I don't. 9 Q Do you know if 3K's ever done any studies of that? 10 A No, I don't know if we have or not. 11 Q Before you good folks at 3H advertised this 8710 12 could be used around sandblasting operations, why 13 didn't you attempt to make any effort to find out 14 what the TLV levels were around sandblasting 15 operations when you in the OHS? knew that that 16 mask would not provide protection in contaminated 17 atmospheres above 10 TLV? A The reason we don't do that is because it is the 19 employer who must determine the proper usage of OP the respirator he gives to his employee; 21 therefore, he has rc measure that in the first place. If he doesn't knew, he has to assume the worst case; and if that's the case, he wouldn't use an 3710. He would use an air-fed hood. n Veil, vou expressly advertised the 2710 to be used 1G 11 12 i ^ 13 14 15 16 i7 ic ln 22 2.2 are yea referring to? HR. CROW: You know the advertisement I'm referring to. It's all in that material he had. HR. 3LIZZARD: Show it to him. THE WITHESS: I'm not sure of the one right offhand. HR. ELIZ SARD: Well -- HR. CROW: We'll get to it in a minute. HR. BLIZZARD: Let's get to it now. HR. CROW: If you want to ask quest ions, why don't you ask questions? HR. BLIZZARD: Well, you may net if we st *-- * i v7 ^ ^ Hr ^ ) 'You said the reason why 2H didn't need to put any information in the advertising lug - i. c ciu ior :e S71G about the maximum permissible nui atmospheres is i in cun rcr mnseir: ARD :j3 U Li Li *Va Don't a a sw e r the n 10 11 12 13 L_ 1 14 15 i O -J y cuesoicn. 192 (By ::r. Crow) la that what you told me? . .i\ * r'if_Ti X 'u7L7i i^iin\ n- . niJ nU 4r* f j<-- d= ini <-*sV? t: Lr LUC^ question. .at me ask you again. !e said what he (By Mr. Crow) Why did you not warn if you advertise specifically for sandblasting operations? MR. BLIZZARD: Don't answer that cuesi (By Mr. Crow) Do you have any idea of the range -- MR. CRC?I: Certify that question. (By Mr. Crow) Do you have any idea of the range of TLV's in sandblasting operations for somebody who might be standing 100 feet away to somebody standing 50 fees away to somebody actually holding on to the blase hose? Sure. It could be anything from sere to 100 mr v' = ur.ew on a; + - - 9 Row arc vou unev on an? - -> < G'"I o -1L no 11 12 O 13 15 *11 .sn~ 17 7 ^ C> 21 22 \ .-i 22 -j "7 T 'V ?rcm reading abouc it i r That literature taught cones ntr a tions? A I suspect if I had to r like the industrial hyg like that. ' n Did you read about that I don't remember a stud n But out of some journal read -- is that right? A *7e have them there at 3 - But you didn't go down of your own pocket, did ri Mo. nt Those are reference mati you could do veur job b< r\ Sure. /*> Sc you knew that sandbl; levels can change drama- depending on wind ccndi' hose has been on, what': it's the inside of a tai hew far away a person i; operation, don't you, M; -\ rr 193 n 10 that for certain. Veil, the question I just asked you involves a very commcn-sensical observation, in fact, doesn't it? You don't have to have a chemical engineering degree to know there's going to be a wide variation of TLV levels in sandblasting operations, right? If one assumes you knew what a TLV is, nc, I don't think it would take a very technical degree to knew there would be a wide variation in the TLV levels. Vhile your group was deciding how to market the 710, part of the group's attention would have been focused on what to tell people it could be uss d -Per, ri.crh.d? C VJ f -1 Vq p ice's attention focused on what to tell people the S710 could not be used for as you were putting that advertising material together sc than '-cu would not either intentionally or inadvertently mislead the ultimata purchaser or user of your 710? 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 o 1L _i .cJ 16 17 uu TL 195 ;on't knov.7. -.here when tn. Las ceir.c done in 1972. From the time you get into the CUSP in 1976, did you participate in any of the marketing -- what would you call them -- marketing decisions made about the advertising for the 8710? Yes. was any time spent in the marketing decision conferences on the 0710 when you were talking about what to put in the sales literature, was there any time spent about what net to put in so as to mislead? Yes, we would -- YR. BL12SARD: I don't understand that question. When you say what was discussed about not putting in so as to mislead, that's a dangling phrase, and I'm net sure what it's there to modify. YR. CRC7J: 77 ell, we know that the S710 was advertised in use around sandblasting. YR. BLIZZARD: Yell, that's why I v/anted you to shew him this advertisement you've been talking about. CRCV7: But he knows this for a (O r* 3 c for is ro make sure you treat the witness fairly and don't decide what he knows based upon what you see in his 7 ? eyes. If you've got an advertisement you're referring to, show it to him; 1 i. otherwise, I'm not going to let him i c answer you about it. (By Br. Crow) 'fell, -without seeing an advertisement, Br . Scr.ee 1, because of your position and your appointment here today as the ' a designee,'do you know- whether or not 3B ever ^ r. advertised the C71Q to be used around sandblasting operations? Yes, in generalities, it was, yes. I assume that that advertising statement that this mask can be used around sandblasting operations, I assume that that was not the result of a monkey V, a 3 9 10 11 12 13 '1 'A I^ 17 19 A No. Q That was aconsciousintentional marketing decision by 3I-I Company, wasn't it? A To be used arcane sandblasting, yes, because it can be. 1 I'm talking abcut the phrase. A Yes. Q Puttingthat in thesales literature was a conscious intentional act? YR. BLIZZARD: That phrase? 0 (By ::r. Crow) Yell, putting in language to the effect that the mask can be used around sandblasting, chat was intentional. That wasn't h.n dccidsnt? * ho, it wasn't an accide nt , no. 0 . Now, if you knew at the time that tha t information was inserted in the sal oc 1iteratur e that a part of, a substances! part of or a small part of sandblasting operations have such high TLV contaminated atmospheres, was there any discussion within your marksming group about somehow limiting cr in some other wav informing people who might purchase this product specifically for use arcund O - 2 n C 5 10 ^ i 11 13 1d 16 ", g *n -i o A oZ _0 tn 198 sandbiasring areas that there waoS<yae 1 imitations on its use in sandblasting areas? Tas any spent in those marketing meetings talking about well, maybe we shouldn't say that unless we put in a qualifier and explain there's some limitations here because sene people might not understand? 17as there any discussion along those lines? A I don't know because that first 8710 to my knowledge has always been advertised as being useful around sandblasting, so that's before I got there, sc I don't know if that kind of discussion took place in those days. 0 Okay. So your answer is I don't know? A That's right. 0 The same sort cf question I've been asking you all day, cc you know either who it was specifically or who good candidates would be in terns of the people who would have put that language in the sales brochures in the beginning? T - i` > a T * T7ja n - ^^ -y i: s 1 ^ r3 ft T dp r- 1 f- 1' v'\ p,W those people, so I can't answer that. I don't knew who they are. 0 Is there a way,T for instance, to gc back through the documents, memorandums or whatever at 311 to track bac!; to the time when the marketing group r- A If they exist, I suppose so, yes. Q And as far as you knew, that would be the only '/ay ? A That would be the only way I'd knew to find it, yes. 10 Q You said to me awhile ago that you didn't consider 7 7 that advertisement misleading because the 8710 i -> could, in fact, be used around sandblasting 7 "5. operations? A That's correct. Q To some degree? Depending on circumstances, yes, it can be. Tew, all I've ever seen is sort of the general statement that it can be used around sandblasting operations. Thar, base; ;n your knowledge of whao n you know from working inside of CHS?, what - 7 conditions are right for use of the 3710? That conditions are right for it? Yes. Then can you use it around sandblasting operations, under what conditions, under what circumstancs s? CO O G r. You car. sa^ it in a necativs w CL / Li 200 Never can it be used when you're at the sandblaster itself. That's not allowed in the first place, sc the only people that could use the 8710, then, is people peripheral to the sandblaster itself, pet tender, maintenance people, even supervision people 'walking in the area, but they would have to -- if someone is there all the time, like a pot tender, for him to be able to use the 8710, there would have to be some knowledge of whether or not the concentration of silica he's being exposed to is less than ten times the threshold limit value cf the particular level of sand they're using because that will vary and chance; and if that's been measured and shown to be the case, then fine. If not, if it hasn't been measured, then, in fact, what we would recommend is that you assume the hazard is unknown; and therefore, you use one that you know will cover it, -which in this case for a pot tender 'would be an air-fed hoed of seme sort. 'Jell, veu told me awhile ago that you absolutely earner use tne 7 1 n watts veu re ci; inc? laat is not the ferm of orctect; mc. is u;dncsC3c n '? 1 "5 _/ 1O 201 t-7 jnci ? OSKA. That precedes the 371C. It's always been that way. That about the Bureau cf Tines? :culdn't tell vou about the Bureau of Tines. Aside from what NIOSH or OSHA says you ought to do -- we kind of went through this before on a different issue -- did 3K have the knowledge in '72 that TLV levels around the actual sandblaster would be so high that the 0710 would not provide adequate protection to the sandblaster in terms of resoiratorv Protection? A I would say I would almost be certain they did for the reason tha t they would know based on the kind of job we h av e pc do, they would know what the rules and r ecu laticr.s were under OSHA; and I ca n ' t i m c. c i n ci ny one n c t. k n o w L n c if you read the endblasting because it tells you why. Ip says because it will probably exceed 10 TLV's; so yes, I would have to say yes, they did know that. So logically, then, if some sandblaster out of ignorance used she 3710 because he hadn't read the C o i3 _/ 31 r" y OSHA regs cr I'XOSH regs but only Ft 202 the chat person very well could contract silicosis? Like I said, I answered that before and said essentially the same thing. That's a misapplication of the product. I don't know for sure he would contract silicosis, not being a doctor. It depends on how long he's exposed, what's going on. Q That frankly sounds like a pat answer to me. A It's not a pat answer. If you did this for an hour, it probably wouldn't matter. MR. BLIZZARD: Don't argue with the witness. Ask him questions. (By Mr. Crow) it the position of the OHSP and you as a designee for 2M Corporation that if sonebodv has contracted silicosis from the use of t by definition has to be a a result of a misuse or misapplication of your or c cu cts ? If they've contracted silicosis and they were usinc cur produce? Yes. I guess in's your position categorically that their disease must by definition be the result or a misuse of vour oroduct? o 10 u nc 1s 2C 21 22 O -5 used only 3M products and contracted silicosis would be - MR. GROM: 'To, no, no. MR. BLIZZARD: They've used other people's products; and some of them, I think Mr. Gray for a period of time didn't: wear anybody's protective devices, didn't wear any protective devices. (By Mr. Crow) See, I'm learning more about Mr. Gray's case as we co along. Does 3M recognize in any way, Mr. Scheel, that there have been cases where sandblasters or people around sandblasters have contracted silicosis even r esp iratory equipment like the A If y ou're asking me whether or chat someone who during the to were exposed to silica were we stil 1 gcc silicosis, we don't all thet tha t's ever happene d. _ rr-.c-- b 3M ever been sued before a esult of th< i r2 -> s o 3 Q 10 'I 13 i& _o ' j-i " -i J. J c 3710 or S50C? A Yes. 0 How "any tines? A I don't knew the total number. 0 Do you kncv; who would have that information? A Yes, cur legal counsel would, obviously. O So if I understood your last answer, you think it's impossible for someone who wore the 2710 to have contracted silicosis in and around sandblasting operations? A I didn't say it was impossible. You asked me if we recognised the fact, and I said no, we don't recognise the fact that that's ever occurred. Q Maybe you and I are squabbling over semantics. ?Jhen I say recc gnise, I con1 t necessarily mean admit, but have you had any internal discussions Wj. w,, i -- - A OHS ? -- I'm not talki ng about with your 1 av/er -- wher e you reccgnis ed or somebody pointed out there~ seems to be some folks getting silicosis even though obey're wearing the 3710? Dever. never. As long as it's being used correctly, obviously. Jell, I'm talking about period. H o. Have you recognised that there have been any 10 11 12 o 13 ?n L/ people in tr ever worn th siliccsis? A Let me understand your question correctly. People who actually have silicosis anc wore an 8710 even though just once, you're asking me if I know that's true? Q Have you received information either in the way of complaints or lawsuits that lets you know there are people that have silicosis that wore the 8710 thinking it would protect them? A That is certainly true that we have received lav/suits of people with silicosis that say they have worn the 8710 some unknown number of times. Q And is it the position of 3H that their having silicosis along with their allegation they were the 8710, is it the position of 3II that they must have necessarily misused the 8710? . BLIZZARD: Tell, ask me about the position of BIT. Ask him about facts and opinions. ? j Crow) Tell, under what circumstances _ :cn silicosis while wearing the 8710? TP. STAHL: Ha's not a medical O O 1 n. ]_2 12 13 1A 15 17 -Q 'q 2G5 GO Ct T t know. As lone as one understands th threshold Unit concept, I would say the only way that could possibly be is a very prolonged time improperly wearing the C710 and very high concentrations of silica. 0 (By hr. Crow7) Ye have two things, actually three because the first part was a qualifier. They could have been wearing the 3710 in too high TLV . concentrations; is that right? A Yes. a They could have improperly been wearing it? A That's right. nbd They didn't fit it right, that's a possibility? A Yes. 0 .And one third one was that -- well, the third one is really about the same as the first one. They were just in super high concentrations of free silica and didn't realize it or didn't know7 what was going c.n? A That's certainly possible, yes. 0 Can you think of any ether possibilities hew someone would end up diagnosed as having silicosis wish a history of wearing the 871C? A Yet offhand, no. r 'To, I do n't. From any of the literature inside of CHS?, can you tell me the distribution of particle size from sandblasting operations; and by that, I mean that isn't it true that most of the particles that come cut of the sandblasting operations, most of the sand particles that are created by the fracturing process of the sand striking a hard object at high speed, most cf th ose parti cles ar e very small in size, either . 5 n icrcns or less 7 ' They're cert airily --J ii Ju--.iU-3 ^1- range I don't know that most of C** c... are less than half micron, but in that rang a- / y - 3 . So veu don't knev; if mosm of th em are in that range or net? That really v;as your answer? To, there'would be a distribution of them. Then you say most, than makes it sound like almost all. There would be a distribution. I don't knew if chat's true, but they're certainly down in that range. Did the Eureau of Fines have an approval for the 3710 mo be used around sandblasting operations? r 13 c 14 i- O pneumo conic sis or fibrosis-producing dusts? I said I'm only familiar with the MIOSH ones, so I don't know. Did 3M Corporation at any time since the introduction of the 8710 attempt to thwart a stricter regulation of what the 8710 could be used in, what type of conditions or atmospheres it could be used in to your knowledge? Say that again. Did we try to do what? Did you try to thwart or stop any attempt by the ISEI1 to restrict the use of the 8710? ISEM? Yes. Mo. You're not familiar with them? Me. Are you talking about the ISDA? Mhat is the ISCA? A I3SA. Mhat is that? The Industrial Safety Equipment Association. Did the Industrial Safety Equipment Association ever 1 r\ 2 / o 9 in 2- 2J 11 12 l 13 id _o '7 'o 19 ~ r\ Restrict crout of rescc ndi = r Die the ISEA in the history cf the S71D ever to your knowledge suggest that 3" restrict the advertised uses cf the 37 IQ in any way? Advertised uses? Met that I know of, no. 0 How about applications where they were advertised or not? A Yes, 7 believe so. I think they were something to do -- yes, just recently. Q What was the suggestion of the ISEA? A I think it had to do with maximum use concentrations of asbestos, I believe it was. n Basically did they feel like your 8710 would not perform satisfactorily in high concentrations cf asbestos? I don't know about high concentrations. Let me ask you: What concentration levels were they worried about? I'm net exactly sure. I think it was something to do with the face of whether it should be used up to 1C DLV's. Cn the ocher hand, I think the thing w spirator s, not US t r 11 io 13 O 1A 1 f. aisposa-- V *] O 210 And did 3H threaten to withdrav/ from the IS2 unless they withdrew those suggestions? I don't knew if they withdrew from it. who withdrew? Don 'v7ilir.es would know that. nr* r J - Can you spell that for me? THE WITNESS: W-i-l-m-e-s. G (3y Mr. Crow) Is he still alive? A Sure, yes. mw, Still work for 311 ? Yes. n Do you have a representative at 3f! who normally testifies before NIOSH and OSKA committees on respiratory equipment? There is -- yes, dimes and I have both done than. Dow often have you nesnified before NIOSH and OSHA committees for 3H on respirator'/ ecuiome.ot? Yes. Twice nnan I recall. ;d the orher gentleman, do you have any idea hov '.a nv t ime s ? -- -v yj 1 , semethinc like that. o Tn 1d IS 17 i9 7 211 Do yea happen to have excerpts, t7r<s4sxcerpts, of the testimony you gav before those committee? available at your office; or would I need to write specific committees and ask for the excerpts of the testimony you two gentlemen have given for 311? I would think it would be there, the testimony. I think it v/ould be in our files. The testimony would be in our files because it's public record and government documents. Anybody else at 3M that testified in OSHA or NIOSH proceedings for respiratory equipment? T'7ilmes was the main oerson to do that sort of thing and myself. Even back to '12? ' That, I couldn't tell you. I wasn't there, and I don't know. . I'm aoinc to shift cear on vou and talk about this 9910. A 0 x ci y . C This is a different respirator from the 8710, A Different in construction, yes. C Different in purpose or use? A Do, it has the same purpose and use and limitations as the 8710 does. r> 12 1? t. v, n Is it "ere effic It's essentially Thy did 3.'! feel the need to design, manufacture, market the 9910 if there's no difference in the utility between it and the 3710? There's a difference in utility in the mechanical features of it, not in filtration efficiency. In terms of a coke even, which that was designed for, it's very hot in. a coke oven; and an 8710 will lose its mechani cal shape very quickly in high heat pe r spiring a lot, so you must replace the respi rater when it's lost or damaged; so i t would be impractical. You would have to change it every few hours, so that one is mere rigid instead; and it holds its shape better because it has two shells put together, and that's why it was de si gne d th at w ay . That's the only reason for this thing coming into being? Yes, basically ahat's right other than the fact that some people like adjustable straps they can pull and van'-:. la's personal preference, so you naturally give ahe customer if you can what he 1n O in * 0 :har. the 2 710, can't you? 213 0 Because you car. adjust the straps. How do you G. Li. | u b u the straos on the 871C? A 3y cullinc them lake this in the bat n 5y moving them on your face, and you can adjust the tightness to the face? To a certain degree, yes. n To a certain degree, I can understand that; but on this particular mask, you can adjust each end everywhere on the mask. You can shorten it or lengthen then it, too, or whatever you want in between? And you're saying the potential for having a tighter face fit cn the 9910 was not any part its cosine into teinc? 'To, I euplaine; ycu why we designed it, for that ourpose. 77^ .1 ... ys i- i- , G "LCiAt G V o *= ' O (Thereupon, a short recess was (By Hr. Crew) Hr. Scheel, net only did we a-- sk 7^p * Wl C2 3 ii 1n 15 17 n' 0 "9 Z1 24 </ hi Yes. 215 Mot just deposed, for instance, in your divorce something like that, but I want to know have you ever been a designee for 3M before in a case where somebody was alleginc that a 3M resoirator caused them to have a disease? Yes, once before. 0 Do you know what she name of that case was? a Frasier or Foster or something like that. Foster, that was it. o Is that the only time you've been deposed in a case similar to this? A Yes. Me have been provided pursuant to that subpoena under our -Texas Rules of Civil Procedure a bunch of documents that I think you brought-with you here today, or did you bring them here with you today? I didn't personally, no. Mho brought them? I don't know. MR. BLIZZARD: I did. (By Mr. Crow) Dkay. So Mr. Blizzard brought them today? A Yes. nj 10 12 14 15 16 17 IS 19 20 91 zO G 25 n Did you participate at all in coin 215 :k through the 3D files tc search cut documents to. comply with the 201 duces tecum? HR. BLIZZARD: Are you referring to the letrer you sent cut? He obviously doesn't know what 201 duces tecun is but 1 et me shortcut it for you. He dicn' t. I think it was done in Minnesota bv their general counsel's office. Q (By Mr. Crow) The documents that we have here on the table in front of us, from your own independent personal knowledge, do you know whether or not the documents that we have or. the table are all the documents that describe the marketing, the testing of the 8500 , 8710 and S910 respiraters? A Nc, I do not knew if they're ail of it. 0 If I were going to ask you and you were going to answer under oath hew you would know if all the documents have, in fact, been produced today, where would you back at 3M to try to look through your fi 1 -- -w u .L j i WU --! VC determination? :11 * t char's net the first thing I'd 9 10 12 o 13 14 i5 15 1 -? 1~ 19 21 '-l 2 ' 25 217 have not read through that stack, s really comment or. what you have asked for, i that's what it represents. If I read through it, I could give you a better answer of whether the t' s tr ue. Okay. Let's start doing that. Before we do, I notice that virtually all of these documents have a stamped number on them. i-i yec 0 f-Ios t of them seam to be sequential. A Yes n Do you know why that number i s on the copies that we have O A I b elieve it's simply a number that per tains to thi s ca se that' s put on by th e legal co unsel. The y' re n ot on the documents originally . When they're copied and given to y ou, there' s a stamp put c n th grn for recordkeeping purposes. That's all I know it's for . n You don T 4- know if these documients were copied for another case an d a number put on them a t that time and then those same documents furnished to us? h "o, I don ' t kncy' Vi mi * C -f- y <ue . YP 0^(77: Yd s tij.ci.tl tci'O'O:ened here? n r.T7 r * r'n I don't know. I 10 11 12 13 14 15 15 X7 1C 19 20 G 212 don't know whether he's been one other case. I don't know. I'm not the lawyer for 3M in that case. I don't know, and I don't know if your request in year notice was the saaie request made in the ether case. I don't think it is. (By ilr. Crow) Let's start through the documents that somebody brought to the deposition today. MR. BLIZZARD: There's no mystery. It's me. ME. CECT: There did you get them from, Ed? - MR. BLIZZARD: I got them from Minnesota, came in the mail. MR. CHCT: Did you send them cur 1 T- U tl > MR. B LIZ ZARD: Yes. MR. CBCT: And this was their r 3 s cc r. s 3 . BLIZZAED: That was it, Evervthir.c that came in the mail tc me, you've con. (By Mr. Crow) >c 1 what's been marked alreacy as Scr.eei hibit 1 Can you tell me wh: Exhibit 1 consists of? O 11 12 13 O 14 i~ 15 iv la o 212 A Exhibit 1 is just the top sheet or Lis^whole thing? ' Q The whole thir.c. If you don't mind, I'll just move over here behind you. If you would, flip through that. I knew you've seen that material before, or I suspect you have. Tell me what it Mo, I haven't seen this before. This is quite old. MM. BLIZZARD: Take whatever time you need to review it to answer the questions he's going to ask you. (By Mr. Crew) Mr. Scheel, in looking through Exhibit 1 on the page that Minnesota Mining and Manufacturing has narked as 52 577 , there is seme sort of reply card. Do you see that? Ys s Do you know how icr.c 3M's been sendina out and \ i n *r a. f\ ;f reolv cards like the one Like this one, r.c, I don't. Me do have reply cards, but in many cases, it's for ether product; in cur company than we do. That reply card scecifically asks what type of work your company does, doesn't it? r 7 b 13 i i a- 07 9~ -> 1 t 220 Anc does it speciry semeplace on there what type of mask she person would be using? No, it doesn't specify what type they'd been using, not that I can see. It does say, "Nad you been using a nuisance dust filter mask previous to using the "3"" Filter A Yes, it does. 0 We're talking about the S50C, aren't we? A No, it says, "Had you been using a nuisance dust filter -ask previous to using the "3"" Filter Ilask?" That could be anything other than the 3500. Q Other than the 8500? A That's what than question says tome. Q Those types of cards would give you some information about how your products were being used, wouldn't they? A This particular one 'would give you some information about that. Q In fact, question number S that somebody at 3H thought up is, "Hew is the "3N" Filter bask being used," isn't that right? A. Yes. 1 If you would, go ahead and flip on. I'm sorry I o 7n 1 221 interrupted vcu. (Witness complies.) The filter mask that we see depicted on 525G1 maa 1 s uhs a5GC cesign, i sn 1 c. it? Yes. Is this still Exhibit 1? Yes. Page 52582, there's an advertisement, and where the prise's too fine, I can't read it. Right here? Yes. It says, "Textile Industries, 'lay, June, July, national Safety Yews, June," then you can't read the rest of it. - The- advertisement is that the mask blocks dust arising from cotton. Isn't that what the advertisement savs? because net all cotton dust is toxic. I see. Seme ccuton dust is toxic, and the re: or . Wul ^ . ;c peeoie would only use that in nontcxic cotter. then use some thine else for toxic cotter. That's correct. you flic on. Text cage. ' -- v-'~ I 11 ;N 14 16 01 r 222 left-hand column, there's an advertises _ -an that says, "I work in a paint plant. This mask really aces a areas dust filtering job, makes breathing easier." It says, "Highly efficient against nontouic dusts and spray particles." A It says highly effective actually is what it says. Q So as long as the paint spray particles are ncntcxic, then you are still okay using that mask? A That's correct. Q The second part of 52583, there's a man, f cur. dry man, grinding what looks like a piece of metal with a grinder; is that right? A Yes, he's grinding something. You can't tell what it is. Q It says, "Mask blocks dusts arising from foundry sands." Yhat kind of dust comes up when you grind metal in a foundry with a grinder? .Any an l n g ease? If there's something on the metal to start with, perhaps a coating of seme sort. I thought that mask wasn't supposed to be made to screen cut metal particles? Mot for toxic metal particles. Sc ncntcxic metal ^articles it will take care of? O ia c 7n 22 How does a mask tell the difference between a tonic or nontoxic metal particle? Does a red, green or yellow light come on? Hot likely. You mean the respirator itself can tell the difference between them.? Ho, it cannot. Human beings have to make it. Or a corporation? Human beings make it. Corporations don't. Apparently the case. HR. BLIZZARD: I think most people will admit corporations are run by human beings, at least 3M is. (By Hr. Crew) If you'll keep looking, if you'll stop with me back here on page 52585, there's an advertisement for a man who finishes drywall; and he doesn't want nc breathe dust from finishing drywall, right? Rinishing drywall with the kind of mud that people put on drywall back in the early '60's, do you know 'whether or not they used asbestos in that mud? Ho, I don't knew if they did in the early 'SC's, if that was true. If vou will :eep flipping, please. T ' D 3 Cl 10 i. ` 12 _o 10 cn y1 oust? It doesn't talk about cotton dust at all. It just talks about wearing it, that a textile worker says, "It's easy to breathe and talk through." OR. BLIZZARD: I don't think that page is an entire document, Carl. I think that's the first page of a document that's several pages long because the sentence ends on 52590 and begins again on 52591. (Bv Hr. Crew) Do you know where that page came from? Are vou askinc me whether I know where it came z r cm? Q Yes. It says, "Reprise of an advertisement of Occupational Hazards, Rational Safety News, September, 195 4 issues." r' s-\ f- r* Q Cl r It de pends or. the operation.. To tell you the truth , I'd have t:3 research it and look it up to tell you th:e trut; i and give you an e:i:act answer; but z here's; ceroa:Ln areas I know the stuff is can si dered t O .i_ c. It has t o do with th e opera tions o f th e textile m achine its;el f. idXI d he gri ncer wc;ulc have to know what kind of metal grind,ing he was going to do to knew if it was t oxic o r not? Yes, somebo dv would have to tell him what kind of metal H0 wa s werki.r.g v/ith. Well, I s hculd say that' s not exactly so. If the employ er knows and gives him the proper respir ator, the worker coesn ' t hav e to worry abcut what kind of metal. S ome S'^ oT,:r> paint.s has to know wheth er their oa i nt ' s to;: ic or n.ontoxic, right? Again, someone would have to knew that to choose the right rescirater. 3v w a V C .cles or the farrr.er that cu've been looking at several pages worth, we' e new on pace 5 2517, it says, "Gives excellent filtration against pc-ilens, c. / owners and spray particles." Th kind cf ides do you suppose they're 1 o o ^0 11 1? 13 1A _0 7 *7 0 23 r A '.To, net normally insecticides. Those are usually considered tonic. Offhand -- Q It doesn't say nor.toxic spray particles, though, does it? A It's ncr.toxic dusts, powders and spray particles. It's all three of them, but I can't give you an example of what a nontoxic spray particle would be on a farm right at the moment. MR. STAHL: Manure. THE WITNESS: Manure. A Well, to answer your original question, what these are, all except for a couple of bounce-back cards that are in there, these are all advertisements for the S500 chat run from about 1SS3 through 1- I. . .s , n r. kIra v. her: nhibit 2 that was furnished to u: tocay. Those stamped wi\_a i ivs oigic num.se r s. want to stem you on cage o2Guo. I: than an ad for a painting ccntracto 35 0 0? c 11 o 1A 1: 1~ on A materials to painting contractors. Oh, I see. That is an ac to people like Devoe? Do you have a Devce in "innescta, people who sell paint and painting supplies and other supplies to stock your 3?' 8500 , what do you call la, a dust mask? Teutonic dust mask, yes. So that painters will buy them., is that what the purpose of the ac is? The purpose of the ad is to tell the dealer who would sell the 8500 that this is a good product, that it will make business sense for him to stock You'll make money from it, right? Certainly. And the second, encuse me, the first sentence says, "Offer your contractor customers clear. 'creathine. Bov? Tith 3T Brand Oilier Basks. They protect their lungs from dusts and sprays." Bid I read that correctly? Yes. Is there any limitation in that advertisement about what kind of dusts and sprays that mask will 10 11 12 c 13 11 ;P 1O *> i>. -5 22 o *5 OA 25 cr sccted face cr a painted face, we can't tell which, and it says in bold print, "Dust and paint spray are nothing to sniff at." Big bold print at the bottom, "Neither are sales of 315 Filter Face Masks." Is that another ad to souebodv who services painting contractors to stock the 311 3500? A Yes, it is. It's to a dealer. . And that ad as we talked about previously is sernething that the marketing department of 311 designed to sell 3K products to dealers who would then resell them to paint contractors; "is that rah t ^ Yes , that' s true. Is there any limitation on page 325 40 about v;haz kind of pains? No, there isn't, but on the other hand, it says nontoxic here, grinding dust, what kind of grinding dust? It says, "It gets the finest filtering protection acainsr grinding cusp anc ncatonic paint spray particles. That kind of dust can you gee -l operations? Zl Find cf dust? - p Vo o 6 A Anything you can grind, you v/oul 7 1 z. 8 0 Yes. Let's go on if you don't ~ 9 at page 52665. There's another 10 geo contractor suppliers to stcc 11 A Yes, that's the case. 12 o Okay. Page 52669 and 52670 are 13 i 14 advertisements to get painting c suppliers to stock the 8500; is 15 Cl Yo, 52569 is a general ad to -- 15 anybody who reads Spotlights, Fa 17 it says if you want free samples -7L U0 your company letterhead to 3M Cc 1 9 you'll receive it. 52570 is an 20 dealer who services painting cor 21 o Yell, can you tell me why 52670 22 wav even mention that the mask i 23 nuisance dust or spray particle: n d. ad going to paint contractor su; vvitn me seme inic.cc goes msntit. different companies? PR. BLISSARD: If you knew. A Yes, I can tell you why. Your question if I understood it was why does it talk about nontoxic C.r here, nuisance dust, spray particles on 52559 and Q does not talk about that on 52670. Is that your 10 question? 11 0 CBy Mr. Cr cw) Yes. 1? A Because 52669 could be read by a potential user of the product; and therefore, there are some warnings given because it is to general public that could write in for free samples. The 52570 is a standard ad not aimed at the person himself. It's aimed at a dealer, the person who would get ' o the product. Ye would get his information about 1 9 the product along with the product that we have in stock, your sales reps that come and train him.,depending on who the sales rep is in that territory. Ye 'would gat that information at a later date. It's net necessary to have that i information here. 1 So you want them to buy your product; and as scon r a 0 : 1 O uOC 10 11 12 *s n -J "1 7 A. 1 Say that again. I understood the part we v;ant their to buy the product. 0 Well, 52670 just like the two earlier ones doesn't mention limitations? A Just like the ones that were aimed at a dealer, yes. Meaning you didn'o feel like you needed to mention limitations of your product. You would furnish these limitations to the supplier later? A Yes, because they are not actual users of the product. n Just like the employer is not the user of the product? > in. Me, not the same at all. tie furnish the information to the employer because we feel he's the best one to pass it along to the employee. A dealer can do that, too, from the 3M sales representative. It's not exactly the same. What is Exhibit *nc*cn6r saries is on the S50 0 )U hammer, ce notice when the laCl J u CX v Wc. ca' vj C- to me +U* -w' e 12 13 i> 14 19 o7 ^ I didn't look -- ;f these are chronological and the numbers are at' .east chronological, the last page I have on chi si 2 s h ow s ' 7 * A Yes, these ads run from approximately' March, 1267 through May, 1974. MR. 3LIZ2ARD: That's assuming they're in chronological order. Q (By Mr. Crew) They're in numerical order, aren't they? ?7e know that generally. ^3 j_i _ ^ a nJTk -j . Icb; ^->L - L.Iid.5- doesn't mean they're in chronological order. Q (By Mr. Crow) Do you know where the rest of the '74 to '34 ads are, '35 ads on the 3500? Ho, I cc not. Can vou tell me what Exhibit 3 is? Exhibit 3 is a recuest ;o the United States Bureau of Mines or Maj i 2 9 , 1 27 2 , for approval of a 2U arena resoi; number 0710; and attached with i: men is une 3u :Sc dara shewing it passed the r ecuir emeni c - c r* uirec ;v a cast resrirarer , silica dust, silica nisi (.`hat's tne cc__ erer.ee oetween silica cusr and 5 r 7 p Q 0 l ]_ 12 o 13 74 17 ?i 233 The silica misc, it's she silica, agaifr?*>SAit i- beer, aerialined. up to be in the corn cf a mist instead. Hew dees that happen? A I'm. not really --1 v . That test is rarely cone because a silic a C'J test is a let more str incent. rrc know the silica mist is easv to filter and the dust rarely done, sc I c; actually seen i a do: 0 Is there any reply from the United States Eureau . cf Mines? A On this, no. To co on with what's on here, there's also results of a qualatative coal dust fit test, a headband uniform and even tension test, copies of she fitting instructions. 0 Did the Bureau cf Mines require copies of your fitting test along with the rest of your test data- before approving the mask? A Accarently so because here it is attached to this and then copies cf engineering drawings cf the structure or -? rs 0 That is Bahibir 1, _ :cr: y J. ?. Dyrud' to D. J. "?c-~ht int or v/hat a^ears to ce the v/itnecsinc cf the r me o 10 12 * r > pass the mist? That's what it says here, yes. Can you tell me what Inhibit 5 is, please? A It's a report on a measurement system from TSI called a TSI mass recorder and saying that it does seem to be a good piece of equipment for measuring the amount of materials that might come through a respirator in terms of mass. "?.. BLIZZARD: Did you look at all the pages of that? THE WITNESS: No, I didn't. That's because I know how these are 'written. This 'would be the discussion on the back . side. Technical report summaries always (By !!r. Crow) Che is "r. Darghini? Cr. Earghini is a fellow that's in our development area of our laberatorv. or -ne ccr r e spo ncer.ce i see mm, anda r> -n tr v r ' be - 0 , which I' m -f ^ d 171 i n U *1 - / it crr cl's "Lobe .rect; ` L. w ou La u ---------- ory Manager, Occupational Protection c 13 14 ' =; 1c r- >es he still wort for 3M? Vo c For the CMS? grouo? , he dees. ist he was still there in October. Do you want me to read this? Just tell me what it is. What is on Exhibit 5? Just what is it generally? A It is a report of 8710's efficiency and a qualitative report on pressure drop increase on S710 after it had been challenged with lead dust as described in the Bureau of Mines Schedule 213; and the two sheets attached to the cover latter are simply the reporting of the conditions of the test and the results. Exhibit 7 appears to me to be from a Mr. J. E. Kropp, P&D Supervisor, Occupational Health and Safety Products at 3H? Ye s. Is he still there? At OHSP, no, there's no Jim Kropp in OESP, so if he's in 3M, I don't knew. ''hat is Schael Exhibit 7? kav. Humber / is a leaner writtenn to Mr. Charles - r. 10 22. 1i 23 I 14 t= _o 1P 10 ^ r, ni 22 22 Richards at L os Alamos cientific Labored 236 talking about testing t at had been dene on the 8710 in terms of silica dust, and it's the effect of the s ilica dust chai. ence on the efficiency of the respirator. Okay. Exhibit 8, if you can, just tell me generally/ what in is, the substance - I haven't quite figured it out yet. The substance of it sort cf speaks for itself, but I warn to ask you who wrote it. Just a second. Generally it's a discussion. It's written from Mr. Melscn Leidel to Philip Lowry/ who's at Los Alamos Scientific Laboratory/ clearing up apparently/ some misunderstandings Mr. Lowry had about what Mr. Leidel had stated about the efficiencies of disposable single use respirators. Muinber 9, please? 'I A Numbs r 9 is an expensicn of approval on TC -21013 2 whi ch covers the chance in a filter media in the 3710 and to allow optional cover webs for the S7I0 r espi rators. Mow, is that the chance you told me about 6 sl rl i r today that the 8710 was chanced once? I would have to say it is, yes. And that was in 1982? rs .4 c Q 1 rK II I^ 13 1A 1" 1 C. >j conditions; and the conclusions reached there was no change in penetration detected in comparison by differences. There was slight increased penetration at the IOC percent relative ?.H storage, and it is requested then from this report that there is a possibility that binders might leak out of the shell into the filter media to cause tha t to occu r, so there should be a study to see if th at po s s i b ility exists Okay. Th ank you. What is 12, if you will g BLIZZARD: Carl, I 'll 1 et you f ini sh w ith this one !'T. CP.CW: And you've also get some be dy whispering in your ear. -j ij d7- 4- ur? A r; n . miliua, -u f rb- right . We've beer. v c r icing on a lo p.g day with a short 1 un c n, a r.d I can see it in the w i t ne s s 1 eyes and t- '-g 0 I n 0 7 r s eyes. I' m. not saying the deposition is at an end, but we need to adjourn as soon as you conclude your questions about this 1 1 ur> _1L rU\ ]_ T_ / i4 15 c 1S co ur _ r available to everybody? MR. BLIZZARD: Yes. MR. CROW: The order in which the exhibits are narked one, two, three, four, five, six, chronological order? MR. BLIZZARD: Yes. MR. CROW: That's fine. That's all I wanted so I can tell what's missing. MR. BLIZZARD: Well, hopefully nothing. Inhibit 12 is a letter from D. ?. Wiimes to Jim Oppcld of MICSH, apparently a submission that had been made for extension of approval on the 0710 respiraccr was an error, and mas looter essentially says here we are submitting it again based on the way you would like us to do it. Okay. ' MR. CRCM: You want to terminate at 3LIZ jr "p 'VU 7 D T"r*'T Tv C V 'P 1G 11 1? O 1C THE STATS OF TEXAS IOUI7TY OF H ARR IS SUBSCRIBED AMD STORE to before me, the indersigned autnority, on ti :he day of A.D. 19 35, by said witness, Xenneth Laurence Schsel. itary Public, State cf Texas 1 n. *. . 6. 7 c G 10 '1 ir' 1 ~> s "I 7 14 17 o r-irj Qrp^rpni QP ^nrTT'rT!T7 qp I,' Karen J. Ingram a Certified Shorthand Reporter and notary Public i and for the State of Tanas, do hereby certify tha the facts stated in the caption to the foregoing deposition are true; that sai deposition was taken before me at said time and place, pursuant to said notice and agreements, the said witness, Kenneth Laurence Scheel, having been by me first duly sworn on oath; I further certify that said deposition was reported by me in shorthand, later reduced :o typewriting under my personal supervision, and the above and foregoing 240 pages of typewriting constitute a true and correct transcript thereof. I further certify that the charge for the oreoaration of the forecoinc correlated transcript is ro/ :har gee y/d/n-fi Given ;r mv official hand and seal of jn this', the 1 o pc dag7 o; '171a*. r . `T\ __ _. ch u a Certificate Po. 1173 Cnoires 12/31/36