It is therefore critical to prevent hazardous substances like lead from entering the supply chain in the first place.

This position is provided publicly on the EPA's "Recognition of Lead Test Kits" web page, available at http://www2.epa.gov/lead/epa-recognition-lead-test-kits.

CHESTERTON COMPANY al ) Defendants ) ) ) DEFENDANT KUBOTA CORPORATION'S RESPONSES TO PLAINTIFFS REQUESTS FOR ADMISSION SET ONE Action Filed July 29 2009 PROPOUNDING PARTIES RHODA EVANS AND BOBBY EVANS RESPONDING PARTY KUBOTA CORPORATION SET NO ONE Defendant KUBOTA CORPORATION Defendant or KUBOTA hereby responds to Plaintiffs Rhoda Evans and Bobby Evans Plaintiffs Request for Admissions Set No. 1 as follows PRELIMINARY STATEMENT 25 These responses are made solely for the purpose of and in relation to this action Each 26 answer is given subject to all appropriate objections including but not limited to objections 27 concerning competency relevancy materiality propriety and admissibility which would require 28 the exclusion of any statement contained herein where made by a witness present and testifying 03/15/2010 17:14 17:14 FAX 053/130537/137 in court All such objections and grounds therefore are reserved and may be interposed at the 2 time of trial 3 It should be noted that this responding party has not fully completed its investigation of 4 the facts relating to this case has not yet fully completed its discovery in this matter and has not 5 completed its preparation for trial All of the answers contained herein are based only upon such 6 information and documents which are presently available to and specifically known to this 7 responding party and disclose only those contentions which presently occur to such responding 8 party It is anticipated that further discovery independent investigation legal research and analysis will supply additional facts add meaning to the known facts as well as establish entirely new factual conclusions and legal contentions all of which may lead to substantial additions to changes in and variations from the contentions herein set forth As Responding Party ceased the sale of asbestos cement pipe in 1975 and during the ensuing 35 years potentially knowledgeable witnesses have left the employ of the asbestos cement pipe division of Kubota Corporation or have become deceased and through standard company record destruction policies potentially responsive documents have been destroyed it should be noted that Responding Party lacks sufficient information and belief to respond to many of the requests for admissions These responses are made on behalf of Kubota Corporation only with regard to information existing during the time asbestos cement pipe was exported to the United States The following responses are given without prejudice to Kubota Corporation's right to produce evidence of any subsequently discovered facts which this responding party may later recall Kubota Corporation accordingly reserves the right to change any and all answers herein as additional facts are ascertained analyses are made legal research is completed and contentions are made The answers contained herein are made in a good faith effort to supply as much factual information and as much specification of legal contentions as is presently known but should in 03/15/2010 03/15/2010 17:14 17:14 FAX 054/137 054/137 no way be to the prejudice of Kubota Corporation in relation to further discovery research or any answers to herein no admission of any nature whatsoever is to be implied or inferred The fact that any request for admission herein has been partially answered should not be taken as an admission to the entire request or that such answer constitutes evidence of any facts thus set forth or assumed All answers must be construed as given on the basis of present recollection 6 Any request for admission deemed as continuing is objected to as oppressive over burdensome 7 improper and not in compliance with Code of Civil Procedure Sections 2033 et seq and will 8 not be regarded as continuing in nature 9 RESPONSES PLAINTIFFS REQUESTS FOR ADMISSION 10 REQUEST FOR ADMISSION NO 1 11 Admit that on approximately June 29 2005 you made an announcement regarding the 12 occurrence of many occupational victims of asbestos as well as the victims of asbestos dust from 13 environmental exposure around the Kanzaki plant 14 RESPONSE REQUEST FOR ADMISSION NO 1 15 16 Objection This request is vague and ambiguous with regard to the terms many 17 occupational victims of asbestos and victims of asbestos dust is overly broad irrelevant and 18 is not reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence The request is 19 propounded to oppress and harass KUBOTA 20 REQUEST FOR ADMISSION NO 2 21 Admit that approximately 75 former workers of the Kanzaki Plant developed 22 mesothelioma as a result of their exposure to the plant's containing products and have 23 24 died as a result of this fatal disease 25 RESPONSE REQUEST FOR ADMISSION NO 2 26 Objection This request is vague and ambiguous with regard to the terms former 27 workers of the Kansaki Plant and containing products is overly broad irrelevant and 28 03/15/2010 17:14 17:14 FAX 055/130557/137 is not reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence The request is propounded merely to oppress and harass KUBOTA In addition the request and its 3 accompanying Form Interrogatory No. 17.1 calls for information that invades the privacy 4 privilege of third parties and their familics 5 REQUEST FOR ADMISSION NO 3 6 7 Admit that you have compensated the surviving families of deceased workers of the 8 Kanzaki Plant who developed mesothelioma as a result of their exposure to the plant's asbestos- 9 containing products 10 RESPONSE REQUEST FOR ADMISSION NO 3 11 Objection This request is vague and ambiguous with regard to the terms surviving 12 families deccased workers of the Kanzaki Plant and containing products is overly 13 broad irrelevant and is not reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence 14 15 The request is propounded merely to oppress and harass KUBOTA In addition the request and 16 its accompanying Form Interrogatory No. 17.1 calls for information that invades the privacy 17 privilege of third parties and their families Should KUBOTA be ordered to respond to this 18 request said order will force KUBOTA to breach its confidentiality contract with third parties 19 REQUEST FOR ADMISSION NO 4 20 Admit that residents of Amagasaki City Japan developed fatal mesothelioma during and 21 after the years the Kanzaki Plant produced containing products as a result of exposure 22 23 to the Kanzaki Plant's containing products 24 RESPONSE REQUEST FOR ADMISSION NO 4 25 Objection This request is vague and ambiguous with regard to the terms residents of 26 Amagasaki City Japan Kanzaki Plant and containing products is overly broad 27 irrelevant and not reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence The 28 03/15/2010 17:15 17:15 FAX Ww) 056/137 056/137 request is propounded merely to oppress and harass KUBOTA In addition the request and its accompanying Form Interrogatory No. 17.1 calls for information that invades the privacy privilege of third parties 4 REQUEST FOR ADMISSION NO 5 5 6 Admit that from 1962 through 1975 approximately 240,000 tons of asbestos was used at the Kanzaki Plant in the production of asbestos water pipes and building material 8 RESPONSE REQUEST FOR ADMISSION NO 5 9 Objection This request is vague and ambiguous with regard to the terms Kanzaki 10 Plant and asbestos water pipes and building material With regard to the years 1962 to 11 1967 prior to Bobby Evans employment with LOS ANGELES DEPARTMENT OF WATER 12 AND POWER this request is overly broad and irrelevant and is not reasonably calculated to lead 13 to the discovery of admissible evidence The request is propounded merely to oppress and harass 14 KUBOTA 15 16 Without waiving these objections Defendant responds as follows 17 Deny 18 REQUEST FOR ADMISSION NO 6 19 Admit that from 1962 through 1975 YOU were informed and had documentation 20 regarding the HAZARDS ASSOCIATED WITH ASBESTOS EXPOSURE and ASBESTOS 21 CONTAINING MATERIAL 22 23 RESPONSE REQUEST FOR ADMISSION NO 6 24 Objection This request is compound with regard to the terms from 1962 to 1975 and 25 and ASBESTOS CONTAINING MATERIAL The request is vague and ambiguous with 26 regard to the term documentation and the term ASBESTOS CONTAINING MATERIAL 27 With regard to the years 1962 to 1967 prior to Bobby Evans employment with LOS 28 03/15/2010 17:15 17:15 FAX 057/137 057/137 ANGELES DEPARTMENT OF WATER AND POWER this request is overly broad and irrelevant and is not reasonably calculated to lead to the discovery of admissible evidence The request is propounded merely to oppress and harass KUBOTA 4 Without waiving these objections Defendant responds as follows 5 6 Through the passage of time and demise of its employees KUBOTA is unable to more 7 completely respond to this interrogatory but shortly before its enactment KUBOTA became 8 aware of a 1960 Japanese Pneumoconiosis Act that addressed pneumoconiosis and asbestosis 9 resulting from long term exposures to asbestos at manufacturing facilities but not lung cancer or 10 mesothelioma and on that basis admits the request KUBOTA believes it first learned of 11 asbestos related cancer and mesothelioma hazards shortly before promulgation of the 1975 12 Japanese Ordinance on

Below are a few examples of measures that would reduce permitting delays contributing to long geothermal lead time.

The Heartland Institute is globally considered the leading think tank promoting skepticism of a human-caused climate crisis.

Lead Indus.

The company also announced its intention to improve its industry-leading energy efficiency in refining and chemical manufacturing facilities.

However, because a compliant test kit does not exist, remodelers have no other cost-effective way to test for lead, so instead they assume the presence of lead and use lead-safe work practices on the job, hence charging their customers for work practices that are unnecessary to protect the home owner - but essential to protect the remodeler from enforcement actions.

The company also announced its intention to improve its industry-leading energy efficiency in refining and chemical manufacturing facilities.

The company also announced its intention to improve its industry-leading energy efficiency in refining and chemical manufacturing facilities.

However, because a compliant test kit does not exist, remodelers have no other cost-effective way to test for lead, so instead they assume the presence of lead and use lead-safe work practices on the job, hence charging their customers for work practices Sierra Club v.

As a result, expensive lead-safe work practices are used in homes with no lead-based paint hazards present, at considerable cost to homeowners.

To view online'. https://www.politicopro.com/energy/whiteboard/2017/10/state-depts-shannon-to-lead-usdelegation-to-climate-talks-094058 Was this Pro content helpful?

Ex. 6 RE: Questions on lead paint for S P?

To view online'. https://www.politicopro.com/energy/whiteboard/2017/10/state-depts-shannon-to-lead-usdelegation-to-climate-talks-094058 Was this Pro content helpful?