Document 3JL2DaEXabDxkmJw7Zdgog9xD

! 1W. 1 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 2 NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS 3 EASTERN DIVISION 4 5 The United States of America,) 6 7 vs. Plaintiff, No. 78C1004 ) DEPOSITION OF ELMER P. WHEELER) 8 Outboard Marine Corporation ) and Monsanto Company, 9 Defendants. 10 11 12 The deposition of Elmer P. Wheelerwas taken 13 before me, Joann H. Singleton, Notary Public for South 14 Carolina, beginning at 10:00 a. m., March 10, 1981, at 15 the Grand Jury Room of the Kershaw County Courthouse, 16 Camden, South Carolina, pursuant to notice. 17 18 APPEARANCES 19 Mr. James T. Hynes, Assistant U. S. Attorney, Office of United States Attorney, United States Courthouse, 20 219 South Dearborn Street, Chicago, Illinois, 60804, Counsel) for Plaintiff. 21 Ms. Roseann Oliver, of the law offices of Phelan, 22 Pope & John, Ltd., 30 North LaSalle Street, Chicago, Illinois, 60602, Counsel for Outboard Marine Corporation. 23 Mr. Hugh Thomas, In House Counsel for putboard 24 Marine Corporation. 25 Mr. Bruce A. Featherstone, of the lawfirm of Kirkland & Ellis, 200 East Randolph Drive, Chicago, Illinois], 60601, Counsel for Monsanto Company. JOANN H. SINGLETON CAimomfi. ipuni cawqumo ** WATER PCB-SD0000056124 1 INDEX 2 3 Stipulations 4 Deponent Sworn 6 Questions by Mr. Hynes 6 Questions by Ms. Oliver 7 Questions by Mr. Hynes 8 Questions by Ms. Oliver 9 Questions by Mr. Featherstone 10 Signature of Deponent 11 Certificate of Notary Public 12 13 14 15 i 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 26 t Page 1 1 1 149 279 296 309 315 316 0 WATER PCB-SD0000056125 STIPULATIONS 1 MR. HYNES: This is taken pursuant to notice and 2 Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. 3 MR. FEATHERSTONE: And can be signed by the 4 witness before any notary? 5 MR. HYNES: Yeah. 0 6 ****** 7 ELMER P. WHEELER, BEING BY ME FIRST DULY SWORN 8 AND CAUTIONED TO SPEAK THE TRUTH, THE WHOLE TRUTH AND 9 NOTHING BUT THE TRUTH, WAS EXAMINED AND TESTIFIED AS 10 FOLLOWS: 11 QUESTIONS BY MR. HYNES: 12 Qi Would you please state your full name and 13 spell the last name for the record. 14 A Elmer P. Wheeler. W-h-e-e-l-e-r. 15 Q. And what's your home address? 16 A 110 Cool Springs Drive, Camden, South Carolina. 17 Qi Before we begin this, Mr. Wheeler, I want to 18 let you know that, any time you're tired or want to take a 19 break for a few minutes, just say so. There's no problem 20 to taJce a little break. 21 A Thank you, Mr. Hynes. 22 Qi What is your profession? # 23 A I'm retired. My profession in my active career 24 was in the field of Industrial Hygiene. 25 Qi And would you briefly trace your educational -1- WATER PCB-SD0000056126 1 background, college and any graduate degrees. 2 A. Yes, Sir. My degree was a Bachelor of Science 3 and Chemistry in the College of Technology at the University 4 of New Hampshire, 1936. In the fall of 1937, I was regis 5 tered at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology in the 6 School of Biology and Public Health to work toward a certi 7 ficate in Public Health, which was MIT's equivalent of a 8 Master's Degree. I was only there for one term, when I was 9 called back to the State of New Hampshire to work for the 10 State Board of Health at the time when the Department was 11 beginning an Industrial Hygiene program in the state. 12 During the rest of that school year, I was involved with 13 that program and visited several hundred plants for indus 14 trial hygiene surveys in the state, varying from five 15 employees to maybe five thousand employees. That fall I 16 returned to MIT but, whereas my original objective had been 17 to be in the general field of Public Health, by this time 18 the emphasis had turned to Industrial Hygiene. And the 19 major courses in Industrial Hygiene were at the Harvard 20 Schoof of Public Health. So, although I was registered at 21 MIT, I took courses at Harvard for credit. I did not get 22 a graduate degree because I did not have the opportunity-- 23 With this switch in emphasis, I did not have the opportunity 24 to complete a thesis. 25 Qi So basically you did the course work but not -2I WATER PCB-SD0000056127 1 the thesis portion of the graduate degree? 2 A. That's right, Sir. And the courses in biology 3 and public health were those intended for graduates in 4 Sanitary Engineering at MIT, plus a number of others who B were taking the courses as pre-med for subsequent entry to 6 medical school. 7 ft Any other formal education after MIT? 8 A. No, Sir. 9 ft Are you a member of any societies, professional 10 societies or organizations? 11 A Yes, Sir. 12 ft Which are they? 13 A Currently, the American Industrial Hygiene 14 Association. I'm certified for the practice of comprehen 15 sive industrial hygiene by the American Board of Industrial 16 Hygiene. 17 18 that. MS. OLIVER: I'm sorry. Would you just repeat 19 A Yes. I am certified for the comprehensive 20 practice of industrial hygiene by the American Board of 21 Industrial Hygiene. I am a member of the American Chemical 22 Society. In all cases now, I believe, emeritus, 23 ft Because you're retired? 24 A Yes. 25 ft I'm not familiar with the certification program -3- WATER PCB-SD0000056128 1 for comprehensive practice of industrial hygiene. Would you 2 explain the requirements for that certification? 3 A. Briefly, it's a program established in 1959. 4 As a matter of fact, the membership elected to go this 5 route when I was president of the American Industrial 6 Hygiene Association. An independent board of industrial 7 hygienists, judging the qualifications of the people in the < 8 field. Initially a number of us who had been in the field 9 for an extended period of time and who had shown the ability 10 and qualifications were granted grandfather clause status, 11 if you will, without examination. And I've forgotten, 12 frankly, what the qualifications were for that grandfather 13 status. The fact is it meant a demonstration of proficiency 14. in the field and a fairly decent tenure. Subsequently a 15 series of examinations were developed, which were available 16 to people who wanted to become certified by the Board in 17 either the comprehensive practice of industrial hygiene or 18 a number of specialties in the field, whether it be 19 analytical chemistry, air pollution, toxicology, radiation 20 healtfi, etcetera. 21 Qt All right. Would you brie0fly explain what the 22 field of Industrial Hygiene is. 23 A I don't think I can give you the precise 24 definition but it's the art and science of examining the 25 environment of industrial employees, determining the -4- WATER PCB-SD0000056129 1 potential exposure to materials that they're handling, 2 evaluating those exposures and, when necessary, recommending 3 controls to limit the exposures to safe levels. 4 Q. And you've practiced in this field all your S professional life? 6 A Yes, although subsequently I got involved in 7 other associations of which I'm no longer a member. The 8 American-- The Air Pollution Control Association, of which 9 I was on the Board of Directors and an officer. I was-- 10 MR. FEATHERSTONE: He didn't ask you. Sir, for-- 11 MR. HYNES: No, no, no. 12 MR. FEATHERSTONE: The question only asked whether 13 you were involved in the area of Industrial Hygiene through 14 out your professional career. { 15 A Yes. 16 Q. You said you were an officer in the American 17 Industrial Hygienists Association. You were president when? 18 1959? Was that-- 19 A YeS. ; j 20 * Q, And are you currently an officer in any of the 21 societies? 22 A No, Sir. ! ; 23 Q. Have you ever had any teaching appointments 24 or-- 25 A No, Sir. -5- WATER PCB-SD0000056130 1 MR. FEATHERSTONE: Please wait until he finishes 2 the question, Mr. Wheeler. 3 A Yes, Sir. 4 Q. I was going to say hospital appointments or S anything relating to that. 6 A. (Shakes head indicating negative answer) . 7 MR. FEATHERSTONE: You have to answer audibly. 8 A No, Sir. 9 Q. Have you ever published any articles in the 10 field of Industrial Hygiene? 11 A Yes. 12 Q. Do you recall what those articles concerned, 13 the subject matters, and where they were published and when? 14 A I believe it was in the late '50s or early 15 '60s where I presented papers that were subsequently pub 16 lished in the scientific journals, relating primarily to 17 the administration and management of industrial hygiene 18 programs. 19 Qt Would you happen to have a list, a bibliography 20 of these publications? I don't want to take the time to go 21 through each and every one that you can remember but-- 22 A I don't know. At one time I had such a list. 23 I don't know if I still have it or not. 24 ft Would it be fair to say that these articles 25 were all in the area of administration and management of -6- WATER PCB-SD0000056131 1 industrial hygiene programs? 2 A. Yes. 3 Qi Would you briefly describe, if you can recall, 4 in a little bit more detail the subject matter of these 6 articles. i 6 A. The emphasis was on where an industrial hygiene 7 program should be established within an industrial corpora 8 tion, who should be responsible for it, the lines of 9 communication and what the program-- I believe, what the 10 program should include. 11 Ql Subsequent to your concluding your course work 12 at MIT and at Harvard, would you-- When did you start 13 working for any companies? What was your employment history}? 14 A. I returned to the State of New Hampshire-- 15 Ql What year? ' 16 A. I guess it was June of '39. I think that ties 17 in with the right sequence of the half year and the full 18 year. And was with the State Health Department as the 19 assistant administrator of the program, director of the 0 20 program, until I was called into service in April of 1941. 21 I was an anti-aircraft artillery officer, served overseas, 22 returned in April or May of 1944, and I was assigned to the 23 Army Industrial Hygiene Laboratory located at Johns Hopkins 24 University. It was a function of the Surgeon General's 25 office, the Surgeon General of the Army. I was yith that -7- WATER PCB-SD0000056132 1 laboratory until I joined Monsanto in July of 1947. 2 Q. And when did you retire from Monsanto? 3 A June 30, 1976. 4 & Anyhow, when you ask someone who retired when 5 they retired, they always know the exact date. Now, you 6 began with Monsanto in July of '47 and you worked through 7 June 30th, '76, as continuous employment? 8 A Yes, Sir. 9 & And what was your first position with Monsanto? 10 A I believe the title was strictly-- It was 11 simply Industrial Hygienist in the Medical Department, 12 under the direction of the Medical Director. 13 Q. And what were your duties? 14.. A The duties of an industrial hygienist of 15 visiting the Monsanto plants, evaluating the handling of 16 products, raw materials, by-products from the standpoint of 17 exposure to our employees and to, where necessary, make 18 recommendations for improved hygienic practice to ensure 19 the health of our workers. 20 " & And in July of '47, was there a specific 21 department called Industrial Hygiene or was it a-- 22 A I was a one man section in the Medical 23 Department. 24 & And you reported directly to a medical direc 25 tor? -8- WATER PCB-SD0000056133 1 A. Dr. Kelly. 2 & And he was the Medical Director then? 3 A Yes, Sir. 4 Qi Was that the title? 5 MR. FEATHERSTONE: Mr. Wheeler, wait until Mr. 6 Hynes has finished his question. 7 A I'm sorry. 8 MR. FEATHERSTONE: You make me nervous. 9 Ql You were the one man industrial hygiene depart 10 ment in July of '47. Did that subsequently change? 11 A Yes. 12 Ql And when was that? ; 13 A 1951 or 1952. 14 Ql And what changes took place? 15 A We added a second individual to assist me in 16 the industrial hygiene efforts. 17 Ql And who was that? 18 A Mr. Jack Garrett. 19 Ql G-a-r-r-e-t-t? 20 ' A Yes. 21 Ql. Were your duties changed in any way? 22 A Yes. 23 Ql In what way? 24 A Corporate management assigned us a similar 25 consulting role to our plant managers, concerned with the -9- WATER PCB-SD0000056134 1 fields of air pollution and water pollution. 2 Q So you added the air pollution and water pollu 3 tion concerns to your duties? 4 1 MR. FEATHERSTONE: Consulting responsibilities. S A Consulting responsibility.' Yes, Sir. 6 Q. And how would you consult and who would you 7 consult with? 8 A At the time of our industrial hygiene visits, 9 we would review with plant management, who had the ultimate 10 responsibility for pollution control measures, as well as 11 safety and fire prevention and health maintenance programs, 12 as to whether or not there were any problems as to what 13 they were doing, whether they were meeting the required 14 permits from whatever organizations might have been in vogue 15 at that time, and in this consulting capacity, to keep 16 abreast of developments in the field because the activity 17 at that time was within health agencies, both from the 0 18 Federal Government and within state agencies that might have 19 any interest or involvement in the pollution field. 20 Ql You say you consulted with plant managers. 21 Does that mean each individual Monsanto plant throughout 22 the country? 23 A Yes. 24 & And could you just briefly describe how the 25 corporate organization structure worked? What I'm looking -10- WATER PCB-SD0000056135 1 at, were the individual plant managers in charge of a 2 straight line of all operations within their plant and then 3 they reported to a particular individual at Monsanto? Or 4 would there be people in a central office, which would 5 control certain aspects of that plant? Was it a centralized 6 or a de-centralized organization? I'm just-- 7 MR. FEATHERSTONE: With respect to what operation? 8 MR. HYNES: The individual plants. B A I don't know. Sir-- I don't know what you 10 mean by de-centralized or centralized. My understanding 11 was that the plant managers were responsible directly for 12 any activities within the confines of his plant. 13 Ql That's what I mean. And then you would consult, 14 with them in any problems they would have in the industrial 15 hygiene area and then in 1952 you would consult with them 16 in any potential air or water pollution problems or concerns 17 within that individual plant? 18 A That's right. 19 Q. What type of concerns or problems did you 20 discuss with these plant managers? What were the typical 21 type of problems that they would see, if there were any, 22 that you'd consult on? 23 MR. FEATHERSTONE: He's already told you it was 24 industrial hygienic practices and pollution consulting. 25 Qi What type of pollution consulting problems did -11- WATER PCB-SD0000056136 o 1 you discuss beginning in '52? What were the type of 2 problems that were coming up at that time with these indi 3 vidual plants? 4 MR. FEATHERSTONE: Well, how is that germane to 5 this lawsuit, Mr. Hynes? 6 MR. HYNES: It's about water pollution. 7 MR. FEATHERSTONE: You've already tried that with 8 the judge and you didn't succeed. 9 MR. HYNES: I want to find out what type of 10 problems there were. 11 MR. FEATHERSTONE: Well, why don't you tell me 12 what it is that you're looking for so I can make a draw on 13 whether I'm going to instruct him to answer that question or 14 not answer that question. I don't see how a problem with a 15 product unrelated to PCB has any bearing on this lawsuit and, 16 indeed, the judge has instructed you that, if you want to 17 find out about pollution control in Monsanto plants with 18 respect to PCBs, you have to do it by interrogatory. 19 MR. HYNES: I want to find out the type of 20 problems-- I want to find out what his duties were and 21 what his responsibilities were. 22 MR. FEATHERSTONE: He's told you that. 23 MR. HYNES: And now I'm going into a little bit 24 more detail of what his responsibilities--what his consult 25 ing consisted of. -12- WATER PCB-SD0000056137 1 MR. FEATHERSTONE: Mr. Wheeler, if you can respond 2 to that question in a little more detail and still on a 3 general level, without getting into any specifics with 4 respect to the pollution aspects of the firm and, indeed, 5 with respect to the industrial hygienic practices, until he 6 directs you to a specific one, go ahead. But if you can't 7 do it, tell him you can't do it. 8 A. The only way I can respond to that, I think, 9 Sir, is that there was a growing interest on the part of 10 everyone of the control of air pollution, water pollution 11 and, in fact, in every instance that I can think of, our 12 plants were faced with obtaining permits from appropriate 13 state agencies for the discharge of any of their wastes. 14 Qi And you would consult with-them of ways to 15 meet the permit requirements? 16 A Not so much that because we weren't qualified 17 engineering-wise to do so, but to see that they got whatever 18 assistance they needed through consultants or, in collabora 19 tion with the state agencies, work out a program that made 20 the permits possible. 21 Qi You and Mr. Garrett, somewhere around '52, 22 were the two man-- 23 A Yes. 24 Qi Industrial hygiene department. How long did 25 that situation last? Did you add more people at a later -13- WATER PCB-SD0000056138 1 date or did your duties change at a later date? 2 MR. FEATHERSTONE: You have two questions there, 3 Mr. Hynes. Which one do you want to ask him first? 4 Qi Did you add more people? S A Yes. 6 & When? 7 A. We added a toxicologist full time in '60. I 8 believe it was 1960. 9 Ql All right. And that's the first change from 10 '52 to '60? You added a toxicologist? 11 MR. FEATHERSTONE: Wait. You're talking about 12 the whole Medical Department or just-- 13 MR. HYNES: No. I'm talking industrial hygiene. 14 A Industrial hygiene, we added another gentleman 15 that.reported to Mr. Garrett. I've' forgotten the year. 16 Mid-'60s, I would say. 17 ' Qi But up to 1960, the only person you added was 18 the toxicologist to your department? 19 A Some time in 1960, I believe. Yes. 20 ' Qi And did your duties change between 1952 and 21 1960? 22 A I had become more involved, along with my other 23 duties, in the field aspects of industrial hygiene, in the 24 toxicology research programs for the corporation, subject 25 to direction of Dr. Kelly, who had the principal responsi- -14- WATER PCB-SD0000056139 1 bility. 2 Qt When did you become more involved with the 3 toxicology research program? About when did that start? 4 A Early, mid-'50s. 5 Qi And what was your involvement in these programs!? 6 MR. FEATHERSTONE: When? At that time? 7 MR. HINES: When it began. 8 A Primarily to make arrangements for the acute 9 screening toxicity studies for Monsanto products. 10 Ql You say make arrangements. 11 A To obtain samples. 12 MR. FEATHERSTONE: Wait until he finishes his 13 question. 14 0 You said make arrangements. Could you explain 15 what you mean by that? 16 A Yes. The obtaining of samples for research, 17 seeing that they were shipped to the contract laboratory 18 that was doing the work for us, receiving the reports and, 19 with Dr. Kelly, interpreting the results. * 20 Ql Did you yourself do any of the toxicity testing 21 at all? 22 A No, Sir. 23 Qi You say, somewhere in the early, mid-'50s, you 24 became involved in this toxicology research program. What 25 you just said concerning arranging for the acute toxicity 15- WATER PCB-SD0000056140 1 tests, was that your involvement that-- Did your involve 2 ment change in any way from the beginning of that period 3 until, let's take it up to, say, 1960? 4 A. It was extended to include monitoring for Dr. 5 Kelly chronic toxicity studies, which he had arranged with 6 contract laboratories. 7 MR. HYNES: Would you repeat that answer, please. 8 REPORTER READS BACK. 9 Ql Am I understanding you right? In the beginning, 10 when you started working in the toxicity research program 11 for Dr. Kelly, your first duties were in arranging for the 12 acute toxicity tests and subsequently it was expanded--your 13 duties were expanded to monitor chronic tests, also? 14 A That's right. 15 Qi That takes us up to about 1960, using as an 16 artificial cut off, when you hired a toxicologist in the 17 department. Is that correct? 18 A Yes, Sir. 19 Qi And when the toxicologist was hiredr- What 20 % was his name? Do you recall? 21 A Dr. William Hunt, deceased. 22 Qi And did your duties change with regard to this 23 toxicity testing once Dr. Hunt was hired? 24 A Dr. Hunt reported to me so I had some mana 25 gerial responsibilities for his efforts. -16- WATER PCB-SD0000056141 1 Ql But did he take over this getting the samples, 2 arranging with contractors, reviewing the reports that you 3 had previously been doing? 4 A. Yes, Sir. 5 Ql And then basically he would report the results 6 and his progress to you then? Is that correct? 7 A Yes, Sir. 8 Ql Did your duties change, subsequent to Dr. Hunt 9 being hired, in the industrial hygiene area with Monsanto? 10 A No. 11 Ql So from that time until you retired, your 12 duties were substantially the same? 13 A Yes. I 14 Ql Could you explain briefly what an acute 15 toxicity study is? ' 16 A Yes. The intent of an acute toxicity study, 17 as we were doing them and as others were doing in the field 18 and as accepted by government agencies, included the 19 determination of an oral, lethal dose in rats, the skin % 20 absorption or penetration lethal dose in rabbits, the skin 21 irritation potential in rabbits, the eye irritation poten 22 tial in rabbits and, with liquid samples, the effects of 23 acute vapor inhalation. 24 Ql On the acute vapor inhalation, any particular 25 species that was the test animal? . -17- 0 WATER PCB-SD0000056142 1 A. Rats. 2 Ql Rats? 3 A. Rats. Yes, Sir. 4 Ql The oral, lethal dose would be rats and then 5 the skin absorption, the skin irritation and eye irritation 6 would be rabbits? 7 A. Yes, Sir. 8 Ql The normal testing animals? 9 A. Yes, Sir. 10 Ql Were these all of the types of acute toxicity 11 tests which were done that you recall? 12 A. Yes, Sir. 13 Ql Were these the normal series of acute tests 14 that were done by the company? 15 A. Yes, Sir. 16 Ql When would these tests be done with relation 17 to a product, a particular chemical product or a chemical 18 component? 19 A. Very early in the research stages of a * 20 chemical. ' 21 Ql Before it would be marketed or manufactured 22 in a-- 23 MR. FEATHERSTONE: Commercial sense? 24 Ql Commercial sense? Is that-- 25 A. Long before. -18- WATER PCB-SD0000056143 1 ft The best of your knowledge, were the acute 2 tests like these or the series of acute tests done on each 3 Monsanto product that was at least in the research stage? 4 I use product in a very broad sense. I don't mean a commer 5 cial product. But any product that is being involved in 6 research, are these the tests that are normal practice to 7 do for each such product? 8 A. Yes. 9 MR. FEATHERSTONE: Mr. Hines, you said, are these 10 the tests? The witness is retired and I don't know-- 11 MR. HYNES: That's fine. 12 ft When I say are, I mean are in the sense of when 13 you were working for Monsanto as an industrial hygienist. 14 And, again, if there's something that's unclear and I IS misstate something, please correct me. Don't be shy. Bruce 16 won't be. 17 MR. FEATHERSTONE: That's right. 18 ft And you mentioned chronic toxicity tests. 19 Could you please explain what chronic toxicity test is? 20 " A A chronic toxicity test attempts to determine 21 the levels of a material that will have an effect on animals 22 when the exposure is repeated over a long period of time 23 by the ingestion route, usually a two year study of rats 24 or dogs at levels which are intended to show a decided 25 effect on the animals-- -19- WATER PCB-SD0000056144 1 Ql A what effect? 2 A A decided effect, if any, in the animals, a 3 level that has a less severe or maybe even a reversible 4 effect and a third level that shows no effect. 5 Ql You mentioned decided effect, a less severe 6 effect-- 7 MR. FEATHERSTONE; Or reversible. 8 Ql Or a no effect level? 9 MR. FEATHERSTONE: Well, the second one-- 10 Ql The second one, less severe but reversible? 11 , A Or reversible. 12 Ql And then a no effect level? 13 A (Nods head indicating affirmative answer). 14 Ql Are these three distinct types of chronic 15 tests? 16 A They are part of the package of the usual 17 chronic toxicity studies. 18 Ql And were chronic toxicity studies done on 19 all of the same chemicals or products that an acute test 20 would "be done? 21 A No, Sir. 22 Ql When would a determination be made of when a 23 chronic-- Or how would a determination of whether a 24 chronic toxicity study would be then made? 25 MR. FEATHERSTONE: Well, at wfrat point in time -20- WATER PCB-SD0000056145 1 are you talking about, Mr. Hynes? I think his testimony 2 has been that he monitored the tests for Dr. Kelly. I'm 3 speaking about-- 4 MR. HYNES: Let me rephrase that. 6 Q. Did Monsanto have a practice as to when a 6 chronic toxicity test would be ordered? 7 ' A. Yes. 8 Qi And what was that practice? 9 A Depending on the use, intended use, of the 10 product and the results of the acute studies. An intended 11 use, to be specific, would be, for example, in pesticide, 12 where government regulations required registration and 13 where battery tests satisfactory to the U. S. Department of 14 Agriculture, the U. S. Food and Drug Administration required 15 that chronic studies or data from chronic studies be 16 established. 17 Ql That's one category, of government requirement, 18 to have chronic studies. Other than a government require 19 ment, was there any practice within Monsanto as to when 20 they would-- 21 A Yes. 0 22 0- --order a chronic toxicity study series? 23 A Yes. 24 MR. FEATHERSTONE: To the extent that you 25 attempted to characterize his testimony, Mr. Hynes, I object -21- WATER PCB-SD0000056146 1 to it. His answer was broader than just those circumstances 2 in which the Federal Government required this chronic 3 testing. 4 MR. HYNES: I understand that. 5 MR. FEATHERSTONE: His answer started with what 6 ever the intended use of the product was. 7 Qi Pick up there. It would be the intended use 8 of the product and/or government regulations. Now-- Just 9 strike that. Government regulations obviously is a require 10 ment if it's required by government regulations to do the 11 chronic tests or whatever would be required to market the 12 product. But other than that, what types of-- 13 MR. FEATHERSTONE: In what circumstances were 14 chronic tests done? 15 Qt In what circumstances would a chronic test be 16 done? Fine. 17 A When the use of a product, a proposed use of 18 a product, indicated that there might be exposure to humans 19 via the inhalation route. 20 ' MR. FEATHERSTONE: Chronic exposure to humans? 21 A Yes, Sir. 22 Qt And what do you mean by chronic exposure to 23 humans? 24 A The field of Industrial Hygiene is concerned 25 with day in and day out exposures of workers to materials -22- WATER PCB-SD0000056147 1 in their work environment, generally on the basis of eight 2 hours a day, forty hours a week. This is prolonged, 3 repeated exposure. So a chronic inhalation study over some 4 period of time, again using different levels, to find a no 5 effect level may be required. 6 Q. So it would be chronic exposure by the inhala 7 tion route. That's when you would internally have the 8 chronic toxicity test series done. Any other situations 9 where Monsanto would have chronic tests done? 10 A Not that I recall. 11 Q. And the inhalation route, the chronic exposure 12 by inhalation would be the only situation-- I'm trying-- 13 Is there any other-- You say if the proposed use of the 14. product indicated chronic exposure by the inhalation route? 15 A Possible chronic exposure. 16 Q. Possible. Would there be any other route of 17 chronic exposure that you can think of where chronic tests 18 would be done by the company? 19 MR. FEATHERSTONE: You mean before the product 20 was marketed? 21 MR. HYNES: Right. 22 A No. 23 Q. This may seem like a simple question. But why 24 would it only be inhalation exposure, other them ingestion? 25 What other methods would there be besides inhalation, -23- WATER PCB-SD0000056148 1 MR. FEATHERSTONE: For skin testing? 2 MR. HYNES: For skin testing. 3 A. I think only for those products that were j 4 intended for repeated and prolonged use by humans, including1 5 materials in perfumes, powder, materials that people would, i i 6 i by the nature of the product, be expected to have repeated 1 'i 7 daily or quite frequent exposure. 8 Q. Did Monsanto market any of those products? 9 A. We marketed a bactericidefor soap. Yes. ! 10 Qi That would be considered adrug;wouldn't it? ! i 11 Or do you know? I .i 12 A. I believe so. I believethe Food and Drug ' 13 Administration defines that. Yes. 14 Q. Did you ever do any subacute toxicity studies | 15 at Monsanto? i 16 A. Monsanto didn't do any toxicity studies. 17 Q. Well, I'm sorry. Did you ever contract out to ; IB do any subacute toxicity studies? ! 19 A. There were some subacute toxicity studies done.j 20 Yes. * . 21 Q. Would youplease explain what asubacute . 22 toxicity study is. ! i i i | 23 A. My recollection is thatthiswould involve 24 maybe a ninety day administration, rather than a year or 25 two years. : i i -25- i WATER PCB-SD0000056149 1 ingestion-- 2 MR. FEATHERSTONE: Wait a minute now. You've got 3 two questions. First you start off with, why inhalation 4 rather than ingestion? 5 Q. Why inhalation rather than other methods of 6 being chronically exposed, from Monsanto's standpoint? 7 A. I don't know of any other methods, except : ' 8 through the possible skin absorption route. 9 MR. FEATHERSTONE: People don't usually ingest 10 industrial chemicals. 11 MR. HYNES: That's fine. 1 understand that. 12 Q, You don't mean you have food and food additives; 13 and products like that and that's why Monsanto is a chemical 14 company. And that's the normal way people would ingest or 1 15 be chronically exposed to your products? I 16 A. The state of the art did not include, in quote, 17 o, chronic skin exposures because the data could be extrapo 18 lated from the inhalation or ingestion and acute skin 19 effects by absorption---excuse me--the effects from the acute, 20 penetration or absorption data. 21 Q. When you say the state of the art, was this at i 22 the time while youwere in industrial hygiene? 23 A. Y e s. ; 24 Q. Prior to your retirement did that, quote, 2b state of the art change? j | -24- WATER PCB-SD0000056150 1 0- In other words, it would be similar to a 2 chronic but the time frame would be much less. Is that a 3 correct characterization? 4 A. Ye s. ! 5 0. Do you recall when a subacute toxicity study 6 would be done as a matter of what Monsanto's practice was i , 7 in that? | 8 MR. FEATHERSTONE: Again, before the product was 9 marketed? 10 MR. HYNES: Right. j 11 A. I don't recall. 12 Qi Do you recall ever being involved in any 13 arranging for or reviewing any subacute toxicity studies 14. for Monsanto? . 15 a. no. 1 i ; 16 Qi Do you recall if Monsanto ever ordered any 17 multigeneration type toxicitystudies in anyof its-- i 18 Strike that. As a matter of practice, did Monsanto ever j 19 contract out for anymultigeneration toxicitystudies? j 20 , .i MR. FEATHERSTONE: Do you know what that is, Mr. ; 21 Wheeler? ; 22 A. I don't know what the term multi means, whether 23 that's one generation, six generations or a hundred genera 24 tions. 25 Q. Say, three generations. -26- WATER PCB-SD0000056151 T 1 A. And your question was, Sir, did,Monsanto ever 2 contract for multigeneration studies? 3 & Yes. 4 A. Yes. 5 Q. In what circumstances was that done? 6 A. I don't recall because this was a later deve 7 lopment in the practice of toxicology research after my 8 involvement had been limited because of other experts that 9 we had in the department, well qualified toxicologists, in 10 addition to Dr. Hunt. 11 Q. You don't recall what circumstances would 12 require, under Monsanto's practices, multigeneration-- 13 A. Not specifically. 14 Q. Generally do you recall any products or any 15 situations where that was called for? You say not specifi 16 cally. Do you recall in general what the multigeneration 17 toxicity tests-- 18 MR. FEATHERSTONEs Is your last question the 19 question you wish the witness to answer? 20 " MR. HYNES: Yes. !' 21 A And what was the question? 22 Q. Let's start it again. You said you don't 23 remember specifically the reasons for a multigeneration 24 toxicity test; other people did that. 25 MR. FEATHERSTONE: He said the circumstances he -27- WATER PCB-SD0000056152 1 didn't recall specifically. 2 MR. HYNES: The circumstances. ; 3 4 were? Q. Do you recall in general what the circumstances 5 A. No, frankly. I'm sorry, Sir, but I'm not real 6 articulate and I sometimes use words that may confuse you. 7 Q. That's okay. I get the same problem sometimes. 8 MR. FEATHERSTONE: You're referring to the word I 9 specifically, obviously, Mr. Wheeler? 10 A Yes. 1 i j 11 Qi I believe you said that the acute toxicity 12 series were done early on in the research end of a product 13 development. I take that to mean that there is constant j 14 research going on within Monsanto to develop new products 15 or improve existing products. Is that correct? 16 A Yes, Sir. 17 Q. And these acute tests would fit in early on 18 in that research for either a new or improved product. Is | 19 that correct? 20 " A Yes, Sir. #i 21 Q. Could you explain, to the best of your know 22 ledge, how a new product would be developed within Monsanto 23 from the point someone got an idea to the point where it 24 was marketed? And the second part of that question, where 25 your department would fit into that process? WATER PCB-SD0000056153 1 MR. FEATHERSTONE: Well, Mr. Hynes, Mr. Wheeler 2 was never in the area of commercial development. j 3 MR. HYNES: I'm asking what he knows about it and : 4 where his department fit into that decision making process. 5 MR. FEATHERSTONE: All right. As a preliminary 6 question, Mr. Wheeler, did you have any involvement in 7 commercial development, as such? 8 A No, Sir. 9 MR. FEATHERSTONE: Okay. Now you can tell Mr. i I ! i 10 Hines what you know about it and where you fit into it. 11 A I can't answer the first part of his question 12 as I understood it because I have no idea. I have no reason | 13 to know what prompted a chemist in the research group to | 14 invent a new product. 15 MR. FEATHERSTONE: Okay. Now, maybe with that 16 preamble in mind-- 17 Q. Where would the Industrial Hygiene Department-- 18 I'm using the word department for you and the people who 19 worked with you and for you. What input did you have into 20 the development of a new product into the research? What 21 was the extent of your input? 22 A The input that I received? 23 Q. No. The input that you put into the new 24 product? I'm thinking in terms of acute toxicity tests and 25 all that. How would you first become involved? bet's start -29- WATER PCB-SD0000056154 1 all over again. How would you first become involved with 2 the development of a new product? 3 A. By management direction, the research chemist 4 was obligated to send us a sample for acute testing at an 5 appropriate point. Accompanying his request for the study 6 was a form on which he had to indicate prospective uses of 7 the product and, equally important, had there been any 8 indication of any effects noted in the research laboratory 9 on him or his associates. This would be our first indica 10 tion that a new product was being considered for a specific 11 use. 12 fr And then, once you received the sample and 13 information sheet, what then occurred within your department!? 14 What did you do? j .. I 15 A The sample was sent to the consulting labora- | 16 tory for the acute studies. j ; 17 Q. And then you received those results back. And 18 what were your duties at that point, once you had received 19 the results back from the lab, the consulting lab? 20 ' A The report was evaluated to compare the data 21 that had been obtained with data that had been--with data 22 bases that had been well established within the industry 23 and by government, I presume. Probably it was the ICC 24 because what I'm referring to is the proper labeling of 25 chemicals before they can enter interstate commerce. And -30- WATER PCB-SD0000056155 1 in the tests then there had been established gradations of j 2 toxicity classification, depending on what the lethal doses 3 were. For example, a compound that had a lethal dose-- I 4 believe my memory is correct. For compounds that had a 5 lethal, oral dose in rats of fifty milligrams per kilogram 6 or less, by law the material had to be identified as a 7 Class B poison; the containers had to meet the approval of 8 the ICC; skull and crossbones had to be on the label, with 9 appropriate recommendations for the handling of that 10 material. Exponentially, I think the range then included-- t j 11 MR. FEATHERSTONE: Mr. Wheeler, the question 12 doesn't ask for that detailed a response. 13 A I'm sorry. 14 MR. FEATHERSTONE: Your answer, before you got 15 off on this tangent, was that you compared the results to 16 established standards. Then what did you do? i 17 A We sent that evaluation of the data back to 18 the individual who had requested the samples and included i 19 copies to those people in the company, specifically the 20 labeling and container group, so that they would be prepared, 21 if the product did move into commercialization, as to the 22 kind of containers that would be necessary to meet the 23 regulations, as well as the label content. 24 Ql You said you evaluated the report. Was just 25 part of the evaluation to determine the proper labeling and -31- WATER PCB-SD0000056156 1 containers that the product should be contained in if it 1 was marketed or was there more to your evaluation than just | 2 3 that? 4 A. More importantly, from an industrial hygiene 5 standpoint, it was possible to estimate what the effects 6 might be if there were exposures to humans, not only our 7 own people but others. 8 Ql And how was that-- How did you go about j 9 determining the possibility of contamination or problems? i | 10 What I'm getting at is-- In talking about labeling, you ; said you had pretty much of a standard reference or, if 11 | 12 there's a certain lethal dose, it would fit into certain ' 13 categories for labeling a poison or whatever other cate- I ; j14 gories there are. What criterion did you use to determine other problems that might exist if the product was marketed?! 15 j 16 MR. FEATHERSTONE: For example, industrial ! 17 hygienic problems? 18 MR. HYNES: Right. 19 MR. FEATHERSTONE: Potential-- 20 ' A Well, the chemical and physical characteristics 21 of the material were obviously a factor. The intended use; 22 the difference between potential exposure if the material 23 was a highly volatile liquid, as compared to a very oily, 24 waxy material; whether the material was a solid, which in 25 turn would tend to limit exposure; and the general -32- WATER PCB-SD0000056157 1 background, based on our training and experience, as to 2 what these data meant in comparison to other well known 3 household products or industrial chemicals. 4 Ql How important was the information which you 5 received from the research chemist with regard to. the 6 intended use of the product to your evaluation of potential 7 problems? 8 A. I don't think I heard the first part of the 9 question. 10 Ql How important was the information concerning 11 the intended use of the product to you in making your evalua 12 tion of the product from an industrial hygiene standpoint? 13 A. At that time in the development or the researchj 14 development of the product, from an industrial hygiene 15 standpoint, it gave us an opportunity to indicate to the 16 man in research whether he had to take special precautions 17 in handling this material and, certainly, if the material 18 was going to go outside the company, the kind of recommenda 19 tions that had to be provided for the safe transportation 20 and sa'fe handling by other research people outside the 21 company. 22 Ql So the intended use data would be somewhat 23 significant to your evaluations of the product? 24 A. Very. * 25 Qi After you made your evaluation, you sent your -33- WATER PCB-SD0000056158 1 report back to-- You sent it back to research chemists. 2 Is that correct? 3 MR. FEATHERSTONE: Among others. That's what he 4 testified to. 5 A Among others, yes. Sir. 6 Qt What further involvement then would your 7 department have with the development of cthis product? 8 A None, unless there were some indication on the 9 part of the people working with it that there were problems 10 with throat irritation, nose irritation on their part from 11 exposures or until such time as the product began to appear 12 to be promising in terms of the development effort. And 13 I'm trying to be a little more precise in that we had 14 research, we had a development group, before things went intjo 15 the marketing group. And our next involvement in the 16 product was probably when it moved from research to people 17 in development. 18 ft Would that-- What you just said, it would be 19 research and then development and then marketing? 20 A Yes, Sir. 21 ft And when the product moved from research to 22 development, that would be the next time you would be 23 involved with that product. Is that correct? 24 A That's my recollection. 25 ft And what would your involvement at that point -34- WATER PCB-SD0000056159 1 be? 2 A. A review of the acute data and, with a clear 3 understanding at that time, I think, of what the proposed 4 uses were, a decision would be made as to whether additional 5 toxicity work should be undertaken. 6 Ql Am I correct in-- My interpretation of what 7 you're saying is, once a product reaches the development 8 area, there is more precise information as to its intended 9 uses and chemical properties and things like that than 10 there were when it was in the research stage, when you first 11 had some input into this process. Is that correct? 12 A That's a long question and I don't remember 13 the first part of it. 14 Qi All right. When a product gets to the develop 15 ment stage from the research stage, you stated that you 16 would review the product, the information that you received 17 on it and determine if more toxicity studies are needed, 18 re-evaluate it in terms of the knowledge that you had at 19 that time. The information in the development stage of the 20 product then is a little bit more comprehensive than it was 21 at the research stage of this product development. Is that 22 correct? 23 A I don't know what you mean by comprehensive. 24 MR. FEATHERSTONE: Do you have more information 25 in the commercial development stage? -35- WATER PCB-SD0000056160 1 A. We had more information from the people in 2 development. Yes. 3 Qi And based on that additional information, you'd 4 make a determination of whether more toxicity data was 5 needed. Is that what you were saying? 6 A. Yes. 7 Qi What would the-- What are the criterion that 8 you would use to determine if more toxicity data was needed 9 at that time? 10 A. If I understand criterion, I don't think we 11 had criterion or criteria that were identified as such. It 12 was a question of scientific judgment. 13 Qi And what factors would lead you to exercise 14 your judgment to order more toxicity tests on a product? 15 A May I answer that in terms of extremes? 16 Qi Fine. 17 A If the early data indicated that the sample 18 was biologically inert, that we could not demonstrate 19 effects in the animals studied, there probably would be no 20 more toxicity work done, unless, even on that data, there 21 was--an intended use was such that there would be human 22 exposure. On the other hand, in this field of pesticide 23 research, which was a major effort in Monsanto, if the 24 material was a class B poison or approaching that level of 25 toxicity, then, obviously, additional studies would be I -36- WATER PCB-SD0000056161 1 recommended and undertaken. 2 Q. And in between those two extremes is wher'~you j 3 exercise your judgment whether you needed or you don't need 4 any more toxicity studies. Is that correct? 5 A. Yes. 6 Q In the commercial development stage, what, are 7 the types--what were the types of additional toxicity j 8 studies that would be ordered? The categories? Would it 1 i 9 be acute, subacute, chronic? 10 A. The acute studies might be extended by using ^ 11 additional animals, in essence, repeating the earlier work 12 but using additional animals and various levels other than 13 had been used in the initial studies, to more definitely i J14 define statistically an oral, lethal dose. If appropriate, j15 subacute studies would be undertaken. If appropriate and j16 an indication of usage such that there could be intimate 17 contact with the skin, the state of the art tests for 18 dermatitis testings in humans would be undertaken. Derma 19 titis potential. 20 " Q, Now, once-- 21 MR. FEATHERSTONE: Wait a minute. He also asked 22 about chronic testing. Is this a stage at which chronic 23 testing might be done if appropriate? 24 A. If appropriate, yes, Sir. 25 Q, Now, once your department made the determination | -37- i WATER PCB-SD0000056162 1 that additional toxicity studies or data was necessary, j 2 assuming it was, you get the results in, you evaluate it 3 like you did before in the earlier stage, the research I j 4 development area stage of the product development? You'd 5 make the same type of evaluation, use the same criterion as 6 that? 7 i A. I was really not that prepared-- 8 Q. Let's do this again. i : i 9 A. You say you. I don't know whether you mean me ; 10 personally or me, the department. 11 Q. I mean you, the department, first of all. 12 Once the determination is made in your department at the 13 commercial developmentstage of the product to do or not to i 'I 14 do additional toxicity tests, once your decision is made, : 15 once you have the data from tests, if any, ordered, what is j 16 the next step your department would take with regard to 17 evaluating that product? * I ! 18 A. I'm going to ask you. Sir. I don't know 19 whether you said on the basis of subacute studies or chronic 20 studies or-- V* 21 MR. FEATHERSTONE: He's just asking you for the 22 general procedure. 23 Q. The general procedure, not what you would do 24 with a chronic versus an acute study. But once your deter 25 mination has been made in your department, once you have -38- WATER PCB-SD0000056163 1 the data to exercise your judgment, what is the next step 2 you take in the product development? 3 A. The Medical Department would analyze the data, 4 interpret it and provide it to the people, not only at that 5 time in development, but, also, back to the people in 6 research and, if the material was approaching commercializa 7 tion, then to the people involved in marketing. j j8 Qi What form would your recommendations normally 9 take? Would it be, we recommend the product; don't recommend 10 it? What form would your recommendations be once you 11 finished your work? 12 MR. FEATHERSTONEs He said interpretations of the 13 data. There's a difference. 14 Q. All right. Your interpretations, your exer 15 cising your judgment, what form did that take when you 16 notified the other departments? 17 A By form, as I understand your question, would 18 be written communication from Dr. Kelly to the involved 19 party. 20 " Qi And what would the content--the type of infor 21 mation that you would communicate? 22 A The information that the department would 23 communicate, to my recollection, consisted of, the interpre 24 tation leads the department to believe marketing can proceed; 25 marketing cannot proceed without additional toxicity data; -39- WATER PCB-SD0000056164  1 or marketing can never proceed in the intended use. 2 Ql If I'm correct, you gave three general cate 3 gories of your department's evaluation, that marketing can 4 proceed, you need additional data, or marketing can never 5 proceed with the intended use? 6 MR. FEATHERSTONE: Did you call those recommenda 7 tions or interpretations? 8 MR. HYNES: I called them interpretations. 9 Q. Are they interpretations or recommendations? 10 MR. FEATHERSTONE: Or comments. 11 & Or comments? What would you categorize these 12 as? 13 A. That's a fine distinction between words that 14 I don't know that I can make. We were responsible for 15 making a judgment and we expressed that judgment. 16 & All right. Fine. In your department's judg 17 ment then, in the situation where your department said 18 marketing can proceed, what criteria did you use? I mean 19 criteria in the broadest sense, not necessarily written 20 criterion. What criterion would your department use to make 21 that recommendation that marketing can proceed? What would 22 be the factors that would be involved in making that deter- 23 mination? 24 A. Well, the principal one, of course, would be 25 the data that had been generated in the toxicology studies -40- WATER PCB-SD0000056165 1 but, also, in conjunction with potential use and the 2 potential exposure to workers and, in some cases, to the 3 public. 4 Qi Could that be categorized-- Would I be fair 5 in categorizing it, for its intended use, it's safe? 6 A. Yes. 7 Q. And then the second recommencfation or evalua 8 tion would be you need additional data. What type of 9 additional data would that consist of? Would that be 10 strictly toxicity data or would it be some other type of 11 data? 12 MR. FEATHERSTONE: Ma'am, would you please repeat 13 the question? 14 REPORTER READS BACK. 15 MR. FEATHERSTONE: You mean in a case which Mr. 16 Wheeler referred to, a recommendation or a judgment from 17 Medical that you can't proceed without additional data? 18 MR. HYNES: Right. 19 MR. FEATHERSTONE: The question is, what type of 20 additional data would you recommend be secured? 21 A. Toxicity data of some sort. 22 Qi So the additional data you referred to there 23 was strictly toxicity data. Is that correct? 24 A. Yes. And I'm including in that the skin 25 testing program with humans that I mentioned earlier. -41- WATER PCB-SD0000056166 1 Ql And what factors would cause your department 2 to make the evaluation that marketing should never proceed 3 with the product for its intended use? 4 A There are so few. In fact, I can't recall of 5 an instance where that was done. 6 Q. Again we're talking at the commercial develop 7 ment stage. Do you recall an instance where that was done 8 on any product at the new product research stage? , 9 A The only instance I can recall. Sir, is j 10 Monsanto made a herbicide for killing weeds. 11 MR. FEATHERSTONE: The question is, do you remem- l i 12 ber it happening at the research stage? I take it, by j 13 happening, he means the Medical Department recommended that 14 development not go ahead with this product. 15 A Yes. 16 Q. Your answer is yes? You do recallthat? ; j | 17 A One instance. j 18 Q. Would you explain whatthat instancewas, the ' 19 best you recall. 20 ' MR. FEATHERSTONE: Did it involve PCBs? 21 A No, Sir. 22 MR. FEATHERSTONE: He's not going to answer the 23 question, Mr. Hynes. 24 MR. HYNES: I don't understand why. I want to 25 find out what the factors are for the recommendation not to -42- I WATER PCB-SD0000056167 0 1 proceed with the product. He remembers one instance. I 2 think we have a right to find out what the factors were that i 3 led them to make that judgment. 4 MR. FEATHERSTONE: Well, you may have a right to 5 the factors but you don't have a right to the product or the 6 particulars. Mr. Wheeler, if you can answer that question 7 generally with respect to the factors that are considered 8 by the Medical Department, you may do so. If you can't, 9 without divulging what the product was, say so and we won't 10 go any further, unless Mr. Hynes can demonstrate some 11 relevancy to this litigation. 12 A. There was one case where a product had been 13 developed that, in the form and concentration that Monsanto 14 proposed to market it, a change in marketing practice 15 actually where it was proposed the Material be sold in its 16 concentrated form, whereas it had been marketed as a 17 mixture, for want of a better word. 18 MR. FEATHERSTONE: You mean diluted form? 19 A. In diluted form, yes, with inert materials. 20 A change in marketing the material as a concentrated mate 21 rial would have required the class B poison label that I 22 mentioned earlier and we didn't feel that that was a logical 23 way to proceed. 24 Qt That's the only instance you can recall? 25 A. The only one I can recall. Yes, Sir. -43- WATER PCB-SD0000056168 1 Ql Once your department's evaluation-- Is that 2 all that you can recall in the commercial development stage 3 of a product? Once you make this final evaluation, proceed, 4 don't proceed, need additional data, once that evaluation is 5 made by your department and sent forward to whomever is 6 supposed to get that, what further input or information is 7 requested from your department on this product before it 8 goes into commercial sales as a fully developed commercial 9 product? 10 A. Your question is so long, Sir, I don't know I 11 how to answer it. 12 MR. FEATHERSTONE: After you made-- 13 Ql After you make your recommendation at the 14 commercial development stage, does your department have any 15 further input in the product before it is finally marketed? 16 A. No, Sir. 17 Q, Now, once a product has been on the market, 18 other than when a problem comes up-- Let's put that aside 19 for a minute. If a product is on the market, does your 20 department ever become involved again in the evaluation? 21 MR. FEATHERSTONE: If there's no problem? 22 MR. HYNES: That's right. 23 Ql I'm talking about, if there's no problem, is 24 there any other further involvement with your department? 25 A. Only as technical bulletins for a product -44- WATER PCB-SD0000056169 1 might be revised and we were required to ensure that the 2 proper handling precautions were included in any revisional 3 bulletins. 4 Qt What are these technical bulletins? 5 A. In every instance, I believe, of a Monsanto 6 product of any volume, there's a technical bulletin that 7 had been prepared to assist, first, people as prospective 8 customers during the development effort of the material 9 and then, secondly, as a part of sales literature just 10 generally available to anyone. 11 Qt And what role did your department play in the 12 technical bulletin revisions or offering a technical bulle 13 tin? 14 A Our role was concerned with the assurance that, 15 if there were necessary precautions in the handling and use 16 from a health standpoint, that these warning statements 17 or recommendations for safe handling be included. 18 MR. FEATHERSTONE: When you use the term, Mr. 19 Hynes, your department, are you referring to-- H 20 MR. HYNES: The Industrial Hygiene Department. 21 MR. FEATHERSTONE: Even though there wasn't an 22 Industrial Hygiene Department, that loose characterization? 23 MR. HYNES: Right. 24 MR. FEATHERSTONE: All right. 25 Qt What situations would require your department -45- WATER PCB-SD0000056170 . 1 to become involved with the revision of a technical bulletin? 2 A. What? 3 Ql What situations would call for you to become 4 involved in revisions of a technical bulletin? S A. It was general company policy that the bulle 6 tins should be reviewed by the department. 7 Qt And when would-- What would prompt the depart 8 ment to review such a revision? Who would initiate the 9 revision of it? First of all, who would initiate the i 10 revision of a technical bulletin? 11 A I believe someone in the marketing department. I 12 Qi And do you recall what situations would prompt | .I 13 them to initiate such a revision? 14 MR. FEATHERSTONE: You have a terrible foundational 15 problem there, Mr. Hynes. Mr. Wheeler wasn't in marketing 16 and, if marketing did it, how can he answer that question? 17 MR. HYNES: If he knows. 18 MR. FEATHERSTONE: I guess that's the be all and 19 end all of foundational problems. To the extent you know 20 anything about it, Mr. Wheeler, you can tell him. 21 A Well, any new data that had been developed 22 about other characteristics of the product, which I had no 23 responsibility or control of. If there was a change in 24 physical characteristics, chemical characteristics-- 25 MR. FEATHERSTONE: Intended uses? -46- WATER PCB-SD0000056171 1 A. Intended uses, in particular. 2 Q. So if there was a change in the intended use, 3 there would be a new technical bulletin, which would come 4 out eventually to take into consideration its new use? 5 A. Yes, Sir. 6 Ql At some point then, your department would have 7 reviewed that intended use and determined the toxicity, the 8 handling, the type of-- Strike that. If the intended use 9 changed in a product, would your department be notified by 10 some other department within the company? 11 A Yes. 12 Ql Was that a standard practice? 13 A Yes. 14 Q. And once you had been notified-- I'm using 15 you in a plural sense. Once you had been notified of an 16 intended use change in a product, what evaluation did your 17 department do in terms of toxicity work or safety and the 18 like for this intended use? 19 MR. FEATHERSTONE: Now we've moved away from the 20 revisions of this-- 21 MR. HYNES: Right. 22 Qt In these product intended use changes, you say, 23 as a matter of practice within the company, if there is an 24 intended use change, your department would be notified. 25 When your department was notified, what did you do? | -47- WATER PCB-SD0000056172 1 A. I can't recall specific instances where any 2 great amount of additional toxicity work was done or any, 3 perhaps, other than, again, as I mentioned earlier, the 4 fact that, if the intended use was going to involve repeated S human skin contact, we would insist that we get data as to 6 show potential irritation problem from that use. 7 Ql Would I be correct in saying that, once you 8 were notified of the change in intended use or an additional 9 intended use, you'd evaluate it with the data that you had 10 on that product and then make a judgment whether you needed 11 more data? 12 A. Yes, Sir, 13 Cl Once your judgment was made, you would make a 14 recommendation to whom as to whether they can go forward 15 with the intended use, you need more data, or don't go 16 forward with the intended use? 17 A. I think. Sir, if the question came to us from 18 the development group, it obviously went back to the people 19 in the development area. If it came from somebody in 20 marketing, then we were in contact with the people in the 21 marketing group. 22 Ql And was the method of your evaluation, the 23 form that your evaluation took, would that be in the techni-j 24 cal bulletin revision. 25 A If we had recommendations or thoughts for -48- WATER PCB-SD0000056173 c 1 changes, yes. 2 Q. But if you had no changes in toxicity data, 3 safe handling data or whatever, you wouldn't be involved 4 with the changes in the technical bulletin revision? 5 A. There was no reason to. We would be involved. 6 There would be no reason to suggest changes. 7 MR. FEATHERSTONE: In the language? 8 A In the language. j 9 Q. You would just review the revision to make sure 10 it comported with prior data? 11 A Our prior data and knowledge. Yes. 12 Q. In your department, industrial hygiene, were 13 all of the toxicity studies done on behalf of or for 14 Monsanto ordered by your department and evaluated by your 15 department? ' 16 A I can't think of any exceptions. 17 Q. And you said before--am I correct--that Monsantb 18 didn't do any in house studies, toxicity studies? They 19 were all contracted out? 20 "* A That's right. 21 Q. Is it correct that any warning labels on 22 products-- I mean finished products that were being mar 23 keted. Did your department have to approve and evaluate 24 those warning labels before they were affixed to the 25 product? -49- WATER PCB-SD0000056174 c 1 A Yes. 2 Qi With regard to the products which Monsanto 3 manufactured, would data-- Strike that a second. Monsanto 4 had various plants throughout the United States. Is that S correct? 6 A. Yes. 7 Q. And each plant would manufacture either raw 8 materials for-- Components. Not raw materials. Components e for other products or make the finished products for sale 10 at these various plants? Is that correct? 11 A. Yes. 12 Ci Would instances of workers' safety problems 13 in the manufacture of these products be sent to your 14 department for evaluation? 15 A There has to be a distinction, I think, Sir, 16 safety and health. We would become aware of any safety 17 problems which involved accidents through the safety direc 18 tor and another staff department in Monsanto, through the 19 safety engineer at the plant, or through the physician at 20 % the plant, who was responsible for the treatment of accident 21 cases. 22 Cl And what would the health problems be? You 23 made a distinction between safety and health. What would 24 the health problems be? 25 A The distinction I was trying to make. Sir, was "50- WATER PCB-SD0000056175 1 that--and this is a sort of a professional situation--an 2 accident is a one time sort of event, should be preventable, 3 should not occur again, barring human error and the lack of 4 corrective physical changes. The potential health effect S of something is a little more obscure and is concerned not 6 with the leak that occurs today and a fellow gets a snoot 7 full of irritating substance and his eyes water and he has 8 a little tightness in his chest, which requires first aid 9 treatment, but the effect that is more obscure and results ; 10 from a limited exposure to a much lower concentration day 11 in and day out over a working lifetime. Is that clear? 12 Ql It's more of a chronic type of a problem? 13 A. Yes. 14 MR. FEATHERSTONE: A chronic type of an exposure, 15 as opposed to problem. 0 16 MR. HYNES: All' right. 17 MR. FEATHERSTONE: I'm exposed to you on a chronic 18 basis and I haven't yet considered that a problem. 19 A I hope mine is acute. Would this be an appro 20 priate" time to make a break for the restroom? 21 MR. HYNES: Fine. 22 RECESSED: 11:30 a. m., March 10, 1981. 23 RECONVENED: 11:37 a. m., March 10, 1981. 24 Ql We're going into some questions now on the 25 pydraul fluids, the aroclors and all. Do you recall when -51- WATER PCB-SD0000056176 1 the pydraul fluids were first marketed by Monsanto? 2 A. I believe the mid-'50s. 3 Ql And prior to their being marketed, was your 4 department involved in evaluating the toxicity, the safety 5 of the products prior to their marketing? 6 A. Yes. 7 & When do you recall your first involvement with 8 that product? With the pydraul fluids? 9 A I don't know. I suppose samples came to us 10 from research. 11 MR. FEATHERSTONE: Do you have any specific j | ! I 12 recollection with pydraul? 13 A No. i 14 Qi In normal practice, before a product is mar 15 keted, how many years would you estimate the average would i 16 be before a product was marketed? Where it would be in 17 research, commercial development? 18 A I don't know. ; 19 Qi There really is no rule of thumb in that. Is j 20 that correct? 21 A Not to my knowledge. 22 Qi Have you reviewed the-- Or at any time did 23 you review the pydraul toxicity studies at Monsanto? 24 A Are you speaking now. Sir, of you, department, 25 or you, Wheeler? ' -52- WATER PCB-SD0000056177 i 1 Ql You, department. Do you know-- I'm sorry. 2 You, Wheeler. 3 MR. FEATHERSTONE: What's the question now? 4 Qi Do you recall reviewing the pydraul toxicity 5 data at any time? Yourself? 6 A Not specific dates. 7 ql do you recall that you did review it at some 8 point? 9 A Yes. 10 Qi Do you recall approximately when that was? 11 A No, because I don't know when they were moving o 12 along in research and to development. 13 Qi Subsequent to their marketing-- Or prior to 14 their being marketed, would I be correct in assuming that 15 they went through the same pattern of evaluation that you 16 referred to previously? The research chemist stage, the 17 commercial development stage? 18 A Yes. 19 Qi And your department, I assume, would have *. 20 conducted or evaluated acute toxicity studies? 21 A Yes. 22 Qi Do you recall if any studies, other than 23 acute toxicity studies, were done on the pydraul product? 24 MR. FEATHERSTONE: That's back when-- 25 MR. HYNES: Back when it was being developed. -53- J WATER PCB-SD0000056178 1 A. I can't recall of any. 2 Q. Do you recall if anything other than acute 3 studies were ever done on the pydraul products? 4 A. Yes. 5 Q. Do you recall when those others, other than 6 acute studies, were done and the type of studies which were 7 done? 8 A. Again, I believe it was some time in the 9 mid-'50s that we had some toxicity tests done at Kettering 10 Laboratories to determine what, if any, effect there might 11 be on animals when the fluids were exposed to hot surfaces 12 or molten metal. 13 Q. And these were toxicity studies which were 14. done after the product had been marketed? 15 A I don't recall. 16 Q. Were you involved in these Kettering 17 Laboratory toxicity studies yourself? 18 A Again, in conjunction with Dr. Kelly. 19 Qt, And your role there was evaluating the results 20 from Kettering? 21 A Discussing the evaluation with Dr. Kelly. 22 Ql And do you recall any recommendations or 23 evaluations which you made with regard to these studies? 24 A The data indicated that, if they were-- 25 MR. FEATHERSTONE: The question is, do you recall o WATER PCB-SD0000056179 1 making any recommendations? 2 A. Recommendations per se, no. j 3 Q. Do you recall what your evaluation of these 4 tests consisted of? 5 A. Our evaluation. 6 MR. FEATHERSTONE: You and Dr. Kelly? 7 Qi You and Dr. Kelly? 8 A Yes. 9 MR. FEATHERSTONE: Do you want theirevaluation? j \ 10 MR. HINES: Yes. Okay. 11 A Our evaluation was that, if there should be 12 a rupture of a system where the fluids were under pressure, 13 which was their intended use, in a closed system, that if 14 there should be a rupture of a hydraulic line and the 15 material was sprayed on molten or hot surfaces, the decom 16 position products would not lead to an immediate threat to 17 the employees in the plant where the accident occurred. 18 Qi What did you mean by an immediate threat? 19 A As I would envision circumstances resulting 20 from feuch an accident, because the fluids were non flammable, 21 the personnel in the plant and the physical property was not 22 subject to burning down and loss of life and property but 23 there could be an evolution of smoke, fumes and perhaps 24 vapors. And there's a distinction here. Sir, in the 25 industrial hygiene field where a cloud of a mixture of -55- WATER PCB-SD0000056180 1 these components would be present until such time as the 2 machinery could be shut down and the area ventilated. 3 MR. FEATHERSTONE: In other; words, the machinery 4 could be shut down and the area ventilated without any 5 immediate threat to human health? 6 A Exactly. 7 Cl You stated that decomposition products of the 8 pydraul. What would these decomposition products be? 9 A My recollection is that there was some analyses! 10 done that showed that these could be gases, including carbon 11 monoxide, which you would get from the combustion of any 12 organic material. There was, I believe, some data that 13 showed that some of the material just volatilized and, 14 thirdly, that, in fact, some of the material did break down 15 into suet and carbon. What analysis was done indicated 16 there was no generation of unusual components that would be 17 seriously toxic for the duration of the exposure necessary 18 to shut down the equipment and ventilate the building 19 before resuming normal operations. *. 20 & I don't understand what you mean by volatilized 21 material. Could you explain that? 22 A Yes. Water volatilizes. YOu get steam out of 23 it. 24 ft Very hot-- I'd say hot vapor but again vapor 25 is a word of art there, too. -56- WATER PCB-SD0000056181 1 A. Vapor is the-- 2 MR. FEATHERSTONE: Wait a minute. That isn't a ; 3 question. He's giving us his understanding. 4 Qt A volatilized material then would be something 5 that is a highly heated gas which comes off? 6 A Not necessarily. 7 Qt All right. I still don't understand what a 8 volatized material is. Could you try to explain that? 9 MR. FEATHERSTONE: Do you want a general or do 10 you want to know how pydraul might be volatized? 11 MR. HYNES: Both. What a volatized material is i 12 generally and how that relates to pydraul, how that is 13 volatilized. 14 MR. FEATHERSTONE: He wants a layman's explanation 15 like one you've given me, perhaps. 16 A I mentioned earlier in my remarks that this is 17 a question of definition for the industrial hygienists and, 18 I think, for biologists in general. In general. I've got 19 to get away from that word. Material is described as a 20 gas if*, in its natural state, it is a gas. Oxygen, nitrogen, 21 etcetera, etcetera. Materials present after being volati 22 lized as a vapor, if in the natural state and at normal 23 temperatures and pressure conditions, the material is a 24 liquid, but then because of heat--and it need not be high 25 heat--it depends on the vapor pressure $f the material--you -57- WATER PCB-SD0000056182 1, have vapors in the atmosphere. 2 MR. FEATHERSTONE: Generated from the liquid? 3 A Generated from the liquid. It's the. gaseous 4 phase of a liquid. Perhaps that-- 5 MR. FEATHERSTONE: He's got it. 6 A The water in the air today-- 7 MR. FEATHERSTONE: Mr. Wheeler-- 8 A Okay. 9 Qi Now, as to the pydraul product, what would be 10 the volatilized material there? 11 MR. FEATHERSTONE: Pydraul vapor. 12 Ql Would the witness answer that question? 13 A Pydraul vapor. 14 Qi So it would just be a gaseous form of the 15 liquid pydraul? . 16 A I don't know how to explain it any other way. 17 Qi Do you recall what prompted your department to 18 order up the tests with Kettering Labs that we were just 19 discussing? 20 ' A Yes. 21 Q. And what was that? 22 A Recognition that there could be in industry a 23 situation where equipment could fail and the kind of 24 circumstance that I've described could occur. 25 Q. And you don't recall if these tests done by -58- WATER PCB-SD0000056183 1 Kettering Labs were done after the product had already been 2 on the market or prior to being marketed? Is that correct? 3 A. I believe they were done before marketing or 4 certainly in conjunction with the early marketing efforts. 5 Qi And that's your first recollection of yourself 6 being involved in any toxicity studies for pydraul. Is that 7 correct? 0 8 A. Other than the acute studies we discussed 9 earlier. 10 Ql Are you familiar with the term aroclor? 11 A. Yes. 12 Qi What is an aroclor product? 13 A. Aroclor is the trade name for a series of 14 mixtures of chemical materials known as polychlorinated 15 byphenyls. 16 Qi And do you recall when aroclors first started 17 to be made by Monsanto? 18 A. Only from what I've read. 19 Qi And from what you've read, what approximately 20 was thfe time? 21 A. The late '30s. 22 Qi And are aroclors components of the pydraul 23 fluid? 24 A. I believe some of them are. Yes. Let me 25 rephrase that. Sir. Some of the pydrauls contain some -59- WATER PCB-SD0000056184 1 aroclors. 2 ft All right. I'm talking on just pydraul fluids 3 which contain PCBs. Pydraul fluids which contain PCBs, 4 they would all include aroclors as components of them. Is 5 that correct? 6 A If I understand your question correctly. 7 ft All pydraul fluids which contain PCBs, compo 8 nents of those fluids would contain aroclors. Is that 9 correct? 10 A Yes. 11 ft Do you recall or do you know in a general 12 sense how the pydraul-- And from now on I'm referring to 13 pydraul as PCB pydrauls. Do you recall how the pydraul 14 fluids are manufactured? 15 A It's a mixture of the components of the fluid. 16 ft And other than the aroclors as components of 17 the fluids, do you recall what other chemicals go into the 18 making of pydraul? 19 A Not of a specific pydraul. 20 ft Are the aroclors the main components of the 21 pydrauls? 22 A I don't know. 23 ft Do you know if the toxicity studies-- The 24 usual series of toxicity studies that we referred to before, 25 were they done for the aroclors? -60- C WATER PCB-SD0000056185 1 A. Would you rephrase that, please. 2 fit Earlier you stated that the pydraul fluids-- 3 your department was involved in the same acute type of tests 4 in their research development stage and the like. Was that 5 same pattern followed for the aroclor products? 6 A. There had been investigations of the aroclors 7 preceding their involvement in the pydrauls. 8 fit And pydrauls-- 9 A Or certain of the aroclors. Sir. 10 Q. Would the toxicity tests, the toxicity studies 11 run for the aroclors? 12 A Yes. Several of them. 13 MR. FEATHERSTONEs I'm sorry. Was the question 14 would or were there? 15 MR. HYNES: Were. ' 16 A I understood him to say were there. 17 MR. FEATHERSTONEs I'm not sure that's right. 18 Court reporter, was that-- 19 REPORTER READS BACK. 20 * MR. HYNES: I thought it was were. I'm sorry. 21 MR. FEATHERSTONEs Why don't you rephrase the 22 question and then you can give him the answer. I mean, 23 would doesn't make-- There wasn't a question there if the 24 word would was in it. 25 Qt The toxicity studies which were done for the -61- WATER PCB-SD0000056186 1 aroclors, in your department's evaluation of the pydraul 2 fluid, would you have used the-- Or do you know if you 3 used the results of the toxicity studies for the aroclors 4 in evaluating the pydraul fluids? 5 A. Yes. 6 Q. And how was that evaluation done? 7 A We had conducted chronic inhalation studies on 8 some of the aroclors beginning, my recollection is, in the 9 early '50s. So we had good inhalation data on the aroclors 10 that led to the setting of a threshold limit value by a 11 government agency as to the safe levelscfor worker exposure. 12 Qi In your department's evaluation of the pydraul 13 fluids-- I take it the evaluation was it can be marketed 14 for its intended purposes. Correct? 15 A Yes. 16 Q. At any point in time you recall, were you ever ! 17 notified of any change or proposed change of use in the 18 pydraul fluid? 19 A Proposed change of use? 20 * Qi Intended use of the product? 21 A As I understand your question, no. 22 Q. It originally was meant to be used as a 23 hydraulic fluid. Is that correct? 24 A Pydrauls? 25 Ql Pydraul. -62- WATER PCB-SD0000056187 1 A. It was intended for uses initially as, my 2 recollection is, hydraulic fluids. Subsequent uses came up, 3 such as air compressor fluids, but again the same principles 4 applying in terms of use. 5 Q. Was your department ever involved in any 6 evaluation of the manufacture of the pydraul fluids in 7 terms of impurities in the fluid or anything of that nature 8 in the manufacturing process? 9 A. Our department, no. 10 Q. What department would be involved in that? 11 MR. FEATHERSTONE: You mean might have been? 12 MR. HYNES: Right. 13 MR. FEATHERSTONE: If such a thing happened? I 14 MR. HYNES: Right. 15 MR. FEATHERSTONE: Do you have any idea? 16 Q. A quality control type of operation is what 17 I'm looking for. 18 A My understanding is that quality control was 19 a constant practice because of the--particularly because of * 20 the dielectric uses of the fluids which were-- 21 MR. FEATHERSTONE: He's talking about pydraul. 22 Q. I'm talking about pydraul. 23 MR. FEATHERSTONE: Do you know what department 24 was responsible for quality control in the manufacture of 25 pydraul fluids? -63- V WATER PCB-SD0000056188 1 A. Research and Plant Quality Control Laboratories, 2 ft Are those two different departments? Research 3 is one and plant quality control department? Are those two 4 different entities? 5 A In most cases, yes. One at the plant, one at 6 a division or central research. 7 ft I take it each plant had their own quality 8 control department? 9 A Yes. !I I 10 ft As to the aroclor fluids, would it be the same j j 11 answer? That the research and plant quality.control labs or| 12 departments would be involved in determining any impurities 13 in the product? 14 A Yes. 15 ft Was your department ever involved in any 16 discussions or evaluations of any findings of either 17 research or plant quality control with regard to impurities 18 in either the pydraul or the aroclor fluids? 19 A Mo. 20 ' ft If certain impurities would be found of a 21 highly toxic nature in an aroclor product or a pydraul 22 product, would they, as a matter of course, have notified 23 your department of a finding? 24 A Yes. 25 ft Or should they have? -64- WATER PCB-SD0000056189 1 A. Yes. 2 Qt And you don't recall any such discussion. Is 3 that correct? 4 MR. FEATHERSTONE: He has already testified to 5 that. Do you want to affirm that again? 6 A Well, I'm under oath. I want to be honest. 7 I have to keep in mind a little bit the time frame. Some 8 time in the early '70s, I believe, our research laboratories 9 looked for specific impurities and found none. 10 Qt What were those impurities they specifically 11 looked for? Do you recall? v 12 A I believe they were so called hydrofurans or 13 chlorinated furans. 14 Q. That would be like dibenzofurans? 15 A No. I don't think that's-- 16 MR. FEATHERSTONE: Were you involved in this, 17 Mr. Wheeler? 18 A No. Only to see the results. 19 Qt You evaluated the results and no impurities 20 of this nature were found. Is that correct? 21 MR. FEATHERSTONE: Wait a minute. His testimony 22 was that these other departments conducted that investiga 23 tion and the no finding was their conclusion. 24 MR. HYNES: And he said he reviewed that. 25 Qt Isn't that what you said? -65- WATER PCB-SD0000056190 1 A. I was made aware of the fact that they had 2 found negative results. Yes. 3 ft Fine. That's all I wanted to know. It was 4 their responsibility to find it? 5 A. Yes. 6 MR. FEATHERSTONE: To look for it. 7 Cl The area of pydraul warning labels, the label 8 ing on pydraul products. Do you recall your department 9 being involved in determining what labeling should be on 10 the pydraul products? 11 A. Only as a part of our review of all labels. 12 Cl Do you specifically recall any pydraul warning 13 labels? 14 A. My recollection is we recommended use such 15 that there would not be repeated and chronic exposure, the i 16 material to be used in closed systems-- J 17 MR. FEATHERSTONE: The question only is whether ; 18 you recall the pydraul labels. Answer yes or no. 19 A Yes. i 20 * Q What do you recall about those pydraul labels? 21 MR. FEATHERSTONE: You mean what they contained? 22 MR. HYNES: Right. 23 A I don't recall the exact wording on the label. 24 Q. Generally what do you recall the wording on 25 the labels? -66- WATER PCB-SD0000056191 1 A. That prolonged and repeated vapor inhalation 2 be avoided, that prolonged and repeated skin contact be 3 avoided. 4 Q. You also mentioned a minute ago something 5 about use in closed systems. Do you recall that being on 6 the label? 7 A. I don't believe we were that specific. I B believe we said use with adequate ventilation. 9 Q. Maybe the labeling is a broader category. Let i 10 me see if I can clear this up in my own mind. I think of 11 labeling as a label on a product, a fifty five gallon drum, 12 a quart bottle, whatever. If a product is shipped-- Is 13 that correct? . My understanding of labeling, at least as I 14 explained it? 15 MR. FEATHERSTONE: Do you mean is that what the 16 witness refers to when he uses the term label? 17 MR. HYNES: Right. 18 Qi Is that what you mean by labeling? A label 19 that would be on a drum or a container of the product? 20 ' A Yes. 21 Q. Pydraul, as I understand it, was also shipped 22 in bulk shipments, a car load or a tank car load on 23 occasions. Do you know if that is true? 24 A I'm not aware of that. 25 Q, If-- Assuming that it is true-- WATER PCB-SD0000056192 1 MR. FEATHERSTONE: Is that a hypothetical question? 2 MR. HYNES: Sounds like it. 3 MR. FEATHERSTONE: Okay. 4 Q. Assuming that pydraul is sometimes shipped in S a car load, tank car load, lot, were there any procedures 6 that you are aware of within Monsanto as to get the warnings 7 that are contained on the label to the customer? 8 A Yes. | 9 Ql And how would that be done? 10 A Again through technical bulletins. The techni 11 cal bulletins included references to the label precautions 12 or contained the same precautions, maybe in a little more 13 elaborate way than the side of a label would permit. 14 Qi Any other way that you can recall? 15 MR. FEATHERSTONE: You mean that he is aware of, 16 even though he*s not involved in it? 17 MR. HYNES: Right. 18 A Through correspondence from customers and 19 prospective customers. %. 20 Qt I take it these technical bulletins are made 21 available to all customers. Is that correct? 22 A Yes. 23 Qi Do you recall any-- Back to the pydraul 24 labeling again, I believe you stated the label stated 25 prolonged vapor inhalation and skin contact should be -68- WATER PCB-SD0000056193 1 avoided, use with adequate ventilation. From your first 2 recollection of pydraul labels until your present recollec 3 tion, do you recall any changes in the warnings on the label'* 4 A. Yes. 5 Q, And what changes do you recall and when? 6 A There was a change some time, I believe, in the 7 '60s that included the statement that the pydrauls did have B chlorinated hydrocarbons as components. 9 10 that? Qi Do you recall any other changes, other than i I 11 A Yes. 12 , 13 about? MR. FEATHERSTONE: What time frame are you talking 14. MR. HYNES: I told him from his first recollection 15 of pydraul labeling to his current recollection, what 16 changes have been on the label. He said in the mid-'60s-- 17 MR. FEATHERSTONE: No. He said some time in the 18 60s. 19 MR. HYNES: Some time in the '60s, they added 20 a statement that chlorinated hydrocarbon was a component. 21 Qi What other changes do you recall and when do 22 you recall these changes in labeling being made? 23 MR. FEATHERSTONE: And is your question in the 24 time period up through the time he retired from the company? 25 MR. HYNES: Yes. o -69- WATER PCB-SD0000056194 1 MR. FEATHERSTONE: You mean the time after PCB 2 fluid was withdrawn from the market? 3 MR. HYNES: No, no. I'm sorry. Again we're just 4 talking about any pydraul fluid which contained PCBs. 5 MR. FEATHERSTONE: Pydraul fluid. PCB pydraul 6 fluid. 7 : A In 1970 there was a change in the label, which 8 cautioned people about disposal of any of the fluid such as 9 they could get into the environment. to Q. Did you say that was in the '70s or in 1970? 11 A I believe it was in early 1970. 12 Ql And that labeling was to all the pydraul 13 products which contained PCBs? 14 A Yes. 15 Qi Going back to the change in the '60s where you 16 added chlorinated hydrocarbons on the label-- 17 MR. FEATHERSTONE: He didn't do that. 18 MR. HYNES: I'm saying you, Monsanto. 19 MR. FEATHERSTONE: Well, you keep shifting between * 20 you, meaning Mr. Wheeler, you, meaning the department, you, 21 meaning Monsanto, Jim. That's a problem. At least I have 22 a problem with that. I'm not a chameleon. 23 MR. HYNES: You're turning colors. 24 MR. FEATHERSTONE: It's hard for me to say those 25 long words. -70- WATER PCB-SD0000056195 1 ft On the change in labeling where chlorinated 2 hydrocarbons was added to the label, ;do you recall what 3 prompted that change? 4 A. No. 5 Qi Do you recall why adding chlorinated hydro 6 carbons to the label is at all significant from a warning 7 standpoint? 8 MS. OLIVER: I object to the orm of the question.j 9 Significant to who? ' 10 MR. HYNES: Significant to Dr. Wheeler. 11 MR. FEATHERSTONE: Mr. Wheeler. 12 MS. OLIVER: Today or in the 1960s? 13 Qt In the 1960s, why was the addition of chlori 14. nated hydrocarbons to the label significant? 15 A I don't recall. 16 Cl Had chlorinated hydrocarbons been a component 17 of the pydraul product throughout the existence pf the sale 18 of the product? 19 A If you're referring to PCB containing pydrauls, 20 PCB iS a chlorinated hydrocarbon. 21 22 is? 23 24 to? 25 & Could you define what a chlorinated hydrocarbon MR. FEATHERSTONE: You mean what the term refers MR. HYNES: Right. -71- - | WATER PCB-SD0000056196 1 A. It almost takes a lecture in chemistry, organic 2 chemistry. 3 Q, Just a brief definition chemically what a 4 chlorinated hydrocarbon is. 5 A. A chlorinated hydrocarbon is a compound that 6 contains carbon as the basic molecule, hydrogen and chlorine. 7 And there are many, many kinds of chlorinated hydrocarbons. 8 There could be one carbon, there could be-- 9 MR. FEATHERSTONE: You have answered the question.: 10 fit Has the chemical term, chlorinated hydrocarbon, 11 been used in the field of chemistry for many years or is it 12 a new term? 13 A. I think I heard about it when I was a freshman 14. in chemistry. . ' MR. FEATHERSTONE: When was that? 15 16 A. 1933. 17 Q, So it's not a new substance or anything? 18 A. No, Sir. 19 & Anyone with a chemistry background would know 20 generally what a chlorinated hydrocarbon is? 21 A. That's correct. 22 MS. OLIVER: I'm just going to object for the 23 record. 24 0 In your opinion? 25 MS. OLIVER: The witness said there were many -72- WATER PCB-SD0000056197 1 compounds which are chlorinated hydrocarbons. 2 MR. HYNES: Right. 3 Qt But the general generic term of chlorinated 4 hydrocarbon is something that should be known by any person 5 in the field of chemistry. Is that correct? 6 MS. OLIVER: I'm going to object to the foundation. 7 What Mr. Wheeler testifies should be known to people in 8 chemistry, I'm not sure there's any foundation for that. 9 MR. FEATHERSTONE: I don't have any objection, Jim. 10 A. I don't understand what the objection is. 11 MR. FEATHERSTONE: We don't have to debate the 12 objection. Is there a question pending? 13 MS. OLIVER: Is there a question pending? 14 MR. FEATHERSTONE: Yeah. .i 15 MS. OLIVER. Yeah. And my objection. | 16 MR. FEATHERSTONE: Do you remember what the 17 question is. 18 MR. HYNES: Would you read back the question. 19 REPORTER READS BACK. 20 A The field of chemistry, yes. 21 MR. FEATHERSTONE: Do you want to break at this 22 point? Are you done with this line of interrogation about 23 the field of chemistry? 24 MR. HYNES: Yeah. We can start up then later. 25 RECESSED: 12:15 p. m., March 10, 1981. 73- WATER PCB-SD0000056198 1 RECONVENED: 1:05 p. m., March 10, 1981. 2 Q. We were talking before the break of a change 3 in labeling and I believe you said you recalled a labeling 4 change in 1970 where there was some caution put on there j 5 in terms of disposing of the product in the environment. 6 Is that correct? 7 A. It was specifically with the aroclors. Yes. 8 Qi Was that with any product containing the 9 aroclors or containing PCBs or was that specifically just 10 the pydrauls? 11 A. I said aroclors. Sir. You said pydrauls. I 12 cannot recall that there was a label change that included 13 the composition or PCB inclusion in any of the pydraul formu 14 lations where there were PCBs in the formulation for the 15 reason that my recollection is we were at the stage of '. '' 16 phasing out fluids that contained PCBs. So there was no 17 reason to include that statement on the label. i 18 Hi M I understanding you right that you don't 19 have any recollection of any of the pydraul products 20 containing PCBs having that labeling change? 21 A. I don't recall but this is seme time ago. 22 Q. I understand that. Just the best you can 23 recall. That's all we can ask for. But you do recall 24 labeling changes on other products which contained PCBs 25 having this cautionary instruction or labeling of don't -74- WATER PCB-SD0000056199 1 dispose in the environment or words to that effect? 2 MR. FEATHERSTONE: He said the product aroclors. 3 You said other products. Do you mean other than aroclors? 4 MR. HYNES: No, no, no. 5 MR. FEATHERSTONE: Aroclors are a product. 6 MR. HYNES: Right. 7 ft Let's go back to what you said. Did Monsanto 8 sell any products that were called aroclors or were the 6 aroclors components of other products with different trade 10 names? 11 MR. FEATHERSTONE: Or both? 12 A I think I answered that question earlier. The 13 aroclors was a series of Monsanto trademark products con i 14 taining polychlorinated biphenyls, made up of polychlori 15 nated biphenyls. 16 ft Right. And were they marketed under the name 17 of aroclors, was my question? 18 A Yes. 16 ft So this cautionary labeling on disposal to 20 the environment, was that on any products, other than a 21 product marketed under the trade name aroclor? Do you 22 recall? 23 A Not that I recall. 24 ft And the best you recall, it was around 1970 25 or in 1970? -75- o WATER PCB-SD0000056200 1 A. That's my recollection. 2 Q. You just stated that that was not on pydraul 3 products as you were phasing out the pydraul products 4 containing PCBs. Is that correct? 5 A. I don't think I said, Sir, that it was not on 6 them. I don't really recall. 7 Q. I'm sorry. I didn't mean that. 8 MR. FEATHERSTONE: His testimony was as to his 9 recollection of that, at that time, Monsanto was phasing 10 out PCB pydraul. 11 Q. Now, do you recall if any other Monsanto 12 products which contained PCBs had that cautionary labeling 13 on it, other than what you just said, the aroclors? 14 A I don't know of any other products that con 15 tained the aroclors? ' 16 Q. So any product which-- Monsanto products which 17 contained PCBs, which were marketed, what were the trade 18 names of these various products? Would it be-- What would 19 be the trade names to denominate a PCB product, other than 20 pydraul and aroclor? ` 21 A I don't know of any. 22 Q, Do you recall the name therminol? 23 A That's right. Yes. That was definitely a 24 product that contained PCBs. 25 Q. I'm just trying to get the names. -76- WATER PCB-SD0000056201 1 A You've refreshed my memory. Sir. 2 Qi Right. So therminol, pydraul, aroclor, products 3 using those trade names are the only ones that you now 4 recall which contained PCBs? , 5 A. That' s right. 6 Q. Do you recall if this cautionary labeling in 7 1970 was put on the therminol products? 8 A. I don't recall. 9 Ql Do you recall, at the time in 1970, if the 10 therminol products were being phased out? 11 MR. FEATHERSTONE: You mean reformulated? 12 MR. HYNES; Reformulated. 13 Qi The PCB formulation was being phased out and 14 being replaced by a non PCB formulation? 15 A I believe that's the case. 16 Qi Similar to pydraul? 17 A Yes, Sir. 18 Qi Do you recall if this phasing out was done . 19 Within the same time frame for the therminol and pydraul? 20 " A That's my recollection. 21 MR. FEATHERSTONE; The answer was, that is your 22 recollection? 23 A It is my recollection that the PCB phase out 24 included not just pydrauls but therminol fluids. 25 Qi But there were aroclor products which were -77- WATER PCB-SD0000056202 1 continued to be marketed, which contained that cautionary 2 labeling in 1970? 3 A. I believe so for the dielectric uses. 4 Qt Now we're getting into my next question. What 5 types of products were continued to be marketed by Monsanto? 6 A. I'm sorry I anticipated your question. 7 Qt That's okay. 8 MR. FEATHERSTONE: Well, it's okay for you but-- 9 Ql To the best of your recollection, what were 10 the uses of Monsanto products which contained PCBs? We 11 already know pydraul. You said hydraulic fluids. What were 12 the other Monsanto products used for which contained PCBs, 13 as best you can recall? 14 MR. FEATHERSTONE: I think the question, Mr. 15 Wheeler, is, what other types of Monsanto products contained l 16 PCBs? I'm not sure that Mr. Wheeler knows all the usages i 17 for those products. 18 MR. HYNES: I understand that. 19 A Well, as you have indicated, Sir, the thermi- 20 nols, Which were a functional fluid in a sense but were 21 heat transfer fluids, still intended for use in closed 22 systems, contained aroclor or PCB products. And then, of 23 course, the aroclors themselvs. . 24 Qt The pydraul was for hydraulic systems, hydrau 25 lic fluids. The therroinols were heat transfer fluids. And -78- o WATER PCB-SD0000056203 1 then the various aroclor products. Do you recall the uses 2 of these various aroclor products? 3 A. Not all of them. There were many of them. 4 Qi The best you can recall, what were some of the 5 uses of them? 6 K As plasticizers in solid plastics; components 7 of erosion and corrosion resistant paints; I believe, to 8 some degree in adhesives. I think there was limited use 9 in rubber gasketing. Those are the ones that come-- 10 ft And the dielectric use? 11 A. The dielectric use, of course. 12 ft Can you just briefly tell me what you under 13 stand a plasticizer to be? A plasticizer use of aroclors? 14. A. A plasticizer is a component of an end plastic 15 product where varying degrees of flexibility may influence 16 the characteristics of that end product and, in this case, 17 adding fire resistance characteristics to that end product, 18 as opposed to other plasticizers that would not lend that 19 characteristic to it. 20 ' ft And a corrosion resistant paint? Just a paint 21 that is not going to corrode as easily when exposed to 22 weather, whatever its uses are? 23 A That's right. 24 ft Adhesives. What type of aroclor use was made 25 in adhesives? -79- WATER PCB-SD0000056204 i 1 MR. FEATHERSTONE: You mean how was aroclor used 2 in-- 3 MR. HYNES: Yeah. 4 Q, How were aroclors used in adhesives? 5 A. My understanding is it was there again as a 6 component to add flexibility to the adhesive. 7 Qi And the dielectric use of aroclors is-- How 8 were aroclors used in a dielectric field? 9 A My understanding is that they were coolants 10 for use in electrical equipment identified as transformers 11 and as capacitors. 12 Qi The dielectric use was as a self-contained 13 transformer or capacitor or whatever? The aroclor was 14 inside it? Sealed? 15 A A sealed unit. Yes, Sir. 16 Qt Earlier you mentioned the word, a closed 17 system. What did you mean? What do you mean in regards to 18 the therminol or pydraul products by the term closed 19 systems? What did you mean by that? 20 % A My understanding of a hydraulic-- 21 MR. FEATHERSTONE: He wants to know what you mean 22 by a closed system. 23 A A closed system to me is a series of vessels, 24 pipes, pumps, which, in the case of the pydrauls, was 25 operated under pressure and, to maintain pressure, there 80- WATER PCB-SD0000056205 1 would have to be a, quote, closed, quote, closed system, 0 2 to functionproperly. 3 QiAnd what's your understanding of the word : i I j 'i 4 closed systems with regard to the heat transfer fluids, the | 5 therminols? ; 6 A. In this case, the therminol was heated in a j -i 7 vessel and then pumped through appropriate piping to anotherj B vessel that needed to be heated for whatever process might j 9 be involved. i 10 Q. Do you recall if the therminol fluids went j .' ! 11 through the same testing procedures that you outlined before | 12 for the pydraul and aroclors, to the best of your recollec- i 13 tion? i 14 A. Yes. 1{I 15 Ql Thatwould be standardpractice. Right? j i 16 A. Yes. ! 17 Q. And in this process, am I correct in saying 18 the industrial hygiene department-- I'm using industrial , 19 hygiene department again. The medical department, of which 20 you're in the industrial hygienearea. AmI correct in j 21 assuming that the purpose for the tests and your evaluation 22 of these products was to determine if there were any risks 23 to workers in the Monsanto plants which manufactured the 24 products and determine what risks there may be for the 25 customer's plant, the customers which utilized these -81- WATER PCB-SD0000056206 1 products? Is that correct? 2 MR. FEATHERSTONE: You mean was that one of the 3 purposes? 4 MR. HYNES: Right. 5 1 A Any risk that may be. Yes. I think that was 6 your question. 7 Ql Right. And is it also-- Was it also one of 8 the functions of your group to minimize any risks, to 9 exposure to these products? i 10 . MR. FEATHERSTONE: You mean in Monsanto's plants? 11 Ql Either in Monsanto's plants or in a customer's 12 plant? 13 A Yes. 14 Ql And an essential element in that decision on 15 your part, the decision making on your part, was to know 16 the intended uses of either the product or the manufacture 17 of the product. Isn't that correct? 18 A Yes. 19 Ql Did your group, your department, have any 20 obligation under your normal conduct of your normal practice 21 to investigate the potential uses or intended uses of this 22 product, other than the information you received from 23 marketing or product development, or did you pretty much 24 rely on those people to come up with the intended uses and 25 exposures? -82- WATER PCB-SD0000056207 1 MR. FEATHERSTONE: To come up with, you mean to 2 communicate-- 3 Q. Communicate to your department? 4 A I think again it's a two part question, a yes 5 or no. To answer the second part of the question, did we 6 rely on the information to come to us from others, that's 7 true. 8 Qi And of your own initiative, do you recall if 9 your department ever verified the information received 10 from product development or research as to potential expo 11 sure? 12 A No. 13 Q. That was their function? To come up with that 14 information so you could evaluate the risks? 15 A Yes. 16 Qi When do you recall first learning that PCBs 17 were reported in the environment? 18 A My recollection is that there was a report in 19 a Swedish newspaper that a Swedish scientist-- 20 MR. FEATHERSTONE: The question is when. 21 A I'm sorry. Some time in the late '60s. 22 Qi And do you recall how you learned about this? 23 A Yes. I 24 Q. How was that? 25 A Correspondence from some of our European -83- WATER PCB-SD0000056208 1 representatives. 2 ft Monsanto subsidiary or-- I don't want to use 3 the word subsidiary if it isn't a subsidiary. 4 A. Monsanto's representatives located in Europe, 5 ft And what were you told or what was in this 6 communication? 7 A Dr. Kelly received a memo or a letter, indi 8 cating that there had been a report in a Swedish newspaper. 9 After an interview with the Swedish scientist, in which he 10 indicated that in his search for the identification of-- 11 MR. FEATHERSTONE: Mr. Wheeler, the question only 12 asked how you became aware of it. You've answered the 13 question. A memorandum to Dr. Kelly. 14 ft All right. And what was contained in that 15 information? What information did you receive? 16 MR. FEATHERSTONE: That he can remember receiving? 17 MR. HYNES: Yeah. 18 A I remember seeing the memo to Dr. Kelly. And 19 my recollection is that our representatives in Europe had 20 heard of or had seen a newspaper account in Sweden that a 21 Swedish scientist involved in--an analytical chemist 22 scientist involved in trying to identify materials in 23 pesticide residues, unknown chemical compounds, using new 24 techniques that he had developed. 25 ft And in this communication, it was this doctor's -84- WATER PCB-SD0000056209 1 conclusion, the Swedish scientist's conclusion that these 2 residues were PCBs? 3 A. There was no conclusion drawn as to whether 4 he had correctly identified PCBs or not. 5 fit And once you received this communication, what 6 did you do about it? 7 MR. FEATHERSTONE: Well, Mr. Wheeler? 8 Q. I say you in terms of your group, the medical 9 department. Did you take any action? 10 MR. FEATHERSTONE: Which is, what did the medical 11 department do as a result of that? 12 A The medical department recommended that our 13 European representatives be in touch with the Swedish 14 scientist. They were given, as corroboration of the 15 scientist's findings, an advertising blurb from the-- 16 MR. FEATHERSTONE: Wait a minute. The medical 17 department instructed the Monsanto representatives overseas 18 to contact-- 19 A The scientist. 20 MR. FEATHERSTONE: The scientist. All right. 21 That answers the question. 22 Q. And how were they supposed to contact this 23 scientist? What instructions were given to this European 24 representative? 25 A Initially, I think, it was correspondence. -85- WATER PCB-SD0000056210 1 Q. By correspondence-- What did you tell them in 2 the correspondence to do or what was he directed to do by 3 the medical department? 4 A. By correspondence, I intended to tell you. 5 Sir, that his contacts with the Swedish scientist initially 6 were by correspondence, subsequently by visits. 7 Qt And what was your Europen representative 8 directed to do with regard to this Swedish scientist? 9 A. To establish a contact that would lead us, 10 through him, to get more details of what the scientist had 11 reported to the public press. . 12 Qt And did you subsequently learn what those 13 details were? 14 A. Yes. 15 Qt And how did you learn it? 16 A. I believe we were-- Our representative was 17 provided with the details of the analytical technique. 18 Qt And he forwarded them to your department? 19 A. Beg pardon? 20 Qt And he forwarded those details to your depart 21 ment, medical department? 22 A. Yes, but, more importantly, to our own 23 analytical research chemists. These were beyond our 24 ability to interpret. 25 Qt And did you subsequently find out the results -86- WATER PCB-SD0000056211 1 of your analytical chemists? Did they analyze the data they 2 received from Sweden? 3 MR. FEATHERSTONE: They didn't get date*. They got 4 an analytical technique. 5 0 All right. What did they do with that tech 6 nique, the best of your knowledge? 0 7 A This prompted our analytical people in St. 8 Louis to contact the Swedish scientist by correspondence 9 to get written detailed examples of the technique used, the 10 instrumentation that was used in an effort to set ourselves 11 up to see if we could corroborate the findings of this 12 material involved with other pesticide residues, as, in 13 fact, being an accurate and definitive method. 14 Q. And did your people-- Were they able to 15 verify the method, the technique, as being accurate? 16 MR. FEATHERSTONE: The Swedish technique? 17 MR. HYNES: Yes. 18 A After many months, with modifications, yes. 19 Q. Getting back to again-- My original question 20 was when you, the medical department, first learned of 21 reports of PCBs in the environment. And you just explained 22 the Swedish technique, which, I believe, led to their 23 determining that there were PCBs in the environment, using 24 this technique. Is that correct? 25 A No. Not the way you phrased the question. -87- WATER PCB-SD0000056212 1 Q. I asked you how you first learned that there 2 were reports--when you first learned, how you first learned 3 that there were PCBs reported in the environment. Did the 4 Swedish scientist report that there were PCBs in the environj5 ment? 6 A. He reported that he had identified what he 7 described as PCBs in environmental samples when he was 8 looking for pesticide residues. B Qt And the techniques that he used in this report 10 were the ones we were just discussing where your analytical 11 people modified his techniques to find out it was a valid 12 technique to identify such substances. Is that correct? 13 MR. FEATHERSTONE: Wait a minute. The report, Mr. 14 Hynes, was a newspaper account supposedly as a result of 15 an interview with some analytical chemist. You haven't 16 established that there was any discussion in the newspaper 17 account of any techniques. The testimony has been that 18 Monsanto contacted some of its own people overseas and said, 19 go find this guy, and they did. 20 Qi And they received the data from him as to what 21 his technique was to come up with these results that were 22 reported and your analytical people modified those tech 23 niques and found, with modifications, that it was a valid 24 technique to identify these compounds. Is that correct? 25 MR. FEATHERSTONE: After many months. Add that, -88- WATER PCB-SD0000056213 1 too. That's what he testified. 2 Q. I just want to verify that that's correct. Is 3 that a correct statement? 4 A. I think, as I understand the way you phrased 5 it, yes. * 6 MR. FEATHERSTONE: There's going to be a chronic 7 exposure here pretty soon. 8 Qi Once the technique was verified after several 9 months, with modifications, what do you recall your depart 10 ment's involvement in identification of PCBs in the environ 11 ment was? 12 MR. FEATHERSTONE: If any. 13 A Our involvement was to be kept informed by 14 the analytical people of, not only the Monsanto effort in 15 developing its own capability of analysis, but in contact 16 with scientists all over the country and abroad, working 17 with people to see if the Swedish technique could be 18 duplicated in other people's laboratories. 19 Q. And was that technique, to your knowledge, 20 verified in other laboratories? 21 A In many cases, no. 22 0- You say this information was first brought to 23 your attention some time in the late '60s? The original-- 24 A '67, '68. 25 Ql And did Monsanto verify at any point that -89- WATER PCB-SD0000056214 1 PCBs were, in fact, in the environment? 2 A. The term environment is such a broad term. 3 Can you be more specific? 4 Cl All right. Verify that it was in lakes and 5 rivers in the United States? 6 A Not by our own analysis, as I recall. 7 Ci Lakes and rivers of any foreign country? Do 8 you recall? 9 A Again, not by our own analyses. 10 Ci I'm just talking about your own analysis now. C 11 In the air in the United States? 12 A No. 13 Ci In sewage treatment plants? 14 MR. FEATHERSTONE: Now, Mr. Wheeler is not an 15 analytical chemist. j 16 17 18 stuff. 19 MR. HYNES: No. I'm asking~ MR. FEATHERSTONE: Analytical chemists do this MR. HYNES: I'm asking his knowledge of Monsanto 20 finding out PCBs in the environment of their own testing. 21 MR. FEATHERSTONE: Which he didn't participate in? 22 MR. HYNES: I'm asking his knowledge. If he says 23 he has knowledge, I particularly want to ask him what his 24 involvement is in it. 25 A I have no knowledge of that. -90- WATER PCB-SD0000056215 1 Qt Do you recall Monsanto verifying that PCBs 2 were found in, for want of a better word, ground? I'm 3 thinking in terms of dump sites, shorelines. Any PCBs 4 found in residue like that? Ground, dirt? 5 A. Not to my knowledge. 6 Qi Did Monsanto, to the best of your knowledge. 7 conduct any investigative tests to determine if PCBs were 8 in the environment at all? 9 A. No. 10 Qi Do you recall ever reading any reports or 11 being informed of any reports that someone else or some 12 other group had identified PCBs in any lakes or rivers in 13 the United States? 14 MR. FEATHERSTONE: You mean had anybody reported 15 that they had found some? 16 MR. HYNES; Yeah. 17 MR. FEATHERSTONE: Whether or not it had been 18 corroborated? 19 A Well-- 20 MR. FEATHERSTONE: Wait a minute. Mr. Hynes, 21 whether or not it was corroborated by Monsanto? 22 MR. HYNES: No. First reported. They received 23 a report or were informed of a report of it being found. 24 I'm not talking about corroborating it. I'm talking about 25 his first knowledge that someone else reported finding -91- WATER PCB-SD0000056216 'I PCBs in lakes or rivers of the United States. 2 A. At some time, and I can't recall the date, a 3 Dr. Riseborough reported again having found materials which 4 he identified as PCB in some environmental samples. 5 Ql Do you know where those samples were supposedly 6 taken? 7 A The West Coast, I believe. 8 ft And to the best of your recollection, is that 9 the first report that you're aware of of such a finding in 10 the United States? 11 MR. FEATHERSTONE: Well, such a reported finding. 12 Alleged finding, Mr. Hynes. 13 A That's-- 14 MR. FEATHERSTONE: Wait a minute. Alleged finding? 15 MR. HYNES: Yeah. Fine.' i 16 A Yes. 17 Ql That's your first recollection? IB A Yes. 19 Qi Did you or anyone in the medical department 20 attempt to verify those findings? 21 A No. 22 d Do you know of anyone else, other than 23 Monsanto, who attempted to verify those findings? 24 A I don't recall of any. 25 Qi Other than Dr. Riseborough-- -92- o WATER PCB-SD0000056217 1 MR. FEATHERSTONE: Riseborough. 2 MR. HYNES: Riseborough. Okay. It all reads the 3 same in the transcript anyhow. 4 MR. FEATHERSTONE: I could always say let the 5 record show that Mr. Hynes can't pronounce that last name. 6 MR. HYNES: If we find out that it's really 7 Riseborough, you're in real trouble. I'm going to amend 8 the transcript. 9 Q. Other than Dr. Riseborough*s report, do you 10 recall the next reported finding--anyone else finding PCBs 11 in lakes or rivers in the United States? 12 ' A Not chronologically. 13 Qi Would it be safe to say, subsequent to Dr. 1.4 Riseborough, there were several reports all in the same, 15 time frame? 16 MR. FEATHERSTONE: All in the same time frame as 17 Dr. Riseborough's report? Is that a fair statement? If 18 it is, tell him it is. And if it isn't, tell him it isn't. 19 A If the time frame is '68 and '69, it would be 20 the same time frame. Yes. 21 Q. Do you recall any specific reports, other than 22 Dr. Riseborough's ? 23 A About alleged findings in the United States? 24 Qt In the United States. Right. 25 A There were so many. 93 WATER PCB-SD0000056218 1 fr You don't specifically recall any particular 2 author or geographic area or anything of that nature? 3 A. Not-- No. Not specifically. 4 Qi Do you recall if Monsanto sought to verify i 5 any of these reported findings? 6 A. Sir, I wish you would-- Could you define for 7 me verify? 8 ft All right. A report comes outthat saysthere 9 are PCBsin this river. I wouldassume therewould be a ! 10 protocol where samples were taken, methods to analyze them. 11 I'm just thinking generally of a scientific report. I 12 MR. FEATHERSTONE: Wait a minute now, Mr. Hynes. i 13 Your questions have asked for any knowledge that he had of 14 any reports. Newspaper reports, popular press reports, all 15 sorts of communications were included in those questions 16 and now you're assuming that his testimony went to scienti- 17 fic reports. I | -i 18 MR. HYNES: The only one he specifically recalls 19 was Dr. Riseborough's. 20 MR. FEATHERSTONE: That doesn't mean-- 21 Ci To verify, I mean that Monsanto would either 22 contract it out or do it themselves to go out to that 23 location, take samples, do an analysis of either the sedi 24 ment, the water, fish, birds, whatever would be the subject 25 of the report. Do you recall Monsanto doing anything of -94- WATER PCB-SD0000056219 1 that nature? 2 A. No. 3 Q. Do you recall Monsanto ever requesting and 4 receiving samples from the author of a particular report? 5 A. I don't recall. 6 Q, Again we're in the 1968, 1969 area. Is that 7 correct? 8 MR. FEATHERSTONE: Is that the limitation you t 9 were placing on-- 10 MR. HYNES: No. That's what Mr. Wheeler said 11 when I was talking about time frame. '68, '69. 12 MR. FEATHERSTONE: Okay. And that's the time 13 frame that applied to your last questions? 14 MR. HYNES: Right. 15 Q. That's what I took your answers to be. In 16 that time frame. Is that correct? 17 A Yes, Sir. 18 Q. Subsequent to that time, '68, '69, did Monsantc 19 initiate any testing programs to determine if there were 20 PCBs in any lakes or rivers in the United States? 21 A Not to my knowledge. 22 Q, Do you recall if Monsanto received information 23 from other persons or groups who were doing such testing? 24 A I'm sure we did. 25 ` Q. Going from that '68, '69 to a '70 to '72 -95- WATER PCB-SD0000056220 1 period, do you recall reviewing any reports from other 2 people as to finding PCBs in lakes or rivers of the United 3 States? 4 MR. FEATHERSTONE: Any reports, Mr. Hynes, or 5 scientific reports? 6 MR. HYNESs Any reports. 7 A I expect, dozens. 8 Qi Do you recall reviewing any scientific reports 9 in that regard? 10 A A number. 11 Q. Do you recall any authors or the subject 12 matter of any of these reports specifically? 13 A No. 14 Ql Do you generally recall what the reports that 15 you reviewed said? ' 16 A There were a number of reports, and I'm speak 17 ing now of scientific literature, of finding PCBs in 18 environmental samples, some reporting methods of analysis 19 that were not as complete and detailed as to satisfy a 20 number of scientists outside of Monsanto, including those 21 in government agencies, that the alleged PCBs had, in fact, 22 been identified. 23 Qi And again, concerning scientific reports, do 24 you recall any particularly concerning the Great Lakes 25 that you reviewed in that '70 to '72 time period? -96- WATER PCB-SD0000056221 1 A. No. 2 Cl Was it part of your responsibilities to keep 3 abreast of the scientific and non-scientific reports of the 4 PCBs in the environment in this 1968 through 1972 period? 5 A. Some aspects of it. 6 Qi What aspects? 7 A. As a matter of course, one in the field of 8 industrial hygiene reads many, many technical journals i 9 monthly. Weekly, perhaps. And part of my function was to, 10 if I came across any material relating to--any published 11 material or data relating to PCBs, to be sure that it was 12 circulated to those in Monsanto who were involved in the 13 problem. I'm sure I did not read every journal that came 14 into the company or that was necessarily available. When 15 we had reports from the many, many people that we were in 16 touch with, collaborating with, providing them samples, 17 providing them our thoughts on the analytical techniques-- 18 When these people would call to our attention a published 19 article in a journal that may have been a little obscure 20 for our normal reading, we would get a subscription to that 21 journal so that we could again try to keep abreast of 22 everything that was being developed, whether or not it 23 related to the biological or industrial hygiene effects or 24 anything concerning a Monsanto product because this was not 25 just limited to PCBs. -97- o WATER PCB-SD0000056222 c 1 Qi I believe you just stated that you would 2 correspond with various people. I assume you mean the 3 medical department in that regard? 4 A. Yes. S Qt Provide samples, discuss the analytical tech 6 niques. 7 A. Our role was to provide the samples, not to | discuss the analytical techniques but to be sure that they j 8 9 were in contact with our own analytical specialists. 10 Ql All right. If a researcher for sane universityj, 11 as an example, was doing some work on PCB research, the i 12 medical department would be contacted and you'd refer them 13 to the-- Is it Analytical Lab? Is that correct? 14 A Analytical group that was involved. 15 Ql They would verify the techniques that this 16 university researcher would be using or assist them in the 17 analytical techniques? 18 MR. FEATHERSTONE: We've lumped a bunch of things 19 together. One is a request for samples. The other one is 20 a verification of analytical techniques. Which one do 21 you-- 22 MR. HYNES: I'm talking about the analytical 23 techniques. 24 Qi The medical department wouldn't be involved 25 in that, other than referring the person to the analytical -98- WATER PCB-SD0000056223 1 group in Monsanto. Is that correct? 2 ' A. That's right. 3 Ql In terms of samples of a product, would the 4 medical department provide that to the researcher? 5 A. Only to ensure that the requester got the 6 sample. 7 Ql Would the medical department be the receiving 8 point within Monsanto to get these requests and you would 9 just refer them out to the various people in Monsanto who 10 would fill the requests. Is that correct? 11 A. Essentially. 12 Qt But if someone requested-- But if someone 13 requested toxicity data on a particular aroclor or PCB 14 product-- 15 A. It was our responsibility to provide that data. .c 16 Qi That was your responsibility to provide that. 17 You say some time in 1970 there were label changes made on 18 the aroclor products, the best you recall, to add in a 19 precautionary instruction not to--to take steps to prevent 20 the aroclors from getting into the environment or words to 21 that effect. And that labeling change was the responsi 22 bility of your department to make that recommendation. Is 23 that correct? 24 A Not the way you phrased that. 25 Qi All right. You said there was a labeling -99- WATER PCB-SD0000056224 1 change in 1970, reflecting environmental release of the 2 product or words to that effect. 3 MR. FEATHERSTONE: Wait a minute. Let's be more 4 precise than that. It was a cautionary instruction. 5 MR. HYNES: A cautionary instruction to take 6 steps not to-- 7 MR. FEATHERSTONE: Discharge aroclors in the 8 environment. 9 MR. HYNES: Discharge aroclors in the environment.: 10 Qi How was that-- How was the decision made and 11 who made the decision to put that cautionary labeling on 12 the product? 13 MS. OLIVER: Just so the record is clear, Mr. 14 Wheeler, didn't you say that the word was dispose of the 15 aroclors in the environment? That was the caution, I 16 think. 17 MR. FEATHERSTONE: Nobody has ever asked him 18 what the cautionary instruction said. Is that a question? 19 MS. OLIVER: I think the witness testified 20 earlier that the caution was directed to disposal of the 21 aroclor in the environment. I don't think anyone has 22 talked about discharge. If we're going to be precise, then 23 we should-- 24 MR. HYNES: Okay. Let's clear it up. 25 Q. To the best of your recollection, what was -100- WATER PCB-SD0000056225 1 the cautionary language on the labels in 1970 dealing with-- 2 A. Eleven years later I cannot tell you what the 3 label said, Sir. 4 Ql But it was something to the effect of either 5 disposal or discharge into the environment? Some caution 6 to prevent that or caution customers not to do that? 7 A. To the best of my recollection, the words 8 directed themselves to avoiding letting the material get 9 into the environment. 10 MR. FEATHERSTONE: That takes care of both of US, 11 Roseann. 12 Q. That's fine. Back to the other question, if 13 I can remember it. Whose responsibility in Monsanto was it 14 to recommend that labeling change? 15 A The decision was reached in conjunction with 16 the business group and the labeling section of Monsanto, 17 who had the principal responsibility for development and 18 printing of labels. 19 Qt And what involvement did your department, the 20 medical department, have in the change of instructions on 21 the label? 22 A My recollection is that it was to agree with 23 the suggestions probably of the business group that such 24 a precautionary comment should be there. 25 Qi It wasn't initiated, this change, by your -101- WATER PCB-SD0000056226 1 department. Is that-- 2 A. Not to my recollection. 3 MR. FEATHERSTONE: Please, Mr. Wheeler, wait 4 until Mr. Hynes finishes his question. You're both too 5 fast for me. 6 ft You referred to the business group. What would 7 the business group be? Would that be in the marketing end? 8 You refer to the business group. What is the business groupj? 9 A. The total business group would have included i 10 marketing, development and research. 11 ft Do you know or do you recall where this change 12 initiated in the labeling? 13 A. No. g 1.4 ft And the best of your recollection, your 15 department's involvement was you reviewed the labeling 16 change and evaluated it in the way you normally would any 17 labeling change. Is that correct? 18 A Yes. 19 ft Were you involved-- Was the medical department 20 involved in the decision to reformulate the pydraul and 21 therminol fluids? 22 A Not to my recollection. 23 ft Do you recall when the medical department was 24 advised that the therminol and pydraul fluids were going to 25 be reformulated? -102- WATER PCB-SD0000056227 1 A. No. 2 Ct Are you saying that the decision to reformulate 3 these two product lines was made in what you call the 4 business group? 5 A Yes. 6 MR. FEATHERSTONE: As far as you know? 7 A As far as I know. | 8 Q. And is that a normal practice or was that a ! i 9 normal practice at Monsanto when a product reformulation was, 10 made not to involve the medical department? Was that the j 11 normal course or the normal practice there? 12 A No. 13 & The next question is: Do you recall any other 14 instances where a product was reformulated? 15 A The answer to the question. Sir, based on 16 earlier testimony today, that we would become aware of a 17 change in a product either in the research or development 18 stage. So we were aware that reformulation efforts were 19 under way through the normal course of our evaluation of 20 new products. 21 MR. FEATHERSTONE: And it's your testimony that 22 it wasn't the medical department's responsibility to refor 23 mulate products? 24 A No. 25 Qt You didn't make suggestions on reformulations -103- WATER PCB-SD0000056228 1 of products? 2 A. Oh, no. 3 .ft Ever? 4 A. No. Not that I recall. 5 ft Do you recall being involved in any-- Or your 6 medical department. Do you recall the medical department 7 being involved in any recommendations to restrict sales of 8 any of the pydraul or therminol products? 9 A. Yes. 10 ft And what do you recall? 11 A We were involved in a business group presenta 12 tion, our participation being to discuss the possible 13 effects. .14 ft The effects in what regard? 15 A The reported possible effects of PCBs in the 16 environment. . 17 Qi And when was this presentation made and, if 18 there were more than one, how many presentations were made? 19 A The one I was referring to was late '69. 20 ft And were you involved personally in that? 21 MR. FEATHERSTONE: I see the makings of a founda 22 tion. 23 A I certainly sat in on some of the discussions 24 of what the presentation was to include and actually was a 25 participant in the presentation. -104- WATER PCB-SD0000056229 1 MS. OLIVER: I'm sorry. Would you repeat the 2 answer. 3 MR. FEATHERSTONE: Would you please read back the 4 answer. 5 REPORTER READS BACK. 6 Q. And who was this presentation made to? 7 A The top corporate management committee. 8 Qi What is this committee? Who made up this 9 committee? 10 A My recollection is it included the chairman 11 of the Board, the president of the company, several vice 12 presidents. c 13 Q. And do you recall what the presentation was 14 from your department? 15 A A review of the literature as we knew it at 16 that time, scientific literature, a review of the chronic 17 toxicology studies that we had undertaken beginning in late 18 '68 and '69, and our view that there was still considerable 19 doubt, not only on our own part but as expressed in the 20 scientific literature, that the materials identified as 21 PCBs were actually PCBs and, if so, what was the signifi 22 cance . 23 Q. I'm not clear as to what you mean by that last 24 part. You said considerable doubt that the materials were 25 PCBs and then I didn't get the last portion. -105- WATER PCB-SD0000056230 1 MR. FEATHERSTONE: Do you want the answer read 2 back? 3 4 5 MR. HYNES: Yes. Why don't you read that. REPORTER READS BACK. Q. And what was the significance. What do you 6 mean by what was the significance of what. I don't under 7 stand that. 6 A No one had established that there was any 9 effect if, in fact, there were PCBs in the environmental 10 samples in conjunction with other chlorinated hydrocarbons, 11 specifically pesticide residues, that this was having any 12 proven effect. 13 Q. That's what was the effect. Okay. After that M meeting, do you recall any other meetings where either you 15 or other members of the medical department made similar < 16 presentations to Monsanto? 17 MR. FEATHERSTONE: To top management again? IB MR. HYNES: To anyone within Monsanto. 19 Q. Another business group? I don't mean just to 20 an individual or something but I mean in a formal presenta 21 tion of this type. 22 A Not a formal presentation. No. 23 ft And you say this was some time in 1969, as you 24 best recall? 25 A October or November is my recollection. -106- C WATER PCB-SD0000056231 1 Qt The chronic toxicity studies which you say 2 were initiated in '68, '69, which you talked about at this 3 meeting, were they, at the time of that meeting, completed 4 or were they still ongoing? 5 A. I think I indicated, Sir, that they had started 6 in late *68 or early '69. 7 Q. Right. So they were still ongoing? 8 A. Still under way. Yes, Sir. 9 Qt Did you have any preliminary results that you i 10 discussed? 11 A. Yes. It's customary in a chronic toxicology 12 study to sacrifice some animals after the first ninety days i 13 and look at them at periodic intervals after that time 14 until the study is completed. 15 Qt Do you recall which company was subcontracted 16 out to do these chronic studies? 17 A. Industrial Bio-Test Laboratories in Chicago. 18 Q. And they were the company that did all of the 19 chronic tests which you're referring here in '68, '69? 20 A That we sponsored, yes. 21 ft Am I correct in assuming that this management 22 business group, the upper management group that the medical 23 department made the presentation to, that is the group that 24 made the determination to restrict the-- Strike that. To 25 reformulate the therminol and pydraul products? -107- WATER PCB-SD0000056232 1 A My recollection is that they agreed to a 2 program of that nature that had been recommended by the 3 business group, that was recommended by the business group. 4 Q. And the medical department's involvement in 6 this was solely this presentation? 6 MR. FEATHERSTONE: What do you mean? Do you mean 7 the presentation to top management? 8 MR. HYNES: Right. 9 A Yes, and as I indicated in response to your 10 earlier question. 11 Q. Did you make any recommendations in this 12 presentation? You, meaning the medical department. Did 13 the medical department make any recommendations of specific 14 action to take in this presentation? 15 A I can't recall specifically. 16 Qi Do you recall if-- Strike that. Would you 17 categorize your presentation as a factual presentation of 18 the state of knowledge in the medical department as to 19 PCBs in the environment, the effects of PCBs in the environ 20 ment? Would that be a fair characterization of your 21 presentation? 22 A The alleged effects of materials in the 23 environment. 24 Qi Right. The best you recall, would the medical 25 department make a recommendation to management to restrict -108- WATER PCB-SD0000056233 1 selling a product, stop selling a product, reformulate it? 2 Would that be the usual type of presentation that the 3 medical department would make? I. _ 4 MR. FEATHERSTONE: Wait a minute. Are we now off S this particular meeting? 6 MR. HYNES: No, no, no. I'm talking in general 7 if the medical department would make recommendations or 8 presentations of this type. 8 Q. Would it be expected of the medical department 10 in the normal course of practice within Monsanto to make 11 such recommendations to reformulate, to-- 12 MR. FEATHERSTONE: You're assuming in your 13 question that it was the medical department that made this 14 recommendation in this particular case and the testimony-- 15 MR. HYNES: No, no, no. I'm not making that 16 assumption. 17 MR. FEATHERSTONE: That's wha. it sounds like. 18 & Mr. Wheeler, you said you don't recall if you 19 made any recommendations--the medical department made any 20 recommendations to top management in this meeting. What 21 I'm asking is: Would it be the normal practice of the 22 medical department to make such recommendations to top 23 management? 24 A. If there was evidence that there was an imme 25 diate threat to health, obviously, it would be part of the -109- WATER PCB-SD0000056234 1 medical director's responsibility. 2 Qi But in a general sense, that would be the type 3 of situation where you would make a recommendation like 4 that? For an immediate threat of health, if you thought 5 there was an immediate threat to health? 6 A. Only if there had been-- The only other 7 instance would be where there were repeated inquiries or 8 reports that there were skin irritation cases, for example, 9 that apparently couldn't be avoided by good industrial 10 hygiene practice, good medical practice, use of protective 11 clothing, etcetera. I can't think of this ever happening 12 but this is the type of situation that would have led the 13 medical department to say you've got to do something about 14 this. 15 Q, Do you recall any subsequent presentations 16 which the medical department made to upper management 17 relating to PCBs, other than this meeting in 1969? 18 A. To my knowledge, there were none that the 19 medical department participated in. 20 Q Do you know of any other such presentations 21 that were made that you were informed of, regarding PCBs? 22 ' A. I'm not certain that there were any. 23 Q. There may have been but you don't really 24 know. Is that correct? , 25 A. That' s right. -110- WATER PCB-SD0000056235 0 1 ft The aroclors at this point, the aroclor 2 products-- 3 MR. FEATHERSTONE: Wait a minute. When you say 4 aroclor products, do you mean the products marketed as 6 the trademark aroclor? 6 MR. HYNES: Right. Aroclor. I'm not talking 7 about the therminol or the pydraul. 8 ft They continued to be marketed with the caution 9 ary label after this 1970 date that you were talking about. 10 Is that correct? i 11 A I don't know for how long, 12 ft My next question was, do you know of any 13 marketing restrictions on the aroclor trade name products 14 subsequent to the 1970 phase out or reformulation of the 15 therminol and pydraul? ' 16 A I think I testified earlier that the only uses 17 that continued to my knowledge were in the dielectric usage. IB ft And was that subsequently terminated or 16 restricted? ' 20 A I believe it was terminated. 1 21 22 ' ft And do you recall when that was? A No. 23 ft Was it before you left the company? 24 A I'm sure. 25 ft Do you recall any medical department involvemenIt -111- WATER PCB-SD0000056236 1 in the decision to terminate the marketing of aroclor 2 products? 3 A. No. 1 4 Qt To the best of your knowledge, did Monsanto 5 ever verify at any point in time that the PCBs, in fact, 6 were getting into the environment? 7 MR. FEATHERSTONE: I take it that includes 8 verifying that PCBs were in the environment? 9 MR. HYNES: Yes. i j! 10 A By its own analytical techniques? 11 Qt No. By information supplied to you by scien- j 12 tific journals or otherwise that satisfied the-- I'm 13 defining what I mean by verification. 14 MR. FEATHERSTONE: Why don't you just say agree 15 ment? ' 16 MR. HYNES: All right. 17 ft Did at some point Monsanto agree that PCBs, 18 in fact, were in the environment? 19 A I think Monsanto agreed with the reported 20 findings in some instances that this was the case. 21 Q. And can you recall specifically what instances 22 Monsanto was in agreement that PCBs were, in fact, in the 23 environment? 24 A Was your question when? 25 Ql No. My question was, did Monsanto ever-- I've -112- WATER PCB-SD0000056237 1 forgotten what-- 2 MR. FEATHERSTONE: The question was-- 3 Q, The question was, what were those reports 4 that Monsanto agreed-- 5 A. I don't recall. 6 Qi Was the medical department ever involved in 7 any determinations as to how PCBs got into the environment? 8 A. Not determination as I understand determination. 9 What do you mean, Sir? Determination? 10 Q, Well, did the medical department ever attempt 11 to verify the method or the way that PCBs got into the 12 environment? 13 A. No. 14 Q. To the best of your knowledge, was the medical 15 department ever informed by any other group within Monsanto 16 as to how PCBs got into the environment? 17 MR. FEATHERSTONE: At any time? 18 MR. HYNES: Yes. 19 A I'm sure we were informed in only theoretical 20 or hbw could that possibly get there sort of discussion, 21 rather than based on analytical data or determination by 22 others that the PCBs were in environmental samples. 23 Q. Do you know of any other groups or individuals 24 within Monsanto who attempted to determine how the PCBs 25 got into the environment? -113- WATER PCB-SD0000056238 1 A. I'm not aware of any. 2 ft You stated that, in the '68, '69 area, a series 3 of chronic toxicity studies were being0 conducted or 4 initiated by Monsanto.and being done by Industrial Bio-Test. 5 Up to that point, do you recall any chronic toxicity studies 6 being done on any PCB type product sold by Monsanto? 7 A. Yes. i 8 ft Do you recall when they were done? I 8 A. There were some definitive inhalation studies 10 done, I would say, in the early '50s on two of the aroclor 11 products. 12 ft Do you recall which aroclor products they were? 13 A. I believe it was 1242 and 1254. 14 ft Were the IBT studies limited to inhalation 15 chronic studies? ' 16 A. No. 17 ft Were there any other chronic studies prior 18 to the IBT studies you just talked about that dealt with 18 anything other than inhalation, that you can recall? 20 A. Again, I don't think I got your question. 21 ft Okay. You stated that you recall a chronic 22 toxicity study-- 23 A A chronic inhalation toxicity study. 24 ft Do you recall any other chronic toxicity 25 studies, other than an chronic inhalation study, done prior -114- WATER PCB-SD0000056239 1 to these IBT chronic studies? 2 A. No. . 3 MR. FEATHERSTONE: On aroclors, obviously? 4 MR. HYNES: On any PCB product. 5 A The IBT studies did not include inhalation. 6 Q. What were the IBT studies, chronic IBT studies, 7 designed to determine, if you recall? 8 A We developed, in conjunction with the scientist 9 at IBT, but more importantly, representatives of the Food 10 and Drug Administration, the U. S. Department of Agriculture 11 the Fish and Wildlife Service, a whole series or battery of 12 tests that we thought would be appropriate to determine, if, 13 in fact, the PCBs were in the environment in levels where 14 determined that were agreed to be reproduceable, what would 15 the effect be, with emphasis on the possibility that PCBs 16 might get into the food chain. We asked-- After discussing17 the outlines and, in great detail, suggested protocols with 18 the toxicologists, particularly in the Food and Drug 19 Administration, we asked for their input as to whether the 20 study should be more comprehensive, had we overlooked 21 studies that would make the results more meaningful, and 22 incorporated any suggestions that they offered. My recollecj 23 tion is that they had few, if any, recommended changes and 24 suggestions that we use a different dose level or we use 25 more animals On a particular dose level, that we sacrifice -115- t WATER PCB-SD0000056240 1 more animals at a different--after a certain period in the 2 experiment than we had anticipated. But-- 3 MR. FEATHERSTONE: I think you answered the 4 question, Mr. Wheeler. You're giving Mr. Hynes some things 5 to ask about. o- 6 Qt And I assume somewhere around 1970 or 1971 7 you received the results, the final results, on these 8 chronic studies from IBT. Is that correct? 9 A I had left Monsanto by 1977. 10 Qi No, no. I said 1970, '71. 11 A No, Sir, because the chronic studies, and I 12 think we got into this earlier today, involves a two year 13 administration of the material. 14 Q. Right. That's-- Well, when did you get the 15 results? It will be easier to ask it that way. When did 16 you receive the final results from the IBT chronic studies? 17 A I believe it was early '72. 18 Q. And do you recall generally what the findings 19 were of those studies? 20 MR. FEATHERSTONE: Do you have a particular study 21 in mind, Mr. Hynes? You've seen the documents there. 22 There were a number of studies done and I believe it's an 23 unfair question. It depends on what you're looking for and 24 what animal used and what dosage-- 25 MR. HYNES: All right.. We'll get into specific -116- WATER PCB-SD0000056241 1 studies later. 2 MR. FEATHERSTONE: You might want to take a break, 3 too. We've been going for an hour and a half. 4 MR. HYNES: Okay. 5 RECESSED: 2:25 p. m., March 10, 1981. 6 RECONVENED: 2:35 p. m., March 10, 1981. 7 Qi Do you recall if any-- Talking of the 1968 8 through 1973 time period, do you recall any toxicity studies 9 being contracted for by Monsanto dealing with PCTs, rather 10 than PCBs? 11 A Chronic studies? 12 Ql Any type of toxicity studies? 13 A I don't recall of any. 14 Qi What-- i 15 A Excuse me. You said PCT, being polychlorinated 16 terphenyls? 17 Qi Polychlorinated terphenyls. 18 A Okay, Sir. 19 Qi Were the polychlorinated terphenyls, the PCTs, 20 sold'by Monsanto under the trade name aroclor? 21 A Yes. 22 Qi What is the difference chemically between a 23 PCB and a PCT? 24 A There are more carbon atoms in the material. 25 Qi In the PCT? -117- WATER PCB-SD0000056242 1 2 3 of? 4 A. Yes. o Qi Any other chemical differences that you know A No. 5 ql Do you recall if the PCTs were a product which 6 was marketed at the same time as the PCBs were? Strike 7 that. When were the PCTs first marketed by Monsanto, to 8 the best of your recollection? 9 A Before 1947. 10 MR. FEATHERSTONEs 1947 being the date you came 11 on board at Monsanto? : 12 A That's right. 13 Qi So they were marketed before you started work? 14 A : To my recollection, yes. Sir. 15 Qi Do you recall reviewing toxicity data on 16 PCTs, say, prior to 1970? 17 A Only in conjunction with review of any of 18 Monsanto's products. 19 Qi Technical bulletin revisions and things of 20 that nature? 21 A Yes, Sir. 22 Qi Do you know of or do you recall any significant 23 differences between the toxicity data for PCTs versus PCBs? 24 MR. FEATHERSTONE: Mr. Hines, what is the 25 relevancy of your examination on PCTs. I've let you ask -118- WATER PCB-SD0000056243 1 a few questions here just to see whether you can establish 2 any and I don't see any. The case is not a PCT case. In 3 your own words, it's a PCB case. And while we aifgue over 4 whether it is, in fact, a PCB case, it certainly involves 5 the chemical PCB. * 6 MR. HYNES: Subsequently the PCTs-- Subsequent J .r 7 to the-- There was a time period where A 200 B was sold 8 to Johnson and, as I understand it, the A 200 B product 9 contained PCTs as a major component, versus PCBs, 10 MR. FEATHERSTONE: That is correct. 11 MR. HYNES: And all I'm trying to get at is to 12 see if there is any significant difference between the two 13 in terms of toxicity with regard to the A 200 B. Maybe 14 there's something coming up in the case that it could occur. 15 I'm not talking about our proof in the case. I'm talking 16 about possible defense in the case from Johnson. 17 MR. FEATHERSTONE: Defense in the case from 18 Johnson? 19 MR. HYNES: I'm talking about mitigation of 20 damages. PCTs aren't dangerous; therefore, they don't have 21 to be drugs. So much of the stuff in the harbor and in the 22 ditch is PCTs, not PCBs. 23 MR. FEATHERSTONE: Well, I'm not going to debate 24 this point with you. I'll let him answer a couple more 25 questions and see what happens, whether it looks to me like -119- WATER PCB-SD0000056244 0 1 you're establishing anything that's relevant. All right. 2 The question, as I understand it, Mr. Wheeler, and correct 3 me if I'm wrong, Mr. Hynes, is: Are you aware of any 4 difference in the toxicity between PCT and PCB? 5 MS. OLIVER: I thought the question related to 6 toxicity data. 7 MR. FEATHERSTONE: I'm sorry. Why don't you just 8 ask the question again, Mr. Hynes? e Q. Are you aware of any significant differences 10 in the toxicity data between PCTs and PCBs? ; ii A According to my recollection, there is 12 considerable difference. 13 Ql And to the best of your recollection, what is 14 the difference? 15 A PCTs are much less toxic. 16 MR. FEATHERSTONE: Than PCBs? 17 A Than PCBs. 18 Qt And is that based on the acute data-- Or what 19 type of toxicity tests are you referring to? Acute and 20 chronic? Or do you recall? 21 A I don't recall that we did any chronic. So 22 it would be acute. 23 MS. OLIVER: On what? 24 MR. HYNES: Acute studies on the PCTs. 25 Qi Mr. Wheeler, do you recall any studies which -120- ' WATER PCB-SD0000056245 1 Monsanto contracted to be done in the biodegradation of 2 PCB products or PCBs? 3 , A. Yes. 4 Qt Do you recall when those studies were first 5 contracted for? 6 7 1969. A. I believe, in late 1968. Perhaps not until 8 ft Do you recall who was the company that did 9 the tests? i 1 10 A. I don't recall the name. These were arranged 11 for by our research group at North Wales with a university 12 laboratory. 13 ft That's North Wales, England? 1.4 A. Yes. Great Britain. 15 ft The people in Wales might start a revolution 16 or something over there. 17 A. They're not English. 0 18 ft Do you recall the purpose of the biodegradation 19 studies? 20 MR. FEATHERSTONE: Other than what the name 21 implies? 22 ft What does the name imply? 23 A. Which question-- 24 Qt What's the purpose of the studies? 25 A. The purpose of a biodegradation study is to -121- 1 WATER PCB-SD0000056246 1 determine through standard techniques, if possible, whether 2 a material in an aqueous medium will degrade--will be 3 degraded by the action of bacterial organisms that are in 4 that medium. 5 ft What do you mean by degrade? 6 A. The chemical composition of the material is 7 altered. 8 ft Did the medical department receive the results B of that study? 10 A. Yes. 11 ft And did you review them? 12 A Yes. 13 ft Do you recall what the findings were? 14 A My recollection is that the findings confirmed 15 work that had been done in our own laboratories in St. Louis 16 and in North Wales that, indeed, the lower chlorinated 17 PCBs did degrade. 18 ft What do you mean by lower chlorinated? Is 19 there a-- The nomenclature, as I understand it, is the 20 aroclors 1042, 1048, 1054. What would you consider the 21 lower chlorinated aroclors or PCBs to be? What percent of 22 chlorine? 23 MR. FEATHERSTONEs Wait a minute. 1054, 1042, 24 that doesn't mean anything to me. I think it's 12. 25 MR. HYNES: Did I say 10? -122- / WATER PCB-SD0000056247 \ 1 MR. FEATHERSTONE: You said 10. 2 MR. HYNES: I apologize. I meant to say 12. 3 A. It is my understanding that those polychlori 4 nated biphenyls which had fewer than five chlorine atoms in 5 them were degraded. 6 Q. And was there a determination made that 7 polychlorinated biphenyls with greater than five chlorine 6 atoms were not degraded? 9 A Yes. Under the conditions of the test. 10 0 I understand that. What was the significance 11 of this determination that the lower chlorinated PCBs' 12 degraded in the situation, the test situation? 13 MR. FEATHERSTONE: Significance to whom? 1* MR. HYNES: The significance to Monsanto. 15 Q Was this used to determine or to help verify 16 the findings of PCBs in the environment, to identify them? 17 Was that the purpose or the significance of this finding? 18 A One of them. Yes. 19 ft And what were the other, if there were other, 20 purposes of the findings? 21 A To determine if, in fact, the lower chlorinated 22 materials did disappear or be degraded. 23 ft Do you recall of any other outside consultants 24 who did a biodegradation study of PCBs for Monsanto? 25 A No. -123- WATER PCB-SD0000056248 1 Qi Now, you stated that in house some work was 2 done on biodegradation. Is that correct? 3 A. Yes. 4 Qi Do you recall the group within Monsanto which 5 did this research? 6 A. The group in the analytical group that I 7 referred to before. I don't recall the specific title. B Q. And do you recall when they did this research? 9 A Not exactly. 10 Ql Was it before or after the work which was done 11 in the United Kingdom? 12 A At the same time. 13 Qt Am I correct in saying that the two groups, 14 the one in the United Kingdom and the one in house in . 15 Monsanto, came to similar conclusions? 16 A Yes. 17 Qt Do you recall any studies being commissioned 18 by Monsanto with any outside firms to determine whether 19 PCBs bio-accumulated in any form of animals? 20 A Only as a part of the studies that were done 21 by IBT. 22 Qi Are you talking again of the chronic studies 23 which were done in '68, *69? 24 A As an extension of the normal examination of 25 tissues would be done in a chronic toxicology study. -124- ' WATER PCB-SD0000056249 1 ' ft But there were no separate, distinct studies 2 just to determine bio-accumulation. Is that correct? 3 A. Not that I recall. 4 ft Do you recall if Monsanto ever did any in 5 house? 6 7 A. I don't recall. ft Do you recall ever reviewing any scientific 8 literature reports of bio-accumulation tests which were done 9 with PCBs? 10 A. No. 11 ft As part of the IBT chronic studies that we 12 were discussing, would they make a recommendation-- Not 13 recommendation. Would they make a determination that the 14 substance was or was not carcinogenic? Would that be a 15 component of those chronic studies? 16 A. Definitely. 17 MS. OLIVER: I'm sorry. The answer was 18 definitely? 19 A. Definitely. 20 MR. FEATHERSTONE: What was the question. Would 21 you read back the question, please. 22 REPORTER READS BACK. 23 A. Insofar as the animals were concerned, of 24 course. 25 ft Do you recall if Monsanto Commissioned any -125- WATER PCB-SD0000056250 1 Btudies from any outside contractor to specifically look 2 for carcinogenicity in the PCBs? 3 A. Yes. 4 MR. FEATHERSTONE: Wait a minute. Carcinogenicity 5 in the PCBs? 6 MR. HYNES: Whether the PCBs were carcinogenic. 7 That would be a better way of putting it. 8 Ql And you said yes. Was this other than the 9 IBT studies we were discussing? 10 A No. 11 Ql That would be included in those IBT chronic 12 studies? 13 A The animal tissues acquired in the IBT studies 14 were subsequently examined by other--by pathologists, 15 including those of the National Cancer Institute, other j 16 than the pathologists that IBT would normally use and, I 17 believe, by two other consulting pathologists not associated 18 with Monsanto or IBT. 19 Ql Other than those pathological examinations, 20 do you recall any other studies commissioned by Monsanto 21 which were done? 22 A Carcinogenic potential? 23 Ql Carcinogenic potential. Right. 24 A No. 25 Ql Were any studies of that type ever done in -126- 0 WATER PCB-SD0000056251 1 house by Monsanto? 2 A. No. 3 Q. Did you review any studies relating to carcino 4 genicity? Any other studies reported in the literature 5 dealing with PCBs? c 6 MR. FEATHERSTONE: At what period of time, Mr. 7 Hynes? 8 MR. HYNES: At any time. 9 A I don't think I ever encountered any in the 10 literature. 11 ft Did you encounter any in any other way? 12 A We were informed by a Dr. Kimbrough that she 13 thought she had found evidence of carcinogenic potential in 14 one or more rats as a result of feeding high levels of 15 one of the PCBs. ' 16 ft Do you recall which one of the PCBs it was? 17 A No. 18 MR. FEATHERSTONE: When was this? 19 A I believe 1972. 20 ft Did the medical department attempt to verify 21 those findings? 22 A There's the word verify again. Sir. 23 ft Well, try to duplicate those findings in any 24 way? 25 A No, because we already had our own evidence -127- WATER PCB-SD0000056252 1 from the IBT studies. 2 Qi Did you-- Did the medical department have 3 the opportunity to review the raw data in Dr. Kimbrough's 4 study? 5 A. I don't recall that we did. 6 Ql Did you have an opportunity to review-- Did 7 the medical department actually review her protocol or her 8 study at all? 9 A. My recollection is that she came to St. Louis 10 and we met with her and she told us verbally her protocols, 11 if you will, and what she thought she had found. 12 Qi Did the medical department take any action with 13 regard to her oral presentation to you? 14 A. My recollection is we asked for the opportunity 15 to have other pathologists, other than her--I don't believe 16 she is a pathologist, examine the tissues. 17 Qi And did other pathologists examine the tissues? 18 A I believe so. 19 Qi Do you recall who they were? 20 A No. 21 Qi And do you recall ever receiving any reports 22 from them or reviewing reports from them? 23 A I recall learning, by what means I don't 24 recall, that no one else had confirmed her identification 25 of the cells. And that included again, I believe, the -128- 0 WATER PCB-SD0000056253 1 pathologists with the National Cancer Institute. 2 Q, Do you recall-- Going back to the '50s again 3 where you said some time in the '50s the pydraul was going 4 through the process of evaluation within Monsanto and your 5 department was involved in that in a normal way and, I think , 6 you said it would be a normal practice jor at least you 7 recalled that the toxicity data developed for arpclors and 8 other similar PCB products would have been reviewed at the 9 time that the pydrauls were being evaluated by your depart 10 ment. Is that correct? 11 A. For those pydrauls that contained PCBs. 12 Q, Say, a pydraul that contained aroclor 1042 or 13 1048, you would review the data of the particular aroclor 14 that-- - 15 A. I don't think we had an aroclor 1042. 16 Q, Well, I'm just using as an example-- 17 MS. OLIVER: 1242. 18 MR. HYNES: Did I say 10 again? Sorry. 19 Qi But you would review the toxicity data on the 20 particular aroclor which was a component of the pydraul. 21 Is that correct? 22 A. I'm sorry for the interruption because now I 23 don't know the question. 24 MR. FEATHERSTONE: He also testified he doesn't 25 have any specific recollection with respect to pydraul, Mr. -129- WATER PCB-SD0000056254 1 Hynes 2 3 4 been? MR. HYNES: I understand that but-- MR. FEATHERSTONE: You're asking what might have 5 & I'm saying, what the business practice would 6 be would expect the toxicity data available on the component 7 products would be reviewed while you were reviewing the 8 pydraul? 9 A That's right. 10 & If your department, the Medical Department, in 11 your review of the toxicity data with the pydraul fluid, if 12 you had been informed at the time-- Again, when the pydraul 13 fluid was going through the development stage when in your 14 department, if you had been informed in the use of the 15 product that the pydraul would be getting into sewers, into 16 lakes, into rivers and thereby exposing a fish population, 17 would that have changed your determinations as to restricted 18 labeling and the like? Your recommendations on the product? 18 MR. FEATHERSTONE: Object to the form of the 20 question. 21 A That's a hypothetical question. 22 Qi Yes, it is. It's a hypothetical question. 23 MR. FEATHERSTONE: I object to the form of the 24 question. : 25 A And what time frame again0 are you talking about, -130- " WATER PCB-SD0000056255 o 1 Sir? 2 Qt When the pydraul product was beginning to be 3 marketed or in the process. You said it was some time in 4 the early '50s. 5 A. I think I may have said mid-'50s. 6 Q. Mid-'50s. 7 A. And now again what's the question? 8 Qt If your department had been informed by the 9 business group or whoever would inform you as to the intended 10 uses of a product--if you had been informed that the product 11 would be getting into a waste disposal system, would leak 12 into rivers, into streams, into lakes, would you have changejd 13 your determination or your evaluation of the product? 14 A This is a twenty-twenty hindsight question. Sir] 15 I don't know how I can answer it. ' 16 Qt Well, you said an important consideration is 17 the intended use of the product. Is that correct? 18 A Yes. 19 Qt And as you recall, the intended use of the 20 pydraul product was in a closed hydraulic system? 21 A That's right. 22 Qt And I take it there was some concern of a leak 23 in a system hitting hot metal or a hot object and vaporizingf 24 A Yes, Sir. 25 Qt That was an obvious concern. But if, in -131- WATER PCB-SD0000056256 1 addition to that, the fluid itself would be getting out into 2 rivers and streams, thereby exposing fish population. 3 vegetation, potentially human beings to this PCB substance. 4 would your evaluation of the product at that time have been 6 different? 6 MR. FEATHERSTONE: I object to the form of the 7 hypothetical question. 8 A. And again the word presumably-- 9 Ql Sir, what word presumably? j 10 A Huh? 11 . MR. FEATHERSTONE: What was the word presumably? 12 A I think he had-- I think his question containe 13 the word presumably. Can you read back the question? 14 REPORTER READS BACK. 15 MR. FEATHERSTONE. And there's an objection to the 16 form of the hypothetical as incomplete and improper. 17 A Do I have to answer? o 18 MR. FEATHERSTONE: Well, if you can. You don't 19 have to if you cannot. 20 A I don't know that I can be responsive to the 21 question. What did he say? That-- 22 MR. FEATHERSTONE: Wait a minute. That's an 23 answer. 24 A All right. I cannot be-- I don't believe I 25 can be responsive to the question because, as I indicated -132- WATER PCB-SD0000056257 1 earlier, this is twenty-twenty hindsight. 2 Ql What other information would you need to be 3 responsive to the question. 4 MR. FEATHERSTONE: You mean, how should you correct 5 your hypothetical, Mr. Hynes? 6 MR. HYNES: No. I'm asking him what other infor 7 mation would he need. 8 A Excuse me. May I again ask for the question? 8 I don't recall if you included human beings or whether your 10 question-- 11 MR. FEATHERSTONE: Yes. He assumed exposure to 12 human beings. 13 A Then, obviously, if there was a question of 14 human exposures that we could foresee or that we had any 15 reason to assume could develop, this would have been taken 16 into consideration. 17 Ql And if-- And that would not be your department' s 18 responsibility to have that information? It would be the 19 business group or the private development group? It would 20 be their responsibility to provide you with that information. 21 Isn't that correct? 22 A Yes. 23 MR. FEATHERSTONE: That information, Mr. Hynes, 24 being* the potential for exposure to human beings in the 25 situation that you hypothesized? -133- WATER PCB-SD0000056258 1 MR. HYNES: Yes. 2 ft And if you had been provided with information 3 that the PCBs would be--that fish would be exposed to PCBs 4 in large quantities, you would expect that information to be 5 provided to you to make that evaluation; wouldn't you? 6 MR. FEATHERSTONE: Would you please reread the 7 question. Madam Court Reporter. 0 8 REPORTER READS BACK. 9 MR. FEATHERSTONE: Try it again. I still don't 10 understand it. 11 REPORTER READS BACK. 12 ft Okay. Strike it. If there was information 13 available that fish would be exposed to PCBs in large 14 quantities, you would expect that . information to be provided 15 to you by the commercial development group or the product 16 development group? : 17 MR. FEATHERSTONE: I object to the form of that 18 question. 19 ft You can answer the question. 20 A I don't-- I still don't think I understand the 21 question, Mr. Hynes. I-- 22 MR. FEATHERSTONE: Wait a minute. You've answered 23 the question. You told him you don't understand it. He's 24 a capable lawyer. 25 ft If there is information available that the -134- WATER PCB-SD0000056259 1 PCBs would be getting in large quantities into a river or a 2 lake, would you consider that information to be important to 3 you in making a determination of whether the product should 4 be marketed in the manner outlined by the product development S group? 6 7 now? MR. FEATHERSTONE: Are we talking about any product 8 MR. HYNES: Yes. 9 MR. FEATHERSTONE: Or are we on pydrauls? 10 MR. HYNES: We're on any PCB product. 11 MR. FEATHERSTONE: And who has knowledge of this 12 information you're assuming? 13 MR. HYNES: I'm assuming it's knowledge of someone 14 within Monsanto. 15 MR. FEATHERSTONE: Someone in Monsanto has 16 knowledge that large quantities of PCB fluid is being dis 17 charged into a river where there's lots of fish. Is that-- 18 MR. HYNES: Right. 19 , Ql Would that type of information be important to 20 you in making your evaluation of the product? 21 A I can't answer what my action would be to a 22 hypothetical question that dates back to 1954 or '55. 23 Qi Why? 24 A For the simple reason again I can't tell you 25 what I would have done any particular circumstance, hypothe- -135- WATER PCB-SD0000056260 1 tical circumstance, twenty five years ago. 2 Qi Then today would that be important information 3 to you in making that determination if you were still working 4 for Monsanto? 5 MR. FEATHERSTONE: I object to that. 6 Qi In your former capacity? 7 MR. FEATHERSTONE: If he were still a professional. 8 He's a retiree. I object to it. We've got compounded 9 speculation. ' 10 Qi May I rephrase that again? Would that informa11 tion be important to an industrial hygienist position that 12 you had when reviewing a product for market development? 13 Would that information be important in determining whether 14 a product should be marketed in that way or not? 15 A Only with further investigation of the product. 16 . Qi All right. It would cause a person in that 17 position to further investigate the product. Is that what 18 you're saying? 19 A Today, yes. 20 Qi And would that have been the same in mid-1950s? 21 A The question didn't come up. 22 MR.' FEATHERSTONE: In Connection with pydraul? 23 A In connection with pydraul. 24 Qi If the question had come up, would it have been 25 important? ! -136- WATER PCB-SD0000056261 1 A. Again, Sir, I can't answer that question. 2 Q. Would the reason be that the state of the art 3 would be different.today than it was in the mid-1950s? Is 4 that why you can't answer the question? 5 A. I couldn't explain it better. 6 Q. Am I correct in saying that in the state of the 7 art at that time it would not be a consideration? Or you 8 don't know if it would be a consideration? 9 A It's not my recollection that it was a 10 consideration. 11 MR. FEATHERSTONE: Well, wait a minute. No, no, no. 12 A Because-- 13 MR. FEATHERSTONE: Wait a minute. You guys are 14 talking cross purposes. Mr. Hynes' question to you was-- 15 I don't know if I can get it right-- But does the fact there 16 have been developments in the state of the art between the 17 1950s and late 1970s or 1980s play a role in the determina 18 tion of whether the information he's providing you is 19 significant? Your answer was yes. And I don't understand f 20 your follow up question, Mr. Hynes. 21 MR. HYNES: At this point I don't remember what 22 my follow up question was. 23 A I don't either. I'm sorry. 24 MR. FEATHERSTONE: I think what you've got to do. 25 Madam Court Reporter, is give the previous question and -137- . WATER PCB-SD0000056262 TT 1 answer because I think Mr. Hynes was asking for an explanation 2 of Mr. Wheeler's answer and the answer Mr. Wheeler gave was 3 not really yes. It was, I couldn't have said it better 4 myself, or something like that. 5 REPORTER READS BACK. 6 MS. OLIVER: I'm still confused, Mr. Hynes. 7 MR. FEATHERSTONE: So am I. The record is confusing, 8 Q. The consideration would be the PCBs were entering 9 a waterway in large quantities and exposing fish to the 10 PCBs. The state of the art in the 1950s, would that have 11 been a consideration in the Medical Department's evaluation 12 of the product for marketing? 13 MR. FEATHERSTONE: You mean the types of tests run 14 MR. HYNES: Not the type of tests.. 15 Q. Would that information on the product getting 16 into a waterway in large quantities, exposing fish to it, 17 would that be a consideration as to your department's evalua| 18 tion of the product? 19 A No. 20 Qt So you're saying that the state of the art in 21 the mid-'50s, that would not have been a consideration. Is 22 that correct? 23 A That's right. 24 Q. In the state of the art in the mid-'50s, would 25 it have been a consideration in your department's evaluation) -138- WATER PCB-SD0000056263 1 of a product if the PCBs were getting into a waterway of any 2 type in large quantities? Period. The prior question was 3 and exposing fish. This is without the exposure of fish. 4 MR. FEATHERSTONEs What's the question? 5 MR. HYNES: The same question without fish. 6 MR. FEATHERSTONE: Oh, yeah. The record for the 7 last fifteen pages is-- We go back and forth about this 8 question and that question. What is the question? B Qt The state of the art in the mid-'50s, would it 10 have been a consideration in your department's evaluation of 11 a product that the PCBs were getting into a waterway in large 12 quantities? 13 MR. FEATHERSTONE: I object to the form of the I.4 question. 15 A I don't know the definition of large. 16 < Qt Several hundred gallons a day. 17 MR. FEATHERSTONE: I still have the same objection 18 A Not if the discharge was within the permit 19 system of a plant that might have that kind of loss. 20 Qt Would your department be expected to be notifie d 21 that that type of discharge was within a permit system? You 22 just said if it was within a permit system. Would that be a 23 consideration of your department's evaluation? 24 A I think it's a question we would ask. 25 Qt If you got, in the mid-1950s, the information -139- WATER PCB-SD0000056264 1 that we were just discussing, your department would then 2 make an evaluation whether you need mors than the normal 3 acute tests? The information that you would need to-- You 4 would analyze that information and make a determination in S your judgment whether you needed more than the standard 6 acute toxicity tests. Is that right? 7 A. I can't answer it because again this is if. I 8 don't know how we would have responded. Sir. 9 fit The state of the art today would be different 10 than in the mid-'50s in this regard? 11 A. As I understand the state of the art, yes. 12 MR. FEATHERSTONEs If you're done with that line of 13 questioning, Mr. Hynes, I'd like to take a break before I 14 explode. 15 RECESSED 3:25 p. m., March 10, 1981. 16 RECONVENED: 3:30 p. m., March 10, 1981. 17 Q. Mr. Wheeler, the IBT chronic studies that were 18 begun in '68 and '69, would I be correct in assuming that 19 they were done--one of the reasons they were done was because 20 of the information being made available then of the PCBs 21 getting into the environment? Fish, birds and the like? 22 Was it partly in response to that information? 23 A It was in response to-- It was in response to 24 the unproven allegation that it might get into the food 25 chain. -140- WATER PCB-SD0000056265 1 ft And what do you mean by getting into the food 2 chain? 3 A Into fish, in particular, which would end up 4 for human consumption. S ft If that information were made available--would ! have been made available to you in the Medical Department id 6 7 the mid-'50s, the information that PCBs were reported to be 8 getting into the food chain, would similar types of studies 9 been commissioned by Monsanto in the mid-'50s? 10 A Without question. 11 ft Even if they were unconfirmed reports at the 12 time? ; 13 A If we could duplicate the data that had been 14 presented in the reports. We and others. 15 ft By duplicate the data, do you mean the data 16 that there was PCBs in the environment, the organisms, in 17 the food chain? Is that what you mean by duplicate the data ? 18 A Using the reported techniques, 19 ft Would information that PCBs were getting into 20 bodies of water which were fished commercially--would that 21 information, had you received it in the mid-'50s, led 22 Monsanto to do IBT type chronic studies in the mid-'50s? 23 MR. FEATHERSTONE: You're assuming there's no 24 evidence that it's getting in the food chain? 25 MR. HYNES: Right. -141- WATER PCB-SD0000056266 1 MR. FEATHERSTONE: Just sitting on the bottom of 2 the lake. 3 MR. HYNES: I'm saying getting into a body of o 4 water which is commercially fished. 5 A Well, as actually happened, if we could confirm 6 the data in the original reports that such was the case, yes, 7 we would have initiated chronic studies. 8 Qt And, again, it wasn't your responsibility to 9 come up with this information? It was the product develop 10 ment group or-- 11 MR. FEATHERSTONE: I object to that, Mr. Hynes. 12 There has been no testimony that it was somebody's responsi 13 bility to come up with information that the PCBs were going 14 in the lake. 15 MR. HYNES: I said this type of information. 16 Ql The potential use of the product-- Strike 17 that. Would it-- In your judgment, in the mid^'50s, would .. I 18 disposal of the PCB product have been a significant deter 19 mination or significant piece of information for your 20 medical department to use when evaluating these products? 21 A I don't understand that question either. 22 Significant, I-- 23 MR. FEATHERSTONE: You've already said you don't 24 understand it. 25 Qi Let's do it this way. In your department's -142- WATER PCB-SD0000056267 1 evaluation of a product, the normal evaluation that you 2 would do, would the disposal, the ultimate disposal of the 3 product after it was marketed, the disposal by the customer, 4 would that have any significance, information of that kind S have any significance to your department's evaluation of 6 that product? 7 A. Only if there was some evidence that there 8 might be an effect from such disposal. 9 Qi And who would determine if-- Within Monsanto 10 would any determination be made of an effect of that 11 disposal, an effect caused by that disposal? 12 MR. FEATHERSTONE: His answer was that there 13 might be an effect. . 14 A I'm confused again. What did I say? 15 . MR. HYNES: Would you read Mr. Wheeler the 16 question and answer again. 17 REPORTER READS BACK. 18 0. You said evidence that there would be some 19 effect-- 20 MR. FEATHERSTONE: There might be. 21 Qt Evidence that there might be some effect from 22 the disposal. Would your medical department make that 23 determination, that there might be some effect, or would 24 this come from scientific literature? 25 MR. FEATHERSTONE: Or both. -143c WATER PCB-SD0000056268 1 ft Or both? 2 A. I think we had to review what data we could 3 find in the literature, the results of any toxicity work, if 4 you will, that we had done on the product and then, in our 5 judgment, make a determination as to whether more work ought 6 to be done to determine if there was an effect. 7 ft If the information-- Strike that. You said 8 that the disposal, the ultimate disposal of a product, 9 would be a consideration in your evaluation if that disposal 10 might cause some effect. Would it be the responsibility of 11 the product group which was supplying.information to tell 12 you about the disposal of the product and your department 13 would make an evaluation if there was some effect? Or 14 would they just inform you that here is the disposal and 15 there's been some reported effect of this disposal? I'm 16 trying to distinguish between the disposal versus the effect 17 of the disposal. 18 MR. FEATHERSTONE: Well, I object to the form of 19 that question. ' 20 ft Would the information of disposal-- Forgetting 21 about effect for a minute, would the information about the 22 ultimate disposal of a product be the type of information 23 the medical department would need to make an evaluation of 24 the product? 25 MR. FEATHERSTONE: Object to the form of the -144- WATER PCB-SD0000056269 1 question. Are we talking about pydraul? Are we talking 2 about-- 3 MR. HYNES: Why don't we-- 4 MR. FEATHERSTONE: Why don't you ask him what 5 information they had on pydraul back then? What are we 6 talking about? I'm going crazy. I'll have to take another 7 break. 8 ft On a PCB product-- Let's do it this way and 9 make Bruce happy. On evaluating a PCB product, would the 10 ultimate disposal of the product have any significance to 11 your department's evaluation of that product for marketing? 12 MR. FEATHERSTONE: He's 'already answered that 13 question. * 14 ` MR. HYNES: I don't think he has. 15 MR. FEATHERSTONE: He answered and I think he 16 said only to the extent that there might be an effect. 17 Q. Again, I ask you. Would the ultimate disposal 18 of the PCB product have any significance to your department 19 in your evaluation of the product? 20 MR. FEATHERSTONE: Other than what he's already 21 said generally? 22 MR. HYNES: Yes. ; 23 A Only if there could have been any suspicion 24 that there might have been any problem or involvement as a 25 result of the disposal. -145 ---------------------------------<r WATER PCB-SD0000056270 1 Qi Who would make the determination to inform 2 your department of the disposal, make a determination that 3 there might be some effect from the disposal? Would that 4 be the product group that would decide to inform you? Let's 5 strike that. You said that it would only be significant 6 if there might be some effect from the disposal. How would 7 that information be communicated to your department? 8 MR. FEATHERSTONE: Which information? 8 A Which information? Disposal or effect? 10 Qi Disposal first. 11 A I don't recall getting any disposal information 12 on-- 13 14 MR. FEATHERSTONE: On PCBs? A On PCBs. 15 Qi If you had gotten disposal information-- 16 Forgetting about effect just for a minute, if you had gotten 17 information relating to PCB's ultimate disposal, would that 18 in any way have caused you to change your evaluation of the 19 product? 20 MR. FEATHERSTONE: The question, Mr. Hynes, has 21 already been answered. 22 A I don't know how I can rephrase the previous 23 answer. 24 MR. FEATHERSTONE: You don't. The previous 25 answer stands. -146- WATER PCB-SD0000056271 1 MR. HYNES: The previous answer to what? On the 2 questions regarding pydraul? 3 MR. FEATHERSTONE: Your previous question, Mr. 4 Hynes, was whether, if they had knowledge or he was given 6 knowledge of the disposal of a PCB product, would that have 6 somehow affected his recommendation. And he said only if 7 there was some suspicion that there might be an effect. 8 Now, that's the answer to what you're-- 8 Q. Some suspicion that there might be some effect 10 What I'm trying to get at-- You're talking about disposal 11 would be significant if there might be some effect to this 12 disposal. Talking about the effect, who would make the 13 determination that there might be some effect? Would that 14 information first come from the product development group 15 or would that information come from the medical department? 16 Somewhere somebody has to make a determination that there 17 might be some effect with the disposal. 18 A But that wasn't your question. 19 MR. FEATHERSTONE: Don't debate him. 20 Ql Who would make or where would that determinatio|n 21 be made or that judgment be made that there might be some 22 effect with this disposal. Would that be within the 23 medical department? 24 A If it was brought to our attention. i 25 Qi If what was brought ,to your attention? -147- WATER PCB-SD0000056272 1 A. The fact that there was disposal and in our 2 judgment such disposal led to the review of data to see if 3 it might have an effect or even a suspicion of an effect. 4 Qi So if the product development group did not 5 inform the medical department of the disposal techniques or 6 the disposal of the PCB products, then, of course, your 7 department couldn't make any determination of whether there a 8 was or was not any effect of this disposal. Is that correct|? 9 MR. FEATHERSTONE: You've got a compound question 10 there, Mr. Hynes. All of a sudden you've now got disposal 11 techniques. 12 MR. HYNES: I'm sorry. 13 MR. FEATHERSTONE: And disposal in the same breath. 14 Qi If the information of the ultimate disposal 15 of the product was not brought to the attention of the 16 medical department by the product development group, then 17 your department could not make a determination if there was 18 or was not an effect on this disposal--relating to this 19 disposal. Is that correct? 20 A If I understand your question, that's correct. 21 MR. FEATHERSTONE: If he didn't know about it, 22 he couldn't do anything about it. 23 MR. HYNES: Exactly. 24 Q, Do you know of any instances where a product 25 development group learned independently of the medical -148- WATER PCB-SD0000056273 department of a potential effect in disposal of any of its products? A. No. MR. HYNES: I don't want to be accused of beating a dead horse to death so I'm going to stop. MR. FEATHERSTONE: Are you telling us you're done? MR. HYNES: I don't have any more questions right now. ****** QUESTIONS BY MS. OLIVER: ft Mr. Wheeler, when you joined Monsanto, did you have any toxicology training? A Not as such. ft What type of training did you have? A I think I indicated that I had had the type of training that a sanitary engineer or a pre-med school student would have, which included biology, physiology, the elementary courses in biology, physiology, bacteriology, communicable diseases, a course in statistics. & When you started with Monsanto and you began evaluating some toxicology data with Dr. Kelly-^- is that what you testified? A Yes. ft Did you have any training for that from Monsanto? -149'; 1 WATER PCB-SD0000056274 1 A. Did I have any training? 2 ft Did you have any training in evaluating these 3 toxicology reports that you were getting? 4 A. Under Dr. Kelly's supervision. 0 5 ft You didn't attend any kind of training program 6 sponsored by Monsonto on toxicology? 7 A. No. 8 ft In the 1950s, was it just you and Dr. Kelly 9 who would review and evaluate these toxicology reports? 10 A. With our consultants, yes. 11 ft I think you said in 1960 Dr. Hunt became a 12 full time toxicologist? 13 A. Yes. 14 ft Before that time, were there any part time 15 toxicologists hired by Monsanto? ` 16 A. No. 17 MR. FEATHERSTONEs Roseann, your question is 18 other than the people to whom they contracted these studies? 19 MS. OLIVER: Yes. 20 ft In house toxicologists? 21 A. No, Ma'am. 22 ft After 1960 were other toxicologists hired by 23 Monsanto for in house work? 24 A Yes. For in house work but not the actual 25 animal experimentation. Monsanto-did not have its own -150- WATER PCB-SD0000056275 1 animal research facilities. 2 Q. It was contracted out to do the actual testing? I 3 A. That's right. 4 Cl But you had in house toxicologists--? 5 A. Yes. 6 Ql --that analyzed the results? 7 A. Yes. 8 Ql Between the years 1960 and 1968, how many 9 toxicologists were hired by Monsanto besides Dr. Hunt? 10 A. Two. , 11 Cl So there were three altogether? 12 A. I don't remember if the third one was hired 13 before or after Dr. Hunt's demise. 14 Cl The medical department, so far as we know, 15 has Dr. Kelly and an industrial hygienist? 16 A. He had an assistant medicai. l director. 17 Oi Was that in the 1950s? 18 A. Not full time in the '50s. No. 19 Ct In the 1950s, besides Dr. Kelly and you and 20 Mr. Garrett, as the industrial hygienists, were there 21 any other people employed in the medical department? 22 A. Nurses, technicians, two or more part time 23 doctors. 24 Cl And they were to handle worker safety, 25 inspect-- r -151-' WATER PCB-SD0000056276 1 A. Clinical work, principally. 2 Qi Clinical work? 3 A. Yes. 4 Qi What type of clinical work? 5 A. When somebody is injured or is ill, they come 6 to the clinic for an aspirin or for a bandaid over the 7 splinter that they got in their finger. 8 Qi Okay. Was the medical department in St. Louis 9 or the medical department-- Strike that. Were there 10 medical departments within Monsanto besides the one you were 11 in in St. Louis? 12 A. Each plant had medical attention available on 13 a part time or full time basis. < 14 Qi Did each plant have an industrial hygiene 15 department and a medical director like Dr. Kelly? 16 A. It's a two part question. They did not have 17 industrial hygienists. I think the term was plant physi 18 cian, rather than medical director, in terms of the doctors. 19 Ql What was Dr. Kelly's title? 20 A. Medical Director for Monsanto Corporation. 21 Qi And he supervised the medical activities of 22 the entire corporation? 23 A. That's right. 24 Qi And you, as industrial hygienist, supervised 25 the industrial practices for the entire Monsanto Company? -152- WATER PCB-SD0000056277 1 A. Yes. 2 Q. In the 1950s, when you and Dr. Kelly were 3 reviewing the toxicology reports for products or phemicals 4 for the Monsanto Company, at any one time would you be 5 involved in reviewing fifteen new chemicals or ten new 6 chemicals? Can you give me an estimate? 7 A. This is a point where I need a definition of 8 new chemical and what stage of--what the stage was within 9 Monsanto. 10 Ql Okay. When a sample was sent to you from the 11 research department in the earliest stages of development 12 of a product-- 13 A. I beg your pardon. In research? 14 ft In research. At a period of time in the 1950s, 15 was it common practice? Were you receiving samples of ten 16 a day or a hundred a day? Can you tell me? 17 A My recollection is that it was more than a 18 hundred or a hundred and fifty a year. 19 Ct And those would be the products or the chemi 20 cals that you would run these acute screen tests? 21 MR. FEATHERSTONE: You mean that he would have 22 had contracted? 23 MS. OLIVER: Had contracted. 24 A Yes. Most of them were from the agriculture 25 research efforts. Maybe half of ithem. / -153- WATER PCB-SD0000056278 1 & But you and Dr. Kelly would be involved in 2 reviewing the results of all these tests? 3 A. Yes. 4 ft How about in the area of product development? 5 When the product moved one step closer to being marketed 6 and you had samples of the product from the development 7 area, can you give me any estimate of how many a year you B got from that? 9 A. Probably not more than ten. 10 ft And on those ten, you and Dr. Kelly would 11 evaluate the data that you had gotten before? 12 A That's right. 13 ft You mentioned that you were the president of 14 the American Industrial Hygiene Association? 15 16 ' 17 18 A Yes. ft In 1959? ' .' ,, A Yes. ft How long were you president of the association? 19 A One year after being president-elect the 20 previous year. 21 ft In your testimony concerning some articles 22 that you published in the late '50s or early '60s on the 23 administration and management of industrial hygiene 24 programs, you said that those articles emphasized partly 25 what type of programs should be included in plants. Can -154- WATER PCB-SD0000056279 1 you tell me what-- 2 A. What, more importantly-- 3 MR. FEATHERSTONE: Wait a minute, Mr. Wheeler. 4 There's no question asked. 5 fit Could you tell me in what areas you felt 6 programs should be set up or be included? Do you under 7 stand what I'm saying? Let me rephrase it. You wrote some 8 articles in the late '50s or early '60s on industrial 9 hygiene programs and management of those programs and in 10 your articles you discussed what type of programs should be 11 included and set up. Can you tel1<me what types of programs, 12 in your opinion, should be set up? ' 13 A. It related more to the lines of responsibility, 14 the corporate headquarters. My view was that the industrial 15 hygiene function belonged in a medical department, reporting 16 to a medical director, who, in turn, did not report to a 17 safety director or personnel group but reported to a higher 18 level or corporate administration, whether it be research, 19 engineering, production, so there was a limited number of 20 people between the medical director and through him the 21 industrial hygiene and top company management. 22 Ci So the industrial hygienist could better 23 implement his programs or the practices he felt were 24 necessary or were appropriate? 25 A. It gave him a stature of dealing with the -155- WATER PCB-SD0000056280 c 1 plant management and with bur employees, through their 2 unions, that we were an unbiased group of people who 3 were not influenced by the personal practices and other 4 considerations. 5 Q. I think you testified earlier today that you, 6 in the 1950s, were assigned a consulting role to air and 7 water pollution matters in Monsanto? 8 A. That's right. 9 0 How much of your time in the 1950s was devoted 10 to this consulting work? 11 A. I would guess twenty five to thirty percent. 12 0 Did you have any training in enviror>mental 13 concerns or air pollution or water pollution before assuming 14 this consulting role? 15 A. Our consulting role was related to the effects 16 on humans, the potential health effects on humans, from air 17 pollution and water pollution and the training I had in 18 industrial hygiene and what sanitary engineering courses I 19 had were obviously important. 20 Qi How would water pollution have an effect on 21 humans? 22 A. Historically water pollution has been a bigger 23 problem in the area of public health than air, beginning 24 with the typhoid fever and micro-organisms that can cause 25 disease and which were the early forces that led to strong -156- WATER PCB-SD0000056281 1 sanitary engineering programs within the health departments 2 nationally and in the states. 3 Q. In performing this consulting role on pollution 4 concerns or matters, were there any factors you looked at 5 in a plant or generally in determining whether any health /; ' 6 practices should be set up in that area? 7 A. I think I testified earlier that, according to 8 my recollection, every plant had a current permit from the 9 appropriate agency to discharge what waste they did dis 10 charge from the plant and was not treated on site. Part of 11 our role was then to keep abreast of scientific developments 12 to try to foresee what additional requirements were coming 13 down the road. 14 ft So it was basically to keep track of what 15 types of materials were permitted tb be discharged in the 16 water and what weren't? 17 A. Right. 18 Q. To your knowledge, in the 1950s and in the 19 1960s, were there any requirements against PCB discharges 20 in the water? 21 A. No. 22 fit In addition to keeping abreast of the develop 23 ments regarding permit requirements and discharge prohibi 24 tions, were there any other specific kinds of considerations 25 or responsibilities you had with respect to water pollution? .` I -157- ' WATER PCB-SD0000056282 1 ' A. Well, I think I included the question of 2 keeping up with developments as best we could through trade 3 journals, through the scientific literature. 4 QL Right. In your role as a consulting person 5 for water pollution concerns, were you aware in the 1950s 6 or the 1960s of any standards or prohibitions against the 7 discharge of chlorinated hydrocarbons? 8 A. Could you speak up a little? / 9 MS. OLIVER: Could you read the question, please. 10 REPORTER READS BACK. 11 A I'm not aware of any in the 1950s. I'm not 12 certain there were any developed even through the 196Qs. 13 Q. You testified earlier about the fact that the 14 term chlorinated hydrocarbons is a well know term in the .0 15 chemistry field and there are many compounds that fall 16 within the term. What are the most familiar types of 17 compounds of chlorinated hydrocarbons? 18 MR. FEATHERSTONE: That are chlorinated hydro 19 carbons? 20 MS. OLIVER: That are chlorinated hydrocarbons. 21 A The general field of industrial hygiene 22 historically has been involved in solvents and, more 23 importantly, they then became involved in pesticides, DDT, 24 chlorophene, toxiphene, etcetera. 25 Q. To your knowledge, were pydraul fluids -158- WATER PCB-SD0000056283 1 recognized-- Strike that. To your knowledge, were PCB 2 fluids recognized in the industrial hygienist field as a 3 chlorinated hydrocarbon? 4 A. Yes. 5 Qt To your knowledge, were PCB fluids--; Strike 6 that. You testified that in the 1960s, I think, a warning 7 was added to pydraul, advising that it was a chlorinated 8 hydrocarbon. Is that correct? 9 A. I think I said it contained chlorinated 10 hydrocarbons. 11 Qi Do you know whether any consideration was 12 given within Monsanto to identifying pydraul as a PCB 13 compound? - 14 MR. FEATHERSTONE: Would you read the question 15 back. Ma'am? 1 16 REPORTER READS BACK. 17 MR. FEATHERSTONE: In the 1960s, when they iden 18 tified it as a chlorinated hydrocarbon? I 19 MS. OLIVER: That's right. ; 20 A Again I'm going to make a correction. PCBs 21 are not a compound. PCB is a mixture of chlorinated hydro 22 carbons . 1 23 Q. It's a chemical? 24 A It's a mixture of chemicals, more accurately 25 defined as polychlorinated biphenyls. 1 r i _____________________________________________________-159-__________________________________ x , WATER PCB-SD0000056284 1 & Do you know if, within Monsanto in the 1950s 2 or 1960s, there was consideration given to identifying 3 pydraul as a polychlorinated biphenyl? 4 A. Pydraul was not a polychlorinated biphenyl. 5 It was a mixture of materials, including polychlorinated 6 biphfenyls. 7 Qi Okay. Do you know whether, within Monsanto in 8 the 1950s or the 1960s, there was a consideration given to 9 indicating on a label or in brochures or technical bulletins 10 that pydraul contained polychlorinated biphenols? 11 MR. FEATHERSTONE: Biphenyls. 12 Qi Biphenyls? 13 MR. FEATHERSTONE: Biphenol is a different 14 product. 15 fr PCBs? 16 A Again, I'm sure you would qualify that by 17 saying those pydrauls that contained polychlorinated 18 biphenyls? 19 Qt Sure. 20 A I don't know of any consideration given to 21 making that identification in the 1950s. 22 Cl How about in the 1960s? 23 A I think I testified that the contains chlori 24 nated hydrocarbons was added at some time in the '60s. I 25 don't believe it was in the '50s.* -160- WATER PCB-SD0000056285 1 & What I'm asking is: Do you know why pydraul 2 was identified as a chlorinated hydrocarbon rather than a 3 PCB? 4 A. In the period in question, pydrauls were a 5 trademark product. 6 MR. FEATHERSTONE: Do you want-- .0 7 MS. OLIVER: Let's call it a day. 8 RECESSED 4:15 p. m., March 10, 1981. 9 RECONVENED 10:00 a. m., March 11, 1981. 10 Qt Mr. Wheeler, you understand that today we're 11 continuing your deposition from yesterday? 12 A Yes. . 13 Q, And you're still under oath from yesterday 14 when the court reporter swore you in? 15 A Yes. 1 understand that. 16 Q. You told us yesterday, I think, that part of 17 your duties with Monsanto included monitoring the chronic 18 tests that were done for products or chemicals. What type 19 of monitoring did you do? 20 A After the protocol had been established by 21 Dr. Kelly and the scientists in the contract laboratory, in 22 conjunction with the Food and Drug Administration or the 23 Department of Agriculture, depending on potential use of 24 the product, my function was pretty much to ensure that 25 the samples got to the laboratory and at intervals, if my -161- WATER PCB-SD0000056286 1 other travels took me near the area where the work was being 2 done, to stop by, receive progress reports and take those 3 back to Dr. Kelly. j 4 & Would I be correct in saying that Dr, Kelly 5 was the person who decided what tests should be run and . \ 6 developed the protocols with your contracting scientists? 7 MR. FEATHERSTONE: Chronic tests? 8 MS. OLIVER: Chronic tests. 9 A. Yes. 10 1 ft During the time you worked for Monsanto before 11 1970, did Monsanto ever ask consultants concerning what 12 types of tests should be run? 13 MR. FEATHERSTONE: Are we still on chronic testing, 14 Roseann? 15 MS. OLIVER: Uh huh. : 16 A. I think I said the protocols were developed 17 by Dr. Kelly, in consultation with the consulting labora. i` 18 tories and other people that were involved. 19 & Do you recall any occasion before 1970 where 20 Dr. Kelly consulted with an outside Monsanto person before 21 contracting with a laboratory to find out what types of 22 tests should be run? ; 23 MR. FEATHERSTONE: What's an outside Monsanto ' V 24 person? 25 MS. OLIVER: Someone.not employed by Monsanto and -162- > * i WATER PCB-SD0000056287 1 not contracted to do a specific job. 2 MR. FEATHERSTONE: He's already testified to 3 government agencies. You mean in addition to government 4 agencies and the outside contracting labs? 5 MS. OLIVER: That's right. 6 MR. FEATHERSTONE: Did Dr. Kelly, to his knowledge, 7 Mr. Wheeler's knowledge, ever contact somebody else? 8 MS. OLIVER: That's right. 9 A. Any other contracting labs? 10 ft No. Any other scientists, any other person 11 in the toxicology field concerning what types of chronic 12 testing should be done? 13 A. I'm sure he did. It'S the nature of keeping 14 up with the profession. * 15 ft Do you recall any specific instances-- 16 A. NO. 17 ft --where this was done? 18 A No. 19 MR. FEATHERSTONE: Again, Mr. Wheeler, please 20 wait until Ms. Oliver finishes her question. 21 ft Before contracting out with Bio-Test to do 22 testing on the' aroclors and the pydraul fluids in 1968 and 23 '69, to your knowledge, did you or did Dr. Kelly consult 24 with any other persons concerning what types of testing 25 should be done? -163- WATER PCB-SD0000056288 1 A. Again, I think I said the protocols were 2 discussed with the Food and Drug Administration, the U. S. 3 Department of Agriculture, the Fish and Wildlife 4 Laboratories. o 5 ft Were you present for those discussions? 6 A Several of them. 7 ft When did those take place? 8 A My recollection would be early '69, while the 8 range finding studies were in progress. 10 Ql The which studies? 11 A The range finding studies. 12 ft And what were those? 13 A Before embarking on-- . I don't recall if I 14 mentioned this yesterday or not. But before embarking 15 on a chronic two year study, a shorter term study has to 16 be done, giving the animals various dosage ranges to ensure 17 that the animals to be involved in a two year study are not 18 alive without any effects at the end of the period. If so, 19 the study is meaningless. By the same-- The othar extreme, 20 if all of the animals are dead, my understanding is that 21 the results wou(ld be meaningless. 22 ft So range finding tests were done? 23 A Yes. 24 ft Could you describe for me who did those tests 25 and what they involved? i . -164- : WATER PCB-SD0000056289 1 A. They were done by Industrial Bio-Test and 2 involved what I just tried to explain. Rats and dogs were 3 given varying doses of the aroclors. 4 Qi Were they injected with doses? 5 A. Injected? 6 & Yes. 7 ' A. No, because the administration was going to be 8 by mouth. 9 Ql So it was an oral administration? 10 A. Yes. 11 0. And who determined that that range finding 12 test should be done? i 13 A. I thought I made it clear that this is just 14 the state of the art normal procedure. 15 Ql Let me ask you this way. There came a time, 16 I take it, when you and Dr. Kelly discussed what tests 17 should be done on the aroclors andtPCB bearing-- 18 A We discussed them. Yes. 19 Q, And when did that discussion take place? . 20 A I don't recall a specific date. 0 21 0 Would it have been approximately 1968? 22 A Yes. *. 23 ft And did you and Dr. Kelly discuss what types 24 of testing should be undertaken? 25 A Yes. -165- t WATER PCB-SD0000056290 1 ft At the initial time when you and Dr. Kelly 2 discussed this matter, were there representatives from the 3 other agencies and from Bio-Test present? 4 A In some of the discussions, yes. 5 ft When was it determined that Bio-Test would be 6 the persons who would do these tests? 7 MR. FEATHERSTONE: When were they hired or when 8 was it determined inside Monsanto? 9 MS. OLIVER: When was a determination made to hire 10 Bio-Test? 11 A To do the aroclor studies? 12 ft Yes. ' 13 A I suppose late '68, when we were discussing the 14 protocols. 15 Q. Did you and Dr. Kelly discuss which outside 16 contracting laboratories could do this work for you? 17 A Not to my recollection. 18 Ct Was there a reason that you used Bio-Test? 19 A Yes. 20 ft What was the reason? 21 A Over the years Bio-Test had become the princi 22 pal consulting laboratory that we were using for all 23 Monsanto products. 24 ft Did you or Dr. Kelly jgive Bio-Test any type 25 of instructions on how the tests should be run or how -166- WATER PCB-SD0000056291 1 the results should be reported? 2 A. Which question would you like answered first. 3 Ma'am? 4 Qi How they were run? 5 A. Beg pardon? 6 Ql How they were run? 7 A. This is what a protocol does is to establish e how a test will be run. 9 Qi Did you or Dr. Kelly ever discuss with Bio-Test 10 what type of results they should report to you? 11 A. No, Ma'am, except the truth as they found it 12 and the data that they found. 13 Qi Do you know if Bio-Test provided you with a 14 discussion of their data and results? i 15 A. Periodically, yes. ' 16 Qi Do you recall any tests run by Bio-Test where 17 they just provided you with the data and the results and 16 conclusions were to be determined by Monsanto from that 19 data? 20 A. No. 21 Qi Do you recall any tests that Bio-Test ran 22 where they would send the samples or specimens back to 23 Monsanto for analysis? 24 A. Yes. " 25 Qi Which tests were those? 4 -167- WATER PCB-SD0000056292 1 A. As the animals were sacrificed, in conjunction 2 with the accepted protocols at that time, various tissues 3 were taken for not only pathological examination but for 4 chemical analysis, the chemical analysis being done by 5 Dr. Richard's group or Bob Keller. 6 Ql I'm sorry. Did you say the chemical analysis 7 would be done by Dr. Richard's group? 8 A. Yes. 9 1 Ql What type analyses were those? 10 A. The analyses, as I understood them, were to 11 determine the presence of PCBs in the various tissues 12 examined. - 13 Ql And what part of it was Bio-Test supposed to 14 do? ' 15 A. Bib-Test was doing the work with the animals. 16 As they sacrificed, the animals, they excised organs, which l 17 they then froze and subsequently sent them to Dr. Richard's 18 group. 19 Ql They didn't do the analysis? 20 A. Not to my knowledge, Ma,am. 21 Ql The chemical analysis.. 22 MR. FEATHERSTONE: Wait a minute. What's the 23 question now? ` 24 MS. OLIVER: They didn't do the chemical analysis 25 for the organs. - 168- WATER PCB-SD0000056293 1 ft To your knowledge, did Dr. Richard's group 2 complete the analysis? 3 A. They completed many early analyses. 4 Qi And were you informed of the results of their 5 analyses? 6 A As in a position of reviewing the correspondence 7 that Dr. Kelly got. 8 Ci Do you recall what they found in their B analyses? 10 A My recollection is that they found, as had 11 been reported in others, that the -PCBs tended to accumulate 12 in fat and liver tissue. 13 Qi You mentioned that they did initial analyses. 14 Were further analyses done on these tissues, to your > 15 knowledge? ' 16 A The reason for my response as it was is that 17 there were thousands, maybe even tons, of samples that were 18 developed and I'm not sure that all of those tissues were 19 examined. I believe enough were done at the various stages 20 in the progress of the work to give data that could be 21 subjected to statistical analysis for significance. 22 MR. 'FEATHERSTONE: When you say examined, Mr. 23 Wheeler-- 24 A Chemically, Sir. * 25 MR.. FEATHERSTONE: For PCB residue? j t -169- ' WATER PCB-SD0000056294 1 A. Yes. 2 Q. PCB residue means PCB accumulation in the 3 tissues? 4 A. The identification of PCB per se in the 5 tissues. 6 Qi The analyses that Dr. Richard's group made 7 were sent to Dr. Kelly, to your knowledge? 8 A. I believe so. Yes. 9 Q. Do you know when these analyses were done? 10 A. Well, again, I think I indicated that this was 11 a prbgression. I believe there was some animals sacrificed 12 after the first three months of the two year chronic studies, 13 so there would be tissues that would be retained from those 14 animals that were sacrificed. Again at six months and I've 16 forgotten what the next period was. It was probably after 16 twelve months and then eventually upon completion of the 17 study. ; 18 Qi Okay. So it was during the period of about 19 1969 to 1972? 20 A. Yes. 21 Q. Did you have any discussions with Dr. Kelly 22 or Dr. Richard or anybody in Monsanto about the signifi 23 cance of Dr. Richard's analyses of the tissues? 24 A. I don't recall any. 25 & Do you know if the analyses that Dr. Richard -170- WATER PCB-SD0000056295 1 made of the tissues were factors or considerations in the 2 withdrawal or phase out of any of the functional fluids? 3 A I'm not aware that they were, 4 ft I think you told us yesterday, Mr. Wheeler, 5 that, when the research department sent a sample over to 6 the medical department, an acute screen was run. Could 7 you explain to me what the term acute screen means? B MR. FEATHERSTONE: He didn't use the phrase acute e screen. 10 MS. OLIVER: I believe that acute screen came out, ii was part of his testimony yesterday. 12 MR. FEATHERSTONE: Mr. Wheeler's testimony used 13 the words acute tests. 1.4 MS. OLIVER: Well, I don't think that's true. 15 Qi But do you understand what an acute screen is? 16 Have you heard'that term before? 17 A Yes. 18 Qi Could you tell me what that is? 1 19 A It consists of the tests that I mentioned to 20 you yesterday. . 21 d And is that a routine series of tests that are 22 run? 23 A Yes. 24 Qi When a sample came from research department, 25 would a chemical be tested or would a product be tested? i 1 -171- : WATER PCB-SD0000056296 1 A I don't think I heard you. 2 Qt Okay. When a sample would come from the 3 research department for this acute screen series of tests 4 to be run, would you receive a chemical substance or would 6 you receive a mixture of chemicals that was going to be a 6 product? 7 A. Both. 8 fit Both. When you received a mixture of chemicals 9 that was going to be a product, would you run this acute 10 screen on different components of that product? 11 A. No. Not routinely. 12 MR. FEATHERSTONE: On the product would you run 13 the acute screen? 14 A. We'd run the acute screen on the product. I 15 understood her question to be-- ' 16 MR. FEATHERSTONE: Break down the product into 17 components. i 18 A Right. My answer to ithat was, no, not 19 routinely. 20 Q. Were there any cases * in which you would do 21 this that you `recall? 22 A My recollection would be only if we didn't 23 have some data on the components. 24 Qt When you received a product from the develop 25 ment section of the company, which was close to being 4 -172- WATER PCB-SD0000056297 1 marketed, I think you said you would review the existing 2 data and then determine whether additional testing was 3 necessary or appropriate? 4 A. Dr. Kelly would determine. Yes. 5 Q. Again, in that situation you wouldn't break 6 the product down to its components. If additional testing 7 was going to be done, it would be done on the whole product? 8 . MR. FEATHERSTONE: He just said that Dr. Kelly 9 made that determination. 10 0 Well, to your knowledge of the procedure, the 11 practice? 12 A I would say the practice is the same as 13 described for products coming from research. 14 Cl You also testified yesterday, I think, that, 15 at the development stage of the product, when you got the 16 product for additional evaluation, you were given a clear 17 understanding of the use of the product. Do you recall 18 that? 19 A I think I said we were given an idea of the 20 proposed use. * 21 Qt A better idea than you had gotten in the 22 research stage of it? . . 23 A Yes. 24 fit In the case of pydraul-- Well, strike that a 25 minute. Are you aware of the different types of pydraul -173- i WATER PCB-SD0000056298 o 1 fluids that were marketed by Monsanto? 2 A. Not today. 3 0. Do you recall a fluid called P-9? 4 A. Yes. 5 ql do you recall, Mr. Wheeler, what you were told 6 was its use when it was sent to you from research? 7 A. I recall only that it was indicated it was to e be a product for use in hydraulic systems in applications 9 where there was the possibility of accidents where the 10 material might be sprayed on hot or molten surfaces. 11 Ct And that information came from the research 12 department? 13 A. I think. Ma'am, you said this was at the .14 development stage. 15 16 17 18 stage. 19 Ct Oh, no. I said research. I'm sorry. MR..FEATHERSTONE: What's the question? MS. OLIVER: The question was at the research MR. FEATHERSTONE: What were you told about the 20 intended use of pydraul F-9 at the research stage? 21 Ci At the research stage? 22 MR. FEATHERSTONE: If you can remember being told 23 anything. 24 A. Well, I think I said yesterday that we had 25 a form that came with every sample that had some indication -174- WATER PCB-SD0000056299 1 of propective use. 2 ft Okay. You don't have any recollection today-- 3 A. No. 4 ft --about what you were told about pydraul-- 5 MR. FEATHERSTONE: At the research stage? 6 MS. OLIVER: At the research stage. 7 A Only that the form would have indicated that 8 it was a prospective candidate for further research and 9 development purposes as a fire resistant hydraulic fluid. 10 ft Did you have any knowledge of hydraulic equip 11 ment? 12 MR. FEATHERSTONE: When? o 13 MS. OLIVER: When pydraul was sent to the lab 14 for research--acute screening. 15 A Very limited. ' 16 ft What was your limited knowledge? 17 A I remember reading how the use of hydraulic 18 systems were developed over a period of perhaps centuries. 19 Initially men used to get a pail of water out of a well by 20 letting a rope down; did they not? This became more 21 sophisticated when they came up with a system of pulleys. 22 Eventually, engineers came up with a way of relieving the 23 manpower that was necessary to do heavy work. And to me a 24 hydraulic system was like the one I had in my automobile 25 for power steering or for power brakes. -175- WATER PCB-SD000005630C 1 Qi Okay. Later on, when development sent you a 2 sample for further evaluation, you had more of an under 3 standing of its intended use? 4 A. Mo. S Qi You were told that lines could break and the 6 fluid could be squirted out. Correct? 7 MR. FEATHERSTONE: Onto molten surfaces? 8 MS. OLIVER: Right. 9 A. Yes. And my concern was about the potential 10 exposure to men, workmen. 11 ft Do you know how you got that information? 12 A. No. 13 Qi Do you recall any other information you got 14 about the use of the fluid? 15 A. NO. 16 MR. -.FEATHERSTONE: Obviously, Ms. Oliver, your 17 question meant in addition to what he has already testified? 18 MS. OLIVER: Sure. Oh, yes. I'm not trying to 19 limit his testimony. 20 MR. FEATHERSTONE: I'm sorry? 21 MS. OLIVER: I'm not trying to limit his testimony 22 in any way, Mr. Featherstone. 23 MR. FEATHERSTONE: All right. Now that I know 24 what your designs are. 25 ft Were you-- Did you ever have the occasion to -176- WATER PCB-SD0000056301 1 visit a die casting plant or a plant that used hydraulic 2 equipment? 3 MR. FEATHERSTONE: Well, why don't you break it 4 into two questions. 5 & A die casting plant? 6 A In my forty years of industrial hygiene, I 7 never saw a die casting operation. 8 Qi Do you know if Dr. Kelly ever visited one? 9 A I don't know. 10 Qi In obtaining information about the new product 11 at the development stage, would a technical bulletin be 12 prepared at the time when you got the sample for additional 13 evaluation? 14 A The technical bulletin would be prepared after 15 getting toxicity information or evaluating the data that 16 we had. 17 Ci In the course of your work, was it your 18 practice or Dr. Kelly's practice to review the information 19 given in the technical bulletins on products? 20 A Yes. 21 Ci Was it your practice to only be concerned with 22 the safe handling, toxicity part of the bulletin or did you 23 familiarize yourself with the entire thing? 24 A Our interests in the whole bulletin was only 25 as related to the potential occupational health or industrial -177- WATER PCB-SD0000056302 1 hygiene problems. 2 ft Is there a difference between the occupational 3 health aspects of a product and the environmental concerns 4 regarding a product? 5 A The two words are used pretty much synonymously. 6 ft Would it be fair to say that, at the same time 7 that you were considering the industrial hygiene problems 6 confronting the workers in plants, that you were concerned 9 with the environmental concerns of the product? 10 A. The environment outside the work place? 11 ft Outside the work place. 12 A Only where we had reason to believe that the 13 material would get into the environment outside of the work 14 place. 15 ft And if you had reason to believe that a product 16 would get out of the work place, what factors would you 17 consider in evaluating that product? 18 MR. FEATHERSTONE: Speaking of Mr. Wheeler 19 personally now? 20 MS. OLIVER: Mr. Wheeler, in conjunction with Dr. 21 Kelly, with whom he worked on evaluating these types of 22 problems. 23 < MR. FEATHERSTONE: You haven't established that, 24 Ms. Oliver. What your earlier questions established is 25 that Dr. Kelly had sole responsibility for many types of i -178- WATER PCB-SD0000056303 1 chronic testing. Mr. Wheeler wasn't involved. So, obviously, 2 their responsibilities within Monsanto were not identical. 3 MS. OLIVER: Mr. Wheeler was involved with the 4 monitoring of the testing and providing Dr. Kelly with S progress reports on the chronic testing. But let's let-- 6 Let's not argue. I'll ask a question and see if we can 7 straighten it out. 8 MR. FEATHERSTONE: Well, he doesn't have to 9 straighten out your question. You have to straighten out 10 the question. 11 MS. OLIVER: We can straighten out the subject 12 area. That's what I mean. 1 , 13 Q. Mr. Wheeler, in the area of industrial hygiene 14 of the workers in the plant, was it your responsibility, 15 along with Dr. Kelly's, to evaluate the product that 16 Monsanto was going to put in the plant? 17 A. If the intended use, to our knowledge, was 18 such that the material could get into the environment. 19 Qi I just asked you about the industrial hygiene 20 in the plant. Was it your responsibility, along with Dr. 21 Kelly's, to evaluate the product for that purpose? 22 A. In our plants or in customer plants? 23 & In your plants, in customer's plants? 24 A. That was the whole purpose of getting the data, 25 of course. 1 179- WATER PCB-SD0000056304 1 Ct But it was your responsibility, along with Dr. 2 Kelly's? 3 A Yes. 4 Qi With respect to evaluating a product, a Monsanto 5 product, which could get into the environment outside of 6 the workers' plant, was it also your responsibility, along 7 with Dr. Kelly's, to evaluate that product? e MR. FEATHERSTONE: When? 9 MS. OLIVER: In the period between 1950 and 1968. 10 MR. FEATHERSTONE: At any time during that period? 11 MS. OLIVER: That's right. . 12 A Only if the intended .use of the product 13 indicated that it could get into the environment, such as 14 a pesticide. 15 Cl If the intended use that you were aware of and 16 Dr. Kelly was aware of was that it could get into the 17 environment outside of the plant, it was your responsibility, 18 along with Dr. Kelly's, to evaluate that product? 19 A It was my responsibility to participate in 0 20 discussions with Dr. Kelly and others as to what the 21 problems might be. c. 22 Qi Who made the judgment on whether that product 23 should be used in a manner which it could be found outside 24 the plant? 25 A Who made the decision? 180-' n WATER PCB-SD0000056305 1 Qi Uh huh. 2 A. Dr. Kelly. 3 & In a case of a product where you or Dr. Kelly 4 were aware that the product could find its way outside of the 5 plant, what types of considerations were given to making the 6 judgment that Dr. Kelly would make? 7 MR. FEATHERSTONE: Wait a minute. When you say 8 a product could find its way outside of a plant, what does 9 that mean? I mean, a product could be manufactured and sold, 10 as is a pesticide, for use outside of a plant. A product can 11 be manufactured for use within a plant but for some reason 12 discharged in the environment. 13 MS. OLIVER: Or disposed of in the environment. 14 MR. FEATHERSTONE: Or disposed of in the environ 15 ment. So you've got at least three cases and maybe my mind's { 16 not fast enough to come up with the fourth, fifth and sixth. 17 But what are you talking about, Ms. Oliver? 18 MS. OLIVER: I'm talking about any product that 19 Monsanto may have marketed-- o 20 MR. FEATHERSTONE: Any product? 21 MS. OLIVER: A product that Monsanto may have 22 marketed which Mr. Wheeler and Dr. Kelly foresaw were 23 suspected would be in the environment. That's all I'm 24 asking about. I'm not making any distinctions about how it 25 got there. I'm just saying that it's there. I'm asking -181- WATER PCB-SD0000056306 1 for what considerations and what factors were considered by 2 Mr. Wheeler and Dr. Kelly in evaluating their product. 3 A It depended on whether it was a pesticide, an 4 additive for detergents, or a component of detergents. It 6 depended on the prospective use of the product. 6 Ql Was your understanding that the pydraul fluids 7 would not find their way into the environment or were not 8 to be used in the environment outside of the plant? B A. That's right. 10 Qi What was your understanding of what the 11 pydraul fluids were composed of? 12 A. What was my understanding? 13 . MR. FEATHERSTONE: Which pydraul fluid are you 14 talking about? . IS MS. OLIVER: Let's talk about F-9. 16 17 F-9. A I was told the specific composition of pydraul 18 Q. Is there anything in the specific composition 19 of pydraul F-9 that you were aware of in the 1950s, which, 20 in your opinion, would lead to the judgment that the fluid 21 should not find its way into the environment outside of the 22 plant? 23 MR. FEATHERSTONE: Ma'am, would you read that 24 question. * 25 A I don't think I understand the question. -182- WATER PCB-SD0000056307 l 1 REPORTER READS BACK. 2 MR. FEATHERSTONE: Well, are you asking him to give 3 his state of knowledge today or the state of knowledge he 4 had in 1950. The first word is is. 5 MS. OLIVER: I thought I referred to the 1950s a 6 and that's my intention. 7 MR. FEATHERSTONE: Well, you did refer to the 8 1950s but not necessarily in connection with his knowledge 8 in the 1950s. I think, if you see where those words are 10 placed in the question, Ms. Oliver, it's not entirely clear. 11 Qt I want it to be clear, Dr. Wheeler, that what 12 I'm asking you about is whether what you knew about the 13 product in the 1950s would lead you to believe that it should 14 not be, should not have been in the environment outside of IS the plant? 16 A To my knowledge, the state of the art was such 17 that it would have been no concern. 18 Qi So it would have been no concern whether the 19 fluid was in the environment or not, outside of the plant? 20 A Not in any circumstances that we could envision. 21 Ql Well, I'm not sure I understand that answer. 22 A Well, we-- 23 24 Don't-- 25 MR. FEATHERSTONE: Wait a minute, Mr. Wheeler. Ql What kind of circumstances could you have -183- WATER PCB-SD0000056308 1 envisibned? 2 MR. FEATHERSTONE: Wait a minute. What are we 3 talking about now? Now I'm confused. 4 ft I'm talking about whether you knew of anything 5 in the pydraul makeup that would have led you to conclude 6 that it should not be in the environment outside of a plant? 7 MR. FEATHERSTONE: In the 1950s? 8 MS. OLIVER: In the 1950s. 1 9 A I think it's an edition of a question you 10 asked before and my answer was no. 11 ft Well, you said something about not under any 12 circumstances you could envision and I'm just inquiring what 13 you mean by that? U A Again I'm repeating myself. There are products 15 at Monsanto made where the uses indicated the materials 16 could get into the environment and I use as an example 17 pesticides, detergent components. No one could foresee at IB that time that any of the components of the pydraul fluids, 19 if used as recommended, would find their way into the 20 environment. 21 ft I'm not sure we're talking on the Bame wave 22 length 23 24 asked. 25 MR. FEATHERSTONE: He just explained the words you A As I understood it. -184- WATER PCB-SD0000056309 1 Ql What I'm asking is: Was there any component 2 part of pydraul that you felt in the 1950s would not be safe 3 in the environment outside of a plant? 4 MR. FEATHERSTONE: He's already answered that. 6 MS. OLIVER: I want to make sure because I think 6 we've had some confusion here. I want to make sure I get 7 an answer to the question. 8 MR. FEATHERSTONE: You've got it already. He's B already said no. 10 A I'll repeat it. No. 11 fit Okay. Good. In the 1960s, before 1968, in 12 your opinion, was there any component part of the pydraul 13 fluids which, in your opinion, would not be safe if found 14 outside of a plant environment? IS MR. FEATHERSTONE: His opinion in the 196 Os' now 16 up to 1968? 17 MS. OLIVER: Up to 1968. 18 A In my opinion, there still was no reason to 19 be concerned if components of pydraul fluids did accidentally 20 get into the environment. 21 Q. You said, I think, yesterday that the testing 22 that Bio-Test did, the chronic testing in the 1968-'72 23 period, in your opinion, would have been appropriate in the 24 '50s if the knowledge that came out in the late 1960s was 2S available at that time? -185- WATER PCB-SD0000056310 1 MR. FEATHERSTONE; I'm sorry. Is that a question? 2 MS. OLIVER: That was a question, 3 ft Is that correct? 4 MR. FEATHERSTONE: Can I hear the question, please? 6 MS. OLIVER: Sure. 6 REPORTER READS BACK. 7 MR. FEATHERSTONE: Objection. It misstates the 6 testimony. Mr. Hynes' question was similar types of tests. B Yours says assume the same IBT tests. 10 MS. OLIVER: Similar types of chronic testing that 11 was done by IBT. That's what I'm asking. 12 MR. FEATHERSTONE: Chronic testing? 13 MS. OLIVER: Uh huh. 14 A The chronic testing would have been done IS according to the state of the art as it existed in that 16 period, as compared to 1968. 17 ft Why would the testing have been done in the 18 '50s? 19 A I was asked a hypothetical question, I believe. 20 Why-- What would Monsanto do if it was informed that any 21 material, my words, any material was getting into the 22 environment, even though we could not determine that to be 23 the case. 24 MR. FEATHERSTONE: I think the question was more 2S specific. It related to materials getting into the food -186- WATER PCB-SD0000056311 1 chain. That was the hypothetical you were asked yesterday. 2 Q. Would that have been the reason why? Because ! 3 you would have had knowledge that your materials were getting 4 into the food chain? 5 MR. FEATHERSTONE: Do you understand the question? 6 A. No. 7 MR. FEATHERSTONE: The question is, would the 8 chronic tests have been done according to the state of the 9 art in the 1950's if you had knowledge that the material i 10 was getting in the human food chain? 11 A Yes. 12 Q. And why would those tests have been appropriate 13 at that point? 14 A I think it was an obligation for any company or 15 industry that was concerned with public health and the 16 welfare of the nation. I 17 Qt Would the same types of tests have been done 18 if Monsanto had the information that the products were, not 19 specifically in the food chain, but in the environment out 20 side of the plant? 21 MR. FEATHERSTONE: I object to the form of the o 22 question. I think now-- You can no longer rely, Ms. Oliver, 23 on your definition of outside of the plant meaning in the 24 environment. I mean, it depends on, as he said yesterday, 25 whether the product is a solid versus a liquid. I mean-- -187- WATER PCB-SD0000056312 1 MS. OLIVER: We're talking-- My understanding, 2 Mr. Featherstone, is we're talking about the pydraul fluids 3 and we're talking about the same types of tests that 4 Bio-Test ran later. 5 MR. FEATHERSTONE: Okay. Now that creates another 6 problem. You and I just had a discussion about the fact 7 that the state of the art changed between the 1950s and 8 1968. Now you say the same type IBT tests and you're assumin 9 the state of the art was such and I don't know whether that's 10 true or not. 11 MS. OLIVER: The witness testified that, to the 12 extent available, in the '50s the same types of tests would 13 have been run. 14 MR. FEATHERSTONE: No. He testified the chronic 15 tests, according to the state of the art of the '50s, would 16 have been done but that doesn't say anything about the same 17 type of tests. IBT ran a particular series of tests, as you 16 well know. 19 MS. OLIVER: Well, let's ask the witness and let's 20 not get into you testify and me testify. We're getting no 21 place fast. 22 Qi Are the same types of tests-- Were the same 23 types of tests, chronic tests run by IBT in the '68 period, 24 available, to ,your knowledge, to be run in the '50s and the 25 '60s? -188- WATER PCB-SD0000056313 1 MR. FEATHERSTONE: She means the precise tests 2 run by IBT in the late '60s. 3 MS. OLIVER: Well, precise, Mr. Featherstone, means 4 on the exact same animals and on the same thing. Now, let's 5 not misstate my question. I'm asking about the same types 6 of tests. 7 A. The same types of tests but with different 8 protocols. 8 & Okay. There were protocols available for 10 running these types of tests in the *50s and the '60s? 11 A. Yes. 12 Ql And, in fact, Monsanto ran these types of tests 13 on other products in the '50s and the '60s? 14 A. Yes. 15 MS. OLIVER: Off the record a minute. 16 OFF THE RECORD DISCUSSION. 17 Q. If you had information in the 1950s that these 18 products had been found in the environment outside of the 19 plant, would you have recommended the same types of chronic 20 testing that was done by Bio-Test in the '68 period? 21 MR. FEATHERSTONE: Wait a minute. 22 MS. OLIVER: Did you hear the question? 23 MR. FEATHERSTONE: Yes. My second objection to 24 it, as you will recall, Ms. Oliver, went to what you mean 25 by in the environment. You have earlier stated that it -189- WATER PCB-SD0000056314 1 meant a product used outside the plant, a product discharged, 2 a product--I can't remember--disposed of outside the plant. 3 MS. OLIVER: Those were your definitions, Mr. . 4 Featherstone. Mine was just outside the plant. 5 MR. FEATHERSTONE: Well, it really doesn't have 6 any meaning. 7 ft Mr. Wheeler, can you answer the question? 6 A Not the way it's phrased. 9 ft How would you like me-- What would you like 10 me to define in the question to help you answer? 11 A I'd like a definition of your use of the term 12 environment outside of the plant. 13 ft Okay. In waterways outside of the plant. 14 MR. FEATHERSTONE: What in waterways outside of 15 the plant? 16 MS. OLIVER: That the fluids were finding their 17 way or were found in waterways outside the plant. 18 MR. FEATHERSTONE: Pydraul fluids? . 19 MS. OLIVER: Right. 20 A I've forgotten the period we're talking about 21 now. 22 MR. FEATHERSTONE: The '50s. 23 A The 1950s? 24 ft That's right. If you had that information in 25 the 1950s, would that have led you to recommend the same -190- WATER PCB-SD0000056315 1 types of chronic testing that was done later by Bio-Test? 2 MR. FEATHERSTONE: And again this relates to the 3 fact that it's not found in the food chain? 4 MS. OLIVER: That's right. In the waterways. 5 A Not without confirmation of the fact that it 6 was there and what the quantities were. 7 Qt You would need to know the quantities? 8 A Yes. 9 0- But, in your opinion, if it were verified that 10 the pydraul fluids were found in waterways and above a 11 certain level, in your opinion, the chronic testing should 12 have been done or would have been done in the '50s? 13 A Only if there was additional evidence that J4 it was present in other organisms in the waterway. 15 Qt Any other considerations besides those you 16 just mentioned that you would have felt important to make 17 the evaluation for further testing? 18 MR. FEATHERSTONE: And I take that, in addition to 19 any others that Dr. Kelly might have, who was responsible 20 for this? 21 MS. OLIVER: Right. 22 A Again, I think, that would depend on verifica 23 tion of the levels of the concentrations. 24 MR. FEATHERSTONE: She's asking whether there's 25 anything else-- -191- WATER PCB-SD0000056316 1 ft Anything else besides-- 2 MR. FEATHERSTONE: Besides what you've already 3 testified to and what Dr. Kelly might have thought about. 4 A I can't speak for Dr. Kelly but I would think 5 an important factor would be whether there was any evidence 6 of any effect of the material. 7 Ct What type of evidence of effect would be 8 significant to you? 9 A Are we talking about the 1950s? 10 Ci Uh huh. 11 A Only if it was an effect-- Only if it was an 12 effect that could conceivably get involved in my area of 13 occupational health or industrial hygiene and I can't 14 conceive of that type of circumstance. 15 MS. OLIVER: I'm sorry. Can you read that back? 16 I missed it. 17 REPORTER READS BACK. 18 ft Could you explain to me what that means? 19 MR. FEATHERSTONE: What don't you understand, Ms. 20 Oliver? 21 MS. OLIVER: I don't understand the answer, Mr. 22 Featherstone. 23 MR. FEATHERSTONE: The problem has always been one 24 of foundation. You and Mr. Hynes have both established 25 independently that Dr. Kelly was the one who was responsible -192- WATER PCB-SD0000056317 1 for chronic testing and selection of materials for chronic [ .I 2 testing m the 1950s and yet you persist m asking Mr. Wheeler 3 what he would have done had he been doing that job back in 4 the 1950s. And what Mr. Wheeler just hit you with was, S listen, my job was an industrial hygienist. 6 MS. OLIVER: I understand that. I'm asking for 7 an explanation from the witness. 8 Q. Let me ask this, Mr. Wheeler. Is it your 9 testimony that you would be concerned with the materials in 10 the environment, in the waterways only to the extent that 11 it may have affected the worker in the plant? 12 MR. FEATHERSTONE: In the 1950s? 13 MS. OLIVER: In the 1950s. 14 MR. FEATHERSTONE: Mr. Wheeler personally? You 15 and Mr. Hynes-- We've got a problem with you being Monsanto 16 Company, the medical department or Mr. Wheeler. 17 MS. OLIVER: I'm asking Mr. Wheeler. 18 A I personally? 19 Qi Uh huh. 20 A My answer is that my primary responsibility was 21 in the field of industrial hygiene. 22 Qi Your primary responsibility was but 1 think 23 you testified that you consulted on water pollution matters. 24 A With our own plants, yes. 25 Q. Okay. My question then is: Your concern with -193- WATER PCB-SD0000056318 1 any knowledge that the pydraul fluids were in the waterway 2 would be to the extent that the fluid nay have affected the 3 worker in the plant? 4 MR. FEATHERSTONE: 1950s again? S MS. OLIVER: In the 1950s. 6 MR. FEATHERSTONE: I object to the form of the 7 question. < 8 A My responsibility was for Monsanto plants. In 9 the circumstance that you have described of a material 10 getting into a waterway did not relate to customers or any 11 other possible sources. 12 0 To your knowledge, was Dr. Kelly concerned with 13 the possibility or potentiality that the products would be 14 found in waterways? 15 A What products? 16 ft The products such as pydraul. 17 MR. FEATHERSTONE:' No, no, no. That's not good 18 enough. What products. Pydraul or just-- A product such 19 as pydraul is meaningless. 20 MS. OLIVER: Okay. Let's make it pydraul. I'm 21 easy to get along with. c 22 A I can't speak for what Dr. Kelly's views were 23 in the 1950s. 24 Ql It would have been his responsibility to 25 evaluate pydraul if the information that it was in waters or -194- WATER PCB-SD0000056319 1 waterways was available in the 1950s and the early '60s. Is 2 that right? 3 MR. FEATHERSTONE: By available, known to Monsanto? 4 MS. OLIVER: Known to Monsanto. Known to Dr. Kelly S and Mr. Wheeler. 6 Qt Mr. Wheeler? 7 A. I'm trying to think how I can distinguish 8 between the medical department's responsibilities within the 9 company-- 10 MR. FEATHERSTONE: You don't have to get into 11 that. Answer her question if you can. If you can't, tell 12 her you can't. 13 A I can't answer it as I understand it. 14 Qi Was it anybody's responsibility within Monsanto 15 that you are aware of who would have the responsibility, if 16 the information that pydraul was getting into the waterways. 17 to evaluate the use of the product and the marketing of the 18 product? IB A The information would have come to Dr. Kelly. 20 Yes. 21 0 And he would have evaluated whether it was 22 safe or it should continue to be marketed or whatever--if 23 more testing should be done. That was his responsibility. 24 Right? 25 ,' A Only if there was confirmation of the fact that -195- WATER PCB-SD0000056320  ( 1 it was there and proceeding such as we did subsequently. 2 but at that time with the state of the art, in trying to find 3 out the significance of its being there. 4 Qi Mr. Wheeler, in the 1950s, what was your know 5 ledge of the PCBs? What did you know PCBs to be? c 6 MR. FEATHERSTONE: Wait a minute. You could get a 7 treatise. I don't know. What particular are you thinking 8 about? He's not going to sit here and start talking about 9 PCBs. You can ask a specific question on it, Roseann. 10 Ql Can you tell me what you understood PCBs to 11 be? 12 MR. FEATHERSTONE: Chemically? 13 MS. OLIVER: Chemically. 14 MR. FEATHERSTONE: All right. Limit your answer 15 to chemically. She has limited the question. 16 A To my knowledge, they were polychlorinated 17 byphenyls. ' 18 Q. Did you know any of the physical properties of IB PCBs? 20 A Yes. 21 Qt And what were they? 22 A The fact that these were oily liquids, varying 23 degrees of viscosity, low volatility, chemically stable. 24 Qi And what does chemically stable mean? 25 A They were chemically stable in that it was WATER PCB-SD0000056321 1 difficult, if not impossible, to react them with other 2 chemicals without destroying them. 3 Qt Do you have any other knowledge of any other 4 properties of PCBs? 5 A. Other properties? 6 fr Yes. 7 A. Yes. e Ql And what were they? 9 A. When I worked for the State of New Hampshire 10 in 1938 or 1939, there was a series of-- 11 MR. FEATHERSTONE: We're talking about physical 12 properties? 13 MS. OLIVER: Uh huh. 14 A She said other properties. I assumed, to be 15 honest, I had to mention toxicity characteristics. 16 MR. FEATHERSTONE: Are we off physical properties 17 now, Ms. Oliver? 18 MS. OLIVER: Yes. I want to ask about toxicity 19 characteristics now. . 20 MR. FEATHERSTONE: His knowledge of those in the 21 1950s? 22 MS. OLIVER: Yes. 23 MR. FEATHERSTONE: Go ahead. 24 A I first heard about polychlorinated biphenyls 25 in 1938 or 1939 as a result of some toxicity work that was -197- WATER PCB-SD0000056322 1 done at Harvard University. 2 MR. FEATHERSTONE: Well, Mr. Wheeler, to answer 3 to her question, you only need to talk about what you knew 4 about the toxicity of the compound. She hasn't asked you 5 for a historical perspective as to your source of that 6 information. 7 A. Toxicity data had been developed and published 8 in the literature in relation to the possible effects on 9 man when PCBs, in conjunction with other chlorinated hydro 10 carbons, where there had been occupational-- I'm going to 11 stop doing that. Where industrial hygiene exposures had 12 occurred. 13 Q. And what were the results of those tests or 14 data? 15 A. The data indicated that, at some level of 16 exposure, the polychlorinated biphenyls, in conjunction with 17 polychlorinated naphthalenes and, I believe, chlorinated 18 benzenes, could have an effect in animals on the liver. 19 This was by the inhalation route. 20 Ql You got that information as a result of reading 21 a study? : 22 A. Yes. 23 Qt Down at Harvard. Was that Dr. Drinker's study? 24 A. Yes. Dr. Cecil Drinker. 25 Qi Do you recall what Dr. Drinker's conclusions ' -198 WATER PCB-SD0000056323 1 on the effect on the liver was? 2 MR. FEATHERSTONE: From what? 3 MS. OLIVER: From his experiments. 4 MR. FEATHERSTONE: On what product? 5 MS. OLIVER: Talking about PCBs in conjunction with 6 other chlorinated hydrocarbons, I believe. 7 A I'm not a bio-chemist or a toxicologist or e a pharmacologist to even recall the specific types of injury 9 to the liver of the animals involved. 10 Ql Okay. Did Dr. Drinker's conclusions relating 11 to PCBs have any significance to you in your work at 12 Monsanto? 13 MR. FEATHERSTONE: No foundation that Dr. Drinker 14 made any specific conclusions with respect to PCBs, Ms. i .i 15 Oliver. The testimony in even your prior questions concern j I 16 PCBs in conjunction with other chlorinated compounds. j 17 Q. Did those results have any significance to you, 18 Mr. Wheeler? 19 A Yes. 20 Q. And what significance did it have? 21 A As a result of the Dr. Drinker studies, a 22 government committee in the U. S. Public Health Service, 23 including industrial hygienists from state agencies, 24 established a level that would be safe for occupational 25 exposures eight hours a day, five days a week. 199- WATER PCB-SD0000056324 t 0 A level of what? 2 A A level of the material in the breathing environ- 3 merit. 4 & Of the PCBs in the breathing environment? < 6 A. My recollection is that the early definition, 6 the early nomenclature as it appeared in these lists of 7 allowable concentrations of threshold limit values was 8 identified only as chlorinated diphenyls, without any i 9 relationship to the different types of chlorinated diphenyls. 10 And I said diphenyls because at that time they were referred 11 to in that fashion and subsequently, for I don't know what 12 reason, became referred to as biphenyls. It's a matter of 13 semantics. 14 & So a safe level was established for inhalation IS by workers of these substances known as chlorinated 16 diphenyls. Is that correct? . 17 A Based on the data in the Drinker studies, a 18 government committee established a number that said, if 19 workers are exposed to no more thain this level in their 20 breathing environment in a work week, there should be no 21 effects. 22 Cl Was that level communicated by Monsanto in its 23 pydraul labels and warnings, to your knowledge? 24 A My recollection is that, by the time the 25 pydraul fluids were developed, we had sponsored the Kettering 200- WATER PCB-SD0000056325 1 Laboratories long term inhalation studies with two specific 2 aroclors, 1242 and 1254, I believe, to clear up among 3 industrial hygienists some questions raised in the Drinker 4 work. This led the government committee to establish then 5 threshold limit values for those two specific polychlorinated 6 biphenyls. This was related to pydraul. It was related to 7 the other uses of the aroclors. 8 9 now? MS. OLIVER: Can we take a couple minutes break 10 RECESSED 11:00 a. m., March 11, 1981. 11 RECONVENED 11:15 a. m. , March 11, 1981, 12 Q. Mr. Wheeler, before we took a break, we were 13 talking about the toxicology properties of-- 14 MR. FEATHERSTONE: Toxicological properties. 15 MS. OLIVER: Toxicological. Same thing. 18 MR. FEATHERSTONE: No. Toxicology is a noun. 17 MS. OLIVER: I'm'going to start correcting your 18 writing. 19 Qi The toxicological aspects or properties of 20 PCBs. Are you aware of any others besides the matters that 21 Dr. Drinker raised in 1939? Or were you aware in the 1950s 22 of any additional-- 23 A I think I told you that we sponsored studies 24 at Kettering Laboratories to develop more data because, I 25 think, I also indicated, the Dr. Drinker work was concerned -201- WATER PCB-SD0000056326 i 1 with a mixture of PCBs with other materials, whereas the 2 work we had done concerned only aroclor 1242 and aroclor 3 1248 per se. 4 Qt Do you know if Monsanto sponsored any work after 6 Dr. Drinker's study before the Kettering Laboratories studies? 6 A. Not to my knowledge. 7 ft Are you aware of any other toxicological 8 properties-- 9 MR. FEATHERSTONE: Are you? You mean today? 10 ft In the 1950s and early 1960s, were you aware 11 of any other toxicological properties of PCBs besides Dr. 12 Drinker's and your Kettering Lab's inhalation studies? 13 A The skin irritation potential on repeated and 14 prolonged contact. 15 ft And what-- Strike that. How did you become 16 familiar with the skin irritation aspect? 17 A Well, in the--1 When I joined Monsanto, and 18 now referring to the '55 period that you mentioned, the 19 aroclors had been in commerce from 1929 to 1955, whatever 20 that number of years would be, without causing effects as 21 a result of their industrial use, with the exception that 22 occasionally there would be, as a result of repeated and 23 prolonged exposure, there would be skin effects that would 24 be reported to the medical department. 25 ft This is from the users of the aroclors, the -202- WATER PCB-SD0000056327 1 customers of Monsanto? 2 A. Yes, Ma'am. 3 ft What types of reports would be received by 4 the medical department? 6 A. Reports is not perhaps the right word. There 6 would be notification to us that they had experienced among 7 their workers cases of skin irritation, what precautions 8 should they take to avoid any further such instances? e ft And what was done in the medical department 10 with respect to these communications? 11 A The medical department responded, reiterating 12 and reaffirming the precautions that we had been recommen 13 ding, that good hygienic practices be followed in working 14 with these materials, particularly as it related to possible 15 skin contact prolonged and repeated. 16 ft Had any chronic studies been done on skin 17 absorption or contact over prolonged periods of time for the 18 aroclors or the pydraul fluids? 19 A No, because there was no intended use that 20 people would have that exposure. 21 ft I see. And when you got reports of that 22 exposure, you just told them not to use like that or not 23 to see that that happened? 24 MR. FEATHERSTONE: Well, now you've shifted to that 25 exposure. Do you mean chronic exposure or just meaning -203- c WATER PCB-SD0000056328 t dermatitis, which is what Mr. Wheeler referred to earlier? 2 MS. OLIVER: Let me 90 back and see if I can make 3 it clearer. 4 Qi The communications you got from Monsanto 6 customers of the aroclors, were those communications 6 describing incidents over long term exposures? 7 A. You'd have to define long term. We've used it 8 in connection with long term chronic animal studies. 9 . Well, chronic exposure to the worker. 10 A. I believe the skin irritation would develop 11 without what I would think what our profession woulddefine 12 as achronic exposure. It may have been daily exposure for 13 a week, two weeks, a month, some short period as that. 14 ft Had any tests been undertaken by Monsanto or 15 sponsored by Monsanto to determine the effects of exposure 16 to a worker over a period of time for a week or two weeks? 17 A. From the skin' exposure? 18 Q From the skin exposure. 19 A. No. This was not a part of the state of the 20 art again. 21 Qi Okay. So it wasn't part of the toxic-- Strike t 22 that. The acute screening tests that were done? 23 A. Only in terms of the acute skin irritation 24 potential in rats that we've mentioned earlier. 25 Q You were studying at Harvard when Dr. Drinker's -204- WATER PCB-SD0000056329 1 study or experiments were underway. Is that right? In the 2 1938-'39 period? 3 A. I'm not sure when he did that work. I was not 4 aware of it when I was there as a student. 5 Ql Were you aware of any other literature concern 6 ing PCBs, besides Dr. Drinker's experiments, before the 7 1950s? 8 A. No. C 9 MR. FEATHERSTONE: Well, Ms. Oliver, did your 10 question exclude what he learned at Monsanto when he joined 11 Monsanto? 12 MS. OLIVER: Yeah. I'm not talking about what 13 Monsanto sponsored. I'm talking about other scientific 14 literature. 15 MR. FEATHERSTONE: I would hate to think that you 16 would exclude Monsanto from scientific literature. 17 18 that. MS. OLIVER: Well, I certainly don't mean to do i 19 Qi Did you read Dr. Drinker's report or analysis 20 at the conclusion of his experiments? 21 A. I don't believe I read them until after I had 22 joined Monsanto. 23 Ql Was that in the 1950s? 24 A. I joined Monsanto in 1947. I don't know when 25 I-- In becoming acquainted with Monsanto products, I don't -205- WATER PCB-SD0000056330 1 know if that was necessarily-- I'm sure it was not a high 2 priority subject because, as I indicated, at that time, 3 there ,was this whole period of industrial uses with only 4 occasional instances of skin irritation. And that was true 5 up until 1969-1970. 6 ft Do you recall learning that Dr. Drinker had 7 found that the chlorinated compounds he was studying were 8 lodged in tissues? e A I don't recall that. 10 ft Were you aware in the 1950s and the early '60s n that PCBs were insoluble in water? 12 A I believed them to be. 13 ft What did that mean to you? 14 A That if the material got into water, it would IS be there as would any heavy oil or maybe even wax candle, 16 if you will, in the case of higher chlorinated ones, which, 17 I believe, within some temperature rangS, were essentially 18 solids. 19 ft Well, are you saying that you believed that, 20 because they were insoluble in water, if they got in the 21 water, they would remain there? 22 A Yes. 23 ft Were the properties of the PCBs being insoluble 24 in water and the chemical stability that you indicated 25 earlier factors that you considered significant at all in 206- WATER PCB-SD0000056331 1 determining or evaluating the pydraul product for toxicology 2 data or toxicological data? 3 A. I don't think I understand the question. 4 Q. That's too bad. 6 A. Well-- 6 MR. FEATHERSTONE: No, no, Mr. Wheeler. 7 Qi Were the insolubility of the PCBs in water and 8 the stability, the chemical stability, of the PCBs, factors 9 that were considerations in any toxicological evaluations 10 of the pydraul fluids? 11 A. I'm sure they must have been. 12 Qt By Dr. Kelly? 13 A Yes. 14 Q. You didn't evaluate those properties in terms 15 of toxicological effects for pydraul yourself? 16 MR. FEATHERSTONE: You mean-- You can answer that. 17 By the way, are we in the 1950s? 18 MS. OLIVER: Uh huh. 19 A Could you repeat the question, please? 4 20 Qi Well, let me rephrase it. You said, I think, 21 that Dr. Kelly would have considered those aspects of the 22 PCBs in evaluating pydraul. It was not your responsibility 23 to do that or you didn't do that? 24 A It was not my responsibility. 25 Qi And you didn't do that? Just so we go one -207- WATER PCB-SD0000056332 1 tep farther and make it clear. 2 A. I may have participated in discussions. Yes. 3 Q. Do you recall any discussions with Dr. Kelly 4 about the insolubility of PCBs or their chemical stability? 5 MR. FEATHERSTONE: In the 195Qs? 6 MS. OLIVER: In the 1950s. 7 A. No. 8 Q. How about in the 1960s up to 1968 or '69? 9 MR. FEATHERSTONE: The same question with respect 10 to discussions with Dr. Kelly? 11 MS. OLIVER: Discussions with Dr. Kelly. 12 A I don't recall any. 13 Q. I think you talked a little bit yesterday about 14 the reformulations of some of the pydraul fluids and the 15 phasing out of the fluids in the 1969, '70, '71, '72 period. 16 Do you recall that? 17 A I believe it's in the record. Yes. 18 Qi Do you recall whether any of the PCB bearing 19 fluids sold by Monsanto were taken off the market without 20 reformulation or phasing out? Just withdrawn? 21 A I can't answer that. 22 Ql You don't recall any? 23 A I don't know. 24 Qi Do you recall any discussions with Dr. Kelly 25 or anyone else at Monsanto about whether the PCB fluids -208- WATER PCB-SD0000056333 1 should be withdrawn from the market or should be phased out? 2 ' A. Yes. 3 Ql Did you discuss those matters with Dr. Kelly? 4 A. I indicated yesterday that I discussed it, not 5 only with Dr. Kelly, but with others in the company when we 6 were making our presentation to the management committee. 7 Qi Before making the presentation to the corporate 8 management committee, did you and Dr. Kelly in the medical 9 department discuss the matter of whether the fluids should 10 be withdrawn or phased out? 11 A. I don't recall. 12 Ql Did you make any recommendations to Dr. Kelly 13 or anyone in Monsanto concerning whether the PCB fluids 14 should be withdrawn from the market? 15 A. I don't recall a specific ^recommendation. 16 Q. Well, what type of recommendation did you 17 make? 16 A. I may have agreed with the program, with the 19 part of the program that was presented by others, at the 20 CMC meeting that this was a logical way to proceed. 21 Ql Do you recall what part of the program that 22 you agreed was a logical way to proceed? 23 A. I don't recall the details of the presentation. 24 It's my recollection that there was a program offered, which 25 included reformulating and perhaps in some cases withdrawing -209- WATER PCB-SD0000056334 1 PCBs from the market 2 Q. Do you recall Dr. Kelly or anyone at Monsanto 3 indicating to you or indicating in a group in which you 4 were present his belief or recommendation that the PCB 5 fluids should be withdrawn from the market? 6 A. Do I recollect if Dr. Kelly participated in a 7 discussion where he recommended withdrawal? 8 Q. Dr. Kelly. Yes. 9 A. I don't recall. 10 Ci Do you recall any other person at Monsanto 11 recommending that the fluid should be withdrawn from the 12 market? 13 MR. FEATHERSTONE: He's already testified-- Oh. 14 Withdrawal from the market? 15 MS. OLIVER: Withdrawal from the market. 16 A. I think again only in this group effort for the 17 presentation. ' 18 Qi Did someone in the group recommend that the 19 fluids should be withdrawn? 20 A. I believe the program presented by the market 21 ing group included recommendations to that effect. 22 Q. Do you recall anyone at Monsanto who expressed 23 any disagreement with the phasing out of pydrauls? 24 A. No. i 25 Ci Was the medical department asked to test the -210- WATER PCB-SD0000056335 t' 1 reformulations for the pydraul fluids? 2 A. I'm sure they were in conjunction with the 3 policies we discussed yesterday. 4 Qi The general practice? 5 A. Beg pardon? 6 Ql The general practice? 7 A. The routine screening. Yes. B & Do you have a recollection specifically of any 9 of the pydraul reformulations? 10 A. No. At that time we had at least two very well 11 qualified toxicologists who were involved and, although they 12 reported to me and was aware of what was going on, I did 13 not have intimate knowledge of it. 14 & And who were the toxicologists? IS A Dr. George AavinGCttS was the chief toxicologist. 16 & Lovinoous-?" t~**JwLlk** 17 A Ifcvinseus. And I've forgotten when Dr. Paul 18 Wright joined him. I believe it was mid-'60s. 19 & And they would have been the persons to see 20 that the testing of the pydraul reformulations was done? 21 A Again, with Dr. Kelly, yes. 22 & And you don't have any specific recollection 23 of what testing was done on these reformulations? 24 A No. t 25 & Were you advised that the reformulations for -211- WATER PCB-SD0000056336 1 the PCB pydraul fluids were intended to be compatible with j i j 2 the old fluids and could just be added to a hydraulic machine 3 or to the old juice? 4 A. I don't remember that I was informed of that. 5 Qi Do you recall any discussions among anyone at 6 Monsanto about cleaning out or draining hydraulic machines 7 that had used PCB fluids? 8 A. Because I had very close contacts with Mr. . 9 Pappageorge, who assumed the responsibility for overseeing i 10 all aspects of the PCB situation in, I believe, January of 11 1970, in the course of many discussions, he may have 12 mentioned it to me. _ 13 Q. Do you recall what he discussed with you 14 generally on that topic? 15 A. No. ' 16 Q. There was discussion, as far as you can recall, 17 about whether-- 18 MR. FEATHERSTONE: He said may have. 19 MS. OLIVER: Well, I'm asking. 20 Ci Do you recall any discussions with Mr. 21 Pappageorge or anyone else concerning whether-- 22 A. I recall-- 23 MR. FEATHERSTONE: Wait a minute. c 24 & Let me ask the question. --whether PCB bearing 25 fluid which had been used previously should be drained or -212- WATER PCB-SD0000056337 1 removed from the machines in which it was before the replace 2 ment was used? 3 A. I don't recall. 4 ft You don't recall. Do you recall any conversa S tions or discussions with Dr. Richard in which Dr, Richard 6 recommended that hydraulic machines containing PCB bearing 7 fluids be steam cleaned or drained? 8 A. No. . 9 & In this period of 1968 to '72 or so, how often 10 would you be involved in meetings concerning the PCB concerns 11 at Monsanto? 12 A. You said from 1968 to 1972? 13 Ql Approximately. 14 A I don't know the number but fewer after Mr. 15 Pappageorge received his assignment in January of 1970 than 16 I had been in the earlier period. 17 fit And was there a person before Mr. Pappageorge 18 who had the overall responsibility for the PCB concerns? 19 ' A It was a joint effort. 20 Qi Among whom? 21 A Ourselves and the analytical group. 22 Qi Were you given certain responsibilities in 23 1968 concerning PCB problem or concern that arose in Monsanto 24 A Yes. 25 Qt And what were your responsibilities? -213- WATER PCB-SD0000056338 1 JL My recollection is that Dr. Richard suggested 2 that there be a meeting, not only from research, but from 3 development and marketing and including the medical depart 4 ment, to discuss the Jensen work and the flood of requests 5 that we were getting for samples from people all over the 6 world essentially and to ensure that each of us within our 7 respective areas of interest, as well as responsibility, 8 communicated with the others in the group. My responsibility, 9 of course, was as a designate of Dr. Kelly's, who again was , 10 kept fully informed. 11 Qi Other than working with Bio-Test and the 12 government agencies, I think you mentioned earlier, to come 13 up with testing for the PCB fluids and sending samples out 14 to interested people who asked for them, were there other 15 specific responsibilities or duties that you or the medical 16 department had with respect to the PCB concerns in the 17 period of '68 to '70? ` 18 A. Well, as an example, as part of my responsi 19 bilities, I visited Professor Widmark in Sweden, as well as 20 people in Great Britain, people whom our representatives in 21 Europe had identified as having an interest in the original 22 Jensen work. I made that trip with Dr. Richard and Dr. Bob 23 Keller to indicate our interest and concern as to what data 24 had been presented, even though it may not have been sub- t 25 stantiated, and, again, to help Dr. Kelly arrive at a -214- WATER PCB-SD0000056339 1 recommendation as to how we should proceed, even though at 2 that time, in April or May of 1969, Dr. Kelly had developed 3 the protocols for the long term studies after the consulation 4 that I've referred to so many times. Part of my trip then 5 was to inform people in the toxicological field, those that 6 we did see, what our programs were and, again, to ask for 7 any input that they had and assurance that, as deta developed, 8 it would be made available to them. 9 Q. As data developed from Within Monsanto, it 10 would be made available to other sources or other people? 11 A Yes. 12 MR. FEATHERSTOME: This -was in reference to the 13 chronic tests? 14 A Yes. 15 Qi What did Professor Widmark have to $ay when 16 you visited him in 1969 about the testing or the results 17 that had been found in Sweden? 18 A He repeated comments that he had made to our 19 European representatives who had visited him, I believe, in 20 early '68. He was disturbed in a way that hiS--I believe 21 Jensen was a student of his. He was disturbed at the way 22 Jensen had revealed what he thought was a breakthrough in 23 analytical techniques, that is, to the press and through 24 a piece of advertising material. More importantly, he F 25 thought that the release was premature, that not enough data -i -215- WATER PCB-SD0000056340 1 had been generated to confirm Jensen's initial conclusions 2 and welcomed the fact that we were willing to cooperate with 3 him and any others who were involved to the maximum of our 4 ability and to keep them informed of any progress. 5 Qt Did he give you any reason to believe that the 6 findings by-- 7 MR. FEATHERSTONE: Jensen? 6 MS. OLIVER: Yeah. I drew a blank. 9 Q. --Mr. Jensen were not accurate? 10 ft. Yes. As a respected scientist, he felt that 11 the release of the data was premature. I've forgotten how 12 many samples had been done but, if I may say a hundred, he 13 thought there should have been thousands of samples. 14 Q. Did you learn in the 1968 to *72 period that 15 PCBs had been found in the effluent of Monsanto's plant in 16 Pensacola, Florida? 17 A I have a vague recollection of it. 16 ft Do you know if any action was taken by the 19 medical department or the research or analytical section 20 with respect to that finding? 21 A My recollection is that it was not in the 22 normal effluent from the plant. That plant had a very 23 highly sophisticated waste treatment system to take its 24 wastes. And what happened actually was a leak. Some piece 25 of equipment that had PCBS in it that got into a drainage .; -216- WATER PCB-SD0000056341 o 1 ditch, which was intended to take, water run-off from rain 2 off the property. This is the best of my recollection. 3 Qi Did you have any knowledge before this infor 4 mation was given to you in the '68 to '70 period that any 5 of Monsanto's plants were discharging or disposing of PCBs 6 from their effluent? 7 A. No. 8 Qi One of your responsibilities in this period of 9 1968 or '69 to '72 was to circulate any material on PCBs 10 that you might run across in journals or whatever. Who 11 received the information? Who did you circulate this infor 12 mation to? 13 A. To the research group, to the marketing group, 14 I believe the development group, not only in the U. S. but, IS the material that appeared to be of significance to our 16 people in Europe. We developed a routine mailing list. 1 17 think part of that responsibility for distribution became 18 Mr. Pappageorge's rather than mine after he came aboard. 19 Q. Who in the development group, to your knowledge, 20 were involved in the PCB concerns of Monsanto? 21 A. I don't remember the names. I'm sorry. 22 Qi In the research group. Dr. Richard and Dr. 23 Keller were involved? 24 A. Yes. 25 Qi And Mr. Pappageorge later on in 1970? -217- WATER PCB-SD0000056342 1 A. Yes. i 2 Ql Were there any other persons that you can 3 recall that were involved on a regular basis with the PCB 4 concerns at Monsanto? ' 5 A. My recollection is Howard Burgen was the key 6 man in the marketing area and maybe a designate of his did 7 participate in any meetings. I think, from my standpoint, 8 he was routinely on the list to get any material that I 9 circulated. . 10 Ql Anybody else that you can think of? 11 A No. 12 Ql You mentioned yesterday, I think, the labeling 13 group, who would be in charge of seeing that the labels went 14 on the product-- Did the people in the labeling group have 15 any input as to what type of information went in, to your 16 knowledge? 17 A To my knowledge, it had been standard practice 18 before I joined Monsanto and certainly some time after I 19 became involved myself. But the labeling group, which was 20 in another staff department, had to circulate drafts of 21 labels to the medical department, even though there was no 22 indication that there was a pre-requisite for a precautionary 23 statement. It was just a matter of course that the medical 24 department built up in its files copies of all Monsanto 25 labels. ! -218- . WATER PCB-SD0000056343 1 Qt And the medical department would be the 2 department with the responsibility to put cautionary language 3 on the label? 4 MR. FEATHERSTONE: Cautionary language for what 5 now? For medical purposes? 6 MS. OLIVER: For product use. 7 A Only insofar as the industrial health problem 8 might be concerned. I'm differentiating that because we had 9 no responsibility for ensuring that, if the material was 10 flammable, that that precaution was mentioned. 11 Qi I see. Was it corporate management committee 12 that was set up or that met, which you made your presentation 13 or the presentation was made? 14 MR. FEATHERSTONE: You can't-- 15 MS. OLIVER: Let me start over again. 16 Q, The corporate management committee that you 17 testified about earlier, was that set up for dealing with 18 the PCB concerns, to your knowledge? 19 A Heavens, no. 20 Qi That was a corporate management committee that 21 met-- 22 A That met daily, I would expect, certainly weekly 23 to deal with any problems related to Monsanto's business. 24 Q. T think you said that, at that presentation, t 25 there was expressed the view that there was considerable -219- WATER PCB-SD0000056344 1 doubt that the materials which Mr. Jensen found in the envirob2 ment were PCBs and there was some question about the signifi 3 cance of that finding, if they were. Do you recall that? 4 A. I think what I said was the validity of his 5 results had been questioned, not only by scientists in Great 6 Britain and at that time by scientists in this country, 7 but certainly by Mr. Jensen's superior, in connection with 8 the validity and reproduceability of the method for analysis. 9 And more importantly, no one to our knowledge had offered 10 any evidence that there was an effect of the PCBs in the 11 environment in conjunction with the chlorinated pesticides 12 that were in the environment. And I have to make that 13 distinction because in no case, to my recollection, was 14 there evidence presented that involved PCBs by themselves. IS MR. FEATHERSTONE: I'm soiry, Roseann. This was 16 a CMC meeting? 17 MS. OLIVER: That's right. 18 Qt After that meeting and any time before you left 19 Monsanto, in your opinion, was there evidence of the effect 20 of PCBs in the environment? 21 A. I can't recall that there was, again in the 22 absence of the other chlorinated compounds. 23 Qt When you're speaking of the effect of PCBs in 24 the environment, are you talking about a harmful effect or 25 just an effect? -220- WATER PCB-SD0000056345 I 1 A. Any effect. 2 Q. Any effect. While you were at Monsanto, did 3 you have any evidence or any reason to believe that there 4 was a harmful effect of PCBs found in the environment? 5 MR. FEATHERSTONEs Any level of PCBs? 6 MS. OLIVER: Any levels. 7 A I don't recall specific instances, although 8 the literature that passed over my desk may well have 9 included reports of effects. But I think I said earlier, to 10 my recollection, I saw none that were definitively attribu 11 table to the PCBs. 12 Q. The Bio-Test tests that were done had what 13 results? 14 A There were many, many studies involved and I 15 can't answer that question unless you're more specific. 16 Q. Were there any studies done that you're aware 17 of that found a harmful effect of PCBs on the test animals? 18 A Yes, because the purpose of the experiment is 19 to use levels that would demonstrate a harmful effect. 20 Q. Do you recall what the harmful effects that 21 were found involved? 22 A My recollection is that it varied with the 23 compounds under study and varied with the species of animals 24 and, I believe, even with the sex of the animals. 25 Q. Do you recall that the studies found effects -221- WATER PCB-SD0000056346 1 on the livers of the animals? 2 A. I believe that was so. Yes. 3 Ql Did the Bio-Test people make recommendations on 4 the toxicity of PCB fluids that they tested? 5 MR. FEATHERSTONE: They didn't test PCB fluids, 6 Ms. Oliver. You have the tests. Well, there's no proper 7 question. They didn't test PCB fluids, Ms. Oliver. You 8 know that. 9 Ql From the results of the tests that were conducte 10 by Bio-Test, did Bio-Test make any recommendations of the 11 toxicity of the pydraul fluid? 12 MR. FEATHERSTONE: Of the pydraul fluid? 13 MS. OLIVER: That's right. ` 14 A I don't know that Bio-Test even knew anything IS about pydraul fluids. ' 16 Ql They tested the aroclors? 17 i A They tested the aroclor. Right. 18 Ql Did they make any conclusions or recommendations 19 on the toxicity of the aroclors? 20 A They made conclusions, based on an interpreta 21 tion of the data. It was not their function to make any 22 recommendations. 23 Ql Do you have a recollection of what generally 24 their conclusions were with respect to the aroclors they 25 tested? ' -222- WATER PCB-SD0000056347 1 A. Their conclusions? 2 & Their conclusions. 3 A. It is my recollection is that they-- 4 MR. FEATHERSTONEs The answer to that question is 6 yes or no. I 6 A. Yes. : 7 Q. What is your recollection of their conclusions? B MR. FEATHERSTONE: Which tests? 9 MS. OLIVER: Generally a recollection pf the-- 10 MR. FEATHERSTONE: You know, from reading the 11 reports, Ms. Oliver, that there was no general conclusion. 12 The conclusions were formed in conjunction with specific 13 tests on specific animals and specific dosages. Do you have 14 a specific one in mind? 15 MS. OLIVER: No. The overall testing program by 16 Bio-Test. 17 MR. FEATHERSTONE: There was no overall. IB , Can you tell me of what their conclusions were 19 overall after the testing they had done on the aroclors? 20 MR. FEATHERSTONE: First you have to establish, 21 Ms. Oliver, that there was an overall conclusion made by 22 Industrial Bio-Test. 23 MS. OLIVER: I'm not establishing that there was 24 an overall conclusion. I'm asking the witness if he can 25 tell me what his recollection is as to the conclusions by -223- WATER PCB-SD0000056348 < 1 Bio-Test. 2 MR. FEATHERSTONE: Any conclusions for any dose 3 level? 4 fit Mr. Wheeler, can you-- 6 A I think I can answer your question, as I 6 understand it, in this fashion. Industrial Bio-Test reached 7 conclusions based on the results of each of the studies that 8 they did and in relation to each of the materials that they 9 investigated. 10 fit Do you recall any of the conclusions that they 11 reached on the tests that were done? 12 A I have a general idea. 13 MR* FEATHERSTONE: She's not asking for your idea. 14 She's asking for your recollection. IS A A general recollection.' 16 ft What is your general recollection? 17 MR. FEATHERSTONE:' To the extent you. Sir, remember 18 a specific conclusion reached by IBT, please place it in 19 the context of a particular test. 20 A My recollection is that, in the long term 21 chronic studies with aroclor 1242, to pick an example, the 22 levels of toxicity--the levels that exhibited toxic effects 23 and, particularly the no effect level, was such that there 24 appeared to be no hazard to humans at levels in which the 25 PCBs were being identified in conjunction with other -224- WATER PCB-SD0000056349 1 chlorinated materials in the food chain. 2 Cl Here the tests that were run by Bio-Test 3 evaluated by Dr. Kelly? 4 A. Yes. 5 Qi Do you know what recommendations Dr. Kelly made. 6 if any, after reviewing the Industrial Bio-Test results? 7 A. I'm not aware of what his recommendations were. 8 No. 9 Ql Did you review the test results? 10 A. Yes. 11 Cl Did you make any recommendations after reviewing 12 the results? 13 A. I don't recall specific recommendations. 14 Cl Did you make any general recommendations? IS A. I believe I made a general recommendation or 16 indicated^greement that the final reports be distributed 17 to anybody that we could identify who would have an interest 18 in them, not only in the government, but other scientists 19 who had expressed an interest. 20 MR. FEATHERSTONE: Let's go off the record a 21 second. 22 RECESSED 12:05 p. m., March 11, 1981. 23 RECONVENED 12:35 p. m., March 11, 1981. 24 Cl fir. Wheeler, I think yovi mentioned yesterday 25 that you had a meeting with Dr. Kimbrough, that Dr. Kimbrough -225- WATER PCB-SD0000056350 1 came out to Monsanto about 1972. 2 MR. FEATHERSTONE: Did you say about 1972? 3 MS. OLIVER: In 1972. 4 Ql Did you have any more communications with Dr. 6 Kimbrough after that time? | 6 A. I did not. ; 7 Qt Did Dr. Kelly, to your knowledge? 8 A. I don't know. 9 Qi Had you communicated with her before the 10 meeting in 1972? 11 A. I met and talked with her at a conference 12 called by the National Institutes of Environmental Health 13 Sciences. I think I can pinpoint this one as being between 14 Christmas and New Year's of 1971 and that's where I first 15 met her. ` ~Ql And what was your discussion or communication 16 17 at that point? 18 A I was in attendance with Bill Pappageorge and 19 Dr. Keplinger from Industrial Bio-Test, who was a participant 20 in the program and presented the summary of the Monsanto 21 studies which had been finished at that time. I also took 22 the occasion to present to people from the FDA-- 23 MR. FEATHERSTONE: No, no, no. The question 24 concerned what you and, I think. Dr. Kimbrough talked about. 25 Is that right? -226- WATER PCB-SD0000056351 1 MS. OLIVER: Dr. Kimbrough? Yes. 2 MR. FEATHERSTONE: I'm not Bure. It may be Mrs. 3 Kimbrough. 4 A. I think she's a PhD. I'm not sure. She 6 informed Dr. Keplinger in my presence that she had been 6 doing some work with one of the PCBs and she thought she had 7 found an indication that there might be carcinogenic evidence 8 in one or more of her animals. 8 Ql Who is Dr. Keplinger? 10 A. Dr. Keplinger is one of the scientists from 11 Industrial Bio-Test Laboratories. 12 Ql He worked on the tests that were conducted in 13 the chronic testing program? 14 A. Yes. 16 Ql In this discussion with Dr. Kimbrough in 1971, 16 were there--ariy^discussions about doing any work with Dr. W 17 Kimbrough by Industrial Bio-Test? 18 A. As a result of her comments, the pathologists 19 from Chicago, Industrial Bio-Test, came down to the meeting 20 and, with her and Dr. Keplinger--I did not participate in 21 this--reviewed the slides that she had brought with her. 22 And it's my recollection that, by the same token, the 23 pathologists from Industrial Bio-Test brought representative 24 slides from the work they had done. Subsequently, outside 25 pathologists, and I think I referred to this yesterday, -227- WATER PCB-SD0000056352 1 including the National Cancer Institute pathologist, reviewed 2 I believe, hundreds of slides from the IBT work. 3 Qi Did Bio-Test report to you or to Dr. Kelly on 4 what Dr. Kimbrough's slides revealed? 5 A. I believe I was told that they did not confirm 6 her identification and, further, the review of the slides 7 that went on almost all night had pretty much convinced her 8 that the cells that she had suspicions about were not, in e fact, cancer cells. 10 Q. The examination of these tissues or cells that 11 Bio-Test took, were those the analyses that were done by 12 Dr. Richard or was that something different? 13 A. Monsanto does not--did not, and as far as I i 14 know today does not, have a pathologist. A pathologist is 15 a specialist at^nedical training* trained to look at tissues. 16 whether they befrom humans or a veterinarian pathologist, 17 in particular, looking at animal tissues to identify any 18 indication that the cells are not normal. 19 Cl What I'm asking now is-- You testified earlier 20 that Dr. Richard's group at Monsanto did some chemical 21 analyses of tissues, which samples had been sent to them 22 by Bio-Test. Are the samples and the analyses done by Dr. 23 Richard different from the analysis of the tissues that 24 you're talking about with Dr. Kimbrough? 25 A A tissue for examination as done by Dr. Kimbrough -228- o WATER PCB-SD0000056353 1 and as done by pathologists-- 2 MR. FEATHERSTONE: She just wants to know whether 3 what Dr. Richard did was different from what Dr.?-- 4 A Completely different. 5 ft Dr. Richard looked for the accumulation or 6 presence of PCBs in tissues-- 7 A By chemical methods. B ft By chemical methods. And the pathologists that e Monsanto contracted with to look at the tissues looked for 10 carcinogenicity or changes in the tissues? 11 A They looked for changes, any changes, in the 12 tissues. 13 ft Did you arrange for the pathologists to look 14 at the tissues? 15 A No. 16 ft Did Dr. Kelly arrange^that? 17 A Dr. Kelly, I think, in conjunction with Dr. IB Levinscus perhaps. 19 ft Mr. Wheeler, when you became aware of the 20 Jensen findings-- ' 21 MR. FEATHERSTONE: Reported findings. 22 MS. OLIVER: Reported findings. 23 MR. FEATHERSTONE: Alleged findings. 24 MS.t OLIVER: Reported findings. 25 MR. HYNES: They were findings. It's just alleged -229- WATER PCB-SD0000056354 1 that they're wrong or right. 2 Qi In the period of 1968, 1969, '70, did you or 3 Dr. Kelly or anyone in the medical department do a search of 4 the literature on PCBs prior to that time? 6 A. We may have had our library do a search, yes, 6 for literature which we would not normally see. I don't 7 recall that we did but I expect we did. 8 & Up until 1970, were you aware of any studies B done that were not sponsored by Monsanto, other than Dr. 10 Drinker's study, on PCBs or aroclors? 0 11 MR. FEATHERSTONE: You're talking about possible 12 effects? 13 MS. OLIVER: Yes. 14 MR. FEATHERSTONE: As distinguished from the 15 analytical work? ' 16 MS. OLIVER: Sure. 17 A I'm not aware that there were any chronic 18 inhalation studies or any other chronic studies done. 19 Ci Were you aware of any studies done, other than 20 Dr. Drinker's, concerning pathologic changes in animals 21 exposed to commercial chlorinated diphenols. ' 22 MR. FEATHERSTONE: You mean diphenyls? 23 MS. OLIVER: Diphenyls. Whatever. Yeah. 24 A I have a vague recollection that some scientist, 25 and I don't recall who, and in some government agency that -230- WATER PCB-SD0000056355 1 I don't recall, published the results of some limited 2 studies following the Drinker work. 3 Q. To your recollection, were you aware of that 4 study or that report prior to 1968? 5 A. Yes. 6 , Prior to 1968 do you have a recollection of a 7 study reporting that PCBs were responsible for the death of 8 workers in a plant? e A. Yes. 10 , Do you recall when you heard about that study? 11 A. In 1937, '38, '39, when I was with the New 12 Hampshire State Health Department. 13 , And what did you know about that study? 14 A. I don't think study describes ^the^informat^on 15 given me of an instance where in a particular industrial \ 16 operation involving, not only PCBs, but polychlorinated^ 17 naphthalenes and other chlorinated benzenes, I believe, due 18 to excessive exposure to vapors, resulted, my recollection 19 is, in a death. 20 MR. FEATHERSTONE: Is that vapors from the mixture 21 you described. Sir? 22 A Yes. This is what led to the Drinker studies. 23 Ql While you were working for the New Hampshire 24 Health Department, were you involved in the area of work 25 where you became familiar with PCBs in the working place? -231- WATER PCB-SD0000056356 1 A. I never encountered any PCBs in any establish- 2 ments in New Hampshire. 3 Qi But you became familiar with the literature and 4 what they were and that type of thing? ;' 6 A. Yes. ' 6 Qi At any time during the period up to 1970 when 7 you were with Monsanto, did you recommend that the warning 8 labels or the cautionary labels on any of the PCB fluids 9 contain the identification that the product contained PCBs? 10 A I participated in discussions. You said 1970. 11 It may have been December, 1969. 12 Ql Okay. Before 1969? 13 A No. ; 14 Ql Did you recommend that the labels include the x 15 words polychlorinated biphenols? ' 16 A No. 17 MR. FEATHERSTONE: Biphenyls. Biphenol is a IB different chemical. 19 Qi Did you consider that the information that the 20 product contained PCBs was not appropriate to go on a 21 cautionary label? 22 MR. FEATHERSTONE: I object to the form of the 23 question. What do you mean by appropriate? 24 MS. OLIVER: Well, let me ask it this way. . 25 Qi Was there a reason why you didn't recommend -232- WATER PCB-SD0000056357 PCBs added to the label of the product? A. Are you referring specifically to pydrauls? Ql Any of the PCB fluids? A I have to make a distinction because I'm not Bure that the aroclor labels did not indicate that they were, in fact, polychlorinated biphenyls. They certainly were identified as such in the technical bulletins and sales literature. i Ci Okay. Well, then pydrauls were not identified as PCB products on the labels. Is that correct? MR. FEATHERSTONE: Well, they didn't contain the word PCB. He's already testified to that. Ci My question is though, is there a reason why you didn't recommend that the word PCB appear on the labels of pydraul fluids? ' I | A I think there were two reasons. One* these were trademark products and, secondly, with the data that we could provide people indicating why we warned repeated and prolonged skin contact and inhalation of vapors and the fact that they were not intended for day in and day out exposures was sufficient to eliminate any potential hazard. MR. FEATHERSTONE: Sufficient from an industrial hygiehic standpoint. A Industrial hygiene. . MS. OLIVER: Would you read back the entire answer. -233- WATER PCB-SD0000056358 1 REPORTER READS BACK. 2 MR. FEATHERSTONE: I'm sorry.o Was it why we 3 warned against repeated exposure and inhalation? Or what 4 was it? 5 REPORTER READS BACK. 6 MR. FEATHERSTONE: I think there's a word missing 7 in there. Repeated exposure and inhalation-- 8 A Be avoided. 9 Q. The first"reason you mentioned was because it 10 was a trademark product. Why would that preclude or make 11 unnecessary the inclusion of the word PCBs on the label? 12 MR. FEATHERSTONE: Well, your first question is 13 why he didn't recommend. ^ 14 MS. OLIVER: Well, in Mr. Wheeler's^opinion. _ IS MR. FEATHERSTONE: All right. WKy"did that play 16 a role on what was not recommended? 17 MS. OLIVER: Right. Why was that one of the 18 reasons? 18 MR. FEATHERSTONE: That's different. You said 20 preclude. I don't think it does. 21 MS. OLIVER: No. 22 MR. FEATHERSTONE: All right. Can you answer 23 that? What she wants to know, and correct me if I'm wrong. 24 is how did tbe fact that there was a trademark product 26 involved affect your decision not to recommend that PCBs -234- WATER PCB-SD0000056359 1 be placed on the pydraul label? Is that fair? 2 MS. OLIVER; That's it. 3 JL It's my understanding that we were not to reveal 4 at that time composition information about the trademark 5 product. 6 Qt And that's the period from the 1950s to 1968? 7 A. From such time as the pydraul fluids were intro-| 8 duced until subsequently there was a change in the label. 8 ft The second part of your answer, and correct me 10 if I'm misstating it, was that, because you provided the 11 customers with information on avoiding prolonged use and 12 contact with skin, that it wasn't necessary, in your opinion, 13 to identify that potential hazard of the PCBs? 14 MR. FEATHERSTONE: Wait a minute. That's not what 15 he said. You asked why PCB wasn't On the label. He said ' Sy 16 it was unnecessary to use it because there were warnings___-^ 17 about avoiding repeated and prolonged skin contact and 18 continued inhalation. 19 Q. My question is: Why do those warnings, again 20 in your opinion, make it unnecessary or made it unnecessary 21 to place the words PCBs on the label? 22 MR. FEATHERSTONE: Okay. A different question. 23 Answer that question. : 24 A I can't. I don't know. Would you read it back,] 25 please. -235- WATER PCB-SD0000056360 1 REPORTER READS BACK. 2 A If I understand the question, you've implied 3 that we recommended or agreed that it should be on the label. 4 Did I misunderstand your question? Is there a double 5 negative there or-- 6 Qi No. I don't think so. 7 MR. FEATHERSTONEs What she wants to know, Mr. 8 Wheeler, is why, having the warnings about avoiding repeated 0 skin contact and against repeated inhalation, why the 10 presence of those warnings on the label affected your 11 decision not to recommend that the acronym PCB or the word 12 polychlorinated biphenyl be on the label? 13 A Well, I think my earlier answer indicated that^ 14 we were also able to provide the customers and users the v/ 15 acute toxicity data, which was the Only type of exposure 16 that we could envision. 17 Qi So the information that you provided to the 18 customer on exposure, in your opinion, made it unnecessary 19 to put the word PCBs on the label? 20 A Right. 21 Qi I think you mentioned earlier that, to your 22 knowledge, the complaints that came in on the use of the 23 aroclors were of skin contact irritations. Is that right? 24 A That's right. - I 25 Qi With respect to the pydraul fluids, do you -236- WATER PCB-SD0000056361 1 recall receiving complaints from customers on the use of the 2 pydraul fluids? 3 A. I believe so. 4 Ql And what categories or types of complaints were 5 received by the medical department? 6 A. The same as had been experienced with the 7 aroclors, that due to repeated and prolonged skin contact, 8 there was a skin reaction. 0 Ql Here there complaints 'received on inhalation of 10 vapors? 11 A Not to my knowledge. I think I did testify 12 yesterday that in the case of-- I`believe there were orie^ or 13 two cases where there had been a line ruptured and where / 14 the workers were discomforted, not incapacitated, discom forted over a period of time that led the company or theNiser 16 16 involved to ask if there were any other significant ''conse 17 quences he should be aware of. There's one other point I 18 have not mentioned and just comes to mind. 19 MR. FEATHERSTONE: Is it responsive to the 20 question. Sir? 21 A It's responsive to the safe handling and 22 resulted to inquiries to us about the toxicity. And that 23 was that the ability or the fact of the accidental splashing 24 of the material in the eyes was particularly painful. 26 Ql And when you received that information, what -237- WATER PCB-SD0000056362 1 1 did the medical department do? 2 MR. FEATHERSTONEs The medical department generated 3 that information. 4 MS. OLIVER: I thought it was in response. He 5 received inquiries concerning that or-- Let me start over 6 again. , 7 Qt Were these inquiries that you received informa 8 tion to the medical department that, if the material pydraul 0 was splashed in the eyes, it was painful? 10 A My recollection is that the label included, 11 and this is something we haven't mentioned before, to avoid ( 12 eye contact; in case of eye contact, finish immediately with^ 13 water; if irritation persists, see a physician. At some 14 time, I believe Dr. Kelly recommended the kind of treatment 15 that a physician would prescribe to help relieve the pain 16 and to speed up the elimination of the irritation. I think 17 the use of-- ` IB MR. FEATHERSTONE: You've answered the question, 19 Mr. Wheeler. 20 Qt What tests did Monsanto conduct or sponsor 21 which led to this information about splashing it in your eye 22 could be painful or these are steps that should be taken 23 if that happens? 24 A This is the purpose of part of the acute 25 toxicity screening study that I've described where the -238- WATER PCB-SD0000056363 1 material was dropped in the eyes of rabbits to see what the 2 degree of irritation was. 3 Qi So it's one of the routine acute screenings? 4 A. Yes. 6 & I think you mentioned yesterday that the acute 6 screen of tests was run on pydraul F-9 before it was placed 7 on the market. Were the same types of tests run on A 200 8 before pydraul A 200 was placed on the market? 0 A I think my testimony indicates that the same 10 type of acute studies would have been done on any of the 11 subsequent pydrauls. 12 Qi Do you have any recollection of what was done--- 13 for A 200? Any specific recollection today? 14 A Only that it would have been the acute studies. - M) 15 Q. Once a product was marketed, am I correct-in 16 saying that, unless some new information was developed or 17 came to the attention of the medical department, there would 18 be no further toxicity tests on that product? 19 A That's right. 20 & Mr. Wheeler, we've been provided with tests 21 done by or sponsored by Monsanto on the aroclors and pydrauls 22 I believe, and one of the tests that we received is a 23 November 9th, 1966, test by Younger Labs on the oral lethal 24 dose of pydraul F-9 for rats. 25 MR. FEATHERSTONE: 1966? -239- WATER PCB-SD0000056364 1 MS. OLIVER: I believe so. 2 MR. FEATHERSTONE: I don't believe that's right. 3 Do you have it in front of you? 0 4 MS. OLIVER: Let me see. Off the record. 5 OFF THE RECORD DISCUSSION. e MS. OLIVER: We'll mark it. 7 DOCUMENT MARKED, "DEFENDANT'S EXHIBIT #1." 8 Q, Mr. Wheeler, I'd like you to look at what we've 0 marked as exhibit number one. Look at it for a couple of 10 minutes and, if you can identify it for us, I'd like you to 11 do that. 12 A All right. : i 13 Q. Could you identify what that is? 14 A Yes. It's a report from Younger Laboratories, 16 reporting the results of two aspects of a routine acute^ 16 toxicity study. 17 Qi Do you have any recollection today of the 18 study itself or the analysis as indicated in the report? 19 A No, Ma'am. 20 Qt A certificate of analysis is not a -full report; 21 is it? Or is it? 22 A For this type of study, yes. Younger 23 Laboratories was involved in other studies. 24 fit Do you know why this study was conducted in 25 November of 1966 for Monsanto? -240- WATER PCB-SD0000056365 i A. I have no idea? 2 ft This type of study would not routinely be done 3 on a product in the market place unless new information had 4 been learned? 5 MR. FEATHERSTONE: Is that a question or a state 6 ment. 7 ft Is that right? 6 MR. FEATHERSTONE: Why don't you take a look at 9 it. 10 A I can't answer whether there was a particular 11 reason for doing the study. I assume there was. 12 ft But it would not be a routine type of study 13 that would be done? 14 A No. , IS ft When you received or the medical department 16 received communications from customers or users of a pydraul 17 product, would those communications provide you with 16 information on how the product was being used by the 19 customer? 20 A To some degree usually, yes^. 21 ft And those communications would increase your 22 knowledge perhaps of the actual uses of the produpt? 23 A That's right. 24 ft Did you or anyone in the medical department i' 25 review all the information that had been accumulated on -241- WATER PCB-SD0000056366 1 the actual uses of the pydraul fluids by the customers for 2 purposes of toxicological analysis? 3 MR. FEATHERSTONE: I object to the form of the 4 question. It is compound and without foundation. Other 5 people in the medical department. 6 MS. OLIVER: Well, Dr. Kelly and Mr. Wheeler. 7 MR. FEATHERSTONE: It's still the same problem 8 with Dr. Kelly. Mr. Wheeler might have gone on vacation. 9 Q, Well, do you know? I'm just asking for your 10 knowledge. ; 11 A Is your question-- 12 Q. My question iss/^Do^ou know whether the / \n .. 13 medical department under D^:. Kelly' s^-supe rvis ion ever 14 reviewed the communications that had been received from 15 customers to determine the actual uses of the Monsanto 16 products and the way they were being used by the customers 17 for toxicological purposes. 18 . A Routinely. 19 Qi Routinely. And if the information you received 20 provided you with information in the manner in which a 21 product was being used that you weren't aware of before, 22 you and Dr. Kelly would re-evaluate-- 23 MR. FEATHERSTONE: Are we on pydrauls? 24 MS. OLIVER: Pydrauls. 25 A Yes. -242- o WATER PCB-SD0000056367 o 1 Ql Were you aware at any time up until 1968 that 2 Monsanto was discussing with its customers the reclamation 3 and reuse of pydraul fluid? 4 A. I don't recall. 5 MS. OLIVER: I'd like you to mark this. 6 DOCUMENT MARKED, "DEFENDANT'S EXHIBIT #2" 7 Qi Would you look at exhibit number two for us, 8 Mr. Wheeler, and identify that document. Can you identify 8 it for us, Mr. Wheeler? 10 MR. FEATHERSTONE: What do you want him to do? 11 Read what it says on it? 12 MS. OLIVER: No. I want him to identify the 13 document, what it is and its date. 14 MR. FEATHERSTONE: The date's on it. 15 Qi Can you identify what document that is? 16 A I can only identify the type of document that 17 was used. ` IB Qi Okay. What type of document is it? 18 A This would be, by my recollection, a form that 20 was used in advising the labeling section in the traffic 21 department what data we had that should be included or 22 considered in preparing a label. 23 Qi So the traffic department was responsible for 24 putting the labels on the products? 25 A That's right. -243- WATER PCB-SD0000056368 1 MS. OLIVER: This document, for the record, is a 2 memorandum with the dates of January 21st, 1959, and 3 February 9th, 1959, with the initials EPW at the bottom, 4 and directed to W. W. Wilson. 5 ft Do you know who Mr. Wilson was? 6 A. I can't place him. 7 ft Were these the types of memorandums that you 8 routinely sent to the traffic department regarding the 6 labeling? 10 A. My recollection is that, when a label was 11 being prepared, there was a form that was used, which 12 included distribution to the medical department. This 13 appears to be just part of that form. I think it indicates 14 that this may have been a second page and the traffic 15 department did not initially get this page for some reason. 16 Ct This is the type of form or similar to this . 17 that you would prepare and send to the traffic department 18 for labeling the products? 19 MR. FEATHERSTONE: I thought the testimony was it 20 was sent to the labeling department to put the label on the 21 product. 22 A In conjunction with Dr. Kelly. 23 ft This was prepared by the medical department? 24 A Items nine and ten, I believe that's correct. 25 Qi There were other items on this form, to your -244- WATER PCB-SD0000056369 1 recollection? 2 A. I think I just mentioned that this is perhaps 3 a second page and the first page-- Apparently when the-- 4 Is there not a reference date to other-- 6 Qi There's a reference that the first one never 6 reached traffic department. 7 A. This is what led me to state that I think the 6 page must have been lost. 9 Qi Is what you're saying a form with more than 10 the information that appears here was normally sent to the 11 traffic department and the medical department filled in the 12 appropriate information and somebody else filled in other 13 parts of it? ^ ^ .; 14 A. Yes. And there are two dates on this document. 15 MR. FEATHERSTONEs You've answered her question, 16 Mr. Wheeler. 17 Qi Do you know what other types of information I 18 went on forms that were sent to the traffic department? 19 A Some of the physical characteristics, flamma 20 bility, explosability. 21 Q. And that would be filled out by another depart 22 ment? 23 A By other people. 24 Ql Do you have a recollection, Mr. Wheeler, of 25 information or correspondance with the Indiana Board of -245- WATER PCB-SD0000056370 c 1 Health-- 2 A. No. 3 ft --in 1950 regarding an incident in one of the 4 plants in the state involving aroclors? 5 A. No. 6 ft Who was Mr. H. S. Litzslinger? 7 A. Mr. Litzslinger was, my recollection is, in 8 the development group that was more concerned with the 9 development of fire resistant hydraulic fluids for aircraft. 10 MS. OLIVER: Let's mark that one number three. 11 DOCUMENT MARKED, "DEFENDANT'S EXHIBIT #3." 12 A Would you look at what we've marked as number 13 three and identify that for us, please. 14 MS. OLIVER: Off the record. 15 . OFF THE RECORD DISCUSSION.' 16 A It appears to be a memorandum that I wrote to 17 Mr. Stu Litzslinger. ' 16 ft And it's entitled, toxicity reports pn OS dash 16 95. Do you have a recollection of what OS-95 was? 20 A Not having read the memo, no. 21 ft If you will take a minute to read it, I want 22 to ask you if you have a recollection of preparing that 23 memorandum. 24 MR. FEATHERSTONE: While he is doing that, please 25 identify by number exhibits one and two. -246- WATER PCB-SD0000056371 1 MS. OLIVER: Exhibit number one is a document 2 stamped on the first page 000660 and the last page is 663. 3 Exhibit numbe^ two is 0000412. Those are the identifications 4 put on the documents as they were produced to us by Monsanto. 6 ft Do you recall preparing that memorandum? 6 A. No. 7 ft In this memorandum, Mr. Wheeler, is a Statement- 8 Strike that. The memorandum appears to be written by you. 9 It has your signature or name at the bottom. Correct? 10 MR. FEATHERSTONE: It doesn't have his signature. 11 MS. OLIVER: His name. Excuse me. 12 ft Do you have any reason to believe that this 13 memorandum was not prepared or sent by you to Mr. Litzslinger 14 A I think the document says that, in conjunction 15 with Dr. Kelly, that is the case. o 16 ft On page two of the memorandum there is a 17 statement, quote, I personally have never seen a die casting 18 machine. Dr. Kelly has seen one or two small ones at North 19 American Aviation. That's what you testified earlier, that 20 you had never been in a die casting plant? 21 A That's right. 22 ft The last paragraph-- The last sentence in that 23 paragraph states, quote, as we become better educated or 24 better informed as to the degree of exposures, subsequent 25 opinions must be related to these exposures. -247- WATER PCB-SD0000056372 1 A Did you refer to the last sentence in that 2 paragraph? 3 Ql The last sentence of that paragraph, if you'd 4 like to review that paragraph again. 5 A. I think you quoted, as we become better 6 educated or better informed-- 7 MR. FEATHERSTONE: That's what she read. All she B wants you to do is review the paragraph. 9 A The whole paragraph? 10 MR. FEATHERSTONE: Yeah. Just read it to yourself. 11 A I've read it. 12 Ql Okay. I'd liJce to ask you if that refreshes 13 your recollection as to th^ circumstances surrounding the 14 preparation of that memorandum? 15 . A No. ' 16 Qi Could you tell me-- If you can, can you tell 17 me what you meant by that sentence? IB MR. FEATHERSTONE: How can he if he can't remember t 19 the circumstances. 20 MS. OLIVER: If he can't, he can say no. 21 Qi Is your answer no, Mr. Wheeler? 22 A Was the question do I recall making that 23 statement or what I meant? 24 Qi Do you recall what you meant by that statement 25 or what is meant by that statement? -248- WATER PCB-SD0000056373 v 1 MR. FEATHERSTONE: Well, the question is, do you 2 recall what you meant by that statement, even though you 3 can't recall the circumstances. 4 MS. OLIVER: That's the only thing I can ask him 5 about. I can't ask him in general what that sentence means; 6 can I? 7 A To me this sentence is self-explanatory. 8 Ql When the word subsequent opinions are there, 9 what does that mean? 10 A Subsequent opinions to me would mean you may 11 have an opinion and at a later date you make a subsequent 12 opinion. ^ 13 Q, Based on the new and better understandingyyou 14 may have of the uses of the product. Is that right? ^ 15 A That's the way I read the sentence. " 16 17 18 6. 19 MS. OLIVER: Let's mark these. DOCUMENTS MARKED AS DEFENDANT'S EXHIBITS 4 THROUGH ft I would like you to look at exhibit number 20 four, which appears to be memorandum of a meeting. It has 21 a document identification number at the bottom of 825 through 22 828. Take a chance to look at that, Mr. Wheeler. Off the 23 record. 24 OFF THE RECORD. 25 Q. Have you looked at it, Mr. Wheeler? -249- WATER PCB-SD0000056374 1 A. Yes, Ma'am. 2 ft Did you attend a meeting-- 3 A. I don't recall. 4 ft --with Industrial Bio-Test Laboratories on 5 aroclor wildlife? Do you recall that? 6 A. No. 7 ft You don't recall that meeting? 8 A. I don't but, since I'm listed as attending, I'm 9 sure I must have been there. 10 ft Does this memorandum refresh your memory as 11 to any of the subjects that were discussed at that meeting? 12 A. Certainly relating to my responsibilities and 13 participation in the meeting. 14 ft I refer you to page three dfe that memorandum. ^ ( 15 There is a part of that page that deals with what is 16 identified there as, quote, defense seems to have these 17 elements. Do you recall discussing the defense of Monsanto's 18 aroclor program or products? 19 MR. FEATHERSTONE: At that meeting? 20 MS. OLIVER: At that meeting. 21 A No. I don't recall the meeting. 22 ft You don't recall the subject matter? 23 A Not in this sense. 24 ft Do you recall the subject matter at any meeting 25 that you were present in which discussed the defense by -250- WATER PCB-SD0000056375 1 Monsanto of its aroclor, PCB products? 2 A Mot identified as that. No. 3 ft Do you recall meetings-- Strike that. Is your 4 testimony, Mr. Wheeler, that you do not recall meetings 5 where the subject of the defense of the aroclor products was 6 discussed? 7, MR. FEATHERSTONE: He just answered that question, 8 Ms. Oliver. e MS. OLIVER: I just want to make sure that the 10 answer is on record, Mr. Featherstone. 11 MR. FEATHERSTONE: Madam Court Reporter, would 12 you please read back that last question and answer. 13 REPORTER READS BACK. 14 ft What do you mean by not identified as that/ .. -/ 15 Mr. Wheeler? '/ 16 A I don't know what Dr. Richard intended or 17 implied by the word defense. IB ft Well, did you attend meetings in which it was 19 discussed how Monsanto should proceed with respect to the 20 information or the reported findings of PCBs in the environ 21 ment? 22 A Yes. 23 ft Did you attend meetings where it was discussed 24 that Monsanto % should emphasize the fact that their under25 standing of the aroclors was that they were not intended to -251- WATER PCB-SD0000056376 1 be spread around outside of the plant or outside of what 2 you'd call the closed system? 3 MR. FEATHERSTONE: Emphasize to whom? 4 MS. OLIVER: To the public. 6 A I think my testimony indicates that I attended 6 several meetings where that was discussed. 7 Q. Did you attend any meetings that discussed the 8 fact that PCBs were reported in atmosphere and streams 9 around Monsanto's manufacturing plants and major customers' 10 plants? 11 MR. FEATHERSTONE: Wait. I'm sorry. Wait a 12 minute. Madam Court Reporter, would you please reread the '3 question, plus whatever the witness had said. 14 REPORTER READS BACK. 15 MR. FEATHERSTONE: When? This document doesn't 16 say that. 17 MS. OLIVER: At any time. I'm not referring to 18 the document. 19 MR. FEATHERSTONE: He has the document in front 20 of him. 21 MS. OLIVER: You're looking at it. Not me. 22 A I'm sorry. I was looking at it. 23 Qi You don't recall any of these five topics of 24 conversation coming up at that meeting? 25 A That's right. -252- WATER PCB-SD0000056377 4 1 MR. FEATHERSTONE: They're also not identified as 2 a topic of conversation. 3 Q. What I'm asking is whether you have a recollec 4 tion of any time discussing with anyone in Monsanto reported 5 findings of PCBs in the atmosphere and streams around 6 Monsanto's plants and major customers'. 7 MR. FEATHERSTONE: I'm sorry. Did you say and 8 major customers or major customers? MS. OLIVER: And. 10 A I am sure I sat in on meetings where the 11 question of sampling the streams near Monsanto plants was 12 discussed. 13 14 70? Qi Was that in the period of lo968 through '71 or 15 A In conjunction with my involvement in the PCB 16 problem as it began to develop in 1968. 17 Qi Then what was discussed at those meetings? 18 MR. FEATHERSTONE: On which point? 18 MS. OLIVER: Concerning that point. 20 MR. FEATHERSTONE: Well, I instruct him not to 21 answer that question. The judge has already outlined for 22 you how you depose that line of questioning. 23 MS. OLIVER: I don't think that's necessarily 24 true. I think the judge said, if we wanted specific infor 25 mation about what was done, we could do it by interrogatory. -253- WATER PCB-SD0000056378 1 I'm asking for this gentleman's recollection of what the 2 discussions were on that subject and I think I'm entitled 3 to it. 4 MR. FEATHERSTONE: You may think so but I think 5 you're not so he's not going to answer the question. 6 MS. OLIVER: Would you certify the question for me. 7 Qt Do you have a recollection-- Strike that. 8 What is your recollection of discussions of PCBs reported 9 in atmosphere or streams around major customers of Monsanto? 10 MR. FEATHERSTONE: What time period? 11 MS. OLIVER: Up until 1970. 12 A I don't have any recollection of reported 13 concentrations around customers' plants. 14 0 Do you have a recollection that there was a 15 discussion that sampling should be made? 16 A No. 17 $ Do you have a recollection of any discussion 18 that Monsanto was going to establish an acceptable standard 19 for PCBs in the atmosphere or streams around major customers' 20 plants? 21 A No. ' 22 Q. Would you look at the last page of the exhibit, 23 which appears to be a chart entitled, aroclor and wildlife. 24 Do you have any recollection of the chart before today? 25 A No. -254- WATER PCB-SD0000056379 1 Qi You don't know who prepared it? 2 A Only that it's attached to a memorandum of 3 Dr. Richard. 4 MR. FEATHERSTONE: The question was, do you know 6 who prepared it? 6 A No. 7 Qi If you would, look at what we have marked as 8 exhibit number five, which I also have marked here as e Richard deposition exhibit number ninfe. Look at that. 10 Have you had a chance to look through that, Mr. Wheeler? 11 A Yes. 12 Qi The first page of that is a copy of a note 13 from Bill Richard to Elmer dated 9-9-69. Do you recall 14 receiving the note and the attachment from Dr. Richard? 15 A Not today. <? 16 Qi Have you ever seen the exhibit before today? 17 A I assume so because it was addressed to me but 18 I don't recall it. 19 Qi There's some writing in the margins of some 20 of the pages of the exhibit. Can you identify whose 21 writing that might be? 22 MR. FEATHERSTONE: Why don't you refer to a 23 specific page, Ms. Oliver? 24 Qi The third page of the document? 25 A I have no idea. It's not my writing. -255- WATER PCB-SD0000056380 1 Qi Do you recall discussing with Dr. Richard that 2 one of the policies Monsanto could take would be to make 3 the government, states and universities prove their case? c 4 K No. E Q, So I don't waste a lot of our time today, Sir, 6 is it your testimony that, after reviewing this document, 7 you don't have any recollection of the topics discussed in 8 the memorandum? e MR. FEATHERSTONE: You mean in connection with 10 this memorandum? ii MS. OLIVER: The subject matter raised in the 12 memorandum. 13 MR. FEATHERSTONE: There have been questions asked 1.4 for two days, Roseann, about certain materials in here. 15 For instance, the chronic toxicity Studies. He's not at this 16 point going to tell you he doesn't have any recollection of 17 that because he's testified to them. 18 & Let me put it this way, Mr. Wheeler. Do you 19 have any recollection of discussing with Dr. Richard or 20 anyone at Monsanto the possible outcomes of the analytical I 21 work and the chemical work-- 22 MR. FEATHERSTONE: As indicated on page one -- 23 Q. --as indicated on page one of Dr. Richard's 24 memorandum. 25 A Not as indicated on page one of Dr. Richard's I -256- WATER PCB-SD0000056381 1 memorandum. 2 ft Dr. Richard states, we can prove some things 3 are okay at low concentrations to give Monsanto some defense. 4 Do you have any recollection today of what Dr. Richard . 5 meant? 6 MR. FEATHERSTONE: I object to the form of the 7 question. How does he know what Dr. Richard meant? You 8 already asked him whether he discussed it with Dr. Richard. 9 There's no foundation for answering the question. 10 ft Do you know what-- Do you have any recollectior 11 of that subject matter being discussed between you and Dr. 12 Richard? 13 A. I think I have already testified that I don't 14 recall having discussed with anybody the defense, in quotes, 15 which Dr. Richard, I think, used rather loosely. 16 ft Well, what I'm asking is, do you have a recollecj 17 tion in 1969 that Monsanto could prove some things are okay 18 at low concentrations, referring, I'm sure, to aroclor 18 functional fluids? 20 MR. FEATHERSTONE: Could prove or thought they 21 could prove, Ms. Oliver? It appears under probable outcomes. 22 A I've already testified that I was one of a 23 group of people that were involved in the presentation and 24 it's obvious to me that this is a very informal, abbreviated 25 brainstorming idea that Dr. Richard wanted to discuss and I -257- WATER PCB-SD0000056382 1 believe that I must have participated in discussions with 2 not only him but others involved in the presentation. 3 Qi Did you agree in 1969 with the statement that 4 appears there under probable outcome, we can prove some 5 things are okay at low concentrations? 6 MR. FEATHERSTONEs Do you mean did he agree with 7 that at any time? 0 e MS. OLIVER: In 1969. At or about the fall of 0 1969. 10 A I think I've also testified-- 11 MR. FEATHERSTONE: Wait a minute. I think you 12 just have to answer the question. 13 Qi Yes or no? 14 MR. FEATHERSTONE: Well, yes or no if you can do 15 it. The question is, in 1969, the fall of 1969, did you 16 agree with the statement, and it doesn't have to appear in 17 a document, stating that we can prove some things are okay IB at low concentrations? Period. 19 A Yes. 20 MR. FEATHERSTONE: Fine. 21 Qi What did you believe you could prove were okay 22 at low concentrations? 23 A The whole purpose of the chronic toxicity tests 24 which I have described were intended to establish safe 25 levels. -258- WATER PCB-SD0000056383 1 Q. Dr. Richard's second statement is, we can't 2 defend against everything. Do you recall any discussion 3 with Dr. Richard or anyone else about what was defensible 4 and what wasn't in terms of the aroclor fluids? 6 A. No. 6 Q, The second sentence reads, some animals or fish 7 or insects will be harmed. Did you have any information 8 concerning that statement in 1969? 9 A. No. 10 Q. I take it you don't know where Dr. Richard got 11 his information? 12 A. I think, as I indicated, this was a brainstorming I; 13 thing and-- 14 MR. FEATHERSTONE: Well-4- 15 A Dr. Richards was making suppositions or proposing 16 possibilities. 17 Q. The last sentence on that page reads, therefore, 18 we will have to restrict uses and clean up as much as we 19 can starting immediately. And I think you testified about 20 your presentation to corporate management committee concern 21 ing the phasing out and restricting of uses of the products. 22 Do you have any recollection of discussing with anyone at 23 Monsanto a clean up? 24 MR. FEATHERSTONE: Of what? i 25 MS. OLIVER: PCBs. a -259- WATER PCB-SD0000056384 1 A. Only as it was involved again with this group 2 presentation. 3 Ql What did the presentation-- What part of the 4 presentation-- Strike that. Let me start again. How did S the presentation involve the clean up aspect? 6 A. It wasn't my area of responsibility or involve 7 ment so I don't recall. 8 Qt Were you present during that part of the 8 presentation? TO A. Of course. 11 Qi What do you recall about it, if anything? 12 13 recall. 14 MR. FEATHERSTONE: He just told you he doesn't Qi You don't recall what that part of the presen 15 tation dealt with? ' 16 A. No. 17 Qi Page two of Dr'. Richard's memorandum, he has 18 a section called water pollution seems to be the first issue. 19 Did you have a discussion with Dr. Richard or anyone else 20 at Monsanto concerning water pollution by aroclors? 21 MR. FEATHERSTONE: At the time of this memorandum? 22 MS. OLIVER: At the time of the memorandum. 23 A I presume bo, following the issue of the 24 memorandum, yes. 25 Qi You don't recall any 'discussion? fc -260- ; WATER PCB-SD0000056385 1 A I don't recall any. No. 2 MR. FEATHERSTONE: She doesn't ask you to presume 3 anything. Just what you recall. Sir. 4 ft Do you recall any conversations with anyone 5 at Monsanto about water pollution in the period of 1968 to 6 1972? 7 MR. FEATHERSTONE: Aroclor? 8 MS. OLIVER: Aroclor. 0 8 A PCBs? 10 ft Yes. 11 A Yes. 12 ft And when were those conversations? During the 13 entire period? 14 A Principally in reporting what I had learned-- 15 MR. FEATHERSTONE: The question is when. 16 A Subsequent, I believe, to the visit to Europe 17 at which time I had an opportunity to meet face to face 18 with the people that had reported finding the PCBs, in 19 conjunction with the pesticide residues, and reporting back 20 to our people then the gist of their comments. 21 ft Other than that report after your European 22 communications-- 23 MR. FEATHERSTONE: Visit. 24 MS. OLIVER: Visit. . 25 ft Do you have any other recollection of discussing -261- . WATER PCB-SD0000056386 1 water pollution by aroclors with anyone at Monsanto? 2 A. Yes. 3 Qi When was this? 4 A. After our analytical group had satisfied them 6 selves that they could duplicate the analytical technique, 6 it seemed appropriate to look for PCBs in the effluent of 7 the Monsanto plant. 8 Q. Did you have any discussions regarding water 9 pollution in or around customers of Monsanto's plants? 10 MR. FEATHERSTONE: You mean the plants of the 11 customers of Monsanto? 12 MS. OLIVER: Uh huh. 13 , A Not that I recall. 14 Q. Page three of the memo, refers to Johnson Motors. IS Do you see that? Do you have any knowledge of the operations 16 of Johnson Motors in 1969? 17 A I don't recall any. 18 Q Did you know that Johnson Motors was a customer 19 of Monsanto's pydraul fluids? 20 A I don't recall. 21 Qi Did you find that out subsequently? 22 A Only since I've been involved with this current 23 deposition. 24 Q. If I can refer you to page four of the memoran- 2S dum, the last section, designated inland waterways. In the ' -262- 0 WATER PCB-SD0000056387 1 margin there is Wheeler slash Richard. Typed in and next to 2 that is be close enough to Great Lakes studies to judge 3 situation. Are there animals which are being affected by 4 the concentrations found? Do you recall discussing with Dr. 6 Richard that you would be involved in that type of endeavor? 6 A. No. 7 Ql Did you monitor or obtain Great Lakes studies 8 to judge whether there were PCBs in the Great Lakes? e A. I believe I testified that part of my function 10 was to review literature from any kind of scientific 11 journals. I don't recall specifically references to the 12 Great La'kes studies. 13 Qi And you don't recall being asked to specifically 14 look into Great Lakes studies? 15 A No. 16 17 18 please. 19 Q. Look at exhibit number six. MS. OLIVER: While he's doing that, mark these, DOCUMENTS MARKED AS, "DEFENDANT'S EXHIBIT #7," 20 AND "DEFENDANT'S EXHIBIT #8.". 21 Qi Have you looked at exhibit number seven? 22 A Six. 23 Qt Six. Okay. The document, Sir, appears to be 24 a memorandum from you to a Mr. Cameron dated January 29th, 25 1970, re status of aroclor toxicological studies. Do you -263- WATER PCB-SD0000056388 1 recall preparing and sending, that memorandum? 2 A. No. 3 Qt Who is Mr. Cameron? 4 A. Mr. Cameron was, I believe, the-- I believe S he was in the development or marketing group in the Brussels 6 office, in the group that was concerned with PCB containing 7 products. 8 Qi That were being sold in Europe? B A. Yes. to Qi Okay. Paragraph three of the memorandum reads: 11 Our interpretation is that PCBs are exhibiting a greater 12 degree of toxicity in this chronic study than we had anti 13 cipated. Do you have a recollection, Sir, of what informa 14 tion you had available to make that statement? 15 A. I've looked through the cover page which you've 16 referred to and glanced briefly at the data that's summarized 17 in the attachments. ` 18 MR. FEATHERSTONE: The question is, what data did IB you have available that led you to write that statement? 20 I think that's what she asked you. Is that right, Roseann? 21 MS. OLIVER: That's right. 22 A. My explanation would be that, based on the 23 range finding studies, based on any previous toxicological 24 work with PCB containing materials, we had expected--Dr. 25 Kelly had expected that the animals would show a-- -264- T WATER PCB-SD0000056389 1 MR. FEATHERSTONE: Mr. Wheeler, she has not asked o 2 for an explanation of that sentence. She has asked for a 3 source of information, the information on which that's based. 4 A I don't recall. 6 Cl Do you recall what degree of toxicity you had 6 anticipated PCBs to show before this memorandum? 7 A No. 8 Qi You say they're exhibiting a greater degree of 9 toxicity than you had anticipated. Could you explain what 10 you meant by that? 11 A Than we had anticipated. 12 Qi Based-- 13 A I don't-- Your question was that 1, Mr. 14 Wheeler, anticipated, I believe. The memo says we had 15 anticipated. ' 16 Cl Then you're referring to-- We means Dr. Kelly 17 and you? ' 18 A Yes. 19 QI I'd like for you to explain what that statement 20 means. 21 MR. FEATHERSTONE: Means or meant? 22 MS. OLIVER: Meant. 23 Qi When you wrote it, Mr. Wheeler. 24 MR. FEATHERSTONE: To the extent you recall that, 25 tell her what it meant when you wrote it, other than what -265- WATER PCB-SD0000056390 1 it says. 2 A. I thought I started to say that my recollection 3 is that-- ' 4 fit I think you did and Mr. Featherstone cut you 6 off, Mr. Wheeler. 6 MR. FEATHERSTONE: No. What I did was, Ms. Oliver, I t 7 I had him to answer the question you posed, as you well 6 know. 9 ft Why don't you tell me what it means, Mr. Wheeler 10 MR. FEATHERSTONE: Is the question now what it 11 means or what it meant? 12 MS. OLIVER: What it meant. 13 A I think more importantly-- 14 MR. FEATHERSTONE: No, no. Answer her question. 15 A I can't tell you, looking at a document on 16 March 16 eleven years after the drafting of the document 17 precisely what I meant or maybe even in general terms. 16 Qi You had done other toxicity testa. Monsanto 19 had sponsored toxicity tests and, based on th^ information 20 you had accumulated up to that point, you and Dr. Kelly did 21 not believe that there would be a degree of toxicity 22 exhibited that you later found. Is that a fair statement? 23 A I think, yes. . 24 Q. Okay. The last paragraph or sentence of that 25 memorandum says, we have additional interim data which will 266 WATER PCB-SD0000056391 1 perhaps be more discouraging. Do you recall what data you 2 had that you thought might be more discouraging? 3 A I have no idea. 4 Ct Do you have a recollection that you, in fact, 6 obtained data which was more discouraging? You and Dr. 6 Kelly? 7 A NO. 8 MR. FEATHERSTONE: Are you done with exhibit six, 9 Ms. Oliver? 10 MS. OLIVER: Uh huh. 11 Ct Would you look at exhibit number seven, Mr. 12 Wheeler. 13 MR. FEATHERSTONE: Do you want him to read it? 14 MS. OLIVER: Yes. 15 Ci Have you had a chance to look at the document, 16 to read the document, Mr. Wheeler? 17 A Yes, Ma'am. ' 18 & This appears to be a memorandum from you to 19 Mr. C. F. Callis dated July 3rd, 1969. Is that correct? 20 A Yes. 21 MR. FEATHERSTONE: Well, it's correct as far as-- 22 MS. OLIVER: It appears to be. 23 MR.-FEATHERSTONE: No, no, no. You added, I think, 24 your own pencil mark on it, Ms. Oliver. 25 MS. OLIVER: That's right. -267- i WATER PCB-SD0000056392 1 MR. FEATHERSTONE: The appropriate asterisk by 2 something which interests you, which I don't believe was on 3 the original document. 4 MS. OLIVER: You're right, Mr. Featherstone That' 5 my pencil mark. 6 Ql Without referring to that pencil mark, is that 7 the document--does that appear to be a document prepared by 8 you, Mr. Wheeler? 9 A. Yes. v 10 Ql Do you have any recollection of preparing this 11 document on or about the date it bears? 12 A. Preparation of the document, no. 13 Ql Okay. Do you have a recollection of the 14 subject matter of the document? 15 A. I've previously testified that I was aware of 16 biodegradation studies being conducted within Monsanto. 17 Ql Okay. And this memorandum reflects the bio 18 degradation studies to be undertaken. Is that correct? 19 A That's right. 20 Ql Who is Mr. CalliB? 21 A I think it's Dr. Callis and he was the 22 director of the research facility activities in the inorganic 23 chemicals division. 24 Ql And the memorandum discusses an -immediate 25 problem and what is termed as a long range proposal on page -268 WATER PCB-SD0000056393 1 two. Did you discuss with-- Strike that. Had you made 2 the determination, Mr. Wheeler, of what was the immediate 3 problem with respect to biodegradation studies? 4 MR. FEATHERSTONE: I object to the form of the 5 question. The question assumes or suggests that there was 6 a problem with biodegradation studies. 7 A. What was the question, please? 8 ft. The question was, did you make the determination 9 of the immediate problem with respect to0biodegradation 10 studies of aroclors? 11 MR. FEATHERSTONE; Same objection. 12 A I believe the terminology was to differentiate 13 in terms of priorities the types of programs which might 14 be undertaken. 15 Q, And who determined the priorities? 16 MR. FEATHERSTONE: For what? 17 MS. OLIVER: For the programs to be undertaken. 18 MR. FEATHERSTONE: As reflected in the document? 19 MS. OLIVER: As reflected in the document, relating 20 to biodegradation studies of the aroclors. : 21 A I believe it was a concensus reached by Dr. 22 Richard's group and ourselves. This was after our trip to 23 Europe and reflects our thoughts as to what we had learned 24 there. 25 Ql Why was the knowledge whether PCBs would 269- ' WATER PCB-SD0000056394 1 degrade biologically and the extent to which they might 2 degrade biologically be immediate priority or problem? 3 MR. FEATHERSTONE; Priority. 4 MS. OLIVER: The memorandum speaks in terms of 5 problem. 6 MR. FEATHERSTONE: And he spoke in terms of 7 priority. . 8 MS. OLIVER: Okay. I said or. 9 A I think, the references to the publications up 10 to that time, the question of biodegradation of PCBs and 11 Which PCBs had arisen. . 12 Qi Who suggested, if you recall, Mr. Wheeler, the 13 long range proposal that's discussed on page two of the 14 memorandum? 15 A I don't remember ever having discussed with-- 16 With Dr.-- Well, it was Mr. In my memos, it would have 17 been Mr., whether he was a'doctor or not. He was not, to 18 my recollection, involved in the type of research we were 16 normally involved in. I'm referring now to toxicity studies. 20 MR. FEATHERSTONE: We've been sitting here a long 21 time. I understand it. But her question was, who made the 22 suggestion or suggestions as contained under the heading of 23 long range proposals? 24 ft If you recall. 25 A I don't recall. ' ---- -- -270-4 a______________________________________ WATER PCB-SD0000056395 1 ft You don't recall-- Strike that. Do you recall 2 being involved in any discussions concerning the need for 3 studies on wastes at Monsanto's plants? 4 A. May I see that document? 6 Qi Uh huh. 6 A. Only as it relates to the paragraph which 7 follows. B ft And could you tell me what you recall? e MR. FEATHERSTONE: Wait a minute. Madam Court 10 Reporter, what's the question. ii REPORTER READS BACK. 12 13 he? 14 MR. FEATHERSTONE: I think he answered that; didn't MS. OLIVER: Only with relation to what appears in IS paragraph two. ' 16 MR. FEATHERSTONE: Wait a minute. I want to hear 17 it from her. ' 16 REPORTER READS BACK. 16 MS. OLIVER: And I want to know what Mr. Wheeler's 20 recollection is. 21 MR. FEATHERSTONE: Well, Mr. Wheeler, to the 22 extent that you can answer that question generally, without 23 getting into a detailed discussion of Monsanto plant 24 effluents, you may. If you can't, tell me and-- 25 A I think I can do it very simply by stating that -271- WATER PCB-SD0000056396 I f ( 1 this was not related to any evident or prospective PCB 2 problem. 3 Ql Was there consideration given, Mr, Wheeler, to a 4 studies on the waste within Monsanto plants or around 5 Monsanto plants with respect to the aroclor or PCB problems? 6 A. My recollection is that there were analytical 7 tests carried out. 8 MR. FEATHERSTONEs The question asked for a yes or 9 no answer. 10 A. Repeat the question, please. 11 MS. OLIVER: Please read it back. 12 REPORTER READS BACK. 13 A May I ask for your definition so I can under 14 stand the studies? 15 Ql Well, any type of-- Well, I mean study in the 16 broader sense of the word. Any consideration given within 17 Monsanto? 18 A There was consideration given to measuring or 19 examining effluent streams that left the plant to determine 20 if there were PCBs present. 21 Ql And was that in the period of around 1969, Mr. 22 Wheeler? 23 A Yes. ' . 24 MR. FEATHERSTONE: Would you read back his prior 25 answer, please. - -272- ' I WATER PCB-SD0000056397 1 REPORTER READS BACK. 2 ft Did you ever hold the title of environmental 3 manager, Mr. Wheeler? 4 A I believe it was manager of environmental 5 health. 7 0. Okay. And when did you acquire that title? A My memory is mid-'60sr perhaps early '60s. 8 Qi Did your duties change at all from what they V: 9 were before you acquired the title, manager of environmental 10 health? 11 A No. 12 Ci Were your responsibilities as manager of 13 environmental health different from industrial hygienist? 14 A When I received the title of manager of 15 environmental health, I had another title other than indus 16 trial hygiene. 17 ft What title was that? 18 A I think at one time I had the title of director 19 of industrial hygiene. At one time I had the title of 20 assistant director of the medical1 department. 21 Ci Was the environmental health a new section 22 within the medical department? 23 A I believe I testified yesterday to Mr. Hynes' 24 questioning that, beginning in early 1950s, we had received 25 responsibility for some degree of consultation with plant -273- WATER PCB-SD0000056398 1 managers-- 2 MR. FEATHERSTONE: The question was, was there a 3 separate section within the medical department denominated 4 environmental health? Named environmental health? 6 A. Not per se. 6 Ql Were there people that worked for you on matters 7 involving environmental health? B A The toxicologist, Mr. Garrett. 9 Qt Mr. Garrett was an industrial hygienist? 10 A Yes. 11 & What I'm asking, Mr. Wheeler, is whether you 12 just got a new title to go with your old responsibilities 13 in the 1960s or whether there was a change in the medical 14- department? IS A. My recollection is that there was a change in 16 corporate personnel policies and the differentiation between 17 manager and director was such that the change was made. 18 & Would you look at exhibit number eight. 19 MR. FEATHERSTONE: Is there a reason there's a 20 handwritten twenty three at the bottom? .i 21 MS. OLIVER: I don't know. We got it like that 22 as far as I know. 23 MR. FEATHERSTONE: You couldn't have gotten it 24 like that. It's an original inksjtot. 2S & Exhibit number eight, Mr. Wheeler, is a -274- o WATER PCB-SD0000056399 1 memorandum or appears to be a memorandum from Mr. Pappageorge 2 to several people within Monsanto, including E. P. Wheeler, 3 concerning aroclor labeling, dated April 13th, 1970. You 4 testified earlier, I think, that in 1970 the label on the 5 aroclors was changed to include the words polychlorinated 6 biphenyls. Is this your recollection of what the label 7 consisted of? 8 A I believe so. e Ql Do you know what use was made of the inventory 10 of pydraul fluids that Monsanto had as it was phasing out ii one fluid and putting in a new one? 12 A No. 13 Qi You don't know whether Monsanto sold whatever 14 they had and then started with the new reformulation? 15 A No. ' 16 Qi One more thing. You testified yesterday, I 17 think, that at some time in the period of '68 to '72, the 18 research department or the lab did some testing on impurities 19 in PCB fluids? 20 A I believe that's right. 21 Qi And to your recollection, when did that testing 22 take place? 7 23 A It was after our 1970 meeting in Europe 24 because-- t 25 MR. PEATHERSTONE: That answers the question. -275- WATER PCB-SD0000056400 1 Ql And do you know why this testing was done? 2 A It's my recollection that the University of 3 Utrecht Laboratory had done some work on PCBs using, not 4 only Monsanto material, but a German comparable product, 5 had looked for impurities and found an impurity in the O 6 German material that was not in the Monsanto material. And 7 we wanted to confirm that. 8 Ql Do you know what impurity was found in the 8 German material? 10 A I believe it was a chlorinated dibenzofuran. 11 Qi And who in the research or chemical department 12 at Monsanto was in charge of finding out whether there was 13 this impurity in the PCB fluids? 14 A Dr. Richard's group. 15 Qi Dr. Richard's group. Okay. And do you recall 16 receiving information that that impurity was not found in 17 the fluids? 18 MR. FEATHERSTONE: Was not found? 19 MS. OLIVER: Was not found. 20 A That's my recollection. 21 Qi Do you recall whether that information you got 22 was in the form of a written report or was it a conversation? 23 A I would expect it was probably a written 24 communication. 25 Qi Do you know if, before Dr. Richard's group 1 -276- . WATER PCB-SD0000056401 1 tested for that impurity, there had been any work done by 2 Monsanto to determine whether there were any impurities in 3 the PCB fluids? 4 MR. FEATHERSTONE: I've let you ask a series of 6 questions, Ms. Oliver. What does this have to do with the 6 lawsuit? 1 . 7 MS. OLIVER: Finding out whatever I can about PCB 8 fluids, Mr. Featherstone. 9 MR. FEATHERSTONE: What do your questions about 10 impurities or supposed impurities in a fluid or a search for 11 impurities in a fluid have to do with the merits of your 12 complaint against Monsanto or the Government's complaint % 13 against us or our answers to any of those things or our cross 14 claims against you? ; 15 MS. OLIVER: Certainly, with respect to our claim 16 against Monsanto, a product that was not reasonably safe for 17 use, we're entitled to find out what was in the product, ' 18 including impurities. I 19 MR. FEATHERSTONE: Your allegation is that we 20 didn't warn you about PCBs or about thQ, effects, etcetera, 21 related to PCBs. What does some unidentified impurity have 22 to do with it? 23 MS. OLIVER: I think it goes basically to the work 24 that was done, Mr. Featherstone. 25 MR.: FEATHERSTONE: Well, you've learned from the -277- WATER PCB-SD0000056402 1 witness that, to his recollection and understanding, there 2 were no impurities found in the fluids and I think that's 3 sufficient. 4 MS. OLIVER: Are you going to instruct him not to 6 answer whether there was any testing done prior to that 6 Richard's group work to determine whether there were any 7 impurities? 8 MR. FEATHERSTONE: To humor you at this hour, I'll 9 let him answer that question and that's it. 10 Ql To your knowledge, Mr. Wheeler? 11 A May I have the full question? 12 Ql Sure. Do you have any knowledge of whether 13 there was any testing done, prior to this work being done 14 by Dr. Richard's group to determine what, if any, impurities 15 may have been present in the PCB fluids? 16 MR. FEATHERSTONE: Sold to Johnson or Outboard 17 Marine? ' 18 MS. OLIVER: PCB fluids. 19 ' MR. FEATHERSTONE: Functional fluids? 20 MS. OLIVER: That's right. 21 MR. FEATHERSTONE: No. Limit it to pydraul, Mr. 22 Wheeler. You weren't sold any functional fluids, other than 23 pydraul. 24 MS. 'OLIVER: Let's don't prolong this. If you're i 25 going to direct him to answer only to pydraul, then I want -278- WATER PCB-SD0000056403 1 the answer to pydraul. 2 MR. PEATHERSTONE: Pine. . 3 JL Am I so directed? ' 4 MR. FEATHERSTONE: Yes. Limit your answer just 6 to pydraul fluids. 6 A I'm not aware that there was any other work of 7 that type done in connection with impurities. 6 Qt Are you aware of any work of that type done e with respect to any other functional fluids sold by Monsanto? 10 A No. ii MS. OLIVER: I don't have anything more. He cam 12 take a break. 13 RECESSED 2:30 p. m., March 11, 1981. 14 RECONVENED 2:40 p. m., March 11, 1981. 15 16 QUESTIONS BY MR. HYNES: 17 Qt Mr. Wheeler, do you recall that there was a 18 series of letters sent out to Monsanto customers, I believe, 19 beginning in '69, running through the early '70s, notifying 20 customers of PCB products that there were reported problems 21 in the environment? Do you recall seeing any of those 22 letters? 23 MR. FEATHERSTONE: You mean presence in the 24 environment? 25 MR. HYNES: Presence. 279- WATER PCB-SD0000056404 1 A. I recall there being a mailing of only one 2 letter. You said a series. I'm not aware of a series. 3 Q. The one letter that you recall seeing, were 4 you involved in any way in the preparation of the contents 5 of that letter? 6 A. I believe I was. Yes. 7 Q. Do you recall what your involvement was? 8 A. As a participant of a group, again, that prepare d 8 the document. 10 Cl Do you recall what other people were in the 11 group besides yourself? 12 A I believe marketing, Bill Richards, Mr. 13 Pappageorge, somebody from the labeling group. T4 Qt Do you recall when that letter was sent out to 15 the customers? 16 A No. Not the specific date. 17 Qt Do you recall what-- You mentioned Mr. 18 Pappageorge and you said he started becoming involved in 19 the PCB situation at Monsanto some time in mid-1970, I 20 believe. So would it be after that date? 21 A I believe he got the assignment January 1, 22 1970. It was after he-- This raises a question about my 23 memory. Bill Pappageorge was involved so it had to be 24 after January, 1969, that the letter was prepared and sent 25 out. -280- WATER PCB-SD0000056405 1 fit '69 or '70? 2 A. Mow you're confusing me because I~ 3 Ci It was some time after Bill Pappageorge-- 4 A. Let me correct myself. I think I may have said 6 the letter went out in '69 because I think you mentioned 6 '69. I think the letter was prepared either in December, *69, 7 or drafts were made in 1969 and the letter went out in early 8 1970. B Ci Do you recall which customers, which category 10 of customers were to receive that letter? 11 A. To my knowledge, all customers of any of the 12 aroclors, any material that included PCBs that we could 13 identify. " 14 Ci Do you recall the contents of the letter? 15 A. Only insofar that it indicated that the question 16 of the presence of PCB in the environment had become an 17 issue, that the issue was not clear but it was Monsanto's 18 belief that all customers should have knowledge of the 19 concern and that extreme effort should be taken to control 20 the possibility of the material getting into the environment. 21 Ci Do you recall any specific aroclors or trade 22 name products which were referred to in that letter? 23 A. No. 24 ft And that's the only letter you recall being 25 involved with in making recommendations or preparation of I -281- i WATER PCB-SD0000056406 1 the letter? 2 A That1 s right. 3 Ql Earlier, I think it was yesterday, you discussed 4 that some of the studies sponsored by Monsanto had found 5 that the lower chlorinated aroclors degraded or the higher 6 chlorinated aroclors didn't. Is that a correct statement of 7 what you said? I'm trying to recall it. 8 A. I don't know if it's a correct statement of 9 what I said. I believe the fact is correct. 10 & My question then is, the degradation that was 11 found in the lower chlorinated aroclors, what form does that 12 degradation take? Does the aroclor itself, the PCB, dis 13 appear? Or is it a lesser chlorine content? What form does 14 that degradation take? 15 MR. FEATHERSTONE: You established yourself 16 yesterday, Mr. Hynes, that Mr. Wheeler wasn't involved in 17 that. 18 MR. HYNES: What is his knowledge of that, what 16 his recollection is that degradation shows? 20 MR. FEATHERSTONE: To the extent you have any 21 recollection or any understanding of it, Mr. Wheeler, go 22 ahead and testify to it. You've got the documents, Mr. 23 Hynes. 24 A My recollection is that the biodegradation e- 25 studies indicated a disappearance of the lower chrlorinated -282- WATER PCB-SD0000056407 1 polychlorinated biphenyls as entities. 2 Qi In your department, the medical department's 3 evaluation of a chemical or a proposed product, either from 4 the research department or the commercial development 5 department, was it the normal practice in your department 6 to do a literature search or review anythin? in the scientifijc 7 literature relating to the chemical or similar chemicals? 8 A. I believe routinely. 8 , Q That's in addition to any prior testing or 10 studies which had been done or sponsored by Monsanto. 11 Correct? 12 A. Yes. 13 Ql Earlier I think you stated that you had recalled 14 one product which was referred to the medical department by, 16 I believe, commercial development.; `It was a change in the 16 product. It was sold in a diluted form and now they were 17 proposing to sell the product in a concentrated form. And 18 you had Baid that your department had, I believe, recommended 10 that the product not be sold in that concentrated form? 20 A Right. 21 Qi My question then is: * The authority or respon 22 sibility of the medical department in a situation like 23 that, did you have a veto power over the* further development 24 or the sale of products or was it a recommendation to the 26 management of the company that would be the medical I -283- WATER PCB-SD0000056408 1 department's recommendation that that product not be 2 marketed? 3 JL It was Dr. Kelly's responsibility and I can't 4 think of an instance when management didn't agree with a 6 recommendation of that type if he made it. I don't know if 6 that answers your veto question. 7 Qt The normal practice would be, if that occurred, 8 that you would assume from your experiences that management 9 would follow Dr. Kelly's recommendations. Do you know if, 10 within the company policy or practices, that they were 11 compelled, management of the company was compelled to follow 12 Dr. Kelly's recommendations? 13 MR. FEATHERSTONE: What*6 the relevance of this? 14 You already know what the practice is or was to the extent IS that Mr. Wheeler knows about it. ' 16 MR. HYNES: Just finding out what the authority 17 of the medical department was with regard to their recommen 18 dations for any products. It's a good product, it's a bad 19 product, we need more tests. 20 MR. FEATHERSTONE: He testified at great length 21 about this yesterday, Mr. Hines. I hope this is your 22 million dollar question because I think this is the last 23 question we're going to entertain on the subject. You can 24 answer the question. ; 25 MR. HYNES: If you remember the question. -284- WATER PCB-SD0000056409 c 1 MR. FEATHERSTONE: Madam Court Reporter, please 2 read back the question. 3 REPORTER READS BACK. 4 A. Is that the question? 6 Qi Yes. e A. Within Monsanto, as I expect there is in every 7 company, there is an operating procedure manual. It spells 8 out the areas of responsibility and authority of key people 9 in the corporation, particularly managers of divisions, the 10 directors of staff-- ' 11 MR. FEATHERSTONE: You don't have to tell him 12 what's in the manual, Mr. Wheeler. All you have to do is 13 tell him what the answer is to his question. 14 JL My recollection is that that corporate policy 15 manual spelled out in clear terms what Dr. Kelly's responsi 16 bilities and authority was. 17 Qt And do you have any present recollection of 18 what that manual stated the authority and responsibilities 19 were with regard to my question? ' 20 A I think only in that people did not argue with 21 a recommendation that Dr. Kelly made. 22 Qi Okay. Fine. In your experience in Monsanto 23 in dealing with PCBs, polychlorinated biphenyls, aroclor 24 products, did you ever have any occasion to see people use 25 as a shorthand for PCBs, polychlorinated biphenyls, the 285- WATER PCB-SD0000056410 1 tern phenyls, p-h-e-n-y-l-s? 2 MR. FEATHER5TONE: Just that alone? 3 MR. HYNES: Right. Just that alone. 4 A. No. 6 Qi How about the word phenols? P-h-e-n-o-l-s? A No. 7 Q. Mr. Wheeler, in your experience with Monsanto 8 and Monsanto sponsoring and your department evaluating e chronic toxicity studies, is a significant part of the studies 10 done by the contracting company-- What significance does an 11 examination of animals which die during the test period have 12 with relation to the results which are found in those studies? 13 MR. FEATHERSTONE: Wait-- 14 MR. HYNES: Let me rephrase it. 18 Ql In a chronic toxicity study, I believe you said 16 that it is expected that, during the life of the study, some 17 test animals will die throughout the study, whatever time. 18 Is it an important part of a chronic toxicity study for an 16 examination to be made of the animals which died during the 20 test period? : 21 MR. FEATHERSTONE: I object to the for?i of the 22 question and there's no foundation, Mr. Hynes. He told you 23 that this was'work done by outside laboratories and Mr. 24 Wheeler himself is not a toxicologist. 25 MR. HYNES: Right. But he stated he has evaluated n, -286-' WATER PCB-SD0000056411 1 and reviewed the chronic studies sponsored by Monsanto as 2 part of his job. 3 MR. FEATHERSTONE: Well, he's evaluated the data 4 reported to him by outside laboratories. 6 MR. HYNES: Right. 6 fit In your experience, is it an important part of 7 the study for an examination to be made of test animals which 8 died during the test period during the chronic toxicity e studies? 10 * A. Yes. 11 & And why is it, in your opinion, important for 12 examinations to be made of test animals which died during 13 the test period? 14 MR. FEATHERSTONE: Important to Mr. Wheeler, who's 16 reviewing the data reported? ` 16 MR. HYNES: Yes. 17 A As in animal or human population, people die i 18 of various reasons. It may be bacterial reasons completely IB unrelated to the experiment that's in progress. But to try 20 1 to determine and rule out a cause and effect relationship 21 from the test compound, a careful examination is made of 22 those animals that die. This is my understanding. Sir. 23 MR. HYNES: Would you mark these, too, please. 24 DOCUMENTS MARKED, "PLAINTIFF'*S EXHIBIT #1," AND %' 25 "PLAINTIFF'S EXHIBIT #2." -287-^ WATER PCB-SD0000056412 1 Qi Mr. Wheeler, would you take a look at plaintiff' p 2 exhibit number one, please. 3 MR. FEATHERSTONE: Do you want him to read this? 4 MR. HYNES: Just take a look at it. This is 5 document-*' 1 think its 18, the stamp number on the front. 6 It*8 the letterhead of Industrial Bio-Test Laboratories, 7 Inc. The title is report to Monsanto Chemical Company sub 8 acute dermal toxicity of aroclor 1242. On the next to last 9 page there is a date, March 27, '63. 10 MR. FEATHERSTONE: Well, Mr. Hynes, attached to 11 the document-- 12 MR. HYNES: The attached last page of the document 13 shouldn't be there, number 449. I don't know how that got 14 there but it's a document from Liberty Mutual. You can just 15 pull that off. ` 16 MR. FEATHERSTONE: There are a couple things j i 17 attached to here. I have a 449, a May 23, 1960, letter to i 18 Liberty Mutual and what looks like a page bearing the number 19 863, which is identified as-- It looks like a page from the 20 exhibit that Ms. Oliver showed the witness, some Younger 21 Laboratory certificate of analysis, page four, November 9-- 22 MR. HYNES: 1 don't haVe that on my copy so that I 23 should be taken off. 24 Qi % Mr. Wheeler, would you just briefly look at 25 exhibit number one and tell me if you recall the purpose of .1 -288- WATER PCB-SD0000056413 1 this test run by Industrial Bio-Test? 2 A. No, because in my testimony I did not mention 3 this kind of study. It's a complete surprise to me that 4 we had it done. t 6 Qt Could you tell me what category you would put < this test into? Acute? Subacute? Chronic? Is there a 7 category like that that you can put this test into? 8 MR. FEATHERSTONEs The witness just told you that 9 he-- Well, told you in his own way that he doesn't recall 10 this study. Now, in order for him to do that fairly, I 11 think, Mr. Hynes, it would require him to read the report. 12 I will note for your benefit that the headline says sub- 13 acute. 14 MR. HYNES: Subacute. Right. I just want to IS identify it from the title or anything else in the document 16 which identifies it as a subacute toxicity study. 17 Qt Is that what you would take this document to 18 be? 19 A Based on the title, yes. 20 Q. And you don't recall-- I believe you just said 21 you don't recall the reason why this test was done? 22 A That's correct. 23 Ci And the date of this report on the last page 24 says March 27th, 1963. Aroclor 1242 is a product which 25 had been marketed for a period of time by Monsanto. Is that -289- WATER PCB-SD0000056414 1 correct? 2 JL 1242 was a product that had been manufacured-- 3 Q. Aroclor 1242 had been marketed by Monsanto for 4 a number of years prior to that? 6 A. Yes. . 4 6 Q, Was a subacute toxicity study the type of 7 study that the medical department would routinely order in 8 reviewing or evaluating a chemical or a product? 9 MR. FEATHERSTONE: Well, this refers to a subacute 10 dermal test. 0 11 MR. HYNES: Subacute dermal. Fine. 12 Qi Is that the type of routine study which would 13 be ordered by your department? 14 A. No. 15 Qi I refer you to page fourteen of exhibit number 16 one. Under the heading number two microscopic pathologic 17 findings, I refer you to this second sentence, which reads, 18 animals that died during the test exhibited advanced post 19 mortem changes'; consequently their tissues and organs were 20 not examined microscopically. 21 MR. FEATHERSTONE: That's two sentences, Mr. Hynes. 22 MR. HYNES: All right. Beginning in the second 23 sentence and finishing up in the third sentence. 24 Qi Do you have any recollection of reviewing this * 25 report and those findings? -290- WATER PCB-SD0000056415 I 1 A. No. 2 Ql Would those two sentences which I read to you 3 have led you in your normal practice to 90 back to the 4 sponsor, in this case XBT, to redo the tests? Would they be 6 any concern to your department, in your experience? 6 A. This would indicate to me that, not infrequently f 7 test animals die for whatever reason, related or unrelated 8 to the experiment. It may be on a Friday and they're not 9 found until late Saturday or sufficient time has elapsed that 10 post mortem changes have occurred in the tissues so that 11 pathological examination would be meaningless. . 12 Q, In other words, once the post mortem changes 13 set in, there's no way you can determine any problems in 14 that tissue because the post mortem will change the physiolog y IS somehow of the tissues. Is that what you're-- 16 A. That's my understanding. 17 Qi Does this mean-- In -your mind would this mean 18 that there's no way of telling why those animals died during 19 the test period? 20 A. I think that's correct. 21 Qt Exhibit number two-- 22 MR. FEATHERSTONEs We're done with one? 23 MR. HYNES: Yes. 24 Q, Exhibit number two, entitled, report to 2E Monsanto Chemical Company, subacute dermal toxicity of -291- WATER PCB-SD0000056416 1 aroclor 1248, again on Industrial Bio-Test letterhead, 2 numbering sequence in the front beginning with 583 and ending 3 with 598. The date on the last page of March 4, 1963. From 4 the title, Mr. Wheeler, do you infer that it's a similar 5 type of test that we just discussed in exhibit number one? 6 A I would infer that. 7 Ql I refer you to page twelve of exhibit number 8 two under the heading number two, microscopic pathologic 9 findings, the second and third sentences of the first para 10 graph, animals that died during the test exhibited advanced 11 post mortem changes; consequently, their tissues and organs 12 were not examined microscopically. Again, that is a similar 13 finding as to the exhibit number one we just discussed? 14 A That's my understanding. IS Ql And I take it your answers to my questions 16 would be the same relating to this as the other, relating 17 to the significance of the finding of those two sentences? 18 A That's correct. 18 Ql Do you recall-- At this point do you recall 20 at any time in your reviewing of acute data or subacute, 21 chronic data which Monsonta sponsored, similar types of 22 findings in studies reported to you? In other words, with 23 the animals dying and post mortem changes set in and not 24 being able to evaluate the tissues microscopically? 25 MR. FEATHERSTONE: Do you mean some animals during -292- WATER PCB-SD0000056417 1 the test period died and there were post mortem changes and, 2 therefore, no examination? 3 MR. HYNES: Right. 4 MR. FEATHERSTONE: As reported by the people-5 MR. HYNES: Right. e A I think I testified, in answer to your earlier 7 question, Sir, that it's not uncommon. In fact, the reverse 8 may be true. It's rare that you can conduct an experiment 0 without losing some animals for some reason unrelated to the 10 test material. 11 ft I understand animals will be lost during the 12 test period. My question relates to animals being lost in 13 the test period where they cannot be examined microscopically 14 because post mortem changes have set in. Do you recall that 15 being a common occurrence in those types of tests? 16 MR. FEATHERSTONE: Well, they certainly can be 17 examined microscopicallyWhat those sentences say is. 18 because of the post mortem changes, the animal tissues were 10 not. And according to the witness's testimony, that would 20 be because there had been changes; therefore, by examination 21 you couldn't determine why the animal died. 22 MR. HYNES: Yeah. 23 MR. FEATHERSTONE: Okay. Well, your question says 24 because of these post mortem changes they couldn't be 25 microscopically examined and that isn't true. ; -293- * WATER PCB-SD0000056418 1 MR. HYNES: Sure, they could be but would what was 2 found be significant? * i 3 MR. FEATHERSTONE: In their judgment. 4 MR. HYNES: Right. 5 MR. FEATHERSTONE: Okay. So what's the question? 6 Ql Was that occurrence, where post mortem changes 7 set in in language here where they were not examined micro 8 scopically because of the post mortem changes, was that a 9 common occurrence in these types of tests, in your experience ? 10 A I think I answered that question yes. 11 Ql Fine. You stated yesterday Dr. Hunt was hired 12 for the medical department as a toxicologist. Is that 13 correct? 14 A Yes. Dr. William Hunt. 15 Q. And he was hired some time in the eajply '60s? 16 A I believe that's right. 17 Ql And prior to that time, the medical department 16 did not, other than Dr. Kelly, and I'm not sure if he's a 18 toxicologist, had no toxicologists working for them? Is 20 that correct? 21 A That's correct. 22 Qi Am I correct that both you and Dr. Kelly 23 reviewed, did all these medical evaluations, medical 24 department evaluations of the chemicals that were referred 25 from the research department, commercial development -294- WATER PCB-SD0000056419 1 department? The two of you were the only two reviewing the 2 data to make your judgment whether the product was safe, 3 unsafe? It was just the two of you? That's all I want to 4 find out. 5 MR. FEATHERSTONE: For what period of time? 6 MR. HYNES: Up until Dr. Hunt was hired. 7 MR. FEATHERSTONE: Excluding any recommendations 8 or advice they got from the outside people who did the tests? 8 MR. HYNES: Well, if they evaluated, the outside. 10 Ql But in the medical department the work was done 11 by you and Dr. Kelly alone up until you hired Dr. Hunt. Is 12 that correct? 13 A That's correct. 14 Qi Do you recall whose decision it was, whose 15 recommendation it was to hire a toxicologist for the medical 16 department? , 17 A Dr. Kelly's. 18 Qi And do you recall discussing with him the 19 reasons for hiring a toxicologist? 20 A I don't recall. 21 Qi Have you ever been deposed before? 22 A No. Thank the Lord. 23 Qi And I take it, also, you've never testified in 24 any case before. Is that correct? 25 A That's correct. -295- WATER PCB-SD0000056420 I 0 Do you have any personal notes or logs that 2 you have in your possession now concerning the PCB situation 3 at Monsanto while you were working there. 4 MR. FEATHERSTONE: Well-- 6 0 I'm talking about your own personal notes, not e records which are at Monsanto or you were shown at Monsanto. 7 I mean something that's your own personal notes, ledgers, e anything of that nature. 9 A. Perhaps the copy of my airline tickets on my I 10 trip to Europe, some mementos. 11 MR. FEATHERSTONE: I think he means something 12 substantive. 13 A No, Sir. 14 MR. HYNES: I'm done. IS ****** ' 16 QUESTIONS BY MS. OLIVER: 17 0 Mr. Wheeler, were you involved in preparing 16 data sheets for toxicological and safe handling information 19 for Monsanto? 20 MR. FEATHERSTONE: Is that a particular form, Ms. 21 Oliver? 22 MS. OLIVER: I've got several different forms 23 but they have toxicological and safe handling information 24 on them. i 25 A Yes. I was involved in the preparation of -296- WATER PCB-SD0000056421 1 some Of them. 2 Ql Were these data sheets internal Monsanto forms 3 or were they reports to some government or other outside 4 Monsanto entity? 5 A. These were internal forms. 6 Qi And was one prepared for every product that you 7 and Dr. Kelly evaluated? 8 MR. FEATHERSTONE: PCB product or just every pro 0 duct? 10 MS. OLIVER: Well, we'll start with every product. 11 Qi Was it a practice to prepare a toxicological 12 and safe handling information sheet for every product you 13 evaluated? .14 A I doubt that we prepared them on samples from 15 our earliest research efforts. ' 16 Qi Once the product came from the development 17 group and was nearer the marketing stage, was one prepared-- 16 a form prepared as a routine matter? 16 A It is my recollection that it was. Yes. 20 Qi Were these sheets updated at any time? 21 A Yes. 22 Q. How often would they be updated? 23 A If additional work was done, again when there 24 was a change in the product or a change in the use or a 25 change in the bulletin. -297- WATER PCB-SD0000056422 1 ft And were those kept in the medical department? 2 The forms? 3 A Yes, among other places. 4 Ql What other departments of Monsanto would have 6 access to that information on those forms? 6 7 forms? MR. FEATHERSTONEs Access to information on the o 8 MS. OLIVER: Access to these forms as filled out e by the medical department. 10 A Anybody. ii Ql Who did you send them to or who did the medical 12 department send the forms to? 13 A The individual that had prompted the revision 14 and any people that would be associated and needed to know 15 the information on the form. ' 16 MR. FEATHERSTONE: That's an internal Monsanto 17 document. Sir? . 18 A Yes, Sir. 19 Ql And were those prepared during the period of 20 time of the 1950s up until 1968? 21 A I don't remember when we developed the form 22 but, from its inception, to my knowledge, even after I left 23 Monsanto, it was-- Certainly during my tenure at Monsanto. 24 Ql Do you have any knowledge, Mr. Wheeler, of any 25 work done on toxicity of aroclors by Swan Chemical Company? 298- WATER PCB-SD0000056423 1 JL NO. 2 Ql In the course of your employment with Monsanto, 3 did you have occasion to read any reports or correspondence I 4 from Swan Chemical Company relating to aroclors? 5 A. I may have. 6 Ql Do you recall any, Sir? 7 A. Only as it would have been associated with the 8 Swan Chemical Company during the interim or during Monsanto's e purchase of the company, long before I joined Monsanto. 10 Ql Was it your understanding that Monsanto ii purchased the Swan Chemical Company? ; 12 A. Yes. . 13 Ql Were you involved at all, Mr. Wheeler, in the 14 preparation of letters prepared by Monsanto people to send IS the customers of PCB products in 1970 and after that? 16 MR. FEATHERSTONE: You mean any kind of letter? 17 MS. OLIVER: Letters concerning PCBs and fluids 18 and the phasing out of the fluids. 19 MR. FEATHERSTONE: Obviously, other than the 20 letter he already testified to in connection with Mr. Hynes' 21 examination? * 22 MS. OLIVER: Right. 23 A Most of the correspondence was the responsi 24 bility of Mr. Pappageorge in the period you're mentioning. Q' 25 Ql You didn't participate in forming or drafting -299- i WATER PCB-SD0000056424 1 a form letter for different of the aroclor or pydraul 2 products to be sent out to customers? 3 4 Yes. A. I expect I participated in some such letters. 5 Q, What were you asked to do with respect to the 6 drafting of these letters? 7 A. To provide, subject to Dr. Kelly's review and 8 approval, presentation of data that would be meaningful and 0 then the interpretation of that data. 10 Qi So any of those letters that contained toxi 11 cological information would have been reviewed by you or 12 Dr. Kelly for that information? 13 A. That's correct. 14 Qi Other than you and Dr. Kelly, were there any 15 other persons in the medical department who got involved in 16 the PCB concerns from 1960 until the time you left? 17 A. Yes. ' 18 Qi And who were those persons? 10 A Dr. Hunt was more involved in monthly contacts 20 with the consulting laboratories. 21 Qi The Bio-Test chronic studies? 22 A Yes. And, I believe, subsequently Dr. Levinsc 23 and his associate. I can't remember his name. 24 Qi iIn your and Dr. Kelly's evaluation of the 25 pydraul fluids, did you consider that, during the use of -300- WATER PCB-SD0000056425 TT 1 the fluid, there may be chemical changes in the fluids? 2 MR. FEATHERSTONE: Is this pydraul fluids? 3 MS. OLIVER: Uh huh. 4 A. I think my testimony has indicated that our 5 understanding was that one of the advantages of the fluids 6 was that they were chemically stable. 7 ft So you didn't consider that there would be any 8 chemical changes during the use of the fluids? 8 A. That's right. 10 ft You mentioned earlier in your testimony that 11 the recommendation was made to use or have adequate ventila 12 tion in case the PCB fluid came in contact with hot molten 13 or flame and vapor was developed. Is that correct? 14 A. I believe I testified that, if there were-- 15 MR. FEATHERSTONE: Wait a minute. Would you read 16 me her question, please. 17 REPORTER READS BACK. IB MR. FEATHERSTONE; Did you testify to that? That 19 is her question. If you did, yes. If you didn't, no, or 20 to the extent that you can recall it. 21 A To the extent that I can recall it, yes. 22 ft Did you consider the effect of this PCB vapor 23 being ventilated and finding its way outside of the plant 24 area? 25 A No. -301- WATER PCB-SD0000056426 i 1 Q. Why not? 2 A. No reason to be concerned. 3 Qt In your opinion, there wouldn't be any harful 4 effect from it being outside of the plant? 6 A. In the gaseous environment of the plant, the 6 answer is no. 7 Qt Were you aware, at any time up to 1968, that B hydraulic equipment leaked hydraulic oil? B A. My understanding was that there could be 10 occasional accidental leaks. 11 Qt Do you know what the diposal method of the 12 fluid that leaked was? 13 A. No. -o 14 Qt Did you consider the fact that there might be 15 these leaks or, as you testified earlier, a line could 16 burst and fluid could squirt out, significant in terms of 17 evaluating the fluid toxicologically? IB MR. FEATHERSTONE: He's already testified they 19 did tests-- 20 Qt Other than the inhalation tests that you 21 testified? 22 A. No. 23 ft I want to make sure I understand something you 24 testified about earlier, Mr. Wheeler. I asked you about 25 the customer complaints regarding PCBs and I think you -302- WATER PCB-SD0000056427 1 mentioned there were complaints occasionally of skin 2 irritation. 3 A I think I said inquiries. I 4 Qi Inquiries. Okay. Was the action that was 5 taken by the medical department to contact these customers j 6 or-- Strike that. Was the action that was taken in responsei 7 to these inquiries to contact these customers to advise them 8 of the cautions to be used with the product? 9 A Yes. 10 Q. Did those inquiries serve as a basis for the 11 medical department to initiate any chronic testing of the 12 product? 13 A. No. 14 Qi Mr. Wheeler, was the same type of testing that 15 you testified to concerning pydraul'F-9 done on the PCB 16 fluids that were used in paints and additives? Strike 17 that. Adhesives? ' I 18 MR. FEATHERSTONE: PCB fluids used where? 19 MS. OLIVER: As adhesives and paints. 20 MR. FEATHERSTONE: Those aren't PCB fluids. 21 MS. OLIVER: In the products. 22 A PCB fluids were not used, to my knowledge, in 23 anything other than the functional fluids, heat transfer, 24 things that we discussed. 25 Ql Well, the aroclors were in some paints and in 303- WATER PCB-SD0000056428 1 some adhesives. Is that correct? 2 A Yes. 3 ft Okay. Was the same type of testing that was 4 done for the pydraul F-9 and the A 200 that you testified 6 about earlier done for the adhesives and the paint that had 6 aroclors? 7 A What type of testing are you referring to? 8 ft I think you referred to the acute screen and 9 inhalation testing. 10 MR. FEATHERSTONE: What's the question now? 11 MS. OLIVER: Were those same toxicity tests, same 12 types of tests done for the other products that I mentioned 13 which contained aroclors? 14 A That was not my understanding of the question 15 you were asking. ' 16 ft Well, that's my question. If you can answer 17 it, I'd appreciate it. ' 18 A I have testified that there was work done on 19 specific aroclors and the data generated in those studies 20 would apply to other uses of those same aroclors, other 21 than the functional fluids. 22 ft To your knowledge, were the products involving 23 aroclors in adhesives and paint tested any differently or 24 more extensively than the pydraul F-9 and A-200 products? i 25 MR. FEATHERSTONE: The problem, Ms. Oliver, in -304- WATER PCB-SD0000056429 1 addition to the fact that it's irrelevant to the lawsuit, 2 is that we did not manufacture those products. He manufac 3 tured the arodors that went into them. He has testified 4 that the aroclors were tested. That e$ds it. 5 Ql Let me try it another way. Here the aroclors 6 that were tested that were to be used in adhesives or paint 7 tested any differently than the F-9, A 200 products? 8 A I've testified and described to the best of my e knowledge and ability the tests that were done on aroclors. 10 And I can only repeat that, from the standpoint of occupa 11 tional health and industrial hygiene, the data would apply 12 to uses other than in the functional fluids. Does that 13 answer your question? 14 Q. Yes, it does. Thank you. In the period up to 15 1968, Mr. Hheeler, did you consider PCB fluids to be 16 related to pesticides? 17 MR. FEATHERSTONEs Oh, come on. How? 18 A No way. 19 MR. FEATHERSTONEs Is your answer no way? 20 A No way. ` 21 Ql No way. Okay. In the period after 1968, when 22 you were discussing or you were asked about the toxicologi 23 cal effects of PCBs as Monsanto knew them to be, you 24 compared the toxicological effects of PCBb to DDT. Do you 25 recall? -305-- WATER PCB-SD0000056430 1 A. I believe I did for purposes of identifying to 2 a layman the degree of toxicity, DDT being a very non-toxic 3 material. 4 Qi Was that the only purpose of comparing it to 5 DDT? That it was a layman-- It could help a layman under 6 stand the subject matter? 7 K Yes. e , & Other pesticides-- Strike that. Pesticides 9 did contain chlorinated hydrocarbons. Is that right? 10 A That was my knowledge from the literature. 11 & So to the extent that PCBs were chlorinated 12 hydrocarbons and pesticides were chlorinated hydrocarbons, 13 they were similar? 14 MR. FEATHERSTONEs Move on to a different topic. 15 If you want to make an argument to the jury on that point, 16 you can. ' 17 MS. OLIVER: We're getting testy. 16 MR. FEATHERSTONE: He's already answered the 19 question whether there's similarity between PCBs-- 20 MS. OLIVER: We're getting testy. 21 MR. FEATHERSTONE: Yeah, since we were told it 22 was going to be another hour and we rati through lunch on 23 this thing. You've got your record on his answer to your 24 question. Now move on to.a different topic. 25 ft Mr. Wheeler, you testified earlier that . -306- WATER PCB-SD0000056431 1 Bio-Test did sane chronic tests in the late '60s and early 2 '70s and, in some of those tests, sent tissue samples to 3 Dr. Richard'8 group for analysis. Do you know who correlated 4 Dr. Richard's results of his analyses with the tests done by 6 Bio-Test? 6 MR. FEATHERSTONE: If anybody. 7 A I don't know. 8 Ql Do you know if they were correlated at all? 9 A I believe they were. 10 Ql But you don't know who did it? 11 MR. FEATHERSTONE: He's already answered that. 12 A Dr. Richard's group, I believe. 13 Ql Did you ever have any communication with 14 Johnson Motors? . 15 A Not to my recollection. 16 Ql Do you know if Dr. Kelly ever did? 17 A Not to my recollection. 18 Ql Did you ever have any discussions with anyone IB within Monsanto regarding Johnson Motors? 20 A Not to my recollection. * 21 Ql Were you ever present in a meeting which 22 discussed Johnson Motors? 23 A Not to my recollection. 24 Ql % I think I'm done. Mr. Wheeler, have you been % 25 asked' to testify in the trial of this case by Monsanto? -307- WATER PCB-SD0000056432 1 MR. FEATHERSTONE: To the extent that the question 2 asks for communication between counsel and your Mr. Wheeler, 3 don't respond to the question. 4 MS. OLIVER: My understanding is Mr. Wheeler is not 6 an employee of Monsanto. Maybe that's wrong. e Qi Are you employed by Monsanto in any-- 7 MR. FEATHERSTONE: He's retired, as he testified. 8 A No. 9 Q, Well, my question then is, have you been asked 10 to testify as a witness? . 11 A My only association with the case has been 12 through Mr. Featherstone. 13 Ql Is the answer then that it hasn't come up? 14 MR. FEATHERSTONE: The answer is what he said. 15 Ql Mr. Wheeler, then let me ask you this. Would 16 you be willing to come to Chicago and testify on behalf of 17 Johnson Motors? 18 MR. FEATHERSTONE: Well, not until he talks to 19 his lawyer. Mr. Wheeler, I would advise you not to answer 20 that question until you have consulted with whomever it is 21 you wish to consult. Are you through playing around now, 22 Ms. Oliver? 23 MS. OLIVER: Am I going to get an answer? 24 MR._FEATHERSTONE: You got your answer. 25 MS. OLIVER: I guess I'm done. -308- WATER PCB-SD0000056433 1 2 QUESTIONS BY MR. FEATHERSTONE: j 3 Q. Mr. Wheeler, It was Dr. Kelly and npt yourself 4 who was responsible for the chronic testing of Monsanto 6 chemicals and products. Is that correct? 6 A That's correct. ' | 7 Qi And that was true in the 1950s and to the 1960s. 8 Is that right? 0 A It was true during my tenure with Monsanto. 10 Q. : I take it it was Dr. Kelly's responsibility to 11 decide what products would be chronically tested? 12 A That's right. 13 Qi And what protocols would be used, after consul 14 tation with the outside experts. Is that correct? 15 A That's right. ' 16 Qi If additional information became available to 17 the medical department that might suggest exposure to humans, 18 other than what was anticipated when a product was first 19 marketed, would that information go to Dr. Kelly? 20 A Yes. 21 Qi And was it Dr. Kelly's responsibility to 22 decide what additional or new chronic tests should be run? 23 A ^That's right. 24 Qi And was it Dr. Kelly's responsibility, in 25 consultation with the outside laboratories, to decide what -309! WATER PCB-SD0000056434 1 tests should be run? 2 A Yes. 3 Qi I take it that will be true of any information 4 that was made available to the medical department about 6 PCBs getting into the food chain? 6 A That's right. 7 Qi I believe you testified that, although not a 8 toxicologist, you had some involvement in administering the 9 chronic tests done for Monsanto after the protocols had 10 been set up by Dr. Kelly. Is it fair to say that there were 11 changes in the state of the art with respect to chronic 12 testing in the 1950s and 1960s? i 13 A Definitely. o 14 Qi Is it fair to say that the chronic tests done 15 in the state of the art in the latd 1960s were different 16 than the state of the art chronic tests done in the 1950s? 17 A Yes. ' 18 Qi In the 1950s did Monsanto perform or have 19 performed chronic tests on materials that were intended to 20 be in the food chain or might get into the food chain? 21 A. Yes. 22 Ql And did it do that in connection with pesticides ? 23 A Yes. . I 24 Q, And certain plasticizers? ! 25 A Yes. ' * -310- WATER PCB-SD0000056435 c 1 g To your knowledge, were these tests done as 2 required by protocols set down by the FDA or some other 3 government agency? 4 A It is my understanding. 6 g To your knowledge, did those government proto 6 cols for the chronic tests change during the years 1950 and 7 1960? 8 A. Yes. 9 g Since I said years, did they change during the 10 decades of the 1950s and 1960s? 11 A Yes. 12 g The government protocols? -. 13 , A. Yes. I 14 g Did they change more than once? 15 A. I would characterize them as being in a constant] 16 state of change. 17 g You testified earlier about a change in a label 18 that applied to aroclor trademarked products. As a point 19 of clarification. Sir, did that change in the aroclor trade 20 mark product label occur at about the time that pydraul and 21 therminols were reformulated? 1 22 A I believe so. 23 g You were asked several times during the last 24 two days questions about Monsanto activities in the area of 25 water and sediment sampling for aroclors. I take it any -311-: WATER PCB-SD0000056436 1 Ql Zs it true that some of thecreports of alleged 2 PCB identification that you saw were not reports in the 3 scientific literature? 4 MS. OLIVER: I'm just going to make a continuing 6 objection on the basis of leading questions. 6 MR. FEATHERSTONE: You can make any kind of 7 objection you want. I'm not going to give you a continuing 8 objection. e MS. OLIVER: Okay. 10 Ql Answer the question. . ; ii A I don't-- ! 12 MS. OLIVER: My objection is for the record. 13 Qi Mr. Wheeler-- 14 A Your question. Sir? 15 MR. FEATHERSTONE: Would the court reporter please 16 reread the question? 17 COURT REPORTER READS BACK. 18 Qi And the period of time. Sir, is late 1960s. 19 A That's right. 20 Qi To the extent you saw reports not in scientific 21 literature, where were those reports? 22 A Trade journals, newspapers. Those a?e the ones 23 that come to mind. ` 24 Qi In connection with the biodegradation tests 25 run by Monsantb Company on aroclors, did you have any direct -313- WATER PCB-SD0000056437 1 activity along this line was not done by the medical depart 2 ment? ! 3 K That's correct. ; 4 Qi What department would have done that? 6 Ai In the case of our plants, by plant personnel. 6 The sampling. And initially the analyses, I believe, were 7 done by Dr. Richard's group. In Wales the laboratory there 6 established their own expertise and analyses, as did 0 subsequently, I believe, our plant in southern Illinois. 10 Ql You were asked by Mr. Hynes, for the government, 11 questions about your knowledge of reports of PCBs in the 12 environment. Sir, is it true that, in the late 1960s and 13 early 1970s, scientific literature showed confusion, if you 14 will, among analytical chemists as to whether PCBs were, in 16 fact, being identified by certain techniques? 16 K That's right. 17 Ql And is it also fair to say there was a dispute, 18 if you will, in the scientific community about the proper 19 techniques for the analysis of PCBs? 20 MS. OLIVER: I'm going to object, assert an 21 objection here on the basis that the witness has already 22 testified to the subject matter extensively and that you're 23 leading the wintess. 24 Qt Answer the question. Sir. 26 A There was disagreement. . -312- WATER PCB-SD0000056438 1 involvement in those tests? 2 K No. 3 Qi Did you have any involvement in setting up the 4 procedures for those tests? 6 K Beg pardon? e fit Did you have any involvement in establishing 7 the procedures for those tests? 8 JL No. 0 Q. Did you have any involvement in the interpre 10 tation of the results of those tests? 11 JL No. 12 HR. FEATHERSTONE: No more questions. 13 HR. HYNES: I don't have any. 14 ****** 15 MS. OLIVER: Do you understand. Hr. Wheeler, that 16 you'11 have the opportunity to read the transcript of your 17 testimony? ' 18 A. I didn't know that. 10 MR. FEATHERSTONE: Well, if he didn't know it, he 20 would have known it shortly. 21 MS. OLIVER: Mr. Featherstone will provide you O 22 with a copy of the transcript and you will have an oppor 23 tunity to read it and make sure the court reporter has 24 taken down the questions that were asked and the answers 25 that you gave in an accurate manner. 314 WATER PCB-SD0000056439 1 A. I'm happy to hear that. 2 MS. OLIVER: Thank you. 3 MR. FEATHERSTONE: Thank you very much. 4 . ****** & DEPOSITION CONCLUDED. 6 7 8 8 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 315- WATER PCB-SD0000056440