Document 74XBBxqjN5L269aeRReLwdJa

TO: FROM: RE: DATE: MEMORANDUM DAVID S. McCREA PAUL MRRELL FAX: 812/336-5307 FAX: 615/525-4679 CHUCK McC NEVADA POWER; REQUESTS OF WESTINGHOUSE FOR ADMISSIONS April 28, 1992 ,1 Regarding David's April 22 letter enclosing discovery requests to Westinghouse in Baker v. Westinghouse: Since the defendants in Nevada Power Company v. Monsanto et al . deny categorically that PCBs are dangerous, it seems to me appropriate to serve Westinghouse with a copy of the Wiener Minutes of the PCB status meeting held December 28, 1971, along with interrogatories, requests for production of documents and requests for admissions substantially identical to those David served in Baker. Following are a few suggestions for additional requests for admissions (some of which might overlap David's requests, but use Wiener's own language): 1. Admit or deny that on or about December 28, 1971, G. W. Wiener, Research Director - Power Systems, informed the persons listed as attending the December 28, 1971 meeting on PCB status that: a. PCBs concentrate in the fatty tissue and in the liver of fish, birds and some animals. [Page 1, item (1)] b. The reproductive cycle of birds and, in particular, leghorn chickens is adversely affected by the presence of PCBs. [Page 2, item (3)] Memorandum April 28, 1992 Page 2 c. As a result of accidental PCB ingestion by humans in Japan, the humans ingesting the PCBs broke out into a rash-type condition known as chloracne and suffered nausea, and that children born to the adult victims suffered brown pigmentation of the skin which persisted at least through three years of age. [Page 2, item (4)] d. There is a very significant concentration factor of the PCBs from the 1 ppm generally distributed [in the environment] to many times that in the various tissues and organs of the fish or animal species. [Page 4, last sentence] e. There is sufficient evidence that PCBs can be deleterious to the health of animal and human life. [Page 3, first paragraph] 2. Admit or deny that PCBs are deleterious to the health of animal and human life. **************** Dilemma: How can Westinghouse admit 1(e), given the language of the defendants briefs (particularly in the District Court)? How can Westinghouse deny 1(e) given the language of Wiener's minutes? chm\nevpower\david-1.mmo