Exhibit 1 

Case 2:11-cv-01754-BRM-AME Document 70-1 Filed 08/04/11 Page 1 of 193 PageID: 1939
"~. '. 

", . ~. " <"" ,~. 

"u" ',: 

,~, ': ; . '. '. :t .. :..·~ 

, , ....... : 

.. :: .,;' 

;." -: . .... . 

. >:;' ": .. ~ , " 

. , 

o , ':)'" 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

FOR THE DISTRICT OF RHODE ISLAND 

---------------------------------------x 

DAVID HOWARD WESTFALL, IN HIS 

CAPACITY AS ADMINISTRATOR OF 

THE ESTATE OF THOMAS HOWARD 

WESTFALL AND IN HIS CAPACITY 

AS ADMINISTRATOR OF THE ESTATE 

OF BETTY E. WESTFALL, C.A. No. 

79-0269 

vs • 

WHITTACKER, CLARK & DANmLS, 

ME'l'ROPOLITAN TALC COMPANY, 

INC., PFIZER, INC., WINDSOR 

MINERALS INC., itself and as 

successor to EASTERN MAGNESIUM 

TALC COMPANY INC., and OMYA, 

INC., itself and as successor to 

VERMONT TALC COMPANY, INC. 

---------------------------------------x 

Deposition of GLENN A. HEMSTOCK, 

taken by plaintiff, pursuant to subpoena 

and stipulation, at the offices of Cahill 

Gordon & Reindel, Esqs., 80 Pine Street, 

New York, New York, on Friday, January 28, 

1983 at 10:20 A.M., before Joseph R. Danyo, 

a Notary Public within and for the State of 

New York. 

DOYLE REPORTING. INC. 

WAL.TER SHAPIRO, C.S.R. 

CHARL.ES SHAPIRO, C.S.R. 

CERTIFIED STENOTYPE REPORTERS 

389 LEXINGTON AVENUE 

NEW YO.K. N.Y. too17 

TELEPHONE 212 - 8S7..a220 

:---~- - ... -~--~ .. -- _ '.-"_ .. _-". '. ---- _ ..-_. -.--~ .. - .. _-_._ . ...........----.- ... - . .....,---~--

PADUANO BASF02698 

Case 2:11-cv-01754-BRM-AME Document 70-1 Filed 08/04/11 Page 2 of 193 PageID: 1940
" - ....... , .. _-_._---_. __ . 

1 

I 

, 2 I 

I 

I 

3 

;. 4 ' .. l:;) .. .' 5 . -'. 

,'" 

6 

, 

.. , . 7 , 

, ':'j 8 

... 

, , 9 . , 

<;i 10 

",j 

11 

12 ." 

,'. 13 , 

j '. , 

, 14 -: . ; 

" 'j .. 

'1 15 

.. .j 16 , . . , ' 

, 

"'I 

17 

.;. "".+ 

.:. ":. 18 

·1 19 i 

.. 

j 

I 20 

'. 

j () I" .:', 21 

I .... ~ 

I 22 

! 

23 

.J: 

• 24 

2.5 

A p pea ran c e s: 

DECOF & GRIMM, ESQS. 

Attorneys for Plaintiff 

One Smith Hill 

Providence, Rhode Island 02903 

BY: DANIEL PRENTISS, ESO" 

2 

Of Counsel 

ADLER POLL,OCK & SHEEHAN, INCORPORATED 

Attorneys for Engelhard Corporation 

and Glenn A. Hemstock 

2300 Hospital Trust Tower 

Providence, Rhode Island 02903 

BY: PETER LAWSON KENNEDY, ESQ. 

-andCAHILL GORDON & REINDEL, P.C. 

80 Pine' Street 

New York, New York 10005 

BY: HOWARD G. SLOANE, ESQ. 

-andKATHY SILBERTHAU, ESQ., 

Of Counsel 

HANSON CURRAN & PARKS, ESQS. 

Attorneys for Defendant Metropolitan 

Talc Co., Inc. 

1210 Turks Head Building 

Providence, Rhode Island 02903 

BY: WILLIAM A. CURRAN, ESQ., 

Of Counsel 

• 

PADUANO BASF0269S 

Case 2:11-cv-01754-BRM-AME Document 70-1 Filed 08/04/11 Page 3 of 193 PageID: 1941
" 

" 

-:;- 0 '- ::.>:~ " 

. 

-v 

. ':' ~ 

.. 

: .. 

" !' 

., -; 

.. ' 

"j " 

'1 

, j 

. " 

" 

! 

-.) 

-' 'j 

• '-1 

i .. "i 

,-:-, ';',,1 , ~ 

, -"1 

1 

:' ":;-.' 

/::~ .. i:.~.::~:·;, ", ,,/ 

:',,-j 

: I ,I 

.. i 

"'j .. :: .... 

,- 0 

.-

1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

" 13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

A P pea ran c e s: 

(continued) 

NUTTER McCLENNEN & FISH, ESQS. 

BY: 

Attorneys for Defendant Windsor 

Minerals Inc. 

Federal Reserve Plaza 

600 Atlantic Avenue 

Boston, Massachusetts 02210 

EDWARD P. LEIBENSPERGER, ESQ., 

RICE DOLAN KIERNAN & KERSHAW, ESQS. 

3 

-- _.------

Of Counsel 

Attorneys for Defendant Omya, Inc. 

Suite 3A 

101 Dyer Street 

Providence, Rhode Island 02903 

BY: JOHN F. ,DOLAN, ESQ., 

Also Present: 

THOMAS D. HALKET, ESQ. 

Minerals & Chemicals Division 

Engelhard Corporation 

JOHN N. BEIDLER, ESQ. 

General Counsel 

Johnson & Johnson 

*** 

Of Counsel 

I 

I 

I 

I 

I 

, 

__ ,...J.l - ' --.----- --'------- .. -,,- .. -------~'~~ 

________ , I 

PADUANO BASF02700 

Case 2:11-cv-01754-BRM-AME Document 70-1 Filed 08/04/11 Page 4 of 193 PageID: 1942
"',-' ", -;", ,; 

:.' "I 

.. ;. ~ . 

. ":~" ~; 

'."~\ " 

. ' .. 

, .• " ..../ 

, . . ': .. , 

'~ 

" 

';{ • '" f 

":' '"j 

:~.j 

';' , 

.- :;. 

" . :. ~; 

.,/' 

·1 

,j 

I 

i 

I 

I 

I 

I . I 

I 

. ©. ~, ... ' 

0

" 

.. 

1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

22 

23 

· 24' 

?5 ! ~ I 

) 

4 

IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED AND AGREED that 

the transc~oC ~ay be signed before any Notary 

Public with the same force and effect as if 

signed before the Court. 

IT IS FURTHER STIPULATED AND AGREED that 

all objections, except as to the form 'of the 

question, are reserved to the time of the trial • 

• • • 

II __ .. J ~ __ ._ .. ~_ , 

--_ i ... --.. -.... 

PADUANO BASF02701 

Case 2:11-cv-01754-BRM-AME Document 70-1 Filed 08/04/11 Page 5 of 193 PageID: 1943
" 

.' , 

.~: 

" ," '.: - ~-." 

.... 

. ' 

.. ., .. 

., l·· 

'.' 

._,1 :~ ." 

.. ~ 

" .<:~ : ;' .~.:. 

.'- .~..:: 

':'\ '.: " 

;\;~ ~~;':I 

" 

.1 .. .. ! '. j 

'I .. 

, ! ". 'j . " j 

.1 ., \ .> .' ; ~ .\ 

.. ' j 

~j 

:1 

'1 

,J 

j ,"1 

1 

! ., . , 

.1 

" "1 

j 

@ \ .; 

0 

1 5 

2 MR. KENNEDY: My name is Peter Kenned;r, and 

S I am representing Eastern Magnesium Talc Company. 

4 A stipulation had been Signed by the 

5 attorneys for the third-party plaintiff, Windsor 

6 Minerals Inc., and Just in case everybody here is 

7 unaware, that stipulation has been entered by the 

8 Magistrate as of last Tuesday, and that stipulatio 

9 dismisses the third-party claim against Eastern 

10 Magnesium Talc Company and' Minerals and Chemicals 

11 Philip Corporation. 

12 Just earlier this week, I had a conversa13 tion with Mr. Prentiss concerning the confiden14 tiality of the aocuments that are going to. be pro15 duced pursuant to the subpoena duces tecum, and in 

16 that regard, we have prepared a stipulation that 

17 I would ask all counsel to read and to sign before 

18 -'-we produce those documents. 

19 So, Mr. PrentiSS, since you are the plain20 tiff's attorney, it is probably most logical 

21 for you to take a 'look, and if you .agree, would 

22 you sign and I will pass copies around the room 

23 to other counsel for them to review. 

24 While you are reading that, I would like 

25 to make one other statement. I understand Mr. I 

I 

i 

._-_ ........ '-' ...... _----- ._~_._._, .. __ ._ ... _ .... ______ L 

PADUANO BASF0270'; 

Case 2:11-cv-01754-BRM-AME Document 70-1 Filed 08/04/11 Page 6 of 193 PageID: 1944
1 6 

2 Prentiss has called the attorneys who are repre-

," 

: ~. 3 senting Whittaker, Clark & Daniels, and am I 

" 

,~y 

'::~' 4 correct they have advised you that they will not .~: 

~" 0 .. '," 

, ~l ~~ ..... 5 

~.;' :~.\ 6 

t~i'f; .. :.~.:~~~ 7 

\{; ~ .: 

be present today? 

MR. PRENTISS: In a telephone conversation 

five minutes ago, Mr. Sarli of the firm Hinckley 

.. J . 

::" 8 0· ~.: . & Allen, advised me that neither he nor other .. , 

.: ...•. -

; . ,:~: 

,- 9 counsel for Whittaker, Clark & Daniels would 

J;:' , 

- 10 , 

',:~ "--.. '. ; " , '" , attend this morning's deposition. 

; 

i 11 He requested that his firm be supplied 

, ~ 

I 12 " with a oopy ot the transcript of this deposition, 

13 'j 

1 

, Ii and it was understood that the deposition would , 

! 14 prooeed in his absence. 

.. i , 15 MR. KENNEDY: I would like to state, so tha , 

, 

, , .. '1 16 

:1 

I 

17 

.;.;> .... ". I ." -, 

'I 

' '1 18 

.~,1 /' 19 "1'1 II 

::: 

"': .. ] 20 

everybody th:1nks we're being fair With Whittaker, Clark 

& Daniels, before they get a oopy, I require 

them to also sign the stipulation. 

(A discussion was held off the record.) 

MR. PRENTISS: My first difficulty with the 

j 

I 0 21 ; 

, 

I 

I 22 

proposed agreement which I am seeing for the first 

time this morning, this proposed confidentiality 

j 

, 23 agreement that is proposed by Englehard and/or 

24 Eastern Magnesium Talc Company is at page four. 

25 The paragraph 4A proposes to restrict any 

--~- ,'--," '-~-"-' 

PADUANO BASF02703 

Case 2:11-cv-01754-BRM-AME Document 70-1 Filed 08/04/11 Page 7 of 193 PageID: 1945
.' " 

}'~~~~r 

~~;i~l Q 

",' ~~~t ..• !;~., 

r~ :t~.: .. :,? 

.,' '. ] " 

.. 

I 

I 

I 

! 

.i 

, 

1 ... ! 

'., I 

. '. 

-

'. ; .. .. 1 

",\ ,.::j 

····1 'c' • 

',-

'. ~:.-' 

' . .. .'. 

, 0 

• '1 

I 

, 

I 

I 

.. ! 

( 

I 

1 

2_ 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

7 

party to this litigation from disclosing the 

materials to be obtained in this deposition from 

any person presently or formerly employed by or 

associated with Engelhard or with any of the parties in this action. That is in quotes. 

The plaintiff has retained the services 

of a Mr. Peter Gale, who is employed as a consultant with a firm in Oklahoma City, Oklahoma, 

to perform analytical services and assist in 

preparation for trial, and presumably to testify 

at trial. Mr. Gale at one time was an employee 

of Engelhard. 

Mr. Gale, in the course of his employment 

with Engelhard and/or a subsidiary of Engelhard 

signed an agreement that he would not reveal or 

divulge information, confidential information he 

obtained as. an employee of Engelhard, and Mr. Gale 

informed me of that agreement in our very first 

telephone conversation in connection with this 

case. 

He has not divulged any such information 

to me, and has stated that he will not, and that 

he will abide by that restriction. 

Be that as it may, this proposed conI 

I 

I 

I 

I 

, 

___ .. _ .. _____ . ___ ' J 

PADUANO BASF0270~ 

Case 2:11-cv-01754-BRM-AME Document 70-1 Filed 08/04/11 Page 8 of 193 PageID: 1946
, o --

/ .' 

, ~ 'J 

I 

1 

__ I 

- , 

\ 

j 

! 

I 

1 :0 

.. 

1 

2 

-3 

4 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

8 

fidentiality agreement would restrict my providing 

any of this information from this deposition to 

Mr. Gale for his use in preparation of this 

case for trial, and I can't agree to that. 

MR. KENNEDY: It is precisely that problem 

that gives rise to the stipulation. We became 

aware of Mr. Gale's participation in the plaintiff s 

case, after we were brought into the case, and I 

forget the date of the letter that I wrote to you, 

but I stated in that letter that he had signed 

the secrecy agreement and I enclosed a copy of it. 

It seems inconceivable to me that an expert 

witness, hired by the plaintiff, who had intimate 

knowledge of what Engelhard considers confidential 

information could prepare plaintiff's case or help 

prepare the plaintirf's case and forget what he 

might have learned as an employee of Engelhard, 

so that is precisely why that language is in this 

deposition, and we have to insist that it remain 

in that. 

MR. PRENTISS: Then we're not going any 

further. Mr. Gale is hired as an expert for his 

credentials and capabilities as a scientist. 

I 

I 

1 

His capability includes the ability to use I 

----- ----'"-~-- -- ----.~-

__________ -___________ _ _ ___ L_ 

PADUANO BASF0270! 

Case 2:11-cv-01754-BRM-AME Document 70-1 Filed 08/04/11 Page 9 of 193 PageID: 1947
I ,I 

j -, . ~ 

j 

i , 1 

0, :" ' 

o 

1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

----------

9 

analytical tools, analytical machines to perform 

analyses and to form opinions and conclusions 

as to chemical constituents, chemical contaminates 

in our bodies or materials that he chooses' to 

analyze. 

That ability only has an indirect relationship to his former emPloyment by Engelhard, and 

that indirect relationship is only in the sense 

that during that employment, he may have furthered 

his innate experience and abilities as a scientist 

He has stated to me, and as a condition of 

his employment by me, that he would not divulge 

to me or utilize in the course of his work i~ this 

case any confidential information that he obtained 

While at Engelhard. In other words, that he 

would not use data, information of any sort that 

he obtained while at Engelhard. He would use only 

his inherent'skills and capabilities and powers as 

a scientist to perform analytical tests,to conduct/ 

i 

research in available literature, openly, publicly i 

I 

available literature, and to prepare expert testi-/ 

mony in this case. I 

He would not rely on objective information 

obtained during the course of his employment at 

---. --. -~-----....-----' - -'-- ,---_. ----, 

PADUANO BASF02701 

Case 2:11-cv-01754-BRM-AME Document 70-1 Filed 08/04/11 Page 10 of 193 PageID: 1948
-.-.-... ~-~ 

1 10 

2 Engelhard, and in my opinion, expressed to him' 

3 and I express it on the record here, having seen 

4 the confidentiality agreement that he signed as 

0 5 ' .. an employee of Engelhard, that is in no way a viol -

6 tion of his employment contract with Engelhard. 

7 What you are proposing this morning for 

8 the first time is that the materials to be de9 veloped by this deposition will not be available 

. , 

! 10 to be used by the plaintiff, at least insofar as 

; 

i 

.. , 

11 one of the experts he has retained in this case. 

! 

, 12 When you first, by telephone, raised to me 

13 the possibility or your request that we sign a 

14 confidentiality agreement regarding materials to 

'I 15 be produced today, I gave my clear and ready assen 

,J , , i 16 j to signing of any standard confidentiality agree-

:',' ,I 17 

18 1 

ment, because I have no desire to breach the 

confidence of Engelhard. I have no desire to diI 19 vulge the contents of any materials that we should 

I 

I 20 

1 , 

, ~"\ 

V 21 

develop from Engelhard other than strictly in 

connection with this litigation. I am perfectly , 

'. -

22 willing to sign a standard confidentiality agree23 ment to that effect. 

24 You did not say in our telephone conver~ 

25

1 

sation that you intended to propose more than 

J 

PADUANO BASF0270' 

Case 2:11-cv-01754-BRM-AME Document 70-1 Filed 08/04/11 Page 11 of 193 PageID: 1949
,--- .... _-'--

1° 

i 

, 

\ 

, i 

", 

j 

, 

, 

. , 

, .~ . ! 

. ; 

I 

j 

J -

:() 

i 

I 

1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

. ------

11 

a standard oonfidentiality agreement and to 

restriot my use of these materials and to restriot 

one of my experts that I have retained and whom 

you were well aware of at the time of our telephone oonversation from use of the materials. I 

oannot agree to.obtaining materials under that 

. -~. _ .. -_._---_ .. orippling ciroumstanoe. 

If you had made that known at the time, 

you had the opportunity to go to the Magistrate 

and seek an appropriate order, and we oould have 

argued this before the Magistrate. 

NOW, we are all here in New York for the 

taking of this deposition and you are imposing a 

condition I cannot aocept. 

MR. KENNEDY: Of oourse, you have put yourself into that position by retaining an expert who 

had signed a oonfidentiality agreement with 

Engelhard. Some of the doouments that would be 

produced, were we to produoe them at this 

depOSition, m1~1t be those doouments that Mr. 

Gale had already~ and had already agreed to 

hold confidential. 

The second point I would like to make is in 

my opinion, this is a standard confidentiality 

I 

._-_ .. _ ... - --_ ..... - ----_._--- - -----_ .. .1 __ -

PADUANO BASF0270E 

Case 2:11-cv-01754-BRM-AME Document 70-1 Filed 08/04/11 Page 12 of 193 PageID: 1950
--_ .. ------ . 

1 12 

2 agreement. I suppose neither you nor I will be 

3 able to decide that without somebody's help. 

4 

---_.- I would like to declare a recess for a moment. 

5 (A recess was taken at this time, and upon 

6 returning, the fOllowing then ensued:) 

7 MR. KENNEDY: Mr. Prentiss, simply stated, 

8 if you do not sign this stipulation, we'll not pro 

; .. , 9 duce the documents. 

,,' .. 

' .. ~ 

.', 10 MR. PRENTISS: We have one alternative, .: 1 

! 11 which we discussed in your absence, and that is 

• 

12 calling the Magistrate to see if we can get a ruli g 

13 in this matter now. 

14 By stiPulation, Mr. ~emstook is here pur15 suant to a valid and effective subpoena duces 

16 tecum, and the documents are here, and I want them 

j 

I 17 and it seems to me it is up to you to move for a 

I 18 protective order. 

,', I 

19 MR. KENNEDY: We're not going to produce 

20 them and calling the Magistrate on the telephone 

o 21 is not satisfaotory. 

22 As a matter of faot, what we'll probably do 

23 is try to schedule a deposition of Mr. Gale just 

24 to find out what he has divulged and what his 

25 charge has been by you or by the plaintiff in the 

t __ ._~"""""-- ..... __ . _____ ... _. __ .... ____ ... _. __ L. 

PADUANO BASF02709 

Case 2:11-cv-01754-BRM-AME Document 70-1 Filed 08/04/11 Page 13 of 193 PageID: 1951
I 

• ,I 

. .. ) 

·1 .. .1 

.' i , ! 

" 

, 

, , 

~i 

" :'j. 

:1 

, 

I 

! 

, 

I 

1 

1 

o 

() 

,_ ..... ~ .. -

1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

--------'-

13 

preparation of this case. We don't have the information at this particular time to know for 

certa1n what he has already divulged. It will be--

it is unsatisfactory to have a telephone conference 

with.the Magistrate. 

MR. PRENTISS: You are saying you dispute 

my representation as to what Mr. Gale d1vulged 

to me? 

MR. KENNEDY: I don't have sufficient facts 

to be able to agree to it or dispute it. I don't 

know. I don't agree to things until I have 

sufficient facts to form an op~nion. 

MR. PRENTISS: You are going to 

MR. CURRAN: You are asking us to thoUgh, 

right now. 

MR. KENNEDY: Yes. 

MR. PRENTISS: You are going to have to get 

an order to get the deposition of Mr. Gale. It is 

a sub,1ect that has already been determined by Judge 

Boyle. 

I am going to ask for costs, for travel to 

this deposition, and I would expect every other 

party will as well. I will not go forward because 

I am not going to sign that agreement, and I will 

PADUANO BASF0271( 

Case 2:11-cv-01754-BRM-AME Document 70-1 Filed 08/04/11 Page 14 of 193 PageID: 1952
,--.-.. -.~"--""""" 

• " t 

.. 

,. 

. : 

; . , 

, 

I 

.. . ·1 

:., 1 

.~ J 

'j 

J 

. 1 

! 

.; ..... :V' .. j 

o 

I 

10 I . 

I 

1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

, ,. . . d 

,f 

12 I' 

14 

15 

16 

17 

i 

" ,. 

20 

21 I 

22 

23 

24 

25 

._------_ .. -._---.. - .• 

14 

move for sanotions 'for refusal to oomply with a 

valid subpoena out of the Federal Court. 

MR. KENNEDY: You do ,of oourse, understand 

that when that stipulation was signed, Eastern 

Magnesium Talc Company was a party. It is no longe 

a party. You understand that? 

MR. PRENTISS: That has no bearing on 

the valid1ty or a subpoena out of Federal Distriot 

Court. 

I would like to have the subpoena and stiPuJ 

lation marked as exhibits to this deposition. 

MR. DOLAN: You won't let the witness testi y 

at all? 

MR. KENNEDY: The witness is perfectly 

able -- you have to understand that these document 

do not belong to Mr. Hemstock. The only reason 

that we're producing these doouments is out of, 

if you will, practicality • 

If you reoall, when Mr. Hemstook was subpoenaed, he was subpoenaed as an officer of a 

party. No, I guess he was not. 

MR. PRENTISS: No, he was not. 

MR. HALKET: Off the record. 

(A disoussion was held off the reoord.) 

~-- ....... _-- ... . 

PADUANO BASF02711 

Case 2:11-cv-01754-BRM-AME Document 70-1 Filed 08/04/11 Page 15 of 193 PageID: 1953
.'~ 

" 

" 

1 

1 

i 

1 

\ 

, 

, 

'-J 

'j 

, 

j 

,I 

I 

I , 

i ,I 

I 

! 

, 

\ 

, 

, 

I 

! , 

r» 

\..;. 

1 15 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

I' 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

MR. PRENTISS: I would like to proceed 

with the deposition of Mr. Hemstock, who is 

appearing here pursuant to subpoena duces tecum. 

I would like to mark as exhibits for the 

record, first the subpoena duces tecum, which is 

dated December 15, 1982, which is directed to 

Mr. Glenn Hemstook, vice president, research, of 

the Engelhard Corporation, Menlo Park, Edison, 

New Jersey. 

(A subpoena duces tecum dated December 

13, 1982 was marked as Plaintiff's Exhibit 1 for 

identification.) 

MR. PRENTISS: I would like to mark as the 

second exhibit a stipulation under the case heading Westfall vs. Whittaker, Clark & Daniels, et al , 

a stipulation executed between myself, as attorney 

for the plaintiff, and Mr. Peter Lawson Kennedy, 

attorney to Glenn Hemstock and Engelhard Corporation and its affiliated companies, dated January 

10, 1983. 

(A stipulation dated January 10, 1983 

between Mr. Prentiss and Mr. Kennedy was now 

marked as Pl~ntiff's Exhibit 2 for identification. ) 

1_-.--,.. __ --,_., .' ___ ~. __ • __ ._ .~ ___ . ___ .. _____ _ 

PADUANO BASF0271:; 

Case 2:11-cv-01754-BRM-AME Document 70-1 Filed 08/04/11 Page 16 of 193 PageID: 1954
. '. 

., 

~ 

:~: 

" 

-

~~ .:-,::" 

.. 

·a 1 

I 

j 

.J 

! 

! 

i 

.I 

, 

; 

., 

,1 

," i 

, 

, 

:] 

'"l 

.;'1 

:', 

;: . 

.,. 

<l .. 

., J 

.. ; J 

'j 

, 

'1 

.1 

! 

! 

i 

I 

I 

._-_._---_. 

1 16 

2 MR. PRENTISS: Mr. Hemstock has been sub3 poenaed, and by the stipulation, that subpoena is 

4 valid and ef£ective, returnable at 10:00 this '. 

0 .. 5 

- morning at the offices of Cahill Gordon & Reindel, 

6 80 Pine Street, New York. 

7 It is now 10:45, and I would like to procee 

8 with the deposition pursuant to the subpoena • 

9 MR. KENNEDY: While we're putting items 

10 on the record, I would like to put in the record 

11 as an exhibit for non-party Engelhard the pro12 posed stipulation and order of confidentiality 

13 so we have a full record. 

14 I also would like to make another'brief 

15 statement, i£ I may. 

16 (The proposed stipulation and order of 

17 confidentiality was now marked as Engelhard Exhibi 

18 1 for identification.) 

19 MR. KENNEDY: The subpoena that was served 

20 on Dr. Hemstock called for the production of 

0 21 all documents within his possession, custody 

22 or control. 

23 As I understand it, I believe Mr. Hemstock 

24 would so testify, he has no documents that would 

25 be responsive to that subpoena. 

..... -._--' -.-- -- .- -- . -"-.~, ~- ._--- -' "'---.--'-- ---- "'---~ ----'~-

PADUANO BASF02713 

Case 2:11-cv-01754-BRM-AME Document 70-1 Filed 08/04/11 Page 17 of 193 PageID: 1955
" .. " 

., , '" 

, " 

>-: •• ":. 

:<;'. "', 

:, .. ~:.:' ,<. 

-:.: ..... 

.. ~ " ....... .' .... 

.. . '. I 

" 

1 

i 

1 

I 

: "j ". ,'1 'j 

,j 

1 

j 

:",1 '0 

j 

1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

,15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

251 

17 

We had brought to this deposition in order I 

I 

to facilitate the plaintiff's discovery, documents I 

I 

that were in the possession of Dr. Hemstock's 

employer, Engelhard Corporation, and also any 

documents that were in the possession of its subsidiaries. 

We've already stated on the record that 

we recently learned that the plaintiff has designa e< 

an expert witness, Mr. Gale, who had been a project leader with Engelhard Minerals & Chemicals 

Corporation, which was a predecessor to Engelhard I 

Corporation in 1978 and 1979, and his duties, 

required him to have responsibility for research 

and analysis of Eastern Magnesium Talc Company 

minerals, including those from Emtal's Johnson, 

Vermont mine. He had access to confidential and 

proprietary information, and he had signed an 

agreement where he had covenanted and agreed that 

in his employment' contract to keep such informatio

confidential. l 

I had spoken with Mr. Prentiss the other 

day concerning a confidentiality agreement to be 

stipulated to before the deposition of Mr. Hemstoct· 

I have been informed 

I 

it has not been , 

I 

! 

-'--:, ,-' ~--, , .. -- ---' ,,,, ,---,,,_ .. - -----------,,---.. ---

PADUANO BASF0271~ 

Case 2:11-cv-01754-BRM-AME Document 70-1 Filed 08/04/11 Page 18 of 193 PageID: 1956
i 

-.. I

i 

1 

.' ,. 

.. ,:'. " ,':' 

.:"' ..... 

' •.... \ 

" ! 

·1 

j 

I 

I 

., 

! 

! 

,,4 ..... 

o 

o 

1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

18 

confirmed, but I have been informed that Mr. Hemstock himself has signed such a confidentiality 

agreement, and consequently, any of his 

testimony may well be in violation of his agreement as well. 

Mr. Hemstock is here. He will testify 

provided a stipulation as far as confidentiality 

can be agreed to concerning his testimony. 

We will not produce any documents that 

we have before us unless the proposed confidentiality agreement 15 signed. 

MR. PRENTISS: I think my prior statement 

is on the record, and fullY,sets forth the plaintiff's position on thiS. 

Mr. Gale's identity as an expert, proposed 

expert, for the plaintiff, was made known, I 

believe, before Engelhard was ever named as a 

party to this case, and Mr. Kennedy was aware of 

his identity at t~e time that I subpoenaed Mr. 

Hemstock for a deposition, and certainly at the 

time that we stipulated as to the return of the 

subpoena to this office for the deposition. 

The subpoena is effective and valid. I 

propose to begin the deposition by filling out 

PADUANO BASF02715 

Case 2:11-cv-01754-BRM-AME Document 70-1 Filed 08/04/11 Page 19 of 193 PageID: 1957
., . "" ;~ 

":," 

:: . ~ . .' 

"., . 1 

I 

.j 

:j 

I 

1,0 j . 

I 

1 19 

2 the record as to exactly what Mr. Hemstock does 

3 have in h1s possession, and I would ask that we 

4 proceed. 

5 (A recess was taken at this time, and upon 

6 return1ng, the follow1ng then ensued:) 

7 G LEN N A. HEM S T 0 C K, 

8 having first been duly sworn by the -----~ . 

9 Notary Public, was exam1ned and testified 

10 as follows: 

11 EXAMINAT·ION BY MR. PRENTISS: 

12 Q My name is R. Daniel Prentiss. I represent 

13 the plaintiff in the action David Howard Westfall, in 

14 his capacity ,as Administrator of the Estate of Thomas 

15 Howard Westfall, et al. vs. Whittaker, Clark & Daniels, 

16 and other defendants, that is pending in the United 

17 States District Court for the District of Rhode Island, 

18 ci vil action number 79-0269. 

19 This is a deposition that is be1ng taken 

20 pursuant to that case, pursuant to the Rules of Civil 

21 Procedure. The depos1tion 1s for the purpose of obta1n22 1ng test1mony from you, which 1s sworn testimony, that 

23 may be used at trial in the proceed1ngs that follow in 

24 this matter. 

25 Because of the possible use of the 

'-.--.--~---- -:-; . --

PADUANO BASF02716 

Case 2:11-cv-01754-BRM-AME Document 70-1 Filed 08/04/11 Page 20 of 193 PageID: 1958
!. 

, 

.. • 

o 

.... i 

I 

. • , 

i 

.\~ 

, 

i 

j 

'·1 ! 

I 

: j 

. 1 0 

1 

I 

I 

I 

! 

~---.~----~~....,..--

1 20 

2 transcript of this deposition, it is important that you 

3 understand the questions that r ask you, and understand 

4 what it is that I am asking before you answer. 

5 For that reason, I will ask that you .. let me_ 

6 know if at any ·time during the course of this deposition 

7 you don't understand my question or the thrU&t o~ 

8 

~ .-.. ~ ---- my question, and I will do my-'oes'£-tOrephrase it so 

9 that you do understand it. 

10 Is that an appropriate arrangement? 

11 A Yes. 

12 Q Could you state your full name for the 

13 record. 

14 A Glenn Alton Hemstock. 

15 Q. Where do you live? 

16 A Princeton, New Jersey. 

17 Q When were you born? 

18 A 1925. 

19 Q Where? 

20 A In Owen Sound, Ontario. 

21 Q Could you describe your education, past 

22 secondary 'education? 

23 A Yes. I went to the University of Toronto 

24 undergraduate, and Purdue University for graduate 

25 training. 

PADUANO BASF02717 

Case 2:11-cv-01754-BRM-AME Document 70-1 Filed 08/04/11 Page 21 of 193 PageID: 1959
" 

I 

i 

.'. 

.. I 

:<1 , " 

... ! 

,1 

· ; I 

, 

, 

" 1 

j 

.1 

"1 

! 

· .. ~~ ;1 

'<:1 

-'1 , ',. I 

,j 

I ("\ 

V 

· 1 

! 

i 

'I 

.. -_ .... - '---""'-.-•.. ---~ 

1 Hemstock 21 

2 Q What degree did you receive from the Uni3 versity of Toronto? 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

A 

Q And what did you study at Purdue? 

A I studied chemistry. 

Q What degree did you receive? 

A PhD. 

Q When did you receive your PhD.~ 

A 1951. 

Q Were you employed following your graduation 

from Purdue~ 

A Yes, I was. 

Q Where? 

A Immediately following graduation, at the 

University. 

Q In what capacity? 

A I was in charge of the state soil testing 

laboratory. 

Q 

A 

Q 

A 

Q 

A 

How long did you remain there? 

About one year. 

What did you do after that? 

I went to the Institute of Paper Chemistry.i ! 

Where is that located? 

In Appleton, Wisconsin. 

I 

I 

-~- ... - --~. ~,' ,'-- - .. - ----- . -- ---_ .. - --- ..... -.... ---... -.-~---.--. 

_~_." __ " .. .-_" .. __ ._ ... 1 

PADUANO BASF027H 

Case 2:11-cv-01754-BRM-AME Document 70-1 Filed 08/04/11 Page 22 of 193 PageID: 1960
..... 

.- .. 

.:. ~l ' . ~---,. I 

I 

. 1 

I 

, 

! 

j 

i 

j 

"- -I' '.' 

.. ;~ 

. '. -1 

1 

" :t 

1 Hemstock 22 

2 Q What was your employment responsibility 

3 there? 

4 A I was a research ass1stant. 

o 5 Q How long did you remain there? 

6 A About ~our and a half years. 

7 Q What was your next employment? 

8 A I went to Minerals & Chem1cals Corporation 

9 of America. 

10 Q Where is that located? 

11 A Menlo Park, New Jersey. 

12 Q In what capacity were you h1red? 

13 A As a sen10r chemist. 

14 Q What were your activities in that capacity? 

15 A As a project leader to carry out research. 

16 Q What areas did you conduct research 1n? 

17 MR. KENNEDY: Let me have a moment. 

18 (A discussion was held off the record.) 

19 MR. KENNEDY: Just a clar1ficat1on, are 

20 you talking in general or specifically as to 

21 certain projects? 

o 22 MR. PRENTISS: It is hard to tell. I am 

23 asking the' quest.ion, what areas d1d he conduct 

24 the research in? Obvious ly, that calls f1rst for 1 

25 a general answer. I m1ght follow with a more I 

I 

I 

• • _., - - •• ~---~ •• ~- •• - ~- # -.--~- .,. ' • ... --~ -- '---~-" . __ ._-,-.--...... _---_ ... . .. ",L . 

PADUANO BASF02715 

Case 2:11-cv-01754-BRM-AME Document 70-1 Filed 08/04/11 Page 23 of 193 PageID: 1961
.,., 

..... 

• ~". 0-

I 

. 1 

I . I : '.' .. I 

... ; 

. .1 , . 

:1 . l 

. I 

, i 

! 

.... , ... \ 

A 

v~ 

'j 0 

I 

·1 

-I 

------'T 

1 Hemstock 23 

2 specific question. 

3 A Clay minerals. 

4 Q When did you go to work? What year did you 

5 go to work for Minerals & Chemicals Corporation? 

6 A 1956. 

7 Q How long did you remain as a project leader 

8 senior chemist? 

9 A Approximately one year. 

10 Q What did you do after that? 

11 A I was advanced to research supervisor. 

12 Q How long did you remain as a research 

13 supervisor? 

14 A Until the end' of 1962. 

15 Q What were your duties as a research super16 visor? 

17 A I had oversight of several research project 

18 Q Were those research projects again in the 

19 area of clay minerals? 

20 A Generally. yes. 

21 Q Did that include talc? 

22 A No. 

23 Q What position did you assume in 1962? 

24 A I left Minerals & Chemicals Corporation of 

25 America and went to Union Camp Corporation. 

-' •.•• _ ••• .,..---•• -~ - " ••••• ~-----•• -,<,-,~ -.-

PADUANO BASF0272C 

Case 2:11-cv-01754-BRM-AME Document 70-1 Filed 08/04/11 Page 24 of 193 PageID: 1962
.... 

~ ... ' ; 

-. 

i 

,I , 'j 

, ','.j 

',." .I 

-- i , ] 

,', 

:1 

tf4. 

"J 

j 

10"" j .; • 

1 Hemstock 24 

2 Q To your knowledge, is Minerals & Chemicals 

3 Corporation of America a corporate predecessor to 

4 Minerals & Chemicals Philip Corporation? 

5 A Yes, I believe so. 

6 Q What did you do at Union Camp Corporation? 

7 A I was a group leader in paper coating 

8 research. 

9 Q How long did you remain there? 

10 A Until mid-April, 1967. 

11 Q Did you conduct any research work at 

12 Union Camp Corporation? 

13 A Not personally. 

14 Q Did you oversee research? 

15 A Yes. 

16 Q In 1967, where did you go to work? 

17 A I returned to Minerals & Chemicals Philip 

18 Corporat ion. 

19 Q In what capacity? 

20 A The title was manager of fundamental 

21 research. 

22 Q What were your duties as manager of funda23 mental research? 

24 A This was a staff position in which my 

25 role was primarily as an advisor, advisor to project 

- -,.. ~, .. ----.--..-.' ... ~--. --.. ---

PADUANO BASF02721 

Case 2:11-cv-01754-BRM-AME Document 70-1 Filed 08/04/11 Page 25 of 193 PageID: 1963
;. .." :. 

-.... : .... : 

.: i 

. i 

.J '. . ':.-I ~" .. ,~ 

\";; 

. '.'1 

: 1 

1 

) 

.... ' 

.. " .. ::1 

~ 

V 

.' I . .,., 0 j .. ' 

j 

1 Hemstock 25 

2 leaders, advisor to administration. 

3 Q The project leaders or by project leaders, 

4 are you referring to the position you formerly held at 

5 that corporation? 

6 A That is generally correct. 

7 Q Did the project leaders report to you as 

8 the manager of fundamental research? 

9 A No, they did not. 

10 Q But you advised project leaders as to the 

11 direction'of research they would.undertake? 

12 A I would make suggestions to them, yes. 

13 Q And you would report to manasement of the 

14 company? 

15 A I reported to the vice president of 

16 research. 

17 Q And would you be carrying out the policies 

18 as enunciated to you by the vice president of research 

19 in your advising the project leaders regarding research? 

20 A Generally, yes. 

21 Q Was one of the areas of research that 

22 was being pursued at that time research in talc? 

23 A No, it was not. 

24 Q How long did you remain as manager of 

25 fundamental research? 

... ...--.--. ".~-""---' .... _-- '--'~""" ._----_ ....... ~-~ 

PADUANO BASF0272. 

Case 2:11-cv-01754-BRM-AME Document 70-1 Filed 08/04/11 Page 26 of 193 PageID: 1964
-----.. -~- " 

1 Hemstock 

2 A Approximately a year. , 

-c 3 Q What position did you assume after that? 

;'" 

:' - , 4 A I became assistant director ot research. : 0 ,'- ". ~ ... "', " •• t-' 5 Q What was your job tunction in that capacity? "-

6 A This was a line position rather than a .-

',,:-

7 statt position, and as such, I directed group leaders, 

.... -, S '.~~ research supervisors in the research department. 

, -- .:~ 

-, --- 9 Q Directed the areas ot research that would . -- , -I 10 be conducted? 

: 

j 11 i A Yes. 

-j 

.J 12 -- -1 Q lvlade decisions as to what areas of 

--, IS research would be pursued? 

-- j 

1 14 A Yes. _J 

'f! 

;1 15 Q At this time, what was the business of 

-. , -i .... ,4 16 ' j : .. ~ 

... ,.,. '- .. 1 17 

51 18 .: .... , : ", 

, ':', ' 

, ":;;'1 

19 

20 I '- I 

'" '; 0 :1 ,-- 21 

i 

Minerals & Chemicals Corporation of America? 

MR. KENNEDY: Objection. 

I instruct the witness not to answer unless 

you just want a general description. 

MR. PRENTISS: I guess you have 'to start 

somewhere. 

" 

, 

, 22 ! 

MR. KENNEDY: Okay. 

2S Give him a general description. 

24 

25 

bot.'!" (A discussion was held otf the re!ord 

the witness and his counsel.) 

-, - --- -----,--~- '- ,,--"------- -, ----- ~,--".~" ...... ",j." 

PADUANO BASF02723 

Case 2:11-cv-01754-BRM-AME Document 70-1 Filed 08/04/11 Page 27 of 193 PageID: 1965
, ,-, 

. , 

. '~';.' 

" .. ;.;-. 

~"'. 

: ... 

'>'j 

": '.' "'j 

_, J) 

~" 

, 

'J 

.,~j A 

.'.1 ~J 

"j 

i 

1 

i 

., 

I 

1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

Hemstock 27 

MR. KENNEDY: I have been informed that 

the question is inaccurate and the witness would 

like an opportunity to point out' the inaccuracy. 

Q Would you, please. 

A In 1967, the time.in question, the company' 

name was Minerals & Chemicals Philip Corporation. 

Q Could you tell me generally what was the 

busines.s of the Minerals & Chemicals Philip Corporation 

in 19671 

A Clay minerals. 

Q What was the corporation's activity in 

the business of clay minerals? 

A Mining and processing. 

Q What clay minerals in particular was the 

corporation involved in mining and processing? 

A Kaolinite, attapulgite. 

Q For the record, maybe we better spell that. 

A K-a-o-l-i-n-i-t-e and a-t-t-a-p-u-l-g-i-t-e 

'Q Any others? 

A There were others that weren't clay 

minerals that we were involved in. 

Q What were those? 

A Limestone and bauxite processing. 

Q In 1967, was Minerals & Chemicals Philip 

.1 I : 

._ ...... ' ___ .. __ ....... ,L-_ .. , ...... __ .~ __ ._ .... _._ .......... __ ......... -- ,.--O".~,--- , .. L 

PADUANO BASF0272< 

Case 2:11-cv-01754-BRM-AME Document 70-1 Filed 08/04/11 Page 28 of 193 PageID: 1966
" .:. , ;. 

.;,."':} 

", ,.: ';, .. '~. 

, ' 

~" '"i. 

. , 

, .. i 

" '" ... : 

, ' ./ • .''i . ': .{ 

, : ... ; 

I , I 

.. ! 

>~, >~ ... ; i 

: .. :~ 

"'j 

C", lj " .. 

.-., ::. I .' . -

.'-~ 

." ..... 

o 

.'j 

". '" , V.,." . 

I-

• 

J 

'c.. 

-----_._-_. --,,--

1 Hemstock 28 

2 Corporation affiliated in any way with Engelhard 

3 Corporation? 

4 ME. KENNEDY: If you know. 

5 A Not directly. .. 

6 Q Was it indirectly? 

7 A There was representation on the . .Jloa~ 

8 of directors ot the company" by-7eprEflfentati vea-' from 

9 Engelhard. 

10 Q How long did you remain assistant director 

11 ot research? 

12 A About five years. 

13 Q Until about 1973? 

14 A APproximately. 

15 Q, What position did you assume at that time? 

16 A I was director of research. 

17 Q ln what way did your Job functions change 

18 with the assumption of that position? 

19 A I had the responsibility for research and 

20 development. 

21 Q Can you distinguish between research and 

22 development, as you know those terms in your capacity? 

23 A Yes. Research is developing new products 

• 24 at the bench scale. Development is taking those ground 

25 quantities at the bench scale and carrying them into I .. _ .. _._~,, __ 1._ 

PADUANO BASF0272l 

Case 2:11-cv-01754-BRM-AME Document 70-1 Filed 08/04/11 Page 29 of 193 PageID: 1967
I 

! 

..... 

, ..... . ': '~' . . " ,,<t.. 

~'. <:t ~~~.:: 

..: . ': 

...... :-~ " 

'. "';r 

" i-

'.~ " . 

--~'--,---

1 ) Hemstock 29 

2 the development o£ a process which can be sUbsequently 

3 commercialized. 

4 What were the products that you were in5 volved with? 

6 MR. KENNEDY: Objection. 

7 Instruct the witness not to answer. 

8 Q What products at this time was Minerals 

9 & Chemicals Philip Corporation in the business ot sellin ? 

10 MR. KENNEDY: Again, are you asking for 

11 a general description? 

12 MR. PRENTISS: To begin with. 

13 A We were selling clays to the paper industry 

14 cataly&ts to the petroleum industry. 

15 Q Did any of the research that was undertaken 

16 at Minerals & Chemicals Philip Corporation during the' 

17 period that you were assistant director of research or 

18 director of research involve potential sa£ety hazards 

19 of any o£ the materials with which the corporation was 

20 dealing? 

21 MR. KENNEDY: Objection to, the form of that 

22 question. I don't, frankly, understand it myself. 

23 MR. PRENTISS: Could you read it back. 

24 (The last question was read back by, the 

25 Reporter. ) 

PADUANO BASF0272E 

Case 2:11-cv-01754-BRM-AME Document 70-1 Filed 08/04/11 Page 30 of 193 PageID: 1968
.'. 

if ,", ·f ' .. 

. ".~ 

}I~~:" 

I 

I 

, 

, 

1 

2 

3 

4 

."''''::', 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

n v' 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

._."--_ .. -~- .~----

Hemstock 30 

A No. 

Q Did any of the research that was conducted 

by the corporation when you were in those capacities 

deal with health hazards or potential health hazards 

of any of the materials with Which the corporation was 

dealing? 

A No, it did not. 

Q You, in your capacity as director of research, did you oversee all of the research and development activities for the company? 

A That's correct. 

MR. HALKET: Off -the record. 

(A discussion was ~eld off the record.) 

Q Over the course of your employment with 

Minerals & Chemicals Philip Corporation, have there been 

corporate changes of name or ownership, to your knowledge? 

A Yes. 

Q Are you intimately familiar with all of 

the details of the corporate changes over that time? 

A No, I am not. 

Q When I direct my questions to you, I am I 

i 

I 

asking you to answer the questions with respect to your I 

I 

employer and to give to the best of your understanding 

I 

._ .. _._.-_.,-._ .. \~-.. .--,-~.-,-' '---~ .. -... ~. 

PADUANO BASF02727 

Case 2:11-cv-01754-BRM-AME Document 70-1 Filed 08/04/11 Page 31 of 193 PageID: 1969
~.·f~----- , ---- -------------------

Hemstock 31 

.~. ',: " 

2 and your 1010wledge regarding what your employer did or 

3 what activities your employer was involved in; is that 

-- 4 satisfactorY? 

-. . Q --- '. . '.~ '. 5 A Yes • 

.- 6 MR. PRENTISS: Could we go back to the 

.. '. : 7 last question that was asked. 

-, S (The last ~uestion was read back by the 

, . : 

::' 9 Reporter. ) , .... j . ' .. I;'l 10 Q And in that capacity, you made the line , : 

. ! 

1 11 decisions as to what areas of research or excuse me, 

; 

; - , 

i 12 what areas into which research would be conducted? 

, 

.. 13 A I 'didn't make those entirely on my own, 

i 

, 14 ., 

i 

so the answer is partially. 

.... , .. ! 

'. j 15 ,- j Q Who else made those decisions? 

, 

· :;1 16 

':.: ...... 17 .... : .. ~. 

, - .... , 18 Q How long did you remain director of researc ? 

A The vice president of research to whom 

I reported • 

..1 19 -. j 

A Approximately a year and a half. 

! .. , 

'. J 20 Q And what position did you assume after 

-

I 0 21 

" , 

I 22 

that? 

A Vice president of research and development. 

, 

1 

I 

! 23 Q This would be some time during 1974? 

24 A 1974. 

25 Q Is that the. position you hold today? 

, ~ ......... --... -~--"---~'.' --_. -"----

PADUANO BASF0272a 

Case 2:11-cv-01754-BRM-AME Document 70-1 Filed 08/04/11 Page 32 of 193 PageID: 1970
I • 

l 

_I 

- - . 

. 

. . ; 

,;<:" .~ 

-- ": 

';.', 

':'1 .)~.;": 

" , '. -" 

,.,' , 

! , ---

-.J , 

i 

~~ 1 

:{ 

.:1 

.•. j 

;} 

_ . 

• J 

1 'j -\1 

'- , -j 

1 .<. ',;:. , '" ! 

:1 ';:1 

-1 

d 

, .. '! 

1 

2 

3 

4 

0 .. - 5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

0 21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

Hemstock 32 

A That's oorreot. 

Q What oorporation do you work for today? 

A I work for Engelhard Corporation. 

Q At what paint, to the best of your knowledge, did your employer ohange from Minerals & Chemioal 

Philip Corporation to the Engelhard Corporation? 

MR. HALKET: It never did. 

A That 1!1 a oomplex quest ion. 

MR. KENNEDY: If you don't know the 

answer, don't guess. 

Q OVer this period of time from 1967 to the 

present, has the plaoe of your employment been the same? 

A Yes, it has. 

Q And to whom does the vioe president of 

researoh, either you or your predeoessor, report? 

A To the president of the division or the 

oompany, depending. 

Q The president of the diVision or the 

company? 

A Today, in Engelhard Corporation, there are 

two divisions, and I report to the president of the 

minerals & chemicals division. 

Q At an earlier time, there was the 

Minerals & Chemicals Company, as an independent corporaI 

- _.,- .. -----,-- -- ----"--"-- ___ L. 

PADUANO BASF0272£ 

Case 2:11-cv-01754-BRM-AME Document 70-1 Filed 08/04/11 Page 33 of 193 PageID: 1971
, . 

.' .. ', . : 

,,' 

.' . 

'. 

::, 

,.5 ;' 

.' 

." '. 

, . 

'.' i 

, 

: .J 

1 .'. I 

.. 

·1 " 

·._._---.---

,0 

~---.--------. ----~ . ...;;....._ .• _, ._._~_""__""f _ 

1 Hemstock 33 

2 tion, if you know? I am not trying to confuse you on 

3 the corporate le~alities. 

4 A When we were Minerals & Chemicals Philip 

5 Corporation, there was only one division with one 

6 president, and the vice president of R and D reported to 

7 that president. 

8 Q And now that it is Engelhard Corporation. 

9 there are two divisions. one of which is the minerals 

10 & chemicals division. is that correct? 

11 A Yes. 

12 Q Of Engelhard Corporation? 

13 A Of Engelhard Corporation. 

14 Q And as to your responsibilities and your 

15 job function, you were always within the minerals & 

16 chemicals entity. whether it was a company on its own 

17 or a division of the Engelhard Corporation. is that 

18 correct? 

19 A That is true. 

20 Q And it is now. the structure is that it is 

21 a division of the Engelhard Corporation? 

22 A That's correct. 

23 Q As vice president of research, do you have 

24 the ultimate responsibility, subject to review by the 

25 president, for the research and development activities 

'j--.... - .-.... -.~-.. '. 

PADUANO BASF02730 

Case 2:11-cv-01754-BRM-AME Document 70-1 Filed 08/04/11 Page 34 of 193 PageID: 1972
.. '. 

',.: .. 

... 

. ',. 1 

.. j 

:l .,j 

I 

~l 

j 

.. ~\ ':1 . '.' '·1 . -. 

.. . "; , . 

,. ~ 

I 

10 

--_ .. ~. ---

G. [ •• ::.1 •.•• $_ ... _ • __ 

1 Hemstook 34 

2 of the oompany? 

3 A My role is as an implementer. 

4 Q What do you implement? 

5 A The programs and projeots that are general 1 

6 agreed to by the management of the division. 

7 Q And what is the management of the division? 

8 A We have a management committee whioh 

9 operates at the pleasure of the president. I am a membe 

10 of that oommittee along with other vioe presidents wto 

11 have other responsibilities. 

12 Q And that management yc~.t ~_S.::':::'~T out .. ;.~ ... _- -

13 polioy of that management oommittee in the area of 1"e14 searoh and development for the oompany? 

15 A That's oorreot. 

16 Q So do you have the ultimate deoision17 making authority within or under that structure of 

18 the management committee for determining the areas 

19 in which research and development will be oonducted? 

20 A I oertainly have a loud voice. 

21 Q And do you review the produots of the 

22 research and development aotivities of the company? 

23 A I would have familiarity with the new pro24 duots. I don't understand,the question of reviewing 

25 products? 

I 

I ___ ..... 1.._ 

PADUANO BASF02731 

Case 2:11-cv-01754-BRM-AME Document 70-1 Filed 08/04/11 Page 35 of 193 PageID: 1973
, 

i 

J 

I 

! 

· ,'. 

j .. , '. 1 

'I 

l 

j 

i 

1 

o 

o 

- ---- -~.~.----- .--"',,""'~' ~. -.' .. "-' 

1 Hem.stock 35 

2 Q I meant project. 

3 A Yes. I do. 

4 Q So if a project leader within the company 

5 carries out a research proJect,is that 9roject at some 

6 point authorized by you? 

7 A Yes. that's correct. 

8 Q Is the result of that research proJect 

9 submitted ultimately to you for review? 

10 A Yes. it would be. 

11 Q And if that product of that research project 

12 is a document or series of documents. is that submitted 

13 to you for your review? 

14 A Yes., I would have an opportunity to review 

15 them. 

16 Q Where does it go from there? 

17 A It goes into a central filing system. 

18 Q A central filing system under which vice 

19 president? 

20 A Not specifically under any vice president. 

21 Q A central filing system for the minerals 

22 & chemicals division of the Engelhard Corporation? 

23 A That's correct. 

24 Q And you as vice president of research are 

25 the .one with the mo st direct authority over that portion 

., 

PADUANO BASF0273. 

Case 2:11-cv-01754-BRM-AME Document 70-1 Filed 08/04/11 Page 36 of 193 PageID: 1974
.-"-'" -- ~.--- ~-.....:...--- _.<-" q'" , 

, . . .... ~ ~.:.> 

''''.'' . .. ' .. ~: ~, 

'. 

i 

I 

: .- 1 

i 

,I 

I 

i 

o 

o 

...... 

1 Hemstock 

2 of the filing system, is that correct? 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

A I suppose one could say that, yes. 

Q There is no other person who has a more 

direct authori.ty over that area of the fil1ng sys~m 

of the company than you, is there?-

A No official of the company has.----' . ,---.~- ~ - ------ - -'- .... -"-

Q The only person with more direct control 

9 would be people who are at the clerical level or staff 

10 or line level, who might have direct hands-on filing 

11 responsibilities, is that right? 

12 A Yes. 

13 Q But as far as the officiaL level of the· 

14 company, you are the one with the most direct respon15 sibility for the custody of the filing that relates 

16 to research and development for the company, is that 

17 correct? 

18 A Yes. 

19 Q Did the company that you work for at any 

20 time during the period of your employment become in21 volved in commerce in talc? 

22 A Could you define commerce? 

23 Q Engaging in any way in the business of 

24 mining, selling, producing, mining or other activity 

25 with talc? 

I 

I 

I 

I ------_. ....,-____ . ___ L_ 

PADUANO BASF02733 

Case 2:11-cv-01754-BRM-AME Document 70-1 Filed 08/04/11 Page 37 of 193 PageID: 1975
ji 

j 

j 

-,1 

J 

:1 

:\ 

.1 

1 

. -'<1 

'1 

i 

.~j , 

'I 

, 1 

. ~ilJ .. , 

J 

-, 

1 

·1 

1 

: ,I 

.' '1 

1 ,I 

o 

o 

1 ) Hemstock 37 

2 A Yes. 

3 Q When? 

4 --- A I don't know exactly. 

5 Q Approximately when did -- did you ever be6 come involved in any way with talc in your capacities 

7 as vice president or research or director of research? 

8 MR. KENNEDY: Is this in any way? 

9 MR. PRENTISS: In any way. 

10 A Yes. 

11 Q When? 

12 A During the late seventies is as accurately 

13 as I can express it. 

14 • Q" Wh~t was the nature of your invo~vement 

15 with talc? 

16 MR. KENNEDY: Are we talking generally or 

17 specifically? 

18 MR. PRENTISS: We have to start somewhere. 

19 MR. KENNEDY: Generally. 

20 A Generally, my responsibility was as an 

21 administrator or all or the things that go on within thei 

22 department. 

23 Q Did you say that was late seventies? 

24 A That was somewhere in the late seventies. 

25 Q Does that mean then that at some point 

PADUANO 

Case 2:11-cv-01754-BRM-AME Document 70-1 Filed 08/04/11 Page 38 of 193 PageID: 1976
.' .'. 

I 

I 

I 

·1 

I 

· .•.. 1 < . 

! 

" 

I 

.1 

I 

10 

" 

1 Hemstock 

2 in the late seventies or thereafter, research and/or 

3 development was conducted in the area of talc in the 

4 c olllP any? 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

MR. KENNEDY: Objection. 

Instruct the witness not to answer. 

Q At any time --

MR. KENNEDY: Absent a confidentiality 

stipulation. 

MR. PRENTISS: Again. I will state 

what I stated to Mr. Kennedy by telephone two 

days ago, I am certainly willing to enter into a 

standard cont:idential1ty .. stiPulation. 

I will not enter into the stipulation he 

has dropped on the table this morning for the reason that it 

MR. KENNEDY: It would interfere with your 

use of a former employee as an expert witness. 

MR. PRENTISS: It is an unusual and 

unacceptable stipulation. 

Q What was the nature 

MR. KENNEDY: The situation using the 

former employee as an expert witness is also an 

unusual situation too. That is why it prompts 

an unusual, as you have termed,confidentiality 

I 

! _~~'""" .. c-. L . 

PADUANO BASF02735 

Case 2:11-cv-01754-BRM-AME Document 70-1 Filed 08/04/11 Page 39 of 193 PageID: 1977
: ~ 

-. ;'1 - '; j 

'-

I 

, 

\ 

-. 

, 

I 

1 

'\ 

I 

, I 

I 

j 

-, 0--- I 'i 

. .:.-

1 Hemstock 39 

2 stipulation. 

3 Q What was the nature of company involvement 

4 in talc? 

5 MR. KENNEDY: Generally? 

6 MR. PRENTISS: Yes. 

7 A Generally, talc was an article of commerce 

8 which we mined and processed. 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

Q 

A 

Q 

And sold? 

And sold. 

What was the nature of the research that 

was conducted by the company in the field of talc? 

MR. KENNEDY: Generally? 

MR. PRENTISS: Genera~lY. 

MR. KENNEDY: Objec~ion. I will instruct 

you not to answer. I have been advised that is 

proprietary . 

Q During the time you were vice president 

of research, did the compan~' make any investigation 

regarding potential health or safety hazards of talc? 

MR. KENNEDY: Objection. Same ground. 

Q During the time you worked for the company, 

I 

did it ever undertake any studies regarding the POSSiblr 

contam1nants of tal.? 

MR. KENNEDY-: Same objection. Same 

---~--

_~. ____ ~" '_ .J. 

PADUANO BASF0273€ 

Case 2:11-cv-01754-BRM-AME Document 70-1 Filed 08/04/11 Page 40 of 193 PageID: 1978
< • 

,. " 

i 

! 

1 

./ 

I 

.. "1 

... J . 'j 

" ··l 

.' '1 ,. 

'1 

. I 

o 

o 

.'" ,,, 

-.....:-. --.~.-'-'-~--

1 Hemstock 46 

2 instruction. 

3 Q Did the company, in the time you have been 

4 employed by it, ever conduct any laboratory investiga5 tions to determine the contaminant content of talcs 

6 mined by the company or by any other entity? 

7 MR. KENNEDY: Same objection. Same 

8 instruction. 

9 Q Did you receive the subpoena duces tecum 

10 which has been marked as Plaintiff's Exhibit I for 

11 identification? 

12 MR. KENNEDY: The.re has already been a 

13 stipulation. Mr. Hemstock did not receive that. 

14 Mr. Hemstock was out of the country when it 

15 was served, and there is a stipulation covering 

16 the efficacy of that subpoena. 

17 Q I am asking if you have ever seen that? 

18 A Yes, I have seen it. 

19 Q Could you tell me whether or not there 

20 exists in the central files of the company any documents 

21 which respond to the following description: " all data 

22 including test reports, laboratory results, memoranda, 

23 correspondence or other written materials of any 

24 description whatsoever regarding any investigation of 

25 

PADUANO BASF02737 

Case 2:11-cv-01754-BRM-AME Document 70-1 Filed 08/04/11 Page 41 of 193 PageID: 1979
__ ,., ,. __ ~o, ... ", __ ,._ .. ~~_ 

.. :' 

. ".- . 

. ,'" 

, .. 

, '"I 

-,' '! :. 

" 

J 

J 

{ 

, 

. I 

, 

.~ 

" "J 

,j 

, j 

,I 

" ,,',' ; 

, , ., : , I 

" 

i 

t 

• I 

1 jO 

I 

I 

.1 

1 Hemstock 41 

2 (including those properties in the name of Eastern 

3 Magnesium Talc Company, specifically the Johnson Vermont 

4 mine) and others, from any study conducted Since 1967." 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14' 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

MR. KENNEDY: I will answer that. 

I have before me documents which we are 

ready to produce at this deposition pursuant to 

the subpoena duces tecum, but will not,absent a 

confidentiality stipulation, namely the one that 

we already presented to you and it is now an 

exhibit to this deposition. 

MR. PRENTISS: Are you 

MR. ~IBENSPERGER: I would like to add 

something on the record. 

On behalf of Windsor Minerals Inc., the 

deposition subpoena that Mr. Prentiss just 

read from was not served upon Windosr Minerals 

or me as counsel for Windsor Minerals, and I have 

never seen it, even as to right now, and I never 

heard the request until you just read it. 

Therefore, I reserve the right to object to 

the scope of this subpeona, or at least to the 

admissibility of any documents under that subpoenaJ I 

MR. HALKET: The documents that are on the I 

I 

table belong to Engelhard Corporation. They do no, 

~._,,_,._l. -'-- - -'-~'-"':' ,--~' ,--_ .. , 

PADUANO BASF0273S 

Case 2:11-cv-01754-BRM-AME Document 70-1 Filed 08/04/11 Page 42 of 193 PageID: 1980
". 

. 

:.~ 

" , . . .1 -.. .. ( 

./ 

.J 

. 1 

.' 

! .. '1 

! 

, 

. • : 

I . , 

j 

... 0

·' 

. ·L .. __ ...... __ .. _,., 

1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

Hemstock 42 

in any way belong to Mr. Hemstock. They are not 

under his custody or control, and they were produced here as an accommodation to the plaintiff. 

They are not subject to that subpoena, 

and as I said, they were produced here solely as 

an accommodation to the plaintiff. 

8 BY MR. PRENTISS: 

9 Q Are you familiar with the documents that 

lO have been referred to by counsel that are here on the 

11 table? 

12 A Generally. 

13 Q Do they cover research projects that were 

14 conducted by the company during the time you were vice 

15 president of research? 

16 MR. KENNEDY: Objection, and the same 

17 instruction. 

18 Q Are those documents a part of the central 

19 file of the company, as you have described the central 

20 file in earlier answers in this deposition? 

21 A I don't know. 

22 Q Have you ever seen those documents before? 

23 A Not all of them. 

24 Q Do. those documents, any of them, relate 

i 

25 to research that was conducted by the company during thel 

I .---,_~" ".~_" _. __ .--..~.-.., . : ________ ¥~-_-.......--J.-. 

PADUANO BASF02739 

Case 2:11-cv-01754-BRM-AME Document 70-1 Filed 08/04/11 Page 43 of 193 PageID: 1981
1---

',' . ~ 

-." 

.' 

'.-

.::' ~ ." 

. , 

I 

:1 

. ·1 

:J 

;J 

." '1 . " 

.... : 

j 

J 

, 

., 

.. 

, 

~". 

-....:....~-.... -. "----

1 Hemstook 43 

2 time you were either direotor of researoh or vioe 

3 president of research? 

4 MR. KENNEDY: Same objeotion, and same 

5 ins.t ru'c tion. 

6 Q Where else in the company -- where else in 

7 Engelhard Corporation, what other division conducts 

8 research and development? 

9 A The Engelhard Industry Division does 

10 conduct research and development. 

11 Q To your knowledge, did the Engelhard 

12 Industry Division conduct al1Y research regarding chemica 

13 qontaminants or contaminant consti,tue,.';;s of talc from 

14 1967 to present? 

15 MR. KENNEDY: Same objection, and same 

16 instruction. 

17 Q Who is the head of research for Engelhard 

18 Ind us tri es Di vis i on? 

19 A Mr. Camran Aykan. 

20 Q Does Engelhard :ndustr1es D1v1sion deal in 

21 any way in talc? 

22 A Not to my knowledge. 

I 

23 Q Are there any other divisions of the i 

I 

24 

25 

Engelhard Corporation besides the two that you have 1 

1dentified, Engelhard Industries and Minerals & Chemical? I 

I 

J ,'~"'~~ -_ .. _,......,.......-- -,~-.---.-~--.--~., .. ,.--.. --. ~,~, ---- ._.----_ ...... _.- _._--

PADUANO BASF02740 

Case 2:11-cv-01754-BRM-AME Document 70-1 Filed 08/04/11 Page 44 of 193 PageID: 1982
',:: 

.', ;' 

.,' ' ... ' 

r--~~'~~ 

I 

~ 2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

, 25 

1_ 

Hemstock 44 

A No. 

Q To your knowledge, is all of the business 

of talc of the Engelhard Corporation conducted by the 

minerals & chemicals division of Engelhard? 

A To my knowledge. 

Q What is the business of Engelhard Industries 

Division, generally', to your knowledge? 

A They are processors of precious metals. 

Q Is Eastern Magnesium Company presently 

associated in any way with the Engelhard Corporation, to 

your knowledge? 

A Yes. 

Q To your knowledge, what is the relationship 

A I don't know specifically. 

Q I don't have your affidavit in front of me. 

Can you state for the record just where 

MR. KENNEDY: I am as confused as 

Mr. Hemstock in that regard. 

MR. PRENTISS: Does anybody want to clarify 

MR. HALKET: Off the record. 

(A discussion was held off the record.) J 

MR. HALKET: Eastern Magnesium is a separat ! 

corporation, all of the stock of which is owned, td 

I 

the best of my knowledge, by Engelhard CorporationJ I 

i 

I 

~ ______ ., ___ L_ 

PADUANO BASF02741 

Case 2:11-cv-01754-BRM-AME Document 70-1 Filed 08/04/11 Page 45 of 193 PageID: 1983
:.. .. 

.. " 

"..' 

,. 

---- -•. ~--

.; 

1 

(0 

\J 

.. --~··~'--T 

1 Hemstock 

I 

45 I 

2 Q To your knowledge, are the activities 

3 of Eastern Magnesium Talc Company governed in any way 

4 by the minerals & chemicals division of Engelhard 

5 Corporation? 

6 MR. KENNEDY: I don't know that this witnes 

7 is qualified tQ give an op~nion in that regard. 

8 ..... __ !1B,. __ i'llENTISS-: ... -I··-am asking to his knowledge 

9 MR. HALKET: I don't understand the ques10 tion. I would like it rephrased. 

11 Q Do you have any responsibility with regard 

12 to Eastern Magnesium Talc Company? 

13 A No, I do not. 

14 Q Did you ever? 

15 A No, I don't. 

16 Q When, to the best of your knowledge, did 

17 Eastern Magnesium Talc Company come into existence 

18 as a relative or subsidiary of Engelhard CorporatiOn? 

19 A During the sixties. 

20 Q Do you know whether the Eastern Magnesium 

21 Talc Company, the subsidiary of Engelhard, ever con22 ducted any studies regarding the chemical constituents 

23 or contaminants of talc? 

24 MR. KENNEDY: Same objection. Same 

25 instruction. 

1... . ___ •.. ----... _.---,._ ....... , -.. -:----.---"7.-"....,..-.~~-

PADUANO BASF0274~ 

Case 2:11-cv-01754-BRM-AME Document 70-1 Filed 08/04/11 Page 46 of 193 PageID: 1984
~-, J.. '. 

" 

.' ,'., 

..j 

j 

. : .:1 

J 

. I 

, i 

" i 

" 

., . 

" i 

J 

,~-... I .~ 

P.\ CJI 

o 

• 

• 

1- .~_ ... __ ._~__ _._ 

1 Hemstock 46 

2 Q Do you know whether there is a head o£ re3 search and development for the Eastern Magnesium Talc 

4 Company, subsidiary of Engelhard Corporation? 

5 A Yes. 

6 Q Who is that? 

7 A I say yes. I know that there is not. 

8 (A recess was taken at this time, and upon 

9 returning, the following then ensued:) 

10 BY MR. PRENTISS: 

11 Q Does minerals & chemicals division conduct 

12 the research and development for Eastern' Magnesium Talc 

13 Company? 

14 A Normally, they would. 

15 Q In what circumstances would they not? 

16 MR. KENNEDY: Generally? 

17 (A discussion was held off the record betwe n 

18 the witness and his counsel.) 

19 A We have never conducted research for Easter 

20 Magnesium Talc. We normally WOUld, if there was researc 

21 to be done. 

22 Q So 

23 A We have not done any. 

24 Q So to your knowledge, Eastern Magnesium 

25 Talc has not conducted research and development? 

---:----.-:,-.-. .....,........~-. ~~---. "-~-.---- . ..., .. .............------.- '.--- ........ -.~~~-

PADUANO BASF0274:J 

Case 2:11-cv-01754-BRM-AME Document 70-1 Filed 08/04/11 Page 47 of 193 PageID: 1985
'. 

J 

.1 

:1 

I ',. f , . ' ... 

,', ;: 

. ',' 

' . 

..... 

>.' 

.:;.: , :-:-,' 

•.... , 

,-:/ . ~. 

", ':i , 

{;:. ·.v , .' ' . 

, :i 

.. 

'.' , 

: ;~ 

" .. 

.. ;~ 

. ' ' . 

" "::--J \ ,', . j 

., 

, 

< ., , 

.;. 

'. 

'. 

'. 

, 

'::;"-

, ': .. -:r ..... 

, . .. 

" '. 

.J 

·1 

'1 

.. ~ 

, 

I 

J 

, 

, 

". 

; 

J 

1 

I 

, 

, 

I 

I 

.. ;~::: 

~ 

0 

, , ---......... --- 1 Hemstock 

2 A That's correct. 

3 Q What other entity besides minerals ~ 

4 chemicals division conducted any research within Engel5 hard Corporation, conducted any research regarding talc 

6 or potential contaminants or hazards within talc? 

7 MR. KENNEDY: Same objection, and same 

8 instruction. 

9 Q Has the minerals ~ chemicals division 

10 or any other division or subsidiary of Engelhard ever 

11 sought outside consultation in research into talc or 

12 contaminants in talc or chemical constituents in talc 

13 or potential. health or safety hazards from talc? 

14 MR. KENNEDY: Same objection. Same 

15 instruction. 

16 Q Where did the documents of the Engelhard 

17 Corporation, which have been brought here to this deposi 

18 tion with which you say you are not familiar, come from? 

19 Do you understand that question? 

20 MR. HALKET: If he does, I don't. 

21 MR. PRENTISS: When I depose you, I will 

22 make it clear. 

23 MR. HALKET: It is a compound question. 

24 A Yes, could you clarify it. 

25 Q You stated that you are familiar with some 

I.. ""~'_" "."""_;'"'' ..... ~~-... C7'.",..... ~~ .~--..:..--., ... --" .. -.. " -. ~~~.-.. "" ......... 

PADUANO BASF02744 

Case 2:11-cv-01754-BRM-AME Document 70-1 Filed 08/04/11 Page 48 of 193 PageID: 1986
"j_" ._. __ .. ~. . ... I _~ .. _., 

" 1 ~~ 

., , 

' .. 

.'; 

" :"< 

:::;;', .~:" 

. ,., 

.' 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

. " 

Hemstock 50 

able to the Magistrate, if the Magistrate wishes 

to view them, but you have to understand that our 

objection is not that any one particular document 

may be privileged for anyone of a number of 

reasons, so I don't think the Magistrate has to 

view the documents. 

He Just has to understand the legal argument that we're making and the necessity for 

some sort of con[dentiality stipulation, so I don' 

think you need a page by page reference, so I 

will take them all with me, and is that satisfactory? 

MR. PRENTISS: Sure. 

Let me ask a couple of more questions. 

BY MR. PRENTISS: 

Q Who is the president of Engelhard Corporation? 

A There are two presidents to Engelhard 

20 Corporation. There is a president of the lo'inerals & 

.. ,:' 

.·1 

1 

1 

i 

. i 

I 

./ 

o 21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

., .. -.....--...--. ,....- .. --

Chemicals Division. There is a president of the Engelhard Industries Division, and there is, I guess, the 

corporate president, Mr. Irving lsko. 

Q When you say the corporate presid~t, 

are you referring to the corporate president of one or 

. _.~.~ .•. , .. "_" _~_'-'_~_'-_""C-' __ --- ____ •• - •• 1_ ... 

PADUANO BASF02747 

Case 2:11-cv-01754-BRM-AME Document 70-1 Filed 08/04/11 Page 49 of 193 PageID: 1987
,-'-----"----'--- ----- -----

-I I 

-- '\ 

" ; 'I 

: ~ 

'; ;·::.~1 

· .. .:, · .. :: ~ :~:~ · ..... " " ~. 

. '''!.,: ~~', <~. 

: '" .. ;: ~:' . ..,...:: 

'Y!l 

..: :1

1 

.. 

t'J» \:iJ 

0

·" 

" 

1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

Hemstock 51 

another of the divisions? 

A No. The presidents of the two divisions 

report to Mr. Isko. 

Q Do you know, can you identify, any person 

within the corporate structure of Engelhard who is the 

custodian of the documents of the corporation? 

A No, I cannot. 

Q Does President Isko have other officers 

who report to him besides the presidents of the two 

divisions? 

A Yes, he does. 

Q Is. there a vice presi':ie:-:t J tr."asu.rer, 

secretary, et cetera of the corporation, of that structure of which Mr. Isko is the head? 

A Mr. Isko has a small corporate staff. 

I can't specifically answer that question. 

MR. PRENTISS: I have nothing further. 

MR. CURRAN: No questions. 

(Continued on the next page.) 

-.-

PADUANO BASF02748 

Case 2:11-cv-01754-BRM-AME Document 70-1 Filed 08/04/11 Page 50 of 193 PageID: 1988
~ '" 

,'",,', 

, , 

'" 

1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

• 24 

25 

Hemstock 52 

MR. LEIBENSPERGER: I have no questions. 

MR. DOLAN: No questions. 

MR. KENNEDY: No questions. 

(Time noted: 

Subscribed and sworn to 

before me this 

of 

day 

, 1983 

12:05 P.M.) 

I ~_~. ______ .. ______ ~-___ -.-. -.-,. __ ~-J. .. 

PADUANO BASF02749 

Case 2:11-cv-01754-BRM-AME Document 70-1 Filed 08/04/11 Page 51 of 193 PageID: 1989
1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

: .... : '" 

,.-:", ,.:. 10 ", , 

.... j .', 11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

, 

53 

CERTIFICATE 

STATE OF NEi'i YORK ) 

) ss: 

COUNTY OF NEW YORK ) 

I, JOSEPH R. DANYO __________________ ~--------------' a 

Notary PUblic Within and for the State of New Yor 

duly commissioned L~d qualified and authorized 

to administer oathS and to take and cert1.t'y 

depoSitions, do hereby certity: 

~at the foregoing deposition ot 

Glenn A. Hemstock, taken by plaintiff, 

pursuant to subpoena and stipulation, at the 

offices of Cahill Gordon & Reindel, Esqs., 80 

Pine Street, New York, New York, on Friday, 

January 28, 1983 at 10:20 A.M. 

That I was attended upon the tak1r~, of said 

deposition by counsel' as listed on page s 2 and. 3; 

~at said witness was first by me duly 

sworn to tell the truth, the whole truth, and 

nothing but the truth, and that he was thereupon' 

examined by counsel present; that! took down 

the test1mony of said witness 1n,machine shcrthL~~ 

and caused the same to be transcribed by a 

person under my supervision. 

PADUANO BASF02750 

Case 2:11-cv-01754-BRM-AME Document 70-1 Filed 08/04/11 Page 52 of 193 PageID: 1990
t 

.~ • 

"( 

I' 

" t 

\' ,. 

I ,< C> ".:: : f 

,':: .. :f ~, 

© \"'1 .•.• o. 

,,':. . ' .. : 

, ,,:{ .~: .~ ,.! .. ~ . 

',~' ' ~ 

.. , ,' 'f ",: 

'" :1 , " 

" J 

, 'f 

> ." " J , 

{ " 

, '" 

, •

, 

":. 

" 

., 'r ,

f 

,. 

:\ , ~ " , • ,-to 

,( ,. 

.. f , .': .r 

i::',,) 

!~ .~ .. , .• 1 :' :, 

.I 

:! , " ", " 

J , 

\ , I C\ 

I 0 • I .~' - ! 

" c 

i 

I 

• ! 

" 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

2.'3 

24 

25 

54' ---I, 

) ; 

I further certify that I am not of counsel I 

or attorney for any of the parties in said 

deposition and caption named, nor in any way 

interested in the event of the cause named in 

said caption; and the same applies to the person 

who transcribed my stenotype notes. 

IN WITNESS WHEREOF. I have hereunto set 

my hand and official seal this _ ... {... ~ __ day of 

1. / ' .vi' f) ,." ., " / • Or .... \. .. .1",'\ 

_.-...---" 

PADUANO 

,/C. , 

1'/ 

'JOSEPH R. DANYO 

.1 ...... -

v' .. ;,~.,._"",~ 

BASF02751 

Case 2:11-cv-01754-BRM-AME Document 70-1 Filed 08/04/11 Page 53 of 193 PageID: 1991
" 

1 

, 1 

: 1 , 'j ,~"" "':;'1 i(;':':'\ .··.·J'v 

'. " J , 'j 

" ":1 

.. ',,' 

", .~ , " 

" 

I :" ~ . 

" 

.. -,:-.' 

~~ /: .:~ , , 

p, 

.. ~<~ 

. '~'::'~l 

~t;..~ 

}~:::~~:21 ~': - ,.-. .," 

:' , ;' ,I 

,," j '" ;, '., 

.:: ) 

" 

1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

• 14 

15 

16 

11 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

PLAINTIFF'S 

,EXHIBIT NO. 

,I 

: Z 

\ :- ",' 

r : 

ENGELHARD 

EXHIBIT NO. 

- ' 

. ,~. } ... 

EXHIBITS 

--------

- Subpoena duces tecum dated 

December 15. 1982 

St1pulat1on dated January 10. 

1.983 signed by Mr.. Prent1ss 

and Mr. Ke,nnedy 

Proposed,st1pu1at1on and order 

of. confident1al1ty 

...... 

PADUANO 

55 

PAGE 

15 

15 

16 

BASF02752 

Case 2:11-cv-01754-BRM-AME Document 70-1 Filed 08/04/11 Page 54 of 193 PageID: 1992
.. / ~ : 

, 

8 

; 

~ 

• 

, " 

PADUANO 

1. 

4 

5 

6 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

FOR THE DISTRICT OF RHODE ISLAND 

DAVID HOWARD WESTFALL, IN HIS 

CAPACITY AS ADMINISTRATOR OF 

THE ESTATE OF THOMAS HOWARD 

WESTFALL AND IN HIS CAPACIT.Y AS 

ADMINISTRATOR OF THE ESTATE OF 

. BETTY E. WESTFALL, , , Plaintiff 

7 VB .• 'C.A. No. 79-0269 

8 WHITTAKER, CLARK & DANIELS, 

METROPOU TAN TALC COMPANY', INC., 

9 and OMYA, INC., itself and as 

successor to VERMONT TALC 

10 COMPANY. ~NC., ' 

11 

12 

13 

14 ' 

16 

1!3 

17 

Defendants 

WINDSOR MINERALS, INC., itself 

'and as successor to EASTERN 

MAGNESIA, TALC COMPANY, INC., 

VS. 

Defendant and 

Third-Party Plain tiff 

M'IN:ERALS & CHEMICALS PHILLIP 

CORPORATION, 

ThirdAparty Defendant 

DEPOSITION 

EXHIBIT u 

p--?-a 

.. 

18 Continued deposition of GLENN HEMSTOCK, 

\ 

19 

20 

taken on behalf of the Plaintiff, pursuant to the Federal 

Rules of Civil Procedure, on March 16, 1983, at the offices 

'21 of Decof & Grimm, One Smith Hill, Providence, Rhode Island, 

22 convening at 10: 00 a. m., befo:re Jeanne M; St. Hi1aire-Derha 

23 Notary Pub lie. 

24 

25 

REPORTING ASSOCIATESR E c: E I V E D 

Shorthand Reporters 

205 Howard Building MAH:& 518ti3 

Providence, RI 02903 ' . ADW4 PULLUU~ &. SHEEHAN 

BASF02291 

Case 2:11-cv-01754-BRM-AME Document 70-1 Filed 08/04/11 Page 55 of 193 PageID: 1993
, 

\, 

PADUANO 

2 

3 

APPEARANCES: 

Decof & Grimm 

'One Smith Hill 

Providence, Rhode Island, 02903, 

BY: DANIEL R. PRENTISS, ESQ., ••. On behalf of the Plaintiff 

4 

Hinckley & Allen 

5 2200 Fleet National Bank Building 

Providence, Rhode Island 02903 

6 BY: MICHAEL G. SARLI"ESQ., ••••• On behalf of Whittaker, 

Clark & Daniels 

7 Hanson, Curran & Parks 

1210 Turks, Head Buildin'g 

8 Providence, Rhode Island 02903 

,BY: WILLIAM A. CURRAN, ESQ., •••• On behalf of Metropolitan 

9 Talc Company, Inc. 

Rice. Dolan, Kiema'n & Kershaw 

10 101 Dyer Street 

Providence, Rhode Island 02903 

11 BY: JOHN F. DOLAN, ESQ ••• o •••••• On behalf of Omya, Inc. 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

26 

-Nutter, McClennen & Fish 

600 Atlantic Avenue 

Boston, Massachusetts 02210 

BY: EDWARD P. LEIBENSPERGER, ESQ., .. On behalf of Windsor 

Minerals, Inc. 

Adler, Pollock & Sheehan 

2300 Hospital Trust Tower 

Providence, Rhode Island 02903 

BY:' PETER LAWSON KENNEDY ,ESQ ••. .. and .. 

Cahill, Gordon & Reindel, 

80 Pine Street , New York, New York, 10005 

BY: HOWARD G. SLOANE, ESQ~) 

.. and .. 

THOMAS D. HALKET, ESQ. 

Menlo Park, CN 28 

Edison, New Jersey 08818 ••.••••. On 

* * * * * * * * * * 

behalf of Engelhard 

Corporation and 

Glenn Hemstock 

Case 2:11cv01754BRMAME Document 701 Filed 08/04/11 Page 56 of 193 PageID: 1994
, 

• 

\. 

,"""", 

\, .... 

, 

PADUANO 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

16 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

NO',' 

1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

DEPOSITION OF DR,' GLENN HEMSTOCK 

Examination by Mr. Prentiss 

(All exhibits were marked prior 

to commencement of deposition,) 

InterNDepartment Memorandum dated 

October 9, 1972 from E. J. Trig1ia 

A document to the file from J. M. 

Z'immermann dated October 30, 1980 

A Technical Service Request from 

.J. H. Shafer dated February 28, 1973 

A Technical Service Request from 

J. M. Zimmermann dated January 17, 1979 

Document entitled "Proposed 

Experimental Design for Fiber 

Distribution" 

PAGE NO. 

4 

A Technical Service Request from 

.J. M. Zimmermann dated S'eptember 6, 1977 

A Technical Service Request from 

R., E. Lomas dated January 29, 1979 

Letter from Roya1~G1obe Insurance Co. 

to Mr. Victor A. Backe1s dated 

,August 18, 1972 

Document entitled "Attachment V" 

from R. A. Nadkarni dated October 27, 1978 

,-- . Letter from JohnsMManville to 

Engelhard Minerals & Chemicals 

Division dated September 5, 1972 

Document entitled·"Mineralogy, Identi~ 

fication, and Quantification of Airborne 

Talc Dust" 

i 

Case 2:11-cv-01754-BRM-AME Document 70-1 Filed 08/04/11 Page 57 of 193 PageID: 1995
F . '. 

• ;' 

I ,.~. 

· ! 

, 

• 

" • • 

~ • 

8 

~ • • • 

PADUANO 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

16 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

NO': 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

26 

! ~ g 1 ~ I ! g (Continued) 

Inter-Department Memorandum dated 

August 22, 1972 f~om J. H. Shafer 

Inter-Department Memorandum dated 

September 16, 1971 from T.D. Ou1ton 

Technical Service Request from 

J. H. Shafer dated March 30, 1979 

Document entitled "History of AsbestosRelated Minera,logical Terminology" 

Inter-Department Memorandum dated 

December 1, 1977 from C. Y. Haas 

Technical Service Request from 

A. L.yuako dated October 12, 1973 

Document to A. L. il.inko dated May 31, 1979 

Letter from Walter C. McCrone Assoc., 

Inc., dated June 27, 1977 to Mr. Frank 

J. Dzierzanowski 

Inter-Department Memorandum dated 

Apgust 18, 1977 from K. Newger 

Technical Service Request from 

C. Y. Haas dated March 29, 1977 

Letter from Walter C. McCrone Assoc., 

Inc. dated April 30, 1979 to Mr • . Peter N. Gale 

Document entitled "Talc Investigation" 

containing calculations 

DOcument entitled "Petrographic Examination of Two Talcose Rock Samples from 

Northern Vermont" .-- • !' 

Lette~ ~rom the H.E.W. dated January 19, 

1973 to Mr. A. J. Dankwerth 

Letter from U.S. Oept. of Labor dated 

July 19, 1979 to Mr. J. Howard Shafer 

ii 

...... __ #loA .... '" ~ 

Case 2:11-cv-01754-BRM-AME Document 70-1 Filed 08/04/11 Page 58 of 193 PageID: 1996
(, 2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

16 

16 

( 17 ) ....... 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

( 25 

NO. 

27 

28 

29 

30 

31 

32 

33 

~ z g .1 .l2 .1 'r §. (Continued) 

Note from the desk of G.A. Hemstock 

dated September 1, 1972 

Inter-Department Memorandum dated 

March 13, 1979 from J. M. Zimmermann 

Purchase Requisition dated May 1, 1973 

for Johns-Manville Research & Engineering 

Center 

Letter from the Minerals & Chemical 

Division dated November 21, 1977 to 

Bobby F. Craft, Ph.D. 

Conversation memo dated February 6', 1979 

Pages of calculations dated January 19, 1977 

Inter-Department Memorandum dated 

August 3, 1979 from R.E. Lomas 

ii 

34 Calculations entitled· "Waterbury Talc Study" 

35 

36 

37 

38 

39 

40 

41 

42 

Technical Service Request from R.W. Wert 

dated June 24, 1982 

Inter-Department Memorandum from E. J. 

Triglia dated May 22, 1979 

Document ent itled "Talc Morphology as 

·Revealed by Scanning Electron Microscopy" 

Note from the office of E. J. Triglia 

Letter from Fred W. Farwell dated November 10, 

.1977 to Mr. Frank J. Dzierzanowski 

Inter-Department Memorandum dated April 20, 

1978 from K. Newger 

.--

Technic,al Service Request dated March 11, 

1982 from R. M. Kazimir 

Letter from the Minerals & Chemicals 

Division dated October 2, 1980 to 

Mr. Mark Palenik 

BASFO 

gg
t 

, 

~. 

I ~ .• 

-; 

• 

" • • 

S 

rl 

~ • : 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

liQ;. 

43 

44 

45 

46 

47 

48 

49 

50 

51 

li ~ li.l ~ 1! ~ (Continued) 

Document entitled "The Basic Mineralogical 

Dichotomy in the Selevan Epidemiology Studylf 

iv 

Inter-Department Memorandum dated September 26, 

1977 from T. D.Oulton 

Inter-Department Memorandum dated July 17,.1979 

fro.m E. J. T'riglia 

Group of documents, first page of which is 

a list of fignures 

Document entitled "VAG Core Samples." 

Technical Service Request dated July 27, 1982 

from K. L. Kayler 

DOcuments contained on pocket of binder 

Documents conta-ined in binder 

Letter from Minerals & Chemical Division 

dated June 13, 1979 to Mr. John Brown '-

********** 

Case 2:11-cv-01754-BRM-AME Document 70-1 Filed 08/04/11 Page 60 of 193 PageID: 1998
2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

(" ." ..... 14 

16 

16 

17 

Ie 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

1 

. (PLAINTIFF'S EXHIBIT NOS. 1 THROUGH 51 WERE 

RECEIVEUIN EVIDENCE FOR IDENTIFIcATION) 

MR. KEt-.'NEDY: Just to reiterate what ~e 

have said during the last deposition session, Dr. Hemstock has no documents in his possession. 

Consequently, he could not respond to the subpoena 

duces tecum. Engelhard Industries, hO\~ever, as an 

accomodation, has searched it!,l·.records and has provided 

me with copies of documents or the 'originals of documents, if the originals existed, which we have brought 

with us. They've already been copied so \~e can mark 

up the copies rather than mark up the originals that 

have been provided by Engelhard. We have ,~ithheld 

very" very fe\~ documents which we consider privileged. 

'Those are documents which are bet\~een counsel and the 

client, and at some time later we will provide you 

with a catalogue of those documents so that you will 

be able to refer to tha·t in the event you feel that 

you can force us to divulge those documents. 

MR. BALKET: Engelhard Industries is a name 

of a division. 

MR. KENNEDY: We also discovered yesterday 

some records, research records, that are in bound 

volumes, and those have been culled and there are some 

pages that have been photostated relative to the call 

BASF022 

Case 2:11cv01754BRMAME Document 701 Filed 08/04/11 Page 61 of 193 PageID: 1999
,-

\ 

1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 . 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

2 

of the subpoena duces tecum. 

MR. PRENTISS: Where are those now? 

MR. KENNEDY: They're in the batch of 

documents which you've already copied. 

MR. PRENTISS: When will the catalogue of 

documents for which you claim privilege be made·available? 

MR. KENNEDY: Midweek next week, only because everybody is going to be out of town running· 

here and there. I think it would be a short list. 

MR. PRENTISS: Anything further preliminarily? 

MR. KENNEDY: That does it. 

MR. HALKET: I would like to say one more 

thing for the record. The records that Engelhard. 

searched were the records of its Research Division 

only. It may have searched some other records, but 

we can only certify that we searched the rec·ords of 

the Research Division. 

MR. PRENTISS: Very well. 

MR. LEIBENSPERGER: Any stipulations with 

respect to objections? 

MR. PRENTISS: Well, I would suggest that 

we preserve all obj ections other than to form of question until trial unless you propose any other stipulaBASFO 
(' 

\ 

• 

~ 

" .. 

1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 , 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

3 

tion. 

MR. LE.IBENSPERGER: No., That's acceptable 

to me. 

MR. KENNEDY: That's fine. 

MR. PRENTISS: What about signing of the 

deposition? Do you require it? 

MR. KENNEDY: I,would like the deposition 

to be reviewed and then signed t~ith or without any 

corrections as is necessary. 

MR. PRENTISS: Shall we proceed? 

MR. KENNEDY: All right. I just want to 

make one other statement, that t~e have modified the 

secrecy stipulations to the extent that it is acceptable to everybody here, and,we're going to circulate 

that during the deposition. 

, MR. PRENTISS: What I'd like to dom just 

take an opportunity to look through the amendments and 

sign it. I don't anticipate that I'll have any objection, but at the break, I'll sign it and r'll'represen

-- I don't expect problems, and we can mark that ,stipu

lation as an exhibit to the·depositiqn at that time. 

Okay? 

MR. KENNEDY: All right, fine. 

GLENN HEMSTOCK, first having been duly sworn 

by the Notary Public, testified as follows: 

BASFO: 
1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

B 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

( 14 . 

16 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

PADUANO 

Q 

A 

Q 

A 

Q 

A 

Q 

Q 

A 

Q 

4 

EXAMINATION BY MR. PRENl'ISS: 

Dr. Hemstock, you are the same Glenn A.. Remstock whose 

deposition was begun' in this proceeding on. Friday. 

January 28, 1983 in the offices of Cahill, Gordon & 

Reindel, 80 Pine Street, New York, Ne~1 York? 

I am. 

MR. PRENTISS: Doctor, I'll remind you that 

you areagain under oath, and that this deposition is 

a' continuation of the deposition that wa's begun at 

that time. 

THE WITNESS: Yes •. 

Doctor, when did your employer fir.st become involved 

in the business relating to taic? 

During the late 1960's. 

How did it become involved in the talc business? 

I don I t know. 

When did your employer first engage in either the 

production or sale of talc? 

MR. KENNEDY: Excuse me. Could we have a 

clarification, Dan? T.he production is one question, 

and the sale is another question. 

Okay. I'll divide it up. When did your employer firs

become involved in the sale of talc? 

I do not know. 

When did it first become involved in the produc'tion of 

BASFO: 
( 

1 

2 A 

3 Q 

4 

5 

6 A 

7 Q 

8 

9 

10 

11 

talc? 

1 do not kno~,. 

Do you know. when your employer first acquired an interest either directly or through any subsidiary 

corporations in a producing facility of talc? 

No, 1 don't. 

Did your. employer ever. either directly or through a 

5 

subsidiary become involved in the production of talc? 

THE WITNESS: Would you repeat that ques'-

tion, please? 

(PREVIOUS QUESTION READ BY REPORTER) 

12 A Yes. 

13 Q ,Did:i.t acquire any talc-producing mines?" 

14. A 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

Q 

A 

Q 

A 

Q 

A 

Q 

Yes. 

Which ones? 

The Johnson mine. I'm not aware of others. 

The Johnson mine, by that you refer to Johnson, Vermont 

Johnson, Vermont. 

And do you know whether your employer either directly· 

or through a subsidiary purchased that mine from any 

. other entity? 

I do not know. 

Did your employer ever .- was your employer ever invalved in any way with a talc mine in Waterbury, 

Vermont? 

RASF02: 

gg
, 

, 

1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 , 

15 ' 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

A 

Q 

A 

Q 

A 

Q 

A 

Q 

A 

Q 

A 

Q 

A 

Q 

r'm not aware of that. 

Was it through a subsidiary, that ypur .employer o~·med 

the Johnson, Vermont' mine? , 

I don't know. 

b 

Did you personally undertake any involvement with 'your 

employer's business in talc? 

No, I did not. 

Did you personally oversee' any investigaFions, studies 

or research regarding talc? 

Only in very general terms. 

In what terms were those'? 

The Research Department is a service department for 

the division. That means that w~ at request of other 

department~will provide service of a technical nature 

relevant to our products. In that context, I was 

generally involved in activities of a technical nature 

in talc. 

When you said division, are you referring to the 

'Minerals and Chemicals Division of Engelhard Corpora-, 

tion? 

Yes, I am. 

And department, by department, are you referring to 

the Department of Research and Development? 

Yes, I am. 

That is the Department of Research and Development of 

R4SF02~ 

Case 2:11cv01754BRMAME Document 701 Filed 08/04/11 Page 66 of 193 PageID: 2004
2 A 

n . 3 

4 

6 Q 

6 

7 A 

8 

9 Q 

10 

11 

12 A 

13 Q 

., 14 . 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 A 

20 

21 

22 

23 Q 

24 

25 A .' ..:.~. 

• .... T r't. 

7 

Engelhard Corporation? 

That is the Department of Research· and. Development of 

the Minerals and Chemicals Division of Engelhar.d 

Corpora tion • 

What was the nature of'the research that took place 

within that department regarding talc? 

Researcher's role was a supporting role. We did not 

undertake formal research studies on talc. 

Did anybody either within Engelhard Corp'oration or at 

the behest of Engelhard Corporation undertake research 

regarding ta lc? 

Not to my knowledge. 

To your knowledge, has anybody employed by Engelhard . 

Corporation ever undertaken studies regarding possible 

contaminants contained in talc? 

THE WITNESS; \.Jould you repeat the question, 

please? 

(PREVIOUS QUESTION READ BY REPORTER) 

Only in the 'context that I previously mentioned; ·that· 

is, research personnel provided a .service in a technical consulting role and carried out whatever was' 

necessary in the way of laboratory tests. 

What were the laboratory tests or other services that 

were car'ried out? 

We, at that time, and still do have the capabilities 

Case 2:11-cv-01754-BRM-AME Document 70-1 Filed 08/04/11 Page 67 of 193 PageID: 2005
r • 

2 

f\. 

. . 3 

4 Q 

6 

6 A 

7 Q 

8 A 

9 

10 

11 Q 

12 

13 

14 

16 A 

16 Q 

17 

18 A 

19 Q 

20 A 

21 Q 

22 

23 A 

24 

25 Q 

8 

of running total chemical analysis, particle size 

distribution, x-ray diffraction, oil absorption, 

surface area. Those are the major. ones; 

Were those facilities used in regard to research on 

talc? 

They were used as requested by our clients. 

Who were your ciients? 

Our clients in this case were other departments withi

Engelhard Corporation, within the Minerals and Chemicals Division of Engelhard Corporation. 

Were you ever requested, and by you I mean the Resear

and Development Department you referred to, to test 

talc for content of asbestos or possible asbestos 

contamination? 

Yes. 

When was the first time, to your knowledge, that your 

department conducted tests of that nature? 

I don It recall. 

Would it have been as early as the early seventies? 

It may have been. 

Over what period of time has that kind of testing take

place? 

It has occurred intermittently over, I suppose, one 

could say a number of years. 

Up until the present? 

BASFf 
• " i 

• o 

: • 

8 

~. 

1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

A 

Q 

A 

Q 

A 

Q 

A 

Q 

A 

Q 

A 

Q 

A 

Q 

9 

Yes, up until the present. 

Do you know the purpose for which your department ~)as 

requested to make 'that kind of res·ea'rch? 

Generally, it was in response to a request from the 

Marketing or Sales Department. 

One of the clients that you referred to is the Engelhard -- excuse' me, is Eastern Hagnesia Talc Company? 

1 don't understand the question. 

You made reference -- I'll rephrase the question. You 

made refe~ence to your department conducting tests 

and studies as a result of reques.ts of clients. Do 

you remember that answer? 

Yes. 

You state clients. Is one of those clients the 

"- Eastern Magnesia Talc Company? 

To the degree that Eastern Magnesia Talc Company was 

a -- was the source of the talc which Engelhard 

Corporation sold. 

And to what degree is that? 

Well, that is the source of the talc that we produce. 

Is that the only. source of the talc that your employer 

produces? 

To my knowledge, yes. 

To your. knowledge, is that -- has that always been the 

only.source of talc which your employer produces? 

gg
2 

0.·: 

3 

4 

5 

6 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

/ 14 

15 

16 

17 

i 18 

.0 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

25 

A To my knowledge, yes. 

Q 

A 

Q 

Q 

A 

Are you a~lare that asbestos or asbestiform minerals 

sometimes are associated ~lith talc. and talc deposits? 

(OBJECTION BY ALL· DEFENSE COUNSEL) 

MR. KENNEDY: Are you talking about in 

general? 

MR. PRENTISS: In general. 

In trace quantities in·some samples, in SOme deposits, 

some areas of some deposits. 

Is it your testimony, then, that asbestos at maximum 

is· only present in general in talc in trace quantities? 

(OBJECTION BY ALL DEFENSE COUNSEL) 

MR. CURRAN: An objection for one Defendant 

will be an objection for all. 

MR. PRENTISS: Dr. Hemstock, I'm going ·to 

ask the Reporter to read back the question just before 

the last one, and before you answer the question, I· 

want you to understand that I'm asking you.from your 

knowledge in general as to talc, not your knowledge as 

to any specific talcs produced by your employer. 

THE WITNE S S : Yes, I understand. 

(PREVIOUS TlvO QUESTIONS READ BY REPORTER) 

Could you answer that question? 

·Yes. 

. MR • KENNEDY: Yes, you can answer it; or 

_ .. __ .... A .. "', 

Case 2:11-cv-01754-BRM-AME Document 70-1 Filed 08/04/11 Page 70 of 193 PageID: 2008
2 

r---, 

" 1 

3 Q 

4 

5 

6 A 

7 Q 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

" 14 A' 

15 

16 Q 

17 

18 

19 A 

20 Q 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 A 

11 

yes is the answer? 

MR. LEIBENSPERGER: He's answered that one. 

Your answer to the question, and undersfanding the 

question is phrased in general, not with respect to 

any particular talc, your answer is yes? 

Yes'. 

Is it ,your understanding that -- let me ask you this. 

Which types of asbestos is it, to your understanding, 

that are generally associated with talc or talc deposits? 

(OBJECTION' BY ALL DEFENSE COUNSEL) , , 

MR. SLOANE: Do you understand the question? 

THE WITNESS: I understand the question. 

The only asbestos mineral that I'm aware of that 

exists in trace quantities in talc is chrysotile. 

To your knowledge, is tremolite asbestos ever associated with talc or talc deposits? 

(OBJECTION BY ALL DEFENSE COUNSEL) 

I don't consider tremolite to be an asbestos min~ral. 

But do you understand that tremolite is sometimes 

associa ted ,d.th talc? 

(OBJECTION BY ALL DEFENSE COUNSEL) 

THE WITNESS: In general? 

MR. PRENrISS: Yes. 

In general, sometimes. 

BASF02: 
12 

Q Do you know what an amphibole is? 

2 A I can only answer that in general terms. It m not a 

~-, 

! " 

3 geologist. 

4 Q You have heard the term? 

5 A I have heard the term. 

6 Q Are amphiboles asbestos minerals? 

1 (OBJECTION BY ALL DEFENSE COUNSEL) 

8 A Not to my kno~)ledge. 

9 Q Are amphiboles, to your knmqledge, generally asso10 cia ted with talc? 

11 (OBJECTION BY ALL DEFENSE COUNSEL) 

12 A Not to my knowledge. 

13 Q So, just to recap, do I understand your testimony to 

14 be that the only asbestos mineral ,~hich, to your know

15 ledge, is associated with talc in general is chrysoti

16 asbestos? 

17 (OBJECTION BY ALL DEFENSE COUNSEL) 

18 A That is correct. 

19 Q That is your understanding? 

20 A That is my understanding. 

21 Q Was there ever research. done or testing done by your 

22 department to determine whether chrysotile asbestos 

23 was present in talc samples given to your department 

24 for analysis? 

25 A yes. " 

BASF 
Q 

2 

3 A 

,4 

5 Q 

6 

7 A 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 Q 

16 

17 A 

18 Q 

19 

20 A 

0, 21 

~ 22 Q 

23 

24 A 

" 

/ 25 Q 

13 

Where, to your kno~11edge, did the talc come from that 

was given to your department for such testing? 

Well, generally from the Emtal Plant an~ mine; occasionally from competitive sources. 

~~en you refer to the Emtal Plant and mine, can you 

descuibe that for the record, tqhat that is? 

Well, again, my description will be general. The talc 

products produced by Emtal are mined underground from 

an underground deposit and are hauled a short distanc

to a plant where the raw ore is processed, processed 

primarily in two respects: One w.ith respect to chang

in particle 'size and size distribution by grinding; 

and in some cases also by floatation, primarily to 

remove colored impurities to improve brightness. 

Is Emtal an acronym or trade name for Eastern Magnesia 

Talc Company? 

I believe so. 

When you say Emtal, are you referring to talc produced 

by Eastern Magnesia Talc Company? 

I'm referring to talc produced by the Minerals and 

Chemicals Division of Engelhard Corporation. 

When you refer to that talc, is that only talc that's 

produced by Eastern Magnesia Talc Company? 

I believe so. 

Do you have some doubt about that? 

BASFO 
14 

A There is doubt on the accuracy of my knowledge on tha

2 Q That is to' say, there may be talc produced in some 

3 other place or from some other mine that is marketed 

4 at Emtal? 

5 A I don't know. I'm not suggesting that. 

'6 Q You don't know? Okay. In the tests of ~lhich you're 

7. aware that were run on Emtal.talc, was there ever 

8 found presence of chrysotile asbestos? 

9 A As indicated earlier, we have found on some samples 

10 from some limited areas only trace amounts, like indi11 vidual fibers, of chrysotile, what '4e believe to be 

12 chrysotile-type asbestos. 

13 Q When you say from some areas, to what are you refer14 ring? 

15 A Samples picked more or less at random either in plant 

16 or in mine. 

17 Q Are you talking of samples of processed talc? 

18 A It could be. 

19 Q What else could it be? 

20 A It could be samples pulled from areas of the mine. 

21 Q You mean ore? 

22 A Ore. 

23 Q Raw ore? 

24 A Right. 

,/ 

26 Q So, your department has tested both processed talc and 

BASFO 
: . 

1 

2 

(\ : 

3 • 

4 

5 

6 Q 

7 

8 

9 

10 A 

11 Q 

12 

13 A 

14 

16 

16 

17 Q 

18 

19 A 

20 

21 

22 

23 Q 

24 A 

25 Q 

raw ore from the' Emtal mine for presence of chrysotile? 

MR. HALKET: Objection. That's not what 

he said. 

(OBJECTION BY ALL DEFENSE COUNSEL) 

Is that accurate, or is that inaccurate? 

15 

MR. KENNEDY: Would you like the question 

read back? Would you read the question back, please? 

(PREVIOUS QUESTION READ BY REPORTER) 

Yes, on occasion. 

When you say on. occasion, what is it that prompts such 

an occasion?· 

As'I indicated earlier, we have had no continuous ongoing study of mineral impurities in talc. It is 

usually -- well, it has· been triggered by requests 

from some of our research clients for such analyses. 

Then who are your research clients besides Eastern 

Magnesia Talc Company? 

·Well, I'm referring to. other departments within the 

organization. I'm referring -- I'm only referring 

to that. I'm not referring to organizations outside 

of the company. 

And what other departments would those be? 

lvell, Manufacturing and Sales and Marketing~ 

When you say· the Manufacturing Department, what does 

BASF02 
• 1 ;:. 

2 

3 

4 

6 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

16 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

A 

Q 

A 

Q 

A 

A 

Q 

A 

16 

that comprehend? 

That's the group that has the responsibility for the 

mining and processing of the talcs that we sell. 

Is that Manufacturing Department distinct from Eastern 

Magnesia Talc Company? 

I don't believe so. I don't know for certain. 

Who is it, to your understanding, which entity is responsible for the manufacturing and mining of talc at 

the Johnson mine today? 

Well --

MR. KENNEDY: That is who individually or 

MR; PRENT.I S S : No. I said which entity. 

MR. SLOANE: \fuich corporate entity? 

MR. PRENTISS: Whatever entity. 

Hell, I look on the Minerals and Chemicals Division as 

an entity. 

Yes, sir. 

And the Emtal product line is only one of several 

product lines that the Minerals and Chemicals Division 

mines and processes and sells. 

MR. SLOANE: Listen to the question and 

answer the question. That's not the question he asked. 

THE WITNESS: Okay. 

MR. SLOANE: Read the question back. 

(PREVIOUS QUESTION READ BY REPORTER) 

Case 2:11-cv-01754-BRM-AME Document 70-1 Filed 08/04/11 Page 76 of 193 PageID: 2014
~ 

" • z 

i 

1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

16 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

A 

Q 

A 

Q 

A 

Q 

A 

Q 

A 

Q 

A 

Q 

A 

Q 

J.J 

To royunrlerstanding, it is the Minerals and Chemicals 

Division. 

There is a corporation called Eastern Mag~esia Talc 

Company; is tha t not correct 7' 

I don 't know. 

Earlier in your testimony, you made reference to the 

Erotal mine and the Emtal facility for processing talc 

ore; do you remember that? 

Yes. 

When you made reference to the Emtal mine, are you 

referring to the 'Johnson, Vermont mine 7 

Yes, I am. 

And the Emtal facility is a facility at or near the 

Johnson, Vermont mine? 

Yes. 

Now, you testified that your department has tested 

both processed talc and raw talc ore from the Erotal 

mine for presence of chry~otile asbestos; is that 

correct? 

Yes. 

Has your department in its research found chrysotile 

asbestos in both processed talc and raw ore from the 

Emtal mine? 

Yes. 

In your earlier answer, you referred, I believe, to 

BASF02 
1. 

? 

,,-.-... 

3 A 

4 Q 

5 A 

6 

7 

8 Q 

9 

10 A 

11 

12 

13 Q 

14 . 

15 

16 A 

17 

18 Q 

19 

20 

21. 

22 

23 

24 

25 

18 

the presence of chrysotile in asbestos that your 

department found as being trace q,-,·antities. Is that 

That is correct. 

wnat do you define as trace quantities? 

Trace quantity is a,level of a component. that can be 

qualitatively identified, but not quantitatively 

measured. 

And can you characterize that as being less than some' 

threshold percentage? 

IVell" no. I can characterize it as an individual 

fiber, but in terms 6f characterizing it as less than 

a certain pe~centage, no, I cannot. 

Is there a threshold percentage below ~~hich the research materials that are available to you cannot 

"-

quantify as to the presence of'chrysotile asbestos? 

Obviously, if there were less than a single fiber, we 

would not be able to characterize to' quantify it. 

So you'll understand my question, let me give you a 

brief explanation. I'm asking whether there is some 

percentage below ,~hich quantification is impossible; 

that is, le~s than one percent or less than five percent or less than ten. percent. Do you understand the 

question? 

MR. HALKET: Objection. I don't. 

(OBJECTION BY ALL DEFENSE COUNSEL) 

BASF02: 

gg
2 

4 Q 

5 

6 

7 

8 A 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15· 

16 

17 

18 A 

19 Q 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

MR. HALKET: Are you talking characterized 

by weight or by molecule nu~ber?' 

MR. PRENTISS: Okay. I understand. 

Is. there any standard format by which percentage con

tent of a talc, of a contaminant such as chrysotile 

asbestos, is stated in terms of ~leight, molecular 

weight, volume or the like? 

There are two types of tests. One can use total che

cal analysis or x-ray diffraction, and those tests ar

limited to identifications of perhaps one to t"lC) per

cent.. There is another type of test such as the ele

tron microscope in which one can identify an individu

particle. 

MR. HALKET: Listen to the question again 

and answer it. That's not the. answer to his' questio

Why don't we read that question again. 

(PREVIOUS QUESTION READ BY REpORTER) 

No. 

In other words, if I were to tell you that I have a 

sample of talc that contains three percent asbestos, 

is there a standard usage in the field with ~·,hich you 

are familiar that you could determine· that that three 

percent meant three percent by weight, three percent 

by volume? How is it commonly stated? 

(OBJECTION BY ALL DEFENSE COUNSEL) 

BASF 
.2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

; 19 • 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

2

A I'm not sure that 1 understand your question.-

Q 

A 

Q 

A 

Q 

A 

Q 

A 

How do you commonly state degree of contamination of 

talc by some other niineral constituent? _ 

(OBJECTION BY ALL DEFENSE COUNSEL) 

If there is sufficient there to detect it by any 

standard methods, then a percent by weight would be 

one way. 

Is that the normal way that you would use in characterizing a talc? 

_ (OBJECTION BY ALL DEFENSE COUNSEL) 

If -there were sufficient of the c,ontaminant present 

that I could express it meaningfully, yes. 

You would say percentage by weight? 

Percentage by weight would be an acceptable -method. 

For example, the talc from the Emtal mine in Johnson, 

Vermont, the processed talc is not pure talc; is that 

correct? 

(OBJECTION BY ALL DEFENSE COUNS~L) 

1 think it is 

MR. KENNEDY: Excuse me, Dan, what do you 

mean by pure talc? 

MR. PRENTISS: Just that, pure talc ore. 

MR. KENNEDY: What kind of talc are you 

ta lking about 7 

MR. PRENTISS: Any of the tales. 

BASFI 
." :. 

• • f 

-i 

• 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7. 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

A 

Q 

A 

Q 

A 

Q 

A 

Q 

A 

Q 

A 

21 

MR. KENNEDY: If you can answer it, that's 

what he ~Iants. 

To the degree that there is basically nothing pure in 

nature, so any ore that we would dig out of the mine 

would contain in all probability something other than 

the major constituent. 

Does talc from the Emtal·mine contain chlorite? 

MR. BALKET: The ore or the --

MR. PRENTISS: Processed talc. 

I don' t knm~. 

Has your department ever tested processed talc from 

the Emtal mine to determine the constituent minerals 

in that talc? 

Yes. we have. 

Are some of the constituent minerals is one of the 

constituent minerals chlorite? 

I don't recall that. 

You stated earlier in an answer that the x-ray diffraction and one other method of analysis of talc from 

mineral constituents was limited to one t.o two percent; 

do you remember that answer? 

Yes, I do. 

When you say limited to one to two percent, what do 

you mean? 

That would. be one to two percent by weight. 

Case 2:11-cv-01754-BRM-AME Document 70-1 Filed 08/04/11 Page 81 of 193 PageID: 2019
(\ : 

3 

4 

6 

1 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

16 

16 

17 

18 

~ 19 

J 20 

8 

~. 21 

• 22 

23 

24 

25 

Q 

A 

Q 

A 

Q 

A 

Q 

A 

Q 

A 

Q 

22 

By that answer, are you saying that those methods of 

analyses cannot detect' constituents of less than. one 

or two percent composition by weight? 

That is correct. It depends somewhat upon the consti~ 

tuent one is looking for, but it's in that range. 

Now, one of the tests that you mentioned Nas ie-ray 

diffraction. !.Jhat was the other test that you grouped 

with x-ray diffraction 'as being limited to one to two 

percent? 

1 don't think 1 said one to two percent in that case. 

Chemical analysis is another method of identifying 

mineral'or at least a chemical species, and from that 

you might be able to infer 'lihat minera ls ~)ere present. 

And ~>/hat' s the limit of chemical analysis for determination of mineral species? 

That depends on the particular combination of minerals 

that happen to be there. 

You can't --

1 couldn't answer. definitively. 

But you do say that x-ray diffraction is limited to on

to two percent in its determination of mineral species

That is my understanding • 

Has any test that. has been done by your department of 

talc from the Emtal mine found by, x-ray diffraction 

the presence of chrysotile asbestos? 

BASF02 
1 

2 A 

3 Q 

4 

5 

6 A 

1 Q 

8 

9 

10 

11 A 

12 Q 

13· 

/" 

14 

16 A 

16 Q 

• 

~ 17 

18 

19 A 

20 Q 

21 

22 

23 A 

24 Q 

.j 

25 

23 

(OBJECTION BY ALL DEFENSE COUNSEL) 

Not to my knowledge. 

Are you aware of all of the of ·the results of all 

of the tests that have been run by your department on 

Emtal talc? 

Only generally. 

\~ould you be aware if x-ray diffraction methods had 

determined the presence of chrysotile asqestos in talc 

from the Emtal mine? 

(OBJECTION BY ALL DEFENSE COUNSEL) 

Possibly. 

Dr. Hemstock, has your department ever had outside 

laboratories or facilities test talc from the Emtal 

mine? 

Yes, on occasion. 

By outside laboratories or facilities, I'm referring 

to a business or a laboratory ~~hich is not connected 

with your employer? 

That is correct. 

You understand that? Your answer is that on occasio~, 

your department has sought an outside laboratory to 

per£orm some sort of analysis on Emtal talc? 

That is correct. 

To your knowledge, has any other person ~~ithin yO)lr 

company -~ I'm referring to Engelhard Corporation 

RASF02 
1 

2 A 

3. Q 

4 

6 

6 A 

7 Q 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 A 

13 

14 

15 Q 

16 

17 

! 18 A 

• 

19 Q 

20 

21 A 

22 Q 

23 

24 A 

25 Q 

24 

sought outside analysis on talc from the Emtal mine? 

Not to my knowledge. 

Has any person, to your knowledge,' has any person 

within your company sought outside analysis of any 

talc other than talc from the Emtal mine? 

Yes. 

What was the purpose for seeking outside analysis 

either of Emtal talc or talc other than Emtal? 

MR. BALKET: I'm going to object to that 

question •. It is ambiguous. 

(OBJECTION BY ALL DEFENpE COUNSEL) 

The. reason was that we either did not have the skills 

to carry out the tests, or we did not have the instrumentation in-house. 

What is the instrumentation that you have in-house 

that's available for analysis of talc for mineral 

constituents? 

Could you be more specific? 

I'll try. Do you have laboratories at your disposal 

within your department? 

Yes. 

What analytical instruments do you have in your laboratories for the testing of talc for mineral constituents 

Well, I mentioned x-ray iliffraction. 

R4~F023 
A If the quantities of mineral present is adequate, 

2 differential thermal ana,lysis. We do' have light 

3 microscopes equipment for looking ,at particle shape, 

4 although that is not a positive identification of 

5 mineral species. Today we do have a scanning electro

6 micropcope. 

Q And when did you obtain the scanning electron microa scope7 

9 A In 1982. 

, 10 Q When did you obtain the x-ray ~fraction facility? 

11 A I don 1 t recall. 

12 Q Have you had that x-ray ~fraction facility since you 

13 began your department began the testing of Emtsl 

14 talc? 

15 A We had it prior to that time. 

16 Q Do you have a transmission electron microscope? 

17 A No, we do not. 

18 Q Is the x-ray dUfraction machine that you have capable 

19 of detecting chrysotile asbestos in talc samples if 

20 such mineral were there? 

21 (OBJECTION BY ALL DEFENSE COUNSEL) 

22 A Only if present in sufficient quantity. 

23 Q What quantity would that be? 

24 A Oh, perhaps greater than five percent. 

25 Q Are you aware of the state'of the art analytical metho 

BASF( 
2 

3 A 

4 Q 

5 

6 

A 

e Q 

9 

10 11 

11 Q 

13 A 

/ 14 Q 

15 

16 

17 11 

18 

.; 

• 19 Q 

20 

21 A 

22 Q 

23 

24 A 

25 Q 

26 

that are available for the testing for the mineral 

constituents of talc? . 

Generally. 

Are there, x-ray dlifraction machines that have a finer 

sensitivity, if that's the proper ~.lOrd, than the one 

that you have? 

Not to my kno'il1edge. 

Do you know of a technique of analysis called electron 

microprobe? 

Yes, I do. 

Is that one technique that is used for detection of 

asbestos minerals? 

Not to my knowledge. 

Is transmission electron microscope one instrument 

tha t is used for' detection of mineral constituents' 

of talc? 

Transmission electron microscopy 'ilil1 measure particle 

shape only. 

Is that an important part of analysis of talc, to 

determine its mineral co?stituents? 

It could be. It's not definitive. 

lfuen you speak of particle shape, that's T"hat generall

termed morphology? 

Yes, that's correct. 

Morphology is one of the means of determining whether 

BASFO: 
2 

3 

4 A 

5 Q 

, 6 

A 

8 Q 

9 

10 A 

11 Q 

12 

13 A 

14 Q 

15 

16 

11 

18 A 

.; 

• 19 Q 

" • • 

~ 20 

3 

• 21 .' 

~ 22 A 

23 

24 Q 

2" 

27 

certain mineral constituents are present; is that 

correct? 

(OBJECTION BY ALL DEFENSE COUNSEL) 

Yes. 

When did your department or t-lhen did' your company 

first send out samples for outside analysis? 

I don't recall. 

Was that at the very beginning of your involvement, 

your department's involvement, in the testing of talc? 

I don 't know. 

You have no recollection of t>7nen it \~as that you 

sought outside laboratory facilities? 

No, I don't. 

Well, you stated in answer to an earlier question that 

you sought the~e outside facilities to obtain analytica I skills that 1ileren I t available within your o~m 

department? 

Correct. 

When did you first determine that your Ot>Jn department 

did not have sufficient analytical skills or methods 

to perform the tests? 

Oh, it 1ilaS generally in the seventies. I could not be 

more specific. 

Would it have been after you had spent some period of 

time doing your ot>Jn in-house analysis? 

BASFO 
A 

2 

~" 3 Q 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 A 

9 Q 

10 

11 

12 A 

13 Q 

14 

15 

16 A 

17 Q 

18 

19 A 

20 Q 

21 

22 A 

23 Q 

24 A 

25 , "J Q 

28 

Perhaps. 

(RECESS) 

Dr. Hemstock, is it your testimony, that 'the testing 

of Emtal talc has found some chrysotile fibers? 

(OBJECTION BY ALL DEFENSE COUNSEL) 

MR. RENNEDY: When on'e Defendant objects, 

it counts for everybody~ 

No. 

Has your department ever found chrysotile asbestos 

in Emtal talc? 

(OBJECTION BY ALL DEFENSE COUNSEL) 

Yes. 

~.fuat was the form of the chrysotile asbestos that you 

found? 

(OBJECTION BY ALL DEFENSE COUNSEL) 

It was present in trace amounts in some samples. 

l.fuat ,~as the morphology of those trace amounts that 

you found? 

They were fibers. 

What were the si~e of the fibers? 

(OBJECTION BY ALL DEFENSE COUNSEL) 

Variable. 

What was the maximum si~e that you recall? 

I ,donlt recall. 

What: was t,he general range of si~es that was found?, 

BASFO 
A 

2 

3 'A 

4 Q 

5 

6 A 

7 Q 

8 A 

9 Q 

10 A 

11 Q 

12 

13 

14 A 

15 Q 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24. 

25 

z

Generally 

(OBJECTION BY ALL DEFENSE COUNSEL) 

Generally in the one micron range. 

When you speak of one micron, are you referring to th

length of the fiber?· 

That's c orrec t. 

Did you find any greater than one micron in length? 

In some.samples. 

Did you find any less than one micron in length? 

In some samples. 

\.J'hat generally was the range ·of aspect ratios of the 

fibers that were fqund? 

(OBJECTION BY ALL DEFENSE COUNSEL) 

I don't recall. 

Dr. Hemstock, I'm going· to start going through som~ 

the documents that have been provided in connection 

with this deposition. These have been marked, and I

going to ask you just to identify them as I show them 

to you. Showing you Plaintiff's Exhibit No. I, can 

you identify that, please? 

MR. KENNEPY: Can we just get one thing 

straight. How would you like him to identify them, 

by date, by department? 

MR. PRENTISS: The most succinct manner he 

can think of to identify it so that· it will be clear 

BASF( 
1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 Q 

; 

• 19 A 

20 Q 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

3

for the record. I think that the kind of documents 

are so diverse --

MR. SLOANE: Just say Plaintiff's Exhibit 

No. L 

MR. PRENTISS: What is Plaintiff's Exhib

MR. HALKET: If you're asking him to'describe the document by reading its face and saying ho

many pages it is, I don't have any objection to that

but I want to make it clear that by so doing he's ~o

testifying to the -- that he has the knowledge suffi

cient to lay a foundation as to the accuracy of the 

information in the document or its admissibility in 

evidence. You're just asking him to read a piece of 

paper that you've given him. 

MR. PRENTISS:' I'll be asking those questions about each one of the documents. 

MR. HALKET: I just ~Ianted to make it cle

Do you know what that document is? 

Generally, yes. 

Have you ever seen it before? 

MR. KENNEDY: Well, let's just clarify th

He has seen all these documents ~~ithin the last two 

days. So, why don't we assume that if he says no, he 

hasn't seen them before, he's really meaning no, 1 

haven't seen' them before they were shown to me the 

BASF 
2 

-, .. 3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

16 

16 

• • " • 17 • f 

g 18 0 

; 

.; 

• 19 

" • • 0 20 ~ 

• 

3 21 ~ • 

~ 22 

23 

24 

25 

3

other. day.by counsel in preparation for this deposition. Okay? 

ME.. PRENTISS: Fine. 

A Not that I recall. 

Q And do you know ~1here it came from? 

MR~ ~NNEDY: That's of your own knowledg

A No. 

MR. KEl\1NEDY: He can read the document an

tell where it came'from, 

THE I.JITNESS: Yes. 

Q The face page of· that document: is a form entitled 

"Inter-Department Memor.andum, Minerals and Chemicals 

Division. II Do you recognize that form at all? 

A Yes, that's a standard memorandum form that our divi

sion uses. 

Q Attached to the standard memorandum form is a page 

which carries at the top the label "TSR NO.: SL 4387

What is a TSR? 

A That I s ~- a TSR is a Technical Service Request; 

Q And what is that? 

A That is a document that is used for committing to 

writing requests that are made by departments outsid

of Research and Development. 

Q By that you mean, would this be a request for analys

by one of the outside laboratories that you discus se

BASI 
1 

2 A 

3 

4 

6 Q 

6 

7 

8 A 

9 Q 

10 

11 

12 A 

13 Q 

14 A 

16 

16 Q 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 A 

22 Q 

23 A 

24 

25 Q 

earlier in your testimony? 

It ,,)ould be a request for analyses from outside the 

Research and Development Depart·ment, not necessarily 

an outside laboratory. 

What services outside the Research and Development 

Department other than outside. laboratories would a 

TSR be directed to? 

Would you clarify the question, please? 

Sure. A TSR can request a service from some person 

other than the Research and Development Department, 

is that --

No. That's a Technical Service Request. 

Yes? 

It's filled out by one of the requesting departments 

outside of R&D for R&D assistance. 

And so, a TSR, this TSR is something that the -- ~'Iell, 

can you tell me from looking at that, is that a reques

that was recei~ed by the Research and Development 

Department? 

(OBJECTION BY ALL DEFENSE COUNSEL) 

i 

Yes, I would say so. 

. On 'ilhat basis would you say so? 

Mr. Triglia is a member of the Research and Developmen

Department, but the-- this form --

Now you're referring to page three of four pages of 

BASFO: 
33 

1 Exhibit l? 

2 A That's correct. 

3 'Q Yes? 

4 A This form would have been filled out by the requestor 

6 outside of R&D. 

6 Q What:ls page two of Exhibit l? 

7 A This is a description of the results. of the tests, 

8 of the analytical tests. 

9 Q By ,~hom ",ere those tests done? 

10 MR. KENNEDY: Could I just clarify one 

11 point? These answers that you're getting are not 

12 . from the personal kno~'ledge of Mr. Hemstock, but just 

13 by his reviewing the document. Do you understand that? 

14 THE HITNESS: That is correct, 

16 MR. KENNEDY: He said he hasn't seen the 

16 document before. 

17 THE \UTNESS: A general knowledge, but not 

18 specific knowledge. 

19 Q Are you finished with your answer? 

20 THE WITNE SS : Would you repeat the last 

21 question, please? 

22 (PREVIOUS QUESTION READ BY REPORTER) 

23 Q Are you finished with your answer? 

24 A Yes. 

\ ... " 

25 Those analytical tests would have been performed by 

RASF02: 
1, 

A 

.-... , 

3 Q 

4 A 

6 

6 

7 Q 

8 

9 

10 A 

11 Q 

12 

13 A 

14 ' 

16 Q 

16 

17 

18 

, 19 

20 A 

21 Q 

22 

23 

24 

26 

34 

the Research and Development Department? 

Not entirely. 

By whom else "1 auld the tests have been run? 

The document states the -- that the scanning electron 

micrograph ':lere run by a laboratory at the ,Georgia 

Institute of Technology •. 

Would the testing ~y 'the Ge,orgia Institute of Technology have 'been done at the request of the Research 

and Development Department? 

It probably ~lOuld. 

Under ~,hat circumstances ~'lould it not have been? 

(OBJECTION BY ALL DEFENSE COUNSEL) 

I can't recall a circumstance where it would not have 

been. 

When the Research and Development Department receives 

a TSR, is it the customary practice of the Research 

and Development Department to keep a copy of that TSR 

together with whatever response was sent to the TSR? 

(OBJECTION BY ALL DEFENSE COUNSEL) 

That would be normal procedure. 

You testified at the deposition on,January 28 that you 

are the official ~lithin your company who has the most 

direct control and custody Over those files of the 

company related to the Research and Development Depart

ment, did you not? 

BASF02 
2 

.~. 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

B 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 . 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 Q 

21 A 

22 

23 Q 

24 

25 

35 

(OBJECTION BY ALL DEFENSE COUNSEL) 

MR. SLOANE: Are. you asking him ~~hether 

he testified to it, 'or whether that's true? 

MR. PRENTISS: I'm asking if he testified 

to it. 

MR. SLOANE: The record speaks for itself. 

Whether he testified to it, or not is in the record. 

MR. PRENTISS: Your objection is noted. 

MR. KENNEDY: Do you recall ~~'hat you 

first of all, do we have a copy of the record? That's 

the best evidence. 

MR. PRENrISS: This is not trial. This is 

a deposition, and we'll hear objections. I don' t l~ant 

to hear instructions; okay? 

MR. KEm-1EDY: I understand, but it is an 

unfair question to start asking him whether or not'he 

said something some time ago without an. opportunity 

for him to review it. You're not trying to play games 

with him, you're trying to get facts. 

Dr. Hemstock, do you have the question? 

I would need to review the previous testimony to be 

sure of that. 

Dr. Hemstock, are you the official within your company 

who has most direct control and custody over the 

records related to the Research and Development Depart2 A 

3 

4 

5 Q 

6 A 

7 Q 

8 A 

9 

10 Q 

11 A 

12 Q 

13 A 

14 Q 

15 A 

16 

17 

! 18 

• 

19 

20 Q 

21 A. 

22 

23 

24 Q 

26 A 

JU 

merit? 

1 do not have direct control. The.documents happen 

to be filed by' personnel, various personnel .~'ithin my 

department.. I do not have direct control over them. 

\fu.o does? 

There has been no one designated as such. 

\fu.o has access to those records? 

They're accessible to members and are maintained primarily for members of the R&D Department. 

You are the head of the R&D Department? 

That is correct. 

Are they accessible to anyone else? 

They'could be on request. 

A re.quest to ~)hom? 

It would probably be a secretary ,·,ho ,~ould -., 1>,ho 

knows the file coding systems that we use, and if the 

request were made to her and it -- and the document 

was not kept in a in any special file, it ,~ould be 

available to the requestor. 

To anybody in the comparty? 

Within reason. We might require the department head 

to indicate whether that document should be made avai.-

1able to an individual on occasion. 

Who might require? 

The -- well, my secretary might ask me if there ,~ere 

BASF02 
1 

2 

'--, 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

\4 

16 

16 

• 

~ 

• 17 !! 

~ 18 

t 

oj 19 • 

" • • 

~ 20 

. J 

0 21 ~ 0 

~ • 22 

23 

24 

25 .. ' 

:>1 

any reason why such and -~ so and so should not have 

access to that file. 

Q It would be .your decision as to :who should have access 

and ~lho should not have access; isn't that right? 

A It could be. 

Q Ii'hO else ~"ould have that decision? 

A Our legal department could. have that authority as ~7ell

Q Who makes the decision as to who has access to the. 

documents? 

A Normally, I 'Ii/auld, if it were something 'that t4ere considered non-routine. 

Q You may on occasion consult legal. counsel in making 

your 'decision; is that right? 

A On occasion, ~ might. 

Q, Other than that, it's your decision; 'is that right? 

A Generally, that is correct, that's true. 

Q Now, Exhibit 1 is a document that -- can you tell me 

whether that came from the files of the Research and 

Development Department of your company? 

A I have no way of knOt~ing that. 

Q Did anybody request of you permission to remove that 

document or any other documents from ,the Research and 

Development Department? 

MR. KENNEDY: Are you talking about the 

documents that we ve produced? 

BASFO~ 
38 

1 MR. PRENTISS: Yes. 

~ MR. KENNEDY: That was done. through legal 

3 counsel of Engelhard Corporation. That's how these 

4 'documents ~~ere gathered. 

5 MR. PRENTISS: There's a question pending. 

6 I'd like an answer. 

7 A Yes. 

8 Q Who requested of you? 

9 A Our legal department. 

10 Q When? 

11 A I don't reca 11. 

12 Q How long ago? 

13 A Generally in the last year. 

14 . Q Were you requested to gather up certain documents by 

16 legal counsel? 

16 (OBJECTION BY ALL DEFENSE COUNSEL) 

17 MR. KENNEDY: That goes to attorney-client 

18 privilege. I'm going to instruct him not to answer 

19 that. 

20 Q Did you gather certain documents as a result of your 

21 discussion with legal counsel? 

22 MR. KENNEDY: I'll object to that, too. 

23 That's trying to get the same information through the 

24 back door. 

26 (OBJECTION BY ALL DEFENSE COUNSEL) 

BASF02 
2 

" , 3 

4 

5 

6 Q 

7 

a 

9 

10 

II 

12 

13 

14 

16 

16 

• • " • 17 • e 

= 

18 

5 

.; 19 • 

~ 

z • 

0 20 i 

8 21 0 • • • 

~ 22 

23 

24 

25 

39 

MR. PRENTISS: Are you instructing him not 

to ans~ler? 

MR. KENNEDY: Ye.s. 

MR. PRENTISS: Let's call up Judge Boyle. 

(OFF-TRE-RECORD DISCUSSION) 

As I understand it, Engelhard Corporation, Dr. Hemstock --

HR '. KENNEDY: Dr. Hemstock ~,lOn't stipulate

We'll stipulate. Is that 1~hat you ~,ere going to say? 

MR. PRENTISS: \,!ell 

MR. KENNEDY: Because he doesn't know what 

I think you ~lant him to stipulate to. What you ~'lant 

to establish is some foundation for these documents. 

MR. PRENTISS: That's right. 

MR. KENNEDY: That ~hey 1~ere kept in the -

you want to stipulate to ~lhat, not~, that the document

that "le have produced were kept in the' ordinary cours

of business? 

MR. PRENI'ISS: That's right. 

MR. KENNEDY: That it !<1as the course of 

business fo~ Engelhard to keep those documents? 

MR. PRENTISS: That's right. 

MR. KENNEDY: We have no problem in stipulating to that. We cannot stipulate, and I think you 

want us to, but we cannot stipulate at, this time that 

BASFI 
1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

) 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 . 

16 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

2S 

4

the events recorded on those documents were recorded 

contemporaneously with the events.· Th<lt ~)e cannot d

not that ,~elre not W'illing to, ,~e're just ·unable·to 

at this time. 

MR. PRENTISS:" Hill you stipulate that 

these documents were made in the ordinary course of 

business of Engelhard? 

MR. KENNj!:DY: I think I did. 

MR. SLOANE: V.ade by anyone in the ordina

course of business. 

MR. PRENTISS: That's right. 

NR. KENNEDY: 1 don't see the semantic di

tinction. 

MR. HALKET: All that '1e can stipulate to 

~ the fact that we found these.in the files of the 

corttpany, and that they were company records. 1 don

know what went through the minds of the people who 

made them when they made them. One of the people wh

made them is Peter Gale. You can ask him better tha

we can, I suspect, what he did· when he t~rote up the 

document. 

MR. LEIBENSPERGER: Moreover, many of the 

documents as 1 sa~q them were prepared by people not 

employed by Engelhard. There's no way of Engelhard 

or any of us sitting around the table can stipulate 

BASF 
2 

3 

4 

6 

6 

7 

B 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

-i 

• 19 

" • • s 20 

s 21 Q 

22 

23 

24 A 

25 Q 

41 

to' hON they 'l'lere prepared by them. 

MR. PRENTISS: You will. sti.pulate, so ~le '11 

be absolutely clear .. that all of these documents came 

from the files of Engelhard Corporation? 

HR. KENNEDY:' Yes. 

MR. PREh~ISS: That the documents were kept 

by Engelhard Corporation in the ordinary course of its 

business, and that it was the --

MR. KENNEDY: Ordinary course' of --

MR. PRENTISS: -- Engelhard's business to 

keep .those documents or keep those records in its 

files? 

MR. KENNEDY: Yes. That's what "le did. We 

got them 

(OFF-THE-RECORD DISCUSSION) 

NR. PRENl'ISS: Can we add Mr. Kennedy's 

last statement. We're stipulating as an ancillary 

part of the regular course of business of Engelhard 

Corporation, it kept these records. 

MR. KENNi: DY : It kept records. 

So, to go back to Exhibit 1, Dr. Hemstock, do you have 

any idea as to page four of Exhibit I'what the origina

of that stated? 

No, 1 do not. 

, Dr. Hemstock, was it the practice of the Research and 

BASF02 
, 

, 

-~-

1. 

2_ 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 -

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

A 

Q 

A 

Q 

A 

Q 

A 

Q 

A 

Develppment Department to prepare reports such as 

that ~lhich appears as page two of Exhibit 1 in response to a TSR such 'as this'? -

Generally, yes. 

4

When yo~ say generally, why do you add the -qualifier

Because some TSR's are very, very brief, and sometim

one sentence or one line. ',That's really't-lhat this 

space is for, to record results, and many times the 

results can all be encompassed within that page. Th

happened to be one that required more space, and, 

consequently, received a separate page. 

So, the practice ~~ithin the Department would be eith

to provide the response to the TSR on that form vlhic

is at page three of Exhibit 1 belm~ the line labeled 

''Results of Tests," and if the-results of the tests 

required greater elucidation, an additional page wou

be provided such as is shov/n as page t~'10 of Exhibit 

is that correct? 

That is correct. 

Exhibit 2 I'd like to hand you at this time. Is tha

another TSR form? 

There is no TSR form in this document', 

Had you ever seen Exhibit 2 prior to preparation for 

this deposition? 

Not that I recall. 

BASF 
~ 

• • f 

· j 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

16 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

Q 

A 

Q 

A 

Q 

A 

Q 

A 

Q 

A 

Q 

A 

Q 

A 

Q 

A 

Q 

43 

Do you know ~lhether this document came from the files 

of the Research and Development Department? 

No, 1 don't. 

\</ho is Mr, Michael Zimmermann? 

Mr. Hichael Zimmermann is the Product Manager for the 

Emtal product line. 

What is x-ray fluorescence· analysis? 

X-ray fluorescence analysis is a technique for identification of the chemical elements present in a 

mineral ore or a product,· 

Is x-ray fluorescence analys.is distinct from x-ray 

diffraction? 

Yes, it is, 

Is x-ray fluorescence analysis a means for testing for 

presence of asbestos mineral in a sample of talc? 

No; it is not. 

Did your department request the B.F. Goodrich Company 

I 

to perform tests on talc samples for presence of asbestos? 

Not to my krto~~ledge. 

What is Exhibit 37 

This is a Technical Service Request. 

From whom? 

The document suggests it's from Mr. Shafer. 

To whom is it addressed? 

gg
44 

A It 'I s addressed to Va:. T:dglia and myself. 

2 Q And what is the !=equest? 

3 A The -- ,,)ell, the. request is, to determine the pr:esenc

4 of asbestos-form particles or free silica in four 

5 samples of mine rock ~o)aste. 

6 Q' Do you recall that TSR? 

7 A No, I do not. 

8 Q You don't recall receiving that? 

9 A No, I do not. 

10 Q Was there a report that was rendered as a result of 

11 that TSR? 

12 A The report is attached to this document. 

13 Q Do you knm'l who wrote the report that is attached'to 

14 . the ,TSR? I'll ShO~l it to you, if you like. 

15 A No, I cannot tell. 

16 Q And ~~hat' s the date of the TSR? 

17 A The date it was initiated was February 28, 1973. 

18 Q And can you determine what the date of the response 

19 is? 

20 A Well, the response date at which the report was com':' 

21 pleted according to this document is June 12, 1973. 

22 Q Did that TSR entail a request by your· department for 

23 outside laboratory analysis? 

24 MR. KENNEDY: Dan, doesn't the report spea

25 for itself? I mean, he's only reading it. 

BASF 
1 A 

2 Q 

,..--" ' 

3 

4 

5 

6 A 

7 Q 

8 

9 A 

10 Q 

11 

12 

13 A 

14 

16 

16 Q 

17 A 

18 Q 

19 

20 

21 A 

22 Q 

23 

24 

25 

, 45 

Yes, that's what the report would suggest. 

No", sho"ling you page three of Exhibit .3, there is a 

table. Can you tell me whe,ther' -- c,an you tell me 

if this table represents the results of the in-house 

analysis that ,-las done 'in response to the TSR? 

I can't ans~ler' that vlith' certainty. 

Do you know whether in-house analysis '\-las done in response to this TSR? 

I don' t kn~1 with certainty. 

Was it the regular practice of your department to prepar,ea report such as is included in response to the 

TSR such as is sho~lD on page one of Exhibit 37 

Well; page one indicates the report is attached, and 

that's ,<)hat these are, attachments. So, that would 

be normal. 

That "lould be the normal practice? 

That's correct. 

Hould it be normal practice to ",rite up this report 

at til e conclusion of the studies that made up the re":, 

port? 

I should think so. 

Now, page three of this report contains a table. On 

the table is a line item that states "Number Asbestos 

Fibers Counted," and there '5 an asterisk which refers 

to the statement, "Based on a total particle count of 

BASF02: 
2 

3 

4 

5 

6 A 

7 

8 Q 

9 A 

10 

11 Q 

12 

13 A 

14 

16 A 

16 Q 

17 A 

18 Q 

.; 19 • 

: 

• 5 20 A 

8 

i 21 Q 

• 22 

23 A 

24 Q 

25 

five hundred." The number asbestos. fibers counted 

under the four c\)lumns are three, four, three, and 

eight respeqtively •. Is that \'lhat you referred to 

earlier as being trace quantities? 

(OBJECTION BY ALL DEFENSE COUNSEL) 

46 

Without a detailed study of the Johns-Hanville report

I COUldn't comment. 

Is the Johns-l1anville report appended to this documen

Yes, it is. 

(RECESS) 

Dr. Hemstock, is 1.6 percent. asbestos as a constituen

of a talc sample what you Hould consider trace quanti

I would 

(OBJECTION BY ALL DEFENSE. COUNSEL) 

I 'l<10uld consider -- no, it is not: 

That's greater than trace quantity? 

Yes. 

Did you receive do you recall 'llhether you received 

this TSR at the time that it 'IIlaS issued? 

No, 1 do not. 

t-las it normally the case that 'llhen a TSR 'llould be give

to your department that you would see· that TSR? 

No, I would not normally see it. 

And would you normally. only see it if it had your nam

on it? 

BASFI 
• • e 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

B 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

A 

Q 

A 

Q 

A 

Q 

A 

Q 

A 

Q 

A 

Q 

A 

Q 

A 

Q 

A 

4( 

If it ~lere addressed specifically. to me, ·1 ~)ould, in 

all probability, I would see it, 

Now, this TSR is addressed specifically'. to you; is 

that right? 

And to Mr. Triglia. 

·Yes. 

.. Who is in my department. 

Under normal circumstances, \"~ould you have read that 

at the time that you received it? 

I might have scanned it and passed it along to t~. 

Triglia. 

Who is Hr. Triglia? 

Mr. Triglia ~l<ilS the group leader of physical measurementa at that time. 

And ~~hat ~7as your pOSition at that time? 

I was Director of Research. 

Before you became a Vice President? 

Thatls correct. 

Nm~, '\o,here a TSR carried your name as one of the addressees, ~lould you normally read the response that 

was ultirn8.te.ly given to that TSR? 

I might. 

Under what circumstances would you read the response? 

I think that the subject mattel:' or my O\"m personal 

interest, .if I wanted to -- if I had a general intere

BASF( 
t 

2 Q 

3 

4 

5 

6 A 

7 Q 

B 

9 

10 A 

11 

12 

13 

14 A 

16 

16 

• 

~ 

17 Q 

18 

.; 

• 19 

20 A 

21 Q 

22 

23 

24 

25 A 

48 

in that area, I might read it. 

In this case, the request, the TS~'request is to 

determine 1-Jhether or not there is a sbestos or a'sbestiform particles or free silica in certain ore samples 

that ~)ere submitted with the TSR; is that correct? 

That' s ~~ha t the document says. 

l<1ould ,that be a matter that: you "lould consider of 

personal interest to you, whether or not there was 

asbestos in any of those are samples? 

I might have had general interest, but not particularl

high Interest in that at that particular time. 

Those ore samples came from -- is it apparent from 

that document where those ore samples came from? 

Yes, to t,he degree that the subject matter is Emtal 

mine 'Ilaste rock, I would ,have to believe they came 

from the Emta1 mine. 

, In 1973, at the time that TSR vIas prepared, ,~ere you 

a~~are of any hazardous propensities of asbestos? 

(OBJECTION BY ALL DEFENSE COUNSEL) 

In a general sense, yes. 

Was it'a matter o£ any concern toyou personally or 

professionally ~lhether any of the ore that was ass'oeiated with the Emtal tale mine contained asbestos? 

(OBJECTION BY ALL DEFENSE COUNSEL) 

In general terms, yes. 

RASFO: 
1 Q 

2 

3 

4 A 

5 Q 

,6 

7 

8 

9 A 

10 Q 

11 

12 A 

13 Q 

14 

15 

16 A 

17 Q 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 A 

23 Q 

24 A 

25 

, -' 

Looking at that document, do you have any -- does 

that refresh any recollection of yours whatsoever as 

to the events that are portrayed in the 'document? 

No, it does not. 

Do you remember the first time that you learned of 

a test result that found asbestos of any type' in 

Emtal talc or Erntal talc ore? 

(OBJECTION BY ALL DEFENSE COUNSEL) 

I couldn't identify such time. 

W$that a matter of some significance to you? 

(OBJECTION BY ALL DEFENSE COUNSEL) 

Would you clarify the question, please? 

You were aware generally in 1973 that asbestos ~las 

kno~m or suspected to have hazardous health propertie

~leren 't you? 

Generally, ,yes. 

And would it ,not have been a matter of concernto you 

having that kno~lledge of asbestos if you were to learn 

that some of the talc that was produced by your'company may come from ore that was associated with asbes

tos? 

Perhaps. 

'Perhaps? 

To the degree that I was generallr aware that asbestos 

~las a very minor constituent of talc, generally. yes. 

BASFO: 
s

'. 

1 Q Well, is it your opinion that as a very minor consti

2 tuent of talc, generally asbestos does not po~e a 

3 health hazard? 

4 (OBJEcTION BY ALL DEFENSE COUNSEL) 

5 MR. KENNEDY: I'm going to not only objec

but lId like to remind you that Engelhard is not a 

7 party to this. This is a discovery depoSition, and 

B I think your question is argumentative \·1hen you real

9 have no cause to be, argumentative ~!ith this witness. 

10 It's a discovery deposition. That's it. 

11 Q Can you answer the question? 

12 THE WITNESS: Would you repeat the questi

13 please? 

14 (PREVIOUS QUESTION READ BY REPORTER) 

15 A That is my general belief. 

16 Q On ~lhat do you base that belief? 

17 (OBJECTION BY ALL DEFENSE COUNSEL) 

lB A Really on the basis of evidence that we have develope

19 over the past several years. The quantities of as~ 

20 bestos in general that we have seen are below the 

21 level that I '<-10uld -consider to be potentially hazardo

22 - Q What is the level; what is that level that you just 

23 referred to? 

24 (OBJECTION BY ALL DEFENSE COUNSEL) 

25 A Thisis a qualitative judgment on my part. I think th 

BASF 
1 

2 

3 

4 

6 

6 Q 

7 

8 

9 A 

10 

11 

12 Q 

13 A 

14 . Q 

16 A 

16 

17 Q 

. 18 

19 A 

20 Q 

21 

22 A 

23 Q 

24 A 

. --,' 25 

51 

levels that are considered hazardous is very much a 

controversial issue, so I stand by' the' fact that 

qualitatively I believe they are belo~!, in my Judgment

are beloH the levels that are to be considered hazardous. 

What in your judgment is a level at which contamination 

by asbestos ~lOuld be consid.ered hazardous? 

(OBJECTION BY ALL DEFENSE COUNSEL)· 

I think speaking again very generally ,·)ithout the 

professional knOl~ledge as an epidemiologist, probably 

of the order of percents --

Of the order of percents? 

Well, let's say t1-10 to five percent. 

1'1-10 'to five percent? 

Speaking as a -- I'm speaking now as a layman in that 

area rather than a professional. 

Thank you. I'll sho",' you Plaintiff's Exhibit 4 for 

this deposition. What is that, Dr. Hemstock? 

This is a Technical Service Request. 

And do you have any recollection of ever having seen 

that before other than through counsel? 

No, I do not. 

Is there a report attached to that TSR? 

Yes, there is. It's a similar form to those we have 

previously looked at. 

BASF02 
1 

2 

3 

4 

6 

6 

7 

8 

9' 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

26 

Q 

A 

Q 

A 

Q 

A 

Q 

A 

Q 

A 

Q 

A 

Q 

A 

Q 

A 

5

As ~,ith the other TSR's, ""as that a form that I'Jas 

customary for your department to prepare in response 

to such a TSR? 

Yes, it was, 

Who is Vir. Marchetti? 

Mr. Marchetti was the Hanager of Technical Service a

that time. 

Not", the bottom of this TSR, there I S a series of 1n

tials after the line "Copies to." Can you identify 

who those,initials belong to? 

Yes, I can. 

Could you do so? 

This one is myself. 

You're referring to "GAH"? 

That is correct. "EWA" refers to Dr. E.~v. Arnold. 

Hho is that? 

He was a Director of Research at this time. 

iVho is "WSS"? 

"HSS" is iv.S. Stay, and he is a group leader of indu

trial products, Technical Service. 

Who is "EJT"? 

That "EJT" is E. J. Triglia ~~ho INIS the Manager of 

Analytical and Physical Measurements at that time; an

"JVK" r,efers to Dr. James V. -Kennedy 'Ylho was also a 

Director of Research at that time. 

BASI 
Q 

2 

3 A 

4 Q 

5 

6 A 

7 Q 

8 

9 A 

10 Q 

11 A 

12 

13 Q 

14 

15 A 

16 

17 Q 

18 A 

19 Q 

'w 

; 20 A 

Ii 

g 

21 Q 

• 22 

23 

24 

25 

53 

Those initials indicate that you, among these other 

people, received a copy of this TSR? 

That's "7hat those initials ~lould normally indicate. 

Does that also indicate that you received a copy of 

the report that '\>las prepared in response t'o the TSR? 

That would be normal procedure. 

And the document' sho,,)s that it ~'las assigned to a Hr. 

F.J. -- and I'll ask your help? 

Dzierzanm1ski. 

Who is that? 

Mr. Dzierzano'l>lski is or was at that time group leader 

of Physical Measurements. 

lolould he be the person who "JOuld have prepared the 

report that is appended to this TSR? 

It ~'lould in all probability be someone in his group 

rather than he himself. 

Could you tell me what is Exhibit 5? 

I cannot identify this document. 

You've never seen Exhibit 5 before? 

Not to my knowledge. 

The title of this paper is "Proposed Experimental 

Design for Fiber Distribution," and the date of the 

second page of this document is 4/15/1970. Do you kn

whether there was concern ,.ithin your department as o

4/15/70 regarding identification of fiber contaminatic 

BASFO 
2 A 

3 Q 

4 

6 A 

6 

1 

8 

9 Q 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 Q 

16 

17 

18 Q 

; 

• 19 A 

~ z 

i 20 

21 

22 

23 Q 

24 A 

26 Q 

54 

of tales that ,'lere produced and sold by your company? 

I don't know that. 

Is there today? 

(O~JECTION BY ALL DEFENSE COUNSEL) 

I. think I've testified earlier the fact that I personally, and I believe the division, believe that the 

level of asbestos minerals present in our tales is at 

a non-hazardous level. 

When did it first concern you: to determine '<1hat the 

fiber levels of your tales were? 

(OBJECTION BY ALL DEFENSE COUNSEL) 

MR. PRENTISS: Let me restate that question. 

THE \irITNE SS : Yes, if you '10uld, please •. 

"-

When was it that you first decided to determine the 

fiber levels of your talc? 

I personally did not make that decision. 

Who did? 

We -- the Research Department was responding to requests from ~~rketing, Sales and Manufacturing, and 

if they requested that we carry out such determinatio

~Ie did, or attempted to. 

You don't recall when that first request ~las?· 

No, I do not. 

And was it communicated to you what.the reason for trn 

BASH 
2 A 

3 

4 

6 A 

6 Q 

1 A 

8 Q 

9 A 

10 . Q 

11 

12 A 

13 Q 

14 

16 

16 A 

• e 

11 Q 

• 18 

! 

A 

• 

19 Q 

20 A 

21 Q 

22 

23 A 

24 

26 A 

55 

request ",as'? 

·1 don't recall the circumstances. 

Do you kno~l ~,hether there ",as any concern over possibl

health hazard.s involved ,dth the talc? 

1 can't definitively respond. 1 don't know. 

You simply don't knm~'? 

I don't kn01il. 

Do you kno", what Exhibit 6 is? 

This is a Technical Service Request. 

Have you ever seen that before, prior to preparation 

for this deposition? 

Not that 1 recall. 

It's the same format of Technical Service Request 

together \'lith responding studies that "las the normal 

course of your department to prepare? 

Yes, it "las. 

To receive and prepare? 

Yes, it '4as. 

NO'!'1, the TSR is addressed to Mr. Marchetti again? 

That is correct. 

Underneath that is a notation of the market, rubber. 

What does that mean? 

I could only speculate. 

MR. ·KENNEDY: Don 't •. 

I don't kriow. 
2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

26. 

Q And ~Ihat generally is that blank that's labeled 

A 

Q 

A 

Q 

A 

Q 

A 

Q 

A 

Q 

"Market" used to denote? 

That is put in by the requestor it he kno~/s ~lhat th

market:!s. That t~ould normally be put in that form b

the requestor. 

What do you mean by the market? , 

Hell, if it ,.ere' petroleum or paper or pll;lstics or 

paints, those ,./ould be all markets. 

That would be the general industry to ~7hich your com

pany was selling talc? 

I be lieve so. 

So, is it your understanding that in the usage of th

documents that the designation "Rubber," for exampl

~)ould mean that this request. this Technical Servi~e 

Request, had to do with talc sales in the rubber industry by your company? 

(OBJECTION BY ALL DEFENSE COUNSEL) 

I·don't know that specifically. 

Do you know that -~ "lhen you say you don't knO,«l tha

specifically. '-1as that the usage to your understandi

the common usage of that designation "Market" on a 

TSR? 

The normal procedure would be to indicate the marke

in that particular box on the form. 

Again, by'market ",eIre talking about that industry t 

BASI 
1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 Q 

8· 

9 

10 

11 

12 A 

13 

14 Q 

15 A 

16 Q 

17 A 

18 Q 

19 A 

20 Q 

21 A 

22 

23 

24 Q 

25 A 

5

which your company ,~as s~lling talc? 

MR. KENNEDY: Hell, excuse me. I've got 

object if it's in reference to this docum~nt because 

this document· shows the product involved is rubber. 

It's not the rubber industry, but it's a very sp~cifi

portion, I believe; balloons. 

I'm asking with respect to the usage of these TSR 

forms. Do you have the question or would you l:i.ke i

.read? 

. THE YlITNESS: Ylould you repeat it, please

(PREVIOUS QUESTION READ BY REPORTER) 

Could you elaborate on that question? I don't under

stand that question. 

Did your company sell talc to the rubber industry?.-

I don' t kno,~ that. 

Does your company sell talc to the paint industry? , 

I don't know that. 

Does your company sell talc to the ceramics industry? 

I don 't kn~t that. 

Ylhat do you know about ~lhom your company sold talc to

The only thing that I know specifically is that we 

sold talc to the paper industry on a Limited basis 

for pitch control. 

That's the only thing·you know spec:!.£ically? 

That's the only thing I know for certain. 

BASF( 
Q 

2 

3 A 

4 

5 Q 

6 

1 A 

8 Q 

9 A 

10 Q 

11 A 

12 

13 

14' Q 

16 

16 A 

17 Q 

18 

, 19 

20 A 

21 Q 

22 

23 A 

24 

! 

/ 26 Q 

5

For all you know, thatts the only talc your company 

sold? 

No, I couldn't say that. I know that all of the tal

v7e sell doesn't go to the paper industry. 

You just have no idea to ~~hom else it's sold besides 

the paper industry? 

That's correct. 

No idea tolha tsoever 7 

No. 

Have you ansl~ered the question? 

I know in general terms that we do sell talc to a 

variety of industries. It is outside my province to 

kno~1 in more detail than that. 

NO~1, this TSR has your' initials dovm at the bottom 

also, doesn't it? 

That's correct. 

Your initials first of all, this is Exhibit 6. U

at the top of this TSR, there's a series of initials 

as well as do~ at the bottom; is that correct? 

Yes, that's correct. 

At the top, who are the recipients designated as by 

those initials? 

This portion of the form, from here do~,'tl to ~lhere th

signature is 

NOl~. you're referring just for the record to the top 

BASI 
2 

3 

4 A 

5 Q 

6 

7 

8 A 

9 Q 

10 A 

11 

12 Q 

13 A 

14 

16 

16 

17 Q 

18 

19 

20 A 

21 Q 

22 A 

23 Q 

24 ' A 

25 Q 

5

of this uppermost boy. on this form, just beneath the 

capital letter designation "Technical Service Reque

is that right? 

That is correct. 

From that point do~m to the end of the box that appea

at about t'Wo- thirds dm·!n the page, you're referring 

to that as the upper part of the request? 

That is correct. 

Now, go ahead and finish your answer. 

That portion of the Technical Service Request was 

filled out by the requestor. 

Yes? 

In this case, Mr. Zimmermann. These people who received copies were designated by him to receive them

and they would have some interest, no doubt, in this 

particular Technical Service Request. 

Now, down at the bottom in the box beginning at twothirds of the ,·,ay down the page to the end, there f s 

another entry for "Copies toll; is that right? 

That is correct. 

Your initials appear in that entry; is that correct? 

That is correct. 

They don't appear at the top? 

That is correct. 

Who makes 'a determination as' to who is to receive the 

BASI 
2 

3 A 

4 

5 

6 Q 

7 

8 

9 A 

10 

11 

12 Q 

13 

14 

15 A 

16 Q 

17 A 

18 Q 

; 

• 19 A 

-: 

• i 20 Q 

8 

~ 21 

• 5 

• 22 

23 A 

24 Q 

25 A 

6

copies of'the report as designated in the bottom par

of that page? 

That judgment ,~ould normally be made 'by Mr. Marchet

the man to ,,)hom the Technical Service Request Nas ad

dressed. 

Did you have any policy within your department that 

you \,ere to receive copies of all reports that dealt 

\~ith asbestos in ta lc 7 

In general, 1 have -- am to receive copies of all 

Technical Service Requests. They pass my desk as 

indicated earlier. 

The question ,is: Did you have a policy, any particu

policy, with ~espect to reports that dealt with asbe

tos? 

No, I did not. 

None \vhatsoever? 

None whatsoever. 

Have you had a chance to look through Exhibit 6 at a

No, I have not. 

And would you do so? Having reviewed that Exhibit 

No.6, does that refresh your recollection in any wa

as to that TSR and the accompanying report? 

No, it does not. 

You have no recollection of that at all? 

No, I have not. 

BASI 
r'. 

\ 

2 

3 

4 

6 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

16 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

Q Let me ~u'st ask you one question in general. You'v

looked through these reports in .preparation for thi

A 

Q 

A 

Q 

A 

Q 

A 

Q 

A 

Q 

A 

Q 

A 

Q 

deposition? 

That's correct. 

Do you ha.veany recollection of any of them? 

Some of the more recent ones that we have received 

or some in l~hich I was directly involved. I could 

identify. I have -- I receive across my desk each 

day probably forty to fifty documents, and it's impossible to remember specifically details of each o

How many of those documents deal with asbestos? 

l-1R. SARLI: What documents now? 

Are you refe:t;ring to the ones that cross my desk ea

day? 

That's right. 

A miniscule number. 

Is it pretty rare? 

Yes, it is relatively rare. 

I show you Exhibit 7. Do you have any recollection 

of that, Dr. Hemstock? 

No, I don't. 

Who is Mr. Peter Gale? 

Mr. Peter Gale was a geologist mineralogist. 

Did he ever have any relationship with Engelhard' 

I 

Corporation? 

BAS 
· ........ 

-i 

z 

'w 

z 

z 

S 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

16 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

26 

62 

A Yes, he did. 

Q What \~as that relationshi{>? 

A He was a project leader in the Research Department. 

Q To whom did he report? 

A He reported to Mr. Dzierzanowski. 

Q And what was his -- what were his duties in his 

capacity as a project leader? 

A His role was to carry out tests in the Physical Measurements area in response to whatever requests callIe 

. in. 

Q When was he hired? 

A I don't recall exactly. It was in the late seventie

Q Did you participate in the decision to hire him? 

A I probably did. 

Q Where was he located while an employee of Engelhard? 

A He was located in Menlo Park. 

Q If,you'll read the handwritten notation that's on 

page two of that Exhibit No. 7 ~- first, can you tell 

me if you recognize the handwriting? 

A No, I do not. 

Q That handwriting suggests that Mr. Gale at the time 

of preparation of that report was in Georgia; is that 

correct? 

(OBJECTION BY ALL DEFENSE COUNSEL) 

A He would not'have been located in Georgia. He may 

BASI 
1 

2 -.......... 

3 .Q 

4 

5 A 

6 Q 

7 

8 A 

9 

10 

11 

12 ;Q 

13 

14 . A 

16 

16 Q 

17 

18 A 

19 

20 Q 

21 

22 

23 A 

24 Q 

25 A 

have gone to Georgia Tech to observe the running of 

these samples. 

6

Was that a regular part of Mr. Gale's duties ~hen he 

worked for Engelhard? 

I would say so. 

He, as a regular part of his duties, would go to 

Georgia Tech to either observe or to run tests hims

He was far down in the learning curve at this time, 

and he ~,ent to Georgia Tech primarily to learn. He 

did nqt necessarily accompany every sample that wen

to Georgia Tech. 

l.Jhen you say he went to Georgia Tech primarily to le

was he down there for some extended period of time? 

Probably during the duration of running the samples 

that he had requested to be run. 

Was Mr. Gale hired for any particular field' of resea

or.analysis within your department? 

Well, he Iqas the mineralogist. Other than the profe

sional skills that he brought with him, no. 

Was he hired with the idea that he would spend some 

substantial portion of his time in analyzing materia

for asbestos content? 

No, he was not. 

That was not any part of his job? 

No, it was not. He was not hired for that reason. 

BAS 
64 

Q This handwritten notation states that Mr. Gale inform

2 the writer that some'chrysotile particles were iden3 tified during .the analysis. Does that finding strike 

4 any recollection of yours at all? 

5 (OBJECTION BY ALL DEFENSE COUNSEL) 

6 A No. 

7 Q You have no recollection of the analysis that Mr. Gal

8 did that is memorialized in Exhibit 71 

9 A No. 

10 Q None whats'oever? 

11 A No, I do not. 

12 Q The subject matter of this Exhibit 7 is Sample REL-79

13 Can you tell me what that code means? 

14 A Thi"B would be a code that was applied by the Manuf,'lc16 turing Depar.tment. I have no knowledge of what speci16 fically it refers to. 

17 Q Does the Manufacturing Department have a code by \.,hic

18 -- a standard code that it uses to identify samples? 

19 A Not to my knowledge. 

20 Q So, REL has no signifi~ance to you whatsoever? 

21 A Other than the fact that the initials correspond to 

22 the init'iator of the request, no, it does not. 

23 Q This is a standard TSR form? 

24 A Thatls ·correct. 

25 Q NOI~, was it standard practi,ce that the response to the 

BASF 
2 A 

3 Q 

4 

5 A 

6 Q 

7 

8 . A 

9 Q 

10 A 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 Q 

17 

18 

19 A 

20 Q 

21 

22 

23 

24 A 

26 

6

TSR forms would be handl1ritten as opposed to typed? 

No, it was not. 

Now, this TSR is labeled "ASAP, Please Rush." Do yo

see that up· there at the top? 

Yes, I do. 

Was that the standard request that a TSR would carry 

about it? 

Not standard • 

Tha twas unusua 1 ? 

It depended upon the rate of response that the reque

expected he was going to get. There were some peopl

who always put "ASAP" or ''Rush'' on vlhether they need

it tomorrow or \~hether they needed it a· month from no

There were others who would do it in a routine basis

The standard policy was firs~ in, first out. 

And was it standard policy that a request, a TSR tha

dealt with asbestos, would carry the "Rush" or "ASAP

notation? 

No, it was not. 

This form, Exhibit 7, and the attached report, that 

was the standard practice of the company to prepare 

that kind of form and that kind of report in response 

to it? 

It wourd be unusual to have this much handwritten informatibn placed on the form. Normally, these come i

BASF 
2 "," 3 

4 Q 

5 

6 

7 A 

8 Q 

9 A 

10 Q 

11 

12 A 

13 Q 

I 

14 

16 

16 A 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

26 

, 66 

in a typewritten fashion; but as I testified e~rlier, 

the upper two-thirds of the document is filled out by 

the requestor. 

Is it your testimony, then, that these hand\'1ritten 

notations in the upper half of the TSR \'lere placed in 

there by the requestor? 

I don't know. 

For example, the date o~ the TSR is January 29, 1979? 

That's correct. 

Now, there's a notation "Request and Sample to P. Gal

2-5-79" ? 

That's correct. 

Would that suggest that this \'1as written on by one of

the persons who received this TSR? 

(OBJECTION BY ALL DEFENSE COUNSEL) 

I can't 

MR. CURRAN: I'm going to object to the 

whole line of the questions. What is the relevance ac 

materiality? The man left the shop in '76. 

MR. BALKET: I would also like to make an 

obj ection ,to 'this kind of question and the previous 

questions that were drawn before this where the counse

for the Plaintiff is essentially asking the witness to 

read things from a document which he did not identify 

and which he does not remember. He's just reading wor

BASFC 
2 

3 

4 Q 

5 A 

6 

7 Q 

8 

9 A 

10 Q 

11 A 

12 Q 

13 A 

14 

16 Q 

16 

17 A 

lB Q 

j 19 

" • 

~ 20 A 

• 8 21 Q 

22 A 

g 

• 

23 Q 

24 

25 

67 

from a p~ece of paper. Counsel for the Plaintiff can 

read those words just as well as, the ~·litness can, and 

has exactly the same force in testimony. 

Who is G. Huff? 

G. Huff was 'the Manager of Plant Technical Service a

that time. He was a member of the Research Departme

Your initials appear at the bottom portion of this 

TSR? 

That's correct. 

Do you recognize Exhibit 8? 

No, I do not. 

Can you tell me what Exhibit 9 is? 

No, I cannot ... other than the document speaks for itself. 

The first page of this document on any kind of a form 

that's used by your company? 

This is not a familiar form to me. 

Let's go through the names. First, it is addressed t

a Mr. Dennis L. Caputo. Do ,you know who that is? 

No. 

Have you ever heard of R.A. Nadkarni? 

No, I've never heard of him. 

Have you ever heard of the persons who are listed as 

receiving copies of this document at the bottom of th

page; R.I. Botto? 

BASF 
2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

a 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

, 6

A No, I am not'. 

Q 

A 

Q 

A 

Q 

A 

Q 

A 

Q 

A 

Q 

A 

Q 

A 

Q 

A 

Q 

A 

Q 

A 

J.B. Cooper? 

No, I'm not. 

J.H. Karchmer? 

No, I'm not. 

R • B. Ivilliams? 

No, I'm not. 

You've never seen this document before in your life? 

No, ,I have not. 

Would you take a look at Exhibit 10? Have you ever 

seen that before? 

No, I have not. 

Who again is Mr. Oulton? 

Mr. Oulton was at that time in the Physical Measurem

Group. 

Physical Measurements Group of the Research and Deve

ment Department? 

Yes. 

Of Engelhard? 

Yes. 

Did he report to you 1 

No, he did not. 

To whom did he report? 

He reported to my predecessor who was the Vice Presi

dent of Research at that time. 

BASI 
2 

3 

4 

5 

·6 

7. 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

16 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

24 

26 

69 

Q What was your position at this time? 

A 

Q 

A 

Q 

A 

Q 

A 

Q 

A 

Q 

A 

Q 

A 

Q 

A 

Q 

A 

Q 

That ~,as 19727 

Yes. 

I was Director of Research. 

And was it your companys practice to utilize JohnsManville as an outside laboratory for analysis of 

asbestos materials? 

(OBJECTION BY ALL DEFENSE COUNSEL) 

Not a practice. 

Did you e~er do it, to your knowledge? 

Not to my knowledge. 

Not to your knowledge? 

Not to my knowledge. 

You have no knowledge derived from any source that 

your company ever sent materials to Johns-i-lanville· 

for testing for asbestos content? 

No, I do not. 

Look at Exhibit 11, please. 

Yes. 

Have you ever seen that before? 

11m generally familiar with it. 

What is it? 

This is a summary paper that was written by Mr. Oulto

for a t.alc symposium •. 

What is Mr·, Oulton I straining? 

BASF 
70 

A "lhat is his training? 

2 Q Yes. 

3 A He's a physical chemist, but has a -- o~ had a great 

4 many years of, experience, and I would say in the lat5 ter Pll:rt of his career was a mineralogist more than a 

6 physical chemist. 

7 Q \.)'ould you look at Exhibit· 12 and tell me ,~hether you 

8 have ever seen that before? 

9 A No, I have not. 

10 Q Is that a· standard form that's used ~lithin your com11 pany? 

12 A I can't identify it as such. It appears so. 

13 Q It carries the name Eastern Magnesia Talc Company? 

14 A That's correct. 

16 Q Johnson operations? 

16 A That's correct. 

17 Q Would this be the Eastern Magnesia Talc Company that 

18 owns the mine in Vermont? 

19 (OBJECTION BY ALL DEFENSE COUNSEL) 

20 A I believe so. 

21 Q Showing you Exhibit 13, do you know what that is? 

22 A Generally, yes. 

23 Q And what is it? 

24 A This was a request made by Mr. Oulton who was' in the 

25 R&D of the Minerals and Chemicals Division for an 

_ A ....... ,,1'1'" 
2 

3 

Q 

5 

6 A 

7 

8 

9 

10 Q 

, 11 

12 A 

13 Q 

14 A 

15 Q 

16 

17 A 

18 Q 

19 A 

20 Q 

21 

22 A 

23 Q 

24 A 

.,,1 25 Q 

electron inicroscope evaluation of a sa'mple by the 

head of the,electron microscope .lab at Engelhard 

Industries Division. 

Do you have any independent recollection of that 

document? 

No, I do not. 

MR. SARLI: What number. is this again, 

please? I'm sorry. 

MR. PRENTISS: 13. 

Did that corne to your attention. at the time it was 

prepared? 

I don' t knO~l·. 

Do you know ~'lha t Exhibit 14 is? 

Generally, yes. 

Had you ever seen that before, prior to preparation 

for this deposition? 

I don't recall. 

You never recall seeing that? 

No, I don't. 

71 

It carries your name at the bottom as a recipient of 

it? 

Of a copy of it, yes. 

I show you Exhibit 15. Have you ever seen that before? 

No, 1 have not. 

You have no recollection of ever having seen that? 
·2 

3 

4 

6 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

16 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

-21 

22 

23 

24 

I '--- .. 26 

A 

Q 

A 

Q 

A 

Q 

A 

Q 

A 

Q 

A 

Q. 

A 

Q 

A 

72 

No, I have not. 

Do you knOt>1 whether that was in the files of the 

Research and Development Department at your corporation? 

I don't kno,~. 

E"hibit 16, I'mhanding you, and is that something that 

you've seen before? 

I don't recall. 

Can you state what Exhibit 17 is? 

This ~las a Technical Service Request made by Mr. Yunko 

for determination of asbestos particles in food and 

drugs. 

Do you have any recollection of that document? 

No, I do not. 

You were the recipient of that, is it? 

That's correct. 

Did you prepare the report? 

No, I did not. 

Do you know who did? 

The assignment was made to Mr. Triglia. I don't know. 

MR. HALKET: I'm going to just have a 

standing obJection to instances where it is the case 

that the witness is testifying by reading the document 

as opposed to his m~ personal knowledge. 

MR. PRENTISS: Fine. 
2 

3 

4 

6 

6 

7 

a 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15' 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

7

Q \.fuo is Mr. Yunko? 

A 

• 

Q 

A 

Q 

A 

Q 

A 

Q 

A 

Q 

A 

Mr. Yunko was the, Director of Sales and Marketing fo

the Minerals and Chemicals Division at that time. 

I'll ask you to look at Exhibit 18. Do you have any 

recollection of that? 

I,don't recall this document. 

Now, that document makes reference to a meeting with 

Glenn Hemstock and Emil Triglia on Friday. The date 

of this memorandum is May 31, 1979. Do you have any 

recollection of a meeting that1s referred to? 

Only in general terms. 

What is your ,recollection? 

This NI,1S a me.eting that ~las held to generally review 

some of the test results that had been carried out 

during that time on the analysis of talc samples and 

air dust samples. 

This is analysis for content of asbestos? 

Well, really the -- it was broader than that. It wa

to determine mineralogical content, asbestos or asbestiform minerals being one. 

Did the Research and Development Department ever und

take a specific study that Nas not so much in respon

to a TSR, but a study on its own to determine asbest

or mineral co~tent of talc? 

There was a general study, n short-term research stu

BASF 
2 

3 

4 Q 

5 A 

6 Q 

7 A 

6 

9 

10 Q 

11 A 

12 

13 

14 Q 

16 

16 A 

11 Q 

18 

19 A 

20 Q 

21 

22 A 

23 Q 

24 A 

26 

to get ~.better understanding of the mineralogical 

content of our talc, not specifically aimed at nsbe

tos. 

When did that take place? 

Approximately in the 1978-79 period. 

Who conducted that study? 

The study ,~as carried out by people within the Rese

Department. Mr. Gale, Mr. Dzierzanowski, Mr. Trigl

were some of the people involved. 

And were you involved as ,,,ell? 

To the degree that I and Mr. Gale visited the Emtal 

Plant and mine; that was the only direct involvemen

I had.· 

Was the study generally undertaken under your super

vision? 

Generally under my supervision, yes. 

Did you review the results of the study from time to , 

time during the course of the study? 

From time to time. yes. 

Is the meeting that's made reference to on Exhibit 

a meeting that ,.,as held in connection with that stud

I believe a part of it was. 

A part of what? I'm not clear on your anS~ler. sir. 

Our study was aimed at looking at various Emtal products. It did not involve looking at competitive 

BASf 
'--.' 

2 

3 Q 

4 

Ii 

6 

7 A 

a Q 

9 

10 

11 A 

12 

samples"and as evidenced by this document j there 

were competitive samples included. 

There were competitive samples that were considered 

at He meeting that's referenced in this document; 

is that your testimony? 

(OBJECTION BY ALL DEFENSE COUNSEL) 

Yes, that's correct. 

In paragraph three of this document, there's a refe

ence to Vermont tales, Vertal. What does Vertal re

to? 

I believe that's ~qould be a sample,--

(OBJECTION BY ALL DEFENSE COUNSEL) 

13 A -'"Of a competi~ive product. 

14 Q" When you say a competitive product. that I s a produc

15 

16 A 

17 Q 

18 A 

19 Q 

20 A 

21 Q 

22 

23 

24 A 

26 

made by some company other than --

Other than Engelhard. , 

Do you know what company is associated with Vertal? 

I believe that would be'the Vermont Talc Company. 

Do you kno~, if that I s still the' name of the company? 

No, I do not. 

There's a reference here to IY.C.D. in caps with 

periods after each of those initials. Do you know 

what that refers to? 

I would assume that was also another -- I believe th

was another competitor. 

BASF 
2 

3 

4 

6 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

16 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

Q Hould that be lfuittaker, Clark & Daniels? 

A 

A 

Q 

A 

Q 

A 

Q 

A 

Q 

A 

Q 

A 

Q 

(OBJECTION BY ALL DEFENSE COUNSEL) 

I believe that's true. 

Now, there's a reference down here to Windsor. To 

~1hat does Windsor refer? 

That also, I believe, is a competitive product. 

Would that be associated with Windsor Minerals, Inc

I believe so. 

Is it your testimony that the tests that 'are made 

reference to in this exhibit -- let me ask you: l,'h

tests were being referred to? 

, HR. KENNEDY: Referring to l~ha tIs contain

in the,exhib~t? 

MR. PRENTISS: That's correct. 

The tests are not specifically defined in this docu

ment. 

Do you have any recollection of what tests were bein

referred to? 

I do not know. 

I'll show you Exhibit 19. Have you ever seen that 

before? 

No, I have not seen this document. 

Is it addressed 'to Mr. Dzierzanowski? 

That is correct. 

Do you know whether that is a report to Mr. Dzierzan

BASF 
1 

2 

3 A 

4 Q 

6 

6 A 

7 Q 

8 

9 

10 A 

11 Q 

12 A 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

·18 Q 

19 A 

20 

8 

• 

~ . 

21 

22 

Q 

23 

24 A 

25 Q 

7

ski from an outside testing laboratory of tests that 

he requested? 

I believe so. 

Did you. ever see the results of this test that's reported on Exhibit 191 

I can I t reca 11. 

There's reference to samples. The samples are numbered R 72-77B and R .191-77A. Do you knm·, what thos

sample numbers refer to? 

Yes. I can describe generally what those are. 

What are they? 

We maintain a log book for all samples that are received by the Research Department, and the "R" stand

for received sample. The number, the second number, 

refers to the number of samples that \·)e received in 

that calendar year, and the calendar year is indicat

by the third digit,. third set of digits. 

~Yhat is the final initial? 

That ",)ould merely indicate two samples received at th

same time. 

So, Sample R 72-77B, by your testimony, would be par

two of the seventy-second sample received by your 

department during 19777 

That would be my judgment. 

R 19l-77A \'lOuld be part one of thl? one hundred ninet~ 

BASF 
2 A 

3 Q 

4 

5 

6 A 

7 Q 

8 

9 

10 

11 A 

12 Q 

13 

( 

" 14 

15 A 

16 Q 

17 

, 18 

19 

20 A 

21 Q 

22 

23 A 

24 

26 Q 

7

first sample received by your department during 1977

That ,.ould be my' judgment. 

Do you know' ~'Jhether the test 'results ",hich are portrayed in Exhibit 19 '!Iere ever embodied in any kind 

of a report prepared by the department? 

I do not know that for a fact. 

Would it be the normal course of business of your 

department to incorporate test results received by 

outside laboratories as a part of a department research report? 

Yes. it t~ould. 

Isho~J you Exhibit 20. Have you ever seen ,that 

before? Do you have any recollection of it? That's 

blO questions. Do you have any recollection of tha

No, I do not recall this,document. 

Now, this document is an inter-department memorandum 

of the Minerals and, Chemicals Division. That means 

part of ~~ an internal document for your company;' is 

that correct? 

Thatls correct. 

Now, we already identified Mr. Oulton, Who is Mr. 

Newgar? 

That 'IolaS Miss Ne",gar. She was a geologist, a minera

ogist in the Physical Measurements Group. 

You're listed as a recipient of this memorandum? 

BASF 
2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

19 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23. 

24 

26 

7

A That is correct. 

Q 

A 

Q 

A 

Q 

A 

Q 

A 

Q 

A 

Q 

A 

Q 

Now, this memorandum has to do with samples of talc 

from the Haterbury and Johnson mines; is. that correc

That's what the document appears to indicate. 

What was your company's interest in the Haterbury 

mine? 

I don I t knO~I. 

Do you have any idea why your company would be involved in testing talc or talc ore from the t<laterbur

mine? 

I only have a general idea of th~t. 

And what is your general idea? 

I believe that the Haterbury mine was·u talc deposit 

that had been largely mined out many, many years ago

The reasons why ~le would be interested in that parti

cular sample, other than for comparative purposes, I 

do not lenoN. 

Is the Waterbury mine near the Johnson mine? 

(OBJECTiON BY ALL DEFENSE COUNSEL) 

I don't know. 

Do you knm·) whether it I S in the same geological form

tion as the Johnson mine? 

(OBJECTION BY ALL DEFENSE COUNSEL) 

No, I do not kn~i that. 

Showing you Exhibit 2i, do you have any independent 

BASF 
, , 

2 A 

3 Q 

4 

5 

6 

1 

8 A 

9 'Q 

10 

11 

12 

13 A 

14 Q 

16 A 

16 Q 

17 

18 

; 

• 19 

" • 

~ 20 A 

21 Q 

22 A 

23 

24 

25 

80 

recollection of that document? 

No, I do not. 

Dr. Hemstock, when the -- your Research ,and Development Departm~nt sent a sample of some material out to 

an outside laboratory to be tested, would it be the 

practice of your department to keep in its files ~lhatever report '"las -received in response to that test? 

Yes, it would. 

Your department would 'Send the request out to an outside laboratory as a part of its ongoing business in 

performing the analyses requested of it by its client 

department? 

Too t t S correct. 

Do, you know ,~ho Mr. J.H. Shafer is? 

He is the Plant Manager of the Emtal operation. 

Could I see the last report or the last exhibit? I 

think it would be 20. I sho,"! you Exhibit 22 for identification. Do you have any recollection of that document? 

Only in general terms. 

And ,~hat is your recollection? 

This was, as the document indicates, a request for a 

transmission electron microscopy and selected area 

diffraction evaluations on three bulk mineral samples 

collected'in 1979. 

BASF02 
2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

18 

'9 

20 

·21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

8

Q This lett<er is a re<sponse to a request fot: that ana

A 

Q 

A 

Q 

A 

A 

Q 

A 

Q 

A 

sis; is that right? 

That is correct. 

Do you recall learning of the results that are reported on that Exhibit No. 227 

No, I do not. 

You have no recollection of ever being told either b

Mr. Gale or by any other person that the laboratory 

foond what it characterized as extremely high levels 

of chrysotile asbestos in one of the samples tested? 

I do not have a recollection of that fact. 

You have no recollection of ever being told that? 

Not of this specific instance. 

Do you have a recollection of ever having been told 

that analysis of talc samples had found high or extremely high levels of chrysotile asbestos? 

I think that characterization is a relative term, an

what might be considered a high level by one individual may not really in fact be a high level. 

Do you have any recollecting of being told by any pe

son that analysis had <shown what any person characterized as being high or extremely high levels of as

bestos in the talc? 

(OBJECTION BY ALL DEFENSE COUNSEL) 

I don't specifically recall that. 

BASI 
2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

B 

9, 

10 

12 

13 

14 

16 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

82 

Q Are you finished with your answer? 

A 

Q 

A 

Q 

A 

Q 

A 

Q 

A 

Q 

Yes, I am. 

When you say you don't specifically r~call that, are 

you saying you don't specifically recall the results 

reported on Exhibit 227 

That is correct, I do not. 

But do you have any recollection ~lithout· regard to 

Exhibit 22'of ever receiving information that some 

analyst had characterized the asbestos content of 

your company's talc as being high or extremely high? 

(OBJECTION BY ALL DEFENSE COUNSEL) 

No, I cannot.say that. 

Do you. have ~ny recollection of ever having been told 

by any person that an analyst had determined that the 

asbestos content of talc sold by your company or from 

your company's mine was at a greater level than trace 

quantities? 

(OBJECTION BY ALL DEFENSE COUNSEL) 

No, I cannot say that. 

You never were told that there was any more than trace 

quantities of asbestos' in your company's talc? 

(OBJECTION BY ALL DEFENSE COUNSEL) 

I do not specifically recall any instance of that. 

Are you saying no person ever told you that? 

(OBJECTION BY ALL DEFENSE COUNSEL) 

BASF02 
2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

16 

16 

17 

18 

.; 19' 

• 

" • • 

~ • 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

26 

. 

Q 

A 

Q 

A 

Q 

A 

Q 

A 

Q 

83 

. MR. KENNEDY: Told him what·, trace quantities or --

Are you .testifying that no person ever told you that 

analysis had determined that there were more than 

trace quantities of asbestos in your company's talc? 

(OBJECTION· BY ALL DEFENSE COUNSEL) 

Yes, that is my testimony. 

Mr. Gale never told you that?· 

No, he did not. 

(OBJECTION BY ALL DEFENSE COUNSEL) 

NO~I, showing you Exhibit 23, can you tell me ~lha t that 

is? 

This ,~as a "Iork sheet that was used by the analyst, 

in this case Mr. Gale, to interpret results from 

transUdssion electron microscope analyses. 

How do you know tha twas Mr. Gale? 

There's a .signature here 'on the bottom. 

Have you ever seen those before other than in preparation for this deposition? 

A Yes, 1 believe I have. 

Q' And ~~hen? 

A I believe these were -- these data I~ere discussed and 

Q 

reviewed generally at one -- at the meetings referred 

to earlier. 

You have a recollection of discussion of these results 

BASF02 
1 

2 A 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 Q 

13 

14 

16 A 

16 

17 Q 

18 

19 A 

20 Q 

21 

22 

23 A 

24 Q 

25 

84 

as portrayed- on Exhibit 23? 

Not those specific results. 

MR. HALKET: I object to the last question 

and the last answer, because if I understand your 

question, it was have you ever- seen the document; and 

if I understand Glenn's answer, it beared no relationship to ~hether he had ever seen the document. This 

is a problem we've talked about before. He is testifying about documents he's never seen. It's sheer 

speculation. 

THE WITNESS: Yes, that's 

I guess I didn't understand your earlier answer. Are 

you testifying you have never seen that document 

before? 

I have not seen that specific documen t. I have seen 

some of those data before. 

, 

Are you saying you may have seen this document, but 

you don't recall whether it I~as this specific one? 

I do not recall having seen that specific document. 

But you may have seen it? 

MR. HALKET: That's not what he testified 

to. 

I don't recall having seen it. 

Was it cu~tomary _ during the course c:f Mr. Gale's study 

-- let me back up. Was this document, to the best of 

Case 2:11-cv-01754-BRM-AME Document 70-1 Filed 08/04/11 Page 144 of 193 PageID: 2082
2 

3 

4 A 

5 

6 A 

7 Q 

8 

9 

10 

11 A 

12 

13 

14 

15 Q 

16 

17 

18 A 

i 

• 19 Q 

20 

21 

22 A 

23 Q 

24 A 

" _.' 25 

your kno\~iedge, prepared as a part of Mr. Gale's 

study that you p~eviously testified to that took 

place during 1978 and 19797 

I believe 

. (OBJECTION BY ALL DEFENSE COUNSEL) 

-- to the best o~ my kno~~ledge. 

85 

Are you familiar enough ~lith the method of Mr. Gale's 

research to be ab~e to testify as to what it is that's 

portrayed on that document? 

(OBJECTION BY ALL DEFENSE COUNSEL) 

Mr. Gale was carrying out transmission electron micro-

scope studies, and ·his intent here \·]as to identify 

the number o~ fibers, fibrous material, in those 

transmission electron microscope samples. 

Did you, during the course of Mr. Gale's study, discuss the results of his studies \~ith him as he produced those results? 

Not as he produced them, only in general terms. 

And \'lOuld you meet periodically·with Mr. Gale to revie\~ the results that he had achieved as part of his 

study? 

Not normally with Mr. Gale. 

With whom would you meet to discuss --

Well, there Nere others involved. Mr. Gale did not 

report to me directly. Normally, ~~. Dzierzanowski 

BASFO: 
....... " 

. 86 

and Mr~ Ti'iglia would also be present; 

2 Q Would Mr. Gale b~ present, also? 

3 A Normally, he would. 

4 Q \~as it your practice at these periodic meetings to 

6 sit dO~1n and revie~'l some of the actual "Iork sheet 

6 results that Mr. Gale or others \'lOrking on the study 

7 had prepared as a part of their study? 

8 A Not normally the original documents. He would sum-. 

9 marize the significant data that he had obtained, and 

10 it "lOuld normally be a summary of those data that I 

11 would revie~'l. 

12 Q Nm·) , across the top of this first page of Exhibit 23 

13 are labeled "Erotal 42" and then there I s a number 

14 79-J-2 underneath that. Can you .tell me what that 

16 refers to or what that signifies? 

16 A No, I don I t' kn01~ what that signifies. 

17 Q Have you ever heard of the term "Emtal" before? 

18 A Yes, I have. 

.. 

• 19 Q What is tha t? 

20 A Erotal refers to products produced from the Johnson 

~ 21 mine. 

• . ~ 

• 22 Q Emtal 42, have you ever heard of any talc referred to 

23 as Emta 1 42 ta Ie? 

24 A Yes. E~tal 42 is a specific grade of talc produced 

"-,,,/ 25 in the Emtal mine. 

BASFO 
2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

( 

14 

16 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

c.. 25 

87 

Q Colunm one and three both are headed "Emtal 42"; is 

A 

Q 

A 

Q 

A 

Q 

A 

Q 

A 

Q 

A 

Q 

that right? 

That's correct. 

And part of Mr. Gale's responsibility in the course 

of carrying out this study \~as to analyze the conten

'mineral content, of talc including Bmtal 42? 

That was one of the commercial samples that ~las certainly included. 

Do you know what kind of a talc Emtal 42 'is? 

(OBJECTION BY ALL DEFENSE COUNSEL) 

It's a relatively course particle-sized talc. 

Is that trial grade talc? 

(OBJECTION BY ALL DEFENSE COUNSEL) 

Yes, I believe so. 

Do you know what markets or industries utilize Erotal 

42 talc? 

No, I do not. 

There's a notation part\>lay down this document. It 

says, "Fibers counted per fifteen grid openings minus 

blank," and then there is an asterisk, and the asterisk at the bott,om states, "Blank equals four fiber

That's correct. 

What fibers is it that were being recorded on this 

document, to the best of your knowledge? 

(OBJECTION BY ALL DEFENSE COUNSEL) 

BASFO: 
1 . A 

2 

3 

4 

5 

I; 

7 

s Q 

9 A 

10 Q 

11 A 

12 Q 

13 

14. 

15 

16 

17 

" 18 

5 

.; 

• 19 Q 

" • i 20 

21 A 

22 Q 

23 

24 

\ I 

'-.J 25 A 

To the best of my knowledge, the mounting of scannin

electron microscope samples is .prepared on a screen

and the screen has openings which are co:nsidered to 

grid openings. In the normal c,ourse of counting, y

count ~~ we would count or Mr. Gale ~10uld count fif~ 

teen grid openings and count the number of fibers th

he saw on that number -- on that field. 

Fibers of what, though? 

Just fibers. 

Any fibers? 

Any fibers. 

What fibrous minerals do you know of that 'l1ere iden

tified as being constituents of Emtal 42 talc? 

(OBJECTION BY ALL DEFENSE COUNSEL) 

HR. HALKET: Do you understand that ques

tion? 

THE HITNESS: It's a broad question. Co

you be more definitive? 

Emtal 42 talc, to your knowledge, does Emtal 42 talc 

contain any minerals other than the 'pure mineral ta

Yes, it does. 

Does it contain several other minerals besides pure 

talc mineral? 

(OBJECTION BY ALL DEFENSE COUNSEL) 

Yes, it does. 

BASf 
1 Q 

2 

3 

4 A 

5 Q 

6 

7 A 

8 

9, 

10 Q 

11 A 

12 

13 Q 

14 A 

15 

16 Q 

17 

18 

; 19 A 

• 

~ • i 20 

21 

22 

23 

24 Q 

, 25 -' 

89 

How many of those other minerals besides talc are 

fibrous in nature? 

(OBJECTION BY ALL DEFENSE COUNSEL) 

There could be several. 

Anq which ones? 

(OBJECTION BY ALL DEFENSE COUNSEL) 

Serpentine could, be present. I would make a distinction between asbestiform minerals and asbestos 

minerals. 

Fine. 

And asbestiform mine~als might a~so be considered 

fibrous in the context of this study. 

\>/hat asbestiform minerals are you referring to? 

Things like serpentine, like chlorite. Those would 

probably be the main oneS. 

Is it your testimony that chlorite is a fibrous form 

of mineral particle? 

(OBJECTION BY ALL DEFENSE COUNSEL) 

It depends how it fractures and how the sample is 

prepared. Chlorite is one of the -- the parent rocks 

of the deposit. It is not talc per se, but it is one 

of the parent rocks derived from talc. I believe that 

chlorite normally is platey in shape. 

What other mineral constituents of Emtal 42 talc besides serpentine and chlorite are fibrous in form? 

BASFO~ 
2 A 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 Q 

9 

10 

11 

12 A 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 Q 

21 

22· 

23 A 

24 Q 

25 

90 

(OBJEC'rION BY ALL DEFENSE COUNSEL) 

In the preparation of an electron microscope sample, 

there is ample opportunity for extraneous fibers to 

be present just from the ambient air. So, consequently, one might pick up a cellulose fiber and consider 

it a fiber in the electron microscope if one didn't 

attempt to identify it further. 

Do you know "lhether the analytical techniques that 

were utilized in this study incorporated any measures 

to avoid contamination by atmospheric fibers? 

(OBJECTION BY ALL DEFE~SE COUNSEL) 

1 don't know that. 1 do know that there was a period 

,~hen the electron microscope we were using vIas contal)1inated. The Georgia Tech instrument vIas used for 

a wide variety of samples, and once the contaminant 

material got inside the barrel of the microscope, it 

could contaminate the samples almost at random. There 

was considerable effort made by Georgia Tech to get 

their microscope cleaned up. It's difficult. 

Did your company continue to use that Georgia Tech 

facility after it knew that the microscope had become 

contaminated? 

Yes, 'ile did. 

And were you not concerned about the effect on the 

results of your tests? 

BASF023: 
! 

• • 

~ 

I 

• 

"-> .' 

PADUANO 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

16 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

91 

A Yes, we ,~lere, and we verified when the'y had it cleaned 

Q 

A 

Q 

A 

Q 

A 

Q 

A 

Q 

up by submitting duplicate or replicate samples. 

HON did yol,1 determine that it had been cleaned up? 

If on two consecutive sampling periods or testing 

periods we got the same number, that was at least some 

indication that it had been cLeaned 'up. 

Did the testing procedures that .,ere undertaken during 

this study include any other tests to definitely identify or more definitely identify the minerals which 

were 'found in fiber form? 

(OBJECTION BY ALL DEFENSE COUNSEL) . Well, the only more definitive test of \"hich I'm a\o1a,:e 

is the, selec~ed area electron diffraction. That was 

done on some samples. 

Which samples? 

Only -,- well, that is a test which positively identifies the mineral component of a given fiber so that 

you're really only looking at the mineralogy of a 

single p'artic le. 

Did those tests confirm the presence of asbestos in 

any of the Emtal tales studied? 

In some cases they did. 

And do you know whether the test results which show 

those results are incQrporated or included within' 

this stack of documents that have been provided today? 

BASF0238i 

Case 2:11-cv-01754-BRM-AME Document 70-1 Filed 08/04/11 Page 151 of 193 PageID: 2089
2 

3 

4 

6 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

16 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

26 

PADUANO I 

92 

A Yes, I believe so. 

Q 

A 

Q 

A 

Q 

A 

Q 

A 

Q 

A 

Q 

A 

Q 

A 

Q 

Can you tell me what Exhibit 24 ·is? 

Yes, in general I can. 

And what is it? 

This was the results of a petrographic analysis by 

an outside consulting firm.run by an individual by 

the name of Fred Farwell. 

When was that completed? 

The document itself suggests that he l~as . looking at 

1977 material. 

Is there a date on the document that shovls a completion date? 

Yes, July 7, .1977. 

Do you have an independent recollection of that study? 

Not of this spec~fic· study, I do not. 

Or of the results that were obtained in the study? 

No, I do not. 

When you say you have no recollec~ion of this specific 

study, do you have a recollectibn generally of studies 

that were conducted by Mr. Farwell? 

Mr. Farwell vIas a lI)icroscopy expert, and vIe used him 

for phase contrast microscope evaluations and also 

for refractive index determinations. 

Are those testing procedures ones that are utilized 

to determine asbestos contamination of samples? 

BASF02388 

Case 2:11-cv-01754-BRM-AME Document 70-1 Filed 08/04/11 Page 152 of 193 PageID: 2090
~ 

" • • 

~ 

; 

~ o 

< 

'--... ' 

· ' Ii 

PADUANO 

1, 

2 A 

3 

4 Q 

6 A 

6 Q 

7 A 

B Q 

9 

10 A 

11 Q 

12 Ii. 

13 Q 

14"'.. A 

15 Q 

16 A 

17 Q 

, 1B A 

19 

20 

21 

22 Q 

23 

24 

26 A 

93 

(OBJECTION BY ALL DEFENSE,COUNSEL) 

The phase contrast microscope has been' used in an 

effort to identify asbestos-'type minerals. 

It is not a definitive test procedure? 

It is not a definitive procedure. 

Do you have any recollection of what Exhibit 25 is? 

No, I do, not. 

You have never seen that before or you have no recollection of having seen it? 

I hav~ not seen~his before, I do not believe. 

Have 'you ever seen Exhibit 26 before? 

No, I have not. 

Do you kno,", what it is? 

No, 1 do not. 

Have you ever seen Exhibit 27 before? 

Yes, I I m generally familiar \~ith it. 

What is it? 

It was a request to Johns-Manville for determination 

of fibers by the phase contrast microscope. This was 

a technique which at that time, 1972, we did not have 

in-house. 

Do you remember your department reque'sting JohnsManville to perform tests as an outside laboratory 

for your department? 

We used many outside laboratories as indicated in the 

BASF023: 

Case 2:11cv01754BRMAME Document 701 Filed 08/04/11 Page 153 of 193 PageID: 2091
documents you've seen earlier. I do not specifically 

recall Johns~Manville as being one 'of them. 

3 Q You have no recollection of 'that? 

4 A No, I do not. 

5 Q Who ~lrote the memorandum that's attached as'page t,·)o 

6 of that exhibit? 

7 A That memorandum is T~ritten by me. 

8 Q Does that memorandum make reference to sending samples 

9 out to Johns-Manville? 

10 A Yes. 

11 For testing? 

12 Yes, that's strongly indicated. 

13 Q Look at Exhibit 28. Tell me if you have any recollec14 tion of that? 

15 A Generally, yes. 

16 Q This is an inter-department memorandum from your com17 pany; is that correct? 

18 A From a member of our company, yes. 

19 Q 'vi thin your company? 

20 A That's correct. 

21 Q Do~offi at the bottom it's "Copy to" follo~~ed by initials? 

22 A That's correct. 

23 Q Your initials are the first set? 

24 A That's correct. 

25 Q There's a circle around your initials. Does that mean 

TI 4. T'\TT A NO 

BASF02 
l' 

2 '----., 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

B 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

, 18 

; 

• 19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

PADUANO 

A 

Q 

A 

Q 

A 

Q 

A 

Q 

A 

Q 

A 

Q 

A 

Q 

95 

this '(o)as your copy of this memorandum? 

This, I believe, is a copy 01 a copy, ahd the fact 

that this is' circledloJould suggest that it ~las my 

file copy that was used to make this copy. 

So, does that mean that the document from,T/1hich this 

copy \-laS made was pulled from your file? 

It \~ould be pulled from the ,general files that we 

ta lleed about earlier. It ~jould not be from my persona 1 

file. 

The circle around it, your initials do\~n here, does 

that mean that \~as your copy of this document? 

(OBJECTION BY ALL DEFENSE COUNSEL) 

This copy ~las made for my eyes, but 

Yes? 

-- but in fact it ,~ould, go into' the' general files ~le 

talked about earlier. It would not be retained by me. 

This document refer to a meeting that was held:in conjunction with the 1978-1979 study that you testified 

to earlier? 

Yes, 1 believe that's true. 

Was that early on in the study or late in the study? 

This was fairly early on in the study. 

Do you have any recollection of the meeting that --

I have a general recollection of it, yes. 

-- took place? 

BASF023! 

gg
'~, 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

6 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

16 

-; 

• 19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

nAnTTtl.NO 

96 

A Yes. 

Q 

A 

Q 

A 

Q 

A 

Q 

A 

Q 

A 

Q 

A 

Q 

A 

Q 

A 

Q 

What happened at.that meeting? 

Hell, this 1tlas a review of the results that ',le obtained 

to date, and a general discussion of ,qhat further work 

needed to be done. 

Do you recail what the results t'lere that you received 

to date? 

No, I do not. 

I ShO"1 you Exhibit 29. Hhat is that? 

This ~~as a request by Mr. Oulton to representatives 

of Johns-Manville for a phase contrast microscopy 

analysis. 

It's. an invoice for outside laboratory 1t1ork? 

That's correct. 

Done by Johns-Hanville for your department;· is that 

right? 

That's correct. 

What is the date on that? 

May 1, 1973. 

I show you Exhibit 30. Have you ever seen that before? 

No, I have not. 

Who is C.Y. Haas? 

Mr. Haas 1tlas the Vice President of Administration of 

the Minerals and Chemicals Division at that time. 

Do you have any recollection of Exhibit 317 

Case 2:11-cv-01754-BRM-AME Document 70-1 Filed 08/04/11 Page 156 of 193 PageID: 2094
PADUANO 

97 

A No, I do not. 

Q This is a memorandum on the ,letterhead, of your company? 

3 A Yes, I believe so. 

4 Q Your initials appear at the bottom of the page? 

5 A That is correct. 

6 Q As being a recipient of a copy? 

7 A As being a recipient of a copy, correct. 

8 Q There's a circle around your initials there? 

9 A Yes. 

10 Q You haye no recollection of having received that? 

11 A No, I'do not. 

12 Q Do you remember back when we discussed Exhib it 9, I'd', 

13 aska:i you if you'd ever seen the name Mr. Nadkarni 

14' ,before? 

'16 A 

16 Q 

17 A 

18 Q 

19 A 

20 Q 

21 A 

22 Q 

23 

24 A 

25 

Yes, correct. 

You've never seen that before? 

I do not know the gentleman. 

His name appears on this document as well, doesn't it? 

Yes, it does. 

You received a copy of that document? 

Yes, that's correct. 

In fact, several of the individuals listed on Exhibit 9 

are also listed on Exhibit 31, aren't they? 

, My interpretation Ivould be that these were Exxon peo-, 

pIe, but I do not knol'l other than what's on the docuCase 2:11-cv-01754-BRM-AME Document 70-1 Filed 08/04/11 Page 157 of 193 PageID: 2095
1. 

2 Q 

3 A 

4 

5 

6 

7· Q 

8 A 

9 Q 

10 

11 A 

12 Q 

13 A 

14 Q 

15 A 

16 

17 

18 Q 

19 

20 A 

21 Q 

22 A 

23 Q 

'24 A 

25 

PADUANO 

98 

ment. 

Do you knm,' what Exhibit 32 ,is 7 

This ~~as a descl:"iption of a . pI:" ocedul:"e' used 1'01:" looking 

for fibcl:"s in phase contrast microscopy. At that 

time, Hiss NeNgar ~vho had just joined our staff \"as 

attempting to learn the technique. 

Appro>dmately 'f.'Ihen \qas that prepared? 

1976, early '77. 

Do you have any ind,ependent l:"ec911ection of either the 

preparation of that or Hhaf: it was used for? 

No, I don 't. 

Who's Daniel A. Jacobs? 

May I see the date? 

Yes, 'sir. It's August 3, 1979. 

Mr. Jacobs ~'las the Production Hanager of the Emtal 

operation. The Plant Manager at Emtal reported to 

Jacobs who was located at Menlo Park. 

Jacobs t~as located at Menlo Park, and the Plant Hanager 

t~as located in Johnson, Vermont? 

That is correct. 

And the Plant Manager was Mr. Shafer? 

That is correct. 

Who was Mr. C.C. Clarke? 

Mr. Clarke ~Ias responsible for environmental activities 

within the Minerals and Chemicals Division. 

Case 2:11-cv-01754-BRM-AME Document 70-1 Filed 08/04/11 Page 158 of 193 PageID: 2096
,,\, 

• e 

; 

• 

,; 

• • 5 

8 

o 

~ 

~ 

PAnnANO 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

16 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

26 

Q 

A 

Q 

A 

Q 

A 

Q 

A 

Q 

A 

Q 

A 

Q 

A 

99 

(RECESS) 

Did you ever see this Exhibit,33· before? 

No, I have not. 

Do you have any idea ~lhat Hr. Jacobs ,vas referring to 

in the memo at the last page of that whe're he says, 

" ••• the attached report looks like more potential 

trouble for Emtal"? 

No, I would not kno\, that. I do not know. 

Have you ever seen Exhibit 34 before? 

This is the continuation of one of the earlier documents in which Miss Net-lgar was at~empting to identify 

the mineral species that were present in samples of 

talc by phase contrast microscopy. 

Anq would that again date back to 1976? 

Hell, this ,·ias somewhat later. The dates'indicated 

are April 7, 8. 

Do you know whether that was prepared as a part of the 

study that took place during 1978 and 1979 that you've 

described? 

I do not believe so. 

Can you tell me '.Jhat Exhibit 35 is? 

This is a Technical Service Request also for evaluation! 

of samples of competitive talc. 

NOI'~' this TSR is directed towards you; is that right? 

Yes, that is correct. 

Case 2:11-cv-01754-BRM-AME Document 70-1 Filed 08/04/11 Page 159 of 193 PageID: 2097
• : 

-I 

• 

w 

• • 

a 

PADUANO 

2 

3 

4 

6 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

16 

16 

,17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

26 

100 

Q It's from a Mr. Wert? 

A 

Q 

A 

Q 

A 

Q 

A 

A 

Q 

A 

Q 

A 

Q 

Yes. 

Who is that? 

Hr. Ivert is he's a -- he's in the Planning and 

Development Department. He's basically a marketing 

man. 

NO~I, a response ~las prepared to this TSR; correct? 

That's correct. 

Who prepared the response? 

'Martha Hamel who is the electron microscopist in R&D. 

I believe she is the person who signed this Technical 

Service Request. 

Did you reVie!'l the response that was given to that 

TSR? 

No, I have not. 

Do you know whether you would have revie~led that at 

the time it was submit ted to Mr. Ivert? 

It would probably have crossed my desk. 

Would yru probably have read it when it crossed your 

desk? 

I mi,ght have read it when it crossed my desk. 

Do you agree with the statements contained 'at page tNO 

in this document, "Although no asbestos ~)as found in 

these samples, the presence of serpentine requires 

that a sharp lookout be kept for chrysotile?" 

Case 2:11-cv-01754-BRM-AME Document 70-1 Filed 08/04/11 Page 160 of 193 PageID: 2098
A 

3 Q 

4 

6 

6 

7 

8 A 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14' Q 

15 

16 

17 

18 A 

-; 

• 19 

• • i 20 

21 

22 

23 Q 

24 

..... / 26 A 

PADUANO 

101 

(OBJECTION BY ALL DEFENSE COUNSEL) 

Would you repeat .the question now? . 

Do you agree, although no asbestos ~,)as found in these 

samples, the presence of serpentine requires that a 

sharp lookout be kept for chrysotile? 

(OBJECTION BY ALL DEFENSE COUNSEL AND MOTION 

TO STRIKE) 

I think Dr. Hamel is relatively unfamiliar with the 

fact that small amounts of chrysotile may have been 

present in our talc samples in the past. I think she 

was identifying. this as something that might not have 

been familiar ~lith her, but was familiar to the rest 

of us. 

Do you agree with this statement, that the presence of 

serpentine requires that a sharp lookout be kept for 

chrysotile? 

(OBJECTION BY ALL DEFENSE COUNSEL) 

Yes, I would generally agree with that. 

MR. DOLAN: Could we have the date of that· 

exhibit, please? 

MR. PRENTISS: Yes. This exhibit is dated 

July 15. 1982. 

And ean you tell me what is the identification of the 

source of the tales that are t.ested under this TSR? 

I can only identify the first two. 

Case 2:11-cv-01754-BRM-AME Document 70-1 Filed 08/04/11 Page 161 of 193 PageID: 2099
" • • : 

• 

8 

• • 

~ . 

PADUANO 

1· Q 

2 A 

3 

4 

6 

6 

7 Q 

8 

9 A 

10 

11 Q 

12 A 

13 Q 

102 

And what are they? 

Those are samples.from 

MR. SARLI: I object. If you look ii'lside 

it says "Vental," not Vertal. 

THE WITNE SS : I would interpret that as 

competitive samples of Vermont talc. 

Vertal, what does that refer to? 

MR. SARLI: I object. 

That is a commercial a trade name for tales produced .by that company. 

By the Vermont ·Talc Company? 

That is my understanding. 

And could you tell me Nhether you recall Exhibit· 36? 

14 . Your answer, sir? 

16 A Excuse me. Hhat was the .question? 

16 (PREVIOUS QUESTION READ BY REPORTER) , 

17 A No, I do not. 

. 18 Q Tha t' s a memorandum, inter-department memorandum within 

19 your company? 

20 A That is correct. 

21 Q It's addressed to you from Mr. Triglia? . 

22 A That is correct. 

23 Q It's dated May 22, 19797' 

24 A That is correct. 

25 Q You have no recollection of having. received this? i 

Case 2:11-cv-01754-BRM-AME Document 70-1 Filed 08/04/11 Page 162 of 193 PageID: 2100
,"", 2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15· 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

26 

PADUANO 

103 

A No, I do not. 

Q 

A 

Q 

A 

Q 

A 

Q 

A 

Q 

Do you know ~lhether you \"ould have read this at the 

time that you received it? 

I beiieve I wQuld have. 

Is that your practice, to read memoranda that \'1ere 

directed t? your attention? 

Very much so. 

Dr. Hemstock, in the first full paragraph of 'page two 

of this memorandum,there is a statement from Mr. 

Triglia that, "The results showed that although there 

Has a variability in the number of fibers counted from 

week to ",eek, there ~Iere, nevertheless, fib2rs present 

in every sample of Emtal 42 tested. A few of the Emtal 

42 samples ShOltled relatively high fiber counts. 11 Dc> 

you know to ltlha t fib er Hr. Triglia is referring in tha t 

sentence? 

(OBJECTION BY ALL DEFENSE COUNSEL) 

Those would be fibers observed in the electron microscope evaluation of those samples. 

And do you know whether Mr. TrigliA was referring to 

a particular mineral fiber? 

(OBJECTION BY ALL DEFENSE COUNSEL) 

I do not know that. 

Mr. Tri'glia, in paragr,aph one of the first page states, 

"Evidence 'of serpentine fibers were found. These 

BASF02 99 

Case 2:11-cv-01754-BRM-AME Document 70-1 Filed 08/04/11 Page 163 of 193 PageID: 2101
" 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 A 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 Q 

13 

14 A 

15 Q 

16 A 

17 

18 Q 

19 

20 

21 A 

22 Q 

23 

24 A 

25 Q 

PADUANO 

'104 

fibers have a very distinctive and unique shape Nhich 

makes them easy to identify.'" Does that statement 

refresh your recollection as to the mine~al fiber.s to 

~Ihich Mr. Triglia referred in the paragraph I read 

from on page two? 

No, it does not. All this refers to is a specific 

shape \~hich he generally classifies as a serpentine 

fiber ~lithout any positive mineralogical iden'tification. 

MR. HALKET: I'm goil1?; to object to that 

question in that it implies that he had a recollection 

as to what ~las :(.n the memo. 

Do you have any recollection of seeing Exhibit 37, 

before? 

No, I do not. , 

Do you have a recollection of seeing Exhibit 38 before? 

No, I do not have a recollection of having seen this 

document. 

In the first page of this Exhibit 38 is a copy of a 

small memo pad page w~th the name of Mr. Triglia on 

it. Is that Mr. Triglia's hand~vriting? 

I believe it is. 

You have no recollection of-receiving a copy of this 

TSR and the attached reports? 

No, I do not. 

Your initials are here and indicate that you did receive 

BASF024 0 

Case 2:11-cv-01754-BRM-AME Document 70-1 Filed 08/04/11 Page 164 of 193 PageID: 2102
.~. 

I .• -

, .... 

,-,' 

PADUANO 

2 

3 

4 

6 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

A 

Q 

A 

Q 

A 

A 

Q 

A 

Q 

A 

Q 

A 

24 Q 

25 

'105 

a copy, though? 

That is correct. 

Do you have any recollection· of Exhibit 39? 

No, I do not. 

Would you state what Exhibit 40 is? 

I believe these are the results of a phase contrast 

microscopic evaluation of samples of \\1aterbury talc. 

This is in 1978 that that was prepared; is that true? 

April 20, 1978. 

This ~'las prepared by your department, is that --

Yes, that is correct. 

Why ~,as your department interested. in studying the 

mineral content of Waterbury talc or Waterbury talc 

ore,? 

(OBJECTION BY ALL DEFENSE COUNSEL) 

The samples in question Nere taken by a geologist Nho 

"las not wi thin the R&D Department, and this \·)as a 

request by him for ~"0rk to be done. I cannot respond 

to why he \~as interested in these particular samples. 

Do yoU know \~hat Exhibit 41 is? 

This was a request for mineralogical evaluation of 

air samples collected in various parts of the Emtal 

Plant. 

Do you have any recollection whatsoever of seeing that 

document before? 

BASF024 1 

Case 2:11-cv-01754-BRM-AME Document 70-1 Filed 08/04/11 Page 165 of 193 PageID: 2103
106 

A Generally, yes, I do. 

2 Q What's your recollection? 

3 A Hell, my recollection is that 'there tolere' small amounts 

4 of fibers ide\1tified on the: filters that ~'lere colIected 

6. from these samples. 

6 Q Do you have an independent recollection of that 

7 separate and apart from reference to the document? 

8 . A Yes, I'm quite familiar with this • 

9 Q What is it about that test or occurrence that make it 

10 stick out'in your memory? 

11 A It happened April 19, 1982. It's,more recent than 

12 most of the rest of the documents. 

13 Q I shot'] you Exhibit 42. Do you knOt" to)hat that is? 

14 A This is the request by v~. Triglia for microscopic 

15 examination of a sample of talc. 

16 Q 'Do you know ~·]hat the results of that examination ",ere? 

• f 17 A No, I do not. 

18 Q You don't remember having seen that before? 

19 A I don't recall this at all. 

20 Q No. 43, is that something you have any knoNledge of? 

21 A No, I do not, 

22 Q you've never seen that before, to the best of your 

23 recollection? 

24 A To the best of my recollection, I 'did not. 

25 Q ,I show you' Exhibit 44. Do you have any knowledge of 

PADUANO 

BASF02402 

Case 2:11-cv-01754-BRM-AME Document 70-1 Filed 08/04/11 Page 166 of 193 PageID: 2104
~ 

• • f 

PADUANO 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

A 

Q 

A 

A 

Q 

A 

Q 

A 

Q 

A 

Q 

A 

Q 

A 

107 

that? 

No, I don't. 

That Exhibit 44 appears to make reference to Exhibit 43 

Yes. 

Does it not? 

Yes, to the Selevan (Niosh) study, correct. 

Did you have any· involvement in occupational health 

or safety as part of your work at the company? 

No, I did not •. At this time, Mr. Oulton ",as not in 

the Research Department. He Nas in the Administration. 

Department. 

So, your activities did not in any ~o]ay involve possible 

compliance with standards of governmental agencies 

that may be applicable to mining? 

That's correct. 

You had no involvement whatsoever? 

None '!,ha tsoever • 

Other than requests that might be made to you for 

analysis of samples? 

Correct, yes. 

I ShO~l you Exhibit 45. Do you have any recollection 

of that? 

This was a summary of results. that were obtained as 

a result of a marketing Technical ·Service Request 

relative to the fiber content of competitive products. 

BASF02403 

Case 2:11-cv-01754-BRM-AME Document 70-1 Filed 08/04/11 Page 167 of 193 PageID: 2105
~ 

" • • i 

8 

'--.r 

" 

PADUANO 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

16 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

Q 

A 

Q 

A 

Q 

A 

Q 

A 

Q 

A 

Q 

A 

Q 

'108 

MR. HALKET: Tha t was not the question he 

asked. Answer the question he asked. Would you repeat it, please? 

Do you recall ,this document? 

I do not recall this document. 

You have no recollection vlhatsoever of ever having 

seen this before? 

No, I do not. 

This is addressed to you? 

That's correct. 

From Mr. Triglia7 

Yes. 

And that's 19797 

Yes. 

That's too far back for recollection? 

(OBJECTION BY ALL'DEFENSE COUNSEL) 

Yes. it is too far back for my specific recollection. 

Now, this document shows test results of various talc 

samples for fiber content; is that true?' 

please? 

(OBJECTION BY ALL DEFENSE COUNSEL) 

THE WITNESS: Would you repeat the question, 

(PREVIOUS QUESTION READ BY REPORTER) 

(OBJECTION BY ALL DEFENSE COUNSEL) 

MR. KENNEDY: You're asking for the Hitness' 

BASF024 4 

Case 2:11-cv-01754-BRM-AME Document 70-1 Filed 08/04/11 Page 168 of 193 PageID: 2106
,109 · , 

interpretation of the witness reading the document? 

2 MR. PRENTISS': vfuat the document portrays. 

3 }1R. KENNEDY: Doesn't it speak for itself? 

4 lfuat probative value does it have if he reads· the 

5 document and tells you ~'lhat he thinks it says? 

6 THE HITl\'ESS: Yes. GEmerally, that's "hat 

1 this document purports to do. 

8 Q The document that you revie~led at the time it was 

9 submitted'to you? 

10 (OBJECTION BY ALL DEFENSE COUNSEL) 

11 THE I~ITNESS: Would you repeat the question? 

12 Q Was it your normal practice to review documents that 

13 were submitted to you? 

14 A Yes. 

15 That was submitted to you? 

16 A Yes, I believe so. 

17 Q Now, the document shows asbesto~ totals for Emtal 

18 samples; for example, Emtal 42, and that refers again 

19 to Emtal 42 talc? 

20 (OBJECTION BY ALL DEFENSE COUNSEL) 

21 A Yes, I believe so. 

22 Q Asbestos total, trace, 0 to 5; do you have any idea 

23 what the zero to five represents? 

24 A No, I dpn' t. 1 don' t knm~ what tlfis column refers to 

25 at all. 

PADUANO 

BASF02405 

Case 2:11-cv-01754-BRM-AME Document 70-1 Filed 08/04/11 Page 169 of 193 PageID: 2107
i 

• 

" • • 

a 

PADUANO 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

26 

Q 

A 

Q 

A 

Q 

A 

Q 

A 

Q 

A 

Q 

A 

Q 

A 

Q 

11U 

So, you wouldn't knoN what the line, for example, that 

sho',}s Emtal 42, across- the column, asbestos total, 

many, 15 to 50 

No, I do not. 

You don't know ~~hat that represents? 

No, I do not. 

There's a reference to "laboratory -used in one column. 

The initials are E. 1. INST. Do you kno'.v wha t tha t 

refers to? 

That I s the Engelhard Industries Instrumentation 

Laboratory. 

Hhere is that located? 

That '))as located at Menlo Parle 

The asbestos fiber total on this column is listed as 

abundant, greater than fifty. Do you !cnm-) 'Jhat tha"t 

signifies? 

No, I don't. 

Hho would? 

MR. KENNEDY: If you know. 

I don't know ",ho ,<)ould. 

Well, E.I. Instrument Laboratory, that's Engelhard 

Industries; is that correct? 

Yes, that's correct. 

Is that laboratory '<lithin the same office building 

that you work in? 

BASF02406 

Case 2:11-cv-01754-BRM-AME Document 70-1 Filed 08/04/11 Page 170 of 193 PageID: 2108
2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7. 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

-; 

• 19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 ... ~ .' 

PADUANO 

,Ill 

A It's in the same building. This document in 1979, 

Q 

A 

Q 

A 

Q 

A 

Q 

A 

Q 

this laboratory had electron microscope capability. 

We did not. The people, "Iho ran this test ~lere merely 

providing a service to us when ~]e requested it. 

Do you have any reason to doubt the accuracy of any 

of the figures that are portrayed on this sheet? 

(OBJECTION BY' 'ALL DEFENSE COUNSEL) 

The quality of results that the Engelhard Industries 

Laboratory in general turned out ~Ias not up to the 

qua lity of the Georgia Tech Laboratories. I think the 

Georgia Tech people had more skills in dealing Nith 

mineral species. The Engelhard Industries group primarily dealt with metals. 

Did the Engelhard Industries Laboratory hav~ a selected 

,area electrqn diffrac'tometer? 

Electron diffraction capabilities? I don "t kno1>] that. 

Tell me t'his. Do you know who performed the tests 

that are shown on Table 2 that's attached to this 

exhibit? 

Yes. The document says that Table 2 results \~ere performed by Georgia Tech. 

Which is a more reliable testing --

In my genera I experience "lith the two groups, yes, I 

t~ould say so. 

}bre reliable testing for mineral identification than 

BASF02407 

Case 2:11-cv-01754-BRM-AME Document 70-1 Filed 08/04/11 Page 171 of 193 PageID: 2109
2 A 

3 Q 

4 

5 

6 A 

7 Q 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 A 

14 

16 Q 

16 

17 

18 

19 A 

20 Q 

21 A 

22 

23 Q 

24 

25 A 

PADUANO 

'112 

the E.I. Instrument Laboratory? 

I \>1ould think so. 

That laboratory found asbestos total for'Emtal 4:2 talc 

at the Sample No. 4026-12 as many, fifteen to fifty? 

(OBJECTION BY ALL DEFENSE COUNSEL) 

I can't address the response to that question at all. 

Now, the bottom of this page, the sentence that, "Most 

of the fibers ~lere small, but several of ·the Emtal 

samples had a few fibers longer than five microns, II , 

do you rec.all nO~'1 having learned that those test resuIts were achieved on Emtal talc? 

(OBJECTION BY ALL DEFENSE COUN$EL) 

That's ~7hat Table 2 ~'1Ould suggest. I do not have any 

independent recollection of that fact. 

Do you have any reason to doubt the accuracy of the 

results 'from the Georgia Tech Laboratory portrayed on 

Table 2? 

(OBJECTION BY ALL DEFENSE COUNSEL) 

I have no opinion. 

None -,)ha tsoever? 

I have no reason to believe that they were in error; 

but conversely, I can't validate that, either. 

This memorandum is to .you from Mr. Triglia. Was it at 

your request that these samples ~7ere tested? 

No, it was' not. 

BASF0240B 

Case 2:11-cv-01754-BRM-AME Document 70-1 Filed 08/04/11 Page 172 of 193 PageID: 2110
,113 

1 Q At whose request was it? 

2 A Mr. Triglia, I believe', made such decisions on his 

3 mm. If he decided that Engelhard, Industries for 

4 verification purposes should carry out other tests, 

5 he would make that decirlion. If he wanted Georgia 

6 Tech to do the testing, he ~';ould also make that dec i7 sion. 

8 Q Mr. Triglia reported to' you? 

9 A Yes, he did. 

10 Q Do you have any recollection or knowledge ~ihy Mr. 

11 Triglia ~lOuld have reported these results to you? 

12 (OBJECTION BY ALL DEFENSE COUNSEL) 

13 A He I~as merely interpreting results that had been made 

14 as indicated here at the request of the Marketing 

,,' 

15 Department. I have no other reason to specifically 

16 know. 

17 Q ~.;rell, Nhy in the practice of your dep'artment Tilould 

18 Vir. Triglia. report the se results to you \'7hen he was 

19 requested to obtain this information by the Marketing 

20 Department? 

21 (OBJECTION BY ALL DEFENSE 'COUNSEL). 

22 A I ~lOuld say that this was only a routine. Hr. Triglia, 

23 I can only surmise, evidentally thought these results 

24 I~ere significant enough to report them in this fashion. 

26 Q Do you knOt~ what Exhibit 46 is? 

PADUANO 

BASF024 S 

Case 2:11-cv-01754-BRM-AME Document 70-1 Filed 08/04/11 Page 173 of 193 PageID: 2111
2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

PADUANO 

,114 

A I have no independent kno~'lledge of this. 

Q 

A 

Q 

A 

Q 

A 

Q 

A 

Q 

A 

Q 

A 

Q 

A 

Q 

A 

You've never seen this'before? 

Not to my knm'lledge. 

Do you know what Exhibit 47 is? 

This is a series of samples that were obtained from a 

potential acquisition candidate. 

Does ,that mean a ,mine that your company was considering 

purchasing? 

That's correct. 

v]hen approximately 'Nas this prepared? 

NR. HALKET: Let the record show that the 

witness is once again reading the document to find the 

answer. 

In the period of mid~year, 1977. 

Do you have any independent recollection of th,e st~dies 

that are represented by that exhibit? 

Only in a very general way. 

i']hat is your recollection? 

I was al'lare that the studies were underway to appraise 

the quality of the deposit for potential acquisition. 

Do you know ~,hether the deposit ,~as studied for poten~ 

tial asbestos content? 

This was an asbestos deposit. 

There was consideration of purchasing an asbestos mine? 

There ~las some consideration given at that time. 

BASF02410 

Case 2:11-cv-01754-BRM-AME Document 70-1 Filed 08/04/11 Page 174 of 193 PageID: 2112
·--.., .. 

i 

• 

, 

, 

PADUANO 

2 

3 

, 4 

5 

6 

7 

a 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

16 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

115 

Q Was it purchased? 

A 

Q 

A 

Q 

A 

Q 

A 

Q 

A 

Q 

A 

Q 

A 

Q 

A 

Q 

A 

Q 

, It was not. 

Dr. Hemstock, page one of this, the f.irst entry is 

Emtal 42. Can you tell me what that means in relation 

to the potential purchase? 

No, I cannot. 

Hhat is it on this document that leads you to conclude 

that it has to do with a poten,tial purcha'se? 

The title of the document itself, VAG core samples 

And what does "VAG" refer to? 

VAG refers to Vermont Asbestos Group. 

I sho\.) you Exhibit, 48. Did you eve): see that before? 

I have no independent recollection of this. 

That" s July of '82, isn't it? 

That's correct. 

Did you receive a copy of this? 

Yes, I did. 

You don't remember this one? 

I don't recall it. 

The paragraph numbered one here in the body of ihis, 

this is a TSR again? 

That's correct. 

"Fiber content: This information is required immediate-, 

ly 'and should be conveyed orally as soon as it is available," and under or pointing to\~ards the. orally is 

BASF02411 

Case 2:11-cv-01754-BRM-AME Document 70-1 Filed 08/04/11 Page 175 of 193 PageID: 2113
:r--... 

~ 

" • • 

5 

PADUANO 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

A 

Q 

A 

Q 

A 

Q 

A 

Q 

A 

Q 

A 

116 

the hand~'lritten ~~ord "only" underlined', Do you know 

why it was that the fiber information Has to be transmit ted only orally? 

No, I do not. 

Hhose direction was' it that that information v;ould 

only be transmitted orally? 

I have no idea, 

Did you receive a copy of this? 

The document Hould indic~te such, 

MR, KENNEDY: vnth or t~ithout the marginalia, 

Did you ever receive the information, the study resuIts that are summarized on Exhibit it,S? Refer to it, 

if you like, 

I had no reason to believe I received any more than 

wha t is described here, 

Now, Exhibit 49 vIas loose material that ~~as in the 

pocket of a looseleaf binder, Do you have any familiarity tvith that material? 

Other than the fact that it appears to be a vlork sheet, 

I have no, knowledge of this document. 

Do you know the looseleaf binder that I'm referring 

to? 

No, not on the basis of information conveyed here, I 

don' t kn01~ ~~hat you're referring to', 

BASF02412 

Case 2:11-cv-01754-BRM-AME Document 70-1 Filed 08/04/11 Page 176 of 193 PageID: 2114
117 

Q Do you know that your counsel came over today with a 

2 black looseleaf binder- that was filled v_,ith documents, 

3 and this EXhibit 50 is a bundle of copies of all those 

4 documents? 

5 A Yes. 

6 Q Are you familiar ~'lith that series of documents? -

7 A I believe this ~Jas a record that Hr. Gale kept of some 

8 of the ra'-l data that he accumulate~. 

9 Q That is the entire contents of the looseleaf binde.:? 

10 A I'm not specifically familiar with this document. 

11 Q By that you're referring to tre entire bundle? 

12 A To the entire bundle. 

13 Q And do you know where that black looseleaf binder came 

14 from and the documents contained in it? 

16 A No, I do not. 

16 Q Had you ever seen those before you prepared for this 

17 deposition? 

18 A No, I had not. 

19 Q Hot·] is it that you know --

20 }1R. HALKET: A point of clarification. 

21 You're asking l'lhether he had seen the specific docu22 ments in the binder and not copies of them that might 

23 have been somet~here else, I take it? 

24 MR. PRENTISS: That's right. 

25 Q How is it that you know that that represents I<.'ork sheets 

PADUANO BASF02413 

Case 2:11-cv-01754-BRM-AME Document 70-1 Filed 08/04/11 Page 177 of 193 PageID: 2115
2 

3 

4 

5 A 

6 Q 

7 A 

8 

9 

10 

11 Q 

12 A 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 Q 

18 

19 

20 

21 A 

22 Q 

23 

24 

25 

PADUANO 

118 

kept by Mr. Gale during the course of his study? 

MR. HALKET: Obj ection. He didn't say he 

kne\~. He surmised ·it. 

.(OBJECTION BY ALL DEFENSE COUNSEL) 

That was only a presumption on my part. 

On ~'7hat basi.s do you make that presumption? 

Some of the earlier documents that ~~e discussed basically had the same kind of calcula.tions in them, and 

so far as I'm aware, Mr. Gale was the only person :.n 

our department who made such calculations. 

In conjunction with the study? 

Not necessarily in conj unction "Iith the study. He 

"Iould -- there Here a number, as is evident here from 

too TSR' s, there ,~ere a number of small independent 

requests. He would use'these kinds of calculations in 

responding to those as 'IJell. 

No~~, these work sheets, to your knot~ledge, do these 

represent just his i>lOrk sheets representing the results 

of his analyses as he obtained them? 

(OBJECTION BY ALL DEFENSE COUNSEL) 

I don r t know that. 

VJas there a report ever made of the'study that Mr, Gale 

and the others conducted? 

MR. KENNEDY: Vlhich study? 

MR; BALKET: I think the evidence shot~s 

BASF02414 

Case 2:11-cv-01754-BRM-AME Document 70-1 Filed 08/04/11 Page 178 of 193 PageID: 2116
"'-'. 

• : 

z " . • 

PADUANO 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 . 

16 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

A 

Q 

A 

Q 

A 

Q 

A 

Q 

Q 

A 

there vlere a number of studies. 

MR. PRENTISS; I~m talking about the study 

that Dr. Hemstock has testified ·to. that took pl?ce in 

1978 and 1979 in vlhich Nr. Gale. took part. 

Yes, there ~~ere, that probably appeared in memoranda. 

I think He've seen the results of them this afternoon. 

Hell, the memoranda that ~'le 've seen are brief memornnda 

without conclusions 01" summaries of the results of 

tests. Has there any final report that ~la s ~'lritten 

regarding that series of tests? 

(OBJECTION BY ALL DEFENSE COUNSEL) 

I don't recall that there was. 

You don't recall that there ~'Ias? 

I don't recall that there ~las. 

You mean there could have been ,. but you wouldn't remember? 

(OBJECTION BY ALL DEFENSE COUNSEL) 

I just don't recall it. 

Hov' long did this study take to perform? 

(OBJECTION BY ALL DEFENSE COUNSEL) 

MR. BALKET: Hhat study? 

Dr. Hemstock, do you have any question about what study 

I'm asking you about? 

I assume you're talking about the study in which Mr. 

Gale and I visited the Vermont mine. 

BASF02415 

Case 2:11-cv-01754-BRM-AME Document 70-1 Filed 08/04/11 Page 179 of 193 PageID: 2117
120 

Q That I s right. 

2 A That study probably occurred over several months, but 

,1"1: 

3 it ,'7as not a dedicated effort on, anybody I s part. It 

4 was a relatively small study that I'JUS almost like a 

5 TSR except it was, initiated ~lithin my department as 

6 opposed to being requested by others. 

7 Q And ,'7hy ~las it initiated within your department? 

8 A VIr. Gale and I I had never ,been to the Emtal mine 

9 or plant, nor had Mr. Gale. Mr. Gale had just joir,ed 

10 the organization, and "le were generally interested in 

11 learning more about the nature of the Emtal deposit', 

12 and I ,'las personally interested in seeing the proces13 sing operation. 

14 Q One of the purposes of the study was to dete:cIPine 

16 asbestos content in the'talc and the ore; is that 

16 correct? 

• • , , 

• 17 • 

11 No, it \»as not. 0 • 

. = 18 Q It ~)as not? ~ 0 

-; 

• 19 11 No, it was not. It ~)as a ,broader intent than that, 

• • • i 20 ,We ~lanted to see the general geology of the deposit, 

, 

3 21 • 

We wanted to find out what other mineral constituents 

• • 

~ 

• 22 there ,,!ere, If we found asbestos, that 11as -- so be it, 

23 We were really looking for other things like magnesite 

24 content, iron carbonate content, other extraneous 

, 25 ~, , minerals like chlorite, like sphene', So, it 1-/a s, a much 

PADUANO 

BASF02416 

Case 2:11-cv-01754-BRM-AME Document 70-1 Filed 08/04/11 Page 180 of 193 PageID: 2118
121 

broader study than you have indicated .. 

2 Q And ~'las asbestos one of the minerals that ~Jas looked 

3 for? 

4 A He looked for fibers. lve were interested in morphology. 

5 He were interested in knowing ~}hat our talc -- the 

6 basic morphology of the talc deposit., If 'I'm found 

7 fibers, 1>7hen you I re looking in an electron microscope, 

8 you see ~Ihat you see. 

9 Q My question was: Has asbestos one of the minerals 

10 that ~las looked for in the talc? 

11 A Yes, it T"as one of the minerais. 

12 Q HOt~ many other such ~tudies did your department ini13 tiate of its m·m the ~lay that you describe this re14 port -- this study as being initiated on its o\cn during 

15 the time that you have been associated ,.,lith the depart16 ment? 

17 A To my lmowledge, none. 

18 Q This is the only one? 

19 A That is correct. 

20 Q You do not knmv whether a report was prepared at the 

21 end of that study? 

22 A 11m not sure that a final report I~as ever issued.' 

23 Q And was an interim report ever issued? 

24 A In the form of a memoranda, some of \·,hich you have 

25 seen. 

PADUANO 

BASF0247 

Case 2:11-cv-01754-BRM-AME Document 70-1 Filed 08/04/11 Page 181 of 193 PageID: 2119
~ 

" • • o 

: 

PADUANO 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

Q 

A· 

Q 

A 

122 

Are there 'any interim or other reports· that ~)ere prepared regarding that study that )iou have nON identified during the course of this deposition? 

Not to mykno"lledge. 

To the. best of your recollection, just from this deposi.tion, do any of the reports that we've identifi'3d 

durin& the course of this deposition present study 

results; that is, the results .of analyses of the 

mineral constituents of talc from the Emtal mine O~Jtained during that study? 

(OBJECTION BY ALL DEFENSE COUNSEL) 

MR. KENNEDY: You're talking about the 

field trip? 

MR. PRENTISS: That's right. 

THE WITNE S S : \';ould you repeat the question) 

please? 

(PREVIOUS QUESTION READ BY REPORTER) 

MR. SLOANE: Do you understand the question? 

(PREVIOUS QUESTION READ BY REPORTER) 

MR. CURRAN: He's already so testified • 

MR. PRENTISS: No, he' hasn't.> 

MR. HALKET: He has testified he isn't. 

familiar with a great number of these documents. I' 

don't knOl') whether he ~lOuld knOy) --

Yes, I believe some of those data are reported in here. 

BASF02411 

Case 2:11-cv-01754-BRM-AME Document 70-1 Filed 08/04/11 Page 182 of 193 PageID: 2120
J 

z 

z 

5 

8 

PADUANO 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6· 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

26 

Q 

A 

Q 

A 

Q 

A 

Q 

A 

Q 

A 

Q 

123 

And where else -- where \'lOuld the rest. of those data 

be reported? 

NR. KEN~lEDY: ive I ve given you a 11 the 

documents ue had •. He made that representation to you. 

You've got all the documents. 

If they're not here, they don't exist. 

Did anybody tell you not to prepare \'1ritten reports 

regarding any part of the stuqy? 

No, sir. 

Did you tell anybody not to prepare written reports 

regarding any part of the study? 

No, I did not. 

(RECESS) 

Dr. Hemstock, I'd like you to look at a memorandum 

that was included.as part of Exhibit 50. DO you recall 

ever having seen that before? 

No, I do not. 

Dr. Hemstock, theres a reference made in this memorandum to the identification of chrysotile fibers in 

talc taken from the Baker mine in Southern Quebec. 

Do you recall that; learning of that identification? 

No, I do not. 

This memorandum states, and I'll read the paragraph 

.that's relevant, "Transmission electron microscopy 

investigations were undertaken at the Georgia Institute 

BASF02419 

Case 2:11-cv-01754-BRM-AME Document 70-1 Filed 08/04/11 Page 183 of 193 PageID: 2121
2 

3 

4 

6 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 A 

17 Q 

18 

19 

20 

21 A 

22 Q 

23 

24 

26 A 

PADUANO 

124 

of Technology from February 12 to February 16. One 

of the samples (79-J-l) investigated during this time 

was a talc production 'sample from the Baker mine in 

Southern Quebec. A request had been made (TSR:J-79-1) 

to examine the sample and determine the. mineralogy and 

possible contaminants present. A transmission electron 

microscope examination of this talc production sample 

showed the presence of chrysotile fibers. The implie,ations prevalent in this information prompted Hr. 

Howard Shafer to' send four more talc production samples 

to the Georgia Institute of Technology for transmission 

electron microscopy. investiga tions." Do you have any 

recollection of Hr. Shafer sending these materia Is out 

for examination in response to learning of chrysotile 

in talc from the Quebec mine? 

No, I do not. 

Gan you tell me ~Ihether or not this event that's stated 

in this memorandum had any effect or ~'las in any "Jay 

related to the decision of your department to undertake 

a study of talc in the Emtal mine in '78 and '79? 

I be lieve it "la s not. 

You believe that your study was undertaken completely 

independent of any information that's contained in 

. this memorandum? 

I believe so; 

BASF02420 

Case 2:11-cv-01754-BRM-AME Document 70-1 Filed 08/04/11 Page 184 of 193 PageID: 2122
2 ' 

~, 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

PADUANO 

125 

Q On what basis do you state that? 

A 

. , 

Q 

A 

Q 

A 

Q 

A 

On the basis that Hr. Gale was a relatively nel<) employee ~Iith the company, and I had not visited the mine 

and completely apart from any involvement in determinations of chrysotile, T,le ~Iere interested in learning 

more of the Emtal mining and processing operation. 

Now, this memorandum has a stated subject of talc, 

investiga tion, review and upda,te? 

Um-hmm. 

Is that talc investigation the study to \<)hich you have 

referred in your 'testimony as 'being conducted in 1978 

and 1979? 

That is Mr. Gale's designation. \,e did not designate 

it as a talc investigation. 

Do you knoN, can you state Nhether or not this memorandum was prepared in conjunction ~Jith the talc study 

that you have testified to? 

MR. KENNEDY: You're talking about the field 

trip? 

(OBJECTION BY ALL DEFENSE COUNSEL) 

MR. PRENTISS: I'm talking about the -talc 

study that Dr. Hemstock has te,stified took place during 

1978 and 1979. 

(OBJECTION BY ALL DEFENSE COUNSEL) 

I don't believe the t~10 events are related. 

BASF0242' 

Case 2:11-cv-01754-BRM-AME Document 70-1 Filed 08/04/11 Page 185 of 193 PageID: 2123
2 

4 

5 

6 

7 

B 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

PADUANO 

Q Which tT,tl0events? 

A 

Q 

A 

Q 

A 

Q 

A 

Q 

The investigation of these specific samples and the 

visit ch,at Mr. Gale and I made to Emtal. 

Hhcn did you make the visit with }ir. Gale to the Emtal 

facility? 

1.JR: KENNEDY: Didn't ".'e covel: this subject 

already? 

l.JR. PRENTISS: No. 

It ~'las in the '78-79 period. 

Over "hat period of time did this study take place? 

HR. KENNEDY: What 'study, the field trip? 

Can you be more specific on the study? You're still 

referring to the visit that Gale and I made and the 

subsequent analyses? That ~~as only one of many, many 

TSR type of activities that went on over this long 

time frame. I don 't think it should be highlighted' 

to the degree that you have indicated it. 

Now, there's a memorandum dated Harch 20, 1979 from 

Peter Gale to several people including yourself. The 

subject of that memorandum is talc -- is that talc 

study or talc investigation? 

Talc investigation. 

Do you ImoN what Hr. Gale is referring to as the talc' 

investigation? 

(OBJECTION BY ALL DEFENSE COUNSEL) 

BASF02422 

Case 2:11-cv-01754-BRM-AME Document 70-1 Filed 08/04/11 Page 186 of 193 PageID: 2124
127 

No, I don' to 

There's a memoraI)dum'dated March 23, 1979 from }"iJ:. 

Triglia to you and Hr. Yunko, and the subject of th<lt 

memorandum is talc investigation. Do you kno\·, ,·;hat 

}ll·. Triglia is referring to? 

No, I do not. 

Here's a memorandum to a Hr. Ga le from a I1r. OJ a Ill.. 

Have you eve'r seen that before? 

No, I liave not. 

Here's a memorandum dated March 1,1979 from Hr. Yunko 

to yOll, subject, Emtal talc. Do you have any recollection of receiving that? 

No, r don't. 

And so, }1r. Yunko told you in this memorandum that, 

"The issue of properly defining Emtal talc mineralogy 

insIsts on becoming more complicated all of a sudden." 

Do you have any idea ,·)hat he was referring to? 

(OBJEctION BY ALL DEFENSE COUNSEL) 

No, I do not. 

"I am deferring any action until "t~e have an opportunity 

to revie"l Peter's findings and recommendations. We'll 

have to decide on a strategy at 'that time." Do you 

have any knowledge or recollection of ,\.)hat strategy 

he's referring to? 

No, I do not. 

BASF02423 

Case 2:11-cv-01754-BRM-AME Document 70-1 Filed 08/04/11 Page 187 of 193 PageID: 2125
2 Q 

3 

4 A 

5 Q 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 A 

12 Q 

13 

\., .. 14 . 

15 

16 

17 A 

.18' Q 

19 A 

20 Q 

21 

22 

23 

24 

26 

PADUANO 

128 

(OBJECTION BY ALL DEFENSE COUNSEL) 

You don't have any recollection Hhat !?trategYNas 

decided on? 

No, I do not. 

No\~, I 'previously showed to YOLl the memorandum dated 

{:pril 11, 1979 to Hr. Triglia from 11:0::. Gale and d1ich 

you received a copy. of. The subject is talc investigation, revie\~ and update. Do you have any idea " .. hat 

talc investigation he's referring to? 

(OBJECTION BY ALL DEFENSE COUNSEL) 

No, I. do not. 

The memorandum dated April 4, 1979. It is to you among 

other people from l1r. Gale, subj ect: Talc investigation. Do you have any idea what. that talc investigatien is? 

(OBJECTION BY ALL DEFENSE COUNSEL) 

No, I don't. 

you have no recollection of a talc investigation? 

No, I do·not. 

These documents, Dr. Hemstock, that you have been questioned on at today' s deposition, ~lhat proportion did 

you obtain from the files of the Research and Development Department? 

MR. SLOANE: Personally? 

THE WITNESS: . I personally? 

BASF02424 

Case 2:11-cv-01754-BRM-AME Document 70-1 Filed 08/04/11 Page 188 of 193 PageID: 2126
129 

MR. PRENTISS: Yes. 

2 A I did not obtain.any personally. 

3 Q Did you direct that any person obtain any of th~ docu4 ments that have been identified in this deposition 

6 prior to this depos.ition at any time? 

6 A No, I did not. 

7 Q Do· you knOf,'1 whether any of these documents that have 

8 been identified in this deposition. 1'lere obtained from 

9 the files associated ~lith your department? 

10 A I believe that is true. 

11 Q HOI~ do you know that? 

12 A Because I ,~as specifically asked by our legal depart13 ment 'to have an opportunity to look at documents, and 

· ...... ~ 

14 my response.,- my secretary assisted the legal department 

15 " in generally locating t~here tho.se files were. 

16 Q \fuat did she look under? 

17 (OBJECTION BY ALL DEFENSE COUNSEL) 

.18 A I don I t kno,~. She has her m·m - - fit e tmder stands the 

19 filing. 

20 Q. Did you give her instructions on how to find these 

21 files?" 

22 A No, I did not. 

23 Q Did you discuss it "lith her at all? 

24 A No, I did not. 

25 Q None wha tsoever? 

PADUANO 

BASF0242f 

Case 2:11-cv-01754-BRM-AME Document 70-1 Filed 08/04/11 Page 189 of 193 PageID: 2127
• ~_~ __ ___ ._.~ __ ''=....J __ .~,: ___ • _ 

., ,130 

<, 

A No, I did not. 

2 Q You're familiar with l'fr. Gale. Are you aware that 

1'-""', 

3 representatives of. your company halJe thr"eatened Hr. 

4 Gale ~lith legal act.ion for participating in this law-· 

5 suit? 

6 (OBJECTION BY ALL DEFEN$E COUNSEL) 

1 A I'm not a~Jare of tha.t. 

B Q Do you kno;., if any pers·on from your company has --

9 MR. KENNEDY: I think a judge suggested it 

10 himself from the bench. 

11 Q Do you knO~7 Hhether any person from your company has 

12 threa tened Hr. Gale ~·,ith any kind of untm"ard r~sult 

13 if he s.hould proceed 1-1ith participating as an expert 

14 in this case? 

16 11R. KENNEDY: Obj ection to the <"lord 

16 "untoward," 

• e 

17 A I have no knov1ledge. 

18 Q You filed an affidavit in a civil action that tliaS 

19 filed in the United States District Court in the Dis20 trict of Vermont, did you not? 

21 A Yes, sir, that's true. 

22 Q Do you remember that? 

23 A Yes, I do. 

24 Q In paragraph five of that affidavit, could you read 

26 that? 

PADUANO 

BASF02426 

Case 2:11-cv-01754-BRM-AME Document 70-1 Filed 08/04/11 Page 190 of 193 PageID: 2128
.... . ••. J 

Q 

2 

r--...· 

3 

4 A 

5 Q 

6 

7. A 

8 Q 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

26 , 

PADUANO 

.132 

Now,. the x~ray diffraction, the output of an x-ray 

diffraction test is saine sort of a graph; is· that 

right? 

It's a tracing, yes. 

It's a tracing, a crooked line going across the graph 

page; is that right? 

That's correct. 

Was it your intention to state in this paragraph five 

of this affidavit that Mr. Gale in looking at the 

tracing of an x-ray diffraction, that he might perform 

tomorrm·~ or next week, ~l1ou1d refresh his recoi1ection 

as to a tracing that he saw back in 1978 or 19797 

MR. KENNEDY: I'm going to object, and I'm 

going to instruct the witness not to answer because I 

think your inquiry now is going to the .motion that' you 

have filed. 1 think the theories behind that are the 

theories of counsel.. It's got no purpose in this 

deposition '1hatsoever. So, I'll instruct him not to 

answer. If you want to get the judge on the phone, 

I'm sure he's sitting in his chambers right nOT,1. 

MR. PRENTISS: Let me state this for the 

record. As of this time, this deposition is the conelusion of the Motion for Contempt because the deposition ):tas taken place. All that'.s left is my application for· fees and expenses. I can state for the 

BASF0242S 

Case 2:11-cv-01754-BRM-AME Document 70-1 Filed 08/04/11 Page 191 of 193 PageID: 2129
o 

• • : 

, 

....... ". 

PADUANO 

2 

3 

4' 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

16 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

·133 

record that I am not pressing any Motion for Contempt 

to the extent there is' still one pending. 'fuat I'm 

stating, there has been filed by Engelhard Corporation, 

a defendant in a related action, in District Court in 

Vermont, an affidavit by Dr. Hem~tock, and I am perfectly entitled to cross-examine'him on something that 

he stated under qath ~)hich is going to be offered as 

a part of the defense to that case in Vermont. 

MR. KENNEDY; But I think if you ~lant to 

depose him on that,the action -- that you should do 

it in the Vermont action, not this action. 

MR. SLOANE; There's a Motion to Dismiss 

pending in that action. You're seeking discovery in 

an action in which a Hotion to Dismiss is pending •. 

The Hotion to Dismiss is made, The argument is that 

there's ro jurisdiction in Vermont. lfuat you're doing, 

l~hat you just candidly explained, is trying to take 

discovery in this action l·)hereyou can t t take it in 

Vermont. That's not proper. You kno,",) it. 

HR. PRENTISS; I can take it ;In Vermont. 

MR. KENNEDY: Then take it in Vermont.' 

HR. PRENTISS: This affidavit ~las also filed 

in this action. 

MR. SLOANE: I think the record no"!» is 

c lear on ~~hy you t re asking these inquiries. 

BASF02429 

Case 2:11-cv-01754-BRM-AME Document 70-1 Filed 08/04/11 Page 192 of 193 PageID: 2130
_ ••• _____ ··-···· •• _'_0 ••• - •• 

,,{.' to; 

'134 

1>1R. KENNEDY: Not, only that, the issue --

2 it ~Jas filed and it has already been resolved. Here 

3 .)e are. the Court I s order. 

4 Q' One last document. Exh~bit 51, Dr, Hemstock, have you 

6 

'6 A 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

16 ' 

16 

17 

18 

19' 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

PADUANO 

ever seen that before? 

I have not seen this document before. 

MR., PR~NTISS: No further questions,' 

MR. LEIBENSPERGER: No questions. 

MR. CURnAN: No questions. 

.l>1R • DOLAN: No questions. 

HR. SARLI: No questi0t:s. 

MR. SLOANE : No questions. 

MR. KENNEDY: No questions. 

(lVHEREUPON, THE DEPOSITION IN THE AFOREMENTIONED MATTER HAS ADJOURNED AT 5:30 P.M.) 

BASF0243C 

Case 2:11-cv-01754-BRM-AME Document 70-1 Filed 08/04/11 Page 193 of 193 PageID: 2131