Document Edybrk1Xk42erYe8RpRwrLbbN

Depo of: WILLIAM B. PAPAGEORGE Monsanto v Aetna February 9, 1993 CR: 54365.0 Page 4S3 to Page 673 ACE-FEDERAL REPORTERS. INC. 202-347-3700 CONDENSED TRANSCRIPT & CONCORDANCE PREPARED BY: ACE-FEDERAL REPORTERS, INC. 1120 G STREET, NW SUITE 500 WASHINGTON, DC 20005 Phone: 202-347-3700 FAX: 202-737-3638 WATER PCB-SD0000063748 BSA Depo of: WILLIAM B. PAPACEORGE Monsanto * Aetna February 9. 1993 CR: 54365.0 XMAX(l) Page 483 PI IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF DELAWARE PI IN AND FOR NEW CASTLE COUNTY PI PI MONSANTO COMPANY, ) PI ) 161 Plaintiff, ) m) PI vs. ) C.A. No. 88 CJA-118-I-CV [91 ) [101 AETNA CASUALTY & SURETY ) [111 COMPANY, et al. ) [121 ) [13] Defendants. ) [14] [151 VOLUME IV [16] [171 Continuation of the deposition of WILLIAM [181 B. PAPAGEORGE, taken on behalf of Defendants, at the Ritz [19] Carlton Hotel, in the County of St. Louis, State of [20] Missouri, recommencing at 9:30 a.m. on the 9th day of [21[ February, 1993, before J. Bryan Jordan, certified shorthand [22] reporter and notary public. Page 484 PI APPEARANCES: PI PI FOR THE PLAINTIFF MONSANTO COMPANY AND THE WITNESS: [41 Mr. Steven Sartatti PI Schwalb, Donnenfeld. Bray & Silbert [61 A Professional Corporation PI Suite 300 [SI 1025 Thomas Jefferson Street, N.W. [9] Washington, D.C. 20006 [10] (202) 965-7910 [111 [12] [13] FOR THE DEFENDANT INTERNATIONAL (EIL) [14] Mr. James A. Hughes [151 Onick, Herrington, & Sutcliffe [161 Old Federal Reserve Bank Building. [171 400 Sansome Street fisi San Francisco, California 94111 [191 (415) 773-5529 poi FAX (415) 772-5759 Pll P21 Page 485 111 FOR THE DEFENDANT TRAVELERS INSURANCE COMPANY: PI Mr. Broderick D. Johnson PI Wiley, Rein & Fielding PI 1776 K Street, N.W. PI Washington, D.C. 20006 161 (202) 828-3163 PI FAX (202) 429-7049 [S] [91 FOR THE DEFENDANT NORTH STAR REINSURANCE CORPORATION: [101 Mr. Robert M. Omrod PH Skadden, Arps, Meagher &. Flom [121 P. O. Box 636 [13] One Rodney Square [14] Wilmington. Delaware 19899 [15] (302) 651-3000 [161 [171 [181 [191 poi PH [221 Page 486 HI INDEX PI PAGE PI EXAMINATION BY MR. HUGHES (Cont'd) 488 [41 PI [6] EXHIBITS PI [S] Papageorge Deposition Exhibit 31 ................. .. 500 [91 Papageorge Deposition Exhibit 32 ................. ... 532 [101 Papageorge Deposition Exhibit 33 ................. .. 557 [HI Papageorge Deposition Exhibit 34 ................. .. 560 [12] Papageorge Deposition Exhibit 35 ................. .. 577 [13] Papageorge Deposition Exhibit 36 ................. ... 579 [141 Papageorge Deposition Exhibit 37 ................. .. 592 [151 Papageorge Deposition Exhibit 38 ................. .. 600 [16] Papageorge Deposition Exhibit 39 ................. .. 608 [17] Papageorge Deposition Exhibit 40 ................. .. 610 [181 Papageorge Deposition Exhibit 41 ................. .. 627 [19] Papageorge Deposition Exhibit 42 ................. ... 628 POJ Papageorge Deposition Exhibit 43 ................. .. 632 PH Papageorge Deposition Exhibit 44 ................. .. 641 P2] Papageorge Deposition Exhibit 45 ................. .. 649 Page 487 PI Papageorge Deposition Exhibit 46 ................. .. 653 PI Papageorge Deposition Exhibit 47 ................. ... 669 PI Papageorge Deposition Exhibit 48 ................. ... 670 [41 PI [6] PI [SI [9] [10] PH [12] [13] [141 [151 [16] [17] [181 [19] PO] PH [221 Page 488 [1] FEBRUARY 9, 1993 PI MR. HUGHES: Let's just go back on the record. PI This is the continuation of the deposition of [41 William Papageorge. We last met on Januaty 15th, 1993. PI BY MR. HUGHES: [61 Q. Good morning, Mr. Papageorge. PI A. Good morning. [81 Q. You understand that you are stiU under oath from [9] the last sessions of your deposition? [10] A. I do. PH Q. Mr. Papageorge, when we broke on January 15th, we [12] Itad been talking about Montar, which l understood was a [13] by-product from PCB manufacture. Correct? [141 A. That is true. [15] Q. And we Itad discussed the fact that Monsanto had [16] made a decision to stop seilittg that product. You recall [171 that? [181 MR. SARFAl 11: Objection; vague. [191 BY MR. HUGHES: PO] Q. Let me rephrase to take care, 1 think, of Mr. PH Sarfatti's objection. You recall we had discussed the fact P21 that Monsanto had decided to stop selling Montar? Page 489 PI A. I do. PI Q. Okay. PI You were part of the process that led to tlutt [41 decision. Is that right? PI A. Yes, sir. [61 Q. Would you describe for us the reasons as you PI understood them at the time that a decision was made to stop PI selling Montar? [91 A. Montar is a complex mixture of many chemicals. [10] Some of those chemicals were - belonged to the category PH called PCBs. PCBs were determined to be present in the ACE-FEDERAL REPORTERS, INC. 202-347-3700 Page 4S3 to Page 489 WATER PCB-SD0000063749 BSA Depo of: WILLIAM B. PAPAGEORGE Monsanto v Aetna February 9, 1993 CR; 54365,0 XMAXa) [121 environmoit, winch was countered to be undesirable. [13] Monsanto's understanding of the uses of Montar was such that [14] Monsanto representatives collectively concluded that the [15] uses of Montar were such that it was impractical and [16] virtually imposable to control the movement of PCBs from [17] the products containing Montar into the environment, and in [181 order to achieve its goal of preventing PCBs from [19] inadvertently entering the environment, Monsanto decided the [20] best approach to that would be the discontinuation of sale [21] of Montars to the uses which were in place at the time. [22] _____ MR. JOHNSON: I'm sorry, can we go off the record Page 490 [1] for a second? [2] (Discussion off the record.) [3] BY MR. HUGHES: [4] Q. Mr. Papageorge, could you tell us why it was [5] perceived that it was undesirable to have PCBs being 16] released into the environment through Montar? [7] A. Well, PCBs are, as best as we could determine, a [8] man-made product material. Its presence in the environment [9] and its persistence in the environment was perceived to be [10] something undesirable. The material being man made had no [11] business in the rivers, and lakes, and ground. At the same [12] time, there were indications that if the PCBs were available [13] to living creatures at different levels, depending on the [14] creature involved, there were some undesirable effects [15] noted, and that certainly was to be avoided. [16] Q. 1 didn't want to interrupt you. By undesirable [17] effects on living creatures, wouid it be fair to interpret [181 that as adverse health effects? [19] A. Yes, it's one criteria, yes, sir. [20] Q. And at the time, did you have studies that [21] documented adverse health effects from exposure to PCBs? [22] A. This decision was made in early 1970. The Page 491 [1] information available relating to health effects on living PI creatures was limited and very sketchy, but there was some [3] evidence, for example, that juvenile shrimp, when exposed to [4] low levels of PCBs in water, would not survive. There were [5] allegations that PCBs in the diet of wild birds bad the same [6] effect that DDT had in that it affected the ability of the [77 birds to lay eggs that would hatch or that bad shells or the [8] shells were thick enough to support the, the nesting mother [9/ hen. At that time, that was the only evidence relating to [10] effect on environmental wildlife. [11] Q. That evidence, however limited and sketchy, 1 [12/ take it was sttfficiem for Monsaiuo to have a concern about [13] the contituied sale of Motuar.' [14] MR. SARFATTI: Can 1 have a continuing objection [15] on leading questions? [161 MR- HUGHES: Of course. [17] A. It was a factor in their decision, yes. [18] BY MR. HUGHES: [19] Q. Were these studies iiuemal to Monsanto? P0] A. No. PI] Q. Who had they been conducted by, if you can P2] recall? Page 492 [11 A. I think I remember the shrimp study definitely P] wits conducted by the commercial fisheries laboratory located [3] in Gulf Breeze. Florida. The harm to birds came from two ]4] sources, one out of Cornell University and the other out of [5] Berkeley, University of California Berkeley. [6] Q. Was one of the factors that entered into the [7] decision to cease selling Montar the concern for the [8] potential of legal liability? ]9] A. I don't recall any discussion that used the [10] expression "legal liability" when we were discussing [11] termination of sales of these types of products. [12] Q. Putting to one side whether that precise term was [13] used, Mr. Papageorge, didn't someone indicate that one of [14] the reasons to consider stopping the sale of Montar was that [15] the potential escape of PCBs could lead to legal action [16] against Monsanto? [17] A. I just do not recall any such discussion. [18] Q. Didn't tluit enter into your own mind at the time [19j of these discussions? P0] A. We're talking now about Montars. pi] Q. That's correct. P2]A, Well, the matter of consequences, legal Page 493 [1] consequences for your actions is always sort of in the back P] of your mind. I don't know that I knowingly think about it [3] in that sense. 1 do know that improper action could lead to [4] legal difficulties. I just don't remember that thought [5] process taking place specifically for Montars. [6] Q. Putting to one side the issue of legal liability. [7] is it correct that there was a concern simply on the [8] potential adverse environmental effect of potential release [9] of PCBs? [10] A.Yes. [11] Q. And the potential adverse health effects of the [12] same? [13] A. Yes. [14] Q. And that, clearly, was part of the discussion [15] that led to the decision to stop selling Montar? [16] A. Yes. [17] Q. And you do recall those discussions? [18] A. Very vividly, yes. ' [19] Q. At the time that the decision was made to stop P0] selling Montar, what was the annual sales volume of the PI] product, in dollars? P2]_______MR. SARFATH: Objection: vague. Page 494 [I] A. I just don't remember those numbers at aQ. P] Hinni-mm. [3] BY MR. HUGHES: [4] Q. What did Monsanto do when it wasconsidering [5] ceasing the sale of Montar to find out what end uses [6] customers put it to? Let me rephrase the question, because [7] it was not very artful. [8] Did Monsanto take any steps to determine the end [9] uses to which Montar was put? [10] MR. SARFATTI: Do you want to put a time on that? [11] BY MR. HUGHES: [12] Q. I'm talking in 1970, during the decision process [13] that led to the conclusion that Monsanto should cease [14] selling Montar. [15] A. Monsanto, through its sales representatives and [16] marketing teams, was aware of the uses to which Montar was [17] placed, from the day they first started shipping Montars to [18] a customer, they had an idea where it would be used. [19] Q. To your knowledge, did Monsanto take atiy steps to P0] determine how customers handled the substance Montar before PI] putting it to the various end uses? And by that, l mean by P2] way of storage, employee handling, and so on. Page 495 [I] A. I'm not aware of any. I don't know. P] Q. Did any of the customers to whom Monsanto sold [3] Montar use it in any manner that resulted in the separation [4] of a substance that mas sold back to Monsaiuo ? [5] MR. SARFATTI: Objection; vague. [6] A. Not to my knowledge. [7] BY MR. HUGHES: [8] Q. During the discussions that led to the decision [9] to stop selling Montar, was there any mention of concerns [10] for product liability claims? [11] A. Not in my presence. [12] Q. Were you present when there was any discussion [13] concemuig whether there were any insurance implications [14] involved in the decision to remove Montar from the market? [15] A. I was not present. [16] Q. Now, you indicated to us when we last met tluu [17] Mr. Park had been involved in some way in this process that [18] led to the decision to cease selling Montar? Is that rigid? [19] A. Yes. P0] Q. Okay, were there any other lawyers for Monsanto PI] involved in the process that led to tluu decision? P2]A. 1 hesitate because it is possible that others. Page 496 [1] but I'm not familiar with what approach Mr. Park took in his PJ deliberations and all, so I cannot speak for that. Page 489 to Page 496 202-347-3700 ACE-FEDERAL REPORTERS. INC. WATER PCB-SD0000063750 BSA Depo of: WILLIAM B. PAPAGEORGE Monsanto v Aetna February 9, 1993 CR: 54365.0 XMAXO) 131 Q. That's fair enough. [4] Who made the decision to bring Mr. Park into die 15] consideration? [6] A. Mr. Park had been a member of an ad hoc group [7] addressing the PCB environmental issue in the late Sixties, [8] so when I arrived to chair this particular group, Mr. Park [9] was already in place. I do not know who made the decision [10] regarding the makeup of that group. [11] Q. You are speaking of the group that made die [12] decision on Montar? [13] A. Yes. [14] Q. Okay, you may have told me, but I'm sorry. I've [15] forgotten in only three weeks. Who all do you recall being [16] iti that group that made die Montar decision ? [17] A. I think I mentioned them primarily by job titles, [18] rather than names. [19] Q. Can you give me names? [20] A. They change. Others [21] Q. Go ahead. I'm sorry. [22] _____ A. Of course, the directors of the two business_______ Page 497 [1] groups that sold PCBs were members. They could not, of 12] course, attend all meetings. Their lieutenants, represented [3] by the Directors of Marketing, the Directors of Research, [4] the Directors of Manufacturing, Engineering representatives, [5] Public Relations representatives, Mr. Park, the Medical [6] Department representatives, I believe that covers the, the [7] makeup of that group. [8] Q. Now I just want to make sure I'm clear on what [9] group we're speaking of. Is this a group specifically [10] formed to address die Montar issue, or was this a group dial [11] addressed broadly the PCB issue? [12] A. It was the broad PCB issue. [13] Q. And dial same group was the one dial addressed [14] die Montar issue as part of die PCB assignment? [15] A. Correct. [16] Q. You had indicated that you at some point were the [17] chair of this group? [18] A. Yes. [19] Q. During what periodwere you thechair of the [20] PCB [21] A. Starting in 1970, and it lasted through my [22] assignment to PCBs which was early '76.___________________ Page 498 [1] Q. Mr. Keating [2] MR. SARFAll1: Try Mr. Papageorge. [3] MR. HUGHES: l`msony, I apologize, Mr. [4] Papageorge. [5] MR. SARFATTI: You'll get a better response that [6] way. [7] THE WITNESS: 1 don't mind being called Lany. [8/ He's a good man. [9] MR. OMROD: If you speak loud enough, he'll hear [10] you. [11] MR. SARFATTI: For the record, he's next door. [12] MR. HUGHES: As mitigation but not an excuse, for [13] the record, I was taking Mr. Keating's deposition yesterday. [14] MR. SARFATTI: Must have been quite memorable. [15] BY MR. HUGHES: [16] Q. Okay, Mr. Papageorge, I apologize. [17] Anodier, another subject dial l had just touched [18] on at die time we broke back ui January was something 1 had [19] termed "die Kepone incident, " and l had asked you ifyou lutd [20] any memory of an event involving Allied Chemical dial was [21] called die Kepone uicident. [22] _____ A. I remember that.__________________________________ Page 499 [1] Q. Okay, and you rememfrer my question? [2] A. Yes. [3] Q. How mtu:h do you remember, as you sit here, about [4] dial event, die Kepone incident? [5] A. Not an awful lot. I remember very vividly the [6] name Kepone to describe the material. I remember the [7] association with Allied Chemical, but I have to confess that [8] I just don't remonber anything specific as to what triggered [9] the interest in the material and what led to the discussions i [10] that followed and ah. I don't recall. ! [11] MR. HUGHES: I'll have this marked next in order, i [12] MR. SARFATTI: So that we can dispense with i [13] checking the documents that you've marked as Exhibit against | [14] your seven-day list, can I have a representation that you I [15] did not intend to use and will not use documents as exhibits j [16] at this deposition that are not on your seven-day list? [17] MR. HUGHES: You may. In fart, I went back and [18] checked last week's, and I believe every - from that check [19] that every document I'm using today is on the list. [20] MR. SARFATTI: Okay. So I have that as a [21] representation? [22[_______ MR. HUGHES: You do,_____________________________ Page 500 [1] MR. SARFATTI: Thank you. [2] (Papageorge Deposition Exhibit 31 marked for [3] identification.) [4] BY MR. HUGHES: [5] Q. We've had marked as Papageorge 31 a diree-page [6] document, a cover memo with attachment. The cover memo is [7] dated May 3, 1978, from R. A. Hernandez to a distribution [8] list. Production numbers for die enure document are CBY [9] 3512701 to 703, atid Mr. Papageorge, I would ask you to [10] review die document and dien let me know when you've had a [11] sttfficient opportunity to do so. [12] (Witness peruses said document.) [13] A. I have quickly reviewed it. | [14] BY MR. HUGHES: [15] Q. Mr. Papageorge, can you tell us who 1161 R. A. Hernandez was in May of 1978? He's the person who's [17] uidicated as the author? [18] A. He is. He was a member of the environmental [19] staff at the Texas City Monsanto plant. [20] Q. Do you know what his particular assignment was in [21] 1978? [22] _______A. AH I recall is that he was - the general___________ Page 501 [1] assignment that he had involved environmental issues of all [2] types, really; air, solid waste and waste, and so on. [3] Q. Did Mr. Hernandez, to your knowledge, have any [4] particular assignment with respect to outside processors? [5] A. Hmm. He was involved, is all I can recall. What [6] his assignment was, I do not know. [7] Q. When you indicate he was involved, you are saying [8] he was involved in some way with outside processors but you [9] don T know specifically what he did? [10] A. He was involved with the issue of material [11] leaving the plant, going to outside processors. I do not [12] know if he was personally involved with representatives of [13] these outside processors. [14] Q. Now, Mr. Papageorge, lutving reviewed diis [15] memorandum, am I correct that it was die practice at [16] Monsanto to make memoranda such as diis to record events at [17] die plant? [18] MR. SARFATTI: Objection: lack of foundation. [19] A. I don't know that I would call it a practice. [20] The preparation of documents of this type was really left to [21] the authors of these documents. If they frit that it [22] required a write-up of this type, they were certainly free Page 502 [1] to do so, so I can recall examples where some of these were 12] documented in this fashion and others were not. 13] BY MR. HUGHES: [4] Q. Okay, and a document such as diis would be [5] retained in die regular course of Monsanto's business, [6] wouldn't it? [7] A. Normally, yes, mm-bmm, [8] Q. And also in die normal course of business, if you [9] were indicated to receive a carbon copy of a memorandum, it [10] would get to you? We had diis discussion last time biu 1 [11] and I've read it, but dial's why I said in the ordinary ! [12] course, one would expect diat you would receive a documeru i [13] dial was actually sent where a carbon copy was indicated to \ [14] go to you. | [15] MR. SARFATTI: Objection. I [16] A. If the author decided to release it and if the ACE-FEDERAL REPORTERS, INC. 202-347-3700 Page 496 to Page 502 WATER PCB-SD0000063751 BSADepo ofi WILLIAM B. PAPAGEORGE Monsanto v Aetna February 9, 1993 CR: 54365.0XMAX(4j [17] mail system didn't fail it, normally it would arrive at my .1181 desk, yes. [19] BY MR. HUGHES: [20] Q. Have you seen this particular exhibit before l f21/ just gave it to you to review1 (221_______ A. Today, I don't remanber that, actually receiving Page 503 HI it12/ Q. I take it your answer is you don i remember one /3/ way or another? [4] A. Correct. IS] Q. You can't say for sure you did not receive it? [6] A. That is correct. [7] Q. Having had the opportunity to review this 18] document, and in particular, the attached two-page [9] memorandum, does that - strike that. [10/ Do you - did you lutve a meeting at the Texas [II] City plant in or about August of 1977 to discuss the outside [12[ processor program ? [13/ A. Again, I don't remember one way or the other. [14] This document would certainly imply that such a meeting was [15] held and that I was present. [16] Q. And do you [17] A. I [181 Q. I'm sorry. [19] A. There were many meetings of this nature taking [20/ place throughout my area of responsibility. I just, this [21] one does not stand out uniquely from the many others that 122/ were held.__________________________________________________ Page 504 [1] Q. When you indicate that many meetings of this type [2] occurred, what type are you referring to? [3/ A. The subject matter, here, is Monsanto's ]4] procedures regarding the sale of materials to outside [5] processors or to the transfer of materials to outside [6] processors. There were many meetings of that type held [7] through the years. This one does not stand out in any [8] special way in my memory. [9] Q. At what time during your career at Monsanto, if [10] you can tell us, did you first begin addressing the issue of [11] the sale of materials to outside processors ? [12] A. Hnim. It would have to be when I was first [13! appointed Director of the Environmental Operations, which [14] was 1977. So that's about the time I became involved with [15] that particular issue. [16] Q. And is it accurate in your mind as indicated by [17] this memorandum, that die incident uivolving Allied Chemical [18[ and Kepone triggered Monsanto's interest in taking a look at [19/ its outside processor relationships? /20[ A. Would you mind repeating that question? [21] Q. Why don't I try to rephrase it. [22] _____ My question is whether - diis is an attempt to____________ Page 505 [1] pin down, perhaps, die time you began to get involved [2/ whedier it was publicity over wtuu had happened to Allied [3/ Chemical with respect to Kepone that led Monsanto to [4] conclude that it ought to take a look at its outside [5] processor relationships. ]6] A. That incident, yes, triggered the thought that [7] let's review what we're doing, to avoid problems. [8/ Q. And I'm no expert on die Kepone incident, biu [9/ what 1 've read about it is diat an outside processor dial [10/ was formulating Kepone on behalf of Allied dumped materials [11] in a river, polluted die river, and diere was fear diey [12] might pollute die Chesapeake Bay, 1 believe. Does dial ring [13] any belts widi you? [14] A. (Witness shakes head in negative manner.) [15] Q. No? [16] A. There's a faint bell. I associate, the minute [17] you start talking, with a fish kill also. [18] Q. In the river, dust's correct. [191 A. In the river, there was a fish kill, yes. It's [20[ coming back to me. [21] Q. Now, were you die person widiin Monsanto Chemical [22/ Intermediates who was in charge cf the program to review______ Page 506 [1] outside processor arrangements? [2] A. I don't know that I ever associated that activity [3] with the, your use of the word "in charge." It was expected [4] of me to communicate to the plants what the corporate [5] objective was and to, where appropriate, assist the plants [6] in understanding what the issue's all about and getting the, [7] the resources to accomplish the task, whether it be people, [8] or money, or whatever. [9] Q. Now [10] A. Uh [11] Q. I'm sorry. [12] A. The actual implementation really depended on the [13] prime manager and his acceptance of this charge, if you [14] win, and successfully completing this study or approach. [15] He could ignore my comments and my offers to assist, and [16] what have you, as long as he could justify to his [17] supervisors, so 1 don't know how to interpret your use of [18] the word was I in charge. [19] Q. You were, certainly, intimately involved [20] A. Yes. [21] Q. - in the effort within MCI? [22] A. When you say "intimately Page 507 [1] Q. You don't like that word? I'll remove [2] "ultimately. " You were clearly involved in the effort from [3] its beginning to its ends. [4] A. Very true, but when you used the word [5] "intimately," that meant I had to know all the analyses of [6] the materials down to the parts per million kind of numbers. [7] I didn't have that kind of knowledge. [8] Q. Let's take that word out and let me ask again. [9] You were involved in die program from the beginning to die [10] etui, right? [11] A. Yes, sir. [12] Q. Now, diismemorandum by - theattached [13] memorandum from Mr. Hernandez suggests there was a meeting [14] at Texas City. My question is whether there was an effort [15] made by yourself to visit all the plants widun MCI to [16] discuss die corporation's outside processor program. [17] A. Yes. [18] Q. So you went toeach plant as you recall and met [19] widi die appropriate individuals at the plant level? [20] A. Yes. This subject along with other subjects, [21] mm-hmin. [22] Q. Okay. I can't help but ask you, Mr. Papageorge, Page 508 [1] was Mr. Thomas assigned particularly to the outside [2] processor issue at the time? [3] A. Mr. Thomas was an attorney assigned to MCI. Part [4] of his assignment included the environmental issues that [5] related to MCI, so he was a logical person to be involved [6] and get familiar with the issues associated with this [7] activity. [8] Q. Now, in Mr. Hernandez' September 1, 1977, memo, [9] which starts at the second page of Papageorge Exhibit 31, he [10] indicates diat you said as a result of the Allied Chemical [11] incidem, Monsanto was taking a hard look at all of its [12] outside processors, and does that accurately reflect what [13] you remember as die corporate position at die time? [14] A. Yes. [15] Q. Okay. Now, did you have a view or did you ] [16] express any view in September of 1977, of Monsanto's [17] responsibility widi respect to outside processors as far as [18] die community, die workers, and die environment where [19] production and waste streams are used and transported? And [20] I'm quoting Mr. Hernandez' language, obviously. [21] A. Yes. [22] _______Q. But I'm - what I want is what - whedier you can Page 509 [1] confirm or deny diat you had a view along diose lines at die [2] time. [3] MR. SARFATTI: Objection; vague. [4] A. I had that view, yes. [5] BY MR. HUGHES: [6] Q. Now, Mr. Hernandez goes on in his memorandum to [7] indicate diat there hot an instruction to develop a dossier Page 502 to Page 509 202-347-3700 ACE-FEDERAL REPORTERS, INC. WATER PCB-SD0000063752 BSA Depo of: WHIIAM B. PAPAGEORGE Monsanto v Aetna February 9, 1993 CR: 54365,0 XMAX/5) [8/ on each processor? Was that pan of the program as you [9] understood it? [10] A. That's my understanding, yes. Mm-hmm. [11] Q. What was the dossier to include? What [12] information? [13] A. Oh, gosh; anything that related to this activity,' [14] the type of material, the labeling, the information supplied [15] to the outside processor, the quantities of material, the [16] way it was shipped, whether it was in drums by truck, or [17] tank cars, or tank trucks, or what have you, anything that [18] the keepers of the dossier felt would be significant [19] relating to that activity. [20] Q. Who were the keepers of die dossier? [21] A. That varied, plant to plant. [22] ______ Q. But it was kept at die plant level?___________________ Page 510 [1] A. Yes. [2] Q. Can you tell us who at Texas Gty maintained [3] outside process or dossiers in 1977-1978? [4] A. I can only - I can narrow it down to two [5] possibilities. I don't know which one. Mr. Hernandez or [6] the purchasing representative at the plant. [7] Q. Can you tell us - strike that. [8/ Do you know whether at any later time from 1978 [9] to 1983. let's say, when you left to go to MIC, wiiedier [10] diere was anyone else at the Texas Gty plant whom you [11] understood to have - to be maintaining die dossiers on [12] outside processors ? [13] A. I don't remember anybody else. [14] Q. Did Ray Ann Reid ever take on that [15] responsibility ? [16] A. Ray Ann was involved. I don't know if she was [17] keeper of the dossier or sort of monitored regarding its [18] presence and contents. I don't remember the details, there. [19] Q. Now, Mr. Hernandez, in the second paragraph of [20] his September 1 memorandum, in the first sentence, he [21] states, quote, "We are not to withhold any information as it [22] relates to safe handling of our materials, * end quote, and______ Page 511 [1] my question to you is whether reading that sentence [2] refreshes your memory as to whether you said anything along [3] those lines to people at die plant level. [4] A. That was my, my input. That's what I emphasized [5] wherever [ went, so it fits. [6] Q. Okay. What did you mean when you told people at [7] die plant level that they were not to withhold any [8] information concerning die safe handling of materials from [9] the plant? For example, withhold from whom? [10] A. Oh, from the people handling the material. The [11] trucking firms, the outside processor. Highway Patrol people [12] in case there's an accident in transit, fire fighting [13] groups. [14] Q. fit ~ let me go back for a second to die dossier [15] diat was to be kept. In 1977, was diere any written [16] statement as to die information diat should be included in [17] an outside processor dossier? [18] A. No, not to my knowledge. [19] Q. When you met with die plant personnel to discuss [20] diis program, did you give them a list of biformation that {21] they should make sure to gatherfor die outside processor [22] dossier?_____________________________________________________ Page 512 [1] A. I recall Hisniwmg the kinds of things that were [2] in a dossier. I don't recall ever having a tight list that [3] I handed out to anybody. [4] Q. Were people at the plant level, as pan of [5] compiling diis dossier, to gadier information concerning the [6] manner in which die outside processor handled die materials [7] sent to it by Monsanto? [8] A. Any observations made by Monsanto representatives [9] along those lines were to be included in the dossier; but we [10] recognized that that was a challenge and that many outside [111 processors like most industry, will not allow outsiders [12] into, onto their plant premises, so it's difficult to make [13] personal observations like that. [14] Q. But / take it that if Monsanto representatives [15] were able to visit an outside processor and observe its [16] handling of Monsanto materials, diey would record those [17] observations in the dossier? [18] A. Record them? That was recommended or at least [19] share them with others and review them as appropriate. [20] Q. And one of the reasons that it would be desirable [21] to have information on how the outside processor was [22] handling outside Monsanto materials war in order to make Page 513 [1] sure diat it was not handling die materials in a way that [2] was damaging to the community or to die environment? [3] A. That's one of the reasons, yes. [4] Q. Are diere any other reasons that Monsanto would [5] be interested in how the outside processor was handling [6] materials sent to the outside processor by Monsanto? [7] A. Well, certainly. One, one reason will be the, [8] would be the effect on their employees' health, if [9] improperly handled. [10] Q. By "dieir employees, " you are referring to die [11] outside processor? [12] A. Correct. [13] Q. Anything else, any other reason -- let me form a [14] complete sentence, a complete question. Is diere any odier [15] reason diat it was deemed desirable for Monsanto to record, [16] if it could, die manner in which die oiuside processor [17] handled material sent to it by Monsanto? [18] MR. SARFATTI: Objection as to form. [19] A. The only other reason that comes to mind is the [20] one that would relate to the safety in the plant as it [21] relates to fires and explosions. [22] BY MR. HUGHES:__________________________________ Page 514 [1] Q. And are you again referring to the oiuside [2] processor's plant7 [3] A. Correct. [4] Q. Was there concern within Monsanto that it might [5] be held responsible in some way if a material it sent to an [6] outside processor was mishandled, resulting in an injury to [7] die oiuside processor's employees? [8] MR. SARFATTI: Objection; vague. [9] A. There's always thisconcern. [10] BY MR. HUGHES: [11] Q. And that concern is what led to diis desire to [12] have this land of information, correct? [13] A. Well, that's one of the concerns. It was [14] triggered by, as we said earlier, the Kepone incident but [15] that kind of opened up a lot of thinking regarding other [16] types of situations, in addition to the environmental type. [17] The employee health type, the safety regarding fires and [18] explosions, either in the plant or in transit, and so on. [19] Q. Okay. Now, again I'm going to try and determuie [20] liow much of what Mr. Hernandez wrote down came from you [21] rather dtan himself, and the next dung I'm interested in [22] is, in his second paragraph of die September 1st, 1977, Page 515 [1] memorandum, he wrote, qiwte, "Care and good judgment nuist be [2] exercised on how we word our transmittals on safe handluig [3] procedures so as to limit our liability and iwt give away [4] confidential information," end quote. [5] Do you see diat? Second paragraph, diird [6] sentence. [7] A. I see it, yes. 181 Q. Is diat a message you were conveying to die plant [9] people? [10] A. Yes. Yes, I was conveying that type of message. [11] I don't know if it's mine or Mr. Hernandez at this point, [12] but it's possible we both had that thought. [13] Q. Can you tell us what concern diere was diat a [14] transmittal aboiu safe handling procedures could affect [15] Monsanto's liability? And diis is in 1977. [16] A. Not being an attorney, I don't know ail the legal [17] ramifications, but the intent there was that if we did not [18] communicate the information we had at hand and some mishap [19] occurred as a result of a property of the material, that [20] it's conceivable, at least to me, that we could then be [21] responsible. ACE-FEDERAL REPORTERS, INC. 202-347-3700 Page 509 to Page 515 WATER PCB-SD0000063753 BSA__________________________________ Depo cf: WILLIAM B. PAPAGEORGE Monsanto v Aetna February 9, 1993 CR: 54365.0 XMAX(6) i'22[_______ Q. I understand. Biu at the scone time, you didn't Page S16 III want to give the outside processor confidential business [21 information. That's the essence of it? I3I A. That's another respansbOity we had, yes, sir. [4] Q. Now, Mr. Hernandez' next sentence indicates. [5] quote. "We are not to recommend procedures or safety 16/ equipment but are to indicate how Monsanto would handle the [77 product or waste stream." End quote. Now, is that [SJ something that you made a point of conveying to the plant [9/ level? [10/ A. Yes. [Ill Q. Okay. Did you suggest to the plant level [121 individuals that if they had an opportunity to observe the [13] outside processor's procedures and they thought they were - [14] that it was handling a material inappropriately, they should [15] suggest "That's not how we would do it"? [16] A. Yes, to use Monsanto's procedures,yes. [17] Q. And to say "If we were doing it, we would do it [18] this way, " and describe how Monsanto would handle the [19] material? [201 A. Under our conditions at our site. [21] Q. Right. [221_______ A. They may be like yours or yoursmay be different. Page 517 [1] Q. Understood. And then 1 take it that the last [2] sentence, there, is also consistent with what you talked [3/ about with the plant level people, which is after giving [41 that information to the processor you would let the [5] processor decide what he should do with the material? [6[ MR. SARFATTI: Objection as to form. [7] A. Yes. [SJ BY MR. HUGHES: [9/ Q. Okay.Now, the first paragraph of the next [10] sentence - first sentence of the next paragraph, Mr. [11] Hernandez wrote, quote, "Every effort should be made to [12] determine how the processor does his business. " Is that [13] something you conveyed to the plant level people? [14] A. Yes, sir. - [15] Q. Now, in 1977, was there - well, strike that. [16] Let's take that as of the date of Mr. Hernandez' memorandum, [17] September 1st, 1977. Was there any policy at Monsanto [IS] concerning under what circumstances it would refuse to [19] continue dealing with an outside processor? [20/ A.T don't recall any formal policy in writing. [211 I do recall that the marketing representatives [22/ or, in the case of the outside processors, the plant people Page 518 [II involved with the customer, the outside processor in this [2! instance, were cautioned that if at any time they sensed [3] that the outside processor would handle the material in an [4/ irresponsible fashion, they were to attempt to communicate [5] to the representatives of the outside processor that the [6/ material should be handled differently, and if no action [7] was, was taken, that the relationship ought to be [8/ terminated. [9] Q. Who provided that caution to the marketing [101 representatives and plant personnel involved with outside [III processors? [12] A. Of course, the management team from the business [13/ director on down to the marketing and the manufacturing team [14] down to the plants and to the plant purchasing people, and I [15] remember being one of them that would talk along these lines [16] and coach along these lines. [17] Q. When you went around to the platu level that was [ISI something you would tell the people there? [191 A. Well, I didn't wait just to go to the plants, 1 PO] would do it via telephone, or when the representatives came pi] to St. Louis and I met with them and so on. This doesn't /22/ mean that evety time 1 saw them I talked about it, but as Page 519 [l[ appropriate, it would come up. PI Q. Were there any specific instances that you can [3] tell us about where a decision was made to stop doing [4] business with an outside processor because of concerns with [5] the way it was handling materials sent to it by Monsanto? [6] A. There were seventh 1 do remember - it's been 17] so long. I remember one that comes to mind. I wish I could [8] remember more of them. [9] Q. Tell us about the one you do remember. [10] A. As best I recall, there was a company, as I [11] recall, located in the Philadelphia area that was in the [12] business of crushing and grinding and pulverizing solid [13] materials on a contractual bass. Monsanto used this [14] service to pulverize a material which was used in deodorant [15] soaps, for example. I had received reports that [16] observations had been made by somebody from Monsanto that [17] made him uneasy, and I was asked to visit the place, which I [18] did, and found that this outside processor was not caretul [19] in the way he controlled his materials, whether it's PO] Monsanto's material or someone rise's, in terms of possible PI] cross-contamination, with dust from one operation P2] contammating the product of another. As a result of that Page 520 [1] situation and his - and the outside processor's refusal to P] consider changing his operations or restructuring his [3] facilities to prevent cross-contamination, that arrangement [4] with this outside processor was terminated. I can't recall [5] other incidences that stick out in my memory. [6] Q. What was the name of this otuside processor [7] that - [8] A. I wish I could recall it; 1 don't. [V] Q. When was it that you were asked to visit this [10] outside processor in the Philadelphia area? [11] A. As best I remember, this happened about 1970 to [12] 1976. [13] Q. At that time in 1975 to 1976, which was before [14] you became the DEO of Monsanto Chemical Intermediates, [15] correct? [16] A. Correct. [17] Q. Was there already a program in place at Monsanto [18] for taking a hard look at outside processors? [19] A. I'm having some difficulty relating to time PO] periods. I don't remember whoi the corporate program as PI] formalized, so I guess my answer is, I just don't remember. [22/Q. After you became the DEO of Monsanto Chemical Page 521 [1] huermediates, did you make any suggestions to people at the P] plant level that they call you if they had an issue [3] concerning outside processors that they wanted to address? [4] A. Wefl, after 1 became the DEO, that kind of call [5] would have been addressed to the individual on my team [6] assigned product acceptability. I certainly encouraged it, [7] but I wanted my team member - [8] Q. When you got this call concerning this [9] Philadelphia outside processor, you had the product [10] acceptability assignment. [11] A. Correct. [12] Q. Was the individual on your DEO staff who would [13] have had that responsibility from 1977 to 1982, Mr. Farley? [14] A. Yes. Yes. [15] Q. And you encouraged plant-level people to call Mr. [16] Farley if they had questions? [17] A. Oh, certainly. That didn't mean they didn't, [18] they couldn't call me, either but I encouraged them to try [19] Mr. Farley first. PO] Q. Now, I'm still on the second page of this PI] exhibit, Mr. Papageorge. At the bottom, there's a heading, P2] "action plan. " Do you see that? * 1 * 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Page 522 [1] A. I see it. PI Q. Okay, and there's a - Mr. Hernandez has a [3] reference to materials being sold to Barker Chemical? Do [4] you see that? [5] A. I see that. [6] Q. Do you know whetlter a dossier was ever compiled [7] on Barker Chemical1 [8] A. 1 don't remember it specifically, but I would [9] have been surprised if it hadn't been. [10] Q. At any point, did you leant that Barker Chemical [11] had been designated a Superfund site? [12] A. No, that's news to me. 1 don't know that. Page 515 to Page 522 202-347-3700 ACE-FEDERAL REPORTERS, INC. WATER PCB-SD0000063754 BSA Depo of: WILLIAM B, PAPAGEORGE Monsanto v Aetna February 9, 1993 CR: 54365.0 XMAXOi [13] Q. Okay. Can you recall any, anybody at the Texas [14] City plant level raising any concerns with you about the [15] manner in which Barker Chemical handled materials sent to it [16] by Monsanto? [17] A. I'm not aware of any, any such comments. /ISI Q. If we can turn to the last page of the exhibit, [19] Mr. Papageorge - PO/ A. I see it. I have it. [21] Q. Mr. Hernandez is setting forth four action items. P2] the first of which refers to developing safe handling_____________ Page 523 [1] procedttres to go to the processor, and then it refers to a PI tutmber offorms that could be used for that purpose. Are [3] those all internal Monsanto forms referenced in that [4] mtmbered Paragraph 1124? [5] A. Yes. 16] Q. Was -did you have any position when you talked [7] to the plant-level individuals, of whether they should [8] include internal Monsanto forms along these lines in the [9] information they gave to the outside processor? [10] A. I think the last part of your question said "in [11] the information given to the outside processor'*1?1 * 3 [12] Q. Yes. [13] A. No,the dossiercontained confidential [14] information, Monsanto confidential information, so some of [15] that information in the dossier would not be shared with the [16] outside processor. 117] Q. So the idea WILS not to said die outside processor [IS] these forms but to take out of these forms die information [19] dial was appropriate to provide to die outside processor? PO] A. Yes. [21] Q. Now, in pointnumber 3, Mr. Hernandez wrote, P2] quote, "It mu recommended that contracts be in force for______ Page 524 [1] sales of waste streams and/or recovery operation. " Is that P] a suggestion that came from you? [3] A. I don't recall who raised that point. I don't [4] Q. Do you recall dial it was raised at meetings dial [5] you attended? [6] A. Yes. [7] Q. Can you connect with that statement any reasons [8] that were given for why a contract should be in place? [9] A. Yes, the intent was to include in the contract [10] the kinds of things that we've talked about in terms of [11] proper information regarding the safe handling of the [12] material. This was perceived to be a, a better way to [13] communicate, rather than an informal arrangement, a [14] telephone call and a handshake. [15] Q. Okay. Now, in point 4 of the numbered paragraphs [16] diat Mr. Hernandez put down, it indicates diat die dossier [17] should be, quote, "ready to go to St. Louis by die year's [18] end, 1977, with a recommendation as to whether we should [19] continue doing business with die processor." Now, you had PO] indicated diat dossiers were kept at die plant level; riglu? PI] A. Yes, that's the final repository. [221_______ Q. Before they get there, are they, were diey sem_________ Page 525 [l] to St. Louis for review? PJ A. A copy, at least a copy of the dossier was sent [3] to St. Louis for review. The final file in which that [4] dossier was kept was at the plant. [5] Q. Okay. Who at St. Louis in 1977-1978 had die [6] responsibility for reviewing dossiers from die Texas City [7] plant, let's say? [8] A. In seventy - by late '77, it was Mr. Farley, [9] assisted by any others in St. Louis that could contribute. [10] Q. In die last paragraph of diis memorandum, Mr. [Ill Papageorge, diere is set out a summary diat is Mr. [12] Hernandez' summary, and my question for you is, again. [13] whedier dtat's information you gave to Mr. Hernandez, versus [14] his own summary of Monsanto's corporate position. [15] A. Well, I certainly shared in that kind of [16] thinking. I cannot speak for Mr. Hernandez at this point [17] whether he was quoting me or summarizing for the group, or [18] expressing his own opinion there. I just don't know what he [19] had in mind. . PO] Q. Let's turn to the first page of the exhibit, Mr. pl] Papageorge, which is dated later. It's dated May 3rd, 1978, P2] a one-page memorandum, and it indicates that - well,__________ Page 526 [1/ diere's Mr. Farley's name - 'Charlie Farley, and Bill P] Papageorge were coming to visit Texas Gty and they wanted [3] to discuss the status of outside processor evaluations." and [4] you've reviewed that portion of dtis memorandum? [5] A. I have. [6] Q. Is this somediing you did at each plant, later to [7] go back and review how far, how much progress they had made [8] on evaluations of outside processors? [9] A. For those plants that had such arrangements, [10] that's what I did. [11] Q. Now, the addressees of diis memorandum, which Mr. [12] Hernandez very conviendy put down what their [13] responsibilities were at the time, do you recognize, at [14] least to the extent there are mamtfacturing people [15] indicated, that those are units that had outside processor [16] arrangements at Texas Gty? And by that, I'm saying [17] styrene, and / take it it's ethyl benzene manufacturing -- [18] A. Yes. [19] Q. - Mr. filler, then Mr. Newsom is listed for PO] styrene/ethyl benzene P.T., and then Mr. Ryan is listed for PI] acrylonitrile and some other things that l don't know what P2] they mean, but some other substances, and my question is______ Page 527 [1] whether these - whether you recognize that it was those P] departments that had outside processor arrangements at the [3] time. [4] A. Well, there are two individuals, there, that [5] represent the departments; Mr. fuller, and Mr. Ryan. [6] Mr. Newsom, you will note, after his name, styrene/EB P.T., [7] that's Plant Technology. In other words, he was part of [8] the, the technical group at the plant that associated with [9] that, those two products. [10] Q. Did you have an understanding in May of 1978 that [11] the Styrene/Ethyl Benzene Manufacturing units had outside [12] processor relationships? [13] A. Oh, yes, mm-hnun. [14] Q. Can you tell us today whether this meeting [15] scheduled for May of 1978 actually took place? [16] A. I don't recall it vividly, no. Hmm-mm. [17] Q. Okay. Did you have any concerns at any time with [18] the progress at Texas City ui evaluating outside processors? [19] A. No. PO] MR. HUGHES: All right, off the record. PI] (Recess from 11:02 to si 1:12.) [22/_______ MR. HUGHES: Back on the record.___________________ Page 528 [1] BY MR. HUGHES: P] Q. Mr. Papageorge, when Monsanto decided to take [3] this hard look at outside processors and a dossier was to be [4] compiled, were - was it contemplated diat as part of die [5] compilation of dossier, people at die plant level would look [6] at die history of die plant's relationship widt the outside [7] processor? [8] A. I don't recall that being brought up as a 19] specifics subject, but you used the word "contemplated," the [10] closest 1 can come, it was assumed that that kind of [11] thinking would take place, but nothing specific was said. [12] Q. You indicated it was assumed. Is diat something [13] diat you assumed? [14] A. Yes, on my part. [15] Q. AU right. The reason l ask diat question is, [16] for example, didn't you consider it to be significant if in [17] die past, die plant personnel had expressed some concern [18] widt die operations of an outside processor? [19] A. I certainly considered it personally, yes, PO] mm-hmm. [21] Q. Okay. Did that subject come up at any cf die P2] meetings that you had widt plant personnel, diat you were______ Page 529 [1]interested in finding out whedier diere had been any prior P] expressions of concern about die operations of an outside [3]processor? ACE-FEDERAL REPORTERS, INC. 202-347-3700 Page 522 to Page 529 WATER PCB-SD0000063755 BSA Depo of: WILLIAM B. PAPAGEORGE Monsanto v Aetna February 9, 1993 CR: 54365.0 XMAXdi) ]4] A. I don't recall that coming up as a specific 15/ topic, no. htnnunm. 16/ Q. Putting to one side whether that came up as a [7] specific topic, in these conversations with the plant IS] personnel, were they encouraged to compile as much [91 information as they had about the outside processor? [10] A. Certainly. Ill] Q. Did you encourage the people at the plant level fl2] to review plant documentation about the outside processor? [13] A. Yes. [14] Q. And were they encouraged to determine, for [15] example, what the planthad sent to an outside processor [16] over time? [17] A. That was part of the, I'm going to call it the [18] historic part of this dossier. [19] Q. So there was a, I take itfrom that answer, that [20] answer implies there was an historic part which is here's [21] what happened until now and a prospective part, "Here's what [22] we propose to" - "Here's the relationship we propose to Page 530 [II have in the future." Is that fair? PI A. WeO, 1 would even break it into a middle [3] category with here's what we're now doing, here what we used 14] to do, here's what we're now doing, here's where we think we [5] ought to be, and it would take it us "X" months, or what [6] have you. to get there. [7] Q. In connection with compiling this dossier, did [8] the plant-level people take a look at whether there had been ]9! any regulatory involvement on the part of the outside [10] processor! [11/ A. That was certainly part of it, yes, sir. That [12] was - yes, but I'm having difficulty recalling a specific [13] statement to that effect, since we were basing our [14] activities on what we knew about the Kepone incident and the [15] fact that regulatory people were involved in that, as we [16] kind of translated that to the kind of thing that could [17] happen to Monsanto, so on. [18] Q. What I was focusing on was whether it urn [19] strike that - whether Monsanto wanted to know, as part of PO] this outside processor dossier, whether any regulatory pi] action had been taken against the outside processor P2] A. Yes. * * 3 4 * 6 7 * * 10 Page 531 [II Q. - during the period Monsanto had been dealing PI with it. [3] A. Yes. [4! Q. Is that something that would affect your [5] assessment of the risks? [6] A. Correct. 17] Q. And that would particularly be so, wouldn't it, [8] if the regulatory action had related to the substance that [9/ Monsanto had sent to the outside processor? 110] MR. SARFATTT: Objection;vague. [11] A. Yeah, that's assumingthat the Monsanto substance [12] was the material of concern to the regulatory people, then [13] oue can also learn from actions that regulatory people take [14] on other materials as to what, if any, effect it would have [15] on Monsanto material. [16] BY MR. HUGHES: [17] Q. Could you explain the latter part of your answer [18] to me ? [19] A. I'D try. If a regulatory agency had taken [20] action or implied that their problems existed at an outside [21] processor's plant relating to a specific material, that [22] material not being Monsanto material, knowing something_____ Page 532 [1] about that material, then Monsanto's people can sit back and PI say, our material is not similar or our material is similar, [3] therefore, that action is of significance to us or it's not [4] relevant to us. [51 MR. HUGHES: Number 32. [6] (Papageorge Deposition Exhibit 32 marked for [7] identification.) ]8] (Witness peruses said document.) [9! MR. HUGHES: For the record, while Mr. Papageorge [10] is reviewing it, we've marked as Papageorge 32 a one-page I [11] document bearing the date January 17, 1977. It purports - I [12] the original purportedly appears to have been signed by i [13] W. B. Papageorge, production number CBY 3512723. [14] BY MR. HUGHES: [15] Q. Let me know when you've had a chance to review [16] that, Mr. Papageorge. [17] (Witness peruses said document.) [18] A. I have read it. [191 BY MR. HUGHES: PO] Q. Let me first ask you, Mr. Papageorge, whether any PI] of the, what appears to be handwriting on this copy, is [22] yours.________________________________________________________ Page 533 [1] A. It is not P] Q. Excluding for he next question that handwriting, [3] this is, this is, isn't it, a document that you prepared? [4] A. It appears to be, yes. [5] Q. Okay. You don't have any, any knowledge to [6] suggest this is not an authentic copy cf a document that you [7] prepared, do you? [8] A. No, I don't. [9] Q. Now, the date that the document bears is January [10] 17th, 1977, and am l correct that at that time, you were [11] still the Matutger of Product Acceptability? [12] A. That is correct. [13] Q. And this is a document you prepared in the course [14] of your duties at Monsanto? [15] A. Yes, sir. [16] Q. And it's one that's retained in the ordinary [17] course of Monsanto's business? [18] A. Yes. [19] Q. The memorandum appears tobe addressed to three PO] individuals, D. E. Donley, S. L. Hunter, and W. R. Riclutrd? PI] A. Yes. [22]_______ Q. Can youtell simply from those names why this_______ Page 534 [1] particular memorandum would be addressed to that group? In P] other words, is there a theme that runs through those three [3] names? [4] A. Well, those three individuals are directors of [.57 technology, responsible for manufacturing processes. They [6] also reported into the team to which I belonged, reporting [7] to Dr. Dmytryszyn, and I believe that they were in the [8] position to know some of these relationships that are [9] listed, and the last sentence reaDy points out the reason [10] for addressing them. I was asking them have any [11] arrangements bear made through thar organizations; the last [12] sentence of that memo covers that [13] Q. In 1977, was there, to your knowledge, any [14] practice concerning what outside processor relationships [15] would be arranged by the Manufacturing Department and what [16] ones would be arranged by the Technology Division? [17] A. I'm not aware of any formal arrangement. I just [18] don't know. And by that, I'm saying 1 don't know of any [19] arrangement made by the Technology Division. I'm only PO] familiar with those made by the manufacturing unit at the pi] plant.I [22]________Q. Now, are you speaking of at the time that's all_______ Page 535 I [11 yu were aware of or up until you left Monsanto? P] A. Up until I left Monsanto, as best as I recall, I [3] don't recall any arrangement that the technology managers [4] arranged with outsiders. ]5] Q. Can you tell us what facts led you to send out a | [6] memorandum essentially soliciting infomuition, whether there [7] were any outside processors that had become involved through [8] the Technology Division? [91 A. I don't remember now what triggered that question [10] in my mind. 1 just don't remember. [11] Q. Now, in this memorandum you indicate that a [12] corporate-wide taskforce had been appointed? [13] A. It does say that [14] Q. Were you a member of that task force ? [15] A. I honestly don't remember tbe details. [16] Q. Okay, let me see if I can jog your memory. I [17] think we may see a document, or I've seen a document. Page 529 to Page 535 202-347-3700 ACE-FEDERAL REPORTERS, INC. WATER PCB-SD0000063756 BSA Depo of: WU11AM B. PAPAGEORGE Monsanto v Aetna February 9, 1993 CR54365.0 XMAX(9) [18/ indicating that Mr. Dahm was involved with the outside [19] processor task force ? [20] A. Yes, Don Dahm. [21] Q. Does that ring a bell with you? [22] ______A. It does. He was working for Mr. Throdahl at the Page 536 [I] time. This is before Mr. Throdahl became the head of the [2/ Environmental Policy staff. That's all that comes to mind [3] at the moment. [4] Q. And do you recall that Mr. Dahm mh the chair of [5] an outside processor task force under Mr. Throdahl's [6] organization? [7] A. That's my recoDection, yes. [8] Q. Having thrown out the name of Mr. Dahm, does tlua [9] ring any bells as to whether you were a member of that task [10] force? [11] A. I remember many discussions with Mr. Dahm on the [12] subject. I'm having a hard time picturing myself in a room [13] full of others wearing a hat of a manber of a particular [14] group. Now, this doesn't mean it didn't happen; I just [15] don't remember that scenario. [16] Q. Okay. Now, at this time in January of 1977, [17] which as you pointed out, as before Mr. Throdahl took his [18] position - well, before the environmental policy staff [19] existed. [20] A. Correct. [21] Q. And at that time, wasn't Mr. Throdahl in a [22] corporate-level technology position? Page 537 [1] A.Yes. [2] Q. Did you lutve any communication in 1977 with Mr. [3] Throdahl about outside processor concerns? [4] A. No. [5] Q. In this memorandum, you've sat forth four [6] categories of relationships to be examined on outside [7] processors? [8] A. I did. [9] Q. Can you tell us, today, what the source was for [10] those four categories? [Ill A. I don't recall. [12] Q. In the fourth category which reads, quote, [13] "Upgrade our by-product or waste extremity," end quote, do [14] you see that? [15] A. 1 see that. [16] Q. All right. Can you tell us what kinds of outside [17] processor arrangements you were referring to in tluu item? [IS] A. The type were a material from Monsanto, could be [19] further processed to produce a, another material that - for [20] which there was a market. [21] Q. And that would include, wouldn't it, itistances [22] where the outside processor intended to market that other Page 538 [1] material, itself? [2] MR. SARFAlTl: Objection; vague. [3] BY MR. HUGHES: [4] Q. Is tlutt right? [5] MR. SARFAlTl: And speculative. [6] BY MR. HUGHES: [7] A. That would include that, yes, sir. [8] Q. And would it also include instances where the [9] outside processor returned this recovered material to [10] Monsanto? [11] A. Yes. [12] Q. In the paragraph immediately after those four [13] numbered categories, you ituhcated tluu the reason for doing [14] this was, quote, "To ensure tluu our corporate concepts of [15] social responsibility are twt compromised by anyone who [16] miglu be considered our agent." [17] Can you tell me the source of tluu expression of [18] concern ? Is tluu your own interpretation or did tluu come [19] from somebody else? [20] A. I don't know if it was original with me or not. [21] At this point, 1 can't really say. I certainly believed in1 [221 that personally. Page 539 [1] Q. Okay. [2] A. Whether it represoits a consensus of a bigger [3] group, I don't recall. [4] Q. Mr. Papageorge, do you recognize any of the [5] lusndwriting on this document? [6] A. No, I don't. [7] Q. Now, one of the names that appears on it is, in a [8] couple ofplaces, W. G. - is it Juhl, J-u-h-l? [9] A. Yes, sir. [10] Q. And at the time in Jatutary of 1977, was Mr. Juhl [11] at the Texas City plant? [12] A. Yes. [13] Q. What was his position at the Texas City plant at [14] that time? [15] A. He was not a member of the plant organization. [16] He was physically located there. His staff was located [17] there. He's a member of the Technology Diviaon. I have [18] forgotten his exact title, but he reported to Mr. Hunter, [19] and his team was associated with technology associated with [20] Texas City plant processes. [21] Q. Now, you told us that the three addressees of the [22] document, that is, Donley, Hunter and Richard, were all_______ Page 540 [1] Directors of Technology for maniftacturing ? [2] A. No. [3] Q. Did I get that wrong? t did get it wrong. [4] A. I don't know that it's so much wrong, it's they [5] were, their title, as I remember, was Directors of [6] Technology. [7] Q. And they reported to Dr. Dmytryszyn? [8] A. Correct. 19] Q. And were they all in St. Louis? [10] A. No. [11] Q. Where were they located? [12] A. Mr. Danley was located in Pensacola, Florida, Mr. [13] Hunter in St. Louis, and Mr. Richard in St. Louis. [14] Q. Did Mr. Hunter's - strike tluu. [15] Did all of dte people in Technology at the Texas [16] City plant report to Mr. Hunter? [17] A. Yes. [18] Q. Okay. There's an uuHcation in your memorandum [19] tluu a preliminary inventory of oiuside processors had been [20] prepared by corporate Directors of Manufacturing? [21] A. That's what it indicates. [22] _______ Q. Okay, and as of July - I'm sorry, as of January_____ Page 541 [1] 1977, who was the Director of Manufacturing with [2] responsibility for the Texas City platu? Was it Mr. [3] Brasfield at tluu time? [4] A. Yes, Mr. Earl Brasfield. [5] Q. Now, it's unlikely, isn't it, tluu Mr. Brasfield, [6] himself, compiled the list of outside processors? [7] A. That's true. [8] Q. Do you know wtu> in the Mamffacturing Group tluu [9] would lutve responsibility for the Texas City plant compiled [10] a list of outside processors? [11] A. It would certainly have to be somebody that the [12] plant manager asagned. At this point in time, 1 don't know [13] who that individual was. It might have been a team. [14] Q. Was your expectation tluu responses to this [15] memorandum would come directly to you? Aid I ask tluu [16] because of, the very last sentence seems to invite that. [17] A. I'm sorry, you mean the responses to this [18] particular document? [19] Q. Yes. In other words, your very last sentence of [20] the document itdicate - is a question - [21] A. Yes.* * 3 4 * 6 7 [22]________ Q. - essentially seeking information._____________________ Page 542 | [1] j [2] A. Yes. Q- Aid - ' [3] A. I was hoping that the addressees would make their [4] composite reports and send me a copy. ! [5] Q. Were you at the time compiling a corporate-wide [6] inventory of outside processors? [7] A. No, I was, 1 was compiling an MCI-wide inventory. /8] Q. I'm sorry, l meant to ask it that way. ACE-FEDERAL REPORTERS, INC. 202-347-3700 Page 535 to Page 542 WATER PCB-SD0000063757 BSA_________________________________ Depo cf; WILLIAM B. PAPAGEORGE Monsanto v Aetna February 9, 1993 CR; 54365.0 XMAXaO) [9] And was it your responsibility, individually, to [10] compile tluu list, from various resources that you used1 fIII A. I sort of acted like the scissors-aud-paste guy [!2] and sent the combination reports to Mr. Dahm. [13] Q. Who else did you send the - well, let me back [14] up. When you say the combination report, once you got ail [15] the feedback from these resources [16] A. Right. [17] Q. - you hod your secretary put it into some kind [IS] offormat, / take it? [19] A. Some kind of format. I don't recall exactly what [201 form it took. It wouldn't surprise me if it was just a [21] matter of stapling it to a note that said, "Here is MCI's [22] report." Page 543 [1] Q. Fair enough. And you sent a copy to Mr. Dahm? [2/ A. Yes. [3] Q. Who else did you send a copy to? [4] A. Oh, God, I don't remember. [5/ Q. Did you notice in January of 1977 what Monsanto [6] intended to do with this inventory of outside processors [7] once it was compiled? [8] A. No, 1 don't. [9] Q. Okay, and what I'm getting at is, were you ever [101 in any discussions about, for example, "we 're going to use [11] this to schedule evaluations of all outside processors," [12] anything along those lines? [13] A. No, that certainly is not my recollection. It [14] did stimulate some MCI thinking to take their actions within [15] MCI. I cannot speak as to what purposes it served for Mr. [16] Dahm and Mr. Throdahl. [17] Q. Did you maintain a copy cf the compilation of [18] information on outside processors within MCI1 [19] A. I don't recall it, but that doesn't mean I didn't [20] keep a copy. [21] Q. When you were going around to the plants later [22] atul discussing the evaluations of outside processors, did Page 544 111 you already iutve a list with you for each plant that you [2] could refer to? [3] A. Oh, I very likely, sure, sure, I prepared for [4] these meetings and that's where my information would come [5] from. [6] Q. At these meetings at the plant level, was there [7] ever one in the format where you went down a list of the [8] outside processors about which you had been performed [9] informed, and asked those present at the meeting what the [101 status is with each outside processor? [HI A. Of course, I don't recall specifically each and [121 every meeting, but 1 can share with you my style, would be [13] one of let the plant open the discussion and share with me [14] iui update on each of the outside processors. In the [15] meantime I would consult my notes, and if there was some gap [16] between the information I was getting and what I had [17] received in the past, I certainly would bring up, "What [18] about this arrangement or what about this issue," and we 119] would pursue it along those lines. [20] Q. So I take it, then, that in these meetings, [21] pursuant to that format, you do recall there being a [22] nui-down of the outside processors and the status of the Page 545 [1] evaluations? [2] MR. SARFATTI: Objection; mischaracterization. [3] A. Well, I don't know about so much a run-down. I [4] had done my homework, by perusing what files I had in my [5] immediate possession, made notes as appropriate where some [6] things I recall so vividly I didn't have to make a note, [7] others I would jot down and I would work from those notes in [8] phrasing my comments and questions to the group that [9] represented the plants. [10] If the issue was covered well, to satisfy the [11] notes I had taken, I certainty didn't bring it up again, but [12] as I said earlier, if there was a gap in the information, [13] somebody was not mentioned that should have been, in terms [14] of an outside processor, 1 would ask, "Well, what about ABC [15] Company? What's the relationship there?" And they would I [16] bring me up-to-date. I [17] BY MR. HUGHES: [18] Q. Okay. On what we've marked as Papageorge Exhibit [19] 32, there's handwriting down at the bottom of the page which [20] reads, as 1 read it, "JOC Oil - SM tars - sale, ` question [21] mark and under that, "Phenolic tars'? [22] A, I see that.__________________________________________ Page 546 [1] Q. Okay. Now, you'll remember when we last met, you [2] indicated that you had heard of JOC Oil in the context cf [3] seeing a truck leaving the Texas City plant; is that right? [4] A. I remembered that, yes. [5] Q. And since our last meeting, Iutve you been able to [6] remember what substance that truck was taking away? [7] A. Not until I saw these notes here, today. [8] Q. Does tluu refresh your memory? [9] A. It does, yes. [10] Q. Okay. So you were aware - let me back up. [11] 1 think you told me that -- well, let me just ask [12] you, this incident at the Texas City plant where you saw the [13] JOC Oil truck leaving - [14] A. Yes. [15] Q. - did it actually say "JOC Oil" on the tntck? [16] A. Yes, as best I remember, the "J-O-C" was on the [17] cab door. Mm-hmm. [18] Q. Approximately when was tluu? [19] A. Oh, golly. [20] Q. Can you narrow it down even to year? [21] A. I'm having difficulty narrowing it down. It [22] certainly would have to be after 1976. I find myself in the Page 547 I [1] position where I'm almost guessing and I'm trying to avoid [2] that. [3] Q. Okay. Well, in - 1 don't want you to guess, Mr. [4] Papageorge. Now we have in front of us as Papageorge 32 a [5] document that you created in January 17th, 1977, and I [6] understand you don't know when the handwriting was put on [7] it. [8] A. That's true. [9] Q. But my question would be whether in response to [10] this corporate-wide taskforce seeking to identify outside [11] processors, it was brought to your attention tluu JOC Oil [12] was an outside processor with which the Texas City plant [13] dealt. [14] A. That I don't remember. I don't remember the [15] listing of outside processors. [16] Q. I haven't asked you, did you get this documetu [17] back with the handwriting on it? [18] A. I don't recall that at all. [19] Q. Now, you indicated tluu seeing, putting that, [20] taking tluu into account, nonetheless seeing JOC Oil-SM [21] tars - sale jogged your memory?1 11 [22] A. It did._____________________________________________ Page 548 [1] Q. Tell us what yourjogged memory is now. [2] A. That's just about H; that he was - that JOC Oil [3] truck was hauling these tars from the styrene process to [4] somewhere. That's all I really recall. [5] Q. And is, is that memory that you now Iutve [6] connected with this incident where you saw the truck leaving [7] the plant1 [8] A. Yes. [9] Q. Now, it also, this handwriting also indicates [10] phenolic tars, and does that refresh your memory as to [11] whether JOC Oil also received phenolic tars from Monsanto? [12] A. Yes, it does. [13] Q. And in wJuu context did you learn that JOC Oil [14] received phenolic tars from Monsanto? [15] A. I don't know that I understand your question. [16] You mean under what conditions did I leam of this, or - [17] Q. Let me ask it like a normal person would. How [18] did you leant it? [19] A. As best I recall, when this particular truck was [20] noted and pointed out to me, the individual who was with me [21] said that it also picks up material from the Chocolate Bayou [22] plant. This is the other Monsanto plant in that area, and Page 542 to Page 548 202-347-3700 ACE-FEDERAL REPORTERS, INC. WATER PCB-SD0000063758 BSA Depo of: WILLIAM B. PAPAGEORGE Monsanto v Aetna February 9, 1993 CR: 54365.0 XMAXfW Page 549 [1] this is where the reference to phenol ton came up. That's, [2] as best as i recall, that's when it happened. [3] Q. Having had your memory refreshed to the extent [4] that you did have a conversation that identified the 15] substances going to JOC Oil, do you remember who it was you [6] had the conversation with? [7] A. No, I don't I wish I could. [8] Q. And do you - can you tell us, having seen this [9] reference, whether you were informed what JOC Oil did with [10] the styrene tars and phenolic tars? [11] A. I was led to believe by that conversation that [12] JOC Oil did some processing to recover salable materials [13] from these two tars. [14] Q. And this is, again, in this conversation we've [15] identified when you saw the truck at the Texas City plant? [16] A. That's my first awareness of this, yes. [17] Q. AU right. Do you now have a memory of [18] discussing JOC Oil other than in that incident where you saw [19] the truck at the Texas City plant? [20] A. No, I don't [21] Q. I asked because you said this was the first [22] incidetu, which implied there was a second, to me._____________ Page 550 [1] A. The implication is there, but I just don't [2] remember JOC Oil any further than that, really. [3] Q. In this conversation that took place after you ]4] saw the JOC Oil truck at the Texas City plant, now tlutt your [5] memory is a tittle more refreshed, let me ask whether you [6] were told what salable materials JOC Oil recovered. [7] A. I don't remember the specific, no. [8] Q. Okay. At least by the time of this conversation [9] when you saw the JOC Oil truck, you knew that JOC Oil took [10] styrene monomer tars and phenolic tars from Monsanto; [11] correct? [12] A. That's it. [13] Q. Do you know anything about the commercial terms [14] on which JOC Oil received those materials? [15] A. At that time? [16] Q. At that tune. [17] A. No. [18] Q. Did you at airy time team the commercial terms [19] imder which JOC Oil received styrene tars and phenolic tars? [20] A. Commercial terms? No. [21] Q. And by that. I mean money paid. [22] _____ A. I understand. 1 think I understand.________________ Page 551 [1] Q. Title passinghands, thingslike that. [2] A. No. ' [3] Q. Did youever seea contractbetween Monsanto and [4] JOC Oil? [5] A. No. [6] Q. As of the tone of that conversation after you saw [7] the JOC Oil truck, you knew that JOC Oil was an outside [8] processor with which Monsanto had some relationship. Is [9] that fair to say? [10] A. I knew there was a relationship. At the time, [11] the expression "outside processor" referred to a service [12] purchased by Monsanto. It's highly unlikely, and I don't [13] remember thinking about JOC 03 as an outside processor [14] under that definition, although I must admit that the [15] expression "outside processor" broadened with time and [16] included companies tike JOC 03 that made material and sold [17] their, the results of their process independently and did [18] not come back to Monsanto with any of 3. [19] Q. Just so I'm clear, Mr. Papageorge, when we were [20] discussing tutmbered category 4 on Papageorge Exhibit 32 - [21] A. Right. [22] _____ Q. - 1 asked you whether that included entities__________ Page 552 [1] that processed matenals for purposes of selling the [2] recovered substances themselves - [3] A. Yes. [4] Q. - and myrecollection is, you said yes. [5] A. Under number 4, yes. [6] Q. So isn't that what JOC Oil was doing by your [7] understanding - [8] A. Yon are right I was - the dates are contused [9] in my mind. [10] Q. The point I'm getting at is that at least by [11] January 1977, the relationship you teamed about with JOC [12] Oil was one that would fit within the then scope of the [13] definition, outside processor? [14] MR. SARFA1 t'l: Objection; vague. [15] A. By 1977, yes. [16] BY MR. HUGHES: [17] Q. Now, if you'll, if we can look at the last two [18] lines of the handwriting on this exhibit, Papageorge Exhibit [19] 32, which 1 read as saying first, "Cumene catalyst," and [20] then is that "AIC13 solution"? [21] A. That's the way I read 3, yes. [22] ______ Q. "- Lowe."_____________________________________ Page 553 [1] A. I see that. [2] Q. And for the record, can you tell us what AIC13 [3] is? [4] A. Aluminum chloride. [5] Q. Was aluminum chloride a substance produced at the [6] Texas City plant? [7] A. I don't know that the word "produced" is the [8] correct word. [9] Q. Fair enough. [10] A. It was present as a result of a process. [11] Q. Would you call it a by-product of a process? [12] MR. SARFATTT: Objection; vague. [13] A. A by-product has a connotation of high quality, [14] higher quality material than this would be. I would suggest [15] that it's a - I can't think of an appropriate word at the [16] moment. It's a stream, 3's a solution that results from [17] the processing, and as best I recall, the aluminum chloride [18] is a catalyst in some process used to make some chemical. I [19] forget which now, and after performing its function and as, [20] in essence, removed from the final product, 3's, 3's [21] available for further processing 3 there's some valuable [22] material in it. That's as best I can do,_____________________ Page 554 [1] Q. Now, I pointed out that this one has a dash and [2] it says "low. " [3] A. I see that. [4] Q. And you will recall we discussed last time a [5] person by the name of Ralph Lowe. [6] A. I do, right. [7] Q. Does reading this handwriting refresh your [8] recollection at all that Monsanto was sending an alumirumt [9] chloride solution to Mr. Lowe for reprocessing? [10] A. It does not. I don't remember 3. [11] Q. In connection with the work you did on the [12] outside processor evaluations, did you ever learn of a [13] company calledDixie oilprocessors? [141 A. No. [15] Q. Up until today, lutve you ever learned of that [16] eiuity? [17] A. I justdon't remember that. [18] Q. Now, let's see. Mr. Papageorge, the date of this [19] exhibit we've been looking at, number 32, is January 17th, [20] 1977, and we can see that somebody m response to this memo [21] wrote down JOC Oil. Is that sometiting that you would have* 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 * 9 [22] expected to be communicated to you ?________________________ Page 555 [1] MR. SARFATTI: Objection: vague. [2] MR. HUGHES: Well, let me rephrase, in light of [3] Mr. Sarfatti's objection. [4] BY MR. HUGHES: [5] Q. It appears, although we don't know whom, that [6] somebody identified in response to this memorandum, that SM [7] tars were being sent to JOC Oil. Isn't that information 181 that you would have expected to be communicated back to you [9] in response to this memo? ] [10] MR. SARFATTI: Objection; mischaractenzation ot j [11] the notes. [12] A. It an depends on who made the arrangement with I [13] JOC 03. If the plant had made 3, then the individuals ACE-FEDERAL REPORTERS. INC. 202-347-3700 Page 549 to Page 555 WATER PCB-SD0000063759 BSA Depp of: WILLIAM B. PAPA GEORGE Monsanto v Aetna February 9, 1993 CR: 54365.0 XMAX(12) 114] listed here as addressees were not included in their [15] document or submission to me. They were to report to me ]I6] those arrangements that their teams had made with outside 117] processors, not what the plant has made, so it isn't [IS] necessarily true that JOC Oil would have been on Mr. [191 Hunter's list. [20] MR. HUGHES: Fair enough. [21] BY MR. HUGHES: [22] ______Q. At the time you wrote this memorandum, it Page 556 [1] indicates you had already gotten information from the [2] mantfacturing people. [3] A. Correct. [4] Q. And in theordinary practice at Monsanto, you [5] would have expected to receive a response to your January [6] 17tli, 1977, memorandum at least within a month, wouldn't [7] you? [SI A. Certainly. [9] Q. Now, the fact - doesn i the fact tluityour first [10! recollection of the term "JOC Oil' of learning of the term [11] "JOC Oil" was in seeing this truck at Texas Gty, indicate [12] that that was before January 17th, 1977? [13] A. That would be one indication. The other could [14] well be that the name "JOC Oil" from a document, remained [15] with me in my memory, until I went to the plant and saw the [16] truck, so that recollection is more vivid than reading it in [!7] a document with many other listings. [IS] Q. Mr. Papageorge, did you know an individual in the [19] technology area of the Texas Gty plant named Lane, W. H. [20] Lane? [21] A. I cannot place that person. [22] _____ MR. HUGHES: Okay, next one. Page 557 [1] (Papageorge Deposition Exhibit 33 marked for [2] identification.) [3] MR. HUGHES: For the record, we've marked as [4] Papageorge Exhibit 33 a two-page memorandum which is a cover [5] memo with attachment. The cover memo date is February 7, [6] 1977, from G. L. McKee to W. G. Juhl. The date is CBY - I [77 mean the Bates number is CBY 3512721. [8] BY MR. HUGHES: [9] Q. Let me know wtien you ve had enough of an [10] opporttmity to review that, Mr. Papageorge. [11] (Witness peruses said document.) [121 BY MR. HUGHES: [13] Q. There's no buticadon you received this document, [14] if that's niutt you are looking for. Mr. Papageorge. [15] A. Yeah, 1 just don't recall this at all, but I have [16] read it. [17] Q. The reason I put it in front of you is, relates [18] to the second page, the attached memorandum, which is one [19] dated September 23rd. 1976, from S. G. Pappas to [20] E. N. Brasfield, and iti particular. I wanted to note that [21] date, to see if that refreshes your memory any further [22] concerning when this otuside processor hard look began. * 1 11 Page 558 [1] (Witness peruses said document.) 121 A. I can't relate this date to that program. I'm ]3] having a difficult time placing it. It just doesn't refresh ]4] my memory. [51 BY MR. HUGHES: [6] Q. Okay. There's a reference on this page, the [7] second page of Papageorge Exhibit 33, to Mr. Eck's memo. [81 A. Yes. [9! Q. IWio is Mr. - what was Mr. Eck's position in [10] September 1976? [11] A. He was the newly appointed Vice-President and [12] Managing Director of Monsanto Chemical Intermediates [13] Company, MCI. [14] Q. So he was the head of the entire operating [15] company? [16] A. Yes. [17] Q. Did you ever have any communication with Mr. Eck [18/ about an outside processor review or evaluation program? [19] A. I don't know, Idon't remember any discussion [20] with Mr. Eck personally, no. | 7/ Q. Did you know that Mr. Eck had uulicaied any [22] ituerest in that program?_____________________________________ Page 559 [1] A. I did not. [2] Q. This is news? [3] A. This is the first I've seen of this. : [4] Q. Okay. This memorandum also suggests mvolvement I PI by Mr. Brasfield - [6] A. It does. [7] Q. - in the program. Tluit you do recall, I take [81 it? [9] A. Yes. [10] Q. Was Mr. Brasfield on the taskforce, addressing [11] outside processors? [12] A. I don't recall Mr. Brasfield being on any [13] particular task force, no. [14] Q. Did you send any reports concerning the status of [15] the outside processor review program to Mr. Brasfield? [16] A. I don't recall doing so. It's very likely that I [17] did, because of his position in the organization. [18] Q. Did you know Mr. Pappas in September of 1976? ]19] A. No, I met Mr. Pappas several months later. . [20] Q. Was it within the discretion of the plants, as [21] you understood it, to decide who at the plant level would be [22] responsible for reviewing and controlling outside processor? Page 560 [1] A. It was the discretion of the plantmanager. [2] Q. Okay, so Mr. Pappas is indicating, here, that at [3] least at Chocolate Bayou, was the Process Technology [4] Department. Do you know - maybe we've already gone over [5] this - you don't know where it was assigned in Texas City? [6] A. No, I don't. [71 MR. HUGHES: Next one. [8] (Papageorge Deposition Exhibit 34 marked for [9] identification.) [10] MR. HUGHES: For the record, while Mr. Papageorge [11] is reviewing the document, we've marked as Exhibit 34 a [12] document that begins with a transmittal slip from the desk [13] of W. B. Papageorge, and then contains a couple of [14] attachments bearing various dates. The entire document is [15] Bates number CBY 3512704 to 3512711. [16] (Witness peruses said document.) [17] BY MR. HUGHES: [18] Q. Mr. Papageorge, let me know when you've been able [19] to familiarize yourself sufficiently with that document. [20] (Witness peruses said document.) [21] A. I've reviewed the document. [22] BY MR. HUGHES;__________________________________ Page 561 [1] Q. Now, Mr. Papageorge, let me represetu for the [2] record tluit this is a document tluu was produced in this [3] form to Defendants. And I say tluu because we have a [4] transmittal slip with certain attachments. Do you recognize [5] this collection as something that you forwarded to Dr. Juhl? [6] A. Now that I've seen it, I recall doing so, mm-hmm. [7] Q. You did that as part of your job as - you are [8] not DEO yet. We can't tell, can we? Is there arty way to [9] tell whether at the time you sent this, you were the DEO? [10] A. I was looking for a date, but I, I do not find [111 any. [12] Q. Well, there are several dates, but [13] tmfbrtunately - [14] A. I was really referring to a date - [15] Q. On your cover memo? [16] A. - of my cover ticket, here. [17] Q. And you had the same transmittal note when you [18] were Manager of Product Acceptability and as DEO? [191 A. Yes. [20] Q. Now, I take it this was something tluu you [21] compiled, did you, at the request? It says, "Per your1 2 3 4 [22] request, Dr. Juhl, " - on the transmittal note?________________ Page 562 [1] A. It does. [2] Q. WluU was Dr. Juhl's request? Can you tell us [3] tluu? [4] A. Of course, I don't recall the exact words but it Page 555 to Page 562 202-347-3700 ACE-FEDERAL REPORTERS. INC. WATER PCB-SD0000063760 BSA Depo of: WILLIAM B. PAPAGEORGE Monsanto v Aetna February 9, 1993 CR: 54365.0 XMAXH3) [5] was something about "What do you have, Bin, regarding [121 tars, correct? [6] outside processor arrangements that I might be interested [13] A. Yes. [7] in?" So I gave him what's shown on this packet, the whole [14] Q. Okay, and here it indicates they were recovering [81 list. [15] ethyl benzene. [9] Q. And you would agree this is a document that was [16] A. That's what it indicates, yes. [10] maintained by Monsanto in the regular course of its [17] Q. Does that refresh your memory tluu that's the [11] business? 118] substance they were recovering? [12] A. Yts. [19] A. Not really, but I can't quarrel with it. I don't [13] Q. From your, one of your previous answers, is it [20] know. [14] fair to state tluu the attachments were materials you had in [21] Q. Okay, and then you'll notice the second from the [15] a file readily accessible to you? [22] last entry on this page is JOC Oil processing phenol tars [16] A. Yes. Page 566 [17] Q. Now, the first twopages of the attachment, Mr. 11] from Ouxolate Bayou: correct? [18] Papageorge, is captioned "Outside Processor Task Force"? [2] A. I see that, yes. [19] A. It is. [3] Q. Now back. I'm sorry to jump around, back up to [20] Q. And at the bottom of the second page inthe lower [4] the first listing for JOC Oil. Over in the far right-hand [21] left-hand comer, it says "D. J. Dahm, 2-15-77"? [5] column, it says, `Arrangement Category,' and there`s a "2" [22] ______ A. It does.__________________________________________ [6] and a "3`? Page 563 [7] A. Yes. [1] Q. Can you tell us wluu that document is? [8] Q. And that relates back, doesn't it, w the outside [2] A. Well, this is the document prepared by Mr. Dahm [9] processor taskforce categories? [3] to describe the, in a short form, really, the program for [10] A. Yes. [4] becoming familiar with our outside processor arrangements, [11] Q. And on the second page, tutmber 2 is for "Oiuside [5] corporate-wide. [12] processors handling material we buy from them. " [6] Q. Vien is it correct to state that this constitutes [13] A. Correct. [7] essentially the instructions to all the operating companies [14] Q. And ptuting that together with the entry for JOC [8] concerning what outside processor relationships this task [15] Oil in the list of oiuside processors, does tluu refresh [9J force was interested in? [16] your recollection tluu Monsanto was purchasing ethyl benzene [10] A. Yes, this includes the instructions on how to [17] back from JOC Oil? [11] report that information. [18] A. It doesn't refresh myrecollection, but I can't [12] Q. So this, this document, here, is the source of [19] argue with the typewritten word. [13] the definition of the scope of the effort that you later [20] Q. Are you able to tell us who compiled the [14] engaged in to compile information concerning outside [21] anachment that lists the outside processors? [15] processors; is that right? [22] ______ A. Well. I - my office, 1 compiled the list that______ [16] A. Well, this is certainly the beginning. This is Page 567 [17] more a listing, as distinguished from the more complete [1] represents Monsanto Chemical Intermediates. [18] dossiers that we talked about earlier, and so on. [2] Q. I'm sorry, I meant to refer to Monsanto Chemical [19] Q. Is any of the lumdwriting on the second page of [3] Intermediates. [20] this exhibit yours? [4] A. I'm the one that did that. But I don't know if [21] A. It is not. [5] this is the list that came out of my office or if this is a [22] _____ Q. Okay. Did you ever have any questions for Mr,_____ [6] retyped version of that. Page 564 [7] Q. Okay, I guess l misunderstood you. You would [1] Dahm on application of the guidelines that the task force [8] agree that you compiled the information that is shown here, [2] had prepared here? [9] you just don't kru>w whether your secretary typed it? [3] A. I probably did. I don't remember them now. [10] A. Correct. [4] Q. There is no particular problem that comes into [11] Q. AU right. [5] mind concerning the application of these guidelines? [12] A. I don't know if this is the document that left my [61 A. Not outstanding, no, other than getting familiar [13] or a copy of the document that left my office or a retyping, [7] with what his objectives were and what he'd like to see, and [14] Q. Can you tell us whether as of May of 1977, you [8] so on. [15] considered this to be a, a completed list or war it still a [9] Q. Let's go to the second attachment which you are [16] living list that was to grow in the fitture? [10] already there, I see, which is a list captioned "Monsanto [17] A. Oh, living. [11] Chemical Intermediates Company," at\d then in the upper [18] Q. And war it a continuous process during the time [12] right-hand comer there's a date 5-16-77." Right now I'm [19] through your service as DEO to continually identify outside [13] referring to the page with Bates member CBY 3512707. [20] processors? [14] My question for you, Mr. Papageorge, is whether [21] A. Certainly.1 11 [15] this is the compilation that you ptu together from the [22]________ Q. Now, when you went to the plants to discuss wluu [16] information tluu you received from various sources. Page 568 [17] A. Well, it certainly contains information from the [1] they should be doing with respect to outside processors, did [18] Monsanto Chemical Intermediates Company. I don't recall [2] you take a list like this with you? By "this," I'm [19] this as being the result of the typing done by my secretary [3] referring to the attachment to Papageorge Exhibit 33. [20] for me. I don't know if this is the original list or [4] A. I don't recall aboutthat - [21] whether this was compiled from another list that was sent to1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9[510] 11 Q. 34; I'm sorry. [22] Mr. Dakin's office._________________________________________ [6] A. I don't know that I'd take a list where all Page 565 [7] plants are listed when I'd visit any one plant. 1 would [1] Q. Can we agree tluu at least as of May 16th, 1977, [8] certainly take information relating to that one plant with [2] this was MCl's current list of oietside processors with which [9] me. [3] it dealt? , [10] Q. Mr. Papageorge, is it fair to conclude from the [4] A. Yes, 1 can agree to that. [11] fact that JOC Oil is shown on this list of MCI oiuside [5] Q. Now, if you'll turn to the second page of the, [12] processors, tluu a dossier should have been compiled on JOC [6] the second page of this particular attachment, which is the [13] OU? [7] page where the, the first listed outside processor is JOC [14] A. Yes. [8] Oil- [15] Q. And to the extent possible, if any Monsanto [9] A. I see it. | [16] employee had been able to observe the manner m which JOC [10] Q. Are you there? Okay, atui even before seeing this j [17] Oil handled the styrene tars and the phenolic tars, that [11] we've now refreshed your memory that they processed styrene [18] ought to have been ptu in the dossier? ACE-FEDERAL REPORTERS. INC. 202-347-3700 Page 562 to Page 568 WATER PCB-SD0000063761 8SADepo cf: WILLIAM B. PAPAGEORGE Monsanto v Aetna February 9, 1993 CR; 54365.0XMAX(14) fl9/ A. Yes. /20j Q. And further, to the extent that the Texas City [21] plant had information about any regulatory actions against [22] JOC OU, that should have gone in the dossier?________________ Page 569 [11 A. To the exteat that it had it, yes. Mm-hmm. [2] Q. And to the extent the Texas City plant had other [3] critical information concerning the operations of JOC Oil, (4J that should have gone into a dossier? [5] MR. SARFATTI: Objection;vague. 16] MR. HUGHES: Let me rephrase the question, in [7] light of Mr. Sarfatti's objection. [S] BY MR. HUGHES: [9] Q. To the extent in the past a Monsanto employee had [10] recorded concern with the manner in which JOC Oil ran its [11] business, that ought to have gotten into the dossier? [121 A. If such a concern was recorded, yes, sir. [13] Q. And that dossier should have been maintained at [14] the Texas City plant? [15] A. Yes. [16] Q. Somewhere. [17] A. Yes. [IS] Q. And a copy of that dossier should have been [19] forwarded to St. Louis, to Mr. Farley, I guess? [201 A. Weil, I don't recall that St. Louis kept the Adi [21] dossier. They certainly reviewed it. [22] _____ Q. Okay. ______________________________________ Page 570 [II A. Now, whether the material they reviewed was 121 the - a copy or whether it was the original, I have no way [3] of knowing. [4] Q. I thought earlier you had said a copy was sent [5] but it doesn't matter to me which way it was done. [6] A. I may have used thewrong word. The information [7] that's in the dossier was sent to St. Louis for review, and 131 (he intent was to return it to the plant as the custodians [9]of that dossier. [10] Q. And by the fact that JOC Oil uav listed in this [11] compilation, you would have expected that process to have [12] occurred for JOC Oil? [13] A. Certainly. [14] Q. When the - generally, when the dossiers, either [15] the - when the information in the dossier came to St. [16] Louis, was there a sign-off procedure? [17] A. Not a formal sign-off, no. [IS] Q. Was there any distinction in the procedures used [19] between existing outside processors and proposed new outside [20/ processors? [211 A. I'm not aware of any, no. [22]_______ Q. Now, in the exhibit before you, Papageorge___________ Page 571 [II Exhibit 34,. on the second page of the exhibit, which is the . 121 first page of the outside processor task force. I'm catling [3] it guidelines - is that a fair term? 141 A. That's fair. [5] Q. Under "General, " it indicates, "To include" and [6] it states, "Arrangements currently dormant but potentially [7] active. " Do you see tlutt? [3] A. I see that. [91 Q. And that was your ttnderstanding at the time of [10] the evaluations you were doing in 1977? (111 A. Yes. [12] Q. When people at the plant level were to prepare a [13] dossier on an outside processor were they to lutve - were [141 they to make the effort to go and check with State [15] regulatory agencies to see if there had been any problems [161 with the outside processor? [17] A. I do not recall any specific instructions of that [ISI type, but it was implied when they were requested to get [19/ very familiar with the operation, the practices of the [20] outside processor, but no instructions were given, "go to [21] the state capital building and look up the record" or any [221 such thing.__________________________________________________ Page 572 [1! Q. You understood in 1977, didn't you, tlutt the [21 State regulatory agency files were a good source of [3] information concerning companies in the business of [4] processing chemicals? [5] MR. SARFATTI: Objection; no foundation. [6] A. I would suggest that they were a source of [7] information. I don't know about the adjective "good." It [8] might be questionable data. I, as I said earlier, I don't [9] recall any instructions that said "Do it" and no [JO] instructions that said "Don't do it." Just, we left it up [11] to the plant that was making the assessment to do what was [12] appropriate. [13] BY MR. HUGHES: [14] Q. To do the right thing. [15] A. Yeah, what they assumed or believed to be the [16] right thing, yeah. [17] Q. Did you ever go to a State regulatory agency's [18] files, yourself, to check up on any outside processor? [19] A. No. [20] Q. Did you ever ask anybody on your staff to go w a [21] state regulatory agency's files to review the files on [22] particular outside processors? _____________________________ Page 573 [1] A. No. [2] Q. Do you know whether anyone on your staff ever did [3] that? [4] A. I donot know. [5] Q. Did you ever instruct anybody at the plant level [6! in Texas, either Texas City or Chocolate Bayou, to go to [7] Austin and check State regulatory agency files? [8] A.No. [9] Q. It was encouraged, wasn't it, at Monsanto that [10] plant management slwuld try to keep a good relationship with [11] the State regulators? [12] A. Certainly. [13] Q. And in fact, to try to develop a personal [14] relationship with the directors and assistant directors of [15] state agencies? [16] A. I don't know about the titles of the positions, [17] but virtually everybody in the state agency from the top [18] people to the, the people on the firing line, so to speak. [19] Q. Okay.Did you personally ever deal with [20] individuals, for example, in the Texas Department of Water [21] Resources? [22] A. No.______________________________________________ Page 574 [1] Q. Did you encourage - strike that. [2] Was it expected that the plant people, when [3] compiling a dossier on an outside processor, would call the [4] state agency, the individuals they knew at the state agency, [5] and ask whether there had been any environmental problems [6] with respect to that outside processor? [7] A. Wed, the dossier was expected to be as complete [8] as they could make it. Whether that involved calling a [9] representative of the state agency or bringing up the [10] subject when they're in a face-to-face meeting with the [11] representative, that was all left up to the individual at [12] the plant assigned the task. Whether it even called for [13] such a question to be raised with the state agency, that was [14] left up to that individual. [15] Q. Were the people at the plant levels instructed to [16] review whether there had been any court filings with respect [17] to an outside processor under review? [18] A. Not by me. [19] Q. Did they have any responsibility to do tlutt? [20] A. Not that I know of. [21] Q. Did they lutve a responsibility to telephone the [22] State regulatory agency individuals whom they knew to ask* 2 3 4 5 6 7 * 9 Page 575 [1] about an outside processor? [2] A. The responsibility was one of, again, they're [3] supposed to keep tuned in to all the situations that are [4] relevant to their responsibilities. If it required a call [5] or a contact with a State regulatory person, they were [6] certainly encouraged to do that, but no one from St. Louis [7] could sit there and tell than "You must call the State [8} regulatory agency on this day, on this subject." That was [9]left to the plant to decide. Page 568 to Page 575 202-347-3700 ACE-FEDERAL REPORTERS. INC. WATER PCB-SD0000063762 BSA Depo of: WJTIJAM B. PAPAGEORGE Monsanto v Aetna February 9, 1993 CR: 54365.0 XMAX(15) [101 Q. Did they have any responsibility to check agency [11] files on an outside processor? [12] A. Well, the responsibility was a broad one of be [13] familiar with an relevant information. It did not go into [14] details about where do you get it and how frequently do you [15] touch base, and so on. [16] Q. If there was a case where an outside processor [17] with which Monsanto was dealing had been ordered by a court [18] to clean up part of its site, is that something you would [19] expect to see in the dossier? [20] MR. SARFATT1: Objection; vague. Speculative. [21] A. Wefl, if there were such a regulatory conclusion ]22] and it's being pursued by that agency, certainly, yeah,______ Page 576 [1] eventually it should end up in that dossier. [2] BY MR. HUGHES; [3] Q. Did you ever see a dossier on JOC Oil? [4] A. I don't recafl it, but that doesn't mean I didn't [5] see it or I saw it. [6] MR. HUGHES: Off the record. [7] (Luncheon recess at 12:35 to 1:55.) [8] MR. HUGHES: Back onthe record. [9] BY MR. HUGHES: [10] Q. Mr. Papageorge, from what we spoke abotu this [11] morning, I take it that it was your view that the plants [12] would be very involved in this outside processor assessment [13] process. There's too many processes in that sentence. Let [14] me try it one more time. In your view, the plant-level [15] individuals were to be involved in the assessment of outside [16] processors. [17] A. Yes. [18] Q. Okay. Did you ever speak with Mr. Pierie on the [19] outside processor review project? [20] A. I don't remember any specific discussion on that [21] subject with Mr. PieHe. [22] _____Q. When you - I'm sorry.______________________________ Page 577 [1] A. I just don't remember. [2] Q. When you first became DEO, which we saw in [3] Papageorge 1 was on or about August 16th, 1977, correct? [4] A. Right. [5] Q. At tluU time, Mr. Pierie was one of the members [6] of your staff? Is that right? [7] A. Yes. Yes. [8] Q. It was Mr. Pierie and Mr. Keating, wasn `t it? [9] A. Oh, yeah, right. [10] Q. Mr. Keating and Mr. Pierie were on that date. [11] A. On that date. [12] MR. HUGHES: Let me have marked as next in order. [13] (Papageorge Deposition Exhibit 35 marked for [14] identification.) [15] (Witness peruses said document.) [16] MR. HUGHES: Mr. Papageorge, to save us time, my [17] intent is to ask you on this document only about the last [18] sentence on the first page. [19! For the record, this Papageorge 35 is a [20] memorandum dated August 30, 1977, from M. A. Pierie, [21] P-i-e-r-l-e, to P. E. Heisler and W. Smull. Production* 11 [221 numbers are WGK 1202162 to 64.___________________________ Page 578 [11 BY MR. HUGHES: /2/ Q. Have you had a chance to look at tluu one [31 sentence, Mr. Papageorge? [4] A. Yes, I have. [5] Q. And the reason 1 wanted to show you this document 16] is this, this is a memo from Mr. Pierie shortly after you [7] became DEO, and it appears, does tluu last sentence - that [8] last sentence refers to assessmetu of by-product [9] disposition. [10] A. It does. [11] Q. Is that something different than the outside [12] processor assessments? [13] A. Wed, the disposition involves a little broader [14] concept. By-product, by-product sales or movements to an [15] outside processor is one of them, and if there is no [16] processor interested in that by-product it could end up in a [17] disposal situation; nothing in return for H. It's just [18] sent off and disposed of in the proper, say, landfill, for [19] example. [20] Q. Now, correct me f I'm wrong, but Mr. Pierie's [21] statement seems to conflict in some ways with your view that [22] the plant-level people should be involved in assessment. Page 579 [1] certainty, of by-product sales to outside processors: [2] correct? [31 A. I - [4] Q What I'm looking for is if you could help me [5] clarify. | [6] A. I'D try. I don't know what Mr. Pierie had in [7] mind when he meant "deeply involved." That's the hangup I [8] have. I do know the plants are involved. Now, if Mr. [9] Pierie was comparing that involvement to all of the issues [10] faced by the plant, environmental staffs or so on, and then [11] in his opinion, it was not deeply - so it's a matter of [12] what proportion of their time would they be spending. [13] Q. Okay, that's fine. Let's not spend anymore time [14] on that one. [15] MR. HUGHES: Next in order. [16] (Papageorge Deposition Exhibit 36 marked for [17] identification.) [18] (Witness peruses said document.) [19] MR. HUGHES: We've marked as Papageorge Exhibit [20] 36 a document with production numbers MCO 0084867 to 872, [21] Let me know when you've had enough time to look at that [22] document, Mr, Papageorge. What I'm interested in is whether Page 580 [1] you can help me out on what it is, since there's very little 12] identifying information concerning people and so on. [3] (Witness peruses said document.) [4] BY MR.HUGHES: [5] Q. Have you seen it before, Mr. Papageorge? [6] A. It does bring back some recollection. I do [77 recall the use of the form they refer to here as EC-203. [8] Q. You were speaking of a reference on the second [9] page of the exhibit under "Procedure,'' E, "Procedure"? [10] A. That is correct. That's one reference. [11] Q. All riglu, go ahead, I'm sorry. [12] A. That's all the recollection I have at the moment. [13] Q. Okay. [14] A. I cannot tell from looking at this document [15] whether this was a, an early draft as a proposal or whether [16] it's the final approved draft. [17] Q. That's fair enough. In the upper right-hand [18] comer of the first page, there are what appear to be [19] mitials JCM. [20] A. I see those. [21] Q. And then the date, 11-16-77. [22] A. Yes.______________________________________________ Page 581 [1] Q. War there anybody tluu you knew to be working on [2] the outside processor evahuuion who had the initials JCM? [3] A. I just cannot place a name with those initials. [4] Q. Now as you pointed oia, there's a reference on [5] the second page in the least two places to a Form EC-203? [6] A. Correct. [7] Q. Can you tell us - oh, and it seems to indicate [8] that Form EC-203 is a form entitled, "Notice of Intent to [9] Utilize Otuside Processor"? [10] A. Yes. [11] Q. And l take it tluu the next page is either tluu [12] form or a draft of that form? [13] A. That is correct. [14] Q. At some point, was there a finalized version of a [15] notice of intent to utilize outside processor tluu war used [16] within Monsanto Chemical Intermediates? [17] A. Yes. [18] Q. You 'll notice - I'm sure you did notice - that [19] on the second page of the exhibit - and we don't - 1 ! [20] acknowledge that we don't know now if this is a draft or a [21] final, but one or the other, it indicates that you would be [22] responsible for MCI to review the EC-203; correct?___________ Page 582 ACE-FEDERAL REPORTERS, INC. 202-347-3700 Page 575 to Page 582 WATER PCB-SD0000063763 BSADepo of: WILLIAM B. PAPACEORGE Monsanto v Aetna February 9, 1993 CR; 54365.0XMAX06) ill A. Yes. 121 Q. Did that turn out to be the fact, that you were ]j] responsible? [4] A. I was responsible to see that the review was [51 conducted. 16] Q. Was the eventual requirement as in some fatal [7] policy that someone in the DEO staff review the EC-203? 15] A. That is right. ]9] Q. Was it Mr. Farley, eventually, who, to whom you 110/ assigned that job? [Ill A. Mr. Farley and later, a Mr. McEwen and still [12] later, a Mr. Mueller. There were [131 Q. Can we summarize that by saying it was the 114] individual with product acceptability responsibilities? ]I5] A. That's, that was my assignment. That's how I did ]I6] it on my team, mm-hmm. [17] Q. If you'll turn to the third page of the 118] exhibit [19] A. 1 have it. [20] Q. Mr. Papageorge, this is the, the page that ends ]2l] "869" in the Bates number on the lower right-lumd comer. ]22] Under "Processing Route," there's five headings, "A " through Page 583 [11 "E," and / note that there's, there's a letter "B" which [2] talks about by-products and a letter "C" that talks about [3] waste streams. Was there a distinction drawn in connection [4] with the outside processor clearance program between ]5] by-products and waste streams? 16] A. 1 think 1 understand your question. Yes, there [7] was a distinction, about whether it be within Monsanto or [8] the outside processor. [9] Q. Could you describe that distinction for me? [101 A. Well, generally, a by-product is perceived to [11] have some commercial value, whereas a waste stream is not [12] perceived to have any value and must be disposed of. [13] Q. On the next page of the - I'm sorry, go two more [14] pages. What l`m looking at is, there's a very nifty flow [15] chart. [16] A. I found it, [17] Q. Was this ever actually used [18] A. Yes. [19] Q. - for the analysisof outside processor risks? [20] A. That was the procedure or the approach used to 121] evaluate. 1 have no way of knowing whether this is the ]22] land version or - because 1 see there are some attempts to Page 584 ]11 modify. PI Q. I understand and 1 see that, as well, but if I ]3] understaitd you, then, there was some flow chart for risk ]4] analysis for outside processors that was actually used in [5] the evaluations. [6] A. Yes, sir. /7/ Q. And whether this is a draft or not, it was [81 something along the lines of this kind offlow chart? [9] . A. Yes. [10] Q. Where you, at each step you answered a question [III and you were branched one way or the other? [12] A. Correct. [13] Q. And if you'll turn to the last page, there's a [14] risk rwtking of one through five? [151 A. Yes. [16] Q. You see that? Was that included in the final [l 7] process where you went through the risk analysis and you [15] came up with a number? [19] A. Yes. ]20] Q. And was that catalysis part of the dossier for pi] each outside processor?* 1 * 3 4 5 6 7 P2] A. Yes._______________________________________________ Page 585 [1] Q. So if l had the dossier for an outside processor. P] the fitll thing, I would - you would expect to find in it [3] some risk analysis that resulted in a number assigned? [4] A. Correct. [5] Q. For level of risk? [6] A. Correct. [7] Q. And this risk analysis meant risk to Monsanto, [8] didn't it? [9] A. I suppose you'd call that the ultimate risk, but [10] really, there was risk to people and risk to the environment [11] seriously considered in these. [12] Q. Weren't those factors that were included in the [13] analysis of the risk to Monsanto of continuing to deal with [14] this processor? [15] A. Oh, sure, the ultimate risk would be Monsanto's [16] yes. [17] Q. And in the final version, we don't know if this [18] is final or not final, but whatever the final version was, [19] were there certain risk scores that would indicate that you PO] either had to change the way the outside processor PI] functioned or terminate your relationship? P2] A. Yes._______________________________________________ Page 586 [1] Q. Do you know whether IOC Oil ever had assigned to P] it a risk number through such an analysis? [3] A. 1 don't remember one, but I would be very [4] surprised, since they were listed, that they didn't undergo [5] such an analysis. [6] Q. Who within Monsanto's organization engaged in the [7] risk analysis for MCI outside processors? [8] A. For MCI, it would be at least one representative [9] from the plant, generally somebody from the Research [10] Department who knew the chemicals involved, and the [11] catalysts, and so on, and it would be under the guidance of [12] the Product Acceptability Manager. [13] Q. So there were at least three individuals who had [14] input into the analysis? [15] A. At least. At least. [16] Q. Were there arty circumstances under which you [17] would personalty get involved in such a risk analysis? [18] A. I would, of course, get involved with any [19] situation in which my Manager, Product Acceptability, PO] thought would be an unacceptable at least to him and wanted PI] my comments. I could get involved in those situations where P2] the Manager, Product Acceptability would feel that the_______ Page 587 [1] response was taking too long, that he needed some support p] from me to get a higher priority on that activity. [3] I would also get involved in those situations [4] where an analysis had been made and the outside processor [5] would be deemed unacceptable. They were teffing me, "hey, [6] this company is no longer being considered," that sort of [7] information would come my way, and I would also get inputs [8] from my Product Acceptability Manager as to the, the status 19] of the whole program. Are we halfway through, are we [10] completed with it, are we in the second round, is this the [11] year when we review these things, and so on. [12] Q. Do you know where Mr. Farley is today? [13] A. The last I heard - this has been several [14] years - he's in the St. Louis area. [15] Q, Where were completed forms EC-203 maintained [16] within Monsanto, for MCI outside processors? [17] A. There's at least a copy at the plant and the [18] Product Acceptability Manager had a copy. I do not know if [19] the corporate policy staff people kept a copy. PO] Q. Were, were any, any reports made by Monsanto PI] Chemical Intermediates to the environmental policy staff1 11 P2] cottceming, for example, "Here's the status of our outside_______ Page 588 [1] processor review"? P] A. Oh, certainly, in the normal course of business, [3] those reports would have been made. I don't recall any [4] specific day or meeting, but this is the kind of subject [5] that I would bring out as we had our discussions around the [6] table. It would be my turn to speak and 1 would report on [7] the status of the program, and something about our findings. | PI Q- Were specific outside processors discussed with [9] the environmental policy staff at any time? [10] A. I don't recall any specific ones mentioned, [11] because that's the kind of detail that, that a large [12] audience would not be necessarily involved or interested in. [13] Q. Now, am l correct that this, this entire program [14] we've been discussing was part of complying with the Page 582 to Page 588 202-347-3700 ACE-FEDERAL REPORTERS, INC. WATER PCB-SD0000063764 BSA__________________________________Depo of: WILLIAM B. PAPAGEORGE Monsanto v Aetna February 9, 1993 CR: 54365.0 XMAX117) [15] Monsanto worldwide environmental guideline on outside [16] processors? [17] A. This program relating to outside processors was [18] eventually folded into the worldwide guidelines that were [19] developed several years later. [20] Q. So the outside processor review program predated [21] the worldwide environmental guidelines? [22] ______ A. Correct._________________________________________ Page 589 [1] Q. Okay, and when the worldwide environmental [2] guideline on outside processors came out, the program was 13] folded ituo one? [4] A. Correct. [5] Q. At any time, did you discuss the outside [6] processor program with Robert Chapman? [7] A. I had discussions with Mr. Chapman but I don't [S] recall any discussion specific to outside processors. [9] Q. Now, you under - [10] A. I just - [11] Q. I'm sorry, I'll letyou finish. [12] A. I'm finished. [13] Q. 1 apologize. [14] You understood, didn't you, that Mr. Outpman was [15] in the Insurance Department cf Monsanto? [16] A. Ves. [17] Q. And you do recall having conversations with Mr. [18] Outpman? [19] A. Yes. [20] Q. And were these conversations on business matters? [21] A. Yes. [22] _____ Q. Can you tell us the subject matter of discussions Page 590 [1] you had with Mr. Outpman on Monsanto business matters? [2] A. Those that I do recall were devoted entirely to [3] PCB matters. Mr. Chapman would drop by and sit in my office [4] with feet on my desk and we'd just talk informally about [5] where things stood, and then he'd say "Thanks" and leave. [6] That's all I remember of Mr. Chapman. I don't recall any [7] subject related to this outside processor, but that doesn't [8] mean it didn't happen. I just don't remember it. [9] Q. Do you recall any other subject matter that you [10] discussed with Mr. Outpman, other than PCB matters? [11] A. No, I don't. [12] Q. When you had the discussions concerning PCB [13] nuttters with Mr. Outpman, did he give you any iiulication of [14] uhv he watued information from you? [15] ' A. No. [16] Q. All riglu, you understood that it must lutve [17] something to do with insurance, didn't you? [18] A. Oh, yes, I understood it had something to do with [19] insurance, but how it aU fitted in, I didn't know. [20] Q. Did he ever uuUcate to you tlutt he wanted [21] information to make reports to insurance companies?1 11 [22] A. No._______________________________________________ Page 591 [1] Q. Did you ever participate with Mr. Outpman in any [2] efforts to settle any PCB-related legal claims? [31 A. No. [4] Q. Did you ever [5] A. Not knowingly; I'n put it that way. [6] Q. Did you ever discuss with Mr. Outpmanissues [7] related to Mr. Monsanto would be able to obtain [8] contributions from its insurance companies to resolve [9] PCB-related legal claims? [10] A. No. [11] Q. Was it a common practice while you were - let me [12] back up. [13] I think we discussed last tune tluttwhile you [14] were DEO, there were periodic meetings of the DEO's of the [15] various operating companies? [161 A. Yes. [17] Q. Okay, did that occur on any specified basis, such [18] as monthly or once every two months, or once a quarter, or [19] anything like that? (201 A. Are you talking now about meetings of the DEO's [211 only? [22]________Q, Did you have such meetings? Page 592 [1] A. Occasionally. [2] Q. Were those periodically scheduled meetings? [3] A. No, they were on a - they were called by at [4] least one of the DEO's who felt a need to get together. P] There was no set schedule. [6] Q. War there any other type of meeting that you [7] called a DEO meeting, other than the one that you've just [8] discussed? [9] A. I don't recall any. 110] Q. Okay. Did you invite others u> attend DEO [11] meetings if they were interested? [12] A. Yes, if they had something that we feh was [13] important to them. [14] Q. Okay. [15] MR. HUGHES: Let's take a look at this document [16] next. [17] (Papageorge Deposition Exhibit 37 marked for [18] identification.) [19] (Witness peruses said document.) [20] MR. HUGHES: I'm showing Mr. Papageorge a [21] two-page exhibit which I believe is the fiont and the back [22] of a single page. The document is dated May 5th, 1978, from Page 593 [11 }. Richard Sayers to she individuals. Production numbers [2] MCO 0084842 to 43. [31 BY MR. HUGHES: [4] Q. Have you had a cluuue to look at this, Mr. [5] Papageorge? [6] A. Let me read it first. [7] Q. Oh, I'm sorry. [8] (Witness peruses said document.) [9] BY MR. HUGHES: [10] Q. Mr. Papageorge, I'm not going to ask you in [11] detail about the contents of the memorandum, although [12] there's really not that much to it, I don't think. I was [13] more interested in whether this particular document, which [14] appears to be a notice of meeting of the DEO's, refers to [15] one of the DEO meetings that we were talking about. [16] A. Yes, it does. Mm-hmm. [17] Q. Was it the practice to send out a notice such as [18] this for each of those meetings with an agenda? [19] A. Not always, no. Sometimes it would just be a [20] telephone call, to mark our calendars and show up at a [21] conference room. [22] _______ Q. Does the fact that this one went out on paper________ Page 594 [1] with a fairly lengthy "CClist aitd a specified emphasis on [2] the outside processor worldwide environmental protection [3] guideline, indicate tlutt this was deemed a more important [4] meeting? [5] MR. SARFATTI: Objection, speculation. [6] A. No, I wouldn't interpret it that way. I would [7] suggest that the reason for this is that Mr. Sayers, who was [8] on Mr. Throdahl's staff, was acting as the meeting arranger [9] and had outside individuals outside of Monsanto invited and [10] he felt that because of the presence of outsiders, that this [11] ought to be handled a little more formal way and make [12] certain we had an audience for them. [13] BY MR. HUGHES: [14] Q. You are referring to the presence of Marsh & [15] McLennan? [16] A. Yes. [17] Q. Were there any other instances when Marsh & [18] McLennan made presentations to the DEO's? [19] A. I don't recall. I don't even recall this one, \ [20] so l/21] Q. Did you know what Marsh &. McLennan was? [22]_______ A. At the time?_______________________________________ I Page 595 ! [1] Q. At the time, yes, May of 1978. : [2] A. I understood it was a consulting company that | [3] would provide a service in evaluating companies such as [4] those that Monsanto used as outside processors. ACE-FEDERAL REPORTERS. INC. 202-347-3700 Page 588 to Page 595 WATER PCB-SD0000063765 BSA_________________________________ Depo of: Will1AM B. PAPAGEORGE Monsanto v Aetna February 9, 1993 CR: 54365.0 XMAX(18> [5] MR. HUGHES: Could you read back that answer, 161 please? [7] THE COURT REPORTER: [8j "A. I understood it was a consulting company [9] that would provide a service in evaluating companies such as [10] those that Monsanto used as outside processors." [Ill BY MR. HUGHES: [12/ Q. Did you use any outside consultants at MCI to [13] review outside processors ? [14] A. Not that I know of. [15] Q. Did you also have cm understanding that Marsh & [16] McLennan was, was one of Monsanto Company's insurance [17] brokers? [18/ A. That's the first I heard of that. [19] Q. Now, you'U note that this notice is copied to [20] Mr. Chapman, on the right-hand side? R, B. Chapman7 You [21] see that? [22] A. Yes. Page 596 [II Q. Right above his name is the name T. A, Caldwell, [2] Jr., with the same Monsanto mailing address? [3/ A. I see that. [4] Q. War Mr. Caldwell in the Insurance Department? [5] A. I don't remember him. [6] Q. Did Mr. Chapman ever attend a meeting of the [7] DEO's where outside processors were discussed? [8[ A. I just don't remember. [9! Q. When you did have discussions with Mr. Chapman, [10] you recall relating to PCB issues? [Ill A. Yes. ~ [12] Q. What sort of information did he ask you to [13] provide? [14] A. It was primarily one of, depending on what point [15] in time we're miking about, he would start off with ''What [16] is your program," and I'd bring him up-to-date. Later, he'd [17] drop by, "Where do you stand on your program?" Or it might [18] be one of, "I happened to be over here in your building and [19] what's new?" Kind of a broad question. I don't ever [20] remember him with any specific item in mind other than the [21] broad PCB environmental issue kind of question. [22] Q. Now, you were responsible for PCB issues from Page 597 [1] 1970 to the end of sometime in '76? [2] A. Early '76, yes, sir. [3] Q. So these visits you are describing with Mr. [4] Chapman, were they in that period? [51 A. WeD. it. it went beyond that. [6] Q. Oh, you continued - I'm sorry, you did tell us [7] that. You maintauied that responsibility after becoming a [8] DEO? [9] A. No. [10[ Q. His \isits continued? [Ill A, His visits did. In other words, 1 assumed he was [12] just touching base with what 1 bad heard. [13] Q. Aboiu PCBs? [14] A. About PCBs, yes, sir. [15] Q. So even though you were no longer assigned to the [16] PCB assure, Mr. Chapman continued to visit you on that [17] subject? ]18] A. Yes; less frequently. [19] Q. Did the subjects that you discussed with Mr. 120] Chapman concerning PCBs - well, strike that. Let me back [21] up. [22] You said you talked to him about the program? He * 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 * 11 Page 598 [1] asked you hows the program going? [2] A. Yes. sir. [3] Q. What's the program? What program are you [4] referring to? [5] A. The PCB market withdrawal, the limitation to only [6] one use, eventually, the results of studies that were [7] uudenvay at the time. This all depends on one - when he [8] came by the office, the results of what 1 understood of the [9] medical toxicity studies, the biodegradation studies, the [101 where does the government stand on these issues, I'm sure it [11] didn't cover all of them, but the whole area, "What's new?" | [12] is really bis question. ; [13] Q. When you had that responsibility for PCBs. did i [14] you monitor in any way litigation m which Monsanto was [15] involved over PCBs? [16] A. 1 don't know that I money toward it. I was [17] called by the, the Law Department when it came time for me I [18] to be deposed or serve as a witness, and that kind of thing. [19] Q. Did you ever discuss that, those litigations with [20] Mr. Chapman ? [21] A. Oh, no. He, he knew about those before I did. [22] ______ Q. Did you - did the subject matter you discussed________ Page 599 [1] with him cover what potential environmental contamination [2] there was as a result of PCBs? [3] A. Some of that, yes, sir. [4] Q. Did Mr. Chapman ever seek inpiu from you [5] concerning where, based on your knowledge of Monsanto's [6] manufacture and sale of PCBs, there was the potential for [7] litigation arising in the future? [8] A. I don't know that he used the word "litigation," [9] he asked me where did I think these PCBs might show up; that [10] kind of question. [11] Q. Did he give any indication to you of why he [12] wanted to know where the PCBs might show up? [13] A. No. [14] (Discussion off the record.) [15] BY MR. HUGHES: [16] Q. Did Mr. Chapman, from time to time, ask for your [17] assistance concerning background of the PCB situation for [18] the purpose of assessing whether there would be insurance [19] coverage for claims? [20] A. If he did ask me for information relating to that [21] area, he didn't mention the reason for his, for his [22] questions.___________________________________________________ Page 600 [1] Q. Did you ever have a discussion with Mr. Chapman [2] concerning insurance coverage for PCB-related claims? [3] A. No, 1 just understood he wore the insurance hat [4] and whatever he was asking was somehow related to his job [5] assignment, but that never came up as a question for me. [6] (Papageorge Deposition Exhibit 38 marked for [7] identification.) [8] (Witness peruses said document.) [9] MR. HUGHES: For the record, we've handed Mr. [10] Papageorge a document, Papageorge Exhibit 38. a document [11] with a cover memo dated August 24, 1978, from C. P. Farley [12] to P. H. Hobson, with attachments, production numbers MCO [13] 6202488 to 493. Let me know when you've had a chance to [14] familiarize yourself with the document, Mr. Papageorge, and [15] then I'll point you to the particular entries in which I'm [16] interested. [17] (Witness peruses said document.) [18] A. I have looked at the document. [19] BY MR. HUGHES: [20] Q. Now, we've discussed Mr. Farley was the [21] individual in your group that nor - had the product1 11 [22] acceptability responsibility?___________________________________ Page 601 [1] A. Yes, sir. [2] Q. And as well, he was the one to whom you assigned [3] the outside processor assessment responsibility? [4] A. Yes, sir. [5] Q. So that this memorandum is - and attachments, is [6] one that he put together hi the discharge of his assigned [7] responsibilities? [8] A. I have no reason not to believe that, yes. [9] Q. And this is also a document nutintained by [10] Monsanto in the regular course of its business? [11] A. It appears to be,yes. [12] Q. Turning to the third page of this exhibit, which [13] is where - it's the attachment where there is a, a later [14] list cf Monsanto Chemical Intermediates Company outside [15] processor arrangements. [16] A. A later - [17] Q. Later than the one we looked at from 1977? Page 595 to Page 601 202-347-3700 ACE-FEDERAL REPORTERS, INC. WATER PCB-SD0000063766 BSA Depo of: WILUAM B. PAPAGEORGE Monsanto v Aetna February 9, 1993 CR: 54365.0 XMAX(19) [ISj A. It appears to be, yes, sir. [19] Q. This one is dated August 1978? [20] A. Correct [21] Q. The fourth - well, under "Plant Chocolate [22] Bayou, * the second entry is "Dixie Oil Processing "? Do you Page 602 [1] see that? [2] A. I see that [3] Q. And it indicates "Services Performed, " it says, [4] "Phenolic Tars to treat railroad ties. " [5] "MC! Product, " "Phenol. ' [6] "Contract, " it says 'Sales" and "Dossier, " it [7] says "No. " [8] You remember earlier today, I asked you about [9] Dixie Oil Processors and whether that rang a bell? [10] A. I did, mm-fanm, [11] Q. Now, here, you see it does appear on a list of [12] Monsanto outside processors. [13] A. It does. [14] Q. Any, any memory refreshed abottt Dixie Oil [15] Processors? [16] A. Not really, but I have no reason again not to [17] accept this as fact. [18] Q. Do you recognize this document as being at least [19] in the format that Mr. Farley maintained? [20] A. I recognize the format. I don't recognize this [21] specific issue of several reports of this type. [22] Q. Okay, 1 understand. Page 603 [1/ Having seen this format btfore, perhaps you can [2] help me out. There's a column tlutt says, "Coiuract"? [31 A. Yes. [4] Q. And on this very page, there`s entries that say, [5] "Sales, " then there's an entry that says, "Yes," along with [6] an entry that says, "No. " [7] Do you have any idea Mutt the distinction is [8] between - I'm on the page that has "Dixie Oil Processors." [9] A. I understandthat. [10] Q. If you godownthe column "Contract," for three, [11] there's an entry of "Sales"? [12] A. Yes. [13] Q. For one there's an entry of "Yes. " Do you [14] understand the distinction between those two entries? [15] A. I think I do. [16] Q. Okay. 117] A. There is a - I was trying to find in some [18] previous documents, here, the reference to the types of [19] contracts. [20] Q. Okay. 121] A. But since 1 can't seem to locate it quickly, let [22] me try to explain. Page 604 [1] Q. Okay. [2] A. A sales contract, as I understood it at the time [3] and understand today, is a situation where the material from [4] Monsanto is sold and becomes the property of this outside [5] processor as a direct sale. Where you see a "Yes," this [6] means that they perform a service for Monsanto, and some of [7] that material is returned to Monsanto. [8] Q. 1 understand. Mr. Papageorge. Tlumk you. [9] If we can go on to the last page of the [101 exhibit [11] A. I have it. [12] Q. - under Texas City, the second-to-last entry is [13] "Lowenco Company"? [14] A. I see that. [15] Q. And again, there's a reference to buying spent [16] aluminum chloride soltttion. [17] A. I see that [181 Q. And we earlier saw a document where it said, [19] "AIC13 - Lowe. " You remember tlutt? You recall tlutt? [20] A.I do. [21] Q. And this indicates that the, the MCI product1 [22] involved is styrene, and again that it's sales: correct? Page 605 [1] A. Yes. The reference to styrene means it comes | [2] from the processing unit that makes styrene. 1 [3] Q. Okay. Seeing this reference to Lowenco Company, [4] does that refresh your memory at all tlutt M - that Texas [5] City plant had an outside processor relationship with such a [6] company? [7] A. It does not I don't remember it. [8] Q. 1 take it, Mr. Papageorge, that from the [9] appearance cf these, of Dixie Oil Processing and Lowenco [10] Company on a list cf Monsanto Chemical Intermediates Company [11] outside processor arrangements, you would expect that at [12] some time, they went through the assessment process tlutt we [13] lutve been discussing. [14] A. They either went through it or were listed to [15] undergo such a study. [16] Q. And the same information tlutt we've already [17] discussed that should go into a dossier, you would expect to [18] be acquired for Dixie Oil Processing and Lowenco, as well? I [19] MR. SARFATT'I: Objection; no foundation. [20] A. Once the dosser is completed, yes. [21] BY MR. HUGHES: [22] _______ Q- War there any procedure for exempting an outside Page 606 [1] processor from the outside processor assessment program? [2] A. Not that I know of. [3] Q. Did you ever get a request to exempt an outside [4] processor from the assessment program ? [5] A. I just don'trecall any requestof that type. I [6] Q. In the last time we met itiJanuary, you told us [7] tlutt from time to time, at least, you discussed [8] environmental matters with Ed Hendricks at the Texas City [9] plant? [10] A. Yes. [11] Q. And I believe you referred to Mr. Hetulricks as an [12] old-timer at the time? [13] A. I did, yes. [14] Q. Did you ever discuss with Mr. Hendricks any [15] outside processors used by the Texas City plant? [16] A. Yes. I did. [17] Q. Please tell us wiuu conversations you recall [18] having with Mr. Hendricks concerning outside processors at [19] the Texas City plant. [20] A. The one that I recall really wasn't any one [21] discussion. There were several opportunities for [22] discusson, and had related to the operation that took place Page 607 [1] at a site referred to as the Texas City Wye. Later, we [2] began using the expression Motco. I don't know just when [3] that expression became common. That's really the only [4] outside processor arrangement that Mr. Hendricks and I [5] discussed. [6] Q. War Mr. Hendricks the source of the information [7] you told us about the last time we met tlutt Motco lutd been a [8] reprocessing facility? [9] A. Yes. I don't know if the expression [10] "reprocessng" is totally accurate. I would call it more of [11] a recovery type of operation. [12] MR. HUGHES: Give me a moment, here, Mr. [13] Papageorge. [14] (Pause) [15] BY MR. HUGHES: [16] Q. Mr. Papageorge, when plant personnel did lutve the [17] opportunity to visit an outside processor and observe how it [18] lumdled materials, were they encouraged to make a written [19] record of theb visits? [20] A. Yes. [21] Q. And tlutt's something tlutt would be put in the1 2 3 4 [22] dossier when it was compiled?________________________________ Page 608 [1] A. That's where it belonged,yes, sir. [2] MR. HUGHES: Mark that. [3] (Papageorge DepositionExhibit 39 marked for [4] identification.) . ; [5] (Witness peruses said document.) | [6] BY MR. HUGHES: ; [7] Q. Mr. Papageorge, this is a lengthy document. We | [8] looked at a prior version of this, 1 believe, at your last ACE-FEDERAL REPORTERS, INC. 202-347-3700 Page 601 to Page 608 WATER PCB-SD0000063767 BSA Depo of: WJJJJAM B. PAPAGEORGE Monsanto v Aetna February 9, 1993 CR: 54365,0 XMAXC20I [9] session. That's a list of perceived known current Monsanto | [15] Monsanto Chemical Intermediates for you to be copied on any 110/ environmental issues. This particular one is dated October I [16] form EC-201 for a product manujactured by Monsanto Chemical IIII 18th, 1978, and let me just, for the record, put in that [17] Intermediates? /121 it's production numbers MCO 5304491 to 518. And all I [18] A. Yes. (13] currently want to ask you about is something that's on the [19] Q. What did you do, if anything, upon receipt of an (14] page that ends in Bates numbers 517. And in particular, I'm [20] EC-201? (15] referring to the first two entries under "Worldwide [21] A. Of course, I would read it and see that it (16] Environmental Protection Guideline Number 6, Outside [22] contained the information that I certainly was familiar with ]17] Processors. " A and B. You see those entries? Page 612 (18/ A. I see those. [1] and if not, I would attempt to learn from it to help my [19] Q. And they have lines drawn through them and then [2] knowledge regarding the product. (20] over - under a column reading "Expected Action Date. " it [3] Q. Was there particular information that you were (211 says "Completed. " [4] interested in from the vantage point of a Director of 1221_______ A. Mm-lmim._________________________________________ [5] Environmental Operations? Page 609 [6] A. Oh, I don't know of any particular. It was (1) Q. Now, is it your recollection that the program [7] related, of course, to human health and environmental /2/ being conducted under guideline number 6 was completed by [8] impact. (3/ the date of this memorandum which is October 1978? And [9] Q. Who set up the practice whereby you would be /4] actually let me add to that, let's put to one side die issue [10] copied on EC-201 for an MCI product? (5/ of as you add new outside processors, you may have to do [11] A. Oh, I don't know that it was any one person. The 161 additional reviews, so my question is realty directed [12] idea of such a form was proposed by, as best I remember, by (71 towards whether your recollection is that as of October [13] someone in the Medical Department. It was discussed at /8/ 1978, the effort had been completed as to all identified [14] several sessions and it finally adopted, and at that time, (9j outside processors. [15] as 1 remember, it was agreed that the, as far as the [10] A. No, it had not and this is not what this refers [16] operating units of Monsanto was concerned, that the DEO's [111 to. [17] office would be the appropriate one to get a copy and it was [12] Q. What does that refer to? [18] up, then, to the DEO to determine who else within that [131 A. This refers to the - it says, "Review the [19] operating company would get copies. (141 guideline and guideline program, mrlnriing target dates." [20] Q. Did you receive any information - strike that. [15] Some of those dates were many months and years down the [21] At - well, (fyou turn to the second page, the line [22] date on the actual Form E-C 201 is July 15th, 1977? Do you [16] yet, - "and develop modifications," they're talking about Page 613 [17] modifications to the guideline program. [1] see that? Down in the lower entries under Mr. Newsom's [18] Q. What page were you referring to? Same page? [2] name? [19] A. The page 517, ending in five one - [3] A. Yeah, that's the date Mr. Newsom - [20] Q. You are looking at subentry B. I'm focusing on [4] Q. Prepared - [21] subentry A, which says, "Define status as of 9-1-78. " [5] A. Submitted it. [221 A. Yeah._____________________________________________ [6] Q. Did you receive any information concerning why - Page 610 [l] Q. Do you have an understanding of what that one [7] strike that. [8] Styrene monomer had been a product of Monsanto [21 meant? [9] Chemical Intermediates for decades; correct? [3! A. It just meant report the status similar to Mr. [10] A. Certainly. [4] Farley's report where some were yesses and some were no's, [11] Q. Can you tell us when the procedure of employing [5] to be completed. [12] EC-201 's went into effect? 16] Q. Okay. [13] A. As best as I can recall, it was about 1975. I [7] A. It's just a candid camera shot of where it stood [14] may have missed that by a year or so in there. [81 at the moment that was done. It doesn't mean the whole [15] Q. The reason I'm asking, Mr. Papageorge, is, I was [9/ program was completed. [16] wondering if you received any information concerning wiry it [10/ Q. And what was it ui your mind that was left to be [17] was that an EC-201 for styrene monomer was submitted in Jtdy [11/ done? [181 of 1977. [12/ A. Oh, quite a bit was left to be done. If you, if [19] A. Well, as soon as 1 had organized my team in 1977, [13] you recall, Mr. Farley's memos talked about the plant will [20] one of the first objectives was to get EC-201's on all the [14] work on this, they had other pressures on their manpower, [21] products that MCI was assigned, and this was one of theI [15] we'd get to it as soon as we can. [22] first to come through the system.____________________________ [16] (Pause) Page 614 [17] MR. HUGHES: Okay, we can put that to one side. [1] Q. So if I understand you, one of the first things [18] (Papageorge Deposition Exhibit 40 marked for [2] you wanted to know when you came ui as a DEO was the, for [19] identification.) [3] every product under your jurisdiction, the type of [20] MR. HUGHES: We've handed Mr. Papageorge an [4] mformadon called for by the EC-201. [21] exhibit, Papageorge Exhibit 40. which is a document, cover [5] A. Yeah, but as far as these products was concerned, [22] memo dated September 22, 1977, from Oliver DeGarmo to1 2 * * * * 7 8 9 * * * 1[63]14I had the, I had the activity started when 1 was still Page 611 [7] Manager of Product Acceptability, and then when Mr. Farley [1] R. A. Newsom, with attachment. The total document is [8] took over, I had asked him to accelerate it. [2] production numbers MCO 9076943 to 60. [31 (Witness peruses saiddocument.) I [9] Q. Why did you warn that process to be completed for j [10] every product within MCI? !41 BY MR. HUGHES: | [11] A. Well, I just wanted to know all 1 could about all /5] Q. Mr. Papageorge, let me ask first, m particular, ! [12] these products. Many of them were, frankly, new to me at 16] have you seen this document before? i [13] the time, early '76 and on, and I felt that this was a good [7] A. I believe I recall it. now that I've glanced at [14] program for everybody involved. [8] it. [15] Q. Who - did you know Mr. Newsom, the individual [9] Q. And would you tell us wliat it is? [16] who prepared this EC-201? 110] A. This document is a copy of a Monsanto form [17] A. Yes, I did, I knew Bob. [11! referred to as EC-201, which is a, a report regarding an [18] Q. And on the EC-201, his title is uidicated as [12/ assessment of the safety and environmental compatibility of [19] Senior Process Specialist? [13] styrene. [14] Q. Was it the practice while you were a DEO of I [201 I PI] A. It is. Q- What did you understand his position to be, Page 608 to Page 614 202-347-3700 ACE-FEDERAL REPORTERS, INC. WATER PCB-SD0000063768 BSA_________________________________ Depo of: WITHAM B. PAPAGEORGE Monsanto v Aetna February 9, 1993 CR: 54365.0 xMAxan [22] exactly? Page 615 [11 A. He's one of the more experioiced research [2] chemists in the Research Department. [3] Q. At what site? [4] A. Texas City. He's located, his office is in Texas [5] City. But he belongs to the technology team, which in '76 [6] was referred to as the Research Department and later became [7] the Department of - Technology Department. [8] Q. And on site at Texas City were his [9j responsibilities directed to Texas City processes? [10] A. More specifically to the styrene process. [11] Q. So he focused solely on the styrene process, did [12] he? [13] A. At that time, yes. [14] Q. In that position as a Senior Process Specialist [15] for the styrene manufacturing unit, was Mr. Newsom [16] considered to be the best-informed person as to the various [17] constituents, and so on, that were generated in the styrene [18] manufacturing process? [19] MR. SARFATTI: Objection;vague. [20] A. I have no way of knowing that. [21] BY MR. HUGHES; [22] Q. You certainly considered him knowledgeable enough Page 616 [1] to property complete form EC-201. [2] A. Well, the combination of knowledge plus he was in [3] a position to consult with others whose desks were nearby, [4] for example, or even plant people, and get all the [5] information pulled together. [6] Q. Mr. Papageorge, was this Form EC-201 employed by [7] you in any way to assess the envirotunental risks presented [8] by Monsanto products? [9] A, That was the, one of the intents, yes. [10] Q. Okay. What other intents did you have as far as [11] making use of thatform? [12] A. Well, the human exposure information was [13] important, also. [14] Q. Before you became the DEO of MCI, you had spent [15] some, wluu, six years on the PCB issue? Or having - not [16] solely on that, but having significant responsibility in [17] that area? [18] A. Yes, about six yeare, yes, sir. [19] Q. And from that six years on the PCB-related [20] issues, you had, didn't you, some sensitivity for the [21] potential environmental risks that a product could have? [22] _____ A. Yes, 1 believe I did._______________________________ Page 617 [1] Q. When you were coming into your position as a DEO [2] of MCI and as you put it, encountering a number of new [3] products, did tluU background you had in PCB result in your [4] having cottcems that these products might be the source of [5] foture environmental problems? [6] A. Well, certainly that was a, an important thought, [7] yes. [8] Q. And lutd you, based upon your experience with [9] PCBs, learned that it was important to determine all the [10] possible ways that individuals could be exposed to an [11] environmentally risky product? [12] A, Well, let me see. Determine all of the possible [13] ways, I [14] Q. Let me rephrase. You utdicated earlier tiuu Mr. [15] Chapman came in to you from time to time and asked, [16] essentially, "Where do you think these PCBs miglu show up?" [17] Right? [18] A. He did do that. [19] Q. And you understood, I take it, tiuu the reason he [20] warned to know where they might show up is that that would [21] be a place for potential concern. [22] _____ A, That was my assumption, yes, sir._________________ Page 618 11] Q. Coming into your job at, as DEO of MCI, was [2] styrene a new product to you? [3] A. Yes. New in terms of, yeah, I had heard of [4] styrene before. It's not that new, but when it came down to [5] details, I had a lot to learn, mrn-hmm. [6] Q. And in light of your experience with PCBs, did [7] you want to team, to paraphrase, where it might be that [8] styrene numomer exposure could show up? [9] A. Certainly. [10] Q. And you also indicated that when you were working [11] on PCBs. that you had some experience with Montar and the [12] potential environmental problems it presented; correct? ! [13] A. Yes. [14] Q. Atui Montar was a, a substance that was generated [15] in the production process for PCBs. [16] A. Correct. [17] Q. All right. [18] From that experience, were you aware in mid 1977 [19] when you were coming in as DEO of Monsanto Chemical [20] Intermediates, that it war also important for environmental [21] reasons to address the various streams and substances [22] generated during the production cf the final product? Page 619 [1] A. Certainly. [2] Q. And am I correct that you were also interested in [3] finding out where those streams and substances might show up [4] in a way that presented environmental risks? [5] A. Yes. [6] Q. Can you tell us what you did to inform yourself, [7] first of all, on the environmental risks, if any, presented 18] by styrene monomer, the uuended finished product? [9] A. Well, what I did, I don't recall in specific [10] terms. The information I was attempting to gather for my [11] own benefit was similar for all these chemicals. It was not [12] different for styrene than for others. I relied quite a [13] bit, almost totally on my team. I had the person, for [14] example, the Product Acceptability person like Mr. Farley, [15] become familiar and coach me as opportunity arose, on what [16] he learned, I had an individual such as, oh, say, Mr. [17] Farley - not Farley, Mr. Pierie, concern himself with [18] wastewater streams and what chemicals were in there that [19] results from a styrene operation, if any. [20] I had Mr, Pierie also review and consider the [21] emissions out the stacks, out the vents, in terms of what [22] effect, if any, is the operation having on air pollution, Page 620 [1] then I had a, for example, Mr. Keating, who I asked to look [2] into the workplace exposure, occupational health issues [3] relating to styrene, in this case, and all the other [4] chemicals, so I relied on that team to keep me tuned in, and [5] of course, to this day, I don't remember all the specifics [6] and all the details, but there was a lot of information [7] flowing in and I tried to remember the, the key points that [8] I felt I should. [9] Q. Was - now, am 1 correct tiuu styrene monomer was [10] a product tluU Monsanto sold? [11] A. Yes. [12] Q. Was someone given the assignment to find out to [13] whom it was sold and wluU uses they made of styrene monomer? [14] A. Yeah, it was the product acceptability managers. [15] Q. Mr. Farley was the - [16] A. Mr. Farley in this case, yes. [17] Q. Because that was something you would want to know [18] in evaluating where styrene might appear in the environment. [19] A. That's correct. [20] Q. Okay. If you would mm to, in Papageorge [21] Exhibit 40, the page ending with Bates members 949 at the1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 [22] bottom? The last 3; are you there?___________________________ Page 621 [1] A. I have it. [2] Q. On this page, Mr. Newsom has set forth, it [3] appears to me, by-products and waste products thrown off in [4] the styrene monomer manufacmring process? Am 1 correct? [5] A. I don't know what you mean by thrown off. [6] Q. Generated. Can you use tiuu word, "generated "? [7] A. They were still under control. They didn't just [8] escape. ! [9] Q. I didn't mean they were spewing off every which i [10/ way, Mr. Papageorge. Let me rephrase the question and the ! [11] record will be clear. | [12] Am 1 correct that the list under "present ACE-FEDERAL REPORTERS. INC. 202-347-3700 Page 614 u> Page 621 WATER PCB-SD0000063769 BSA Depo of: WniJAM B. PAPAGEORGE Monsanto v Aetna February 9, 1993 CR: 54365.0 XMAXI22) [13] solutions of by-products and waste products" are substances [14] generated during the production process of styrene monomer? [15] A. Correct. [16] Q. Now, am I also correct that in assessing the [17] potential environmental risk of styrene monomer, that you [18] warned to know what uses were made of each by-product and [19] what was done with each waste product? [20] A. Okay. [21] Q. Is that fair? [22] A. Yes. All right. Page 622 [1] Q. Who within - well, strike that. Was someone [2] within your group assigned the responsibility to look at [3] these by-products and waste products? And I'm just using [4] styrene as an example, but to look at them to report on [5] where they went and how they were used? [6] A. The Product Acceptability Manager was the man I [7] looked to to monitor these kinds of things. He, in turn, [8] would use whatever resouices within MCI to help them do so. [9! For example, he could go to Mr. Newsom to get [10] tutored on exactly what it is that they're talking about [11] here, and so on, or he could go to an engineering person, if [12] necessary. [131 Q. And again, here, Mr. Papageorge, is the [14] distinction, here, between by-products and waste products as [15] listed here the one you described earlier? And that is that [15] if you 've got some use for the substance, it's a by-product, [17] and if you don't and you are going to Itave to dispose of it [18] somewhere, it's a waste product? [19] MR. SARFATTI: Objection; vague. [20] A. It's close to that I kind of relate by-products [21] as having some, some value, some recoverable value. [22] BY MR. HUGHES: Page 623 [1] Q. Now, 1 note - I'm sorry, did I interrupt you? 1 [2] didn 7 mean that. [3! A. I was going to say further that a waste product, [4] with the current technology then available, didn't appear to [5] be economically attractive, and therefore, must be discarded [6] properly somewhere. [71 Q. So if I'm understanding what you are saying, if [8] there was a change in technology and suddenly one of these [9] items listed under "Waste Product" had a valuable use, you [10] would consider it a by-product. [11] A. Yes, mm-hmm. [121 Q. Okay. You'U note that on toluene, Mr. Newsom [13] wrote "Sold" and then it says, "Separate EC-201 prepared. " [14] A. I see that. [15] Q. Okay. Was it - did you have an understanding as [16] to whether, when there was a by-product produced and it, by [17] itself, was going to be sold, you needed a second EC-201 for [18] that product, by-product? [19/ A. That's right,yes. [201 Q. So anytime you are - within Monsanto, anytime [211 you were considering the sale of a product or a by-product, [22] you had to have an EC-201 ? * 11 Page 624 (11 A. Correct. 121 Q. And that - okay. There's a reference in this [3/ document to an EC-202. I don 7 have one. Can you tell us [4] what an EC-202 is? The reference I'm thinking of is, the [5] one I saw is on the page ending in Bates 951. [6/ A. I see that. [7] Q. Yes. [8] A. Let me try to recall, as best as I remember, the [9/ two EC documents were somehow related in that one was [10] referred to as a preliminary assessment, and if my memory [11] serves me right, the 202 was the, considered the final one. [12] They were rather similar in approach, but one was more, much [13] more specific and more detailed. [14] Q, Did EC-201, ifyou'll look at the page ending [151 950[16] A. I see it. [17] Q, - there's an approval signature tine. [18] A. Mm-hmm. [19] Q. And now there are several other approval areas on [20] this document that are signed by Oliver DeGarmo, but my [21] question to you is whether there was also a requirement that [22] someone within the operating company sign off on an EC-201. Page 625 [1] A. Yes, the - [2] Q. Who was that? [3] A. That would bethe ProductAcceptability Manager. [4] Q. Mr. Papageorge, if you 'llturn back again just [5] briefly to the page ending in 949, did you ever receive any [6] information concerning whether, when listing waste products [7] from a Monsanto process, RCRA considerations were taken into [8] account? And by that, I mean whether the impact of RCRA [9] requirements as to how to handle waste were taken into [10] account in deciding whether to list a substance as a waste [11] in an EC-201. [12] A. Yes, as best as I recall, RCRA considerations [13] were included, but keep in mind that RCRA regulations [14] weren't available until several years later. [15] Q. Understood. Until 1980 or so? [16] A. Yes, sir, and as best as I recall, it would most [17] likely appear on the 202 veraon of this assessment. [18] Q. Can you tell us how RCRA considerations were [19] taken into account after the regulations were issued, in ' [20] filling out an EC-202 form? [21] A. Well, they - if the hem was to be disposed, [22] let's say, as an example, in a landfill and be trucked to Page 626 [1/ that site, there had to be some reference in there to meet [2] the RCRA requirement in place at the time. For - an [3] example would be the manifesting system, or the, the use of [4] the properly designed disposal sites, and the - I forget [5] all the details of the requirements but they must meet the [6] regulations that were in effect at the time. [7] Q. Okay. Mr. Papageorge, with respect to the EC-201 [8] we have in front of us prepared by Mr. Newsom and approved [9] by Oliver DeGarmo - actually, let me back up. Oliver [10] DeGarmo was someone in the Department of Medicine and [11] Environmental Health? [12] A. He was. [13] Q. Did he have a specific assignment to review [14] EC-201 and EC-202 forms? [15] A. He was designated by the medical director to be [16] the representative from the Medical Department to, yes, [17] approve these documents after consultation with the proper [18] individuals in the Medical Department. [19] Q. And I'm - am I correct that the EC-201 we have [20] in front of us as part of Papageorge Exhibit 40 was prepared [21] by Mr. Newsom in the normal course of his duties at [22] Monsanto? Page 627 [1] A. Yes, sir. [2] Q. Okay, and the document was mauitabied iti the [3] normal course of Monsanto's business? [4] A. Yes, sir. [5] Q. And similarly, in the normal course of Monsanto's [6] business while you were a DEO, a copy mis delivered to you? [7] A. Yes. [8] Q. In other words, if things worked the way they [9] should have, you would get a copy? [101 A. Yes. [11] MR. HUGHES: Okay. Off the record. [12/ (Discussion off the record and short break.) [13] (Papageorge Deposition Exhibit 41 marked for [14] identification.) [15] (Witness perusessaid document.) [16] MR. HUGHES: I've handed Mr. Papageorge what [17] we've marked as Exhibit 41, and it's a one-page document [18] dated December 5, 1977, from Oliver DeGarmo to R. A. Newsom [19] re: Your submission 7-15-77, production number MCO 8250929, 120] and Mr. Papageorge, 1 do not have, today, the attachment [21] which would be the EC-201 for styrene tar, but 1 did want to [22] ask you a couple of questions, nonetheless, based on this 1 2 3 Page 628 [1] cover memorandum. [2] First, do you recall receiving an EC-201 for [3] styrene tar in or about sometime between July and December Page 621 to Page 628 202-347-3700 ACE-FEDERAL REPORTERS, INC. WATER PCB-SD0000063770 BSA Depo of; WILLIAM B. PAPAGEORCE Monsanto v Aetna February 9, 1993 CR: 54365.0 XMAX03I [4] of 1977? [5] A. Not really, hmm-mm. [6] Q. Now, this memorandum indicates that as of its [7] dau, the styrene tar was being used as fuel in the Texas [8] City plant; correct? [9] A. It does say that. It does indicate that. [I0[ Q. Was consideration being given to your knowledge [11/ in or about December of 1977 to selling styrene tars? [12/ A. Not to my knowledge. [13] Q. Okay. Do you know during what periods the [14/ relationship with JOC Oil existed whereby styrene tars were [15] sold to it for processing or refining? [16] A. No, I, I don't recall. [17] (Papageorge Deposition Exhibit 42 marked for [18] identification.) [19] MR. HUGHES: While Mr. Papageorge is talcing a [20] look at it, for the record. Papageorge Exhibit 42 is a cover [21] memorandum dated December 5, 1977, from Oliver DeGarmo to [22j R. A. Newsom, with attachment, production numbers are MCO Page 629 [1] 9076913 to MCO 9076922. [2] BY MR. HUGHES: [3] Q. Let me know when you've had a sufficierU chance [4] to look through the document, Mr. Papageorge. [5] (Witness peruses said document.) [6] A. I have reviewed the document. [7] BY MR. HUGHES: [8/ Q. Do you recognize the document? [9] A. Wed, I recognize the format. I recall the [10] expression "fhix oil." I remember it being used as a fuel [11] oil in the styrene process. I do not recall this specific [12] document. [13] Q. And perhaps you'll recall also, we looked at a [14] document earlier in which it was uidicated that flux oil was [15] being sold to JOC Oil for reprocessing? Let's take a look. [16] And I'm referring back to Papageorge Exhibit - wait a [17] minute. [18] (Pause to peiuse documents.) [19] MR. HUGHES: I'm looking for the one that has the [20] cover note that says, "From the desk of W. B. Papageorge." [21] Off the record for a second. [22] (Discussion off the record) Page 630 [I] MR. HUGHES: Back on the record. [21 BY MR. HUGHES: [3] Q. Referring to Papageorge Exhibit 34, which we [4] looked at this momutg and I'm wrong there, too, so forget [5] it. ' [6] (Discussion off the record.) [7] MR. HUGHES: Let's forget that one, Mr. [8] Papageorge. Thanks. For now, anyway. [9] BY MR. HUGHES: [10] Q. Do you know, Mr. Papageorge, whether at any point [11] the Texas City plant sent flux oil to JOC Oil? [12] A. I do not know. [13] Q. Mr. Papageorge, while the DEO of Monsanto [14] Chemical Intermediates, did you look uuo the potential of [15] styrene monomer for being a carcinogen? [16] A. That question did occur to me. I recall checking [17] with someone in Monsanto's Medical Department, and I was [18] left with the impression that it was not a carcinogenic [19] concern. I'm trying to recall who that individual might [20] have been. At the moment, I am having difficulty recalling [21] who it was.1 2 * 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 [22]________Q. What if I suggested the tutme Peter Berto? Would Page 631 [1] tluU ring a bell? [2] A. Ah, yes, Peter was a likely person. I may be [3/ wrong, but he would have been someone that I might have [4] approached, yes. [5] Q. Okay. Was there a concern about the possible [6] carcinogenic effect of styrene monomer as a result cf some [7] report or memorandum piu together by Union Carbide? [8] A. Oh, gosh, I don't remember that specific. I just [9] don't recall the specifics. [10] Q. Let me ask you this. During the time that you [11] were DEO of MCI, were you familiar with the term [12] "substantial risk report' that needed to be submitted under [13] certain circumstances to the EPA? [14] A. Substantial risk, that came in under TOSCA. [15] Q. 1 believe it's under the Toxic Substances Control [16] Act. [17] A. Toxic Substances Control Act, and I'm trying to [18] recall it. The requirement didn't occur until, hmm. The [19] late '70's. In fact, as I recall, the EC-201-202 approach [20] was in anticipation of that kind of reporting. [21] Q. At some point while you were at Monsanto, were [22] you the member of a TOSCA committee at Monsanto ? Page 632 [1] A. I don't recall it as being defined by such a 12] term. There was a group of us working with Wink Corey in [3] putting together a, a list of chemicals that Monsanto's [4] operating units were involved with. It could be that that [5] group of us that was working on that project was referred to [6] as a TOSCA committee. I can't place that terminology with [7] any other activity at the moment. [8] Q. Were you compiling this list for the purpose of [9] determining whether taty substantial risk notices needed to [101 be filed? [11] A. No, this list was in - was required by the TOSCA [12] regulations that were issued, and we had to submit it in [13] certain format and by a certain time, and so on. [14] (Papageorge Deposition Exhibit 43 marked for [15] identification.) [16] MR. HUGHES: We've handed Mr. Papageorge what [17] we've marked as Exhibit 43, which is a cover memorandum [18] dated December 22, 1977, from W. R. Robirds to various [19] addressees and carbon copies, with several attachments. The [20] total document is production numbers ANN 1125396 to 400. [21] MR. HUGHES: Let me know when you've had enough [22] time to look at that document, Mr. Papageorge. Page 633 [1] THE WITNESS: I will. [2] (Witness peruses said document.) [3] THE WITNESS: I have reviewed the document. [4] BY MR. HUGHES: [5] Q. Taking a look first at the cover page, the first [6] memorandum, cover memorandum, Mr. Papageorge, the author is [7] a W. R, Robirds? [8] A. He is, it is. [9] Q. What was Mr. Robirds's position in December 1977? [10] A. He was a member of Monsanto Agricultural Products [11] Company. [12] Q. And I take it this cover memorandum is one tlmt [13] is circulated neither to you nor to anyone within MCI. [14] A. That is correct. [15] Q. He's circulating this within his own operating [16] company? [17] A. That is correct. [18] Q. I notice it's also, a copy was also shown as [19] going to Mr. lessee? [20] A. Yes. [21] Q. You see tluxt? Did you understand Mr. lessee to [22] luxve any responsibilities for substantial risk information 1 11 Page 634 [1] wider TOSCA? [2] A. No more so than all the other addressees listed. [3] Q. Can we - let's turn to the page tlutt ends in [4] Bates number 389. [51 A. 389? [6] Q. 398; I'm sorry. [7] A. 398. [8] Q. And this memorandum, which is dated December 12, [9] 1977, from W. R. Corey, l take it that's Wink Corey? [10] A. Yes. [11] Q. That you mentioned? [12] A. I call him Wink. [13] Q. And 1 now note that which I hadn't before, that [14] he's -- it's indicated he's the Director of TOSCA [15] administration. [16] A. Yes. [17] Q. Correct? And there's a list of addressees, ACE-FEDERAL REPORTERS, INC. 202-347-3700 Page 628 to Page 634 WATER PCB-SD0000063771 BSA Depo of: WILLIAM B. PAPACEORGE Monsanto v Aetna February 9, 1993 CR: 54365.0 XMAXC2.4; ll8] including yourself? 1191 A. Yes. COI Q. Is that die group, whether or not it's ]2I] appropriate to coil it a committee, but the group that you P2] recall compiling the list of MCI - of Monsanto products for Page 635 [II compliance with TOSCA ? PI A. Some of the members in that group participated in 131 the compiling of the list. Some individuals in that group 141 were not involved. [5/ Q. And the page attached to this memorandum, the [61 next page in this exhibit, is a procedure set forth. The [7] caption is "Internal Procedures For Transmittal of [S/ Substantial Picks Information to the Director of DMEH [91 Monsanto Company," correct? [10/ A. Yes. [II] Q. And you do recall, don't you, that there was a [12[ written procedure? [13/ A. Yes, sir. [14] Q. And that you were the designated uidividual [15] within MCI to whom such information was to be communicated? [16] A. Yes. ]17} Q. Were there any instances where substantial risk [IS] information under TOSCA was directed to your attention while [19] you were the Director of Environmental Operations for MCI? ]20] A. As best as I recall, there were a few that were pi] placed into this procedure, working their way through the P2[ organization. 1 don't remember any within MCI that reached Page 636 /// the point where they had to be forwarded to the EPA. PI Q. Now, am l correct that during the entire period [3] where the TOSCA requirements were in effect and you were the [4] DEO of MCI, you were the designated individual to whom that [5] information should be communicated? [6] A. Within MCI. ]7] Q. Within MO. [8] A. Yes. [9] Q. Fine, And then was it also always the practice, [10] while you were DEO of MCI and these requirements were in [11] place, that you were to report the information to the [12] director of the Department of Medicine and Environmental [13] Health? [14] A. Yes. [15] Q. Were you given any instructions on the 116] circumstances that would raise a question of whether a [! 7] report to the EPA was necessary under TOSCA ? [IS] A. Yes, but I don't recall the details any longer. [19] Obviously, such information as effects that are already ]20] known about a material, like cyanide is a deadly poison when pi] breathed, that kind of information is already well-known, so P2] that would be an example of the kind of thing it would not Page 637 /// have to report. We did get some guidelines but I've ::/ forgotten the details. PI Q. Who provided you with guidelines? ]4! A. As best I recall, they originated out of Wmk [5] Corey's office, but he got a lot of information out of the [6] Medical Department, so it was a joint effort. [7] Q. At any point, did you address the question of [8] whether a TOSCA substantial risk information notice needed [9] to be given to the EPA with respect to the North 80? !I0] A. No, I don't associate North 80 with substantial [III risk notification. [12/ Q. Were there any site - was there any site with [13] which Monsanto had some involvement in the State of Texas [14] concerning which you recall there being any isstte of whether [15] a substantial risk information notice should be sent to the [161 EPA? [17] A. Not to my knowledge. [18] Q. Were you given any guidance on whether if [19] Monsanto discovered tluu an outside processor, through P0] inappropriate handling of Monsanto materials, was exposing [21/ the environment to a risk, there needed to be a substantial[I] P2] risk information notice under TOSCA?__________________________ Page 638 [I] A. I received no such documents. I P] Q. Did that possibility ever enter into your mind I [3] while you were the DEO of MCI? ! [4] A. No. [5] Q. Mr. Papageorge, did you ever discuss with anyone [6] you understood to be from die Insurance Department or the [7] Risk Management Department of Monsanto, the arrangements [8] within MCI whereby certain substances generated in [9] production processes were sold to outside processors? [10] A. No. [11] Q. Was it common knowledge within representatives of [12] MCI at - in the St. Louis headquarters complex that there [13] were arrangements whereby certain substances generated in [14] MCI processes were sold to outside processors? [15] MR. SARFATTI: Objection; vague, nofoundation. [16] A. You described it as common knowledge. I really [17] don't know. [18] BY MR. HUGHES: [19] Q. Let's take it one step at a time. Clearly, it P0] was known within the DEO staff. PI] A. Yes. [22]_______ Q. You and your staff members knew of these____________ Page 639 [1] arrangements. PI A. Yes. [3] MR. SARFATTI: Objection; vague, unless you want [4] to define "these arrangements." [5] BY MR. HUGHES: [6] Q. You knew that substances, certain substances were [7] sent to reprocessors from MCI production processors, ]8] correct? [9] A. I bad access to that information, yes, sir. [10] Q. And you knew it, correct? [11] A. I don't rlnim that 1 knew everything all the time [12] every time, but - [13] Q. You knew it occurred? ]14'] A. At some time, yes. [15] Q. And Mr. Farley clearly knew it occurred. [16] A.Yes. [17] Q. And did the other managers within your [18] organization, Mr. Pierle and Mr. Weishaar? [19] A. Well, they were certainly aware of it, because we P0] would discuss it at our little group meetings. pi] Q. And you also discussed it at environmental policy P2] staff meetings from time to time?______________________________ Page 640 [1] A. Not in as much detail, but - in a broader sense. I21 yes. [3] Q. Did you discuss outside processor arrangements [4] with Earl Brasfield at any time? [5] A. I can't recall the instance I did it. It would [6] be - the time and place that I did it, but that would be a [7] typical type subject I might have with the man. I just [8] don't remember details. [9] Q. During the time tluu you were the DEO of MCI, how [10] many managing directors were there of that operating [11] company? [12] A. I'm confused. [13] Q. Not at the same time. Okay, I mean was there [14] more than one over that period? [15] A. Oh. I'm sorry,within MCI - [16] Q. Yes. [17] A. - there were threewhile Iwas - [18] Q. And who were those three individuals? [19] A. It started out with Mr. Eck, John Eck, and then I PO] believe this order is correct; then Frank Reese, and then PI] "Press" Cunningham, C. P. Cunningham.1 * 3 4 5 6 7 8 P2]_______ Q. Am 1 correct that within Monsanto, it was____________ j Page 641 [1] always - strike that. Am l correct that at least with P] respect to the managing directors of MCI during the period [3] you were its DEO, each of them, while Managing Director, was [4] a vice-president of the corporation? [5] A. That is correct. [6] Q. Did you discuss with any of those three men at [7] any time the outside processor arrangements that Monsanto [8] had - strike that - that Monsanto Chemical Intermediates Page 634 to Page 641 202-347-3700 ACE-FEDERAL REPORTERS. INC. WATER PCB-SD0000063772 BSA Depo of; WILLIAM B. P.APAGEORGE Monsanto v Aetna February 9, 1993 CR; 54365.0 XMAXQ5) [9] had? [10] A. I don't recall a discussion of that type with the [11] managing directors. If it did occur, it happened whai [12] with a broad kind of agenda where several items were [13] discussed. I just - it doesi't - I can't recall it. [14] MR. HUGHES: Okay. [15] (Papageorge Deposition Exhibit 44 marked for [16] identification.) [17] (Witness peruses said document.) [18] MR. HUGHES: We've handed Mr. Papageorge Exhibit [19] 44. For the record, it's a memorandum with an attachment [20] from M. L. Mullins to a long list of individuals; dated [21] April 4, 1984, production numbers MCO 7525205 to 209. [22] _____ (Witness peruses said document.)_______________________ Page 642 [1] BY MR. HUGHES: [2] Q. Mr. Papageorge, the portions of this document I'm [3] iiuerested in, if that'll help you speed up, you can read [4] those pans and shim the rest - are "New Sites, ' that [5] section, and then at present, you can just take a look at [6] whatever else you feel is necessary to become familiar with [7] the document generally. [8] (Witness peruses said document.) [9] A. I have glanced through the document. [10] Q. On the date of this document April 4, 1984, Mr. [11] Papageorge, you had been transferred to having the DEO [12] responsibility for Monsanto industrial chemicals, correct? [13] A. Correct. [14] Q. Do you recognize this documetu? That is, [15] Papageorge Exhibit 44. [16] A. I don't remember this specific document. I [17] recall this kind of information being generated. [18] Q. And by "this kind of information, " do you mean [19] updates on the status of Superfitnd sites? [20] A. Yes, sir. [21] Q. And do you also recall that Mr. Mullins, at some [22] point in time, was the individual who circulated the___________ Page 643 [1] information? [2] A. Yes. [3] Q. In fact, do you recall that at some point, Mr. [4] Mullins became responsible for RCRA and CRCLA within the [5] environmental policy staff? [6] A. Yes. [7] Q. He succeeded, at some point, Mr. Jessee? [8] A. Correct. [9] Q. When you received from Mr. Mullins reports on [10] Superfitnd status, did you review the documents? Was this [11] something you were iiuerested in? [12] A. Oh, certainly. [13] Q. Were you interested in what was going on even in [14] other operating companies? [15] A. To a lesser degree, certainly, I would follow, [16] the activity, there, in hopes of learning something that [17] might apply to those sites assigned to me. [18] Q. And once again, if, in the ordinary course of [19] things, if they worked it properly, being listed as an [20] addressee of this document, you would receive a copy? [21] A. Likely, yes.1 11 [22]_______ Q. Now, I ask you to take a took at the new sites______ Page 644 [1] section of this document and I'm interested in particular in [2] the last paragraph. [3] A. I see it. [4] Q. Okay. Did you become aware in or about April 4, [5] 1984, that two additional Texas sites had been identified as [6] potentially involving Monsanto? [7] A. I recall the Brio Site, and as best as I could [8] recall, I thought I first was made aware of that in 7(5, but [9] it appears it was listed here in '84, so my riming may have [10] been off. The Barker Chemical rings no bell whatever with [11] me. I just don't remember that at all. [12] Q. Let's put Barker to one side for a moment. Let [13] me ask you this. Were there any meetings at which the [14] status of Superfitnd sites potentially involving Monsanto [15] were discussed? [16] A. I don't recall a meeting specifically held for [17] this subject. [18] Q. For the subject of Superfitnd? [19] A. Superfunds. I do recall an occasion where, say, [20] Mr. Muffins would bring it up as a topic during [21] environmental policy staff meetings, as sort of a quick [22] status report. Page 645 [1] Q. Now, you'll notice in the last sentence of that [2] last paragraph, Mr. Mullins wrote, quote, "We will follow [3] developments but do not anticipate being held responsible [4] for cleanup at such locations, due u> their supplier/ [5] customer nature, as opposed to waste treatment or disposal," [6] end quote. [7] My question to you is whether you participated in [8] any discussions at any time concerning Monsanto's position [9] that it should not be held responsible because its [10] relationship with those sites hot one of a supplier to a [11] customer. [12] A. 1 recall being present when that thought was [13] expressed. I don't know that I would call it a thorough [14] discussion of the matter. [15] Q. Okay. [16] A. This usually represented someone's opinion. I [17] was in no position to challenge it or agree with it. I [18] just, I heard it and remembered it. [19] Q. This time, Mr. Papageorge, it's my opportunity to [20] say that 1 did not and I don't want to emphasize the word [21] "thorough" as far as discussion is concerned; okay? Let's [22] throw that word out - Page 646 [1] A. All right. [2] Q. - and focus just on there was a discussion. [3] Who, who made the statement that you recall being made [4] concerning Monsanto's position being it should not be held [5] responsible because there was a supplier/customer [6] relationship? [7] A. I honestly don't know; I don't remember. [8] Q. Can you tell us the names of anybody who was [9] present when that discussion took place? [10] A. Gosh. [11] Q. Other than yourself, of course. [12] A. I'd be guessing, because this meeting was, in my [13] recollection, very likely an environmental policy staff [14] meeting, and the attendees were those that showed up at many [15] such meetings. Who was present at this specific one and who [16] was absent. I just do not remember. [17] Q. Were there any instances other than this one time [18] you believe at an environmental policy staff meeting - [19] strike that. [20] Other than this one instance that you believe was [21] at an environmental policy staff meeting, were there any [22] other instances where you can recall someone stating that Page 647 [1] Monsanto's position was that it slwuld not be held [2] responsible for clean-up at the Brio Site because it was a [3] supplier/customer relationship rather than one of waste [4] treatment or disposal? [5] A. I don't recall any such meeting. [6] Q. So you just recall the one; is tlutt right? [7] A. I recall at least one incident. It was very [8] likely the environmental policy staff meeting, and even that [9] I'm not certain. I don't recall any meeting specifically on [10] the subject, nor do I recall that particular opinion [11] regarding liability being expressed at some other meeting. [12] Q. Can you tell us whether that position was [13] expressed by Mr. Mullins? [14] A. I wish I - I just don't know. [15] Q. Can you tell us whether that position was [16] expressed by Georgette Grimm? [17] A. Don't know. I don't remember, rather. [18] Q. I'm seeing - if throwing particular names as you [19] gets us airy farther. Don't worry, there will be a couple of ! [20] more. i [21] MR. SARFAl I I: How about Clarence Thomas? | [22]________MR. HUGHES: He was gone by that time. ACE-FEDERAL REPORTERS, INC. 202-347-3700 Page 641 to Page 647 WATER PCB-SD0000063773 BSA Depo of: WILLIAM B. PAPAGEORGE Monsanto v Aetna February 9, 1993 CR; 54365.0 XMAX0.6), Page 648 [I] MR. OMROD: Doing more constructive things. PI BY MR. HUGHES: [31 Q. Can you tell us whether Robert Toth expressed 14/ that posuion? 151 A. As best as I recall, it's very unlikely that [61 Robert Toth would have, (7J Q. And what makes you say that? [tiI A. He was not as actively involved as Miss Grimm, [9] and Mr. Mullins and the other names you may have mentioned, [10[ Q. Can you recall whether anyone from the Legal [III Department expressed the view that they didn't anticipate [12! Monsanto s being held responsible for cleanup at the Brio [13/ Site because of the supplier/customer relationship? [14[ A. No, as I said, I just don't remember the [15] individual. [!6] MR. HUGHES: Can't blame a guy for trying, can [17] you? [18/ (Pause) [19] BY MR. HUGHES: [20] Q. Mr. Papageorge, at some point during your career ]21] at Monsanto, you heard the term "environmental impairment /22[ liability insurance," didn't you?______________________________ Page 649 [II A. I just can't place that term with anything that I P] was involved with. I don't associate that with any activity ]3] that I was associated with. It is not a term I use [4] personally. [5] Q. You have heard the term before this deposition, [6] haven't you? [7] A. I don't think so. I don't place it with any 18] particular situation at all. [9] (Papageorge Deposition Exhibit 45 marked for [10] identification.) [Ill BY MR. HUGHES: [121 Q. Papageorge Exhibit 45 is a memorandum dated July [13] 2, 1982, from Clayton F. Callis to a list of addressees. [14] Production number MCO 0426381. Have you lutd a chance to [15] review that rather brief document? [16] A. I have, mm-hmm. [17] Q. Having reviewed this document, does it refresh [18] your memory at all that Mr. Toth gave a presentation to the [19] DEO's concerning environmental liability insurance? 1201 A. Which is different from impairment insurance. [211 Q. Well, I think he left a word out, bid let's, [22[ either nay, let's say.________________________________________ Page 650 [I] A. I'm having difficulty recalling this particular P] meeting. I just don't remember any, anything about it. PI Q. Let's see if we can - l don't want to tie, tie [4] us down simply to a meeting on July 2, 1982. Wlutt if we put [5] it this way. Were you at a DEO meeting on atty date? [6] Actually, this meeting was going to be July 14th, 1982, bid [7] putting this memorandum, having just reviewed this [8] memorandum, is there any memory that's refreshed concerning [9] a meeting with the DEO's at which there was a presentation [10] on environmental liability insurance, as well as on product [11] liability? [121 A. I don't remember. [13] Q. Was it during the years that you were a DEO at []4] Monsanto uttusual - strike that. [15/ How many times while you were a DEO at Monsanto [16] did someone from the Risk Management Department give a [17] presentation at a DEO meeting on insurance? [181 A. I don't ronember any, I'm going to call it formal [19] presentation where the insurance representative stood up P0[ before the audience and gave a presentation. I remember a piI few instances where representatives of the department sat in* 1 * 3 4 5 P2] around the table like this one and participated in the________ Page 651 [1] general discussions that took place and the round robin that PI took place at the end of the meeting. That is the only [3] participation that I recall from either Mr. Chapman or Miss [4] Grimm or Mr. Toth. I don't remember any formal [5] presentation. I [6] Q. Well, let's change our focus to a round table. i [7] Was there any round table where environmental liability | [8] insurance was the subject? | 19] A. There were comments from the representatives that [10] related to insurance, and as best I - I don't remember the | [11] details, but they did cover areas such as human health | [12] problems and environmental impact, but I just don't ronember | [13] the, just what details were presented under those subjects. [14] Q. What do you mean when you say one of the subjects [15] touched on was environmental impact? [16] A. WeU, the presence of an undesirable chemical [17] that some spot that had to be cleaned up, for example. Does [18] that help? I don't know if that's - it's an environmental [19] impact, in my understanding. P0[ Q. Wets theu kind of environmental impact one then PI] was discussed at some kind of round table in the context of P2] insurance? Page 652 [1] A. Well, the only connection with the insurance, the P] fact that the insurance representative is the one that may [3] have brought it up as, as it became bis or her turn to speak [4] out around the table and bring the group up-to-date. [5] As I said, I don't recall the specific comments [6] that were made by that insurance representative and how it [7] ties into the environmental or human health issues. PI Q. Can you identify the insurance representative [9] whom you lutd in mind? I [10] A. As I said, it was one of those three people. [11] Q. Okay. [12] A. Either Bob Chapman, or Miss Grimm, or Mr. Toth. [13] Q. And do you remember more than one meeting like [14] this, or just one meeting? [15] A. Oh, it happened sporadically through the years. [16] Of course, all three would not be present there and they [17] would not be present at every meeting. They'd show up when [18] they could, or when they had to. I don't know which, what [19] determined their presence. P0] Q. And are you referring to a meeting bivolving the pi] DEO's? [22/A. The environmental policy staff, at which Mr. Page 653 [1] Throdahl's group, the DEO's were present, public relations P] people, legal people, and it's a mixed audience. [3] Q. Do you have a memory of somebody from the [4] insurance group actually speaking at a meeting of tlud kind? [5] A. No, that's like I said, I'm referring to those as [6] formal presentations where the speakers prepared to cover a [7] subject in depth for some period of time during a meeting. [8] I just don't recall one of those. It doesn't mean it [9] happened or didn't happen; I just don't remember. [10] Q. Was there any instance where m the context of a [11] discussion either of employee health or environmental [12] impact, any questions were directed to an insurance [13] representative at the meeting concerning what insurance [14] implications? [15] A. I don't remember any such specifics, no. [16] (Papageorge Deposition Exhibit 46 marked for [17] identification.) [18] MR. HUGHES: I've had marked as Papageorge [19] Exhibit 46 a document with a cover memorandum dated P0] September 27, 1982, from G. L. lessee to various addressees pi] with two attachments at that, production numbers MCO p2] 0426235-240. Let me know when you've had sufficient I Page 654 | [1] opportunity to review this document, Mr. Papageorge. i PJ (Witness peruses said document.) j [3] A. I have reviewed the document. [4] BY MR. HUGHES: [5] Q. You are one of the iiuiividuals shown as an [6] addressee of the document, Mr. Papageorge? [7] A. I am. [8] Q. Have you seen this document before ? [9] A. I don't recall it. [10] Q. Having had the opportunity to review the [11] document, that is, Papageorge Exhibit 46 - well, strike [12] that. Page 648 to Page 654 202-347-3700 ACE-FEDERAL REPORTERS, INC. WATER PCB-SD0000063774 BSA Depo of: WTT7JAM B. PAPAGEORGE Monsanto v Aetna February 9, 1993 CR: 54365.0 XMAXG.7) [13] Prior to looking at this document, did you have [14] any memory cf being asked to either be interviewed yourself [15] or protide a staffmember to be interviewed by an individual [16] who was seeking information about Monsanto for the purposes [17] of an environmental impairment liability insurance policy? [18] A. AD I coaid recall was if Miss Grimm was involved [19] in some activity. 1 couldn't recall the details. I could [20] not recall my involvement in this activity. I just don't [21] remember ever being interviewed by anyone in this matter, so [22] I can recall virtually nothing about this, really. Page 655 [1 ] Q. And is this - is that true after having reviewed [2] this document, Papageorge Exhibit - [3] A. After reviewing this document, 1 note that Mr. [4] Keating sat in for me in this review. I, at this point in [5] time, don't recall why 1 wasn't available to participate. [6] Q. Did you select Mr. Keating to sit in for you? [7] A. WeD, normally when I'm away from the office, I [8] designated one of my team members to act in my behalf in [9] these matters, so if I was away at the time aD this was [10] taking place, Mr. Keating - I'm guessing here - he must [111 have been the person I bad watching my desk for me. [12] Q. When you said you designated an individual to [13] handle these matters, what did you mean by "these matters"? [14] A. WeD, to handle any matters that came across my [15] desk requiring my personal attention. In other words, look [16] in my mad basket and respond and answer the telephone, and [17] so on. [18] Q. Having reviewed Papageorge Exhibit 46, is your [19] memory refreshed at all that both Georgette Grimm and Bob [20] Toth came to a DEO meeting to discuss Monsanto's purchase of [21] environmental impairment liability insurance? [22] A. I do not remember that. Page 656 [1] Q. That would have been unusual, wouldn't it, for [2] both Georgette Grimm and Bob Toth to come to a DEO meeting to [3] give presentation on the purchase of a particular insurance [4] policy? [5] A. It would have been, yes. [6] Q. But nonetheless, it doesn't stick in your mind at [7] all? [8] A. Doesn't ring any bells. I may not have attended [9] that meeting. I don't know. [10] Q. Fair enough. [11] A. I just don't remember. [12] Q. Did - do you recall having any discussions with [13] your fellow DEO's in or about July through September of 1982 [14] concerning Monsanto's purchase ofan environmental [15] impairment liability insurance policy? [16] A. I do not. [17] Q. Did you ever speak with a Mr. Tom Burger of [18] Harding Lawson Associates? [19] A. I don't know the man. [20] Q. Do you know the name Harding Lawson Associates? [21] A. No, I don't. [22] Q. At the time cf this memorandum September 27, * 1 11 Page 657 [1] 1982, Mr. Keating's responsibilities dealt solely with [2] industrial hygiene; correct? [3] A. That was his assignment, yes, sir. [4] Q. And that had been his assignment since sometime [5] in 1978; isn 7 that right? [6] A. '77. /77 Q. Sometime shortly after you became DEO. [8] A. Correct. [9] Q. Okay, and in September of 1982, was there one [10] other individual who hot a manager of environmental affairs [11] directly under you? [12] A. In 1982? [13] Q. Yes. That's a poor question. Let me ask you [14] this. Who was the individual with the equivalent position [15] as Mr. Keating who was assigned in September of 1982 the [16] environmental responsibilities? [17] A. There were two individuals. [18] Q. Okay. [19] A. Mr. Foresman, Michael Foresman, and Michael [20] Weishaar. [21] Q. Were they at the same position or was Mr. [22] Weishaar slightly senior? Page 658 [1] A. No, they were in the same position. Those are [2] the two that were involved with environmental matters. [3] Q. Do you have - can you tell me any reason that it [4] wasn't either Mr. Weishaar or Mr. Foresman who were asked to p] participate in an interview with a man who wanted [6] information about environmental matters? [7] MR. SARFATTI: Objection; no foundation. p] A. I don't know that there's any reason. It just 19] wasn't their turn to pinch hit for me in my absence. [10] BY MR. HUGHES: [11] Q. Would you agree with me that either Mr. Foresman [12] or Mr. Weishaar would have been more knowledgeable at [13] September or October of 1982 about environmental issues [14] within MCI than was Mr. Keating? [15] A. They would have been more knowledgeable of [16] details, but Mr. Keating's background prior to his [17] industrial hygiene assignment was in the environmental area, [18] so he was familiar with the, the broad subject, be was in a [19] position where he was fairly weD tuned in to current [20] activity, not in minute detail but in the broader picture. [21] I don't know what else to add to that except that in my [22] absence, he chose to sit in for me, rather than appoint Page 659 [1] someone else. [.2] Q. In your - within your staff, was there even at [3] the same, even within the same title, some seniority [4] ranking, such that Mr. Keating, who had been with the [5] company the longest, had more seniority and in your absence [6] would be the person who would make decisions such as that? [7] MR. SARFATT I: Objection; vague. [8] A. Oh, I did not select my stand-in based on [9] seniority. I rotated it, recognizing they're all busy [10] people and I didn't want to saddle one person with [11] additional duties every time, so as 1 took my vacations or [12] made my trips and aD, I would rerotate that assignment, and [13] it appears that at this time, it was Mr. Keating's turn. [14] BY MR. HUGHES: [15] Q. What facts lead you to state as you did several [16] minutes ago that Mr. Keating was tuned in u> matters at the [17] plant level? Environmental matters? [18] A. WeD, we had our weekly staff meetings, our [19] little group, where we compared notes in quite detail. Mr. [20] Keating had, of course, the background at many of the plants [21] so he could understand quickly what was going on. This team [22] had lunch together. They, they were so dose in their Page 660 [1] working environment that Mr. Keating had a very good [2] understanding of the environmental issues. [3] Q. Describe for me this weekly staff meeting that [4] you just mentioned. Was that something that you had PI throughout the time you were DEO at Monsanto Otemical [6] Intermediates? [7] A. Yes, with my group. [8] Q. Who all would attend the weekly staff meetings? [9] A. Mr. Keating, Mr. Weishaar - weD, again, it [10] depends on what year we're talking about. Mr. Foresman, Mr. [11] Farley, Mr. McEwen, that team. [12] Q. Anyone else who would attend those staff [13] meetings? [14] A. No. [15] Q. All right, so it was, by title, it would be the [16] Director cf Environmental Operations, the Managers of [17] Environmental Operations or cf Industrial Hygiene, in Mr. [18] Keating's case, and then the Environmental Operation [19] Managers, putting the name at the other end? [20] A. Yeah, if they existed, yeah. [21] Q. Okay. [22] ! A. Plus the Product Acceptability Managers. Page 661 ] [11 j [2] I [3] Q. Were any minutes kept of those meetings? A. No. (Discussion off the record.) ACE-FEDERAL REPORTERS, INC. 202-347-3700 Page 654 to Page 661 WATER PCB-SD0000063775 USA Depo of: WTfIJAM B. PAPACEORGE Monsanto v Aetna February 9, 1993 CR: 54365.0 XMAXC28) Ml BY MR. HUGHES: (5/ Q. How long, generally, did your weekly staff 16/ meetings last? 17] A. Oh, generally, they'd last from, oh, 9:00 or (8] 10:00 o'clock in the morning till noon, lunchtime. i9j Q. Would they continue through hatch? HOI A. No. We'd break up. [Ill Q. So in other words, you tried to have at least a 1121 rliree-hour meeting, mo- to three-hour meeting with your f13] staff event vveek. 1141 A. Yeah. [151 Q. And were agendas prepared for these meetings or [16] teas it more along the tines of "What are you doing this [17] week" and- [181 A. No, (here were no agendas. Each of us would [19] bring in pencil notes as to the kinds of things we wanted to [20/ talk about or learn about. 1211 (Discussion otf the record.) 1221_______ BY MR, HUGHES:___________________________________ Page 662 /// Q. Was it within the discretion of the individual /2/ who you asked to sit in for you in your absence to make the /3/ decision that as to a particular matter, instead of his [4] responding to it, it should be one of the other members of [51 your staff? . 161 A. It was at the discretion of the individual. He 17] could volunteer himself or he could appoint someone. /8I Q. I apologize for having to ask you to tell me [9] something that you answered before, but it'll be faster than [101 my loolang it up. While you were DEO of MCI, were any of [111 'he Monsanto facilities in the St. Louis area within your [12/ jurisdiction? 113/ A. Yes. 114] Q. Which ones, again? 115J A. Queeny plant, and the Krummrich Plant in Sauget, [16] Illinois. [17] Q. In or about the period of July through September [18] 1982, did you receive any information that an individual [19] wanted to conduct an environmental risk assessment at a [20] Monsanto facility in the Sl Louis area? [21] A. I don't recall such a request. 122[_______Q. If an outside risk assessment service wanted to________ Page 663 [II have an oppommitv to visit one of the plants that had been [2] under your jurisdiction, is that something you would have ]3] expected to have been mformed of, as the Director of Ml Environmental Operations? [51 A. Yes. It would have very likely come to me, I /61 would have asked my manager to handle the details and [7] manager for the review. f8/ Q. Did it come to your attention at any time - [9/ strike that. [10] While you were DEO of MCI, did you ever hear of [111 an environmental risk assessment firm by the name of ERAS, [12] E-R-A-S, initials? [13] A. No. [141 Q. Or by the name "Environmental Risk Assessment [15] Services''' [16] A. No. [17] Q. We can't get away from this one yet, Mr. [181 Papageorge. Let's look again at Exhibit 46, the attachment [19/ to the cover memorandum. which is from Georgene Grimm, 120] addressed to Jean Jessee. [21] A. I see that.* 1 2 3 * * * * 8 /22I_______ Q. Is this document, which was attached to the cover Page 664 [1] memorandum addressed to you, one that is familiar to you in [2] any way? . [3] A. I just have no recall on any of these documents. Ml I draw a total blank. [51 Q. On the first page of the attached memorandum from /6] Georgene Grimm, it's with the production numbers ending in [71 236. [8] A. I have it. [9/ Q. There is what she calls an outline of information [101 that she says Tom Burger indicated he wanted to receive. Do [II] you see that? It's under two headings "General" and ! [12] "Facilities"? j [13] A. 1 see that. | [14] Q. Under "Facilities," were you ever made aware, ui I [15] the latter part of 1982, of a request from a risk assessment j [16] service, for the types of information listed there in [17] numbers 1 through 11? [18] A. I just do not recall this. I draw a blank. [19] Q. Item 10, listed under "Facilities, ` which is, [20] quote, "Summary ofpast, present, anticipated litigation - [21] only cases having some merit," end quote. Did you have any [22] information that you had compiled within the DEO group_______ Page 665 [1] concerning - well, let's start with past litigation on [2] environmental matters in which Monsanto had been involved. [3] A. No. [4] Q. You didn't maintain anything like that? [5] A. No. [6/ Q. Did you maintain any itfformation concerning [7] ongoing litigation? [8] A. No. [9] Q. And finally did you maintain anything in the DEO [10] group on litigation that you were - that Monsanto uus [11] anticipating over environmental matters? [12] A. No. [13] Q. Where would you have looked for such information [141 if you wanted to get it? [15] A. I'd go to Monsanto's Legal Department. [16] Q. Is that Mr. Park would be the person you would [17] call? [18] A. Weil, he would certainly be a logical one, yes, [19] Mr. Park would be the logical one because of the [20] environmental law involved. [21] Q- We're focusing on environmental claims, here, [22] only._______________________________________________________ Page 666 [1] A. Yes. 12] Q. Is there anyone else in the Legal Department who [3] you would have thought of to call in September of 1982 if [4] you wanted information concerning past, present and 15] anticipated litigation? [6] A. Wefl, certainly, at one time, Mr. Park had other [7] attorneys working with him. As best as 1 recall, by 1982, [8] he bad others on his staff. I personally worked with Mr. [9] Park when he was available. If he was not in the office, I [10] would go to one of bis assistant attorneys. I [HI Q- Let's back up to number 9 in that same list, [12] which is, quote, "Historical and current waste disposal [13] practices, on and offsite," end quote. Did the DEO group [14] at MCI maintain information on that subject? [15] MR. SARFATT1: Object on the grounds of [16] vagueness. [17] A. I don't recall any He or coflection of [18] information that addressed that. The managers of [19] environmental matters would go to the plants to get that [20] kind of information. [21] BY MR. HUGHES:1 11 [22]_______ Q. 1 take itfrom your answer that while you were_______ Page 667 [1] the Director of Environmental Operations of MCI, you never, [2] you and no one in your group made an attempt to compile, for [3] example, a list of waste disposal sites used by the Texas [4] City plant 1950 to today? [5] A. I don't remember any activity of that nature, no. [6] Q. Do you remember seeing any list of that kind from [7] any source within Monsanto? And I'm focusing ui particular [8] on the Texas City plant. [9] A. 1 do not recall such a list. [10] Q. Was there ever an instance where you wanted to [11] know the waste disposal sites used by the Texas City plant [12] from some date in the past, I960 up until 1980? [13] A. I'm trying to recall the environmental guidelines [14] that were eventually established in the '80's at which an [15] attempt was made to summarize the current practices of the [16] plants, and as best I recall, under that program, there was [17] a pulling together of this kind of information. That's as Page 661 to Page 667 202-347-3700 ACE-FEDERAL REPORTERS, INC. WATER PCB-SD0000063776 BSA Depo of: WILLIAM B. PAPAGEORGE Monsanto v Aetna February 9, 1993 CR: 54365.0 XMAXI29) [18] close as my memory can bring me to this. [19] Q. Which program were you referring to? [20] A. There was, as 1 remember, an environmental policy [21] guideline referring to current waste disposal practices, [22] activities, as distinguished from outside processor kinds of Page 668 [1] activities. There were two programs, and it's under the [2] waste disposal program that a summary was put together for [3] each plant. [4] Q. Mr. Papageorge, did you - strike that. Are you [5] familiar with a survey that went under the name the Eckhardt [6] Subcommittee Survey? [7] A. Eckhardt. Hmm. The name Eckhardt Subcommittee [8] rings a very faint bell. 1 can't associate it with anything [9] specific. [10] Q. Well, let me represent to you, Mr. Papageorge, [11] that there was a Congressional subcommittee chaired by Bob [12] Eckhardt who was from the State of Texas - [13] A. Yes. [14] Q. - that decided in 1979 to ask the 50 or so [15] largest chemical companies in the United States to complete [16] a survey and identify waste disposal sites that they had [17] employed from 1950 to date. [18] A. lyfm-hmm. [19] Q. Now, if you'll accept just for the purposes of [2Of this question that my representation is accurate, does that [21] ring any bells with you of the Eckhardt survey? [22] A. Not many. 1 recall a reference to the Eckhardt Page 669 [1] committee, but I don't recall what Monsanto's response to [2] that committee request was, so I just don't remember the [3] details. [4] (Papageorge Deposition Exhibit 47 marked for [5] identification.) [6] BY MR. HUGHES: [7] Q. What we've marked as Papageorge Exhibit 47 is a [8] memorandum dated October 13, 1980, from G. L. lessee to a [9] list of what appears to be -- well, to an address list, [10] let's just call it, production mtmbers MCO 6201847 to 854. [11] And Mr. Papageorge, this, as it indicates, does not purport [12] to be the actual response to the Eckhardt survey, but [13] rather, a condensation put together by Mr. lessee. Okay? [14] A. That's what the memorandum states. [15] Q. Have you seen this document before, Mr. [16] Papageorge? [17] A. I do; I don't remember it, but there again, I may [18] or may not have received it. [19] Q. Do you -- strike that. [20] Were you involved in -- if you take a look at the [21] first page, Mr. Papageorge, the cover memo from Mr. lessee, [22] it references a EPS-DEO staff meeting discussion of penduig Page 670 [1] legal or regulatory enforcement action against HWM [2] facilities. Does reviewing that refresh your recollection [3] of any meetings at which the subject of hazardous waste [4] facilities to which Monsanto had sent arty substances arose? [5] A. That was, it arose more than once. [6] Q. What that means is - that was not a precise [7] question. Where the subject was raised of "we would tike to 18] see a list of all of the hazardous waste sites that we can [9] identify to which Monsanto had sent wastes." [10] A. WeO, as best as I can recall, one of the [11] guidelines was developed called for such a list, internally, [12] within Monsanto. [13] Q. And 1 take it you lutve no separate recollection [14] of warning to see such a list other than that guideline ? [15] A. Well, the guideline is a result of that desire. [16] Such a list was considered to be desirable, and one way to [17] get it is to prepare some guidelines on how to get that [18] data, and this was done. [19] (Papageorge Deposition Exhibit 48 marked for [20] identification.) [21] MR. HUGHES: We've had marked as Papageorge [22] Exhibit 48 a document dated October 6, 1982, from 1 Page 671 [1] H. M. Keating to M. R. Foresman and M. F. Weishaar, | [2] production numbers MCO 6034060 to 064. [3] (Witness peruses said document.) [4] BY MR. HUGHES: [5] Q. Have you seen this document before. Mr. [6] Papageorge? [7] A. 1 don't recall it. [8] Q. Once again, we can say that in the ordinary [9] course, if you were copied on a document as you appear to be [10] on this one, you would lutve received it? [11] A. That is correct. [12] Q. And can we also agree dutt this sort of document. [13] lutd it come across your desk, was one to which you would [14] lutve given your attention? [15] A. Certainly. Mm-hmm. [16] Q. I mean, this is somewhat out of the ordinary of [17] the day-to-day work that you were doing. Isn't dust right? [18] A. See, 1 don't know how to describe, describe it as [19] being out of the ordinary. [20] Q. Well, you didn't ordinarily read about interviews [21] arranged with your staff by die Monsanto Risk Managemem [22] section._____________________________________________________ Page 672 [1] A. Oh, that's true. [2] Q. That would have piqued your interest, would it [3] not? [4] A. Yes. [5] Q. Yeah. Is any of die handwriting on die first [6] page yours? [7] A. No. [8J Q. Up in die - starting ui die upper right-lumd [9] section? [10] A. No. [11] Q. Did Mr. Keating come to you at any time ui late [12] 1982 to discuss with you an interview he had had concerning [13] environmental risks at the plant level? [14] A. I don't recall such a discussion, but it's likely [15] that he did. That would have been a normal feedback to me [16] when I returned back to the office, Mr. Keating would cover [17] activities of this nature that took place in my - during my [18] absence, [19] Q. So if I understand your answer, you are saying [20] you don't remember b; correct? [21] A. That is correct. [22] ______ Q. But assuming dial diis documeiu is accurate and_____ Page 673 [1] reflects diat Mr. Keating lutd such an interview, dial is die [2] sort of diing he would have discussed widi you? [3] A. That is correct. [4] (Discussion off the record.) [5] (Whereupon the deposition as was recessed at [6] 5:25 p.m., to be resumed at 9:00 o'clock the [7] following day.) [8] PI [10] [11] [12] [13] [14] [15] [161 [17] [18] [19] [20] [21] [22]________________________________________ ACE-FEDERAL REPORTERS, INC. 202-347-3700 Page 667 to Page 673 WATER PCB-SD0000063777 BSA______________________ Depo of: WILLIAM B. PAPAGEORGE Monsanto v Aetna February 9, 1993 CR: 54365.0 Look-See <31; Look-See Concordance Report 2,263 UNIQUE WORDS 386 NOISE WORDS 31,052 TOTAL WORDS SINGLE FILE CONCORDANCE 670:22; 672:12 1983 [11 510:9 1984 [31 641:21: 642:10; 644:5 19899 [1] 485:14 1993 [3] 483:21; 488:1, 4 1:55 [1] 576:7 1st PI 514:22; 517:17 -2- CASE SENSITIVE 2 [4] 566:5, 11; 649:13; 650:4 WORD RANGES @ BOTTOM OF PAGE 2-15-77 [11 562:21 20006 pi 484:9; 485:5 201 [11 612:22 -0- 0084842 [1] 593:2 0084867 [11 579:20 0426235-240 [1] 653:22 0426381 [11 649:14 064 [1] 671:2 202 [5] 484:10; 485:6, 7; 624:11; 625:17 209 [1] 641:21 22 PI 610:22; 632:18 236 [1J 664:7 23rd [11 557:19 24 [1] 600:11 -I - 27 P] 653:20; 656:22 I [41 508:8; 510:20; 577:3; -3- 664:17 10 [1] 664:19 1025 [11 484:8 10:00 [11 661:8 II [11 664:17 11-16-77 [11 580:21 1124 [11 523:4 1125396 [I] 632:20 11:02 [1] 527:21 12 [11 634:8 1202162 [I] 577:22 12:35 [11 576:7 13 [1] 669:8 Nth [1] 650:6 15th [3] 488:4, 11; 612:22 16th [2] 565:1; 577:3 17 [1] 532:11 1776 [1] 485:4 17th [5] 533:10; 547:5; 554:19; 556:6, 12 18th [1] 608:11 1950 [2] 667:4; 668:17 I960 [1] 667:12 1970 [5] 490:22; 494:12: 497:21; 520:11; 597:1 1975 [21 520:13; 613:13 1976 [61 520:12, 13; 546:22; 557:19; 558:10; 559:18 1977 [451 503:11; 504:14; 3 [4] 500:7; 523:21; 566:6; 620:22 30 [1] 577:20 300 [11 484:7 302 [11 485:15 31 [4] 486:8: 500:2, 5; 508:9 32 [9] 486:9; 532:5, 6, 10; 545:19; 547:4; 551:20; 552:19; 554:19 33 [51 486:10; 557:1, 4; 558:7; 568:3 34 [6] 486:11; 560:8, 11; 568:5; 571:1: 630:3 35 [3] 486:12; 577:13, 19 3512701 [11 500:9 3512704 [1] 560:15 3512707 [1] 564:13 3512711 [11 560:15 3512721 [1] 557:7 3512723 [11 532:13 36 [3] 486:13: 579:16, 20 37 PI 486:14; 592:17 38 [3] 486:15; 600:6, 10 389 PI 634:4, 5 39 PI 486:16; 608:3 398 PI 634:6, 7 3rd [11 525:21 -4- 508:8, 16; 511:15; 514:22; 515:15; 517:15, 17; 521:13; 524:18; 532:11; 533:10; 534:13; 536:16; 537:2; 539:10: 541:1; 543:5; 547:5; 552:11, 15; 554:20; 556:6, 12; 557:6; 565:1; 567:14; 571:10; 572:1; 577:3, 20; 601:17; 610:22; 612:22; 613:18, 19; 618:18; 627:18; 628:4, 11, 21: 632:18; 633:9; 634:9 1977-1978 P] 510:3; 525:5 1978 [15] 500:7, 16, 21; 510:8; 525:21; 527:10, 15; 592:22; 595:1; 600:11; 601:19; 608:11; 609:3, 8; 657:5 1979 [11 668:14 1980 13] 625:15; 667:12; 669:8 4 [6] 524:15; 551:20; 552:5; 641:21; 642:10; 644:4 40 [5] 486:17; 610:18, 21; 620:21; 626:20 400 pi 484:17; 632:20 41 [3] 486:18: 627:13, 17 415 PI 484:19, 20 42 [3] 486:19; 628:17, 20 429-7049 [11 485:7 43 [4] 486:20; 593:2; 632:14, 17 44 [4] 486:21; 641:15, 19; 642:15 45 [3] 486:22; 649:9, 12 46 [6] 487:1; 653:16, 19; 654:11; 655:18; 663:18 47 [3] 487:2; 669:4, 7 48 131 487:3; 670:19, 22 488 [1] 486:3 493 [1] 600:13 1982 [17] 521:13; 649:13; 650:4, 6; 653:20; 656:13; 657:1, 9, 12, 15; 658:13; 662:18; 664:15; 666:3, 7; -5j 5 PI 627:18; 628:21 5-16-77 [1] 564:12 50 [11 668:14 ; 591:7 500 [11 486:8 absence [5] 658:9, 22: 517 PI 608:14: 609:19 659:5; 662:2: 672:18 518 [11 608:12 absent [1] 646:16 5304491 [1] 608:12 accelerate [I] 614:8 532 [11 486:9 accept PI 602:17; 668:19 557 [1] 486:10 Acceptability [12] 533:11; 560 [11 486:11 561:18; 586:12, 19, 22; 577 [11 486:12 587:8, 18; 614:7: 619:14; 579 [1] 486:13 622:6; 625:3; 660:22 592 [1] 486:14 acceptability [5] 521:6, 10: 5:25 [1] 673:6 582:14: 600:22: 620:14 5th [1] 592:22 acceptance [1] 506:13 - 6- access [1] 639:9 accessible [1] 562:15 6 [31 608:16; 609:2; 670:22 60 [1] 611:2 600 [1] 486:15 6034060 [1] 671:2 608 [11 486:16 610 [1] 486:17 6201847 [11 669:10 6202488 [I] 600:13 627 [1] 486:18 628 [11 486:19 632 [11 486:20 636 [I] 485:12 64 [1] 577:22 641 [1] 486:21 649 [1] 486:22 651-3000 [1] 485:15 653 [I] 487:1 669 [11 487:2 670 [1] 487:3 accident [1] 511:12 accomplish [1] 506:7 account [4] 547:20; 625:8, 10, 19 accurate [4] 504:16; 607:10; 668:20; 672:22 accurately [1] 508:12 achieve [1] 489:18 acknowledge [1] 581:20 acquired [1] 605:18 acrylonitrile [1] 526:21 Act PI 631:16, 17 act [1] 655:8 acted [1] 542:11 acting [l] 594:8 Action [1] 608:20 action [10] 492:15; 493:3; 518:6; 521:22; 522:21; 530:21; 531:8, 20: 532:3; 670:1 - 7- 7 [1] 557:5 7-15-77 [IJ 627:19 70 [1] 631:19 703 [11 500:9 7525205 [1] 641:21 76 [51 497:22; 597:1, 2; 614:13; 615:5 77 PI 525:8; 657:6 772- 5759 [1] 484:20 773- 5529 [1] 484:19 actions [4] 493:1; 531:13; 543:14; 568:21 active [1] 571:7 actively [1] 648:8 activities [4] 530:14; 667:22; 668:1; 672:17 activity [13] 506:2; 508:7; 509:13, 19; 587:2; 614:6; 632:7; 643:16; 649:2; 654:19, 20; 658:20; 667:5 actual [3] 506:12; 612:22; 669:12 -8- ad [11 496:6 add [31 609:4, 5; 658:21 80 [31 637:9, 10: 667:14 addition [1] 514:16 8250929 [11 627:19 additional [3] 609:6: 644:5: 828-3163 [1] 485:6 659:11 84 [1] 644:9 address [6] 497:10; 521:3; 85 [I] 644:8 596:2; 618:21; 637:7; 669:9 854 [11 669:10 addressed [8] 497:11, 13; 869 [11 582:21 521:5; 533:19; 534:1; 872 [1] 579:20 663:20: 664:1; 666:18 88 [1] 483:8 addressee P] 643:20; 654:6 - 9- addressees [9] 526:11; 539:21; 542:3; 555:14; 9 P] 488:1; 666:11 9-1-78 [11 609:21 9076913 [11 629:1 9076922 [1] 629:1 9076943 [I] 611:2 94111 [I] 484:18 949 PI 620:21; 625:5 950 [1] 624:15 951 [1] 624:5 965-7910 [1] 484:10 9:00 PI 661:7; 673:6 9:30 [11 483:20 9th [1] 483:20 632:19; 634:2, 17; 649:13; 653:20 addressing [4] 496:7; 504:10; 534:10; 559:10 adjective [1] 572:7 administration [1] 634:15 admit [1] 551:14 adopted [1] 612:14 adverse [41 490:18, 21; 493:8, 11 AETNA [11 483:10 affairs [1] 657:10 affect PI 515:14; 531:4 affected [1] 491:6 -A - a.m. [1} 483:20 ABC [11 545:14 ability [1] 491:6 able [61 512:15; 546:5; 560:18; 566:20; 568:16; ; agencies P] 571:15; 573:15 i agency [141 531:19: 572:2, | 17, 21; 573:7, 17; 574:4, 9, I 13, 22; 575:8, 10, 22 ( agenda P] 593:18; 641:12 agendas [21 661:15, 18 agent [11 538:16 agree p] 562:9; 565:1, 4: 567:8; 645:17: 658:11; 671:12 agreed [1] 612:15 Agricultural [1] 633:10 Ah [1] 631:2 air PI 501:2; 619:22 al [1j 483:11 AIC13 [3] 552:20; 553:2; 604:19 allegations [1] 491:5 Allied [6] 498:20; 499:7; 504:17; 505:2, 10; 508:10 allow [1] 512:11 Aluminum [1] 553:4 aluminum [4] 553:5, 17; 554:8; 604:16 analyses [1] 507:5 analysis [13] 583:19: 584:4, 17, 20; 585:3, 7, 13; 586:2. 5, 7, 14, 17; 587:4 ANN [1] 632:20 Ann PI 510:14, 16 annual [1J 493:20 answer [9] 503:2: 520:21: 529:19, 20; 531:17; 595:5: 655:16: 666:22; 672:19 answered P] 584:10; 662:9 answers [1] 562:13 anticipate [2] 645:3; 648:11 anticipated [2] 664:20; 666:5 anticipating [1] 665:11 anticipation [1] 631:20 anybody [7] 510:13; 512:3: 522:13; 572:20; 573:5; 581:1; 646:8 anymore [1] 579:13 anytime [2] 623:20 anyway [1] 630:8 apologize [4] 498:3, 16; 589:13; 662:8 appear [6] 580:18; 602:11: 620:18; 623:4; 625:17: 671:9 appearance [1] 605:9 APPEARANCES [l] 484:1 appears [14] 532:12, 21; 533:4, 19: 539:7: 555:5: 578:7; 593:14; 601:11, 18: 621:3: 644:9; 659:13; 669:9 application pj 564:1, 5 apply [1] 643:17 appoint P] 658:22; 662:7 appointed [3] 504:13; 535:12; 558:11 approach [6] 489:20; 496:1: 506:14; 583:20; 624:12; 631:19 approached [1] 631:4 appropriate [10] 506:5; 507:19; 512:19; 519:1; 523:19; 545:5; 553:15; 572:12; 612:17; 634:21 approval P] 624:17, 19 approve [1/ 626:17 approved P] 580:16; 626:8 Approximately [1] 546:18 April [31 641:21; 642:10; 644:4 area [12] 503:20; 519:11; 520:10; 548:22; 556:19; 587:14: 598:11; 599:21: 616:17; 658:17; 662:11, 20 areas PI 624:19; 651:11 argue [1] 566:19 arising [1] 599:7 arose [3] 619:15: 670:4. 5 Arps [1] 485:11 From 0084842 to Arps WATER PCB-SD0000063778 SSA Depo of: WILLIAM B. PAPAGEORGE Monsanto v Aetna February 9, 1993 CR; 54365.0 _________________ Look-See(32) arranged /4{ 534:15, 16; audience [4] 588:12: 594:12; I Bray [1] 484:5 I catalysts [1] 586:11 535:4; 671:21 650:20; 653:2 I break [3] 530:2: 627:12; categories [41 537:6, 10; Arrangement [1] 566:5 August [51 503:11: 577:3. ' 661:10 538:13; 566:9 arrangement [8J 520:3; 20: 600:11; 601:19 breathed [1] 636:21 Category [1] 566:5 524:13: 534:17, 19; 535:3; Austin [1] 573:7 Breeze [1] 492:3 category [4] 489:10; 530:3: 544:18; 555:12; 607:4 authentic [1] 533:6 brief [1] 649:15 537:12; 551:20 Arrangements [1] 571:6 author [3] 500:17; 502:16; briefly [1] 625:5 caution [1] 518:9 arrangements [17] 506:1: 633:6 bringing [1] 574:9 cautioned [1] 518:2 526:9, 16: 527:2; 534:11; authors [1] 501:21 Brio [3] 644:7; 647:2; CBY [6] 500:8; 532:13; 537:17: 555:16; 562:6; available [7] 490:12; 491:1; 648:12 557:6, 7; 560:15; 564:13 563:4: 601:15; 605:11; 553:21; 623:4; 625:14: broad [6] 497:12: 575:12; CC [1] 594:1 638:7, 13; 639:1, 4; 640:3; 655:5; 666:9 596:19, 21; 641:12; 658:18 cease [3] 492:7; 494:13; 641:7 avoid [2] 505:7; 547:1 broadened [1] 551:15 495:18 arranger [I] 594:8 avoided [1] 490:15 broader [3] 578:13; 640:1; ceasing [1] 494:5 arrive [11 502:17 aware [12] 494:16; 495:1; 658:20 certified [1] 483:21 arrived [1] 496:8 522:17: 534:17; 535:1; broadly [1] 497:11 chair [4] 496:8; 497:17, 19; artfid [11 494:7 546:10: 570:21; 618:18: Broderick [1] 485:2 536:4 asking [3] 534:10; 600:4; 639:19; 644:4, 8; 664:14 broke [2] 488:11; 498:18 chaired [1] 668:11 613:15 awareness [1] 549:16 brokers [1] 595:17 challenge [2] 512:10; 645:17 assess [1] 616:7 awful [1] 499:5 Bryan [1] 483:21 chance [6] 532:15; 578:2; assessing [2] 599:18; 621:16 Building [1] 484:16 593:4; 600:13; 629:3; Assessment [1] 663:14 -B- building [2] 571:21; 596:18 649:14 assessment [17] 531:5; background [4] 599:17: 572:11; 576:12, 15; 578:8, 617:3; 658:16; 659:20 22; 601:3; 605:12; 606:1, 4; Bank [1] 484:16 611:12; 624:10: 625:17; Barker [6] 522:3, 7, 10, 15; 662:19. 22: 663:11; 664:15 644:10, 12 assessments [1] 578:12 base [2] 575:15; 597:12 assigned [16] 508:1, 3: based [4] 599:5: 617:8: 521:6: 541:12; 560:5; 627:22; 659:8 574:12; 582:10; 585:3; basing [1] 530:13 586:1; 597:15; 601:2, 6; basis [21 519:13: 591:17 613:21; 622:2; 643:17; basket [1] 655:16 657:15 Bates [8] 557:7; 560:15: assignment [16] 497:14, 22; 564:13; 582:21; 608:14: 500:20; 501:1, 4, 6: 508:4; 620:21; 624:5; 634:4 521:10; 582:15; 600:5; Bay [1] 505:12 620:12; 626:13; 657:3, 4; Bayou [5] 548:21; 560:3: 658:17: 659:12 566:1; 573:6; 601:22 assist [2] 506:5, 15 bearing [2] 532:11; 560:14 assistance [1] 599:17 bears [1] 533:9 assistant [2] 573:14; 666:10 becomes [1] 604:4 assisted [1] 525:9 becoming [2] 563:4; 597:7 associate [4] 505:16; 637:10; begins [1] 560:12 649:2: 668:8 behalf [3] 483:18; 505:10; associated [6] 506:2; 508:6; 655:8 527:8; 539:19; 649:3 believe [15] 497:6: 499:18; Associates [2] 656:18, 20 505:12; 534:7; 549:11; association [1] 499:7 592:21; 601:8; 606:11: assumed [5] 528:10, 12, 13; 608:8; 611:7; 616:22; 572:15: 597:11 631:15; 640:20; 646:18, 20 assuming [2] 531:11; 672:22 ' believed [2] 538:21: 572:15 bell [6] 505:16: 535:21; assumption [1] 617:22 602:9: 631:1; 644:10: 668:8 assure [1] 597:16 bells [4] 505:13; 536:9: attached [6] 503:8; 507:12; 656:8; 668:21 557:18: 635:5; 663:22; belonged [3] 489:10: 534:6; 664:5 608:1 attachment [13] 500:6; belongs [1] 615:5 557:5: 562:17; 564:9; 565:6; benefit [1] 619:11 566:21; 568:3; 601:13; Benzene [1] 527:11 611:1; 627:20; 628:22: benzene [4] 526:17, 20; 641:19: 663:18 565:15; 566:16 attachments [71 560:14; Berkeley [2] 492:5 561:4; 562:14; 600:12; Bern [1] 630:22 601:5; 632:19: 653:21 best-informed [1] 615:16 attempt [5] 504:22; 518:4; bigger [1] 539:2 612:1: 667:2. 15 Bill [21 526:1; 562:5 attempting [1] 619:10 biodegradation [1] 598:9 attempts [1] 583:22 birds [3] 491:5, 7; 492:3 attend [5/ 497:2; 592:10; bit [2] 610:12; 619:13 596:6: 660:8, 12 blame [1] 648:16 attended [2] 524:5; 656:8 blank [2/ 664:4, 18 attendees [1] 646:14 Bob [5] 614:17; 652:12; attention [5] 547:11; 655:19; 656:2; 668:11 635:18; 655:15: 663:8; Bax [11 485:12 671:14 branched [1] 584:11 attorney [2] 508:3; 515:16 Brasfield [9] 541:3, 4, 5; attorneys [2] 666:7, 10 557:20; 559:5, 10, 12, 15; attractive [1] 623:5 640:4 Burger [2] 656:17; 664:10 business [20] 490:11; 496:22; 502:5, 8; 516:1; 517:12; 518:12; 519:4, 12; 524:19; 533:17; 562:11; 569:11; 572:3; 588:2; 589:20; 590:1; 601:10: 627:3, 6 busy [11 659:9 buy [1] 566:12 buying [1] 604:15 By-product [1] 578:14 by-product [15] 488:13; 537:13; 553:11, 13; 578:8, 14, 16; 579:1; 583:10: 621:18; 622:16; 623:10, 16, 18, 21 by-products [7] 583:2, 5; 621:3, 13; 622:3, 14, 20 - C-* 8 C.A. [1] 483:8 cab [1] 546:17 Caldwell [2] 596:1, 4 calendars [1] 593:20 California [2] 484:18; 492:5 call [22] 501:19; 521:2, 4, 8, 15, 18; 524:14; 529:17: 553:11; 574:3; 575:4, 7; 585:9; 593:20; 607:10; 634:12, 21; 645:13; 650:18; 665:17; 666:3; 669:10 calling [2] 571:2; 574:8 Callis [11 649:13 calls [1] 664:9 camera [1] 610:7 candid [1] 610:7 capital [1] 571:21 caption [1] 635:7 captioned [2] 562:18: 564:10 Carbide [1] 631:7 carbon [3] 502:9, 13; 632:19 carcinogen [1] 630:15 carcinogenic [2] 630:18; 631:6 Care [1] 515:1 care [1] 488:20 career [2] 504:9; 648:20 careful [1] 519:18 Carlton [1] 483:19 cars [1] 509:17 case [6] 511:12; 517:22; 575:16; 620:3, 16; 660:18 cases [1] 664:21 CASTLE [1] 483:2 CASUALTY [1] 483:10 catalyst [2] 552:19; 553:18 change [4] 496:20; 585:20; 623:8: 651:6 changing [1] 520:2 Chapman [25] 589:6, 7, 14, 18; 590:1, 3, 6, 10, 13; 591:1, 6; 595:20; 596:6, 9; 597:4, 16, 20; 598:20; 599:4, 16; 600:1; 617:15; 651:3; 652:12 charge [4] 505:22; 506:3, 13,18 Charlie [1] 526:1 chart [3] 583:15; 584:3, 8 check [5] 499:18: 571:14; 572:18; 573:7; 575:10 checked [1] 499:18 checking [2] 499:13; 630:16 Chemical [29] 498:20; 499:7; 504:17; 505:3, 21; 508:10; 520:14, 22; 522:3, 7,10, 15; 558:12; 564:11, 18; 567:1, 2; 581:16; 587:21; 601:14; 605:10; 611:15, 16; 613:9; 618:19; 630:14; 641:8; 644:10; 660:5 chemical [3] 553:18; 651:16; 668:15 chemicals [9] 489:9, 10; 572:4; 586:10; 619:11, 18; 620:4; 632:3; 642:12 chemists [1] 615:2 Chesapeake [1] 505:12 chloride [5] 553:4, 5, 17; 554:9; 604:16 Chocolate [5] 548:21; 560:3; 566:1; 573:6; 601:21 chose [1] 658:22 circulated [2] 633:13; 642:22 circulating [1] 633:15 circumstances [4] 517:18; 586:16; 631:13; 636:16 City [45] 500:19; 503:11: 507:14; 510:2, 10; 522:14; 525:6; 526:2, 16; 527:18; 539:11, 13, 20; 540:16; 541:2, 9; 546:3, 12; 547:12; 549:15, 19; 550:4; 553:6: 556:11, 19; 560:5; 568:20; 569:2, 14; 573:6; 604:12; 605:5; 606:8, 15, 19; 607:1; 615:4, 5, 8, 9; 628:8; 630:11; 667:4, 8, 11 CJA-118-1-CV [1] 483:8 claim [1] 639:11 claims [6] 495:10; 591:2, 9; 599:19; 600:2; 665:21 Clarence [1] 647:21 clarify [11 579:5 Clayton [1] 649:13 clean [1] 575:18 clean-up [1J 647:2 cleaned [1] 651:17 cleanup [2] 645:4; 648:12 clear [3] 497:8; 551:19; 621:11 clearance [1] 583:4 closest [1] 528:10 coach [21 518:16; 619:15 collection [2] 561:5: 666:17 collectively [1] 489:14 column [4] 566:5; 603:2, 10; 608:20 combination [3] 542:12, 14; 616:2 Coming [1] 618:1 coming [5] 505:20; 526:2; 529:4; 617:1; 618:19 comments [6] 506:15: 522:17; 545:8; 586:21: 651:9; 652:5 ' Commercial [1] 550:20 commercial [4] 492:2; 550:13, 18; 583:11 committee [5] 631:22; 632:6; 634:21; 669:1, 2 common [4] 591:11; 607:3; 638:11, 16 communicate [4] 506:4; 515:18; 518:4; 524:13 communicated [4] 554:22; 555:8; 635:15; 636:5 communication [2] 537:2; 558:17 community [2] 508:18; 513:2 companies [10] 551:16; 563:7; 572:3; 590:21; 591:8, 15; 595:3, 9; 643:14; 668:15 COMPANY [4] 483:4, 11; 484:3; 485:1 Company [12] 545:15; 558:13; 564:11, 18; 595:16; 601:14; 604:13: 605:3, 10: 633:11: 635:9 company [12] 519:10; 554:13; 558:15; 587:6; 595:2, 8; 605:6; 612:19; 624:22; 633:16; 640:11; 659:5 compared [1] 659:19 comparing [1] 579:9 compatibility [1] 611:12 compilation [4] 528:5; 543:17; 564:15; 570:11 compile [4] 529:8; 542:10; 563:14: 667:2 compiled [13] 522:6; 528:4: 541:6, 9: 543:7; 561:21; 564:21; 566:20. 22; 567:8; 568:12; 607:22; 664:22 compiling [8] 512:5; 530:7: 542:5, 7; 574:3; 632:8; 634:22; 635:3 complete [6/513:14: 563:17; 574:7; 616:1; 668:15 Completed [1] 608:21 completed [9] 567:15; 587:10, 15; 605:20; 609:2, 8; 610:5, 9; 614:9 completing [1] 506:14 complex [2] 489:9; 638:12 compliance [1] 635:1 complying [1] 588:14 composite [1] 542:4 compromised [1] 538:15 arranged to compromised WATER PCB-SD0000063779 BSA Depo of: WILLIAM B. PAPAGEORGE Monsanto v Aetna February 9, 1993 CR: 54365.0 Look-See<33, conceivable [1] 515:20 context [4] 546:2; 548:13: created [1] 547:5 concept f1J 578:14 651:21: 653:10 creature [1] 490:14 concepts [1] 538:14 continually [1] 567:19 creatures [3] 490:13, 17; concern [17] 491:12; 492:7; Continuation [1] 483:17 491:2 493:7; 514:4, 9, 11; 515:13; continuation [1] 488:3 criteria [1] 490:19 528:17: 529:2; 531:12; continue [3] 517:19; 524:19; critical [1] 569:3 538:18; 569:10, 12; 617:21: 661:9 cross-contamination [2] 619:17; 630:19; 631:5 continued [4] 491:13; 597:6, 519:21; 520:3 concerned [3] 612:16; 614:5; 10, 16 crushing [1] 519:12 645:21 continuing [2] 491:14: Cumene [1] 552:19 concerning [36] 495:13; 585:13 Cunningham [2] 640:21 511:8: 512:5: 517:18; 521:3, continuous [1] 567:18 current [7] 565:2; 608:9: 8; 534:14; 557:22; 559:14: Contract [3] 602:6; 603:2, 623:4; 658:19; 666:12: 563:8, 14; 564:5; 569:3; 10 667:15, 21 572:3; 580:2; 587:22; contract [4] 524:8, 9; 551:3; currently [2] 571:6; 608:13 590:12; 597:20; 599:5, 17: 604:2 custodians [1] 570:8 600:2; 606:18; 613:6, 16: contracts [2] 523:22; 603:19 customer [7] 494:18; 518:1; 625:6; 637:14; 645:8; 646:4; contractual [1] 519:13 645:5, 11; 646:5; 647:3; 649:19; 650:8; 653:13; contribute [1] 525:9 648:13 656:14; contributions [1] 591:8 customers [3] 494:6, 20; 665:1, 6; 666:4; 672:12 Control [2/ 631:15, 17 495:2 concerns [7] 495:9; 514:13; control [2] 489:16; 621:7 cyanide [1] 636:20* 11 519:4; 522:14; 527:17; controlled [1/ 519:19 537:3; 617:4 controlling [1] 559:22 -D- conclude [2] 505:4; 568:10 concluded [1] 489:14 conclusion [2] 494:13; 575:21 condensation [I] 669:13 conditions [2] 516:20; 548:16 conduct [1] 662:19 conducted [4] 491:21; 492:2; 582:5; 609:2 conference [1] 593:21 confess [1] 499:7 confidential [4] 515:4; 516:1; 523:13, 14 confirm [1] 509:1 conflict [1] 578:21 confused [2] 552:8; 640:12 Congressional [1] 668:11 connect [1] 524:7 connected [1] 548:6 connection [4] 530:7; 554:11; 583:3; 652:1 connotation [1] 553:13 consensus [1] 539:2 consequences [2] 492:22; 493:1 consider [5] 492:14; 520:2: 528:16; 619:20; 623:10 consideration [2] 496:5; 628:10 considerations [3] 625:7, 12, 18 considered [10] 489:12; 528:19; 538:16; 567:15; 585:11; 587:6; 615:16, 22; 624:11; 670:16 considering [2] 494:4; 623:21 consistent [1] 517:2 constituents [1] 615:17 constitutes [1] 563:6 constructive [1] 648:1 consult [2] 544:15; 616:3 consultants [1] 595:12 consultation [1] 626:17 consulting [2] 595:2, 8 Cont'd [11 486:3 contact [1] 575:5 contained [2] 523:13; 611:22 containing [1] 489:17 contains [2] 560:13; 564:17 contaminating [1] 519:22 contamination [1] 599:1 contemplated [2] 528:4, 9 contents [2] 510:18; 593:11 conversation [7] 549:4, 6, 11, 14: 550:3, 8; 551:6 conversations [4] 529:7; 589:17, 20; 606:17 conveyed [1] 517:13 conveying [3] 515:8, 10; 516:8 conviently [1] 526:12 copied [4] 595:19: 611:15; 612:10; 671:9 copies [2] 612:19; 632:19 copy [24] 502:9, 13; 525:2; 532:21; 533:6; 542:4; 543:1, 3, 17, 20; 567:13; 569:18; 570:2, 4; 587:17, 18, 19; 611:10; 612:17; 627:6, 9; 633:18; 643:20 Corey [4] 632:2; 634:9; 637:5 Cornell [1] 492:4 comer [4] 562:21; 564:12; 580:18; 582:21 corporate [7] 506:4; 508:13: 520:20; 525:14: 538:14; 540:20: 587:19 corporate-level [1] 536:22 corporate-wide [4] 535:12; 542:5; 547:10; 563:5 CORPORATION [1] 485:9 Corporation [1] 484:6 corporation [2] 507:16; 641:4 COUNTY [1] 483:2 County [11 483:19 couple [4] 539:8; 560:13; 627:22; 647:19 course [26] 491:16; 496:22; 497:2; 502:5, 8, 12; 518:12; 533:13, 17; 544:11; 562:4, 10; 586:18; 588:2; 601:10; 611:21; 612:7; 620:5; 626:21; 627:3, 5; 643:18; 646:11; 652:16; 659:20; 671:9 COURT [2] 483:1; 595:7 court [2] 574:16; 575:17 cover [24] 500:6; 557:4, 5; 561:15, 16; 598:11; 599:1: 600:11: 610:21; 628:1, 20: I 629:20; 632:17; 633:5, 6, j 12; 651:11; 653:6, 19; 663:19, 22; 669:21; 672:16 coverage [2] 599:19: 600:2 covered [1] 545:10 covers [2] 497:6; 534:12 CRCLA [1] 643:4 D.C. [2] 484:9; 485:5 Dahm [12] 535:18, 20; 536:4, 8, 11; 542:12; 543:1, 16; 562:21: 563:2; 564:1, 22 damaging [1] 513:2 Danley [3] 533:20; 539:22; 540:12 dash [1] 554:1 data [2] 572:8; 670:18 Date [1] 608:20 date [22] 517:16; 532:11: 533:9; 554:18; 557:5, 6, 21; 558:2; 561:10, 14; 564:12; 577:10, 11; 580:21; 609:3; 612:22; 613:3; 628:7; 642:10; 650:5; 667:12; 668:17 dated [19] 500:7; 525:21; 557:19; 577:20; 592:22; 600:11; 601:19; 608:10; 610:22; 627:18; 628:21; 632:18; 634:8; 641:20; 649:12; 653:19; 669:8; 670:22 dates [5] 552:8; 560:14; 561:12; 609:14, 15 day [6] 483:20; 494:17; 575:8; 588:4; 620:5; 673:7 day-to-day [1] 671:17 DDT [11 491:6 deadly [1] 636:20 deal [2] 573:19; 585:13 dealing [3] 517:19; 531:1; 575:17 dealt [31 547:13; 565:3; 657:1 decades [1] 613:9 December [7] 627:18; 628:3, 11. 21; 632:18; 633:9; 634:8 decide [3] 517:5; 559:21; 575:9 decided [5] 488:22; 489:19; 502:16; 528:2; 668:14 deciding [1] 625:10 decision [19] 488:16; 489:4, 7; 490:22; 491:17; 492:7; 493:15, 19; 494:12; 495:8, 14, 18, 21; 496:4, 9, 12. 16; 519:3; 662:3 decisions [1] 659:6 deemed [3] 513:15; 587:5; 594:3 deeply [2] 579:7, 11 DEFENDANT [3] 484:13; 485:1, 9 Defendants [3] 483:13, 18: 561:3 Define [1] 609:21 define [1] 639:4 defined [1] 632:1 definitely [1] 492:1 definition [3] 551:14; 552:13; 563:13 DeGarmo [6] 610:22; 624:20; 626:9, 10; 627:18; 628:21 degree [1] 643:15 DELAWARE [1] 483:1 Delaware [1] 485:14 deliberations []] 496:2 delivered [1] 627:6 deny [1] 509:1 DEO [58] 520:14, 22; 521:4, 12; 561:8, 9, 18; 567:19; 577:2; 578:7; 582:7; 591:14, 20; 592:4, 7, 10; 593:14, 15; 594:18; 596:7; 597:8; 611:14; 612:16, 18; 614:2; 616:14; 617:1; 618:1, 19; 627:6; 630:13; 631:11; 636:4, 10; 638:3, 20; 640:9; 641:3; 642:11; 649:19; 650:5, 9, 13, 15. 17; 652:21; 653:1; 655:20; 656:2, 13; 657:7; 660:5; 662:10; 663:10: 664:22; 665:9; 666:13 deodorant [1] 519:14 Department [25] 497:6; 534:15; 560:4: 573:20; 586:10; 589:15; 596:4; 598:17; 612:13; 615:2, 6, 7; 626:10, 16, 18; 630:17; 636:12; 637:6; 638:6, 7; 648:11; 650:16; 665:15; 666:2 department [1] 650:21 departments [2] 527:2, 5 depended [l] 506:12 depending [2] 490:13; 596:14 depends [3] 555:12; 598:7; 660:10 deposed [1] 598:18 Deposition [36] 486:8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15. 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22; 487:1, 2 , 3; 500:2; 532:6; 557:1; 560:8; 577:13; 579:16; 592:17; 600:6; 608:3; 610:18; 627:13; 628:17; 632:14; 641:15; 649:9; 653:16; 669:4; 670:19 deposition [7] 483:17: 488:3, 9; 498:13; 499:16; 649:5; 673:5 depth [11 653:7 Describe [1] 660:3 describe [7] 489:6; 499:6; 516:18; 563:3: 583:9; 671:18 described [2] 622:15; 638:16 describing [1] 597:3 designated [6] 522:11; 626:15; 635:14; 636:4; 655:8, 12 designed [1] 626:4 desirable [3] 512:20; 513:15: 670:16 desire [2] 514:11; 670:15 desk [7] 502:18: 560:12; 590:4; 629:20: 655:11, 15: 671:13 desks [11 616:3 detail [5] 588:11; 593:11; 640:1; 658:20; 659:19 detailed [1] 624:13 details [15] 510:18; 535:15: 575:14; 618:5; 620:6; 626:5: 636:18; 637:2; 640:8; 651:11, 13; 654:19; 658:16 ; 663:6; 669:3 Determine [1] 617:12 determine [8] 490:7; 494:8. 20: 514:19; 517:12; 529:14: 612:18; 617:9 determined [2] 489:11; 652:19 determining [1] 632:9 develop [3] 509:7; 573:13; 609:16 developed [2] 588:19; 670:11 developing [1] 522:22 developments [1] 645:3 devoted [1] 590:2 diet [1] 491:5 differently [1] 518:6 difficult [2] 512:12; 558:3 difficulties [1] 493:4 difficulty [5] 520:19; 530:12; 546:21; 630:20: 650:1 direct [1] 604:5 directed [4] 609:6; 615:9; 635:18; 653:12 Director [11] 504:13; 541:1: 558:12; 612;4; 634:14; 635:8, 19; 641:3; 660:16; 663:3: 667:1 director [3] 518:13; 626:15: 636:12 Directors [6] 497:3, 4; 540:1, 5, 20 directors [7] 496:22; 534:4: 573:14; 640:10; 641:2, 11 discarded [1] 623:5 discharge [1] 601:6 discontinuation [1] 489:20 discovered [1] 637:19 discretion [4] 559:20; 560:1: 662:1, 6 discuss [15] 503:11; 507:16: 511:19: 526:3; 567:22: 589:5: 591:6; 598:19; 606:14; 638:5; 639:20: 640:3; 641:6; 655:20; 672:12 discussed [20] 488:15, 21; 554:4; 588:8; 590:10; 591:13; 592:8; 596:7; 597:19; 598:22; 600:20; 605:17; 606:7; 607:5; 612:13; 639:21; 641:13; 644:15; 651:21; 673:2 discussing [7] 492:10; 512:1; 543:22; 549:18; 551:20; 588:14; 605:13 Discussion [8] 490:2; 599:14; 627:12; 629:22: 630:6; 661:3, 21; 673:4 discussion [20] 492:9, 17: 493:14; 495:12; 502:10; 544:13; 558:19; 576:20: 589:8; 600:1; 606:21, 22; 641:10; 645:14, 21; 646:2. 9; 653:11; 669:22; 672:14 discussions [14] 492:19; 493:17: 495:8; 499:9; 536:11; 543:10; 588:5; 589:7, 22; 590:12; 596:9: 645:8; 651:1; 656:12 dispense [1] 499:12 disposal [10] 578:17; 626:4; From conceivable to disposal WATER PCB-SD0000063780 BSA Depo of: WILLIAM B. PAPAGEORGE Monsanto v Aetna February 9, 1993 CR: 54365.0 Look-See(34) 645:5: 647:4: 666:12; 667:3, II. 21; 668;2, 16 dispose [1/ 622:17 disposed 131 578:18; 583:12; 625:21 disposition [2] 578:9, 13 distinction [7] 570:18; 583:3, 7, 9; 603:7, 14; 622:14 distinguished [2/ 563:17; 667:22 distribution 11! 500:7 Division [4] 534:16, 19; 535:8: 539:17 Dixie [7] 554:13: 601:22; 602:9, 14; 603:8; 605:9, 18 DMEH [11 635:8 Dmvtrvszyn PI 534:7; 540:7 document [1191 499:19: 500:6, 8, 10, 12; 502:4, 12; 503:8, 14: 532:8, 11, 17; 533:3, 6, 9, 13; 535:17; 539:5, 22: 541:18, 20; 547:5, 16; 555:15; 556:14, 17; 557:11, 13; 558:1; 560:11, 12, 14, 16, 19, 20, 21; 561:2: 562:9: 563:1, 2, 12: 567:12. 13:577:15.17: 578:5; 579:18, 20, 22: 580:3, 14; 592:15. 19, 22; 593:8, 13: 600:8, 10, 14, 17, 18; 601:9: 602:18; 604:18: 608:5, 7: 610:21; 611:1, 3, 6. 10: 624:3. 20; 627:2, 15, 17; 629:4, 5, 6, 8, 12, 14; 632:20, 22: 633:2, 3; 641:17, 22; 642:2, 7, 8, 9, 10, 14, 16; 643:20; 644:1; 649:15, 17; 653:19; 654:1, 2, 3, 6, 8, 11, 13; 655:2, 3; 663:22; 669:15; 670:22; 671:3, 5, 9. 12; 672:22 documentation [1/ 529:12 documented P] 490:21; 502:2 documents [II] 499:13, 15; 501:20. 21: 603:18; 624:9; 626:17; 629:18; 638:1; 643:10; 664:3 Doesn 't [I] 656:8 doesn't [14/ 518:21; 536:14; 543:19: 556:9: 558:3; 566:8, IS; 570:5: 576:4: 590:7: 610:8: 641:13: 653:8: 656:6 dollars [1] 493:21 Don [11 535:20 Donnenfeld [1] 484:5 door PI 498:11; 546:17 dormant [1] 571:6 Dossier [1] 602:6 dossier [45/ 509:7, 11, 18, 20: 510:17; 511:14, 17, 22: 512:2. 5. 9. 17; 522:6; 523:13, 15; 524:16; 525:2, 4: 528:3, 5: 529:18; 530:7, 20: 568:12, 18. 22; 569:4, 11. 13. 18, 21; 570:7, 9, 15: 571:13: 574:3, 7; 575:19; 576:1, 3; 584:20: 585:1: 605:17, 20: 607:22 dossiers [6] 510:3, 11; 524:20; 525:6; 563:18; 570:14 Dr [51 534:7: 540:7; 561:5, 22: 562:2 draft [51 580:15, 16; 581:12, 20; 584:7 draw P] 664:4, 18 drawn p] 583:3; 608:19 drop PI 590:3; 596:17 drums [1] 509:16 due [1J 645:4 dumped [1] 505:10 dust [1] 519:21 duties [3] 533:14; 626:21; 659:11 - - E-C [11 612:22 E-R-A-S [11 663:12 Earl PI 541:4; 640:4 Early [1] 597:2 early [4] 490:22; 497:22; 580:15: 614:13 EB [11 527:6 EC [11 624:9 j \ EC-201 P3] 611:11. 16, 20; 612:10; 613:12, 17, 20; 614:4, 16, 18; 616:1, 6; 623:13, 17, 22; 624:14, 22; 625:11; 626:7, 14, 19: 627:21; 628:2 EC-201-202 [1] 631:19 EC-202 [4] 624:3, 4; 625:20; 626:14 EC-203 [61 580:7; 581:5, 8, 22: 582:7; 587:15 Eck [7] 558:7, 9, 17, 20, 21; 640:19 Eckhardt [7] 668:5, 7, 12, 21, 22; 669:12 economically [1] 623:5 Ed [1] 606:8 effect [111 491:6, 10; 493:8; 513:8; 530:13; 531:14; 613:12; 619:22; 626:6; 631:6; 636:3 effects [7] 490:14. 17, 18, 21; 491:1; 493:11; 636:19 effort [81 506:21; 507:2, 14; 517:11; 563:13; 571:14; 609:8: 637:6 efforts [11 591:2 eggs [1] 491:7 E1L [1] 484:13 emissions [1] 619:21 emphasis [1] 594:1 emphasize [1] 645:20 emphasized [11 511:4 employed PI 616:6; 668:17 employee [5] 494:22; 514:17; 568:16; 569:9: 653:11 employees [3] 513:8, 10; 514:7 employing [1J 613:11 encountering [1] 617:2 encourage PI 529:11; 574:1 encouraged [8] 521:6, 15, 18; 529:8, 14; 573:9; 575:6; 607:18 End [1] 516:7 end [16] 494:5, 8, 21; 507:10; 510:22; 515:4; 524:18; 537:13; 576:1; 578:16; 597:1; 645:6; 651:2; 660:19; 664:21; 666:13 ending [6] 609:19; 620:21; 624:5, 14; 625:5; 664:6 ends [41 507:3; 582:20; 608:14; 634:3 enforcement [1] 670:1 engaged P] 563:14; 586:6 Engineering [11 497:4 engineering [1] 622:11 ensure [1] 538:14 enter PI 492:18: 638:2 entered [1] 492:6 entering [1] 489:19 entities [1] 551:22 entitled [1] 581:8 entity [1] 554:16 entries [6] 600:15: 603:4, 14; 608:15, 17; 613:1 entry [8] 565:22; 566:14: 601:22; 603:5. 6, 11, 13; 604:12 environment [12] 489:12, 17, 19; 490:6, 8, 9; 508:18; 513:2; 585:10; 620:18; 637:21; 660:1 Environmental [14] 504:13; 536:2; 608:16; 612:5; 626:11; 635:19; 636:12; 659:17; 660:16, 17, 18; 663:4. 14; 667:1 environmental [68J 491:10; 493:8; 496:7; 500:18; 501:1; 508:4; 514:16: 536:18; 574:5; 579:10; 587:21; 588:9, 15, 21; 589:1; 594:2; 596:21; 599:1; 606:8; 608:10; 611:12; 612:7; 616:7, 21; 617:5: 618:12, 20; 619:4, 7; 621:17; 639:21: 643:5; 644:21: 646:13, 18. 21; 647:8; 648:21; 649:19; 650:10; 651:7, 12, 15, 18, 20; 652:7. 22; 653:11; 654:17; 655:21; 656:14; 657:10. 16; 658:2, 6, 13, 17; 660:2; 662:19; 663:11; 665:2, 11,20, 21; 666:19; 667:13, 20; 672:13 environmentally [1] 617:11 EPA [51 631:13; 636:1, 17; 637:9, 16 EPS-DEO [11 669:22 equipment [1] 516:6 equivalent [1] 657:14 ERAS [1] 663:11 escape [2] 492:15; 621:8 essence [2] 516:2; 553:20 essentially [4] 535:6; 541:22: 563:7: 617:16 established [1] 667:14 et [1] 483:11 Ethyl [11 527:11 ethyl [4] 526:17, 20: 565:15; 566:16 evaluate [1] 583:21 evaluating [4] 527:18: 595:3, 9; 620:18 evaluation P] 558:18: 581:2 evaluations [8] 526:3, 8; 543:11, 22; 545:1; 554:12; 571:10: 584:5 event P] 498:20; 499:4 events [1] 501:16 eventual [1] 582:6 eventually [5] 576:1; 582:9: 588:18; 598:6: 667:14 everybody [2] 573:17; 614:14 evidence [3] 491:3, 9, 11 exact P] 539:18; 562:4 exactly [31 542:19: 614:22; 622:10 EXAMINATION [1] 486:3 examined [1] 537:6 example [19] 491:3; 511:9; 519:15; 528:16; 529:15; 543:10: 573:20: 578:19; 587:22; 616:4; 619:14; 620:1: 622:4, 9; 625:22; 626:3; 636:22: 651:17; 667:3 . factors P] 492:6; 585:12 examples [1] 502:1 ! facts PI 535:5: 659:15 except [1] 658:21 j fail [1] 502:17 Excluding [1] 533:2 j faint PI 505:16; 668:8 excuse [1] 498:12 Fair [4] 543:1; 553:9: exempt [1] 606:3 555:20; 656:10 exempting [1J 605:22 fear [10] 490:17; 496:3; exercised [1] 515:2 530:1; 551:9; 562:14; Exhibit [66[ 486:8. 9, 10. 568:10; 571:3, 4; 580:17; 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 621:21 18, 19, 20, 21, 22; 487:1, fairly PI 594:1; 658:19 2, 3; 499:13; 500:2; 508:9: familiar [14] 496:1; 508:6; 532:6: 545:18; 551:20: 534:20; 563:4: 564:6: 552:18; 557:1, 4; 558:7; 571:19; 575:13; 611:22; 560:8, 11; 568:3; 571:1; 619:15; 631:11; 642:6; 577:13; 579:16, 19; 592:17; 658:18; 664:1; 668:5 600:6, 10; 608:3; 610:18, familiarize P] 560:19; 21; 600:14 620:21; 626:20; 627:13, 17: Farley P3] 521:13, 16, 19; 628:17, 20: 629:16; 630:3: 525:8: 526:1; 569:19; 582:9, 632:14, 17; 641:15, 18; 11: 587:12; 600:11, 20; 642:15; 649:9, 12; 653:16, 602:19; 610:4, 13; 614:7; 19; 654:11; 655:2, 18: 619:14, 17; 620:15, 16; 663:18; 669:4, 7: 670:19, 639:15; 660:11 22 fashion PI 502:2; 518:4 exhibit [17] 502:20; 521:21; faster [1] 662:9 522:18; 525:20; 552:18; FAX PI 484:20; 485:7 554:19: 563:20; 570:22; fear [1] 505:11 571:1; 580:9; 581:19: FEBRUARY [11 488:1 582:18; 592:21; 601:12; February PI 483:21; 557:5 604:10; 610:21; 635:6 Federal [1] 484:16 EXHIBITS [11 486:6 feedback PI 542:15; 672:15 exhibits [1] 499:15 feel PI 586:22; 642:6 existed [4] 531:20; 536:19; feet [1] 590:4 628:14; 660:20 fellow [1] 656:13 existing [1] 570:19 felt [7] 501:21; 509:18; expect [51 502:12; 575:19; 592:4, 12; 594:10; 614:13; 585:2; 605:11, 17 620:8 expectation [1] 541:14 Fielding [1] 485:3 Expected [1] 608:20 fighting [1] 511:12 expected [8] 506:3; 554:22; file [31 525:3; 562:15; 555:8; 556:5; 570:11; 574:2, 666:17 7; 663:3 filed [1] 632:10 experience [4] 617:8; 618:6, files [7] 545:4; 572:2, 18, 11, 18 21; 573:7; 575:11 experienced [1] 615:1 filings [11 574:16 expert [1] 505:8 filling [11 625:20 explain P] 531:17; 603:22 final [14] 524:21; 525:3; explosions P] 513:21; 553:20; 580:16; 581:21; 514:18 582:6; 583:22; 584:16; exposed p] 491:3; 617:10 585:17, 18: 618:22; 624:11 exposing [1] 637:20 finalized [1] 581:14 exposure [4] 490:21: 616:12; find [6] 494:5; 546:22: 618:8; 620:2 561:10: 585:2; 603:17; express [1] 508:16 620:12 expressed [7] 528:17; finding p] 529:1; 619:3 645:13: 647:11, 13, 16; findings [1] 588:7 648:3, 11 Fine [11 636:9 expressing [1] 525:18 fine [11 579:13 expression [8] 492:10; finish [11 589:11 538:17; 551:11, 15; 607:2, finished PI 589:12; 619:8 3, 9; 629:10 fire (11 511:12 expressions [1] 529:2 fires PI 513:21; 514:17 extent [7] 526:14; 549:3; firing [1] 573:18 568:15, 20; 569:1, 2, 9 firm [1] 663:11 extremity [1] 537:13 firms [1] 511:11 First [1] 628:2 -F- first 1361 494:17: 504:10, face-to-face [1] 574:10 faced [1] 579:10 Facilities [3] 664:12, 14,19 facilities [4] 520:3; 662:11: 670:2, 4 facility P] 607:8; 662:20 fact [15] 488:15, 21; 499:17; 530:15; 556:9; 568:11; 570:10; 573:13; 582:2; 593:22; 602:17; 631:19: 643:3: 652:2 factor [1] 491:17 12; 510:20; 517:9, 10; 521:19; 522:22; 525:20; 532:20; 549:16, 21; 552:19: 556:9; 559:3; 562:17; 565:7; 566:4; 571:2; 577:2, 18; 580:18; 593:6; 595:18; 608:15; 611:5; 613:20, 22; 614:1; 619:7; 633:5; 644:8: 664:5; 669:21; 672:5 fish [21 505:17, 19 fisheries [1] 492:2 dispose to fisheries WATER PCB-SD0000063781 BSA Depo of: WILLIAM B. PAPAGEORGE Monsanto v Aetna February 9, 1993 CR: 54365.0 Look-See(35l fit [11 552:12 fits [II 511:5 fined [1/ 590:19 five [31 582:22; 584:14; 609:19 Flom [11 485:11 Florida [2] 492:3: 540:12 flow [31 583:14; 584:3, 8 flowing [I) 620:7 flux [31 629:10, 14; 630:11 focus [2] 646:2; 651:6 focused [1] 615:11 focusing [4] 530:18; 609:20; 665:21; 667:7 folded (21 588:18; 589:3 follow [21 643:15; 645:2 followed [1] 499:10 following [1] 673:7 Force [1] 562:18 force [13] 523:22; 535:12, 14, 19; 536:5, 10; 547:10; 559:10, 13; 563:9; 564:1; 566:9; 571:2 Foresman [6] 657:19; 658:4, 11; 660:10; 671:1 forget [41 553:19; 626:4; 630:4. 7 forgotten [3] 496:15; 539:18; 637:2 Form 14] 581:5, 8; 612:22; 616:6 form [161 513:13, 18; 517:6; 542:20: 561:3; 563:3; 580:7; 581:8, 12; 611:10, 16; 612:12; 616:1, 11; 625:20 formal U] 517:20; 534:17; 570:17; 594:11; 650:18; 651:4; 653:6 formalized [1] 520:21 format [9] 542:18, 19; 544:7, 21; 602:19, 20; 603:1; 629:9; 632:13 formed [1] 497:10 forms [7] 523:2, 3, 8, 18; 587:15; 626:14 formulating [1] 505:10 forth [41 522:21; 537:5; 621:2; 635:6 fonvarded [3] 561:5; 569:19; 636:1 found [21 519:18: 583:16 foundation [5] 501:18; 572:5; 605:19; 638:15; 658:7 four (41 522:21: 537:5, 10; 538:12 fourth [21 537:12: 601:21 Francisco [1] 484:18 Frank [11 640:20 frankly [1] 614:12 free [11 501:22 frequently [2] 575:14; 597:18 front 15] 547:4: 557:17; 592:21; 626:8, 20 fitel [21 628:7; 629:10 full [31 536:13; 569:20; 585:2 fitller [21 526:19: 527:5 function [1J 553:19 functioned [1] 585:21 future [4] 530:1; 567:16; 599:7: 617:5 - G- gap [2] 544:15; 545:12 gather [3] 511:21; 512:5, 619:10 gave (61 502:21: 523:9; 525:13; 562:7; 649:18; 650:20 Generated [1] 621:6 generated [8] 615:17; 618:14, 22; 621:6, 14; 638:8, 13; 642:17 Georgene [5] 647:16; 655:19; 656:2; 663:19: 664:6 gets [1] 647:19 Give [11 607:12 give [8] 496:19; 511:20: 515:3; 516:1; 590:13: 599:11; 650:16; 656:3 given [91 523:11; 524:8; 571:20; 620:12; 628:10; 636:15; 637:9, 18; 671:14 giving [1] 517:3 glanced [2] 611:7; 642:9 goal [1] 489:18 God [1] 543:4 goes [1] 509:6 golly [1] 546:19 Gosh [1] 646:10 gosh [2] 509:13; 631:8 gotten [2] 556:1; 569:11 government [1] 598:10 Grimm [9] 647:16; 648:8; 651:4; 652:12; 654:18; 655:19; 656:2; 663:19; 664:6 grinding [1] 519:12 ground [1] 490:11 grounds [1] 666:15 Group [1] 541:8 group [35] 496:6, 8. 10, 11, 16; 497:7, 9, 10, 13, 17; 525:17; 527:8: 534:1; 536:14; 539:3; 545:8; 600:21; 622:2; 632:2, 5; 634:20, 21; 635:2, 3; 639:20; 652:4; 653:1, 4; 659:19; 660:7; 664:22; 665:10; 666:13; 667:2 groups [2] 497:1; 511:13 grow [1] 567:16 guess [41 520:21; 547:3; 567:7; 569:19 guessing [3] 547:1; 646:12; 655:10 guidance [2] 586:11; 637:18 Guideline [1] 608:16 guideline [10] 588:15; 589:2; 594:3; 609:2, 14, 17; 667:21; 670:14, 15 guidelines [10] 564:1, 5: 571:3; 588:18, 21; 637:1, 3; 667:13; 670:11, 17 Gulf [1] 492:3 guy [2] 542:11; 648:16 -H- hadn't [2] 522:9; 634:13 halfway [1] 587:9 hand [1] 515:18 handed [6] 512:3; 600:9; 610:20: 627:16; 632:16; 641:18 handle [7J 516:6, 18; 518:3; 625:9; 655:13, 14; 663:6 handled [9] 494:20; 512:6: 513:9, 17; 518:6; 522:15; 568:17; 594:11; 607:18 handling [16] 494:22; 510:22; 511:8, 10; 512:16, 22: 513:1, 5; 515:2, 14; 516:14; 519:5; 522:22; 524:11; 566:12; 637:20 hands [I] 551:1 handshake [1] 524:14 handwriting [11] 532:21; 533:2; 539:5; 545:19; 547:6, 17: 548:9: 552:18; 554:7; 563:19: 672:5 hangup [I] 579:7 hard [5] 508:11; 520:18; 528:3; 536:12; 557:22 Harding [2] 656:18, 20 harm [1] 492:3 hat 12] 536:13; 600:3 hatch [1] 491:7 hauling [1] 548:3 haven't [2] 547:16; 649:6 hazardous [2] 670:3, 8 he'd [3] 564:7; 590:5; 596:16 he'll [1] 498:9 head [31 505:14; 536:1; 558:14 heading [1] 521:21 headings [2] 582:22; 664:11 headquarters [1] 638:12 Health [2] 626:11; 636:13 health [11] 490:18, 21; 491:1; 493:11: 513:8; 514:17; 612:7; 620:2; 651:11; 652:7; 653:11 hear (2} 498:9; 663:10 heard [8] 546:2; 587:13; 595:18; 597:12; 618:3; 645:18; 648:21; 649:5 Heisler [1] 577:21 held [10] 503:15, 22; 504:6; 514:5; 644:16; 645:3, 9; 646:4: 647:1; 648:12 help [8] 507:22; 579:4; 580:1; 603:2; 612:1; 622:8: 642:3; 651:18 hen [11 491:9 Hendricks [6] 606:8, 11, 14, 18; 607:4, 6 Hernandez [22] 500:7, 16; 501:3; 507:13; 508:8, 20; 509:6; 510:5, 19; 514:20; 515:11; 516:4; 517:11, 16; 522:2, 21; 523:21; 524:16; 525:12, 13, 16; 526:12 Herrington [1] 484:15 hesitate [1] 495:22 hey [11 587:5 high [1] 553:13 higher [2] 553:14; 587:2 highly [11 551:12 Highway [1] 511:11 historic [2] 529:18, 20 Historical [1] 666:12 history [1] 528:6 hit [I] 658:9 Hmm [31 501:5; 504:12; 668:7 hmm [1] 631:18 Hmm-mm [2] 494:2; 527:16 hmm-mm [2] 529:5; 628:5 Hobson [1] 600:12 hoc [1] 496:6 homework [1] 545:4 honestly [2] 535:15; 646:7 hopes [1] 643:16 hoping [1] 542:3 Hotel [1] 483:19 HUGHES [1151 486:3; 488:2, 5, 19; 490:3; 491:16, 18; 494:3, 11; 495:7; 498:3, 12, 15; 499:11, 17, 22; 500:4, 14; 502:3, 19; 509:5; 513:22; 514:10; 517:8; 527:20, 22: 528:1; 531:16; 532:5, 9, 14, 19; 538:3, 6; 545:17; 552:16; 555:2, 4, 20, 21; 556:22: 557:3. 8, 12: , 647:7 558:5; 560:7, 10, 17, 22; include [7] 509:11; 523:8; 569:6, 8; 572:13; 576:2, 6, 524:9; 537:21; 538:7, 8: 8, 9; 577:12, 16; 578:1; 571:5 579:15, 19; 580:4; 592:15, included [9] 508:4; 511:16: 20; 593:3, 9; 594:13; 595:5, 512:9; 551:16, 22; 555:14; 11; 599:15; 600:9. 19; 584:16; 585:12; 625:13 605:21; 607:12, 15; 608:2. includes [1] 563:10 6; 610:17, 20; 611:4; independently [1] 551:17 615:21; 622:22: 627:11, INDEX [1] 486:1 16; 628:19; 629:2, 7, 19; indicate [13] 492:13; 501:7; 630:1, 2, 7, 9; 632:16. 21: 504:1: 509:7; 516:6: 535:11 633:4; 638:18; 639:5; 541:20; 556:11; 581:7; 641:14, 18; 642:1: 647:22; 585:19; 590:20; 594:3; 648:2, 16, 19; 649:11: 628:9 653:18; 654:4; 658:10: indicated [19] 495:16; 659:14; 661:4. 22; 666:21: 497:16; 500:17; 502:9, 13; 669:6; 670:21; 671:4 504:16; 524:20; 526:15; Hughes [1] 484:14 528:12; 538:13: 546:2; human [4] 612:7; 616:12: 547:19: 558:21; 614:18; 651:11; 652:7 617:14; 618:10; 629:14: Hunter [7] 533:20; 539:18, 634:14; 664:10 22; 540:13, 14, 16; 555:19 indicates [15] 508:10; 516:4; HWM [11 670:1 524:16; 525:22; 540:21; Hygiene [1] 660:17 548:9; 556:1; 565:14, 16; hygiene 12] 657:2; 658:17 571:5; 581:21; 602:3; - I- 604:21; 628:6; 669:11 indicating [2] 535:18; 560:2 I'd [5] 568:6, 7; 596:16: 646:12: 665:15 I've [11] 496:14; 502:11: 505:9; 535:17: 559:3; 560:21; 561:6; 611:7; 627:16; 637:1; 653:18 idea [4] 494:18: 523:17: 603:7; 612:12 identification [18] 500:3: 532:7; 557:2; 560:9; 577:14; 579:17; 592:18; 600:7: 608:4; 610:19; 627:14: 628:18; 632:15; 641:16; 649:10; 653:17; 669:5; 670:20 identified [5] 549:4, 15: 555:6; 609:8; 644:5 identify [5] 547:10; 567:19; 652:8; 668:16; 670:9 identifying [1] 580:2 ignore [1] 506:15 Illinois [1] 662:16 immediate [1] 545:5 immediately [1] 538:12 impact [7] 612:8; 625:8; 651:12, 15, 19, 20; 653:12 impairment [5] 648:21: 649:20; 654:17; 655:21; 656:15 implementation [1] 506:12 implication [1/ 550:1 implications [2] 495:13; 653:14 implied [3] 531:20; 549:22; 571:18 implies [1] 529:20 imply [11 503:14 important [6] 592:13; 594:3; 616:13; 617:6, 9; 618:20 impossible [1] 489:16 impractical [1] 489:15 impression [1] 630:18 improper [1] 493:3 improperly [1] 513:9 inadvertently [1] 489:19 inappropriate [l] 637:20 inappropriately [1] 516:14 incidences [1] 520:5 incident [14] 498:19, 21; 499:4: 504:17: 505:6. 8; 508:11; 514:14; 530:14; 546:12; 548:6: 549:18, 22; indication [5] 540:18; 556:13; 557:13; 590:13; 599:11 indications [1] 490:12 individual [23] 521:5, 12; 541:13; 548:20; 556:18; 574:11, 14; 582:14; 600:21; 614:15; 619:16; 630:19; 635:14; 636:4; 642:22; 648:15; 654:15; 655:12: 657:10, 14; 662:1, 6, 18 individually [1] 542:9 individuals [21] 507:19; 516:12; 523:7; 527:4; 533:20; 534:4; 555:13; 573:20; 574:4, 22; 576:15; 586:13; 593:1; 594:9; 617:10; 626:18; 635:3: 640:18; 641:20; 654:5; 657:17 Industrial [1] 660:17 industrial [3] 642:12; 657:2: 658:17 industry [1] 512:11 inform [1] 619:6 informal [1] 524:13 informally [1] 590:4 Information [1] 635:8 information [91] 491:1; 509:12, 14; 510:21; 511:8, 16, 20; 512:5, 21; 514:12: 515:4, 18; 516:2; 517:4; 523:9, 11, 14, 15, 18; 524:11; 525:13; 529:9; 535:6; 541:22; 543:18; 544:4, 16; 545:12; 555:7; 556:1; 563:11, 14; 564:16, 17; 567:8; 568:8, 21; 569:3; 570:6, 15; 572:3, 7; 575:13; 580:2; 587:7; 590:14, 21; 596:12; 599:20; 605:16; 607:6; 611:22; 612:3, 20; 613:6, 16; 614:4: 616:5. 12; 619:10; 620:6; 625:6; 633:22: 635:15, 18; 636:5, 11, 19, 21; 637:5, 8. 15, 22; 639:9; 642:17, 18: 643:1; 654:16; 658:6; 662:18; 664:9, 16. 22; 665:6, 13; 666:4, 14, 18. 20; 667:17 informed [3] 544:9; 549:9; From fit to informed WATER PCB-SD0000063782 bsa Depo of: WILLIAM B. PAPAGEORGE Monsanto v Aetna February 9, 1993 CR: 54365.0 ________________ Look-See(36} *63:3 , 588:12; 598:15; 604:22; - K- 666:2 i lower ]3] 562:20; 582:21; mtrials [4] 580:19: 581:2, ' 614:14; 632:4; Keating [231 498:1. 13; i legal [11] 492:8, 10, 15, 813:1 3- 663:12 635:4; 648:8; 649:2; 654:18:, 577:8. 10; 620:1; 655:4, 6, 22; 493:4. 6; 515:16; 591:2. lunch [2] 659:22; 661:9 miurv 111 514:6 input (31 511:4; 586:14; 599:4 inputs (I/ 587:7 instance /5J 518:2; 640:5; 546:20: 653:10; 667:10 658:2; 665:2, 20; 669:20 involvement [5] 530:9: 559:4; 579:9; 637:13; 654:20 involves [1] 578:13 involving [5] 498:20; 10; 657:1. 15; 658:14, 16: 659:4, 13, 16. 20; 660:1, 9, 18; 671:1: 672:11, 16; 673:1 keep [5] 543:20: 573:10: 575:3; 620:4: 625:13 9; 653:2; 670:1 lengthy [2] 594:1; 608:7 lesser [1] 643:15 letter [2] 583:1, 2 level [22] 507:19: 509:22; 511:3, 7; 512:4; 516:9, 11; Luncheon [I] 576:7 lunchtime [1] 661:8 - M- mail [2] 502:17; 655:16 mailing [1] 596:2 instances 18/ 519:2: 537:21; 504:17; 644:6, 14; 652:20 keeper [1] 510:17 517:3, 13; 518:17; 521:2; maintain [5] 543:17; 665:4, 538:8; 594:17: 635:17; 646:17, 22; 650:21 instruct [1j 573:5 irresponsible [1] 518:4 issue [19] 493:6; 496:7: 497:10, 11, 12, 14; 501:10; keepers [2] 509:18, 20 Kepone [10] 498:19, 21; 499:4, 6; 504:18; 505:3, 8, 522:14; 524:20; 528:5; 529:11; 544:6; 559:21; 571:12; 573:5; 585:5; 6, 9; 666:14 maintained [8] 510:2; 562:10: 569:13; 587:15; instructed [1] 574:15 instruction (l] 509:7 instructions [7] 563:7, 10; 504:10, 15: 506:6: 508:2: 521:2; 544:18; 545:10: 596:21; 602:21; 609:4; 10: 514:14: 530:14 kept [7] 509:22: 511:15; 524:20; 525:4; 569:20; 659:17; 672:13 levels [3] 490:13; 491:4; 574:15 597:7; 601:9; 602:19; 627:2 maintaining [1] 510:11 ntakeup [2] 496:10; 497:7 571:17, 20: 572:9, 10; 636:15 INSURANCE fll 485:1 Insurance [3] 589:15; 596:4: 638:6 insurance 129] 495:13; 590:17, 19, 21: 591:8: 595:16; 599:18; 600:2, 3; 648:22: 649:19, 20; 650:10, 616:15; 637:14 issued [2] 625:19; 632:12 issues [14] 501:1; 508:4, 6; 579:9; 591:6; 596:10, 22; 598:10; 608:10; 616:20; 620:2; 652:7; 658:13; 660:2 it'll [1] 662:9 Item [1] 664:19 item [31 537:17; 596:20; 587:19; 661:1 key [1] 620:7 kill [21 505:17. 19 kinds [61 512:1; 524:10; 537:16; 622:7; 661:19; 667:22 knowing [4] 531:22; 570:3; 583:21; 615:20 knowingly [2] 493:2: 591:5 liability [15] 492:8, 10; 493:6: 495:10; 515:3, 15; 647:11; 648:22; 649:19: 650:10, 11; 651:7; 654:17: 655:21; 656:15 lieutenants [1] 497:2 light [31 555:2; 569:7; 618:6 limit [1] 515:3 man [6] 490:10; 498:8; 622:6: 640:7; 656:19; 658:5 man-made [1] 490:8 Management [3] 638:7; 650:16; 671:21 management [2] 518:12; 573:10 Manager [10] 533:11; 561:18; 586:12, 19, 22; 17. 19; 651:8, 10, 22; 652:1, 2, 6, 8; 653:4, 12, 13; 654:17: 655:21: 656:3, 625:21 items [3] 522:21: 623:9; 641:12 knowledge [15] 494:19; 495:6; 501:3: 507:7; 511:18; 533:5: 534:13: 599:5: 612:2: limitation [1] 598:5 limited [2] 491:2, 11 line [31 573:18; 609:15; 587:8, 18; 614:7; 622:6; 625:3 manager [6] 506:13; 541:12; 15 TV [11 483:15* 11 616:2: 628:10, 12; 637:17: 624:17 560:1: 657:10; 663:6, 7 intend [I] 499:15 intended 13/ 537:22; 543:6: -J - 638:11, 16 knowledgeable [3] 615:22; lines [12] 509:1; 511:3; 512:9; 518:15, 16; 523:8; Managers [3] 660:16, 19, 22 619:8 Intent [1/ 581:8 J-O-C [1] 546:16 J-u-h-I [1] 539:8 658:12, 15 Krummrich [1] 662:15 543:12; 544:19; 552:18; 584:8; 608:19; 661:16 managers [4] 535:3; 620:14; 639:17; 666:18 intent [5] 515:17: 524:9; lames [1] 484:14 list [50] 499:14, 16, 19; Managing [2] 558:12; 641:3 570:8; 577:17; 581:15 lanuary [15] 488:4, 11; -L- 500:8; 511:20; 512:2; 541:6, managing 13] 640:10; intents [2] 616:9, 10 498:18; 532:11; 533:9; interest [4] 499:9: 504:18; 536:16; 539:10; 540:22; 558:22; 672:2 543:5; 547:5; 552:11; interested [17] 513:5; 554:19: 556:5, 12; 606:6 514:21; 529:1; 562:6; 563:9; JCM [2] 580:19; 581:2 578:16; 579:22; 588:12; Jean [1] 663:20 592:11; 593:13; 600:16; Jefferson [1] 484:8 612:4; 619:2; 642:3; 643:11, Jessee [8] 633:19, 21; 643:7; 13; 644:1 653:20; 663:20; 669:8, 13, Intermediates [19] 505:22: 21 520:14; 521:1; 558:12; job [5] 496:17: 561:7: 564:11, 18: 567:1, 3: 582:10; 600:4; 618:1 581:16: 587:21: 601:14; IOC [52] 545:20; 546:2, 605:10: 611:15, 17; 613:9; 13, 15; 547:11, 20; 548:2. 618:20: 630:14; 641:8; 11, 13; 549:5, 9, 12, 18; 660:6 550:2, 4, 6, 9, 14, 19; Internal [1/ 635:7 551:4, 7, 13, 16; 552:6, 11; internal [3] 491:19; 523:3. 554:21; 555:7, 13, 18; 8 556:10, 11, 14; 565:7, 22; internally [l] 670:11 566:4, 14, 17; 568:11, 12, INTERNATIONAL [1] 16. 22; 569:3, 10; 570:10, 484:13 12; 576:3; interpret [3] 490:17; 506:17; 586:1; 628:14; 629:15; 594:6 630:11 interpretation II] 538:18 jog [I] 835:16 interrupt 12] 490:16: 623:1 jogged [2] 547:21; 548:1 interview [3] 658:5; 672:12; John [1] 640:19 673:1 JOHNSON [1] 489:22 interviewed [3] 654:14, 15, Johnson [1] 485:2 21 joint [1] 637:6 interviews [1] 671:20 Jordan [1] 483:21 intimately [4] 506:19, 22: jot [1] 545:7 507:2, 5 ; Ir [11 596:2 inventory [4] 540:19; 542:6, judgment [1] 515:1 7: 543:6 Jtthl [6] 539:8, 10; 557:6; invite [21 541:16; 592:10 561:5, 22; 562:2 invited [1] 594:9 July [9] 540:22; 612:22; involved [46] 490:14; 613:17; 628:3; 649:12; 495:14. 17, 21; 501:1, 5, 7, 650:4, 6; 656:13; 662:17 8. 10, 12; 504:14; 505:1; jump [1] 566:3 506:19; 507:2, 9; 508:5; jurisdiction [3] 614:3; 510:16; 518:1. 10; 530:15; 662:12: 663:2 535:7, 18: 574:8: 576:12. justify [I] 506:16 15: 578:22; 579:7. 3: juvenile [1] 491:3 586:10, 17. 18, 21; 587:3; labeling [1 ] 509:14 laboratory [1] 492:2 lack [1] 501:18 lakes [1] 490:11 landfill [21 578:18; 625:22 Lane [2] 556:19, 20 language [1] 508:20 large [1] 588:11 largest [1] 668:15 Larry [1] 498:7 last [34] 488:4, 9: 495:16; 499:18; 502:10; 517:1; 522:18; 523:10; 525:10: 534:9. 11: 541:16, 19; 546:1. 5; 552:17; 554:4; 565:22; 577:17; 578:7, 8; 584:13; 587:13; 591:13: 604:9; 606:6: 607:7; 608:8; 620:22; 644:2; 645:1, 2; 661:6, 7 lasted [1] 497:21 late [4] 496:7; 525:8: 631:19; 672:11 latter [2] 531:17; 664:15 Law [1] 598:17 taw [1] 665:20 Lawson [2] 656:18. 20 lawyers [1] 495:20 lay [1] 491:7 lead [3] 492:15; 493:3; 659:15 leading [1] 491:15 leant [11] 522:10; 531:13: 548:13. 16. 18: 550:18; 554:12; 612:1: 618:5. 7; 661:20 teamed [4] 552:11: 554:15: 617:9: 619:16 learning [2] 556:10; 643:16 leave [1] 590:5 leaving [4] 501:11; 546:3, 13; 548:6 left-hand [1] 562:21 Legal [3] 648:10; 665:15; 10; 542:10; 544:1, 7; 555:19; 562:8; 564:10, 20, 21; 565:2; 566:15, 22; 567:5, 15, 16; 568:2, 6, 11; 594:1; 601:14; 602:11; 605:10; 608:9; 621:12; 625:10; 632:3, 8, 11; 634:17, 22; 635:3; 641:20; 649:13; 666:11; 667:3, 6, 9; 669:9; 670:8, 11, 14, 16 listed [16] 526:19, 20; 534:9; 555:14; 565:7; 568:7; 570:10; 586:4; 605:14: 622:15; 623:9; 634:2; 643:19; 644:9; 664:16, 19 listing 14] 547:15; 563:17; 566:4; 625:6 listings [1] 556:17 lists [1] 566:21 litigation [8] 598:14; 599:7, I 8; 664:20; 665:1, 7, 10; 666:5 litigations [1] 598:19 living [5] 490:13, 17; 491:1: 567:16, 17 locate [1] 603:21 I located 17] 492:2; 519:11: 539:16; 540:11, 12; 615:4 locations [1] 645:4 \ logical [3] 508:5; 665:18, 19 longest [1] 659:5 ' lot [51 499:5; 514:15; 618:5; \ 620:6; 637:5 loud [11 498:9 Louis [19] 483:19; 518:21: 524:17; 525:1, 3, 5, 9; 540:9, 13; 569:19, 20; 570:7, 16; 575:6; 587:14; 638:12; 662:11, 20 low [21 491:4; 554:2 Lowe [4] 552:22; 554:5, 9; 604:19 Lowenco [4] 604:13: 605:3, 9, 18 641:2, 11 manifesting [1] 626:3 manner [7] 495:3; 505:14; 512:6: 513:16; 522:15; 568:16; 569:10 manpower [1] 610:14 manufacture [2] 488:13; 599:6 manufactured [1] 611:16 Manufacturing [6] 497:4; 527:11; 534:15; 540:20; 541:1, 8 manufacturing [10] 518:13; 526:14, 17; 534:5, 20; 540:1; 556:2; 615:15, 18; 621:4 Mark [1] 608:2 mark [2] 545:21; 593:20 marked [32J 499:11, 13; 500:2, 5; 532:6, 10; 545:18; 557:1, 3; 560:8, 11; 577:12, 13; 579:16, 19; 592:17; 600:6; 608:3; 610:18; 627:13, 17: 628:17; 632:14, 17; 641:15; 649:9; 653:16, 18; 669:4, 7; 670:19, 21 market [4] 495:14; 537:20, 22; 598:5 Marketing [1] 497:3 marketing [4] 494:16; 517:21; 518:9, 13 Marsh [4] 594:14, 17, 21; 595:15 ntaterial [40] 490:8, 10; 499:6, 9; 501:10; 509:14, 15; 511:10; 513:17; 514:5: 515:19; 516:14, 19; 517:5; 518:3, 6; 519:14, 20; 524:12: 531:12, 15, 21, 22; 532:1, 2: 537:18, 19; 538:1, 9; 548:21; 551:16; 553:14, 22; 566:12; 570:1; 604:3, 7; 636:20 materials [25] 504:4, 5, 11; 505:10; 507:6; 510:22; initials to materials WATER PCB-SD0000063783 BSA Depo of: WILLIAM B. PAPAGEORGE Monsanto v Aetna February 9, 1993 CR: 54365.0 Look-See(37) 511:8: 512:6, 16, 22; 513:1, 635:2; 638:22; 655:8; 662:4 monitor [2] 598:14; 622:7 6; 519:5, 13, 19; 522:3, IS; memo [14] 500:6; 508:8; monitored [1] 510:17 531:14; 549:12; 550:6, 14: 534:12; 554:20; 555:9; monomer [12] 550:10; 552:1; 562:14; 607:18; 557:5; 558:7; 561:15; 578:6:\ 613:8, 17; 618:8; 619:8: 637:20 600:11; 610:22; 669:21 620:9, 13; 621:4, 14, 17; matter [11/ 492:22; 504:3: memorable [1] 498:14 630:15; 631:6 542:21: 570:5; 579:11; memoranda [1] 501:16 MONSANTO [2] 483:4; 589:22; 590:9; 598:22; memorandum [52] 501:15; 484:3 645:14; 654:21; 662:3 502:9; 503:9; 504:17; Monsanto [170] 488:15, 22; matters [17] 589:20; 590:1, 507:12, 13; 509:6; 510:20; 489:13, 14, 19; 491:12, 19; 3, 10, 13; 606:8; 655:9, 13, 515:1; 517:16: 525:10, 22; 492:16: 494:4, 8, 13, 15, 14: 658:2, 6; 659:16, 17: 526:4, 11; 533:19; 534:1: 19: 495:2, 4, 20; 500:19: 665:2, 11; 666:19 535:6, 11; 537:5; 540:18; 501:16; 502:5; 504:3, 9, 18; McEwen [2] 582:11; 660:11 541:15; 555:6, 22; 556:6; 505:3, 21; 508:11, 16; MCI [48] 506:21; 507:15; 557:4, 18; 559:4; 577:20; 512:7, 8, 14, 16, 22; 513:4, 508:3 , 5; 542:21; 543:14, 15, 18; 558:13; 565:2: 593:11; 601:5; 609:3; 628:1, 6, 15, 17; 514:4: 515:15; 6, 21; 516:6, 16, 18; 517:17: 568:11; 581:22; 586:7, 8: 631:7; 632:17; 633:6. 12; 519:5, 587:16; 595:12; 602:5: 634:8; 635:5; 641:19; 13, 16. 20; 520:14, 17, 22; 604:21; 612:10; 613:21; 649:12; 650:7, 8; 653:19; 522:16: 523:3, 8, 14; 614:10; 616:14; 617:2; 656:22; 663:19; 664:1, 5; 525:14; 528:2; 530:17, 19; 618:1; 622:8; 631:11; 669:8, 14 531:1, 9, 11, 15, 22; 532:1; 633:13; 634:22; 635:15, 19, memory [27] 498:20; 504:8; 533:14, 17: 535:1, 2; 22; 636:4, 6. 7, 10; 511:2; 520:5; 535:16; 546:8; 537:18; 538:10; 543:5; 638:3, 8, 12, 14; 639:7; 547:21; 548:1, 5, 10: 549:3. 548:11, 14, 22: 550:10; 640:9, 15; 641:2; 658:14; 17; 550:5; 556:15; 557:21; 551:3, 8, 12, 18: 554:8: 662:10; 663:10; 666:14; 558:4; 565:11, 17; 602:14; 556:4: 558:12; 562:10; 667:1 605:4; 624:10; 649:18: 564:10, 18: 566:16; 567:1, MCI-wide [1] 542:7 650:8; 653:3; 654:14; 2; 568:15; McKee [1] 557:6 655:19; 667:18 569:9; 573:9; 575:17; McLennan [4] 594:15, 18. memos [1] 610:13 581:16; 583:7; 585:7, 13, 21: 595:16 men [1] 641:6 IS; 586:6; 587:16, 20; MCO [13] 579:20; 593:2; mention [2] 495:9; 599:21 588:15: 589:15: 590:1; 600:12; 608:12; 611:2; mentioned [6] 496:17: 591:7; 594:9; 595:4, 10, 16; 627:19; 628:22; 629:1; 545:13; 588:10; 634:11; 596:2; 598:14; 599:5; 641:21: 649:14; 653:21; 648:9: 660:4 601:10, 14; 602:12; 604:4, 669:10; 671:2 merit [1] 664:21 6, 7; 605:10; 608:9; 611:10, Meagher [1/ 485:11 message [2] 515:8, 10 15, 16; 612:16; 613:8; mean [24] 494:21; 511:6; MIC [1] 510:9 616:8; 618:19; 620:10; 518:22; 521:17; 526:22; Michael [2] 657:19 623:20; 625:7; 536:14; 541:17; 543:19: mid [11 618:18 626:22; 627:3, 5; 630:13, 548:16; 550:21; 557:7; middle [11 530:2 17; 631:21, 22; 632:3; 576:4; 590:8; 610:8; 621:5, million [1] 507:6 633:10; 634:22; 635:9; 9; 623:2; 625:8; 640:13; mind [19] 492:18; 493:2; 637:13, 19, 20; 638:7; 642:18; 651:14; 653:8; 498:7; 504:16, 20; 513:19; 640:22; 641:7, 8; 642:12; 655:13; 671:16 519:7; 525:19; 535:10: 644:6, 14; 645:8; 646:4; means [3] 604:6: 605:1; 536:2; 552:9; 564:5; 579:7; 647:1; 648:12, 21; 650:14, 670:6 596:20; 610:10; 625:13: 15: 654:16: 655:20; 656:14: meant [7] 507:5; 542:8: 638:2; 652:9; 656:6 660:5: 662:11, 20; 665:2, 567:2; 579:7: 585:7; 610:2, mine [1] 515:11 10, 15: 667:7: 669:1; 670:4, 3 minute [3] 505:16; 629:17; 9. 12; 671:21 meantime [1] 544:15 658:20 Montar [28] 488:12, 22; Medical [6/ 497:5: 612:13; minutes [2] 659:16; 661:1 489:8, 9, 13, 15. 17; 490:6; 626:16, 18; 630:17; 637:6 mischaracterization [2] 491:13; 492:7, 14; 493:15, medical [2/ 598:9; 626:15 545:2; 555:10 20; 494:5, 9, 14, 16, 20; Medicine [2] 626:10; 636:12 mishandled [1] 514:6 495:3, 9, 14, 18; 496:12, meet [2] 626:1, 5 mishap [1] 515:18 16; 497:10, 14; 618:11, 14 meeting [45] 503:10, 14; Miss [41 648:8; 651:3; Montars [4] 489:21; 492:20; 507:13; 527:14; 544:9, 12: 652:12; 654:18 493:5; 494:17 546:5; 574:10; 588:4; 592:6, missed [1] 613:14 month [1] 556:6 7: 593:14; 594:4, 8; 596:6; Missouri [1] 483:20 monthly [1] 591:18 644:16; 646:12, 14, 18, 21; misunderstood [1] 567:7 months [4] 530:5; 559:19; 647:5, 8, 9, 11; 650:2, 4, mitigation [1] 498:12 591:18; 609:15 5, 6, 9, 17; 651:2; 652:13, mixed [1] 653:2 morning [5] 488:6, 7; 14, 17, 20; 653:4, 7, 13; mixture [1] 489:9 576:11; 630:4; 661:8 655:20; 656:2, 9; 660:3; Mm-hmm [8] 509:10; Motco [2] 607:2, 7 661:12; 669:22 546:17; 569:1; 593:16; mother [I] 491:8 meetings [28] 497:2; 608:22: 624:18; 668:18; movement [1] 489:16 503:19; 504:1, 6; 524:4: 671:15 movements [1] 578:14 528:22; 544:4, 6, 20; mm-hmm [10] 502:7: Mueller [1] 582:12 591:14, 20, 22; 592:2, 11: 507:21; 527:13; 528:20; Mullins [8] 641:20; 642:21; 593:15, 18: 639:20, 22; 561:6; 582:16; 602:10; 643:4, 9; 644:20: 645:2; 644:13, 21: 646:15: 659:18; 618:5; 623:11: 649:16 647:13; 648:9 660:8, 13; 661:1, 6, 15: modifications [2] 609:16, 17 myself [2] 536:12; 546:22 670:3 modify [1] 584:1 member [11] 496:6; 500:18; moment [8] 536:3; 553:16; - N- 521:7: 535:14; 536:9, 13: 539:15, 17; 631:22; 633:10: 654:15 members [6] 497:1; 577:5; 580:12; 607:12; 610:8; 630:20; 632:7; 644:12 money [3] 506:8; 550:21; 598:16 N. W. [2] 484:8; 485:4 | name [18] 499:6; 520:6; I 526:1: 527:6; 536:8; 554:5; I 556:14; 581:3; 596:1; 613:2; 630:22; 656:20: 660:19: objectives [2] 564:7; 613:20 663:11, 14: 668:5. 7 observations [4] 512:8, 13, named [1] 556:19 17: 519:16 names [8] 496:18, 19: observe [4] 512:15; 516:12: 533:22; 534:3; 539:7; 646:8; 568:16; 607:17 647:18; 648:9 obtain [l] 591:7 narrow [2] 510:4; 546:20 Obviously [1] 636:19 narrowing [1] 546:21 obviously [1] 508:20 nature [4] 503:19; 645:5: occasion [1] 644:19 667:5; 672:17 Occasionally [1] 592:1 nearby [1] 616:3 occupational [1] 620:2 negative [1] 505:14 occur [4] 591:17; 630:16: nesting [1] 491:8 631:18: 641:11 newly [1] 558:11 occurred [5] 504:2; 515:19: news [2] 522:12; 559:2 570:12; 639:13, 15 Newsom [14] 526:19; 527:6; October [6] 608:10; 609:3, 611:1; 613:1, 3; 614:15; 7: 658:13; 669:8; 670:22 615:15; 621:2; 622:9: offers [1] 506:15 623:12; 626:8, 21; 627:18; office [12] 564:22: 566:22; 628:22 567:5, 13; 590:3; 598:8; nifty [1] 583:14 612:17; 615:4; 637:5; 655:7; nonetheless [3] 547:20: 666:9; 672:16 627:22: 656:6 Oh [25] 509:13; 511:10; noon [1] 661:8 521:17; 527:13; 543:4; normal [7] 502:8; 548:17: 544:3; 546:19; 567:17; 588:2; 626:21; 627:3, 5; 577:9; 585:15; 588:2; 672:15 590:18; 593:7; 597:6; Normally [1] 502:7 598:21; 610:12; 612:6, 11; normally [2] 502:17; 655:7 631:8; 640:15; 643:12: NORTH [1] 485:9 652:15; 659:8; 661:7; 672:1 North [2] 637:9, 10 oh [31 581:7; 619:16: 661:7 notary [1] 483:22 Oil [57] 545:20; 546:2, 13, note [13] 527:6; 542:21: 15; 547:11; 548:2, 11, 13: 545:6; 557:20; 561:17, 22; 549:5, 9, 12, 18; 550:2, 4. 583:1; 595:19; 623:1, 12; 6, 9, 14, 19; 551:4, 7, 13, 629:20; 634:13; 655:3 16; 552:6. 12; 554:21; noted [2] 490:15; 548:20 555:7, 13, 18; 556:10, II, notes [8] 544:15; 545:5. 7, 14; 565:8, 22; 566:4, 15, 11; 546:7; 555:11; 659:19; 17; 568:11, 13, 17, 22; 661:19 569:3, 10; 570:10, 12; Notice [1] 581:8 576:3; notice [13] 543:5; 565:21; 586:1; 601:22; 602:9, 14; 581:15, 18; 593:14, 17; 603:8; 605:9, 18; 628:14; 595:19; 633:18; 637:8, 15, 629:15; 630:11 22; 645:1 oil [5] 554:13; 629:10, 11, notices [1] 632:9 14: 630:11 notification [1] 637:11 Oil-SM [11 547:20 Number [2] 532:5; 608:16 Okay [75] 489:2: 495:20: number [19] 523:2, 21; 496:14; 498:16; 499:1, 20; 532:13; 552:5; 554:19: 502:4; 507:22; 508:15; 557:7; 560:15; 564:13; 511:6; 514:19; 516:11: 566:11; 582:21; 584:18: 517:9; 522:2, 13; 524:15: 585:3; 586:2; 609:2; 617:2; 525:5; 527:17; 528:21; 627:19; 634:4; 649:14: 533:5; 535:16; 536:16; 666:11 539:1; 540:18, 22; 543:9; numbered [4] 523:4; 524:15; 545:18; 546:1, 10; 547:3; 538:13; 551:20 550:8; 556:22; 558:6; numbers [19] 494:1; 500:8; 559:4; 560:2; 563:22; 507:6; 577:22; 579:20: 565:10, 14, 21; 567:7; 593:1; 600:12; 608:12, 14; 569:22; 573:19; 576:18; 611:2; 620:21; 628:22; 579:13; 580:13; 589:1; 632:20; 641:21; 653:21; 591:17; 592:10, 14; 602:22; 664:6, 17; 669:10: 671:2 603:16, 20: 604:1; 605:3; -O- 610:6, 17; 616:10; 620:20; 621:20; 623:12, 15; 626:7: o'clock [2] 661:8; 673:6 627:2, 11; 628:13; 631:5; oath [1] 488:8 640:13; 641:14; 644:4; Object [1] 666:15 645:15; Objection [27] 488:18: 652:11; 657:9, 18; 660:21; 493:22; 495:5; 501:18; 669:13 502:15; 509:3; 513:18; okay [2] 624:2; 645:21 514:8; 517:6; 531:10: 538:2; Old [1] 484:16 545:2; 552:14; 553:12; old-timer [1] 606:12 555:1, 10; 569:5; 572:5; Oliver [6] 610:22; 624:20; 575:20; 594:5; 605:19; 626:9; 627:18: 628:21 615:19; 622:19; 638:15; OMROD [2] 498:9; 648:1 639:3; 658:7; 659:7 Omrod [1] 485:10 objection [4] 488:21; 491:14:1 one-page [3] 525:22; 532:10: 555:3; 569:7 627:17 objective [1] 506:5 ones [3] 534:16; 588:10; From matter to ones WATER PCB-SD0000063784 BSA Depo of: WTTJ.IAM B. PAPAGEORGE Monsanto v Aetna February 9, 1993 CR: 54365.0 Look-See(38) 662:14 584:4. 21; 585:1, 20: 586:7; m?oinj (1] 665:7 . 587:4. 16, 22; 588:8, 15, open ('ll 544:13 17. 20: 589:2. 5. 8; 590:7; opened [1] 514:15 . 594:2. 9; 595:4, 10, 12, 13; operating [10] 558:14; ; 596:7; 601:3, 14; 602:12; 563:7: 591:15: 612:16. 19; I 604:4: 605:5, 11, 22; 606:1, 624:22; 632:4; 633:15; ' 3, 15. 18; 607:4, 17; 609:5, 640:10; 643:14 9: 637:19: 638:9. 14; 640:3; Operanon [IJ 660:18 641:7: operation (7] 519:21: 524:1: ; 662:22: 667:22 571:19: 606:22; 607:11; outsiders [3/ 512:11; 535:4; 619:19, 22 j 594:10 Operations [7] 504:13; ; outstanding [1 ] 564:6 612:5; 635:19; 660:16, 17; 663:4; 667:1 - P- operations [4J 520:2; P-i-e-r-l-e [1] 577:21 528:18; 529:2; 569:3 opinion (41 525:18; 579:11; p.m. [1] 673:6 P.T. [2] 526:20; 527:6 645:16; 647:10 opportunities [1] 606:21 I packet [1( 562:7 ! PAGE [1] 486:2 opportunity [10] 500:11; i page [50] 508:9; 521:20; 503:7: 516:12; 557:10; | 522:18; 525:20; 545:19; 607:17; 619:15; 645:19; 557:18: 558:6, 7; 562:20; 654:1, 10; 663:1 i 563:19: 564:13; 565:5, 6, 7, opposed [If 645:5 order [6] 489:18; 499:11; : 22; 566:11; 571:1, 2; ! 577:18; 580:9, 18: 581:5, 512:22; 577:12; 579:15; i 11. 19: 582:17, 20; 583:13; 640:20 j 584:13: 592:22; 601:12; ordered [lj 575:17 ! 603:4. 8; 604:9; 608:14; ordinarily [1] 671:20 j 609:18, 19; ordinary [7] 502:11; 533:16; 612:21; 620:21: 621:2; 556:4; 643:18; 671:8, 16, 624:5, 14; 625:5; 633:5; 19 organization [6] 536:6; 634:3: 635:5, 6; 664:5; 669:21: 672:6 539:15; 559:17; 586:6; pages [2] 562:17; 583:14 635:22: 639:18 paid [11 550:21 organizations [1] 534:11 PAPAGEORGE [1] 483:18 organized [1] 613:19 Papageorge [151] 486:8, 9, original [4] 532:12; 538:20: 10. 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 564:20; 570:2 17. 18, 19, 20, 21, 22; originated [1] 637:4 487:1, 2, 3; 488:4, 6, 11; Orrick [1] 484:15 ought [6] 505:4; 518:7; 490:4; 492:13; 498:2, 4, 16; 500:2, 5, 9, 15; 501:14; 530:5: 568:18; 569:11; 594:11 507:22; 508:9; 521:21; 522:19: 525:11, 21; 526:2; outline [l] 664:9 Outside [41 562:18; 566:11; 528:2; 532:6, 9, 10, 13, 16, 20: 539:4; 545:18; 547:4: 581:9: 608:16 outside [194] 501:4, 8, 11, 13; 503:11: 504:4. 5, 11, 551:19, 20; 552:18; 554:18; i 556:18: 557:1, 4, 10. 14; *1 558:7: 560:8, 10, 13, 18; 19; 505:4, 9; 506:1; 507:16:1 561:1: 562:18; 564:14; 508:1, 12, 17; 509:15; i 568:3. 10; 570:22; 576:10; 510:3.12:511:11.17,21; \ 577:3. 13, 16, 19: 578:3; 512:6. 10, 15. 21. 22; 513:5. 6. 11. 16: 514:1, 6, 7: 516:1. 13; 517:19, 22; : 579:16. 19, 22; 580:5; \ 582:20: 592:17, 20; 593:5, 10: 600:6, 10, 14; 604:8; 518:1.3.5,10:519:4,18: I 605:8: 607:13, 16; 608:3, 7; 520:1. ; 610:18, 20, 21: 611:5; 4, 6. 10. 18: 521:3. 9; 613:15; 616:6; 620:20; 523:9, 11. 16. 17, 19; , 621:10; 622:13: 625:4; 526:3, 8, 15; 527:2, 11. 18: | 626:7, 20; 627:13, 16, 20; 528:3. 6. IS: 529:2. 9. 12. \ 628:17, 19, 20; 629:4, 16, 15: 530:9, 20. 21; 531:9. 20; 534:14; 535:7, 18; 536:5; 537:3, 6, 16, 22; 538:9: 540:19; 541:6, 10; 542:6: 543:6, 11. 18, 22: j ) 20: 630:3, 8, 10, 13: 632:14, 16, 22: 633:6; \ 638:5: 641:15, 18; 642:2, ! 11. 15; 645:19: 648:20; 649:9, 12; 544:8, 10, 14, 22; 545:14; 547:10, 12. 15; 551:7, 11, 13, 15: 552:13: 554:12: I 653:16. 18: 654:1, 6, 11; i 655:2, 18; 663:18; 668:4, 1 10: 669:4, 7, 11. 16, 21; 555:16; 557:22; 558:18; 670:19, 21: 671:6 559:11.15.22: 562:6; 563:4. 8. 14: 565:2, 7; : paper [1] 593:22 Pappas [4] 557:19; 559:18. 566:8, 15, 21; 567:19; 19: 560:2 568:1, 11; 570:19: 571:2, : Paragraph [1] 523:4 13, 16, 20: 572:18, 22; paragraph [9] 510:19: 574:3, 6, 17; 575:1. 11, 16; | 514:22; 515:5; 517:9, 10; 576:12, 15, 19; 578:11, 15; \ 525:10; 538:12; 644:2; 579:1; ` 645:2 581:2, 15; 583:4, 8, 19: ' paragraphs [1] 524:15 paraphrase [1] 618:7 Park [10] 495:17: 496:1. 4, 6. 8: 497:5; 665:16. 19; 666:6. 9 Part [1] 508:3 part [23] 489:3; 493:14; 497:14; 509:8; 512:4; 523:10; 527:7: 528:4. 14; 529:17, 18. 20, 21; 530:9. 11, 19; 531:17; 561:7; 575:18: 584:20; 588:14; 626:20; 664:15 participate [3] 591:1; 655:5: 658:5 participated [3] 635:2; 645:7: 650:22 participation [1] 651:3 parts [2] 507:6; 642:4 passing [1] 551:1 Patrol [1] 511:11 Pause [4] 607:14; 610:16; 629:18: 648:18 PCB [17] 488:13; 496:7; 497:11, 12, 14, 20; 590:3, 10, 12; 596:10, 21, 22; 597:16; 598:5; 599:17; 616:15; 617:3 PCB-related [4] 591:2, 9: 600:2; 616:19 PCBs [28] 489:11, 16. 18; 490:5, 7, 12, 21; 491:4, 5; 492:15; 493:9: 497:1, 22: 597:13. 14. 20; 598:13. 15; 599:2, 6, 9, 12; 617:9, 16: 618:6, 11, 15 pencil [1] 661:19 pending [1] 669:22 Pensacola [1] 540:12 people [38] 506:7; 511:3, 6, 10, 11; 512:4; 515:9; 517:3, 13, 22; 518:14, 18; 521:1, 15: 526:14: 528:5: 529:11; 530:8, 15; 531:12, 13; 532:1; 540:15; 556:2; 571:12; 573:18; 574:2, 15; 578:22; 580.-2; 585:10; 587:19: 616:4; 652:10; 653:2; 659:10 perceived [6] 490:5, 9; 524:12; 583:10, 12; 608:9 perform [1] 604:6 Performed [1] 602:3 performed [1] 544:8 performing [1] 553:19 period [8] 497:19: 531:1; 597:4; 636:2; 640:14; 641:2; 653:7; 662:17 periodic [1] 591:14 periodically [1] 592:2 periods [2] 520:20; 628:13 persistence [1] 490:9 person [17] 500:16; 505:21; 508:5; 548:17; 554:5; 556:21; 575:5; 612:11; 615:16; 619:13, 14; 622:11; 631:2; 655:11; 659:6, 10; 665:16 personal [3] 512:13; 573:13; 655:15 personally [8] 501:12; 528:19: 538:22; 558:20; 573:19: 586:17; 649:4: 666:8 personnel [6] 511:19: 518:10; 528:17, 22; 529:8; 607:16 peruse [1] 629:18 peruses [24] 500:12; 532:8, 17; 557:11; 558:1; 560:16, 20; 577:15; 579:18; 580:3; 592:19; 593:8; 600:8, 17; 608:5; 611:3; 627:15; 629:5: 633:2; 641:17, 22; 642:8: 654:2; 671:3 perusing [1] 545:4 Peter [2] 630:22; 631:2 Phenol [1] 602:5 phenol [2] 549:1; 565:22 Phenolic [2] 545:21; 602:4 phenolic [7] 548:10, II, 14; 549:10; 550:10, 19; 568:17 Philadelphia [3] 519:11; 520:10; 521:9 phrasing [1] 545:8 physically [1] 539:16 picks [1] 548:21 picture [1] 658:20 picturing [1] 536:12 Pierle [13] 576:18, 21; 577:5, 8. 10, 20; 578:6, 20: 579:6, 9; 619:17, 20; 639:18 pin [1] 505:1 pinch [1] 658:9 piqued [1] 672:2 place [25] 489:21; 493:5; 496:9: 503:20; 519:17; 520:17; 524:8; 527:15; 528:11; 550:3; 556:21; 581:3; 606:22; 617:21; 626:2; 632:6; 636:11; 640:6; 646:9; 649:1, 7; 651:1, 2; 655:10; 672:17 placed [2] 494:17; 635:21 places [2] 539:8; 581:5 placing [1] 558:3 PLAINTIFF [1] 484:3 Plaintiff [1] 483:6 plan [1] 521:22 Plant [3] 527:7; 601:21; 662:15 plant [106] 500:19; 501:11, 17; 503:11; 507:18, 19; 509:21, 22; 510:6, 10; 511:3, 7, 9, 19; 512:4, 12; 513:20; 514:2, 18; 515:8; 516:8, 11; 517:3, 13, 22; 518:10, 14, 17; 521:2; 522:14: 524:20; 525:4, 7; 526:6; 527:8; 528:5, 6, 17, 22: 529:7, 11, 12. 15; 531:21; 534:21; 539:11, 13, 15, 20; 540:16; 541:2, 9, 12; 544:1, 6, 13; 546:3, 12; 547:12; 548:7, 22: 549:15, 19; 550:4; 553:6; 555:13, 17; 556:15, 19; 559:21; 560:1; 568:7, 8, 21; 569:2, 14; 570:8; 571:12; 572:11; 573:5, 10; 574:2, 12, 15; 575:9: 579:10: 586:9; 587:17: 605:5; 606:9, 15, 19; 607:16; 610:13; 616:4; 628:8; 630:11; 659:17; 662:15; 667:4, 8, 11; 668:3; 672:13 plant-level [5] 521:15: 523:7; 530:8; 576:14: 578:22 plants [17] 506:4, 5; 507:15: 518:14, 19; 526:9; 543:21; 545:9; 559:20; 567:22; 568:7; 576:11; 579:8; 659:20; 663:1; 666:19: 667:16 Please [1] 606:17 please [1] 595:6 Plus [1] 660:22 plus [1] 616:2 point [24] 497:16; 515:11: 516:8; 522:10: 523:21; 524:3, 15; 525:16: 538:21: 541:12; 552:10; 581:14; 596:14; 600:15; 612:4; 630:10; 631:21; 636:1; 637:7: 642:22; 643:3 . 7; 648:20; 655:4 pointed [4] 536:17; 548:20; 554:1: 581:4 points [2] 534:9; 620:7 poison [I] 636:20 Policy [1] 536:2 policy [19] 517:17, 20; 536:18; 582:7; 587:19, 21: 588:9; 639:21; 643:5; 644:21: 646:13. 18. 21; 647:8; 652:22; 654:17; 656:4, 15; 667:20 pollute [1] 505:12 polluted [1] 505:11 pollution [1] 619:22 poor [1] 657:13 portion [1] 526:4 portions [1] 642:2 position [26] 508:13; 523:6; 525:14: 534:8; 536:18, 22; 539:13; 547:1; 558:9; 559:17; 614:21; 615:14; 616:3: 617:1; 633:9: 645:8. 17; 646:4; 647:1, 12, 15; 648:4: 657:14. 21; 658:1. 19 positions [1] 573:16 possession [1] 545:5 possibilities [1] 510:5 possibility [1] 638:2 potential [12] 492:8, 15; 493:8, 11; 599:1, 6; 616:21; 617:21; 618:12; 621:17; 630:14 potentially [3] 571:6; 644:6, 14 practice [9] 501:15, 19; 534:14; 556:4; 591:11; 593:17; 611:14; 612:9; 636:9 practices [4] 571:19; 666:13: 667:15, 21 precise [2] 492:12; 670:6 predated [1] 588:20 preliminary [2] 540:19; 624:10 premises [1] 512:12 preparation [1] 501:20 prepare [2] 571:12; 670:17 Prepared [1] 613:4 prepared [13] 533:3, 7, 13; 540:20; 544:3; 563:2; 564:2: 614:16; 623:13: 626:8, 20; 653:6; 661:15 presence [7] 490:8; 495:11; 510:18; 594:10, 14: 651:16; 652:19 present [16] 489:11; 495:12, 15; 503:15; 544:9; 553:10; 621:12: 642:5: 645:12; 646:9, 15; 652:16, 17; 653:1; 664:20; 666:4 presentation [7] 649:18; 650:9, 17, 19, 20; 651:5; 656:3 presentations [2] 594:18; 653:6 presented [5] 616:7: 618:12; 619:4, 7; 651:13 Press [I] 640:21 pressures [1] 610:14 prevent [I] 520:3 preventing [1] 489:18 ongoing to preventing WATER PCB-SD0000063785 BSA Depo of: WILLIAM B. PAPAGEORGE Monsanto v Aetna February 9, 1993 CR: 54365.0 Look-See(39) previous [2] 562:13; 603:18 primarily [2] 496:17; 596:14 prime [1] 506:13 Prior [11 654:13 prior [3] 529:1; 608:8; 658:16 priority [1] 587:2 problem [1] 564:4 problems [7] 505:7; 531:20; 571:15; 574:5; 617:5; 618:12; 651:12 Procedure [2] 580:9 procedure [7] 570:16: 583:20: 605:22; 613:11: 635:6. 12, 21 Procedures [1] 635:7 procedures [8] 504:4; 515:3. 14: 516:5, 13. 16; 523:1: 570:18 Process [3/ 560:3; 614:19: 615:14 process [25] 489:3; 493:5: 494:12; 495:17, 21; 510:3; 548:3; 551:17; 553:10, 11. 18; 567:18; 570:11; 576:13; 584:17; 605:12; 614:9; 615:10, 11, 18; 618:15; 621:4, 14; 625:7; 629:11 processed [3] 537:19: 552:1: 565:11 processes [6] 534:5; 539:20: 576:13; 615:9; 638:9, 14 Processing [4] 582:22; 601:22; 605:9, 18 processing [7] 549:12: 553:17, 21; 565:22; 572:4; 605:2; 628:15 Processor [2] 562:18; 581:9 processor [129] 503:12; 504:19; 505:5, 9; 506:1; 507:16; 508:2; 509:8, 15: 511:11, 17, 21; 512:6, 15, 21; 513:5, 6, 11, 16; 514:2. 6, 7; 516:1, 13; 517:4, 5. 12, 19; 518:1, 3. 5; 519:4, 18; 520:1, 4, 6, 10; 521:9: 523:1, 9, 11, 16, 17, 19: 524:19; 526:3, 15; 527:2. 12: 528:7, 18: 529:3, 9. 12. 15: 530:10, 20, 21; 531:9. 21; 534:14; 535:19; 536:5: 537:3, 17, 22; 538:9; 544:10; 545:14; 547:12: 551:8, 11, 13, 15; 552:13: 554:12; 557:22; 558:18: 559:15, 22; 562:6; 563:4. 8; 565:7; 566:9; 571:2, 13, 16, 20; 572:18; 574:3, 6, 17; 575:1, 11,16; 576:12, 19; 578:12, 15, 16: 581:2, 15; 583:4, 19; 584:21: 585:1, 14, 20; 587:4; 588:1, 20; 589:6; 590:7; 594:2; 601:3, 15; 604:5; 605:5, 11; 606:1. 4: 607:4, 17; 637:19; 640:3; 641:7; 667:22 Processors [4] 602:9, 15: 603:8; 608:17 processors [70] 501:4, 8, 11, 13; 504:5, 6, 11; 508:12, 17; 510:12; 512:11; 517:22; 518:11; 520:18: 521:3; 526:8; 527:18; 528:3; 535:7; 537:7; 540:19; 541:6. 10; 542:6; 543:6, 11, 18. 22; 544:8, 14, 22; 547:11. 15; 554:13; 555:17; 559:11: 563:15; 565:2; 566:12, 15. 21; 567:20; 568:1. 12; 570:19, 20; 572:22; 576:16; 579:1; 583:8; 584:4; 586:7; 587:16; 588:8, 16, 17; 589:2, 8; 595:4, 10, 13; 596:7; 602:12; 606:15, 18; 609:5, 9; 638:9, 14; 639:7 produce [1] 537:19 produced [4] 553:5, 7; 561:2; 623:16 Product [14] 533:11; 561:18; 586:12, 19, 22; 587:8, 18; 602:5; 614:7; 619:14; 622:6; 623:9; 625:3; 660:22 product [31] 488:16; 490:8; 493:21; 495:10; 516:7; 519:22; 521:6, 9; 553:20; 582:14; 600:21; 604:21; 611:16; 612:2, 10; 613:8; 614:3, 10: 616:21; 617:11; 618:2, 22; 619:8; 620:10, 14; 621:19; 622:18; 623:3, 18, 21; 650:10 Production [4] 500:8; 577:21; 593:1; 649:14 production [19] 508:19; 532:13; 579:20; 600:12; 608:12; 611:2; 618:15, 22; 621:14; 627:19; 628:22; 632:20: 638:9: 639:7; 641:21; 653:21; 664:6; 669:10; 671:2 Products [1] 633:10 products [15] 489:17; 492:11: 527:9; 613:21; 614:5, 12; 616:8; 617:3, 4: 621:3, 13; 622:3, 14; 625:6; 634:22 Professional [1] 484:6 program [38] 503:12; 505:22; 507:9, 16; 509:8; 511:20; 520:17, 20; 558:2, 18, 22; 559:7, 15; 563:3; 583:4; 587:9; 588:7, 13, 17, 20; 589:2. 6; 596:16, 17; 597:22; 598:1, 3; 606:1, 4; 609:1, 14, 17; 610:9; 614:14: 667:16, 19; 668:2 programs [1] 668:1 progress [2] 526:7; 527:18 project [2] 576:19; 632:5 proper [3] 524:11; 578:18; 626:17 properly [4] 616:1; 623:6; 626:4; 643:19 property [2] 515:19; 604:4 proportion [1] 579:12 proposal [1] 580:15 propose [2] 529:22 proposed [2] 570:19; 612:12 prospective [1] 529:21 Protection [1] 608:16 protection [1] 594:2 provide [5] 523:19; 595:3, 9; 596:13; 654:15 provided [2] 518:9; 637:3 Public [1] 497:5 public [2] 483:22; 653:1 publicity [1] 505:2 pulled [11 616:5 pulling [1] 667:17 pulverize [1] 519:14 pulverizing [1] 519:12 purchase [3] 655:20; 656:3, 14 purchased [1] 551:12 purchasing [3] 510:6; 518:14; 566:16 purport [1] 669:11 purportedly [1] 532:12 purports [1] 532:11 purpose [3] 523:2; 599:18; 632:8 purposes [4] 543:15; 552:1; 654:16; 668:19 pursuant [1] 544:21 pursue [1] 544:19 pursued [1] 575:22 Putting [3] 492:12; 493:6; 529:6 putting [6] 494:21; 547:19; 566:14; 632:3; 650:7: 660:19 -Q-_______ quality [2] 553:13, 14 quantities [1] 509:15 quarrel [1] 565:19 quarter [1] 591:18 Queeny [1] 662:15 question [37] 494:6; 499:1; 504:20, 22; 507:14; 511:1; 513:14; 523:10; 525:12; 526:22; 528:15; 533:2; 535:9; 541:20; 545:20; 547:9; 548:15; 564:14; 569:6; 574:13; 583:6; 584:10; 596:19, 21; 598:12; 599:10; 600:5; 609:6; 621:10; 624:21; 630:16; 636:16; 637:7; 645:7; 657:13; 668:20; 670:7 questionable [1] 572:8 questions [7] 491:15; 521:16; 545:8; 563:22; 599:22; 627:22; 653:12 quick [1] 644:21 quickly [3] 500:13; 603:21; 659:21 quote [18] 510:21, 22; 515:1, 4; 516:5, 7; 517:11; 523:22; 524:17; 537:12, 13; 538:14; 645:2, 6; 664:20, 21; 666:12, 13 quoting [2] 508:20; 525:17 - R- railroad [1] 602:4 raise [1] 636:16 raised [4] 524:3, 4; 574:13; 670:7 raising [1] 522:14 Ralph [1] 554:5 ramifications [1] 515:17 ran [1] 569:10 rang [1] 602:9 ranking [2] 584:14; 659:4 Ray [2] 510:14, 16 RCRA [7] 625:7, 8, 12, 13, 18; 626:2; 643:4 re [1] 627:19 read [12] 502:11; 505:9; 532:18; 545:20; 552:19, 21; 557:16; 593:6; 595:5; 611:21; 642:3; 671:20 readily [1] 562:15 reading [4] 511:1; 554:7; 556:16; 608:20 reads [2] 537:12; 545:20 reason [17] 513:7, 13, 15, 19; 528:15; 534:9; 538:13; 557:17; 578:5; 594:7; 599:21; 601:8; 602:16; 613:15; 617:19; 658:3, 8 reasons [7] 489:6; 492:14; 512:20; 513:3, 4; 524:7; 618:21 recall [137] 488:16, 21; 491:22; 492:9, 17; 493:17; 496:15; 499:10; 500:22; 501:5; 502:1; 507:18; 512:1, Reese [1] 640:20 2: 517:20, 21; 519:10, 11; refer [4] 544:2; 567:2; 520:4, 8; 522:13; 524:3, 4; 580:7; 609:12 527:16; 528:8; 529:4; 535:2, reference [15] 522:3; 549:1, 3; 536:4; 537:11; 539:3; 9; 558:6; 580:8, 10; 581:4; 542:19; 543:19; 544:11, 21; 603:18; 604:15; 605:1, 3; 545:6; 547:18; 548:4, 19; 624:2, 4; 626:1; 668:22 549:2; 553:17; 554:4: referenced [1] 523:3 557:15; 559:7, 12, 16: references [1] 669:22 561:6; 562:4; 564:18; 568:4; referred [7] 551:11; 606:11: 569:20; 571:17; 572:9; 607:1; 611:11; 615:6; 576:4; 580:7; 588:3, 10: 589:8, 17; 590:2, 6, 9: 624:10; 632:5 Referring [1] 630:3 592:9; 594:19; 596:10: referring [16] 504:2; 513:10; 604:19: 606:5, 17, 20; 514:1; 537:17; 561:14: 610:13; 611:7; 613:13; 564:13; 568:3; 594:14; 619:9; 624:8; 625:12, 598:4; 608:15; 609:18; 16; 628:2, 16; 629:9. 11. 629:16: 652:20; 653:5; 13; 630:16, 19; 631:9, 18, 667:19, 21 19; 632:1; 634:22; 635:11, refers [6] 522:22; 523:1; 20: 636:18: 637:4, 14; 578:8; 593:14; 609:10, 13 640:5; 641:10, 13; 642:17, refining [1] 628:15 21; 643:3; 644:7, 8, 16, 19; reflect [1] 508:12 645:12; 646:3, 22; 647:5, 6, reflects [1] 673:1 7, 9, 10; 648:5, 10; 651:3; refresh [10] 546:8; 548:10: 652:5; 653:8; 654:9, 18, 19, 554:7; 558:3; 565:17; 20. 22: 655:5; 566:15, 18; 605:4; 649:17; 656:12; 662:21; 664:3, 18; 670:2 666:7, 17; 667:9, 13, 16: refreshed [6! 549:3; 550:5; 668:22; 669:1; 670:10: 565:11: 602:14; 650:8: 671:7; 672:14 655:19 . recalling [3] 530:12; 630:20; refreshes [2] 511:2; 557:21 650:1 refusal [1] 520:1 receipt [1] 611:19 refuse [1] 517:18 receive [10] 502:9, 12; regarding [10] 496:10; 503:5; 556:5; 612:20; 613:6; 504:4; 510:17; 514:15, 17; 625:5; 643:20; 662:18; 524:11; 562:5; 611:11; 664:10 612:2; 647:11 received [13] 519:15; regular [3] 502:5; 562:10: 544:17; 548:11, 14; 550:14, 601:10 19; 557:13; 564:16; 613:16; regulations [4] 625:13, 19; 638:1; 643:9; 669:18; 626:6; 632:12 671:10 regulators [1] 573:11 receiving [2] 502:22: 628:2 regulatory [18] 530:9, 15, Recess [1] 527:21 20; 531:8, 12, 13, 19; recess [1] 576:7 568:21; 571:15; 572:2, 17. recessed [1] 673:5 21; 573:7; 574:22; 575:5, 8. recognize [10] 526:13: 21; 670:1 527:1; 539:4; 561:4: 602:18, Reid [1] 510:14 20; 629:8, 9; 642:14 Rein [11 485:3 recognized [1] 512:10 REINSURANCE [1] 485:9 recognizing [1] 659:9 relate [3] 513:20: 558:2; recollection [15] 536:7; 622:20 543:13; 552:4; 554:8; related [10] 508:5; 509:13: 556:10, 16; 566:16, 18; 531:8; 590:7; 591:7; 600:4: 580:6, 12; 609:1, 7; 646:13; 606:22: 612:7; 624:9; 670:2, 13 651:10 recommencing [1] 483:20 relates [4] 510:22; 513:21; recommend [1] 516:5 557:17; 566:8 recommendation [1] 524:18 relating [10] 491:1, 9; recommended [2] 512:18; 509:19; 520:19; 531:21; 523:22 568:8; 588:17; 596:10; Record [1] 512:18 599:20: 620:3 record [35] 488:2; 489:22; Relations [1] 497:5 490:2: 498:11, 13; 501:16; relations [1] 653:1 512:16; 513:15; 527:20, 22; relationship [16] 518:7; 532:9; 553:2; 557:3: 560:10: 528:6; 529:22; 545:15; 561:2; 571:21; 576:6, 8; 551:8, 10; 552:11; 573:10, 577:19; 599:14; 600:9; 14; 585:21; 605:5; 628:14: 607:19; 608:11; 621:11; 645:10; 646:6; 647:3; 627:11, 12; 628:20: 629:21, 648:13 22; 630:1, 6; 641:19; 661:3, relationships [7] 504:19; 21: 673:4 505:5; 527:12; 534:8, 14; recorded [2] 569:10, 12 537:6; 563:8 recover [1] 549:12 release [2] 493:8: 502:16 recoverable [1] 622:21 | released [1] 490:6 recovered [3] 538:9; 550:6: \ relevant [3] 532:4; 575:4, 552:2 13 recovering [2] 565:14, 18 relied [2] 619:12; 620:4 recovery [2] 524:1: 607:11 remained [1] 556:14 From previous to remained WATER PCB-SD0000063786 BSA Depo of: WILLIAM B. PAPAGEORGE Monsanto v Aetna February 9, 1993 CR: 54365.0____________________ Look-See(40) remember [89] 492:1; 493:4; 15: 622:8 >94:1; 498:22; 499:1, 3, 5, respect [9] 501:4; 505:3; '>. 8; 502:22; 503:2, 13; 508:17; 568:1; 574:6, 16; 508:13: 510:13, 18: 518:15; 626:7: 637:9; 641:2 519:6, 7, 8, 9; 520:11, 20, respond [1] 655:16 21: 522:8; 535:9, 10, 15; responding [1] 662:4 536:11, 15; 540:5; 543:4; response [9] 498:5; 547:9; 546:1. 6. 16; 547:14; 549:5: 554:20; 555:6. 9: 556:5; 550:2 , 7; 551:13: 554:10, 587:1: 669:1, 12 17; 558:19: 564:3: 576:20; responses [2] 541:14, 17 577:1; 586:3; 590:6, 8; responsibilities [8] 526:13; 596:5, 8, 20: 602:8; 604:19; 575:4; 582:14: 601:7; 615:9; 605:7; 612:12, 15; 620:5, 7; 633:22; 657:1, 16 624:8; 629:10: 631:8: responsibility [22] 503:20; 635:22; 640:8; 642:16; 508:17; 510:15; 516:3; 644:11; 646:7, 16; 647:17; 521:13; 525:6: 538:15; 648:14; 650:2, 12, 18, 20; 541:2, 9; 542:9; 574:19, 21; 651:4, 10, 12; 652:13; 575:2, 10, 12; 597:7: 653:9, 15: 654:21; 655:22; 598:13; 600:22; 601:3: 656:11; 667:5, 6, 20; 669:2, 616:16; 622:2; 642:12 17; 672:20 responsible [14] 514:5; remembered [2] 546:4: 515:21; 534:5; 559:22; 645:18 581:22; 582:3, 4; 596:22; remove [2] 495:14; 507:1 643:4; 645:3, 9; 646:5; removed [1] 553:20 647:2; 648:12 repeating [1] 504:20 rest [I] 642:4 rephrase [7] 488:20; 494:6; restructuring [1] 520:2 504:21; 555:2; 569:6; result [91 508:10; 515:19; 617:14; 621:10 519:22; 553:10; 564:19; report (16/ 540:16: 542:14, 599:2: 617:3; 631:6; 670:15 22; 555:15: 563:11; 588:6; resulted [2] 495:3; 585:3 610:3, 4; 611:11; 622:4; resulting [1] 514:6 631:7, 12; 636:11, 17; results [5] 551:17; 553:16; 637:1; 644:22 598:6, 8; 619:19 reported [3] 534:6; 539:18; resumed [1] 673:6 540:7 retained [2] 502:5; 533:16 REPORTER [11 595:7 return [2] 570:8: 578:17 reporter [1] 483:22 returned [3] 538:9: 604:7; reporting [21 534:6; 631:20 672:16 reports [9] 519:15; 542:4, retyped [1] 567:6 12; 559:14; 587:20; 588:3; retyping [1] 567:13 590:21; 602:21; 643:9 Review [1] 609:13 repository [1] 524:21 review [34] 500:10; 502:21; represent [3] 527:5; 561:1; 503:7; 505:7, 22; 512:19; 668:10 525:1, 3; 526:7; 529:12; representation [3] 499:14, 532:15; 557:10; 558:18; 21; 668:20 representative [10] 510:6; 559:15; 570:7; 572:21; 574:16, 17; 576:19; 581:22; 574:9. 11: 586:8; 626:16; 582:4, 7; 587:11: 588:1, 20; 650:19: 652:2, 6, 8; 653:13 595:13; 619:20: 626:13; representatives [15] 489:14; 643:10; 649:15; 654:1, 10; 494:15; 497:4, 5, 6; 501:12; 655:4; 512:8, 14; 517:21: 518:5, 663:7 10, 20; 638:11; 650:21; reviewed [13] 500:13; 651:9 501:14; 526:4: 560:21; represented [3] 497:2; 545:9; 569:21; 570:1; 629:6; 633:3; 645:16 649:17; 650:7; 654:3; 655:1, represents [2] 539:2; 567:1 18 reprocessing [4] 554:9; reviewing [6] 525:6; 532:10; 607:8, 10; 629:15 559:22; 560:11; 655:3: reprocessors [1] 639:7 670:2 request [8] 561:21, 22; reviews [1] 609:6 562:2; 606:3 . 5; 662:21; Richard [4] 533:20; 539:22; 664:15: 669:2 540:13: 593:1 requested [1] 571:18 Ricks [1] 635:8 required [3] 501:22; 575:4; Right [7] 516:21: 542:16; 632:11 551:21; 564:12; 577:4; requirement [4] 582:6: 596:1; 617:17 624:21; 626:2: 631:18 right [30] 489:4: 495:18; requirements [4] 625:9; 507:10; 524:20; 527:20; 626:5: 636:3, 10 528:15; 537:16; 538:4; requiring [1] 655:15 546:3; 549:17; 552:8; 554:6: rerotate [1] 659:12 563:15; 567:11; 572:14, 16; Research ]4] 497:3; 586:9: 577:6, 9; 580:11; 582:8; 615:2, 6 590:16; 618:17; 621:22; research [1] 615:1 623:19; 624:11; 646:1; Reserve [1] 484:16 647:6; 657:5; 660:15; resolve [1] 591:8 671:17 Resources [1] 573:21 right-hand [6] 564:12; resources [4] 506:7; 542:10, 566:4; 580:17; 582:21; 595:20; 672:8 ring [6] 505:12; 535:21: 536:9; 631:1; 656:8; 668:21 rings [2] 644:10; 668:8 Risk [4] 638:7; 650:16; 663:14; 671:21 risk (311 584:3, 14, 17: 585:3, 5, 7. 9, 10, 13, 15. 19; 586:2. 7, 17; 621:17; 631:12, 14; 632:9; 633:22; 635:17; 637:8, 11, 15, 21, 22; 662:19, 22; 663:11; 664:15 risks [7] 531:5; 583:19; 616:7, 21; 619:4, 7; 672:13 risky [1] 617:11 Ritz [1] 483:18 river [4] 505:11, 18, 19 rivers [I] 490:11 Robert [4] 485:10; 589:6; 648:3, 6 robin [1] 651:1 Robirds [3] 632.18; 633:7, 9 Rodney [1] 485:13 room [2] 536:12; 593:21 rotated [1] 659:9 round [5] 587:10: 651:1, 6, 7, 21 Route [1] 582:22 run-down [2] 544:22: 545:3 runs [1] 534:2 Ryan [2] 526:20; 527:5 -S- si 1:12 [1] 527:21 saddle [1] 659:10 safe [6] 510:22; 511:8; 515:2, 14; 522:22; 524:11 safety [4] 513:20: 514:17; 516:5; 611:12 salable [2] 549:12; 550:6 sale [11] 489:20; 491:13; 492:14; 494:5; 504:4, 11; 545:20; 547:21; 599:6; 604:5; 623:21 Sales [3] 602:6; 603:5, 11 sales [8] 492:11; 493:20; 494:15: 524:1; 578:14; 579:1; 604:2, 22 San [1] 484:18 Sansome [1] 484:17 SARFATTI [39] 488:18; 491:14; 493:22; 494:10; 495:5; 498:2, 5, 11, 14; 499:12, 20; 500:1; 501:18; 502:15; 509:3; 513:18: 514:8; 517:6; 531:10; 538:2, 5; 545:2; 552:14: 553:12; 555:1, 10; 569:5; 572:5; 575:20; 594:5; 605:19; 615:19; 622:19: 638:15; 639:3; 647:21; 658:7; 659:7; 666:15 Sarfatti [4] 484:4; 488:21: 555:3; 569:7 sat [3] 537:5; 650:21; 655:4 satisfy [11 545:10 Sauget [1] 662:15 save [1] 577:16 Sayers [2] 593:1; 594:7 saying [7] 501:7; 526:16; 534:18: 552:19; 582:13; 623:7: 672:19 scenario [1] 536:15 schedule [2] 543:11; 592:5 scheduled [2] 527:15; 592:2 Schwalb [1] 484:5 scissors-and-paste [1] 542:11 scope [2] 552:12; 563:13 scores [1] 585:19 Second [1] 515:5 second [25] 490:1; 508:9; 510:19; 511:14; 514:22; 521:20; 549:22; 557:18; 558:7; 562:20; 563:19; 564:9; 565:5, 6, 21; 566:11; 571:1; 580:8; 581:5, 19; 587:10; 601:22; 612:21; 623:17; 629:21 second-to-last [1] 604:12 secretary [3] 542:17; 564:19; 567:9 section [4] 642:5; 644:1; 671:22; 672:9 seek [1] 599:4 seeking [3] 541:22: 547:10; 654:16 select [2] 655:6; 659:8 selling [11] 488:16, 22; 489:8; 492:7; 493:15, 20; 494:14; 495:9, 18; 552:1; 628:11 send [7] 523:17; 535:5; 542:4, 13; 543:3; 559:14; 593:17 sending [1] 554:8 Senior [2] 614:19; 615:14 senior [1] 657:22 seniority [3] 659:3, 5, 9 sense [2] 493:3; 640:1 sensed [1] 518:2 sensitivity [1] 616:20 sentence [18] 510:20; 511:1; 513:14; 515:6; 516:4; 517:2, 10; 534:9, 12; 541:16, 19; 576:13; 577:18; 578:3, 7, 8; 645:1 Separate [1] 623:13 separate [1] 670:13 separation [1] 495:3 September [17] 508:8, 16; 510:20; 514:22; 517:17; 557:19; 558:10; 559:18; 610:22; 653:20; 656:13, 22; 657:9, 15; 658:13; 662:17; 666:3 seriously [1] 585:11 serve [1] 598:18 served [1] 543:15 serves [1] 624:11 service [8] 519:14; 551:11; 567:19; 595:3, 9; 604:6; 662:22; 664:16 Services [2] 602:3; 663:15 session [1] 608:9 sessions [2] 488:9; 612:14 setting [1] 522:21 settle [1] 591:2 seven-day [2] 499:14, 16 seventy [1] 525:8 shakes [1] 505:14 share [3] 512:19; 544:12, 13 shared [2] 523:15; 525:15 shells [2] 491:7, 8 shipped [1] 509:16 shipping [1] 494:17 shorthand [1] 483:21 shot [1] 610:7 show [9] 578:5; 593:20; 599:9, 12; 617:16, 20; 618:8; 619:3; 652:17 showing [1] 592:20 shrimp [2] 491:3; 492:1 sign [1] 624:22 sign-off [2] 570:16, 17 signature [1] 624:17 signed [2] 532:12; 624:20 significance [1] 532:3 significant [3] 509:18; 528:16; 616:16 Silbert [1] 484:5 smgte [I] 592:22 sir [281 489:5; 490:19; 507:11: 516:3; 517:14; 530:11; 533:15: 538:7; 539:9; 569:12; 584:6; 597:2, 14; 598:2; 599:3; 601:1, 4, 18; 608:1; 616:18; 617:22; 625:16; 627:1, 4; 635:13; 639:9; 642:20; 657:3 sit [7] 499:3; 532:1; 575:7: 590:3; 655:6; 658:22; 662:2 Site 13] 644:7; 647:2; 648:13 site [101 516:20: 522:11; 575:18; 607:1; 615:3, 8; 626:1; 637:12; 666:13 Sites [I] 642:4 sites [11] 626:4; 642:19; 643:17, 22; 644:5, 14; 645:10; 667:3, 11; 668:16; 670:8 situation [6] 520:1; 578:17; 586:19; 599:17; 604:3; 649:8 situations [4] 514:16; 575:3; 586:21; 587:3 six [41 593:1; 616:15, 18, 19 Sixties [1] 496:7 Skadden [1] 485:11 sketchy [2] 491:2, 11 skim [1] 642:4 slightly [11 657:22 slip [21 560:12; 561:4 SM [2] 545:20; 555:6 Smull [11 577:21 soaps [1] 519:15 social [11 538:15 Sold [1] 623:13 sold [13] 495:2, 4; 497:1; 522:3; 551:16; 604:4; 620:10, 13; 623:17; 628:15; 629:15; 638:9, 14 solely [3] 615:11; 616:16; 657:1 soliciting [1] 535:6 solid [2] 501:2; 519:12 solution [4] 552:20; 553:16; 554:9; 604:16 solutions [1] 621:13 somebody [8] 519:16: 538:19; 541:11; 545:13; 554:20; 555:6: 586:9; 653:3 somehow [2] 600:4; 624:9 someone [15] 492:13: 519:20; 582:7; 612:13; 620:12; 622:1; 624:22; 626:10; 630:17; 631:3; 645:16; 646:22; 650:16; 659:1; 662:7 somewluit [1] 671:16 Somewhere [1] 569:16 somewhere [3] 548:4; 622:18; 623:6 sorry [21] 489:22; 496:14, 21; 498:3; 503:18; 506:11; 540:22; 541:17; 542:8; 566:3; 567:2; 568:5; 576:22; 580:11; 583:13; 589:11; 593:7; 597:6; 623:1; 634:6; 640:15 sort [8] 493:1; 510:17; 542:11; 587:6; 596:12: 644:21; 671:12; 673:2 source [8] 537:9; 538:17; 563:12; 572:2, 6; 607:6; 617:4; 667:7 sources [2] 492:4; 564:16 speak [9] 496:2; 498:9; remember to speak WATER PCB-SD0000063787 BSA Depo of; WillJAM B. PAPAGEORGE Monsanto v Aetna February 9, 1993 CR: 54365.0 Look-See(41> 525:16; 543:15; 573:18; 642:19; 643:10: 644:14, 22 576:18; 588:6; 652:3; step [2] 584:10; 638:19 656:17 steps [2] 494:8, 19 speakers [1] 653:6 Steven [1] 484:4 speaking [5] 496:11: 497:9; stick [21 520:5: 656:6 534:22; 580:8; 653:4 stimulate [1] 543:14 special flj 504:8 stop [7] 488:16, 22; 489:7: Specialist [2] 614:19; 615:14 493:15, 19; 495:9: 519:3 specific [25] 499:8; 519:2; stopping [1] 492:14 528:11; 529:4. 7; 530:12; storage [1] 494:22 531:21; 550:7; 571:17; stream [3] 516:7: 553:16: 576:20; 588:4, 8, 10; 589:8: 583:11 596:20; 602:21; 619:9; streams [7] 508:19; 524:1; 624:13; 626:13; 629:11: 583:3, 5; 618:21; 619:3, 18 631:8: 642:16; 646:15; Street [3] 484:8, 17; 485:4 652:5; 668:9 strike [18] 503:9: 510:7; specifically [8] 493:5; 497:9; 517:15; 530:19; 540:14; 501:9; 522:8; 544:11; 574:1; 597:20: 612:20: 615:10; 644:16: 647:9 613:7; 622:1; 641:1, 8; specifics [4] 528:9; 620:5: 646:19; 650:14; 654:11; 631:9; 653:15 663:9; 668:4; 669:19 specified [2] 591:17: 594:1 studies [5] 490:20; 491:19; speculation [1] 594:5 598:6, 9 Speculative [1] 575:20 study [31 492:1: 506:14; speculative [1] 538:5 605:15 speed [1] 642:3 style [11 544:12 spend [1] 579:13 Styrene [2] 527:11; 613:8 spending [1] 579:12 styrene [40] 526:17, 20; spent [21 604:15; 616:14 527:6: 548:3: 549:10: spewing [1] 621:9 550:10. 19; 565:11; 568:17; spoke [11 576:10 604:22; 605:1, 2; 611:13; sporadically [1] 652:15 613:17; 615:10. 11. 15, 17; spot [1] 651:17 618:2, 4, 8; 619:8, 12, 19; Square [1] 485:13 620:3, 9, 13, 18; 621:4, 14, St [19] 483:19; 518:21: 17; 622:4; 627:21; 628:3, 7, 524:17; 525:1, 3, 5, 9; 11, 14; 629:11; 630:15; 540:9, 13; 569:19, 20; 631:6 570:7, 15; 575:6; 587:14; Subcommittee [2] 668:6, 7 638:12; 662:11, 20 subcommittee [1] 668:11 stacks [1] 619:21 subentry [2] 609:20, 21 staff [35] 500:19; 521:12; subject [251 498:17; 504:3; 536:2, 18; 539:16; 572:20; 507:20; 528:9, 21; 536:12; 573:2; 577:6; 582:7; 587:19. 574:10; 575:8; 576:21: 21; 588:9; 594:8; 638:20, 588:4; 589:22; 590:7, 9; 22; 639:22; 643:5; 644:21; 597:17; 598:22; 640:7; 646:13, 18, 21; 647:8; 644:17, 18; 647:10; 651:8; 652:22; 654:15; 659:2, 18; 653:7; 658:18; 666:14; 660:3, 8, 12; 661:5, 13; 670:3, 7 662:5; 666:8; 669:22; subjects [4] 507:20; 597:19; 671:21 651:13, 14 staffs [11 579:10 submission [2] 555:15; stand [4] 503:21; 504:7; 627:19 596:17; 598:10 submit [1] 632:12 stand-in [1] 659:8 Submitted [1] 613:5 stapling [1] 542:21 submitted [2] 613:17; STAR [1] 485:9 631:12 start [3] 505:17; 596:15; substance [10] 494:20; 665:1 495:4; 531:8, 11; 546:6; started [3] 494:17: 614:6; 553:5; 565:18; 618:14: 640:19 622:16; 625:10 Starting [1] 497:21 Substances [2] 631:15, 17 starting [1] 672:8 substances [11] 526:22; starts [II 508:9 549:5; 552:2; 618:21; 619:3; STATE [1] 483:1 621:13; 638:8, 13; 639:6; State [111 483:19; 571:14; 670:4 572:2, 17; 573:7, 11; Substantial [2] 631:14; 574:22; 575:5, 7; 637:13: 635:8 668:12 substantial [8] 631:12; state [111 562:14; 563:6: 632:9; 633:22; 635:17; 571:21: 572:21; 573:15, 17; 637:8, 10, 15, 21 574:4, 9, 13; 659:15 succeeded [1] 643:7 statement [5] 511:16; 524:7; successfully [1] 506:14 530:13; 578:21; 646:3 sufficient [4] 491:12: States [1] 668:15 500:11; 629:3; 653:22 states [3] 510:21; 571:6; sufficiently [l] 560:19 669:14 suggest [6J 516:11, 15: stating [1] 646:22 533:6: 553:14; 572:6; 594:7 status [13] 526:3; 544:10, suggested [1] 630:22 22; 559:14: 587:8, 22: suggestion [1] 524:2 588:7: 609:21: 610:3; suggestions [1] 521:1 suggests [2] 507:13; 559:4 Suite [1] 484:7 summarize [2] 582:13; 667:15 summarizing [1] 525:17 Summary [1] 664:20 summary [4] 525:11, 12, 14; 668:2 Superfund [5] 522:11: 642:19; 643:10; 644:14, 18 Superfunds [1] 644:19 SUPERIOR [1] 483:1 supervisors [1] 506:17 supplied [1] 509:14 supplier [5] 645:4, 10; 646:5; 647:3; 648:13 support [2] 491:8; 587:1 suppose [1] 585:9 supposed [1] 575:3 SURETY [1] 483:10 surprise [1] 542:20 surprised [2] 522:9; 586:4 Survey [1] 668:6 survey [4] 668:5, 16, 21; 669:12 survive [1] 491:4 Sutcliffe [11 484:15 system [3] 502:17; 613:22; 626:3 - T- table [61 588:6; 650:22; 651:6, 7, 21; 652:4 talk [3] 518:15; 590:4; 661:20 talked [7] 517:2; 518:22; 523:6; 524:10; 563:18; 597:22; 610:13 talking [10] 488:12; 492:20; 494:12; 505:17; 591:20; 593:15; 596:15; 609:16; 622:10; 660:10 talks [2] 583:2 tank [2] 509:17 tar [3] 627:21; 628:3, 7 target [1] 609:14 Tars [1] 602:4 tars [22] 545:20, 21; 547:21; 548:3, 10, 11, 14; 549:1, 10, 13; 550:10, 19; 555:7; 565:12, 22; 568:17; 628:11, 14 Task [1] 562:18 task [141 506:7; 535:12, 14, 19; 536:5, 9; 547:10; 559:10, 13; 563:8; 564:1; 566:9; 571:2; 574:12 team [15J 518:12, 13; 521:5, 7; 534:6; 539:19; 541:13; 582:16; 613:19; 615:5; 619:13; 620:4; 655:8; 659:21; 660:11 teams [21 494:16: 555:16 technical [1] 527:8 Technology [10] 527:7; 534:16, 19; 535:8; 539:17; 540:1, 6, 15; 560:3; 615:7 technology [8/ 534:5; 535:3; 536:22: 539:19; 556:19; 615:5; 623:4, 8 telephone [5] 518:20; 524:14; 574:21; 593:20; 655:16 telling [1] 587:5 term [10] 492:12; 556:10; 571:3; 631:11; 632:2; 648:21; 649:1, 3, 5 termed [1] 498:19 terminate [1] 585:21 terminated [2] 518:8; 520:4 termination [1] 492:11 terminology [1] 632:6 terms [9] 519:20: 524:10: 545:13; 550:13, 18, 20; 618:3: 619:10, 21 Texas [50] 500:19; 503:10; 507:14; 510:2, 10; 522:13; 525:6; 526:2, 16; 527:18; 539:11, 13, 20; 540:15; 541:2, 9; 546:3, 12; 547:12; 549:15, 19; 550:4; 553:6; 556:11, 19; 560:5; 568:20; 569:2, 14; 573:6, 20; 604:12; 605:4: 606:8, 15, 19; 607:1; 615:4, 8, 9; 628:7; 630:11; 637:13; 644:5; 667:3, 8. 11; 668:12 Thank [2] 500:1; 604:8 Thanks [2] 590:5; 630:8 that'll [1] 642:3 theme [1] 534:2 They'd [11 652:17 they'd [1] 661:7 they're [5] 574:10; 575:2; 609:16; 622:10; 659:9 thick [1] 491:8 thinking [6] 514:15; 525:16; 528:11: 543:14; 551:13; 624:4 third [3] 515:5; 582:17; 601:12 Thomas [4] 484:8; 508:1, 3; 647:21 thorough [2J 645:13, 21 three [12] 496:15; 533:19; 534:2, 4; 539:21; 586:13; 603:10; 640:17, 18; 641:6; 652:10, 16 three-hour [2] 661:12 three-page [1] 500:5 Throdahl [91 535:22; 536:1, 5, 17, 21; 537:3; 543:16; 594:8; 653:1 throw [1] 645:22 throwing [1] 647:18 thrown [3] 536:8; 621:3, 5 ticket [1] 561:16 tie [2] 650:3 ties [21 602:4; 652:7 tight [1J 512:2 till [1] 661:8 times [1] 650:15 timing [1] 644:9 Title [1] 551:1 title [51 539:18; 540:5; 614:18; 659:3; 660:15 titles [21 496:17; 573:16 toluene [11 623:12 Tom [2] 656:17; 664:10 topic [31 529:5, 7; 644:20 TOSCA [12] 631:14, 22; 632:6, II; 634:1, 14; 635:1, 18; 636:3, 17; 637:8, 22 total [3] 611:1; 632:20; 664:4 totally [21 607:10; 619:13 Toth [71 648:3, 6; 649:18; 651:4; 652:12; 655:20; 656:2 touch [I] 575:15 touched [2] 498:17; 651:15 touching [1/ 597:12 towards [1] 609:7 Toxic [2] 631:15, 17 toxicity [1] 598:9 transfer [1] 504:5 transferred [1] 642:11 transit [2] 511:12; 514:18 translated [1] 530:16 Transmittal [1] 635:7 transmittal [5] 515:14; 560:12; 561:4, 17. 22 transmittals [1] 515:2 transported [1] 508:19 TRAVELERS f1] 485:1 treat [I] 602:4 treatment [2] 645:5; 647:4 triggered [5] 499:8; 504:18: 505:6; 514:14; 535:9 trips [1] 659:12 truck [15] 509:16; 546:3, 6. 13, 15; 548:3, 6, 19; 549:15, 19; 550:4, 9; 551:7. 556:11, 16 trucked [I] 625:22 trucking [1] 511:11 trucks [1] 509:17 true [7] 438:14; 507:4; 541:7; 547:8; 555:18; 655:1: 672:1 tuned [4] 575:3; 620:4; 658:19; 659:16 Turning [1] 601:12 tutored [1] 622:10 two-page [3] 503:8; 557:4; 592:21 type [181 501:20, 22; 504:1. 2, 6; 509:14; 514:16, 17: 515:10; 537:18; 571:18: 592:6; 602:21; 606:5: 607:11; 614:3; 640:7; 641:10 typed [1] 567:9 types [5] 492:11; 501:2; 514:16; 603:18; 664:16 typewritten [1] 566:19 typical [1] 640:7 typing [1] 564:19 - U- Uh [1] 506:10 ultimate [2] 585:9, 15 unacceptable [2] 586:20; 587:5 undergo [2] 586:4; 605:15 understand [191 488:8; 515:22; 547:6; 548:15; 550:22; 583:6; 584:2, 3; 602:22; 603:9, 14; 604:3, 8: 614:1, 21; 633:21; 659:21: 672:19 understanding [12] 489:13: 506:6; 509:10; 527:10; 552:7; 571:9; 595:15; 610:1: 623:7, 15; 651:19; 660:2 Understood [2] 517:1; 625:15 understood [16] 488:12; 489:7; 509:9; 510:11; 559:21; 572:1; 589:14; 590:16, 18; 595:2, 8; 598:8: 600:3; 604:2; 617:19; 638:6 underway [1] 598:7 undesirable [6] 489:12; 490:5, 10, 14, 16; 651:16 uneasy [1] 519:17 unfortunately [1] 561:13 Union [11 631:7 uniquely [1] 503:21 unit [3/ 534:20; 605:2; 615:15 United [1] 668:15 units [4] 526:15: 527:11; 612:16; 632:4 University [2] 492:4, 5 unlikely [3] 541:5; 551:12: 648:5 unusual [2] 650:14; 656:1 up-to-date [3] 545:16; From speakers to up-to-date WATER PCB-SD0000063788 BSA Depo of: WILLIAM B. PAPAGEORGE Monsanto v Aetna February 9, 1993 CR: 54365.0 596:16: 652:4 we're [71 497:9: 505:7; update [II 544:14 530:3, 4; 543:10; 596:15: updates [1] 642:19 660:10 Upgrade [11 537:15 We've [61 500:5; 579:19; upper [3/ 564:11: 580:17; 610:20: 632:16; 641:18; 672:8 670:21 uses [9j 489:13, 15, 21; we've [16] 524:10: 532:10; 494:5 , 9. 16 , 21; 620:13; 545:18; 549:14; 554:19; 621:18 557:3; 560:4, 11: 565:11; Utilize 111 581:9 588:14; 600:9, 20; 605:16; utilize [11 581:15 627:17; 632:17; 669:7 - V- wearing [1] 536:13 week [3] 499:18; 661:13, 17 vacations [I] 659:11 weekly [4] 659:18: 660:3, 8: ague [17] 488:18; 493:22; 661:5 495:5; 509:3: 514:8; 531:10; weeks [1] 496:15 538:2; 552:14; 553:12; Weishaar [71 639:18: 555:1; 569:5; 575:20; 657:20, 22; 658:4, 12; 615:19; 622:19; 638:15; 660:9; 671:1 639:3: 659:7 well-known [1] 636:21 vagueness [1] 666:16 Weren't [1] 585:12 valuable [2/ 553:21; 623:9 weren't [1] 625:14 value 14] 583:11, 12; WGK [11 577:22 622:21 whereas [1] 583:11 vantage [1] 612:4 whereby [4] 612:9: 628:14; varied [1] 509:21 638:8, 13 vents [II 619:21 Whereupon [1] 673:5 version [7] 567:6; 581:14: wherever [1] 511:5 583:22: 585:17, 18; 608:8; wild [1] 491:5 625:17 wildlife [1/ 491:10 versus [I] 525:13 Wiley [11 485:3 via [II 518:20 WILLIAM [11 483:17 Vice-President [1] 558:11 William [11 488:4 rice-president [1] 641:4 Wilmington [1] 485:14 view [8/ 508:15, 16; 509:1, Wink [4] 632:2; 634:9, 12; 4: 576:11, 14: 578:21; 637:4 648:11 wish [41 519:7; 520:8: vimtally [3] 489:16; 573:17; 549:7; 647:14 654:22 withdrawal [1] 598:5 visit [9/ 507:15; 512:15; withhold [31 510:21; 511:7, 519:17; 520:9; 526:2; 568:7; 9 597:16; 607:17; 663:1 WITNESS [41 484:3; 498:7; visits [41 597:3, 10, 11; 633:1, 3 607:19 Witness [25] 500:12: vivid [11 556:16 505:14; 532:8, 17; 557:11; vividly [4] 493:18; 499:5; 558:1: 560:16, 20; 577:15; 527:16: 545:6 579:18: 580:3; 592:19; VOLUME [I/ 483:15 593:8: 600:8, 17: 608:5; volume [1/ 493:20 611:3; 627:15: 629:5; 633:2,-\ volunteer [1] 662:7 641:17, 22; 642:8; 654:2; vs [I/ 483:8 671:3 witness [1] 598:18 - W-11 wondering [1] 613:16 wait [2! 518:19; 629:16 wanted [22] 521:3, 7; 526:2; 530:19; 557:20; 578:5: 586:20; 590:14, 20; 599:12; 614:2, 11; 617:20; 621:18: 658:5; 661:19; 662:19, 22; 664:10; 665:14; 666:4; 667:10 wanting [1] 670:14 Washington [2! 484:9; 485:5 Waste [1] 623:9 waste [29] 501:2; 508:19; 516:7: 524:1: 537:13; 583:3, 5. 11; 621:3, 13, 19; 622:3, 14.18; 623:3; 625:6, 9, 10; 645:5; 647:3: 666:12; 667:3, 11. 21; 668:2, 16: 670:3, 8 wastes [1] 670:9 wastewater [1] 619:18 watching [11 655:11 Water [1] 573:20 water [1] 491:4 wavs 131 578:21: 617:10, 13 We'd [II 661:10 we d [21 590:4; 610:15 We're [2] 492:20: 665:21 word [17] 506:3, 18; 507:1, 4. 8; 515:2; 528:9: 553:7, 8, 15; 566:19; 570:6: 599:8; 621:6; 645:20, 22; 649:21 words [81 527:7; 534:2; 541:19; 562:4; 597:11; 627:8; 655:15; 661:11 wore [1] 600:3 work [41 545:7; 554:11; ! 610:14; 671:17 | worked [3] 627:8: 643:19; | 666:8 | workers [1] 508:18 j working [8] 535:22; 581:1; \ 618:10: 632:2, 5: 635:21: | 660:1; 666:7 workplace [1] 620:2 Worldwide [1] 608:15 worldwide [5] 588:15, 18. 21; 589:1; 594:2 worry [1] 647:19 wouldn't [7] 502:6; 531:7; 537:21; 542:20; 556:6: 594:6: 656:1 write-up [1] 501:22 writing [1] 517:20 written [3] 511:15; 607:18: 635:12 wrong [7] 540:3, 4: 570:6: 578:20; 630:4: 631:3 wrote [81 514:20; 515:1; 517:11; 523:21; 554:21; 555:22; 623:13; 645:2 Wye [11 607:1 , j 1 i | - Y- Yeah [101 531:11; 557:15; 572:15: 609:22; 613:3; 614:5: 620:14; 660:20; 661:14; 672:5 yeah [5] 572:16; 575:22; 577:9: 618:3; 660:20 year [5J 524:17; 546:20; 587:11; 613:14; 660:10 years [10] 504:7; 587:14; 588:19; 609:15; 616:15, 18, 19; 625:14; 650:13; 652:15 yesses [1] 610:4 yesterday [1] 498:13 you'd [1] 585:9 You'll [31 498:5; 581:18; 623:12 you'll [121 546:1; 552:17; 565:5, 21; 582:17; 584:13; 595:19; 624:14; 625:4; 629:13; 645:1; 668:19 you've [14] 499:13; 500:10: 526:4; 532:15; 537:5; 557:9; 560:18; 579:21; 592:7: 600:13; 622:16; 629:3; 632:21: 653:22 yours [5] 516:22; 532:22; 563:20; 672:6 yourself [8] 507:15; 560:19; 572:18; 600:14; 619:6; 634:18; 646:11; 654:14 i I update to yourself Look-See(421 WATER PCB-SD0000063789 Deposition, ot WILLIAM B. PAt'AGAUKCfci, y -- lu irepruary i^^j. Page Line CORRECTIONS TO DEPOSITION Correction: 7 1 do*'] mind bcirUj called Ha tty. To/ 2- 4^ pts , rea f Icj: tnr, boh'd ouisie. Qnd ouairr/ a*i<d 3<? 0*1 . ToL '3 plant- manager* u net hi-5 ** cegptnne e. of- +ha Uia^e* t /'/ <7<7t/ 512. m i dossier. X atarx^'h rcccxll eaer hAu,n^q f^ped li$i +b<\j* 528 *bp&c.i ti'c `bo'bfcc.t , 6</^ ^ou o bed He. word `'c&n-Umfi latcct * -Hre~ 511 is ~Tkc*- 4-tjpc* whtre. CL> material from thon64d4v, eocld /><=>_ 553 11 Cornet uthich nouj, And afkr p<r ^ornuncj ,-/j -funoinm <=mol <5 59 z. (qle**, <e? ^9r. Wieure,, "There. ut/gre*------- 51 8 9 5^8 [U (p$o Z2- 1*5+ L> 3 la G 1 18 1 n YYiedical 4v'f.icih^ $4-udies t +hc biode^radahttto `$4-c'diesJ T Aamt dmew X yyionioned i4-* X u^<t6 Wtof i 4* X 5 (Sife^kct -Hi e name. PeUr Ber-lead ? Goulet dll X. can recall <*/a$ tThbb 5 r i m nr) uu4 6 inuoll><d Qrramtje -Cor +hc. I'-e.i/ieuJ, X doyj't ire member i-p t bi/t the re. a^ahn , X *n Ay 1*7o 5 X-f- tuab , i f arose. more Ph<tn once.. UK n X do~ni b+u)t4J houj to oL-gscn be- , describe^ i j- at 704 7 (4pr\[ 5, ft)r. Boe^ch u/ab +he. Sbneral WlayiAefCn cf izl 9 ^ourbe , X uua s a.u*are. ot Hie SA* 1* ^ interest /n +he. site. 19 + ?G3 nz 12. 5 >+ G i X" do Oof rgnnembcr "^hii artici-e. Th4 X d<hn'4~ recall . 7E A4niur +^a4 wat> one cf Ol)t X dayx'-h idmaiAj fMa (- X would <ca 1 j if- (o^tca/ 'i-hts i* 4erm$ o{ 'l^olu's results Qnd fthruzania's opinion cf t'he^ WATER PCB-SD0000063790