Document XOXVeedE3DrEppEG1zz5qyB7K

SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES CASE NO. BC 368842 MICHAEL BRADFORD and TERRY BRADFORD, Plaintiffs, -vs- A.W. CHESTERTON COMPANY, et al. , Defendants. DEPOSITION OF: BRUCE KETCHAM TRANSCRIPT of the stenographic notes of the proceedings in the above-entitled matter, as taken by and before LINDA M. HOFFMANN, a Certified Court Reporter and Notary Public, held at the WORLDWIDE BUSINESS CENTER, 575 Madison Avenue, Suite 10, New York, New York, on Tuesday, April 29, 2008, commencing at 9:30 a.m. Page 1 Aiken & Welch Court Reporters B. Ketcham 4-29-08 22b1303e-c2a4-49dc-aa31-dcbf5b86ff21 APPEARANCES; KELLER, FISHBACK & JACKSON, LLP BY: DANIEL L. KELLER, ESQ. 62 William Street, 6th Ftodr New York, New York I0D05 646*536-2719 Attorneys for Plninllffe McKENNA LONG 3l ALDDIUDGE, LLP BY: KELVIN WYLES, ESQ. (By telephone) 444 South Flower Street 1 SLh Floor Los Angeles, California 90071-2901 213-6S8-IQ0D Attorneys for Defendants Arvituncrilor, Inc, and Certninteed KASOWITZ, BENSON, TORRES & FRIEDMAN, LLP . BY: JOHN C. CANONI, ESQ. 1633 Broadway New York, New York 10019-6799 212-506-1700 Attorneys for Defendant Arvinmeritor and Witness SMITH ABBOT, L.L.P. BY: JAMES WALKER SMITH, ESQ. 45 Wall Street, Suite 1100 New York, New York 10005 2I2-PSM501 Attorneys for Defendant Pneumo Abe*, LLC PRJNDLE, DECKER &. AMARO, ESQS, BY: ARPI GALFAYAN, ESQ, (By telephone) 310 Golden Shore Parkway Lang Bench, California 90302 562-436-3946 Attorneys for Defendant Pneumo Abex 1 APPEARANCES: 2 PERKINS COIE, LLP BY: HANK HOLMBERG, ESQ. (By telephone) 3 4 Embatcndero Center San Francisco, California 94111 4 415-344-7000 Attorneys for Defendant, Honeywell 5 POND NORTH, LLP 6 BY: AMY KUO, ESQ. (By telephone) 505 Montgomery Sheet 7 San Francisco, California 94111 415-217-1240 a Attorneys far Defendants NAPA and Genuine Parts Co. 9 McKENNA LONG & ALDRIDGE, LLP 10 BY: SHEILA O'GARA, ESQ. (By telephone) 101 California Street 11 41st Floor San Francisco, California 94111 12 415-267-4000 Attorneys for Defendants Ford and 13 General Motors 14 FOLEY & MANSFIELD, PLLP BY: MARY H. PAK, ESQ. (By telephone) 15 1111 Broadway, 10th Floor Oakland California 94607 510-590-9500 16 Attorneys for Defendant Calnveras Asbestos 17 10 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 Page 2 1 INDEX 2 WITNESS DIRECT CROSS REDIRECT RECROSS 3 BRUCE KETCHAM BY MR. KELLER 6 4 5 6 EXHIBITS 7 NO. DESCRIPTION PAGE e P-1 Cast Records, 3 pages............. 7 9 P-2 Abex Florence, Inspection Characteristics, 2 pages.......... 16 10 P-3 Rockwell International n Aftermarket Parts & Services, 1993 Brake Quantum Program....... .26 12 P-4 Trailer Axle Assemblies, Specify 13 Rockwell...........................30 14 P-5 Trailer OEM Bulletin 92TA-9, dated October 1,1992,4 pages.... 33 15 P-6 General Parts Bulletin, GP 556, 16 March 4, 1993,2 pages............ JS 17 P-7 Photocopy DfHandwritten document...49 10 P-S Interna! Letter dated June 21, 1974................................56 19 P-9 Internal Letter dated May 3, 1074...56 20 P-10 Four letters dated May 19,1975.....64 21 P-11 Four letters dated January 12, 22 1973, and attached Grievance Form ..72 23 P-12 Memo dated 23 December 1975,6 pages..............................79 24 P-13 Material Safety Data Sheet, 2 25 pages...... ......... B0 Page 3 EXHIBITS, continued P-14 Internal Letter dated September B, 1987, 4 pages....................83 P-15 Industrial Hygiene Survey, Rockwell-Standard Company, Ashtabula, Ohio, July 21, 1971.... 90 P-16 National Safety council, Automotive, Tooling, Metalworking and Associated Industries Newsletter, 4 pages................ 96 P-17 Material Safety Data Sheet for Asbestos-Containing Brake Linings, 7 pages ...............98 10 P-18 Letter dated February 5, 1986, 11 with attachment, 14 pages.........102 12 P-19 Notice ofTaking Deposition and Request for Production of 13 Documents...........................131 14 15 16 17 10 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 Page 4 Page 5 Aiken & Welch Court Reporters 2 (Pages 2 to 5) B. Ketcham 4-29-08 22b1303e-c2a4-49dc-aa31-dcbf5bB6ff21 i Page 6 Page 8 1 (Tie proceedings began at 9:30 a.m.) 1 2 BRUCE KETCHAM, business address at 39100 Country CIul 2 3 Lane, Farmington Hills, Michigan, having been duly 3 4 sworn by the Notary Public, testified as follows: 4 5 DIRECT EXAMINATION BY MR. KELLER: 5 6 Q. Good morning, Mr. Ketcham. My name is 6 7 Dan Keller. I represent the plaintiffs in this case. 7 8 How are you this morning? 8 9 A. Good morning, Mr. Keller. 9 10 Q. Mr. Ketcham, do you understand that 10 11 you're appearing here today as the person most 11 12 knowledgeable on behalf ofArvinmeritor? 12 13 A. Yes. 13 14 Q. You've been deposed before. Correct? 14 15 A. Yes, I have. 15 16 Q. Okay. Would it be okay with you if I 16 17 dispose of the normal admonitions concerning the 17 18 conduct of a deposition, or would you like to hear 18 19 them? 19 20 A. It would be fine to dispose of them, 20 21 Q. Very good. Mr. Ketcham, I'm going to 21 22 show you a few documents that were, and I'll 22 23 represent to you that they were copied from a set of 23 24 13 boxes that were produced at the Kassowitz firm 24 25 yesterday and copied by them and provided to me by 25 Q. Okay. And can you tell me what they are? A. Not beyond being what is the description as a cost record. Q. Okay. And do you know what a cost record is? A. I believe it is a record that shows the purchase price for the particular part number at various points in time. Q. Okay. Mr. Ketcham, I described to you this box that I found within the Arvinmeritor documents of green cards that Plaintiffs 1 were pulled from. Have you ever seen those cards? A. I don't recall that I have, no. Q. Okay. Have you ever seen cards that are similar to Plaintiffs 1? A. In some way, yes. Q. Okay. And what is that way? A, I used to be a purchasing manager within Rockwell, and we kept records such as this in the Purchasing Department similar to this. Not exactly like this. Q. And how would you use the cost records in the Purchasing Department when you worked for Rockwell? Page 7 Page 9 1 e-mail last night. 1 A. Again, I did not use something that was 2 First I would like mark Plaintiffs 2 called a cost record. I used other purchasing cards, 3 Exhibit 1. 3 what I would call a card. 4 (Exhibit P-1, Cost Records, 3 pages was 4 Q, And could you describe that card for me. 5 received and marked for identification.) 5 the one that you used? 6 MR. WYLES: Could you extend me the 6 A. It's -- not really. It's, you know, 7 courtesy of describing the documents to the best you 7 sort of 25 years removed from where we are right now. 8 can, given we're in the situation I am at of 8 I believe it most likely included information on the 9 defending on the phone, and I don't have to discover 9 vendor, the part number, the quantity that was to be 10 them by him reading it, I would appreciate that 10 ordered, and the purchase price, in general. 11 MR. KELLER: Okay. Can we go off the 11 Q. Was the purpose of the card to track the 12 record for a second. 12 purchase of materials from certain vendors that were 13 (A discussion takes place off the 13 used in making Rockwell products? . 14 record.) 14 A. Correct. 15 Q. Mr. Ketcham, I'm showing you, again. 15 Q. Okay. Can you look at the first page of 16 documents, a three-page document marked Plaintiffs 16 Plaintiffs 1. The top left-hand comer 17 Exhibit 1 which were copied from the 13 boxes 17 reads "Vendor code M830A." Did I read that 18 provided by Arvinmeritor's counsel yesterday. Thesi : 18 correctly? 19 are copies of three cards entitled "Cost Record." 19 A. You did. 20 And I'll represent to you that they came from two 20 Q. Okay. Can you tell me what the vendor 21 boxes filled with green-colored cards and organized 21 code is? 22 in some sort of code fashion. 22 A, Vendor code is a code that's set up 23 Do you recognize these documents. 23 within Rockwell's system that identifies a particular 24 Mr. Ketcham? 24 vendor for a part. 25 A. I've seen them before, yes. 25 Q. Okay. Further down the card. 3 (Pages 6 to 9) Aiken & Welch Court Reporters B. Ketcham 4-29-08 22b1303e-c2a4-49dc-aa31-dcbf5bB6ff21 Ketcham - direct Page 10 Page 12 1 underneath, again, the name "Vendor," reads "M/M 1 Q. This is - 2 (Carlisle)." Did I read that correctly? 2 A. This does not show that, in fact, it was 3 A. Yes, you did. 3 ordered. 4 Q. Okay. My question is does the vendor 4 Q. This shows simply that in these years or 5 code M830A correspond to the vendor that's listed, 5 within this date range, this would have been the cost 6 M/M (Carlisle)? 6 of whatever product is referenced here. Is that 7 A. I can't tell exactly, but my presumption 7 correct? 8 is is that it would. 8 A. That's correct. 9 Q. And that's based on your experience in 9 Q. Okay. And again, at the top of the page 10 having worked for Rockwell? 10 here, it reads, "Lining." Does that indicate what 11 A. That's correct. 11 the type of product is, the price of which is 12 Q. Okay. Would, in your experience, M/M 12 reflected in this cost record? 13 (Carlisle) have had more than one vendor code? 13 A. Yes, that's the generic name of the 14 A. They may have. 14 product. 15 Q. Okay, And what would have been the 15 Q. Okay. And what type of product is that? 16 purpose of having more than one vendor code, if you 16 A. It's a lining. 17 know? 17 Q. Would that have been a brake lining or 18 A. The material for M/M (Carlisle), they 18 some other type of lining? 19 could be multiple plants that it could be ordered 19 A. This would have been a brake lining. 20 from. So if, you know, Plant A would have one code. 20 Q. Okay. Did you work for Rockwell in 21 Plant B would have another code where the purchase 21 1976, '77, '78, and 79? 22 order was directed to. 22 A. For some of those years, yes. 23 Q. Did vendor code on the first page of 23 Q. Okay. Which years? 24 Plaintiffs 1 that reads "M830A, is there any way to 24 A. I started there in 78. 25 dissect that alphanumeric code to give us more 25 Q. Did you work there in 79, as well? Page 11 Page 13 1 information about the vendor, or is that simply a 2 randomly assigned alphanumeric code, to the extent 3 you know? 4 A. It's a quasi random alphanumeric code. 5 Q. Okay. What part of it is not random? 6 A. Typically, the first alpha in there is 7 the leading alpha of the vendor's name, followed by a 8 three-digit numeric random number. And then 9 typically the final alpha down there is for a 10 particular location for that vendor. 11 Q. On the left-hand side, it reads, "Date," 12 and then I see "10-76," and then just "77," "78," and 13 "79." Does that reflect the date, as far as you 14 know, when the purchase reflected by this card was 15 made? 16 A. There's not a purchase reflected in this 17 card. 18 Q. What does this card reflect, then7 19 A. It's a -- appears to reflect a cost 20 record, as described. 21 Q. What does that mean, a cost record? 22 A. It's, to me, it's showing the material 23 cost for that part at various points in time. 24 Q. Whether it was ordered or not. Right? 25 A. That's correct. 1 A. Yes. 2 Q. Do you remember if Rockwell purchased 3 brake linings from Carlisle in 1978 and 79? 4 A. I don't have a total memory recall of 5 that, no. 6 Q. You don't know one way or the other? 7 A. No. 8 Q. Do you recall whether they ever supplied 9 brake linings to Rockwell? 10 A. Yes, Carlisle was a brake lining vendor 11 to Rockwell. 12 Q. Page two is -13 MR. WYLES: I just want to interpose my 14 objection or lodge a statement. I discussed the 15 scope of this deposition with Mr. Fishback, with 16 Steven Fishback. And while we may disagree as to the 17 scope, I let him know where we stood. We sent a 18 letter on Friday. I don't know whether you've seen a 19 copy of that letter. 20 As you know, the products at issue, 21 based upon Mr, Bradford's testimony in 1983, 1984,1 22 let Steven know, as is clear from the letter, that 23 would allow you some leeway and we will allow 24 Mr. Ketcham to testify as to his personal knowledge 25 from his work at Arvinmeritor, and he was employed 4 (Pages 10 to 13) Aiken & Welch Court Reporters B. Ketcham 4-29-08 22b1303e-c2a4-49dc-aa31-dcbf5bBGff21 Ketcham - direct Page 14 Page 16 1 from 1978 through 1997, so we're going to give you 1 Rockwell? j 2 some leeway. But to the extent you start getting 2 A. That's correct. i 3 into materials that predate bis period of employment. 3 Q. Okay. And then on page three, which, 4 and spend an undue amount of time on those materials, 4 let the record reflect is even more difficult to read ! 5 then I'm going to object to the scope and instruct 5 than the prior two pages of Plaintiffs 1, the vendor 6 him not to answer. 6 is listed as Abex. Do you recognize that vendor? 7 So I'm not instructing him now. I just 7 A. Yes, I do. 8 want to let you know where we stand and where we're 8 Q. Do you recall if Abex supplied brake j 9 coming from, and we think we're being reasonable as 9 linings to Rockwell during your period of employment 10 to the scope ofhis testimony that we're allowing 10 with Rockwell? 11 today. 11 A. Yes, I do. 12 MR. KELLER: And just to briefly respond 12 Q. And did they? s 13 to that. As you're likely aware, our position is 13 A. Yes. 14 that the scope is dictated by the deposition notice. 14 MR. WYLES: Same objection as before. \ 15 But with that being said, I also 15 MR. KELLER: I would like the next 16 understand and appreciate that we're talking about a 16 document marked Plaintiffs 2. And let the record j 17 wide swath of time, and that there's likely or may 17 reflect that Plaintiffs 2 is a document in the top j 18 not be more than one witness who would be your person 18 left-hand comer it reads "Abex." And then in ; 19 most knowledgeable, and that -- and we don't expect 19 handwriting it reads "Florence." And this document : 20 that Mr. Ketcham will have sufficient knowledge about 20 came from the Arvinmeritor document production S 21 the company to respond to all the categories in our 21 yesterday. There's also a title on the page which | 22 notice. We'll ask our questions. If Mr. Ketcham 22 reads "Inspection Characteristics." I 23 doesn't know, as I've read before, he'll simply just 23 (Exhibit P-2, Abex Florence, Inspection j 24 tell us that he doesn't know. 24 Characteristics, 2 pages was received and marked for j 25 Q. With that being said, on page two of . 25 identification.) Page 15 j 5 Page 17 \ 1 Plaintiffs Exhibit 1 is another cost record which 1 Q. Mr. Ketcham, do you recognize that if j 2 was taken from the same place, from the Arvinmeritor 2 document? ' j 3 documents. Let the record reflect it is very 3 A. I've seen it before, yes. j 4 difficult to read, but it does appear to have on the 4 Q. And what is it? j 5 line titled "Name," the word "lining," and underneath 5 A. It is an inspection record. j 6 the word "Vendor," "R-M." 6 Q. And do you -- strike that. j 7 And my question, Mr. Ketcham, is are you 7 MR. WYLES: 'Pm sorry to interrupt. But = 8 familiar with a Rockwell lining vendor that's 8 can you just give me a date when you identify these | 9 reflected in this card with the initials R-M? Do you 9 documents? Your e-mail came through, hut I haven't | 10 know the full name of that vendor? 10 been able to open it yet. j 11 A. I believe so. 11 MR. KELLER: Okay. Could we go off the | 12 Q. And what does "R-M" stand for? 12 record for a second? | 13 A. To me, it would stand for 13 (A discussion takes place off the j 14 "Raybestos-Manhattan." 14 record.) | 15 Q. And in your experience at Rockwell, do 15 Q. Let the record reflect that Plaintiffs | 16 you recall whether Raybestos-Manhattan was a suppliei 16 2 has a set of dates on it. It is two pages, and the l 17 of brake linings to Rockwell? 17 first date is the production date of 4-26-95/7-20-95, j 18 MR. WYLES: Objection, overbroad as to 18 and a revision date of 8-3-88. ? 19 time, vague. 19 Mr. Ketcham, you stated that you've seen 20 A. At some point in time in the past they 20 a document like this before. Is that correct? | 21 were, yes. 21 A. Correct. j 22 Q. During your employment with Rockwell? 22 Q. And what was the purpose of this j 23 A. I'm not certain about that. 23 document, to the extent that you recall? { 24 Q. You just recall that, at some point in 24 A. It is an inspection document, incoming l 25 time, they were a supplier of brake linings to 25 inspection document I 5 (Pages 14 to 17) Aiken & Welch Court Reporters B. Ketcham 4-29-08 22b1303e-c2a4-49dc-aa31-dcbf5bB6ff21 Ketcham - direct Page 18 Page 20 1 Q. Would Rockwell and/or -- strike that 2 Would Rockwell inspect documents, or would they 3 require their vendors to inspect documents that they 4 purchase from them? 5 MR. WYLES: Objection, vague. 6 A I'm sure that they did both. 7 Q. Does this document reflect an inspection 8 done by Abex on products that were provided to 9 Rockwell? 10 A. I'm uncertain. 11 Q. Okay. What is -- do you know the 12 purpose of this document? 13 A. From just reviewing it, it appears to be 14 an incoming inspection document. 15 Q. Okay. And was this document something 16 that would have been required by Rockwell of its 17 vendors? 18 A. Possibly, yes. 19 Q. Do you know one way or the other? 20 A. No, I don't. 21 Q. Did you work with these types of 22 documents when you worked at Rockwell? 23 A. Some of my people did, these types of 24 documents. I don't know. Obviously, this one was 25 created after -- after I had left Florence. 1 A I believe it refers to the edge code 2 marking that would have been on this particular 3 lining. 4 Q. And where would that edge code appear on 5 the lining? I mean, on the edge, itself, on the edge 6 of the lining, itself? 7 A. That's correct. 8 Q. Okay. And were edge codes -- do you 9 recall whether the lining suppliers to Rockwell 10 during your employment put edge codes on each of 11 their linings? 12 MR. WYLES: Objection, vague and 13 overbroad. 14 MS. GALFAYAN: Arpi Galfayan on the 15 phone, I join. 16 And before we go on, Mr. Keller, do you 17 agree that an objection by one is an objection by 18 all. 19 MR. KELLER: Who's talking? 20 MS. GALFAYAN: Arpi Galfayan, from 21 Prindle, Decker, Amaro. 22 MR. KELLER: Have you made an 23 appearance? 24 MS. GALFAYAN: I'm going to have to make 25 a late appearance. I got on late. Page 19 Page 21 1 Q. And how do you know that? How do you 2 know it was created after you left Florence? 3 A. Because it's dated 1995. 4 Q. Is that the date that this document was 5 created, or is the revision date of 1988 the date 6 that this document was created? 7 A. I believe this document -- well, are you 8 talking about the printed document or are you talking 9 about the handwritten items that are on here? 10 Q. Just to cut to the chase, Mr. Ketcham, 11 do you believe that this form is a form that was 12 revised in 1988, if you know? 13 A. I do not know. 14 Q. Okay. Do you believe that the 15 inspections, and I would refer you to the column 16 "Date," in the bottom left-hand comer, that the 17 inspections referenced in this document occurred in IB 1995? 19 A. That's correct. 20 Q. Okay. I really just -- I have one 21 question about this document in particular, and that 22 is this column entitled "Edge Code A.O. Spec No. 23 M-78," do you know what that column means? 24 A. I believe so. 25 Q. And what is it? 1 MR. KELLER: All right. I will 2 stipulate that an objection by one defendant 3 constitutes an objection by all defendants who have 4 appeared today. 5 MS. GALFAYAN: I would like to go ahead 6 and make an appearance, a belated appearance at this 7 point. 8 MR. KELLER: Well, okay. We're waiting. 9 MS. GALFAYAN: Madam Court Reporter, 10 this is Arpi Galfayan, and I'll spell that for you. 11 It's A-R-P-I, last name G-A-L-F-A-Y-A-N, appearing on 12 behalf of Pneumo Abex, LLC. 13 MR. KELLER: We'll get the rest from you 14 later, Counsel. 15 MS. GALFAYAN: Thank you. 16 MR. KELLER: Could you read my question 17 hack, please. 18 (Whereupon, the court reporter reads as 19 requested.) 20 A. They did on some of them, yes. 21 Q. And what was the purpose of, if you 22 know, putting the edge code on the lining, itself? 23 MR. WYLES: Speculation, lack of 24 foundation. 25 A. To identify it. 6 {Pages 18 to 21) Aiken & Welch Court Reporters B. Ketcham 4-29-08 22b1303e-c2a4-49doaa31-dchf5bB6ff21 Ketcham - direct Page 22 Page 24 1 Q. And why would Rockwell want to identify 2 the brake lining as opposed to just having the brake 3 lining sent in an Abex box, taking the lining out and 4 putting it on a brake, if you know? 5 A. Because you want to know what that part 6 is. 7 Q. Okay. And you want to know what that a part is when you're either -- when you're assembling 9 your brakes? 10 A. Among other reasons, yes. 11 Q. Any other reasons? 12 A. When you're shipping it, when you're 13 installing it Many reasons, for identification 14 purposes. 15 Q. Does the edge code tell you what type of 16 lining it is? 17 A. What do you mean by ''type"? 18 Q. In other words, well, are there 19 different types of brake linings? 20 MR.WYLES: Vague. 21 A. What do you mean by "type"? 22 Q. Are there different sizes of brake 23 linings? 24 A. Yes, there are. 25 Q. Are brake linings made up of different 1 by "mix"? 2 A. "Mix" is what I refer to as -- or what 3 the industry refers to as the materials that go into 4 the manufacture of the brake lining. 5 Q. Does it refer to a formula? 6 A. Probably ultimately it does. 7 Q. Is this spec a Rockwell spec or an Ahex 8 spec? . 9 MS. GALFAYAN: Speculation. 10 A, The spec shown there, M-78, is a 11 Rockwell spec. 12 Q. Can you tell by looking at this spec. 13 M-78, whether that brake lining that's referenced 14 there contained asbestos? 15 A. If I knew what M-78 was, yes. 16 Q. Does M-78 -- strike that. Was there a 17 document that you recall from Rockwell or a catalog 18 or some reference manual where I could take M-78 anc 19 flip to M-78 in the book and it would tell me what 20 the mix of that brake lining was? 21 MR. WYLES: Objection; vague, overbroad. 22 A. It would tell you the manufacturer's 23 mix, yes, specification. 24 Q. And what was the name -- okay. So the 25 "M-78" refers to the specification, in other words, Page 23 Page 25 1 ingredients or components? 1 how the brake lining was -- the ingredients that made 2 A. Yes, they are. 2 up the brake lining. Is that correct or is that 3 Q. Okay. And that's what I refer to when I 3 incorrect? 4 refer to "type." 4 A. That's really incorrect. 5 So my question is are there different 5 Q. Okay. And bow is it incorrect? 6 types of brake linings? 6 A. The "M-78" would refer to the, in this 7 A. Yes, there are. 7 particular case here, the Ahex specification. 8 MR.WYLES: Vague. B Q. Okay. 9 Q. And does the edge code reflect what type 9 A. Which is another identifier. It 10 of brake lining is supplied by a vendor? 10 doesn't -- that Abex specification does not tell you 11 MR. WYLES: Vague, compound. 11 what materials went into that particular 12 A. In some ways, yes. 12 specification. 13 Q. And how does, for example, this edge 13 Q. What does it tell you, if you know? 14 code which appears to be M-78 tell me what type of 14 A. It tells you the Abex identifier. 15 brake lining is reflected in this document? 15 Q. So "M-78" is an Abex number, or is it a 16 A. It would reflect the mix of that 16 Rockwell number? 17 particular brake lining. 17 A. That's a Rockwell number. 18 Q. If one were to dissect M-78, does it 18 Q. Okay. And if I wanted to find out the 19 tell you what type of mix is in this particular 19 mix of this particular lining, where would I go at 20 lining that's referenced in Plaintiffs 2? 20 Rockwell, if it still existed, to find that mix 21 A. It references the mix, yes. 21 number, and what corresponds to that mix number? 22 Q. Do you know by seeing the number M-78 22 A. To the material specification, that M-78 23 what the mix is? 23 material specification. 24 A. No. 24 Q. And where were the material 25 Q. And when you say "mix," what do you mean 25 specifications kept? 7 (Pages 22 to 25) Aiken & Welch Court Reporters B. Ketcham 4-29-08 22b1303e-c2a4-49dc-aa31-dcbf5b86ff21 Ketcham - direct Page 26 Page 26 1 A. I don't recall at this particular point 2 in time. 3 Q. Was there a name for whatever 4 compilation there was of material specifications? 5 A. Yes. 6 Q. And what was that? 7 A. Materia] specifications. B Q. Was it the material specifications book? 9 A. It was really just material 10 specifications. 11 MR. WYLES: Vague. 12 Q. Okay. And was it a book or a hinder, or 13 what did it look like? 14 A. Pages. 15 Q. Just loose pages stacked up on a shelf, 16 or were they in a binder, or how were they kept? 17 A. Each material specification would be a IB page or a series of pages. 19 Q. In a binder? 20 A. At one point in time they would have 21 been in a binder. 22 Q. Okay. How else were they kept? 23 A. In later years, they were kept online. 24 Q. Okay. 25 (Exhibit P-3, Rockwell International 1 Q. On page two of Plaintiffs 3, there are 2 several titles, one of which reads, "Lined brake 3 shoes." 4 Did I read that correctly? 5 A. Yes, you did. 6 Q. And one of the column headings reads 7 "Lining." Does that refer to brake linings? 8 A. Yes, they do. 9 Q. Okay. And would those be the brake 10 linings that were put into the brake shoes sold by 11 Rockwell? 12 A. That were assembled to the brake shoes 13 sold by Rockwell, correct. 14 Q. Okay. And the lined brake shoes in this 15 document, you can flip through it and see, appear on 16 pages 2 and 3. Correct? 17 A. Correct, 18 Q. And in each row underneath in the column 19 entitled "Lining," it reads, among other things, 20 either Carlisle or Abex. 21 Do you see that? 22 A. On page one are you referring to? 23 Q. I'm referring to Plaintiffs Exhibit 3, 24 pages 2 and 3. 25 A. I'm sorry. Page 2. Page 27 Page 29 1 Aftermarket Parts & Services, 1993 Brake Quantum 1 Q. Yes. 2 Program was received and marked for identification.) 2 A. Yes, you're correct. 3 Q. Mr. Ketcham, I'm showing you the next 3 Q. Okay. Is it your understanding that 4 document in order entitled "Rockwell International 4 Carlisle and Abex were the vendors who supplied the 5 Aftermarket Parts & Services, 1993 Brake Quantum 5 linings for the lined brake shoes that are listed on 6 Program." 6 pages 2 and 3? 7 Do you recognize this document? 7 A. Yeah. 8 A. I've seen it before, yes. 8 MR. WYLES: Objection; vague, calls for 9 Q. And what is it? 9 speculation. 10 A. I don't know anything more about it 10 A. Yes, that would be my interpretation. 11 other than what you described as far as the title of 11 Q. Are you aware of whether, in 1993, 12 the document. 12 Rockwell purchased brake linings from any other 13 Q. What is a Brake Quantum Program, if you 13 vendors other than Carlisle or Abex? 14 know? 14 A. I am not aware, although it is certainly 15 A. It would appear to be a sales program; 15 possible. 16 but beyond that, I really don't know. 16 Q. Mr. Ketcham, it's my understanding that 17 Q. And what would have been the purpose of 17 Rockwell sold brakes in different ways to its 18 this document? 18 customers. It's my understanding that they sold 19 A. To convey information to customers. 19 individual brake linings, they sold brakes and 20 Q. So Plaintiffs 3 would have been a 20 assembled brakes, and they sold brakes in overhaul 21 document that would have been provided to Rockwell's 21 kits. Is that correct? 22 customers? 22 MR. WYLES: Objection, vague, overbroad. 23 MR. WYLES: Objection, lack of 23 Q. And let me limit the question to your 24 foundation, calls for speculation. 24 period of employment with Rockwell. 25 A. I believe so, yes. 25 A. Could you read back the question. 8 (Pages 26 to 29) Aiken & Welch Court Reporters B. Ketcham 4-29-08 22b1303e-c2a4-49doaa31-debf5b86ff21 Ketcham - direct Page 30 Page 32 1 please. 1 Did I read that correctly? 2 (Whereupon, the court reporter reads as 2 A. Did -- which line is that now? That 3 requested.) 3 one? 4 MR. WYLES: Still overbroad, but go 4 Q. Yes. 5 ahead. 5 A. Yes. 6 A. By "assembled brakes," are you talking 6 Q. What does "ABB" mean, if you know? 7 about lined brake shoes? 7 A. Abex. 8 Q. Yes. 8 Q. And does that indicate that the supplier 9 A. Yes, you're correct. 9 for the lining included in that part was an Abex 10 Q. Okay. Is there any other way that 10 lining? 11 Rockwell sold brakes to its customers other than the 11 A. That is correct. 12 three ways in which I described? 12 Q. If you remain in that column and go down 13 A. Yes. 13 to the third row, there's a series of numbers and 14 Q, And how was that? 14 letters, as well. And the lower row of numbers and 15 A. Some were assembled to axles that 15 letters reads "MM-E145A." 16 Rockwell manufactured and shipped, assembled to the 16 Did I read that correctly? 17 axle. And brake assemblies which included other 17 A. Yes, you did. IB brake parts were also sold to customers. 18 Q. What does the "MM" reflect? 19 (Exhibit P-4, Trailer Axle Assemblies, 19 A. "Molded Material." 20 Specify Rockwell was received and marked for 20 Q. Okay, And was Molded Material, was that 21 identification.) 21 a company or a supplier or a type of brake lining? 22 Q. Mr. Ketcham, I'm showing you Plaintiffs 22 What was it? 23 Exhibit 4 which appears to be a catalog 23 A. It's a vendor supplier. 24 entitled "Trailer Axle Assemblies." In the top 24 Q. And the vendor was named what, Molded 25 right-hand comer, it reads, "PB-9314, Issued 12-92." 25 Material? Page 31 Page 33 1 Did I read that correctly? 2 A. Yes, you did. 3 Q. And what is this document? 4 A. It's generically a parts book. 5 Q. And who would have received this 6 document or purchased this document? 7 A. Rockwell customers. 8 Q. You just described that Rockwell would 9 sell brakes to its customers with axles. Is that 10 correct? 11 A. I had mentioned that. Correct. 12 Q. Okay. And if you flip to page eight. 13 It's not marked eight, but... 14 A. Where is it? 15 Q. On the top of the page, it reads "TN 16 Series Axles With Brakes." 17 MR. CANONI: Page six in the lower left. 18 A. Okay. 19 Q. Okay. Underneath the column titled 20 "Brake size and lining mix," there are a series of 21 numbers and letters. Do you see that? 22 A. Yes, I do. 23 Q. And in the first row underneath "Brake 24 size and lining mix," it reads on the second line, 25 "ABB 931-162." 1 A. Molded Material, or Carlisle. 2 Q. Did Carlisle supply the lining that was 3 included in the part reflected in this row, the third 4 row? 5 A. That's correct. 6 Q. By way of example, the TN series axles 7 with brakes appear in this document on pages numbered 8 6 and 7. Do you see that? Next page. 9 A. What was the question again, or can yon 10 read it back? 11 Q. The TN series axles with brakes appear 12 on pages 6 and 7 in this document. Correct? 13 A. Correct. 14 Q. And if you look at each of the brake 15 linings that are indicated in the second column on 16 pages 6 and 7, the alphanumeric portion reads, the 17 prefix reads either "MM" or "ABB." Is that correct? 18 A. That is correct. 19 Q. And does that indicate that the brake 20 linings that were included in the parts for the TN 21 series axles with brakes were either Carlisle or Abex 22 brake linings? 23 A. For the axles that are shown on these 24 two pages, that's correct. 25 (Exhibit P-5, Trailer OEM Bulletin 9 (Pages 30 to 33) Aiken & Welch Court Reporters B. Ketcham 4-29-08 22b1303e-c2a4-49dc-aa31-dcbf5b86ff21 Ketcham - direct Page 34 Page 36 s 1 92TA-9, dated October 1, 1992, 4 pages was received 1 saying. j 2 and marked for identification.) 2 Q. What do you believe it's saying? i 3 Q. Mr. Ketcham, I'm showing you next in 3 MR. WYLES: Objection, the document j 4 order Plaintiffs 5. It is entitled "Rockwell 4 speaks for itself. 1 5 Aftermarket Parts & Services," dated October 1st, 5 A. The document speaks for itself. s 6 1992, Bulletin No. 92TA-9. 6 Q. Well, I want tD know, aside from the j 7 Did I read that correctly? 7 document, what you interpret this to mean. ( 8 A. Yes, you did. 8 MR: WYLES: I object to the extent that 1 9 Q. On the third page, it reads, "Product 9 it calls for speculation, lack of foundation. If he j 10 Information Letter." And in the second full 10 doesn't know, he doesn't know. ! 11 paragraph, it reads: "With the discontinuance of 11 A. Based on the words in the document, it's ] 12 Abex 551-D asbestos-based lining material, which was 12 saying that the Abex 551-D was replaced by the j 13 utilized as original equipment brake lining material 13 Carlisle MM-G210. So that is not necessarily saying j 14 for fire truck and crash trucks, the nonasbestos 14 that that occurred in June of 1992. ! 15 Carlisle, MM-G21Q lining material has been in use to 15 Q. Let me just ask you, and this is not ! 16 replace Abex 551-D for high energy braking." 16 intended to be argumentative in any way, shape or 1 17 Did I read that correctly? 17 form. Let me just ask you, do you know why this jj 18 A. Yes, you did. 18 Product Information Letter 150 was circulated in j 19 Q. Do you know one way or the other why 19 1992, if, by your account, asbestos was removed from 1 20 Abex 551-D was discontinued? 20 Rockwell's brakes in 1987? If you know. 3 21 MS. GALFAYAN: Objection, calls for 21 A. This was announced to announce the jj 22 speculation. 22 availability of the NAB-456. j 23 MR. WYLES: Vague, overbroad. 23 Q. Okay. Is it your position that the Abex 1 24 A. Because Abex discontinued manufacturing 24 550-D asbestos-based lining was discontinued in 19877* 25 it. 25 MR. CANONI: You said 550-D. | Page 35 Page 37 j 1 Q. Do you know why they discontinued 2 manufacturing it? 3 MR. WYLES: Still speculation, lack of 4 foundation. 5 A. It was discontinued when they changed 6 from asbestos to nonasbestos lining manufacture. 7 Q. Do you know when that was done? 8 A. For Rockwell, it was in -- I believe it 9 was December of 1987. 10 Q. Plaintiffs Exhibit 5 is -11 MR. HOLMBERG: Excuse me. I didn't get 12 the last answer was cut out. Could I get the last 13 answer read back, please? 14 (Whereupon, the court reporter reads as 15 requested.) 16 Q. This document is dated June, 1992. If 17 asbestos was phased out of brake linings in '87, why 18 would Rockwell be advising their customers in 1992 19 that they're discontinuing asbestos-based lining 20 material? 21 MR. WYLES: Objection to the extent it 22 misstates the document, argumentative. 23 Q. If you know. 24 MR. WYLES: Assumes facts. 25 A. Yeah, I don't believe that's what it's 1 MR. KELLER: 551-D. | 2 MS. GALFAYAN: Objection; lack of jj 3 foundation, vague, calls for speculation. f 4 Q. If you know, e 5 A, During that time frame in there, Abex f 6 discontinued the manufacture of the 551-D. [ 7 Q. During that time frame of 1987? | 0 A. 1987, early 1988, | 9 Q. Was there a brake lining that was used ij 10 between the '87/'88 time frame when the 551-D was | 11 discontinued, and 1992 when the MM-G210 was released?! 12 MR. WYLES: I'm just going to object jj 13 that we're going well beyond the scope, particularly s 14 given that Mr. Bradford's exposure to, by his own j 15 account, to Rockwell brakes was in the early 1980s, t 16 so there's no relevance, whatsoever, of the brakes j 17 post-1983. j 18 Q. If you know. i 19 A. Could you read back the question, again? jj 20 Excuse me, | 21 (Whereupon, the court reporter reads as 1 22 requested.) | 23 A. I don't believe that's what the document 24 says. : 25 Q. Okay. Let me ask it differently and j 10 (Pages 34 to 37) Aiken & Welch Court Reporters B. Ketcham 4-29-08 22b1303e-c2a4-49dc-aa31-dcbf5bB6ff21 Ketcham - direct Page 38 Page 40 1 I'll move on. 1 A. Caterpillar did not build trucks. 2 When the Abex 551-D was discontinued in 2 Q. They built heavy equipment. Correct? 3 the '87/'88 time frame by your account, do you 3 A. That's correct. 4 believe that it was replaced around that same time 4 Q. Did Rockwell supply parts to heavy 5 frame by theMM-G210? If you know. 5 equipment manufacturers? 6 A. At some point in time it was, yes. 6 A. Yes, they did. 7 Q. Do you know what point in time? 7 Q. And which ones that you recall? 8 A. No, I don't. 8 MR.-WYLES: Once again, we're going well 9 (Exhibit P-6, General Parts Bulletin, GP 9 beyond the scope. Mr. Bradford did not testify to 10 556, March 4, 1993, 2 pages was received and marked 10 doing any work on or around any heavy equipment. The 11 for identification.) 11 only heavy equipment he worked on were trucks, so 12 Q. Mr. Ketcham, what I'm showing you next 12 here I think we're straying again for the second 13 as Plaintiffs 6 is a two-page document 13 time -- well, beyond the second time, this is the 14 entitled ''Rockwell Aftermarket Parts & Services, 14 second time I've mentioned it; and if we continue to, 15 Bulletin No. GP 556," dated March 4th, 1993. 15 then I'm going to interpose some limiting objections. 16 Have you ever seen this document before? 16 A. Certainly Caterpillar, Hyster. And 17 A. Yes, I have. 17 there were -- I'm sure that there were other ones. 18 Q. And what is it? 18 although I was not that familiar with the off-highway 19 A. It's a General Parts Bulletin issued by 19 market. 20 Aftermarket Parts & Services. 20 Q. Other than truck manufacturers and heavy 21 Q. What's a General Parts Bulletin? 21 equipment manufacturers, what other types of 22 A. It's an announcement that goes out to 22 companies did Rockwell supply brakes and brake 23 the customers. 23 assemblies and axles with brakes to? 24 Q. And what does it tell the customers? 24 A. Trailer manufacturers. 25 A. It tells them, in this particular 25 Q. Any other industries? Page 39 Page 41 1 instance here, of certain parts that were available. 1 A. And Rockwell distributors. 2 a description of those parts, and the list price of 2 Q. Any other industries that you can think 3 those parts. 3 of? 4 Q. And is this a bulletin that went to 4 A. Those are the major ones that come to 5 Penske Truck Leasing? 5 mind right now. 6 MR. WYLES: Objection, calls for 6 Q. Do you recall the names of the trailer 7 speculation, lack of foundation. The document speaks 7 manufacturers that Rockwell distributed to? 8 for itself. 8 MR. WYLES: Objection, vague as to time. 9 A. It may have. 9 Q. During your employment at Rockwell. 10 Q. Did Rockwell sell its -- sell brakes and 10 A. The names escape me right now. 11 axles with brakes to manufacturers of trucks 11 Q. You can't think of one? 12 during -- 12 A. Monon, Kentucky, Strick. And I'm sure 13 A. Yeah. 13 there were other ones. 14 Q. -- during your tenure at Rockwell? 14 Q. But those are all you can recall at this 15 A. Yes. 15 time? 16 Q. And what manufacturers do you recall 16 A. After 25 years, yes. 17 Rockwell selling brakes, brake linings, and axles 17 MR. HOLMBERG: Could I have the answer 18 with brakes to? 18 read back. The answer cut out on the phone. 19 A. I can think of the major heavy-duty 19 (Whereupon, the court reporter reads as 20 truck manufacturers that were in business in that 20 requested.) 21 period of time, from Ford, to Freightliner, to Volvo, 21 Q. On page two of Plaintiffs 6, there is, 22 International, Mack, Western Star. Those were 22 one of the columns is titled "OEM lining." What does 23 probably the primary major heavy truck manufacturers 23 that mean? 24 in North America. 24 A. What's shown in those columns is the 25 Q. Caterpillar? 25 lining manufacturer, lining mix designation. 11 (Pages 38 to 41) Aiken & Welch Court Reporters B. Ketcham 4-29-08 22b1303e-c2a4-49dc-aa31-dcbf5bB6ff21 Ketcham - direct Page 42 Page 44 1 Q, This is the -- well, strike that. Can 2 you tell by looking at the numbers in these columns 3 who the vendor for these linings was? 4 A. Not without -- I don't recognize all of 5 the number nomenclature that's here. Obviously, it 6 would have been preceded by the manufacturer's 7 identification. Some of those may be shown on some 8 of the prior documents that we looked at, or perhaps 9 not. 10 Q. If you look at Plaintiffs Exhibit 3 on 11 page two, in the column titled "Lining," the second 12 row reads, "Abex, EXL, Supreme, 685, 931-62." 13 MR. CANONI: 162. 14 Q. Dash, 162. Thank you. 931-162 is the 15 same number that's listed on Plaintiffs Exhibit 6 on 16 the second page in the first row underneath "OEM 17 lining." Is that correct? 18 A. That's correct. 19 Q. Having made that comparison, does 20 "931-162" reference an Abex -21 MS. GALFAYAN: Objection, calls for 22 speculation. 23 MR. KELLER: I wasn't done with my 24 question, but so noted. 25 Q. --an Abex mix? 1 two, we also see, at least the codes seem to indicate 2 that there is also included an Abex brake lining in 3 the major brake overhaul kits. Correct? 4 A. Yes in the first one that we referenced, 5 yes, the 931-162. 6 Q. Is the reason that it states "OEM 7 lining" in Plaintiffs 6, and just "lining" in 8 Plaintiffs 1,-because the lining was included In the 9 major brake overhaul kits without Rockwell having 10 done anything to it? 11 MR. WYLES: Objection; vague, lacks 12 foundation, calls for speculation. 13 MS. GALFAYAN: Objection. 14 MR. KELLER: Withdrawn. I'll ask it 15 differently. 16 Q. In your experience at Rockwell, would 17 there have been any difference between the lined 18 brake shoe referenced in Plaintiffs Exhibit 3 on 19 page two, and the OEM lining in the major brake 20 overhaul kit on page two of Plaintiffs 6? 21 MR. WYLES: Same objection. 22 Q. If you know. 23 A. I think you're mixing apples and 24 oranges. I can't answer that question. 25 Q. How am I mixing apples and oranges? Page 43 Page 45 1 A. I believe so. 1 A. Over here you're dealing with a lining 2 Q, Can you explain to me -- and if you've 2 which was on a shoe that was assembled to a trailer 3 already done this, I apologize -- but can you explain 3 axle; over here you're talking about lined shoes with 4 to me why it says "OEM lining" on page two of 4 a return spring. 5 Plaintiffs 6? 5 Q. Okay. And how are they different? 6 MR. WYLES: Objection, calls for 6 A. I thought I just explained that 7 speculation, lacks foundation. 7 Over in the first instance, in Exhibit 8 Q. To the extent you know. 8 3, you're talking about a trailer axle that has lined 9 A. "OEM lining" is referring to that as the 9 shoes that are assembled to a trailer axle, and it is 10 original equipment manufacturer lining. There are 10 sold as a trailer axle with lined shoes. 11 various aftermarket linings that are manufactured by 11 In Exhibit 6, you're talking about the 12 various manufacturers. This is just reflecting that 12 sale of a kit, and that kit contains two lined shoes 13 it is the original OEM lining mix that is used in 13 with one return spring. They're different products. 14 this particular one. 14 Q. Okay. When Rockwell assembled its major 15 Q. Is there a difference between -- strike 15 brake overhaul kits during your tenure at Rockwell, 16 that. During your tenure at Rockwell, Rockwell 16 what was the process employed by Rockwell to 17 purchased brake linings from, among other vendors. 17 incorporate the brake lining, the unattached brake 18 Abex. Correct? IB lining into the major brake overhaul kit, if you 19 A. Correct. 19 know? 20 Q. And we saw in Plaintiffs -- Plaintiffs 20 MR. WYLES: Objection, vague as to 21 Exhibit 3 on page two that lined brake shoes made by 21 "process." 22 Rockwell contained, some of them contained Abex brake 22 A. The linings would be received. They 23 linings. Correct? 23 would be riveted onto an unlined shoe to become a 24 A Correct 24 lined shoes -- shoe. And two of those shoes with, in 25 Q. And in Plaintiffs Exhibit 6, on page 25 this particular instance here that we're talking 12 (Pages 42 to 45} Aiken & Welch Court Reporters B. Ketcham 4-29-08 22b1303e-c2a4-49dc-aa31-dcbf5bB6ff21 Ketcham - direct Page 46 Page 4B 1 about, Kit No. 8292 AFF, two shoes, and a return 1 lined brake shoes, and during that process, as I 2 spring would have been placed into a box, and that 2 understand your testimony, it incorporated a brake 3 would have been sold as that kit. 3 lining into the lined brake shoe. Other than 4 Q. Okay. And how would Rockwell 4 riveting and grinding the brake lining, did anything 5 incorporate a brake lining into its lined brake shoes 5 else have to happen to that brake lining in order to 6 during your tenure there? 6 incorporate it into the lined brake shoe? And the 7 A. The lining, in these particular 7 time period I'm talking about is during your tenure 8 instances here, would have been riveted to the table 8 at Rockwell. 9 of the brake shoe to create a lined shoe. 9 MR. WYLES: Objection to the extent it 10 Q. Did they have to do anything else to the 10 misstates testimony. 11 lining in order to finish the product before it was 11 A. The -- during my tenure at Rockwell, 12 sold? 12 most shoes were purchased already to size and did not 13 MR.WYLES: Vague. 13 require grinding. So the majority of the brake shoes 14 A. During -- as these were sold here in 14 that were, in fact, lined, just took a lining which, 15 1993? 15 for over-the-highway trucks got riveted onto the 16 Q. Let me ask it differently. 16 brake shoes. 17 During your tenure at Rockwell, did the 17 Very early in my tenure, there were some 18 brake linings ever have to be ground before they were 18 linings that did require grinding -- not all, but 19 sold? 19 some -- and for the linings that required grinding, 20 A. Are you talking about the Q-brake 20 those linings were riveted to the brake shoes and 21 linings here? 21 ground. And that constituted creating the lined 22 Q. I'm talking about any brake linings. 22 brake shoe. ' 23 A. Some did. 23 Q. And that -- did the process that you've 24 Q. Okay. And why would they have to be 24 just described constitute the totality of work that 25 ground? 25 would have to be done on a brake lining in order to Page 47 Page 49 1 A. Because they were not manufactured to 2 size. 3 Q. So to fit the -- to fit the lining onto 4 the brake shoe, they would have to be ground. Is 5 that correct? 6 A. No, that's incorrect. 7 Q. Okay. Why would they have to be ground B then? 9 MR. WYLES: Objection, vague and 10 overbroad. 11 A. They would be ground in order to match 12 the clearance profile of the brake drum. 13 Q. Other than riveting the lining and 14 grinding the lining, was there anything else that had 15 to be done at Rockwell before a product that 16 incorporated a brake lining was sold to the end 17 customer? IB MR. WYLES: Objection to the extent it 19 misstates testimony. 20 A. I think you're mixing some apples and 21 oranges again and combining too many things into -- 22 Q. Let me break down -- 23 A. -- into the question. 24 Q. Let me break it down. 25 When Rockwell was manufacturing its 1 incorporate it into a finished brake product during 2 your tenure? 3 MR. WYLES: Objection, vague. 4 A. Correct. 5 (Exhibit P-7, Photocopy of Handwritten 6 document was received and marked for identification.) 7 Q. Mr. Ketcham, I'm showing you a one-page 8 document which has been marked Plaintiffs Exhibit 7. 9 It is a fair but difficult-to-read copy of a 10 handwritten letter that contains a date of May 10th, 11 1982. 12 Do you recognize this document? 13 A. I've seen it before, yes. 14 Q. Okay. What is it? 15 A. It's a handwritten letter. 16 Q. Do you know what it's referring to? 17 A. Not beyond what's referred to in the 18 letter, itself. 19 Q. Do you recognize any of the names in the 20 top left-hand comer? 21 A. Yes. 22 Q. And who are those people, if you know? 23 A I recognize one of the names there. 24 Q. And who's that? 25 A. Buzz Rankin. 13 {Pages 46 to 49) Aiken & Welch Court Reporters B. Ketcham 4-29-08 22b1303e-c2a4-49dc-aa31-dcbf5bB6ff21 Ketcham - direct Page 50 Page 52 1 Q. And who is that? 1 2 A. He was an individual, at this point in 2 3 time, I believe he worked in the Ashtabula plant. 3 4 Q. In what capacity, if you know? 4 5 A. I don't recall right now. 5 6 Q. Do you know why he would have received 6 7 this handwritten letter? 7 8 MR. WYLES: Objection; calls for 8 9 speculation, lacks foundation. 9 10 A. No, I don't. 10 11 Q. Okay. I'm going to attempt to read the 11 12 first sentence here. "The result of an asbestos test 12 13 conducted on May 10th, 1982, show us to be above the 13 14 OSHA standard on the 662 riveter in Department 36 14 15 while running the Al-3222-1609 shoes drilling -- 15 16 MR. CANONI: Rivet. 16 17 Q. -- "rivet holes as needed." 17 18 Did I read that correctly? 18 19 A. That's correct. 19 20 Q. Do you recall during your tenure at 20 21 Rockwell any monitoring for asbestos in any of the 21 2 2 Rockwell facilities ? 22 23 A. Yes. 23 24 Q. What's the earliest that you recall 24 25 monitoring for asbestos at any Rockwell facilities 25 recall -- do you know, as a person most knowledgeable for Arvinmeritor to respond to questions about Rockwell, when Rockwell started monitoring for asbestos in its facilities? A. My belief is that it would be in the early 1970s. Q. And what is the basis for that belief? A. Based upon discovery responses that have been provided in the past. Q. And are you referring to discovery responses that you verified? A. That's correct. Q. Have you done anything to confirm whether, by talking to people or review of documents, when Rockwell started monitoring for asbestos in its facilities? A. I've seen some documents over time. Q. Okay. Documents aside from just discovery responses. Correct? A. Yes. Q. Okay. Can you -- well, strike that, Did you testify earlier that Rockwell discontinued its use of asbestos-containing brake linings in and around the '87/'88 time frame? MR. WYLES: Objection, misstates Page 51 Page 53 1 during your tenure there? 1 testimony. 2 A. I can't put an earliest date from 2 A. No. 3 recollection. 3 Q. Okay. Was there a period of time when 4 Q. You started in 1978,'79. Is that 4 Rockwell discontinued using ashestos-containing brakcjS 5 correct? 5 linings? 6 A. 1978. 6 A. Yes. 7 Q. Thank you,'78. Do you recall in 7 Q. And when was that? 8 1978 -- well, strike that. What facility did you 8 A. After that point in time, after 1987, 9 first start working in for Rockwell? 9 Q. After 1987? 10 A. At the Florence, Kentucky, facility. 10 A. Yes. It was not a sharp discontinuance. 11 Q. And do you recall monitoring at the 11 Q. Okay. Was it a -- was there a phase-out 12 Florence, Kentucky, facility for asbestos? 12 of asbestos-containing brakes that took place at 13 A. I recall it was done, yes. 13 Rockwell to the extent you recall? 14 Q. Okay. And how long were you at the 15 Florence, Kentucky, facility? 16 A. Until sometime in 1984. 14 A. 15 Q. 16 1987? Yes. Okay. And did that start in December, 17 Q. Do you recall whether the monitoring for 18 asbestos at the Florence, Kentucky, facility was 17 18 19 conducted while you were there between 1978 and 19841 19 A. No. Q. When did it start? A. Earlier. 20 A. I'm sure it was. 21 Q. And what makes you sure that it was? 22 A. Because testing was done on a routine 23 type ofbasis. Do I recall a particular year or time 20 Q. When? 21 A. Sometime in the, I want to say mid-'80s. 22 Q. Okay. And do you know if that phase-out 23 was ever completed such that Rockwell reached a pc 24 or details? No. 24 that it was selling no asbestos-containing -- no 25 Q. Let me just ask it this way: Do you 25 brakes containing asbestos? 14 (Pages 50 to 53) Aiken & Welch Court Reporters B. Ketcham 4-29-08 22b1303e-c2a4-49dc-aa31-dcbf5bB6ff21 Ketcham - direct Page 54 Page 56 1 A. Yes. 1 A. Yes. 2 Q. And when was that? 2 Q. I show you Plaintiff's next in order 3 A. In totality, 2000. 3 marked Plaintiffs Exhibit 8. 4 Q. Do you know why Rockwell began to phase 4 (Exhibit P-8, Internal Letter dated June 5 out asbestos-containing brakes from its products? 5 21, 1974 was received and marked for identification.) 6 A. The lining manufacturers developed 6 Q. And it is a one-page document 7 nonasbestos mixes. Beyond that, no. 7 entitled "Rockwell International Internal 8 Q. Why -- do you know why Rockwell chose to 8 Letter," and dated June 21st, 1974, 9 purchase non-asbestos-containing brake linings for 9 Do you recognize this document? 10 its products starting in somewhere in the '80s, as 10 A. I've seen it before, yes. 11 you testified to? 11 Q. The date of this document, 1974, 12 A. No. 12 predates your time at Rockwell. Correct? 13 Q. Do you know who made the decision to 13 A. That's correct. 14 begin purchasing non-asbestos-containing brake 14 Q. Okay, Do you recall an effort, or do 15 linings during the phase-out of asbestos-containing 15 you know anything about an effort to comply with the 16 brake linings? 16 1976 standard of two fibers per cc that's referenced 17 A. No. 17 in this letter? 18 MR. WYLES: Are you still there? 18 MR. WYLES: Objection; vague, overbroad. 19 (A discussion takes place off the 19 A. No, I don't. 20 record.) 20 Q. Do you have any knowledge about a 1976 21 MR. "WYLES: I was wondering whether now 21 standard concerning two fibers per cc of asbestos? 22 would be a good time for a break. 22 A. No, I do not. 23 MR. KELLER: Let's take a break and go 23 (Exhibit P-9, Internal Letter dated May 24 off the record. 24 3, 1074 was received and marked for identification.) 25 (A recess is taken.) 25 Q. Mr. Ketcham, I'm showing you a document Page 55 Page 57 1 Q. Okay. Back on the record. 2 Mr. Ketcham, you testified about a 3 series of truck trailer and heavy equipment 4 manufacturers that Rockwell supplied to. Do you 5 recall that testimony? 6 A. Yes. 7 Q. Okay. Do you know one way or the other 8 whether Rockwell supplied to those entities 9 throughout the entirety of your tenure there? 10 A. I don't know that as I sit here. 11 Q. Okay. So for example, you listed as 12 truck manufacturers Ford, Freightliner, Volvo, 13 International, Mack, and Western Star. Do you recall 14 one way or the other whether Rockwell supplied to 15 those manufacturers during the entirety of your 16 tenure at Rockwell? 17 MR. WYLES: Objection to the extent it's 18 compound. 19 A. We supplied to them and I recognize them 20 as customers. Do I know for a fact that we supplied 21 to them every single year? I don't know that as I 22 sit here. 23 Q. And would your answer be the same with 24 regard to the heavy equipment manufacturers and 25 trailer manufacturers that you identified? 1 which has been marked Plaintiffs Exhibit 9. It's a 2 one-page document dated 1974 entitled "Internal 3 Letter, Rockwell International." 4 Do you recognize this letter? 5 A. I've seen it before, yes. 6 Q. And what is it? 7 A. It's an internal letter. 8 Q. Okay. And are you familiar with the 9 substance of the letter? 10 A. Not beyond what the letter, itself, 11 states. 12 Q. And 1974 predates your time at Rockwell. 13 Is that correct? 14 A. That is correct. 15 Q. Do you know one way or the other whether 16 workers at the Ashtabula Brake facility wore masks in 17 1974? 18 A. Nothing beyond what's stated in the 19 letter. 20 Q. Okay. In 1978 -- strike that. 21 Was the Florence, Kentucky, facility a 22 distribution facility or a manufacturing facility, or 23 something else? 24 A. It started as a distribution facility, 25 and over time progressed into some remanufacturing. 15 (Pages 54 to 57) Aiken & Welch Court Reporters B. Ketcham 4-29-08 22b1303e-c2a4-49dc-aa31-dcbf5b86ff21 Ketcham - direct Page 58 Page 60 1 Q. When you started in 1978, was any 2 remanufacturing being conducted at the Florence, 3 Kentucky, facility? 4 A. No. 5 Q. When did that start? 6 A. I want to say in the mid-'80s. 7 Q. Did any of the riveters, for example, 8 who worked with brake linings wear masks at the 9 Florence, Kentucky, facility in the mid-'80s? 10 A. There were no riveters at the Florence, 11 Kentucky, facility in the mid-'SOs. 12 Q. Did any of the workers who worked in 13 remanufacturing in the Florence, Kentucky, facility 14 in the mid-'80s wear masks? 15 A. Not that I recall. 16 MS. O'GARA: Excuse me for interrupting, 17 Mr. Keller, this is Sheila O'Gara. We're having a 18 little trouble hearing you. Your voice is kind of 19 falling off. 20 MR. KELLER: Very good. I'll move a 21 little closer to the phone. 22 A. Are you assuming that the 23 remanufacturing -- 24 MR. CANONI: No, no, let him ask the 25 question. 1 A. Most likely, yes. 2 Q. Okay. And what facilities would those 3 have been? 4 A. Various facilities, Rockwell facilities. 5 Q. Did you visit the Ashtabula Brake 6 facility? 7 A. I have been to Ashtabula. 8 Q. Did you visit the Ashtabula Brake 9 facility in the early '80s? 10 A. Quite possibly, yes. 11 Q. Do you remember one way or the other? 12 A. You're splitting my tenure between 13 the 70s and the '80s. I can't recall that 14 precisely. 15 Q. Do you recall a time frame when you 16 visited the Ashtabula Brake facility? 17 A. Yes. 18 Q. And what would the time frame be? 19 A. During my time frame, during my tenure 20 at Florence, 21 Q. Do you remember what period of time you 22 were -- well, strike that. You were at Florence 23 between 78 and '84. Is that correct? 24 A. That's correct. 25 Q. Okay. And while you were there, you Page 59 Page 61 1 Q. I'll get there. 2 In 1978, did you visit any other 3 facilities owned by Rockwell other than the Florence, 4 Kentucky, facility? 5 A. I may have. 6 Q. Okay. Do you recall visiting any other 7 facilities in 1978? 8 A. No. 9 Q. Okay. In 1979, did you visit any other 10 facilities outside the Florence, Kentucky, Rockwell 11 plant? 12 A. I may have. 13 Q. Okay. Do you recall visiting them? 14 A. In that particular year? 15 Q. Yes. 16 A. It's too long ago to recall a particular 17 year. 18 Q. Well, let me ask it differently. 19 Do you recall visiting any facilities 20 other than the Florence, Kentucky, facility, in the 21 1970's? 22 A. I don't recall. 23 Q. Okay. Do you recall visiting any 24 facilities other than the Florence, Kentucky, 25 facility, between 1980 and 1984? 1 have a recollection of going to the Ashtabula Brake 2 facility? ' 3 A. That is correct. 4 Q. When you were there, do you recall 5 seeing anybody wearing a mask? 6 A. Not that I recall. 7 Q. Okay. Did you visit any area of the 8 facility while you were there during your tenure at 9 the Florence facility -- let me rephrase that. 10 Between 1978 and 1984, while you were at 11 the Florence facility, and you visited the Ashtabula 12 Brake facility, did you have the occasion to enter 13 any of the areas of the Ashtabula facility where 14 brake linings were being incorporated into Rockwell 15 products? 16 A. Most likely. 17 Q. Okay. 18 A. But I don't recall specifics of that. 19 Q. Do you recall seeing anybody wearing 20 masks while performing those procedures? 21 A. I don't know that specifically that I 22 saw those procedures; but I, again, did not recall 23 seeing anybody wear masks. 24 Q. As the person most knowledgeable for 25 Rockwell, do you know one way or the other whether 16 (Pages 58 to 61) Aiken & Welch Court Reporters B. Ketcham 4-29-08 22b1303e-c2a4-49dc-aa31-dcbf5bB6ff21 Ketcham - direct Page 62 Page 64 1 workers who worked for Rockwell and used brake 1 A. Beyond what's stated in the documents 2 linings were provided masks by Rockwell? 2 such as this, I have no recollection. 3 MR. WYLES: Objection, vague as to time. 3 Q. And you don't know one way or the other 4 Overbroad. 4 based on your review of other company documents, as 5 A. I certainly have seen documents such as 5 well. Is that correct? : 6 Plaintiffs Exhibit 9 that talk about masks. Beyond 6 A. I don't recall the specifics of other 7 that, no, I have no personal recollection. 7 company documents as I sit here. 8 Q. Let me ask it this way, then: Based on 8 Q. Okay. With regard to this issue. 9 your review of Rockwell documents, do you have an 9 A. Correct. i 10 understanding about whether workers that worked for 10 Q. Okay. 11 Rockwell were provided masks? 11 (Exhibit P-10, Four letters dated May 12 A. At some point in time, I believe they 12 19, 1975 were received and marked for j 13 were. 13 identification.) 14 Q. Okay. And do you know what point in 14 Q. Mr. Ketcham, I'm providing you with a j 15 time that would be? 15 document marked Plaintiffs Exhibit 10. It is four 16 A. No, I do not. 16 pages, and four separate letters dated May 19th, ] 17 Q. Okay. Do you know what types of workers 17 1975. And the substance of the letter is the same. 18 were given masks? 18 In other words, the body of the letter, as I read it, j 19 A. No, I do not. 19 and correct me if I'm wrong, is identical. The 20 Q. Okay. Based on your experience at 20 difference is the addressee is different. This is a 21 Rockwell and your review of documents, do you have an 21 letter from Mr. or Ms. Pilkington, the Purchasing 22 understanding about what types of workers would have 22 Agent. .; 23 been given masks? 23 MR. WYLES: I'm going to object to the 24 A. Nothing beyond what is stated in some of 24 extent the documents speak for themselves. i 25 the documents, such as Plaintiffs Exhibit 9. 25 Q. Mr. Ketcham, do you recognize these ] Page 63 Page 65 j 1 Q. And what have you seen in the documents 1 letters? j 2 that identifies different types of workers who would 2 A. I've seen them before. j 3 have worn masks at Rockwell facilities? 3 Q. And what are they? j 4 A. I mean, similar to what's stated in the 4 A. They are external letters that were ; 5 document, in Plaintiffs 9, in the second paragraph. 5 written by somebody at -- a purchasing agent at 6 Q. And what is that? 6 Rockwell, addressed to various vendors mentioned in ; 7 A. Where it says masks will no longer be 7 the letters. 8 necessary, which obviously implies that at some point 8 Q. You worked at Purchasing. Correct? i 9 in time they were being used for workers exposed to 9 A, Yes, I did. 10 asbestos dust. 10 Q. At a later date, though. Correct? 11 MR. WYLES: I will object to the extent 11 A. That's correct. ! 12 the document speaks for itself, and it calls for 12 Q. Did you know Mr. or Ms. Pilkington? ; 13 speculation, lack of foundation. 13 A. I don't believe so. j 14 Q. Is it your understanding based on your 14 Q. Did yon know -- do you recognize any of j 15 review of documents, including Plaintiffs Exhibit 9, 15 the names at the top of the letter? There are three 16 that there was a period of time at Rockwell when 16 names listed there. j 17 workers were given masks and then the masks were 17 A. 1 do not. 18 discontinued? 18 Q. Okay. These letters, the first letter j 19 A. I really don't know. I have no personal 19 is written to Molded Materials Division. Is that 20 knowledge of that. 20 correct? j 21 Q. Well, aside from your personal 21 A. That's correct. j 22 knowledge, I'm asking just about based on your review 22 Q. And it's your understanding that's a j 23 of different documents. 23 Carlisle division? 1 24 MR. WYLES: Objection, calls for 24 A. That's correct. 25 speculation. 25 Q. Is it your understanding that they 17 (Pages 62 to 65) Aiken & Welch Court Reporters B. Ketcham 4-29-08 22b1303e-c2a4-49dc-aa31-dcbf5b86ff21 Ketcham - direct Page 66 Page 68 1 supplied brake linings to Rockwell? 1 (A discussion takes place off the 2 A. Yes, it is. 2 record.) 3 Q, The second letter is to the Bendix 3 MR. KELLER: Madam Court Reporter, was 4 Corporation. Did I read that correctly? 4 there a question pending? 5 A. Correct. 5 (Whereupon, the court reporter reads as 6 MR. HOLMBERG: Excuse me. This is Hank 6 requested.) 7 Holmberg. Could I have that letter e-mailed to me at 7 Q. Mr. Ketcham, do you recall that the 8 this time? B Bendix Corporation provided brake linings to 9 MR. KELLER: Yeah. I mean, Kelvin Wyles 9 Rockwell? 10 can do that to you, I can't parse out the -- 10 MR. HOLMBERG: Assumes facts, lacks 11 MR. HOLMBERG: I want to have that 11 foundation, vague, ambiguous, overbroad, calls for 12 letter e-mailed to me prior to any questions being 12 speculation, calls for information not within the 13 asked about it. My e-mail address is 13 personal knowledge of this witness. 14 HHolmberg@perkinscoie. com. 14 A. Yes. 15 MR. KELLER: I don't have the ability to 15 Q. And do you recall that Bendix 16 e-mail it to you, sir. 16 Corporation sold brake linings to Rockwell during 17 MR. HOLMBERG: Mr. Wyles, can you do 17 your tenure at Rockwell? 18 that? 18 MR. HOLMBERG: Same objections. 19 MR. WYLES: I am experiencing e-mail 19 A. I don't know that. 20 problems. I am not trying to be -- 20 Q. Okay. But based on -- as the person 21 MR. KELLER: Sir, you know what, the 21 most knowledgeable for Rockwell, based on your review 22 letter is very short. Perhaps I should read it into 22 of company documents, including Plaintiffs Exhibit 23 the record. 23 10, it's your understanding that the Bendix 24 MR. HOLMBERG: Well, let's go off the 24 Corporation, at least in 1975, was providing brake 25 record and you can read it to me. Is that okay? 25 linings to Rockwell. Correct? Page 67 Page 69 1 MR. KELLER: Why does it have to be off 1 2 the record? 2 3 MR. HOLMBERG: Because I may or may nol 3 4 have objections to it. 4 5 MR. KELLER: Well, what's the basis for 5 6 me reading it off the record and you objecting to it? 6 7 MR. HOLMBERG: Well, because we're 7 8 entitled to see any document prior to your 8 9 questioning a witness about it. 9 10 . MR. KELLER: Well - 10 11 MR. HOLMBERG: If you read it to me. 11 12 over the phone, off the record, then I may or may not 12 13 have objections to it. 13 14 MR. KELLER: Can't you just object on 14 15 the record? 15 16 MR. HOLMBERG: No. Well, what's wrong 16 17 with going off the record and reading it? 17 18 MR. KELLER: The document is going to be 18 19 attached to the deposition, whether you object or 19 20 not. 20 21 MR. HOLMBERG; Well, I want to know 21 22 what's in it before you read it on the record and 22 23 before you question him. 23 24 MR. KELLER: Oh, okay. All right. Pair 24 25 enough. We'll go off the record for a second. 25 MR. HOLMBERG: Same objections. MR. "WYLES: The document speaks for itself. A, Based on the document, it says that, yes. Q. Do you have any reason to doubt that Bendix was a supplier to Rockwell of brake linings? MR. HOLMBERG: Same objections. A. No. Q. Okay. The third page is, again, the same letter, different addressee, to Raybestos Manhattan, Inc. Correct? A. That is correct. Q. Is it your understanding that Raybestos Manhattan, Inc., supplied brake linings to Rockwell? A. At some point in time. MR. HOLMBERG: This is Hank Holmberg. I'm going to make a belated objections restating all the same objections to the Bendix letter; and also moving to strike the testimony in deposition and to exclude at trial on the grounds that we were not provided a copy of that document prior to this deposition. Q. Is it your understanding as the person most knowledgeable for Rockwell that Raybestos 18 (Pages 66 to 69) Aiken & Welch Court Reporters B. Ketcham 4-29-08 22b1303e-c2a4-49dc-aa31-dcbf5b86ff21 Ketcham - direct Page 70 Page 72 1 Manhattan, Inc., was supplying brake linings to 1 Q. Okay. ; 2 Rockwell as of the date of this letter? 2 A. But there may have been. 3 A. I don't know anything more than what's 3 Q, Do you recall -- I can see that 1975 4 stated in the letter as far as dates. 4 predates your time at Rockwell, but just as the ] 5 Q. Do you have any reason to doubt that, 5 person most knowledgeable, do you recall a problem 6 based on your reading of this letter, 6 with asbestos dust in rivet holes and lining dust in i 7 Raybestos-Manhattan Inc., was supplying brake linings 7 boxes as received from any vendors while you were 8 as identified in this letter as a lining vendor to 8 there? j 9 Rockwell as of the date of this letter? 9 MR. WYLES: Objection; vague, overbroad. 10 A. No, I don't doubt that. 10 MR. HOLMBERG: Lacks foundation, calls 11 Q. And the fourth and final letter is. 11 for speculation. Holmberg. 1 12 again, the body of the letter is the same. The 12 A. I don't recall, no. 13 addressee is different The addressee here is Ahex 13 Q. Okay. You don't recall ever hearing 14 Corporation, American Brakeblok Division. Did I read 14 about or discussing with anyone or reviewing any j 15 that correctly? 15 documents other than Plaintiffs Exhibit 10 that 16 A. You did. 16 referenced a problem with lining dust in rivet holes 17 Q. Do you recognize Abex Corporation, 17 from vendors? . 1 18 American Brakeblok Division, as a supplier or vendor IB MR, HOLMBERG: Same objection. j 19 of brake linings to Rockwell? ^ 19 MR. WYLES: Objection. 20 MS. GALFAYAN: Objection; lack of 20 A. I don't recall whether I've seen any 21 foundation, vague, calls for speculation. 21 other documents that may have discussed that ! 22 A. Yes. 22 Possibly, possibly not; but I have no personal j 23 Q, And do you have -- based on your review 23 recollection of the issue. 24 of page four of Plaintiffs Exhibit 10, is it your 24 (Exhibit P-11, Four letters dated | 25 understanding that Abex Corporation, American 25 January 12,1973, and attached Grievance Form was | Page 71 Page 73 \ * 1 Brakeblok Division, was supplying brake linings as of 1 received and marked for identification.) [ 2 the date of this letter? 2 Q. Mr. Ketcham, I'm showing you a document j 3 MS. GALFAYAN: Same objection. 3 marked next in order Plaintiffs Exhibit 11. There 1 4 A. Again, I have no personal knowledge 4 are four letters and a fifth page entitled "Grievance j 5 beyond what's stated in the letter, but that's what 5 Form." The letters are dated January 12th, 1973. | 6 the letter appears to say. 6 Do you recognize these letters and the ! 7 Q. Okay. I'll represent to you. 7 grievance form that follows? \ B Mr. Ketcham, that in the Arvinmeritor documents 8 A. I've seen them before. f 9 produced to me, these were the only four letters that 9 Q. Okay. And what are they? I 10 were dated May 19th, 1975, in the area of the 10 A. They are external letters from Rockwell j 11 documents where I found them. And based on that, let 11 to four lining suppliers. ! 12 me ask you, are you aware one way or the other, of 12 Q. And - | 13 any other suppliers of brake linings as of 1975 other 13 MR, CANONI: Hold on a second. Are you j 14 than the four entities that are identified as 14 representing that this is the way you want the \ 15 addressees in these letters? And I ask based on your 15 document to be marked? It's not the way the document l 16 review of prior company documents as the person most 16 was provided to you. | 17 knowledgeable for Arvinmeritor, and your personal 17 MR. KELLER: Let's go off the record. | 18 experience, as well. 18 (A discussion takes place off the ; 19 MR. WYLES: Objection, vague as to time. 19 record.) | 20 overbroad. 20 Q. Mr. Ketcham, do you know why these 21 A. I do not know of others at this 21 letters were sent to Abex Corporation, the Bendix -- 1 22 particular point in time. There may have been. 22 MR. CANONI: Can you hold on, please? j 23 Q. Okay. But you don't know of any? 23 MR. KELLER: We were just off the l 24 A. I don't know of any at this particular 24 record. I went back on. You want me to go off? 1 25 point in time. 25 MR. CANONI: You still haven't answered \ 19 (Pages 70 to 73) Aiken & Welch Court Reporters B. Ketcham 4-29-08 22bl303e-c2a4-49dc-aa31-dcbf5bBGff21 Ketcham - direct Page 74 Page 76 j 1 the question. 1 speculation, not based on the witness' personal j 2 MR, HOLMBERG: Excuse me. Are we on or 2 knowledge? I 3 off the record? 3 Q. Do you recall that at some point in time ] 4 MR. KELLER: We're on the record. 4 those different entities supplied brake linings to : 5 MR. HOLMBERG: Okay. Well, I'm going to 5 Rockwell? j 6 ask again that the letter involving Bendix he read 6 MR. HOLMBERG: Holmberg. Leading, j 7 off the record prior to any questions about it. 7 assumes facts, lacks foundation, calls for \ 8 MR. KELLER: Well, you're once again 8 speculation,-vague, ambiguous, overbroad, calls for j 9 interrupting, so we're going to take care of the 9 testimony not within the personal knowledge of the ] 10 first problem first and then we'll take care of you. 10 witness, calls for hearsay. \ 11 MR HOLMBERG: Okay. 11 MR. KELLER: Mr. Holmberg, I think that \ 12 MR. KELLER: To answer your question, 12 is the totality of all objections available under the 1 13 yes. 13 Code, and I'm willing to give you a running objection | 14 MR. CANONI: Okay. 14 for this document. | 15 Q. Mr. Ketcham, do you know why the letters 15 MR. HOLMBERG: Okay. Thank you. | 16 in Plaintiffs Exhibit 11 were sent to the entities 16 Q. Do you remember the question? j 17 to whom they are addressed? 17 A. Could you read it back, please. j 18 MR, HOLMBERG: Holmberg. Leading, 18 (Whereupon, the corn! reporter reads as j 19 assumes facts, lacks foundation, calls for 19 requested.) 1 20 speculation, calls for information not based on 20 A. Yes, I 21 personal knowledge, calls for hearsay. 21 MR. HOLMBERG: Holmberg. I will add one s 22 A. Not beyond what's stated in the letter, 22 objection, and that is that these questions and this i 23 itself. 23 line of questions calls for opinion testimony from a j 24 Q. And based on your review of the letter, 24 lay witness. So we'll just add that to my other | 25 what is your understanding of the purpose and intent 25 stated objections. ] Page 75 Page 77 | 1 of the letter? 1 MR. KELLER: So added. 2 MR. HOLMBERG: Same objections. 2 MR. HOLMBERG: Thank you. 3 MR. WYLES: Objection, the document 3 Q. These letters, the first sentence of 4 speaks for itself, calls for speculation. 4 each of the letters reads "This letter is being 5 A. Assuming that page five of the exhibit 5 directed" -- strike that. 6 is what's referred to in the letters on pages one 6 The first line, the first two lines 7 through four, there was a grievance from the union 7 reads, of these letters, "This letter is being 8 talking about dust in rivet and bolt holes. B directed to all of our lining suppliers." And then 9 Q. And do you know what the time frame is 9 the sentence continues on. 10 we're talking about here? 10 Do you have any reason to doubt that the 11 MR. HOLMBERG: Same objections. 11 addressees, the entities listed in the addressees 12 A. The dates shown on the letter and on the 12 were suppliers of brake linings in 1973 when this 13 grievance form are from January, 1973. 13 letter was sent based on your position as the person 14 Q. And can you tell me to whom the letters 14 most knowledgeable for Arvinmeritor? 15 referencing this grievance were sent -- 15 A. The letter speaks for itself, and that's 16 MR. WYLES: Objection, the document 16 what the letter states. 17 speaks for itself. 17 Q. Well, do you have any reason to doubt 18 MR. HOLMBERG: Same objections. 18 that that was the case, based on your position as the 19 Q. -- in Plaintiffs 11? 19 person most knowledgeable? 20 A. They're shown on the letters, for Abex 20 A. No. 21 Corporation, the Bendix Corporation, Molded Material' 21 Q. And let me ask that a little bit 22 Division, and Raybestos-Manhattan, Inc. 23 Q. And do you recall that those entities at 22 differently. 23 MR. WYLES: Object to the extent they 24 some point in time -- 24 lack foundation, calls for speculation. 25 MR. HOLMBERG: Move to strike, 25 Q. As the person most knowledgeable, are j j j !j | j 1 f * 1 jj | jj 1 | | | j p j | 1 | 20 (Pages 74 to 77) Aiken & Welch Court Reporters B. Ketcham 4-29-08 22b1303e-c2a4-49dc-aa31-dcbf5b86ff21 Ketcham - direct Page 78 Page 80 1 you aware of any other suppliers of brake linings as 1 A. I've seen it before. 2 of January 12th, 1973, other than Abex, Bendix, 2 Q. And I'll acknowledge that 1975 predates 3 Carlisle, and Raybestos? 3 your tenure with Rockwell, but let me ask: Do you 4 A. There may be, but as I sit here, I do 4 know what this document is? 5 not know. ' 5 MR. WYLES: Object; the document speaks 6 Q. Mr. Ketcham, one of the documents that I 6 for itself, vague, overbroad, beyond the scope of his 7 reviewed yesterday of the Arvinmeritor documents, but 7 testimony on his personal knowledge. 8 was not provided to me, and I'm paraphrasing, stated 8 A. Not beyond what is written in the 9 that at some point in time -- this was in the 1980's, 9 document. 10 I don't remember the exact year, and we'll give 10 Q. Do you recall if Rockwell did anything 11 everybody a chance to object after I finish my 11 in response to receiving this document? 12 question -- that Abex was a major supplier of brake 12 MR. WYLES. Objection, calls for 13 linings to Rockwell. 13 speculation, lacks foundation. 14 MS. GALFAYAN: Objection, lacks 14 A. I have no knowledge. 15 foundation. 15 (Exhibit P-13, Material Safety Data 16 MR. KELLER: Hold on. Not done with my 16 Sheet, 2 pages was received and marked for 17 question. I will give you a chance. I promise. 17 identification.) 18 MS. GALFAYAN: I'm sorry. IB Q, Okay. 19 MR. KELLER: That's okay. 19 Mr. Ketcham, I am giving you a document 20 Q. Based on your personal knowledge and 20 marked Plaintiff's Exhibit 13. 21 your position as the person most knowledgeable, do 21 At the top it reads, "Material Safety 22 you agree with the statement that Abex was a major 22 Data Sheet." The top right-hand comer reads "Motion 23 supplier of brake linings to Rockwell in the 1980s? 23 Control" --1 believe that's "Industry," in Carlisle. 24 MS. GALFAYAN: Objection; lacks 24 Do you recognize this document? 25 foundation, calls for speculation, overbroad, assumes 25 A. I've seen it before. Page 79 Page 81 1 facts. 1 Q. And what is it? 2 MR. WYLES: I'll join. That's 2 A. It's an MSDS sheet, or Material Safety 3 overbroad, vague as to time. 3 Data Sheet. 4 A. Abex was certainly a supplier. I 4 Q. Can you tell by looking at it when it 5 recognize the name. I don't know anything as far as 5 was prepared? 6 specific volumes during specific periods of time. 6 A. The date in the document says November 7 Q. Would you categorize Abex as a major 7 18th, 1985. 8 supplier ofbrake linings to Rockwell? 8 Q. And you were employed by Rockwell at 9 MS. GALFAYAN: I have the same 9 that time. Correct? 10 objections. 10 A. Yes, I was. 11 A. I don't know if they were a major 11 Q. Okay. Of the hazardous components. 12 supplier. They were a significant supplier. They 12 asbestos (chrysotile) is listed amongst several 13 were a supplier. 13 hazardous components. Correct? 14 (Exhibit P-12, Memo dated 23 December 14 A. That is correct. 15 1975, 6 pages was received and marked for 15 Q. Okay. About halfway down the first 16 identification.) 16 page, it says, "Identity (As used on label and 17 Q. Mr. Ketcham, I am showing you a document 17 list)." 18 that's been marked Plaintiffs Exhibit 12. The 18 Correct? 19 addressor is Asbestos Information Association, and 19 MR. WYLES: Objection to the extent the 20 it's dated December 23rd, 1975, and the subject is 20 document speaks for itself. 21 "Proposed OSHA Regulation, Occupational Exposure to 21 A. Yes, that's what it says. 22 Asbestos, 29 CFR Part 1910 (Copy enclosed)." 22 Q. And then followed -- and thereafter, 23 Did I read that correctly? 23 there are a series of alphanumeric, what I presume to 24 A. Yes. 24 be codes. Correct? 25 Q. Do you recognize this document? 25 MR. WYLES: Same objection. 21 (Pages 78 to 81) Aiken & Welch Court Reporters B. Ketcham 4-29-08 22b1303e-c2a4-49dc-aa31-dcbf5bB 6ff21 Ketcham - direct Page 82 Page 84 1 A. That is correct. 1 labeling program was implemented for Automotive 2 Q. And do you know what those codes 2 Operations." 3 reflect? 3 Did I read that correctly? 4 A. I believe those are lining mixes. 4 A. Yes, you did. 5 Q. Are those, if you know, Rockwell codes 5 Q. Do you have a recollection one way or 6 or Carlisle codes? 6 the other of whether Rockwell started adding warnings 7 A. Carlisle codes. 7 to asbestos-containing products in 1986? 8 Q. Do you know one way or the other -- 8 MR: WYLES: I'm just going to object to 9 strike that. 9 the extent that the question is misleading. That's a 10 Do you know one way or the other whether 10 different question than what's stated in the 11 Rockwell used any of the Carlisle brake linings that 11 document. 12 are referenced in this MSDS under "Identity'1? 12 MR. KELLER: And if I'm incorrect in the 13 A. Yes. 13 way I'm asking my questions, or I'm assuming 14 Q. And did they? 14 something, I know Mr. Ketcham will tell me. 15 A. Some of them, yes, I recognize. 15 A. Could you please read the question back. 16 Q. Which ones do you recognize? 16 (Whereupon, the court reporter reads as 17 A. 8C5. That's the only one that I can 17 requested.) 18 speak of for certain. IB A. Yes, I have a recollection. 19 Q. How do you recognize it? 19 Q. And what is that recollection? 20 A. It's only been 25 years. 20 A. That the asbestos warning labels were on 21 Q. In other words, in what capacity would 21 some products prior to 1986. 22 you have learned that 8C5 was a Carlisle mix code for 22 Q. Do you know when Rockwell started adding 23 a Carlisle brake lining that was used in Rockwell 23 warnings to its asbestos-containing products? 24 products, if you know? 24 A. It's probably more -- best stated in the 25 A. I really don't recall. I just recall 25 responses to interrogatories that were provided in Page 83 Page 85 1 the number. I don't recall how I learned of that 1 the case. As I recall, there were some warnings in 2 particular number. 2 field service manuals in the mid-'70s. There were 3 Q. Just based -- so it was just based on 3 labels on boxes of replacement parts, I believe. 4 your general knowledge and background with Rockwell? 4 beginning either the late '70s or early '80s. And 5 A. At some point in time I latched onto 5 there are also labels that were put on product 6 that and I remembered it. 6 sometime, perhaps, in the early '80s. But that's 7 Q. Very good. 7 from my recollection as I'm sitting here right now. 8 (Exhibit P-14, Internal Letter dated B Q. Okay. Do you know what manuals in 9 September 8, 1987, 4 pages was received and marked 9 the '70s included warnings about asbestos? 10 for identification.) 10 A. I know some of the field service manuals 11 Q. Mr. Ketcham, I'm showing you a document 11 did. Which ones in particular, I can't recall as I 12 marked Plaintiffs Exhibit 14 dated September 8th, 12 sit here. 13 1987, entitled "Internal Letter, Rockwell 13 Q. Do you recall whether they dealt with a 14 International, Subject: Asbestos Labeling Program." 14 certain industry over another or a certain product 15 Do you recognize this document? 15 over another? 16 A. I have seen it before. 16 MR. WYLES: Objection; vague, compound. 17 Q. And what is it? 17 A. I would imagine that they would have 18 A. It is an internal letter dealing with an 18 appeared into the brake field maintenance manuals. 19 asbestos labeling program, as it states. 19 Q. And do you know what those warnings 20 Q. Do you recall an asbestos labeling 20 said? 21 program while you were at Rockwell? 21 A. Not as I sit here. 22 A. I recall asbestos labels. Don't know 22 Q. You just recall that there was some type 23 about a program. But I recall asbestos labels. 23 of warning in the '70s in the field service manuals 24 Q. Okay. The first sentence of this letter 24 concerning asbestos? 25 reads: "During the later part of 1986, an asbestos 25 A. Field maintenance manuals. That is 22 (Pages 82 to 85) Aiken & Welch Court Reporters B. Ketcham 4-29-08 22b1303e-c2a4-49dc-aa31 -dcbf5bB6ff21 Ketcham - direct Page 86 Page 88 1 correct. 1 that's referenced -- or are those the labels that are ! 2 MR. WYLES: Daniel, on this point I 2 referenced in Plaintiffs Exhibit 14, with the 3 would refer you to the responses to interrogatories 3 subject "Asbestos Labeling Program"? ; 4 that Mr. Ketcham referred to. There are a 4 A. Some of them are, yes. 5 number where this is dealt with in detail. 5 Q. Plaintiffs Exhibit 14 references j 6 MR. KELLER: Very well. And you know, 6 Automotive Operations. Correct? j 7 I'm just asking Mr. Ketcham about his knowledge. 7 A. That's correct. j 8 MR. WYLES: I understand. 8 Q. Do you understand the Rockwell i 9 Q. With regard to boxes that you referenced 9 Automotive Operations to be separate and apart from 10 that carried warnings in the late '70s, were those -- 10 the other industries served by Rockwell, which j 11 do you know what was in those boxes, what types of 11 included, according to your testimony, trailer I 12 products? 12 manufacturers, heavy equipment manufacturers, and j 13 A. I believe I said it was the late '70s, 13 truck manufacturers? | 14 early '80s. I can't recall specifically on that. 14 MR. WYLES: Objection; vague, overbroad, j 15 Q. Okay. 15 A. Automotive Operations was the division j 16 A. The products that would have been in 16 or operation for which the plant entities that j 17 those boxes would have been asbestos-containing 17 provided product to heavy truck manufacturers were -- ; 18 linings, or lined brake shoes. 18 were in within the firm, within the company. j 19 Q. Anything else? 19 Q. Did Rockwell make any products that j 20 A. Those are the items that I can recall. 20 could be used on an automobile? j 21 Q. And then with regard ~ 21 A. Yes. i 22 A. And could also -- excuse me, could also 22 Q. And what were those products? \ 23 fall over to any of the major overhaul kits that 23 MR. WYLES: Objection; vague as to time, j 24 contained lined brake shoes together with other 24 overbroad. j 25 parts. 25 A. The ones that I can recall as I sit here j Page 87 Page 89 j 1 Q. Well, let me ask you about that. The 2 kits, themselves, would it be a situation where you 3 would have a big box that contained the kit, and then 4 you would have a smaller box containing the brake 5 inside the big box? 6 MR WYLES: Objection; vague, overbroad. 7 Q. If you remember or recall. e A. Typically, the other way around. 9 Q. Okay. And where would the warning 10 appear? 11 A, On the outside of the box on the label. 12 Also, at some point in time, there were TSAs or 13 Technical Service Aids that got packaged in the 14 boxes, also. 15 Q. And then you stated, you testified about 16 products that also contained, asbestos-containing 17 products that also contained warnings in the 18 early'80s. Correct? Is that separate and apart 19 from the boxes? 20 MR. WYLES: Objection to the extent it 21 misstates testimony. 22 A. I believe in the early '80, there were 23 also labels that appeared on lined shoes. 24 Q. Okay. And with regard to the labels 25 that appeared on lined shoes, is that the program 1 would be door latches, window regulators, sunroofs, j 2 some plastic components, suspension components. And | 3 there may be other ones. 1 4 Q. Did Rockwell make any products for jj 5 automobiles during your tenure that contained brake jj 6 linings? 1 7 A. No. j 8 Q. So the Automobile Operations that are j 9 referenced in Plaintiffs Exhibit 14 concern what j 10 Rockwell operations? a 11 MR WYLES: Objection, vague. jj 12 Q. Do you want me to restate the question? 1 13 A. Yeah, if you could, yeah. j 14 Q. Okay. Sure. ] 15 You just testified that Rockwell never P 16 made any products, that you're aware of, containing l 17 brake linings for automobiles; and this 1987 letter | 18 references a labeling program for, among other j 19 things, brake shoes that contain asbestos linings for 1 20 Rockwell's Automobile Operations. | 21 And so my question is why does this I 22 letter reference Automotive Operations, and in j 23 particular, warnings about asbestos in brake shoes J 24 that contain asbestos linings -- 1 25 MR. WYLES: I object to the extent the | 23 (Pages 86 to 89) Aiken & Welch Court Reporters B. Ketcham 4-29-08 22b1303e-c2a4-49dc-aa31-dcbf5bB6ff21 Ketcham - direct Page 90 Page 92 1 document speaks for itself, to the extent it 1 They're not objecting. Is the document -- it was 2 misstates the document, and is misleading and 2 produced. It says something. I'll ask the question 3 argumentative. 3 differently. I'll ask the question differently. 4 Q. Why does it reference Automobile 4 Q. Do you have any reason to doubt the 5 Operations if Rockwell didn't make any 5 substance of this letter, this document. Plaintiffs 6 asbestos-containing brakes for automobiles? 6 Exhibit 15? 7 MR. WYLES: Same objections. 7 A. I'm not quite sure what you mean "doubt B A. Automotive Operations is the label, to 8 the substance of it." Again, I'll go back to the 9 call it that, of the division that made automotive 9 letter speaks for itself. 10 products. That Automotive Operations made products 10 Q. Okay. Do you know, as the person most 11 for passenger cars, as well as heavy trucks, as well 11 knowledgeable -- well, strike that. 12 as off-highway equipment. They made different 12 On page two, the third full paragraph, 13 products for different manufacturers. So that, you 13 second sentence, reads: "The potential health hazard 14 know, although products were made for passenger cars. 14 associated with asbestos" -- 15 they were not brake products. Brake products were 15 A. Hold on, hold on. 16 made for heavy trucks and trailers, off-highway 16 Q. Keep going. Right there. 17 equipment. 17 A. Okay. 18 (Exhibit P-15, Industrial Hygiene IB Q. "The potential health hazard associated 19 Survey, Rockwell-Standard Company, Ashtabula, Ohio 19 with exposure to asbestos is that of inhalation of 20 July 21, 1971 was received and marked for 20 airborne fibers resulting in a type of 21 identification.) 21 pneumocosis" -- 22 Q. Mr. Ketcham, I'm showing you what's been 22 MR. CANONI: Pneumoconiosis. 23 marked Plaintiffs Exhibit 15. The cover page 23 Q. -- "pneumoconiosis referred to as 24 says "Industrial Hygiene Survey. 24 asbestosis." 25 Rockwell-Standard -- 25 Did I read that correctly? Page 91 Page 93 1 MR. HOLMBERG: What exhibit is this? 2 MR. KELLER: Fifteen. 3 Q. Rockwell-Standard Company, Ashtabula, 4 Ohio, July 21st, 1971. 5 Do you recognize this document? 6 A. I have seen it before. 7 Q. Do you know what it is? 8 A. The document sort of speaks for itself, 9 but it's a document from George D. Clayton & 10 Associates to Rockwell-Standard Company. 11 Q. You say that the document speaks for 12 itself. I mean this in the most positive light, my 13 question is, do you believe that the document, what's 14 stated in it is accurate? 15 A. I do not know. 16 Q. Do you have -- 17 A. I don't have a personal opinion on that. 18 Q. Okay. As the person most knowledgeable, 19 do you have any reason to doubt the contents of the 20 document? 21 MR. CANONI: Can we go off the record, 22 please? 23 MR. KELLER: Hold on. There's a 24 question pending. Are you instructing the witness -- 25 I mean, you've got counsel here from California. 1 A. Yes, you did. 2 Q. As the person most knowledgeable, do you 3 know one way or the other whether this was the first 4 period in time when Rockwell learned that asbestos 5 exposure was associated with the term "asbestosis"? 6 MR. WYLES: Objection; calls for 7 speculation, lacks foundation, beyond his personal B knowledge. 9 A. No, I do not know. 10 Q. Okay. On page three at the top, it 11 reads, "Many recent studies have indicated an 12 association between exposure to asbestos in both 13 industrial and urban atmospheres and an increase in a 14 relatively rare type of lung cancer known as 15 mesothelioma." 16 Did I read that correctly? 17 A. Yes, you did. 18 Q. Do you know one way or the other whether 19 this was the first instance when Rockwell was advised 20 that there was an association between asbestos 21 exposure and mesothelioma? 22 MR. WYLES: Objection, the document 23 speaks for itself. Again, you're interpreting the 24 document, misstating the document. Calls for 25 speculation. Lacks foundation. 24 (Pages 90 to 93) Aiken & Welch Court Reporters B. Ketcham 4-29-08 22b1303e-c2a4-49dc-aa3l-debf5bB6ff21 Ketcham - direct Page 94 Page 96 1 A. No, 1 the plant manager at Ashtabula? ] 2 Q, No, you don't know? 2 A. No, I don't. | 3 A. No, that's correct. 3 Q. Was he the plant manager when you came 4 Q. And then at the end of this first full 4 on board with Rockwell in 1978? 5 paragraph on page three, it reads: "However, this 5 A. I can't recall. ' 6 new hazard has received much public attention because 6 Q. How do you know he was the plant manager ; 7 it has been suggested that very minimal 7 of Ashtabula? ' 8 nonoccupational exposure can be sufficient to produce 8 A. Again, one of those facts that you ! 9 the disease in some individuals." 9 recall. i 10 I withdraw that. 10 Q. You just remember from your general j 11 On page four, underneath the first full 11 knowledge? \ 12 paragraph, underneath the title "Presentation of 12 A. That's correct. | 13 results," a sentence therein reads: "Concentrations." 13 Q. Okay. \ 14 Do you see the sentence starting with 14 (Exhibit P-16, National Safety council, j 15 "concentrations"? 15 Automotive, Tooling, Metalworking and Associated j 16 A. Yes. 16 Industries Newsletter, 4 pages was received and 17 Q. "Concentrations as high as 7.8 fibers 17 marked for identification.) 1 18 per milliliter were measured during shakedown of the 18 Q. Mr. Ketcham, I'm going to show you a 19 bag filters located inside the building; whereas, the 19 document marked Plaintiffs Exhibit 16. It is, reads j 20 highest concentration of fibers encountered by 20 at the top, "National Safety Council, Automotive j 21 workers at routine operations was 1.3 fibers per 21- Tooling, Metalworking and Associated Industries i 22 millimeter (sample 9392 AA), measured at numbers 22 Newsletter." j 23 43 8-G riveter." 23 Did I read that correctly? 24 Did I read that correctly? 24 A. Yes, you did. 25 A. I believe so. 25 Q. And the date is February, 1980. And Page 95 Page 97 j 1 Q. Do you have any knowledge based on your 2 review of documents or as the person most 3 knowledgeable about the concentration levels at any 4 Rockwell facilities that are referenced in the 5 language I just read? 6 MR. WYLES: Objection, the document 7 speaks for itself, and misleading to the extent 8 you're interpreting the document or asking him to 9 interpret the document. It goes beyond his personal 10 knowledge and it calls for speculation, lacks 11 foundation, beyond the scope. 12 A. No, I don't recall any. 13 Q. Okay. The second page of Plaintiffs 14 Exhibit 15 is what appears to be a cover letter to 15 Mr. F.J. Griffith of the Rockwell-Standard Company 16 from Clayton. 17 Do you know who Mr. FJ. Griffith is or 10 was? 19 A. I believe so. 20 MR. WYLES; Object to the extent of the 21 description, the document speaks for itself. 22 Q. And who was he? 23 A. I believe that, at that point in time. 24 he was the plant manager at Ashtabula. 25 Q. Okay. Do you know how long he remained 1 then there's another title, "Minimizing Asbestos j 2 Exposures and Hazards in the Workplace." j 3 Did I read that correctly? ! 4 A. Yes. | 5 Q. Now, there's a stamp at the top here. 6 It says, "Received April 1st, 1980, Personnel." | 7 Do you recognize -- withdrawn. ) B There's a stamp here that says, 9 "Received March 27th, 1980, Safety Department." ; 10 Do you recall one way or the other i 11 whether Rockwell had a Safety Department? j 12 MR. WYLES: Objection, vague as to time. 13 Q. Withdrawn. j 14 Do you recall whether Rockwell had a 1 15 Safety Department as of March 27th, 1980, the date of j 16 the received stamp on Plaintiffs Exhibit 16? 1 17 A. No, I don't. f 18 Q. Okay. Do you recall whether Rockwell 19 had a Safety Department at any time during your | 20 tenure there? I 21 A. They had people that had the title i 22 Regional Health and Safety Managers. | 23 Q. And where did they sit? 24 A. As I recall them, they were in the Troy I 25 headquarters. 1 25 (Pages 94 to 97) Aiken & Welch Court Reporters B. Ketcham 4-29-08 22b1303e-c2a4-49dc-aa31-dcbf5b86ff21 Ketcham - direct *' Page 93 Page 100 | 1 Q. Troy, Michigan? 1 go about determining whether or not a brake contained j 2 A. That's correct. 2 asbestos by an asbestos warning label either on the j 3 Q. Okay. And do you know what their 3 part, itself, or on the shipping container? j 4 function was? 4 MR. WYLES: Objection; vague and 5 MR. WYLES: Objection; lack of 5 overbroad. 6 foundation, calls for speculation. 6 A. That's certainly one way of doing it. | 7 A. Basically, plant health and safety. 7 Q. Okay. How would, if you know, how would j 8 Q. All right. Do you know if Rockwell 8 Rockwell make the determination about which brakes j 9 maintained a library? 9 required a warning about asbestos and which didn't? ! 10 MR. WYLES: Objection, vague. 10 MR. WYLES: Objection, argumentative, j 11 A. Rockwell had a library at some points in 11 vague. | 12 time. 12 A. Once the decision was made to put labels j 13 Q. Where was it--more than one or just 13 on asbestos-containing brakes, that was, to the best j 14 one that you're aware of? 14 of my knowledge, done across the board. It was not a j 15 A. The one that I know of was one. 15 question of picking some asbestos-containing brake \ 16 Q. Okay. And where was that located? 16 shoes to put the label on and some not to put it on. | 17 A. In Troy, Michigan. 17 Q. Okay. At what point in the jj 18 (Exhibit P-17, Material Safety Data 18 manufacturing process was the warning put on the | 19 Sheet for Asbestos-Containing Brake Linings, 7 pages 19 brakes that contained asbestos? S 20 was received and marked for identification.) 20 A. On the brake shoes, itself | 21 Q. Mr. Ketcham, I'm showing you what's been 21 MR. WYLES: Objection, vague. | 22 marked Plaintiff's Exhibit 17. It's entitled 22 MR. KELLER: Was that "vague"? ! 23 "Material Safety Data Sheet for Asbestos-Containing 23 MR. WYLES: Yeah. j 24 Brake Linings." 24 A. On the brake shoes, itself, that would ; 25 Did I read that correctly? 25 be done in one of the final operations. Page 99 Page 101 ! 1 A. Yes, you did. 2 Q. And what is it? 3 A. It is an MSDS. 4 MR. WYLES: Objection, the document 5 speaks for itself. 6 A. It's an MSDS sheet. 7 MR, WYLES: Do you have a date on that. 8 Daniel? 9 Q. Yes. Mr. Ketcham, if you turn to the 10 very last page, on the bottom left-hand comer it 11 says July 24th, 1989. 12 Did I read that correctly? 13 A. Yes, you did. 14 Q. And what does that date indicate, if you 15 know? 16 A. I would believe that it would be the 17 date that the document was finally put together in 18 final form. 19 Q. Okay. In Section I, next to the words 20 "Product Name," it reads, "Brake linings containing 21 asbestos on Rockwell brakes. Rockwell parts having 22 such linings may be identified by the asbestos 23 warning label either on the part, itself, or on the 24 shipping container." 25 My question is: Is that how one would 1 Q. During the final operations when the \ 2 warning was applied to the brake shoes, themselves, 1 3 how would -- how would Rockwell know whether to apply p 4 a warning to that brake -- withdrawn. Strike that. | 5 How would Rockwell know that the break it was \ 6 applying the asbestos warning to contained asbestos? ) 7 A. I'm not familiar with the specific 1 B procedures in the brake manufacturing plants that j 9 would have identified it as such. | 10 Q. Did Rockwell maintain a list of mix ij 11 codes that identified whether brakes contained 1 12 asbestos or not? ! 13 MR. WYLES: Objection; vague as to time, i 14 overbroad. ( 15 A. Not that I'm aware of f 16 Q. Are you aware of how one could determine S 17 whether a brake contained asbestos by reading the j 18 edge code on the brake lining? 1 19 A. Yes. f 20 Q. And how is that? j 21 A. Going to the material specifications. j 22 Q. And the material specifications are -- j 23 are the material specifications the same thing as you jj 24 discussed -- are they the same thing as the mixes j 25 that are identified with the mix codes? I 26 (Pages 98 to 101) Aiken & Welch Court Reporters B. Ketcham 4-29-08 ZZb1303e-cZa4-49dc-aa31-dcbf5bB6fTZ1 Ketcham - direct Page 102 Page 104 1 MR. WYLES: Objection, vague. 2 A. Yes, we talked about it earlier in the 3 deposition. 4 Q. Okay. So if I wanted to know whether a 5 Rockwell brake contained asbestos, could I look at 6 the edge code on the brake lining and refer to the 7 specifications to determine whether it contained 8 asbestos? 9 A. I believe so, yes. 10 (Exhibit P-18, Letter dated February 5, 11 1986, with attachment, 14 pages was received and 12 marked for identification.) 13 Q. Mr. Ketcham, I'm showing you what's been 14 marked next in order Plaintiffs Exhibit 13 -- 15 MR. CANONI: Eighteen. 16 Q. --18, and it is a 14-page document 17 The first page is a letter from Rockwell 18 International of Canada Limited, dated February 5th, 19 1986, to Rockwell International in Newark, Ohio. 20 Do you recognize this document? 21 A. I have seen it before. 22 Q. And what is it? 23 A. It's -- 24 MR. WYLES: The document speaks for 25 itself. 1 MR. WYLES: Object. The document speaks 2 for itself. 3 Q. The second page is a Material Safety 4 Data Sheet from Carlisle. Is that correct? 5 A. Correct. Carlisle Motion Control 6 Industries. 7 Q. And the fifth page is an MSDS from Abex B Corporation.' Correct? 9 A. Correct. 10 Q. And the remaining pages are additional 11 pages ofMSDS's from Ahex. Correct? 12 MR. WYLES: Objection to the extent the 13 document speaks for itself. 14 A. Correct. 15 Q. Were you working for Rockwell in 1986? 16 A. Yes, I was. 17 Q. Are you aware of any additional asbestos 18 vendors other than Allied Corporation, Carlisle, and 19 Abex, whose MSDS's are attached to the cover letter 20 in Plaintiffs 18? 21 A. I do not know. 22 MR. WYLES: Objection, vague as to time. 23 MR. HOLMBERG: Yeah. Holmberg. Assume: 24 facts, lacks foundation, vague as to time, ambiguous. 25 overbroad, calls for speculation, calls for testimony Page 103 Page 105 1 A. It's a letter to Tilbury Plant customers 1 not within the personal knowledge of the witness, 2 enclosing certain pieces of information, MSDS sheets. 2 calls for hearsay. 3 to be exact. 3 MR. KELLER: Off the record. 4 Q. The first sentence of the letter reads: 4 (A recess is taken.) 5 "To comply with the above" -- strike that. 5 Q. Mr. Ketcham, what did you do to prepare 6 The subject of the letter reads: "OSHA 6 for your deposition today, if anything? 7 Hazard Communication Standard CFR 1910.1200." 7 A. I reviewed the discovery responses in 8 Did I read that correctly? 8 the case, and I reviewed some documents that 9 A. Yes, you did. 9 Mr. Canoni provided to me. 10 Q. And the letter starts with: "Dear 10 Q. Did you review the deposition notice? 11 Material Manager: To comply with the above-mentionec 11 A. I have not seen that, no. 12 OSHA regulation, Rockwell International Tilbury Plant 12 Q. Did you do, other than talking to 13 is sending to all of our customers new Material Data 13 Arvinmeritor's counsel and reviewing the documents 14 Sheets (from our asbestos vendors)." 14 that you've just identified, did you do anything 15 The next paragraph reads: "These 15 further to prepare for your deposition today? 16 Material Safety Data Sheets have been updated and 16 A. No. 17 include the products you currently purchase as well 17 Q. About how long did it take you to 18 as products you may purchase from Rockwell in the 18 prepare? 19 future." 19 A. Probably about, oh, two-and-a-half 20 Did I read that correctly? 20 hours. 21 A. Yes, you did. 21 Q. Can you briefly describe for me your 22 Q. And then thereafter, page two is 22 educational background. 23 titled "Product Fact Sheet," from Allied Corporation. 23 A. I have bachelor's degrees in electrical 24 Correct? 24 engineering and industrial economics from Union 25 A. That's correct. 25 College. I have a master's in business 27 (Pages 102 to 105) Aiken & Welch Court Reporters B. Ketcham 4-29-08 22b1303e-c2a4-49dc-aa31-dcbf5b86ff21 Ketcham - direct Page 106 Page 10B s s 1 administration from Xavier University, and I have a 1 areas for government products? \ 2 law degree from the University of Detroit. 2 A. Reviewed the contracts dealing with i 3 Q- Have you ever practiced law? 4 A. No, I have not. 3 government products with the prime contractors. 4 Q. Other than your duties in government j j 5 Q. Smart. 6 You're currently working for Exponent. 5 products and technical support in defense of product \ 6 liability litigation, do you have any other duties in ] 7 Is that correct? 7 your position in Product Analysis between '97 and ! 8 A. That is correct. 9 Q. You are not an employee of Arvinmeritor. 10 Correct? 8 2000? 9 A. 10 Q. Those are the ones that I can recall. Prior to your position in Product l j i 11 A. That's correct, I am not. 11 Analysis, where did you work? 1 12 Q. How long have you been with Exponent? 12 A. Rockwell International. 13 A. Since 2000. 13 Q. And what was your position? i| j 14 Q. What's your position there? 15 A. Title is Senior Managing Engineer. 14 A. Manager, Product Analysis. ij 15 Q. And how long -- when did you begin that 5 16 Q- And other than providing -- strike that. 17 Do you serve as a litigation consultant to 16 position? 17 A. 1993. 1 ] 18 Arvinmeritor? 18 Q. What were your duties in that position? jj 19 A. In this type of matter, yes. 20 Q- Okay. Other than serving as a 21 litigation consultant to Arvinmeritor, what other 19 A. Same duties as in the other position. 20 Q. Anything additional? 21 A. No. jj t j 22 type of work do you perform for Exponent? 22 Q. And when you say the other position, | 23 A. As a consulting engineer. 24 Q. For other companies? 25 A. For other companies, yes. 23 you're talking about your position in Product 24 Analysis for Meritor Automotive? 25 A. Right. Meritor Automotive was a 1 jj j Page 107 Page 109 j 1 Q. Okay. Before you worked for Exponent in 1 spin-off from Rockwell. 2 the year 2000, when you started working for Exponent 2 Q. Do you have any knowledge about the jj | 3 in the year 2000, where did you work? 3 spin-off of Meritor Automotive from Rockwell 4 A. Meritor Automotive. 4 International? 5 Q. What was your position? 6 A. I was a Manager of Product Analysis. 5 MR. WYLES: Objection, vague. 6 A. Such as? 7 Q. And how long did you hold that position? 7 MR. KELLER: Withdrawn. B A. Since 1997. 8 Q. Did -- was Meritor Automotive a spin-off 9 Q. And what were your duties in that 10 position? 9 of Rockwell International in 1997? 10 A. Yes, it was. 11 A. To provide technical support to in-house 11 Q, Okay. And did the entity Rockwell 12 and outside counsel in defense of product litigation. 12 International, to the extent you know, continue as a 13 Q. Like asbestos litigation? 13 going concern? 14 A. Asbestos, as well as, you know, other 14 A. There were various entity name changes 15 product issues. 15 and spin-offs, and things of that type of nature, 16 Q. Did you have any -- 16 during the mid 1990s. 17 MR. WYLES: Daniel, you're cutting in 17 Q. Okay. And do you know what prompted the 18 and out again. The witness is fine. 18 name change and various spin-offs that you described? 19 Q. Did you have any other duties in that 19 MR. WYLES: Objection; lack of 20 position? . 20 foundation, calls for speculation. 21 A. Yes. I also had some responsibility 21 Q. If you know. 22 for, at that point in time, government products. 23 Q. And what were those responsibilities? 22 A. Rockwell International was a 23 multinational conglomerate, and the decision was madd| 24 A. Primarily in the contract areas. 25 Q. And what did you do in the contract 24 to spin off the various business entities of the 25 conglomerate to stand-alone corporations or for sale 28 (Pages 106 to 109) Aiken & Welch Court Reporters B. Ketcham 4-29-08 22b1303e-c2a4-49dc-aa31-dcbf5bS6ff21 Ketcham - direct 1 or mergers with other corporations. Page 110 1 A. Not that I can recall. Page 112 j n j 2 Q. Do you know whether Rockwell's brake 2 Q. Are you aware of any government j 3 manufacturing component, for lack of a better word, 3 investigation concerning asbestos in any of j 4 that we've been discussing today was spun off to 4 Rockwell's products? < 5 Meritor Automotive? 5 MR. WYLES: Same objections. | 6 A. That was -- that business operation was 6 A. Not that I'm aware of. | 7 included in the business entities that moved to 7 Q. Prior to 1988, were you employed by 1 8 Meritor Automotive. 8 Rockwell International? 9 Q. Do you know one way or the other whether 9 A. Yes, I was. j 10 Meritor Automotive purchased or absorbed a division 10 Q. Okay. And in what capacity? j 11 of the Carlisle group in 1997? 11 A. Division Materials Manager. j 12 MR. WYLES: Objection, calls for 12 Q. And when did you begin in that position? j 13 speculation. 13 A. 1984. 14 A. Don't believe -- 14 Q. And what were your duties in that t 15 MR. WYLES: Lack of foundation, beyond 15 position? 1 16 knowledge in his employment with Rockwell, beyond the 16 A. Responsible for materials management and 1 17 scope. 17 coordination with the axle manufacturing plants.. jj 18 A. I don't believe so, not that I recall. 18 Q. Anything else? j 19 Q. Prior to 1993, what was your position? 19 A. In a nutshell, that was it. | 20 A. Manager, Product Compliance. 20 Q. Did you deal with brake linings? jj 21 Q. And was that with Rockwell 21 A. Only tangentially. 1 22 International? 22 Q. And how was that? jj 23 A. Yes, it was. 23 A. During that period of time was when the 1 24 Q. And how long did you hold that 24 major change from asbestos to nonasbestos linings j 25 position -- when did you start in that position? 25 occurred, and the axle plants that I had 1 Page 111 Page 113 jj 1 Excuse me. 2 A. 1988. 3 Q. And what were your duties in that 4 position? 5 A. Primarily potential product safety 6 investigations. 7 Q. Anything else? 8 A. And dealing with certain government 9 entities. 10 Q. And what did that entail, dealing with 11 certain government entities? 12 A. Notification of potential recalls of 13 products related to the potential product safety 14 investigations. 15 Q. Any other duties in that position? 16 A. Those are the primary duties. 17 Q. Did you ever conduct product safety 18 investigations? 19 A. Yes. 20 Q. Did you ever investigate the potential 21 hazards of asbestos in any of the Rockwell products? 22 A. No. 23 Q. Are you aware of any investigation 24 concerning asbestos in any Rockwell products? 25 MR. WYLES: Objection; vague, overbroad. 1 responsibility for, obviously, on some of their axle f 2 assembled brake linings to them, or brake shoes to | 3 the axles, so I was involved in making sure that I I 4 was aware of the status with the changeover that was | 5 occurring. ! 6 Q. Do you know why they made the changeover | 7 from asbestos to nonasbestos-containing brake 1 8 linings? .I 9 MR. WYLES: Objection, asked and jj 10 answered. | 11 A. I don't know why the lining jj 12 manufacturers made that decision, no. f 13 Q. Do you believe, based on your position 1 14 as the person most knowledgeable, that the lining | 15 manufacturers were the ones that made that decision? 1 16 MR. WYLES: Objection; vague, lacks jj 17 foundation. t 18 MS. GALFAYAN: And calls for 1 19 speculation. Galfayan. jj 20 Q. To the extent you know. 1 21 A. To the best of my knowledge, yes. | 22 Q. Are you aware of any decision within ! 23 Rockwell International to move from 1 24 asbestos-containing brakes to nonasbestos-containing 1 25 brakes? jj 29 (Pages 110 to 113) Aiken & Welch Court Reporters B. Ketcham 4-29-08 22b1303e-c2a4-49dc-aa31 -dcbf5bB6ff21 Ketcham - direct Page 114 Page 116 1 MR. WYLES: Objection; vague, asked and 1 Q. Any other departments? 2 answered. 2 A. Those are the ones that I can recall at 3 Q, To the extent you know. 3 this point in time. 4 A. I'm not aware of any decision to do 4 Q. Okay. In your capacity as supervisor of 5 that. It's obviously something that occurred during 5 Quality, what were your duties? 6 the 1980s. 6 A. Basically to make certain that the, you 7 Q. Okay. And when you participated in the 7 know, staffing in the organization was meeting the 8 changeover with regard to the axles, do you know if 8 goals that we had set for them, supervising the 9 that happened closer to 1984, when you first took 9 Quality Control Manager. 10 that position, or closer to 1988, when you ended that 10 Q. What quality goals were set for the 11 position, or was it during the whole period? 11 Quality Department? 12 MR. WYLES; Objection to the extent it 12 A. Incoming receipt of materials, 13 misstates testimony. 13 inspection of that when necessary, making sure that 14 A. Change occurred over a period of time. 14 the outgoing product was shipped properly and 15 The most pronounced change was in December of 1987. 15 correctly, and that the proper materials were shipped 16 Q. What di d you p ersonally do to assist in 16 to customers. And there are probably a host of other 17 the changeover? 17 things that I don't recall right now. 18 A. Made sure that the purchasing 18 Q. Do you recall whether the Quality 19 organization, central purchasing organization at that 19 Department that you supervised at Florence inspected 2 0 point in time was communicating with the materials 2 0 the brake linings when they came from the suppliers? 21 management at the plants to make sure that a supply 21 A, I can't recall. 2 2 of linings or lined shoes was available for their use 22 Q. Okay. With regard to your supervision 23 during this transition period. 23 of the Specs Department, what was involved in your 24 Q. Anything else? 24 supervision of that department? 25 A. That's the primary responsibility. 25 A. Specifications basically dealt with - Page 115 Page 117 1 Q- That's all you can remember as far as 2 how you participated in the process personally? 3 A. That's correct. 4 MR. WYLES: Asked and answered. 5 Q- Prior to 1984, you were in Florence? 6 A. That's correct. 7 Q. Okay. And what was yonr position in 8 Florence? 9 A. Production Control Manager. 10 Q- And that was for Rockwell. Correct? 11 A. Correct 12 Q- And did you start in that position 13 in '78? 14 A. No. 15 Q- Okay. When did you start in that 16 position? 17 A. '82. 18 Q. And what were your duties? 19 A. I supervised some various departments 20 within the -- within the plant. 21 Q. What departments? 22 A. Quality, Purchasing, Specifications, 23 Shipping, Receiving. 24 Q. And what did you do -- 25 A. At various points in time. 1 customer questions, as far as, I have this, this is t 2 what's broken, what parts do I need to order in order j 3 to get this item fixed. It was basically dealing ] 4 with customer inquiries of that type of nature. f 5 Q. And what were your duties as a | 6 supervisor for the Specs Department -- strike that. ; 7 What did you do in your capacity as a supervisor of | 8 the Specs Department to assist in their efforts of r 9 identifying parts for customers? 10 A. Making sure that they have the systems j 11 and the personnel in order to allow them to do the i 12 job. I 13 MR. WYLES: Daniel, you're cutting out f 14 again. Sorry. \ 15 Q. To the extent that you know, if a | 16 customer called in and was referred to the Specs j 17 Department for a part that they needed, how would the \ 18 personnel in the Specs Department identify whatever ! 19 part was being requested by the customer? j 20 MR. WYLES: Objection; vague, overbroad, s 21 incomplete hypothetical. ? 22 A. They bad access to various bills of l 23 materials, and drawings, and things like that, that 1 24 they could walk through and determine what was ; 25 necessary. \ 30 (Pages 114 to 117) Aiken & Welch Court Reporters B. Ketcham 4-29-08 22b1303e-c2a4-49dc-aa31-dcbf5bB6ff21 Ketcham - direct Page 118 Page 120 1 Q. So if I needed a new brake lining for my 1 A. No. 2 brake, and I called the Specs Department in Florence 2 Q. Where did you work prior to working for 3 between 1982 and 1984, what would the personnel that 3 Rockwell? 4 I would be speaking with in the Specs Department do 4 A, General Electric Company. 5 in order to find out what brake lining I needed? 5 Q. Anyplace else? 6 MR. WYLES; Objection; lack of 6 A. After college, no, other than a stint 7 foundation, calls for speculation. 7 that I did in the Army Reserve. 8 A. You're asking much too specific a 8 Q. And what did you do for GE? 9 question after 25 years. 9 A. During what period of time? 10 Q. You don't know? 10 Q. Prior to 1978. 11 A. No. 11 A. I held a couple positions in a 12 Q. Prior to 1982, where did you work? 12 commercial appliance manufacturing plant; and prior 13 A. At Florence. 13 to that I was on their manufacturing management 14 Q. And in what capacity? 14 training program. 15 A. As Purchasing Manager. 15 Q. How long did you work for GE? 16 Q. And when did you start in that position? 16 A. About six years. 17 A. 1978. 17 Q. '72 to 78? 18 Q. Was that your first position? 18 A. Correct. 19 A. No. 19 Q. Did Rockwell, to the extent you know, 20 Q. All right. And that was for Rockwell? 20 use gaskets in its manufacture of any of its 21 A. That's correct. 21 products? 22 Q. Okay. What were your duties in that 22 A. Yes. 23 position? 23 Q. Do you know if any of those gaskets 24 A. Procurement of, or supervising the staff 24 contained asbestos? 25 that worked for me in procurement of what we'd call 25 A. Yes. Page 119 Page 121 1 purchased complete items or PC items, as well as 1 Q. Did they? 2 expendables, boxes, labels, things like that; as well 2 A. Some of them did, yes. 3 as contracts related to the operation of the 3 Q. And who, if you know, were the vendors 4 facility. 4 that supplied those gaskets? 5 Q. What's a purchase complete item? 5 A. I don't recall as I sit here. 6 A. It would be like a nut or a bolt type of 6 MR. WYLES: Objection; vague as to time. 7 item, as opposed to something that was purchased from 7 overbroad, beyond the scope. 8 an inter-plant source, from a Rockwell plant where 8 Q. And do you know what products or how 9 they assembled something and shipped them in to us. 9 those gaskets were incorporated into Rockwell 10 Q. Did you have any other duties in that 10 products? 11 position? 11 MR. WYLES: Same objections. Daniel, 12 A. Those were the primary responsibilities. 12 unless you frame it with some regard to relevance in 13 Q. And prior to that position, what 13 this case, then I'm going to instruct him not to 14 position did you hold? 14 answer. 15 A. Sales Order Manager. 15 MR. KELLER: All right. Well, you go 16 Q. And when did you start in that position? 16 ahead and instruct him. I encourage you to look at 17 A. '78. 17 the deposition notice. It's not limited to any sort 18 Q. And what were your duties in that 18 of product. I have limited the time frame to 19 position? 19 Mr. ICetcham's employment and personal knowledge to 20 A. Supervised the staff of inside sales 20 the period of time he was employed there. It's just 21 personnel. 21 general background knowledge. 22 Q. Anything else? 22 Are you instructing the witness not to 23 A. In a nutshell, that was it. 23 answer? 24 Q. Prior to that position, did you hold any 24 MR. WYLES: You ask the question and 25 other positions with Rockwell? 25 I'll think about it. 31 (Pages 118 to 121) Aiken & Welch Court Reporters B. Ketcham 4-29-08 22b1303e-c2a4-49dc-aa31-dcbf5b86ff21 Ketcham - direct Page 122 Page 124 \ 1 MR. KELLER: All right. 1 A. That's correct. 2 MR. WYLES: You haven't limited it to 2 Q. One last question on the subject, 3 his period of employment when you framed that 3 Do you ever recall seeing a warning 4 question originally, so 1 just want to hear it with 4 about asbestos on any clutch that was manufactured, 5 that frame, and I'll give it some consideration. 5 clutch product that was manufactured by Rockwell? 6 MR. KELLER: Very well. 6 MR. WYLES: Object, This is way beyond 7 Q. During your period of employment at 7 the scope. Rockwell clutches aren't an issue, truck 3 Rockwell, how were asbestos-containing gaskets 8 clutches aren't an issue. 9 incorporated into Rockwell's products? And I'll give 9 Q. And I'm only asking with regard to your 10 counsel a running objection to this question. 10 personal knowledge during your tenure at Rockwell, 11 A. They were used as gaskets primarily in 11 MR. WYLES: I will let him answer based 12 axle components that I can recall. 12 on the fact that you represented this will be the 13 Q. Any other components that you can 13 last question you have for him on the subject. 14 recall? 14 A. No. 15 A. Those are the ones that I recall. 15 Q. Have you ever served as a litigation 16 Q. Do you recall during your tenure at 16 consultant for any other companies or persons? 17 Rockwell whether Rockwell manufactured clutches? 17 MR. WYLES: Sorry. You cnt out, for any 18 A. Yes, they did. 18 what? 19 Q. Okay. And do you recall whether those 19 Q. For any other companies or individuals. 20 clutches incorporated asbestos-containing components? 20 MR. WYLES: I'm just going to object as 21 A. Yes, I do recall. 21 beyond the scope, irrelevant. 22 Q. And do you know -- and did they? 22 A. No. 23 A. No. 23 Q. How did Arvinmeritor get its name? 24 Q. Okay. And how do you know that? 24 MR. WYLES: Objection; lacks foundation, 25 A. Because I was there. The question has 25 calls for speculation. \ j i j 1 j j j j j j ] ] j | i ! j j | j ; Page 123 Page 125 \ 1 been asked before. 1 Q, I assume "Meritor" comes from Meritor i 2 Q. I understand. How do you know that the 2 Automotive. Where does "Arvin" come from? Correa) 3 materials that were incorporated into Rockwell's 3 me if I'm wrong. f 4 clutches did not contain asbestos? 4 A. You're correct on the first part. The j 5 MR. WYLES: Objection; argumentative. 5 second part is Arvin Industries, jj 6 asked and answered. 6 Q. And what did they do, if you know? 1 7 A. Because -- because that's what I was 7 A. I really don't know. They manufactured 1 8 told when I investigated the matter. 8 automotive components; but beyond that, I don't l 9 Q. Okay. And just so I have some 9 have -- jj 10 background, what did you do to investigate the matter 10 Q. And did they at some point in time merge I 11 other than talking to Arvinmeritor's counsel? 11 with Meritor Automotive, as far as you know? 1 12 A. I'm sure at that point in time I spoke 12 A. Yes, that's correct. j 13 with the people in the clutch business. 13 Q. Okay. Do you remember when that was? \ 14 Q. Rockwell's clutch business? 14 A. In 2000. | 15 A. Yes. 15 Q. Okay. Other than -- withdrawn. I 16 Q. Did you do anything else? 16 We talked about earlier that Rockwell jj 17 A. That was probably 20 years ago, sol 17 manufactured automotive products -- manufactured ] 18 don't recall. IB products for trucks, trailers, and heavy equipment. | 19 Q. So as of 20 years ago -- let's see, that 19 Correct? jj 20 puts us in 1988. Right? 20 A. I think that's what we talked about, | 21 A. '87, '88. 21 yes. i 22 Q. 'S7, '88, you recall consulting with 22 Q. Okay. Are you aware of Rockwell jj 23 Rockwell's clutch people and them telling you that 23 International manufacturing any products that j 24 the clutches didn't contain asbestos. Is that 24 contained brake linings for any other industries | 25 correct? 25 during your tenure at Rockwell? jj 32 (Pages 122 to 125) Aiken & Welch Court Reporters B. Ketcham 4-29-08 Ketcham - direct Page 126 Page 128 1 A. Industrial equipment. 1 worked there. 2 Q. What type of industrial equipment? 2 MR. HOLMBERG: Excuse me. Could I have 3 A. Such as forklifts. 3 the court reporter read that answer back, please. 4 Q. Okay. Other than industrial equipment, 4 (Whereupon, the court reporter reads as 5 are you aware of any other industries? 5 requested.) ! 6 A. None that come to mind. Well, you know, 6 Q. During your tenure at Rockwell, did j 7 buses, but obviously buses is an offshoot of heavy 7 Rockwell manufacture any brake linings? j 8 trucks. 8 A. Yes. 9 Q. Anything else? 9 Q. Okay. And was that in Ashtabula? j 10 A. That's what comes to my mind. 10 A. No. 11 Q. And for those industries other than 11 Q. Where was that? 12 asbestos-containing brakes and perhaps an 12 A. York. j 13 asbestos-containing gasket, are you aware of any 13 Q. Okay. Anyplace else? i 14 other components or parts that were incorporated into 14 A. Actually, we should add York to the 1 15 Rockwell's products for those industries that may 15 list. 16 have contained asbestos? And this is during your 16 Q. Okay. j 17 tenure at Rockwell and based on your personal 17 A. No. | 18 knowledge. 18 Q. And those linings, the brake linings 19 MR. WYLES: At this point I'm going to 19 that were manufactured at York by Rockwell did not j 20 instruct him not to answer. I thing it's beyond. 20 contain asbestos. Correct? \ 21 well, beyond the scope and well beyond the relevance 21 A. That is correct. | 22 of this case, Daniel. 22 Q. To the extent you know, what was the jj 23 MR. KELLER: And your instruction is 23 relationship between Maremont and Rockwell and/or | 24 noted. I would instruct you to look at the 24 Meritor Automotive? i 25 deposition notice which does not limit the scope of 25 MR. WYLES: Objection. Vague as to | Page 127 Page 129 f 1 this deposition to -- 1 time. Lack of foundation, calls for speculation, t| 2 MR. WYLES: No, I'm aware of that, and 2 beyond the scope. 5 3 you know, we filed an objection to it. I also tried 3 Q. If you know. 4 to meet with Steven where obviously we disagree abou 4 A. I believe that Maremont was at some 5 where we stand as to the scope. And so I have given 5 point in time an entity within Arvin Industries. 6 a long latitude, but now you're going well beyond 6 That's the extent of my knowledge. 3 1 1 | 7 areas which are in this litigation. 8 And so for that reason, you're getting 7 Q. Did you ever work with Maremont when you | 8 worked at Rockwell? | 9 into other industries now and other products in other 9 A. No. ! 10 industries. I'm going to instruct him. 10 Q. Do you know one way or the other whether i 11 MR. KELLER: Very well. 11 Arvinmeritor continues to sell any j 12 Q. During your tenure at Rockwell, where 13 were their manufacturing facilities located? And I'm 14 specifically asking where were their manufacturing 12 asbestos-containing products? 13 A. To the best of my knowledge, they do 14 not. \ | i 15 facilities located that used asbestos-containing 16 brake linings, if you know? 17 A. During a portion of the period of time 18 that I was there, those facilities would have been 15 Q. Do you know if they ever did? And I ask 16 that question assuming that Arvinmeritor came into 17 existence in, I believe you said 2000? 18 A. 2000. | i J | 19 Tilbury, Ashtabula, Winchester, Newark, Kenton, 20 Oshkosh, Battle Creek, New Castle, Marysville, 19 MR. WYLES: And I'm going to object, 20 Beyond the scope. Beyond the scope of his 1 | 21 Florence, 22 Q. Marysville. Which state? 23 A. Ohio. Those are the ones that come to 24 mind. As I sit here, some of those facilities were 21 employment, beyond the scope of his deposition, 22 beyond all relevance to Mr. Bradford's claim. 23 A. To the best of my knowledge, they did 24 not. jj jj jj 1 25 in operation for only a portion of the time that I 25 Q. When you were at Rockwell, did Rockwell 1 33 (Pages 126 to 129) Aiken & Welch Court Reporters B. Ketcham 4-29-08 22b1303e-c2a4-49dc-aa31-dcbf5b86ff21 Ketcham - direct Page 130 Page 132 1 have a master catalog for its products that it 1 knowledgeable for Arvinmeritor. Correct? 2 provided to its customers, or did it have separate 2 A. That is correct. 3 catalogs depending on the type of customer that would 3 Q. I would ask you to turn to page ten, and 4 be receiving it? 4 on page ten, there's a title which reads, 5 MR. WYLES: Objection; vague, overbroad, 5 "Information Sought," and thereunder it reads, 6 compound. 6 "Person most knowledgeable." 7 A. As far as parts catalogs are you talking 7 Do you see that? 0 about? 8 A. Yes, Ido. 9 Q. Yes. 9 Q. And under that there's a series of 10 A. Parts catalogs, to the extent that they 10 categories. The first one reads, "All information 11 existed, were published by product line. 11 pertaining to your document retention policy." 12 Q. And can you tell me the different 12 Do you have any information pertaining 13 product lines that you recall during your tenure at 13 to Arvinmeritor's document retention policy? 14 Rockwell? 14 A. It's rather broad. 15 A. There are a whole different variety of 15 Q. What is it? 16 product lines, ones that I can remember that had 16 A. Arvinmeritor did have or does have a 17 parts manuals would have been axle, trailer axle, 17 record retention policy. 18 brake. I'm sure that there were other ones, but 18 Q. Let me ask you: Do you have any 19 those are the ones that come to mind right now. 19 information concerning Rockwell's record retention 20 Q. And so there would be a catalog for 20 policy during your tenure there? 21 parts for those -- for a separate catalog for axles 21 A. It's still a broad question, but yes. 22 and a separate one for brakes. Is that correct? 22 Q. Okay. And do you recall what the 23 A. That's what I remember from my tenure 23 document retention policy was concerning Rockwell 24 there, yes. 24 documents -- 25 Q. Were those catalogs released annually? 25 MR. WYLES: Objection, vague and \ : i j ; i j Page 131 Page 133 1 MR. WYLES: Objection, lack of 2 foundation. 3 Q. During your tenure, to the extent you 4 recall. 5 A. Periodically. I don't know that they 6 were annual. 7 Q. Okay. 8 MR. WYLES: Daniel, let me ask, it's one 9 o'clock. Do you think that we will be able to push 10 on to finish this rather than take a lunch? 11 (A discussion takes place off the record 12 and a recess is taken.) 13 (Exhibit P-19, Notice of Taking 14 Deposition and Request for Production of Documents 15 was received and marked for identification.) 16 Q. Mr. Ketcham, I've provided you a 17 document marked Plaintiffs Exhibit 19, which is 18 Plaintiffs Notice of Taking Deposition and Request 19 For Production of Documents for a custodian of 20 records and person most knowledgeable. 21 Do you have that document in front of 22 you? 23 A. Yes, I do. 24 Q. Okay. And it's your understanding that 25 you're appearing today as the person most 1 overbroad. 2 Q. -- that concern asbestos-containing 3 brake linings? 4 A. I don't think that there was any part of 5 the retention policy that was categorized in that 6 particular manner. 7 Q. How was the document retention policy 8 categorized? 9 A. It was categorized, based upon my 10 recollection, based upon the type of document that it 11 was. 12 Q. And what were the different types of 13 documents? 14 A. There are a multitude of different 15 categories. 16 Q. Which are the ones that you recall as 17 you sit here today? 18 A. For instance, letters, drawings. 19 specifications, various categories of documents of 20 that type. 21 Q. And what was the policy as to the 22 retention of those types of documents at Rockwell 23 during your tenure, to the extent that you recall? 24 A. Various document categories were 25 retained for -- by policy, for various lengths of ; j i 1 1 ; i ; ! 34 (Pages 130 to 133) Aiken & Welch Court Reporters B. Ketcham 4-29-08 22b1303e-c2a4-49dc-aa31-dcbf5b86ff21 Ketcham - direct Page 134 Page 136 1 time. 2 Q. Okay, One of the types of documents 3 that you identified were letters. Correct? 4 A. Um-hum. 5 Q. And how long were those retained? 6 A, I can't recall. 7 Q. Okay, Do you recall any of the lengths 8 of time certain types of documents at Rockwell were 9 retained during your tenure there? 10 A. No, 11 Q, Okay. 12 MR. WYLES: Objection; lack of 13 foundation, calls for speculation. 14 Q. You were employed by Meritor Automotive 15 as well. Correct? 16 A. That's correct. 17 Q. Okay. Do you have any knowledge about 18 Meritor Automotive's document retention policy? 19 MR. WYLES: Objection; lack of 20 foundation, calls for speculation, beyond the scope. 21 A. Yes. 22 Q. And does the -- did the Meritor document 23 retention policy mirror the document retention policy 24 at Rockwell, to the extent that you recall? 25 A. To the extent that I recall. 1 A. I recall some of the corporate history 2 for Rockwell International. 3 Q. Okay. And the corporate history that 4 you recall, does that concern predecessors to 5 Rockwell International? 6 A. That's correct. 7 Q. Okay. Was one of those predecessors an 8 axle company? 9 MR. WYLES: Objection, vague. 10 A. Do you have a name? 11 Q. It starts with a T. Timken. Is that 12 it? 13 A. Timken-Detroit Axle? 14 Q. Yes. 15 A. Yes. 16 Q. Was that a predecessor-in-interest to 17 Rockwell? 18 A. Yes. 19 Q. Did Timken become a part of Rockwell at 20 some point in time? 21 A. Timken-Detroit Axle? 22 Q. Yes. 23 A. Yes. 24 Q. And do you know when that was? 25 A. Well, there were various entities in Page 135 Page 137 1 MR. WYLES: Lack of foundation. 1 between. 2 A. To the extent that I recall, yes, it was 2 Q. Let me just ask one more question on 3 a carryover. 3 this topic, and that is, when did the Rockwell 4 Q. Were you ever employed by Arvinmeritor 4 International, to the extent that you know, that you 5 other than in your capacity as litigation consultant? 5 worked for, come into existence? 6 A, No, I was not 6 A. It was in either 1972 or 73. 7 Q. Do you have any knowledge about 7 Q. And do you know who their 8 Arvinmeritor's document retention policy? 8 predecessor-in-interest was in 1972, 73? 9 MR. WYLES: Objection, beyond the scope. 9 A. I believe it was North American 10 A. No, I do not. 10 Rockwell. 11 Q. The second category reads: "All 11 Q. Other than your testimony today and 12 information pertaining to your corporate history and 12 knowledge concerning that testimony with regard to 13 structure, including but not limited to the 13 Rockwell products that contained asbestos, do you 14 identities of all of your predecessors-in-interest 14 have any knowledge about any asbestos-containing 15 and successors-in-interest." 15 products that were manufactured and/or sold by any of 16 Other than your testimony today in 16 Rockwell's predecessors-in-interest or 17 response to my questions, including but not limited 17 successors-in-interest? 18 to your responses to my questions about Maremont, 18 MR. WYLES: I'm going to object, that's 19 Carlisle, Rockwell, Meritor Automotive and 19 beyond the scope, and instruct him not to answer. 20 Arvinmeritor, do you have any other knowledge 20 Mr. Ketcham has given extensive testimony on the 21 concerning this category? 21 different industries the products are made for, the 22 MR. WYLES: Vague and overbroad. But go 22 different types of products, the different 23 ahead. 23 asbestos-containing products that go well beyond 24 A. Yes. 24 Mr. Bradford's alleged exposure to any Rockwell 25 Q. Okay. And what is that knowledge? 25 products. On that basis, I think this line of 35 (Pages 134 to 137) Aiken & Welch Court Reporters B. Ketcham 4-29-08 22b1303e-c2a4-49dc-aa3l-dcbf5bB6ff21 Ketcham - direct Page 138 Page 140 1 questioning is irrelevant and harassing; and 1 Q. Do you know who was? 2 therefore, I'm instructing him not to answer. 2 A. Yes. 3 Q. Other than the entities that we 3 Q. Who? 4 discussed today from which Rockwell, during your 4 A. Me. 5 tenure there, purchased asbestos-containing brake 5 Q. And when did you assume responsibility 6 linings, are you aware of any other entities during 6 for maintaining the Material Safety Data Sheets? 7 your tenure there from which Rockwell purchased 7 A. They were revised, I believe it was in 8 asbestos-containing products? 8 the late 1990s. 9 MR. WYLES: I'm going to just object. 9 Q, And you participated in that process? 10 This question has been asked several times in 10 A, Yes. 11 different forms about vendors, suppliers. 11 Q. Was that in your position in product 12 A. No. 12 analysis for Rockwell International between '93 13 Q. Category 13 reads: "All information 13 and '97? 14 pertaining to Material Safety Data Sheets pertaining 14 A. I can't recall whether it was '97 or 15 to your asbestos-containing products and/or their 15 earlier, or '97 and later. 16 component parts, as created from 1955 to 1995." 16 Q. Do you recall whether you were 17 Do you see that? 17 responsible for revision to Material Safety Data 18 A. Yes, Ido. IB Sheets in your position at Rockwell, or in your 19 Q. All right. And we've reviewed some 19 position at Meritor? 20 Material Safety Data Sheets today concerning not only 20 A. That's what I can't recall. 21 Rockwell products, but some of the brake linings 21 Q. Okay. It could be one; it could be the 22 manufactured by some of Rockwell's brake lining 22 other? 23 suppliers. Correct? 23 A. Yeah, it was in that period of time. 24 A. Correct. 24 Q. Between 1982 and 1984, you were a 25 Q. Okay. Who was responsible during your 25 Product Control Manager. Correct? [ | i i : j ' 1 ! i j Page 139 Page 141 j 1 tenure at Rockwell for drafting the Material Safety 2 Data Sheets to the extent that you recall? In other 3 words, was it a department or a person? 4 A. I believe it was drafted by a person or 5 a group of people. 6 Q. Okay. Do you know the names of any of 7 those people? 8 A. Yes, I do. 9 Q. And what are those names? 10 A. Barbara Boroughf. 11 Q. Anybody else? 12 A. And I believe that she most likely 13 worked with counsel at that point in time. 14 Q. With who? Oh, with attorneys? 15 A. Yes. 16 Q. Where did she sit, what facility? 17 A. Troy. 18 Q. Do you recall what period? 19 A. They were first drafted in the mid-'80s, 20 I believe. 21 Q, Do you know if she was responsible for 22 maintaining and updating them thereafter? 23 MR. WYLES: Objection, lack of 24 foundation. 25 A. No, she was not. 1 A. Production Control Manager. 2 Q. Production Control Manager. And one of 3 the departments you supervised was Purchasing. Is [ 4 that correct? 1 5 A. That's correct. 1 6 Q. Was the Purchasing Department t 7 responsible for purchasing brake linings from r 8 vendors? f 9 A. I can't recall. t 10 Q. Okay. Do you remember any of the names j 11 of the people in the Purchasing Department that you | 12 supervised? '" = 13 A. Yes. | 14 Q. And what are those names? j 15 A. Annie Shaw, Jake Jones. I can't recall j 16 the other ones at this point in time. S 17 Q. And what facility was that? \ IB A. Florence. ! 19 Q. Florence. Okay. i 20 Category number 14 reads: "All jj 21 information pertaining to when you first became aware | 22 of the hazards associated with asbestos exposure." j 23 I will note for the record that there J 24 are general order interrogatory responses which jj 25 address this, and which you verified, and I believe jj 36 (Pages 138 to 141) Aiken & Welch Court Reporters B. Ketcham 4-29-08 22b1303e-c2a4-49dc-aa31-dcbf5bB6ff21 Ketcham - direct Page 142 Page 144 1 they are dated June 23rd, 2006. 1 A. Could you read the question back. 2 Do you have an understanding about if 2 please. 3 and/or when Rockwell became first aware of a hazard 3 (Whereupon, the court reporter reads as 4 associated with asbestos exposure? 4 requested.) 5 A. Not beyond what's stated in the 5 A. Okay. And you're referring to 6 discovery responses. 6 knowledge. This is knowledge that I acquired when I 7 Q. Category number 15 reads: "All 7 was at Rockwell? B information, including but not limited to warnings. 8 Q. Yes. 9 directives, instructions and/or similar statements 9 A. No. 10 issued by you to your employees, customers, or 10 Q. Do you have any knowledge in your 11 members of the general public pertaining to your 11 capacity as a person most knowledgeable concerning 12 asbestos-containing products from 1955 to 1995." 12 the sale of any Rockwell products to National 13 And again, I will acknowledge that this 13 Automotive Parts? 14 subject in some capacity is addressed in the 14 MR, WYLES: I'm going to object. It's 15 interrogatory responses that I've just identified. 15 beyond the scope. It's vague as to "products." 16 And I believe counsel for Arvinmeritor has also 16 Overbroad. 17 indicated as such today on the record. 17 A. Yes. 18 Aside from what is in the interrogatory 18 Q, Okay. And what is that knowledge? 19 responses that you verified, do you have any 19 A. That National Automotive Products or 20 additional information -- and aside from your 20 NAPA, at certain locations, warehouse locations, were 21 testimony today, do you have any additional 21 in Rockwell's name and address master as a customer. 22 information concerning this category? 22 Q. Okay. And does that indicate to yon 23 A. I don't believe so. 23 that Rockwell sold some of its products to NAPA? 24 Q. Okay. Specifically with regard to this 24 MS. KUO: This is Kuo. I object based 25 case, do you know Mr. Bradford? 25 on speculation. Page 143 Page 145 1 A. Do I know him? No. 1 MR. WYLES: Vague, overbroad, calls for 2 Q. Okay. You never talked to him? 2 speculation, lacks foundation, beyond the scope. 3 A. No, 3 A. They may have, I do not know. 4 Q. On page 17, there's a list of sites that 4 Q. Is it your understanding as the person 5 are allegedly relevant in this litigation. Have you 5 most knowledgeable that Rockwell distributed some 6 ever been to any of those sites? 6 parts to NAPA, NAPA stores? 7 A. No, 7 MS. KAO: Objection, asked and answered; 8 Q. Do you have any knowledge about the sale 8 same objection as before concerning vagueness. 9 of any Rockwell products during your tenure at 9 MR. WYLES: And calls for speculation. 10 Rockwell to any of those locations or entities that 10 beyond the scope. 11 are listed on Exhibit A, page 17? 11 A. I do not know. 12 A, Knowledge during my tenure? 12 Q. Do you know if in the early '80s, which 13 Q. Yes. 13 we've agreed is within the scope of this deposition, 14 A. No. 14 Rockwell distributed any products containing break 15 Q. Do you have any knowledge about the sale 15 lining to NAPA and any of its stores, or any of its 16 of Rockwell parts or Rockwell products during your 16 stores? 17 tenure at Rockwell to National Automotive Parts 17 A. I do not know. 18 Association, Dow and Tractor, Dow and Hammon? 18 MS. KAO: Kao. Same objections. 19 MR. WYLES: Objection to the extent it's 19 Q, Do you know, you said that NAPA was ?0 compound. But listen, for expediency sake, he can 20 listed in the customer directory for Rockwell. Is 11 answer. 21 that correct? 12 MR. CANONI: You want him to look at any 22 A. Name and address master. 3 particular category? 23 Q. Okay. What is the name and address 4 Q. And I am referencing by way of 24 master? 5 background, categories 26 through 30. 25 A. It's a listing of customers from 37 (Pages 142 to 145) Aiken & Welch Court Reporters B. Ketcham Ketcham - direct Page 146 Page 148 1 basically the late 1960s through 1995. 1 membership in the trade organizations. 2 Q. Okay. And if a customer is listed in 2 Other than what's set forth therein, do 3 that directory, what does it mean? 3 you have any additional knowledge concerning 4 MR. WYLES: Objection, calls for 4 Rockwell's membership in any trade organizations? 5 speculation. 5 A. No. 6 Q. If anything. 6 Q. Again, in the general order 7 MR. WYLES: Lack of foundation. 7 interrogatory responses, there is a list of prior B A, It means that they were set up as a 8 depositions,-and this is as of 2006, again concerning 9 customer. 9 Rockwell. Are you aware of, other than this 10 Q, Okay. Is it your understanding that if 10 deposition, any other depositions taking place 11 a customer is listed in a customer directory, that 11 concerning Rockwell and/or Arvinmeritor as the 12 they at one point in time purchased products from 12 successor-in-interest to Rockwell? 13 Rockwell? 13 A. Possibly. 14 MR. WYLES: Calls for speculation, lacks 14 Q. And when did those take place? 15 foundation. 15 A. After that point in time. 16 A. I do not know. 16 Q. How many were there? 17 Q. As you sit here today, do you know one 17 A. I don't recall. 18 way or the other whether NAPA ever purchased any 18 Q. Did you testify? 19 products from Rockwell? 19 A. I may -- 20 MR. WYLES: Asked and answered, . 20 Q. Did you sit for your deposition? 21 argumentative. 21 A. I may have. 22 MS. KAO: Join. 22 Q. Okay. Do you know how many times? 23 A. I do not know. 23 A. Not as I sit here and without looking at 24 Q. As you sit here today, do you know one 24 documents. 25 way or the other whether Dow and Tractor or Dow and 25 Q. Do you want to look at this? Page 147 Page 149 1 Hammon purchased any products from Rockwell? 2 A. During what period of time? 3 Q. Ever. 4 A. Yes. 5 Q. And did they? 6 A. Yes. 7 Q. When? 8 A. 2002. 9 Q. Other than in 2002, do you know one way 10 or the other whether Dow and Tractor or Dow and 11 Hammon purchased any products from Rockwell? 12 MR. WYLES: Objection; vague, overbroad, 13 beyond the scope. 14 A. No. 15 Q. Referring to category number 34, are you 16 aware of any studies, surveys, or reports performed 17 by or on behalf of Rockwell for the purpose of 18 determining a substitute for asbestos in any of 19 Rockwell's asbestos-containing products? 20 A. No, I am not. 21 MR. WYLES: I object, vague and 22 overbroad. 23 Q. There's a description in the general 24 order interrogatory responses that were verified by 25 you concerning trade organizations, and Rockwell's 1 A. No. 2 Q. I'll show it to you anyway. 3 MR. CANONI: Can we go off the record? 4 MR. KELLER: Yes. 5 (A discussion takes place off the 6 record.) 7 Q. During your tenure at Rockwell, did they 8 ever sell exhaust systems and/or catalytic 9 converters? 10 A. No. 11 MR. WYLES: Just for the record, I 12 object to that as being beyond the scope; but given 13 the answer, okay. 14 Q. Do you have an understanding one way or 15 the other of whether Arvinmeritor and/or Rockwell wai 16 ever a member or participated in the Center For 17 Claims Resolution? 18 A. I have no knowledge of that. 19 Q. Do you know one way or the other whether 20 Rockwell ever formed a belief that asbestos could 21 lead to either lung cancer or mesothelioma? 22 MR. WYLES: Objection; vague, overbroad, 23 vague as to time, lacks foundation, and calls for 24 speculation. 25 A. I have no knowledge beyond what's in the 38 (Pages 146 to 149) Aiken & Welch Court Reporters B. Ketcham 4-29-08 22b1303e-c2a4-49dc-aa31-dcbf5b86ff21 Ketcham - direct Page 150 1 discovery responses. 2 Q. Okay. And there's also a question in 3 the discovery responses about when Rockwell and/or 4 its predecessors or successor-in-interest first 5 became aware of the hazards of asbestos. Other than 6 what's in the interrogatory responses, do you have 7 any additional knowledge? 8 A. No, I do not. 9 MR. WYLES: Asked and answered. 10 MR. KELLER: Okay. Mr. Ketcham, thank 11 you. That's all I have for today. 12 (The proceedings concluded at.l :47 p.m.) 13 14 15 16 17 IB 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 1 STATE OF NEW YORK ) 2 COUNTY OFNEW YORK ) 3 4 1 wi.sh ID mnke the followi.ng changes, for 5 the fallowing reasons; 6 PAGE LINE: CHANGE: 7 REASON: CHANGE: 0 REASON: CHANGE: 9 REASON: CHANGE: 10 REASON: ' CHANGE: 11 REASON: CHANGE: 12 REASON: CHANGE: 13 REASON: CHANGE: 14 REASON: CHANGE: 15 REASON: CHANGE: 16 REASON: CHANGE: 17 REASON: CHANGE- 10 REASON: CHANGE: 19 CHANGE: 2D CHANGE: 21 REASON: CHANGE: 22 REASON: CHANGE: 23 REASON: CHANGE: 24 REASON: 25 Page 151 Page 152 ' : '! ! i ! * 1 1 i ' 0 REASON:J REASON:? i J Page 153 | 1 JURAT 2 3 I, BRUCE KETCHAM, the witness herein, 4 the foregoing testimony of the pages of this 5 deposition, do hereby certify it to be a true and 6 correct transcript, subject to the corrections, if 7 any, shown on the attached page. 8 9 10 BRUCE KETCHAM 11 12 13 14 15 16 Subscribed and swom to before me 17 this day of 200S 18 19 NOTARY PUBLIC 20 21 22 23 24 25 1 STATE OF NEW YORK: NEW YORK COUNTY : j ) 2 3 I, LINDA M. HOFFMANN, a Notary Public of the State o; 4 New York, do hereby certify that prior to the \ 5 commencement of the examination BRUCE KETCHAM \ 6 was duly swom by me to testify the truth, the whole j 7 truth and nothing but the truth. I FURTHER CERTIFY j 8 dmt the foregoing is a true and accurate transcript j 9 of the testimony as taken stenographically by and | 10 before me at the time, place and on the date j 11 hereinbefore set forth. i 12 ( 13 I FURTHER CERTIFY that I am neither a relative nor : 14 employee nor attorney nor counsel of any of the j 15 parties to this action, and that I am neither a j 16 relative nor employee of such attorney or counsel, \ 17 and that I am not financially interested in the ] 18 action. 1 19 j 20 1 21 Notary Public, State ofNew York j 22 Commission Expires 12/14/08 23 2 4 Dated: May 9, 2008 25 | | 5 | 39 (Pages 150 to 153) Aiken & Welch Court Reporters B. Ketcham 4-29-08 22b1303e-c2a4-49dc-aa31 -dcbf5b86ff21 May 9,2008 Kelvin Wyles, Esq. McKenna Long & Aldridge, LLP 444 South Flower Street, Bth Floor Los Angeles, California 90071-2901 RE: Bradford v. A,W. Chesterton Company, et al. Dear Mr. Wyles: Enclosed please find the deposition transcript of Bruce Ketcham's testimony taken on Tuesday, April 29,2008, in the above-captioned 10 matter. 11 Kindly have Mr. Ketcham review his deposition testimony, making any changes or 12 corrections on a separate errata sheet After doing so, please hnve him sign the original Jural 13 Certification before a Notary Public. 14 Thank you for your cooperation. 15 Sincerely, 16 n IB LINDA M. HOFFMANN, C.C.R. is 20 21 22 23 24 25 Page 154 Aiken & Welch Court Reporters 40 (Page 154) B. Ketcham 4-29-08 22b1303e-c2a4-49dc-aa31-dcbf5bB6ff21