Document 5L1wd7pBvavrZRqmkYVwznx9z

U'Jvie'U'iVi*3..--i!rlr\ P. ^ r1 'i 1 w -'i iJl JDfe 4-S 1 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 2 DISTRICT OF MASSACHUSETTS 3 ALICE L. WARREN, ADMINISTRATRIX ) 4 OF THE ESTATE OF JOHN 3. WARREN, ) DECEASED, > 5 Plaintiff, ) ) 5 v. ) ) Civil Action 7 ) Ha. 39-30201-? THE DOW CHEMICAL COMPANY, ) 9 THE 3.F. GOODRICH COMPANY, ) UNION CARBIDE COMPANY, AND ) 9 CONTINENTAL OIL COMPANY, ) 10 Defendants. ) ) 11 12 DEPOSITION OF CHARLES A. PRATTS 13 TAKEN BY KEITH A. MINOFF ON BEHALF OF THE PLAINTIFF 14 HAY 23, 1991 15 16 17 13 13 REPORTED BY LAURA LYNN MURPHY 20 REGISTERED PROFESSIONAL REPORTER - CERTIFICATE OF ilERiT CERTIFIED SHORTHAND REPORTER 21 22 23 (314) 231-2202 24 25 RANKIN REPORTING & LEGAL VIDEO UCC 078549 - 1 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 2 DISTRICT Or MASSACHUSETTS 3 ALICE L. WARREN, ADMINISTRATRIX ) 4 OF T3S ESTATE OP JOHN IT. WARREN,) DECEASED, ) 5 Plaintiff, ) ) 6 v ) ) Civil Action 7 ) No. 89-30201-F THE DOW CHEMICAL COMPANY, ) e THE B.F. GOODRICH COMPANY, ) UNION CARBIDE COMPANY, AND ) 9 CONTINENTAL OIL COMPANY, ) 10 Defendants, ) ) 11 12 DEPOSITION OF CHARLES A, PRAT7K, produced, sworn 13 and examined on behalf of the Plaintiff on the 23d day of 14 May, 1991, between the hours of 8 o'clock in the forenoon IS and 6 o'clock in the afternoon of that day at the officer of 16 MONSANTO CHEMICAL COMPANY, 000 M, Lindbergh Boulevard..n the 17 County of St, Louia, State of Missouri, before Laura Lynn ie Murphy, a Registered Professional Reporter - Certificate of 19 Merit*, a Certified Shorthand Reporter and a Notary Public 20 within and for the State of Missouri, in a cause pending 21 wherein Alice L. Warren is the Plaintiff and The Dow 22 Chemical Company, The B,F. Goodrich Company, Union Carbide 23 Company Continental Oil Company are the Defendants. 24 25 RANKIN REPORTING & LEGAL VIDEO y UCC 078550 1 APPEARANCE 2 3 ROBINSON, DONOVAN, HADDEN & BARRY, P.C. 1500 Main Street, Suite 1400 4 Post Office Box 15509 3ptingfiexd, Massachusetts 01115 5 By: Xeith A, Minoff 5 MELICK * PORTER i One Joy Street Boston, Massachusetts 02103 a Syj Robert ? Powers 9 STUTTER, MeCLENNSH i FISH 10 One International Place Boston, Massachusetts 02110-2699 11 By: Susan L. Parsons 12 MORRISON, MAHONUY * MILLER 13 250 Summer Street Boston, Massachusetts 02210 14 By: Joseph F. Randini 15 16 17 INDEX 13 CHARLES A. PRATTE 13 DIRECT EXAMINATION 3Y MR, MINOPF CROSS-EXAMINATION !3Y MS. PARSONS 20 CROSS-EXAMINATION BY HR. RENDINI REDIRECT EXAMINATION BY MR. MINOFF 21 RECROSS-EXAMINATION BY MS. PARSONS REDIRECT EXAMINATION BY MR. MINOFF 22 23 ^ EXHIBITS 24 PLAINTIFF'S DEPOSITION NO. 25 1 Notj.ce of Taking of Deposition tor the Plaint.If for the `Nitnccu for the Defendants Union Carbide Company, The Dow Chemical Company & Conoco for the Defendant The 3.F. Goodrich Company PAGE MO. 4 61 63 65 70 72 11 RANKIN REPORTING & LEGAL VIDEO 3 UCC 078551 J * . J. . s^i . 1 2 Records Management Manual booklet 5/78 17 3 Document Attorney Work Productdated910517 20 2 4 Pacts with Monsanto booklet 26 5 Document 41 3 6 Group of document! 42 4 5 STIPULATION 6 IT IS rlEREBJf STIPULATED AMD AGREED, by and between 7 counsel for the parties that this deposition may be taken m 3 shorthand by Laura Lynn Ilurphy, RPR-CM, CSR, and afterwards 9 transcribed into print and signature by the witness is 10 waived. 11 CHARLES A. PRATTS, 12 of lawful age, being first duly sworn to tell the truth, the 13 whole truth and nothing but the truth, deposes and ;iays in 14 behalf of the Plaintiff, as follows; 15 DIRECT EXAMINATION 16 3Y MR, HINCFF; 17 Q, Sir, could you please state your full name, IS A, My name is Charles A, Pratte, Jr. 19 Okay 20 MS. PARSONSi Keith, for the record I thi 21 should do stipulations. 22 MR. MiNOFFi Usual stipulations. Counsel? 23 ^ MS, PARSONS: Yea 24 MR. MINOFF: Stipulations are that all 25 objections except those as to the form of the question 4 RANKIN REPORTING LEGAL VIDEO UCC 078552 1 reserved for trial and are not waived by not being made 2 here, the same with regard to notions to strike. And then a 3 guess we should talk about waiving the reading and signing, 4 3ob. 5 HR. POWERS: That's fine. e HR. MINOFF: Okay. You will agree to waive 7 the reading and signing of the deposition? 3 HR. POWERS: Yes. 9 HR. HIHOFF; Okay. 10 Q. i'B sorry, sir, your name's Charles. What's the 11 middle initial? 12 A. A. Pratte. 13 Q. P-r-a-t-t? 14 A. E, 1 have an e at the end, Jr. 15 o. And what is your home address. Hr. Piatte? 16 A. 1547 Azalea, A-s-a**l-e-a, Drive, Webster Grove^, 17 two words, Missouri 63119. 18 Q. And where are you currently employed? 19 A*. L^aa employed by Monsanto here in St. Louis, 300 20 North Lindbergh. 21 Q. And what is your job title with Monsanto? 22 A. I'm manager of raw material supply. 23 0. Aqd how long have you held that position? 24 A. I've held it for about 21 years. 25 0. So that would be beginning in approximately 1970? RANKIN REPORTING & LEGAL VIDEO UCC 078553 <J\jihr*Ll & illU' -i*x' i. 1 A. Wall, actually I was -- had another titj-e before 2 then. I was theie in corporate purchasing uinca about *GG 3 buying raw materials. The tit-e wa^ changed along the lino. 4 3, Okay. Why don't you just take me through your work 5 nistocy at Monsanto beginning with your first position? 6 A. 1 was first hired in January of I960 at the 7 Springfield, Mass*, plant. I was hired as a staff engineer. 3 And about two years later, X was asked to go into 9 purchasing. TO Q. Also at the Springfield plant? 11 A. At the Springfield, Mass., plant. 12 0. And what was your title with respect to the 13 purchasing? 14 A. Buyer, X bought mechanical supply items. 15 Q. So that wouldn't have included any type of vinyl 16 chloride or other chemicals? 17 A. Mo. 13 0. And how long did you hold this titie? 19 Ar Oh-, 1 left Springfield in Washington -- i arrived 20 in St* Louis on Washington's birthday 1963, I think it was 21 the 21st of February. And I worked at the Sauget, Illinois, 22 plant as a buyer* 23 0. Hew do you spell that? 24 A. S-a-u-g-e-t. 7.5 Q. What were you buying? RANKIK REPORTING & LEGAL VIDEO UCC 078554 1 A. I bought mechanica* at fir^t and chon l 2 began to buy raw aateriaia there for the pj.ant* 3 Q. Okay* What caused you to be transferred from 4 Springfield, Massachusetts, to St* Louis? 5 A, Well, they had a work reduction but they wre G trying to reduce the employment about 10 percent and they 7 asked me to interview for another job. 3 0* All right* And how long did you stay in that 9 position? 10 A. Oh, I probably was at the Sauget plant three years. 11 Q. fa sorry, sir, X didn't catch your last answer. 12 A. About three years* 13 Q. That would take us up to 1966? 14 A. Yeah* 15 Q. Is that right? 16 A. We * H say about that time* I don't remember the 17 exact dates, okay. .13 0. Okay* Where did you go from there? 19 A*. I^wac made purchasing agent at our 3t. Peters, 20 Missouri# plant. 21 Q* And -- 22 A* 1 stayed there for about two years* 23 0* L^t me just ask the next question. What were you 24 In charge of purchasing as purchasing agent? 25 A. Well, 1 was responsible for ail purchases at the RAUKItf REPORTING & LEGAL VIDEO 7 UCC 078555 1 plant* This was a silicon plant. We made silicon wafe^. 2 Q. So that d_d not Involve the purchase of any vinyl 3 chioride? 4 A. Mo, it did not include vinyl chloride. 5 Q. 3ut it did involve purchasing other chemicals? 6 A. That's true. 7 0, For the production of silicon product? e A. That's right. 9 Q. How i.ong did you stay in that position? 10 A. About two years. n 0. Which would bring us to about 1966? 12 A. tfh-huh 13 0. And where did you go from there, sir? 14 A. I came over here Into general offices to bo -- to 15 start buying raw materials for the corporation. 16 0. What department were you in when you first came to 17 the St. Louis headquarters In 1968? 13 A. Corporate purchasing department. 19 And who was the head of corporate purchasing at 20 that time? 21 A* 1 believe it was Carl Evans. 22 0* Whet would his title have been? 23 A. n* would have been director of purchasing. 24 0. And what was your title within that corporate 25 purchasing department? PAIIKIM REPORTING i LEGAL VIDEO a UCC 078556 1 A. I think it was senior buyer or a title like thus. 2 Q, Just for your benefit# Sir. Pratte, it would hero 3 for the court reporter if you wouid waic until my question 4 is finished before you start to speak because it's hard for 5 her to take things down when there's overlapping 6 conversation, 7 A. Okay, 3 Q* So Carl Evans was your supervisor in corporate 9 purchasing? 10 A. No. 11 Q, Okay. Who was your -- 12 A. He was in charge of the department, 13 0. VTho was your supervisor then? 14 A. Ron Burnett. 15 0- Okay. Did he also go by R.I1. Burnett? 15 A, I believe so. 17 0- Okay. What was his title? ifl A. He was manager of raw materials. 19 Q,v And your position changed in 1970 or the name of 20 the job position you held changed? 21 A, I'b not sure when they changed our titles. X don't 22 recall the exact date that they made us, you know, manager 23 of raw materials. The names, the function -- the function 24 essentially grew but right from the beginning we were 25 responsible for buying raw materials for the corporation. 9 RAMXIN REPORTING & LEGAL VIDEO __________________________________UCC 078557 1 But over time they have elevated the jobs to what it is 2 coday* 3 , Okay# which is manager of raw materials? 4 A. Supply, uh-huh. ' 5 0. Okay. Mow# why don't you tell me, first of ail# $ what types of products or things were you purchasing 7 between# say, 1968 and 1970 when your job title changed? 3 A. I bought chlorine, sulfur, sulfuric acid, muriatic 3 acid, caustic soda# soda ash and maybe some seven or eight 10 other raw materials, 11 Q. What about vinyl chloride? 12 A. I did not buy vinyi chloride, 13 Q. Was vinyl chloride considered by the company to be 14 a raw material? 15 A. At the -- in 1963 we were supplying our own out of IS Texas City. So we were not buying vinyl chloride monomer 17 corporately in 1963, 13 0. So raw materials as far as the purchasing 19 depaiecaenfr'Vas concerned only involved things that were -- 20 chemicals that were purchased from nonMonsanto sources; is 21 that right? 22 A* That's correct, 23 0, Hid there come a time, sir, when you became 24 involved in tne purchase of vinyl chloride from nonMonsanto 25 sources? BASKIN REPORTING & LEGAL VIDEO 10 UCC 078558 1 A. 1 did not buy v:nyi chloride at any time. 2 Q, Well* when you ^ay I, you're iay*ng personally you 3 were not involved in any such purchases? 4 A. That's correct* The department did buy -- starting 5 1369 they entered a contact with the -- with Dow. 6 Q. Okay. And what's your source of knowledge about 7 that contract? 8 A- Well* X -- the vinyl chloride monomer is made 9 between the reaction of chlorine and ethylene and I bought 10 the chlorine- And when we were -- and when we were making 11 it ourselves, the chlorine went to Texas City. And when we 12 entered this contract, we had to take that chlorine and move 13 it elsewhere into our system and X had that responsibility. 14 Q- Okay- And is that how you came to know about tne 15 Dow contract for vinyl chloride? 15 A- That is how I came to become aware of the contract, 17 yes 18 0- let me show you, sir, the Notice of Taking of 19 Deposition.for this'deposition 20 MR. MINOPTs Why don't we have this marked .as 21 Exhibit No. 1, please. 22 (Plaintiff's Exhibit Mo. 1 is marked.) 23 0- Sdr* I'm snowing you what's been marked as Exhibit 24 No. 1 which is the Notice of Taking of Deposition for this 25 deposition. I'd like you to take a look at it and then tell RANKIN REPORTING & LEGAL VZJEO 11 UCC 078559 1 me, first of ail, whether you've ever -een this document 2 before. 3 A. X believe I've seen this document, a copy of this 4 document* Yes, it looks like the copy that Z received* 5 0* Okay* I'd like you to take a look at the itexa 6 numbered 1 through 7 on page 2 of the exhibit and ask you 7 whether or not it is your deposition that you have been 3 designated to testify as to those matters today* 9 A* Okay* Do you want to rephrase your question? 10 0. Yes* I just wanted to ask you whether or not it as 11 your understanding, sir, that you have been designated by 12 Honsanto to testify aa to those seven areas today* 13 A. Yes, I've been designated to testify* 14 Q. Okay* And are you prepared to testify as to each 15 of those areas? 16 A. Yes, X am. 17 0* Okay* The deposition notice also states further 18 down on the page that "The persons designated to testify on 19 these..matters shall bring with them the following documents" 20 and it goea on to li3t three types of documents. Have you 21 brought any of those documents with you today, sir? 22 A* No* The only document I was able to uncover in my 23 investigation was that one there* 24 Q* Okay* What type of investigation did you do as far 25 as these documents is concerned? HANKIN P.EPOETING & LEGAL VIDEO 12 UCC 078560 1 A. I contacted teveLal people who may have had sorae 2 knowledge who I thought bad some knowledge about this 3 particular agreement with Dow and also, hopefully, could 4 remember or be knowledgeable about the supply of vinyl 5 chloride prior to 1969. 6 0. <?ho did you contact? 7 A. 1 contacted Ron Burnett, Charrie Fullerton, ;iackie, 3 John iiackie, Larry Gormley. And 1 contacted our legal 9 department to see if there were any records, retained 10 records. 11 Q. Anybody else? 12 A. No. 13 Q. So it was just those four plus the Monsanto legal 14 department -- 15 A, Yeah. 15 Q. -- that you contacted? And the only document then 17 you were able to uncover --- excuse me, did you want to add 18 something, sir? 19 A*. Veil, yeah, the person that sent that to me was Ann 20 Clark* X talked to her on the phone. 21 0. Who*s she? 22 A* Kell, she's the one that keeps track of the 23 documents -that we have on file on this particular document 24 here* You've got a copy of it. 25 Q. Ann Clark? RANKIN REPORTING & LEGAL VIDEO 13 Ucc 078561 1 A* Ann Clark, /sail. 2 Q. Where does she work at Monsanto? 3 A* She works over at, well, a store of records, X1 rr. 4 not too sure, ^ut she keeps track for filing of contracts 5 In the vault, Monsanto's procedure in-purchasing is to 6 retain -- not retain but to store certain contracts of 7 certain size and length in a vault, to keep the original _r. 8 a vault, okay. 9 And so in my Investigation, 1 thought that 10 contacting her to see if there would be a contract we may 11 have had on the Dow VC*4 os anybody else. And so that -- 12 that particular document was given to me. 13 Q. Okay. And this document. I'm just looking at it 14 for the first time so you'll have to excuse me. 15 A. Sure. 1G n, This document appears to Identify four items which 17 are, themselves, documents which are each identified by a 18 document number, correct? 19 MS. PARSONSi Objection. 20 MR. R2NDINI: Objection. 21 MR. POWERSi You may answer the question. 22 WITNESS; Pardon me? 23 MR. POWERS; You can answer the question 24 deepite the objection. 25 WITNESS? Would you rephrase it? I'm RANKIN REPORTING 4 LEGAL VIDEO 14 UCC 078562 1 confused 2 0. (BY MR. Mi:>TOFF) Yea. la it fair to a ay that th^c 3 document that hau just been handed to me identifies. tour 4 other documents which are identified by a document ID S number? 5 MS. PARSONS; Objection* 7 MR. RHNDINI; Objection. 3 WITNESSs I -- it has a numoer, a document ID 9 number, yes, this piece of paper X save you. 10 Q. (BY MR. M1NOFF) Okay. Now, under Item 1 where it 11 says narrative, it says "Agreement between Dow Chemical and 12 t]Cm -- x imagine that refers to Monsanto Company; is that 13 correct? 14 MS. PARSONSs That's true. 15 Q. (BY MR. HIIIGFF) -- "under which MC is granted un 10 option to purchase up to 250,000,000 pounds of vinyl 17 chloride monomer pec year for 10 year period, 1/1/69 througn 13 12/31/70." 19 MS. PARSONS: Objection. 20 Q. (BY MR. M1NOFF) Sir, do you know if the agreement, 21 itself, still exists in some form? 22 MS. parsons* objection. 23 -- WITNESS; I was told -- can I answer that? 24 MR. POWERS: Keah. 25 WITNESS: 1 was bold that the document had RANKIN REPORTING & LEGAL VIDEO 15 UCC 078563 1 been destroyed some sin or so months ago 2 MS. PASSOHS; Objection, 3 HR. RSNDI'TI: Objection. 4 Q. (BY HR. AiNCFF) Who told you that? 5 A. Ann Clark. G Q. Did one say how it was destroyed? 7 A. You clean by fire or -- 3 Q. Or who destroyed it? 9 A. -- shredding? Ho. 10 Q. And by six months ago, would that have been, say, 11 fall of 1990? 12 ids. PARSONSx Objection. 13 Q. (BY HR, MINOFP) When did you speak to Hiss Clark? 14 A. 1 spoke to her last week 1 believe or the week 15 before, within the ia&t two weeks I upoke to her. 1C, 0. And that's when she toid you that the Bow agreement 17 had been destroyed about six months previous? IS A. Yes. 19 0- Do you know where that document was kept up to the 20 time it was destroyed? 21 A. There is a vaurt which I've never seen where we pui 22 all our documents into, purchase contracts into, but i've 23 never seea.it. 24 0. Is the vault located here at the headquarters in 25 St. Louis? RANKIN REPORTING & LEGAL VIDEO 15 UCC 078564 1 A X believe ro. 2 Q. is Mias Ciaxfc located in this complex? 3 A* Yes, yea* 4 0. And she's in the cecords area, the records 5 department? 6 A* To the best of my knowledge. 7 Q. Okay. While we're talking about records, do you 3 know, sir, what Monsanto's record retention policy is with 9 respect to contracts of this kind such as the one between 10 Dow and Monsanto? 11 A. x don't specifically know what it is but if there 12 is a retention policy, and that's easily available, I just 13 don't know what it is. I can't quote. But we don't -- we, 14 you know, we have retention rules and even in purchasing 13 where the contracts are not kept in a vault. 15 MR. llINOFFi Can we have this marked, please. 17 (Plaintiff's Exhibit Mo. 2 is marked.) IS Q. Okay. Sir, I'm showing you what's been marked as 19 Exhibit 2 which is a booklet entitled Records Management 20 Manual, May 1973, Monsanto. Would you please take a ~ook at 21 this and tell me if you're familiar with the document. 22 A. I am not familiar with this document although i've 23 seen che book. I'm not famixiar. I've not studied it -n any 24 way. IS Q. x*;n not asking if you can quote chapter and verse RANKIN REPORTING & LEGAL VIDEO ______ 17 UCC 078565 1 from it 2 A* No. 3 0. I'm just asking if you've seen it before. 4 A. I've seen it before, i haven't -- I haven't realty 5 read it. 6 Q. Let me see that, please. Are you aware of the 7 distinction that une company makes between major contracts 3 and other types of contracts with respect to record 9 retention? 10 MS. PARSONS: I want to object. 11 WITNESS: Philosophically only. 12 q. (3Y &R. MINOFF) And what is your understanding of 13 it philosophically? 14 A. Weil, we -- the way we work it is we have a 15 procedure that tells us essentially that if the contract ic 16 no long or so many dollars, and i don't remember whether it 17 was three years or five years, we send these to the vau^t, IS okay, for retention. Others we keep in our files. If 19 they'xe one to two-year contracts for 3, $4 million, we keep 20 then in our files. And I just can't -- 1 can't quote the, 21 you know, his -- where the break line is. 22 0. Okay* So you can't say that it's only aagor 23 contracts ^that go into the vault and other ones don't? 24 A. What do you mean by major? 25 Q. Well, I'm just asking you about your understanding RANKIN REPORTING & LEGAL VIDEO 12 UCC 078566 1 as to the term major contract ac it's u^ed, for mntance, .n 2 the Records Management Manua-. And I'll refer you to tne 3 page I'm looking at which is page 13 of the manual. 4 A. TJh-huli Major contract $5 million in one year, 5 that sounds -- $10 million in five years, yeah, yeah, and, 6 you know, okay, that's, you know, looks okay, looks right. 7 Q. Okay. That's what you understand a major contract 3 to mean in the -- 9 A. In this context, yes. 10 Q. -- in the context of the Monsanto record retention 11 policy as exposed in the manual? 3.2 MS. PARSONSi Objection. 13 MR. RENDINI* Objection. 14 Q. (BY MR. MINOFF) Is that right, sir? You can 15 answer 16 MR. POWERS: Go ahead and answer. 17 WITNESS I Yes. 13 0 (BY MR. MXHOFF) And do you know, cir, based on 19 thatdeiiaition provided there if the Dow agreement referred 20 to on the piece of paper that was just handed to me which 21 we'll mark shortly as Exhibit No. 3 if that contract wo* a 22 major* contract? 23 ^ MS. PARSONSi Objection. 24 MR. POWERS: Answer the question. 25 0 (BY MR. MlftOFF) If you can answer. RANKIN REPORTING & LEGAL VIDEO 19 UCC 078567 1 A Yes 2 Q. It was? 3 A. Oh-buh* 4 MR. RENDINI: Can we see the document from 5 which he is reading, sir? 6 MR* MINOFF: Sure. 7 IIS. PARSONS: I'm just going to put an 8 objection on the record that 1 don't think this witness u 9 competent to testify to the detail of the record retention 10 program since he's already testified that he's not familiar 11 with this document* 12 MR. RENDINI; I'll join m that objection* 13 (Plaintiff's Exhibit No. 3 is marked.) 14 MR* MINOFF; Let me know when you're through. 15 MR, RENDINI: Uh-huh. 15 MS. PARSOT7S: In addition, this wasn't one of 17 the subject areas upon which he was called to testify. 18 MR. MINOFF; That's true. 19 MR. RENDINI; Same objection. 20 Q. (BY HR. MINOFF) Okay. Going back for a second, 21 3ir, to Exhibit No. 3, you -- 22 A* Oh-huh. 23 0* Up you have that in front of you? 1 think you do. 24 A. Okay* 25 Q. VThen you spoke to Ann Clark, did you have this RANKIN REPORTING LEGAL VIESO ?0 UCC 078568 w `.Vi* w u 1 document in front of you? 2 A. No. 3 Q. Okay. You only `jot that j.ater? 4 A. yeah. I talked to her on the jjhone asking her if 5 there was any records and she sent me tnis an the 5 Q. And you didn't speak to her after you got this 7 document? 3 MS. PARSONS: Objection. 9 WITNESS; No, 1 don't beixove so l talked to 10 her after the document. 11 Q. (3Y MR. MINOFP) Did you talk to anybody with 12 respect to any of the items referenced in the document? 13 A. No. 14 0- When Miss Clark told you that the Dow agreement aad 15 been destroyed six months previous -- 16 A. Uh-huh. 17 Q. -- do you know whether she was referring to item IS No. 1 as opposed to either of the three other items luted 19 in Exhibit.No. 3? 20 A. No. 21 MR. RENDINI: Objection. 22 MS. PARSONS: Same objection. 23 Q. UJY MR. UINOFF) What did she say to you exactly? 24 What were her exact words as best you can recall with 25 respect to what was destroyed? RANKIN REPORTING 6 LEGAL VIDEO 21 UCC 078569 1 A. She simply said that she looked at her records, 2 there was thia -- this agreement and that she could not give 3 me -- the agreement had been destroyed some sxx j.iontns ago, 4 thereabouts 5 Q- So oho referred to an agreement in the singular or 6 opposed to in the plural? 7 US. PARSONS3 Objection. 3 WITNESS: Can't remember that* 9 Q. (DV MR, KINOFF) Okay, i notice, air, that this 10 document refers to a contract dated September 13, 1966 -- 11 MS. PARSONS: Objection. 12 WITNESSs Uh-huh* 13 Q. (BY MR. MIHOFF) -- tor vinyl chloride uonomet 14 between Dow Chemical and MC. 13 A. Uh-hufr. is MG. PARSONS: Objection. 17 Q. (BY MR. MINCFF) Do you have any understanding as 18 to what contract is being talked about? 19 iV* looked at that and it seemed to me tnat was a 20 typo, you know, i says how can there be '66 referring to a 21 contract and 1969 and i -- l felt that that was a typo. 22 Q. Okay* That is it shouldn't say 9/13/66, it should 23 probably 9/13/68? 24 MS. PARSONS: Objection. 25 WITNESSt I don't know, I assume it had RA?IN REPORTING & LEGAL VIDEO 22 UCC 078570 1 reference to this contract and toe *65 would have bean too 2 far in advance but that's, you know, that's my opinion. 3 Q. (BY MR. MxNOFF) So you questioned that when you 4 saw the 1956 date? 5 MS. PARSONS: Oojaction. 6 WITNESS: Yeah, X looked at that and card 7 there's something wrong with that* l don't know what that 0 is about. 1 assumed it was closer to or even after the one 9 in '63, 1 don't know. 10 Q. (BY MR. MiNOFF) Did you feel compelled to ask 11 anybody about that after you saw that 1966 date? 12 A. Mo. 13 Q. And you did not do that? 14 A. No. To me it was a -- it didn't make any sense, 15 o. So you just assumed that the date was wrong? 15 MS. PARSONS: Objection. 17 WITNESS; i assumed xt was wrong. 13 0. (BY MR* MINOFF) Okay. And the 9/1-3/56 dace aiao 19 uppeocs oo^tbe second page of the exhibit -- 20 MS. PARSONS: Objection. 21 Q. (BY MR. MINOFF) -- with respect to Item Nos. 3 and 22 4, correct? 23 ^ MS. PARSONS: Objection. 24 WITNESS: Uh-huh. 75 Q. (BY MR. MINOFF) And did you also feel chat chat RANKIN REPORTING & LEGAL VIDEO 23 UCC 078571 1 was probably an error when you jaw this document? 2 A. That was my opinion, yes. 3 0* Do you know, sir, if Monsanto maintains a record of 4 what documents are destroyed, that is a list of what's 5 destroyed and when and by whom, that type of information? G MS. PARSONS: Objection. 7 WITNESS? This would reflect that that's, you 3 know, that they do. 3 0. (BY MiKOPP) I'm sorry, obviously they kept records 10 here. i'a sorry, does this indicate when these documents -- 11 oh, it does when they're destroyed. I'm sorry, i didn't see 12 that. 13 A. Yes. 14 Q. It does indicate, though, the date on which they're 15 destroyed; is that right? 16 MS. PARSONS: Objection. 17 Q. (BY MR. MINOFF) At least I don't see one, maybe IS you do. 19 At Storage information, do you see it? Destroyed, 20 yeah, it has a date 19901214. 21 Q. That's a date then? 22 A. Yeah, that looks like the date it was destroyed. 23 Q. T(iat would be December 14, 1990? 24 A. Yeah, 1 would chink that that's exactly what they 25 meant. RANKIN REPORTING & LEGAL VIDEO 24 UCC 078572 iX1 0 . -k W - > 1 Q. And that was the elate on waxen all four of chose 2 items were destroyed? 3 MS. PARSONS: i*a going to make an objection 4 again.because this witness is not competent to testify as to 3 any -- regarding records or records retention and has no 6 personal knowledge how or when these records were destroyed. 7 MR. RENDINX: Same objection. ns/ Q. (By hiR. MINOFF) That i3 what the document would 9 appear to indicate* air* all of -- each of these four 10 documents were destroyed on December 14* 1990? 11 A. That is correct. 12 MS. PARSONS: Same objection. 13 MB. RENDINI: Same objection. 24 Q. (BY MR. MXNOFF) Let's get back to, sir, to what 13 exactly it was that you did in the corporate purchasing 1C department beginning xn 1968. You mentioned that -- you 17 listed a number of substances that you purchased including 18 chlorine. Do you recall that? 19 A* That's correct. 20 Q. And chlorine is one of the components of vinyl 21 chloride; is that right? 22 rtS. PARSONS; objection. 23 . WITNESS: That ia correct. 24 Q. (BY MR. MxNCFF) You said that earlier as weu. Do 25 you know* air, during that period* say* between 1968 and RANKIN REPORTING & LEGAL VIDEO 25 UCC 078573 1 1970 what Monsanto plants or which Monsanto plants we*e 2 using vinyl chioii.de monomer? 3 MS. PARSONS: Objection. 4 V7ITNESS s The only plant I could determine waa 5 using vinyl chloride monomer was the Springfield, Mass., 6 plant. 7 Q. <31* OR. MINOFF) X want to show you, sir, a Xerox 3 of a booklet that X came across. 3 MR. MIHOFF: Mark this as the next exhibit. 10 (Plaintiff's Exhibit Ho. 4 is marked.) 11 M3. PARSONS: Can X see that? 12 HR. MINOFF: Sure. I'm going to be asking hia 13 about this part of it. 14 0. Okay. Sir, now i'm showing you Exhibit No. 4 which 15 as 1 said, a Xerox of a booklet called Facto v,ita IG Monsanto 1972 and directing your attention specifically to 1.7 the upper portion center of that document where it -.aye 10 Monsanto Polymers and Petrochemical.; Company. Do you see 19 that?.. 20 A. Uh-buh, uh-huh. 21 Q. And it goes on to list a number of plant locations. 22 Can you read those? It's not a very good copy. 23 A. landing plastics such as -- 24 0. Why don't you just read it to yourserf and then 25 I'll ask you a couple questions about it. RANKIN REPORTING & 7.HGAL VIDEO 2.6 UCC 078574 1 A. It's not a very good copy; okay. 2 Q. Okay. Now, With respect to those pj.arit locations 3 listed -- 4 A, Ub-huh. 5 0 -- Addyston, Ohio -6 A. Addyston, Ohio, just outside of Cincinnati. 7 Q. Okay. And there are eight other plant facilities a 3 A. CJh-nuh. 10 Q. -- mentioned including Springfield. Does that 11 refresh your recollection, sir, as to whether there were any 12 plants other than Springfield, Massachusetts, that made use 13 of vinyl chloride monomer? 14 A. X -- it doesn't do anything for me. 15 Q, Okay. So as far as you're concerned, Spr.ngfie-d, 16 Massachusetts, was the only plant that used vinyl chioriue? 17 MS. PARSONS: Objection. 18 WITNESS* My investigation did not determine 19 there-*waa-any other location. My memory doesn't tell me 20 that we made it elsewhere but, okay. 21 Q. (BY MR. M1NOFF) Okay. Now, after -- there was a 22 time, air, when Monsanto's Texas City plant shut down, is 23 that fair to say? 24 MS. PARSONS: Objection. 25 WITNESS: That is correct -- wait, now the RANKIN REPORTING & LEGAL VIDEO 27 UCC 078575 1 plant Is still there. Texas City still exists. 2 Q. (3Y MR. MlWOFF) Weil, let's be taore specific then. 3 Texas City plant made vinyl chloride monomer, correct? 4 A. That*3 correct. 5 Q. It's one of the thins* that was done at that plant? 5 A. That's correct. 7 Q. There were also other things that were done at t.ie 3 plant? 3 MS. PARSONS: Objection. 10 MR. REtIDIIU: Objection. 11 WITNESS* (Witness nodded.) 12 Q. (BY MR. WIHOFF) As far as the vinyl chloride 13 production was concerned, that portion of the Texas City 14 operations completexy shut down? 15 MS. PARSONS; Objection. 16 WITNESS; Correct. 17 Q. (BY MR. MINOFF) And do you recall when chat was? IS A. Prior to January of '69. 19 And -- 20 A. Or on or about January, I'a not that specific. 21 Q. And why do you focus in on January 1, 1959? 22 A. Because all the indications are that we entered 23 this requirements contract with Dow and there would be no 24 reason to believe that we would keep both running. 25 Q. Okay. You referred to it as a requirements RANKIN REPORTING & LEGAL VIDEO 23 UCC078576 Di-iPU A'i-iv---4.0it 1 contract. What does that mean to you? 2 A. That sienna that we don't have a right -- if we 3 enter a contract with a supplier for requirements, they uavu 4 the responsibility for our total requirements. We have no 5 right to 90 out and buy roiu somebody else. 5 Q. it's like an exclusive dealing arrangement? 7 A. That's correct. 9 Q. And that's for the benefit of both parties, is it 9 not? 10 AS. PARSONS: Objection. II WITNESS* It*3 -- X don't know how to answer 12 the question. 13 Q. (3Y MR. HIHOFF) Well, it assures Monsanto of a 14 source in this case; for instance, vinyl chloride? 15 MS. PARSONS: Objection. IS MR. RENDINI: Objection. 17 WITNESS: In tne cone of Monsanto, it puts who 13 responsibility on that supplier to supply us and be 19 responsible for supplying us. That's what it does for us. 20 Q. (BY MR. MINOP?) And you mentioned earlxer that you 21 first became aware of that contract in connection wxth your 22 purchase of chlorine; i3 that right? 23 A. Yes. 24 0. And -- 23 A. I was the buyer of chlorine at that point in time. RANKIN REPORTING > LEGAL VIDEO 29 UCC 078577 1 Q. Okay. The chlorine that you were buying wane the 2 Texas City vinyl chloride operations were still operating 3 vas all discontinued for the Texas City plant; *.o that 4 correct? r, A. No, I bought chlorine for other iocationo, too. s Q. AH right. So chlorine was used not just tor the 7 manufacture of vinyl chloride but for ocher purposes as 3 well? 9 MS. PARSONS: Objection. 10 WITNESS: That's correct. 11 Q. (3Y MR. MiNOFP) 3ut as far as the manufacture of 12 vinyl chloride was concerned, all of the chlorine purchased 13 for that purpose went to Texas City; is that right? 14 MS. PARSONS: Objection* 15 MR. RENDINI: Objection. 16 WITNESS: That's correct. 17 Q. <3Y MR. MINOFF) And did that change at ca! once 13 the Dow contract went into effect? 19 A* X@s it did. 20 Q. And how did it change? 21 A* Well, the -- the coioxaitments that we had with 22 suppliers to supply chlorine, that chlorine was redirected 23 to other locations, other Monsanto locations to be specific. 24 We shut down a plant here in St. Louas that made chlorine 25 and we shipped it to St. Louis. RANKIN REPORTING & LEGAL VIDEO 30 UCC 078578 w IJ ^ W. t * A, .*> _,> A fki'.l 1a_l>w ^ U/k 1 q. Okay. And you stopped buying chlorine for the 2 purposes of asking v*nyl chloride ail together? 3 A. Yes. 4 q. Didn't buy any chlorine for that purpose after the Dow contract went into effect? 6 MS. PARSONS: Objection. 7 WITNESS: That la correct. a Q. (3Y MR. MINOFF) And is it your understanding that 9 that was on or about January 1, 1969? 10 MS. PARSONS: Objection. 11 WITNESS: Yes. 12 Q. (BY MR. MiNOFF) Now, you have remained involved 13 with the purchase of raw materials for Monsanto from January 14 1, 1969, to today? 15 A. That is correct. 16 Q. Right? During that time, sir, are you aware -- i 17 not asking you if you're personally involved but are you 13 aware of Monsanto purchasing vinyl chloride from any source 19 other--than-Dow Chemical Company? 20 MS. PARSONS: Objection. 21 WITNESS; My investigation showed 1 was unable 22 to determine that we bought from anybody else. 23 0. CSY MR. MINOFF) Okay. What did your investigation 24 consist of? 25 A. Weil, i asked for whatever records were available. RANKIN REPORTING & LEGAL VIDEO 31 UCC 078579 1 There weren't any records available 1 talked to people who 2 had knowledge of it at one time and they could not g*ve me 3 any names. Ron 3u:nett did not have a memory of it. 4 Charlie Fullerton could not remember aver entering any and. 5 jo on. 5 0. Okay. What did Mr. 3urnett tell you exactly? 7 A. I asked him if we had ever bought any vinyl 3 chloride monomer from anybody but Dow once we entered the 9 contract* He says "I -- I doubt it.* He says *t don't 10 remember." 3ut he says "I don't remember ever having bougnt 11 anything from other than Dow. That was Dow's ia responsibility." 13 Q. now, Mr. Burnett, he was your supervisor? 14 A. That's correct. 15 0. in the corporate purchasing department? 1G A. That is correct. 17 Q. Tie was -- what was his title, manager of -- 13 A. Raw materials. 19 SU it aw materials. 20 MS. PARSONS: Objection. 21 Q. (BY MR. MIMOFF) And he worked as you did in St. 22 Louis? 23 A. That's correct. 24 Q. Do you know, sir, if the Individual plants located 25 throughout the country ever purchased chemicals from outside RANKIN REPORTING 1 LEGAL VIDEO 32 UCC 078580 1 sources directly rather than through the offices in 2 Louis? 3 A* X don't know how to anewor that. There are things 4 we delegate co then, to buy. 5 0. Okay. Well* iet's -- 6 A. But they're very specific; in other words, tfceto'i 7 things that we elect not to handle corporateiy that we G permit the plants to buy. 9 Q. including chemicals? 10 ;i3. PARSONS: Objection. 11 WITNESS: Yeah, sure. 12 0. (BY aR. aiNOFP) And how long has that been the 13 policy? 14 A. As far as 1 can remember. 15 0. Ac long as you've been involved in corporate 16 purchasing? 17 A. Sure. is Q. Since 1968? 19 MS. PARSONS: Objection. 20 WITNESS: Sure. 21 Q. (BY HR. MINOFP) Okay, And do you know whether or 22 not vinyl chloride fails into the category of those 23 chemicals which Monsanto corporate permits the individual24 pianta to purchase on their own? 25 MS. PARSONS: Objection. RANKIN REPORTING LEGAL VIDEO 33 UCC 078581 W 4 J 4 fci~~ *>**> **4. 1 WITNESS: i'a uure tnat they didn't petalt 2 them to buy vinyl chloride monomer on their own. 3 Q. {by MR. iiiKOFF) What aakes you iu;e oc that? 4 A. I talked to Larry Goraley and he ^a:d he made 3 .releases hut everything was not handled m St. Louis. G Q. And what caused you to speak to Hr. Gormiey? Why 7 did you contact hia? 3 A* As part of my investigation. X was told to 9 investigate thoroughly to find out, you know, what the 10 history, what did we buy from other people during this 11 period of time, you Know. And so i did what X was asked to 12 do. 13 Q. Okay. How did you iearn of Hr. Goimiey? 14 A. Weil, I knew Larry back in Springfield, X worked a* 15 the Springfieid plant. We were associates although ho 16 bought raw materials. But I knew Larry for a long time. 17 Q. Were you able to confirm through any other source 13 that any vinyl chloride purchased wou*d have been througn 19 St. Leuis-sather than through Springfield? 20 A. Well, I think that that's -- I assume that it was. 21 I did not ask that question everyone that X talked to. At 22 least I don't recall asking chat question. 23 Q. Okay. Now, Hr. Burnett told you that he did not 24 recall purchasing or Monsanto purchasing vinyl chloride from 25 any source other than Bow? RANKIN REPORTING & LEGAL VIDEO 34 UCC 078582 1 MS. PARSONS: Objection. 2 WITNESSi That's correct. 3 Q. (B MR. rfXNOFF) And who waii Mr. Fullerton? I 4 don't think you identified him. 5 A. Well, he was in that end of the division 6 responsible for marketing sales. 7 Q. Marketing and sales of what products? 3 A. Well, the things that we made and he was involved 9 as part of the liaison party in this whole Dow contract, as 10 1 recall. 11 0. He was also working in St. Louis? 12 A. Ves, he was. 13 Q. And what did you ask him and what did he tell you 14 about supplier of vinyl chloride to Monsanto? 15 A. I asked him essentially the same thing l asked Mr. 16 Burnett and he had no recollection of ever having bought off 17 anyone else but Dow -- 13 Q. He did recall -- 19 A* tr during the -- we're talking about now 1969. 20 Q. He did recall the Dow contract? 21 A. Oh, yes. 22 MS. PARSONSi Objection. 23 Q. (Y MR. MiHOFF) What was his involvement with 24 respect to that contract? 25 A. Hell, he represented the division. RANKIN REPORTING & LEGAL VIDEO UCC 078583 1 Q What division was chat? 7 A. Weil, that would he the polymer division, i thin* 3 the one you had referenced to. 4 o. Polymer and petrochemicals? 5 A. It might have even changed the name hut that 5 division that used the vinyl chloride monomer. 7 Q. And where is Mr. Fullerton located now? S A. Well, ne's retired from Monsanto. He's here \>i 3c. 9 Lours. He has -- he's in the financial advisory business. 10 0. And what about this other gentleman who you 11 mentioned. Jay Mackie? 12 A. John Mackie. 13 0* John Mackie? 14 A. Yeah. 1 called him, he's ctiii a Monsanto 15 employee. 16 Q. Okay. What does he do at Monsanto? 17 A. He's in the textile division. i*m not quite cure IS what hrs title is but it's a marketing function. 19 Q^t And why did you contact Mr. Mackie? 20 A. His name was given to me as possibly someone who 21 would have knowledge about thi3 particular agreement. 22 Q. Okay. So when you contacted him, what did he have 23 to say? 24 A. He said that his recollection was that it was a 25 requirements contract and Dow had full responsibility of 16 RANKI?1 REPORTING St LEGAL VIDEO ________________ nC_Q285_84___ w w 1 --li 1 supplying our need3. 2 Q. Did Hr. i-lackie have any personal involvement with 3 respect to that contract, if you know? 4 A.. No, I don't know. 5 Q. But he knew that or he said that it was a s requirements contract? 7 MS. PARSONS; Objection. 8 WITNESS: That's correct. 9 o. (BV MR. MINOPF) Was that your only source of 10 information to your previous statement that that's the type 11 of contract it was? 12 A. Everyone X talked to Implied that it was a 13 requirements contract. 14 Q, Ur. Pratte, while the Texas City vinyl chloride 15 operations were still going, do you know whether Monsanto 16 ever on any occasion acquired vinyl chloride from any 17 nonHonsanto source? IS MS. PARSONS: Objection. 19 WITNESS: My investigation did not surface 20 that va had purchased any from anybody. There was no 21 records, there was no evidence to point that we had 22 purchased from anybody although one has to assume that 23 somewhere along the line, our ?lant3 may not have run, had a 24 breakdown or something and we courd have gone out to buy *--> *v elsewhere. But there's no records on tnat, there's no RANKIN REPORTING & LEGAL VIDEO 37 UCC 078585 1 records to say who. 3ut j.t night have been minor anyway 2 ay thought. 3 Q, Is thia jusc speculation on your pare? 4 A. Well, you know, our plant was certainly a very S large plant. It could take care of more than we needed, c best X could determine. And jo our interest to sell our i Vinyl chloride monomer if we don't use it internally. And n we would not, my opinion, go out and buy just -- you know, i 9 would think that we would probably go out and cover the 10 shortages that may occur from time to time either because we 11 got into a plant turnaround or mechanical failure. This is 12 -- this is rather common in the chemical industry. 13 Q. That is when there are shortages of a particular 14 chamicai, that each chemical company might go outride of its 15 own organization to acquire that chemical. Is that a common 16 occurrence? 17 MR, RENDINI: Objection. 18 WITNESS: No, I'm saying if we're -- 19 MR. POWERS; Go ahead. 20 WITNESS: If we're a producer of a cnemicai 21 and we're supplying ourselves or even somebody else and our 22 plant goes down, the logic is we have responsibility to go 23 out and cover our needs so we don't shut our plant down 24 because of some of this raw material is not available, we 25 go out and find it somewhere1 s else. And so we do that from RANKIN REPORTING & LEGAL VIDEO 33 UCC 078586 1 time to time when those incidents occui 2 So my logic aayj that, yean, over the period of 3 time that we made stuff at Texas City, there were times chat 4 we had to go out and get material elsewhere because of 3 breakdowns or some some reason* 6 0* (BY MR. aiNOPP) But you don't know of any specific 7 instances where that occurred? s A. No, because all of my investigation showed no 9 evidence of any records on this subject* 10 Q. So the testimony that you just gave is just based 11 on your work experience at Monsanto and your general 12 experience regarding the chemical industry -- 13 MS. PARSO!JS; Objection* 14 MR. RENDItTl: Objection. 15 Q. (BY MR. J41N0FF) -- not on any specific facts? 16 A* Well, I'm not sure I understand your question. 17 Q. That is your testimony that that's a coiamon 13 occurrence when, for instance, a plant that produces a 19 material 59 bo used shuts down for some reason, that the 20 company might go elsewhere to take care of any shortages 21 Chat might occur -- 22 A. Sure* 23 MS. PARSONS: Objection. 24 WITNESSi Sure* 25 MR. RENDINI: Objection. RANKIN REPORTING & LEGAL VIDEO 3? UCC 078587 1 Q (BY MR. MINOFF) -- you Just know that froa you;, 2 experience at Monsanto? 3 M3. PARSONS: Objection? 4 WITNESS; Yet. 5 0, (3Y MR. MINGFF) And that happens with respect to 5 -- oc that that might happen with respect to any chewicai 7 that Monsanto supplies to itself? Q MS. PARSONS* Objection# 9 WITNESS: Yes. 10 MR. RENDINI; Objection. 11 0. (BY MR. aiNOFT) Based on your experience, sir, are 12 you able to estimate what percentage of Monsanto vinyl 13 chloride was used at the Springfield plant as opposed to 14 noatlousanto vinyl chloride before Texas City shut down? 15 MS. PARSONS; Objection. 15 MR. RESIDIN'!: Objection. 17 WITNESS; I would say it had to be uiinxaai but 13 X couldn't give you any real hard numbers. They were not 19 available.^ 20 Q, (BY MR. MiNOFF) Okay. Aside from speaking to the 21 four individuals that you mentioned, consulting with the 22 legal department of Monsanto and speaking with Ann C^ar* 23 i guess s^e would be a fifth individual -- and receiving 24 Exhibit No. 3 from Miss Clark and reviewing it, did you do 25 anything at arl to investigate the supply of vinyl cnioride RANKIN REPORTING & LEGAL VIDEO 40 UCC 078588 1 to Monsanto in preparing for this deposition today? 2 A* 1 -- everything i did went to dead end so X didn't 3 go farther* So if i'd have -- if 1 had had found a lead, 4 I'd have pursued it. But i didn't find any additional. ^eod_ rHi chat wouid -- i found no evidence to suggest that anything different. 7 Q. Okay. Aside from this document that you handed me, 3 Exhibit -- today. Exhibit no. 3 -- 9 A. Uh-huh. 10 Q. -- have you reviewed any documents in preparing for 11 this deposition? 12 A. No, I've seen no documents* 13 0. Weil, I've got some documents for you. Let me show 14 you, first of ail -- 15 (Plaintiff1s Exhibit No. 5 is marked.) 16 0. Sir, I'm showing you Exhibit Mo. 5 which just for 17 your information I'll tell you was furnished to us by 18 Monsanto back in May of 1990. I'd like to show this to you 19 now and have you take a look at it, and then i'll ask you if 20 you've ever seen that document before. Have you seen chat 21 document before, sir? 22 A. No, never have. 23 MR. HINOP?s Let's go off the record for a 24 second 25 (Discussion off the record. Plaintiff's RANKIN REPORTING & LEGAL VIDEO 41 UCC 078589 1 Exhibit No. $ is racked.) 2 MR, MiNOFF: And ^uiit oi the record# what'j 3 in here? This includes a Monsanto memo dated February 9, 4 196 S. 5 i*i>. PARSONS: Keith# could you aiao identify 6 the exhibit number from the Nelson exhibit? 7 MR. xllNOFF: Oh# and this was Exhibit No. 11 % to the Terry Nelson depo. The next one was at Exhibit No. 9 10 to tne Nelson depo which was a memo dated June 13# 1573# 10 also to Monsanto. The next one was Exhibit 21 to Terry 11 Nelson which is -- that appears to be a Monsanto memo# it 12 doesn't say Monsanto on it, dated June 7# I960. Next is .13 Exhibit No. 9 from Terry Nelson's deposition# a Monsanto 14 memorandua dated October 24# 1968. Next is Exhibit Mo. 7 15 1013 Terry Nelson# a Monsanto memo dated December 10# 1071. IS Next io an exhibit from Robert Bourget# liir 17 deposition# an exhibit from his Deposition Exhibit Me. 4. 13 The first page for identification is a letter from Dow 15 Chemical to Monsanto dated December 10, 1973. And then 20 finally we have what was Exhibit No. 5 to Terry Nelson's 21 deposition and Exhibit No. 2 to Mr. Bourget's deposition 22 which ia a memorandum from Monsanto dated February 23# 1974. 23 Okay, Sir# during the break you had an opportunity 24 to go through all of the documents included in Exhibit Mo. 25 6# correct? RANKIN REPORTING & LEGAL VIDEO 42 UCC 078590 1 A. Yes. 2 Q. And you to*d ae off the record just now that before 3 today you don't recarl seeing any of these documents; i.i 4 that right? 5 A. That's correct. 5 Q. Okay. In reviewing these documents today# zie, was 7 there anytning in them that you read to refresh your 0 recollection about anything you discovered in your 9 investigation about supply of vinyl chloride to Monsanto 10 from otner sources? 11 MR. RENDINI; Objection. 12 ms. parsonsi Objection. 13 WITNESS; The implication theie is that from 14 time to time the Springfield plant did acquire material 13 elsewhere hut minor quantities at best. 18 Q. (BY MR. HINOFF) Okay. And what led you to that 17 j.ast conclusion? IS A. Well/ the amount of paper you're talking about, i 19 mean ..this^pne or two cars from -- 20 Q, Okay. 3o you're assuming/ is it fair co say, that 21 there aren't anymore documents other than theue that rebate 22 to that subject area? 23 A. X$ah, well, I'm sure that you're 24 MS. PARSONS; Objection. 25 hr. RSNOinis Objection. RANKIN REPORTING h TiEGAI. VIDSO 43 UCC 078591 1 WITNESS; The investigation was thorough in 2 this particular instance. 3 Q, (BY MR. MINCFF) Okay. I want to ank you, ait, 4 about some or the nLnes that I've seen on these and other 5 documents, people who apparently were headquartered in the 6 St. Louis office. 7 A. X have to comment that that one there you showed 8 me, L know the man, Clarence Doucette. He's been dead 20 9 years at least. 10 0. Zou're referring to Exhibit No. 5, the 1956 memo? 11 A. Yaah, yeah. 12 Q. Hr* C.L. Doucette? 13 A. Clarence, yea, X knew the man. 14 Q. Who was he at Monsanto? 15 A. He worked at the Springfield, Mass., plant in 16 distribution. 17 Q. Okay. He was never rn St. Louis? is that correct? 13 A. Mot to ay knowledge. 19 Qfcay. Do you know any of the other names on 20 Exhibit No. 5, the -- any of the names listed under ce? 21 A. Yea, 1 do, yes, X do. John Duncan, the second name 22 there, be hired me -- well, he hired me into purchasing X 23 should sag* 24 0. Let me ask the question a different way. Are there 25 any people there who you know worked out of St. Louis at RANKIN REPORTING & LEGAL VIDEO 44 UCC 078592 1 opposed to Springfield? 2 A. Ai Urban who id now dead did who was plant manager 3 ended up here in Sc. Louis at one time. 4 Q, Anyone else? 5 A* x don't recognize any other names. 5 Q. Ok ay. rlho was the other fellow who you said was m 7 Springfield? 3 A. John Duncan. 9 Q. Do you Know if Mr. Duncan is still auve? 10 A. I don't know, i last saw John in 19 maybe 65. 11 it's over 25 years ago. 12 0. '-Then you were still in Springfield? 13 A. 1 was here -- no, X was here when 1 saw him. 14 0. Did you see him -- IS A. He came to St. Louis one time and 1 saw him. x 1G don't know anything aoout the whereabouts. 17 Q. You mentioned Hr. Burnett. 18 A. Ron Burnett, yes, Mr. Burnett. 39 0* tfas Ron Burnett your supervisor up until the time 20 that he retired from the company? 21 A. Essentially for ali the years. 22 Q. When was that? 23 A. Kell, I came into corporate purchasing in about `63 24 and he was my boss. He brought ma into corporate purchasing 25 and I think he retired maybe eight years ago, nine, eight, RANKIH REPORTING LEGAL VIDEO 45 UCC 078593 1 nine years ago would be ay guess. 2 Q, And he st-i* r-*ves in Sc. Louis? 3 A, Re stxi.1 ,,ives in 5t* Lou*s. 4 Q. I've got a fellow named R.;f. ISueker Do you know 5 h im? 6 A. 1 know the name* I think he was in charge of 7 transportation back in Springfield but -- 3 Q. What about a Mr. R.3. Dunlop? 9 A. Roland Dunlop, yeah, Roland was in corporate 10 distribution here. !7e retired maybe five, six years ago, 11 seven years ago* 12 Q* And what is corporate distribution? what do they 13 do? 14 A. Weil, they arrange for railcar shipments and things 15 like that. They contract for outside warehousing. They 15 negotiate with the railroads for itself. 17 2* And what was Mr. Dunlop's position within that 13 division? 19 A, U$ finally became director of distribution Before 20 retiring. 21 0* Okay* And he retired how long ago? 22 A* Z *n guessing here. I'm guessing at least Uve 23 years. ^ 24 Q. And do you know i he's still alive? .35 A. Oh, yes -- well, I assume he's alive. Yeah, i've PASSIM REPORT*MG u LEGAL VIDEO 45 UCC 078594 ww'A faf' 'J --1 W * .W 1 jeen his within the -.a-c couple years. 2 Q. Do you know where he lives? -Ji A. No, St. Louis somewhere'*. 4 2. what about J.N. Chancy, Does that name t.ng a ocrl 3 with you? 6 A, Mo, no. 7 Cj. !?ow about H.T. Hale? 3 A. Mo. 9 Q. How about R.O. wesseis? 10 A. yeah, the name rings a bell but 1 haven't seen him 11 in eight years or oo. 12 C. Okay. What did he do at Monsanto? 13 A. He was a transportation manager. 14 Q. in St. Louis? 15 A. xn St. Louis, yeah. 15 Q. Do you know where he is today? 17 A Mo IS Q. Do you know if he's in St. Louis area? 19 U I,have no knowledge where he is. 20 Q. Bow about a gentleman named Herbert Parum? 21 A. Herb Parum, yes, he worked -- he was Bon Burnett'^ 22 boas. 23 Q. So he was -- 24 A. Director of raw materials. We have more than one 25 director. RANKIN REPORTING & LEGAL VIDEO 47 UCC 078595 1 Q. Did he work with -- at the uame time as Carl "vanu? 2 A. Yes. 3 Q. They're on the .same lever? 4 A. NOf Call was the boss, Herb waa underneath him, Ron 5 was underneath him and 1 was way down at the bottom. 5 Q. But this is a long time ago? 7 A. it's a long time ago, right. 3 Q. And do you know when iir. Par urn left the company? 9 A. Mo, i don't, l think he ^eft before Son did. 10 0* Du you know if he's still alive? 11 A. The last I heard he's alive. 12 0. Do you know where he lives? 13 A. 1 teiiSve he's in Hannibal, Missouri. 14 Q. What about a gentleman named A.J. Frankei? 15 A. Alan Frankel, yes. 15 Q, Who was Mr. Frankel? 17. A. Tie was a manager of raw materials. 19 Q. Did you work with him m that division? 19 Kt At one time I worked with him briefly. He was ny 20 boss at one time. 21 0* Okay. And is he still with the company? 22 A. No, he's retired. 23 Q. Qpw lung ago? 24 A. Again 1 -- I'm guessing 19S5ish. 25 0. Okay. Do you know where he's now living? RAMKIN REPORTING & LEGAL VIDEO 43 UCC 078596 uOim*' u . MA~n*wi>U <;. cur 1 A* *!e lives in St. Louis area. 2 0- What about R.i. Lait? 3 A. Don't know the man* 4 0- What about G.R. Sido, S-i-d-o, Sido? 5 A, i'eah, Bob Sido X think. 6 o. And where did he work at Monsanto? 7 A. He worked in distribution. 1 think he was in & .Labeling. Bob Sido, I think he -- hie function was 9 labeling 10 0. Same area as Ur. Dunlop? 11 A* He worked m the same department. 12 Q. He was involved in labeling? 13 A. Labeling. 14 Q. What does that mean? 15 A. Weil, you know, there are laws that say every 16 package has to have a certain, you know, information on it* 17 And he was the one that care -- he cared for making ^ure 13 that Monsanto's packages contained the right information, 19 they met the government regulations, et cetera. 20 Q. Warnings and so forth? 21 A* Warning labels, yes. 22 Q. What about A.V. Laakso with two a's? 23 A. Don't know, don't know Laakso. 24 Q. How about a C.F. Smith? 25 A. Charlie Smith, Springfield, Massachusetts. He was RANK IN R2P0RTZ3G & LEGAL VIDEO 49 UCC 078597 1 the -- he was the purchasing agent there after Duncan 1 2 think. 3 0. X gather you don't Know where he is now? 4 A. Larry told me he was living in Connecticut and 5 didn't have good health. I asked about it. 6 0. Finaliyf what about a Q.V. Eierwort? 7 A. The name rings a bell but 1 don't -- don't know the 8 man, can't -- 9 0. Okay. Sir. did you ever in your experience at 10 Monsanto ever get involved in any way In requirements 11 contracts, that is seeing that they were carried out or the 12 operation of a requirements contract? 13 MS. PARSONS: Objection. 14 WITNESS: Well, I've had requirement contract 15 -- I've negotiated contracts, requirement contracts. 15 0. (B tin, .4IN0TF) Okay, meaning requirement 17 contracts for Monsanto's requirements? 10 A. Sure. 19 Okay. And what types of requirement contractu were 20 you involved in with respect to what chemicals or other 21 goods? 22 A. Well, chlorine, caustic soda, soda ash, you know, 23 one of those along the line would be a requirements 24 contract; in other words, you commit your total supply to a 25 supplier. Generally you say, well, my requirements are, as RANKIN REPORTING fi LEGAL VIDEO DO ____ UCC 078598 1 an example# X need 20,000 tona of camething, okay. And 2 would have a contract that tney would be tne supplier, uay, 3 15 to 32/000 tons, That's what the contract woui-d say and 4 he woucd gat the supply* I would have no other contracts. 5 Q. The requirement contractu that you have oeen 6 involved in, are they always exclusive; that is, do they 7 always restrict Monsanto from purchasing that product from 8 cojzteoody else? 9 A* if it's a requirements contract, yes. 10 2. Like by definition that's one of the clauses -- 11 A. Statement* 12 Q. -- in the contract, statements in the contract? 13 A, Couxd be a statement* But I guess you could go 14 further and say if it's in excess of your requirements, the 15 reason would be a -- your logic would say that's a 16 requirements contract; in other words, you can't -- Lf you 17 have a commitment for so many pounds of stuff, you can't go 13 out and buy something else from somebody else* That would 19 be unethical# my opinion, okay. 20 0* So it may or may not say it in the contract? 21 A. That's right, could be implied* 22 Q* But in your opinion, it's something chat's 23 generally .ot done when there's that type of contract An 24 force? 25 A. That's right, at Monsanto's not done. RAI1KIN REPORTING ik LEGAL VIDEO 51 UCC 078599 1 Q Do you know, sir, or are you aware of any instances, 2 in which a supplier was not able cor whatever reason to 3 fulfill Monsanto's needs under a requirements contract? 4 A. Do 1 know of an instance? Repeat that question, 5 please S Q. Do you have any instances where a supplier who had 7 a requirements contract with Monsanto was not aDie for 0 whatever reason to supply Monsanto with the product? 3 A. It happens* 10 q. Okay* And what -- what did or what does Monsanto 11 do in those instances? 12 A*. We put the responsibility on that supplier to go 13 out and secure material. And, you know, it's how -- he*s 14 responsible. If it coots him more money, he has to come a*.15 and pay for it* 15 Q. But he has to locate it? 17 A. He has to .Locate it. 13 Q. He has to arrange for it to be shipped? 19 4,t U-huh. 20 Q* Typically, do these contractu require tne seller to 21 ship the product to tne Monsanto facility wnere it's going 22 to be used? 23 A. d have to cay yes* 24 0. As opposed to Monsanto, for instance, going to tne 25 source and taking the product --; RANKIN REPORTING & LEGAL VIDEO 52 UCC 078600 1 A No 2 Q. -- itself, and delivering it? 3 A. I would think the supplier would arrange for a*x 4 tiie shipping responeibix i.ty 3 Q OK ay. 5 MS. PARSONS: Just want to register a *7 objection co the extent that we're dealing with products s other chan the products that Mr* Pratte has addressed in his 9 career at Monsanto. 10 :iR, MINOFF: night, and we clearly are because 11 Z baiieve Mr. Pratte has already testified that aside from 12 the Dow contract, ae knows of no other arrangements between 13 Monsanto and any other supplier for vinyl chloride. 14 Q. is that fair? 15 A.. that's correct. 15 Q. VIheth er they be contracts or some less rot max 17 arrangoment; is that right? 13 A. i have no -- yeah, the answer's yes. 19 d* lour investigation uncovered no information as to 20 that? 21 MS. PARSONS: Objection. 22 WITNESS: No, it didn't. 23 ^ MR* RENDIMI: Objection. 24 WITNESS: My investigation showed that we had 25 no agreements -- other agreements other than those that we RANKIN REPORTING S LEGAL VIDEO 53 UCC 078601 1 talked about/ the Dow agreement. 2 G. (BY MR. MINOFF) in your investigation did you *nu 3 out any information about Mon&anto ever acquired vinyi. 4 ci'uyi*ue from otner nonHoncanto sources through a pooling 5 arrangement? Do you know what a pooling arrangement iu? 6 HS* PARSONS: Objection* 7 MR. REMDINI; Objection* 3 WITNESSi Would you define a pooling? 9 0. (BY HR. H1NOPF) Weil, let's u*e a different term. 10 through an exchange agreement as where Monsanto would 11 acquire vinyl chloride from a company and, in return, supply 12 chat company with soae other product* 13 HS* PARSONS: Objection* 14 MR. RENDXNi: Objection. 15 WITNESS: Would you rephrase that question 15 again? I loot you. 17 Q. in par to* (3Y MR. MINCFF) Okay. Well, let's take it in two 19 A* Okay. 20 Q. Are you aware from your experience at Monsanto of 21 any practice where Monsanto exchanges a cneaicai with 22 another company and gets another chemical in return? 23 ^ MS. PARSONS a Objection. 24 WITNESS: The came chemica*, yes. 25 G. (BY MR. H1N0FF) No* The same chemical? RANKIN REPORTING & LEGAL VIDEO 54 ucc 078602 1 A* Well/ we have exchanges; ;n other words, I've coon 2 cases where Monsanto have supplied material and taken some 3 material hack somewhere else, she came Kind o material. 4 Q. And is there any special nomenclature for that 3 within Monsanto? 6 A. Just exchange agreements. 7 Q. And did you become aware through your invest-.gatiou 8 that there were any such exchange agreements between 9 Monsanto and any other company involving vinyl chloride? 10 MS. PARSONSi Objection. 11 WITNESSj 1 was unable to detect any such 12 ar c anyemen fes. 13 Q. (3Y MR. MXNOFS*) Do you know, sir, of other 14 arrangements that Monsanto has had with other companies in 15 the past where Monsanto supplies the company with, say, 16 chemical A and receives in return from that company chemical 17 Dr a different chemical? 18 MR. RENDINI: Objection. 19 MS. PARSONS; Objection. 20 WITNESS: No, I -- internationally we do ror.e 21 bartering. I'm familiar with come of that going on. We've 22 taken polish hams for something else, you know, that kind of 23 thing butand it is by definition a chemical, whether it 24 be meat or not. 73ut I don't -- I don't recall any specific 25 of exchanges that we have. RANKIN REPORTING 4 I.SGAL VIDEO 55 UCC 078603 1 MR. MiNOFF: Off the record for a second. 2 (Discussion off the record.) 3 Q, X take it fro your testimony, air, that you did 4 not become aware of any such arrangements; between Monsanto 5 and any other company which involved vinyi ciuoride? 5 MS, PARSONS; Objection. 7 WITNESS: That's correct. o Q. (B MR. M1NOPP) Do you know, sir, rf there was any 9 time dating which the Dow requirements contract was in 13 effect when Dow was not able for whatever reason to fulfill 11 Monsanto's needs for vinyl chloride? 12 MS. PARSONS: Objection. 13 WITNESSj No, I don't have any evidence in 14 that 15 0. (B'f MR* MINOPF) Okay. Is it fair to say, sir, 16 that as far as you're able to determine, while that 17 agreement was in effect that all of the vinyl chloride IS acquired by Monsanto was acquired from Dow Chemical Company? 19 MS PARSONS: Objection. 20 WITNESS: 'Would you rephrase the question? 21 MR. RENDINI; objection. 22 MR. MINOPF: Let me just have it read back. 23 _ (The question was read by the reporter.) 24 WITNESS: My investigation did not show that 25 there vac any other supplier. So by that reasoning, the RANKIN REPORTING & LEGAL VIDEO 55 UCC 078604 1 answer is yes 2 MS. PARSONS: Same objection. 3 Qm (BY MR. MiHOFF) Okay, How, the Texas City plant 4 shut down in 1968 was it? S A. i don't know, i can't remember. MS. PARSONS: objection. 7 Q, {B'jf HR. MZNOFF) Do you know whether oc not 8 Monsanto used any of its own vinyl chloride after the p.ant o shut down, that is any vinyl chloride that night have been 10 stored or warehoused in some way? 11 A. L don't know that. 12 Q. Do you know a J.8. Bentley, sic? 13 A. No, I don't. 14 3 What about an R. Rosenberg? These wou.d have been 15 Monsanto employees. 1G A. Ho, I don't, don't know cither one of those names. 17 Q. Was there one person who was in charge of 13 administering the Dow contract out of St. Louis? 19 At I would say it had to be Ron Burnett. 20 Q. Okay. Why would you say it would have to be him? 21 A. Well, he was the one that negotiated the contract. 22 Qm Okay. And, therefore, he wouid have been the 23 person whq^followed up with the administration of it? 24 A. Sure, sure. 25 Q. Did you talk to Mr. Burnett about that when you RANKIN REPORTING 6 LEGAL VIDEO 57 UCC 078605 1 contacted him? 2 A. NO. 3 Q. Did I ask you whether you knew a person named ::.r. 4 Colette? 5 A*. Ed Ceiette, no, you didn't ask me that. 6 0. Do you know Mr. Ceiette? 7 A. yes. 3 Q. And who was he? 9 A. Well, I'm not sure where he was at that time Out he 10 -- plant manager in the 1 SQs at the Springfield plant. 11 Q. Was he previously in St. Louis? 12 A. He spent time in St. Louis aa well as Europe. 13 Q. Okay. What did he do while he was in St. Louis? 14 A. i'a -- i believe he was in production planning, 15 manufacturing and production planning is I believe where he 16. was. 17 Q. So he was a production person as opposed to, say, a 13 purchasing or transportation or distribution person? 19 A* Bight, but he could have had responsibility for 20 transportation for a division, l don't know that. 21 Q. Which division would that have been? 22 A* For a division and, obviously, if it's -- well -- 23 Q. Do you know, first of all, Mr. Ceiette doesn't work 24 for Monsanto any longer? 25 A. I think he retired. RANKIN REPORTING i LEGAL VIDEO 53 UCC 078606 1 0 Do you know now iong ago? 2 A, Sd Ceiette, I'm -- I think ho retired within the 3 last five years, 4 Q. Do you know where na lives now? 5 A* No. Me last was in Springfield, Hass. C 0. Okay. Sir, I'd iike to show you again Exhibit no, 7 1 which is the notice of deposition, the various matters 3 listed on it that you were to testify to today. 9 A. Uh-huh. 10 0- Looking at Item No. 1 on page 2, i've asked you 11 3one things about sources of supply of vinyl chloride 12 monomer 13 A. Uh-huh. 14 0- la it fair to say that through your testimony 13 today, you've exhausted all of your knowledge on that topic? 16 MS. PARSONS: Objection. 17 Q. (OY HR. MXNOFF) That is the area listed as Sxhioic IS No. 1, i.3 there anything else that you can tell me with 19 regard to.that? 20 ns. PARSONS; Objection. 21 WITNESS: NO. 22 Q. {BY MR. MINOFF) Nothing else? 23 A. tip thing else that comet to mind. 24 Q. What about Item No. 2? 25 *1S. PARSONS; Same objection. RANKIN REPORTING & LEGAL VIDEO 39 UCC 078607 Oi'ur J 1 IjK-"Ax xuJ `a,tii; a 1 Q. (BY MR* MINOFF) And yust tai^Q some t*-.e to read 2 to yourself before you answer* 3 A. Mo on 2, 4 0. What about \'o. 3? 5 A* Weil, now* does that include the stuff you showed 6 oe today? 7 MS PARSONS: Saae objection* 3 0- (BY MR. MINOFF) Let me take a look. What i \n 9 asking you, sir, xu have you already testified as to 10 everything that you knew when you walked in here? XI MS. PARSONSr Objection. 12 Q. (BY HR. M1NOFF) As to now we're talking about -- 13 A. Mo. 3? 14 Q. -- itea No. 3. 13 MS. PARSONS: objection. 16 HR. RENDINI: Objection. 17 WITNESS* Yes. 13 Q. (BY MR. MiNOFF) Okay. Would the saae -- would 19 your -ansvee be the same, sir, with respect to items 4 20 through 7? 21 MS. PARSONS: Saae objection. 22 Q. (3Y HR. iUNOFF) That is what you've already 23 testified -to everything that you know? 24 MS. PARSONS: Objection. 25 HR. RENOINIi Objection. RANKIN REPORTING & LEGAL VIDEO 60 UCC 078608 1 WITNESS: Tnrough 7 I guess cho snswe. is ^ es, 2 well, the answer is yes. I've essentially told you 3 everything that i know. 4 0. (3Y MR. MIMOFF) Okay. Are there any other 5 individuals^ r.*r, who you did not speak to who you feel c flight be able to supply some information as to any of tho^e 7 seven matters that you just reviewed? 3 MS. PARSONS: Objection. 3 WITNESS: l don't believe so. 10 Q. (3Y HR. MINOFF) Okay. Would it help you to look 11 at documents that 1 just handed you today, that *s the ones 12 included in Exhibit 6, to determine whether or not there 13 might be other people with information? 14 iiS. PARSONS: Objection. 13 WITNESS: i *ooked at the names and I, you 16 know, I really can't -- it's so long ago that it's -- aiy 17 assumption Is that they couldn't remember any better than I 13 can. 13 HR. MINOFFs Off the record. 20 (Discussion off the record.) 21 HR. MIN0F7: I don't have any further 22 questions for you, i-u. Pratte, thank you. 23 ,, WITNESS: Okay. 24 HR. MINOFF: But these folks might. 25 CROSS-EXAM! NATION RANKIN REPORTING 6 LEGAL VIDEO 61 UCC 078609 1 BY MS. PARSONS; 2 Q. Just a couple of. Mr. Platte, ay name iz Sue 3 Parsons and 1 represent Dow Chemical and Union Carbide. 1 4 just nave a couple brief questions with regard to your 5 personal knowledge of the Dow contract. Your personal 5 knowledge cone- from the fact that you were responsible for 7 purchasing chlorine; is that correct? 3 A. That is correct. 9 0. And your testimony that the Dow contract began in 10 1359 cones from the fact that you were required to find 11 other sources for the chlorine because Dow now came into the 12 picture; ia that correct? 13 A. Yes, C had to move the chlorine to other locations. 14 Q. And based on your personal knowledge, your 1 r Investigation as a representative of Monsanto, it is your 15 testimony that the Dow contract began in 1969/ is tnat 17 correct? 10 A. That's correct. 19 And then referring to Exhibit -- what was that 20 exhibit number? Just referring to Exhibit No. 3 -- 21 A. Uh-Uuh. 22 Q. -- where it has entries under items, 2, 3 and 4 23 referring_to a contract dated 9/13/66, it*s your testimony 24 that chat would be incorrect based on everything that you 25 know today; is that correct? RANKIN REPORTING 5 LEGAL VIDEO 62 UCC 078610 1 A. My ausuaptxon of that, that that date didn't match 2 anything and that the date was wrong. 3 Q* Okay. To your Knowledge, you have never heard of a 4 Dow contract tnat would have been in effect with Monsanto -n 5 1966; is that correct? 6 A. No. 7 MR. MiNOFR: Objection to form. 8 Q, <3Y MS. PARSONS) That is correct? 9 A. That is correct. 1C MS. PARSONS: That * c all X have. 11 CROSS-EXAMINATION 12 EY MR. RENDINI; 13 Q, Mr. Pratte, I*m Joseph Rendini and I represent B.F. 14 Goodrich. I belreve you said on direct examination that 15 ocher than the Indian Orchard plant in Springflerc, no 16 Monsanto prant was using VCM as part of its production 17 process during the period that's relevant to this complaint, 18 which is from 1947 to 1974? is that correct? 19 A* That is correct. 20 Q. Do you know during that time period what or how 21 much VCM the Indian Orchard plant would consume on an annual 22 basis? 23 A. The best information I have is about 200,000,000 24 pounds. 25 Q. And what*3 that based upon? RANKIN REPORTING & I,FCAL VrDEO 63 UCC 078611 1 A The amount of chlorine that is involved, people 2 talked to. 3 0. Do you have any knowledge as to what toe -- what 4 the amount of VCM covered by the Dow contract was? 5 A, it -- the paper says was up to 250,000,000 pounds. 5 It would have covered that high. 7 3. So that 250,000,000 pounds would have covered the 8 totai amount of the total VCM requirements of the Indian 9 Orchard plant, would it not? 10 A. To my knowledge, yea. 11 Q. Do you know what the annual production of the Texas 12 City plant was up to the time of its closing? 13 A. MO. 14 3* Do you know If it was greater than 200,000,000 15 pounds per year? 16. A. That's the impression i received, that it was 17 greater than a 200,000,000 pound plant and, yeah, that's the IS information I got. 19 Q+ And what's that information based upon? 20 A. Conversations with people. 21 Q. And I understand -- understood your direct 22 examination testimony to be that prior to the shutting down 23 of the ?exs City plant, you've had no information on any 24 VCM coming into the Indian Orchard plant from nonMonsanco 25 sources? is that correct? RANKIN REPORTING 6 LEGAL VIDEO 64 UCC_ 078612 1 A* That's cOiifcct. 2 Q. Right. After the closing of tae Texas City plant 3 and after the Dow contract went .nto effect, which was about 4 tae same time as i understand, correct -- 5 A. Ves. A q. -- I also understand your direct testimony to be 7 that you have no information of any VCti coming unto the 3 Indian Orchard plant from nonDow sources; is that correct? 9 A. That's correct. 10 0* So to the best of your knowledge as a result of 11 your investigation, ail of the VCft being used at the Indian 12 Orchard piant either came from Monsanto, itself, or from 13 Dow; is that correct? 14 MS. PARSONS: Objection. 15 WITNESS: Let*3 put it this way here, Dow had 16 the responsibility to supply. And beyond that I don't know. 17 Q. (BE MR. RENDINI) Okay. So let me rephrase the 18 question to state that during the relevant time period, the 19 responsibility for furnishing VCM to the Indian Orchard 20 piant was either Monsanto's up to the time of the Texas City 21 closing or after that it was Dow's; is that correct? 22 A. That's correct. 23 0* At some point it became the case that Indian 24 Orchard stopped using VCil; isn't that correct? 25 A. X don't believe they use it today. 65 RANKIN REPORTING 6 LEGAL VIDEO UCC 078613 1 Q* So at some point they nad to stop us:n.] it, rignt? 2 A. Yeah. 3 Q. So after Indian Orchard stopped using VCM, do you 4 know if any other Monsanto facilities continued to uue VC*-* 5 for any purpose? *3 A. No, I don't know of any other. 7 MR. RENDINI: I don't have anything further. 3 REDIRECT EXAMINATION 9 BY MR. MINOFF: 10 Q. Mr. Pratte, I just have a couple more follow-up 11 questions with respect to Exhibit Mo. 3. Do you nave that 12 in front of you? There you go. 13 A. 1 have a copy nor a -- i have the original. 14 0- Okay. Maybe we should have marked the original 15 one. Okay. Looking at Item No. 1, it says the third xino IS down effective date. You see that? 17 A. Uh-huh. IS Q. And it says next to that 19660913 and that vou.ti 19 correspond,to a date of September 13, 1966, correct? 20 MS. PARSOM3: Objection, that is -- chat's 21 what the date is. 22 MR. REHDINi: What line? Excuse me, what 23 line? okay* 24 MR. iiiMOFF; The third line down Item Mo. 1. 25 MS. PARSONS: Again I'm going to object RANKIN REPORTING a LEGAL VIDEO 56 UCC 078614 1 because he did not tbit document and has no 2 knowledge as to the document. The document speaks for 3 Itself. A I4R, RENDINIs Some objection. 5 Q. (BY fXR. MINOPS*) Now, it was your testimony eat-ier 6 and in response to Miss Parsons that you believe that taut 7 date was in error; is that correct? 3 A. Well, down beiow when I read the item 1, * didn't 9 catch the one on the top when it said 9/13/66 the Itea 2. 10 Q. Where does it say that? 11 A. night here. 1? 0. In the narrative portion? 13 A. in the narrative portion. 14 Q. Correct. IS A. I looked at that and i says, well, joes, this as IS they're talking about the account that goes into effect on. 17 1/1/G9. I says, hell, that's 3 years -- well, 2 1/2 years 18 ahead of time and they're talking about an amendment. a 19 asauaed it-waa the wrong date. 20 Q. Okay. 21 A. I thought it wouj.d be closer to the starting date. 22 Q. Okay. So that's what led you to conclude that the 23 September-13, 1966, date must have been a mistake? 24 A. That's -- yeah, that's what I thought, that's what 25 led me to believe it was a typo* RANKIN RSPORTiSG G LEGAL VIDEO D/ UCC 078615 1 Q. Okay* Why don't we now i.ook at item No. 2, ueeoad 2 line where It Jay-i Signature date* 3 A. uh-huh. 4 Q. And that appears to indicate September 14/ 1966. . mJ MS. PARSONS: Objection.' 6 WITNESS: Interpretation* 1 0. (BY MR. WINOFF) Weil, that's -- it says 13G60D147 3 ilS. PARSONS* Objection. 9 WITNESS: Yeah* that's the interpretation i -- 10 0. (BY MR. MIHOST) Okay. And it's your belief with 11 respect to that that that date is also *n error? 12 A. X didn't look at -- l was .Looking at the body here* 13 This is the first time I've really focused on th*s 14 particular, you know, dating system so I really -- tl-ns -- i 15 really wasn't focusing on that. I focused on the date 9/13. 15 Q. Okay. But you see now that that is a 1S66 date 17 which appears at various places on this document under item IS Ho* 1 as well as ID A Right# X see the numbers* 20 MS. PARSONS: Objection. 21 WITNESS: I see the numbers and l can put that 22 kind of an interpretation on it. 23 0* tY MR. MX MOPE) And by that, you mean that you're 24 interpreting that those numbers such as 19660914 mean a dace 25 of September 14, 1966? RANKIW REPORTING & LEGAL VIDEO 58 UCC 078616 wU- -- * ^ v... ^ w* . 1 MS. PARSONS; Objection. *> 4. MR. RENDlUr: Objection. 3 Q. (9Y MR, aiNQFF} That*3 what you wean when you oay 4 your interpretation of it? 5 M3. PARSONSi Objection. 6 MR. REND1WI: Objection. 7 WITNESS: Yec. 3 Q. (BY MR. UINOPP) What about the last -- l*s sor^y, 9 Itea Wo. 3 at the bottom of the page, bottom of the first 10 page? 11 A. Item 3, 12 Q. l think it'; the front of which you have under Item 13 No. 3. It says signature date 19671113. Using your 14 interpretation, taat would correspond to a data of November 15 13, 1967? 15 MS. PARSONS: Objection. 17 MR. REHD1N1: Objection, IS WITNESS: Yes. 19 lay HR. MINOFF) And is it your belief, sir, based 20 on what you know about the Dow contract that that date i-s 21 also in error? 22 A. Now that you pointed this out, i don't know what to 23 24 Q. Well -- 25 A. X really -- I really can't comment. I think you'i. RANKIN REPORTING a LEGAL VIDEO 69 UCC 078617 .. _>. Nj 1 have to ask the j^eruon who does this documentation. 2 Q. X think you'ie right, li it lair to uay, though, 3 ai ~z, that you do not know foe a foot that -- let'* just cake 4 taut Jute that -- that 19G7 date iu in error or not? 3 MS PARSOKS; Objection. <5 MR. RENQiNI: Objection. 7 0. CSV MR. MINOFF) la that correct? S A. I would say yea. 9 3* You don't know that for a fact? 10 MS. PARSOKS; Objection. 11 WITNESS* 1 don't know that for a fact. 12 0. (3V MR, MINOFF) In fact# without cooing the actual 13 documents# you don't know for a fact whether any of the 14 dates listed foe each of these items as accurately stated or 15 not? 15 MS. PARSONS: Objection. 17 MR. RENU1MI: Objection. ie V7ITNESS; That's true. 19 G- WBY MR. MXHOFF) And your understanding is that toe 20 documents as indicated here nave arl been destroyed? 21 A. That's what I*a -- I was told. 22 MR. MINOFF: Okay. I'm going to adjourn -- 23 ^ MS. PARSONS* 1 have some questions. 24 MR. MINOFF: Oh, okay. 25 ^CROSS-EXAMINATION RANKIN REPORTING * LEGAL VIDEO 70 UCC 078618 1 BY MS. PARSONS: 2 Q. Sic# just referring to t:le saite exhibit, you didn't 3 generate this document; is that correct? 4 A. Ho, X did not generate t;u3 document. 5 Q. And you had no reaponsibia*ty for preparing it; is 6 that correct? 7 A. That's correct. a Q. And you don't know the reasons it was prepared; .s 9 that correct? 10 A. I do know why it was prepared, it was in answer to IX my questions. 12 0. As to your search for documents? 13 A. As to whether we had any contracts pertaining to 14 this subject. 15 Q. But because you cUdn't prepare this document., you IS have no knowledge of how the computer system in this 17 document works; is that correct? IS A. Ho. 19 And so the numbers that are generated herein could 20 mean anything; isn't that true? 21 A. They must mean something. 22 Q. Well, I mean you'd been guessing if you to^d us 23 here today^what exactly these dates meant; is that correct? 24 A. Yeah, yeah. 25 Q. Based on your personal knowledge and in your RANKlH REPORTING 6 I,EGAX VIOEC 71 ucc 078619 1 investigation as a representative of Monsanto, you nave no 2 knowledge whatsoever of any Dow contract regarding VCto prro.. 3 to 1969; is that correct? 4 A. That's correct. 5 Q. And to your knowledge, the only contract that 6 existed between Dow and Monsanto began in 1969; is that ? correct? 8 A. That is correct* 3 MS. PARSONSs Okay. That's ail 1 have. 10 REDIRECT EXAMINATION 11 BY MR. MiNOFF: 12 Q. Just one more question before we adjourn. Hr. 13 Piatte. Did Ann Clark prepare this document? 14 A. To my knowledge. 15 HR. HiNOPFi Okay. i`d like to adjourn now. 16 i'J like to leave the record open for further inquiry of 17 anyone eice chat Monsanto might wish to designate given the 18 fact that there were documents which X produced today that 19 Mr. Eiatte* the designated witness, did not nave an 20 opportunity to see and did not see prior to the deposition. 21 I'd like to give him and I guess Monsanto, itself, an 22 opportunity to review those for the purpose of determining 23 whether o&^not there's any further investigation which 24 should be done to respond as fully as possible to questions 25 within the areas listed in the notice. RANKIN REPORTING S LEGAL VIDEO 72 UCC 078620 Ol-il'U i **;* n j. < 1 MR. 20VJSRS: Keith, those documents, you'-u 2 aware where those documents came from. They came from 3 individuals* file m the non can to Indian Orchard plant. ?;va 4 le^usot was made for a search of Monsanto documents kept in 5 the regular course of business. This the computer 0 printout of the documents that were here* Ac you can cue, <* / they were destroyed in December. Those were the documents S chat we had. 9 Mr. Pratte made inquiry of the individuals who are 10 With the company who had knowledge -- that he felt had 11 knowledge so that he couid obtain a familiarity beyond hie 12 own personal knowledge with the subjects which you 13 identified. He has testified that since 19 -- from 1969 14 until the piant closed that Dow was a supplier of v my: 13 chloride monomer, Dow was responsible. Pte 1969 Mori can to IS was responsible for the supply of vinyl chloride monomer. 17 The documents which you showed him are not 19 inconsistent with anything that he testified to here today, 19 lie indicated that at times there were occasions when 20 companies other than Monsanto, VCM made its way into the 21 Indian Orchard plant. A search nas been made, we have not 22 located any other documents which would indicate when these 23 swaps were*made, how much, who. you've come -- we've 24 provided you with documents which have come up which showed 25 on occasion these things happen and he's testified to that RASKIN REPORTING S LEGAL VIDEO 73 UCC 078621 1 here today* 2 But, you know, there is no further investigation 3 which Monsanto can do. There are no further documents that 4 they are aware of which would give you with any greater Jf specificity when these swaps happened, with who, how much. 6 And I don't know what else you're looking for. 7 MS. PARSONSi And i wourd ooject to having ay 3 clients have to come hack here again since Monsanto has 9 designated the person who they deemed to be or they deemed 10 to have tao moat knowledge on this subject. 11 MR. rendINIs Same objection on behalf of 12 Goodrich and also an objection to the characteriaation of 13 the evidence by Mr. Powers. 14 *1S. PARSONSi Same objection as veU. 15 MR. POWERS: Weil, if we can go off the 1G record. 17 (Discussion off the record. The deposition 1G was adjourned, the exhibits were retained by counsel and the 19 signature-was waived.} 20 21 22 23 24 25 RANK! 15 REPORTING a LEGAL VIDEO 74 UCC 078622 VUi'U' :J . ^kW X STATE OF MISSOURI ) ) SS 2 cm or st. loois ) 3 I, Laura Lynn Murphy, Registered Professionai 4 Reporter - Certificate of Merit, Certified Shorthand 5 Reporter, notary Public within and tor the State of 6 Missouri# DO 3ER3BY CERTIFY that pursuant to agreement 7 between the parties the aforementioned witness cane before 0 me at the time and place hereinbefore mentioned, who was by 9 me first duly sworn to tell the whole truth o hie knowledge 10 touching the matter m controversy aforesaid; that he was 11 examined on the day# between the hours and at the piece in 12 that behalf aforesaid; and his examination was taken in 13 shorthand and later reduced to print; that signature by the 14 witness is waived and said deposition is herewith returned 15 and filed with the court. 15 IN WiTttESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto subscribed my 17 name and affixed ay notarial Seal thisday 13 of ;, 1991. 19 Uy Commission Expires July 10, 1993. 20 21 22 23 Laura Lynn Murphy, RPR-Ch, C5R 24 25 75 RANKIN REPORTING & LEGAL VIDEO UCC 078623