Document GKVaekyZLpk9RzdL4DJ2K51pY

<V' 'C GREENSBORO DAILY NEWS pc (^>w -- Section 1 . Friday January 14,1972 j Monsanto Co. Files Denial In PCB Case BY DAVID S. GREENE ` Dolly New* Slofl Writer The Monsanto Co., a leading producer of industrial chemi cals, has claimed it hear* r.o or liability for damages resulting from the con tamination of fish meal in a pasteurizing process at Wilming ton. . i Monsanto, replying to a $68- million suit filed against ft and several other firms by Holiv^ (TFarms Poultry Industries Inc. of ; Wilkes CdiiiiTy, alleged acts of negligence by the designers, fab , ricators and operators cf the pasteurizing system "were the i efficient and proximate causes j of any damages that may have been suffered." Hollv Farms, which seeks $56 million from Monsanto alone, filed the suit after destroying i thousands of chickens and.eggs j it said had been contaminated : by a chemical, polychlorinated ; biphenyl (PCB), which had : leaked into fish meal that was sold to it for use as chicken- feed. ** MONSANTO supplied the chemical as a heat exchange j fluid in the pasteurizing svstem. j and Kelly Farms alleged the i chemical manufacturer violated (See Monsanto: B-6. Col. 1) n -prv .... 7 mwv^uz. -Xj!-J'fi'XT_ JFi. kfOCo I *t*ibilitv For-Damages Monsanto asked that if any ; From B-I judgment is ultimatelv enter- j ed against it in the case that it = its own safety code by continu ing to supply fluid when it should have discovered that it was shipping fluid to replace that lost by leakage. Monsanto replied that it "had no knowledge of the ownership or operation of the pasteurizing machine at Wilmington, North Carolina, but it has since been informed and believes that this machine was operated by South Pacific Protein Association Inc. and under its sole and exclusive control and direction." "It would have been neglig ence for those in charge of operating and maintaining the pasteurizing machine to operate it while the chemical heat ex change fluid was leaking from its container into the fish meal, be allowed to recover the | amount from the other firms, j and declared it "p!eads the utv. j foreseen and unforeseeable in- | tervening. insulating ncgligance ; of the designers, fabricators and | operators ir, bar of any recovery' : by the plaintiff against this de fendant." * THE CHEMICAL company also said the fluid in question, bearing the trade name Thermi- i no! FR-i, was shipped during i 1971 in containers bearing labels j "clearly setting forth precau- | tions to be observed in the use i and handling cf the product." A copy of the label bore this statement: "This product con ! tains polycholrinated biphenyl* ! which some studies have shewn j ami ii wuuid have been danger ous lor such persons operating the pasteurizing machine iu con tinue to operate the same know ing or having reason to know that the heat exchange fluid was leaking from its container into the fish meal," Monsanto said. Asking dismissal of the suit, Monsanto cited as one defense Holly Farms' failure to name the William J. Moran Co. and Western precipitation Division of Joy Manufacturing Co. par ties in the action. Monsanto said these firms "are needed for just adjudication." ' ' * HOLLY FARMS had men tetriiiiidiil. aucine caie snumu i Krt 4n *rv onrrv I I Jl l U MIC Citr uurirliCiU. j spills, leakage, use. disposal, va- j porization or otherwise. Contact 1 your Monsanto representative j regarding reclamation or dispos- | al of used fluid." . Monsanto also alleged the leak was known to the operators of the device, that they sought re- ; pairs by "persons incompetent ! and unskilled as to repair of j such equipment." The device op- j erators, Monsanto added, contin- ! used to use the device after repair attempts were unsuccess- i ful. . i tioned the firms in its suit, The other firms named in the ; identifying them in connection suit have not yet fiied answers ! with the purchase and installa to Holly Farms' claims. .: tion of the pasteurizing device.' Other parties in the'suit, | which was transferred in Nov- ember from Wilkes Superior Court to U.S. Middle District Court at Greenshoro at the re quest of Monsanto, were identi fied by Holly Farms as follows: East Coast Terminals Inc., owner of facilities at the Fort of Wilmington; South Pacific Pro tein Association, which leased a portion of a port warehouse where the device was located: and the Wilbur-Eilis Co. and International Proteins Cor p., . which Holly Farms said sold it : DSW 325489 the contaminated fish meal. i STLCOPCB4075580