Document O36VLgvExxo82Q5o10ve2O3VQ

CARLO MARTINO 7/11/2007 EUBANKS VS. A.W. CHESTERTON IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA IN AND FOR THE COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES COURT OF UNLIMITED JURISDICTION Page 1 DONALD EUBANKS and DIANA EUBANKS, Plaintiffs, vs. A.W. CHESTERTON COMPANY, et al., Defendants. ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) NO. BC365542 DEPOSITION OF CARLO FRANCIS MARTINO Chicago, Illinois Tuesday, July 11, 2007 REPORTED BY: KAREN WRIGHT CSR NO. 3936 JOB NO. 51597HAN LUDWIG KLEIN REPORTERS & VIDEO, INC. 800.540.0681 e08d329d-027b-438b-9587-ca63e8cbb1cb CARLO MARTINO 7/11/2007 EUBANKS VS. A.W. CHESTERTON Page 2 IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA IN AND FOR THE COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES COURT OF UNLIMITED JURISDICTION DONALD EUBANKS and DIANA EUBANKS, ) ) Plaintiffs. ) ) vs. ) NO. BC365542 ) A.W. CHESTERTON COMPANY, et al., ) ) Defendants. ) > 10 n Deposition of CARLO FRANCIS 12 MARTINO, taken on behalf of the 13 Plaintiffs, at 71 South Wacker Drive 14 Chicago. Illinois 60606. commencing 15 at 9:19 a.m., on Tuesday, July 11, 16 2007, before Karen Wright. CSR No. 17 3936. a Certified Shorthand Reporter 18 in and for the County of Riverside. 19 State of California. 20 21 22 23 24 25 Page 3 1 APPEARANCES: 2 FOR THE PLAINTIFFS: 3 STANLEY, MANDEL & IOLA, LLP 4 BY: WILLIAM A GALERSTON. ATTORNEY AT LAW 3100 Monticello Avenue, Suite 750 5 Dallas. Texas 75205 214.443.4300 6 7 FOR DEFENDANT SQUARE D COMPANY: 8 KIRKPATRICK & UXKHART PRESTON GATES ELLIS, LLP BY: JEFFREY N. KINSEY, ATTORNEY AT LAW 3 Heniy W. Oliver Building 535 Smithfield Street 10 Pittsburgh. Pennsylvania 15222-2312 412.355.6500 11 12 FOR DEFENDANT UNION CARBIDE AND THE WITNESS: 13 MAYER, BROWN, ROWE & MAW BY: KATHERINE M CLARK, ATTORNEY AT LAW7 71 South Wacker Drive Chicago, Illinois 60606 15 312.7g2.0600 16 FOR DEFENDANT WARREN PUMPS, INC.: 17 CARROLL, BURDICK & McDONOUGH, LLP 16 BY: EDW ARD R. ULLOA, ATTORNEY AT LAW (Telephonic .Appearance) 19 633 West Fifth Street, 51st Floor Los .Angeles, California 90071-2048 20 213.833.4500 21 22 23 24 25 Page 4 1 .APPEARANCES (CONTD): FOR DEFENDANT GARLOCK SEALING TECHNOLOGIES: LAW OFFICES OF GLASPY & GLASPY 4 BY. BRIAN O'MALLEY. ATTORNEY AT LAW (Telephonic Appearance) 5 One Walnut Creek Center 100 Pringle Avenue. Suite 750 6 W alnut Creek. California 94596 925.947.1300 0 FOR DEFENDANT EATON ELECTRICAL, INC.: 9 HOW'ARD ROME MARTIN & RIDLEY. LLP BY. PIA V. McDOUGALL, ATTORNEY AT LAW lu (Telephonic Appearance) 1775 Woodside Road. Suite 200 11 Redwood City, California 94061-3436 650.365.7715 12 13 FOR DEFENDANT UNION CARBIDE CORPORATION: 14 McKENNA, LONG & ALDRIDGE LLP BY. FARAH S. NICOL. ATTORNEY AT LAW' 15 (Telephonic Appearance) 444 South Flower Street Suite 800 16 Los Angeles. California 90071-2901 213.688.1000 17 10 FOR DEFENDANTS FRASER'S BOILER SERVICE, INC., AND GENUINE PARTS COMPANY: 19 POND NORTH. LLP 2 U BY. TIMOTHY C. PIEPER, ATTORNEY AT LAW' (Telephonic Appearance) 21 505 Montgomery Street 13th Floor San Francisco, California 94111-2585 22 415.217 1240 23 24 25 Page 5 1 APPEARANCES (CONTD): FOR DEFENDANT SYD CARPENTER MARINE CONTRACTOR. INC : LAW OFFICES OF PRINDLE DECKER & AMARO. LLP 4 BY: TODD A. FUSON. ATTORNEY AT LAW (Telephonic Appearance) 5 310 Golden Shore, Fourth Floor Long Beach. California 90802 6 562.436.3946 FOR DEFENDANT GENERAL SIGNAL CORPORATION: SELMAN BREITMAN. LLP 9 BY: CRAIG R MAKI. ATTORNEY AT LAW (Telephonic Appearance) 10 11766 Wilshire Boulevard. Sixth Floor Los Angeles, California 90025-6538 11 310.445 0800 12 FOR DEFENDANT ROCKWELL AUTOMATION, INC.: 13 THOMAS WHITELAW & TYLER. LLP 14 BY: JEAN C. MICHEL. ATTORNEY AT LAW (Telephonic Appearance until 10:26 a.nv) 15 CHRISTOPHER A. KEELE, ATTORNEY AT LAW (Telephonic Appearance. 10:43 to 2:16) 16 ELIZA M. RODRIGUES, ATTORNEY AT LAW (Telephonic Appearance. 2 16 p in. to end) 17 18101 Von Kaiman Avenue, Suite 230 Irvine, California 92612 10 949.679.6400 19 FOR DEFENDANTS PARKER BOILER MANUFACTURING CO.: 20 WALSWORTH. FRANKLIN, BEVINS & McCALL. LLP 21 BY: ANNA T VALIENTE, ATTORNEY AT LAW (Telephonic Appearance) 22 One City Boulevard West. Fifth Floor Orange. California 92868-3677 23 714.634 2522 24 Also Present: 2 5 PAT DANDREA, Videographer 2 (Pages 2 to 5) LUDWIG KLEIN REPORTERS & VIDEO, INC. 800.540.0681 e08d329d-027b-438b-9587-ca63e8cbb1cb CARLO MARTINO 7/11/2007 EUBANKS VS. A.W. CHESTERTON Page 6 1 INDEX 2 EXAMINATION BY PAGE 3 MR. GALERSTON 10,246 4 MS. CLARK 243 5 MR. MAKI 245 6 P.M. SESSION 135 7 8 EXHIBITS (BOUND UNDER SEPARATE COVER) 9 PLAINTIFFS' PAGE 1 0 1 Notice of Taking of Deposition 8 of Defendant LInion Carbide Corporation's Person(s) Most Knowledgeable, dated 6/5/07 12 (5 pages) 13 2 Notice of Taking of Deposition 8 of Defendant LInion Carbide 14 Corporation's Custodian(s) of Records and Request for 15 Production of Documents, dated 6/5/07 (5 pages) 16 3 Letter from Paul. Hanley & 8 17 Harley to .All Defense Counsel, dated 6/27/07, with attached fax 1 o confirmation sheets (5 pages) 19 4 Letter from Paul. Hanley & 8 Harley to McKenna. Long & 20 .Aldridge, dated 6/30/07 (1 page) 21 5 Objections to Notice of Taking 8 Deposition of Union Carbide 22 Corporation's Person Most Knowledgeable, dated 7/6/07 2 3 (15 pages) 24 25 Page 7 EXHIBITS (Cont'd) PLAINTIFFS' PAGE 6 Document headed "Tentative Product Formulation and Request for Cost Estimate,' dated 3/23/62 (1 page) Document headed "Product Formulation and Cost," dated 11/8/71 (1 page) Document on Union Carbide letterhead. Re: Special Requirements, Phenolic Molding Materials Handbook, dated 10 12/15/72(1 page) 11 Letter from Anderson Kill & 8 Click to Levy Phillips & 12 Konigsberg, Re. Union Carbide's Response to Standard Liability 13 Interrogatories, dated 5/12/03, with attached responses 14 (97 pages) 15 10 Document headed 'Data Bulletin. Arc Chute Filter Technology.' lb dated 01 /2003 (2 pages) 11 Military Specification for 8 Molding Plastics and Molded 18 Plastic Parts. Thermosetting. MIL-M-14F (41 pages) 19 Document headed 'Switchgear 137 20 Insulation Materials1' (1 page) 21 INFORMATION TO BE SUPPLIED (None) 23 24 QUESTIONS MARKED 25 (None) Page 8 1 CHICAGO. ILLINOIS; WEDNESDAY, JULY 11, 2007 2 9:19 A.M. _i 4 (Plaintiffs' Exhibits 1 through 11 were 5 marked for identification by the Certified Shorthand 6 Reporter.) 7 THE VIDEOGRAPHER: I'm Pat DAndrea. your 8 videographer. and I represent M&M Reporting. 9 Incorporated. Legal Sen ices of Itasca. Illinois, in 10 affiliation with Professional Reporters. 11 The date is 7/11/2007. The time is 12 9:19:17. The location is 71 South Wacker Drive. 13 Chicago. Illinois 60606. The case caption is Donald 14 Eubanks versus A.W. Chesterton Company. Case No. 15 BC365542. The deponent is Carlo Martino. 16 Would counsel please identify yourselves 17 and state whom you represent. 18 MR. GALERSTON: Yes. This is William A. 19 Galerston of Stanley. Mandel & Iola. I'm here on 2 0 behalf of the Plaintiffs. Diane and Donald Eubanks. 21 MR. KINSEY: This is JeffKinsey. I'm here 22 for K&L Gates and representing Square D Company. 2 3 MS. CLARK: Katherine Clark, from Mayer. 2 4 Brown. Rowe & Maw. on behalf of Union Carbide and 2 5 the witness. Page 9 1 MR. GALERSTON: On the phone? 2 MS. NICOL: Farah Nicol. on behalf of Union 3 Carbide. 4 MR. FUSON: And this is Todd Fuson, on 5 behalf of Syd Carpenter Marine Contractor. 6 MS. VALIENTE: Anna Valiente. on behalf of 7 Parker Boiler Company. 8 MR. MICHEL: Jean Michel -9 MR. ULLOA: Ed Ulloa. on behalf of Warren 10 Pumps, LLC. 11 MR. GALERSTON: Please repeat yourself. 12 MR. ULLOA: Ed Ulloa, U-l-l-o-a. on behalf 13 of Warren Pumps, LLC. 14 MR. O'MALLEY: Brian O'Malley, on behalf of 15 Garlock Sealing Technologies. 16 THE VIDEOGRAPHER: Court Reporter Karen 17 Wright will now swear in the witness. 18 MR. PIEPER: One more appearance. We have 19 more appearances. 20 MR. MICHEL: Jean Michel, for Rockwell 21 Automation. Inc. 22 MS. McDOUGALL: Pia McDougall 23 MR. MAKI: This is Craig Maki -24 MS. McDOUGALL: -- Eaton Electrical. Inc. 25 MR. GALERSTON: Please, again. Eaton. The 3 (Pages 6 to 9) LUDWIG KLEIN REPORTERS & VIDEO, INC. 800.540.0681 e08d329d-027b-438b-9587-ca63e8cbb1cb CARLO MARTINO 7/11/2007 EUBANKS VS. A.W. CHESTERTON Page 10 1 attorney making the appearance -- 2 MR. PIEPER: This is Tint Pieper. on behalf 3 of Defendants Genuine Parts Company and Fraser's 4 Boiler Service. Inc. 5 MR. GALERSTON: The attorney making an 6 appearance for Eaton needs to state her appearance ~j again, please. 8 MS. McDOUGALL: Pia McDougall. for Eaton 9 Electrical. Inc. 10 MR. GALERSTON: Anyone else? 11 MR. MAKE Yes. Craig Maki. on behalf of 12 General Signal Corporation. 13 MR. GALERSTON: Is that everyone on the 14 phone? 15 Thank you. 16 THE VIDEOGRAPHER: The Court Reporter Karen 17 Wright will now swear in the witness. 18 19 CARLO FRANCIS MARTINO. 20 having declared under penalty of perjury to tell 21 the truth, was examined and testified as follows: 22 23 EXAMINATION 24 BY MR. GALERSTON: 25 Q. Good morning, sir. Could you please state Page 11 1 your full legal name for the record. 2 A. Yes. Carlo Francis Martino. 3 Q. Mr. Martino, my name is Billy Galerston. 4 1 represent the Plaintiffs in the lawsuit that has 5 been brought against several companies, including 6 Union Carbide. 7 Do you understand that, sir? 8 A. Yes. 9 Q. And I understand that you're being 10 presented today in two capacities, one as a 11 custodian of records and one as a corporate 12 representative with knowledge of certain areas 13 relating to the Bakelite division of Union Carbide. 14 Is that correct? 15 A. As representative. I didn't know I was 16 being represented - or custodian of records. 17 Q. Okay. Well, let me -- I'm going to hand 18 you a couple of documents which are the Notices of 19 Deposition, and when you see these, you'll notice 20 that they're dated for June 21st and that, by 21 agreement, the deposition did not go forward at that 22 date, and we're now going forward. 23 I'll hand you what's been marked as 24 Exhibits 1 and 2 and ask if you've had an 25 opportunity to review those exhibits prior to just Page 12 1 now. 2 A. Yes. 3 Q. You have seen these? 4 A. Yes. 5 Q. Okay. Now, I'm going to hand you now 6 what has been marked as Exhibit No. 3, which is a 7 document which indicates that the deposition is to 8 take place today at this location and that you. 9 Carlo Martino, are being presented as a witness. 10 Do you see that, sir? 11 A. Yes. 12 Q. Okay. Have you seen this document before? 13 A. No. 14 Q. Is that letter correct in that it is your 15 understanding that you are being presented in the 16 capacity as represented by Exhibit No. .3? 17 MS. CLARK: I'm going to object; calls for 18 a legal conclusion. 19 THE WITNESS: I agree person most 20 knowledgeable. Custodian of records, I don't have 21 responsibility for that. I'm retired. 22 BY MR. GALERSTON: 23 Q. Okay. Fair enough. 24 I'm going to hand you now what has been 25 marked as Exhibit No. 4, which is a letter to Union Page 13 1 Carbide's counsel in California, and ask if you have 2 seen a copy of Exhibit No. 4, which requests formula 3 sheets for specific Bakelite products manufactured 4 by Union Carbide. 5 A. I didn't see the letter, but I did see the 6 list of products. 7 Q. Okay. Do you know of any documents that 8 are in existence in Union Carbide, that would be 9 under the control of Union Carbide, that would be 10 responsive to the request for documents related to 11 those specific products listed in that letter in 12 Exhibit 4? 13 A. There would be formulation sheets in the 14 files. 15 Q. And have you brought with you formulation 16 sheets to this -- 17 A. No, I don't have any. 18 Q. Do you know of any efforts made by anyone 19 on behalf of Union Carbide, either in-house or its 20 outside counsel, that have been made to comply with 21 the request that's in Exhibit 4? 22 MS. CLARK: I would just like to put an 23 objection on the record that this letter was not 24 part of the proper Notice of Deposition, nor are the 25 formula sheets that are listed in it necessarily 4 (Pages 10 to 13) LUDWIG KLEIN REPORTERS & VIDEO, INC. 800.540.0681 e08d329d-027b-438b-9587-ca63e8cbb1cb CARLO MARTINO 7/11/2007 EUBANKS VS. A.W. CHESTERTON Page 14 1 responsive to any of the categories in the 2 deposition notice. And we did file our objections 3 to the notice and have not heard any response or any 4 meet-and-confer efforts from Plaintiffs' counsel. 5 You can go ahead and answer, sir. 6 BY MR. GALERSTON: 7 Q. You were saying what documents would be 8 responsive to this request. 9 A. The fonnulation sheets. 10 Q. Okay. Do you know if there would be 11 invoices, possibly, that were maintained by Union 12 Carbide that would show the sales of these 13 formulations to end users? 14 A. Only sales records. 18 Q. Do you know of any efforts that have been 16 made to determine whether or not Union Carbide 17 maintains and still controls records of sales of 18 its phenolic resin compounds to end users such as 19 Square D, Eaton Electric, or Allen-Bradley? 20 A. They have records. The span of years I 21 don't know exactly. 22 Q. Have you reviewed any of those sales 23 records from Union Carbide to Square D, Allen24 Bradley, or Eaton Electric? 25 A. I have not. Page 15 1 Q. If I understand it correctly, it is your 2 understanding or opinion that there would be sales 3 records that should have been maintained, but you 4 have not reviewed them and do not know where they 5 would be. Is that fair to say? 6 A. Well, I know that they're in the repository 7 here, but I don't have access to them. 8 Q. And when you say that you know that they're 9 there, have you actually seen them there, or is it 10 just your belief that they should be there? 11 A. On other matters I've been sent portions 12 of them to review whether there were any molding 13 materials on the list; not for this case but other 14 cases. 15 Q. Have you been sent any documentation to 16 review in preparation for this deposition that 17 you're giving today? 18 A. No. 19 Q. Okay. I'm going to hand you now' w'hat has 20 been marked Exhibit 5. And I don't believe this is 21 a document that you probably have any knowledge of. 22 but just so you can identify it. 23 Exhibit 5 I'll represent to you is a copy 24 of a legal document prepared by Union Carbide's 25 attorneys and filed in this case objecting to Page 16 1 certain requests for documents in connection with 2 your deposition. 3 Have you seen this, sir? 4 A. No, I have not. 5 MS. CLARK: Can we just --1 just want to 6 clarify. It may create more confusion down the 7 road. He has seen depositions in this case. I'm 8 not sure if he understood your question. 9 MR. GALERSTON: Fair enough. 10 THE WITNESS: I thought he was referring to 11 this document. 12 MS. CLARK: I understand. Right. But 13 MR. GALERSTON: Okay. I appreciate that. 14 and I figured as much. 15 MS. CLARK: Okay. 16 BY MR. GALERSTON: 17 Q. Okay, sir. If you'd like, you can set 18 those aside. I don't know' that we'll be needing 19 those again. That's kind of the housekeeping for 20 the deposition. 21 Okay, sir. As you understand. I represent 22 a gentleman by the name of Donald Eubanks. Do you 23 understand that? 24 A. Yes. 25 Q. Have you reviewed his deposition testimony? Page 17 1 A. I've read three of his depositions. 2 Q. Okay. Three partial transcripts of Ins 3 deposition? 4 A. Yes. 5 Q. Do you recall which days you reviewed? 6 A. I think the dates were April. 7 Q. Okay. 8 A. One was April 1 st or 2nd, and another one 9 was the 12th I think. 10 Q. Okay. In addition to the depositions that 11 you have reviewed, the partial transcripts of Donald 12 Eubanks, have you reviewed transcripts of any of tire 13 other shipmates who have been deposed in the case? 14 A. Yes. 15 Q. Who have you reviewed? 16 A. Gibson, Crull, C-r-u-1-1, Duane Walker, and 17 Infante. 18 Q. Robert Infante? 19 A. Yes. 20 Q. Okay. Have you reviewed those in their 21 entirety? 22 A. Whatever -- it appeared to be the entire 23 document. 24 Q. To the best of your knowledge, you w eren't 25 provided with just portions of the depositions by LUDWIG KLEIN REPORTERS & VIDEO, INC. 5 (Pages 14 to 17) 800.540.0681 e08d329d-027b-438b-9587-ca63e8cbb1cb CARLO MARTINO 7/11/2007 EUBANKS VS. A.W. CHESTERTON Page 18 1 counsel? 2 A. No. No. 3 Q. Okay. And the portion -- and you reviewed 4 the entirety of the material that was sent to you? 5 A. Yes. 6 Q. Did you make any notes or make any comments 7 regarding the review? 8 A. When I was going over the documents, I made 9 some notes as I went along as to which one I was 10 reviewing and references to our products that I 11 might want to go back and see again. 12 Q. Okay. Have you brought those depositions 13 with you? 14 A. Not the depositions. I left those on -- 15 they're on my computer. 16 Q. Have you brought the notes that you made? 17 A. No. 18 Q. Do those notes still exist? 19 A. I would have to check when I get back. 20 They were scribbled on a piece of paper, and they 21 might -- may still be on my desk. 22 Q. Okay. So if I understand you correctly. 23 you're prepared to testify in this case based upon 24 your memory of your review of those documents or 25 depositions, correct? Page 19 1 A. Yes. 2 Q. Not to be rude, sir, but let me ask you. 3 how old are you? 4 A. Eighty. 5 Q. Okay. And are you taking any sort of 6 medications? 7 A. Only for cholesterol. 8 Q. Therefore, I assume that there's no 9 physical issue or a medical issue that you feel that 10 would affect your ability to recall and testify 11 accurately in your deposition. 12 A. None that I'm aware of. 13 Q. In the previous times that you've been 14 deposed and testified at trial, have you -- do you 15 generally do it by memory, or do you usually rely 16 upon notes and information from your review? 17 A. Always by memory. 18 Q. Okay. Having taken the majority of those 19 depositions that you reviewed, I would estimate that 20 we're talking about testimony that runs well in 21 excess of a thousand pages. 22 Would you agree with that? 23 A. It seemed like more than that. 24 MS. CLARK: Object; fontt. 25 BY MR. GALERSTON: Page 20 1 Q. Okay. It seemed like more than that. 2 And I don't know ifyou realize it. but since you 3 only reviewed three days' worth of Mr. Eubanks' 4 deposition, that there were actually 11 days that 5 he gave testimony. So you only saw a portion of 6 his deposition. 7 A. Right. 3 Q. Do you have an understanding of 9 Mr. Eubanks' illness? 10 A. I am aware of what mesothelioma is. 11 Q. Okay. Do you understand that Mr. Eubanks 12 is likely to die within the next few months from his 13 disease? 14 A. Yes. I'm sorry to hear that. 15 Q. And do you have an understanding that 16 that's caused by exposure to asbestos? 17 MS. CLARK: Object to form. 18 MS. N1COL: Lacks foundation, calls for 19 speculation, bey ond the scope. 20 MR. GALERSTON: Please identify yourself. 21 MS.NICOL: FarahNicol. 22 MR. GALERSTON: Ms. Nicol. do you represent 23 Union Carbide? 24 MS.NICOL: Yes. I do. 25 MR. GALERSTON: Okay. Union Carbide has an Page 21 1 attorney sitting here in the room. We are not going 2 to have two Union Carbide attorneys objecting to the 3 testimony. So I would ask that the two of you meet 4 and confer and decide which one of you is going to 5 represent this witness. 6 MS. NICOL: I don't think there will be any 7 disruption that goes on. I think we're entitled to 8 make our objections and have you move on with the 9 testimony. 10 MR. GALERSTON: Counsel, Union Carbide has 11 an attorney present. I am not going to be double12 teamed by two lawyers. I will allow you to choose 13 to be the one who represents this witness and 14 counsel present can be quiet. I'm not going to 15 have two lawyers for Union Carbide objecting to the 16 testimony as we go forward. 17 MS. NICOL: Well, so far you haven't, and 18 you may not. 19 MR. GALERSTON: I just did. 20 MS. NICOL: But if the questions aren't 21 objectionable. I don't think you'll have anything 22 to worry about. 23 MR. GALERSTON: Ma'am. I just did. You both 24 objected j ust to that one question. If it happens 25 again, we'll take it up then. 6 (Pages 18 to 21) LUDWIG KLEIN REPORTERS & VIDEO, INC. 800.540.0681 e08d329d-027b-438b-9587-ca63e8cbb1cb CARLO MARTINO 7/11/2007 EUBANKS VS. A.W. CHESTERTON Page 22 1 Q. Pm sorry, Mr. Martino. We were 2 discussing -- 3 Actually, I lost the question. Karen, 4 would you read back the last question, please. 5 (The record was read as follows: 6 "Question: And do you have an 7 understanding that that's caused by 8 exposure to asbestos?") 9 THE WITNESS: I can only answer that based 10 on what I've heard and in the news. And I'm not a 11 medical expert. Some cases have been linked to 12 asbestos. I don't know if all cases have been 13 linked to asbestos. 14 BY MR. GALERSTON: 18 Q. Fair enough. Let me ask you this. When 16 did you generally develop your knowledge of the 17 diseases that are caused by exposure to asbestos? 18 MS. CLARK: Objection; beyond the scope. 19 THE WITNESS: About the late '60s, sixty 20 about '68, '69. 21 BY MR. GALERSTON: 22 Q. Okay. In what context was it that you 23 became aware of the health hazards associated with 24 asbestos? 25 MS. CLARK: Objection; beyond the scope. Page 23 1 THE WITNESS: The publicity initially. 2 Johns-Manville was about five miles away from the 3 Carbide plant, and the -- what was happening there 4 was in all of the newspapers. 5 So any -- everybody in the area became 6 very much aware of what was happening. And, of 7 course, that also led to everybody looking at their 8 own operations to detennine, you know, are we safe 9 enough. 10 BY MR. GALERSTON: 11 Q. When you say in the late '60s, are we 12 talking about approximately the 1968 time frame? 13 A. Yes. 14 Q. Okay. And when you say what was happening 15 with Johns-Manville, were you referring to the 16 Manville, New Jersey plant -- 17 A. Yes. 18 Q. -- and the health crisis that was occurring 19 in Manville? 20 A. Yes. 21 Q. Okay. And your knowledge, ifl understand 22 you correctly, came from the general media as 23 opposed to anything that you attribute to Union 24 Carbide. 25 A. Initially, yes. But later, we started Page 24 l getting more information. 2 Q. And my understanding is, is that in the 3 early 1970s, approximately 1972, 1973, Union Carbide 4 sent an industrial hygienist into your Research & 5 Development Department to do some testing of the 6 molding process to determine whether or not asbestos 7 was released in your lab. 8 MS. CLARK: Objection; foundation9 THE WITNESS: Oh.no. No. Way10 MS. CLARK: Wait. Wait. Let me finish. 11 THE WITNESS: I'm sorry. 12 MS. CLARK: Objection; foundation, form. 13 MR. GALERSTON: Okay. 14 THE WITNESS: The testing started in our 15 lab as soon as the OSHA test became available, and 16 that w'as 1970. 17 BY MR. GALERSTON: 18 Q. So if I understand correctly, in 1970 -- 19 A. Yes. 20 Q. -- industrial hygienists were then testing 21 the processes that were taking place in your lab. 22 correct? 23 A. Yes. 24 Q. What is the earliest date that you recall 25 Union Carbide and its Safety Department or any other Page 25 1 function within Union Carbide coming to you, as 2 the3 I believe it was the general manager of 4 Research & Development, the Bakelite division? 5 A. I was manager of the -- group manager of 6 the phenolie molding material and laminating resins 7 group. 8 Q. Okay. When did someone come to you, in 9 that position, from Union Carbide to advise you of 10 the risks of exposure to asbestos? 11 MS. CLARK: Objection; foundation. 12 THE WITNESS: There was a lot of verbal 13 communication at that time, and I would say as soon 14 as the OSHA test became available. 15 BY MR. GALERSTON: 16 Q. Okay. And just so I can clarify, when you 17 say "at that time," the verbal communications. 18 you're talking about the 1970 time frame? 19 A. Yes. Yeah, as soon as the test was out. 20 Q. So in the 1970s, give or take some time 21 period, 1 assume 22 A. Yeah. 23 Q. -- Union Carbide was making you aware, as 24 the group manager -- 25 Was it group manager for phenolic resins? 7 (Pages 22 to 25) LUDWIG KLEIN REPORTERS & VIDEO, INC. 800.540.0681 e08d329d-027b-438b-9587-ca63e8cbb1cb CARLO MARTINO 7/11/2007 EUBANKS VS. A.W. CHESTERTON Page 26 1 A. Phenolic molding material and laminating 2 products. 3 Q. Thank you. Okay. Which that group 4 encompassed the manufacturing of what Union Carbide 5 sold as Bakelite, correct? 6 A. Not the manufacturing. I was in Research & 7 Development. It was the product development and the 8 technical service for those products. 9 Q. Fair enough. 10 A. The manufacturing was done at the same 11 site. 12 Q. But. again, my point -- I digress. It was 13 in 197014 A. Yes. 15 Q. -- that Union Carbide is coming to you, 16 in your position, and advising you of the health 17 hazards associated with asbestos, correct? 18 MS. CLARK: Objection; mischaraeterizes his 19 testimony, beyond the scope. 20 BY MR. GALERSTON: 21 Q. Sir. counsel has objected to my answer -- 22 my question, so I'm going to rephrase it. 23 Sir. when did Union Carbide come to you and 24 advise you, verbally or in writing, of the hazards 25 associated with asbestos? Page 27 1 A. My recollection was 1970. 2 Q. Okay. Fair enough. 3 And if I understand it correctly based upon 4 your previous testimony, that in 1970, Union Carbide 5 had been in the business of manufacturing and 6 selling asbestos-containing phenolic moldings and 7 resins for at least 30 years, since about 1948, when 8 they merged with Bakelite Corporation, correct? 9 A. '70? That -1 think in 1907 is when 10 phenolics was first invented. So about 40 -- yes. 11 Yes. About 40, 50 years, yeah. 12 Q. Okay. And I know that you can't put a 13 percentage with any real certainty as to the 14 percentage of the phenolic moldings and resins that 15 were sold by Union Carbide during the, let's say. 16 the 1950s, '60s, and '70s that contained asbestos, 17 but I understand that at least approximately 18 somew here betw een 10 and 25 percent of all of the 19 formulations called for use of asbestos. Correct? 20 MS. CLARK: Objection; foundation, form. 21 THE WITNESS: That varied over the years. 22 I can't give you a figure based on formulations. 23 only on volumes. 24 MR. GALERSTON: Okay. 25 THE WITNESS: Roughly, it went - it ranged Page 28 1 anywhere from a low of 10 to 15 percent to a high, 2 at one point, of 40 and then back down to zero. 3 BY MR. GALERSTON: 4 Q. You know what? And I apologize. I'm kind 5 of getting ahead of myself. Let's kind of step 6 back, and let me go back with a couple more general 7 questions. 8 Now, sir, you've given several depositions 9 over the years, correct? 10 A. Yes. 11 Q. If I understand it correctly, the first 12 time you were deposed in an asbestos matter where 13 you were testifying on behalf of Union Carbide would 14 have been in May of 2001. Is that correct? 15 A. It was in 2001, but I don't remember if it 16 was May or not. 17 Q. Okay. Do you recall giving testimony in 18 the Richard Yeager case out in California in a 19 San Francisco matter? 20 A. That was the first case, in San Francisco, 21 yes. 22 Q. And I'll represent to you, according to 23 the deposition transcript that 1 have, that that 24 was May 4th, 2001. Okay? 25 A. Okay. Page 29 1 Q. I understand that that same week you gave a 2 second deposition. Is that correct? Like May 9th? 3 A. No. It was later than that. 4 Oh, a second deposition? 5 Q. Correct. 6 A. I'm sorry. I thought you meant another 7 trial. 8 Q. Okay. No. No. I understand, according 9 to what I have been able to find, I found a May 9th, 10 2001, deposition that you gave in an Indiana matter. 11 Is that correct? 12 A. I recall something like that, yes. 13 Q. And to the best of your know ledge, would 14 that have beat the second time you gave a deposition 15 on behalf of Union Carbide? 16 A. Yes. 17 Q. Now, this was all approximately five years 18 after you retired from the company, correct? 19 A. I retired in '96, so it would be, yes, five 20 years. 21 Q. And while you were employed by Union 22 Carbide, you never gave a deposition in an asbestos23 related matter, right? 24 A. No. 25 Q. And you never gave a deposition in any sort LUDWIG KLEIN REPORTERS & VIDEO, INC. 8 (Pages 26 to 29) 800.540.0681 e08d329d-027b-438b-9587-ca63e8cbb1cb CARLO MARTINO 7/11/2007 EUBANKS VS. A.W. CHESTERTON Page 30 1 of chemical exposure or personal injury matter while 2 working at Union Carbide, correct? 3 A. No. 4 Q. Now, the other tiling I've been able to 5 identify is that in July of 2002 you gave a -- you 6 actually testified during a trial. Is that correct? 7 A. Yes. 8 Q. And that was a matter out in California, 9 correct? 10 A. Yes. 11 Q. Okay. And then the only other tiling I've 12 been able to find is a more recent transcript of a 13 deposition that you gave in March of 2007 in the 14 "Branagan" matter. 18 Do you recall that? 16 A. Yes. 17 Q. Have you given other depositions or 18 testified at other trials than those that I've just 19 discussed? 20 A. Yes. 21 Q. Okay. How many transcripts or proceedings 22 am 1 missing? 23 A. 1 would estimate that I gave over a dozen 24 depositions over the last six years. 25 Q. And how about other trials? Page 31 1 A. Two. 2 Q. Two other ones or two including the one 3 that we discussed in California? 4 A. There were just two, in California. 5 Q. Okay. Do you recall what the names of the 6 cases were that you testified in in trial? 7 A. The second one was the Trinchese case. 8 Q. Trinchese? 9 A. Yes. 10 Q. And what was the fust one? 11 A. The first one, I don't remember the name of 12 the plaintiff. 13 Q. Actually, I don't recall picking out a 14 name. I have just a partial transcript and nothing 15 that indicated who the plaintiff was, in my review. 16 Okay. Do you know what the outcome of 17 either one of those trials were? 18 A. The first one was dismissed by the judge. 19 Q. Okay. 20 A. The second one 1 wasn't at when it was 21 over, but 1 read in the newspaper that we were foimd 22 five percent guilty, which was difficult for me to 23 understand, but -- 24 Q. Now, when you say the first one was 25 dismissed, is that to say that Union Carbide - the Page 32 1 claims against Union Carbide were dismissed, or was 2 the entire case dismissed? 3 A. The entire case was dismissed. 4 Q. Was Union Carbide the only defendant in the 5 case at that time, to the best of your know ledge? 6 A. I don't know. 7 Q. Okay. And in the second case, where you 8 said there w as a finding of liability of five 9 percent -- 10 A. Yes. 11 Q. -- do you recall what the damages were 12 found in that case? 13 MS. CLARK: Objection; foundation, beyond 14 the scope. 15 THE WITNESS: I don't know. 16 BY MR. GALERSTON: 17 Q. Okay. And you said that was Trinchese, 18 correct? 19 A. Yes. 20 Q. Okay. Sir, 1 take it, based upon your 21 experience in depositions, you know how this works 22 and you understand the rules, and 1 don't need to 23 go through them with you. 24 A. Yes. 25 Q. You just let us know when you need a break Page 33 1 or anything like that. 2 Now , according to my review of your 3 previous testimony, you went to work for Union 4 Carbide in 1948 as a trainee. Is that correct? 5 A. Yes. 6 Q. At that time. Union Carbide had already 7 merged with Bakelite Corporation, correct? Or 8 Bakeland Corporation? 9 A. Yes. 10 Q. Do you know what year Union Carbide had 11 merged with Bakeland? 12 A. No, I don't. 13 Q. Okay. I understand that in 1948, as a 14 trainee, you had some exposure to the Bakelite 15 division. Correct? 16 A. I was in the Bakelite division. 17 Q. And you were there for a short period of 18 time, and then you moved on to another area. 19 correct? 20 A. In the Bakelite division. 21 Q. Okay. The entire -- I may have 22 misunderstood, then. I was under the impression 23 that, as a trainee, you were in Bakelite, and then 24 you moved outside of Bakelite. 25 A. No. No. 9 (Pages 30 to 33) LUDWIG KLEIN REPORTERS & VIDEO, INC. 800.540.0681 e08d329d-027b-438b-9587-ca63e8cbb1cb CARLO MARTINO 7/11/2007 EUBANKS VS. A.W. CHESTERTON Page 34 1 Q. So you always stayed in Bakelite? 2 A. I was always there. 3 Q. Okay. So from 1948 until your retirement. 4 you were involved in Bakelite? 5 A. I was involved in a variety of the plastics 6 that were made by the Bakelite division. 7 Q. Okay. 8 A. They were all called Bakelite at one time. 9 Q. Okay. You were assigned to Research & 10 Development; is that correct? 11 A. Yes. 12 Q. And was it in 1960 that you became manager 13 of the lab? 14 A. Yes. Manager of the phenolic molding and 15 laminating resins group. There were many labs. 15 Q. But would that have been considered the 17 Bakelite lab? 18 A. Oh, yes. 19 Q. Okay. I'm going to try to break this down 20 into maybe some smaller bits. We talked a little 21 bit about percentages and stuff like that, and 1 22 mentioned that 1 had kind of gotten ahead of myself. 23 In Research & Development for Bakelite, 24 your group was responsible for refining formulations 25 for phenolic molding products and resins for Page 35 1 customers to use, correct? 2 A. Yes. 3 Q. Were you also involved in new research into 4 new products, or w'as it primarily refinement of 5 existing formulations? 6 A. We had a resin group that tried to 7 develop new phenolic resins, and w'e did evaluate 8 those resins in molding materials and laminating 9 resins if we thought they had potential. 10 We also would manipulate the existing 11 formulations depending on changing requirements in 12 the marketplace. 13 Q. Okay. Now, I want to go ahead and kind of 14 start our questioning in that 1960 time period, when 15 you became the group manager. 16 At that time, when you became the group 17 manager. Union Carbide's Bakelite division was using 18 asbestos in a percentage of its compounds, correct? 19 A. Yes. 20 Q. I understand that those compounds were 21 referred to by formulations that would begin with 22 letter designations like BM or BR. Is that correct? 23 MS. CLARK: Objection; assumes facts. 24 THE WITNESS: The first letter would be B. 25 That represents phenolic molding material. Page 36 1 MR. GALERSTON: Okay. 2 THE WITNESS: Or phenolic. The second 3 letter is for molding, would be M. 4 MR. GALERSTON: All right. 5 THE WITNESS: R would be resin. 6 BY MR. GALERSTON: 7 Q. And G would be granular? 8 A. It could be ground, yeah, ground resin. 9 Q. Okay. Now, my understanding is that the 10 materials that were being sold by Union Carbide 11 were not final products. Correct? 12 A. By "final products," you mean the molded 13 part? 14 Q. Correct. 15 A. Yeah. No, they were not. 16 Q. This was a refined compound that was being 17 provided to other manufacturers for them to 18 manipulate and put into final form for use in their 19 equipment, correct? 20 A. Yes. 21 Q. My understanding of phenolic moldings and 22 resins is that these were noneonduetive materials 23 that could be used in electrical componentry. 24 MS. CLARK: Object to form. 25 THE WITNESS: It was one of the Page 37 1 applications. There were many. 2 BY MR. GALERSTON: 3 Q. Okay. What are some of the other 4 applications for phenolic resins and moldings? 5 A. Well, let's take molding first. 6 Q. Okay. 7 A. In the early '60s, washing machine 8 agitators, iron handles, toaster panels, TV 9 cabinets, radio cabinets, pot handles, automotive 10 parts, a multitude of electrical parts for 11 automotives, transportation, power. Those are the 12 ones I -- you know, the big ones. 13 Q. Okay. Before we go to resins, let me ask 14 you a couple of questions about that. 15 So my understanding is that the phenolic 16 molding products that Union Carbide's Bakelite 17 division was selling, they would send either bags. 18 barrels, or even larger containers of a refined 19 material that would then be used by the manufacturer 20 to heat and mold into the form of these various 21 tilings that you just described, such as pot handles. 22 toaster handles, or TV sets. Correct? 23 A. Yes. Now, let me take "refine," make sure 24 that, you know, you understand what - yeah. I 25 never referred to it as refined. 10 (Pages 34 to 37) LUDWIG KLEIN REPORTERS & VIDEO, INC. 800.540.0681 e08d329d-027b-438b-9587-ca63e8cbb1cb CARLO MARTINO 7/11/2007 EUBANKS VS. A.W. CHESTERTON Page 38 1 The molding material is resin plus 2 reinforcement. Phenolic resin is very brittle 3 material. So the produet the customer got was the 4 reinforced plastic groimd up into fine particles in 5 a bag or a box or whatever. You know, resin had no 6 filler. 7 Q. Okay. 8 A. That was also sold. 9 Q. Okay. Fair enough. So the phenolic resin 10 would have been in a liquid or a syrupy context. 11 right? 12 A. And also granular -- 13 Q. Okay. 14 A. - like sand. 18 Q. So this refined resin that was in - had 16 this bond, the strengthening agents of a filler 17 A. Right. 18 Q. - such as I think I've seen you said 19 there's woodflour, you could use coal, or you could 20 use asbestos or mica or something else, correct? 21 A. Yeah, or glass. You know, it - there's a 22 variety of fillers. Nylon. 23 Q. Okay. So you took the plastic resin, added 24 the filler, dried it out, ground it up, sent it to 25 the end user, who would then use it in their Page 39 1 manufacturing process, and they would heat it in 2 some fonn or fashion, either a microwave ripe of 3 agitation or simply heating it up, and then molding 4 it, correct? 5 A. Yes. 6 Now, you made a comment there that -- well. 7 okay. I missed it. It may come back to me. 8 Q. Okay. If it does, just let me know and 9 say, "Let me expand upon my previous answer." 10 A. Okay. 11 Q. Now', if I understand it correctly. Union 12 Carbide also made phenolic resin, which is -- it's a 13 plastic, correct? 14 A. Yes. 15 Q. And that means that it's derived from oil, 16 correct? 17 A. Well, it eventually goes back to oil, yes. 18 and that's one of the sources. Primarily the 19 phenol, yes. 20 Q. Right. You take crude oil, you break it 21 down; then you take otYcertain components. Some of 22 it goes out in the gasoline. 23 A. Yeah. 24 Q. But it's a complex molecule that can be 25 manipulated in a multitude of different tilings. Page 40 1 correct? 2 A. Yes. Yes. 3 Q. And eventually what Union Carbide did is 4 they were able to take a portion of that crude oil 5 and mm it into plastics, which they could then 6 manipulate and sell in a bunch of different 7 components, correct? 8 A. Yes. It's -- what we derived was the 9 phenol, so there's obviously, you know, the whole 10 string of refinements and chemical reactions which 11 are done. We had our own phenol plant. 12 Q. Okay. 13 A. And then the phenol is reacted with 14 formaldehyde to make the phenol - phenolic resin. 15 and then you had variatioas of phenol. 16 Q. Now, the resins could be sold either in 17 a dry form, a granular form or in a liquid form. 18 correct? 19 A. Right. 20 That was tire point I wanted to make. I 21 think you implied the molding material was dried. 22 It was not dried. It was a hot process. 23 Q. Okay. 24 A. It was melted. We used a granular phenolic 25 resin and then added the fillers, and then it went Page 41 1 on hot rolls. 2 Q. Okay. 3 A. Yeah. No liquid. 4 Q. So after you would fill in - after you 5 mixed the filler into the resin, was it then 6 dried -- or allowed to cool, I should say, not 7 dried, cooled 8 A. Cooled. 9 Q. - and then ground? 10 A. Yes. 11 Q. Okay. The resins - we talked a little 12 bit about some of the uses of the phenolic molding 13 compoimds. What about the resins; what were they 14 used for? 15 A. I think of phenolic resin as a good glue. 16 and it was used in varnishes, it was used to 17 impregnate Kraft paper and make laminates. 18 You would run Kraft paper through liquid 19 resin and then take these dried sheets and stack 20 them together and make, like, formica. The backing 21 is all phenolic, just the top is melamine. 22 And you could use glass -- you know -- 23 whatever mat, canvas. Plywood is glued to keep the 24 layers together. Oh, 1 could go on and on. Ifs a. 25 you know -- 11 (Pages 38 to 41) LUDWIG KLEIN REPORTERS & VIDEO, INC. 800.540.0681 e08d329d-027b-438b-9587-ca63e8cbb1cb CARLO MARTINO 7/11/2007 EUBANKS VS. A.W. CHESTERTON Page 42 1 Q. Well, let's talk about windings. Were 2 motor w indings covered with phenolic resin? 3 A. I think in some cases w here varnish was 4 required, yes. 5 Q. One of the things about phenolic resin is 6 that it's not conductive, correct? 7 A. That's right. 8 Q. And so a lot of usage was where, in 9 electronic components, where you wanted no 10 conductivity, correct? 11 A. Yes. Now, there were other resins for 12 special uses, so it wasn't just phenolics. There 13 were times where even phenolics wasn't good enough. 14 and there were epoxys and melamines and polyester. 15 So initially, you know, phenolic was the 16 material of choice, but what evolved after that. 17 that was part of the business I was not involved in. 18 Q. Okay. So as is always the case, it seems, 19 is that once they find something, they find 20 something better. 21 A. Well, that's right. 22 Q. Or different. 23 A. That's right. 24 Q. And so there was competition, and there 25 were some applications that the phenolic resins did Page 43 1 not match up well. 2 A. It was fierce competition, not only from 3 other manufacturers of phenolic resins, but also the 4 thermal plastics that were being developed that had 5 high melting points, and they started taking 6 business away from the phenolics. 7 Q. With regards to the phenolic resins, we -- 8 I don't know if it was clear before. We talked 9 about the phenolic moldings, and we talked about 10 some asbestos fillers. 11 A. Yeah. 12 Q. In the resins, would there ever be any 13 filler used in those, or were they all asbestos14 free? 15 A. Always -- always filler-free, asbestos16 free. We just sold the pure resin, and the 17 customers then did with it what they needed to do 18 to make their products. 19 MR. GALERSTON: Very good. Thank you. 20 On the phone, there's somebody that w'e 21 can hear breathing very heavily into their phone. 22 Please put your phones on mute. Thank you. 23 Q. In 1960. thereabouts, when you became group 24 manager, do you know' w'hat your annual sales w'ere of 25 phenolic resins and moldings? Page 44 1 MS. CLARK: Object to form. 2 THE WITNESS: No. 3 BY MR. GALERSTON: 4 Q. Do you have -5 A. I don't remember. I knew then, but I don't 6 know now. 7 Q. Do you have any recollection as to any time 8 frame what a good year would have been for the sales 9 of phenolic resins and moldings while you w ere group 10 manager? 11 MS. CLARK: Object to form. 12 MS. NICOL: I'm sorry. Can I have that 13 question read back, please? 14 (The record w;as read as follows: 15 "Question: Do you have any 16 recollection as to any time frame w'hat a 17 good year would have been for the sales 18 of phenolic resins and moldings while you 19 were group manager?") 20 THE WITNESS: For molding materials, our 21 plant capacity was roughly 50 million pounds. 22 BY MR. GALERSTON: 23 Q. And what year w'as that? 24 A. That was -- that was probably around 1960. 25 Q. Okay. Page 45 1 A. And it might have been a little bit more 2 than that, but that's a rough figure. 3 Q. Sure. 4 And do you know what the sales price was. 5 approximately, for a pound of phenolic resin 6 material in that time period? 7 MS. CLARK: Object to form. 8 THE WITNESS: It was cheap. 9 MS. NICOL: I'm just going to ask that we 10 specify the objections to form. 11 THE WITNESS: Sorry. Kate. 12 MR. GALERSTON: This is becoming13 THE WITNESS: Andrm14 MR. GALERSTON: Just one second. 15 MS. CLARK: Wait for a16 MR. GALERSTON: This is becoming very 17 disruptive with two Union Carbide counsel addressing 18 the court reporter, objecting to the deposition. 19 This is not acceptable, and it will not be 20 tolerated. 21 We have counsel here, and I will ask that 22 counsel on the phone for Union Carbide cease and 23 desist from interrupting the deposition. 24 Q. Sir? 25 A. I don't remember the price, but it was low' 12 (Pages 42 to 45) LUDWIG KLEIN REPORTERS & VIDEO, INC. 800.540.0681 e08d329d-027b-438b-9587-ca63e8cbb1cb CARLO MARTINO 7/11/2007 EUBANKS VS. A.W. CHESTERTON Page 46 1 relative to what it is now. 2 Q. Okay. And when you say 50 million pounds 3 per year, that's for both resins and moldings? 4 A. Oh. no. No. That's molding material. 5 Q. That's molding. There's -- 6 A. Now, a resin figure I can't give you. I 7 don't know. 8 Q. Okay. In 1960, when you became group 9 manager, were you generally familiar with the 10 customer list that Union Carbide was selling its 11 phenolic moldings to? 12 A. I became familiar. 13 Q. And in 1960, do you have a recollection 14 whether or not Square D was a customer of Union 15 Carbide? 16 MS. CLARK: Objection; beyond the scope. 17 THE WITNESS: I don't know about 1960. The 18 time frame for Square DI don't remember, but I -- 19 they did become a customer. 20 BY MR. GALERSTON: 21 Q. Okay. You're aware that Square D was a 22 customer. You're just not certain as to when and 23 where? 24 A. Well, I don't know if they were a customer 25 at that time. They may have been. But I recall a Page 47 1 later time when they became a customer. They could 2 have bought it. but I don't remember. 3 Q. Sure. Fair enough. And let me ask you 4 this. When do you recall that Square D was a 5 customer? 6 A. Probably the mid-'60s. 7 Q. Okay. And did they remain a customer until 8 Union Carbide got out of the Bakelite business? 9 A. Well, I left in'73. They were still a 10 customer then. 11 Q. Okay. Let me check something. 12 A. Let me qualify that. That was Square D 13 in Lexington that I'm familiar with. There were 14 probably other Square D locations, and I don't know 15 if they bought from us and what they bought from us. 16 Q. Okay. Square D in Lexington. 17 Well, let me ask you this. What about 13 Cutler-Hammer? Do you recall whether Cutler-Hammer 1 9 was a customer of Union Carbide? 20 A. Oft'and on. 21 Q. When you say "off and on," w'hat is the time 22 frame that you recall that they were off and on? 23 A. Well, we were constantly trying to get 24 their business and then have it for a while, and 25 then we would lose it to a competition, and then -- Page 48 1 so it was back and forth. 2 Q. Okay. Would that have been the entire time 3 from 1960 to 1973? 4 A. As I recall, yes. 5 Q. What about Allen-Bradley? 6 A. The same. 7 Q. The same time frame, too? 8 A. Yes. 9 And when 1 say "off," they may have bought 10 some small quantities, you know, in the off period 11 that they couldn't get from somebody else. But it 12 was a matter of price. 13 Q. Okay. Now, when you say that - let's go 14 back to Square D. Let's talk about when you say 15 Square D was a customer, what products were they 16 buying from you? 17 And when 1 say "you," I mean Union Carbide, 18 of course. 19 A. Yeah. 20 MS. CLARK: Objection; foundation, vague. 21 THE WITNESS: I can't remember all of the 22 numbers, but the ones 1 do remember are 5303 and 23 5314. 24 BY MR. GALERSTON: 25 Q. Okay. And - all right. Those are Page 49 1 moldings, 1 assume. 2 A. Yes. They would be BMG or BMR. 3 Q. Okay. And what are those, those two 4 fonnulations -- 5 Those are fonnulations you gave me. 6 correct? 7 A. Yes. 8 Q. And these are fonnulations that 1 assume 9 either you or your predecessor in Research & 10 Development had to review and approve the 11 manufacture, correct? 12 A. We would -- well, if we developed the 13 product, we would approve it for manufacturing use. 14 If it was in existence, we had nothing to do with 15 it. 16 Q. Well, but at one point in time, the 17 fonnulation had to be come up with, right? 18 A. Yes. Right. 19 Q. And if I understand it correctly, that 20 sometimes you would have fonnulations that would 21 be customized for the customer 22 A. Yes. 23 Q. -- at their request, correct? 24 A. Yes. 25 Q. Regardless of where the original 13 (Pages 46 to 49) LUDWIG KLEIN REPORTERS & VIDEO, INC. 800.540.0681 e08d329d-027b-438b-9587-ca63e8cbb1cb CARLO MARTINO 7/11/2007 EUBANKS VS. A.W. CHESTERTON Page 50 1 formulation came from, they had to go through your 2 department? 3 A. Yes. 4 Q. When you say 5303 and 5314 as being 5 formulations that you recall Union Carbide selling 6 to Square D, what were those for? What is that? 7 Is that a -- that's an asbestos-containing phenolic 8 resin or molding compound used for what? 9 MS. CLARK: Objection; foundation, 10 ambiguous. 11 THE WITNESS: All of the uses I am not 12 familiar with because they bought the resin and, you 13 know, they made a variety - a wide variety of parts 14 for industrial uses. But it would -- you know, some 18 of their products would be made out of that. 16 BY MR. GALERSTON: 17 Q. Okay. Square D. What is your 18 understanding of what Square D did? What did they 19 manufacture and sell? 20 A. Primarily -- well, my association was 21 switchgear, but I'm sure there was a lot more than 22 that. 23 Q. You understood that Square D was an 24 electronics parts manufacturer? 25 A. I was never involved with electronics Page 51 1 parts, so I don't know. 2 Q. Tire switchgear that you referred to, was 3 that electronic switchgear for power generation? 4 A. The part -- the few - the one time 1 saw 5 our material being molded, it was a huge part for -- 6 it looked like a power - for electrical power. 7 Where the components went and how they were 8 assembled and the final assembly we didn't see. 9 Q. Sure. I appreciate that. 10 Now -- okay. So let's go back to 5303. 11 All right? That is a Union Carbide Bakelite product 12 that was a phenolic molding, correct? 13 A. Yes. 14 Q. Okay. 5303, would that have been asbestos15 containing? 16 A. It had some. 17 MS. CLARK: Objection; vague, ambiguous. 18 THE WITNESS: It had some. 19 BY MR. GALERSTON: 20 Q. Do you recall what percentage of that would 21 have been asbestos-containing? 22 A. Roughly 30 percent. 23 Q. So ifl understand it correctly, the 24 process that we're talking about for manufacturing 25 of 5303 would have been to take the phenol from the Page 52 1 phenol plant, mix it with asbestos and some other 2 filler materials, which would -- which was a hot 3 process, which would then be extruded, cooled, be 4 ground into a granular form that was then bagged and 5 sold to the end user. Square D in this case. 6 Correct? 7 A. Yes. 8 Q. And Square D would then take that ground 9 product, which is -- 10 What's tire consistency ofthat material? 11 A. Oh, a coarse sand. 12 Q. Okay. It would then take that, and they 13 would use it in their own manufacturing process. 14 which 1 would assume would involve bringing it into 15 a hopper and then injecting it into a mold, heating 16 it up, making it hot to where it would melt and fuse 17 into a unified body, and then the part would then be 18 cooled and used. Is that your understanding? 19 A. Right. 20 MR. KINSEY: Objection; lacks foundation. 21 calls for speculation. 22 THE WITNESS: Yes. But let me qualify 23 that phenolic molding material was only one of tire 24 products that they bought. They bought asbestos25 free products, and they also bought -- you know, Page 53 1 there was a variety of molding products for 2 electrical switchgear, some of which w e made and 3 some made by others. 4 So we're just talking about the phenolic. 5 but there are many products that go into the 6 switchgear. 7 BY MR. GALERSTON: 8 Q. Well, I appreciate that, and I -- if I 9 understand you, you said two different tilings that 10 were important there. One is that the two products 11 that you were able to recall by formulation -- 12 A. Right. 13 Q. -- 5303 and 5314, are only two of many 14 different products that Union Carbide sold to 15 Square D over that time period. Correct? 16 A. Well, we sold them those particular 17 products, and those are the ones 1 remember. There 18 are probably some others that 1 don't remember. 19 Q. Right. 20 A. But the point I'm trying to make is they 21 didn't just buy phenolic, and they didn't just buy 22 it from us. You know, we were not the major 23 supplier in the industry. We were - we used to be 24 years ago, until we had an explosion. But we went 25 from number one to number two to number three and 14 (Pages 50 to 53) LUDWIG KLEIN REPORTERS & VIDEO, INC. 800.540.0681 e08d329d-027b-438b-9587-ca63e8cbb1cb CARLO MARTINO 7/11/2007 EUBANKS VS. A.W. CHESTERTON Page 54 1 ended up down about number four. Our market share 2 was -- went from 33 percent down to less than 15 3 percent. 4 So the point I'm trying to make is that 5 there were many -- they had many sources of 6 material. 7 MR. GALERSTON: And I object to the 8 nonresponsive nature of the answer. 9 Q. I appreciate that, sir. There may have 10 been other products Union Carbide sold to Square D. 11 and Square D would have had other suppliers is what 12 you're saying. Correct? 13 A. Yes, exactly. And sorry. 14 Q. You're not familiar -- 15 A. Sorry I didn't summarize that. 16 Q. You're not in a position to testify as to 17 when, where, and how Square D purchased its phenolic 18 materials, correct? 19 A. Could you repeat that again for me. please? 20 Q. Sure. It w;as probably a pretty poor 21 question. 22 You're not in a position to testify based 23 upon vour personal knowledge from whom Square D 24 purchased its phenolic resin materials at any given 25 time, correct? Page 55 1 A. That's correct. 2 Q. You can testify of your personal knowledge 3 of the sales that Union Carbide made to Square D. 4 correct? 5 A. That's right. 6 Q. You are aware that there were other 7 manufacturers in the market who were marketing to 8 Square D in competition with Union Carbide while you 9 were selling to them, correct? 10 A. Yes. 11 MR. KINSEY: Objection: calls for 12 speculation. 13 BY MR. GALERSTON: 14 Q. Okay. When was it that you visited a 15 Square D manufacturing facility and saw the UC, 16 Union Carbide, material being used? 17 A. The exact date I don't recall, but it would 18 be probably in the '60s. 19 Q. Okay. And I will venture a guess that this 20 would have been at the Lexington facility. 21 A. Yes. 22 Q. Do you know where Square D had all of its 23 manufacturing facilities in the United States in the 24 1960s? 25 A. Notallofthem.no. Page 56 1 Q. Other than the Lexington facility, what 2 other facilities are you familiar with? 3 A. I had heard of one in California 4 Q. Okay. 5 A. -- but didn't know about it. 6 Q. Now. in the 1960s. you were working the 7 Bound Brook facility of Union Carbide, correct? 3 A. Yes. 9 Q. That is both a research facility and a 10 production facility, correct? 11 A. I worked in the R&D. I was - there was -- 12 we worked with Manufacturing. That was a different 13 department. 14 Q. Right. But I'm just--my point Tm trying 15 to make is that there was -- in Bound Brook -- there 16 was the Research Department, where you were assigned. 17 correct? 18 A. Yes. 19 Q. Also. Union Carbide had its manufacturing 20 for the phenolic materials in Bound Brook, as well. 21 A. Yes. 22 Q. During the 1960s. I understand that Union 23 Carbide had a phenolic manufacturing facility on the 24 West Coast. Correct? 25 A. Resin -- Page 57 1 MS. CLARK: Objection; assumes facts. 2 THE WITNESS: Resin only. 3 BY MR. GALERSTON: 4 Q. Okay. So all of the molding materials that 5 Union Carbide was selling in the United States in 6 the 1960s were manufactured in Bound Brook? 7 A. Yes. 8 Q. Okay. Was there ever a manufacturing 9 facility for phenolic molding materials in Canada? 10 A. Yes. 11 Q. When did it exist? 12 A. Well, it existed during the time I was in 13 the business. When it was started, 1 don't 14 remember. 15 Q. Okay. So by 1960, was it in operation? 16 A. Yes. 17 Q. Did it remain in operation through the 18 '60s? 19 A. Yes. 20 Q. Was there a Mexico manufacturing facility? 21 A. Yes. 22 Q. When did it -- was it in existence when you 23 joined in 1960? 24 A. Yes. 25 Q. And 1 should clarify, when you became group 15 (Pages 54 to 57) LUDWIG KLEIN REPORTERS & VIDEO, INC. 800.540.0681 e08d329d-027b-438b-9587-ca63e8cbb1cb CARLO MARTINO 7/11/2007 EUBANKS VS. A.W. CHESTERTON Page 58 1 manager in 1960. 2 Was there regions that each one of these 3 manufacturing facilities was responsible for 4 providing material for? 5 A. They sold within their own country. 6 Q. Okay. 7 A. At that time, the tariffs were pretty high. 8 Q. Okay. So if I understand it correctly, the 9 Canadian facility would have sold to Canadians, the 10 Mexican facility would have sold to Mexico, and the 11 United States facility would have sold in the United 12 States. 13 A. Yes. 14 Q. We talked about the formulation 5303, which 18 I think you indicated was a 30-percent asbestos16 containing phenolic molding material that Union 17 Carbide sold to Square D during the 1960s and 18 through 1973, correct? 19 A. Yes. 20 MS. CLARK: Object21 THE WITNESS: Well22 MS. CLARK: Wait. Object to form, assumes 23 facts. 24 MR. KINSEY: Join. 25 THE WITNESS: During the early '70s, we Page 59 1 were removing asbestos from the products, and the 2 amount of -- I vaguely recall that we were reducing 3 the amount of asbestos in 5303. 4 So at some point in the 70s, the 5 formulation changed to a lower asbestos level and. 6 finally, no asbestos. 7 BY MR. GALERSTON: 8 Q. Okay. Fair enough. But as you sit here 9 now, you can't tell me when that step-down took 10 place? 11 A. It was in tire -- probably around 73. 12 Q. Okay. 13 A. We were working on it when I left. 14 Q. And do you recall what that step-down was? 15 Was it that it went from 30 percent down to 20 16 percent? 17 A. I recall going down to 15 percent, but the 18 next step was zero. 19 Q. Okay. Let's talk about 5314. That was the 20 other formulation you recall selling to Square D, 21 correct? 22 A. Yes. Yes. 23 Q. That was sold also in that time frame 1960 24 to 1973? 25 MS. CLARK: Objection; assumes facts. Page 60 1 THE WITNESS: It was sold in that time 2 frame, but that had a limited life. 3 BY MR. GALERSTON: 4 Q. Okay. What do you mean by "limited life" 5 for 5314? 6 A. It was developed for -- it was a sisal7 reinforced product. 8 Q. Sisal, could you spell that for me? 9 A. S-i-s-a-1. 10 Q. Okay. What is a sisal? 11 A. Ifs like a rope. You know, ropes are made 12 out of it. 13 Q. Okay. 14 A. Yeah. When you get a package, you know. 15 and you get this brown twine, you know, it's 16 probably sisal. 17 Q. Okay. So 5314 was in something that Union 18 Carbide was putting resin on, or was this a resin 19 that - a molding compound that was used for 20 applying to ropes? 21 A. No, no. We used tire groimd - the chopped22 up sisal as the reinforcement for tire phenolic 23 resin. 24 Q. Was there any other fillers that you 25 recall, such as asbestos, wood, or coal? Page 61 1 A. I would have to look at the formulation to 2 determine what else we had in there. It was 3 primarily sisal, and, you know, if there was coal or 4 anything else, that would show' up there. 5 Q. Okay. So since I'm concerned about 6 asbestos, it would - it's possible that asbestos 7 was used along with the sisal, it's possible that it 8 wasn't. Is that fair to say? 9 A. If it was used, it would have been a very 10 small quantity. 11 Q. And when we talk about a very small 12 quantity, are we talking about one to two percent. 13 or are we talking five to ten percent? 14 A. Five or less. 15 Q. Okay. 16 A. Now, I'm guessing there. You would have -- 17 I would have to refer to the formulation. 18 Q. Now. during the time frame 1960 to 1973. do 19 you recall what the amount of sales was in terms of 20 pounds or number of units sold by Union Carbide to 21 Square D of either 5303 or 5314? 22 A. No. 23 Q. Do you know' of your own personal know ledge 24 what a minimum sale w'ould have been of either one of 25 these formulations? 16 (Pages 58 to 61) LUDWIG KLEIN REPORTERS & VIDEO, INC. 800.540.0681 e08d329d-027b-438b-9587-ca63e8cbb1cb CARLO MARTINO 7/11/2007 EUBANKS VS. A.W. CHESTERTON Page 62 1 MS. CLARK: Objection; vague, ambiguous. 2 THE WITNESS: There wasn't such - there 3 wasn't a minimum sale. That was sold in truckload 4 quantities. You know, they could buy any quantity 5 they wanted. 6 BY MR. GALERSTON: 7 Q. Well, 1 assume that they wouldn't call up 8 and order and say, "Send me a pound of 5314." 9 A. No, nobody did that. 10 Q. Right. Right. So we're talking -- I mean. 11 we're talking probably more than just a 25-pound 12 bag. 13 A. Well, sample quantities of a new material. 14 generally, they would ask for at least a 50-pound 18 bag, maybe 200 pounds. 16 Q. Right. 17 A. And even a thousand pounds. 18 Q. Right. And that's for them to test out the 19 new product, correct? 20 A. Yes. Yeah. 21 Q. And I assume that's probably something that 22 Union Carbide probably, if they were interested in 23 it, they probably provided free of charge. 24 A. That's right. 25 Q. But once there's an agreement between Union Page 63 1 Carbide and the customer, such as Square D, as to a 2 formulation, then they gear up the entire plant to 3 make a batch run, correct? 4 A. Yes. 5 Q. Do you know' how' large a batch is for the 6 Bound Brook facility for 5303? 7 MS. CLARK: Objection; vague, ambiguous. 8 THE WITNESS: 1 don't remember the minimum 9 size runs that the plant would require. And often. 10 for efficiency, w'e would have material in stock so 11 that, you know, you could send the order out of 12 stock. 13 BY MR. GALERSTON: 14 Q. Okay. Do you recall whether or not 15 formulations 5303 or 5314 were formulations that 16 were specific to Square D. or were these all 17 formulations that were sold to other consumers, as 18 well? 19 A. The 5303 was sold to many customers, not 20 just Square D. 21 53 14 w'as primarily Square D. It w'as for 22 outlet boxes that w'ould go in the wall. And that 23 had limited life because somebody else took the 24 business aw'av from us. 25 Q. Okay. Page 64 1 A. Whether we sold that to anybody else or 2 not, I don't remember. 3 Q. 5303 was used for switchgear, 1 believe you 4 said. Correct? 5 A. Well, that was one of the uses. It w as 6 used by other customers for other applications. 7 Q. What other types of applications were you 8 familiar with for 5303? 9 A. It could be used for pot handles, knife 10 handles -- 11 Q. Let me make it a little bit easier. 12 A. Okay. 13 Q. I'm interested primarily now in electrical 14 componentry. 15 A. Yeah. 16 Q. What other electrical componentry are you 17 familiar with, if any, that formulation 5303 might 18 have been used for? 19 MS. CLARK: Objection; beyond the scope. 20 THE WITNESS: Right now, other than 21 electrical parts, which includes housings and, you 22 know, automotive parts, traasmission parts - that 23 type of product was used for transmission parts in 24 automobiles -- 25 MR. GALERSTON: Okay. Page 65 1 THE WITNESS: - you know, a lot of 2 automotive parts. 3 BY MR. GALERSTON: 4 Q. 5303, would you say it was heat resistant? 5 A. Yes. 6 Q. Okay. 7 A. Well, it's relative to others, you know. 8 but it was -- in the phenolic category, it was heat 9 resistant. 10 Q. And would it be something that could be 11 used in higher voltage applications? 12 A. Yes. 13 MS. CLARK: Objection; vague, ambiguous. 14 BY MR. GALERSTON: 15 Q. When I say "high voltage," you agreed that 16 this 5303 would be a product that could be used in a 17 high voltage application. What does that mean to 18 you? 19 A. That it could be used for electrical parts 20 where those voltages - you had to have insulation 21 protection from that kind of voltage and also be 22 able to withstand the long-term effect, you know. 23 the environment that part was in, the life it 24 would - the durability of the product. 25 Q. Okay. And so this was obviously something 17 (Pages 62 to 65) LUDWIG KLEIN REPORTERS & VIDEO, INC. 800.540.0681 e08d329d-027b-438b-9587-ca63e8cbb1cb CARLO MARTINO 7/11/2007 EUBANKS VS. A.W. CHESTERTON Page 66 1 that was more robust than some of your other 2 formulations. 3 A. Yes. Yes. 4 Q. What would have been a less robust 5 formulation, if you can recall? 6 MS. CLARK: Objection; vague, ambiguous. 7 THE WITNESS: For heat resistant 8 applications -- 9 THE REPORTER: I'm sorry. "For heat 10 resistant applications" -- 11 THE WITNESS: No. For - would you repeat 12 that again, please? 13 THE REPORTER: The questions was, "What 14 would have been a less robust fonnulation, if you 18 can recall?" And 1 thought your answer started. 16 "For heat resistant applications," and you 17 continued, but I didn't catch what you said. 18 THE WITNESS: No. For a less robust 19 product would be a woodflour-filled phenolic 20 compound. 21 BY MR. GALERSTON: 22 Q. Do you recall a fonnulation number for that 23 wood fill? 24 A. BMG-5000 was one of our most popular. 25 Q. Okay. Would you agree with me that you Page 68 1 A. He was assigned to the Square D Lexington 2 location. 3 Q. Do you know Mr. Martella's whereabouts? 4 A. No. 5 Q. When is the last time you spoke with 6 Mr. Martella or had any contact ? When is the last 7 time you spoke with Mr. Martella or had contact with 8 him? 9 A. Well, he left the company. Sometime during 10 the period of time I was there, he left. Probably 11 in the 70s. 12 MR. GALERSTON: Okay. We've been going for 13 about an hour. Are you good for a break? 14 THE WITNESS: I could use one. 15 MR. GALERSTON: Okay. Let's take a break. 16 and I'm going to switch gears, and we'll go to 17 another company. 18 We're off the record. 19 THE VIDEOGRAPHER: This is the end of Tape 20 Number One in the deposition of Carlo Martino. The 21 time is 10:26:15. We are off the record. 22 (Recess taken: 10:26 a.m. to 10:43 a.m.) 23 THE VIDEOGRAPHER: We are back on the 24 record. This is the beginning of Tape Number Two. 25 The time is "10:48:26." Page 67 Page 69 1 were not responsible for the sales of phenolic resin 10:43:34 1 Counsel, you may proceed. 2 and molding materials by Union Carbide to Square D? 10:43:35 2 MR. GALERSTON: Okay. Ms. Clark, you 3 A. Not responsible? 10:43:37 3 wanted to make a clarification on the record? 4 Q. Conect. 10:43:39 4 MS. CLARK: Yes. Ijust wanted to clarify 5 A. No. 10:43:42 5 that Mr. Martino is being presented by Union Carbide 6 Q. Would you agree with me that at the time. 7 in the 1960s and 1970s when you were the group 10:43:45 6 as the custodian of records. I think he w'as 10:43:49 7 confused earlier w'hen asked the question. He 8 manager, there would have been others who would have 10:43:51 8 thought the question was did he have possession of 9 been responsible for managing the sales of Union 10:43:51 9 all of the records. 10 Carbide's Bakelite phenolic resin and molding 10:43:5410 The records are maintained by the lawyers. 11 materials to Square D? 10:43:5711 as the molding compound business has been out of 12 A. Yeah. Our primary contact with the 10:44:0012 business for over 30 years. It's a lawyer- 13 customers is the Sales Department. 10:44:0313 maintained repository here at Mayer Brown. 14 Q. Okay. Do you recall who would have been 10:44:0614 And a search of the repository was 15 the sales manager or somebody who would have been 10:44:1015 conducted in advance of the deposition, and 16 a sales -- who would have been responsible for 10:44:1316 Mr. Martino is familiar generally with the type of 17 overseeing the Sales Department's contact with 10:44:1617 documents that are maintained in that repository . 18 Square D during the 1960s and early '70s. while you 10:44:1818 And I w'ould also note that Plaintiffs' 19 were group manager? 10:44:2119 counsel in this case has visited the repository 20 A. The salesman's name was Alex Martella. 10:44:2420 previously and copied numerous documents from the 21 Q. Martella. M-a-r-t- - 10:44:3021 repository. 22 A. M-a-r-t-e-l-l-a. 10:44:3122 MR. GALERSTON: Are you done, ma'am? 23 Q. Okay. And do you recall his 10:44:3223 MS. CLARK: Yes. 24 responsibilities? Was he a sales manager for all. 10:44:3324 MR. GALERSTON: Thank you. 25 or was he assigned to Square D? 25 Q. Mr. Martino, are you prepared to continue? 18 (Pages 66 to 69) LUDWIG KLEIN REPORTERS & VIDEO, INC. 800.540.0681 e08d329d-027b-438b-9587-ca63e8cbb1cb CARLO MARTINO 7/11/2007 EUBANKS VS. A.W. CHESTERTON Page 70 Page 72 10:44:35 1 10:44:42 2 10:44:46 3 10:44:48 4 10:44:51 5 10:44:55 6 10:44:56 7 10:44:58 8 10:45:03 9 10:45:0710 10:45:2311 10:45:2812 10:45:3213 10:45:3314 10:45:3515 10:45:3816 10:45:4017 10:45:4518 10:45:4619 10:45:4920 10:45:5121 10:45:5122 10:45:5523 10:45:5724 25 A. Yes. Q. Okay. We were talking about the business relationship between Union Carbide and Square D. and we were talking about two of the formulations that you recall specifically Union Carbide sold to Square D, which were 5303 and 5314. Correct? A. Yes. Q. I now want to hand you what I have previously marked as Exhibit No. 6 to your deposition. Okay? I would ask you to review that. and then we'll ask you a few' questions about that. Please let me know when you've finished your review. and I'll proceed at that time. A. Yes. Q. Okay, sir. First off. I've handed you a document here that's been marked as Exhibit "C" that contains some lettering at the bottom right. Do you see that? It says UCASB01875903. A. Yes. Q. Do you know' what that designation means, if anything? A. I don't know'. Q. Okay. Second question: Have you ever seen this document before? A. I--if I had. I don't recall it. 10:47:06 1 10:47:09 2 10:47:09 3 10:47:14 4 10:47:15 5 10:47:15 6 10:47:18 7 10:47:26 8 10:47:29 9 10:47:3310 10:47:3611 10:47:3712 10:47:4213 10:47:4514 10:47:4815 10:47:5116 10:47:5417 10:47:5618 10:47:5719 10:48:0920 10:48:0921 10:48:0922 10:48:0923 10:48:1324 25 A. Yes. Q. Would this be a Bakelite material? A. Yes. Q. Okay. BMG tells us that this is a granular material, correct? A. Yes. Q. 5105. what does that, ifanything, mean to you? A. The 5 does have some significance with regard to the resin that's used. I think that stands for a two-step, but I'm guessing here. Q. Okay. A. The rest, the 105, is just, you know. sequence in the nomenclature system. Q. Okay. And you know what? I made a mistake and forgot to ask you. the fact that the last letter. BMGB. B. that indicates to us that this is a second generation of this formulation, correct? A. Yes. Q. And that's kind of hinted at by the fact that this formulation supersedes one dated 9/14/61, correct? A. That's correct. Q. Okay. Now. the fact that there was a 9 -- oh. strike that. I'm getting ahead of myself. Page 71 Page 73 10:46:05 1 10:46:08 2 10:46:12 3 10:46:12 4 10:46:12 5 10:46:18 6 10:46:22 7 10:46:23 8 10:46:28 9 10:46:3010 10:46:3011 10:46:3412 10:46:3613 10:46:3814 10:46:4315 10:46:4716 10:46:5117 10:46:5218 10:46:5319 10:46:5620 10:46:5621 10:46:5822 10:47:0023 10:47:0524 25 Q. Okay. Now, if I understand it correctly. the top of this document says "Tentative Product Formulation and Request for Cost Estimate." Is that correct? A. Yes. Q. It is Issue No. 2, dated 3/23/62, and supersedes something dated 9/14/61. Correct? A. Yes. Q. Okay. Hus is for a product BMGB-5105 Black 25, correct? A. Yes. Q. What does that mean, ifanything, to you? MS. CLARK: I'm going to object. On its face, the document is beyond the scope of the deposition. The date of it is 1962, and the notice is from '67 onward, and it predates any alleged exposure of the Plaintiff. BY MR. GALERSTON: Q. Sir, you can answer. A. Okay. What does that designation mean to me? Q. Yes, if anything. A. It's a molding material. Q. Okay. And is that a - does this appear to be a Union Carbide molding material? 10:48:17 1 10:48:19 2 10:48:22 3 10:48:26 4 10:48:32 5 10:48:41 6 10:48:41 7 10:48:44 8 10:48:48 9 10:48:5110 10:48:5211 10:48:5512 10:49:0013 10:49:0214 10:49:0515 10:49:0616 10:49:0717 10:49:0918 10:49:1519 10:49:1720 10:49:1921 10:49:1922 10:49:2023 10:49:2124 25 Okay. We look here, and there's a notebook page and dates, some additional information. I assume that this is information that it would be stored in the Research Department. A. It would be -- a copy would be kept. This is a request for cost estimate. That would go to Manufacturing. Q. Okay. Now, where would - and when we say -- and I'm trying to figure out. Notebook 6273, where would that have been located in 1961? MS. CLARK: I'm just going to object to the whole line of questioning to the extent it's outside the scope of the time frame in the notice. THE WITNESS: That would be Fred Ducea's notebook, and it would be in his possession until he filled it. BY MR. GALERSTON: Q. All right. Looking on, we see "Product Type Code: 424." Do you know what that means? A. I don't recall, no. Q. Okay. The next line says, "Basic Material: Phenolic." A. Right. Q. ''Grade: Two Step." A. Right. 19 (Pages 70 to 73) LUDWIG KLEIN REPORTERS & VIDEO, INC. 800.540.0681 e08d329d-027b-438b-9587-ca63e8cbb1cb CARLO MARTINO 7/11/2007 EUBANKS VS. A.W. CHESTERTON Page 74 Page 76 10:49:23 1 10:49:24 2 10:49:24 3 10:49:27 4 10:49:28 5 10:49:31 6 10:49: 36 7 10:49:40 8 10:49:45 9 10 : 49: 4610 10:49:4811 10 : 49:5112 10:49:5913 10 : 50:0114 10:50:0415 10:50:0716 10:50:1017 10:50:1218 10:50:1519 10:50:1620 10:50:2221 10:50:2322 10:50:2623 10:50:3124 25 Q. Okay. Phenolic, we understand that to be the resin -- A. Yes. Q. -- that's derived from the oil. A. Correct. Q. What does the "Two Step" refer to? A. There are two types of phenolic resin. The two-step resin, you have to add the crosslinking agent to it, and the crosslinking agent is hexa. Ifs on the list there. Q. I see that. Okay. A. If it's a one-step resin, the crosslinking agent is reacted onto the phenol molecule, and you don't have to add any hexa. Q. Okay. So if I understand it correctly. when we talk about the grade and whether or not it's a single step or a two-step, we're talking about the process of the preparation of the phenol resin. correct? A. Yes. Q. Okay. "Processing," it says, "Mold-Rigid; Form: Granular." 1 assume this is referring that the material that is BMGB-5105 is going to be in a granular form, and it's going to be used for molding 10:51:47 1 10:51:51 2 10:51:54 3 10:51:56 4 10:52:01 5 10:52:08 6 10:52:13 7 10:52:18 8 10:52:22 9 10:52:2310 10:52:2511 10:52:2712 10:52:3113 10: 52 :34 14 10:52:3715 10:52:4116 10: 52 : 44 17 10:52:4518 10:52:5019 10:52:53 20 10:52:53 21 10:52:56 22 10:52:59 23 10:53:04 24 25 A. Yes. Q. Okay. So is it safe to assume from this document that Square D was a customer of Union Carbide's Bakelite division in 1961? A. No. This is sample 2. Now, what this says, this is experimental, and it implies that if tire cost estimate came out right, that location would be sent a sample for evaluation. Whether that resulted in sales or not depended on the outcome of that evaluation. Q. Okay. Well, 1 guess my thought is, is that the fact that this is a second iteration of this fonnulation, does it appear that the first fonnulation had been put into use and had been sold? MS. CLARK: Objection; foundation, vague. THE WITNESS: It had been sold, but whether it was sold to Square D or not, I don't know. BY MR. GALERSTON: Q. Okay. We see here that the application for this is for electrical switchgear, correct? A. Yes. Q. Then, if we look further down, it says -- we see a listing of material codes, material descriptions, and percentages for the BMGB-5105, correct? Page 75 Page 77 10:50:37 1 10:50:39 2 10:50:42 3 10:50:49 4 10:50:56 5 10:51:03 6 10:51:03 7 10:51:06 8 10:51:08 9 10:51:0910 10:51:1011 10:51:1512 10:51:1713 10:51:1814 10:51:2115 10:51:2616 10:51:2617 10:51:2918 10:51:3119 10:51:3220 10:51:3721 10:51:3922 10:51:3923 10:51:4324 25 a rigid component. Correct? A. Yes. Q. Okay. "Differs from Issue 1, has C-22 resin for faster cure." What does that mean? A. It looks as if the C-22 resin is a resin that cured faster in the mold and gave faster cycles. Q. And I assume when w e talk about cures faster in the mold, we're talking about in the end user's mold, correct? A. Yes. Q. So C-22 is a specific class of phenol resin that Union Carbide can manufacture. A. Yes. Q. How many classes of resin w ere there? Numerous? A. I can't even guess. Q. Okay. A. There were many, many, many. Q. Fair enough. Okay. And then, so Issue 1 indicates that this is a second iteration of a formulation, correct? A. Yes. Q. And then it says the customer here is Square D, Cedar Rapids, Iowa, correct? 10:53:05 1 10:53:07 2 10:53:11 3 10:53:12 4 10:53:14 5 10:53:16 6 10:53:19 7 10:53:20 8 10:53:20 9 10:53:2410 10:53:2511 10:53:3012 10:53:3013 10:53:3314 10:53:3315 10:53:3316 10:53:3517 10:53:3718 10:53:3819 10:53:3920 10:53:3921 10:53:4322 10:53:4323 10:53:4524 25 A. Yes. Q. We see what you indicated was a two-step resin, which is 27.5 percent of the product. correct? A. Yes. Q. There's a separate type of -- another iteration of the tw o-step resin, which is another 5.5 percent, correct? A. Yes. Q. Then you have the -- A. Hexa. Q. -- the crosslinking agent, the hexa, which is another 5.5 percent. It has lime in it, correct? A. Yes. Q. Nigrosine? A. Right. That's a tolerant. Q. Asbestos? A. Yes. Q. Cotton flock? A. Yes. Q. Woodflour and stearic acid, correct? A. Yes. Q. Okay. The largest component of this product is asbestos, correct? 20 (Pages 74 to 77) LUDWIG KLEIN REPORTERS & VIDEO, INC. 800.540.0681 e08d329d-027b-438b-9587-ca63e8cbb1cb CARLO MARTINO 7/11/2007 EUBANKS VS. A.W. CHESTERTON Page 78 Page 80 10:53:48 1 10:53:50 2 10:53:50 3 10:53:59 4 10:54:01 5 10:54:05 6 10:54:07 7 10:54:11 8 10:54:15 9 10:54:1910 10:54:2111 10:54:24 12 10:54:2913 10:54:2914 10:54:3015 10:54:3216 10:54:3517 10:54:3618 10:54:3619 10:54:3820 10:54:4221 10:54:4522 10:54:4823 10:54:5224 25 A. Yes. Q. At 40 percent. A. Yes. Q. Okay. Looking at this document by itself. we cannot determine whether or not this product was ever sold or used by Square D. Is that fair to say? A. That's correct. Q. Based upon your recollection of the materials that Union Carbide sold to Square D, do you have reason to believe that BMGB-5105 was a formulation that was sold to Square D? MS. CLARK: Objection; foundation, vague. THE WITNESS: I don't recall the product. so I don't know. BY MR. GALERSTON: Q. Okay. So the fact that you don't recall doesn't indicate whether or not one way or the other -- A. That's right. Q. -- it was sold. Okay. The formulation here for this electrical switchgear -- strike that. This formulation for this phenolic molding compound that would be used to create electrical switchgear, is this kind of a common formulation, or 10:56:20 1 10:56:21 2 10:56:22 3 10:56:23 4 10:56:24 5 10:56:25 6 10:56:26 7 10:56:27 8 10:56:29 9 10:56:3110 10:56:3111 10:56:3212 10:56:3313 10:56:3514 10:56:3515 10:56:3716 10:56:3917 10:56:3918 10:56:4119 10:56:4320 10: 56: 44 21 10:56:4522 10:56:5023 10:56:5624 25 started, but they did have a mining asbestos business for a while. BY MR. GALERSTON: Q. Okay. You're familiar with Calidria asbestos? A. Yes. Q. Do you know whether or not this would have been Calidria asbestos? A. This would not have been. Q. These are shorts, right? A. Yes. Q. Calidria doesn't come in shorts. A. Oh, yes. Q. Okay. Why A. Yes, they did. Q. It did come in shorts. But you weren't using Calidria shorts? A. No. No. Q. Okay. So this was asbestos that you were purchasing -- Union Carbide w as purchasing from other suppliers. A. Yes. Q. The asbestos that Union Carbide used in its Bakelite products, was it always asbestos purchased from other vendors, or was it sometimes Calidria and Page 79 Page 81 10:54:59 1 10:55:02 2 10:55:08 3 10:55:15 4 10:55:18 5 10:55:22 6 10:55:23 7 10:55:24 8 10:55:26 9 10:55:3110 10:55:3311 10:55:3412 10:55:3413 10:55:3914 10:55:4115 10:55:4316 10:55:5017 10:55:5518 10:55:5919 10:56:0520 10:56:0721 10:56:0922 10:56:1123 10:56:1224 25 is this an unusual formulation? MS. CLARK: Objection; vague. THE WITNESS: It's not unusual, no. It's typical of the way we wrote formulations, and the variations would be in the various components: different fillers. If it was a two-step, you would always have hexa. BY MR. GALERSTON: Q. Okay. Now, let's talk about the asbestos that is used here. We see that it is material code RM-18B. Do you see that? A. Yes. Q. Are you familiar with who provided that asbestos that Union Carbide used in this formulation? A. There's a raw material handbook that the plant had -- I think we had a copy, also -- that would reference who supplied it. Q. Okay. Do you know -- certainly in 1961, you're aware that Union Carbide was mining its own asbestos out in California, correct? MS. CLARK: Objection; assumes facts. foundation. THE WITNESS: I don't recall when that 10:57:01 1 10:57:01 2 10:57:03 3 10:57:09 4 10:57:12 5 10:57:14 6 10:57:14 7 10:57:15 8 10:57:20 9 10:57:2310 10:57:3011 10:57:3312 10:57:3613 10:57:3714 10:57:3915 10:57:4316 10: 57: 44 17 10:57:4518 10:57:4919 10:57:52 20 10:57:5721 10:57:58 22 10:58:02 23 10: 58:04 24 25 sometimes other vendors'? A. It was -- MS. CLARK: Objection; overbroad. THE WITNESS: It was always other vendors'. We were approached by Calidria and w e tested it, but it changed the product too much, and we didn't use it. BY MR. GALERSTON: Q. Okay. I understand based upon previous answers to interrogatories that Union Carbide has filed that various manufacturers -- I should say miners -- provided the asbestos, including Johns-Manville and Carey Canadian. A. Yes. Yes. Q. Do you know of any others? A. Not Johns-Manville. Well, maybe they did provide some. Q. Okay. A. I recall Carey Mines as being our supplier. and then there was a Vermont company, also, that supplied. There may be others, but those are the main ones. Q. Okay. And if anybody wants to look along with me. I'm looking at answer to interrogatory number 21 in the New York City asbestos litigation. 21 (Pages 78 to 81) LUDWIG KLEIN REPORTERS & VIDEO, INC. 800.540.0681 e08d329d-027b-438b-9587-ca63e8cbb1cb CARLO MARTINO 7/11/2007 EUBANKS VS. A.W. CHESTERTON Page 82 Page 84 10:58:16 1 10:58:18 2 10:58:22 3 10:58:25 4 10:58:25 5 10:58:27 6 10:58:28 7 10:58:30 8 10:58:33 9 10:58:3510 10:58:3611 10:58:4412 10:58:4613 10:58:5214 10:58:5415 10:58:5916 10:59:0217 10:59:0318 10:59:1419 10:59:2120 10:59:2221 10:59:2222 10:59:2623 10:59:2824 25 and the indication here is that short fiber Canadian chrysotile asbestos was purchased from Carey Canadian Mines. Rubberoid Company. Johns-Manville Company, and Asbestos Corporation Limited. A. Yeah. Q. Is that familiar -- is that consistent with your recollection? MS. CLARK: Object; foundation, way beyond the scope of the notice, and I don't have that document in front of me to see what you're referencing, either. THE WITNESS: The main ones that I always worked with -- that's probably -- that's correct. but the main ones that I'm familiar with are the Carey Mines and the Vermont. Whether the others were purchased for some other reason, for certain formulations or not, I don't recall. BY MR. GALERSTON: Q. Okay. Looking back at Exhibit 6. there is a reference to Department 014-4. Unit BA. Do you see that, sir? A. Yes. Q. What does that mean, if anything, to you? A. The department is the Molding Material Department. 11:00:49 1 11:00:53 2 11:00:57 3 11:01:00 4 11:01:01 5 11:01:02 6 11:01:05 7 11:01:09 8 11:01:11 9 11:01:1410 11:01:1711 11:01:2312 11:01:2613 11:01:2914 11:01:3215 11:01:3416 11:01:3817 11:01:3818 11:01:4219 11:01:4520 11:01:4721 11:01:5122 11:01:5223 11:01:5724 25 Please do us the courtesy of putting your phone on mute and keeping it on mute. Q. Does this project number mean anything to you in particular with regards to Square D? A. No. Q. Okay. A. No. It would be for any project. You know, that lasted about two years. Q. Okay. Below that, we see that this is requested -- I assume that this pricing issue is requested -- by the Sales Department. Correct? A. Well, it's requested by Fred Ducca. The Sales Department doesn't get involved until a decision is made that we're going to sample it. Q. I see where it says F.W. Ducca, and then I assume that's his signature below that, and I see that it was approved by V.W. Schroeder. A. Yes. Q. But at the far left, you see it says what appears to be "Storage, Shipment & Retest Code," and then it says something that looks like to me ''Requested By," and then it says "Sales." Do you see that? A. Oh. Sales requested that the -- that this product be made for Square D. Page 83 Page 85 10:59:31 1 10:59:41 2 10:59:44 3 10:59:52 4 10:59:54 5 10:59:57 6 10:59:59 7 11:00:01 8 11:00:02 9 11:00:0310 11:00:0511 11:00:0712 11:00:0913 11:00:1014 11:00:1215 11:00:1516 11:00:2017 11:00:2118 11:00:2319 11:00:3020 11:00:3821 11:00:3922 11:00:4123 11:00:4424 25 Q. Okay. A. And the unit is one of the manufacturing lines. Q. Okay. And we look below that and we see. under the section that says "General Remarks." it says "W Product" and there's an "X" indicating that that product has been selected. It appears that part of that has been cut off. Do you know what that says? A. What's that? "W Product"? Q. Yeah. It's this line right here A. Oh. that's probably -- Q. -- right under "General Remarks." A. That's probably new product. Q. New product. Okay. Then it goes on and says, "Project No. 817-97-4-7401. " What does that refer to. i f you know? A. Oh. for a period of time, we had a system where every project that we worked on had to have a designation and a budget, and that's what it's referring to. MR. GALERSTON: Those on the phone, we have somebody who has not muted their phone, and we can hear you speaking to others and shuffling papers. 11:02:04 1 11:02:07 2 11:02:07 3 11:02:10 4 11:02:12 5 11:02:13 6 11:02:13 7 11:02:16 8 11:02:19 9 11:02:1910 11:02:1911 11:02:2212 11:02:2513 11:02:2814 11:02:3015 11:02:3416 11:02:3717 11:02:3818 11:02:4019 11:02:4720 11:02:5221 11:02:5422 11:02:5523 11:02:5524 25 Q. Okay. So if I understand it correctly. sales was requesting the new formulation. A. Yes. Q. And that now the formulation has been derived, and now it's going to be sent out for pricing. A. Yes. Q. Okay. And so the next step would be that somebody in Manufacturing is going to price it; is that correct? A. Yes. Q. So they'll price it. and then it will go back to Sales, and Sales will pitch it to Square D? A. Probably the way the system worked, usually worked, they have to go back to the Marketing manager, and the Marketing manager would make the decision as to wiiether he w'anted to proceed with it. Q. Okay. A. There probably w'ould be discussions with the Sales manager if there w'as a disagreement. Q. Now. this is from March of'62. which w'ould have been the time that you were the group manager. correct? A. Yes. Q. And looking at this document, does this 22 (Pages 82 to 85) LUDWIG KLEIN REPORTERS & VIDEO, INC. 800.540.0681 e08d329d-027b-438b-9587-ca63e8cbb1cb CARLO MARTINO 7/11/2007 EUBANKS VS. A.W. CHESTERTON Page 86 Page 88 11:03:02 1 11:03:06 2 11:03:06 3 11:03:07 4 11:03:09 5 11:03:12 6 11:03:14 7 11:03:15 8 11:03:15 9 11:03:1710 11:03:2011 11:03:2012 11:03:2113 11:03:2314 11:03:2415 11:03:2616 11:03:2817 11:03:3218 11:03:3419 11:03:3620 11:03:4321 11:03:4422 11:03:4623 11:03:4624 25 appear to be a doeument that would have been created by Union Carbide employees around 1962? A. Yes. Q. Do you have any reason to believe that there's anything that would not have been recorded here that would have been information that was being recorded from the time that this document was created? MS. CLARK: Objection. Can I get that back, please? MR. GALERSTON: I tell you what. Let me strike that. Q. Let me ask you this. Sir, do you have any reason to believe that this is not an authentic Union Carbide doeument? A. No. No. That looks authentic. Q. Okay. Does this appear to be the type of documents that are maintained in the Union Carbide/Mayer Brown repository here in this building? A. It could be. I -- you know, you would have to cheek the repository to be sure. Q. But is this the ty pe of material A. Yes. Q. --just in general? 11:04:58 1 11:04:59 2 11:05:02 3 11:05:06 4 11:05:06 5 11:05:10 6 11:05:10 7 11:05:10 8 11:05:10 9 11:05:1110 11:05:1511 11:05:1512 11:05:1713 11:05:1814 11:05:2115 11:05:2516 11:05:2617 11:05:3118 11:05:3719 11:05:3720 11:05:3821 11:05:3922 11:05:4023 11:05:4324 25 designation, correct? A. No. Q. Okay. You've had an opportunity'to review this document in its entirety, have you? A. Now? Q. Yes. A. Yes. Q. Now. And before we get into it, let me ask you this. Is there any -- does this document appear to be an authentic Union Carbide document? A. Yes. Q. Do you have any reason to believe that any of the information contained in this doeument w ould not be accurate based upon the information that the people had at the time that they made the document? UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER: Hello? MR. GALERSTON: Hello? You're interrupting a deposition. Do you have a question for us? BY MR. GALERSTON: Q. I'm sorry, sir. A. That's okay. Q. Do you have any reason to believe that this doeument has any inaccuracies or any information in it that's not correct? Page 87 Page 89 11:03:49 1 11:03:51 2 11:03:53 3 11:03:55 4 11:04:21 5 11:04:22 6 11:04:27 7 11:04:28 8 11:04:30 9 11:04:3010 11:04:3211 11:04:3212 11:04:3513 11:04:3714 11:04:3915 11:04:4116 11:04:4217 11:04:4218 11:04:4419 11:04:4620 11:04:4721 11:04:5022 11:04:5423 11:04:5524 25 A. Yes. Yes. Q. All right. I'm going to hand you now what I've marked as Exhibit No. 7 to your deposition and ask you to review that, and I'll ask you a few questions about that. A. Yes. Q. Sir. prior to me just handing Exhibit No. 7 to you. do you recall having reviewed this document previously? A. Recently? Q. Yes. A. No. Q. Okay. And I appreciate that, and the jury hasn't had an opportunity' to see the document yet. but you say that because we see that this is a document that you reviewed and approved previously. correct? A. Yes. Q. Okay. Before we get to that, let me just make sure that we have this properly identified on the record. In the lower right comer, it says UCASB01876275. correct? A. Yes. Q. And. again, you're not familiar with that 11:05:46 1 11:05:49 2 11:05:52 3 11:05:52 4 11:05:59 5 11:06:00 6 11:06:00 7 11:06:01 8 11:06:07 9 11:06:0710 11:06:1111 11:06:1212 11:06:1413 11:06:1614 11:06:1815 11:06:2016 11:06:2217 11:06:2218 11:06:2419 11:06:2620 11:06:3121 11:06:3122 11:06:3423 11:06:3524 25 A. I don't see any. Q. Okay. The document that we're looking at is a Product Formulation and Cost form, correct? A. Yes. Q. I guess it's a form number BA 386-18A. Is that correct? A. Yes. Q. And this is for a product number BMRS-6935 BK 25 DC, correct? A. Right. Q. Okay. This is for a resin; is that correct? A. Molding material. Q. Because it's -- okay. Explain to me. I get confused. That's right, the second letter is the one that says whether or not it's molding or resins. A. Right. Q. So this is B for Bakelite, M for molding. R for what? A. This is for injection molding process -- Q. Okay. A. -- which was a new process for making -- for molding. Q. Okay. 23 (Pages 86 to 89) LUDWIG KLEIN REPORTERS & VIDEO, INC. 800.540.0681 e08d329d-027b-438b-9587-ca63e8cbb1cb CARLO MARTINO 7/11/2007 EUBANKS VS. A.W. CHESTERTON Page 90 Page 92 11:06:40 1 11:06:48 2 11:06:53 3 11:06:53 4 11:06:54 5 11:06:58 6 11:06:59 7 11:07:05 8 11:07:07 9 11:07:1010 11:07:1411 11:07:2212 11:07:2713 11:07:3014 11:07:3215 11:07:3316 11:07:3517 11:07:3618 11:07:3619 11:07:3920 11:07:3921 11:07:4122 11:07:43 23 11:07: 46 24 25 A. It's more efficient. And the -- as I recall, we used the R in the third place to designate products that we were making for injection molding. Q. Okay. A. It usually meant coarser granulation. Q. All right. S, that tells us that this is the -- there has been several iterations of this formulation, correct? A. Usually, tliat's what it means. This appears to be an exception, because S means we did a lot of -- a lot of changes. Again, it's vague. But it could be a way of designating the injection molding grade, which was new at the time. Q. Okay. So the S may or may not relate to -- A. Yes. Q. -- what we've traditionally thought that fourth letter meant. A. Right. Q. Okay. BK 25 is the color, correct? A. Yes. Q. What does the DC stand for? A. Dust control. Q. Okay. What does that mean to you? A. Eliminating as many of the very fine 11:08:55 1 11:08:56 2 11:09:01 3 11:09:02 4 11:09:03 5 11:09:07 6 11:09:10 7 11:09:10 8 11:09:12 9 11:09:1610 11:09:1711 11:09:2012 11:09:2113 11:09:2114 11:09:2815 11:09:3016 11:09:3117 11:09:3718 11:09:4319 11:09:5020 11:09:5021 11:09:5622 11:10:0123 11:10: 0424 25 MR. GALERSTON: Okay. THE WITNESS: And, therefore, you know, along those lines, I think we probably made that decision. MR. GALERSTON: Okay. I'll object to the nonresponsive nature of the answer. Q. The date of this is November 8th, 1971, correct? A. Yes. Q. This is Issue No. 1, and it doesn't supercede anything, and 1 believe that's why you believe that the S may not apply to previous versions. A. Yes. Q. Product type 363-T25-P2967, what does that mean, if anything? A. I don't remember. Q. Okay. Here, the grade is a two-step, but it's a Low 2-2. What does that refer to? A. It is not as fast curing as the 2-2 prime resin. The 2-2 designates - the phenol group is like a - ifs a hexagon. If you connect the hexa - the methyl group comes from the hexa - at the top part of the hexagon with the top part of the Page 91 Page 93 11:07:54 1 11:07:57 2 11:07:59 3 11:08:00 4 11:08:01 5 11:08:01 6 11:08:04 7 11:08:06 8 11:08:14 9 11:08:1710 11:08:1911 11:08:1912 11:08:2113 11:08:2314 11:08:2315 11:08:24 16 11:08:3117 11:08:3318 11:08:3719 11:08:4120 11:08:4221 11:08:4522 11:08:5023 11:08:5324 25 particles in the product that usually create dust. Q. So in 1971, either Union Carbide or, here. the customer Square D was concerned about the dust that was created by this product? MS. CLARK: Objection. MR. KINSEY: Objection. MS. CLARK: Foundation, beyond the scope. MR. KINSEY: Calls for speculation. THE WITNESS: I don't know who made the decision to make it dust control, whether that was ours or not. I think it was. BY MR. GALERSTON: Q. Okay. Somebody was concerned about the dust in the handling of this product, correct? A. Yes. MS. CLARK: Same objections. THE WITNESS: The dust particles are important when you want to press the granulars together and have them stick. So we would like to eliminate all of the dust particles in that, but w e couldn't do it. In the injection molding process you could because you didn't press any -- make any preforms, and you therefore could come up with cleaner product. 11:10:13 1 11:10:15 2 11:10:18 3 11: 10:24 4 11:10:25 5 11:10:27 6 11:10:30 7 11:10:37 8 11:10:37 9 11: 10:3710 11:10:3911 11: 10:4212 11:10:4313 11:10:4514 11:10:5115 11: 10:5316 11:10:5617 11:10:5718 11:11:0419 11:11:0720 11:11:1321 11: 11:1522 11: 11:1823 11: 11:2424 25 other hexagon, you get a very fast resin. If you connect it from that point to the bottom of the hexagon, you get a slow-curing resin. So that's the way of designating the two different positions. Q. Okay. Thank you, sir. We see that the customer or manufacturing processing method is for Square D, correct? A. Yes. Q. And then the form, this is a granular form. which 1 think you were indicating for the injection mold, you use a coarser sand; is that correct? A. Yes. Q. Okay. And then it says it differs from a previous formulation which is BMMA6935 BK. It states that this is different in that it is an injection molding grade. Correct? A. Correct. Q. So BMMA-6935 is another Union Carbide phenol molding compound that was sold for a very similar use but was not of the same coarseness as this one, correct? A. Whether it was a similar use, 1 don't know. It was not as coarse and was sold for a different process, method of molding, and it probably went to 24 (Pages 90 to 93) LUDWIG KLEIN REPORTERS & VIDEO, INC. 800.540.0681 e08d329d-027b-438b-9587-ca63e8cbb1cb CARLO MARTINO 7/11/2007 EUBANKS VS. A.W. CHESTERTON Page 94 Page 96 11:11:34 1 11:11:40 2 11:11:45 3 11:11:48 4 11:11:50 5 11:11:50 6 11:11:53 7 11:11:54 8 11:11:56 9 11:12:0010 11:12:0511 11:12:0812 11:12:1213 11:12:1714 11:12:2015 11:12:2116 11:12:2817 11:12:2918 11:12:3019 11:12:3520 11:12:3721 11:12:3822 11:12:4123 11:12:4324 25 other customers, as well. Q. Okay. But I believe this is true. BMMA-6935 BK 25 would have been the product that Union Carbide was selling to Square D prior to the development of this new form, correct? MR. KINSEY: Calls for speculation. MS. CLARK: Objection; assumes facts. foundation. THE WITNESS: That, I don't know, whether they were the customer for the original product or whether we decided that the modification was the best fit for what they wanted to do. BY MR. GALERSTON: Q. Can you tell whether or not this was a change in the product that was requested by Square D? MS. CLARK: Same objections. THE WITNESS: From this, I can't tell. BY MR. GALERSTON: Q. Okay. If we look below, it says, "Two Step Heat Resistant Material (Utility)," correct? A. Yes. Q. Is that your understanding, is that this material would be something that could be used by companies such as Square D in manufacturing 11:14:02 1 11:14:03 2 11:14:05 3 11:14:08 4 11:14:09 5 11:14:09 6 11:14:15 7 11:14:17 8 11:14:19 9 11:14:1910 11:14:2711 11:14:2912 11:14:2913 11:14:3314 11:14:3315 11:14:3616 11:14:3617 11:14:4018 11:14:4219 11:14:4320 11:14:4521 11:14:4722 11:14:5023 11:14:5324 25 A. For the initial run, yes. Q. Okay. A. That's small for what the Manufacturing Department wants, though. Q. So this would be a test batch? A. Yes. Q. Okay. We then see, similar to Exhibit No. 6, the material numeric codes and description and the quantities, correct? A. Yes. Q. The first one is CAP. I take it this is a form of the resin. Is that correct? A. Yes. Q. Okay. And then it's reacted with hexa? A. Yes. Q. And then the fillers are lime, nigrosine. and -- A. Lime is an accelerator. Q. Oh, it's an accelerator. Thank you. What about the nigrosine; is that an accelerator or -- A. No. Nigrosine is a tolerant. Q. Okay. Then you have your fillers: asbestos floats, coal, and pulp flock. A. Right. Page 95 Page 97 11:12:49 1 11:12:53 2 11:12:55 3 11:12:57 4 11:13:00 5 11:13:01 6 11:13:02 7 11:13:04 8 11:13:06 9 11:13:0610 11:13:0811 11:13:1112 11:13:1313 11:13:2414 11:13:2515 11:13:3016 11:13:3317 11:13:3818 11:13:4119 11:13:4320 11:13:4721 11:13:5122 11:13:5323 11:13:5624 25 component parts that would have some heat resistance in its use in the utilities industry? MS. CLARK: Objection; overly broad. ambiguous. THE WITNESS: Utility I think meant multipurpose - MR. GALERSTON: Okay. THE WITNESS: - not specific to any particular application. MR. GALERSTON: All right. THE VIDEOGRAPHER: Sir. can you just raise your microphone up to this, right up in here? THE WITNESS: Move it up? (Discussion off the record.) BY MR. GALERSTON: Q. Okay. sir. Now that we've got -- Mr. D'Andrea has inteijected his coordination here. the "Equipment Prescribed: UNITC." what does that mean? A. I don't remember. Q. Okay. "Batch Size: 4.000 pounds." that means when you make this -- take this formulation and you're going to make a batch of it at Union Carbide, it's going to weigh 4.000 pounds when you're done, right? 11:14:55 1 11:15:03 2 11:15:05 3 11:15:08 4 11:15:12 5 11:15:17 6 11:15:18 7 11:15:21 8 11: 15:26 9 11:15:2610 11: 15:2811 11: 15:3112 11:15:3313 11:15:3414 11:15:3715 11: 15:3816 11: 15:4117 11:15:4318 11: 15:4719 11: 15:4720 11: 15 :5221 11: 15 :5822 11:16:0123 11:16:0324 25 Q. What is pulp flock? A. It's a fibrous cellulosic material that imparted some impact strength. Q. Okay. What does it come from? A. It -- I think paper, along the fiber - a wood pulp, because we also had cotton flock. So pulp implies paper. Q. The asbestos floats, the product code is RM-18Q, similar to what we saw in Exhibit 6, correct? A. Would you repeat that again? Q. The asbestos floats are product code RM-18Q, which is the same as we saw in Exhibit 6, correct? A. Yes. Yes. Well, this is 18Q. The other one is 18B. Q. I stand corrected. Okay. What's the difference; do you know? A. Either -- well, this is floats. That was probably a little more fibers. These are shorter. Q. Okay. A. And the 18Q would designate that and who supplied that floats - those floats. Q. And looking at this, you can't detennine whether or not it was Carey Canadian or some other 25 (Pages 94 to 97) LUDWIG KLEIN REPORTERS & VIDEO, INC. 800.540.0681 e08d329d-027b-438b-9587-ca63e8cbb1cb CARLO MARTINO 7/11/2007 EUBANKS VS. A.W. CHESTERTON Page 98 Page 100 11:16:07 1 11:16:07 2 11:16:14 3 11:16:17 4 11:16:17 5 11:16:22 6 11:16:24 7 11:16:25 8 11:16:30 9 11:16:3410 11:16:3511 11:16:4112 11:16:4413 11:16:4614 11:16:5115 11:16:5316 11:16:5717 11:17:0018 11:17:0319 11:17:0620 11:17:1221 11:17:1322 11:17:1623 11:17:1824 25 supplier? A. No. Q. Okay. And for this product, BMRS-6935, it was 26.6 percent asbestos, correct? A. Yes. Q. And that's in comparison to BMGB-5105, which was 40 percent asbestos. A. Right. Q. Okay. Then it says externally, you have camauba wax and dibutyl -- A. Phthalate. Q. -- phthalate. What does that mean? What is being supplied externally to these granules? A. The first one is a wax, and that's to help the granules slide over each other easier. In an injection machine, you feed from a hopper down to a narrow opening over a screw, so you have to have those - the granules flow continuously. Otherwise, you don't get material fed through the mold. The dibutyl phthalate is an anastatic agent. Q. Okay. So this is - you would run your you would run your batch based upon the first portion, and then, after you had it, you would then 11:18:17 1 11:18:21 2 11:18:24 3 11:18:29 4 11:18:35 5 11:18:35 6 11:18:38 7 11:18:41 8 11:18:42 9 11:18:4210 11:18:4211 11:18:4312 11:18:4513 11:18:4614 11:18:5215 11:18:5216 11:18:5517 11:18:5618 11:19:0119 11:19:0220 11:19:0521 11:19:0822 11:19:1123 11:19:1124 25 A. Well, at that time, that was the number given to our Development Department. Q. Okay. Then we look over and we see that this was -- the originator of this formulation -- Is this a request, or is this a run sheet? A. The person? Q. No. This is a -- you know, the previous one we looked at, there was a pricing guide. correct? A. Yes. Q. Exhibit 6. A. Yes. Q. That was a request for pricing on that. Now, this appears to be something different. Mr. Olivo is the originator, correct? A. Yes. Q. And Mr. Olivo, what department was he in? A. He was -- he worked for me. Q. Okay. So why is Mr. Olivo taking this step at this point in time? MS. CLARK: Objection; foundation. THE WITNESS: He was assigned the job of coming up with a product that was suitable. BY MR. GALERSTON: Q. And who is he communicating to with this? Page 99 Page 101 11:17:23 1 11:17:25 2 11:17:26 3 11:17:29 4 11:17:33 5 11:17:34 6 11:17:36 7 11:17:38 8 11:17:41 9 11:17:4410 11:17:4711 11:17:4912 11:17:5013 11:17:5214 11:17:5315 11:17:5516 11:18:0017 11:18:0318 11:18:0319 11:18:0520 11:18:0621 11:18:0922 11:18:0923 11:18:1224 25 treat it with this to prevent it from creating static and to allow it to flow smoothly through the injection machine. A. Yes. It would be -- it would be granulated, and then these additives would be put in. Q. Okay. Then we look below, and we see a product description with something regarding its specific gravity, and this says there's no gaseous or liquid components. This is a hundred percent solid. Correct? A. I'm sorry. I missed that. Q. Well, we're looking under the "Product Description," and we see it says, "Solids: 100%." A. Yes. Q. That implies that there's no liquids or no gaseous components to this product, correct? A. I don't get the liquid part. Where do you -- Q. There are no liquids, correct? A. No. No. Q. Right. That's it. There wasn't any trick there. "Responsible Department: 819" for development, what does that mean? 11:19:16 1 11:19:17 2 11:19:20 3 11:19:25 4 11:19:27 5 11:19:31 6 11:19:34 7 11:19:42 8 11:19:45 9 11:19:4810 11: 19:5211 11:19:54 12 11: 19: 5813 11:20:0014 11:20:0115 11:20:0116 11:20:0217 11:20:0318 11:20:0519 11:20:05 20 11:20:06 21 11:20:0922 11:20:1123 11:20:12 24 25 Is this to Manufacturing for them to go ahead and tun this? A. This is sent to Manufacturing, and they have to agree to do it. You know, they'll look this over and detennine whether ifs going to create any problems in doing - in miming this product. Q. Okay. Do you have a recollection whether or not BMRS-6935 was actually put into production? A. I would have to check the records. Q. Do you recall Union Carbide creating and marketing an injectable granular form? A. Yes. That was one of our goals. Q. Okay. So whether or not this specific product went into production, you did create a product -- A. Yes. Q. -- to go into production? A. Yes. Q. And we see that this is approved by you. correct? A. Yes. Q. So Mr. Olivo prepared this, you approved it, and it was sent to Manufacturing, correct? A. Yes. Q. And we see that the distribution list 26 (Pages 98 to 101) LUDWIG KLEIN REPORTERS & VIDEO, INC. 800.540.0681 e08d329d-027b-438b-9587-ca63e8cbb1cb CARLO MARTINO 7/11/2007 EUBANKS VS. A.W. CHESTERTON Page 102 Page 104 11:20:17 1 11:20:20 2 11:20:21 3 11:20:23 4 11:20:25 5 11:20:29 6 11:20:35 7 11:20:39 8 11:20:47 9 11:20:4910 11:20:5211 11:20:5212 11:20:5413 11:20:5414 11:20:5515 11:20:5816 11:21:0117 11:21:0418 11:21:0719 11:21:1120 11:21:1421 11:21:1622 11:21:1723 11:21:2324 25 included you and Mr. Olivo, as well as Baker and Thomas in R&D. correct? A. Yes. Q. Would they have been in a position to kill this project at this point in time. Mr. Thomas or Mr. Baker? A. Baker w'as high up in the R&D organization. I don't recall whether he w'as the director at that time or not. Phil Thomas w'as an associate director. Q. Okay. Could they have killed this project based upon their review' of this if they wanted to? A. They could, yes. Q. Do you have any reason to believe that they did? A. No. they didn't. Q. Okay. Looking over in the Manufacturing distribution list, we see Barbieri. Churchill, Grover. LePage. Matthews. Mazzucchelli, Stringer. and Thomas -- Thompson, correct? A. Yes. Q. Would it be necessary to get agreement and approval of all of these people in order to run this batch? A. No. The people who would be most involved would be Thompson, who was the department head. He 11:22:58 1 11:22:59 2 11:23:03 3 11:23:04 4 11:23:05 5 11:23:09 6 11:23:13 7 11:23:16 8 11:23:20 9 11:23:2410 11:23:2811 11:23:2912 11:23:3213 11:23:3814 11:23:4315 11:23:4516 11:23:4717 11:23:4918 11:24:1719 11:24:2020 11:24:2621 11:24:2922 11:24:3023 11:24:3224 25 MR. KINSEY: Calls for speculation. THE WITNESS: I would not recommend this for arc chutes or arc shields. It doesn't have good enough arc resistance. BY MR. GALERSTON: Q. Did anybody ask you whether or not BMRS-6935 could be used by Square D to manufacture arc chutes or arc shields? A. No. Q. Let me ask you this. What about BMGB-5105; could that have been used to create arc chutes or arc shields? A. Again, I would not recommend it at all. It's -- it wouldn't have good arc resistance, or good enough arc resistance. Q. I'm now going to hand you what I've marked as Exhibit No. 8 to your deposition and ask you to review that, and let me know when you're completed. and I'll ask you some questions. A. Okay. Q. Again, does this appear to be a document -- a Union Carbide document? A. Yes. Q. And in looking at it. does it appear to be the type of document that would have been created Page 103 Page 105 11:21:29 1 11:21:34 2 11:21:40 3 11:21:47 4 11:21:53 5 11:21:57 6 11:21:59 7 11:22:06 8 11:22:09 9 11:22:1410 11:22:1711 11:22:1912 11:22:2013 11:22:2214 11 -.22:2115 11:22:2916 11:22:3117 11:22:3318 11:22:3519 11:22:3820 11 :22:44 21 11:22:4522 11:22:4823 11:22:5224 25 could raise objections. Q. Okay. A. I don't recall -- Mazzucchelli was on the operations team. He could raise objections. And George Stringer was head of the QC lab. and he could raise some objections from any problems it would create for him. Q. Okay. Do you know if any attempt has been made by Union Carbide or its counsel to find documents relating to these materials that are discussed here in Exhibit 7 that were sold or possibly sold to Square D? A. Documents with regard to this? Q. Correct. A. I'm not aware of anything that's been done. Q. Okay. To the best - MS. CLARK: I would just like to state we made a search of the repository in accordance with the objections and the products that are at issue in this case, which are arc chutes and arc shields. which these documents don't reference. BY MR. GALERSTON: Q. Sir. do you know whether or not product BMRS-6935 could have been used by Square D to make arc chutes or arc shields? 11:24:37 1 11:24:42 2 11:24:44 3 11:24:49 4 11:24:52 5 11:24:52 6 11:24:54 7 11:24:55 8 11:24:56 9 11:24:5810 11:25:04 11 11:25:0712 11:25:14 13 11:25:1714 11:25:2215 11:25:2616 11:25:3117 11:25:3118 11:25:3519 11:25:42 20 11:25:43 21 11:25:45 22 11:25:47 23 11:25:50 24 25 during the time that you were the group manager for the phenolic resins and moldings division? A. Yes. Q. This document has a designation of UCASBO0924626. Do you see that, sir? A. Yes. Q. And, again, you're not familiar with that designation, correct? A. No. Q. This document appears to be on a form of letterhead, does it not? A. Yes. But it really isn't a letter. Q. No. A. There appears to be some special requirements associated with these products. probably with regard to testing or, you know, something in -- tliat's not the routine. Q. Okay. A. I can't tell what that is. But this is a recording that there are some revisions, special requirements for these products. Q. All right. Very good. Well, let's break this down a little bit piece by piece. The top of the document is where we see "Union Carbide Corporation, Chemicals and Plastics, 27 (Pages 102 to 105) LUDWIG KLEIN REPORTERS & VIDEO, INC. 800.540.0681 e08d329d-027b-438b-9587-ca63e8cbb1cb CARLO MARTINO 7/11/2007 EUBANKS VS. A.W. CHESTERTON Page 106 Page 108 11:25:55 1 11:25:55 2 11:25:57 3 11:25:59 4 11:26:01 5 11:26:03 6 11:26:04 7 11:26:07 8 11:26:09 9 11:26:1210 11:26:1411 11:26:1512 11:26:1513 11:26:1714 11:26:1915 11:26:1916 11:26:2217 11:26:2418 11:26:2619 11:26:2620 11:26:2821 11:26:3022 11:26:3323 11:26:3524 25 Bound Brook. New Jersey," correct? A. Yes. Q. And that would have been, if I -- when I say it's a letterhead, this appears that it's probably preprinted on the page before it was typed up, correct? A. Would you repeat that, please? Q. When I say that this appears to be a letterhead, this information would have been probably on the piece ofpaper and printed before somebody then typed the remainder of the information on this page, correct? A. Yes. Yes. Q. Okay. We see that this document is dated December 15th, 1972. correct? A. Yes. Q. All right. The re line -- This is not addressed to anybody, so we don't think it's a letter, right? A. Yes. Q. This is something that somebody is typing up and going to keep with some other material, and this is for some form of explanation of what they're doing, I assume. Right? A. Yes. ThisisGunst. I think he was 11:27:51 1 11:27:52 2 11:27:54 3 11:27:57 4 11:28:02 5 11:28:02 6 11:28:02 7 11:28:05 8 11:28:11 9 11:28:1210 11:28:1411 11:28:2112 11:28:2313 11:28:2814 11:28:3115 11:28:3516 11:28:3917 11:28:4118 11:28:4419 11:28:4720 11:28:5221 11:28:5622 11:28:5623 11:28:5924 25 Q. Okay. Well, this one -- A. Well, that's the way it is here, products and then customer. Q. So we see it says "Revision and Additions," and then it has a section for adding and a section for removing, correct? A. Yes. Q. Under the adding, we see that there's a product BMMA-6935 BK25 GR12, correct? A. Yes. Q. Okay. First off, is that a product that you are familiar with off the top of your head? A. Well, it's - I'm familiar with it from what I see on this sheet, yes. What I'm trying to determine here is does this removal mean removal of -- that the products were obsoleted. Q. Okay. A. It appears, you know, remove Q. Well, it's imder the section for adding, is it not? A. Well, there's also something under "Remove." Q. Right. There's a section for removal, as well. Page 107 Page 109 11:26:41 1 11:26: 43 2 11:26:46 3 11:26:48 4 11:26: 49 5 11:26:50 6 11:26:52 7 11:26:55 8 11:27:00 9 11:27:0210 11:27:0611 11:27:0912 11:27:0913 11:27:1114 11:27:1515 11:27:2316 11:27:2717 11:27:2918 11:27:3419 11:27:3620 11:27:3621 11:27:3822 11:27:4023 11:27:4724 25 associated with Manufacturing. So it looks to me like a Manufacturing document. Q. All right. Well, the re line says. "Special Requirements, Phenolic Molding Materials Handbook," correct? A. Yes. Q. Are you familiar with a Phenolics Molding Materials Handbook? A. I was at the time. I don't recall, you know, anything about it now. Q. Okay. Was this a handbook that Union Carbide prepared and distributed to its customers? A. No. Q. What was this handbook? A. As I recall, it was an internal -- it's for internal use, recording, you know , so if there were any special requirements in testing or in handling this product, that the people who made the product would be aware of, and it would give more detail as to what they had to do about it -- Q. Okay. A. - special testing and so forth. Q. Was this a handbook that would have been broken down by customers or by products, or how? A. Probably products. 11:29:00 1 11:29:01 2 11:29:05 3 11:29:07 4 11:29:09 5 11:29:09 6 11:29:16 7 11:29:27 8 11:29:29 9 11:29:3910 11:29:4311 11:29:4412 11:29:4613 11:29:4914 11:29:5215 11:29:5416 11:29:5517 11:29:5518 11:29:5719 11:30:0320 11:30:0321 11:30:0322 11:30:0823 11:30:0924 25 A. Yes. Q. Okay. And so we see there we have this one product, and I believe you said you have some information with regard to it because it's referenced on Exhibit 7. correct? A. Yes. Q. So we know that this was - that BMRS-6935 is a revision to BMMA-6935. correct? A. They're both the same number. Oh. wait a minute. There's a Black 2 and a Black 25. That implies that they're two different tolerances. Otherwise, those two products are exactly the same. Q. Okay. Well, let me just break it down line byline. Let's kind of go down. But for now. Tm going to separate the "Add" column from the "Remove" column. Okay? A. Okay. Q. So just looking at that first product under the "Add" column. BMMA-6935. BK25 GR12 A. Right. Q. - Serial No. W266-72. Customer Square D Company -- Correct? A. Right. 28 (Pages 106 to 109) LUDWIG KLEIN REPORTERS & VIDEO, INC. 800.540.0681 e08d329d-027b-438b-9587-ca63e8cbb1cb CARLO MARTINO 7/11/2007 EUBANKS VS. A.W. CHESTERTON Page 110 Page 112 11:30:16 1 11:30:22 2 11:30:25 3 11:30:27 4 11:30:29 5 11:30:35 6 11:30:40 7 11:30:43 8 11:30:44 9 11:30:4510 11:30:4811 11:30:5112 11:30:5413 11:30:5514 11:30:5715 11:30:5816 11:31:0417 11:31:0618 11:31:0919 11:31:1020 11:31:1421 11:31:1622 11:31:2423 11:31:2924 25 Q. -- in looking at this, can you tell whether or not Union Carbide sold BMMA-6935 BK25 GR12 to Square D Company? A. This document alone would not tell me that. Q. Okay. The fact that it has a serial number W266-72, does that indicate this was a product that was actually manufactured by Union Carbide? A. The serial number doesn't, to me, doesn't indicate that. Q. Okay. A, ItQ. In looking at Exhibits 6 and 7, we didn't see any references to serial numbers, did we? A. No. Q. Okay. When did a product receive a serial number? A. I don't know. Q. Do products that aren't manufactured and sold by Union Carbide frequently receive serial numbers? A. I don't know. Q. What department was responsible for assigning serial numbers? A. Gunst was not part of Research & Development. The location is a Research & 11:32:46 1 11:32:49 2 11:32:56 3 11:33:00 4 11:33:04 5 11:33:06 6 11:33:09 7 11:33:11 8 11:33:17 9 11:33:2110 11:33:2111 11:33:2512 11:33:2613 11:33:2814 11:33:3015 11:33:3016 11:33:3617 11:33:4418 11:33:4719 11:33:4720 11:33:5321 11:33:5522 11:34:0123 11:34:0124 25 product since it has a different serial number? A. My experience has been that the composition is defined by the designation of the product itself. The serial number would not imply -- I've never seen a serial number used to differentiate between one product and another. Q. Is it possible that the serial number describes batch runs? A. No. No. That -- the batch -- we had numbers for batch runs, and that -- those are not batch numbers. Q. Okay. Now, for this one, if we look across under the "Remove" column -- The first one. there w'as no information under the "Remove." correct? A. Yes. Q. Under this one. BMMA-6935 BK25 GR12. Serial No. W267-72, we see removal of W220-72 dated 9/15/72, correct? A. That's right. Q. Okay. So we see removal of a serial number that is different from the four serial numbers that we see under the addition lines, correct? A. That's right. Q. Looking at that information with regards to Page 111 Page 113 11:31:37 1 11:31:41 2 11:31:43 3 11:31:46 4 11:31:47 5 11:31:48 6 11:31:51 7 11:31:54 8 11:31:56 9 11:31:5710 11:31:5911 11:32:0012 11:32:0013 11:32:0114 11:32:0415 11:32:0616 11:32:1117 11:32:1918 11:32:2019 11:32:2520 11:32:2521 11:32:2722 11:32:2823 11:32:3224 25 Development building, though. So I'm not certain from this document who he was reporting to. Q. Okay. Let me ask you this. On December 15th, 1972, you were still group manager of phenolic resins and materials, correct? A. Yes. Yes. Q. Or moldings. Excuse me. H.C. Gunst. if I understand it. did not report to you because he wasn't in R&D. A. That's right. Q. He was in Manufacturing. A. I'm assuming that's where he was because he wasn't in R&D. Q. Okay. A. Why he was located in the R&D building. I don't understand. Q. Okay. Let's go to the next product. BMMA-6935 BK25 GR12. Serial No. W267-72. Customer Square D Company. Did I read that correctly? A. What was that comment? Q. Did I read that correctly? A. Yes. Q. Okay. This product-is it fair to say that this second product is different from the first 11:34:07 1 11:34:09 2 11:34:12 3 11:34:14 4 11:34:18 5 11:34:19 6 11:34:20 7 11:34:23 8 11:34:26 9 11:34:3210 11:34:3411 11:34:3412 11:34:4013 11:34:4514 11:34:4615 11:34:5516 11:34:5617 11:34:5618 11:35:0919 11:35:1020 11:35:1121 11:35:1822 11:35:2223 11:35:2424 25 that serial number, does that provide you with any idea what the serial number refers to? MS. CLARK: Objection; asked and answered. THE WITNESS: Well. I'm completely unfamiliar with w'hat the serial numbers are used for. BY MR. GALERSTON: Q. Okay. Now. the first two products that we saw' under the "Add" section had the exact same product designations with a differentiation of the serial number by one. correct? A. Yes. Q. The third product is BMRS-6935 BK25 GR18, serial code W268-72. for Square D Company, correct? A. Yes. Q. Okay. This appears to be a molding compound again, correct? A. Yes. Q. And the designation of the R here indicates what? A. Injection molding. Q. Okay. I don't know'if I asked you what the GR stands for. Each one of these four products have a GR designation at the end. What does that stand for? 29 (Pages 110 to 113) LUDWIG KLEIN REPORTERS & VIDEO, INC. 800.540.0681 e08d329d-027b-438b-9587-ca63e8cbb1cb CARLO MARTINO 7/11/2007 EUBANKS VS. A.W. CHESTERTON Page 114 Page 116 11:35:29 1 11:35:29 2 11:35:30 3 11:35:36 4 11:35:37 5 11:35:39 6 11:35:39 7 11:35:41 8 11:35:44 9 11:35:4510 11:35:4611 11:35:4612 11:35:5013 11:35:5414 11:35:5715 11:36:0016 11:36:0317 11:36:1318 11:36:1619 11:36:1620 11:36:1821 11:36:2022 11:36:2123 11:36:2324 25 A. That's a measure of the fluidity of the product. Q. Okay. A. The higher the number, the easier the material will flow. Q. Well, these are all granular, correct? A. Yes. Q. So this is talking about, again, for the injection molding process, you need it to be more fluid than you would otherwise? A. Yes. Q. Okay. A. And it depends on the part, too. If it's a thin part, you need more fluidity than a thick part. Q. The fact that these are all products 6935, does that tend to indicate that they are of the same composition? A. They're in the same classification. If the -- it doesn't mean that the resin content is the same. Q. Okay. A. In order to get the more fluidity, you have to put in more resin. Q. Well, I was going to ask you about that. What about the external treatment? Would that 11:37:41 1 11:37:43 2 11:37:43 3 11:37:45 4 11:37:48 5 11:37:48 6 11:37:49 7 11:37:51 8 11:37:53 9 11:37:5510 11:37:5611 11:38:0212 11:38:0613 11: 38:1214 11:38:1615 11:38:2116 11:38:24 17 11:38:2518 11:38:2919 11:38:32 20 11:38:4121 11:38:4122 11:38:4123 11:38:4124 25 the rest of the handbook? MS. CLARK: Objection; foundation, calls for speculation. THE WITNESS: I don't know. You know, this is all new to me. I've never seal this documait before. BY MR. GALERSTON: Q. Okay. And based upon what you're saying, I assume that you have not seen similar documents. A. Yes. Q. You are familiar with molding material handbooks in general, correct? A. Again, this particular one 1 don't recall seeing. I mean, I -- I'm completely contused about this. You would have to search the files to see if there's even a copy that's available. Q. If those documents were in existence, would they be in the repository? A. Yes. MS. CLARK: I'm sorry. Can 1 get that last question and answer back. (The record was read as follows: "Question: If those documents were in existence, w ould they be in the repository? Page 115 Page 117 11:36:28 1 11:36:31 2 11:36:38 3 11:36:40 4 11:36:40 5 11:36:46 6 11:36:48 7 11:36:53 8 11:36:56 9 11:37:0110 11:37:0611 11:37:0912 11:37:1213 11:37:1714 11:37:1915 11:37:1916 11:37:2217 11:37:2518 11:37:2919 11:37:2920 11:37:3121 11:37:3222 11:37:3323 11:37:3524 25 also be part of the reason why you have a GR18 designation for a product, and then you may have the same product without the external treatment? A. And that would be with regard to what? To - Q. GR18, the two GR18s versus the two GR12s. A. No. No. The external addition has nothing to do with that grade number. It was -- that was measured on the product, and there was a technique that would measure how far or how easily the material would flow. It could affect the number. but you would compensate so it would be within the right range. Q. Okay. H.C. Gunst was the author of this document, so it appears. Correct? A. Yes. Q. And we see his initials over here under the typing, and then I assume that a secretarial person. NMP, was responsible for the typing. Is that what that means? A. Yes. Q. Okay. And then it says there was an attachment, correct? A. Yes. Q. Do you think the attachment would have been 11:38:52 1 11:38:52 2 11:38:55 3 11:38:55 4 11:38:57 5 11:38:59 6 11:39:02 7 11:39:04 8 11:39:05 9 11:39:0710 11:39:1311 11:39:1712 11:39:2313 11:39:2714 11:39:2915 11:39:2916 11:39:3217 11:39:3418 11:39:3519 11:39:3620 11:39:4221 11:39:4622 11:39:4823 11:39:5124 25 "Answer: Yes.") BY MR. GALERSTON: Q. Sir, I'm going to hand you--I'm intentionally skipping Exhibit No. 9 now'. A. Okay. Q. I'm going to go ahead and hand you what has been previously marked as Exhibit No. 10 and ask you if you're familiar with Exhibit 10. A. Yes. Q. Okay. How is it that you're familiar with Exhibit No. 10? A. It's the result of my Internet search trying to understand better what an arc chute was. Q. Exhibit 10 is a Data Bulletin for Arc Chute Filter Technology, correct? A. Yes. Q. This is information that you obtained on your own; is that correct? A. Yes. Q. Is it information that you reviewed and relied upon in giving your testimony today? A. It helped me understand what I was dealing with, yes. Q. Had you reviewed any Arc Chute Filter Technology bulletins prior to reviewing this one? 30 (Pages 114 to 117) LUDWIG KLEIN REPORTERS & VIDEO, INC. 800.540.0681 e08d329d-027b-438b-9587-ca63e8cbb1cb CARLO MARTINO 7/11/2007 EUBANKS VS. A.W. CHESTERTON Page 118 Page 120 11:39: 53 1 11:40: 03 2 11:40: 11 3 11:40: 13 4 11:40: 16 5 11:40: 16 6 11:40: 19 7 11:40: 22 8 11:40: 23 9 11:40: 2510 11:40: 2811 11:40: 3212 11:40: 3613 11:40: 3914 11:40: 4115 11:40: 4316 11:40: 5717 11:41: 0218 11:41: 0519 11:41: 0720 11:41: 0721 11:41: 1022 11:41: 1223 11:41: 1624 25 A. No. Q. I'm going to hand you what has been marked as Exhibit 11 to your deposition, and are you familiar with Exhibit 11? A. Yes. Q. Okay. How is it that you're familiar with Exhibit 11? A. It's a military specification for molding material. Q. When did you become familiar with Exhibit No. 11? A. This particular one -- I mean. I'm familiar with the military M-14 specification. This particular exhibit, I saw it yesterday. Q. Okay. Prior to yesterday, when is the last time you looked at a military specification for molding plastics and plastic parts? A. Oh, it was during - prior to one of my previous depositions, but I don't recall which one. It was probably several years. Q. All right. Fair enough. When did you first become familiar with the military specification for molding plastics and molded plastic parts? A. For phenolic compounds, when I -- we had 11:43:13 1 11:43:15 2 11:43:22 3 11:43:28 4 11:43:35 5 11:43:36 6 11:43:38 7 11:43:43 8 11:43:48 9 11:43:5710 11:44:0211 11:44:0812 11:44:1513 11:44:1814 11:44:2115 11:44:2416 11:44:2717 11:44:3118 11:44:3319 11:44:4320 11:44:4821 11:44:5122 11:44:5123 11:44:5224 25 categories and submit evidence, you know, testing. to show' that -- provide the test data that shows that you do, to the government. And this -- these are all of the ty pe of products that the military specifies that can be used for their military specifications. Now', there also would be a military specification for the finished part which would state what type of product should be used in that part. For example, they say they used type CFI-10, and then only that type of material could be used. Q. Okay. In 1960, did Union Carbide manufacture, sell, and distribute phenolic materials, resin and molding, that would meet the requirements under phenolic resins of Exhibit 11? MS. CLARK: Objection; foundation, overly broad, so outside the scope of the notice and overbroad as to time frame. THE WITNESS: We met - we made a number of these different phenolic compounds that would probably meet some of these classifications. We did not make any of the melamine compounds. We did not make melamine. BY MR. GALERSTON: Q. Okay. Well, since I'm interested in Page 119 Page 121 11:41: 29 1 11:41: 32 2 11:41: 38 3 11:41: 41 4 11:41: 47 5 11:41: 48 6 11:41: 50 7 11:41: 52 8 11:41: 53 9 11:41: 5710 11:42: 0011 11:42: 0912 11:42: 1113 11:42: 1414 11:42: 1815 11:42: 2516 11:42: 3417 11:42: 3818 11:42: 4219 11:42: 5020 11:42: 5021 11:42: 5222 11:42: 5523 11:42: 5724 25 responsibility for the molding material group. Q. Prior to 1960, did you have any familiarity with Exhibit 11 or its predecessor? A. Prior to 1960, there was no need for me to have. It existed, but I had no reason to refer to it. Q. Okay. So prior to 1960, you had no reason; therefore, you didn't have familiarity with it. Correct? A. Well, 1960? That's when I started in the area, so sometime after that, I would have gotten involved in it. Q. What is the significance, if any, of Exhibit 11 and the testimony that you're giving with regards to Donnv Eubanks? A. This -- in order for a product to be used for a military application, it has to meet the specifications of one of these categories, and for Square D to use it for the military application. that specific product has to be on the Qualified Product List. Q. Okay. A. This -- and if you want to be on the product qualified list, you have to take your product and determine if it fits one of these 11:44:57 1 11:44:57 2 11:45:00 3 11:45:05 4 11:45:09 5 11:45:12 6 11:45:14 7 11:45:18 8 11:45:22 9 11:45:2810 11:45:3711 11:45:4512 11:45:4913 11:45:5714 11:45:5815 11:45:5916 11:46:0117 11:46:0518 11:46:0719 11:46:1420 11:46:2021 11:46:2722 11:46:3023 11:46:3224 25 asbestos-containing products particularly -- A. Yes. Q. -- let's look at type MFG. Did Union Carbide in the Bakelite division manufacture, sell, and distribute a phenolic resin material that had an asbestos filler for general purpose and w'as heat resistant? MS. CLARK: Objection; overly broad, vague. THE WITNESS: They did sell asbestos materials. Whether they would have been qualified under this MFG or MFH or MFI-10 category'. I would have to determine w'hether we actually measured the properties and -- versus what's required. BY MR. GALERSTON: Q. Did you -- A. Just because they have asbestos filler doesn't mean they meet the requirement. You have to run the test to determine that. Q. Do you know' of your ow'n personal know ledge whether or not Union Carbide sold an asbestoscontaining phenolic molding product that would have met the requirements of type MFG under MIL-M-14F? MS. CLARK: Objection; overly broad, vague. asked and answered. THE WITNESS: Without referring to the 31 (Pages 118 to 121) LUDWIG KLEIN REPORTERS & VIDEO, INC. 800.540.0681 e08d329d-027b-438b-9587-ca63e8cbb1cb CARLO MARTINO 7/11/2007 EUBANKS VS. A.W. CHESTERTON Page 122 Page 124 11:46:34 1 11:46:35 2 11:46:39 3 11:46:42 4 11:46:47 5 11:46:53 6 11:46:56 7 11:46:58 8 11:47:00 9 11:47:0010 11:47:0311 11:47:0412 11:47:0513 11:47:0514 11:47:0815 11:47:1016 11:47:1417 11:47:2218 11:47:2619 11:47:2720 11:47:3221 11:47:3422 11:47:4123 11:47:4424 25 records, I can't answer that. BY MR. GALERSTON: Q. Okay. Likewise, type MFH; do you know whether or not Union Carbide's Bakelite division sold and distributed a product that would have been used by companies such as Square D. Cutler-Hammer, and Allen-Bradley that would have met the requirements of MFH? MR. KINSEY: Objection; assumes facts not in evidence. MS. CLARK: Objection; overly broad, vague. THE WITNESS: Again, I would have to refer to the records. BY MR. GALERSTON: Q. Okay. When you say you would have to refer to the records, what records would you refer to? A. Well, as to whether or not we ever qualified a product under the MFG or the MFH or the MFI designation. Q. Okay. A. And if we did get on the Qualified Product List, whether or not that product was sold to Square D. and I would need the sales records for that. Q. With regards to MFI-10 and 20, you have no 11:49:38 1 11:49:43 2 11:49:45 3 11:49:49 4 11:49:56 5 11:49:59 6 11:50:00 7 11:50:02 8 11:50:07 9 11:50:1210 11:50:1611 11:50:1912 11:50:2313 11:50:2714 11:50:3115 11:50:3316 11:50:4117 11:50:4518 11:50:4919 11:50:5020 11:50:5021 11:50:5222 11:50:5623 11:50:5924 25 be to test the product and submit all of the data to the proper agency. And my experience is that it -- you know, the end user would request -- you know, they would deal only with regard to their part and the military specifications that applied to their finished part. MR. GALERSTON: HI object to the nonresponsive nature of the answer. Q. Do you -- is it fair to say that you cannot testify of your own personal knowledge that Union Carbide never attempted to have its phenolic molding compounds approved by the United States Government for placement on the Qualified Products List under the MFG, MFH, or the MFI designations? MS. CLARK: Objection; vague, confusing. THE WITNESS: All I'm saying is that I cannot tell from my recollection whether we did or not. but we may have, and the only way to determine that is to go to the records. I don't remember. That's 40 years. BY MR. GALERSTON: Q. Oh, sure. Sure. Well, and you didn't remember what the contents of Exhibit No. 11, which is military spec M-14F, was before you were handed it by counsel, correct? Page 123 Page 125 11:47:51 1 11:47:53 2 11:47:56 3 11:47:59 4 11:48:01 5 11:48:08 6 11:48:14 7 11:48:26 8 11:48:30 9 11:48:3310 11:48:36 11 11:48:3912 11:48:4213 11:48:4514 11:48:5215 11:48:5716 11:49:0317 11:49:0618 11:49:0719 11:49:12 20 11:49:1621 11:49:2022 11:49:2523 11:49:3024 25 information one way or the other that indicates to you whether Union Carbide's Bakelite division ever manufactured, sold, or distributed a product that met the requirements for the MFI-10 or 20 classification? A. That's a very high impact strength, which implies that it -- I'm not sure whether we had anything in our product -- in our products that was that strong. That could be a Fiberite material. Q. Okay. And is it fair to say that you don't have information that would indicate to you whether or not Square D, Cutler-Hammer, or Allen-Bradley ever submitted any product that they manufactured using materials purchased from Union Carbide for approval under MFG, MFH, MFI-10, or MF1-20? A. In my experience, the end user did not request the product approval from the government. That was up to us to do. The procedure would be that if they wanted to use our product and it was not on the Qualified Products List, they would ask through our Sales Department that we get it qualified, and if the Marketing manager approved it, then either we or the Quality Control Department would go through the procedure of getting that qualification, which would 11:51:05 1 11:51:08 2 11:51:09 3 11:51:09 4 11:51:13 5 11:51:18 6 11:51:20 7 11:51:23 8 11:51:24 9 11:51:2910 11:51:3211 11:51:3312 11:51:3613 11:51:3914 11:51:4315 11:51:4616 11:51:5217 11:51:5218 11:51:54 19 11:51:5720 11:52:0021 11:52:02 22 11:52:02 23 11:52:0524 25 A. Oh, no. That's -- I did. I knew that such a document existed, and I used it when I was in the business. Q. Right. A. I mean, I had no need to refer to it after I retired except when it came up once before. Q. Well, sure. And when cotmsel gave this to you, did you ask counsel for the Qualified Products List that goes with it? A. I asked about it and what, you know, what products -- whether we had any information what products were on the Qualified Products List. And tliat's very important, because if it wasn't on the Qualified Products List, Square D could not take 5303 and mold it into an electrical part for the government, for a military application. And tlie information may be available, but 1 haven't seat it. Q. And has counsel told you why counsel did not give you the Qualified Products List that coordinates with mil spec M-14F? MS. CLARK: Objection; argumentative. Don't answer that question. He asked to see that document in relation to arc-resistance properties which pertained to the 32 (Pages 122 to 125) LUDWIG KLEIN REPORTERS & VIDEO, INC. 800.540.0681 e08d329d-027b-438b-9587-ca63e8cbb1cb CARLO MARTINO 7/11/2007 EUBANKS VS. A.W. CHESTERTON Page 126 Page 128 11:52:11 1 11:52:16 2 11:52:19 3 11:52:22 4 11:52:24 5 11:52:25 6 11:52:26 7 11:52:29 8 11:52:32 9 11:52:3310 11:52:3511 11:52:3612 11:52:3713 11:52:3914 11:52:4115 11:52:4516 11:52:4817 11:52:49 18 11:52:5019 11:52: 54 20 11:52:5621 11:53:0022 11:53:0123 11:53:0424 25 arc chutes and arc shields in this case. I'll object to the improper implication there. MR. GALERSTON: I'll object to the side-bar. Q. Sir, did counsel tell you -- when you asked them lor the Qualified Products List, did they tell you why they didn't give it to you? MS. CLARK: Objection; misstates his testimony. He didn't say he asked for the Qualified Products List. MS. N1COL: Also, privilege objection. THE WITNESS: Am I allowed to answer that or not? MR. GALERSTON: Counsel, what is the basis of your privilege objection? And what are you doing interrupting this deposition again? MS. N1COL: I don't consider lodging a legal objection an interruption. You can move on with your deposition. MR. GALERSTON: No. What's the basis of your qualification of this witness for privilege? MS. NICOL: You're asking about communications with counsel representing him. MR. GALERSTON: This witness is not an employee of yours. This is a consultant who has retired from your corporation. You have no basis 11:53:54 1 11:53:55 2 11:53:57 3 11:53:58 4 11:54:01 5 11:54:02 6 11:54:04 7 11:54:06 8 11:54:08 9 11:54:1010 11:54:1311 11:54:1512 11:54:1713 11:54:1814 11:54:2015 11:54:2016 11:54:2217 11:54:2318 11:54:2519 11:54:2820 11:54:2921 11:54:3222 11:54:3623 11:54:3724 25 remember her name. MR. GALERSTON: Counsel, if you want to coach your witness, take him outside and don't do it on the record. Okay? You know, this is ridiculous. I'm trying to ask this witness -- I'm now having you coaching him on the record; I've got Nicol. Nicola Nafar. whatever her name is, in California lodging objections. This is completely inappropriate. MS. CLARK: Well, wait. I have to respond to that. I'm not coaching the witness. I was correcting an inaccuracy. The gentleman may not remember her specific name. He said he didn't have a direct communication with her. MR. GALERSTON: Counsel, I'm not asking you're not under oath, and I'm not asking you questions. If you want to take him on crossexamination or direct examination, whatever you want to call it when you have an opportunity, you can clarify any misstatements he makes at that point in time. It is not for you to get on the record and clarify his testimony. That is for you to do by direct examination, not by speechifying. MS. NICOL: Counsel. I'm going to suggest you change your tone. Page 127 Page 129 11:53:08 1 11:53:10 2 11:53:10 3 11:53:11 4 11:53:12 5 11:53:13 6 11:53:13 7 11:53:14 8 11:53:16 9 11:53:1910 11:53:2111 11:53:2212 11:53:2313 11:53:2414 11:53:2715 11:53:2916 11:53:3117 11:53:3418 11:53:4019 11:53:4020 11:53:4421 11:53:4422 11:53:4623 11:53:5024 25 for an attorney-client privilege with this witness. MS. NICOL: You're miseharacterizing it. BY MR. GALERSTON: Q. SirMS. NICOL: The legal objection has been made. BY MR. GALERSTON: Q. SirWhat's your name, again? MS. NICOL: I made my appearance for the record. It's Farah Nicol. MR. GALERSTON: Pardon me? MS. NICOL: Farah Nicol. MR. GALERSTON: Farah Nicol. Q. Sir, when did you meet Ms. Farah Nicol? A. I didn't meet with Farah Nicol. Q. Okay. Did you ever ask Farah Nicol to represent you in this deposition? A. I had my -- I had no direct communication with Farah Nicol. Q. Do you know why Farah Nicol is claiming to have an attorney-client privilege with you? MS. CLARK: For the record, Ms. Nicol is co-counsel and, in fact, was involved in some discussions with Mr. Martino, and he may not 11:54:41 1 11:54:45 2 11:54:46 3 11:54:51 4 11:54:54 5 11:54:58 6 11:54:58 7 11:55:01 8 11:55:05 9 11:55:1410 11:55:1911 11:55:2112 11:55:2113 11:55:2114 11:55:2315 11:55:2416 11:55:2617 11:55:2918 11:55:3019 11:55:3220 11:55:3321 11:55:3522 11:55:3523 11:55:3624 25 MR. GALERSTON: Thank you so very much for your recommendation. I probably would have a much better tone if you would stop interrupting my deposition and lodging spurious objections. Q. Sir. does "Ms. Far" represent you? MS. CLARK: Objection; calls for a legal conclusion. THE WITNESS: You know. I'm - I'm new' to this. I don't know' who represents me. I assume that it's my local counsel here -- I mean Ms. Clark -- but what the relationship is between other attorneys. I mean. I'm not a legal expert. MR. GALERSTON: I understand that. sir. THE WITNESS: I mean. I'm BY MR. GALERSTON: Q. Have you hi red any -- A. And I'm quite surprised. Every time. I learn something new. Q. Sir, have you hired an attorney to represent you in your deposition today? A. No, I have not. MS. CLARK: Objection; calls for a legal conclusion. BY MR. GALERSTON: Q. Sir. do you feel - are you paying for 33 (Pages 126 to 129) LUDWIG KLEIN REPORTERS & VIDEO, INC. 800.540.0681 e08d329d-027b-438b-9587-ca63e8cbb1cb CARLO MARTINO 7/11/2007 EUBANKS VS. A.W. CHESTERTON Page 130 Page 132 11:55:39 1 11:55:40 2 11:55:42 3 11:55:44 4 11:55:46 5 11:55:46 6 11:55:48 7 11:55:50 8 11:55:52 9 11:55:5510 11:55:5711 11:56:0112 11:56:0213 11:56:0314 11:56:0415 11:56:0716 11:56:0717 11:56:0918 11:56:1019 11:56:1220 11:56:1321 11:56:1722 11:56:1723 11:56:2124 25 anybody's legal services as you're here today? A. No. Q. Are you here to testify as to factual matters that you're aware of based upon your work at Union Carbide in the Bakelite division? A. Yes. Q. Okay. And you are being compensated for your time here, are you not? A. Yes. Q. Are you able to take any legal actions on behalf of Union Carbide based upon information provided you by Ms. Far or Ms. Clark? MS. CLARK: Objection; calls for a legal conclusion. THE WITNESS: What do you mean "legal action"? BY MR. GALERSTON: Q. Can you act on behalf of Union Carbide in any capacity? A. In a what capacity? Q. In any capacity. MS. CLARK: Objection; vague, calls for a legal conclusion. THE WITNESS: I'm retired. I can act only as, you know. I'm requested to act and as a -- and 11:57:52 1 11:57:55 2 11:57:56 3 11:58:00 4 11:58:01 5 11:58:04 6 11:58:04 7 11:58:08 8 11:58:12 9 11:58:1710 11:58:1811 11:58:1812 11:58:2013 11:58:2114 11:58:2415 11:58:2616 11:58:2817 11:58:3118 11:58:3519 11:58:3920 11:58:4221 11:58:4522 11:58:4823 11:58:5324 25 Q. Sir, I apologize for the distractions and the disruptions. Let's see if we can get back to the question at hand. The question is, is would the Qualified Products List have been information that you would have liked to have had to review' prior to giving your testimony today? MS. CLARK: Objection; vague, ambiguous. THE WITNESS: I didn't know if! would need it. and 1 probably won't know until after we complete the deposition. BY MR. GALERSTON: Q. Well. I'm asking you now. sir. Would it have been information that you would have liked to have known, whether or not Union Carbide ever submitted information to the United States Government to get any of its products qualified under MIL-M- 14F? MS. CLARK: Same objections. THE WITNESS: It would have helped, yes. BY MR. GALERSTON: Q. Do you know whether or not the Qualified Products List that would have been in effect or. I should say. would coordinate with MIL-M- 14F would be located in the repository maintained here in the law Page 131 Page 133 11:56:31 1 11:56:38 2 11:56:39 3 11:56:42 4 11:56:45 5 11:56:48 6 11:56:50 7 11:56:51 8 11:56:53 9 11:56:5610 11:56:5811 11:57:0012 11:57:0213 11:57:0414 11:57:0715 11:57:0916 11:57:1217 11:57:1418 11:57:2219 11:57:2820 11:57:3221 11:57:3422 11:57:3723 11:57:4724 25 testify with regard to what I remember about the business and how the products were used. MS. N1COL: Counsel, this is Farah Nicol. Let's make no bones about it. He's not being produced here and was not subpoenaed as a fact witness. He's being produced as the person most knowledgeable on behalf of Union Carbide Corporation, and that's pursuant to the deposition notice Plaintiffs served in this case. You have yet to cover the subject matter. the very narrow' subject matter, called for in the deposition notice, and a lot of leew'av has been given. So if there's any interruption of the deposition process. I believe it's you going well outside the scope of the deposition. So be clear. He is not a fact witness. You did not subpoena him by name in any way, shape. or form. He is being produced pursuant to your deposition notice to Union Carbide Corporation. MR. GALERSTON: Are you quite done? Ms. Far? Ms. Far. are you finished? MS. NICOL: I've made my objection for the record. If I have something more to say, you can be sure I will. BY MR. GALERSTON: 11:59:06 1 11:59:06 2 11:59:06 3 11:59:06 4 11:59:06 5 11:59:07 6 11:59:09 7 11:59:11 8 11:59:13 9 11:59:1810 11:59:1811 11:59:2112 11:59:2613 11:59:2914 11:59:3415 11:59:3916 11:59:4017 11:59:4418 11:59:4719 11:59:5120 11:59:5721 12:00:0522 12:00:0923 12:00:1824 25 firm of Union Carbide's? MS. CLARK: Objection; foundation. THE WITNESS: That would be the first place I would look. BY MR. GALERSTON: Q. Are you aware of any efforts that were made to determine whether or not that type of information was in the repository? MS. CLARK: Objection; vague, ambiguous. THE WITNESS: I don't know if there were. BY MR. GALERSTON: Q. Have you looked at Exhibit No. 11 sufficiently to know whether or not, in general. the products that Union Carbide manufactured in the 1960s and 1970s would have met the requirements for type MFG. MFH. MF1-10 and 20? MS. CLARK: Objection; beyond the scope of the notice and beyond the scope of what was agreed upon, which is the applications at issue in this case, arc chutes and arc shields. THE WITNESS: I looked to refresh my memory as to what these categories were. I did not determine whether we did have any products that would meet the various categories and don't have the information available to me right now to be able to 34 (Pages 130 to 133) LUDWIG KLEIN REPORTERS & VIDEO, INC. 800.540.0681 e08d329d-027b-438b-9587-ca63e8cbb1cb CARLO MARTINO 7/11/2007 EUBANKS VS. A.W. CHESTERTON Page 134 Page 136 12:00:22 1 12:00:30 2 12:00:32 3 12:00:33 4 12:00:35 5 12:00:38 6 12:00:41 7 12:00:48 8 12:59:08 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 do it. MR. GALERSTON: It's 12:00 o'clock. The tape is running. Why don't we go ahead and take an hour for lunch. THE WITNESS: Good. THE VIDEOGRAPHER: This is the end of Tape Number Two in the deposition of Carlo Martino. The time is 12:00:41. We're off the record. (Lunch recess taken at 12:00 p.m.) --oOo-- 13:03:23 1 13:03:26 2 13:03:29 3 13:03:32 4 13:03:34 5 13:03:40 6 13:03:41 7 13:03:41 8 13:03:43 9 13:03:4310 13:03:4511 13:03:4812 13:03:5113 13:03:5214 13:03:5415 13:03:5516 13:03:5817 13:04:0118 13:04:0319 13:04:0620 13:04:0921 13:04:0922 13:04:1123 13:04:1124 25 A. Infante, one part. Q. Okay. You reviewed Infante in part. Walker and Gibson in whole? A. Well, there was only one sent to me. Q. That's correct. Those were not -- there were not multiple parts to Walker, to Gibson, or to Crull. A. Okay. Q. So you reviewed those in their entirety? A. Yes. Q. In addition to that, you did some research on your own, and you came up with what has been marked as Exhibit "D," which is the Data Bulletin regarding Arc Chute Filter Technology published by Square D, correct? A. That's the top document, but there's something -- the attachment is Gund Company, also. Q. Okay. Wliv don't you get Exhibit 10 out. Right there, it's next to you. So you're telling me that Exhibit 10 is actually two documents -- A. Yes. Q. -- the first being a two-page publication from Square D/Schneider Electric, correct? A. (Nonaudible response.) Page 135 Page 137 12:59:16 1 13:02:29 2 13:02:29 3 13:02:49 4 13:02:50 5 13:02:57 6 13:02:58 7 13:02:58 8 13:02:58 9 13:02:5810 13:02:5911 13:03:0112 13:03:0213 13:03:0214 13:03:0215 13:03:0416 13:03:0617 13:03:0718 13:03:1019 13:03:1320 13:03:1321 13:03:1622 13:03:1923 13:03:2124 25 CHICAGO, ILLINOIS: WEDNESDAY, JULY 11, 2007 1:02 P.M. THE VIDEOGRAPHER: We're back on the record. This is the beginning of Tape Number Three in the deposition of Carlo Martino. The time is 13:02:53. Counsel, you may proceed. MR. GALERSTON: Thank you. EXAMINATION (RESUMED) BY MR. GALERSTON: Q. Mr. Martino, are you prepared to go forward? A. Yes. Q. Very' good. Sir, I want to go back over the documents that you reviewed in preparation for your deposition today. My understanding is that you reviewed three portions of the Donnv Eubanks deposition. Correct? A. Yes. Q. You reviewed - do you know if you reviewed the entirety of the Robert Infante deposition? There's three parts. (> do you believe you reviewed one part? 13:04:19 1 13:04:23 2 13:04:28 3 13:04:33 4 13:04:37 5 13:04:38 6 13:04:40 7 13:04:43 8 13:04:45 9 13:04:4510 13:04:4911 13:04:5212 13:05:0813 13:05:0914 13:05:0915 13:05:0916 13:05:1117 13:05:1318 13:05:1419 13:05:1520 13:05:1821 13:05:2022 13:05:2123 13:05:2224 25 Q. And then the third page, which appears to be a printout of a website; is that correct? A. Yes, for the Gund Company, G-u-n-d. Q. Okay. What is the significance of this third page ) A. That's where I started. Q. Okay. I'm going to suggest, would you do me a favor? Will you gently remove that from this document since it's a separate document? A. Sure. Q. So let's remove it from Exhibit 10. Karen, if you would be so kind to provide us with another number, please. (Plaintiffs' Exhibit 12 was marked for identification by the Certified Shorthand Reporter.) BY MR. GALERSTON: Q. Okay, sir. Now that we've got the exhibits clarified. Exhibit 10 is a two-page document. correct? A. Right. Q. And you agree that it does not -- Exhibit 12, which was attached to 10, does not go with 10, correct? A. That's right. Q. All right. Exhibit 12 you say was where 35 (Pages 134 to 137) LUDWIG KLEIN REPORTERS & VIDEO, INC. 800.540.0681 e08d329d-027b-438b-9587-ca63e8cbb1cb CARLO MARTINO 7/11/2007 EUBANKS VS. A.W. CHESTERTON Page 138 Page 140 13:05:27 1 13:05:30 2 13:05:34 3 13:05:41 4 13:05:45 5 13:05:53 6 13:05:55 7 13:06:00 8 13:06:03 9 13:06:0610 13:06:1111 13:06:1212 13:06:1513 13:06:1514 13:06:1615 13:06:1816 13:06:2017 13:06:24 18 13:06:3019 13:06:3020 13:06:3321 13:06:3722 13:06:3923 13:06:3924 25 you started; is that correct? A. That was the first information that appeared to be relevant on the Internet, and it listed the type of products that are used for arc chutes, which in this particular case are melamine laminates and glass, glass-reinforced. Q. Okay. So the page that we're looking at in Exhibit 12, which is dated July 10th, 2007, says "Switchgear" at the top, and then it has "insulation materials range from glass polyester phase barriers to flame retardant polypropylene," correct? A. Would you repeat that, please? Q. Exhibit 12 is dated July 10th, 2007, correct? A. Yes. Q. Okay. And at the top, it says "Switchgear," and then says, "insulation materials range from glass polyester phase barriers to flame retardant polypropylene," correct? A. Yes. Q. And then you're saying that under "Switchgear Insulation Materials," you can find some descriptions of arc chutes -- A. Yes. Q. -- and materials that are used for arc 13:07:33 1 13:07:34 2 13:07:37 3 13:07:37 4 13:07:37 5 13:07:40 6 13:07:40 7 13:07:43 8 13:07:46 9 13:07:4710 13:07:4711 13:07:5012 13:07:5313 13:07:5614 13:07:5815 13:08:0116 13:08:0417 13:08:0718 13:08:0819 13:08:1020 13:08:1321 13:08:1722 13:08:1823 13:08:1824 25 A. Yes. Q. -- it came up with a list of a number of hits, and you said there w ere numerous ones, correct? A. Yes. Q. That's the list I mean. Did you keep that? A. No. Q. Okay. So this is the first document you looked at, the switchgear document. Exhibit 12? A. Yes. Yes. Q. Okay. A. And it said here, "To order" - "It contains application information, material options, and technical data sheets on each material. To order," you have to -- to get "Switchgear Insulation Products Handbook, click here." which 1 was going to do. but I wouldn't have gotten it back in time. And I may still do it for my ow;n information. Q. Okay. A. But after I saw' that, I started looking at other sites to see - what I w;as looking for is a picture so I could visualize what the arc chute looked like. Q. Okay. A. Which then I found on the Square D Page 139 Page 141 13:06:42 1 13:06:42 2 13:06:46 3 13:06:50 4 13:06:50 5 13:06:51 6 13:06:53 7 13:06:54 8 13:06:54 9 13:06:5610 13:06:5811 13:07:0012 13:07:0613 13:07:1014 13:07:1015 13 : 07:1116 13:07:1417 13:07:1818 13:07:2119 13:07:2420 13:07:2721 13:07:2922 13:07:2923 13:07:3224 25 chutes, correct? A. Yes. Q. And I believe you're indicating that you're down towards the bottom where it says "Vulcanized Fibre"; is that correct? A. Yes. Q. And then you saw the "Silicone Bonded Mica Laminate"? A. Right. Q. And then you saw the "Melamine," correct? A. Right. Q. Okay. What was the search that you ran that resulted in finding this document? A. I just put in "arc chutes" into the search box. Q. Okay. A. And I got many, many references. Q. What search engine did you use? A. I think it's Yahoo. Q. And did you maintain or keep the list that you found? A. 1 have copies of both documents at home. yes. Q. No. I mean when you ran the search for arc chutes -- 13:08:20 1 13:08:24 2 13:08:24 3 13:08:24 4 13:08:33 5 13:08:34 6 13:08:35 7 13:08:39 8 13:08:44 9 13:08:4710 13:08:49 11 13:08:54 12 13:09:0013 13:09:0314 13:09:0715 13:09:1016 13:09:1317 13:09:1618 13:09:1919 13:09:22 20 13:09:2721 13:09:3022 13:09:3323 13:09:3624 25 document. Q. Okay. And the Square D document is Exhibit 10, correct? A. Yes. Q. And Exhibit 10 depicts a 2003 rendition of an arc chute, correct? A. Yes. Q. Okay. Do you know whether or not an arc chute in 1990 -- in 1970 would have looked similar to the arc chute depicted in this? A. That, I don't know. Q. Have you done -- A. The -- what -- the depositions 1 read, to me, what they described were what I understood were arc barriers or arc shields, and I was familiar with those. I was not familiar with arc chutes, and tliat's why I did this. This particular arc chute is different than the description that was given in the deposition. Q. Okay. Did you do any research with regards to arc shields or arc barriers? A. No. Q. You felt sufficiently familiar with the terminology and knew what an arc barrier and arc shield was like? 36 (Pages 138 to 141) LUDWIG KLEIN REPORTERS & VIDEO, INC. 800.540.0681 e08d329d-027b-438b-9587-ca63e8cbb1cb VQ iD ID CTi O (*) i--1 CARLO MARTINO 7/11/2007 EUBANKS VS. A.W. CHESTERTON Page 142 Page 144 13:09:37 1 13:09:38 2 13:09:43 3 13:09:47 4 13:09:50 5 13:09:58 7 13:10:00 8 13:10:02 9 13:10:05 10 13:10:07 11 13:10:09 12 13:10:10 13 13:10:24 14 13:10:26 15 13:10:26 16 13:10:30 17 13:10:32 18 13:10:34 19 13:10:35 20 13:10:35 21 13:10:38 22 13:10:41 23 13:10:43 24 25 A. Yes. Q. Okay. A. Yeah. And there was a description in the deposition which, you know, I -- when they described it, it is an arc barrier. Why are they calling it a chute? And that's what -- why I went further, to try to understand is there a difference between a chute and a barrier. To me, it's -- you know, what they described were barriers. Q. Okay. Fair enough. Do you have any pictures of arc shields or arc barriers? A. No. Q. Okay. So you reviewed, based upon your own research. Exhibits 10 and 12, correct? A. Yes. Q. Exhibit 11, which is the mil spec for Molding Plastics and Molded Plastic Parts, Thermosetting, was provided to you by counsel. correct? A. Yes. Q. What else, if anything, did you review in preparation for your deposition today? A. That was it. Q. Did you review the testimony of the 13:12:03 1 13:12:07 2 13:12:08 3 13:12:10 4 13:12:14 5 13:12:15 6 13:12:16 7 13:12:17 8 13:12:18 9 13:12:2110 13:12:2311 13:12:2412 13:12:2513 13:12:2814 13:12:3015 13:12:3216 13:12:3317 13:12:3518 13:12:3619 13:12:3820 13:12:4121 13:12:4222 13:12:4823 13:12:5124 25 MR. GALERSTON: Okay. Objection to the nonresponsive nature of the answer. Q. How many pages of the deposition did you review? A. All of it. Oh, of the -- Q. Barbaglia. A. -- Square D? Q. Correct. A. It was just a portion of one page. I didn't see the rest. Q. Do you remember what page number it was that you reviewed? A. No. Q. I assume, based upon your testimony, it wasn't testimony that you chose to review, this is only the testimony that counsel chose to present to you. Correct? A. Well, what she felt was relevant. Q. Right. A. I don't know what was in the rest of it. Q. You have no idea what was omitted? A. Right. Q. Did you see the portion of the testimony where Mr. Barbaglia testified that he believed that the arc shields that they provided did contain Page 143 Page 145 13:10:48 1 13:10:50 2 13:11:00 3 13:11:01 4 13:11:02 5 13:11:03 6 13:11:04 7 13:11:06 8 13:11:07 9 13:11:10 10 13:11:1211 13:11:1412 13:11:1713 13:11:1914 13:11:2015 13:11:2216 13:11:2417 13:11:2718 13:11:3119 13:11:4020 13:11:4221 13:11:4722 13:11:5223 13:12:0024 25 Square D corporate representative who was deposed. Robert Barbaglia? A. I saw that, a portion of that, yesterday. Q. Okay. Do you have that with you today? A. No. Q. Did you keep it? A. No. Q. Counsel has it? A. Yes. Q. Did you ask counsel to hold it for you? A. Well, it wasn't mine to begin with. Q. Do you consider the depositions they sent you electronically and that are stored on your commuter to be yours or counsel's? A. No. There was a copy. Q. Okay. What portion of the Barbaglia deposition did you review? A. Just the part with regard to the arc shield and arc chute, that he did not think the Bakelite product was used in making those pieces, which is the same conclusion I have come to. I would not use a phenolic for that purpose, either. It has very poor arc resistance. And, in fact, none of the MIL-14 products have an arc-resistant test in them, including phenolic asbestos compounds. 13:12:56 1 13:12:59 2 13:13:00 3 13:13:03 4 13:13:07 5 13:13:09 6 13:13:09 7 13:13:11 8 13:13:13 9 13:13:1710 13:13:1911 13: 13:2112 13:13:2113 13:13:2314 13: 13:2415 13:13:2516 13: 13:2817 13:13:3018 13:13:3019 13:13:3920 13:13:4321 13:13:4522 13:13:4923 13:13:5024 25 asbestos? MR. KINSEY: Objection; mischaracterizes previous testimony. THE WITNESS: 1 didn't see anything with regard to his believing that there was asbestos in the product that was used. BY MR. GALERSTON: Q. Did you see the testimony where he indicated that he had no personal knowledge of the manufacture, sale, or distribution of the arc shields that might have been sold to the United States Navy in the 1970s? A. No. MR. KINSEY: Objection. MS. CLARK: Objection; mischaracterizes the testimony. THE WITNESS: 1 only saw that one portion that 1 felt was maybe a paragraph. BY MR. GALERSTON: Q. Okay. Would it be fair to say that you do not know one way or the other as to the accuracy of the testimony Mr. Barbaglia gave? MS. CLARK: Objection; ambiguous. THE WITNESS: Well, I liked that he agreed with me. 37 (Pages 142 to 145) LUDWIG KLEIN REPORTERS & VIDEO, INC. 800.540.0681 e08d329d-027b-438b-9587-ca63e8cbb1cb CARLO MARTINO 7/11/2007 EUBANKS VS. A.W. CHESTERTON Page 146 Page 148 13:13:51 1 13:13:55 2 13:13:58 3 13:14:00 4 13:14:01 5 13:14:03 6 13:14:04 7 13:14:07 8 13:14:09 9 13:14:12 10 13:14:14 11 13:14:14 12 13:14:14 13 13:14:16 14 13:14:19 15 13:14:22 16 13:14:24 17 13:14:31 18 13:14:34 19 13:14:38 20 13:14:44 21 13:14:47 22 13:14:49 23 13:14:51 24 25 BY MR. GALERSTON: Q. Okay. You don't have any basis to know whether or not Mr. Barbaglia's testimony is accurate. Is that fair to say? A. No basis for what? Q. To know whether or not his testimony is accurate. MS. CLARK: Objection; vague, ambiguous. THE WITNESS: Well, it's a matter of judgment, you know. 1 didn't read anything that made me feel that he didn't know what he was talking about. BY MR. GALERSTON: Q. Do you believe you read enough to get an idea whether or not Mr. Barbaglia was competent to testify? You read a paragraph of his testimony. A. Only that part, yeah. 1 don't know the man, and 1 don't know his background. Q. If I understand it correctly, you believe that his testimony with regards to the use of Bakelite materials for arc chutes would not have been likely, based upon your own experience with that material. Is that fair to say? A. No. I'm saying that we both agreed that a phenolic compound w ould not have been used for 13:16:18 1 13:16:36 2 13:16:40 3 13:16:44 4 13:16:47 5 13:16:50 6 13:16:50 7 13:16:52 8 13:16:53 9 13:16:5610 13:16:5811 13:17:0212 13:17:0913 13:17:1514 13:17:1815 13:17:2216 13:17:2517 13:17:2918 13:17:2919 13:17:3120 13:17:3421 13:17:3622 13:17:3923 13:17:4024 25 A. No. at least not during the period of time I was there, which w;as since 1948. Q. With regards to the research that you've done, do you believe that you have made an exhaustive research to determine whether or not phenolic resins have ever been used to make arc shields? MS. CLARK: Objection; asked and answered. argumentative. THE WITNESS: I've done enough to prove to myself that that's the conclusion I would come to, and then add to it my experience that phenolic resins carbonize in the presence of an arc. and the carbon -- the carbon formation would continue and go right through, and especially on a thin barrier -- it would no longer be an arc barrier -- and that my experience in the past was that we would not use a phenolic where an excellent arc resistance was required. BY MR. GALERSTON: Q. You would agree with me that Union Carbide and its Bakelite division were not in the business of manufacturing and selling arc chutes and shields. correct? A. That's right. Page 147 Page 149 13:15:02 1 13:15:05 2 13:15:09 3 13:15:14 4 13:15:19 5 13:15:22 6 13:15:26 7 13:15:27 8 13:15:27 9 13:15:29 10 13:15:33 11 13:15:36 12 13:15:39 13 13:15:42 14 13:15:44 15 13:15:47 16 13:15:50 17 13:15:53 18 13:15:57 19 13:16:00 20 13:16:05 21 13:16:07 22 13:16:08 23 13:16:10 24 25 arc -- for arc barriers or arc chutes, and it would have -- in my particular case, I believe it was a melamine, just like Gund Company states, and 1 think it's backed up by the mil specs where the only categories that show arc-resistant testing, test required, are melamine and polyesters. There are no phenolic compounds that require an arc-resistant test. MR. GALERSTON: [object to the nonresponsive nature of the answer. Q. Sir, did you undertake any investigation or research to determine w hether or not phenolic resins were ever used for the manufacture of arc chutes -- excuse me -- arc shields? MS. CLARK: Objection; asked and answered. THE WITNESS: Well, as far as I've gone of what I've told you I've done and the mil specs. As far as I'm concerned, tliat's good enough. If it isn't there, if you don't have a phenolic compound that the government will qualify for arc-resistant application, you can't use it, and, you know, I don't see where any further research would be necessary'. BY MR. GALERSTON: Q. Did Union Carbide sell melamine products? 13:17:43 1 13:17:46 2 13:17:52 3 13:17:55 4 13:17:55 5 13:18:04 6 13:18:08 7 13:18:14 8 13:18:20 9 13:18:2510 13:18:3011 13:18:3012 13:18:3213 13:18:3714 13:18:3715 13:18:4016 13:18:4817 13:18:5318 13:18:5719 13:19:0120 13:19:0521 13:19:0622 13:19:0723 13:19:0924 25 Q. Would you agree with me that Union Carbide Research & Development group for the Bakelite division never engaged in product evaluation of the use of Bakelite for arc shields? A. That's right. Q. Would you agree, in 1960. that you were not aware whether or not the phenolic resins and molding compounds that UC w'as selling might have been used by companies such as Square D. Allen-Bradley. Nelson Marine, or Cutler-Hammer to be used for arc shields? MR. KINSEY: Objection; assumes - or asks for speculation. MS. CLARK: Yeah. Objection; beyond the scope of the notice, compound, calls for speculation. THE WITNESS: These MIL-14 specs I think were dated 1960. so my conclusion w'ould be that if no phenolic containing asbestos was listed for arc resistance under the mil spec. then, therefore, even in 1960, it would not have been used to make a product like an arc chute for military application. MR. GALERSTON: Objection to the nonresponsive nature of the answ'er. Q. The question, sir. is w'hether or not you're aw'are of third parties such as Square D. Cutler- 38 (Pages 146 to 149) LUDWIG KLEIN REPORTERS & VIDEO, INC. 800.540.0681 e08d329d-027b-438b-9587-ca63e8cbb1cb CARLO MARTINO 7/11/2007 EUBANKS VS. A.W. CHESTERTON Page 150 Page 152 13:19:18 1 13:19:20 2 13:19:21 3 13:19:22 4 13:19:23 5 13:19:25 6 13:19:28 7 13:19:34 8 13:19:34 9 13:19:3610 13:19:3911 13:19:4212 13:19:4313 13:19:4414 13:19:4715 13:19:5116 13:19:5517 13:19:5818 13:19:5919 13:20:0220 13:20:0521 13:20:0522 13:20:0723 13:20:0824 25 Hammer, Nelson Marine. Allen-Bradley, using phenolic resins for arc shields. A. I am not aware of that. MS. CLARK: Objection; asked and answered. calls for speculation. MR. MAKI: Objection; assumes facts not in evidence, lacks foundation, calls for speculation. MR. KINSEY: Join. BY MR. GALERSTON: Q. Would you agree with me. in 1970. that you were not familiar with all of the uses of phenolic resins and molding compounds that were being sold by Union Carbide? A. Yes. Q. Would you agree that you are not familiar with the uses of the Union Carbide Bakelite compounds that were sold to Square D and what applications they were using it for? MR. KINSEY: Objection; assumes facts not in evidence, calls for speculation. THE WITNESS: The specific parts, yes. BY MR. GALERSTON: Q. That would be true for Cutler-Hammer, as well, correct? A. Yes. 13:21:25 1 13:21:27 2 13:21:29 3 13:21:30 4 13:21:31 5 13:21:33 6 13:21:36 7 13:21:36 8 13:21:38 9 13:21:4210 13:21:4411 13:21:5012 13:21:5613 13:22:0614 13:22:0915 13:22:1316 13:22:1517 13:22:1718 13:22:1819 13:22:2120 13:22:2321 13:22:2622 13:22:2723 13:22:3124 25 MR. KINSEY: Same objections. MR. MAKI: Objection; lacks foundation. calls for speculation, assumes facts not in evidence. MR. KINSEY: Join. MS. McDOI.JGALL: Counsel, did you mean electrical and not electronic? Otherwise, I'll state my objection. MR. GALERSTON: Electrical, that is correct. MS. McDOUGALL: Thank you. THE WITNESS: 1 never heard of a company trying to do that. I mean, they - if the part is not on the Qualified - if the specified category is not used in that part, they're not meeting the military requirement, and 1 don't know what the penalties are for that in case the government finds out. I'm sure there would be failures, to begin with, and an investigation of the failures. BY MR. GALERSTON: Q. My question is, is it your opinion, and 1 recognize that this may not be your area of expertise, but is it your opinion that it could not be done? A. Submit a switchgear -- or a part that has an arc shield or arc chute molded out of phenolic Page 151 Page 153 13:20:10 1 13:20:11 2 13:20:12 3 13:20:16 4 13:20:18 5 13:20:22 6 13:20:27 7 13:20:30 8 13:20:32 9 13:20:3510 13:20:3611 13:20:4412 13:20:4413 13:20:5014 13:20:5215 13:20:5616 13:21:0317 13:21:0618 13:21:1319 13:21:1820 13:21:1921 13:21:1922 13:21:2123 13:21:2324 25 Q. That would be true for Allen-Bradley. correct? A. Yes. Q. You're not aware of any testing that would have been done by companies such as Square D. Allen-Bradley. Nelson Marine, or Cutler-Hammer to determine the arc resistance of any of the phenolic resins and molding compounds sold by Union Carbide? A. That's right. MR. MAKI: Assumes facts, lacks foundation. calls for speculation. MR. KINSEY: Join. BY MR. GALERSTON: Q. Is it your opinion that electronic equipment manufacturers such as Square D. AllenBradley. Cutler-Hammer, and Nelson Marine were prevented from submitting their products to the United States Government for inclusion on the Qualified Products List without Union Carbide's know ledge that they were including some of their component materials? MS. CLARK: Objection. MR. KINSEY: Objection. MS. CLARK: Objection; foundation, overly broad, compound. 13:22:40 1 13:22:45 2 13:22:48 3 13:22:49 4 13:22:51 5 13:22:56 6 13:23:05 7 13:23:09 8 13:23:09 9 13:23:1010 13:23:1311 13:23:1312 13:23:1413 13:23:1614 13:23:1815 13:23:1916 13:23:2317 13:23:2518 13:23:2919 13:23:3420 13:23:3721 13:23:4022 13:23:5223 13:23:5624 25 molding compound - or made out of a phenolic molding compound or laminate that did not have -- that w'as not on the -- that the military spec would not provide? Q. No. that's not the question. The question is, is do you believe it is possible for a company to submit a product for inclusion on the Qualified Products List without Union Carbide's knowledge that they were submitting it -- A. All right. Q. -- while it contained a Union Carbide Bakelite product? A. Okay. MS. CLARK: Objection; calls for speculation, foundation. THE WITNESS: I thought when you said product, you were talking about their product. Now, if you're talking about our product. the molding compound, that, they would not do. They would have to go through us in order to get that product qualified or use somebody else's material that w'as qualified. BY MR. GALERSTON: Q. Other than the one page of the Barbaglia deposition and the fact witnesses, w'as there 39 (Pages 150 to 153) LUDWIG KLEIN REPORTERS & VIDEO, INC. 800.540.0681 e08d329d-027b-438b-9587-ca63e8cbb1cb CARLO MARTINO 7/11/2007 EUBANKS VS. A.W. CHESTERTON Page 154 Page 156 13:24:01 1 13:24:02 2 13:24:02 3 13:24:04 4 13:24:05 5 13:24:06 6 13:24:07 7 13:24:10 8 13:24:13 9 13:24:2010 13:24:2411 13:24:2612 13:24:3313 13:24:3414 13:24:3715 13:24:3816 13:24:4517 13:24:4918 13:24:5419 13:24:5520 13:24:5721 13:25:0122 13:25:02 23 13:25: 04 24 25 anything else you reviewed in preparation for today's deposition? A. No. Q. Have you reviewed any of your prior depositions? A. No. Q. Have you ever gone back and reviewed any of your prior testimony? A. Oh, a few years -- I don't have them all. to begin with. I think I only have four. And in the last three, four years, no. Q. Have you ever reviewed your previous testimony with counsel to discuss your answers? A. Previous testimony with counsel? Q. Correct. A. Testimony in a deposition? Q. A deposition or at trial. A. No. Q. Okay. Have you ever been mock deposed by counsel? MS. CLARK: I'm just going to object to the extent you're wading into attorney-client privilege. but - THE WITNESS: Would you repeat that. please? 13:25:57 1 13:25:58 2 13:26:01 3 13:26:01 4 13:26:01 5 13:26:03 6 13:26:04 7 13:26:05 8 13:26:06 9 13:26:0910 13:26:1111 13:26:14 12 13:26:1713 13:26:1914 13:26:2015 13:26:2016 13:26:2717 13:26:3118 13:26:3619 13:26:38 20 13:26:3921 13:26:4022 13:26:4123 13:26:4324 25 I spread it out. Q. Certainly. And I understand you charge $75 travel time. A. Yes. Q. And I understand that you live in New Jersey. Correct? A. Yes. Q. And how much time did it take you to travel here to Chicago for the deposition today? A. Including, you know, from when 1 leave home to when I get here, it takes about 10 hours. Q. Okay. And then you spent part of the day yesterday preparing for your deposition with counsel, correct? A. Yes. Yes. Q. How long was that? A. Probably six, seven hours. Q. Okay. Did you discuss the depositions and tire infonnation contained in the depositions? A. Yes. Q. Is that when you went through the mil spec again? A. Yes. Q. Was that when you asked to see the mil Page 155 Page 157 13:25:05 1 13:25:07 2 13:25:09 3 13:25:09 4 13:25:12 5 13:25:13 6 13:25:18 7 13:25:20 8 13:25:20 9 13:25:2110 13:25:2411 13:25:2712 13:25:2713 13:25:2714 13:25:2915 13:25:3016 13:25:3017 13:25:3418 13:25:3519 13:25:4120 13:25:4321 13:25:4822 13:25:5423 13:25:5424 25 BY MR. GALERSTON: Q. Have you ever given a mock deposition with counsel for Union Carbide ? A. What is a mock deposition? Q. Pretend, where you are practicing giving a deposition. A. Oh, no. No. Q. You're being compensated to be here today. correct? A. Yes. Q. If 1 understand it correctly, your previous testimony is you charge $ 150 an hour for review of materials. A. Yes. Q. Is that still correct? A. Yes. Q. How many hours have you used -- strike that. How many hours have you spent reviewing materials in preparation for today's deposition? A. I haven't added them up, but I would estimate probably just going through all of those depositions took me about five or six hours. Q. Okay. A. Now, 1 didn't do them all at the same time. 13:26:50 1 13:26:54 2 13:26:57 3 13:26:58 4 13:27:04 5 13:27:06 6 13:27:08 7 13:27:09 8 13:27:11 9 13:27:1210 13:27:1411 13:27:1512 13:27:1913 13:27:2214 13:27:2315 13:27:2416 13:27:2617 13:27:2718 13:27:3019 13:27:3320 13:27:3621 13:27:3822 13:27:3923 13:27:4124 25 spec, or did they have the mil spec for you? A. We talked about the mil spec, and a copy was available, so -- MS. CLARK: I just want to caution you not to reveal anything that reveals attorney-client privilege or our discussions. You can tell him what you looked at; that's fine. THE WITNESS: Yeah. MR. GALERSTON: And for what it's worth. I don't believe that attorney-client privilege pertains here, but that's neither here nor there at the moment. THE WITNESS: Yeah. It's a document that we were able to get. you know, because we got into the military specification. BY MR. GALERSTON: Q. Did you ask at that time to see any of your previous depositions? A. No. Q. Okay. You charge $200 for deposition time. What about the deposition prep time with them? Was that at 200 or $ 150? A. 150. Q. And is it going to take you about 10 hours to get home? 40 (Pages 154 to 157) LUDWIG KLEIN REPORTERS & VIDEO, INC. 800.540.0681 e08d329d-027b-438b-9587-ca63e8cbb1cb CARLO MARTINO 7/11/2007 EUBANKS VS. A.W. CHESTERTON Page 158 Page 160 13:27:45 1 13:27:47 2 13:27:48 3 13:28:06 4 13:28:09 5 13:28:12 6 13:28:15 7 13:28:16 8 13:28:18 9 13:28:2110 13:28:2611 13:28:2712 13:28:2713 13:28:3514 13:28:3515 13:28:3616 13:28:3917 13:28:4018 13:28:4119 13:28:4220 13:28:4521 13:28:4622 13:28:5623 13:28:5924 25 A. Yes. Q. Okay. Did you visit the document repository? A. No. Q. Have you ever reviewed Union Carbide's master set of interrogatory answers in either California, in Texas, New York, anywhere where they have master discovery responses? MS. CLARK: I would like to object as beyond the scope of the notice and the issues in this case. There's nothing at all in the notice about the interrogatory answers. But go ahead. THE WITNESS: I don't recall seeing any interrogatories. BY MR. GALERSTON: Q. And in general, in the six years that you've been -- A. Yes. Q. -- providing litigation support to Union Carbide, have you ever reviewed their sworn answers to interrogatories? A. I don't recall of any. Q. Do you know' John MacDonald, Assistant Corporate Secretary for Union Carbide? 13:30:37 1 13:30:39 2 13:30:40 3 13:30:40 4 13:30:41 5 13:30:43 6 13:30:44 7 13:30:46 8 13:30:47 9 13:30:4910 13:30:4911 13:30:5612 13:31:0013 13:31:0314 13:31:0615 13:31:1216 13:31:1417 13:31:1418 13:31:1619 13:31:1920 13:31:1921 13:31:2122 13:31:2323 13:31:2524 25 extent that what you read indicated to you that the references were to arc shields and not to arc chutes. A. Yes. Q. Okay. A. And I wanted to understand if there was a difference. Q. And your understanding is that there is a difference, is there not? A. Well, I'm still not sure. Q. Okay. A. To me, what was described is what I think is an arc barrier, and 1 think one of the - your witnesses that you deposed said the same tiling -1 think it was Crull - that he also thought of them as arc barriers. Arc chutes, he said, "If you want to call them arc chutes, okay." Q. Okay. A. That's my position, too. I - and maybe there's a subtle difference in the w ay they work. I don't know. Q. Well, that's my next question to you. What is the difference between an arc shield and an arc chute, in your mind? A. Based on this, which is recent, the - Page 159 Page 161 13:29:04 1 13:29:06 2 13:29:07 3 13:29:10 4 13:29:12 5 13:29:14 6 13:29:14 7 13:29:17 8 13:29:20 9 13:29:2510 13:29:3011 13:29:5312 13:29:5513 13:30:0314 13:30:0615 13:30:1116 13:30:1317 13:30: 14 18 13:30:1619 13:30:18 20 13:30:27 21 13:30:3022 13:30:3123 13:30:3124 25 A. No. For Carbide? Q. For Union Carbide. A. Yeah. No. Q. Have you ever assisted counsel in preparing answers to interrogatories with regards to your knowledge as to the Bakelite division of Union Carbide? MS. CLARK: Objection; beyond the scope. THE WITNESS: I get -- over the past six years, I got many calls with regard to subjects relating to the litigation. Where that information went, I don't know. BY MR. GALERSTON: Q. You indicated that your review of the deposition testimony was somewhat contusing to you because of the intermittent or the exchangeable use of the terms "arc shields" and "arc chutes," correct? MS. CLARK: Objection; mischaracterizes the testimony. THE WITNESS: Not confusing. It was something I needed to clarify so 1 could understand it. BY MR. GALERSTON: Q. Okay. I thought you said something to the 13:31:30 1 13:31:31 2 13:31:36 3 13:31:41 4 13:31:44 5 13:31:50 6 13:31:53 7 13:31:59 8 13:32:01 9 13:32:1610 13:32:2311 13:32:2612 13:32:2913 13:32:3114 13:32:34 15 13:32:3616 13:32:3817 13:32:4118 13:32:4519 13:32:4720 13:32:5621 13:32:5922 13:33:00 23 13:33:03 24 25 Q. Exhibit No. 10? A. Yeah. - and my idea of w hat an arc barrier is. an arc barrier is a barrier you put between one terminal and another to prevent the arc from jumping from one terminal to the other, and this flat piece that you put there is the barrier. And that's exactly what was described in the deposition. This picture shows that the arc barrier -- the arc chute is placed in front of a contact and that the purpose is to vent the gas and the heat away from the inside of the switch, which makes sense it's called a chute, because you're -- Now, that same tiling can happen with a barrier. If they're close enough together, if there's an arc, it's going to -- the material is going to vent between the plates, except that this is one contact. What was described in the deposition was I think three contacts and barriers on -- in between. So, you know, they both need good arc resistance. So at that point, I didn't pursue it any further. Q. What is your electrical background and training? 41 (Pages 158 to 161) LUDWIG KLEIN REPORTERS & VIDEO, INC. 800.540.0681 e08d329d-027b-438b-9587-ca63e8cbb1cb CARLO MARTINO 7/11/2007 EUBANKS VS. A.W. CHESTERTON Page 162 Page 164 13:33:06 1 13:33:07 2 13:33:10 3 13:33:14 4 13:33:16 5 13:33:17 6 13:33:20 7 13:33:20 8 13:33:21 9 13:33:2310 13:33:2411 13:33:2712 13:33:2813 13:33:3214 13:33:3415 13:33:3816 13:33:3917 13:33:4918 13:33:5319 13:33:5820 13:34:0321 13:34:0522 13:34:0923 13:34:1224 25 A. I have -- I'm not an electric engineer. Q. Have you ever designed -- You hold patents in design of phenolic -- not phenolics - in some of the other products that Union Carbide developed, correct? A. Yes. Yes. Q. None of the patents that you hold in your name, or held in your name -- A. Yes. Q. - were related to phenolic resins or moldings, correct? A. That's right. Q. You have no specialized training in electronics or the use of phenolic materials in electronics, correct? MS. CLARK: Objection; asked and answered. THE WITNESS: My experience has been primarily to recommend a plastic to a customer, if they tell me what they're looking for, based on the properties of that plastic. I don't have to be an electrical engineer to do that. Most of the time, the choice is made by the engineer who is designing the switch, not by the supplier, and they just pick something from our data sheet. 13:35:18 1 13:35:20 2 13:35:21 3 13:35:21 4 13:35:27 5 13:35:32 6 13:35:35 7 13:35:38 8 13:35:42 9 13:35:4610 13:35:4811 13:35:4912 13:35:5113 13:35:5314 13:35:5415 13:35:5916 13:36:0117 13:36:0418 13:36:0819 13:36:1320 13:36:2021 13:36:2122 13:36:2223 13:36:2224 25 A. No. MR. MAKI: Assumes facts, lacks foundation. calls for speculation. BY MR. GALERSTON: Q. Have you ever purchased and evaluated an electronic component manufactured by Square D. Nelson Marine. Eaton Electric, Allen-Bradley, Cutler-Hammer, to determine whether or not they were using any Union Carbide Bakelite phenolic molded compounds in the manufacture of their products? MR. MAKI: Assumes facts, lacks foundation. calls for speculation. MS. CLARK: Objection; overly broad. ambiguous, beyond the scope of the notice. THE WITNESS: No. BY MR. GALERSTON: Q. Have you ever undertaken an investigation to determine whether or not Square D. Nelson Marine, Allen-Bradley, Cutler-Hammer, or Eaton Electric has ever used any Union Carbide Bakelite phenolic molded compounds in equipment that they sold to the United States Navy? MS. CLARK: Objection; overly broad, beyond the scope of the notice -- THE WITNESS: No. Page 163 Page 165 13:34:12 1 13:34:15 2 13:34:19 3 13:34:21 4 13:34:23 5 13:34:26 6 13:34:30 7 13:34:30 8 13:34:32 9 13:34:3810 13:34:4011 13:34:4612 13:34:4913 13:34:5214 13:34:5315 13:34:5516 13:34:5817 13:34:5818 13:34:5919 13:35:0120 13:35:0621 13:35:0822 13:35:1323 13:35:1624 25 BY MR. GALERSTON: Q. Have you ever been involved in evaluating the use of a phenolic molded material in an electrical application? MS. CLARK: Objection; overly broad, outside the scope of the notice. THE WITNESS: I've never been present for that, no. BY MR. GALERSTON: Q. Have you ever evaluated or issued a report detennining whether or not a Union Carbide Bakelite phenolic molded material would be adequate to use as an arc shield in electric applications? MS. CLARK: Objection; overly broad, ambiguous. THE WITNESS: My conclusion is based on the mil specs. That's all. I have not done the testing. BY MR. GALERSTON: Q. Have you ever consulted with customers such as Square D, Cutler-Hammer. Eaton Electric, Nelson Marine, Allen-Bradley. as to whether or not it w'ould be advisable to use a Union Carbide Bakelite phenolic molded compound as an arc shield in any electric applications? 13:36:25 1 13:36:27 2 13:36:28 3 13:36:29 4 13:36:30 5 13:36:32 6 13:36:33 7 13:36:53 8 13:36:58 9 13:37:0610 13:37:0711 13:37:1012 13:37:1313 13:37:1814 13:37:2515 13:37:3116 13:37:3317 13:37:3618 13:37:4119 13:37:4520 13:37:5021 13:37:5322 13:37:5723 13:37:5924 25 MS. CLARK: -- and the facts in this case. THE WITNESS: I'm sorry. MR. MAKI: Assumes facts, lacks foundation, calls for speculation. MR. KINSEY: Join. BY MR. GALERSTON: Q. Your answer, sir? A. No. Q. With regards to the insulation that was applied to the control boxes on the ship, that was described as Bakelite. Do you recall that testimony, sir? MS. CLARK: Objection; misstates facts. THE WITNESS: In one of the depositions I recall that the witness said they put a board in the back of the metal box and then sound insulation on the sides. In my experience, what's typically used for that electrical insulation is a Kraft paperimpregnated phenolic laminate. That's very popular. you know, very extensively used in that area. For the sound insulation, it didn't look as if it had anything to do with any of our products. I don't know what they would have used in there. BY MR. GALERSTON: 42 (Pages 162 to 165) LUDWIG KLEIN REPORTERS & VIDEO, INC. 800.540.0681 e08d329d-027b-438b-9587-ca63e8cbb1cb CARLO MARTINO 7/11/2007 EUBANKS VS. A.W. CHESTERTON Page 166 Page 168 13:38:03 1 13:38:07 2 13:38:13 3 13:38:15 4 13:38:20 5 13:38:22 6 13:38:25 7 13:38:27 8 13:38:27 9 13:38:2910 13:38:3011 13:38:3112 13:38:3913 13:38:4214 13:38:4415 13:38:4616 13:38:5517 13:38:5718 13:38:5819 13:38:5920 13:39:0121 13:39:0222 13:39:0423 13:39:0624 25 Q. Is it fair to say that you don't know who manufactured any of the material that was used on the IJSS LANG while Donny Eubanks served on it? A. No, I wouldn't know who manufactured it. Q. Is it fair to say that you can't testify one way or the other whether or not it was Union Carbide Bakelite materials that were used on the USS LANG? A. That's correct. MS. CLARK: Objection; misstates his testimony. THE WITNESS: That's correct. BY MR. GALERSTON: Q. What of the testimony of -- Was it Mr. Walker that you recall testified to the use of the board in the back of the box? A. 1 don't remember which one that said that. I would have to look at the deposition again to determine that. Q. Well, would that have been something that you noted when you were going through the deposition? A. Yeah, I think so. Q. Okay. So it might be in your notes, as well? 13:40:30 1 13:40:36 2 13:40:39 3 13:40:43 4 13:40:45 5 13:40:46 6 13:40:46 7 13:40:47 8 13:40:49 9 13:40:5410 13: 40:5511 13:40:5912 13:41:0113 13:41:0314 13:41:0415 13:41:0816 13:41:1217 13:41:1218 13:41:1519 13:41:1720 13:41:1721 13:41:1922 13:41:2223 13:41:2624 25 are specified as, you know, electrical insulation for control boxes with - you know, any metal box. It's typically used for that. Q. And those laminates. Union Carbide sold those type of phenolic laminates, correct? MS. CLARK: Objection; misstates his testimony -- THE WITNESS: No. MS. CLARK: -- assumes facts. THE WITNESS: Sorry. Union Carbide did not make and sell laminates. They only sold the resin to the manufacturers of laminates, and the resin did not contain any asbestos. BY MR. GALERSTON: Q. Is it fair to say that the sale of the raw resin was not the end of the product -- A. That's right. Q. -- that it had to be - additional materials would have to be added to if correct'? A. Yes. Q. And is it fair to say that Union Carbide would not know one way or the other whether or not the end user was adding asbestos as other fillers to that laminate when they are creating their Page 167 Page 169 13:39:08 1 13:39:10 2 13:39:12 3 13:39:14 4 13:39:16 5 13:39:18 6 13:39:19 7 13:39:22 8 13:39:22 9 13:39:2510 13:39:2811 13:39:2812 13:39:3313 13:39:3614 13:39:4115 13:39:4716 13:39:4917 13:39:5318 13:39:5519 13:39:5720 13:40:0121 13:40:0722 13:40:1523 13:40:1924 25 A. It might be on my note, yeah. But I could always go back and look it up again. Q. As you sit here, you're not sure who it was, but it was a shipmate, correct? A. It was one of those depositions. Q. Okay. Well, you realize Mr. Gibson didn't serve on the ship. A. Not -- no. Gibson wasn't -- definitely not Gibson. Q. Okay. That's what I'm trying to get to. We're talking, about on the USS LANG, correct? A. That's correct. Q. With regards to the testimony with regards to the board in the box, w ould you agree with me that you are using some of your experience and knowledge regarding the electrical applications of phenolic resins to come to the conclusion that it would be the Kraft type paper that was used in it as opposed to something else, because the description was inadequate to come to that conclusion? A. Well, there are also military specifications for laminates, and in 1965, there were over 30 difterent categories, and in each category, there's a short description of what the composition is and intended use, and paper laminates 13:41:32 1 13:41:36 2 13:41:39 3 13:41:41 4 13:41:44 5 13:41:47 6 13:41:48 7 13:41:52 8 13:41:55 9 13:41:5510 13:41:5811 13:41:5912 13:42:0513 13:42:1014 13:42:1215 13:42:1416 13:42:1817 13:42:2018 13:42:2519 13:42:28 20 13:42:34 21 13:42:3522 13:42:38 23 13:42:4124 25 laminates? A. Well, here again, it's -- they are not -- if they represent that as a paper-based laminate. they can't add asbestos to it. They're misrepresenting what the product is. And that can be detennined. Q. Is it your opinion that a paper-based laminate cannot contain asbestos? A. I've never seen it being done. I never saw it done. Q. Have you ever seen an asbestos-containing paper1? A. There is a -- in '65, there was a laminate based on asbestos paper, and there was one based on asbestos mat. Q. And would it be fair to say that you don't know w hat the ultimate manufacturer of the laminate did with the resin? A. I can only go by what the intended use was on the -- in the military specification for that laminate, and electrical insulation wasn't listed. It was heat insulation. Q. Okay. Well, sir, are you holding out to have specialized knowledge with regards to the United States Navy's use of laminates and resins and 43 (Pages 166 to 169) LUDWIG KLEIN REPORTERS & VIDEO, INC. 800.540.0681 e08d329d-027b-438b-9587-ca63e8cbb1cb CARLO MARTINO 7/11/2007 EUBANKS VS. A.W. CHESTERTON Page 170 Page 172 13:42:48 1 13:42:50 2 13:42:52 3 13:42:53 4 13:42:53 5 13:42:54 6 13:42:55 7 13:42:58 8 13:43:04 9 13:43:0510 13:43:0611 13:43: 1112 13:43:1513 13:43: 1914 13:43:2215 13:43:2216 13:43:2317 13:43:2518 13:43:2519 13:43:2720 13:43:3121 13:43:3322 13:43:3623 13:43:38 24 25 phenolic moldings? MS. CLARK: Objection; overly broad, vague. ambiguous. THE WITNESS: Would you repeat that. please? BY MR. GALERSTON: Q. Are you claiming to have specialized knowledge and expertise in knowing what the United States Navy allowed for use of phenolic moldings and resins? MS. CLARK: Same objections. THE WITNESS: Not specialized. I am going by what -- their documents as to what they say they want and need and my interpretation of that in terms of the products we made. BY MR. GALERSTON: Q. My question, sir, is not as to the products that Union Carbide made. A. Yeah. Q. I'm talking about the United States Navy and what it allowed to be used, that you claim to have specialized knowledge as to what the United States Navy would allow to be -- what uses it would allow for phenolic moldings and resins. MS. CLARK: Objection; asked and answered. 13:44:40 1 13:44:41 2 13:44:42 3 13:44:43 4 13:44:47 5 13:44:50 6 13:44:50 7 13:44:52 8 13:44:56 9 13:45:0010 13:45:0311 13:45:0812 13:45:1013 13:45:1114 13:45:1215 13:45:1416 13:45:1617 13:45:2018 13:45:2219 13:45:2420 13:45:2721 13:45:2822 13:45:3023 13:45:3324 25 military specifications that I saw' in 1965,1 didn't see one. BY MR. GALERSTON: Q. And my question to you, sir, is: Did you look at one military specification, such as M-14F? A. Well, it has a different number -- Q. Okay. A. - and I don't recall what that number is, but it is along similar lines. And also, the National - NEMA. the National Electrical Manufacturers Association, also has a similar listing that is exactly the same as the military spec, and they cross-reference each other. So there are two different sources you can look at. Q. And my question is: is do you feel that you have reviewed it sufficiently to claim specialized expertise and knowledge with regards to the laminates and their use in the United States Navy? MS. CLARK: Objection; overly broad, asked and answered. THE WITNESS: I still have a problem with this word "specialized." It isn't specialized knowledge. Somebody else with my background could Page 171 Page 173 13:43:41 1 13:43:42 2 13:43:43 3 13:43:46 4 13:43:48 5 13:43:55 6 13:43:57 7 13:43:59 8 13:44:00 9 13:44:04 10 13:44:0711 13:44:0712 13:44:0813 13:44:1014 13:44:1215 13:44:1316 13:44:1517 13:44:1718 13:44:2019 13:44:2320 13:44:2721 13:44:28 22 13:44:3023 13:44:3124 25 THE WITNESS: What do you mean by "specialized"? BY MR. GALERSTON: Q. You're indicating to me that the United States Navy would not allow the use of certain tilings, such as asbestos paper laminates, based upon your review of a mil spec, correct? MS. CLARK: Objection; misstates his testimony. THE WITNESS: If there was such a product. there would have to be a mil spec on it, and I didn't see it. BY MR. GALERSTON: Q. Do you claim to have exhaustive -- A. That's not specialized, you know. That's just looking at documents. Q. Do you claim to have read all of the military specifications with regards to all applications so you can testify to the jury in this case that there were no military specifications that would allow or call for the use of asbestoscontaining paper laminates? MS. CLARK: Objection; overly broad, beyond the scope of the notice. THE WITNESS: All I can testify is that the 13:45:35 1 13:45:37 2 13:45:37 3 13:45:40 4 13:45:42 5 13:45:44 6 13:45:45 7 13:45:47 8 13:45:49 9 13:45:5010 13:45:5311 13:45:5612 13:45:5813 13:45:5814 13:46:0015 13:46:0316 13:46:0517 13:46:0918 13:46:0919 13:46:1320 13:46:1721 13:46:2022 13:46:2223 13:46:2624 25 do the same thing MR. GALERSTON: Okay. THE WITNESS: - and just look at that. Now, if you're saving somebody is going to cheat and put asbestos in when they're not supposed to, I have no way of knowing that. BY MR. GALERSTON: Q. No, sir, nobody is suggesting that anybody has cheated or done something inappropriate. The question is, is do you feel that you have made a study of the subject matter sufficiently to claim expertise, or have you just read one document related to the specifications as to laminates? MS. CLARK: Counsel, argumentative, asked and answered. He's explained the best he can his knowledge on this subject. 1 think we should move on. And it's way beyond the scope of the notice, in any event. THE WITNESS: All I can tell you is my 13 years' experience in that area, plus sources of information 1 used, and that's it, and, you know, if you need more than that, then you'll have to find somebody else. BY MR. GALERSTON: 44 (Pages 170 to 173) LUDWIG KLEIN REPORTERS & VIDEO, INC. 800.540.0681 e08d329d-027b-438b-9587-ca63e8cbb1cb CARLO MARTINO 7/11/2007 EUBANKS VS. A.W. CHESTERTON Page 174 Page 176 13:46:30 1 13:46:32 2 13:46:36 3 13:46:36 4 13:46:38 5 13:46:38 6 13:46:40 7 13:46:42 8 13:46:44 9 13:46:4610 13:46:4611 13:46:5012 13:47:0013 13:47:0314 13:47:0515 13:47:0716 13:47:0817 13:47:0918 13:47:0919 13:47:1020 13:47:1221 13:47: 1422 13:47:1723 13:47:2024 25 Q. What are the different uses of phenolic molded components that you're aware of that were approved by the United States Navy -- MS. CLARK: Objection; over -- BY MR. GALERSTON: Q. - in 1970? MS. CLARK: Objection; overbroad and beyond the scope of the notice. THE WITNESS: The uses that they describe in their military specifications. BY MR. GALERSTON: Q. Which are? A. Well, let me see. Q. And. sir. I'm not talking about the actual compounds which are listed on the first page. I'm talking about the actual usage. A. The actual part? Q. Right. A. No. Q. That you're aware of. A. No, I don't. Q. Okay. So as you sit here now, you're not aware of any phenolic resins or phenolic moldings that would be used on United States Navy vessels. correct? 13:48:54 1 13:48:56 2 13:48:58 3 13:49:01 4 13:49:09 5 13:49:18 6 13:49:21 7 13:49:22 8 13:49:24 9 13:49:2810 13:49:3011 13:49:3212 13:49:3513 13:49:3814 13:49:3815 13:49:4216 13:49:4617 13:49:5218 13:49:5519 13:50:0020 13:50:0021 13:50:0422 13:50:0723 13:50:1124 25 I don't know. I couldn't - by looking at the part, I would not be able to tell whether it contained asbestos and who made it, if that's what you're after, or say this is a phenolic or this is a -- or this is a polyester or this is a glass filled or. you know. It would have to be tested. BY MR. GALERSTON: Q. The testimony that was given in this case with regards to the cleaning of arc shields - And let's go ahead and use the tenn "arc shields" to mean the barriers between the two contacts to prevent the electricity traveling from one contact to an adjacent contact. Okay? A. Yes. Q. The testimony was that those would build up carbon deposits on them, was it not? A. The one testimony, yes. I think Eubanks' testimony was there was a buildup, yes. And I think another one, that there was some sanding required. yes. Q. Is it your recollection that only one shipmate recalled that there was some sanding required on the shields? A. That, I'm not sure. 1 think Crull said he Page 175 Page 177 13:47:25 1 13:47:29 2 13:47:32 3 13:47:33 4 13:47:33 5 13:47:38 6 13:47:43 7 13:47:49 8 13:47:54 9 13:48:0010 13:48:0311 13:48:0512 13:48:0813 13:48:1414 13:48:1715 13:48:1916 13:48:2117 13:48:3118 13:48:3119 13:48:3120 13:48:3321 13:48:3322 13:48:4223 13:48:4724 25 A. I would not be able to identify that this part was made from such and such a product, if that's what you're looking for, in the case of molding material. Q. Right. A. I can say that it was common - a Kraft paper laminate was commonly used in electrical insulation because I've seen it come up before, and that's consistent with the descriptions. But unless I saw the part, I would say, yeah, that's it. Q. So based upon your experience, knowledge. and study of the military specifications, as you sit here now, you can't say whether or not -- whether a product of a phenolic molding nature was approved for use in the United States Navy, correct? A. That's right. Q. You have no specialized knowledge or expertise as to the use of phenolic molded compounds in electrical systems in the United States Navy, correct? MS. CLARK: Objection; overly broad, asked and answered. THE WITNESS: Again, yeah, "specialized expertise." I have the expertise that you're aware of. Whether you consider that specialized or not. 13:50:16 1 13:50:18 2 13:50:19 3 13:50:22 4 13:50:25 5 13:50:28 6 13:50:31 7 13:50:34 8 13:50:39 9 13:50:4110 13:50:4411 13:50:4612 13:50:5013 13:50:5414 13:50:5615 13:50:5916 13:51:0217 13:51:0618 13:51:0919 13:51:1420 13:51:1721 13:51:2122 13:51:2323 13:51:2424 25 wiped them. 1 don't recall him saying that he sanded them. Q. Do you remember Walker saying that he had to scrape them? A. That I don't recall was Walker. Somebody said that they had to -- that they saw Eubanks sanding the surface. Q. And you don't recall Infante saying that they had to be cleaned and scraped? A. I'm not sure about that one, no. Q. Okay. Well, assume for me that the evidence and testimony in the case will be that the arc shields had to be cleaned, which involved scraping and sanding and tilings like that. Okay? Do you have an understanding that that would have been a carbon buildup from the arc? MS. CLARK: Objection; vague, ambiguous. THE WITNESS: In the case of a melamine, I would expect that that would be the source. In the case of a phenolic, it would -- in fact, it could be part of it, but also, it would be the phenolic itself and any cellulosic material that might be in that phenolic -- MR. GALERSTON: Okay. THE WITNESS: - so that you - they are 45 (Pages 174 to 177) LUDWIG KLEIN REPORTERS & VIDEO, INC. 800.540.0681 e08d329d-027b-438b-9587-ca63e8cbb1cb CARLO MARTINO 7/11/2007 EUBANKS VS. A.W. CHESTERTON Page 178 Page 180 13:51 : 30 1 13:51 : 30 2 13:51 : 30 3 13:51 : 31 4 13:51 : 33 5 13:51 : 37 6 13:51 : 37 7 13:51 : 42 8 13:51 : 45 9 13:51 : 4510 13:51 : 4611 13:51 : 5012 13:51 : 5413 13:51 : 5514 13:51 : 5615 13:51 : 5816 13 : 52 : 0517 13 : 52 : 0818 13 : 52 : 1319 13 : 52 : 1620 13 : 52 : 2321 13 : 52 : 2722 13 : 52 : 2823 13 : 52 : 2924 25 both going to gradually carbonize and bum through. And it's a similar -- BY MR. GALERSTON: Q. So the testimony -- A. -- similar to what you see if you get a short in your wall receptacle, you know. BY MR. GALERSTON: Q. So the testimony that you reviewed which indicates that the arc shields -- A. Yes. Q. - were required to be cleaned would be consistent with your expectation of use of either a melamine-based product or a phenolic product in a control box, correct? MS. CLARK: Objection; overly broad. misstates testimony. THE WITNESS: I - since I didn't see phenolic approved for arc-resistant use, I would not expect it to be a phenolic. Now, if it was used for a nonmilitary application and somebody said, "Well, ifs good enough," then, you know, I - that's something I don't know. But for military use, that would have to be a melamine. BY MR. GALERSTON: Q. How much resistance is necessary for an arc 13:54:02 1 13:54:09 2 13:54:14 3 13:54:23 4 13:54:26 5 13:54:28 6 13:54:28 7 13:54:30 8 13:54:31 9 13:54:3410 13:54:3411 13:54:3512 13:54:3613 13:54:3814 13:54:4115 13:54:4416 13:54:4617 13:54:5218 13:54:5419 13:54:5720 13:54:5921 13:55:0022 13:55:0123 13:55:04 24 25 military specification for the product that contains an arc shield in it will have in it what category of material is permissible that has to be used for that arc shield, and that's what the end user has. So that would specify exactly what they had to use. Q. Have you reviewed -- A. And that would reference back to this list. Q. Have you reviewed that specification, that mil spec? A. I -- to get a mil spec for the end product. you have to know the -- Q. For the arc shield? A. Yeah. -- you would need to know what that piece is, and I wouldn't have access to it. That would be the manufacturer of the product. Q. You have not reviewed the specifications for arc shields in any application, correct? A. From the end user's point of view, no. Q. You haven't reviewed those specifications. so you don't know what materials were approved for use for arc shields, correct? MS. CLARK: Objection; asked and answered, misstates his testimony. THE WITNESS: Maybe I'm not explaining Page 179 Page 181 13:52 32 1 13:52 34 2 13:52 35 3 13:52 40 4 13:52 43 5 13:52 44 6 13:52 44 7 13:52 46 8 13:52 50 9 13:52 5410 13:52 5711 13:53 0212 13:53 0513 13:53 0914 13:53 1415 13:53 1916 13:53 : 2117 13:53 : 28 18 13:53 3219 13:53 3720 13:53 4021 13:53 4422 13:53 4823 13:53 5224 25 shield? MS. CLARK: Objection; vague, ambiguous. THE WITNESS: 1 don't know. The government decided that by specifying which products they felt were adequate in setting an arc-resistant specification on each category. BY MR. GALERSTON: Q. Where does it say that an arc shield must be a melamine product? A. The MIL-14 spec, ifyou look at arc resistance, you'll see an arc-resistant specification. If you look at the phenolic categories, you see no arc-resistant specification. And if you look at the descriptions, you don't see any of the categories for arc resistance, where arc resistance is listed, except for the melamines. Q. Where does it say that an arc shield has to have a minimum arc resistance? A. If there's no arc-resistant requirement on it, then the government is not going to use it in an arc-resistant application. You know', what tests do they have that it is arc resistant? If the arcresistance value is there, that is the minimum that you have to meet in order to meet the qualification. Now, to take it one step further, the 13:55:09 1 13:55:09 2 13:55:10 3 13:55:14 4 13:55:22 5 13:55:25 6 13:55:29 7 13:55:34 8 13:55:37 9 13:55:4010 13:55:4311 13:55:4512 13:55:4713 13:55:4714 13:55:4815 13:55:5116 13:55:5417 13:55:5818 13:56:0119 13:56:0420 13:56:0921 13:56:1222 13:56:1223 13:56:1424 25 myself correctly here -- BY MR. GALERSTON: Q. SirA. -- or clearly. From a product point of view, if you don't fit these categories, you don't get on the qualified list for that particular application. So that's the first step. And you have to -- if you -- if arc resistance is required, which we all agree is required in an arc shield and arc chute -- Q. Is that agreed? I haven't agreed to that. You haven't shown me the specification that says what the arc resistance is, and that's my question to you. MS. CLARK: Counsel, argumentative. He hasn't finished his answer. Please let him finish. THE WITNESS: Take a look at the MIL-14 spec and look at arc resistance at the top of the property list. That is what the specification calls for in the product that you are going to submit if you want it on the Qualified Product List for that. for any application that requires arc resistance. BY MR. GALERSTON: Q. Where does it say that an arc chute has to have a minimum arc resistance? 46 (Pages 178 to 181) LUDWIG KLEIN REPORTERS & VIDEO, INC. 800.540.0681 e08d329d-027b-438b-9587-ca63e8cbb1cb CARLO MARTINO 7/11/2007 EUBANKS VS. A.W. CHESTERTON Page 182 Page 184 13:56: 17 1 13:56: 17 2 13:56: 17 3 13:56: 20 4 13:56: 23 5 13:56: 23 6 13:56: 25 7 13:56: 29 8 13:56: 34 9 13:56: 3710 13:56: 4 011 13:56: 4 312 13:56: 4913 13:56: 5214 13:56: 5215 13:56: 5316 13:56: 5617 13:56: 5313 13:57: 0119 13:57: 0320 13:57: 04 21 13:57: 0722 13:57: 1023 13:57: 1024 25 MS. CLARK: Objection; asked and answered. THE WITNESS: Yes. BY MR. GALERSTON: Q. Where? What mil spec says the minimum arc resistance has to be what? Where does it say that? A, In~ MS. CLARK: Objection; asked and answered. THE WITNESS: In MIL-14, you have a minimum arc resistance. Now, you're saying, "Show me a specification that this arc shield has to have this arc resistance." I don't think there is one. There will be a specification saying: For this arc shield, you have to use type such and such and from this supplier who is on the approved product list. BY MR. GALERSTON: Q. Where is that? A. That is with the end user. Q. So, sir, as I understand it, as you sit here today, you cannot point me to a mil spec that says that arc chutes had to be made of a specific typeot'material. Correct? MS. CLARK: Objection; asked and answered. THE WITNESS: Not from the end user's point of view, that's right. BY MR. GALERSTON: 13:59: 09 1 13:59: 13 2 13:59 16 3 13:59 17 4 13:59 19 5 13:59 23 6 13:59 26 7 13:59 26 8 13:59 27 9 13:59 3010 13:59 3211 13:59 3412 13:59 3413 13:59 3714 13:59 4015 13:59 4116 13:59 4217 13:59 4618 13:59 4819 13:59 4920 13:59 5221 13:59 5422 14 : 00 0023 14 : 00 0324 25 Control Department to do it. and then the necessary data would be collected and sent on, sent to the proper agency. Q. Now, sir, if I understand you correctly, based upon your previous testimony and the documents reviewed, you don't dispute whether -- that Union Carbide sold Bakelite materials to Square D. Is that correct? A. That's right. Q. And you don't dispute that Union Carbide through its Bakelite division sold Bakelite products to Allen-Bradley. correct? A. That's right. Q. Likewise, you don't dispute that Union Carbide sold Bakelite products to Cutler-Hammer, correct? A. That's right. Q. You don't dispute that those products -- that some of those products w ould have been asbestos-containing products, correct? A. That's correct. Q. Now. my understanding is, is that there w;as testing done in the Union Carbide Bakelite division Research & Development laboratories in the '70s to determine whether or not asbestos was released when Page 183 Page 185 13 57 14 1 13 57 16 2 13 57 19 3 13 57 23 4 13 57 29 5 13 57 36 6 13 57 53 7 13 57 56 8 13 58 00 9 13 58 06 10 13 58 12 11 13 58 16 12 13 58 19 13 13 58 24 14 13 58 27 15 13 58 33 16 13 58 35 17 13 58 36 18 13 58 39 19 13 58 43 20 13 58 45 21 13 58 49 22 13 58 53 23 13 58 58 24 25 Q. And the mil specs that you showed me where it talks about resistance does not specifically refer to arc chutes, does it? A. It -- in the molding section, no. In the laminate section, I would have to check this, but I think arc barriers are mentioned, not arc chutes. And that's for melamine resins, not phenolic resin. Q. Okay. In the 1960s to the '73 time period, when you were the group manager for Research & Development for the phenolic resins and moldings, did you have someone dedicated to applying to the United States Navy for -- I should say the United States Government -- for inclusion of Union Carbide Bakelite materials on the Qualified Products List? A. Not that one -- not one person. We didn't have that much going on. It was as requested by Marketing. Q. Did Marketing have somebody who was responsible for that? A. Responsible for making the request, yes. Q. Who was responsible for shepherding a product through the Qualified Products List process? A. Once the Marketing manager would request it, he could either ask the R&D lab to submit -- to do file testing and submit the results or the Quality 14:00: 14 1 14:00: 14 2 14 : 00 17 3 14 : 00 21 4 14 : 00 24 5 14 : 00 25 6 14 : 00 25 7 14 : 00 31 8 14 : 00 35 9 14 : 00 3910 14 : 00 4111 14 : 00 4512 14 : 00 4513 14 : 00 4614 14 : 00 5015 14 : 00 5216 14 : 00 5417 14 : 00 5518 14 : 00 5719 14:01 0020 14 : 01 0021 14:01 0222 14 : 01 0223 14:01 0624 25 the moldings were made. Correct? MS. CLARK: Objection; beyond the scope. What does that have to do with this notice. Counsel? THE WITNESS: I remember having the tests run. yes. I have not been able to find the results in the documents. BY MR. GALERSTON: Q. Okay. And did Union Carbide ever conduct any testing to determine whether or not there was asbestos released when those molded products were drilled, cut. or abraded? MS. CLARK: Counsel, this is way beyond the scope of the notice. MR. GALERSTON: Counsel, it is not. Look at "Exhibit No." 5. Okay? I'm really tired of this. Any and all information that you have that may be regarding discoverable matters for the abovereferenced case. In this case. Union Carbide's knowledge as to the extent of the asbestos released from its products is highly relevant. Okay? MS. CLARK: CounselMR. GALERSTON: So if you don't believe that it falls within No. 5. which is a catchall of great magnitude. I'll have to disagree with you. 47 (Pages 182 to 185; LUDWIG KLEIN REPORTERS & VIDEO, INC. 800.540.0681 e08d329d-027b-438b-9587-ca63e8cbb1cb CARLO MARTINO 7/11/2007 EUBANKS VS. A.W. CHESTERTON Page 186 Page 188 14:01:10 1 14:01:10 2 14:01:12 3 14:01:14 4 14:01:15 5 14:01:18 6 14:01:20 7 14:01:23 8 14:01:25 9 14:01:2810 14:01:3111 14:01:3412 14:01:3513 14:01:3714 14:01:4015 14:01:4316 14:01:4617 14:01:4918 14:01:5319 14:01:5620 14:01:5921 14:02:0022 14:02:0323 14:02:0524 25 and I'm going to go fonvard with questioning the witness. MS. CLARK: Right, it's a catchall that says nothing about asbestos released from the products. MR. GALERSTON: Counsel, do you understand why Union Carbide has been sued in this case? Mr. Eubanks is dying from mesothelioma because he has inhaled asbestos, asbestos that we claim came from vour client's products. Union Carbide's Bakelite that was supplied to Square D. AllenBradley, Cutler-Hammer, and others, so the asbestos that we believe, in part, was supplied by your client. So whether or not Union Carbide knew about the asbestos in its products is highly relevant. MS. CLARK: Counsel. I disagree as to when it's a person-most-knowledgeable deposition and he's been asked to testify on certain topics specified in your notice, and details about tests at their facility, none of that is specified in your notice. Til let it go on for a while, but can we please stick to the topics in the notice? MR. GALERSTON: Well, w'e'll disagree as to whether or not I'm on the subject. I believe that I'm well within my topics. 14:03:07 1 14:03:08 2 14:03:13 3 14:03:14 4 14:03:17 5 14:03:18 6 14:03:23 7 14:03:27 8 14:03:30 9 14:03:3110 14:03:3311 14:03:3512 14:03:3713 14:03:4314 14:03:4615 14:03:5216 14:03:5317 14:03:5518 14:03:5819 14 : 04: 0020 14:04:0321 14:04:0322 14:04:0523 14:04:0824 25 A. Yes. Q. Okay. A. Both at one time. And as I recall, we passed. Q. Okay. And so do you recall which product was tested? A. We took one that had a high asbestos level, like 5303, but I don't recall whether that was the actual product we used. But it was a high asbestos filling. Q. So you're talking about a product that had 40 to 50 percent? A. Probably more like 30,35. Q. Okay. And when you say that the test level was -- you passed, does that indicate that asbestos was released, but it was below the then TLV, or threshold limit value? MS. CLARK: Objection; foundation, not called for or specified in the notice as to presenting a person knowledgeable on the details of those tests. You can answer. THE WITNESS: Again, I have to go by recollection because 1 haven't found it, the records, but as I recall, it was very low, where Page 187 Page 189 14:02:09 1 14:02:12 2 14:02:16 3 14:02:21 4 14:02:22 5 14:02:25 6 14:02:26 7 14:02:27 8 14:02:28 9 14:02:2910 14:02:3211 14:02:3212 14:02:3313 14:02:3414 14:02:3715 14:02:4216 14:02:4817 14:02:4918 14:02:4919 14:02:5220 14:02:5521 14:02:5822 14:03:0023 14:03:0324 25 Q. Sir, the question to you was whether or not Union Carbide ever did any testing to detennine whether or not asbestos was released from its Bakelite products when it was cut, abraded, or drilled. MS. CLARK: Same objections. THE WITNESS: Do 1 answer that? MS. CLARK: You can answer. THE WITNESS: Yes. BY MR. GALERSTON: Q. What tests were done, and when were those done? MS. CLARK: Same objections: beyond the scope. THE WITNESS: It would be in the early '70s, and I recall that we had it done in the laboratory and that we were well within the OSHA limits. BY MR. GALERSTON: Q. Okay. Now, and just so I'm clear. I've read your previous testimony on several occasions where you testified that the molding process was tested. Now, if I understand you correctly, you're saying that actually cutting, abrading, and grinding of the completed product was tested, as well. 14:04:16 1 14:04:17 2 14:04:17 3 14:04:19 4 14:04:21 5 14:04:24 6 14:04:28 7 14:04:29 8 14:04:37 9 14:04:4110 14:04:42 11 14:04: 43 12 14:04:44 13 14:04:45 14 14:04:48 15 14:04:52 16 14:04:54 17 14:04: 55 18 14:04:56 19 14:04:57 20 14:05:0021 14:05:0322 14:05:1023 14:05:1624 25 they were even not sure whether they had found some fibers or not. BY MR. GALERSTON: Q. Would there be somebody else at Union Carbide that would be more knowledgeable about the test results from these asbestos-containing products that Union Carbide was selling other than yourself? A. Not that I'm aware of. Q. Okay. The tests, were these tests done after the 1970 mold tests, or would they have been done before that? A. Which mold tests? MS. CLARK: Objection; vague, ambiguous. BY MR. GALERSTON: Q. Your previous testimony indicated in the 1970 time frame you did the testing to detennine whether or not your operator was exposed to asbestos when he would do the molding, correct? A. Yes. MS. CLARK: Objection: mischaracterizes testimony. THE WITNESS: 1 think the test with the operator was done first, probably in the early '70s. This came next because it, you know', raised the question, "Okay. What happens if you do that?" 48 (Pages 186 to 189) LUDWIG KLEIN REPORTERS & VIDEO, INC. 800.540.0681 e08d329d-027b-438b-9587-ca63e8cbb1cb CARLO MARTINO 7/11/2007 EUBANKS VS. A.W. CHESTERTON Page 190 Page 192 14:05:25 1 14:05:30 2 14:05:36 3 14:05:40 4 14:05:40 5 14:05:47 6 14:05:52 7 14:05:54 8 14:05:57 9 14:06:0010 14:06:0311 14:06:0712 14:06:1313 14:06:1514 14:06:1815 14:06:2016 14:06:2017 14:06:2118 14:06:2519 14:06:2620 14:06:3121 14:06:3422 14:06:3523 14:06:3624 25 The -- now, I want to make the point that a molded part is -- you make a molded part so you don't have to machine and drill and so forth, and most molded parts that I'm familiar with don't require that. That's why you do it that way, to save the money. So that's the reason the chances of somebody doing that I think are very low'. But we still did it to - because we did some of our -- some drilling and machining of plaques to make specimens, and we wanted to be sure our people w'ere safe. But customers, people who buy the product. the molded part. I'm not aware of anybody who cuts the molded piece, and they' shouldn't, because they change the nature of w hat -- the design of the part. and it's not going to function the way it was supposed to. MR. GALERSTON: Object to the nonresponsive nature of the answer. Q. If others have testified that they would have to cut, drill, or abrade Union Carbide Bakelite materials, you w'ould not disagree with that testimony, would you? A. What's that? MS. CLARK: Objection. 14:07:40 1 14:07:41 2 14:07:44 3 14:07:46 4 14:07:48 5 14:07:49 6 14:07:54 7 14:07:57 8 14:08:01 9 14 : 08:0410 14 : 08:0711 14:08:1412 14:08:1613 14:08:1714 14:08:2115 14:08:2316 14:08:2517 14:08:3018 14:08:3219 14:08:3520 14:08:3621 14 : 08:4122 14:08:4323 14:08:4624 25 MS. CLARK: Objection; assumes facts, misstates his testimony. THE WITNESS: From what I saw there. I don't think it would be molded. They're fiat pieces, and I w'ould think they would come from laminates. Plus, you would need, in a 16th-inch piece like that, the highest rigidity and the highest impact strength. That part made from any of our phenolic compounds, if it was injection molded. I don't think would have sufficient strength for the application. I think those are made from laminates. cut from laminates. MR. GALERSTON: I object to the nonresponsive nature of the answer. Q. Did you see the testimony that there were some that described it as being a flat piece that was a barrier and then some that were like a dome that were bolted on? A. I didn't see the dome part. Is that in the documents that I -- Q. Have you ever seen anybody describe an arc shield such as the ty pe that would be attached by two screws that would be on wings that would then be a dome over a contact? Page 191 Page 193 14:06:39 1 14:06:41 2 14:06:42 3 14:06:43 4 14:06:44 5 14:06:44 6 14:06:46 7 14:06:52 8 14:06:54 9 14:06:5510 14:06:5811 14:07:0012 14 :07: 04 13 14:07:0514 14:07:0915 14:07:1316 14:07:1817 14:07:2218 14:07:2619 14:07:28 20 14:07:32 21 14:07:32 22 14:07:3323 14:07:3724 25 THE WITNESS: I'm sorry. MS. CLARK: I don't think he heard you. Do you want to state it THE WITNESS: Would you repeat that again for me? BY MR. GALERSTON: Q. Sure. If others have testified that they would have to cut, abrade, or otherwise modify Union Carbide Bakelite materials, you don't have a dispute with that testimony, do you? MS. CLARK: Objection; vague, ambiguous. calls for speculation. MR. MAKI: Assumes facts, lacks foundation. THE WITNESS: I would question why they would do it. And in the deposition of one of your witnesses, and I'm not sine whether it was Infante or not -- he said that they could not do that, that they would have to get approval and have to go up through the chain of command to change anything. Now, laminates are cut and drilled and so forth, but molding materials, it's rare, in my experience. BY MR. GALERSTON: Q. Tire arc shields that were described would be molded, correct? 14:08:51 1 14:08:54 2 14:08:56 3 14:08:57 4 14:08:57 5 14:08:59 6 14:09:02 7 14:09:04 8 14:09:08 9 14 : 09:1210 14 : 09:1611 14 : 09:1712 14 : 09:1913 14 : 09:2214 14 : 09:2515 14 : 09:2616 14 : 09:2817 14:09:2818 14:09:3119 14:09:3420 14:09:3421 14:09:3722 14:09:4323 14:09:4724 25 MS. CLARK: Objection; overbroad, vague. THE WITNESS: Now. are you talking about a dome or just taking a fiat piece and bending it over? BY MR. GALERSTON: Q. I'm speaking of a dome. A. A dome, actually rounded. The dome. I didn't see that in the testimony that I read, and I've never heard of a dome arc shield, but there could be one. I mean. I haven't seen all of the problems they have with arcing. Q. You don't claim to have specialized knowledge with regards to the design of arc shields. correct? MS. CLARK: Objection; vague, ambiguous. THE WITNESS: Special knowledge on my part? BY MR. GALERSTON: Q. Correct, with regards to the design of arc shields. A. The dome part? I just-Q. In general, arc shields in general. A. All I can testify is that the fiat pieces that were described in the documents that I read I think were made from laminates, and the Guild 49 (Pages 190 to 193) LUDWIG KLEIN REPORTERS & VIDEO, INC. 800.540.0681 e08d329d-027b-438b-9587-ca63e8cbb1cb CARLO MARTINO 7/11/2007 EUBANKS VS. A.W. CHESTERTON Page 194 Page 196 14:09:55 1 14:09:56 2 14:10:01 3 14:10:06 4 14:10:11 5 14:10:15 6 14:10:21 7 14:10:28 8 14:10:30 9 14:10:3610 14:10:3811 14:10:4212 14:10:4313 14:10:4614 14:10:4715 14:10:4816 14:10:4917 14:10:5118 14:10:5419 14:10:5720 14 : 10:5921 14:11:0122 14:11:0323 14:11:0524 25 description also refers to laminates. That's this one. And from my experience, a thin piece like the chutes -- or the barriers that were described in there would be made from a laminate, and you would want a reinforcement in there to get the most rigid, strongest piece, especially in a 16th-inch thickness. If made by a molding material and molded, you would not have sufficient strength. It would be very brittle. Now. domes. I don't know anything about domes, and that was not described in any of the documents I looked at. MR. GALERSTON: Object to the nonresponsive nature of the answer. Q. Sir. what experience do you have in designing arc shields? A. None. Q. Prior to preparing for this deposition. what have you done to investigate the design of arc shields? A. Nothing more than I've already told you. Q. Have you ever consulted with Square D, Cutler-Hammer. Allen-Bradley, or any other electronic -- electric equipment manufacturer as to 14:12:35 1 14:12:37 2 14:12:40 3 14:12:42 4 14:12:43 5 14:12:47 6 14:12:47 7 14:12:47 8 14:12:49 9 14:12:5110 14:12:5611 14:12:5812 14:13:0013 14:13:0414 14:13:0815 14:13:1216 14:13:1517 14:13:1718 14:13:1919 14:13:2120 14:13:3121 14:13:3322 14:13:3723 14:13:3724 25 Q. Do you have reason to doubt that Donny Eubanks would have been exposed to the dust from the debris of the arc shields w hen he cleaned it out? MS. CLARK: Objection; calls for speculation, ambiguous. THE WITNESS: No, I have no doubt he would be. BY MR. GALERSTON: Q. Do you know' of any studies that were ever made to determine whether or not asbestos was released from the arc shields? MS. CLARK: Objection; assumes facts not in evidence, beyond the scope of the notice. THE WITNESS: Since we didn't, I don't think, provide materials for arc shields and do any testing on them, I mean. I -- we would not have done any testing, no. MR. GALERSTON: Okay. I object to the nonresponsive nature of the answer. Q. If I understand it correctly. Union Carbide did not do any testing of its phenolic molded compounds to determine whether or not they released asbestos fibers as they were put in use. Is that right? MS. CLARK: Objection; misstates his Page 195 Page 197 14:11:13 1 14:11:33 2 14:11:36 3 14:11:40 4 14:11:41 5 14:11:42 6 14:11:54 7 14:11:54 8 14:11:54 9 14:11:54 10 14:11:5711 14:12:0112 14:12:0513 14:12:10 14 14:12:13 15 14:12:14 16 14:12:14 17 14:12:17 18 14:12:20 19 14:12:24 20 14:12:24 21 14:12:24 22 14:12:26 23 14:12:2924 25 the design and manufacture of arc shields? A. No. Q. There is a description of the debris that is created from the breakdown of the arc shield. Are you familiar with that? A. Yes. Q. Do you believe that it is possible for the arc shields and other components in the interior of a control box to break down? MS. CLARK: Objection; vague, ambiguous. THE WITNESS: From the testimony, they said that periodically they had to replace the arc shield, so that indicates to me that there was eventually a failure of some sort. Whether it w as mechanical or whether it was a result of the arc, I don't know. BY MR. GALERSTON: Q. Did you understand that, in part, the debris that was being removed from the control boxes periodically would have been the debris from the arc shield? A. Yes. Q. Did you also understand that the arc shield would be weakened by the cleaning and the scraping? A. Yes. 14:13:40 1 14:13:46 2 14:13:48 3 14:13:48 4 14:13:50 5 14:13:51 6 14:13:51 7 14:13:53 8 14:13:54 9 14:13:54 10 14:13:5611 14:13:5912 14:14:0013 14:14:0214 14:14:0315 14:14:0916 14:14:1317 14:14:2018 14:14:2119 14:14:2220 14:14:2421 14:14:2822 14:14:3023 14:14:3324 25 testimony. THE WITNESS: You mean the taking of tests on the granular material? BY MR. GALERSTON: Q. No. Tire finished product. A. On the finished product? Q. Coned. MS. CLARK: Same objection. THE WITNESS: And what kind of tests? BY MR. GALERSTON: Q. To determine whether or not they would release asbestos fibers over time after they had beat put into use. MS. CLARK: Same objection, asked and answered. THE WITNESS: Why would they release asbestos fiber after time in use? They don't degrade unless they're -- I can't think of any example where that would be necessary. BY MR. GALERSTON: Q. Okay. So I take it from your answer that Union Carbide did not engage in a study to determine whether or not its phenolic molded compounds that contained asbestos would release asbestos fiber over time as an end product. Correct? 50 (Pages 194 to 197) LUDWIG KLEIN REPORTERS & VIDEO, INC. 800.540.0681 e08d329d-027b-438b-9587-ca63e8cbb1cb CARLO MARTINO 7/11/2007 EUBANKS VS. A.W. CHESTERTON Page 198 Page 200 14:14:37 1 14:14:40 2 14:14:45 3 14:14:48 4 14:14:50 5 14:14:52 6 14:14:55 7 14:14:57 8 14:14:58 9 14:15:00 10 14:15:03 11 14:15:04 12 14:15:05 13 14:15:12 14 14:15:17 15 14:15:19 16 14:15:27 17 14:15:30 18 14:15:33 19 14:15:35 20 14:15:39 21 14:15:39 22 14:15:4123 14:15: 45 24 25 MS. CLARK: Objection; vague, ambiguous. beyond the scope. THE WITNESS: If it was not abraded in use by some mechanism, no. BY MR. GALERSTON: Q. Regardless of how it would have happened. Union Carbide did not undertake to determine and study whether or not asbestos would be released over time from that product, right? MS. CLARK: Same objections. THE WITNESS: I'm unaware of any such testing or the need for it. BY MR. GALERSTON: Q. Okay. With regards to the Bakelite products that Union Carbide sold to its customers such as Square D, Allen-Bradley, Cutler-Hammer, Nelson Marine, and others, when did the Bakelite division start to warn of the hazards of asbestos related to its asbestos-containing Bakelite? MR. MAKE Objection; lacks foundation. calls for speculation, assumes facts. MR. KINSEY: Join. MS. CLARK: Join. THE WITNESS: I can't give you the exact date, but it would be in '12 or '73,1 believe. 14:16:57 1 14:16:57 2 14:16:59 3 14:17:02 4 14:17:06 5 14:17:06 6 14:17:07 7 14:17:08 8 14:17:12 9 14:17:1410 14:17:1511 14:17:2412 14:31:0513 14:31:2914 14:31:3115 14:31:3616 14:31:3817 14:31:4118 14:31:4419 14:31:4420 14:31:4421 14:31:4622 14:31:4923 14:31:5224 25 came in, the raw asbestos bags -- A. Yes. Q. -- or however they came, do you know when Union Carbide's Bakelite division first received warnings from the supplier as to the hazards related to asbestos? A. Oh. no. MR. GALERSTON: Okay. 1 think we need to change the tape, so why don't we take five. THE VIDEOGRAPHER: This is the end of Tape Number Three in the deposition of Carlo Martino. The time is 14:17:16. We are off the record. (Recess taken: 2:17 p.m. to 2:31 p.m.) THE VIDEOGRAPHER: We are back on the record. This is the beginning of Tape Number Four in the deposition of Carlo Martino. The time is 14:31:35. Counsel, you may proceed. MR. GALERSTON: Thank you. Q. Mr. Martino, are you ready to continue? A. Yes. Q. Very good. Sir. earlier, you were explaining Union Carbide's Bakelite market position, and 1 believe you said early on. Union Carbide was number one in Page 199 Page 201 14:15:57 1 14:16:00 2 14:16:06 3 14:16:09 4 14:16:12 5 14:16:16 6 14:16:19 7 14:16:20 8 14:16:24 9 14:16:2710 14:16:3011 14:16:3212 14:16:3513 14:16:3514 14:16:3815 14:16:4116 14:16:4317 14:16:4418 14:16:4519 14:16:4920 14:16:5121 14:16:5322 14:16:5323 14:16:5324 25 where we started putting labels on the bags. But there were discussions with customers through the Sales Department after the OSHA test came out. and quite a bit of discussion between the customer and us about what the OSHA test meant and how to run it and so forth. But the labeling of bags didn't come until, you know. '72. '73. BY MR. GALERSTON: Q. Okay. And do you recall when the first -- the asbestos that Union Carbide w'as buying to put in the Bakelite materials that it w'as selling, do you remember when those asbestos bags were first labeled with warnings with regards to the hazards of asbestos? MS. CLARK: Objection; foundation. THE WITNESS: The asbestos wfe were selling? I had nothing to do with that product. BY MR. GALERSTON: Q. Not the asbestos you were selling. The asbestos you were purchasing, the RM-18. A. Well, the warning would come from the asbestos company. Q. Right. A. Yeah. Q. And fm asking about the bags that they 14:31:57 1 14:32:00 2 14:32:02 3 14:32:02 4 14:32:04 5 14:32:07 6 14 : 32 :09 7 14 : 32 :09 8 14:32:10 9 14:32:1210 14:32:1411 14:32:1612 14:32:1913 14:32:2114 14:32:2215 14:32:2716 14:32:3017 14:32:3418 14:32:4119 14:32:4320 14:32:4621 14:32:5322 14:32:5823 14:33:0024 25 the market. And when 1 say Bakelite, I mean phenolic resins and moldings, right? A. Yes. Q. And then you said there was an explosion. and I would assume that to be a reference to the Bhopal explosion. A. Oh, no. Q. No? A. No. This was an explosion of our -- in our phenolic molding material plant. Q. Okay. When did that occur? A. 1 believe it was 1952. Q. As a result of that, you lost market share because your production was down? A. Yes. And we also had to give - because at that time we had customers who bought all of their material from us, they suddenly had to be supplied by somebody else, and our competitors didn't have the same formulations. So what we had to do was give our fonnulations to our competitors and have them make the product for our customers. And, of course, we had to give away a lot of our knowledge to them. Q. Okay. 51 (Pages 198 to 201) LUDWIG KLEIN REPORTERS & VIDEO, INC. 800.540.0681 e08d329d-027b-438b-9587-ca63e8cbb1cb CARLO MARTINO 7/11/2007 EUBANKS VS. A.W. CHESTERTON Page 202 Page 204 14:33:07 1 14:33:14 2 14:33:18 3 14:33:20 4 14:33:22 5 14:33:23 6 14 :33:26 7 14:33:26 8 14:33:28 9 14:33:2910 14:33:3011 14:33:3512 14:33:3913 14:33:4214 14:33:4415 14:33:4616 14:33:4917 14:33:5018 14:33:5519 14:33:5720 14:33:5921 14:34:0022 14:34:0223 14:34:0424 25 A. And after that, customers would not give a himdred percent of their products to one supplier, which is -- and that's true now in many cases. You can't rely on just one. Q. Once burned, twice shy? A. Yes. Q. So was that in the Bound Brook facility? A. Yes. Q. Okay. In 1952, you were not the group manager, correct? A. No. Q. When you became group manager in 1960, would you agree that Union Carbide was the number two supplier of phenolic resins and moldings? MS. CLARK: Objection; beyond the scope. assumes facts not in evidence. THE WITNESS: We thought we were. BY MR. GALERSTON: Q. Okay. My understanding is that Union Carbide stayed in the phenolic resins business imtil 1974, 1975. Correct? A. Yes. Q. And at that time -- A. Well, we went out of the business the end of'74. 14:35:33 1 14:35:37 2 14:35:42 3 14:35:46 4 14:35:51 5 14:35:55 6 14:35:58 7 14:36:01 8 14:36:01 9 14:36:0210 14:36:0511 14:36:0712 14:36:0913 14:36:1014 14:36:1315 14:36:1716 14:36:1717 14:36:2018 14:36:2319 14:36:25 20 14:36:32 21 14:36:4022 14:36:4723 14:36:5124 25 continuous, but intermittent. That's probably the most severe. And it's not a question ofjust a short period of time. It's over a period of time at those conditions that any phenolic compound, whether it lias asbestos in it or not, will lose its properties. But with a mineral filler, and particularly with asbestos, the properties retain for a longer period of time. BY MR. GALERSTON: Q. Okay. So my understanding is that Union Carbide is more likely to include asbestos in its high-temperature Bakelite applications. A. Yes. Yes. Q. I also understand that the general purpose Bakelite also contained asbestos at some point in time. Correct? MS. CLARK: Objection; misstates facts and miscliaracterizes the testimony. THE WITNESS: Hiere was -- there were some at very low levels -- I think it was nine percent -- that we developed and we called general purpose. but those were primarily woodtlour fill and just a small amount of asbestos, which helped us improve tire long-term aging of the product but at low er Page 203 Page 205 14:34:08 1 14:34:14 2 14:34:18 3 14:34:21 4 14:34:23 5 14:34:24 6 14:34:24 7 14:34:36 8 14 :34 : 39 9 14:34:4210 14:34:4511 14:34:4712 14:34:5113 14:34:5514 14:34:5915 14:35:0016 14:35:0017 14:35:0118 14:35:0219 14:35:0420 14:35:0921 14:35:1522 14:35:1823 14:35:2424 25 Q. The end of 1974. And did you sell off the unit, or did you just close it down? A. The equipment was removed. Whether it was sold to anybody or not, I don't know. Q. At that point in time, you were no longer involved with Bakelite, correct? A. That's right. Q. 1 want to clarify something from your deposition that you gave in the Barragan case. I think 1 called it Branagan before. It's Barragan, B-a-r-r-a-g-a-n. This is the testimony that you gave in March of this year. There you testified as to, I guess. different types of Bakelite: high temperature versus regular temperature, general purpose versus specialized. A. Yes. Q. Do you recall that testimony? A. Yes. Q. What is your -- what is the definition of a high-temperature application for Bakelite? MS. CLARK: Objection; overbroad, vague. THE WITNESS: Well, an application where the likely exposure is going to be 350,400 degrees Fahrenheit, like ovens. It doesn't have to be 14:36:56 1 14:36:57 2 14:36:59 3 14:37:01 4 14:37:04 5 14:37:05 6 14:37:06 7 14:37:10 8 14:37:14 9 14:37:1810 14:37:2211 14:37:2912 14:37:3213 14:37:3214 14:37:3615 14:37:3816 14:37:4217 14:37:5118 14:37:5619 14:38:0320 14:38:0921 14:38:1322 14:38:1423 14:38:1524 25 temperatures. BY MR. GALERSTON: Q. Okay. And you indicated in your previous testimony that it was a short period of time that that asbestos was included in that product, correct? A. Yes, because -- MS. CLARK: Objection; overbroad, vague. THE WITNESS: Yes, because then we decided, in 1970, after the OSHA test came out, that we wanted to remove as much asbestos as we could from our products, and we started with the low' levels and worked our way up. And the low' levels was in '70, '71, and then -- BY MR. GALERSTON: Q. What year did Union Carbide start using asbestos in its general purpose Bakelite? MS. CLARK: Objection; overbroad, vague. THE WITNESS: I vaguely remember some small amounts of asbestos in some products in the early '60s, but they were specialty applications. But it wasn't until in the later '70s that we came up with this one product that had nine percent that gave us longer life. BY MR. GALERSTON: Q. Okay. And I believe you said in the later 52 (Pages 202 to 205) LUDWIG KLEIN REPORTERS & VIDEO, INC. 800.540.0681 e08d329d-027b-438b-9587-ca63e8cbb1cb CARLO MARTINO 7/11/2007 EUBANKS VS. A.W. CHESTERTON Page 206 Page 208 14:38:20 1 14:38:24 2 14:38:30 3 14:38:30 4 14:38:32 5 14:38:35 6 14:38:37 7 14:38:38 8 14:38:40 9 14:38:4110 14 :38:44 11 14:38:4512 14:38:4613 14:38:5014 14:38:5315 14 :38:54 16 14 :38:55 17 14:38:5618 14:39:0219 14:39:0520 14:39:0721 14:39:0922 14:39:1523 14:39:1624 25 '70s. I believe you meant the later '60s. A. No. It was -- let's see. It would be 5440. I think 5440 was developed in the late '60s. Q. Okay. A. It was in the '70s that we started taking the asbestos out, but the product was introduced before the '70s. Q. Okay. And I believe you indicated that was 5440 you were referring to. A. I think so. Q. And that was a general purpose Bakelite? A. That was a general purpose with a little bit of asbestos in it. Q. Okay. In that same deposition, you were talking about your high-temperature Bakelite and your market for that. Do you recall testifying with regards to that? A. I don't recall it in those terms. Q. Okay. And let me just ask you this. Do you recall stating that Square D, Cutler-Hammer, and Allen-Bradley would have been your customers for your high-temperature Bakelite from 1969 to 1974? A. Yes. Yes. Q. That sounds right to you? 14:40:59 1 14:41:03 2 14:41:09 3 14:41:14 4 14:41:18 5 14:41:22 6 14:41:24 7 14:41:29 8 14:41:33 9 14:41:3610 14:41:3911 14:41: 5512 14:41:5713 14:41:5914 14:42:0315 14:42:0916 14:42:1417 14:42:1518 14:42:1819 14:42:1920 14:42:2121 14:42:2122 14:42:2323 14 : 43:1124 25 had any of its Bakelite materials on the Qualified Products List in response to mil spec M-14F? A. 1 suspect we had some. I'm pretty sure we had BMG-0750, which was our MicroFil material. qualified imder the MFE specification, because mica -- of the mineral fillers, mica is the best for electrical properties. Unfortunately, you know, in an application. electrical properties are only one consideration, and you have to -- you know, cost and other properties are important, too. So that's why the others exist. Q. Sir, I'm going to hand you what I've marked as Exhibit No. 9 to your deposition, and 1 will represent to you these are sworn interrogatory answers filed by Union Carbide in May 2003 in New York City asbestos litigation. I referred to these earlier. I believe you indicated that you have not previously had an opportunity to review interrogatory answers. Correct? A. Yes. Q. Therefore, I assume that these are not familiar to you. Correct? A. I don't see anything familiar. Page 207 Page 209 14:39:23 1 14:39:41 2 14:39:45 3 14:39:50 4 14:39:53 5 14:39:54 6 14:39:55 7 14:39:58 8 14:40:03 9 14:40:0810 14:40:1011 14:40:1312 14:40: 1813 14:40:2314 14:40:27 15 14:40:2916 14:40:3317 14:40:3518 14:40:3919 14:40:43 20 14:40:4621 14:40:4922 14:40:5123 14:40:53 24 25 A. Yeah. Yes. And that was -- I was referring to the 5303. Q. Okay. Now, we talked about the Qualified Products List, and particularly the M- 14F list, correct? Do you remember talking about that? A. Yes. Yes. Q. That mil spec. And you indicated that you did not know whether or not Union Carbide ever had any Bakelite or other products that were on the QPL for that mil spec, correct? A. I said I didn't know what we had on those products, not that they -- yeah, I didn't know what we had at various periods of time. But I also had in mind at that time the qualified products, not only ours but of our competitors, and other types of resin. It would have been helpful to know if there -- what products that they had on the Qualified Products List for the products they have there with arc-resistant specifications, whether they were ours or somebody else's, which would give me another lead as to what was being used for the arc shield. Q. Is it your testimony that you don't know one way or the other whether or not Union Carbide 14:43:16 1 14:43:18 2 14:43:19 3 14:43:22 4 14:43:31 5 14:43:34 6 14:43:36 7 14:43:39 8 14:43:41 9 14:43:4710 14 : 43: 4911 14 : 43: 5112 14 : 43: 5113 14 : 43: 5314 14 : 43: 5515 14 : 43: 5516 14 : 43: 5917 14:44:0118 14 : 44: 0319 14 : 44: 0520 14 : 44: 0821 14:44:0922 14:44:1023 14 : 44: 1224 25 Q. Okay. Well, for what it's worth -- A. Is it all the same? 1 mean, this -- it's all one interrogatory? Q. No, no. There is a large number. There's objections, there's responses. It goes to No. 89. No. I take that back. Yeah, 89. I have some specific questions that are in here relating to Bakelite. You, of course, sir. are entitled to look at this document as fully and completely as you wish, but it's my -- my last question to you was, as 1 understand it, this has never been provided to you before. Correct? A. No. Q. And nothing like this has been provided to you before by Union Carbide's counsel, correct? A. No. Q. Okay. Like I said, you're welcome to spend as much time with this document as you like. I'm not going to rush you through it. I have some specific questions that are in here related to Bakelite and whether or not you agree, disagree, or if you can amplify. A. All right. Q. Okay? My first question does not have to -- it's on page 25. 53 (Pages 206 to 209) LUDWIG KLEIN REPORTERS & VIDEO, INC. 800.540.0681 e08d329d-027b-438b-9587-ca63e8cbb1cb CARLO MARTINO 7/11/2007 EUBANKS VS. A.W. CHESTERTON Page 210 Page 212 14:44:25 1 14:44:28 2 14:44:28 3 14:44:30 4 14:44:34 5 14:44:37 6 14:44:39 7 14:44:43 8 14:44:49 9 14:44:5110 14:44:5311 14:44:5512 14:44:5713 14:44:59 14 14:45:0115 14:45:0316 14:45:0517 14:45:0718 14:45:0719 14:45:0820 14:45:1121 14:45: 14 22 14:45: 17 23 14:45:22 24 25 MR. MAKI: Counsel, 1 apologize. This is Craig Maki. Did you mark that on the record? MR. GALERSTON: Yes, Exhibit No. 9. MR. MAKI: Okay. Thank you. BY MR. GALERSTON: Q. Well, sir, I tell you what. If you w ould look at page 22, that's where the question is, if you look at that before w e start reading the answ er. Question No. 21 on page 22, the interrogatory question to Union Carbide was: "For the period 1928 to the present. state the address of each miner, manufacturer or processor of asbestos or asbestos fibers used in your products and for each such miner, manufacturer or processor state: "a. The date, amounts and delivery point for each shipment of asbestos you received. "b. The products in which the asbestos was used." There is a discussion there with regards to the Calidria, and you're welcome to read through it, and what I want to ask you about is on page 25, when we finally get to an answer that relates to 14:46:31 1 14:46:39 2 14:46:43 3 14:46:45 4 14:46:47 5 14:46:48 6 14:46:53 7 14:46:55 8 14:46:57 9 14:46:5810 14:47:0211 14:47:0512 14:47:0813 14:47:1014 14:47:1115 14:47:1116 14:47:1417 14:47:2218 14:47:2519 14:47:3020 14:47:3321 14:47:3522 14:47:3823 14:47:4124 25 Corporation. There was a merger with a company here in Chicago. Redmanol I think, and I don't recall the -- it may be the Bakeland Corporation that was in Perth Amboy. I would have to go back through the history and refresh my memory. But there was a merger. Q. Okay. And there was -- Bakelite was manufactured by another company prior to it being manufactured by Union Carbide, correct? A. Yes. Q. Whoever that is, be it Bakeland. be it -- A. Yeah. I think it w;as Redmanol. Q. Okay. That merger took place in what year? Was that 1907 that you were saying earlier? MS. CLARK: Objection; asked and answered THE WITNESS: No. MS. CLARK: -- misstates the testimony. THE WITNESS: 1907 is when Bakeland first discovered phenolic resins. And the reason that comes to mind is we just celebrated its hundredthyear anniversary at the plant. At the facility, no longer a plant. The molding material came after that, you know. The resin came first. And exactly when that started. I don't know'. Page 211 Page 213 14:45:30 1 14:45:31 2 14:45:32 3 14:45:35 4 14:45:37 5 14:45:39 6 14:45:41 7 14:45:42 8 14:45:44 9 14 : 45: 4610 14:45:4811 14:45:5012 14:45:5313 14:45:5514 14:45:5615 14:45:5816 14:46:0017 14:46:0018 14:46:0419 14:46:0820 14:46:0821 14:46:0922 14 : 46:1123 14:46:2024 25 Bakelite. A. Okay. Q. Okay? You see the second-to-the-last paragraph of the answer to interrogatory 21 states: "Union Carbide manufactured phenolic molding compounds under the trade name Bakelite. Some of Union Carbide's phenolic molding compounds were manufactured with asbestos. Union Carbide bought primarily short fiber Canadian chrysotile asbestos from several suppliers over the years. including but not limited to, Carey Canadian Mines, Rubberoid Company, Johns-Manville Company, Limited, and Asbestos Corporation Limited," period. Did I read that correctly? A. Yes. Q. Okay. What I want to confirm is that Bakelite was a trade name for Union Carbide, correct? A. Yes. Q. It was a name that they acquired when they merged with the Bakeland Corporation, correct? A. I'm not sure there was a Bakeland 14:47:44 1 14:47:47 2 14:47:48 3 14:47:54 4 14:47:57 5 14:47:58 6 14:48:09 7 14:48:16 8 14:48:17 9 14:48:2310 14:48:3111 14:48:3712 14:48:3913 14:48: 42 14 14:48:4715 14:48:5216 14:49:0217 14:49:0518 14:49:09 19 14:49: 12 20 14:49:15 21 14:49: 18 22 14:49:24 23 14:49:24 24 25 BY MR. GALERSTON: Q. Okay. And I'm looking for the date for the merger with Union Carbide. A. The merger, again, I would have to go back into the history to get you the exact date. It exists someplace. Q. Okay. When Union Carbide first started marketing Bakelite, that was for both a molded and a resin product, correct? A. They started with resin first, and that was made into beads and, you know, jewelry, fancy cases. handles. Then they came -- we began to realize that if it was going to go anywhere, they had to reinforce it, because it didn't have enough strength by itself. When that occurred, I don't know, but sometime in the '20s, I would believe, or late 1900 -- or 1915, you know, in that area. And that business lias gradually evolved, as well as others. you know: resin applications, laminates, that sort of tiling. Q. By the time that you became involved in the Bakelite division of Union Carbide in 1948, they were already offering the molding compositions. correct? A. Oh, yes. Yes. 54 (Pages 210 to 213) LUDWIG KLEIN REPORTERS & VIDEO, INC. 800.540.0681 e08d329d-027b-438b-9587-ca63e8cbb1cb CARLO MARTINO 7/11/2007 EUBANKS VS. A.W. CHESTERTON Page 214 Page 216 14:49:36 1 14:49:42 2 14:49:43 3 14:49:44 4 14:49:47 5 14:49:49 6 14:49:52 7 14:49:55 8 14:49:57 9 14:49:5810 14:49:5911 14:50:1212 14:50:1613 14:50:2714 14:50:2715 14:50:2716 14:50:2717 14:50:2718 14:50:2719 14:50:2920 14:50:3021 14:50:3222 14:50:3823 14:50:3824 25 Q. And Union Carbide continued to market resins and molded constituents under the Bakelite name, correct? A. Yes. Q. All of the products that we have discussed today, specifically with Square D, but also those that were sold to Allen-Bradley, Cutler-Hammer, those would have all been under the Bakelite nomenclature, correct? A. What they bought from us? Q. Correct. A. Yes. Q. I'm going to ask you a question with regards to the next interrogatory, which is No. 22, which begins right below what we just read. The interrogatory asks: "With respect to each asbestos product" -- MS. CLARK: Wait just a minute. I don't think we're there. THE WITNESS: 22? MS. CLARK: It's No. 22, right? MR. GALERSTON: Right, on page 25. THE WITNESS: Okay. BY MR. GALERSTON: 14:51:29 1 14:51:30 2 14:51:31 3 14:51:32 4 14:51:34 5 14:51:37 6 14:51:40 7 14:51:45 8 14:51:47 9 14:51:4710 14:51:4811 14:51:5012 14:51:5013 14:51:5114 14:51:5215 14:51:5416 14:51:5617 14:52:0118 14:52:0619 14:52:0820 14:52:0921 14:52:1122 14:52:1323 14:52:1424 25 Q. -- and then it goes on through subpart i. A. Uh-huh. Q. Okay. You see that? A. Yes. Q. Okay. And then we see that there's the general objections made by Union Carbide, and I want to ask you specifically with regards to information on phenolic moldings on page 28. Do you see it there on page 28. the last full paragraph that's shown there -- A. Yes. Q. -- starting "In 1973"? A. Yes. Q. It states there: "In 1973, Union Carbide printed the following cautions on the packages of asbestos-containing phenolic molding compounds: Quote. Caution! Contains asbestos fibers: Avoid creating dust; Breathing dust" -- excuse me -- "Breathing Asbestos Dust May Cause Serious Bodily Harm, period, close quote. Union Carbide ceased manufacturing and selling asbestos containing phenolic molding compounds 14:50:40 1 14:50:41 2 14:50:44 3 14:50:46 4 14:50:47 5 14:50:51 6 14:50:53 7 14:50:55 8 14:50:57 9 14:50:5910 14:51:0111 14:51:0112 14:51:0313 14:51:0514 14:51:0715 14:51:1016 14:51:1117 14:51:1318 14:51:1919 14:51:2020 14:51:2121 14 : 51:24 22 14:51:2523 14:51:2724 25 Page 215 Q. "With respect to each asbestos product (including loose asbestos fiber) you manufactured, refined. processed, sold or delivered, state whether you claim any caution warning. caveat or other statement about health involved in using the product and/or dust generated by the product was ever given to purchasers of the product or directed to the users of the product. If so. state separately for each product: "a. The precise w ording of each caution or set of instructions." And it goes through i. through those subparts. Do you see that, sir? A. What was the question? Q. Do > ou see that sir1? Do you see that it goes through subpart i? A. See "set of instructions"; is that what you're referring to? Q. No. Interrogatory 22 -- A. Olt. yes. I Q. -- that statement that I read -- A. Yes. 14:52:17 1 14:52:19 2 14:52:19 3 14:52:21 4 14:52:22 5 14:52:24 6 14:52:25 7 14:52:26 8 14:52:28 9 14:52:3110 14:52:3311 14:52:3412 14:52:4013 14:52:4314 14:52:4715 14:52:5216 14:52:5317 14:52:5618 14:52:5919 14:53:0220 14:53:0521 14:53:1122 14:53:1523 14:53:1524 25 Page 217 by 1975." Do you see that, sir? A. Yes. Q. Did I read it correctly? A. And what? Q. Did I read it correctly? A. Yes. you did. Q. Okay. Is that consistent with your recollection, that it wasn't until 1973 that any caution labels were placed on phenolic molding compounds? A. Yes. Q. Okay. Were you involved in the creation of this warning? A. No. Q. Do you understand what this warning means. what it's saying to you? MS. CLARK: Objection; vague, ambiguous. THE WITNESS: It is telling our customers which of the products they bought from us contain asbestos and which did not. and that if they contained asbestos, they should do some testing to determine whether they are operating within the OSHA limits. BY MR. GALERSTON: 55 (Pages 214 to 217) LUDWIG KLEIN REPORTERS & VIDEO, INC. 800.540.0681 e08d329d-027b-438b-9587-ca63e8cbb1cb CARLO MARTINO 7/11/2007 EUBANKS VS. A.W. CHESTERTON Page 218 Page 220 14:53:19 1 14:53:29 2 14:53:33 3 14:53:37 4 14:53:40 5 14:53:42 6 14:53:47 7 14:53:50 8 14:53:54 9 14:53:5710 14 :54:04 11 14:54:1012 14:54:14 13 14:54:17 14 14:54:21 15 14 :54:23 16 14 :54:28 17 14:54:2918 14:54:3519 14 :54:38 20 14:54:4021 14:54:4222 14:54:4423 14 :54:52 24 25 Q. Okay. Do you know how you could use, say, 5404 and avoid breathing dust while using it? A. Dust -- well, of course, ventilation, and we had a dust -- you know, we were dealing with dust well before asbestos became an issue. Dust is what caused the explosion in our plant. So there are -- our customers also, you know, used ventilation to keep the dust down. We put as little tines in as possible in the product and still meet their requirements. So dust was always a -- in fact, I think we had a dust warning label on our bags. What this means is it's more than dust that you have to look out for. And most of our customers already were aware of the OSHA test, but they didn't know which products contained asbestos and which didn't unless they asked us. This resolved that issue. Q. Okay. So if I understand correctly, you wouldn't avoid creating dust so much as you would suppress the dust by ventilation -- is that what you're saying? -- in your own facilities. A. In our own facility, ventilation -- you know, once you did all you could to contain the area that you're working in, then the only solution is 14:56:03 1 14:56:06 2 14:56:09 3 14:56:11 4 14:56:12 5 14:56:13 6 14:56:16 7 14:56:18 8 14:56:21 9 14:56:2210 14:56:2411 14:56:2712 14:56:2813 14:56:3014 14:56:3115 14:56:3216 14:56:3317 14:56:3618 14:56:4119 14:56:4520 14:56:5021 14:56:5222 14:56:5623 14:56:5624 25 THE WITNESS: We had a warning label about dust, as I recall. Now', that should be checked from the records, but as I recall, we had something on tire bags about dust. BY MR. GALERSTON: Q. And to the best of your recollection, w hat did that dust warning state? A. I would have to look at the file because I don't remember the exact wording. It w'ould be similar to this. Q. What information do you have that your customers actually received that warning and understood that w arning? MS. CLARK: Objection; foundation, beyond the scope. THE WITNESS: Well, if itMS. RODRIGUES: Join. THE WITNESS: If it was on the bag. they would have received it if they used the material. If they had any concerns about what to do about it. you know, they could always call us. And some, you know, with regard to asbestos, we did get calls. With regard to dust, I don't remember anybody calling. BY MR. GALERSTON: Page 219 Page 221 14:55:01 1 14:55:04 2 14:55:07 3 14:55:14 4 14:55:19 5 14:55:23 6 14:55:23 7 14:55:27 8 14:55:29 9 14:55:3210 14:55:3511 14:55:3712 14:55:3813 14:55:4014 14:55:4215 14:55:4316 14:55:4417 14:55:4718 14:55:4719 14:55:4920 14:55:52 21 14:55:5522 14:55:58 23 14 : 55:58 24 25 dust, you know, ventilation and also protection of the employees themselves. In '73,74, the operators were wearing masks, you know, and clothing which they had to leave at work. So all sorts of precautions were taken. Whatever technology w'as available was implemented. Q. You stated that your customers of your phenolic molding compounds were aware of the hazards related to dust. How do you know that your customers such as Square D. Allen-Bradley, or Cutler-Hammer were familiar with the hazards of asbestos dust? MR. KINSEY: Objection: assumes facts. MS. RODRIGUES: Objection; lacks foundation. THE WITNESS: 1 said they were aware of dust, not asbestos dust. BY MR. GALERSTON: Q. Okay. How were you -- how' do you know that your customers such as Square D, Cutler-Hammer, and Allen-Bradley were aware of the hazards associated with dust? A. We had a warning -MS. RODRIGUES: Same objection. 14:57:01 1 14:57:06 2 14:57:08 3 14:57:11 4 14:57:19 5 14:57:20 6 14:57:22 7 14:57:24 8 14:57:26 9 14:57:2910 14: 57:34 11 14:57:3712 14:57:3813 14:57:4114 14:57:4315 14:57:4716 14:57:5017 14:57:5618 14:57:5919 14:57:5920 14:58:0321 14:58:0622 14:58:1123 14: 58:14 24 25 Q. When did Union Carbide's Bakelite division first send out an MSDS relating to its asbestoscontaining phenolic molding compounds? A. MSDS sheets? MS. CLARK: Objection; beyond the scope. THE WITNESS: I would have to check the records. My guess is in the 70s. BY MR. GALERSTON: Q. Would you agree with me that this wanting label that was put on in 1973 was Union Carbide's first attempt to communicate to its phenolic molding compound customers regarding the hazards directly associated with asbestos? MS. CLARK: Objection; misstates testimony. THE WITNESS: No. 1 think 1 previously testified that there were verbal communications between the Sales Department and us after the OSHA test came out and what it meant, and some even wanted us to do -- nin the test in their facilities. BY MR. GALERSTON: Q. Are you aware of any direct communication between the Union Carbide Bakelite division and Square D communicating the risks associated to asbestos from exposure - excuse me - from working with the Bakelite phenolic molding compounds'? 56 (Pages 218 to 221) LUDWIG KLEIN REPORTERS & VIDEO, INC. 800.540.0681 e08d329d-027b-438b-9587-ca63e8cbb1cb CARLO MARTINO 7/11/2007 EUBANKS VS. A.W. CHESTERTON Page 222 Page 224 14:58:19 1 14:58:20 2 14:58:23 3 14:58:25 4 14:58:25 5 14:58:27 6 14:58:30 7 14:58:30 8 14:58:32 9 14:58:3310 14:58:3511 14:58:4112 14:58:4713 14:58:5114 14:58:5415 14:58:5616 14:58:5817 14:59:0218 14:59:0319 14:59:0620 14:59:0921 14:59:1422 14:59:1823 14:59:2524 25 MR. KINSEY: Objection as to the use of the phrase "working with." MS. CLARK: And objection: beyond the scope. This is not within any of the categories in the notice. THE WITNESS: They were oik of the first w'ho wanted an asbestos-free product. BY MR. OALERSTON: Q. When did they want that? A. What's that? Q. When did they ask for that? A. Around 1973, w'hen this label came out. Q. Do you know' w'hen Cutler-Hammer first was told that there was a hazard of asbestos from the Union Carbide Bakelite phenolic molding compounds? MS. CLARK: I'll continue to object to this whole line of questioning on hazards of asbestos. none of winch is specified in the notice. UNIDENTIFIED SPEAKER: Calls for speculation and assumes facts and lacks foundation. THE WITNESS: They would have known when they got bags from us. I don't know what our customer relations with them were in the early '70s. If they were not buying anything from us. I don't know if there would be communications on the OSHA 15:00:57 1 15:00:59 2 15:01:02 3 15:01:04 4 15:01:06 5 15:01:09 6 15:01:10 7 15:01:11 8 15:01:13 9 15:01:1510 15:01:1711 15:01:1812 15:01:1913 15:01:2214 15:01:2315 15:01:2516 15:01:2617 15:01: 3018 15 : 01: 3119 15:01: 3520 15:01:3921 15 : 01: 4222 15:01: 4323 15:01:4324 25 products, did you attempt to determine whether the product complied with any allegedly applicable safety standards. orders or rules, regulations or design requirements promulgated by any professional society, association, or government body? "a. If you did not, please state the reasons for not conducting such an analysis and identify the name of the person deciding not to conduct the analysis; "b. If you did, identify the safety standards, safety orders, rules. regulations, which you claim you considered by naming the title, number. page and date of the regulation, and identifying the place where a copy of said regulation can be obtained." There's a response which includes the objections that we've seen in the previous ones, and then there's a discussion related to Calidria. Do you see that, sir? A. Yes. Q. The answer says: Page 223 Page 225 14:59:29 1 14:59:29 2 14:59:31 3 14:59:34 4 14:59:37 5 14:59:40 6 14:59:42 7 14:59:44 8 14:59:44 9 14:59:4810 14:59:4911 14:59:5112 14:59:5413 14:59:5614 14:59:5715 15:00:2516 15:00:2717 15:00:3618 15:00:4819 15:00:4920 15:00:5021 15:00:5022 15:00:5223 15:00:5224 25 test. BY MR. GALERSTON: Q. What about Allen-Bradley? Do you recall anyone from Allen-Bradley being told verbally of the hazards relating to potential asbestos exposures through the Bakelite phenolic molding compounds? MS. CLARK: Objection: assumes facts, beyond the notice. THE WITNESS: Normally , I MS. RODRIGUES: Objection: lacks foundation, misstates testimony. THE WITNESS: Verbal communication. I don't know if that occurred. And if they didn't buy anything from us. they wouldn't have got that asbestos label, either. BY MR. GALERSTON: Q. Sir. if you'd turn to page 34.1 want to ask you about interrogatory and response No. 30. MS. CLARK: On page 34 and No. 30. BY MR. GALERSTON: Q. Are you there, sir? A. Yes. Q. Okay. Question No. 30 asks: "At the time of the development of. and sale of each of your asbestos 15:01:47 1 15:01:48 2 15:01:51 3 15:01:52 4 15:01:55 5 15:01:57 6 15:01:59 7 15:02:04 8 15:02:04 9 15:02:0810 15:02:0911 15:02:1112 15:02:1313 15:02:1514 15:02:1715 15:02:1916 15:02:2217 15:02:2418 15:02:2519 15:02:2820 15:02:2821 15:02:3122 15:02:3323 15:02:3424 25 "During the time that Union Carbide owned and operated its Calidria business. Union Carbide w as aware of and recognized the early (pre 1972 OSHA Standard) Threshold Limit Value set forth by the American Conference of Got eminent Industrial Hygienists (ACGIH) and the later Threshold Limit Value established bv OSHA in 1972. In 1964, Union Carbide prepared an Asbestos Toxicology Report, which was given to many of Union Carbide's asbestos customers. many of whom were sophisticated companies familiar with the use and handling of asbestos. Union Carbide included the carlv ACGIH Threshold Limit Value in the Report. This Asbestos Toxicology Report was updated from time to time to keep Calidria customers current with evolving medical knowledge about health and safety issues relating to asbestos. Union Carbide also disseminated the OSHA standard to 57 (Pages 222 to 225) LUDWIG KLEIN REPORTERS & VIDEO, INC. 800.540.0681 e08d329d-027b-438b-9587-ca63e8cbb1cb CARLO MARTINO 7/11/2007 EUBANKS VS. A.W. CHESTERTON Page 226 Page 228 15:02:38 1 15:02:40 2 15:02:43 3 15:02:44 4 15:02:45 5 15:02:47 6 15:02:49 7 15:02:49 8 15:02:53 9 15:02:5510 15:02:5511 15:02:5712 15:02:5813 15:03:0014 15:03:0115 15:03:0116 15:03:0417 15:03:0718 15:03:0819 15:03:0920 15:03:1221 15:03:1622 15:03:2023 15:03:2024 25 Calidria customers in material safety data sheets, and A1A and other safety" -- excuse me -- "other health and safety literature made available or sent to Calidria customers," period. Did I read that correctly, sir? A. Yes. Yes. Q. Have you ever seen the 1964 Union Carbide Asbestos Toxicology Report? A. No. MS. CLARK: Objection; beyond the scope. BY MR. GALERSTON: Q. You were an employee of Union Carbide in 1964, were you not? A. Yes. Q. You were operating the Bakelite division that used asbestos in the manufacturing of your products, did you not? A. Yes. Q. The asbestos that you were using in the Bakelite division, was it substantially different from the Calidria that was reported in the Asbestos Toxicology Report? MS. CLARK: Objection - 15:04:35 1 15:04:38 2 15:04:40 3 15:04:42 4 15:04:43 5 15:04:44 6 15:04:50 7 15:04:51 8 15:04:53 9 15:04:5610 15:04:5611 15:04:5612 15:04:5613 15:05:1014 15:05:1015 15:05:4916 15:05:5017 15:05:5218 15:05:5419 15:05:5520 15:05:5721 15:05:5922 15:06:0023 15:06:02 24 25 MS. CLARK: I'm going to be instructing him not to answer unless you don't hurry and get off of this topic. I've given you lots of leeway. It's not in his notice. BY MR. GALERSTON: Q. Can you answer? Do you need the court reporter to read back the question? THE WITNESS: Am I allowed to answer that? MS. CLARK: Can you read back the last question. Madam Court Reporter, please. Thank you. (The record was read as follows: "Question: Do you know of any efforts that were made to disseminate the Union Carbide Asbestos Toxicology Report to the Bakelite customers?") THE WITNESS: No. On theMS. CLARK: There's no question. Carlo, I mean, unless you feel you need to clarify something. THE WITNESS: I just wanted to make sure that that was understood. I assume you meant Bakelite customers. Bakelite molding material customers. MR. GALERSTON: Correct. THE WITNESS: Okay. Well, then the answer is still the same. Page 227 Page 229 15:03:21 1 15:03:22 2 15:03:25 3 15:03:31 4 15:03:37 5 15:03:37 6 15:03:39 7 15:03:42 8 15:03:44 9 15:03:4610 15:03:4911 15:03:5412 15:03:5813 15:04:0314 15:04:0515 15:04:1116 15:04:1317 15:04:1518 15:04:1819 15:04:2020 15:04:2721 15:04:3022 15:04:3223 15:04:3224 25 BY MR. GALERSTON: Q. To the best of your knowledge. MS. CLARK: Objection; foundation. THE WITNESS: They were both chrysotile asbestos, but we were not using Calidria asbestos. BY MR. GALERSTON: Q. Okay. Since you were not using Calidria asbestos, I guess you were not considered a customer of Union Carbide and, therefore, you weren't provided with this report. Fair to say? A. Well, I can say I wasn't provided with this report. Whether our Safety Department or Safety manager in our main office was given the report or not, I don't know'. Q. Do you know of any efforts that were made to disseminate the Union Carbide Asbestos Toxicology Report to the Bakelite customers? MS. CLARK: Counsel, I'm going to ask that we move on so we can try to get this completed today. I've given you a lot of leeway. There's not one mention of hazards of asbestos in the notice. Really, unless you can tell me why this is relevant under your notice -- BY MR. GALERSTON: Q. Can you answer your question, sir? 15:06:05 1 15:06:06 2 15:06:10 3 15:06:12 4 15:06:12 5 15:06:15 6 15:06:16 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 15:06:2117 15:06:2118 15:06:3319 15:06:3420 15:06:3521 15:06:3822 15:06:4023 15:06:4224 25 BY MR. GALERSTON: Q. The answer is that you're not aware of any efforts made by Union Carbide to disclose its Asbestos Toxicology Report to the Bakelite customers? A. Referring to the -- MS. CLARK: Objection; asked and answered. beyond the scope. THE REPORTER: I'm sorry. 1 didn't get your answer, sir. Do you need me to read back the question? THE WITNESS: Yes. (The record was read as follows: "Question: The answer is that you're not aware of any efforts made by Union Carbide to disclose its Asbestos Toxicology Report to the Bakelite customers?") THE WITNESS: That's correct, yeah. MS. CLARK: Objection; beyond the scope. THE WITNESS: Okay. I didn't remember -- I didn't catch the Bakelite part. Yes, tliat's correct. BY MR. GALERSTON: Q. Sir, we went through the documents that we 58 (Pages 226 to 229) LUDWIG KLEIN REPORTERS & VIDEO, INC. 800.540.0681 e08d329d-027b-438b-9587-ca63e8cbb1cb CARLO MARTINO 7/11/2007 EUBANKS VS. A.W. CHESTERTON Page 230 Page 232 15:06:49 1 15:06:54 2 15:06:58 3 15:07:02 4 15:07:07 5 15:07:08 6 15:07:10 7 15:07:10 8 15:07:11 9 15:07:1210 15:07:1211 15:07:1612 15:07:2213 15:07:2514 15:07:2615 15:07:2916 15:07:3417 15:07:3818 15:07:4019 15:07:42 20 15:07:43 21 15:07:46 22 15:07:4923 15:07:5024 25 were able to discover on our own, which indicate that Square D was -- well, strike that. We went through the Exhibits 6, 7, and 8, which were Union Carbide documents related to formulations of its Bakelite products for Square D. Correct? MR. KJNSEY: Objection; misstates testimony, assumes facts. MS. CLARK: Join. THE WITNESS: Yes. BY MR. GALERSTON: Q. Okay. As indicated previously, you testified that Allen-Bradley had been a customer of Union Carbide's Bakelite division, correct? A. On and off, yes. Q. Okay. And as you sit here today, you can't state which compounds or which products Union Carbide's Bakelite division was selling to Allen-Bradley; is that fair to say? A. No, I can't. No. Q. You were able to come up with a couple of formulations for Square D. Can you do the same for Allen-Bradley? MS. RODRIGUES: Objection: asked and answered. 15:09:13 1 15:09:13 2 15:09:16 3 15:09:18 4 15:09:21 5 15:09:26 6 15:09:28 7 15:09:34 8 15:09:36 9 15:09:3910 15:09:4411 15:09:4612 15:09:4613 15:09:4914 15:09:5115 15:09:5116 15:09:5517 15:09:5818 15:10: 0019 15:10: 0420 15:10:0721 15:10:0922 15:10:1523 15:10:1524 25 containing phenolic molding compounds to CutlerHammer? MS. CLARK: Same objection: overly broad. vague and ambiguous. MS. McDOUGALL: Join. THE WITNESS: Let me go baek to that. I was too quick on it. Since 1 don't remember what the products were that we did sell to them, 1 can't be sure that we did. I would have to go to the records and get the product numbers for both of them and then detennine whether those products had asbestos in them. BY MR. GALERSTON: Q. 1 understand that you can't be certain. A. Yeah. Q. And the question is: Based upon your recollection, is it more likely than not that Union Carbide's Bakelite division sold asbestos-containing phenolic molding compounds to Cutler-Hammer? MS. CLARK: Objection; overbroad, vague. MS. McDOUGALL: Speculation, foundation. THE WITNESS: I can't answer that. BY MR. GALERSTON: Q. Okay. And my understanding is that you Page 231 Page 233 15:07:52 1 15:07:55 2 15:07:55 3 15:08:01 4 15:08:03 5 15:08:08 6 15:08:13 7 15:08:14 8 15:08:16 9 15:08:1910 15:08:2111 15:08:2312 15:08:2713 15:08:2814 15:08:3615 15:08:4716 15:08:5017 15:08:5418 15:08:5619 15:08:5820 15:08:5921 15:09:0322 15:09:0523 15:09:0624 25 MS. CLARK: Joined. THE WITNESS: Not without going to the records. BY MR. GALERSTON: Q. We discussed Cutler-Hammer and that Cutler-Hammer had been a customer of Union Carbide's Bakelite division off and on from 1960 until 1974, correct? A. Yes. Yes. Q. As with Cutler-Hammer -- excuse me. As with Square D. you were able to come up with a couple of formulations that you specifically recall were sold to Square D. Can you do the same for Cutler-Hammer? A. No. Q. Is there any doubt in your mind that Union Carbide's Bakelite division sold asbestos-containing Bakelite compounds to Allen-Bradley? MS. CLARK: Objection; overly broad, vague. ambiguous as to time. THE WITNESS: I think we did. MS. RODRIGUES: It lacks foundation. BY MR. GALERSTON: Q. Do you have any reason to believe that Union Carbide's Bakelite division sold asbestos- 15:10:21 1 15:10:25 2 15:10:26 3 15:10:27 4 15:10:29 5 15:10:30 6 15:10:32 7 15:10:33 8 15:10:38 9 15:10:4310 15:10:4711 15:10:5112 15:10:54 13 15:10:5514 15:10:5715 15:11:0116 15:11:0317 15:11:04 18 15:11:0519 15:11:0720 15:11:10 21 15:11:13 22 15:11:17 23 15:11:1924 25 have not made any effort or attempt to investigate or research in the repository and detennine whether or not that answer is there. Correct? A. That's right. Q. The same for Allen-Bradley, correct? A. Yes. Q. Same for Square D, for that matter. Correct? A. Well, Square D, you know, we had a very good relationship, so my memory is better with them. and what we -- they were a customer, a steady customer, over a longer period of time. So my memory is clearer there. That was not the case with these other two. Q. Okay. And your recollection with regards to Square D was that Union Carbide's Bakelite division did sell asbestos-containing phenolic molding compounds -- A. Yes. Q. -- to Square D. A. Yes. Q. Do you have any other opinions with regards to the accuracy of the testimony given by any of the witnesses in this case that you have not given so far? 59 (Pages 230 to 233) LUDWIG KLEIN REPORTERS & VIDEO, INC. 800.540.0681 e08d329d-027b-438b-9587-ca63e8cbb1cb CARLO MARTINO 7/11/2007 EUBANKS VS. A.W. CHESTERTON Page 234 Page 236 15 :: 11 : 24 1 15 :: 11 : 24 2 15 :: 11 : 26 3 15 :: 11 : 31 4 15 :: 11 : 37 5 15 :: 11 : 40 6 15 :: 11 : 46 7 15 :: 11 : 52 8 15 :: 11 : 57 9 15 :: 12 : 0110 15 :: 12 : 1211 15 :: 12 : 2512 15 :: 12 : 3213 15 :: 12 : 3514 15 :: 12 : 4215 15 :: 12 : 4816 15 :: 12 : 5217 15 :: 12 : 5518 15 :: 12 : 5919 15 :: 13 : 0220 15 :: 13 : 0821 15 :: 13 : 1222 15 :: 13 : 1623 15 :: 13 : 2124 MS. CLARK: Objection; ambiguous. THE WITNESS: There were ~ MS. RODRIGUES: Join. THE WITNESS: There were inconsistencies that - between testimonies. Mr. Eubanks testified that he saw "Bakelite" stamped on the arc shields, and none of the other witnesses said that. They said there was no "Bakelite" stamped on those parts. So that's an inconsistency that, if it's important, needs to be resolved. That was the most glaring. The other testimony, Mr. Infante referred to phenolic on motor windings, 1 believe, or on wires and that it would flake off, and he sort of implied that was Bakelite. That wasn't an inconsistency, but it was not an asbestos-containing material and sounded to me like a varnish. And whether it was a phenolic varnish or not, you know, 1 couldn't tell. The only other problem 1 had we already discussed, was what they described 1 thought were arc shields and their reference to arc chutes was something 1 wasn't familiar with. And, you know, I resolved it by getting more information. It wasn't inaccurate; it just was interpretation. 15:14: 56 1 15:14: 58 2 15:15: 01 3 15:15: 05 4 15:15: 08 5 15:15: 08 6 15:15: 10 7 15:15: 18 8 15:15: 19 9 15:15: 2110 15:15: 2 411 15:15: 2712 15:15: 3113 15:15: 3714 15:15: 4115 15:15: 4316 15:15: 5017 15:15: 5218 15:15: 5719 15:15: 5920 15:16: 0021 15:16: 0222 15:16: 0223 15:16: 0424 25 Eubanks was not exposed to asbestos while working as an electrician on the USS LANG? MS. CLARK: Objection; overbroad, vague. THE WITNESS: If he was, he didn't define it in his testimony. BY MR. GALERSTON: Q. At least not to your satisfaction. A. Right. Q. All of theA. Well, now wait. There's a lot of other testimony of other places in the ship that he worked, so I can't say he wasn't exposed to asbestos there. All I can say is the testimony as it applied to our products, 1 didn't see where we created -- that we caused his asbestos problem. Q. If I understand it correctly, you're saying that, in your opinion, the products that were in the control boxes and the motor controllers and other electrical places would not have contained asbestos that he would have been exposed to? A. I can't say -- MS. CLARK: Objection; miseharacterizes his testimony. THE WITNESS: I can't say that because I don't - they didn't tell me what was in those Page 235 Page 237 15 13 24 1 15 13 31 2 15 13 34 3 15 13 37 4 15 13 39 5 15 13 40 6 15 13 43 7 15 13 51 8 15 13 55 9 15 13 55 10 15 13 59 11 15 14 00 12 15 14 03 13 15 14 08 14 15 14 12 15 15 14 18 16 15 14 27 17 15 14 31 18 15 14 34 19 15 14 34 20 15 14 46 21 15 14 47 22 15 14 49 23 15 14 51 24 25 BY MR. GALERSTON: 15 16 10 1 Q. Okay. Have you -- you've given the opinion 15 16 14 2 that you do not believe that it would have been a 15 16 15 3 Union Carbide Bakelite product used for the arc 15 16 18 4 shields, correct? 15 16 21 5 A. Yes. 15 16 24 6 Q. Do you have any other opinions with regards 15 16 26 7 to Mr. Eubanks' potential exposure to asbestos 15 16 26 8 from -- to Union Carbide's asbestos-containing 15 16 32 9 Bakelite products? 15 16 3810 A. Based - 15 16 4211 MS. CLARK: Objection; vague. 15 16 4712 THE WITNESS: Based on the testimony that 15 16 4713 he gave and the others gave, you know, 1 saw 15 16 5114 descriptions only of arc shields and reference to 15 16 5515 this insulation board in one of the panels. There 15 16 5916 was no reference to molded parts at all. 15 17 0017 So based on that testimony, 1 don't see 15 17 0318 where he would have been exposed to asbestos in the 15 17 0319 first place, whether it was our product or not. 15 17 0620 BY MR. GALERSTON: 15 17 0821 Q. And when you say "our product," you mean 15 17 1222 Union Carbide's Bakelite product? 15 17 1223 A. Right. 15 17 1724 Q. And so is it your opinion that Donny 25 boxes. So 1 don't know whether there were molded parts, and if there were, whether they would likely be ones that contained asbestos. BY MR. GALERSTON: Q. And you're not testifying with regards to asbestos content of packing in the packing glands that were on the boxes or anything like that, correct? A. No. Q. 1 believe Donny Eubanks, Denton Crull, Duane Walker, and Robert Infante all testified to working with and around Bakelite. Correct? A. Yes. Q. And they all claimed to be exposed to dust from Bakelite, correct? A. They were exposed to dust from the arc shields. Q. What they testify as to being Bakelite, correct? A. They called it Bakelite, which 1 disagree with, that it couldn't have been, because I think it was a melamine, and we didn't make melamine. Q. Okay. A. So they were exposed to that dust. MR. GALERSTON: 1 object to the 60 (Pages 234 to 237 LUDWIG KLEIN REPORTERS & VIDEO, INC. 800.540.0681 e08d329d-027b-438b-9587-ca63e8cbb1cb CARLO MARTINO 7/11/2007 EUBANKS VS. A.W. CHESTERTON Page 238 Page 240 15:17:19 1 15:17:21 2 15:17:23 3 15:17:30 4 15:17:34 5 15:17:37 6 15:17:39 7 15:17:42 8 15:17: 44 9 15:17:4610 15:17:4911 15:17:5312 15:17:54 13 15:18:0014 15:18:0115 15:18:0216 15:18:0517 15:18:08 18 15:18:1119 15:18:1220 15:18:1421 15:18:1822 15:18:2823 15:18:3224 25 nonresponsive nature of the answer. Q. Sir, I'm not asking about the accuracy of the testimony. I just want to confirm with you that you agree that Donnv Eubanks, Denton Crull, Duane Walker, and Robert Infante all described and testified that they and Donnv Eubanks were exposed to dust from Bakelite. Correct? MS. CLARK: Objection; asked and answered. Tire testimony speaks for itself. THE WITNESS: Yes. They also said they didn't know whether it contained asbestos. MR. GALERSTON: Fair enough. THE WITNESS: And they also said that it was a generic name; they thought it was. BY MR. GALERSTON: Q. They all testified that they had been told that it was Bakelite, correct? MS. CLARK: Objection; misstates testimony. MS. RODRIGUES: Join the objection to this line of questioning. THE WITNESS: I think in one case they said it was referred to as Bakelite on the -- on the card in parentheses, which, you know, they're also calling what I think is a paper-based laminate Bakelite, which didn't contain asbestos. 15:19:47 1 15:19:53 2 15:19:56 3 15:19:57 4 15:19:59 5 15:20:01 6 15:20:05 7 15:20:09 8 15:20:12 9 15:20:14 10 15:20:1711 15:20:1812 15:20:2213 15:20:2514 15:20:2715 15:20:2916 15:20:3517 15:20:3718 15:20:4119 15:20:44 20 15:20:47 21 15:20:50 22 15:20:50 23 15:20:52 24 25 from Square D that indicates whether or not they used asbestos-containing phenolic resins or moldings in their control boxes and motor controllers that were on the USS LANG, correct? MR. KINSEY: Objection; assumes facts not in evidence. THE WITNESS: Hie only tiling I saw was that Square D testimony, that part where he said he did not think the arc shield contained Bakelite product. BY MR. GALERSTON: Q. Which implies that Square D has not produced any documents that you have been provided that indicate that nothing that they sold the United States Navy -- strike that. A. I'm glad, because I was going to ask you to repeat it. Q. I got myself confused, too. Square D has not produced any documents that you're aware of that indicate that the motor controllers and control boxes and other electrical equipment they provided to the United States Navy and installed on the USS LANG did not contain asbestos, correct? MR. KINSEY: Objection; miscliaracterizes evidence on the record. Page 239 Page 241 15:18:36 1 15:18:38 2 15:18:43 3 15:18:46 4 15:18:48 5 15:18:50 6 15:18:55 7 15:18:58 8 15:19:02 9 15:19:0510 15:19:0811 15:19:1112 15:19:1513 15:19:1714 15:19:1915 15:19:1916 15:19:2317 15:19:2618 15:19:2819 15:19:3120 15:19:3221 15:19:3622 15:19:3923 15:19:4024 25 BY MR. GALERSTON: Q. You don't have personal knowledge based upon studies of the arc chutes or the laminate to determine whether or not those were asbestos containing on the USS LANG, correct? A. No. Q. Your opinion that the arc chutes and the insulating laminate that has been described do not contain asbestos are based upon the mil specs and your understanding of the application of those products in electrical equipment, correct? A. That's correct. Q. You have not undertaken a study with regards to the designs and specifications for the USS LANG,correct? A. That's correct. Q. You have not interviewed or conducted investigations as to other shipmates that were on the USS LANG to determine what they knew about the asbestos contents of those products, correct? A. That's correct. Q. You have not reviewed any speci tic documents relating to the USS LANG, correct? A. That's correct. Q. You have not been provided with information 15:20:55 1 15:20:56 2 15:20:56 3 15:20:59 4 15:21:03 5 15:21:06 6 15:21:10 7 15:21:11 8 15:21:13 9 15:21:1310 15:21:1611 15:21:1812 15:21:2213 15:21:2614 15:21:2815 15:21:3416 15:21:3917 15:21:4218 15:21:4519 15:21:4820 15:21:5221 15:21:5522 15:21:5823 15:22:0324 25 THE WITNESS: 1 haven't seen anything from Square D. BY MR. GALERSTON: Q. You have not seen any testimony, documents, or other information that indicates that the CutlerHammer motor controllers and control boxes that were on the USS LANG did not contain asbestos, correct? A. That's correct. MS. MeDOUGALL: Assumes facts. BY MR. GALERSTON: Q. You have not seen any documentation, testimony, or information that indicates that the Allen-Bradley motor controllers, control boxes, and or other electrical equipment that were on the USS LANG did not contain asbestos, correct? A. That's correct. Q. You have not met with or discussed with corporate representatives for Square D. CutlerHammer. or Allen-Bradley to determine whether or not they sold any component parts that contained asbestos to the United States Navy for the USS LANG? A. No. Q. You have not seen any deposition testimony from other cases or in other matters from AllenBradley or Cutler-Hammer related to the asbestos 61 (Pages 238 to 241, LUDWIG KLEIN REPORTERS & VIDEO, INC. 800.540.0681 e08d329d-027b-438b-9587-ca63e8cbb1cb CARLO MARTINO 7/11/2007 EUBANKS VS. A.W. CHESTERTON Page 242 Page 244 15:22:11 1 15:22:13 2 15:22:15 3 15:22:17 4 15:22:20 5 15:22:34 6 15:22:36 7 15:22:39 8 15:22:43 9 15:22:4610 15:22:4811 15:22:5012 15:22:5213 15:22:5314 15:22:5415 15:22:5616 15:22:5717 15:23:0118 15:23:0219 15:23:0220 15:23:0521 15:23:0622 15:23:0723 15:23:1124 25 content of their equipment; is that correct? A. I don't recall seeing them at all, no. Q. And we'll go ahead and limit it to specifically with regards to the equipment that they sold to the United States Navy for the USS LANG. A. Thafs correct. MR. GALERSTON: Sir, I believe I'm at the end of my questions. I am going to review my notes to determine if I have any additional questions. I am going to reserve my right to ask questions. additional questions, even if others don't have questions so we can go ahead and move this along. Is that agreeable? THE WITNESS: Oh, okay. Good. I might even make my plane. MR. GALERSTON: I'll go ahead and pass the witness at this point. MS. CLARK: Can we take -- we've been going over an hour again. Can we take a five-minute break? THE WITNESS: Oh, okay. Well, thenTHE VIDEOGRAPHER: Go off the record? MR. GALERSTON: Yes. THE VIDEOGRAPHER: The time is 15:23:06. We are off the record. 15:33:18 1 15:33:21 2 15:33:22 3 15:33:23 4 15:33:27 5 15:33:30 6 15:33:30 7 15:33:32 8 15:33:34 9 15:33:3510 15:33:3811 15:33:4112 15:33:4313 15:33:4614 15:33:4915 15:33:5016 15:33:5117 15:33:5418 15:33:5719 15:34:0020 15:34:0021 15:34:0222 15:34:0523 15:34:1924 25 you said in response to a question, that UCC was. you thought, maybe number two in the market in 1960. Do you recall that? A. Yes. Q. How about in 1967; what percentage of the market did Union Carbide have at that time? A. Less than -- MR. GALERSTON: Objection; form, calls for speculation, and it calls for expert testimony beyond this witness's capacity. THE WITNESS: Less than 20 percent. BY MS. CLARK: Q. Okay. Counsel also asked you some questions about the Bakelite trademark and what products Union Carbide sold under the Bakelite name. Do you recall that? A. Yes. Q. Were there products other than phenolic resins or phenolic molding compounds that were sold under the name Bakelite by Union Carbide? A. Yes. Q. And could you name for me some of those products, please? A. Polyethylene, polystyrene, vinyls. polysulfone. and Phenoxine. Page 243 Page 245 15:31:53 1 15:32:23 2 15:32:26 3 15:32:31 4 15:32:31 5 15:32:33 6 15:32:33 7 15:32:33 8 15:32:35 9 15:32:3710 15:32:3911 15:32:4212 15:32:4313 15:32:4514 15:32:5015 15:32:5116 15:32:5317 15:32:5718 15:32:5819 15:32:5920 15:33:0221 15:33:0422 15:33:0623 15:33:0924 25 (Recess taken: 3:23 p.m. to 3:32 p.m.) THE VIDEOGRAPHER: We're back on the record. This is the beginning of Tape Number Five in the deposition of Carlo Martino. The time is 15:32:27. Counsel, you may proceed. EXAMINATION BY MS. CLARK: Q. Mr. Martino. I just have a few follow-up questions for you. Counsel asked you a few questions about general purpose Bakelite. Do you recall that? A. Yes. Q. The general purpose Bakelite. is that a category that encompasses more than one formula? A. Yes. Q. Did all of the formulas that you would consider to fall within general purpose Bakelite contain asbestos? A. No. Q. So there were some formulas that were general purpose Bakelite that never contained asbestos at any time; is that right? A. Yes. Q. Counsel also asked you, in 1960. or maybe 15:34:24 1 15:34:26 2 15:34:28 3 15:34:29 4 15:34:34 5 15:34:35 6 15:34:36 7 15:34:37 8 15:34:39 9 15:34:3910 15:34:3911 15:34:3912 15:34:4213 15:34:4714 15:34:5115 15:34:5316 15:34:5517 15:34:5918 15:35:0119 15:35:0420 15:35:1121 15:35:1522 15:35:2023 15:35:2324 25 Q. Okay. Did any of those products ever contain asbestos? A. No. MS. CLARK: That's all of the questions I have. Thank you. MR. GALERSTON: Next? No one here. On the telephone, anybody with any questions? MR. MAKE Yes. This is Craig Maki, with Selman Breitman. I have two questions, hopefully. EXAMINATION BY MR. MAKI: Q. First, sir, are you aware of any sales of Bakelite product to Nelson Marine Products? A. No, I'm not. Q. Are you aware of any sales records pertaining to Nelson Marine Products? A. Would you repeat that again, please? Q. Are you aware of the existence of any sales records referencing Nelson Marine Products? A. I'm not aware of -- we have sales records. but I don't -- I'm not aware of whether you -- Nelson Marine Products is even on the list. Q. Okay. 62 (Pages 242 to 245) LUDWIG KLEIN REPORTERS & VIDEO, INC. 800.540.0681 e08d329d-027b-438b-9587-ca63e8cbb1cb CARLO MARTINO 7/11/2007 EUBANKS VS. A.W. CHESTERTON Page 246 15:35:26 1 15:35:26 2 15:35:29 3 15:35:30 4 15:35:34 5 15:35:34 6 15:35:34 7 15:35:34 8 15:35:38 9 15:35:4210 15:35:4611 X j . -j J . 4 U 1 z. 15:35:4913 15:35:5014 15:35:5415 15:35:5616 15:35:5917 15:36:0318 15:36:0419 15:36:0520 15:36:1621 15:36:1822 15:36:1923 15:36:2324 25 A. I don't recall Nelson. MR. MAKI: I have nothing further. MS. CLARK: Just answer the best you can. THE WITNESS: No. MR. GALERSTON: Next? Anyone else on the phone with questions for this witness? FURTHER EXAMINATION BY MR. GALERSTON: Q. Hearing none. sir. I had a couple follow-up. Mr. Maki took hall ot my questions for The other one. I wanted to ask vou about a company Eaton Electric. Are you familiar with a company by the name of Eaton Electric? A. The name sounds familiar, but that's all. Q. You don't know one way or the other whether or not Eaton Electric was a customer of Union Carbide's Bakelite division? A. I don't know. MR. GALERSTON: Okay. I believe those are all of the questions I have for you, sir. THE WITNESS: Oh. good. MR. GALERSTON: Anyone else? Okay. THE VIDEOGRAPHER: This is the end of Tape Page 247 15:36:26 1 15:36:31 2 15:36:35 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 17 14 Number Five, which concludes the deposition of Carlo Martino. The time is 15:36:27. WeareotTthe record. (Ending time: 3:36 p.m.) --oOo-- 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 Page 248 1 2 WITNESS'S CERTIFICATE 3 4 5 6 I am die witness in the foregoing 7 deposition. I have read the foregoing deposition. 8 and having made such changes and corrections as I 9 desire, I certify' that die same is true ofmy own 10 knowledge, except as to diose matters which are 11 dierein stated upon my information or beliet. and 12 as to those matters. I believe it to be true. 13 I declare under penalty of perjure under 14 die laws of die State of California diat the 15 foregoing is tme and correct. 16 Executed on 17 at . 18 19 20 21 22 CARLO FRANCIS MARTINO 2.3 24 25 Page 249 1 REPORTER'S CERTIFICATE 2 3 4 I. Karen Wright. CSR No. 3936, a Certified 5 Shorthand Reporter in and for the State of 6 California, do hereby certify: 7 That prior to being examined, the witness 8 named in the foregoing proceedings was by me duly 9 sworn to testify to the truth, the whole tnith. and 10 nothing but the truth; 11 That said proceedings were taken by me in 12 shorthand at the time and place herein named and was 13 thereafter transcribed into typewriting under my 14 direction, said transcript being a true and correct 15 transcription of my shorthand notes. 16 I further certifv that I have no interest 17 in the outcome of this action. 18 19 20 21 22 KAREN WRIGHT 23 CSR NO. 3936 24 25 63 (Pages 246 to 249) LUDWIG KLEIN REPORTERS & VIDEO, INC. 800.540.0681 e08d329d-027b-438b-9587-ca63e8cbb1cb