Document oNjn4JVQjvqzEEayd8xb7EY7

FRANK M. SEAN JACK 8. MANNING DOUGLAS T. GOSOA ANN MOORE PAUL. A. HIGOON RICK W. THAMM WILLIAM J. COZORT, JR. GREGORY A. SCMLAK Bean & Manning, L.L.P. ATTORNEYS AT LAW 5SA7 SAN FELIPE. SUITE ISOO HOUSTON, TEXAS 77057 May 6, 1993 TELEPHON E (7131 783*7070 TELECOPIES (713) 7S3-7IS7 ALSO LICENSED IN COLORADO VIA AIRBORNE #2982963211 Mr. Bill Long District Clerk Dallas County Courthouse 600 Commerce Street Dallas, TX 75202 RE: Cause No. 89-08122-E; Clyde Junior Ramey, et al v. OwensCorning Fiberglas Corp., et al; In the 101st Judicial District of Dallas County, Texas Cause No. 89-10315-E; Alma Covington, et al v. OwensComing Fiberglas Corp., et al; In the 101st Judicial District of Dallas County, Texas Cause No. 91-0111-E; Oscar Curlong Densmore, et al v. Owens-Corning Fiberglas Corp., et al; In the 101st Judicial District of Dallas County, Texas Cause No. 91-06672-E; Arthur Neal Farr, et al v. OwensCorning Fiberglas Corp., et al; In the 101st Judicial District of Dallas County, Texas Cause No. 91-06889-E; Hubert Johnson House, et al v. Owens-Corning Fiberglas Corp., et al; In the 101st Judicial District of Dallas County, Texas Cause No. 91-07372-E; Kennon Fletcher Shook, et al v. Owens-Corning Fiberglas Corp., et al; In the 101st Judicial District of Dallas County, Texas Cause No. 91-07666E; Clarence Carl Bookout, et al v. Owens-Corning Fiberglas Corp., et al; In the 101st Judicial District of Dallas County, Texas Cause No. 91-07718-E; Charles Von Ahlefeld, et al v. Owens-Corning Fiberglas Corp., et al; In the 101st Judicial District of Dallas County, Texas Cause No. 91-08150-E; Audry Phillipy, et al v. OwensCorning Fiberglas Corp., et al; In the 101st Judicial District of Dallas County, Texas Bill Long Page 2 Cause No. 91-08308-E? Charles Edward Salley, et al v. Owens-Corning Fiberglas Corp., et al? In the 101st Judicial District of Dallas County, Texas * Cause No. 91-09225E? Vernon Senn, et al v. Owens-Corning Fiberglas Corp., et al? In the 101st Judicial District of Dallas County, Texas Cause No. 91-12437-E? Ralph Cline Harley, et al v. OwensCorning Fiberglas Corp., et al? In the 101st Judicial District of Dallas County, Texas Dear Mr. Long: Enclosed herewith please find Owens-Corning Fiberglas Corporations Responses to Plaintiffs' Interrogatories and Requests for Production of Documents. Please file this pleading among the papers of the above referenced matter and, by appropriate notation on the margin of this letter, notify me of such filing. A copy of this pleading has been forwarded to the opposing attorney of record, as shown below. Also, a copy of this transmittal letter has been forwarded to the various counsel of record as indicated below. Should you have any questions or comments concerning this matter, please do not hesitate to contact me. Kindest personal regards. Very truly yours, - BEAN & MANNING, L.L.P. (UjJ.yZ-- RWT/amh Enclosure cc: Mr. Russell W. Budd w/o Enclosures All Other Counsel of Record Rick W. Thamm VIA AIRBORNE #2982963314 VIA REGULAR MAIL No. 89-08122-E CLYDE JUNIOR RAMEY, ET AL Plaintiffs, vs. OWENS-CORNING FIBERGLAS CORPORATION, ET AL Defendants. S IN THE DISTRICT COURT s s s s OF DALLAS COUNTY, TEXAS S s s s 101ST JUDICIAL DISTRICT No. 89-10315-E ALMA COVINGTON, ET AL Plaintiffs, vs. OWENS-CORNING FIBERGLAS CORPORATION, ET AL Defendants. S IN THE DISTRICT COURT s s s s OF DALLAS COUNTY, TEXAS s s s 101ST JUDICIAL DISTRICT No. 91-0111-E OSCAR CURLONG DENSMORE, ET AL S s Plaintiffs, s s vs. S OWENS-CORNING-FIBERGLAS CORPORATION, ET AL s s s s Defendants s IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF DALLAS COUNTY, TEXAS 101ST JUDICIAL DISTRICT No. 91-06672-E ARTHUR NEAL FARR, ET AL Plaintiffs, vs. OWENS-CORNING FIBERGLAS CORPORATION, ET AL Defendants. S IN THE DISTRICT COURT S s s S OF DALLAS COUNTY, TEXAS s s s s 101ST JUDICIAL DISTRICT No. 91-06889-E HUBERT JOHNSON HOUSE, ET AL Plaintiffs, vs. OWENS-CORNING FIBERGLAS CORPORATION, ET AL Defendants. S S s s s S s s s IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF DALLAS COUNTY, TEXAS 101ST JUDICIAL DISTRICT No. 91-07372-E KENNON FLETCHER SHOOK, ET AL Plaintiffs, vs. OWENS-CORNING FIBERGLAS CORPORATION, ET AL Defendants. S $ s s s S s s $s IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF DALLAS COUNTY, TEXAS 101ST JUDICIAL DISTRICT No. 91-07666--E CLARENCE CARL BOOKOUT, ET AL Plaintiffs, vs. OWENS-CORNING'FIBERGLAS CORPORATION, ET AL Defendants. S s s s $ s s s ss IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF DALLAS COUNTY, TEXAS 101ST JUDICIAL DISTRICT 2 No 91-07718--E CHARLES VON AHLEFELD, ET AL Plaintiffs, vs. OWENS-CORNING FIBERGLAS CORPORATION, ET AL Defendants. S s s s s S s s ss IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF DALLAS COUNTY, TEXAS 101ST JUDICIAL DISTRICT No 91-08150-E AUDRY PHILLIPY, ET AL Plaintiffs, vs. OWENS-CORNING FIBERGLAS CORPORATION, ET AL Defendants. S IN THE DISTRICT COURT S s s S OF DALLAS COUNTY, TEXAS s $ s s 101ST JUDICIAL DISTRICT No. 91--08308--E CHARLES EDWARD SALLEY, ET AL Plaintiffs, vs. OWENS-CORNING'FIBERGLAS CORPORATION, ET AL Defendants $ S S S S S $ $ $ S IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF DALLAS COUNTY, TEXAS 101ST JUDICIAL DISTRICT No 91-09225-E VERNON SENN, ET AL Plaintiffs, vs. OWENS-CORNING FIBERGLAS CORPORATION, ET AL Defendants. S IN THE DISTRICT COURT s s s s OF DALLAS COUNTY, TEXAS S S s s s 101ST JUDICIAL DISTRICT No 91-12437-E RALPH CLINE HARLEY, ET AL Plaintiffs, vs. OWENS-CORNING FIBERGLAS CORPORATION, ET AL Defendants. S IN THE DISTRICT COURT s s ss OF DALLAS COUNTY, TEXAS s s s s s 101ST JUDICIAL DISTRICT INTERROGATORY NO. 1: AS of April 25, 1955, was Robert W. McArthur an officer or an employee of Owens-Corning, its subsidiaries or affiliated corporations? If so, describe the position of employment he held on April 25 1955, and any subsequent positions he held with Owens-Corning, its subsidiaries or affiliated corporations. RESPONSE NO. 1: Robert W. McArthur was employed by OCF from 04/13/50 until 08/31/62. Mr. McAuthur's positions with OCF are listed as follows: 04/13/50-01/01/51 01/01/51-03/01/60 03/01/60-08/31/62 Advertising, Trainee Sales Rep. I&C, Mkt. Developer -4- INTERROGATORY NO. 2: As of May 23, 1957, please state whether M.D. Burch was an officer or employee of Owens-Corning, its subsidiaries or affiliated corporations. If so, please describe his position and duties as of May 23, 1957, and any subsequent positions he held with Owens-Corning, its subsidiaries or affiliated corporations. RESPONSE NO. 2: M.D. Burch was employed by OCF from 1940 until 12/31/81. Mr. Burch is now deceased. His positions with OCF are listed as follows: Plant Manager, Kansas City 1954-1972 - Director of Industrial Relations 1/1/73-12/31/81 - V. P., Industrial Relations INTERROGATORY NO. 3: As of August 13, 1957, please state whether Ben S. Wright was an officer or employee of Owens-Coming, its subsidiaries or affiliated corporations. If so, please describe his position and duties as of August 13, 1957, and any subsequent positions he held with Owens-Corning, its subsidiaries or affiliated corporations. RESPONSE NO. 3: Benjamin S. Wright was employed by OCF from 11/07/40 to 01/16/70. Mr. Wright's positions with OCF are listed as follows: 11/07/40-01/01/45 01/01/45-02/01/45 02/01/45-09/01/45 09/01/45-08/01/47 08/01/47-10/01/47 10/01/47-04/27/49 04/27/49-01/01/52 01/01/52-03/01/62 03/01/62-01/01/65 02/01/69-01/16/70 Sales, Div. Mgr. Tex.Prod., Div. Mgr. Cust. Service Branch Mgr. Branch Mgr. Sales, Admin. Asst. Gen. Sales Mgr. Gen Sales, V.P. Admin., V.P. of Purchasing and Trade Relations Public Relations, V. P. Executive V.P., Purchases and Transport -5- INTERROGATORY NO. 4: As of September 17, 1963, please state whether William Letz, was an officer or employee of Owens-Corning, its subsidiaries or affiliated corporations. If so, please describe his position and duties as of September 17, 1963, and any subsequent positions he held with Owens-Corning, its subsidiaries or affiliated corporations. RESPONSE NO. 4: OCF states that, to the best of its knowledge, it has never employed a person named William Letz. However, OCF states that William Lotz was employed by OCF from 06/18/56 until 11/30/64. Mr. Lotz1 positions with OCF are listed as follows: 06/18/56-02/01/60 02/01/60-07/16/63 07/16/63-01/01/64 01/01/64-08/01/64 08/01/64-11/30/64 Process and Product Lab, Testing and Development Technologist Basic Research Lab, Scientist Product Development, Senior Technologist Engr. and Indus., Technical Service Rep. Prod. Development, Intermediate Develop. Technologist INTERROGATORY NO. 5: As of September 17, 1963, please state whether A.J. Pearson, was an officer or employee of Owens-Corning, its subsidiaries or affiliated corporations. If so, please describe his position and duties as of September 17, 1963, and any subsequent positions he held with Owens-Coming, its subsidiaries or affiliated corporations RESPONSE NO. 5: Arthur J. Pearson was employed by OCF from 01/14/46 until 07/31/83. Mr. Pearson's positions with OCF are listed as follows: 01/14/46-08/01/46 08/01/46-07/01/48 07/01/48-09/01/54 09/01/54-10/16/56 Personnel, Technician Prod. Cont., Technologist Manufacturing, Process Specialist Production Supervisor -6- 10/16/56-05/01/68 05/01/68-01/16/79 01/16/79-07/31/83 Mgr., Process and Product Development Process and Quality Control Mgr., Const. Mtls. Technical and Quality Assurance Mgr. INTERROGATORY NO. 6: As of May 7, 1964, please state whether J.H. Thomas was an officer or employee of Owens-Coming, its subsidiaries or affiliated corporations. If so, please describe his position and duties as of May 7, 1964, and any subsequent positions he held with Owens-Coming, its subsidiaries or affiliated corporations. RESPONSE NO. 6: John H. Thomas was employed by OCF from 11/01/38 to 12/31/72. Mr. Thomas died on 09/20/91. His positions with OCF are listed as follows: 11/01/38-08/01/39 08/01/39-10/01/47 10/01/47-07/01/48 07/01/48-04/01/49 04/01/49-04/30/59 04/30/59-09/01/63 09/01/63-11/01/67 11/01/67-01/01/70 01/01/70-08/16/71 08/16/71-12/31/72 Research Lab Sales Manager Purchasing Director V.P. Purchasing V. P. Textile Products Div. Pacific Coast Div. Executive V.P. of R&D President Pres., Chief Oper. Officer Vice Chairman - Exec. Officer INTERROGATORY NO. 7: As of May 7,1964, please state whether Harold Boeschenstein was an officer or employee of Owens-Corning, its subsidiaries or affiliated corporations. If so, please describe his position and duties as of May 7, 1964, and any subsequent positions he held with Owens-Corning, it subsidiaries or affiliated corporations. -7- RESPONSE NO. 7; Harold Boeschenstein was employed by OCF from 10/28/38 until 12/31/67. Mr. Boeschenstein died on 10/31/72. His positions with OCF are listed as follows: 10/28/38-01/01/64 Executive President 01/01/64-12/31/67 Executive, Chairman of the Board Mr. Harold Boeschenstein remained on OCF's Board of Directors after his retirement until 1972. INTERROGATORY NO. 8: As of May 7, 1964, please state whether Lou Saxby was an officer or employee of Owens-Corning, its subsidiaries or affiliated corporations. If so, please describe his position and duties of May 7, 1964, and any subsequent positions he held with Owens-Corning, its subsidiaries or affiliated corporations. RESPONSE NO. 8: Lewis W. Saxby, Jr. was employed by OCF from 04/01/58 until 12/31/89. Mr. Saxby's positions with OCF are listed as follows: 04/01/58-05/01/60 05/01/60-05/02/64 05/01/64-04/01/71 04/01/71-08/16/74 08/16/74-11/01/78 11/01/78-12/31/89 Admin., Mgr. S&C, Mgr. V.P., s&c Division Mech. Prod, and Constr. Serv., V. P., Mech. Operating Div. Ofc. of Chief Exec., Sr. V.P. V.P. INTERROGATORY NO. 9: As of March 7, 1966, please state whether A. C. Siefert was an officer or employee of Owens-Corning, its subsidiaries or affiliated corporations. If so, please describe his position and duties as of March 7, 1966, and any subsequent positions he held with Owens-Corning, its subsidiaries or affiliated corporations. -8- RESPONSE NO. 9: August C. Siefert was employed by OCF from 09/01/42 until 03/01/78. Mr. Siefert*s positions with OCF are listed as follows: 09/01/42*04/16/56 04/16/56-01/01/66 01/01/66-03/01/78 Research, Technologist Director of Research Research Fellow INTERROGATORY NO. 10: Please state whether A.C. Siefert is still alive, and if so, please provide his address and telephone number. RESPONSE NO. 10: OCF states that, to the best of its knowledge, Mr. August C. Siefert is alive. INTERROGATORY NO. 11: As of July 28, 1966, please state whether John Vyverberg was an officer or employee of Owens-Corning, its subsidiaries or affiliated corporation. If so, please describe his position and duties as of July 28, 1966, and any subsequent positions he held with Owens-Corning, its subsidiaries or affiliated corporations. RESPONSE NO. 11: John F. Vyverberg was employed by OCF from 01/07/46 until 10/31/83. Mr. Vyverberg*s positions with OCF are listed as follows: 01/07/46-10/01/47 10/01/47-04/30/51 04/30/51-06/01/61 06/01/61-10/01/63 10/01/63-01/01/67 01/01/67-01/01/68 01/01/68-01/01/71 01/01/71-10/31/83 Sales, Industry Div. Supervisor Admin. Asst, to Gen. Sales Mgr. Pacific Coast Division Mkting. Mgr., Ind. & Engr. Sales I&C, Sales Mgr. Mgr., Industry Relations Office of Sr. V.P., Dir. Industry Presidents Staff, V.P. of Industry Relations -9- INTERROGATORY NO. 12: As of July 28, 1966, please state whether John Marshall Briley was an officer or employee of Owens-Corning, its subsidiaries or affiliated corporations. If so, please describe his position and duties as of July 28, 1966, and any subsequent positions he held with Owens-Corning, its subsidiaries or affiliated corporations. RESPONSE TQ_INTERROGATORY NO. 12: John Marshall Briley was employed by OCF from 01/01/52 until 12/31/70. Mr. Briley's positions with OCF are listed as follows: 01/01/52-02/01/57 02/01/57-12/31/61 12/31/61-05/01/63 05/01/63-12/31/70 Executive, Vice President Executive, Vice President and General Counsel Leave of Absence Executive, Vice President INTERROGATORY NO. 13: . As of August 8, 1966, please state whether F.H. Edwards was an officer or employee of Owens-Corning, its subsidiaries or affiliated corporations. If so, please describe his position and duties as of August 8, 1966, and any subsequent positions he held with Owens-Corning, its subsidiaries or affiliated corporations. RESPONSE TO INTERROGATORY NO. 13: Francis H. Edwards was employed by OCF from 03/01/43 until 08/31/69. Mr. Edwards' positions with OCF are listed as follows: 03/01/43-07/16/52 07/16/52-08/16/57 08/16/57-08/31/69 Admin., Personnel staff Specialist Industrial Relations, Senior Staff Assistant - Gen. Personnel Industrial Relations Assistant INTERROGATORY NO. 14: As of February 9, 1968, please state whether Robert Logan was an officer or employee of Owens-Corning, its subsidiaries or affiliated corporations. If so, please describe his position and duties as of February 9, 1968, and any subsequent positions he held with Owens-Corning, its subsidiaries or affiliated corporations. -10- RESPONSE-TO INTERROGATORYLNO. 14; Robert L. Logan, Jr. was employed by OCF from 07/01/62 until 07/02/77. Mr. Logan's positions with OCF are listed as follows: 07/01/62-02/01/73 02/01/73-06/10/75 06/10/75-07/02/77 Legal and Patent, Attorney Law, Special Counsel Law, Sr. Counsel and Asst. Secretary INTERROGATORY NO. 15: As of February 9, 1968, please state whether Jon L. Konzen, M.D. was an officer or employer of Owens-Coming, its subsidiaries or affiliated corporations. If so, please describe his position and duties as of February 9, 1968, and any subsequent positions he held with Owens-Coming, its subsidiaries or affiliated corporations. RESPONSE TO INTERROGATORY NO. 15: Jon L. Konzen was employed by OCF from 01/15/68 until the present. Dr. Konzen's positions with OCF are listed as follows: 01/15/68-10/31/85 10/31/85-12/31/92 01/01/93-present Corporate Medical Director V.P., Medical and Health Affairs Occupational Medicine Consultant INTERROGATORY NO. 16: Please state whether Dr. Jon L. Konzen, M.D. is still alive, and if so, please provide his last known address and telephone number. RESPONSE TO INTERROGATORY NO. 16: OCF states that Dr. Jon L. Konzen is alive and employed by OCF. OCF's address is as follows: Owens-Corning Fiberglas Corporation; Fiberglas Tower/T-26; Toledo, Ohio 43659. -11- INTERROGATORY NO. 17; As of September 13, 1972, please state whether R.F. Shannon, was an officer or employee of Owens-Corning, its subsidiaries or affiliated corporations. If so, please describe his position and duties as of September 13, 1972, and any subsequent positions he held with Owens-Corning, its subsidiaries or affiliated corporations. RESPONSE TO INTERROGATORY N0.17: Richard F. Shannon was employed by OCF from 06/01/45 until 06/17/49. Hr. Shannon was reemployed by OCF on 09/07/50. He retired on 01/31/86. Mr. Shannon's positions with OCF are listed as follows: 06/01/45-06/17/49 09/07/50-04/01/58 04/01/58-06/16/68 06/16/68-1975 1975-01/31/86 Lab, Research Technologist Lab, Technologist Research Scientist Chem. Research Lab. Mgr. Sr. Research Associate INTERROGATORY NO. 18: As of September 13, 1972, please state whether T.R. Schuman, was an officer or employee of Owens-Corning, its subsidiaries or affiliated corporations. If so, please describe his position and duties as of September 13, 1972, and any subsequent positions he held with Owens-Corning, its subsidiaries or affiliated corporations RESPONSE TO INTERROGATORY NO. 18: Thomas R. Schuman was employed by OCF from 01/15/68 until 11/15/72.: During this time, Mr. Schuman was employed by OCF's Legal Department as an Intermediate Patent Attorney. INTERROGATORY NO. 19: Please identify by name, occupation of claimant, location and date of claim all workers' compensation claims against OwensCorning, its subsidiaries or affiliated corporations for asbestos-related diseases and/or death before 1973. -12- RESPONSE.TO INTERROGATORY NO. 19; OCF objects to this interrogatory on the grounds that it is overly broad and burdensome. Without waiving its objections and with regard to those claims filed against OCF before 1974, OCF states as follows: OCF has been named as a party in worker's compensation actions filed by persons allegedly employed at some point in time on construction jobs involving OCF's Contracting and Supply Division. These persons were typically hired from union halls for specific jobs on an as-needed basis and were not long-term employees. As a result, these claimants filed actions against numerous past and present employers. These claimants alleged a variety of injuries from exposure--throughout their employment histories--to numerous asbestos and nonasbestos-containing materials manufactured and/or distributed by a number of companies. OCF lacks adequate records to provide a complete response to this interrogatory for a number of reasons. Individual state workers' compensation laws determined the specific employers and/or insurance carriers which could be named as defendants in compensation actions, as well as the procedures for their notification. As a result, even though some workers' compensation claims list OCF as an employer, OCF may not have received notice of the claim, and even if OCF received notice of the claim, it may not have been aware that the claim was related to asbestos exposure or that the claimant was employed by OCF. -13- Furthermore, worker's compensation claims historically have been processed by OCF's insurance carriers and OCF's corporate headquarters did not always receive notification of individual claims. OCF sets forth in Table A the pertinent information from OCF's records which is presently believed to be related to workers' compensation claims filed before 1974 by individuals employed by OCF's Contracting and Supply Division: -14-  (M M . HI4 f. 0 //3 I/I5 t i i n l t i i M i i t l n I9 4 M M 4 OCf la t A a |tU i. CA (ifa ia ra la M ia llla | l lajary lik llk . * la *la a | A |M M *i 1H4 1H4 IS a lk ii t*4 ik*l< U saiiM * ( M flll. Allaa I 01/07/00 1 Aakastai la u ila ta t I t H I M l 1 taalata Aakailaa 1 iSat F taatlaca. CA * IMA 1 IMA 1 |A atkai *! p la t lali|laaaiaata ta n la fi * H I ----- t|(M *!* *1 l '| * *p! mt l lMM | IM, *V! V3 'M | r t i M l | i----- (M I-C U I 'u c i tc tl | itiiiM V 2 1 /tl/K m 5g * * nX mX i V 9m f ii 9*% 159 mm s 9 m: i ' a 5 ft M * 1 jf*i mm --* 5 <* <c e ? 9 2 at s 1ft u * i 2. * * 9 1 X mX ' 9X1 9 9 1 9 --9ft f9ftt. 9 ft ft ft S s | 9 im 9* a 9 | - ft. ft IL 9 fftt 1 2 *0 9f9ff9ttt fst t*ax 3 fftt f9ftt w9ft * M9 o f(ftt 5 iQa ? ft 9 . ft! Ilsi 1 9 9ft < ft ft fftt m ft X ft 99 ft fftt -- 9ft ft 9fftt ft z< OV * g ft 9 ft 9 i n w iik t ir c*wt>it.oA i'i ocr i t t t . i t t i i m p u iA t u ir a ii Ia l> m i i m i * i i n i t cU Im a I a<m I a< N t k p m aa< *aM ( I ia a i*i l i i nk UCC< l 'to w n ic l ,*u n |9 '9 n* lt Pi in uul k l i t.p OH l m ' .. j>on. u it (0 ioum .1 II.c .u .n d iurnc l l . t IM I 41 M cs -t u i k il Ik * * ol uHlni 2 liittll /2 li l 0/ n I io 1h119i.)l9lOi nC( fl 'i tl e c iiM 4 l> c MM n 91*11111111' t Ul w ul (Mt tkililtMl . 4UnU l i*i lti ' f. U c l l* 4 Ol Cl tFi U s i *iv 11*1 *4 D * llw'?ltkk i l M lc kU Ut l la U fUi tk k 4 K ili lk t k| IIK H , U ' *< C il4 U | l * M Ik lll tit k <1 M I I UU U v ilt ki i lH Ih 4 l IH U IN I. 1 M I C* M I* C fk kl( iliU kM m' iki l l * C ta ll* | *1 fH *4 Ik U llH l l lk * < k I *t II* ll# lll* (k ic k ' 4 ** 4 I*|M OCf ik *I* k lU ii 14.8 In the course of litigation, a certain plaintiffs' counsel produced to OCF's Law Department portions of workers' compensation files purporting to be claims filed by various insulation workers and other tradesmen. It is believed that these files were originally obtained from codefendants or from public records, and copies were forwarded to OCF's Law Department in approximately 1979. Some of these files reflect claims apparently filed against OCF which OCF cannot currently verify from a review of its records. Table C sets forth information from such claims where OCF was presumably a party. -16- i ! C_* 9*< om a 8 <2 #> * i *% wI% m f*mm 9 9~ 9m ill l r9 1 rl li! < m mm 1 M I m 3 :{ 3> * m 33 em i 9 | 3g g 3 3 1 9 1 3 3 S 3 3 9 3 h 53 3 s # 9 m > O 3 5 iI s5 g M % 9 {l! | !u !=i *!| 3S 1 59 9 l 2m 3 fg g mm #m m 9 9 9 9 9 M9 9 3w< ms* V9> 3 #* 9 9 9 m *m m l l l l t|t4< /! / 1 <(* llt l M ` IIIM t u*l m i . m i * m i m .> <> ...................... M . . . . . . . .......... ,,. . . .............. IM m In addition to the claims in Table A, OCF's records reflect that the following individuals, listed in Table B, also filed asbestos-related workers' compensation claims before 1974. It is believed these claims were probably handled by OCF's insurance carriers. OCF's records do not indicate when or if OCF received notice of these claims. -15- ! M t* IN * ! l i i t i i i i rI I * Cm ^ m i i I I m f H Cl i !* < t it a p U la lll <aaai*l ta | | > | a li c lt ik a l I H i i i i l a H l la t i M i i l t l i i l l a i a a l a4iaaa4 alaaaary U * 1 * 1 1 - ( * * < * * I I I * OCI ' < ' l< * l U U I l l l t ' ( m l la m a tla m lfel I I I * (ia la a a l a lia M (a |(a u l aiaM y a t la if iaaaia II* (III* * llw lm i 16.4 5 9 i 3 t a i The following employees of OCF's Berlin, New Jersey Kaylo manufacturing plant also filed workers' compensation claims against OCF before 1974, in which they alleged injury from exposure to asbestos in the plant environment: Name Approx. Date of Claim Filed Allecred Iniurv Albert Behnke 09/15/72 Chronic bronchitis; emphysema, cirrhosis of the liver William Bodine 03/21/73 Asbestosis, emphysema Harry Copeland Floyd Regn 1/22/72 06/14/71 Pulmonary asbestosis Chronic pulmonary obstructive disease, pneumoconiosis George Zepp 07/13/72 Pneumoconiosis, asbestosis In 1965, OCF learned that a Berlin worker had apparently contracted asbestosis; however, the injury was apparently not related to work at OCF and, to OCF's knowledge, no workers' compensation claim was filed against OCF. When OCF purchased the Bloomington, Illinois plant from UNARCO in 1970, it acquired certain files pertaining to workers' compensation claims brought against UNARCO by its employees. OCF, however, did not have knowledge of these claims until it purchased the plant in 1970. Some of these claims alleged injury from exposure to asbestos in the plant environment. A few employees of other OCF manufacturing plants filed asbestos-related workmen's compensation claims before 1974. It -17- is not known whether these employees were actually exposed to asbestos in connection with their employment for OCF. Additional information pertinent to the subject matter of this interrogatory would be contained in OCF's files related to asbestos* OCF has collected numerous records and documents relating to asbestos generally. These documents are stored in OCF's document library located in Richmond, Virginia. The document library contains existing documents generated and/or received at OCF's corporate headquarters in Toledo, Ohio; its technical center in Granville, Ohio; and its manufacturing facilities in Berlin, New Jersey; Bloomington, Illinois; Newark, Ohio; and Santa Clara, California. The library also contains certain files obtained from Fiberglas Engineering and Supply Company in San Francisco, California, and Seattle, Washington. Other documents relating to Fiberglas Engineering and Supply Company of San Francisco are maintained by the law firm of Popelka, Allard, McCowan & Jones in San Jose, California, pursuant to an agreement contained in Defendant OCF's response to Plaintiffs' Request for Production in Helev. et al. v. Fibreboard. et al.. June 10, 1989. Additional documents relating to OCF's supply and contracting units may be in the possession of various OCF trial counsel. The library contains responsive, non-privileged materials generated before and during the time that OCF manufactured asbestos-containing Kaylo insulation. -18- At a mutually convenient time, OCF will make available for inspection by plaintiffs1 counsel the non-privileged documents stored in its document library. Counsel for OCF will provide an index, which sets forth the file titles of those files contained in each box, and personnel to assist plaintiffs' counsel in locating documents responsive to the discovery requests in this matter. OCF will also make arrangements for copying documents which plaintiffs' counsel may select. Copying and shipping costs will be borne by plaintiffs, unless otherwise ordered by the Court. OCF's library includes documents that contain information which is considered to be proprietary and trade secret. Therefore, such documents will be produced only after the entry of an appropriate protective order. OCF has removed from the library any existing materials which it contends are protected from discovery as privileged attorney-client communications, party communiations, attorney work product materials, or otherwise beyond the scope of permissible discovery. Each document removed as privileged has been substituted with an easily identifiable marker which describes the privileged document by document type, fe.q.. memo, letter, note), date, author, recipient, subject matter, and basis for objection. These markers may be designated for copying in the same manner as non-privileged documents. OCF refers plaintiffs to attached Exhibit A, a copy of an index of those documents generated and/or received by OCF prior to 1973 which -19- OCF claims are protected from discovery as attorney-client communications, party communications and/or attorney work product, and to attached Exhibit B, a copy of an. index of those document generated and/or received by OCF after 1972 which OCF claims are protected from discovery as attorney-client communications and/or attorney work product. Visits to the library may be scheduled through OCF's local counsel. INTERROGATORY NO._ 20; Please describe all tests performed by Owens-Corning to determine if asbestos-containing Kaylo posed a health hazard to users of the product. RESPONSE TO INTERROGATORY NO. 20: OCF objects to this interrogatory on the grounds that it is vague, ambiguous, overly broad and burdensome. OCF also objects to this interrogatory to the extent that it seeks information which is protected from discovery as attorney-client communications, party communications and/or attorney work product. Without waiving its objections, OCF offers the following overview of those tests, studies, and surveys of which it was aware before 1974 which pertain to the potential health effects of asbestos-containing Kaylo. Before OCF purchased the Berlin, New Jersey, Kaylo manufacturing plant from Owens-Illinois, Owens-Illinois sponsored studies on Kaylo. These studies were conducted at the Trudeau Foundation located in Saranac Lake, New York. -20- In 1956, before its acquisition of the Kaylo manufacturing plant from Owens-Illinois, OCF inquired into the information that Owens-Illinois had regarding the health aspects of OwensIllinois* Kaylo product. OCF was informed that a study at Saranac Lake, published in 1955, showed that animals, if exposed for a prolonged period of time to extraordinarily high concentrations of Kaylo dust, could develop a mild asbestosis reaction. However, OCF was informed at the same time that OwensIllinois' experience in the Kaylo manufacturing plants, including x-ray results of its employees, revealed no lung changes of any kind that could be attributed to the occupational exposure to Kaylo. See attached Exhibit C (Bates numbered 01 118 0108), a letter from W. 6. Hazard to Ira Brought dated 6/12/56. Documents from OCF's historical files, which OCF believes it received from Owens-Illinois around the time of OCF's acquisition of the Berlin, New Jersey plant, informed OCF that Owens-Illinois had never received any complaints from any user reflecting any health or physical impairment on the part of people handling Kaylo material. Owens-Illinois had thus concluded, based on its experiences in the factories and in the field and its consideration of the Saranac Lake report, that the actual hazard to the health of those handling Kaylo was considered to be small. OCF refers plaintiffs to attached Exhibit D (Bates numbered 01 501 1348-1352), a draft of a pamphlet and correspondence relating to the health aspects of Kaylo, prepared by Owens-Illinois in 1952, which OCF believes it received in 1958. See also attached -21- Exhibit E, a collection of documents pertaining to the Saranac Laboratory's testing of asbestos-containing Kaylo which were in OCF's historical files and which OCF believes it received shortly after it acquired the Berlin, New Jersey, Kaylo manufacturing plant (Exhibit E consists of 12 documents. Bates numbered as follows: 01 501 1354-1355; 01 501 1353; 01 034 0001-0032; 01 501 1343-1344; 01 501 1347; 01 501 1441; 01 035 0498-0530; 01 501 1439-1440; 01 501 1345-1346; 01 501 1348-1352; 01 501 1405-1406; 01 501 1319-1331). OCF may have in its possession other documents of the type inquired of herein which OCF received after litigation began and in the course of discovery. OCF further states that it conducted a survey of its workers in the Berlin, New Jersey, Kaylo manufacturing plant which was concluded in December 1970. See attached Exhibit F. During the period of time in which OCF manufactured asbestos-containing Kaylo products, dust level counts were taken for asbestos at the Berlin, New Jersey, Kaylo manufacturing plant by Aetna in 1961, 1963, 1965, 1967, 1969, and 1972; by Bradley in 1968 and 1969; and by Clayton in 1970, 1971, 1972, and 1973. See attached Exhibits 6, H, and I which include copies of the results of some of those surveys. During this time period, the New Jersey Department of Labor and Industry also periodically conducted industrial hygiene inspections, including dust level counts for asbestos, at the Berlin plant. OCF refers plaintiffs to attached Exhibit J, a collection of documents which OCF counsel obtained in the course -22- of litigation from the New Jersey Department of Labor and Industry pertaining to such inspections. Industrial hygiene surveys, consisting of dust counts, were conducted during the fabrication of Kaylo block insulation on December 11, 1961, February 25, 1963, and in March 1963 at Union Carbide's Construction Insulation Shop in Charleston, West Virginia, by Robert Peele, an Industrial Hygienist for Union Carbide. As a result of his surveys, Mr. Peele concluded that 1} the fabrication of Kaylo block insulation produced negligible health effects; 2) the environmental condition in evidence during the fabrication of Kaylo block insulation was not hazardous to health; and 3) Kaylo block insulation could be fabricated safely at Union Carbide's Construction Insulation Shop. OCF refers plaintiffs to copies of the Peele studies attached as Exhibit K (Report 62-IH-l-G-l consisting of 15 pages) and Exhibit L (Report 63-IH-3--G--1 consisting of 14 pages). Documents in OCF's historical files indicate that at least by May 16, 1963, Robert Peele discussed his test results with William A. Lotz of OCF Product Testing. OCF refers plaintiffs to attached Exhibit M, a copy of a June 20, 1963, memorandum from William Lotz to J. K. Boynton (Bates numbered 01 007 0303-0304). Entries from Robert Peele's daily calendar secured by OCF in the course of litigation further indicate that Robert Peele (1) met with Robert Estep of OCF on April 30, 1963, and discussed Union Carbide's dust analysis tests and research techniques (see attached Exhibit N); (2) spoke to Robert Estep on May 1, 1963, -23- and set up a meeting for May 16, 1963, with Estep and William Lotz (see attached Exhibit 0); and (3) met with Estep and Lotz on May 16, 1963, to discuss the best techniques for conducting air analysis (see attached Exhibit P). Dust surveys were performed at power plants in Montour, Pennsylvania, on January 15, 1973, and in Peachbottom, Pennsylvania, on January 16 and 17, 1973; and at a shipyard in San Diego, California, on June 26 and 27, 1973. These surveys were done by G. E. Devitt, Chief Industrial Hygienist, OwensCorning Fiberglas Corporation, Fiberglas Tower, Toledo, Ohio 43659. Results of these surveys were communicated to OCF's Contracting Division. See attached Exhibit Q, the results of those surveys conducted at Montour, Pennsylvania; Peachbottom, Pennsylvania; and San Diego, California. In addition, in the course of litigation OCF has become aware of the following studies pertaining to the potential health effects of Kaylo: In August and September 1966, the industrial hygiene department of Bath Iron Works conducted surveys of the dust released when cutting various pipecovering materials. See attached Exhibit R, the study results from the test dated August 19, 1966 and Exhibit S, the results of the test dated September 12, 1966. After concluding these surveys, Bath Iron Works decided to use Kaylo pipecovering on future projects, because it was less dusty than other asbestos-containing pipecovering. -24- In 1967, industrial hygienists at DuPont evaluated total dust generated by fabricating, handsawing, and filing Kaylo. Dust counts from fabricating Kaylo with a band saw and a hand saw resulted in a negligible amount of total dust, defined as less than 100 particles per cubic foot. Filing of Kaylo resulted in a trace amount of total dust, defined as greater than 5,000 particles per cubic foot but less than .2% of the TLV. Additional information pertinent to the subject matter of this interrogatory would be contained in OCF's files related to asbestos as described in Response No. 19. INTERROGATORY NO. 21: Please describe all tests or asbestos-containing Kaylo performed at the request or direction of Owens-Coming by any other person or entity to determine if asbestos-containing Kaylo posed a health hazard to users of the product. RESPONSE TO INTERROGATORY NO. 21: OCF objects to this interrogatory as overly broad and burdensome, as well as vague and ambiguous. OCF also objects to this interrogatory to the extent that it seeks information which is protected from discovery as attorney-client communications, party communications, and/or attorney work product. Without waiving its objections, OCF refers plaintiffs to Response No. 20 and the exhibits proffered therein. Additional information pertinent to the subject matter of this interrogatory would be located in OCF's files related to asbestos as described in Response No. 19. -25- INTERROGATORY NO. 22: Please describe any tests performed by or for Owens-Corning to determine whether cutting, sawing or handling its asbestoscontaining Kaylo produced dust in excess of the applicable threshold limit value ("HiV*) in any of the following work settings: a. Shipyards; b. Powerhouses; c. Paper mills; d. Refineries; and e. Any other industrial plant or installation. If so, please describe the tests, provide the date or dates the tests took place and provide an authentic copy of such test results. RESPONSE TO INTERROGATORY NO. 22: OCF objects to this interrogatory on the grounds that it is vague, ambiguous, overly broad and burdensome. Without waiving its objections, OCF refers plaintiffs to Response No. 20. INTERROGATORY NO. 23: For each year between 1953 and 1973, please state the total sales by Owens-Corning in dollars of asbestos-containing Kaylo pipe covering and block insulation. RESPONSE TO INTERROGATORY NO. 23: OCF objects to this interrogatory as overly broad and burdensome, as well as vague and ambiguous. Without waiving its objections, OCF refers plaintiffs to attached Exhibit T, which lists OCF's total dollar sales for asbestos-containing Kaylo products during the time period April 1953 to April 1973. INTERROGATORY NO. 24: For each year between 1953 and 1973, what was asbestoscontaining Kafylo *s approximate share of the market for sales of high-temperature, asbestos-containing calcium silicate pipe covering and block insulation? -26- RESPONSE TO INTERROGATORY NO. 24: OCF objects to this interrogatory as overly broad and burdensome. OCF also objects to this interrogatory to the extent that it seeks information which is protected from discovery as attorney-client communications, party communications and/or attorney work product. Without waiving its objections, OCF states that during the time period OCF manufactured asbestoscontaining Kaylo products (1958-1972), OCF employees made various attempts to determine OCF's market share for these products. Each such estimate varied according to the scope of the market in question and the method of estimating or calculating OCF's market share. Thus, estimates ranged anywhere from 18% (of the high temperature insulation market in 1958) to 35% (among the major competitors in the calcium silicate market in 1971). However, calcium silicate type materials comprised only one portion of the pipe and block insulation market. Other high temperature asbestos pipe and block materials included 85% magnesia, bonded perlite, bonded fibered asbestos, and numerous asbestos cement products usedon pipes. In the 1950's and early 1960's numerous 85% magnesia products were strong competitors with calcium silicate type materials. Bonded perlite and bonded asbestos fiber products remained strong competitors throughout the 1960's and early 1970's. In addition, there were numerous lower temperature asbestos pipe and block insulation products, including aircell, asbestos felt molded insulation and insulation blankets. Undoubtedly Kaylo*s share of the total pipe -27- and block insulation market was very substantially smaller than that described above. Documented information supporting these estimates is attached as Exhibit U. Additional documents pertinent to the subject matter of this interrogatory would be located in OCF's files related to asbestos as described in Response No. 19. INTERROGATORY NO. 25; Does Owens-Corning have in its possession any documentation that it advised any branch of the United States Government or any foreign government between 1953 and 1973 that the asbestos in Kaylo could cause detrimental health effects on humans? If so, please identify the date and nature of such communication, and provide an authentic copy of any such documentation that exists. RESPONSE TO INTERROGATORY NO. 25: OCF objects to this interrogatory as overly broad and burdensome, as well as vague, ambiguous. OCF also objects to this interrogatory to the extent that it seeks information which is protected from discovery as attorney-client communications, party communications and/or attorney work product. OCF further objects to this interrogatory to the extent it seeks information that is irrelevant and not reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence. Without waiving its objections, OCF states that it does not have a compilation of the information requested herein. However, to the extent plaintiffs seek information regarding those warning labels and cautionary materials that OCF distributed with those asbestos-containing products it sold to various branches or -28- agencies of the U.S. Government, OCF offers the following overview: In 1964, at the suggestion of Eagle-Picher, OCF agreed to the placement of a cautionary label on bags of OC-110 (SC-30) and OC--660 (SC-40) cement manufactured by Eagle-Picher and rebranded for OCF. These labels read as follows: "CAUTION: This product contains asbestos fiber. Inhalation of asbestos in excessive quantities over long periods of time may be harmful. If dust is created when this product is handled, avoid breathing the dust. If adequate ventilation control is not possible, wear respirators approved by the U.S. Bureau of Mines for pneumoconiosis producing dust." See attached Exhibit V. OCF did not author the OC-110 or OC-660 warnings. In December 1966, OCF handstamped cautionary labels on containers of Kaylo insulation which read as follows: "This product contains asbestos fiber. If dust is created when this product is handled, avoid breathing the dust. If adequate ventilation control is not possible, wear respirator approved by the U. S. Bureau of Mines." Cartons with preprinted warnings were used after February 1967. No reproductions of the handstamped packages are available. However, attached Exhibit W accurately reflects the labeling stamped on all packages from December 1966 to November 1970. In November 1970, OCF changed the Kaylo cautionary label to read: "CAUTION - Product contains asbestos fiber. Inhalation of dust in excessive quantities over long periods of time may be -29- harmful. Avoid breathing dust. If adequate ventilation is not possible, wear respirators approved by the U. S. Bureau of Mines for pneumoconiosis producing dust." See attached Exhibit X. After its purchase of the Bloomington, Illinois, plant from Unarco on April 15, 1970, OCF continued to use the warning labels already printed on Unarcoboard (Fyrcor) packaging which read as follows: "CAUTION - This product contains asbestos fiber. Inhalation of asbestos in excessive quantities over long periods of time may be harmful. If dust is created when this product is handled avoid breathing the dust. If inadequate ventilation control is not possible, wear respirators approved by the U. S. Bureau of Mines for pneumoconiosis producing dusts." See attached Exhibit Y. OCF did not author the original Unarcoboard warning. In May 1971, OCF revised the Fyrcor warning to read: "WARNING - This product contains asbestos fibers. Inhalation of asbestos fibers in excessive quantities over long periods of time may be harmful. Avoid breathing the dust. If adequate ventilation control is not possible, wear respirators of a type approved by the U. S. Bureau of Mines for pneumoconiosis dusts." See attached Exhibit Z. The author of the 1966 Kaylo cautionary label is presently unknown; however, J. M. Briley (retired) directed that the cautionary label be printed on Kaylo product cartons. Per Saverstrom (retired) was involved in the change of Kaylo*s cautionary label in 1970. The person responsible for the change -30- of Fyrcor's label in 1971 is also unknown; however. Dr. Jon Konzen participated in this activity. The above described cautionary labels were directed to all users of those products. Additionally, OCF, on its own and through the National Insulation Manufacturers Association, prepared and disseminated to contractors, distributors, and insulators information regarding potential health hazards associated with asbestoscontaining insulation. In 1968, NIMA published a pamphlet entitled "Recommended Health Safety Practices for Handling and Applying Thermal Insulation Products Containing Asbestos." This pamphlet was distributed at meetings of the Insulation Distributor Contractors National Association. OCF also directly distributed the pamphlet to its branch managers. Supply and Contracting (S & C) supervisors. Home Building Products (HBP) supervisors, and S & C managers with instructions to review the matter with their salesmen. See attached Exhibit AA, a copy of this pamphlet. OCF also participated, through the educational and legislative committee of NIMA and at regional meetings of the IDCNA, in the presentation of health and safety programs to distributors and contractors. At those meetings, contractors and distributors: (1) were advised of the current status of health and safety activities pertinent to their businesses; (2) were given copies of the NIMA publications on health and safety practices and medical research literature; (3) discussed the -31- contents of those publications; (4) discussed the merits of the proposed pre-employment and periodic physical examination programs on a cooperative employer-employee basis; (5) were urged to establish regional health and safety committees; and (6) were given an opportunity to ask questions of the experts. These NIMA programs were presented to contractors and distributors with the intention that they would instruct their employees accordingly. In 1972, Donald Bradshaw, OCF's Region Manager of Power and Process for the West Coast and Chairman of the National Insulation Contractor's Association's Occupational Health and Safety Committee, authored, along with other committee members, a pamphlet entitled, "Safety Reminders." See attached Exhibit BB. It is OCF's present understanding that this pamphlet was disseminated to contractors, distributors, and insulators. OCF further refers plaintiffs to attached Exhibit CC, a pamphlet entitled "Caution: Asbestos Dust ..." published by the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health. This pamphlet was distributed by OCF to its asbestos worker employees on or around October 30, 1973. OCF also held meetings with the International Association of Heat and Frost Insulators and Asbestos Workers and the Glass Bottle Blowers. The meeting between OCF and the president of the International Association of Heat and Frost Insulators and Asbestos Workers took place in the union's offices in Washington, D. C; the exact date of this meeting is unknown but OCF believes it was before 1972. OCF is uncertain as to the details regarding -32- its meeting with the Glass Bottle Blowers. At these meetings, OCF attempted to discuss the then-known health concerns regarding asbestos. Also, OCF management held meetings with the unions at OCF's Berlin, New Jersey, manufacturing plant and made special presentations to employees to discuss those health concerns related to asbestos. OCF was involved in all of the above activities in order to ensure the safe use of its asbestos-containing products. OCF further refers plaintiffs to attached Exhibit DD. Additional information pertinent to the subject matter of this interrogatory would be contained in OCF's files related to asbestos as described in Response No. 19. INTERROGATORY NO. 26: Did Owens-Corning ever sell asbestos-containing products in any foreign country? If so, please list such countries, and state the approximate years such sales took place. RESPONSE TO INTERROGATORY NO. 26; OCF objects to this interrogatory on the grounds that it seeks information which is irrelevant and not reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence. Without waiving its objection, OCF states that it distributed asbestos-containing Kaylo insulation products generally throughout the U.S. and, in some cases, to international destinations from April 1953 to April 1973. According to a review of OCF's collection of invoices for asbestos-containing -33- Kaylo insulation products, OCF ceased the distribution of such products in April 1973. OCF further states that, between January 1, 1973 and April 1973, limited shipments of asbestos-containing Kaylo were made to Venezuela, Saudi Arabia, Colombia, and Iran. INTERROGATORY NO. 27; If the answer to the previous Interrogatory is Hyes", please state the dates, if any, that warnings were placed on such asbestos-containing products in each country where they were sold, and describe such warnings, if any. RESPONSE TO INTERROGATORY NO. 27: OCF objects to this interrogatory as overly broad and burdensome. OCF also objects to this interrogatory to the extent it seeks information that is irrelevant and not reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence. Without waiving its objections, OCF refers plaintiffs to Response No. 26. OCF further refers plaintiffs to Response No. 25 and the exhibits proffered therein for information regarding those warning labels and cautionary materials that OCF distributed with its asbestos-containing products. To the extent it exists, additional information pertinent to the subject matter of this interrogatory would be contained in OCF*s files related to asbestos as described in Interrogatory Response No. 19. INTERROGATORY' NO. 28: Please list all substitute materials used in place of asbestos which are contained in asbestos free Kaylo block and pipe covering. -34- RESPONSE NO. 28; OCF objects to this interrogatory on the grounds that it is vague and ambiguous. Without waiving its objections, OCF states that, as a result of research, OCF learned that AR Glass Fibers could be used as a substitute for amosite asbestos and that wood pulp would serve as a substitute for chrysotile asbestos. The technology necessary to manufacture asbestos free Kaylo first became available in 1972. The production of asbestos-free Kaylo, which was marketed as Kaylo AF and is currently being marketed as Pink Calcium Silicate, began in November 1972. This product contains the following ingredients: glass fibers, wood pulp, lime, Portland cement, diatomaceous earth, tripoli, clay, and Kaylo dust. INTERROGATORY NO. 29: What year was asbestos free Kaylo pipe covering and block a. sold b. marketed c. distributed RESPONSE NO. 29; In November 1972, OCF began to manufacture and distribute an asbestos-free high temperature insulation product known as Kaylo AF. This product is currently marketed as Pink Calcium Silicate. INTERROGATORY NO. 30; For all substitutes which you have listed in Interrogatory No. 28 please state if these substitutes were available in a. The decade of the 1940's -35- b. The decade of the 1950's c. The decade of the 1960's RESPONSE NO, 30: OCF objects to this interrogatory on the grounds that it is vague and ambiguous. Without waiving its objections, OCF refers plaintiffs to Response No. 28 and states that it is not aware of the technology which may have been developed or available to other manufacturers of asbestos-containing insulations. Although OCF had worked for many years to develop a substitute, it was unable to develop and market an acceptable substitute until October 1972. REQUEST FOR PRODUCTION OF ES REQUEST NO. 1; Please produce a genuine and authentic copy of any and all documents identified in response to these Interrogatories. RESPONSE TO REQUEST NO. 1: OCF objects to this request as overly broad and burdensome, as well as vague and ambiguous, specifically on the grounds that plaintiffs have not defined the term "genuine.N A copy cannot be genuine and authentic. OCF also objects to this request to the extent that it seeks information which is protected from discovery as attorney-client communications and/or attorney work product. OCF further objects to this request to the extent it seeks information that is irrelevant and not reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence. -36- Without waiving its objections, OCF refers plaintiffs to Interrogatory Response Nos. 1-27 and the exhibits proffered therein. OCF further refers plaintiffs to its files related to asbestos as described in Interrogatory Response No. 19. REQUES_T__N_0_*--2: Produce a copy of each and every unpublished article, unpublished document or unpublished paper regarding asbestos or asbestos-related disease which any Owens-Corning lawyer has given to Dr. Thomas Howard. RESPONSE TO REQUEST NO. 2: ' OCF objects to this request as overly broad and burdensome. Without waiving its objections, OCF states that it is in the process of compiling the materials requested, and will supplement this response. Respectfully submitted BEAN & HANNING, L.L.P Rick W. Thamm Texas State Bar No. 19820020 5847 San Felipe, Suite 1500 Houston, Texas 77057 (713) 783-7070 (713) 974-8173 Fax Number ATTORNEYS FOR DEFENDANT, OWENS-CORNING FIBERGLAS CORP -37- CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I hereby certify that Owens-Corning Fiberglas Corporation^ Responses to Plaintiffs1 Interrogatories and Request for Production has been served upon Mr. Russell Budd, Baron & Budd, The Centrum, 3102 Oak Lawn Avenue, Suite 1100, Dallas Texas 75219, plaintiff*s counsel of record, by overnight delivery and to all other counsel of record by regular mail this day of May, 1993. Rick W. Thamm -38-