Document 6Boye48zeoOw1bZ4pRwXQ6v31

Urtfti.CC ^ i T O : E. H. Harbison, Jr. G. D. I n g e n t h r o n G. Y o u n g *.. The attached MIC Q&As are the final version for Mr. Hanley. At this point, of course, he is only interested in reviewing major new issues. R C X :sint Att. 7 .(Lj X L t u ^ i v s y J j L * * J u / u c f ^ & ***?& -* < < X C c : ^ ^ ( Q x u c ^ x iL c '' / Z t i x , s ^ i c X X .a b ^ J ^ ' < c U u t L U ^ - i*yV' V0 x z i.A S -- C o n n d ^ n i '^i o t * P r e ie c iiieolrSde"r? '80c*i to C004 5 6 -26- Q: ViHAT IS MON SANTO GOING TO DO A B O U T D I O X I N C A U S E D F I S H / F R O G / O R CALF KILLS IN STURGEON. A: The elesn-up contract or for the r a i l r o a d has r e m o v e d all contaminated material from the January 10 spill. The EPA has undertaken a very thorough monitoring plan to ensure there is no long-term h e alth p r o b l e m in S t u r g e o n . T h e E PA has taken water and soil s a m ples f r o m the spi 11 si te and has taken blood and urine samples from cTean-up workers. The EPA is also c o o r d i n a t i n g the tiss u e and b l o o d e x a m i n a t i o n of area livestock. At this p o int t h e r e ' s no i n d i c a t i o n that the trace amount of TCDD has a n y t h i n g to do w i t h the reported fish, frog or calf kills. OCP (ortho-chlorophenol) itself is a product that requires worker protection like gloves and eye p r o t e c t i o n . It is classified as a corrosive liquid and can cau s e b u r n s . The emphasis since the January spill has been on containment of the spilled product and removal of the c o n t a m i n a t e d soil. The EPA feels the two ponds containing dead fish contain enough OCP to have been toxic to the fish. Steps were taken to b u l l d o z e a* dam to p r e v e n t o v e r f l o w f r o m t h e s e p o n d s into, nearby streams. Q: W A S N ' T T H E R E DIOX I N IN THE C H E M I C A L S P I L L E D IN S T U R G M O .? Q/-^ A: We do k n o w that TCDD or dioxin, w h i c h is the p r o d u c t i o n impurity found in this load of OCP ( o r t h o - c h l o r o p h e n o l ) , .while h i g h l y toxic to man was f o u n d in q u a n t i t i e s so small that we can just b a r e l y m e a s u r e it. lie f o u n d 37 p a r t s p e r billion in our OCP. Another way of stating that is the total load of OCP weighed about 207,000 pounds. The trace contamination of TCDD in that load was 1/3 of 1 ounce, and spread evenly throughout the tank car contents. We feel confident that the TCDD has had absolutely nothing to do with the animal or fish losses in S turgeon, and the i m p u r i t y presented no hazard t o t h c c i t i z c n s . v-i. HAVE OTHER TANK CARS OF OCP, SHIPPED SINCE THE STURGEON, MO., ACCIDENT, BEEN CONTAMINATED WITH TCDD? Very shortly after the TCDD was discovered, we started to analyze the production unit where the OCP (ortho-chlorophcnol) and its chemical intermedia tes arc made. If TC D D is f o u n d elsewhere, it would be a p r o d u c t i o n i m p u r i t y w h i c h wo w o u l d try to eliminate. We arc l o o k i n g at all l e vels of the p r o d u c t i o n unit and, as part of that co m p l i c a t e d process, we are studying f j other batches of OCP. We'll prub::b)y k n o w in m l d - m V p r r i a ^ U \ j td-Cfc - where the. pro blem is in the uni t. ^ -26ii- Q. How long will the OCP bo a p r o b l e m at S t u r g e o n ? A. We don't consider the CCP to be a hcal.th prob l e m at Sturgeon. Rather, it is an odor problem, as the smell can be detecte d at very small amounts. VJe don't k n o w w h e n the sm e l l w i l l fall bo low the level that can be detected, as some people may be more sensitive to the smell than others. ^ O r r r .- f- ./ ' Ci ( e/i;_a j * - to -27- aK ' ' , .Cri: no w LONG WILL TjJE OCP BE A H A 7.AIID I N ^ S T G R G D O N ? re)\ A: Fo r t u n a tel > / uC P ( o r t h o - c h l o r op he n o 1) r a p id 1 y ^ b i o c!e g r ad e s . U n d e r l a b o r a t o r y c o n d i t i o n s the p r o d u c t in w a t e r g o e s . f r o a 300 par.ts p e r m i l l i o n to e s s e n t i a l l y zero-'in f r o m tv;o d a y s to two" w e e k s , d e p e n d i n g on c o n d i t i o n s ./' W o 1d e x p e c t a n y < V\ 0 CP/'that is in a b o d y of w a t e r to d c g r a d c c o m p l e t e l y in u fo w e e k s . - T h e r e a s o n O C P is stifJl a r o u n d in the w a t e r A / n o w is e v i d e n t l y b e c a u s e it w a s / f r o z e n a n d h e n c e d i d n ' t ^ hav c / the o p p o r t u n i t y to b i o d e g r a d e . Q: IF OCP IS K I L L I N G F I SHES AND FROGS, H O W DO Y/E K N O W IT I S N ' T POISONING HUMANS? A: OCP is d e t e c t a b l e in taste and s m ell at e x t r e m e l y low levels. For example, you can taste O C P in v;ater at 1 p a r t per billion. The level to kill SOS of test a n i m a l s is 6 7 ,000 time s that concentration. So you can see our taste is a safety factor against any c o n t a m i n a t i o n of g r o u n d water. You g c-1- s c-t-r-ong / / j f m edi r.i i * 3 9 t-o--rhe s ai-t?.! r o o"/mc-thbaTL...SJ;iel-l--o-rw -ca'Sgre,,y Aw 0 a t ^4-0 GUrh'O'f"^h^b^rccT:rraTron--rha'r^^'ni'nrmB^ t ' ' ' `: T 2 S t ^ ^niiESis,----- d Q: HAS M O N S A N T O SOLD ITS O P T O E L E C T R O N I C D E V i C E A N D / O R I I I - V MATERIALS BUSINESS? A: We have s i gned an a g r e e m e n t in p r i n c i p l e w ith G e n e r a l I n s t r u m e n t C o r p o r a t i o n for Gen eral I n s t r u m e n t to a c q u i r e M o n s a n t o 1s Worldwide Optoelectronic Device and III-V Materials business. The S i l i c o n Prod uc ts B u s i n e s s G r o u p is unaf fe,cted.by this agreement. Y-O lisCi3 Ht 13 i-S JDD Sject to Protective QrdCi, Q: THE ST. P E TERS P LANT D U M P S H A Z A R D O U S W A S T E IN A L A N D F I L L ADJACENT TO THE INXSBROQK RECREATIONAL AREA. W H A T WASTE IS D U M P E D , HOW HAZARDOUS IS IT AND WILL.IT SOME DAY FIND ITS WAY INTO OUR LANES? A: The p l a n t ' s solid w aste is abou t 90 p e r c e n t w a ter and calci um, nine percent silicon, silicate and fluoride and about one percent trace metals. The Missouri Department of Natural Resources, which has . responsibility for industrial waste landfills, has stated lha t the geology in thc 1ancfill area -- a thick deposit of impermeab 1c clay -- prev n Vs waste na torial from cscaping the site. Q: !;-\S MONSANTO ENDED ITS EFFORT 10 REVERSE A SOLID WASTE DISPOSAL BUSINESS NOW FUAT :: LAN i-CAE D PROJECT FAILED? No a d d i t i o n a l r e s e a r c h i s be? 'di':'.-: at. the .present time, t.c . t - - V '"! -28- Q: W H A T IS THE STATUS OF THE P C 3 'L A W S U I T S M E N T I O N E D IN T H E 1977 (AND/OR 1978) A N N U A L REPO PAT? A: C u r r e n t l y M o n s a n t o is a c o d e f e n d a n t in three laws u i t s a l l e g i n g $2.1 b i l l i o n damage to b u s i n e s s e s in A l a bama and G e o r g i a as a result of PCB contamination of the Coosa River and Lake Weiss. These lawsuits were filed as^class actions, but in two of the cases the courts have d e n i e d class c e r t i f i c a t i o n ; thus the plaintiffs are proceeding to recover only their individual claims. In addition, the U.S. EPA has filed suit against Outboard Marine Corporation of Waukegan, Michigan, alleging that Outboard Marine discharged PCBs into Waukegan Harbor and Lake Michigan. In N o v e m b e r ^ 1 9 7 S , O u t b a r d M a r i n e joined M o n s a n t o in that lawsuit.' We believe that these suits are without merit and that they will not adversely affect the company. Q: J.S M O N S A N T O D OING A N Y T H I N G TO R E M O V E PCBs F R O M T H E f E N V I R O N M E N T ? A: We are c o m m i t t e d to two u n i v e r s i t y s t u d i e s on d e v e l o p i n g ideas and doing feasibility studies on how PCBs might be remo v e d f rom the env ironment. The. u n i v e r s i t i e s i n v o l v e d have been interviewing various candidates to undertake these studies. W e , of course, don't know what results they may report, but we are hopeful that these research-oriented institutions might produce valuable, unconventional ideas as to h o w PCBs might be remov.ed. Q; (Only if asked) W H I C H . U N I V E R S I T I E S A R E INVOL V E D ? A: The C a l i f o r n i a Institute of T e c h n o l o g y and the M a s s a c h u s e t t s Institute of Technology. I might add that the studies are only in the very early stages of development, however. IS M O N S A N T O DOING ANYTHING A OUT THE OIL TANK C O N T A M I N A T E D WITH PCBs IN FRQNTENAC, MO.? A: The final PC3 storage* tank owned by a d i s p o s a l c o n t r a c t o r was r e m o v e d from the F r o n t e n s e site A p r i l 6. The c o n t r a c t o r had shipped the PCBs at the beginning of April to Louisiana, for incineration. p *" l3 -Suhiecf *n Protective Order -29- Q: IS M O N S A N T O DOING ANY THING A B O U T T M E * P C B -C O N T A M I N A T E D O I L IN DITIMER, MO.? A: A di sposal contractor had d e p o s i t e d w a s t e s in an o p e n pit near f a r m l a n d in Dirtier, Mo. This c o m p a n y had a c o n t r a c t w i t h M o n s a n t o to dispose of waste oil from our C o r p o r a t e Research Center, and had contracts for disposal with many other St. Louis firms at the same t i m e . ' As soon as we were aware of the problem, ve immeciatlcy stopped shipping with the company. Last y e a r , a suit was filed against the c o n t r a c t o r and Monsanto, c l a i m i n g d a m a g e s i n c u r r e d ,w h e n this material allegedly leaked onto private property. The suit is now in litigation. Q: D O E S M O N S A N T O PLAN TO R E I N T R O D U C E NT A INTO T H E U . S . ? A: We have a s ked the EPA to r e - e v a l u a t e the g o v e r n m e n t ' s e a r l i e r p o s i tions on the use of NT A in the U.S. N T A has b e e n used for nine years in Canada without any p r o b l e m s . W e ' r e asking the E P A to revi ew exi s t jng. s s f e t y data and the c o n c l u s i o n s of the International Joint Commission with respect to NTA's use in household detergents. Last year the IJC reported that there is no r e a s o n a b l e cause for restricting the use of N T A in the Great Lakes Basin. We agree with that conclusion, and hope that the EPA agrees as well. Q: WH Y DID M O N S A N T O SELL F L A Y O R / E S S E N C E ? W H A T S A L E P R I C E ? A: This d e c i s i o n was part of our c o n t i n u i n g p r o g r a m to cull those businesses that do not fit into our long-term 'growth plans. In effect, this frees capital for those b u sinesses that would benefit from additional investment. The sales price was not disclosed as part of the agrccmcnt. with B u s h Bo ak e A 1 1e n , th e p u rc h a sc r . ilow e vor, I c a n r e p o r t th a t it does not affect our sales or p r o f i t s in any m a t e r i a l way. v- .[.C*W ,I 3C!I-o u Dj :cC l O Protective .Order - -29aAdditional answer to q u e s t i o n ... Is Monsanto p l a y i n g any role in the nitritc/sorbatc controversy? A. Recently, the US DA and HEW (Food & Drug /Administration) h e l d a joint press conference, proposing that Congress pass legislation which would give some flexibility on banning nitrite. Such flexibility could include allowing the USDA to institute measures / such as the one proposed for use of reduced nitr i t e and sorbate. Confidential-Subject Protective Order. -30- Q: W H A T IS M O N S A N T O DOING R E G A R D I N G T H E I N T R O D U C T I O N OF P H O S P H A T E L EGISLATION IN VARIOUS S TATE L E G I S L A T U R E S ? A:. M o n s a n t o has been very active in fri g h ttiinngg state r e s t r i c t i o n s or bans on pho sp hat e dete rgents, The hue and cry t o . b a n phosp h a t e s to protect our n a t i o n 1s 'waters is an e m o t i o n a l issue, but not one bas ed on scien tifi.c e v i d e n c e . M o n s a n t o sponsored studies con ducted ir.dep c n,dc n 1 1y by b o t h C o r n e l l and Pudue Universities to study i ake water q u a l i t y in Ne w York and Indiana. Both states ha ve hadN detergent phosphate bans since 1975. .Both Purdue and Cornell concluded that the phosphate restrictions had no effect on their lake water quality. Additionally, we have worked with the Soap and Detergent Association and with our major customers in pres.enting the technical facts on detergent phosphate to the a p propriate government bodies. We are also a plaintiff in a suit in Michigan challenging the phosphate restrictions there. At Monsanto we believe that the net effect of l e g i s l a t i o n to ban det ergent phosp h a t e is to d e p r i v e the p u b l i c a c c e s s to a safe, low cost, and highly e f f e c t i v e product. % Q: IS M O N S A N T O STILL LOSING M O N E Y ON S O R B A T E S ? A: C o m p e t i t i v e cond it ion s c r e a t e d by f o r e i g n m a n u f a c t u r e r s have requi r e d us to p rice s o r b a t e s at u n r e a l i s t i c a l l y l ow levels. Recently, prices have moved upward, though still not to levels that 'are r e q u i r e d for an a d e q u a t e rate of return. Vie have been very a g g r e s s i v e l y w o r k i n g in n e w m a r k e t s and applications, and we are hopeful that the pricing problems will be resolved eventually. pConfidantiai-Subject to Q: IS MONSANTO PLAYING ANY ROLE IN THE NITRITES I N 'BACON fr NT k CTVERSY ? A: Last year, we sub mi tte d a p r o p o s a l to the U.S. D e p a r t m e n t of Agriculture which wou 1c allow the use of a r e d u c e d level of nitr i t e s in bacon along w i t h p o t a s s i u m sorb a t e . T h e agency reacted favorably and issued a proposed regulation, which would rcc'uire the use of a lower n i t r i t e lev e l w i t h potassium sorbate, with an appropriate time for comment. If the gov er nment fin al izes the r e g u l a t i o n , a n d we e x p e c t actio n in 1979, then sorbates could be used in b a c o n s o m e t i m e this ycar ^ a n d would erpate af Targe -i in. nark;o t dema n d . J i _ Q: K H A I M S Til!: STATU skip THE L A W S U I T S F ILED A G A I N S T M O N S A N T O KITH R E GARD TO FliNTACIi LORO PHENOL" Q 'y > A : T11crc a r o currcr.11y lhi*oo s u i t s in vol vi :ig cn 11 ie c o n t a m i n a t e d with pciiinchVaro-'h: not h u i o v - j ike courts. Two c a s e s arc in the pvc-r il stage and the this in the comp la inv staro. No i:ntend ta r e p v e s v :z curs V* ina ti.e rs . v i o i'o u s 1y in th c s c -31- Q: IS MONSANTO PLANNING TO BUILD A SILICON PRODUCTION UNIT AT SPARTANBURG, S.C.? A: Our o p e r a t i n g m a n a g e m e n t is s e r i o u s l y c o n s i d e r i n g that site, but the proposal has not been brought forward to the CAC or to the board of direct ors. If the b o a r d a p p r o v e s the proposal, we will make a full announcement at that time. Q: W E R E ANY OF M O N S A N T O ' S R U B B E R C H E M I C A L P R O D U C T S USED IN THE MANUFACTURE OF THE FIRESTONE 500 TIRE? . A: M o n s a n t o is the No. 1 p r o d u c e r of rubber chemicals, and we sell products to all of the tire companies, including Firestone. (None of which are suspect in the r eported problems with this tire.) Q: A R E P H O S P H A T E ESTE R S USED IN ANY M O N S A N T O PRODU C T S , A N D WHAT IS THE CONCERN ABO U T THEM? A: P h o s p h a t e sters are used in some of our FR a d d i t i v e s for plastics and in our hydra u l i c fluids for industry, areas where they make a vital contribution. In April 1973, EPA's .Inter-agency Testing Committee recommended that phosphate esters be p l a c e d on the p r i o r i t y list for t e s t i n g .b e c a u s e of the large production volume in the U n i t e d States and the opportunity for worker exposure to thse compounds beyond that encountered at their original site of manufacture. We feel there should be no concerns about the phosphate esters we manufacture and, in fact, we have a testing program that has been underway for the past several years to^ensure their acceptabil ity. ^onvienijal-Subject to Protective Order