12/16/10 Deposition Transcript- Picone

Capital Reporting CompanyPicone, Carlos Emilio 12-16-2010

(866) 448 - DEPOwww.CapitalReportingCompany.com © 2010

1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF MARYLAND GREENBELT

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

CHEVRON CORPORATION, :

Petitioner, :

vs. : Case No.

CARLOS EMILIO PICONE, : 8:10-cv-02990-AW

Respondent. :

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

Washington, D.C.

Thursday, December 16, 2010

Videotaped Deposition of:

CARLOS EMILIO PICONE

Called for oral examination by counsel for Petitioner,

pursuant to notice, at the law offices of Gibson,

Dunn & Crutcher, 1050 Connecticut Avenue, Northwest,

Washington, D.C., before Denise M. Brunet, RPR, of

Capital Reporting Company, a Notary Public in and for

the District of Columbia, beginning at 9:12 a.m., when

were present on behalf of the respective parties:



2

1 A P P E A R A N C E S

2

3 On behalf of the Petitioner:

4 PETER E. SELEY, ESQUIRE DANIEL E. SCHMITT, ESQUIRE

5 Gibson Dunn & Crutcher, LLP 1050 Connecticut Avenue, Northwest

6 Washington, D.C. 20036 (202) 955-8500

7 [email protected] [email protected]

8

9 On behalf of the Respondent:

10 ERIC WESTENBERGER, ESQUIRE JOHN J. ZEFUTIE, JR., ESQUIRE

11 Patton Boggs, LLP The Legal Center, One Riverfront Plaza

12 Newark, New Jersey 07102 (973) 848-5600

13 [email protected] [email protected]

14

15 ALSO PRESENT: Michael A. Kelsh Dylan Browne, Videographer

16

17

18

19

20

21

22



3

1 C O N T E N T S

2 EXAMINATION BY: PAGE

3 Counsel for Petitioner 7

4

5 DEPOSITION EXHIBITS: PAGE

6 1200 - Report of Carlos E. Picone 6

7 1201 - Subpoena 27

8 1202 - August invoice 50

9 1203 - 8-25-2010 e-mail 59

10 1204 - 8-26-2010 e-mail 63

11 1205 - 8-26-2010 e-mail 69

12 1206 - Subcontractor Agreement 72

13 1207 - 8-26-2010 e-mail 96

14 1208 - 8-26-2010 e-mail 99

15 1209 - 8-26-2010 e-mail 102

16 1210 - 8-27-2010 e-mail 107

17 1211 - September invoice 117

18 1212 - 9-5-2010 e-mail 125

19 1213 - 9-7-2010 e-mail 131

20 1214 - 9-7-2010 e-mail 134

21 1215 - 9-7-2010 e-mail 138

22 (Exhibits continued on the next page.)



4

1 DEPOSITION EXHIBITS: PAGE

2 1216 - 9-8-2010 e-mail 154

3 1217 - 9-8-2010 e-mail 168

4 1218 - 9-13-2010 e-mail 175

5 1219 - Core Health Indicators 250

6

7 (*Exhibits attached to the transcript.)

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22



5

1 P R O C E E D I N G S 13:56:32

2 (Deposition Exhibit Number 1200 was premarked 13:56:32

3 for identification.) 13:56:32

4 THE VIDEOGRAPHER: Good morning, Counsel.

5 This is tape number 1 of the videotaped deposition of 09:11:39

6 Dr. Carlos Emilio Picone taken in the matter of 09:11:45

7 Chevron Corporation versus Carlos Emilio Picone 09:11:49

8 pending before the United States District Court, 09:11:57

9 District of Maryland, Greenbelt, case number 09:12:01

10 8:10-CV-0299-AW. This deposition is being held at the 09:12:11

11 law office of Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher, LLP, located at 09:12:18

12 1050 Connecticut Avenue, Northwest, Washington, D.C., 09:12:25

13 on December 16th, 2010 at approximately 9:12 a.m. 09:12:31

14 My name is Dylan Browne. I am the legal 09:12:37

15 video specialist. The court reporter is Denise Brunet 09:12:41

16 in association with Capital Reporting Company located 09:12:44

17 at 1821 Jefferson Place, Northwest, Washington, D.C. 09:12:47

18 For the record, would counsel please 09:12:53

19 introduce themselves and whom they represent. 09:12:55

20 MR. SELEY: Peter Seley from Gibson, Dunn & 09:12:57

21 Crutcher representing Chevron Corporation. 09:13:02

22 MR. SCHMITT: Dan Schmitt, Gibson, Dunn & 09:13:03



6

1 Crutcher, Chevron Corporation. 09:13:08

2 MR. SELEY: Also at the deposition is Michael 09:13:09

3 Kelsh. 09:13:12

4 MR. WESTENBERGER: And Michael Kelsh is? 09:13:14

5 MR. SELEY: He's an expert for Chevron. 09:13:16

6 MR. WESTENBERGER: Is there any company he's 09:13:19

7 associated with? 09:13:22

8 MR. KELSH: Exponent. 09:13:24

9 MR. WESTENBERGER: Eric Westenberger, Patton 09:13:24

10 Boggs, on behalf of the witness and the Lago Agrio 09:13:30

11 plaintiffs. 09:13:32

12 MR. ZEFUTIE: John Zefutie, Patton Boggs, on 09:13:34

13 behalf of the witness and the Lago Agrio plaintiffs. 09:13:36

14 THE VIDEOGRAPHER: Very well. Will the court 09:13:36

15 reporter please swear or affirm in the witness. 09:13:39

16 WHEREUPON, 09:13:39

17 CARLOS EMILIO PICONE, 09:13:39

18 called as a witness, and after having been first duly 09:13:39

19 sworn, was examined and testified as follows: 09:13:39

20 EXAMINATION BY COUNSEL FOR CHEVRON CORPORATION 09:13:39

21 BY MR. SELEY: 09:13:39

22 Q Good morning, sir. 09:13:39



7

1 A Good morning. 09:13:51

2 Q Can you please state and spell your full name 09:13:51

3 for the record. 09:13:54

4 A Carlos Emilio Picone. Carlos, C-A-R-L-O-S. 09:13:55

5 Emilio, E-M-I-L-I-O. Picone, P-I-C-O-N-E. 09:14:00

6 MR. WESTENBERGER: One quick question, I'm 09:14:03

7 sorry, Peter, before we go on. Is there anyone else 09:14:05

8 who is attending this deposition by any other method. 09:14:08

9 MR. SELEY: No. There's Livestream and, as 09:14:12

10 far as I know, you know, we have hook-ups here. I 09:14:16

11 don't know if anyone else is hooked up to the 09:14:19

12 Livestream. 09:14:21

13 MR. WESTENBERGER: Okay. The Livestream 09:14:21

14 is being streamed -- 09:14:23

15 MR. SELEY: Of the transcript. 09:14:23

16 MR. WESTENBERGER: Is being streamed where, 09:14:24

17 just so I understand? 09:14:24

18 MR. SELEY: It's part of the LiveNote, so 09:14:24

19 it's -- 09:14:29

20 MR. WESTENBERGER: Okay. The reason I ask is 09:14:30

21 that I understood there was some streaming of these 09:14:31

22 depositions over the Internet in some fashion. That's 09:14:34



8

1 why I ask. So -- we have a right to know who is 09:14:38

2 attending the deposition, obviously, in case there are 09:14:41

3 people who should not be attending the deposition. 09:14:44

4 MR. SELEY: If there's any issue, I'll let 09:14:46

5 you know. You know, but I don't know of anyone else 09:14:49

6 who is attending. 09:14:51

7 MR. WESTENBERGER: Okay. Is it being 09:14:52

8 streamed over the Internet? 09:14:54

9 MR. SELEY: Through Livestream, which is -- 09:14:55

10 it's an Internet-based stream, yes. 09:14:56

11 MR. WESTENBERGER: Okay. Beyond the people 09:14:58

12 here, though, is my question. 09:15:00

13 MR. SELEY: Like I said, I don't know if 09:15:01

14 there's anyone else who's hooked into Livestream. 09:15:04

15 Okay? 09:15:08

16 MR. WESTENBERGER: Okay. 09:15:08

17 BY MR. SELEY: 09:15:08

18 Q Sorry about that, sir. Now, you just took an 09:15:08

19 oath. Do you understand what that oath means? 09:15:13

20 A I do. 09:15:15

21 Q And what does that oath mean to you? 09:15:15

22 A I'm here to speak the truth. 09:15:17



9

1 Q Is there any reason that you can think of 09:15:19

2 that you can't testify truthfully and accurately 09:15:23

3 today? 09:15:26

4 A No. 09:15:26

5 Q Are you currently taking any medications that 09:15:26

6 would impair your memory in any way? 09:15:29

7 A No, I may after today, but no. 09:15:32

8 Q Have you ever been deposed before, sir? 09:15:35

9 A No. 09:15:39

10 Q Have you ever testified at trial? 09:15:39

11 A No. 09:15:41

12 Q Have you ever testified in any other 09:15:41

13 proceedings, not at trial? 09:15:44

14 A No. 09:15:46

15 Q Have you ever been retained as an expert 09:15:46

16 witness in any proceeding? 09:15:51

17 A Providing consultative services, not on 09:15:52

18 trial, not deposed. My practice litigation, but I 09:15:59

19 haven't been deposed. I am asked to review records 09:16:05

20 and to provide my opinion and so forth, but never been 09:16:08

21 deposed. 09:16:10

22 Q Okay. Since you haven't been deposed before, 09:16:11



10

1 let me tell you a little bit about how this process 09:16:20

2 works. Like you said, you've taken an oath to tell 09:16:23

3 the truth. So I'm going be asking you questions and 09:16:26

4 you're going to be giving me answers. This young lady 09:16:29

5 here is taking down all of my questions and all of 09:16:33

6 your answers, and she's going to create a transcript 09:16:36

7 that's going to have what everybody said. 09:16:40

8 A I have read -- 09:16:41

9 Q Good. 09:16:41

10 A -- depositions before, so I know what that is 09:16:43

11 about. 09:16:46

12 Q Okay. In order to make sure that we get a 09:16:46

13 good transcript, there are a few basic ground rules 09:16:49

14 that we have to observe. First, you have to answer my 09:16:51

15 questions verbally. Nodding your head or shaking your 09:16:56

16 head doesn't come out on the transcript. 09:16:58

17 A Yes. 09:17:00

18 Q Second, we have to avoid speaking over each 09:17:00

19 other. In a normal conversation, you might interrupt 09:17:04

20 something I'm saying or I might interrupt something 09:17:08

21 you're saying. In a deposition, we need to be very 09:17:10

22 careful, you know, for me to get a complete question 09:17:12



11

1 out and then for you to get your complete answer out 09:17:15

2 without interruption. 09:17:18

3 A All right. 09:17:18

4 Q So I'm going to do my best not to interrupt 09:17:19

5 you and to make sure that you finish your answer, and 09:17:21

6 I would like you to do your best not to interrupt my 09:17:23

7 questions. Okay? 09:17:27

8 A Yes. 09:17:28

9 Q At some point during this deposition, your 09:17:29

10 attorney may object to a question that I've asked. 09:17:31

11 That's because your attorney thinks that the question 09:17:35

12 I've asked is not a good question. 09:17:38

13 A He promised he would not. 09:17:39

14 Q Oh, very good. Well, in that case, we don't 09:17:42

15 have to worry about this, but just on the off chance 09:17:43

16 that he does -- 09:17:46

17 A Exactly. 09:17:46

18 Q -- object, you still need to answer the 09:17:46

19 question that he objects to. The objection is just 09:17:48

20 for the record and for a decision by a court later on. 09:17:51

21 The only time that you would not answer a question is 09:17:55

22 if your attorney instructs you not to answer the 09:17:58



12

1 question and you agree to follow that instruction. Do 09:18:00

2 you understand that? 09:18:06

3 A I do. 09:18:06

4 Q If you think I've asked you a confusing 09:18:07

5 question or if you don't understand what I've asked 09:18:11

6 you, you need to speak up and tell me. Okay? 09:18:13

7 A Yes. 09:18:15

8 Q If you do answer a question that I've asked, 09:18:16

9 I'm going assume that you understood what I was 09:18:19

10 asking. 09:18:22

11 A Absolutely. 09:18:22

12 Q If you need a break at any time during the 09:18:22

13 deposition, please let me know. We can't break in the 09:18:26

14 middle of a question -- 09:18:29

15 A Sure. 09:18:31

16 Q -- but if you need a break, we'll try to 09:18:31

17 accommodate that as quickly as possible. Now, do you 09:18:34

18 have any questions about this process before we 09:18:37

19 continue? 09:18:38

20 A I do not. 09:18:38

21 Q So I take it by what you said before that 09:18:39

22 you've never been accepted by a court as an expert 09:18:48



13

1 qualified in any particular area; is that right? 09:18:51

2 A Correct. 09:18:53

3 Q Have you ever been sued? 09:18:54

4 A I have. 09:19:00

5 Q How many times? 09:19:01

6 A Two times. One still -- I haven't been 09:19:03

7 deposed about the case. It's a medical malpractice 09:19:10

8 case. The case has been through different plaintiffs 09:19:14

9 and -- plaintiff's attorneys, rather. And, in fact 09:19:16

10 we're going on the fourth or fifth iteration, and the 09:19:19

11 plaintiff's attorneys seem to excuse themselves, and 09:19:24

12 we're waiting for the day when I will be deposed. 09:19:28

13 The other one is a recent case and I have 09:19:33

14 yet to find out details about it. 09:19:36

15 Q So the first case is a medical malpractice 09:19:37

16 case? 09:19:41

17 A Correct. 09:19:41

18 Q You don't know what the second case is about? 09:19:41

19 A No, I do know. I know the specifics about 09:19:43

20 the case. But I just -- essentially, the case was 09:19:45

21 recently filed, so I don't know exactly where it will 09:19:48

22 end up. 09:19:52



14

1 Q Is that second case also a medical 09:19:52

2 malpractice case? 09:19:55

3 A It's a medical malpractice case. Alleged 09:19:55

4 malpractice -- correct that. 09:20:03

5 Q I understand. Can you provide me with a 09:20:03

6 brief description of the claim in the first case? 09:20:12

7 A Sure. A patient, 83-year-old gentleman who 09:20:15

8 had metastatic renal carcinoma -- metastatic kidney 09:20:21

9 cancer -- and who developed pneumonia, multi-organ 09:20:24

10 failure, sepsis, and ended up in the ICU -- I do 09:20:28

11 critical care, and I provided medical care in the ICU. 09:20:30

12 I informed the prognosis was bad, and -- multi-organ 09:20:36

13 failure in that situation usually is fatal. I, in 09:20:40

14 fact, shared with the family that I did not feel 09:20:45

15 comfortable about continuation of advanced life 09:20:48

16 support measures. And I obtained another critical 09:20:51

17 care physician to take over for me three days before 09:20:55

18 the gentleman passed away. 09:20:59

19 And the gentleman passed away three days 09:21:01

20 later, and I was still sued by the family -- the 09:21:03

21 daughter, in fact, who claims that I somehow committed 09:21:06

22 homicide by providing medications to the patient, 09:21:09



15

1 sedatives and so forth. 09:21:14

2 Q Could you brief -- I'm sorry. Did you finish 09:21:14

3 your answer? 09:21:17

4 A I did. 09:21:17

5 Q Can you briefly describe for me the second 09:21:18

6 case? 09:21:21

7 A Second case is a case of a patient who I 09:21:21

8 treated for asthma, somebody who had bad asthma who 09:21:25

9 required some special biologic treatment and who had 09:21:29

10 done well in that regard, but who was anticoagulated, 09:21:34

11 had an artificial valve and was anticoagulated for 09:21:39

12 that artificial valve, and one day developed an 09:21:41

13 infection, an upper respiratory tract infection, was 09:21:46

14 treated for that infection -- so developed an upper 09:21:52

15 respiratory tract infection. Since that can cause an 09:21:53

16 asthma exacerbation, she was treated for that asthma 09:21:56

17 exacerbation with an antibiotic. She was treated for 09:22:02

18 that with an antibiotic, and within 24 hours she had 09:22:05

19 intracranial bleed and essentially died as a result of 09:22:12

20 an intracranial hemorrhage. 09:22:16

21 Plaintiff -- the husband claims that the 09:22:19

22 reason the bleeding -- intracranial bleeding took 09:22:22



16

1 place is because of the antibiotic, Which I feel is, 09:22:25

2 you know, impossible in 24 hours to cause that. But 09:22:29

3 that's open to debate. 09:22:33

4 Q Now, neither of these cases has been resolved 09:22:36

5 yet, right? 09:22:37

6 A No. 09:22:38

7 Q Has your medical malpractice insurer accepted 09:22:38

8 the defense of these cases? 09:22:53

9 A Yes. 09:22:54

10 Q Are you represented by counsel here today? 09:22:55

11 A Explain to me by counsel -- explain to me 09:23:01

12 your question. 09:23:09

13 Q Do you have a lawyer here on your behalf 09:23:09

14 today? 09:23:13

15 A I do. 09:23:13

16 Q Who is that? 09:23:13

17 A Eric Westenberger. 09:23:15

18 Q Do you have any retention agreement with 09:23:18

19 counsel? 09:23:22

20 A I do not. 09:23:24

21 Q Are you paying your counsel for work on your 09:23:25

22 behalf? 09:23:28



17

1 A I do not -- I am not. 09:23:28

2 Q Does your counsel also represent the 09:23:29

3 Ecuadorian plaintiffs? 09:23:35

4 A I don't believe so. 09:23:36

5 Q Did anyone discuss that with you? 09:23:38

6 A My understanding is that there is a different 09:23:43

7 firm that is -- that represents the plaintiff, the 09:23:47

8 Ecuadorian plaintiffs, but not Patton Boggs. 09:23:52

9 Q So you didn't sign any type of waiver of a 09:23:56

10 conflict between representation of you and 09:24:02

11 representation of the Ecuadorian plaintiffs; is that 09:24:05

12 right? 09:24:09

13 A Correct. 09:24:09

14 MR. WESTENBERGER: Objection to form. 09:24:09

15 MR. SELEY: 09:24:09

16 Q Have you authorized your counsel to 09:24:11

17 communicate freely with the Ecuadorian plaintiffs' 09:24:14

18 counsel? 09:24:18


20 THE WITNESS: Have I -- there was no specific 09:24:18

21 authorization. Did I sign any specific document in 09:24:22

22 that regard? I assumed, since this was -- when I was 09:24:24



18

1 contacted to generate my report, the request was 09:24:28

2 essentially a document for the Ecuadorian court. So I 09:24:33

3 certainly assumed that this would be shared with the 09:24:37

4 plaintiffs in Ecuador because my -- all along, I was 09:24:39

5 working under the assumptions that this would be a 09:24:44

6 document for the court in Ecuador. 09:24:46

7 BY MR. SELEY: 09:24:48

8 Q All right. I have marked as Exhibit 1200 a 09:24:52

9 document titled, "Estimated cost of delivering health 09:25:07

10 care to the affected population of the Concession area 09:25:10

11 of Ecuador." 09:25:14

12 Doctor, do you recognize this document? 09:25:17

13 A I do. 09:25:18

14 Q And what is this document? 09:25:18

15 A It's a document that I submitted in 09:25:21

16 mid-September, I believe. And I worked on this at the 09:25:24

17 end of August and beginning of September. I have not 09:25:27

18 seen it in quite some time, but I do recognize it. 09:25:31

19 Q When you say this is a document that you 09:25:34

20 submitted, who did you submit this document to? 09:25:37

21 A I submitted this via the Weinberg group to 09:25:39

22 the -- I was told that this would make it to the 09:25:43



19

1 Concession area in Lago Agrio in Ecuador. I did not 09:25:46

2 submit it directly. 09:25:50

3 Q All right. I'd like you to turn to the page 09:25:52

4 that is numbered at the bottom 004712. Can you do 09:25:59

5 that, please? 09:26:07

6 A Yeah. 09:26:07

7 Q That page is the beginning of your CV; is 09:26:13

8 that right? 09:26:18

9 A Correct. 09:26:18

10 Q Does this CV accurately describe your 09:26:18

11 educational background? 09:26:23

12 A It does. 09:26:23

13 Q Does it accurately describe your work 09:26:24

14 history? 09:26:26

15 A It does. 09:26:26

16 Q Now, you understand that your testimony here 09:26:27

17 today is related to your work as an expert for the 09:26:37

18 Ecuadorian plaintiffs; is that right? 09:26:41

19 A Correct. 09:26:43

20 MR. WESTENBERGER: Object to the form. 09:26:44

21 BY MR. SELEY: 09:26:44

22 Q Is it correct to say that your role in the 09:26:44



20

1 Ecuador litigation against Chevron was to determine 09:26:52

2 the economic cost of delivering health care to the 09:26:55

3 population of the former Concession area in Ecuador? 09:26:58

4 A Correct. That was the objective, the goal. 09:27:01

5 Q Looking at your CV, do you have any advanced 09:27:06

6 degrees in the field of health care economics? 09:27:21

7 A I do not. 09:27:23

8 Q Any advanced degrees in the field of health 09:27:24

9 care econometric analysis? 09:27:30

10 A I do not. 09:27:31

11 Q Any educational background in financing 09:27:32

12 health care infrastructure? 09:27:37

13 A No. 09:27:37

14 Q Any educational background in public health 09:27:38

15 policy? 09:27:42

16 A No. 09:27:42

17 Q Are you a health care economist? 09:27:43

18 A I'm not. My brother happens to be one, but 09:27:47

19 not me. 09:27:50

20 Q I noticed that. Have you ever had a job 09:27:50

21 where you worked as a health care economist? 09:27:53

22 A No. 09:27:56



21

1 Q You're a pulmonologist? 09:27:57

2 A I do pulmonary and critical care. 09:28:00

3 Q You have an active medical practice? 09:28:03

4 A I do. 09:28:04

5 Q In Maryland? 09:28:05

6 A In Chevy Chase, yes. 09:28:07

7 Q As part of your medical practice, do you 09:28:11

8 typically develop financial analyses of health care 09:28:14

9 infrastructure? 09:28:17

10 A No. 09:28:17

11 Q You've engaged in volunteer work overseas? 09:28:19

12 A I do. 09:28:28

13 Q Can you describe that volunteer work to me, 09:28:29

14 please? 09:28:31

15 A Yes. I try to dedicate -- we have an 09:28:31

16 organization that is called Pan American Medical 09:28:35

17 Society, and we participate in missions overseas. We 09:28:39

18 try to do this as pro bono work and we try to do some 09:28:42

19 fundraising annually and go overseas to work mostly in 09:28:45

20 Central America and South America. 09:28:49

21 Q And your work in Central America and South 09:28:50

22 America, is that primarily work in clinics in Central 09:28:54



22

1 America and South America? 09:28:58

2 A Yes. 09:28:58

3 Q As part of that volunteer work, have you been 09:28:59

4 called upon to develop any financial analyses of 09:29:03

5 health care infrastructure? 09:29:05

6 A No. 09:29:07

7 Q You don't have an economics degree, right? 09:29:09

8 A I do not. 09:29:16

9 Q Do you have any advanced degrees in 09:29:17

10 epidemiology? 09:29:20

11 A I do not. 09:29:20

12 Q Have you ever worked as an epidemiologist? 09:29:21

13 A No. 09:29:26

14 Q Do you have any educational background in 09:29:32

15 determining whether a particular population is 09:29:36

16 experiencing an increased incidence of disease? 09:29:40

17 A No. Just as part of my regular medical 09:29:42

18 training and medical education, you do take 09:29:46

19 epidemiologic courses and so forth, preventive 09:29:49

20 medicine, epidemiology, and so you develop some basic 09:29:53

21 knowledge of it, but not -- have I applied econometric 09:29:57

22 information, econometric formulas to come up -- no. 09:30:02



23

1 Q And you've never conducted any epidemiologic 09:30:04

2 studies, right? 09:30:09

3 A No. 09:30:09

4 Q You're not a health care statistician? 09:30:11

5 A I am not. 09:30:13

6 Q And you've never worked as a health care 09:30:13

7 statistician? 09:30:17

8 A I have not. 09:30:17

9 Q Can you describe for me your employment 09:30:18

10 history? 09:30:24

11 A Yes. I -- well, my early employment, I 09:30:24

12 guess, I was -- I worked as a teaching assistant at 09:30:32

13 the university in biochemistry, in human physiology, 09:30:36

14 in pharmacology. And after that, I just -- I was -- 09:30:40

15 my initial work was as an intern at the Medical 09:30:49

16 College of Virginia, then as a resident. Following 09:30:53

17 that, I stayed as the chief resident. Then I came to 09:30:56

18 NIH to do my fellowship in critical care. 09:31:00

19 I returned to Richmond to do emergency 09:31:03

20 medicine and critical care, and I worked there on 09:31:06

21 faculty for a couple of years before I joined private 09:31:11

22 practice in Chevy Chase. 09:31:15



24

1 Q Have you ever worked in the petroleum 09:31:16

2 industry? 09:31:22

3 A I have not. 09:31:22

4 Q You've never done any oil field-related work? 09:31:23

5 A No. 09:31:25

6 MR. WESTENBERGER: Objection to the form. 09:31:26

7 BY MR. SELEY: 09:31:27

8 Q Now, prior your work on this case, had you 09:31:27

9 ever been hired to determine the cost to deliver 09:31:33

10 health care to a population based on allegations of 09:31:36

11 exposure to a chemical substance? 09:31:41

12 A No. 09:31:43

13 Q Had you ever been hired to determine the 09:31:43

14 health care needs of a population as a result of their 09:31:50

15 exposure or alleged exposure to a chemical -- 09:31:53

16 A No. 09:31:53

17 Q -- substance? 09:31:56

18 MR. WESTENBERGER: Objection to form. Let 09:31:57

19 him finish his questions. 09:32:00

20 MR. SELEY: I was going to remind him. Thank 09:32:01

21 you. 09:32:05

22 BY MR. SELEY: 09:32:05



25

1 Q Have you ever been hired to determine the 09:32:08

2 impact of exposure to crude oil on health? 09:32:11

3 A No. 09:32:14


5 BY MR. SELEY: 09:32:16

6 Q Have you ever written any articles or 09:32:16

7 conducted any academic research into the impact of 09:32:21

8 exposure to crude oil on health? 09:32:24


10 THE WITNESS: No. 09:32:27

11 BY MR. SELEY: 09:32:27

12 Q Have you ever written any articles or done 09:32:27

13 any academic research into the health effects of crude 09:32:33

14 oil versus refined petroleum? 09:32:37

15 A No. 09:32:39

16 Q Have you ever conducted any studies of 09:32:40

17 petroleum migration from oil exploration and 09:32:45

18 production areas? 09:32:50

19 A No. 09:32:50

20 Q Have you ever conducted studies to determine 09:32:52

21 the pattern or the extent of exposure to petroleum in 09:32:55

22 a population? 09:33:00



26

1 A No. 09:33:00

2 Q Now, specific to this case, did you conduct 09:33:01

3 any studies to determine the migration of petroleum 09:33:09

4 from the oil exploration and production areas in the 09:33:14

5 former Concession area? 09:33:19

6 A No. 09:33:20


8 BY MR. SELEY: 09:33:25

9 Q Did you do any studies to determine in this 09:33:25

10 case the population in the former Concession area that 09:33:27

11 was actually exposed to any petroleum releases? 09:33:32

12 A No. 09:33:36

13 Q Now, are you aware of any studies that assess 09:33:37

14 the population in the former Concession area that was 09:33:45

15 actually exposed to any petroleum releases? 09:33:53

16 A No. 09:33:55

17 (Deposition Exhibit Number 1201 was marked 13:56:32


19 BY MR. SELEY: 09:34:14

20 Q Sir I have handed to you a document marked as 09:34:14

21 Exhibit 1201. Do you recognize this document, sir? 09:34:42

22 A I do not. But I do recognize my name. 09:34:46



27

1 Q This document is a subpoena to testify at 09:34:50

2 deposition. Do you know whether you were ever served 09:34:55

3 with this document? 09:35:00

4 A I imagine so. I was informed, but I have 09:35:00

5 never seen the document myself. 09:35:06

6 Q Are you here today to testify in compliance 09:35:07

7 with this subpoena? 09:35:11

8 A Correct. 09:35:12

9 Q Did you discuss the subpoena with anyone? 09:35:12

10 A As I recall -- I believe -- I don't recall if 09:35:16

11 Mr. Westenberger or Mr. Small, but somebody from 09:35:24

12 Patton Boggs informed me that I was being served a 09:35:28

13 subpoena and that I was expected to appear for 09:35:30

14 deposition. 09:35:33

15 Q Okay. Now, can you turn to the fourth page 09:35:33

16 of Exhibit 1201, the page that has, at the top, 09:35:43

17 attachment A. Do you see that, sir? 09:35:48

18 A I do. 09:35:50

19 Q Have you ever seen attachment A before? 09:35:50

20 A I have not. 09:35:55

21 Q In attachment A, could you please turn to 09:35:56

22 page 13, please. And this is still in Exhibit 1201. 09:36:05



28

1 There is a section on page 13 that's titled the 09:36:14

2 documents to be produced. Have you ever seen that 09:36:17

3 section of attachment A before, sir? 09:36:21

4 A I have not. 09:36:24

5 Q Have you ever seen a list identifying the 09:36:25

6 documents that are supposed to be produced in response 09:36:32

7 to the subpoena? 09:36:35

8 A No, I haven't seen a list, but I was told any 09:36:36

9 and all documents should be produced, which is 09:36:41

10 precisely what I did. 09:36:43

11 Q Now, what did you do to search for responsive 09:36:44

12 documents in this case? 09:36:53

13 A I went back to my Outlook and essentially -- 09:36:53

14 all the documents that I had downloaded into my folder 09:37:00

15 under the title Ecuador, I copied all of those 09:37:04

16 documents. And I also copied all the incoming and 09:37:08

17 outgoing mail -- you know, sent mail -- related to 09:37:14

18 this particular subject. 09:37:15

19 Q Did you keep any notes that were not on your 09:37:17

20 computer? 09:37:21

21 A No. 09:37:21

22 Q Did you produce any notes that you kept on 09:37:22



29

1 your computer? 09:37:27

2 A There was no additional -- there were no 09:37:28

3 additional documents to produce. 09:37:32

4 Q Did you keep phone records related to this 09:37:33

5 case? 09:37:37

6 A No. 09:37:37

7 Q Did you keep any date books or calendars 09:37:37

8 related to this case? 09:37:42

9 A No, just -- in my invoice submitted, which I 09:37:43

10 believe you have a copy, I -- whenever -- when I would 09:37:48

11 finish a day working on the project, I would just put 09:37:52

12 in the hours that I invested in the project. That was 09:37:55

13 the only bookkeeping. 09:37:59

14 Q You said you searched for e-mails. Did you 09:38:00

15 produce all of the e-mails you have related to this 09:38:06

16 case? 09:38:09

17 A I did. 09:38:09

18 Q Approximately how many e-mails do you believe 09:38:10

19 you produced? 09:38:14

20 A They were in different computers. Maybe 30. 09:38:14

21 20, 30, thereabouts. 09:38:23

22 Q You said they were in different computers. 09:38:25



30

1 Which different computers were your e-mails in? 09:38:29

2 A One was -- yeah. My home computer and my 09:38:32

3 work computer. Some of the e-mails may have been 09:38:36

4 deleted, but the e-mails kept a string. So, in other 09:38:41

5 words, one e-mail may contain multiple. That's why 09:38:46

6 the number is hard to know exactly. 09:38:50

7 Q Did anyone ask you to narrow your collection 09:38:52

8 of documents in any way? 09:39:13

9 A No. 09:39:14

10 Q Did anyone ask you not to produce certain 09:39:14

11 documents? 09:39:18

12 A No, on the other hand; they said, produce 09:39:18

13 them all. 09:39:22

14 Q To your knowledge, have all the documents 09:39:22

15 that you produced to counsel been produced to Chevron? 09:39:30

16 A I believe so. 09:39:33

17 Q Are you aware that some of the documents that 09:39:34

18 were originally produced to Chevron were produced in a 09:39:41

19 redacted form? 09:39:43

20 A Explain to me. 09:39:44

21 Q Where parts of the documents were blacked 09:39:48

22 out. 09:39:52



31

1 A I am not aware of that. I certainly did not 09:39:52

2 invest time in doing that. 09:39:58

3 Q Are you aware that there were some documents 09:39:59

4 that were produced late last night to Chevron? 09:40:05

5 A Yes, because I had forgotten that -- I had a 09:40:08

6 gmail account, and I had forgotten that there were a 09:40:12

7 couple of e-mails that -- where I had corresponded 09:40:15

8 with people I know in Ecuador, and I had forgotten 09:40:17

9 that I had used that account. 09:40:20

10 And essentially -- trying to remain true to 09:40:23

11 the idea we have nothing to hide, there are those 09:40:25

12 documents. 09:40:28

13 Q So as you sit here today, are you aware of 09:40:34

14 any documents that would be responsive to the subpoena 09:40:38

15 that have not yet been produced? 09:40:43

16 A No. 09:40:44

17 Q You said you downloaded certain documents to 09:40:44

18 an Ecuador folder on your computer? 09:40:50

19 A Yes. 09:40:52

20 Q Where did you download those documents from? 09:40:53

21 A From -- mostly from the Internet, from public 09:40:56

22 sources. The World Health Organization, the World 09:41:01



32

1 Bank database, the INEC, which is the Ecuadorian 09:41:04

2 Census Bureau, and Pan American Health Organization. 09:41:10

3 Q Did you have access to a Weinberg Group 09:41:15

4 website? 09:41:24

5 A No. I have only access to the intranet, but 09:41:25

6 there were no documents that I utilized that were 09:41:31

7 beyond -- that were password protected. 09:41:34

8 Q Were you provided any documents through the 09:41:36

9 Weinberg Group's website? 09:41:44

10 A No, not through the Weinberg Group website. 09:41:45

11 Two assistants in the Weinberg Group collaborated with 09:41:50

12 me and provided some documents. Many of those 09:41:54

13 documents I found independently, and so there may be 09:41:55

14 some duplication. In other words, you may have 09:41:55

15 seen -- if you looked at all the e-mails, you may have 09:42:01

16 seen some attachments that came from the Weinberg 09:42:03

17 Group that I already had in my collection. 09:42:06

18 Q Were you given access to documents on any 09:42:13

19 other -- strike that. I'm going to try again. 09:42:19

20 A As they say, we have all day. 09:42:29

21 Q Were you given access to any other private 09:42:32

22 websites where you were provided documents? 09:42:37



33


2 THE WITNESS: No. The Weinberg Group 09:42:43

3 provided me with a printed copy of something called 09:42:45

4 Cabrera report. That's the only thing that was 09:42:51

5 provided that I had no access otherwise. 09:42:54

6 BY MR. SELEY: 09:42:56

7 Q When you say they provided you a printed copy 09:43:01

8 of the Cabrera report, do you mean that someone from 09:43:04

9 the Weinberg Group physically handed you a paper copy 09:43:08

10 of the -- 09:43:12

11 A Yes. 09:43:12

12 Q -- of the Cabrera report? 09:43:13

13 A Of the Cabrera report, yes. I believe -- 09:43:13

14 because there were many attachments or many 09:43:19

15 appendices, and I believe mostly it was appendix P 09:43:21

16 or -- O or P, one of those letters. They also send me 09:43:25

17 some of those documents in digital format, in a PDF 09:43:30

18 document. But since it was quite lengthy, 50 or 60 09:43:33

19 pages, I relied mostly on the copy that I was 09:43:37

20 provided. 09:43:40

21 Q Did you provide that paper copy to your 09:43:40

22 counsel to be produced? 09:43:44



34

1 A No. I believe that I had a digital copy, a 09:43:46

2 PDF format-type copy, and that was produced. 09:43:49

3 Q Did you make any notes or highlight the paper 09:43:52

4 copy of the Cabrera report that you were given? 09:43:58

5 A No. I used -- I did read through it, and I 09:44:00

6 read mostly -- you know, a few pages in the center of 09:44:04

7 the report that were pertinent to my task. But did I 09:44:07

8 make any notes or any additional notations and the 09:44:13

9 like? No. 09:44:16

10 Q Have you thrown away or destroyed any 09:44:16

11 documents that are related to this case? 09:44:24

12 A Not that I recall. 09:44:26

13 Q Have you deleted any e-mail related to this 09:44:28

14 case that you weren't able to recover in a different 09:44:40

15 e-mail string? 09:44:45

16 A Not knowingly. 09:44:46

17 Q Do you have a typical practice of document 09:44:48

18 deletion after a period of time? 09:45:00

19 A Yes. If I don't, my wife takes care of that. 09:45:01

20 Q What is the typical practice? 09:45:06

21 A We usually don't delete the sent messages, so 09:45:08

22 usually I can recover the string, looking in the sent 09:45:12



35

1 messages. So we always keep the sent messages. In 09:45:16

2 the inbox, we do delete. 09:45:19

3 Q Did you engage in that practice with regard 09:45:21

4 to the e-mails in this case? 09:45:28

5 A Not in any different format. In other words, 09:45:29

6 I didn't do anything different pertaining this 09:45:35

7 particular task as I would any other e-mail. 09:45:38

8 Q So if you received an e-mail in your inbox 09:45:40

9 and you did not forward it to anyone or send it to 09:45:54

10 anyone, that e-mail could have gotten deleted in your 09:45:57

11 normal e-mail deletion process? 09:46:01

12 A Potentially. 09:46:03


14 BY MR. SELEY: 09:46:05

15 Q Do you have any way of knowing whether that 09:46:07

16 happened? 09:46:08

17 A No. 09:46:09

18 Q Can you describe for me what you did to 09:46:09

19 prepare for this deposition? 09:46:21

20 A I was called maybe two months ago. I was 09:46:22

21 told that I was going to be deposed. I said, that's 09:46:28

22 wonderful; I have no -- there's no better way to spend 09:46:30



36

1 a day. And it's always a learning experience. 09:46:33

2 And I met with counsel yesterday to talk 09:46:37

3 about the case. And that was the extent of the 09:46:42

4 preparation. 09:46:46

5 Q How long -- 09:46:46

6 A I provided documents when they were 09:46:48

7 requested, and that was that. I never went back to 09:46:51

8 look at documents or read documents or -- 09:46:53

9 Q How long did you meet with counsel yesterday? 09:46:55

10 A About five hours, six hours. 09:47:01

11 Q And during that meeting, you did not look at 09:47:04

12 any documents? 09:47:11

13 A I did not. 09:47:11

14 Q Other than counsel, was there anyone else 09:47:12

15 present at that meeting? 09:47:23

16 A No one else. 09:47:25

17 Q Have you met with anyone else to prepare for 09:47:26

18 this deposition? 09:47:29

19 A I have not. 09:47:29

20 Q Have you talked with anyone else other than 09:47:30

21 your counsel to prepare for this deposition? 09:47:34

22 A No. 09:47:35



37

1 Q You didn't meet with anyone at the Weinberg 09:47:35

2 Group? 09:47:42

3 A No. 09:47:42

4 Q Have you discussed this deposition with 09:47:43

5 anyone other than your counsel? 09:47:47

6 A No, I have not. With my wife. I did tell my 09:47:47

7 wife that I was being deposed. 09:47:52

8 Q Are you aware that there are other discovery 09:47:54

9 proceedings besides this one regarding the Ecuadorian 09:48:01

10 case? 09:48:07

11 A I'm not aware of any. 09:48:07

12 Q Is there anything that you wanted to do in 09:48:09

13 preparation for this deposition that you did not have 09:48:14

14 an opportunity to do? 09:48:17

15 A I don't believe so. This is I guess about 09:48:17

16 answering questions honestly and in a candid fashion. 09:48:22

17 So there was nothing to prepare. 09:48:26

18 Q Did anyone tell you what to say in your 09:48:28

19 deposition today? 09:48:31


21 BY MR. SELEY: 09:48:32

22 Q Did anyone tell you how to testify with 09:48:33



38

1 regard to any particular subject? 09:48:35

2 MR. WESTENBERGER: Objection to form? 09:48:36


4 BY MR. SELEY: 09:48:37

5 Q Did anyone suggest to you particular ways to 09:48:38

6 answer certain questions? 09:48:41

7 A No. 09:48:42

8 Q Did anyone suggest to you that some ways of 09:48:47

9 answering questions are better than other ways of 09:48:50

10 answering questions? 09:48:52

11 MR. WESTENBERGER: Objection. 09:48:53


13 BY MR. SELEY: 09:48:53

14 Q Did anyone tell you that there are not things 09:48:55

15 that you could not say in your deposition? 09:48:57


17 THE WITNESS: Absolutely not. 09:48:59

18 BY MR. SELEY: 09:49:00

19 Q When did you first hear about the Ecuadorian 09:49:01

20 litigation against Chevron? 09:49:05


22 THE WITNESS: When the Weinberg Group 09:49:07



39

1 contacted me about the case. 09:49:10

2 BY MR. SELEY: 09:49:11

3 Q When was that? 09:49:11

4 A That was, I believe, in August of 2010. 09:49:17

5 Q Who from the Weinberg Group contacted you? 09:49:26

6 A Mr. Ted Dunkelberger. 09:49:29

7 Q And how did Mr. Dunkelberger contact you? 09:49:32

8 A Via telephone. 09:49:40

9 Q About how long was that phone call? 09:49:44

10 A Probably five or ten minutes. I was on 09:49:51

11 vacation, in fact, and he contacted me. I happened to 09:49:58

12 be on the beach, and so it wasn't a long phone call. 09:50:02

13 He just explained to me what -- a couple of things 09:50:05

14 about the case. 09:50:09

15 Q What did he tell you about the case during 09:50:10

16 that phone call? 09:50:12

17 A He just mentioned that -- if I knew about a 09:50:13

18 litigation -- a Chevron litigation in the Oriente 09:50:18

19 region of Ecuador, and would I be willing to review 09:50:22

20 information on that and possibly prepare an expert 09:50:26

21 report on this. 09:50:29

22 And I said when I finish my vacation I would 09:50:31



40

1 be glad to review documents and the like and see if 09:50:36

2 there was something that I could potentially do. 09:50:40

3 Q This was in August of 2010? 09:50:42

4 A Correct. I think mid-August. 09:50:47

5 Q Did you tell him at that time that you had 09:50:53

6 not heard anything about the Ecuadorian litigation 09:51:00

7 against Chevron? 09:51:03

8 A I did. 09:51:04

9 Q What did he tell you about that litigation? 09:51:04

10 A He explained to me that -- the issues of 09:51:06

11 Texaco and Petroecuador having been involved in 09:51:13

12 exploration -- oil exploration, and there was a case 09:51:18

13 where plaintiffs were claiming reparation and damages 09:51:22

14 from environment damage as a result of those oil 09:51:25

15 wells. 09:51:29

16 Q Did he tell you what he wanted your role to 09:51:29

17 be in the case? 09:51:35


19 THE WITNESS: He specifically said, would you 09:51:37

20 be able to determine or come up with a cost estimate 09:51:42

21 on providing health care to the people of this region. 09:51:44

22 And he emphasized that it was for -- that this was a 09:51:52



41

1 task for the Ecuadorian court. In fact, I even asked, 09:51:56

2 is it a report that I need to submit in Spanish or 09:52:01

3 should it be submitted in English, and the answer was, 09:52:04

4 no, it has to be submitted in English, and we have to 09:52:07

5 officially translate it. 09:52:12

6 BY MR. SELEY: 09:52:13

7 Q You said this was an issue for the Ecuadorian 09:52:19

8 court? 09:52:23

9 A That's right. In other words, the request 09:52:23

10 was, could you generate the report possibly to be 09:52:26

11 utilized by the Ecuadorian court regarding cost 09:52:31

12 estimates. And he did emphasize that there was a 09:52:35

13 deadline that had to be met because he was -- he 09:52:39

14 wanted to find out if I had the time to invest. 09:52:44

15 Q What was the deadline he said had to be met? 09:52:46

16 A Mid-September. 09:52:49

17 Q Did you tell him that you would be able to 09:52:50

18 determine those cost estimates? 09:53:05

19 A No. I said at the time that I would have to 09:53:06

20 investigate and try to get my mind around the issues. 09:53:10

21 Q Did he tell you why he was calling you 09:53:15

22 particularly? 09:53:22



42

1 A He thought -- I guess he thought of me. He 09:53:22

2 thought of me because I am a physician, I have 09:53:30

3 traveled through the region and the like, and -- why 09:53:33

4 did he call me in particular? No. 09:53:39

5 Q Do you know who referred Mr. Dunkelberger to 09:53:41

6 you? 09:53:47

7 A No. 09:53:47

8 Q You've been to Ecuador before, correct? 09:53:49

9 A I have. 09:53:56

10 Q How many times? 09:53:56

11 A Twice. 09:53:56

12 Q When? 09:53:57

13 A In 2006 and 2008. 09:53:58

14 Q Where did you go when you were in Ecuador in 09:54:01

15 2006 and 2008? 09:54:09

16 A To the same place -- as part of the Pan 09:54:10

17 American Medical Society endeavor, we went to a 09:54:14

18 military hospital to just -- within Quito to provide a 09:54:16

19 pro bono, you know, held care mission. It was mostly 09:54:22

20 a surgical mission. Since I'm not a surgeon, I really 09:54:24

21 just participated in the recovery area, in the PACU, 09:54:29

22 in the post-anesthesia room and tried to provide 09:54:31



43

1 health care. 09:54:35

2 Q How long did you spend in Ecuador in 2006? 09:54:35

3 A Both times was a week. 09:54:38

4 Q A week each? 09:54:42

5 A Yeah. Yes. 09:54:44

6 Q When you were in Ecuador in 2006 or 2008, did 09:54:49

7 you hear anything about the case against Chevron? 09:55:06

8 A I did not. 09:55:09

9 Q Did anyone at that time that you came into 09:55:11

10 contact with in Ecuador say that they thought whatever 09:55:17

11 illnesses they had were caused by Texaco? 09:55:22

12 A No. 09:55:24


14 BY MR. SELEY: 09:55:25

15 Q When you were in Ecuador, did you see any 09:55:26

16 news reports regarding the litigation against Chevron? 09:55:29

17 A I did not. 09:55:32

18 Q Have you ever seen any news reports regarding 09:55:33

19 the litigation against Chevron in Ecuador at all? 09:55:42

20 A Since then, yes. Not before. Since I 09:55:44

21 participated in this case, I guess my antennas were 09:55:53

22 probably tuned in. But -- so since then, yes. But 09:55:56



44

1 not before. 09:55:58

2 Q Let me see if I understand that. Are you 09:55:59

3 saying that since you were contacted in August of 09:56:02

4 2010 -- 09:56:04

5 A Correct. 09:56:04

6 Q -- you've heard news reports regarding the 09:56:07

7 Ecuadorian litigation against Chevron? 09:56:10

8 A Yes. 09:56:12

9 Q What have you heard? 09:56:12

10 A I heard about the filing of documents in this 09:56:13

11 court in Lago Agrio. And there was a press release -- 09:56:19

12 I don't recall the details, but there was a press 09:56:24

13 release in connection with the filing of the documents 09:56:26

14 in mid-September. 09:56:29

15 Q So are you referring to a press release about 09:56:30

16 the filing of documents that included your expert 09:56:39

17 report in the court in Lago Agrio? 09:56:42

18 A That's right. 09:56:50

19 Q Have you run any Internet searches about the 09:56:50

20 Ecuador litigation? 09:56:55


22 THE WITNESS: Yes. As part of my trying to 09:56:56



45

1 learn about the -- the case, yes. In fact, I also -- 09:57:03

2 within the Chevron website, is there is information 09:57:07

3 that I looked at. There's extensive information 09:57:11

4 within the Chevron website. 09:57:15

5 BY MR. SELEY: 09:57:16

6 Q When you ran these searches, what did you 09:57:22

7 find out about the case? 09:57:26


9 THE WITNESS: Well, I learned that it has 09:57:28

10 been a long protracted process that is -- well, I was 09:57:31

11 trying to educate myself on both sides of the story. 09:57:37

12 That's why I also went to the Chevron website to find 09:57:40

13 out -- you know, because you can never believe just 09:57:45

14 one bell. 09:57:49

15 BY MR. SELEY: 09:57:54

16 Q Did you do that Internet research before you 09:57:55

17 agreed to be retained by the plaintiffs in this case? 09:57:58

18 A I don't recall if it was -- actually I did 09:58:00

19 not -- I don't recall signing a specific document 09:58:06

20 that -- a retention document about this case. I had 09:58:08

21 signed a previous document with the Weinberg Group 09:58:13

22 back in 2008, and -- I believe it was April of 2008. 09:58:16



46

1 So I don't recall signing any new documents as I was 09:58:21

2 being retained for this particular project. 09:58:25

3 Q Now, at the time you were contacted by 09:58:26

4 Mr. Dunkelberger at the Weinberg Group about being 09:58:33

5 retained for this case, did you tell him that you 09:58:36

6 didn't have a background in health economics? 09:58:41

7 MR. WESTENBERGER: Objection to the form of 09:58:45

8 the question. 09:58:47

9 THE WITNESS: I did. He knew exactly my 09:58:47

10 background. He has a copy of my CV. He knew exactly 09:58:50

11 my qualifications. 09:58:53

12 BY MR. SELEY: 09:58:54

13 Q And how did he respond when you told him you 09:58:55

14 didn't have the health economics background? 09:58:57



17 THE WITNESS: As I recall, that this was a 09:59:02

18 report that would have some limitations based on the 09:59:07

19 amount of information available, the amount of time 09:59:11

20 available that was directed to the Ecuadorian court, 09:59:14

21 potentially to help the Ecuadorian court in coming up 09:59:18

22 with some cost estimates. 09:59:24



47

1 BY MR. SELEY: 09:59:26

2 Q Now, you said your brother is a health 09:59:29

3 economist, right? 09:59:31

4 A He's a health economist, yes. 09:59:31

5 Q Did you tell Mr. Dunkelberger that your 09:59:34

6 brother is a health economist? 09:59:37

7 A Well, informally. But he's a -- he's not 09:59:37

8 somebody who has done work in third-world nations 09:59:44

9 coming up with cost estimates and developing health 09:59:47

10 care systems and so forth. So -- at some point, I did 09:59:50

11 share with Mr. Dunkelberger that my brother was a 09:59:54

12 health economist. But I didn't suggest that because, 09:59:57

13 in informal discussions with my brother, he wouldn't 10:00:04

14 be interested in taking something like this anyway. 10:00:08

15 Q So, in your view, your brother is no more 10:00:09

16 qualified to do this work than you are? 10:00:15


18 Objection to the extent it mischaracterizes his 10:00:18

19 testimony. 10:00:21

20 THE WITNESS: In some -- he has some 10:00:24

21 qualifications that I certainly don't have, and I have 10:00:27

22 other qualifications that he doesn't have. 10:00:30



48

1 BY MR. SELEY: 10:00:38

2 Q Did you tell Mr. Dunkelberger that you 10:00:38

3 believed he needed a health economist to do this work? 10:00:44



6 THE WITNESS: At some point, I did mention -- 10:00:50

7 I believe via e-mail or via some other means I did 10:00:53

8 mention that I felt, in order to do a proper work 10:00:57

9 product, an environmental economist was required, a 10:01:01

10 health economist, proper econometric calculations. 10:01:05

11 And even though I'm not an epidemiologist, I can see 10:01:09

12 when a particular project, you know, requires 10:01:15

13 additional expertise. 10:01:20

14 BY MR. SELEY: 10:01:23

15 Q What was his response to that? 10:01:24

16 A The response was that the -- that this was a 10:01:25

17 project that would have to be submitted for the 10:01:30

18 Ecuadorian court. And so I felt some comfort in a 10:01:32

19 way. The idea was that this would be a document for 10:01:41

20 the court in Ecuador to, you know, come up with a cost 10:01:44

21 estimate that we knew had limitations -- limitations 10:01:48

22 because of time and because of the available data. We 10:01:53



49

1 had no -- we didn't have all the data sources to 10:01:59

2 really come up with an adequate final and accurate 10:02:03

3 cost estimate. 10:02:08

4 Q So you were comfortable producing this report 10:02:08

5 even though you knew that there were limitations as to 10:02:30

6 time, as to data, and as to the expertise that was 10:02:34

7 being brought in the report? 10:02:40

8 A Correct. All of my uneasiness about it was 10:02:42

9 all -- it's all easy to follow. In other words, the 10:02:54

10 questions that I had are easy to follow on the strings 10:03:01

11 of e-mails and so forth, and information that I have 10:03:05

12 already produced. 10:03:08

13 Q In your view, if this project had the 10:03:08

14 participation of an environmental economist, a health 10:03:28

15 care economist and a epidemiologist, would that have 10:03:34

16 resulted in a better product for the Ecuadorian court? 10:03:39


18 THE WITNESS: Potentially, but I'm not sure. 10:03:44

19 Why? Because of the available data, or lack thereof. 10:03:48



22 BY MR. SELEY: 10:04:00



50

1 Q You've been handed Exhibit Number 1202. Do 10:04:23

2 you recognize this document, sir? 10:04:32

3 A I do. 10:04:32

4 Q What is this document? 10:04:33

5 A This is an invoice that I submitted to the 10:04:34

6 Weinberg Group upon completion of the project. No, 10:04:36

7 this is, I think, at the end of August. There was 10:04:40

8 another one at the end of the September. 10:04:43

9 Q So this is an invoice you've created for your 10:04:44

10 work in the Ecuador case? 10:04:48

11 A Correct. 10:04:49

12 Q Does this invoice accurately reflect the time 10:04:49

13 you spent on the project in August? 10:04:52

14 A I spent a lot more time than that, but I feel 10:04:53

15 that I could not submit all of the time invested 10:04:57

16 because some of the time I invested was on my personal 10:05:00

17 education. 10:05:07

18 Q Your personal education about what, sir? 10:05:07

19 A Education about the case and about the 10:05:09

20 specifics of the case and so forth. 10:05:12

21 Q Your August invoice at Exhibit 1202 indicates 10:05:13

22 that the first time you billed any time to this case 10:05:22



51

1 was on August 25th. Does that indicate that you were 10:05:25

2 first contacted on the 25th? 10:05:31

3 A No. I was contacted in mid-August, but I was 10:05:32

4 on vacation at the time. 10:05:37

5 Q That first day on the invoice, August 25th, 10:05:38

6 your invoice indicates that you had a four-hour 10:05:49

7 meeting with the Weinberg Group. Am I reading that 10:05:52

8 correctly? 10:05:56

9 A Correct. 10:05:56

10 Q Where was that meeting? 10:05:56

11 A At their offices, just two blocks away. 10:05:58

12 Q At the Weinberg Group's offices? 10:06:02

13 A Correct. 10:06:06

14 Q Who was presented at that meeting? 10:06:07

15 A Mr. Ted Dunkelberger and, as I recall, Kerry 10:06:08

16 Roche, who is another attorney, and I believe Marla 10:06:15

17 Scarola who is another attorney who works with the 10:06:22

18 firm. 10:06:24

19 Q Kerry Roche, is that a man or a woman? 10:06:24

20 A It's a woman. 10:06:27

21 Q Is it your understanding that Ms. Roche is an 10:06:28

22 attorney? 10:06:33



52

1 A Yes. 10:06:33

2 Q And Ms. Scarola? 10:06:40

3 A Scarola, yeah. 10:06:41

4 Q Is it your understanding that Ms. Scarola is 10:06:42

5 an attorney? 10:06:45

6 A Yes. 10:06:45

7 Q Was the role that you were going to play in 10:06:45

8 the Ecuador litigation discussed at that four-hour 10:06:56

9 meeting? 10:07:00

10 A Yes. 10:07:00


12 BY MR. SELEY: 10:07:01

13 Q What was the substance of that discussion? 10:07:02

14 A The substance was to try to determine the 10:07:03

15 task at hand and how to go about completing that task. 10:07:09

16 Q What did you determine the task was at that 10:07:14

17 point? 10:07:23

18 A Was to come up with a cost estimate of 10:07:23

19 providing health care costs to the people of this 10:07:27

20 region. 10:07:30

21 Q At that meeting, did you discuss whether the 10:07:30

22 health care costs that you were trying to determine 10:07:50



53

1 would be related to any health care issues people in 10:07:56

2 the region were experiencing as a result of exposure 10:08:03

3 to petroleum contamination? 10:08:07


5 THE WITNESS: No. As I recall, the idea 10:08:09

6 was -- I mentioned that I could not make any causation 10:08:12

7 determinations, that was really beyond the scope of 10:08:17

8 the project. The project was really to just come up 10:08:19

9 with a cost estimation. 10:08:21

10 BY MR. SELEY: 10:08:23

11 Q Were you told at that meeting that this work 10:08:30

12 was going to be used as part of a damage claim by the 10:08:33

13 plaintiffs in Ecuador? 10:08:39

14 A I wasn't told that. I inferred that. 10:08:40

15 Q And what were you told about the relationship 10:08:47

16 between the generalized cost estimate that you were 10:08:51

17 doing and plaintiffs' damages claim? 10:08:57


19 THE WITNESS: The -- as I understand, the 10:08:59

20 project was to try, in our best, honest estimate, come 10:09:04

21 up with a figure -- with a number figure to estimate 10:09:10

22 providing cost to this region of Ecuador, cost 10:09:15



54

1 estimate for health care to this region of Ecuador. 10:09:18

2 And that that would be submitted to the court by 10:09:22

3 mid-September as part of several -- it will be one 10:09:25

4 part of a bigger report. 10:09:31

5 BY MR. SELEY: 10:09:32

6 Q Your role was not to try to link health care 10:09:34

7 costs to exposure to petroleum? 10:09:40

8 A No. 10:09:43

9 Q Is that right? 10:09:44

10 A Correct. 10:09:45

11 Q And you didn't do so, correct? 10:09:45

12 A I don't believe so. 10:09:51

13 Q Was there anything else discussed at that 10:10:06

14 four-hour meeting at the Weinberg Group's offices on 10:10:09

15 the 25th? 10:10:12

16 A Yes. I was provided with this Cabrera report 10:10:13

17 that I mentioned. I was told that they would have 10:10:18

18 individuals to support my work and to potentially 10:10:25

19 collaborate with Mrs. Scarola and Mrs. Roche on this 10:10:31

20 project. 10:10:37

21 Q When you were provided the Cabrera report, 10:10:38

22 what were you told about it? 10:10:49



55


2 THE WITNESS: I was told that this had been 10:10:54

3 an expert report prepared for the court in Lago Agrio, 10:10:57

4 and that had several subsections, one of them 10:11:01

5 pertaining to health care, and that was the one that 10:11:09

6 really pertained to me. 10:11:12

7 BY MR. SELEY: 10:11:13

8 Q Were you told that Richard Cabrera actually 10:11:15

9 prepared that report? 10:11:21


11 THE WITNESS: I was told -- yes, Richard 10:11:23

12 Cabrera. I believe he had a team. It probably wasn't 10:11:26

13 just himself considering the volume of the report, but 10:11:29

14 yes. 10:11:32

15 BY MR. SELEY: 10:11:32

16 Q Who did you understand Richard Cabrera to be? 10:11:33

17 A I think he's an engineer, but I did not do 10:11:35

18 any background check or any -- 10:11:44

19 Q What did you understand his role to be with 10:11:46

20 regard to the Lago Agrio court? 10:11:50


22 THE WITNESS: I think he is an independent 10:11:53



56

1 expert appointed by the court to generate these 10:11:59

2 reports. 10:12:02

3 BY MR. SELEY: 10:12:03

4 Q Is that what you were told by the Weinberg 10:12:04

5 Group when you met with them? 10:12:08


7 THE WITNESS: I don't recall them saying 10:12:09

8 that. I think that that was on the front page 10:12:13

9 describing what the report was about. 10:12:17

10 BY MR. SELEY: 10:12:18

11 Q So when you read the Cabrera report, you 10:12:22

12 concluded, by reading it, that he was an independent 10:12:25

13 expert appointed by the court? 10:12:28

14 MR. WESTENBERGER: Objection on to form. 10:12:29

15 THE WITNESS: Did I conclude that? No. 10:12:30

16 BY MR. SELEY: 10:12:38

17 Q Okay. Explain that to me. 10:12:39

18 A I read the report and the -- the 10:12:40

19 characterization term that came to my mind wasn't 10:12:51

20 independent. That was not the way I would necessarily 10:12:54

21 describe. 10:12:56

22 Q So what characterization did come to your 10:12:56



57

1 mind? 10:13:00

2 A I felt the report jumped around quite a bit. 10:13:00

3 And it became clear that the data to generate some of 10:13:11

4 this report, it was lackluster at best. And -- in 10:13:18

5 other words, there was a lot of background information 10:13:24

6 in the report -- sometimes I was a little bit lost 10:13:25

7 reading the report. In other words, a lot of 10:13:29

8 background information more than, you know, sometimes 10:13:31

9 answering the questions specifically laid out early 10:13:33

10 on. 10:13:41

11 Q In reviewing the Cabrera report, did you 10:13:44

12 determine that he was an expert representing one of 10:13:52

13 the parties? 10:13:58

14 A No. 10:13:59


16 BY MR. SELEY: 10:14:00

17 Q As you sit here today, do you know whether 10:14:06

18 Mr. Cabrera was an independent expert versus an expert 10:14:09

19 appointed by one of the parties? 10:14:14

20 A I think he's an independent expert, but I 10:14:17

21 truly don't know. 10:14:22

22 Q Did you discuss Mr. Cabrera's role with 10:14:23



58

1 anyone at the Weinberg Group? 10:14:30


3 THE WITNESS: They shared with me the report, 10:14:34

4 and we talked about the report, and I remember looking 10:14:37

5 through it, browsing through it, and just indicating 10:14:42

6 that I didn't feel -- in order to generate my report, 10:14:45

7 I truly felt that I could not rely on any information 10:14:49

8 in the report. 10:14:52



11 BY MR. SELEY: 10:15:12

12 Q Dr. Picone, you've been given a document 10:15:12

13 that's marked as Exhibit 1203. It's a document that 10:15:39

14 was produced by you in this proceeding. Do you 10:15:44

15 recognize this document, sir? 10:15:47

16 A I do. 10:15:48

17 Q And what is this document? 10:15:49

18 A It's an e-mail to a friend of mine who is an 10:15:51

19 economist. 10:15:57

20 Q The individual that you're talking about is 10:15:57

21 Manuel Abdala? 10:16:10

22 A Correct. 10:16:12



59

1 Q And the first e-mail in the string in 10:16:15

2 Exhibit 1203 was sent by you to Dr. Abdala on 10:16:19

3 August 25th at 12:24 p.m.; does that look right? 10:16:26

4 A Yeah. 10:16:34

5 Q In that e-mail you ask him to tell you what 10:16:35

6 time you can call him because you want some advice; is 10:16:44

7 that right? 10:16:47

8 A Yeah. 10:16:47

9 Q What advice were you looking for from 10:16:48

10 Dr. Abdala? 10:16:53

11 A He is a good friend of mine, and he has done 10:16:53

12 a number of expert reports, and because he has done 10:16:57

13 this type of work before on many occasions, I felt 10:17:02

14 that I could consult with him about the task at hand. 10:17:05

15 Q You had never done an expert report before, 10:17:08

16 right? 10:17:12

17 A Correct. 10:17:12

18 MR. WESTENBERGER: Objection. Asked and 10:17:12

19 answered. 10:17:14

20 BY MR. SELEY: 10:17:14

21 Q Based on these e-mails, it appears that you 10:17:14

22 talked to Dr. Abdala sometime on the afternoon of 10:17:21



60

1 the 25th? 10:17:23

2 A Yes. 10:17:24

3 Q What was the substance of that conversation? 10:17:24

4 A The substance was, you know, the task at 10:17:26

5 hand, what I had to -- the data points, the data 10:17:31

6 sources that I would potentially need to generate the 10:17:34

7 report. And as I recall, he indicated to me some work 10:17:38

8 that he had done in the past. He looked through his 10:17:44

9 files and he found a document he had prepared before 10:17:47

10 with an environmental economist. 10:17:50

11 Q What data sources did Dr. Abdala tell you you 10:17:51

12 would need to rely on to write your report? 10:17:56


14 THE WITNESS: Well, we went through a number 10:18:02

15 of data sources. As I recall, you know, first an 10:18:08

16 evaluation, a proper evaluation in the field of the 10:18:13

17 existing situation regarding drinking water, regarding 10:18:18

18 the health care infrastructure, and also -- well, the 10:18:22

19 professionals available, the educational background of 10:18:29

20 those professionals, the technicians available, you 10:18:31

21 know, infrastructure to be provided. I mean, a number 10:18:35

22 of things that we felt that were necessary to come up 10:18:39



61

1 with an adequate cost estimate. 10:18:42

2 BY MR. SELEY: 10:18:44

3 Q That evening, Dr. Abdala sent you a proposal 10:18:49

4 that he had regarding evaluating environmental issues 10:18:52

5 in litigation; isn't that right, sir? 10:18:56

6 A Yes. I think it was a case from way back 10:19:00

7 regarding -- yes, environmental counterclaims, but it 10:19:06

8 was mostly about, I think, drinking water. 10:19:11

9 Q Did you review this proposal sent by 10:19:13

10 Dr. Abdala? 10:19:20

11 A I looked at it. I did read it. I don't 10:19:20

12 recall the content. I'm just refreshing my memory. I 10:19:25

13 remember looking at it. 10:19:32

14 Q Did you notice that, in Dr. Abdala's 10:19:32

15 proposal, he indicated that the work to draft the 10:19:38

16 report indicated there would take three to four 10:19:44

17 months? 10:19:46

18 A Correct. And we talked about that. 10:19:46

19 Q What's the substance of that conversation? 10:19:48

20 A The substance was that, to generate a report, 10:19:51

21 as I acknowledged early on, we needed a number of data 10:20:03

22 sources and, in the available amount of time and with 10:20:04



62

1 the available data, or lack of that data, it would be 10:20:06

2 difficult to come up with an accurate report. 10:20:11

3 I voiced these concerns to Mr. Dunkelberger 10:20:15

4 and, once again, the issue was providing a best cost 10:20:20

5 estimate under the limitations -- the time constraints 10:20:26

6 and the limitations with the data available. 10:20:30

7 Q The time constraints. At that point, you 10:20:33

8 were going to have to produce a report in 10:20:38

9 approximately two weeks, right? 10:20:41

10 A Correct, a little bit over two weeks. 10:20:42

11 Q And that caused you concern? 10:20:45

12 A That, and the lack of good data sources. 10:20:47

13 Q Did Dr. Abdala indicate to you in your 10:20:51

14 conversation with him that it was feasible to do the 10:21:01

15 work you're expected to do in two weeks? 10:21:05

16 A No. As I recall, he said, you need to really 10:21:08

17 define your objective. So if the objective is a cost 10:21:17

18 estimate, best cost estimate under these limitations 10:21:21

19 under these circumstances, then, yes, to produce a 10:21:25

20 final product of accurate cost estimates, he felt that 10:21:28

21 in that amount of time would be impossible. 10:21:33




63


2 BY MR. SELEY: 10:21:34

3 Q Dr. Picone, a document has been handed to you 10:21:34

4 marked as Exhibit 1204. It is a series of e-mails. 10:22:06

5 Do you recognize these documents, sir? 10:22:15

6 A I do. 10:22:17

7 Q And what are they? 10:22:17

8 A These are documents that were sent by my 10:22:18

9 wife. 10:22:22

10 Q To you? 10:22:22

11 A To me. 10:22:24

12 Q All these e-mails from your wife to you 10:22:25

13 attaching various documents were sent on August 25th? 10:22:34

14 A Correct. 10:22:38

15 Q So the e-mail address 10:22:39

16 [email protected], is that your wife's e-mail 10:22:50

17 address? 10:22:53

18 A Correct. 10:22:53

19 Q Why did your wife send you the documents that 10:22:57

20 were attached to these e-mails? 10:23:00


22 THE WITNESS: Because she works in 10:23:02



64

1 development. She has a degree in development. She 10:23:05

2 works in monitoring and evaluation of different 10:23:08

3 projects supported by the World Bank. And I was, 10:23:12

4 essentially -- as part of my task of due diligence, I 10:23:17

5 tried to get my hands on, you know, most -- as many 10:23:20

6 documents as I could to look at the field and find out 10:23:24

7 if there were any other projects, any other cost 10:23:27

8 estimate projects coming up with -- you know, 10:23:32

9 particularly for development of a health care system. 10:23:34

10 I cast a wide net and tried to, you know, get as many 10:23:37

11 documents to educate myself and to potentially help 10:23:41

12 achieve the goal. 10:23:45

13 BY MR. SELEY: 10:23:46

14 Q Did you ask her for these specific documents 10:23:49

15 or are these documents that she found and forwarded to 10:23:51

16 you? 10:23:54

17 A These are documents she found and forwarded 10:23:54

18 to me. 10:23:57

19 Q Did you indicate to her what topics she 10:23:58

20 should research in order to find documents? 10:24:08

21 A I told her that my -- the goal was to come up 10:24:09

22 with a cost estimate, best cost estimate of providing 10:24:13



65

1 a health care system to a particular region. And she 10:24:18

2 then decided that these were documents that 10:24:22

3 potentially could help or that may present some 10:24:24

4 similarities or some differences, but that may be of 10:24:28

5 help. 10:24:33

6 Q Did you review all of the documents that she 10:24:33

7 sent you on August 25th? 10:24:37

8 A August 25th or -- 10:24:38


10 THE WITNESS: -- the next day, but I did open 10:24:42

11 those documents and I looked through them. Most of 10:24:43

12 them were not really very helpful. In fact, after 10:24:45

13 looking at dozens of them, I concluded that they were 10:24:51

14 not helpful. 10:24:54

15 BY MR. SELEY: 10:24:54

16 Q Why were they not helpful? 10:24:56

17 A Because they were not really similar to the 10:24:57

18 region that we were talking about, this Oriente region 10:25:01

19 of Ecuador, because they had specific -- the project 10:25:07

20 designations were a lot more specific. They had an 10:25:15

21 assessment of the current situation, there was a 10:25:19

22 budget, there was a time frame. There were a number 10:25:22



66

1 of reasons why they were not pertinent. 10:25:25

2 Q What do you mean by there was a time frame in 10:25:28

3 these other documents, and that made them not 10:25:48

4 pertinent? 10:25:50

5 MR. WESTENBERGER: Objection. Form. 10:25:50

6 THE WITNESS: Some of them -- for instance, I 10:25:51

7 remember one, I believe in India or in Fiji, was 10:25:54

8 providing, you know, some sort of -- I don't know if 10:25:57

9 it was -- one was about drinking water; another one 10:25:59

10 was staffing a clinic. They were more specific and 10:26:04

11 limited as far as the amount of time that the -- you 10:26:10

12 know, for instance, was a budget and a goal of 10:26:16

13 developing a health care system or a project or a 10:26:18

14 clinic -- a number of clinics within three years, and 10:26:20

15 it truly didn't pertain -- didn't -- I didn't see the 10:26:24

16 similarities. 10:26:26

17 BY MR. SELEY: 10:26:26

18 Q Did anyone tell you what the time frame was 10:26:27

19 for the project that you were undertaking? 10:26:30

20 A I was told the cost estimate for -- an annual 10:26:33

21 cost estimate that would be -- in other words, to come 10:26:42

22 up with a budgetary proposal. 10:26:43



67

1 Q Did anyone tell you how far out to extend 10:26:45

2 that annual cost estimate? 10:26:52


4 THE WITNESS: Initially, they did not. Then, 10:26:53

5 later on, as we were generating the report, then yes. 10:26:55

6 In fact, I learned about that the last day. 10:26:58

7 BY MR. SELEY: 10:27:00

8 Q So you learned about how far out to extend 10:27:03

9 the cost estimate in your report on the last day 10:27:11

10 before you signed your report? 10:27:16

11 A When we generated the final draft. 10:27:16

12 Q Who is "we"? 10:27:19

13 A Myself, in collaboration with the Weinberg 10:27:23

14 Group. 10:27:27

15 Q Is your wife familiar -- strike that. 10:27:27

16 Before you got involved in this project, was 10:27:39

17 your wife familiar with the Lago Agrio litigation? 10:27:41

18 A No. 10:27:44

19 Q Did you ever discuss with your wife whether 10:27:44

20 you had the expertise to reach the opinions that you 10:27:53

21 were being asked to reach in this case? 10:27:57




68

1 THE WITNESS: Yes. 10:27:58

2 BY MR. SELEY: 10:28:00

3 Q What was the substance of that discussion? 10:28:02

4 A My wife, since she works in monitoring and 10:28:03

5 evaluation, indicated that the -- coming up with an 10:28:08

6 accurate cost estimate was not simple and that it 10:28:16

7 would require months of labor and potentially, you 10:28:18

8 know, work the field. And -- but the final conclusion 10:28:21

9 of the discussion, as I recall, was that this was a 10:28:27

10 best cost estimate under the given circumstances for 10:28:30

11 the Ecuadorian court. 10:28:32

12 Q Did your wife express any views to you about 10:28:33

13 how you should write your report? 10:28:37





18 BY MR. SELEY: 10:28:41

19 Q Dr. Picone, I've put before you a document 10:28:41

20 that has been marked as Exhibit 1205. Do you 10:29:16


22 A I do. 10:29:22



69

1 Q What is this document? 10:29:23

2 A It's an e-mail that I sent to the Weinberg 10:29:24

3 Group, specifically Kerry Roche, on August 25th -- 10:29:27

4 26th at 6:00 in the morning. 10:29:36

5 Q Now, prior to your work on this case, you 10:29:36

6 indicated that you had previously worked with the 10:29:51

7 Weinberg Group; is that right? 10:29:53

8 A Yes. 10:29:54

9 Q Had you worked with Ted Dunkelberger before? 10:29:55

10 A I have. 10:29:59

11 Q Before your involvement in this case? 10:29:59

12 A Correct. 10:30:03

13 Q Had you worked with Kerry Roche before? 10:30:03

14 A Yes. 10:30:06

15 Q Had you worked with Marla Scarola before? 10:30:08

16 A Yes. 10:30:11

17 Q What did you work on with those individuals 10:30:12

18 before your involvement in this case? 10:30:17

19 MR. WESTENBERGER: I'm just going to object 10:30:19

20 and note that, to the extent that you need to -- would 10:30:20

21 be required to reveal information that is confidential 10:30:24

22 or privileged under any agreements you may have with 10:30:26



70

1 the Weinberg Group or with other clients -- I just 10:30:29

2 would caution to you that extent. 10:30:34

3 THE WITNESS: I just collaborated with them 10:30:35

4 in assessing whether or not there had been illness in 10:30:37

5 some plaintiffs. In other words, I reviewed medical 10:30:45

6 records to find whether or not there had been 10:30:48

7 consequences from environmental exposure in these 10:30:53

8 particular plaintiffs. 10:30:56

9 BY MR. SELEY: 10:30:58

10 Q What was the environmental exposure at issue? 10:30:59

11 A Was -- it involved mostly involvement -- 10:31:03

12 exposure to particulate matter and environmental 10:31:09

13 exposure. But not pertaining -- it wasn't drinking 10:31:14

14 water. It was mostly environmental exposure -- 10:31:21

15 aerosolized environmental exposure. 10:31:25

16 Q The question was whether people breathing air 10:31:29

17 that was potentially contaminated with particulate 10:31:37

18 matter -- 10:31:40

19 A Correct. 10:31:40

20 Q -- ended up with particular disease end 10:31:40

21 points? 10:31:45

22 A Correct. 10:31:45



71

1 Q And you were hired in that case because of 10:31:45

2 your experience as a pulmonologist? 10:31:53

3 A Correct. 10:31:54



6 BY MR. SELEY: 10:31:55

7 Q Dr. Picone, I've marked a document as 10:31:55

8 Exhibit 1206 and provided it to you. Is this the 10:32:31

9 subcontractor agreement that you had with the Weinberg 10:32:36

10 Group dated April of 2008? 10:32:41

11 A Correct. 10:32:44

12 Q So you didn't enter into this subcontract 10:32:46

13 agreement to work on the Ecuador case, right? 10:32:53

14 A Correct. 10:32:55

15 Q And you entered into no new subcontract 10:32:56

16 agreement for the Ecuador case? 10:33:01

17 A Correct. 10:33:02

18 Q In Exhibit 1206, why did you cross out your 10:33:02

19 work address and put in your home address? 10:33:07

20 A I don't recall. Probably because all of 10:33:09

21 this, I like to keep it separate from my clinical 10:33:17

22 work. 10:33:22



72

1 Q Now, at the time you were contacted by the 10:33:22

2 Weinberg Group in this case, were you told that their 10:33:29

3 client was the Ecuadorian plaintiffs? 10:33:36

4 A Was I told -- I don't recall that. 10:33:37

5 Q Were you told anything about the Weinberg 10:33:41

6 Group's client? 10:33:45

7 A When I first communicated with Ted 10:33:45

8 Dunkelberger, he told me about the litigation taking 10:33:50

9 place and would I be willing to research this subject 10:33:53

10 and provide a document to the court, to the Ecuadorian 10:34:01

11 court. 10:34:05

12 Q Did he indicate to you that the Weinberg 10:34:05

13 Group didn't have the necessary expertise to do this 10:34:13

14 project in-house? 10:34:15



17 THE WITNESS: I don't recall him saying that. 10:34:18

18 BY MR. SELEY: 10:34:19

19 Q Do you know whether they have the expertise 10:34:21

20 to do this project at the Weinberg Group? 10:34:23





73

1 THE WITNESS: I know that has -- he has 10:34:26

2 contacted multiple experts before, and I know that he 10:34:29

3 has access to -- one of the things he does is 10:34:32

4 precisely that, bring together different experts in 10:34:35

5 different areas to generate these type of reports. 10:34:38

6 So -- I did not know if this would be 10:34:42

7 something provided internally or that he would be 10:34:44

8 hiring a number of experts to provide different 10:34:47

9 reports. 10:34:49

10 BY MR. SELEY: 10:34:49

11 Q Do you know whether he contacted any other 10:34:50

12 experts to do the work that you ultimately did in this 10:34:53

13 case? 10:34:57

14 A I do. I know that he contacted -- I know -- 10:34:57

15 an epidemiologist or somebody who would do a 10:35:02

16 demographic assessment of trying to estimate the -- 10:35:06

17 best estimate the population at risk. 10:35:09

18 Q So Mr. Dunkelberger told you that he had 10:35:11

19 contacted an epidemiologist to try to do a best 10:35:18

20 estimate of the population at risk? 10:35:22

21 MR. WESTENBERGER: Objection to the extent -- 10:35:23

22 THE WITNESS: I'm not sure he used those 10:35:23



74

1 words. 10:35:23

2 MR. WESTENBERGER: -- it mischaracterizes his 10:35:31

3 testimony. 10:35:32

4 THE WITNESS: I don't recall that he used 10:35:32

5 those words. I don't recall if he said specifically 10:35:35

6 a, you know, bona fide epidemiologist, but I do recall 10:35:40

7 there would be an expert informing on the best 10:35:44

8 estimation of the population at risk. 10:35:48

9 BY MR. SELEY: 10:35:50

10 Q Do you know if an expert was hired to 10:35:51

11 determine the best estimate of the population at risk? 10:35:57

12 A I do. 10:35:59

13 Q Do you know who that expert is? 10:36:00

14 A I do not. 10:36:02

15 Q But an expert was hired to do that work? 10:36:05

16 A Yes. He was hired and, in fact, I -- in one 10:36:10

17 of these early meetings, as the meeting was 10:36:14

18 concluding, I was coming in and this person was coming 10:36:18

19 out, but I don't recall his name. I do recall his 10:36:21

20 features of his face, but I don't recall his name. 10:36:23

21 Q Did you ever see a report from that expert? 10:36:25

22 A No, I did not see that report myself. 10:36:27



75

1 Q Did you ever see any calculations from that 10:36:29

2 expert? 10:36:35

3 A No. I just -- but I know, because the -- 10:36:35

4 some of the databases utilized were the so-called INEC 10:36:41

5 databases -- I-N-E-C -- which is, like, the Census 10:36:46

6 Bureau for Ecuador, Instituto Nacional de Estadistica 10:36:49

7 Censo -- and asked me to translate certain -- some 10:36:55

8 information. 10:37:03

9 So I, you know, translated some information 10:37:04

10 since I speak Spanish, but -- 10:37:08

11 Q Who asked you to translate the information? 10:37:10

12 A The person generating this report, but it was 10:37:11

13 via e-mail, so I didn't really see his face. 10:37:15

14 Q I don't know that I saw any e-mails back and 10:37:18

15 forth between you and anyone other than the Weinberg 10:37:26

16 Group. 10:37:29

17 A Yes. Or it might have been -- I remember 10:37:29

18 sitting at a computer terminal. It might have been at 10:37:32

19 the Weinberg Group in one of those meetings where I 10:37:38

20 was provided with data from the INEC, big streams of 10:37:41

21 data, and I was trying to make sense of them. 10:37:44

22 Q Did you communicate with other experts using 10:37:46



76

1 the computers at the Weinberg Group? 10:37:56

2 A No, that was the only time I recall early on 10:37:58

3 in the case where I was asked, since I know Spanish, 10:38:01

4 to provide this additional assistance. 10:38:06

5 MR. WESTENBERGER: Objection. He didn't 10:38:07

6 testify that he communicated using the computer. He 10:38:10

7 said he was sitting at a computer. 10:38:12

8 MR. SELEY: We need to change the tape, so 10:38:12

9 why don't we take about a five-minute break. 10:38:19

10 THE VIDEOGRAPHER: The time is 10:38 a.m. 10:38:21

11 This completes tape number 1. We are going off the 10:38:24

12 record. 10:38:26

13 (Whereupon, a short recess was taken.) 10:38:27

14 THE VIDEOGRAPHER: The time is 10:47 a.m., 10:38:27

15 December 16th. We are back on record, tape number 2. 10:47:41

16 BY MR. SELEY: 10:47:44

17 Q Before we broke, you had said that you were 10:47:44

18 at the Weinberg Group's offices reviewing information 10:47:52

19 from the INEC database; is that right? 10:47:56

20 A Yes. As I recall, they were from the INEC 10:47:58

21 database. 10:48:04

22 Q What was the purpose of you reviewing that 10:48:04



77

1 information? 10:48:06

2 A I just happened to be there that morning for 10:48:06

3 one of the meetings that -- those four hours that you 10:48:09

4 mentioned. And since I was there and I know Spanish, 10:48:12

5 the person in charge of looking into -- the 10:48:15

6 epidemiologic -- this is the expert who was going to 10:48:18

7 generate an epidemiologic demographic growth 10:48:21

8 assessment and so forth -- asked if I could look into 10:48:25

9 that database and translate some of the issues, make 10:48:28

10 sure that the columns in that Excel database, that 10:48:34

11 spreadsheet, that the designations -- that I could 10:48:38

12 translate the designations to be sure that they got 10:48:39

13 them right. 10:48:43

14 For instance, they looked at -- I don't 10:48:44

15 know -- number of women, number of men, number of -- 10:48:45

16 so the translations -- because they were all in 10:48:48

17 Spanish. 10:48:49

18 Q Were you told that the individual conducting 10:48:50

19 this work did not speak Spanish? 10:48:57

20 A I knew he did not speak Spanish. 10:48:59

21 Q How did you know that? 10:49:01

22 A Because I happened to see the person coming 10:49:03



78

1 in and out of the meeting. We shook hands. I knew 10:49:05

2 the person didn't speak Spanish, and I was told. 10:49:08

3 Q How did you communicate your translations to 10:49:10

4 this individual? 10:49:24

5 A As I recall, they had -- they had -- they had 10:49:24

6 printed this big database, and I just translated some 10:49:30

7 of the words that were not easy to follow in English 10:49:35

8 right there and then. 10:49:38

9 Q And who did you give that translation to? 10:49:39

10 A It was one of the assistants in the Weinberg 10:49:43

11 Group. I don't recall if he was -- somebody named 10:49:49

12 Chris Arthur -- or some of the, you know, assistants. 10:49:52

13 I don't believe he was an attorney. 10:49:55

14 Q Do you recall if the individual who was 10:49:56

15 conducting this work with regard to the population 10:50:02

16 potentially at risk was a man named Daniel Rourke? 10:50:07

17 A Daniel? 10:50:09

18 Q Rourke, R-O-U-R-K-E. 10:50:12

19 A It rings a bell, but I couldn't confirm that. 10:50:15

20 Q Okay. When you were meeting with the 10:50:20

21 Weinberg Group on the 25th of August, were you told 10:50:41

22 that the report that was going to be submitted in 10:50:46



79

1 Lago Agrio would be a report by the Weinberg Group? 10:50:51



4 THE WITNESS: No. I believed the report 10:50:57

5 would have three or four components to it, that I 10:51:00

6 would be generating one of the components of the 10:51:03

7 report. It was for the plaintiff. The plaintiff 10:51:06

8 would be submitting this to the court in Lago Agrio. 10:51:10

9 My understanding -- I don't recall the -- in 10:51:14

10 fact, I do recall the initial phone call from Ted 10:51:17

11 Dunkelberger. He asked if I would be able to generate 10:51:21

12 a report, a separate report -- it would be a separate 10:51:23

13 report. And I don't recall that it would be under the 10:51:27

14 heading the Weinberg Group. I think that this was a 10:51:30

15 report that had been requested of the Weinberg Group, 10:51:33

16 and the Weinberg Group would be channeling all these 10:51:37

17 reports to the requesting party. 10:51:40

18 BY MR. SELEY: 10:51:42

19 Q But at that point it was not your 10:51:43

20 understanding that the Weinberg Group was going to 10:51:45

21 take your work and put it into a Weinberg Group 10:51:48

22 report? 10:51:51



80


2 Objection. Asked and answered. 10:51:53

3 THE WITNESS: I truly -- I felt at this point 10:51:55

4 that it would be one report with four subheadings. 10:51:57

5 But I wasn't -- it wasn't clear to me if it would be 10:52:01

6 under the Weinberg Group or under the plaintiffs' 10:52:04

7 attorneys group. 10:52:07

8 BY MR. SELEY: 10:52:07

9 Q Now, you say at that meeting you were given a 10:52:09

10 paper copy of the Cabrera report? 10:52:14

11 A Yes. 10:52:16

12 Q And you skimmed through it? 10:52:16

13 A Yes. 10:52:17

14 Q Now, were you told that your role was to 10:52:18

15 support the findings in the Cabrera report? 10:52:22

16 A No. 10:52:25


18 BY MR. SELEY: 10:52:26

19 Q Were you told that the purpose of your work 10:52:26

20 was to address the Cabrera report's findings in a way 10:52:32

21 that someone reading your report would conclude that 10:52:37

22 the Cabrera results were valid? 10:52:42



81


2 THE WITNESS: No, that's all. On the other 10:52:46

3 hand, I was told that I should not rely -- that the 10:52:50

4 request was to generate a report that did not 10:52:52

5 replicate or did not rely on the Cabrera report. 10:52:55

6 BY MR. SELEY: 10:52:58

7 Q Why were you told not to rely on the Cabrera 10:52:59

8 report? 10:53:06

9 A Because that would be a duplication, and that 10:53:06

10 had already been submitted. And truly, too, I don't 10:53:10

11 believe the Cabrera report -- as I recall, my mandate 10:53:18

12 was cost estimates and cost estimates only. And so I 10:53:23

13 tried to narrow my mission as best I could because I 10:53:28

14 still felt that cost estimates was, you know, a 10:53:32

15 significant undertaking. 10:53:36

16 Q Now, you're aware that, in the Cabrera 10:53:37

17 report, there was an annex P that addressed a proposed 10:53:40

18 comprehensive health program? 10:53:46

19 A Yes. 10:53:47

20 Q Did you understand that your role was 10:53:49

21 different than support for annex P? 10:53:51

22 A Yes. 10:53:56



82


2 answered. 10:53:58

3 BY MR. SELEY: 10:53:59

4 Q What did you understand the difference was 10:53:59

5 between what you were doing and what Cabrera report 10:54:04

6 annex P did? 10:54:08


8 answered multiple times. 10:54:10

9 THE WITNESS: Yes. The -- reading that 10:54:12

10 report, now that you mentioned specifically P, there 10:54:14

11 were some cost estimates there that I couldn't quite 10:54:19

12 abide by, that I couldn't -- had really no way of 10:54:22

13 recognizing whether they were true or not. I truly 10:54:25

14 didn't know what the data sources were. And I just 10:54:30

15 could not use that as the basis for my report. 10:54:33

16 Specifically, there were, you know, costs 10:54:41

17 about -- I don't know -- transportation, a number of 10:54:43

18 things that I -- you know, it was just -- I just felt 10:54:45

19 it was not -- it was impossible for me to use that as 10:54:51

20 anything that would hold any water. 10:54:56

21 BY MR. SELEY: 10:54:58

22 Q Now, did anyone tell you that the plaintiffs 10:54:59



83

1 actually chose Cabrera to play the role of the court 10:55:02

2 expert? 10:55:06



5 THE WITNESS: Did not know that. 10:55:07

6 BY MR. SELEY: 10:55:09

7 Q Did anyone tell you that the Cabrera report 10:55:10

8 and the annexes to that report had actually been 10:55:12

9 written by the plaintiffs and their consultants? 10:55:16


11 the question. Assumes facts -- 10:55:19

12 THE WITNESS: I don't -- 10:55:19

13 MR. WESTENBERGER: -- not in evidence and -- 10:55:21

14 THE WITNESS: -- know that. I truly -- I 10:55:21

15 felt that it was a -- I truly felt that Cabrera -- or 10:55:24

16 at least what I recall represented to me was that 10:55:26

17 Cabrera had been an independent expert selected by the 10:55:30

18 court who generated these reports. 10:55:34

19 BY MR. SELEY: 10:55:36

20 Q Did anyone tell you that the plaintiffs in 10:55:38

21 the Ecuadorian litigation had attempted to hide the 10:55:40

22 true authorship of the Cabrera report? 10:55:44



84


2 the question -- 10:55:48

3 THE WITNESS: I certainly didn't -- 10:55:48

4 MR. WESTENBERGER: -- assumes facts not in 10:55:48

5 evidence, and this line of questioning is improper and 10:55:50

6 irrelevant. The doctor has testified that he did not 10:55:56

7 rely on the Cabrera report, he did not use the Cabrera 10:55:59

8 report, he did his work independently. So your 10:56:02

9 testimony about what is -- 10:56:05

10 MR. SELEY: Eric -- 10:56:05

11 MR. WESTENBERGER: -- or what is not alleged 10:56:07

12 with regard to Cabrera -- 10:56:08

13 MR. SELEY: Okay, Eric, that's an -- 10:56:09

14 MR. WESTENBERGER: No, I don't -- 10:56:09

15 MR. SELEY: -- entirely improper speaking 10:56:11

16 objection. 10:56:13

17 MR. WESTENBERGER: -- care. Don't interrupt 10:56:13

18 me. I will -- you can -- 10:56:15

19 MR. SELEY: It's improper. 10:56:15

20 MR. WESTENBERGER: At the end of it, you can 10:56:15

21 say it's improper. I'm going state what I want to 10:56:16

22 state for the record, and then you can state what you 10:56:17



85

1 want to state. 10:56:18

2 The entire line of questioning is irrelevant 10:56:19

3 and improper. As the doctor has testified, he did his 10:56:22

4 work as independently as possible, and you should get 10:56:24

5 to the work that he did in his report. 10:56:26

6 MR. SELEY: All right. I would like to move 10:56:28

7 to strike counsel's testimony. And that's a 10:56:30

8 completely improper speaking objection. 10:56:32

9 BY MR. SELEY: 10:56:32

10 Q That said, sir, do you recall the question 10:56:35

11 that I asked you? 10:56:38

12 A Yes. The question that you asked was, do I 10:56:39

13 recall or has anybody -- or did anybody represent to 10:56:43

14 me that the Cabrera report was somehow -- or that the 10:56:48

15 plaintiff somehow tried to hide parts of the -- of 10:56:53

16 those reports? 10:56:57

17 Q What I asked you was, did anyone tell you 10:56:59

18 that the plaintiffs had attempted to hide the 10:57:01

19 authorship of the Cabrera reports? 10:57:03


21 THE WITNESS: No. I wasn't aware of that. 10:57:05

22 BY MR. SELEY: 10:57:07



86

1 Q Now, if you had been told any of this, you 10:57:08

2 know, that the Cabrera report had been written by the 10:57:11

3 plaintiffs and their consultants, that Cabrera had 10:57:15

4 been chosen by the plaintiffs rather than the court, 10:57:18

5 and that the plaintiffs had attempted to hide the 10:57:20

6 authorship of the report, is that something that you 10:57:22

7 would have been concerned about in taking on this 10:57:27

8 project? 10:57:29

9 A Really I did not rely on the Cabrera report 10:57:29

10 to generate my report, so I was trying to stay true to 10:57:34

11 my mandate, which was to come up with the best cost 10:57:39

12 estimate under the circumstances. So I don't think 10:57:42

13 that is relevant to my project. 10:57:43

14 Q Now, throughout this project, did you give 10:57:44

15 members of the Weinberg Group regular updates on your 10:57:51

16 progress? 10:57:55



19 THE WITNESS: I did, as I recall. 10:57:56

20 BY MR. SELEY: 10:57:57

21 Q Okay. So let's turn back to Exhibit 1205 10:58:00

22 which is the e-mail on August 26th from you to Kerry 10:58:03



87

1 Roche. All right. You said Kerry Roche is an 10:58:09

2 attorney at the Weinberg Group? 10:58:17

3 A Yes. 10:58:17

4 Q Do you know what Kerry Roche's background is? 10:58:18

5 A She has worked as a consultant for the 10:58:24

6 Weinberg Group in multiple different litigation cases. 10:58:28

7 I think she has some knowledge and some expertise in 10:58:31

8 environmental damages and environmental litigation, 10:58:34

9 but I don't think she litigates herself. She works 10:58:38

10 mostly as a consultant. 10:58:41

11 Q Do you know what her educational background 10:58:42

12 is? 10:58:42

13 A She's an attorney. 10:58:44

14 Q Does she have any scientific background? 10:58:44

15 A I don't know. 10:58:47

16 Q Okay. Can you read the first sentence of 10:58:48

17 Exhibit 1205 into the record, please. 10:58:54

18 A The e-mail? 10:58:56

19 Q Yes. 10:58:59

20 A "Can't quite get my head around the amount of 10:58:59

21 data we need to process in such a short time to 10:59:05

22 generate this report." 10:59:07



88

1 Q Okay. When you say that you can't get your 10:59:07

2 head around the amount of data you need to process, 10:59:09

3 what did you mean by that? 10:59:12

4 A Well, the amount of data -- the number of 10:59:12

5 data sources, articles, things, the amount of 10:59:16

6 education, and the -- you know, in order to generate a 10:59:18

7 final product -- and then essentially I describe here, 10:59:24

8 we need geographic data, demographic, situational 10:59:29

9 assessment of current infrastructure, drinking water, 10:59:33

10 distribution system -- I go through a laundry list of 10:59:36

11 things we need. And I was concerned that -- you know, 10:59:38

12 I wanted to do a good job and to provide an accurate 10:59:42

13 report, and -- but I realized, as I tried to 10:59:46

14 investigate and research the subject, that the data 10:59:51

15 available was relatively small. 10:59:55

16 Q Now, you say in this sentence "the amount of 10:59:59

17 data that we need to process." Who's the "we" that 11:00:05

18 you're referring to there? 11:00:09

19 A Myself min collaboration with -- because they 11:00:09

20 were -- I would have some support from Kerry Roche and 11:00:14

21 from Marla Scarola, the "we" is we. 11:00:17

22 Q So the "we" is you, Kerry Roche and Marla 11:00:22



89

1 Scarola? 11:00:27

2 A That's right. They would be supporting me 11:00:27

3 and helping me generate the report. 11:00:29

4 Q You described the second sentence in this 11:00:32

5 e-mail as a laundry list of data that you would need; 11:00:41

6 is that right? 11:00:46

7 A Correct. 11:00:46

8 Q Where did you get that list of data needs? 11:00:47

9 A You mean, where did I come up with this 11:00:51

10 particular laundry list? 11:00:57

11 Q Yes, sir. 11:00:58

12 A Or -- well, based on my educational 11:00:58

13 background, I know that I need some information to 11:01:04

14 generate the report. Even though I'm not an 11:01:06

15 epidemiologist and I'm not a health economist, I do 11:01:09

16 recognize some of the needs. 11:01:14

17 Q I think you said earlier that you talked to 11:01:14

18 Dr. Abdala about some of the data needs. Did he 11:01:18

19 indicate to you that you needed geographic data, 11:01:23

20 demographics, situational assessment of current 11:01:28

21 infrastructure, any other items you've listed here in 11:01:31

22 Exhibit 1205? 11:01:34



90

1 A I don't recall him telling me that. That was 11:01:35

2 something that I recognized from the get-go. 11:01:37

3 Q Now, why, in your view, did you need 11:01:42

4 geographic data? 11:01:50

5 A Because that would -- you know, you need to 11:01:51

6 know, are we talking about a valley and just one 11:01:55

7 valley? Or are we talking about multiple different 11:01:58

8 localities that are -- how are they connected? What 11:02:02

9 type of infrastructure, communications infrastructure 11:02:04

10 is present? 11:02:06

11 Q Are you done, sir? 11:02:06

12 A Yes. 11:02:10

13 Q Why do you feel that you needed demographic 11:02:10

14 data? 11:02:15

15 A Because it's impossible to come up with a 11:02:15

16 cost estimate of a health care system unless we know 11:02:19

17 the population -- the target population for whom you 11:02:22

18 want to provide this health care system. 11:02:27

19 Q What particular demographic data do you feel 11:02:28

20 that you needed? 11:02:31

21 A I needed the number of individuals certainly, 11:02:32

22 the number of towns, the number of -- the number of 11:02:39



91

1 villages, how they were -- you know, how distant from 11:02:44

2 one another, what type of communications, existing 11:02:47

3 communications between them, current infrastructure in 11:02:51

4 the field. That sort of thing. 11:02:55

5 Q Now, did you receive any data regarding the 11:02:57

6 population distributions in the former Concession 11:03:01

7 area? 11:03:05

8 A I looked for that data, in fact, myself on 11:03:05

9 the -- the INEC, and that's where I learned about the 11:03:10

10 different localities, the different -- you know, small 11:03:14

11 little towns. And in these two counties or two 11:03:18

12 departments, they call them, of Sucumbios and 11:03:23

13 Orellana, and so I looked at specifically those two 11:03:28

14 counties. 11:03:33

15 Q Now, did you ever receive any data indicating 11:03:33

16 how many people lived within 250 meters of a well 11:03:37

17 site? 11:03:45

18 A I did not. 11:03:45

19 Q Any data regarding population within any 11:03:46

20 proximity to a well site? 11:03:54

21 A No. I did look at a map, I believe, that was 11:03:56

22 present in one of the reports, looking at the location 11:04:02



92

1 of the wells and potentially the -- you know, the area 11:04:04

2 surrounding those wells. But there was no mention 11:04:09

3 of -- I truly don't recall -- of any -- as far as 11:04:14

4 number of individuals exposed and the gradient of 11:04:16

5 exposure and so forth, no. 11:04:20

6 Q In your report, did you take into account any 11:04:28

7 information about the proximity of individuals to the 11:04:36

8 former well sites? 11:04:43

9 A No. 11:04:45

10 Q In your report, did you take into account any 11:04:45

11 information about the demographics of the population 11:04:57

12 you were studying? 11:05:04

13 A Did I take into account the demographics? 11:05:04

14 Q Yes. 11:05:09

15 A Yes. When the final report was put together, 11:05:10

16 yes, we utilized the best assessment of what was 11:05:14

17 provided the last day, trying to merge that with a 11:05:18

18 cost estimate because we decided that the best way 11:05:22

19 to -- I was uncomfortable with any other way of 11:05:24

20 generating a cost estimate, and so I decided to use a 11:05:30

21 per capita assessment and, therefore, on the final 11:05:34

22 calculation, we utilized this demographic growth and 11:05:37



93

1 demographic data in order to come up with a final cost 11:05:42

2 estimate. 11:05:46

3 Q What demographic data did you use? 11:05:46

4 A The demographic data prepared by this other 11:05:48

5 expert who was going to work on this demographic 11:05:52

6 aspect of the project. 11:05:56

7 Q I want to make sure we're saying the same 11:05:56

8 things here. What do you mean when you say 11:05:59

9 demographic data? 11:06:04

10 A The number -- the census data. The number of 11:06:04

11 individuals potentially at risk in the area of the 11:06:10

12 Concession area. 11:06:13

13 Q Did you take into account any data regarding 11:06:13

14 the age of the population? 11:06:18

15 A No. 11:06:19

16 Q The distribution of males versus females? 11:06:20

17 A No. 11:06:26

18 Q The cultural distribution? 11:06:26

19 A I did not. 11:06:27

20 Q Any data other than population? 11:06:29

21 A No. 11:06:34

22 Q Now, towards the end of this e-mail from you 11:06:36



94

1 to Kerry Roche at the Weinberg Group at Exhibit 1205, 11:07:11

2 you say, "I truly enjoy learning new things and new 11:07:16

3 challenges and" -- I assume you mean "do not" -- 11:07:19

4 "shirk from them easily, but should also be realistic 11:07:22

5 and deliver a quality product." 11:07:26

6 Now, what did you mean by that sentence? 11:07:28

7 A I was concerned that the -- there weren't 11:07:29

8 that many data sources. I initially, as I initiated 11:07:35

9 the project and I got myself -- in other words, as I 11:07:38

10 rolled up my sleeves to work on this, I was hoping I 11:07:42

11 would find more data sources. And as I worked on it, 11:07:45

12 I found myself without as much hard information and, 11:07:50

13 therefore -- you know, and I mentioned my concerns 11:07:56

14 right here, the geographic data, demographic 11:08:00

15 situational assessment, a number of things that were 11:08:03

16 missing. 11:08:05

17 And then, you know, we fell back on this 11:08:06

18 position, this was a best cost estimate under the 11:08:09

19 circumstances for the Ecuadorian court. 11:08:12

20 Q You keep emphasizing that this is the best 11:08:14

21 cost estimate under the circumstances for the 11:08:29

22 Ecuadorian court. Do you have any understanding as to 11:08:32



95

1 whether the work that you did would be appropriate for 11:08:37

2 a U.S. court? 11:08:41


4 THE WITNESS: I do. I know that, for the -- 11:08:43

5 some American -- well, for American courts, you truly 11:08:47

6 need to have more data to support whatever you're 11:08:49

7 indicating. 11:08:54

8 BY MR. SELEY: 11:08:54

9 Q But because this was for the Ecuadorian 11:09:01

10 court, you didn't feel that you needed to meet that 11:09:03

11 standard? 11:09:05


13 THE WITNESS: No. I felt I had to meet that 11:09:06

14 standard insofar as my ability and insofar as the data 11:09:09

15 were available. But I did due diligence trying to 11:09:14

16 come up with the data, and since data were not 11:09:18

17 available, this was the work product that we could 11:09:20

18 prepare. 11:09:23



21 BY MR. SELEY: 11:09:24

22 Q I've marked as Exhibit 1207 an e-mail from 11:09:24



96

1 you to Kerry Roche on August 26th at 6:32 a.m. Do you 11:10:13


3 A Yes, I don't recall the specific content of 11:10:25

4 the document, but I do remember sending this e-mail. 11:10:29

5 I'm surprised I was up so early. 11:10:34

6 Q Well, it's a few minutes after the e-mail 11:10:37

7 that you sent at Exhibit 1205. 11:10:42

8 A That's right. They were busy days. 11:10:44

9 Q In this e-mail you include a link to a 11:10:48

10 document on the Internet from the InterAmerican 11:10:53

11 Development Bank. Do you see that? 11:10:57

12 A Uh-huh. 11:10:58

13 Q You're sending this to Kerry Roche at the 11:10:58

14 Weinberg Group? 11:11:01

15 A Correct. 11:11:02

16 Q You indicate that the link is to a document 11:11:02

17 for a project in Guatemala, but it illustrates the 11:11:06

18 task ahead. Now -- 11:11:10


20 Q What did you mean by this document 11:11:11

21 illustrates the task ahead? 11:11:17

22 MR. WESTENBERGER: Objection. The document 11:11:19



97

1 speaks for itself. 11:11:22

2 THE WITNESS: Truly, the document should 11:11:22

3 speak for itself. I don't recall exactly the content 11:11:26

4 of the document, to be honest, but it was probably a 11:11:28

5 comprehensive document looking at -- and I don't 11:11:32

6 believe it was pertaining health care. But it's 11:11:35

7 something to -- the idea of cost estimates. I just 11:11:39

8 don't recall the specific context of the document. 11:11:43

9 BY MR. SELEY: 11:11:45

10 Q Now, at this point, when you sent this e-mail 11:11:59

11 that is Exhibit 1207, did you believe that your role 11:12:02

12 was to put together a document that's similar in scope 11:12:08

13 to the InterAmerican Development Bank document that 11:12:12

14 you linked to? 11:12:15


16 THE WITNESS: No. I think that, in an ideal 11:12:16

17 situation, certainly -- I was looking for documents 11:12:21

18 that could have -- that could be comprehensive and 11:12:24

19 that would be similar to the one that I was tasked 11:12:27

20 with. As time -- and here I was, I think, you know, 11:12:31

21 alluding to my concern because this follows shortly -- 11:12:39

22 yeah, this follows some of my concerns and the 11:12:41



98

1 limitations that we were facing. 11:12:44

2 BY MR. SELEY: 11:12:45

3 Q So you sent this to Ms. Roche as an 11:12:48

4 indication of the amount of information you felt you 11:12:57

5 needed in order to produce your report? 11:13:01


7 THE WITNESS: Potentially. I don't recall 11:13:04

8 exactly the content of the document. 11:13:07



11 BY MR. SELEY: 11:13:08

12 Q Dr. Picone, you've been handed a document 11:13:08

13 that's marked 1208. And this appears to be a document 11:13:32

14 that contains an e-mail you received from Kerry Roche 11:13:40

15 on August 26th at 9:32 a.m. 11:13:47

16 A Uh-huh. 11:13:50

17 Q Do you see that? 11:13:51

18 A I do. 11:13:51

19 Q Do you recognize this document? 11:13:52

20 A I do. 11:13:53

21 Q All right. Now, this e-mail from Ms. Roche 11:13:53

22 cc's Ted Dunkelberger and Marla Scarola, right? 11:14:01



99

1 A Correct. 11:14:06

2 Q Now, in that e-mail, Ms. Roche says that, 11:14:06

3 "This seems like an overwhelming task at this point." 11:14:12

4 Do you see that? 11:14:15

5 A Yes. I indicated that on my previous e-mail. 11:14:15

6 Q And she indicates she wants to set up a call 11:14:18

7 so that we can make sure you're headed in the right 11:14:23

8 correction. 11:14:27


10 A I do. 11:14:27

11 Q Now, you sent this e-mail to your wife? 11:14:28

12 A Yes. 11:14:31

13 Q Why did you do that? 11:14:32

14 A I don't recall the specifics, but I share a 11:14:34

15 lot of information with my wife. I e-mail, as she 11:14:38

16 e-mails me, several times a day. But one of the 11:14:41

17 reasons why because of the -- I was -- at that point, 11:14:44

18 I felt a bit worried about the number of data sources, 11:14:49

19 and I truly wanted to get my hands on as many as I 11:14:54

20 could. And I was a little bit worried that they were 11:14:58

21 not materializing. 11:15:03

22 Q Could you turn back to Exhibit 1202, please, 11:15:04



100

1 which is your August invoice. 11:15:38

2 A Okay. 11:15:41

3 Q That invoice indicates that you had a call on 11:15:44

4 August 26th, a conference call for one hour. 11:15:57

5 A Uh-huh. 11:16:00

6 Q Was that a call with the Weinberg Group? 11:16:00

7 A Yes. 11:16:03

8 Q And was that a call that was in response to 11:16:04

9 the e-mails that we've just been discussing? 11:16:07

10 A Correct. 11:16:09

11 Q What was the substance of that call? 11:16:10

12 A Well, I voiced my concerns, as I indicate in 11:16:13

13 my e-mail, and -- that I wanted to get more hard data 11:16:19

14 to produce these documents -- and my expert report. 11:16:24

15 And the response was, we need to continue to 11:16:28

16 search for available data, but we need to recognize 11:16:34

17 that the scope of the report is to come up with a best 11:16:41

18 cost estimate. And so as long as we -- we kept 11:16:44

19 that -- in other words, the final -- my recollection 11:16:55

20 is the final outcome of that conversation was, let's 11:16:59

21 keep the eye on the ball; the goal here is to come up 11:17:02

22 with a cost estimate looking at as many data sources 11:17:05



101

1 as we have, considering the amount of time we have and 11:17:08

2 considering the data available in the field. 11:17:12



5 BY MR. SELEY: 11:17:15


7 marked as Exhibit 1209. And this appears to be an 11:17:44

8 e-mail chain between you and Marla Scarola on 11:17:49

9 August 26th. Is that an accurate description of -- 11:17:54

10 A Yes. 11:17:57

11 Q -- this document? 11:17:58


13 Q Now, if you look at the earliest e-mail in 11:18:00

14 the chain, Ms. Scarola is indicating that she tried to 11:18:05

15 call you and is looking for guidance about what action 11:18:09

16 you want her to take. Do you see that? 11:18:12

17 A Uh-huh. 11:18:14

18 Q What was your understanding at this time of 11:18:14

19 Ms. Scarola's background and expertise? 11:18:17

20 A She's an attorney as well. She has helped 11:18:19

21 with other projects. She works with the Weinberg 11:18:24

22 Group, and she was available to support my research of 11:18:28



102

1 the subject. 11:18:31

2 Q Do you know whether Ms. Scarola has any 11:18:31

3 scientific background? 11:18:34

4 A I do not. 11:18:35

5 Q In response to her e-mail, you send an e-mail 11:18:37

6 at 2:07 p.m. in Exhibit 1209 where you indicate you 11:18:49

7 want to know whether you're dealing with all four 11:18:56

8 provinces or just a few cantons within the two 11:18:59

9 mentioned in the report, Sucumbios and Orellana. 11:19:03


11 A I do. 11:19:10

12 Q Is the report you're referring to there the 11:19:10

13 Cabrera report? 11:19:13

14 A I don't recall if it was -- the -- I don't 11:19:14

15 recall if it was the Cabrera report or the -- because 11:19:22

16 I also had a little map that indicated the location of 11:19:26

17 the wells, and so I don't recall if it was the map -- 11:19:30

18 I'm referring to the map and what's in the map or the 11:19:33

19 Cabrera report itself. 11:19:36

20 Q Where did you get the map that you're 11:19:37

21 referring to? 11:19:39

22 A I think it was part of the Cabrera report, 11:19:40



103

1 but I remember it was a separate sheet. But I seem to 11:19:47

2 recall that it was embedded as well inside one of the 11:19:52

3 documents. 11:19:55

4 Q Did someone hand that map to you separately? 11:19:55

5 A Yes. When I went to the initial meeting in 11:20:03

6 late August, I remember I was given a copy of the 11:20:08

7 Cabrera report, the P annex, and that map that was a 11:20:12

8 separate sheet. 11:20:18

9 Q So someone at the Weinberg Group gave you 11:20:18

10 that map? 11:20:21

11 A Yes. 11:20:21

12 Q Did you produce that map in this case? 11:20:21

13 A No, I don't recall. I don't think so. 11:20:23

14 MR. WESTENBERGER: Of course the witness 11:20:28

15 testified it's his recollection that it's actually 11:20:29

16 part of the Cabrera report and he's not certain that 11:20:32

17 it's independent of that. 11:20:36

18 BY MR. SELEY: 11:20:36

19 Q You were handed that map separately? 11:20:36

20 A I think so, but I seem to recall that it was 11:20:44

21 part of the bigger document of the Cabrera report. 11:20:46

22 Q Do you know that for sure? 11:20:49



104

1 A I'm not certain. 11:20:51

2 Q Why did you not produce that map? 11:20:53

3 A Because, truly, I forgot, number one. Number 11:21:00

4 two, I thought it was embedded in the document. I 11:21:05

5 really thought it was part of the document. 11:21:09

6 Q What are the four provinces you're referring 11:21:10

7 to in your e-mail of 2:07 p.m. on Exhibit 1209? 11:21:15

8 A The four provinces that seem to be 11:21:22

9 geographically related to Texaco's activities in this 11:21:27

10 region. The two that certainly -- that I do remember 11:21:29

11 is Sucumbios and Orellana. Now, I don't recall the 11:21:33

12 name of the other two, but if I see a list of the 11:21:42

13 cantons I will remember. 11:21:43

14 Q What's the difference between provinces and 11:21:45

15 cantons? 11:21:48

16 A In Ecuador, the provinces are divided in 11:21:48

17 cantons, which are like counties within the province. 11:21:54

18 Q And would a province, then, be like a state 11:21:58

19 in the U.S.? 11:22:02

20 A That's right, yes. 11:22:03

21 Q The Cabrera report that you were given, was 11:22:06

22 that in English or Spanish? 11:22:23



105

1 A It was in English. 11:22:25

2 Q Did anyone indicate to you that that was a 11:22:27

3 translation of the document that was filed in Ecuador? 11:22:35

4 A No, I don't recall ever hearing about a 11:22:37

5 translation. 11:22:42

6 Q So no one indicated to you how that English 11:22:44

7 version of the Cabrera report was generated? 11:22:51

8 A No. 11:22:53

9 Q When you were given the Cabrera report, did 11:22:53

10 anyone raise with you the fact that there had been 11:23:06

11 questions raised about its authorship? 11:23:12

12 MR. WESTENBERGER: Objection. You've covered 11:23:16

13 all this territory already. 11:23:18


15 BY MR. SELEY: 11:23:20

16 Q Now, in Ms. Scarola's response to your e-mail 11:23:20

17 of 2:07 p.m. on Exhibit 1209, she indicates that she 11:23:33

18 does not know the population of interest; is that 11:23:39

19 right? 11:23:49

20 A Correct. 11:23:49

21 Q Now, did you take that to mean that she did 11:23:51

22 not know whether your report was supposed to cover all 11:23:55



106

1 four provinces versus just Sucumbios and Orellana? 11:23:57

2 A I don't think she knew the answer. 11:24:01

3 Q She also, in that e-mail, asks for you to 11:24:03

4 send her a draft outline. 11:24:11

5 A Correct. 11:24:12

6 Q Did you do that? 11:24:13

7 A I did. 11:24:14



10 BY MR. SELEY: 11:24:14


12 marked as Exhibit 1210. Do you recognize this 11:24:46

13 document? 11:24:49

14 A Yes. 11:24:49

15 Q This document appears to be an e-mail from 11:24:52

16 you to Marla Scarola attaching a draft outline of your 11:24:56

17 report; is that right? 11:25:03

18 A Seems to be. Attaches a document with 11:25:04

19 comments from the plaintiff on the Cabrera report as 11:25:08

20 well as the author's response. 11:25:10

21 Q I'm looking -- 11:25:10

22 A For commentary -- annex P, yeah. 11:25:14



107

1 Q So, yes, this is e-mail from you to 11:25:17

2 Ms. Scarola attaching a draft outline of your report? 11:25:20

3 A She sends me this record, yes, correct. Oh, 11:25:22

4 I'm sorry. You're talking about at the top. Yes. I 11:25:28

5 sent a draft document on the outline for health care 11:25:32

6 delivery system, yes. 11:25:36

7 Q If you go to the last page of Exhibit 1210, 11:25:37

8 that is the document that was attached to this e-mail. 11:25:48

9 Do you recognize that page? 11:25:54

10 A I do. 11:25:55

11 Q That's the page marked with the Bates number 11:25:55

12 at the bottom 5831. What is that? 11:25:59

13 A It's just the -- as indicated, it's a draft 11:26:03

14 outline in order to generate the report. I thought I 11:26:07

15 had to get information, the geographic area, the 11:26:13

16 population at risk -- all the information. 11:26:18

17 Essentially, this was a -- the tasks ahead. Sort of 11:26:19

18 an outline and a list of things that I needed to 11:26:24

19 generate the report. 11:26:27

20 Q Okay. In the first sentence under 11:26:28

21 "objective," you indicate that, "TWG has been asked to 11:26:36

22 provide an expert report on cost estimates for the 11:26:39



108

1 development of a health care system for the affected 11:26:42

2 communities of Sucumbios and Orellana in northeastern 11:26:46

3 Ecuador." 11:26:50


5 A I do. 11:26:52

6 Q What does TWG stand for? 11:26:52

7 A The Weinberg Group. 11:26:55

8 Q So at this point, did you believe that the 11:26:56

9 Weinberg Group was going to provide the expert report? 11:26:59

10 A The Weinberg Group was going to -- they were 11:27:01

11 obtaining experts to generate the report from these 11:27:06

12 four experts. 11:27:12

13 Q Okay. Looking under the section on Bates 11:27:13

14 number 5831 titled, "Proposed tasks," the first 11:27:23

15 proposed task is, "An evaluation of geographic area 11:27:30

16 and population at risk." 11:27:33

17 What do you mean by population at risk here? 11:27:36

18 A Population at risk. That is proximity to 11:27:38

19 wells and, you know, truly if -- if we're talking 11:27:43

20 about people who have been potentially affected by the 11:27:47

21 exploration, oil exploration and so forth, you know, 11:27:52

22 what type of -- how many people are we talking about? 11:27:55



109

1 What is the proximity? That's it -- I think it's 11:27:58

2 self-explanatory, evaluation of geographic area and 11:28:03

3 population at risk. 11:28:06

4 Q Let's look at number 3 under your proposed 11:28:09

5 tasks which is titled, "Survey of population's basic 11:28:12

6 health indicators." 11:28:16

7 Why is that important to your work? 11:28:18

8 A Because it's important to know where they are 11:28:20

9 and where we want to go. 11:28:24

10 Q I'm sorry. Where what are? 11:28:26

11 A Where they were. I mean, essentially, where 11:28:28

12 this population is pertaining -- level of sanitation, 11:28:31

13 level of education, basic health care. And -- so the 11:28:35

14 current situation and where we want to take that 11:28:39

15 population to. 11:28:43

16 Q What impact does the level of sanitation have 11:28:43

17 on illnesses? 11:28:48


19 THE WITNESS: Major. 11:28:52

20 BY MR. SELEY: 11:28:55

21 Q What about the level of education? What 11:29:01

22 impact does that have on illness? 11:29:03



110


2 THE WITNESS: They are both interrelated. 11:29:06

3 BY MR. SELEY: 11:29:08

4 Q What about nutrition? 11:29:11


6 THE WITNESS: Likewise. 11:29:14

7 BY MR. SELEY: 11:29:15

8 Q Immunization? 11:29:17

9 MR. WESTENBERGER: Same objection. 11:29:19

10 THE WITNESS: All of the above. 11:29:19

11 BY MR. SELEY: 11:29:21

12 Q Under number 4 on proposed tasks, your 11:29:21

13 outline indicates that you should focus on disease 11:29:35

14 entities potentially related to toxic exposures. Why 11:29:38

15 is that important? 11:29:42

16 A Because here we're claiming that this area 11:29:42

17 has been contaminated and it has resulted in health 11:29:49

18 effects and, therefore, we should probably have -- 11:29:53

19 this is sort of an ideal situation. In other words, I 11:29:56

20 was trying to come up with a list of things that 11:30:00

21 ideally I should answer in order to come up with an 11:30:02

22 adequate report or with a cost estimate. And so, 11:30:06



111

1 pertaining to these allegations, I thought that it was 11:30:13

2 important to have a monitoring system as well. 11:30:17

3 Q Okay. So in order to evaluate the health 11:30:20

4 care costs associated with allegations of exposure to 11:30:22

5 petroleum, you need to identify what disease entities 11:30:28

6 are related to that exposure? 11:30:32


8 THE WITNESS: Ideally. 11:30:34

9 MR. SELEY: All right. 11:30:36

10 MR. WESTENBERGER: I need to take a short 11:30:39

11 break. 11:30:52

12 MR. SELEY: One second. Let me just check 11:30:52

13 here. Okay. Why don't we go ahead and take a break 11:30:57

14 right now. 11:31:02

15 MR. WESTENBERGER: Five minutes should do it. 11:31:02

16 MR. SELEY: Okay. That's fine. 11:31:02

17 THE VIDEOGRAPHER: The time is 11:31 a.m. We 11:31:02

18 are going off the record. 11:31:10


20 THE VIDEOGRAPHER: The time is 11:43 a.m. We 11:31:12

21 are back on the record. 11:43:00

22 BY MR. SELEY: 11:43:01



112

1 Q Dr. Picone, you still have in front of you 11:43:01

2 Exhibit 1210, and we were looking at your outline. In 11:43:04

3 particular, I'd like to draw your attention to 11:43:10

4 number 6 under proposed tasks in your outline. 11:43:13

5 Number 6 says, "Cost analysis and budget development," 11:43:19

6 then there's a question mark and the word "methods." 11:43:23

7 Now, what did you mean by that part of your 11:43:26

8 outline? 11:43:28

9 A What type of methods are we going to use to 11:43:28

10 analyze costs? Essentially, what -- I think it's 11:43:33

11 self-explanatory. 11:43:39

12 Q So at this point, you did not have a 11:43:39

13 particular method in mind to analyze costs, is that 11:43:43

14 right? 11:43:48

15 MR. ZEFUTIE: Objection to form. 11:43:48

16 THE WITNESS: I had a method in mind. The -- 11:43:48

17 I had this outline. I wanted to fill in the blanks 11:43:53

18 for each one of these particular items and, once that 11:43:55

19 was all determined, then come up with a cost analysis. 11:44:00

20 And budget developments going forward -- that was the 11:44:05

21 idea. 11:44:09

22 BY MR. SELEY: 11:44:09



113

1 Q But in the end, that's not the methodology 11:44:11

2 that you ultimately used? 11:44:14

3 MR. ZEFUTIE: Objection to the form. 11:44:15

4 THE WITNESS: Correct. 11:44:16

5 BY MR. SELEY: 11:44:17

6 Q All right. Looking back at Exhibit 1202, 11:44:18

7 which is your August invoice, on August 27th you had 11:44:21

8 an one-and-a-half-hour conference call. Was that 11:44:26

9 conference call with the Weinberg Group as well? 11:44:32

10 A Correct. 11:44:34

11 Q Who was on that call? 11:44:34

12 A I believe Marla Scarola, Kerry Roche and Ted 11:44:36

13 Dunkelberger. I'm not sure Kerry was part -- Kerry 11:44:43

14 Roche was part of that, but certainly Marla and Ted 11:44:51

15 Dunkelberger. 11:44:55

16 Q And what was the purpose of that call? 11:44:55

17 A To review the outline. 11:44:58

18 Q Did Ted Dunkelberger and Marla Scarola 11:44:59

19 provide comments on your outline? 11:45:05

20 A They did. 11:45:06

21 Q What was the nature of those comments? 11:45:09

22 A How would we go about procuring that 11:45:11



114

1 information. 11:45:17

2 Q Did they make any changes to your outline? 11:45:17

3 A No. They felt that the outline was adequate, 11:45:21

4 but the question is, how could we best answer each one 11:45:24

5 of those items. 11:45:29

6 Q Now, that same afternoon, Ms. Scarola sent 11:45:29

7 you a report on health statistics of Ecuador from 11:45:43

8 USAID. Do you recall that? 11:45:47


10 THE WITNESS: I don't recall it specifically, 11:45:50

11 but yes, there was -- we shared documents back and 11:45:52

12 forth. 11:45:54

13 BY MR. SELEY: 11:45:54

14 Q I believe she also sent you a link to the 11:45:56

15 INEC database. And we've already talked about what 11:45:58

16 INEC is? 11:46:01

17 A Yes. 11:46:02

18 MR. ZEFUTIE: Counsel, so I'm clear, are we 11:46:04

19 referring to any exhibit? 11:46:07

20 MR. SELEY: No. 11:46:08

21 MR. ZEFUTIE: No? Okay. 11:46:09

22 BY MR. SELEY: 11:46:09



115

1 Q Do you have any understanding as to why 11:46:09

2 Ms. Scarola sent you either of those documents? 11:46:12

3 A She was supporting my effort, and she was 11:46:15

4 trying to obtain documents that may potentially be 11:46:20

5 pertinent. 11:46:27

6 Q Did you ask her specifically for these 11:46:27


8 A No. 11:46:31

9 Q These are documents she collected on her own 11:46:32

10 and forwarded to you? 11:46:36

11 A Correct. 11:46:36


13 BY MR. SELEY: 11:46:42

14 Q Now, on your invoice at Exhibit 1202 you 11:46:42

15 indicate that you did document review on the 28th, 11:46:56

16 29th, 30th and 31st of August; is that right? 11:47:01

17 A Correct. 11:47:06

18 Q And you spent about eight hours over those 11:47:07

19 four days reviewing documents? 11:47:15

20 A A little more -- 11:47:18


22 THE WITNESS: -- than that, but that's what I 11:47:19



116

1 felt comfortable submitting a bill for. 11:47:22

2 BY MR. SELEY: 11:47:24

3 Q The documents you were reviewing over those 11:47:25

4 four days, were they the documents that had been sent 11:47:28

5 to you by Ms. Scarola? 11:47:30


7 THE WITNESS: That was one of them. I did an 11:47:33

8 open search on the Internet, I looked at the INEC 11:47:37

9 database and the documents that I have provided. 11:47:39

10 BY MR. SELEY: 11:47:41

11 Q You also have an entry at the bottom of 11:47:43

12 Exhibit 1202 for "e-mail - telephone communication - 11:47:47

13 month." 11:47:53

14 What is that entry? 11:47:54

15 A That is to account for the time that I spent 11:47:55

16 communicating back and forth, e-mailing on the -- on 11:47:59

17 the telephone. 11:48:03



20 BY MR. SELEY: 13:56:32

21 Q Dr. Picone, you have been provided a document 11:48:48

22 marked as Exhibit 1211. Do you recognize that 11:48:52



117

1 document, sir? 11:48:57

2 A I do. 11:48:58

3 Q What is that document? 11:48:59

4 A It's another invoice for the month of 11:48:59

5 September. 11:49:01

6 Q So Exhibit 1202 was an invoice for the month 11:49:04

7 of August, and 1211 is an invoice for the month of 11:49:11

8 September? 11:49:15

9 A Correct. 11:49:15

10 Q Does this invoice at 1211 accurately reflect 11:49:16

11 the time that you spent on the project in Ecuador in 11:49:27

12 September? 11:49:30

13 A No. As I said, I spent a lot more time than 11:49:31

14 this. But I just felt that I could not be billing for 11:49:35

15 all of the time because there was, as I indicated 11:49:39

16 before, quite a bit of time that I spent researching, 11:49:44

17 educating myself and learning about all the ins and 11:49:47

18 outs of the project. 11:49:50

19 Q What was your hourly billing rate? 11:49:51

20 A 300. 11:49:54

21 Q $300 an hour? 11:49:55

22 A Correct. 11:49:57



118

1 Q Did you have any agreement with the Weinberg 11:49:58

2 Group as to a cap on your total bills? 11:50:06

3 A No. 11:50:09

4 Q Did they indicate to you how much they 11:50:10

5 expected you to bill them? 11:50:15

6 A Not at all. 11:50:18

7 Q Did they indicate to you how many hours they 11:50:19

8 expected you to spend on this? 11:50:22

9 A Not at all. In fact, they were surprised 11:50:23

10 that I did not bill for all of the hours that I spent 11:50:26

11 on it. 11:50:28

12 Q On September 1st, your invoice indicates that 11:50:29

13 you had a two-and-a-half-hour meeting with the 11:50:38

14 Weinberg Group; is that right? 11:50:40

15 A That's what it says. 11:50:41

16 Q Where did you have that meeting? 11:50:43

17 A At the Weinberg Group, in their offices on 11:50:45

18 19th Street. 11:50:49

19 Q And who was present at that meeting? 11:50:49

20 A As I recall -- I've been there many times, as 11:50:51

21 it is indicated on my invoice. So, likely, Ted 11:50:58

22 Dunkelberger, Marla Scarola and Kerry Roche. 11:51:02



119

1 Q Other than Ted Dunkelberger, Marla Scarola 11:51:06

2 and Kerry Roche, did you meet with anyone else at the 11:51:13

3 Weinberg Group -- 11:51:16

4 MR. ZEFUTIE: Objection. 11:51:16

5 BY MR. SELEY: 11:51:16

6 Q -- at any time on this project? 11:51:18


8 THE WITNESS: One time I met a plaintiffs' 11:51:20

9 attorney. I don't recall exactly which one of these 11:51:24

10 meetings. It was a brief encounter. 11:51:26

11 MR. ZEFUTIE: And let me just state for the 11:51:29

12 record, you know, don't reveal any privileged 11:51:31

13 communications. 11:51:33

14 THE WITNESS: Yeah. Absolutely. 11:51:34

15 BY MR. SELEY: 11:51:34

16 Q But you can tell me if you met with the 11:51:35

17 attorney. 11:51:37

18 MR. ZEFUTIE: Yes. 11:51:38

19 THE WITNESS: Yeah, I did. 11:51:39

20 BY MR. SELEY: 11:51:40

21 Q Do you know when that was? 11:51:40

22 A I just don't recall exactly which one of 11:51:41



120

1 those meetings, but at one of the meetings I did. 11:51:44

2 Q Do you remember the name of the plaintiffs' 11:51:46

3 attorney? 11:51:47

4 A There was one gentleman that stands out, a 11:51:47

5 tall gentleman named Donziger. 11:51:51

6 Q And was that meeting with Mr. Donziger at the 11:51:54

7 Weinberg Group offices? 11:52:00

8 A Yes. I was not scheduled to meet with them. 11:52:02

9 They happened to be in a meeting, and I came in to 11:52:09

10 meet with Marla and Kerry Roche, as I recall. And I 11:52:13

11 was introduced, and they explained to me who they 11:52:17

12 were. 11:52:20

13 Q You said "they." 11:52:20

14 A Yes. He was accompanied by another 11:52:23

15 gentleman, another attorney, whose name I don't 11:52:28

16 recall, but was a lot shorter. 11:52:30

17 Q Who else was in that meeting with 11:52:36

18 Mr. Donziger? 11:52:43


20 THE WITNESS: Was this other colleague of 11:52:44

21 his, Ted Dunkelberger, the -- Mr. Weinberg was there 11:52:49

22 in the meeting as well, as I recall. And I was there 11:52:54



121

1 to meet with Marla and Kerry, and they were -- I'd say 11:53:02

2 they participated to some extent in the meeting as 11:53:07

3 well. 11:53:09

4 BY MR. SELEY: 11:53:09

5 Q Do you recall if that meeting was the one 11:53:11

6 meeting you had in August? 11:53:17

7 A I don't believe so. I just don't know which 11:53:18

8 one of them. 11:53:25

9 Q So it's your best recollection that that 11:53:25

10 meeting was one of the four meetings that you had with 11:53:28

11 the Weinberg Group in September? 11:53:34


13 THE WITNESS: Yes, I think so. 11:53:39

14 BY MR. SELEY: 11:53:42

15 Q Would would you recognize the other 11:53:47

16 individual with Mr. Donziger's name if I mentioned it? 11:53:50

17 A Not the name. I certainly would recognize 11:53:53

18 his face. 11:53:59

19 Q I don't carry pictures around, so I don't 11:53:59

20 know that I can help you with that. 11:54:04

21 Was this other colleague an individual at the 11:54:13

22 same law firm as Mr. Donziger? 11:54:16



122


2 THE WITNESS: I don't know. I assume so, but 11:54:19

3 I don't know. 11:54:22

4 BY MR. SELEY: 11:54:22

5 Q Do you know if this other individual was a 11:54:22

6 lawyer at all? 11:54:25


8 THE WITNESS: I thought he was a lawyer, but 11:54:26

9 lawyers all look alike. They all have a tie and they 11:54:29

10 look serious. Like politicians. 11:54:32

11 BY MR. SELEY: 11:54:44

12 Q Did you discuss the substance of your report 11:54:44

13 in the presence of Mr. Donziger? 11:54:50

14 MR. ZEFUTIE: Objection. I'll advise the 11:54:53

15 witness not to answer that question -- 11:54:55


17 MR. ZEFUTIE: -- on the basis of privilege. 11:54:59

18 THE WITNESS: No, I don't recall 11:55:00

19 discussing -- 11:55:02

20 MR. ZEFUTIE: I advise you not to answer the 11:55:02

21 question on the basis of privilege. 11:55:06

22 BY MR. SELEY: 11:55:07



123

1 Q Did you discuss with any of the individuals 11:55:07

2 at the Weinberg Group any information that was 11:55:23

3 provided to them during that meeting that would be 11:55:26

4 relevant to your report? 11:55:29

5 MR. ZEFUTIE: Objection to the form. Assumes 11:55:31

6 facts not in evidence. 11:55:34

7 And to the extent -- do not reveal any 11:55:34

8 privileged communications. 11:55:38

9 THE WITNESS: I truly don't recall. It was a 11:55:39

10 meeting to discuss the progress of the report and -- 11:55:43

11 to discuss the data that we were obtaining and to try 11:55:49

12 to make more progress on our report. 11:55:52

13 BY MR. SELEY: 11:55:54

14 Q Are you aware of whether Mr. Donziger 11:56:00

15 provided any facts that were to be used in your 11:56:03

16 report? 11:56:08



19 BY MR. SELEY: 11:56:09

20 Q Are you aware of whether Mr. Donziger 11:56:10

21 provided any assumptions that you were to use in your 11:56:13

22 report? 11:56:15



124

1 MR. ZEFUTIE: Same objection. 11:56:17


3 BY MR. SELEY: 11:56:18

4 Q Were there any other non-Weinberg Group 11:56:18

5 experts meeting with Mr. Donziger? 11:56:44


7 THE WITNESS: Not that I recall. 11:56:50

8 BY MR. SELEY: 11:56:51

9 Q Is that the same meeting where you shook 11:56:53

10 hands with the individual that was doing some of the 11:56:56

11 epidemiological work? 11:56:59


13 THE WITNESS: No. I think that that was a 11:57:03

14 more -- that was my first meeting, I'm pretty sure, in 11:57:05

15 August when I... 11:57:07



18 BY MR. SELEY: 11:57:10

19 Q Did you have any substantive discussions with 11:57:10

20 Mr. Donziger about your report? 11:57:46


22 THE WITNESS: No, I don't recall. 11:57:49



125

1 BY MR. SELEY: 11:57:51

2 Q You don't recall or no? 11:57:54

3 A No, I don't recall talking to Mr. Donziger to 11:57:55

4 any extent. I met him briefly, and that was the 11:58:00

5 extent of my exposure. 11:58:03

6 Q You've been handed a document marked as 11:58:05

7 Exhibit 1212. This is a series of e-mails, including 11:58:11

8 one from Marla Scarola to you on September 5th, 2010 11:58:19

9 at 12:55. Do you see that, sir? 11:58:28

10 A I do. 11:58:31

11 Q Do you recognize this document? 11:58:31

12 A I do. 11:58:33

13 Q This is an e-mail you received from 11:58:35

14 Ms. Scarola? 11:58:41

15 A Yes. 11:58:41


17 BY MR. SELEY: 11:58:43

18 Q Can you read the first two sentences of the 11:58:43

19 e-mail from Ms. Scarola of the Weinberg Group to you. 11:58:48

20 A "I spoke with Ted this morning and he 11:58:51

21 suggested one option for deriving health care cost 11:58:54

22 estimates. Considering the lack of better 11:58:58



126

1 information, we may need to multiply per capita health 11:58:59

2 expenditures" -- 11:59:03

3 Q That sentence continues, I believe. 11:59:06

4 A Yeah. 11:59:06

5 -- "expenditures by 100,000, estimated total 11:59:09

6 population in the Concession area." 11:59:13

7 Q Ted is Ted Dunkelberger? 11:59:14

8 A Correct. 11:59:16

9 Q So is it your understanding of this e-mail 11:59:17

10 that Mr. Dunkelberger came up with the idea of 11:59:19

11 multiplying per capita health expenditure by the 11:59:23

12 estimated population in the Concession -- 11:59:26


14 Go ahead and answer. 11:59:29

15 THE WITNESS: No. We had spoken about this 11:59:29

16 before. Essentially lack of -- due to the lack of 11:59:32

17 data -- I kept saying, we don't have good hard data; 11:59:36

18 you know, one of the things we could do is -- and then 11:59:42

19 Ted and Marla essentially came up with this World 11:59:46

20 Health Organization health care spending, and they 11:59:50

21 suggested the number. 11:59:52

22 The idea was -- we actually discussed that, 11:59:53



127

1 you know, on the telephone as well. I remember 11:59:57

2 talking about that at one of the meetings and on the 11:59:58

3 telephone. And then apparently they were agreeable 12:00:01

4 that that would be another adequate way. 12:00:05

5 BY MR. SELEY: 12:00:09

6 Q This e-mail says from -- from Marla, "I spoke 12:00:12

7 with Ted this morning and he suggested one option for 12:00:14

8 deriving a health care system cost estimate." 12:00:17


10 Q So that -- does that indicate that he's the 12:00:20

11 one that suggested that option? 12:00:22

12 MR. ZEFUTIE: Objection. The document speaks 12:00:24

13 for itself. 12:00:26

14 THE WITNESS: That's right. Correct, the 12:00:26

15 document speaks for itself. Marla actually does not 12:00:28

16 work at the Weinberg Group. She is based in 12:00:31

17 Blacksburg. She's actually off-site. And so some of 12:00:36

18 the communications I had on-site Marla was not 12:00:39

19 present. 12:00:42

20 So at the time this was sent to me, this 12:00:43

21 really came up in one of the discussions I had at the 12:00:46

22 Weinberg Group, using the per capita expenditure. 12:00:50



128

1 But, yes, to answer your question, the 12:00:54

2 document suggests that this was an idea out of Mr. Ted 12:00:57

3 Dunkelberger. 12:00:59

4 BY MR. SELEY: 12:01:00

5 Q Was using this methodology of multiplying 12:01:00

6 per capita health expenditure times the population in 12:01:06

7 the Concession area your idea? 12:01:10

8 A As I recall, it was a corroborative idea that 12:01:12

9 came out during the course of these meetings. 12:01:15

10 Q Okay. I'm not sure what you mean by 12:01:17

11 collaborative idea. 12:01:19

12 A I just expressed my concern that, you know, 12:01:20

13 we could not come up -- we couldn't really fill in the 12:01:23

14 blanks. This document -- I guess document 1210 -- we 12:01:27

15 had an outline and a number of things to -- a number 12:01:36

16 of blanks to answer, number of questions to answer. 12:01:38

17 Since we could not answer all of these questionnaires, 12:01:41

18 then another fall-back position was to use demographic 12:01:45

19 information and a per capita cost estimate. 12:01:48

20 Q But you don't know who came up with that 12:01:50

21 specific approach? 12:02:00

22 A No, I don't -- if your question is was -- was 12:02:00



129

1 it proposed by Ted Dunkelberger? I couldn't tell you 12:02:06

2 yes, he came up with this idea. I actually just said 12:02:09

3 I was concerned that we couldn't answer the questions. 12:02:14

4 And so, during the course of the discussion, you know, 12:02:16

5 I could say, well, we know health care expenditure 12:02:20

6 per capita, and looking through the INEC database, we 12:02:23

7 could come up with costs per regions. So that was the 12:02:27

8 fall-back position. 12:02:32

9 Q Now, you ultimately adopted this method in 12:02:38

10 your report for calculating health care costs, right? 12:02:41

11 A Correct. 12:02:43

12 Q Now, is Mr. Dunkelberger a health care 12:02:46

13 economist? 12:02:50

14 A No. 12:02:50

15 Q Does he have any advanced degrees in 12:02:50

16 economics? 12:02:55

17 A Not to my knowledge. 12:02:55

18 Q What about in health care policy? 12:02:55

19 A I don't think so. 12:02:58

20 Q Do you know whether Mr. Dunkelberger has 12:02:58

21 either the education or experience to vouch for the 12:03:02

22 scientific validity of the methodology identified in 12:03:06



130

1 Exhibit 1212? 12:03:10


3 THE WITNESS: I do not. 12:03:13

4 BY MR. SELEY: 12:03:14

5 Q Do you know whether this methodology of 12:03:15

6 multiplying per capita health care costs by an 12:03:18

7 estimated population has ever been used in any 12:03:21

8 litigation anywhere in the world? 12:03:23



11 THE WITNESS: I do not know. 12:03:26

12 BY MR. SELEY: 12:03:27

13 Q You're not aware of any case where this 12:03:32

14 methodology has been used; is that right? 12:03:34

15 MR. WESTENBERGER: Objection to the form 12:03:36

16 of -- 12:03:36


18 MR. WESTENBERGER: -- the question. He just 12:03:36

19 answered that question. 12:03:37



22 MR. SELEY: Could we go off the record for 12:03:39



131

1 one second. 12:04:16

2 (Discussion held off the record.) 12:04:16

3 BY MR. SELEY: 12:04:16

4 Q Mr. Picone -- sorry. Dr. Picone, you've been 12:04:16

5 provided a document that's marked Exhibit 1213. Do 12:04:26

6 you recognize this document, sir? 12:04:32

7 A I do. 12:04:34

8 Q This is a document that includes an e-mail 12:04:34

9 from Kerry Roche to you, Mr. Dunkelberger, Ms. Scarola 12:04:38

10 and Myron Weinberg on September 7th, 2010 at 4:22 p.m. 12:04:45

11 A Uh-huh. 12:04:52

12 Q Who is -- is that correct, sir? 12:04:53

13 A Correct. 12:04:55

14 Q Who is Myron Weinberg? 12:04:56

15 A Who is Marla? 12:04:58

16 Q No, Myron Weinberg. 12:05:00

17 A Oh. Myron Weinberg is one of the senior 12:05:02

18 partners -- I believe he's one of the founders of the 12:05:05

19 consulting group. 12:05:10

20 Q The Weinberg Group? 12:05:11

21 A The Weinberg Group, yes. 12:05:12

22 Q Now, this e-mail from Ms. Roche indicates 12:05:14



132

1 that she drafted a section for the report comparing 12:05:19

2 the proposed health care fund -- sorry. Let me start 12:05:24

3 that again. 12:05:31

4 This e-mail indicates that Ms. Roche drafted 12:05:32

5 a section for your report that compares your proposed 12:05:36

6 health care system to the World Trade Center Health 12:05:43

7 Care Fund; is that right? 12:05:48

8 A Right. 12:05:48

9 MR. WESTENBERGER: Objection to form of the 12:05:48

10 question and to the extent that it mischaracterizes 12:05:50

11 the document. 12:05:52

12 BY MR. SELEY: 12:05:54

13 Q And that draft is attached starting at Bates 12:05:56

14 number 5585; is that right? 12:06:02

15 A Correct. 12:06:04

16 Q In the e-mail on Exhibit 1213, Ms. Roche 12:06:05

17 indicates to you that she believes this draft 12:06:22

18 comparison is very rudimentary. When you reviewed 12:06:27

19 this draft, did you agree with that? 12:06:31

20 A Did I agree with it? Well, no, I was 12:06:33

21 concerned that there were major differences with 12:06:39

22 the -- providing health care to the region of the 12:06:41



133

1 Concession -- the Concession area. 12:06:44

2 Q You were concerned that there were major 12:06:47

3 differences between providing health care to the 12:06:49

4 Concession area and providing health care to 12:06:52

5 individuals in New York City? 12:06:57

6 A Absolutely. 12:06:57



9 BY MR. SELEY: 12:06:59

10 Q Dr. Picone, you've been handed an exhibit 12:06:59

11 marked as 1214 which is an e-mail from the e-mail 12:07:29

12 address [email protected] to Kerry Roche. Is 12:07:33

13 that an e-mail from you to Kerry Roche? 12:07:41

14 A It is. 12:07:43

15 Q Dated September 7th, 8:37 p.m.? 12:07:44

16 A Correct. 12:07:47

17 Q Is this an e-mail in response to Ms. Roche's 12:07:48

18 draft of the comparison between providing health care 12:07:55

19 to individuals in the Concession and the World Trade 12:08:03

20 Center Fund? 12:08:05





134


2 BY MR. SELEY: 12:08:07

3 Q In this e-mail to Ms. Roche, you indicated 12:08:13

4 that there were vast differences of providing a cost 12:08:17

5 estimate for the World Trade Center and the Oriente 12:08:21

6 region of Ecuador. 12:08:25

7 A Correct. 12:08:25

8 Q What are those differences? 12:08:26

9 A Well, they're indicated in the document. I 12:08:28

10 said two-thirds of the people live in rural areas and 12:08:33

11 frequently a primary care physician -- primary care 12:08:36

12 provider is a shaman. 12:08:38

13 Q What's a shaman? 12:08:39

14 A Indigenous people in this region frequently 12:08:41

15 use witch doctors. 12:08:45

16 Q Is a shaman a witch doctor? 12:08:50

17 A Correct. 12:08:53

18 Q And you're pointing that out in order to make 12:08:54

19 what point? 12:09:01



22 THE WITNESS: The point that comparing the 12:09:06



135

1 world health -- the World Trade Center collapse and 12:09:10

2 the consequences -- the health consequences to those 12:09:15

3 people impacted, that there were some vast 12:09:19

4 differences, that there were some pros and some cons, 12:09:21

5 but that it was difficult to just take that at face 12:09:25

6 value. 12:09:30

7 BY MR. SELEY: 12:09:30

8 Q Is that what you mean where you say a little 12:09:33

9 further down in this e-mail, "The gap with modern 12:09:36

10 health care is striking"? 12:09:39

11 A Correct. 12:09:41

12 Q The gap here is a gap between what's 12:09:42

13 happening in Ecuador and what is happening in New York 12:09:45

14 City? 12:09:49

15 A Correct. 12:09:49

16 Q A little further down in the e-mail, you say 12:09:49

17 that you've been agonizing over this. What do you 12:09:55

18 mean by that? 12:09:59

19 A I don't know that I used that word. I used 12:10:00

20 agonizing? 12:10:06

21 Q Do you see that? It's in the sentence that 12:10:07

22 begins -- 12:10:11



136

1 A Oh, yeah. 12:10:12

2 Q -- "hopefully" -- 12:10:12

3 A Yeah. Okay. Okay. 12:10:12

4 Q Hold on. Let me get the question out here. 12:10:13

5 A Yes. 12:10:15

6 Q So the sentence begins, "Hopefully, we can 12:10:16

7 wrap up a decent document by tomorrow." Then it says, 12:10:17

8 "I have been agonizing over this," and then continues. 12:10:20

9 What did you mean by "agonizing over this"? 12:10:23

10 A Because I was concerned about the -- as I 12:10:26

11 have indicated several times by now, I was concerned 12:10:28

12 about the inability to fill in the blanks to all the 12:10:31

13 questions I had in order to come up with a final 12:10:36

14 beautiful product. 12:10:41

15 Q And you indicate here that you talked with 12:10:42

16 your brother, the health economist. 12:10:46

17 A Uh-huh. 12:10:47

18 Q Did you, in talking with your brother, talk 12:10:47

19 to him about the methodology that had been proposed to 12:10:54

20 use per capita spending times the population in the 12:10:59

21 Concession? 12:11:03

22 A I mentioned this to him, yes. 12:11:03



137

1 Q What was his reaction to that methodology? 12:11:06

2 A That that was rudimentary at best. 12:11:09



5 BY MR. SELEY: 12:11:20

6 Q Dr. Picone, you've been handed an exhibit 12:11:20

7 marked 1215 which is an e-mail from you to Marla 12:11:47

8 Scarola, Ted Dunkelberger and Kerry Roche at the 12:11:54

9 Weinberg Group dated September 7th, 2010 at 9:05 p.m.; 12:11:57


11 A Uh-huh. 12:12:03

12 Q Okay. And this e-mail attaches a document 12:12:03

13 that's titled, "Draft outline, health care delivery, 12:12:08

14 Ecuador." Do you see that, sir? 12:12:12

15 A I do. 12:12:16

16 Q The document that is -- begins at Bates 12:12:16

17 number 5542 and continues to Bates number 5548 was the 12:12:23

18 document that was attached to this e-mail. Do you 12:12:29

19 recognize that document, sir? 12:12:33

20 A I do. 12:12:34

21 Q And what is that document? 12:12:35

22 A It's a draft line -- it's a draft outline of 12:12:37



138

1 the cost estimate. 12:12:42

2 Q Now, you indicate in the cover e-mail that 12:12:43

3 this draft is not nearly perfect. 12:12:53

4 A Correct. 12:12:57

5 Q What did you mean by that? 12:12:57

6 A That -- as indicated. In other words, it's 12:13:01

7 not perfect because we truly had no -- it was 12:13:06

8 impossible to obtain the data required to generate the 12:13:10

9 final report on cost estimates. 12:13:16

10 Q So you -- 12:13:16

11 A This was a best estimate. 12:13:20

12 Q I'm sorry. I didn't mean to interrupt you, 12:13:21

13 sir. 12:13:24

14 You characterized this draft as not a true 12:13:25

15 cost estimate; is that right? 12:13:31

16 A I characterized that the objective here is 12:13:32

17 not achievable with the information available and 12:13:37

18 without accurate on-site surveys, et cetera. 12:13:40

19 Q And the objective in this case is? 12:13:42

20 A To provide cost estimates. 12:13:44

21 Q When you sent this draft to the Weinberg 12:13:47

22 Group, it was your expectation that you would 12:14:12



139

1 collaborate with the Weinberg Group to refine this 12:14:16

2 draft; is that right? 12:14:19

3 A Yes. 12:14:19

4 Q Now, looking at the draft itself that begins 12:14:20

5 on Bates number 5542 of Exhibit 1215, this draft 12:14:31

6 includes in it the language that had been sent to you 12:14:38

7 by Kerry Roche of the Weinberg Group about comparison 12:14:43

8 to the World Trade Center Fund; is that right? 12:14:50

9 A Correct. 12:14:52

10 Q And you pasted that language into your draft 12:14:52

11 verbatim -- 12:14:57



14 BY MR. SELEY: 12:14:59

15 Q -- isn't that right, sir? 12:15:00

16 A Yeah, we collaborated on this. We had been 12:15:00

17 collaborating before on the World Trade Center 12:15:04

18 project, and so I was very much aware of all this 12:15:07

19 information from the World Trade Center. 12:15:09

20 Q What do you mean when you say you 12:15:10

21 collaborated before on the World Trade Center project? 12:15:15

22 A We -- that is another project we collaborated 12:15:17



140

1 before. When you asked me questions about, you know, 12:15:20

2 how is it that I -- the health care situations that I 12:15:23

3 have reviewed, I reviewed those situations for -- 12:15:26

4 pertaining the World Trade Center. 12:15:30

5 Q Let me make sure I understand this. Are you 12:15:31

6 saying that the work you did with the Weinberg Group 12:15:33

7 in 2008 was associated with the World Trade Center? 12:15:37

8 A Correct. 12:15:40

9 Q Okay. But this specific language that's in 12:15:41

10 your report is the language that was drafted by 12:15:48

11 Ms. Roche; is that right? 12:15:51

12 A It was drafted by Ms. Roche, and we 12:15:52

13 collaborated on it. 12:15:55

14 Q What do you mean by you collaborated on it? 12:15:56

15 A She sent it to me for my review, and I had 12:15:59

16 some comments and some -- in fact, some of the things 12:16:02

17 were corrected, and then it made it into the final 12:16:04

18 report. 12:16:10

19 Q How much of this section was changed from 12:16:10

20 what Ms. Roche sent to you? 12:16:16

21 A Some of it. Minimal changes. 12:16:18

22 Q Now, this draft of your report uses the 12:16:21



141

1 methodology that you had previously testified was 12:16:32

2 methodology you and Ted Dunkelberger discussed? 12:16:38

3 A Correct. 12:16:41

4 Q And that's the methodology of applying -- of 12:16:41

5 multiplying per capita health care cost by population? 12:16:48

6 A Correct. 12:16:50

7 Q All right. So if you turn to Bates number 12:16:50

8 5543, which is the second page of your draft, in the 12:16:56

9 first sentence under "affected area demographics," the 12:17:04

10 draft indicates that, "The population at risk is 12:17:10

11 approximately 100,000 inhabitants." 12:17:12

12 Do you see that, sir? 12:17:15

13 A I do. 12:17:16

14 Q Did you take that number from the 12:17:16

15 September 5th e-mail that was sent to you from the 12:17:22


17 A Correct. But I knew that that number would 12:17:25

18 be refined according to the work of the epidemiologist 12:17:28

19 who was submitting another portion of the report. 12:17:33

20 Q So that 100,000, is that just a place holder 12:17:35

21 for another number that will be inserted later? 12:17:45

22 A Pretty much. I put in demographic data that 12:17:47



142

1 I downloaded from the INEC, on that little table, 12:17:54

2 which reflects a number of 200,000, but I knew that 12:17:58

3 not everyone had been exposed, or was necessarily in 12:18:02

4 the area of concern. 12:18:05

5 Q So you didn't believe, at the time you wrote 12:18:11

6 this draft, that 100,000 inhabitants was the correct 12:18:16

7 number? 12:18:21

8 A It was an approximate number. 12:18:21

9 Q And that estimate of 100,000, you believed 12:18:23

10 that was an approximate number based on your review of 12:18:34

11 the population of the Orellana and Sucumbios 12:18:36

12 provinces? 12:18:42

13 A That -- I knew the number of individuals 12:18:42

14 who -- the number of inhabitants in those regions 12:18:46

15 based on my investigation through the INEC database. 12:18:49

16 I did not know exactly the region of concern and how 12:18:53

17 many individuals we're talking about, the affected 12:18:56

18 population. So that's why I couldn't venture a 12:18:59

19 precise number without additional help. 12:19:03

20 Q Okay. So it was your belief that at some 12:19:04

21 point there would be a more refined estimate of the 12:19:09

22 number of affected individuals? 12:19:13



143

1 A Yes. 12:19:14

2 Q And that number would be plugged into this 12:19:15

3 section of your report? 12:19:18

4 A Yes. 12:19:18

5 Q All right. Let's look at the next section of 12:19:19

6 your report that's titled, "Current health system 12:19:26

7 infrastructure." 12:19:29

8 MR. WESTENBERGER: You're in the draft, 12:19:29

9 correct? 12:19:31

10 BY MR. SELEY: 12:19:32

11 Q Sorry. I'm in the draft at Bates number 12:19:32

12 5543. 12:19:36

13 A Yes. 12:19:39

14 Q Did you write that section on current health 12:19:41

15 system infrastructure? 12:19:45

16 A That's available in the INEC. I did. That's 12:19:45

17 available in the INEC database. And, in fact, this 12:19:49

18 information was also present in the Cabrera report. I 12:19:53

19 confirmed that information looking at the INEC 12:19:58

20 database. 12:20:02

21 Q Just so I understand your testimony, did you 12:20:02

22 take this information from the Cabrera report and then 12:20:10



144

1 confirm it in the INEC database or did you take it 12:20:13

2 from the INEC database and then look at the Cabrera 12:20:16

3 report? 12:20:20

4 A No. I first saw it at the Cabrera report. 12:20:20

5 And I went through documents in the INEC database -- 12:20:23

6 specifically, there was, I believe, a long PDF 12:20:28

7 document that, you know, sort of focused on 12:20:31

8 information on different provinces. And this data was 12:20:33

9 corroborated. 12:20:36

10 Q Now, the last paragraph in that section that 12:20:37

11 begins, "In order to accomplish the stated objective, 12:20:47

12 more accurate surveys of the existing infrastructure 12:20:50

13 are necessary," that reflects the concern you've 12:20:53

14 explained to me about the lack of data available? 12:20:58



17 THE WITNESS: Correct. In other words, just 12:21:03

18 knowing the number of beds, the number of hospitals is 12:21:10

19 a small portion of it. A small portion of the 12:21:18

20 consideration of health care cost estimate. 12:21:22

21 BY MR. SELEY: 12:21:24

22 Q The next sentence there, the one that begins, 12:21:25



145

1 "Moreover," did you write that sentence? 12:21:29


3 Q All right. Let's look at the next section on 12:21:42

4 potential examples of activities and goals. Do you 12:21:46

5 see that section? 12:21:49

6 A I do. 12:21:50

7 Q Did you write that entire section? 12:21:50



10 THE WITNESS: I think I did. 12:21:54

11 BY MR. SELEY: 12:21:55

12 Q Let's look at number 6 in this section. 12:21:58

13 A Uh-huh. 12:22:00

14 Q Number 6 is titled, "Toxicology center and 12:22:00

15 epidemiologic monitoring of contamination-related 12:22:05

16 conditions." 12:22:09


18 A I do. 12:22:10

19 Q What is the purpose of a toxicology center 12:22:10

20 and epidemiologic monitoring of contamination-related 12:22:18

21 conditions? 12:22:24

22 A This is -- in an ideal scenario, if we are 12:22:25



146

1 trying to -- if the claim is that here we are dealing 12:22:29

2 with contamination and conditions that are related to 12:22:34

3 toxic exposures, then we need to have a numerator and 12:22:38

4 a denominator: How many individuals -- you know, 12:22:42

5 what's the population at risk and how many people in 12:22:45

6 that population at risk has been real deemed 12:22:47

7 contaminated and having a clinical condition? 12:22:50

8 So that's why, in an ideal situation, I felt 12:22:54

9 that would be part of a system. 12:22:57

10 Q Moving to the next section in this draft at 12:22:59

11 Bates number 5545, the section that's titled, "Health 12:23:21

12 care expenditure analysis per capita" -- do you see 12:23:26

13 that section, sir? 12:23:28

14 A I do. 12:23:30

15 Q Where do you get the $231 per capita health 12:23:31

16 care expenditure number? 12:23:36



19 THE WITNESS: This was downloaded from the 12:23:39

20 World Health Organization database. 12:23:44

21 BY MR. SELEY: 12:23:46

22 Q Is this $231 per capita an updated number 12:23:48



147

1 from the per capita number that was sent to you by 12:23:55

2 Ms. Scarola? 12:23:59

3 A No. I believe she -- the number that she 12:23:59

4 sent me was 200 or 276 or -- it wasn't 231. But the 12:24:04

5 number that I could come up with that was the most 12:24:09

6 recent, the most up-to-date was 231. 12:24:11

7 Q Now, the $231 per capita number that you use 12:24:13

8 here, that's not an estimate of the additional health 12:24:22

9 care costs that are being incurred as a result of 12:24:27

10 exposure to petroleum, right? 12:24:31

11 A Not at all. 12:24:33

12 Q $231 per person is just the total amount of 12:24:34

13 dollars needed to provide all health care? 12:24:43

14 A Correct. 12:24:47

15 Q So that would include care for communicable 12:24:47

16 diseases, prenatal care, things like that? 12:24:52

17 A Correct. 12:24:56

18 Q So using this methodology in your report of 12:24:56

19 multiplying per capita total health care cost times 12:25:09

20 the population doesn't provide you any estimate of the 12:25:12

21 amount of health care costs associated with petroleum 12:25:16

22 exposure, right? 12:25:19



148


2 question. Asked and answered. 12:25:21


4 MR. SELEY: All right. Why don't we change 12:25:21

5 tapes. 12:25:27

6 THE VIDEOGRAPHER: The time is 12:25 p.m., 12:25:27

7 December 16th. This completes tape number 2. Going 12:25:31

8 off the record. 12:25:34

9 (Lunch recess.) 12:25:34

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22



149

1 AFTERNOON SESSION 12:25:22


3 December 16th, 2010. We're back on record, tape 13:00:12

4 number 3. 13:00:15

5 BY MR. SELEY: 13:00:15

6 Q Doctor, you understand you're still under 13:00:15

7 oath? 13:00:19

8 A I do. 13:00:19

9 Q Did you have any discussions with your 13:00:20

10 counsel about the substance of your testimony? 13:00:22

11 A No. 13:00:23

12 Q We were looking at Exhibit 1215. Do you 13:00:25

13 still have that in front of you, sir? 13:00:33

14 A I do. 13:00:35

15 Q On page Bates numbered 5545, in the section 13:00:36

16 on health care expenditure analysis per capita, you 13:00:48

17 use a projected cost over a 30-year timeline. Do you 13:00:53

18 see that? 13:00:58

19 A I do. 13:00:58

20 Q Why is 30 years being used? 13:00:58

21 A It was -- that number was provided to me by 13:01:02

22 the Weinberg Group. 13:01:06



150

1 Q Who at the Weinberg Group provided that 13:01:06

2 number to you? 13:01:10

3 A I believe it was Mr. Dunkelberger. 13:01:11

4 Q Did Mr. Dunkelberger indicate to you why that 13:01:14

5 30-year period was the period to use? 13:01:18

6 A No. 13:01:20

7 Q As you sit here today, do you have any 13:01:21

8 understanding as to why that 30-year period is being 13:01:27

9 used? 13:01:31

10 A I don't really know the reasons. I think it 13:01:31

11 was an arbitrary estimate, 30 years, but I don't know 13:01:34

12 the reason behind it. 13:01:36

13 Q All right. And then the next section in this 13:01:39

14 draft, the section on comparable health care delivery 13:01:44

15 programs, that's the section that was sent to you by 13:01:47

16 Kerry Roche? 13:01:54

17 A That we collaborated on. Now, initially, it 13:01:55

18 was sent to me by Kerry Roche, yes. 13:01:58

19 Q Okay. In that section, there's a discussion 13:02:01

20 of Agent Orange. Do you see that, sir? 13:02:03

21 A Correct. 13:02:06

22 Q Do you know what Agent Orange is? 13:02:12



151

1 A It was a defoliant used in Vietnam. 13:02:15

2 Q Do you -- strike that. 13:02:20

3 Is it your position that exposure to 13:02:28

4 weathered crude oil results in the same disease 13:02:32

5 outcomes as exposure to Agent Orange? 13:02:35

6 A Absolutely not. 13:02:37

7 Q Is it your position that exposure to crude 13:02:38

8 oil has been linked to a range of disease outcomes? 13:02:42

9 A I'm not aware of good data that supports that 13:02:45

10 conclusion. 13:02:51

11 Q Turning back now to Exhibit 1211 which is 13:02:51

12 your September invoice, that invoice indicates -- 13:03:05

13 A Okay. 13:03:18

14 Q That invoice indicates that you met with the 13:03:19

15 Weinberg Group on September 8th for three-and-a-half 13:03:22

16 hours. Do you recall that meeting, sir? 13:03:27

17 A I remember meeting with them a number of 13:03:29

18 times before the final product was accomplished. 13:03:33

19 And -- but if you ask me do I recall the specifics of 13:03:35

20 that meeting, no, I don't. 13:03:40

21 Q It appears to me that that was the longest 13:03:41

22 meeting you had with the Weinberg Group in September. 13:03:45



152

1 Does that help refresh your recollection of that 13:03:49

2 specific meeting? 13:03:52

3 A It might. You ask me what type of content, 13:03:53

4 and I will be glad to oblige. 13:03:58

5 Q Okay. Well, who was present at that meeting? 13:04:00

6 A Most of these meetings were the same people. 13:04:01

7 So it was Ted Dunkelberger, Kerry Roche. And Marla 13:04:05

8 would join us via telephone. 13:04:08

9 Q Do you recall anyone else being in attendance 13:04:10

10 at that meeting? 13:04:17

11 A No. 13:04:17

12 Q Was there anyone else in attendance by 13:04:20

13 telephone? 13:04:23

14 A Marla Scarola was in attendance by telephone. 13:04:23

15 Q I'm sorry. Besides Marla Scarola, was there 13:04:27

16 anyone else in attendance by telephone? 13:04:31

17 A Not that I recall. But you could request the 13:04:33

18 telephone records. 13:04:40

19 Q This was a meeting that took place at the 13:04:42

20 Weinberg Group's offices? 13:04:44


22 Q Do you recall the substance of this 13:04:46



153

1 particular meeting? 13:04:48

2 A It was, again, gearing up to preparing the 13:04:51

3 final report. So we were working on the draft and the 13:04:55

4 various iterations of the same draft. 13:04:58

5 Q When you say you were working on the draft, 13:04:59

6 is that the draft that's contained in Exhibit 1215? 13:05:02

7 A Correct. 13:05:05



10 BY MR. SELEY: 13:05:06

11 Q Dr. Picone, you have been provided a document 13:05:06

12 that's marked as Exhibit 1216. Do you recognize this 13:05:41


14 A I do. 13:05:45

15 Q This document contains an e-mail from Chris 13:05:51

16 Arthur dated September 8th at approximately 4:50 p.m. 13:05:56

17 to you, cc'ing Kerry Roche; is that right, sir? 13:06:01

18 A Uh-huh. Yes. 13:06:06

19 Q And attached to that document is -- sorry. 13:06:07

20 Attached to that e-mail is a document titled, "Health 13:06:16

21 care delivery KERO notes, 9/8/2010." Do you see that? 13:06:19

22 A I do. 13:06:26



154

1 Q Attached to Exhibit 1216 behind the first 13:06:27

2 page is the document that was attached to Chris 13:06:45

3 Arthur's e-mail. Do you recognize that document, sir? 13:06:50

4 A I do. 13:06:54

5 Q Is Chris Arthur male or female? 13:06:55

6 A Male. 13:07:04

7 Q Okay. Chris Arthur's e-mail indicates that 13:07:05

8 he's attaching the latest draft. I assume that means 13:07:09

9 the latest draft of your report? 13:07:16

10 A Yes. The latest draft -- we were 13:07:17

11 collaborating on the report, and so it would be going 13:07:18

12 back and forth. His task, as I recall, was to make 13:07:21

13 sure the references corresponded -- that the 13:07:25

14 footnotes -- you know, number 1 corresponded to -- 13:07:30

15 essentially that the references were adequate, were 13:07:33

16 reliable. 13:07:35

17 Q You're talking specifically about Chris 13:07:35

18 Arthur's role? 13:07:40

19 A Yes. He was an -- he's an assistant to Kerry 13:07:40

20 Roche and the rest of the attorneys. 13:07:46

21 Q The e-mail indicates that this draft was sent 13:07:47

22 per Kerry's request. I assume that means Kerry Roche? 13:07:59



155

1 A Yes. 13:08:04

2 Q And the designation "KERO notes," does -- 13:08:04

3 A That's Kerry Roche. 13:08:12

4 Q So these are Kerry Roche's notes on the 13:08:14

5 draft; is that right? 13:08:19

6 A I think that this is -- I don't believe that 13:08:19

7 there are any substantial differences between this 13:08:23

8 document, 1216, and 1215. I think that the document 13:08:25

9 is pretty much the same. 13:08:29

10 Q Okay. 13:08:29

11 A There may be some minor changes. I remember 13:08:30

12 that I had put in my report more of a bullet-type 13:08:34

13 format, and they wanted us to change that into more of 13:08:38

14 a paragraphs and more of a -- you know, this cursive 13:08:41

15 report. 13:08:47

16 Q Well, let's look at the two exhibits you just 13:08:48

17 mentioned, Exhibit 1215 and Exhibit 1216. 13:08:54

18 A Okay. 13:08:58

19 Q The first page of your draft at Exhibit 1215 13:08:59

20 included the objective and proposed tasks. That page 13:09:15

21 has been eliminated from Exhibit 1216? 13:09:20

22 A Correct. 13:09:24



156

1 Q And the draft at 1216, it appears that 13:09:24

2 Ms. Roche highlighted all of the section labeled 13:09:35

3 "affected area demographics." Is that right, sir? 13:09:41

4 A Correct. 13:09:46

5 Q Do you know why Ms. Roche highlighted that 13:09:46

6 section? 13:09:50

7 A I don't know why that was highlighted. I 13:09:50

8 think that, in the final product, the goal was to 13:09:55

9 change this bullet format and the like more into 13:10:02

10 paragraphs and more narrative. And so it may very 13:10:05

11 well be that this had to be the -- it had to be 13:10:09

12 reformatted. 13:10:12

13 Q But no one explained to you why that was 13:10:13

14 highlighted? 13:10:16


16 Q The next section titled, "Current health 13:10:17

17 system infrastructure" -- it looks like Ms. Roche 13:10:24

18 added the note that, "Some exists, but it is 13:10:27

19 inadequate for the affected population" in the title? 13:10:32

20 A Correct. 13:10:35

21 Q Is that just an explanation of what this 13:10:38

22 section needed to include, or is it something else? 13:10:42



157



3 THE WITNESS: I think it's self-explanatory. 13:10:46

4 BY MR. SELEY: 13:10:49

5 Q Okay. And by "self-explanatory," what you're 13:10:50

6 saying is that this just describes what this section 13:10:55

7 needs to include. 13:11:00



10 THE WITNESS: No. It just says, "Current 13:11:01

11 health system infrastructure," and it is obvious from 13:11:05

12 my report that there is infrastructure, but that it's 13:11:09

13 inadequate at present. So I guess she just felt that 13:11:14

14 that should be another line that should be included. 13:11:19

15 BY MR. SELEY: 13:11:21

16 Q Turning to the next section of the report 13:11:32

17 with the title that begins, "Potential activities and 13:11:35

18 goals" -- do you see that, sir? 13:11:38

19 A Yes. 13:11:45

20 Q It appears that Ms. Roche added a new 13:11:45

21 sentence under that title that says, "These people 13:11:50

22 have broad health care needs which can be tied back to 13:11:54



158

1 the environmental damages." 13:11:57

2 Is that right, sir? 13:11:58

3 A Correct. 13:11:59

4 Q What environmental damages is this sentence 13:11:59

5 talking about? 13:12:07

6 A I'm presuming that alludes to environmental 13:12:07

7 damages related to environmental exposures. 13:12:10

8 Q Did you ask Ms. Roche in particular what 13:12:11

9 environmental damages she meant by this? 13:12:15

10 A No, but I assumed that she implied oil 13:12:17

11 products and contamination. 13:12:24

12 Q What is the basis for Ms. Roche's conclusion 13:12:25

13 that broad health care needs can be tied back to 13:12:29

14 environmental damages? 13:12:32



17 THE WITNESS: You can ask Mrs. Roche. 13:12:34

18 BY MR. SELEY: 13:12:36

19 Q So you don't know what the basis is for that 13:12:36

20 statement? 13:12:38

21 A That is just, I think, background information 13:12:38

22 that was provided to me early on. In fact, on the 13:12:41



159

1 final report, there is a comment early on on my report 13:12:44

2 that also alludes to environmental damage. But I 13:12:48

3 wasn't asked to really come up with a causation 13:12:51

4 statement; I was asked to come up with a cost 13:12:54

5 estimate. So I abstain or refrain myself from making 13:12:56

6 a causation statement. 13:13:00

7 Q Okay. So you didn't reach the conclusion 13:13:04

8 that health care needs of the population in the 13:13:07

9 Oriente can be tied to Texaco's operations; is that 13:13:10

10 right? 13:13:15

11 A No. 13:13:15

12 Q Okay. 13:13:15

13 A I did not. 13:13:16

14 Q And you didn't reach the conclusion that 13:13:16

15 health care needs of the population in the Oriente can 13:13:19

16 be tied back to any particular environmental damages? 13:13:22

17 A No. 13:13:24

18 Q You're not taking the position that any 13:13:25

19 environmental damage alleged to be associated with 13:13:56

20 Texaco activities are causing communicable diseases in 13:13:58

21 the Oriente region, right? 13:14:02

22 A Certainly not. 13:14:03



160

1 Q And you're not taking the position that any 13:14:04

2 alleged environmental damage from Texaco activities is 13:14:11

3 causing heart disease in the Oriente region, right? 13:14:14

4 A No. 13:14:17

5 Q Diabetes? 13:14:18

6 A No single disease. 13:14:19

7 Q Again, comparing Exhibit 1215 to 13:14:20

8 Exhibit 1216, in 1215, in this section on potential 13:14:45

9 activities and goals, you had a notation about 13:14:53

10 toxicology center and epidemiologic monitoring. And 13:14:59

11 we discussed that earlier. 13:15:03

12 A Yes. 13:15:03

13 Q That does not appear in the draft that 13:15:04

14 Ms. Roche sent you, does it? 13:15:09

15 A No, it does not seem to be there. 13:15:10

16 Q Okay. Did you discuss with Ms. Roche why she 13:15:17

17 eliminated that notation from this draft? 13:15:21

18 A I don't -- 13:15:23



21 THE WITNESS: I don't recall. 13:15:24

22 BY MR. SELEY: 13:15:25



161

1 Q I'm sorry. You don't recall discussing it 13:15:27

2 with her? 13:15:30

3 A No, I don't recall the specifics of that, 13:15:30

4 whether to include that or not. But truly we felt 13:15:33

5 that it was probably beyond the scope of the -- we had 13:15:39

6 already laid out why there were limitations. This was 13:15:41

7 a best attempt to provide a list of things that we 13:15:44

8 would need in order to come up with an accurate 13:15:50

9 product. And so this was the best estimate, the best 13:15:54

10 approximation. And so putting additional information 13:15:56

11 about toxicology centers isn't that -- we felt it was 13:16:00

12 beyond the scope of the product -- of the report. 13:16:04

13 Q Did she explain that to you or is that your 13:16:10

14 understanding based on your reading of the report? 13:16:16

15 A No. That is something that we discussed back 13:16:18

16 and forth, trying to keep it relatively clean, 13:16:24

17 succinct and on key. 13:16:27

18 Q In Exhibit 1216, can you turn to the page 13:16:29

19 that ends in the Bates number 5559, please. 13:16:36

20 A Yes. 13:16:39

21 Q In looking at the series of paragraphs at the 13:16:40

22 top of that page, it appears that Ms. Roche added a 13:16:49



162

1 sentence that reads, "One example of many is the 13:16:53

2 deforestation that had impacted the treatment of basic 13:16:57

3 health care needs by shamans." 13:17:01


5 A I do. 13:17:05

6 Q Okay. Did you have any discussion with 13:17:05

7 Ms. Roche as to the basis for this conclusion that 13:17:12

8 deforestation had impacted treatment? 13:17:17



11 THE WITNESS: I don't recall the specifics, 13:17:23

12 but we did try to ruminate other ways of, you know, 13:17:26

13 explaining the needs of these people. I don't recall 13:17:34

14 specifically this part right here as far as 13:17:40

15 deforestation. 13:17:43

16 BY MR. SELEY: 13:17:43

17 Q Did you do any research into deforestation? 13:17:48

18 A No. 13:17:50

19 Q Do you know if Ms. Roche did any research 13:17:51

20 into deforestation? 13:17:55

21 A I do not. 13:17:55

22 Q Did you review any of the reports that have 13:17:57



163

1 been submitted in the Ecuador case regarding 13:18:02

2 deforestation? 13:18:04

3 A No. 13:18:04

4 Q Do you know if Ms. Roche reviewed any of 13:18:05

5 those reports? 13:18:08

6 A I do not know. 13:18:09

7 Q Under that sentence, there's a -- some 13:18:10

8 wording that says, "Cite INEC document." 13:18:23

9 Do you know what that language is referring 13:18:26

10 to? 13:18:31

11 A It's referring to one of the documents that 13:18:31

12 is -- that should be in the references, should be in 13:18:34

13 the back in references. If it's not in this final 13:18:42

14 product -- it should be in the final product. Because 13:18:46

15 there was one document that was downloaded from the 13:18:49

16 INEC database. 13:18:51

17 Q Did that document have to do with 13:18:52

18 deforestation? 13:18:55

19 A No. The document had to do with the 13:18:55

20 population, the -- mostly with the demographics, the 13:18:58

21 current infrastructure -- health care infrastructure, 13:19:03

22 and also was an analysis on, you know, how many 13:19:07



164

1 people -- the degree of -- the literacy rate, 13:19:10

2 sanitation, how many people were seen by, you know, 13:19:15

3 witch doctors, shamans and so forth. 13:19:19

4 Q Now, do you have any scientific basis to 13:19:22

5 conclude that deforestation in the Oriente is the 13:19:33

6 result of Texaco operations? 13:19:37

7 A No. 13:19:37



10 BY MR. SELEY: 13:19:40

11 Q Do you have any basis to assess whether 13:19:40

12 Ms. Roche's statement about deforestation impacting 13:19:48

13 treatment by shamans is accurate? 13:19:53




17 BY MR. SELEY: 13:19:56

18 Q Turning to the next section in Exhibit 1216, 13:19:58

19 the draft that you had received from Ms. Roche, and 13:20:14

20 comparing it to the section in 1215 on health care 13:20:17

21 expenditure analysis per capita, it appears that the 13:20:26

22 first paragraph in that section in 1216 was added by 13:20:30



165

1 Ms. Roche; is that right? 13:20:35

2 A I don't see a new paragraph, but -- do you 13:20:36

3 mean -- 13:20:49

4 Q Okay. Let me see if I can do a better job of 13:20:49

5 directing you here. I'm looking at section -- the 13:20:53

6 section that's titled, "Health care expenditure 13:20:57

7 analysis per capita." 13:21:00

8 A Uh-huh. 13:21:00

9 Q And in Exhibit 1216, that section starts with 13:21:01

10 a paragraph that begins, "It is difficult, if not 13:21:07

11 impossible, to obtain definitive numbers on health 13:21:09

12 care costs in this region." 13:21:13


14 A I do. 13:21:15

15 Q I'm now looking back at Exhibit 1215 in the 13:21:15

16 section titled, "Health care expenditure analysis 13:21:20

17 per capita," and I don't see that paragraph. So the 13:21:23

18 paragraph that begins, "It is difficult, if not 13:21:30

19 impossible, to obtain definitive numbers on health 13:21:34

20 care costs in the region" in Exhibit 1216, that's a 13:21:37

21 paragraph that was added by Ms. Roche; is that right? 13:21:40

22 A No. We collaborated on this product and 13:21:42



166

1 so -- you know, she was certainly the typist in this 13:21:44

2 regard, but this is -- I wouldn't characterize it as 13:21:48

3 she, you know, composed this and I was just -- no. We 13:21:53

4 collaborated back and forth. And she was in charge 13:21:59

5 of -- considering the time limits, the time 13:22:02

6 constraints, yes. 13:22:04

7 Q Okay. What is the PAHO? 13:22:06

8 A Pan American Health Organization. 13:22:18

9 Q Did you review data from the PAHO in 13:22:22

10 developing your opinion? 13:23:00

11 A Yes. There is a specific country section per 13:23:01

12 different nations, and there was one section on 13:23:09

13 Ecuador. 13:23:12

14 Q What data was included in that section? 13:23:12

15 A Similar data to the one that I obtained from 13:23:15

16 the World Health Organization. In fact, they both 13:23:19

17 link back to the same documents. And so this is 13:23:22

18 mostly demographic information, literacy rates, a 13:23:24

19 number of other -- epidemiologic information. 13:23:30

20 There's also a World -- I'm sorry. The World 13:23:40

21 Bank has a doing business report per nation, so I also 13:23:43

22 looked at those. I mean, this all should be included 13:23:46



167

1 in the documents furnished. 13:23:50



4 BY MR. SELEY: 13:23:51


6 marked as Exhibit 1217. Do you recognize that 13:24:21


8 A I do. 13:24:28

9 Q Exhibit 1217 is an e-mail from you to 13:24:29

10 Ms. Roche, Mr. Dunkelberger and Ms. Scarola at the 13:24:39

11 Weinberg Group dated September 8th, 2010 at 7:40 p.m., 13:24:43

12 and attaching a document titled, "Health care delivery 13:24:49

13 draft, 20100908." 13:24:55


15 A I do. 13:25:01

16 Q Okay. This document attached to Exhibit 1217 13:25:18

17 is described in the e-mail as another draft. Do you 13:25:35

18 see that? 13:25:39

19 A I do. 13:25:39

20 Q That's another draft of your report, sir? 13:25:40

21 A Uh-huh. 13:25:43

22 Q I'm sorry? 13:25:43



168

1 A Yes. 13:25:44

2 Q Okay. I'd like to compare Exhibit 1217 with 13:25:45

3 Exhibit 1216. Do you have those two documents -- 13:25:58

4 A I do. 13:25:58

5 Q -- in front of you? 13:26:04

6 Okay. The first section on affected area 13:26:11

7 demographics, that appears to me to be the same. Is 13:26:13

8 that your sense as well, sir? 13:26:17

9 A It appears to be the same. 13:26:21

10 Q The next section on current health system 13:26:22

11 infrastructure, the information that was in 13:26:29

12 Exhibit 1216 in outline or bullet point form appears 13:26:38

13 now to have been turned into paragraphs? 13:26:43

14 A Yes. And there is some additional 13:26:45

15 information as well. 13:26:48

16 Q Now, did you write these paragraphs yourself, 13:26:48

17 sir? 13:26:53

18 A I did. 13:26:53

19 Q The next section on potential activities and 13:26:54

20 goals appears to be the same as the draft sent to you 13:27:07

21 by Ms. Roche. 13:27:17

22 A Correct. 13:27:18



169

1 Q Just to make sure the record is clear, 13:27:19

2 that -- 13:27:23

3 A Yes. 13:27:23

4 Q -- my question is, that the next section on 13:27:24

5 potential activities and goals in Exhibit 1217 appears 13:27:28

6 to be the same as that section in Exhibit 1216 which 13:27:31

7 was sent to you by Ms. Roche; is that right? 13:27:36

8 A Correct. In collaboration with Mrs. Roche. 13:27:38

9 Q I understand. 13:27:42

10 A For the record, as you say. 13:27:44

11 Q I'd like to turn your attention to page 5599 13:27:46

12 in Exhibit 1217, and I'd like you to look at the last 13:27:58

13 three paragraphs in the section on potential 13:28:13

14 activities and goals. Do you see that, sir? 13:28:23

15 A Yes, I do. 13:28:27

16 Q There appears to be a new sentence here that 13:28:30

17 says, "According to official documents by the Ministry 13:28:38

18 of Health, over 40 percent of the indigenous 13:28:41

19 populations of the affected provinces rely on shamans 13:28:44

20 and spiritual leaders when seeking assistance for 13:28:48

21 their ailments." 13:28:52

22 Is that a sentence you wrote, sir? 13:28:53



170

1 A Yes. 13:28:55

2 Q And then did you write the sentence that 13:28:56

3 follows that? 13:28:58

4 A One example -- the one of deforestation 13:28:58

5 originated from Mrs. Kerry Roche. 13:29:04

6 Q No, no, I'm sorry, sir. I meant the sentence 13:29:06

7 that followed the sentence you wrote, the one that 13:29:08

8 reads, "The local populations have seen their habitat 13:29:11

9 and environs degraded to such an extent that their 13:29:16

10 ability to procure sustenance from them has been 13:29:20

11 permanently altered." 13:29:24

12 Did you write that sentence in Exhibit 1217, 13:29:25

13 sir? 13:29:28

14 A I don't recall that that originated from me, 13:29:28

15 but it was likely during collaboration with Ms. Roche. 13:29:32

16 Q What's the basis for the conclusion that the 13:29:36

17 local populations have seen their habitat and environs 13:29:38

18 degraded to such an extent that their ability to 13:29:42

19 procure sustenance from them has been permanently 13:29:44

20 altered? 13:29:48

21 A That was background information provided to 13:29:49

22 me. I have no basis to make that statement. 13:29:51



171

1 Q Have you reviewed the report of 13:29:53

2 Dr. Wasserstrom, an anthropologist, on the condition 13:29:59

3 of indigenous nutritional needs in the Oriente? 13:30:03

4 A I have not. 13:30:06

5 Q If Dr. Wasserstrom concluded that the 13:30:08

6 nutritional needs of the indigenous population are 13:30:14

7 being met, do you have any basis to dispute that 13:30:17

8 conclusion? 13:30:20


10 question. 13:30:24

11 THE WITNESS: Do I have basis -- no. In 13:30:24

12 my -- I would be surprised, to say the least. 13:30:26

13 BY MR. SELEY: 13:30:29

14 Q You're not an anthropologist, right, sir? 13:30:32

15 A No. 13:30:35

16 Q You have no educational background or 13:30:35

17 training to reach any conclusions about the impact of 13:30:42

18 alleged contamination on an indigenous people's food 13:30:50

19 supply, right? 13:30:54

20 A Correct. We have already covered that. 13:30:54

21 Q Looking at Exhibit 1217, this draft, which 13:30:56

22 appears to have been sent September 8th, is the last 13:31:43



172

1 draft that was produced in your documents to Chevron. 13:31:49

2 Do you recall any drafts after September 8th, 2010? 13:31:58

3 A No, I remember this was a final draft. The 13:32:03

4 idea was to meet the next morning or the -- I think it 13:32:09

5 was the next morning -- and work on the final product. 13:32:13

6 Q Looking at Exhibit 1211, which is your 13:32:15

7 September invoice -- 13:32:25

8 A Yes. 13:32:28

9 Q -- it appears that you had a Weinberg Group 13:32:28

10 meeting on September 9th of 2010 for two hours. 13:32:31

11 A Correct. 13:32:35

12 Q Is that the meeting where you went over the 13:32:36

13 draft in Exhibit 1217? 13:32:41

14 A Yes. It was actually trying to generate the 13:32:42

15 final report that was submitted. That meeting and the 13:32:46

16 meeting the next day. 13:32:51

17 Q Okay. You're referring to the meeting on 13:32:51

18 September 10th, 2010 for one hour? 13:32:55

19 A Correct. 13:32:57

20 Q When did you actually complete your report? 13:33:02

21 A It was completed at that particular time, I'm 13:33:10

22 pretty sure, on September 10th or thereabouts. I'm 13:33:16



173

1 not sure if it was the 10th -- I think the 10th might 13:33:19

2 have been a Friday, and the work product was finally 13:33:24

3 submitted on -- you know, the next week. But I -- the 13:33:28

4 final report I think was generated at that meeting. 13:33:31

5 Q The 10th was a Friday, if that helps you 13:33:35

6 recall. 13:33:36

7 A Yeah. 13:33:36

8 Q Did you review your final report at that 13:33:47

9 meeting on the 10th at the Weinberg Group's offices? 13:33:52

10 A As I recall. 13:33:55

11 Q Was there anyone present at the September 9th 13:33:56

12 and September 10th meetings that you had with the 13:34:24

13 Weinberg Group other than yourself, Mr. Dunkelberger, 13:34:28

14 Ms. Scarola and Ms. Roche? 13:34:34

15 A That's what I recall. 13:34:36

16 Q Was Ms. Scarola physically present or just 13:34:38

17 available by phone? 13:34:42

18 A No. I think she -- she made it for that 13:34:42

19 meeting, or the day before. I don't recall exactly if 13:34:47

20 it was the Friday or the Thursday, but I think she was 13:34:50

21 there for one of those meetings. 13:34:52

22 Q The last entry on your time sheet is 13:34:54



174

1 September 10th, 2010. Does that indicate that you 13:35:11

2 didn't do any substantive work after September 10th? 13:35:15

3 A Yes. It may well be, but I know I didn't put 13:35:18

4 in all my hours. So could there be additional work 13:35:26

5 that was done afterwards that I did not bill for? 13:35:29

6 Yes. 13:35:32

7 Q Did you review your final report before you 13:35:32

8 sent a signature page to the Weinberg Group? 13:35:46

9 A I did. 13:35:48



12 BY MR. SELEY: 13:35:48

13 Q Dr. Picone -- 13:35:48

14 A Yes. 13:36:26

15 Q -- you've been handed a document marked as 13:36:27

16 Exhibit 1218. It's an e-mail from you to Kerry Roche 13:36:31

17 dated Monday, September 13, 2010 at 6:09 a.m. Do you 13:36:36

18 recall this document, sir? 13:36:43

19 A I do. 13:36:44

20 Q Now, in your e-mail to -- 13:36:44

21 A This reminds me. I should be billing for 13:36:50

22 these hours. 13:36:53



175

1 Q In your e-mail to Ms. Roche, you ask why the 13:36:53

2 Weinberg Group decided to file your report as a 13:37:02

3 separate document under your name. 13:37:05

4 A Correct. 13:37:06

5 Q Does that indicate that, prior to this point, 13:37:07

6 it was your understanding that your work would be 13:37:11

7 integrated into a Weinberg Group report? 13:37:14

8 A Not a Weinberg Group report. I thought it 13:37:16

9 would be a big report and that one of the portions 13:37:19

10 would be my portion. I was surprised to see that it 13:37:23

11 wasn't characterized as the Weinberg Group report and 13:37:28

12 there was four or five separate reports being 13:37:31

13 submitted. 13:37:34

14 Q Why did you think it might be more credible 13:37:34

15 to have separate reports as opposed to a single 13:37:45

16 report? 13:37:50

17 A It -- 13:37:50

18 MR. WESTENBERGER: Objection to the 13:37:50

19 mischaracterization. 13:37:51

20 THE WITNESS: It wasn't a question. I just 13:37:51

21 did not know -- I was surprised, as I indicate in my 13:37:54

22 e-mail. 13:37:56



176

1 BY MR. SELEY: 13:37:56

2 Q Did anyone ever answer this question you had 13:37:58

3 about why the decision was made to have separate 13:38:01


5 A The decision was made by the Weinberg Group. 13:38:06

6 Was I explained why or was I given a reason for that? 13:38:13

7 No. 13:38:16

8 Q Who told you that the decision was made by 13:38:16

9 the Weinberg Group? 13:38:25

10 A In discussion with Kerry Roche. Now, if your 13:38:26

11 question is, is it possible that this was -- the 13:38:35

12 decision was made above the Weinberg Group, it's 13:38:37

13 certainly possible. I'm not privy to the answer to 13:38:40

14 that. 13:38:43

15 Q In your discussions with Ms. Roche about this 13:38:43

16 issue, she didn't indicate to you why the Weinberg 13:38:48

17 Group decided that there would not be a Weinberg Group 13:38:57

18 report? 13:39:02



21 THE WITNESS: They are the ones who contacted 13:39:04

22 different experts and, you know, prepared. That's 13:39:07



177

1 why -- my understanding was that this would be under 13:39:11

2 one big umbrella and there were would be four separate 13:39:14

3 reports under one big umbrella. But -- and then I 13:39:18

4 became aware, towards the end, that they would be 13:39:21

5 separate reports. 13:39:23

6 BY MR. SELEY: 13:39:24

7 Q Now, when you were told that this report was 13:39:44

8 going to be filed under your name in court in Ecuador, 13:39:47

9 did you raise any concerns with anyone about that? 13:39:54

10 A I remember talking to Kerry Roche about that, 13:39:57

11 and to Ted Dunkelberger. I was just surprised because 13:40:00

12 initially I thought there would be, as I said already 13:40:04

13 a couple of times, there would be a master report with 13:40:07

14 four subsections. But was I concerned or did I 13:40:10

15 have -- did I express any particular reservations 13:40:16

16 about it? No. 13:40:19

17 Q Before this case, had you ever filed anything 13:40:19

18 in Ecuadorian court before? 13:40:25

19 A No. 13:40:27

20 Q Did you review the Ecuadorian rules about the 13:40:27

21 obligation of expert witnesses in Ecuador? 13:40:34

22 A No, I did not. 13:40:36



178

1 Q Did anyone describe those rules to you? 13:40:37




5 BY MR. SELEY: 13:40:43

6 Q As we sit here today, do you have any 13:40:44

7 understanding of what Ecuadorian law requires 13:40:46

8 regarding expert witnesses in Ecuadorian court? 13:40:50

9 A I do not. 13:40:53

10 Q So you don't have any basis to know whether 13:40:53

11 your work as an expert witness in this case complies 13:40:58

12 with the requirements of Ecuadorian law; is that 13:41:01

13 right? 13:41:03




17 BY MR. SELEY: 13:41:06

18 Q Do you know what level of scientific 13:41:08

19 certainty is required of expert witness testimony in 13:41:11

20 Ecuadorian court? 13:41:15





179


2 BY MR. SELEY: 13:41:19

3 Q Did anyone tell you? 13:41:19

4 A No. If somebody would have told me, then I 13:41:20

5 would know the answer. 13:41:25

6 Q What level of scientific certainty did you 13:41:26

7 apply to your work in this case? 13:41:31

8 A I think I was honest and -- from the 13:41:33

9 beginning to the end. I tried to search for adequate 13:41:38

10 data sources. I tried to get my hands on as many 13:41:42

11 sources as I could with a limited amount of true data 13:41:45

12 in the field. I think I was able to deliver the best 13:41:51

13 cost estimate I possibly could, given the amount of 13:41:57

14 time and the available data sources. 13:42:00

15 Q Looking back at your final report, 13:42:02

16 Exhibit 1200, it's dated September 10th -- and your 13:42:16

17 signature page is also dated September 10th. Do you 13:42:25

18 see that, sir? 13:42:27

19 A Yes. 13:42:28

20 Q Was this signature page attached to the final 13:42:31

21 report that you signed or did you send the signature 13:42:42

22 page separately? 13:42:45



180

1 A I sent the signature page separate -- I sent 13:42:46

2 my signature separately. In fact, we met that morning 13:42:51

3 of the 10th, and I had clinical duties so I had to 13:42:55

4 make it back before the final editing was done. 13:42:59

5 So the final product was sent to me, and then 13:43:02

6 I sent my signature to attach to the report. 13:43:04

7 Q I guess I'm having a bit of a hard time 13:43:07

8 understanding some of these documents. In 13:43:19

9 Exhibit 1218, which is dated September 13, you 13:43:24

10 indicate that you'll mail -- you'll e-mail your 13:43:29

11 electronic signature to paste in. The signature page 13:43:34

12 here is dated September 10, 2010, the signature page 13:43:38

13 on your final report. 13:43:44

14 A Uh-huh. 13:43:45

15 Q Can you explain that discrepancy? 13:43:45

16 A Yeah, I think we finalized the report on 13:43:49

17 Friday, if I'm not mistaken, and I probably -- you 13:43:52

18 know, by the time I saw -- I send the -- I didn't 13:43:56

19 recall exactly when I sent my signature, but 13:43:59

20 apparently it was after the weekend. 13:44:01

21 Q And you said that was because you had to 13:44:02

22 leave to do your clinical work before the final draft 13:44:09



181

1 was produced; is that right? 13:44:12

2 A Well, the final draft was -- we were working 13:44:14

3 on the final draft. They e-mailed me the final draft, 13:44:16

4 and then I sent my signature for -- to attach, I 13:44:19

5 believe. 13:44:21

6 Q We weren't provided any e-mail with the final 13:44:21

7 draft from the Weinberg Group to you. Why is that? 13:44:31

8 A It's probably -- it may very well be because 13:44:36

9 I -- the inbox I unfortunately usually delete e-mails 13:44:41

10 coming in. I -- you know, whatever is in the sent box 13:44:45

11 is what I produced because there's what I had 13:44:51

12 available to me. But if -- you know, that should be 13:44:53

13 available in the documents that -- from other e-mail 13:44:57

14 sources. 13:45:02

15 Q I'm sorry. I didn't understand the last part 13:45:02

16 of what you just said. 13:45:06

17 A So since I delete my inbox, I may not -- I 13:45:06

18 went in and I copied anything that had to do with 13:45:13

19 Ecuador. But since I delete whatever is coming to me, 13:45:15

20 I certainly had access to what was going out of my 13:45:18

21 box. 13:45:22

22 Q When you signed the blank page that was 13:45:22



182

1 ultimately used to fill out your signature page in 13:45:48

2 your report, did anyone explain to you what you were 13:45:51

3 attesting to under Ecuadorian law? 13:45:55

4 A I was submitting an expert report on cost 13:45:59

5 estimates, best cost estimates, with the limitations 13:46:03

6 we had at hand. 13:46:07

7 Q But did anyone explain to you what your 13:46:07

8 signature on that document meant under Ecuadorian law? 13:46:10



11 THE WITNESS: If your question is, did 13:46:15

12 somebody spend time telling me what that implied, no. 13:46:16

13 But I think I know, if you're providing expert 13:46:20

14 testimony, you are saying that, to the best of your 13:46:24

15 ability, you are, you know, indicating that this is 13:46:25

16 true and that you hold by that -- you stand by that as 13:46:28

17 true. 13:46:37

18 BY MR. SELEY: 13:46:37

19 Q Okay. But you don't know whether your report 13:46:40

20 meets the attestation requirements under Ecuadorian 13:46:43

21 law; is that right? 13:46:47

22 MR. WESTENBERGER: Objection. Asked -- 13:46:47



183

1 THE WITNESS: I am not an -- 13:46:47

2 MR. WESTENBERGER: -- and answered. 13:46:49

3 THE WITNESS: -- attorney, I am not aware of 13:46:49

4 Ecuadorian law, and I do not know the answer. 13:46:53

5 BY MR. SELEY: 13:46:56

6 Q Did you review any Ecuadorian standards for 13:46:56

7 valid scientific testimony before you agreed to file 13:46:58

8 your report in Ecuadorian court? 13:47:01


10 answered. 13:47:04

11 THE WITNESS: I did not. 13:47:04

12 (Discussion held off the record.) 13:47:12

13 BY MR. SELEY: 13:47:15

14 Q Were you paid for your work on the Ecuador 13:47:15

15 case? 13:47:29

16 A I was. 13:47:29

17 Q Were you paid the full amount of your two 13:47:30

18 invoices? 13:47:34

19 A I was. 13:47:34

20 Q Who were you paid by? 13:47:35

21 A The Weinberg Group. 13:47:37

22 Q Do your two invoices at Exhibit 1202 and 1211 13:47:40



184

1 reflect all of the compensation that you expect to 13:47:51

2 receive on this case? 13:47:54

3 A They do. 13:47:54

4 Q You don't have any contingent fee interest in 13:47:56

5 the outcome of the Ecuador litigation, right? 13:48:03

6 A I don't. In fact, I have some stock that I 13:48:05

7 own, Chevron stock, so I hope Chevron does very well. 13:48:09

8 It's been doing very well the last week. 13:48:14

9 Q Do you know if the Weinberg Group has a 13:48:15

10 contingent fee interest in the outcome of the Ecuador 13:48:19

11 litigation? 13:48:22

12 A No. 13:48:22

13 Q No, they don't, or no, you don't know? 13:48:22

14 A I don't know. 13:48:25

15 Q Do you know if Patton Boggs has a contingent 13:48:25

16 fee interest in the outcome of the Ecuador litigation? 13:48:29

17 A I don't know. 13:48:32

18 Q Have you done any work on the Ecuador case 13:48:32

19 since your expert report? 13:48:36

20 A No. 13:48:37

21 Q Have you been asked to do any additional work 13:48:37

22 on the Ecuador case? 13:48:41



185

1 A No. 13:48:42

2 Q Do you expect to do any additional work on 13:48:42

3 the Ecuador case? 13:48:44

4 A No. I hope Chevron does well because I 13:48:45

5 just -- I invested some money, and they seem to be 13:48:48

6 paying good dividends. 13:48:52

7 Q Now, were you aware, when you began working 13:48:52

8 on this project, that you might be deposed here in the 13:48:58

9 United States? 13:49:01

10 A Was I aware of that? No. But I welcome the 13:49:01

11 opportunity. 13:49:11

12 Q Was that contingency that you would be 13:49:11

13 deposed, is that provided for in your subcontract 13:49:15

14 agreement with the Weinberg Group? 13:49:18

15 A I believe it does. But I'm not certain. 13:49:19

16 Q You didn't personally hire any consultants or 13:49:22

17 subcontractors to assist you with your work on the 13:49:28

18 Ecuadorian litigation, right? 13:49:31

19 A Correct. 13:49:32

20 Q Did you have any written communications with 13:49:32

21 any attorneys representing the Ecuadorian plaintiffs 13:50:01

22 in this case? 13:50:05



186


2 Q Are you familiar with the name Douglas Allen? 13:50:08

3 A Douglas? 13:50:20

4 Q Allen, A-L-L-E-N. 13:50:22

5 A No. 13:50:26

6 Q How about Lawrence Barnthouse? 13:50:26

7 A No. 13:50:33

8 Q Daniel Rourke? 13:50:34

9 A Yes, the name rings a bell. I think I met 13:50:36

10 the gentleman, but I cannot quite place his face. I 13:50:40

11 think -- I think he might have been the other person 13:50:45

12 who is either the epidemiologist or who was cranking 13:50:48

13 the data on -- you know, looking at the affected 13:50:53

14 population. 13:50:56

15 Q Robert Paolo Scardina? 13:50:56

16 A No, don't know him. 13:50:59

17 Q Jonathan Shefftz? 13:51:02

18 A Don't know him. 13:51:04

19 Q Have you ever been on a telephone call with 13:51:05

20 any of these individuals as far as you know? 13:51:17

21 A Not that I recall. I did -- I believe I 13:51:19

22 spoke to this gentleman Daniel -- 13:51:23



187

1 Q Rourke? 13:51:23

2 A -- Rourke, I think. And I think he's the one 13:51:27

3 who requested that I translate some of these things on 13:51:29

4 the database -- on the spreadsheet document that I 13:51:32

5 referred to. 13:51:37

6 Q Did you have any other communication with 13:51:37

7 Mr. Rourke? 13:51:40

8 A No. 13:51:41

9 Q Other than the one time that you've already 13:51:45

10 described, did you meet Mr. Rourke at any other time? 13:51:49

11 A I don't recall. No, I don't think so. 13:51:53

12 Consultants have more time than clinicians. 13:52:02

13 Q And to your knowledge, you didn't exchange 13:52:10

14 e-mails or documents with Mr. Rourke; is that right? 13:52:16

15 A Correct. 13:52:18

16 Q You haven't seen drafts of any of the other 13:52:19

17 expert reports in this case? 13:52:32

18 A I have not. 13:52:32

19 Q Looking at Exhibit 1200, which is your expert 13:52:34

20 report, have you seen the Spanish version of this 13:52:55

21 document that was filed under your name in Ecuador? 13:53:01

22 A I have not seen it. But I offered to 13:53:03



188

1 translate it. 13:53:08

2 Q That offer was rejected? 13:53:10

3 A It was. I was told that it had to be an 13:53:12

4 official translator approved by the court and so 13:53:18

5 forth. 13:53:20

6 Q So do you have any idea, as we sit here 13:53:20

7 today, whether the Spanish version of your report that 13:53:27

8 was submitted to the court in Ecuador accurately 13:53:31

9 reflects your conclusions? 13:53:34

10 A I do not know because I never saw it. 13:53:35

11 Q Did anyone reach out to you during the 13:53:38

12 process of translation with any questions about your 13:53:41

13 report? 13:53:44

14 A No. 13:53:44

15 Q Do you know whether your electronic signature 13:53:45

16 was inserted into the Spanish version of the report? 13:53:54

17 A Do not know that. I've never seen it. 13:53:56

18 Q And no one ever told you one way or the other 13:54:01

19 whether your signature would be inserted? 13:54:05

20 A I don't know the answer to that. No, no one 13:54:07

21 ever told me about that. In fact, I would be 13:54:10

22 surprised if, without my authorization, it was 13:54:12



189

1 inserted to the Spanish version. 13:54:14

2 Q In performing your work on this project, you 13:54:18

3 didn't do any of your own sampling or sample analysis, 13:55:04

4 right? 13:55:08

5 A No. We have already covered that. 13:55:08

6 Q Did you make any effort to evaluate who 13:55:10

7 caused any contamination in the Oriente that might 13:55:18

8 exist? 13:55:22

9 A No. Once again, that was beyond the scope of 13:55:22

10 the report. 13:55:30

11 Q Now, you mentioned earlier today that you had 13:55:30

12 met Steven Donziger briefly? 13:55:34

13 A Yes. 13:55:38

14 Q What's your understanding of his role in the 13:55:39


16 A My understanding is that he's one of the 13:55:45

17 plaintiffs' attorneys. 13:55:48

18 Q Has anyone indicated to you that they needed 13:55:48

19 to get Mr. Donziger's approval before acting or 13:55:57

20 approving any action in this case? 13:56:01





190

1 THE WITNESS: I don't know one way or the 13:56:05

2 other. 13:56:07

3 BY MR. SELEY: 13:56:07

4 Q You've never exchanged e-mails with 13:56:14

5 Mr. Donziger; is that right? 13:56:16

6 A No. 13:56:16

7 Q Have you ever been on a phone call with 13:56:17

8 Mr. Donziger? 13:56:23

9 A No. 13:56:23

10 Q Has anyone ever indicated to you that they 13:56:24

11 were communicating with you on Mr. Donziger's behalf? 13:56:27

12 A On Mr. Donziger's behalf? No. I think his 13:56:29

13 communication was directly -- probably with the 13:56:33

14 Weinberg Group directly and, you know, I never really 13:56:35

15 had -- since I'm working for the Weinberg Group, my 13:56:39

16 communication certainly was with the Weinberg Group. 13:56:42

17 And my understanding is that any and all communication 13:56:45

18 needs to take place through the Weinberg Group. And I 13:56:48

19 believe my confidentiality agreement with them 13:57:00

20 indicates that. 13:57:03

21 MR. SELEY: Why don't we take a five-minute 13:57:04

22 break right now. 13:57:28



191

1 THE VIDEOGRAPHER: The time is 1:57 p.m. We 13:57:28





6 BY MR. SELEY: 14:08:25

7 Q Dr. Picone, did anyone ever tell you that the 14:08:25

8 role of the Weinberg Group in this case was to conduct 14:08:32

9 an assessment of the Cabrera report? 14:08:35

10 A No. 14:08:37

11 Q Did anyone explain to you what the Weinberg 14:08:38

12 Group's role was supposed to be in the case, if not to 14:08:58

13 assess the Cabrera report? 14:09:02

14 A No. They indicated that they would be in 14:09:04

15 charge of generating reports, looking at -- my mandate 14:09:07

16 was cost estimate. One of the other experts would 14:09:13

17 come up with demographic areas, and I believe try to 14:09:15

18 determine the population at risk and exposed. 14:09:20

19 And I believe one of the other expert's 14:09:23

20 mandate was looking at --I'm not really sure if the 14:09:26

21 person was a toxicologist or a person trained to look 14:09:32

22 at exposures and consequences. And there was yet one 14:09:34



192

1 more part of the report that I'm not exactly sure what 14:09:39

2 it was about. 14:09:42

3 But I don't recall ever listening or hearing 14:09:43

4 the word we need to criticize the Cabrera report or we 14:09:47

5 need to, you know, do something regarding the Cabrera 14:09:51

6 report. 14:09:56

7 Q Before you got involved in this case, had you 14:09:56

8 ever heard of Richard Cabrera? 14:10:00

9 A No. 14:10:03

10 Q Is the first time you heard of Cabrera when 14:10:04

11 you were given his report? 14:10:13

12 A Correct. 14:10:14

13 Q I take it you never met Mr. Cabrera? 14:10:14

14 A No. 14:10:21

15 Q Never spoken with him? 14:10:22

16 A No. 14:10:24

17 Q Never exchanged e-mails with Mr. Cabrera? 14:10:25

18 A No, I don't know the man. 14:10:29

19 Q As far as you know, you've never communicated 14:10:31

20 with him in any way? 14:10:35

21 A Correct. 14:10:36

22 Q Have you ever seen any communications between 14:10:37



193

1 Mr. Cabrera and anybody else? 14:10:40

2 A No. 14:10:41

3 Q Do you know that the annex P in the Cabrera 14:10:42

4 report on health care systems was actually written by 14:10:55

5 an individual named Jaime Briehl? 14:10:57

6 MR. WESTENBERGER: Objection to -- 14:11:00

7 THE WITNESS: Jaime? 14:11:01

8 BY MR. SELEY: 14:11:02

9 Q Briehl. 14:11:05


11 THE WITNESS: No, I do not know that. 14:11:05

12 MR. WESTENBERGER: -- the form of the 14:11:06

13 question. Objection. Assumes facts not in evidence. 14:11:08

14 BY MR. SELEY: 14:11:10

15 Q Have you ever heard the name Jaime Briehl 14:11:10

16 before? 14:11:15

17 A No, I truly haven't. I thought they were all 14:11:15

18 appendices under Cabrera. I just assumed that -- I 14:11:15

19 didn't really look at -- because it's such a 14:11:19

20 voluminous report, I wouldn't be surprised if that was 14:11:22

21 a collaborative effort with many people collaborating 14:11:24

22 in the report. 14:11:27



194

1 Q Are you aware -- strike that. 14:11:27

2 Were you aware before today that the true 14:11:45

3 authorship of the Cabrera report was in question? 14:11:48




7 question. 14:11:54

8 BY MR. SELEY: 14:11:54

9 Q I apologize if I've asked you this question 14:12:10

10 before, but I don't recall. Have you discussed the 14:12:12

11 true authorship of the Cabrera report with anyone? 14:12:16




15 BY MR. SELEY: 14:12:25

16 Q Are you familiar with a company called 14:12:37

17 Stratus Consulting? Stratus Consulting? 14:12:41

18 A No. 14:12:44

19 Q To your knowledge, have you communicated with 14:12:46

20 anyone from Stratus Consulting on your work in the 14:12:51





195

1 THE WITNESS: I already said -- 14:12:56

2 MR. WESTENBERGER: If he doesn't know who 14:12:59

3 Stratus -- 14:12:59

4 THE WITNESS: -- I just don't know. 14:12:59

5 MR. WESTENBERGER: -- Consulting is and he 14:12:59

6 doesn't know who these people are, how would he have 14:13:03

7 communications with them? This is getting -- 14:13:03

8 THE WITNESS: I truly don't. 14:13:08

9 BY MR. SELEY: 14:13:12

10 Q You said you've been to Ecuador twice? 14:13:17

11 A Uh-huh. 14:13:19

12 Q 2006, 2008? 14:13:20

13 A Correct. 14:13:23

14 Q During those trips, did you ever visit the 14:13:24

15 Oriente region? 14:13:32

16 A No, I indicated that I have not, that I 14:13:33

17 stayed in Quito, and I went up to the highlands and 14:13:35

18 back down to the coast, but not to the Oriente region. 14:13:41

19 Q So you never visited any of the former 14:13:45

20 Concession area? 14:13:50

21 A I have not. 14:13:50

22 Q Are you aware that Texaco petroleum no longer 14:13:55



196

1 operates any of the oil production facilities in 14:14:02

2 Ecuador? 14:14:03

3 A Yes, I became aware that Texaco -- I think it 14:14:03

4 was acquired by Chevron, and I believe -- I think the 14:14:07

5 oil company of Ecuador is the one managing at present 14:14:15

6 the Concession, as you call it. 14:14:19

7 Q Did you take that fact into account in any 14:14:20

8 way in your evaluation of health care costs? 14:14:26

9 A No, I don't see how that's pertinent. I 14:14:31

10 don't see how that is pertinent. 14:14:34

11 Q Do you know what oil companies operate in the 14:14:35

12 Sucumbios and Orellana region today? 14:14:47

13 A No. 14:14:48

14 Q Do you know what companies operated in that 14:14:48

15 region from 1964 to 1990? 14:14:52

16 A It was indicated to me as part of this work 14:14:54

17 product that Texaco and Petroecuador both collaborated 14:15:01

18 and operated exploration wells. 14:15:08

19 Q You say it was indicated to you. Indicated 14:15:10

20 by whom? 14:15:14

21 A By Ted Dunkelberger in the report of, you 14:15:14

22 know, how is it that this came about and, you know, 14:15:18



197

1 what we are trying to accomplish. As background 14:15:21

2 information -- in other words, as background 14:15:30

3 information, how is it that we need to generate this 14:15:32

4 report. 14:15:34

5 Q Did Mr. Dunkelberger indicate to you that 14:15:34

6 Texaco and Petroecuador were the only two oil 14:15:40

7 companies that operated in that region from 1960 to 14:15:44

8 1990? 14:15:48

9 MR. WESTENBERGER: Objection. I'm going to 14:15:49

10 object to this line of questioning at this point, 14:15:50

11 Peter. This is beyond -- 14:15:53

12 THE WITNESS: I don't know. 14:15:53

13 MR. WESTENBERGER: -- the scope of his -- 14:15:53

14 hold on one second, Dr. Picone. 14:15:53

15 THE WITNESS: Yeah. Sure. 14:15:53

16 MR. WESTENBERGER: Beyond the scope of this 14:15:53

17 deposition, and it's certainly well beyond the scope 14:15:57

18 of Dr. Picone's report. As he has stated, he does not 14:16:00

19 arrive at any conclusions with respect to causation or 14:16:04

20 fault, as is clear from his report. 14:16:09

21 So if you want to ask questions about his 14:16:09

22 report, things related to his report, that's fine. If 14:16:12



198

1 not, I'm going to ask you to move on. And, if you 14:16:14

2 don't, we'll end the deposition if there's no further 14:16:17

3 areas of questioning about the report. 14:16:19

4 BY MR. SELEY: 14:16:19

5 Q Sir? 14:16:19

6 A I truly don't know the answer to that. 14:16:24

7 Q Are you familiar with the name TexPet? 14:16:29

8 A TexPet? No. 14:16:39

9 Q Do you understand that Chevron has actually 14:16:42

10 never operated oil wells in Ecuador? 14:16:51


12 THE WITNESS: I -- 14:16:52

13 MR. WESTENBERGER: I'm going to ask that we 14:16:55

14 stay on the record. And I want the witness to -- 14:16:57

15 Dr. Picone, if you could please step outside so that 14:16:59

16 counsel -- 14:17:01

17 MR. SELEY: Hold on -- 14:17:01

18 MR. WESTENBERGER: -- can have a discussion 14:17:01

19 on the record. 14:17:03

20 MR. SELEY: -- hold on a minute. 14:17:03

21 MR. WESTENBERGER: I can do that. We can 14:17:03

22 have a discussion on the record outside of the 14:17:05



199

1 presence of the witness. I want to have a discussion 14:17:07

2 with you. 14:17:09

3 MR. SELEY: I have a question pending for the 14:17:09

4 witness. 14:17:12

5 MR. WESTENBERGER: Okay. That's fine. And I 14:17:12

6 have an objection. 14:17:14

7 MR. SELEY: Fine. 14:17:14

8 BY MR. SELEY: 14:17:14

9 Q Sir? 14:17:14

10 A Do I know that -- if Chevron operated any of 14:17:15

11 these oil wells? That was your question? 14:17:17

12 Q Any oil wells in Ecuador. 14:17:20

13 A I do not know. 14:17:21

14 MR. WESTENBERGER: Okay. Now we can -- you 14:17:22

15 can step outside and we'll have a discussion on the 14:17:23

16 record. 14:17:29

17 MR. SELEY: I would like to mark the time, 14:17:29

18 please. 14:17:32

19 THE VIDEOGRAPHER: Very good. The time is 14:17:32

20 2:17 and 40 seconds. We are still on the record. 14:17:34

21 MR. WESTENBERGER: Peter, if you don't make 14:17:37

22 some sort of a proffer as to what the relevance of 14:17:38



200

1 this questioning is to Dr. Picone's report and -- 14:17:42

2 well, without that, I'm not going to permit any 14:17:44

3 further questioning along these lines. It has no 14:17:46

4 relevance to his report and it is beyond the scope of 14:17:49

5 his report and his deposition. 14:17:52

6 MR. SELEY: You're indicating that you 14:17:53

7 believe questioning about who was involved in the area 14:17:57

8 that Dr. Picone wrote his report about is irrelevant. 14:18:03

9 MR. WESTENBERGER: Dr. Picone is not opining 14:18:06

10 on who is at fault in this case, does not assign any 14:18:10

11 liability to anyone and -- 14:18:13

12 MR. SELEY: Dr. Picone's entire report is 14:18:13

13 based on the premise that there's health injury 14:18:16

14 resulting from Texaco's operation. It says it in his 14:18:20

15 report. 14:18:23

16 MR. WESTENBERGER: He's testified very 14:18:23

17 clearly he did not arrive at any cause -- you've -- 14:18:25

18 you've asked this question several different ways, and 14:18:28

19 he has given you the same testimony. He is not making 14:18:31

20 any assessment as to causation. He is not assigning 14:18:33

21 any liability whatsoever to any entity, does not do 14:18:36

22 so. You can ask him that question again for the -- I 14:18:39



201

1 don't know -- umpteenth time if you need to. 14:18:41

2 But, with that -- that is clear that this is 14:18:42

3 not -- none of this questioning is related to his 14:18:46

4 report, it's well beyond the scope of his report and 14:18:49

5 his deposition. If you want to ask him questions 14:18:51

6 about his report -- 14:18:54

7 MR. SELEY: I think I absolutely have a right 14:18:54

8 to ask him about his background knowledge of what's 14:18:57

9 going on in the area, you know, the basis -- he talks 14:19:00

10 about all this background that he was provided. I 14:19:03

11 want to know what he knows. He's the expert that 14:19:06

12 signed this report, so he needs to provide testimony 14:19:09

13 about what he knows about the area. So I'm going to 14:19:12

14 ask him questions about that. And it goes to all the 14:19:14

15 background that he's already testified is in his 14:19:17

16 report. So I don't see any basis -- 14:19:19

17 MR. WESTENBERGER: Which background are you 14:19:19

18 referring to that's in his report that he's testified 14:19:21

19 to? 14:19:23

20 MR. SELEY: He keeps saying that all the 14:19:24

21 information in his report about oil production 14:19:26

22 operations and how they impact health, the 14:19:30



202

1 environmental damage in his report was provided to him 14:19:34

2 by background. I absolutely have a right to ask him 14:19:37

3 about his knowledge about all this. 14:19:40

4 MR. WESTENBERGER: You already asked him 14:19:41

5 that. You have already asked him that. And he -- he 14:19:44

6 testified that he did not have a basis to -- to 14:19:47

7 conclude on those issues that you just raised. You're 14:19:50

8 not going to retread the same area. 14:19:53

9 MR. SELEY: Eric, I have a right to ask him 14:19:55

10 about that stuff. 14:19:58

11 MR. WESTENBERGER: Or -- you're going beyond 14:19:58

12 the scope of the deposition. 14:20:00

13 MR. SELEY: I'm not going beyond the scope of 14:20:01

14 anything. I mean, this is -- 14:20:03

15 MR. WESTENBERGER: You're going beyond the 14:20:03

16 scope of his report. 14:20:05

17 MR. SELEY: Well, I disagree. I think this 14:20:05

18 all goes to the background of his report and what his 14:20:07

19 report was produced for. So I don't see any basis to 14:20:10

20 say that the witness can't answer questions about his 14:20:12

21 understanding of oil production operations in the 14:20:14

22 area, about what those -- 14:20:17



203

1 MR. WESTENBERGER: He's testified about that 14:20:18

2 already, Peter. 14:20:20

3 MR. SELEY: You know, I have a right to ask 14:20:21

4 him questions, Eric. 14:20:25

5 MR. WESTENBERGER: But you don't have the 14:20:27

6 right to reask him the same questions over and over. 14:20:28

7 MR. SELEY: These are not the -- these are 14:20:30

8 not the same questions. 14:20:32

9 MR. WESTENBERGER: They are the same 14:20:32

10 questions. They're seeking to elicit the same 14:20:33

11 testimony which you've already elicited about his 14:20:35

12 knowledge of -- of oil operations in the area or any 14:20:38

13 basis to conclude whether or not any causation exists, 14:20:40

14 which he has testified clearly he does not opine on 14:20:43

15 that, and he does not assign any liability to any 14:20:46

16 entity in the case. He has testified, and his report 14:20:48

17 indicates what his report is about, which is providing 14:20:50

18 a best estimate on the -- delivering health care to 14:20:53

19 the -- in Ecuador. That is it. 14:20:58

20 He is not assigning any liability, so to ask 14:20:59

21 him who was operating in an area or who is not 14:21:02

22 operating in an area, according to what your testimony 14:21:05



204

1 is on that issue, which -- ultimately, it is 14:21:09

2 testimony -- is entirely irrelevant and beyond the 14:21:11

3 scope of his report and his deposition. 14:21:14

4 MR. SELEY: Well, I disagree. 14:21:16

5 MR. WESTENBERGER: I understand. 14:21:18

6 Do you have questions about his report. 14:21:23

7 MR. SELEY: Of course I do. I mean, all of 14:21:25

8 this is questioning about his report. 14:21:26

9 MR. WESTENBERGER: I -- I disagree. 14:21:28

10 MR. SELEY: Okay. I understand you disagree. 14:21:29

11 MR. WESTENBERGER: I'm going to terminate the 14:21:33

12 deposition unless you move on to a new area. 14:21:35

13 MR. SELEY: You're going to terminate the 14:21:37

14 deposition? 14:21:39

15 MR. WESTENBERGER: I want to have questions 14:21:39

16 about the report. I understand you have -- you were 14:21:41

17 given an order to conduct a Rule 26 deposition, and it 14:21:43

18 has limits, and it's limited to his report and his 14:21:48

19 opinions. And he's established that the things you're 14:21:50

20 about to ask him about he has no opinions on and has 14:21:52

21 arrived at no conclusions on those issues. 14:21:56

22 To now go back and ask him the same questions 14:21:59



205

1 again is, one, harassing and, two, beyond the scope of 14:22:01

2 the report and his deposition. 14:22:05

3 MR. SELEY: Well, it's not the same questions 14:22:07

4 again, and I don't think it's beyond the scope at all. 14:22:08

5 MR. WESTENBERGER: But it's seeking to -- 14:22:11

6 MR. SELEY: I just don't. 14:22:11

7 MR. WESTENBERGER: -- to elicit the same 14:22:11

8 testimony which he's -- and, again, to reiterate, he 14:22:13

9 has not concluded anything on the issue of liability 14:22:16

10 or assignment of fault to anyone, or causation. 14:22:20

11 You're now asking about who -- whether he has any 14:22:23

12 knowledge about who operated where or who caused what 14:22:26

13 in the area. He's not arriving at any opinions on 14:22:29

14 that. He's not opining on that. 14:22:32

15 That means, by its very nature, it's beyond 14:22:36

16 the scope of his report and beyond the scope of the 14:22:37


18 MR. SELEY: Okay. I disagree. 14:22:41

19 MR. WESTENBERGER: Okay. I'm not going to 14:22:45

20 permit any further questioning on it. If we need to 14:22:50

21 take it up with the court, then we need to take it up 14:22:54

22 with the court. 14:22:57



206

1 MR. SELEY: Why don't we take a five-minute 14:22:57

2 break. 14:23:27

3 THE VIDEOGRAPHER: The time is 2:23 and 35 14:23:27

4 seconds. We are going off the record. 14:23:32



7 December 16th, 2010. We are back on the record. 14:40:15

8 BY MR. SELEY: 14:40:18

9 Q Dr. Picone, are you aware that the plaintiffs 14:40:20

10 have filed a lawsuit against Chevron in Ecuador? 14:40:22

11 A That the plaintiffs, yes. 14:40:25

12 Q Are you aware that your report is being used 14:40:26

13 by the plaintiffs to claim damages? 14:40:28

14 A Yes. 14:40:30

15 Q All right. Are you aware that your report is 14:40:32

16 being used by plaintiffs to claim that the court 14:40:35

17 should award a particular amount of damages against 14:40:37

18 Chevron? 14:40:41



21 THE WITNESS: It was -- I was asked to 14:40:43

22 generate the best cost estimate with the time -- 14:40:47



207

1 within the -- as I indicated already several times. 14:40:51

2 Am I aware that that is part of a -- you know, 14:40:54

3 judgment or a -- no, this is something that is 14:40:56

4 proposed to court as one more document among many 14:40:59

5 others. 14:41:02

6 BY MR. SELEY: 14:41:03

7 Q All right. That's not the question that I 14:41:05

8 asked you, though. The question that I asked you is 14:41:07

9 whether you're aware that your report is being used by 14:41:09

10 the plaintiffs to claim that the court should award 14:41:13

11 the amount of damages in your report from Chevron? 14:41:16

12 A I am aware there is a report utilized by the 14:41:19

13 plaintiffs -- by plaintiffs' counsel providing this 14:41:26

14 information to the court, yes. 14:41:28

15 Q What do you think the plaintiffs are 14:41:29

16 providing this information to the court for? 14:41:31


18 THE WITNESS: To come up with some cost 14:41:33

19 estimate regarding damages. 14:41:38

20 BY MR. SELEY: 14:41:39

21 Q Where would the damages come from? 14:41:41




208

1 THE WITNESS: That is a question of 14:41:46

2 causation, and I cannot comment on causation. 14:41:46

3 BY MR. SELEY: 14:41:50

4 Q As you sit here today, do you have any 14:41:50

5 understanding as to where the damages the plaintiffs 14:41:52

6 want to receive would come from? 14:41:57



9 THE WITNESS: Where would they come from? 14:42:02

10 The allegation is that Texaco has caused damages and, 14:42:05

11 therefore, they are -- my understanding is that they 14:42:09

12 are pursuing -- since Texaco no longer exists as an 14:42:13

13 entity, they're pursuing Chevron since Chevron has 14:42:16

14 merged with Texaco. 14:42:19

15 BY MR. SELEY: 14:42:23

16 Q How does your report help the court determine 14:42:24

17 how much in damages should be awarded against Chevron? 14:42:29



20 To the extent that you have an 14:42:34

21 understanding... 14:42:35

22 THE WITNESS: My understanding is that this 14:42:35



209

1 is one way to come up with a cost -- or health care 14:42:40

2 cost estimates with the limitations put forth. How 14:42:45

3 would that help the court? I can only speculate. 14:42:52

4 BY MR. SELEY: 14:42:56

5 Q Okay. What's your speculation? 14:42:56


7 Don't speculate. 14:43:00

8 BY MR. SELEY: 14:43:00

9 Q Do you think your report -- 14:43:01

10 MR. WESTENBERGER: Speculation is not -- 14:43:02

11 MR. SELEY: Okay. I hear you. I'm 14:43:04

12 correcting -- 14:43:05

13 BY MR. SELEY: 14:43:05

14 Q Do you think your report helps the court in 14:43:05

15 any way in establishing the amount of damages that the 14:43:10

16 court should award against Chevron? 14:43:13

17 MR. WESTENBERGER: Objection. His report 14:43:15

18 does not speak to that issue. He's gone over this 14:43:17

19 several times. 14:43:19

20 MR. SELEY: Let him answer the question. 14:43:20

21 MR. WESTENBERGER: He's answered your 14:43:22

22 question several times. This is becoming -- it's 14:43:23



210

1 harassment. He's testified a multitude of times today 14:43:25

2 that his report does not opine on that issue. 14:43:31

3 BY MR. SELEY: 14:43:35

4 Q Sir? 14:43:35

5 A I think it probably was requested. I would 14:43:36

6 imagine it was requested in order to help the court 14:43:39

7 determine a cost estimate or a compensation -- for 14:43:42

8 a -- for development of a compensation budget, 14:43:50

9 potentially. That would be my best speculation. 14:43:54

10 MR. WESTENBERGER: You're asking him to 14:43:56

11 speculate, Peter. 14:43:58

12 BY MR. SELEY: 14:43:59

13 Q Would you agree that your report is 14:43:59

14 predicated on the assumption that there has been 14:44:21

15 damage to the population in the Oriente caused by 14:44:25

16 Texaco operations? 14:44:30


18 THE WITNESS: It is background information. 14:44:33

19 I was not asked to come up with the causation 14:44:35

20 judgment. 14:44:39

21 BY MR. SELEY: 14:44:39

22 Q Maybe I don't understand what you mean by 14:44:40



211

1 background information. 14:44:41

2 A It was background information, as I indicate 14:44:42

3 in the report. I was informed that this has happened 14:44:46

4 in the Oriente region. I was not making a 14:44:48

5 determination of, you know, damages. I was just 14:44:51

6 trying to come up with a best cost estimate according 14:44:54

7 to my objective. 14:44:57

8 Q So if there is no link between Texaco oil 14:44:58

9 operations and the health care needs in this area, 14:45:05

10 then your report provides no assistance to the court; 14:45:10



13 the question. And that's not what the doctor 14:45:15

14 testified to. He has stated again and again what 14:45:19

15 his -- 14:45:23

16 MR. SELEY: Don't testify for him. 14:45:23

17 MR. WESTENBERGER: -- report and what his 14:45:23

18 conclusions are. 14:45:24

19 BY MR. SELEY: 14:45:24

20 Q Sir -- 14:45:24

21 MR. WESTENBERGER: And he is not 14:45:27

22 testifying -- 14:45:28



212

1 THE WITNESS: Could you please repeat the 14:45:28

2 question? 14:45:28

3 MR. WESTENBERGER: -- as to causation. 14:45:28

4 BY MR. SELEY: 14:45:30

5 Q If there was no link between Texaco oil 14:45:30

6 operations and the health care needs in this area, 14:45:43

7 then your report provides no assistance to the court; 14:45:47


9 MR. WESTENBERGER: Objection. Those are 14:45:50

10 questions for the lawyers to argue about in Ecuador 14:45:51

11 under -- they're legal questions. 14:45:57

12 THE WITNESS: My impression would be correct. 14:45:57

13 The issue of causation, I think, is the most important 14:46:00

14 one, but I'm not asked to comment on that. 14:46:02

15 BY MR. SELEY: 14:46:07

16 Q Can you please turn to Exhibit 1200, which is 14:46:12

17 your report, and turn to page 3 of your report, which 14:46:16

18 is actually the first -- 14:46:25

19 A Yes. 14:46:27

20 Q -- page. The first sentence of that report 14:46:27

21 reads, "The people of Sucumbios and Orellana have 14:46:33

22 broad health care needs which in many ways can be tied 14:46:39



213

1 back to the long-standing environmental damages caused 14:46:41

2 by Texaco's oil exploitation." 14:46:44

3 Do you believe that sentence to be true, sir? 14:46:50

4 A That is background information provided to 14:46:53

5 me. Do I know for a fact that that is true? No. 14:46:56

6 Q Do you believe it to be true, sir? 14:46:58



9 THE WITNESS: I have not seen it -- I believe 14:47:04

10 it to be true, but I have not seen the oil wells. I 14:47:04

11 have not seen the consequences of exploration. I have 14:47:07

12 not seen any of this. In other words, I have no way 14:47:11

13 to really say one way or the other. 14:47:14

14 BY MR. SELEY: 14:47:16

15 Q What is the basis for your belief that this 14:47:17

16 is true? 14:47:17

17 A This was the background information that was 14:47:19

18 provided to me by the consulting group that retained 14:47:20

19 me. 14:47:24

20 Q By the Weinberg Group? 14:47:24

21 A By the Weinberg Group. 14:47:26

22 Q Did the Weinberg Group indicate to you why 14:47:27



214

1 they believed that environmental damages were caused 14:47:33

2 by Texaco as opposed to any other company? 14:47:35

3 MR. WESTENBERGER: Objection. Form of the 14:47:37


5 THE WITNESS: They did not indicate -- I 14:47:39

6 didn't really know it was any other company operating 14:47:42

7 in the same region. I truly don't know. 14:47:44

8 BY MR. SELEY: 14:47:44

9 Q So you're not aware that Petroecuador has 14:47:47

10 been operating in that region since 1990? 14:47:49

11 A I -- 14:47:53

12 MR. WESTENBERGER: Objection. I believe he 14:47:53

13 testified to this earlier. 14:47:54

14 THE WITNESS: No, I wasn't -- at the time, I 14:47:54

15 wasn't aware. Now I am aware because you mentioned 14:47:56

16 that several times and because -- I think this has, in 14:47:58

17 fact, reminded me that since the late '80s or 1990, 14:48:01

18 Texaco operations stopped in Ecuador. 14:48:07

19 BY MR. SELEY: 14:48:09

20 Q Does that understanding have any impact on 14:48:11

21 your belief that environmental damages were caused by 14:48:15

22 Texaco's oil exploitation? 14:48:17



215


2 the question. I think you've established, Peter, that 14:48:21

3 it's an assumption. 14:48:23

4 THE WITNESS: It's an assumption. It's 14:48:23

5 background information, but I truly have no ways of 14:48:26

6 corroborating that. That is the assumption that was 14:48:29

7 provided. You know, this is the background 14:48:36

8 information: Why is this requested? Who requests 14:48:39

9 this? And then it's just the initial paragraph. 14:48:42

10 BY MR. SELEY: 14:48:45

11 Q What do you mean when you say "who requests 14:48:48

12 this"? 14:48:50

13 A Well, what -- the goal: Why do we need to 14:48:50

14 come up with a cost estimate of delivering health care 14:48:54

15 to this region? This is background information that's 14:48:56

16 trying to make sense of a particular document. 14:49:00

17 Q So are you testifying that the reason you 14:49:02

18 need to come up with an estimate of health care costs 14:49:10

19 in the region is because of this claim that Texaco's 14:49:14

20 oil exploitation has resulted in broad health care 14:49:19

21 needs? Is that right? 14:49:22

22 MR. WESTENBERGER: Objection. He's 14:49:23



216

1 testified -- 14:49:25


3 MR. WESTENBERGER: -- quite clearly that it's 14:49:25

4 based on -- that's an assumption. 14:49:25

5 BY MR. SELEY: 14:49:25

6 Q So then -- 14:49:25

7 A No. That's an assumption and it's just 14:49:26

8 background information that I was provided with. 14:49:28

9 Q Isn't your entire report predicated on trying 14:49:44

10 to figure out what the health care costs are to an 14:49:46

11 area that you call an affected area? 14:49:50

12 MR. WESTENBERGER: Objection. He's 14:49:52

13 testified -- 14:49:54


15 MR. WESTENBERGER: -- about the assumption. 14:49:55

16 BY MR. SELEY: 14:49:57

17 Q And what do you mean by affected? 14:49:57

18 A An area that is in close proximity to the 14:49:58

19 operation -- the oil operations. 14:50:03

20 Q So when you say affected area in your report, 14:50:04

21 you're referring just to areas in close proximity to 14:50:14

22 oil operations; is that your testimony? 14:50:18



217


2 THE WITNESS: To individuals and populations 14:50:20

3 that have been exposed one way or another to -- 14:50:23

4 potentially to consequences of environmental 14:50:29

5 degradation. 14:50:32

6 I wasn't asked to comment on the consequences 14:50:33

7 of that exposure and whether or not there is any -- 14:50:35

8 there are any merits of causation. But the idea was 14:50:38

9 to use some sort of demographic constraints to -- 14:50:41

10 because we couldn't really extrapolate and -- you 14:50:45

11 know, what -- we're trying to provide health care to 14:50:48

12 whom? To the individuals that -- of this region where 14:50:50

13 the operations were conducted. 14:50:55

14 BY MR. SELEY: 14:50:57

15 Q And the operations that you're talking about 14:50:57

16 are Texaco's operations? 14:51:08


18 answered. 14:51:10

19 THE WITNESS: I have no idea. 14:51:10

20 MR. WESTENBERGER: He testified that this is 14:51:12

21 the assumption stated in the first -- 14:51:13

22 THE WITNESS: It is an assumption -- 14:51:13



218

1 MR. WESTENBERGER: -- line of the report that 14:51:15

2 you read. 14:51:16

3 THE WITNESS: -- but I have no way to 14:51:16

4 corroborate that. 14:51:21

5 BY MR. SELEY: 14:51:21

6 Q And in your report you didn't divide out in 14:51:22

7 any way effects that you believe are from Texaco 14:51:28

8 operations versus anyone else's operations? 14:51:31


10 answered -- 14:51:34


12 MR. WESTENBERGER: -- on multiple occasions. 14:51:36


14 BY MR. SELEY: 14:51:38

15 Q Still on page 3 of your report in the section 14:51:38

16 titled, "State of existing health care 14:52:02

17 infrastructure," the first sentence of that section 14:52:05

18 indicates that, "There's minimal existing health care 14:52:08

19 infrastructure in the Concession area, and it's 14:52:11

20 clearly inadequate for meeting the needs of the 14:52:13

21 affected population." 14:52:17




219

1 A I do. 14:52:18

2 Q Did you write that sentence, sir? 14:52:18

3 A Yes. 14:52:20

4 Q So you did, not someone from the Weinberg 14:52:20

5 Group? 14:52:24

6 A No. 14:52:24




10 BY MR. SELEY: 14:52:27

11 Q What are the most prevalent diseases among 14:52:29

12 the populations of Sucumbios and Orellana? 14:52:31

13 A Repeat the question. 14:52:35

14 Q What are the most prevalent diseases present 14:52:35

15 among the populations of Sucumbios and Orellana? 14:52:39

16 A I do not have access to that information, 14:52:41

17 but -- I can only speculate. I would imagine it's 14:52:46

18 infectious diseases. 14:52:51

19 Q What are the most prevalent diseases among 14:52:52

20 the entire population of the Oriente region of 14:53:00

21 Ecuador? 14:53:04

22 A Don't know. I can speculate, but I don't 14:53:04



220

1 know for a fact. 14:53:09

2 Q Do you have any basis to believe that there's 14:53:10

3 a difference between the most prevalent diseases in 14:53:16

4 Sucumbios and Orellana as opposed to the remainder of 14:53:20

5 the Oriente? 14:53:23

6 A No. 14:53:23



9 BY MR. SELEY: 14:53:26

10 Q So is it your belief that the health care 14:53:26

11 needs in Sucumbios and Orellana are typical of the 14:53:33

12 health care needs in the Amazon region of Ecuador as a 14:53:36

13 whole? 14:53:40

14 A Yes. 14:53:40

15 Q Is it your belief that the public health 14:53:40

16 infrastructure in Sucumbios and Orellana is typical of 14:53:46

17 the public health infrastructure of the Amazon region 14:53:49

18 of Ecuador as a whole? 14:53:53

19 A Yes. 14:53:54

20 Q Do you have any basis to conclude that the 14:53:55

21 population in Sucumbios and Orellana have different 14:54:06

22 health care needs as a result of oil exploration and 14:54:12



221

1 production operations? 14:54:17

2 A No. I have no reasons to believe that it 14:54:18

3 would be different. 14:54:22

4 MR. SELEY: All right. Why don't we change 14:54:22

5 tapes. 14:54:25

6 THE VIDEOGRAPHER: The time is 2:56 p.m. 14:54:26

7 This completes tape number 3. We are going off the 14:54:29

8 record. 14:54:31



11 December 16th, 2010. We are back on record. This is 14:57:44

12 tape number 4. 14:57:47

13 BY MR. SELEY: 14:57:47

14 Q Okay. We're still looking at Exhibit 1200, 14:57:47

15 and in particular, page 3 of Exhibit 1200. In the 14:57:54

16 section on state of existing health care 14:58:01

17 infrastructure, you mentioned in this section that in 14:58:04

18 Orellana province, 80 percent of the population is 14:58:07

19 below poverty and that 68 percent live below the 14:58:10

20 poverty line in Sucumbios. Do you see that? 14:58:15

21 A I do. 14:58:16

22 Q Do you know what the percentages of 14:58:17



222

1 population that are living in poverty in other regions 14:58:21

2 of the Ecuadorian Amazon region are? 14:58:26

3 A Yes. That is -- do I know for a fact -- as 14:58:28

4 we sit here today, do I remember the numbers? No, I 14:58:34

5 don't remember the numbers, but that information is 14:58:37

6 available in one of the references provided. 14:58:38

7 Q Is the level of poverty in regions of the 14:58:39

8 Ecuadorian Amazon other than Orellana and Sucumbios 14:58:44

9 province similar to the level of poverty in Orellana 14:58:48

10 and Sucumbios? 14:58:53



13 THE WITNESS: Yes. This region is at the 14:58:54

14 bottom -- of the 21 provinces in Ecuador, this 14:58:59

15 region -- these two provinces certainly are in the -- 14:59:03

16 I think the 17th and 19th place when it comes to total 14:59:08

17 per capita income and a number of other markers. 14:59:12

18 BY MR. SELEY: 14:59:15

19 Q Is it your belief that the presence of this 14:59:16

20 level of poverty affects the health status of the 14:59:20

21 individuals in the region? 14:59:23




223


2 THE WITNESS: Absolutely. 14:59:26

3 BY MR. SELEY: 14:59:27

4 Q You mention in your report that 50 percent of 14:59:29

5 the provinces do not have access to potable water. Is 14:59:32

6 that reference just to Sucumbios and Orellana or to 14:59:36

7 all of the provinces in the Ecuadorian Amazon? 14:59:38

8 A It's actually -- I think it refers to the 14:59:40

9 Oriente region. I would have to go back and look at 14:59:43

10 the reference, but I believe it's this region. 14:59:48

11 Q And in your report, you identify the 14:59:51

12 components starting on page 4 of a proposed health 14:59:58

13 care program. 15:00:04

14 A Yes. 15:00:04

15 Q Would it be fair to say that these components 15:00:05

16 apply equally to all regions of the Amazon, not just 15:00:09

17 Sucumbios and Orellana? 15:00:13



20 THE WITNESS: Sure. To any health care 15:00:16

21 system that you were trying to implement in any 15:00:20

22 region, not just that particular portion of Amazonia. 15:00:23



224

1 In fact, Anacostia would qualify. That's off 15:00:29

2 the record. 15:00:47

3 BY MR. SELEY: 15:00:47

4 Q Still on page 4 of your report, the last 15:01:07

5 sentence in the section above components of proposed 15:01:10

6 health care program, your report reads, "Deforestation 15:01:12

7 due to oil exploration has impacted the ability of 15:01:16

8 people in the Concession to obtain their traditional 15:01:20

9 medical treatment." 15:01:23

10 I think you testified before that that 15:01:23

11 sentence is not a sentence that you personally added 15:01:26

12 to this; is that right? 15:01:29


14 answered. 15:01:31

15 THE WITNESS: That's in collaboration with, I 15:01:31

16 think, Kerry Roche and the other members of the team. 15:01:36

17 Do I know for a fact that there was deforestation 15:01:38

18 caused by oil exploration? No, I don't know for a 15:01:41

19 fact. I have not seen this region myself. 15:01:45

20 But considering that these people rely on 15:01:48

21 traditional medicine and roots and -- traditional 15:01:51

22 medicine, environmental sources, then insofar as that 15:01:54



225

1 is true, then the other conclusion may be true as 15:02:03

2 well. But I have no proof one way or the other. 15:02:06

3 BY MR. SELEY: 15:02:10

4 Q So you have no basis to understand whether 15:02:13

5 deforestation is, in fact, due to oil exploration; is 15:02:20

6 that your testimony, sir? 15:02:24




10 BY MR. SELEY: 15:02:27

11 Q In the section on components of proposed 15:03:00

12 health care program that begins on page 4, other than 15:03:02

13 the introductory sentence there, the bullet points are 15:03:07

14 all the same as the bullet points that were in the 15:03:14

15 Kerry Roche e-mail to you on September -- I believe it 15:03:20

16 was September 8th; is that right, sir? 15:03:28



19 THE WITNESS: They seem to be. I think that 15:03:34

20 they were in a previous e-mail from me to her as well. 15:03:35

21 I don't think they have changed in any meaningful way. 15:03:40

22 BY MR. SELEY: 15:03:43



226

1 Q What would you have needed to do in order to 15:04:41

2 develop an estimate of health care costs required to 15:04:45

3 address any health issues associated with oil 15:04:50

4 production or exploration operations? 15:04:56



7 THE WITNESS: Ideally, you would have a 15:04:58

8 before and after situation and you would have good 15:05:05

9 access to preventive health and you would have 15:05:08

10 surveillance, you know, of any type of occurrence 15:05:11

11 pertaining to suspected toxic effects and 15:05:15

12 contamination, contamination of water sources, quite a 15:05:18

13 bit of information that I don't think is available. 15:05:24

14 BY MR. SELEY: 15:05:26

15 Q What's your understanding of how individuals 15:05:31

16 in this region could possibly be exposed to petroleum? 15:05:34



19 THE WITNESS: My understanding, this is a 15:05:41

20 portion of the rain forest. This is where branches of 15:05:42

21 the Amazon basin originate, or it's part of the Amazon 15:05:49

22 basin and, therefore, there is, you know, rain forest, 15:05:52



227

1 quite a bit of water and rainfall. And so possibly 15:05:54

2 through contamination of water sources. That would be 15:06:00

3 a concern. 15:06:05

4 Now, do I have any, you know, proof that 15:06:06

5 that's the case? No. But that would one of my main 15:06:09

6 concerns would be making sure that you seal those -- 15:06:14

7 if you asked me, what could I do to try to prevent any 15:06:17

8 type of major impact to the environment and the 15:06:23

9 peoples of this region, one would be to be careful 15:06:25

10 with the -- you know, the process of, you know, 15:06:27

11 exploration by the proper seal -- properly sealing 15:06:30

12 those wells. 15:06:37

13 BY MR. SELEY: 15:06:37

14 Q Did you make any effort to determine whether 15:06:39

15 there has been any impact on water in the region from 15:06:43

16 former oil production and operation facilities? 15:06:48



19 THE WITNESS: No, that was not the mandate. 15:06:53

20 That was beyond the scope of my work. 15:06:57

21 BY MR. SELEY: 15:06:58

22 Q In determining what the affected population 15:06:59



228

1 is for the purposes of coming up with your cost 15:07:03

2 number, did you attempt to determine what the 15:07:11

3 population of individuals potentially exposed to 15:07:15

4 contaminated water is? 15:07:19

5 A No -- 15:07:20



8 THE WITNESS: -- I did not. 15:07:23

9 BY MR. SELEY: 15:07:24

10 Q Do you have any evidence that there's any 15:07:30

11 water contamination in the area? 15:07:33



14 THE WITNESS: I have no personal evidence of 15:07:36

15 that. 15:07:38

16 BY MR. SELEY: 15:07:38

17 Q Is there any other way that individuals in 15:07:38

18 the area would be exposed to crude oil from former oil 15:07:47

19 exploration and production sites? 15:07:55

20 A Sure. Oil is present in the substrates of 15:07:58

21 Planet Earth, and so you may certainly -- we may 15:08:02

22 certainly explore and get it to come up or, in other 15:08:05



229

1 situations, it may come up by itself. So 15:08:08

2 contamination of water sources doesn't always 15:08:12

3 necessarily imply -- this is just personal knowledge; 15:08:13

4 it doesn't mean that -- I'm not an expert; I'm not a 15:08:16

5 geologist. But contamination of a water source, in my 15:08:17

6 mind, doesn't imply that that has been caused. It 15:08:20

7 could be just from natural telluric (phonetic) forces 15:08:25

8 at work. 15:08:28

9 BY MR. SELEY: 15:08:28

10 Q I want to make sure we're talking about the 15:08:31

11 same thing here. You've said that one method of 15:08:33

12 exposure, a pathway for exposure, is through 15:08:39

13 contaminated water? 15:08:44

14 A Correct. 15:08:45

15 Q Is there any other pathway to exposure from 15:08:46

16 former oil production and operation sites in the area? 15:08:50

17 A I guess another one is if you burn fossil 15:08:55

18 fuels, if you burn fuels, then, you know, you 15:09:01

19 aerosolize particles, and that can potentially also 15:09:05

20 contaminate the environment. That can cause 15:09:08

21 consequences. 15:09:10

22 Am I aware of other forms of contamination or 15:09:10



230

1 possible environmental damage? No. 15:09:14

2 Q Do you believe that there's any evidence in 15:09:16

3 this case that people were exposed to contaminants 15:09:21

4 from burning petroleum at the former oil production 15:09:28

5 and operation sites? 15:09:33

6 MR. WESTENBERGER: Objection. Could you read 15:09:34

7 that back? I'm sorry. I missed the first part. 15:09:36

8 (The reporter read the record as requested.) 11:16:28



11 THE WITNESS: No, there's no reason for me to 15:09:51

12 believe that there were other sources. 15:09:54

13 BY MR. SELEY: 15:09:55

14 Q In attempting to determine the affected 15:09:56

15 population for the purposes of your calculation in 15:09:59

16 your report, did you attempt to determine what 15:10:01

17 individuals may have been exposed by burning 15:10:06

18 petroleum? 15:10:09

19 A No. I imagine some burning has taken place 15:10:09

20 because frequently gas is in substrates near where oil 15:10:17

21 is present. But do I have evidence of that? No. 15:10:21

22 Q Did you take that into account in your report 15:10:24



231

1 in any way? 15:10:28

2 A No. No. 15:10:28

3 Q Still on page 5 of your report in the section 15:10:28

4 optimal methods for calculating health care costs -- 15:11:18

5 A Uh-huh. 15:11:20

6 Q -- the first paragraph of that section, last 15:11:21

7 sentence. That sentence reads, "It is difficult to 15:11:25

8 predict overall costs when the entire range of 15:11:30

9 diseases related to the environmental contamination 15:11:33

10 has not yet been established or become manifest. What 15:11:37

11 did you mean by that statement? 15:11:42

12 A That we truly don't know if there are 15:11:43

13 diseases that are -- essentially, epidemiologic 15:11:49

14 information is lacking, so we don't know if there are 15:11:53

15 any conditions that truly have been clearly linked to 15:11:56

16 environmental exposure and, therefore, you know, this 15:12:02

17 is a black box. 15:12:05

18 Q Are you assuming, for the purposes of your 15:12:07

19 report, that there is a range of diseases that will 15:12:20

20 become manifest as a result of exposure to petroleum? 15:12:24

21 MR. WESTENBERGER: Objection -- 15:12:27

22 THE WITNESS: No. I think -- 15:12:27



232

1 MR. WESTENBERGER: -- to the form of the 15:12:28


3 THE WITNESS: -- this is background 15:12:29

4 information, and I really could not come up with -- 15:12:30

5 these are the -- I here list the reasons why I am not 15:12:35

6 able to provide an accurate estimate, and this is just 15:12:38

7 one more reason. 15:12:44

8 BY MR. SELEY: 15:12:46

9 Q The next section of your report is a section 15:12:47

10 about cost estimates based on per capita health care 15:12:57

11 expenditures. Do you see that, sir? 15:13:01

12 A I do. 15:13:02

13 Q The methodology in this section is the same 15:13:02

14 methodology that we saw in prior drafts; is that 15:13:11

15 right, sir? 15:13:15

16 A Correct. 15:13:15

17 Q If you turn to page 6, there's a chart at the 15:13:16

18 top of page 6 of your report. Do you see that, sir? 15:13:32

19 A I do. 15:13:34

20 Q You indicate in the text that that table 15:13:35

21 includes population projections from 2010 to 2019 for 15:13:43

22 the five cantons in Sucumbios and Orellana where oil 15:13:49



233

1 production facilities are located. Do you see that, 15:13:56

2 sir? 15:13:58

3 A I do. 15:13:58

4 Q Is that your language? 15:13:59

5 A No. 15:14:00

6 Q Whose language is that? 15:14:00

7 A That was inserted later because this part of 15:14:02

8 the report was supposed to be developed by this other 15:14:06

9 demographer working on the project whose name -- I 15:14:14

10 don't know exactly if he was this gentleman you named, 15:14:16

11 O'Rourke (sic). I believe it was him. But this was 15:14:21

12 inserted later. 15:14:23

13 Q What do you mean by inserted later? 15:14:24

14 A On the final draft. 15:14:28

15 Q When you signed your report, was this section 15:14:30

16 in your draft? 15:14:34

17 A On the final one that was e-mailed back to 15:14:35

18 me, as I recall. 15:14:38

19 Q And based on the other documents we've looked 15:14:42

20 at, that would have been before September 13th, right? 15:14:56

21 A On September 13th or September 10th. 15:15:02

22 Q When you first received the final draft of 15:15:06



234

1 the report that included this section, did you ask any 15:15:22

2 questions of anyone about the methodology in this 15:15:28

3 section? 15:15:32

4 A No. 15:15:32

5 Q Did you understand the methodology in this 15:15:33

6 section? 15:15:36

7 A I understood that this was being established 15:15:38

8 or performed, completed by someone who had expertise 15:15:41

9 in demographic growth, that these calculations were -- 15:15:44

10 took into account the exposure -- a gradient of 15:15:48

11 exposure and looking at the population, the 15:15:54

12 demography -- the demographic density and so forth of 15:15:56

13 these five cantons in those two provinces. 15:16:01

14 Q Why is there no citation in this section to 15:16:05

15 the work of whoever it was that put this together? 15:16:12

16 A There's no citation -- you mean as far as 15:16:14

17 references? Because there was no publication where 15:16:24

18 this was drawn from. 15:16:26

19 Q There's no indication in this section 15:16:27

20 anywhere that this was written by anyone other than 15:16:29

21 you; isn't that right? 15:16:34

22 A Because this was -- 15:16:36



235



3 THE WITNESS: -- a collaborative product, and 15:16:39

4 I feel that this was part of -- it was a team effort. 15:16:41

5 BY MR. SELEY: 15:16:44

6 Q Because of that, you didn't feel the need to 15:16:45

7 indicate that this section was written by -- 15:16:48


9 BY MR. SELEY: 15:16:48

10 Q -- somebody else; is that right? 15:16:50


12 question. Argumentative. 15:16:53

13 THE WITNESS: Correct. This was done -- it 15:16:54

14 was part of a team effort, and this was done by one of 15:16:56

15 the other members of the team. 15:16:58

16 MR. SELEY: We all need to make sure to try 15:17:00

17 to not speak over each other. 15:17:03

18 BY MR. SELEY: 15:17:03

19 Q Do you have any basis to conclude that these 15:17:15

20 projections of population are valid? 15:17:19

21 A No. I was not the demographer coming up with 15:17:23

22 these numbers. 15:17:27



236

1 Q Do you have any basis to conclude that 15:17:27

2 whoever came up with these numbers looked at the 15:17:31

3 correct five cantons? 15:17:35

4 A I cannot speculate one way or the other. I 15:17:36

5 assume they were -- you know, they went through due 15:17:41

6 diligence and they applied the proper information. 15:17:46

7 Q Did you perform any due diligence on these 15:17:47

8 calculations in order to determine whether they were 15:17:51

9 accurate? 15:17:55

10 A No. 15:17:55

11 Q Do you have any understanding as to the 15:17:56

12 degree of scientific certainty that the individual who 15:18:05

13 wrote this part of your report used in coming up with 15:18:10

14 their populations? 15:18:14



17 THE WITNESS: No. I'm not certain of that. 15:18:17

18 BY MR. SELEY: 15:18:19

19 Q All of the population numbers on this chart 15:18:30

20 are significantly higher than the 100,000 that you had 15:18:34

21 in your drafts; is that right? 15:18:40

22 A Correct. 15:18:42



237

1 Q And that resulted in a higher annual cost in 15:18:42

2 the far right-hand column of the chart; is that right? 15:18:52

3 A Correct. 15:18:56

4 Q In an earlier e-mail that we discussed today, 15:18:56

5 you were asking about which four cantons should be 15:19:19

6 used and, in this section, there's an indication that 15:19:25

7 five cantons were used to calculate population. Do 15:19:29

8 you have any understanding of why there's a 15:19:35

9 discrepancy between the four cantons and the five 15:19:37

10 cantons used in your report? 15:19:42



13 THE WITNESS: I don't know exactly the reason 15:19:46

14 why there is a discrepancy. I believe it may have 15:19:48

15 originated looking at the map of the Concession area 15:19:52

16 and different regions within that -- those oil wells 15:19:55

17 that are mapped in this Concession area. But that 15:20:00

18 is -- I can only assume. I'm not certain. 15:20:02

19 BY MR. SELEY: 15:20:05

20 Q You don't have any reason to know that, 15:20:05

21 right? 15:20:08

22 A Correct. 15:20:08



238

1 Q Do these population numbers in the table on 15:20:09

2 page 6 of your expert report at Exhibit 1200 reflect 15:20:25

3 all of the individuals that live within the five 15:20:35

4 cantons described here? 15:20:40


6 Q Do you have any understanding of the 15:20:44

7 scientific basis for the growth curve that's applied 15:20:49

8 to this population in order to estimate it from 2010 15:20:53

9 to 2019? 15:20:58


11 answered. 15:21:01


13 BY MR. SELEY: 15:21:02

14 Q Do you know what the numerical difference is 15:21:02

15 between each of the population numbers in this chart? 15:21:19

16 A I mean, as far as the demographic growth that 15:21:22

17 has been applied? 15:21:31

18 Q Let me ask the question a little differently. 15:21:32

19 Maybe it wasn't a good question. Did you ever try to 15:21:35

20 figure out the difference in numbers between the 15:21:39

21 population in 2012 versus 2011? 15:21:42

22 A No. 15:21:48



239

1 MR. WESTENBERGER: Object to the form of the 15:21:48


3 BY MR. SELEY: 15:21:50

4 Q Did you try to figure out the difference in 15:21:51

5 population numbers for any two years? 15:21:53

6 A No. 15:21:54

7 Q Are you aware that, in this chart, the 15:21:54

8 assumption is that the population increases by exactly 15:22:00

9 5,305 people every single year? 15:22:05

10 A No, but if I do the math, then I would -- I'm 15:22:08

11 certainly -- I'm certain I could come up with that 15:22:13

12 calculation. I haven't done the math. I haven't 15:22:16

13 applied those formulas. 15:22:20

14 Q Do you have any reason to believe that the 15:22:22

15 population in this area will increase by exactly 5,305 15:22:28

16 people -- 15:22:36

17 A No, these -- 15:22:36

18 Q -- each year? 15:22:36

19 A These are estimates, and the cost is a cost 15:22:36

20 estimate as indicated time and time again. And these 15:22:39

21 are just projections. 15:22:43

22 Q Why is the statement made under this table 15:22:44



240

1 that reliable population estimates are not available 15:22:49

2 for the years after 2019? 15:22:53

3 A I don't think they are available for -- 15:22:54

4 between 2010 and 2019 or after 2019. 15:22:58

5 Q What is the basis for using a methodology 15:23:00

6 where you multiply the ten-year period in your table 15:23:15

7 by three? 15:23:21

8 A It was suggested that we had to make a 15:23:21

9 projection over the course of three decades. 15:23:26

10 Q That was suggested by the Weinberg Group? 15:23:28

11 MR. WESTENBERGER: Objection. This has all 15:23:33

12 been covered. Asked and answered. 15:23:35


14 BY MR. SELEY: 15:23:36

15 Q I'm sorry? 15:23:37

16 A Yes. 15:23:37

17 Q Do you understand how far from the well sites 15:23:37

18 the assumption was made that the population would be 15:24:11

19 affected by oil operations? 15:24:15



22 THE WITNESS: No, I don't know those details. 15:24:20



241

1 BY MR. SELEY: 15:24:21

2 Q Are you aware that the population within five 15:24:21

3 kilometers of any of the former oil production 15:24:40

4 operations is significantly smaller than the 15:24:43

5 population listed in your table? 15:24:45



8 THE WITNESS: I am not aware of that. 15:24:49

9 BY MR. SELEY: 15:24:50

10 Q Do you believe, as you sit here today, that 15:24:50

11 it would be more appropriate to use a population 15:25:00

12 within five kilometers of a former well site to 15:25:03

13 calculate the annual cost of health care to what's 15:25:08

14 called here the affected population? 15:25:14



17 THE WITNESS: Potentially. 15:25:17

18 BY MR. SELEY: 15:25:17

19 Q You don't know one way or the other? 15:25:19

20 A I'm not certain one way or the other because 15:25:20

21 I just don't know the extent of, particularly, water 15:25:23

22 sources, contamination of water sources and the 15:25:26



242

1 consequences of that. So it certainly prima facie 15:25:29

2 makes sense, sounds logical, but I just don't know the 15:25:32

3 answer. 15:25:36

4 Q If I ask you the same question with regard to 15:25:36

5 the population living one kilometer from the well 15:25:39

6 sites, would your answer be the same? 15:25:42




10 question. 15:25:45

11 THE WITNESS: Right. It's a rational 15:25:45

12 question, but -- and a rational assumption, but I just 15:25:49

13 don't know. 15:25:50

14 BY MR. SELEY: 15:25:52

15 Q What was your basis for concluding that the 15:26:01

16 methodology here to multiply a population by 15:26:06

17 per capita health care expenditures was a valid 15:26:11

18 methodology? 15:26:14


20 answered. 15:26:17

21 THE WITNESS: Yes, I think we have already 15:26:17

22 covered that, but, as I indicated before, because of 15:26:19



243

1 the limitations, because of the lack of data, we felt 15:26:23

2 that -- yeah. 15:26:27

3 BY MR. SELEY: 15:26:28

4 Q I'm asking a slightly different question, 15:26:29

5 sir. 15:26:32

6 A Okay. 15:26:32

7 Q I understand that there are limitations -- 15:26:32

8 A Yes. 15:26:34

9 Q -- in the data, and I think you've testified 15:26:34

10 that those limitations prevented you from doing a 15:26:37

11 comprehensive health cost estimate; is that right? 15:26:41

12 A Correct. 15:26:43

13 Q I appreciate that what you've done here is 15:26:46

14 different than that, that the methodology used here is 15:26:48

15 different, but why is this methodology using 15:26:53

16 per capita health care costs a valid methodology? 15:26:57

17 MR. WESTENBERGER: Objection. He testified 15:27:02

18 about this earlier. You asked about -- 15:27:04

19 THE WITNESS: I have no other better manner 15:27:06

20 of going about the request of coming up with a best 15:27:07

21 cost estimate. 15:27:11

22 BY MR. SELEY: 15:27:12



244

1 Q Why did you use the average Ecuador 15:27:20

2 per capita health care cost versus the health care 15:27:30

3 costs in Sucumbios and Orellana to do your 15:27:34

4 calculation? 15:27:37

5 A Because those are, I thought, more -- first 15:27:37

6 of all, they were widely available in reputable data 15:27:44

7 sources -- you know, the World Bank and the World 15:27:48

8 Health Organization, most of them have the same 15:27:54

9 figures. The information about this region came from 15:27:56

10 the INEC, from the same Ecuadorian census bureau. And 15:28:01

11 the data in that regard was older and there was only 15:28:06

12 one report where I could get my hands on some 15:28:11

13 information pertaining these two regions. 15:28:14

14 Q You indicate in your report that the 15:28:16

15 per capita health care spending in the region was only 15:28:26

16 $75 as of 2001. 15:28:29

17 A Correct. 15:28:31

18 Q Is that the one data point that you're 15:28:32

19 talking about? 15:28:35

20 A Correct. 15:28:35

21 Q If you used $75 as opposed to 231, you come 15:28:35

22 up with a very different number, right? 15:28:42



245

1 A Correct. 15:28:44

2 Q A much lower number? 15:28:44

3 A A much lower number. 15:28:46

4 Q You indicate that the affected provinces have 15:28:47

5 historically received only 2.6 percent of the total 15:29:05

6 health care expenditures. Do you see that? 15:29:08

7 A That's -- yes. 15:29:10

8 Q Do you know what the percent of the 15:29:10

9 Ecuadorian population that lives in the affected 15:29:14

10 provinces is? 15:29:17

11 A I didn't do the calculation, but it's 15:29:18

12 probably close to that. It's actually probably less 15:29:21

13 than 2.6 percent. 15:29:25

14 Q So -- 15:29:26

15 A I'm sorry. It's probably 5 percent. I would 15:29:29

16 have to go back and do the numbers, but if they 15:29:32

17 received a total of 2.6 percent of the total and it 15:29:34

18 was only 75 per capita, I can do the math. 15:29:38

19 Q I guess this is a problem that I had trying 15:29:42

20 to figure out this math as well, sir, because using 15:29:47

21 the population numbers in the table and comparing 15:29:51

22 those population numbers to the population of Ecuador, 15:29:54



246

1 I get about 1.3 percent of the population living in 15:29:59

2 these areas. 15:30:03

3 A Correct. 15:30:03

4 Q And you indicate that they received 15:30:04

5 2.6 percent of the total health care expenditure. 15:30:07

6 A That is what is reported in those documents 15:30:09

7 from 2001. 15:30:11

8 Q So based on that math, it would seem that 15:30:12

9 more of the total health care expenditure is going to 15:30:19

10 these areas than its population would otherwise 15:30:22

11 warrant. 15:30:25

12 A Yeah. 15:30:25



15 THE WITNESS: It would seem. 15:30:28

16 BY MR. SELEY: 15:30:31

17 Q Do you believe that to be true? 15:30:34

18 A I have no way of knowing for sure, but I 15:30:35

19 relied on information provided in these documents that 15:30:41

20 are publicly available. 15:30:44

21 Q Is there no information in the INEC database 15:30:46

22 after 2001 about per capita health care spending in 15:31:11



247


2 A Not that I recall. Much of this information 15:31:16

3 was present in one of the documents that I think is 15:31:21

4 referenced. It's a long document that is about 120 15:31:24

5 pages long that is in Spanish, and it breaks down -- 15:31:28

6 it's a report submitted by two experts. It's broken 15:31:31

7 down, you know, by provinces. 15:31:35

8 Q That's the 2002 report from the Minister of 15:31:37

9 Health? 15:31:42

10 A It may very well be. I don't exactly recall, 15:31:43

11 but I can -- yeah, 2002 projection, yeah, the fourth 15:31:53

12 reference. 15:31:59

13 Q Did you make any effort to determine whether 15:31:59

14 the INEC database contained information that you could 15:32:05

15 use to determine per capita health care spending in 15:32:09




19 THE WITNESS: It was too old. The 15:32:17

20 information that I saw did not -- was not -- did not 15:32:18

21 agree with 2008 information that I had in the World 15:32:22

22 Health Organization number of per capita expenditure. 15:32:28



248

1 Expenditure, I guess, is not a best number. I didn't 15:32:34

2 want to use the highest number, which was 276, I think 15:32:38

3 from 2007 because capital expenditures can sway the 15:32:41

4 number one way or the other. 15:32:46

5 So -- for instance, if they build hospitals 15:32:48

6 in one year and there are big capital expenditures, 15:32:50

7 the number may potentially be skewed and it may be 15:32:55

8 very high. And so I felt that we had to use most 15:32:56

9 recent, but, at the same time, not necessarily the 15:32:59

10 highest because I didn't want to bias information and 15:33:01

11 I wanted to stay as close to the truth as possible. 15:33:07

12 Q Your reference there to a number -- I think 15:33:11

13 it was $274 -- and it's in your report, I believe, at 15:33:16

14 page 5 in footnote 1. You're referring to the World 15:33:23

15 Health Organization estimate for 2005; is that right? 15:33:31

16 A Page 5. Yeah, exactly. Yes. 15:33:34

17 Q Isn't it the case that that estimate was 15:33:42

18 based on an average exchange rate as opposed to a 15:33:47

19 U.S.-based exchange rate, and that's why that number 15:33:52

20 is higher, sir? 15:33:54

21 A I think the -- all of the estimates from the 15:33:55

22 World Health Organization, I think all of those are in 15:34:01



249

1 dollars. So per capita expenditures in dollars. The 15:34:04

2 Ecuadorian economy, to my knowledge, has been in 15:34:08

3 dollars for quite some time. So I don't believe there 15:34:11

4 would be any exchange rate difference because it has 15:34:14

5 been dollarized. 15:34:17

6 MR. SELEY: Why don't we go off the record 15:34:18

7 for a minute or two. I want to see if I can try and 15:34:43

8 find a document. 15:34:46








16 MR. WESTENBERGER: Just to be clear, by my 15:44:29

17 count, we were off the record at your request for 15:44:30

18 about ten minutes. 15:44:33

19 BY MR. SELEY: 15:44:36

20 Q We were talking about footnote 1 on page 5 of 15:44:36

21 your report -- 15:44:39

22 A Yes. 15:44:40



250

1 Q -- which discussed a World Health 15:44:41

2 Organization estimate for 2005 of $274 per capita. 15:44:44

3 A Yes. 15:44:50

4 Q I've placed before you a document marked as 15:44:51

5 Exhibit 2019 (sic). Is this a document that you're 15:44:55

6 familiar with, sir? 15:44:59

7 A Yes, I've seen this before. 15:45:00

8 Q Is this the document from which you got the 15:45:02

9 $274 per capita number -- 15:45:07


11 Q -- in -- in footnote 1 of your report, sir? 15:45:10


13 Q That $274 per capita number is in a row 15:45:14

14 that's labeled, "Per capita total expenditure on 15:45:23

15 health," and then, in parentheses, it says, "PPP 15:45:27

16 int$," end parentheses. 15:45:35

17 A Yes. 15:45:35

18 Q Do you know what the PPP int$ means? 15:45:35

19 A No. 15:45:41

20 Q The row below that is labeled, "Per capita 15:45:46

21 total expenditure on health at average exchange rate 15:45:52

22 (U.S. dollar)." 15:45:57



251

1 A Uh-huh. 15:46:00

2 Q And that row indicates that the value is 15:46:00

3 $147. 15:46:06

4 A Correct. 15:46:06

5 Q In your view, is the $147 per capita estimate 15:46:07

6 equivalent to the per capita number that you're using 15:46:18

7 in your report in the table on page 6? 15:46:26

8 MR. WESTENBERGER: Objection to the -- 15:46:29


10 MR. WESTENBERGER: -- form of the question. 15:46:30

11 BY MR. SELEY: 15:46:31

12 Q Why not, sir? 15:46:31

13 A My understanding is that the Ecuadorian 15:46:32

14 economy had been dollarized, and I took that number at 15:46:39

15 231 at face value. 15:46:43

16 Q As you sit here today, do you know if that 15:46:44

17 $231 per capita number is associated with a U.S. 15:46:54

18 dollar exchange rate or an international exchange 15:47:03

19 rate? 15:47:07


21 THE WITNESS: A U.S. dollar exchange rate. 15:47:08

22 BY MR. SELEY: 15:47:09



252

1 Q The $231 per capita number that you use in 15:47:27

2 your report, does that assume that currently there is 15:47:31

3 no health care expenditure being made on what you call 15:47:40

4 the affected population? 15:47:45


6 THE WITNESS: No. It doesn't make that 15:47:47

7 assumption. It's just a total annual health care cost 15:47:50

8 expenditure for the Ecuadorian population. Total. 15:47:54

9 BY MR. SELEY: 15:47:54

10 Q Okay. So your -- 15:48:02

11 A Infrastructure total. 15:48:03

12 Q So your annual cost number in the table on 15:48:06

13 page 6 of your report is just a number based on the 15:48:15

14 total per capita health expenditure for the affected 15:48:22

15 population; is that right? 15:48:26

16 A Correct. 15:48:27

17 Q If a court were to require Chevron to make 15:48:31

18 this annual health care expenditure that you identify 15:48:53

19 in your report, that would have the effect of doubling 15:48:58

20 the annual health care expenditure for the individuals 15:49:05

21 in the affected population; is that right? 15:49:08




253

1 THE WITNESS: No, not quite right because, as 15:49:11

2 we discussed, this particular region received a lower 15:49:13

3 amount annually. So it wouldn't necessarily double 15:49:17

4 it. It would provide resources above and beyond what 15:49:21

5 was already being provided. 15:49:24

6 BY MR. SELEY: 15:49:25

7 Q So it could triple it or quadruple it; you 15:49:27

8 don't know? 15:49:30


10 THE WITNESS: Well, according to the 15:49:30

11 denominator that you're using. If the denominator was 15:49:33

12 $76 per capita that was the current expenditure, then 15:49:40

13 this would potentially quadruple it. 15:49:46

14 BY MR. SELEY: 15:49:46

15 Q Now, starting at the bottom of page 6 in your 15:50:00

16 report, you include the section on the World Trade 15:50:01

17 Center Fund that was sent to you in that e-mail from 15:50:15

18 Kerry Roche of the Weinberg Group that we previously 15:50:17

19 discussed, right? 15:50:20


21 Mischaracterization. 15:50:21

22 THE WITNESS: What was the question? 15:50:23



254

1 MR. SELEY: Let's read that question back, 15:50:27

2 please. 11:16:28

3 (The reporter read the record as requested.) 11:16:28

4 BY MR. SELEY: 15:50:33

5 Q Is that right, sir? 15:50:33

6 A We have already spoken about that. 15:50:59

7 Q So is that correct, sir? 15:51:02

8 A Yes. 15:51:06


10 Mischaracterization of his testimony about that. 15:51:08

11 BY MR. SELEY: 15:51:09

12 Q Okay. Now, you had concluded, when you first 15:51:13

13 received that section on September 8th, that the World 15:51:17

14 Trade Center Fund was a very different situation than 15:51:23

15 the Oriente in Ecuador, correct? 15:51:30

16 A Right. 15:51:33

17 Q And you had concluded as far back as 15:51:33

18 September 8th, when you first received that, that the 15:51:38

19 World Trade Center Fund was not an appropriate 15:51:41

20 comparison because of the difference between Ecuador 15:51:44

21 and New York City, right? 15:51:47




255

1 the question. Mischaracterization. 15:51:49

2 THE WITNESS: Yeah, there was some pluses and 15:51:49

3 some minuses, and I indicated those. And I think 15:51:52

4 they're indicated in the document. 15:51:58

5 BY MR. SELEY: 15:51:59

6 Q Who is the target group for World Trade 15:51:59

7 Center Fund benefits? 15:52:03

8 A Responders, police officers, firefighters and 15:52:03

9 so forth. 15:52:08

10 Q It's not the entire population of New York 15:52:08

11 City, right? 15:52:11

12 A No. 15:52:11

13 Q In order to be a participant in the World 15:52:12

14 Trade Center Fund, do those individuals need to 15:52:19

15 establish that they were potentially exposed to 15:52:21

16 dangerous substances? 15:52:23



19 THE WITNESS: They have to make a claim. 15:52:26

20 They did not have to, to my knowledge, to document 15:52:30

21 exposure. They had to be registered, I believe, in 15:52:34

22 the database early on. 15:52:39



256

1 BY MR. SELEY: 15:52:40

2 Q Is the World Trade Center Fund paying for all 15:52:42

3 of the health care for those individuals enrolled in 15:52:46

4 the fund? 15:52:49



7 THE WITNESS: I know there is a fund set up 15:52:51

8 to -- to take care of the health care needs of these 15:52:54

9 individuals. Are they covering all of those health 15:53:00

10 care needs? I truly don't know. I believe most of 15:53:05

11 them. 15:53:08

12 BY MR. SELEY: 15:53:08

13 Q Well, is the World Trade Center Fund set up 15:53:09

14 to cover treatment of infectious diseases for the 15:53:12

15 individuals in -- 15:53:18

16 A No. There -- 15:53:18

17 Q -- the fund? 15:53:18

18 A -- are specific entities that were 15:53:18

19 designated, I believe. Res -- 15:53:21

20 Q What do you mean by -- sorry. I didn't let 15:53:22

21 you finish. Please. 15:53:26

22 A I believe there were specific entities 15:53:27



257

1 designated that -- in connection with that exposure 15:53:29

2 that would be covered by the World Trade Center fund. 15:53:34

3 Q What are those specific entities? 15:53:36

4 A I'm not -- I mean, some of them may be -- I'm 15:53:38

5 not aware of all the details, but I think respiratory 15:53:43

6 illnesses, gastroesophageal reflux disease -- GERD, 15:53:46

7 respiratory illnesses, cancers, hematologic cancers, 15:53:53

8 those type of entities. 15:53:58

9 Q So the World Trade Center Fund applies only 15:53:59

10 to specific disease outcomes? 15:54:03



13 THE WITNESS: I believe so. 15:54:07

14 BY MR. SELEY: 15:54:08

15 Q That's very different than the health program 15:54:14

16 that you're suggesting in your report, right? 15:54:16



19 THE WITNESS: The -- it's very different -- 15:54:20

20 you mean, the overall cost of providing health care? 15:54:24

21 BY MR. SELEY: 15:54:27

22 Q Let me ask a better question. 15:54:28



258

1 The fact that the World Trade Center Fund 15:54:30

2 only applies to a specific set of disease outcomes 15:54:35

3 makes that fund different than what you propose in 15:54:39

4 your report; is that right? 15:54:43

5 A Correct. 15:54:44


7 BY MR. SELEY: 15:54:46

8 Q Your report covers all diseases; is that 15:54:48

9 right? 15:54:48

10 A Potentially, yes. 15:54:50

11 Q The fact that -- strike that. 15:54:50

12 On page 7 of your report at Exhibit 1200, you 15:55:24

13 have a section on why the World Trade Center provides 15:55:33

14 a reasonable comparison. Do you see that section? 15:55:37

15 A I do. 15:55:39

16 Q In the first sentence of that section, it's 15:55:39

17 written, "Most importantly, both of these disasters 15:55:46

18 involved complex and ill-defined environmental 15:55:51

19 exposures, with both physical and chemical 15:55:54

20 components." 15:55:58


22 A I do. 15:55:59



259

1 Q Did you write that sentence? 15:56:00

2 A In collaboration with Kerry Roche. 15:56:01

3 Q So what did you mean by both of these 15:56:04

4 disasters involved complex and ill-defined 15:56:08

5 environmental exposures? 15:56:11

6 A Complex, because they took place over quite a 15:56:12

7 bit of -- you know, the length of time was quite -- 15:56:15

8 was extended through, potentially, two decades. So in 15:56:20

9 that regard, they were dissimilar. They were not, you 15:56:23

10 know, equivalent. 15:56:26

11 Ill-defined as far as, you know, consequences 15:56:28

12 of environmental exposure. 15:56:31

13 Probably the word "disaster" is a 15:56:35

14 mischaracterization; it should not have been used. If 15:56:39

15 we are true to form, that word "disaster" applied to 15:56:42

16 WTC, but certainly didn't apply to necessarily this 15:56:45

17 particular exposure. 15:56:49

18 Q When you say that the exposure in the Ecuador 15:56:49

19 case is an ill-defined environmental exposure, what do 15:57:00

20 you mean by that? 15:57:04

21 A That it's ill-defined as the report 15:57:04

22 indicates. Ill-defined as far as the amount, the 15:57:10



260

1 concentration, the gradient, the direct effects on -- 15:57:13

2 we don't know the consequence, the health consequences 15:57:18

3 that may have had. So ill-defined. 15:57:21

4 Q Two sentences down from there, the report -- 15:57:25

5 your report reads, "Certain health effects have been 15:57:37

6 associated with exposure to petroleum-based chemicals, 15:57:40

7 including cancer and effects on the central nervous 15:57:44

8 system, the immune system, lungs and other organs, 15:57:47

9 skin, reproductive system, and fetal development," and 15:57:51

10 it cites an ATSDR publication. Do you see that 15:57:55

11 sentence, sir? 15:57:58

12 A I do. 15:57:58

13 Q Did you write that sentence? 15:57:58

14 A It was done mostly by Kerry Roche. She is 15:57:59

15 the one who appended that reference. 15:58:04

16 Q Do you have any basis to conclude that any of 15:58:06

17 the health effects that are identified in this 15:58:11

18 sentence are associated with petroleum-based 15:58:15

19 chemicals? 15:58:20


21 the question. The citation speaks for itself. 15:58:22

22 THE WITNESS: I have no personal proof. It 15:58:24



261

1 is cited by one of my collaborators. 15:58:27

2 BY MR. SELEY: 15:58:29

3 Q Do you have any understanding as to whether 15:58:35

4 the ATSDR document that's cited here refers to health 15:58:39

5 effects associated with refined petroleum products as 15:58:44

6 opposed to crude oil? 15:58:48



9 THE WITNESS: I do not know. 15:58:51

10 BY MR. SELEY: 15:58:52

11 Q Do you know what weathered crude oil is? 15:59:00

12 A No. 15:59:03

13 Q Did you review any of the epidemiologic 15:59:04

14 studies that have been conducted on populations living 15:59:22

15 in the Amazon region of Ecuador? 15:59:24

16 A No. 15:59:26

17 Q Were you aware that there had been a number 15:59:27

18 of studies, epidemiologic studies, involving the 16:00:08

19 population in the Amazon region of Ecuador? 16:00:13


21 the question. Assuming facts not in evidence. 16:00:17

22 THE WITNESS: No, but it is not pertinent to 16:00:19



262

1 the objective of my -- my task. 16:00:24

2 BY MR. SELEY: 16:00:25

3 Q Why not? 16:00:29

4 A Because I wasn't asked to make a causation 16:00:29

5 argument. 16:00:34

6 Q In this same section of your report on 16:00:34

7 page 7, the section titled, "Why the World Trade 16:01:09

8 Center provides a reasonable comparison," the last 16:01:13

9 sentence of that section reads, "Consequently, any 16:01:16

10 health care program must involve understanding and 16:01:21

11 defining the exposure-related health effects." 16:01:23


13 A I do. 16:01:27

14 Q Your health care program outlined in your 16:01:28

15 report does not do that? 16:01:31

16 A Does not. 16:01:32

17 MR. SELEY: I'd like to take about a 16:01:55

18 ten-minute break. 16:01:57







263


2 BY MR. SELEY: 16:16:42

3 Q Dr. Picone, I have a couple of things that I 16:16:42

4 need to ask you, and I'm going to apologize in 16:16:46

5 advance, but I do need to ask you. Have you ever been 16:16:50

6 convicted of a crime? 16:16:52

7 A No. Not yet. 16:16:53

8 Q Have you ever been convicted of any ethical 16:16:57

9 violations as part of your medical practice? 16:17:02

10 A No. 16:17:03

11 Q Other than the medical malpractice cases that 16:17:03

12 we've already talked about, have you ever been accused 16:17:09

13 of any other professional misconduct? 16:17:14

14 A No. 16:17:17

15 Q Do you have any family relationship with any 16:17:18

16 of the plaintiffs in this case? 16:17:28

17 A No. 16:17:29

18 Q Do you know who the plaintiffs are in this 16:17:29

19 case? 16:17:32

20 A I believe the people of these particular 16:17:32

21 cantons in Sucumbios and Orellana. There's a 16:17:37

22 description of Aguinda. An Aguinda name, I believe, 16:17:44



264

1 is one of the plaintiffs' name. 16:17:49

2 Q But to your knowledge, you have no family 16:17:50

3 relationships with anyone who is a plaintiff in the 16:17:55

4 case? 16:17:57

5 A No. 16:17:57

6 Q Looking at your report at Exhibit 1200, is 16:17:58

7 there any way to go through your report and separate 16:18:10

8 out the costs of health care that are associated with 16:18:14

9 Texaco operations versus Petroecuador operations? 16:18:21

10 A No. 16:18:24

11 Q In your report, when describing the affected 16:18:25

12 population, do you take into account in any way how 16:18:34

13 much of your affected population was allegedly 16:18:40

14 affected by pre-1990 operations versus post-1990 16:18:44

15 operations? 16:18:48

16 A No. 16:18:49

17 Q In your report, do you take into account in 16:18:49

18 any way any difference between individuals living near 16:19:00

19 remediated sites versus non-remediated sites? 16:19:06

20 A No. 16:19:10

21 Q Using the methodology in your report, would 16:19:11

22 conducting remediation at sites in the area reduce the 16:19:20



265

1 number of your affected population? 16:19:26

2 A Potentially. 16:19:28

3 Q Are you aware that remediation is currently 16:19:29

4 ongoing in the area? 16:19:42


6 Assumes facts not in evidence. 16:19:45

7 THE WITNESS: I heard about that. I just 16:19:46

8 don't know exactly what remediation is. I presume 16:19:49

9 it's cleanup operation and so forth, but I'm not privy 16:19:52

10 to the details of that. 16:19:55

11 BY MR. SELEY: 16:19:56

12 Q Is it your understanding, based on what you 16:20:00

13 heard, that the remediation is being conducted by 16:20:03

14 Petroecuador? 16:20:06


16 THE WITNESS: I truly don't know if it was 16:20:06

17 Petroecuador or based on funds from Texaco or -- don't 16:20:09

18 know. 16:20:15

19 BY MR. SELEY: 16:20:15

20 Q Is the remediation you're talking about 16:20:18

21 remediation that is ongoing today or remediation that 16:20:22

22 took place in the 1990s? 16:20:25



266

1 MR. WESTENBERGER: Objection -- 16:20:26

2 THE WITNESS: I'm not talking -- 16:20:26

3 MR. WESTENBERGER: -- as to remediation 16:20:26

4 you're talking about. 16:20:29

5 THE WITNESS: -- about -- yeah, you are 16:20:29

6 talking about it. I'm not talking about it. 16:20:30

7 MR. WESTENBERGER: He said he doesn't know. 16:20:31

8 BY MR. SELEY: 16:20:34

9 Q I'm trying to understand what you know. 16:20:37

10 A I mean, you mentioned remediation. They were 16:20:37

11 not my words. I -- have I heard of it? I have heard. 16:20:40

12 Since, you know, I became involved with this, I have 16:20:46

13 heard that there was some remediation in progress, but 16:20:47

14 do I know any details? No. 16:20:51

15 Q Okay. Using the methodology in your report, 16:20:52

16 would stopping the remediation that's in progress 16:20:55

17 result in an increase in the number of potentially 16:21:01

18 affected individuals? 16:21:03


20 question. 16:21:06

21 THE WITNESS: If remediation is in progress, 16:21:06

22 I think it's a good thing. I mean, that could be my 16:21:09



267

1 only logical conclusion. 16:21:12

2 BY MR. SELEY: 16:21:14

3 Q Are you aware of any efforts by the 16:21:29

4 plaintiffs in this litigation to stop ongoing 16:21:32

5 remediation? 16:21:35



8 THE WITNESS: I don't really know of that. 16:21:38

9 BY MR. SELEY: 16:21:43


11 increasing the number of wells in the area -- and I'm 16:21:49

12 talking about oil wells in the area -- increase the 16:21:56

13 number of potentially affected people? 16:21:59



16 THE WITNESS: Increasing the number of wells 16:22:03

17 will increase the number of affected individuals if 16:22:08

18 more individuals get exposed. If the wells are -- if 16:22:11

19 there are more wells in the same region and the same 16:22:15

20 population is exposed, not necessarily. 16:22:17

21 BY MR. SELEY: 16:22:19

22 Q Well, do you know how many wells have been 16:22:21



268

1 dug in the region that your report covers? 16:22:25

2 A I know there's a number -- 16:22:28



5 THE WITNESS: -- but I don't know the 16:22:29

6 details. 16:22:32

7 BY MR. SELEY: 16:22:34

8 Q Do you know if that number has gone up or 16:22:35

9 gone down after 1990? 16:22:37

10 A Don't know. 16:22:38

11 Q If you were aware that, since 1990, 350 new 16:22:41

12 wells have been dug in the area, would that impact 16:22:52

13 your assessment of the affected population? 16:22:55


15 the question. Assumes facts not in evidence. 16:22:59

16 THE WITNESS: I can only speculate. That's 16:23:00

17 really -- that's a hypothetical question and -- would 16:23:03

18 there be more people potentially exposed? If it is in 16:23:06

19 new geographic regions, potentially yes. 16:23:11

20 BY MR. SELEY: 16:23:13


22 an increase in the number of spills in the area that 16:23:22



269

1 you were evaluating increase the affected population? 16:23:26




5 BY MR. SELEY: 16:23:32

6 Q Are you aware that, since 1990, Petroecuador 16:23:35

7 has experienced 1400 documented spills in the area? 16:23:39


9 the question. Assumes -- 16:23:44

10 THE WITNESS: I was not aware of that. 16:23:47

11 MR. WESTENBERGER: -- facts not in evidence. 16:23:46

12 BY MR. SELEY: 16:23:48

13 Q If you were aware of that, would that have an 16:23:48

14 impact on your conclusion about how many people are 16:23:55

15 potentially affected? 16:23:59




19 BY MR. SELEY: 16:24:02

20 Q Is there any way that that would decrease the 16:24:20

21 number of potentially affected people? 16:24:23

22 A Unlikely. 16:24:25



270

1 Q Unlikely or -- 16:24:27



4 BY MR. SELEY: 16:24:31

5 Q -- any conceivable way? 16:24:33

6 A Unlikely. There are more oil spills in the 16:24:33

7 region -- I don't see how that can help decrease 16:24:36

8 potential contamination. 16:24:40

9 Q Using the methodology in your report, does 16:24:42

10 the drilling location of wells impact the number of 16:25:20

11 affected people? 16:25:23



14 THE WITNESS: Not according to the 16:25:25

15 methodology that we applied, because we truly were not 16:25:26

16 aware -- we did not utilize a gradient of exposure and 16:25:29

17 proximity to other wells and a number of other 16:25:35

18 variables that I truly had no knowledge of. 16:25:35

19 BY MR. SELEY: 16:25:41

20 Q If you had knowledge of well locations and 16:25:44

21 population distribution around those wells, would you 16:25:50

22 have been able to make a more refined estimate of 16:25:54



271

1 potential health care costs associated with that 16:26:00

2 population? 16:26:02



5 THE WITNESS: Potentially. But then you 16:26:05

6 would get into an issue of causation, and that was 16:26:08

7 beyond the scope of my project, and I don't believe I 16:26:12

8 have the expertise to determine that. 16:26:15

9 BY MR. SELEY: 16:26:16

10 Q If you didn't take causation into account in 16:26:39

11 your report, why did you not just multiply the 16:26:44

12 per capita health care cost times the entire 16:26:49

13 population of Ecuador? 16:26:53

14 A Because not everyone was exposed. We were 16:26:54

15 just talking about one particular geographic region of 16:27:00

16 Ecuador. 16:27:02

17 Q So there is an element of your report that 16:27:03

18 considers exposure? 16:27:08



21 THE WITNESS: The mandate or the request was 16:27:13

22 to come up with a cost estimate for this region of 16:27:16



272

1 Ecuador, these two provinces of Ecuador. 16:27:20

2 BY MR. SELEY: 16:27:20

3 Q Who -- 16:27:24

4 MR. WESTENBERGER: You've covered this in his 16:27:24

5 assumption at the start of his report multiple times 16:27:27

6 today. 16:27:32

7 BY MR. SELEY: 16:27:33

8 Q You just testified that the mandate for their 16:27:33

9 request was to come up with a cost estimate for this 16:28:02

10 region. 16:28:05

11 A Yes. 16:28:06

12 Q You're talking about the request of the 16:28:07



15 answered multiple times. 16:28:14

16 THE WITNESS: That's right. I think it was 16:28:15

17 requested by the plaintiffs via the Weinberg Group. I 16:28:18

18 had no direct contact with the plaintiffs' attorneys. 16:28:23

19 BY MR. SELEY: 16:28:25

20 Q So the decision to use these two provinces as 16:28:26

21 opposed to any other measure of exposure was made 16:28:30

22 either by the plaintiffs or the Weinberg Group? 16:28:35



273



3 THE WITNESS: It was, as far as I know, made 16:28:39

4 by the plaintiff -- plaintiffs' group -- plaintiffs' 16:28:44

5 attorney. I had no direct information -- I have no 16:28:48

6 direct knowledge because I had no direct communication 16:28:51

7 with the plaintiffs' attorneys; therefore, I had 16:28:55

8 communication with the Weinberg Group, and these were 16:28:58

9 part of the assumptions, yes. 16:29:00

10 BY MR. SELEY: 16:29:01

11 Q When you say that these were part of the 16:29:01

12 assumptions, are you saying that you're applying an 16:29:12

13 assumption that exposure of potentially affected 16:29:23

14 individuals is commensurate with their residence in 16:29:27

15 these provinces? 16:29:32


17 THE WITNESS: Potentially. This was the 16:29:34

18 population at risk one way or the other. People who 16:29:37

19 were in Quito, who were in Guayaquil, were not 16:29:40

20 populations at risk. 16:29:44

21 BY MR. SELEY: 16:29:44

22 Q When you say population at risk, all you mean 16:29:45



274

1 by that is this was the population selected by either 16:29:50

2 the plaintiffs' lawyers or the Weinberg Group -- 16:29:53


4 BY MR. SELEY: 16:29:53

5 Q -- is that right? 16:29:56

6 MR. WESTENBERGER: Argumentative. He's 16:29:56

7 explained his -- 16:30:00

8 THE WITNESS: If you want to put -- 16:30:00

9 MR. WESTENBERGER: -- assumption. 16:30:01

10 THE WITNESS: -- it that way, yes. 16:30:01

11 BY MR. SELEY: 16:30:03

12 Q Well, you've said you have no basis to assert 16:30:03

13 that this population was at risk, right? 16:30:06

14 A Well, I have not traveled to the Oriente 16:30:08

15 region of Ecuador. I have not really witnessed the 16:30:12

16 operations of Texaco or Petroecuador. If you're 16:30:14

17 asking, do I have any other means of corroborating 16:30:17

18 that that's the case, the answer is no. 16:30:20

19 MR. SELEY: Okay. We received a number of 16:30:24

20 documents, as you know, last night. It's 400-odd 16:30:27

21 pages of documents. I appreciate your testimony that 16:30:30

22 these are documents that you just recently discovered, 16:30:33



275

1 had not been produced, so you produced them. 16:30:37

2 Obviously, they were produced late. We're not in a 16:30:38

3 position to ask any questions about those documents 16:30:41

4 today. Just because of the volume, we couldn't get to 16:30:44

5 those. 16:30:47

6 Given that, we may have to ask you to come 16:30:49

7 back and answer questions about those documents. And 16:30:56

8 I can anticipate that you may not be comfortable 16:31:01

9 with -- 16:31:04

10 MR. WESTENBERGER: Well, I think I may be 16:31:04

11 able to help clarify the situation. 16:31:07

12 MR. SELEY: Sure. 16:31:07

13 MR. WESTENBERGER: It did become clear 16:31:10

14 yesterday that those were two e-mails that, as the 16:31:11

15 doctor -- Dr. Picone has testified, just did not 16:31:14

16 realize that he did not collect and produce. I 16:31:17

17 believe, if you ask him any questions about those 16:31:22

18 e-mails, about whether there was any reliance 16:31:23

19 whatsoever -- or it relates to his report, it would 16:31:27

20 clarify that, if you want to ask those questions -- or 16:31:31

21 I can at the end -- and it could help resolve that 16:31:32

22 situation. 16:31:34



276

1 I still understand your position, but I just 16:31:35

2 want to at least make that point for clarification 16:31:37

3 purposes. 16:31:40

4 MR. SELEY: I appreciate that. Having not 16:31:40

5 seen the e-mails and not seen the attached documents, 16:31:43

6 I don't know that I'm in a position to ask questions 16:31:46

7 that are, you know, intelligent questions of 16:31:48

8 Dr. Picone. 16:31:52

9 THE WITNESS: I can say a couple of things 16:31:52

10 about those documents. Some of them are duplicates. 16:31:54

11 As you will see, there are a couple of documents that 16:31:57

12 are duplicates of other documents that I had already 16:31:59

13 seen and I have already produced. 16:32:01

14 There's one in particular that pertains to 16:32:04

15 solicitation of CT scanners; I mean, it's just asking 16:32:07

16 information about equipment and other information that 16:32:10

17 I communicated with a gentleman who -- with a doctor 16:32:14

18 who happened to do a rural rotation close to this 16:32:16

19 region in Ecuador. So trying to cast a wide net and 16:32:21

20 trying to produce as much -- you know, trying to be as 16:32:25

21 reliable as possible and trying to use all of my 16:32:28

22 sources, I -- that's why I reached out to this 16:32:31



277

1 gentleman to try to get some additional information. 16:32:34

2 The reason I did not produce those documents 16:32:38

3 early on is because I do hospital rotations from time 16:32:40

4 to time and I don't have access to my home computer or 16:32:43

5 my hospital computer, and I had forgotten that I had 16:32:46

6 used a gmail account. 16:32:50

7 MR. SELEY: Well, just so we're clear, I'm 16:32:51

8 not making any statement saying that you -- you know, 16:32:54

9 there was any reason that you didn't produce those. 16:32:57

10 THE WITNESS: No, no, I'm just -- 16:32:57

11 MR. SELEY: I understand it was just 16:32:59

12 inadvertent, and I don't have any issue with that. 16:33:00

13 But, like I said, I haven't seen the documents -- 16:33:04

14 THE WITNESS: Sure. 16:33:04

15 MR. SELEY: -- themselves. 16:33:04

16 BY MR. SELEY: 16:33:04

17 Q Who is the individual that you're talking 16:33:07

18 about that you were in communication with? 16:33:09

19 A I actually put a -- there is a reference on 16:33:11

20 my document about that. Dr. Buitron, B-U-I-T-R-O-N. 16:33:13

21 Q Did Dr. Buitron express any views about this 16:33:24

22 litigation to you? 16:33:30



278

1 A No. 16:33:32

2 Q Did you indicate to Dr. Buitron the reason 16:33:33

3 that you were asking him questions? 16:33:41

4 A I indicated that I wanted to gather 16:33:43

5 information about this region of Ecuador and the state 16:33:47

6 of health care in this region of Ecuador. 16:33:51

7 Q Did you indicate to Dr. Buitron that your 16:33:53

8 questions were in connection with litigation against 16:34:00

9 Chevron? 16:34:04

10 A I don't know that I said in those terms. 16:34:04

11 I -- I did say that I was -- I was supposed to come up 16:34:10

12 with cost estimates, and I wanted to know the state -- 16:34:12

13 the current state of the health care system. 16:34:16

14 MR. SELEY: Okay. I'm not sure that I can 16:34:22

15 ask any more intelligent questions about that without 16:34:25

16 having reviewed the documents. 16:34:28

17 BY MR. SELEY: 16:34:28

18 Q Did you communicate with an individual named 16:34:43

19 Villamar? 16:34:46

20 A Who? I'm sorry. 16:34:46

21 Q Villamar, V-I-L-L-A-M-A-R? 16:34:48

22 A Not that I recall. He may be -- there was 16:34:51



279

1 another -- this gentleman that I know who is from 16:35:01

2 Ecuador is currently in the U.S., and I communicated 16:35:06

3 with him. He corresponded with another gentleman who 16:35:09

4 is currently doing his fellowship or his -- I'm sorry, 16:35:12

5 his rural medicine rotations in El Puno, close to this 16:35:15

6 region in Ecuador. And so maybe it will be that he 16:35:20

7 had communications with him. 16:35:24

8 Q Do you know who Mike Park is? 16:35:25

9 A No. 16:35:30

10 MR. SELEY: All right. Other than 16:35:31

11 potentially having to ask questions about the 16:36:10

12 documents that we haven't had a chance to review yet, 16:36:12

13 I don't believe I have any further questions at this 16:36:14

14 time for you, Dr. Picone. I do appreciate your time. 16:36:17

15 Thank you. 16:36:21

16 THE WITNESS: Sure. 16:36:21

17 MR. WESTENBERGER: Just to put my statement 16:36:21

18 on the record, I'm not consenting to having the 16:36:23

19 witness called back. We can take that issue up should 16:36:26

20 you deem it -- deem to raise it at some point at that 16:36:29

21 time, and we consider the deposition to be closed. 16:36:32

22 MR. SELEY: Okay. I appreciate your 16:36:37



280

1 position. Obviously, I'm not willing to say the 16:36:39

2 deposition is closed until I've had a chance to review 16:36:43

3 the documents. 16:36:46

4 MR. WESTENBERGER: Understood. 16:36:47


6 December 16th, 2010. This completes today's 16:36:51


8 (Whereupon, at 4:36 p.m. the deposition of

9 CARLOS EMILIO PICONE was adjourned.)

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22



281

1 CERTIFICATE OF NOTARY PUBLIC

2 I, Denise M. Brunet, the officer before whom

3 the foregoing deposition was taken, do hereby certify

4 that the witness whose testimony appears in the

5 foregoing deposition was duly sworn by me; that the

6 testimony of said witness was taken by me

7 stenographically and thereafter reduced to print by

8 means of computer-assisted transcription by me to the

9 best of my ability; that I am neither counsel for,

10 related to, nor employed by any of the parties to this

11 litigation and have no interest, financial or

12 otherwise, in the outcome of this matter.

13

14 ______________________________ Denise M. Brunet

15 Notary Public in and for the District of Columbia

16

17

18

19

20 My commission expires:

21 November 30, 2012

22



282

1 ACKNOWLEDGEMENT OF DEPONENT

2

3

4 I, CARLOS EMILIO PICONE, do hereby

5 acknowledge I have read and examined the foregoing

6 pages of testimony, and the same is a true, correct

7 and complete transcription of the testimony given by

8 me, and any changes and/or corrections, if any, appear

9 in the attached errata sheet signed by me.

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22 ________________ ____________________________Date CARLOS EMILIO PICONE



283

1 Eric Westenberger, EsquirePatton Boggs, LLP

2 The Legal Center, One Riverfront PlazaNewark, New Jersey 07102

3

4 IN RE: Chevron Corporation vs. Carlos Emilio Picone

5

6 Dear Mr. Westenberger:

7 Enclosed please find your copy of the

8 deposition of CARLOS EMILIO PICONE, along with the

9 original signature page. As agreed, you will be

10 responsible for contacting the witness regarding

11 signature.

12 Within 30 days of receipt, please forward

13 errata sheet and original signed signature page to

14 counsel for Petitioner, Peter E. Seley, Esquire.

15 If you have any questions, please do not

16 hesitate to call. Thank you.

17 Yours,

18

19 Denise M. Brunet, RPR, Reporter/Notary

20 cc: Peter E. Seley, Esquire

21

22



284

1 Capital Reporting Company1821 Jefferson Place, Northwest

2 3rd FloorWashington, D.C. 20036

3 (202) 857-3376

4 E R R A T A S H E E T

5 Case Name: Chevron Corporation vs. Carlos Emilio

6 Picone

7 Witness Name: Carlos Emilio Picone

8 Deposition Date: December 16, 2010

9 Page No. Line No. Change/Reason for Change

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21 _____________________ ____________

22 Signature Date


Page 1

(866) 448 - DEPOwww.CapitalReportingCompany.com

© 2010

$$147 251:3,5

$231 146:15,22147:7,12 251:17252:1

$274 248:13250:2,9,13

$300 117:21

$75 244:16,21

$76 253:12

0004712 19:4

07102 2:12 283:2

11 5:5 76:11 154:14

248:14 249:20250:11

1.3 246:1

1:00 149:2

1:57 191:1

10 180:12

10:38 76:10

10:47 76:14

100,000 126:5141:11,20142:6,9 236:20

102 3:15

1050 1:18 2:5 5:12

107 3:16

10th 172:18,22173:1,5,9,12174:1,2179:16,17 180:3233:21

11:31 111:17

11:43 111:20

117 3:17

12:24 59:3

12:25 148:6

12:55 125:9

120 247:4

1200 3:6 5:2 18:8179:16 187:19212:16221:14,15 238:2258:12 264:6

1201 3:7 26:17,2127:16,22

1202 3:8 49:2050:1,21 99:22113:6 115:14116:12 117:6183:22

1203 3:9 58:9,1359:2

1204 3:10 62:2263:4

1205 3:11 68:16,2086:21 87:1789:22 94:1 96:7

1206 3:1271:4,8,18

1207 3:13 95:19,2297:11

1208 3:14 98:9,13

1209 3:15 101:3,7102:6 104:7105:17

1210 3:16 106:8,12107:7 112:2128:14

1211 3:17116:18,22117:7,10 151:11172:6 183:22

1212 3:18 124:16125:7 130:1

1213 3:19 130:20131:5 132:16

1214 3:20 133:7,11

1215 3:21 137:3,7139:5 149:12153:6155:8,17,19160:7,8 164:20165:15

1216 4:2 153:8,12154:1155:8,17,21156:1 160:8161:18164:18,22165:9,20168:3,12 169:6

1217 4:3167:2,6,9,16168:2 169:5,12170:12 171:21172:13

1218 4:4 174:10,16180:9

1219 4:5 249:12

125 3:18

13 27:22 28:1174:17 180:9

131 3:19

134 3:20

138 3:21

13th 233:20,21

1400 269:7

154 4:2

16 1:12 284:8

168 4:3

16th 5:13 76:15148:7 149:3206:7 221:11280:6

175 4:4

17th 222:16

1821 5:17 284:1

1960 197:7

1964 196:15

1990 196:15 197:8214:10,17268:9,11 269:6

1990s 265:22

19th 118:18222:16

1st 118:12

22 76:15 148:7

2.6 245:5,13,17246:5

2:07 102:6 104:7105:17

2:08 191:4

2:17 199:20

2:23 206:3

2:40 206:6

2:56 221:6

2:57 221:10

20 29:21

200 147:4


Page 2


© 2010

200,000 142:2

2001 244:16246:7,22

2002 247:8,11

20036 2:6 284:2

2005 248:15 250:2

2006 42:13,1543:2,6 195:12

2007 248:3

2008 42:13,15 43:645:22 71:10140:7 195:12247:21

2010 1:12 5:1339:4 40:3 44:4125:8 131:10137:9 149:3167:11172:2,10,18174:1,17 180:12206:7 221:11232:21 238:8240:4 280:6284:8

20100908 167:13

2011 238:21

2012 238:21281:21

2019 232:21 238:9240:2,4 250:5

202 2:6 284:3

21 222:14

231 147:4,6 244:21251:15

24 15:18 16:2

250 4:5 91:16

25th 51:1,2,5

54:15 59:3 60:163:13 65:7,869:3 78:21

26 204:17

26th 69:4 86:2296:1 98:15 100:4101:9

27 3:7

276 147:4 248:2

27th 113:7

28th 115:15

29th 115:16

33 109:4 149:4

212:17 218:15221:7,15

3:34 249:9

3:44 249:14

30 29:20,21 149:20150:11 281:21283:12

300 117:20

30th 115:16

30-year 149:17150:5,8

31st 115:16

35 206:3

350 268:11

3rd 284:2

44 110:12 221:12

223:12 224:4225:12

4:02 262:19

4:16 262:22

4:22 131:10

4:36 280:5,8

4:50 153:16

40 169:18 199:20

400-odd 274:20

55 231:3 245:15

248:14,16249:20

5,305 239:9,15

50 3:8 33:18 223:4

5542 137:17 139:5

5543 141:8 143:12

5545 146:11149:15

5548 137:17

5559 161:19

5585 132:14

5599 169:11

5831 107:12108:14

59 3:9

5th 125:8 141:15

66 3:6 112:4,5

145:12,14232:17,18 238:2251:7 252:13253:15

6:00 69:4

6:09 174:17

6:32 96:1

60 33:18

63 3:10

68 221:19

69 3:11

77 3:3 258:12 262:7

7:40 167:11

72 3:12

75 245:18

7th 131:10 133:15137:9

88:10-cv-02990-AW 1:8

8:10-CV-0299-AW 5:10

8:37 133:15

80 221:18

80s 214:17

8-25-2010 3:9

8-26-20103:10,11,13,14,15

8-27-2010 3:16

83-year-old 14:7

848-5600 2:12

857-3376 284:3

8th 151:15 153:16167:11 171:22172:2 225:16254:13,18

99/8/2010 153:21


Page 3


© 2010

9:05 137:9

9:12 1:21 5:13

9:32 98:15

9-13-2010 4:4

9-5-2010 3:18

955-8500 2:6

96 3:13

9-7-20103:19,20,21

973 2:12

9-8-2010 4:2,3

99 3:14

9th 172:10 173:11

Aa.m 1:21 5:13

76:10,14 96:198:15 111:17,20174:17

Abdala 58:2159:2,10,22 60:1161:3,10 62:1389:18

Abdala's 61:14

abide 82:12

ability 95:14170:10,18182:15 224:7281:9

able 34:14 40:2041:17 79:11179:12 232:6270:22 275:11

absolutely 12:1138:17 119:14133:6 151:6201:7 202:2

223:2

abstain 159:5

academic 25:7,13

accepted 12:2216:7

access32:3,5,18,2133:5 73:3 181:20219:16 223:5226:9 277:4

accommodate12:17

accompanied120:14

accomplish 144:11197:1

accomplished151:18

according 141:18169:17 203:22211:6 253:10270:14

account 31:6,992:6,10,13 93:13116:15 196:7230:22 234:10264:12,17271:10 277:6

accurate 49:262:2,20 68:688:12 101:9138:18 144:12161:8 164:13232:6 236:9

accurately 9:219:10,13 50:12117:10 188:8

accused 263:12

achievable 138:17

achieve 64:12

acknowledge282:5

acknowledged61:21

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT 282:1

acquired 196:4

acting 189:19

action 101:15189:20

active 21:3

activities 104:9145:4 157:17159:20 160:2,9168:19 169:5,14

actually 26:11,1545:18 55:883:1,8 103:15126:22127:15,17 129:2172:14,20 193:4198:9 212:18223:8 245:12277:19

added 156:18157:20 161:22164:22 165:21224:11

additional 29:2,334:8 48:13 76:4142:19 147:8161:10 168:14174:4 184:21185:2 277:1

address 63:15,1771:19 80:20133:12 226:3

addressed 81:17

adequate 49:261:1 110:22114:3 127:4154:15 179:9

adjourned 280:9

adopted 129:9

advance 263:5

advanced 14:1520:5,8 22:9129:15

advice 59:6,9

advise 122:14,20

aerosolize 229:19

aerosolized 70:15

affected 18:10108:1,20 141:9142:17,22156:3,19 168:6169:19 186:13216:11,17,20218:21 227:22230:14 240:19241:14 245:4,9252:4,14,21264:11,13,14265:1 266:18267:13,17268:13269:1,15,21270:11 273:13

affects 222:20

affirm 6:15

afternoon 59:22114:6 149:1

afterwards 174:5

against 20:1 38:2040:7 43:7,16,19


Page 4


© 2010

44:7 206:10,17208:17 209:16278:8

age 93:14

Agent 150:20,22151:5

ago 35:20

agonizing135:17,20136:8,9

agreeable 127:3

agreed 45:17183:7 283:9

agreement 3:1216:18 71:9,13,16118:1 185:14190:19

agreements 69:22

Agrio 6:10,13 19:144:11,17 55:3,2067:17 79:1,8

Aguinda 263:22

ahead 96:18,21107:17 111:13126:14

ailments 169:21

air 70:16

alike 122:9

allegation 208:10

allegations 24:10111:1,4

alleged 14:3 24:1584:11 159:19160:2 171:18

allegedly 264:13

Allen 186:2,4

A-L-L-E-N 186:4

alludes 158:6159:2

alluding 97:21

already 32:1749:12 81:10105:13 114:15161:6 171:20177:12 187:9189:5 195:1201:15 202:4,5203:2,11 207:1242:21 253:5254:6 263:12276:12,13

altered 170:11,20

am 5:14 9:19 17:123:5 31:1 42:251:7 183:1,3207:2,12 214:15229:22 232:5241:8 281:9

Amazon 220:12,17222:2,8 223:7,16226:21261:15,19

Amazonia 223:22

America21:20,21,22 22:1

American 21:1632:2 42:17 95:5166:8

among 207:4219:11,15,19

amount 46:1961:22 62:2166:11 87:2088:2,4,5,16 98:4101:1 147:12,21179:11,13

183:17 206:17207:11 209:15253:3 259:22

Anacostia 224:1

analyses 21:8 22:4

analysis 20:9112:5,19 146:12149:16 163:22164:21 165:7,16189:3

analyze 112:10,13

and/or 282:8

annex 81:17,2182:6 103:7106:22 193:3

annexes 83:8

annual 66:20 67:2237:1 241:13252:7,12,18,20

annually 21:19253:3

answer 10:1411:1,5,18,21,2212:8 15:3 38:641:3 106:2110:21 114:4122:15,20126:14128:1,16,17129:3 176:2,13179:5 183:4188:20 198:6202:20 209:20242:3,6 274:18275:7

answered 59:1980:2 82:2,8130:19 148:2183:2,10 209:21217:18 218:10

219:8 224:14238:11 240:12242:20 270:3272:15

answering 37:1638:9,10 57:9

answers 10:4,6

antennas 43:21

anthropologist171:2,14

antibiotic 15:17,1816:1

anticipate 275:8

anticoagulated15:10,11

anybody 85:13193:1

anyone 7:7,118:5,14 17:5 27:930:7,10 35:9,1036:14,17,2037:1,5,18,2238:5,8,14 43:958:1 66:18 67:175:15 82:2283:7,20 85:17105:2,10 119:2152:9,12,16173:11 176:2177:9 178:1179:3 182:2,7188:11 189:18190:10 191:7,11194:11,20200:11 205:10218:8 234:2,20264:3

anything 35:637:12 40:6 43:754:13 72:5 82:20


Page 5


© 2010

177:17 181:18202:14 205:9

anyway 47:14

anywhere 130:8234:20

apologize 194:9263:4

apparently 127:3180:20

appear 27:13160:13 282:8

appears 59:2198:13 101:7106:15 151:21156:1 157:20161:22 164:21168:7,9,12,20169:5,16 171:22172:9 281:4

appended 260:15

appendices 33:15193:18

appendix 33:15

applied 22:21236:6 238:7,17239:13 259:15270:15

applies 257:9258:2

apply 179:7223:16 259:16

applying 141:4273:12

appointed 56:1,1357:19

appreciate 243:13274:21 276:4279:14,22

approach 128:21

appropriate 95:1241:11 254:19

approval 189:19

approved 188:4

approving 189:20

approximate142:8,10

approximately5:13 29:18 62:9141:11 153:16

approximation161:10

April 45:22 71:10

arbitrary 150:11

area 13:1 18:1019:1 20:326:5,10,14 42:2191:7 92:193:11,12 107:15108:15 109:2110:16 126:6128:7 133:1,4141:9 142:4156:3 168:6195:20 200:7201:9,13202:8,22203:12,21,22204:12 205:13211:9 212:6216:11,18,20218:19228:11,18229:16237:15,17239:15 264:22265:4 267:11,12268:12,22 269:7

areas 25:18 26:4

73:5 134:10191:17 198:3216:21 246:2,10

argue 212:10

argument 262:5

Argumentative235:12 274:6

arrive 197:19200:17

arrived 204:21

arriving 205:13

Arthur 78:12153:16 154:5

Arthur's154:3,7,18

articles 25:6,1288:5

artificial 15:11,12

aspect 93:6

assert 274:12

assess 26:13164:11 191:13

assessing 70:4

assessment 65:2173:16 77:8 88:989:20 92:16,2194:15 191:9200:20 268:13

assign 200:10203:15

assigning 200:20203:20

assignment 205:10

assist 185:17

assistance 76:4169:20 211:10

212:7

assistant 23:12154:19

assistants 32:1178:10,12

associated 6:7111:4 140:7147:21 159:19226:3 251:17260:6,18 261:5264:8 271:1

association 5:16

assume 12:9 94:3122:2 154:8,22236:5 237:18252:2

assumed 17:2218:3 158:10193:18

assumes 83:1184:4 123:5193:13 265:6268:15 269:9

assuming 231:18261:21

assumption210:14 215:3,4,6216:4,7,15217:21,22 239:8240:18 242:12252:7 272:5273:13 274:9

assumptions 18:5123:21 273:9,12

asthma 15:8,16

ATSDR 260:10261:4

attach 180:6 181:4

attached 4:7 63:20


Page 6


© 2010

107:8 132:13137:18153:19,20154:1,2 167:16179:20 276:5282:9

attaches 106:18137:12

attaching 63:13106:16 107:2154:8 167:12

attachment27:17,19,21 28:3

attachments 32:1633:14

attempt 161:7228:2 230:16

attempted 83:2185:18 86:5

attempting 230:14

attendance152:9,12,14,16

attending 7:88:2,3,6

attention 112:3169:11

attestation 182:20

attesting 182:3

attorney11:10,11,2251:16,17,22 52:578:13 87:2,13101:20 119:9,17120:3,15 183:3273:5

attorneys 13:9,1180:7 154:20185:21 189:17

272:18 273:7

August 3:8 18:1739:4 40:3 44:350:7,13,2151:1,5 59:363:13 65:7,869:3 78:21 86:2296:1 98:15100:1,4 101:9103:6 113:7115:16 117:7121:6 124:15

authorization17:21 188:22

authorized 17:16

author's 106:20

authorship 83:2285:19 86:6105:11 194:3,11

available 46:19,2048:22 49:1960:19,20 61:2262:1,6 88:1595:15,17 100:16101:2,22 138:17143:16,17144:14 173:17179:14181:12,13 222:6226:13 240:1,3244:6 246:20

Avenue 1:18 2:55:12

average 244:1248:18 250:21

avoid 10:18

award 206:17207:10 209:16

awarded 208:17

aware 26:13 30:1731:1,3,1337:8,11 81:1685:21 123:14,20130:13 139:18151:9 177:4183:3 185:7,10194:1,2 195:22196:3206:9,12,15207:2,9,12214:9,15 229:22239:7 241:2,8257:5 261:17265:3 267:3268:11269:6,10,13270:16

away 14:18,1934:10 51:11

Bbackground 19:11

20:11,14 22:1446:6,10,14 55:1857:5,8 60:1987:4,11,14 89:13101:19 102:3158:21 170:21171:16 197:1,2201:8,10,15,17202:2,18 210:18211:1,2 213:4,17215:5,7,15 216:8232:3

bad 14:12 15:8

ball 100:21

Bank 32:1 64:396:11 97:13166:21 244:7

Barnthouse 186:6

based 24:10 46:1859:21 89:12127:16142:10,15161:14 200:13216:4 232:10233:19 246:8248:18 252:13265:12,17

basic 10:13 22:20109:5,13 162:2

basin 226:21,22

basis 82:15122:17,21158:12,19 162:7164:4,11170:16,22171:7,11 178:10201:9,16202:6,19 203:13213:15 220:2,20225:4 235:19236:1 238:7240:5 242:15260:16 274:12

Bates 107:11108:13 132:13137:16,17 139:5141:7 143:11146:11 149:15161:19

beach 39:12

beautiful 136:14

became 57:3 177:4196:3 266:12

become 231:10,20275:13

becoming 209:22

beds 144:18

beginning 1:21


Page 7


© 2010

18:17 19:7 179:9

begins 135:22136:6 137:16139:4 144:11,22157:17165:10,18225:12

behalf 1:22 2:3,96:10,13 16:13,22190:11,12

behind 150:12154:1

belief 142:20213:15 214:21220:10,15222:19

believe 17:4 18:1627:10 29:10,1830:16 33:13,1534:1 37:15 39:445:13,22 48:751:16 54:1255:12 66:7 78:1381:11 91:2197:6,11 108:8113:12 114:14121:7 126:3131:18 142:5144:6 145:2147:3 150:3155:6 181:5185:15 186:21190:19191:17,19 196:4200:7 213:3,6,9214:12 218:7220:2 221:2223:10 225:15230:2,12 233:11237:14 238:5239:14 241:10246:17 248:13

249:3 250:10,12255:21256:10,19,22257:13263:20,22 271:7275:17 279:13

believed 48:3 79:4142:9 214:1

believes 132:17

bell 45:14 78:19186:9

benefits 255:7

besides 37:9152:15

best 11:4,6 53:2057:4 62:4,1864:22 68:1073:17,19 74:7,1181:13 86:1192:16,1894:18,20 100:17114:4 121:9137:2 138:11161:7,9 179:12182:5,14 203:18206:22 210:9211:6 243:20248:1 281:9

better 35:22 38:949:16 125:22165:4 243:19257:22

beyond 8:11 32:753:7 161:5,12189:9197:11,16,17200:4 201:4202:11,13,15204:2205:1,4,15,16227:20 253:4

271:7

bias 248:10

bigger 54:4 103:21

bill 116:1 118:5,10174:5

billed 50:22

billing 117:14,19174:21

bills 118:2

biochemistry23:13

biologic 15:9

bit 10:1 57:2,662:10 99:18,20117:16 180:7226:13 227:1259:7

black 231:17

blacked 30:21

Blacksburg127:17

blank 181:22

blanks 112:17128:14,16136:12

bleed 15:19

bleeding 15:22

blocks 51:11

Boggs 2:116:10,12 17:827:12 184:15283:1

bona 74:6

bono 21:18 42:19

bookkeeping29:13

books 29:7

bottom 19:4107:12 116:11222:14 253:15

box 181:10,21231:17

branches 226:20

break 12:12,13,1676:9 111:11,13190:22 206:2262:18

breaks 247:5

breathing 70:16

brief 14:6 15:2119:10

briefly 15:5 125:4189:12

Briehl 193:5,9,15

bring 73:4

broad 157:22158:13 212:22215:20

broke 76:17

broken 247:6

brother 20:1847:2,6,11,13,15136:16,18

brought 49:7

Browne 2:15 5:14

browsing 58:5

Brunet 1:19 5:15281:2,14 283:19

budget 65:2266:12 112:5,20210:8

budgetary 66:22


Page 8


© 2010

build 248:5

Buitron 277:20,21278:2,7

B-U-I-T-R-O-N277:20

bullet 156:9168:12225:13,14

bullet-type 155:12

bureau 32:2 75:6244:10

burn 229:17,18

burning230:4,17,19

business 166:21

busy 96:8

CCabrera

33:4,8,12,1334:4 54:16,2155:8,12,16 56:1157:11,1880:10,15,20,2281:5,7,11,1682:583:1,7,15,17,2284:7,12 85:14,1986:2,3,9102:13,15,19,22103:7,16,21104:21 105:7,9106:19143:18,22144:2,4 191:9,13192:4,5,8,10,13,17 193:1,3,18194:3,11

Cabrera's 57:22

calculate 237:7241:13

calculating 129:10231:4

calculation 92:22230:15 239:12244:4 245:11

calculations 48:1075:1 234:9 236:8

calendars 29:7

cancer 14:9 260:7

cancers 257:7

candid 37:16

cantons 102:8104:13,15,17232:22 234:13236:3237:5,7,9,10238:4 263:21

cap 118:2

capita 92:21126:1,11 127:22128:6,19 129:6130:6 136:20141:5146:12,15,22147:1,7,19149:16 164:21165:7,17 222:17232:10 242:17243:16 244:2,15245:18 246:22247:15,22 249:1250:2,9,13,14,20251:5,6,17252:1,14 253:12271:12

capital 1:20 5:16248:3,6 284:1

carcinoma 14:8

care 14:11,1718:1020:2,6,9,12,17,21 21:2,8 22:523:4,6,18,2024:10,14 34:1940:21 42:19 43:147:10 49:1552:19,22 53:154:1,6 55:560:18 64:9 65:166:13 84:1790:16,18 97:6107:5 108:1109:13 111:4125:21 126:20127:8129:5,10,12,18130:6132:2,6,7,22133:3,4,18134:11 135:10137:13 140:2141:5 144:20146:12,16147:9,13,15,16,19,21 149:16150:14 153:21157:22 158:13159:8,15 162:3163:21 164:20165:6,12,16,20167:12 193:4196:8 203:18209:1 211:9212:6,22215:14,18,20216:10 217:11218:16,18220:10,12,22221:16223:13,20 224:6

225:12 226:2231:4 232:10241:13 242:17243:16 244:2,15245:6 246:5,9,22247:15252:3,7,18,20256:3,8,10257:20262:10,14 264:8271:1,12278:6,13

careful 10:22227:9

Carlos 1:8,15 3:65:6,7 6:17 7:4280:9 282:4,22283:4,8 284:5,7

C-A-R-L-O-S 7:4

carry 121:19

case 1:7 5:9 8:211:1413:7,8,13,15,16,18,20 14:1,2,3,615:6,7 24:826:2,10 28:1229:5,8,1634:11,14 35:436:3 37:1039:1,14,1540:12,17 43:7,2145:1,7,17,2046:550:10,19,20,2261:6 67:2169:5,11,1871:1,13,16 72:273:13 76:3103:12 130:13138:19 163:1177:17 178:11179:7 183:15


Page 9


© 2010

184:2,18,22185:3,22 187:17189:20 191:8,12192:7 200:10203:16 227:5230:3 248:17259:19263:16,19 264:4274:18 284:5

cases 16:4,8 87:6263:11

cast 64:10 276:19

causation 53:6159:3,6 197:19200:20 203:13205:10 208:2210:19 212:3,13217:8 262:4271:6,10

cause 15:15 16:2200:17 229:20

caused 43:1162:11 189:7205:12 208:10210:15 213:1214:1,21 224:18229:6

causing 159:20160:3

caution 70:2

cc 283:20

cc'ing 153:17

cc's 98:22

Censo 75:7

census 32:2 75:593:10 244:10

center 2:11 34:6132:6 133:20134:5 135:1

139:8,17,19,21140:4,7145:14,19160:10 253:17254:14,19255:7,14256:2,13 257:2,9258:1,13 262:8283:2

centers 161:11

central21:20,21,22260:7

certain 30:1031:17 38:6 75:7103:16 104:1185:15 236:17237:18 239:11241:20 260:5

certainly 18:3 31:147:21 84:3 90:2197:17 104:10113:14 121:17159:22 166:1176:13 181:20190:16 197:17222:15228:21,22239:11 242:1259:16

certainty 178:19179:6 236:12

CERTIFICATE281:1

certify 281:3

cetera 138:18

chain 101:8,14

challenges 94:3

chance 11:15

279:12 280:2

change 76:8 148:4155:13 156:9221:4 284:9

Change/Reason284:9

changed 140:19225:21

changes 114:2140:21 155:11282:8

channeling 79:16

characterization56:19,22

characterize 166:2

characterized138:14,16175:11

charge 77:5 166:4191:15

chart 232:17236:19 237:2238:15 239:7

Chase 21:6 23:22

check 55:18111:12

chemical 24:11,15258:19

chemicals260:6,19

Chevron 1:55:7,21 6:1,5,2020:1 30:15,1831:4 38:20 39:1840:7 43:7,16,1944:7 45:2,4,12172:1 184:7185:4 196:4

198:9 199:10206:10,18207:11208:13,17209:16 252:17278:9 283:4284:5

Chevy 21:6 23:22

chief 23:17

chose 83:1

chosen 86:4

Chris 78:12153:15154:2,5,7,17

circumstances62:19 68:1086:12 94:19,21

citation 234:14,16260:21

Cite 163:8

cited 261:1,4

cites 260:10

City 133:5 135:14254:21 255:11

claim 14:653:12,17 146:1206:13,16207:10 215:19255:19

claiming 40:13110:16

claims 14:21 15:21

clarification 276:2

clarify 275:11,20

clean 161:16

cleanup 265:9

clear 57:3 80:5


Page 10


© 2010

114:18 169:1197:20 201:2249:16 275:13277:7

clearly 200:17203:14 216:3218:20 231:15

client 72:3,6

clients 70:1

clinic 66:10,14

clinical 71:21146:7 180:3,22

clinicians 187:12

clinics 21:22 66:14

close 216:18,21245:12 248:11276:18 279:5

closed 279:21280:2

coast 195:18

collaborate 54:19139:1

collaborated 32:1170:3139:16,21,22140:13,14150:17 165:22166:4 196:17

collaborating139:17 154:11193:21

collaboration67:13 88:19169:8 170:15224:15 259:2

collaborative128:11 193:21235:3

collaborators261:1

collapse 135:1

colleague 120:20121:21

collect 275:16

collected 115:9

collection 30:732:17

College 23:16

Columbia 1:21281:15

column 237:2

columns 77:10

comes 222:16

comfort 48:18

comfortable 14:1549:4 116:1 275:8

coming 46:21 47:964:8 68:5 74:1877:22 181:10,19228:1 235:21236:13 243:20

commensurate273:14

comment 159:1208:2 212:14217:6

commentary106:22

comments 106:19113:19,21140:16

commission281:20

committed 14:21

communicable147:15 159:20

communicate17:17 75:22 78:3278:18

communicated72:7 76:6 192:19194:19 276:17279:2

communicating116:16 190:11

communication116:12 187:6190:13,16,17273:6,8 277:18

communications90:9 91:2,3119:13 123:8127:18 185:20192:22 195:7279:7

communities108:2

companies196:11,14 197:7

company 1:205:16 6:6 194:16196:5 214:2,6284:1

comparable150:14

compare 168:2

compares 132:5

comparing 132:1134:22 160:7164:20 245:21

comparison132:18 133:18139:7 254:20

258:14 262:8

compensation184:1 210:7,8

complete 10:2211:1 172:20282:7

completed 172:21234:8

completely 85:8

completes 76:11148:7 221:7280:6

completing 52:15

completion 50:6

complex 258:18259:4,6

compliance 27:6

complies 178:11

components79:5,6 223:12,15224:5 225:11258:20

composed 166:3

comprehensive81:18 97:5,18243:11

computer 28:2029:1 30:2,331:18 75:1876:6,7 277:4,5

computer-assisted281:8

computers29:20,22 30:176:1

conceivable 270:5

concentration


Page 11


© 2010

260:1

concern 62:1197:21 128:12142:4,16 144:13227:3

concerned 86:788:11 94:7 129:3132:21 133:2136:10,11177:14

concerns 62:394:13 97:22100:12 177:9227:6

Concession 18:1019:1 20:326:5,10,14 91:693:12 126:6,12128:7 133:1,4,19136:21 195:20196:6 218:19224:8 237:15,17

conclude 56:1580:21 164:5202:7 203:13220:20 235:19236:1 260:16

concluded 56:1265:13 171:5205:9 254:12,17

concluding 74:18242:15

conclusion 68:8151:10 158:12159:7,14 162:7170:16 171:8225:1 267:1269:14

conclusions171:17 188:9

197:19 204:21211:18

condition 146:7171:2

conditions145:16,21 146:2231:15

conduct 26:2191:8 204:17

conducted 23:125:7,16,20217:13 261:14265:13

conducting 77:1878:15 264:22

conference 100:4113:8,9

confidential 69:21

confidentiality190:19

confirm 78:19144:1

confirmed 143:19

conflict 17:10

confusing 12:4

connected 90:8

Connecticut 1:182:5 5:12

connection 44:13257:1 278:8

cons 135:4

consenting 279:18

consequence 260:2

consequences 70:7135:2 191:22213:11 217:4,6229:21 242:1

259:11 260:2

Consequently262:9

consider 279:21

consideration144:20

considering 55:13101:1,2 125:22166:5 224:20

considers 271:18

constraints 62:5,7166:6 217:9

consult 59:14

consultant 87:5,10

consultants 83:986:3 185:16187:12

consultative 9:17

consulting 131:19194:17,20 195:5213:18

contact 39:7 43:10272:18

contacted 18:139:1,5,11 44:346:3 51:2,3 72:173:2,11,14,19176:21

contacting 283:10

contain 30:5

contained 153:6247:14

contains 98:14153:15

contaminants230:3

contaminate

229:20

contaminated70:17 110:17146:7 228:4229:13

contamination53:3 146:2158:11 171:18189:7 226:12227:2 228:11229:2,5,22 231:9241:22 270:8

contamination-related145:15,20

content 61:12 96:397:3 98:8 152:3

context 97:8

contingency185:12

contingent184:4,10,15

continuation14:15

continue 12:19100:15

continued 3:22

continues 126:3136:8 137:17

conversation10:19 60:3 61:1962:14 100:20

convicted 263:6,8

copied 28:15,16181:18

copy 29:1033:3,7,9,19,2134:1,2,4 46:10


Page 12


© 2010

80:10 103:6283:7

Core 4:5

Corporation 1:55:7,21 6:1,20283:4 284:5

correct 13:2,1714:4 17:1319:9,19,22 20:427:8 40:4 42:844:5 49:8 50:1151:9,13 54:10,1158:22 59:1761:18 62:1063:14,18 69:1270:19,2271:3,11,14,1789:7 96:15 99:1100:10 105:20106:5 107:3113:4,10115:11,17117:9,22 126:8127:14 129:11130:17131:12,13132:15 133:16134:7,17135:11,15 138:4139:9 140:8141:3,6,17 142:6143:9 144:17147:14,17 148:3150:21 153:7155:22 156:4,20158:3 168:22169:8 171:20172:11,19 175:4178:16 185:19187:15192:12,21195:13 212:12

216:14218:11,13 225:9229:14 232:16235:13 236:3,22237:3,22 242:8243:12244:17,20 245:1246:3 251:4252:16 254:7,15258:5 282:6

corrected 140:17

correcting 209:12

correction 99:8

corrections 282:8

correctly 51:8

corresponded 31:7154:13,14 279:3

corroborate 218:4

corroborated144:9

corroborating215:6 274:17

corroborative128:8

cost 18:9 20:2 24:940:20 41:11,1846:22 47:9 48:2049:3 52:1853:9,16,22 61:162:4,17,18,2064:7,22 66:20,2167:2,9 68:6,1081:12,14 82:1186:11 90:1692:18,20 93:194:18,21 97:7100:18,22107:22 110:22112:5,19 125:21127:8 128:19

134:4138:1,9,15,20141:5 144:20147:19 149:17159:4 179:13182:4,5 191:16206:22 207:18209:1,2 210:7211:6 215:14228:1 232:10237:1 239:19241:13243:11,21 244:2252:7,12 257:20271:12,22 272:9278:12

costs 52:19,22 54:782:16 111:4112:10,13129:7,10 130:6147:9,21165:12,20 196:8215:18 216:10226:2 231:4,8243:16 244:3264:8 271:1

counsel 1:16 3:35:4,18 6:2016:10,11,19,2117:2,16,18 30:1533:2236:2,9,14,2137:5 114:18149:10 198:16207:13 281:9283:14

counsel's 85:7

count 249:17

counterclaims61:7

counties 91:11,14

104:17

country 166:11

couple 23:21 31:739:13 177:13263:3 276:9,11

course 103:14128:9 129:4204:7 240:9

courses 22:19

court 1:1 5:8,156:14 11:20 12:2218:2,6 41:1,8,1144:11,1746:20,2148:18,20 49:1654:2 55:3,2056:1,13 68:1172:10,11 79:883:1,18 86:494:19,22 95:2,10177:8,18178:8,20 183:8188:4,8205:21,22206:16207:4,10,14,16208:16209:3,14,16210:6 211:10212:7 252:17

courts 95:5

cover 105:22138:2 256:14

covered 105:12171:20 189:5240:12 242:22257:2 272:4

covering 256:9

covers 258:8 268:1


Page 13


© 2010

cranking 186:12

create 10:6

created 50:9

credible 175:14

crime 263:6

critical 14:11,1621:2 23:18,20

criticize 192:4

cross 71:18

crude 25:2,8,13151:4,7 228:18261:6,11

Crutcher 1:18 2:55:11,21 6:1

CT 276:15

cultural 93:18

current 65:21 88:989:20 91:3109:14 143:6,14156:16 157:10163:21 168:10253:12 278:13

currently 9:5252:2 265:3279:2,4

cursive 155:14

curve 238:7

CV 19:7,10 20:546:10

DD.C 1:11,19 2:6

5:12,17 284:2

damage 40:1453:12 159:2,19160:2 202:1210:15 230:1

damages 40:1353:17 87:8158:1,4,7,9,14159:16206:13,17207:11,19,21208:5,10,17209:15 211:5213:1 214:1,21

Dan 5:22

dangerous 255:16

Daniel 2:478:16,17186:8,22

data 48:2249:1,6,19 57:360:5,11,15 61:2162:1,6,1275:20,21 82:1487:2188:2,4,5,8,14,1789:5,8,18,1990:4,14,1991:5,8,15,1993:1,3,4,9,10,13,20 94:8,11,1495:6,14,16 99:18100:13,16,22101:2 123:11126:17 138:8141:22 144:8,14151:9166:9,14,15179:10,11,14186:13 243:1,9244:6,11,18

database 32:176:19,21 77:9,1078:6 114:15116:9 129:6142:15143:17,20

144:1,2,5 146:20163:16 187:4246:21 247:14255:22

databases 75:4,5

date 29:7 282:22284:8,22

dated 71:10133:15 137:9153:16 167:11174:17179:16,17180:9,12

daughter 14:21

day 13:12 15:1229:11 32:20 36:151:5 65:1067:6,9 92:1799:16 172:16173:19

days 14:17,19 96:8115:19 116:4283:12

de 75:6

deadline 41:13,15

dealing 102:7146:1

Dear 283:6

debate 16:3

decades 240:9259:8

December 1:125:13 76:15 148:7149:3 206:7221:11 280:6284:8

decent 136:7

decided 65:2

92:18,20 175:2176:17

decision 11:20176:3,5,8,12272:20

decrease 269:20270:7

dedicate 21:15

deem 279:20

deemed 146:6

defense 16:8

define 62:17

defining 262:11

definitive165:11,19

defoliant 151:1

deforestation162:2,8,15,17,20163:2,18164:5,12 170:4224:6,17 225:5

degradation 217:5

degraded 170:9,18

degree 22:7 64:1164:1 236:12

degrees 20:6,822:9 129:15

delete 34:21 35:2181:9,17,19

deleted 30:4 34:1335:10

deletion 34:1835:11

deliver 24:9 94:5179:12

delivering 18:9


Page 14


© 2010

20:2 203:18215:14

delivery 107:6137:13 150:14153:21 167:12

demographer233:9 235:21

demographic73:16 77:7 88:890:13,19 92:2293:1,3,4,5,994:14 128:18141:22 166:18191:17 217:9234:9,12 238:16

demographics89:20 92:11,13141:9 156:3163:20 168:7

demography234:12

Denise 1:19 5:15281:2,14 283:19

denominator146:4 253:11

density 234:12

departments91:12

DEPONENT282:1

deposed9:8,18,19,21,2213:7,12 35:2137:7 185:8,13

deposition 1:143:5 4:1 5:2,5,106:2 7:8 8:2,310:21 11:9 12:1326:17 27:2,14

35:19 36:18,2137:4,13,19 38:1549:20 58:9 62:2268:16 71:4 95:1998:9 101:3 106:8116:18 124:16130:20 133:7137:3 153:8167:2 174:10197:17 198:2200:5 201:5202:12204:3,12,14,17205:2,17 249:12279:21 280:2,7,8281:3,5 283:8284:8

depositions 7:2210:10

deriving 125:21127:8

describe 15:519:10,13 21:1323:9 35:18 56:2188:7 178:1

described 89:4167:17 187:10238:4

describes 157:6

describing 56:9264:11

description 14:6101:9 263:22

designated 256:19257:1

designation 155:2

designations 65:2077:11,12

destroyed 34:10

details 13:14 44:12240:22 257:5265:10 266:14268:6

determination211:5

determinations53:7

determine 20:124:9,13 25:1,2026:3,9 40:2041:1852:14,16,2257:12 74:11191:18 208:16210:7 227:14228:2 230:14,16236:8 247:13,15271:8

determined112:19

determining 22:15227:22

develop 21:822:4,20 226:2

developed 14:915:12,14 233:8

developing 47:966:13 166:10

development64:1,9 96:1197:13 108:1112:5 210:8260:9

developments112:20

Diabetes 160:5

died 15:19

difference 82:4

104:14 220:3238:14,20 239:4249:4 254:20264:18

differences 65:4132:21 133:3134:4,8 135:4155:7

different 13:8 17:629:20,22 30:134:14 35:5,664:2 73:4,5,881:21 87:6 90:791:10 144:8166:12 176:22200:18 220:21221:3 237:16243:4,14,15244:22 254:14257:15,19 258:3

differently 238:18

difficult 62:2135:5 165:10,18231:7

digital 33:17 34:1

diligence 64:495:15 236:6,7

direct 260:1272:18 273:5,6

directed 46:20

directing 165:5

directly 19:2190:13,14

disagree 202:17204:4,9,10205:18

disaster 259:13,15

disasters 258:17259:4


Page 15


© 2010

discovered 274:22

discovery 37:8

discrepancy180:15 237:9,14

discuss 17:5 27:952:21 57:2267:19 122:12123:1,10,11160:16

discussed 37:452:8 54:13126:22 141:2160:11 161:15194:10 237:4250:1 253:2,19

discussing 100:9122:19 161:1

discussion 52:1368:3,9 129:4131:2 150:19162:6 176:10183:12198:18,22199:1,15

discussions 47:13124:19 127:21149:9 176:15

disease 22:1670:20 110:13111:5 151:4,8160:3,6 257:6,10258:2

diseases 147:16159:20219:11,14,18,19220:3231:9,13,19256:14 258:8

dispute 171:7

dissimilar 259:9

distant 91:1

distribution 88:1093:16,18 270:21

distributions 91:6

District 1:1,2,215:8,9 281:15

divide 218:6

divided 104:16

dividends 185:6

doctor 18:12 84:685:3 134:16149:6 211:13275:15 276:17

doctors 134:15164:3

document 17:2118:2,6,9,12,14,15,19,20 26:20,2127:1,3,5 33:1834:1745:19,20,2148:19 50:2,458:12,13,15,1760:9 63:368:19,21 69:171:7 72:1096:2,4,10,16,20,2297:2,4,5,8,12,1398:8,12,13,19101:6,11 103:21104:4,5 105:3106:11,13,15,18107:5,8 115:15116:21 117:1,3125:6,11127:12,15128:2,14131:5,6,8 132:11

134:9 136:7137:12,16,18,19,21 144:7153:11,13,15,19,20 154:2,3 155:8163:8,15,17,19167:5,7,12,16174:15,18 175:3182:8 187:4,21207:4 215:16247:4 249:8250:4,5,8255:4,20 261:4277:20

documented 269:7

documents28:2,6,9,12,14,16 29:330:8,11,14,17,2131:3,12,14,17,2032:6,8,12,13,18,22 33:17 34:1136:6,8,12 40:144:10,13,16 46:163:5,8,13,1964:6,11,14,15,17,20 65:2,6,1166:3 97:17100:14 103:3114:11115:2,4,7,9,19116:3,4,9 144:5163:11 166:17167:1 168:3169:17 172:1176:4 180:8181:13 187:14233:19 246:6,19247:3274:20,21,22275:3,7276:5,10,11,12277:2,13 278:16

279:12 280:3

dollar 250:22251:18,21

dollarized 249:5251:14

dollars 147:13249:1,3

done 15:10 24:425:12 47:859:11,12,15 60:890:11 174:5180:4 184:18235:13,14239:12 243:13260:14

Donziger120:5,6,18121:22 122:13123:14,20124:5,20 125:3189:12 190:5,8

Donziger's 121:16189:19190:11,12

double 253:3

doubling 252:19

Douglas 186:2,3

download 31:20

downloaded 28:1431:17 142:1146:19 163:15

dozens 65:13

[email protected]:16

Dr 5:6 58:1259:2,10,22 60:1161:3,10,14 62:1363:3 68:19 71:7


Page 16


© 2010

89:18 98:12101:6 106:11112:1 116:21131:4 133:10137:6 153:11167:5 171:2,5174:13 191:7197:14,18198:15200:1,8,9,12206:9 263:3275:15 276:8277:20,21278:2,7 279:14

draft 61:15 67:11106:4,16107:2,5,13132:13,17,19133:18137:13,22138:3,14,21139:2,4,5,10140:22 141:8,10142:6 143:8,11146:10 150:14153:3,4,5,6154:8,9,10,21155:5,19 156:1160:13,17164:19167:13,17,20168:20 171:21172:1,3,13180:22 181:2,3,7233:14,16,22

drafted 132:1,4140:10,12

drafts 172:2187:16 232:14236:21

draw 112:3

drawn 234:18

drilling 270:10

drinking 60:1761:8 66:9 70:1388:9

[email protected] 2:7

due 64:4 95:15126:16 224:7225:5 236:5,7

dug 268:1,12

duly 6:18 281:5

Dunkelberger39:6,7 42:5 46:447:5,11 48:251:15 62:3 69:972:8 73:18 79:1198:22113:13,15,18118:22 119:1120:21 126:7,10128:3129:1,12,20131:9 137:8141:2 150:3,4152:7 167:10173:13 177:11196:21 197:5

Dunn 1:18 2:55:11,20,22

duplicates276:10,12

duplication 32:1481:9

during 11:9 12:1236:11 39:15123:3 128:9129:4 170:15188:11 195:14

duties 180:3

Dylan 2:15 5:14

Eearlier 89:17

160:11 189:11214:13 237:4243:18

earliest 101:13

early 23:11 57:961:21 74:17 76:296:5 158:22159:1 255:22277:3

Earth 228:21

easily 94:4

easy 49:9,10 78:7

econometric 20:922:21,22 48:10

economic 20:2

economics 20:622:7 46:6,14129:16

economist20:17,2147:3,4,6,1248:3,9,1049:14,15 58:1960:10 89:15129:13 136:16

economy 249:2251:14

Ecuador 18:4,6,1119:1 20:1,328:15 31:8,1839:19 42:8,1443:2,6,10,15,1944:20 48:2050:10 52:8

53:13,22 54:165:19 71:13,1675:6 104:16105:3 108:3114:7 117:11134:6 135:13137:14 163:1166:13 177:8,21181:19 183:14184:5,10,16,18,22 185:3 187:21188:8 189:15194:21 195:10196:2,5 198:10199:12 203:19206:10 212:10214:18 219:21220:12,18222:14 244:1245:22254:15,20259:18261:15,19271:13,16 272:1274:15 276:19278:5,6 279:2,6

Ecuadorian17:3,8,11,1718:2 19:18 32:137:9 38:19 40:641:1,7,11 44:746:20,21 48:1849:16 68:1172:3,10 83:2194:19,22 95:9177:18,20178:7,8,12,20182:3,8,20183:4,6,8185:18,21222:2,8 223:7244:10 245:9249:2 251:13


Page 17


© 2010

252:8

editing 180:4

educate 45:1164:11

educating 117:17

education 22:1850:17,18,19 88:6109:13,21129:21

educational 19:1120:11,14 22:1460:19 87:1189:12 171:16

effect 252:19

effects 25:13110:18 218:7226:11260:1,5,7,17261:5 262:11

effort 115:3 189:6193:21 227:14235:4,14 247:13

efforts 267:3

eight 115:18

either 115:2129:21 186:12272:22 274:1

El 279:5

electronic 180:11188:15

element 271:17

elicit 203:10 205:7

elicited 203:11

eliminated 155:21160:17

else 7:7,11 8:5,1436:14,16,17,20

54:13 119:2120:17152:9,12,16156:22 193:1235:10

else's 218:8

e-mail3:9,10,11,13,14,15,16,18,19,20,21 4:2,3,4 30:534:13,1535:7,8,10,1148:7 58:1859:1,5 63:15,1669:2 75:13 86:2287:18 89:5 93:2295:22 96:4,6,997:10 98:14,2199:2,5,11,15100:13 101:8,13102:5 104:7105:16 106:3,15107:1,8 116:12125:13,19 126:9127:6 131:8,22132:4,16133:11,13,17134:3 135:9,16137:7,12,18138:2 141:15153:15,20154:3,7,21167:9,17174:16,20175:1,22 180:10181:6,13225:15,20 237:4253:17

e-mailed 181:3233:17

e-mailing 116:16

e-mails

29:14,15,1830:1,3,4 31:732:15 35:4 49:1159:21 63:4,12,2075:14 99:16100:9 125:7181:9 187:14190:4 192:17275:14,18 276:5

embedded 103:2104:4

emergency 23:19

Emilio 1:8,155:6,7 6:17 7:4,5280:9 282:4,22283:4,8 284:5,7

E-M-I-L-I-O 7:5

emphasize 41:12

emphasized 40:22

emphasizing 94:20

employed 281:10

employment23:9,11

Enclosed 283:7

encounter 119:10

endeavor 42:17

engage 35:3

engaged 21:11

engineer 55:17

English 41:3,478:7 104:22105:1,6

enjoy 94:2

enrolled 256:3

enter 71:12

entered 71:15

entire 85:2 145:7200:12 216:9219:20 231:8255:10 271:12

entirely 84:15204:2

entities 110:14111:5 256:18,22257:3,8

entity 200:21203:16 208:13

entry 116:11,14173:22

environment40:14 227:8229:20

environmental48:9 49:14 60:1061:4,770:7,10,12,14,1587:8158:1,4,6,7,9,14159:2,16,19160:2 202:1213:1 214:1,21217:4 224:22230:1 231:9,16258:18259:5,12,19

environs 170:9,17

epidemiologic22:19 23:177:6,7 145:15,20160:10 166:19231:13261:13,18

epidemiological124:11

epidemiologist22:12 48:11


Page 18


© 2010

49:15 73:15,1974:6 89:15141:18 186:12

epidemiology22:10,20

equally 223:16

equipment 276:16

equivalent 251:6259:10

Eric 2:10 6:916:17 84:10,13202:9 203:4283:1

errata 282:9283:13

Esquire 2:4,10283:1,14,20

essentially 13:2015:19 18:2 28:1331:10 64:4 88:7107:17 109:11112:10126:16,19154:15 231:13

establish 255:15

established 204:19215:2 231:10234:7

establishing209:15

Estadistica 75:6

estimate 40:2048:21 49:3 52:1853:16,20,21 54:161:1 62:5,1864:8,22 66:20,2167:2,9 68:6,1073:16,17,2074:11 86:12

90:16 92:18,2093:2 94:18,21100:18,22110:22 127:8128:19 134:5138:1,11,15142:9,21 144:20147:8,20 150:11159:5 161:9179:13 191:16203:18 206:22207:19 210:7211:6 215:14,18226:2 232:6238:8 239:20243:11,21248:15,17 250:2251:5 270:22271:22 272:9

estimated 18:9126:5,12 130:7

estimates 41:12,1846:22 47:9 62:2081:12,14 82:1197:7 107:22125:22 138:9,20182:5 209:2232:10 239:19240:1 248:21278:12

estimation 53:974:8

et 138:18

ethical 263:8

evaluate 111:3189:6

evaluating 61:4269:1

evaluation 60:1664:2 68:5 108:15

109:2 196:8

evening 61:3

everybody 10:7

everyone 142:3271:14

evidence 83:1384:5 123:6193:13228:10,14230:2,21 261:21265:6 268:15269:11


exacerbation15:16,17

exactly 11:1713:21 30:646:9,10 97:398:8 119:9,22142:16 173:19180:19 192:1233:10 237:13239:8,15 247:10248:16 265:8

examination 1:163:2 6:20

examined 6:19282:5

example 162:1170:4

examples 145:4

Excel 77:10

exchange 187:13248:18,19 249:4250:21251:18,21

exchanged 190:4

192:17

excuse 13:11

exhibit 5:2 18:826:17,2127:16,22 49:2050:1,21 58:9,1359:2 62:22 63:468:16,2071:4,8,18 86:2187:17 89:22 94:195:19,22 96:797:11 98:9 99:22101:3,7 102:6104:7 105:17106:8,12 107:7112:2 113:6114:19 115:14116:12,18,22117:6 124:16125:7 130:1,20131:5 132:16133:7,10 137:3,6139:5 149:12151:11153:6,8,12 154:1155:17,19,21160:7,8 161:18164:18165:9,15,20167:2,6,9,16168:2,3,12169:5,6,12170:12 171:21172:6,13174:10,16179:16 180:9183:22 187:19212:16221:14,15 238:2249:12 250:5258:12 264:6

exhibits 3:5,22


Page 19


© 2010

4:1,7 155:16

exist 189:8

existing 60:17 91:2144:12218:16,18221:16

exists 156:18203:13 208:12

expect 184:1 185:2

expectation138:22

expected 27:1362:15 118:5,8

expenditure126:11 127:22128:6 129:5146:12,16149:16 164:21165:6,16 246:5,9247:22 248:1250:14,21252:3,8,14,18,20253:12

expenditures126:2,5 232:11242:17 245:6248:3,6 249:1

experience 36:171:2 129:21

experienced 269:7

experiencing22:16 53:2

expert 6:5 9:1512:22 19:1739:20 44:16 55:356:1,1357:12,18,2059:12,1574:7,10,13,15,21

75:2 77:683:2,17 93:5100:14 107:22108:9 177:21178:8,11,19182:4,13 184:19187:17,19201:11 229:4238:2

expertise 48:1349:6 67:2072:13,19 87:7101:19 234:8271:8

experts73:2,4,8,1275:22 108:11,12124:5 176:22191:16 247:6

expert's 191:19

expires 281:20

explain 16:1130:20 56:17161:13 180:15182:2,7 191:11

explained 39:1340:10 120:11144:14 156:13176:6 274:7

explaining 162:13

explanation156:21

exploitation 213:2214:22 215:20

exploration 25:1726:4 40:12108:21 196:18213:11 220:22224:7,18 225:5226:4 227:11

228:19

explore 228:22

Exponent 6:8

exposed 26:11,1592:4 142:3191:18 217:3226:16 228:3,18230:3,17 255:15267:18,20268:18 271:14

exposure 24:11,1525:2,8,21 53:254:770:7,10,12,13,14,15 92:5 111:4,6125:5 147:10,22151:3,5,7 217:7229:12,15231:16,20234:10,11255:21 257:1259:12,17,18,19260:6 270:16271:18 272:21273:13

exposure-related262:11

exposures 110:14146:3 158:7191:22 258:19259:5

express 68:12177:15 277:21

expressed 128:12

extend 67:1,8

extended 259:8

extensive 45:3

extent 25:21 36:347:18 69:20 70:2

73:21 121:2123:7 125:4,5132:10 170:9,18208:20 241:21

extrapolate 217:10

eye 100:21

Fface 74:20 75:13

121:18 135:5186:10 251:15

facie 242:1

facilities 196:1227:16 233:1

facing 98:1

fact 13:9 14:14,2139:11 41:1 45:165:12 67:6 74:1679:10 91:8105:10 118:9140:16 143:17158:22 166:16180:2 184:6188:21 196:7213:5 214:17220:1 222:3224:1,17,19225:5 258:1,11

facts 83:11 84:4123:6,15 193:13261:21 265:6268:15 269:11

faculty 23:21

failure 14:10,13

fair 223:15

fall-back 128:18129:8

familiar 67:15,17186:2 194:16


Page 20


© 2010

198:7 250:6

family 14:14,20263:15 264:2

fashion 7:22 37:16

fatal 14:13

fault 197:20200:10 205:10

feasible 62:14

features 74:20

fee 184:4,10,16

feel 14:14 16:150:14 58:690:13,19 95:10235:4,6

fell 94:17

fellowship 23:18279:4

felt 48:8,18 57:258:7 59:13 60:2262:20 80:3 81:1482:18 83:1595:13 98:4 99:18114:3 116:1117:14 146:8157:13 161:4,11243:1 248:8

female 154:5

females 93:16

fetal 260:9

fide 74:6

field 20:6,8 60:1664:6 68:8 91:4101:2 179:12

field-related 24:4

fifth 13:10

figure 53:21216:10 238:20

239:4 245:20

figures 244:9

Fiji 66:7

file 175:2 183:7

filed 13:21 105:3177:8,17 187:21206:10

files 60:9

filing 44:10,13,16

fill 112:17 128:13136:12 182:1

final 49:2 62:2067:11 68:8 88:792:15,21 93:1100:19,20136:13 138:9140:17 151:18153:3 156:8159:1 163:13,14172:3,5,15173:4,8 174:7179:15,20180:4,5,13,22181:2,3,6233:14,17,22

finalized 180:16

finally 173:2

financial 21:8 22:4281:11

financing 20:11

findings 80:15,20

fine 111:16 197:22199:5,7

finish 11:5 15:224:19 29:1139:22 256:21

firefighters 255:8

firm 17:7 51:18

121:22

first 6:18 10:1413:15 14:6 38:1950:22 51:2,559:1 60:15 72:787:16 107:20108:14 124:14125:18 141:9144:4 154:1155:19 164:22168:6 192:10212:18,20217:21 218:17230:7 231:6233:22 244:5254:12,18258:16

five 36:10 39:10111:15 175:12232:22 234:13236:3 237:7,9238:3 241:2,12

five-minute 76:9190:21 206:1

Floor 284:2

focus 110:13

focused 144:7

folder 28:14 31:18

food 171:18

footnote 248:14249:20 250:11

footnotes 154:14

forces 229:7

foregoing 281:3,5282:5

forest 226:20,22

forgot 104:3

forgotten 31:5,6,8

277:5

form 17:14,1919:20 24:6,1825:4,9 26:730:19 33:1 35:1337:20 38:2,2140:18 43:1344:21 45:846:7,15 47:1748:4 49:17 52:1153:4,1855:1,10,2156:6,14 58:260:13 63:21 65:966:5 67:3,2268:14 72:15,2179:2 80:1 81:183:3,10 84:186:17 95:3,1297:15 98:6109:18 110:1,5111:7 112:15113:3 114:9115:12,21 116:6120:19 121:12123:5124:6,12,21126:13130:2,9,15 132:9133:21 134:20139:12 144:15145:8 146:17148:1 157:1,8158:15 160:19162:9 164:8,14168:12 171:9176:19178:2,14,21182:9 189:21193:12 194:6,12206:19207:17,22208:7,18 211:12


Page 21


© 2010

213:7 214:3215:1 220:7222:11,22223:18 225:7,17226:5,17 227:17228:6,12 230:9232:1 235:1,11236:15 237:11239:1 240:20241:6,15 242:9246:13 247:17251:10 252:5,22253:9,20 254:22255:17 256:5257:11,17 258:6259:15 260:20261:7,20265:5,15 266:19267:6,14268:3,14269:2,8,16270:12 271:3,19273:1

format 33:17 35:5155:13 156:9

format-type 34:2

former 20:326:5,10,14 91:692:8 195:19227:16 228:18229:16 230:4241:3,12

forms 229:22

formulas 22:22239:13

forth 9:20 15:122:19 47:1049:11 50:2075:15 77:8 92:5108:21 114:12116:16 154:12

161:16 164:3166:4 188:5209:2 234:12255:9 265:9

forward 35:9112:20 283:12

forwarded64:15,17 115:10

fossil 229:17

founders 131:18

four-hour 51:652:8 54:14

fourth 13:10 27:15247:11

frame 65:2266:2,18

freely 17:17

frequently134:11,14230:20

Friday 173:2,5,20180:17

friend 58:18 59:11

front 56:8 112:1149:13 168:5

fuels 229:18

full 7:2 183:17

fund 132:2,7133:20 139:8253:17254:14,19255:7,14256:2,4,7,13,17257:2,9 258:1,3

fundraising 21:19

funds 265:17

furnished 167:1

Ggap 135:9,12

gas 230:20

gastroesophageal257:6

gather 278:4

gearing 153:2

generalized 53:16

generate 18:141:10 56:1 57:358:6 60:6 61:2073:5 77:7 79:1181:4 86:10 87:2288:6 89:3,14107:14,19108:11 138:8172:14 197:3206:22

generated 67:1183:18 105:7173:4

generating 67:575:12 79:6 92:20191:15

gentleman14:7,18,19120:4,5,15186:10,22233:10 276:17277:1 279:1,3

geographic 88:889:19 90:4 94:14107:15 108:15109:2 268:19271:15

geographically104:9

geologist 229:5

GERD 257:6

get-go 90:2

getting 195:7

Gibson 1:17 2:55:11,20,22

given 32:18,2134:4 58:12 68:1080:9 103:6104:21 105:9176:6 179:13192:11 200:19204:17 275:6282:7

giving 10:4

glad 40:1 152:4

gmail 31:6 277:6

goal 20:4 64:12,2166:12 100:21156:8 215:13

goals 145:4 157:18160:9 168:20169:5,14

gone 209:18268:8,9

gotten 35:10

gradient 92:4234:10 260:1270:16

Greenbelt 1:2 5:9

ground 10:13

group 18:2132:3,10,11,1733:2,9 37:238:22 39:5 45:2146:4 50:6 51:756:5 58:1 67:1469:3,7 70:171:10 72:2,13,20


Page 22


© 2010

75:16,19 76:178:11,2179:1,14,15,16,20,21 80:6,7 86:1587:2,6 94:196:14 100:6101:22 103:9108:7,9,10 113:9118:2,14,17119:3 120:7121:11 123:2124:4 125:19127:16,22131:19,20,21137:9 138:22139:1,7 140:6141:16 149:22150:1 151:15,22167:11 172:9173:13 174:8175:2,7,8,11176:5,9,12,17181:7 183:21184:9 185:14190:14,15,16,18191:8213:18,20,21,22219:5 240:10253:18 255:6272:13,17,22273:4,8 274:2

Group's 32:951:12 54:14 72:676:18 152:20173:9 191:12

growth 77:7 92:22234:9 238:7,16

Guatemala 96:17

Guayaquil 273:19

guess 23:12 37:1542:1 43:21128:14 157:13

180:7 229:17245:19 248:1

guidance 101:15

Hhabitat 170:8,17

hand 30:12 52:1559:14 60:5 81:3103:4 182:6

handed 26:20 33:950:1 63:3 98:12101:6 103:19106:11 125:6133:10 137:6167:5 174:15

hands 64:5 78:199:19 124:10179:10 244:12

happened 35:1639:11 77:2,22120:9 211:3276:18

happens 20:18

harassing 205:1

harassment 210:1

hard 30:6 94:12100:13 126:17180:7

haven't 9:19,2213:6 28:8 187:16193:17 239:12277:13 279:12

having 6:18 40:11146:7 180:7276:4 278:16279:11,18

head 10:15,1687:20 88:2

headed 99:7

heading 79:14

health 4:5 18:920:2,6,8,12,14,17,21 21:8 22:523:4,6 24:10,1425:2,8,13 31:2232:2 40:21 43:146:6,1447:2,4,6,9,1248:3,10 49:1452:19,22 53:154:1,6 55:560:18 64:9 65:166:13 81:1889:15 90:16,1897:6 107:5 108:1109:6,13 110:17111:3 114:7125:21126:1,11,20127:8 128:6129:5,10,12,18130:6 132:2,6,22133:3,4,18135:1,2,10136:16 137:13140:2 141:5143:6,14 144:20146:11,15,20147:8,13,19,21149:16 150:14153:20 156:16157:11,22158:13 159:8,15162:3 163:21164:20165:6,11,16,19166:8,16 167:12168:10 169:18193:4 196:8200:13 201:22203:18 209:1

211:9 212:6,22215:14,18,20216:10 217:11218:16,18220:10,12,15,17,22 221:16222:20223:12,20 224:6225:12 226:2,3,9231:4 232:10241:13 242:17243:11,16244:2,8,15 245:6246:5,9,22247:9,15,22248:15,22250:1,15,21252:3,7,14,18,20256:3,8,9257:15,20260:2,5,17 261:4262:10,11,14264:8 271:1,12278:6,13

hear 38:19 43:7209:11

heard 40:644:6,9,10192:8,10 193:15265:7,13266:11,13

hearing 105:4192:3

heart 160:3

held 5:10 42:19131:2 183:12

help 46:21 64:1165:3,5 121:20142:19 152:1208:16 209:3210:6 270:7


Page 23


© 2010

275:11,21

helped 101:20

helpful65:12,14,16

helping 89:3

helps 173:5 209:14

hematologic 257:7

hemorrhage 15:20

hereby 281:3282:4

herself 87:9

he's 6:5,6 47:4,755:17 57:20103:16 127:10131:18 154:8,19187:2 189:16200:16201:11,15,18203:1 204:19205:8,13,14209:18,21 210:1215:22 216:12274:6

hesitate 283:16

hide 31:11 83:2185:15,18 86:5

high 248:8

higher 236:20237:1 248:20

highest 248:2,10

highlands 195:17

highlight 34:3

highlighted156:2,5,7,14

hire 185:16

hired 24:9,13 25:1

71:1 74:10,15,16

hiring 73:8

historically 245:5

history 19:1423:10

hold 82:20 136:4182:16 197:14198:17,20

holder 141:20

home 30:2 71:19277:4

homicide 14:22

honest 53:20 97:4179:8

honestly 37:16

hooked 7:11 8:14

hook-ups 7:10

hope 184:7 185:4

hopefully 136:2,6

hoping 94:10

hospital 42:18277:3,5

hospitals 144:18248:5

hour 100:4 117:21172:18

hourly 117:19

hours 15:18 16:229:12 36:10 77:3115:18 118:7,10151:16 172:10174:4,22

human 23:13

husband 15:21

hypothetical

268:17

IICU 14:10,11

I'd 19:3 112:3121:1 168:2169:11,12262:17

idea 31:11 48:1953:5 97:7 112:21126:10,22128:2,7,8,11129:2 172:4188:6 217:8,19

ideal 97:16 110:19145:22 146:8

ideally 110:21111:8 226:7

identification 5:326:18 49:2158:10 63:1 68:1771:5 95:20 98:10101:4 106:9116:19 124:17130:21 133:8137:4 153:9167:3 174:11249:13

identified 129:22260:17

identify 111:5223:11 252:18

identifying 28:5

I'll 8:4 122:14

ill-defined 258:18259:4,11,19,21,22 260:3

illness 70:4 109:22

illnesses 43:11

109:17 257:6,7

illustrates96:17,21

I'm 7:6 8:2210:3,20 11:412:9 15:2 20:1832:19 37:1142:20 48:1149:18 61:1269:19 73:2284:21 89:14,1596:5 102:18104:1 106:21107:4 109:10113:13 114:18124:14 128:10138:12 143:11151:9 152:15158:6 161:1165:5,15 166:20167:22 170:6172:21,22176:13 180:7,17181:15 185:15190:15 191:20192:1 197:9198:1,13 200:2201:13 202:13204:11 205:19209:11 212:14229:4 230:7236:17 237:18239:10,11240:15 241:20243:4 245:15257:4 263:4265:9 266:2,6,9267:11 276:6277:7,10278:14,20279:4,18 280:1

imagine 27:4


Page 24


© 2010

210:6 219:17230:19

immune 260:8

Immunization110:8

impact 25:2,7109:16,22171:17 201:22214:20 227:8,15268:12 269:14270:10

impacted 135:3162:2,8 224:7

impacting 164:12

impair 9:6

implement 223:21

implied 158:10182:12

imply 229:3,6

important 109:7,8110:15 111:2212:13

importantly258:17

impossible 16:262:21 82:1990:15 138:8165:11,19

impression 212:12

improper84:5,15,19,2185:3,8

inability 136:12

inadequate 156:19157:13 218:20

inadvertent277:12

inbox 35:2,8181:9,17

incidence 22:16

include 96:9147:15 156:22157:7 161:4253:16

included 44:16155:20 157:14166:14,22 234:1

includes 131:8139:6 232:21

including 125:7260:7

income 222:17

incoming 28:16

increase 239:15266:17267:12,17268:22 269:1

increased 22:16

increases 239:8

increasing267:11,16

incurred 147:9

independent 55:2256:12,2057:18,20 83:17103:17

independently32:13 84:8 85:4

India 66:7

indicate 51:162:13 64:1972:12 89:1996:16 100:12102:6 105:2107:21 115:15

118:4,7 127:10136:15 138:2150:4 174:1175:5,21 176:16180:10 197:5211:2 213:22214:5 232:20235:7 244:14245:4 246:4278:2,7

indicated 60:761:15,16 68:569:6 99:5 102:16105:6 107:13117:15 118:21134:3,9 136:11138:6 189:18190:10 191:14195:16196:16,19 207:1239:20 242:22255:3,4 278:4

indicates 50:2151:6 99:6 100:3105:17 110:13118:12 131:22132:4,17 141:10151:12,14154:7,21 190:20203:17 218:18251:2 259:22

indicating 58:591:15 95:7101:14 182:15200:6

indication 98:4234:19 237:6

indicators 4:5109:6

indigenous 134:14169:18

171:3,6,18

individual 58:2077:18 78:4,14121:16,21 122:5124:10 193:5236:12 277:17278:18

individuals 54:1869:17 90:2192:4,7 93:11123:1 133:5,19142:13,17,22146:4 186:20217:2,12 222:21226:15 228:3,17230:17 238:3252:20 255:14256:3,9,15264:18 266:18267:17,18273:14

industry 24:2

INEC 32:1 75:4,2076:19,20 91:9114:15,16 116:8129:6 142:1,15143:16,17,19144:1,2,5163:8,16 244:10246:21 247:14

I-N-E-C 75:5

infection15:13,14,15

infectious 219:18256:14

inferred 53:14

informal 47:13

informally 47:7

information 22:2239:20 45:2,3


Page 25


© 2010

46:19 49:1157:5,8 58:769:21 75:8,9,1176:18 77:1 89:1392:7,11 94:1298:4 99:15107:15,16 114:1123:2 126:1128:19 138:17139:19143:18,19,22144:8 158:21161:10166:18,19168:11,15170:21 197:2,3201:21207:14,16210:18 211:1,2213:4,17215:5,8,15 216:8219:16 222:5226:13 231:14232:4 236:6244:9,13246:19,21247:2,14,20,21248:10 273:5276:16 277:1278:5

informed 14:1227:4,12 211:3

informing 74:7

infrastructure20:12 21:9 22:560:18,21 88:989:21 90:9 91:3143:7,15 144:12156:17157:11,12163:21 168:11218:17,19

220:16,17221:17 252:11

inhabitants141:11 142:6,14

in-house 72:14

initial 23:15 79:10103:5 215:9

initially 67:4 94:8150:17 177:12

initiated 94:8

injury 200:13

ins 117:17

inserted 141:21188:16,19 189:1233:7,12,13

inside 103:2

insofar 95:14224:22

instance 66:6,1277:14 248:5

Instituto 75:6

instruction 12:1

instructs 11:22

insurer 16:7

int$ 250:16,18

integrated 175:7

intelligent 276:7278:15

InterAmerican96:10 97:13

interest 105:18184:4,10,16281:11

interested 47:14

intern 23:15

internally 73:7

international251:18

Internet 7:22 8:831:21 44:1945:16 96:10116:8

Internet-based8:10

interrelated 110:2

interrupt 10:19,2011:4,6 84:17138:12

interruption 11:2

intracranial15:19,20,22

intranet 32:5

introduce 5:19

introduced 120:11

introductory225:13

invest 31:2 41:14

invested 29:1250:15,16 185:5

investigate 41:2088:14

investigation142:15

invoice 3:8,17 29:950:5,9,12,2151:5,6 100:1,3113:7 115:14117:4,6,7,10118:12,21151:12,14 172:7

invoices 183:18,22

involve 262:10

involved 40:1167:16 70:11192:7 200:7258:18 259:4266:12

involvement69:11,18 70:11

involving 261:18

irrelevant 84:685:2 200:8 204:2

isn't 61:5 139:15161:11 216:9234:21 248:17

issue 8:4 41:7 62:470:10 176:16204:1 205:9209:18 210:2212:13 271:6277:12 279:19

issues 40:10 41:2053:1 61:4 77:9202:7 204:21226:3

items 89:21 112:18114:5

iteration 13:10

iterations 153:4

it's 7:18,19 8:1013:7 14:3 18:1536:1 49:9 51:2058:13,18 69:284:19,21 90:1596:6 97:6103:15,17107:13 109:1,8112:10 117:4121:9 135:21137:22 138:6157:3,12163:11,13


Page 26


© 2010

174:16 176:12179:16 181:8184:8 193:19197:17 201:4204:18205:3,4,5,15209:22 215:3,4,9216:3,7 218:19219:17 223:8,10226:21 242:11245:11,12,15247:4,6 248:13252:7 255:10257:19 258:16259:21 265:9266:22 274:20276:15

I've 11:10,1212:4,5,8 68:1971:7 95:22118:20 188:17194:9 250:4,7280:2

JJaime 193:5,7,15

Jefferson 5:17284:1

Jersey 2:12 283:2

job 20:20 88:12165:4

John 2:10 6:12

join 152:8

joined 23:21

Jonathan 186:17

JR 2:10

judgment 207:3210:20

jumped 57:2


KKelsh 2:15 6:3,4,8

KERO 153:21155:2

Kerry 51:15,1969:3,13 86:2287:1,4 88:20,2294:1 96:1,1398:14 113:12,13118:22 119:2120:10 121:1131:9 133:12,13137:8 139:7150:16,18 152:7153:17154:19,22155:3,4 170:5174:16 176:10177:10 224:16225:15 253:18259:2 260:14

Kerry's 154:22

key 161:17

kidney 14:8

kilometer 242:5

kilometers241:3,12

knew 39:1746:9,10 48:2149:5 77:20 78:1106:2 141:17142:2,13

knowingly 34:16

knowledge 22:2130:14 87:7129:17 187:13194:19 201:8

202:3 203:12205:12 229:3249:2 255:20264:2 270:18,20273:6

Llabeled 156:2

250:14,20

labor 68:7

lack 49:19 62:1,12125:22 126:16144:14 243:1

lacking 231:14

lackluster 57:4

lady 10:4

Lago 6:10,13 19:144:11,17 55:3,2067:17 79:1,8

laid 57:9 161:6

language 139:6,10140:9,10 163:9233:4,6

last 31:4 67:6,992:17 107:7144:10 169:12171:22 173:22181:15 184:8224:4 231:6262:8 274:20

late 31:4 103:6214:17 275:2

later 11:20 14:2067:5 141:21233:7,12,13

latest 154:8,9,10

laundry 88:1089:5,10

law 1:17 5:11121:22 178:7,12182:3,8,21 183:4

Lawrence 186:6

lawsuit 206:10

lawyer 16:13122:6,8

lawyers 122:9212:10 274:2

leaders 169:20

learn 45:1

learned 45:967:6,8 91:9

learning 36:1 94:2117:17

least 83:16 171:12276:2

leave 180:22

legal 2:11 5:14212:11 283:2

length 259:7

lengthy 33:18

less 245:12

let's 86:21 100:20109:4 143:5145:3,12 155:16254:1

letters 33:16

level109:12,13,16,21178:18 179:6222:7,9,20

liability 200:11,21203:15,20 205:9

life 14:15

likely 118:21


Page 27


© 2010

170:15

Likewise 110:6

limitations 46:1848:21 49:562:5,6,18 98:1161:6 182:5209:2 243:1,7,10

limited 66:11179:11 204:18

limits 166:5204:18

line 84:5 85:2137:22 157:14197:10 218:1221:20 284:9

lines 200:3

link 54:6 96:9,16114:14 166:17211:8 212:5

linked 97:14 151:8231:15

list 28:5,8 88:1089:5,8,10 104:12107:18 110:20161:7 232:5

listed 89:21 241:5

listening 192:3

literacy 164:1166:18

litigates 87:9

litigation 9:1820:1 38:20 39:1840:6,9 43:16,1944:7,20 52:861:5 67:17 72:883:21 87:6,8130:8184:5,11,16185:18 189:15

194:21 267:4277:22 278:8281:11

little 10:1 57:662:10 91:1199:20 102:16115:20 135:8,16142:1 238:18

live 134:10 221:19238:3

lived 91:16

LiveNote 7:18

lives 245:9

Livestream7:9,12,13 8:9,14

living 222:1 242:5246:1 261:14264:18

LLP 2:5,11 5:11283:1

local 170:8,17

localities 90:891:10

located 5:11,16233:1

location 91:22102:16 270:10

locations 270:20

logical 242:2 267:1

long 36:5,939:9,12 43:245:10 100:18144:6 247:4,5

longer 195:22208:12

longest 151:21

long-standing

213:1

lost 57:6

lot 50:14 57:5,765:20 99:15117:13 120:16

lower 245:2,3253:2

Lunch 148:9

lungs 260:8

Mmail 28:17 180:10

main 227:5

major 109:19132:21 133:2227:8

male 154:5,6

males 93:16

malpractice13:7,15 14:2,3,416:7 263:11

man 51:19 78:16192:18

managing 196:5

mandate 81:1186:11 191:15,20227:19 271:21272:8

manifest231:10,20

manner 243:19

Manuel 58:21

map 91:21102:16,17,18,20103:4,7,10,12,19104:2 237:15

mapped 237:17

mark 112:6199:17

marked 18:826:17,20 49:2058:9,13 62:2263:4 68:16,2071:4,7 95:19,2298:9,13 101:3,7106:8,12 107:11116:18,22124:16 125:6130:20 131:5133:7,11 137:3,7153:8,12 167:2,6174:10,15249:12 250:4

markers 222:17

Marla 51:16 69:1588:21,22 98:22101:8 106:16113:12,14,18118:22 119:1120:10 121:1125:8 126:19127:6,15,18131:15 137:7152:7,14,15

Maryland 1:2 5:921:5

master 177:13

materializing99:21

math 239:10,12245:18,20 246:8

matter 5:670:12,18 281:12

may 9:7 11:1030:3,532:13,14,1565:3,4 69:22


Page 28


© 2010

115:4 126:1155:11 156:10174:3 181:8,17225:1 228:21229:1 230:17237:14 247:10248:7 257:4260:3 275:6,8,10278:22

maybe 29:2035:20 210:22238:19 279:6

mean 8:21 33:860:21 66:2 88:389:9 93:8 94:3,696:20 105:21108:17 109:11112:7 128:10135:8,18 136:9138:5,12 139:20140:14 165:3166:22 202:14204:7 210:22215:11 216:17229:4 231:11233:13 234:16238:16 256:20257:4,20259:3,20266:10,22273:22 276:15

meaningful225:21

means 8:19 48:7154:8,22 205:15250:18 274:17281:8

meant 158:9 170:6182:8

measure 272:21

measures 14:16

medical 13:7,1514:1,3,11 16:721:3,7,1622:17,18 23:1542:17 70:5 224:9263:9,11

medications 9:514:22

medicine 22:2023:20 224:21,22279:5

meet 36:9 37:195:10,13 119:2120:8,10 121:1172:4 187:10

meeting 36:11,1551:7,10,1452:9,21 53:1154:14 74:1778:1,20 80:9103:5118:13,16,19120:6,9,17,22121:2,5,6,10123:3,10124:5,9,14151:16,17,20,22152:2,5,10,19153:1172:10,12,15,16,17 173:4,9,19218:20

meetings 74:1775:19 77:3119:10 120:1121:10 127:2128:9 152:6173:12,21

meets 182:20

members 86:15224:16 235:15

memory 9:6 61:12

men 77:15

mention 48:6,892:2 223:4

mentioned 39:1753:6 54:17 77:482:10 94:13102:9 121:16136:22 155:17189:11 214:15221:17 266:10

merge 92:17

merged 208:14

merits 217:8

messages 34:2135:1

met 36:2,1741:13,15 56:5119:8,16 125:4151:14 171:7180:2 186:9189:12 192:13

metastatic 14:8

meters 91:16

method 7:8112:13,16 129:9229:11

methodology113:1 128:5129:22 130:5,14136:19 137:1141:1,2,4 147:18232:13,14234:2,5 240:5242:16,18243:14,15,16264:21 266:15267:10 268:21270:9,15

methods 112:6,9231:4

Michael 2:15 6:2,4

mid-August 40:451:3

middle 12:14

mid-september41:16

mid-September18:16 44:14 54:3

migration 25:1726:3

Mike 279:8

military 42:18

min 88:19

mind 41:20 56:1957:1 112:13,16229:6

mine 58:18 59:11

minimal 140:21218:18

Minister 247:8

Ministry 169:17

minor 155:11

minuses 255:3

minute 198:20249:7

minutes 39:1096:6 111:15249:18

mischaracterization 175:19253:21 254:10255:1 259:14

mischaracterizes47:18 74:2


Page 29


© 2010

132:10

misconduct263:13

missed 230:7

missing 94:16

mission 42:19,2081:13

missions 21:17

mistaken 180:17

modern 135:9

Monday 174:17

money 185:5

monitoring 64:268:4 111:2145:15,20160:10

month 116:13117:4,6,7

months 35:2061:17 68:7

Moreover 145:1

morning 5:4 6:227:1 69:4 77:2125:20 127:7172:4,5 180:2

mostly 21:1931:21 33:15,1934:6 42:19 61:870:11,14 87:10163:20 166:18260:14

move 85:6 198:1204:12

Moving 146:10

multi-organ14:9,12

multiple 30:5 73:2

82:8 87:6 90:7218:12 272:5,15

multiply 126:1240:6 242:16271:11

multiplying126:11 128:5130:6 141:5147:19

multitude 210:1

Myron131:10,14,16,17

myself 27:5 45:1164:11 67:1374:22 88:19 91:894:9,12 117:17159:5 224:19

NNacional 75:6

narrative 156:10

narrow 30:7 81:13

nation 166:21

nations 47:8166:12

natural 229:7

nature 113:21205:15

nearly 138:3

necessarily 56:20142:3 229:3248:9 253:3259:16 267:20

necessary 60:2272:13 144:13

neither 16:4 281:9

nervous 260:7

net 64:10 276:19

Newark 2:12283:2

news 43:16,1844:6

night 31:4 274:20

NIH 23:18

Nodding 10:15

none 201:3

non-remediated264:19

non-Weinberg124:4

nor 281:10

normal 10:1935:11

northeastern108:2

Northwest 1:182:5 5:12,17284:1

Notary 1:20281:1,15

notation 160:9,17

notations 34:8

note 69:20 156:18

notes 28:19,2234:3,8 153:21155:2,4

nothing 31:1137:17

notice 1:17 61:14

noticed 20:20

November 281:21

numerator 146:3

numerical 238:14

nutrition 110:4

nutritional171:3,6

Ooath 8:19,21 10:2

149:7

object 11:10,1819:20 69:19197:10 239:1266:19 268:3

objection 11:1917:14,19 24:6,1825:4,9 26:7 33:135:13 37:2038:2,11,16,2140:18 43:1344:21 45:846:7,15 47:17,1848:4 49:17 52:1153:4,1855:1,10,2156:6,14 57:1558:2 59:18 60:1363:21 65:9 66:567:3,22 68:1472:15,21 73:2176:5 79:280:1,2,17 81:182:1,7 83:3,1084:1,16 85:8,2086:17 95:3,1296:22 97:15 98:6105:12 109:18110:1,5,9 111:7112:15 113:3114:9 115:12,21116:6 119:4,7120:19 121:12122:1,7,14123:5,17


Page 30


© 2010

124:1,6,12,21125:16 126:13127:12130:2,9,15 132:9133:21 134:20139:12 144:15145:8 146:17148:1 157:1,8158:15 160:19162:9 164:8,14171:9 175:18176:19178:2,14,21182:9,22 183:9189:21193:6,10,13194:4,12,22197:9 198:11199:6 206:19207:17,22208:7,18209:6,17 210:17211:12 212:9213:7 214:3,12215:1,22 216:12217:1,17 218:9219:7 220:7222:11,22223:18 224:13225:7,17226:5,17 227:17228:6,12 230:6,9231:21 235:1,8236:15 237:11238:10240:11,20241:6,15242:7,19 243:17246:13 247:17251:8,20252:5,22253:9,20254:9,22 255:17256:5 257:11,17

258:6 260:20261:7,20265:5,15 266:1267:6,14 268:14269:2,8,16270:2,12271:3,19 272:14273:1,16 274:3

objective 20:462:17 107:21138:16,19144:11 155:20211:7 262:1

objects 11:19

obligation 177:21

oblige 152:4

obtain 115:4 138:8165:11,19 224:8

obtained 14:16166:15

obtaining 108:11123:11

obvious 157:11

obviously 8:2275:2 280:1

occasions 59:13218:12

occurrence 226:10

offer 188:2

offered 187:22

office 5:11

officer 281:2

officers 255:8

offices 1:1751:11,12 54:1476:18 118:17120:7 152:20

173:9

official 169:17188:4

officially 41:5

off-site 127:17

Oh 11:14 107:3131:17 136:1

oil 24:425:2,8,14,1726:4 40:12,14108:21 151:4,8158:10196:1,5,11 197:6198:10199:11,12201:21 202:21203:12 211:8212:5 213:2,10214:22 215:20216:19,22220:22 224:7,18225:5 226:3227:16228:18,20229:16 230:4,20232:22 237:16240:19 241:3261:6,11 267:12270:6

Okay 7:13,208:7,11,15,169:22 10:12 11:712:6 27:15 56:1778:20 84:1386:21 87:16 88:1100:2 107:20108:13111:3,13,16114:21 128:10136:3 137:12140:9 142:20

150:19 151:13152:5 154:7155:10,18 157:5159:7,12 160:16162:6 165:4166:7 167:16168:2,6 172:17182:19 199:5,14204:10205:18,19209:5,11 221:14243:6 252:10254:12 266:15274:19 278:14279:22

old 247:19

older 244:11

one-and-a-half-hour 113:8

ones 176:21

ongoing 265:4,21267:4

on-site 127:18138:18

open 16:3 65:10116:8

operate 196:11

operated196:14,18 197:7198:10 199:10205:12

operates 196:1

operating203:21,22214:6,10

operation 200:14216:19 227:16229:16 230:5265:9


Page 31


© 2010

operations 159:9164:6 201:22202:21 203:12210:16 211:9212:6 214:18216:19,22217:13,15,16218:8 221:1226:4 240:19241:4264:9,14,15274:16

opine 203:14210:2

opining 200:9205:14

opinion 9:20166:10

opinions 67:20204:19,20205:13

opportunity 37:14185:11

opposed 175:15214:2 220:4244:21 248:18261:6 272:21

optimal 231:4

option 125:21127:7,11

oral 1:16

Orange 150:20,22151:5

order 10:12 48:858:6 64:20 88:693:1 98:5 107:14110:21 111:3134:18 136:13144:11 161:8204:17 210:6

226:1 236:8238:8 255:13

Orellana 91:13102:9 104:11106:1 108:2142:11 196:12212:21219:12,15220:4,11,16,21221:18 222:8,9223:6,17 232:22244:3 247:1,16263:21

organization21:16 31:22 32:2126:20 146:20166:8,16 244:8247:22248:15,22 250:2

organs 260:8

Oriente 39:1865:18 134:5159:9,15,21160:3 164:5171:3 189:7195:15,18210:15 211:4219:20 220:5223:9 254:15274:14

original 283:9,13

originally 30:18

originate 226:21

originated170:5,14 237:15

O'Rourke 233:11

others 207:5

otherwise 33:5246:10 281:12

outcome 100:20184:5,10,16281:12

outcomes 151:5,8257:10 258:2

outgoing 28:17

outline 106:4,16107:2,5,14,18110:13112:2,4,8,17113:17,19114:2,3 128:15137:13,22168:12

outlined 262:14

Outlook 28:13

outs 117:18

outside 198:15,22199:15

overall 231:8257:20

overseas21:11,17,19

overwhelming99:3

Pp.m 59:3 102:6

104:7 105:17131:10 133:15137:9 148:6149:2 153:16167:11 191:1,4206:6 221:6,10249:9,14262:19,22280:5,8

PACU 42:21

page 3:2,5,22 4:1

19:3,727:15,16,22 28:156:8 107:7,9,11141:8 149:15154:2 155:19,20161:18,22169:11 174:8179:17,20,22180:1,11,12181:22 182:1212:17,20218:15 221:15223:12 224:4225:12 231:3232:17,18 238:2248:14,16249:20 251:7252:13 253:15258:12 262:7283:9,13 284:9

pages 33:19 34:6247:5 274:21282:6

PAHO 166:7,9

paid 183:14,17,20

Pan 21:16 32:242:16 166:8

Paolo 186:15

paper 33:9,21 34:380:10

paragraph 144:10164:22165:2,10,17,18,21 215:9 231:6

paragraphs155:14 156:10161:21168:13,16169:13

parentheses


Page 32


© 2010

250:15,16

Park 279:8

participant 255:13

participate 21:17

participated 42:2143:21 121:2

participation49:14

particles 229:19

particular 13:122:15 28:18 35:738:1,5 42:4 46:248:12 65:170:8,20 89:1090:19112:3,13,18153:1 158:8159:16 172:21177:15 206:17215:16 221:15223:22 253:2259:17 263:20271:15 276:14

particularly 41:2264:9 241:21

particulate70:12,17

parties 1:2257:13,19 281:10

partners 131:18

party 79:17

passed 14:18,19

password 32:7

past 60:8

paste 180:11

pasted 139:10

pathway

229:12,15

patient 14:7,2215:7

pattern 25:21

Patton 2:11 6:9,1217:8 27:12184:15 283:1

paying 16:21185:6 256:2

PDF 33:17 34:2144:6

pending 5:8 199:3

people 8:3,11 31:840:21 52:19 53:170:16 91:16108:20,22134:10,14 135:3146:5 152:6157:21 162:13164:1,2 193:21195:6 212:21224:8,20 230:3239:9,16 263:20267:13 268:18269:14,21270:11 273:18

peoples 227:9

people's 171:18

per 92:21 126:1,11127:22 128:6,19129:6,7 130:6136:20 141:5146:12,15,22147:1,7,12,19149:16 154:22164:21 165:7,17166:11,21222:17 232:10242:17 243:16244:2,15 245:18

246:22247:15,22 249:1250:2,9,13,14,20251:5,6,17252:1,14 253:12271:12

percent 169:18221:18,19 223:4245:5,8,13,15,17246:1,5

percentages221:22

perfect 138:3,7

perform 236:7

performed 234:8

performing 189:2

period 34:18150:5,8 240:6

permanently170:11,19

permit 200:2205:20

person 74:1875:12 77:5,2278:2 147:12186:11 191:21

personal 50:16,18228:14 229:3260:22

personally 185:16224:11

pertain 66:15

pertained 55:6

pertaining 35:655:5 70:13 97:6109:12 111:1140:4 226:11244:13

pertains 276:14

pertinent 34:766:1,4 115:5196:9,10 261:22

Peter 2:4 5:20 7:7197:11 199:21203:2 210:11215:2 283:14,20

Petitioner 1:6,162:3 3:3 283:14

Petroecuador40:11 196:17197:6 214:9264:9 265:14,17269:6 274:16

petroleum 24:125:14,17,2126:3,11,15 53:354:7 111:5147:10,21195:22 226:16230:4,18 231:20261:5

petroleum-based260:6,18

pharmacology23:14

phone 29:439:9,12,16 79:10173:17 190:7

phonetic 229:7

physical 258:19

physically 33:9173:16

physician 14:1742:2 134:11

physiology 23:13

Picone 1:8,15 3:65:6,7 6:17 7:4,5


Page 33


© 2010

58:12 63:3 68:1971:7 98:12 101:6106:11 112:1116:21 131:4133:10 137:6153:11 167:5174:13 191:7197:14 198:15200:8,9 206:9263:3 275:15276:8 279:14280:9 282:4,22283:4,8 284:6,7

P-I-C-O-N-E 7:5

Picone's 197:18200:1,12

pictures 121:19

placed 250:4

plaintiff 15:2117:7 79:7 85:15106:19 264:3273:4

plaintiffs 6:11,1313:817:3,8,11,1718:4 19:18 40:1345:17 53:13,1770:5,8 72:3 80:682:22 83:9,2085:18 86:3,4,5119:8 120:2185:21 189:17206:9,11,13,16207:10,13,15208:5 263:16,18264:1 267:4272:17,18,22273:4,7 274:2

plaintiff's 13:9,11

Planet 228:21

play 52:7 83:1

Plaza 2:11 283:2

please 5:18 6:157:2 12:13 19:521:14 27:21,2287:17 99:22161:19 198:15199:18 212:1,16254:2 256:21283:7,12,15

plugged 143:2

pluses 255:2

pneumonia 14:9

point 11:9 47:1048:6 52:17 62:779:19 80:3 97:1099:3,17 108:8112:12134:19,22142:21 168:12175:5 197:10244:18 276:2279:20

pointing 134:18

points 60:5 70:21225:13,14

police 255:8

policy 20:15129:18

politicians 122:10

population 18:1020:3 22:1524:10,14 25:2226:10,1473:17,20 74:8,1178:15 90:1791:6,19 92:1193:14,20 105:18107:16

108:16,17,18109:3,12,15126:6,12 128:6130:7 136:20141:5,10142:11,18146:5,6 147:20156:19 159:8,15163:20 171:6186:14 191:18210:15 218:21219:20 220:21221:18 222:1227:22 228:3230:15 232:21234:11 235:20236:19 237:7238:1,8,15,21239:5,8,15240:1,18241:2,5,11,14242:5,16245:9,21,22246:1,10252:4,8,15,21255:10 261:19264:12,13 265:1267:20 268:13269:1 270:21271:2,13273:18,22274:1,13

populations169:19 170:8,17217:2 219:12,15236:14 261:14273:20

population's 109:5

portion 141:19144:19 175:10223:22 226:20

portions 175:9

position 94:18128:18 129:8151:3,7 159:18160:1 275:3276:1,6 280:1

possible 12:1785:4 176:11,13230:1 248:11276:21

possibly 39:2041:10 179:13226:16 227:1

post-1990 264:14

post-anesthesia42:22

potable 223:5

potential 145:4157:17 160:8168:19 169:5,13270:8 271:1

potentially 35:1240:2 46:21 49:1854:18 60:6 64:1165:3 68:7 70:1778:16 92:1 93:1198:7 108:20110:14 115:4210:9 217:4228:3 229:19241:17 248:7253:13 255:15258:10 259:8265:2 266:17267:13268:18,19269:4,15,18,21271:5 273:13,17279:11

poverty 221:19,20222:1,7,9,20


Page 34


© 2010

PPP 250:15,18

practice 9:1821:3,7 23:2234:17,20 35:3263:9

pre-1990 264:14

precise 142:19

precisely 28:1073:4

predicated 210:14216:9

predict 231:8

premarked 5:2

premise 200:13

prenatal 147:16

preparation 36:437:13

prepare 35:1936:17,21 37:1739:20 95:18

prepared 55:3,960:9 93:4 176:22

preparing 153:2

presence 122:13199:1 222:19

present 1:22 2:1536:15 65:3 90:1091:22 118:19127:19 143:18152:5 157:13173:11,16 196:5219:14 228:20230:21 247:3

presented 51:14

press 44:11,12,15

presume 265:8

presuming 158:6

pretty 124:14141:22 155:9172:22

prevalent219:11,14,19220:3

prevent 227:7

prevented 243:10

preventive 22:19226:9

previous 45:2199:5 225:20

previously 69:6141:1 253:18

prima 242:1

primarily 21:22

primary 134:11

print 281:7

printed 33:3,778:6

prior 24:8 69:5175:5 232:14

private 23:2132:21

privilege122:17,21

privileged 69:22119:12 123:8

privy 176:13 265:9

pro 21:18 42:19

probably 39:1043:22 55:1271:20 97:4110:18 161:5180:17 181:8190:13 210:5

245:12,15259:13

problem 245:19

proceeding 9:1658:14

proceedings 9:1337:9

process 10:1 12:1835:11 45:1087:21 88:2,17188:12 227:10

procure 170:10,19

procuring 113:22

produce 28:2229:3,15 30:10,1262:8,19 98:5100:14 103:12104:2 275:16276:20 277:2,9

produced 28:2,6,929:19 30:15,1831:4,15 33:2234:2 49:12 58:14172:1 181:1,11202:19 275:1,2276:13

producing 49:4

product 48:949:16 62:20 88:794:5 95:17136:14 151:18156:8 161:9,12163:14 165:22172:5 173:2180:5 196:17235:3

production 25:1826:4 196:1201:21 202:21221:1 226:4

227:16 228:19229:16 230:4233:1 241:3

products 158:11261:5

professional263:13

professionals60:19,20

proffer 199:22

prognosis 14:12

program 81:18223:13 224:6225:12 257:15262:10,14

programs 150:15

progress 86:16123:10,12266:13,16,21

project 29:11,1246:2 48:12,1749:13 50:6,1353:8,20 54:2065:19 66:13,1967:16 72:14,2086:8,13,14 93:694:9 96:17117:11,18 119:6139:18,21,22185:8 189:2233:9 271:7

projected 149:17

projection 240:9247:11

projections 232:21235:20 239:21

projects 64:3,7,8101:21


Page 35


© 2010

promised 11:13

proof 225:2 227:4260:22

proper 48:8,1060:16 227:11236:6

properly 227:11

proposal 61:3,9,1566:22

propose 258:3

proposed 81:17108:14,15 109:4110:12 112:4129:1 132:2,5136:19 155:20207:4 223:12224:5 225:11

pros 135:4

protected 32:7

protracted 45:10

provide 9:20 14:533:21 42:18,2272:10 73:8 76:488:12 90:18107:22 108:9113:19 138:20147:13,20 161:7201:12 217:11232:6 253:4

provided 14:1132:8,12,2233:3,5,7,20 36:654:16,21 60:2171:8 73:7 75:2092:17 116:9,21123:3,15,21131:5 149:21150:1 153:11158:22 170:21181:6 185:13

201:10 202:1213:4,18 215:7216:8 222:6246:19 253:5

provider 134:12

provides 211:10212:7 258:13262:8

providing 9:1714:22 40:2152:19 53:22 62:464:22 66:8132:22133:3,4,18 134:4182:13 203:17207:13,16257:20

province104:17,18221:18 222:9

provinces 102:8104:6,8,14,16106:1 142:12144:8 169:19222:14,15223:5,7 234:13245:4,10 247:7272:1,20 273:15

proximity 91:2092:7 108:18109:1 216:18,21270:17


public 1:20 20:1431:21 220:15,17281:1,15

publication234:17 260:10

publicly 246:20

pulmonary 21:2

pulmonologist21:1 71:2

Puno 279:5

purpose 76:2280:19 113:16145:19

purposes 228:1230:15 231:18276:3

pursuant 1:17

pursuing208:12,13

putting 161:10

Qquadruple

253:7,13

qualifications46:11 47:21,22

qualified 13:147:16

qualify 224:1

quality 94:5

question 7:6 8:1210:2211:10,11,12,19,21 12:1,5,8,1416:12 46:8,1648:5 70:1672:16,22 79:383:4,11 84:285:10,12 86:18112:6 114:4122:15,21128:1,22130:10,18,19132:10 133:22134:21 136:4

139:13 144:16145:9 146:18148:2 157:2,9158:16 160:20162:10 164:9,15169:4 171:10175:20176:2,11,20178:3,15,22182:10,11189:22 193:13194:3,7,9,13199:3,11200:18,22206:20 207:7,8208:1,8,19209:20,22211:13 212:2213:8 214:4215:2 219:13220:8 222:12223:1,19225:8,18226:6,18 227:18228:7,13 230:10232:2 235:2,12236:16 237:12238:18,19 239:2240:21 241:7,16242:4,10,12243:4 246:14247:18 251:10253:22 254:1255:1,18 256:6257:12,18,22260:21 261:8,21266:20 267:7,15268:4,15,17269:3,9,17270:13 271:4,20273:2

questioning 84:585:2 197:10


Page 36


© 2010

198:3 200:1,3,7201:3 204:8205:20

questionnaires128:17

questions10:3,5,15 11:712:18 24:1937:16 38:6,9,1049:10 57:9105:11 128:16129:3 136:13140:1 188:12197:21 201:5,14202:20203:4,6,8,10204:6,15,22205:3 212:10,11234:2275:3,7,17,20276:6,7278:3,8,15279:11,13283:15

quick 7:6

quickly 12:17

quite 18:18 33:1857:2 82:11 87:20117:16 186:10216:3 226:12227:1 249:3253:1 259:6,7

Quito 42:18195:17 273:19

Rrain 226:20,22

rainfall 227:1

raise 105:10 177:9279:20

raised 105:11202:7

ran 45:6

range 151:8231:8,19

rate 117:19 164:1248:18,19 249:4250:21251:18,19,21

rates 166:18

rather 13:9 86:4

rational 242:11,12

RE 283:4

reach 67:20,21159:7,14 171:17188:11

reached 276:22

reaction 137:1

reading 51:7 56:1257:7 80:21 82:9161:14

reads 162:1 170:8212:21 224:6231:7 260:5262:9

real 146:6

realistic 94:4

realize 275:16

realized 88:13

really 42:20 49:253:7,8 55:662:16 65:12,1775:13 82:12 86:9104:5 127:21128:13 150:10159:3 190:14191:20 193:19213:13 214:6

217:10 232:4267:8 268:17274:15

reask 203:6

reason 7:20 9:115:22 150:12176:6 215:17230:11 232:7237:13,20239:14 277:2,9278:2

reasonable 258:14262:8

reasons 66:1 99:17150:10 221:2232:5

recall 27:10 34:1244:12 45:18,1946:1,17 51:1553:5 56:760:7,15 61:1262:16 68:9 71:2072:4,1774:4,5,6,19,2076:2,2078:5,11,1479:9,10,13 81:1183:16 85:10,1386:19 90:1 92:396:3 97:3,8 98:799:14102:14,15,17103:2,13,20104:11 105:4114:8,10 118:20119:9,22120:10,16,22121:5 122:18123:9 124:7,22125:2,3 128:8151:16,19152:9,17,22

154:12 156:15160:21 161:1,3162:11,13170:14 172:2173:6,10,15,19174:18 180:19186:1,21 187:11192:3 194:10233:18 247:2,10278:22

receipt 283:12

receive 91:5,15184:2 208:6

received 35:898:14 125:13164:19 233:22245:5,17 246:4253:2 254:13,18274:19

recent 13:13 147:6248:9

recently 13:21274:22

recess 76:13111:19 148:9191:3 206:5221:9 249:11262:21

recognize 18:12,1826:21,22 50:258:15 63:5 68:2189:16 96:2 98:19100:16 106:12107:9 116:22121:15,17125:11 131:6137:19 153:12154:3 167:6

recognized 90:2

recognizing 82:13


Page 37


© 2010

recollection100:19 103:15121:9 152:1

record 5:18 7:311:20 76:12,1584:22 87:17107:3 111:18,21119:12 130:22131:2 148:8149:3 169:1,10183:12 191:2,5198:14,19,22199:16,20206:4,7 221:8,11224:2 230:8249:6,10,15,17254:3 262:20263:1 279:18

records 9:19 29:470:6 152:18

recover 34:14,22

recovery 42:21

redacted 30:19

reduce 264:22

reduced 281:7

reference 223:6,10247:12 248:12260:15 277:19

referenced 247:4

references154:13,15163:12,13 222:6234:17

referred 42:5187:5

referring 44:1588:18102:12,18,21104:6 114:19

163:9,11 172:17201:18 216:21248:14

refers 223:8 261:4

refine 139:1

refined 25:14141:18 142:21261:5 270:22

reflect 50:12117:10 184:1238:2

reflects 142:2144:13 188:9

reflux 257:6

reformatted156:12

refrain 159:5

refresh 152:1

refreshing 61:12

regard 15:1017:22 35:3 38:155:20 78:1584:12 166:2242:4 244:11259:9

regarding 37:941:11 43:16,1844:6 60:1761:4,7 91:5,1993:13 163:1178:8 192:5207:19 283:10

region 39:19 40:2142:3 52:2053:2,22 54:165:1,18 104:10132:22 134:6,14142:16 159:21160:3 165:12,20

195:15,18196:12,15 197:7211:4 214:7,10215:15,19217:12 219:20220:12,17222:2,13,15,21223:9,10,22224:19 226:16227:9,15244:9,15 253:2261:15,19267:19 268:1270:7 271:15,22272:10 274:15276:19 278:5,6279:6

regions 129:7142:14 222:1,7223:16 237:16244:13 268:19

registered 255:21

regular 22:1786:15

reiterate 205:8

rejected 188:2

related 19:1728:17 29:4,8,1534:11,13 53:1104:9 110:14111:6 146:2158:7 197:22201:3 231:9281:10

relates 275:19

relationship 53:15263:15

relationships264:3

relatively 88:15

161:16

release44:11,13,15

releases 26:11,15

relevance 199:22200:4

relevant 86:13123:4

reliable 154:16240:1 276:21

reliance 275:18

relied 33:19246:19

rely 58:7 60:1281:3,5,7 84:786:9 169:19224:20

remain 31:10

remainder 220:4

remediated 264:19

remediation264:22265:3,8,13,20,21266:3,10,13,16,21 267:5

remember 58:461:13 66:7 75:1796:4 103:1,6104:10,13 120:2127:1 151:17155:11 172:3177:10 222:4,5

remind 24:20

reminded 214:17

reminds 174:21

renal 14:8

reparation 40:13


Page 38


© 2010

repeat 212:1219:13

replicate 81:5

report 3:6 18:133:4,8,12,1334:4,7 39:2141:2,10 44:1746:18 49:4,754:4,16,2155:3,9,1356:9,11,1857:2,4,6,7,1158:3,4,6,8 59:1560:7,12 61:16,2062:2,8 67:5,9,1068:13 74:21,2275:12 78:2279:1,4,7,12,13,15,2280:4,10,15,2181:4,5,8,11,1782:5,10,1583:7,8,22 84:7,885:5,1486:2,6,9,1087:22 88:1389:3,1492:6,10,15 98:5100:14,17102:9,12,13,15,19,22 103:7,16,21104:21105:7,9,22106:17,19107:2,14,19,22108:9,11 110:22114:7 122:12123:4,10,12,16,22 124:20 129:10132:1,5 138:9140:10,18,22141:19143:3,6,18,22

144:3,4 147:18153:3 154:9,11155:12,15157:12,16 159:1161:12,14166:21 167:20171:1 172:15,20173:4,8 174:7175:2,7,8,9,11,16 176:18177:7,13179:15,21180:6,13,16182:2,4,19 183:8184:19 187:20188:7,13,16189:10 191:9,13192:1,4,6,11193:4,20,22194:3,11 196:21197:4,18,20,22198:3200:1,4,5,8,12,15201:4,6,12,16,18,21202:1,16,18,19203:16,17204:3,6,8,16,18205:2,16206:12,15207:9,11,12208:16209:9,14,17210:2,13211:3,10,17212:7,17,20216:9,20218:1,6,15223:4,11 224:4,6230:16,22231:3,19232:9,18233:8,15 234:1

236:13 237:10238:2 244:12,14247:6,8 248:13249:21 250:11251:7252:2,13,19253:16 257:16258:4,8,12259:21 260:4,5262:6,15264:6,7,11,17,21266:15 267:10268:1,21 270:9271:11,17 272:5275:19

reported 246:6

reporter 5:15 6:15230:8 254:3

Reporter/Notary283:19

Reporting 1:205:16 284:1

reports 43:16,1844:6 56:2 59:1273:5,9 79:1783:18 85:16,1991:22 162:22163:5 175:12,15177:3,5 187:17191:15

report's 80:20

represent 5:1917:2 85:13

representation17:10,11

represented 16:1083:16

representing 5:2157:12 185:21

represents 17:7

reproductive260:9

reputable 244:6

request 18:1 41:981:4 152:17154:22 243:20249:17 271:21272:9,12

requested 36:779:15 187:3210:5,6 215:8230:8 254:3272:17

requesting 79:17

requests 215:8,11

require 68:7252:17

required 15:9 48:969:21 138:8178:19 226:2

requirements178:12 182:20

requires 48:12178:7

Res 256:19

research 25:7,1345:16 64:20 72:988:14 101:22162:17,19

researching117:16

reservations177:15

residence 273:14

resident 23:16,17

resolve 275:21


Page 39


© 2010

resolved 16:4

resources 253:4

respect 197:19

respective 1:22

respiratory15:13,15 257:5,7

respond 46:13

Respondent 1:92:9

Responders 255:8

response 28:648:15,16100:8,15 102:5105:16 106:20133:17

responsible283:10

responsive 28:1131:14

rest 154:20

result 15:19 24:1440:14 53:2 147:9164:6 220:22231:20 266:17

resulted 49:16110:17 215:20237:1

resulting 200:14

results 80:22151:4

retained 9:1545:17 46:2,5213:18

retention 16:1845:20

retread 202:8

returned 23:19

reveal 69:21119:12 123:7

review 9:19 39:1940:1 61:9 65:6113:17 115:15140:15 142:10162:22 166:9173:8 174:7177:20 183:6261:13 279:12280:2

reviewed 70:5132:18 140:3163:4 171:1278:16

reviewing 57:1176:18,22 115:19116:3

Richard55:8,11,16 192:8

Richmond 23:19

right-hand 237:2

rings 78:19 186:9

risk 73:17,2074:8,11 78:1693:11 107:16108:16,17,18109:3 141:10146:5,6 191:18273:18,20,22274:13

Riverfront 2:11283:2

Robert 186:15

Roche 51:16,19,2154:19 69:3,1387:1 88:20,2294:1 96:1,13

98:3,14,21 99:2113:12,14118:22 119:2120:10 131:9,22132:4,16133:12,13 134:3137:8 139:7140:11,12,20150:16,18 152:7153:17154:20,22 155:3156:2,5,17157:20 158:8,17160:14,16161:22 162:7,19163:4 164:19165:1,21 167:10168:21 169:7,8170:5,15 173:14174:16 175:1176:10,15177:10 224:16225:15 253:18259:2 260:14

Roche's 87:4133:17 155:4158:12 164:12

role 19:22 40:1652:7 54:6 55:1957:22 80:1481:20 83:1 97:11154:18 189:14191:8,12

rolled 94:10

room 42:22

roots 224:21

rotation 276:18

rotations 277:3279:5

Rourke 78:16,18186:8

187:1,2,7,10,14

R-O-U-R-K-E78:18

row 250:13,20251:2

RPR 1:19 283:19

rudimentary132:18 137:2

Rule 204:17

rules 10:13 177:20178:1

ruminate 162:12

run 44:19

rural 134:10276:18 279:5

Ssample 189:3

sampling 189:3

sanitation109:12,16 164:2

saw 75:14 144:4180:18 188:10232:14 247:20

scanners 276:15

Scardina 186:15

Scarola 51:1752:2,3,4 54:1969:15 88:21 89:198:22 101:8,14102:2 106:16107:2 113:12,18114:6 115:2116:5 118:22119:1125:8,14,19131:9 137:8147:2 152:14,15


Page 40


© 2010

167:10173:14,16

Scarola's 101:19105:16

scenario 145:22

scheduled 120:8

Schmitt 2:4 5:22

scientific 87:14102:3 129:22164:4 178:18179:6 183:7236:12 238:7

scope 53:7 97:12100:17 161:5,12189:9197:13,16,17200:4 201:4202:12,13,16204:3 205:1,4,16227:20 271:7

seal 227:6,11

sealing 227:11

search 28:11100:16 116:8179:9

searched 29:14

searches 44:1945:6

second 10:1813:18 14:115:5,7 89:4111:12 131:1141:8 197:14

seconds 199:20206:4

section 28:1,3108:13 132:1,5140:19143:3,5,14

144:10145:3,5,7,12146:10,11,13149:15150:13,14,15,19156:2,6,16,22157:6,16 160:8164:18,20,22165:5,6,9,16166:11,12,14168:6,10,19169:4,6,13218:15,17221:16,17 224:5225:11 231:3,6232:9,13 233:15234:1,3,6,14,19235:7 237:6253:16 254:13258:13,14,16262:6,7,9

sedatives 15:1

seeking 169:20203:10 205:5

seem 13:11103:1,20 104:8160:15 185:5225:19 246:8,15

seems 99:3 106:18

seen 18:18 27:5,1928:2,5,832:15,16 43:18164:2 170:8,17187:16,20,22188:17 192:22213:9,10,11,12224:19 250:7276:5,13 277:13

selected 83:17274:1

Seley 2:4 5:20

6:2,5,217:9,15,188:4,9,13,1717:15 18:7 19:2124:7,20,2225:5,11 26:8,1933:6 35:14 37:2138:4,13,18 39:241:6 43:1445:5,15 46:1247:1 48:1,1449:22 52:1253:10 54:555:7,1556:3,10,16 57:1658:11 59:20 61:263:2 64:13 65:1566:17 67:768:2,18 70:971:6 72:18 73:1074:9 76:8,1679:18 80:8,1881:6 82:3,2183:6,1984:10,13,15,1985:6,9,22 86:2095:8,21 97:998:2,11 101:5103:18 105:15106:10 109:20110:3,7,11111:9,12,16,22112:22 113:5114:13,20,22115:13116:2,10,20119:5,15,20121:4,14122:4,11,22123:13,19124:3,8,18125:1,17 127:5128:4130:4,12,22

131:3 132:12133:9 134:2135:7 137:5139:14 143:10144:21 145:11146:21 148:4149:5 153:10157:4,15 158:18160:22 162:16164:10,17 167:4171:13 174:12176:1 177:6178:5,17 179:2182:18 183:5,13190:3,21 191:6193:8,14194:8,15 195:9198:4,17,20199:3,7,8,17200:6,12201:7,20202:9,13,17203:3,7204:4,7,10,13205:3,6,18206:1,8 207:6,20208:3,15209:4,8,11,13,20210:3,12,21211:16,19212:4,15 213:14214:8,19 215:10216:5,16 217:14218:5,14 219:10220:9 221:4,13222:18 223:3224:3225:3,10,22226:14227:13,21228:9,16 229:9230:13 232:8235:5,9,16,18236:18 237:19


Page 41


© 2010

238:13 239:3240:14241:1,9,18242:14 243:3,22246:16 249:6,19251:11,22 252:9253:6,14254:1,4,11 255:5256:1,12257:14,21 258:7261:2,10262:2,17 263:2265:11,19 266:8267:2,9,21268:7,20269:5,12,19270:4,19 271:9272:2,7,19273:10,21274:4,11,19275:12 276:4277:7,11,15,16278:14,17279:10,22283:14,20

self-explanatory109:2 112:11157:3,5

send 33:16 35:963:19 102:5106:4 179:21180:18

sending 96:4,13

sends 107:3

senior 131:17

sense 75:21 168:8215:16 242:2

sent 28:1734:21,22 35:159:2 61:3,963:8,13 65:7

69:2 96:7 97:1098:3 99:11 107:5114:6,14 115:2116:4 127:20138:21 139:6140:15,20141:15 147:1,4150:15,18154:21 160:14168:20 169:7171:22 174:8180:1,5,6,19181:4,10 253:17

sentence 87:1688:16 89:4 94:6107:20 126:3135:21 136:6141:9 144:22145:1 157:21158:4 162:1163:7 169:16,22170:2,6,7,12212:20 213:3218:17 219:2224:5,11 225:13231:7 258:16259:1260:11,13,18262:9

sentences 125:18260:4

separate 71:2179:12 103:1,8175:3,12,15176:3 177:2,5180:1 264:7

separately103:4,19 179:22180:2

sepsis 14:10

September 3:17

18:17 50:8117:5,8,12118:12 121:11125:8 131:10133:15 137:9141:15151:12,15,22153:16 167:11171:22172:2,7,10,18,22173:11,12174:1,2,17179:16,17180:9,12225:15,16233:20,21254:13,18

series 63:4 125:7161:21

serious 122:10

served 27:2,12

services 9:17

SESSION 149:1

several 54:3 55:499:16 136:11200:18 207:1209:19,22214:16

shaking 10:15

shaman134:12,13,16

shamans 162:3164:3,13 169:19

share 47:11 99:14

shared 14:14 18:358:3 114:11

sheet 103:1,8173:22 282:9283:13

Shefftz 186:17

she's 10:6 87:13101:20 127:17

shirk 94:4

shook 78:1 124:9

short 76:13 87:21111:10,19 191:3206:5 221:9249:11 262:21

shorter 120:16

shortly 97:21

sic 233:11 250:5

sides 45:11

sign 17:9,21

signature 174:8179:17,20,21180:1,2,6,11,12,19 181:4 182:1,8188:15,19283:9,11,13284:22

signed 45:21 67:10179:21 181:22201:12 233:15282:9 283:13

significant 81:15

significantly236:20 241:4

signing 45:19 46:1

similar 65:1797:12,19 166:15222:9

similarities 65:466:16

simple 68:6

single 160:6175:15 239:9


Page 42


© 2010

sir 6:22 8:18 9:826:20,21 27:1728:3 50:2,1858:15 61:5 63:568:21 85:1089:11 90:11 96:2117:1 125:9131:6,12137:14,19138:13 139:15141:12 145:17146:13 149:13150:20 151:16153:13,17 154:3156:3 157:18158:2 162:4165:13167:7,14,20168:8,17169:14,22170:6,13 171:14174:18 179:18198:5 199:9210:4 211:20213:3,6 219:2225:6,16232:11,15,18233:2 243:5245:20 248:20250:6,11 251:12254:5,7 258:21260:11 262:12

sit 31:13 57:17150:7 178:6188:6 208:4222:4 241:10251:16

site 91:17,20241:12

sites 92:8 228:19229:16 230:5240:17 242:6

264:19,22

sitting 75:18 76:7

situation 14:1360:17 65:2197:17 109:14110:19 146:8226:8 254:14275:11,22

situational 88:889:20 94:15

situations 140:2,3229:1

six 36:10

skewed 248:7

skimmed 80:12

skin 260:9

sleeves 94:10

slightly 243:4

small 27:11 88:1591:10 144:19

smaller 241:4

so-called 75:4

Society 21:1742:17

solicitation 276:15

somebody 15:827:11 47:8 73:1578:11 179:4182:12 235:10

somehow 14:2185:14,15

someone 33:880:21 103:4,9219:4 234:8

sometime 59:22

sorry 7:7 8:18 15:2

107:4 109:10131:4 132:2138:12 143:11152:15 153:19161:1 166:20167:22 170:6181:15 230:7240:15 245:15256:20 278:20279:4

sort 66:8 91:4107:17 110:19144:7 199:22217:9

sounds 242:2

source 229:5

sources 31:22 49:160:6,11,15 61:2262:12 82:14 88:594:8,11 99:18100:22179:10,11,14181:14 224:22226:12 227:2229:2 230:12241:22 244:7276:22

South 21:20,2122:1

Spanish 41:275:10 76:377:4,17,19,2078:2 104:22187:20 188:7,16189:1 247:5

speak 8:22 12:675:10 77:19,2078:2 97:3 209:18235:17

speaking 10:18

84:15 85:8

speaks 97:1127:12,15260:21

special 15:9

specialist 5:15

specific 17:20,2126:2 45:19 64:1465:19,20 66:1096:3 97:8 128:21140:9 152:2166:11256:18,22257:3,10 258:2

specifically 40:1957:9 69:3 74:582:10,16 91:13114:10 115:6144:6 154:17162:14

specifics 13:1950:20 99:14151:19 161:3162:11

speculate 209:3,7210:11219:17,22 236:4268:16

speculation209:5,10 210:9

spell 7:2

spend 35:22 43:2118:8 182:12

spending 126:20136:20 244:15246:22 247:15

spent 50:13,14115:18 116:15117:11,13,16


Page 43


© 2010

118:10

spills 268:22 269:7270:6

spiritual 169:20

spoke 125:20127:6 186:22

spoken 126:15192:15 254:6

spreadsheet 77:11187:4

staffing 66:10

stand 108:6182:16

standard 95:11,14

standards 183:6

stands 120:4

start 132:2 272:5

starting 132:13223:12 253:15

starts 165:9

state 7:2 84:21,2285:1 104:18119:11 218:16221:16278:5,12,13

stated 144:11197:18 211:14217:21

statement 158:20159:4,6 164:12170:22 231:11239:22 277:8279:17

States 1:1 5:8185:9

statistician 23:4,7

statistics 114:7

status 222:20

stay 86:10 198:14248:11

stayed 23:17195:17

stenographically281:7

step 198:15 199:15

Steven 189:12

stock 184:6,7

stop 267:4

stopped 214:18

stopping 266:16

story 45:11

Stratus 194:17,20195:3

stream 8:10

streamed 7:14,168:8

streaming 7:21

streams 75:20

Street 118:18

strike 32:19 67:1585:7 151:2 194:1258:11

striking 135:10

string 30:434:15,22 59:1

strings 49:10

studies 23:225:16,2026:3,9,13261:14,18

studying 92:12

stuff 202:10

subcontract71:12,15 185:13

subcontractor3:12 71:9

subcontractors185:17

subheadings 80:4

subject 28:18 38:172:9 88:14 102:1

submit 18:20 19:241:2 50:15

submitted18:15,20,21 29:941:3,4 48:1750:5 54:2 78:2281:10 163:1172:15 173:3175:13 188:8247:6

submitting 79:8116:1 141:19182:4

subpoena 3:727:1,7,9,13 28:731:14

subsections 55:4177:14

substance24:11,1752:13,14 60:3,461:19,20 68:3100:11 122:12149:10 152:22

substances 255:16

substantial 155:7

substantive124:19 174:2

substrates 228:20230:20

succinct 161:17

Sucumbios 91:12102:9 104:11106:1 108:2142:11 196:12212:21219:12,15220:4,11,16,21221:20 222:8,10223:6,17 232:22244:3 247:1,16263:21

sued 13:3 14:20

suggest 38:5,847:12

suggested 125:21126:21 127:7,11240:8,10

suggesting 257:16

suggests 128:2

supply 171:19

support 14:1654:18 80:1581:21 88:20 95:6101:22

supported 64:3

supporting 89:2115:3

supports 151:9

supposed 28:6105:22 191:12233:8 278:11

sure 10:12 11:512:15 14:7 49:1873:22 77:10,1293:7 99:7 103:22113:13 124:14


Page 44


© 2010

128:10 140:5154:13 169:1172:22 173:1191:20 192:1197:15 223:20227:6 228:20229:10 235:16246:18 275:12277:14 278:14279:16

surgeon 42:20

surgical 42:20

surprised 96:5118:9 171:12175:10,21177:11 188:22193:20

surrounding 92:2

surveillance226:10

Survey 109:5

surveys 138:18144:12

suspected 226:11

sustenance170:10,19

sway 248:3

swear 6:15

sworn 6:19 281:5

system 64:9 65:166:13 88:1090:16,18 107:6108:1 111:2127:8 132:6143:6,15 146:9156:17 157:11168:10 223:21260:8,9 278:13

systems 47:10

193:4

Ttable 142:1 232:20

238:1 239:22240:6 241:5245:21 251:7252:12

taking 9:5 10:547:14 72:8 86:7159:18 160:1

talk 36:2 136:18

talked 36:20 58:459:22 61:1889:17 114:15136:15 263:12

talking 58:2065:18 90:6,7107:4 108:19,22125:3 127:2136:18 142:17154:17 158:5177:10 217:15229:10 244:19249:20 265:20266:2,4,6 267:12271:15 272:12277:17

talks 201:9

tall 120:5

tape 5:576:8,11,15 148:7149:3 221:7,12

tapes 148:5 221:5

target 90:17 255:6

task 34:7 35:741:1 52:15,1659:14 60:4 64:496:18,21 99:3108:15 154:12

262:1

tasked 97:19

tasks 107:17108:14 109:5110:12 112:4155:20

teaching 23:12

team 55:12 224:16235:4,14,15

technicians 60:20

Ted 39:6 51:1569:9 72:7 79:1098:22113:12,14,18118:21 119:1120:21 125:20126:7,19 127:7128:2 129:1137:8 141:2152:7 177:11196:21

telephone 39:8116:12,17127:1,3152:8,13,14,16,18 186:19

telluric 229:7

ten 39:10 249:18

ten-minute 262:18

ten-year 240:6

term 56:19

terminal 75:18

terminate204:11,13

terms 278:10

territory 105:13

testified 6:199:10,12 84:6

85:3 103:15141:1 200:16201:15,18 202:6203:1,14,16210:1 211:14214:13 216:1,13217:20 224:10243:9,17 272:8275:15

testify 9:2 27:1,637:22 76:6211:16

testifying 211:22215:17

testimony 19:1647:19 74:3 84:985:7 143:21149:10 178:19182:14 183:7200:19 201:12203:11,22 204:2205:8 216:22225:6 254:10274:21 281:4,6282:6,7

Texaco 40:1143:11 159:20160:2 164:6195:22 196:3,17197:6208:10,12,14210:16 211:8212:5 214:2,18218:7 264:9265:17 274:16

Texaco's 104:9159:9 200:14213:2 214:22215:19 217:16

TexPet 198:7,8

text 232:20


Page 45


© 2010

Thank 24:20279:15 283:16

that's 7:22 10:711:11 16:3 28:130:5 33:4 35:2141:9 44:18 45:1258:13 81:2 84:1385:7 89:2 91:996:8,19 97:1298:13 101:12104:20 107:11109:1 111:16113:1 115:22118:15 127:9,14131:5 137:13140:9 141:4142:18 143:6,16146:8,11 147:8150:15 152:21153:6,12 155:3165:6,20 167:20173:15 176:22196:9 197:22199:5 201:18207:7 211:13215:15 216:4,7224:1,15 227:5238:7 245:7247:8 248:19250:14 257:15261:4 266:16268:16,17272:16 274:18276:22

themselves 5:1913:11 277:15


thereabouts 29:21172:22

thereafter 281:7

therefore 92:2194:13 110:18208:11 226:22231:16 273:7

thereof 49:19

there's 7:9 8:4,1435:22 45:3 112:6150:19 163:7166:20 181:11198:2 200:13218:18 220:2228:10 230:2,11232:17234:16,19237:6,8 263:21268:2 276:14

they're 134:9203:10 208:13212:11 255:4

third-world 47:8

three-and-a-half151:15

throughout 86:14

thrown 34:10

Thursday 1:12173:20

tie 122:9

tied 157:22 158:13159:9,16 212:22

timeline 149:17

title 28:15 156:19157:17,21

titled 18:9 28:1108:14 109:5137:13 143:6145:14 146:11153:20 156:16165:6,16 167:12218:16 262:7

today 9:3,716:10,14 19:1727:6 31:13 37:1957:17 150:7178:6 188:7189:11 194:2196:12 208:4210:1 222:4237:4 241:10251:16 265:21272:6 275:4

today's 280:6

tomorrow 136:7

top 27:16 107:4161:22 232:18

topics 64:19

total 118:2 126:5147:12,19222:16 245:5,17246:5,9250:14,21252:7,8,11,14

towards 93:22177:4

towns 90:22 91:11

toxic 110:14 146:3226:11

toxicologist 191:21

toxicology145:14,19160:10 161:11

tract 15:13,15

Trade 132:6133:19 134:5135:1139:8,17,19,21140:4,7 253:16254:14,19255:6,14

256:2,13 257:2,9258:1,13 262:7

traditional224:8,21

trained 191:21

training 22:18171:17

transcript 4:7 7:1510:6,13,16

transcription281:8 282:7

translate 41:575:7,11 77:9,12187:3 188:1

translated 75:978:6

translation 78:9105:3,5 188:12

translations 77:1678:3

translator 188:4

transportation82:17

traveled 42:3274:14

treated15:8,14,16,17

treatment 15:9162:2,8 164:13224:9 256:14

trial 9:10,13,18

tried 42:22 64:5,1081:13 85:1588:13 101:14179:9,10

triple 253:7

trips 195:14


Page 46


© 2010

true 31:10 82:1383:22 86:10138:14 179:11182:16,17194:2,11213:3,5,6,10,16225:1 246:17259:15 282:6

truly 57:21 58:766:15 80:3 81:1082:13 83:14,1592:3 94:2 95:597:2 99:19 104:3108:19 123:9138:7 161:4193:17 195:8198:6 214:7215:5 231:12,15256:10 265:16270:15,18

truth 8:22 10:3248:11

truthfully 9:2

try 12:16 21:15,1832:19 41:2052:14 53:20 54:673:19 123:11162:12 191:17227:7 235:16238:19 239:4249:7 277:1

trying 31:10 44:2245:11 52:2273:16 75:2186:10 92:1795:15 110:20115:4 146:1161:16 172:14197:1 211:6215:16 216:9217:11 223:21245:19 266:9

276:19,20,21

tuned 43:22

turn 19:3 27:15,2186:21 99:22141:7 161:18169:11212:16,17232:17

turned 168:13

Turning 151:11157:16 164:18

TWG 107:21108:6

twice 42:11 195:10

two-and-a-half-hour 118:13

two-thirds 134:10

type 17:9 59:1373:5 90:9 91:2108:22 112:9152:3 226:10227:8 257:8

typical 34:17,20220:11,16

typically 21:8

typist 166:1

UU.S 95:2 104:19

250:22251:17,21 279:2

U.S.-based 248:19

Uh-huh 96:1298:16 100:5101:17 131:11136:17 137:11145:13 153:18165:8 167:21

180:14 195:11231:5 251:1

ultimately 73:12113:2 129:9182:1 204:1

umbrella 177:2,3

umpteenth 201:1

uncomfortable92:19

understand 7:178:19 12:2,5 14:519:16 44:2 53:1955:16,19 81:2082:4 140:5143:21 149:6169:9 181:15198:9204:5,10,16210:22 225:4234:5 240:17243:7 266:9276:1 277:11

understanding17:6 51:21 52:479:9,20 94:22101:18 115:1126:9 150:8161:14 175:6177:1 178:7180:8 189:14,16190:17 202:21208:5,11,21,22214:20226:15,19236:11 237:8238:6 251:13261:3 262:10265:12

understood 7:2112:9 234:7 280:4

undertaking 66:19

81:15

uneasiness 49:8

unfortunately181:9

United 1:1 5:8185:9

university 23:13

unless 90:16204:12

Unlikely 269:22270:1,6

updated 146:22

updates 86:15

upon 22:4 50:6

upper 15:13,14

up-to-date 147:6

USAID 114:8

usually 14:1334:21,22 181:9

utilize 270:16

utilized 32:6 41:1175:4 92:16,22207:12

Vvacation 39:11,22

51:4

valid 80:22 183:7235:20 242:17243:16

validity 129:22

valley 90:6,7

value 135:6251:2,15

valve 15:11,12


Page 47


© 2010

variables 270:18

various 63:13153:4

vast 134:4 135:3

venture 142:18

verbally 10:15

verbatim 139:11

version 105:7187:20 188:7,16189:1

versus 5:7 25:1457:18 93:16106:1 218:8238:21 244:2264:9,14,19

via 18:21 39:848:7 75:13 152:8272:17

video 5:15

Videographer2:15 5:4 6:1476:10,14111:17,20 148:6149:2 191:1,4199:19 206:3,6221:6,10249:9,14262:19,22 280:5

videotaped 1:145:5

Vietnam 151:1

view 47:15 49:1390:3 251:5

views 68:12277:21

villages 91:1

Villamar278:19,21

V-I-L-L-A-M-A-R278:21

violations 263:9

Virginia 23:16

visit 195:14

visited 195:19

voiced 62:3 100:12

volume 55:13275:4

voluminous193:20

volunteer 21:11,1322:3

vouch 129:21

vs 1:7 283:4 284:5

Wwaiting 13:12

waiver 17:9

warrant 246:11

Washington1:11,19 2:65:12,17 284:2

wasn't 39:12 53:1455:12 56:1970:13 80:5 85:21147:4 159:3175:11,20214:14,15 217:6238:19 262:4

Wasserstrom171:2,5

water 60:17 61:866:9 70:14 82:2088:9 223:5226:12227:1,2,15228:4,11

229:2,5,13241:21,22

ways 38:5,8,9162:12 200:18212:22 215:5

weathered 151:4261:11

website 32:4,9,1045:2,4,12

websites 32:22

week 43:3,4 173:3184:8

weekend 180:20

weeks 62:9,10,15

Weinberg 18:2132:3,9,10,11,1633:2,9 37:138:22 39:5 45:2146:4 50:651:7,12 54:1456:4 58:1 67:1369:2,7 70:1 71:972:2,5,12,2075:15,19 76:1,1878:10,2179:1,14,15,16,20,21 80:6 86:1587:2,6 94:196:14 100:6101:21 103:9108:7,9,10 113:9118:1,14,17119:3 120:7,21121:11 123:2125:19127:16,22131:10,14,16,17,20,21 137:9138:21 139:1,7140:6 141:16149:22 150:1

151:15,22152:20 167:11172:9 173:9,13174:8175:2,7,8,11176:5,9,12,16,17181:7 183:21184:9 185:14190:14,15,16,18191:8,11213:20,21,22219:4 240:10253:18272:13,17,22273:8 274:2

welcome 185:10

we'll 12:16 198:2199:15

wells 40:15 92:1,2102:17 108:19196:18 198:10199:11,12213:10 227:12237:16267:11,12,16,18,19,22 268:12270:10,17,21

we're 13:10,1293:7 108:19110:16 142:17149:3 217:11221:14 229:10275:2 277:7

Westenberger2:10 6:4,6,97:6,13,16,208:7,11,16 16:1717:14,19 19:2024:6,18 25:4,926:7 27:11 33:135:13 37:2038:2,11,16,21


Page 48


© 2010

40:18 43:1344:21 45:846:7,15 47:1748:4 49:17 52:1153:4,1855:1,10,2156:6,14 57:1558:2 59:18 60:1363:21 65:9 66:567:3,22 68:1469:19 72:15,2173:21 74:2 76:579:2 80:1,1781:1 82:1,783:3,10,1384:1,4,11,14,17,20 85:20 86:1795:3,12 96:2297:15 98:6103:14 105:12109:18 110:1,5,9111:7,10,15130:2,9,15,18132:9 133:21134:20 139:12143:8 144:15145:8 146:17148:1 157:1,8158:15 160:19162:9 164:8,14171:9 175:18176:19178:2,14,21182:9,22 183:2,9189:21193:6,10,12194:4,6,12,22195:2,5197:9,13,16198:11,13,18,21199:5,14,21200:9,16 201:17202:4,11,15203:1,5,9

204:5,9,11,15205:5,7,19206:19207:17,22208:7,18209:6,10,17,21210:10,17211:12,17,21212:3,9 213:7214:3,12215:1,22216:3,12,15217:1,17,20218:1,9,12 219:7220:7 222:11,22223:18 224:13225:7,17226:5,17 227:17228:6,12 230:6,9231:21 232:1235:1,8,11236:15 237:11238:10 239:1240:11,20241:6,15242:7,9,19243:17 246:13247:17 249:16251:8,10,20252:5,22253:9,20254:9,22 255:17256:5 257:11,17258:6 260:20261:7,20265:5,15266:1,3,7,19267:6,14268:3,14269:2,8,11,16270:2,12271:3,19272:4,14273:1,16

274:3,6,9275:10,13279:17 280:4283:1,6

we've 100:9114:15 233:19263:12

whatever 43:1095:6 181:10,19

whatsoever 200:21275:19

whenever 29:10

Whereupon 6:1676:13 111:19191:3 206:5221:9 249:11262:21 280:8

whether 22:1527:2 35:15 52:2157:17 67:1970:4,6,16 72:1973:11 82:13 95:1102:2,7 105:22123:14,20129:20 130:5161:4 164:11178:10 182:19188:7,15,19203:13 205:11207:9 217:7225:4 227:14236:8 247:13261:3 275:18

whoever 234:15236:2

whole 220:13,18

whom 5:19 90:17196:20 217:12281:2

who's 8:14 88:17

whose 120:15233:6,9 281:4

wide 64:10 276:19

widely 244:6

wife 34:19 37:6,763:9,12,1967:15,17,1968:4,12 99:11,15

wife's 63:16

willing 39:19 72:9280:1

witch 134:15,16164:3

witness6:10,13,15,189:16 17:20 25:1033:238:3,12,17,2240:19 44:22 45:946:9,17 47:2048:6 49:1853:5,1955:2,11,2256:7,15 58:360:14 63:2265:10 66:6 67:468:1,15 70:372:17 73:1,2274:4 79:4 80:381:2 82:983:5,12,14 84:385:21 86:1995:4,13 97:2,1698:7 103:14105:14 109:19110:2,6,10 111:8112:16 113:4114:10 115:22116:7119:8,14,19120:20 121:13


Page 49


© 2010

122:2,8,15,16,18123:9,18124:2,7,13,22126:15 127:14130:3,11,17134:1,22 144:17145:10 146:19148:3 157:3,10158:17 160:21162:11 164:16171:11 175:20176:21178:4,11,16,19179:1 182:11183:1,3,11 190:1193:7,11194:5,14195:1,4,8197:12,15198:12,14199:1,4 202:20206:21 207:18208:1,9,22210:18 212:1,12213:9 214:5,14215:4 216:2,14217:2,19,22218:3,11,13219:9 222:13223:2,20 224:15225:9,19226:7,19 227:19228:8,14 230:11231:22 232:3235:3,13 236:17237:13 238:12240:13,22241:8,17242:8,11,21243:19 246:15247:19 251:9,21252:6253:1,10,22255:2,19 256:7

257:13,19260:22 261:9,22265:7,16266:2,5,21267:8,16268:5,16269:4,10,18270:14 271:5,21272:16 273:3,17274:8,10 276:9277:10,14279:16,19281:4,6 283:10284:7

witnessed 274:15

witnesses 177:21178:8

woman 51:19,20

women 77:15

wonderful 35:22

wording 163:8

work 16:2119:13,1721:11,13,18,19,21,22 22:3 23:1524:4,8 30:347:8,16 48:3,850:10 53:1154:18 59:13 60:761:15 62:15 68:869:5,1771:13,19,2273:12 74:1577:19 78:1579:21 80:19 84:885:4,5 93:594:10 95:1,17109:7 124:11127:16 140:6141:18 172:5173:2 174:2,4

175:6 178:11179:7 180:22183:14184:18,21185:2,17 189:2194:20 196:16227:20 229:8234:15

worked 18:1620:21 22:1223:6,12,20 24:169:6,9,13,1587:5 94:11

working 18:529:11 153:3,5181:2 185:7190:15 233:9

works 10:2 51:1763:22 64:2 68:487:9 101:21

world 31:22 64:3126:19 130:8132:6 133:19134:5 135:1139:8,17,19,21140:4,7 146:20166:16,20 244:7247:21248:14,22 250:1253:16254:13,19255:6,13256:2,13 257:2,9258:1,13 262:7

worried 99:18,20

worry 11:15

wrap 136:7

write 60:12 68:13143:14 145:1,7168:16 170:2,12219:2 259:1

260:13

written 25:6,1283:9 86:2 185:20193:4 234:20235:7 258:17

wrote 142:5169:22 170:7200:8 236:13

WTC 259:16

Yyesterday 36:2,9

275:14

yet 13:14 16:531:15 191:22231:10 263:7279:12

York 133:5 135:13254:21 255:10

you'll 180:10

young 10:4

Yours 283:17

yourself 168:16173:13

you've 10:2 12:2221:11 23:1,624:4 42:8 44:650:1,9 58:1289:21 98:12101:6 105:12106:11 125:6131:4 133:10135:17 137:6144:13 167:5174:15 187:9190:4 192:19195:10200:17,18203:11 215:2229:11 243:9,13


Page 50


© 2010

272:4 274:12

ZZefutie 2:10 6:12

112:15 113:3114:9,18,21115:12,21 116:6119:4,7,11,18120:19 121:12122:1,7,14,17,20123:5,17124:1,6,12,21125:16 126:13127:12

Documents

12/16/10 Deposition Transcript- Picone