Document 6bKgGbYZ0EQQVJDGvZOxvEbod

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT 07 VEST VIRGINIA CHARLESTON, VEST VIRGINIA JAMES M. ADKINS, Administrator of the Estate of Ralph E. Adkins, Deceased, at al, Plaintiffs, s MONSANTO COMPANY, a Delaware Corporation, Defendant. ) ) ) ) ) ) ) No. 81-2098 ) ) ) ) ) Deposition of VINCENT T. KATTEUCCI taksn on behalf of the plaintiffs. Reporter: M. Joy Springer J am es M ay R epo rting S ervice CERTIFIED SHO RTHAND REPORTERS R R 2 BOX 65 EDWARDSVILLE. ILLIN O IS 62025 A M 1 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OP WEST VIRGINIA 2 CHARLESTON, WEST VIRGINIA 3 4 JAMES M. ADKINS, Administrator ) of the Estate of Ralph E. Adkins, ) 5 Deceased, et al, ) 6 Plaintiffs, ) ) 7 vs. ) ) No. 81-2098 8 MONSANTO COMPANY, a Delaware ) ) Corporation, 9 10 Defendant. ) ) ) 11 12 APPEARANCES: 13 Messrs, Calwell, McCormick ft Peyton, by W. Stuart Calwell, Jr., Esq., For the Plaintiffs; 14 Messrs. Bowles, McDavid, Graff & Love, 15 by P. Michael Pleska, Esq., For the Defendant. 16 17 18 IT IS STIPULATED AND AGREED by and between 19 counsel for the plaintiffs and counsel for the defendant 20 that the deposition of VINCENT T. MATTEUCCI may be taken 21 pursuant to Rule 26(a) of the Federal Rules of Civil Pro 22 cedure, on behalf of the plaintiffs, on July 15, 1983, at 23 the Radisson Hotel, Room 215, 9th Street and Convention 24 Plaza, St. Louis, Missouri, before M. JOY SPRINGER, a 25 Notary Public within and for the County of Madison, State JAMES MAY REPORTING SERVICE 1  ` 4 f Vr 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 1I 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 of Illinois; that the issuance of notice and dedimus is waived, and that this deposition may be taken with the same force and effect as if all Federal rules and statutory requirements had been complied with. IT IS FURTHER STIPULATED AND AGREED that any and all objections to all or any part of this deposition except objections as to form of the questions asked or answers given, are hereby reserved and may be raised on the trial of this cause; and that the signature of the deponent is not waived. VINCENT T. MATTEUCCI, produced, sworn and examined on behalf of the plaintiffs, deposes and says as follows: EXAMINATION - BY MR. CALWELL: (Whereupon the reporter marked Plaintiff's Deposition Exhibit #3*12 (Monsanto's I.D. #832*1389 and 832*1390), consisting of two pages; Plaintiff's Deposition Exhibit #3*13 (Monsanto's I.D. #832*1391), consisting of one page.) - { JAMES MAY REPORTING SERVICE 2 1 Q Would you state your name for the record, 2 please? 3 A. My name is Vincent Thomas Matteucci. 4 a And where do you live? 5 A. I live at 13638 Armstead, A-r-n-s-t-e-a-d, St. Louis, Missouri 63131. 7 Q, And you're employed by Monsanto? 8 A. Yes. 9 Q What do you do for Monsanto? 10 A. I 'm Director of Manufacturing in the 11 Industrial Chemicals operating unit. 12 Q Is that MIC? 13 A. MIC. 14 Q What Is your education? 15 A. I graduated as a chemical engineer in I960 16 fron Northeastern University. 17 Q What kind of degree is that? B.S.? 18 A. Bachelor's . 19 a Okay. Any other education? 2 0 A. I 've attended graduate business school. I 21 don't have a graduate degree. 2 2 Cl Co you did some post-graduate course work, 23 that kind of thing? 24 A- Yes . 25 Q Okay. When did you first go to work for `i J A M E S M A Y R E P O R T I N G S E R V I C E 1 3 1 the company, Monsanto? 2 A. Joined Monsanto in 1957. 3 Q You are in some kind of a co-op program? 4 A. Yes, I was. 5 Q Where did you first work for Monsanto? 6 A. In Everett, Massachusetts. 7 You born uo there? 8 A. Yes, I was. 9 Q, And what kind of a facility did they have 10 at Everett, Massachusetts? 11 A. At that point in tine I would describe it 12 as a fairly large multi-product chemical plant. 13 Q Make any herbicides up there? 14 A 'Jot to ny knowledge. 15 You work with any chlorinated phenols in 16 that operation? 17 A N o , I did not. 18 Q You got your degree, then, in 1950 and con 19 tinued on with Monsanto, and what wa3 your next position 20 with Monsanto, where was it? 21 A Well, I stayed at Everett through 1963 in 22 various technical and manufacturing positions, and at that 23 point in time I transferred to St. Louis Headquarters in an 24 engineering department that was not the Central Engineering 25 Department but was a division engineering department, JAMES MAY REPORTING SERVICE I 1 precursor to a central engineering group. 2 Q Now, when you say a central engineering 3 group, ia that a central engineering group in something 4 like MIC? 5 A. Obviously we reorganized several times since 6 then. It was specifically the Engineering Department for 7 the Inorganic Chemicals Division at that time. 8 Q In these depositions we have been talking 9 about organizational units. I realize there's been a lot 10 of reorganizations. 11 A. I'll try to keep that clarified. It was 12 Inorganic Engineering Department. 13 C. So it was the central engineering of an 14 operating unit of some kind? 15 A. That's right. As opposed to the engineering 16 department located at a plant. 17 Q All right. Did you work with any chlorinated 18 phenols in that position? 19 A. No, I did not. 20 Q How long did you stay in that position? 21 A. Oh, approximately three and a half years. 22 Just to clarify the organizational changes, during that 23 period we created what's now called the Central Engineering 24 Department, and in the last year or two of that period the 25 Inorganic Engineering Department in effect was assimilated JAMES MAY REPORTING SERVICE . \ 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 into a Corporate Engineering Department. Q Now, you said Corporate Engineering Departm e n t . Is that company-wide? A. World-wide, company-wide. Q And that haopened how long ago? A. record. ?66, a p p r o x i m a t e l y . T h a t 's a matter of G I 'm Just trying to get some idea. So then beginning in about the middle '60'3 you were in a central engineering department that had company-wide responsibility? A. Yes. Q. Now, what does a corporate engineering department do? I mean, is it an advisory kind of thing, or what is it? A. Basically involved in the capital programs for the corporation, the design and the construction of new plants, significant plant improvements, expansions, things of that sort. Q Would you be designing new facilities at existing plants? A. All of the above. New facilities, existing plants, new plants. Q Did you design or do any work for the Nitro, West Virginia, manufacturing facility? A. I did not specifically. Obviously, the i JAMES MAY REPORTING SERVICE C0 t% 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 Central Engineering Department did. Q Did anybody working under you or associated with you in that department do that? A. No. Q Do you know anyone in the Central Engineering Department who did? A. Not specifically. Q But you do know that some work was done? A. I'm assuming that some work was done. Q If you wanted to find out what work was done, if at all, who would you go ask? A. Your question 1b specific to the mid-'60's? C, Yeah, right. A. I guess I 'd have to ask the people who were responsible for the Nitro Plant at that time. How would you find them, how would you know who they are? A. It's a matter of record who the plant managers, who the technical superintendents were at that time. Q Go, I mean, if you wanted to find out what the Corporate Engineering Department did, y o u 'd ask the Nitro Plant manager? A. Yes. (1 And h e 'd know what Corporate Engineering did JAMES MAY REPORTING SERVICE * 7 1 for them? 2 A. H e 'd know what was taking place at that 3 point in time. He would know what kind of activity and 4 projects were being installed. It would be a matter of 5 record who the specific people were involved. It could be 6 dozens of people. 7 Q That would be the place to start, the plant 8 manager in charge at that particular time? 9 A. It would be a ratter of record. There would 10 be engineering drawings and documents people had probably 11 signed. 12 Now, has there always been, to your knowledge 13 some type of a Corporate Engineering Department or function? 14 A. To my knowledge, there has always been a 15 Central Engineering Department In Monsanto. It has been 16 called different things at different points of time and it's 17 had different levels of responsibility. From my earliest 18 days I could tell you that that would have included many of 19 our corporate architects and our corporate specialists in 20 terms of specific areas of technology. 21 Q Now, I am trying to get a relationship 22 between the Corporate Engineering Department and, perhaps, 23 other engineering operations. Is it the ultimate responsi 24 bility of the Central Engineering Department to design these 25 new plants, new facilities, and retooling and that kind of JAMES MAY REPORTING SERVICE thing that you were talking about? A. Only significant. Q The significant program? A. That's right. And the definition of signi ficant probably has changed through the years. It might have been a dual limit, and even at that point was a guide line, net a policy. V^ere you might say, to use an example, if a project looks like it's under a million dollars, clearly many of our plants would have the capability of designing and executing that kind of expansion or modifica tion. But it might be substantially greater than that and a specific plant at that point in time might have the resources to do, say, a two-million-dollar oroject, so there's no hard-and-fast policy. Guideline based on work loads, both corporate-wide and plant level, and the capa bility of the plant. Q Does the Central Engineering Department, or whatever department carried out that function over the years, does it have a, like, a supervisory function, let's say, over a plant engineering department that might be designing, say, a major project? Nould it be subject to the supervision or approval or review of the Central Corporate Engineering? A Not formally. Our plant Technical Services Departments traditionally have not reported back to our JAMES MAY REPORTING SERVICE .* %1 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 Corporate Engineering Department, but, obviously, there is a technology network within Monsanto. Our plant technical people would have technical relationships especially with specialists in our corporate group. Q So you have pretty good communication net- works to tap expertise throughout the -- A. I would hone so. Q Has that generally been true over the years for Monsanto? A. I think it's more of an individual situa- tion. I t 's not corporate policy. 3ut it is a practice? A. It's a practice. There are people within the company who have spent much of their careers in very narrow technical areas sr.d you know who they are -- Q. Y o u can tell. All right. We left off where you're in the Central Engineering Department in '66, right? A. In '66. Q And you're working as an engineer in there, obviously? A. As a Project Manager but as an engineer. (\ And how long did you stay in that position? A. Until about late '66. Cl What happened to you then? JAMES MAY REPORTING SERVICE A. At that point in time I transferred to our Krummrich Plant, which is in Sauget, Illinois. Q What were you doing for the Krummrich Plant? A. I was at Krummrich from approximately late '66 to June of 1970, so I 'll try to capture that entire period for you. During that period I basically had two positions, an Engineering Supervisor and then the Technical Superintendent for what was at that time the Inorganic Division products that were produced at the Krummrich Plant. Q What were those products? A. Those products, to the best of my recollec tion, were -- and I 'll list them. It's a fairly long list. Q Just an idea of what it is. A. Phosphoric acid, phosphorus trichloride, phosphorus oxychloride, phosphorus pentachloride. Q Was Santophen one of them? A. Santophen was not one of them. You want me to continue the list? Q No, that's all right. Now, when you were at the Krummrich Plant, did you work with chlorinated phenols ? A. No. Q Did you supervise anyone who did? A. No, I did not. Q Did no work at all with pentachlorophenol? A. None at all. JAMES MAY REPORTING SERVICE  % T- 1 Q, Orthochlorophenol? 2 A. None at all. 3 Q Trichlorophenol? 4 A. N o . 5 Q Did you know there was an operation at that time that dealt with the chlorophenols? 7 A. Yes, I did. 8 a Was that Department 237, something like that? 9 A. There were a number of departments. I think 10 that was one of them. 11 Q So looks like about four years or so you 12 were at the Xrummrich Plant. Your duties never brought you 13 into contact with the operations concerning the chlorophenols 14 there, 3 that right? 15 A. That' s correct. 16 Q Okay. Vhat happened in 1970, then? 17 A. 1970 I became the Plant Manager of our plant 18 in Martinez, California. 19 Q What's that plant do? 20 A. At the time that plant had two major func- 21 tions. It produced a family of vanadium and platinum 22 catalysts and produced elemental sulfur and sulfuric acid 23 that were recovered from the refinery waste stream that was 24 located adjacent to the plant. 25 a During that time did you have occasion to J A M E S M A Y R E P O R T I N G S E R V I C E 12 k work with carbon disulfide? A. No, I did not. Q H2S? A. Yes, I did. Q What did your work with H2S involve? A. H2S was one of the refinery waste streams I mentioned to you. We in effect transferred streams con taining hydrogen sulfide gas from the refinery and produced both elemental sulfur, which we marketed, and sulfuric acid from those waste streams. Q You were the Plant Manager, and as I under stand, part of the mission of the Plant 'Manager is to be responsible for the health and safety of the workforce? A. That clearly is one of his major responsi bilities . Q Particularly if you're working with a sub stance such as H2S? A. That'8 correct. Q That is a highly toxic and dangerous sub stance, isn't it? A. It certainly is. Q Did you receive any training about the handling of dangerous or toxic substances during the course of your work at Monsanto? A. Yes, I have. JAMES MAY REPORTING SERVICE I 3 1 Q What did that consist of? 2 A. I can't specifically tell you about all the 3 training I have had in that project. 4 4 Kind of -- 5 A. Hydrogen sulfide is probably one of the 6 number one killers in the chemical industry. There are 7 more mortalities from hydrogen sulfide gas than any other 8 chemical. At least, that's the statistics I recall when I 9 was in that Job. So clearly there were a great deal of 10 publications, films for safety training available to myself 11 and they were supplied both internally from our Corporate 12 Safety and Property Protection group as well as other 13 industry groups. I can recall seeing several films that 14 were training films giving a great deal of information con- 15 c e m i n g that product. 16 Q Now, aside from being informed that it would 17 kill you, were you provided any information about its long- 18 term health effects, if any, that were obviously less than 19 fatal? 20 A I don't specifically recall that, although, 21 we certainly at that point in time were monitoring closely 22 for hydrogen sulfide gas at this location. 23 a How did you do that? 24 A Initially I can recall that monitoring being 25 the typical one-shot test with a Drags tube and a capsule ; | JAM ES MAY REPORTING SERVICE \ lil , i'V 1 of some sort, and then as technology developed and began 2 to mature, we went to continuous monitors for H2S. 3 Q Continuous monitoring? 4 A. Uh huh (yes). 5 Q Now, In connection with that, did you have 6 any specific health monitoring of the people who were 7 working In that area to check their physical condition 8 periodically? 9 A. Yes. 10 Q And was a part of that physical examination 11 specifically designed to look for the effects of H2S expo 12 sure? 13 A. I don't believe that we specificallylooked 14 for that. 15 Q Okay. What kind of a health monitoring 16 program did you have in place out there? 17 A. Basically we had a program where all 18 employees received annual physicals under the direction of 19 a local physician that we contracted with. 20 Q Did this local physician have any particular 21 training in industrial hygiene or industrial medicine? 22 A. Mot to my knowledge, 23 0, Was there a requirement or company policy 24 that looked at the qualifications of doctors who were con 25 tracted with or hired as plant physicians? JAM ES MAY REPORTING SERVICE 15 ^-V 1 A Absolutely. That was & decision that was 2 typically Jointly made between plant management and our 3 Corporate Medical Department. 4*Q What were the kinds of things you looked at 5 in terms of qualification for the physician? 6 A Clearly you look for medical competency, 7 somebody who would service the plant. That was always a 8 concern. 9 Q How would you know if a doctor was competent 10 to engage in this rather specialized area of medicine? 11 A You're making an assumption in those days 12 we had an open choice of physicians who were trained and 13 knowledgeable in industrial medicine, and I don't believe 14 that's an accurate assumption. 15 - Veil, did you look for someone who was? 16 A You would try to, but, frankly, industrial 17 medicine, particularly in the early '70's, was not what I 18 perceived as a field we could simply go out and take our 19 pick among several. Specifically at Martinez the physician 20 we had there was there when I arrived and was there when I 21 left, and he was a very professional physician. He was also 22 a surgeon. He also became ray personal physician. That's 23 how much confidence I had in him. I can only tell you that 24 all the people at Martinez felt he serviced them very pro- 25 fessionally during that period. ; JAM ES MAY REPORTING SERVICE 16 \ 1 Q Did you ever determine what his qualifica 2 tions were? 3 A. I never personally looked through his back 4 ground. He was a surgeon, he was an F.A.C.S. Ke certainly 5 had the up-front credentials in terms of my experiences with 6 him that I would have to suggest that his qualifications 7 became apparent to me during the period that I had a rela 8 tionship with him, 9 Q Okay. But you don't know whether he had any 10 particular expertise in examining or monitoring people who 11 nay have been exposed to one or more hazardous substances, 12 you don't know about his qualifications in that regard? 13 A. Ho, I don't. As we were concerned about 14 our industrial hygiene exposure in the plant, he was aware 15 of those. We provided a certain amount of that feedback 16 to him tc help him in his evaluation. 17 Q And was that a company policy or practice, 18 to provide the on-site physician with as much information 19 as possible to assist him in his -- 20 A. It certainly was practice. I don't say it 21 was written policy, I can't say I ever read that, but 22 clearly it was the practice. I 'm sure that from time to 23 time we met with him and routinely gave him some of the 24 specifications of what we were trying to accomplish. 25 Q, Now, your experience as Plant Manager when yo JAMES MAY REPORTING SERVICE 1 at Martinez, California, insofar as the doctor was concerned, 2 when you got.there he was there and you were perfectly satis 3 fied with him the years you were at that plant. Now, was 4 that your first plant manager's Job? 5 A. Yes, it was. 6 Q Was it your only plant manager's Job? 7 A. Yes, it was. 8 Q In preparation for that Job did you receive 9 any kind of training, like, a course from Monsanto, like, 10 Introduction to being a plant manager or something like that? 11 A. No course specific to that at that time. 12 Since then we have developed one. 13 3 Since 1970, or thereabouts? 14 A. Well, certainly since 1970. I don't recall 15 specifically when we developed the course. 16 And what I was getting at, did you receive 17 any specific instructions about plant medical people? In 18 other words,"you're going to be a plant manager tomorrow, 19 Mr. Matteuoci, and you have to look for these kinds of 20 things in these medical people," did you get any instructions 21 like that? 22 A. Mo, I did not. 23 Q So how did you learn that it was Monsanto's 24 practice to look at the qualifications of the doctors that 25 you contracted with and used as plant physicians? How did JAM ES MAY REPORTING SERVICE i 'S 1 you come to know that? 2 A.*. Annually our corporate medical people would 3 visit the plant, talk to us about our experiences, what we 4 were trying to accomplish, meet with the local physician. 5 I recall specifically those kinds of things. 6 Q Do you know if that was a company-wide 7 practice? 8 A. I can't say. I'm assuming it was, but that's 9 an assumption on my part. 10 Cl I understand. The Corporate Medical Depart 11 ment people would at least visit your plant and chat with 12 the physician and see what's going on? 13 A. Yes. And there were others. Not Just 14 corporate medical at that tine. We did have and have had 15 for 3one time Industrial hygiene group that would come out 16 and -- 17 Q Do the sane thing? 1 18 A Safety and property protection as well. 19 Q And they would take a look at and monitor 20 that H2S situation? 21 A The H2S was probably more a safety concern 22 in the plant than hygiene. Our experience and the industry 23 experience at that tine was clearly exposures or emissions 24 of H2S were highly hazardous, not so much from an industrial 25 hygiene standpoint but simply from a survival standpoint. JAM ES MAY REPORTING SERVICE 19 * t 1 Q It's given that H2S will kill you, obviously. 2 Were- you given any information about repeated low-level 3 exposure over a period of time? 4 A. Not that I recall. 5 Q And was there a level of exposure to H2S 6 that was considered safe? 7 A. Yes, there was. X don't recall the specific 8 level, but we clearly had guidelines as to what the exposure 9 levels were for most of the chemicals that we had. 10 Q. All right. And do you know if those exposure n levels took into account the effects of repeated exposure to 12 low levels over the years? 13 A- I expect that would have been typical NIOSH 14 data. I can't comment what kind of testing was behind those 15 limits 16 0> As Plant Manager you didn't receive any par17 ticular instruction along those lines, is that right? 18 A. Not any specific instructions but clearly 19 assimilated knowledge. 20 Q Did you tell your workforce anything about 21 suspected or real long-term effects of low-level exposures 22 to H2S over a period of time? 23 A. N o . 24 Q As far as you know, there was no literature 25 from Monsanto about that either? JAM ES MAY REPORTING SERVICE 20 1 A. None that I specifically recall on low-level 2 exposure other than we certainly had the NIOSK Information 3 available to us on not only H2S but all the other chemicals 4 we produced. That Information was clearly discussed openly 5 in the plant with all our employees. 6 <1 And I presume you had a level that was a fatail 7 level, you could be exposed to a level of it that would kill 8 you? 9 A. V.'e certainly knew that. 10 ^ And if you blotted that out on a continuum, 11 If you worked back to a point where there would be no expo 12 sure, somewhere In between there was a safe level and 13 between a safe level and a fatal level you had varying 14 decrees of exposure thao may or may not have been harmful, 15 Is that right? 16 A. That would have been typical information for 17 many of the chemicals we produced, and that exposure level, 18 that threshhold level, was at that point In time probably 19 the NIOSK book that we annually received an update from our 20 industrial hygiene group or as significant changes were 21 made to that we would receive those. 22 So It would be your testimony, then, that 23 the NIOSK book was the standard for Monsanto on many of 24 these chemicals? 25 A. I wouldn't state that for all of Monsanto, JA M E 5 MAY REPORTING SERVICE 21 $ i) 1 but clearly that was the guideline we used. 2 Q All right. How long were you at the 3 California plant? 4 A. Approximately five years. I left there In 5 the fall of 1975. 6 Q, And where did you go? 7 A. At that point In time I Joined the Detergent 8 and Phosphates Division of MIC In marketing and had marketing 9 responsibility for general and industrial phosphates. 10 Q And where were you stationed? 11 A. In St, Louis. 12 Q From California back to St. Louis, right? 13 A (Nods head affirmatively.) 14 Z Now, in that Job you say it was like a 15 marketing Job? 16 A It was Marketing Manager's assignment for 17 that family of products. 18 Q You sell stuff, or what? 19 A No. This is a planning staff position 20 where you essentially -- 21 Q, That's a corporate staff? 22 A No. It's division staff. You'll have to 23 understand that within Monsanto I think of sales as being 24 the salesman who calls on the customer getting the order, 25 and market planning being the people involved with setting JAM ES MAY REPORTING SERVICE 22 c 1 world-wide strategy, and that includes volume, price, market 2 ;segmentation and all the typical planning responsibilities 3 of marketing. 4 Q And did any of the products that you were 5 involved with there, were there any chlorinated phenols involved in those products at all? 7 A. No. This was a family of inorganic phos8 phate products, many of which are used in food, PDA appli9 cations. 10 0, How long were you in the marketing business? 11 A. I was in that position approximately a year 12 and a half. 13 q Then where did you go? 14 A. At that point I became the Commercial 15 Director for our water treatment chemicals business. 16 Q Did those products involve any phenols, 17 chlorination of any benzene rings or anything like that? 18 A. No, they did not. 19 Q So how long were you in that business? 20 A. Approximately two years. 21 Q So that gets us up to about '79 or so? 22 A. 1979, the spring of *79 April of *79. 23 0, What happened then? 24 A. `At that point in time I became the Director 25 of Manufacturing for the Detergent and Phosphates Division. JAM ES MAY REPORTING SERVICE 23 1 G And did the Detergent and Phosphates 2 Division, would that be the same products that you were 3 involved in marketing with? 4 A. Yes. 5 G Did it include any additional matters? A. Yes. 7 G Would it have included any chlorinated 8 phenols? 9 A. Yes. 10 G And that would have been the Santophen, 11 perhaps? 12 A Yes. 13 G And orthochlorophenol crude? 14 A And the family of products associated with 15 that, yes. 1 G In 179 what does a Director of Manufacturing 17 of the Phosphates Division do? 18 A I had line responsibility for five plants. 19 Those plants were Augusta, Georgia; Kearny, New Jersey; 20 Trenton, Michigan; Carondelet, which is St. Louis, Missouri; 21 Long Beach, California. 22 G And how long did you stay in that Job? 23 A Approximately two years. 24 Q In r8l. Does that get you to your present 25 position? JAM ES MAY REPORTING SERVICE I .1 A. Not really. 2 Q What happened In !8l? 3 A. In 1981 we reorganized the manufacturing 4 function in MIC, and in addition to the five plants that I 5 Just mentioned I picked up five additional plants. 6 Q Okay. Who did you pick up? 7 A. Nitro, West Virginia; Everett, Massachusetts; 8 Camden, New Jersey; Seattle, Washington. I left one out. 9 Q That's all right. 10 A. Della River Plant, New Jersey. 11 Q Now, those plants were merely brought under 12 the same kind of position you had as Director of Manufac 13 turing for Detergents and Phosphates, right? 14 A. Yes. Fred Holzapfel retired approximately 15 at that point In tine and I replaced him as Director of 16 Manufacturing for Nitro. Just give you that transition. 17 Q Okay. How long did that Job last? 18 A. Two years. 19 Q That gets us to *83. That must be where 20 you are now? 21 A. Essentially In January of '83 I'm still 22 the Director of Manufacturing with another mix of plants 23 that does not include Nitro. 24 Q So for a brief period of time there Nitro 25 was under you, right? JAM ES MAY REPORTING SERVICE 25 J 'O? 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 1 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 A. Yes. Q And then It was taken out from under you. Now, through this period of time that we are talking about did you ever learn anything about a family of substances called dioxins? A Yes. Q When did you first become aware there was such a substance or substances? A I can't give you specific date, but I would say mid-to-late '70*8, that range. Q Do you know what the occasion was of your finding out about that? A I don't recall. Q What did you find out about it? A Through that period I would have tosay that dioxins as a contaminant, certain chemicals was receiving a fair amount of public and in-house exposure, and somewhere in that period of time I became aware of it; but I can't recall specifically whether it was In a trade magazine or an internal document or one of my peers talking about It, I don't recall. 3ut it was in that *76 to *79 time period, 4 Okay. Did you do any professional reading on the ^subject? A No, I've not. Q When you got this responsibility for the JAM ES MAY REPORTING SERVICE k 26 & #^ T 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 70 17 12 13 74 75 l 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 Nitro Plant, were you made aware of any suspected problems with the dioxin contamination In a product they used to manufacture there, 2,A,5 T? A. I was aware of that, yes. Q How were you made aware of that? A. Through plant visits, discussions and my involvement in the Mitro Task Force. Q Okay. And how long were you on the Nitro Task Force? A. Approximately two years. Q And the reason you were on it was because you had responsibility for this plant during that period of time? A Yes. Fred Holzapfel was a member, and when he retired I became a member. 0 Are you familiar, then, with the Suskind studies? A Yes, I am. Q And I fve been told thatthere was a mortality study that Suskind did on the Nitro group, is that correct? A I've not seen it specifically. I've heard that comment made. 0, And there was al30 a morbidity study under taken. Were you aware of that? A I was generally aware of that, yes. . JAM ES MAY REPORTING SERVICE i 27 1** " 1 Q Now, do you know why those studies were 2 undertaken at the time they were undertaken? 3 A . Obviously wasn't involved when the decisions 4 were made to conduct those studies. 5 Q But did you learn why those studies were 6 undertaken? 7 A. I don't think I've ever asked specifically 8 why, but clearly this is something because of the exposure 9 that people had had, my perception that Monsanto clearly 10 wanted to identify what, if any, health hazards, health 11 impacts were the results of chemical exposures at the 12 Mitro Plant. 13 Q, And as far as you know, that was the motiva- 14 tion for those undertakings? 15 A. I think we have done other similar studies, 16 perhaps, with less scope, but thi3 was not unusual. 17 Ci Do you know if you've done other similar 18 studies on dioxins? 19 A. Not to my knowledge. 20 Q Do you know if there have been similar 21 studies done -- well, what did those other similar studies 22 involve? 23 A. Involved concerns, and I'm talking specifi- 24 cally now back when I was at Martinez when there were 25 exposures there as asbestos became a concern. We were ; J A M E S M A Y R E P O R T IN G S E R V IC E 28 | -v 1 handling a raw material that contained an amount of 2 crystalline type asbestos and we were concerned about that. 3 Our people came out and looked specifically and talked to 4 our local doctor, and we instituted some additional tests 5 during the annual physicals and tightened down on our expo 6 sure levels as a result of that beyond the NIOSH guidelines. 7 Q Do you know if a study similar to the 8 Suskind studies were done that involved H2S? 9 A. No, I'm not. 10 Q So the people at the Martinez Plant, as far 11 as you know, were not studied as a result of their work 12 with H2S? 13 fu That's correct, 14 Q Do you know of anystudiesinvolving carbon 15 disulfide? 16 A. No, I don't. 17 Q Niran? 18 A. N o , I Tm not. 19 Q Aside from the asbestos work that you told 20 me about, do you know of any other studies on any other 21 substance that were similar to the undertaking that Suskind 22 was involved in at the Nitro Plant? 23 A. No, I 'm not. 24 Q So as far as you know, asbestos is the only 25 one that Monsanto has undertaken? JAM ES MAY REPORTING SERVICE ft 1 A. Yes. It was not specifically asbestos but 2 a component of a raw material we were using. And it doesn't 3 surprise me that we didn?t do a health study at Martinez 4 in H2S. We had a very small population, approximately 5 thirty operators, and I understand the difficulty of statis 6 tically studying that small of a group. 7 Q Okay. Did you have any involvement in the 8 Suskind study at Nitro? 9 A. The only involvement I had was waiting for 10 the study to be published. I can honestly say that to the 11 best of my knowledge all of the work wa3 done prior to my 12 being responsible for the Nitro Plant and the study was not 13 published when I left. 14 Q Did you know if the Suskind studies had 15 anything to do with the litigation that the Nitro Plant is 16 involved in7 17 A. My perception is It did not. 18 Q So as far as you know, there was no connec 19 tion there, that was not part of the motivating -- 20 A. , It was my perception that it was not. 21 Q All right. I want to hand you what's been 22 marked Exhibits 342 (Monsanto's I.D. 3324389 and 8324390) 23 and Exhibit 3^2 (Monsanto's I.D. 8324391). 24 Mr. Matteucci, you have had an opportunity to look 25 at Exhibits 343 and 3^2, have you not? JAM ES MAY REPORTING SERVICE I 3C 1 A. Yes, X have. 2 Q And could you describe 3^2 for the record, 3 please? Just tell us the date and who it!s to and that 4 sort of thing. 5 A It's a memo to Clayton Callis and myself 6 from Lloyd Boesch dated February 10th, 1982. 7 Q And as far as you know, you received that 8 memo? 9 A Yes. 10 Q And would you likewise describe Exhibit 3^3 n for the record too? 12 A It's a memo from Clayton Callis to myself 13 dated February 9th. 14 Ci All right. I presume you got that also, is 15 that right? 16 A Yes. 17 Q Do you have anyspecific recollection of 18 those two documents? 19 A Generally, yes. 20 Q If you would, please read Exhibit 3^2, read 21 the material between A and B marked on that exhibit. 22 A ''I reviewed the outline in yourreference 23 memo. I understand February 11th disclosure is for Monsanto 24 only, but that Dr. Suskind Is then clearly free to go 25 public in any manner he wishes. It would seem reasonable JAM ES MAY REPORTING SERVICE 1 for us to request Dr. Suskind to coordinate any release with 2 proper communication inside Monsanto, somewhat as you sug 3 gest." 4 Q All right, sir. Thank you. 5 I'll hand you Exhibit 3^3 and ask you to read the 6 materials between A and 3, if you would, please, to the 7 Jury. 8 A. "Following the discussion with Lloyd at 9 lunch on February 8th, I again reviewed with Dan Bishop 10 the game plan for release of the Suskind study. The avail 11 able advance information does not indicate any surprises." 12 Q All right. Thank you. 13 Now, while you were on the Nltro Task Force did you 14 receive any preliminary information about Dr. Suskind's 15 results from either the mortality study or the morbidity 16 study? 17 A. I personally did not. 18 Do you know anyone who did? 19 A. I believe that some people did. 20 Q Okay. Do you know who those people might 21 have been? 22 A. I'm speculating, but I assume it was Dave 23 Frazer and probably Clayton Callis, possibly someone from 24 our corporate medical group. 25 0, And did you learn what the information was? JAM ES MAY REPORTING SERVICE I HP fc' ^ 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 25 A. Generally, yes. Q .. What was your general knowledge? A. My general perception of the result of the study was there was no significant health problem to the population he studied beyond chloracne. Q Okay. Do you know when you learned that, some time frame? A. I would have to say probably early '82, somewhere in that time frame. Q Do you know if there was a written report that contained that information that you testified about? A. I don't recall. I recall a sequence of events. During this period we were anxious to get Suskind to complete his report primarily to relieve the anxiety of our employees at Nitro. He had promised them face-to-face feedback on a study, and during the period I was involved with the Nitro Task Porce that was primarily our interest in accelerating Suskind to complete and publish that report. Obviously from the standpoint of communications we wanted our employees to hear about it first and not have that kind of information leeking to the press or to our own people. The only other thing I want to comment on is through this period of that lawsuit it was always our intent not to allow the lawsuit or the Suskind study to get in the way of our relationships with our people at Nitro, that we would ' T JAM ES MAY REPORTING SERVICE 3: k 1 manage the plant and manage the people to whatever extent 2 we could oblivious to the lawsuit and the Suskind study. 3 4 Okay. Did this preliminary report that you 4 heard about or at least preliminary communication about some 5 preliminary conclusions, was that communicated to the Nitro 6 workers? 7 A. It's my perception that It was. I don't 8 recall whether that took place after I left or before I left, 9 but It would have had to have been close to that time frame. 10 4 Do you know how that would have been accom 11 plished? 12 A. I knew what the game plan was, and I assume 13 It was followed. 14 Q What was the plan? 15 A. The game plan was to have Suskind, as it 16 always had been, come to Nitro and present his findings to 17 our employees, not only current employees but past employees, 18 because they were the ones that were studied. They were the 19 ones who volunteered to be the guinea pigs for these studies,, 20 and we owed them that. 21 Q So the idea was to have some kind of 22 meeting and invite all the people? 23 A. The game plan was to have themeeting, and 24 I can't comment as to whether all thesethings tookplace. 25 Q I understand that. JAM ES MAY REPORTING SERVICE i 3 mw l A. But the discussion revolved around having 2 a meeting, inviting appropriate members of the union as well 3 as all. of our employees at present and retired who were a 4 part of the study who wanted to come plus videotaping the 5 presentation in a Q and A so that others who perhaps couldn't 6 make it might have an opportunity to at least first-hand 7 see that if they wanted to. 8 Q Did the game plan Include a mechanism to 9 advise each individual worker what his particular problems 10 or lack of problems were as they were determined during the 11 study? 12 A. I don't recall that ever being discussed 13 because I'll assume, as in all other work that we have done, 14 if an individual is found with a specific problem, then 15 that's handled immediately even through his private physi16 clan and obviously face to face with that individual. That 17 would have been routine process. 18 MR. CALWELL: Thanks, Mr. Matteucci. 19 It's been a pleasure. 2 21 22 23 Vincent T. Matteucci 24 25 / JAM ES MAY REPORTING SERVICE i 3! fliw m* 1 )2 ' S T A T E O P I L L I N O I S ) ss )3 C O U N T Y . . O F M A D I S O N 4 5 6 7 I, M. JOY SPRINGER, a Notary Public, duly 8 commissioned and qualified in and for the County of Madison, 9 State of Illinois, do hereby certify that pursuant to notice 10 came before me on the 15th day of July, 1983, at the 11 Radisson Hotel, Room 215, 9th Street and Convention Plaza, 12 St. Louis, Missouri, VINCENT T. MATTEUCCI, who was by me 13 duly sworn to testify to the truth and nothing but the truth 14 of his knowledge touching and concerning the matters in . 15 controversy In this case; that he was thereupon carefully 16 examined upon oath, and his examination reduced to writing 17 under my supervision; that the deposition is a true record 18 of the testimony given by the witness; and signature of the 19 witness was not waived by agreement of counsel. 20 I FURTHER CERTIFY that I am neither attor21 ney nor counsel for nor related to nor employed by any of 22 the parties to the action In which this deposition is 23 taken; and further, that I am not a relative or employee 24 of any attorney and counsel employed by the parties hereto, 25 or financially interested in the action. 1 JAM ES MAY REPORTING SERVICE `i 35 A /_ i 1 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my 2 hand>and affixed ray notarial seal on this _________ day of 3 ____ ' ' 1983. 4 5 7 8 Notary Public within and 9 for the County of Madison, In the State of Illinois. 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 JAM ES MAY REPORTING SERVICE 33