UM Grace Case

W.R. Grace’s letter to the Environmental Protection Agency advising against a public health emergency for Zonolite attic insulation did not constitute obstruction of justice, Grace lead defense attorney David Bernick argued during the testimony of defense witness William Corcoran.

Corcoran, who has worked as Grace’s vice president of public and regulatory affairs since 1999, testified about his interactions with the EPA and a letter he wrote to the agency in opposition to a public health emergency declaration on Zonolite insulation. The letter is referenced in the government’s obstruction of justice charge against Grace.

The EPA “charged Grace with criminal, corrupt activity based on language from that letter you wrote,” Bernick told Corcoran and the court. Corcoran himself has not been charged in this case.

The government charge referenced Corcoran’s statement that “no credible” evidence existed to show that Zonolite attic insulation has caused disease in anyone, and other statements in the letter to show obstruction of justice.

Rather than posing an obstruction of justice, Bernick argued that Corcoran’s letter simply acted as Grace’s legitimate and legal response to the government’s concerns. He noted that Grace presented evidence from its own scientific studies to the EPA to argue against removal of Zonolite attic insulation from homes, and asked Corcoran if he knew whether there was “anything wrong” with Grace’s approach.

“Under our constitution, like it or not, we have the right to petition our government,” Corcoran replied, describing his letter to the EPA as a lawful and justified response.

Government prosecutor Kris McLean handled the cross-examination, which further examined Corcoran’s letter. McLean asked questions aimed at showing Grace’s main concern was money, a claim which Corcoran refuted.

“I was very concerned about human health in this,” Corcoran said.

One of his concerns was that a public emergency declaration would lead to removal of Zonolite insulation throughout the nation and be very expensive and unnecessary for the EPA, Corcoran said. A million to ten million homes may have Zonolite attic insulation in them, making the task of any removal very expensive, Corcoran said.

McLean shot back that Grace knew they would have to cover some of the costs as well.

“Grace could write a check for everything Grace had … and it wouldn’t cover a tenth of it,” Corcoran replied, saying they were more concerned about the government’s spending.

As well, a new management team had recently come to Libby when the EPA inquiries first began, Corcoran explained.  He and the new CEO had “absolutely no knowledge of this ongoing risk in Libby, Montana,” before taking the job as vice president of public and regulatory affairs in 1999, Corcoran said.

Corcoran often reiterated that very few cases of health problems from Zonolite insulation have ever been reported. McLean countered by citing a case from St. Louis, referred to as the “Hiroshi (sic)” case.

“As far as you’re concerned, if that (the case) is correct, that would be the only person in the country that was harmed by ZAI? (Zonolite attic insulation)?” McLean asked.

“That’s the only one I know of,” Corcoran replied, adding that other factors existed in the St. Louis case, including the alleged victim’s exposure to asbestos during military service.

Bernick handled the redirect, brandishing his signature whiteboard to argue against McLean’s points. The defense attorney highlighted the overwhelming cost estimated for any nationwide removal of Zonolite insulation as one reason Grace opposed it, painting the action as unpractical and unnecessary. One EPA document Bernick referenced estimated the cost of removing the insulation from only 10 percent of homes as at least 10 billion dollars, adding fuel to Bernick’s argument that even the EPA questioned whether a public health emergency should be declared.

Corcoran’s testimony ended and the court took its lunch break at 12:00 p.m.

 –Ryan Thompson (2:09 p.m.)