Document g2k85aORDjb3qLMrBooQkDgGq

0001 1 2 THE VIDEOGRAPHER Will the court reporter 3 please swear in the witness? 4 THE WITNESS I do 5 BY MR EGDORF Q Good morning, sir, 6 please state your full name? 7 A John L Myers 8 Q How old of a man are you Mr Myers? 9 A I'm 74 10 Q You've been deposed before haven't you? 11 A Yes,lhave 12 Q Many times, true? 13 A Yes 14 Q Testified in court before? 15 A Yes 16 Q How many times do you think you've been 17 deposed? 18 A About 21 or 22 19 Q Wbat about in court? 20 A Five or six times 21 Q You testified in cases wnere Union Carbide 22 has been held responsible by a jury for someone's 23 asbestos illness? 24 MR UXSSETTER Object to the form 25 THE WITNESS I very seldom hear the 0002 1 results of a trial l don't know - l can't answer 09 50 50 2 that 09 50 54 3 Q The results don't interest you? 09 50 54 4 A I've never been made aware of them 09 50 56 5 Q Objection Non-responsive Do the results 09 50 58 6 not interest you? 09 51 01 7 A Yes, they would 09 51 01 8 Q You're here today as a corporate 09 51 03 9 representative for Union Carbide, is that correct? 09 51 05 10 A Yes 09 51 07 11 Q You're being paid? 09 51 08 12 A Yes 09 51 09 13 Q Is it still $250 an hour? 09 51 10 14 A Yes 09 51 12 15 Q Has it been the same for all these other 09 51 13 16 cases where you testified? 09 51 16 17 A No, it started out lower than that 09 51 17 18 Q Are your expenses also paid? 09 51 19 19 A Yes 09 51 21 20 Q You don't live here in Monterey, correct? 09 51 21 21 A I live in Monterey County not in the City 09 51 24 22 of Monterey 09 51 26 23 Q Did you stay here at the hotel? 09 51 27 24 A No 09 51 29 25 Q Did you drive in from your house today? 09 51 30 0003 1 A Yes 09 51 31 2 Q Okay Who pays you? 09 51 32 3 A The -- Orrick 09 51 36 4 Q The Orrick lawfirm? 09 51 39 5 A Yes 09 51 41 6 Q Okay So you're not paid directly by Union 09 51 42 7 Carbide You're paid by the lawyers? 09 51 45 8 A Yes 09 5147 9 Q If I need to I will, but you--go through 09 51 48 10 all the formalities, but understand what we're doing 09 51 51 11 today, correct? 09 51 54 12 A Yes 09 5155 13 Q You understand about objections and that 09 51 55 14 sort of thing? 09 51 57 15 A Yes 09 5158 16 Q If for some reason you need to take a break 09 51 59 17 let me know I'll accommodate you l generally try 09 52 02 18 to break on the hour Okay? 09 52 05 19 A Okay 09 52 06 20 Q It's about on the hour I don't mean 09 52 07 21 necessarily the top of the hour, just that we've 09 52 08 22 gone an hour or so okay? 09 52 1 1 23 A Okay 09 52 13 24 Q Is that okay with you? 09 52 14 25 A It's fine 09 52 15 0004 1 Q If you need to do something different just 09 52 15 2 let me know V okay? 09 52 18 3 THE REPORTER Let's go off the record for 09 52 21 4 a moment 09 52 23 5 THE VIDEOGRAPHER Going off the record at 09 52 23 6 9 52 a m 09 53 28 7 (Short break) 8 THE VIDEOGRAPHER We're going back on the 09 53 30 9 record 9 53 a m 09 53 33 10 BY MR EGDORF Q Mr Myers you've 09 53 35 11 also testified before -- before on behalf of the 09 53 37 12 AIA, is that correct? 09 53 40 13 A No 09 53 41 14 Q You've never testified as a corporate 09 53 42 15 representative for the AIA? 09 53 44 16 A You mean on - in lawsuits? 09 53 45 17 Q Yes, sir 09 53 48 18 A No 09 53 49 19 Q You testified as a corporate representative 09 53 50 20 for - for AIA before some kind of legislative or 09 53 52 21 regulatory body? 09 53 59 22 A Yes, l have presented testimony not on 09 54 00 23 behalf of the AIA necessarily but l have presented 09 54 02 24 testimony 09 54 05 25 Q You were an officer at one point with the 09 54 06 0005 1 AIA correct? 09 54 09 A Yes 09 54 10 Q Your were president in fact, weren't you? 09 54 10 A Yes 09 54 12 Q When was that? 09 54 13 A l don't remember the years exactly The 09 54 13 late '80s to the mid '90s 09 54 17 8 Q Have you ever testified as a corporate 09 54 21 9 representative for KCAC? 09 54 23 10 A No 09 54 24 11 Q You were president of that company too? 09 54 25 12 A I was, yes 09 54 26 13 Q What about the Calidria Corporation? Are 09 54 29 14 you familiar with that entity? 09 54 39 15 A Yes 09 54 40 16 Q Did you nave a title with the Calidria 09 54 41 17 Corporation? 09 54 43 18 A Not any different than with Union Carbide 09 54 45 19 Q Okay what do you -- can you be more 09 54 49 20 specific than that? 09 54 50 21 A What my title was? 09 54 50 22 Q Yes, sir 09 54 52 23 A I was product and production manager 09 54 53 24 Q I want to try to be clear on that for a 09 54 54 25 second The Calidria Corporation came about in 09 54 57 0006 1 1994, right? 09 55 01 2 A Yes 09 55 02 3 Q And that was an entity recreated as a 09 55 02 4 subsidiary of Union Carbide, correct? 09 55 06 5 A Yes 09 55 06 6 Q Purpose of that was to facilitate the 09 55 07 7 transition and sale of the interest in the mine to 09 55 10 8 KCAC, correct? 09 55 12 9 A It was--no, not particularly for KCAC 09 55 13 10 It was to facilitate the sale, is the way l 09 55 17 11 understand it 09 55 19 12 Q For somebody? 09 55 21 13 A For somebody, yes 09 55 21 14 Q Union Carbide wanted an entity in between, 09 55 22 15 right? 09 55 26 16 A I guess so 09 55 26 17 Q Okay So that's why I want to try to be 09 55 27 18 clear about it When KCAC comes around, you go to 09 55 30 19 KCAC, right? 09 55 33 20 A Yes 09 55 34 21 Q And you became president, right? 09 55 34 22 A Yes 09 55 36 23 Q So that'swhat I'm trying to figure out 09 55 37 24 With respect tothe Carbide Corporation, were you 09 55 39 25 president or were you just the General Manager, or 09 55 41 0007 1 one of those other types of titles that you had with 09 55 44 2 Union Carbide? 09 55 49 3 A What l said when you asked me, product and 09 55 49 4 production manager 09 55 52 5 Q All right Just trying to be clear on 09 55 53 6 that So you never had any officer title with the 09 55 55 7 Carbide corporation, is that right? 09 55 59 8 A That's correct 09 56 00 9 Q Do you know who the president of the 09 56 01 10 Carbide Corporation was? 09 56 02 11 A No. I don't 09 56 03 12 Q If l wanted to find tne documents regarding 09 56 04 13 tne Carbide Corporation do you know wnere tney are'' 09 56 06 14 A No, I don't 09 56 08 15 Q Would tnose nave not been passed on to 09 56 09 16 KCAC -- I'm sorry Excuse me I apologize Tne 09 56 12 17 Calidria Corporation Sorry It's early for me 09 56 17 18 even in California time 09 56 20 19 MR UXSSETTER Let's back up When you 09 56 22 20 were asking tne Carbide Corporation l tnougnt you 09 56 24 21 were talking about Union Carbide 09 56 24 22 BY MR EGDORF Q Tbe Calidria 09 56 26 23 Corporation, sir, do you know wnere tneir documents 09 56 27 24 are? 09 56 30 25 A No. I don't 09 56 30 0008 1 Q Would tney not nave been passed on to KCAC, 09 56 31 2 I mean, wasn't KCAC a successor to tnem? 09 56 34 3 A I don't know wnetner it was still tne 09 56 38 4 Calidria Corporation wnen it was pass order to KCAC 09 56 40 5 or not 09 56 44 6 Q Might have been anotner entity in general? 09 56 44 7 A Yes 09 56 46 8 Q were there any entities that weren't 09 56 46 9 created by union Carbide that might have been in 09 56 49 10 between? 09 56 52 11 A Entities that weren't created by Union 09 56 53 12 Carbide? 13 Q Yes, sir 09 56 53 14 A Not that I'm aware of 09 56 53 15 Q Did you review any documents pertaining to 09 56 55 16 tne Calidria Corporation in preparation for today's 09 56 57 17 deposition? 09 56 59 18 A No, I nave not 09 57 00 19 Q wnat documents did you review? 09 57 01 20 A Various documents that might come up in 09 57 03 21 tne -- in tne deposition today 09 57 06 22 Q Like wnat? 09 57 08 23 A On, tne Sayers report 09 57 09 24 Q Okay 09 57 1 1 25 A Tne Mellon studies, similar reports like 09 57 16 0009 1 that 09 57 18 2 Q Some of tne medical reports that are -- 09 57 18 3 nave been snown to you in various otner cases, 09 57 21 4 correct? 09 57 23 5 A No 09 57 24 6 Q On, you saw some reports you nad never seen 09 57 26 7 before? 09 57 29 8 A No, I don't think so 09 57 29 9 Q Okay Well, you've been deposed wnat would 09 57 31 10 you say? 21 times, give or take? 09 57 33 11 A Yes 09 57 34 12 Q You've been asked questions about tne 09 57 35 13 Sayers report, tne Mellon report, and Doctor 09 57 36 14 Demehl's papers, and that sort of thing, correct? 09 57 39 15 A Yes 09 57 42 16 Q Any medical studies that you saw in 09 57 43 17 preparation for this deposition that you had hot 09 57 45 18 been asked for in previous depositions'' 09 57 47 19 A No, not that I remember 09 57 49 20 Q What else did you look at' 09 57 51 21 A Well, l can't remember the documents 09 57 54 22 Again, they were similar to what I've been asked 09 57 57 23 about in other depositions 09 58 00 24 Q Did you look at the discovery answers that 09 58 01 25 have been given in this case by Union Carbide' 09 58 03 0010 1 A Yes, I think I did 09 58 07 2 Q Okay Did you look at any of your previous 09 58 09 3 depositions' 09 58 15 4 A No, I did not 09 58 15 5 Q wnen did you review these documents' 09 58 17 6 A Yesterday 09 58 20 7 Q Okay Were they given to you' 09 58 21 8 A wnat do you mean' 09 58 24 9 Q Well, I mean- 09 58 26 10 A Just to- 09 58 27 11 Q Mr Lassetter or somebody say here's the 09 58 29 12 stuff we want you to look at' 09 58 32 13 A Yes 09 58 33 14 MR LASSETTER Object to the form Don't 09 58 34 15 answer the question 09 58 35 16 BY MR EGDORF Q Were you given 09 58 35 17 documents to look at' 09 58 37 18 A Yes 09 58 38 19 Q Where are they' 09 58 38 20 A l have no idea 09 58 39 21 Q What did you do with them' 09 58 40 22 A l wasn't given them to keep l was just 09 58 42 23 shown - l was shown them 09 58 44 24 Q Okay How much time did you spend 09 58 46 25 reviewing the documents' 09 58 48 0011 1 A Probably four- four or frve hours 09 58 51 2 Q You did that here at the hotel yesterday' 09 58 54 3 A Yes 09 58 56 4 Q So is that the extent of your preparation 09 58 57 5 for today's deposition' 09 58 59 6 A Yes 09 59 00 7 Q Did you review any of the correspondence 09 59 04 8 between Union Carbide and Dow regarding Calidria' 09 59 07 9 A No 09 59 10 10 Q Union Carbide did consult with Dow 09 59 13 11 regarding Calidria, didn't it' 09 59 15 12 A I have no idea 09 59 18 13 Q Are you denying that that happened' 09 59 22 14 A l said l have no idea what-who Union 09 59 24 15 Carbide talked to about Calidria 09 59 27 16 Q Would it surprise you if that happened' 09 59 30 17 A No 09 59 32 18 MR LASSETTER Object to the form 09 59 33 19 BY MR EGDORF Q You wrote a paper 09 59 34 20 called the safe use of Calidria, didn't you? 09:59:35 21 A. I have not sure if that was the title. I 09:59:39 22 wrote several papers similar to that. 09:59:43 23 Q. Something to that effect? 09:59:45 24 A. Yes. 09:59:46 25 Q. I think 've seen one place thought it 09:59:47 0012 1 was called the safe use of Calidria and I thought I 09:59:49 2 saw another place it's called the safe use of 244. 09:59:51 3 MR. LASSETTER: Object to the form. 09:59:55 4 BY MR. EGDORF: Q. Does that sound 09:59:55 5 familiar? 09:59:56 6 A. Could be, yes. 09:59:56 7 Q. 244 is a type of Calidria; right? 09:59:57 3 A. Yes. 10:00:00 9 Q. You also hadsome other RGs you had 100 and 10:00:00 10 144; right? 10:00:05 11 A. Yes. 10:00:06 12 Q. Tell rne just generally, very generally, 10:00:06 13 what the difference is between 100 and 144 and 244? 10:00:03 14 A. RG 100 is pelletized. RG 144 is an open 10:00:13 15 fiber of that-of RG 100. RG 244 is a chemically 10:00:13 16 modified asbestos product. 10:00:24 17 Q. How's 244 chemically modified? 10:00:27 13 A. By treating the asbestos slurry with acidic 10:00:31 19 acid and sodium silicate. 10:00:38 20 Q. You know that silica causes lung disease, 10:00:42 21 don't you? 10:00:45 22 MR. LASSETTER: Object to the form. 10:00:45 23 THEWITNESS: Some forms of silica do, yes. 10:00:46 24 BY MR. EGDORF: Q. And you guys at 10:00:43 25 Union Carbide added silica to your Calidria to form 10:00:50 0013 1 the 244; right? 10:00:53 2 A. That was a very thin molecular coating of 10:00:54 3 amorphous silica on the fibers. 10:01:01 4 Q. So, yes, you added silica; right? 10:01:03 5 A. Amorphous silica. 10:01:05 6 Q. When did you do that? 10:01:06 7 A. When we produced RG 244. 10:01:07 3 Q. When was that? 10:01:10 9 A. I think,. in 1967 or 1968. 10:01:12 10 Q. Certainly after you knew about some of the 10:01:15 11 hazards of asbestos; correct? 10:01:17 12 A. I was aware, yes, of some of the hazards. 10:01:19 13 Q. Do you know a rnan name Jirn Powers? 10:01:23 14 A. I remember the name. I can't remember- 10:01:29 15 Q. You don't recall - I'rn sorry. I don't 10:01:31 16 mean to cut you off. If I do just let rne know and 10:01:33 17 I'll try to be quiet and let you finish. Okay? 10:01:36 13 A. All right. 10:01:33 19 Q. You don't recall hirn being a lawyer that's 10:01:39 20 presented you for deposition before? 10:01:41 21 A. No, as I say, I remember the name. I don't 10:01:43 22 know in what context I've met hirn, if I'rn met hirn. 10:01:46 23 I'rn not sure. 10:01:50 24 Q. I take it you've rnet many lawyers over time 10:01:51 25 that have represented you Union Carbide? 10:01:54 0014 1 A. Yes. 10:01:56 2 Q. Mr. Powers, I'll represent to you, has been 10:01:57 3 a lawyer for Union Carbide and has presented you for 10:01:59 4 deposition before. Okay? 10:02:02 5 A. If you say so. 10:02:03 6 Q. I rnay not be telling the truth, but I'll 10:02:04 7 ask you to assume that I arn. I don't intend to lie 10:02:07 3 to you is what I mean by that. Okay? 10:02:11 9 A. Okay. 10:02:13 10 Q. If I make a mistake it's an honest mistake. 10:02:14 11 MR. LASSETTER: Object to the form. 10:02:17 12 MR. EGDORF: That's ironic. 10:02:18 13 MR. LASSETTER: Object to the side bar. 10:02:22 14 BY MR. EGDORF: Q. I also represent to 10:02:23 15 you that Mr. Powers has started trials on behalf of 10:02:24 16 Union Carbide. Okay? 10:02:28 17 A. I don't know that. 10:02:29 18 Q. I'rn just representing to you at this - 10:02:30 19 that that's the case. Okay? 10:02:32 20 A. Yes. 10:02:34 21 Q. For the purpose of the couple questions I'rn 10:02:34 22 going to ask you. All right? 10:02:37 23 A. All right. 10:02:38 24 Q. Mr. Powers did this in a case called the 10:02:38 25 Latharn case, and in his opening statement he said, 10:02:42 0015 1 and I quote: The Sayers report was generally 10:02:45 2 accurate. Was he right or wrong? 10:02:47 3 A. It was a compilation of public information, 10:02:50 4 so I would say it was generally accurate, yes. 10:02:55 5 Q. He also said that Union Carbide made 10:02:58 6 mistakes regarding asbestos with the public and its 10:03:01 7 customers. Is he right or wrong? 10:03:05 8 MR. LASSETTER: Object to the form. 10:03:07 9 THE WITNESS: I'rn not aware of any 10:03:07 10 mistakes. 10:03:09 11 BY MR. EGDORF: Q. So in that-in 10:03:09 12 your opinion he was wrong if he said that? 10:03:10 13 A. would not agree with that, yes. 10:03:13 14 (Deposition Exhibit Number 1 was 15 marked for identification.) 16 BY MR. EGDORF: Q. All right. Let rne 10:03:15 17 show you what I've marked as Exhibit Number 1. 10:03:16 18 (Hands document.) After you take a look at that let 10:03:19 19 rne know when you're ready to answer rny questions. 10:03:25 20 A. Do you want rne to read all of this? 10:03:51 21 Q. No, sir, just let rne know when you're ready 10:03:53 22 to answer rny questions. If you need more time after 10:03:55 23 I ask you a question, you can feel free. 10:03:58 24 A. All right. 10:04:00 25 Q. All right? I probably arn not going to ask 10:04:01 0016 1 you anything about the attachment except for one 10:04:05 2 question, which is: Do you know if you wrote the 10:04:07 3 attachment or parts of the attachment? 10:04:10 4 A. I wrote parts of it. I don't remember that 10:04:16 5 it was specific to corrosion resistant tank 10:04:20 6 fabrication. 10:04:23 7 Q. Fair enough. So you rnay have wrote - 10:04:24 3 written parts of that but you don't think you wrote 10:04:26 9 it all? 10:04:28 10 A. That's correct. 10:04:29 11 Q. Is that fair? 10:04:30 12 A. That's fair. 10:04:30 13 Q. All right. If you look at the first page, 10:04:31 14 sir, you see we at the top it's an old document it's 10:04:32 15 March 9th, 1973 you see that? 10:04:36 16 A. Yes. 10:04:38 17 Q. But at the top it says I can't read the 10:04:39 18 first two letters and then it says J. L. Myers 10:04:41 19 filed. Do you see that? 10:04:45 20 A. Yes. 10:04:47 21 Q. And that's you, isn't it sir? 10:04:47 22 A. I arn J. L. Myers, yes. 10:04:50 23 Q. Do you know what the two letters are before 10:04:52 24 J. L. Myers filed? 10:04:55 25 A. No. I don't. 10:04:56 0017 1 Q. Okay. This is a letter from Mr. Rhodes to 10:04:57 2 Mr. Shallow at Dow Chemical Corporation; true? 10:05:00 3 A. Doctor Rhodes, yes. 10:05:04 4 Q. I'rn sorry. He didn't put doctor there. 10:05:06 5 I'rn not familiar with hirn that he was what kind of 10:05:08 6 doctor? 10:05:10 7 A. Ph.D. chemical engineer. 10:05:10 8 Q. Okay You knew Mr. Rhodes while you were at 10:05:12 9 Union Carbide? 10:05:15 10 A. I knew Doctor Rhodes yes. 10:05:16 11 Q. Excuse rne. I'll call hirn Doctor. I 10:05:17 12 apologize. You already corrected rne on that. Is 10:05:20 13 Doctor Rhodes still alive? 10:05:26 14 A. Yes. 10:05:27 15 Q. Do you know where he is? 10:05:27 16 A. The last I knew he was in Colorado. 10:05:29 17 Q. Retired? 10:05:29 18 A. Yes. 10:05:30 19 Q. Did you have occasion while you were with 10:05:30 20 Union Carbide working on Calidria or with the 10:05:32 21 Calidria business to have communications with Doctor 10:05:35 22 Rhodes? 10:05:37 23 A. He was in our marketing group, yes. 10:05:37 24 Q. Would it be typical that Doctor Rhodes 10:05:39 25 would copy you on correspondence that he might send 10:05:42 0018 1 out regarding Calidria? 10:05:44 2 A. Yes. 10:05:49 3 Q. Now, do you know Mr. Shallow at Dow 10:05:50 4 Chemical Company? 10:05:52 5 A. No. I don't. 10:05:52 6 Q. Do you recall personally ever talking to 10:05:54 7 anyone at Dow regarding Calidria? 10:05:57 8 A. No, I don't. 10:05:59 9 Q. In the first paragraph Mr. Rhodes says: In 10:06:00 10 accordance with our telephone conversation of March 10:06:04 11 8, 1973 a copy of the safe use of Calidria RG 244 10:06:07 12 that has been passed through our legal department is 10:06:13 13 enclosed. This one also includes the three tables 10:06:16 14 that were omitted previously. Do you see that? 10:06:21 15 A. Yes. 10:06:23 16 Q. Do you know, sir, if from time to time 10:06:23 17 legal department at Union Carbide changed any of 10:06:25 13 your drafts of the papers you wrote? 10:06:27 19 A. I don't remember that they did or whether 10:06:23 20 they did or not. 10:06:30 21 Q. All right. So you can't tell rne one way or 10:06:30 22 the other? 10:06:33 23 A. That's correct. 10:06:33 24 Q. Did you have a policy at Union Carbide that 10:06:34 25 if you were going to draft papers regarding asbestos 10:06:36 0019 1 that they needed to be passed through the legal 10:06:39 2 department? 10:06:42 3 A. I don't think it was limited to asbestos, 10:06:42 4 but yes. 10:06:45 5 Q. All right. The - so - but did you work 10:06:45 6 on any products other than Calidria? I'rn sorry. 10:06:53 7 Let rne strike that. I know there was a period of 10:06:53 3 time you were with the nuclear group in Paduca, 10:07:00 9 Kentucky; right? 10:07:04 10 A. Yes. 10:07:05 11 Q. Other than that was all your involvement 10:07:05 12 with respect to Calidria at Union Carbide? 10:07:03 13 A. Yes. 10:07:11 14 Q. All right. When you were at the nuclear 10:07:11 15 department if you wrote any papers did they need to 10:07:13 16 go through the legal department? 10:07:15 17 A. I don't recall. I don't recall. 10:07:13 13 Q. When you were at the nuclear department 10:07:21 19 that was what? Like 1952 to '66, something like 10:07:23 20 that? 10:07:26 21 A. 1951 to 1966. 10:07:26 22 Q. Oh,'51 is the year you graduated from 10:07:29 23 Perdue is that right? 10:07:33 24 A. Yes. 10:07:34 25 Q. Were you involved in the studies done at 10:07:34 0020 1 the nuclear department where they x-rayed and tested 10:07:36 2 Johns-Manville's asbestos? 10:07:40 3 A. No. 10:07:43 4 Q. You weren't part of the studies where they 10:07:43 5 were trying to figure out a way to take the toxicity 10:07:45 6 out of the asbestos? 10:07:43 7 MR. LASSETTER: Objection to form. 10:07:49 3 THE WITNESS: I've never heard of that 10:07:50 9 before. 10:07:51 10 BY MR. EGDORF: Q. Were you part of 10:07:51 11 the studies where, at the nuclear division where 10:07:52 12 they tried the same thing with Calidria? 10:07:54 13 A. I didn't know they did. 10:07:56 14 MR. LASSETTER: Object to the form. 10:07:58 15 BY MR. EGDORF: Q. If they did you 10:07:59 16 certainly weren't part of that? 10:08:00 17 A. I was not part of it. 10:08:02 13 Q. Okay. Now, let's go back to Exhibit Number 10:08:03 19 1, sir. And again, this is from Doctor Rhodes to 10:08:05 20 the person at Dow; right? 10:08:03 21 A. Yes. 10:03:09 22 Q. I have no objection to your rewrite rnan 10:08:10 23 deleting further portions. 10:08:15 24 Did I read that correctly? 10:03:16 25 MS. HAMS: Object to the form. 10:08:20 0021 1 THE WITNESS: Yes. 10:03:21 2 BY MR. EGDORF: Q. Would it be typical 10:03:22 3 while you were at Union Carbide that you would send 10:08:24 4 documents or papers to other companies giving them 10:08:26 5 authority to edit your work? 10:08:29 6 A. No, I don't know what this is about. 10:03:32 7 Q. Well, do you not understand what that 10:03:35 3 sentence means? 10:03:37 9 A. I really don't, no, I don't. 10:08:33 10 Q. Well, it refers to somebody at Dow deleting 10:08:39 11 further portions; correct? 10:03:42 12 MS. HAMS: Object to the form. 10:03:44 13 THE WITNESS: That's what it says, yes. 10:03:45 14 BY MR. EGDORF: Q. Do you know what 10:08:46 15 portions had been deleted before it was sent to Dow? 10:08:43 16 A. No. 10:08:50 17 Q. I mean, it does say further portions, 10:03:51 13doesn't it? 10:03:54 19 A. Yes. 10:03:55 20 Q. And if Mr. Shallow responded, you don't 10:09:04 21 know what those responses were; is that right? 10:09:03 22 A. That's correct. 10:09:11 23 Q. And if I wanted to find the original paper 10:09:11 24 that's attached, you know, before it went through 10:09:14 25 Carbide's legal department or before any further 10:09:13 0022 1 portions were deleted, do you know where that would 10:09:21 2 be? 10:09:24 3 A. No, Idon't. 10:09:24 4 Q. Okay. I'rn done with that one for now, sir. 10:09:25 5 I'rn not sure, you -- the lawyers may want to have 10:09:23 6 them over there. If we - if you need to refer back 10:09:31 7 to a document some point today that's fine. I just 10:09:34 3 want to make sure we keep them out of your way. All 10:09:36 9 right? 10:09:43 10 A. All right. 10:09:43 11 Q. Let's talk about Exhibit Number 2. 10:09:43 12 (Deposition Exhibit Number 2 was 10:09:53 13 marked for identification.) 10:09:53 14 BY MR. EGDORF: Q. Oops. Let rne know 10:10:01 15 when you're ready, sir. It's a short one. 10:10:02 16 MS. HAMS: May I s ee a copy of it after he 10:10:14 17 finishes that? 10:10:17 18 MR. LASSETTER: Before he's questioned 10:10:18 19 about it? 10:10:21 20 MS. HAMS: Hrn? 10:10:22 21 MR. LASSETTER: Are you saying before he's 10:10:25 22 questioned about it? 10:10:26 23 MS. HAMS: Yeah, real quick, just after -10:10:27 24 when he finished. 10:10:30 25 MR. EGDORF: These documents are apparently 10:10:31 0023 1 all in y'all's own repositories. Object to y'all 10:10:33 2 taking rny time to do this. 10:10:37 3 MR. LASSETTER: Object to the side bar. Do 10:10:40 4 you have got extra copies? 10:10:41 5 MR. EGDORF: You got them apparently. 10:10:43 6 BY MR. EGDORF: Q. Sir, have you seen 10:10:44 7 this document before? 10:10:45 3 A. I don't remember seeing it, but I would 10:10:46 9 have seen it in rny position, yes. 10:10:48 10 Q. Okay. And this is April 1973 by Mr.- 10:10:49 11 excuse rne - Doctor Rhodes again; correct? 10:10:53 12 A. Yes. 10:10:55 13 Q. Now at that time I see in this one it says 10:10:55 14 Niagara Falls. In 1973 you were in Niagara Falls; 10:10:58 15 correct? 10:11:02 16 A. Yes. 10:11:03 17 Q. You had been out in King City from what'67 10:11:03 13 to'70 something like that? 10:11:07 19 A. That's right. 10:11:09 20 Q. Then you went to Niagara Falls for 10 or 11 10:11:10 21 years and you went back to King City? 10:11:14 22 A. Yes. 10:11:16 23 Q. When you went to Niagara Falls I don't know 10:11:16 24 what the title is. My understanding was you were in 10:11:19 25 essence managing the Calidria business; is that 10:11:19 0024 1 correct? 2 A. No, that's not correct. 10:11:22 3 Q. Okay can you tell - correct then. 10:11:24 4 A. I was marketing manager. 10:11:25 5 Q. Marketing manager. Was there someone you 10:11:27 6 answered to? 10:11:29 7 A. Yes. 10:11:30 3 Q. Who? 10:11:30 9 A. It changed over the years, but it was in 10:11:30 10 the Union Carbide's New York office, a rnan named 10:11:33 11 Bill Thurber. 10:11:39 12 Q. Okay. Mr. Thurber. What was his title, if 10:11:41 13 you recall, or give rne an idea? 10:11:44 14 A. I don't recall. 10:11:45 15 Q. Now, when you were sent back to King City, 10:11:47 16 in '31? 10:11:51 17 A. Yes. 10:11:52 18 Q. Was that-did you consider that a 10:11:52 19 promotion or a demotion or lateral? 10:11:55 20 A. It was a promotion. 10:11:57 21 Q. Let's go hack to Exhibit Number 2, sir. 10:12:00 22 You see again under objective - well, let rne go to 10:12:04 23 the top. T. P. Norris, who is he? 10:12:07 24 A. He was one of our salesmen. 10:12:10 25 Q. Did he work for you? 10:12:11 0025 1 A. Yes. 10:12:13 2 Q. Mr. Walsh, did he work for you? 10:12:13 3 A. Yes. 10:12:15 4 Q. When it says KC file I'rn guessing King 10:12:17 5 City, but is that right or wrong? 10:12:20 6 A. That would be correct. 10:12:21 7 Q. All right. So you would see it because you 10:12:22 3 would look at the King City files? 10:12:24 9 A. No, I was in Niagara Falls. 10:12:26 10 Q. Okay. Well, I'rn just asking, would you not 10:12:29 11 get copies on KC files, is what I meant? 10:12:31 12 A. No, that file - that copy would have gone 10:12:33 13 to King City. 10:12:36 14 Q. All right. So in that file, Niagara Falls, 10:12:37 15 that's more the specific reason why you would have 10:12:40 16 seen this? 10:12:42 17 A. Yes. 10:12:43 13 Q. Okay. And it says under objectives: Learn 10:12:43 19 status of safe use of 244 publication. Do you see 10:12:46 20 that? 10:12:49 21 A. Yes. 10:12:50 22 Q. Observations. The 244 article is still in 10:12:50 23 their legal department. He will check with them. 10:12:54 24 You see that? 10:12:57 25 A. Yes. 10:12:57 0026 1 Q. Now, when you got copy of this do you know 10:12:53 2 if you followed up on that or talked with somebody 10:13:00 3 at Dow to find out what was going on? 10:13:03 4 A. That's what Doctor Rhodes was doing. 10:13:05 5 Q. Okay. So you were just simply made aware 10:13:07 6 that that's what he's doing? 10:13:10 7 A. Yes. 10:13:12 3 Q. Well, do you know if he finally got an 10:13:12 9 answer from Dow? 10:13:15 10 A. No, I don't. 10:13:15 11 Q. You sold to Dow, didn't you? 10:13:21 12 MS. HAMS: Object to the form. 10:13:23 13 THE WITNESS: I don't know. I'd have to 10:13:24 14 check sales records. I don't recall that we ever 10:13:26 15 sold to them. 10:13:29 16 BY MR. EGDORF: Q. You sold to Dow 10:13:29 17 when you were president of KCAC, didn't you? 10:13:31 13 MS. HAMS: Object to the form. 10:13:35 19 THE WITNESS: Again, I don't recall whether 10:13:36 20 they were a customer or not. 10:13:37 21 BY MR. EGDORF: Q. Might have been? 10:13:39 22 A. I'd have to look at sales records. 10:13:40 23 Q. Okay. Where are the sales records? 10:13:43 24 A. They're in the repository. 10:13:45 25 Q. Okay. So what would somebody look under to 10:13:47 0027 1 try to find out if sales were made to Dow? 10:13:51 2 A. I would start with looking under Dow. 10:13:54 3 Q. Okay. Whole category just for dow? 10:13:57 MS. HAMS: Object to the form? 10:14:00 THE WITNESS: No, they were filed by 10:14:01 6 customer name. 10:14:02 7 BY MR. EGDORF: Q. Okay. 10:14:04 3 A. Or filed alphabetically. If they were a 10:14:05 9 very small customer they might be in a folder with 10:14:06 10 several other Ds. 10:14:03 11 Q. Okay. Now, assume with rne -- I don't know 10:14:10 12 the answer -- but assume with rne that Dow did 10:14:12 13 respond from their legal department regarding the 10:14:16 14 safe use of 244 rnerno. Okay? Would that be in that 10:14:13 15 customer file, or is that the kind of thing that 10:14:21 16 would be filed somewhere else? 10:14:24 17 MS. HAMS: Object to the form. 10:14:26 13 MR. LASSETTER: Object to the form. 10:14:27 19 THE WITNESS: I have no idea where it would 10:14:29 20 be. 10:14:30 21 BY MR. EGDORF: Q. Okay. 10:14:30 22 A. They wouldn't be in the sales records 10:14:31 23 though. 10:14:33 24 Q. You ever been sued personally, sir? 10:14:36 25 A. No. 10:14:39 0023 1 MR. LASSETTER: Object to the form. 10:14:39 2 THE WITNESS: No, I haven't. 10:14:41 3 BY MR. EGDORF: Q. What's your home 10:14:42 4 address? 10:14:44 5 A. 1 - 10:14:46 6 MR. LASSETTER: Hold on a second? Okay. 10:14:47 7 Go ahead. 10:14:52 3 THE WITNESS: 102 River Drive in King City. 10:14:53 9 BY MR. EGDORF: Q. Do you feel, sir, 10:14:57 10 that your interests personally are completely 10:14:59 11 aligned with that of Union Carbide? 10:15:02 12 MR. LASSETTER: Object. Calls for legal 10:15:06 13 conclusion. 10:15:03 14 THE WITNESS: I really have no idea what 10:15:03 15 that question means. 10:15:11 16 BY MR. EGDORF: Q. Okay. Well, for 10:15:12 17 example, I represented to you the comment that 10:15:16 13 Mr. Powers said at a trial, the comment you're 10:15:20 19 saying you would disagree with; correct? 10:15:26 20 A. That's right. 10:15:23 21 Q. And assuming he did that, you understand he 10:15:29 22 was speaking on behalf of Union Carbide? 10:15:33 23 A. No, I don't know that. 10:15:34 24 Q. You don't believe that your lawyers have 10:15:35 25 the authority to speak on your behalf? 10:15:37 0029 1 A. I don't know what - 10:15:40 2 MR. LASSETTER: Object to the form. 10:15:41 3 THE WITNESS: - authority they have. 10:15:42 4 BY MR. EGDORF: Q. See I'm - one of 10:15:43 5 rny problems that I'm trying to clear up, you know, 10:15:45 6 here at the beginning before we get too much 10:15:48 7 farther, sir, is I'rn trying to figure out, you 10:15:50 8 apparently sav you're the corporate representative 10:15:52 9 of Union Carbide. What if the people at Union 10:15:55 10 Carbide have said things different from you? Arn I 10:15:57 11 supposed to assume that what you say is the current 10:16:00 12 position, or do you not know? 10:16:03 13 A. I don't think I'rn the corporate 10:16:04 14 representative. I'rn representing or trying to 10:16:06 15 answer your questions about Calidria asbestos. 10:16:08 16 Q. Well, as I understand it, sir, you have 10:16:11 17 been designated as a corporate representative 10:16:13 18 regarding certain categories to do - by Union 10:16:16 19 Carbide. I said I need to talk to a witness about 10:16:18 20 certain things and I was told you speak on behalf of 10:16:22 21 the corporation do you understand that? 10:16:24 22 __A__ With-regard to Calidria. 10:16:25 23 Q. All right. 10:16:27 24 A. I don't know anything else about other 10:16:27 25 operations at Union Carbide. 10:16:29 0030 1 Q. And the full work that you did to prepare 10:16:30 2 today to testify as a corporate representative was 10:16:33 3 the four or five hours that you spent reviewing 10:16:34 4 documents yesterday with Mr. Lassetter; is that 10:16:38 5 right? 10:16:39 6 A. Yes. 10:16:40 7 Q. Just one second, sir. 10:16:50 3 Sir, the Calidria products we talked about, 10:16:57 9 the 244, 144, 100, those were patented, weren't 10:17:01 10 they? 10:17:05 11 A. The RG 244 process was patented. 10:17:05 12 Q. And that's the one that added the silica? 10:17:09 13 A. Well, I told you we had added acidic acid 10:17:11 14 and sodium silicate we did not add silica per se. 10:17:18 15 Q. You're making a distinction between 10:17:22 16 silicate and silica? 10:17:23 17 A. I would - certainly arn. 10:17:24 18 Q. You think silicate's not hazardous? 10:17:25 19 A. I have no idea. Sodium silicate? 10:17:28 20 Q. Yes, sir. 10:17:31 21 A. Well, it's a chemical. I don't recall what 10:17:32 22 the hazard is. 10:17:34 23 Q. Sir, you were -- you were adding a chemical 10:17:35 24 to your product, and you didn't know if it was 10:17:37 25 hazardous or not? 10:17:39 0031 1 A. I don't know what you mean by hazardous. 10:17:40 2 Q. Hurt people. 10:17:42 3 A. I don't remember what the hazardous 10:17:42 4 conditions - I mean acidic acid is an acid. I 10:17:46 5 don't know what sodium silicate precautions were. 10:17:52 6 Q. Did you ever find out? 10:17:55 7 A. I don't remember. No, I haven't checked on 10:17:56 3 it in recent years. 10:17:57 9 Q. Is it your testimony that before you put 10:17:59 10 the silicate in there that you checked it out to see 10:13:02 11 if it was hazardous or not? 10:18:05 12 A. That would have been reported by the vendor 10:18:07 13 to us, and then we would have taken whatever 10:13:10 14 precautions were appropriate for handling sodium 10:13:13 15 silicate, and the same is true for acidic acid. 10:13:15 16 Q. You never put on a single bag of 244 that 10:13:20 17 there is was sodium silicate, did you? 10:18:25 13 A. It wasn't actually sodium silicate. Those 10:13:27 19 two were chemicals that created a reaction that put 10:13:30 20 a -- as I said before, a molecular coating of 10:18:33 21 amorphous silica on the fibers. 10:18:36 22 Q. Objection. Non-responsive. You never put 10:13:37 23 any warning or any statement on a bag about that 10:18:40 24 process, did you? 10:13:42 25 A. About the RG 244 process? 10:18:43 0032 1 Q. Yes, sir, that, the sodium silicate and the 10:18:46 2 acetate that you talked about. You never put 10:13:49 3 anything out there on the bag of your products about 10:18:51 4 that, did you? 10:13:54 5 A. We didn't describe our process on the bags, 10:13:55 6 no. 10:18:57 7 Q. And you didn't warn any customers or the 10:13:57 3 public that you had done that process to the 244, 10:18:59 9 did you? 10:19:02 10 A. We didn't-no, we didn't warn people 10:19:05 11 about the process for making RG 244. 10:19:03 12 Q. And you knew in 1967 that silica can cause 10:19:11 13 lung disease, didn't you? 10:19:15 14 MR. LASSETTER: Object to the form. 10:19:13 15 THE WITNESS: As I said before, certain 10:19:13 16 forms of silica can cause silicosis. 10:19:20 17 BY MR. EGDORF: Q. Did you not think 10:19:23 13 the public was entitled to know what you were 10:19:25 19 putting in your products? 10:19:27 20 A. It wasn't crystalline silica. 10:19:27 21 Q. Objection. Non-responsive. Did you not 10:19:30 22 feel like the public is entitled to know what you 10:19:33 23 put in your products? 10:19:36 24 A. There was no need to inform the product- 10:19:36 25 the customer about a product that was harmless. 10:19:39 0033 ______________________________________________________ 1 Q. Objection. Non-responsive. That's not rny 10:19:42 2 question, sir. Did you not feel like you needed to 10:19:45 3 fully disclose everything that you put in your 10:19:43 4 products to the public whether you thought it was 10:19:49 5 safe or not? 10:19:52 6 A. No. 10:19:53 ~l Q. Certainly no harm in telling them about 10:19:54 3 safe things, is there? 10:19:56 9 A. You mean to describe on every product- 10:19:57 10 Q. Yes, sir. 10:20:00 11 A. - baa-no. we did not do that.______ 10:20:01 12 Q. And you didn't give your customers any of 10:20:02 13 your research as to whether or not sodium silicate 10:20:05 14 would pose a hazard or not, did you? 10:20:07 15 A. We did not do any research on sodium 10:20:10 16 silicate. 10:20:13 17 Q. Do you think it's appropriate for you to 10:20:13 13 put out products that you don't even research first? 10:20:15 19 MR. LASSETTER: Objection to form. 10:20:19 20 THE WITNESS: Again, I don't know what you 10:20:19 21 mean by research. 10:20:21 22 BY MR. EGDORF: Q. Well, you answered 10:20:21 23 the question just before saying we didn't do any 10:20:22 24 research. Do you think that's appropriate? 10:20:25 25 MR. LASSETTER: Object to the form. 10:20:27 0034 THE WITNESS: The vendor provided sodium 10:20:2$ silicate. We didn't invent sodium silicate or 10:20:31 produce sodium silicate. 10:20:34 BY MR. EGDORF: Q. So it's okay to 10:20:36 rely on the vendor? 10:20:37 A. I think so, yes. 10:20:39 Q. wnat was the result of the reaction when 10:20:57 you put in the sodium silicate and the acetate? 10:21:00 9 A. We didn't use any acetate. 10:21:04 10 Q. I'rn sorry. I must - 10:21:05 11 A. The reaction is the same as I said before. 10:21:07 12 Q. Sorry, sir. Just trying to be clear. 10:21:09 13 A. The sodium silicate and acidic acid - 10:21:12 14 Q. Acidic acid. 10:21:16 15 A. -- were mixed with the slurry of asbestos 10:21:13 16 fibers, and that formed a molecular coating on the 10:21:20 17 asbestos fibers. 10:21:25 13 Q. Where did the slurry go? 10:21:27 19 A. It went through our process. 10:21:31 20 Q. But where did it go? 10:21:33 21 A. The steps in the process? 10:21:34 22 Q. No, where - where did it end up? 10:21:36 23 A. It ended up as a product, RG 244 10:21:33 24 Q. So all the sodium silicate ended up in the 10:21:42 25 product in one form or another? 10:21:45 0035 1 A. No, there's a reaction between the two 10:21:46 2 that - I forget what it forms, an amorphous silica 10:21:49 3 and I think water. I'rn not sure. 10:21:54 4 Q. And what happened to the amorphous silica 10:21:56 5 that's left over? 10:21:59 6 A. That's - I just told you. That was a 10:21:59 7 coat-molecular coating on the fibers. 10:22:01 3 Q. So it went on with the product? 10:22:05 9 A. It was a molecular coating on the fibers. 10:22:07 10 Q. So is it your testimony there was no 10:22:09 11 residue or leftover material after all of these 10:22:11 12 chemical reactions? 10:22:14 13 A. The amorphous silica was on the fibers. 10:22:15 14 The other material was - would have been - gone 10:22:19 15 into the -- into the water when the slurry was 10:22:22 16 filtered and then discarded. 10:22:25 17 Q. Discarded where? That's what I'rn trying to 10:22:26 18 getto. 10:22:29 19 A. With all the other waste water. Most of it 10:22:30 20 was recycled. It was recycled, yes. 10:22:33 21 Q. What about the parts that weren't recycled? 10:22:36 22 Where did they go? 10:22:33 23 A. They were all re - all the water was 10:22:39 24 recycled. 10:22:41 25 Q. I'rn just trying to be clear, sir. You said 10:22:42 0036 1 before the parts that were recycled. Are you now 10:22:45 2 saying it was all recycled? 10:22:49 3 A. The water was recycled. 10:22:50 4 Q. Let rne back up to where I got down that 10:22:53 5 road. The 14 - the - excuse rne. The 244 was 10:22:55 6 patented; correct? 10:22:59 7 A. It was a patented process. 10:23:01 3 Q. Who got the patent? 10:23:04 9 A. A man named Doctor Chwastiak. 10:23:06 10 Q. Okay. Did he work for Carbide? 10:23:10 11 A. Yes. 10:23:13 12 Q. Were you involved at all in the paperwork 10:23:13 13 or - that led to the patent? 10:23:17 14 A. Not that I recall. 10:23:19 15 Q. Where is all the back-up information for 10:23:22 16 the patent, all the documents? 10:23:25 17 A. I have no idea. 10:23:27 13 Q. Do you know why they're not in the 10:23:31 19 repository? 10:23:34 20 A. I don't know that they're not. 10:23:34 21 MR. LASSETTER: Object to the form. 10:23:36 22 THE REPORTER: One at a time, gentlemen. 10:23:39 23 BY MR. EGDORF: Q. Have you gone and 10:23:43 24 looked at the repository. 10:23:44 25 A. No. I haven't. 10:23:46 0037 1 Q. Why are you so confident there is going to 10:23:47 2 be a file there for your customers, like if Dow was 10:23:50 3 a customer there's for sure a file there for that? 10:23:53 4 A. I'rn not confident. I'rn aware that there 10:23:56 5 are sales records in the repository. 10:23:59 6 Q. When you left KCAC in 1993, KCAC was still 10:24:04 7 in the business of mining and selling asbestos; 10:24:08 3 true? 10:24:11 9 A. Yes. 10:24:11 10 Q. In fact, wasn't it up into just this year 10:24:12 11 that that mine was still producing asbestos? 10:24:16 12 A. I think they closed down at the end of 10:24:19 13 2001. 10:24:21 14 Q. Do you have any problem with that? 10:24:25 15 A. With the closing down? 10:24:27 16 Q. No, that they continued to mine and sell 10:24:29 17 the asbestos until 2001? 10:24:31 13 A. No. 10:24:33 19 Q. As far as you're concerned, it can still be 10:24:34 20 mined and sold today; right? 10:24:37 21 A. It can be mined and sold and used safely, 10:24:39 22 yes. 10:24:42 23 Q. Do you think it's a safe product? 10:24:42 24 A. It can be used safely, yes. 10:24:44 "25 CT. Objection. Non-responsive. Do you think 10:24:46 0033 1 it is a safe product? 10:24:49 2 A. Yes, I do. You mean Calidria? 10:24:50 3 Q. Yes, sir. 10:24:53 4 A. Yes. 10:24:54 5 Q. Did you tell your customers it was a safe 10:24:54 6 product? 10:24:56 7 A. No. 10:24:57 3 Q. Did you tell them it wasn't a safe product? 10:24:57 9 A. We told them it should be treated as any 10:24:59 10 other asbestos. 10:25:02 I------ Q--Sj"yJU'fieiftcrtfrem?--------------------- fO:25:04------------ 12 A. No. 10:25:05 13 Q. Well, you just told rne you thought it was 10:25:06 14 safe and you still think it's safe, but you told 10:25:03 15 them something different? 10:25:11 16 A. That's today I think it's safe. When we 10:25:11 17 were introducing it we told people that it was -- to 10:25:14 13 treat it the same as any other asbestos. 10:25:17 19 Q. So you think it was okay for you to sell it 10:25:20 20 when you didn't think it was safe? 10:25:23 21 A. I didn't say that I didn't think it was 10:25:24 22 safe. I said they should treat it as any other 10:25:26 23 asbestos. 10:25:29 24 Q. And you knew that other asbestos was n't 10:25:30 25 safe, didn't you? 10:25:32 0039 1 A. I knew that there were reports of that, 10:25:33 2 yes. 10:25:35 3 Q. Not just reports. Your own medical 10:25:35 4 department; right? 10:25:37 5 A. They-that's right. They read reports. 10:25:39 6._me.y-p.uLQur-th.e.ir-r.e.p.Q.d:________________ 10:25:42________ 7 Q. And you got copies of materials from the 10:25:43 3 medical department; didn't you? 10:25:46 9 A. Yes. 10:25:43 10 Q. The medical department wasn't hiding stuff 10:25:43 11 from Mr. Myers, were they? 10:25:51 12 A. They weren't hiding anything at all as far 10:25:52 13 as I know. 10:25:55 14 Q. But you weren't passing those medical 10:25:55 15 reports to your customers, were you? 10:25:57 16 A. We were passing on the medical department's 10:25:59 17 toxicology report. 10:26:03 13 Q. You didn't pass off all the reports to the 10:26:04 19 customers, did you? 10:26:07 20 A. I don't know what reports you mean. 10:26:07 21 Q. You didn't give the customers the Mellon 10:26:08 22 study, did you? 10:26:11 23 A. No. 10:26:11 24 Q. You didn't give the customers the Sayers 10:26:12 25 study did you? 10:26:15 0040 1 A. I wouldn't call it a study. 10:26:16 2 Q. Report. Is that fair? We' call it a 10:26:13 3 report. 10:26:21 4 A. Okay. 10:26:22 5 Q. You didn't give customers the Sayers 10:26:22 6 report, did you? 10:26:24 7 A. No, we didn't. We have rnay have some. I 10:26:25 3 don't know what we did. We didn't make a practice 10:26:27 9 of giving it to them. 10:26:23 10 Q. You didn't give Doctor Dernehl's - arn I 10:26:29 11 pronouncing it correctly? 10:26:32 12 A. Dernell. 10:26:34 13 Q. Didn't give the customers his letter after 10:26:35 14 he reviewed the Sayers report, did you? 10:26:37 15 A. I don't know if that went to customers ~ 10:26:39 16 any customers or not. 10:26:41 T7 Q. You didn't give customers documents that 10:26:42 13 had not first gone through your legal department, 10:26:44 19 did you? 10:26:47 20 A. Yes, we gave customers many documents that 10:26:47 21 were in our files on the health hazards of asbestos. 10:26:49 22 Q. I thought all those had to go through your 10:26:55 23 legal department first. 10:26:53 24 A. You mean- 10:27:00 25 MR. LASSETTER: Object to the form. 10:27:00 0041 1 THE WITNESS: You mean scientific studies? 10:27:01 2 BY MR. EGDORF: Q. Oh, let's he clear. 10:27:03 3 I rnay have made a - not made a distinction. I'rn 10:27:05 4 talking about Union Carbide created documents. 10:27:03 5____A._Wh.at.kin.d.Q.Ld.Qc.um.ents?____________ l.Q.:.2.7:_1_1_______ 6 Q. Any kind of documents. For example, if you 10:27:12 7 gave a customer a copy of your safe use of Calidria, 10:27:14 3 the customer didn't get that until it had already 10:27:17 9 gone through the Union Carbide legal department; 10:27:20 10 correct? 10:27:22 11 A. That was - in that case, yes. 10:27:23 12 Q. As we've seen in these documents, until it 10:27:25 13 had gone through the Dow legal department too; 10:27:23 14 right? 10:27:30 15 A. No, that is not true. That has nothing to 10:27:31 16 do with our use of that report. This as I read to 10:27:33 17 you was something about coatings on tanks. I have 10:27:36 13 no idea where that - what that means. 10:27:39 19 Q. Sir- 10:27:41 20 A. I thought that was probably rnaybe where the 10:27:42 21 Dow was going to use the product. 10:27:45 22 Q. Sir, every copy of every safe use of 10:27:46 23 Calidria document authored by you is dated after 10:27:49 24 that, those two exhibits, isn't it? 10:27:52 25 A. They-Dow ciici not have anything to do 10:27:55 0042 1 with the product-or the paper that I prepared. 10:27:57 2 Q. Objection. Non-responsive. That wasn't rny 10:28:00 3 question, sir. 10:28:02 4 A. Oh. 10:28:03 5 Q. Your safe use of Calidria document for- 10:28:04 6 for example, I don't know if you call it that, but 10:28:07 7 you presented one of those type of papers in San 10:28:08 3 Francisco; right? 10:23:11 9 A. Yes. 10:23:12 10 Q. In'74 or'75; right? 10:23:13 11 A. I don't recall the date. 10:23:16 12 Q. Well, if it was '74-75 it's after Exhibits 10:23:13 13 1 and 2, isn't it? 10:23:23 14 A. Yes. 10:28:24 15 Q. Now, toxicology reports, I think you 10:23:25 16 referenced those. Those went through the Union 10:23:29 17 Carbide legal department before they went to 10:23:31 13 customers, didn't they? 10:28:33 19 A. I don't know. 10:23:34 20 Q. Your warnings, if any, that were on your 10:23:35 21 bags, those went through the legal department first, 10:28:37 22 didn't they? 10:23:40 23 A. I don't know. 10:23:40 24 Q. You don't know? 10:28:41 25 A. I was not involved with that. 10:28:42 0043 I Q. You were not involved with discussions 10:23:43 about what warnings should go on the bags? 10:23:45 A. Notthefirstwarning.no. 10:23:47 Q. Any warnings? 10:23:49 A. I don't recall if I had anything ~ no, 10:23:51 after our - the first warning, when we went I mean 10:23:54 the OSHA warning starting in 1972. And that would 10:28:57 have - thatwas-pcescribed by OSHA.--------------- 1IX2943J------- 9 Q. That was six years after John Myers knew 10:29:04 10 that there was a problem with asbestos; right? 10:29:07 11 A. Six years? You mean the OSHA standards? 10:29:10 12 Q. The 1972 warning you're talking about. 10:29:13 13 A. That was six years after I started with the 10:29:16 14 asbestos group, yes. 10:29:20 15 Q. And you knew there were people in the group 10:29:22 16 before that that knew about problems with asbestos; 10:29:23 17 true? 10:29:29 13 A. No, I don't know that. 10:29:29 19 Q. You don't know that? You're familiar with 10:29:30 20 the IHF materials, aren't you? 10:29:35 21 A. No. I'm not. 10:29:38 22 Q. Carbide was in the IHF, wasn't it? 10:29:39 23 A. I don't - I have heard that, but I don't 10:29:42 24 know that from rny own -- I don't know for a fact 10:29:44 25 rnyself. 10:29:43 0044 I Q. You didn't know that Carbide helped find - 10:29:43 2 found the IHF? 10:29:51 3 A. No. I have heard that, hut I don't know 10:29:53 4 that, as I said. 10:29:55 5 Q. In'81 when you went hack to King City, 10:30:04 6 were you told why you were being sent there? 10:30:11 7 A. Well, as I said, it was a promotion. 10:30:13 3 Q. What was your - what were you told your 10:30:16 9 goal was, or what were you supposed to he 10:30:20 10 accomplishing? 10:30:23 11 A. I don't rernernher it was put in that form. 10:30:26 12 I was product and -- product and production manager. 10:30:29 13 I was responsible for the operation of the mine and 10:30:32 14 the mill. 10:30:34 15 Q. Keep sales up? 10:30:35 16 A. No, I didn't - wasn't in sales anymore. 10:30:36 17 Q. Well, they had to have production to make 10:30:42 13 sales; right? 10:30:45 19 A. No, you have to have sales to make 10:30:46 20 production. 10:30:43 21 Q. I guess you can look at it that way too. 10:30:48 22 You were con- -- Carbide was continuing to 10:30:51 23 sell the Calidria from the mine in the early 1930s, 10:30:54 24 wasn't it? 10:30:57 25 A. Yes, till 1985. 10:30:53 0045 1 Q. But at that point Carbide was trying to 10:30:59 2 concentrate and sell -- sell the Calidria in places 10:31:02 3 outside the United States; true? 10:31:05 4 A. No, there wasn't any special effort. It 10:31:07 5 was all -- always the same. We tried to get sales 10:31:09 6 wherever we could. 10:31:12 7 Q. So if there are documents that show that 10:31:13 3 Carbide in the 1930s was trying to concentrate in 10:31:16 9 third world countries where the knowledge regarding 10:31:20 10 asbestos was less and the pressure was less, those 10:31:23 11 documents are just inaccurate? 10:31:26 12 A. I haven't documents like that. 10:31:27 13 Q. Well, what about when you were at KCAC as 10:31:30 14 the president in 1985. You were trying to sell 10:31:33 15 Calidria outside the United States, weren't you? 10:31:36 16 A. We always were, yes. 10:31:38 17 Q. And part of that and part of why you were 10:31:39 13 directed that way is because of the pressure in the 10:31:40 19 United States regarding asbestos; correct? 10:31:42 20 A. As I say, we didn't make any particular 10:31:44 21 effort. We tried to sell export as well as domestic 10:31:47 22 the whole time. 10:31:50 23 Q. Sir, would you agree that the public was 10:31:56 24 entitled to accurate and unbiased information 10:32:03 25 regarding asbestos from Union Carbide? 10:32:06 0046 1 A. Yes. 10:32:09 2 Q. Would you agree that your customers were 10:32:10 3 entitled to accurate and unbiased information 10:32:14 4 regarding asbestos from Union Carbide? 10:32:17 5 A. Yes. 10:32:20 6 Q. And you would agree, wouldn't you, sir, 10:32:21 7 that if Carbide failed to provide full and accurate 10:32:23 3 information, that Carbide would be wrong? 10:32:27 9 A. I think you'd have to define full and 10:32:29 10 accurate information, but we tried to tell all the 10:32:32 11 customers that our asbestos should be treated like 10:32:35 12 any other asbestos. 10:32:33 13 Q. You think it's okay for Carbide to withhold 10:32:39 14 medical studies from the public? 10:32:42 15 A. I think it's appropriate to inform the 10:32:46 16 customers about the hazards of asbestos. 10:32:50 17 Q. Do you think it's okay for Carbide to 10:32:52 13 withhold medical studies from the public? 10:32:56 19 A. I think there are studies that would not be 10:32:53 20 appropriate to send to the public. 10:33:00 21 Q. So the answer is yes, it would be 10:33:02 22 appropriate to withhold them? 10:33:03 23 A. In some cases, yes. 10:33:05 24 Q. Do you think it's appropriate for Carbide 10:33:06 25 to alter the data of studies, and then give the new, 10:33:09 0047 1 altered document to the public? 10:33:13 2 A. You have -- if you have something like that 10:33:15 3 I'd like to see it. 10:33:17 4 Q. If that happened is it appropriate? 10:33:13 5 A. That's a very big if. 10:33:20 6 Q. If that happened is it appropriate? 10:33:22 I _A. To withhold information -___________ 10:33:24_____ 3 Q. No, sir. To alter information and provide 10:33:25 9 the altered information to the public. Is that 10:33:27 10 appropriate? 10:33:29 II A. And this is a general question? 10:33:29 12 Q. Yes, sir. 10:33:31 13 A. I don't think that would be appropriate. 10:33:31 14 Q. You certainly wouldn't think it would be 10:33:33 15 appropriate if Carbide did it, would you? 10:33:35 16 A. Not necessarily, no. Again, I think it 10:33:36 17 depends on the situation.________________ 10:33:39 13 Q. So some circumstances it might be okay to 10:33:39 19 alter data? 10:33:42 20 A. I - I - I don't know what you're talking 10:33:43 21 about. 10:33:46 22 Q. Well, you say it depends on the situation. 10:33:46 23 Give rne an example of the situation where it would 10:33:48 24 be okay for Carbide to alter data from a medical 10:33:50 25 study? 10:33:55 0043 1 A. I don't have any idea. 10:33:56 2 Q. But it's possible? 10:33:53 3 A. If you say so, yes. 10:33:59 4 Q. Well, you're the one who said so. You said 10:34:00 5 there might be situations. 10:34:03 6 A. There could be. ves.___________ 10:34:04 7 Q. Do you think it's appropriate for a company 10:34:17 8 to withhold information it has regarding health 10:34:20 9 hazards pertaining to its products? 10:34:25 10 A. I think, again, it depends on what the 10:34:27 11 information is. I think you have to ask rne some 10:34:30 12 specific questions and not generalities. 10:34:32 13 Q. Sir, as a general rule, you can't say that 10:34:34 14 it's not okay to withhold information about health 10:34:36 15 hazards to the public? 10:34:40 16 A. I think you have too many nots and 10:34:41 17 negatives._________________________ 10:34:43___________ 13 Q. Sure. 10:34:44 19 A. Please repeat. 10:34:44 20 Q. Sure. You can imagine situations where it 10:34:45 21 would be okay to withhold health hazard information 10:34:50 22 from the public; is that correct? 10:34:53 23 A. Again, it would depend on the situation 10:34:55 24 entirely and on the information. 10:34:56 25 Q. So there might be a situation where it 10:34:53 0049 1 would be okay? 10:35:00 2 A. Where the information is peer reviewed and 10:35:00 3 accurate, that would be public's. 10:35:03 4 Q. Well, of course, you information can't be 10:35:06 5 peer reviewed if you don't give it to the public, 10:35:08 6 can it? 10:35:10 7 A. I don't think the public peer-does the 10:35:10 3 peer reviews. 10:35:12 9 Q. Well, if you don't give it to other 10:35:14 10 scientists it can't be peer reviewed either, can it? 10:35:16 11 A. That's correct. 10:35:19 12 Q. You think it's a - you think it's 10:35:20 13 important for a company like Union Carbide to give 10:35:23 14 its employees full disclosure regarding the health 10:35:26 15 hazards of the materials that they work with? 10:35:28 16 A. I think it would be appropriate, yes. 10:35:31 17 Q. You're familiar with the letter from the 10:35:34 18 medical director to Mr. Lenitz regarding the Smith 10:35:37 19 book, aren't you? 10:35:40 20 A. Yes. 10:35:41 21 Q. Medical director said: Make sure the 10:35:42 22 employees don't see this, didn't he? 10:35:45 23 A. I don't remember those words. If you could 10:35:47 24 show rne a copy of it, I -- 10:35:49 25 Q. This is not the sort of book we would want 10:35:52 0050 1 readily available to plant personnel. Do you 10:35:54 2 remember that now? 10:35:56 3 A. Yes. 10:35:57 4 Q. You think that's appropriate? 10:35:57 5 A. Yes. 10:35:59 6 Q. So it was appropriate to keep information 10:35:59 7 like that from your employees? 10:36:02 3 A. This was very - this was an article 10:36:03 9 written by a doctor for doctors, and our employees 10:36:05 10 were not doctors._____________________10:36:09___________ 11 Q. Objection. Non-responsive. You think- 10:36:10 12 A. The doctors that we were using were given 10:36:12 13 that information to use in their evaluation of our 10:36:14 14 employees. 10:36:17 15 Q. Objection. Non-responsive. You thought it 10:36:17 16 was appropriate to keep that information from your 10:36:20 17 employees correct? 10:36:22 13 A. It was not rny decision, but I think that 10:36:23 19 was appropriate. 10:36:25 20 Q. Sir, you had communications from time to 10:36:51 21 time with customers regarding TLV, didn't you? 10:36:56 22 A. Yes, that would have been part of our 10:36:59 23 discussions. 10:37:01 24 Q. What does TLV stand for? 10:37:01 25 A. Threshold limit value. 10:37:05 QQ5J____________________________________________________ 1 Q. Do you know who invented TLV? 10:37:06 2 A. No. 10:37:09 3 You didn't know that carne from Dow Chemical 10:37:10 4 Company? 10:37:12 5 A. I said I don't know. 10:37:13 6 MR. LASSETTER: Object to the form. 10:37:14 7 BY MR. EGDORF: Q. You didn't know 10:37:15 3 that? 10:37:16 9 A. I said I don't know, yes. 10:37:16 10 Q. You think it was appropriate for Union 10:37:20 11 Carbide to rely on a company like Dow Chemical 10:37:22 12 Company regarding something like TLV? 10:37:26 13 MS. HAMS: Object to the form. 10:37:23 14 MR. LASSETTER: Object to the form. 10:37:30 15 THE WITNESS: I don't think Union Carbide 10:37:31 16 relied on anything except for the governmental 10:37:32 17 regulations that described the TLV. 10:37:35 13 BY MR. EGDORF: Q. Oh, no, sir, you 10:37:37 19 relied on your suppliers for example about silicate; 10:37:33 20 right? 10:37:41 21 A. For sodium silicate and acidic acid, yes. 10:37:41 22 Q. Why would Carbide then care about what 10:37:44 23 Dow's legal department had to say about the safe use 10:37:48 24 then? 10:37:51 25 A. As I said, I don't remember that happening 10:37:52 0052 1 or what the purpose was. 10:37:55 2 Q. You're not aware, are you, sir, of any 10:37:56 3 independent work done by Carbide to make sure TLVs 10:37:53 4 were accurate, are you? 10:38:02 5 A. You mean, to question the ACGIH or - 10:33:03 6 Q. No, sir? 10:33:06 2 --- A---.foe-government------------------------ tQ;.33;.Q6-------------------- 3 Q. You guys were putting out what you thought 10:38:07 9 the right TLV was before any government statement on 10:33:13 10 that, weren't you? 10:33:16 11 __ A._MQt.that.Lr.e.c.alL.n.Q_____________ 1.Q.:.3.3.:1.?______________ 12 Q. Okay. I'rn going to look at some documents 10:38:18 13 on that. 10:33:22 14 Would it have been appropriate -- just a 10:33:28 15 minute. One second. I can't seern to find rny 10:33:37 16 document here. 10:38:41 17 Would it have been appropriate in 1972 for 10:33:49 18 Union Carbide to tell a customer that Calidria was 10:38:55 19 not harmful? 10:38:58 20 A. No. 10:39:00 21 Q. Would it have been appropriate in 1972 for 10:39:03 22 Union Carbide to tell a customer that Calidria was 10:39:07 23 different than other asbestos? 10:39:11 24 A. Oh, yes, it was different, that's correct. 10:39:13 25 Q. Would it have been appropriate for Union 10:39:15 0053 1 Carbide to have told a customer in 1972 that the 10:39:17 2 health hazards associated with Calidria were 10:39:20 3 different than that from other asbestos? 10:39:25 4 A. No, as I said several times, we told 10:39:27 5 customers to treat our asbestos the same as all 10:39:30 6 other asbestos. 10:39:34 7 Q. So that would not be appropriate? 10:39:36 3 A. That's correct.__________________ 10:39:37______________ 9 (Deposition Exhibit Number 3 was 10:39:40 10 marked for identification.) 10:39:40 11 BY MR. EGDORF: Q. Let rne show you 10:39:40 12 Exhibit Number 3. 10:40:06 13 A. Okay. 10:40:07 14 MS. HAMS: May I see it? 10:40:03 15 BY MR. EGDORF: Q. Sir, would you read 10:40:09 16 the second paragraph out loud, please? 10:40:11 17 A. If I can. 10:40:16 13 Q. Do your best. 10:40:19 19 A. The asbestos we use is a unique type 10:40:19 20 available from just one - from one mine in 10:40:23 21 California. It is produced and processed by the 10:40:26 22 Union Carbide Corporation. They have run extensive 10:40:29 23 medical tests on this asbestos, parentheses, 10:40:35 24 Calidria RG 144, and we have their assurance it is 10:40:40 25 non-carcinogenic. 10:40:47 0054 1 Q. This is a letter from a Mr. Smith at Castor 10:40:43 2 Oil Company to a Mr. Gallagher at DuPont; correct? 10:40:51 3 A. Yes. 10:40:56 4 Q. If somebody at Union Carbide had told 10:40:57 5 Castor Oil that they had run extensive medical tests 10:40:59 6 and assured them that it was non-carcinogenic would 10:41:02 7 that have been inappropriate? 10:41:06 3 A. Yes, and I don't believe that happened. 10:41:03 9 MR. EGDORF: Hey, David, during the break 10:41:11 10 can you find rne the letter from Rhodes to Castor 10:41:13 11 Oil? 10:41:15 12 DOCTOR EGILMAN: Sure. 10:41:24 13 BY MR. EGDORF: Q. If somebody did say 10:41:26 14 that they were wrong; correct? 10:41:23 15 A. Mr. Smith was wrong in saying that, yes. 10:41:29 16 Q. No, if somebody at Union Carbide told 10:41:32 17 Mr. Smith that, that somebody at Union Carbide was 10:41:35 13 wrong; correct? 10:41:33 19 A. That's correct. 10:41:39 20 Q. And of course you don't know if people at 10:41:39 21 Carbide told other customers the same thing, do you? 10:41:41 22 A. I said I don't think any of our people told 10:41:45 23 that person that. 10:41:47 24 Q. Well, you don't know, do you, sir? 10:41:48 25 A. Oh, no. I was not there. 10:41:50 0055 1 Q. And you don't-you don't know what your 10:41:51 2 salespeople told any customers, do you? 10:41:54 3 A. I was not there. Unless I was there I 10:41:56 4 would know. 10:41:58 5 Q. In fact, sir, you don't know what 10:41:59 6 Kelly-Moore was told, do you? 10:42:01 7 A. No. 10:42:03 Q. We've been close to an hour, rnaybe a little 10:42:06 9 short. Do you want to go ahead and take a break 10:42:09 10 now? 10:42:12 11 A. All right. 10:42:12 12 THE VIDEOGRAPHER: Going off record. 10:42 10:42:13 13 a.rn. 10:53:43 14 (Short break.) 10:58:41 15 THE VIDEOGRAPHER: We're going back on the 10:58:41 16 record. 10:58 a.rn. 10:58:43 17 BY MR. EGDORF: Q Mr. Myers, you 10:58:46 18 smoke, don't you? 10:58:47 19 A. Yes. 10:58:48 20 Q. You've seen the studies regarding the 10:58:49 21 synergistic effect between asbestos and smoking, 10:58:52 22 haven't you? 10:58:54 23 A. Cigarette smoking, yes. 10:58:55 24 Q. You think pipe smoking tobacco is okay? 10:58:56 25 A. I've never seen any studies on pipe 10:59:00 0056 1 smoking. 10:59:03 2 Q. So you think it's okay? 10:59:04 3 A. All the studies I've seen by Doctor 10:59:06 4 Selikoff were on cigarette smoking. 10:59:09 5 Q. So you- 10:59:12 6 A. I choose to smoke rny pipe. 10:59:13 7 Q. You think pipe smoking is okay? 10:59:15 3 A. I choose to smoke. I don't know whether 10:59:17 9 it's been okay or not. 10:59:19 10 Q. How long have you been a pipe smoker? 10:59:21 11 A. Oh, many, many years. I don't remember. 10:59:23 ._1.2_1..5_QL2Q_y.e.ar.s_______________________1..Q.:.5.9:.25________ 13 Q. Going back to when you were with Union 10:59:25 14 Carbide? 10:59:28 15 A. Yes. 10:59:28 16 Q. Out at the King City plant? 10:59:28 17 A. No, no, we didn't- 10:59:31 18 Q. I don't mean at the plant per se, I mean 10:59:32 19 when you worked there. 10:59:35 20 A. Oh, when I worked - 10:59:35 21 Q. Yes. 10:59:36 22 A. -1 smoked, yes. 10:59:37 23 Q. You would from time to time socialize with 10:59:39 24 other employees out there, didn't you? 10:59:41 25 A. Yes. 10:59:42 0057 1 Q. You had employees who were friends of 10:59:43 2 yours; right? 10:59:45 3 A. Yes. 10:59:45 4 Q. And you smoked pipes in their 10:59:46 5 accompaniment, didn't you? 10:59:51 .6___ A._Ye.S________________________ 1..Q.:.5.9:.52_______________ 7 Q. You at one point-I say you, I mean Union 10:59:53 3 Carbide. I don't know that you per se did - were 10:59:56 9 involved in it. Carbide banned smoking at the 10:59:59 10 plant? 11:00:05 11 A. Yes. 11:00:05 12 Q. When did that happened? 11:00:06 13 A. I can't remember the year exactly. 11:00:07 14 Q. Was it when you were out there, or were you 11:00:09 15 in Niagara Falls? 11:00:11 16 A. I think I was in Niagara Falls. 11:00:12 17 Q. Okay. So sometime between'70 and'31? 11:00:15 13 A. Yes. 11:00:13 19 Q. Think it was earlier or later? 11:00:13 20 A. I think it was in the latter part of-I'rn 11:00:20 21 not sure. Just say rnid'70s. I don't know. I 11:00:22 22 don't know the answer to that. 11:00:26 23 Q. Okay. Fair enough. I'rn just trying to 11:00:23 24--ball-park-it-a-little-bit:------------------------ 14-Q0;3Q-------------------- 25 Did you ever put any warnings on Calidria 11:00:32 0058 1 advising the customers that they shouldn't smoke if 11:00:39 2 they were going to use the product? 11:00:42 3 A. We didn't put warnings on bags about 11:00:44 4 smoking, no,_______________________11:00:47_____________ 5 Q. Did you send any materials to your 11:00:43 6 customers regarding any kind of information 11:00:50 7 regarding hazards associated with smoking and 11:00:52 3 working around asbestos? 11:00:54 9 A. Yes. 11:00:55 10 Q. What did you send them? 11:00:56 11 A. There was information in - in many of the 11:00:57 12 technical reports, scientific reports, especially by 11:01:00 13 Doctor Selikoff and we sent copies of the NAS 11:01:03 14 National Academy of Sciences study, which I think 11:01:09 15 mentioned smoking. 11:01:12 16 Q. To who? 11:01:13 17 A. To our customers. 11:01:14 13 Q. All of them? IQ A Potential customers ves 11:01:16 11-01-16 20 Q. Where is the document that shows that? 11:01:13 21 A. That was our practice. 1 dont have any 11:01:20 22 documents that say that. 11:01:23 23 Q. So you say it happened but you can't 11:01:24 24 produce a document that proves that it did happen; 11:01:26 25 correct? 11:01:23 0059 1 A. 1 think we have documents in the - in the 11:01:23 2 file. 11:01:32 3 Q. What file? 11:01:32 4 A. In the - what do you call it? At the 11:01:33 5 doc- -- at the -- where you got the information that 11:01:38 6 these carne out of. From the repository. 11:01:41 7 Q. I didn't get any of these from the 11:01:42 repository 11:01:45 9 A. Well, the repository I think is where that 11:01:45 10 would be. 11:01:43 11 Q. You certainly don't know if anything like 11:01:49 12 that was sent to Kelly-Moore, do you? 11:01:50 13 A. Yes, we sent those to all customers, and 11:01:52 14 they were a customer. 11:01:55 15 Q. Sir- 11:01:56 16 A. So to me that adds up to ves we did. 11:01:57 17 Q. Sir, you just told rne earlier today you 11:02:00 13 don't know what Kelly-Moore got sent, didn't you? 11:02:02 19 A. I don't think so. 11:02:04 20 Q. You testified under oath to the same thing 11:02:05 21 before, haven't you? 11:02:07 22 A. About Kelly-Moore? 11:02:03 23 Q. Yeah. 11:02:09 24 A. We sent them the same that we sent all of 11:02:10 25 our customers, the asbestos toxicology report, the 11:02:12 0060 1 NAS report, the OSHA regulations, the EPA 11:02:13 2 regulations. 11:02:22 3 Q. And this testimony you're giving now is -- 11:02:23 4 MR. LASSETTER: Excuse rne. You're 11:02:25 5 interrupting. 11:02:27 6 THE WITNESS: Whatever - whatever studies 11:02:27 7 we had available we added to our list of available 11:02:29 3 studies as time went on. 11:02:32 9 BY MR. EGDORF: Q. Objection. 11:02:33 10 Non-responsive. You've corne up with all this during 11:02:34 11 the break, haven't you? 11:02:33 12 A. No. 11:02:39 13 Q. Oh, we just took a 20-minute break, and now 11:02:39 14 suddenly you remember things you think went to 11:02:42 15 Kelly-Moore? 11:02:44 16 A. I don't recall the other question about 11:02:45 17 Kelly-Moor&p-na 11:02:47 13 Q. Well, the record will speak to it, but how 11:02:43 19 about I ask you about a deposition you gave in 11:02:50 20 November of 2001 with Mr. Lanier? You would have 11:02:52 21 told the truth then, wouldn't you? 11:02:55 22 A. Yes. 11:02:56 23 Q. You wouldn't like in a deposition, would 11:02:57 24 you? 11:02:59 25 A. Not-to the - to the best of rny ability 11:03:00 0061 1 I'rn telling the truth. 11:03:02 2 Q. You were asked by Mr. Lanier about the TLV, 11:03:03 3 and you answered: I don't know what we told 11:03:07 4 Kelly-Moore or what we told Kelly-Moore or didn't 11:03:09 5 tell them. 11:03:12 6 MR. LASSE TTER: Just about the TLV? 11:03:15 7 MR. EGDORF: About anything. 11:03:17 3 MR. LASSETTER: Object. 11:03:13 9 MR. EGDORF: And object to you interrupting 11:03:19 10 the deposition. You want to say object to form 11:03:21 11 fine. Otherwise you don't get to say all your other 11:03:23 12 nice side bars. 11:03:26 13 BY MR. EGDORF: Q. If you testified to 11:03:27 14 Mr. Lanier in 2001 that you don't know what 11:03:23 15 Kelly-Moore was told by Union Carbide, was that true 11:03:31 16 or false? 11:03:33 17 MR. LASSETTER: Object to the form. 11:03:34 13 THE WITNESS: I'll telling you now that we 11:03:35 19 sent-I don't have any proof of a letter we sent, 11:03:36 20 here's these documents, but that was our practice -- 11:03:39 21 BY MR. EGDORF: Q. In 2001? 11:03:42 22 A. Let rne - to send these documents to our 11:03:43 23 customers, and they were a customer,__________ 11:03:46 24 Q. Objection. Non-responsive. Did you tell 11:03:47 25 the truth in 2001 November or not? 11:03:49 0062 1 A. To the best of rny ability, yes. 11:03:52 2 Q. And did you tell the truth earlier today 11:03:53 3 when I asked you what Kelly-Moore had been sent? 11:03:56 4 MR. LASSETTER: Object to the form. 11:03:59 5 THE WITNESS: I would have answered the 11:04:00 6 question to the best of rny ability. 11:04:00 7 Q. Would you have told the truth? 11:04:01 3 A. To the best of rny ability, yes. 11:04:02 9 Q. What's your explanation if your answer now 11:04:04 10 conflicts with what you said before? 11:04:07 11 A. Maybe I didn't understand the question, but 11:04:09 12 I arn just telling you now what we sent was sent to 11:04:11 13 all customers. 11:04:14 14 Q. Objection. Non-responsive. But it 11:04:15 15 certainly wouldn't have anything to do with the 20 11:04:17 16 minutes you spent with your lawyers, would it? 11:04:20 T7 A. I did not spent 20 minutes with rny lawyers. 11:04:22 13 Q. Well, the record will show how long we took 11:04:25 19 a break, won't it, sir? 11:04:27 20 A. I was not with rny lawyers. I was outside 11:04:27 21 smoking. 11:04:30 22 Q. You didn't spend any time with your lawyers 11:04:30 23 during the break? 11:04:33 24 A. About two minutes, one or two minutes. 11:04:34 25 Q. And the answer was - that you just gave 11:04:35 0063 1 about all the stuff you think you gave Union Carbide 11:04:39 2 less than two minutes, wasn't it? That you gave 11:04:41 3 Kelly-Moore. 4 A. I don't know-I don't see the 11:04:42 5 relationship - 6 Q. Well, sir, I'rn just trying to figure out 11:04:42 7 what the truth is. 11:04:43 3 A. What he. 11:04:45 9 Q. What you said - excuse rne. Now you're 11:04:46 10 interrupting rne. 11:04:47 11 A. We did not discuss this. 11:04:43 12 Q What is the truth? What you said in 2001, 11 04 50 13 or what you're saying now, or what you said before 11 04 53 14 the break? 11 04 55 15 MR UXSSETTER He's telling you - 11 04 56 16 MR EGDORF No 11 04 56 17 MR UXSSETTER Well, then hecan't answer 1104 57 18 your question 11 04 58 19 MR EGDORF If you want to instruct him 11 04 59 20 not to answer, feel free Take it up with the 1 1 05 00 21 court 1 1 05 03 22 MR UXSSETTER I'm obstructing him not to 1 1 05 03 23 answer- 1 1 05 05 24 MR EGDORF Fine 1 1 05 05 25 MR UXSSETTER - until you show him the 1 1 05 06 0064 1 question and answer that you're now accusing him of 1 1 05 07 2 changing 1 1 05 09 3 MR EGDORF Good luck 110510 4 MR UXSSETTER Don't answer 110511 5 BY MR EGDORF Q Which one is the 110512 6 truthful answer? 110513 7 MR UXSSETTER Don't answer He doesn't 1105 14 8 even know what you're talking about, Gene 11 05 14 9 MR EGDORF I read it to him You don't 110516 10 know that? You don't know your testimony? 11 05 17 11 MR UXSSETTER You didn't read him the 110517 12 full question and answer 110519 13 MR EGDORF Object to the side bar Knock 1 1 05 20 14 it off 1 1 05 22 15 MR UXSSETTER Show it to him or he's not 1 1 05 22 16 going to answer 1 1 05 25 17 MR EGDORF Knock it off 1 1 05 25 18 MR UXSSETTER You don't tell me what to 1 1 05 26 19 do, Gene 1 1 05 28 20 MR EGDORF Well, you're not going to tell 1 1 05 28 21 me what to do either 1 1 05 29 22 MR UXSSETTER I'm simply instructing - 1 1 05 30 23 MR EGDORF No, you're - yeah, then 1 1 05 30 24 that's what you say The other words are not 1 1 05 32 25 allowed under the rules Mr Go-to lawyer, I think 1 1 05 33 0065 1 you know the rules, I hope 1 1 05 35 2 MR UXSSETTER I'm simply advising you 1 1 05 36 3 that he's not going to answer any question - 1 1 05 37 4 MR EGDORF Then, fine You make the 1 1 05 39 5 instruction The side bar otherwise is 11 05 40 6 inappropriate 11 05 44 7 MR UXSSETTER I think first of all you 11 05 44 8 need to calm down 11 05 44 9 MR EGDORF Sir - no, you don't tell me 11 0545 10 what to do 11 Now, sir, if you testified in 2001 - 11 05 45 12 MR UXSSETTER No stop, stop, stop, stop 11 0548 13 No more You're going to need to calm down 1 1 05 50 14 MR EGDORF I am calm You need to sit 1 1 05 53 15 down 1 1 05 55 16 MR UXSSETTER No Take a break 1 1 05 55 17 MR EGDORF And quit interrupting me I'm 1 1 05 56 18 fine 1 1 05 57 19 MR BICKS Let's cool it 1 1 05 58 20 MR EGDORF I am cool I'm tired of being 1 1 06 00 21 interrupted and the rules being violated if you want 1 1 06 02 22 to instruct him not to answer I to ask my questions 1 1 06 02 23 and you make the instruction Just because you guys 1 1 06 03 24 want to hide the truth and tell him what to say, 1 1 06 06 25 doesn't make it appropriate Now let's go 1 1 06 09 0066 1 MR UXSSETTER We're not going on until 110611 2 you've calmed down 110613 3 MR EGDORF Fine You're wasting my time 1106 14 4 and we'll take that up with the court too 110615 5 Mr Myers are you ready to proceed? 11 06 17 6 MR UXSSETTER Are you ready to proceed, 110619 7 Gene? 8 MR EGDORF I've been ready I'm ready 1 1 06 20 9 for you to sit down and let me take my deposition 1 1 06 23 10 MR UXSSETTER You shout at him one more 1 1 06 26 11 time It's over 1 1 06 26 12 MR EGDORF wnatever Do wnateveryou 1 1 06 26 13 want, Scott, and we're be rignt here 1 1 06 28 14 Ready to go, Mr Myers? 1 1 06 31 15 THE WITNESS Yes 1 1 06 34 16 BY MR EGDORF Q Let's go If you 1 1 06 34 17 testified in 2001 that you didn't know what 1 1 06 35 18 Kelly-Moore was provided, was that testimony true or 1 1 06 38 19 false? 11 06 42 20 MR UXSSETTER Don't answer the question 11 06 42 21 until he shows you the question and answer that he 11 06 43 22 claims you answered, which he claims -- 11 06 45 23 MR EGDORF It's not a specific 11 06 47 24 question-answer If that was your general testimony 11 06 48 25 in 2001, was that true or false? 1 1 06 50 0067 1 A I'm telling you what we--our practice 1 1 06 53 2 was, was to send these particular documents that l 1 1 06 56 3 have described to all of our customers, and 1 1 06 58 4 Kelly-Moore was a customer 1 1 07 01 5 Q Objection 1 1 07 04 6 A What l said in the earlier deposition may 1 1 07 05 7 not have said that exactly, but that's what we did 1 1 07 07 8 Q So was that testimony in 2001 true or 1107 10 9 false? 11 07 14 10 MR UXSSETTER Object to the form many 1107 14 11 THEWITNESS I can't really tell you that 11 07 15 12 BY MR EGDORF Q Okay When I asked 11 07 18 13 you earlier today and you said you didn't know wnat 11 07 18 14 Kelly-Moore was provided, was that true or false? 1 1 07 21 15 A I don't remember telling you -- 1 1 07 23 16 MR UXSSETTER Hold on Can we get the 1 1 0723 17 court reporter to go back and get the question and 1 1 07 24 18 answer? 1 1 07 26 19 MR EGDORF No, we're not doing it that 1 1 07 26 20 way. 21 MR. LASSETTER: I think the question - 11:07:23 22 BY MR. EGDORF: Q. The record speaks 11:07:23 23 for itself, Mr. Myers. We'll ask~ I'll withdraw 11:07:29 24 it and ask you another question. 11:07:32 25 MR. LASSETTER: Okay. 11:07:33 0063 1 BY MR. EGDORF: Q. Would it he 11:07:34 2 appropriate for Union Carbide to influence public 11:07:35 3 officials about what's in public documents? 11:07:33 4 A. Can you give rne an example of what 11:07:40 5 you're- 11:07:43 6 Q. I'rn just asking a general - it might 11:07:43 7 depend? 11:07:45 3 A. I think it would depend, yes. 11:07:45 9 Q. Okay. 11 07:47 10 A. On what the situation is. 11:07:47 11 Q. Would it be a- 11:07:49 12 A. And I don't know what you mean by public 11:07:51 13 officials. 11:07:53 14 Q. Well, anyone. I mean, one of the things 11:07:54 15 you did was lobby; right? 11:07:58 16 Excuse rne, can you be quiet or whisper 11:07:59 17 lower, please, so you're not on the record 11:03:02 13 whispering to hirn while I'rn asking questions and 11:03:04 19 he's answering? 11:08:07 2L __ A. What was the .question?_____________ 11:08:09______ 21 Q. Well, for example, one of the things you 11:03:10 22 did was lobby; right? 11:03:11 23 A. I don't remember doing anything called 11:08:13 24 lobbying.no. 11:03:17 25 Q. What would you call it? 11:03:17 0069 1 A. Trying to present information that was 11:08:13 2 available from the -- from the field, as we usually 11:08:21 3 put it. 11:08:22 4 Q. Trying to get folks like the Consumer 11:03:23 5 Product Safety Commission to change the rules they 11:03:24 6 were going to institute; right? You sent letters 11:03:27 7 like that, didn't you? 11:03:30 A. I didn't personally but we commented on--11:08:30 9 their proposed rules, ves. 11:03:33 10 Q. Well, you wrote letters to customers asking 11:03:34 11 them to copy your letters and say the same thing, 11:08:3 12 didn't you? 11:03:39 13 A. I don't recall that, no. 11:03:40 14 Q. You deny that that happened? 11:03:42 15 A. No. I don't. 11:03:44 Q. Sir, you are -- are you still the mayor in 11:08:50 King City? 11:03:53 .A._Ye.s._______________________ 11;.Q8.;.54_ 19 Q How long have you been the mayor? 11:03:56 20 A I'rn in rny 11th year. 11:03:57 21 Q Who appoints the Coroner? 11:03:59 ~72 A. Imhaavvee" no idea. I think - well, in 23 Monterey County the Sheriff is the Coroner 09:05 24 Q. You've had communications with the 11:09:08 25 Coroner's office, haven't you? 11:09:10 0070 1 A. Which one? 11:09:12 2 Q. Out in King City. 11:09:13 3 A. Well, with the Sheriff, I-I knowhirn 11:09:15 4 personally, yes, hut I haven't talked to hirn as 11:09:13 5 Coroner.no. 11:09:20 6 Q. Is he a friend of yours? 11:09:21 7 A. He's an acquaintance. 11:09:22 3 Q. Okay. 11:09:24 ___ A H.Q.t.n.e.c.e.ssarily..a.frie.nd___________ 1_1.:.Q.9:24________ 10 Q. Mr. Kronkhyte was your friend, wasn't he? 11:09:27 11 A. Yes. 11:09:30 12 Q. He was employed at Union Carbide, wasn't 11:09:30 13 he? 11:09:32 14 A. Yes. 11:09:33 15 Q. For how long? 11:09:34 16 A. Probably over 25 years. 11:09:39 17 Q. Mr. Kronkhyte's dead, isn't he? 11:09:42 13 A. Yes. 11:09:46 19 Q. One of the things you have done is monitor 11:09:50 20 death certificates in King City, isn't it? 11:09:53 21 A. No, I don't do that. 11:09:55 22 Q. You haven't kept up with - what - when 11:09:56 23 the employees that worked at the mine die? 11:09:59 24 A. I know when they die, yes. 11:10:01 25 Q. And you don't look at their death 11:10:03 0071 1 certificates? 11:10:05 2 A. I have on occasion, but I don't-it's not 11:10:06 3_a.prar.tir.p.,.nfi__________ ____________ 1-1_1.n:08____________ 4 Q. Have you not testified just three weeks ago 11:10:03 5 that one of your practices was to monitor the death 11:10:11 6 certificates? 11:10:13 7 A. No, I don't recall testifying to that. 11:10:14 3 Q. You don't remember giving a deposition over 11:10:17 9 at the Doubletree about three weeks ago where you 11:10:19 10 asked about-you were asked about death 11:10:22 11 certificates? 11:10:24 12 A. Yes, I'rn answering what your question was. 11:10:25 13 I don't recall doing that as a matter of practice. 11:10:28____ 14 Q. In 1991 you became aware of a death 11:10:30 15 certificate that showed that an employee at the King 11:10:33 16 City mine had died of asbestosis; correct? 11:10:35 17 A. Yes ,1-1 don't know the date. If you 11:10:39 18 can show me the paperwork.________________11:10:42______ 19 Q. Approximately. 11:10:43 20 A. I have no idea approximately even. 11:10:43 21 Q. Okay. I'rn sorry. I wasn't clear. Were 11:10:45 22 you agreeing with approximately, or not agreeing 11:10:47 23 with approximately? 11:10:50 24 A. No, I'd like for you to s how rne the 11:10:50 25 document, then we can have the accurate date. 11:10:53 0072 1 Q. We'll take the date out of it, just to be 11:10:55 2 clear then. You're aware of a death certificate 11:10:57 3 that you saw that indicated that an employee that 11:10:59 4 had worked at the King City mine had died and the 11:11:02 5 death certificate said asbestosis was the cause; 11:11:06 6 correct? 11:11:10 7 A. I don't remember that was the cause, no. 11:11:10 _8____Q-Ymi-dnnlLzz__________________ 1_1_1_1_12______________ 9 A. The word asbestosis was on the certificate, 11:11:12 10 but I don't know whether that listed it as the 11:11:17 11 cause.__________________________ 11:11:19________________ 12 Q. That was Mr. Kronkhyte, wasn't it? 11:11:20 13 A. I don't think so. 11:11:22 14 Q. Who was it? 11:11:22 15 A. I don't-I'rn not going to reveal people's 11:11:23 16 death certificate information. 11:11:25 17 Q. Well, that's public record, sir. 11:11:26 18 A. I don't remember - you'd have to show rne 11:11:28 19 the record. Maybe I could identify it. 11:11:30 20 Q. Sir, as the mayor of King City, do you 11:11:32 21 think it's appropriate to hide public records and 11:11:33 22 not disclose information in public records? 11:11:36 23 A. The mayor-being mayor has nothing to do 11:11:40 24 with what we're talking about. 11:11:42 25 Q. I would just think the person being mayor 11:11:43 0073 1 would have a higher idea of what should be disclosed 11:11:46 2 to the public; is that not true? 11:11:49 3 A. I never thought about that. 11:11:50 4 Q. As you're sitting here today, you don't 11:11:51 5 want rne to tell - you don't want to tell rne the 11:11:54 6 name of a person that's on a public death 11:11:56 7 certificate? 11:11:59 3 A. I don't think that's appropriate, and I 11:11:59 9 don't remember the name that-you'd have to show 11:12:01 in_mp._thp._dnr.nmp.nt______________________ 1.1_l?_n.3__________ 11 Q. You remember the name. You testified three 11:12:04 12 weeks ago you knew who it was. You just didn't want 11:12:06 13 to say. 11:12:03 14 A. That's correct. 11:12:09 T5 U. SO wno was it? H7T2TD9 16 A. We're talking - I don't know which death 11:12:10 17 certificate you're talking about. 11:12:13 13 Q. So who was it? So there are more death 11:12:14 19 certificates that might have said asbestosis than 11:12:17 20 one? 11:12:20 21 A. I don't recall anymore. 11:12:20 22 Q. Then you must know who the one is. 11:12:22 23 A. I don't think it's appropriate for rne to 11:12:24 24 tell you. 11:12:26 25 Q. Okay. Well, your lawyers in discovering 11:12:26 0074 1 this case said we could have all the medical records 11:12:28 2 pertaining to all the employees of the King City 11:12:32 3 plant do you think they were wrong to tell us that 11:12:34 4 was okay? 11:12:36 5 A. No, I don't- 11:12:37 6 MR. LASSETTER: He's not going to give you 11:12:37 7 a name. You can take it up with the court if you 11:12:39 3 like. 11:12:40 9 MR. EGDORF: Object to the side bar. 11:12:41 10 Enough. 11:12:42 11 MR LASSETTER: I'm telling you. 11:12:42 12 MR EGDORF: That's fine. You withdrawing 11:12:43 13 your own agreement? 1111:12:45 14 MR. LASSETTER: I'm telling you - 11:12:45 15 MR. EGDORF: Are you withdrawing your own 11:12:46 16 agreement? 11:12:43 17 MR. LASSETTER: I don't know what agreement 11:12:43 13 you're talking about. 11:12:50 19 MR. EGDORF: I'rn sure you don't. I've 11:12:51 20 learned that. I'll send you the e-rnail. Maybe 11:12:52 21 you'll tell rne the General Counsel orders you to do 11:12:55 22 away with that one. 11:12:53 23 ' MR. LASSETTER: What are you talking about? 11:12:59 24 MR. EGDORF: Yes. Well, you agreed that we 11:13:00 25 could have all the medical records because you 11:13:02 0075 1 weren't convinced that they would show any 11:13:04 2 asbestosis in them. 11:13:06 3 MR. LASSETTER: Well, that- 11:13:06 4 MR. EGDORF: Mr. Myers - 11:13:06 5 MR. LASSETTER: Well, hold on, hold on - 11:13:07 6 no. 11:13:03 7 MR. EGDORF: Mr. Myers, after - I'm moving 11:13:08 B on. I'rn not -- you're not taking any more of rny 11:13:09 9 time. 11:13:12 10 MR. LASSETTER: I'rn simply answering your 11:13:12 11 question. 11:13:13 12 MR. EGDORF: I don't need to hear it. 11:13:14 13 MR. LASSETTER: We've made it clear 11:13:15 14 discovery. 11:13:16 45______ MR. EGDORF: I'rn not hearing you.______ 11:13:16____ 16 MR. LASSETTER: And the medical records are 11:13:16 17 available in the repository.______________ 11:13:20___________ 13 BY MR. EGDORF: Q. Mr. Myers? 11:13:21 49_ A Yes 11:13:22 20 Q. After you found out about this you had 11:13:22 21 somebody call the Coroner's office to find out about 11:13:2^ 22 that death certificate, didn't you? 11:13:27 23 A. Yes. 11:13:29 24 Q. And after that call was made the death 11:13:29 25 certificate was changed, wasn't it? 11:13:32 0076 1 A. It was changed later, yes. 11:13:34 2 Q. Do you think that was appropriate? 11:13:36 3 A. Yes, in that case it was. 11:13:33 4 Q. So you think it's appropriate for you to 11:13:33 5 use your influence as mayor to have death 11:13:41 6 certificates changed? 11:13:42 7 A. Has nothing to do with - I dont think I 11:13:43 3 was mayor at that time, for one thing, and I was not 11:13:45 9 acting - if I was the mayor I was not acting as 11:13:43 10 mayor. I was acting as a concerned person. 11:13:50 11 Q. Concerned about the effect-you had 11:13:53 12 been - how many times had you testified by 1991 ? 11:13:54 13 A. I don't recall. 11:13:57 14 Q. At that time you were still getting -- you 11:13:57 15 were getting paid $250 an hour then to testify for 11:14:00 16 Union Carbide, weren't you? 11:14:03 17 A. No. 11:14:04 13 Q. You weren't? They didn't pay you then? 11:14:05 19 A. No. 11:14:07 20 Q. You just did it all for free? 11:14:07 21 A. I didn't get any pay for testifying in 11:14:09 22 1991, if that's what you're talking about. 11:14:13 23 Q. Well, you were still getting income as a 11:14:16 24 salaried employee then, weren't you, until 1993 when 11:14:19 25 you retired? 11:14:22 0077 1 A. That's correct. 11:14:22 2 Q. So you were getting paid that way? 11:14:23 _3___ A. I was - yes, I was getting paid rny salary. 11:14:25_______ 4 Q. You'd certainly would agree that in 1991 if 11:14:23 5 it carne out that a person that worked at the King 11:14:30 6 City mine had died of asbestosis that would be 11:14:33 7 against the interests of Union Carbide and KCAC, 11:14:36 3 wouldn't it? 11:14:39 9 A. It was a -- it was a questionable decision 11:14:40 10 by whoever did the examination, and we questioned 11:14:43 11 it. And it was changed by the -- whoever the 11:14:45 12 medical people were in the Coroner's office. 11:14:50 13 Q. Objection. Non-responsive. With all due 11:14:53 14 respect, it's not rny question, sir. 11:14:55 15 __A Okay______________ _________11-14-57__________ 16 Q. If there was a death certificate that 11:14:57 17 stayed and remained stating someone died of 11:15: 00 13 asbestosis that would be against the interests of 11:15:0 4 19 Union Carbide and KCAC; true? 11:15:06 20 A. Not necessarily. 11:15:09 21 Q. You think it would be a good thing? 11:15:09 22 A. It would be a matter of concern. 11:15:11 23 Q. Well, sir, that would be the first time - 11:15:12 24 A. Not saying it was good or bad. It wasa 11:15:15 25 matter of concern. 11:15:13 Ot373 1 Q. That wasn't the first time that you heard 11:15:13 2 about employees at the mine that had lung problems, 11:15:20 3 is it? 11:15:24 4 A. I don't recall any others, no. 11:15:24 5 Q. You don't remember Doctor Lewinson corning 11:15:25 6 out in 1934 doing a survey of the employees? 11:15:23 7 A. Yes. 11:15:30 3 Q. He found that three of them he thought had 11:15:31 9 lung cancer; right? 11:15:33 10 A. I don't remember that again. You'd have to 11:15:34 11 show rne the documents. 11:15:36 12 Q. He said at least one he thought had 11:15:37 13 asbestosis; isn't that right? 11:15:39 14 A. You'd have to show rne the document. I 11:15:41 15 don't remember his words. 11:15:44 16 Q. Well certainly-assume with rne that 11:15:45 17 Doctor Lewinson did find that? 11:15:46 18 A. I don't want to assume that, no. 11:15:46 19 Q. Just asking you for the purpose of rny 11:15:48 20 question to assume that. You certainly at Union 11:15:50 21 Carbide would have had an obligation to tell those 11:15:53 22 employees of that finding, wouldn't you? 11:15:55 23 A. If it was proven to be true, yes. 11:15:57 "24 Q. And this study that was done by Doctor 11:15:59 25 Lewinson, that was as part of this transition where 11:16:01 0079 1 we got the Calidria Corporation; correct? 11:16:05 _2 A. I don't know. I don't remember the -____11:16:07____ 3 Q. You don't remember that was part of the due 11:16:08 4 diligence for the ultimate sales so the buying 11:16:10 5 companies could know what their potential future 11:16:13 6 exposure is in litigation? 11:16:16 7 A. No. I don't know that. 11:16:17 3 Q. You think that's wrong, or you just dont 11:16:19 9 know? 11:16:20 10 A. I don't know that. 11:16:21 11 Q. Okay. Well, once again, assume with rne 11:16:22 12 that Doctor Lewinson had findings like what I 11:16:29 13 mentioned. At least three people he suspected had 11:16:31 14 lung cancer and at least one, two that he thought 11:16:35 15 had asbestosis. Do you think that Union Carbide 11:16:38 16 would you have and obligation to tell all the 11:16:40 17 employees about that, or just the ones that he 11:16:43 13 thought were sick? 11:16:45 19 A. Again, as I told you, I think if it was 11:16:46 20 proven, you would tell the employees, yes. 11:16:48 21 Q. All of them? 11:16:50 22 A. I don't-I can't make that decision 11:16:50 23 sitting here today. 11:16:53 24 Q. Well, sir, you were in charge of the plant 11:16:53 25 then. What would your decision be, if you were 11:16:55 0030 1 making what you would think is the right decision? 11:16:58 2 A. If it was true that somebody had asbestos 11:17:00 3 related disease, we probably would have made that 11:17:03 4 known, yes. 11:17:05 5 Q. All right. Would you need to make that 11:17:06 6 known to your customers too? 11:17:03 7 A. No, I don't think so. 11:17:09 3 Q. Why not? 11:17:11 9 A. I don't think our customers would care what 11:17:12 10 our employees'health situation was. 11:17:14 Tl U. but you never asked tnern it tney'o care 11:1 /:1b 12 either, would you? 11:17:20 13 A. You're all - you're strictly talking 11:17:21 14 hypothetical here and I - 11:17:23 15 Q. Well, sir- 11:17:24 16 A. I can't really respond. 11:17:25 17 Q. If a person can -- if a salesperson at 11:17:27 they told customers that there wasD disease in UC mine/mill workers 18 Union Carbide went to a customer and said: We know 11:17:29 19 this product is safe because none of our employees 11:17:32 20 have ever gotten sick from it -- 11:17:34 21 A. We never told anybody it was safe. 11:17:36 22 BY MR. EGDORF: Q. Excuse rne you 11:17:39 23 didn't let rne finish, sir. 11:17:40 24 A. Oh. All right. 11:17:42 25 Q. If a customer said that would that- 11:17:42 0031 1 excuse rne if a salesman said that to a customer, 11:17:43 2 would that salesman be saying -- be saying something 11:17:45 3_wmng?___________________________ 1.i_17.4a_________________ 4 A. I don't get the questions with if and 11:17:48 5 assume. We did not tell anyone that our asbestos 11:17:51 6 was safe. 11:17:54 7 Q. No, sir, you said you don't know that 11:17:54 3 because you weren't there. You said they shouldn't 11:17:56 9 tell them that. Isn't that what you told rne 11:17:53 10 earlier? 11:13:01 11 A. That was our policy. 11:18:01 12 Q. Soif somebody did that, they violated the 11:13:03 13 policy? 11:13:05 14 A. Yes. 11:13:06 15 Q. And who would they answer to for that? 11:13:06 16 A. If ~ if - when I was the marketing 11:13:03 17 manager they would have answer to rne. I don't know 11:18:11 18 what period of time you're talking about. 11:13:14 19 Q. Well, you're not aware of anybody scolding 11:13:15 20 the sales guy to Castor Oil, are you? 11:18:13 21 A. Scolding? I don't know. I don't know 11:18:23 22 where Castor Oil got that information. 11:18:24 23 Q You think maybe they just made it up? 11:13:26 24 A Yes, I think so. 11:13:23 25 Q Well, why don't I show you - what - what 11:18:36 0032 1 did I give you? 3? My numbers are out of whack 11:13:41 2 here. 11:13:43 3 Let's take a look at Exhibit Number 4. 11:13:44 4 (Deposition Exhibit Number 4 was 11:13:47 5 marked for identification.) 11:18:47 6 BY MR. EGDORF: Q. That's signed by 11:13:47 7 you, you're John L. Myers; correct? 11:13:49 3 A. Yes. 11:13:51 9 Q. Marketing manager; correct? 11:13:51 10 A. Yes. 11:13:53 11 Q. April 30, 1973 you were the marketing 11:13:54 12 manager; right? 11:13:57 13 A. Yes. 11:13:57 14 Q. Do you know who P. C. Weeks is? 11:13:53 15 A. No. 11:19:01 16 Q. You don't remember hirn being a fellow in - 11:19:01 17 at Union Carbide, Australia? 11:19:04 18 A. I wouldn't remember until you said that. 11:19:05 19 I - and I still don't remember for sure. 11:19:07 20 Q. Why don't you read what in your letter, the 11:19:09 21 highlighted portion. Read that out loud. 11:19:12 22 A. Well, can I read the whole thing? 11:19:17 23 Q. I asked you to read the highlighted portion 11:19:13 24 out loud, please. 11:19:21 25 MR. LASSETTER: Let hirn read the whole 11:19:22 0033 1 letter. 11:19:24 2 MR. EGDORF: Excuse rne. I get to ask hirn 11:19:24 3 the questions. You can ask hirn to read it all out 11:19:27 4 loud after he's finished. 11:19:29 5 MR. LASSETTER: He's not going to do it, 11:19:29 6 Gene, until he's read the letter. 11:19:30 7 MR. EGDORF: Well, fine. I'll read it to 11:19:30 R_ymi,Sir_IIIL.withdraw.it___ ____________ 1_1_1.9i.32____________ 9 BY MR. EGDORF: Q. Didn't you write: 11:19:32 10 We say that RG 244 is not a significant hazard? 11:19:32 11 Isn't that what it says? 11:19:35 12 MR. LASSETTER: Don't answer the question 11:19:35 13 until you've had an opportunity to review the 11:19:37 14 document. 11:19:39 15 THE WITNESS: That says that in that one 11:19:39 16 short phrase. I think you'd have to read the rest 11:19:41 17 of it to find out what the - 11:19:44 13 BY MR. EGDORF: Q. Oh. 11:19:45 19 A. - what it means. 11:19:45 20 Q. You think the better part is just as 11:19:46 21 Degussa says that aerosil is not a significant 11:19:43 22 hazard we say that RG 244 is not a significant 11:19:51 23 hazard. You think that makes it better? 11:19:51 24 A. No. 11:19:53 25 Q. No. 11:19:53 0034 1 A. I'd like to see all of it though, if you 11:19:53 2 don't-to read. 11:19:57 3 Q. Is this your handwriting in the top right, 11:19:58 4 sir? 11:20:00 5 MR. LASSETTER: Wait a minute. Stop. I 11:20:01 6 want to make this very clear. 11:20:03 7 MR. EGDORF: Objection to the side-bar, and 11:20:05 8 objection to you interrupting rny questioning. If 11:20:07 9 you have an objection make it. 11:20:09 10 MR. LASSETTER: You have been in enough 11:20:10 11 depositions to know better. 11:20:12 12 MR. EGDORF: And you have been in enough to 11:20:13 13 know you can't do what you're doing. 11:20:15 14 BY MR. EGDORF: Q. Is that your 11:20:17 15 handwriting top right? 11:20:17 16 MR. LASSETTER: He's not going to answer 11:20:13 17 the questions until you've given hirn an opportunity 11:20:19 13 to look at the document. Just give it to hirn. 11:20:23 19 MR. EGDORF: I gave it to hirn to look at 11:20:24 20 and just as I said with every document today take 11:20:25 21 your time to review it. He answered rny questions. 11:20:27 22 You're the one who suddenly said please review the 11:20:28 23 document. 11:20:31 24 MR. LASSETTER: He's not- 11:20:31 25 MR. EGDORF: Sir, is that your handwriting 11:20:32 0085 1 in the upper right? 1 1 20 35 2 MR UXSSETTER Don't answer your question 1 1 20 36 3 Take your time 1 1 20 37 4 MR EGDORF Which is it? Don't answer the 1 1 20 37 5 question or take your time? 1 1 20 39 6 MR UXSSETTER Take time to review the 11 2043 7 document 11 20 43 8 MR EGDORF Oh, then can he answer the 11 20 45 9 question? 10 MR UXSSETTER We'll see 11 20 45 11 THE WITNESS That's my handwriting, yes 11 20 45 12 BY MR EGDORF Q And you authored 11 20 46 13 this letter, didn't you, sir? 11 20 48 14 A And what we have said in all of our 11 20 49 15 information to our customers is that our asbestos 1 1 20 54 16 and most asbestos can be used safely without 1 1 20 56 17 endangering the health of the workers 18 MR EGDORF Objection Non-responsive 11 21 19 19 Miss court reporter, would you read back the 112119 20 question he was asked And, sir, would you please 1121 19 21 try to answer the question l asked you then? 11 21 19 22 THEWITNESS I think again I said yes 112119 23 that's my handwriting 11 21 19 24 MR EGDORF It wasn't the question 11 21 19 25 THEREPORTER That was the last question 112119 0086 1 BY MR EGDORF Q There's a question 2 after that I'll ask it again You authored this 112120 3 letter didn't you, sir? 112122 4 A l signed it, yes And there is an example 112123 5 at the end of what we sent to customers of various 1121 26 6 documents 112129 7 Q Did I ask you that? Object to the- 112129 8 non-responsive? 112132 9 A I think-you want this all-- 112134 10 BYMR EGDORF Q You let people 112135 11 write your letters for you? 112136 12 A Sometimes l have help, yes 112138 13 Q Well, you wouldn't sign anything you didn't 11 21 40 14 think was true, would you? 112141 15 A Not intentionally, no 112144 16 Q That wouldn't be good business practice, 112146 17 would it? 11 21 48 18 A It wouldn't be good personal practice 112148 19 Q Certainly if something wrong was going to 112152 20 get conveyed to the customer that would be bad, 1121 55 21 wouldn't it, under your name? 11 21 57 22 A I think this is a -- is a perfectly good 112159 23 statement 1 1 22 01 24 Q It's not what I asked you, sir 1 1 22 02 25 A l think our asbestos can be - is not a 1 1 22 03 0087 1 significant hazard 1 1 22 06 2 Q Sir, if your-I'm trying Please listen 1 1 22 07 3 to my question You're not answering my question 1 1 22 09 4 A. Okay. 11:22:11 5 Q. It wouldn't be good for something 11:22:12 6 inaccurate under your name to get to a customer, 11:22:14 7 would it. Didn't ask you anything about that 11:22:18 3 document. 11:22:19 9 A. Wouldn't be good, 1 - 11:22:20 10 Q. You'd agree to that? 11:22:22 11 A Don't knnw whpfhpr that's tup nr not 11-99-94 12 Q. What about Mr. Whitlock? Was he a friend 11:22:23 13 of yours? 11:22:32 14 A. Yes. 11:22:32 15 Q. He's dead too, isn't he? 11:22:32 16 A. Yes. 11:22:34 17 Q. Do you know how many of the people that 11:22:38 18 Doctor Lewinson surveyed in 1984 are now dead? 11:22:41 19 A. No. I have no idea. 11:22:48 20 Q. With respect to the death certificate 11:22:57 21 originally said asbestosis on it, you got a copy of 11:23:00 22 that death certificate, didn't you? 11:23:04 23 A. Yes. 11:23:05 24 Q. You got it at your office? 11:23:06 25 A. I don't remember-I can't remember how I 11:23:07 0038 1 got it. 11:23:09 2 Q. Sorry. Do you still have a copy of it at 11:23:10 3 your office? 11:23:12 4 A. I don't have an office. 11:23:13 5 Q. Do you have a copy of it at your house? 11:23:14 6 A. No. 11:23:16 7 Q. Did you throw it out? 11:23:17 8 A. I never had a copy at rny house. 11:23:19 9 Q. Well, how did you know what it s aid? 11:23:21 10 A. I've seen it- 11:23:22 11 Q. Where did you? 11:23:23 2L2_ ___A__ =-in-fle.pnsitinns________________1.1_23i24_________ 13 Q. Well, no, how did you see it to then tell 11:23:25 14 somebody to call to see about getting it 11:23:23 15 investigated? 11:23:30 16 A. I just said I don't remember how I got it. 11:23:31 17 Q. Okay. So then when you got it, what have 11:23:36 13 you done with what you got? 11:23:38 19 A. It was in the files. I don't know where it 11:23:41 20 is now. 11:23:43 21 Q. What - what do you mean by the files? 11:23:44 22 A. At -- at KCAC. 11:23:46 23 Q. Okay. So you think it would still be in 11:23:43 24 the KCAC files? 11:23:52 25 A. Well, they're closed down. They don't have 11:23:53 0039 1 any files. 11:23:56 2 Q. Do you know where their files are now? 11:23:56 3 A. No, I don't. 11:23:53 4 Q. Where were the files -- did you understand 11:23:59 5 they'd have been -- they maintained their files at 11:24:01 6 their offices until they closed down. 11:24:03 7 A. To the best of rny knowledge yes? 11:24:07 Q. When KCAC closed down, did you still have 11:24:03 9 an ownership interest? 11:24:12 10 A. No. 11:24:13 11 Q. Did you sell that interest at some point? 11:24:13 12 A. Yes. 11:24:15 13 Q. When? 11:24:16 14 A. Shortly after I got s orne shares, they 11:24:16 15 wanted them hack. I think it was within a year 11:24:13 16 after the sale took place. 11:24:20 17 Q. Do you- 11:24:23 13 A. Probably 1936. 11:24:23 19 Q. Do you know why they wanted them back? 11:24:24 20 A. No, I don't. 11:24:26 21 Q. What did you get paid for them? 11:24:27 22 A. I don't recall. 11:24:29 23 Q. During the year or so I think you said that 11:24:30 24 you had the shares did you get paid any dividends or 11:24:32 25 a share of the profits? 11:24:36 0090 1 A. No. 11:24:38 2 Q. Was KCAC profitable while you were the 11:24142 3 president? 11:24:45 4 A. As far as I recall, in most years it was, 11:24:43 5 yes.___________________ _________ 11:24:51_________ 6 Q. And you were president-what? Seven 11:24:51 7 eight years, something like that? 11:24:54 3 A. From '85 to '93. And I said I didn't share 11:24:55 9 in the profits, but we did have an employee -- if we 11:25:01 10 had had net income - positive net income it was 11:25:05 11 shared with the employees. 11:25:03 12 Q. And you obviously got a salary? 11:25:09 13 A. Yes. 11:25:11 14 Q. Now, did you actually retire from Union 11:25:11 15 Carbide? 11:25:13 16 A. Well, I quit working for them in 1985. I 11:25:14 17 didn't start receiving any pension checks until I 11:25:17 13 retired from KCAC. 11:25:21 19 Q. In'93? 11:25:23 20 A. Yes. 11:25:24 21 Q. So the last ten years or so, in addition to 11:25:25 22 the monies you've received as part of you are 11:25:27 23 testifying in litigation, you've also received 11:25:29 24 pension benefits from Union Carbide? 11:25:32 25 A. From Union Carbide and KCAC. 11:25:33 0091 1 Q. From both? 11:25:35 2 A. Yes. 11:25:36 3 Q. What are your pension benefits just 11:25:40 4 generally speaking? 11:25:42 5 A. What are they? 11:25:43 6 Q. Yeah. 11:25:44 7 A. Well, I have life insurance coverage, I 11:25:45 3 have pension checks, and I'rn still participating in 11:25:49 9 the Union Carbide chemical -- medical plan. 11:25:55 10 Q. Do you own stock? 11:25:53 11 A. No. 11:25:59 12 Q. Did you? 11 26:01 13 A. Only with KCAC for that year. 11:26:03 14 Q. I meant just in generally, do you hold 11:26:06 15 stock in Union Carbide or have you? 11:26:09 16 A. Oh, I did many, many years ago. When l 11:26:11 17 was - I think it was before I got -- I'm not sure 11:26:16 13 when I had it, but it was part of a savings plan 11:26:13 19 that Union Carbide had. 11: 26:22 20 Q. Other than that, you know, kind of a 11:26:23 21 pre401(k) 401 (k) kind of thing? 11:26:26 22 A. Yes. 11:26:30 23 Q. Is that how it was or -- okay. Did you 11:26:32 24 ever get stock or stock options as part of your 11:26:33 25 income package from Union Carbide? 11:26:33 0092 -1----- A. Mo. 44-26-40- 2 Q. Are you familiar with employees at the King 11:26:53 3 City mine that were found to have pleural 11:26:57 4 thickening? 11:27:02 5 A. No. 11:27:02 6 Q. Do you know what that is ? 11:27:03 7 A. Thickening of the pleura. 11:27:04 3 Q. Are you aware that in the literature that 11:27:06 9 that's something that can be caused by exposure to 11:27:03 10 asbestos; correct? 11:27:12 11 A. Yes. 11:27:12 12 Q. Including Calidria; correct? 11:27:13 13 A. I don't think so, no. 11:27:15 14 Q. Sir, haven't testified before that you 11:27:16 15 believe Calidria can cause asbestosis and lung 11:27:19 16 cancer? 11:27:23 17 A. Yes. I'rn talking about today I don't 11:27:23 13 believe that Calidria is harmful. 11:27:25 19 Q. Okay. Didn't you just testify - excuse 11:27:23 20 rne. Didn't you just testify three weeks ago that 11:27:32 21 you believed that Calidria could cause asbestosis 11:27:34 22 and lung cancer? 11:27:38 23 A. I don't recall that, no. 11:27:39 24 Q. Well, certainly- 11:27:40 25 A. Oh. 11:27:41 0093 1 Q. - if you gave a deposition three weeks ago 11:27:41 2 you told the truth, didn't you? 11:27:43 3 A. That's what we were - as I said, that's 11:27:45 4 what we were telling customers while we were selling 11:27:47 5 it, to treat our asbestos like any others, but since 11:27:49 6 I've retired I think there's been many - quite a 11:27:52 7 bit of information to show that Calidria asbestos 11:27:55 3 does not cause disease. 11:27:59 9 Q. When did you corne up with that? 11:28:03 10 A. In the last ten years. As I said I've - 11:23:06 11 with different studies. 11:23:09 12 Q. What document told you that? 11:28:11 13 A. I haven't seen any document that told rne 11:23:12 14 that. 11:28:14 15 Q. So you're saying there's studies out there 11:28:15 16 that now say suddenly Calidria is safe and better? 11:28:17 17 A. That's what I understand. I haven't seen 11:23:21 18 them. 11:23:23 19 Q. But you can't cite to a single thing that 11:23:23 20 evidences that? 11:23:26 21 A. Well, a study by Doctor Muhle in Germany. 11:28:27 22 Q. What about Doctor Langer? 11:28:31 23 A. I don't remember hirn studies from hirn. 11:23:32 24 Q. What about the studies from Italy? 11:23:34 25 A. Italy? I don't know which study you're 11:23:36 0094 1 talking about. 11:23:39 2 Q. What about your own internal studies that 11:28:39 3 -- from Mellon Institute that showed the rats got 11:23:42 4 mesothelioma more readily with your product than any 11:23:46 5 other? 11:23:50 6 MR. LASSETTER: Object to form. 11:23:50 7 THE WITNESS: I certainly don't remember 11:23:51 3 that. 11:28:52 9 BY MR. EGDORF: Q. Well, heck. I 11:23:55 10 mean, when you found that out, did you send a letter 11:23:56 11 to somebody at KCAC and say we need to take all 11:23:59 12 those warnings off the product? This is all wrong. 11:29:02 13 A. When I found out what? 11:29:04 14 Q. That Calidria is perfectly safe. 11:29:06 15 A. That was after I retired. 11:29:03 16 Q. Yeah. And so when you found out, because 11:29:12 17 it's important to get the facts right, as you told 11:29:14 13 rne with the death certificates, even though you 11:29:17 19 weren't working there anymore, did you call somebody 11:29:13 20 at KCAC and say, whoa, you've got a false warning on 11:29:21 21 your product? Did you do that? 11:29:25 22 A. Did I tell KCAC what to do? 11:29:25 23 Q. Yeah. 11:29:27 24 A. I'rn afraid not. There were still rules 11:29:23 25 regarding - 0095 I Q. So it's okay to - 11 29:29 2 A. -- rules regarding regulations. 11:29:31 3 Q. So it's okay -- 11 29:33 4 A. Why don't you let rne finish? 11:29:33 5 Q. Go ahead. 11:29:34 6 A. There were still rules regarding labels 11 29:35 7 that go on bags. 11:29:37 3 Q. And you could have written a letter just 11:29:33 9 like any citizen to OSHA or anybody else about that, 11:29:40 10 couldn't you? 11:29:43 11 A. I could have, yes. 11:29:43 12 Q. Just like you decided it was important to 11:29:44 13 call the Sheriff about that death certificate; 11:29:46 14 right? 11:29:49 15 A. I don't think I called any Sheriff, but- 11:29:49 16 Q. Certainly-you didn't tell rne that that 11:29:52 17 was done? The Sheriff wasn't contacted about the 11:29:54 13 death certificate? 11:29:57 19 A. Not that I know of. 11:29:53 20 Q. Oh, the Coroner? 11:29:59 21 A. Coroner, yes. 11:30:00 22 Q. Same thing. You made it a point to contact 11:30:01 23 hirn, didn't you? 11:30:04 24 A. I don't know about other counties, hut the 11:30:04 25 County of Monterey the Sheriff is the Coroner. 11:30:07 nng fi______________________________________________________ 1 Q. And you did that because you thought it was 11:30:10 2 important to get accurate information out in the 11:30:12 3 public; right? You didn't want something wrong in a 11:30:14 4 public document; right? 11:30:16 5 A. I don't really consider a death certificate 11:30:17 6 a public document. 11:30:19 7 Q. Oh, so you got your hands on somebody's 11:30:20 8 private personal death certificate that shouldn't 11:30:23 9 have been public? 11:30:26 10 A. I said I don't know if it's public or not. 11:30:27 11 I did have a copy, yes. 11:30:30 T2 Q. You think It would be okay If It was 11: 30: 3' 13 private and not supposed to be public for you to get 11:30:33 14 it? 11:30:36 15 A. I don't know how I got it. 11:30:36 16 Q. I mean, you don't-you told us today you 11:30:33 17 don't want to divulge the guy's name. Did you ask 11:30:40 13 his family if it was okay for you to get his death 11:30:43 19 certificate? 11:30:46 20 A. I don't recall that know. 11:30:47 21 Q. Did you ask his family if it was okay for 11:30:43 22 you to call the - 11:30:50 23 MR. LASSETTER: Would you rnind not leaning 11:30:50 24 forward into the witness. 11:30:52 25 MR. EGDORF: Yeah, I would rnind. I'rn not 11:30:52 0097 1 in his face. 'rn not even in the camera. 11:30:54 2 BY MR. EGDORF: Q. Did you contact his 11:3(1 55 3 family about whether they thought it was okay for 11:30 57 4 you to contact the Coroner about his death 11:30: 59 5 certificate? 11:31:01 6 A. I don't recall if I did that or not. 11:31:02 7 Q. Did you ask the family if it was okay for 11:31:04 3 you to contact his doctor? 11:31:06 9 A. I don't recall that I contacted his doctor. 11:31:09 10 Q. Well, you said that-strike that. 11:31:12 11 As far as you're concerned it was okay to 11:31:' 12 do all those things without their permission? 11:31:' A. As l said, l don't remember if l talked to 11:31:20 14 Mrs. Whitlock or not? 11:31:22 15 Q. Do you think it was okay to talk to them 11:31:24 16 without their permission? 11:31:26 17 A. If it was okay to what? 11:31:27 13 Q. For you to contact the Sheriff's office - 11:31:29 19 excuse rne - the Coroner or anyone else regarding 11:31:32 20 his cause of death without their permission? Do you 11:31:35 21 think that's okay? 11:31:37 22 A. I said I don't recall whether I did or not. 11:31:33 23 Q. I understand that. I said if you did it 11:31:40 24 without their permission do you think that's okay? 11:31:43 25 A. 1 don't know. 11:31:45 0093 1 Q. You're not sure? 11:31:46 2 A. 1 don't know. 11:31:47 3 Q. Do you usually take actions that you're not 11:31:43 4 sure about before you do them whether they're okay 11:31:51 5 or not? 11:31:55 6 MR. LASSETTER: Object to the form. 11:31:55 7 THE WITNESS: I probably cio, yes. 11:31:56 3 BYMR.EGDORF: Q. In 1966 when you 11:31:57 9 got involved with Calidria and you knew or had been 11:31:59 10 told at the time whether you believe it now or not 11 that Calidria was unsafe, did you ever suggest to 11:32:03 12 somebody rnaybe we shouldn't do this? Maybe we 11:32:06 13 shouldn't sell this? 11:32:03 14 A. I don't recall anybody tell rne it was 11:32:09 15 unsafe. 11:32:12 16 Q. Well, you told rne you - excuse rne - you 11:32:12 17 testified earlier today you knew since 1966? 11:32:12 18 -- A--Not-thaUt-was-unsafe------------------- U;32U6------------------- 19 Q. You knew it might cause lung cancer and 11:32:13 20 asbestosis, and you testified in many depositions 11:32:20 21 that you got that information in your training 11:32:23 22 before you started working with Calidria in 1966; 11:32:25 23 right? 11:32:23 24 A. No, I haven't testified to that. 11:32:23 25 Q. You haven't? 11:32:29 0099 1 A. No. 11:32:31 2 Q. You sure you didn't say that three weeks 11:32:31 3 ago too? 11:32:34 4 A. That I got it in training before I started 11:32:34 5 working.__________________________ 11:32:35_________________ 6 Q. Safe - part of your safety training in 11:32:36 7 1966 before you went to the Calidria department? 11:32:33 3 A. No, I didn't - went directly from Paduca, 11:32:40 9 Kentucky to the - to Niagara Falls. I didn't have 11:32:44 10 any training before I went to the - to Niagara 11:32:46 11 Falls. 11:32:43 12 Q. So you if testified and said that under 11:32:49 13 oath three weeks ago, that was inaccurate? 11:32:52 14 A. I'rn telling you that I did not have any- 11:32:54 15 you said if I had safety training before I went to 11:32:56 16 Niagara Falls. I did not have. 11:32:59 17 Q. I didn't ask you about where you went. I 11:33:01 13 said 1966 - I don't know where you went first. So 11:33:03 19 far as I understand it from what you've told rne 11:33:06 20 about Calidria you went to King City in 1967 first. 11:33:03 21 A. That's wrong. 11:33:11 22 Q. Okay. So if you've testified'67 was your 11:33:12 23 first at King City, that's wrong too? 11:33:15 24 A. I think you -- you must have gotten mixed 11:33:13 25 up. I went to Niagara Falls in 1966. I went to 11:33:20 0100 1 King City in 1967. 11:33:24 2 Q. Okay. Hey, Dave, get the - the deposition 11:33:25 3 Mr. Hartly took three weeks ago where he said that 11:33:29 4 he got-learned about all of it at the safety 11:33:32 5 training in 1966. 11:33:34 6 You don't remember Mr. Hartly taking your 11:33:36 7 deposition three weeks ago? 11:33:3S 3 A. Yes. 11:33:39 9 Q. Give or take? 11:33:40 10 A. Yes, I remember. 11:33:41 11 Q. You don't remember hirn asking you the same 11:33:42 12 thick? 11:33:45 13 A. I don't remember hirn tying it down to one 11:33:45 14 year.no. 11:33:50 15 Q. Did you at any time when you were -- take 11:33:51 16 the year out. When you were hearing about the 11:33:53 17 reports that some people thought that asbestos might 11:33:54 13 be unsafe, did you ever write a rnerno or tell one of 11:33:57 19 your superiors, hey, maybe we shouldn't sell this 11:34:00 20 stuff? 11:34:03 21 A. I was not in any position to tell rny 11:34:03 22 superiors that, and we did not consider it -- we 11:34:06 23 always considered that asbestos could be used 11:34:10 24 safely. 11:34:11 25 Q. Objection. Non-responsive. 11:34:12 0101 I So the answer is no, you never suggested 11:34:14 that, did you? 11:34:16 A. No, I didn't. 11:34:16 Q. And when you were the president at KCAC in 11:34:17 1935 which is more than 10 years ago; correct? 11:34:20 A. Yes. 11:34:23 Q. You didn't make the decision we shouldn't 11:34:23 sell asbestos because it might be unsafe, did you? 11:34:25 A. No. I didn't. 11:34:2i 10 Q. Are you proud of the safety record at Union 11:34:36 11 Carbide? 11:34:39 12 A. Very proud, yes. 11:34:39 13 Q. You know which one I want. You don't hsve 11:34:43 14 it? Bhopal, you proud of that? 11:34:45 15 A. I'rn not familiar with - 11:34:51 16 Q. You're not? 11:34:53 17 A. - what happened there. I'rn not-I don't 11:34:54 13 - I mean I don't know the details of -- of what 11:34:56 19 what caused the accident. 11:34:58 20 Q. You know thousands of people died because 11:35:00 21 of a Carbide facility over there; right? 11:35:03 22 A. Carbide had a facility there, and people 11:35:05 23 died, yes. I don't know whether it's because they 11:35:03 24 had a facility or not.__________________11:35:12_____________ 25 Q. Well, you know that Carbide's been asked to 11:35:13 0102 1 corne to India and answer for criminal charges. You 11:35:17 2 know that, don't you? 11:35:20 3 A. I have read that. 11:35:21 4 Q. Do you think it's appropriate for Carbide 11:35:21 5 to refuse to go answer to those charges? 11:35:23 6 A. I'm not in a position to answer that. 11:35:26 7 Q. Just asking your opinion of what's right or 11:35:23 3 wrong as a representative of the company? 11:35:31 9 A. I don't have an opinion on that. 11:35:34 10 Q. What about Hawk's Nest? Are you proud of 11:35:35 11 that? 11:35:33 12 A. Of what? 11:35:39 13 Q. Hawk's Nest, are you proud of that? 11:35:40 14 A. I don't know what you're talking about. 11:35:42 15 Q. You're not familiar with the thousands of 11:35:43 16 mine workers that died as a -- in West Virginia 11:35:46 17 working on a mine for Union Carbide in the '20s and 11:35:49 13 '30s? 11:35:53 19 A. I don't remember that, no. 11:35:53 20 Q. You don't remember seeing information about 11:35:55 21 how Carbide took those thousands of bodies and 11:35:57 22 dumped them in an unmarked pit? You don't know 11:36:00 23 about that? 11:36:02 J24____ A Nn_Nn,-Ldmlt_______________ 1-1:36:03_______________ 25 Q. You don't know about in that case that the 11:36:03 0103 1 guy who ran the mine over there consulted with the 11:36:05 2 Coroner and got the death certificates changed as to 11:36:03 3 how those people died?__________________ 11:36:11___________ 4 MR. LASSETTER: Object to the form. 11:36:12 5 THE WITNESS: I don't know anything about 11:36:13 6 what you're talking about. So you don't-no use 11:36:14 7 your asking more questions, because you don't know 11:36:17 3 anything about it. 11:36:20 9 Q. With all due respect, sir, I'll decide what 11:36:20 10 questions to ask you and if you don't know, you can 11:36:23 -11--telLroe-yoiLdonlt-know------ I------------------- U;.36;.23------------------ 12 So you don't know all facts about Carbide's 11:36:23 13 history in terms of health and safety do you? 11:36:27 14 A. No. I never said that I did. 11:36:30 15 Q. Isn't it true that in 1963 that Carbide 11:36:32 16 created an internal rnerno where it said that Carbide 11:36:34 17 said they had killed, rnairned and injured twice as 11:36:37 13 many employees as any other company in the company? 11:36:40 19 MR. LASSETTER: Object to the form. 11:36:44 20 THE WITNESS: Is that a question? 11:36:45 21 BY MR. EGDORF: Q. Yes, sir. 11:36:46 22 A. Do I know that? 11:36:47 23 Q. Yes, sir. 11:36:49 24 A. No. 11:36:49 25 Q. If Carbide said that would they be wrong? 11:36:49 0104 1 A. I don't know whether they said it or not. 11:36:51 2 Q. You were there - 11:36:54 3 A. Maybe you should show rne some documents. 11:36:55 4 Q. I will, just a minute. I'rn printing it 11:36:57 5 out. 11:36:59 6 A. Okay. 11:37:00 7 Q. You were at the company at the time. You 11:37:00 3 weren't aware of what your safety record was in 11:37:01 9 1968? 11:37:05 10 A. Of the Calidria asbestos group? 11:37:05 11 Q. No, Carbide as a whole. 11:37:08 12 A. No. 11:37:09 13 Q. Do you think Carbide took the initiative as 11:37:17 14 a safety leader with respect to asbestos? 11:37:20 15 A. I don't know what you mean by took the 11:37:25 16 initiative as a leader. 11:37:27 17 Q. Made sure that all the information got out 11:37:28 18 there to the public so the public could judge it on 11:37:31 19 their own. 11:37:34 20 A. That's-as I just said, that's part of 11:37:34 21 our practice, to send the customer the information 11:37:37 22 that we had on -- through the asbestos toxicology 11:37:39 23 report and other scientific documents that were 11:37:42 24 available. 11:37:44 25 Q. Well, sir, you didn't send all the 11:37:45 0105 1 documents. You sent the ones that - the ones that 11:37:48 2 you chose to send; correct? 11:37:49 3 A. We filled our files with what we thought 11:37:50 4 were appropriate documents on the health hazards of 11:37:54 5 asbestos. 11:37:57 Q. You at Carbide made the decision to edit 11:37:59 or -- or not provide to customers all of the 11:38:01 information. You chose which information they would 11:38:04 9 be provided; true? 11:38:06 10 A. No, we give them a list of what we had 11:38:07 11 available, and they could pick out what they wanted. 11:38:10 12 Q. That was - didn't include the Mellon 11:38:12 13 study, did it? 11:38:14 14 A. No, not Mellon. 11:38:14 15 Q. Didn't - didn't include Sayers or Dernehl 11:38:14 16 or Braun/Truan, did it? 11:38:17 17 A. Yes, it includes the toxicology report. 11:38:19 18 That was something we sent starting in 1964. 11:38:22 19 Q. Yeah, you can get that too. I'rn going to 11:38:35 20 show hirn this other one first. 11:38:39 21 Unfortunately, sir, the first page on this 11:38:44 22 exhibit is not very clear, but I'rn not the source of 11:38:46 23 it, so take a look at that. 11:38:48 24 (Deposition Exhibit Number 5 was 11:39:41 25 marked for identification.) 11:39:41 0106 I THE WITNESS: Okay. 11:39:42 2 BY MR. EGDORF: Q. Sir, the first 11:39:43 3 part - and this is authored by you; correct? 11:39:44 4 A. Yes. 11:39:47 5 Q. February 12, 1974; correct? 11:39:47 6 A. Yes. 11:39:50 7 Q. Regarding Calidria asbestos; correct? 11:39:50 8 A. Right. 11:39:53 9 Q. I think actually up at the top right 11:39:54 10 there's a dash, and I think it's marketing; is that 11:39:56 11 correct? 11:39:59 12 A. Yes. And underneath it's: Safe use 11:39:59 13 literature. 11:40:02 Note document re: list of items to be sent toD customers. 007891; Other UCC doc #s 1025533; 023078; 020782; 020767; 016169; 14 Q. Okay. And you copied some of the people 11:40:03 15 we've talked about before today, Mr. Norris, and 11:40:05 16 Mr. Walsh, and Mr. Thurber, and Mr. ~ Doctor 11:40:0S 17 Rhodes; right? 11:40:11 18 A. Yes. 11:40:12 19 Q. Now, it says in thebeginning: Enclosed 11:40:12 20 are copies of some items in our files to answer most 11:40:15 21 questions on the potential hazards associated with 11:40:19 22 the use of asbestos; correct? 11:40:22 23 A. Yes. 11:40:23 24 Q. And if we turn the page, canyou tell rne 11:40:23 25 whether Doctor -- excuse rne -- whether - yes -- 11:40:25 0107 1 Doctor Sayers' report is on that list? 11:40:27 2 A. I think I've already told you it was not on 11:40:29 3 that list. 11:40:32 4 Q. Is the Mellon study on this list? 11:40:32 5 A. No. 11:40:35 6 Q. Is the Herneon study on this list? 11:40:35 7 A. I don't know what that is. 11:40:33 3 Q. It's the Braun/Truan report on this list? 11:40:39 9 A. I never heard of that. 11:40:43 10 Q. Well, do you feel like when you were at 11:40:44 11 Carbide that you had a responsibility to acquire all 11:40:46 12 of the available literature regarding the hazards of 11:40:4S 13 asbestos? 11:40:51 14 A. That would be almost irn- -- I would say an 11:40:52 15 impossible task. 11:40:55 16 Q. Do you think you had a -- a -- an 11:40:55 17 obligation to try to get as much of it as possible? 11:40:59 18 A. Well, we did what we could with especially 11:41:01 19 the published literature like World Health 11:41:04 20 Organization, the - as I mentioned earlier, the 11:41:07 21 National Academy of Sciences. We felt like those 11:41:10 22 were independent reports that described the hazards 11:41:14 23 of asbestos. 11:41:17 24 Q. You thought those were better than your own 11:41:17 25 reports? 11:41:20 9+03-------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1 A. Well, our reports were not-_________11:41:21 2 Q. Independent; right? 11:41:23 3 ____ MR. LASSETTER: Let him finish.________ 11:41:24_______ 4 THE WITNESS: They were not designed to be 11:41:27 5 passed on to customers. We - we took the 11:41:29 6 information that was developed for example by 11:41:31 7 Mellon, and put that into our asbestos toxicology 11:41:33 8 report___________________________ 11'41'37_________________ 9 BY MR. EGDORF: Q. So in your opinion 11:41:37 10 Carbide needed to put all the information that were 11:41:39 U__in those reports in its toxlnoiog^ietiQils?______11:41:41____ 12 A. Not all of it, no. We put in - well, the 11:41:44 Pertinent to the situation't) 13 14 T5 medical department did it. They put in what they 11:41:47 thought was pertinent to the situation. 11:41:49 Q. Sir, you saw on the Sayers report where it 11:41:51 and, the "situation" is to sellD as much asbestos as possible by reassuring customers that there is no 16 says in several places: We need to tell our 11:41:53 health risk. 17 customers this; correct? 11:41:55 18 A. That's exactly what we were doing telling 11:41:56 19 our customers. 11:41:59 20 Q. And is it your testimony that every single 11:41:59 21 thing he said you needed to tell the customers you 11:42:02 22 told them? 11:42:06 23 A. Well, you show rne the Sayers report and I 11:42:06 24 will look at it and figure it out. 11:42:03 25 Q. You don't know-excuse rne. You don't 11:42:10 0109 1 know without looking at it whether you told all the 11:42:11 2 customers all the things that should have been told? 11:42:14 3 A. Do I have that memory? No, I don't have 11:42:15 4 the Sayers report memorized. I've seen it a lot of 11:42:17 5 times in depositions. 11:42:20 6 Q. And you looked at it yesterday, sir. 11:42:20 7 A. Certainly didn't memorize it. 11:42:22 3 Q. You looked at it yesterday? 11:42:24 9 A. Yes. 11:42:25 10 Q. Is it your testimony with what you saw 11:42:25 11 yesterday that all the information was provided to 11:42:2S 12 the customers that's contained in Sayers report? 11:42:30 13 A. I - again, I didn't memorize it. I'd have 11:42:32 14 to see what he recommended. 11:42:35 15 Q. Sir, again, you don't know what was - 11:42:37 16 A. Again, that went to the medical department, 11:42:39 17 and then they took it from there in their asbestos 11:42:41 18 toxicology report. 11:42:44 19 Q. Sir, you don't-if you sent-if you or 11:42:47 20 your salespeople forward something, is it your 11:42:50 21 responsibility to make sure it's accurate? 11:42:52 22 A. If rny salespeople forward something? 11:42:54 23 Q. Yeah? 11:42:57 24 A. Like what a calling card. 11:42:57 25 Q. No, a medical - medical report. Dear 11:42:53 0110 1 fill-in-the-blank customer, enclosed is our - a 11:43:02 2 report that summarizes our opinions regarding 11:43:05 3 asbestos, signed John Myers. Is it your 11:43:03 4 responsibility to make sure what's in that report is 11:43:11 5 accurate before you send it? 11:43:14 6 A. You mean, this published report? I don't 11:43:15 7 know what really what you're talking about. 11:43:19 3 Q. Your internal reports, or the internal 11:43:21 9 information you've provided that you told rne that 11:43:24 10 you gave to customers. If you signed off and say 11:43:26 11 here it is, is it you the one signing it, do you 11:43:29 12 have a responsibility to make sure it's accurate and 11:43:32 13 complete?_________________________ 11:43:34______________ 14 A. We sent as I said the asbestos toxjcology 11:43:35 15 report. That was produced by the medical 11:43:33 16 department. I did not challenge the medical 11:43:41 17 department on that. And then we sent other 11:43:44 18 published documents that I've already gone through. 11:43:47 19 There's 30 or 29 on this list._____________ 11:43:50__________ 20 Q. Sir, I'rn not asking you about that now. 11:43:53 21 A. Okay. 11:43:57 22 Q. Objection. Non-responsive. I'll ask you 11:43:57 23 about a different document. Look at Exhibit 6. 11:44:00 24 Tell rne, please, if you've seen that before. 11:44:02 25 (Deposition Exhibit Number 6 was 11:44:06 0111 1 marked for identification. 11:44:06 2 THE WITNESS: No. 11:44:07 3 __ BY MR. EGDQRF: Q. What's the title? 11:44:07 A. Qur ten-year safety failure. 11:44:11 5 Q. And whose letterhead is it? 11:44:13 6 A. It's got a Union Carbide. 11:44:15 7 Q. And if you turn to the next page, sir, and 11:44:17 3 read out loud the first paragraph under summary. 11:44:19 9 A. Simply stated, our safety performance has 11:44:24 10 shown no improvement for more than ten years as 11:44:27 11 measured by the most significant yardstick, 11:44:30 12 disabling injury frequency. Furthermore, in the 11:44:33 13 last ten years we have become the most hazardous 11:44:36 14 employer in the Big 7 chemicals group, rnairning 11:44:40 15 people at more than twice the rate of the others, 11:44:43 16 and last year we let more accident dollars go down 11:44:46 17 the drain or up in srnoke than any one of these major 11:44:50 13 competitors. 11:44:53 19 Q. Now, on the first page, sir, somebody in 11:44:53 20 handwriting put company confidential; correct? 11:44:56 21 A. Yes. 11:44:59 22 Q. Certainly you wouldn't expect somebody at 11:45:00 23 Carbide to write something false in a document 11:45:03 24 that's going to be kept within Carbide, do you? 11:45:06 25 A. I would have no opinion on that. I'rn - 11:45:09 0112 1 Q. Nobody shared that rnerno with you? 11:45:11 2 A. This? 11:45:13 3 Q. Yes. 11:45:13 4 A. I said I've never seen it before. 11:45:14 5 Q. Okay. Is that the kind of thing you think 11:45:16 6 you should have been told about? 11:45:13 7 A. Not necessarily, no. I wasn't involved 11:45:20 3 with the corporate activities. 11:45:22 "9 rHE REPORTER: One moment, Counsel. 33 10 MR. EGDORF: Oops, stay on the exhibit, 11:45:40 11 Mr. Myers. 11:45:42 12 THE REPORTER: Please continue. 11:45:43 13 BY MR. EGDORF: Q. Who is Mr. Pearsall 11:45:44 14 (phonetic)? 11:45:45 15 A. As I recall, he was a safety manager or 11:45:46 16 person in the Colorado location. 11:45:50 17 Q. How about Mr. Rebholtz? 11:45:53 13 A. He was in the Union Carbide New York office 11:45:56 19 in the rnetals division. 11:46:00 20 Q. Mr. Wolf? 11:46:02 21 A. He was in the rnetals division in New York. 11:46:05 22 Q. Sir -- 11:46:10 23 A. Is the R. Wolf orR. F. Wolf? 11:46:11 24 Q. R. F. Wolf? 11:46:15 25 A. Yes. 11:46:13 0113 1 Q. In 1932 did you guys - you guys - Union 11:46:13 2 Carbide were advised of some requirements 11:46:22 3 promulgated by EPA to submit unpublished health and 11:46:25 4 safety studies; correct? 11:46:30 5 A. Again, I don't recall that. 11:46:32 6 Q. Well, if EPA had asked you to produce all 11:46:35 7 unpublished health and safety studies, is that 11:46:40 3 something you'd feel obligated to comply with? 11:46:43 9 A. This is Calidria or Union Carbide? I-I 11:46:47 10 wouldn't have any-I don't have any opinion on 11:46:49 11 that. 11:46:52 12 Q. Well, it must be Calidria if your name's on 11:46:52 13 the document, wouldn't it, in 1932? 11:46:55 14 A. Yes. 11:46:57 15 Q. And of course in 1932 you - you're still 11:46:57 16 working for Union Carbide. You're -- what's your 11:47:00 17 title at the plant? 11:47:03 13 A. Product and production manager. 11:47:04 19 Q. Okay. So if EPA had said in 1932, we want 11:47:06 20 copies of your health and safety studies, that's 11:47:10 21 something you'd feel like you need to comply with, 11:47:13 22 wouldn't you? 11:47:16 23 A. I think it would have to be evaluated. I 11:47:17 24 don't think you can just say yes or no to some -- a 11:47:19 25 question like that. 11:47:22 0114 1 Q. Well, do you think you need to decide which 11:47:23 2 ones we want to give them and not give them? 11:47:25 3 A. I didn't mean that no. 11:47:29 4 Q. What do you mean by need to be evaluated? 11:47:31 5 A. What they're asking for and what we had. 11:47:33 6 Q. Let rne clarify then would you agree that 11:47:35 7 you need after clarification to provide them 11:47:33 3 whatever it is they're asking for? 11:47:40 9 A. If they ask for a specific document and it 11:47:42 10 was a legal request I would say yes. 11:47:45 11 Q. Well not necessarily a specific document. 11:47:47 12 If they don't-if it's an unpublished study they 11:47:49 13 rnay not know the name of the document; right? 11:47:52 14 A. Well, you said if they asked for a 11:47:54 15 document. 11:47:56 16 Q. Okay. Now, if they asked for your health 11:47:56 17 and safety studies regarding Calidria, okay, would 11:47:53 13 you take that to mean you need to give them all of 11:43:01 19 them? 11:43:04 20 A. You mean anything that we had collected? 11:43:04 21 Q. Sure. 11:43:06 22 A. You mean passing out to customers, that 11:43:07 23 kind nf thing_______________________ 11-48TI9______________ 24 Q. No, I don't think you had to pass it out to 11:43:10 25 customers because it says it's unpublished. 11:43:12 0115 1 Unpublished health and safety studies. 11:43:15 72 A. Again, I - I would have to know the 11:48:17 3 situation and the legal requirements. 11:48:20 cf 010094 4 Q. Okay. So you would want to find out the 11:43:22 5 legal requirements before you decided what 11:48:24 6 information they'd be given? 11:43:26 7 A. I think that would be appropriate yes. 11:43:23 3 Q. As opposed to oh, here look at all our 11:43:29 9 medical stuff because we have nothing to hide; 11:43:34 010094 10 right? 11:43:36 11 A. I would say that I would want to pass that 11:43:36 12 by the- 11:43:33 13 Q. Well, do you remember ever telling anyone 11:43:39 14 that the Mellon Institute studies in 1966 and 1971 11:43:42 15 need not be reported? 11:43:47 16 A. Did I tell them that? 11:43:43 17 Q. Yeah. 11:43:49 13 A. I don't recall that. 11:48:50 19 Q. You don't recall writing a letter saying 11:43:51 20 that on October 26th, 1932? 11:43:52 21 A. No, I don't. 11:43:56 22 Q. Well, if you did so, do you think that was 11:43:57 23 appropriate- 11:43:59 24 A. I don't know- 11:43:59 25 Q. - to decide that the Mellon study 11:49:00 0116 1 shouldn't be given to the EPA? 11:49:03 2 A. I don't know. 11:49:05 3 Q. If you did so, you would have carefully 11:49:05 4 evaluated it and corne up with some reason why you 11:49:07 5 didn't think you needed to produce it; right? 11:49:10 6 A. I wouldn't have done that on rny own, but 11:49:13 7 with other help, yes. 11:49:15 3 Q. The legal department? 11:49:17 9 A. Legal, rnaybe medical, and management 11:49:13 10 probably. 11:49:21 11 Q. Sir, what's your undergraduate degree in? 11:49:34 12 A. Chemical engineering. 11:49:38 13 Q. I take it you had to take rnath courses to 11:49:42 14 get that, didn't you? 11:49:45 15 A. I started in probably grade school with 11:49:46 16 rnath courses, yes. 11:49:49 17 Q. Do you know what an average is? 11:49:50 13 A. Yes. 11:49:51 19 Q. Can you give rne your best definition of 11:49:52 20 what an average is? 11:49:55 21 A. You add two numbers together and divide 11:49:56 22 them by two, and you get an average. 11:49:59 23 Q. So if, for example, let's say that s orneone 11:50:02 24 tells you they have three items and the average is 11:50:04 25 ten. Okay? Because you could have more than two to 11:50:07 0117 1 get an average; right? 11:50:11 2 A. Yes. 11:50:12 3 Q. Like batting average in baseball, bat three 11:50:12 4 or four or 500 times in a year; right? 11:50:16 5 A. Yes. 11:50:13 6 Q. So let's say you have three items in our 11:50:13 7 example, and the average is ten? 11:50:21 3 A. Average what is ten? 11:50:23 9 Q. Whatever it is. Widgets; okay? 11:50:24 10 A. Okay. 11:50:27 11 Q. If-for the average to he ten there only 11:50:23 12 are two possibilities; right? Either all three 11:50:31 13 items are ten, or there has to be at least one 11:50:34 14 that's more than ten; correct? 11:50:33 15 A. Yes. 11:50:40 16 Q. Because you could have a number that's 11:50:42 17 below ten a number, a number that's above ten, a 11:50:45 13 number that's exactly ten and get an average of ten, 11:50:50 19 such as 9, 10 and 11; right? 11:50:52 20 A. Yes. 11:50:54 21 Q. Now, sir, I was going to ask you some 11:50:57 22 questions regarding the sale of Carbide's interest 11:50:59 23 in the mine. That's called the Coalinga mine; 11:51:03 24 right? Or arn I mixing up some terms there? 11:51:09 25 A. Yeah, you're mixing some terms. 11:51:11 0113 1 Q. Okay. What's it called? 11:51:14 2 A. The whole deposit was sometimes called the 11:51:15 3 Coalinga deposit. My-because the other two 11:51:13 4 companies operating up there had their operations 11:51:20 5 headquartered in Coalinga. 11:51:24 6 Q. Fair enough. I just want to make sure I 11:51:23 7 define the mine correctly. What would I call the 11:51:30 3 mine so you and I aren't confused, or some other 11:51:33 9 lawyer reads this one day and says you said 11:51:36 10 something you didn't say. 11:51:39 11 A. Urn- 11:51:42 12 Q. Just call it the King City mine can you 11:51:42 13 live with that or do you want something else? 11:51:45 14 A. No, it was in San Benito County. It wasn't 11:51:47 15 even in- 11:51:49 16 Q. Okay. 11:51:50 17 A. 60 miles - 30 miles from King City. 11:51:50 13 Q. Why don't we just call it the mine? Can 11:51:54 19 you live with that?____________________11:51:56_________ 20 A. Okay. The asbestos mine. 11:51:56 21 Q. The asbestos mine, where y'all got your 11:51:57 22 Calidria? 11:52:00 23 A. Right._______________________11:52:00___________ 24 Q. Now, I was going to ask you some questions 11:52:01 25 of the sale of the interest from Carbide to KCAC, 11:52:03 0119 1 but with what I asked you earlier I just want to 11:52:06 2 make sure this is right. The sale actually was done 11:52:09 3 by, you believe, this Carbide Corporation to KCIC 11:52:11 4 (sic), not Union Carbide directly to KCAC; right? 11:52:14 5 MR. LASSETTER: I think you meant - you 11:52:20 6 mean Calidria? 11:52:22 7 MR. EGDORF: Yeah, Calidria. 11:52:22 3 MR. LASSETTER: Go ahead. 11:52:22 9 THE WITNESS: I - I don't remember - 11:52:22 10 BY MR. EGDORF: Q. Sorry. I keep 11:52:23 11 mixing those up. 11:52:25 12 A. - if we were still Calidria Corporation 11:52:26 13 when we -- that was a very short-lived corporation. 11:52:23 14 I'm not sure whether it changed hack to Union 11:52:31 15 Carbide, or if Calidria Corporation was in excision 11:52:33 16 when the sale was made. 11:52:37 17 Q. If I asked you this earlier I apologize, 11:52:33 13 because I kind of got off topic when I asked you 11:52:41 19 about that. Did you have any involvement in the 11:52:44 20 sale of the interest from whatever company it was to 11:52:46 21 KCAC other than just you were an employee out there? 11:52:50 22 A. I was involved. I talked to the potential 11:52:53 23 buyers about the operation. 11:52:56 24 Q. Who were the other two companies in that 11:53:02 25 area that were mining asbestos? 11:53:05 0120 1 A. In what area? 11:53:07 2 Q. Out-you said there were two other 11:53:03 3 companies operating near the - the mine where the 11:53:10 4 Calidria carne from? 11:53:13 5 A. Yes, J. M. and Atlas asbestos. 11:53:14 6 Q. J. M. as in Johns-Manville? 11:53:19 7 A. Yes. 11:53:21 3 Q. There was trernolite in their asbestos mine 11:53:21 9 wasn't there? 11:53:24 10 A. In Canada, yes. 11:53:24 11 Q. No, in the one in California. 11:53:25 12 A. Oh, no. Never was any trernolite find. 11:53:23________ 13 Q. J. M. and Atlas didn't have trernolite in 11:53:30 14 theirs? Are you sure? 11:53:35 15 A. Yes. They couldn't have had because there 11:53:35 16 wasn't any trernolite there. 11:53:33 17 Q. Well, you didn't own their mine did you? 11:53:39 13 A. It was all the same deposit. 11:53:41 19 Q. So- 11:53:43 20 A. And it was examined by several people who 11:53:43 21 sampled the whole deposit, not just our area. 11:53:46 22 Q. So your Calidria would be the same as the 11:53:49 23--J^4^-aad-Atlas-ast3estos4hatx from that area? 11:53:5.1 24 A. The mine would -- the ore would be the 11:53:55 25 same, not the final product. 11:53:57 0121____________________________________________________________ 1 Q. Do you know if there was any agreement 11:53:53 2 between Carbide and KCAC or the Calidria Corporation 11:54:01 3 and KCAC where KCAC would be indemnified for any 11:54:07 4 claims madeagainst it regarding asbestos?________ 11:54:11____ 5 A. I think there was an indemnification 11:54:14 6 clause. I can't remember exactly how it was worded. 11:54:18 7 Q. And when you were president of KCAC 11:54:20 3 certainly that's something that would have been 11:54:23 9 maintained in the files of the company; true? 11:54:25 10 A. The sales contract? 11:54:27 11 Q. Yes. 11:54:23 12 A. Yes. 11:54:23 13 Q.Did you understand the indemnification 11:54:29 14 provision to be part of the sales contract or a 11:54:32 15 different document? 11:54:34 16 A. I don't recall. 11:54:34 17 Q. Okay. Did you have any communications with 11:54:35 13 the Continental Insurance Company in connection with 11:54:39 19 the sale of the interest in the mine? 11:54:42 20 A. Not that I remember. 11:54:43 21 Q. Do you remember folks from Continental 11:54:45 22 Insurance Company corning out there? 11:54:46 23 A. No. 11:54:43 24 Q. Do you remember getting the documents from 11:54:50 25 the Continental Insurance Company regarding 11:54:52 0122 1 asbestos? 11:54:55 2 A. No. 11:54:55 3 Q. My question wasn't very good. Just so 11:54:57 4 we're clear, you deny that you got them, or you just 11:54:59 5 don't remember- 11:55:02 6 A. I don't remember anything about Continental 11:55:03 7 Insurance. 11:55:04 3 Q. Okay. Any other insurance companies? That 11:55:05 9 you had communication with in connection with the 11:55:11 10 sale of the interest in the mine? 11:55:13 11 A. Not that I recall. 11:55:15 12 Q. Sir, I've noticed in your depositions 11:55:17 13 before, you get asked a lot of questions about OSHA 11:55:21 14 and OSHA's regulations; true? That's a topic you've 11:55:23 15 heard about? 11:55:27 16 A. On occasion, yes. 11:55:23 17 Q. One thing I haven't seen anybody ask you 11:55:29 13 about I wanted to ask you about real, real, real 11:55:31 19 briefly, you're familiar with the MSHA aren't you? 11:55:34 20 A. The mine - yes Mine Safety and Health 11:55:33 21 Administration. 11:55:39 22 Q. I got rny letters right, didn't I? 11:55:41 23 A. Yes, MSHA. 11:55:44 24 Q. You understood that they had regulatory 11:55:45 25 authority over the mine, didn't you? 11:55:43 0123 1 A. They were - yes, well, yeah, I'rn not sure 11:55:50 2 they were directly, but we did have visits from MSHA 11:55:52 3 quite frequently, yes. 11:55:58 4 Q. Did you exchange correspondence with them 11:55:59 5 MSHA is that what you're saying? 11:56:03 6 A. That's what the acronym was called. 11:56:05 7 Q. Did you exchange correspondence or 11:56:07 3 communications with them from time to time?______11:56:09_____ 9 A. I think we did. I think they usually gave 11:56:10 10 us a report of their inspections, and we probably 11:56:12 11 responded in some way. 11:56:16 12 Q. Did MSHA issue citations, you know, like 11:56:17 13 OSHA sometimes issues citations, did MSHA do that as 11:56:22 14 well?____________________________ 11:56:27__________________ 15 A. I think they had authority to. I dont 11:56:27 16 remember whether we got any or not. 11:56:31 17 Q. You might have, might not have you just- 11:56:33 13 it's been a long time? 11:56:35 19 A. Just don't remember, yeah. 11:56:36 20 THE REPORTER: One at a time. 11:56:35 21 BY MR. EGDORF: Q. Would those be in 11:56:37 22 the repository or at KCAC's files wherever those are 11:56:38 23 or do you know? 11:56:41 24 A. I do not know. 11:56:41 25 Q. MSHA continue to out while it was KCAC? 11:56:42 0124 1 A. Yes. 11:56:46 2 Q. Also OSHA would corne out from time to time; 11:56:46 3 correct? 11:56:49 4 A. Cal OSHA, not federal OSHA. 11:56:50 5 Q. Never had any visits from the feds? 11:56:52 6 A. Federal OSHA? 11:56:54 7 Q. Yes, sir. 11:56:55 3 A. I don't think so. 11:56:56 9 Q. Anyother federal agency corne inspect the 11:56:56 10 mine? 11:56:59 11 A. MSHA. 11:56:59 12 Q. I'm sorry. I was excluding them too. I 11:57:00 13 apologize. 11:57:04 14 A. And I can't remember if EPA ever carne out. 11:57:04 15 We- 11:57:03 16 Q. Did you ever- 11:57:09 17 A. Oh, federal; right? US Bureau of Mines, I 11:57:09 13 don't-no, they weren't a regulatory. Okay go 11:57:13 19 ahead. That's all I can remember. 11:57:16 20 Q. Did you all ever get any citations from 11 57: 13 21 OSHA? 11:57:21 zz 7v From cal osha? nrr 23 Q. Yes, sir. 11:57:22 24 A. Yes. 11:57:23 25 Q. Where are those located? 11:57:23 0125 1 A. The citations? 11:57:25 2 Q. Yes, sir. 11:57:27 3 A. I have no idea. 11:57:27 4 Q. Did you get citations for your fiber counts 11:57:23 5 being too high? 11:57:31 6 A. Not that I recall. 11:57:32 7 Q. What were the citations for? 11:57:33 3 A. Well, their normal thing was a handrail 11:57:34 9 broken, or-I can't remember all of the - 11:57:39 10 Q. Okay. 11:57:42 11 A. -- citations. That was 30 years ago or so. 11:57:42 12 Q. Is it your testimony, sir, affirmatively, 11:57:46 13 that you never got a citation or Carbide or KCAC 11:57:50 14 never got a citation from OSHA because of the fiber 11:57:54 15 counts, or are you not sure or don't remember? 11:57:53 16 A. I'rn not - don't remember. 11:58:01 17 Q. Sir, last thing before they change the tape 11:53:03 13 - how much time do I have left? 11:53:06 19 THE VIDEOGRAPHER: A few minutes. 11:58:07 20 BY MR. EGDORF: Q. All right. I had 11:53:09 21 Doctor Egilrnan print out a copy of a couple of pages 11:53:13 22 of the deposition of the deposition I was referring 11:58:13 23 to earlier that Mr. Hartly took of you a few weeks 11:53:21 24 ago. I want to show you page 35. If you would read 11:58:24 25 the question and the answer that's bracketed 11:58:29 0126 J__staiting_ar.linp.-1.9,-plp.ase_______________ 1-1-58:3.1____________ 2 A. The question: All right. And when - when 11:58:36 3 you started - when you started working with 11:58:41 4 Calidria in the 1960s you through your training 11:58:46 5 locations at Union Carbide were aware that asbestos 11:58:51 6 caused asbestosis and cancer; correct? 11:58:54 7 Mrs. Judin: Object to form. 11:58:58 3 The Witness: Yeah, I think I answered that 11:59:00 9 earlier. Yes, I would have been aware of that. 11:59:02 10 Q. All right. Is that answer accurate? 11:59:06 11 A. Yes._______________________ 11:59:09________________ 12 MR. EGDORF: I think she needs to take a - 11:59:13 13 change the tape and I think we're at about an hour 11:59:15 14 again. So if you want to take a break and stretch 11:59:18 15 your legs again, srnoke or whatever, that's fine. 11:59:20 16 A. All right. 17 THE VIDEOGRAPHER: This is the end of tape 11:59:37 18 1 in the videotape deposition of John Myers. Going 11:59:37 19 off the record at 11:59. 11:59:37 20 (Short break.) 12:15:23 21 THE VIDEOGRAPHER: This is the beginning of 12:15:23 22 tape 2 in the videotape deposition of John Myers. 12:15:30 23 We're going back on the record at 12:15 p.rn. 12:15:33 24 BY MR. EGDORF: Q. Mr. Myers, before I 12:15:37 25 ask anymore questions I do want to clarify one thing 12:15:39 0127 1 on the record, because I kept saying this deposition 12:15:42 2 was three weeks ago, and I guess I've just lost rny 12:15:44 3 track of time. It was June 25th, 2003, so I guess 12:15:50 4 it was a month and a few days ago. Okay? 12:15:53 5 A. That's fine. 12:15:56 6 (Deposition Exhibit Number 7 was 7 marked for identification.) 3 BY MR. EGDORF: Q. I think your 12:15:57 9 counsel has the exhibit excerpt of that transcript. 12:15:58 10 I wanted to call your a attention to page 35 on 12:16:00 11 Exhibit 6 or 7,1 think it is. What's the number I 12:16:04 12 marked that? I lost track again? 12:16:09 13 A. 7.________________________ 12:16:09_________________ 14 Q. Up near the top on page 35 you see line 11: 12:16:10 15 Question: All right. Now, did you ever see any 12:16:16 16 records that indicated that-where a death 12:16:13 17 certificate indicated the word asbestosis on it? 12:16:20 18 What was your answer. 12:16:24 19 A. Not that I recall, no. 12:16:25 20 Q. That wasn't true was it? 12:16:26 21 A. No, it wasn't. That was a- 12:16:27 22 Q. Okay. Sir, I'rn done with that exhibit. If 12:16:30 23 you want to set it aside.________________ 12:16:32 24 (Deposition Exhibit Number 8 was 25 marked for identification.) 0123 I BY MR. EGDORF: Q. I want to ask 12:16:35 2 you -- show you another deposition, November 29, 12:16:36 3 2001. It's actually taken in this hotel, by 12:16:40 4 Mr. Lanier in the Latharn versus Garlock case. If I 12:16:45 5 turn your attention to page 72, line - excuse rne. 12:16:51 6 Page 73. Line 7 the question is: There were areas 12:17:00 7 where you wore respirators because the Chrysotile 12:17:0^ 3 asbestos can hurt you; right? 12:17:09 9 If you'd look at line 9 and read your 12:17:11 10 answer out loud, please? 12:17:13 11 A. Yes, it can cause asbestosis or I think it 12:17:14 12 can. We have -- like I say, we haven't had any- 12:17:13 13 and then he cut rne off. 12:17:22 14 Q. And what was the date of the deposition per 12:17:23 15 the front page of the whole deposition, sir? 12:17:25 16 A. November 29th, 2001. 12:17:29 17 Q. Okay. Now, I've been trying to find - 12:17:32 13 A. Did you want to put that over here? 12:17:41 19 Q. I didn't mark it. 12:17:42 20 A. Oh. 12:17:43 21 Q. I've been trying to find as many of your 12:17:44 22 depositions as I can, and the first one that I could 12:17:46 23 find was back in 1932. Do you know if you ever gave 12:17:50 24 one before then? 12:17:53 25 A. No. I didn't. 12:17:53 0129 1 Q. Does 1932 sound about right? 12:17:59 2 A. Yes. 12:13:01 3 Q. Excuse rne. I've lost rny stickers here. I 12:13:04 4 show you what I've marked as Exhibit 3. It's got 12:13:13 5 some stickies on it, and if we need to we can take 12:13:17 6 those off later, but it might help us find some of 12:13:20 7 the pages; okay? 12:13:23 3 A. All right. 12:13:24 9 Q. I don't know if I - I might have these 12:13:25 10 two, rny version your version, backwards if so, we 12:13:26 11 can change them out, just so I can ask you the right 12:13:31 12 questions. And I'rn going to call your attention to 12:13:33 13 the places that I have some questions. Okay, sir? 12:13:36 14 A. All right. 12:13:33 15 Q. If you'll turn to page 53. Does it not go 12:13:39 16 that far? 12:13:53 17 A. I don't have a 53. 12:13:53 13 Q. I wonder if I -- I wonder if we mixed them 12:19:00 19 up. His ends at 53. Where is the rest of that- 12:19:06 20 rest of it? 12:19:17 21 DOCTOR EGILMAN: There's one completed 12:19:21 22 volume. 12:19:23 23 MR. EGDORF: This goes to page 52. There 12:19:23 24 is no 53. 12:19:26 25 DOCTOR EGILMAN: What's this. 12:19:23 0130 1 MR. EGDORF: More pages. Well, I see-I 12:19:29 2 see what happened, I think. I'rn sorry, Mr. Myers. 12:19:32 3 Here we go. Here you go. 12:19:35 4 DOCTOR EGILMAN: No, that's yours. This 12:19:39 5 one's his. 12:19:43 6 MR. EGDORF: All right. We'll trade them 12:19:44 7 out. I'll mark that one Exhibits. 12:19:45 3 (Deposition Exhibit Number 3 was 12:19:59 9 remarked for identification.) 12:19:59 10 MR. EGDORF: See if that will work on 12:19:59 11 there. There you go. All right. You've got page 12:20:01 12 53, sir? I've got it. Looks you don't. Let rne 12:20:05 13 know when you've got it. 12:20:09 14 A. Yes. 12:20:10 15 Q. You see there's a green sticky down there 12:20:11 16 at the bottom of the page? 12:20:13 17 A. Yes. 12:20:14 IS Q. Now, all the depositions you've ever given 12:20:15 19 weregiven under oath, weren't they, sir? 12:20:17 20 A. Yes. 12:20:19 21 Q. And you understood in all those depositions 12:20:20 22 that you need to answer truthfully and to the best 12:20:22 23 of your ability? 12:20:25 24 A. Yes. 12:20:25 25 Q. Just like today; right? 12:20:25 0131 1 A. Yes. 12:20:27 2 Q. And I take it, as far as you can recall, 12:20:27 3 you always told the truth or tried to in your 12:20:30 4 depositions didn't you? 5 A. Again, to the best of rny ability. 12:20:34 6 Q. Now, page 53, line 20, the question is: 12:20:35 7 Okay. Well, you were familiar that asbestos could 12:20:35 3 cause lung impairment prior to 1970, were you not? 12:20:38 9 And what was your answer? 12:20:43 10 A. I couldn't say that I was, not really. 12:20:44 11 Q. If you turn to page 63, sir, - I think 12:20:53 12 it's where the next green sticker is. 12:20:58 13 If we go up to line 6 - it's not 12:21:01 14 highlighted there. I'rn going to go up a little 12:21:07 15 above that. Okay?____________________ 12:21:09__________ 16 Question: And of course you stated that 12:21:10 17 you didn't know anything about the disease processes 12:21:13 13 for asbestos before 1970. 12:21:15 19 And what was your answer? 12:21:17 20 A. I couldn't remember knowing it. 12:21:18 21 Q. And then you got interrupted it looks like 12:21:20 22 with right, and then what did you say? 12:21:22 23 A. I think before then. 12:21:23 24 Q. And the next question is: Okay. So this 12:21:24 25 warning didn't inform you of any disease processes 12:21:26 0132 resulting in asbestos in your present recollection, 12:21:29 did it? 12:21:33 And what was your answer? 12:21:33 A. I don't know what warning he's talking 12:21:36 about what. 12:21:41 Q. What was the answer? 12:21:42 A. The answer is no. 12:21:43 J We may come back to tnat. I'm done witn 12:21:44 9 that exhibit for right now, sir. Okay? If you want 12:21:43 10 to set it aside. 12:21:51 11 A. Okay. 12:21:53 12 Q. Now-just one second, sir. Excuse rne one 12:22:03 13 second, sir. I'm just trying to find the next 12:22:22 14 exhibit here. I thought I had it in the right 12:22:25 15 place, but mavbe I didn't. Ah. here we go. 12:22:27 16 Do you remember a time where Union Carbide 12:22:31 17 purchased the homes of employees that had asbestos 12:22:39 13 in them? 12:22:45 19 A. I don't remember purchasing any, but there 12:22:46 20 were some homes that had asbestos in them. 12:22:49 21 Q. You had some employees at King City who 12:22:51 22 took the asbestos to their homes and used that for 12:22:54 23 insulation; correct? 12:22:58 24 A. Yes. 12:22:59 25 Q. At any time did anybody warn those 12:22:59 0133 1 employees that they should not do that? 12:23:02 2 A. I don't know. I wasn't there at that time. 12:23:04 3 Q. It occurred before you were there? 12:23:07 4 A. To the-yes. 12:23:10 5 Q. Okay. Well, even if you - what year are 12:23:12 6 you then - tell rne. You're saying during'70 to 12:23:16 7 '31? 12:23:20 3 A. No, no, no. It was before - I think it 12:23:20 9 was before'66. 12:23:23 10 Q. You don't remember anything - 12:23:24 11 A. I think it was 1967. 12:23:26 12 Q. I'rn sorry. I didn't mean to interrupt you. 12:23:28 13 A. Before'67 is when I went to the plant. 12:23:31 14 Q. Well, you don't remember one being done in 12:23:33 15 1930? 12:23:35 16 A. The employees taking home - in 1930? No. 12:23:35 17 Q. No, no, no. Carbide purchasing the home of 12:23:38 13 an employee in 1930 that had asbestos in it? 12:23:42 19 A. That wasn't your question. You asked when 12:23:45 20 they took it home, and I don't know when they took 12:23:47 21 it home, but it was before I was out there. 12:23:49 22 Q. Have you ever seen a document that 12:23:51 23 indicated any employee was warned not to take the 12:23:53 24 asbestos from the facility? 12:23:55 25 A. Have I seen - no, I haven't seen that 12:23:57 0134 1 document. 12:23:59 2 Q. And you never wrote one like that at any 12:23:59 3 time, did you? 12:24:02 4 A. Did I write a document about not taking it 12:24:03 5 home? 12:24:05 6 Q. Yes, sir. 12:24:05 a----- A--No-pottbat-Uecall-------------------- 12-24:06----------------- 3 Q. Now, do you remember a fellow named Roy 12:24:07 9 Crow? 12:24:11 10 A. Yes. 12:24:11 11 Q. He was an employee out there, wasn't he? 12:24:12 12 A. Yes. 12:24:15 13 Q. And isn't he one of the people that used 12:24:15 14 asbestos obtained from the rn li to insulate in his 12:24:18 15 attic? 12:24:22 16 A. I think that he was, but do not know that 12:24:27 JJZ--tonsure___________________ _____ 19-94-9Q____________ 18 Q. Do you know who Terrance Keating is? 12:24:30 19 A. No. 12:24:32 20 Q. Well, in 1930 you were still involved with 12:24:44 21 Calidria; right? 12:24:51 22 A. 1930 I was in Niagara Falls in the 12:24:52 23 marketing department. 12:24:54 24 Q. Okay. Did you ever disclose as part of 12:24:55 25 your marketing that you had advised your own 12:24:59 0135 1 employees that they needed to take Calidria out of 12:25:02 2 their houses? 12:25:05 3 A. Did we tell customers that? Is that what 12:25:06 4 you're saying? 12:25:09 5 Q. Yeah. 12:25:09 6 A. No. 12:25:10 7 Q. Did you ever tell any of your customers 12:25:10 3 that you at Union Carbide had bought an employee's 12:25:12 9 house to eliminate possible further exposure? 12:25:15 10 A. Did we tell customers that? 12:25:19 11 Q. Yes. 12:25:21 12 A. No, not that I recall. 12:25:21 13 Q. Well, you wouldn't need to buy somebody's 12:25:23 14 house and take all the asbestos out if it was safe, 12:25:25 15 would you? 12:25:23 16 A. I don't think at that time we knew what the 12:25:23 17 safety hazards were with as- - with our asbestos. 12:25:34 18 Again we - at that point in time we were telling 12:25:37 19 everyone it was - to treat it the same as any other 12:25:39 20 asbestos. 12:25:44 21 Q. Well, 1930 is after Mellon and Sayers and 12:25:44 22 Dernehl, isn't it? 12:25:43 23 A. In years after people - I don't know what 12:25:51 24 you mean. 12:25:54 25 Q. After they wrote their reports. Those were 12:25:55 0136 1 in the 1960s, weren't they, for the most part? 12:25:57 2 A. I - I don't know the dates, but they were 12:26:00 3 before 1930, yes. 12:26:02 4 Q. Well, you would agree that-well, let rne 12:26:03 5 backup. 12:26:13 6 You would agree that-strike that. I'rn 12:26:15 7 not going to ask you that. Save that one for trial. 12:26:25 3 You're planning on corning to the trial, 12:26:28 9 aren't you? 12:26:29 10 A. That's not up to rne, I don't think. 12:26:31 11 Q. Well, you have no reason as you sit here 12:26:33 12 today why you wouldn't want to corne tell your side 12:26:36 13 of the story at trial do you? 12:26:38 14 A. Not unless I had some kind of a serious 12:26:40 15 conflict. 12:26:43 16 Q. Okay. Well, after KCAC took over did you 12:26:45 17 all buy anybody's houses that had asbestos in them 12:26:49 18 from the mine? 12:26:53 19 A. I don't recall any, no. And it didn't corne 12:26:53 20 from the mine. It carne from the plant. 12:26:57 21 Q. Well, did you all have asbestos at the 12:26:59 22 plant that didn't corne from the mine? 12:27:02 23 A. Well, the mine was where we got the ore. 12:27:04 24 Q. Did you - did your employees at the plant 12:27:08 25 have access to asbestos that did not corne from your 12:27:11 0137 1 mine? 12:27:13 2 A. No. Well, I suppose they would through 12:27:14 3 hardware stores or-for insulation. 12:27:19 4 Q. Was there asbestos in the plant like for 12:27:22 5 insulation for example? 12:27:24 6 A. There could have been. I don't know for 12:27:25 7 sure. 12:27:26 3 Q. Did you ever warn any of your employees 12:27:23 9 about that? 12:27:30 10 A. That was all enclosed. 12:27:30 11 Q. Well, did you ever warn your employees, not 12:27:33 12 only do we have this Calidria asbestos here, we also 12:27:35 13 have the Crocidolite that we agree is more 12:27:38 14 dangerous? 12:27:42 15 A. I don't think we had any Crocidolite that I 12:27:42 16 know of. 12:27:46 17 Q. Well, when you were out there it would have 12:27:46 18 been your job to know, wouldn't it? 12:27:43 19 A. Whether or not we had Crocidolite. 12:27:50 20 Q. Yes, sir. 12:27:52 21 A. I don't think we had Crocidolite. 12:27:53 22 Q. It would have been your job to know, 12:27:55 23 wouldn't it, sir? 12:27:56 24 A. I don't think we had it. I don't know- 12:27:57 25 Q. Objection. Non-responsive. 12:27:59 0138 1 It would have been your job to know, 12:28:00 2 wouldn't it? 12:23:01 3 A. I don't know whether it would have been rny 12:28:02 4 job or not. We didn't have any Crocidolite to rny 12:23:04 5 knowledge. 12:23:07 6 Q. Objection. Non-responsive. 12:23:07 7 Who decided what your job obligations and 12:23:09 3 responsibilities were? 12:23:12 9 A. I don't think I ever received anything in 12:23:13 10 writing, what I was supposed to do. I just took 12:23:15 11 over from another plant manager. 12:23:17 12 Q. Well, did you ever get, you know, any 12:23:20 13 correspondence from somebody in Niagara Falls for 12:28:24 14 example when you were at King City, said: No, John, 12:28:26 15 you can't do that, as to anything? 12:23:29 16 __A. I don't recall anything like that, no.____12:23:33_________ 17 Q. So by the two depositions we saw, which one 12:23:47 18 was accurate? The one that said you knew about 12:28:50 19 asbestos in the'60s, or the one that said you 12:28:54 20 didn't know anything as of 1970, that you gave in 12:23:57 21 1932? Which is the truthful one? 12:28:59 22 MR. LASSETTER: Object to the form. 12:29:01 23 THE WITNESS: I learned subsequently to 12:29:02 24 1982 that I would have been in the place where I 12:29:06 25 would have received the information about the 12:29:09 0139 1 hazards of asbestos. 12:29:12 2 BY MR. EGDORF: Q. I'm just asking 12:29:14 3 which - you're saying both testimonies are 12:29:16 .4--accurate.?---------------------------------------------------- 12;2.9:-19--------------------------- 5 A. Yes, to the best of rny knowledge they were 12:29:19 6 accurate at that time. 12:29:21 7 Q. Okay. So the testimony where you said you 12:29:22 3 knew about asbestosis and lung cancer in the '60s is 12:29:24 9 accurate, and the one that says you didn't know 12:29:29 10 anything about lung cancer as of 1970 is also 12:29:31 11 accurate? 12:29:34 12 A. To the best of rny ability, that was rny best 12:29:35 13 answer. 12:29:37 14 Q. Can you explain how that's possible? 12:29:37 15 A. Because I had ten or 20 years more 12:29:39 16 information- 12:29:42 17 Q. I'm not- 12:29:43 13 A. -in 1932. 12:29:44 19 Q. Not talking about since then. I'rn talking 12:29:46 20 about what you knew in 1966 or what you knew in 12:29:47 21 1970. 12:29:50 22 A. As I said, I- 12:29:51 23 Q. You- 12:29:52 24 A. - had learned after I was - after I was 12:29:53 25 at the plant and reviewing documents that I would 12:29:58 0140 1 have been in a place to have learned more about the 12:30:01 2 hazards of asbestos. 12:30:06 3 Q. So here today in 2003 you know more about 12:30:07 4 what you knew about asbestos in 1966 than you did in 12:30:10 5 1966 or 1970 or 1982? 12:30:14 6 A. Yes, I think so. 12:30:16 7 Q. You just had memory loss in 1982? 12:30:13 3 A. No, I said I've reviewed documents that 12:30:21 9 would have shown that I was made available - made 12:30:24 10 - made aware of those hazards of asbestos. 12:30:26 11 Q. Okay. Did you ever notify anybody that 12:30:29 12 your testimony in 1982 was inaccurate? 12:30:31 13 A. I was never asked to do that. 12:30:34 14 Q. And you didn't affirmatively do it, did 12:30:36 15 you? 12:30:39 16 A. Did I go out and broadcast - no, I did 12:30:39 17 not. 12:30:43 18 Q. To correct the record, like with the death 12:30:43 19 certificate. 12:30:46 20 A. No, I didn't. 12:30:46 21 Q. Which is more important? Your own word or 12:30:47 22 that - somebody else's death certificate? 12:30:51 23 A. I didn't have any knowledge that I was 12:30:52 24 supposed to go back and correct the deposition. 12:30:54 25 Q. You're more worried about somebody else's 12:30:57 0141 1 death certificate than people believing you believe 12:31:00 2 something now that you said in 1932 that you don't 12:31:03 3 believe? 12:31:05 4 A. I -_______________________________ 12:31:07________________________ 5 Q. You don't think your statements are worthy 12:31:07 6 of needing to be corrected? 12:31:09 7 A. I didn't know that I was supposed to do 12:31:10 3 that. 12:31:12 9 Q. Not talking about supposed to. You 12:31:12 10 weren't- you -- nobody told you you had to go 12:31:13 11 check death certificates either. You thought it was 12:31:16 12 the right thing to do; right? 12:31:13 13 A. Yes. 12:31:19 14 Q. You don't think the right thing to do is 12:31:20 15 make sure that your-all your records out there 12:31:22 16 are truthful and accurate? 12:31:24 17 A. I've never reviewed rny 22 depositions with 12:31:25 13 thatinrnind.no. 12:31:23 19 Q. That's not important to you? 12:31:29 20 A. Not right now, it isn't, no,____________ 12:31:31_______________ 21 Q. Well, what is important? Is there 12:31:33 22 something more important than the truth? 12:31:35 23 A. Telling you the truth in this current 12:31:36 24 deposition. 12:31:39 25 (Discussion off the record.) 12:31:49 0142 1 BY MR. EGDORF: Q. I got you. Stop. 12:31:49 2 So you never went back in this ten years or 12:31:52 3 so where you've learned maybe Calidria's okay, for 12:31:53 4 example, that you testified, you never went back and 12:32:02 5 said: I better go back and look at all the things 12:32:04 6 I've said and change them. You didn't do that? 12:32:09 7 A. No. 12:32:12 3 Q. You didn't tell any lawyers - well, strike 12:32:13 9 that. 12:32:15 10 You haven't posed any objection when 12:32:15 11 lawyers that represent Union Carbide represent your 12:32:13 12 statements are something that you no longer believe, 12:32:21 13 have you? 14 A. You have to repeat that one. 12:32:24 15 Q. Well, if a Union Carbide lawyer stands up 12:32:25 16 in a trial and says: Mr. Myers has said since 1932, 12:32:27 17 blah, blah, blah, that we read from the deposition, 12:32:31 13 that would trouble you wouldn't you -- wouldn't it? 12:32:34 19 A. I don't know what you mean by trouble rne. 12:32:36 20 Q. Well, wouldn't it trouble you that a lawyer 12:32:33 21 on behalf of Union Carbide is standing up and saying 12:32:40 22 that your position is something that you no longer 12:32:42 23 believe? 12:32:45 24 A. I think you- 12:32:45 25 Q. That wouldn't trouble you? 12:32:47 0143 _______________________ _____________________________ 1 A. I think things change, which they did. 12:32:43 2 Q. That wouldn't trouble you? 12:32:51 3 A. I think people make mistakes and people 12:32:52 4 learn things through years. 12:32:55 5 Q. Objection. Non-responsive. 12:32:56 6 That wouldn't trouble you, that people are 12:32:53 7 representing your opinion as something it's not? 12:32:59 3 MR. LASSETTER: Object to the form. 12:33:01 9 THE WITNESS: I don't think it would 12:33:02 10 trouble rne, no. 12:33:03 11 BY MR. EGDORF: Q. So if Mr. Lassetter 12:33:04 12 misrepresents something about what your position is, 12:33:06 13 that wouldn't trouble you either? 12:33:09 14 A. Are we talking about today or when? 12:33:10 15 Q. All of the discovery answers, for example. 12:33:12 16 A. I think you'd have to ask rne a specific 12:33:14 17 question. 12:33:17 13 Q. Okay. 12:33:13 19 A. And maybe I can give you an answer. 12:33:13 20 Q. We'd have- 12:33:21 21 A. I can't answer that question. 12:33:22 22 Q. We'd have to look at a specific answer to 12:33:22 23 know whether your word misrepresented is troublesome 12:33:25 24 or not; is that right? 12:33:23 25 A. Whether rny word is - 12:33:29 0144 1 Q. Being misrepresented is okay or not. We'd 12:33:31 2 have to look at a specific example? 12:33:33 3 A. I think so, because I can't follow your 12:33:35 .4_lin.e..Q.Lqu.e.sti.Q.ning__________________________ 1.2;.3.3.;.3..7_______________ 5 Q. Well, sir, let rne show you another 12:34:04 6 deposition that you gave in August 30th of 1934, 12:34:14 7 page 29. Whose handwriting is that? 12:34:21 3 A. That's rny handwriting. 12:34:27 9 Q. To correct the deposition; right? 12:34:30 10 A. I was - yes, I would assume that's what 12:34:33 11 this is. 12:34:36 12 Q. So from time to time you have reviewed your 12:34:37 13 testimony to make sure it's accurate, haven't you? 12:34:39 14 A. I have had that opportunity on occasion, 12:34:41 15 yes._____________________________________12:34:43______________________ 16 Q. Why don't I go ahead and mark this one, 12:34:45 17 sir. Just put that on top. Okay? Mark that 12:34:47 13 deposition as Exhibit Number 9. 12:34:54 19 (Deposition Exhibit Number 9 was 20 marked for identification.) 21 THE WITNESS: Do you want 3 on top of seven 12:34:59 22 or do you want to leave 3 out. 12:35:01 23 BY MR. EGDORF: Q. 3 is the one with 12:35:05 24 the stickies; right? 12:35:06 25 A. Yes. 12:35:07 0145 1 Q. I don't know if we're going to go back to 12:35:07 2 it are not, but if we put it there we can pull it if 12:35:09 3 we need to, Mr. Myers I'rn not going to - no, you 12:35:13 4 can put that all together. That's all just going to 12:35:15 5 go together. We'll put a clip on it or something at 12:35:16 6 a break. Okay? It's all within the pile. The 12:35:20 7 court reporter's going to find it. Are you ready? 12:35:22 3 A. Yes. 12:35:25 9 Q. Okay. Did you ever personally have any 12:35:25 10 conversations with Doctor Sayers about Calidria? 12:35:23 11 A. No, 1 don't know -- no, IVe never met 12:35:30 12 Doctor Sayers. 12:35:34 13 Q. Did you ever - 12:35:35 14 A. No, not doctor, Mr. Sayers. 12:35:36 15 Q. He was a doctor? 12:35:33 16 A. No. 12:35:39 17 Q. He had a Ph.D., didn't he? 12:35:39 13 A. No. 12:35:41 19 Q. He didn't? 12:35:41 20 A. (Shakes head.) Not to my knowledge. 12:35:42 21 Q. Oh. Okay. Well, you certainly wouldn't 12:35:46 22 want somebody representing they're a doctor if 12:35:50 23 they're not, would you, from your company? 12:35:52 24 A. Would I want that? I - again, I don't 12:35:54 25 have any opinion on that kind of a question. 12:35:56 0146 1 Q. How did Doctor Dernehl? You're not going 12:35:59 2 to question whether he's a doctor or not, are you? 12:36:02 3 A. No. 12:36:04 4 Q. Did you ever have a personal conversation 12:36:04 5 with hirn about Calidria? 12:36:06 6 A. I don't recall if I ever talked to hirn 12:36:03 7 about asbestos or not. 12:36:10 3 Q. Well, do you feel like you had an 12:36:11 9 obligation to talk with the medical department 12:36:14 10 regarding the product that you were in charge of 12:36:16 11 selling? 12:36:13 12 A. I said I don't remember talking. We 12:36:13 13 probably did through the years. 12:36:21 14 Q. Wasn't rny question, sir. Do you agree that 12:36:22 15 you had a responsibility to consult with the medical 12:36:25 16 department regarding their knowledge of the products 12:36:27 17 you were selling? 12:36:29 13 A. Well, we got that information from them, 12:36:30 19 yes. 12:36:32 20 Q. Do you believe that that was an obligation 12:36:32 21 you had? 12:36:34 22 A. That I had? 12:36:35 23 Q. Yes, sir. 12:36:35 24 A. In 1964. 12:36:36 25 Q. At any time. 12:36:37 0147 1 A. No, I was not even involved with asbestos 12:36:39 2 when he put out his first toxicology report. 12:36:41 3 Q. I'rn talking about the time that you were 12:36:44 4 involved with Calidria. You had an -- did you have 12:36:45 5 an obligation or not to consult with Union Carbide's 12:36:49 6 medical department? 12:36:52 7 A. No, I don't think so. 12:36:53 3 Q. Did anybody? 12:36:54 9 A. I'rn sure some other management of the 12:36:55 10 asbestos business would have been in touch with 12:36:53 11 them. 12:37:00 12 Q. Is it your testimony that all the 12:37:02 13 information that the customers needed to know was 12:37:06 14 contained in the toxicology reports that were 12:37:03 15 provided - that you say were provided? 12:37:10 16 A. No. that's why we sent them all the other 12:37:13 17 forms of information. That was an internal 12:37:16 13 document. We sent them things that had been 12:37:13 19 published. 12:37:22 20 Q. But you can't find for rne one specific 12:37:22 21 document or evidence you said any of those things to 12:37:25 22 any customers, much less Kelly-Moore; correct? 12:37:23 23 A. Only that that was our practice to send it 12:37:31 24 to all customers. 12:37:33 25 Q. You have no proof or evidence of that at 12:37:34 0143 1 all; correct? 12:37:36 2 A. I don't have it here, no. 12:37:37 3 Q. And is it your opinion that the toxicology 12:37:33 4 reports that were provided were sufficient to 12:37:41 5 provide your customers with the information they 12:37:43 6 needed to know about asbestos? 12:37:45 7 A. No, that's what I just answered that 12:37:46 3 question. We sent them other information that was 12:37:43 9 available- 12:37:51 10 Q. So- 12:37:52 11 A. -- from the scientific community. 12:37:53 T2 Q. So the toxicology reports were incomplete? 12:37:55 13 A. No, they were - as far as the medical 12:37:58 14 department, those are were their-that was what 12:33:01 .1.5._thP.y.pnt.nnt________________________________12-33:04_________________ 16 Q. Well, and certainly your opinion as to what 12:33:05 17 was in the toxicology reports were accurate; right. 12:38:03 13 A. Accurate? Yes, I have no reason to doubt 12:33:11 Lane to Fusaro 19 the accuracy of the medical department. 12:33:13 20 Q. It would be wrong if Union Carbide put 12:33:15 21 anything in the toxicology reports that's 12:33:13 22 inaccurate, wouldn't it? 12:38:20 23 A. I don't know. I guess so. 12:38:21 24 Q. You guess? You're not sure? 12:33:22 25 A. Again, that's a medical department 12:33:23 0149 1 document, and I'rn not here sitting here judging the 12:33:25 2 medical department of Union Carbide._____________ 12:38:23 3 Q. Your department passed on those documents 12:33:29 4 to customers. That's your responsibility, right, 12:33:32 5 Mr. Myers? 12:38:34 6 A. Did we pass ~ did we send out the 12:38:34 7 toxicology report? 12:38:37 3 Q. Yeah. You're the marketing guy; right? 12:33:33 9 A. I did in 1970 to 1931; right. 12:38:40 10 Q. And you had a responsibility to make sure 12:33:44 11 what you, John Myers, communicated to customers, 12:33:46 12 didn't you? 12:33:43 13 A. No, I depended on the medical department 12:38:49 14 for their statements. 12:38:51 15 Q. Did you ever write a letter that said: 12:33:51 Lane to FusaroD Did he depend onD the legal dept? 16 Dear customer, I have no idea if this is accurate or 12:38:53 17 not, hut rny medical department says it is. Consult 12:38:56 18 them. Did you ever tell them anything like that? 12:38:59 19 A. Obviously, not. 12:39:01 20 Q. Did you ever tell customers: If you want 12:39:03 21 more information you're free to corne look at all the 12:39:05 22 documents in our medical department? 12:39:07 23 A. I don't know if I put it that way, but all 12:39:09 24 those documents would have been public information. 12:39:1 25 Q. Did you ever tell a customer: If you have 12:39:17 0150 1 more questions, I'rn not the right person to ask. 12:39:17 2 Call Doctor Dernehl. 12:39:21 3 A. We rnay have if there was a ~ if there was 12:39:22 4 a doctor to the staff that we were talking to that 12:39:23 5 rnay have taken place, yes. 12:39:26 6 Q. And certainly you'd expect somebody in the 12:39:27 7 medical department to tell the truth to a customer; 12:39:30 3 right?_________________________ 12:39:32__________________ 9 A. I don't-have no opinion on what the 12:39:33 10 medical department tells people.________________ 12:39:35 11 Q. You work for the company, sir. Do you 12:39:37 12 think13 A. I work for the asbestos - 12:39:39 14 Q. Excuse rne. Now you're interrupted rne, sir. 12:39:40 15 A. Well you asked rne - I worked for the 12:39:41 16 Calidria asbestos unit. 12:39:44 17 Q. Of Union Carbide? 12:39:44 13 A. They were a part of Union Carbide, it's 12:39:45 19 rnetals division. 12:39:47 20 Q. Do you think there's a difference - 12:39:43 21 different ethical obligations for different groups 12:39:49 22 at Union Carbide? 12:39:52 23 A. No, I don't think so. 12:39:52 24 Q. If a customer called the medical department 12:39:56 25 and said I'd like to see all the studies and reports 12:39:59 0151 1 y'all have ever done about asbestos, would it be 12:40:03 2 appropriate for the medical department to say okay, 12:40:06 3 but not give them some, like Mellon and Sayers and 12:40:09 4 Dernehl? Would that be okay? 12:40:13 5 A. Again, I - I don't-can't answer that 12:40:15 6 question. I'rn not a - rendering judgment on the 12:40:13 7 medical department. 12:40:20 3 Q. Well, what about if the customer called you 12:40:21 9 and said, Mr. Myers, can you get rne all of the 12:40:23 10 documents that-in your-from your medical 12:40:27 11 department that talk about asbestos? Would it be 12:40:30 12 appropriate for you to represent you gave them all, 12:40:32 13 but not? 12:40:34 14 A. Again, I - your hypothetical questions 12:40:35 15 are - I don't know howto answer them. 12:40:39 16 Q. It's very simple. If somebody said, please 12:40:41 17 give them all to us, would you be wrong to lie and 12:40:44 18 say here they all are, when it doesn't include all 12:40:47 19 of them? Would that be okay or not? 12:40:52 AJA docs public? 20 A. I don't have any idea how many records were 12:40:53 21 in the files, or what medical records were in the 12:40:55 22 medical files. 12:40:59 23 Q. Would it he wrong - well you knew at that 12:40:59 24 time about Doctor Sayers, for example. Would it be 12:41:00 25 wrong if you got that request and didn't include 12:41:03 0152 1 Doctor Sayers in the material provided? 12:41:06 2 MR. LASSETTER: I thought he was not a 12:41:07 3 doctor. 12:41:07 4 THE WITNESS: That was Mr. Sayers. 12:41:03 5 BY MR. EGDORF: Q. Yeah, he was. 12:41:09 6 A. That was Mr. Sayers, and his was not a 12:41:10 7 document, not a scientific document. He was 12:41:11 3 reporting on what was available to the public in the 12:41:15 9 library. 12:41:13 10 Q. Objection. Non-responsive. 12:41:13 11 If somebody asked you for all the materials 12:41:20 12 regarding the hazards of asbestos, would it be 12:41:23 13 appropriate for you not to give them Doctor Sayers 12:41:26 14 or Mr. Sayers or whatever you want to call hirn's 12:41:29 15 report? 12:41:30 16 A. His report was not a medical report. No, 12:41:31 17 we would not provide that unless somebody asked for 12:41:33 13 it specifically. 12:41:36 19 Q. Which they wouldn't know about because you 12:41:37 20 never told anybody it existed; right? 12:41:33 21 A. I don't recall that I told anyone. 12:41:39 22 Q. Well, how about Doctor Dernehl if they said 12:41:40 23 they wanted all the medical reports. You're not 12:41:41 24 going to say that his letters don't constitute 12:41:41 25 reports are you? 12:41:45 0153 1 A. His letters are not reports. 12:41:46 2 Q. Well what about his letter where he says 12:41:43 3 Doctor Sayers report is accurate? 12:41:50 4 A. I don't recall that he said that. 12:41:52 5 Q. You don't? 12:41:53 _6____ A___Shnw.mp.-thP.-lP.tfp.r_Lr.an^z__________ 1?.4.1_54_________ 7 Q. Well, you've already agreed with rne today 12:41:55 3 it's generally accurate. 12:41:53 9 A. That's an important word, generally. 12:42:00 10 Q. Oh, what's in it that's inaccurate? 12:42:03 11 A. You'd have to show it to rne. And I'll - 12:42:04 12 Q. Well, you seern confidant it's not full 12:42:07 13 accurate. I think you would have something in rnind? 12:42:07 14 A. No, I'd like to see it. I don't want to 12:42:10 15 guess. 12:42:12 16 Q. You don't know? 12:42:12 17 A. I don't want to guess. 12:42:13 13 Q. So as you sit here, you don't know? 12:42:14 19 A. I'rn not going to guess. 12:42:16 20 Q. Objection. Non-responsive. 12:42:17 21 As you sit here, you can't tell rne without 12:42:19 22 looking at it anything in it that you think is 12:42:21 23 inaccurate? 12:42:23 24 A. That's correct. 12:42:24 25 Q. So is that why you wouldn't provide it to 12:42:26 0154 1 the customers, because it might have something in it 12:42:28 2 that's inaccurate? 12:42:31 3 A. No, it wasnt something you would give to 12:42:33 4 customers. It was a review of public information by 12:42:37 5 a salesman in -- from England. 12:42:40 6 Q. Well- 12:42:45 7 A. And the information in it was already 12:42:45 3 included. 12:42:47 9 Q. What about Doctor Dernehl's letter? That's 12:42:47 10 not -- that's a medical opinion regarding what 12:42:51 11 Mr. Sayers wrote; correct? 12:42:53 12 A. He took Mr. Sayers ~ he read Mr. Sayers 12:42:55 13 summary and all the information that I -- as far as 12:42:59 14 I can remember was already included in what we were 12:43:04 15 giving to customers. 12:43:06 16 Q. Okay. Well, what's the number there, 12:43:12 17 Mr. Myers, please? 12:43:21 13 A. Nine. 12:43:23 19 (Deposition Exhibit Number 10 was 12:43:24 20 marked for identification.) 12:43:24 21 BY MR. EGDORF: Q. Well, let's look at 12:43:25 22 Exhibit Number 9. 12:43:26 23 A. No. that's this one. 12:43:23 24 Q. Oh, that one's 9. I'rn sorry. Exhibit 10. 12:43:29 25 That's the document we've been referring to by I. C. 12:43:39 0155 1 Sayers; correct? 12:43:43 2 A. Yes. 12:43:44 3 Q. Asbestos is a health hazard in the United 12:43:44 4 Kingdom; right? 12:43:47 5 A. Yes. 12:43:49 6 Q. You were already working with Calidria in 12:43:49 7 1967, weren't you? 12:43:52 3 A. I had just barely started, yes. 12:43:53 9 Q. Turn to the Section 1.0, please. 12:43:57 10 A. Okay.______________________________ 12:44:04______________ 11 Q. The third paragraph, sir, about halfway 12:44:05 12 down. Do you see the sentence: However, there's a 12:44:071 13 growing feeling that the quoted threshold limit 12:44:09 14 value is no longer tenable. Do you see that? 12:44:12 15 A. Yes. 12:44:15 16 Q. Did you put that in any document you gave 12:44:15 17 to your customers? 12:44:17 18 A. That was covered somehow in the - in 12:44:18 19 Doctor DerneH's report._____________________ 12:44:21______________ 20 Q. Did you put that in the letter that was 12:44:22 21 given - or information provided to your customers? 12:44:25 22 A. I think that was something - words like 12:44:23 23 that, in the - in the Doctor Dernell's report. 12:44:31 24 Q. So you think-objection. Non-responsive. 12:44:35 25 I mean, did you provide this to the 12:44:37 0156 1 customers or not? 12:44:39 2 A. Yes, we did. 12:44:43 3 MR. LASSETTER: Objection. Asked and 12:44:43 4 answered. 5 THE REPORTER: I'm sorry. Was there an 12:44:43 6 objection? 12:44:43 7 MR. LASSETTER: Yes. I said: Objection. 12:44:43 3 Asked and answered. 12:44:44 9 BY MR. EGDORF: Q. So you think that 12:44:46 10 there is a growing feeling that the quoted threshold 12:44:47 11 limit value is no longer tenable as provided to 12:44:50 12 customers; right? 12:44:53 13 A. I said not in those words, but through 12:44:54 14 Dernehl's asbestos toxicology report. 12:44:57 15 Q. In what- 12:45:00 16 __ A. And he-saysjEseareh continues.__________ 12:45:00_____ 17 Q. Okay. But of course you wrote letters to, 12:45:02 is for example, the Consumer Product Safety Commission 12:45:05 19 telling them that you thought the threshold limit 12:45:07 20 value was just fine and didn't need to be changed, 12:45:10 21 didn't you? 12:45:13 22 A. I don't recall that. 12:45:13 23 Q. You asked people -- customers like 12:45:14 24 Kelly-Moore to write letters saying the same thing, 12:45:17 25 didn't you? 12:45:20 0157 J____ A. I said, again, I don't recall that. 12:45:20 2 MR. LASSETTER: Object to the form. 12:45:22 3 BY MR. EGDORF: Q. Section 4.1, sir: 12:45:23 4 Evidence is now growing to indicate that there is 12:45:33 5 also an increased incidence of cancers of the 12:45:36 6 gastrointestinal tract. 12:45:41 7 Where did you tell customers that? 12:45:43 3 A. I don't think we ever-that was ever 12:45:45 9 proven to be a -- I mean, it was in some of the 12:45:47 10 documents that we passed out. That was how 12:45:50 11 customers would be made aware of it. 12:45:52 12 Q. Object and a -- objection. Non-responsive? 12:45:55 13 Did you tell -- 14 A. The National Academy of Sciences report had 12:45:53 15 that information in it. 12:46:01 16 Q. Was that from Union Carbide? 12:46:01 17 A. We passed it out, yes. 12:46:03 13 Q. Was that a Union Carbide document? 12:46:06 19 A. Union Carbide did not write the National 12:46:03 20 AcadernyofSciencesreport.no. 12:46:10 21 Q. Did Union Carbide put in any of its own 12:46:12 22 documents, such as its toxicology reports, that 12:46:15 23 evidence is now also growing to indicate that there 12:46:17 24 is also an increased incidence of cancers of the 12:46:17 25 gastrointestinal tract? 12:46:20 0153 1 A. They refer to cancer, which cancer is 12:46:21 2 cancer. I don't think they specify Gl or any other 12:46:23 3 forms of cancer. 12:46:26 4 Q. All cancer is the same? 12:46:27 5 A. Cancer is cancer, yes. I mean - it says, 12:46:29 6 I think, other cancers in one of his -- again, you'd 12:46:32 7 have to show rne his -- 12:46:35 3 Q. So for example - 12:46:37 9 A. If you think I'rn not telling the truth, you 12:46:39 10 can show rne his letter and let's read it. 12:46:41 11 Q. Just trying to find out what you told the 12:46:43 12 customers, sir, you're the one that's here 12:46:46 13 designated as the corporate representative to tell 12:46:48 14 us? 12:46:51 15 A. Okay. That's ~ I'rn telling we did through 12:46:51 16 the National Academy of Sciences report. 12:46:53 17 Q. But you can't prove it? Is that right? 12:46:55 13 A. Well, if you got rne the documents I can 12:46:57 1_99__shQW-where.-it-says---______________________ 12:46:58___________ 20 Q. You're the corporate representative, sir. 12:46:53 21 Where is the document that shows that you told 12:47:00 22 Kelly-Moore or gave the National Academy of whatever 12:47:03 23 you're talking about document? 12:47:05 24 A. I think we've already been through that. 12:47:06 25 Q. Where - you don't know; right? 12:47:03 0159 1 A. That's correct. 12:47:10 2 Q. Mow, Mr. Whitlock died of colon cancer, 12:47:10 3 didn't he? 4 A. I don't remember. 12:47:14 12:47:15 5 Q. You discussed that - do we need to pull 12:47:16 6 out the deposition from a month ago again? You're 12:47:13 7 sure you don't remember? 12:47:21 3 A. No, I don't remember. 12:47:22 9 Q. Do you have any memory problem, sir? 12:47:23 10 A. No.________________________________ 12:47:25____________________ 11 Q. You don't remember what Mr. Whitlock, your 12:47:27 12 friend, died of? 12:47:30 13 A. No, I don't. 12:47:31 14 Q. But you looked at his death certificate 12:47:32 15 too, didn't you? 12:47:34 16 A. Yes. 12:47:34 17 Q. You don't recall at length discussing 12:47:36 13 Mr. Whitlock having colon cancer in your previous 12:47:39 19 deposition? 12:47:43 20 A. I remember talking about someone having 12:47:43 21 colon cancer. I don't think we ever identified the 12:47:46 22 employee. 12:47:49 23 Q. Well, in 19-- in the 19--when did 12:47:49 24 Mr. Whitlock die approximately? 12:47:52 25 A. I don't know. 12:47:54 0+60----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1 Q. In the'90s? In the 2000s? In the'80s? 12:47:55 2 Can you narrow it by decade? 12:43:00 3 A. No, I can't. 12:43:01 4 Q. Well, at the time he died did you think 12:48:02 5 cancer was just cancer, or is that a new opinion, 12:43:04 6 that all cancer is the same? 12:43:07 7 A. I don't-you asked rne that question. I 12:48:03 3 don't think all cancer is the same. I said that- 12:43:10 9 Q. Well- 12:43:13 10 A. - in Doctor Dernell's report, I'rn pretty 12:48:13 11 sure that he mentioned other cancers. 12:48:16 12 Q. All right. Your comment, I believe, and 12:43:13 13 the record will reflect, was cancer is cancer. So, 12:43:19 14 I mean, did you have that opinion at the time 12:43:23 15 Mr. Whitlock died? 12:43:24 16 A. I don't recall when Mr. Whitlock died. And 12:43:27 17 a cancer - you always have to have a modifier in 12:48:30 13 front of it, whether it's colon, or Gl, or lung, 12:43:33 19 or- 12:43:37 20 Q. Which medical school did you they teach you 12:48:38 21 that at? 12:43:39 22 A. Brain. I - that there were different 12:43:41 23 forms of cancer? 12:48:43 24 Q. Yeah, which medical school did you go to 12:43:44 25 for that? 12:48:47 0161 1 A. I just read that in - that there's brain 12:48:43 2 cancer and lung cancer and - is that what you mean 12:48:50 3 the different kinds of. 12:43:53 4 Q. Objection. Non-responsive. 12:43:55 5 What medical school did you go to? 12:43:55 6 A. I didn't go to a medical school. 12:48:57 7 Q. Let's turn to Section 4.4. Is that the 12:48:59 3 section about mesothelioma? Correct? 12:49:05 9 A. Yes. 12:49:03 10 Q. Union Carbide never put the word 12:49:09 11 mesothelioma in any of its warnings, did it? 12:49:12 12 A. Yes, in the asbestos toxicology report that 12:49:15 13 was sent to customers. 12:49:17 14 Q. But warnings on the products? 12:49:19 15 A. We didn't use the word mesothelioma on the 12:49:21 16 bags, no, if that's what you mean. 12:49:24 17 Q. Well, you never even used cancer until 12:49:26 18 when? 12:49:29 19 A. I don't remember the date. 12:49:29 20 Q. As of 1934 you weren't using cancer were 12:49:31 21 you? 12:49:33 22 A. No. 12:49:34 23 Q. Even though you knew that asbestos might 12:49:34 24 cause cancer; correct? 12:49:36 25 A. Yes. We were using the OSHA prescribed 12:49:37 0162 1 warning, which in their discussion says it would 12:49:41 2 cause undue alarm if you would use the word cancer. 12:49:44 3 Q. Objection. Non-responsive? 12:49:47 4 Actually you were - 12:49:48 5 A. I'rn telling you why we didn't use cancer. 12:49:49 6 Q. I didn't ask you, sir. Objection. 12:49:51 7 Non-responsive. 12:49:52 3 A. Okay. 12:49:53 9 Q. If you just answer what I ask we'll get 12:49:54 10 done. 12:49:57 11 You were involved in the decision making 12:49:53 12 process, the folks who talked about whether cancer 12:50:01 13 should be included or not, weren't you? 12:50:03 | MCA 3/1572| [Marsh, 5/5/75] WRG warning doc Weaver 6/27/73 AJA 6/12/721 14 A l don't recall that l may have been 12 50 05 15 Q In fact, you saw the document that 12 50 07 16 indicated that the primary reason y'all didn't want 12 50 08 17 to put cancer on there is because it might be fatal 12 50 1 1 18 to sales, true? 12 50 14 19 A We never tried to hide the fact that our 12 50 16 20 asbestos was like any other and could cause cancer 12 50 19 21 Q Objection Non-responsive 12 50 22 22 A That was sent to every customer 12 50 23 23 Q You're familiar with the document that 12 50 26 24 indicates that Union Carbide was concerned that 12 50 27 25 including the word cancer on the label could be 12 50 30 0163 1 fatal to sales, true? 12 50 33 2 A l remember a document like that l don't 12 50 34 3 know whether you're quoting it accurately or not 12 50 36 4 Q Pretty close at least, right? 12 50 38 5 A l have no idea 12 50 40 6 Q Well, how do you--what do you think it 12 50 41 7 said? 12 50 43 8 A I don't remember what it says 12 50 43 9 Q Some authorities even believe that a single 12 50 49 10 brief exposure-- 12 50 51 11 A Where are you now? 12 50 52 12 Q It's the same paragraph, under 4 4, the 12 50 53 13 first one 44 1 12 50 56 14 A Okay 12 50 59 15 Q At the end Some authorities even believe 12 50 59 16 that a single brief exposure might be sufficient 12 51 01 17 That's under the mesothelioma section, correct? 12 51 04 18 A Yes 12 51 07 19 Q Where did you provide that to your 12 5107 20 customers? 12 5109 21 A Again, there was a talk about mesothelioma 125110 22 in Doctor Demehl's reports saying that the TLV 12 51 12 23 might not even be low enough for mesothelioma or 12 51 20 24 something like that 125123 25 Q What you put in the documents like the 12 5124 0164 1 toxicology report that you gave to customers is that 12 51 27 2 it had to be high levels of exposures for long 12 51 27 3 periods of time to cause mesothelioma isn't that 12 51 30 4 true? 12 51 33 5 A That's true of especially Chrysotile, yes 125134 6 Q And that's what you told the customers, 125136 7 correct? 12 5138 8 A We were using - or selling Chrysotile, 12 5139 9 yes 12 51 42 10 Q Well did you tell your customers where 12 5142 11 under 4 4 2 the finding in which there were folks in 12 51 44 12 Canada and Britain in which people appeared to have 12 51 48 13 gotten mesothelioma having only been exposed to 12 51 50 14 Chrysotile amounts? 12 5154 15 A I don't know where you're reading 125155 16 Q Under 4 4 2 there's an insert quotation 112 5157 17 was--1 wasn't specifically reading l was 12 52 00 18 paraphrasing l can read it Maybe that's easier 12 52 02 19 However, cases have occurred in the US, 16 12 52 05 20 in number between 1963 and 1965 Canada six in number 12 52 10 21 1952 to 1954 I think's wnat it says, and a few in 12 52 13 22 Britain in wnich people concerned appeared to have 12 52 16 23 only been exposed to Chrysotile Did you tell that 12 52 19 24 to your customers? 12 52 22 25 A The six cases, only six cases? No, I don't 12 52 23 0165 1 remember telling customers there were 16 in the 12 52 27 2 Canada--or 16 and six, 22 We didn't tell them 12 52 30 3 about those 22 cases 12 52 38 4 Q Well, did you tell the customers at all 12 52 39 5 that you knew that there were cases where people had 12 52 41 6 been exposed only to Chrysotile and gotten 12 52 43 7 mesothelioma? 12 52 47 8 A Well, l think, again, the important word 12 52 47 9 you're leaving out is appear to have been only 12 52 50 10 exposed to Chrysotile 12 52 53 11 Q Objection Non-responsive 12 52 55 12 Did you tell that to the customers or not? 12 52 56 13 A l told you we did not tell them about the 12 52 58 14 22 cases, or that maybe -- if they had -- if there 12 53 00 15 were any that appeared to be exposed only to 12 53 03 16 Chrysotile, no 12 53 06 17 Q Would you agree that your Calidria is a 12 53 07 18 fine fiber product? 12 53 10 19 A We described it as a finely divided 12 53 13 20 product, yes 12 53 17 21 Q Well, as part of making sure -- hold on one 12 53 19 22 second, sir 12 53 23 23 Did you ever review Mr - excuse me, 12 53 34 24 Doctor Wagner's 1974 study about Chrysotile? 12 53 36 25 A 1974? Not that I remember 12 53 40 0166 1 Q The one where he found that a higher 12 53 42 2 percentage of rats would get mesothelioma from your 12 53 45 3 type of asbestos than any other including 12 53 47 4 Crocidolite? 12 53 50 5 A I don't remember reading that 12 53 52 6 Q Do you think that's something that might 12 53 54 7 have been important for you to know? 12 53 56 8 A I'd have toe read it and find out what he's 12 53 57 9 saying 12 54 01 10 Q Certainly it's something you think your 12 54 01 11 medical department should be looking into, isn't it? 12 54 04 12 A I'd like to read wnat you're quoting from 12 54 09 13 Q Is that the kind of thing you think your 12 54 10 14 medical department should be looking into, a report 12 54 12 15 if it existed like that? 12 54 13 16 A If that was one single study that's not 12 54 14 17 necessarily - if that was a substantiated study it 12 54 17 18 might-- would be important, yes 12 54 21 19 Q The medical department would need to look 12 54 21 20 at it to figure that out, right? 12 54 23 21 A That would be one of their 12 54 25 22 responsibilities, yes 12 54 27 23 Q Let's go to 6 0 or 6 1 tnink it's rignt 12 54 30 24 under 6 0 12 54 35 25 A 6 1? 12 54 45 0167 Q Yean, 6 1 says moral issues You see that? 12 54 47 A Yes 12 54 51 Q Second paragrapn Can you read tne first 12 54 51 sentence, please? 12 54 53 A it tnerefore seems tnat on tne basis of 12 54 54 present evidence we are not entitled under any 12 54 57 circumstances to state tnat our material is not a 12 55 00 8 nealtn nazard 12 55 02 9 Q Do you agree witn tnat? 12 55 02 10 A l certainly do Tnat was exactly wnat we 12 55 04 11 were doing 12 55 06 12 Q Objection not -- to tne non-responsive part 12 55 06 13 of tne answer 12 55 08 14 Tne last part, now tnere's a comment tnat 12 55 1 1 15 says Tnen it must surely be our duty to caution 12 55 13 16 nim - referring to tne customer - and point out 12 55 16 17 means wnereby ne can noid tne asbestos air float 12 55 18 18 concentration to a minimum 12 55 22 19 Was tnat information provided to tne 12 55 25 20 customers? 12 55 26 21 A Yes, we always told tnem to avoid creating 12 55 27 22 dust 12 55 30 23 Q Turn tne page, please, sir 6 3 references 12 55 31 24 tne tnresnoid limit value, correct? 12 55 34 25 A Yes 12 55 36 0168 1 Q Tnis figure was an arbitrary choice and had 12 55 36 2 no experimental foundation 12 55 40 3 Did you tell that to your customers? 12 55 42 4 A This was--again, I don't know of any 12 55 43 5 foundation he has for making these comments 12 55 47 6 Q Objection Non-responsive Sir, I'm 12 55 49 7 trying, but that's not my question 12 55 50 8 Did you tell that to your customers? 12 55 52 9 A We told them to operate as far below the 12 55 54 10 TLV as possible 12 55 57 11 Q Objection Non-responsive 12 55 58 12 Did you tell your customers that the TLV 12 55 59 13 was an arbitrary choice and had no experimental 12 56 02 14 foundation? 12 56 05 15 A No 12 56 05 16 Q You can set that one aside, sir 12 56 16 17 What about Doctor Lane? Did you ever talk 12 56 19 18 to him about asbestos or Calidria? 12 56 34 19 A Not that I recall 12 56 36 20 Q Did you ever see any reports or-by him? 12 56 37 21 A I don't remember 12 56 39 22 Q Do you remember Doctor Lane indicating he 12 56 41 23 thought that Union Carbide was not accurately 12 56 43 24 representing the hazards associated with Calidria to 12 56 46 25 its customers? 12 56 49 0169 1 A No, I don't remember that 12 56 50 2 Q Sir, did you ever tell customers that the 12 56 56 3 published information about their - about the 12 56 59 4 hazards of the asbestos was inaccurate and should be 12 57 02 5 ignored'' 12 57 05 6 A The public's information' You mean 12 57 06 7 scientific articles' 12 57 09 8 Q Yeah, or articles that were reported in the 12 57 10 9 newspaper 12 57 13 10 A Oh, yeah, there was some articles that 12 57 14 11 were -- were not entirely accurate, yes 12 57 17 12 Q And did you ever write anything to your 12 57 20 13 customers saying You can disregard that article 12 57 23 14 because it's -- the source is a bunch of 12 57 25 15 environmental kooks' Did you ever say thinking like 12 57 28 16 that' 12 57 31 17 A l don't remember that, no 12 57 31 18 Q Something to that effect' 12 57 33 19 A I don't recall If you want to show me 12 57 34 20 something, I'll find out I mean- 12 57 36 21 Q Are you denying you said that, or you don't 12 57 38 22 know' 12 57 40 23 A Yeah, l don't think l would have used the 12 57 40 24 word kooks 12 57 43 25 Q Okay Environmentists' Would you have 12 57 43 0170 1 said - A l don't remember what l said 12 57 47 Q You're interrupting me, sir 12 57 47 Would you have something like 12 57 49 environmentalists' 12 57 52 A I've used the word environmentalists, yes 12 57 52 Q And you have had communications with 12 57 59 customers who asked you What about this article we 12 58 02 9 just saw' And you told them don't worry about the 12 58 05 10 article That's inaccurate' Right' 12 58 07 11 A If you want to show me what I what you're 12 58 09 12 telling me then I'll agree to it but l can't agree 12 58 10 13 without seeing it 12 58 14 14 Q You don't know what you did' 12 58 14 15 A What' 30 years ago' 12 58 18 16 Q Yeah 12 58 19 17 A No, I don't I don't know everything - 12 58 19 18 Q But the jury is supposed to believe you 12 58 19 19 when you say 30 years ago I know we told Kelly-Moore 12 58 22 20 certain things, right' 12 58 22 21 A Oh, yes I know that for sure 12 58 23 22 Q You remember that' 12 58 25 23 A Yes, sir 12 58 26 24 Q Didn't remember it two years ago though, 12 58 26 25 right' 12 58 28 0171 1 A I - no, I think you're - 12 58 28 2 Q Right' 12 58 31 3 A - misinterpreting the answer said they 12 58 32 4 were a customer? 12 58 32 5 Q No, sir I wasnt interpreting I was 12 58 33 6 reading? 12 58 35 7 MR UXSSETTER Excuse me Don't interrupt 12 58 35 8 nim Go anead witn your answer 12 58 38 9 THE WITNESS I said we were sending 12 58 39 10 information to our customers and Kelly-Moore was a 12 58 41 11 customer 12 58 43 12 MR EGDORF Okay 12 58 44 13 MR UXSSETTER We're out of time 12 5845 14 MR EGDORF Says wno? 12 58 46 15 MR UXSSETTER Me 12 5847 16 MR EGDORF We're out of time for wnat? 12 58 47 17 MR UXSSETTER It's 1 00 I'm hungry 12 5849 18 I'm tired 12 58 51 19 MR EGDORF Tnat's tne difference between 12 58 52 20 being out of time You can ask me if you want to 12 58 53 21 take a break, or be can say ne wants to take a 12 58 56 22 break, wnicn I said I'd do You're just being rude 12 58 58 23 MR UXSSETTER Okay 12 59 02 24 MR EGDORF Do you want to take a break 12 59 03 25 now, Mr Myers? 12 59 04 0172 1 THE WITN Yes, tnat would be fine 12 59 05 2 MR EGDORF For luncn is an nour okay? 12 59 07 3 THE WITNESS Yes 12 59 09 4 MR EGDORF All right 12 59 09 5 MR UXSSETTER Going off tne record 12 59 10 6 12 59 pm 12 59 12 7 (Luncn break) 12 59 16 8 THE VIDEOGRAPHER We're going back on tne 14 10 16 9 record at 2 10 p m 14 10 19 10 BYMR EGDORF Q Mr Myers, I want 141024 11 to snow you -- well, let me snow you -- let me ask 14 10 26 12 you first, do you know wno J A Riddle is 14 10 28 13 A Yes 14 10 30 14 Q wnoisne? 14 10 31 15 A He was tne plant manager at King City l 14 10 32 16 tnink starting in 1964 14 10 40 17 Q Before you? 14 10 42 18 A Yes 14 10 43 19 (Deposition Exhibit Number 10 was 14 10 43 20 marked incorrectly for 14 1044 21 identification, remarked 14 1044 22 by tne court reporter as 10A) 14 10 44 23 BYMR EGDORF Q Letmesnowyou 141044 24 Exhibit Number 10 and ask you if you've seen tnat 14 10 45 25 before? 14 10 47 0173 1 A l tbink I've seen it in depositions, yes 14 10 52 2 Q And looks like it's a May 9, 1969 letter 14 10 55 3 from Mr Riddle to T Frank Tobin, plant manager at 14 10 58 4 Stedfast Rubber Company, correct? 14 11 03 5 A Yes 14 11 05 6 Q Do you know if Stedfast was one of your 14 1105 7 customers? 14 1108 8 A I don't recall 14 1108 9 Q Okay do you see there Our Calidria resin 14 1109 10 grade 144 asbestos is nearly pure Chrysotile 14 11 15 11 asbestos? is that correct? 14 1120 12 A Yes 14 11 20 13 Q And one of the ways that y'all marketed the 14 1121 14 Calidria was that it was purer than any other 14 11 24 15 asbestos out there, right? 14 11 26 16 A As far as the fiber content, yes 14 1127 17 Q And y'all marketed it as that being a good 14 1129 18 thing, right? 14 1132 19 A We marketed that as being a -- an advantage 14 11 33 20 to the customer 14 1135 21 Q Then he says A different type known as 14 1136 22 Crocidolite is believed by many authorities to be 14 11 39 23 implicated in causing mesothelioma and lung cancer 14 11 43 24 Did l read that correctly? 14 1147 25 A Yes 14 11 48 0174 1 Q Is it appropriate in your view for 14 1149 2 Mr riddle to make a distinction between Chrysotile 14 11 52 3 and Crocidolite to a customer? 14 11 56 4 A Well, l think it would be appropriate, yes 14 1159 5 I don't know what his thoughts were but-- 14 12 00 6 Q I thought you-- 14 12 00 7 A - we often made that distinction, yes 14 12 01 8 Q l thought you told me earlier that your 14 12 01 9 responsibility was to tell the customers that yours 14 12 02 10 is no different than any other asbestos in terms of 14 12 05 11 health and safety and that that's what you did? 14 12 08 12 A That's not what it says It says many 14 12 10 13 authorities to be implicated in causing 14 1212 14 mesothelioma 14 12 15 15 Q Objection Non-responsive 14 12 16 16 Didn't you tell me earlier today-- well, 14 12 18 17 I'll just ask it a different way is it your 14 12 19 18 position that with respect to the health hazards 14 12 20 19 associated with asbestos, that you told your 14 12 23 20 customers, or should have told your customers not to 14 12 25 21 make a distinction between your asbestos and any 14 12 28 22 other asbestos? 14 12 30 23 A We told them not to treat our asbestos any 14 12 30 24 differently than any others with regard to the 14 12 33 25 potential health hazards 14 12 35 0175 1 Q So if Mr Tobin took this letter to mean 14 12 36 2 that somehow your asbestos was different than other 14 12 40 3 asbestos, that's not what y'all would have wanted to 14 12 42 4 convey, correct? 14 1247 5 A I don't know how he took the letter 14 12 48 6 Q I didn't ask you that I said if that's 14 12 48 7 how he took it that would not be how you wanted the 14 12 50 8 information conveyed, is it? 14 12 51 9 A l think it was becoming established, the 14 12 52 10 difference between Crocidolite, especially with 14 12 56 11 regard to mesothelioma, and l don't see anything 14 13 00 12 wrong with Mr Riddle pointing that out 14 13 03 13 Q So in 1969, as far as you're concerned it 14 13 06 14 was okay to say that Chrysotile should be treated 14 13 09 15 differently than Crocidolite in terms health and 14 13 12 16 safety' 14 13 14 17 A No, l think it was stated as the same 14 13 14 18 precautions to not create dust and to be keep the 14 13 18 19 TLV below the allowable level 14 13 20 20 Q The allowable level that you already knew 14 13 21 21 wasn't low enough, right' 14 13 24 22 A No, I didn't know that 14 13 25 23 Q Well, Mr Sayers'report that was signed 14 13 27 24 off and agreed to by Doctor Dernehl said 5 wasn't 14 13 29 25 low enough It needs to be more like 1, right' 14 13 33 0176 1 A Mr Sayers, again, was a salesman in the 14 13 36 2 UK He put that in his paper, and l don't-- 14 13 38 3 Q Objection Non-responsive 14 1341 4 A Sir-well, then repeat the question 14 13 42 5 Q My question was clear 14 13 43 6 A Well then start again 14 13 44 7 Q Let me do it a different way Doctor 14 13 45 8 Dernehl said -- put in his paper, in his letter, 14 13 48 9 after he read Doctor - Mr Sayers' report that even 14 13 52 10 a level of 1 would not be low enough, correct' 14 13 54 11 A Again, you'd have to show me the letter, 14 13 57 12 because l don't know if that's exactly what he said 14 13 59 13 Q Well, am I just completely wrong' 14 14 02 14 A l have no idea I'd like to see the 14 14 04 15 letter 14 14 07 16 Q Well, we can go into it Is it your 14 14 07 17 testimony as a corporate representative of Union 14 14 09 18 Carbide that you didn't have any information to 14 14 12 19 indicate that the levels, the TLV levels promulgated 14 14 15 20 by the government agencies, were not low enough' 14 14 18 21 A That was the opinion of some people We 14 14 21 22 were following what the -- the ACGIH recommended 14 14 25 23 Q Well, you had people at Union Carbide who 14 14 29 24 thought the level needed to be lower, didn't you' 14 14 31 25 A Are you talking about Mr Sayers' 14 14 34 0177 1 Q You had people at Union Carbide who thought 14 14 35 2 the level needed to be lower, didn't you' 14 14 38 3 A I don't know 14 14 39 4 Q Did you tell anybody, any of your 14 14 40 5 customers There are people at Union Carbide who 14 14 42 6 think the TLV is not low enough' 14 14 44 7 A You just told me that was in Mr - Doctor 14 14 46 8 Demehl's letter 14 14 49 9 Q I'm talking about the letter you didn't 14 14 50 10 give to any customers, the one in 1967, after he 14 14 52 11 reviewed Mr Sayers's report 14 14 56 12 A We gave the customers the asbestos 14 14 59 13 toxicology report We didn't give them internal 14 15 02 14 letters 14 15 05 15 Q Did you write any letters or give any 14 15 05 16 information to any of your customers that there were 14 15 08 17 people at Umion Carbide who thoughtthe TLV was hot 14 15 11 18 low enough to be safe'' 14 15 14 19 A Did we use those words exactly' 14 15 15 20 Q Or even close' 14 15 18 21 A No, l don't remember that Yeah, in our 14 15 19 22 asbestos toxicology report l think that's what 14 15 21 23 doctor Dernell said l mean, we can find it 14 15 24 24 Q wnat about Doctor Lane' Did you ever talk 14 15 28 25 to him' 14 15 30 0178 1 A Nothing different than this morning, when 14 15 31 2 you asked me the same question l still don't 14 15 33 3 remember talking to him 14 15 35 4 Q Well, we were starting to do that when your 14 15 36 5 lawyer decided we needed to take a break for lunch 14 15 39 6 Are you familiar with Doctor Lane's memo, 14 15 44 7 where he referred to some of the information being 14 15 47 8 provided to customers that-- regarding the safe use 14 15 51 9 of Calidria RG 244' 14 15 55 10 A Well, if you let me see, l can tell you 14 15 58 11 whether l was-- 14 16 00 12 Q Well, I don't have anything right here I'm 14 16 01 13 ready to -- talking about showing you yet I'm just 14 16 03 14 asking you 14 16 07 15 A And l can't answer the question 14 16 07 16 Q You don't know' 14 16 08 17 Safe use of Calidria 244, that's something 14 16 10 18 you wrote, right' 14 16 13 19 A l participated in that, yes 14 16 14 20 Q Okay So do you recall Doctor Lane ever 14 16 16 21 saying anything, for example, that some of the 14 16 21 22 report-- or some of what's in that document is a 14 16 24 23 half truth and is misleading' 14 16 27 24 A I think I told you I don't remember, unless 14 16 30 25 you show it to me Maybe l -- then l could remember 14 16 32 0179 1 that l saw it before 14 16 34 2 Q Well, would you think if the person from - 14 16 36 3 Doctor Lane from your medical department said 14 16 38 4 something that was in a paper that you were -- 14 16 40 5 participated in was half true and misleading 14 16 42 6 regarding health hazards of asbestos that you would 14 16 45 7 have an obligation to change that document' 14 16 48 8 A l don't know whether he was looking at a 14 16 50 9 draft or the final document 14 16 51 10 Q Well, do you remember your document ever 14 16 54 11 being changed by anyone in the medical department' 14 16 56 12 A No, I don't remember that 14 16 59 13 Q Do you remember Doctor Lane ever writing a 14 17 05 14 memo saying that all varieties of asbestos produce 14 17 06 15 disease' 14 17 10 16 A Do I remember him saying - no, I don't 14 17 13 17 remember him saying that 14 17 15 18 Q Do you remember Doctor Lane saying that the 14 17 16 19 discussion of Chrysotile is a diversionary tactic' 14 17 18 20 A l think l - I've told you several times l 14 17 22 21 don't remember any correspondence from Doctor Lane 14 17 25 22 Q Objection Non-responsive 14 17 28 23 l just asked you did he ever tell you that? 14 17 29 24 A l don't remember 14 17 31 25 Q Chrysotile causes disease Did anyone from 14 17 36 0180 1 the asbestos -- excuse me -- from the medical 14 17 39 2 department tell you that? 14 1742 3 A That was in all of the toxicology reports, 14 17 43 4 yes 14 1745 5 Q But you think today they're all wrong? 14 17 46 6 A No, asbestos does cause disease Depends 14 17 49 7 on what kind you're talking about 14 17 52 8 Q Wby would you all be worried about 14 17 53 9 everybody else's kind of asbestos? You weren't 14 17 57 10 selling anything but Calidria, right? 14 18 00 11 A We weren't worried about anyone else's 14 18 03 12 Q So wnen you have all these documents and 14 18 04 13 memos that talk about concerns about asbestos, 14 18 05 14 you're talking about the product you're putting out, 14 18 06 15 right? 14 18 08 16 A l don't--I've explained many times We 14 18 09 17 told our customers to treat our asbestos like any 14 18 11 18 other asbestos as far as the health hazards, 14 18 14 19 potential health hazards 14 18 18 20 Q Didn't ask you that, sir 14 18 19 21 A Okay 14 18 20 22 Q The memos, internal memos that you have at 14 18 20 23 Union Carbide that discuss studies about asbestos, 14 18 23 24 and what we tell customers about asbestos, that's 14 18 26 25 not talking about other people's asbestos It's 14 18 29 0181 1 talking about yours, right? 14 18 31 2 A I think it was talking about all of them 14 18 32 3 Q Well, you weren't selling the-- 14 18 34 4 A You have to show me that if you want-- 14 18 36 5 Q You weren't selling the other kinds, right? 14 18 38 6 A Tnat's correct 14 18 40 7 Q Were you studying everybody else's? 14 18 42 8 A Studying? From wbat standpoint? 14 1844 9 Q From any standpoint 14 18 47 10 A Sure we were comparing, running lab tests 14 18 48 11 to compare their effectiveness in applications 14 18 51 12 versus ours 14 18 54 13 Q So you could go to customers and say, for 14 18 55 14 example Don't by that Crocidolite It's the bad 14 18 57 15 stuff Buy ours Right? 14 19 04 16 A We didn't contact any Crocidolite 14 19 06 17 customers, to your knowledge 14 19 10 18 Q Union Carbide was a Crocidolite customer, 14 19 10 19 wasn't it? 14 19 11 20 A l nave no idea 14 19 13 21 Q You don't know about the studies, for 14 19 14 22 example, in West Virginia wnere Union Carbide had 14 19 16 23 people -- employees dropping dead from a -- 14 19 19 24 Crocidolite that was used as insulation? 14 19 20 25 A No 14 19 23 0182 1 Q Well, certainly don't you think that- 14 19 24 2 that at least the information you knew about other 14 19 26 3 types of asbestos, that Union Carbide as a company 14 19 28 4 should have told employees that worked around 14 19 32 5 Crocidolite what they knew? 14 1934 6 A l nave no knowledge of wnat was going on 14 19 36 7 with - l mean wherever they were using Crocidolite 14 19 39 8 Q Didn't ask you that Just asking as a just 14 19 42 9 a fundamental matter, if Union Carbide had knowledge 14 19 44 10 that its workers were working with a product that 14 19 47 11 was dangerous, don't you think that Union Carbide 14 19 49 12 had an obligation to tell them that? 14 19 52 13 A l imagine they did tell them that- 14 19 54 14 Q So- 14 19 56 15 A - based on the information that was known 14 19 56 16 Q So if there's a memo regarding the 14 19 58 17 employees in West Virginia that says, don't tell 14 20 00 18 them this, you might have a problem with that? 14 20 02 19 A l would be surprised, yes 14 20 04 20 Q All right I keep marking the wrong 14 20 05 21 document I'm going to show you Exhibit 11 Have 14 20 08 22 you seen that before? 14 20 13 23 (Deposition Exhibit Number 11 was 24 marked for identification ) 25 MR UXSSETTER Let me look at it first 14 20 23 0183 1 Gene, is this the document that's attached to your 14 20 25 2 motion in labor privilege 14 20 28 3 MR EGDORF I don't know I naven't 14 20 30 4 participated in any motion like that 14 20 32 5 MR UXSSETTER Hold on a second 14 20 34 6 It's okay This is one of the documents 14 20 47 7 that was on our privilege list and pursuant to our 14 20 49 8 protective order, the procedure requires that you go 14 20 53 9 to the court and get a ruling on it before you can 14 20 56 10 use it 14 20 58 11 MR EGDORF We have submitted it to the 14 20 58 12 court Will you quit stalling about who the judge 14 21 00 13 is, we can get an answer 14 BY MR EGDORF Q Have you seen this 14 2104 15 before? 14 2105 16 MR UXSSETTER Jean 14 2106 17 MR EGDORF Sit down please 14 2106 18 MR UXSSETTER We're not going to talk 142106 19 about the document- 14 2106 20 MR EGDORF Well, then you can make an 14 2107 21 objection It's- 14 2107 22 MR UXSSETTER I'm objecting to it 14 2107 23 MR EGDORF Fine I'm going to ask him 14 2109 24 questions anyway And you can - you can instruct 14 21 11 25 him not to answer All l did was ask nim if ne'd 142112 0184 1 seen this document before 14 21 16 2 MR UXSSETTER We're not going to have it 14 21 17 3 attached to the record 142119 4 MR EGDORF Well, then we can put it under 14 21 20 5 seal as we need to 14 2123 6 MR UXSSETTER The procedure is he's not 14 2123 7 going answer any questions -- 14 21 23 8 MR EGDORF Well, fine Then you can 14 2124 9 instruct him not to answer Can me move on, please? 14 21 26 10 MR UXSSETTER No, because you might as 142126 11 well not waste your time I'm telling you right 12 now- 13 MR EGDORF You don't tell me what's 142127 14 wasting my time 14 2128 15 MR UXSSETTER If there is- 142130 16 MR EGDORF If you have an objection make 14 21 30 17 it 14 21 31 18 MR UXSSETTER Do you intentionally want 142131 19 to violate the protective order? 14 2133 20 MR EGDORF Not intentionally violate -- I 14 21 34 21 know that your lawyer, your company's lawyer, Jim 14 21 34 22 Powers, admitted this document at a trial 14 21 37 23 MR UXSSETTER That's your position on the 14 21 39 24 matter 14 2140 25 MR EGDORF So I'm just asking - 14 2140 0185 1 MR U\SSETTER We have a protective 14 21 42 2 order- 14 2143 3 MR EGDORF He's already talked about the 14 2143 4 contents of the document today too 14 21 44 5 MR UXSSETTER You asked him about 14 2146 6 questions and he said I've not seen the document 14 21 48 7 MR EGDORF No, I asked him the document 14 2150 8 that said it would be fatal to not put cancer on the 14 21 54 9 warning label which is what this document says 14 21 57 10 MR UXSSETTER I didn't know what you were 14 21 58 11 talking about until you pulled out a document that's 14 21 59 12 obviously privileged 14 22 03 13 MR EGDORF Fine I'm going to ask him 14 22 03 14 the questions You can instruct him not to answer 14 22 05 15 and we can move on 16 MR UXSSETTER You can ask as many 14 22 06 17 questions as you want he's not going to answer them 14 22 06 18 MR EGDORF That's fine 14 22 06 19 BYMR EGDORF Q Have you seen 14 22 07 20 Exhibit 11 before? 14 22 08 21 MR UXSSETTER I don't want you to take a 14 22 10 22 look at the document It's a privileged document 14 22 11 23 MR EGDORF Object to the coaching of the 14 22 14 24 witness If you instruct him not to answer, fine 14 22 15 25 MR UXSSETTER Gene- 14 22 18 0186 1 MR EGDORF Say it 14 22 18 2 MR UXSSETTER Don't tell me how to 14 22 19 3 control my witness 14 22 21 4 MR EGDORF I'm going to tell you not to 14 22 22 5 violate the rules making sidebar speeches 14 22 22 6 MR UXSSETTER I'm- 14 22 22 7 MR EGDORF If you have an objection, make 14 22 22 8 your objection I don't need to hear anything from 14 22 23 9 you 14 22 25 10 MR UXSSETTER You're violating a 14 22 25 11 protective order 14 22 27 12 MR EGDORF Well, I don't agree 14 22 27 13 MR UXSSETTER Okay There's a - 14 22 28 14 there' - 15 MR EGDORF I'm not going to debate with 14 22 28 16 you 14 22 28 17 MR UXSSETTER There's a ruling in this 14 22 29 18 litigation 14 22 30 19 MR EGDORF I'm not going to debate you 14 22 30 20 Make your objection 14 22 33 21 MR UXSSETTER Gene, do not tell me what 14 22 34 22 to say or when to say it 14 22 36 23 MR EGDORF And you don't do it to me 14 22 38 24 either 14 22 40 25 MR UXSSETTER And I'm simply telling you 14 22 40 0187 1 - l haven't done that 14 22 41 2 MR EGDORF So are you telling me - 14 22 41 3 MR UXSSETTER I'm simply telling you that 14 22 41 4 he's not going to answer any questions - 14 22 41 5 MR EGDORF Fine Tnen instruct him not 14 22 41 6 to answer He'll say l refuse to answer, and we'll 14 22 42 7 move to the next question 14 22 45 8 MR UXSSETTER I don't want the witness 14 2246 9 looking at the document 14 22 48 10 MR EGDORF That's fine 14 22 49 11 MR UXSSETTER We have a ruling - 14 22 49 12 MR EGDORF You can instruct him that too, 14 22 49 13 but l get to make my record on it 14 22 51 14 MR UXSSETTER Please do, except you're in 14 22 53 15 violation of a protective order 14 22 55 16 MR EGDORF I disagree with that and I'm 14 22 57 17 not intending to violate the protective order Can 14 22 58 18 we finish the deposition, please, without your 14 22 58 19 speeches? You're paid plenty by the hour You 14 23 00 20 don't have to talk extra to get- 14 23 03 21 MR UXSSETTER Why is it that you make 14 23 04 22 speeches, Gene? 14 23 06 23 MR EGDORF Responding to yours 14 23 08 24 MR UXSSETTER - to ride me for from 14 23 09 25 simply trying to protect the record and keep you 14 23 10 0188 1 from violating the protective order 14 23 13 2 MR EGDORF Which you've more than done, 14 23 15 3 and no, I haven't 14 23 17 4 MR UXSSETTER Okay 14 23 18 5 BY MR EGDORF Q At least I haven't 14 23 18 6 violated my own word 14 23 18 7 You're not going to look at Exhibit 11, 14 23 18 8 sir? 14 23 20 9 A No 14 23 20 10 Q You're going to instruct to answer- 14 23 20 11 refuse to answer questions about it? 14 23 21 12 A Yes 14 23 22 13 Q Did you ever write any letter to anybody at 14 23 23 14 Carbide saying Jim Powers shouldn't be allowed to 14 23 25 15 represent and speak for Union Carbide? 14 23 28 16 A l can't remember writing a letter like 14 23 31 17 tnat.no 14 23 33 18 Q Are you aware of any motion tnat's been 14 23 33 19 filed tnat said Jim Powers nad no autnority to act 14 23 35 20 for Union Carbide? 14 23 41 21 A No, I am not 14 23 41 22 Q wnen Mr Powers represented you at a 14 23 42 23 deposition, did anybody represent to you tnat ne nad 14 23 45 24 no autnority to represent Union Carbide? 14 23 47 25 A Not tnat I remember 14 23 48 0189 1 Q Certainly you wouldn't nave a confidential 14 23 49 2 communication witn somebody tnat wasn't a lawyer for 14 23 52 3 Union Carbide, would you? 14 23 54 4 A l wouldn't nave a confidential 14 23 55 5 communication without- 14 23 57 6 Q You wouldn't nave a meeting wnere you 14 23 58 7 discussed confidential information witn Mr Powers 14 24 00 8 if ne wasn't a lawyer for Union Carbide, would you? 14 24 03 9 A I don't know I may nave 14 24 05 10 Q Well, do you feel like tnat you personally 14 24 16 11 did a tnorougn investigation of all tne knowledge 14 24 18 12 tnat was out mere about asbestos while you worked 14 24 21 13 at Union Carbide? 14 24 24 14 A No, that would be impossible 14 24 24 15 Q Did you try? 14 24 26 16 A We - as evidenced by wbat we were making 14 24 28 17 available to customers, we - we did a fair job of 14 24 32 18 providing customers witn information that was not 14 24 36 19 generated by Union Carbide 14 24 39 20 Q Well, then why would you hide information 14 24 40 21 from the customers? 14 24 43 22 A On, did we? What? 14 24 44 23 Q Why wouldn't you give them Sayers report 14 24 46 24 and let them figure out for themselves he's not a 14 24 48 25 doctor and doesn't know what he's talking about? 14 24 51 0190 1 A To me it wasn't appropriate and wasn't my 14 24 53 2 decision, but l would agree that it was not 14 24 56 3 appropriate, that that information has already been 14 24 58 4 available to the customer 14 25 01 5 Q Do you - aren't you familiar with the 14 25 03 6 phrase the customer is always right? 14 25 04 7 A I've heard tnat 14 25 06 8 Q You disagree with that? 14 25 07 9 A I'm not talking about a customer that 14 25 08 10 sells - or a customer that's buying stuff at 14 25 10 11 Safeway, or anything like that 14 25 13 12 Q Didn't ask you that Do you disagree with 14 25 14 13 it? 14 25 16 14 MR UXSSETTER Let him finish 14 25 17 15 THE WITNESS I don't have any opinion, 14 25 18 16 answer to that question 14 25 20 17 BY MR EGDORF Q If the customer 14 25 21 18 says, l need that information, l need all of your 14 25 22 19 information in order to evaluate that product, what 14 25 25 20 you're selling me, do you think it's right for you 14 25 27 21 not to give them all the information 14 25 29 22 A That's usually what they would ask, and we 14 25 31 23 would provide them with information 14 25 33 24 Q You didn't provide it all You provided 14 25 34 25 what you chose to give them, right? 14 25 37 0191 1 A We had a list of what we thought was a very 14 25 38 2 good explanation of the hazards of asbestos and how 14 25 41 3 to use it safely 14 25 46 4 Q You didn't give them everything You-- 14 25 46 5 A That was our opinion 14 25 48 6 THE REPORTER One at a time 14 25 48 7 Q You didn't give them everything You gave 14 25 49 8 them what you chose to gave them - give them, 14 25 49 9 right? 14 25 49 10 A No, we had them look at the list and let 14 25 49 11 them choose what they wanted 14 25 51 12 Q You didn't put everything on the list 14 25 53 13 though, did you? 14 25 54 14 A You mean all the documents on asbestos? 14 25 54 15 Q Yes, sir 14 25 56 16 A No 14 25 57 17 Q Not even your own - all your own studies 14 25 57 18 about asbestos at Carbide Those aren't on the list 14 26 00 19 either are they? 14 26 03 20 A We've been through that before We 14 26 04 21 provided the information that was in there to our 14 26 05 22 customers We did not give them copies of the 14 26 08 23 report 14 26 10 24 Q Do you think-well, who is Mr Thurber? 14 26 11 25 You told me that earlier forgot his title He's 14 26 14 0192 1 with the metals division? 14 26 17 2 A Yes 14 26 18 3 Q You didn't remember his title or he was 14 26 18 4 above you somehow? 14 26 21 5 A Yes 14 26 22 6 Q How about R E Byrne? Who's he? 14 26 22 7 A He was in our mark- - technology marketing 14 26 26 8 group in Niagara Falls 14 26 29 9 Q How about H B Rhodes? 14 26 31 10 A I've seen his name many times he was a 14 26 34 11 Ph D , a chemical engineer in the marketing group 14 26 37 12 Q l think we talked about him a little 14 26 40 13 earlier, correct? 14 26 42 14 A Yes 14 26 43 15 Q None of those people were lawyers, were 14 26 44 16 they? 14 26 45 17 A NO 14 2646 18 Q You had conversations with those folks 14 26 52 19 about whether cancer should be put on your warning 14 26 54 20 labels, didn't you^ 14 26 56 21 A l can't recall that, but we probably would 14 26 57 22 have discussed that 14 26 59 23 Q And in 1975 y'all didn't put cancer in any 14 27 00 24 warning label, did you? 14 27 05 25 A No, we were using the OSHA prescribed 14 27 07 0193 1 label 14 27 10 2 Q Let me ask-l want to recite a statement 14 27 14 3 and ask you if you agree with it or not Okay? 14 27 18 4 If there is really an appreciable chance 14 27 23 5 that the use of a Union Carbide product will result 14 27 26 6 in a serious injury to a substantial number of 14 27 30 7 people, Union Carbide should not be supplying it 14 27 32 8 Do you agree or disagree with that? 14 27 35 9 MR UXSSETTER Hold on What document are 14 27 37 10 you reading from? 14 27 38 11 MR EGDORF I didn't read from any 14 27 39 12 document l read from my notes in there 14 27 40 13 MR UXSSETTER Well, I think that comes 14 2742 14 from a privileged document again 14 27 44 15 BYMR EGDORF Q Would you - 14 2745 16 I'm not showing mm any document 14 27 46 17 Would you agree with that as a statement or 14 27 48 18 not, that Union Carbide shouldn't put out products 14 27 50 19 that might hurt people? 14 27 52 20 A Again, that's a matter of degree Almost 14 27 56 21 all the chemical products that Union Carbide sold 14 27 59 22 and other chemical companies sold could be hazardous 14 28 02 23 in some manner Being valuable to the economy, they 14 28 06 24 cannot stop - you cannot stop producing all 14 28 12 25 products that have some hazard associated with them 14 28 14 0194 1 Q So - so you don't agree with the 14 28 18 2 statement? 14 28 19 3 A l don't disagree with it it's just that 114 28 20 4 feel like it depends on the - whetherthe product 14 28 23 5 is valuable to - to the - to the users 14 28 27 6 Q There might be exceptions to that 14 28 31 7 statement? 14 28 33 8 A l just - l don't disagree with it or agree 14 28 34 9 with it entirely 14 28 37 10 Q Well, some of that would depend on how the 14 28 38 11 product's being used, right? in terms of what its 14 28 41 12 overall value to the economy and society and all 14 28 44 13 that is, right? 14 28 47 14 A There would be a lot of factors involved 14 28 47 15 Q Okay Do you think it's appropriate for 14 28 49 16 Union Carbide asbestos to be used in Kleenex? 14 28 52 17 A l think it could be used, yes 14 28 59 18 Q You think that would be appropriate? 14 29 00 19 A l don't know that we ever used - ever sold 14 29 03 20 any in that, but l don't see that it would be a 14 29 07 21 problem 14 29 09 22 Q You sold asbestos -- your Calidria asbestos 14 29 10 23 to paper companies, didn't you? 14 29 13 24 A A little bit, yes 14 29 14 25 Q Your Union Carbide Calidria was used in 14 29 16 0195 1 Tampons Do you tnink tnat's appropriate? 14 29 20 2 A l don't know tnat was used in mere 14 29 21 3 Q In your view, would tnat be an appropriate 14 29 24 4 use? 14 29 26 5 A I wouldn't see anytning wrong witn it 14 29 26 6 Q How about as paper wrapping for food 14 29 28 7 products Would tnat be okay witn you? 14 29 31 8 A Yes 14 29 33 9 Q In fact, you were upset when tne FDA told 14 29 33 10 you tnat you couldn't do tnat anymore, rignt? 14 29 36 11 A l was remembering just tne opposite l 14 29 38 12 tnougnt tney told us wnat could use it in tne 14 29 41 13 food- 14 29 44 14 Q Let me clarify myquestion You were upset 14 29 44 15 wnen you found out tnat tneFDA mignt not let you do 14 29 47 16 it anymore, and tnen y'all took steps to try and 14 29 51 17 convince tne FDA otherwise, correct? 14 29 54 18 A You nave to snow me sometning I don't 14 29 56 19 remember tnat 14 29 58 20 Q You don't remember anytning like tnat? 14 29 58 21 A l remember naving discussions about FDA, 14 30 00 22 but I tnougnt tne ruling was tnat it could be used 14 30 02 23 Q Well, you'd agree tnat you spent a great 14 30 07 24 deal of time trying to influence regulation and 14 30 09 25 legislation, correct? 14 30 12 0196 1 A l don't know wnat you mean by great deal 14 30 13 2 I spent some time witn tnat 14 30 15 3 Q Snow you Number 12 and ask you to identify 14 30 20 4 tnat for us 14 30 23 5 (Deposition Exhibit Number 12 was 14 30 24 6 marked for identification) 14 30 24 7 THE WITNESS Well, it's a letter from me 14 30 32 8 to an attached list wnicn isn't attached 14 30 34 9 Q Just giving it to you now I got it, sir, if 14 30 37 10 lean find an attaenment i'll be glad to add it to 14 30 41 11 tne deposition 14 30 45 12 A Dated July 14tn, 1977 14 30 45 13 Q Okay Can I borrow tnat one second? I'll 14 30 48 14 give it back to you, sir 14 30 50 15 Doesn't it say wnere tne green arrow is 14 30 52 16 For tne past several years we nave spent an 14 30 56 17 increasing amount of time and money to keep abreast 14 30 58 18 of and, as necessary, influence legislation 14 30 58 19 involving asbestos? 14 3101 20 That's wnat it says, isn't it, sir? 14 31 01 21 A Yes 14 31 04 22 Q And tnat's a letter you wrote, isnt it, 14 3104 23 sir? 14 3107 24 A Yes 14 31 07 25 Q Is that accurate? 14 3108 0197 1 A Yes, that's true 14 3109 2 Q Okay You can set that one aside, sir 14 3115 3 A Oh, okay 14 3124 4 Q Show you what I've marked as Exhibit Number 14 31 32 5 13 and ask you to identify that one for us, sir 14 31 34 6 (Deposition Exhibit Number 13 was 14 31 45 7 marked for identification) 14 3145 8 THE WITNESS It's a letter from me to 14 3145 9 Mr Thurber 14 3148 10 BY MR EGDORF Q What's the date, 143149 11 sir? 14 31 51 12 A July 9th, 1976 14 31 52 13 Q Does it indicate what the subject matter of 14 31 54 14 the letter is? 14 3158 15 A Packaging an transportation problems with 143159 16 asbestos dust 14 32 05 17 Q Can l take that back one second? I'll give 14 32 06 18 it back to you 14 32 08 19 Would you read out loud the first paragraph 14 32 09 20 on the second page? 14 32 12 21 A We have agreed to participate in additional 14 32 13 22 asbestos education programs which the state may 14 32 16 23 schedule in August or September The state will 14 32 19 24 send a letter to about 100,000 potential asbestos 14 32 22 25 users in August We assisted in drafting the letter 14 32 26 0198 1 and will review the final draft next week 14 32 30 2 Q So you assisted the state in drafting a 14 32 32 3 letter that was going to go to asbestos users? 14 32 34 4 A That's what it says here, yes 14 32 36 5 Q Did you give the state open access to all 14 32 38 6 your medical files as part of that process? 14 32 40 7 A I don't think they needed any 14 32 43 8 Q Objection Non-responsive Did you give 14 32 45 9 the state- 14 32 46 10 A NO 14 32 47 11 Q Thank you I'm done with that document, 14 32 47 12 sir 14 32 51 13 A Let me go back to the last question You 14 32 58 14 said did we give them all of our medical 14 33 00 15 information? 14 33 05 16 Q Something to that effect, I don't know the 14 33 05 17 specific words, but it was something like that 14 33 07 18 A Well, at least not to my knowledge 14 33 08 19 Q Tney got all your medical files, or 14 33 08 20 something l can't remember exactly how l did it? 14 33 10 21 A I'll say not to my knowledge did we do it 14 33 13 22 Q Okay Show you - wnat am I up to? 14? 14 33 16 23 A Yes This is 13 14 33 19 24 Q Okay Thankyou 14 33 21 25 (Deposition Exhibit Number 14 was 14 33 28 0199 1 marked for identification 14 33 28 2 BY MR EGDORF Q think you'll 14 33 28 3 probably be able to identify that one pretty easily 14 33 30 4 for us? 14 33 33 5 A Yes 14 33 33 6 Q What is it, sir? 14 33 33 7 A That's a paper l wrote on handling 14 33 35 8 asbestos -- handling asbestos, Chrysotile asbestos, 14 33 38 9 and plastics 14 33 43 10 Q Now, is this a paper that other people 14 33 44 11 helped write too, or you put your name on it 14 33 46 12 somebody else wrote, or did you actually are the 14 33 50 13 ones that sat down and wrote it? 14 33 51 14 A l probably wrote most of it, and it would 14 33 52 15 have been a joint effort with the people in the 14 33 55 16 marketing group 14 33 58 17 Q All right And I was looking - it looks 14 34 00 18 like December 1975 is the date that's on here Does 14 34 02 19 that sound about right to you? I found it--1 saw 14 34 06 20 that date on the third page 14 34 10 21 A Well, this says presented June 16th, 1975, 14 34 12 22 I think 14 34 18 23 Q Oh, where you--oh, I see where you're 14 34 20 24 looking Okay 14 34 23 25 A When it was published in this law-in 14 34 24 0200 1 this journal 14 34 25 2 Q All right Now, I want to go up to this 14 34 26 3 section right here where you can see the 14 34 29 4 highlighting on mine, the copy, sir? 14 34 31 5 A All right 14 34 34 6 Q Now, is that--do you know what that is 14 34 34 7 there? is that some kind of abstract of the article 14 34 37 8 or is that actually something you wrote? 14 34 40 9 A That's an abstract l don't remember if l 14 34 42 10 wrote it or- 14 34 44 11 Q Okay 14 34 46 12 A - the journal wrote it 14 34 46 13 Q l want to--to read out one part and ask 14 34 47 14 you to tell me if you agree with it or not Okay? 14 34 50 15 On the abstract You with me? 14 34 55 16 A Yeah 14 34 56 17 Q Many of the articles on asbestos by the 14 34 56 18 press have been emotionally oriented and distorted 14 34 58 19 and in some cases stories have been sensationalized 14 35 01 20 based on obvious misinterpretation of facts is 14 35 05 21 that something you agree with? 14 35 09 22 A Yes 14 35 10 23 Q And that was something you put in a paper 14 35 10 24 you published, correct? 14 35 12 25 A Yes 14 35 13 0201 1 Q Is that something you would have told 14 35 14 2 customers if they asked you? 14 35 15 3 A Yes There were customers at this meeting 14 35 16 4 so- 14 35 19 5 Q Okay 14 35 19 6 A - they would have heard that 14 35 19 7 Q The use of half truths or unsubstantiated 14 35 20 8 statement has led to general confusion and the 14 35 24 9 unfair castigation of asbestos in products 14 35 27 10 containing asbestos 14 35 32 11 Do you agree with that statement? 14 35 33 12 A Yes 14 35 34 13 Q Is that something you told customers? 14 35 34 14 A It was--again, it was in this document 14 35 35 15 which was available to customers 14 35 38 16 Q Kelly-Moore wasn't a customer that was at 14 35 39 17 this June 16th, 1975 meeting, were they? 14 35 42 18 A l have no idea who the attendees were 14 35 45 19 Q Done with that one, sir This is 14? 14 35 48 20 Looking at the wrong place from the file then right 14 36 10 21 All right So we're on 15? 14 36 13 22 A Yes 14 36 15 23 Q Thank you for keeping me straight on the 14 36 15 24 numbers 14 36 17 25 (Deposition Exhibit Number 15 was 14 36 20 0202 1 marked for identification) 14 36 20 2 BY MR EGDORF Q Is Number- 14 36 20 3 Exhibit Number 15 a letter that you wrote to Doug 14 36 23 4 Merrill at Kelly-Moore? 14 36 25 5 MR UXSSETTER Let me back up This is a 14 36 26 6 procedural issue On my Exhibits 14 we've got a 14 36 28 7 blank page here, and it looks like we're missing 14 36 32 8 several sections of the paper 14 36 34 9 MR EGDORF That's how - that's how I 14 36 37 10 think I have it or I think how we've gotten it, but 14 36 40 11 I'm nappy to -- if we nave other copies we'll 14 36 44 12 produce it, but that's what l have, or if we find 14 36 47 13 other pages I'm happy to produce them Apparently 14 36 50 14 this came from Carbide somewhere, but I'm happy to 14 36 53 15 have a -- when - I'm hap- - 16 MR UXSSETTER Well, there isn't a Bates 14 36 56 17 number The pages are out of order 14 36 58 18 MR EGDORF I'm telling you that's how I 14 36 58 19 have it I'm happy-- if you've got the rest of the 14 37 00 20 document and want to supplement it, l have no 14 37 03 21 objection to that 14 37 05 22 MR UXSSETTER Well, 77 Yeah, the pages 14 37 06 23 are out of order, and there's page 21176 is just 14 37 08 24 missing 14 37 14 25 MR BICKS If you know a trial exhibit - 14 37 16 0203 1 some of the recent Kelly-Moore trial exhibits, it 14 37 18 2 would be helpful 14 37 20 3 MR EGDORF I would be thrilled to have 14 37 21 4 the rest of the document l personally-- whether 14 37 22 5 you want to believe it -- I'm not the asbestos 14 37 25 6 lawyer I don't know what--so I don't know if 14 37 27 7 that's the only three pages everybody has, or 14 37 29 8 everybody has the whole document and somebody took 14 37 31 9 three pages out, or somewhere in between 14 37 35 10 I would think the whole document, if it's 14 37 37 11 somewhere, would be in your repository, and you 14 37 39 12 could get it, but l will be happy to ask at my 14 37 42 13 office if somebody has full, complete document I'm 14 37 46 14 sure if Doctor Egilman has the full document he'd be 14 37 52 15 happy to give it to y'all That's what l have 14 37 55 16 though And I'm happy to have the record 14 37 58 17 supplemented to include the whole document, if 14 38 02 18 that's what everybody wants to do 14 38 04 19 THE WITNESS Okay I don't know what you 14 38 09 20 want to ask l don't know what all the to do 14 38 10 21 BY MR EGDORF Q No, I think I had a 14 38 12 22 question but we probably loss it in all that l 14 38 13 23 think my question was Is this a correct--true 14 38 16 24 and correct copy of the letter with an attachment 14 38 18 25 that you wrote to Doug Merrill at Kelly-Moore? 14 38 19 0204 1 A Well, it appears to be, yes 14 38 22 2 Q In that letter you were suggesting to him 14 38 24 3 that you--well, strike that Please turn to the 14 38 27 4 second page You put Also enclosed is a copy of 14 38 29 5 our letter recently sent to members of the Consumer 14 38 32 6 Product Safety Commission, correct? 14 38 36 7 A Yes 14 38 38 8 Q And you were asking Mr Merrill and 14 38 40 9 Kelly-Moore to become involved, correct? 14 38 42 10 A Well, yeah We're asking him to send a 14 38 51 11 similar letter to -- to the Consumer Product Safety 14 38 54 12 Commission 14 38 56 13 Q Okay Was there any other times that you 14 38 58 14 can recall that you or someone at Union Carbide 14 39 00 15 contacted Kelly-Moore and asked them to write 14 39 03 16 letters similar to letters you had written or 14 39 06 17 somebody at Union Carbide had written to a 14 39 09 18 governmental agency? 14 39 12 19 A I don't recall any others 14 39 12 20 Q Okay Done with that, sir I don't want 14 39 14 21 to number wrong, since you're looking at the one we 14 39 37 22 just did 14 39 41 23 (Deposition Exhibit Number 16 was 14 39 42 24 marked for identification ) 14 39 42 25 BY MR EGDORF Q Have you seen 14 39 43 0205 1 Exhibit Number 16 before, which l believe is 14 39 44 2 Mr Hemeon's report from June of 1947 for the 14 39 46 3 Industrial Hygiene Foundation? 14 39 51 4 A I don't think so, no I dont think I've 14 39 53 5 ever seen that 14 39 55 6 Q Have you ever-excuse me I'm sorry 14 39 56 7 A I don't think I've ever seen this 14 39 58 8 Q I need to make sure my question is 100 14 4000 9 percent clear, so we don't have any ambiguity, sir 14 40 03 10 You've been shown a lot of documents in your 14 40 07 11 depositions and trial testimony over the years that 14 40 10 12 you've probably testified no, l have not seen this 14 40 12 13 document before, right? 1440 14 14 A Yes 14 40 15 15 Q So what I was -- so to make sure my 1440 16 16 question is clear, do you not even recall seeing 14 40 19 17 this document at deposition before'' l wasn't trying 14 40 21 18 to limit it to just did you see it back in 1974 or 14 40 24 19 something like that' 14 40 27 20 A l don't recall seeing it at anytime, but l 14 40 27 21 may nave in depositions 14 40 30 22 Q Okay Is it fair to say as far as you 14 40 32 23 know, sir, tnat this report was never provided to 14 40 35 24 tne customers of Union Carbide' 14 40 38 25 A Not to my knowledge 14 40 40 0206 1 Q Okay Put tnat one aside, sir 14 40 48 2 (Deposition Exhibit Number 17 was 14 41 19 3 marked for identification) 144119 4 BY MR EGDORF Q Exhibit Number 17 144119 5 I'm going to snow you, sir, is entitled an 14 41 22 6 Epidemiological Study of Lung Cancer in Asbestos 14 41 25 7 Miners from Doctors Braun and Truan, dated 1958 14 41 27 8 Have you seen tnat before' 14 4131 9 A Nottnatirecaii.no 14 4131 10 Q 1958 is tne same year tnat Union Carbide 14 4134 11 acquired tne interest in tne mine, isn't it' 14 41 36 12 A No, I don't think so 14 4140 13 Q on, wnatyear do you tnink it was' 144142 14 A well, tney never did really require - 14 4145 15 acquire an interest Tney did a--tne deposit was 14 4148 16 discovered in 1959 by Union Carbide and most of 14 41 52 17 tne -- tney file claims You don't actually buy tne 14 41 57 18 land or anytning Just file claims on tne land 14 42 01 19 But tne -- like l say, tne deposit wasn't discovered 14 42 03 20 till'59 14 42 07 21 Q well, but nad to be before tnen tnat 14 42 07 22 Carbide nad tne right to go --1 don't know wnat tne 14 42 10 23 rignt word is -- search, dig, take samples, et 14 42 12 24 cetera, to find tne deposit, right' 14 42 15 25 A No, not--that's not the way I understand 14 42 17 0207 1 it 14 42 20 2 Q What's your understanding of how it 14 42 20 3 happened' l mean, l guess what I'm trying to figure 14 42 22 4 out is did Carbide go on their own onto somebody 14 42 23 5 else's property and discover the mine' 14 42 26 6 A Yes 14 42 28 7 Q I mean-okay Who owned it then' 14 42 29 8 A l think the Bureau of Land Management 14 42 31 9 Q Do you -- was Carbide, as you understood 14 42 32 10 it, invited to go into the mine and do that, or they 14 42 36 11 just kind of were going around on their own looking 14 42 38 12 at things like that' 14 42 41 13 A l think that was considered unrestricted 14 42 42 14 land Bureau of Land Management- 14 42 44 15 Q Had the' 14 42 46 16 A - had no restrictions on who could go onto 14 42 47 17 it 14 42 51 18 Q Okay From your understanding - I know 14 42 51 19 you weren't there in 1958-'59, but you know I - I'm 14 42 53 20 -- sounds like you have a little history on this 14 42 55 21 Was Johns-Manville and forgot the other company you 14 42 58 22 told me that did mining out there Atla- -- Atlas? 14 43 02 23 A Atlas 14 43 04 24 Q Johns-Manville and Atlas, were they already 14 43 05 25 out there at that time? 14 43 08 0208 1 A No, the deposit was discovered in 1959 14 43 09 2 Q Okay 14 43 12 3 A Nobody knew it was asbestos until after 14 43 12 4 that- 14 43 14 5 Q Okay 14 43 14 6 A - is the way l understand it, let's put 14 43 14 7 it 8 Q Okay Fair enough Okay Exhibit Number 14 43 17 9 17 Have you - have you seen this before? 14 43 21 10 A l said, not that l recall 14 43 23 11 Q I'm sorry, sir Is it fair to say, as far 14 43 25 12 as you know, that this report was not provided to 14 43 31 13 any customers of Union Carbide? 14 43 34 14 A l think that would be accurate, yes 14 43 36 15 Q Are you aware that there was a draft of 14 43 39 16 this report the year before that had an entire 14 43 41 17 discussion regarding lung cancer and asbestos that 14 43 44 18 was taken out of the published report? 14 43 47 19 A l - l think I've never seen it before l 14 43 49 20 wouldn't have ever seen a draft 14 43 52 21 Q Okay Well, let me-just in case,just 14 43 54 22 so - make sure we - we're all talking about the 14 44 02 23 same document, have you seen Exhibit Number 18 14 44 05 24 before, which is entitled Restricted Copy 7, 14 44 08 25 Industrial Hygiene Foundation of America, Inc An 14 44 12 0209 1 Epidemiological Study of Lung Cancer in Asbestos 14 44 17 2 Miners Report to Quebec Asbestos Mining 14 44 20 3 Association, September 1967, and I think my question 14 44 27 4 is Have you seen that before? 14 44 29 5 A Not that I recall 14 44 29 6 Q You certainly would not recall giving any 14 44 30 7 information contained in there to customers of Union 14 44 34 8 Carbide, correct? 14 44 36 9 A That's correct 14 44 36 10 Q Sir, I want to go back to this whole 14 45 03 11 deposition that had the stickles on it It's 14 45 07 12 probably under that pile somewhere Takeyourtime 14 45 09 13 trying to get it out of there 14 45 13 14 A Okay 14 45 27 15 Q And just to refresh us, this is the 14 45 28 16 deposition you gave, according to cover page, on 14 45 31 17 April 9th, 1982, correct? No, that's not the right 14 45 33 18 one? 144543 19 A Mine's dated August 30th 14 45 43 20 Q No, that's a different one we asked about 14 45 45 21 The one that had all the stickles on it Let me see 14 45 49 22 what we've got there, whether we've got two put 14 45 53 23 together or something Maybe l pulled out the wrong 14 45 57 24 one Oh, yeah, that's what it is See, they're 14 46 00 25 mixed together That explains it Exhibits 8 and 9 14 46 04 0210 1 to your deposition today got put together There 14 46 07 2 you go Exhibit Number 8 is there, and 9 we'll just 14 46 09 3 need to get another clip for 14 46 14 4 A Okay 14 46 18 5 Q Okay I may--David, I'm going to have 14 46 18 6 clips in that box 14 46 25 7 I'lltry to find where l was headed to, 14 46 28 8 sir, and I'll point you out to a page 14 46 30 9 A Well let's go back to the date on it, if 14 46 32 10 you-- 14 46 35 11 Q Oh, sure I'm sorry April 9th,1982 14 4635 12 Are we on the same one now1' 14 46 38 13 A Yes 14 46 39 14 Q in Columbia, South Carolina. Case of Lester 14 46 40 15 Rice versus Union Carbide, right? 14 46 44 16 A Yes Yes 14 46 45 17 Q If you turn to page 12 - 14 46 46 18 A Okay 14 46 48 19 Q --line 18, you were asked What is the 14 46 49 20 range of sizes for Calidria asbestos? 1446 51 21 Could you read your answer, please? 14 46 54 22 A Where is that? Line what? 14 46 56 23 Q Line 19 starts your answer, sir Line 18 14 46 58 24 was the question l just read which is What is the 14 47 01 25 range of sizes for Calidria asbestos? 14 47 04 0211 1 A We normally consider our fiber average as 14 47 06 2 five microns in length The range could be again 14 47 10 3 from near zero to 20 or 30 These are individual 14 47 15 4 fiberiles This doesn't mean that there aren't 14 47 18 5 bundles in there of fiberiles that would be longer 14 47 21 6 than or bigger around 14 47 24 7 Q And that is to be - after 20 or 30 I think 14 47 26 8 you left out the word microns, correct, sir? It 14 47 30 9 says microns after 20 or 30? 14 47 33 10 A Oh, yeah 14 4735 11 MR UXSSETTER Did I miss something, or 14 47 35 12 did we start with a question that was lines 1 and 14 47 36 13 2- 1447 39 14 MR EGDORF You missed something 14 47 39 15 MR UXSSETTER - and then skip all the 144740 16 way to the answer on 19 and 20 14 47 42 17 MR EGDORF l read the question on line 14 47 44 18 18 What is the range for sizes for Calidria 14 47 46 19 asbestos? 14 4749 20 MR UXSSETTER Okay 14 47 49 21 BY MR EGDORF Q Okay, sir And 14 47 54 22 this was in a deposition you gave under oath, l 14 47 55 23 think we address it is earlier, right? 14 47 58 24 A Well, if you look at the answer of the next 14 48 00 25 question, I would guess that 14 48 03 0212 1 Q Okay 14 48 04 2 A So I'm really guessing 14 48 04 3 Q Objection Non-responsive 14 48 07 4 All rignttum to page 17, sir, line 14 14 48 19 5 Question Okay l would appreciate it if you would 14 48 30 6 explain your operation to me 14 48 33 7 And can you read tne answer out, please? 14 48 34 8 A All right Every two years approximately, 14 48 38 9 it could be -- vary from one to tnree, we do a 14 48 40 10 mining operation mat's all subcontract We don't 14 48 43 11 use our own people format except to oversee it and 14 48 47 12 tell tnem wnere to do tne mining and stockpile tnat 14 48 50 13 for-at tne mine site 14 48 56 14 Q Now, nave you monitored any deatn 14 48 57 15 certificates for subcontract employees? 14 49 00 16 A No.maven't l don't make a practice of 14 49 02 17 monitoring deatn certificates 14 49 05 18 Q Objection Non-responsive 14 49 07 19 Did you at Union Carbide retain copies of 14 49 09 20 medical records of tne subcontractor employees? 14 49 11 21 A l don't recall tnat we did 14 49 16 22 Q Did you at Union Carbide conduct lung tests 14 49 18 23 or x-rays of lungs of tne subcontract employees? 14 49 21 24 A We did air monitoring and found tnat tneir 14 49 25 25 levels were - in tne air were extremely low and 14 49 29 0213 1 didn't require or suggest tnat tnere be any medical 14 49 35 2 monitoring done for tne truck drivers 14 49 37 3 Q Objection Non-responsive 14 49 39 4 Tne answer is no, you didn't nave lung - 14 49 41 5 lung exams done, is tnat correct? 14 49 43 6 A I'm explaining why Yes, we didn't-and 14 49 45 7 no we did not nave-- 14 49 48 8 Q And- 14 49 49 9 A And yes, we did not nave 14 49 50 10 Q Sir, you nad air levels at tnat plant tnat 14 49 53 11 were in excess of tne TLV, didn't you? 14 49 58 12 A Yes 14 50 00 13 Q You nad some places in tne plant tnat tney 14 50 00 14 were constantly above tne TLV, true? 14 50 03 15 A No, I don't think so 14 50 07 16 Q Sure you naven't been asked tnat question 14 50 08 17 in a deposition tnat you answered it tnat way? 14 50 11 18 A Constants expo-- levels above tne TLV? 114 50 13 19 don't know 14 50 16 20 Q in certain places in tne plant 14 50 17 21 A Tne packaging area, we nad--tney were-- 14 50 18 22 required respirators tnere because tne levels could 14 50 23 23 exceed tnat, but tney didn't continually exceed TLV 14 50 26 24 Q You certainly nave seen tne data and tne 14 50 31 25 reports to indicate tnat respirators are not 14 50 33 0214 1 sufficient to protect employees from levels of 14 50 35 2 asbestos above tne TLV, naven't you? 14 50 38 3 A No, tnat's where you--tnat's when you 14 50 40 4 wear respirators, is wnen tne levels are above tne 14 50 43 5 TLV 14 50 46 6 Q No, sir, I don't think you understood my 14 50 47 7 question Let me try again1' 14 50 49 8 You nave seen reports and studies that nave 14 50 50 9 been done saying respirators are inadequate to 14 50 52 10 protect the workers in that situation, haven't you' 14 50 55 11 A No, l haven't seen them 14 50 57 12 Q Well, certainly you'd agree that you had a 14 50 59 13 responsibility when you were running the plant to 14 51 01 14 find out if something like that was true, didn't 14 51 02 15 you' 14 51 05 16 A We did that We -- we depended on the US 14 5105 17 Bureau of Mines, l think it was, or on MSHA one, to 14 51 09 18 tell us what kind of respirators were need -- needed 14 51 14 19 depending on how - what the levels were we expected 14 51 18 20 or monitored 14 5121 21 Q Did you write them letters like you wrote 14 51 22 22 CPSC and so forth about what you thought the 14 51 25 23 regulations ought to be' 14 51 28 24 A MSHA regulations' 14 5129 25 Q Yes, sir 14 5130 0215 1 A Yes, we worked with them very diligently on 14 51 31 2 regulations 14 5134 3 Q Sir, l want to go back for one second We 14 5134 4 were -- we generally touched on the topic earlier 14 51 37 5 about you being the mayor for King City for 10 or 11 14 51 40 6 years, something like that' 14 5143 7 A Yes 14 5144 8 Q I don't know if I clearly asked you Is 14 5144 9 that-- are you currently the mayor' 14 51 46 10 A Yes 14 5147 11 Q Have you--the 10 or 11 period--year 14 5148 12 period is that in one fell swoop, i e , started 11 14 51 51 13 years ago, or have is there been times when you were 14 51 56 14 mayor, then not mayor, then mayor again' 14 51 59 15 A It's continuous 14 52 00 16 Q How often do you run for election' 14 52 02 17 A Every four years for the City Council, and 14 52 04 18 the mayor is chosen from among City Council members 14 52 06 19 Q So the City Council people vote for who the 14 52 10 20 mayorwillbe' 14 52 14 21 A Yes 14 52 14 22 Q Do you have to be on the City Council to be 14 52 15 23 voted mayor' 14 52 17 24 A Yes 14 52 17 25 Q So I guess the first thing you do is run 14 52 19 0216 1 for City Council then if you make the City Council 14 52 20 2 they go and decide who the mayor is 14 52 20 3 A That's correct 14 52 20 4 Q How many people are on the City Council' 14 52 20 5 A Five 14 52 23 6 Q Were you opposed last time you ran for 14 52 23 7 mayor' 14 52 26 8 A Yes Well, there were two seats vacant and 14 52 26 9- 10 Q In the Council? 14 52 34 11 A --three people running 14 52 35 12 Q Sorry I didn't mean to cut you off Just 14 52 36 13 to make sure l understand wnatyou were saying 14 52 39 14 A He was -- well, there were three -- two 14 52 42 15 seats open and three people running 14 52 44 16 Q So if you've been mayor for 11 years, does 14 52 45 17 that mean you have been elected five or six times, 14 52 48 18 or is the term four years or six years or something? 14 52 51 19 A Tne mayor's term is two years 14 52 52 20 Q So five or six times You're in the sixth 14 52 55 21 term? 14 52 57 22 A Yes 14 52 57 23 Q Who ran against you last time? 14 52 58 24 A In the Council race? 14 52 59 25 Q Yes 14 53 00 0217 1 A Didn't run against me We had--as l 14 53 01 2 said, we had three candidates for two positions 14 53 03 3 One was myself One was a man named Byron Lynn and 14 53 05 4 the other one was a man named Lopez l can't think 14 53 12 5 of his first name 14 53 15 6 Q Maybe it will nelp me understand wnat's 14 53 17 7 the other position You said running for two 14 53 20 8 positions? 14 53 22 9 A mere were two positions open on the 14 53 23 10 Council 14 53 25 11 Q Oh 14 53 26 12 A Two openings on the Council 14 53 26 13 Q I wasn't being very clear Okay I 14 53 28 14 understand that part You got three people running 14 53 29 15 for two positions on the Council Was there 14 53 32 16 somebody else on the Council that said l want to be 14 53 34 17 mayor too, or was it just nobody ran against 14 53 36 18 Mr Myers in terms of deciding who the mayor will 14 53 39 19 be? 14 5342 20 A The last time 14 53 42 21 Q Yes, sir 14 53 42 22 A And I -- let me correct something Tne 14 53 43 23 other candidate or the other candidate for City 14 53 45 24 Council at the last election was -- last name was 14 53 47 25 Andrade, A-n-d-r-a-d-e 14 53 51 0218 1 Q Correct 14 53 53 2 A No, l was nominated by one person, and 14 53 54 3 elected to be mayor 14 53 57 4 Q Okay 14 5358 5 A It's usually in the past been a rotational 14 53 59 6 thing You know, you want to be mayor this year? 14 54 02 7 But nobody had -- had been retired or wanted the 14 54 05 8 job So- 14 5408 9 Q Nobody has wanted to do it besides you for 14 54 09 10 awhile? 14 5411 11 A Yes 14 5412 12 Q Okay l thought l read somewhere that you 14 54 12 13 also have some kind of involvement with - l don't 14 54 15 14 know if it's the state or the county, but the Air 14 54 18 15 Quality Board or something like that? 14 54 21 16 A I'm the Southern Monterey County 14 54 22 17 representative on the Monterey Bay Unified Air 14 54 25 18 Pollution Control District 14 54 30 19 Q How do you get appointed to that? 14 54 30 20 A As the mayor of King City 14 54 32 21 Q Okay So wnoever was the mayor would have 14 54 34 22 that job? 14 54 36 23 A No, it could--no it could be any one of 14 54 37 24 the mayors in the four cities in the South County 14 54 40 25 Q Any other boards or committees or 14 54 42 0219 1 organizations you belong to? 14 54 45 2 A Yes 14 5447 3 Q Can you tell me what else, please? 14 54 47 4 A I'm on the hospital Board of Trustees for 14 54 52 5 21 years On the hospital Foundation Executive 14 54 55 6 Committee 14 54 59 7 Q What hospital -- sorry My fault Go 14 55 01 8 ahead 14 5504 9 A Well, Mee Memorial Hospital is the name of 14 55 05 10 the hospital 14 55 07 11 Q In King City? 14 55 07 12 A Yes 14 55 09 13 Q Is that the only nospital in King City? 14 55 09 14 A Yes 14 5511 15 Q How many people live in King City? 14 55 12 16 A About 12,000 14 55 14 17 Q So we talked earlier about your friends, 14 55 15 18 Mr wnitlock and Mr Kronknyte, a little bit? 14 55 17 19 A Yes 14 5521 20 Q Right? Did they die at that hospital? 14 55 21 21 A No Well, Mr Kronkhyte died at home, l 14 55 24 22 think 14 55 28 23 Q Do you know if those two individuals had 14 55 29 24 gotten treatment at that hospital? 14 55 31 25 A Oh, I'm sure they did Well, that's where 14 55 33 0220 1 their x-rays were being taken through their entire 14 55 35 2 careers with Union Carbide Asbestos operation 14 55 38 3 Q The OSHA required x-rays would have taken 14 55 43 4 place there? 14 55 45 5 A Well, we did that before OSHA came into 14 55 46 6 effect, but yes 14 55 49 7 Q Okay So but if I Irve in King City and 14 55 49 8 trip in a hole and break my ankle or something, 14 55 52 9 that's the hospital I'm going to go to, right? 14 55 54 10 A Well, depends on the seriousness of your 14 55 57 11 injury 14 55 59 12 Q Might get shipped off to -- wnat? San 14 55 59 13 Francisco? 14 56 02 14 A Well, Salinas, San Francisco, Stanford, l 14 56 03 15 mean - 14 56 06 16 Q From time to time, even trying to operate a 14 56 06 17 safe plant, workers get hurt-- got hurt at the 14 56 10 18 mine, right? 14 56 12 19 A At the mine? I don't recall 14 56 12 20 Q Well, I mean- 14 56 14 21 A - anybody being hurt at the mine 14 56 15 22 Q Well, people cut themselves and things like 14 56 17 23 that from time to time, even if you're trying to De 14 56 19 24 safe, right? That just naturally happens? 14 56 21 25 A We've had injuries at the plant, at the 14 56 23 0221 1 mill, yes 14 56 25 2 Q Typically, would those people go to the 14 56 26 3 hospital for treatment? 14 56 28 4 A Again, it would depend on the seriousness 14 56 29 5 of the injury 14 56 31 6 Q Is it your understanding that the x-rays 14 56 31 7 that have been taken of the employees would still De 14 56 33 8 at the hospital? 14 56 36 9 A You know, I don't know where they are 14 56 37 10 Q Well, l thought l heard something earlier 14 56 40 11 today I don't know if it was you or your lawyer 14 56 42 12 I'm just trying to clarify Something about some of 14 56 44 13 these medical records would be in the Carbide 14 56 47 14 repository Do you know one way or the other? 14 56 51 15 A No, I don't 14 56 53 16 Q Did you ever go to the hospital or the 14 56 53 17 board you were sitting on and ask to get copies of 14 56 55 18 all those things? 14 56 58 19 A Of all of wnat things? 14 56 59 20 Q All the medical records they might have of 14 57 00 21 employee there at the mine 14 57 03 22 A No, l never-they don't have any medical 14 57 05 23 records Tney-they did the x-rays at the 14 57 07 24 hospital, but the doctors would have the-- 145710 25 physicians would have the -- the medical records 14 57 12 0222 1 Q With respect to your friend Mr Kronkhyte, 14 57 15 2 do you know if ne got medical treatment somewnere 14 57 19 3 other than King City? 14 57 23 4 A NO, I don't 14 57 24 5 Q wnat about Mr Whitlock? 14 57 24 6 A He was--he had several--or at least 14 57 27 7 two -- at least two heart attacks, and to the best 14 57 30 8 of my knowledge he was treated at Stanford 14 57 34 9 University Hospital 14 57 37 10 Q The deposition - if you would turn to page 14 57 39 11 48,sir 14 5741 12 A Okay 14 57 50 13 Write it down Write it down 14 57 54 14 Actually, we're at a good point for Doctor 14 57 56 15 Egilman I don't think-I don't know if I 14 57 59 16 finished exploring it I started asking you about 14 58 02 17 the hospital group Were there any other groups 14 58 03 18 that you needed to tell me to finish that answer 14 58 05 19 MR UXSSETTER Object to the form 14 58 07 20 BY MR EGDORF Q I'll rephrase it 14 58 09 21 You mentioned being on the hospital board and we 14 58 09 22 talked about the air quality issue Are there any 14 58 11 23 other organizations you belong to or committees that 14 58 14 24 you're a member of that we haven't talked about so 14 58 17 25 far? 14 58 20 0223 A I can't think of any 14 58 20 Q Okay 14 58 22 A Not-- not currently have been involved 14 58 22 with other things before 14 58 25 Q Can you give me some ideas of wnat else in 14 58 26 the past? 14 58 28 A American institute of Chemical Engineers, 14 58 29 8 American Chemical Society l can't remember any 14 58 35 9 more at this point 14 58 38 10 Q Are you alicensed professional engineer? 14 58 39 11 A No 14 5841 12 Q Do they have that status in California? 14 58 41 13 A I think so, but I don't know I've never 14 58 47 14 investigated that 14 58 50 15 Q Never tried to get that certification, if 14 58 51 16 it does exist here? 14 58 53 17 A NO 14 58 54 18 Q Okay On page 48, line 20 Are you aware 14 58 55 19 of any claims for asbestos diseases arising from 14 59 01 20 persons involved in the manufacture of these--1 14 59 05 21 won't say it right-- acetylene cylinders? 14 59 08 22 Can you read your answer, please? 14 59 12 23 A l have heard of one compensation claim at 14 59 13 24 Indianapolis where the acetylene cylinders are 14 59 17 25 lined 14 59 21 0224 1 Q And then you were asked wnat year that was? 14 59 21 2 A Yes 14 59 24 3 Q What did you say? 14 59 24 4 A l have no idea 14 59 25 5 Q Can you tell me whatdecade it was in? 14 59 26 6 And what was your answer? 14 59 28 7 A Isay When - when the compensation claim 14 59 30 8 was made, question? I would guess in the '70s, back 14 59 32 9 in the'70s 14 59 36 10 Q Do you recall any Workers'Comp claims 14 59 38 11 being submitted regarding asbestos by workers at 14 59 41 12 King City mine? 14 59 45 13 A No 14 5945 14 Q Sir, are you familiar with the 14 59 46 15 Manufacturing Chemists Association? 14 59 47 16 A Yes, I've heard of that 14 59 49 17 Q Not something you belong to? 14 59 51 18 A No 14 59 52 19 Q Did you know that Union Carbide belonged to 14 59 56 20 this group? 14 59 59 21 A l would assume that they did, yes, being a 15 00 00 22 major factor in the chemical industry 15 00 03 23 Q Are you aware that in 1972 that that group 15 00 05 24 suggested that cancer should be put on an asbestos 15 00 09 25 label? 15 00 13 0225 1 A No, I'm not 15 00 14 2 Q Nobody told you that? 15 00 19 3 A I don't-I said I don't-I'm not 15 00 21 4 familiar with that, no 15 00 23 5 Q Did you feel - well, strike that 15 00 25 6 As you sit here today, do you think it 15 00 28 7 would have been inappropriate for Union Carbide to 15 00 29 8 put cancer on an asbestos label in 1972? 15 00 32 9 A Again, as I've said several times, we were 15 00 36 10 following the regulations published by Occupational 15 00 38 11 Safety and Health Administration that proposed, or 15 00 43 12 that prescribed what the label should read 15 00 46 13 Q Well, did OSHA ever tell you you had to put 15 00 50 14 cancer on the label? 15 00 53 15 A I think it's on there now in their current 15 00 56 16 regulations 15 00 58 17 Q Did Carbide ever put cancer on the label 15 0102 18 before it was regulated? 15 01 05 19 A No, l-l think weve answered that- 15 0107 20 mentioned that several times 15 01 10 21 Q Turn to page 59, sir, please 150114 22 A Okay 15 0130 23 Q LineNumber4 Question Union Carbide 15 0132 24 has had official-had-says address i'll try 15 0136 25 to read it again I'm sorry I'm trying to read it 15 01 40 0226 1 verbatim 15 0143 2 Union Carbide has had officials address 15 01 44 3 congress or congressional hearings concerning the 15 01 48 4 threshold limit values being established, have they 15 01 52 5 not? 6 And your answer was what? 150155 7 A Once, I think 15 0155 8 Q Question Once at the Goldberg nearing? 15 0155 9 And your answer was wnat? 150156 10 A Yes 15 01 57 11 Q Question Okay And they opposed the 150158 12 setting of the standard of two fibers per 15 02 00 13 milliliter, did they not? 15 02 04 14 And your answer was? 15 02 05 15 A Yes 15 02 07 16 Q What was the Goldberg hearing? 15 02 07 17 A I don't knowDon't remember that 15 02 09 18 Q Do you know how you heardabout all this? 15 02 1 1 19 A No, I don't 15 02 14 20 Q Now, in light of all the medical 15 02 15 21 information you had seen in Sayers, and Dernehl, and 15 02 17 22 so forth regarding the TLV, can you give mean 15 02 20 23 explanation why Union Carbide would have opposed the 15 02 25 24 setting of the TLV to be two fibers per milliliter? 15 02 27 25 A No, I don't 15 02 31 0227 1 Q Okay Turn to page 61, please 15 02 32 2 A Okay 15 02 36 3 Q Question on line 7 Now. wnen was the 15 02 37 4 first warning put on Dags of Calidria' 15 02 40 5 Your answer was'' 15 02 42 6 A In 1968 15 02 43 7 Q Is it fair to say, sir, that between 15 02 44 8 1963-64 or so, in 1968 that there were no warnings 15 02 47 9 on the label of the bags of Calidria' 15 02 52 10 A That's what I just said The first warning 15 02 55 11 was put on in 1968 15 02 57 12 Q wny wasn't a warning put on earlier' 15 03 00 13 A I - you have to ask somebody other than 15 03 03 14 me l don't know But again, the--the asbestos 15 03 05 15 toxicology report was being given to customers, 15 03 18 16 which would be a pretty good warning 15 03 21 17 Q Objection Non-responsive 15 03 25 18 Sir, in 1972,1 believe your testimony nas 15 03 26 19 been several times, OSHA required that a certain 15 03 30 20 label be put on the bags, correct' 15 03 33 21 A In 1972, yes, the OSHA regulations were 15 03 37 22 published 15 03 41 23 Q Union Carbide didn't change its labels 15 03 42 24 right away, did it' 15 03 44 25 A We wrote them a letter and asked them if we 15 03 45 0228 1 could use the bags that we already had on hand until 15 03 48 2 we had exhausted their - until we exhausted the 15 03 52 3 use -- the bags that we had on hand could we use the 15 03 58 4 warning we had been using, and they said yes, that 15 04 01 5 they- 15 04 04 6 Q That took quite a while, didn't it' 15 04 05 7 A If you know l nave no idea Probablya 15 04 07 8 few months 15 04 09 9 Q You're not aware that it was more than 15 04 10 10 months, it was years' 15 04 12 11 A No, I'm not 15 04 12 12 Q Let me show you Exhibit 19 and ask you if 15 04 13 13 you've seen that before 15 04 16 14 (Deposition Exhibit Number 19 was 15 04 17 15 marked for identification ) 15 04 17 16 THE WITNESS Yeah, it's what we just 15 04 24 17 discussed 15 04 26 18 BY MR EGDORF Q This is a letter or 15 04 26 19 l guess more correct an internal correspondence you 15 04 28 20 sent to Mr Tnurber, correct' 15 04 32 21 A Yes 15 04 33 22 Q wnat's the date' 15 04 33 23 A November 1976 15 04 34 24 Q And you refer in there to the June 1972 15 04 36 25 OSHA standards, correct' 15 04 38 0229 1 A Yes 15 04 40 2 Q And then wnat did you write starting with 15 04 40 3 We did not' 15 04 43 4 A Just what l said before We did not 15 04 44 5 destroy old bags but made the change as new 15 04 47 6 bags were ordered 15 04 50 7 Q You left the out year, sir Can you read 15 04 51 8 the sentence out loud, please? 15 04 54 9 A We did not destroy old Dags in 1972, Put 15 04 56 10 made the change as they were ordered 15 05 00 11 Q Did you think that was appropriate? 15 05 02 12 A That's exactly what we just discussed 15 05 04 13 Q Why would you even ask if what you're 15 05 08 14 trying to do is the right thing and communicate 15 05 1 1 15 wnat's required to De communicated? 15 05 16 16 A We were communicating it not only on the 15 05 18 17 Dags but in other ways which we've discussed many 15 05 18 18 times 15 05 18 19 Q Apparently Mr ThurDer didn't know it four 15 05 19 20 years later, did he That's why he had to write 15 05 21 21 this memo? 15 05 24 22 A I don't know why he was writing He 15 05 24 23 probably needed to have this for some reason, when 15 05 27 24 we did what, and this was a response 15 05 29 25 Q You don't know when the change was made or 15 05 31 0230 1 when the new bags wre ordered, do you, sir? 15 05 34 2 A Some products, the Dags would have been 15 05 37 3 ordered immediately because we had very high 15 05 39 4 turnover Others may have taken a few months 15 05 42 5 Q You don't know how long it took, do you? 15 05 44 6 A It took a few months 15 05 46 7 Q Do you have any documents that 15 05 48 8 affirmatively state how long it took? 15 05 50 9 A No 15 05 52 10 Q If there's testimony out there that it took 15 05 52 11 a lot longer than a few months, are those people 15 05 54 12 lying? 15 05 57 13 A I didn't--haven'tseen any such 15 05 57 14 testimony 15 06 00 15 Q If there'stestimony thatit wasn't until 15 06 00 16 1975 or '76 that some of your customers got bags 15 06 02 17 with the OSHA warnings on it, are those people not 15 06 07 18 telling the truth, as far as you know? 15 06 10 19 A As l said, l haven't seen such testimony, 15 06 1 1 20 and I don't remember that it took years 15 06 13 21 Q Okay Now, sir, on page 62 at the top you 15 06 15 22 see the question is Can you recall seeing this on 15 06 48 23 a bag back in the '60s, or did you -- did your first 15 06 50 24 recollection of this come about as a result of your 15 06 54 25 searching your files and as a result of litigation? 15 06 56 0231 1 wnat was your answer? 15 06 59 2 A I don't know wnat he's talking about, 15 06 59 3 seeing wnat on a Dag 15 07 02 4 Q Will you just read your answer out loud, 15 07 03 5 please, sir? If it helps, this is the next page 15 07 06 6 after we were talking about the one where it says 15 07 09 7 what year the warning was first put on the bag 15 07 12 8 It's the very next page in the deposition 15 07 14 9 A Okay 15 07 16 10 Q What was your answer? 15 07 16 11 A No, l have seen it on the bags when l was 15 07 20 12 at the plant 15 07 23 13 Q We skipped a few lines Question wnat 15 07 23 14 did you think or wnat did you think that'' 15 07 26 15 Meant and what did you say' 15 07 27 16 A It meant that breathing the dust could 15 07 29 17 cause harm l don't know necessarily that it was 15 07 31 18 tied into the diseases as we have now determined, 15 07 33 19 asbestosis and lung cancer, but breathing of any 15 07 37 20 dust of course is harmful to the lungs 15 07 40 21 Q Well, if we turn to page -- to page 63, 15 07 42 22 sir Line 6 Question And of course you stated 15 07 46 23 that you didn't know anything about the disease 15 07 51 24 processes from asbestos before 1970 15 07 53 25 And wnat was your answer' 15 07 55 0232 1 A Tnat I couldn't remember knowing 15 07 57 2 Q And he interrupts and says Right And 15 07 59 3 wnat did you say' 15 08 02 4 A l couldn't remember knowing a date before 15 08 03 5 then 15 08 04 6 Q Question Okay So this warning didn't 15 08 05 7 inform you of any disease processes resulting from 15 08 07 8 asbestos in your present recollection, did it' 15 08 10 9 And wnat did you say' 15 08 12 10 A No 15 08 12 11 Q Sir, in the late 1960s and 70s there were 15 08 22 12 companies that were putting cancer labels on 15 08 27 13 asbestos, weren't there' 15 08 30 14 A I don't know, but if you would like to go 15 08 31 15 back to that page 63, to answer a prior question - 15 08 34 16 Q Sir, I didn't ask you anything about what 15 08 38 17 it says- 15 08 40 18 MR UXSSETTER Let him finish 15 0840 19 THEWITNESS Well, it just says I think 15 08 42 20 we finished - we used up all the bags in October of 15 08 43 21 1972 You were asking me for a date 15 08 47 22 Q ObjectionNon-responsive 15 08 51 23 You don't know there were other - 15 08 53 24 A I'm answering the question before 15 08 54 25 Q I didn't ask you that It's not pending, 15 08 55 0233 1 sir Mr Lassetter can ask you whatever he wants 15 08 59 2 to 15 09 01 3 A All right Okay 15 09 02 4 Q Sir, is it your testimony you werent aware 15 09 03 5 that there were companies that were putting cancer 15 09 05 6 on their labels - 15 09 07 7 A No, I said- 15 09 08 8 Q - before - before OSHA mandated it' 15 09 09 9 A l said l don't remember 15 09 12 10 Q Did you feel those folks were violating 15 09 13 11 OSHA by putting cancer on the label' 15 09 16 12 A As l said, l don't remember that they put 15 09 19 13 cancer on their labels And no, that wouldn't be a 15 09 21 14 violation 15 09 24 15 Q Likewise, you could have put cancer on the 15 09 25 16 label if you chose to OSHA didn't prevent you from 15 09 27 17 doing it, did it? 15 09 33 18 A They recommended not putting it on there 15 09 34 19 Q Well, do you have a letter from OSHA that 15 09 37 20 says that? 15 09 38 21 A No, it's in the preamble to the 15 09 38 22 regulations 15 09 41 23 Q And what was that based on? 15 09 41 24 A l don't remember how it was worded, just 15 09 43 25 says that they feel like the word -- using the word 15 09 46 0234 1 cancer would cause undue alarm or similar words 15 09 48 2 Q Well, in your communications with OSHA you 15 09 51 3 didn't give them the Mellon report, or Doctor Sayers 15 09 54 4 report, or - or anything like that, did you'' 15 09 56 5 A Well, they had all the scientific evidence 15 09 58 6 they needed 7 Q Objection Non-responsive 15 10 01 15 10 01 8 Did you give -- 15 10 03 9 A No 15 10 04 10 Q -- OSHA the Sayers report' 15 10 05 11 A No 15 10 06 12 Q Or the Braun/Truan study' 15 10 06 13 A I don't know 15 10 08 14 Q Or Doctor Demehl's comments regarding 15 10 09 15 Mr Sayers'report' Did you give that to OSHA' 15 10 12 16 A No 15 10 14 17 Q l think we're about at an hour if you need 15 10 16 18 to take a break' 15 10 18 19 A Yeah, l think I'm kind of ready to stretch 15 10 18 20 my- 15 10 20 21 THE VIDEOGRAPHER Let me change the tape 15 10 21 22 This is a good time Hold on This is the end of 15 10 23 23 tape 2 in the videotape deposition of John Myers 15 10 26 24 We're going off record at 3 10 p m 15 10 30 25 (Shortbreak) 15 17 47 0235 1 THE VIDEOGRAPHER This is the beginning of 15 17 48 2 tape 3 in the videotape deposition of John Myers 15 17 49 3 We're going back on the record at 3 18 p m 15 17 53 4 BY MR EGDORF Q Sir, isn't it true 15 18 00 5 that originally OSHA was going to put cancer on the 15 18 01 6 1972 warning label' 15 18 07 7 A I don't know that 15 18 09 8 Q Didn't the AIA lobby OSHA to remove that 15 18 10 9 provision' 15 18 14 10 A I don't know that 15 18 15 11 Q The AIA, you know what that is, don't you' 15 18 16 12 A well, AIA is Asbestos international 15 18 20 13 Association 15 18 21 14 Q Asbestos what' l thought it was 151823 15 information' 15 18 25 16 A That's AIAN, and AIA is Asbestos 17 International Association AINA is asbestos 15 18 26 15 18 31 18 Information Association of North America 15 18 39 19 Q Okay Well, do you know Mr Rawlings' 151842 20 A Yes 15 18 43 21 Q What was his position at Union Carbide? 15 18 44 22 A He was a Vice-President in the metals 15 18 46 23 division, l believe At least some point in time he 15 18 49 24 was 15 18 52 25 Q He worked for Union Carbide, didn't he? 15 18 53 0236 1 A Yes 15 18 55 2 Q What number? I can't really see We've 15 18 56 3 changed all the numbers I'm going to assume we're 15 18 59 4 on 20 Somebody will tell me if I'm wrong, 15 19 02 5 hopefully Show you Exhibit 20, which looks like a 15 19 05 6 June 12, 1972 Asbestos information Association/North 15 19 09 7 America letterhead, signed by Mr Swetomc Doyou 151915 8 know Mr Swetomc? 15 19 19 9 A No, I don't think I ever met him 15 19 21 10 Q Okay You see Mr Rawlings's name is there 15 19 24 11 as one of the people that's getting this on the very 15 19 28 12 front, correct? 15 19 30 13 A Yes 15 19 30 14 Q After you've looked at it, let me know if 15 19 30 15 you've seen it before, please 15 19 33 16 A No, l don't remember seeing it before, but 15 19 34 17 I may have 15 19 37 18 Q So if there was an effort from Union 15 19 39 19 Carbide to lobby OSHA regarding what should be on 15 19 42 20 the warning label, that's not something - in 1972 15 19 44 21 -- that's not something you were a part of? 15 19 47 22 A Nottnatlrecall.no 15 19 49 23 Q Is that the kind of thing you would expect 15 19 51 24 Mr Rawlings to do as part of his job at Union 15 19 54 25 Carbide? 15 19 56 0237 1 A l think he was -- he may have been 15 19 58 2 representing Union Carbide on the--well, no No, 15 20 00 3 I don't know why they sent it to him Apparently 15 20 05 4 we -- Carbide was not a member company at that time 15 20 08 5 Q Did Mr-just--brain cramped Forgot 15 20 1 1 6 his name Mr Rawlings, for one reason or another, 15 20 15 7 he's copied and involved in this, correct, whether 15 20 18 8 Carbide was a member or not? 15 20 21 9 A He's copied with it, yes 15 20 23 10 Q Any other organizations you can think of 15 20 25 11 that Carbide wasn't a member of that from time to 15 20 26 12 time you would participate in their discussions or 15 20 28 13 get their documents? 15 20 30 14 A No 15 20 31 15 Q Okay We can go back to this deposition, 15 20 32 16 sir, if you want to go ahead and set that aside 15 20 34 17 If we turn to page 69, sir, question, line 15 20 52 18 9 Okay One Canadian company mentions cancer 15 20 55 19 Johns-Manville mentions smoking as being an 15 20 59 20 additional hazard and does not describe cancer, do 15 2101 21 they not? 15 2104 22 What was your answer? 152105 23 A They don't describe cancer 152105 24 Q Question Okay But they do mention 15 21 07 25 smoking? 15 2109 0238 1 And your answer? 15 21 10 2 A Yes 15 21 11 3 Q But that's in addition to the wording 152111 4 that's described on your bag? 15 21 13 5 And your answer? 15 21 14 6 A Yes 15 21 15 7 Q Now, at any time has Carbide put a warning 15 21 15 8 on its bags regarding smoking and cancer? 15 21 20 9 A Not that I remember 15 2123 10 Q So, I mean, you were aware, weren't you, 15 2128 11 sir, that there were cancer warnings that were put 15 21 32 12 on some bags of asbestos by some manufacturers prior 15 21 36 13 to the OSHA regulations? 152139 14 A I don't know This was after the OSHA 15 2140 15 regulations, ten years after So-- 15 2143 16 Q Well, in 1982 you didn't have a cancer 15 2144 17 warning label on your bags, did you That's when 15 21 47 18 you gave this deposition 15 2150 19 A l thought were asking about other 152150 20 companies 15 2152 21 Q In 1982 did Union Carbide have a cancer- 15 2153 22 have the word cancer on its warning labels at 15 21 56 23 Calidria? 15 22 00 24 A l think I've answered that several times 15 22 00 25 We did not use the word cancer 15 22 02 0239 1 Q 1982 is the date you gave this deposition 15 22 04 2 we're looking at, correct? 15 22 07 3 A Yes 15 22 08 4 Q If you turn to page 106, sir? 15 22 25 5 A Okay 15 22 37 6 Q Are you familiar with the fact that 15 22 38 7 Union - I'm sorry Line 1 Are you familiar with 15 22 40 8 the fact that Union Carbide contributed $15,000 to 15 22 42 9 the Industrial Hygiene Foundation in 1965 to 1973 to 15 22 46 10 partially finance studies concerning asbestos? 15 22 51 11 And what was your answer? 15 22 53 12 A Only by reading it in the interrogatories 15 22 54 13 Q Now, have you done any research since that 15 22 56 14 time to find out about that? 15 22 59 15 A Find out about what? 15 23 00 16 Q What Union Carbide was doing with the 15 23 01 17 Industrial Hygiene Foundation 15 23 04 18 A Well, I can't-add anything more than 15 23 06 19 they contributed, well, 15,000 to the - to finance 15 23 09 20 studies concerning asbestos 15 23 13 21 Q As far as you know in part of your 15 23 14 22 marketing, did you ever provide papers from the 15 23 16 23 Industrial Hygiene Foundation to your customers? 15 23 19 24 A I would --1 don't remember even being 15 23 22 25 familiar with the Industrial Hygiene Foundation 15 23 24 0240 1Q So is that a no. sir? 15 23 27 2 A Did we send--1 wouldn't know I- 15 23 28 3 Q You did not send anytning from tne 15 23 32 4 Industrial Hygiene Foundation, is tnat correct? 15 23 34 5 A Not to my knowledge 15 23 38 6 (Deposition Exhibit Number 21 was 15 24 11 7 marked for identification) 15 24 11 8 BY MR EGDORF Q Snow you Exhibit 15 24 11 9 Number 21 and ask you if you're familiar witn tnat, 15 24 13 10 sir? 15 24 17 11 A Yes, I nave seen tnis before 15 24 22 12 Q Did you author tnat? 15 24 25 13 A Did I author it? No, Mr Rawlings-- 15 24 27 14 Q I'm sorry I asked the question wrong 15 24 30 15 You're copied on that, correct, sir? 15 24 33 16 A Yes 15 24 36 17 Q Can I borrow that one second? I'm sorry 15 24 36 18 Sir, l didn't make an extra copy I'll be glad to 15 24 39 19 hand it to you after asking you a question though 15 24 42 20 Would you read out loud the paragraph 15 24 44 21 starting with once again, and goes onto the second 15 24 46 22 page? 15 24 49 23 Well, actually, first, can you tell me the 15 24 49 24 date of the document, please? 15 24 51 25 A March 23rd. 1972 15 24 53 0241 1 Q And the--is there a re as to what the 15 24 54 2 letter is about? 15 24 58 3 A Subject Exhibits to be placed on record 15 25 00 4 in hearings with regard to amendment of 29 CFR, Part 15 25 03 5 1910, March 14th through 17th, 1972 15 25 07 6 Q The hearing is about the OSHA regulations, 15 25 14 7 right, sir? 15 25 16 8 A Well, doesn't say that, but-- 15 25 17 9 Q You understand-- 15 25 19 10 A Well, it doesn't say that 15 25 19 11 Q You understand it to mean that, don't you? 15 25 21 12 A Not necessarily 15 25 23 13 Q Okay Well, fine Read the paragraph 15 25 25 14 that's starting with once again 15 25 27 15 A Once again, I state our strong conviction 15 25 33 16 that the imposition of special regulations, alarmist 15 25 36 17 labels, and general waste disposal regulations to 15 25 40 18 products containing firmly ground asbestos fibers 15 25 44 19 will have a severe adverse economic impact on our 15 25 47 20 asbestos business without furthering the objectives 15 25 51 21 on which the exposure standards are based 15 25 55 22 Q The alarmist labels being talked about was 15 25 58 23 the discussion about putting cancer on the label, 15 26 02 24 right? 15 26 04 25 A Doesn't say that 15 26 05 0242 1 Q Well, you know that's what it is, don't 15 26 06 2 you? 15 26 08 3 A No, I don't 15 26 08 4 Q Well, is there some other label that was 15 26 09 5 proposed that you thought was alarmist other than 15 26 12 6 cancer? 15 26 14 7 A l don't know that a --1 havent seen the 15 26 14 8 OSHA proposal which you described as having cancer 15 26 18 9 in the warning 15 26 23 10 Q Do you--you don't know that, that that 15 26 24 11 was the case? 15 26 27 12 A I think I told you when you asked me 15 26 29 13 before l don't remember that that word was in the 15 26 31 14 warning label 15 26 34 15 Q Well, sir-and I'm not trying to be 15 26 34 16 difficult with you I'm trying to make sure I 15 26 37 17 understand the distinction There's a difference 15 26 39 18 between you saying it didn't happen and you saying 15 26 41 19 you don't remember it So I'm trying to figure out 15 26 44 20 which thing - which one you're telling me 15 26 46 21 Are you saying there never was as far as 15 26 49 22 you know a discussion about cancer being in the 15 26 51 23 label that Carbide opposed or are you saying you 15 26 54 24 don't remember if there was discussion like that? 15 26 55 25 A I'm saying I don't know if there was a 15 26 57 0243 1 discussion You said you had, I think, information 15 26 58 2 that showed an original label with the word cancer 15 27 02 3 in it I haven't seen that I don't know 15 27 04 4 Q All right So when you were saying you 15 27 06 5 haven't seen something, you're talking about I 15 27 08 6 haven't handed you a document today like that? 15 27 10 7 A Yes 15 27 12 8 Q Okay You're not denying that there is 15 27 13 9 discussion about cancer being on the label You're 15 27 15 10 just saying you don't remember and l haven't showed 15 27 19 11 you anything to tell you one way or the other? 15 27 22 12 A That's correct 15 27 24 13 Q Okay Fair enoughCan I have that back 15 27 25 14 for a second, sir? 15 27 27 15 Well, you were copied on this Somebody - 15 27 28 16 Mr Rawlings apparently thought this was something 15 27 31 17 important for you to be kept abreast of, correct? 15 27 33 18 A Yes 15 27 36 19 Q So let's take the word cancer out of it for 15 27 36 20 a second Tell me what other things you can recall, 15 27 39 21 if any, that Union Carbide might have felt were 15 27 42 22 alarmist that were going to be put on the label, or 15 27 44 23 at least discussed to be put on the label? 15 27 47 24 A I nave no idea 15 27 50 25 Q Do you think in 19- - 15 27 50 0244 1 A You know, we're not talking -let me point 15 27 51 2 out that we're not talking about asbestos in general 15 27 54 3 here We're talking about a particular type of 15 27 56 4 product wherein the asbestos is firmly bound in a 15 28 00 5 plastic cylinder 15 28 03 6 Q Objection Non-responsive 15 28 04 7 A That explains why-why we were making15 28 08 8 comments on the label 15 28 10 9 Q Objection Non-responsive 15 28 1 1 10 The plastic you're talking, about is that 15 28 12 11 the pelletization that included the sodium silicate 15 28 14 12 we talked about? 15 28 17 13 A The plastic I'm talking about is what our 15 28 20 14 customers use -- in which they used our asbestos 15 28 23 15 Q Okay Fair enough Now- 15 28 26 16 A There wasn't any plastic involved with - 15 28 28 17 Q Do you- 15 28 30 18 A - sodium silicate 15 28 31 19 Q Objection Non-responsive 15 28 32 20 Do you feel like the warning label that was 15 28 33 21 promulgated in 1972 was inappropriate? 15 28 37 22 A No 15 28 39 23 Q Do you think it was alarmist? 15 28 39 24 A No 15 2841 25 Q Do you think it went far enough? 15 28 42 0245 1 A Yes l think it was adequate to warn 15 28 44 2 people not to breathe the dust and that there was 15 28 48 3 serious bodily harm, or whatever it said 15 28 51 4 Q At any point in time do you feel like that 15 28 53 5 the warning labeling that Union Carbide had on its 15 28 56 6 products was inadequate? 15 28 57 7 A l would have probably raised that question 15 29 00 8 if l had thoughtthat at the time, and l didn't- 15 29 03 9 Q Well, how about when you - 15 29 06 10 A - raise that question 15 29 07 11 Q I'm sorry Well, what about in 1975 when 15 29 08 12 you were the president of KCAC? Do you think your 15 29 10 13 label was adequate then? 15 29 15 14 A Well, if l didn't raise any objections to 15 29 16 15 it, l guess l thought it was adequate 15 29 19 16 Q You certainly had the authority to raise 15 29 21 17 the objection then didn't you? 15 29 23 18 A Yes 15 29 24 19 Q In 1995 did KCAC have cancer on its labels? 15 29 24 20 A I don't remember what year the new OSHA 15 29 29 21 standards came out- 15 29 32 22 Q Keep on asking questions 15 29 33 23 A - requiring the word asbestos - or 15 29 34 24 cancer 15 29 35 25 Q So your testimony, sir, is whether it was 15 29 35 0246 1 Union Carbide or the Calidria Corporation or with 15 29 37 2 KCAC, at no time before there was an OSHA 15 29 40 3 requirement of cancer did your warning labels state 15 29 43 4 cancer? 15 29 47 5 A We've answered that many times, or l nave 15 29 47 6 We did not put the word cancer on there until it was 15 29 50 7 required in the OSHA standards 15 29 54 8 Q Do you think that's an evidence of the 15 29 55 9 leadership role that Union Carbide took in getting 15 29 59 10 asbestos knowledge out to the public? 15 30 02 11 A Yes, because we described the effects of 15 30 03 12 asbestos including cancer in all of our mailings to 15 30 08 13 our customers 15 30 1 1 14 Q You wouldn't have put-- as far as you're 15 30 12 15 concerned, John Myers is concerned, you wouldn't 15 30 14 16 nave put cancer on the warning label unless OSHA had 15 30 16 17 told you, would you? 15 30 19 18 A l can't really answer that 15 30 21 19 Q Well, you don't even believe it today do 15 30 22 20 you about your products? 15 30 23 21 A Nottoday.no 15 30 24 22 Q Did you believe it in 1984? 15 30 25 23 A Probablynot 15 30 26 24 Q 1982? 15 30 28 25 A I don't know when I felt like our product 15 30 29 0247 1 was safe enough to be used 15 30 33 2 Q Have you seen Exhibit Number 22 before, 15 30 35 3 which is the -- the Manufacturing Chemists 15 30 38 4 Association It's dated March 15, 1972, from a --1 15 30 40 5 can't read his name real well George Best to a G F 15 30 46 6 Scannell Have you seen this before? 15 30 51 7 (Deposition Exhibit Number 22 was 15 30 53 8 marked for identification) 15 30 53 9 THE WITNESS I don't recall seeing it 15 30 58 10 before l don't know any of the three people that 15 30 59 11 are mentioned on here 15 31 05 12 BY MR EGDORF Q Okay Did you ever 15 31 07 13 have any conversations with anyone about Carbide 15 31 08 14 regarding any involvement they had with the 15 31 11 15 Manufacturing Chemists Association? 15 31 13 16 A I don't remember anything about--1 think 15 31 15 17 I've said that earlier l don't know anything about 15 31 18 18 Manufacturing Chemists Association 15 31 20 19 Q Did you ever contact the Manufacturing 15 31 22 20 Chemists Association inquiring about any information 15 31 23 21 they might have regarding the hazards of asbestos? 15 31 26 22 A Did I contact them? 15 3128 23 Q (Counsel nods head ) 15 3130 24 A No. I -- l think I've said I don't- 15 31 30 25 didn't have any contact with them 15 31 33 0248 1 Q You know though that Carbide was a member 15 3134 2 of that group, don't you? 153137 3 A l think l testified that l assumed that 15 3138 4 they were, being a major chemical producer 15 3141 5 Q What-make sure I call you to the right 15 3149 6 place The third page of the document, sir, that - 15 31 51 7 it's an attachment to the letter, right? It's a 15 31 54 8 suggested label Can you read that out loud, 15 3158 9 please? 15 32 01 10 A Where does it say a suggested label? 15 32 01 11 Q Well, if you want to read through the 15 32 03 12 letter you can find it, but I think that's the gist 15 32 05 13 of it If you want I can rephrase the question 15 32 08 14 Just asking you to please read out loud what's on 15 32 1 1 15 the third page 15 32 14 16 A All right Asbestos is the top word Then 15 32 14 17 it says warning, then a colon Harmful if inhaled 15 32 20 18 May cause delayed lung injury, parentneses, 15 32 24 19 asDestosis, comma, lung cancer Do not breatne 15 32 28 20 dust Use only witn adequate local exnaust 15 32 32 21 ventilation or approved respiratory protective 15 32 37 22 devices Remove dust and fibers from clotning only 15 32 40 23 by vacuum cleaning Clean work areas only witn 15 32 43 24 vacuum cleaning or wet cleaning metnods 15 32 47 25 Q Was mere any point in time that you know 15 32 50 0249 1 of tnat Union Carbide put every one of tnose tnings 15 32 53 2 on its labels'' 15 32 55 3 A No 15 32 59 4 Q l can't even read tnat l tnink I'm done 15 33 00 5 witn tnat one, sir Let's put tnat tnere, sir I 15 33 02 6 already asked nim tnat Yean, I did You need to 15 33 17 7 start paying attention 15 33 26 8 (Deposition Exhibit Number 23 was 15 33 30 9 marked for identification ) 15 33 30 10 BY MR EGDORF Q Sir, let me snow 15 33 30 11 you -- lost track again because I'm on a new page 15 33 32 12 Tnat was 21' 15 33 36 13 A Yes 15 33 37 14 Q Can l just do mis' Won't get messed up 15 33 37 15 again this way Let me snow you wnat I'll mark as 15 33 40 16 Exhibit Number 22 15 33 44 17 (Deposition Exhibit Number 22 was 15 33 44 18 marked incorrectly for 15 33 44 19 identification, remarked bytne 15 33 44 20 reporter as 22A ) 15 33 44 21 BY MR EGDORF Q See that's dated 15 33 48 22 July 8, 1966, Mellon Institute Special Report, 15 3349 23 correct' 15 33 52 24 A Yes 15 33 53 25 Q And mat's one of tne documents we've 15 33 53 0250 1 talked about today tnat was not passed on to tne 15 33 55 2 customers, correct' 15 33 58 3 A mat's correct 15 33 58 4 Q And mat's one of tne documents you 15 33 59 5 reviewed in preparing for tne deposition today, 15 34 01 6 correct' 15 34 03 7 A l didn't really review it l - l tnink we 15 34 03 8 looked at it 15 34 06 9 Q Okay Under summary on tne first page, 15 34 07 10 sir, you see tnere's -- tne tnird line down tne 15 34 10 11 sentence starts Of tne tnree products, CMS 100 15 34 13 12 Do you see tnat' 15 34 16 13 A On, yes 15 34 18 14 Q Paren, refined fiber, close paren, produces 15 34 20 15 tne most severe reaction 15 34 25 16 Did I read tnat correctly' 15 34 26 17 A Yes 15 34 27 18 Q Did you ever disclose tnat to your 15 34 27 19 customers' 15 34 29 20 A No, we told our customers wnat tne 15 34 30 21 conclusions of this test were, tnat our asbestos 15 34 32 22 should be treated the same as any other asbestos 15 34 36 23 Q Objection Non-responsive? 15 34 38 24 Did you tell- 15 34 39 25 A We didn't send them a copy of the report or 15 34 39 0251 1 use that-that sentence 15 34 42 2 Q Did you ever, in your toxicology reports or 15 34 44 3 any other documents you provided to your customers, 15 34 46 4 tell them that your product produced the most severe 15 34 49 5 reaction in a 1966 study? 15 34 51 6 A I - not that I recall 15 34 54 7 Q Okay 15 34 56 8 A But you have to - again, you have to 15 34 57 9 describe what this study is, to make it make sense 15 34 59 10 This is an injection study looking for fibrosis, not 15 35 02 11 cancer 15 35 07 12 Q I object to the non-responsive portion of 15 35 08 13 the answer 15 35 1 1 14 Do - do you agree with the statement, 15 35 1 1 15 there is no known safe level exposure to asbestos, 15 35 16 16 is correct? 15 35 20 17 A Notanymore.no 15 35 21 18 Q Did you believe that at some point? 15 35 22 19 A mat's wnat our general belief was about 15 35 25 20 all asbestos including ours 15 35 28 21 Q Did you ever communicate to the customer in 15 35 30 22 the toxicology report or otherwise, quote There is 15 35 32 23 no known safe level of exposure to asbestos? is 15 35 37 24 that in any of your documents? 15 35 41 25 A Not that I recall 15 35 42 0252 1 Q I'll show you Exhibit Number- 15 35 53 2 A Am l allowed to ask who said that, or- 15 35 54 3 Q Your lawyer has the document 15 35 57 4 A I- 15 35 59 5 Q Be glad to let you - I'm sure he can talk 15 36 00 6 to you about it Let me show you Exhibit Number 23 15 36 03 7 (Deposition Exhibit Number 23 was 15 36 06 8 marked for identification) 15 36 06 9 BY MR EGDORF Q Actually, back up 15 36 20 10 I'll be glad to help you Mr Rhodes said it, and 15 36 22 11 you were copied on it, and you didn't disagree with 15 36 25 12 it 15 36 28 13 A Okay 15 36 28 14 Q Now, this is a letter from Doctor Dernehl, 15 36 29 15 correct? 15 36 33 16 A Yes 15 36 33 17 Q And I think on the first part, sir, we had 15 36 35 18 taken the liberty at some point to try to retype it 15 36 38 19 because the copy we have is - is hard to read 15 36 41 20 You're happy - I'm happy to have you try to look at 15 36 44 21 the original copy if you want, or look at my retype, 15 36 47 22 and if l made a mistake on the retype we'll live 15 36 50 23 with that 15 36 53 24 A Allright 15 36 54 25 Q Okay? And you see on the first - let me 15 36 54 0253 backup I didn't ask you this Do you know Mr T 15 37 02 J Hall? 15 37 05 A No, I don't think I - I dont remember 15 37 05 meeting him l may have but l don't remember well 15 37 10 Q And you see he says l have reviewed the 15 37 12 report asbestos as a health in the United Kingdowm 15 37 17 prepared l 0 Sayers, and in general l find that it 15 37 17 8 is reasonably accurate Did l read that correctly? 15 37 19 9 A As I read it by C Sayers 15 37 22 10 Q Okay That may be one of those typos I'm 15 37 24 11 reading off the other one l know his name is l C 15 37 28 12 I was reading off my copy Other than that mistake, 15 37 31 13 did I read it correctly? 15 37 34 14 A Yes, l mean, reason- - reasonably 15 37 36 15 accurately, yes 15 37 37 16 Q And as we talked about earlier Doctor 15 37 37 17 Dernehl was indeed the medical doctor, correct? 15 37 39 18 A Yes 15 37 42 19 Q in fact he was the Associate Medical 15 37 42 20 Director? 15 37 45 21 A Yes 15 37 45 22 Q If we go down a little bit farther, sir,15 37 49 23 which version are you trying to -- to look at? 15 37 53 24 A Well, I was trying to look at the original 15 37 55 25 before 15 37 57 0254 1 Q Okay On the second paragraph, I think 15 37 57 it's on the second page of what you're looking at on 15 38 01 the original 15 38 04 A Oh, well- 15 38 06 Q If you want to go back? 15 38 07 A I'll go back to this 15 38 08 Q Fine I'm looking at the bottom of the 15 38 09 first page then on my typewritten version 15 38 1 1 A Okay 15 38 13 Q Okay? And down near the bottom it says 15 38 14 In the injection study Do you see that? 15 38 17 A Yes 15 38 18 Q In the injection study the Coalinga refined 15 38 19 fiber produced the most severe reaction in the belly 15 38 21 cavity, whereas the standard fiber and the 15 38 24 Johns-Manville fiber were essentially the same and 15 38 28 less severe Did l read that correctly? 15 38 31 A Yes 15 38 33 Q Did you provide that information to your 15 38 34 customers? 15 38 36 A We didn't - as we've already determined, 15 38 36 we didn't send this letter to our customers It 15 38 39 was - the information in it was incorporated into 15 38 41 the asbestos toxicology report 15 38 44 Q Was that specific information incorporated? 15 38 46 4 the -- these health hazards and the safe use 15 39 00 5 Q Well, in fact, sir, what this letter from 15 39 04 6 Doctor Dernehl the associate medical director is 15 39 06 7 saying is Yours isn't the same as the others 15 39 10 8 It's worse 15 39 12 9 A Yeah, that was in these--as l said, the 15 39 13 10 injection studies for fibrosis so it's not -- had 15 39 15 11 nothing to do with inhalation 15 39 18 12 Q So in your toxicology--I'm sorry In 15 39 20 13 your toxicology reports that went to the customers 15 39 22 14 did you say Our asbestos shouldn't be treated like 15 39 25 15 the other kinds of asbestos because it's worse? 15 39 28 16 A No, we did not say that 15 39 30 17 Q You said treat it same--exact same is 15 39 32 18 that what you're telling me? 15 39 34 19 A Yes 15 39 35 20 Q So you didn't tell the customers it was 15 39 36 21 worse, did you? 15 39 38 22 A It wasn't worse I dont think it was 15 39 38 23 worse with regard to innalation These were 15 39 41 24 ingestion studies 15 39 44 25 Q Okay Did you tell your customers that it 15 39 45 0256 1 was worse regarding ingestion studies? 15 3947 2 A No 15 3949 3 Q Bottom of that paragraph, sir The only 15 39 49 4 conclusion we can draw from this crude test is that 15 39 52 5 it is possible that our Coalinga product may be more 15 39 55 6 hazardous to use than long fiber asbestos, and that 15 39 58 7 it may induce the disease asbestosis at an early 15 40 01 8 time after exposure 15 40 05 9 Did l read that correctly? 15 40 06 10 A It didn't find it, but- 15 40 07 11 Q It's the bottom of that same paragraph 15 40 08 12 A Oh, yes, okay 15 40 11 13 Q Are you with me now? 15 40 12 14 A Yes 15 40 13 15 Q Do l need to read it again? 15 40 14 16 A No, that's fine 15 40 15 17 Q Do you think I read it correctly? 15 40 17 18 A Yes 15 40 18 19 Q All right Did you communicate that 15 40 18 20 sentence to your customers? 15 40 20 21 A Again, for the same reasons as the other 15 40 21 22 sentence you -- you pulled out of there -- and again 15 40 25 23 you've got to point out that he's calling this a 15 40 29 24 crude test, and that it may be more hazardous 15 40 32 25 Q So the answer is no, you didn't tell your 15 40 35 0257 1 customers? 15 40 38 2 A We told our customers to treat it the same 15 40 38 3 as all other forms of asbestos 15 40 41 4 Q You did not tell your customers that the 15 40 43 5 Coalinga product may be more hazardous, did you? 15 40 45 6 A Again it says may be more hazardous 15 40 47 7 There's no -- no positive proof that that's what -- 15 40 50 8 Q Not what l asked you, sir It's a simple 15 40 52 9 question Did you tell your customers that the 15 40 55 10 Coalinga product may be more hazardous'' 15 40 57 11 A No 1541 00 12 Q Thankyou 154100 13 Now, next paragraph I'm reading the last 15 4101 14 couple sentences in that paragraph 15 41 10 15 It is probable that the 5 million particles 15 41 11 16 per cubic foot will not be acceptable for the 15 41 15 17 prevention of mesothelioma l have no idea what 15 41 19 18 concentration might be effective in preventing this 15 41 19 19 disease, and l would wonder whether even a limit of 15 41 21 20 1 million particles per cubic foot would be 15 41 24 21 effective in this regard Did l read that 154128 22 correctly' 15 4129 23 A Yes 15 4129 24 Q Did you y'all tell that to OSHA when you 154129 25 were protesting the provision to drop the level from 15 41 32 0258 1 five to two' 15 4135 2 A I think they already knew that I don't 154136 3 remember that we had sent anything from the medical 15 41 38 4 department to OSHA 15 4144 5 Q Objection to the non-responsive portion of 15 4145 6 the answer 15 41 47 7 Did you communicate this to your customers' 15 41 47 8 A l think in a way, through the asbestos 15 4149 9 toxicology reports again 154152 10 Q Well, sir, you guys when you were -- maybe 15 4153 11 you didn't do it--1 better phrase it a different 15 41 56 12 way While--Union Carbide provided free testing 15 41 59 13 at some of your customers' facilities that were 15 42 03 14 usings your products, didn't they' 15 42 05 15 A The air monitoring' 15 42 07 16 Q Yes, sir 1542 08 17 A Yes 15 42 08 18 Q And you would do that testing, and if they 15 42 09 19 were under the 5 for the TLV, you would tell them 15 42 11 20 they had a clean bill of health, wouldn't you' 15 42 15 21 A No, l don't think we ever worded it that 15 42 17 22 way 15 42 20 23 Q All right Did you ever lie to 15 42 20 24 customers-- 15 42 20 25 A We just gave them the results and let them 15 42 20 0259 1 do with them what they would We never analyzed the 15 42 22 2 results from a -- from how they should proceed 15 42 25 3 standpoint 15 42 29 4 Q But you volunteered to go do the testing, 15 42 29 5 but then didn't analyze the results for the 15 42 32 6 customers' 15 42 34 7 A Maybe l misstated We analyzed the 15 42 34 8 results, obviously, but we didn't tell the customer 15 42 36 9 what to do 15 42 39 10 Q Well, part of the reason you volunteered to 15 42 40 11 do the testing is because you didn't want the 15 42 42 12 customer finding somebody else to do it, did you'' 15 42 44 13 A wny would that be -- or wbat do you mean by 15 42 47 14 that question' 15 42 49 15 Q You didn't want somebody else to do it and 15 42 50 16 tell the customer something adverse to wnat Union 15 42 52 17 Carbide's interests were, did you' 15 42 54 18 A I think that's totally incorrect 15 42 56 19 Q Okay Let's look at Exhibit 24 15 42 58 20 (Deposition Exhibit Number 24 was 15 43 01 21 marked for identification ) 15 43 01 22 BY MR EGDORF Q Couple names I'm 1543 04 23 not sure if we've talked about today or not G L 15 43 05 24 Dickson, wno's he 15 43 08 25 A He was in a marketing group 15 43 09 0260 1 Q in Niagara Falls or- 15 43 11 2 A Niagara Falls 15 43 13 3 Q Mr Walsh' 15 43 14 4 A He was in - he was in the marking group in 15 43 15 5 Atlanta 15 43 18 6 Q 0 J Malacarne' M-a-l-a-c-a-r-n-e' 15 43 20 7 A l remember the name l think he was in - 15 43 29 8 l think ne was in Colorado 1543 31 9 Q Okay 1543 33 10 A In the metals division 1543 33 11 Q With UCC though' 1543 35 12 A Yes 15 43 36 13 Q VD Holt' 1543 38 14 A He was in the metals division I'm not 15 43 39 15 sure where 154342 16 Q Okay F H Larrison' 1543 43 17 A He was the plant manager, the asbestos 1543 46 18 plant manager 15 43 49 19 Q Before you or after you' 15 43 50 20 A He was before me 15 43 53 21 Q Okay I'm going to show you a document 15 43 56 22 dated July 31, 1973, originating department Calidria 15 43 59 23 asbestos marketing, and some other names are also on 15 44 03 24 the document, Mr Thurber and - and so forth 15 44 06 25 First question l have after you look at the 15 44 10 0261 1 document is Can you tell me wno authored it, 15 44 14 2 because l don't see a name as do wno did it, but 15 44 18 3 maybe I'm just not looking at it clearly enough' 15 44 21 4 A Sounds like maybe l would have written it, 15 45 02 5 but it - it - maybe this is only the first page 15 45 04 6 Q Okay And I'm not sure That's the page l 15 45 08 7 have and the way it came to me, but sounds like 15 45 10 8 something you possibly wrote, but maybe not' 15 45 13 9 A Possibly 15 45 15 10 Q Okay Can you read the higblignted 15 45 16 11 portion, please' 15 45 18 12 A The need for increased production of higniy 15 45 19 13 profitable RG 244 is obvious 15 45 23 14 Q Does that sound like the way you felt in 15 45 27 15 1973' 1545 29 16 A Well, we couldn't produce enough for the 15 45 30 17 sales, and obviously we were sending someone out to 15 45 33 18 try to evaluate the plant or the production circuit 15 45 37 19 to see if we could increase the production of RG 244 15 45 42 20 that was -- it was a highly profitable product 15 45 47 21 Q So in 1973, while according to you your 15 45 49 22 product provided all your customers with all the 15 45 54 23 scientific data, their response is to just buy more 15 45 56 24 and more of it, is that correct? 15 46 00 25 A This was a very, very low volume product, 15 46 01 0262 1 and they wouldn't have to buy very much to be--to 15 46 09 2 make us run out 15 46 12 3 Q But you sure had a whole lot of people in 15 46 13 4 the marketing department for that low volume 15 46 15 5 product, didn't you? 15 46 18 6 A I don't know what you mean by that 15 46 19 7 Q Well, l mean half the names we mentioned 15 46 20 8 today that are on that letter are in the marketing 15 46 23 9 department, right? 15 46 26 10 A Well, Dickson was and Norris-- 15 46 27 11 Q You? 15 46 29 12 A -and Walsh That's three or four 15 46 30 13 Q You? 15 46 36 14 A Yeah, myself 15 46 37 15 Q Okay 15 46 40 16 A They were covering the whole world, and l 15 46 40 17 wouldn't call that a large number of salespeople 15 46 42 18 Q Okay I'm done with that one, sir 15 46 44 19 Did you ever inform anyone at OSHA or any 15 46 52 20 governmental entity that you thought the companies 15 46 55 21 like Johns-Manville or Turner and New were violating 15 46 57 22 the OSHA preamble by printing cancer on their 15 47 00 23 labels? 15 47 04 24 A NO 15 47 04 25 Q Now, in terms of making sure that the law 15 47 05 0263 1 is followed and that accurate facts come out, you 15 47 07 2 didn't think that was something that you ought to 15 47 10 3 comment upon? 1547 12 4 A NO 1547 12 5 Q Okay 15 47 15 6 A l certainly wouldn't be responsible for 15 47 21 7 other companies following the OSHA standards 15 47 24 8 Q Objection Non-responsive 15 47 28 9 (Deposition Exhibit Number 25 was 15 47 42 10 marked for identification) 15 47 42 11 BY MR EGDORF Q Look at Exhibit 15 47 43 12 Number 25 The good news is I'm running out of 15 47 45 13 documents 15 47 49 14 So your named on this one as a copy-to as 15 47 50 15 well It's from Mr - excuse me to Mr R L 15 47 53 16 Folkman l don't know if we've mentioned his name 15 47 57 17 Do you know who he is? 15 48 01 18 A He was in the metals division, and l think 15 48 02 19 he was a vice-president at least sometime 15 48 06 20 Q And this is from Doctor Rhodes--got it 15 48 10 21 right that time, called him Doctor Have you seen 15 48 12 22 this before? 15 48 14 23 A Well, l was copied, so l must have seen it 15 48 26 24 before, yes 15 48 29 25 Q Okay Turn to the second page Can you 15 48 31 0264 1 read the paragraph with the arrow1' 15 48 33 2 A The most critical impact of a very low 15 48 35 3 standard would be on our customers who manufacture 15 48 38 4 asbestos containing products, and most particularly 15 48 41 5 on the great diversity of ultimate users of these 15 48 44 6 products 15 48 47 7 Q So you- 15 48 48 8 A A standard- 15 48 49 9 Q Sorry 15 48 50 10 A - 0 1 fiber per cc could force many of 15 48 51 11 them to turn to alternative products 15 48 54 12 Q So adds Union Carbide were concerned that 15 48 56 13 if there was a low standard put out by OSHA or the 15 48 59 14 other regulatory agencies your sales would fall, 15 49 03 15 correct' 15 49 06 16 A If there was a - if it was so low in 15 49 06 17 certain areas - wnat we were complaining about was 15 49 14 18 the - well, not complaining, but he was explaining 15 49 16 19 to Mr Folkman that our customers wno manufacture 15 49 21 20 these where the fibers are bound in were going to be 15 49 24 21 affected by a standard that would be applied to them 15 49 27 22 even though it probably wasn't appropriately 15 49 31 23 applied 15 49 35 24 Q In fact you guys told OSHA you didn't even 15 49 36 25 think you could comply with a TLV of 2, didn't you' 15 49 39 0265 1 A Of 2' think we were able to comply with 15 49 43 22 154945 3 Q That wasn't my question, sir Let me try 154945 4 again 15 49 47 5 Y'all told OSHA before the regulation was 154948 6 enacted that you did not think you could comply with 15 49 51 7 a level of 2, didn't you' 15 49 54 8 A I'll read you what it says here At the 15 49 55 9 present time our King City plant is generally 15 49 57 10 meeting the 2 fiber level, and with particular 15 50 00 11 attention to housekeeping can probably achieve 15 50 04 12 levels down to about 1 fiber per cc 15 50 05 13 Q Dropping to 1 would be safer for the 15 50 08 14 employees, wouldn't it' 15 50 13 15 A Well, again, that-without any 15 50 14 16 amplifications, depends on how long you're exposed 15 50 16 17 and to what 15 50 20 18 Q Just a general proposition, sir, we're 15 50 20 19 going - you wouldn't dispute that even the folks 15 50 23 20 who think asbestos is bad, or folks wbo mignt 15 50 27 21 disagree with you would agree that a level of one 15 50 30 22 would be better for the employee than a level of 15 50 33 23 two, right' 15 50 36 24 A A level of zero would be better than that 15 50 36 25 Q Right And as you indicate in there, you 15 50 39 0266 1 thoughtyou could drop the level to 1 or 1 5, right? 15 50 41 2 A It says we can probably achieve those 15 50 45 3 levels 15 50 47 4 Q Well, since Union Carbide cared so much 15 50 48 5 about its employees, why didn't you just do it? 15 50 51 6 A We were keeping them as low as possible 15 50 54 7 Q Well, why didn't you get them down to 1 0 15 50 56 8 or 1 5? 15 50 59 9 A And we provided respirators wnen they 155100 10 exceeded the levels 155103 11 Q All right So you couldn't keep it to 1 0 15 5105 12 or 1 5, correct? 15 51 08 13 A Couldn't keep it? It's up--you read this 15 51 10 14 yourself 15 51 12 15 Q Well- 15 51 12 16 A We're meeting the 2 fiber and may be able 155113 17 to go to 1 fiber 15 51 16 18 Q l guess the key thing that would go into 155118 19 dropping the level from 5 to 2 or 2 to 1 5 or 1 15 5121 20 would be how much money it would cost the company to 15 51 24 21 institute the mechanism that would accomplish that, 15 51 30 22 right? 23 A That would be a factor, of course 15 5130 24 Q And that would be something you would take 155131 25 into consideration in deciding wnat level you wanted 15 51 33 0267 1 to have, correct? 15 5137 2 A We weren't establishing the levels OSHA 155138 3 was establishing the levels 15 5141 4 Q Establishing the levels you wanted in your 15 5142 5 own plant Nobody - OSHA wasn't going to prevent 15 51 42 6 you from naving a lower level than the requirements, 15 51 45 7 was it? OSHA didn't say No, you got to have two 15 5147 8 You can't have one That didn't happen did it? 15 5151 9 A Not that I recall 15 5154 10 Q Okay 15 5156 11 A You want this over here 15 5156 12 Q Yeah, yeah, I'm done with that Sorry 15 5158 13 Just going to show you what I'll mark as 15 52 01 14 Exhibit 26, sir It's got a Union Carbide Bates 15 52 04 15 label on it l have no idea where it came from 15 52 06 16 Can you tell me if you've seen it before, and if 15 52 09 17 maybe you authored it? 15 52 10 18 (Deposition Exhibit Number 26 was 15 52 13 19 marked for identification) 15 52 13 20 THE WITNESS No, I don't - I - pretty 15 52 17 21 sure I didn't author it I don't know where it came 15 52 20 22 from 15 52 24 23 Q Do you have any idea who authored it just 15 52 25 24 by looking at it? 15 52 29 25 A No 15 52 29 0268 1 Q Do you recall any specific letters that 15 52 31 2 you, John Myers, wrote to OSHA regarding your 15 52 35 3 opinions as to the appropriate TLV' 15 52 38 4 A l don't remember that l ever wrote any 15 52 43 5 regarding TLV 15 52 45 6 Q Did you write letters to OSHA regarding 15 52 47 7 your opinions on any other topic that they were 15 52 49 8 regulating that might affect the King City mine'' 15 52 53 9 A At one point I did work with OSHA on the -- 15 52 55 10 on what was called construction standards l 15 52 58 11 attended meetings l don't remember if l wrote 15 53 02 12 letters or not 15 53 05 13 Q I don't know now long we've gone, sir I 15 53 08 14 could use a break for just a minute I'm going to 15 53 1 1 15 be finished pretty soon l just have a few more 15 53 13 16 documents I need to show you If you don't mind if 15 53 17 17 we stretch our legs for just a few minutes now' 15 53 20 18 A All right 19 Q Okay' 15 53 24 15 53 24 20 THE VIDEOGRAPHER We're going on off the 15 53 25 21 record 3 53 p m 15 53 27 22 (Short break) 15 57 46 23 THE VIDEOGRAPHER We're going back on the 15 58 07 24 record 3 58 p m 15 58 17 25 BY MR EGDORF Q wasn't ready now, 15 58 20 0269 1 was I' I got new numbers 26 Is that the last 15 58 26 2 one we used, or does somebody have what are the 15 58 31 3 other ones' 4 MR UXSSETTER That's the last one 15 58 34 5 BY MR EGDORF Q Let me show you 15 58 35 6 Exhibit Number 27, Mr Myers Looks like July 27, 15 58 36 7 1973, Calidria Asbestos, Marketing Looks like it's 15 58 40 8 from you 15 58 44 9 (Deposition Exhibit Number 27 was 15 58 45 10 marked for identification) 15 58 45 11 BYMR EGDORF Q Says, second 15 5845 12 paragraph We could answer this by saying that our 15 58 47 13 HP asbestos does not contain any of the listed 15 58 49 14 materials, et cetera However, we no longer have 15 58 52 15 approval from FDA to use asbestos in paper intended 15 58 55 16 for use in contact with food 15 59 00 17 Did I read that correctly' 15 59 01 18 A Yes 15 59 05 19 Q And that's your document, sir' You 15 59 06 20 authored it' 15 59 09 21 A Yes Yes 15 59 10 22 Q Does that refresh your recollection about 15 59 1 1 23 what you were allowed to do or not allowed to do 15 59 13 24 with respect to asbestos products that might relate 15 59 16 25 to food' 15 59 20 0270 1 A That's in this time frame, 1973, we no 15 59 21 2 longer had approval I don't know when it was-- 15 59 24 3 wnen approval was denied 15 59 28 4 Q Next document, sir 15 59 31 5 (Deposition Exhibit Number 28 was 15 59 33 6 marked for identification) 15 59 33 7 BY MR EGDORF Q Moving right along 15 59 34 8 Got a couple more names for you I don't know if 15 59 39 9 we've -- said -- yean, couple more I'm not sure if 15 59 41 10 we mentioned today or not One l don't think we did 15 59 45 11 E J Kleber? 15 59 49 12 A He was in tne marketing group 15 59 50 13 Q Can't remember if we mentioned Mr Byrne 15 59 51 14 before, or not 15 59 53 15 A Yes, ne was in tne marketing group 15 59 54 16 Q Okay So I'm going to give you some names 15 59 57 17 nere Mr Byrne, Mr Dickson, Mr Kleber, you, 15 59 59 18 Mr Norris, Mr Rnodes.andMr Ingalls Would you 16 00 03 19 all be in tne marketing group? 16 00 07 20 A Yes 16 00 08 21 Q Okay Let me snow you Exhibit 28 and ask 16 00 08 22 you if you're familiar witn it 16 00 1 1 23 A Yes, I've seen tnis 16 00 18 24 Q Okay Tnis is a document pertaining to a 16 00 20 25 discussion amongst tne marketing staff about now to 16 00 24 0271 1 deal witn any customer inquiries regarding tne new 16 00 27 2 OSHA regulations, correct? 16 00 30 3 A No, it's not a--it's not a memo about a 16 00 31 4 discussion Tnis is Mr Ingalls'memo to--to 16 00 35 5 tnese people 16 00 40 6 Q All rignt So ratnertnan- 16 00 40 7 A Not a discussion 16 00 42 8 Q All rignt Ratnertnan eitner of interpret 16 00 43 9 it, tne sentence says Tne following is suggested 16 00 46 10 as a basic format for handling inquiries from 16 00 49 11 customers concerning tne new OSHA regulations, 16 00 52 12 correct? 16 00 53 13 A Yes 1600 53 14 Q Dated June 22, 1972, correct? 16 00 53 15 A Yes 1600 56 16 Q Was Mr Ingalls your boss at this time? 16 00 57 17 A No 1600 59 18 Q Was he below you, above you, or the same as 16 00 59 19 you? 16 01 02 20 A He worked for me 16 0103 21 Q He worked for you Well, who--who had 16 0103 22 the -- let me ask - let me put it - change it this 16 01 09 23 way Were you the one that had the authority to 160112 24 decide what the basic format would be for handling 16 01 15 25 customer inquiries on any particular topic? 16 01 18 0272 1 A It would be done as a group project, yes 16 0121 2 Q You told us earlier you're generally 16 0123 3 familiar with this document, correct? 1601 25 4 A Yes 16 01 27 5 Q Did you ever produce - create any kind of 16 0127 6 memo or tell anyone that you disagreed with what was 16 01 29 7 in this document? 16 0132 8 A I'm sure l did l don't remember at the 16 0133 9 time, but l certainly would nave not been - did not 16 01 35 10 agree with this - do hot agree with this, the way 16 01 38 11 it's worded 16 0141 12 Q Okay Now, the fact--but you can't find 16 0142 13 me the document that that happened, where you wrote 16 01 44 14 a memo saying l disagree with this, correct? 16 01 46 15 A I haven't seen that 16 0148 16 Q Okay Let's talk about what's in this 16 0149 17 memo Number 1, under Mr Ingalls's suggested 160152 18 format is set the mood, correct? 16 0158 19 A Yes 16 01 59 20 Q Controlling the conversation is paramount 16 02 00 21 correct? 16 02 07 22 A Yes 16 02 07 23 Q The first paragraph of Bill Johnson's 16 02 08 24 letter to the Office of Safety and Health Standards 16 02 1 1 25 19- -- excuse me 6-9-72 summarize our position and 16 02 14 0273 1 attitude 16 02 18 2 Do you agree with that? 16 02 19 3 A I - well, he left out I think to me an 16 02 20 4 important sentence Assure the customer that the 16 02 25 5 new law is reasonable and within the limits of 16 02 28 6 practicality l don't--1 don't remember Bill 16 02 30 7 Johnson's letter, no 16 02 33 8 Q wno was Bill Johnson? 16 02 34 9 A He was in metal division - 16 02 35 10 Q Did you- 16 02 37 11 A - and in the New York office l don't 16 02 37 12 know what his position was 16 02 38 13 Q Did you review any letter that Mr Johnson 16 02 39 14 sent to OSHA before it went out? 16 02 41 15 A I don't recall that 16 02 43 16 Q Are you familiar with this letter as you 16 02 44 17 sit here today? 16 02 46 18 A No 16 0247 19 Q After referencing, you know, refer them to 16 02 47 20 the letter, it says It also seems to have the 16 02 50 21 soothing effect on the emotionally irate 16 02 53 22 Did I read that correctly? 16 02 56 23 A Yes 16 02 57 24 Q Were you having customers calling who you 16 02 57 25 would describe as emotionally irate regarding the 16 02 59 0274 1 new asbestos regulations? 16 03 02 2 A I don't remember that, no 16 03 03 3 Q Next paragraph If the customer is 16 03 05 4 persistent and threatens to eliminate asbestos a 16 03 08 5 certain amount of aggressiveness may be effective 16 03 1 1 6 Did I read that correctly? 16 03 15 7 A Yes 16 03 16 8 Q Is that how your salesmen communicated with 16 03 16 9 customers regarding the OSHA regulations? 16 03 19 10 A Certainly not 16 03 21 11 Q Well, you don't know if they did or not 16 03 22 12 You just don't think they should, correct? 16 03 24 13 A I'm essentially positive that they would 16 03 26 14 not have followed any of these recommendations here 16 03 30 15 by Mr Ingalls, who had really no authority to write 16 03 33 16 this kind of a letter anyway 16 03 36 17 Q Did you fire him? 16 03 38 18 A Did I? 16 03 39 19 Q Yeah 16 03 39 20 A No 16 0340 21 Q Now, of course, as you told us earlier 16 0341 22 today, sir, you don't know what any specific 16 03 44 23 salesperson told any customer because you weren't 16 0347 24 there, right? 16 03 49 25 A I think that's obvious, yes 16 03 49 0275 1 Q Words and catch phrases such as premature, 16 03 52 2 irrational, or avoiding the inevitable -- each of 16 03 56 3 those in their own quotes -- will sometimes turn the 16 03 59 4 table 16 04 01 5 Did you agree with that as a marketing 16 04 02 6 approach? 16 04 04 7 A l don't know what he means 16 04 04 8 Q Did you ever discipline Mr Ingalls or 16 04 05 9 anyone else regarding this memo or using this 16 04 07 10 marketing approach? 16 04 09 11 A I don't think anybody was using this 16 04 10 12 marketing approach 16 04 13 13 Q Objection Non-responsive 16 04 14 14 Did you ever discipline Mr Ingalls-- 16 04 15 15 A No 16 04 18 16 Q - regarding his marketing approach or this 16 04 18 17 memo? 16 04 20 18 A I think I just answered that No, I don't 16 04 21 19 remember writing him a letter or - but I'm - I'm 16 04 25 20 sure I did talk the him about it, but I don't 16 04 28 21 remember that 16 04 30 22 Q Next paragraph The main objective is to 16 04 31 23 keep the customer on the defensive Make him 16 04 33 24 justify his -- underlined -- position Did I read 16 04 36 25 that correctly? 16 04 38 0276 1 A Yes 16 04 39 2 Q Does that seem like appropriate conduct 16 04 39 3 from Union Carbide regarding asbestos in 1972? 16 04 42 4 A l think I've told you the whole letter is 16 04 44 5 not appropriate for the marketing - he -- as l say, 16 04 47 6 Mr Ingalls, had no control over any of the people 16 04 51 7 he was writing the letter to and he -- he shouldn't 16 04 55 8 have written it, but he did 16 04 58 9 Q Objection Non-responsive 16 04 59 10 Have you seen this letter before today? 16 05 00 11 A Many times 16 05 02 12 Q Have you been asked about it before? 16 05 03 13 A Yes 16 05 05 14 Q What's the last two sentences in that 16 05 06 15 paragraph say? 16 05 09 16 A The -- starts off with Main objective? 16 05 12 17 Q No. sir The last two sentences in that 16 05 16 18 paragraph? 16 05 18 19 A But that paragraph, is that the one you're 16 05 19 20 talking about? 16 05 21 21 Q Yes Yes I'm sorry I misunderstood 16 05 21 22 your question, yes I apologize 16 05 24 23 A Don't cover too much ground in one 16 05 26 24 confrontation Even rabies shots are spaced at 16 05 28 25 moderate intervals 16 05 31 0277 1 Q And I take it your-your testimony would 16 05 32 2 be you don't feel that should be - should have been 16 05 34 3 Union Carbide's position either, correct? 16 05 37 4 A Well, maybe you wouldn't try to cover too 16 05 39 5 much ground in one confrontation, maybe - that may 16 05 42 6 be some way to describe - that may be a way to - 16 05 47 7 you would discuss the regulations with somebody l 16 05 51 8 don't know wnat the rabies shots means or has to do 16 05 56 9 with this 16 05 59 10 Q Okay You can set that one aside, sir 16 06 04 11 Sir, l have an exhibit I'm going to mark as 16 06 12 12 Number 29 that Doctor Egilman was kind enough to 16 06 15 13 give me, where he, l guess, did a power point 16 06 19 14 presentation regarding a Carbide document So it's 16 06 22 15 not the specific document It's an excerpt from it 16 06 25 16 I don't want to misrepresent what it is 16 06 28 17 DOCTOR EGILMAN That'S- 16 06 31 18 BY MR EGDORF Q Urn - um but it's 16 06 34 19 dated March 16th, 1972, Statement of James w 16 06 35 20 Rawlings, Vice-President, Mining and Metals 16 06 40 21 Division, Union Carbide Corporation We've talked 16 06 42 22 about him some today, correct? 16 06 45 23 A Yes 16 06 46 24 Q And it's pertaining to thehearing on 16 06 46 25 proposed asbestos standards under the Occupational 16 06 49 0278 1 Safety and Health Act And as he saw earlier in 16 06 51 2 some documents, Mr Rawlings had some communications 16 06 54 3 with OSHA about that, right? 16 06 58 4 A Yes 16 07 00 5 Q And can you read out loud the section 16 07 00 6 that's pulled from the letter, that's quoted there? 16 07 02 7 A Is this the same letter we already - is it 16 07 05 8 in evidence here? 1607 07 9 QI'm not 100 percentpositive Doctor 16 07 09 10 Egilman seems to indicate it was, but l don't to 16 07 12 11 represent it because l don't have it in front of me 16 07 12 12 MR UXSSETTER Well, let's get to the 16 07 12 13 letter rather than using something - 16 07 13 14 MR EGDORF If it's the letter, I'm nappy 16 07 14 15 to do that 16 07 16 16 MR UXSSETTER What's the date of it? 16 07 17 17 March 16,'73 I don't see it 16 07 20 18 BY MR EGDORF Q That's fine David 16 08 07 19 can print out another one for you What's the- 16 08 08 20 A You want me to read that? 16 08 09 21 Q Sure 16 08 1 1 22 A The threshold limit value of 2 fibers - 16 08 12 23 THE REPORTER I'm sorry Can you begin 16 08 15 24 again, please? 16 08 15 25 THE WITNESS The threshold limit value of 16 08 16 0279 1 2 fibers per milliliter cannot be achieved in our 16 08 19 2 operations by any presently known combination of 16 08 24 3 engineering installations 16 08 28 4 BY MR EGDORF Q Was Mr Rawlings 16 08 30 5 telling OSHA the truth when he said that? 6 A I'm sure he believed it was the truth 16 08 31 16 08 33 7 Q Did you correct him or correct the record 16 08 35 8 with OSHA on that? 16 08 38 9 A l don't remember the date of that other 16 08 40 10 letter when - which said that we could meet the two 16 08 42 11 fibers 16 08 46 12 Q Well, did you send anything to OSHA, I 16 08 46 13 mean, regarding correcting anything that 16 08 49 14 Mr Rawlings had told OSHA? 16 08 51 15 A No, I wouldn't have anything to do with 16 08 53 16 this This is concerning the plant operations I 16 08 55 17 was in the marketing in Niagara Falls in 1972 So l 16 08 57 18 didn't - no, I didn't send him any - 16 09 03 19 Q Okay 16 09 05 20 A -letter 16 09 05 21 Q Let's look at Exhibit Number 30 16 09 06 22 (Deposition Exhibit Number 30 was 16 09 08 23 marked for identification) 16 09 08 24 BY MR EGDORF Q March 22, 1966 I 16 09 09 25 don't think your name is on this one though Have 16 09 1 1 0280 1 you seen it before? 16 09 13 2 A l think l have seen it before l dont 16 09 30 3 remember seeing it at the time, but l would have 16 09 33 4 been - l was in the - well, l was in - no, I'm 16 09 35 5 not even sure l had joined the group in March of 16 09 39 6 '66 16 0943 7 Q That was my next question Do you know 16 09 43 8 what part of the year in '66 you joined'' 16 09 45 9 A As I recall, it was summer 16 09 47 10 Q Okay 16 09 50 11 A After the kids got out of school in 16 09 51 12 Kentucky 16 09 54 13 Q Okay And then you moved out here to 16 09 55 14 California' 16 09 57 15 A In'67 16 09 57 16 Q Okay Says Gentlemen, early in March the 16 09 59 17 New York Times and The Herald Tribune reporting the 16 10 02 18 establishment of a new environment health laboratory 16 10 06 19 in Mount Sinai Hospital, New York City, received 16 10 11 20 some publicity, copy attached, in regard to asbestos 16 10 12 21 dust as a health hazard 16 10 15 22 All right' 16 10 16 23 A Yes 16 10 16 24 Q We understand that a few newspapers in 16 10 17 25 other cities picked I up 16 10 18 0281 1 All right? 16 10 20 2 A Yes 16 10 21 3 Q Then itsays Out ofcontext, in quotes, 16 10 21 4 reporting leads to erroneous conclusions, and this 16 10 24 5 is no exception 16 10 27 6 Right? 16 10 27 7 A Yes 16 10 28 8 Q Now, it --although this predated your time 16 10 28 9 did you ever have occasions where you told customers 16 10 31 10 that reports they might have seen in newspapers or 16 10 34 11 periodicals were erroneous or out of context or were 16 10 37 12 to De discounted for one reason or another? 16 10 44 13 A l don't know wnether l used the words 16 10 46 14 erroneous or discounted, Put we already read my- 16 10 49 15 from my report where l said something of the same 16 10 53 16 thing, except l don't remember using the word 16 10 54 17 erroneous or- 16 10 58 18 Q l don't think you used the word erroneous 16 11 00 19 in that either, in the document we looked at I'm 16 11 03 20 just trying to find out did you ever use the word 16 11 05 21 erroneous maybe in talking to a customer? 16 11 08 22 A l certainly don't remember that, no 16 1109 23 Q Okay Done with that one, sir Let's look 16 11 12 24 at Exhibit 31 - 25 (Deposition Exhibit Number 31 was 16 11 16 0282 1 marked for identification ) 16 1116 BY MR EGDORF Q - which I think 16 1117 you're probably going to be able to identify for me 16 1119 A Yes 16 11 21 Q wnat'sthat? 16 1121 A it's called -- titled Chrysotne Asbestos 16 11 22 in Plastics, by John L Myers, Calidria Asbestos, 16 11 25 Union Carbide Corporation, Mining and Metals 16 11 31 Division, Niagara Falls, New York, Presented on May 16 11 33 14th, 1974 at the 32nd Annual Technical Conference 16 11 36 of the Society of Plastics Engineers in San 16 1140 Francisco 16 1143 Q Well, sir, I'd like to ask you some 16 11 44 questions about some things in this document You 16 1146 authored it, right? 16 11 48 A Again, I- 16 1149 Q Or it- 16 11 50 A - signed my name to it, and l probably - 16 1151 l probably got help with other things 16 11 55 Q Okay So it mignt not all be yours, but 16 1157 potentially? 16 12 00 A It's possible, yes 16 12 00 Q Okay If we turn to the page after the 16 12 02 cover page, you have a heading called What is 16 12 05 asbestos? 16 12 08 4 accounts for over 95 percent of US consumption as 16 12 15 5 noted in Table 1 16 12 18 6 Did I read that correctly? 16 12 19 7 A Yes 16 12 21 8 Q Now, sir, we can nave a friendly debate 16 12 22 9 regarding wnicn types of asbestos nave caused wnat 16 12 26 10 injuries, but do you take it-- do you dispute tnat 16 12 28 11 there are people tnat have been hurt by asbestos'' 16 12 33 12 A No 161235 13 Q Do you dispute there are people who have 16 12 36 14 gotten mesothelioma from asbestos' 16 12 41 15 A Yes -- or wait a minute Ask the question 16 12 43 16 again 16 12 46 17 Q Do you dispute that people have got 16 12 47 18 mesothelioma from asbestos exposure' 16 12 49 19 A No 161252 20 Q Do you dispute that people have gotten lung 16 12 53 21 cancer from asbestos exposure' 16 12 55 22 A No 16 12 57 23 Q Okay Let me break it down a little more 16 12 57 24 than that as you sit here today Do you dispute 16 13 00 25 that people have gotten mesothelioma from exposure 16 13 02 0284 1 to Chrysotile asbestos' 16 13 07 2 A The only cases I've heard would be 16 13 09 3 concerned with Canadian asbestos that had tremolite 16 13 11 4 contamination l don't know of any mesotheliomas 16 13 16 5 that have been caused by pure Chrysotile asbestos 16 13 18 6 Q What about the young children in Israel 16 13 22 7 that you all got told about in 1975' 16 13 25 8 A I don't know about that 16 13 27 9 Q Okay We'll look at that document after we 16 13 28 10 do this one 16 13 30 11 What about lung cancer' Do you--do you 16 13 31 12 dispute that there have been lung cancers caused by 16 13 34 13 Chrysotile' 16 13 37 14 A No 161338 15 Q Do you dispute that there has been 16 13 38 16 asbestosis caused by Chrysotile' 16 13 43 17 A NO 161346 18 Q Okay Break it down Ithink this is the 16 1348 19 last of -- do you dispute there are people who have 16 13 48 20 gotten asbestos from Calidria' 16 13 50 21 A Yes, I do 16 13 52 22 Q And do youdispute that there are people 16 13 52 23 who have gotten asbestosis -- excuse me -- lung 16 13 55 24 cancer from Calidria' 16 13 56 25 A Yes, I do 16 13 57 0285 1 Q And you think for some reason Calidria is 16 13 58 2 different than Chrysotile' 16 14 01 3 A No, it is Chrysotile 16 14 01 4 Q in fact -- 16 14 03 5 A It's a pure form of Chrysotile Doesn't 16 14 04 6 have any other contamination, plus it's a very short 16 14 07 7 fiber 16 14 10 8 Q And l think we established that earlier 16 14 10 9 You think the product's better because it has more 16 14 12 10 asbestos in it, right? 16 14 15 11 A It's better-it's more--1 mean it's 16 14 16 12 better from a application standpoint, yes The more 16 14 20 13 product you have, you're buying in a bag, it 16 14 24 14 obviously is going to give you better performance in 16 14 29 15 your application 16 14 32 16 Q Let's turn another page, sir There's a 16 14 32 17 heading What is the asbestos hazard? Do you see 16 14 35 18 that? 16 14 37 19 A Yes 16 14 38 20 Q A couple - four or five lines down It is 16 14 38 21 important to note that based on epidemiological data 16 14 41 22 these diseases have occurred primarily in workers 16 14 45 23 with high long-term exposures to asbestos dust 16 14 49 24 Did I read that correctly? 16 14 51 25 A Yes 16 14 52 0286 1 Q That's not accurate, is it? 16 14 53 2 A What are we talking about? Lung cancer? 16 14 54 3 Yeah, lung cancer and asbestos, yeah, l would - l 16 14 57 4 would agree with that 16 15 00 5 Q With what's written there? 16 15 01 6 A Yes 16 15 03 7 Q Well, we saw the papers just a little while 16 15 03 8 ago that you got - where y'all got told about low 16 15 06 9 exposures, didn't we? 16 15 09 10 A Well- 16 15 13 11 Q Doctor Dernehl's letters? 16 15 13 12 A Yeah, l don't think one sentence or one 16 15 14 13 opinion would die- -- epidemiological data would 16 15 19 14 overcome any single individual statement 16 15 26 15 Q Well, who would know more about 16 15 28 16 epidemiological data? You or Doctor Dernehl? 16 15 31 17 A Tbe only thing I know about it is from wbat 16 15 34 18 l read, and l don't know wnat he has read 16 15 36 19 Q Well, you certainly didn't include anything 16 15 39 20 about Doctor Dernehl in this section, did you? 16 15 41 21 A Why would - no, I - why would I - I 16 15 43 22 don't know wny I would include doctor Dernell in 16 15 46 23 this section 16 15 48 24 Q Well, you didn't reference any of the data 16 15 49 25 you were aware of where some people thought it 16 15 52 0287 1 didn't have to be a high, long-term exposure to 16 15 55 2 asbestos dust to cause disease You didn't include 16 15 59 3 that, did you? 16 16 03 4 A No, we--as we read further on, we did 16 16 04 5 reference Doctor Hammond and Doctor Silikoff 16 16 06 6 Q I'm done with that one, sir 16 16 09 7 (Deposition Exhibit Number 32 was 16 16 28 8 marked for identification) 16 16 28 9 BY MR EGDORF Q Show you Exhibit 32 16 16 29 10 and ask you if you've seen it before, and if you 16 16 31 11 know who wrote it? 16 16 33 12 A This looks like a -- no, I don't know who 16 16 52 13 wrote it Looks like might be a mixture of-- no, l 16 17 00 14 don't know who put it together, and I'm not sure 16 17 18 15 it's all put together properly 16 17 20 16 Q Okay Do you know if this was provided to 16 17 22 17 customers? 16 17 25 18 A This document here? 16 17 27 19 Q Yes, sir 16 17 28 20 A I wouldn't think so 16 17 29 21 Q If you turn to page 3? 16 17 30 22 A Okay 16 17 36 23 Q Looking kind of in the middle under 16 17 39 24 Health hazards continued Are you with me? 16 17 41 25 A Okay Yeah 16 17 43 0288 1 Q When the health concerns first become well 16 17 44 known in the 19- -- in the mid 1960s, Union Carbide 16 17 47 had several small scale animal tests run by 16 17 51 Carnegie-Mellon institute 16 17 56 Now, let me stop on that sentence You're 16 17 59 aware that Union Carbide was involved in funding the 16 18 01 Mellon Institute, correct? 16 18 03 A That's the way l understand it, yes 16 18 04 9 Q These tests indicated that Calidria was 16 18 06 10 about the same as the other Chrysotile tests, and 16 18 08 11 this has been our position since that time? 16 18 12 12 Did l read that correctly? 16 18 15 13 A Yes 16 18 16 14 Q That's just not true, is it, sir? We 16 18 16 15 looked at that study a little while ago where it 16 showed that the Calidria tested more hazardously, 16 18 19 17 correct? 18 A Well, again, l can't remember the wording 16 18 22 19 without looking at it, but l thought it said may be 16 18 24 20 more -- and that was again talking about 16 18 27 21 fibergenecity, or whatever 16 18 30 22 Q Nowhere in the Mellon study did it say 16 18 32 23 these tests indicated that Calidria was about the 16 18 34 24 same as the other Chrysotile testing, did it? 16 18 37 25 A l don't recall that statement, no 16 18 40 0289 1 Q Okay I'm done with that one, sir 16 18 42 2 MR EGDORF Would you like to just talk 161901 3 into the microphone? All right I got it Can I 16 19 02 4 finish the deposition? Write a note then I'm not 16 19 08 5 going to -- well, I'm not going to waste his time 16 19 11 6 for you to talk to me Okay Fine I'll ask him 16 19 14 7 that You've got a sticky on it Even I can figure 16 19 17 8 it out 16 19 20 9 BY MR EGDORF Q Sir, let me show 16 19 24 10 you -- actually, the only copy have on this I 16 19 26 11 highlighted So maybe that v\ I help you to know 16 19 29 12 what I'm looking at What are we on? 32? 16 19 31 13 A Yes 16 19 34 14 (Deposition Exhibit Number 32 was 16 19 36 15 marked incorrectly for 16 19 36 16 identification, remarked bytne 16 19 36 17 court reporter as 33 ) 16 19 36 18 BY MR EGDORF Q It's a memo to you, 16 19 42 19 copy to a wnoie Duncn of people, from Harrison 16 19 44 20 Rnodes, February 19tn, 1980 Originating 16 19 49 21 department Calidria asbestos Subject Review of 16 19 55 22 King City Plant Monitoring and Medical Records Are 16 19 58 23 you familiar witn that document? 16 20 00 24 A No, l don't remember it l don't remember 16 20 05 25 seeing it before, but it was sent to me, so l would 16 20 14 0290 1 nave seen it, but l don't remember it 16 20 17 2 Q Was tnat plan ever implemented? 16 20 19 3 A well, I nave to read it to see wnattne 16 20 23 4 plan is 16 20 25 5 Q Okay Let me know wnen you're ready 16 20 25 6 THEREPORTER I think there is already a 162116 7 32 MR EGDORF We'll change it to 33 16 21 16 9 THEREPORTER Yean, mere was 162119 10 THEWITNESS I really don't know wnat 162152 11 tne --1 don't remember tnat tnis was ever 16 21 57 12 implemented, no 16 22 00 13 BY MR EGDORF Q Okay Did you not 16 22 01 14 tnink it was a good idea to monitor tne -- tne 16 22 02 15 nealtn of all tne employees in 1980? 16 22 05 16 A I don't tnink it would nave been my - 16 22 07 17 again, l was still in marketing l wouldn't be 16 22 1 1 18 telling tne plant wnat to do 16 22 14 19 Q So did you write a memo back to Doctor 16 22 17 20 Rhodes and say why are you asking me -- 16 22 19 21 A No, I don't remember that 16 22 21 22 Q Okay Well, when you went back to the mine 16 22 23 23 out there in what? 1981? 16 22 28 24 A '81 16 22 33 25 Q Was there any kind of monitoring program 16 22 34 0291 1 going on? 16 22 36 2 A Oh, yes That started in 1963 16 22 37 3 Q Let me show you what I'm going to mark 16 22 49 4 as -- apparently l -- we need to, actually-- I'm 16 22 51 5 sorry I forgot your name? 16 22 54 6 MR BICKS Peter 16 22 56 7 MR EGDORF Peter, I'm sorry I got told 16 22 57 8 bytne court reporter tnat we already did 32, so l 16 22 59 9 think -- 10 MR BICKS Need to check them? 16 23 01 11 MR EGDORF Yeah, I think it needs to be 16 23 03 12 changed to 33 I think she told me the number 16 23 03 13 MR BICKS She did it 16 23 06 14 MR EGDORF I'm sorry I didn't see her 16 23 07 15 do that 34 16 23 10 16 (Deposition Exhibit Number 34 was 16 23 13 17 marked for identification) 16 23 13 18 BY MR EGDORF Q Keep marking the 16 23 16 19 one l -- has my little cheat sheet notes on it 16 23 17 20 Here we go Recognize that as being MSDS Material 16 23 20 21 Safety Data Sheet of the Calidria Corporation? 16 23 24 22 A Yes 16 23 27 23 Q And we see on the back, last page, bottom 16 23 32 24 Effective date December 31 1984. correct? 16 23 35 25 A Yes 16 23 42 0292 1 Q Turn to the second page There's a 16 23 42 2 reference to chronic effects of over exposure, 16 23 48 3 right? 16 23 50 4 A Yes 16 23 51 5 Q Over exposure to Chrysotile asbestos has 16 23 53 6 caused damage to lungs, asbestosis, in parens, lung 16 23 55 7 cancer and mesothelioma of the pleura and 16 24 00 8 peritoneum, correct? 16 24 05 9 A Yes 16 2406 10 Q Then there was a reference to ingestion 16 24 07 11 down at the bottom, right? 16 24 09 12 A Yes 16 2411 13 Q Indicating there is conflicting evidence 16 24 11 14 regarding gastrointestinal cancers, right? 16 24 13 15 A Yes 16 2416 16 Q Did you agree with this document that was 16 24 17 17 being put out by the Calidria Corporation? 16 24 19 18 A l think, based on the way it was required 16 24 22 19 to be -- the MSDS -- the way the regulations were in 16 24 26 20 preparing the MSDS, yes, I would agree with this 16 24 32 21 Q And there's not a single thing we've 16 24 35 22 referenced that's in that box that you didn't know 16 24 38 23 about before 1984, is there? 16 24 41 24 A I really don't know what you mean 16 24 44 25 Q Well, we've gone over all the documents 16 24 45 0293 1 today that all are before 1984 regarding 16 24 48 2 gastrointestinal cancers and exposure to asbestos 16 24 52 3 causing lung cancer and asbestosis and mesothelioma 16 24 54 4 These weren't things that you guys just learned in 16 25 00 5 1984, were they? 16 25 02 6 A No 16 25 03 7 Q You didn't put these things in your MSDSs 16 25 03 8 before 1984 though, did you? 16 25 07 9 A I don't know what was in it before, but 16 25 08 10 this -- the reason that mesothelioma is in here was 16 25 10 11 because there was -- well, as l understand it, l 16 25 14 12 haven't seen the regulation exactly, but you're 16 25 16 13 required to put any scientific study that was -- 16 25 20 14 well, l guess, peer reviewed you had to mention 16 25 26 15 it -- if it Chrysotile -- if they determined that 16 25 30 16 Chrysotile caused mesothelioma then you had to list 16 25 36 17 this in - in the MSDS, and then ingestion, there it 16 25 39 18 says some studies indicate 16 25 47 19 Q Objection Non-responsive 16 25 49 20 You didn't have mesothelioma in the MSDS 16 25 50 21 before 1984 did you? 16 25 55 22 A I have to look at one, but I don't think we 16 25 57 23 did 16 26 00 24 Q Okay 16 26 00 25 A And I just explained why it was in this 16 26 00 0294 1 one 16 26 03 2 Q Objection Non-responsive 16 26 03 3 Sir, did you sell asbestos to companies to 16 26 06 4 be used in the treatment of beer? 16 26 09 5 A Not that I recall 16 26 12 6 Q What about acid leached asbestos to treat 16 26 15 7 beer? 16 26 20 8 A l don't recall that we ever produced any of 16 26 21 9 that 16 26 24 10 Q Well, let me show you Exhibit Number 35, 16 26 25 11 have you read the third paragraph, and tell me if 16 26 28 12 that changes your answer Oops Forgot the second 16 26 31 13 page 16 26 34 14 (Deposition Exhibit Number 35 was 16 26 34 15 marked for identification ) 16 26 34 16 THE WITNESS Third paragraph, you said? 16 26 43 17 BY MR EGDORF Q Yes, Sir 16 2644 18 A From a strictly legal sense -- 16 2645 19 Q l didn't say you had to read it out loud 16 26 48 20 A Oh 16 26 50 21 Q I'm just--the bottom there, does that 16 26 50 22 change your answer about whether or not your 16 26 52 23 products were being used in beer? 16 26 54 24 A Not that I know of I don't think so I 16 26 56 25 don't know that we ever produced any acid leached 16 26 58 0295 1 asbestos 16 27 02 2 Q Why would y'all be talking about it in your 16 27 02 3 own memos then? 16 27 05 4 A Don't know Can't answer that 16 27 05 5 Q Let me borrow that, please 16 2707 6 Okay How about paper or plas- -- I'm not 16 27 10 7 going to say this rignt P-l-a-s-t-i-s-c-o-l How 16 27 17 8 do I say that? Plastiscol 16 27 22 9 A Plastiscol Yes 16 27 24 10 Q Was your paper being used for paper and 16 27 25 11 Plastiscol including applications that come in 16 27 28 12 contact with food? 16 27 30 13 A I don't know I-I don't know 16 27 30 14 Q Well, that's referenced in this document 16 27 32 15 too that you were copied on, correct? 16 27 35 16 A Where did you read that? Oh, okay 16 27 38 17 Q Same paragraph, just a little higher up 16 27 40 18 A It says it will shut us out I don't know 16 27 45 19 wnether we were ever in it or not 16 27 49 20 Q Maybe you were trying to get in it wnat 16 27 51 21 year is that? 16 27 53 22 A '73 16 27 54 23 Q That's after the OSHA regulations in '72 16 27 55 24 about asbestos, right? 16 27 58 25 A Yes 16 27 59 0296 1 Q What about cigarette paper? Your asbestos 16 27 59 2 was sold to be used in cigarette paper, wasn't it? 16 28 02 3 A mat's come up before I don't know that 16 28 05 4 it ever was used in cigarette paper 16 28 07 5 Q Do you agree tnat your product snould not 16 28 10 6 nave been used in cigarette paper? 16 28 12 7 A It wouldn't be a good application, yes 16 28 14 8 No, it wouldn't be 16 28 16 9 Q Okay Done witn tnat one, sir 16 28 18 10 A l do remember tnat we nad a customer in 16 28 21 11 Korea wno wanted to -- was going to use it in 16 28 23 12 cigarette paper, and we refused to sell to tnem 16 28 27 13 Q Objection Non-responsive 16 28 31 14 Let me snow you Number 36 -- 16 28 34 15 (Deposition Exhibit Number 36 was 16 28 37 16 marked for identification) 16 28 37 17 BY MR EGDORF Q - and nave you 16 28 38 18 read out loud tne entire tnird paragrapn You'll 16 28 41 19 see tnis was sent to you as well by H B Rhodes, 16 28 44 20 September 29, 1975 Tbe paragrapn starting In 16 28 48 21 general You can look at tne rest if you want l 16 28 54 22 just want to ask you about tnat third paragrapn 16 28 58 23 A Well, I want to know what he's talking 16 29 00 24 about 16 29 02 25 Q Okay 16 29 03 0297 1 A It's written by Doctor Rhodes to Byrne, 16 29 07 2 Ingalls, Myers, and Thurber, subject is visit to the 16 29 1 1 3 18th International Congress on occupational health, 16 29 15 4 Brighton, England, September 14th to 19th, 1975 In 16 29 18 5 general the conference produced only one bomb shell 16 29 24 6 in the asbestos area, a paper by Doctor M Wasserman 16 29 28 7 of Israel It was in a different session on 16 29 32 8 geography and occupational health He took a 16 29 36 9 detailed look at about 40 mesothelioma deaths that 16 29 39 10 had been recorded in Israel There were several 16 29 43 11 among small children They were about equally 16 29 47 12 distributed between men and women A substantial 16 29 50 13 proportion had no significant traceable occupational 16 29 54 14 exposure, and the highest rates were not in the two 16 29 59 15 regions of Israel, where the plants which handle 16 30 02 16 asbestos were located He drew the conclusion tnat 16 30 05 17 the cause was non-occupational exposure to asbestos 16 30 08 18 Q Did you pass on that information to your 16 30 13 19 customers that you learned in 1975? 16 30 16 20 A I don't think you would pass on information 16 30 18 21 that was in a single paper no 16 30 21 22 Q So the answer is no, you did not pass it 16 30 24 23 on? 16 30 26 24 A Not to my knowledge 16 30 26 25 Q Okay I'm done with that one 16 3101 0298 1 Sir, do you think it's appropriate for 16 31 17 2 folks at Union Carbide to refer to people who died 16 31 19 3 from mesothelioma as konking out? 16 31 22 4 MR UXSSETTER Back into a privileged 163132 5 document? 16 3134 6 MR EGDORF Not asking about a document 163134 7 Do you think it would be appropriate for people at 16 31 37 8 Union Carbide to refer to people dying of 16 31 39 9 mesothelioma as konking out 16 3141 10 A l probably wouldn't use that word, but l 16 3143 11 have seen it used in other places 16 31 46 12 Q Did you ever scold anybody for referring to 16 31 51 13 folks that way? 16 3153 14 A Did I ever scold anyone? 16 3155 15 Q Yes 16 31 57 16 A I'm sorry No 16 31 57 17 Q Discipline them'' Imean, you were the boss 16 31 59 18 to some people, right' 16 32 02 19 A Not to Mr Klotzbach 16 32 02 20 Q Well, I don't even know who he is but you 16 32 04 21 were the boss to some people, right' 16 32 07 22 A Yes, a few 16 32 09 23 Q Okay 16 32 30 24 Sir, were there -- we talked a lot about 16 32 30 25 King City in that area, and it's our understanding 16 32 34 0299 1 there was a mine that wasn't exactly in King City 16 32 38 2 It was out somewnere, and then the actual plant that 16 32 41 3 did the refinement was in King City, is that right' 16 32 44 4 A No 16 3248 5 Q Okay Correct me, please 16 32 49 6 A Well, the plant was not in King City 16 32 50 7 Q Okay wnere was it' 16 32 53 8 A It was about five miles south of King City 16 32 54 9 Q All rignt Was it in a different city or 16 32 57 10 was it just a suburb of King City' 16 33 02 11 A I don't know wnether suburb is the right-- 16 33 04 12 Q Okay 16 33 08 13 A Agricultural area 16 33 08 14 Q Okay Now, were there any other plants or 16 33 10 15 facilities where Calidria product or the ore from 16 33 12 16 the mine was refined to be sold' 16 33 15 17 A You mean other than King City' 16 33 16 18 Q Yes, sir 16 33 18 19 A And the ore -- you mean - no 16 33 20 20 Q Were there workers -- was there -- were 16 33 22 21 there workers in the-- 16 33 24 22 A Well, I'm sorry There were Atlas and J 16 33 26 23 M 16 33 29 24 Q SorryJust talking about Calidria for the 16 33 29 25 moment 16 33 33 0300 1 A Uh-huh 16 33 33 2 Q Just Union Carbide 16 33 34 3 A Calidria there was only one mill 16 33 35 4 Q Were there workers in other places that had 16 33 37 5 their hands on it for Union Carbide before it went 16 33 39 6 to customers' 16 33 41 7 A You mean other than Calidria asbestos 16 33 42 8 people' 16 33 45 9 Q Talking about the Calidria 16 33 46 10 A No, but l mean otherthan Calidria people, 16 33 47 11 were handling it before it went to customers? 16 33 49 12 Q No, I'm not asking a very clear question 16 33 52 13 I'm sorry, sir I'm just trying to figure out if 16 33 54 14 there was anywhere else where folks would work with 16 33 56 15 Calidria besides the King City area For example, 16 34 00 16 did you have an operations plant in another part of 16 34 03 17 the country where you would send Calidria and Union 16 34 05 18 Carbide workers would do something with it, either 16 34 09 19 put it in Union Carbide products, or do some other 16 34 11 20 refinement to it? 16 34 14 21 A We sold to a few Union Carbide locations 16 34 15 22 Q Such as where? 16 34 18 23 A One was in Boundbrook, New Jersey, very 16 34 19 24 limited -- in fact, all sales were very small to 16 34 23 25 Union Carbide plants 16 34 26 0301 1 Q All right Now, l want to be clear here 16 34 28 2 When you say sales to Carbide, was Carbide actually 16 34 33 3 selling the Calidria to Carbide? 16 34 36 4 A We were--the Calidria group was selling 16 34 38 5 the asbestos to Union Carbide plants 16 34 41 6 Q So it's more how Carbide accounted for what 16 34 43 7 happened to that l mean, it wasn't actually 16 34 46 8 something where Carbide wrote Carbide a check, was 16 34 49 9 it? 16 34 51 10 A Sure 16 34 52 11 Q It was that way Okay And those would be 16 34 52 12 in the files somewhere? 16 34 54 13 A Yes 16 34 55 14 Q Whether it was--what did you say? 16 34 56 15 Boundbrook, New Jersey, or somewhere else? 16 34 58 16 A Yes 16 35 01 17 Q Did you ever have any investigation done 16 35 01 18 regarding the employees in New Jersey, Bambrook, New 16 35 03 19 Jersey, or anyone else, seeing whether or not any of 16 35 07 20 them got hurt by asbestos? 16 35 12 21 A That was, as l say, they were a very 16 35 13 22 infrequent customer They were -- and no, I haven't 16 35 16 23 heard of anyone there being hurt by asbestos 16 35 19 24 Q So you--are you saying it didn't happen 16 35 23 25 or you didn't hear about it? 16 35 25 0302 1 A I didn't hear about it 16 35 26 2 Q Okay Sir, I think Doctor Egilman has 16 3528 3 gotten it for me I think this is the full 16 35 45 4 testimony from Mr Rawlings to OSHA, where we looked 16 35 49 5 at that blurb a little bit earlier? 16 35 53 6 A Yes 16 35 56 7 Q And I'll go ahead and mark this as an 16 35 56 8 exhibit 16 35 59 9 (Deposition Exhibit Number 37 was 10 marked for identification ) 11 BY MR EGDORF Q Going to ask you a 16 36 08 12 couple of questions about it 16 36 1 1 13 DOCTOR EGILMAN Not yet 16 36 16 14 BY MR EGDORF Q Okay That's all 16 36 17 15 right Do you see there in the first paragraph, he 16 36 18 16 says As such, l am concerned with all the 16 36 22 17 activities of our asbestos operations from mining to 16 36 24 18 sales 16 36 27 19 Did you see that'' 16 36 27 20 A No, what paragraph - oh 16 36 28 21 Q Very beginning 16 36 30 22 A Oh 16 36 31 23 Q Did l read that correctly' 16 36 31 24 A Yes 16 36 32 25 Q So earlier you told me Mr Rawlings didn't 16 36 33 0303 1 have anything to do with marketing and sales Would 16 36 35 2 that change your opinion regarding the purpose of 16 36 38 3 his providing testimony to OSHA' 16 36 40 4 A I don't know I don't remember telling you 16 36 43 5 he didn't have anything to do with it He was our 16 36 45 6 boss He was my boss 16 36 48 7 Q Okay Maybe I'm misremembering Fair 16 3649 8 enough The record--the record will say whatever 16 36 51 9 it says 16 36 53 10 A He was- 16 36 54 11 Q You don't- 16 36 55 12 A He was responsible for all activities 16 36 55 13 Q Do you recall earlier testifying - maybe 116 36 58 14 got this wrong too You can correct me if you think 16 37 01 15 so Tnat you - you testified that Mr Rawlings 16 37 04 16 providing information to OSHA nad nothing to do with 16 37 06 17 Calidria' 16 37 09 18 A l don't think l said that If l said that 16 37 10 19 I - I would say I misspoke 16 37 12 20 Q Fair enough Okay That's the only kind 16 37 14 21 of asbestos Union Carbide mined, right' 16 37 16 22 A No, they did as- - mine asbestos in 16 37 19 23 Rhodesia, but - or the - l shouldn't say they had 16 37 23 24 - they owned a mine in Rnodesia 16 37 27 25 Q wnen did they do that' 16 37 30 0304 1 A When' 16 37 32 2 Q Yeah 16 37 32 3 A I don't know 16 37 32 4 Q Well- 16 37 33 5 A My understanding, they never did produce 16 37 34 6 any fiber, saleable fiber 16 37 36 7 Q You don't know wbat time frame' Is this 16 37 38 8 while you were involved with Calidria' 16 37 41 9 A Yeah, it was from'66 to'80 something, 16 37 43 10 sometime 16 37 46 11 Q Any other mines' 16 37 49 12 A No 16 37 50 13 Q Okay Can you read the first sentence on 16 37 51 14 the second page, and tell me if you agree with it 16 38 00 15 after you read it out loud 16 38 03 16 A The economic viability of Union Carbide's 16 38 04 17 asbestos business is dependent on its ability to 16 38 08 18 maintain its specialty products market 16 38 1 1 19 Q Do you agree with that? 16 38 13 20 A Yes 16 38 14 21 Q Okay Nowtnat we nave tne wnoie document 16 38 15 22 nere, you at least nad a cnance to glance at it 16 38 21 23 Just to De clear, did you see this document before 16 38 25 24 it was submitted to OSHA by Mr Rawlings? 16 38 27 25 A I don't recall wnetner I did or not 16 38 30 0305 1 Q Tne yellow sticky at tne bottom, can you 16 38 32 2 read tne last sentence on tnis page and go anead and 16 38 36 3 read tne rest of tne paragrapn on tne next page, 16 38 39 4 please? 16 38 43 5 A Tne only significant alternative 16 38 43 6 tnixotropic agent now available is amorphous silica 16 38 46 7 The silica product has a much lower bulk density 16 38 50 8 than our asbestos product and is inherently more 16 38 54 9 dustier It is more expensive than our product and 16 38 57 10 is, in our opinion, a much less efficient 16 39 00 11 thixotrope Amorphous silica dust levels are also 16 39 04 12 regulated under the Occupational Safety and Health 16 39 08 13 Act However, the silicadust fibers and attendant 16 39 1 1 14 hazard regulations have receivedmuch less 16 3913 15 publicity, and its continued use is not questioned 16 39 18 16 by customers 16 39 20 17 Q Do you agree with that statement? 16 39 21 18 A All the-all the sentences? 16 39 23 19 Q Yeah 16 39 25 20 A Yes 16 39 26 21 Q Okay So you agree that the silica was 16 39 26 22 dustier? 16 39 29 23 A It was less dense, yeah, and he says 16 39 31 24 inherently much dustier 16 39 35 25 Q You agree that it was--the hazards 16 39 36 0306 1 associated with it were not as publicized as those 16 39 38 2 with asbestos? 16 39 41 3 A At this time they were -- they were not as 16 39 42 4 publicized They later promulgated some regulations 16 39 45 5 on silica 16 39 49 6 Q And as you told us earlier today, you 16 39 49 7 didn't provide any information about the silica to 16 39 51 8 your customers, correct? 16 39 54 9 A Well, as I've tried to explain, the silica 16 39 55 10 on the fibers was a molecular coating, if you know 16 39 59 11 what that means That's only one molecule of 16 40 03 12 thickness, and you wouldn't consider that as a 16 40 06 13 silica additive to RG 244 l wouldn't, and l don't 16 40 10 14 think any chemical person would 16 40 15 15 Q Well, that--that remains to be seen, but 16 40 17 16 as you defined it there, sir, you didn't tell that 16 40 19 17 to the customers, did you? 16 40 22 18 A That it had silica? Yeah, l - it was-- 16 40 23 19 we call it a silica treated asbestos l think 16 40 26 20 that's in the -- in that RG 244 document 16 40 29 21 Q Did you tell your customers it was dustier? 16 40 32 22 A That silica is dustier? 16 40 35 23 Q Yeah 16 40 37 24 A l-l don't l don't remember We may 16 40 38 25 have You know, if they use silica, they obviously 16 40 42 0307 1 have seen that for themselves 16 40 46 2 Q Well, sir, you're aware that--that the 16 40 47 3 hazards that are associated with dust are in amounts 16 40 49 4 that people can't see, right? 16 40 52 5 A Not that--no, that's not correct 16 40 54 6 Q You think you have to be able to see the 16 40 57 7 dust for it to be dangerous? 16 40 59 8 A It depends on what the composition of the 164100 9 dust is 16 41 03 10 Q You think Crocidolite dust has to be seen 16 4103 11 to be hazardous? 16 4108 12 A I don't know about Crocidolite 13 Q What about Chrysotile? 164109 16 41 10 14 A It is non-fiber 16 4111 15 Q What about Chrysotile? Does it have to be 16 41 12 16 seen to be hazardous? 164115 17 A In my opinion, you have to define whether 164116 18 you're stalking about Calidria or other Chrysotile 16 41 19 19 Q It hasn't been until just the last two 16 4122 20 years that Union Carbide, for example in lawsuits 16 41 25 21 and you in depositions, has tried to say that 16 41 26 22 Calidria is different than other kinds of 16 41 29 23 Chrysotile, isn't that true? 164131 24 A I don't know how long it's been that we've 164132 25 known that there was tremolite in Canadian 16 41 36 0308 1 Chrysotile 16 4139 2 Q well, you also know that Doctor Langer's 16 4140 3 report it says he found tremolite in California, 16 41 43 4 right? 16 4145 5 A l have never seen that 16 4146 6 Q Okay 16 4147 7 A And if you're talking about our deposit, 16 4147 8 I've never seen that Doctor Langer, as far as l 16 4150 9 know, never found any tremolite in our deposit 16 41 53 10 Q Okay You'd agree that your deposit is the 16 41 56 11 same deposit, isn't it, that Johns-Manville and 16 41 58 12 Atlas have, right? 16 42 02 13 A They were operating on the same deposit 16 42 03 14 Q Excuse me Will you read the sentence 16 42 05 15 starting with however, on to the end of the 16 42 16 16 paragraph? 16 42 19 17 A However, the proposed regulations call for 16 42 21 18 the posting of what we believe are excessively 16 42 23 19 alarmist warning signs wherever asbestos dust hazard 16 42 26 20 is present The term dust hazard is not defined 16 42 30 21 Certainly it should be made clear that warning signs 16 42 33 22 need be posted only where the established threshold 16 42 36 23 limit value may be exceeded 16 42 41 24 Q Do you agree with that? 16 42 42 25 A Yes 16 42 44 0309 1 Q The last paragraph has got ah arrow next to 16 42 51 2 it, sir l think we talked about it earlier, so-- 16 42 55 3 but for purposes of the record though, we can take 16 42 57 4 it with the actual document 16 43 01 5 A We are confident that we can comply with 16 43 02 6 the threshold limit value of 5 fibers per milliliter 16 43 04 7 in our own operations It is our opinion, however, 16 43 12 8 that a threshold limit value of 2 fibers per 9 milliliter cannot be achieved in our operations by 16 43 13 10 any presently known combination of engineering 16 43 15 11 installations 16 43 18 12 Q The fact is, sir, at that time--that was 16 43 18 13 done in 1972 -- you knew you could comply with two, 16 43 21 14 buty'all didn't want to say that, because you 16 43 25 15 thought that might cause a regulation to be enacted 16 43 27 16 that way, correct? 16 43 30 17 A That's your words That's not my words 16 43 31 18 No, I don't believe that 16 43 33 19 Q And that's what--is that not what was 16 43 35 20 going on at Carbide and why you argued against the 16 43 37 21 limit of two? 22 A That's not what I feel, no 16 43 40 16 43 41 23 Q Okay Just a minute, sir We talked a 16 43 44 24 little bit earlier about those death certificates 16 44 11 25 You told me you didn't remember how you got the -- 16 44 14 0310 1 got a copy of -- of the one that had asbestosis on 16 44 16 2 it You remember we discussed that a little bit? 16 4419 3 A Yes, I do 16 44 22 4 Q l want to kind of explore and see if we can 16 44 23 5 figure out how you might have gotten it Do you 16 44 26 6 know wnether you went down to the county offices or 16 44 28 7 the city offices and researched where all the death 16 44 30 8 certificates are? Did you do anything like that? 16 44 34 9 A No 16 44 36 10 Q Did you get it from the doctor of the 16 44 37 11 employee? 16 44 40 12 A I don't think so 16 44 41 13 Q All right Did you--you didn't get it16 44 42 14 from nis family, did you? 16 44 44 15 A I don't think so, but again, I don't know 16 44 46 16 l don't remember where l got it 16 44 48 17 Q Did you go to his funeral? 16 44 49 18 A Yes, I think so 16 44 51 19 Q Well, I'm trying to think what other 16 44 54 20 possibilities are there Maybe did you get it from 16 44 56 21 the hospital from the board you sat on? 16 44 58 22 A No, the board wouldn't have had anything to 16 45 01 23 do with that, but I don't --1 just don't remember 16 45 03 24 how it came into my knowledge 16 45 06 25 Q Did he have -- did the man have an autopsy 16 45 08 0311 1 before that death certificate was printed? 16 45 12 2 A I don't think so 16 45 16 3 Q Did he have an autopsy after the phone call 16 45 17 4 was made regarding the concerns you had about the 16 45 20 5 death certificate stating asbestosis' 16 45 23 6 A The autopsy was required because in Santa 16 45 26 7 Clara County they have a rule or policy that anyone 16 45 31 8 who has worked with asbestos must have an autopsy, 16 45 36 9 is the way l understand why he had an autopsy 16 45 39 10 Q Who performed the autopsy? 16 45 42 11 A l have no idea 16 45 44 12 Q Did you talk to the person who performed 16 45 46 13 the autopsy? 16 45 48 14 A I don't think so No, I'm sure I didn't 16 45 49 15 Q Did you raise your concerns about the 16 45 54 16 document -- the death certificate stating asbestosis 16 45 56 17 before or after the autopsy was done'' 16 45 59 18 A I think that was before 16 46 01 19 Q So you decided that the death certificate 16 46 03 20 was wrong and you didn't even know what the autopsy 16 46 06 21 had found, right' 16 46 09 22 A I didn't say it was wrong I questioned 16 46 10 23 it 16 46 12 24 Q Well, you were questioning it when the 16 4613 25 autopsy hadn't even been done yet, and you're not 16 46 15 0312 1 even a doctor, right' 16 46 18 2 A That's correct 16 46 18 3 Q So on what basis were you questioning it' 16 46 20 4 A Because of my concern whether one of our 16 46 22 5 employees might have asbestosis 16 46 25 6 Q So in the early 1990s you finally got 16 46 30 7 concerned about that' 16 46 34 8 A I think I was concerned many years before 16 46 36 9 that 16 46 38 10 Q Well, that wasn't what your- 16 46 40 11 A That's why we put in our engineering 16 46 41 12 controls, why we gave physical exams, why we used 16 46 43 13 respirators l mean that - all this was done out 16 46 47 14 of concern for the employees' health 16 46 50 15 Q Sir, you didn't do that because of your 16 46 53 16 concern for the employees You did that because you 17 were concerned for Union Carbide because there was 16 46 56 18 going to be a document that had asbestosis in it, 16 46 56 19 right' 16 46 59 20 A That's what you said, but that's not what 16 46 59 21 I'm saying 16 47 01 22 Q l mean, you've never seen a death 16 47 02 23 certificate of any of the employees of Union Carbide 16 47 04 24 at King City that didn't say asbestos and call the 16 47 07 25 Coroner and say you better check and make sure It 16 47 11 0313 1 might be asbestosis You never did that, did you' 16 47 12 2 A Not that l recall l don't think I've seen 16 47 16 3 many death certificates 16 47 19 4 Q You didn't do it on any of them, did you' 16 47 20 5 A I did it on one, yes 16 47 22 6 Q I'm trying to figure out, sir, I mean, 16 47 23 7 autopsies - l mean, we don't have bodies sit around 16 47 26 8 for weeks before autopsies are done generally, do 16 47 29 9 we? 1647 31 10 A l don't know I'm not a Coroner l mean 16 47 31 11 I'm not a medical doctor remember 16 47 34 12 Q Sometime between tne time tnis guy died and 16 47 36 13 before tne autopsy tnat you say is required by law 16 47 38 14 to be done, somenow in tnat time period you got nis 16 47 42 15 deatn certificate? 16 47 44 16 A l don't --1 tried to say l cannot remember 16 47 45 17 where l got it or where -- how l got it 16 47 48 18 Q Do you have a standing request with certain 16 47 50 19 people that if a certain list of employees, if they 16 47 52 20 die you'd like to see their death certificates? 16 47 55 21 A NO, I don't 16 47 57 22 MR EGDORF I don't understand the 16 48 18 23 question 16 48 19 24 (Discussion off the record) 16 48 26 25 BY MR EGDORF Q Have you checked 16 48 32 0314 1 into any of the autopsies that were performed on 16 48 33 2 other workers from King City who died? 16 48 38 3 A l don't remember l may have checked one 16 48 40 4 more 16 48 42 5 Q Why were you interested in this one and the 16 48 43 6 other one, maybe? You weren't interested in all the 16 48 46 7 workers? Just these two guys? 16 48 49 8 A No, l think l would have been made aware of 16 48 51 9 if any of our people had any asbestos related 16 48 54 10 disease 1648 56 11 Q Well, if somebody's looking for it, right? 16 48 56 12 A Yeah I don't know who would look for it 16 48 59 13 Q l mean, if you had --1 mean, there's been 16 49 01 14 more than two people who worked at King City who 16 49 03 15 died, right? 16 49 05 16 A Yes 16 49 06 17 Q You didn't call the Coroner after those and 16 49 06 18 say He worked at our plant Can you make darn 16 49 09 19 sure whether or not he had asbestosis? You didn't 16 49 12 20 make any calls like that, did you? 16 49 15 21 A No, I didn't 1649 16 22 Q You didn't make a point looking at all 16 49 17 23 their death certificates, did you? 16 49 19 24 A No, I didn't 16 49 21 25 Q Can we--1 mean, King City is a small 16 49 25 0315 1 town, isn't it? 16 49 28 2 A 12,000 population, about 16 49 29 3 Q And you're the mayor, right? 16 49 31 4 A Yes 16 49 34 5 Q You're on the City Council, so obviously 16 49 34 6 some people know you to vote for you, right? 16 49 38 7 A Yes 16 49 40 8 Q Giveme some ideas whomight have given you16 49 43 9 this death certificate, if you didn't go do it on 16 49 47 10 its own Who would be thing, God, we ought to give 16 49 49 11 this to John? 16 49 52 12 A I cannot tell you anything different than 16 49 53 13 what I've already told you You can ask me many 16 49 55 14 times, but l don't remember where it came from 16 49 58 15 Q Well, are you aware of other people who 16 50 00 16 spend time just monitoring death certificates of 16 50 03 17former Union Carbide employees'' 16 50 06 18 A No, I'm not 16 50 07 19 Q Well, we can agree you didn'tget it from 16 50 1 1 20 his family' We can agree to that, can't we' 16 50 14 21 A No, I said I didn't know 16 50 16 22 Q So you're saying you might have' 16 50 17 23 A I'm saying I don't know 16 50 20 24 Q So if someone's going to testify in this 16 50 41 25 case that they know and have talked to you about 16 50 44 0316 1 other death certificates that you've reviewed, you 16 50 47 2 think they might be fibbing' 16 50 50 3 A You have to ask that one again l got 16 50 53 4 lost 16 50 57 5 Q Try again There's going to be a witness 16 50 57 6 in this case who's going to testify that they know 16 51 00 7 for a fact that you reviewed other death 16 51 03 8 certificates besides this one, or maybe two, and 16 51 05 9 that you were monitoring death certificates of 16 51 08 10 employees at King City is it going to be your 165111 11 testimony that that person's lying' 16 51 13 12 A l testify --1 would testify that they were 16 51 17 13 wrong I don't know I'd use the word lying, but-- 165119 14 Q Okay 16 5122 15 A - or they were misinformed or- 16 5122 16 Q Okay So did you--okay Apparently, as 165125 17 incredible as it sounds to me, you don't have any 16 51 32 18 clue of who gave you this death certificate, which 16 51 36 19 apparently must have been pretty important to you, 16 51 39 20 because you did a lot of work in that regard 16 51 42 21 MR UXSSETTER Object to the form 165144 22 BY MR EGDORF Q And this person 16 5145 23 just happened to say Golly, maybe John will be 16 5147 24 interested in this Let's give it to him is that 16 5149 25 what you think happened' 16 5152 0317 1 MR UXSSETTER Object to the form 165153 2 THE WITNESS I told you I don't remember 16 5153 3 how or when I got it 16 5155 4 BY MR EGDORF Q Well, sir, you know 16 51 56 5 what' If that's the only death certificate you've 16 5157 6 seen, you don't know if anybody else had asbestosis 16 52 00 7 when they died, do you' 16 52 03 8 A l haven't examined all the death 16 52 04 9 certificates.no 16 52 06 10 Q So the answer is no, you don't know, do 16 52 06 11 you' 16 52 09 12 A l think l would have been made aware of 16 52 09 13 that 16 52 1 1 14 Q Why' 16 52 1 1 15 A Because of the fact that we are a small 16 52 12 16 town, and we care about our employees, and l think 16 52 15 17 the family of ah employee who would -- had gotten 16 52 17 18 some kind of an asbestos related disease would have 16 52 21 19 let me know or let the plant know I don't think it 16 52 24 20 would be a secret 16 52 28 21 Q Then why is it a secret who the guy is? 16 52 31 22 A Different subject 16 52 33 23 Q Oh, so I can just ask one of the other 16 52 35 24 12,000 people that live in King City, and they'll 16 52 37 25 all know who he is because everybody there cares 16 52 41 0318 1 about each other, and the people in the plants, 16 52 44 2 right? They'll all know, right? 16 52 46 3 MR UXSSETTER Object to the form 16 5248 4 THE WITNESS Yeah 12,000 - maybe not 16 52 49 5 12,000, but a few will know who he is 16 52 51 6 BY MR EGDORF Q Is the original 16 52 59 7 death certificate still in the public records? 16 53 01 8 A I don't know how long they retain those 16 53 03 9 Q Do you have any other jobs other than 16 53 36 10 working at the mine? 16 53 39 11 A Yeah, l work part time in a funeral home 16 53 40 12 Q When did you do that? 16 53 45 13 A Oh, I think I started -- it was after I 16 53 48 14 retired Probably seven or eight years ago 16 53 55 15 Q So in the mid'90s? 16 53 58 16 A Seven or eight years ago, whatever that is 16 54 02 17 Q How many funeral homes are there or funeral 16 54 05 18 parlors are there -- what's the right phrase? 16 54 09 19 Funeral home or funeral parlor? 16 54 12 20 A Any one you choose 21 Q What was yours called? 16 54 14 16 54 15 22 A Chapel, l think Well, funeral home 16 54 17 23 Q What was the full name of it? 16 54 19 24 A Whitehurst Grim 16 54 22 25 Q Whitehurst Grim? 16 54 24 0319 1 A Yes 16 54 27 2 Q As inGrim reaper, G-r-i-m? 16 54 27 3 A Yes 16 54 31 4 Q Whatwas your job there? 16 54 31 5 A l worked very part-time to drive a hearse, 16 54 32 6 haul flowers 16 54 37 7 Q Were you--at that point you were already 16 54 39 8 getting your pensions from Carbide and KCAC, right? 16 54 42 9 A Yes 16 54 46 10 Q You just thought it might be--are you 16 54 47 11 married? 16 54 49 12 A Yes 16 54 49 13 Q Is your-was your wife still alive? 16 54 50 14 A Yes 16 54 53 15 Q She lives with you here in Monterey area? 16 54 53 16 A Yes 16 54 56 17 Q And so you thought a good way to spend your 16 54 56 18 retirement would be to work part-time at a funeral 16 54 59 19 parlor? 16 55 03 20 A A friend of mine was running it and needed 16 55 03 21 help 16 55 06 22 Q Who was your friend? 16 55 06 23 A Well, the current funeral home manager is 16 55 10 24 Robert Eddington 16 55 13 25 Q Who was your friend that you were referring 16 55 15 0320 1 to that needed help? 16 55 17 2 A l can't remember if l started after he took 16 55 18 3 over, or if he -- the other guy, his name was -- his 16 55 22 4 name was Kevin - can't think of his last name 16 55 30 5 Kevin something 16 55 35 6 Q We can leave a blank in the transcript, and 16 55 36 7 I'm sure your attorney will have you look at it, and 16 55 38 8 if you remember it fill it in 16 55 40 10 11 Q So I guess too many people were dying in 16 55 42 12 King City, so Kevin needed help'' 16 55 45 13 A l think that's rather a crude way to put 16 55 48 14 it, but he needed help, yes 16 55 51 15 Q Okay Were there other funeral parlors in 16 55 53 16 King City' 16 55 57 17 A No, only one 16 55 57 18 Q So anybody that died in King City would end 16 55 58 19 up at that funeral parlor' 16 56 01 20 A No, no, they could go wherever they choose 16 56 03 21 Q Well, if the body was going to stay in King 16 56 06 22 City to be buried or cremated, it would go to that 16 56 09 23 funeral parlor' 16 56 12 24 A Not necessarily 16 56 13 25 Q Where else might it go' 16 56 14 0321 1 A The body or funeral' 16 56 16 2 Q Body 16 56 18 3 A It could go to any funeral home in - well, 16 56 19 4 Salinas, a lot of people use Salinas mortuaries 16 56 22 5 Q Okay Well, let's talk about the gentleman 16 56 26 6 who had the death certificate that had asbestosis on 16 56 28 7 it originally Did he go to the Grim - forgot the 16 56 32 8 first name 16 56 37 9 A Whitehurst 16 56 37 10 Q - Whitehurst funeral home after he died' 16 56 38 11 A Yes, l believe he did 16 56 41 12 Q And of course while you worked there he's 16 56 42 13 probably not the only person you saw from the plant 16 56 46 14 that came through the funeral home, was he' 16 56 49 15 A No, there have been a few others 16 56 51 16 Q So generally speaking, I know it could 16 56 53 17 vary, how soon after one of these folks has passed 16 56 56 18 away would they show up at the funeral home' 16 57 00 19 A Usually they're picked up on the same day 16 57 03 20 Sometimes they're taken to the Coroner's office 21 and -- in Salinas, and sometimes they're taken 16 57 05 16 57 09 22 directly to a funeral home 16 57 12 23 Q So- 16 57 14 24 A But we don't do any embalming in the King 16 57 15 25 City office So they go--they would go to the 16 57 18 0322 1 company's branch in Salinas 16 57 21 2 Q Any cremating be done there? 16 57 23 3 A No 16 57 25 4 Q That would be done in Salinas also'' 16 57 25 5 A No, it's done in Atascadero or someplace up 16 57 28 6 near Santa Cruz 16 57 36 7 Q Okay Now, when - so sometimes these 16 57 37 8 bodies would come to the funeral parlor or funeral 16 57 42 9 home before they even had the autopsies done, 16 57 45 10 correct' 16 57 48 11 A Normally, yes 16 57 49 12 Q And then they'd go on to the Coroner, 16 57 50 13 right' 16 57 52 14 A Urn- 16 57 53 15 Q If an autopsy was going to be performed' 16 57 54 16 A Yeah, and l think sometimes they go to the 16 57 56 17 Coroner directly I don't know what the policy is 16 57 59 18 l don't do pick-ups of dead bodies 16 58 02 19 Q Okay You're just driving the hearse at 16 58 04 20 the funerals' 16 58 07 21 A Yes 16 58 08 22 Q Okay Now- 16 58 09 23 A I have done a couple pick-ups, but I - 16 58 09 24 it's not my bag 16 58 12 25 Q Now. sometimes when those bodies would 16 58 13 0323 1 arrive at the funeral home would the death 16 58 16 2 certificates accompany the bodies' 16 58 19 3 A I don't think so 16 58 21 4 Q Do you think maybe you could have got the 16 58 23 5 death certificate while you were working at the 16 58 25 6 funeral home' 16 58 27 7 A That's possible 16 58 27 8 Q Maybe you could have seen other death 16 58 29 9 certificates while you worked at the funeral home' 16 58 31 10 A Yes 16 58 34 11 Q So possibly, not saying it happened, but 16 58 34 12 one possible scenario is that there's a former 16 58 39 13 employee of the King City mine who dies, shows up at 16 58 42 14 the Grim funeral home with a death certificate 16 58 46 15 before he has an autopsy, and you might see that, 16 58 49 16 right' 16 58 52 17 A That's possible, yes 16 58 53 18 Q And at this time you're the mayor of the 16 58 54 19 town, right' 16 58 56 20 A I don't know whether I was at that time or 16 58 57 21 not I am now, yes 16 59 01 22 Q Well, you tell me You've been the mayor 16 59 02 23 for 11 or 12 years, and you told me you retired at 16 59 04 24 1993 l agree I'm not good at math, but that would 16 59 08 25 make you the mayor after you retired, wouldn't it' 16 59 12 0324 1 A Yes 16 59 14 2 Q In fact, you were probably the mayor 16 59 14 3 sometime before you retired'' 16 59 17 4 A Well, 11 years from today is'92 Yeah,I 16 59 18 5 would have probably been mayor maybe for one year 16 59 22 6 before I retired 16 59 25 7 Q Just to be really safe and sure, have -- 16 59 26 8 have you ever had any lung tissue samples taken from 16 59 29 9 any of the workers who died and were sent to 16 59 32 10 Carbide's medical department for testing' 16 59 34 11 A Not that I know of 16 59 36 12 Q Anywhere other than to Carbide' 16 59 41 13 A Not that--well, I dont know about that, 16 59 43 14 no 16 5945 15 Q What do you mean, you don't know about 16 59 45 16 that' 16 59 47 17 A I wouldn't--it's not anything I would do 16 59 47 18 Q Well, you might not do it I don't--not 16 59 53 19 supposing you're the one who cut out body parts, but 16 59 55 20 did you ever ask anybody to do that' 17 00 00 21 A You mean since l retired' 17 00 01 22 Q At any time 17 00 02 23 A l don't recall No, l never asked anybody 17 00 03 24 to cut out anybody's body parts 17 00 06 25 Q So it's a possibility that you asked for 17 00 09 0325 1 that before you retired' 17 00 1 1 2 A I don't- 17 00 12 3 Q Excuse me You're interrupting - 17 00 12 4 A I don't know can how it works 17 00 14 5 Q I don't know why you made that distinction, 17 00 16 6 whether it was before or after you retired 17 00 19 7 A You asked me after l retired After l 17 00 23 8 retired l wouldn't have been involved with that 17 00 25 9 Q Well, but you would be at the funeral and 17 00 27 10 seeing death certificates 17 00 30 11 A What-l don't know what that has to do 17 00 31 12 with collecting tissue samples 17 00 33 13 Q Were you a pall bearer for Mr Whitlock' 17 00 36 14 A NO 17 00 38 15 Q For Mr Kronkhyte' 17 00 39 16 A No I don't think so 17 00 40 17 Q Were you a pall bearer for any of your 17 00 42 18 friends from the plant who died' 17 00 45 19 A l don't recall that l have or was 17 00 47 20 Q Did you go to Mr Whitlock or 17 00 52 21 Mr Kronkhyte's homes after they died to pay your 17 00 56 22 respects to the families' 170100 23 A I've seen Mr Whitlock's wife on occasion, 170101 24 but l have -- it don't remember going to her home 17 01 05 25 Q Did you attend both of their funerals' 170108 0326 1 A As far as l can recall l did, yes 17 0111 2 Q Are you aware of when you--of any folks 17 0117 3 who died of lung cancer, regardless of whether they 17 01 20 4 worked at the mill or not' 17 0123 5 A Anybody in King City' 17 0126 6 Q Yeah 17 0128 7 A Or Monterey County? 170128 8 Q Yeah 17 0130 9 A Who died of lung cancer? 17 0130 10 Q Yeah 17 0132 11 A Well, l see -- read obituaries occasionally 17 01 33 12 and sometimes it says what they die of 17 01 36 13 Q Well, did you ever see death certificates 17 01 38 14 of other folks who died of lung cancer? 17 01 40 15 A Not that l recall 17 0142 16 Q Did you ever see any death certificates 17 01 43 17 other than one we talked about that had asbestosis 17 01 46 18 in it, regardless of whether the person worked at 17 01 49 19 King City mine or mill or not? 17 01 52 20 A l said I've seen a few, yes 17 0154 21 Q Did you ever tell the family of your friend 17 02 07 22 who died that originally had asbestosis on his death 17 02 1 1 23 certificate that you had made some inquiries 17 02 15 24 regarding the death certificate and that you thought 17 02 17 25 it was inaccurate? 17 02 20 0327 1 A l don't recall that,no 17 02 22 2 Q Did you ever- 17 02 28 3 A l shouldn't say no I just don't recall 17 02 28 that 17 02 31 Q Do you ever remember having any 17 02 31 communications with other funeral parlors in the 17 02 33 area, even the ones in Salinas, regarding wanting to 17 02 36 be advised if folks who worked at the King City mine 17 02 39 9 died and were sent there? 17 02 42 10 A No 17 02 44 11 Q Sir, l may be done l want to take just a 17 02 49 12 quick break and visit with Doctor Egilman and make 17 02 51 13 sure And l may have a question or two, but I'm 17 02 54 14 about done with you Okay? 17 02 57 15 A All right 17 02 58 16 THE VIDEOGRAPHER Going off the record 17 02 59 17 5 03 p m 17 03 01 18 (Short break) 17 09 22 19 THE VIDEOGRAPHER We're going back on the 17 09 22 20 record 5 09 p m 17 09 29 21 BY MR EGDORF Q Mr Myers, did the 17 09 32 22 folks that you talked about at the funeral parlor 17 09 33 23 that you were helping part-time, you mentioned two 17 09 37 24 names and you couldn't remember the last name l 17 09 39 25 don't remember the names Tney're in the record 17 09 41 0328 1 A Yes 17 09 43 2 Q Are they still alive, those two guys? The 17 09 43 3 Whitlock Grim - not Whitlock 17 09 47 4 A Whitehurst 17 09 51 5 Q I'm sorry The Whitehurst Grim funeral 17 09 52 6 parlor still open and operating? 17 09 55 7 A Yes 17 09 57 8 Q Still work there part-time? 17 09 58 9 A Yes, l was supposed to--asked to work 17 09 59 10 today 17 10 01 11 Q What's the address? 17 10 01 12 A You were more important 17 10 03 13 Q Thank you What's the address? 17 10 05 14 A It's on Bassett Street l don't know the 17 10 06 15 number 17 10 09 16 Q In King City proper or somewhere else'' 17 10 10 17 A Yes, in King City 17 10 12 18 Q To the best of your knowledge, have there 17 10 15 19 ever been any studies done regarding the lungs of 17 10 17 20 men who have died that worked at the King City mill 17 10 22 21 and mine' 17 10 27 22 A Not to my knowledge 17 10 27 23 Q Certainly if any studies like that had been 17 10 28 24 conducted, that's the kind of thing you would be 17 10 32 25 made aware of. correct' 17 10 34 0329 1 A Yes, I would think so 17 10 35 2 Q Or you would expect somebody to make you 17 10 37 3 aware of it, right' 17 10 40 4 a l - again, l would think so 17 10 42 5 Q During this last seven or eight years l 17 10 57 6 think is the time frame you gave that you'd worked 17 10 59 7 part time at the funeral parlor Has there been any 17 11 03 8 time period where you were not working part time for 17 11 07 9 the funeral parlor' 17 11 10 10 A No 17 11 12 11 Q So it's been- 17 11 12 12 A But the - but it's fairly rare Imean, 171113 13 it runs in cycles Sometimes l work two or even 17 11 16 14 three times a week, and other times it's only once a 17 11 20 15 month 17 11 23 16 Q Let me ask you a question to clarify it 117 1123 17 think I know what you - you mean You work as 17 1125 18 needed You don't have a set thing where you come 17 11 28 19 in Mondays and Fridays, or something like that' 17 11 30 20 A No, no, just work when I'm called 17 1134 21 Q Generally that's when they need, for lack 17 1137 22 of a better phrase, overflow help or an extra 17 11 39 23 driver' 17 1142 24 A Yes 17 11 42 25 Q Okay Sir, I appreciate your time I 17 1143 0330 1 think I've asked you all the questions sort of 17 11 45 2 appreciate your time 17 11 50 3 You've got about 15 seconds 17 11 51 4 (Discussion off the record ) 17 11 56 5 MR EGDORF Think fast enough don't 17 11 58 6 want to make the guy sit here and wait 17 12 00 7 l promise this will be the last one 17 12 04 8 regardless of what he says 17 12 05 9 DOCTOR EGILMAN Should be appreciated 17 12 08 10 Spare me a moment 17 12 11 11 BY MR EGDORF Q If you'll just hold 17 12 13 12 on one second, Mr Myers, I'm sorry 17 12 15 13 A l can't go I'm fastened down 17 12 19 14 Q I'm sorry? 17 12 21 15 A I'm fastened down 17 12 23 16 Q Oh, I understand well, you've probably 17 12 24 17 done this enough, you don't get up with it or do 17 12 27 18 you? 17 12 29 19 A l started to a moment ago 17 12 30 20 Q I still do at some times You'd think the 17 12 31 21 technology would be such they could just put it on 17 12 36 22 the table and should be just fine Said you would 17 12 41 23 think 17 12 43 24 MR EGDORF I can't even see it Don't 171247 25 even know what it is 17 13 02 0331 1 DOCTOR EGILMAN The Grim reaper 17 13 05 2 MR EGDORF Well,fine What is it? 171306 3 DOCTOR EGILMAN This is a warning from 17 13 08 4 1959 with the Grim reaper on it He works for the 17 13 10 5 Grim thing l thought that would be a relevant-- 17 13 13 6 MR EGDORF If that makes you happy What 17 13 15 7 number are we on? 38? 17 13 17 8 (Deposition Exhibit Number 38 was 17 13 20 9 marked for identification) 17 13 20 10 DOCTOR EGILMAN Thanks 17 13 26 11 BYMR EGDORF Q Mr Myers, have you 17 13 28 12 seen Exhibit Number 38 before? 17 13 29 13 A No, I haven't 17 13 33 14 Q Mr Myers, I think I've now asked you all 171337 15 the questions that I'm going to ask you for today, 17 13 40 16 and perhaps we will see you at trial l appreciate 17 13 42 17 your patience It went a little longer than l 17 13 45 18 expected it would, but thank you for coming down 17 13 48 19 A You're entirely welcome 17 13 50 20 THE VIDEOGRAPHER This is the end of 17 13 52 21 videotape Number 3 in the videotape deposition of 17 13 54 22 John Myers We're going off the record at 5 13 p m 17 13 57 23 (Time noted 5 14pm) 17 14 04 24 25