Document O32y8G7Kj3oweNJYxkE2rm0d1

MO. 86-2385-D JAMES DECKER AND ) IN THE DISTRICT COURT NETA DECKER ) Plaintiffs ) } Versus ) ) OF DALLAS COUNTY, TEXAS ARMSTRONG WORLD INDUSTRIES, ) ) INC., ET AL, ) > Defendants ) 95TH JUDICIAL DISTRICT RESPONSES OF DEFENDANT PROKO INDUSTRIES. INC. TO PLAINTIFFS * FIRST _SET OF INTERROGATORIES TO: LISA A. BLUE, ESQUIRE, ATTORNEY FOR PLAINTIFFS The defendant Proko Industries, Inc. hereby responds to plaintiffs' first set of interrogatories dated March 26, 1986. This defendant reserves the right to amend or supplement its responses if it finds that inadvertent omissions or errors have been made or if additional or more accurate information becomes available that is required to be provided. 1. Please state the name, address and job title of each person who has supplied information used in answering these interrogatories. 1. response: (a) Robert F. Wright, President Proko Industries, Inc. 18601 LBJ Freeway, Suite 400 Mesquite, Texas 75150 (b) Myrle Self Route 2, Box 380 Midlouthian, Texas 76065 (c) Ron Knotts 1801 Carrier Place Dallas, Texas 75050 (d) Benny Dry _ Proko Industries, Inc. Post Office Box 498 Kaufman, Texas 75142 (e) Phil Cutts Proko Industries, Inc. 18601 LBJ Freeway, Suite 400 Mesquite, Texas 75150 (f) Robert Dubose Proko Industries, Inc. Post Office Box 1355 3175 Waycross, Georgia 31501 (g) Wally Conner Proko Industries, Inc. Post Office Box 264 Cambridge City, Indiana 47327 (h) Harold George Proko Industries, Inc. Post Office Box 384 Madison, South Dakota 57042 2. Please state whether or not you are a corporation; if so, please state your correct corporate name, each state of incorporation, the date of your incorporation and the address of your principal place of business. 2. response; This defendant was incorporated in the state of Texas on September 29, 1954. This defendant's corporate headquarters are located at 18601 LBJ Freeway, Suite 400, Mesquite, Texas 75150. 3. Please describe the corporate history of the Defendant, (a) Please state whether or not defendant has ever held a certificate of authority to do business or is otherwise licensed to do business in the state of Texas and/or has ever regularly conducted business in Texas. 2- - (b) If so, please state the date or dates on which such certificate of authority and/or license was obtained and/or during which such business was conducted in Texas. 3. RESPONSE: From September 29, 1954 until June, 1974 this defendant was known as The Proko Company. In June, 1974 this defendant's name was changed to Proko Industries, Inc. On June 20, 1975 this defendant was purchased by R.P.M., Inc. of Medina, Ohio; and its name was changed to Republic PM of Texas. On August 25, 1975, this defendant's name was changed back to Proko Industries, Inc. (a) and <b) This defendant was originally incorporated in the state of Texas on September 29, 1954 and has regularly conducted business in Texas since that time. 4. Please state whether or not 'defendant has purchased, assumed, or in any other manner acquired any of the assets and/or liabilities of any corporation or entity engaged in the mining of asbestos or the manufacturing, marketing, or distribu tion of asbestos-containing products. If so, please identify the company whose assets and/or liabilities were acquired, the date of each such acquisition, and the manner of each such acquisition. 4. RESPONSE; In 1968 this defendant purchased Drywall Manufacturing and Supply, Inc. of Watertown, Minnesota. In approximately 1970 this defendant purchased Lee Forbes and Company, Inc., of Hammond, Louisiana. 3- - 5. Please identify by trade and/or brand name every asbestos-containing product manufactured by defendant from 1960 through the present. Please state also: (a) The name of the company that manufactured the product; (b) The dates that defendant manufactured and/or sold the product; (please be sure to state when the product was withdrawn from the market) (c) A description of the chemical composition of the product, including the type of asbestos (i.e., amosite, crysotile, [sic] or crocidolite) contained in the product and the percentage of asbestos contained in the product; (d) A description of the physical appearance of the product; (e) A description of the packaging of the product when sold by defendant# including the dates each type of package was used and a description of any printed material or trademarks that appeared thereon; (f) A description of the intended use of the product; (g) Whether or not defendant made any changes in the product/ and if so# the changes made and the dates of the changes; (h) A description of warnings, if any, that appeared on the product or on the packaging of the product in the years 1960 through the present. 5. response: This defendant manufactured, at various times during its existence, two virtually identical product 4- - lines of asbestos-containing products. Those product lines were: (1) the Triko line which was sold under the registered trademark "Triko Products" and (2) a secondary line which was sold under several different names. The difference between the batching formulas for the two product lines was minimal and was unrelated to asbestos fiber content. (i) Triko Aristex and TriKo Ariatex ..Eflly (a) Proko Industries, Inc. (b) Triko Aristex - 1960-77. Triko Aristex Poly - 1973-77. (This response refers to the dates these products were sold containing asbestos fiber.) (c) The following basic raw materials were common to most of this defendant's asbestos-containing products: (1) calcium carbonate; (2) methocel; (3) clay; (4) mica; (5) talc; (6) a preservative such as T.J.P.; (7) chrysotile asbestos fiber and (a) a binder such as casein, poly vinyl alcohol, poly vinyl acetate or starch. Additionally, all of this defendant's aggregated products contained either zonolite, perlite, pumice, or a chopped poly styrofoam. This defendant does not believe these products ever contained more than 5% chrysotile asbestos fiber (150 lbs. in approximately a 3,000-pound batch) and generally contained less. (d) This product was off-white in color and was an aggregated ceiling texture in fine, medium and coarse grades. 5- - (e) from 1960-77 Triko Aristex was packaged in purple, blue or orange 25, 35 and 40-pound bags with brown lettering. From 1960-77 Triko Aristex Poly was packaged in white 35 and 40-pound bags with orange lettering. Triko Aristex with slight or no formulation change was also sold under the following names during the following years and was packaged as indicated: 1. Mr. Mud Decorative Acoustic was sold from 1968 until 1977 and was packaged in blue and orange 40-pound paper bags with white and orange lettering. 2. Forbest Acus-T-Coat was sold from 1971 until 1977 and was packaged in white 25, 35 and 40-pound paper bags with blue lettering. 3. Universal Unitex was sold from 1963 until 1977 and was packaged in white 25-pound paper bags with black lettering. 4. Napko Simulated Acoustic was sold from 1974 until 1977 under a private labelling agreement with Napko Paint Company and was packaged in white Napko Paint Company 35 and 40-pound bags with purple lettering. 5. All-Pro Simulated Acoustic was sold from 1975 until 1977 under a private labelling agreement with All-Pro Corporation and was packaged in yellow, red and white All-Pro Corporation 35 and 40-pound bags with brown lettering. 6. Glidden Spray Texture was sold from 1973 until 1977 under a private labelling agreement with 6- - Glidden-Durkee Paint Company and was packaged in red Glidden-Durkee Paint Company 35 and 40-pound bags with white lettering. 7. Jones-Blair Simulated Acoustic was sold from 1966 until 1968 and from 1974 until 1977 under a private labelling agreement with Jones-Blair Paint Company. This defendant has been unable to determine the size or description of the package. 8. Franklin Simulated Acoustic was sold from 1975 until 1977 under a private labelling agreement with Franklin Paint Company. This defendant has been unable to determine the size or description of the package. 9. In-Tex Simulated Acoustic. This defendant believes that Triko Aristex may have been sold under this name for a brief period in the mid-1970*s under a private labelling agreement with a company called Inland Sales. However, this defendant has been unable to verify this or determine the size or description of the package. 10. Aristex Ultima Texture was sold in 1975 only and was packaged in white 35 and 40-pound bags with red and blue lettering. 11. Super Aristex was sold from approximately 1973 until 1977. This defendant has been unable to determine the size or description of the package. Triko Aristex Poly with slight or no formulation change was also sold under the following names during the following years and was packaged as indicated: 7- - 1. Mr. Mud Poly was sold from 1973 until 1977 and was packaged in 35 and 40-pound bags with orange lettering. 2. Napko Simulated Acoustic Poly was sold from 1974 until 1977 under a private labelling agreement with Napko Paint Company and was packaged in white Napko Paint Company 25-pound bags with purple lettering. 3. All-Pro Simulated Acoustic Poly was sold from 1975 until 1977 under a private labelling agreement with All-Pro Corporation and was packaged in yellow, red and white All-Pro Corporation 35-pound bags with brown lettering. 4. Poly-Tex was sold in 1974 and 1975 only. This defendant has been unable to determine the size or description of the package. 5. Aristex Ultima Poly was sold in 1975 only and was packaged in white 35 and 40-pound bags with red and blue lettering. The following printed information was, at various times, printed on the packages of Proko's products. Proko has been unable to determine the applicable dates of each. 1. DO NOT INTERMIX THIS PRODUCT IS CHEMICALLY BALANCED, MIXING IT WITH OTHER PRODUCTS OR ADDITIVES COULD CAUSE LUMPING, OR LOSS OP ADHESION. WE WILL NOT ASSUME RESPONSIBILITY FOR RESULTS. GUARANTEE This product is pre-tested for workability, adhesion, and shrinkage before shipment is made, to insure uni formity of product. This product is guaranteed to 8- - satisfactorily perform the service for which it is sold, when mixed according to directions on the pack age. No claim for repairs or adjustments will be honored unless reported and inspection made by a representative of the Company before proceeding with replacement. 2. WARRANTY All products manufactured by the Proko Company have been made of the finest raw materials obtainable and carefully selected for the individual product in which they will be used. Good results will be obtained with all Triko products when used in accordance with printed directions, but due to varying types and con ditions of surfaces and weather, as well as skill of applicator applying said products, we will accept NO RESPONSIBILITY BEYOND THE PURCHASE PRICE OF THE MATERIAL. No claim for repairs or adjustments will be honored unless reported and inspection made by a representative of the Company before proceeding with replacement. THE PROKO COMPANY, INC. DO NOT INTERMIX These products are chemically balanced, mixing with other products or additives could cause lumping, or loss of adhesion resulting in an unsatisfactory job. We will not assume responsibility for results. 3. LIMITED WARRANTY This product is warranted against defects in material and workmanship for one year from the date of original consumer purchase. If this product is found by Proko Industries to be defective, Proko will replace the materials that are defective. No warranty claim will be honored unless Proko Industries is notified within two weeks of the occurrence of the problem and a representative of Proko Industries is given the oppor tunity to inspect the problem before any repairs are undertaken. 9- - This warranty is void where failure of the product is the result of misapplication. Neglect/ shipping dam age or alteration of product also voids the warranty. This warranty is in lieu of all other express warran ties. Furthermore/ the implied warranties of fitness for particular purpose and merchantability are limited to the direction of the express warranty, that is. In no event will Proko Industries be liable for inci dental or consequential damages arising out of or connected with the product. Also, see response (5)(i)(h) below for a description of the warnings that appeared on the packaging for the product. Additionally, each package had the name of the product printed thereon and, in the case of Triko products, had the registered trademark "Triko Products" printed thereon. (f) These products were simulated acoustical decorative-texture finishes for use on interior wallboard, plaster or concrete ceilings. The only difference between Triko Aristex and Triko Aristex Poly was that Triko Aristex Poly contained a chopped styrofoam aggregate. (g) This defendant is unsure of the meaning of the term "changes" in this interrogatory. If plaintiffs are referring to changes in batching requirements, these were constantly changed due to the constantly changing nature of the raw materials used in the product formulas. The various raw materials changed with regard to their color, water absorption capability and purity on a continual basis. This defendant was required continually to compensate for these changes by either adding additional raw materials or changing the proportions of the existing raw materials. -10- (h) This defendant believes that some time prior to the OSHA required asbestos warning label, possibly as early as the raid-1960's, many of Proko's packages for asbestos-containing powder products (and non-asbestos containing powder products) contained the following precaution: THE MIXING OF ANY POWDER MATERIAL PRODUCES SOME DUST, THEREFORE WE RECOMMEND THAT GOOD VENTILATION BE PROVIDED DURING THE MIXING OPERATION. FOR ADDED PROTECTION THE USE OF A BUREAU OF MINES APPROVED DUST MASK IS SUGGESTED. This defendant has been unable to determine the actual date on which this label first appeared on its packaging. This defendant believes the OSHA required asbestos warning label was placed on all of its packages for asbestos-containing products at various times between 1970 and 1972. The following OSHA required asbestos warning label was in place on all packages for asbestos-containing products by no later than 1972: CAUTION CONTAINS ASBESTOS FIBERS AVOID CREATING DUST BREATHING ASBESTOS DUST MAY CAUSE SERIOUS BODILY HARM The wording of the OSHA required asbestos warning label was never altered, amended or changed in any manner. Beginning in 1972, many of Proko's packages for asbestos- containing products also contained the following precaution: GENERAL .PRECAUTIONS!. A DUSTY ATMOSPHERE, WHETHER OR NOT IT CONTAINS ASBESTOS, IS NEVER HEALTHY. WHEN DRY SANDING OR OTHERWISE CREATING DUST ON THE JOB, BE SURE TO PROVIDE ADEQUATE VENTILATION, AND AS REQUIRED, A BUREAU OF MINES APPROVED RESPIRATOR. WET SPONGING THE FINISHED JOINT INSTEAD OF SANDING WILL ELIMINATE THE DUST PROBLEM. -11- (ii) Triko Joint Compound (referred to until mid-1960*s as Triko Joint Cement). (a) See response 5(i)(a) above. <b) 1960-77. (This response refers to the last date this product was sold containing asbestos fiber.) (c) See first paragraph to response 5(i)(c) above. This defendant does not believe that this product ever contained more than 5% chrysotile asbestos fiber (150 pounds in approximately a 3,000-pound batch) and generally contained less. (d) This product was off-white in color and was a powder-form joint treatment material. (e) From 1960-77 this product was packaged in white 25-pound bags with brown lettering. Triko Joint Compound containing asbestos fiber with slight or no formulation change was also sold under the following names: 1. Forbest Joint Compound was sold from 1971 until 1977 and was packaged in white 25-pound bags with blue lettering. 2. Napko Joint Compound was sold from 1974 until 1977 under a private labelling agreement with Napko Paint Company and was packaged in white Napko Paint Company 25-pound bags with purple lettering. -12- For information concerning the printed material that appeared on the packaging for this product/ see response 5(i)(e) above. (f) This product was a joint treatment material for laying tape and for treating joints# nail spots and metal reinforcement in drywall construction. It required a topping coat and painting to produce a finished surface. (g) See response 5(i)(g) above. (h) See response 5(i)(h) above. (iii) Triko Too-Kote (a) See response 5{i)(a) above. (b) 1960-77. (This response refers to the last date this product was sold containing asbestos fiber.) (c) See first paragraph to response (5)(i)(c) above. This defendant does not believe that this product ever contained more than 6.9% chrysotile asbestos fiber (100 pounds in approximately a 1,444-pound batch) and generally contained less. (d) This product was off-white in color and was a powder-form joint treatment material. (e) From 1960-77 this product was packaged in white 25-pound paper bags with orange lettering. Triko Top-Xote containing asbestos fiber with a slight formulation change (in the binder) was sold under the name Super -13- Top-Kote from-approximately 1973 until 1977. This defendant has been unable to determine the size or description of the package. For information concerning the printed material that appeared on the packaging for this product, see response 5{i)(e) above. (f) This product was a joint treatment material for use as a topping coat over Triko Joint Compound. It required painting to produce a finished surface. (g) See response 5(i)(g) above. (h) See response 5(i)(h) above. (iv) Triko 3_ in_l. Triko Fill-'n-Finish and Triko Code 10Q. (a) See response 5(i)(a) above. (b) Triko 3 in 1 - 1960-77. Triko Fill-'n-Finish - 1961-62. Triko Code 100 - 1968-76. (This response refers to the last date these products were sold containing asbestos fiber.) Triko Fill-*n-Finish and Triko Code 100 were discontinued for reasons which had nothing to do with the removal of asbestos fiber. (c) See first paragraph to response (5)(i)(c) above. This defendant does not believe these products ever contained more than 6.5% chrysotile asbestos fiber <100 pounds in approximately a 1,546-pound batch) and generally contained less. -14- (d) These products were off-white in color and were powder-form joint treatment materials. (e) From 1960-77 Triko 3 in 1 was packaged in cream and brown 5-pound boxes and tan 25-pound paper bags with brown lettering and in white 25-pound paper bags with blue lettering. This defendant has been unable to determine the size or description of the packaging for Triko Fill-'n-Finish. From 1968-76 Triko Code 100 was packaged in white 25-pound paper bags with red lettering. Triko 3 in 1 containing asbestos fiber with slight or no formulation change was also sold under the following names: 1. Mr. Mud AFV was sold from 1968 until 1977 and was packaged in green and white 25-pound bags with orange lettering. 2. Napko All Purpose was sold from 1974 until 1977 under a private labelling agreement with Napko Paint Company and was packaged in white Napko Paint Company 25-pound bags with purple lettering. 3. All-Pro All Purpose was sold from 1975 until 1977 under a private labelling agreement with All-Pro Corporation and was packaged in yellow, red and white All-Pro Corporation S-pound cartons and 25-pound bags with black lettering. 4. Forbest All Purpose or Forbest "A" 3 in 1 was sold from 1971 until 1977 and was packaged in white 25-pound bags with blue lettering. -15- _5. Universal All Purpose was sold rom 1962 until 1977 and was packaged in kraft paper 25-pound bags with blue lettering. 6. Jones-Blair All Purpose was sold from 1966 until 1968 and from 1974 until 1977 under a private labelling agreement with Jones-Blair Paint Company* This defendant has been unable to determine the size or description of the package. 7. In-Tex All Purpose. This defendant believes that Triko 3 in 1 may have been sold under this name for a brief period in the mid-1970's under a private labelling agreement with a company called Inland Sales. However, this has not been verified and this defendant has been unable to determine the size or description of the package. 8. Super 3 in 1 was sold from approximately 1973 until 1977. This defendant has been unable to determine the size or description of the package. For information concerning the printed material that appeared on the packaging for these products, see response 5(i)(e) above. (f) Triko 3 in 1 was a casein-bound all-purpose joint treatment material for the treating of joints and nail spots and for texturing in drywall construction. Triko Fill-'n-Finish and Triko Code 100 were vinyl-bound all-purpose joint treatment materials for the treating of joints and nail spots and for texturing in drywall construction. -16- All .three required painting to produce a finished surface. (g) See response 5(i)(g) above. (h) See response 5(i)(h) above. <v) Trito-3 in 1 Redi-Mi* (a) See response 5(i)(a) above. (b) 1962-77. (This response refers to the last date this product was sold containing asbestos fiber.) (c) See first paragraph to response (5)(i)(c) above. This defendant does not believe that this product ever contained more than 2.5% chrysotile asbestos fiber (150-pounds in approximately a 6,000-pound wet batch) and generally contained less. (d) This product was off-white in color and was a heavy paste joint treatment material. (e) From 1962-77 this product was packaged in white plastic or tinplate 1-gallon pails, 4 and 62-pound pails and 52-pound cartons with yellow labels and brown lettering and in 1-gallon pails, 52 and 62-pound pails and 52 and 55-pound cartons with white labels and red and blue lettering. This product containing asbestos fiber with slight or no formulation change was also sold under the following names: 1. Mr. Mud Redi-Mix was sold from 1968 until 1977 and was packaged in 4 and 62-pound pails and 52-pound cartons with white labels and orange lettering. -17- -2. Universal Redi-Mix was sold from 1962 until 1977. This defendant has been unable to determine the size or description of the package* 3. Forbest Redi-Mix was sold from 1971 until 1977 and was packaged in 52 and 62-pound pails and in 52-pound cartons with white labels and blue lettering. 4. Napko Redi-Mix was sold- from 1974 until 1977 under a private labelling agreement with Napko Paint Company and was packaged in Napko Paint Company 52 and 62-pound pails and 52-pound cartons with white labels and purple lettering. 5. All-Pro Redi-Mix was sold from 1975 until 1977 under a private labelling agreement with All-Pro Corporation and was packaged in 1 and 5-gallon and 52-pound pails and in 50-pound cartons with yellow, red and white labels and black lettering. 6. Jones-Blair Redi-Mix was sold from 1966 until 1968 and from 1974 until 1977 under a private labelling agreement with Jones-Blair Paint Company. This defendant has been unable to determine the size or description of the package. 7. Franklin Redi-Mix was sold from 1975 until 1977 under a private labelling agreement with Franklin Paint Company. This defendant has been unable to determine the size or description of the package. 8. In-Tex Redi-Mix. This defendant believes that Triko 3 in 1 Redi-Mix may have been sold under this name for a brief period in the mid-1970's under a private labelling -18- agreement with- a company called Inland Sales. However, this has not been verified and this defendant has been unable to determine the size or description of the package. For information concerning the printed material that appeared on the packaging for this product, see response 5(i)(e) above. (f) This product was a redi-mixed all-purpose joint treatment material for the treating of joints and nail spots and for texturing in drywall construction. This product required painting to produce a finished surface. (g) See response 5(i)(g) above. (h) See response 5(i)(h) above. (vi) Triko Redi-Mix Topping (a) See response 5(i)(a) above. (b) 1963-77. (This response refers to the last date this product was sold containing asbestos fiber.) (c) See first paragraph to response (5)(i)(c) above. This defendant does not believe that this product ever contained more than 2.5% chrysotile asbestos fiber (150 pounds in approximately a 6,000-pound wet batch) and generally contained less. (d) This product was off-white in color and was a heavy paste joint treatment material. -19- (e) -From 1962-77 this product was packaged in 62-pound tinplate pails with green lettering, 5-gallon white plastic pails with white labels and green lettering and 52-pound boxes with brown lettering. This product containing asbestos fiber with slight or no formulation change was also sold under the name Mr. Mud Redi-Mix Topping from 1968 until 1977. This defendant has been unable to determine the size or description of the package. For information concerning the printed material that appeared on the packaging for this product, see response 5(i)(e) above. (f) This product was a ready-mixed joint treatment material for use as a topping coat over Triko Joint Compound. It required painting to produce a finished surface. (g) See response 5(i)(g) above. (h) See response 5(i)(h) above. (vii) Triko-Plex and Triko-Plex Interior (a) See response 5(i)(a) above. (b) Triko-Plex - 1968-79. Triko-Plex Interior - 1976-79. (This response refers to the last date these products were sold containing asbestos fiber.) (c) See first paragraph to response (5)<i)(c) above. This defendant does not believe that these products ever contained more than 2.1\ chrysotile asbestos fiber (50 -20- pounds in approximately a 2,360-pound wet batch) and generally contained less. (d) These products were off-white in color and were thick-bodied smooth or textured paints manufactured in smooth, fine, medium and coarse grades (with or without aggregate) which were harder and more durable than ordinary textures. They could be tinted with 8 standard universal colorants. (e) From 1968-79 these products were packaged in white and black 1 and 5-gallon pails and 55-gallon drums with white labels and turquoise lettering. For information concerning the printed material that appeared on the packaging for these products, see response 5(i)(e) above. (f) These products were encapsulated flexible vinyl latex decorative-texture paints for use on structural concrete, hadite block, concrete block, plywood, properly primed metal, asbestos siding and asphalt shingles. The only difference between Triko-Plex and Triko-Plex Interior was that Triko-Plex Interior was not weather resistant and was intended for interior use only. (g) See response 5(i)(g) above. (h) See response 5(i)(h) above. (viii) Triko Blox-Fill (Regular and Redi-Mix) (a) See response 5(i)(a) above. (b) Triko Blox-Fill (Regular) - 1960-77. Triko Blox-Fill (Redi-Mix) - 1967-78. -21- (This response refers to the last date these products were sold containing asbestos fiber.) (c) See first paragraph to response (5)(i)(c) above. This defendant does not believe that these products ever contained more than 2.9% chrysotile asbestos fiber (80 pounds in approximately a 2,750-pound batch) and generally contained less. In addition to the raw materials listed in response 5(i)(c) above, these products also contained cement. (d) These products were off-white in color. Triko Blox-Fill (Regular) was a powdered material manufactured in smooth and aggregate grades. Triko Blox-Fill (Redi-Mix) was a paste material manufactured in smooth grade only. (e) From 1960-77 Triko Blox-Fill (Regular) was packaged in tan 25-pound bags with red lettering. From 1967-78 Triko Blox-Fill (Redi-Mix) was packaged in 1 and 5 gallon pails with white labels and brown lettering. Triko Blox-Fill (Regular) containing asbestos fiber with slight or no formulation change was also sold under the following names: 1. Mr. Mud Masonry Block Fill was sold from 1968 until 1977 and was packaged in brown and white 25-pound bags. 2. Napko Bloc Fill was sold from 1974 until 1977 under a private labelling agreement with Napko Paint Company and was packaged in white Napko Paint Company 25-pound bags with purple lettering. -22- 3. Jones-Blair Bloc Seal was sold from 1966 until 1968 and from 1974 until 1977 under a private labelling agreement with Jones-Blair Paint Company. This defendant has been unable to determine the size or description of the package. Triko Blox-Fill (Redi-Mix) containing asbestos fiber with slight or no formulation change was also sold under the name Napko Bloc-Fill (Redi-Mix) from 1974 until 1977 under a private labelling agreement with Napko Paint Company and was packaged in Napko Paint Company 1 and 5 gallon pails with white labels and purple lettering. For information concerning the printed material that appeared on the packaging for these products, see response 5(i)(e) above. (f) Triko Blox-Fill (Regular) was a vinyl-bound cement-based powder material for application to porous concrete surfaces. Triko Blox-Fill (Redi-Mix) was ready-mixed material for application to a vinyl latex porous concrete surfaces. It was intended for interior use only. Both products required painting to produce a finished surface. (g) See response 5(i)(g) above. (h) See response 5(i)(h) above. (ix) Triko-Plex Stucco Base Vinyl (a) See response 5(i)(a) above. -23- (b) -1979-81. (This response refers to. the last date this product was sold containing asbestos fiber.) (c) See first paragraph to response (5)(i)(c) above. This defendant does not believe this product ever contained more than 1.1% chrysotile asbestos fiber (20 pounds in approximately a 1750-pound wet batch). (d) This product was off-white in color and was a lightly aggregated paste. (e) From 1979-81 this product was packaged in 1, 5 and 55-gallon drums with white labels and blue lettering. For information concerning the printed material that appeared on the packaging for this product# see response 5(i)(e) above. (f) This product was an encapsulated ready-mixed weather-resistent vinyl latex-bound exterior flexible texture coating. (g) See response 5(i)(g) above. (h) See response 5(i)(h) above. (x) Triko Vin-L-Tex (a) See response 5(i)(a) above. (b) 1971-82. (This response refers to the last date this product was sold containing asbestos fiber.) (c) See first paragraph to response (5)(i)(c) above. -24- This_ defendant does not believe this product ever contained more than 4.4% chrysotile asbestos fiber <100 pounds in approximately a 2,296-pound wet batch). (d) This product was off-white in color and was a ready-mixed textured paint which was harder and more durable than ordinary textures and was available in smooth, fine, medium and coarse grades. (e) From 1971-82 this product was packaged in 1 and 5 gallon pails and in 55-gallon drums with green and brown labels and brown lettering. For information concerning the printed material that appeared on the packaging for this product, see response 5{i)(e) above. (f) This product was an encapsulated ready-mixed vinyl latex textured paint for interior use only. (g) See response 5(i)(g) above. (h) See response 5(i)(h) above. (xi) Triko Exterior Aristex (a) See response 5(i)(a) above. (b) 1964-77. (This response refers to the last date this product was sold containing asbestos fiber.) (c) See first paragraph to response (5)(i)(c) above. This defendant does not believe this product ever contained more than 5% chrysotile asbestos fiber (150 pounds in approximately a 3000-pound batch) and generally contained less. -25- In addition to the raw materials listed in response 5(i)(c) above, this product also contained cement. (d) This product was off-white in color and was an aggregated powder manufactured in medium and coarse grades. (e) From 1964-77 this product was packaged in white 25-pound bags with brown lettering. For information concerning the printed material that appeared on the packaging for this product, see response 5(i)(e) above. (f) This product was a cement-base decorative-texture finish for use on protected exterior surfaces (such as overhangs and canopies or interior concrete or masonry surfaces only. (g) See response 5(i)(g) above. (h) See response 5(i)(h) above. (xii) Triko-Plex Flexlt and Elexit Filler (a) See response 5(i)(a) above. (b) 1969-82. (This response refers to the last date these products were sold containing asbestos fiber.) (c) See first paragraph to response (5)(i)(c) above. This defendant does not believe these products ever contained more than 1.4% chrysotile asbestos fiber (80 pounds in approximately a 5,500-pound wet batch). In addition to the raw materials listed in response 5(i)(c) above, Flexit Filler contained aggregate. -26- (d) These products were tan or cream in color and were highly flexible adhesive joint treatment materials. (e) From 1969-82 these products were packaged in white 1 and 5 gallon pails with brown lettering. For information concerning the printed material that appeared on the packaging for these products, see response 5(i)(e) above. (f) These products were encapsulated ready-mixed highly-bound vinyl latex flexible joint treatment materials. (g) See response 5(i)(g) above. (h) See response 5(i)(h) above. (xiii) Triko Set-Fast (a) See response 5(i)(a) above. (b) 1967-77. (This response refers to the last date this product was sold containing asbestos fiber.) (c) See first paragraph to response (5)(i)(c) above. This defendant does not believe that this product ever contained more than 6% chrysotile asbestos fiber (150 pounds in approximately a 2,509-pound batch) and generally contained less. In addition to the raw materials listed in response 5(i)(c) above, this product also contained plaster. (d) This product was off-white in color and was a powder-form joint treatment material. (e) From 1967-77 this product was packaged in white 25-pound bags with red lettering. -27- Triko^ Set-Fast containing asbestos fiber with slight or no formulation change was also sold under the name Napko QD from 1974 until 1977 until a private labelling agreement with Napko Paint Company and was packaged in white 25-pound Napko Paint Company bags with purple lettering. For information concerning the printed material that appeared on the packaging for this product, see response 5(i)(e) above. (f) This product was a plaster based setting-type joint treatment material in powder form used for taping and filling only. (g) See response 5(i)(g) above. (h) See response 5<i)(h) above. (xiv) Triko_ Radi-Mix Texture (a) See response 5(i)(a) above. (b) 1977-82. (This response refers to the last date this product was sold containing asbestos fiber.) (c) See first paragraph to response (5)(i)(c) above. This defendant does not believe that this product ever contained more than 1.3% chrysotile asbestos fiber (80 pounds in approximately a 6,000-pound wet batch) and generally contained less. (d) This product was off-white in color and was a smooth heavy paste material. -28- (e) -From 1977-82 this product was packaged in 50-pound corrugated cartons with white labels and blue lettering. For information concerning the printed material that appeared on the packaging for this product, see response 5(i)(e) above. (f) This product was an encapsulated latex bound ready-mixed smooth-textured material which required painting to produce a finished surface. (g) See response 5(i)(g) above. (h) See response 5(i)(h) above. (xv) Triko Radex Base Coat and Triko Radex Finish Coat (a) See response 5(i)(a) above. (b) 1964-77. (This response refers to the last date these products were sold containing asbetos fiber.) (c) See first paragraph to response (5)(i)(c) above. This defendant does not believe that these products ever contained more than 5\ chrysotile asbestos fiber (150 pounds in approximately a 3,000-pound batch) and generally contained less. In addition to the raw materials listed in response 5(i)(c) above, these products also contained plaster. (d) These products were gray to off-white in color and were plaster-based aggregated fillers (sand-like plaster finish). -29- (e) -From 1964-77 Triko Radex Base Coat was packaged In white 25 and 35-pound bags with black lettering. From 1964-77 Triko Radex Finish Coat was packaged in white 25 and 35-pound bags with maroon lettering. For information concerning the printed material that appeared on the packaging for these products, seeresponse 5(i)<e) above. (f) Triko Radex Base Coat was a plaster-based filler used to coat electric radiant heat cables in ceilings which required a coat of Triko Radex FinishCoat or some other finishing product to produce a finished surface. Triko Radex Finish Coat was a simulated-acoustic decorative-texture finish for use as a finish coat over electric radiant heat cables and ceilings. (g) See response 5(i)(g) above. (h) See response 5(i)(h) above. (xvi) Triko Pro-Tex. Texture. Triko Super-Tex Texture and Triko Vinvl Sand Finish Texture (a) See response 5(i)(a) above. (b) 1960-77. (This response refers to the last date these products were sold containing asbestos fiber.) (c) See first paragraph to response (5)(i)(c) above. This defendant does not believe that these products ever contained more than 5\ chrysotile asbestos fiber (150 -30- pounds in approximately a 3,000-pound batch) and generally contained less. (d) These products were off-white in color. (e) From 1960-77 Triko Pro-Tex Texture was packaged in tan 25-pound bags with green lettering. From 1960-77 Triko Super-Tex Texture was packaged in white 25-pound bags with green lettering. From 1960-77 Triko Vinyl Sand Finish Texture was packaged in white 25-pound bags with green and red lettering. Triko Vinyl Sand Finish Texture containing asbestos fiber with slight or no formulation change was also sold under the following names: 1. Mr. Mud Spray Texture was sold from 1968 until 1977 and was packaged in purple 25 and 40-pound bags with orange and white lettering, brown 25 and 40-pound bags with orange and white lettering, black 25 and 40-pound bags with orange and white lettering and green 25 and 40-pound bags with orange and white lettering. 2. Napko Spray Texture was sold from 1974 until 1977 under a private labelling agreement with Napko Paint Company and was packaged in white Napko Paint Company 25-pound bags with purple lettering. 3. Universal Sand Finish was sold from 1962 until 1977 and was packaged in kraft paper 25-pound bags with green lettering. -31- ji. Forbest Sand Finish was sold from 1971 until 1977 and was packaged in white 25-pound bags with blue lettering. 5. Jones-Blair Sand Finish was sold from 1966 until 1968 and from 1974 until 1977 under a private labelling agreement with Jones-Blair Paint Company. This defendant has been unable to determine the size or description of the package. 6. In-Tex Spray Texture or Inland Spray Texture. This defendant believes that Triko Vinyl Sand Finish Texture may have been sold under one or both of these names for a brief period in the mid-1970*s under a private labelling agreement with a company called Inland Sales. However, this has not been verified and this defendant has been unable to determine the size or description of the package. For information concerning the printed material that appeared on the packaging for these products, see response 5{i)<e) above. (f) Triko Pro-Tex Texture and Triko Super-Tex Texture were non-aggregated smooth textures for use on interior walls and ceilings which required painting to produce a finished surface. Triko Vinyl Sand Finish Texture was an aggregated texture for use on interior walls and ceilings which required painting to produce a finished surface. (g) See response 5(i)(g) above. (h) See response 5(i)(h) above. -32- (xvii) Triko-Bar (a roof coating material) (a) See response 5(i)(a) above. (b) 1973-79. (This response refers to the last date this product was sold containing asbestos fiber.) (c) This defendant does not believe this product ever contained more than .6% chrysotile asbestos fiber (40 pounds in approximately a 6/000-pound wet batch). (d) This product was off-white in color and was an acrylic latex-based roof-coating material in heavy liquid form. (e) From 1973-79 this product was packaged in 1 and 5-gallon pails and 55-gallon drums which bore white labels with red lettering. For information concerning the printed material that appeared on the packaging for this product/ see response 5{i)(e) above. (f) This product was an encapsulated weather-barrier mastic coating for urethane and phenolic foam insulation/ foam glass and new and old roofing substrates. (g) See response 5(i)(g) above. (h) See response 5(i)(h) above. (xviii) Triko-Lume (two separate roof coating materials) (a) See response 5(i)(a) above. (b) 1976-83. (This response refers to the last date these products were sold containing asbestos fiber.) -33- (d) JThese products were heavy liquid or paste black or aluminized materials. (e) From 1973-79 these products were packaged in 1 and 5-gallon pails which bore silver and white labels with black lettering. For information concerning the printed material that appeared on the packaging for these products# see response 5(i)(e) above. (f) These products were encapsulated water-repellant asphaltic-based roof preparation and coating materials. (g) See response 5(i)(g) above. (h) See response 5(i)(h) above. 6. Prior to releasing the products listed in Interrogatory No. 5 to the public for sale# were any tests conducted on same to determine potential health hazards involved in the use of materials contained therein? (a) If so# state (1) Name# address and job classification of each individual who conducted such tests. (2) The results of such tests. (3) The person in possession of these documents. (4) Were any design changes made because of these tests. If so# explain what design changes were made. 6. RESPONSE: No. 7. Identify by name# job title# and current address each and every individual ever employed by defendant who had respon- -34- sibility for jthe sale and distribution of asbestos-containing products* Indicate also the dates that each such individual had such responsibility. 7. RESPONSE: This defendant objects to this Interrogatory on the grounds that it is unlimited as to time and place, overbroad and seeks information which is irrelevant, immaterial and is not reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence. Furthermore, to require this defendant to provide such information would be burdensome, expensive and harassing to comply with. 8. Does defendant claim that plaintiff misused their asbestos-containing products? (a) If so, please explain how plaintiff misused the asbestos-containing products. 8. RESPONSE; Discovery in this case is in the early stages. This defendant will set forth its defenses in timely filed amended pleadings. 9. Identify each and every distributor defendant sold their asbestos-containing products to in Louisiana, Texas, Oklahoma and Illinois from 1962 through 1981. 9. RESPONSE: This defendant objects to this Interrogatory on the grounds that it is unlimited as to time, overbroad and seeks information which is irrelevant, immaterial and is not reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence. Furthermore, to require this defendant to provide -35- such information would be burdensome* expensive and harassing to comply with. WINSTEAD* MCGUIRE* SECHREAST & MINICK 1601 Elm Street Suite 700 Thanksgiving Tower Dallas* Texas 75201 (214) 745-5158 Bys Robert H. Frost Attorneys for Defendant Proko Industries* Inc. -36- STATE OF TEXAS COUNTY OF DALLAS ) ) ) Robert F. Wright# being duly sworn according to law# deposes and says that he is the President of Proko Industries# Inc., that he is authorized to make this affidavit on its behalf, that the information necessary to prepare the within Responses of Defendant Proko Industries# Inc. to Plaintiffs' First Set of Interrogatories dated March 26# 1986# has come from his personal knowledge as well as from others and from the records of Proko Industries# Inc.# that he does not necessarily have personal knowledge of all of the facts stated but believes the same to be true and correct to the best of his knowledge# information and belief. SWORN TO before me this day of / - / Notary Public for Texas My Commission Expires (L.S.) -37-