Document 5LYK2m6GXaeBkmxvDgNX1z9jD
FILE NAME: Celanese (CEL) DATE: 1999 June 15 DOC#: CEL047 DOCUMENT DESCRIPTION: Legal - Deposition of Laubly Voi 2 - Tab L
STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA COUNTY OF MECKLENBURG
IN THE GENERAL SUPERIOR COURT 98--CBS--967 0
COURT OF DIVISION
c. JUSTICE
GARY ROBERT ALBRIGHT, et al . )
)
Plaintiffs,
)
)
v.
)
)
HNA HOLDINGS, INC., also
)
known as TREVIRA, INC.,
)
formerly HOECHST CELANESE, INC.)
and FIBER INDUSTRIES, INC.,
)
)
Defendants.
)
_______________________________ )
VIDEOTAPE DEPOSITION OF CHARLES LAUBLY JUNE 15, 1999
TUCSON, ARIZONA
VOLUME II
ARIZONA COURT REPORTING 177 North Church Avenue
Suite 1006 Tucson, Arizona 85701
(520) 623-3375 Ronald L. Lunsford, R.P.R.
ARIZONA COURT REPORTING
201 APPEARANCES
CHRISTOPHER D MAURIELLO, ESQ. WALLACE & GRAHAM Attorneys at Law 525 North Main Street Salisbury, North Carolina 28144 Attorney for the Plaintiffs
MICHAEL HUTCHINS, ESQ. JOSEPHINE H. HICKS, ESQ. PARKER, POE, ADAMS & BURNSTEIN Attorneys at Law 2500 Charlotte Plaza Charlotte, North Carolina 28244 Attorney for the Defendants
ARIZONA COURT REPORTING
WITNESS
I ~N D E X
202
page
CHARLES LAUBLY
EXAMINATION (Cont'd) BY MR. MAURIELLO . .
203
EXAMINATION BY MR. H U T C H I N S ............
267
FURTHER EXAMINATION BY MR. MAURIELLO . . .
313
FURTHER EXAMINATION BY MR. HUTCHINS . . .
328
EXHIBITS
#1 Celanese File (Retained)
U2 "Industrial Carcinogenesis and Toxicology," by M.W. Goldblatt
#3 "Research in Industrial Health in the Chemical Industry," by M.W. Goldblatt
#4 "Occupational Carcinogenesis," by M.W. Goldblatt
#5 "Lectures on Scientific Medicine," University of London, 1957
U6 "Occupational Carcinogenesis," by M.W. Goldblatt
#7 "Occupational Cancer," by M.W. Goldblatt
#8 "Turner and Newell, Ltd. Board Meeting," May 25, 1967
U9 Celanese Answers to Interrogatories
VOL I 169
VOL I 183
VOL I 192
VOL I 192
VOL I 193
VOL I 193
VOL I 193
VOL I 195
VOL II 255
ARIZONA COURT REPORTING
203
1
BE IT REMEMBERED that Pursuant to Notice
2
for Taking Depositions in the above-styled and numbered
3
cause, the videotape deposition of CHARLES LAUBLY,
4
Volume II, was taken upon oral examination at the
5
University Marriott, in the City of Tucson, State of
6
Arizona, before me, Ronald L. Lunsford, a Notary Public
7
in and for the County of Pima, on the 15th day of June,
8
1999, commencing at the hour of 10:18 a.m., in a
9
certain cause now pending in the General Court of
10
Justice, Superior Court Division of the State of North
11
Carolina, County of Mecklenburg.
12
******
13
14
THE VIDEOGRAPHER: This is the beginning of
15
the second day of the video deposition of Charles
. J
16
Laubly. The date is June 15, 1999. The time is 10:18
1 7
a.m. and we're back on the record.
18
MR. HUTCHINS: Mr. Laubly, you have been
19
previously sworn and I remind you, you are still under
20
oath.
21
22
EXAMINATION
( Cont'd)
23
24
BY MR. MAURIELLO:
25
Q.
Good morning, sir.
ARIZONA COURT REPORTING
204
1
A.
Good morning.'
2
Q.
Welcome back.
3
We'll try and pick up where we left off
4
yesterday, and I think we were talking generally about
5
the point in time in 1966 when you came down to the
6
plant after being hired as a corporate industrial
7
hygienist.
8
I'm just going to return to that time frame
9
for a moment and we'll move on from there.
10
At that point in time you told me that you
11
did pay a visit to the Salisbury plant, you recall; is
12
that correct?
13
A.
After I came aboard, yes.
14
Q.
Yes, sir. You believe that was sometime in
15
1966, you said. It could have been the summer or it .-i;
16
could have been the fall; is that a fair statement?
17
A.
Yes. It sounds right.
18
Q.
All right. And, Mr. Laubly, from that
19
point forward -- I know you gave us a little bit of a
20
background yesterday in terms of your visits.
21
Do you remember I ran down with you the
22
list of subsidiary companies?
23
A.
Yes.
24
Q.
Okay. And I asked you how many of those
25
companies were kind of under your control versus
ARIZONA COURT REPORTING
205
1
someone else, and you mentioned a couple of those
2
companies.
3
Can you give me an idea of how often you
4
would have visited the fiber group, and by that I'm
5
talking about Fiber, FII, Fiber Industries plants, from
6
1966 until you left in 1979?
7
Was there a set schedule, or can you give
8
me a general idea of how often you would have visited
9
that area?
10
A.
There was never any set schedule to the
11
plants.
12
Q.
Okay. Well, let's talk specifically about
13
the plants near Charlotte, the Rock Hill plant in
14
Salisbury. Do you recall offhand the general number of
15
times that you visited the Salisbury fiber plant after --i
16
1966?
17
A.
As much as a couple of times a year.
18
Q.
All right. And did that pattern or that
19
frequency remain until you left in '79?
20
A.
It's really hard to say, but I --
21
Q.
I don't want you to guess. If you know,
22
tell me. If you don't, then --
23
A.
I was down in the area frequently.
24
Q.
All right. When you went down in the area,
25
did you have the habit of trying to visit all the
ARIZONA COURT REPORTING
206
1
plants in that location when you went there?
2
A.
Yes.
3
Q.
In other words, you'd fly into Charlotte or
4
something and visit the Charlotte area plants?
5
A.
Yes. That's the I operated.
6
Q.
And you told me occasionally you went with
7
Dr. Dixon; is that correct?
8
A.
Very rarely.
9
Q.
Well, that was my next question.
10
Can you give me a little bit more of
11
quantitatively how often Dr. Dixon would have
12
accompanied you on any of those trips?
13
A.
Once or twice, total.
14
Q.
In the total time you were there?
i
15
A.
Yes. We didn't travel together very much-.
1 6
Q.
All right. Do you know if Dr. Dixon had
17
accompanied you to the Salisbury fiber plant
18
specifically on any occasion?
19
A.
No, I don't.
20
Q.
We mentioned the name of Herbert Kolander.
21
A.
Yes.
22
Q.
And my understanding is, correct me if I'm
23
wrong, Mr. Kolander was superintendent of safety?
24
A.
Safety director, yes. Director of safety.
25
Q.
Director of safety. And do youknow the
ARIZONA COURT REPORTING
207
1
years he was the director of safety for Celanese?
2
A.
Not -- well, not exactly. I think he came
3
on board in 1970.
4
Q.
Okay. So he came on board after you had
5
already been there for some time?
6
A.
Oh, yes.
7
Q.
All right. Was there a predecessor,
8
someone before him in that position?
9
A.
Well, Glenn Fleming.
10
Q.
And you told me Mr. Fleming's office was
11
out of Charlotte?
12
A . True.
13
Q.
When Mr. Kolander -- withdrawn.
14
15
job?
Did Mr. Kolander take over Mr. Fleming's .; 7 .
16
A.
Yes.
17
Q.
What happened to Mr. Fleming at that point?
18
A.
He retired.
19
Q.
He retired around 1970?
20
A.
Yes.
21
Q.
Is that your understanding?
22
And when Mr. Kolander took over as the
23
director of safety in 1970, how long did he remain in
24
that position?
25
A.
Well, he was there when I left. I don't
ARIZONA COURT REPORTING
208
1
know how long.
2
Q.
Okay. Had you ever met with Glenn Fleming
3
at the Salisbury plant on any occasion before he
4
retired or left in 1970?
5
A.
The only time I could recall would be when
6
we attended the annual safety contest function.
7
Q.
Can you elaborate on that? Safety contest
8
function, what's that?
9
A.
Well, the Blancke Safety Award is given
10
annually to the best plant, and that was in -- the
11
award was given in 1972, the spring, picnic day, time.
12
Q.
When you say the award was given, does
i.
13
that mean the first time an award had been given or is
1 4
that --
15
A.
No. I mean, it's an annual award given to
16
the best --
17
Q.
Plant in the Celanese group?
18
A.
All of Celanese.
19
Q.
And had that award process been underway
20
since you began in 1966? Is that, something that was in
21
place when you --
22
A.
Yes. Yes.
23
Q.
Do you know offhandwhich plants received
24
awards on any year?
25
A.
I was looking at some of the things I had.
209
1
1969, the Clear Lake Chemical Company,
2
Chemical Plant got it.
3
Q.
That was in '69?
4
A.
'69. And then in '72, I know that
5
Salisbury got it.
6
Q.
Salisbury got the award in 1972?
7
A.
Yes.
8
Q.
And that's the safety award, it's a company
9
award?
10
A.
A company award.
11
Q.
Who is that awardbestowed on? Is it given
12
to the plant manager or the company --
i
13
A.
To the plant. Just to the plant, to the --If
14
employees.
15
Q.
And who issues the awards? I know it's
16
Celanese, but who does that award come from? Who makes
17
the determination as to who receives the award?
18
A.
Well, Glenn Fleming'soffice. The safety
19
director's office.
20
Q.
And do you know the criterion for the
21
award, what type of things they look at or looked at?
22
A.
Man hours of accident-free working.
23
Q.
And I don't mean to pick on the definition.
24
I'm trying to understand how they worked it back in
25
'72.
21 0
1
When you're talking about accident-free,
2
are you talking about like traumatic injuries?
3
A.
Total.
4
Q.
Right. But when you say accident-free, any
5
accidents?
6
A.
Yes. That's true.
7
Q.
Accidents involving an injury to a worker?
8
A.
True.
9
Q.
Okay, Any other criterion that goes into
10
the annual award?
11
A.
I don't recall.
12
Q.
Did you participate in theprocess at all,,' ;
13
either by reviewing plants for the award or giving
- j
14
input as the industrial hygienist?
15
A.
No.
16
Q.
Okay. That was purely out of the safety
17
department?
18
A.
Yes.
19
Q.
And you told me yesterday that when you
20
went to various plants, you first told me when I asked
21
you what you did when you went to various plants, you
22
told me that when you started with Celanese in 1966,
23
you were told to go out and take samples. Do you
24
recall that testimony?
25
I'll rephrase it if that's an unclear
211
1
statement.
2
You told me that when you started in early
3
1966, you received about a one-day training.
4
A.
No. No. No. I received a one-day
5
training when I went with Kemper.
6
Q.
All right. I thought you indicated that
7
when you were in New York, you also received
8
approximately one day of training in New York.
9
A.
No. No. That's not true.
10
Q.
All right. Then correct me. What type of
11
training did you receive in New York?
12
A.
No industrial hygiene training.
?
13
Q.
All right.
14
A.
Because I was hired to do the industrial
15
hygiene job.
16
Q.
All right. You didn't receive any training
17
at that point?
18
A.
That's true.
19
Q.
All right. And when you were told to go
20
out and visit these various plants, I think you told me
21
that you went in there to perform some functions.
22
A.
I --
23
Q.
I'll rephrase thequestion.
24
What were you doing when you went to the
25
various plants in 1966 and thereafter? What type of
212
1
things did you do when you entered a plant?
2
A.
Well, in most instances, making contact
3
with a safety person and industrial relations manager
4
to tell them that I was available for industrial
5
hygiene matters.
6
Q.
And after that process was completed, what,
7
if anything, did you do?
8
A.
At any specific plant?
9
Q.
Well, did you have a particular routine
10
when you went to a plant, besides making contact with
11
them? Did you do --
12
A.
Making an on-site inspection.
i
13
Q.
All right. That's what I'm getting at.
1 4
Did you actually perform those type of functions?
15
A.
Yes.
16
Q.
Did you walk around the plants when you
17
were in there?
18
A.
Yes.
19
Q.
And is it your testimony that youperformed
20
that function not only for plants in the fiber group
21
but for other subsidiaries of Celanese?
22
A.
Yes.
23
Q.
Okay. And, again, why don't youtell me
24
this morning how many, and I'm not going to hold you to
25
the exact number, approximately how many plants are we
213
1
talking about?
2
A.
Forty to fifty.
3
Q.
And, Mr. Laubly, when you went to these
4
plants to do an inspection of the plant, did you keep
5
any records?
6
A.
No.
7
MR. HUTCHINS: Just so I'm clear, you're
8
asking has he kept records today that would relate back
9
to those visits, or did he make records at the time of
10
the visits?
11
MR. MAURIELLO: Either.
12
BY MR. MAURIELLO:
jf ;
13
Q.
Any records that you have today or records
14
that you made back then that you turned into the
15
company, any written record of your inspection?
16
A.
No. Most of my reporting was done word of
17
mouth to Ernie Dixon.
18
Q.
Okay. And, again, when you say most, did
19
you keep some records?
20
A.
If I saw some conditions I thought that
21
they might beef up a little bit, I would write a memo.
22
Q.
All right. Andwas that memo turned into
23
the plant safety superintendent?
24
A.
Yes.
25
Q.
And was it turned into Dr. Dixon? Was a
214
1
copy sent to Dr. Dixon?
2
A.
Yes.
3
Q.
Did you cc your copy to anyone else of that
4
memo, besides the plant and the medical department in
5
New York?
6
A.
No.
7
Q.
Did you keep copies of those memos?
8
A.
I did.
9
Q.
You don't have them any longer?
10
A.
No.
11
Q-
Okay. Which brings me to a little
1 2
an aside question.
i
13
Do you have any records from your work in
1 4
that plant whatsoever?
15
A.
No.
16
Q.
Do you have any of the reference materials,
17
if any, you would have consulted with when you were an
18
industrial hygienist for Celanese?
19
A.
I don't get what you mean on reference
20
materials.
21
Q.
Well, let me ask you: Did you have any
22
types of books that you consulted with that you had in
23
your office in New York for industrial hygiene, either
24
anything that you brought with you from Kemper or
25
anything that you may have acquired over the years, to
215
1
assist you with performing your job as an industrial
2
hygienist?
3
A.
We had an extensive library at Celanese,
4
with a librarian.
5
Q
Was the library in New York?
6
A
In New York.
7
Q
Was it within the medical department?
8
A
Yes.
9
Q
Did it have medical texts and journals?
10
A
Yes.
1 1
Q
Did it have occupational and industrial
1 2
hygiene texts?
13
A.
Yes.
1 4
Q.
And you had a librarian; is that correct?
15
A.
Yes.
15
Q-
What was his or her name?
17
A.
Her name was Linda Weisman.
18
Q.
Was Linda the librarian your entire time
19
when you were in New York?
20
A.
when I started there, we had some file
21
cabinets and a couple of bookcases, and then it
22
gradually grew.
23
Q.
Can you give me a general idea of the size
24
of the resource materials that you kept up there in New
25
York? Was it a room, a building, an office? What type
216
1
of --
2
A.
It was a room such as this. Not as large
3
as this.
4
Q.
A regular conference room sized room; is
5
that a fair statement?
6
A.
Yes.
7
Q.
Did that room contain any other type of
8
resource materials besides for the medical department,
9
or was it exclusively for the medical department?
10
A.
The medical department.
11
Q.
And you told me earlier, when you started
12
in '66, it was just you and Dr. Dixon and a nurse; is f
13
that correct?
14
A.
Yes.
15
Q.
The nurse's name you didn't recall?
16
A.
No.
17
Q.
From 1966 until you leftin '79, who else
18
was in the medical department besides the three people
19
you just named?
20
A.
Judy Tinns. She preceded Linda Weisman,
21
but then Judy took over in product safety.
22
Q.
So she preceded the librarian, so to speak?
23
A.
Yes.
24
Q.
Did Linda Weismanholdany other position
25
besides librarian?
217
1
A.
No.
2
Q.
She wasn't a product safety individual?
3
A.
No.
4
Q.
What was Judy Tinns' background? Was she
5
also an industrial hygienist?
6
A.
No. She was a chemist by training.
7
Q.
And what years did she hold the position
8
within the medical department?
9
A.
Well, she came after I was there and left
10
before I left. She went with Sherwin-Williams.
11
Q.
Do you know where Judy Tinns is today?
12
A.
No,I don't. I know she has left
.
13
Sherwin-Williams.
14
Q.
Do you know whereshe resides?
15
A.
NO.
16
Q.
How about Linda Weisman, do you know where
17
she is today?
18
A.
No, I don't. Every once in a while I ask
19
about Linda, but I don't know where she lives.
20
Q.
Do you know if she is still employed with
21
the company?
22
A.
She is not.
23
Q.
Did she retire or move on to another job?
24
A.
I think she moved on.
25
Q.
And the last you knew of her, where was she
218
1
residing?
2
A.
Well, she was working out of Bridgewater, I
3
think.
4
Q.
Connecticut?
5
A.
No, the Bridgewater plant, our office in
6
New Jersey.
7
Q.
New Jersey. But as best you recall, she
8
doesn't work there anymore?
9
A.
No.
10
Q.
Have we covered all the individuals that
11
were in the medical department --
1 2
A.
Well, John Clary, Dr. John Clary, who was a
13
toxicologist.
"
1 4
Q.
And when did Dr. Clary come on board?
15
A.
In the mid '70s.
16
Q.
Was he an actual employee of Celanese?
17
A.
Yes.
18
Q.
And heworked in the medical department?
19
A.
Yes.
20
Q.
How long did he stay?
21
A.
I don't know. He was there when I left.
22
Q.
What is your understanding of his
23
background before he worked for Celanese? Do you know
24
where he had worked prior?
25
A.
I can't recallwhere he came from.
219
1
Q.
Do you know of any other jobs he worked
2
before Celanese?
3
A.
No, I don't. I did at the time, but I
4
don't.
5
Q.
Do you know if he is still working with the
6
company?
7
A.
I don't know.
8
Q.
Anyone else within the medical department
9
that we haven't spoken of?
10
A.
Well, Larry Birkner.
11
Q.
B-E-R-K-N-E-R?
12
A.
B--I--R--K--N--E--R .
t
13
Q.
And what was Larry's position or title?
14
A.
Industrial hygienist.
1 5
Q.
When did he come on board?
16
A.
In the late '70s, just prior to my leaving.
17
Q.
All right. Were you his boss -- withdrawn.
18
You were the corporate industrial
19
hygienist.
20
A.
Yes.
21
Q.
What position did he hold?
22
A.
Industrial hygienist.
23
Q.
Did he report to you or did he report to
24
Dr. Dixon?
25
A.
Well, yes, he was supposed to.
220
1
Q.
Did Mr. Birkner assist you in performing
2
any of your inspections in the plants?
3
A.
No. What they did was divide it up, and he
4
took over the chemical part and I took over the fibers.
5
Q.
Understood. Do you know if Mr. Birkner had
6
inspected, for lack of a better term, gone through any
7
of the fiber plants during the times he was there in
8
the late '70s, or when he started in the late '70s?
9
A.
No.
10
Q.
Do you know if he had any responsibility,
11
so to speak, for the fiber division, versus the
12
chemical side?
13
A.
No.
7:
1 4
Q.
That's, no, he didn't, or you don 't know?
15
A.
I don't believe he did.
16
Q-
Okay. Now, when you went to the Salisbury
1 7
fiber plant on any of the occasions that you spoke of,
18
had you ever seen any of the insulators installing
19
insulation?
20
A.
No.
21
Q.
Had youever seen any of theFleur Daniel
22
workers doing any of the construction of the plant, the
23
original plant construction?
24
A.
No.
25
Q.
By that, Imeananything, tanks,vessels,
i
221
1
boilers, pipes?
2
A.
I can't recall.
3
Q.
Okay. Did you ever -- withdrawn.
4
Do you know as you sit here today how many
5
plants Fleur Daniel had contracts with in the fiber
6
division for Celanese?
7
A.
No, I don't know the exact number.
8
Q.
Before you started in 1966 with Celanese,
9
had you heard of either Daniel Construction Company or
10
Fleur Corporation?
11
A.
Fleur, I did, yes.
1 2
Q.
How did you know of Fleur at that time?
1 3
A.
They were an insured of Kemper.
14
Q.
Did you do any type of work within a Fleur "jT
15
plant or for Fleur workers while you were with Kemper
16
or Lumberman's?
17
A.
Yes.
18
Q.
Do you recall which plants?
19
A.
It was Cape Canaveral. They were doing
20
some welding out there and I had to inspect them, on
21
one of the towers.
22
Q.
In Florida?
23
A.
Yes.
24
Q.
So your jurisdiction went all the way down
25
to Florida at that point?
222
1
A.
Oh, yes.
2
Q-
3
work?
Okay. Now, Fleur people were doing welding
4
A.
Yes.
5
Q.
All right. After you became the industrial
6
hygienist for Celanese in '66, did you ever meet with
7
any representatives from Fleur Daniel regarding any
8
work that they were doing within any of the fiber
9
plants?
10
A.
No.
11
Q.
Do you a gentleman named Ty Annis?
1 2
A.
No, I don't .
1 3
Q.
My understanding is that Mr. Annis was ?the
14
original supervisor of the insulators for Salisbury./,
15
and I'm just giving you that information. He was
16
probably there in 1965 and '66.
17
Do you recall meeting him at any point?
18
A.
No.
19
Q.
Do you recall meeting with anyone out of
20
the Fleur Daniel office in Greenville, South Carolina,
21
which was their regional office at that point?
22
A.
No.
23
Q.
Did you ever receive any type of material?
24
from Celanese regarding their contracts or their
25
relationship with Fleur in any of the plants?
223
1
A.
No.
2
Q.
Did you ever send Fleur Daniel any
3
information about materials within the plants that
4
their workers may be exposed to?
5
A.
No.
6
Q.
I guess what I'm getting at, did you ever
7
have any type of communication, either by meetings,
8
telephone conversations, correspondence, between your
9
department, the medical department of Celanese and
10
anyone in Fleur or Fleur Daniel?
11
A.
No.
12
Q.
Okay. When you were walking through the ;
13
plant on these occasions, was there any way for you to i
.
14
discern or tell the difference between who was a Fleur
15
worker in the plant and who was a Celanese worker?
16
A.
Offhand, I can't remember exactly, but they
17
would have a different type of safety hat.
18
Q.
Okay. Did they havea different color hat
19
than the Celanese people did?
20
A.
Yes.
21
Q.
Do you recall as you sit here today the
22
difference in what colors they --
23
A.
No, I assume -- here, I'm justassuming,
24
because I have one. It's white. Celanese was white.
25
Q.
All right. And getting back to some of the
224
1
questions I was asking you about yesterday, when you
2
were doing your function as a industrial hygienist, you
3
were looking for overall potential hazardous conditions
4
in the plant. Is that a fair statement?
5
A.
That's fair.
6
Q.
And that would havebeen ahazardous
7
condition to any of the workers in the plant?
8
A.
Yes.
9
Q.
If you had seen a hazardous condition that
10
might have affected a Fleur worker wearing a white hat,
11
would you have done something about it?
12
A.
I would have reported to the, in this case*
13
Sam Swearingin.
14
Q.
You would have reported that to
15
Hurk-Celanese management of the plant?
16
A.
Yes.
17
Q.
And really what I'm getting at is, you
18
weren't distinguishing between health related --
19
withdrawn. Let me rephrase the question.
20
You weren't distinguishing between hazards
21
that might have affected Fleur workers versus hazards
22
that might have affected Celanese workers, you were
23
just looking for hazards?
24
A.
Just looking for hazards.
25
Q.
All right. Do you know how muchasbestos
225
1
insulation was installed in the plant in 1966?
2
A.
I have no idea.
3
Q.
Do you know asbestos was brought into the
4
plant, how it was delivered to the plant in 1966
5
through 1972?
6
A.
No.
7
Q.
Do you know for how longasbestos had been
8
used for installation of new construction at that
9
plant?
10
A.
No.
11
Q.
Now, yesterday youtold me that,and,
12
again, correct me if I'm wrong, the first time you made
13
the actual connection between asbestos hazards and * .
1 4
cancer was after the National Register came out in 'T\ . -*
15
Is that a fair statement?
16
A.
Yes.
17
Q.
And I think you told me that in 1971 you
18
sent a copy of that Register to Sam Swearingin or to
19
the plant?
20
A.
Yes.
21
Q.
And you also told me you did that in a
22
general sense; in other words, you weren't sending it
23
for asbestos purposes, you were just sending him a copy
24
of the Register.
25
A.
True.
226
1
Q.
And you read that?
2
A.
Yes.
3
Q.
And that 1971 Federal Register dealt with
4
the new act of OSHA in 1970?
5
A.
Yes.
6
Q.
And it dealt with a number of different
7
potential hazards in addition to asbestos; is that
8
correct?
9
A.
Yes.
10
Q.
And after you sent thatFederal Register to
1 1
Mr. Swearingin, did you give him any type of directive
12
about using asbestos in the plant from that point
13
forward?
/ /
14
a.
no.
it'
1 5
Q.
Is it true that into 1973 plant workers
16
were still installing asbestos in the plant?
17
A.
I can't recall.
18
Q.
Had you ever given any directives about
19
using any particular form of asbestos products, such as
20
asbestos gaskets, asbestos mastics, insulation or
21
anything of that nature?
22
A.
No.
23
Q.
The plants -- withdrawn.
24
You indicated yesterday that in addition t
25
some of the plants in the United States, the
227
1
subsidiaries listed for Celanese that you visited, I
2
think you told me you visited some in Canada?
3
A.
Yes.
4
Q.
And some in Canada were under your
5
responsibility; is that a fair statement?
6
I'll withdraw it.
7
Did you have -- did Dr. Dixon ask that you
8
visit certain plants in Canada also?
9
A.
Yes.
10
Q.
Can you give me the names of either --
11
withdrawn.
12
Can you give me the names of the plant
13
locations?
,v .
14
A.
Drummondville.
.* f
1 IJi,
-- ;
IS
Q.
What type of plant. Just give me -- -
16
A.
Fibers.
17
Q.
These are all in the fiber group?
18
A.
Yes.
19
Q.
What other plants, Mr. Laubly?
20
A.
Edmonton. There was smaller plants in the
21
eastern townships, St. John and --
22
Q.
You said the eastern provinces?
23
A.
Well, the townships outside of Montreal.
24
Q.
Were they in the province of Quebec?
25
A.
Yes.
228
1
Q.
How many plants were in that area?
2
A.
Three or four. They were very, very small
3
plants.
4
Q.
Were they also in the fiber group?
5
A.
X believe so.
6
Q.
Did any other industrial hygienist for the
7
company, being Celanese, have responsibility for any of
8
the plants in the United States besides yourself?
9
A.
No.
10
Q.
You were it?
11
A.
X was it.
12
Q.
And the plants in Canada?
13
A.
Yes.
14
Q.
Did any other industrial hygienist harre r
15
responsibility for the Canada plants?
16
A.
No.
17
Q.
How about the plants in Mexico? Did you
18
have any responsibility for those plants?
19
A.
Well, I visited them every year.
20
Q.
You did?
21
A.
Yes.
22
Q.
Did anyone else for the company visit them
23
for the medical department or for industrial hygiene?
24
A.
No.
25
Q.
Those were also ones that you inspected
229
1
periodically?
2
A.
On an annual basis.
3
Q.
Any other countries besides Canada, the
4
United States and Mexico that were under your control,
5
so to speak, from '66 to '79?
6
A.
One in Barankia, Columbia.
7
Q.
Would you get down there annually?
8
A.
No. I got down there once on a special
9
problem.
10
Q.
What type of plant was that?
11
A.
Pardon?
12
Q.
What type of plant?
13
A.
They manufactured carbon disulfide, a
1 4
chemical operation.
15
Q.
A chemical plant?
16
A.
Yes.
17
Q.
All right. I read to you, and we don't
18
have to go back through that list, but I read to you
19
Celanese Euro and there's Celanese U.K. and some
20
Celanese subsidiaries in Europe. Do you recall that?
21
A.
Yes.
22
Q.
Did you have any responsibility for those
23
plants?
24
A.
Well, I visited a couple of them, that's
25
all.
230
1
Q.
You did.
2
A.
The one in Lanachen.
3
Q.
Okay. And I guess whatI'm getting at, did
4
the medical department in New York,to the bestof your
5
knowledge, was that department responsible for the
6
entire Celanese operation or was there any other
7
medical department or industrial hygienist employed by
8
the company who worked the other plants?
9
A.
We were it.
1 0
Q.
Okay. Everything came through New York?
11
A.
Yes.
1 2
Q.
Would you be visiting those other plants, i
13
and by those, I'm talking about Celanese Euro and
'
14
Celanese U.K., would you visit those plants as often as
1 5
you visited the ones here?
1 6
A.
I visited them once.
17
Q.
One time?
18
A.
One time.
19
Q.
All right. I think I asked you this
20
yesterday, but I just want to make sure.
21
Did you ever attend any type of joint
22
meeting between the joint owners of Fiber Industries,
23
being Imperial Chemical and Celanese?
24
A.
No.
25
Q.
Did the medical department at Celanese ever
231
1
call for any type of coordinated meeting between any
2
subcontractors that worked within the fiber group, such
3
as Fleur Daniel or any of the other subcontractors?
4
A.
Not to my knowledge.
5
Q.
Was there -- and I understand your
6
testimony earlier that you didn't contact Fleur Daniel
7
directly.
8
Was there any type of system in place
9
whereby the medical department would either cc memos to
10
the subcontractors or call for an annual meeting or
11
have any type of communication?
12
A.
I never saw any such.
/
13
Q.
Okay. Were the contracts, with the
14
understanding you were in industrial hygiene, did your
15
department review any of the particular contracts
16
between the owners of the plant, Celanese, and the
17
subcontractors, for any reason?
18
A.
No.
19
Q.
For safety reasons or anything like that,
20
legal/safety reasons?
21
A.
Not that I know of.
22
Q.
Now, when you started in 1966, you told me
23
that prior, back when you were working for American Can
24
Company, you had for a short stint worked as an
25
insulator.
232
1
A.
Yes.
2
Q.
You told me about abag that had asbestos
3
on it, correct?
4
A.
Right.
5
Q.
All right. And thenyou told
me about the
6
two impinger samples that you did when you were with
7
Kemper.
8
Aside from that, had you had any --
9
withdrawn. Bad question.
10
Had you had any type of training in terms
11
of the types of asbestos products that were
12
manufactured up until that point in time, either from ./ .
13
Kemper or Lumberman's?
14
A.
No.
15
Q.
Okay. Did you know the names of any
16
manufacturers in 1966 when you became corporate
17
industrial hygienist of asbestos products?
18
A.
I only knew of Johns-Manville.
19
Q.
Did you know the names of any of the
20
Manville products?
21
A.
No.
22
Q.
Were you ever sent any type of --
23
withdrawn.
24
You told me about the library that you had
25
up there in New York.
233
1
A.
Yes.
2
Q.
Did that library contain any type of
3
information about asbestos products?
4
A.
I'm sure it did.
5
Q.
Do you recall reviewing that at any point
6
in time, to look at the manufacturers of gaskets or
7
insulation or any other type of --
8
A.
I don't recall.
9
Q.
And what I'm getting at is, when you were
10
walking through these plants in '66 and thereabouts,
1 1
did you have any type of working knowledge about what
1 2
type of materials in the plant may have contained
13
asbestos?
14
A.
No.
15
Q.
Could you tell the difference between an
16
asbestos thermal insulation and a non-asbestos thermal
17
insulation by looking at it?
18
A.
No.
19
Q.
Could you tell the difference by touching
20
it or feeling it?
21
A.
No.
22
Q.
Do you know what type of materials the
23
Salisbury plant was using that may have contained
24
asbestos?
25
A.
No,I don't.
234
1
Q.
All right. With the understanding that you
2
left in 1979, have you had the opportunity to review
3
any of the abatement records of any asbestos materials
4
that were taken out of the plant?
5
A.
No.
6
Q.
Have you heard of a company called
7
Contaminant Control?
8
A.
No.
9
Q.
Have you heard of a company called
10
Strategic Organization Systems, otherwise known as SOS?
11
A.
No.
12
Q.
Do you know the types of mineral asbestos,
13
the various forms?
14
A.
Well, I've seen it in there, and 1 did --
/
1 5
Q.
This isn't a test.I'm just trying to find
16
out your general working knowledge.
17
Did you know that back in 1966?
18
A.
Yes.
19
Q.
Okay. Did youever read any type of
20
literature about the hazards of one form over another?
21
A.
Oh, I'm sure I didread about it.
22
Q.
Okay.Do you recall,
as you sit here
23
today, about which was considered more hazardous for
24
certain reasons?
25
A.
No, I don't.
--- -
reporting
235
1
Q.
Now, Were you ever told that the Salisbury
2
plant had what was called -- withdrawn. Withdraw the
3
question.
4
Were you ever told that the Salisbury plant
5
was cited by OSHA for housekeeping problems associated
6
with asbestos?
7
A.
No.
8
Q.
Did Sam Swearingin ever contact you for any
9
reason regarding OSHA inspections or OSHA citations
10
within the plant?
11
A.
Yes.
12
Q.
On what occasion?
/
13
A.
When OSHA showed up to make a general
14
inspection of the plant.
15
Q.
Every time?
16
A.
No. The initial time.
17
Q.
Do you know how many OSHA inspections there
18
were at the plant during your stint there?
19
A.
No. No, I don't.
20
Q-
When was that initial time that you recall?
21
A.
Probably early '71, sometime in that time
22
frame. Right after the directive came out and OSHA
23
then started going through the area.
24
Q-
All right. Was there an OSHA visit because
25
the -- withdrawn.
238
1
A.
Yes.
2
Q.
Was that aone-dayvisit?
3
A.
Yes.
4
Q.
All right. Now, this document, being from
5
Dave Smith's deposition, Number 33, references a
6
citation in 1978.
7
I'm going to show you a document marked
8
Exhibit 30 from Mr. Smith's deposition and ask you if
9
you've ever seen that before?
10
A.
(Reviewing documents.)
11
I've never seen this.
12
Q.
This appears to be a copy of a citation
13
from the North Carolina Department of Labor, and it
14
states: Employer failed to maintain external surfaces .
15
in place of employment free of accumulations of
16
asbestos fibers, which, with dispersion, would cause an
17
excessive concentration, such as in K-4 west area,
18
second floor.
19
Do you see that language?
20
A.
I see that, yes.
21
Q.
I'm going to ask you some questions.
22
MR. HUTCHINS: I just want to object
23
generally to the use of the document to the extent
24
there's inquiry into what it otherwise purports to say
25
on its face.
239
1
MR. MAURIELLO: Fair enough.
2
BY MR. MAURIELLO:
3
Q.
Do you recall if Mr. Swearingin ever spoke
4
to you about this particular citation?
5
A.
No. I don't recall.
6
Q-
The K--4 west area, second floor, had you
7
ever been to that area on occasion during your visits
8
or inspections?
9
A,
I went through the plant, but I don't
10
recall them by area numbers anymore.
11
Q.
All right. And going back to Mr. Smith's
12
deposition, Exhibit 33, again, this is dated in August
13
of 1970 -- well, it says right there, two years after ? '{
14
the citation was issued, correct?
.
15
A.
1980, you mean?
16
Q.
Correct. Yes. 1980 at the top.
17
A.
Yes.
18
Q.
And it references a1978citation?
19
A.
Yes.
20
Q.
And it alsoreferences labor expenditures,
21
$44,482.00. Do you see that?
22
A.
I see that.
23
MR. HUTCHINS: I object to the form of the
24
question.
25
BY MR. MAURIELLO:
240
1
Q.
Well, I'm going to ask you some questions
2
about that. And material costs of $5,742.00?
3
A.
That's here.
4
Q.
Do you recall if those facts, namely what
5
labor costs were and what the material costs were for
6
the clean up were reported to your office?
7
A.
I don't recall that.
8
Q.
And that document, Number 33, lists the
9
various areas that were cleaned, correct?
10
A.
I see that.
11
Q.
All right. And I'm going to show you what
1 2
was marked at Mr. Smith's deposition as Number 31, and;
13
just to speed things up, I'm just going to reference
1 4
the top.
1 5
The document that we marked earlier, or
16
that I spoke to you earlier about, Number 33,
17
references two citations, and this document that I just
18
handed you, Number 31, is listed as Citation Number 2?
19
A.
Yes.
20
Q.
All right. Now, do you know why it took
21
until August 27th of 1980 for the clean up to be
22
completed?
23
MR. HUTCHINS: I object to the form of the
24
question.
25
THE WITNESS: I don't know.
1
BY MR. MAURIELLO:
241
iJ
i
i
i
2
Q.
Okay. Do you know if there was ever any
3
correspondence between -- withdrawn.
4
Do you know if Fleur Daniels was also given
5
the same citation?
6
A.
No, I don't.
7
Q.
Have you ever seen any documentation
8
between the management of Fleur Daniel and Celanese
9
about the responsibility for asbestos clean up in the
10
plant?
11
A.
No, I haven't.
1 2
Q.
I'm going to show you what we marked in an
13
earlier deposition of Mr. Smith as Plaintiff's 37, a n d 'i
14
just ask you to take a look at that. And just let me
15
know when you're ready.
16
A.
(Witness complies.)
17
Okay. Ask your question.
18
Q-
Have you ever seen that document before?
19
A.
That's after my time.
20
Q-
Okay. Well, you left in '79, correct?
21
A.
Yes.
22
Q-
All right. So the answer is no?
23
A.
No.
24
Q-
Which, by the way, I don't think I asked
25
you this : Specifically, when in 1979 did you leave the
n p n n o r P T K lf:
242
1
plant?
2
MR. HUTCHCNS: Leave Celanese, you mean?
3
MR. MAURIELLO: Correct. I'm sorry.
4
THE WITNESS: August 3rd.
5
BY MR. MAURIELLO:
6
Q.
Did you leave before Dal Perry took over
7
responsibilities for Mr. Swearingin, which occurred in
8
1979, if you know?
9
MR. HUTCHINS: I object to the form of the
10
question.
11
THE WITNESS: I don't remember Dal Perry.
1 2
BY MR. MAURIELLO:
13
Q.
You don't remember him?
./
14
A.
No.
,, 5;-:
15
Q.
Okay. Were you aware of any studies
16
regarding types of trades that may be considered under
17
OSHA regulations -- withdrawn.
18
Were you aware of the actual OSHA
19
regulations that designated certain trades to be at
20
higher risk for asbestos exposure?
21
MR. HUTCHINS: I object to the form of the
22
question.
23
THE WITNESS: I can't recall.
24
BY MR. MAURIELLO:
25
Q.
Were you aware of any of the OSHA acts t
243
1
had classified workers, and depending on class level,
2
for their exposure to asbestos?
3
A.
No.
4
Q.
Were you ever made aware of any of the laws
5
in Worth Carolina concerning what trades were
6
considered, quote, dusty trades, under North Carolina
7
law?
8
A.
I only knew that workers had to -- in
9
certain dusty trades had to have a miner's card.
1 0
Q-
A what card?
11
A.
They called it a miner's card.
1 2
Q-
The workers in a dusty trade did?
13
A.
Yes.
i-
14
Q.
And do you recall for how long that was .in
- 5* '
15
effect?
16
A.
No, I don't.
17
Q.
Do you know if and when Daniel Construction
18
Company itself had been designated by North Carolina as
19
a dusty trade industry?
20
A.
No.
21
Q.
Have you ever received any type of
22
information about subcontractors being designated as a
23
dusty trade in North Carolina?
24
A.
No.
25
Q-
Do you know for how long asbestosis has
244
1
been a compensable disease under North Carolina's
2
Worker's Compensation Act.
3
A.
No.
4
MR. HUTCHINS: Object to the form of the
5
question.
6
THE WITNESS: I don't, no.
7
(Reviewing documents.)
8
BY MR. MAURIELLO:
9
Q.
Do you have any type of materials in your
10
possession from your employment as an industrial
11
hygienist with the corporation such as any type of logs
12
or schedules or records or anything of that nature?
13
A.
No.
14
Q.
Did you ever take any photographs or video /
15
logs or videotapes of any of the plants?
16
A.
No.
1 7
Q.
Did anybodythat was with you or within
18
your department onoccasion take anysuch photographs
19
for any purposes?
20
A.
No. They weren't allowed.
21
Q.
They weren't allowed to?
22
A.
That 's right.
23
Q.
Okay While you were employed as the
24
industrial hygienist for Celanese, did you attend any
25
type of seminars or symposiums for your trade?
ARIZONA COURT REPORTING
245
1
A.
Seminars or symposiums?
2
Q.
Yeah. Did you go to any trade shows or
3
trade meetings or meetings of industrial hygienists?
4
MR. HUTCHINS: Are you talking about while
5
he was at Celanese?
6
BY MR. MAURIELLO:
7
Q.
Yeah, that was my question. While you were
8
employed --
9
A.
Well, the Industrial Hygiene Association's
10
annual meetings.
11
Q.
That you told me aboutyesterday?
12
A.
Right.
13
Q.
Anything else?
/
14
A.
And local section meetings of both New York.
,is
15
and New Jersey.
16
Q.
Now, you told me yesterday that,again, the
17
first time that you recognized the relationship between
18
asbestos and cancer was in 1971?
19
A.
Yes.
20
Q-
Is that the same answer for mesothelioma?
21
A.
No, I can't say that.
22
Q.
Okay. What can you tell me about when you
23
first learned about the relationship between asbestos
24
exposure and mesothelioma?
25
A.
When I did?
ARIZONA COURT REPORTING
246
1
Q-
Yes- Was it before you learned about the
2
lung cancer relationship or after?
3
A.
It's after.
4
Q.
After 1971?
5
A.
Yes.
6
Q.
When you -- withdrawn.
7
Did you learn about that relationship
8
between what you read in the OSHA regulations?
9
A.
No.
10
Q.
From what sourcedid you learn about the
11
lung cancer/asbestos relationship?
12
A.
I don't recall.
13
Q.
You do recall, though, that it was around / .
14
1971?
~'*
15
A.
Yes.
16
Q.
What information, if any, did you impart to
17
plant safety regarding that?
18
A.
What do you meanby "that"?
19
Q.
That
relationship. Did you giveSam
20
Swearingin or any safety supervisor any type of
21
information about what you had discovered?
22
A. No.
23
Q.
Had you ever sent to Sam or any other plant
24
manager information about asbestos hazards or potential
25
hazards?
ARIZONA COURT REPORTING
247
1
A.
Just those that were in the Federal
2
Register.
3
Q.
All right. And when did you do that?
4
A.
Well, right after it came out.
5
Q.
By sending the Register itself; is that
6
what you are telling me?
7
A.
Well, the copy, the photocopy.
8
Q.
Do you know what information was given to
9
plant workers about the hazards of asbestos at the
10
Salisbury plant from 1966, when you came on board,
11
until 1970?
12
A.
No.
13
Q.
Did you instruct the plant supervisor or
14
safety superintendent to impart any information to
15
those workers about potential hazards of asbestos?
16
A.
No, I did not.
17
Q-
If -- withdrawn
18
Do you know what information was given to
19
Fleur Daniel workers from Hurk-Celanese and/or its
20
management regarding the hazards of asbestos at any
21
time before you left in 1979?
22
A.
No.
23
Q.
Was there any directive from the medical
24
department at Hurk-Celanese -- excuse me -- at
25
Celanese, to Fleur Daniel or any subcontractors to
ARIZONA COURT REPORTING
248
1
provide them with information about asbestos?
2
A.
I don't know of any.
3
Q-
I'm sorry if I asked this question, but I
4
need to -- did you know that asbestos was being
5
installed in the Salisbury plant in 1966?
6
A.
No.
7
Q-
Did you know at any point in time
8
thereafter -- withdrawn.
9
When for the first time were you made aware
10
of the fact that asbestos may have been installed in
11
the Salisbury plant?
1 2
A.
I can't recall.
13
Q.
Did you know before the -- withdrawn.
14
You told me earlier you did not recall
15
seeing those citations that I just showed you, the
16
specific one I just showed you; is that correct?
17
A.
Yes.
18
Q.
On asbestos?
19
A.
Yes.
20
Q.
To the best of your knowledge, you haven't
21
seen that before?
22
A.
Yes.
23
Q.
Have you seen any type of in-house
24
inspection by the plant that talked about asbestos?
25
A.
No.
ARIZONA COURT REPORTING
249
1
Q.
Did you know when you left in 1979 that the
2
Salisbury plant had asbestos in it?
3
A.
No.
4
Q.
Had you ever seen any of the workers in the
5
plant working with gaskets?
6
A.
No.
7
Q.
Had you ever seen any workers in the plants
8
removing insulation?
9
A.
No.
10
Q.
And you told me earlier you didn't recall
11
seeing new construction insulation, correct?
12
A.
Correct.
13
Q.
Do you ever recall -- withdrawn.
- .
14
Had you ever seen workers moving equipment- y;
15
throughout the plant using a chainfall?
-
16
A.
I can't recall.
17
Q.
Do you know what I'm talking about?
18
A.
Yes, I know.
19
Q.
Do you know whatdrifting refers to? Have
20
you ever heard that term before?
21
A.
No.
22
Q.
Had you ever seen workers fixing cables to
23
any portion of the ceiling joist or the beams within
24
the plant?
25
A.
No.
ARIZONA COURT REPORTING
250
1
Q.
Had you ever seen any heavy vessels or
2
equipment being moved from one room to another or
3
within a room, or the process by which they did that?
4
A.
No.
5
Q.
Had you ever seen any of the workers mixing
6
any materials in which to perform the insulation work?
7
A.
No.
8
Q.
Had you ever seen any of the workers
9
cutting any of insulation?
10
A.
No.
11
Q.
Sawing insulation?
1 2
A.
No.
13
Q.
Had you ever been in the insulation saw
1 4
room within the plant?
1 5
A.
No.
16
Q.
Okay. Had you ever seen the type of
17
equipment that the insulators use in which to cut
18
insulation?
19
MR. HUTCHINS: Are you talking about at any
20
time or at the Salisbury plant?
21
THE WITNESS: Any time or at the Salisbury
22
plant?
23
BY MR. MAURIELLO:
24
Q.
Any time at the Salisbury plant.
25
A.
No.
ARIZONA COURT REPORTING
1
Q.
I'm just referring to Salisbury now.
2
A.
No. No.
3
Q.
Okay. Do you know as you sit here today
4
which plants within the fiber group that were plants
5
you visited from '66 to '79 contained asbestos?
6
A.
The Greenville plant.
7
Q.
You know that that did?
8
A.
Yes
9
Q-
How do you know that?
10
A.
I was told that they were going to be
11
replacing asbestos type insulation with non-asbestos,
12
if possible.
13
Q.
And do you recall the general time frame
14
when that communication to you? They were going to
15
abate or remove the asbestos, is that what you are
16
telling me?
17
A.
Yes.
18
Q.
Do you recall generally when that took
19
place or when they told you about it?
20
A.
Well, again, in the '70s. That's all I can
21
say.
22
Q.
Any other location besidesGreenville?
23
A.
No. I don't recall.
24
I think I'm going to take a little break.
25
MR. HUTCHINS: Would you like to take a
ARIZONA COURT REPORTING
252
1
break?
2
THE WITNESS: Sure.
3
MR. MAURIELLO: Absolutely.
4
THE VIDEOGRAPHER: The time is 11:17 and
5
we're going off record.
6
(Recess taken.)
7
THE VIDEOGRAPHER: The time is 11:41 and we
8
are back on record.
9
BY MR. MAURIELLO:
1 0
Q.
Thank you. Mr. Laubly, I just want to ask
11
you what I believe is a few more questions, and I'll
12
finish up.
13
Getting back to your knowledge of asbestos
14
issues and asbestos hazards, had you ever learned of
15
the detrimental relationship between cigarette smoking
16
and asbestos exposure, what's sometimes known as the
1 7
cinergistic effect between a person who smokes
18
cigarettes and is also exposed to asbestos?
19
A.
I heard about it, yes.
20
Q.
What's generally your understanding? I
21
know you're not a medical doctor, but, generally, what
22
information do you recall as to that issue, cigarette
23
smoking and asbestos?
24
MR. HUTCHINS: I object to the form of the
25
question, but you may answer, Mr. Laubly.
ARIZONA COURT REPORTING
253
1
BY MR. MAURIELLO:
2
Q.
I'll rephrase the question. Let me
3
rephrase it because I want to make sure we can avoid as
4
many objections as possible.
5
While you were an industrial hygienist with
6
Celanese, did you receive any information relating to
7
the issue of cigarette smoking and asbestos?
8
A.
I'm sure I did, but I can't recall it.
9
Q.
Do you recall if you received such
10
information before you worked for Celanese in 1966?
11
A.
No.
12
Q.
That's, no, you don't recall, or, no, you
13
didn't?
I
14
A.
I didn't.
15
Q.
After you received any information about
16
asbestos and cigarette smoking, did you formulate any
17
type of policy?
18
A.
At Celanese?
19
Q.
Yes, sir.
20
A.
No.
21
Q.
Did the medical department at Celanese ever
22
initiate any type of policy about smoking in general,
23
along any lines within the plants?
24
A.
I can't recall.
25
Q.
I'll rephrase the question, if it's
ARIZONA COURT REPORTING
254
1
unclear.
2
MR. HUTCHINS: Okay.
3
BY MR. MAURIELLO:
4
Q.
I'd like to know if the medical department
5
at Celanese -- let me break it down.
6
Did you issue any type of directive out of
7
the medical department relating to where any plant
8
workers can smoke, how often they can smoke within the
9
plants?
10
A.
No, I did not.
11
Q.
Did you pass along any information to
12
either plant management or plant workers about the
1 3
issue of asbestos and smoking in any form?
14
A.
No.
15
Q.
Do you know if anyone else did that, out of
1 6
the medical department, either Dr. Dixon or any of the
17
other --
18
A.
I don't recall that.
19
Q.
Okay. Do you know how the workers in the
20
Salisbury knew or should have known of the effects of
21
exposure to asbestos fibers?
22
MR. HUTCHINS: I object to the form of the
23
question.
24
THE WITNESS: I don't understand.
25
BY MR. MAURIELLO:
ARIZONA COURT REPORTING
255
1
Q.
Sure. Then let me show you what we marked
2
as Plaintiff's Exhibit 9, and this is an answer that
3
was filed in this lawsuit by Celanese, and I'm going to
4
direct your attention to -- this is the answer.
5
I think you've got a copy of that, don't
6
you?
7
MR. HUTCHINS: Well, I don't have it with
8
me. Can I just take a glance at that for a moment?
9
(Reviewing documents.)
10
BY MR. MAURIELLO:
11
Q.
Mr. Laubly, I'm going to direct your
12
attention to what's listed as a fourth defense on Page
13
7 of the answer to your deposition marked Plaintiff's i
y
14
Exhibit 9, and I'm going to read what the attorneys fof,,.;
15
Celanese have filed in this case in that answer:
16
"The worker plaintiffs knew or should have
17
known about the effects of exposure to
18
asbestos fibers and knew or should have
19
known to treat any insulating material as
20
if it contained asbestos, unless they were
21
certain it did not contain asbestos."
22
Question number one, regarding that
23
statement: What information did you pass on from 1966
24
to 1979 to inform workers of that hazard?
25
MR. HUTCHINS: I object to the question on
ARIZONA COURT REPORTING
256
1
several grounds. First of all, it deals with the
2
answer and legal defense is asserted there to the
3
extent it seeks to draw a legal conclusion from Mr.
4
Laubly, and I object. I object generally on foundation
5
and other grounds.
6
MR. MAURIELLO: Well, this is a defense
7
that is set up by the defendant in this case, and I'm
8
going to ask this particular witness: If you have any
9
information about what knowledge the insulators in this
10
case had regarding the effects of asbestos.
11
THE WITNESS: No.
12
BY MR. MAURIELLO:
13
Q.
Do you have any information about what type
14
of communication or information was communicated to any t
15
of the plaintiff insulators or workers in this lawsuit ;
16
about asbestos?
17
A.
No.
18
Q.
And, just so I'm clear, you did not impart
19
any information to their, to Fleur Daniel about the
20
effects of asbestos exposure, did you?
21
A.
No.
22
Q.
Did youdraft any directive that workers
23
within the Salisbury plant should assume insulating
24
materials contained asbestos?
25
A.
No, I did not.
ARIZONA COURT REPORTING
257
1
Q.
Are you aware of anyone that communicated
2
to any of the insulators in the Salisbury plant at any
3
point in time that they should assume insulation in the
4
plant contained asbestos?
5
A.
No.
6
Q.
Now, the next subsection to that defense
7
states:
8
"The worker plaintiffs failed to exercise
9
reasonable care for their own protection
10
and safety."
11
Do you see that statement?
12
A.
I see the statement, yes.
13
Q.
Okay. In what way are you aware of workers
14
failing to exercise reasonable care for their own
15
safety and protection?
16
MR. HUTCHINS: I'll object to the question
17
on the same grounds stated previously.
18
THE WITNESS: I'm not aware of that.
19
BY MR. MAURIELLO:
20
Q.
All right. Section C says:
21
"The worker plaintiffs voluntarily exposed
22
themselves to the risks of working around
23
insulating materials without taking
24
precautions to protect themselves from
25
potential asbestos exposure."
ARIZONA COURT REPORTING
258
1
First question regarding that part: Do you
2
know, again, when any of the workers knew they were
3
working around asbestos materials?
4
MR. HUTCHINS: I want to interpose the same
5
objection to the earlier question involving the answer,
6
and I object to the use of these legal documents with
7
this witness, generally.
8
MR. MAURIELLO: That's fine.
9
MR. HUTCHINS: He may answer the question.
10
MR. MAURIELLO: That's fine, and for the
11
record, just so I can confront the witness with these
12
questions, we'll note a standing objection to the
13
answer; is that fair?
1 4
MR. HUTCHINS: A standing objection to the
15
questions.
16
MR. MAURIELLO: To the questions based on
17
this answer.
18
MR. HUTCHINS: That's right.
19
MR. MAURIELLO: Fair enough.
20
MR. HUTCHINS: Any questions you might ask
21
dealing with this particular document.
22
MR. MAURIELLO: Fair enough.
23
THE WITNESS: Okay. Now, ask me the
24
question.
25
BY MR. MAURIELLO:
ARIZONA COURT REPORTING
259
1
Q.
Sure. This statement says:
2
"The workers plaintiffs voluntarily exposed
3
themselves to the risk of working around
4
insulating materials without taking
5
precautions to protect themselves from
6
potential asbestos exposure."
7
First of all, when are you aware of any of
8
the insulators being aware of the fact that they were
9
working around asbestos?
10
MR. HUTCHINS: I object to the form.
11
THE WITNESS: I can't recall.
1 2
BY MR. MAURIELLO:
13
Q.
What facts do you have that indicate when ./ ;
14
any of the workers were aware of the hazards of
1 5
asbestos and what time frame?
1 6
A.
I have no facts.
17
MR. HUTCHINS: I object to the form of the
18
question.
19
BY MR. MAURIELLO:
20
Q.
Okay. Now you can answer.
21
A.
I have no facts.
Q.
Thank you. What precautionsare you aware
of that the plaintiffs in this lawsuitfailed to take
that amounts to unreasonable care?
MR. HUTCHINS: I object to the form.
ARIZONA COURT REPORTING
260
1
THE WITNESS: I have no knowledge.
2
BY MR. MAURIELLO:
3
Q.
And the last subsection to that defense
4
indicates :
5
"The worker plaintiffs failed to adhere to
6
warnings and instructions concerning
7
precautions to be taken and avoid asbestos
8
exposure."
9
Do you know which warnings that statement
10
is referring to?
11
A.
No.
12
Q.
Do you know which instructions?
13
A.
No.
/
14
MR. HUTCHINS: Are we done with the
1 5
documents?
16
MR. MAURIELLO: Yes.
17
BY MR. MAURIELLO:
18
Q.
Mr.Laubly, back in 1966, was it your
19
understanding that certain precautions should have been
20
taken for any worker working around asbestos?
21
Let me be more specific. Were you aware of
22
any precautions that should have been taken for any
23
workers working with asbestos, such as asbestos
24
insulation?
25
MR. HUTCHINS: Object to the form of the
ARIZONA COURT REPORTING
261
1
question.
2
THE WITNESS: The only thing I knew was the
3
receipt of the Federal Register.
4
BY MR. MAURIELLO:
5
Q.
Okay. You knew back in 1966 that asbestos
6
exposure could potentially lead to asbestosis, correct?
7
A.
Correct.
8
Q.
Would you agree with me that certain
9
precautions should have been taken back at that time?
10
MR. HUTCHINS: I object to the form of the
11
question. Should have been taken with respect to what?
12
BY MR. MAURIELLO:
13
Q.
Any worker working around asbestos
; -
14
insulation.
'
15
A.
Working to -- as significant exposures,
16
yes.
17
Q.
All right. And so you have -- you used the
18
term "significant exposure."
19
Assuming that an individual was around a
20
significant exposure, by your definition, should
21
certain precautions be taken?
22
A.
Yes.
23
Q.
Is asbestos such a substance that
24
precautions need to be taken in order to prevent harm,
25
given a substantial exposure?
ARIZONA COURT REPORTING
262
1
A.
Well, it's listed in the Federal Register
2
as one.
3
Q.
It's also listed as a known carcinogen at
4
this point?
5
A.
Yes.
6
MR. HUTCHINS: You mean at the time the
7
Federal Register came out?
8
MR. MAURIELLO: Correct.
9
BY MR. MAURIELLO:
10
Q.
Which is back in 1971, it was listed as a
11
carcinogen; is that correct?
12
A.
Yes.
1 3
Q.
Would you agree, then, that work 'around
14
asbestos products, by its very nature, can cause
' '
15
serious harm unless certain precautions are taken?
16
MR. HUTCHINS: Object to the form.
17
THE WITNESS: Give that again.
18
BY MR. MAURIELLO:
19
Q.
Would you believe that working around
20
asbestos can potentially be harmful unless certain
21
precautions are taken?
22
A.
Yes.
23
Q.
Okay. Would you agree that asbestos
24
itself, as a known carcinogen, is inherently dangerous?
25
A.
Well, yes.
ARIZONA COURT REPORTING
253
1
Q.
Under the definition we just talked about?
2
A.
Yes.
3
Q.
Would youagree that work around asbestos
4
is an inherently dangerous activity?
5
MR. HUTCHINS: I object to the form of the
6
question. Always? All the time? Everywhere?
7
MR. MAURIELLO: Potentially.
8
MR. HUTCHINS: Any dose?
9
THE WITNESS: Potentially, yes.
10
BY MR. MAURIELLO:
11
Q.
Well, that'sa fair objection.
12
Let's talk about specific insulators. I'm ;
13
not talking about a bystander or someone with minimal "> .f i
14
exposure. I'm talking about insulators or millwrights; .'/,
15
or individuals that may come in contact with asbestos
1 6
material.
1 7
Would you agree with me that that may be
18
potentially an inherently dangerous activity?
19
MR. HUTCHINS: Well, it's the same
20
objection. All the time? Everywhere? All exposures?
21
MR. MAURIELLO: Well, that's why I used the
22
word "potential." We can't be there all the time, so
23
I'm talking about --
24
THE WITNESS: That's true, yes.
25
BY MR. MAURIELLO:
264
1
Q-
Did your medical department issue any
2
directives about record keeping within any of the
3
plants?
4
A.
No.
5
Q.
Did any department withinCelanese issue
6
directives or bylaws or rules about what type of
7
records were to be kept?
8
A.
I can't recall.
9
Q.
I'm assuming theanswer to this next
10
question is no.
11
You haven't reviewed the purchase records
12
for the Salisbury fiber plant?
13
A.
That's true.
14
Q.
All right. And you don't know which
15
engineering records are in existence and which are not?
16
A.
No, I do not.
17
Q.
Okay. Do you know a gentleman named Arnold
18
Runyon? I will represent to you, he's been listed as
19
the supervisor for Daniel out of Greenville in the late
20
'60s. Do you know Mr. Runyon?
21
A.
No. I just saw the name recently in one of
22
those memos you showed me.
23
Q.
On the dusty trades document?
24
A . Yes .
25
Q.
Had you ever heard about him before?
265
1
A.
No.
2
Q.
While you were the industrial hygienist
3
from '66 to '79, were any portions of any plants
4
labeled for asbestos content?
5
A.
Not to my knowledge.
6
Q.
And you mentioned earlier, theGreenville
7
plant, you were aware that there was an abatement that
8
was about to be undertaken, correct?
9
A.
Correct.
10
Q.
And you told me earlieryou weren't aware
11
of the fact that the Salisbury plant had asbestos; is
12
that correct?
/ ;
13
A.
Correct.
14
Q.
In any of the other plants, Canada, U.K., 1 . *
15
Mexico, did Celanese request, to the best of your
16
knowledge, that any portions of the plant be labeled
17
for workers --
18
A.
No.
19
Q.
-- for asbestos content?
20
A.
Not to my knowledge.
21
Q.
Okay. I assume -- you retired in 1979?
22
A.
Yes.
23
Q.
Had you been back to the company to perform
24
any type of activity since your retirement in '79?
25
Aside from any legal proceeding, have you been actively
266
1
involved in anything, any of the operations within the
2
company?
3
A.
No.
4
Q.
Have you been back to any of the plants for
5
any reason?
6
A.
No.
7
Q.
All right. Is it a fair statement on my
8
part, then, regards to the Salisbury fiber plant, you
9
don't have any direct knowledge of the operations of
10
the plant after you left in 1979?
1 1
A.
That's true.
12
Q.
Have you reviewed any documentation, either;;
13
in preparation for this deposition or in any other
f
1 4
proceedings for Celanese that imparted any information., i
15
to you about what happened in the Salisbury plant in
1 6
the 1980s or 1990s?
17
A.
No.
18
Q.
I assume that you do not know personally
19
any of the plaintiffs to this lawsuit?
20
A.
I do not.
21
Q.
You don't -- withdrawn.
22
Have you seen their names on any of the
23
legal documents before you testified today?
24
A.
No, I haven't.
25
Q.
And I think it's pretty clear that when you
267
1
were in the plant in the '60s and '70s you weren't, you
2
don't recall the names of any of the Fleur Daniel
3
workers that may have been in the plant?
4
A.
No, I do not.
5
MR. MAURIELLO: All right, Mr. Laubly. I
6
appreciate it. That's all the questions I have for
7
you. Thank you for your time.
8
THE WITNESS: Thank you.
9
MR. HUTCHINS: I have a few questions.
10
11
EXAMINATION
12
13
BY MR. HUTCHINS:
|
1 4
Q.
As you know, my name is Mike Hutchins and I
* .if
15
represent Celanese in this case.
16
Would you please tell our jury what year
17
you were born in, sir?
18
A.
1916.
19
Q.
How old are you today, sir?
20
A.
Just about 83.
21
Q.
And you'll be 84 --
22
A.
No, 83 in October.
23
Q.
You'll be 83 in October of this year.
24
You were asked some questions earlier by
25
Mr. Mauriello regarding your employment by American Can
ARIZONA COURT REPORTING
268
1
Company both before and after World War 2. Do you
2
remember those questions?
3
A.
Yes.
4
Q.
Were asbestos-containing products, to your
5
knowledge, present in the facilities owned and operated
6
by American Can where you worked?
7
A.
Yes.
8
Q.
In fact, I believe you toldus about
9
installing some of those products?
1 0
A.
Yes.
1 1
Q.
Did American Can give you any training
1 2
regarding how to handle asbestos-containing products
1 3
when you worked there?
J
14
A . No.
'.:>
1 5
Q.
Did anybody at American Can give you any :
1 6
education or convey any information regarding potential
1 7
health risks associated with asbestos of any kind?
18
A.
No.
19
Q.
Let me talk a little bit about your
20
education at Georgia Tech. And I believe you said you
21
graduated there in 1949; is that right?
22
A.
True.
23
Q.
You mentioned earlier some difficulty you
24
had in certain mathematics and science courses while
25
you studied at Georgia Tech?
i
269
1
A.
Yes.
2
Q.
Did you receive any training in your high
3
school education or preparation for college-level
4
mathematics or science courses?
5
A.
No.
6
Q.
When you received your degree from Georgia
7
Tech, had you completed all requirements for your
8
Bachelor of Science degree?
9
A.
Yes.
10
Q.
They didn't let you pass or slide on any of
11
those requirements?
12
A.
No. I had more hours credit than was
-
13
needed.
y 'f
- iff1
14
Q.
You ultimately passed the mathematics and
.if
15
science requirements that Georgia Tech had?
16
A.
At last, yeah.
17
Q.
In your studies at Georgia Tech, did you
18
receive any education or information regarding asbestos
19
health risks of any kind?
20
A.
No.
21
Q.
Was asbestos a subject of study at Georgia
22
Tech in any way that you remember, sir?
23
A.
I can't recall.
24
Q.
Now, your studies atGeorgia Tech were
25
interrupted by service in the United States Army; is
270
1
that right?
2
A.
True.
3
Q.
Could you briefly in summary tell our jury
4
a little bit about what you did while you were in the
5
service?
6
MR. MAURIELLO: Object to the form. You
7
can answer.
8
THE WITNESS: I worked in a clinical
9
laboratory. I was also engaged in parasiticological
10
work and entomological work when I was overseas. It
11
was all geared towards occupational health for the
12
service men.
13
BY MR. HUTCHINS:
..r
14
Q.
What sort of occupational health concerns
rVjL**1
15
did you deal with while you were in the U.S. Army?
16
A.
Well, exposure to parasites and just
17
general sanitation.
18
Q.
You indicated, I think, that you worked at
19
a laboratory.
20
A.
Yes.
21
Q.
What sort of training or techniques did you
22
learn about while you worked at that laboratory?
23
A.
In the Army medical laboratory?
24
Q.
That's right.
25
A.
Blood work.Blood chemistry. And
271
1
hematology. A lot of microscopy. Venereal disease.
2
Q.
All of the various exposures of one kind or
3
another that soldiers in that day and age might have?
4
A.
True.
5
Q.
Insect borne or otherwise, right?
6
A.
That's right.
7
Q.
You indicated that you took some training
8
in the use of microscopes?
9
A.
Yes.
10
Q.
Was that training that you used later in
11
your occupational career as an industrial hygienist?
1 2
A.
Yes. In the Army it was blood counting, !
13
and in the career, it was dust counting.
.:
14
Q.
But the same general techniques?
1 5
A.
Same general technique, yes.
16
Q.
You stated earlier that you served overseas
17
while you were in the U.S. Army. Can you tell us where
18
you served overseas?
19
MR. MAURIELLO: Object to the form. You
20
can answer.
21
THE WITNESS: New Guinea and the
22
Philippines.
23
BY MR. HUTCHINS:
24
Q.
How long did you serve overseas, sir?
25
A.
About two years.
272
1
Q.
And you left active duty, then, in 1945 or
2
'46?
3
A.
December 30, 1945.
4
Q.
You remember that date well, don't you?
5
A.
I remember. There are certain dates I
6
remember.
7
Q.
Now, you've testified earlier that you've
8
worked as an industrial hygienist for Lumberman's
9
Insurance Company, a division of Kemper, between 1949
10
and 1966; is that correct?
11
A.
Correct.
12
Q.
During the period that you were employed by:
13
Lumberman's, were there many schools, as you understood.!
1 4
it, that taught courses or offered degrees in
1 5
industrial hygiene?
1 6
A.
I only knew of two, really, Johns-Hopkins
17
and Harvard.
18
Q.
During the period that you worked for
19
Lumberman's, again, from 1949 to 1966, were there many
20
industrial hygienists involved in your field or
21
employed in your field?
22
A.
No.
23
Q.
To the extent that there were industrial
24
hygienists active during that period, and, again, I'm
25
talking about 1949 to 1966, where were they employed,
273
1
in the main?
2
MR. MAURIELLO: Object to the form.
3
THE WITNESS: Most of them were employed by
4
the insurance companies. A few of the larger
5
corporations like DuPont and Exxon and Bell Labs had
6
their own industrial hygienists.
7
BY MR. HUTCHINS:
8
Q.
During the period of 1949 to 1966, based on
9
your experience and involvement in the field, was it
10
common for companies in American industry to have their
11
own on-staff industrial hygienists?
12
A.
No.
;i -
13
Q.
How did companies in American industry
14
between 1 9 4 9 and 1 9 6 6 typically get industrial h y g i e n e .'.tt-
15
support or advice if they wanted it?
16
A.
They got it from --
17
MR. MAURIELLO: Object to the form.
18
THE WITNESS: -- the insurance company.
19
BY MR. HUTCHINS:
20
Q.
An insurance companysuch asKemper?
21
A.
Yes.
22
Q.
Did Celanese, in yourexperience, while
23
working for the Lumberman's division of Kemper, seek
24
industrial hygiene advice from their carriers?
25
A.
Yes.
274
1
Q.
Did you visit Celanese plants and perforin
2
industrial hygiene duties while an industrial hygienist
3
for Kemper?
4
A.
Yes.
5
Q.
Did that include any plants in Fiber
6
Industries?
7
A.
Yes.
8
Q.
Did that include any plants with Celanese
9
Fibers Company?
10
A.
Yes.
11
Q.
Did that includeplants owned oroperated
12
by those companies in North and South Carolina?
13
A.
Yes.
.v:.
1 4
Q.
Generally speaking, from your experience -,?*
1 5
and your recollection of industrial hygiene in the
16
1940s and the 1950s, how did an industrial hygienist
17
such as yourself get training in their field?
18
A.
Well, it wastraining in the field. I
19
mean, that's how we did it. It was a do-it-yourself
20
type of training.
21
Q.
Sort of on-the-job training?
22
A.
On-the-job training.
23
Q.
During the time that you were at
24
Lumberman's, again, between 1949 and 1966, did you
25
maintain contacts or have contacts with other
ARIZONA COURT REPORTING
275
1
industrial hygienists or occupational health people at
2
that time?
3
A.
Yes.
4
Q.
Can you tell our jury how you had those
5
contacts and what they entailed?
6
A.
A lot of the contacts were made through the
7
local sections of the American Industrial Hygiene
8
Association.
9
Q.
And that's been referred to here as the
10
AIHA.
11
A.
The AIHA, yes.
12
Q.
Do you recall when the AIHA was founded?
13
A
1939 .
14
Q.
The AIHA Exists today?
. t
15
A.
Pardon?
16
Q.
The AIHA still exists today?
17
A.
Yes.
18
Q.
What sort of contacts or other
19
opportunities would you have with industrial hygienists
20
through the American Industrial Hygiene Association.
21
And, again, we're talking about the 1940s and the
22
1950s.
23
A.
I don't exactly know what your question is.
24
Q.
Sure. You indicated that you had contact
25
with other industrial hygienist from the 1940s and the
276
1
1950s through the AIHA.
2
Can you tell us how those contacts would
3
work, what the nature of those contacts would be?
4
A.
If I had a specific problem that I was
5
working on, I would call an industrial hygienist who I
6
thought had experience with that, and then go from
7
there.
8
We, all of our contacts were by telephone.
9
We didn't have the computers to go to, so it was by
10
telephone. It was, our network was by phone.
11
Q.
Now, you mentioned something called
1 2
chapters earlier.
y-
] l
13
A.
The chapters, or they're called local
14
sections. These were comprised of safety engineers, :
.it
15
industrial nurses, other industrial hygienists,
16
instrument manufacturers, so if we had problems there,
17
we could contact at our annual -- I mean our monthly
18
meetings.
19
Q.
Where did you belong to chapters of the
20
American Industrial Hygiene Association?
21
A.
In Chicago, I started out there and I was
22
elected to the board of directors. And left when I was
23
transferred.
24
Then I became a member of the New Jersey
25
section and then the New York section, and eventually
277
1
became chairman of the latter two. And then now, I'm a
2
member of the Arizona section.
3
Q.
During the period that you worked for
4
Lumberman's between 1949 and 1966, were you a member of
5
any other professional organizations or groups?
6
A.
The American Chemical Society. And I think
7
I was a member of the Health Physics Society in
8
Arizona.
9
Q.
Okay.
10
A.
They met so infrequently, that's why I say.
11
Q.
Well, again, now, I'm talking about back in
12
the period when you worked for Lumberman's.
13
A.
Right.
f. *v V
14
Q.
Through the AIHA or the local chapters or \; J|
15
any of the other organizations that you belonged to or ;
16
had contacts with between 1949 and 1966, did you
17
receive any training or information regarding the
18
handling of asbestos-containing products?
19
A.
No.
20
Q.
Did youreceive any specialinformation
or
21
guidance of any kind regarding potential health risks
22
associated with asbestos exposure?
23
A.
No.
24
Q.
Now,you've been asked a lot ofquestions
25
earlier regarding asbestos and hazard. During the time
ARIZONA COURT REPORTING
278
1
you were employed at Lumberman's, Mr. Laubly, what was
2
the recognized potential hazard of asbestos exposure as
3
you understood it to be?
4
A.
Long-term exposure to asbestos could cause
5
asbestosis.
6
Q.
Was there a particular concentration or
7
amount of exposure understood by you to be related to
8
the potential for that disease, asbestosis?
9
A.
On the time-weighted average, it was five
10
particles per cubic foot of air.
1 1
Q.
As an eight-hour time-weighted?
1 2
A.
At an eight-hour time-weighted average.
13
Q.
Is that what was known as the threshold :ii' *
1 4
limit value?
1 ij
1 5
A.
Well, first it was the MAC.
*
1 6
Q.
Which stood for what?
1 7
A.
Maximum allowable concentration. Then they
18
changed it to the TLV.
1 9
Q.
Was that a high threshold limit value for
20
asbestos?
21
MR. MAURISLLO: Object to the form.
22
THE WITNESS: Yes.
23
BY MR. HUTCHINS:
24
Q.
During this time period, and, again, 1949
25
to 1966, was it your understanding and that of people
ARIZONA COURT REPORTING
279
1
whom you had contact with, 'that any exposure to
2
asbestos could be harmful?
3
A.
I don't believe so.
4
Q.
So as you understood it at that time,
5
asbestosis was a disease of high-dose exposure over a
6
lengthy period of time.
7
MR. MAURIELLO: Object to the form.
8
THE WITNESS: Yes, that's true.
9
BY MR. HUTCHINS:
10
Q.
And just so I'm clear, based on your
11
experience and your contacts while you were at
1 2
Lumberman's in the field of industrial hygiene, do you.' -
1 3
remember hearing anybody opine or suggest that lesser>,:/*;|f
1 4
briefer exposures to asbestos put anybody at potential
1 5
risk for disease?
16
A.
No.
1 7
Q.
While you worked at Lumberman's, did you
18
have any training or experience that would lead you to
19
appreciate that there were potential hazards associated
20
with dust concentrations?
21
A.
Again?
22
Q.
Certainly. While you were at Lumberman's,
23
did you have any training or information that would
24
lead you to appreciate or understand that there could
25
be hazards associated with dust concentrations?
280
1
A.
Yes.
2
Q-
Was that limited toasbestos?
3
A.
No.
4
Q.
What were some of the other dust
5
concentrations or dusty substances that were important
6
to the field of industrial hygiene while you were
7
employed by Lumberman's?
8
MR. MAURIELLO: Object to the form.
9
Relevance. You can answer.
10
THE WITNESS: Primarily it was silica.
11
BY MR. HUTCHINS:
12
Q.
Were there other dusty substances that were;'
13
of concern to the field of industrial hygiene as you
-'-f .'f
1 4
understood it while you were employed by Lumberman's?-
15
A.
Yes. Coal dust was another one. Cotton
16
dust. Beryllium. Any, most any dust that could --
1 7
that you would work with.
18
Q.
Was asbestos one of the dusts, though, that
19
you were trained to have an appreciation of?
20
A.
Yes.
21
Q.
Now, Ibelieve you testified earlier, while
22
you with Lumberman's, you may have made visits to a
23
couple of hundred plants a year?
24
A.
Yes.
25
Q.
Did you everseeinsulatorsworking with
281
1
insulation products in the course of any of those
2
visits?
3
A.
I never saw any actual workers.
4
Q.
Okay. Did you ever see what you considered
5
to be dust conditions caused by the use of
6
asbestos-containing products, insulation products, in
7
any of those plants that you visited with Lumberman's?
8
A.
Not insulation products.
9
Q.
Did you see asbestos dust concentrations
10
anywhere?
11
MR. MAURIELLO: Object to the form.
12
THE WITNESS: Yes. As I mentioned, at
13
Mastic Tile.
14
BY MR. HUTCHINS:
15
Q.
I believe you testified that some time in
16
the 1950s you did a survey of a mastic tile plant in
17
New York?
18
A.
Yes.
19
Q.
I believe you testified aswell that you
20
also visited a facility in Chicago where they
21
manufactured asbestos-containing brake linings?
22
A.
Correct.
23
Q.
Did you doasbestos-related dustsampling
24
in those two plants?
25
A.
Yes.
282
1
Q.
Why did you sample for asbestos in those
2
two locations but not elsewhere?
3
A.
Because they were actual manufacturing
4
operations and involved the raw materials.
5
Q.
You say the raw materials. How was
6
asbestos being used in those plants?
7
A.
Well, they were incorporated into the
8
product. Mastic Tile was a manufacturer of floor tile.
9
And the brake lining, of course, then had asbestos in
10
it.
11
Q.
And this was raw fiber being used in those
1 2
facilities?
13
A.
Raw fibers.
1 4
Q.
Okay. I'll let you choose the word in a
15
panorama of exposures, would the potential exposures in
16
those facilities be high, low or something else?
17
MR. MAURIELLO: Object to the form. You
18
may answer.
19
THE WITNESS: At the mastic tile, it was
20
high. At the brake lining, it was low.
21
BY MR. HUTCHINS:
22
Q.
During your period of employment with
23
Lumberman's, did you see potentials to exposure in
24
other facilities that was similar to those potential
25
exposures you examined at the mastic tile plant and the
PURPORTING
283
1
brake lining plant?
2
A.
Again?
3
Q.
Sure. During your employment by
4
Lumberman's, did you ever see in any other facility
5
that you visited potential exposures to asbestos that
6
were similar to the potentials you saw at the mastic
7
tile plant and the brake lining plant?
8
A.
No.
9
Q.
While you were with Lumberman's, did you
10
ever see reports or statistics on occupation disease
11
compensation claims submitted to the insurance company?
12
A.
No.
13
Q.
Was that something that was submitted to
14
the division that you worked with, headed by Mr.
"i
15
Walworth?
15
A.
Yes.
17
Q.
Would thenature of the claimssubmitted to
18
Lumberman's from its various insureds be something that
19
you were generally aware of while you were employed by
20
the company?
21
A.
Yes.
22
Q.
Between 1949 and 1965,while you were
23
employed with Lumberman's, are you aware of any claim
24
being submitted to that insurance carrier for any type
25
of asbestos-related disease?
7\
rinrinm nnrmnmTMP
284
1
MR. MAURIELLO: Object to the form.
2
THE WITNESS: No.
3
BY MR. HUTCHINS:
4
Q.
While you were employed with Lumberman's,
5
were you aware from any other source, conversations
6
with other industrial hygienists, other people in the
7
field of occupational health, of anybody claiming to
8
have any disease related to asbestos exposure?
9
MR. MAURIELLO: Object to the form.
10
THE WITNESS: I can't recall any.
11
BY MR. HUTCHINS:
12
Q.
You mentioned earlier something called a
13
threshold limit value or a TLV; is that right?
./
14
MR. MAURIELLO: Object to the form.
15
THE WITNESS: Correct.
16
BY MR. HUTCHINS:
1 7
Q.
You mentioned it. There was a TLV for
18
asbestos, was there not?
19
MR. MAURIELLO: Object to the form.
20
THE WITNESS: Yes.
21
BY MR. HUTCHINS:
22
Q.
Who promulgated the TLV or threshold limit
23
value for asbestos that existed while you were employed
24
by Lumberman's?
25
A.
The American Conference of Governmental
ARIZONA COURT REPORTING
285
1
Industrial Hygienists.
2
Q.
What, generally speaking, was the American
3
Conference of Governmental Industrial Hygienists?
4
A.
It consisted of the people from academia
5
and from government agencies, local -- state, mostly
6
state agencies.
7
Q.
Could an industrial hygienist such as
8
yourself belong to the American Conference of
9
Governmental Industrial Hygienists?
10
A.
No.
11
Q.
What did the American Conference of
12
Governmental Industrial Hygienists, or ACGIH, do?
13
MR. MAURIELLO: Object to the form.
i
14
THE WITNESS: They inspected plants for the
15
Department of Labor.
16
BY MR. HUTCHINS:
17
Q.
If you know, what did the American
18
Conference of Governmental Industrial Hygienists
19
promulgate TLVS for?
20
MR. MAURIELLO: Object to the form.
21
THE WITNESS: What --
22
BY MR. HUTCHINS:
23
Q.
What was their purpose in promulgating
24
TLVS?
25
A.
To --
ARIZONA COURT REPORTING
286
1
MR. MAURIELLO: Object to the form.
2
THE WITNESS: They were used as guidelines
3
for the control of exposures, workroom contaminants.
4
BY MR. HUTCHINS:
5
Q.
were there ACGIH threshold limit values for
6
substances other than asbestos?
7
A.
Yes.
8
Q.
Can you recall how many other substances?
9
A.
It grew every year. Probably about 100 in
1 0
a little pamphlet that we used to carry around with us.
11
Q.
In your experience as an industrial
12
hygienist in the 1940s and 1950s, were threshold limit
13
values relied upon by you and industrial hygienists ini
1 4
the field as a guideline for exposure?
15
A.
A guideline, yes.
1 6
Q.
We've talked some inthe course of your
17
deposition, Mr. Laubly, about doing dustmeasurements
18
in various plants for various different substances.
1 9
Could you tell me, sort of starting at the
20
beginning, if you wanted to go to a plant to do a dust
21
survey, how you would go about performing that
22
assignment and what equipment or what technology you'd
23
be using in that process?
24
MR. MAURIELLO: What point in time are we
25
talking about now?
HDT7flMil COfTPiP PPDnD'T'TMO
287
1
BY MR. HUTCHINS:
2
Q.
Just so it's clear, this is while you were
3
employed by Lumberman's as an industrial hygienist.
4
A.
Yes. In most instances, my first source
5
would be the safety engineer who regularly serviced a
6
plant, and he would express some concern that there was
7
a dust exposure.
8
Then I would accompany that person and go
9
to the insured and explain what had to be done.
10
Q.
Let me stop you for moment. You say you
11
went to the insured.
12
A.
Went to the insured.
13
Q.
You were based in New York City?
14
A.
I was based in, well, New Jersey.
15
Q.
In the New York area?
16
A.
In the New York area.
17
Q.
Did you take a plane and go visit the
18
plant?
19
A.
No. I took a six-cylinder Chevy.
20
Q.
What was your area of responsibility while
21
you were employed with Lumberman's?
22
A.
Basically everything, mostly everything
23
east of the Mississippi. Once or twice I got west of
24
it, but all of the states based east of the
25
Mississippi.
a d t 7h m 7\ r*nriDrn DfnnDniTMr
288
1
Q.
And how did you visit the plants that you
2
were expected to visit in your area of responsibility?
3
A.
What would -- by motor vehicle.
4
Q.
Did you use equipment in the course of your
5
work?
6
A.
Yes. I carried all the equipment that was
7
assigned to me in the trunk of the car so that when I
8
arrived at the plant, I then could be able to use it.
9
Q.
If you would, tell me how you would do a
10
dust study once you got to the plant.
11
A.
Well, there would be a general walk-through
12
of the plant where I would then determine the areas
1 3
that I thought needed evaluation. And then I would
1 4
make my evaluation by taking a midget impinger dust
15
sample.
16
Q.
Let me stop here for a moment.
17
We've heard reference before to an
18
impinger.
19
A.
Yes.
20
Q.
What exactly is an impinger and how does it
21
work, Mr. Laubly?
22
A.
It's actually a flask attached to a vacuum
23
pump, and this draws the air sample in through a liquid
24
and deposits, impinges the dust at the bottom of the
25
flask.
ART ZONA rntlRT RKPORTTNO
289
1
Q.
And what kind of liquid would be in the
2
flask?
3
A.
Distilled water. Usually distilled water.
4
Q.
Now, you indicated you draw air through a
5
vacuum --
6
A.
Yes.
7
Q.
-- into this flask. How would you draw air
8
into the flask?
9
A.
Well, the flask was so constructed that it
10
had an open port that it would draw it.
11
Q.
Was this an electrical device? Did you
12
plug it in and press a button?
1 3
A.
No. It was a hand-operated pump.
j
1 4
Q.
Hand-operated? How?
15
A.
A crank. It's a crank. Operated the pump
16
with a crank handle.
17
Q.
I'm trying to imagine this. Like an ice
18
cream maker?
19
A.
No, like an organ grinder. In fact, that's
20
-- they used to kid us about that. Where was the
21
monkey.
22
Q.
So you would operate the crank and that
23
would draw air into the --
24
A.
For about 10 to 15 minutes.
25
Q.
Once you'd undergone that process, what
ARIZONA COURT REPORTING
290
1
would you do to analyze or evaluate the data that you
2
had collected?
3
A.
Well, then the material, a portion of the
4
material, the liquid material, would be put on a
5
microscope slide with a grid that had a grid, a
6
counting grid, and place it on a microscope, stage and
7
proceed to count it.
8
Q.
What type of microscope was used?
9
A.
A simple monocular microscope.
10
Q.
What is sometimes described as a light
11
microscope?
12
A.
Light field.
13
Q.
And did you send this off for counting? I/
14
mean, how was that done?
-j
1 5
A.
The counting was done in the motel after
16
hours by myself.
17
Q.
With a light microscope, having done a dust
18
sample, what could you count by light optical
19
examination?
20
A.
Total dust.
21
Q.
And at that level of magnification, could
22
you discern or differentiate one particle ofsubstance
23
from another?
24
A.
It would be very difficult.
25
Q.
Was there some technique available to you
291
1
where you would try to isolate the amount of a specific
2
substance you might find in a given environment?
3
A.
Well, the procedure would be to take a
4
settled dust sample and then that sample would be sent
5
to a laboratory to determine the percentage of either
6
silica or asbestos. And then they would send us that
7
and we would determine the percentage of that in the
8
total dust sample and extrapolate the result to get a
9
time-weighted average.
10
Q.
By the techniques available when you
11
retired in 1979, was this a fairly precise methodology?
12
A.
It was more precise, because collection was
13
done on a millipore filter.
/
14
Q.
In '79?
15
A.
In '79, and then sent toa laboratory for
1 6
the counting.
17
Q.
With the technology that you've described,
18
say, in the 1950s, were the results that you obtained
19
precise or more in terms of an estimate?
20
MR. MAURIELLO: Object to the form.
21
THE WITNESS: Well, it was a good estimate.
22
BY MR. HUTCHINS:
23
Q.
Was therebetter technology later inyour
24
career to do dust sampling of all types?
25
A.
Yes.
71DT 7HKTA r'nnO'T PT?DMDrPTTVin
292
1
Q.
And what was that called?
2
A.
I believe it was called phase contrast
3
microscopy.
4
Q.
In terms of collection techniques, was
5
there different equipment available later in your
6
career?
7
A.
Well, yes. They had battery-operated
8
pumps, and as I say, they collected them then on a
9
millipore filter.
10
Q.
What's a millipore filter?
11
A.
It's a fine plastic filter that's contained
1 2
in a cassette and it's usually, in most instances it's
13
pre-weighed because you're going to make a
14
determination of the weight of the material.
15
Can you ask anything more on that now?
16
MR. MAURIELLO: Can we take a short break
17
for a minute?
18
MR. HUTCHINS: Sure.
19
THE VIDEOGRAPHER: The time is 12:31. We
20
are going off record.
21
(Recess taken.)
22
THE VIDEOGRAPHER: The time is 12:40 and we
23
are back on the record.
24
BY MR. HUTCHINS:
25
Q.
Mr. Laubly, before we took our break, we
ARIZONA COURT REPORTING
293
1
were talking about certain technology available
2
associated with dust sampling. And you indicated that
3
there eventually came to be different microscopic
4
techniques available for analysis and you mentioned
5
something called a millipore filter.
6
Were these techniques an advancement over
7
what you described earlier in using impingers?
8
A.
They were more versatile. We still used
9
the midget impinger with the new miniaturized battery
10
equipment, vacuum pump, in other words.
11
Q.
If you recall, when did the millipore
1 2
technology come into general availability?
13
A.
After OSHA started.
i
14
Q.
So prior to OSHA, to the extent there was.
15
any sampling being done, it would have been the
16
impinger techniques you've testified to?
17
A.
Yes.
18
Q.
As anindustrialhygienist, are you
19
acquainted with the term "area sampling"?
20
A.
Yes.
21
Q.
Are you acquainted with the term "personal
22
sampling"?
23
A.
Yes.
24
Q.
Could you tell us briefly what the two are?
25
A.
An area sample would be a sample taken
21R T 7.DM A P O O R T 1 R R `D P R rPTNiP
294
1
around this room, A personal sample would be done at
2
the breathing zone of the worker.
3
Q-
How would you do a sample of the breathing
4
zone of the worker? What sort of equipment would you
5
use?
6
MR. MAURIELLO: Object to the form as to
7
time frame.
8
THE WITNESS: You would use, you could the
9
midget impinger, and then fasten the pump to the
10
worker's belt. You'd have to have the extreme
11
cooperation of the worker.
12
With the millipore filter, it also could be
13
put up there close to the breathing zone, but you would
14
have to watch the worker all the while it was being
15
done.
16
BY MR. HUTCHINS:
17
Q.
Was the cassette filter put on the collar
18
an improvement over the belt model that you were
19
talking about earlier?
20
A.
It was -- well, actually it was the same.
21
It was still connected to the pump. It was an airline
22
from the pump to the cassette.
23
Q.
Was it lighter?
24
A.
Much lighter.
25
Q.
In your experience as an industrial
ARIZONA COURT REPORTING
295
1
hygienist, was there much personal sampling done in the
2
1950s?
3
MR. MAURIELLO: Object to the form. You
4
can answer.
5
THE WITNESS: We tried -- it was called
6
that. We tried to do it as much as we could, as much
7
as we could.
8
BY MR. HUTCHINS:
9
Q.
Did techniques for personal sampling
10
improve or get more refined as you went forward in your
11
career?
12
A.
Yes.
13
Q.
Did the millipore technology make that any/
14
easier to do?
15
A.
Much easier.
16
Q.
Was the quality of the personal sample that
17
you could obtain through the millipore technology, did
18
it have the potential to be more precise than through
19
the impinger technology?
20
A.
Yes.
21
Q.
Now, you testifiedearlierthat you were
22
hired by Celanese Corporation in 1966; is that right?
23
A.
Yes.
24
Q.
When you were hired byCelanese,how long
25
had you worked in the field of industrial hygiene?
ARIZONA COURT REPORTING
296
1
A.
Seventeen years.
2
Q.
When you were hired by Celanese, did you
3
feel that you needed to receive any industrial hygiene
4
training from Celanese or anybody else to perform your
5
industrial hygiene duties with the company?
6
A.
No.
7
Q.
In 1966 when you hired on with Celanese,
8
were there some companies in American industry other
9
than Celanese that had on-staff industrial hygienists?
1 0
MR. MAURIELLO: Object to the form.
11
THE WITNESS: Yes.
1 2
BY MR. HUTCHINS:
1 3
Q.
Based on your knowledge and experience in :
1 4
the field at that time in 1966, was it common for
15
companies in American industry to have industrial
1 6
hygienists on staff?
17
A.
It was not common.
18
Q.
In response to questions from counsel, you
19
indicated that shortly after you were hired you went
20
with Dr. Dixon to a meeting in Williamsburg.
21
A.
Yes.
22
Q.
What was that a meeting of?
23
A.
The Society of Toxicology.
24
Q.
Were there other industrial hygienists
25
present at that meeting?
ARIZONA COURT REPORTING
297
1
A.
I can't recall any other than myself.
2
Q.
Were there more industrial hygienists
3
employed, based on your knowledge and experience, in
4
1966 than there were, say, in 1949 in this country?
5
A.
Yes.
6
Q.
Having said that,were there many people
7
practicing in the field of industrial hygiene in 1966?
8
MR. MAURIELLO: Object to the form.
9
THE WITNESS: The membership was growing.
10
That's all I could say.
11
BY MR. HUTCHINS:
1 2
Q.
If you recall, did the numbers of
13
industrial hygienists increase by a large percentage at
1 4
some particular time?
15
A.
Yes. After OSHA.
16
Q.
You began to see a lot morepeople
17
practicing in the field after OSHA than before?
18
A.
True.
19
Q.
I believe you testified earlier that you
20
had responsibility for industrial hygiene support to
21
many plants within Celanese Corporation; is that right?
22
A.
Correct.
23
Q.
And I think you gave you a number of
24
between 40 or 50 plants.
25
A.
Yes.
ARIZONA COURT REPORTING
298
1
Q.
Did you provide that industrial hygiene
2
support from your desk in New York City?
3
A.
Sixty percent of the time it was on-site.
4
Q.
Sixty percent in a given year?
5
A.
Yes.
6
Q.
Did that involve a lot of travel, Mr.
7
Laubly?
8
A.
About 60 percent of my time.
9
Q.
When you were with Lumberman's, did you
10
enter industrial facilities where asbestos-containing
11
insulation was present?
12
A.
Oh, certainly.
13
Q.
I'll let you pick the characterization.
14
Would you say that most industrial plants
15
that you went into with Lumberman's had
16
asbestos-containing insulation in them, some of them?
17
How would you characterize them?
18
MR. MAURIELLO: Object to the form.
19
Relevancy.
20
THE WITNESS: I would say most of them had
21
some form of insulation.
22
BY MR. HUTCHINS:
23
Q.
When you came to Celanese Corporation, did
24
the facilities owned and operated by Celanese have
25
asbestos-containing insulation present in them as well?
ARIZONA COURT REPORTING
299
1
A.
I'm certain they did.
2
Q.
You were asked some questions earlier by
3
counsel regarding particular asbestos-containing
4
products that may have present at the Salisbury plant
5
for operations that may have gone on there.
6
First of all, would you agree with me that
7
you would have a better or a more specific recall of
8
what went on in the plants in 1979 when you left the
9
company than you would today?
10
A.
Yes.
11
Q.
Do you believe that there was
12
asbestos-containing insulation present in the Salisbury
13
plant?
.
14
A.
I believe that, yes.
15
Q.
Did you believe that was true when you
16
worked for Celanese Corporation?
17
MR. MAURIELLO: Object to the form.
18
THE WITNESS: When I worked for Celanese?
19
BY MR. HUTCHINS:
20
Q.
Yes, sir.
21
A.
Yes.
22
Q.
Was that apresumption that you made?
23
A.
Well, I assumed that industry used covering
24
for -- as an insulation product.
25
Q.
Did you apply thatpresumption when you
ARIZONA COURT REPORTING
300
1
went in to do a survey at any plant operated by
2
Celanese?
3
A.
Yes.
4
Q.
What was the basis for you presuming that a
5
Celanese plant would have asbestos--containing
6
insulation in it, sir?
7
a.
well, it was necessary on certain
8
pipelines, as my experience with other industrial
9
operations. It was a common sight overhead.
10
Q.
Now, I believe you testified that you made
11
industrial hygiene surveys of the Salisbury plant?
12
A.
Yes.
13
Q.
And if I remember correctly, you thought . .
14
you might have been in the plant perhaps twice a year '?
15
during your period of employment at Celanese?
' "
16
A.
Perhaps.
17
Q.
While you did industrial hygiene surveys at
18
Celanese, whether at the Salisbury plant or any other
19
plant owned by the company, would you be looking for
20
dusty conditions of any kind or was that something that
21
was not a part of your responsibility?
22
A.
No. I would belooking for dust.
23
Q.
Would thatbe limitedto asbestos or would
24
those be dust conditions of any kind?
25
A.
Any kind.
ARIZONA COURT REPORTING
301
1
Q.
During the visits that you made to the
2
Salisbury plant, did you see dusty conditions of any
3
kind inside the facility?
4
A.
Oh, I may have seen some of the TA dust in
5
certain areas. I can't say exactly where it is now. I
6
can't recall that, but generally, that would be the
7
most apparent.
8
Q.
You say TA dust. What is TA dust?
9
A.
Well, that's your raw material.
10
Q.
Terathalic acid?
11
A.
Terathalic acid.
12
Q.
That's a raw material used in the
13
manufacture of polyester?
14
A.
Yes.
15
Q.
Do you recall seeing dusty conditions at
16
the Salisbury plant generated by the use of insulation
1 7
products?
18
MR. MAURIELLO: Object to the form.
19
THE WITNESS: I don't recall that.
20
BY MR. HUTCHINS:
21
Q.
What would the procedure be that you would
22
follow, if any, if you had seen dusty conditions at the
23
Salisbury plant or any other Celanese plant associated
24
with the use of insulation material?
25
A.
We would conduct a survey.
ARIZONA COURT REPORTING
302
1
Q-
Would you have taken any steps to raise
2
that issue to the management of the plant?
3
A.
Through the safety supervisor and the
4
industrial relations manager, yes.
5
Q-
Would the same be true if you saw dusty
6
conditions caused by any other source at Salisbury or a
7
plant owned by Celanese?
8
A.
Yes.
9
Q.
So if you had a concern about dust
10
concentrations, it wouldn't be limited solely to
11
asbestos?
12
A.
That's true.
13
Q.
Now, I believe you testified earlier that /
1 4
while you were at Lumberman's, you believed that
15
asbestosis was a potential risk of asbestos exposure
16
associated with very high dust concentrations over a
1 7
long period of time?
18
A.
True.
19
Q.
Did you hold that belief as well while you
20
were employed as a corporate industrial hygienist by
21
Celanese?
22
A.
Yes.
23
Q.
Do you hold that belief today, sir?
24
A.
Oh, yes.
25
Q.
Did you see during any of your plant visits
ARIZONA COURT REPORTING
303
1
or surveys while employed by Celanese asbestos-related
2
dust conditions of that nature, very high
3
concentrations?
4
MR. MAURIELLO: Object to form.
5
THE WITNESS: I never encountered that.
6
BY MR. HUTCHINS:
7
Q.
Based on your plant surveys and visits
8
while employed by Celanese, did you believe that any
9
worker was at risk of any asbestos-related disease at
10
Salisbury or any other plant operated by Celanese?
11
A.
No, I did not.
12
Q.
Based on your training, experience and
13
observation, was asbestos exposure deemed by you while./
14
at Celanese to be a significant health hazard at
.
15
Salisbury or any other plant operated by the company?
16
A.
No.
17
Q.
Based on your education, experience and
18
observations, would the mere presence of
19
asbestos-containing insulation in a manufacturing
20
facility have caused you concern in 1955?
21
A.
No.
22
Q.
Would it have caused you any particular
23
concern in 1966?
24
A.
No.
25
Q.
Would it have caused you any particular
ARIZONA COURT REPORTING
304
1
concern i n 1 9 7 9 when y o u r e t i r e d ?
2
A.
No.
3
Q.
While you were employed by Celanese, were
4
claims of occupational illness or disease from any of
5
the plants reported to the corporate medical
6
department?
7
A.
I never saw any.
8
Q.
If those reports were made, they would be
9
made to Dr. Dixon?
1 0
A.
True.
11
Q.
While you were employed by Celanese, did
12
you ever hear in any form that any worker at a Celanese
13
plant was claiming that they had any asbestos-related
14
illness?
15
A.
While I was there, no.
16
Q.
Until you obtained such information through
17
the Federal Register in 1971, had you obtained any
18
previous information, whether from Celanese or any
19
other source, that asbestos could be a potential
20
carcinogen?
21
A.
I can't recall receiving any.
22
Q.
When you were employed by Celanese, did you
23
continue to be a member of the American Industrial
24
Hygiene Association?
25
A.
Yes.
ARIZONA COURT REPORTING
305
1
Q.
Were you a member of the national
2
organization?
3
A.
Yes.
4
Q.
Did you continue to be a member of local
5
chapters such as you described to us earlier?
6
A.
Yes.
7
Q.
Can you recall while you were at Celanese
8
any other professional organizations that you either
9
belonged to or whose meetings you may have attended?
10
A.
The American Chemical Society. And
11
basically, that's it.
12
Q.
While you were employed by Celanese, do you
13
recall obtaining any information from any of those
j
14
organizations regarding potential cancer risks from
15
asbestos exposure?
16
A.
No, I do not.
17
Q.
I believe you testified earlier that when
18
the OSHA standard came out in the Federal Register in
19
1971, you sent those regulations to the various plants
20
operated by Celanese; is that right?
21
A.
That's true.
22
Q.
Would that include the Salisbury plant?
23
A.
Yes.
24
Q.
Would that include the other plants
25
operated by Fiber Industries, Inc. and Celanese Fiber
ARIZONA COURT REPORTING
306
1
Company?
2
A.
All, all of those.
3
Q.
Did the 03HA standards evolve over time
4
during the period you were employed by Celanese?
5
A.
Yes.
6
Q.
If you remember, did the asbestos standard
7
change while you were employed by Celanese?
8
A.
Yes.
9
Q.
If there were changes to the OSHA
10
regulations while you were employed by Celanese, did
11
you send those changes or updates to each of the plants
1 2
as well?
13
A.
Yes.
-
14
Q.
Do you recall something called the BNA
15
Occupational Health Reporter?
16
A.
That's Bureau of National Affairs?
17
Q.
Yes, sir.
18
A.
I recall the paper.
19
Q.
Do you recall ever sending any information
20
regarding occupational health issue from that report to
21
the people at the plant level?
22
A.
No.
23
Q.
Once you forwarded theOSHA regulations to
24
the various Celanese plants, to include, for example,
*
25
Salisbury, who would be responsible for implementing
ARIZONA COURT REPORTING
307
1
those regulations at the plant level?
2
A.
The safety supervisor and the industrial
3
relations manager.
4
Q.
If they had any questions regarding
5
occupational health issues, would that be something
6
that they would refer to you or would that be to
7
somebody else in the company?
8
A.
Well, either me or Dr. Dixon.
9
Q.
So if there were questions regarding the
10
implementation of OSHA regulations as they pertain to
11
occupational health, they could raise those issues with
12
you or Dr. Dixon?
13
A.
Yes.
14
Q.
Not specific to asbestos, necessarily, do i
.r
15
you remember plants after OSHA seeking consultations
15
with you or Dr. Dixon on occupational health issues?
17
A.
I don't remember.
18
Q.
You don't rememberspecifics?
19
A.
No specifics.
20
Q.
Mr. Laubly, you were asked some questions
21
earlier regarding whether or not you consider asbestos
22
to be an inherently dangerous substance or whether or
23
not you deemed asbestos work to be inherently
24
dangerous.
25
Do you remember those questions?
ARIZONA COURT REPORTING
308
1
A.
Yes.
2
Q.
Let me ask you some questions and follow-on
3
to that.
4
Based on your education, experience,
5
training and observations, do you believe that asbestos
6
work is always dangerous?
7
A.
No.
8
Q.
Do you believe thatasbestosexposure is
9
always dangerous?
10
MR. MAURIELLO: Object to the form.
11
THE WITNESS: No.
1 2
BY MR. HUTCHINS:
13
Q.
Based on your education, training and
;
1 4
experience, do you believe that asbestos work or
15
asbestos exposure is usually or typically dangerous?
15
A.
No.
17
Q.
Would youagree that asbestos work or
18
asbestos exposure could sometimes be dangerous?
19
A.
Sometimes.
20
Q.
What would be the factors thatwould go
21
into how asbestos exposure potentially could be
22
sometimes dangerous?
23
A.
Well, the level of exposure and over a long
24
period of time.
25
Q.
Any other factors thatwould go into that
ARIZONA COURT REPORTING
309
1
analysis?
2
A.
The conditions of the workplace.
3
Q.
So the amount of the dose, the duration of
4
exposure, and the working environment, generally?
5
A.
Yes.
6
Q.
And I believe you testified earlier that
7
based on your training and experience the dose and the
8
duration associated with an asbestos-related disease
9
would be very high on both scores; is that right?
10
A.
That's true.
11
Q.
You were asked somequestionsearlier
12
regarding Celanese's policies on the use of respiratory
13
protection.
/
14
Do you remember those questions, Mr.
15
Laubly?
1 6
A.
Yes.
17
Q.
Based on what youcan recallin your
18
experience, did Celanese policy make the use of
19
respiratory protectionmandatory for any purpose?
20
A.
No.
21
Q.
What were the factors that would go into
22
the usage of respiratory protection in a working
23
environment?
24
A.
Where youwould find a veryhigh
25
concentration by dust counting, a survey, for one
ARIZONA COURT REPORTING
310
1
thing.
2
Q.
Would that be true of, say, vapor exposures
3
as well?
4
A.
Vapors as well.
5
Q.
In your experiences as an industrial
6
hygienist, are there any hard and fast rules, at least
7
while you were employed at Celanese, for when and where
8
respiratory protection would be employed?
9
A.
No.
10
Q.
That would be based on the circumstances
11
and the situation?
12
A.
Yes.
13
Q.
At the plant level, in your experience at
14
Celanese, who would be required or expected to make
15
that appreciation and make the determination on when
16
respiratory protection would be needed?
17
A.
The safety supervisor.
18
Q.
In the course of your 30-year career in
19
industrial hygiene, you visited many plants, many
20
facilities operated by many companies, didn't you?
21
MR. MAURIELLO: Object to the form.
22
THE WITNESS: Yes.
23
BY MR. HUTCHINS:
24
Q.
Based on the totality of your experience as
25
an industrial hygienist, would you say that the
ARIZONA COURT REPORTING
311
1
Celanese facilities for which you had responsibility
2
were in general clean plants?
3
MR. MAURIELLO: Object to the form.
4
THE WITNESS: Very clean plants.
5
BY MR. HUTCHINS:
6
Q.
Would you say that about the Salisbury
7
plant as well?
8
A.
I think it was one of the cleaner ones.
9
Q.
Would you say that the Celanese facilities
10
for which you had responsibility generally observed
11
good housekeeping practices?
12
A.
Generally.
13
Q.
Would you say that of the Salisbury plant
14
as well?
15
A.
Yes.
16
Q.
Based on your experience and knowledge
1 7
gained over the course of your career, would you say
18
that the Celanese facilities for which you had
19
responsibility were safe plants?
20
MR. MAURIELLO: Object to the form.
21
THE WITNESS: Yes.
22
BY MR. HUTCHINS:
23
Q.
Would you say that of the Salisbury plant
24
as well?
25
MR. MAURIELLO: Object to the form.
a r t 7.nw& rnriRTi
312
1
THE WITNESS: Yes.
2
BY MR. HUTCHINS:
3
Q.
If you compared all of the facilities in
4
which you performed industrial hygiene work and did
5
industrial hygiene surveys with the plants for which
6
you had responsibility at Celanese, how would you rate
7
the Celanese plants?
8
MR. MAURIELLO: Object to the form.
9
THE WITNESS: Very good.
10
BY MR. HUTCHINS:
11
Q.
Would that statement be true of the
12
Salisbury plant as well?
13
A.
Oh, yes.
14
MR. HUTCHINS: Mr. Laubly, I think those
15
are the questions I have for you at this time. I want
15
to thank you for taking the time to come and talk with
17
us these last few days.
18
THE WITNESS: Thank you.
19
MR. MAURIELLO: I have a few follow-up
20
questions for you, Mr. Laubly, now that we've gotten
21
into some areas. Sorry.
22
23
24
25
ARIZONA COURT REPORTING
313
1
FURTHER
EXAMINATION
2
3
BY MR. MAURIELLO:
4
Q.
Where are the dust counts for the Salisbury
5
plant?
6
A.
Where are they?
7
Q.
Yes, sir.
8
MR. HUTCHINS: I object to the form of the
9
question.
10
THE WITNESS: Do you mean the results of
11
them or?
12
BY MR. MAURIELLO:
13
Q.
Yes, sir.
1 4
A.
I do not know.
15
Q.
What dust counts did you do for the
16
Salisbury plant?
17
A.
I don't recall.
18
Q.
Well, correct me if I'm wrong. You just
19
testified that you knew of the standard of the American
20
Conference of Governmental Hygienists before you worked
21
at Salisbury. Is that correct?
22
A.
That's true.
23
Q.
So you knew of a threshold limit value that
24
was established prior to your work in 1966 at
25
Salisbury?
ART7DNa rnupv pvDnoi'TMr.
31 4
1
A.
Yes.
2
Q.
For asbestos?
3
A.
Yes.
4
Q.
Is that correct?
5
And you knew that asbestos in a certain
6
concentration could be hazardous; is that correct?
7
A.
Correct.
8
Q.
And then you came on board in '66 and you
9
testified about opinions on concentrations of dust in
10
Salisbury.
11
Where are the test results for the
12
concentrations of dust in Salisbury?
13
A.
I don't recall on that. Where was that?
14
Q.
That's what I'd like to know.
15
A.
No, I mean --
16
Q.
What concentrations of dust, what sampling
17
did you do at the Salisbury plant for asbestos or
18
general bulk sampling for dust?
19
A.
I didn't do them.
20
Q.
Who did them?
21
A . I don't know.
22
Q.
Did anybody do them?
23
A.
I don't know.
24
Q.
You testified you had opinions about
25
exposure in the Salisbury plant, but you told me on
ARIZONA COURT REPORTING
315
1
direct examination you never saw anybody install
*
2
insulation; is that correct?
3
A.
Yes.
4
Q.
You never saw anybody constructing the
5
plant; is that correct?
6
A.
That's true.
7
Q.
You never saw anybody remove insulation
8
from the plant?
9
A.
That's true.
10
Q.
You never saw anybody removing or dealing
11
with gaskets in the plant?
1 2
A.
That's true.
13
Q.
You don't even know where thesaw room is i
14
located for
insulation; is thatcorrect?
15
A.
I can't recall whereit is.
1 6
Q.
You don't knowwhat type of equipment the
17
insulators used to cut insulation; is that correct?
18
A.
I don't recall that.
19
Q.
Did you do any sampling of any of the
20
insulators, personal air sampling or area air sampling
21
as you testified to a minute ago for the insulators
22
when they were installing asbestos?
23
A.
No, I did not.
24
Q.
Did you do any area sampling for any of the
25
millwrights who are parties to this lawsuit?
ARIZONA COURT REPORTING
316
1
A.
No.
2
Q.
Did you do any air sampling for any of the
3
maintenance workers that worked any of the hydrolators
4
on any of the pipes in this lawsuit?
5
A.
No,
6
Q.
You didn't do any air sampling, period?
7
A.
Period. Not any dust samples.
8
Q.
You told us you hadn't heard about anybody
9
making a claim for asbestos in the plant. You left in
10
1979, didn't you?
1 1
A.
Yes.
12
Q,
You've heard the term "latency"?
13
A.
Yes.
1 4
Q.
What doeslatency refer to when we deal
15
with asbestos disease, sir?
16
MR. HUTCHINS: Object to the form of the
17
question.
18
BY MR. MAURIELLO:
19
Q.
What do you understand the term "latency"
20
to mean?
21
A.
Something that happens later on.
22
Q.
It takes time for theindividual's body to
23
react to an inhalation of asbestos fibers, does it not?
24
MR. HUTCHINS: I object to the form of the
25
question.
Ti n T O /~\AT n n o n ' i r n r-M-n
317
1
BY MR. MAURIELLO:
2
Q.
Sir, in the literature you have reviewed as
3
an industrial hygienist, is there a latency period from
4
time of exposure to the development of the disease?
5
MR. HUTCHINS: Object to the form of the
6
question.
7
THE WITNESS: I can't remember
8
specifically.
9
BY MR. MAURIELLO:
10
Q.
Well, in your review of the literature, can
11
someone develop an asbestos disease from exposure
12
within five years?
13
MR. HUTCHINS: I object to the form of the
-'c
14
question.
15
THE WITNESS: I do not know.
16
BY MR. MAURIELLO:
17
Q.
You don't know the answer to that?
18
A.
I don't know the answer.
19
Q.
Do you know what is the generally
20
acceptable latency period from time of exposure to the
21
development of the signs of asbestos exposure?
22
MR. HUTCHINS: Object to the form of the
23
question.
24
THE WITNESS: No, I don't.
25
BY MR. MAURIELLO:
318
1
Q.
Do you know what pleura plaques are?
2
A.
No.
3
Q.
Do you know what interstitial fibrosis is?
4
A.
No.
5
Q.
Do you know what pleura thickening is?
6
A .
No.
7
Q-
You're not a medical doctor, are you, sir?
8
A.
No.
9
MR. HUTCHINS: Make the point.
10
MAURIELLO:
11
Q.
Well, the point, I'm making the point.
1 2
You testified on direct -- a minute ago
13
that you hadn't heard of any claim from the plant; is
14
that correct?
;l
15
A.
That's true.
16
Q.
And, again, you left in 1979; is that
17
correct?
18
A.
Yes.
19
MR. HUTCHINS: I think in fairness to the
20
record, not just from the plant. He said he hadn't
21
heard of any claim of asbestos-related illness anywhere
22
in Celanese Corporation.
23
BY MR. HUTCHINS:
24
Q.
So you hadn't heard of any of the claims
25
made out of the Salisbury plant until this lawsuit?
nn>T70M7\ onncm1 Dn-nnon-iTMO
319
1
A.
That is true.
2
Q.
You hadn't heard of any claims made, any
3
worker's compensation claims out of this plant in the
4
'70s; is that correct?
5
MR. HUTCHINS: I object to the form of the
6
question.
7
MR. MAURIELLO: What's the objection?
8
MR. HUTCHINS: Lack of foundation, for
9
starters.
10
MR. MAURIELLO: Thank you.
11
MR. HUTCHINS: Assumes facts not in
12
evidence.
13
MR. MAURIELLO: Well, that's the point of i
14
being here, counselor.
15
BY MR. MAURIELLO:
16
Q.
Sir, have you heard of any worker's
17
compensation claims that were made out of this plant in
18
the 1970s, claims made in the 1970s on asbestos
19
exposure?
20
MR. HUTCHINS: That's a different question.
21
MR. MAURIELLO: Is that an objection?
22
MR. HUTCHINS: That's a different question.
23
MR. MAURIELLO: Thank you.
24
BY MR. MAURIELLO:
25
Q.
Have you heard of that, sir?
ARIZONA COURT REPORTING
320
1
A.
NO.
2
Q.
You were asked questions about the
3
dangerousness, your opinion on the dangerousness of
4
asbestos.
5
Would you recommend that an insulator
6
install asbestos-containing insulation without
7
respiratory protection?
8
MR. HUTCHINS: I object to the form of the
9
question. Where? When? Under what circumstances?
10
BY MR. MAURIELLO:
11
Q.
You can answer. I note your objection.
12
Would you recommend that, sir?
13
I'll be more specific. Counsel wants me to .
14
be more specific.
. -i}
15
Would you recommend that an individual on a
16
daily basis who's installing asbestos and cutting
1 7
asbestos insulation not wear respiratory protection
18
over a five-year period?
19
MR. HUTCHINS: Same objection. Where?
20
When? Under what circumstances?
21
THE WITNESS: I don't understand that
22
question. It's too fast for me.
23
BY MR. MAURIELLO:
24
Q.
All right. Would you recommend that an
25
insulator at the Salisbury plant in North Carolina in
AD T 7 HMA ^nn n m
321
1
the United States who works at the plant on an average
2
of 40 to 60 hours a week, who spends 80 percent of his
3
time installing new insulation, cutting insulation
4
during the daily work that he performs, not wear
5
respiratory protection if that insulation contains
6
asbestos?
7
Is there any more information you need?
8
MR. HUTCHINS: I object to the form of the
9
question. When, under what circumstances?
10
BY MR. MAURIELLO:
11
Q.
Between 1966 and 1972.
12
A.
If the dust concentrations were measured,
13
indicated a significant exposure to asbestos, then I
1 4
would recommend respiratory protection until suitable
15
engineering controls can be installed.
16
Q.
All right. And in the Salisbury plant, we
17
don't know what the dust concentrations are because
18
there weren't any taking; is that correct?
19
A.
That's true.
20
Q.
Did you request any personalsampling taken
21
by the cassette and airline process that you just
22
described earlier at the Salisbury plant?
23
A.
No.
24
Q.
Did you request area sampling be taken?
25
A.
No.
ARIZONA COURT REPORTING
322
1
Q.
And that's because, one of the reasons is
2
you didn't know asbestos was being used in the plant,
3
as you testified to earlier, correct?
4
MR. HUTCHINS: I object to the form of the
5
question. Argumentative and contrary to his testimony.
6
BY MR. MAURIELLO:
7
Q.
Well, you testified earlier, sir, you were
8
unaware of the fact when you left in 1979 that asbestos
9
was used in the Salisbury plant. Do you recall that
10
testimony?
11
MR. HUTCHINS: I object. That's not what
12
he said.
1 3
MR. MAURIELLO: Well, then, somebody's not?
14
listening.
%
15
BY MR. HUTCHINS:
16
Q.
Do you recall that testimony, sir?
1 7
MR. HUTCHINS: Or somebody's hearing what
18
they want. That's an unfair characterization of his
19
testimony and I object.
20
THE WITNESS: I later said that generally
21
asbestos was used in many industrial plants, and that
22
was it.
23
BY MR. MAURIELLO:
24
Q.
And that was after you had a break and you
25
spoke to counsel; is that right?
&RT70Na COURT RFPORTT NO
323
1
A.
No, no, no, no, no.
2
Q.
You testified that when you were with
3
Lumberman's and you were analyzing for dust
4
concentrations, you would walk through the plant, take
5
dust samples, evaluate the data and look at the
6
microscopic slides. Is that correct?
7
A.
Correct.
8
Q.
Okay. Did you do that at the Salisbury
9
plant?
10
A.
No.
11
Q.
Why not?
12
A.
I didn't conduct thestudy there.
13
Q.
You testified that the first time, again, 1; .
\ '
14
you had learned about this asbestos cancer relationship^'
15
was in 1971; is that correct?
16
A.
Yes.
1 7
Q.
And you also testified as to thev a r i o u s
18
memberships and organizations you were a member of when
19
you worked for both Lumberman's and when you worked for
20
Celanese, correct?
21
A.
Yes.
22
Q.
It's not yourtestimony, is it, that those
23
organizations did not publish material regarding that
24
correlation, is it?
25
MR. HUTCHINS: I object to the form.
ARIZONA COURT BPPnpT'TMr.
324
1
BY MR. MAURIELLO:
2
Q.
I'll be more specific.
3
Is it your opinion that prior to 1966,
4
there were no publications relating asbestos to lung
5
cancer?
6
MR. HUTCHINS: I object to the form of the
7
question.
8
THE WITNESS: No.
9
BY MR. MAURIELLO:
1 0
Q.
Your testimony today is you just didn't see
11
those materials, correct?
12
A.
I didn't see them.
13
Q.
You also testified that very few plants had
1 4
industrial hygienists, correct?
15
A.
Correct.
16
Q.
And that was, I think the question was from
17
counsel, was back in the 1950s, primarily insurance
18
companies had industrial hygienists?
19
A.
Yes.
20
Q.
Well, Imperial Chemical Industries had one;
21
is that correct?
22
A.
I don't know.
23
Q.
Well, let me show you, again, Exhibit 3, by
24
M.W. Goldblatt. And listed on Page 1, from the
25
Imperial Chemical Industries Industrial Hygiene
ARIZONA COURT REPORTING
325
1
Research Lab in Wymingherts, England, by M.W.
2
Goldblatt.
3
Do you see that?
4
A.
Yes.
5
Q.
Is it your understanding now that Imperial
6
Chemical Industries had an industrial hygienist in --
7
MR. HUTCHINS: Object to the form of the
8
question. He can't say that from looking at the
9
document.
10
THE WITNESS: I can't say it, but it's
11
there, it says it.
12
BY MR. MAURIELLO:
13
Q.
Do you dispute what's written in that
14
document?
j
15
MR. HUTCHINS: I object to the form of the
16
question .
17
THE WITNESS: Pardon?
18
BY MR. MAURIELLO:
19
Q.
Do you dispute what's written in that
20
document?
21
MR. HUTCHINS: You're calling for the
22
witness to speculate on that. I object.
23
THE WITNESS: I don't know.
24
BY MR. MAURIELLO:
25
Q.
And Celanese had an industrial hygienist,
ARIZONA COURT REPORTING
326
1
which was you, when you worked in their plants through
2
Lumberman's Insurance, correct?
3
A.
Yes.
4
Q.
So these two corporations had anindustrial
5
hygienist prior to 1965 when this plant was built in
6
one form or another, both Imperial Chemical and
7
Celanese?
8
MR. HUTCHINS: Object to the form of the
9
question. Argumentative.
10
THE WITNESS: For use where?
11
BY MR. MAURIELLO:
12
Q.
In their plants?
13
A.
Which plant?
I
1 4
Q.
The Salisbury plant.
1 5
A.
No.
16
Q.
How about the fibers plants?
1 7
A.
Yes.
18
Q.
The Salisbury plant because itwasn't
19
constructed until '65?
20
A.
That's true.
21
Q.
But when it came -- the other fiber group
22
plants had an industrial hygienist?
23
A.
No.
24
Q.
They didn't?
25
A.
They had me.
ARIZONA COURT REPORTING
327
1
Q.
Through Lumberman's?
2
A.
Yes.
3
Q.
Now, you testified that in your opinion the
4
Salisbury fiber plant was a clean plant; is that
5
correct?
6
A.
Yes.
7
Q.
Have you seen any of thesurveys that were
8
performed by Celanese itself after you left the plant
9
in 1979 of the Salisbury plant?
10
A.
No.
11
Q.
Have you seen any comments byCelanese
12
about the housekeeping procedures at that plant after
13
you left in 1979?
i
1 4
A.
Nothing. Until your exhibits here.
15
Q.
Had you seen any of the exhibits from Sam
16
Swearingin's office prior to 1979 regarding mock OSHA
1 7
Inspections?
18
A.
I can't recall that.
19
Q.
You haven't seen any of thecomments out of
20
the safety department about housekeeping, generally,
21
from 1966 to 1979?
22
A.
No.
23
MR. MAURIELLO: All right, sir. That's all
24
I have for you.
25
MR. HUTCHINS: Mr. Laubly, just a couple of
ARIZONA COURT REPORTING
328
1
follow-ups.
2
3
FURTHER
EXAMINATION
4
5
BY MR. HUTCHINS:
6
Q.
You've testified that you did not dust
7
sampling at the Salisbury plant whileyou wereemployed
8
at Celanese; is that right?
9
A.
Yes.
10
Q.
Do you know one way or another whether
11
anybody else ever did dust sampling at any time at the
12
Salisbury plant?
13
A.
I think through the exhibits that they did!
1 4
some work. That's all I can recall.
15
Q.
But from personalknowledge, youdon't know
1 6
whether others were doing dust sampling there or not,
17
do you?
1 8
A.
No.
19
Q.
In yourvarious surveys of the Salisbury
20
plant, did you ever see dust concentrations from any
21
source, from any cause, that led you to believe that
22
dust studies were something that you needed to do
23
there?
24
A.
No.
25
Q.
Do youknowpersonally if any publications
ARIZONA COURT REPORTING
329
1
existed before you saw the Federal Register in 1971
2
that linked asbestos exposure to potential cancer?
3
A.
No.
4
MR. HUTCHINS: That's all I have, sir.
5
Thank you.
6
THE WITNESS: Thank you.
7
MR. MAURIELLO: Thank you, Mr. Laubly.
8
THE VIDEOGRAPHER: The time is 1:20 and
9
this is the end of the videotape deposition.
10
11
* * 'k * *
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
CHARLES LAUBLY
22
23
24
25
ARIZONA COURT REPORTING
330 CERTIFICATE
STATE OF ARIZONA )
)
COUNTY OF PIMA
)
ss.
BE IT KNOWN that I took the foregoing deposition pursuant to Notice; that I was then and there a Notary Public in and for the County of Pima, State of Arizona; that by virtue thereof I was authorized to administer an oath; that the witness, CHARLES LAUBLY, before testifying, was duly sworn according to law, and that the testimony of the witness was reduced to writing under my direction, all done to' the best of my skill and ability.
I DO FURTHER CERTIFY that I am not a relative or attorney of either party, or otherwise interested in the events of this action.
My Commission Expires: January 1, 2000
ARIZONA COURT REPORTING
