Document 6Babkqwv11BEE8Enqy8G5aaZd

1 (Pages 1 to 4) James E. Heffron - 11-12-08 Page 1 James E. Heffron - 11-12-08 Page 2 JEFFERSON CIRCUIT COURT TOM ROBERTSON PLAINTIFF VS TRANSCRIPT OF THE VIDEOTAPE TESTIMONY OF JAMES E. HEFFRON GARLOCK, etc. DEFENDANTS (November 12, 2008) Nancy L. Nunnelley, RMR Kentucky Certification No. 20042B131 4413 Chenwood Lane Louisville, Kentucky 40299 (502) 267-4156 nunnelleys@insightbb.com 1 APPEARANCES: 2 For the Plaintiff 3 Joseph D. Satterley, Esquire 4 J. Robert Shelton, Esquire Sales, Tillman, Wallbaum, Catlett & Satterley 5 325 West Main Street Louisville, Kentucky 40202 6 7 8 For the Defendants 9 John K. Gordinier, Esquire Pedley & Gordinier 10 455 South Fourth Avenue, Suite 1150 Louisville, Kentucky 40202 11 12 Rebecca F. Schupbach, Esquire Stites & Harbison 13 400 West Market Street Louisville, Kentucky 40202 14 15 16 Nancy L. Nunnelley, RMR (502) 594-1728 (502) 267-4156 Fax 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 (502) Nancy L. 594-1728 Nunnelley, RMR (502) 267-4156 Fax James E. Heffron - 11-12-08 Page 3 James E. Heffron - 11-12-08 Page 4 1 THE FOLLOWING IS A TRANSCRIPT OF THE 1 He's being called by Garlock out of order. The 2 VIDEOTAPED TRIAL TESTIMONY OF JAMES HEFFRON IN THE 2 plaintiffs have agreed to it. End of story. 3 ABOVE-CAPTIONED MATTER ON NOVEMBER 12, 2008: 3 MR. SHELTON: No, that's not the end of 4 *** *** *** 4 the story, Your Honor. Mr. Gordinier stated that he 5 MR. SHELTON: Your Honor, plaintiff would 5 wanted to bring Mr. Heffron in because he wasn't 6 call James Heffron. 7 MR. GORDINIER: No, please. 6 going to be available when he had his case in chief. 7 MR. GORDINIER: That's right. 8 MR. SHELTON: May we approach? 9 MR. GORDINIER: Mr. Heffron is a witness 10 called by Garlock. He kindly agreed to - 8 MR. SHELTON: I said fine. Bring him in. 9 I'll let him bring in a witness in the middle of our 10 case. That doesn't mean, Your Honor, that I cannot 11 THE COURT: Approach, please. 12 (BENCH DISCUSSION) 13 THE COURT: Yes, sir. 14 MR. GORDINIER: For the last -- excuse me. 11 call him in my case in chief. I'm accommodating. 12 THE COURT: It sure would seem to be that. 13 I think that's a fair reading of what that means. 14 MR. SHELTON: Your Honor, he's going to be 15 For the last -- several days ago I asked if it would 16 be agreeable to put on Mr. Heffron out of order. And 17 the plaintiffs agreed that he could be put on out of 18 order today after they finished with their two 19 witnesses. I have Mr. Heffron here. I want to put 20 him on the stand. I've been -- it's been agreed that 15 -- we've accommodated as requested Mr. Gordinier by 16 allowing Mr. Heffron to be injected into our case. 17 THE COURT: Right. 18 MR. SHELTON: I never agreed, however, 19 that I would not call him as a witness and ask him 20 questions first. That's all -- this is an issue 21 I could do so. 22 The plaintiffs have been asked again and 23 again and again, who are you going to use today? Who 24 are your witnesses going to be? And they have never 21 22 23 24 who's going to direct and who's going to cross him. THE COURT: I think -- I'm assuming you - you didn't - MR. SHELTON: Specifically address this, 25 mentioned James Heffron. Mr. Heffron is here now. 25 we did not. Nancy L. Nunnelley, RMR (502) 594-1728 (502) 267-4156 Fax Nancy L. Nunnelley, RMR (502) 594-1728 (502) 267-4156 Fax 2 (Pages 5 to 8) James E. Heffron - 11-12-08 Page 5 James E. Heffron - 11-12-08 Page 6 1 THE COURT: -- do it on purpose. But I 1 MR. SHELTON: That's fine. 2 can't imagine -- I'm picturing that conversation in 2 MR. GORDINIER: He has a plane to catch. 3 my head, and I can't imagine Mr. Gordinier came away 3 4 with any impression other than he would be permitted 4 MR. SHELTON: That's fine. THE COURT: Okay. 5 to call his witness out of order -- 5 MR. SHELTON: All right. 6 MR. GORDINIER: And also -- 6 THE COURT: All right. 7 THE COURT: -- and call him as his 7 (OPEN COURT) 8 witness. 8 THE COURT: Folks, what we're discussing 9 MR. GORDINIER: Yes. And, also, Your 9 is Mr. -- and I'm going to say his name wrong. 10 Honor, Mr. Heffron is not on plaintiff's witness 10 Heffron? 11 list. This is the first that we've been -- 11 MR. GORDINIER: Mr. Heffron, Mr. James 12 THE COURT: I agree. I think I appreciate 12 Heffron. 13 your accommodating him, but in the spirit of that 13 THE COURT: Mr. Heffron by agreement of 14 cooperation, he should be called out of order by the 14 the parties is being called out of order. He's 15 person who's calling him. 15 actually a witness that Garlock had intended to call 16 MR. SHELTON: So now I'm going to have to 16 during their case in chief, but because Mr. Heffron 17 cross him at 5:15, 5:30? 17 will not be available by the time we get to that 18 MR. GORDINIER: No. 18 point, Mr. Satterley and Mr. Shelton have agreed to 19 MR. SHELTON: So I'm penalized because -- 19 allow him to be called now. So it's a little strange 20 MR. GORDINIER: If you -- 20 that you're going to have a -- a -- going to have 21 THE COURT: No, wait, whoa, whoa, whoa. 21 Mr. Gordinier do the direct examination before his 22 Don't talk to each other. Talk to me. 22 case actually begins. 23 MR. GORDINIER: If you will let me start 24 my examination now, it will be finished by 4:30. 23 But I remind you of something. And again, 24 I'm sorry that I can't keep straight what I've told 25 THE COURT: Okay. 25 you-all because I didn't do my usual spiel about Nancy L. Nunnelley, RMR Nancy L. Nunnelley, RMR (502) 594-1728 (502) 267-4156 Fax (502) 594-1728 (502) 267-4156 Fax James E. Heffron - 11-12-08 James E. Heffron - 11-12-08 Page 7 Page 8 1 witnesses. But the truth is it doesn't matter who 2 calls a witness because it's not who calls them or 1 for the record. 2 MR. HEFFRON: James E. Heffron, 3 who asks them questions. It's only the answers that 3 H-E-F-F-R-O-N. 4 they give that are important, and they're only 4 THE COURT: Thank you, sir. 5 important to the extent that you think they're 5 MR. GORDINIER: Judge, to make you feel a 6 important. And you'll figure out how they fit in, if 6 little bit more comfortable, and I know to make the 7 at all, in the overall picture when you're figuring 7 jury feel a little bit more comfortable, Mr. Heffron 8 out your decision in this case. So with that 8 has a plane to catch to go back to Rochester. So I'm 9 understanding and with appreciation for the courtesy 9 going to keep my direct examination as brief as 10 shown by both counsel in allowing this to take place, 10 possible. 11 it's my understanding that Mr. Heffron will be the 11 EXAMINATION BY MR. JOHN K. GORDINIER 12 next witness. 12 MR. GORDINIER: Mr. Heffron, where do you 13 MR. GORDINIER: Yes. Thank you, Your 13 live, sir? 14 Honor. 14 MR. HEFFRON: Geneva, New York. 15 MR. SATTERLEY: Your Honor, Doctor Dodson, 15 Q. And by whom are you employed? 16 may he remain in the courtroom? 16 A. Garlock Sealing Technologies, LLC. 17 THE COURT: Absolutely. 17 Q. Okay. And how long have you worked for 18 MR. SATTERLEY: Thank you. 18 Garlock? 19 THE COURT: Please come forward, sir. 19 A. Approximately 35 years. 20 That's fine. Go ahead and -- go ahead and climb up 20 Q. What is your present position with the 21 there first. There you go. 22 (WITNESS SWORN) 23 THE COURT: Thank you, sir. Please make 24 yourself comfortable. Once you've done so, if you 21 company? 22 A. Senior marketing manager, voice of the 23 customer. 24 Q. And over the last, oh, 35 years that you 25 will state your full name and spell your last name 25 have worked for Garlock I assume that you have had a Nancy L. Nunnelley, RMR (502) 594-1728 (502) 267-4156 Fax Nancy L. Nunnelley, RMR (502) 594-1728 (502) 267-4156 Fax 4 (Pages 13 to 16) James E. Heffron - 11-12-08 Page 13 James E. Heffron - 11-12-08 Page 14 1 called TAMPS, temperature, application, media, 2 pressure and size when it applies to gasketing. And 3 all those are factors that -- or could be factors in 4 the selection of a gasket material. 5 Temperature, for instance, asbestos was good to 6 750 degrees continuous, and it was used at 7 temperatures higher than that. 8 Application could be, like I mentioned earlier, 9 could be between a pipe flange. It could be a casing 10 gasket on a pump. 11 Media is the fluid that's being sealed. Is it 12 a liquid or is it a gas, is it corrosive, is it going 13 to attack the gasket material and cause it to fail. 14 Pressure obviously is also important. It could 15 result in the gasket blowing out. It also has a lot 16 to do with the integrity of the material to begin 17 with. 18 And size is an issue because not all materials 19 can be made in all sizes that gaskets are required. 20 Q. Okay. Does Garlock now have and have they 21 had in the past an active research and development 22 arm? 23 A. Yes. Sometimes in Garlock's history it's 24 had a -- an area that was exclusively responsible for 25 research and development. But generally in the years Nancy L. Nunnelley, RMR (502) 594-1728 (502) 267-4156 Fax 1 that I've been there it's been part of each small 2 business unit, it's their responsibility to 3 understand customers' needs and develop products to 4 meet those needs. 5 Q. All right. And has Garlock worked with 6 companies in the development of both -- when I say 7 companies, I mean in industry, have they worked with 8 these companies in the development of both 9 asbestos-containing and nonasbestos-containing 10 gaskets? 11 A. Yes. I have most of my familiarity, of 12 course, with nonasbestos materials since they really 13 began to be popular in the late '60s and then in the 14 early '80s. A couple of notable ones, Dupont was the 15 original inventor of a material called Teflon. 16 That's their trade name. It's a chemically inert 17 material that's got a lot of interesting and 18 excellent properties. 19 Garlock worked with Dupont on a process that 2 0 they developed called the HS10 process which allowed 21 it to restructure Teflon, add filler materials and 22 reduce one of the -- the big issues associated with 23 Teflon, which is its tendency to cold flow, which 24 essentially just means that it would change its 25 thickness over time, which is not what you want to Nancy L. Nunnelley, RMR (502) 594-1728 (502) 267-4156 Fax James E. Heffron - 11-12-08 James E. Heffron - 11-12-08 Page 15 Page 16 1 have a gasket do. 2 Another material would be Blue-Gard, which was 3 the first nonasbestos compressed gasketing material. 4 And, again, we worked with Dupont with their Kevlar 5 fiber to come up with a version with their 6 cooperation that would -- that would work in that 7 manufacturing process. 8 And then maybe perhaps more to the point, also, 9 it's always been a practice for Garlock to ask its 10 customers if they're not satisfied with the 11 performance of their product or in the development of 12 a new product they're not satisfied, that they 13 provide us with samples of the failed material, which 14 we then -- can then kind of do an autopsy on to 15 determine what was the method of failure to see if we 16 can overcome that in the next version of that product 17 or a new product. 18 Q. In the development of the Gylon product, 19 Gylon hyphen Dupont product, what was that -- that 20 particular nonasbestos-containing gasket designed to 21 -- what purpose was it designed to fill? 22 A. Well, it was designed to take care of the 23 media, which is part of that TAMPS, where the media 24 in particular is corrosive. It's -- it's going to - 25 it's like an acid or a caustic, severe acid or Nancy L. Nunnelley, RMR (502) 594-1728 (502) 267-4156 Fax 1 caustic services. 2 Could I get a glass of water, any chance? 3 Q. Yes, sir, you sure may. 4 A. I'm sorry. 5 Q. Oh, my goodness. That's service for you. 6 Thank you very much. 7 Okay. So if I understand you correctly, the 8 project that Garlock and Dupont entered upon was for 9 the development of a nonasbestos-containing gasket 10 for use in highly caustic process lines and acid 11 lines, is that correct? 12 A. Yes. The areas where Teflon had originally 13 been introduced but had some shortcomings. 14 Q. And when was the Gylon product introduced? 15 A. The first version of Gylon was introduced, 16 actually the first two versions of Gylon was 17 introduced in 1965. And there has been a number of 18 other styles of Gylon developed since then, 19 introduced. The most notable other two were in 1982. 20 Q. Okay. Did you bring an example with you or 21 not an example. Did you bring a Gylon gasket with 22 you? 23 A. Apparently not. 24 Q. Okay. Did you bring a -- you mentioned the 25 word Blue-Gard. Nancy L. Nunnelley, RMR (502) 594-1728 (502) 267-4156 Fax 5 (Pages 17 to 20) James E. Heffron - 11-12-08 Page 17 James E. Heffron - 11-12-08 Page 18 1 A. Yes, sir. 2 Q. Did you bring that with you? 3 A. Yes, I did. 4 Q. Now, what is Blue-Gard again? 5 A. Blue bar -- Blue-Gard is a Garlock trade 6 name. And I wish I'd brought an actual style 3000 7 Blue-Gard gasket because they're colored blue. That 8 was the first gasket that Garlock introduced. 9 But Blue-Gard was trade name that was meant to 10 reflect a family of products, a family of products 11 all of which used Kevlar fiber as the reinforcing 12 fiber in the material. 13 So it's available with a variety of elastomers, 14 neoprene, styrene, butadiene, nitro rubber and so 15 forth, and in a bunch of different colors as well, 16 white, off white, black, gray and so forth. 17 Q. And the Blue-Gard was or is a 18 nonasbestos-containing gasket -- 19 A. Yes. 20 Q. -- is that right? 21 A. That's correct. 22 Q. When was Blue-Gard introduced? 23 A. 1980. 24 Q. 1980. And could you -- could you tell me 25 from the beginnings in 1905 when you started to make Nancy L. Nunnelley, RMR (502) 594-1728 (502) 267-4156 Fax 1 gaskets and in particular nonasbestos-containing 2 gaskets, what sort of applications would apply for 3 the nonasbestos-containing gasket? 4 A. Well, it really depends on what the 5 nonasbestos gasketing material is made of. In the 6 earliest days most nonasbestos materials were either 7 rubber, hom -- what we refer to as homogeneous rubber 8 or, in other words, it's all rubber, there's nothing 9 else, or it might be rubber with some kind of a 10 fabric reinforcement, the word being duck, D-U-C-K, 11 which was a Dacron chlorobutanol type material. 12 There are other -- there are other 13 reinforcements, but most of the -- and vegetable 14 fiber was another material. That's -- vegetable 15 fiber is a product that's also a gasketing product 16 made in a different manufacturing process. Did you 17 want me to describe the more modern ones as well or? 18 Q. Well -- 19 A. Okay. 20 Q. -- let me ask you this question. And do 21 you -- do you have a nonasbestos-containing gasket 22 there? 23 A. Yes. 24 Q. Okay. Do you have an asbestos-containing 25 gasket there? Nancy L. Nunnelley, RMR (502) 594-1728 (502) 267-4156 Fax James E. Heffron - 11-12-08 James E. Heffron - 11-12-08 Page 19 Page 20 1 A. It's not a gasket. It's a -- it's a -- 1 but it's not the kind of dough you use to make a cake 2 Q. Compressed sheet? 2 obviously or a pie, I should say. But what you do is 3 A. Yes. 3 you mix fiber, asbestos fiber, nonasbestos fiber with 4 Q. Okay. With the naked eye can you tell 4 other fillers, which are elastomers or rubber. It 5 whether a gasket contains asbestos or doesn't contain 5 can be clay. And you use essentially gasoline. It's 6 asbestos? 6 technically known as toluene, but it's basically 7 A. Not really. 7 gasoline. And that acts as a solvent to mix this -- 8 Q. They look the same to you? 8 all these different materials together until you've 9 A. Yes, they do. 9 got a very homogeneous consistency. Just like if you 10 Q. They feel the same? 10 made a cake, you wouldn't want a piece of flour that 11 A. Well, they're the same manufacturing 11 wasn't mixed in with the rest of the ingredients. 12 process, and they're designed to look and operate the 12 That material is then -- it's not very 13 same, yes. 13 sophisticated in many respects. After it's mixed in 14 Q. All right. Let me ask you this: You 14 this big mixing bowl, it's dumped into what's called 15 mentioned the manufacturing process. What is the 15 a dough cart, which is just -- does exactly what it 16 manufacturing process for compressed sheet gasket? 16 sounds like. It's a cart that's used to transport 17 A. The manufacturing process is in some 17 the dough over to what's called a sheeter. A sheeter 18 respects, if you think about it in terms of making a 18 is nothing more than two rolling pins, if you will, 19 cake, you put in flour. You put in chocolate 19 two revolving metal rolls, one of which is heated and 20 perhaps. You put in milk. You put in eggs, and you 20 one of which is cooled. 21 mix it all up. And obviously the milk is an 21 Again, it's not very sophisticated. A shovel 22 important part of the ingredient in getting it to -- 22 is taken, and the material, the dough is shoveled in 23 in the consistency you want. 23 between these two rotating surfaces. And it wants to 24 Well, we make a product -- when we make 24 stick and adhere to the heated roll. It builds up. 25 compressed gasketing material, we also make a dough, 25 There's an operator watching a gauge. Some of Nancy L. Nunnelley, RMR (502) 594-1728 (502) 267-4156 Fax Nancy L. Nunnelley, RMR (502) 594-1728 (502) 267-4156 Fax 9 (Pages 33 to 36) James E. Heffron - 11-12-08 Page 33 James E. Heffron - 11-12-08 Page 34 1 facilities in the country that you're basically 1 that you-all used to make. 2 testing a product? 2 A. Well, the industrial hygienists I'm sure 3 MR. SHELTON: Object, Your Honor, to -- 3 have spoken about that, and they're better equipped 4 Q. If I misstate it, you can tell me. 4 than I. But I'm familiar with the industrial hygiene 5 A. Well -- 5 tests that have been conducted for Garlock over the 6 THE COURT: Overruled. 6 years. I've read some of the tests in their entirety 7 MR. SHELTON: Your Honor, objection. 7 and all of them at their conclusionary or summary 8 THE COURT: Overruled. 8 part, and it's my understanding from reading this 9 A. There's really two things. First of all, 9 that the fiber release, if any, is below that of any 10 the customer expects that before we approach them, 10 government standard. 11 that we're going to have done some type of testing. 11 Q. Okay. Thank you. I believe, Mr. Heffron, 12 Usually it's a standard industry test. Sometimes 12 that I'm going to turn you over to counsel for 13 it's special tests that we have designed specifically 13 plaintiff for cross-examination. 14 for that customer or that product. 14 One last question before I sit down, and that 15 In addition to that while Garlock attempts to 15 is, was -- was Garlock ever a member of the American 16 test its product, it can't possibly duplicate all of 16 Textiles Institute? 17 the hundreds and thousands of medias, sizes, 17 A. Yes. 18 applications and specifics of every customer's plant. 18 Q. And that's when they were making a textile 19 So, yes, in a way customers are often testing 19 product? 20 the product for us after we provided them with enough 20 A. Yes. 21 incentive and -- that they should believe that it 21 Q. Thank you, sir. 22 could work. 22 THE COURT: Thank you. Mr. Shelton. 23 Q. And let me ask you the same kind of 23 EXAMINATION BY MR. J. ROBERT SHELTON 24 question with regard to the fiber release 24 MR. SHELTON: Good afternoon. 25 characteristics of your asbestos-containing gaskets 25 MR. HEFFRON: Good afternoon. Nancy L. Nunnelley, RMR Nancy L. Nunnelley, RMR (502) 594-1728 (502) 267-4156 Fax (502) 594-1728 (502) 267-4156 Fax James E. Heffron - 11-12-08 James E. Heffron - 11-12-08 Page 35 Page 36 1 Q. I'm going to do my best to move through the 1 worked for. 2 materials I have here as quickly as possible so that 2 Q. As a corporate representative for Garlock 3 you can be on your way and the jury and everyone else 3 you sat through -- you've testified in many different 4 in this courtroom. 4 trials where Garlock's been a defendant, correct? 5 You're here as a corporate representative of 5 A. I have testified in trials previously, yes. 6 Garlock? 6 Q. And you've sat through those trials with 7 A. I am. 7 defense counsel before, have you not? 8 Q. And do you know who the plaintiff in this 8 A. Well, I've been -- I've sat through part -- 9 case is? 9 portions of trials, yes. I'm not sure what your 10 A. Mr. Robertson. 10 question is. 11 Q. Do you know his first name? 11 Q. Okay. But you're here today to testify, 12 A. His estate. I don't. 12 and then you'll be gone, correct? 13 Q. Do you know who this is? 13 A. Yes. 14 A. I believe that's Mrs. Robertson. 14 Q. Just so the jury's familiar with the size 15 Q. Do you know her first name? 15 and scope of your employer, Garlock has plants in 16 A. I don't. 16 Palmyra, New York? 17 Q. Do you know what Mr. Robertson did for a 17 A. That's correct. 18 living? 18 Q. Gastonia, New York? 19 A. It's my understanding he was a pipe fitter. 19 A. No. Gastonia, North Carolina, but there's 20 Q. And do you know where -- and where he 20 no longer a facility there. 21 worked as a pipe fitter? 21 Q. I'm sorry. North Carolina. Sodus, New 22 A. I believe he worked in a variety of 22 York? 23 different places. I know Dupont was one of the 23 A. There was a facility in Sodus, New York. 24 facilities. But there were a whole host of 24 There is not any longer. 25 companies, it's my understanding, that Mr. Robertson 25 Q. Sydney, Australia? Nancy L. Nunnelley, RMR (502) 594-1728 (502) 267-4156 Fax Nancy L. Nunnelley, RMR (502) 594-1728 (502) 267-4156 Fax 11 (Pages 41 to 44) James E. Heffron - 11-12-08 Page 41 James E. Heffron - 11-12-08 Page 42 1 these documents you'll agree that by the late 1940s 1 Q. Now, Mr. Gordinier asked you about when 2 Garlock was already protecting its own factory 2 Garlock was a member of the asbestos textile industry 3 workers from the dangers of asbestos dust? 4 A. Yes. In Garlock's asbestos textile 3 or institute. Do you recall when your answer -- your 4 answer to that question, sir? 5 manufacturing operation as early as the '30s, I 5 A. I don't think he asked me the years. But 6 believe, there were methods in place to reduce or 6 my answer would be that sometime in the 1940s, and 7 eliminate, minimize the amount of dust, yes. 8 Q. And you would agree with me back in the 7 then again I think from 1966 to '40 -- or '82 or 8 something like that. It's in our answers. I don't 9 1930s and 1940s just as today workers who were 9 have that answer memorized. 10 injured have the right -- had the right to file - 10 Q. How about as late as 1971? 11 who were injured on the job for pneumoconiosis or 11 A. Yes, I believe so, yeah. 12 other dust diseases, had the right to file workers' 12 Q. So as late as 1971 when Garlock was clearly 13 compensation claims against their employer - 13 making -- during this entire time period they were 14 A. That's correct. 14 also making asbestos-containing gaskets, correct, 15 Q. -- correct? 15 from 1905 through at least 1971? 16 A. Yes, that's correct. 16 A. Yes, encapsulated asbestos gasket. 17 Q. And, in fact, by the late 1940s Garlock had 17 Q. And just so the jury's clear, the asbestos 18 already begun to receive workers' compensation claims 18 fibers being used in Garlock's textile factories are 19 from its factory workers claiming asbestos-related 19 the same type of asbestos fibers going in their 20 lung diseases? 21 A. Yes. The first workers' compensation case 20 gaskets, correct? 21 A. Yes. The manufacturing process is much 22 for asbestosis was received by Garlock in about 1946 22 different, but the fiber is the same. 23 or 1947. That was Vera Clemens. And she worked in 23 Q. Well, it's not the manufacturing process 24 the textile department working with raw asbestos 24 that's been accused of injuring workers, is it? It's 25 fiber. 25 the fibers themselves, correct? Nancy L. Nunnelley, RMR Nancy L. Nunnelley, RMR (502) 594-1728 (502) 267-4156 Fax (502) 594-1728 (502) 267-4156 Fax James E. Heffron - 11-12-08 Page 43 James E. Heffron - 11-12-08 Page 44 1 A. It's the fiber release. 1 claims from workers in their factories, correct? 2 Q. Now, can I have the Elmo, please? I'm 2 MR. GORDINIER: May we approach just 3 going to show you, sir, what has been marked as 4 Plaintiffs Exhibit No. 23, which has been admitted 3 quickly, Your Honor? 4 THE COURT: Approach, please. 5 into evidence as Plaintiffs Exhibit No. 23. And 6 Dave was so kind as to put these signs on here. 5 6 (BENCH DISCUSSION) THE COURT: Yes, sir. 7 Thank you. This, sir, I know you've seen this 8 document before, have you not? 7 MR. GORDINIER: Objection to this line of 8 questioning unless he can relate the manufacture of 9 A. I have. 9 textiles to the manufacture of gaskets. 10 Q. Through years of testifying. This is the 10 THE COURT: I think he did with the fact 11 March 7th, 1956, minutes of the Asbestos Textile 11 that they contain the same fibers. 12 Institute. We have on there the name of Mr. Howton, 12 MR. GORDINIER: Well, were they made in 13 correct? You see where that's underlined? 13 the same state? Were they, you know. 14 A. I do. 14 THE COURT: I'll let -- save that for 15 Q. Garlock Packing Company. And, again, what 15 cross-examination, but your objection is noted. 16 was his duties at Garlock at this time? 16 MR. SHELTON: Thank you. 17 A. At that time Mr. Howton was responsible, I 17 (OPEN COURT) 18 think as a supervisor in the textile manufacturing 18 Q. I'm sorry. I don't believe I heard the 19 portion of Garlock's plant. 20 Q. All right. And this textile, just to give 19 answer to my question. If you did, I didn't hear. 20 I'm sorry. 21 the jury a little background on this meeting, you'll 21 A. I don't remember the specifics of the 22 recall that they were meeting here because at about 22 meeting. I know that Garlock wasn't a member at that 2 3 this point in time in 1956 the various members of the 23 time. Mr. Howton attended to share with the 2 4 Asbestos Textile Institute had been receiving or 2 5 continued to be receiving workers' compensation 24 association the Garlock practices in dust 25 minimization in its plant. But as far as the Nancy L. Nunnelley, RMR (502) 594-1728 (502) 267-4156 Fax Nancy L. Nunnelley, RMR (502) 594-1728 (502) 267-4156 Fax 12 (Pages 45 to 48) James E. Heffron - 11-12-08 Page 45 James E. Heffron - 11-12-08 Page 46 1 document itself, I'm -- I've read it, but I don't 2 remember the specifics of it. 3 Q. Okay. Well, in any event, Mr. Howton was 4 at this meeting wherein there was -- this was minutes 5 of that meeting, correct? 6 A. Yes. 7 Q. And you see at the bottom -- do you know 8 who Doctor Heuper is? 9 A. I've heard the name before. 10 Q. And at this meeting that Mr. Howton was at 11 they discussed that Doctor Heuper claims that 12 asbestosis cancer can be found after exposure of six 13 months to 42 years in ages of people 25 to 65 years. 14 He also has a new definition of asbestosis such as 15 one particle of asbestos with the physical conditions 16 surrounding it can be diagnosed as asbestosis 17 according to him. All workers in this industry are 18 susceptible. 19 Now, sir, all workers in this industry, do you 20 interpret that as confined to the asbestos textile 21 workers or all workers in the industry? 22 A. I don't interpret the document. 23 Q. Okay. 24 A. I can tell you what it says. 25 Q. He's further -- he states further that a Nancy L. Nunnelley, RMR (502) 594-1728 (502) 267-4156 Fax 1 minimum of 170,000 dust particles per cubic liter is 2 recognized for the development of asbestosis, cancer 3 in man, and he notes that Doctor Heuper said that 4 asbestosis is compensable in Germany and notable in 5 England and Wales. You've seen this document before, 6 have you not? 7 A. I have. 8 Q. Now, just so we're clear who Doctor Heuper 9 is, look on the second page, it states here that 10 Doctor Smith also advised that there is other 11 damaging information being circulated written by the 12 same Doctor Heuper, who is the chief of the 13 environmental cancer section for the National Cancer 14 Institute, the National Institute of Health, 15 Bethesda, Maryland, correct? 16 A. That's what the article says, yes. 17 Q. Now, you're familiar with, are you not, 18 another meeting held -- well, actually I think this 19 is the very next day, March 8th. Are you familiar -- 20 you've seen these minutes from the follow -- from the 21 second day of this meeting, have you not? 22 A. I may have. 23 Q. What's been marked and admitted into 24 evidence as Plaintiff's Exhibit No. 24. You may 25 have. You have, have you not? Nancy L. Nunnelley, RMR (502) 594-1728 (502) 267-4156 Fax James E. Heffron - 11-12-08 James E. Heffron - 11-12-08 Page 47 Page 48 1 A. I probably have. 1 THE COURT: I understand it to be -- 2 Q. Okay. 2 MR. GORDINIER: Well, not in this trial. 3 A. I don't specifically remember it. 3 THE COURT: What I understood him to say 4 Q. All right. Well, perhaps, let me try to 4 in an abundance of caution he can't say with 5 refresh your memory by returning to the -- again, 5 specificity that he remembers that particular line 6 this shows, just for the jury's edification or 6 from that particular document. But I don't think he 7 knowledge, that there is, again, in attendance as a 7 would quibble with the fact that he has reviewed that 8 guest a G.E. Howton, correct? 8 document previously. But technically your objection 9 A. That's correct. 9 is sustained. And if you need to have him 10 Q. And on the second page of this Doctor 10 authenticate it more clearly, you can do that. 11 Heuper's name comes up again with a Doctor Holmes, 11 MR. SHELTON: Well, understand, it's 12 chairman of the air hygiene committee of the ATI, 12 already in evidence. 13 states that -- 13 THE COURT: I shouldn't say authenticate 14 MR. GORDINIER: Excuse me, please. May we 14 it. But if you need -- in order for him to speak 15 approach quickly? 15 about it, he does have to recognize it. But you can 16 THE COURT: Yes, sir. 16 use him certainly as you could anyone to bounce off 17 (BENCH DISCUSSION) 17 those things. But I think it's -- technically the 18 MR. GORDINIER: Unless -- unless the 18 motion is correct. The motion is sustained. But I 19 witness can -- can state that he has seen the 19 don't -- I don't see the harm thus far. Put it that 20 document and is familiar with the document, I think 20 way. 21 that has to be -- that basis has to be laid before he 21 MR. SHELTON: All right. 22 can question him further. 22 (OPEN COURT) 23 MR. SHELTON: I've got prior sworn 23 MR. SHELTON: Dave, the Elmo, please. 24 testimony he's acknowledged -- he's testified about 24 Q. Sir, do you recall now that you've seen 25 this document about 12 times. 25 this paragraph, you've had this paragraph from this Nancy L. Nunnelley, RMR (502) 594-1728 (502) 267-4156 Fax Nancy L. Nunnelley, RMR (502) 594-1728 (502) 267-4156 Fax 14 (Pages 53 to 56) James E. Heffron - 11-12-08 Page 53 James E. Heffron - 11-12-08 Page 54 1 case of a lawsuit. 1 Q. My question to you is, sir, have you seen 2 Q. All right. Thank you, sir. Now -- 2 any Garlock documents showing that at -- in 1971 they 3 MR. SHELTON: And I would move this into 3 started to put a warning label on its 4 evidence, Plaintiffs Exhibit No. 70 into evidence, 4 asbestos-containing gaskets? 5 Your Honor. 5 A. Well, again, this is an article or a 6 THE COURT: Objections? Plaintiff's 6 document from the Asbestos Textile Institute. And 7 Exhibit 70 will be admitted without objection. 7 that's textile products, not encapsulated gasketing. 8 MR. SATTERLEY: What's the date of that 8 So it's a different product completely. 9 document? 9 Q. Okay. My question was, sir -- 10 THE COURT: 1971. 10 A. But I think to answer your question, no. 11 MR. SHELTON: February the 4th, 1971. 11 Q. -- do you see any evidence where Garlock 12 Q. Now, sir, they discuss at this meeting 12 considered or began to put warning labels on their 13 where Mr. Cuzmick from Garlock is in attendance, the 13 asbestos products anytime in 1971? 14 issues discussed essentially, should we start putting 14 A. No. 15 warnings on our products. That's what that document 15 Q. Anytime in 1972? 16 reflects, correct? 16 A. No. 17 A. Well, it indicates what Mr. Sheckler said. 17 Q. '73? 18 I don't know what the discussions were. I wasn't 18 A. No. 19 there. 19 Q. '74? 20 Q. I understand. I'm just saying this 20 A. No. 21 document reflects that Mr. Sheckler, quote, thinks 21 Q. '75? 22 that our industry must give serious consideration to 22 A. No. 23 labelling asbestos products, i.e., a warning label. 23 Q. '76? 24 That's what this document states? 24 A. No. 25 A. That's correct. 25 Q. Now, in 19 -- 1977 -- in 1977 Garlock had Nancy L. Nunnelley, RMR Nancy L. Nunnelley, RMR (502) 594-1728 (502) 267-4156 Fax (502) 594-1728 (502) 267-4156 Fax James E. Heffron - 11-12-08 James E. Heffron - 11-12-08 Page 55 Page 56 1 what is referred to as a product liability committee, 2 did it not? 3 A. Yes. 4 MR. SHELTON: Anymore stickers, Joe? 1 2 3 4 A. Not specifically. Q. All right. Generally? A. In the early 1970s. Q. All right. Now, this meeting of the 5 MR. SATTERLEY: Sure. 5 product liability committee minutes was July 26, 6 Q. And, sir, what was the product liability 6 1977, as reflected on this document, correct? 7 committee? 7 A. Yes. 8 A. A committee that discusses product 8 Q. All right. And its paragraph three states 9 liability. 9 that biggest area of exposure for now is asbestos. 10 Q. And I will show you what we marked as 10 It was agreed that we would work on this particular 11 Plaintiff's Exhibit No. 71. And could you identify 11 product first, and through our experiences apply them 12 that as a -- a document produced by the Garlock 12 to our products. Just so the jury's clear, we're 13 product liability committee? 13 talking about asbestos-containing gaskets at this 14 A. Yes, I believe it is. 14 point, correct? 15 Q. And you're familiar with that document? 15 A. It doesn't say. 16 A. Oh, I'm sure I've seen it. 16 Q. Okay. Well, let me ask you this, sir: Was 17 MR. SHELTON: All right. And I would move 17 Garlock still making asbestos textile products in 18 that into evidence. Permission to publish, Your 18 1977? 19 Honor. 19 A. Yes, I believe so. 20 THE COURT: Any objections? Plaintiffs 20 Q. It was. What asbestos textile products was 21 Exhibit 71 will be admitted without objection. 21 it making? 22 Permission to publish granted. 22 A. It made woven asbestos cloth which it used 23 Q. Now, sir, do you know when OSHA came out 23 in manufacturing some of its packings, and it also 24 with the regulation concerning putting warnings on 24 made yarn which was consumed in its braiding 25 asbestos-containing products? 25 operation. Nancy L. Nunnelley, RMR (502) 594-1728 (502) 267-4156 Fax Nancy L. Nunnelley, RMR (502) 594-1728 (502) 267-4156 Fax 15 (Pages 57 to 60) James E. Heffron - 11-12-08 Page 57 James E. Heffron - 11-12-08 Page 58 1 Q. Okay. But you -- are you stating to the 2 jury that this jury -- that this committee is 3 referring to asbestos textile products and not its 4 gaskets? 5 A. No. I'm saying it doesn't -- it's not 6 specific. 7 Q. All right. Well, let's go on and see if we 8 can figure that out throughout this document. We'll 9 move through it real quickly. In any event, they 10 talk about a particular product first in paragraph 11 three. It says that Mr. Guffy brought up the point 12 that most companies have lost product liability suits 13 because of their failure to warn. That's what he 14 stated, correct? 15 A. It is. 16 Q. And after some discussion it was the 17 unanimous opinion of the committee that they 18 immediately begin to label all advertising of all 19 products that contain asbestos. That would include 20 gaskets, would it not, sir? 21 A. Yes. 22 Q. With the following phrase: Caution: 23 Contains asbestos fibers, avoid creating dust. 24 Breathing asbestos dust may cause serious bodily 25 harm. And then they assign Mr. Stay the Nancy L. Nunnelley, RMR (502) 594-1728 (502) 267-4156 Fax 1 responsibility of seeing this label's put on the 2 products and that the catalogues have the products 3 before they're sent out. And let me ask you, sir, 4 that warning, was that warning ever implemented in 5 1977? 6 A. Yes. 7 Q. All right.That is the standard warning, 8 though, recommended or required by OSHA, though, is 9 it not? 10 A. Yes. It wasn't -- it wasn't required for 11 encapsulated products, but it is the standard OSHA 12 warning, and it is the one that we used. 13 Q. Well, you say the OSHA reg didn't apply to 14 encapsulated products. In fact, sir, that OSHA 15 regulation stated that it does not apply to 16 encapsulated products if with the foreseeable use of 17 that product asbestos fibers are not released into 18 the air. That's what the regulation states, correct? 19 A. It could be. I'm not an industrial 20 hygienist. 21 Q. I'm sorry. I thought you just said that 22 you believe it applied to encapsulated products, and 23 now you're stating you don't know what the regulation 24 states? 25 A. I don't specifically know what the Nancy L. Nunnelley, RMR (502) 594-1728 (502) 267-4156 Fax James E. Heffron - 11-12-08 James E. Heffron - 11-12-08 Page 59 Page 60 1 regulation states, no. I'm not an expert in 2 industrial hygiene. 3 Q. All right. In any event, that is the 4 warning language required by the OSHA regulation, 5 what we just read, correct? 6 A. That's the standard OSHA warning, that's 7 correct. 8 Q. Now, sir, have you brought in any -- is it 9 your testimony here today that Garlock actually put 10 out that warning in 1977? 11 A. Yes. 12 Q. We've had two pipe fitters testify in this 13 case that worked with, by their own testimony, 14 asbestos Garlock gaskets into the '90s and stated 15 they never saw such a warning. Let me ask you this, 16 sir: Did Garlock put that warning on the gaskets 17 themselves? 18 A. They put it on the sheet. The gasket is 19 cut out of the sheet. 20 Q. So you're stating that if it's cut out of 21 the sheet, there would at least be part of that 22 warning on the gasket? 23 A. It depends on the size and the 24 configuration of the gasket. 25 Q. Well, if you cut -- if you cut a gasket - Nancy L. Nunnelley, RMR (502) 594-1728 (502) 267-4156 Fax 1 and I believe the jury saw you can take a ball pean 2 hammer and knock a hole out of the sheet and you make 3 a gasket, right? 4 A. That's correct. 5 Q. If you did that and the warning's on the 6 sheet, you're going to knock out part of the warning, 7 correct? 8 A. Yes. And if you're doing that, you're 9 looking at a sheet which has a warning on it. 10 Q. All right. Or part of a warning? 11 A. Well, the sheet has the warning on it. The 12 gasket would possibly only have a portion of the 13 warning. 14 Q. And you understand that Garlock also made 15 premanufactured gaskets that you didn't have to take 16 out of a sheet? 17 A. That's correct. We - 18 Q. Those did not have a warning on them ever, 19 correct? 20 A. Well, the sheet had a warning, and the size 21 and the configuration of the gasket would determine 22 whether or not any of that warning found its way onto 23 the gasket. 24 Q. My question -- my point is, sir, there was 25 also gaskets made by Garlock that did not come in Nancy L. Nunnelley, RMR (502) 594-1728 (502) 267-4156 Fax 16 (Pages 61 to 64) James E. Heffron - 11-12-08 Page 61 James E. Heffron - 11-12-08 Page 62 1 sheets. They were precut gaskets? 2 A. That's correct. 3 Q. They never had a warning on them, did they? 4 A. Only if it was cut out of a portion of the 5 sheet that had the warning. 6 Q. I'm sorry. I feel like we're going in 7 circles here, but there's certain gaskets made by 8 Garlock that were premanufactured that never were in 9 a sheet, correct? 10 A. No. Well, all compressed asbestos gaskets 11 are cut out of a sheet. 12 Q. Okay. 13 A. So -- 14 Q. But not necessarily cut by the pipe fitter 15 or end user, correct? 16 A. That's correct. 17 Q. All right. And those would never have a 18 warning on them, correct? 19 A. Not unless the portion of the sheet that 20 they used had the warning on it. 21 Q. Okay. So, sir, as far as the language 22 used, Garlock also knew, did it not, in 1997 -- in 23 1977 that pipe fitters would have to remove its 24 gaskets after a certain point in time? 25 A. It certainly knew that pipe fitters were Nancy L. Nunnelley, RMR (502) 594-1728 (502) 267-4156 Fax 1 one of the trades that would replace gaskets. All 2 gaskets have to be replaced periodically. 3 Q. All right. And Garlock knew that in 1961? 4 A. Yes. 5 Q. And it knew it in -- all the way through 6 1999? 7 A. That's correct. 8 Q. And Garlock also knew that when its 9 gaskets, asbestos gaskets were removed, that they -- 10 the gasket had to be removed thoroughly from the face 11 of the flange in order to put in the new gasket, 12 correct? 13 A. That's correct. 14 Q. It was a safety issue, correct? 15 A. It was very important to make sure the 16 gasket seals properly, yes. 17 Q. So Garlock also knew then during this time 18 period that pipe fitters such as Tom Robertson would 19 take a hand wire brush to its asbestos gaskets, 20 correct? 21 A. I believe so. 22 Q. It also knew that from time to time pipe 23 fitters such as Mr. Robertson would take an electric 24 wire brush and remove the rest of the gasket from the 25 flange, correct? Nancy L. Nunnelley, RMR (502) 594-1728 (502) 267-4156 Fax James E. Heffron - 11-12-08 Page 63 James E. Heffron - 11-12-08 Page 64 1 A. It may have. 1 Q. All right. Well, let's talk about the 2 Q. But nevertheless, Garlock never warned 2 basis of that knowledge. You've testified that 3 these hard-marking -- hard-working men such as Tom 3 Garlock knew that pipe fitters out there were doing 4 Robertson not to use a hand wire brush on its gasket, 4 this. We've already -- we've already seen documents 5 did it? 5 that Garlock knew by the 1940s that its -- that 6 A. Well, Garlock didn't believe then and 6 workers in its factories exposed to asbestos fibers 7 doesn't believe today that that type of operation 7 were becoming sick. I, therefore, presume that, say, 8 releases fibers in such a level as to pose a hazard. 8 1950 Garlock knew the pipe fitters were using its 9 But, no, it never told people not to use a wire 9 gaskets, that Garlock began to test its gaskets to 10 brush. 10 see, in fact, how much asbestos fibers were being 11 Q. And it never told them, under no 11 breathed by pipe fitters, right? 12 circumstances take an electric wire brush to this 12 A. No. There was no belief then as today that 13 asbestos gasket? 13 the removal of an asbestos gasket posed any health 14 A. No. Its caution was don't damage the 14 issue. 15 flange. 15 Q. All right. But how did Garlock have that 16 Q. Don't damage the flange. 16 belief in 1950, the 1960s if it never tested its 17 Sir, let me ask you something. Have you seen 17 products? 18 anything in any Garlock corporate documents 18 A. Garlock sold direct to customers from its 19 evidencing that Garlock was ever concerned whatsoever 19 inception in 1905 to the late 1960s. It constantly 20 that pipe fitters were out there essentially 20 worked with customers. And it didn't observe any 21 obliterating its 75 to 85 percent asbestos fiber 21 problems with the removal of its product during that 22 gaskets and breathing in that dust? 22 period of time. The testing as far as fiber release 23 A. No. Garlock always believed then and now 23 did not occur until approximately 1980. 24 that the gaskets, the encapsulated gaskets it made 24 Q. I understand that. My point is, sir, my 25 were safe for use. 25 question I'd like for you to tell this jury, what is Nancy L. Nunnelley, RMR (502) 594-1728 (502) 267-4156 Fax Nancy L. Nunnelley, RMR (502) 594-1728 (502) 267-4156 Fax 17 (Pages 65 to 68) James E. Heffron - 11-12-08 Page 65 James E. Heffron - 11-12-08 Page 66 1 the basis of Garlock's belief in the '50s, '60s or 2 '70s that workers such as Mr. Robertson were not at 3 risk when it took a hand wire brush, an electric wire 4 brush to its 75 to 85 percent containing asbestos 5 gaskets if it never tested them during that time? 6 A. Didn't have any scientific data at that 7 time. 8 Q. It had no scientific data, and as we've 9 also established, it never warned the worker to use 10 respiratory protection during that time, correct? 11 A. No, because it wasn't necessary. 12 Q. And that's based upon -- you -- I'm sorry, 13 Mr. Heffron, you keep saying that. Upon what basis 14 are you saying that Garlock had that belief in the 15 '50s, '60s and '70s that it wasn't necessary? 16 A. From its observation of the use of its 17 product. But as I said, there were no -- there was 18 no scientific information at that time. 19 Q. Did Garlock believe that it had a duty to 20 end users such as pipe fitters to test its products 21 to make sure that they wouldn't be dangerous to the 2 2 end user in the 1950s, '60s and '70s? 23 A. Certainly. And it did those tests to make 2 4 sure the product performed properly. 2 5 Q. It didn't do them in the '50s, '60s or Nancy L. Nunnelley, RMR (502) 594-1728 (502) 267-4156 Fax 1 '70s, though, did it? 2 A. It didn't do any industrial hygiene studies 3 until the 1980s. 4 Q. And then in the 1980s it didn't even do 5 those tests in house, did it? 6 A. No. Garlock wouldn't have the expertise to 7 do that type of testing in house. It used certified 8 industrial hygienists. 9 Q. It used a Mr. McCrone, did it not? 10 A. It used a number of companies. 11 Q. And do you know that a Mr. Richard Hatfield 12 worked during -- in that McCrone study in the 1980s? 13 A. Not specifically, no. 14 Q. Well, I want you to assume that 15 Mr. Hatfield came and testified here the other day, 16 Monday, that he did work on that McCrone study. He 17 was asked to duplicate some test results that Mangold 18 had done and that he was using some flanges, and the 19 test results he was getting was higher than the 20 results that Mangold had gotten and that he advised 21 Garlock of this fact and that Garlock told him to 22 stop his studies. My question to you is, sir, do you 23 know why Garlock told him to stop the study? 24 A. I don't know anything about that. 25 Q. Sir, and just so the jury's also aware of Nancy L. Nunnelley, RMR (502) 594-1728 (502) 267-4156 Fax James E. Heffron - 11-12-08 James E. Heffron - 11-12-08 Page 67 Page 68 1 this, certain asbestos manufacturers did step up to 2 the plate in the 1970s and begin -- even before OSHA 3 regulations came out and required it, did step up to 4 the plate and began to put warnings on their asbestos 5 products in the early 1970s, correct? 6 A. No one that I'm aware of that's in the 7 fluid-sealing industry, no. I don't know. 8 Q. Okay. Let me try to refresh your memory. 9 Garlock was buying raw asbestos fibers to use at its 10 factories that made these gaskets, correct? 11 A. Yes. 12 Q. And for example, tell the jury where one of 13 these factories may be. Palmyra? 14 A. The Garlock factory? 15 Q. Yeah. 16 A. Yes. Palmyra. 17 Q. Palmyra. And you'll recall, you'll agree 18 that in the early 1970s these raw asbestos fibers 19 would come in with bags, and these bags would have 20 warnings on them about the dangers of inhaling 21 asbestos dust, correct? 22 A. I don't know when the asbestos fiber 23 manufacturers first began to apply a warning. 24 Q. But they were on there by the early 19 - 2 5 by the early 1970s, weren't they? Nancy L. Nunnelley, RMR (502) 594-1728 (502) 267-4156 Fax 1 A. I don't know for sure. 2 Q. You don't know when that was? 3 A. I don't. 4 Q. Well, you'll agree with me, sir, that you 5 did testify in an action known as Dexter versus 6 Triangle Insulation down in Marshall Circuit Court. 7 Do you remember that? 8 A. Not specifically, no. 9 Q. Okay. Well, let's see if -- I will show 10 you a transcript of the trial testimony of James 11 Heffron given February 7, 2006, in Benton, Kentucky. 12 Do you recall being asked these questions and giving 13 these answers at that time? This is page 95. And it 14 states that: And isn't it true, sir, that as of, 15 say, at least 1972, and maybe as early as 1966, these 16 manufacturers of this raw asbestos fiber was already 17 putting warnings on these bales about the dangers of 18 inhaling raw asbestos fibers? 19 Answer: I'm not sure when they began using 20 warnings. 21 Question: It was at least by 1972, was it not, 22 sir? 23 Answer: No response. 24 Question: Was it not, sir? 25 Answer: I'm not certain. Nancy L. Nunnelley, RMR (502) 594-1728 (502) 267-4156 Fax 18 (Pages 69 to 72) James E. Heffron - 11-12-08 Page 69 James E. Heffron - 11-12-08 Page 70 1 Question: But it was sometime in the early 2 '70s? 3 Answer: I believe so. 4 Do you recall being asked those questions and 5 giving those answers, sir, back in 2006 in western 6 Kentucky? 7 A. I believe my response today is pretty much 8 the same. I don't specifically remember it, but I 9 can read the transcript. That's what it says. 10 Q. All right. And so these bales of raw 11 asbestos fibers are coming into Garlock's factories, 12 and Gar -- with the warnings on them. And then 13 Garlock will undo the bales, take the fibers and make 14 gaskets out of them, correct? 15 A. Yes. It would use the manufacturing 16 process I described earlier. 17 Q. And then these gaskets would have -- would 18 be made of 75 to 85 percent raw fiber, correct? 19 A. Yes. In its gasket form it's no longer a 2 0 raw fiber. It's part of a composite. But it is made 21 up of 75 to 85 percent asbestos fiber, that's 2 2 correct. 23 Q. So this fiber comes in one door with a 24 warning from one manufacturer. You guys put it 25 through your process, ship it out the other door to Nancy L. Nunnelley, RMR (502) 594-1728 (502) 267-4156 Fax 1 end users such as Mr. Robertson, and it's 75 to 85 2 percent asbestos, and there's no warning on it, 3 correct? 4 A. That's correct. Again, it's an 5 encapsulated product. It's not a raw asbestos fiber. 6 Q. And let me ask you, sir, when Goodrich came 7 to you and said, you know, we -- we insist upon using 8 -- you would agree with me, sir, that with respect to 9 asbestos gaskets, if they're precut -- there's no 10 question that if asbestos gaskets are precut and put 11 into a flange and flanged up, there's no risk to a 12 pipe fitter inhaling any asbestos dust, correct? 13 A. I believe it's correct, yes. 14 Q. Nothing harmful at all about that process, 15 is there? 16 A. I don't believe so. 17 Q. So if B.F. Goodrich came and wanted their 18 pipe fitters and their maintenance people to do that 19 and put in a flange, nothing harmful or dangerous 20 about that. Now, sir, do you know if B.F. Goodrich 21 was telling their same maintenance people that when 22 you take these Garlock gaskets out, that you better 23 use respiratory protection? 24 A. No, I doubt they were, because it wasn't 25 required then, it isn't required now. Nancy L. Nunnelley, RMR (502) 594-1728 (502) 267-4156 Fax James E. Heffron - 11-12-08 James E. Heffron - 11-12-08 Page 71 Page 72 1 Q. Do you know, sir, or are you speculating? 2 A. No, I don't know. 3 Q. By the way, have you brought anything to 4 show the jury today that has a warning on it on an 5 asbestos Garlock gasket? 6 A. Not a gasket. A sheet, a portion of a 7 sheet. 8 Q. You have a portion of a sheet? 9 A. Correct. 10 Q. Can I see that, please? 11 A. Certainly. 12 Q. And what -- this is a -- this is a sheet 13 gasket? 14 A. It's a small sample, about an eight and a 15 half by eleven sample cut out of a sheet of gasketing 16 material. 17 Q. All right. And when was this manufactured? 18 A. I don't know. 19 Q. You don't know when this was manufactured? 20 A. Not specifically, no. 21 Q. Do you know if these gaskets were ever - 22 these sheet gaskets were ever sold in the Louisville 23 area? 24 A. No idea. It was -- came out of Garlock 25 inventory. So I would say it wasn't sold to anyone. Nancy L. Nunnelley, RMR (502) 594-1728 (502) 267-4156 Fax 1 MR. SHELTON: I'll have this marked as 2 Plaintiff's Exhibit No. 2. May I publish - 3 THE COURT: 72. 4 MR. SHELTON: May I publish 72, Your 5 Honor? 6 MR. GORDINIER: No, you may not. 7 MR. SHELTON: May I publish this to the 8 jury? 9 THE COURT: Approach, please. 10 (BENCH DISCUSSION) 11 MR. GORDINIER: Judge. 12 THE COURT: Yes, sir. 13 MR. GORDINIER: This was not an exhibit 14 that was listed by the plaintiff. And I don't 15 believe that he can walk up, grab something that the 16 witness has that doesn't belong to him, turn around 17 and try to enter it as an exhibit. Now, to satisfy 18 the court, when it comes time for cross-examination, 19 since this belongs to my client, I will mark it as an 20 exhibit and offer it to the court. 21 ATTORNEY: That's improper. 22 THE COURT: I'm going to allow him to do 23 it only because there was this discussion about 24 stamping things out of this and how the warning may 25 or may not end up on the finished product. And so Nancy L. Nunnelley, RMR (502) 594-1728 (502) 267-4156 Fax 19 (Pages 73 to 76) James E. Heffron - 11-12-08 Page 73 James E. Heffron - 11-12-08 Page 74 1 I'll allow it for that purpose -- 2 MR. GORDINIER: But -- 3 THE COURT: -- and if you want to mark it 4 as a defendants' exhibit, I mean, something else, 5 that's fine, too. 6 MR. GORDINIER: Just so we do things 7 properly, this court directed us to prepare a list of 8 exhibits to be submitted. They did not list this as 9 an exhibit. 10 THE COURT: Right. And -- 11 MR. GORDINIER: And I think it's improper. 12 THE COURT: I disagree only in that, you 13 know, it's not an exhaustive list. And if in the 14 course of the trial something came up and, for 15 example, this came up, it's not inappropriate to add 16 that. 17 MR. GORDINIER: Okay. 18 THE COURT: So -- 19 MR. GORDINIER: I've really got no 20 objection whatsoever for that being marked as an 21 exhibit. 22 THE COURT: Well, you're welcome to put 23 your own sticker on it, too. 24 MR. GORDINIER: And -- 25 THE COURT: It can be defendants' -- Nancy L. Nunnelley, RMR (502) 594-1728 (502) 267-4156 Fax 1 MR. GORDINIER: -- it being published to 2 the jury. I do object with walking up and grabbing 3 something out of someone's hands that doesn't belong 4 to them, turning around and then saying, well, I'm 5 going to use this, and I'm just going to take it. I 6 just think that's wrong, judge. 7 THE COURT: I disagree. But I -- 8 MR. GORDINIER: Okay. 9 THE COURT: -- your motion -- 10 MR. GORDINIER: All right. 11 THE COURT: -- your motion is in for the 12 record. It's overruled. 13 (OPEN COURT) 14 MR. SHELTON: Your Honor, I would move 15 this into evidence and permission to publish 16 Plaintiffs Exhibit No. 72. 17 THE COURT: Granted. That would be 18 admitted as Plaintiff's Exhibit 72 and will likely be 19 retagged as a defendants' exhibit as well at some 20 point. 21 Q. All right. Now, I'm showing this thing -- 22 this document. I've zoomed back. Sir -- 23 MR. GORDINIER: Could we approach just one 24 minute? 25 THE COURT: Okay. Nancy L. Nunnelley, RMR (502) 594-1728 (502) 267-4156 Fax James E. Heffron - 11-12-08 James E. Heffron - 11-12-08 Page 75 Page 76 1 MR. GORDINIER: I apologize. We'll make 2 this quick. 3 (BENCH DISCUSSION) 4 MR. GORDINIER: Judge, I'm having a 5 problem with the idea that counsel can take someone 6 else's property without asking, turn around and just 7 use it for their own purposes. I just think that's 8 wrong. It would have been right if he had -- if he 9 had acquired that in discovery and produced, listed 10 it as an exhibit, and that would be fine. But this 11 doesn't belong to him. And now the idea of him 12 walking up and snatching -- here you go. Why don't 13 you take his glasses and put them in as an exhibit. 14 THE COURT: Well, and I got to tell you, 15 and I understand your objection. But -- and in the 16 grand scheme of things you're right. But in 17 particular this became relevant through the 18 examination. I don't think Mr. Shelton expected it. 19 MR. SHELTON: I didn't know he had it. 20 THE COURT: And I think because he 21 happened to have it and because it's relevant to the 22 specific testimony, then I think it's perfectly 23 appropriate that he adopt that. The example I'll use 24 is, you know, there have been times, Jim Lesousky 25 took a defendant's glasses one time and introduced Nancy L. Nunnelley, RMR (502) 594-1728 (502) 267-4156 Fax 1 them into evidence. I mean, you can do it. I mean, 2 it's -3 MR. GORDINIER: Okay. Okay. 4 THE COURT: It's not -- the idea of those 5 exhibit lists is that there aren't surprises. But it 6 doesn't mean -- doesn't preclude you from adapting to 7 the circumstance, and the circumstance in this case 8 was there was extensive discussion -9 MR. GORDINIER: And -10 THE COURT: -- and it was somewhat 11 contested by the witness as to whether there were 12 gaskets that were made without these sheets and 13 whether the warning label would appear on the sheets. 14 And this is a pretty good -15 MR. GORDINIER: Well, I think it is. 16 THE COURT: -- part of that. 17 MR. GORDINIER: And I think it's very 18 relevant from every respect. I don't contest that at 19 all. I just have a problem with counsel grabbing 20 property that doesn't belong to him without asking -21 MR. SHELTON: I did ask. I said can I 22 see -23 THE COURT: Don't interrupt. 24 MR. GORDINIER: -- and adopting it -- and 25 adopting it as his own. I just think there's Nancy L. Nunnelley, RMR (502) 594-1728 (502) 267-4156 Fax 20 (Pages 77 to 80) James E. Heffron - 11-12-08 Page 77 James E. Heffron - 11-12-08 Page 78 1 something wrong with that, and it shouldn't be 2 allowed. 3 ATTORNEY: In fact, they moved to exclude 4 or not allow us to take anything off their desk or 5 from them during the course of this trial. That was 6 in one of their motions in limini. 7 THE COURT: But if your objection is in 8 terms of the courtesy aspect of it, I guess I see 9 where you're coming from. But honestly, I just -- I 10 get that you have a problem with it. I honestly 11 don't. And I think it was -- 12 MR. GORDINIER: I mean, what's the limit? 13 THE COURT: Well, he can't pick through 14 your briefcase. He can't go through your car. 15 MR. GORDINIER: Why not? 16 THE COURT: Or the trunk. 17 MR. GORDINIER: Why not? 18 THE COURT: Because, you know, we can 19 argue about it, but I don't choose to. I mean -- 20 MR. GORDINIER: Okay. I don't want to 21 take anymore time. But you see my point? 22 THE COURT: Your record's made, and to the 23 extent that I'm wrong, somebody will tell me along 24 the way, but I honestly don't have a problem with it. 25 MR. GORDINIER: Okay. Nancy L. Nunnelley, RMR (502) 594-1728 (502) 267-4156 Fax 1 (OPEN COURT) 2 THE COURT: Yeah. 3 MR. SHELTON: Thank you. 4 THE COURT: You're welcome. 5 Q. Again, just so the jury knows, you brought 6 this -- you brought this with you to the trial here 7 today, but you have no knowledge as to when this 8 product was created, correct? 9 A. When the sheet was produced, no, I don't 10 know specifically, no. 11 Q. Do you know if it's asbestos-containing? 12 A. Yes, it is asbestos-containing. 13 Q. All right. In any event, sir, I'll put 14 this up here so the jury could see, that's the 15 warning that I read earlier. That's the OSHA, 16 standard OSHA warning, correct? 17 A. It is. 18 Q. All right. Now, I'm going to take this off 19 so I can turn it off. I just want you to 20 acknowledge, if you would, that there's pipes out 21 there that may only be that big around with flanges 22 on it, correct? 23 A. That's correct. 24 Q. And you could cut a gasket out of here 25 about that big, could you not? Nancy L. Nunnelley, RMR (502) 594-1728 (502) 267-4156 Fax James E. Heffron - 11-12-08 James E. Heffron - 11-12-08 Page 79 Page 80 1 A. Yes, you could. 2 Q. And that pipe fitter that saw that gasket 3 would never see a warning, would he? 4 A. If it was cut out of that portion, that's 5 correct. 6 Q. And you would also agree that Garlock 7 certainly had the technology, did it not, to put that 8 warning sign all over this gasket, correct? 9 A. Yes. And they could have left this name 10 off. 11 Q. And still left the name on? 12 A. The sheet could be covered with nothing but 13 warning. 14 Q. So what do you -- what does Garlock believe 15 is more important, warning workers or advertising its 16 brand name? 17 A. Well, again, as I've stated many times, 18 it's an encapsulated product for which Garlock has 19 always believed it poses no risk. The warning was 20 put on there voluntarily by Garlock, even though its 21 products were exempt. 22 Q. Finally, sir, I just want to ask you a 23 little bit about crocidolite use in gaskets. 24 Crocidolite was used in Garlock's gaskets from at 25 least the 1950s up until 1983, correct? Nancy L. Nunnelley, RMR (502) 594-1728 (502) 267-4156 Fax 1 A. Yes. There was -- there was some gasketing 2 that contained crocidolite, that's correct. 3 Q. And that the application for the 4 crocidolite, blue asbestos gaskets was acid lines, 5 among other lines, correct? 6 A. Hot or cold mineral acid. Chrysotile could 7 be used in dilute acid service as well. But the most 8 severe would require either Teflon or compressed 9 asbestos with crocidolite. 10 Q. Crocidolite asbestos fiber? 11 A. Yes, sir. 12 Q. And isn't it true that Teflon was available 13 for use as a substitute for use in acid lines as 14 early as 1968? 15 A. Yes. But only good to temperatures of 16 about 500 degrees. 17 Q. And Garlock still waited until 1938 or 15 18 years after that product was available to stop using 19 crocidolite in its gaskets, correct? 20 A. Customers still wanted to use crocidolite 21 in their most severe high-temperature acid 22 applications. 23 Q. And is it also true, sir, that Teflon was 24 twice as expensive as crocidolite fiber or 25 crocidolite gaskets? Nancy L. Nunnelley, RMR (502) 594-1728 (502) 267-4156 Fax 21 (Pages 81 to 84) James E. Heffron - 11-12-08 Page 81 James E. Heffron - 11-12-08 Page 82 1 A. I don't know what the ratio was, but it's 2 certainly more expensive. 3 Q. And finally, sir, I want to ask you if you 4 can identify what we'll have marked as Plaintiff's 5 Exhibit No... 6 THE COURT: Seven-four. 7 MR. SHELTON: Seventy-three wasn't it, or 8 I screwed up again then, Your Honor. 9 THE COURT: No. You're right. I got 70, 10 71. I skipped to 73. 11 Q. You mentioned on direct examination about 12 the availability of asbestos-free gaskets, I believe 13 you said by the mid 1960s? 14 A. Well, Garlock has always made some 15 gasketing materials that are nonasbestos. If we're 16 talking about gasketing that uses the same 17 manufacturing process, the first nonasbestos 18 substitute was available in 1980. 19 Q. Okay. I'm sorry. I thought you'd 20 testified that -- that there was nonasbestos gaskets 21 available by the mid '60s to early '70s? 22 A. Well, there was -- there was nonasbestos 23 materials like rubber and fabric reinforced rubber 24 available as early as 1905. But the manufacturing 25 process used to produce compressed gasketing, either Nancy L. Nunnelley, RMR (502) 594-1728 (502) 267-4156 Fax 1 asbestos or nonasbestos, no nonasbestos material was 2 available using that process until 1980. 3 Q. All right. In any event, can you identify 4 Plaintiffs Exhibit No. 73? 5 A. Well, it certainly looks like a Garlock 6 gasketing catalogue of some sort or, well, maybe not 7 asbestos gasketing. It says asbestos-free sealing 8 products, and it's dated -- I don't know when it's 9 dated. 10 Q. Well, that was going to be my question. Do 11 you know when that was printed? 12 A. I don't. 13 Q. Do you know what decade? 14 A. I don't. 15 Q. What is your best guess or your best -- 16 what is your -- your most educated guess? 17 A. It references Blue-Gard. Blue-Gard wasn't 18 introduced until 1980. So it would be sometime after 19 1980. 20 MR. SHELTON: All right. And I would move 21 that into evidence, Your Honor, Plaintiff's Exhibit 22 No. 73. 23 THE COURT: Any objections? Could I see 24 that one, please? 25 MR. SHELTON: Oh, yeah, I'm sorry. Your Nancy L. Nunnelley, RMR (502) 594-1728 (502) 267-4156 Fax James E. Heffron - 11-12-08 Page 83 James E. Heffron - 11-12-08 Page 84 1 Honor, let me confer with counsel here. 2 THE COURT: Okay. Plaintiffs Exhibit 73 3 will be admitted without objection. 4 Q. Sir, let me ask you something. You -- I 5 believe you testified on direct examination there's 6 no way to tell whether a gasket has asbestos in it or 7 not just by looking at it, correct? 8 A. I would say that Garlock would want to 9 examine the gasket rather than rely on a visual exam. 10 There are -- there might be some people who claim 11 that they can look and tell the difference. I will 12 tell that you the external appearance is the same. 13 Q. All right. So if we've seen a gasket shown 14 to the jury by defense counsel, Mr. Gordinier, have 15 you ever seen that gasket that Mr. Gordinier carries 16 to trial? 17 A. I don't know. 18 Q. But if you -- how long have you worked for 19 Garlock? 20 A. Thirty-five years. 21 Q. And you can't tell a gasket by looking at 22 it whether it has asbestos in it or not, that's 23 correct? 24 A. No. I would expect most people would say 25 they can't tell. Nancy L. Nunnelley, RMR (502) 594-1728 (502) 267-4156 Fax 1 Q. And you can't? 2 A. Probably not. 3 MR. SHELTON: All right. No further 4 questions, Your Honor. 5 THE COURT: Let's see. Actually do you 6 all have questions, Mr. Jones, Ms. Schupbach? 7 MR. JONES: No. 8 THE COURT: No. Okay. Then 9 Mr. Gordinier. 10 MR. GORDINIER: Can we mark this as 11 Garlock's exhibit next for identification only? 12 THE COURT: Yes. It's going to be 16. 13 MR. GORDINIER: And, let's see, we've got 14 Defendants' -15 THE COURT: You've got your pen. 16 MR. GORDINIER: I've got my pen. Okay. 17 And the number was? 18 THE COURT: Sixteen. 19 MR. GORDINIER: Sixteen. Okay. 20 FURTHER EXAMINATION BY MR. JOHN K. GORDINIER 21 MR. GORDINIER: I will hand you what has 22 been marked Garlock's Exhibit No. 16 for 23 identification, sir. 24 MR. SATTERLEY: What number was that, 25 Mr. Gordinier? Nancy L. Nunnelley, RMR (502) 594-1728 (502) 267-4156 Fax 22 (Pages 85 to 88) James E. Heffron - 11-12-08 Page 85 James E. Heffron - 11-12-08 Page 86 1 MR. GORDINIER: Number 16. 2 MR. SATTERLEY: Sixteen. 3 Q. And ask you if you recognize that? It's on 4 the back. 5 A. Well, it's Garlock style 7021. It's a 6 compressed asbestos sheet in 1/32nd thickness. 7 Q. Okay. Is there a warning on there? 8 A. Yes. 9 Q. Where's the warning located? 10 A. Well, in this particular case the warning 11 is on the plastic outside wrap. 12 Q. Is that the way those -- that gasket is 13 delivered to the customer, wrapped in cellophane? 14 A. No. 15 Q. Oh, okay. How is it delivered to the 16 customer? 17 A. It's usually delivered to the customer -- 18 well, this is not a gasket. This is a piece of a 19 gasket. 20 Q. Okay. 21 A. The gasket would be delivered in whatever 22 manner the customer wanted it. It could be a single 23 gasket. It could be dozens of gaskets. They would 24 be -- again, it really depends a lot on the size and 25 so forth. Nancy L. Nunnelley, RMR (502) 594-1728 (502) 267-4156 Fax 1 Q. Okay. Would the warning be attached to the 2 box or the -- or whatever it was delivered in? 3 A. No, I don't believe there would be a 4 warning on the box. That would apply to braided 5 packing. But gasketing, the warning was affixed or 6 branded on the sheet itself. 7 Q. Okay. Do you remember when the textile 8 operation part of -- division of Garlock placed its 9 first warnings on asbestos cloth pile pads? 10 A. I think it was probably about 1972. 11 Q. 1972? 12 A. Yes, sir. 13 Q. And the -- Garlock placed its warnings on 14 gaskets in 1977, is that right? 15 A. That's correct. 16 Q. And you were in sales at the time? 17 A. I was. 18 Q. You were familiar with your competitors in 19 the gasketing business? 20 A. Yes. 21 Q. Was there any other maker of gaskets in the 22 United States that placed a warning on its products 23 as early as 1977? 24 MR. SHELTON: Objection, Your Honor. May 25 we approach? Nancy L. Nunnelley, RMR (502) 594-1728 (502) 267-4156 Fax James E. Heffron - 11-12-08 James E. Heffron - 11-12-08 Page 87 Page 88 1 Q. If you know, sir. 2 THE COURT: Approach, please. 3 (BENCH DISCUSSION) 4 MR. SHELTON: It's irrelevant, Your Honor. 5 We're trying Garlock, not other manufacturers. 6 THE COURT: Well, I get the reference. 7 I'll allow it. 8 MR. GORDINIER: Thank you. 9 (OPEN COURT) 10 Q. Sir? 11 A. No, no other manufacturer placed a warning 12 on its products. 13 Q. How many companies, if you can give us an 14 estimate off your -- off the top of your head, made 15 asbestos-containing gaskets for use in American 16 industry in 1977? 17 MR. SHELTON: Same objection, Your Honor. 18 THE COURT: Noted. Overruled. 19 A. I'm not specifically. I can tell you that 20 HHP46, which is a very popular specification for 21 asbestos gasketing, I think lists 14 different 22 manufacturers on it. 23 Q. Okay. And these are competitors of yours? 24 A. Yes, sir. 25 Q. You are familiar with each of the Nancy L. Nunnelley, RMR (502) 594-1728 (502) 267-4156 Fax 1 companies? 2 A. I think so, yes. 3 Q. Okay. And Garlock voluntarily put a 4 warning on its gaskets in 1977? 5 A. That's correct. 6 Q. And no other company in the United States 7 making gaskets put a warning on their product, did 8 they? 9 A. No. 10 Q. Carrying us forward to 1999, do you know if 11 any other company that was making asbestos-containing 12 gaskets in the United States had put a warning on its 13 product by that time? 14 A. I believe so, but I don't know 15 specifically. 16 Q. Do you know that there weren't companies -17 there were companies that hadn't? 18 A. Yes. 19 Q. Okay. Would you tell us the name of some 20 of those companies if you remember? 21 A. I'm not sure I can tell you accurately. 22 Q. Okay. But you know there are gaskets being 23 produced, manufactured and sold without any kind of 24 warning in 1999? 25 A. That's my belief, yes, sir. Nancy L. Nunnelley, RMR (502) 594-1728 (502) 267-4156 Fax 23 (Pages 89 to 90) James E. Heffron - 11-12-08 Page 89 James E. Heffron - 11-12-08 Page 90 1 Q. Okay. Gasket -- but Oarlock was still 1 Q. Mr. Heffron, do you believe that Garlock 2 putting a warning on its product? 2 would be justified in making and distributing and 3 A. Yes. That's correct. 3 selling a dangerous product just because other 4 THE COURT: I had one clarification. I 4 manufacturers were doing it? 5 think you originally said '79. And then you said 5 A. Well, that's a hypothetical question. I 6 '99. Are we talking about '79 or '99? That's the 6 don't believe Garlock did manufacture, distribute and 7 way I heard it. 7 sell a dangerous product. So -- 8 A. The question as I understood it was 1999. 8 Q. I didn't ask you if they did, sir. My 9 THECOURT: 1999. 9 question again was, as a corporate representative of 10 MR. GORDINIER: 1999. 10 Garlock do you believe Garlock would be justified in 11 A. Yes. 11 making, distributing and selling dangerous products 12 THE COURT: Okay. Thank you. I may 12 just because other companies did? 13 have mis -- I may have misheard. 13 A. Of course, not. 14 Q. I believe that's all I have, Mr. Heffron. 14 Q. Do you believe, sir, as a corporate 15 Thank you so much. 15 representative of Garlock that two rights -- or two 16 A. You're welcome. 16 wrongs make a right? 17 Q. And I'll let you go. 17 MR. GORDINIER: I'll object. Can we have 18 THE COURT: Thank you. Mr. Shelton? 18 a little clarification on that, judge? 19 FURTHER EXAMINATION BY MR. J. ROBERT SHELTON 19 MR. SHELTON: I'll withdraw the question, 20 MR. SHELTON: Yes. You're here as the 20 Your Honor. No further questions. 21 representative of Garlock sealing manufacturer, 21 THE COURT: Okay. Mr. Heffron, thank you, 22 Garlock -- Garlock today, correct? 22 sir. You may step down and catch your plane. Thank 23 MR. HEFFRON: That's correct. 23 you for your time today. You're relieved from 24 Q. Its corporate representative? 24 further obligation in this matter. 25 A. I am. 25 Nancy L. Nunnelley, RMR Nancy L. Nunnelley, RMR (502) 594-1728 (502) 267-4156 Fax ( 502) 594-1728 (502) 267-4156 Fax