WITNESS TESTIFIES SUPPLY WAS RECYCLED
By Elise Ackerman
Mercury News
Posted on Tue, Dec. 16, 2003
An expert in industrial ventilation testified Monday in the IBM toxics trial that the design of the computer company's clean rooms did not guarantee a fresh air supply.
Consultant Robert Morris described the rate of airflow in a hypothetical IBM clean room as very weak. The room was modeled after one at a San Jose plant where IBM employees coated computer disks with a mixture of toxic chemicals. Two former IBM workers employed at the Cottle Road facility allege that the company knowingly exposed them to chemicals that ultimately caused their cancer. Plaintiffs James Moore, 62, suffers from non-Hodgkin's lymphoma and Alida Hernandez, 73, has been treated for breast cancer.
Air samples
IBM maintains that workers in its clean rooms handled chemicals safely. Air samples taken by the company show workers' exposure to chemicals like trichloroethylene and toluene fell within exposure limits set by the federal government.
However, expert witnesses hired by the plaintiffs have challenged the company's measurements. Earlier this month, an analytical chemist testified in the Santa Clara County Superior Court trial that IBM's lab may not have followed accepted scientific practices. Morris and a former IBM engineer have suggested that IBM recycled contaminated air over and over.
Big Blue's legal team has countered that the experts claims don't make sense. ``If you have exhaust, you have to have fresh air to replace it,'' said IBM attorney Mary Ellen Powers.
For more than a week, IBM's lawyers have sparred with Morris, a soft-spoken 59-year-old, over the details of his technical model and the adequacy of his credentials.
The plaintiffs' attorney, Richard Alexander, said the same modeling principles were used to investigate anthrax contamination in the Hart Senate Office Building and a postal facility outside Washington, D.C. In introducing Morris to the jury, Alexander took pains to establish that even though Morris only has an associate's degree, he has more than 25 years practical experience in airflow control. He said Morris has done modeling for governmental organizations and companies in the semiconductor, chemical and nuclear industries.
In testimony, Morris said he had used a combination of ``best practices'' and the plaintiffs' memories to re-create the dimensions of the areas where Moore and Hernandez worked from the 1960s to 1980s. The plaintiffs have accused IBM of withholding relevant architectural documents. But IBM has said the documents were among those made available and that Alexander overlooked them.
Memory disputed
As Morris' own memory occasionally tripped the consultant up, IBM attorney Robert Weber has repeatedly made an issue of Morris' reliance on the plaintiffs' memories. Weber also succeeded in preventing Moore from testifying about the effect the rooms' design could have on the flow of contaminated air over a coating machine -- an important detail in determining whether workers breathed harmful chemicals.
After sustaining a series of Weber's objections, Judge Robert Baines explained to the jury that expert witnesses could only testify to topics that were previously addressed in earlier depositions. ``We do not allow witnesses at trial to give opinions on new and different areas,'' he said. ``We are not trying to hide anything from you, but it is only fair to all parties.''
