Document gaOZe9dgrRGGbEp4xanXkwa0e

IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA IN AND FOR THE COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES --0O0-- ROBERT FRANK SMITH and MARY LOU SMITH, Plaintiffs, vs. NO. BC 396072 CHRYSLER LLC; GENERAL ELECTRIC COMPANY, et al., Defendants. / TELEPHONIC DEPOSITION OF CARLO MARTINO Taken before NICOLETTE SMITH CSR No. 11275 January 28th, 2009 $ Aiken & Welch Court Reporters C. Martino 1-28-09 39066227-0c4f-4c39-b5cc-3d98e6e1ae69 Page 2 Page 4 INDEX PAGE EXAMINATION BY MR. BOSL EXHIBITS PAGE PLAINTIFFS' 1. Notice of Taking Deposition of Union Carbide Corporation's Custodian 10 of Records 37 11 2. Notice of Taking Deposition of Union Carbide Corporation's Person Most 12 Qualified 38 13 3. Objections to Notice of Taking Deposition of Union Carbide 14 Corporation's Custodian of Records 38 15 4. Objections to Notice of Taking Deposition of Union Carbide 16 Corporation's Person Most Qualified 38 17 5. Meet-and-confer letters 39 18 6. January 12, 2009, letter regarding deposition rescheduling 40 19 20 7. Declaration of Carlo Martino 40 21 8. 1952 Square D document 43 22 9. Westinghouse documents 57 23 10. 5017 formulation 57 24 25 1 ALICE AHN, K&L Gates LLP, Four Embarcadero 2 Center, Suite 1200, San Francisco, California 94111, 3 appeared telephonically on behalf of the Defendant 4 Square D Company. 5 6 7 CRAIG WOODS, Mayer Brown, 71 South Wacker 8 Drive, Chicago, Illinois 60606, appeared telephonically 9 on behalf of the Defendant Union Carbide. 10 11 12 SUSAN GILEFSKY, McKenna, Long & Aldridge, 444 13 South Flower Street, 8th Floor, Los Angeles, California 14 90071, appeared telephonically on behalf of the 15 Defendant Union Carbide. 16 17 18 ED TOWLE, Towle, Denison, Smith & Tavera, 10866 19 Wilshire Boulevard, Suite 500, Los Angeles, California 20 90024, appeared telephonically on behalf of the 21 Defendant Parker Hannifin, successor to EIS. 22 23 24 25 Page 3 Page 5 1 TELEPHONIC DEPOSITION OF CARLO MARTINO 2 3 BE IT REMEMBERED, that pursuant to Notice and 4 on this 28th day of January 2009, commencing at the hour 5 of 11:08 a.m., at 15709 Saint Albans Place, Truckee, 6 California, before me, NICOLETTE SMITH, CSR No. 11275, a 7 Certified Court Reporter, licensed by the State of 8 California, appeared CARLO MARTINO, via telephone, 9 produced as a witness in said action, and being by me 10 first duly sworn, was thereupon examined as a witness in 11 said cause. 12 13 --oOo-- 14 15 JUSTIN BOSL, Kazan, McClain, Abrams, Lyons, 16 Greenwood & Harley, 171 Twelfth Street, Suite 300, 17 Oakland, California 94607, appeared telephonically on 18 behalf of the Plaintiffs. 19 20 21 ALBERT THUESEN, Jackson & Wallace, 55 Francisco 22 Street, 6th Floor, San Francisco, California 94133, 23 appeared telephonically on behalf of the Defendant 24 Rogers Corporation. 25 1 CARLO MARTINO, 2 sworn as a witness, 3 testified as follows: 4 EXAMINATION BY MR. BOSL: 5 Q. Good morning, sir. Or I guess it's afternoon 6 for you. Would you state your name for the record and 7 spell it, please. 8 A. Carlo, C-a-r-l-o, F. Martino, M-a-r-t-i-n-o. 9 Q. Thank you. And you and I haven't had the 10 pleasure of talking before, and since we are on the 11 phone, please let me know if at any time you can't hear 12 me or my words are cutting off, and I'll see what I can 13 do to change that. 14 A. Okay. 15 Q. I know that you've been deposed on multiple 16 occasions. So if it's okay with you, I'm going to 17 dispense with going through the basic ground rules that 18 we always talk about. Is that okay? 19 A. That's fine with me. 2 0 Q. I'll simply remind you that you are under oath, 21 and this has the full force and effect of testimony as 2 2 if you were testifying in court. Do you understand 2 3 that? 2 4 A. Yes. 2 5 Q, All right. And also, of course, at any time if___ 2 (Pages 2 to 5) Aiken & Welch Court Reporters C. Martino 1-28-09 39066227-0c4f-4c39-b5cc-3d98e6e1ae69 Page 6 Page 8 1 you need a break, by all means, let me know. I try to 2 take a break at least once an hour, but if we need 3 breaks in between then, just let me know. 4 A. I appreciate that. 5 Q. And we'll see, depending on how long we go, we 6 may need to take a short lunch break for those of us 7 here on the West Coast. But we'll deal with that when 8 we get there. 9 Sir, if you would state, please, your current 10 address for the record. 11 A. 125 River Road, Branchburg, 12 B-r-a-n-c-h-b-u-r-g, New Jersey, 08876-3621. 13 Q. Sir, are you currently employed by Union 14 Carbide? 15 A. No, I'm not. 16 Q. Do you receive a pension from Union Carbide? 17 A. Yes, I do. 18 Q. And do you own any stock in Union Carbide? 19 A. Yes, I do. 20 Q. Do you know how many shares, approximately? 21 A. Right now, about ten thousand. 22 Q. And do you receive any health insurance through 23 Union Carbide? 24 A. They subsidize part of it. 25 Q. And finally, are you being compensated for your 1 morning? 2 A. Yes. 3 Q. Okay. 4 MS. GILEFSKY: And Justin, just so the record 5 is clear. This is Susan Gilefsky. At about 8:30 6 Pacific time this morning, I received two e-mails from 7 Mr. Bosl's paralegal, Cathy Boggs, which had 8 approximately ten pages, total, of attachments. Those 9 are the documents that Mr. Martino is speaking of. 10 I don't know -1 can't tell from looking at 11 them exactly where they came from or exactly what they 12 are and whether or not he's seen them. But I'm sure we 13 can talk about that at the time you start discussing 14 those documents. 15 MR. BOSL: Sure. Thank you. And at some point 16 I will specifically identify them, and we'll attach 17 those to the record when we get there. 18 BY MR. BOSL: 19 Q. All right. And other than those documents, 20 sir, have you reviewed any other documents? 21 A. We requested the formulation sheet for 5017 and 22 just received it about ten minutes ago and went over 23 that document. 24 Q. Okay. Where did you receive that from? 25 A. Chicago. The Mayer Brown office. Page 7 Page 9 1 testimony today? 2 A. Yes. 3 Q. In what form? 4 A. An hourly rate. Two hundred dollars an hour. 5 MR. WOODS: And let me object to the question 6 and clarify that Mr. Martino is being compensated for 7 his time in connection with his work on asbestos cases 8 for Union Carbide, and that includes his time right now. 9 BY MR. BOSL: 10 Q. Mr. Martino, how have you prepared for today's 11 deposition? 12 A. I went over the depositions of the plaintiffs 13 and read those sections which pertain to Bakelite. And 14 I also read the first section, which was the work 15 history. 16 Q. Okay. Did you choose those portions or 17 somebody else? 18 A. No, I did. 19 Q. Okay. 20 A. Also, we went over the notice of deposition. 21 Q. Okay. And have you reviewed any other 22 documents? 23 A. We reviewed just this past hour the documents 24 that I assume came from you. 25 Q. Okay. The ones that I e-mailed to counsel this 1 Q. Any other documents? 2 A. No, this is it. 3 Q. Did you speak with anyone other than your 4 lawyers, prior to the deposition, about this deposition 5 or the subject matter of this case? 6 A No, I did not. 7 Q. Okay. And how long did you meet with your 8 counsel this morning? 9 A. We had lunch together. About an hour and a 10 half. 11 Q. Okay. Have you spent any other time with your 12 counsel, discussing this case? 13 A. We met yesterday to go over the notice of 14 deposition, and 15 MR. WOODS: Let me just, for the record, for 16 Mr. Martino's benefit. You're fine to answer if you 17 spent any more time, but the substance of the 18 conversation is privileged. So you should stay away 19 from the substance of the conversation. You can answer 20 whether you had conversations and when they were and how 21 long they were. 22 MR. BOSL: Correct. That's all I'm asking 23 about. 24 THE WITNESS: It was about an hour and a half 25 yesterday also. 3 (Pages 6 to 9) Aiken & Welch Court Reporters C. Martino 1-28-09 39066227-0c4f-4c39-b5cc-3d98e6e1 ae69 Page 10 Page 12 1 BY MR. BOSL: 2 Q. Okay. When was the first time that you were 3 made aware that you would be giving a deposition in this 4 case? 5 A. It was a couple of weeks ago I was called 6 for - about three weeks ago I was called for available 7 dates. 8 Q. And sir, let me ask you this. Attached to 9 Union Carbide's MSJ in this case, there's a declaration 10 that you gave in January of 2004 in a case where, as far 11 as I can tell, the plaintiffs name was Calvin Jackson. 12 Have you reviewed that declaration prior to this 13 deposition? 14 A. Jackson? Was this among the depositions I was 15 sent? 16 Q. No. It was a declaration Union Carbide 17 attached to one of its motions in the case. It doesn't 18 actually have a caption, but in it you make reference to 19 a Calvin Jackson. 20 A. I don't recall seeing anything like that. 21 Q. Okay. 22 MS. GILEFSKY: And Justin, just for the record. 23 I'll represent to you that that was a declaration made 24 in another case. You are correct. 25 MR. BOSL: No, I understand that. I was simply 1 to what the part looked like that he was drilling or why 2 he was drilling it. That's what I got out of it. 3 Q. Okay. Is it your understanding that there were 4 types of Bakelite used in conjunction with electrical 5 panels during that time period? 6 MR. WOODS: Objection to the form. Vague and 7 ambiguous. 8 BY MR. BOSL: 9 Q. You can answer, sir. 10 A. What it specifically referred to was not clear 11 to me from the deposition. I am familiar with the word 12 "Bakelite," and that is generally used to describe many 13 of our - of the products made by Union Carbide. Not 14 only the phenolics but also a lot of the thermal 15 plastics as well. It's a trade name. 16 Q. I want to ask you, because it makes some 17 reference to this in the declaration that was attached 18 to Union Carbide's motion. My understanding, am I 19 right, that in sometime on - in or about 1952, Union 20 Carbide sold or gave up the patent for many of its 21 phenolic molding materials? 22 A. 1952? 23 Q. Yes. Am I correct? 24 A. I think what you're referring to is the period 25 when we had an explosion at the plant. Page 11 Page 13 1 wondering whether or not he's reviewed that prior to the 2 deposition. 3 MR. WOODS: Okay. And I'm not sure Carlo -- it 4 doesn't look like he understands what you're asking. 5 Just to clarify, and correct me if I'm wrong, 6 this is an affidavit that you signed, Carlo, in another 7 case. 8 THE WITNESS: Okay. 9 MR. WOODS: In a case possibly involving 10 someone named Jackson that was filed previously. That 11 affidavit was apparently attached to Union Carbide's 12 summary judgment motion in this case. 13 BY MR. BOSL: 14 Q. Am I correct, sir, you haven't reviewed that 15 prior to the deposition? 16 A. No, I have not. 17 Q. Okay. All right. And I may have a couple of 18 questions about that, but we'll get there. 19 All right. You testified that you did review 20 Mr. Smith's deposition. Can you relate for me what your 21 understanding of his work with any kind of Bakelite was. 22 A. From what I read in the deposition, he claims 23 that he drilled what he called Bakelite when he worked 24 for Southern General Electric Company, I believe it was, 25 from mid-1963 to the end of 1965. He was not clear as 1 Q. Right. 2 A. During that period of time, we had to give our 3 formulations to some of our competitors so that our 4 customers would continue to be supplied while we were 5 rebuilding our plant. I don't think there were any 6 patents involved at that point. 7 Q. I see. During the 1952 to 1966 time period, or 8 prior to 1966 - and let me strike that for a moment. 9 Most of my questions are going to be limited to 10 the prior-to-1966 period, since, as you point out, 11 Mr. Smith stopped working at Southern California Edison 12 in '65. So if I fail to specify that, that's the time 13 period I'm talking about. If I try and talk about some 14 other time period, I'll make sure to specify that. 15 A. Okay. 16 Q. But during the 1952 to 1966 time period, 17 approximately what percent of the market for phenolic 18 molded compounds did Union Carbide have? 19 A. Was that '62 to '66? 20 Q. '52. 21 A. Oh, '52? 22 MR. WOODS: I'm going to object to the question 23 as being vague and ambiguous. 24 MS. GILEFSKY: Also lacks foundation, calls for 25 speculation. 4 (Pages 10 to 13) Aiken & Welch Court Reporters C. Martino 1-28-09 39066227-0c4f-4c39-b5cc-3d98e6e1ae69 Page 14 Page 16 1 THE WITNESS: May I answer that? 1 Carbide lawyer or the other should take lead. And the 2 MR. WOODS: Yes. 2 other one I'm happy to allow to monitor. But I would 3 THE WITNESS: Right after the explosion, I 3 request that whichever one is not doing the objecting 4 think our share dropped to about low 30s, and then it 4 should be silent for the purposes of the deposition. I 5 continued to drop through the '60s. By '66 we were 5 don't think it's proper to be doubling up. ; 6 probably under 30 percent, somewhere in the 25 to 30 6 BY MR. BOSL: 7 percent range. 7 Q. Anyway - all right. Mr. Martino, were there 8 BY MR. BOSL: 8 internal documents within Union Carbide reflecting what 9 Q. And what is the basis of your understanding of 9 the total sales were for the year? 10 the percentage market that Union Carbide had at that 10 MR. WOODS: Objection as to form, vague as to 11 time period? 11 time. 12 A. What was my understanding? 12 THE WITNESS: There were at the time I was ; 13 Q. What is that based on? Have you -- 13 working there. I'm trying to recall. I was able to : 14 A. That was based on our share of the market. Our 14 reconstruct - some of those figures, I quoted to you 15 sales versus the total sales in the industry of those 15 from some of the records I was able to find in the 16 types of products. 16 repository. But they weren't available for every year. : 17 Q. Have you seen any documents reflecting that 17 It was probably every four or five years. ? 18 information? 18 BY MR. BOSL: 19 A. No - yes. Modem Plastics published in 19 Q. When did you do this, I'll call it 20 January every year what the total sales for the industry 20 reconstruction, of the numbers? 21 were. And by taking what our sales were, we were able 21 A. About 2002, when I first started to get ; 22 to determine the percentage of the market that we had. 22 involved in testifying for Union Carbide. ' 23 Q. I see. 23 BY MR. BOSL: 24 Would you have knowledge of the percentage of 24 Q. And you found the documents in the repository? 1 25 other manufacturers? 25 A. There. And also, the Modem Plastics Page 15 Page 17 1 A. Only in general. What was published in the 1 references, I had to go to the library to get those, at 2 Modem Plastics Encyclopedia. I'm tiying to think 2 Rutgers' library. 3 exactly where. Usually Modem Plastics Encyclopedia 3 Q. Why were you reworking those figures? 4 would have some references to that. 4 MR. WOODS: And let me caution the witness that 5 Q. Would Modem Plastics indicate what Union 5 you shouldn't reveal any conversations that you had with 6 Carbide sales were? 6 attorneys in connection with responding to that answer. 7 A. Not in terms of sales, no. They didn't get - 7 So if you can answer why you were doing it apart from a 8 they wouldn't publish the percentages unless -- one year 8 conversation or direction from an attorney, then you can 9 they published capacity figures. I don't recall any 9 answer it. 10 other years that they did. 10 THE WITNESS: I was doing that because ; 11 Q. Do you recall which year that was? 11 questions were arising, just like you're asking, about 12 A. I believe it was in the seventies. 12 our shares. 13 Q. All right. So let me make sure I understand 13 BY MR. BOSL: 14 this. Modem Plastics would publish in January what the 14 Q. Where -- did you reduce the reconstruction 15 total sales of molded materials were for the year? 15 figures, that you were doing, into some sort of a 16 A. Yes. 16 document? 17 Q. And then Union Carbide would take its own 17 A. No, I didn't. I passed on that information to 18 internal numbers and compare that to the total? 18 Mayer Brown. 19 A. Yes. 19 Q. What happened to the documents that you found 20 Q. Okay. 20 from the repository, that you base those numbers on? 21 MS. GILEFSKY: I just want to remind the 21 A. They are still there. 22 witness, for the record, Justin, that your questions 22 Q. Were they put back into the repository, or are 23 pertain to prior to 1966. 23 they still segregated in some form? 24 MR. BOSL: That's correct. Although I need to 24 MR. WOODS: To the extent that you know. 25 repeat a request, which is, simply, that one Union l..2..5.. . THE WITNESS: They were put back. 5 (Pages 14 to 17) Aiken & Welch Court Reporters C. Martino 1-28-09 39066227-0c4f-4c39-b5cc-3d98e6e1 ae69 Page 18 Page 2 0 1 BY MR. BOSL: 1 THE WITNESS: I don't know what the total 2 Q. Would you be able to find those documents 2 markup was just for asbestos products. 3 again? 3 BY MR. BOSL: 4 A. I could find probably most of them, yes. It 4 Q. Okay. For the market of molding compound used 5 would take some time. 5 for electrical applications, what percentage of that 6 Q. Do you know what percentage, from the '52 to 6 market did Union Carbide have? 7 '66 time period, of the asbestos-containing phenolic 7 MR. WOODS: Objection to form, foundation, 8 molding compound market Union Carbide had? 8 calls for speculation. 9 MR. WOODS: Objection to form, vague, 9 THE WITNESS: That, I don't know. 10 overbroad, calls for speculation. 10 BY MR. BOSL: 11 THE WITNESS: In 1960,1 estimated that of our 11 Q. Do you know the percentage of the phenolic 12 total production, less than 20 percent contained 12 molding compounds for industrial electrical high-voltage 13 asbestos. That increased slowly until 1966, where it 13 applications that Union Carbide had? 14 reached about 30 - a little over 30 percent. And then 14 A. No. No. We didn't break the market - I don't 15 we peaked in 1969,1 believe, to 40 and then came back 15 have access to those figures and haven't seen them. 16 down again. 16 Q. Okay. All right. In the 1952 to 1966 time 17 MR. WOODS: And let me just clarify. The 17 period, who were Union Carbide's competitors for 18 question was -- was your question how much of Union 18 industrial electrical applications, and specifically 19 Carbide material was asbestos-containing or how much of 19 high-voltage applications, of phenolic molding 20 the total market between everybody was Union Carbide 20 compounds? 21 asbestos material? 21 MR. WOODS: Objection to form, vague, 22 MR. BOSL: It was: Of the market of 22 overbroad, foundation, calls for speculation. 23 asbestos-containing compounds, how much of that was 23 THE WITNESS: Durez was number one. Plastic 24 Union Carbide. 24 Engineering, or Plenco, was number two. General 25 MR. WOODS: I have the same objections as 25 Electric. Reichhold. And then there were some Page 19 Page 21 1 before. 1 specialty manufacturers who made molding compounds who 2 THE WITNESS: What we'd have to do is take 2 were not directly - direct competitors. 3 those figures I gave you and multiply them times what 3 BY MR. BOSL: 4 our market share was. 4 Q. Would one of those be Rogers Corp? 5 BY MR. BOSL: 5 A. Yes. Yes. 6 Q. So you believe that your market share for the 6 Q. Can you name any others? 7 total market is equivalent to the market share that 7 A. Did I mention GE in the list of competitors? 8 Union Carbide had for the asbestos-containing compounds? 8 Q. You did. Yes. Are there any others that you 9 MR. WOODS: I'm going to object to the form. 9 can name? 10 Mischaracterizes. 10 A. In molding materials, those were the main ones. 11 THE WITNESS: No. What I'm saying is, that if 11 There were a couple small ones that went out of 12 we have a 30 percent market share in 1960 and 20 percent 12 business. I don't recall their names. 13 of our production contained asbestos, then our share in 13 Q. Is Fiberite one? 14 the market would have been 20 percent of 30, or 6 14 A. No. They were a specialty manufacturer of 15 percent. 15 molding materials, and they were primarily a customer of 16 BY MR. BOSL: 16 ours. They didn't compete with us. 17 Q. Okay. All right. I understand that. I think 17 Q. Did Union Carbide, during that '52 to '66 time 18 we're talking past each other a little bit. I'm not 18 period, test its molding compounds for specific 19 asking about the total market of phenolic molding 19 applications? 20 compounds. But in this question. I'm limiting it to the 20 MR. WOODS: Objection. Vague, overbroad. 21 market of asbestos compounds. And of the asbestos 21 THE WITNESS: We would test against 22 molding compounds, how much of that market -- of that 22 specifications for certain qualifications. For example. 23 was Union Carbide? 23 military specifications or ASTM specifications. Any 24 MR. WOODS: Object to form. Vague, foundation. 24 special testing for a particular application, the 25 calls for speculation. j--2..5... customer would have to request it. But that was rare. 6 (Pages 18 to 21) Aiken & Welch Court Reporters C. Martino 1-28-09 39066227-0c4f-4c39-b5cc-3d98e6e1ae69 Page 22 Page 24 1 BY MR. BOSL: 2 Q. What kind of specifications did Union Carbide 3 test with regards to the ASTM? 4 A. They would be physical properties, like tensile 5 strength, flexural strength, and then also electrical 6 properties. Dielectric strength. In some cases, arc 7 resistance. They would be listed under ASTM 8 specifications. But I don't recall all of them. 9 Q. And did -1 guess I'll ask this both ways. 10 Did Union Carbide ever test its molding compound to 11 comply with various specifications or requirements by 12 Underwriters Laboratories? 13 A. Yes. 14 MR. WOODS: Objection. Vague, overbroad. 15 THE WITNESS: Yes, we did. 16 BY MR. BOSL: 17 Q. And I guess in the other direction, did UL ever 18 test Union Carbide molding compounds for various 19 applications? 20 MR. WOODS: Objection. Vague, overbroad, 21 foundation, calls for speculation. 22 THE WITNESS: All I recall is work -- when we 23 applied for UL certification, we would run the tests 24 ourselves. I don't recall of any time when they ran the 25 tests for us. 1 military applications or the ASTM category. I think it 2 was military applications. But those documents do exist 3 even now. And it's been a while since I've looked at 4 them. 5 Q. When you say the documents exist, you mean they 6 exist within Union Carbide's repository? 7 A. Oh, no. I think you can get them through the 8 Internet or through the government. 9 Q. Okay. Did all of Union Carbide's phenolic 10 molding compounds during that time period comply with 11 one category or another of these -- one of these three 12 bodies? 13 MR. WOODS: Objection. Vague, overbroad. 14 THE WITNESS: As I recall, most fell into one 15 of those categories. I can't say all did. Because we 16 were always developing some new products. I'd say most 17 did. 18 BY MR. BOSL: 19 Q. And so if you - well, okay. So UCC did all of 20 the testing to determine whether or not a particular 21 formulation of phenolic molding compound complied with a 22 category under either ASTM or the military specification 23 or the UL. Is that right? 24 A. Yes. 25 Q. And so for each of the specific compound Page 23 Page 2 5 1 BY MR. BOSL: 2 Q. Okay. What kind of - what categories of 3 approval did UL have? What I'm trying to get at is, 4 were the approvals that it needed to have tensile 5 strength of X, or was it that it was for a particular 6 application? What were those specifications about? 7 MR. WOODS: Objection to the form. Vague, 8 overbroad. What products are you talking about, and 9 what time period? 10 MR. BOSL: I'm sorry. This is '52 to '66 for 11 molding compounds. 12 MR. WOODS: Phenolic molding compounds. 13 THE WITNESS: There would be the ASTM 14 categories. And there are also military specifications. 15 They also had categories. And for each category, they 16 would list what physical and electrical properties had 17 to be met in order to meet those standards. 18 BY MR. BOSL: 19 Q. Can you name what kind of categories you can 20 recall, for phenolic molding compounds for '52 to '66, 21 in the ASTM? 22 A. I'd have to go - they exist. I'd have to go 23 back to the records to refresh my memory. There is the 24 MFH and the FE. FE, like, for example, would be for 25 electrical grade. I don't recall whether that was for 1 formulations, Union Carbide was aware what it was 2 approved for. Is that correct? 3 MR. WOODS: Objection to form, vague, 4 foundation, calls for speculation. 5 THE WITNESS: We knew the category. What it 6 was - the specific applications it would be used in, we 7 were not always aware of that. For example, a 8 general-purpose phenolic was used in many applications 9 and many industries. It would fit that general-purpose 10 category. But what our customers used it for 11 specifically, we didn't always know. 12 BY MR. BOSL: 13 Q. With regards to phenolic molding compounds that 14 were, I'm going to say, graded or compliant with the 15 electrical category, is it fair to say Union Carbide 16 knew that that molding compound would be used in 17 electrical application? 18 MR. WOODS: Objection to form, vague. 19 overbroad, calls for speculation, and foundation. 20 THE WITNESS: We knew it would be used for 21 electrical application. It would not be limited to 22 those applications. The customer was free to use it 23 wherever he wanted. 24 BY MR. BOSL: 25 Q. Among the asbestos-containing phenolic molding 7 (Pages 22 to 25) Aiken & Welch Court Reporters C. Martino 1-28-09 39066227-0c4f-4c39-b5cc-3d98e6e1ae69 saw Page 26 Page 28 * 1 compounds during that time period, am I correct that 2 there was a range of asbestos content among the various 3 formulations? 4 A. Yes. 5 Q. What was the purpose of the varying asbestos 6 content among the different formulations? In other 7 words, why did the asbestos content vary? 8 A. It was a matter of just to what extent -how 9 much heat resistance the customer was willing to pay 10 for. The more asbestos, the higher the cost. And many 11 applications didn't require the ultimate in heat 12 resistance. 13 Q. So it's true, though, that the more heat 14 resistance required, the more asbestos required in the 15 molding compound? 16 MR. WOODS: Objection to form, mischaracterizes 17 testimony, overbroad. 18 BY MR. BOSL: 19 Q. You can answer, sir. 2 0 A. Yeah. Generally that's true. The more 21 asbestos, the better the heat resistance and the higher 2 2 the price. 2 3 MR. WOODS: Let me just say for the record -- I 2 4 just want to make a clarification for the record. There 2 5 are certain topics that you've indicated you wanted to 1 needing a higher asbestos content in the phenolic 2 molding compound other than just heat resistance? 3 MR. WOODS: Objection to form, overbroad, 4 vague. 5 THE WITNESS: The use of any mineral would 6 increase the arc resistance. So a side benefit of using 7 the higher asbestos content gave us better arc 8 resistance as well. But phenolic resin carbonizes and 9 is not the best binder for an arc-resistant material, so 10 that if a customer wanted good arc resistance, he went 11 to a melamine compound, which had much better arc 12 resistance. 13 There are also other - many other types of 14 thermosetting resins, like the phthalates and the 15 silicones and the polyesters, which have better 16 electrical properties than the phenolics. 17 But if he wanted - if he was using a phenolic 18 and he had the asbestos in it, he did get some better 19 arc resistance as well. 2 0 BY MR. BOSL: 21 Q. And let me ask you more specifically, then. In 2 2 electrical applications, what were the reasons for using 2 3 an asbestos-containing phenolic molding compound? 2 4 MR. WOODS: Objection. Assumes facts not in I 2 5 evidence, overbroad, vague, foundation, calls for j Page 27 Page 29 S 1 talk to Carlo about, the person most knowledgeable and 2 the custodian. You're free to ask him other questions, 3 I suppose, but you haven't really touched on any of the 4 topics that he was noticed for. And I wanted to make a 5 clarification that he's only here as the person most 6 knowledgeable on those particular topics that have been 7 noted. 8 MR. BOSL: I think this is all laying a 9 foundation for the questions in the compound -- I'm 10 sorry - in the categories that we've noticed regarding 11 supply of products to the various manufacturers for 12 products that were used at Southern California Edison. 13 And so I think we're just establishing the foundation 14 that we're getting there for. 15 It also goes for topics contained in the 16 declaration of Mr. Martino that were attached to Union 17 Carbide's 18 MR. WOODS: I'm not going to instruct the 19 witness not to answer, but some of his answers may not 2 0 be on behalf of Union Carbide of the person most 21 knowledgeable. 2 2 MR. BOSL: That's an argument for another day. 2 3 BY MR. BOSL: 2 4 Q. All right, sir. Were there any other purposes 2 5 or characteristics of asbestos that might dictate________ 1 speculation. j 2 Go ahead. f 3 THE WITNESS: In electrical applications, mica J 4 is the natural fiber of choice. Asbestos is used if we 1 5 needed long durability over a long period of time at | 6 elevated temperatures. And we got that with the 7 asbestos. But for electrical properties, there are | f 8 better choices than asbestos. 9 BY MR. BOSL: | f 10 Q. Is the reason you say that -- what property of j 11 mica are you referring to that was better for 12 electrical? | J 13 A. Low loss characteristics. That's the main one. | 14 Q. In other words, it was a better conductor? j 15 MR. WOODS: Objection to form, vague. 16 THE WITNESS: Not that it was a better f J 17 conductor. It just had - I'm not that familiar with 1 18 all the electrical properties and their significance, 19 but it did have low loss characteristics for electronic j 2 0 parts. And I'd have to -- I would need time to go back | 21 and research that to give you a better answer. 2 2 BY MR. BOSL: 1 f 2 3 Q. Where would you look in order to get a better j 2 4 answer? j 2 5 A. I would see what documents we'd have on our ; 8 (Pages 26 to 29) Aiken & Welch Court Reporters C. Martino 1-28-09 39066227-0c4f-4c39-b5cc-3d98e6e1ae69 cvS#.*; Page 3 0 Page 32 | 1 mica fill materials and then get more in depth into the 1 They char. And that's one of their advantages. 2 electrical properties and what their significance were. 2 BY MR. BOSL: 3 Q. Sorry. Give me one moment. 3 Q. So maybe I should use a different word. 4 All right. Sir, what were the characteristics 4 Cellulose is not nearly as heat-resistant as asbestos. 5 of asbestos that made it useful in phenolic molding 5 Is that correct? 6 compounds? 6 A. That's correct. 7 MR. WOODS: Objection. Mischaracterizes his 7 Q. All right. For -- I'm going to use, at various 8 testimony, assumes facts not in evidence, vague, 8 times in this deposition, the term "high voltage," and I 9 overbroad. 9 know that that's a rather relative term. Different 10 You can answer. 10 people have different definitions of "high voltage." 11 MS. GILEFSKY: I'm not trying to double-team 11 I'm going to define that as anything over 600 volts. Do 12 you in any way, but we have been, I think, sort of 12 you understand? 13 generous up to this point in terms of giving you a lot 13 A. Yes. 14 of leeway to lay your foundation that you feel you need. 14 Q. From - during that 1952 to 1966 time period, 15 We're starting to veer off of the deposition notice, and 15 was there any phenolic molding compound that was 16 I would just ask you to bring it back to the depo 16 approved by either the ASTM or the UL for high-voltage 17 notice. 17 applications that did not use an asbestos filler? 18 MR. BOSL: I'm trying to get there. I'm 18 MR. WOODS: Objection to form, vague, 19 following up on some of the answers that he's given me, 19 overbroad, foundation, calls for speculation. 2 0 though. 2 0 THE WITNESS: I don't recall any category that 21 MS. GILEFSKY: I got you. And we're trying to 21 specifically stated it was for high voltage. I'd have 2 2 give you leeway so that you can make your record that 22 to go back and look at the ASTM designations and 2 3 you need to make. But at the same time, we're cognizant 2 3 military specifications in that period of time to be 2 4 of the fact that we're veering off course. 2 4 sure of that. But I don't recall it at all. 2 5 BY MR. BOSL: 2 5 BY MR. BOSL: Page 31 Page 33 1 1 Q. Sir, do you need the question read back to you? 2 A. No. 3 The asbestos was a filler of choice if we 4 needed heat resistance. It was the best for 5 high-temperature applications. That's why we had 6 difficulty replacing it. There are other fillers that 7 were better if it was in regards to electrical 8 properties. 9 Q. Is it true that asbestos was also 10 water-resistant? 11 MR. WOODS: Objection to form, foundation, 12 overbroad. 13 THE WITNESS: It and many other - if you add 14 it or any other of the mineral fillers, you reduce the 15 moisture absorption of the phenolic compound. It does 16 not have a unique ability to do that. 17 BY MR. BOSL: 18 Q. For example, cellulose was not as 19 water-resistant as a mineral. Is that correct? 20 A. Yes. 21 Q. Is it also correct that cellulose was not 22 fire-resistant? 23 MR. WOODS: Objection to form. Vague. 24 THE WITNESS: Phenolic molding compounds don't 25 bum, even if they're - contain all cellulose filler. 1 Q. Well, regardless of what the categories, then, 2 of the various bodies were, was there any phenolic 3 molding compound used during that '52 to '66 time period 4 for high-voltage applications that used a nonasbestos 5 filler? 6 MR. WOODS: Vague, overbroad, foundation, calls 7 for speculation. 8 Used by anybody? Or - it's just way 9 overbroad. 10 BY MR. BOSL: 11 Q. Go ahead, sir. 12 A. I don't know. 13 Q. Okay. Would you agree, though, that 14 asbestos-containing phenolic molding compound was used 15 in high-voltage applications during that time period? 16 MR. WOODS: Objection to form, vague, 17 overbroad, foundation, calls for speculation. 18 THE WITNESS: Exactly where our customers used 19 those products, I don't know. 20 BY MR. BOSL: 21 Q. Okay. Would Union Carbide recommend a 22 nonasbestos filler for phenolic molding compound in 23 high-voltage applications during that time period? 24 MR. WOODS: Objection to the form, incomplete 25 hypothetical, calls for speculation, overbroad. 9 (Pages 30 to 33) Aiken & Welch Court Reporters C. Martino 1-28-09 39066227-0c4f-4c39-b5cc-3d98e6e1ae69 Page 34 Page 36 1 THE WITNESS: I can't think of any time anybody 1 MR. BOSL: Yes. You're welcome to have a 2 asked us for a product that was specifically designed 2 running objection. I disagree with it, but you're 3 for high-voltage applications. The customer would just 3 welcome to have it. 4 give us a list of their -- of what they wanted in the 4 MS. GILEFSKY: Thank you. 5 product, and we would try to match those 5 BY MR. BOSL: 6 characteristics. 6 Q. Go ahead, sir. 7 But it would depend on all the requirements for 7 A. Would you repeat the question, please? 8 the application. They might not want to use a phenolic, 8 Q. Yes. 9 in the first place, for high-voltage applications. 9 Are you aware, prior to 1966, of any 10 There are better materials than phenolics for that. 10 requirements that the public utilities commission had 11 BY MR. BOSL: 11 for - of California - for molding compounds - 12 Q. Would cellulose be a good filler for 12 phenolic molding compounds used in electrical 13 high-voltage applications? 13 applications? 14 MR. WOODS: Objection to form, vague, 14 A. No, I did not. 15 overbroad, calls for speculation. 15 Q. Did Union Carbide have any dealings with the 16 BY MR. BOSL: 16 public utilities commission regarding phenolic molding 17 Q. And I'm specifically referring to that time 17 compounds during that time period? 18 period. Because I understand that there are other types 18 A. I am not aware of any contacts with them. 19 of cellulose fillers used at a later date. 19 Q. Are you familiar, during that time period, with 20 MR. WOODS: Same objections. 20 Southern California Edison having any kind of contact 21 THE WITNESS: I can't answer those questions, 21 or - with Union Carbide? I'm sorry. Just "contact 22 because I can't recall our testing specifically for the 22 with Union Carbide." 23 material's ability to withstand high voltages. We 23 A. Not that I am aware of. 24 tested for arc resistance. That's about the closest we 24 Q. Okay. Was it common for Union Carbide to have 25 can come to it. And I don't think we were using high 25 contact with utilities? Page 3 5 Page 37 1 voltages to do that either. 1 A. No. 2 BY MR. BOSL: 2 Q. Are you aware of any requirements that Southern 3 Q. What was the highest voltage Union Carbide used 3 California Edison had for molding compounds used in 4 for testing its phenolic molding compounds during that 4 electrical applications in California prior to '66? 5 period? 5 A. No, I'm not. 6 A. I don't recall. I'd have to go back to the 6 MR. BOSL: We've been going pretty close to an 7 methods. 7 hour. Do you want to take a short break here? 8 Q. What is the highest voltage that you can 8 THE WITNESS: Yes. I could use one. Thank 9 recall? 9 you. 10 MR. WOODS: Asked and answered. Objection. 10 MR. BOSL: We'll take a five-minute break, 11 THE WITNESS: I don't remember. I'd have to 11 then. 12 look at the methods. It would be the ASTM method for 12 (The parties agreed to go off the record.) 13 arc resistance, so it might be described there. 13 MR. BOSL: Back on the record. 14 BY MR. BOSL: 14 Before we go any further, let me take care of 15 Q. Prior to 1966, are you familiar with any 15 some housekeeping. Attached as Exhibit No. 1 is 16 requirements that the public utility commission of 16 Plaintiffs' September 19th - although I think it was 17 California had for phenolic molding compounds and 17 served September 22nd - 2008 Notice of Taking 18 products used in California? 18 Deposition of Defendant Union Carbide Corporation's 19 MS. GILEFSKY: Objection. Outside the scope of 19 Custodian of Records. 20 notice. I'm sorry. I have to pipe up. We've been 20 (Plaintiffs' Exhibit No. 1 was marked for 21 going almost an hour, and we haven't touched upon any of 21 Identification.) 22 those categories. Would you stipulate to a running 22 MR. BOSL: Exhibit No. 2 will be of the same 23 objection that these sets of questions are outside the 23 date, Plaintiffs' Notice of Taking Deposition of 24 scope of the notice so that I don't have to keep 24 Defendant Union Carbide Corporation's Person Most 25 interrupting you and Mr. Woods doesn't have to either? 25 Qualified. 10 (Pages 34 to 37) Aiken & Welch Court Reporters C. Martino 1-28-09 39066227-0c4f-4c39-b5cc-3d98e6e1ae69 ...... ........ ............. ........... '""i Page 38 Page 40 1 (Plaintiffs' Exhibit No. 2 was marked for 1 plaintiffs, alerting them that the deposition of Union 2 Identification.) 2 Carbide's custodian of records and person most 3 MR. BOSL: We can make Nos. 3 and 4 defendant 3 knowledgeable was rescheduled for January 28th at 11 4 Union Carbide's objections to the same -- sorry. 4 a.m. Pacific time and providing call-in information. 5 Number 3 will be Union Carbide's objections to the 5 (Plaintiffs' Exhibit No. 6 was marked for 6 custodian of records' deposition. 6 Identification.) 7 (Plaintiffs' Exhibit No. 3 was marked for 7 MR. BOSL: Number 6 will be the declaration of 8 Identification.) 8 Carlo Martino, dated, it looks like, the 20th of January 9 MR. BOSL: And No. 4 will be Union Carbide's 9 2004, which we've already made some reference to. 10 objections to the person most knowledgeable's 10 MR. WOODS: You mean Exhibit 7? 11 deposition. 11 MS. GILEFSKY: Yeah. 12 (Plaintiffs' Exhibit No. 4 was marked for 12 MR. BOSL: I'm sorry. Exhibit No. 7. You're 13 Identification.) 13 right. I wrote two 6s there. 14 MS. GILEFSKY: Right. And those are both dated 14 (Plaintiffs' Exhibit No. 7 was marked for 15 October 15th. 15 Identification.) 16 MR. BOSL: Thank you. 16 MS. GILEFSKY: And, just to be clear, that was 17 MS. GILEFSKY: Sure. 17 the one that we talked about that was attached to Union 18 Justin, if it's okay with you, I'd like to 18 Carbide's motion for summary judgment? 19 attach collectively as next in order our meet-and-confer 19 MR. BOSL: Right. 20 letters regarding the scope of the deposition as well. 20 MS. GILEFSKY: Thank you. 21 And primarily, I'd like the January 9th letter from 21 MR. WOODS: Are you going to have questions 22 McKenna Long to your attention; your January 22nd letter 22 specifically about that declaration, Justin? 23 to Melissa Berberoglu - B-e-r-b-e-r-o-g-l-u is the last 23 MR. BOSL: I may have one or two when we get 24 name - her attention; and then our January 27th letter 24 down to the end, but we'll see. 25 to your attention, collectively. 25 MR. WOODS: I don't know if we have a copy of Page 3 9 Page 41 1 (Exhibit No. 5 was marked for 2 Identification.) 3 MR. WOODS: Do you have all those, or who is 4 going to send those to the court reporter? Do we need 5 to send those? 6 MS. GILEFSKY: I can take care of it or Justin 7 can. We can talk about that off the record. 8 MR. BOSL: One of us can. And I'll simply 9 state for the record, my lack of response to the 10 January 27th letter should not be construed as 11 acceptance of necessarily all of the provisions or 12 arguments that Union Carbide raises. It's simply a 13 matter of it being a day before the deposition and not 14 having a chance to respond. I'll stand by my letter of 15 the 22nd, but I don't know that it will matter here. 16 MS. GILEFSKY: Right. And just to respond 17 formally on the record, although hopefully it won't 18 matter, we obviously stand by our letter of the 27th, 19 meaning the scope of the deposition. Having said that. 20 however, we've already given quite a bit of leeway in 21 terms of broadening it out a little bit in an effort to 22 meet and confer and in an effort to go forward in good 23 faith with this deposition. 24 MR. BOSL: That was No. 5, right? So No. 6 25 will be a January 12, 2009, fax to all parties, from 1 that here. 2 MR. BOSL: Okay. I think we've actually 3 already covered a fair amount of it. I may have a 4 couple more follow-up questions. But rather than 5 specifically directing him to specific paragraphs of the 6 declaration. I've been asking it generally. 7 MR. WOODS: Okay. 8 MR. BOSL: Because he had not reviewed the 9 declaration, and I presumed he did not have a copy there 10 with him. 11 BY MR. BOSL: 12 Q. All right, sir. I want to move on from some of 13 the generalities, although I may have follow-up 14 questions in a little while about them, and I want to 15 ask you specifically what - to what extent you recall 16 there being a relationship between Union Carbide and 17 Square D prior to 1996. 18 MR. WOODS: Excuse me. You mean prior to 1996 19 or 1966? 20 MR. BOSL: I'm sorry. 1966. 21 MR. WOODS: I'll object to the form as being 22 vague and overbroad. 23 Go ahead. 24 THE WITNESS: And what was the question again? 25 BY MR. BOSL: 11 (Pages 38 to 41) Aiken & Welch Court Reporters C. Martino 1-28-09 39066227-0c4f-4c39-b5cc-3d98e6e1ae69 Page 42 Page 44 1 Q. To what extent was there of any kind of a 2 relationship between Union Carbide and Square D in terms 3 of Square D purchasing Union Carbide's products? 4 MR. WOODS: Same objections. 5 THE WITNESS: Well, I was aware that they were 6 a customer of ours. I don't know during that period of 7 time what they bought and when they bought it or what 8 location - Square D location bought our product. The 9 sales scrolls only go back to 1966. 10 BY MR. BOSL: 11 Q. Are you familiar, though, with Square D 12 purchasing from Union Carbide prior to '66? 13 MR. WOODS: Objection. Asked and answered and 14 foundation. 15 Go ahead. 16 THE WITNESS: I've seen references to Square D, 17 but no - nothing that shows actual sales. So there may 18 have been sales, but I don't know what they were. 19 BY MR. BOSL: 20 Q. What references do you recall seeing? 21 A. I think it was in one of the documents you 22 said. Let's see. 23 I think there was those prior depositions I may 24 have obtained and in some of the documents I may have 25 seen maybe.} But I don't -- at this stage, can't pick 1 THE WITNESS: I don't know what that - what 2 nomenclature is used on these documents. 3 BY MR. BOSL: 4 Q. And on the lower right-hand comer, is that 5 a - here it is. I apologize. I've been searching 6 frantically on my desk where I put this document and 7 just found it. 8 On the lower right-hand comer, it says 9 "Bakelite, trade-mark, phenolic plastics, Bakelite 10 Company, a division of Union Carbide and Carbon 11 Corporation." Is that a trademark you're familiar with? 12 A. Yes. 13 Q. Is that, in fact, the Union Carbide Bakelite 14 trademark? 15 A. Yes. 16 Q. Have you seen Bakelite advertisements from the 17 1950s era prior to this? 18 A. Oh, yes. 19 Q. Okay. 20 MR. WOODS: And you're talking about molding 21 compound or just -- I mean, because Union Carbide sold a 22 lot of products they called Bakelite. 23 MR. BOSL: I understand that. And for the 24 moment, I'm keeping that very general. 25 MR. WOODS: So any product that was sold under Page 43 Page 45 1 it out and be more specific about it. The best way 2 would be to check the repository. That's what I'd do. 3 Q. And specifically, you mentioned one of the 4 documents that we sent. 5 MR. BOSL: I'm going to attach as No. 8 6 THE WITNESS: Here it is. You sent a 1952 7 document that references Square D. 8 (Plaintiffs' Exhibit No. 8 was marked for 9 Identification.) 10 BY MR. BOSL: 11 Q. And would you agree that appears to be -- that 12 is a Bakelite advertisement? 13 A. Yes, it is. 14 MS. GILEFSKY: And again just so the record is 15 clear, this is one of the documents that I received from 16 Plaintiffs' counsel this morning. I cannot attest as to 17 where it came from or the authenticity or integrity of 18 the document itself. 19 BY MR. BOSL: 20 Q. Can you look at the Bates number on the bottom 21 of that document and read it, please. 22 A. Do you want me to read it? UCASB00407069. 23 Q. Would you agree that the Bates stamp, at the 24 beginning, "UC," is a Union Carbide Bates stamp? 25 MR. WOODS: If you know. 1 a trade name "Bakelite" as you see in that ad. 2 THE WITNESS: Oh, yes. Many. 3 BY MR. BOSL: 4 Q. From the 1950s era? 5 A. Fifties, sixties. 6 Q. Okay. And does this document here, 7 Exhibit 8 -- is this also a Bakelite ad? 8 A. Yes. 9 Q. Okay. All right. And you would agree with me 10 that this document indicates that Square D was a 11 customer of Bakelite? 12 MR. WOODS: Objection. Calls for speculation, 13 foundation. 14 THE WITNESS: It implies that, yes. 15 BY MR. BOSL: 16 Q. Okay. Let me ask you. On this document, it 17 refers to Bakelite general-purpose phenolic BM-13 - I 18 think that's 838. Is that what it looks like to you? 19 A. Yes. 20 Q. Okay. What kind of material is BM-13838? 21 A. Well, the description here says general-purpose 22 phenolic. And during that period of time, that would 23 have been a wood flour fill, no asbestos. We've asked 24 Sue Wasserman at Mayer Brown to see if she can find the 25 formulation for that product to verify that it was wood 12 (Pages 42 to 45) Aiken & Welch Court Reporters C. Martino 1-28-09 39066227-0c4f-4c39-b5cc-3d98e6e1ae69 Page 46 Page 48 1 flour fill. 2 MR. BOSL: And if found, I would request a copy 3 of that. 4 BY MR. BOSL: 5 Q. Sir, are you familiar with the numerical and -- 6 well, the alphanumerical designations of the various 7 Bakelite products? 8 A. With the designation we were using in the 9 sixties, yes. These designations on this '52 document 10 is the old system. And that, I - other than "B" as 11 being "phenolic" and "M" being "molding," the rest, I'm 12 not familiar with the system. 13 Q. Okay. 14 A. That was changed in the - somewhere in the 15 after 1955, to a new system. 16 Q. Okay. I'm sorry. Under the old system, you 17 said that "B" stands for "phenolic." And what did you 18 say "M" stands for? 19 A. Molding. And that also applies to the new 20 system as well. 21 Q. All right. I apologize. 22 So would that new system, then, have been in 23 place in 1960? 24 A. Yes, it would have been. 25 Q. What was the designation "BMM" under the new 1 compounds are you familiar with Square D purchasing from 2 Union Carbide? 3 A. Square D? 4 Q. Yes. 5 MR. WOODS: And let me object on the grounds 6 overbroad and vague as to time. 7 THE WITNESS: I'm most familiar with the 8 products they were buying in the latter part of the 9 sixties, from us at the Lexington location. Prior to 10 '66,1 don't know what they bought specifically. 11 According to the '52 document, they were buying this 12 BM-13838. Whether they were buying any others, I don't 13 know. 14 BY MR. BOSL: 15 Q. Let me ask you, sir, how is it that you know 16 that BM-13838 was a wood fill - or wood flour filler? 17 A. Because they called - it's called 18 general-purpose phenolic. And in the fifties, when we 19 called a product "general-purpose," it contained only 20 wood flour. But I think that should be verified. 21 That's why we asked Sue to get us the formulation if she 22 can find it. 23 Q. What would the designation - or what would the 24 description have been had the phenolic been 25 asbestos-containing, assuming that you're correct? Page 47 Page 49 1 system? 2 A. "B" would be "phenolic"; "M," "molding"; M, in 3 the third letter, it's - I think it refers to the 4 granulation. Again, I want to check the records to be 5 sure, but I think it means a more fine-free granulation. 6 Fine-free, or less dust. But I'd have to check back 7 into the records to be sure of that, if it's important. 8 Q. Okay. Was there a designation for an asbestos 9 molding compound? 10 A. You wouldn't be able to tell from the 11 designation whether it had asbestos in it or not. 12 Q. Okay. Would you be able to tell from the 13 designation if it was a mineral filler? 14 A. No. 15 Q. What would the designation of BMMA mean? 16 A. Well, the letters, as I defined them before, 17 phenolic molding and probably fine-free granular. "A" 18 would mean that it's a -- either - a new product that 19 is still experimental. The system called for that 20 fourth letter to be dropped once that product became 21 commercial, but that wasn't always done. So you'll see 22 four letters on many of the products. And it could be 23 BMMB or BMMC. That just means it's a - the C is a new 24 version of A and B. 25 Q. All right. What type of phenolic molding 1 A. It would have been called heat-resistant. 2 Q. Sir, would you agree that high-voltage 3 applications require a high heat-resistant molding 4 compound? 5 MR. WOODS: Objection to form, vague, 6 overbroad, foundation, calls for speculation. 7 THE WITNESS: No, I wouldn't agree, because I 8 don't recall us testing a product specifically for its 9 resistance to high voltages. I've been -- the reason 10 I'm hesitating, I'm trying to remember forty years ago, 11 and it doesn't - that doesn't always come back quickly. 12 But I don't recall any tests for where that particular 13 property was important. 14 BY MR. BOSL: 15 Q. Are you familiar with what properties would be 16 required for a high-voltage application? 17 MR. WOODS: Objection to form, vague, 18 overbroad. 19 THE WITNESS: Again, I don't 20 MR. WOODS: Foundation. 21 THE WITNESS: I don't recall customers coming 22 in and asking us, "We want something for high voltages." 23 I recall them asking, "Do you have a product that meets 24 these requirements," and they would have a list of 25 requirements that were the standard electrical tests. 13 (Pages 46 to 49) Aiken & Welch Court Reporters C. Martino 1-28-09 39066227-0c4f-4c39-b5cc-3d98e6e1ae69 Page 50 Page 52 | 1 I'd have to - I don't know how I could answer your 2 question any other way. 3 BY MR. BOSL: 4 Q. Okay. All right. In the 1966 time period, 5 what do you recall Square D buying from Union Carbide? 6 A. In the sixties? 7 Q. Yes. 8 MR. WOODS: Objection. Overbroad, vague. 9 THE WITNESS: Well, again, as I mentioned 10 before, I don't know what they bought prior to 1966. 11 After 1966, they were buying 5303. What was another 12 product? 54 - I don't remember. 54-something. And 13 those were the big sellers. After '66, we do have 14 records on what they bought. 15 MR. WOODS: And Justin, just to be clear, we're 16 offering Mr. Martino as a PMK witness for sales before 17 '66, so representations he's made about after, he's not 18 testifying about the company. I know we have a standing 19 objection on that, but I just want to make it clear so 20 that you understand that. 21 BY MR. BOSL: 22 Q. Sir, do you remember Square D also purchasing 23 5314? 24 A. That's the one. That's the one I was trying to 25 remember. Yes. That's it. 1 A. I believe it contains a small amount. I would ! 2 have to check the formulation sheet to determine how j 3 much. j 4 Q. Do you know what - at least a range of j 5 asbestos content? j 6 A. Again, no. I'll have to give you a guess. I 1 7 think it was less than 10 percent. But again, I want to l 8 qualify that by saying I should check the formulation | 9 sheet to be sure. f 10 Q. And what was the approximate asbestos content j 11 of 5303? j 12 A. About 30 percent. I 13 Q. All right. And for 5303 and 5314, what are | 14 the -- what are the letters that would have preceded j 15 that designation? j 16 MR. WOODS: Objection to form. f 17 THE WITNESS: Well, both of them would have j 18 "BM" in the first two, indicating phenolic and molding. 1 19 We had a BMG, we had a BMM and a BMR-5303, all which j 2 0 were differences in granulation. Which of those j 21 Square D bought, I don't recall. But the basic formula 1 2 2 would be the same. I think the BMR had a little bit 2 3 less asbestos in it than the BMM. j 24 BY MR. BOSL: I 2 5 Q. What does the "R" in "BMR" stand for? j Page 51 Page 53 I 1 Q. Okay. 1 A. "R" was a courser granulation that we developed 2 MR. WOODS: I'll object to that question. It's 2 for the injection molding process. That was a more 3 vague, again, as to time, and overbroad. 3 automative way of molding a part. You just dumped it 4 MS. AHN: I'll join that. 4 into a hopper, and the screw heated up the material and 5 BY MR. BOSL: 5 then injected it into the mold. It was a completely 6 Q. Sir, do you have any reason to believe that 6 enclosed process, and they did not require a fine 7 Square D changed what it was purchasing between sometime 7 granulation with fines in it. 8 prior to '66 and 1966? 8 Q. Sir, what is the earliest you recall 9 A. Changed its purchasing? 9 Westinghouse purchasing asbestos-containing molding 10 Q. Correct. 10 compound from Union Carbide? 11 A. I don't know what you mean by "change." We - 11 MR. WOODS: Objection. Assumes facts, 12 they became a more important customer to us because they 12 overbroad, vague. 13 were buying more and we had a better relationship with 13 THE WITNESS: Again, I'd have to tell you the 14 one of their locations. That was in Lexington, 14 same. I don't have records that go back beyond 1966. 15 Kentucky. Other than that, I don't know of any other 15 So if they did, I don't know what they bought and when 16 change. 16 they bought it and how much they bought. 17 Q. I'm just wondering if you're aware whether or 17 BY MR. BOSL: 18 not they changed what products they were buying from 18 Q. All right. And sir, did you receive some 19 Union Carbide prior to '66 and post-'66. 19 documents this morning from counsel regarding 20 MR. WOODS: Objection. Compound, vague, 20 Westinghouse? 21 overbroad. 21 A. I have some documents here, yes. 22 THE WITNESS: That, I don't know. 22 Q. Okay. 23 MS. AHN: Belatedly lacks foundation. 23 MS. GILEFSKY: And again, just so the record is 24 BY MR. BOSL: 24 clear. This is Susan Gilefsky. These are, I think, the 25 Q. Is 5314 also an asbestos-containing product? 25 nine pages that we received this morning from Ms. Boggs MS 14 (Pages 50 to 53) Aiken & Welch Court Reporters C. Martino 1-28-09 39066227-0c4f-4c39-b5cc-3d98e6e1ae69 Page 54 Page 56 1 of Kazan's office. Again, I cannot attest to the 1 invited you to come to our repository too. But if you 2 accuracy or the authentication of these documents. I 2 have a request, if you would put it in a letter or 3 don't know where they were obtained from. 3 something like that so it doesn't get lost in the 4 But it appears from - I don't believe they 4 deposition. 5 were obtained from any kind of Union Carbide repository. 5 MR. BOSL: Yeah. Certainly. I'll follow up 6 So I don't know how much the witness will be able to 6 with a letter from whatever I request here today. 7 talk about these documents. But feel free. 7 MR. WOODS: And we'll respond accordingly. 8 MR. BOSL: I understand. 8 MS. GILEFSKY: And just so the record is clear, 9 BY MR. BOSL: 9 Justin. Mr. Woods is correct; we did invite you all to 10 Q. Sir, if you would turn with me to -- sorry -- 10 come to the repository. And so the record is also 11 the third page, I believe. 11 clear, your office has come to the repository in the 12 MR. WOODS: I don't know that we have it in the 12 past. 13 same order as you, so you might want to be more 13 BY MR. BOSL: 14 specific. 14 Q. Sir, I'm flipping forward a little bit to 15 MR. BOSL: Fine. 15 another memo, from an H.A. Pearce to the R&D Center, 16 BY MR. BOSL: 16 dated March 4th, 1963. 17 Q. It looks like a Westinghouse memo. 17 A. Is that in the documents you sent? 18 A. Here it is. 18 Yes. Okay. 19 Q. 1960. And it goes to the East Pittsburg Works 19 Q. Does BMG-5017 contain an asbestos-containing 20 2-F. Down at the bottom is a signature of a J. Toth. 20 molding compound? 21 MR. WOODS: We've got a couple of documents 21 A. BMG-5017? 22 that fit that description. 22 Q. Yes. 23 MS. GILEFSKY: Justin, your phone cut out, I 23 A. No. That's a mica fill. 24 think, when you were saying the date. It's December 6, 24 Q. Okay. And what's your foundation for that? 25 1960, in the upper right-hand comer? Correct? 25 A. We asked for the formulation this morning and Page 55 Page 57 1 MR. BOSL: Correct. 2 MS. GILEFSKY: Does that help you, Craig? 3 MR. WOODS: Yeah. That helps. Thank you. We 4 have that one. Go ahead, Mr. Martino. 5 THE WITNESS: Yes. 6 BY MR. BOSL: 7 Q. Sir, in the middle of the page, Bakelite 8 BMG-500 in the 1960 period. What was the filler in 9 that? 10 MR. WOODS: In what period? 1960? 11 MR. BOSL: Yes. 12 MR. WOODS: If you know. 13 THE WITNESS: I think the - I know the 14 BMG-500,1 don't know. We would have to check the 15 formulation on that. The BMM-05001 think contained 16 asbestos. We'd have to check that also. 17 BY MR. BOSL: 18 Q. All right. Do you know what the percentage of 19 the BMM-0500 was, of asbestos? 20 A. No, I don't. 21 MR. BOSL: I would ask that to the extent that 22 the formulation is available, that it be produced. 23 MR. WOODS: Yeah. I mean, if you're going to 24 make requests, I suggest that you put the things in 25 writing, preferably formally in writing. I know we'd 1 it showed it had mica. 2 Q. Okay. Do you have that formulation there with 3 you? 4 A. Yes. 5 MR. BOSL: I'd like to attach - let me do 6 this: I'm going to attach the - these Westinghouse 7 documents collectively as the next in order. I think 8 that's No. 9. 9 (Plaintiffs' Exhibit No. 9 was marked for 10 Identification.) 11 MR. BOSL: I'll attach the formulation for 5017 12 as No. 10. 13 (Plaintiffs' Exhibit No. 10 was marked for 14 Identification.) 15 MR. BOSL: Sorry. Give me just a moment. 16 BY MR. BOSL: 17 Q. I can't recall now if I've mentioned this or 18 asked this. If I did, forgive me. Where have you 19 seen - other than the one document we've attached here, 20 where have you seen references to sales to Square D 21 prior to '66? 22 A. I haven't seen any reference to sales. I -- 23 I've seen references - documents relating to inquiries 24 from Westinghouse. 25 MR. WOODS: Just so the record is clear, I 15 (Pages 54 to 57) Aiken & Welch Court Reporters C. Martino 1-28-09 39066227-0c4f-4c39-b5cc-3d98e6e1 ae69 Page 58 Page 6 0 j 1 think the question was on Square D. 1 A. Oh, by frequent conversations on the phone, and I 2 MR. BOSL: That's right. I'm asking about 3 Square D here. 2 I visited the customer with him on a number of 3 occasions. f \ 4 THE WITNESS: Square D. But again, I'd have to 4 Q. And that was the Lexington facility? s 5 search the records, because I - I have nothing in front 5 A. Yes. 6 of me. And a lot of this is just recollection. 6 Q. Did you ever visit any other Square D 7 BY MR. BOSL: 7 facilities? f 8 Q. What is your recollection, then, of ~ 8 A. No. | 9 A. That they were a customer prior to '66. But 9 Q. During the visits you made to Square D or in 1 10 what they bought and when they bought it and for what 10 any conversations that Mr. Martella may have related to | 11 locations they bought it, I don't have any information. 11 you, were you aware of what application Square D was i 12 Q. Okay. Do you know who at Union Carbide called 12 buying its material for? 1 13 on Square D during that time period? 13 MS. GILEFSKY: Just again I want to make sure f 14 A. Prior to '65, no. 14 it's clear. I think he was talking about Mr. Martella 1 15 Q. Who called on Square D in '65 and '66? 15 with respect to a later time period. f 16 A. Well, the salesperson that we dealt with 16 MR. BOSL: Well, I think that's a little bit | 17 most - and I don't recall exact years. In the latter 17 vague. j 18 sixties, it was Alex Martella. 18 MS. GILEFSKY: We again just assert the running I 19 Q. And that was the Square D employee that you 19 objection to the fact that Mr. Martino is being produced | 20 dealt with? 20 today for the time period 1966 and prior. I 21 A. No. No. That was our salesperson. 21 BY MR. BOSL: 1 22 Q. Okay. 22 Q. Go ahead, sir. j 23 A. No. The person at Square D was Matt Mayo 23 A. In the time I visited, it looked like in regard 1 24 (phonetic). And that was the Lexington location. 24 to electrical parts - components of large electrical j 25 Q. And that you know started in '65, you said? 25 parts. But I never saw the completed component, nor did Page 59 Page 61 1 A. No. I don't recall the exact year, but it was 2 the latter sixties that I recall our having a very good 3 relationship with that location and with that 4 individual. And that's probably when we sold the most 5 material to them. 6 Q. Do you know why your familiarity with Square D 7 changes in the late sixties? 8 MR. WOODS: Objection to form, assumes facts. 9 THE WITNESS: We had a very good salesman 10 assigned to them. 11 BY MR. BOSL: 12 Q. That's Mr. Martella? 13 A. Yes. He was excellent. 14 Q. Do you know if Mr. Martella is still alive? 15 A. No, I don't. 16 Q. What office was he working out of? 17 A. I don't recall what our office structure was at 18 that time. 19 Q. Do you know where he lived? 20 A. Not now, no. 21 Q. Do you know where he lived in the 1960s? 22 A. Oh, no. 23 Q. Did you know him? 24 A. Yes. 25 Q. How did you know him? 1 I know where they were going. ? 2 MR. BOSL: Sir, can we take a couple-minute 3 break? I'll come right back in a minute. 4 THE WITNESS: Okay. ^ 5 (The parties agreed to go off the record.) | 6 BY MR. BOSL: 7 Q. Sir, we spoke before about Underwriters Labs. > 8 And am I correct it was your understanding that Union j 9 Carbide tested to make sure that its products were 10 compliant with various categories of UL? Is that : 11 correct? ; 12 MR. WOODS: Objection. 13 MS. GILEFSKY: Outside the scope, lacks ; 14 foundation, calls for speculation. f 15 THE WITNESS: I'm trying to think back on what ; 16 UL did require. And in the early sixties, I don't 17 recall what we did with them. They later came up with a 18 program that involved extensive testing. Long-term 19 aging and so forth. But that was in the latter part of 20 the sixties. And I don't recall other activities prior 21 to that. 22 BY MR. BOSL: 23 Q. Did UL test Union Carbide materials prior to 24 '66, as far as you know? 25 MR. WOODS: Objection. Beyond the scope, lacks 16 (Pages 58 to 61) Aiken & Welch Court Reporters C. Martino 1-28-09 39066227-0c4f-4c39-b5cc-3d98e6e1ae69 Page 62 Page 64 1 foundation, calls for speculation. 2 THE WITNESS: I don't recall of any - any 3 instance where we dealt directly with them on that. 4 They primarily tested finished parts, not the molding 5 compounds, not until what I told you about where we got 6 involved in long-range aging tests with them. 7 BY MR. BOSL: 8 Q. When were those long-range aging tests 9 conducted? 10 A. The latter part of the sixties. 11 Q. Okay. Now, am I correct that both UL and the 12 ASTM would issue some sort of a certification or 13 approval, whatever the right word is, for a product, 14 such as a particular type of molding compound, 15 certifying or approving it for various categories? 16 MR. WOODS: Objection to form, foundation, 17 calls for speculation. 18 MS. GILEFSKY: It's also overly broad as to 19 time, scope, and outside the scope. 20 THE WITNESS: The only time I recall UL coming 21 out with a rating number that you had to qualify for was 22 in those studies that I told you about. They came up 23 with a UL rating number. And I don't recall exactly how 24 that was worded, but it was maximum temperature that the 25 material could be safely used without losing its 1 required of the filler went up with the increase of 2 voltage that that panel was going to be used for? 3 MR. WOODS: Objection to form, vague, 4 overbroad, foundation, calls for speculation. 5 MS. GILEFSKY: Incomplete hypothetical. 6 MR. WOODS: I was coming there. 7 MS. GILEFSKY: Sorry. 8 THE WITNESS: As I mentioned before, this is 9 the first time I've been asked the performance of a 10 product with regard to voltage, and this is not 11 something we ever focused on. So I can't answer that. 12 I don't know whether there is a relationship in 13 voltage versus asbestos content, with asbestos or any 14 other mineral filler. All I can say is that the primary 15 purpose of our increasing the asbestos content was to 16 get heat resistance, not voltage resistance. 17 BY MR. BOSL: 18 Q. What kind of applications required greater heat 19 resistance? 20 MR. WOODS: Objection. Vague, overbroad, calls 21 for speculation. Asked and answered, I think, too. 22 THE WITNESS: Exposure to temperatures of 350, 23 400 degrees Fahrenheit for long periods of time. 24 BY MR. BOSL: 25 Q. Did Union Carbide ever test or rate its molding Page 63 Page 65 1 properties. And it's -- it appears in some of our 2 advertising -- in our molding manual in the seventies. 3 The ASTM didn't require that we get their 4 approval. They just gave the specifications that we had 5 to meet. 6 BY MR. BOSL: 7 Q. And so was it up to Union Carbide to make sure 8 that it met those, those requirements? 9 A. Yes. 10 MR. WOODS: Objection to form, vague. 11 overbroad. 12 THE WITNESS: Yeah. Yes. Some customers would 13 ask us to verily it. 14 BY MR. BOSL: 15 Q. How was that verified? 16 A. We would send them a copy of the test results. 17 Q. Do those test results still exist in the 18 repository, to your knowledge? 19 A. Each product has a data sheet that lists the 20 properties that we would certify to. 21 Q. And do those data sheets still exist? 22 A. Some - some are available. What years, I 23 don't know. 24 Q. Sir, speaking about electrical panels prior to 25 1966, would you agree that the amount of heat resistance 1 compounds based on amperage? 2 A. Not that I'm aware of. 3 Q. Are you aware of a relationship between the 4 amperage that the molding compound would be subjected to 5 or exposed to and the heat-resistant quality of the 6 molding compound? 7 MR. WOODS: Objection to form, vague, 8 overbroad, calls for speculation, foundation, assumes 9 facts. 10 THE WITNESS: No, I do not. 11 BY MR. BOSL: 12 Q. Did I get your testimony right? Earlier you 13 said that mica was the preferred filler for electrical 14 usages prior to '66? 15 A. Well, not only prior to '66. After '66 also. 16 Q. In your experience, are you aware that mica was 17 ever used as a filler for molding compounds in 18 electrical panels? 19 MR. WOODS: Objection to form, vague. 20 overbroad. 21 THE WITNESS: I don't know, because I don't 22 know what components the manufacturers of those panels 23 were putting in there and what the requirements were for 24 those components. That could be mica fill, polyester, 25 silicone, melamine, dialkyl phthalate, epoxy, many 17 (Pages 62 to 65) Aiken & Welch Court Reporters C. Martino 1-28-09 39066227-0c4f-4c39-b5cc-3d98e6e1ae69 Page 66 Page 68 1 different molding compounds that can be colored brown or 2 black, and they all look like what people call a typical 3 Bakelite. 4 BY MR. BOSL: 5 Q. And it included asbestos as well? 6 A. Yes. And you look at them, you can't tell. 7 The only way you can tell is to know what the 8 designations are and go back through the manufacturer 9 and find out what they made it from. 10 Q. Is it true that an asbestos-filled 11 asbestos-containing molding compound would have had a 12 very smooth finish? 13 MR. WOODS: Objection to form, vague, 14 overbroad, calls for speculation, incomplete 15 hypothetical. 16 THE WITNESS: Sorry. Yes. But that's 17 primarily - a mineral filler does give you a smoother 18 surface. It doesn't have to be asbestos. But the 19 polish on the mold also has an effect. 20 BY MR. BOSL: 21 Q. What other minerals were used prior to 1966 as 22 fillers for electrical application molding compounds? 23 MR. WOODS: Objection to the form, overbroad, 24 vague. 25 THE WITNESS: Clay. 1 mica data - the mica fill material data sheets and | 2 compare them with the asbestos fill to see the | 3 differences in electrical properties. But low loss f 4 characteristics is one that I recall as being an 5 advantage for the mica. S 6 They both have good arc resistance relative to 3 7 a phenolic, relative to other binders, like melamine, f 8 that were not as good. The same filler melamine would | 9 be far superior. 1 10 Asbestos is more fibrous, so the impact J 11 strength would be a little higher with asbestos than it ) 12 would be for mica. They both would give better { 13 dimensional stability, lower moisture absorption. | 14 That's about all I can recall. ! 15 BY MR. BOSL: j 16 Q. In terms of the finish in general, would J 17 asbestos be smoother than mica? | 18 MR. WOODS: Objection to form, vague, j 19 overbroad. f 20 THE WITNESS: I recall them both being the 21 same. f ,j: 22 BY MR. BOSL: f 23 Q. With regards to a wood flour filler, would j 24 asbestos have had a smoother finish? 25 MR. WOODS: Objection. Vague, overbroad. Page 67 - Page 69 i 1 MR. WOODS: Lacks foundation, calls for 1 THE WITNESS: Does asbestos what? i 2 speculation. Sorry. 2 BY MR. BOSL: | 3 THE WITNESS: Clay, calcium carbonate, coal. 3 Q. Have a smoother finish. { 4 Mica, of course. Now, those are the mineral fillers. 4 MR. WOODS: Same objections. Calls for j 5 BY MR. BOSL: 5 speculation. f 6 Q. Am I correct that mica is a metallic filler, a 6 THE WITNESS: It is difficult to tell the { 7 metallic mineral? 7 degree of improvement unless you were - you were | 8 MR. WOODS: Objection to the form. Vague. 8 magnifying some of the surface. Just looking at them, j 9 THE WITNESS: I don't know what its composition 9 you would not be - opening the cabinet and looking at | 10 is. 10 them, you wouldn't be able to tell. You would have to } 11 BY MR. BOSL: 11 do a very close examination and know which - what 1 12 Q. Okay. 12 you're looking for. ; 13 A. I don't think it's a metal, no. If it was a 13 BY MR. BOSL: j 14 metal, it would be conductive. 14 Q. Would a wood flour phenolic compound have had a | 15 Q. Is mica conductive? 15 uniform color? I 16 A. No. 16 A. Oh, yes. J 17 Q. What is its conductivity compared to asbestos? 17 Q. As uniform as an asbestos-filled compound? 18 A. I don't know. I'd have to compare side by side 18 MR. WOODS: Objection to form, vague, ; 19 the two of them. 19 overbroad. 20 Q. In terms of the characteristics as a filler of 20 THE WITNESS: You wouldn't be able to tell the . 21 molding compounds prior to '66, what differences are 21 difference in color, between the two. 22 there between mica and asbestos? 22 BY MR. BOSL: 23 MR. WOODS: Objection to form, vague, 23 Q. What are the other differences between ; 24 overbroad. 24 cellulose as a filler, or wood flour, compared to 25 THE WITNESS: Well, I'd have to look at the 25 asbestos in the pre-'66 time period? 18 (Pages 66 to 69) Aiken & Welch Court Reporters C. Martino 1-28-09 39066227-0c4f-4c39-b5cc-3d98e6e1ae69 Page 7 0 Page 72 1 MR. WOODS: Objection to form, vague, 2 overbroad. 3 THE WITNESS: Well, the cellulose would absorb 4 more moisture, so you'd have a higher water absorption 5 figure on the data sheet. The - and as a result, the 6 expansion and contraction in moist environments would be 7 higher for cellulose fill and an asbestos fill. The arc 8 resistance would be better for the asbestos or mica fill 9 relative to the wood flour fill. 10 On the other hand, you get good - better 11 strength with the - better impact strength with the 12 wood flour fill. Slightly better. They were all 13 brittle, to some extent. I'm talking about small 14 differences. Those are the primary differences. Wood 15 flour was the most available and the least expensive. 16 BY MR. BOSL: 17 Q. Would asbestos have had a higher specific 18 gravity than cellulose? 19 A. Yes. 20 Q. And would asbestos have a higher specific 21 gravity than mica? 22 A. As I recall, they were about the same. I don't 23 recall making a direct comparison with the exact amount 24 of each. But they were pretty close. 25 MR. WOODS: And Justin, are you talking about 1 called on Westinghouse? 2 A. No, I don't. 3 Q. Or which facility of Westinghouse purchased 4 from - from Union Carbide? 5 A. No. 6 MR. WOODS: Also, objection. Assumes facts. 7 BY MR. BOSL: 8 Q. Are you aware if there was any - if there were 9 any molding compounds in the 1960s approved for circuit 10 boards or panel boards in California for public 11 utilities? 12 MS. GILEFSKY: Outside the scope of 13 designation, overly broad, vague and ambiguous. 14 THE WITNESS: No. I wouldn't know that. The 15 customers that made the panels would know. 16 MR. WOODS: Can I have a clarification, Justin? 17 When you say "panels," are you talking like a board? I 18 think you mentioned circuit board. Or are you talking 19 about the components that go into electrical panels? I 20 just want to clarify for the witness to make sure he's 21 answering it. 22 MR. BOSL: Well, to the extent that phenolic 23 molding compounds are used in either of those, then I'm 24 referring to both. 25 THE WITNESS: Well, my answer was based on Page 71 Page 73 1 the molding compounds having a different specific 1 components inside the electrical panel. And by "panel," 2 gravity, or are you talking about the substance asbestos 2 I mean a box as described by your plaintiff. He 3 versus the substance mica? 3 described a box six feet to eight feet high, two feet 4 MR. BOSL: I'm talking about the substance 4 deep, six feet wide. What components went in there and 5 within the molding compound. 5 what they were made from and whose product was used to 6 MR. WOODS: The specific gravity of the 6 make them, I have no idea. And I don't know how you 7 compound itself? 7 would find out. 8 MR. BOSL: Yeah. 8 BY MR. BOSL: 9 MR. WOODS: I'm going to object because it's an 9 Q. Would your answer to my previous question 10 incomplete hypothetical. 10 change - in other words - well, let me just reask it, 11 THE WITNESS: I'd say they are close. But if 11 then, with it changed. 12 you needed to be more exact than that, then we'd have to 12 In the 1960s, are you aware whether or not in 13 run a comparison between the two or look at data sheets 13 California there were any phenolic molding compounds 14 that are very close. It's certainly not the difference 14 approved for use in switchgears? 15 between what you'd get between mineral fill versus 15 MR. WOODS: Object to the form, vague, 16 cellulose fill. 16 overbroad, and lack of foundation, calls for 17 BY MR. BOSL: 17 speculation. 18 Q. Sir, are you familiar with who at Union Carbide 18 THE WITNESS: I can't answer that. A 19 called on Westinghouse prior to 1966? 19 switchgear, I would have to know what the switchgear 20 A. No, I don't. 20 requirements would be. And it might not even be a 21 Q. Are you familiar with what locations of 21 phenolic that would meet those requirements. So I have 22 Westinghouse were purchasing from Union Carbide prior to 1 22 no idea what would be approved for those applications. 23 '66? 23 BY MR. BOSL: 24 A. No, I don't. 25 Q. At any time during the 1960s, do you know who 24 Q. Are you aware whether the public utilities 2 5 commission had requirements for switchgears in the 1960s 19 (Pages 70 to 73) Aiken & Welch Court Reporters C. Martino 1-28-09 39066227-0c4f-4c39-b5cc-3d98e6e1ae69 Page 74 Page 7 6 1 in California? 2 MS. GILEFSKY: Same objections. 3 THE WITNESS: I don't know how they would 4 specify their requirement, whether they would specify 5 the whole electrical box and then leave it up to the 6 manufacturer to decide what goes in it. I'm not aware 7 of utilities specifying what exactly the design of the 8 inside of the box should be. 9 BY MR. BOSL: 10 Q. With regards to switchgears in the 1960s, do 11 you know if the public utilities commission made any 12 kind of specifications of any sort? 13 MR. WOODS: Same objections. 14 THEWITNESS: No. I wouldn't be familiar with 15 any of their requirements. 16 MR. BOSL: All right. I think we've gone 17 another hour. Why don't we take another five-minute 18 break. We may be done or close to done. 19 MR. WOODS: Okay. Great. 2 0 MR. BOSL: Thank you. 21 (The parties agreed to go off the record.) 2 2 MR. BOSL: All right. I think with that, I 2 3 have no further questions at this time, subject to my 2 4 request for various documents, which we can discuss 2 5 after the deposition. 1 the code to retain custody of the deposition. And off 2 the record we talked about a schedule and the logistics 3 in terms of getting Ms. Smith all of the exhibits. So 4 stipulated. 5 MR. BOSL: Off the record. 6 (Whereupon, the deposition was concluded 7 at 1:15 p.m.) 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 Page 75 Page 77 1 MR. WOODS: Sure. 2 MR. BOSL: Off the record. 3 MR. WOODS: Yeah. We don't have any questions 4 either, but we do want the witness to read and sign the 5 deposition. 6 MR. BOSL: Does counsel for Square D have any 7 questions, or Rogers? 8 MS. AHN: No, I do not. 9 MR. THUESEN: I do not. 10 MS. GILEFSKY: And Justin, just to respond very 11 briefly to your request for those additional documents. 12 We will be happy to meet and confer with you. But just 13 to reiterate what was said previously, the invitations 14 were extended with respect to the repository, and 15 Kazan's office has visited the repository in the past. 16 But again, we'd be happy to meet and confer with you. 17 MR. BOSL: We can discuss it after the fact. 18 MS. GILEFSKY: Shall we go off the record to 19 discuss logistics? 2 0 MR. BOSL: That sounds good. 21 (The parties agreed to go off the record.) 2 2 MS. GILEFSKY: Back on the record. 23 I just want to indicate that Mr. Martino would 2 4 like to review and sign his deposition transcript. We 2 5 will relieve the court reporter of her obligations under 1 SIGNATURE OF DEPONENT 2 3 I, the undersigned, CARLO MARTINO, do hereby 4 certify that I have read the foregoing deposition and 5 find it to be a tme and accurate transcription of my 6 testimony, with the following corrections, if any. 7 8 PAGE LINE CHANGE 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 CARLO MARTINO, Date 25 20 (Pages 74 to 77) Aiken & Welch Court Reporters C. Martino 1-28-09 39066227-0c4f-4c39-b5cc-3d98e6e1ae69 Page 7 8 1 STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) 2) 3 COUNTY OF NEVADA ) 4 5 I, NICOLETTE SMITH, do hereby certify: 6 That CARLO MARTINO, in the foregoing deposition 7 named, was sworn by me as a witness in the 8 above-entitled action at the time and place therein 9 specified; 10 That said deposition was taken before me at 11 said time and place, and was taken down in shorthand by 12 me, a Certified Shorthand Reporter of the State of 13 California, and was thereafter transcribed into 14 typewriting, and that the foregoing transcript 15 constitutes a full, true and correct report of said 16 deposition and of the proceedings that took place; 17 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunder subscribed 18 my hand this 2nd day of February 2009. 19 20 NICOLETTE SMITH, CSR No. 11275 21 State of California 22 23 24 25 Aiken & Welch Court Reporters 21 (Page 78) C. Martino 1-28-09 39066227-0c4f-4c39-b5cc-3d98e6e1ae69