Asbestos Exposure for Bell Telephone Workers

1 SUPERIOR COURT OF NEW JERSEY
LAW DIVISION: MIDDLESEX COUNTY
2 DOCKET NO. L-5469-07 (AS)

4 PHILIP & KAREN DEGNAN, VIDEOTAPE
DEPOSITION UNDER
5 Plaintiff, ORAL EXAMINATION
OF
6 vs. CHARLES P. LICHTENWALNER

7 ALCATEL LUCENT, et al,

8 Defendant(s).

11 TRANSCRIPT of the deposition of the
witness called for Oral Examination in the
12 above-captioned matter, said deposition being
taken pursuant to Superior Court Rules of
13 Practice and Procedure by and before RACHEL
SANTIAGO, a Notary Public and Shorthand
14 Reporter of the State of New Jersey, at the
offices of THACHER, PROFFITT & WOOD, 25
15 DeForest Avenue, Summit, New Jersey on Friday,
July 25, 2008, commencing at approximately
16 10:00 in the forenoon.

22 BRODY DEPOSITION SERVICES
Certified Shorthand Reporters and Videographers
23 90 Woodbridge Center Drive, Suite 220
Woodbridge, New Jersey 07095
24 (732) 283-5737

1 A P P E A R A N C E S:

3 COHEN, PLACITELLA & ROTH, P.C.

4 127 Maple Avenue

5 Red Bank, New Jersey 07701

6 (732) 747-9003

7 BY: CHRISTOPHER PLACITELLA, ESQ.

8 Attorneys for Plaintiff

10 LAW OFFICE JOHN McGOWAN, LLC

11 54 Main Street

12 Chatham, New Jersey 07928

13 (973) 507-9511

14 BY: JOHN McGOWAN, ESQ.

15 Attorneys for Defendant, Deponent Lucent

17 THACHER, PROFFITT & WOOD

18 25 DeForest Avenue

19 Summit, New Jersey 07901

20 (908) 598-5700

21 BY: ROBERT L. HORNBY, ESQ.

22 Attorneys for Defendant, Deponent Lucent

1 A P P E A R A N C E S (Cont’d):

3 McELROY, DEUTSCH, MULVANEY & CARPENTER, LLP,

4 1300 Mount Kemble Avenue

5 Morristown, New Jersey 07962

6 (973) 993-8100

7 BY: MICHELLE HYDRUSKO, ESQ.

8 Attorneys for Defendant, Railroad Construction

9 Company, Inc.

11 LAVIN, O’NEIL, RICCI, CEDRONE & DISIPIO

12 190 North Independence Mall West

13 Suite 500

14 Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19106

15 (215) 627-0303

16 BY: BASIL A. DiSIPIO, ESQ.

17 Attorney for Defendant, 3M Company

19 RIKER, DANZIG, SCHERER, HYLAND, PERRETTI, LLP

20 Headquarters Plaza

21 One Speedwell Avenue

22 Morristown, New Jersey 07962

23 (973) 538-0800

24 BY: KELLY CRAWFORD, ESQ.

25 Attorneys for Defendant, AT&T

1 A P P E A R A N C E S (Cont’d):

3 MARGOLIS EDELSTEIN

4 216 Haddon Avenue

5 Westmont, New Jersey 08108

6 (856) 858-7200

7 BY: RYAN M. KOOI, ESQ.

8 Attorneys for Defendant, John Crane

10 KENT & McBRIDE, P.C.

11 555 Route 1 South,

12 Woodbridge Towers, 4th Floor

13 Iselin, New Jersey 08830

14 (732) 326-1711

15 BY: STEPHEN DENARO, ESQ.

16 Attorneys for Defendant, T. J. McGlone

18 CONNELL FOLEY, LLP

19 85 Livingston Avenue

20 Roseland, New Jersey 07068

21 (973) 535-0500

22 BY: MEGAN ROBERTS, ESQ.

23 Attorneys for Defendant, Frank A. McBride

1 A P P E A R A N C E S (Cont’d):

3 HARDIN, KUNDLA, McKEON & POLETTO, P.A.

4 673 Morris Avenue

5 Springfield, New Jersey 07081

6 (973) 912-5222

7 BY: NICEA D’ANNUNZIO, ESQ.

8 Attorneys for Defendant, Henkels & McCoy

10 A L S O P R E S E N T:

11 Justin Placitella

12 Michael Noonan

13 Thomas Farmer, Videographer

1 I N D E X

3 WITNESS PAGE

4 CHARLES P. LICHTENWALNER

5 Direct by Mr. Placitella 7, 195

6 Cross by Mr. Kooi 191

8 E X H I B I T S

9 EXHIBIT DESCRIPTION PAGE

10 P-1 Membership Booklet
1958-1959 62
11

12 P-2 Membership Booklet
1966-1967 63
13
(Exhibits annexed to transcript.)
14

1 C H A R L E S P A U L L I C H T E N W A L N E R,

2 121 Petticoat Lane, Lebanon,

3 New Jersey, called as a witness, having

4 been first duly sworn according to law

5 by a Notary Public of the State of

6 New Jersey, testifies under oath as follows:

7 VIDEOGRAPHER: Good morning. This

8 is Tape Number One to the videotape

9 deposition of Charles Paul Lichtenwalner in

10 the matter of Degnan versus Lucent before

11 the Superior Court of New Jersey Law

12 Division Middlesex County Docket Number

13 L-5469-07.

14 This deposition is being held at 24

15 (sic) DeForest Avenue, Summit, New Jersey

16 on July 25 at video time 10:06 a.m. My

17 name is Thomas Farmer. I am the

18 videographer. The court reporter is

19 Rachel Santiago. Counsel will please

20 introduce themselves and affiliations and

21 the witness will be sworn in by the court

22 reporter.

24 DIRECT EXAMINATION BY MR. PLACITELLA:

25 Q. Good morning, Mr. Lichtenwalner, did

1 I pronounce that correct?

2 A. You did.

3 Q. How are you? My name is Chris

4 Placitella, as I introduced myself to you

5 before, I am here for purposes of taking your

6 deposition. You’ve had your deposition taken

7 before?

8 A. I have.

9 Q. So I’m not going to go over all the

10 rules, et cetera, essentially you know what’s

11 going on.

12 A. I believe I do.

13 Q. Okay. Now, are you still, you live

14 at 121 Petticoat Lane, Lebanon, New Jersey?

15 A. I do.

16 Q. How long have you lived there?

17 A. Thirty years.

18 Q. And you’ve previously testified

19 about the use of asbestos in Bell Systems while

20 employed by Bell Laboratories?

21 A. While employed? I don’t think I

22 testified while I was employed by Bell

23 Laboratories.

24 MR. MCGOWAN: Objection to form.

25 Q. I understand. You’ve previously

1 testified about asbestos used in the Bell

2 Systems during the time that you worked at Bell

3 Laboratories; correct?

4 A. That’s correct.

5 Q. And you testified about what was

6 known by Bell Labs in the past relating to

7 asbestos?

8 MR. MCGOWAN: Objection.

9 A. I have.

10 Q. You have information to the

11 containing asbestos-containing products used in

12 telephone equipment prior to 1993; is that

13 correct?

14 A. That is correct.

15 Q. And you know about the information

16 relating to asbestos in cable used in the Bell

17 Operating Companies?

18 A. Correct.

19 MR. MCGOWAN: Form.

20 A. I am not — very little asbestos

21 used in cables in the Bell System to my

22 knowledge.

23 Q. Are you being paid for your time

24 here?

25 A. I believe I will be.

1 Q. Okay. And what rate are you

2 charging?

3 A. I will be submitting a bill for

4 $175 an hour.

5 Q. Okay. And who are you going to

6 submit that bill to?

7 A. I will submit the bill to Thacher,

8 Proffitt & Wood.

9 Q. Okay. And who is going to pay that

10 bill?

11 A. I am not sure.

12 Q. Do you understand the reason why

13 you are here today?

14 A. I believe I am here because I got a

15 subpoena about a month ago.

16 Q. And have you had any, are you

17 represented by counsel here today?

18 A. I am represented by counsel today.

19 Q. And are you paying for counsel?

20 A. I am not paying for counsel.

21 Q. And have you signed a retainer to

22 be represented by counsel?

23 A. I have not signed a retainer.

24 Q. Did you request to be represented

25 by counsel?

1 A. I did not request.

2 Q. So was counsel offered to you by

3 Lucent?

4 A. Yes.

5 Q. In the past you have testified on

6 behalf of Lucent as a corporate witness,

7 correct?

8 A. That is correct.

9 Q. On how many occasions?

10 A. I am not sure.

11 Q. Just your best estimate?

12 A. Two or three times.

13 Q. Okay. Were you paid in those

14 cases?

15 A. I don’t remember.

16 Q. Now, did you spend any time

17 preparing for today’s deposition?

18 A. I did spend time, yes.

19 Q. And when did you spend time

20 preparing for today’s deposition?

21 A. Approximately one week ago.

22 Q. Where did that prep time take

23 place?

24 A. That took place in this room.

25 Q. And who was present?

1 A. John McGowan and Robert Hornby.

2 Q. In the context of that preparation,

3 did you review any documents.

4 MR. MCGOWAN: I am going object. I

5 think we can get into a little privilege.

6 Q. You can answer it.

7 A. I can answer it?

8 Q. Uh-hum.

9 A. I saw very few documents and only

10 briefly at that time.

11 Q. What were the subject matter of the

12 documents?

13 A. The subject matter was, as I

14 recall, it was memoranda and letters from the

15 Bell System during the time I was working

16 there.

17 Q. Do you have –

18 MR. PLACITELLA: Mr. McGowan, do

19 you have the documents you reviewed with

20 the witness?

21 MR. MCGOWAN: I do not have them.

22 And I’m going to assert claim of privilege

23 on those.

24 MR. PLACITELLA: You are.

25 MR. MCGOWAN: Yes.

1 MR. PLACITELLA: Why, because they

2 are authored by lawyers?

3 MR. MCGOWAN: I don’t know what

4 documents he’s specifically referring to

5 so if there’s any memorandum or notes that

6 I’ve prepared. . .

7 MR. PLACITELLA: I don’t want to,

8 anything that you prepared.

9 BY MR. PLACITELLA:

10 Q. I want to know the documents that

11 you prepared, were they Bell System documents

12 as opposed to lawyers documents?

13 A. That is correct.

14 Q. And who were they authored by?

15 A. They were very few documents that

16 we reviewed at that time. The ones that I

17 remember at this time, one was authored by some

18 corporate level of AT&T and the other one was

19 documents that I prepared, a document that I

20 prepared.

21 Q. A document that you prepared while

22 you worked for what company?

23 A. While I worked for Bell

24 Laboratories.

25 Q. Okay.

1 MR. PLACITELLA: I’d ask during the

2 break if I can get those documents and

3 take a look at them.

4 Q. Now, I understand that you

5 graduated from high school in 1965?

6 A. That is correct.

7 Q. And from the University of

8 Pennsylvania in 1969 with a degree in Physics?

9 A. That is correct.

10 Q. And you received a Master’s in

11 Environmental Science from Rutgers in 1992?

12 A. That is correct.

13 Q. Have you taken professional

14 development courses throughout your career?

15 A. Yes, I have.

16 Q. And you have an engineering license

17 for the State of New Jersey?

18 A. That is correct.

19 Q. After you got out of school you

20 spent a brief time as a day laborer, correct?

21 A. That is correct.

22 Q. And then you went to work for Bell

23 Laboratories in Murray Hill, New Jersey?

24 A. That is correct.

25 Q. Okay. And that was, approximately,

1 1969?

2 A. December 12, 1969.

3 Q. The day that will live in infamy?

4 A. I’m sorry, I misspoke. I believe

5 it was December 15.

6 Q. Okay. When you started at Bell

7 Laboratories you were investigating the

8 properties of crystals and chemicals?

9 A. Correct.

10 Q. And at some point in time you went

11 to work for Bell Laboratories Industrial

12 Hygiene Department; is that correct?

13 A. That is correct.

14 Q. And you worked in the Industrial

15 Hygiene Department for about 25 years until

16 about 1999?

17 A. Yes.

18 Q. Originally, am I correct, you were

19 hired as an Instrumentation Specialist for the

20 Hygiene Department at Bell Labs?

21 A. Correct.

22 Q. And as Instrumentation Specialist

23 you developed equipment and collected samples,

24 analyzed industrial hygiene samples, that kind

25 of thing?

1 A. Correct.

2 Q. All right. During the course of

3 your employment from ’75 to ’99 you had various

4 titles?

5 A. Correct.

6 Q. But your job functions remained

7 basically the same; is that right?

8 A. That is correct.

9 Q. Okay. From 1990 to ’95 you were a

10 process safety manager?

11 A. Correct.

12 Q. What is that?

13 A. My job was to look at the

14 experiments that researchers were performing

15 and assure that they were performed safely.

16 Q. Okay. And you took samples as part

17 of the Industrial Hygiene Department for Bell

18 Labs; is that fair?

19 A. I did.

20 Q. And some of those samples included

21 samples of asbestos in the workplace?

22 A. Yes, that’s correct.

23 Q. What kind of sampling were you

24 doing for asbestos in the workplace and for

25 whom?

1 A. I collected air samples both area

2 and personnel samples. This was all part of

3 the work that I was performing for the

4 Industrial Hygiene Group. I collected some

5 bulk samples, analyzed them for asbestos. And

6 then, I’m sorry, specifically, just asbestos

7 or?

8 Q. Yes.

9 A. Okay. Specifically just asbestos.

10 Q. I know you do a lot of stuff, but,

11 you know, everyone’s got to beat the beach

12 traffic.

13 A. Air and bulk samples.

14 Q. Now, you worked for Bell Labs,

15 specifically, until sometime in the 1980′s?

16 A. Bell Laboratories changed its name

17 a few times –

18 Q. Okay.

19 A. So that’s a difficult question to

20 answer.

21 Q. Okay. Did there come a — when you

22 first started working, you worked for Bell

23 Laboratories?

24 A. That is correct.

25 Q. Then where did you get your check

1 from?

2 A. I believe it was from Bell

3 Laboratories.

4 Q. Did there come a time when Bell

5 Laboratories was not issuing your paycheck

6 anymore?

7 A. Yes.

8 Q. And when was that?

9 A. I don’t know the exact date, but at

10 some date they dropped the term Bell

11 Laboratories and become AT&T.

12 Q. So at some point in time you

13 started to be paid, your checks were issued by

14 AT&T?

15 A. That is correct.

16 Q. That was the parent company of the

17 Bell Operating System?

18 A. That is correct.

19 MR. MCGOWAN: Object to form.

20 Q. Did anything change in terms of

21 your job function and responsibility from the

22 day, the last day you received a check from

23 Bell Laboratories to the first day you received

24 a check from AT&T?

25 A. My job function did not change.

1 Q. Okay. Did there come a time when

2 your check was no longer written by AT&T but

3 then was written by Lucent?

4 A. That is correct.

5 Q. Did that happen around 1996?

6 A. I believe that’s true.

7 Q. All right. Did your job functions

8 change at all when you started to be paid by

9 Lucent versus when you were being paid by AT&T?

10 A. It did not change.

11 Q. Did the people you report to change

12 in any way?

13 A. They did not change.

14 Q. Did somebody ever tell you about

15 the changes that were coming, why they were

16 being made, or did you just wake up one morning

17 and they say, your checks are now coming from

18 Lucent?

19 A. We received a lot of information

20 from the company about the changes that were

21 taking place, sir.

22 Q. What did you understand the reason

23 for the change between Bell Laboratories and

24 being paid by AT&T?

25 A. My understanding is that AT&T

1 decided that they wanted to have one company

2 with more uniform policies and practices and my

3 understanding was they dropped the name Bell

4 Laboratories, Bell Telephone Laboratories, and

5 decided to put everyone under one name.

6 Q. Okay. And then what about the

7 change over between AT&T and Lucent, what is

8 your understanding for why that changeover took

9 place?

10 A. My understanding is that AT&T spun

11 off Lucent Technologies, and, therefore, it

12 became an independent, a company independent of

13 AT&T.

14 Q. But before that time AT&T owned

15 Lucent; is that your understanding?

16 A. Before that time, there was no

17 Lucent name.

18 Q. Okay. So your job functions were

19 then just transferred by AT&T to Lucent?

20 A. That is my understanding.

21 Q. And then at some point in time you

22 left the Industrial Hygiene Department and went

23 to work for the Optical Networking Department?

24 A. That is correct.

25 Q. And you were ultimately laid off

1 out of that Department, correct?

2 A. That is correct.

3 Q. And after that you did some work

4 for Harvard University?

5 A. Correct.

6 Q. Did you continue to live in New

7 Jersey while you were doing work for Harvard?

8 A. I did.

9 Q. All right. What, basically, were

10 your functions as it related to Harvard?

11 A. I was an industrial hygienist at

12 Harvard University performing general

13 industrial hygiene duties.

14 Q. And those duties would take place

15 in the general area of your home?

16 A. No.

17 Q. Would you go all over the country

18 to do that? What was your general geographic

19 sphere of work?

20 A. My general geographic sphere of

21 work while working for Harvard was Cambridge,

22 Massachusetts and Boston, Massachusetts.

23 Q. Are you still working for them now?

24 A. I am not.

25 Q. Okay. Are you currently working

1 now?

2 A. I am currently working as an

3 independent contractor.

4 Q. Okay. Doing what?

5 A. Industrial hygiene.

6 Q. And how long have you been doing

7 that?

8 A. I’ve been doing that since 1975.

9 Q. How long have you been working as

10 an independent contractor?

11 A. I’ve been working as an independent

12 contractor from July of 2007 to date.

13 Q. Okay. So you officially left

14 employment of Harvard in July of 2007?

15 A. Officially, I left in June 30 of

16 2007.

17 Q. And the reason you left is because?

18 A. I left because I was tired of doing

19 a weekly commute of 300 miles.

20 Q. Understandable. Did you have to

21 give back your Harvard tie?

22 A. I never received a Harvard tie.

23 Q. Okay. Good so I like you. My

24 understanding is that Bell Laboratories for

25 whom you worked, was a wholly-owned subsidiary

1 of AT&T?

2 A. That was my understanding also.

3 Q. And the funding for Bell

4 Laboratories came 50 percent from Western

5 Electric and 50 percent from AT&T; is that

6 correct?

7 MR. MCGOWAN: Object to form.

8 A. That was my understanding.

9 Q. And when you went, first job you

10 had you went to work at Murray Hill, New

11 Jersey, correct?

12 A. That is correct.

13 Q. And at that time there was,

14 approximately, 24,000 employees at that job

15 site?

16 A. That is incorrect.

17 Q. How many were there?

18 A. Approximately, 4,000 at that job

19 site.

20 Q. What about Bell Labs generally?

21 A. I was told Bell Labs generally had

22 24,000 employees.

23 Q. Okay. What was the function, when

24 you first started to work there, what was the

25 function of Bell Laboratories as it related to

1 the AT&T Operating Companies?

2 A. Bell Laboratories provided research

3 services to AT&T and the Operating Telephone

4 Companies.

5 Q. Did those research services include

6 services to Western Electric?

7 A. They did.

8 Q. To AT&T itself?

9 A. Yes.

10 Q. To the Operating Telephone

11 Companies?

12 A. Yes.

13 Q. Would that include New Jersey Bell?

14 A. It would.

15 Q. Okay. Did Bell Laboratories have a

16 representative in each of the Bell Operating

17 Companies?

18 A. It did.

19 Q. Okay. Who was the representative

20 for Bell Laboratories for New Jersey Bell, do

21 you remember?

22 A. I do not remember.

23 Q. Was there a representative of Bell

24 Laboratories for New Jersey Bell?

25 A. I believe there was.

1 Q. Bell Laboratories provided the

2 scientific and research end for the Bell

3 Operating Companies; is that a fair statement?

4 A. That is a fair statement.

5 Q. As part of that function, Bell Labs

6 conducted health and safety research for

7 Operating Companies; is that right?

8 A. It did.

9 Q. I want to just focus prior to 1984,

10 in 1984 there was some kind of divestiture?

11 A. That is correct.

12 Q. Okay. What happened? What was

13 your understanding of the divestiture in 1984?

14 A. My understanding was that AT&T

15 split up into regional Bell Operating Companies

16 and AT&T, which became, was a mixture of Long

17 Lines, Bell Laboratories, and Western Electric.

18 Q. Let’s just focus pre-1984, before

19 the divestiture in 1984, all of the Bell

20 Operating Companies relied upon Bell

21 Laboratories for industrial hygiene advice; is

22 that correct?

23 MR. MCGOWAN: I’m just going to

24 object to the form in terms of the start

25 date. Pre-’84 I don’t know how far back

1 we’re going.

2 MR. PLACITELLA: Uh-hum, right.

3 A. They relied on Bell Laboratories

4 and perhaps other resources.

5 Q. Okay. But Bell Laboratories, but

6 one of the companies they relied upon — well,

7 let me ask the question this way, prior to

8 1984, did New Jersey Bell rely upon Bell

9 Laboratories for industrial hygiene advice?

10 MR. MCGOWAN: Form.

11 A. Yes.

12 Q. Did Western Electric before 1984

13 rely upon Bell Laboratories for industrial

14 hygiene services and advice?

15 MR. MCGOWAN: Form.

16 A. My statement would be that Western

17 Electric has its own Industrial Hygiene Group.

18 They also used Bell Laboratories. When you say

19 relied, they didn’t rely solely, it wasn’t even

20 majority Bell Laboratories.

21 Q. Okay. But in terms of, say, New

22 Jersey Bell, they relied solely upon Bell

23 Laboratories, to your knowledge, from

24 industrial hygiene, correct?

25 MS. CRAWFORD: Objection to form.

1 A. No. That is not true.

2 Q. Who else did they relied upon?

3 A. They would have used Western

4 Electric Industrial Hygiene Services as well.

5 Q. Okay. So, to your knowledge

6 understanding, prior to 1984 the two entities

7 that provided industrial hygiene advice and

8 services to New Jersey Bell would have been

9 Western Electric and Bell Laboratories; is that

10 a fair statement?

11 A. To my knowledge.

12 Q. Okay. That’s all I want is your

13 knowledge. Now, after 1984, who provided the

14 industrial hygiene advice and services to New

15 Jersey Bell? When I say who, I mean what

16 entity?

17 A. After 1984 I couldn’t say because I

18 was not — I was working for a different

19 company at that time. But Bell Laboratories

20 continued to provide services, Western Electric

21 as a manufacturing for many products provided

22 services, and I believe New Jersey Bell became

23 part of Bell Atlantic. And I believe Bell

24 Atlantic hired an industrial hygienist.

25 Q. Okay. After 1984, when you were

1 working for AT&T, did you continue to provide

2 industrial hygiene services for either New

3 Jersey Bell or Bell Atlantic?

4 A. Yes, I did.

5 Q. Both?

6 A. Both.

7 Q. Okay.

8 A. I’m sorry. Let me rephrase that.

9 Q. Go ahead.

10 A. I don’t believe there was a New

11 Jersey Bell after 1984 –

12 Q. Okay.

13 A. Maybe at the Corporate, I believe

14 it became Bell Atlantic at that time.

15 Q. All right. So did you, in your

16 capacity as an industrial hygienist for AT&T,

17 provide industrial hygiene services and advice

18 to Bell Atlantic?

19 A. I did as a contract basis.

20 Q. What does that mean?

21 A. It means that we were no longer

22 able to go out and provide those services

23 without a contract. A specific contract was

24 needed for us to work for Bell Atlantic.

25 Q. Did anybody else have a contract

1 for those services other than AT&T, to your

2 knowledge, for Bell Atlantic?

3 A. Not to my knowledge.

4 Q. Okay. Now, I want to just focus on

5 Western Electric. They had a research facility

6 that you were familiar with?

7 A. Yes.

8 Q. Okay. They have something called

9 the Engineering Research Center?

10 A. Yes.

11 Q. Where was that located?

12 A. Hopewell, New Jersey.

13 Q. Okay. And was that involved in the

14 manufacturing of products for Western Electric?

15 A. It was my understanding that

16 Hopewell was involved with optimizing the

17 manufacturing of products.

18 Q. Is it your understanding that

19 Western Electric made products for the

20 Operating Companies?

21 A. Yes.

22 Q. What is your understanding of the

23 function of Western Electric as it relates to

24 New Jersey Bell?

25 A. It is my understanding that Western

1 Electric provided products to Operating

2 Telephone Companies including New Jersey Bell.

3 Q. Did all New Jersey Bell products

4 come through Western Electric?

5 A. No.

6 Q. Okay. What products came through

7 Western Electric? Well, let me put it this

8 way, what products didn’t come through Western

9 Electric to New Jersey Bell, if you know?

10 MR. MCGOWAN: Objection as to the

11 time period, form.

12 A. I know that switches did not come

13 from Western Electric. I know that a lot of

14 products came through Western Electric to New

15 Jersey Bell, and I know that a lot of products

16 came to New Jersey Bell that didn’t come from

17 Western Electric.

18 Q. And when you say “from,” do you

19 mean manufactured, or do you mean the

20 manufactured or through? Let me clarify it,

21 okay.

22 A. All right.

23 Q. Western Electric manufactured

24 certain products for New Jersey Bell, correct?

25 A. That is correct.

1 Q. Did they distribute product to New

2 Jersey Bell that they did not manufacture?

3 A. Yes, they did.

4 Q. What kind of products did they

5 distribute to New Jersey that they did not

6 manufacture, if you know?

7 A. The ones that I was familiar with

8 would be products that we used outside of plant

9 work.

10 Q. What does that mean?

11 A. Outside plant is, basically,

12 equipment that is outside of Central Offices,

13 and, basically, goes to residences and

14 businesses.

15 Q. So let’s, say, there’s an employee

16 who works out in the field for a Bell Operating

17 Company, do all the products used by that

18 employee come through Western Electric?

19 A. No.

20 Q. Okay. How is that divided up or is

21 it divided up?

22 A. I really couldn’t say. It was up

23 to the individual companies and their

24 purchasing.

25 Q. Okay. I’ll go a little further.

1 You never, personally, worked directly for

2 Western Electric, correct?

3 A. That is correct.

4 Q. But you had extensive interaction

5 with Western Electric employees; is that fair?

6 MR. MCGOWAN: Form.

7 A. I would say that’s fair.

8 Q. Now, AT&T did not make products

9 using the operating system, correct?

10 A. I am not aware of AT&T as a

11 corporate entity making products.

12 Q. Right, but –

13 A. AT&T as the owner of the Western

14 Electric made products.

15 Q. So because they owned Western

16 Electric and Western Electric made the

17 products?

18 A. Correct.

19 Q. Do you believe that before 1984

20 even though your paycheck was coming from Bell

21 Labs you were, in effect, working for AT&T?

22 MS. CRAWFORD: Objection to form.

23 MR. MCGOWAN: Form.

24 A. Yes. I believe I was working for

25 AT&T as a company of Bell Laboratories.

1 Q. That’s where all the direction

2 ultimately came from, right.

3 MS. CRAWFORD: Objection to form.

4 A. No, I would say –

5 Q. Were they at the top of the

6 pyramid?

7 A. From the standpoint of Bell

8 Laboratories, not, it was very much independent

9 of AT&T.

10 Q. All right. After 1996 when Lucent

11 took over, it was your impression you were no

12 longer working for AT&T at that point?

13 A. That was my impression.

14 Q. Now, I want to focus back on Bell

15 Laboratories, the Industrial Hygiene

16 Department. That Department existed at least

17 from the 1960′s; is that true.

18 MR. MCGOWAN: Form.

19 A. Yes, it did.

20 Q. And you began working for the

21 Industrial Hygiene Department for Bell

22 Laboratories in June or July of 1975?

23 A. That is correct.

24 Q. At the time you started in that

25 capacity, the Bell Operating System had what,

1 about a million employees?

2 A. That’s what I was told.

3 Q. Before you worked at Bell Labs in

4 the Industrial Hygiene Department, there were

5 other people who worked as hygienist before

6 you?

7 A. That is correct.

8 Q. And what were their names?

9 A. Well –

10 Q. That you recall.

11 A. The names that I recall are William

12 Schreibeis, George Wilkening. Those were my

13 supervisor and his boss. There were numerous

14 other people and at the moment I can’t recall.

15 Q. Now, Mr. Schreibeis, he lived in

16 Berkeley Heights?

17 A. He did.

18 Q. Is he still living?

19 A. I do not know.

20 Q. And what was his job in relation to

21 yours?

22 A. He was my supervisor.

23 Q. For how long did he remain your

24 supervisor?

25 A. I really could not say, but I don’t

1 exactly know the dates when –

2 Q. Okay.

3 A. — I reported to someone else.

4 Q. Was he still your supervisor after

5 1984 when the divestiture took place?

6 A. I believe so.

7 Q. What was his job function vis-a-vis

8 you as your supervisor?

9 A. Sorry, I don’t understand.

10 Q. It’s a bad question.

11 A. He was my supervisor.

12 Q. You reported to him?

13 A. I reported to him.

14 Q. Did he give you direction as to

15 what jobs you were to do?

16 A. He did.

17 Q. Who was the head of the Industrial

18 Hygiene Department for Bell Laboratories when

19 you started to work there in 1975?

20 A. In 1975 the head of the department

21 was George Wilkening.

22 Q. Okay.

23 A. And I believe it was called

24 Environmental Health & Safety.

25 Q. And at some point in time did Mr.

1 Schreibeis take over that position?

2 A. He did not.

3 Q. Okay. Who replaced Mr. Wilkening?

4 A. To the best of my knowledge, that

5 would have been Mike Glowats (phonetic).

6 Q. You were hired as part of the Bell

7 System Services Group to examine industrial

8 hygiene issues in the AT&T Operating Companies;

9 is that a fair statement?

10 A. That’s a fair statement.

11 Q. And that included New Jersey Bell?

12 A. It did.

13 Q. It included Bell Atlantic?

14 A. No, at the time it did not include

15 Bell Atlantic.

16 Q. At some point in time it included

17 Bell Atlantic?

18 A. No.

19 Q. Okay.

20 A. In 1984 Bell Atlantic was formed

21 and at that point the Bell System Services

22 Group no longer had that function.

23 Q. What happened to the Bell System

24 services? What took over that function?

25 A. The Bell System Services Group, the

1 people in the group continued to exist, and we

2 performed contract work for operating, for the

3 R Box, for each of the Bell Operating

4 Companies.

5 Q. Same exact people, same exact job

6 function?

7 A. That is correct.

8 Q. Now, I want to just focus on the

9 first five years that you worked as a

10 hygienist. You looked at exposure to toxins in

11 the workplace for Bell Operating Companies?

12 A. Correct.

13 Q. And that included asbestos exposure

14 from people working with asbestos-containing

15 products?

16 A. Correct.

17 Q. I’m just going to go over some of

18 your background on the issue of asbestos. When

19 you were in college you were a physics major,

20 correct?

21 A. Correct.

22 Q. So you didn’t take any courses in

23 college on asbestos per se, correct?

24 A. That is correct.

25 Q. But before joining the Industrial

1 Hygiene Department at Bell Labs, is it my

2 understanding, correct, that you went to work,

3 I mean, you went to school at the University of

4 Cincinnati?

5 A. The time frame — I went to school

6 at the University of Cincinnati after June or

7 July of 1975.

8 Q. Okay. I apologize. And you took

9 specific courses at the University of

10 Cincinnati related to asbestos?

11 A. I did.

12 Q. Did you have, how many courses did

13 you take related to asbestos?

14 A. I took a two-week course at the

15 University of Cincinnati in General Principles

16 of Industrial Hygiene. That probably included

17 several modules on asbestos. In addition, I

18 took other courses not at the University of

19 Cincinnati.

20 Q. Was there some text or resource

21 that you relied upon to consult on the subject

22 of asbestos when you wanted questions

23 answered?

24 MR. MCGOWAN: At the University of

25 Cincinnati?

1 MR. PLACITELLA: Yes.

2 A. Yes.

3 Q. What was that, do you recall?

4 A. Fundamentals of Industrial Hygiene.

5 Q. And do you remember the author of

6 that?

7 A. It was multiple authors, and it was

8 prepared by the American Conference. I’m

9 sorry, I believe — well, I’m not sure if it

10 was prepared by the American Conference of

11 Industrial Hygienist or the American Industrial

12 Hygiene Association. I am sure it’s multiple

13 authors.

14 Q. When you went, when you were

15 working as an industrial hygienist at Bell

16 Laboratories, was there a resource that you

17 would consult when you had questions concerning

18 the issue of asbestos?

19 A. Yes.

20 Q. What were the resources that you

21 would consult?

22 A. The resources that I would consult

23 would be the OSHA regulations, the OSHA

24 Documentations of the Regulations, the National

25 Institute of Occupational Safety and Health

1 Asbestos. They had books published on a number

2 of different materials. The general text on

3 industrial hygiene, primarily the Fundamentals

4 on Industrial Hygiene, and the materials from

5 the courses that I took.

6 Q. Was there a go to person at Bell

7 Labs that you went to that discussed the issues

8 of asbestos exposure?

9 A. It would have been my supervisor,

10 Bill Schreibeis.

11 Q. Now, when you were taking classes

12 at the University of Cincinnati, what was,

13 specifically, told you about the potential

14 dangers of exposure to asbestos?

15 A. I don’t recall any specifics other

16 than the general knowledge of the industry

17 hygiene field of asbestos exposure at that

18 time.

19 Q. Were you informed what diseases

20 were associated with asbestos exposure?

21 A. Yes, I was.

22 Q. And which diseases?

23 A. Basically, lung cancer,

24 mesothelioma, emphysema like symptoms, fibrosis

25 in the lungs. Those are the ones that I

1 remember.

2 Q. Did you have an understanding as a

3 result of your training and education that it

4 took less exposure to asbestos to cause

5 mesothelioma than, say, lung cancer or

6 asbestosis?

7 MR. MCGOWAN: Form.

8 A. No, I wouldn’t know.

9 Q. You didn’t, know, okay. Now, other

10 than what you’ve discussed so far, did you have

11 any formal training with respect to Bell

12 Laboratories concerning the potential dangers

13 associated with asbestos exposure?

14 A. Yes.

15 Q. What was that?

16 A. Courses at McCrone Institute.

17 Q. What did you learn there?

18 A. I learned how to analyze air and

19 bulk samples of asbestos.

20 Q. Did those courses also involve the

21 general overview of what the dangers were

22 associated with the exposure to asbestos?

23 A. I am almost certain it would have,

24 but I can’t recall the specifics.

25 Q. Now, in your courses and in your

1 work, are there basic principles of worker

2 protection to prevent exposure to industrial

3 dust that are recognized by industrial

4 hygienist?

5 A. Yes.

6 Q. And as an industrial hygienist for

7 Bell Laboratories, did you recognize the

8 principle that a company should know about the

9 potential dangers associated with the use of

10 its product?

11 MR. MCGOWAN: Form.

12 A. Yes.

13 Q. Okay. As an industrial hygienist

14 for Bell, did you recognize the principle that

15 a company should warn consumers about dangers

16 associated with the use of its products?

17 MR. MCGOWAN: Form.

18 A. Yes.

19 Q. As an industrial hygienist for

20 Bell, did you recognize the principle that a

21 company does not own knowledge about the

22 dangers of its product? In other words, what I

23 mean by that is, that a company should share

24 the knowledge about product dangers with

25 workers or consumers?

1 MR. MCGOWAN: Form.

2 A. Yes.

3 Q. As an industrial hygienist for

4 Bell, did you recognize the principle that a

5 worker has the right to know what a distributor

6 knows about the hazards with the use of its

7 product?

8 MR. MCGOWAN: Form.

9 A. Yes.

10 Q. As an industrial hygienist for Bell

11 Laboratories, did you recognize the principle

12 that a company should never mislead workers

13 about the safety of its products?

14 MR. MCGOWAN: Form.

15 A. Yes.

16 Q. As an industrial hygienist working

17 for Bell, did you recognize the principle that

18 a company should always tell the truth about

19 any dangers associated with the use of its

20 products?

21 MR. MCGOWAN: Form.

22 A. Yes.

23 Q. As an industry hygienist for Bell

24 Laboratories, did you recognize the principle

25 that safety is the primary concern when selling

1 products to consumers?

2 MR. MCGOWAN: Form.

3 A. The primary concern, yes.

4 Q. Okay. You agree with the principle

5 as an industrial hygienist for Bell that a

6 company should never withhold information about

7 dangers associated with the use of its

8 products?

9 A. Yes.

10 Q. You agree with the principle as a

11 hygienist for Bell that a company should never

12 put profits before worker safety?

13 A. Yes.

14 Q. You agree with the principle as the

15 hygienist for Bell that the greater the danger

16 associated with the use of a product, the

17 stronger the warning is necessary?

18 MR. MCGOWAN: Form.

19 A. Yes.

20 Q. You agree with the principle as an

21 industrial hygienist for Bell that a warning

22 should inform workers how to use a product

23 safely?

24 A. Yes.

25 Q. Now, as an industrial hygienist

1 working for Bell, did you recognize that there

2 were certain principles to prevent exposure to

3 industrial dust?

4 A. Yes.

5 Q. And what were those principles?

6 A. Quite a number.

7 Q. Did you recognize the principle of

8 engineering controls?

9 A. Yes.

10 Q. And did engineering controls

11 include ventilation?

12 A. Yes.

13 Q. And am I correct that the principle

14 of engineering controls to prevent exposure to

15 industrial dust predated your becoming a

16 hygienist by decades?

17 A. Yes.

18 Q. And did you recognize the principle

19 of segregation of work force as a way of

20 preventing exposure to industrial dust?

21 A. I am not sure what you mean by

22 segregation of the work force.

23 Q. In other words, if you don’t have

24 to be in the area were there’s industrial dust,

25 you segregate those operations from those who

1 necessarily have to be there?

2 A. I recognize that principle.

3 Q. As a principal of industrial

4 hygiene for Bell, did you recognize the use of

5 respirators as a way to prevent exposure to

6 industrial dust?

7 MR. DISIPIO: Objection to form.

8 A. Yes, one.

9 Q. First we start, I’m going to go

10 with the priorities with you.

11 A. Okay.

12 Q. And that principle also predated

13 your beginning in the Industrial Hygiene

14 Department at Bell by decades, true?

15 A. True.

16 MR. MCGOWAN: Form.

17 Q. And did you recognize as an

18 industrial hygienist for Bell, did you

19 recognize the principle that workers should be

20 warned to prevent exposure to industrial dust?

21 A. Yes.

22 Q. And that principle also predated

23 your joining Bell as an industrial hygienist by

24 decades, true?

25 MR. MCGOWAN: Form.

1 A. True.

2 Q. And did you recognize the principle

3 of supplying changing rooms as a way to prevent

4 take-home exposure to toxins that were

5 generated in the workplace?

6 A. Yes.

7 Q. And that principle also predated

8 your joining Bell as an industrial hygienist by

9 any decade, true?

10 MR. MCGOWAN: Form.

11 A. True.

12 Q. Now, in terms of priorities, as an

13 industrial hygienist the first thing you do is

14 you look to see if you can engineer out the

15 danger, correct?

16 A. Incorrect.

17 Q. What’s the first thing you do? You

18 assess the danger?

19 A. That is correct.

20 Q. So I miss that one.

21 A. I would go even further than that.

22 I would anticipate the possibility of a

23 danger.

24 Q. Okay. So the first thing you would

25 do as a principle of industrial hygiene is

1 anticipate the possibility of a danger. What

2 does that mean?

3 A. Basically, you’re looking at the

4 type of work that might be done in the future

5 to determining how it can be done safer.

6 Q. Does the anticipation of the danger

7 include research into the available resources

8 that would provide background information on

9 that danger?

10 A. It would include that, yes.

11 Q. Would it include library research,

12 reading text, those kinds of things?

13 A. Yes.

14 Q. So the first thing I’m going to do

15 in order to protect the worker as an industrial

16 hygienist is we’re going to anticipate the

17 dangers, correct?

18 A. Anticipate the potential dangers.

19 Q. Potential dangers. That includes

20 doing whatever research is necessary to bring

21 you up to speed?

22 A. Correct.

23 Q. What’s the next thing in order of

24 priority?

25 A. The next thing would be to

1 evaluate.

2 Q. All right. An evaluation includes,

3 when you say evaluation, what do you mean by

4 that?

5 A. I’m sorry. When I say evaluate, I

6 mean one would determine whether or not an

7 exposure actually existed.

8 Q. And how would you do that?

9 A. In the case of asbestos, one would

10 do air monitoring.

11 Q. And the principle for air

12 monitoring for asbestos went back to the

13 1940′s; is that fair?

14 A. I believe it did.

15 Q. But at some point in time the way

16 you technically did it changed; is that fair?

17 A. That is correct.

18 Q. All right. So it was known in the

19 1940′s that in order to assess whether a hazard

20 exist with people working with

21 asbestos-containing products that air

22 monitoring should be done; is that fair?

23 A. That’s true.

24 Q. Okay. Now, and you’re aware that

25 was actually required as a regulation in the

1 State of New Jersey in the 1950′s?

2 MR. MCGOWAN: Form.

3 A. I am not aware of that.

4 Q. Okay. What’s the next thing after

5 you evaluate whether a — scratch that. When

6 you make an evaluation, do you evaluate whether

7 there’s an actual danger or a potential danger?

8 A. Yes, both.

9 Q. And if you determine there’s a

10 potential danger, is your next line of defense

11 different than an actual danger?

12 A. Actual danger, yes.

13 Q. Okay. If you’ve determined there’s

14 an actual danger by doing monitoring or

15 investigation, what is the next thing, what is

16 the next principle of industrial hygiene that

17 you would have employed to prevent exposure to

18 industrial dust?

19 A. Talking hypothetically here but the

20 next thing if it was an actual thing, you’d

21 probably stop the work, cease the work

22 activities.

23 Q. Altogether?

24 A. Yes.

25 Q. Okay.

1 A. Which would be different than if

2 there’s a potential.

3 Q. Tell me, just so I understand it in

4 formulating my questions, in your mind what is

5 the difference between an actual danger and a

6 potential danger?

7 A. An actual danger is one that you’ve

8 recognized that you perhaps have exceeded an

9 occupational exposure limit.

10 Q. Okay.

11 A. The potential is that you have the

12 potential for exceeding an occupational

13 exposure limit.

14 Q. So if you know that you’ve exceeded

15 the exposure limit, you should stop that

16 operation altogether, correct?

17 A. That’s correct.

18 Q. And the only way that you would

19 know if you exceeded the limit is by doing

20 actual testing?

21 A. Correct.

22 Q. So it was a recognized principle of

23 industrial hygiene going back to the 1940′s for

24 asbestos that you needed to do testing to make

25 that determination?

1 MR. MCGOWAN: Form.

2 Q. Correct?

3 A. I don’t know the date that came

4 out. In the 1940′s, 1950′s that was beyond my

5 knowledge.

6 Q. Okay. If there was potential

7 danger, you determine there was a potential

8 danger, what principle of industrial hygiene

9 would be employed addressing potential danger?

10 A. We would try using what methods of

11 control you could come up with.

12 Q. And in terms of priority, what

13 would the methods of control be?

14 A. In my — the first priority would

15 be substitute a less hazardous product.

16 Q. Okay.

17 A. I can go down the list if you like.

18 Q. Sure, please. Go ahead.

19 A. The first priority would be

20 substitute a less hazardous product. The

21 second one would be a process change. The

22 third one would be looking at some form of

23 exhaust ventilation. The fourth one would be

24 dilution ventilation and then the last one

25 would be individual personal protection.

1 Q. Where does warnings come in the

2 priorities?

3 A. I don’t consider that part of the

4 control measures.

5 Q. Okay. But in terms of the control

6 measures that you’ve just discussed, those were

7 principles recognized by industrial hygiene

8 long before you started working for Bell

9 Laboratories, correct?

10 A. That is correct.

11 Q. Okay. Do you recognize warning a

12 worker as one of the available resources in

13 your armory to protect that worker from

14 exposure to hazardous dust?

15 A. Yes.

16 Q. Okay. What in your mind, let me

17 just go back through and maybe I can get some

18 sense. Focusing on the subject of asbestos,

19 did all of the controls that you just went

20 through for me, apply to asbestos in your mind?

21 A. They did.

22 Q. Okay. And those controls for

23 asbestos would have also predated your joining

24 the Industrial Hygiene Department at Bell by

25 decades, true?

1 MR. MCGOWAN: Form.

2 A. True.

3 Q. And you would agree with me that it

4 had been recognized for decades before you

5 started with Bell that workers were entitled to

6 a sane appreciation of risk they would

7 encounter in the workplace when working with

8 asbestos-containing products, true?

9 MR. MCGOWAN: Form.

10 A. Could you please rephrase that

11 question?

12 Q. Would you agree that workers were

13 entitled as a principle of industrial hygiene

14 to a sane appreciation of the risk?

15 A. I’m not sure of the word sane.

16 Sane, what do you mean by that?

17 Q. You’ve never seen that in an

18 industrial hygiene publication?

19 A. Sane, s-a-n-e?

20 Q. Correct.

21 A. I must have seen it, but I’m not

22 familiar with the use of the word sane.

23 Q. No problem. You would agree that

24 any warning should be clear as to the level of

25 risk when related to the worker?

1 A. I would agree.

2 Q. And that in addition anytime you

3 would need to warn somebody, training would

4 also be part of an industrial hygiene program

5 to protect against exposure to asbestos?

6 A. I consider warning to be a facet of

7 training.

8 Q. Okay. Now, do industrial hygiene

9 principles recognize that a worker has a right

10 to know of hazardous operations being carried

11 out in his or her vicinity?

12 A. I agree.

13 Q. And that would also go back decades

14 before you became an industrial hygienist?

15 A. It would.

16 Q. Do industrial hygiene principles

17 recognize the worker had a right to know

18 whether products he is being asked to use had

19 toxic ingredients?

20 A. I agree with that.

21 Q. And that would also go back decades

22 before you became an industrial hygienist?

23 A. Yes.

24 Q. Do industrial hygiene principles

25 recognize workers’ right to know if the dust

1 generated by the cutting or fabrication

2 materials he’s using is toxic?

3 A. Yes.

4 Q. Okay. Did industrial hygiene

5 principles recognized that any exposure to

6 human carcinogen should be eliminated whenever

7 possible?

8 A. Yes.

9 Q. And that also predated your

10 becoming an industrial hygienist by decades,

11 true?

12 MR. MCGOWAN: Form.

13 A. Yes.

14 Q. And for asbestos at least into the

15 1950′s, true?

16 MR. MCGOWAN: Form.

17 A. Would you please rephrase that?

18 Q. Yeah. In other words it was a

19 recognized principle that for asbestos, that

20 was a carcinogen going back at least to the

21 1950′s.

22 MR. MCGOWAN: Form.

23 A. I believe so.

24 MR. PLACITELLA: He’s got like two

25 minutes on the tape, do you want to take a

1 break?

2 MR. MCGOWAN: That’s fine if that’s

3 a good time for you.

4 MR. PLACITELLA: How about five

5 minutes?

6 VIDEOGRAPHER: We are going off the

7 record. This is Tape Number One, time is

8 eleven o’clock.

9 (Whereupon a brief recess is

10 taken.)

11 VIDEOGRAPHER: This is Tape 2 of

12 the videotape deposition of Charles Paul

13 Lichtenwalner in the mater of Degnan vs

14 Lucent. We are on the record and the

15 video time is 11:08.

16 BY MR. PLACITELLA:

17 Q. From the information you had as an

18 industrial hygienist for Bell, did AT&T have

19 the money and resources to conduct the proper

20 testing to determine if asbestos hazardous

21 existed in the workplace?

22 MR. MCGOWAN: Form.

23 A. Yes.

24 Q. Did AT&T have the money and the

25 resources to ensure the workers were properly

1 warned of asbestos hazardous in the workplace?

2 MR. MCGOWAN: Form.

3 A. Yes.

4 Q. Did Western Electric have the money

5 and resources to conduct the proper testing to

6 determine if asbestos hazardous existed in the

7 workplace?

8 MR. MCGOWAN: Form.

9 A. Yes.

10 Q. Did Western Electric have the money

11 and resources to ensure workers were properly

12 warned of hazards in the workplace?

13 MR. MCGOWAN: Form.

14 A. Yes.

15 Q. Did Western Electric have the money

16 and the resources to ensure that workers were

17 properly warned of hazardous associated with

18 the products they sold to Bell Operating

19 Companies?

20 MR. MCGOWAN: Form.

21 A. Yes.

22 Q. Including New Jersey Bell?

23 A. Including New Jersey Bell.

24 Q. Did Bell Laboratories have the

25 money and the resources to conduct proper

1 testing to determine if asbestos hazards

2 existed in the workplace?

3 A. Yes.

4 Q. Did Bell Laboratories have the

5 money and the resources to ensure workers were

6 properly warned of hazards in the workplace?

7 A. Yes.

8 Q. Now, am I correct that when you

9 started at, as an industrial hygienist, Bell

10 Labs had already recognized asbestos as a

11 potential human carcinogen?

12 A. I’m not sure what you mean by Bell

13 Labs already recognized individuals at Bell

14 Labs?

15 Q. People working in the Industrial

16 Hygiene Department.

17 A. Yes.

18 Q. And did individuals working in the

19 Industrial Hygiene Department at Bell

20 Laboratories recognized that asbestos exposure

21 can cause mesothelioma when you first started

22 working there?

23 A. Yes.

24 Q. At the time you started working at

25 Bell Laboratories, did Bell Laboratories

1 recognize asbestos as a carcinogen to be

2 concerned about in the workplace of the

3 Operating Companies?

4 A. Yes.

5 Q. Was it your understanding that this

6 knowledge predated your joining Bell Labs as an

7 industrial hygienist?

8 A. Yes.

9 Q. Your boss, Mr. Schreibeis –

10 A. Schreibeis.

11 Q. He had extensive knowledge about

12 the dangers of asbestos –

13 MR. MCGOWAN: Form.

14 Q. — did he not?

15 A. Do you mean extensive was he an

16 expert?

17 Q. Yes.

18 A. In asbestos, no.

19 Q. Okay.

20 A. But he was an expert in industrial

21 hygiene.

22 Q. He was before he became to Bell

23 Laboratories, he was actually the industrial

24 hygienist for the Industrial Hygiene

25 Foundation, did you know that?

1 A. I believe, I knew he was a member

2 of the Industrial Hygiene Foundation.

3 Q. Did you know he worked as an

4 industrial hygienist for the Industrial Hygiene

5 Foundation?

6 A. I did not know that.

7 Q. And whatever information he had as

8 an industrial hygienist for the Industrial

9 Hygiene Foundation he would have brought with

10 him to Bell Laboratories. Would you agree with

11 that?

12 MR. MCGOWAN: Form.

13 MR. HORNBY: Objection.

14 A. I don’t believe he would have

15 forgotten information that he knew in the past.

16 Q. So he was aware of all the — he

17 worked at the Industrial Hygiene Foundation

18 back in the 1950′s, right?

19 A. I do not know.

20 Q. You were a member of the American

21 Industrial Hygiene Association, correct?

22 A. And still am.

23 Q. Still am. And so is Mr.

24 Schreibeis, correct?

25 A. Correct.

1 Q. Now, when you’re a member of the

2 American Industrial Hygiene Association, what

3 were the benefits of membership?

4 A. The ability to attend professional

5 conferences at reduced rates and monthly

6 journal, I believe it was a monthly journal,

7 actually bimonthly journal, professional

8 meetings local and national, the ability to

9 meet people with, you know, networking. All of

10 that.

11 Q. From time to time, did the American

12 Industrial Hygiene Association’s journal

13 contain articles on asbestos exposure and the

14 potential dangers of asbestos?

15 A. It did.

16 MR. PLACITELLA: Could you mark

17 this on P-1.

18 (Whereupon document is marked as

19 P-1 for identification.)

20 Q. Take a look at P-1, Mr. Lichtenwalner.

21 In front of you, you have something called

22 Membership Booklet American Industrial

23 Association 1958, 1959. Do you see that?

24 A. I see it.

25 Q. And it’s not the full booklet

1 ’cause it is hundreds of pages. Could you flip

2 to the last page? You see the last page?

3 A. I do.

4 Q. The fourth name from the top on the

5 left side on page 69, what is that name?

6 A. Fourth name from the top?

7 Q. From the bottom, I’m sorry.

8 A. You’re talking about Mr. Schreibeis,

9 Mr. William J.?

10 Q. Right. Was that the same person

11 that was your boss?

12 A. I believe that was my boss.

13 Q. And it says there that he worked

14 for whom?

15 A. Industrial Hygiene Foundation.

16 Q. Now, that’s all I have on that.

17 MR. PLACITELLA: Mark this one

18 next.

19 (Whereupon document is marked as

20 P-2 for identification.)

21 Q. I have in front of you the 1966,

22 1967 Membership book for the American

23 Association Industrial Hygiene Association,

24 correct?

25 A. Correct.

1 Q. Can you flip to the last page? You

2 see the third name from the top on the right-

3 hand side of page 88?

4 A. Mr. William J. Schreibeis, I do.

5 Q. And is that the same William J.

6 Schreibeis who worked for the Industrial

7 Hygiene Foundation.

8 MR. MCGOWAN: Form.

9 Q. — by virtue of the prior membership

10 list?

11 A. I believe it is.

12 Q. And it says, who does he work for

13 there?

14 A. Bell Telephone Labs.

15 Q. Now, would you agree with me that

16 without proper abatement an area contaminated

17 with asbestos remains contaminated with

18 asbestos?

19 A. No.

20 Q. Why not?

21 A. I’m sorry, yes, it remains

22 contaminated with asbestos. It may or may not

23 be airborne that it could expose people.

24 Q. What do you mean by that?

25 A. What I am talking about, an area

1 that’s contaminated I guess is continued to be,

2 asbestos will continue to be present there,

3 yes.

4 Q. And that will remain indefinitely

5 unless there was proper abatement process?

6 A. Even with abatement process, it may

7 remain there.

8 Q. And what would be a proper

9 abatement process?

10 A. Various types of abatement were

11 used, is used. One is the removal of

12 asbestos. One is encapsulation of the

13 asbestos.

14 Q. Once the asbestos becomes airborne

15 in the work environment, does it continue to

16 contaminate that environment without proper

17 abatement?

18 A. Yes.

19 Q. And does that remain indefinitely?

20 A. I couldn’t say.

21 Q. When you started working as an

22 industrial hygienist in 1975 for Bell

23 Laboratories, was asbestos exposure for Bell

24 Operating Companies a major problem you had to

25 deal with?

1 A. It was not.

2 Q. Was it a major problem that you had

3 to address?

4 A. Yes.

5 Q. Did you recognize as an industrial

6 hygienist for Bell Laboratories that asbestos

7 exposure and smoking increases the risk of

8 cancer?

9 A. Yes.

10 Q. As an industrial hygienist for Bell

11 Laboratories, did you discriminate between the

12 types of asbestos in determining if there was a

13 hazard present in the work place to a worker?

14 A. We did not.

15 Q. Does the presence of a visible dust

16 in connection with the use of a known asbestos-

17 containing product, is that an indication of a

18 hazard?

19 A. No.

20 Q. Okay. Is the presence of visible

21 dust in connection with the use of a known

22 asbestos-containing product an indication of a

23 potential hazard?

24 A. Yes.

25 Q. And when there’s an indication of a

1 potential hazard because of the presence of

2 dust where asbestos-containing products were

3 used, what is necessary from industrial hygiene

4 perspective to address that situation?

5 A. Evaluate whether or not that

6 potential hazard could become a real hazard.

7 Q. And how do you do that?

8 A. Collect bulk samples to determine

9 that asbestos is present. Collect air

10 monitoring to determine what gets into the air.

11 Q. Now, you would agree then that the

12 presence of visible dust in connection with the

13 use of a known asbestos-containing products

14 would warrant further investigation or testing?

15 A. I would agree with that.

16 Q. At what point are you — scratch

17 that. Are you familiar with the concept of a

18 threshold limit value?

19 A. I am.

20 Q. Are you familiar with the concept

21 of a threshold limit value in terms of millions

22 of particles per cubic foot?

23 A. I am.

24 Q. Okay. At one point in time the

25 threshold limit value for asbestos-containing

1 dust was five million particles per cubic foot;

2 is that fair?

3 A. I don’t know the exact number, but

4 I know that there was a particle standard, yes.

5 Q. At what point in time is asbestos-

6 containing dust become visible to the naked eye

7 — scratch that. Are you able to tell, is

8 there a cutoff in terms of any measuring where

9 asbestos-containing dust — scratch that.

10 Would you agree with me that there

11 is some asbestos-containing dust that is

12 invisible?

13 A. Invisible to the naked eye?

14 Q. Correct.

15 A. I would agree with that.

16 Q. And at some point if there’s enough

17 dust, the aggregate of the asbestos-containing

18 dust can become visible to the naked eye, would

19 you agree with that?

20 A. I would agree with that.

21 Q. Do you know at what point in the

22 continuum where dust containing asbestos

23 becomes visible versus invisible to the naked

24 eye?

25 A. I do not.

1 Q. So if you know that there is an

2 asbestos-containing product being used in the

3 workplace, how do you know whether there’s

4 enough asbestos in the workplace in order to

5 determine whether there’s a risk for real

6 exposure?

7 A. I know that by air monitoring.

8 Q. Without air monitoring, is there

9 anyway to tell?

10 A. Not to my knowledge.

11 Q. So would it then be that a proper

12 principle of industry hygiene would be that if

13 you know that someone is working with or around

14 an asbestos-containing product, in order to

15 find out whether that person is at risk, air

16 monitoring would have to be done?

17 A. Sorry — yes, I would agree that

18 air monitoring is used to determining asbestos

19 exposure risk.

20 Q. And without that monitoring there

21 is no way to tell?

22 A. Not to my knowledge.

23 Q. So if you suspect that somebody is

24 working with asbestos in the workplace as a

25 principle of industrial hygiene you should

1 monitor, do a monitoring to see if asbestos

2 fibers can be released, would agree with that?

3 A. I would agree with that.

4 Q. Okay. Now, at some point in time,

5 did Bell Laboratories create a videotape

6 relating to asbestos hazards to be used in

7 training?

8 A. Possibly.

9 Q. Do you remember seeing such a

10 videotape?

11 A. At the moment I don’t remember.

12 Q. To your knowledge, when is the

13 first time that Bell Laboratories conducted any

14 testing for the presence of asbestos-containing

15 dust in the work environment for any Bell

16 Operating Company?

17 A. To my knowledge, it would have been

18 after June or July of 1975 but there may have

19 been prior ones done by Mr. Schreibeis.

20 Q. Why June or July 1975 stand out?

21 A. That’s the time when I was hired to

22 work in the Bell Systems Group.

23 Q. All right. So one of the reasons

24 you were hired was to actually help do the air

25 monitoring?

1 A. That is correct.

2 Q. Okay. And prior to that time, was

3 there any program in place in the Bell

4 Operating Companies for air monitoring for

5 asbestos-containing dust?

6 MR. MCGOWAN: Form.

7 A. Not to my knowledge.

8 Q. Given the fact that you articulated

9 that monitoring was something that should be

10 done going back to the 1940′s, do you know why

11 it was never done before 1975 –

12 MR. MCGOWAN: Form.

13 Q. — by Bell?

14 A. Okay. Bell Laboratories –

15 Q. Correct?

16 A. — Western Electric, New Jersey

17 Bell, I’m sorry, which company are you

18 referring to?

19 Q. Any of them.

20 A. I believe that Western Electric

21 would have conducted air monitoring for

22 asbestos. I am not aware of it, but I believe

23 they would have done so.

24 Q. And they would have done that in

25 the context of their manufacturing facilities?

1 A. I believe that.

2 Q. Okay.

3 A. This is something that I know for a

4 fact.

5 Q. All right. Do you have any

6 information as to whether Western Electric

7 conducted air monitoring where workers actually

8 used their product out in the field?

9 A. Not to my knowledge.

10 Q. Okay. Do you know why from your

11 experience no air monitoring was done by Bell

12 Laboratories for asbestos-containing dust

13 before 1975 when you got there?

14 MR. MCGOWAN: Form.

15 MR. HORNBY: Objection to form.

16 A. First part is you stated no

17 monitoring was done. I cannot verify or

18 confirm or deny no monitoring was done.

19 Q. Okay. Now, is it my understanding,

20 correct, that the industrial hygiene records

21 for the Bell Labs Group would go back for say

22 1962?

23 A. I believe they would.

24 Q. Okay. And what was retained in

25 those records?

1 A. Reports of industrial hygiene

2 monitoring, letters.

3 Q. If monitoring was actually done by

4 Bell Laboratories prior to 1975, would you

5 expect it to be in those records?

6 A. I would.

7 Q. Now, at some point in time you

8 actually yourself, personally, went back and

9 reviewed some of those records, true?

10 A. No, I did not.

11 Q. Well, those records were originally

12 stored I microfiche?

13 A. They were not stored on microfiche

14 until after I joined the organization.

15 Q. And then what happened? At whose

16 direction were they put on microfiche?

17 A. I suspect it came from George

18 Wilkening.

19 Q. And at the some point the

20 microfiche was then converted to CD-ROM?

21 A. That is correct.

22 Q. And was that CD-ROM work

23 searchable?

24 A. It was.

25 Q. And where was that data then

1 stored?

2 A. One set of the CD-ROMS was stored

3 on my desk. I don’t know where the others,

4 data is stored.

5 Q. And when you left. What happened

6 to that data?

7 A. I don’t know.

8 Q. Who did you turn it over too?

9 A. Before I left, the CD-ROMS I don’t

10 know, specifically, what happened to the

11 CD-ROMS.

12 Q. Was there a man by the name of Sean

13 VanDuran who took control of any of that

14 information?

15 A. Quite possible.

16 Q. Okay. And who is he? He’s a

17 hygienist in your group?

18 A. Sean VanDuran was a hygienist in

19 our group.

20 Q. In addition to the industrial

21 hygiene testing, if any was done, what other

22 kinds of records would be contained on those

23 CD-ROMS related to the Bell Laboratories

24 Industrial Hygiene Department?

25 A. Those records were called

1 chronological files and it was basically

2 people’s files on day-to-day basis what they

3 retained.

4 Q. So for instance, they’d have a file

5 for, they’d have a file for Schreibeis?

6 A. That’s correct.

7 Q. Okay. Did you ever conduct air

8 testing for asbestos in telephone company

9 offices for New Jersey Bell?

10 A. I did.

11 Q. Where did you do that?

12 A. I could not tell you, specifically,

13 the buildings. I did not –

14 Q. Do you remember what town it was?

15 A. We certainly did them in New

16 Brunswick. We did them for asbestos probably

17 in Newark, and there would have been other

18 locations.

19 Q. And one of the things that you were

20 doing was testing to see if there was asbestos

21 in the general ambient air?

22 A. That’s correct.

23 Q. And did you actually discover trace

24 amounts of asbestos present in the ambient air

25 in the New Jersey Bell Telephone buildings?

1 A. We discovered trace amounts of

2 fibrous, yes.

3 Q. And when that discovery was made,

4 what, if any, action was taken?

5 A. The amount number of fibers per

6 cubic centimeter of air were compared to the

7 occupational exposure limits. To my knowledge,

8 they were all below, well below the

9 occupational limits at the time. So the action

10 that was taken was basically reporting those

11 results to the various people.

12 Q. Do you know whether the workers or

13 people who worked in that environment were told

14 about the results of your surveys?

15 A. I know that the supervisors of

16 those workers were told of those results.

17 Q. Well, what about the actual people

18 who were walking through the building?

19 A. I could not say.

20 Q. If someone was working with or

21 around an asbestos-containing product, and

22 asbestos is released, the ambient level of

23 asbestos would be increased in the background,

24 would you agree with that?

25 A. I would agree with that.

1 Q. The fibers that you found in the

2 offices of New Jersey Bell, were they above

3 background levels?

4 A. Generally, not.

5 Q. Were there some?

6 A. Yes.

7 Q. Now, would you agree that the

8 deterioration and aging of an asbestos-

9 containing product can cause release of

10 asbestos fiber?

11 A. Yes.

12 Q. Were you responsible for evaluating

13 the occupational health exposure of Operating

14 Company employees?

15 A. I was.

16 Q. And did that include New Jersey

17 Bell?

18 A. It does.

19 Q. Subsequently Bell Atlantic?

20 A. Correct.

21 Q. And was that job to investigate and

22 evaluate whether there were occupational

23 exposures to asbestos?

24 A. It included that, correct.

25 Q. Did New Jersey Bell rely upon your

1 laboratory for communication of hazards found

2 in the workplace?

3 A. I would say not.

4 Q. Who was supposed to communicate the

5 hazards found in the workplace?

6 A. I believe that would have been the

7 function of New Jersey Bell safety staff.

8 Q. Who was it that communicated to New

9 Jersey Bell the findings of hazards in the

10 workplace?

11 A. I did.

12 Q. Did Bell Laboratories have any

13 program in place to make sure that the

14 findings, its findings concerning hazard in the

15 workplace were communicated to the employees of

16 the Operating Companies?

17 A. Yes.

18 Q. And what was that?

19 A. The reports that we generated were

20 sent to the Occupational Health Working Group

21 and from the Occupational Health Working Group

22 they were distributed to safety and medical

23 staff of the Operating Telephone Companies.

24 Q. But how did you ensure that the

25 administrative staff and the safety people in

1 the Operating Companies actually communicated

2 that information to the actual worker?

3 A. I did not ensure that.

4 Q. AT&T as the parent running the

5 show, did they have a program in place to make

6 sure that the information that you discovered

7 ultimately found its way into the actual

8 workers?

9 MS. CRAWFORD: Objection to form.

10 A. I don’t know.

11 Q. Now, I think you told me before

12 that Western Electric had its own industrial

13 hygienist?

14 A. They did.

15 Q. Did you know a man by the name of

16 George Ware?

17 A. I did.

18 Q. Frank Worden?

19 A. Yes.

20 Q. Gene Dennison?

21 A. Yes.

22 Q. Were they all industrial hygienist

23 for Western Electric that you had interaction

24 with?

25 A. Yes, they were.

1 Q. Did you consult with Western

2 Electric hygienist on a regular basis?

3 MR. MCGOWAN: Form.

4 A. I’d, say, not on a regular basis,

5 but intermittently.

6 Q. Did you actually visit Western

7 Electric plants?

8 A. I did.

9 Q. Did you do that many times?

10 A. Define many.

11 Q. Did you discuss the subject of

12 asbestos with Western Electric hygienists?

13 A. Yes.

14 Q. And what was the sum and substance

15 of those discussions? Can you recall?

16 A. They would have been general

17 industrial hygiene professional discussions.

18 Q. Okay. You just referred to

19 something called the Occupational Health

20 Working Group?

21 A. I did.

22 Q. That was a management level group

23 that discussed occupational health concerns?

24 A. It did.

25 Q. And did those occupational health

1 concerns include asbestos?

2 A. They did.

3 Q. Did the Occupational Health Working

4 Group, did that consistent of the medical

5 director for Western Electric?

6 A. It did.

7 Q. Do you remember who that was?

8 A. If you give me a name I might be

9 able to confirm it but at the moment, I don’t

10 remember.

11 Q. Did the Occupational Health Working

12 Group include industrial hygienist from Western

13 Electric?

14 A. It did.

15 Q. Did the Occupational Health Working

16 Group include the medical director for Bell

17 Labs?

18 A. I am not sure.

19 Q. Did it include the industrial

20 hygiene director for Bell Laboratories?

21 A. It did.

22 Q. Am I correct that as part of your

23 job function, you frequently consulted with the

24 Occupational Health Working Group?

25 MR. MCGOWAN: Form.

1 A. I would not say frequent.

2 Q. How about all the time?

3 A. No, not all time.

4 Q. Is it true in some sense that you

5 worked for the Occupational Health Working

6 Group?

7 A. Yes, that is true.

8 Q. And that you were charged with

9 looking at health hazards and then reporting to

10 them?

11 A. That is correct.

12 Q. So anything that you learned as an

13 industrial hygienist was no secret?

14 A. That is correct.

15 Q. And all the things that you knew

16 about the dangers of asbestos, the member of

17 the Occupational Health Working Group would

18 have know as well?

19 MR. MCGOWAN: Form.

20 A. They would.

21 Q. And all the principles that we went

22 through earlier about how to protect workers,

23 all those principles were also known to the

24 members of Occupational Health Working Group,

25 true?

1 MR. MCGOWAN: Form.

2 A. True.

3 Q. Now, asbestos was one of the

4 subjects that the Occupational Health Working

5 Group was concerned with?

6 A. True.

7 Q. Am I correct the Occupational

8 Health Working Group actually oversaw the

9 operations of the industrial hygienist working

10 at Bell Labs?

11 A. It did.

12 Q. So AT&T, for example, knew

13 everything you were doing, in effect?

14 MS. CRAWFORD: Objection.

15 A. Define AT&T.

16 Q. Their medical director.

17 A. True.

18 Q. And the head industrial hygienist

19 at Western Electric knew everything that you

20 were doing?

21 MR. MCGOWAN: Form.

22 A. Yes.

23 Q. You gave them the information that

24 you uncovered, correct?

25 A. That is correct.

1 Q. It was then up to them to determine

2 what to do with it, right?

3 A. It was not my job, right.

4 Q. So if a program had to be developed

5 to make sure that the actual worker in the

6 field got the information, that would have been

7 the function of the Occupational Health Working

8 Group?

9 A. I would not phrase it that way.

10 Q. Okay. How would you phrase it?

11 A. The way I would phrase it is the

12 Occupational Health Working Group would provide

13 the information to the Operating Telephone

14 Companies. It would then be their

15 responsibility to provide that information.

16 Q. But the Operating Telephone

17 Companies were also part of the Occupational

18 Health Working Group, were they not?

19 A. Not really, no.

20 Q. They didn’t have members?

21 A. There was generally one member of

22 one of the operation, the Operating Telephone

23 Companies as part of the Occupational Health

24 Working Group, but they did not all have

25 representatives in that group.

1 Q. Okay. The Bell System, just so I

2 make sure that I am clear, the Bell System

3 Services Group was charged with looking at the

4 industrial hygiene exposures to Operating

5 Company employees?

6 A. Correct.

7 Q. Okay. And you would, specifically,

8 go out in the field and watch Operating Company

9 employees do work?

10 A. Correct.

11 Q. That included work with asbestos-

12 containing products, true?

13 A. There were no asbestos-containing

14 products, to my knowledge, that they used.

15 Q. Well, you were aware that employees

16 of the Operating Companies worked with or

17 around asbestos products as part of their job?

18 A. Correct.

19 Q. Okay. Did you ever observe them

20 doing that?

21 A. I did.

22 Q. And do you know what a cable

23 splicer is?

24 A. I do.

25 Q. What’s a cable splicer?

1 A. A cable splicer, to my knowledge,

2 is a person who is charged with taking and

3 making connections to cables. Basically,

4 that’s their primary role, opening cables and

5 then making connections and closing them.

6 Q. Okay. Did you as part of your

7 responsibilities observe the activities, the

8 work activities of cable splicers?

9 A. I did.

10 Q. On how many occasions?

11 A. I would estimate several hundred.

12 Q. Okay. And did you do that for

13 cable splicers at the New Jersey Bell?

14 A. I did.

15 Q. What locations do you recall or the

16 kinds of locations?

17 A. The kinds of locations, basically,

18 for cable splicers we defined it, I believe the

19 did as well, aerial buried and underground. So

20 we looked at all of those types of work.

21 Q. Did you understand the kinds of

22 products the cable splicers were using in order

23 to perform their work?

24 A. Yes.

25 Q. How detail was your understanding?

1 A. I am not sure how to answer that

2 question.

3 Q. Were you aware of all products they

4 used or generally what they used?

5 A. I was aware, I was trying to make

6 myself aware of most of the products that they

7 used.

8 Q. As you sit here today, can you say

9 that you were aware of all or just some of the

10 products they used?

11 A. I can almost guarantee you I was

12 not aware of all because there were many of

13 them.

14 Q. Are you aware that employees of the

15 Bell Operating Companies would use asbestos-

16 containing gloves?

17 A. Yes.

18 Q. Okay. Are you aware that employees

19 of the Bell Operating Companies would work with

20 asbestos insulated cable?

21 A. I am not aware of any asbestos

22 insulated cable.

23 Q. Did you observe exposure to

24 asbestos when asbestos-containing products were

25 damaged or caused the release of fibers into

1 the air?

2 MR. MCGOWAN: Form.

3 A. Yeah. That was my job to look at

4 that.

5 Q. What was a Bell System catalog of

6 supplies? Are you familiar with that?

7 A. Bell System catalog of supplies?

8 I’m not familiar exactly with that. There were

9 a number of catalogs and supplies.

10 Q. Do you know where, let’s say

11 somebody had gloves and they needed them for

12 work on the job, where would, how would they

13 get those gloves, how would they order them,

14 how would they get to them?

15 A. My understanding is that they would

16 order them through their supervisor.

17 Q. And do you know for instance, who

18 would be the supplier of those gloves to the

19 Bell Operating Companies?

20 A. In many cases it would be Western

21 Electric, but they could also go out and

22 purchase them on their own.

23 Q. Did they have to get special

24 permission to do that?

25 A. Not to my knowledge.

1 Q. Okay. Are you aware that employees

2 would use asbestos-containing gloves when they

3 were performing soldering operations?

4 A. No.

5 Q. Have you ever seen that done?

6 A. Have I ever seen soldering

7 operation or asbestos containing –

8 Q. Well, have you ever seen a

9 soldering operation?

10 A. I have.

11 Q. Okay. And did the employees wear

12 gloves in the soldering operation?

13 A. There’s two types of soldering

14 operations.

15 Q. Well, do they have soldering

16 operations up on the poles?

17 A. I did not observes soldering

18 operations up on the pole.

19 Q. Did you observe soldering

20 operations in manholes?

21 A. Yes, I did.

22 Q. Who was performing those

23 operations?

24 A. They were performed by cable

25 splicers.

1 Q. Do you know when soldering

2 operations were being performed in manholes if

3 whether the people doing that operation would

4 be wearing protective clothing?

5 A. They would.

6 Q. What kind of protective clothing?

7 A. They would be wearing gloves.

8 Q. What kind of gloves?

9 A. The ones that I observed were

10 leather.

11 Q. Leather?

12 A. Leather.

13 Q. At what point in time? Was that

14 from 1975 forward?

15 A. Right, that’s correct.

16 Q. Do you have any idea what kind of

17 gloves were being used prior to 1975 when you

18 got there for soldering operations in manholes?

19 A. I do not know.

20 Q. Who would know that?

21 A. Probably, I really couldn’t say.

22 Q. If there was sworn testimony

23 indicating that asbestos-containing gloves were

24 used in manholes during soldering operations,

25 would you have any information to rebut that.

1 MR. MCGOWAN: Form.

2 A. I have no information to rebut it.

3 Q. If there was testimony that

4 asbestos-containing gloves were used on poles

5 during soldering operations, would you have any

6 information to rebut that?

7 MR. MCGOWAN: Form.

8 A. It’s not something that I’ve ever

9 seen.

10 Q. Okay. Now, were asbestos-

11 containing gloves a source for asbestos

12 exposure for Bell Telephone employees?

13 A. Not exposures above the

14 occupational exposure limit.

15 Q. The way you’re qualifying it, were

16 there sources of exposure limit whether or not

17 it was above?

18 A. They were a source of potential of

19 asbestos exposure.

20 Q. Did you ever actually do readings

21 for how much asbestos, if any, was released

22 during the use of an asbestos-containing glove?

23 A. I, personally, did not.

24 Q. Did Bell Labs do it?

25 A. Other individuals in our group did.

1 Q. And were those reads are made known

2 to you?

3 A. Yes.

4 Q. And how?

5 A. They would have been, I would have

6 seen the reports if they had passed.

7 Q. Do you recall what the results of

8 those readings were?

9 A. As I recall, they were below the

10 occupational exposure limits.

11 Q. Were they above background?

12 A. I couldn’t say.

13 Q. So your focus was whether it was

14 above or below not how much?

15 MR. MCGOWAN: Form.

16 Q. Scratch that. In other words, as

17 long as it was below, you didn’t care about how

18 much below?

19 MR. MCGOWAN: Form.

20 A. That’s correct.

21 Q. Do you know if asbestos-containing

22 gloves used by Operating Company employees

23 released asbestos into the ambient work

24 environment?

25 A. To my knowledge, we never measured

1 anything above the occupational exposure

2 limits.

3 Q. At the some point in time, however,

4 there was a recommendation made to get rid of

5 all the asbestos-containing gloves in the Bell

6 Operating Systems, correct?

7 A. Correct.

8 MR. MCGOWAN: Form.

9 Q. And that recollection was made by

10 somebody that worked for you?

11 A. No.

12 Q. Who made that recommendation?

13 A. As I recall, that recommendation

14 came out from someone in AT&T.

15 Q. Okay. And when was that?

16 A. I can’t say. I would guess

17 somewhere in the 1975 to ’84 time frame.

18 Q. And why was that recommendation

19 made?

20 A. It was believed that there was no

21 need for the asbestos-containing gloves and use

22 that it was meant for.

23 Q. Well, was it also based for the

24 potential for exposure?

25 A. It was potential for exposure.

1 Q. Now, did AT&T ever mandate that all

2 of the asbestos-containing gloves that are

3 already in use, that were used be removed?

4 A. I believe that was part of the

5 letter.

6 Q. And when was that?

7 A. I would imagine sometime around

8 1980 in the ’75 to ’84 time frame.

9 Q. And what did the letter say to your

10 recollection?

11 A. Remove the asbestos-containing

12 gloves from central offices.

13 Q. So that directive came from AT&T to

14 the Bell Operating Companies?

15 A. Correct.

16 Q. So it was actually AT&T who had the

17 ultimate say as to what products were used or

18 not used?

19 MS. CRAWFORD: Objection to form.

20 A. False.

21 Q. Well, did the Bell Operating

22 Companies have the ability at that point to

23 say, hey we’re not going to listen?

24 A. Yes.

25 Q. Okay. Did they do that to your

1 knowledge?

2 A. Not to my knowledge.

3 Q. What was the nature of the

4 directive? Why did AT&T express that? Why did

5 AT&T have the ability to provide such a

6 directive if it was a separate company from the

7 Bell Operating Company?

8 A. I can’t argue for the management

9 but because AT&T was the majority shareholder

10 in most of the Bell Operating Systems that gave

11 them of the authority.

12 Q. Okay. Were the workers who had

13 been using asbestos-containing gloves in the

14 past advised at that point that they were

15 potentially exposed to asbestos by using the

16 gloves?

17 MR. MCGOWAN: Form.

18 A. I couldn’t state how they were

19 warned or what they were told.

20 Q. Who would know that?

21 A. The supervisors of the workers who

22 removed them.

23 Q. Did AT&T ever direct, to your

24 knowledge, that the workers be told that they

25 had used asbestos-containing gloves that

1 created potential exposure in the past?

2 A. Would you rephrase.

3 Q. That was a bad question. Do you

4 know whether or AT&T directed that the

5 employees in the Operating Companies be advised

6 that they had previously had the potential for

7 asbestos exposure by using asbestos-containing

8 gloves?

9 A. No.

10 Q. Do you know what program AT&T

11 directed to make sure that all of the asbestos-

12 containing gloves were taken out of circulation

13 in the Bell Operating Companies?

14 A. I do not know.

15 Q. Do you know whether such a program

16 was ever instituted?

17 A. I do not know.

18 Q. Do you know whether Bell — scratch

19 that. Do you know whether AT&T ever

20 recommended that people who have worked with

21 asbestos-containing gloves have annual physical

22 examinations?

23 A. To my knowledge they were not.

24 That was not recommended.

25 Q. Do you know if Bell Labs ever made

1 a recommendation that people who were working

2 with asbestos-containing gloves in the past get

3 annual physical exams?

4 A. I do not know of any

5 recommendation.

6 Q. Are you familiar with a product

7 known as an asbestos wiping cloth?

8 A. I am.

9 Q. What is an asbestos wiping cloth?

10 A. As I remember it is a square cloth

11 perhaps four or six inches square, perhaps half

12 an inch thick that’s used in lead soldering

13 operations.

14 Q. And during what period of time was

15 that used by employees in the Bell Operating

16 System, do you know?

17 A. I imagine well before 1975, but by

18 the time I started in 1975, very little lead

19 was done. And so it was difficult for us to

20 observe that operation.

21 Q. Do you understand that the use of a

22 wiping cloth was to remove or mold solder

23 around?

24 A. That was one of the uses perhaps

25 the most minor use.

1 Q. What was the major use?

2 A. The major use as I was taught was,

3 basically, to be able to catch the lead solder

4 as it came off the wipe and use it, hold the –

5 provide heat for the bottom part of the wipe

6 when it was being done. And, basically, to

7 wipe the solder into the joint and to smooth it

8 off.

9 Q. Was that product used in the

10 manholes?

11 A. It was.

12 Q. Was it used in the poles?

13 A. Perhaps. I didn’t see that.

14 Q. Would you agree with me that given

15 enough time and use that the cloth would fray

16 over time?

17 MR. MCGOWAN: Form.

18 A. All the cloths that I saw were very

19 much unfrayed, and they appeared to be quite

20 substantial.

21 Q. Did you ever observed it being

22 used?

23 A. I did.

24 Q. When?

25 A. Well, I actually used one myself.

1 I observed it being used in training classes.

2 I observed it being used in the field.

3 Q. So as part of your training in 1975

4 you were still handling asbestos wiping cloths?

5 A. That’s correct.

6 Q. Did you ever test for the release

7 of asbestos fiber from an asbestos wiping

8 cloth?

9 A. I don’t recall that I ever did.

10 Q. Did anyone at Bell Laboratories

11 ever test for the release of asbestos fibers

12 from asbestos wiping cloths?

13 A. I don’t recall.

14 Q. Were employees of the Bell

15 Operating Companies — scratch that. Where did

16 those asbestos wiping cloths, do you know where

17 they came from?

18 A. I do not.

19 Q. Do you know whether they were

20 distributed through Western Electric?

21 A. I do not.

22 Q. Who would know that, do you know?

23 A. Possibly they’re KS specifications

24 for the — most of part products that came from

25 Western Electric and so there might be some

100

1 information on the KS information.

2 Q. What is a KS specification?

3 A. I don’t exactly know what the word

4 KS stands for. It was specifications for

5 products that were provided for Western

6 Electric.

7 Q. Okay. And what would be like

8 included in a typical specification?

9 A. What the material, what materials

10 to make it off, how you would test it to be

11 sure it performed its function, possibly

12 suppliers and ultimate suppliers of that

13 particular product.

14 Q. And was that specification

15 available for most of the products that were

16 used by Bell Operating Companies’ employees on

17 the field?

18 A. Products that came from Western

19 Electric, yes.

20 Q. Would you agree with me that the

21 use of an asbestos wiping cloth had the

22 potential for asbestos exposure?

23 MR. MCGOWAN: Form.

24 A. I would agree that it has the

25 potential for asbestos exposure but not likely

101

1 above the occupational exposure level.

2 Q. But you never tested to find that

3 out?

4 A. I, personally, never did.

5 Q. Did anybody at Bell Labs ever

6 tested to determine whether using asbestos

7 wiping cloths would create exposures above the

8 occupational limits?

9 A. I do not remember.

10 Q. Was a recommendation ever made by

11 the Bell Laboratories that employees using

12 asbestos-containing wiping cloths had the

13 potential for asbestos?

14 A. Let me specify that I don’t know

15 what the wiping cloths were made off so they

16 may or may not have been made of asbestos. I

17 don’t know that there was any recommendation

18 for — I’m sorry, what was it? What

19 recommendation were you asking about?

20 Q. Well, let me ask you. You are

21 aware that at some point in time the wiping

22 cloths that were being used for soldering

23 operations contained asbestos, true?

24 MR. MCGOWAN: Form.

25 A. False.

102

1 Q. You don’t know that?

2 A. I don’t know that.

3 Q. So then, how do you know whether

4 they would release asbestos or not?

5 A. If they didn’t have asbestos,

6 didn’t contain asbestos they would not release

7 it.

8 Q. So you just were aware that wiping

9 cloths were being used in conjunction with the

10 soldering operation?

11 A. That’s correct.

12 Q. But you don’t know what they

13 contained?

14 A. That’s correct.

15 Q. Did you ever hear that wiping

16 cloths contained asbestos that were used at the

17 Bell Operating Companies?

18 A. I do not remember ever hearing

19 that.

20 Q. All right. So before today, that

21 has never arisen?

22 A. I’m sorry, what? Please –

23 Q. The issue as to whether the wiping

24 cloths that were used in the soldering

25 operations whether that contained asbestos,

103

1 today’s the first time that issue ever came up

2 to you?

3 A. No.

4 Q. When is that issue first addressed

5 to you?

6 A. Possibly several years ago in

7 testimony or deposition for testimony.

8 Q. So when you were working — let me

9 ask the question this way? When you were

10 working at Bell Laboratories or its successor,

11 the subject of whether the wiping cloths that

12 were used by operating employees or soldering

13 operations containing asbestos never came up?

14 A. I do not recall ever evaluating

15 wiping cloths for asbestos-containing

16 materials.

17 Q. So if the wiping cloths contained

18 asbestos, nobody ever told you?

19 A. That is correct.

20 Q. Are you aware of any testing

21 whatsoever to determine whether the wiping

22 cloths contained asbestos?

23 A. I am not aware of any testing.

24 Q. Are you aware as to whether

25 asbestos was released from the use of wiping

104

1 cloths in soldering operations?

2 MR. MCGOWAN: Form.

3 A. As I’ve said before, no, I’m not

4 aware of any testing for asbestos release for

5 soldering operations.

6 Q. As an industrial hygienist charged

7 with protecting the health and safety of

8 workers, if those wiping cloths contained

9 asbestos, would you have liked to have known

10 that?

11 A. I definitely would have liked to

12 have known that, yes.

13 Q. Why?

14 A. ‘Cause that was our job. That was

15 our task to find out employees exposures to

16 hazardous materials.

17 Q. And unless somebody told you it had

18 asbestos, there’s nothing that you could do in

19 order to protect people who were working with

20 the product, correct?

21 A. Incorrect.

22 Q. What could you do?

23 A. I could have and we did review

24 specifications of the materials that people

25 were using.

105

1 Q. Did you review specifications for

2 wiping cloths?

3 A. I did not.

4 Q. Did anybody in your group review

5 specifications for wiping cloths?

6 A. I am not aware of any.

7 Q. Are you aware as to whether any

8 workers were ever told that the wiping cloths

9 they were using contain asbestos?

10 MR. MCGOWAN: Form.

11 A. I am not aware of any.

12 Q. Do you know and understand what an

13 asbestos pillow is?

14 A. My understanding of an asbestos

15 pillow is something that’s used to plug holes

16 between floors in a central office.

17 Q. Are they also known as asbestos

18 bags?

19 A. Possibly.

20 Q. And you’re aware that at some point

21 in time — well, scratch that. What was the

22 purpose of an asbestos pillow?

23 A. The purpose of an asbestos pillow

24 was to plug the opening in the floor between

25 the central offices cables went through as a

106

1 fire stopping material.

2 Q. Did you ever personally observed an

3 asbestos-containing pillow?

4 A. No.

5 Q. Do you know from others in the

6 group or any kind of research what an asbestos-

7 containing pillow looked like?

8 A. I should sit back and say I’ve seen

9 pillows stuff in holes in Central Offices,

10 whether or not they contained asbestos or not,

11 I don’t know. So I have seen pillows, whether

12 or not they were asbestos-containing pillows, I

13 don’t know.

14 Q. Do you know, did you ever remove

15 any specifications for the pillows that were

16 used?

17 A. I, personally, did not review

18 specifications.

19 Q. Okay. Anybody in your group review

20 specifications?

21 A. I believe some people did.

22 Q. Were they Western Electric

23 specifications?

24 A. I imagine they were.

25 Q. Okay. Now, the pillows that you

107

1 stuffed in the holes in Central Offices, what

2 color were they?

3 A. As I recall they were either green

4 or blue.

5 MR. PLACITELLA: Why don’t we take

6 five minutes or so.

7 VIDEOGRAPHER: We are now off the

8 record. This is the end of Tape 2 of

9 today’s deposition.

10 (Whereupon a brief recess is

11 taken.)

12 VIDEOGRAPHER: This is Tape 3 of

13 today’s videotape deposition of Charles

14 Paul Lichtenwalner in the matter of Degnan

15 versus Lucent. Deposition is being held

16 at 25 DeForest Avenue, Summit, New Jersey,

17 July 25, 2008, video time is 12:12. We

18 are now on the record.

19 BY MR. PLACITELLA:

20 Q. Are you aware during what period of

21 time asbestos-containing pillows were used in

22 Operating Company Central Offices?

23 A. I don’t know the dates.

24 Q. There was at some point in time a

25 recommendation made by you to discontinue the

108

1 use of asbestos-containing pillows?

2 A. Not by me personally.

3 Q. By whom?

4 A. I believe, again, it came from

5 someone at AT&T.

6 Q. So at some point in time AT&T

7 directed that asbestos-containing pillows no

8 longer be used?

9 A. Possible it was AT&T, possible it

10 was Western Electric.

11 Q. And was that after you started

12 working as an industrial hygienist in Bell

13 Laboratories Group?

14 A. I don’t know the time frame for

15 that.

16 Q. Do you know whether the directive

17 ever indicated that all the asbestos-containing

18 pillows were already in placed should be

19 removed from the Central Offices?

20 A. It’s my recollection that that

21 recommendation was not — it was required to

22 remove the ones that were already in place.

23 Q. So there was no recall if you, for

24 lack of a better term, for the asbestos-

25 containing pillows that were already in place?

109

1 A. That’s my understanding.

2 Q. And would you agree with me that

3 they’re likely at the that point, if you take

4 into account all of the holes and all the

5 buildings, thousands of the asbestos-

6 containing pillows in place?

7 MR. MCGOWAN: Form.

8 A. Given the buildings, it’s likely

9 there were thousands of pillows.

10 Q. Now, the presence of asbestos-

11 containing pillows created the probability of

12 company employees being exposed to asbestos,

13 would you agree with that?

14 MS. CRAWFORD: Objection.

15 A. I would state that I don’t believe

16 that that would create an exposure permissible

17 above the occupational exposure limits.

18 Q. Well, was testing ever done to

19 determine whether the handling of asbestos-

20 containing pillows generated the release of

21 asbestos fiber?

22 A. I did not do it, and I am not aware

23 of any testing done during the handling of

24 pillows.

25 Q. Now, are you distinguishing

110

1 handling from something else?

2 A. I am distinguishing it from having

3 the pillows in place.

4 Q. Okay.

5 A. And I did numerous applications in

6 Operating Telephone Companies, Central Offices

7 where these pillows were used and did not find

8 high levels of asbestos.

9 Q. In other words, you just did a

10 sample around where the pillow was already in

11 place?

12 A. That’s correct.

13 Q. But you never actually pulled the

14 pillow out to see if that process would release

15 asbestos fiber?

16 A. I, personally, never did that.

17 Q. Did anybody else?

18 A. I don’t know. I don’t remember.

19 Q. Why not?

20 MR. MCGOWAN: Form, two questions

21 prior. I do apologize.

22 Q. Why not?

23 A. Again, I don’t remember.

24 Q. Were you aware that those pillows

25 had the potential for being moved when work had

111

1 to be done on cables running through the holes

2 that they were stuffed then, correct?

3 MR. MCGOWAN: Form.

4 A. That’s correct.

5 Q. So the only testing that was ever

6 done was taking the test to see if the pillows

7 that were already there were releasing any

8 fiber as they sat there?

9 MR. HORNBY: Objection. That’s not

10 the witness’s testimony.

11 A. I’m sorry. I don’t remember

12 whether testing was done during movement of the

13 pillows.

14 Q. Well, you didn’t do it, did you?

15 A. I did not do it.

16 Q. And as you sit here today, are you

17 aware of any?

18 A. I am not aware on any testing that

19 was done?

20 Q. Are you aware of any testing what

21 would happen if somebody took the pillow in

22 their hand and manipulated it?

23 A. I am not aware of any testing.

24 Q. Are you aware what would happen

25 when somebody had to pulled the pillow out?

112

1 A. I am not aware of testing when the

2 pillow was pulled out.

3 Q. What happens with those pillows, am

4 I correct, is they actually get shoved in

5 tightly into a hole to stop the cables from

6 moving around?

7 A. You could not say. I never saw

8 pillows being used.

9 Q. Did you ever run a test to

10 determine whether pushing the pillows into a

11 hole would release asbestos fibers?

12 MR. MCGOWAN: Form. The witness

13 has testified he does not know if it had

14 asbestos.

15 MR. PLACITELLA: No, that’s not

16 what he said.

17 A. As I said before, I do not, I did

18 do any testing in the use of the pillows.

19 Q. Okay. Do you remember what the

20 directive from AT&T said when it was mandated

21 that you could no longer use asbestos-containing

22 pillows.

23 MS. CRAWFORD: Objection to form.

24 A. I don’t recall that there was a

25 directive about no longer using asbestos-

113

1 containing pillows. It’s possible it was just

2 changed so that asbestos be no longer used in

3 the pillows.

4 Q. Do you know whether the people who

5 would have either removed or installed those

6 pillows were ever warned that the pillows

7 contained asbestos?

8 MR. MCGOWAN: Form.

9 A. I have a very vague recollection of

10 information being disseminated that some of the

11 pillows contained asbestos and that employees

12 were to be informed that they were not to

13 manipulate them anymore than was necessary.

14 And if they knew that they had asbestos-

15 containing pillows, to replace them when they

16 needed to remove the pillows from the floors.

17 Q. Why would they not –

18 A. That’s a very vague recollection

19 and you know I wouldn’t want to since I’m under

20 oath here, I don’t remember exactly the

21 recommendation requirement letter that went

22 out. I do remember vaguely something to that

23 effect went out.

24 Q. Would that be contained in the

25 industrial hygiene files?

114

1 A. Likely it would not.

2 Q. Where would that kind of records be

3 stored?

4 A. If there are any locations where

5 people maintain the recommendation letters,

6 general letters, and so forth from AT&T, that

7 would likely be the source of that.

8 Q. Now, you say be careful not to move

9 or manipulate it, why should you be careful not

10 to move or manipulate it?

11 A. Whenever you move or manipulate

12 asbestos-containing materials there’s potential

13 for release of asbestos fibers in the air.

14 Q. Do you know whether cable splicers

15 who had to run their cables or remove those

16 bags were ever warned that they were

17 potentially exposed to asbestos in doing that

18 operation?

19 A. I am not aware at any time that

20 they were warned, but I would not have been

21 privy to that, those training or warnings.

22 Q. Do you know whether AT&T ever

23 recommended that they be warned?

24 A. I am not aware of any

25 recommendation to that effect.

115

1 Q. Do you know whether the employees

2 in the Operating Companies were ever told that

3 they were — the pillows they used in the past

4 contained asbestos?

5 A. I am not aware of that.

6 Q. Do you know whether the employees

7 who would have encountered asbestos-containing

8 pillows as part of their job were informed to

9 have annual medical examinations?

10 A. I am not aware of that.

11 Q. A principle of industrial hygiene

12 recognized for decades would have dictated that

13 the air be tested for people who installed or

14 removed pillows known to contain asbestos,

15 true?

16 MR. MCGOWAN: Form.

17 A. False. Possibly one could look at

18 the coverings for the pillows and determine

19 whether or not it was likely to release

20 asbestos. It was my understanding that the

21 coverings for the pillows did not contain

22 asbestos. Again, as I said, I cannot, I am

23 familiar with the pillows only indirectly from

24 reports or talking with other industrial

25 hygienist.

116

1 Q. Well, there’s no allegation that

2 the outside of the pillow itself was asbestos?

3 Is there any information to that effect?

4 A. There’s no information one way or

5 other.

6 Q. Okay.

7 A. But it’s my understanding that they

8 were not asbestos on the outside.

9 Q. Now, you went to this course at the

10 McCrone Institute?

11 A. I did.

12 Q. And there you learned how to test

13 to see if something on the surface of an object

14 contained asbestos?

15 A. I learned how to test if materials

16 contained asbestos, surface interior

17 everywhere.

18 Q. So you could have taken those bags

19 that were thought to contain asbestos and look

20 at the outside using the techniques that you

21 were taught to determine if that, in fact, was

22 the case that there was asbestos on the

23 outside, true?

24 A. That’s true, I could have done

25 that.

117

1 Q. But it wasn’t done?

2 A. I did not do it.

3 Q. And nobody else at Bell Labs did?

4 MR. MCGOWAN: Form.

5 A. I don’t remember if –

6 Q. And AT&T never directed that it be

7 done?

8 A. They never directed me to do that.

9 Q. Now, in a prior deposition you were

10 asked the following question and you gave the

11 following answer. It says, “My point is not as

12 though the Western Electric Company’s employees

13 were actually going to be exposed to the

14 asbestos-containing bags and not the Operating

15 Telephone Company employees or vice versa.

16 Both the employees of Western Electric as well

17 as, for example, Pacific Bell, had a

18 probability of being exposed to asbestos as a

19 result of the presence of these

20 asbestos-containing bags in the workplace,

21 right?”

22 And your answer was, “My

23 understanding that there was a probability for

24 both of them to be exposed.” Do you recall that

25 testimony?

118

1 A. I do not.

2 Q. All right. Do you have –

3 MR. MCGOWAN: Where is that from?

4 MR. PLACITELLA: Page 181 of the

5 deposition are Mr. Lichtenwalner, September

6 16, 2003, in the Graham case.

7 Q. Would you agree that there was a

8 probability that Operating Companies’ employees

9 would be exposed if you testified under oath in

10 this case?

11 MR. MCGOWAN: I’m going to object

12 to the form in terms of any prior or

13 preceding language in testimony that may

14 differ from your question.

15 MR. PLACITELLA: That’s fine.

16 A. I would agree that there is a

17 probability. The probability may be small.

18 Q. Okay. You understand what a

19 transite cable hole cover is?

20 A. I understand what a transite cover

21 is. Are you referring to transite covers used

22 in Central Offices?

23 Q. Correct.

24 A. Yes.

25 Q. Materials used in Bell Operating

119

1 Companies contain transite, would you agree

2 with that?

3 A. Transite was used at Bell Operating

4 Companies, yes.

5 Q. Under what specification? Was that

6 a Western Electric specification?

7 A. I don’t know.

8 Q. Okay. Do you believe it was more

9 likely than not a Western Electric

10 specification?

11 MR. MCGOWAN: Form.

12 A. I couldn’t say for that particular

13 product for that particular use of that

14 product.

15 Q. Would you agree that transite was a

16 potential problem to Operating Telephone

17 Company employees?

18 A. I would disagree with that.

19 Q. In your deposition that I just told

20 your counsel about on page 147 you were asked

21 the following question and you gave the

22 following answers.

23 “You had indicated earlier that

24 there were potential materials containing

25 transite that might pose a potential

120

1 problem to the Operating Telephone Company

2 employees.

3 “ANSWER: Yes.

4 “QUESTION: What kinds of material

5 contained transite? Materials made of

6 transite.”

7 Does that refresh your recollection

8 as to whether transite was a potential problem

9 for the Operating Telephone Company employees?

10 MR. MCGOWAN: Objection to form.

11 A. Perhaps I misspoke. As transite

12 asbestos in place, I do not believe poses a

13 potential exposure hazard to Operating

14 Telephone Company employees. Disturbing

15 transite materials might pose a potential

16 problem.

17 Q. Transite was — let’s just make

18 sure we’re talking about the same thing. The

19 transite covers, they were used in Central

20 Offices, correct?

21 A. Correct.

22 Q. Okay. And they would actually

23 cover the holes where the asbestos pillows were

24 stuffed into, correct?

25 MR. MCGOWAN: Form.

121

1 A. Possibly. Possibly they would be

2 used in lieu of the asbestos pillows.

3 Q. Okay. Now, give me a description

4 of the transite cable hole covers that you’re

5 thinking of?

6 A. The ones that I’m thinking of would

7 be a transite board, perhaps a half an inch

8 thick, basically, made long and wide enough to

9 cover generally a slot if it was between the

10 board in the Central Office.

11 Q. So they’d be about, maybe

12 three-quarters of a foot long?

13 A. Three-quarters of a foot?

14 Q. How long would they be typically?

15 A. It depends. It would need to be

16 long enough to cover the width of the slot and

17 they were various size slots. The largest that

18 I saw was probably 4 foot long and perhaps a

19 foot wide.

20 Q. About three-quarters of an inch

21 thick?

22 A. I would I think something like

23 that, yes.

24 Q. Now, did you ever do any testing of

25 the transite covers in place in the Central

122

1 Office to see if they were releasing asbestos

2 fibers?

3 A. In the sense that we tested

4 asbestos in Central Offices, yes, we did that

5 testing.

6 Q. So you specifically tested to see

7 whether the transite cover in place was

8 releasing asbestos?

9 A. No. We specifically tested to see

10 if there was asbestos in Central Offices.

11 Q. Okay. Did you ever tested to

12 determine whether the moving of the transite –

13 this is made of cement, right?

14 A. I believe it is.

15 Q. And how did you, how heavy are

16 these things typically?

17 A. They weigh as much as a piece of

18 cement. That thickness and area of volume.

19 Q. Well, when you have to move them,

20 do people typically pick them up or do they

21 slide them across the floor or what?

22 A. Again, I never saw them being

23 moved, but it would be very easy to pick them

24 up. It weighed even the largest ones would be

25 a few pounds.

123

1 Q. And when those, did you ever do any

2 testing to determine when you pick up the

3 covers and put them back down, whether that

4 process release is asbestos fibers?

5 A. I never did any testing like that.

6 Q. Did anybody else do that kind of

7 testing?

8 A. I don’t recall it being done in

9 Central offices.

10 Q. Was it done elsewhere?

11 A. I had some friends who did some

12 testing working with asbestos in a laboratory

13 setting.

14 Q. And where was that?

15 A. In Holmdel, New Jersey.

16 Q. And what kind of test did they run?

17 A. Basically, were doing testing to

18 determine what happens when you drill transite

19 board to determine what the potential exposures

20 were.

21 Q. And what were the results of those

22 tests?

23 A. I don’t know. It’s in the

24 literature of the Industrial Hygiene

25 Association.

124

1 Q. Under what circumstances — you

2 mean those tests were performed by Bell?

3 A. Yes.

4 Q. Why would an Operating Company

5 employee have to drill, cut, saw transite in

6 the course of their work?

7 A. This was done for work at the Bell

8 Laboratories so it was to determine exposure at

9 Bell Laboratories personnel.

10 Q. In the Laboratories themselves?

11 A. That is correct.

12 Q. Okay. But what about testing done

13 in the field for people who were moving around

14 these transite covers?

15 A. I am not aware of any.

16 Q. So just so we’re clear, no testing

17 was ever done to determine whether there was a

18 release of asbestos fiber when handling,

19 replacing, or moving transite of hole covers?

20 MR. HORNBY: Objection, it

21 misstates his testimony.

22 MR. MCGOWAN: Form.

23 A. No testing was ever done,

24 specifically, to determine exposure, moving or

25 handling asbestos covers. However, exposure

125

1 monitoring was done in Central Offices –

2 Q. Right.

3 A. — and some of that may have been

4 the handling or removal of transite covers at

5 that time.

6 Q. So you believe that because the

7 exposure levels were low generally in the

8 Central Offices that that somehow was an

9 indication that people who might be handling

10 the hole covers were not at risk for exposure?

11 Would that be the extrapolation you made?

12 A. I didn’t make an extrapolation like

13 that. My statement would be that we measured

14 concentrations in Central Offices, handling of

15 transite may have been going on at the time;

16 therefore, there may have been some exposures

17 that measure that type of operation.

18 Q. Well, how close to this operation

19 of moving the transite were your testing done?

20 A. It could be any distance from one

21 foot to the maximum dimension of a Central

22 Office.

23 Q. So you have no idea whether the

24 testing that you did in Central Offices had any

25 bearing whatsoever on whether asbestos was

126

1 released during the moving of transite cable

2 hole covers?

3 MR. MCGOWAN: Form.

4 A. I have no direct knowledge of

5 asbestos exposure when those things were

6 moved.

7 Q. ‘Cause no one ever looked?

8 MR. MCGOWAN: Form.

9 A. Not that I recall.

10 Q. Okay. Did anyone — by the way,

11 the guys like the cable splicers who had to run

12 cable through those holes, would they have to

13 move those covers as part of their jobs?

14 A. I don’t know.

15 Q. People working with transite cable

16 hole covers included workers running new cables

17 from one floor to the next; would you agree

18 with that?

19 A. That’s a possibility.

20 Q. Do you remember testifying about

21 that?

22 A. No, I don’t.

23 Q. Would you quarrel with that?

24 A. No, I would not.

25 Q. Now, did a directive ever come from

127

1 AT&T that transite cable hole covers never

2 stopped being used in the Central Offices?

3 A. Not to my knowledge.

4 Q. Did a directive ever come from AT&T

5 indicating that people who moved those covers

6 should be warned that they contained asbestos?

7 A. Not to my knowledge.

8 Q. Was there ever a recall of cable

9 hole covers in Central Offices that were made

10 from transite?

11 A. Not to my knowledge.

12 Q. Just to round out the whole cable

13 issue, are you familiar with a product known as

14 Quick Plug Cement?

15 A. I am not.

16 Q. Do you know whether cement was used

17 as part of the process of sealing the area

18 where the cable hole cover was used?

19 A. I am not aware of that.

20 Q. Okay.

21 MR. PLACITELLA: Do you want to

22 stop now for a half hour? Is that a good

23 time for you?

24 (Whereupon a brief luncheon

25 recess is taken.)

128

1 A F T E R N O O N S E S S I O O N.

2 VIDEOGRAPHER: Time is 1:22. We

3 are on the record.

4 BY MR. PLACITELLA:

5 Q. Good afternoon. No disrespect but

6 I have to ask you this question. Did you

7 discuss the subject of your testimony at all at

8 lunchtime?

9 A. Yes, not the subject. The form of

10 testimony.

11 Q. What does that mean?

12 A. Discussed how I was performing.

13 Q. And what were you told?

14 MR. MCGOWAN: Objection.

15 MR. PLACITELLA: Any discussion you

16 had while he’s still under oath is not

17 privilege.

18 Q. What was it that you discussed?

19 A. What I had said, how I had said it,

20 sorry.

21 Q. What does that mean?

22 A. How I answered the questions.

23 Q. Well, were you told to do anything

24 differently?

25 A. No, I was not.

129

1 Q. What was the sum and substance of

2 your discussion?

3 A. Basically, that I was answering the

4 questions and continue to do so.

5 Q. Okay. Am I correct that transite

6 conduits were used to hold cables for

7 underground telephone communications?

8 A. Correct.

9 Q. And what would happen is those

10 transite conduits would connect one manhole to

11 another; is that fair?

12 A. That’s true.

13 Q. So what would happen is there would

14 be a manhole in Point A, another one in Point

15 B, and the conduit would be laid underground,

16 correct?

17 A. Correct.

18 Q. Okay. And the cable would actually

19 be pulled through that conduit?

20 A. That’s correct.

21 Q. Okay. And during what period of

22 time, if you know, was transite conduit used

23 for that purpose in the Bell Operating

24 Companies?

25 A. I don’t know the time frame.

130

1 Q. Was there ever a time when you were

2 working for Bell Labs or any of its successors

3 where the transite cement conduit was

4 discontinued?

5 A. I am not aware of it being

6 discontinued.

7 Q. So no time, to your knowledge, was

8 there ever a directive that transite cement

9 conduit should no longer be used for holding

10 telecommunications cable underground?

11 A. Not to my knowledge.

12 Q. Okay. Now, what would be the

13 reason for pulling cable through a conduit?

14 A. To put the cable inside the

15 conduit. The conduits were normally placed on

16 the ground empty.

17 Q. Did you ever see, physically,

18 observe transite conduit?

19 MR. MCGOWAN: Object to the form.

20 A. I’ve been inside manholes and

21 perhaps was present, but I don’t recall if I

22 was ever present when they were laying the

23 conduit. All I would have seen was the conduit

24 where, actually the face of the manhole.

25 Q. Did you ever observe that, in any

131

1 New Jersey Bell property?

2 MR. MCGOWAN: Form.

3 A. I was in numerous manholes in New

4 Jersey Bell properties.

5 Q. Did you physically witness, ever

6 physically witness the pulling of the cable

7 through transite conduit in New Jersey Bell

8 properties?

9 A. I did.

10 Q. Now, is that something that would

11 be done in the presence of a cable splicer?

12 A. It would not.

13 Q. Are you aware of cable splicers

14 ever doing that?

15 A. I am not aware of cable splicers

16 pulling cable.

17 Q. Can you say with certainty that

18 that did not happen?

19 MR. MCGOWAN: Form.

20 A. There were a million people in the

21 Bell System. I cannot say with certainty what

22 did or did not take place.

23 Q. Now, the pulling of cable through

24 conduit resulted in the release that

25 contaminated the ambient air, the release of

132

1 asbestos, that contaminated the ambient air in

2 manholes, true?

3 MR. MCGOWAN: Form.

4 A. The potential was there, yes.

5 Q. In fact, did you ever do any

6 measurements to determine if that, in fact,

7 happened?

8 A. I believe I did some measurements.

9 Q. And did you do those measurements

10 yourself?

11 A. I believe I did.

12 Q. And what were the results of your

13 measurements?

14 A. I do not recall.

15 Q. Do you recall that your

16 measurements showed elevated levels of asbestos

17 fibers in the manholes where cable was pulled

18 through the transite conduit?

19 MR. MCGOWAN: Form.

20 A. I do not recall.

21 Q. The concern you had, you don’t

22 remember the results one way or the other?

23 A. That’s correct.

24 Q. Did you generate reports from doing

25 that testing?

133

1 A. If I made measurements, I generate

2 a report, reports.

3 Q. And that generated the file that’s

4 in some CD-ROM that you left behind?

5 A. Correct.

6 Q. Now, your concern was that in

7 pulling the cables that there was concern, you

8 had concern about pulling cables through

9 transite conduit, did you not?

10 MR. MCGOWAN: Form.

11 A. I did.

12 Q. And what you found was that the

13 pulling of the cable through the transite

14 conduit typically contaminated the manhole with

15 asbestos, true?

16 MR. MCGOWAN: Form.

17 A. I don’t recall what the results

18 were.

19 Q. I want to see if I can refresh your

20 recollection. In your deposition of September

21 16, 2003, in the Graham case, you were asked

22 the following question, and giving the

23 following answers. Page 154 starting on the

24 bottom, line 24.

25 “You also indicated there was

134

1 exposure to asbestos from working with

2 transite conduit. How would the exposure

3 take place in that circumstances?

4 “ANSWER: The concern that we had

5 is when they were pulling out cables from

6 transite conduits so it would be the

7 cables being pulled through the conduit.

8 “QUESTION: The cables being pulled

9 through the conduit would result in the

10 release of asbestos that contaminated the

11 ambient air?

12 “ANSWER: Typically, it contaminated

13 the manhole.

14 “QUESTION: The manhole area?

15 “ANSWER: Right.”

16 Q. Do you recall giving that

17 testimony?

18 A. I recall giving the testimony. I

19 don’t recall the specific details of my

20 responses.

21 Q. You want a retract that testimony

22 here today?

23 A. No.

24 Q. Okay. So your testing showed that

25 the pulling of cable through transite conduit

135

1 typically contaminated manholes with asbestos,

2 true?

3 MR. MCGOWAN: Object to form.

4 A. As I said, I don’t remember the

5 results of that testing.

6 MR. MCGOWAN: Just for

7 clarification, I don’t think the testimony

8 read to him had the word “testing” in it.

9 I might have misheard.

10 Q. It said, all right, just so we’re

11 clear, “The cables being pulled through the

12 conduit would result in the release of asbestos

13 that contaminated the ambient air.

14 “ANSWER: Typically it contaminated

15 the manhole.

16 “QUESTION: The manhole area?

17 “ANSWER: Right.”

18 Can you tell me what was the basis

19 for that statement, that it typically

20 contaminated the manhole.

21 A. The basis for that statement would

22 be that when you’re creating, pulling cable

23 through material you have the possibility of

24 generating dust.

25 Q. Now, cable splicers worked in

136

1 manholes. You agree with that?

2 A. I agree with that.

3 Q. Okay. Would you agree that once

4 the manhole was contaminated, it remained

5 contaminated unless it was properly abated?

6 A. I could see possibilities that it

7 did not remain contaminated.

8 Q. And what would those possibilities

9 be?

10 A. The possibilities are that before

11 people entered manholes, they had to ventilate

12 manholes. That ventilation created a lot of

13 air that would have been removed a lot of the

14 dust that was in the manhole.

15 Q. But what happened to the people

16 that were in the manhole pulling the cable

17 through?

18 MR. MCGOWAN: Objection to form.

19 A. People were not standing in the

20 manhole when the cable was being pulled

21 through. That was forbidden.

22 Q. By whom?

23 A. By Bell System practices.

24 Q. Is that written down somewhere?

25 A. Yes.

137

1 Q. Why was it forbidden?

2 A. As a safety hazard in case

3 something broke.

4 Q. What do you mean as a safety hazard

5 if something broke?

6 A. When you’re pulling cable there’s

7 large forces involved to pull that cable

8 through the manhole large distances. There is

9 typically large wheels that are used to prevent

10 bending the cable. So there’s large forces

11 involved and there could be, you know, some

12 people were not allowed to be in the manhole

13 while the cable was being pulled.

14 Q. What ventilation was put in the

15 manhole that would remove the air in the

16 manhole?

17 A. Ventilation was required before

18 entering any manhole.

19 Q. What does that mean by ventilation?

20 A. It means that there was manhole

21 ventilators that provided air into manholes

22 basically, purged the air and provide fresh

23 airs into manholes while people were working in

24 them.

25 Q. And the ventilation would also have

138

1 the effect of stirring up whatever dust had

2 settled in the manhole, true?

3 A. That’s true.

4 Q. And how long would a manhole have

5 to be ventilated before somebody would have to

6 go in there?

7 A. I don’t recall the exact time, but

8 it depends on the size of the manhole. Most

9 manholes I believe it’s a minimum of five

10 minutes. It required at least seven air

11 changes.

12 Q. And did you ever do any testing to

13 see after the manhole was ventilated whether

14 asbestos was removed from the manhole that was

15 contaminated?

16 A. I do not recall doing any testing.

17 Q. Why not?

18 A. I don’t see what the purpose would

19 be.

20 Q. Well, you knew that pulling the

21 transite cable through, pulling the cable

22 through the transite typically contaminated the

23 manhole, true?

24 A. True.

25 MR. MCGOWAN: Form.

139

1 Q. You know that people would then go

2 into the manhole, true?

3 A. True.

4 Q. But you never determined to see

5 whether those people were going to be exposed

6 once they went into the manhole?

7 A. Let me restate. I may have done

8 some testing for asbestos in manholes while

9 people were working, but I don’t recall any

10 specific times that I did that.

11 Q. Well, as you sit here today, you

12 cannot recall ever testing to determine whether

13 people were exposed to asbestos that you say

14 were typically contaminated inside of

15 manholes?

16 MS. CRAWFORD: Objection to form.

17 MR. MCGOWAN: Form.

18 A. I don’t recall I ever said

19 typically contaminated.

20 Q. So you did not testify, “The cables

21 being pulled through the conduit would result

22 in the release of asbestos that contaminated

23 the ambient air; your answer, typically, it

24 contaminated the manhole.”

25 You didn’t say that under oath

140

1 under penalty of perjury, sir?

2 A. Perhaps I did.

3 Q. Was it the truth under penalty of

4 perjury, sir?

5 MR. MCGOWAN: Form, argumentative.

6 A. Was what –

7 Q. That asbestos typically

8 contaminated the manhole through — by the

9 pulling of the cable through the transite

10 conduit?

11 A. I’d like you to repeat the question

12 that was asked. I had some particular concerns

13 about the way that question was asked prior to

14 my answer.

15 Q. Sir, did you give the answer to the

16 following question? “The cables being pulled

17 through the conduit would result in the release

18 of asbestos that contaminated the ambient air.”

19 Your answer, “Typically it contaminated the

20 manhole.”

21 Do you remember that testimony?

22 A. I remember the testimony.

23 Q. Okay. What tests did you run to

24 determine whether people who went into that

25 manhole after the cable was pulled through were

141

1 not at risk for asbestos exposure?

2 A. That test would have been done

3 while the cable, after the cable had been

4 pulled through the manhole. At that point I

5 would have been monitoring the linemen who were

6 doing that cable pulling.

7 I thought, sorry, I assumed that

8 your question prior to this was whether or not

9 I did any testing of cable splicers working in

10 manholes after cables had been pulled. And I

11 don’t recall, but it’s possible that there was

12 testing done for asbestos in cable splicers.

13 Q. But you have no information, as you

14 sit here today, that that testing was done?

15 A. I do not recall any of that

16 testing.

17 Q. Did you ever receive a directive

18 from AT&T to test the manholes to see how long

19 they remained contaminated?

20 A. No, I did not.

21 Q. Did you ever receive a directive

22 from the Occupational Health Working Group to

23 test the manhole to see how long they remained

24 contaminated?

25 A. I did not.

142

1 Q. As someone whose dedicated his life

2 to protecting his life to the health and safety

3 of workers, why didn’t you on your own run

4 tests to determine how long the manhole

5 remained contaminated with asbestos after it

6 was pulled through?

7 MR. MCGOWAN: Form, argumentative.

8 A. How long? That’s a difficult

9 series of questions to answer given the

10 variable nature of manholes and exposures and

11 water conditions and things like that. That

12 would not be an easy study to determine how

13 long contamination existed in manholes.

14 Q. Well, did you do it, say, two hours

15 after the cable was pulled?

16 A. As I said before, I did testing

17 while cable was being pulled. I don’t recall

18 the results, the specific results of that

19 test. I also know that we did sampling in

20 manholes while cable splicers were working. I

21 don’t recall if asbestos measurements were

22 taken as part of that.

23 Q. What trades would enter the

24 manholes on behalf of Bell Operating Companies

25 after the cable was pulled through the transite

143

1 conduit?

2 A. Cable splicers.

3 Q. That’s it?

4 A. Linemen would also be in there,

5 possibly some people for doing testing, but

6 most of it would be cable splicers and

7 linemen.

8 Q. So you only have two trades

9 possibly that you had to test for?

10 A. Right. That’s correct.

11 Q. So there are only two sets of

12 people that needed your attention for

13 protection in the manholes after the cable was

14 pulled through the transite conduit, correct?

15 MR. MCGOWAN: Form.

16 A. Correct.

17 Q. But as you sit here today, you

18 can’t point to any testing that you ever did to

19 see if those people were at the risk?

20 MR. HORNBY: Objection.

21 A. I don’t have access to my records.

22 We’re talking about things that occurred 35

23 years ago. I don’t recall all the measurements

24 that I took.

25 Q. Well, if you had to get those

144

1 records to provide complete and accurate

2 testimony, who would you ask and what would you

3 do?

4 A. Who would I ask? Basically, I

5 would go to the operating telephone companies

6 and ask if any of them still retain the records

7 that were given to them as a result of the

8 divestiture. Another possibility would be Bell

9 Laboratories to see if any of the records still

10 exist there, and then I don’t know.

11 Q. Okay. Was anybody else involved in

12 the testing that found contamination, asbestos

13 contamination in manholes other than yourself?

14 MR. MCGOWAN: Objection to form.

15 A. Yes.

16 Q. Who?

17 A. There were a number of people who

18 worked in the Bell System Services Group and we

19 all did testing.

20 Q. Give me some names?

21 A. Francis Foster, Gary Kenny, Roy

22 Deichman, Patty Paine. Those are the ones

23 that immediately come to mind.

24 Q. Now, did you ever test any other

25 asbestos-containing product on behalf of Bell

145

1 Labs where your conclusion was that that

2 product contaminated the work environment with

3 asbestos?

4 MR. MCGOWAN: Objection to form.

5 A. Not that I can recall.

6 Q. So the only test you ever can

7 recall doing where you find contamination of

8 the work environment was on the transite

9 conduit in the manholes, correct?

10 MR. HORNBY: Objection.

11 A. Incorrect. I just remember there

12 was sprayed asbestos insulation on buildings.

13 Let’s see those are, right.

14 Q. So just those two?

15 A. I object to the use of the word

16 contamination. I would prefer to hear it as –

17 Q. I’m sorry, that was your word,

18 contaminated the manhole, right, not mind,

19 correct?

20 A. All right.

21 Q. You object to your own words, sir?

22 A. I would have preferred to have said

23 potential contamination.

24 Q. It’s not funny, right, sir?

25 Contamination with asbestos in a working

146

1 environment, it’s not funny, is it?

2 MR. MCGOWAN: Objection,

3 argumentative.

4 Q. It’s not something to laugh about,

5 is it?

6 A. It is not.

7 Q. Especially for my client who went

8 down in those manholes. It’s not funny for

9 him, is it?

10 MR. MCGOWAN: Objection,

11 argumentative.

12 Q. Tell me what you did to protect my

13 client, Mr. Degnan, who climbed down in those

14 manholes for New Jersey Bell after the cable

15 was pulled through the transite conduit?

16 MR. MCGOWAN: Objection to form.

17 A. We evaluated work practices, the

18 people that were inside manholes to determine

19 their hazards and potential exposures.

20 Q. And what did you find?

21 A. As I said, we found, as I recall,

22 little to no exposures above the occupational

23 exposure limits.

24 Q. Do you have those tests? Where did

25 you come up with that?

147

1 MR. HORNBY: Objection to form.

2 Q. You tested in the manholes after

3 you said they were contaminated and found

4 little exposures above the occupational limits

5 or below?

6 A. We’re talking about asbestos. I

7 don’t recall the ones for asbestos, but I

8 certainly made other measurements inside

9 manholes for people who where working.

10 Q. I am focusing on asbestos here. My

11 client died from asbestos. You understand

12 that?

13 MR. MCGOWAN: Objection,

14 argumentative.

15 A. That’s my understanding.

16 Q. You understand my client, Mr.

17 Degnan, was a cable splicer who worked at New

18 Jersey Bell, and he died from mesothelioma.

19 You understand that?

20 A. That’s what I’ve been told.

21 Q. So that’s what I want to talk

22 about. What readings did you do to determine,

23 after you found out that manholes were

24 contaminated from pulling cable through

25 transite conduit, what did you to do protect

148

1 people like Mr. Degnan from asbestos exposure

2 in those manholes?

3 MR. MCGOWAN: Objection to form.

4 A. I don’t recall that I measured

5 exposures above the permissible exposure limit.

6 Q. Well, did you measure any exposures

7 for asbestos?

8 A. When you say did I measure any

9 exposures, you mean did I take any exposure

10 measurements or did I take, did I get any

11 measurements that determined asbestos?

12 Q. Did you take any measurements to

13 determine whether there was asbestos fibers in

14 the work environment in manholes after the

15 cable was pulled through the transite conduit?

16 MR. HORNBY: Objection.

17 A. I don’t recall.

18 Q. Did you ever report back to the

19 Occupational Health Working Group that you

20 determined that manholes were contaminated with

21 asbestos as a result of the pulling with cable

22 through transite conduit?

23 MR. HORNBY: Objection to form.

24 A. I don’t recall.

25 Q. Would there be any reason why you

149

1 would withhold that information from the

2 members of the Occupational Health Working

3 Group?

4 MR. MCGOWAN: Form.

5 A. I definitely would not withhold

6 that information.

7 Q. So after that information was

8 communicated, what, if anything, did the

9 Occupational Health Working Group do in

10 response to the report that manholes were

11 contaminated with asbestos as a result of

12 pulling cable through transite conduit?

13 MS. CRAWFORD: Objection to form.

14 A. I don’t know what report was given

15 to the Occupational Health Working Group.

16 Q. Well, you think it was likely you

17 told them?

18 A. I think it’s quite likely someone

19 told them, not necessarily myself. And then

20 what action was taken by them to make sure that

21 the people who would go into those manholes

22 after they were contaminated were not placed at

23 risk?

24 MR. MCGOWAN: Objection to form.

25 Asked and answered.

150

1 A. What was done was I believe special

2 efforts were taken to determine asbestos

3 exposures in pulling cables through manholes.

4 We were, specifically, charged in trying to

5 find out what the exposures were.

6 Q. Okay. And what did you find out?

7 A. Again, as I said, I don’t know and

8 it wasn’t just myself doing this work. It was

9 a team of us that did it.

10 Q. There were only two classes of

11 workers who went in those manholes after the

12 cable splicers after the cables were pulled,

13 right; linemen and splicers, right?

14 A. That’s correct.

15 Q. They wouldn’t have been hard to

16 find and hard to warn, correct?

17 MR. MCGOWAN: Objection to form.

18 MR. HORNBY: Objection.

19 A. It was difficult to find people who

20 were pulling cable through manholes.

21 Q. Not my point. I’m saying after the

22 cable was pulled, you knew there were only two

23 classes of workers that were going into those

24 manholes; cable splicers and linemen, true?

25 A. Correct.

151

1 Q. So if you warned classes of workers

2 to protect themselves, you knew who they were

3 and where to find them, true?

4 A. That wasn’t our job, to warn or to

5 find people.

6 Q. If AT&T wanted to warn the cable

7 splicers they knew who to warn and where to

8 find them, true?

9 MS. CRAWFORD: Objection to form.

10 A. True.

11 Q. And you told me at the beginning of

12 this deposition that AT&T had both the money

13 and the resources to do whatever warning was

14 necessary to protect the health and safety of

15 workers, true?

16 A. I did.

17 Q. Do you have any information, as you

18 sit here today, that AT&T used its money and

19 its resources to warn cable splicers who

20 entered the manholes that those manholes could

21 be contaminated with asbestos?

22 A. I have no information.

23 Q. Have you ever heard of a company

24 called Henkels & McCoy?

25 A. Yes.

152

1 Q. Who is Henkels & McCoy?

2 A. It’s a company I believe provides

3 telecommunication services to Sprint. They

4 have an office near the bottom of the road

5 where I live.

6 Q. Do you know whether they ever

7 supplied the transite conduit that was used in

8 the New Jersey Bell Operating Companies?

9 MS. D’ANNUNZIO: Objection to form.

10 A. I do not.

11 MR. PLACITELLA: Was that a bad

12 question?

13 MS. D’ANNUNZIO: Yes.

14 MR. PLACITELLA: What was wrong

15 with it?

16 MS. D’ANNUNZIO: Can you just read

17 it back then I’ll tell you what it is.

18 Going on, I’ll remember it.

19 (Whereupon last question was read

20 back.)

21 MR. PLACITELLA: That was a bad

22 question?

23 MS. D’ANNUNZIO: Maybe not.

24 MR. PLACITELLA: Okay.

25 BY MR. PLACITELLA:

153

1 Q. Do you have any knowledge of

2 Henkels & McCoy in any role they had in

3 relation to New Jersey Bell?

4 A. I do not.

5 Q. Do you know what a cable vault

6 cover is?

7 A. No, I don’t.

8 Q. So then you wouldn’t have any idea

9 what the composition of a cable vault cover is?

10 A. What a cable vault cover be used in

11 a cable?

12 Q. To cover cable for splicing?

13 A. So you’re saying a cover used in

14 cable vaults; is that what you’re talking

15 about?

16 Q. It’s called a cable vault cover.

17 A. I’m not familiar with that term.

18 Q. Do you know what a cable bag is?

19 A. A cable bag is my understanding is

20 a place where small pieces of wire get placed

21 when they’re doing, cutting pieces of wire.

22 Q. Do you know what the composition of

23 a cable bag was?

24 A. The ones that I saw were paper.

25 Q. So you don’t know about any –

154

1 you’re unaware of any fire retardant cable bag?

2 A. I’m not aware of –

3 Q. In the contents of Bell Operating

4 Companies?

5 A. No, I am not aware of it.

6 Q. Okay. Do you know what an asbestos

7 blanket is?

8 A. Yes.

9 Q. You’re aware that asbestos blankets

10 were used in the Bell Operating Companies in

11 conjunction with soldering operations?

12 A. I have a very vague recollection of

13 something like that. Whether or not it

14 contained asbestos, I don’t know. I know that

15 blankets were placed when they were working on

16 the distribution price.

17 Q. Do you know whether those blankets

18 were ever tested by your group to determine

19 whether they contained asbestos?

20 A. I don’t recall.

21 Q. Did your group ever test blankets

22 to determine whether fiber, asbestos fiber was

23 released during the use of those blankets?

24 A. I don’t remember any testing.

25 Q. Can you tell me, as you sit here

155

1 today, ’cause I’m going to write them down, all

2 of the products that you’re aware that

3 Operating Company employees used or encountered

4 that contained asbestos?

5 A. Can I get a clarification there?

6 You said encountered, Operating Telephone

7 Company employees worked on customer premises.

8 Q. I’m going to exclude customer

9 premises, okay? That’s a good clarification.

10 A. Okay.

11 Q. Can you tell me all of the

12 asbestos-containing products that you’re aware

13 of that Operating Company employees would have

14 used or encountered other than on customer’s

15 premises? You want to think about that. He

16 had to change the tape.

17 A. All right.

18 VIDEOGRAPHER: This completes Tape

19 3 of the video deposition.

20 (Whereupon a brief recess is

21 taken.)

22 VIDEOGRAPHER: This is Tape 4 of the

23 videotape deposition of Charles Paul

24 Lichtenwalner in the matter of Degnan

25 versus Lucent. It is July 25, 2008, video

156

1 time is two o’clock. We are on the

2 record.

3 BY MR. PLACITELLA:

4 Q. You’re going to list for me the

5 products that you can recall that contain

6 asbestos that would be used or encountered by

7 Bell Operating Company employees other than the

8 products they would have encountered on the

9 customer’s premises.

10 A. We’ve mentioned transite and

11 transite was used on a number of different

12 places as in the ducts and also used in various

13 places in buildings as in fireproofing

14 material. I am not sure I can list all the

15 places, but those are the ones that I remember.

16 Q. Okay.

17 A. There were asbestos-containing

18 resistors that were used in Central Office

19 switching equipment. At one point I was sent a

20 small piece of wire that had asbestos

21 insulation around it. It appeared to be quite

22 old. I was told that it hadn’t been used for

23 many years, and I believe it was for power

24 cable, but, again, this was just something that

25 was something sort of an odd-kind of a thing.

157

1 There were, we mentioned asbestos

2 gloves. These were used in the Central Offices

3 extensively. Hopefully, they were never used.

4 They were there to put out fires and they were

5 kept in canvas bags and pulled out for

6 inspection once a year.

7 There was a clay containing

8 asbestos that I was asked to analysis at one

9 point for asbestos. I was told to use it for

10 fire stopping, but I never saw it used. I

11 never saw it being used. Let’s see.

12 There’s almost certainly where some

13 buildings with spray-on asbestos insulation but

14 that would have been rare in the Bell System as

15 most of the buildings that I was aware of were

16 encased in concrete. At the moment I’ve run

17 out of the things.

18 Q. Okay. I’m not going to ask you

19 about resistors. That has nothing to do with

20 this case. The clay, what was the form that

21 that came to you that you observed?

22 A. It came to me as a piece of clay

23 like child’s modeling clay, you know, pliable

24 kind of material that that would retain its

25 shape. You can mold it any shape you want.

158

1 Q. Did you see a package for that, or

2 did it just come?

3 A. I did not see a package for it. I

4 got it sent in an envelop kind of thing.

5 Q. And the clay would that hardened or

6 would it remain malleable?

7 A. It would remain malleable.

8 Q. And did you test that clay?

9 A. I tested that clay.

10 Q. And what did you determine?

11 A. I found asbestos in it.

12 Q. Okay.

13 A. I’m sorry I can also — there would

14 have been vinyl asbestos tiles for the floors.

15 Q. And you said they had potential for

16 creating exposure when they’re cut, correct?

17 A. I never saw them being cut.

18 Q. Well, do the cutting of asbestos

19 floor tile create potential for asbestos

20 exposure?

21 A. I didn’t measure that at all ’cause

22 I wasn’t aware that Bell System people would do

23 cutting of floor tiles.

24 Q. All right. There’s some you

25 probably forgot. What about ebony power board?

159

1 A. Oh, ebony power board I was told

2 had asbestos as well.

3 Q. Okay. Well, we’ll agree that you

4 can’t remember everyone as you sit here,

5 correct?

6 A. Thank you.

7 Q. Now, was something known as a Bell

8 System Practices guide?

9 A. There were numerous Bell System

10 Practices. I don’t know about a guide for Bell

11 System.

12 Q. What is that?

13 A. Basically, Bell System Practices

14 were written practices that were written to

15 inform employees how to do their job.

16 Q. Okay. Who was the author?

17 A. There were various authors, and,

18 basically, they’re usually subject matter

19 experts in the use of that particular product.

20 Q. Where did they originate?

21 A. I believe they originated, I know

22 they originated, some of them originated in

23 Bell Labs. Some of them originated in Western

24 Electric. Some of them originated at AT&T. So

25 they could have come from a number of different

160

1 places.

2 Q. And those were guides that were

3 distributed to operating company employees?

4 A. They were.

5 Q. And they would have manuals and say

6 like something like how to enter a manhole?

7 A. That was one of them, yes.

8 Q. How to use a screwdriver?

9 A. That is correct.

10 Q. How to pull cable through

11 distribution frame?

12 A. I’m not familiar with that one, but

13 there probably was one.

14 Q. How to pull cable through a

15 conduit?

16 A. Yes.

17 Q. How to do soldering?

18 A. Different types of soldering so

19 there would have been several for the type of

20 soldering that was being done.

21 Q. And did any of these guides have an

22 industrial hygiene section?

23 A. I am not sure what you mean by

24 industrial hygiene. There was no specific

25 section for industrial hygiene.

161

1 Q. In other words, if somebody, for

2 instance, if there’s a guide for pulling cable

3 through conduit, does the guide say anything

4 about be careful doing this, can release

5 asbestos fiber?

6 A. Every Bell System practice that I’m

7 aware, basically, had a section on safety,

8 which would have included a section on

9 industrial hygiene.

10 Q. Did the guides ever warn,

11 specifically, about using or manipulating

12 asbestos?

13 A. I don’t know.

14 Q. Do you know whether or not the

15 guides provided them with any cautions about

16 possible asbestos contamination in the

17 manholes?

18 A. I’m not aware of it.

19 Q. That would have been a good place

20 to put it, don’t you think?

21 MR. MCGOWAN: Objection to form.

22 A. Yes, it would.

23 Q. Now, how about the — was there a

24 guide for using asbestos gloves?

25 A. The only use of asbestos gloves

162

1 that I’m aware of, would have been for putting

2 out fires in cable trays. There probably was a

3 guide for fire protection that would have

4 mentioned asbestos gloves, but I don’t believe

5 there would have been a Bell System practice

6 for use of asbestos gloves.

7 Q. Well, if their witness’s say they

8 used asbestos gloves when they were handling

9 hot solder, would you quarrel with that?

10 A. As I said, there were a lot of

11 people working for the Bell System and possibly

12 there were people who used them.

13 Q. Okay. Did any of the practice

14 guides that you’re aware of, contain warnings

15 about potential asbestos exposure?

16 A. I don’t recall any.

17 Q. But those guides would have

18 actually reached the operating company

19 employees, true?

20 A. Yes.

21 Q. So if you wanted to make sure

22 somebody knew about asbestos, that would have

23 been a good place to put it?

24 A. That would be one place to put it,

25 yes, and it may have been in some.

163

1 Q. But you’re not aware of any?

2 A. I don’t recall.

3 Q. Now, just to be clear, the good

4 news is I’m getting close to the end. You are

5 not aware of any testing — well, scratch

6 that. AT&T, Bell Labs, and Western Electric

7 all knew that asbestos could cause cancer the

8 day you walked into to your job as an

9 industrial hygienist at Bell Labs, true?

10 MR. MCGOWAN: Object to form.

11 A. There were people at AT&T Bell Labs

12 knew that asbestos could cause cancer.

13 Q. And there were people at AT&T, Bell

14 Labs, and Western Electric that understood what

15 their principles of industrial hygiene were to

16 protect workers if they wanted to, true?

17 A. That’s correct.

18 Q. And one of those principles as we

19 discussed this morning was testing to determine

20 whether people who handled asbestos-containing

21 products were at risk, true?

22 A. Correct.

23 Q. So these were all things known to

24 AT&T, Bell Labs, and Western Electric the day

25 you walked into work.

164

1 MR. MCGOWAN: Objection to form.

2 Q. Right?

3 A. That’s correct. When I walked into

4 work, yeah.

5 Q. All right. You have no evidence as

6 you sit here today that any testing was ever

7 done to determine whether asbestos fibers was

8 released during the use of asbestos-containing

9 gloves, correct?

10 MR. MCGOWAN: Objection.

11 A. Before when I started, I don’t

12 recall any information to that effect.

13 Q. At any point in time?

14 A. Well, testing I believe was done

15 not by me of the use of the gloves during an

16 inspection process. The annual inspection

17 process I believe measurements were taken.

18 Q. You mean somebody went and looked

19 at a glove that was not in use and did a test?

20 A. No.

21 Q. What happened?

22 A. I am saying that the requirement

23 was that the gloves be pulled out of their bag

24 an inspected once a year.

25 Q. Okay.

165

1 A. And as I recall, someone in our

2 group made measurements of that person while

3 they did that inspection.

4 Q. Okay. No testing was ever done of

5 gloves used, asbestos gloves used in soldering

6 operations, true?

7 MR. MCGOWAN: Form.

8 A. I am not aware of asbestos gloves

9 used in soldering operations.

10 Q. No study was ever done of asbestos

11 gloves being used in asbestos soldering

12 operations, true?

13 A. As I said, I am not aware of any

14 gloves being used in soldering operations;

15 therefore, no testing was done.

16 Q. No testing was done of the use of

17 asbestos wiping cloths by cable splicers,

18 true?

19 MR. MCGOWAN: Form.

20 MR. HORNBY: Objection.

21 A. It’s true. I am not aware of any

22 testing for that.

23 Q. And AT&T never directed that such

24 testing be done, correct?

25 A. I would suggest that that’s

166

1 somewhat leading. The way that I would phrase

2 it, the answer is that AT&T directed the Bell

3 System Services Group to investigate asbestos

4 exposure whenever they can find it. I am not

5 aware, you know, testing in some these

6 instances, that you’ve mentioned.

7 Q. So you’ve never received a

8 directive from AT&T or the Occupational Health

9 Working Group to test the asbestos cloth, true?

10 A. That’s true.

11 Q. Okay. You never did any testing

12 concerning the installation or removing of

13 asbestos pillows, true?

14 A. I don’t recall doing any testing,

15 correct.

16 Q. And you never received the

17 directive from AT&T to do testing on the

18 installation or removal of asbestos pillows,

19 true?

20 A. Again, the way you are phrasing it

21 is not the way I would like to answer that

22 question. We were charged with testing

23 wherever people might have health problems

24 exposures and in some sense we instructed to do

25 some kind of testing. In another sense nothing

167

1 as a specific charge was given to us.

2 Q. So you were instructed to do it,

3 but you didn’t do it?

4 A. We were instructed to find out

5 where we judge there was likely to be

6 exposures.

7 Q. How would you know unless you

8 pulled it out of the hole and stuffed it back

9 in?

10 A. That’s one of the ways by testing

11 it. Another way is by looking at the potential

12 for exposure.

13 Q. Just by looking at it sitting

14 there, that was good enough for you?

15 MR. MCGOWAN: Objection.

16 A. Things like vinyl asbestos tile,

17 that was probably enough.

18 Q. I’m not talking about that. I’m

19 talking about bags of asbestos that men took

20 and shoved into holes. Did you ever test

21 those?

22 A. I never saw that operation, and so

23 I never tested for that.

24 Q. Well, you could have done it,

25 right? They were there. All you could do is

168

1 pull them out and shoved them back in. You

2 could have tested for that, right?

3 A. At the time I didn’t know they

4 contained asbestos.

5 Q. Neither did the poor people that

6 were using them, right?

7 MR. HORNBY: Objection to form.

8 MR. MCGOWAN: Objection.

9 A. I don’t know what they knew.

10 Q. You never did any testing and were

11 never directed to do any testing for use with

12 asbestos blankets, true?

13 A. Correct.

14 Q. You never warned people who used

15 asbestos gloves that they had the potential for

16 exposure, true?

17 MR. MCGOWAN: Form.

18 A. Correct.

19 Q. And the Occupational Health Working

20 Group never directed that people who used

21 asbestos-containing gloves be warned, true?

22 MR. MCGOWAN: Form.

23 A. I’m sorry. What was the question?

24 Q. The Occupational Health Working

25 Group that you worked for never directed the

169

1 people who used asbestos gloves be warned for

2 the potential of exposure?

3 A. Sorry, I thought worn meaning wear

4 but you mean warned as –

5 Q. I mean warned like –

6 A. Alert.

7 Q. — alert.

8 A. I don’t know.

9 Q. The Occupational Health Working

10 Group never directed that you warn people who

11 use asbestos wiping cloths that they have

12 potential for exposure, true?

13 A. Not to my knowledge.

14 Q. The Occupational Health Working

15 Group never told you to warn people who removed

16 or installed asbestos-containing pillows that

17 there was potential for asbestos exposure,

18 true?

19 MR. MCGOWAN: Form.

20 A. That was not my job. They did not

21 tell me to do so.

22 Q. Do you have any idea that they ever

23 provided the warnings for pillows?

24 A. For pillows I don’t recall what.

25 Sorry, I have a vague recollection there was

170

1 something mentioned about pillows, but I don’t

2 recall the details.

3 Q. Now, as part of your job, did you

4 ever go out to new construction sites?

5 A. Yes.

6 Q. Under what circumstances? Why

7 would you go out to new construction sites?

8 A. The reason I hesitated was because

9 if I did, it would be seldom. Why would I go

10 out, because there was potential for people to

11 be, to find out if there was a potential for

12 people to be exposed.

13 Q. Under what circumstance?

14 A. While they’re performing their

15 job. The construction site, the people I would

16 have been looking at, would typically have been

17 worked engineers that were overseeing outside

18 contractors.

19 Q. Why is that?

20 A. It was my understanding that New

21 Jersey Bell at that time most of the

22 construction was done by outside contractors.

23 Q. But why would you be concerned in

24 1975 and thereafter for engineers that worked

25 for New Jersey Bell being exposed to asbestos?

171

1 A. I’m sorry, eliminate asbestos. I

2 don’t recall I ever did that for asbestos.

3 Q. Okay.

4 A. Other hazards, yes.

5 Q. Okay. Was it a recognized

6 industrial hygiene principle that work site

7 owners had the duty to protect outside

8 contractors from harmful exposures on their

9 properties?

10 MR. MCGOWAN: Objection to form,

11 calls for legal conclusion.

12 MS. CRAWFORD: Join.

13 A. That’s a general principle, yes.

14 Q. Would you have supported allowing a

15 Bell System employee without protection in a

16 new construction environment where asbestos was

17 used?

18 MR. MCGOWAN: Could we have that

19 question read back?

20 Q. I’ll just give the question gain so

21 we’re clear. Would you have supported as an

22 industrial hygienist for Bell Laboratories

23 allowing a Bell System employee without any

24 respiratory protection to enter a new

25 construction environment where asbestos-

172

1 containing products were used?

2 MR. MCGOWAN: Form.

3 A. Yes. I would because that would

4 have been my job. If it were to monitor them

5 or to determine what their exposures were,

6 again, you’re saying asbestos-containing

7 products were used. Many asbestos-containing

8 products were not capable of releasing fibers

9 into the air.

10 Q. Okay. You are familiar with a

11 product know as joint compound?

12 A. I’ve heard the term.

13 Q. Do you know the spackling that goes

14 on the walls?

15 A. Yes.

16 Q. Have you ever seen that sanded?

17 A. Have it –

18 Q. — sanded when it’s applied?

19 A. Yes, I have. I have.

20 Q. It creates dust?

21 A. It does.

22 Q. Were you aware that that product

23 contained asbestos?

24 A. Some of it may have.

25 Q. Would you have allowed a Bell

173

1 Operating employee to enter a work environment

2 where joint compound was being sanded without

3 any protection?

4 A. It was not my job to disallow

5 employees to enter areas. That was their

6 supervisor.

7 Q. Would you recommended that an

8 employee be allowed in an area where asbestos-

9 containing joint compound were be sanded and

10 created dust?

11 A. If I — how would I know or how

12 would the employee know if it contained

13 asbestos?

14 Q. Someone would have to test it,

15 right?

16 A. Or in that particular case you’d

17 have to read the product label.

18 Q. Right. Would you have recommended

19 that a Bell System employee work in an

20 environment without any protection where

21 asbestos-containing joint compound was being

22 sanded?

23 MR. MCGOWAN: Form.

24 A. I would first of all, been testing

25 it before I recommended it or removed it or

174

1 decided not to recommend it.

2 Q. Test it for what?

3 A. Test it for asbestos.

4 Q. Supposed you found out –

5 A. And other materials that might be

6 present there.

7 Q. Supposed you found out it was

8 asbestos, then what would you have

9 recommended?

10 MR. MCGOWAN: Objection.

11 A. It depends on the levels.

12 Q. Well, if you knew there was

13 asbestos in the dust that was being created in

14 the sanding operation, what recommendations

15 would you make?

16 MR. MCGOWAN: Object to form.

17 A. Is this hypothetical?

18 Q. It’s not hypothetical, sir.

19 A. It’s not hypothetical?

20 Q. No.

21 A. No? Because, again, that never

22 occurred to me at the time so that’s why.

23 Basically, okay, you want me to go through with

24 that?

25 Q. (Indicating.)

175

1 A. I would recommend respiratory

2 protection while I was monitoring them. Then

3 based on results, I would determine whether or

4 not respiratory was needed in the future.

5 Q. If AT&T was building a new building

6 and asbestos products were being used and those

7 products created dust on their installation,

8 would you have allowed a Bell System employee

9 in that building without you first testing to

10 see if a hazard existed?

11 MR. MCGOWAN: Form.

12 MS. CRAWFORD: Object to form.

13 A. Basically, I would discuss what

14 kind of work they were doing to determine

15 whether or not that material would be

16 disturbed.

17 Q. Supposed it was going to be

18 disturbed and they were going to be in the

19 area, what recommendation would you make?

20 A. Recommendation would be, it could

21 be many recommendations. One of the

22 recommendations would be to have the employer

23 or the owner of the building clean it before

24 they are allowed to work, wear respiratory

25 protection if you don’t know what the maximum

176

1 level is, instruct the employee not to disturb

2 the material, wet it down. Again, it would

3 depend very much on a particular situation.

4 Q. The recommendation once you knew

5 there was a potential for exposure would never

6 be to do nothing, am I right?

7 A. Do nothing mean not do the job?

8 Q. Doing nothing to protect the

9 worker.

10 A. I’m sorry, another possibility

11 would be not to do that job so. . .

12 Q. The recommendation would never be

13 to do nothing to protect the health and safety

14 of that that worker if there was a potential

15 for exposures, true?

16 A. That’s correct.

17 Q. What I want to do is, I want to

18 take minutes, go through my notes to see if I’m

19 done here, okay?

20 (Whereupon a brief recess is

21 taken.)

22 VIDEOGRAPHER: The time is 2:38.

23 We are on the record.

24 BY MR. PLACITELLA:

25 Q. I just want to be clear on

177

1 something, when you did the testing in the New

2 Jersey Bell Central Offices, I think you told

3 me there was asbestos present in the ambient

4 air based on your testimony, correct?

5 A. I am sorry if I did. I misspoke.

6 I meant fibers were present in the ambient

7 air.

8 Q. All right.

9 A. And the asbestos standard is based

10 on the fibers that you count.

11 Q. Okay. You found asbestos fibers in

12 the ambient air in the New Jersey Bell

13 Operating Offices?

14 A. No. We found fibers in the ambient

15 air and the asbestos standards specify that you

16 count the fibers in the air. And that’s how

17 you determine whether or not you’ve exceeded

18 the standard.

19 Q. All right.

20 A. And it may or may not be asbestos.

21 Q. So you never looked to see if the

22 fibers in the air were asbestos or not.

23 A. Never is a strong term. We did do

24 some — it requires transmission microscopy

25 just to find out fibers in the air. There were

178

1 certainly some samples that were done like

2 that. But the standard technique is just to

3 count the number of fibers in the air.

4 Q. Okay. Once you found out there

5 were fibers in the air, you never went to the

6 next step to find out if the fibers were

7 asbestos?

8 A. Generally, not.

9 Q. Well, were the fibers in the air

10 above background?

11 A. Usually, they were below the

12 ambient outside background.

13 Q. So you saw fibers in the air, but

14 you never figured out whether the fibers were

15 asbestos?

16 A. I wouldn’t say never, but most of

17 the time we did not go the next step to

18 determine whether or not these fibers were

19 asbestos. The standard at the time, and I

20 think, believe still, does not call for

21 identification of those fibers as to whether or

22 not they are asbestos.

23 Q. So as long as they were below the

24 then existing OSHA limit, you did not endeavor

25 to find out whether the fibers that were

179

1 floating around in the air were asbestos or

2 not; is that a fair statement?

3 A. That’s a fair statement.

4 Q. Okay. Even if they were in the

5 breathing zone of the people that worked in

6 that building?

7 A. That is correct.

8 Q. Do you try — scratch that. Every

9 time you did a study in the New Jersey Central

10 Offices for New Jersey Bell, did you find

11 fibers in the air?

12 A. It’s a difficult thing to answer

13 because the way you do — the analysis is done,

14 there’s almost always some residual background

15 on the filters that you’ve analyze and you have

16 to subtract what you find in the air sample

17 from what you get on a blank filter.

18 So there were almost invariably

19 fibers determined when we did count even on

20 blank filters that had no air drawn through

21 them.

22 Q. I don’t want to know about the

23 blank stuff. All I want to know is every time

24 you actually test the air in the New Jersey

25 Bell Central Offices, did you find fibers?

180

1 A. Yes.

2 Q. How many times did you do that

3 testing?

4 A. I don’t know the exact number.

5 Q. Or was it ten, 50, a hundred, a

6 thousand, guesstimate?

7 A. My guess would be about 200.

8 Q. So on, approximately, 200 samples

9 you did, every time you found fibers in the

10 air, right?

11 A. All right, I mean fibers on the

12 filters.

13 Q. All right.

14 A. I wouldn’t necessarily say fibers

15 in the air, but we found fibers and the fiber

16 is defined basically as a certain morphological

17 shape. It may or may not be a fiber. It might

18 be some artifact of the way the filter is

19 prepared.

20 Q. You found fibers in each of the 200

21 samples that you took, correct?

22 A. Correct.

23 Q. And even though you took 200

24 samples where you found fibers, you never once

25 looked to see if any of those fibers were

181

1 asbestos?

2 A. I don’t know how many times. We

3 did some sampling by transmission of

4 electro microscopy to determine whether

5 or not there were asbestos fibers in

6 the air.

7 Q. So you did do it?

8 A. We did some.

9 Q. Did you find asbestos fibers?

10 A. I believe we found them.

11 Q. Okay. When you found there was

12 asbestos fibers in the air, was that indicative

13 that — well, scratch that. What

14 recommendations did you make to the Bell, to

15 the Objectional Working Group about whether the

16 people working in those offices should know

17 that there was asbestos floating in the air?

18 A. The recommendation that was made

19 was a letter to the OSHA director as to what

20 happens when you find asbestos fibers in the

21 air and you also find asbestos fibers in the

22 ambient air and they are approximately equal.

23 So that letter for clarification of the OSHA

24 specs standards went out to the director of

25 OSHA at the time.

182

1 Q. Okay. And what happened?

2 A. I believe it was Mark Horn, and on

3 his last day in office, he, two years after the

4 question went out to him, he responded, and,

5 basically, ducked the question, to my, as I

6 recall the answer.

7 Q. So he ducked the question?

8 A. Right.

9 Q. So while you waited for two years

10 for an answer, nobody was told anything?

11 A. Sorry?

12 MR. MCGOWAN: About what?

13 Q. About what you do about the fibers

14 floating in the air inside Central Offices?

15 You waited for two years from OSHA and during

16 that whole time the Occupational Working Group

17 never said we better tell the people in those

18 offices?

19 A. The levels were below the

20 occupational exposure limits at the time.

21 Q. Okay. I understand that.

22 A. Typically, in the Central Offices

23 they were below the ambient outside air.

24 Q. Okay. You build a building,

25 right? When you build that building, don’t you

183

1 have ventilation in that building?

2 A. That’s correct.

3 Q. And how many times an hour does the

4 building get ventilated, the ventilated air

5 changed typically?

6 MR. MCGOWAN: Objection to form.

7 A. It depends. But in Central Offices

8 probably something like two to four times per

9 hour.

10 Q. So two to four times per hour. So

11 let’s say two ’cause I’m bad in math. And

12 there are 24 hours in a day, so that’s 48 hours

13 times a day the air is changed, correct?

14 A. Correct.

15 Q. Even though the air is changed over

16 48 times a day, when you did your testing over

17 time, each time you still found fibers in the

18 air?

19 A. I don’t understand what you’re

20 driving at. We find fibers in the outside air

21 and we find fibers in the building.

22 Q. I understand but –

23 A. And we typically find lower levels

24 inside the building because the air that’s

25 brought inside the building is filtered and

184

1 that removes dust particles included.

2 Q. So then any of the fibers that were

3 inside the building came from inside the

4 building, right?

5 A. Incorrect.

6 Q. Well, you just said that the air

7 that was coming from the outside removed the

8 fibers with the filter.

9 A. I said it was filtered but that’s

10 not a hundred percent filtration.

11 Q. Well, what percent?

12 A. With the filters that we’re using

13 at the Bell System, I believe they were

14 something like 95 percent filters through.

15 Q. So they took out 95 percent of

16 whatever could come in and we filtered out at

17 least 48 times a day, but every time you went

18 and you took a sample, you found fibers in the

19 air?

20 MR. MCGOWAN: Form.

21 MR. CRAWFORD: Objection.

22 A. It wasn’t filtered 48 times a day.

23 Q. Well, there was an air exchange 48

24 times, right?

25 A. That’s correct.

185

1 Q. Didn’t you tell me that the air

2 exchange has ability to eliminate asbestos from

3 the environment?

4 MR. MCGOWAN: Objection to form.

5 MR. HORNBY: Objection.

6 A. I said it has the ability to

7 partially eliminate.

8 Q. Never totally?

9 A. Never totally.

10 Q. Okay. So when those guys were down

11 in the contaminated manholes, and those

12 manholes were ventilated, they were never

13 totally decontaminated by ventilation were

14 they –

15 MR. MCGOWAN: Objection to form.

16 MR. HORNBY: Objection.

17 Q. — by your own statement?

18 A. There was no filtration with the

19 stuff that was used in the manhole.

20 Q. All right. So if the manhole was

21 contaminated with asbestos, there was no way of

22 getting all the asbestos out that was

23 contaminating that manhole, true?

24 MS. D’ANNUNZIO: Objection.

25 A. I don’t see how that follows the

186

1 filtration in a building.

2 Q. Well, you told me that one of the

3 ways you got the asbestos out the manhole was

4 there was an air exchange, ventilated, right?

5 A. Correct.

6 Q. But that ventilation would never

7 totally remove the asbestos in the manholes

8 once they were there, would you agree with

9 that?

10 MR. MCGOWAN: Form.

11 A. Again, if there’s asbestos in the

12 ambient air outside and you’re blowing that

13 into the manhole, that asbestos in the ambient

14 air is going to be in the manhole as well as –

15 well, it’s going to be in the manhole.

16 Q. Well, what about the asbestos

17 that’s in the manhole from the pulling the

18 cable, where does that go?

19 A. Blown out of the manhole.

20 Q. All of it?

21 A. No.

22 Q. So once the asbestos is in the

23 manhole and contaminated, it’s never totally

24 removed, do you agree with that?

25 MR. MCGOWAN: Object to the form.

187

1 MS. D’ANNUNZIO: Objection.

2 A. I would — totally remove?

3 Q. Right.

4 A. No.

5 Q. But the workers were never told

6 that, right?

7 MR. HORNBY: Objection.

8 A. There were a number of training,

9 things that were given for asbestos. I know in

10 particular for people working on customer

11 premises. I don’t know what kind of training

12 was given on asbestos for New Jersey Bell

13 employees. I do know that New Jersey Bell did

14 keep training records of the training for their

15 employees.

16 Q. You’re aware of training that says

17 hey you cable splicer go down on that manhole,

18 you’re at risk of dying from asbestos?

19 A. I am not aware of any training with

20 those exact words.

21 Q. So now let’s go back to the AT&T

22 building. I just want to make sure I

23 understand this. You did samples, at least 200

24 samples in the New Jersey Bell Central Offices

25 over an extended period of time?

188

1 A. Eighteen months?

2 Q. Okay. Over 18 months. I don’t

3 have the math in my head to do. And you say

4 that the air is exchanged, it’s cleared out two

5 to four times an hour, right?

6 A. With air from outside.

7 Q. Right. And that you filter out 95

8 percent of the air comes in is clean, right?

9 A. No, it filters out 95 percent of

10 the particles.

11 Q. Right, the fibers.

12 A. Right. Of a certain size and again

13 it depends on specified tests and it –

14 Q. Just so I understand –

15 A. Okay.

16 Q. So over 18 months, even though you

17 filter out 95 percent of what can come in terms

18 of fibers, and you have 48 air changes a day,

19 every time you looked in the Central Offices,

20 you found asbestos fiber, you found fibers in

21 the air, right?

22 MR. MCGOWAN: Form.

23 A. We found fibers in the filters.

24 Q. That came from the air?

25 A. Some came from the air. Some were

189

1 artifacts of the filter and the analytical

2 technique.

3 Q. Okay. Some came from the air?

4 A. Yes.

5 Q. Don’t you think that any of those

6 fibers could have come from activities that

7 went on inside the offices?

8 A. I believe it could, yes.

9 Q. Now, any increase in the number of

10 fibers in a work environment increases the risk

11 for getting disease, do you agree with that?

12 MR. HORNBY: Object to form.

13 A. That’s not my, I’m not an

14 epidemiology.

15 Q. That’s fair. Was there a spec for

16 the transite conduit?

17 A. I’m sorry, was there a what?

18 Q. A specification for the transite

19 conduit.

20 A. I’m almost certain there was.

21 Q. Do you know whose specification it

22 was?

23 A. I do not know.

24 Q. If I wanted to find a spec for the

25 conduit, what would I look for?

190

1 A. Good question. I really couldn’t

2 say.

3 Q. Looking back, knowing everything

4 that you know now, did the Occupational Health

5 Working Group make any mistakes in protecting

6 workers in Bell Operating Companies from

7 potential exposure to asbestos during their

8 work activities?

9 MR. MCGOWAN: Object to form.

10 A. None that I know of.

11 Q. So you agree that everything they

12 did then was deliberate?

13 MR. MCGOWAN: Object to the form.

14 MR. HORNBY: Objection.

15 A. Deliberate?

16 Q. There was no mistakes, then it was

17 deliberate?

18 A. Deliberate and no mistakes are not

19 opposites in my terminology.

20 Q. How about on purpose? Everything

21 they did was on purpose?

22 A. Everything they did was on purpose.

23 MR. PLACITELLA: That’s all the

24 questions I have. Thank you.

25 Anybody else?

191

1 MR. KOOI: I have a few questions.

2 CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MR. KOOI:

3 Q. Good afternoon, sir. I’m with the

4 law firm of Margolis, Edelstein. Hopefully,

5 I’ll be quick. I only have a few questions for

6 you.

7 MR. PLACITELLA: Can you tell me

8 who you represent?

9 MR. KOOI: John Crane.

10 Q. What, if any, procedures were in

11 place regarding the safety of the work

12 performed by contractors or subcontractors at

13 Bell or AT&T facilities?

14 A. What time frame are you talking

15 about? If you have any or can you be more

16 specific?

17 Q. From the time of your initial

18 industrial hygiene position forward.

19 A. Again, at Bell Laboratories there

20 were requirements, basically, people when they

21 sign the contract, they had to show that they

22 had — were going to follow OSHA regulations

23 and so forth. Depending upon where they were

24 working we would inform them of that.

25 In the Operating Telephone

192

1 Companies, it was my understanding that most of

2 the contractors, the buildings were secured and

3 contractors were generally not performing work

4 in there unless you want to consider Western

5 Election as being contractors inside a New

6 Jersey Bell or an AT&T building. It’s a very

7 broad question, I am an industrial hygienist.

8 I didn’t specify what the requirements were.

9 Q. Okay. Do you know if Bell had any

10 policies separate and distinct from the OSHA

11 regulations regarding workplace safety of

12 contractors or subcontractors.

13 A. To my knowledge they required

14 contractors or subcontractors to follow the

15 OSHA regulations.

16 There were no differences between

17 the OSHA regulations or the recommendations of

18 the American Conference of Governmental

19 Hygienists or the National Institute of

20 Occupational Safety & Health. We would

21 typically choose to use the most restrictive

22 occupational exposure limit.

23 Q. Did Bell separate its in-house

24 personnel from the work areas of contractors or

25 subcontractors?

193

1 MR. MCGOWAN: Object to form. Bell

2 who?

3 Q. Bell Labs?

4 A. Bell Labs? Depends on what was

5 going on. If we’re talking construction

6 activity, we try to seal off the areas where

7 the construction was going on to protect the

8 employees. If we’re talking about people like

9 digital equipment who did computers and so

10 forth at Bell Laboratories, then they would

11 often times have desks nearby, be treated much

12 like Bell Labs’ employees.

13 Q. For the purposes of my questions

14 today, I am going to use contractors and

15 subcontractors as construction workers, okay?

16 A. Okay.

17 Q. I apologize for that for the lack

18 of clarity there. To what extent did Bell Labs

19 direct the work of contractors or

20 subcontractors performing work on its

21 premises?

22 MS. CRAWFORD: Objection to form.

23 MR. MCGOWAN: Form.

24 A. Without specific information about

25 the type work that was being done, I couldn’t

194

1 really say.

2 Q. Did you have any interaction with

3 construction contractors while working at Bell

4 Labs?

5 A. I did.

6 Q. And what was the extent of your

7 interaction?

8 A. My interaction was typically to

9 sometimes review the plan scope of work and

10 also to do monitoring in the areas outside

11 where the construction was being done to ensure

12 that Bell Labs’ employees were not overexposed

13 to toxic agents, noise, physical agents.

14 Q. Did you have any role in

15 formulating the safety procedures for

16 contractors or subcontractors working at Bell

17 facilities?

18 MS. CRAWFORD: Objection to form.

19 MR. PLACITELLA: Are we talking

20 about labs?

21 A. Basically, I had very little role

22 in terms of writing procedures for the work

23 activities.

24 Q. Do you know who did — withdrawn.

25 Okay. I think that’s all the questions I have

195

1 for you today. Thanks. For your time.

2 MR. PLACITELLA: Okay. I have a

3 couple, just a couple.

4 REDIRECT EXAMINATION BY MR. PLACITELLA:

5 Q. Do you have any familiarity with

6 the AT&T buildings at Hoes Lane in Piscataway?

7 A. There was a tower at Hoes Lane in

8 Piscataway that I spent some time at, yes.

9 Q. You’re talking about an office

10 building?

11 A. Yeah.

12 Q. What did you do there?

13 A. I oversaw asbestos removal after

14 the breakup of the Bell System.

15 Q. When did that asbestos removal take

16 place? Sorry, it’s going to take five minutes.

17 A. Yeah. Again, I don’t know the

18 exact date, but it was probably after,

19 somewhere around 1984, ’85.

20 Q. What areas of the building it would

21 be, do you recall?

22 A. The asbestos was removed from the

23 hung ceilings.

24 Q. You mean the sealing tiles

25 themselves?

196

1 A. No. I don’t mean the ceiling tiles

2 themselves, I mean spay-on asbestos on the

3 ceilings of the ceiling tiles.

4 Q. Do you know when that building was

5 constructed?

6 A. I do not.

7 Q. Was that the only asbestos that was

8 abated?

9 A. I don’t recall, but that was the

10 major bulk of the work.

11 Q. Did you oversee the abatement?

12 A. I was hired to perform air

13 monitoring to assure that the people in the

14 buildings on floors, other than where the

15 asbestos was being removed, were not exposed to

16 asbestos. So I didn’t oversee necessarily the

17 actual work.

18 Q. What floors, do you remember how

19 many floors?

20 A. As I remember, it was nine or ten

21 floors.

22 Q. And they all had spray asbestos

23 above the plenums?

24 A. Yes.

25 Q. Were cables run above the plenums?

197

1 A. At the time that I was, probably

2 the cables perhaps were probably there. I

3 don’t remember in particular.

4 Q. When that building was constructed,

5 would Bell Labs have been in charge of the

6 industrial hygiene related to that building?

7 A. It would not.

8 Q. Who would have been in charge?

9 A. There was a company called 195

10 Broadway Corporation that built a lot of the

11 buildings. I don’t know for a fact, but I

12 would guess that the 195 Broadway Corporation

13 would have been responsible for it, or it may

14 have been another company and they purchased

15 the building. Again, I don’t –

16 Q. How long had AT&T own that building

17 to your knowledge?

18 A. I have no knowledge of how long.

19 Q. Did AT&T maintain the ability as

20 the owner of the building on new construction

21 to stop construction anytime it wanted to if it

22 thought it was an unhealthy work environment?

23 MS. CRAWFORD: Objection to form.

24 A. I would assume that it did.

25 Q. The ultimate control of the work

198

1 site on new construction laid with the building

2 owner, would you agree with that?

3 MS. CRAWFORD: Objection to form.

4 A. I’m sorry, could you repeat that?

5 Q. The ultimate control of what went

6 on with the work site was with the building

7 owner doing construction?

8 MS. CRAWFORD: Objection to form.

9 A. I couldn’t say. Responsibility

10 could have been handed to the general

11 contractor. So I really don’t know.

12 Q. But the buck ultimately stops with

13 the owner?

14 MS. CRAWFORD: Objection to form.

15 A. I am not sure of the legal

16 ramifications.

17 Q. How about from an industrial

18 hygiene perspective? Is the responsibility to

19 the workers on a construction site ultimately

20 that of the owner?

21 A. The responsibility, to my mind,

22 would rest both with the owner and the

23 contractor that was building it.

24 Q. Thank you. That’s all the

25 questions I have.

199

1 MR. MCGOWAN: We’re done? Thank

2 you everyone.

3 THE WITNESS: Thank you.

4 VIDEOGRAPHER: This concludes

5 today’s deposition. We are off the

6 record.

7 (Deposition adjourned at 3:10 p.m.)

200

1 CERTIFICATION OF VERBATIM TRANSCRIPT

3 I, Rachel Santiago, hereby certify that

4 the transcript I have herein produced is within

5 the guidelines adopted by the State of New

6 Jersey Administrative Code and I certify to the

7 following:

8 I am not related to any party involved in

9 this action and I have no financial interest in

10 the outcome of this action.

11 I am a court reporter, an unbiased agent

12 of the courts and the transcript produced

13 herein is a verbatim record of the testimony as

14 testified to under oath within a judicial body

15 created by statute of the State of New Jersey.

16 Also, I am a duly authorized Notary Public

17 of the State of New Jersey or an otherwise

18 acceptable Foreign Commissioner of Deeds, duly

19 authorized to administer oaths for the purpose

20 of this record.

21 My commission expires August 2012. Notary

22 Public NO. 2204535.

25 Signature__________________________

New Jersey Mesothelioma Lawyers | Philadelphia Mesothelioma Lawyers

Do You Want to Know Your Legal Options?

Search

The Law Offices of Cohen, Placitella and Roth

Popular Keyword Searches