Document Jrj7Dv2EQk89vXnyvXza9gao6

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEVADA NEVADA POWER COMPANY, ) ) ) Plaintiff, )' -vs- ) ) # CV-89-555-LDG ) MONSANTO COMPANY, GENERAL ) ELECTRIC CORPORATION, et al., ) ) Defendants. ) (LRL ) DEPOSITION OF JOHN H. CRADDOCK On the part of the Plaintiff March 19, 1993 GJConcannon & Jaeger General Court Reporters 705 Olive Street, Suite 604 St. Louis, Missouri 63101 (314) 421-1000 COMPU TB K A 113BU *TKAPiSUKlFTl UJM 1 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEVADA 2 3 NEVADA POWER COMPANYr ) ) 4) Plaintiff, ) 5 -vs- ) 6 MONSANTO COMPANY, GENERAL 7 ELECTRIC CORPORATION, et al*, ) ) ) ) 8 Defendants ) ) # CV-89-555-LDG(LRL) 9 10 * * * 11 I N D E X 12 WITNESS: / Page: 13 JOHN H. CRADDOCK y 14 Direct Examination by Mr* Bradley .............. 4 15 16 EXHIBITS 17 Deposition Exhibit $ 1373. . . . .................... 33 18 Deposition Exhibit # 1220.............. * ............ 47 19 Deposition Exhibit #1224......... 20 49 Deposition Exhibit 1532............................ 50 21 Deposition Exhibit # 1234........................ * * 54 22 Deposition Exhibit 1232......... 55 23 Deposition Exhibit #979 ............................ 62 24 25 -2- CONCANNON & JAEGER COM FU TU K Al U UU TKAWUK1 FT1UN 1 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEVADA 2 .3 NEVADA POWER COMPANY , ) ) 4 Plaintiff, ) 5 -VS- ) ) # CV-89-555-LDG (LRL) ) 6) MONSANTO COMPANY, GENERAL ) 7 ELECTRIC CORPORATION, et al., ) Defendants. ) 8 9 DISCOVERY DEPOSITION OF WITNESS, to be used in an 10 action pending in the District Court of the United States, 11 for the District of Nevada, wherein NEVADA POWER COMPANY is 12 Plaintiff, and MONSANTO COMPANY, et al. are Defendants, 13 pursuant to Notice, under the provisions of Rule 26 of the 14 Rules of Civil Procedure, taken on March 19, 1993, at the 15 law offices of Messrs. Husch & Eppenberger, 100 North 16 Broadway, St. Louis, Missouri, before John T. Concannon, a 17 Notary Public within and for the State of Missouri. 18 A P P E A R A N C E S 19 The Plaintiff was represented by Mr. Ralph A. Bradley, of the law firm of Bradley & Merrell, c/o Jones, 20 Jones, Close & Brown, 300 South Fourth Street, Ste. 700, Las Vegas, Nevada, 89101. 21 The Defendant, Monsanto Company, was represented by 22 Mr. Bruce A. Featherstone, of the law firm of Kirkland & Ellis, 1999 Broadway, Ste. 4000, Denver Colorado, 80202. 23 24 25 -3 CONCANNON & JAEGER COMPUTE K AI 13ttD 'JL'MAl^jbUK1 'TJLULM 1 JOHN H. CRADDOCK, PhD 2 a witness of lawful age, being first sworn to tell the .3 truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, deposes 4 and says as follows; 5 DIRECT EXAMINATION 6 QUESTIONS BY MR. BRADLEY; 7 Q. Mr. Craddock, my name is Ralph Bradley and I 8 introduced myself to you just a few moments ago, correct? 9 A. Correct. 10 Q. I represent Nevada Power Company in a lawsuit 11 that they brought against Monsanto, General Electric and 12 Westinghouse. You understand that, don't you? 13 A. Yes, I do. 14 Q. Are you here, today, represented by an 15 attorney? 16 A. Mr. Featherstone. 17 Q. If, during the course of the deposition, I ask 18 a question that's not clear, will you tell me? 19 A. Certainly. 20 Q And if, at any time, you want to take a break. 21 just let us know and we'll accommodate you, all right? 22 A. That's fine. 23 Q. Have you had your deposition taken before? 24 A. Yes, I have. 25 Q. When? - 4CONCANNON & JAEGER CJUI-lir'UTijiri al'idliu rj.j. 1 A. Two or three times probably. The latest may 2 be a year-and-a-half ago, two years ago. Something like .3 that. 4 Q. And where was it that your deposition was 5 taken a year-and-a-half ago? 6 A. It was here, in St. Louis. 7 Q. And in what kind of case? 8 A. It was a environmental cleanup case. 9 Q. Involving what product or chemical? 10 A. It was involving PCBs. 11 Q, Do you remember the name of the case? 12 A. I think I was Thoreau Die Casting versus 13 Monsanto. 14 Q. Do you recall what the general areas you 15 covered in your deposition? 16 A* Vaguely. Some health effects, some regulatory 17 matters; general chemical and physical properties of PCBs, 18 things like that. 19 Q. All right. Prior to that, when did you have 20 your deposition taken? 21 A. It was probably a year, couple of years 22 earlier than that. 23 Q. In what case did you give testimony in, in 24 that matter? 25 A. I think it vias known as the One Marketplace - 5-- CONCANNON & JAEGER COMPUTER AIDED TRANSCRIPT!UK 1 case* 2 Q. And what was the general subject matter of 3 what you testified to in your deposition in that case? 4 MR. FEATHERSTONE: Well, as I said before, Mr, 5 Bradley, that's covered by a confidentiality protective 6 agreement order and for the same reasons, he won't describe 7 that* You know he testified there. I let him answer that 8 question, or he gave a deposition. 9 MR. BRADLEY: All right. As long as it's 10 clear I'm not waiving my right to question him in the event 11 you're wrong, 12 MR. FEATHERSTONE: I didn't ask you to waive 13 your right. I understand. 14 MR, BRADLEY: Well, let me ask it this way. 15 To make the record clear, are you instructing him not to 16 answer 17 MR. FEATHERSTONE: I am. 18 MR. BRADLEY: Okay. 19 Q. (By Mr. Bradley) Prior to that, when did you 20 give a deposition? 21 A. I don't specifically remember another case but 22 I may have or I may not. 23 Q. Did you keep copies of the transcripts of your 24 deposition? 25 A. No. -6CONCANNON & JAEGER COMPUTER AIDED TKANCKiPXIUH 1 Q. Have you testified in any trials? 2 A. I think the only thing I've testified in was 3 the One Market Plaza case. 4 Q. And the testimony you gave in the One 5 Marketplace case was in addition to the deposition you gave 6 in that case? 7 A. I believe that's correct. 8 Q. Did you review any documents in preperation 9 for today's deposition? 10 A. Yes. 11 Q. What documents did you review? 12 A. General literature that had to do with PCBs, 13 historical actions, publications. 14 Q. Did you seek out that literature yourself or 15 is that literature that was provided to you? 16 A. I provided a list of documents and it was 17 provided to me by counsel. 18 Q. Okay. To whom did you provide the list of 19 documents? 20 A. Mr. Featherstone. 21 Q. Do you recall what the titles were of any of 22 those documents? 23 MR. PEATHERSTONE: Well, which ones now, Mr. 24 Bradley? 25 MR. BRADLEY: The ones that he reviewed. 7CONCANNON & JAEGER COMPUTER AIDED TRANSCRIPTION 1 MR. FEATHERSTONE: Okay. 2 A, I don't recall specific titles, no. 3 Q. (By Mr. Bradley) Why don't you tell me what 4 you do recall about the documents you reviewed? 5 A. I asked for some generic -- 6 MR. FEATHERSTONE: No* No, Dr. Craddock. in 7 response to that question, identify - to the extent you can 8 -- the documents that you reviewed. 9 A. Okay. I looked at documents that had, by 10 Jacobson and documents by Greta Fine, and some documents by 11 Walter Rogan* I looked at some documents by Dr. Renata 12 Kimbrough; I looked at some documents submitted to the 1981 13 EPA rule-making by the Chemical Manufacturers Association 14 trade groups; I looked at copies of the Materials Safety 15 Data Sheet for PCBs which I had generated previously; I 16 looked at some documents that were published by EPRI 17 Electric Power Research Institute, had to do with 18 transformers that contained PCBs and other electrical 19 devices; I looked at -- LEt's see. Reviewed articles of 20 health effects of PCBs that was put together by Dr. Gaffey 21 and published. 22 Q. (By Mr. Bradley) And published? 23 A. And published. That's generally most of it. 24 Q. Do you recall the date of the EPRI material 25 that you reviewed? -8CONCANNON & JAEGER COMPUTER AIDED TRANSCRIPTION 1 A. It was material from roughly 1982 to -- The 2 last conference was 1991. .3 Q. Did you review any EPRI material that was 4 generated in the 1970s? 5 A. No. 6 Q. 1960s? 7 A. NO. B Q, Is Greta Fine a researcher? 9 A. Yes. 10 Q. Jacobson is a researcher? 11 A. Correct. 12 Q. Water Rogan is a researcher? 13 A. That's correct. 14 Q. Renata Kimbrough is a researcher? 15 A. Yes. 16 Q. Do you know the article, or excuse me, the 17 date of the article by Dr. Gaffey? 18 A. The -- I think the document that I looked at 19 was a 1981 document that was submitted as an appendix to 20 the Chemical Manufacturers Association comments to EPA. I 21 think it was subsequently published in Peer Review Journal 22 in *82 or *83. First document was a draft of an oral 23 presentation that he had made, preprint. 24 Q. I 'm going to ask you some questions about your 25 educational background -9CONCANNON & JAEGER (JU[-1i'UXEK A 1LiEiu IKttWS JXrxVti 1 A. Okay. 2 0. Where did you attend college? .3 A* Undergraduate school was Memphis State 4 University. 5 Q. Did you receive a degree from Memphis State? 6 A. Yes. A B.S. Degree. 7 Q. In what? 8 A* Chemistry. 9 Q In what year? 10 A 1958. 11 Q. What did you do upon completion of your 12 Bachelor 1s degree? 13 A* I went immediately to graduate school. 14 Q. Where? 15 A. Vanderbilt University in Nashville, Tennessee. 16 Q. I*m sorry? 17 A. Vanderbilt. 18 Q- Vanderbilt. Did you receive a graduate degree 19 from Vanderbilt? 20 A. Yes, I did. 21 Q. What degree? 22 A. Ph.D. in Chemistry. 23 0. In what year? 24 A. 1961. 25 Q. And was your Ph.D. in a particular area of - 10 CONCANNON & JAEGER COMPUTER AIDED TRANSCRIPTION 1 chemistry? 2 A. Inorganic chemistry. .3 Q. What is inorganic chemistry? 4 A. Inorganic chemistry is the chemistry of other 5 than carbon animals primarily. Q. What did you do for work upon completion of 7 your Ph.D? 8 A. I was employed by the M.D. Kellogg Company in 9 New York City, New York, 10 MR. FEATHERSTONE: N or M? 11 A. M. 12 MR. FEATHERSTONE: M? 13 A. Mother. 14 Q- (By Mr. Bradley) Was that in 1961? 15 A, 1961, correct. 16 Q. What was your job title there? 17 A. I think it w.as a research chemist, or research 18 specialist. 19 Q. And what kind of work did you do? 20 A. I investigated petrochemical catalytic 21 reactions using pressure metal atoms in solution. 22 Q. How long did you have that job? 23 A, I was with M. W. Kellogg until 1965. 24 Q. What did you do in 1965? 25 A. I joined Monsanto Company, St. Louis. - 11 CONCANNON & JAEGER COMPUTER A 1 UEU TKfiNSltti'Tiuiv 1 Q. Why did you join Monsanto? 2 A* Very good opportunity for a significant .3 promotion - group leader. Starting up a group of chemists 4 in this particular field, which was a hot field of 5 chemistry at the time. 6 Q. Were you solicited -- Was your employment 7 solicited or did you apply for a job? 8 A. No. I applied for a job. 9 Q. What was your job title when you began work 10 with Monsanto? 11 A. Again, it was something like a research 12 chemist. Maybe a research specialist* 13 Q. And what kind of work did you do as a research 14 specialist in 1965 with Monsanto? 15 A. I did exploratory work in chemistry of 16 petrochemicals. Catalytic chemistry, catalytic reaction 17 with precious metals. 18 Q. Similar to the work you did with M* W. 19 Kellogg? 20 A. Correct. 21 Q* How long did you have that job title? 22 A. Probably six months to a year. 23 Q* What was your next job title? 24 A. I think it was -- Whatever the title 25 research chemist or research specialist, it was more or - 12 CONCANNON 6 JAEGER COMPUTER AIDED TRANSCRIPTION 1 less a payroll category, which made me a senior staff 2 member. I had junior members that worked for me then. .3 Q. And were you doing the same type of work? 4 A. Yes. 5 Q. What was your next jobtitle with Monsanto? 6 A. Research group leader. 7 Q, When were you a research group leader? ^ 8 A. I started in '65. Probably *67 to *69, 9 something like that. 10 Q. What did you do as a research group leader? 11 A. I conducted research myself and managed a 12 small group of other chemists and chemical engineers doing 13 catalytic chemistry. 14 Q. Also with petrochemicalreactions involving 15 precious metals? 16 A. Right. 17 Q. When was your next job title change? 18 A. Probably in about *71, '72. Somewhere in that 19 time frame. 20 Q. My notes indicate,you were a research group 21 leader beginning in *67 and going to "69? is that correct? 22 A. Whenever the next job was. It was research 23 group leader one and research group leader two. These are 24 pay scale changes. 25 Q. And then what job title did you get in *71 or - 13 CONCANNON & JAEGER COMPUTER AIDED TRANSCRIPTION 1 *727 2 A* I moved to the title of supervisor of .3 commercial development. 4 Q. What work did you do as supervisor of 5 commercial development? 6 A. This was a, sort of an interim position. The 7 director of the central research department was trying to 8 move projects faster from research into the operating units 9 of Monsanto. Central research is considered a corporate IO function. Manufacturing was done in operating companies 11 which had profit responsibilities. This was a trial 12 program to see if they could take an active researcher, or 13 research manager who had moved projects to a certain stage 14 which were ready for commercialization and to move them 15 faster into commercialization by transferring the research 16 manager with the project. 17 Q. How long were you supervisor of commercial 18 development? 19 A. This particular function, probably a 20 year-and-a-half, two years. Something like that. 21 Q. What products were you working with as 22 supervisor of commercial development? 23 A. Originally, it was the manufacture of acidic 24 acids, approprionic acid. Petrochemical base products of 25 that type. - 14 CONCANNON & JAEGER i\lULtu rvfM.'iu>\-x\.j.r j.j-'-m.i 1 Q. And did the type of product you worked with 2 change? .3 A. Yes. I moved in this function into what was 4 known then as the hydrocarbons and polymers division, which 5 was in charge of large volume petrochemical derived 6 products. 7 Q. Did -- Well, you said you moved into the 8 hydrocarbons and polymer division. Was that part of a 9 different division or department? 10 A. Yes. That subsequently became the, almost 11 like an operating company. 12 Q. And in the corporate structure of Monsanto, to 13 whom did the hydrocarbons and polymer division report to? 14 A. Well, it had its own division general manager, 15 who subsequently reported up to the, I think to the 16 chairman and CEO. 17 Q. Did the hydrocarbons and polymer division 18 include production containing PCBs? 19 A. No. 20 Q. What did you do next for employment within 21 Monsanto? 22 A. I subsequently was transferred from the 23 hydrocarbons/polymers division to Monsanto Industrial 24 Chemicals Company, Pood and Pine Chemicals Division. 25 Q. What was the Monsanto Industrial Chemicals - 15 CONCANNON & JAEGER COMPUTER A 1US1; TKftrJsiKJ-v l ulv 1 Company? 2 A. That was the company that had profit .3 responsibility for industrial chemicals, which were sort of 4 intermediate volume things that were generally sold to 5 other companies or industries for manufacturing purposes. 6 Q. Are you familiar with the letters put 7 together, MCS? 8 A. Well, that's -- I think that acronym stood 9 for several things over the years, okay? 10 Q. What has it stood for over the years, by 11 years? 12 A. It's hard to -- At times in research, it 13 stood for Monsanto Company Symposia. They would have their 14 own series of lectures and visiting dignitaries that would 15 come in and give essentially technical presentations in the 16 research center. It was called an MCS series chemical 17 symposium. I think at one time, it referred to part of the 18 computerisation effort within Monsanto. They were trying 19 to develop a group -- A group was trying to standardise 20 all computers throughout the company on research. People 21 had one kind of computer, everybody had other different 22 things. That was corporate research. Different operating 23 units, whether they were divisions or companies, and these 24 names changed from time-to-time, their own separate 25 department would have whatever type of computer system they - 16 CONCANNON 6 JAEGER COMPUTER AIDED TRANSCKiPTlUft 1 wanted. They were trying to develope a Monsanto computer 2 system so that everybody would have the same type of .3 machine, and they could talk to each other and transfer 4 data and disks, and it had something to do with that at one 5 point. At one point in time, it had to do with a Monsanto 6 chemical sample identification. 7 Q. When does it have to do with a Monsanto 8 chemical sample identification? 9 A. Ever since I've been at Monsanto, it's had to 10 do with that. When you're in research, you develop a new 11 composition or a new composition to Monsanto, you send it 12 to the library information center and if it was something 13 new or different, you'd get an MC5 number. It was just a 14 means for internal identification while they were pursuing 15 whether it's patentable or a different formulation or 16 however it was handled. Primarily, it had to do with the 17 old organic division, I think, and it's probably still 18 used. I don't know if they still do it, but the numbers 19 still exist. 20 Q. Do you know whether, if a product manufactured 21 by Monsanto originated with an MCS number, whether it 22 always maintained it's - it was always identified by that 23 MCS number? 24 A. Well, that MCS was unique. It represented a 25 specific product or formulation or compound or something. - 17 CONCANNON JAEGER COMPUTER AIDED TKANSUKIRTI UM 1 It may take on other names when it became commercialized, 2 it dropped the MCS name, but it was -- You know, the MCS .3 number was never issued to another entity. It's like a 4 social security number. One owner has that. 5 Q, Roughly, what year did you transfer to the 6 Monsanto Industrial Chemicals Company? 7 A. Probably about *74, somewhere in that time 8 frame. 9 Q. And you were with the Pood and Fine Chemicals 10 Division? 11 A. That's correct. 12 Q. What did you do with that work? 13 A. I was a manager of commercial development, 14 working in the area of food addivites. Primarily, food 15 preservatives. 16 Q. How long did you have that job? 17 A. Until 1977. 18 Q. What did^you do in1977? 19 A. 1977, I remained in Monsanto Industrial 20 Chemicals Company and transferred to the newly formed 21 Environmental Operations Department. 22 Q. What was the Environmental Operations ^ 23 Department when you transferred to it in 1977? 24 A. It was a new department. It was in its 25 infancy. It was established to provide information to the - 18 - CONCANNON & JAEGER COMPUTER AIDED TRANSCRIPTION 1 operating plants about the new environmental regulations 2 which were just coming in. It was just after the TSCA Act .3 was passed and the RCRA Act was fixing to be passed, or 4 several very important environmental laws came in about 5 this time. So this was a unit within the Industrial 6 Chemicals Company which operated thirty-odd plants in this 7 country at the time and several in Europe, to provide 8 uniform information, uniform systems for the recordkeeping 9 and for compliance and whatever, with the environmental 10 regulations which were just beginning to be passed and coroe 11 into being. 12 Q. What was your title when you worked with the 13 environmental operations department? 14 A. Something like manager of product safety, or 15 something like that. 16 Q. The whom did you report? 17 A. To Robert Nelson. 18 Q. And was what Robert Nelson's position when you 19 were reporting to him? 20 A. He was the director of this group. I'm trying 21 to think what his title was. May be Director of 22 Environmental Affairs, or something like that. 23 Q. Whatever his title was, he was director of the 24 Environmental Operations Department? 25 A. No. There was a separate title, a DEO, and - 19 i CONCANNON & JAEGER <JU['It'llTilK UUIU r i.vn 1 that was occupied by another person who had the title of 2 DEO. .3 Q,, All right. And who was the head of the DEO? 4 A. The DE for the industrials chemicals company 5 was a man by the name of Dr. Clayton Callis. 6 Q. C-a-1-1 -- 7 A. - i-s. 8 Q. "DEO" is the Department of Environmental 9 Operations? 10 A. Director of the Environmental Operations. 11 Q, What work did you do as manager of product 12 safety? 13 A. I was responsible for regulations which were 14 being promulgated under the Toxic Substances Control Act, 15 and seeing that these were implemented within the operating 16 plants for MCC? I was responsible for work that was 17 required to produce material safety data sheets, or I 18 worked with other people that would make sure we had that 19 information, and the sheets were up-to-date and so forth; 20 did some work with that. I did things generally that came 21 under the new TOSKA law. There were certain recordkeeping, 22 reporting requirements, inspections required. That type of 23 thing 24 Q. 1 take it, when you became manager of product 25 safety, you were working with products manufactured by - 20 CONCANNON & JAEGER COMPUTER AIDED TRANSCRIPTION 1 Monsanto that contained polychlorinated biphenyls? 2 MR. FEATHERSTONE: you take it, what? May I -3 hear the question, please? 4 MR. BRADLEY: Let me just rephrase it f 5 THE WITNESS: It!s kind of broad. 6 MR. FEATHERSTONE: Yes. 7 MR. BRADLEY: I *11 rephrase it. 8 MR. FEATHERSTONE: Let Mr. Bradley ask his 9 question. I don't need to hear it back if he's going to 10 rephrase it. 11 Q. (By Mr* Bradley) At some point in time in 12 your career with Monsanto, did you begin work with products 13 containing polychlorinated biphenyls manufactured by 14 Monsanto? 15 A. Yes. 16 Q. Whenwould that haveoccurred? 17 A* That was this time. 18 Q. 1977? 19 A. That's when I came to that job function, 20 that's correct. 21 Q. Prior to coming into that job, were you aware 22 that Monsanto manufactured products containing 23 polychlorinated biphenyls? 24 A. Yes. 25 Q. When did you first hear the term - 21 CONCANNON & JAEGER COMPUTER AIDED TRANSCKIFTiUN 1 polychlorinated biphenyl? 2 A, It's hard to say. I first used .3 polychlorinated biphenyls when I was a researcher in the 4 laboratory. 5 Q. And when was that? 6 A. It was probably in the late '60s, somewhere 7 like that. Probably in *67 to '69. That time frame. 8 Q. What research were you doing with PCBs in the 9 laboratory between *67 and *69? 10 A. PCBs were used in the laboratory as a safety 11 requirement. It was used in what's known as oil baths or 12 high temperature baths, or to maintain uniform temperature 13 for carrying out exploratory chemical reactions. 14 Q. Did you take any precautions while working in 15 the lab between *67 and '69 when you were working with 16 PCBs? 17 A. Well, there's always precautions that you take 18 in the laboratory when you use -- The precautions that 19 were taken with PCBs were similar precautions that were 20 required with any higher temperature bath. You had to use 21 it in a ventilated fume hood; the fume hoods had to be 22 safety approved and have doors that would close, so you 23 could stick your hand in there, in case the reaction that 24 you were doing were explosive. The precautions were 25 primarily for the exploratory reactions, not necessarily - 22 CONCANNON & JAEGER COM PUT h'K A XU hiD TKAW L K i r n u w 1 for the oil bath, except for oil baths that were flammable. 2 You had to make sure that you had fire extinguishers, or .3 extinguishers immediately beside the hood. That was the 4 advantage of PCBs. It removed the hazard for fire and 5 flames should there be an explosion during the exploratory 6 reaction. 7 Q. When you worked with PCBs, though, you worked 8 with ventilated fume hoods? 9 A. Yes. That's standard procedure for working 10 with any exploratory chemical in a laboratory that is vapor 11 presured. Petrochemical reactions in small glass ampules 12 that are sealed, you heat these things up. So you have to 13 have them in a place, if they rupture, that you don't spew 14 through the building. 15 Q. Explain for me what a fume hood is? 16 A. A fume hood is just a piece of equipment 17 that's in any laboratory. It's usually a chemical 18 workbench that's covered with a fume hood that has a 19 separate ventilation system. It has usually what's 20 referred to as a negative air pressure so that any venting 21 of any of the materials in the hood would be pulled into 22 the hood and reduce pressure so it's not pushed out into 23 the laboratory. The laboratory ventilation system is 24 usually tied in with the rest of the building, the office 25 space in the complex. So when you're doing any types of - 23 CONCANNON & JAEGER COMPUTER AIDED TRANSCRIPTION 1 chemical reactions with things that have odors, high vapor 2 pressure or whatnot, you use a fume hood to contain the 3 vapors, and they're vented separately to some other 4 treatment center. 5 Q. When you wereworking with PCBs in the lab -- 6 First of all, did you workwith PCBs in the lab during any 7 period other than '67 to '69? 8 A. Not that I recall. 9 Q. When you worked with PCBs in the labs, did you 10 wear gloves? 11 A. Not necessarily. 12 Q. Okay. 13 A. The PCBs werea vehicle in a tank, so the 14 other -- All it was, it was just like -- It was an oil 15 bath, and you would immerse reaction flasks, or hook them 16 in the thing and the bottom part of the flask was heated by 17 the medium, so you didn't use open flame. So you didn't 18 touch the PCBs. 19 Q. What did you use to immerse the flask into the 20 PCB bath? 21 MR. FEATHERSTONE: It wasn't a PCB bath. It 22 was an oil bath. 23 THE WITNESS: These were PCB baths that 24 replaced an oil bath. 25 MR. FEATHERSTONE: I misunderstood. - 24 - CONCANNON & JAEGER Jt\ \UEtU r j.j. 1 A. Oil baths are flammable, they ignite, PCB 2 baths don't. They don't give off the fumes because the .3 boiling point of PCBs is several hundred degrees lower 4 centigrade lower - than what you would operate if you would 5 use an oil bath. Depending on the equipment we're using, 6 you usually use standard laboratory glasswear, and it was 7 on a laboratory frame behind it. Things you've seen in the 0 movies of the mad scientist, where you have the bars going 9 across and you clamp different glass sizes to this to hold 10 them in place. And so whatever the clamp was that you were 11 going - that you mounted this flask into the reaction with, 12 that's what you held it with. It clamped around the neck 13 tightly. When it came out, it looked like a little handle 14 but the end of the handle was a device that would attach it 15 to an apparatus. Before you did an experiment, you made 16 sure all these things fit in place and certain things were 17 static and fixed, and changed what was in the reaction 18 flask. 19 Q. You did immerse your hand or arm into the PCB 20 bath? 21 A. No. Not at four hundred degree Fahrenheit, I 22 don't think so. 23 Q. And when the flask came out of the PCB bath, 24 would you handle the flask? 25 A. Ultimately. - 25 CONCANNON & JAEGER COMPUTER AIDED TRANSCRIPT!UN 1 Q. Did you wear gloves when you handled the 2 flask? .3 A* Sometimes, After the flask cooled, the first 4 thing that you did was you had to clean off the outside of 5 the flask of whatever it was - whether it was PCBs or oils 6 - and the procedure was essentially the same thing. You 7 pulled the flask out, lifted it up, let it drain back over 8 the bath, then you would take - usually, you'd use a glove 9 or something, not to get chemicals on your hand - and you 10 would wipe the bottom of the flask with a paper towel or 11 lab wipe, they called it, and you'd take the bath out, put 12 it over a, -- Every organic chemistry lab has a cleaning 13 bath, which is essentially a large reactor that contains 14 some type of chemicals to clean glassware, and this can be 15 anything from simple Acetone purge to achromatic acids and 16 you clean the bottom of the flask with that and rinse it, 17 Q, 1 take it, the gloves that you wore were 18 nonporous gloves? 19 A. General laboratory glovers, or some type of a 20 rubber stuff that are impervious. General laboratory 21 gloves that are just impervious to most chemicals. Later 22 years when plastic rolltop gloves were used, they were used 23 in the laboratory because they use the gloves and you 24 disposed of them. It was just a plastic glove, one-time 25 use. Went into the chemical waste disposal. - 26 CONCANNON & JAEGER COMPUTER AIDED TRANSCRIPTION 1 Q, You've describe for me generally what you did 2 as manager of product safety. I'd like you to now be more .3 specific about the work that you did as manager of product 4 safety. 5 MR. FEATHERSTONE: Wait a minute. What 6 specifically do you want him to talk about? 7 MR. BRADLEYs Go ahead and answer the 8 question. 9 A. Well, primarily was responsible for 10 regulations under the Toxic Substances Control Act to 11 assure that plants were in compliance with those 12 regulations. 13 Q. (By Mr. Bradley) What would you do to make 14 certain plants were in compliance with those regulations? 15 A. First thing is, you had to obtain copies of 16 the regulations. In conjunction with the environmental law 17 department, you had to interpret these, distill them, 18 Federal Register Notices, down into some practical steps 19 for operations, so that environmental supervisors and our 20 operating facilities could understand and implement with 21 normal plant personnel. So we did this type of thing. 22 Q. All right. 23 A. If the records were required to be kept, then 24 we would try to develop a simple format, or form, or system 25 to recommend to the plant so everybody didn't develop a - 27 CONCANNON & JAEGER COMPUTER AIDED TRANSCRIPTION 1 different type form, because we had thirty-three that I had 2 responsibility for. We wanted all of the information .3 collected in the same way because from time-to-time, you 4 were required to make, or you could be required, the way 5 the laws were written, to make corporate reports. 6 Therefore, you had to be able to compile the data. So we 7 did those kinds of things. We provided advice and answered 8 questions for the plants. 9 Q. Advice on how to comply with the -- 10 A . . How to comply with the regulations. 11 Q. What documents did you review, if any, prior 12 to beginning your work as manager of product safety? 13 A. In 177? 14 MR. BRADLEY: Yes. 15 A. Primarily, the emerging TOSKAregulations. 16 That was my responsibility. 17 Q. Other than the emerging TOSKA regulations, did 18 you review any documents prior to becoming manager of 19 product safety? 20 A. I don't recall. 21 Q. Do you recall whether you reviewed any 22 internal memoranda regarding the toxilogical features of 23 PCBs? 24 A. I know I didn't do that because I wasn't 25 really involved with that area of PCBs at that time. - 28 CONCANNON JAEGER COMPUTER AIDED TRANSCRIPTION 1 Q. All right* During your work as manager of 2 product safety, did you generate any documents? .3 A* Yes. 4 Q. What kinds of documents did you generate? 5 A. As I said, I generated documents for use by 6 the plants, summarizing proposed regulations under TOSKA, 7 newly passed or - what's the word? One time they propose a 8 regulation, comment on it and they have the final 9 regulation. The final regulations were sent to the plant 10 because, in summary fashion, they had to be implemented in 11 a uniform way. The proposed regulations -- Industry was 12 asked to comment on the proposed regulations. We would 13 summarize these, try to summarize the pertinent points* 14 Sometimes, the proposed regulations would offer 15 alternatives. We would try to summarize these in some 16 simplified way and submit these to the plants, and say 17 which of these can be implemented easily, least manpower, 18 this type of thing, compile these into a corporate answer 19 or comment to the agencies for development of the final 20 rules. Those kinds of documents. I monitored compliance 21 by the plants. Periodically, I'd visit the plants, 22 thirty-three plants. I'd probably visit a plant a month 23 - sometimes, if I could, two plants a month - just to see 24 what they were doing, how they were doing* It was kind of 25 an informal plant visit or inspection, answer questions. - 29 CONCANNON & JAEGER (JUMt'U'i'Ei.K fliuttu i.rx 1 If records were required to be keptf look at their record ) 2 logs to see if they were doing things, requirements for / .3 keeping records. Make sure they're doing them in ink. 4 Plant people will do it with whatever they can scratch on. 5 So you have to look and make sure these things are there. 6 That kind of thing. Generate summaries of those annually, 7 how many plants were -- 8 Q. V7ould you generate reports concerning the 9 plants that you had visited regarding their compliance? 10 A. No, Generally, these were verbal and oral, 11 because I wasn't -- It wasn't a scorekeeping thing. It 12 was to make sure that if -- TOSKA is a funny law. You 13 don't necessarily submit reports to, under TOSKA every 14 year. 15 MR. FEATHERSTONE: John, the question is 16 whether you submitted reports on your inspections. 17 A. NO, 18 Q. (By Mr. Bradley) Did you submit -- Did you 19 write reports that were submitted to any governmental 20 agencies while you were manager of product safety? 21 A. I don't think so. 22 Q. Did you help in preparation of any documents 23 submitted to a governmental agency while you were manager 24 of product safety? 25 A- Yes. Comments on proposed rule makings, this - 30 CONCANNON & JAEGER COMPUTER AIDED TRANSCRIPTION 1 type of thing. 2 Q. All right. And how long were you manager of 3 product safety? 4 A. Until 1980. 5 Q. What job did you move to in 1980? 6 A. In 1980* I still had the title of manager of 7 product safety. As manager of product and environmental 8 safety, and I had responsibilities for managing PCB issues. 9 Q. Did you have responsibility for managing PCB 10 issues prior to 1980? 11 A. Prom '77 until *80# I the part of PCB issues 12 that had to do with plant compliance. 13 Q. And in 1980, how was your PCB responsibility 14 expanded? 15 A. Instead of justhaving the responsibility for 16 the plant compliance of the industrial chemicals plant, I 17 became the corporate focal point for PCB information and/or 18 managing PCB questions. 19 Q. What did you do, if anything, to prepare you 20 for your expanded job responsibility in 1980? 21 A. I read available summary records of Monsanto1s 22 PCB activities and history, and of PCB history that had to 23 do with the passage of the TOSKA Act and publication of the 24 subsequent regulations. 25 Q. Did you review any toxicological information - 31 CONCANNON & JAEGER COMPUTER AIDED TRANSCRIPTION 1 regarding PCBs prior to, or to prepare you for your 2 expanded responsibilities in 19807 3 A. Yes, I did. 4 Q. What did you review? 5 A. There was a -- In 1979, Monsanto submitted 6 data to a Congressman Eckhart's subcommittee. 7 Q. 8 with? Do you know what state Congressman Eckhart was 9 A. I don't know. 10 Q. Do you recall the name of the subcommittee? 11 A. It had to do with hazardous waste. They were 12 looking at some of the hazardous waste and asking some 13 specific questions about history. 14 Q. What other toxicological information did you 15 review on PCBs to prepare you for your expanded job 16 responsibilities in 1980? 17 A. There was a volume published by the National 18 Academy of Sciences entitled "PCBs," which was a review up 19 to that point in time, 1979, of the environmental 20 toxicology knowlege of PCBs. 21 Q. What else? 22 A. There was a document that was published in 23 1952. I think the title of it was "Polychlorinated 24 Biphenyls," and it was - it was a result of a review of the 25 known properties, health properties and so forth, what was CONCANNON & JAEGER COMPUTER AIDED TRANSCRIPTION 1 known about PCBs up to that point in time, May of 1972, 2 when it was published. This was a report of the .3 Interdepartmental Task Force on PCBs. 4 Q. In 1972? 5 A. Yes, that was published in 1972. I reviewed 6 this in 1980. 7 Q. You had originally said 1952, but you mean 8 *72? 9 A. No. 72. 10 Q. What else did you review, if anything? 11 A. Those were really the big summaries that were 12 available that I recall, was the National Academy summary, 13 the Eckhart report and -- 14 MR. FEATHERSTONE: Interdepartmental Task 15 Force? 16 A. Yes. 17 Q. (By Mr. Bradley) I'm going to show you 18 Plaintiff's Exhibit 1373 and ask if that is a document that 19 you reviewed to prepare for your expanded responsibilities 20 in 1980? 21 A. This is the NIOSH document, and I have looked 22 at this. I'm not sure this is the first thing that I 23 looked at, at that point in time, but I have seen this and 24 I have read this thing, yes. 25 Q. Do you recall when you saw and read that - 33 CONCANNON & JAEGER COMPUTER AIDED TRANSCRIPTION 1 exhibit? 2 A. It was sometime during 1980/ but it was not .3 one of the first things I did. 4 Q. And is this a document that you maintained in 5 your files within Monsanto? 6 A. Yes. I had a copy of this in my office, a 7 bound copy, published by NIOSH. 8 Q. Does that appear to been an accurate, true and 9 accurate copy of the criteria put out by NIOSH on 10 polychlorinated biphenyls? 11 A. As far as I can tell from the cover. This is 12 a loose-leaf photocopy of it. 1 assume it's the same 13 document. 14 Q. This is the kind of document that -- Well, 15 did you keep other types of -- Excuse me. Did you keep 16 other documents of a similar type as part of your job 17 responsibility at Monsanto? 18 A. I obtained -- I don't know what you mean by 19 "similar type," but yes, I obtained documents published by 20 the U.S. Government and kept them so I could understand 21 what was in them and what, if any, requirements were 22 dictated by the documents. 23 MR. BRADLEY: All right. This would be a good 24 time for me to take a break, if it's acceptable to 25 everybody else. - 34 CONCANNON & JAEGER COMPUTER AIDED TRANSCRIPTION 1 MR. PEATHERSTONEr That's fine 2 THE WITNESS: Fine with me. .3 MR. BRADLEY: See you back at 1:10. 4 MR. PEATHERSTONE: Pine. 5 (Whereupon, a luncheon recess was taken.) 6 Q. (By Mr. Bradley) Have you ever had contact 7 with a trade association comprised in whole or in part of 8 electrical utility companies? 9 A. Yes. 10 Q. Which trade associations? 11 A. Edison Electric Institute; Edison Electric 12 Institute/USWAG; American Public Power Institute; National 13 Rural Electric Cooperative Association. I can't think of 14 anybody else offhand. 15 MR. PEATHERSTONE; Can I hear those back? I 16 missed the first and last one. 17 (Whereupon, the reporter propounded the previous question.) 18 Q. (By Mr. Bradley) When did you first have 19 contact with EEI? 20 A. Approximately 1980. 21 Q. 22 1980? What is EEI? Excuse me. What was EEI in 23 A. It's the Edison Electric Institute. 24 Q. And who were its members? 25 A. It's my understanding they're primarily - 35 - CONCANNON & JAEGER COMPUTER AIDED TRANSCRIPTION 1 members of public stock-held utilities. I think that's how 2 it's defined. 3 Q. Do you know whether Nevada Power Company was 4 ever a member of Edison Electric Institute? 5 A. I don't know. 6 Q. Would Edison Electric Institute be located in 7 a city? 8 A. Yes. 9 Q. New York? 10 A. No. 11 Q. Where? 12 A. Washington, D.C. 13 Q. Did you have communication with more than one 14 person at EEI? 15 A. Yes. Their staffs changed over the years. 16 Q. Which personnel at EEI did you have 17 conversations with regarding PCBs, if any? 18 A. Cory Trench. 19 Q. C-o-r-yf T-r-e-n-c-h? 20 A. Right. John Novae. Those are the two staff 21 members of the EEI I had conversations was. 22 Q. Did you have conversations with .anyone at EEI, 23 other than those two staff members regarding PCBs? 24 A. Well, there were members of the committees, 25 which were probably utility companies. - 36 CONCANNON & JAEGER COMPUTER AIDED TRANSCRIPTION 1 Q. Do you know whether the committee members were 2 electric utility companies or is that a guess you1re 3 making? 4 A* Well, the USWAG Committee - Utility Solid 5 Waste Activity Group - are all members of the utilities 6 industry. 7 Q. All right. Anyone, other than the two staff 8 members that you mentioned and members of the Utility Solid 9 Waste Activity Group that you had contact with from EEI, 10 that you had contact with regarding PCBs? 11 A. They had various hired outside counsel from 12 time-to-time that represented them. 13 Q. Attorneys? 14 A. Yes. 15 Q. Have we now covered the types of people you 16 spoke with at EEI regarding PCBs? 17 A. That1s right. 18 Q. Did you provide any written documents to EEI? 19 A. Yes. 20 Q. You, personally? 21 A. Yes. 22 Q- Vhat documents? 23 A. When you say "you, personally," maybe I sent 24 them personally. 25 Q. Do you no whether Monsanto submitted documents - 37 CONCANNON & JAEGER COMPUTER AIDED TRANSCRIPTION 1 to EEI beginning in 1980? 2 A. Some. 3 Q. What documents did Monsanto submit to EEI 4 beginning in 1980? 5 A. Mondanto made available documents that had to 6 do with health effects of PCBsr studies done by outside 7 consultants for Monsanto, published peer review journal 8 literature that happened to be collected by me that other 9 people might have. 10 Q. When you say that Monsanto made available, 11 documents, does that mean that you provided them to EEI, or 12 what do you mean when you say documents were made 13 available? 14 A* I guess what I meant was what I thought you 15 meant when you said did we make documents available. 16 Q. All right. Did you provide documents to EEI 17 beginning in 1980 regarding PCBs? 18 A. To those people that I've named as contacts, 19 yes. 20 Q. By making them available, what you mean is you 21 gave them documents? 22 A. Yes. 23 Q. Are those documents that you reviewed in 24 preparation for your deposition today? 25 A. Some of them may be included. - 38 CONCANNON & JAEGER COMPUTER AIDED TRANSCRIPTION 1 Q. In your office -- Let me ask this first. Are 2 you still a Monsanto employee? .3 A. No. 4 Q. You're retired? 5 A. Yes. 6 Q. When did you retire? 7 A. January 29th, 1993. 8 Q, Congraduations. 9 A. Thank you. 10 Q. When you retired, was there a file which had 11 the documents Monsanto sent to EEI regarding PCBs? 12 A. I don't recall a specific file labeled "EEI" 13 with documents. 14 Q. All right. Do you recall, though, there being 15 a file that contained the documents that were sent by 16 Monsanto to EEI beginning in 1980 regarding PCBs? 17 A. The documents that were sent to EEI should 18 still be in the Monsanto files. They're just pulled from 19 wherever they are as the need or the questions arose. 20 Q. And if you were going to go back to your 21 office, how would you identify which documents Monsanto 22 sent to EEI beginning in 1980 regarding PCBs? 23 A. I'd have to specifically try to remember what 24 document was given to them and then look appropriately. 25 Q. When you sent documents to EEI -- Well, let - 39 CONCANNON & JAEGER COMPUTER AIDED TRANSCRIPTION 1 me rephrase that. When you provided documents to EEI, were 2 those documents provided with a cover letter? .3 A. Sometimes; sometimes not. 4 Q. How would you go back and identify which 5 documents Monsanto provided to EEI regarding PCBs beginning 6 in 1980 that were not accompanied by a cover letter? 7 MR. FEATHERSTONE: Just answered that. S Objection, Cummulative. 9 A. I'd just have to try to identify them and 10 recollect what they were. 11 Q* (By Mr. Bradley) Have you ever done that? 12 A. NO. 13 Q. Who did you speak with at APPI regarding PCBs, 14 if anyone? 15 A. I don't recall a specific name at APPI. 16 Q. Do you know whether Monsanto provided any 17 documents to APPI beginning in 1980 regarding PCBs? 18 A. APPI was, from time-to-time, a member of the 19 Industry Consensus Group that worked on PCBs and alsor the 20 consensus group that worked on PCBs which included two 21 environmental groups. As a participant, they were shared 22 all information that was passed around or worked out in 23 these committee meetings. So it's a very informal transfer 24 by everybody, but everybody's information was shared back 25 and fourth around the table. - 40 CONCANNON & JAEGER COMPUTER AIDED TRANSCRIPTION 1 Q. Were you a member of the Industry Consensus 2 Group that worked on PCBs? * A. Yes. 4 Q. When was theIndustry Consensus Groupthat 5 worked on PCBs formed? 6 A. Roughly, late 1980 or early 1981. 7 Q. Who elsewere members? 8 A. The Chemical ManufacturersAssociation was a 9 member. I was Monsanto's representative there. Edison 10 Electric Institute/USWAG was a member? National Electrical 11 Manufacturers Association was a member. 12 THE WITNESS: Did you say the Industry 13 Consensus Group or the -- 14 MR. FEATHERSTONE: Industry Consensus Group. 15 A. Those are the major members of the Industry 16 Consensus Group. From time-to-time, as regulations came in 17 that these people were particularly interested in, APPI was 18 a member? American Association of Railroads was a member? 19 Iron and Steel Institute was a member. Whatever the trade 20 association is - was - that represents the Automobile 21 Manufacturers. They've changed that name a time or two. I 22 don't know if it's American Automobile Manufacturers or 23 what, headquartered in Detroit? the two APIs, American 24 Petroleum institute and American Paper Institute, were both 25 separately members from time-to-time; maybe the American - 41 CONCANNON & JAEGER COMPUTER AIDED TRANSCRIPTIOH 1 Fertilizer Institute was a member. Lots of trade 2 associations came in and out. Those are the ones that come 3 to mind. 4 Q. (By Mr. Bradley) And did you indicate that 5 the Industry Consensus Group working on PCBs included two 6 environmental groups? 7 A. The Industry Consensus Group was named by the 8 trade press and that included the groups I mentioned, plus 9 the NRDC and EDF. 10 MR. FEATHERSTONE: The question was whether 11 the Industry Consensus Group included those two 12 environmental organizations. 13 A. I thought he said did the consensus group. 14 MR. BRADLEY: No. 15 MR. FEATHERSTONE: No. He said Industry 16 Consensus. 17 A. Industry Consensus did not include 18 environmental organizations by definition. 19 Q. (By Mr. Bradley) What was the difference, if 20 any, between the Industry Consensus Group working on PCBs 21 and the consensus group working on PCBs? 22 A. The industry group contained only industry 23 members who reached a position. They would present their 24 position with the environmental groups who reached a common 25 position, and we reached one position for both PCB - 42 CONCANNON & JAEGER COMPUTER AIDED TRANSCRIPTION 1 consensus groups. 2 Q. Other than EEI/USWAG, were there any members 3 of the consensus group that had electric utility companies 4 as members, that you know of? 5 A. APPI, NREA. 6 Q. Do you recall who the representative was from 7 APPI in the consensus group? 8 A * Mo* 9 Q. Was there more than one? 10 A. Various groups sent various staff people, 11 members, from time-to-time* They just sent a 12 representative. 13 Q. What kind of groups were sending people as 14 representatives for APPI with the consensus group? 15 MR, FEATHERSTONE: Object to the form of the 16 question, 17 A. I guess I don't understand what you want. 18 Q. (By Mr. Bradley) Okay. I think, then, that I 19 didn't understand your answer. When you said that various 20 groups would send different representatives, you mean the 21 APPI would send -- 22 Q. APPI as a group -- Okay. This company sent 23 one of their members, or if one of their members wanted to 24 go, they might attend. They might send staff people. They 25 all had paid staff members, as well as members of their - 43 CONCANNON & JAEGER COMPUTER AIDED TRANSCRIPTION 1 group who were on the committee. You may have one person. 2 You may have five people in that group who could be staff 3 people/ could be paying members of the group or outside 4 counsel or consultants. Whoever they wanted to bring. 5 Q. The consensus group was formed for what reasonf do you know? 7 A. Yes. 8 Q. What? 9 A. EDP andNRDC filed suit in1979 challenging IO the PCB regulations under TOSKA. CMA, USWAG/ EEI/USWAG and 11 NIOSH filed as intevenors in the lawsuit. They began 12 working to try to resolve these Issues and began trying to 13 help EPA frame a new set of regulations which would be 14 acceptable to the groups and which would be acceptable by 15 the Eighth District Circuit Court of Washington D.C. 16 MR. BRADLEY: I'm sorry. Would you read that 17 answer back to me? 18 MR. FEATHERSTONE: It's the Court of Appeals. 19 Whatever it is. It's the D.C. Court of Appeals. 20 MR. BRADLEY: You can change it to D.C. Court 21 of Appeals. 22 Q. (By Mr. Bradley) The consensus group was not 23 formed as a result of an order from a Judge, was it? 24 A. No. 25 Q. And were reports generated from the consensus - 44 CONCANNON & JAEGER COFIPUTbK ilUbU X K f l K a u u n i uu 1 group? 2 A. No. Not as you'd normally think of a report, 3 no. 4 Q, V7ere there agenda items for consensus group 5 meetings? 6 A. There was an informal agenda any time there 7 was a meeting, yes. 8 Q. Were papers presented to the consensus group? 9 A. Prom time-to-time, there were working papers 10 that one side or the other would present. 11 Q. Did Monsanto present any papers to the 12 consensus group? 13 A. No. Monsanto, as Monsanto, was not a member 14 of the consensus group. 15 Q. Well, as Monsanto's representative -- I 16 thought you indicated you participated as Monsanto's 17 representative. 18 A. Yes, I participated as Monsanto's 19 representatuve. 20 MR. FEATHERSTONE; Wait a minute. He was 21 Monsanto's representative at the Chemical Manufacturers 22 Association. 23 A. Right. 24 MR. PEATHERSTONE; Which was a member of the 25 consensus group. 45 - CONCANNON & JAEGER COMPUTER AIDED TRANSCRIPTION 1 MR, BRADLEYs All right. 2 Q. (By Mr.Bradley) Did the Chemical 3 Manufacturers Association present any documents to the 4 consensus group? 5 A. Yes. 6 Q. By documents -- 7 A. They presented all sorts of documents 8 suggesting language for various points of contention; 9 technical documents supporting their position for using 10 such language and interpretation; contractor studies that 11 were done on behalf of the chemical industry to answer 12 questions that were asked; a review of the health effects 13 literature of PCBs. 14 Q. Did you participate in the development of that 15 review? 16 A. Yes. 17 Q. And in your participation in the development 18 of that review, were you participating as a Monsanto 19 representative? 20 A. On the CMA portion, yes. I was Monsanto's 21 representative on the CMA panel, right. 22 Q, Do you know whether documents were maintained 23 by anyone at the conclusion of the work of the consensus 24 group? 25 A. The final documents that were submited to the - 46 CONCANNON & JAEGER COMPUTER AIDED TKANSCKlFT1UM 1 agency I think would probably be maintained. 2 Q. To EPA? 3 A. To EPA. There were formal comments that were 4 submitted in the rule -- Therewas rule making involved, 5 and these were voluminous. CMA submitted a large thing, 6 the utility people submitted separately a large thing. 7 Lots of documents were submitted to the record and were 8 kept. 9 Q. I'm going to show you Plaintiff's Exhibit 1220 10 and ask you to review that. 11 A. Okay. 12 Q. That's a document, "Polychlorinated Biphenyls, 13 a Perspective," and it has your name, "John H. Craddock, 14 Ph.D., Monsanto" on it. Is that a document that you wrote? 15 A. Yes, sir. 16 Q. What year did you write that? 17 A. 1981 is the date on the front, January 30th. 18 Q. Oh. At the bottom? 19 A. The date of this version, yes. 20 MR. BRADLEY: So many numbers down there, I 21 couldn't see it. 22 Q. (By Mr. Bradley) And is that a true and 23 accurate copy, as best you can tell, of the document that 24 you prepared? 25 A. From glancing through it, it looks so, yes. - 47 CONCANNON & JAEGER COMPUTER AIDED TKANSCJKJ.PXJLUIN 1 Q. Andwhy did you prepare the document? 2 A. I'd have to try to recollect a date. I think 3 this version wasgiven as a result of a request to make a 4 presentation before the Chamber of Commerce in the City of 5 Dayton, Ohio. 6 Q. When you wrote this, was it based upon 7 information that you gathered while you were working at 8 Monsanto? 9 A. Yes. 10 Q. Is this the kind of information you would have 11 given to the Chemical Manufacturers Association? 12 MR. FEATHERSTONE: Object to the form. 13 A. It's the kindof information. Whether this 14 speech was actually a published document or written 15 information that was provided to the people directly, I 16 don't know. 17 Q. (By Mr. Bradley) Do you know whether this 18 document was ever provided to the Chemical Manufacturers 19 Association? 20 A. I doubt ifthis document, as such, was 21 provided to CMA. It was a speech for a specific purpose, 22 specific organization, function. 23 Q. And did you keep copies of the speeches that 24 you gave during the time you were a Monsanto employee? 25 A. Probably. - 48 CONCANNON & JAEGER COMPUTER AIDED TRANSCRIPTION 1 Q. Kept them in your files? 2 A. I had a reading file that most anything I 3 wrote was kept in the files. if you could remember the 4 date, you could retrieve it. 5 Q. You maintained that as part of the business 6 work you did there, at Monsanto? 7 A. Yes. 8 Q. I'm now going to hand you Plaintiff's Exhibit 9 1224 and ask you to review that. 10 A. Okay. 11 Q. This is a December 12, 1980 letter from David 12 Forsyth Zoll, z-o-1-1, Assistant General Counsel for 13 Antitrust and Regulatory Litigation of the Chemical 14 Manufacturers Association to CMA members potentially 15 affected by regulation of PCBs; is that correct? 16 A. That's correct. 17 Q. Dated December 12th, 1980. 18 Q. That's correct. 19 Q. On the 6th page at the bottom, it indicates 20 that you were a member? 21 A. Correct - of the CMA task force. 22 Q. Have you seen this document before today's 23 date? 24 A. I saw it when it was issued back when. 25 Q. Does this appear to be a true and accurate - 49 - ONCANNON & JAEGER (JUMi'UTEK rtlUHU I'KftWO^Ritriiuin 1 copy of that? 2 A. It does, as far as 1 can remember. .3 Q. Is this a document that you would have also 4 maintained in your files at Monsanto? 5 A. Maybe. This one may have been discarded after 6 the request was fulfilled. 7 Q. I'm going to show you Plaintiff's Exhibit 8 1532. 9 A. Okay. 10 Q. This is a February 9th, 1981 letter from you 11 to Mr. Charles, G-r-i-g-a-l-a-u-s-k-i, Physical Scientist 12 and Enforcement Office, Region V, u.S. Environmental 13 Protection Agency; is that correct? 14 A. That's correct. 15 Q. And in it, in the letter, you say, "Attached 16 for your information is a copy of my recent presentation 17 entitled 'Polyclorinated Biphenyls - A Perspective1 that 18 was presented as part of the City of Dayton, Ohio Chamber 19 of Commerce Education Program and Mews Media Support 20 Subcommittee briefing to local news media and city/area 21 government officials in late January." Is that correct? 22 A. That's correct. 23 Q. Did that refer to Plaintiff's Exhibit 1220? 24 A. Yes. 25 Q. Did you speak with anyone at NRECA beginning - 50 CONCANNON & JAEGER CUMFUTJjK /i1UtiU uw 1 in 1980 regarding PCBs? 2 MR. FEATHERSTONE: NRECA? Is that what you .3 said? 4 A. National Rural Electric Cooperative 5 Association. 6 MR. BRADLEY: Yes, 7 A. I don't remember the exact date when NRECA 8 became involved. 1980 was the formative year but from 9 time-to-time when things got moving, NRECA representatives 10 attended some of the meetings, presentations, seminars, 11 whatnot. Early in 1980, NRECA people were present. 12 Q. (By Mr. Bradley) Which meetings and seminars 13 were NRECA representatives attending? 14 A. I believe they were -- EPA held a major 15 symposium on PCB health effects in 1982, known as the 16 Bethesda Conference. I believe they were in attendance 17 there. They may have attended some of the Industry 18 Consensus Group meetings where presentations were made to 19 EPA staff, or the rule-making negotiations, 20 Q. You don't know whether they attended or not? 21 You just don't know? 22 A. No, They came in and out. 23 Q. Did Monsanto provide any documents to NRECA 24 regarding PCBs, and beginning with 1980? 25 THE WITNESS: Directly to NRECA? - 51 CONCANNON & JAEGER COMPUTER AIDED TRAISICJKXVT1Ufr 1 MR. BRADLEY: Yes. 2 A. I can11 remember. .3 Q. (By Mr. Bradley) I*m getting confused here 4 with all my acronyms. Did you indicate whether Monsanto 5 had any, or provided any documents to APPI beginning in 6 1980 regarding PCBs? 7 A. I don't recall specific submissions from 8 Monsanto to APPI. 9 Q. Whatever submissions may have come from there/ 10 whatever participation they may have had regarding the 11 industry consensus group 12 A. That's correct. 13 Q, - did Monsanto provide any documents to 14 particular electric utility companies beginning in 1980 15 regarding PCBs? 16 A. Yes. 17 Q. What documents did Monsanto provideto 18 electric utilities companies regarding PCBs beginning in 19 1980? 20 A. Specifically/ weprepared a material safety 21 data sheet/ a generic material safety data sheet, on PCBs 22 to answer many of the questions raised by the regulatory 23 agencies. They were made available to anybody who asked 24 for them. 25 Q. All right. So if a utility company called and ; - 52 - CONCANNON & JAEGER COMPUTER AIDED TRANSCRIPTION 1 asked for an MSDS, you would send It to them? 2 A, Yes. .3 Q. And if they didn't call and ask for one, none 4 was sent? 5 A. That1s correct. 6 Q. All right. Other than the MSDS, did Monsanto 7 provide any information - excuse me - any documents to 8 electric utility companies regarding PCBs beginning in 9 1980? 10 A. We had many specific reguests from specific 11 utilities, and information was always provided in response 12 to their questions. 13 Q. So again, if someone had contacted Monsanto, 14 they'd be given information? 15 A. Yes. 16 Q. If they didn't contact Monsanto, theywouldn't 17 be given information? 18 MR. FEATHERSTONE: I object to the form of 19 that guestion. 20 Q. (By Mr. Bradley) Is that correct? 21 A. I guess I'm confused about the question. If 22 somebody asked for information, okay, they received 23 information to answer their question, to satisfy their 24 question. 25 MR. BRADLEY: All right. - 53 CONCANHOH & JAEGER COMPUTER AIDED TRANSCRIPTION 1 A. Obviously, if they didn't ask, you couldn't 2 give them anything. .3 Q. (By Mr. Bradley) And other than the specific 4 request from specific utilities and the MSDSs, did Monsanto 5 provide any information to, directly to electric utility 6 companies regarding PCBs beginning in 19807 7 MR. PEATHERSTONE: Objection. Cumroulative. 8 Already asked and answered. 9 A. Those are the things that I recall directly, 10 responses to direct questions. Otherwise, they got it from 11 the trade associations or the Federal Register program. 12 Q. (By Mr. Bradley) I'm now going to show you 13 Plaintiff's Exhibit 1234 and ask you to review that. 14 A. Okay. 15 Q. Is that an HSDS sheet prepared by Monsanto, 16 October, *88, regarding PCBs? 17 A* Yes, it is. 18 Q. And is that an MSDS that would have been sent 19 to any electric utility company who requested a copy of an 20 MSDS? 21 A. Anybody who requested it after this date would 22 have received this copy. There were different versions. 23 This was an update, as it states. 24 Q, Does that appear to you to be a true and 25 accurate copy of the MSDS that Monsanto prepared on that - 54 CONCANNON & JAEGER ^ U r ,i'U '.L '*fv ULtU i x iW H 1 date? 2 A. Yes. .3 Q. And did Monsanto keep copies of those MSDSs in 4 their files as part of their regular business activities? 5 A. Yes. 6 Q. I'm now going to show you Plaintiff's Exhibit 7 1232 -- or excuse me - 1232, and ask you to review that. 8 A. Okay. 9 Q. Is that also an MSDS sheet prepared by 10 Monsanto regarding polychlorinated biphenyls? 11 A. Yes. 12 Q. Is there a way of telling what the date was of 13 the preparation of this documents? 14 A. Page 6 of 6, center of the page. 15 Q. It indicates it was issued 10-15-85? 16 A. Correct. 17 Q. And is this a true and accurate copy of the 18 MSDS prepared by Monsanto, 10-15-85? 19 A. It appears to be,right. 20 Q. And is this a document that was maintained in 21 your files at Monsanto as part of your regular business 22 activity? 23 A . Yes. 24 MR. FEATHERSTONE: Wait until he finishes his 25 question. - 55 - CONCANNON St JAEGER COMPUTER AIDED TRANSCRIPTION 1 Q. (By Mr, Bradley) Who prepared the MSDSs? 2 A. They were prepared under my direction and I -3 prepared much of themr myself, 4 Q. Prepared, based upon the information that you 5 had gathered at the time regarding the safety in handling 6 of PCBs? 7 A. Information that I had gathered. Information 8 that was in the published literature and information that 9 was in Monsanto files, 10 Q. Do you know whether, beginning in 1980, anyone 11 from Monsanto had direct oral or written contact with 12 anyone from Nevada Power Company? 13 A, I don't recall. 14 Q. Do you know whether anyone in Monsanto 15 beginning in 1980 had contact with anyone who indicated 16 they were going to have direct contact with Nevada Power 17 Company? 18 A. No. 19 Q. Do you know of any person who gave information 20 to Nevada Power Company regarding the studies that had been 21 performed over time regarding PCBs? 22 MR. FEATHERSTONE: May I hear the question, 23 please. 24 (Whereupon, the reporter propounded the previous question.) 25 THE WITNESS: You want to know if I know a - 56 COHCANNON & JAEGER COMPUTER AIDED TRANSCRIPTION 1 name that gave something to that companyf that name? Is 2 that specific? Is that what you1re asking? .3 HR. BRADLEY; A name or a group. 4 A. The electric utility trade associations - EEI, 5 USWAG - made available to their members copies of this CMA 6 submission to EPA in response to the 1981 rule-making. As 7 an appendix, as part of that submission to the Federal 8 agencies, several Monsanto documents summarizing 9 information we had in our files was prepared by our staff 10 and were included to the agency. So the members of the 11 consensus group, which included the utility trade 12 associations, made available to their members and 13 participants this information, which we freely made 14 available through CMA to them. 15 Q. Now, how do you know that EEI, USWAG made 16 available to their members this type of information? 17 A. They asked for copies of the information, 18 asked if it was free to be distributed. CMABs answer is 19 yes, it is. 20 Q. Did anyone from EEI, USWAG show you documents 21 that indicated they were, in fact, distributing that 22 information to electric utility companies? 23 A. No. 24 Q. Did anyone from EEI, USWAG indicate to you 25 orally that they were distributing that CMA material and - 57 CONCANNON & JAEGER COMPUTER AIDED TRANSCRIPTION X Monsanto material to electric utility companies? 2 A. Their representatives asked if it was 3 available to be distributed. I assumed that meant they 4 were going to distribute it, since we made it available to 5 them. 6 Q. Other than EEI, USWAG, do you know of any 7 person or group that gave information to electric utility 8 companies regarding the studies that had taken place over 9 time regarding PCBs? 10 A . No. 11 Q. Do you know whether, beginning in 1980, 12 electrical utility companies received warnings regarding 13 the actual or potential hazards of PCBs from any source? 14 A. If they received the material safety data 15 sheets, they received the warnings that were contained 16 therein. 17 Q. Other than the MSDSs, were there any -- 18 MR. FEATHERSTONEs You already asked about the 19 CMA submission. Is that in addition to that, Mr. Bradley? 20 A. The information published by the EPA in the 21 Federal regulations which govern PCBs and their uses, they 22 certainly should have received that. 23 MR. BRADLEY: Okay. 24 Q. (By Mr. Bradley) Any other warnings? 25 A. Those would be the ones that come to mind. - 58 CONCANNON & JAEGER COMPUTER AIDED TRANSCRIPTION 1 Q. Did you maintain the title Manager of Product 2 and Environmental Safety from 1980 to your retirement? .3 A. No. 4 Q. What was your next job? 5 A. My job function remainedthe same, maybe some 6 expanded activities. My title changed and increased, more 7 or less, as direct responsibility for the function and 8 salary level increased. 9 Q. But the kind of work you did stayed the same? 10 A. Yes. 11 Q. Until you retired? 12 A. That's correct. 13 Q. In the documents submitted by Monsantoto CMA, 14 did Monsanto indicate when it first learned that PCBs were 15 absorbed through the skin? 16 A. I don't specificallyrecall that. 17 Q. In the documents submitted -- Well,let me 18 back off for a moment. Do you know whether the CMA 19 submission to the consensus group, or to the Industry 20 Consensus Group, either one, indicated when Monsanto first 21 learned that PCBs are absorbed through the skin? 22 MR. FEATHERSTONE: Well, let me -- I'm sorry. 23 Let me hear the question now back, please. 24 (Whereupon, the reporter propounded the previous question.) 25 MR. FEATHERSTONE: Okay. - 59 CONCANNON & JAEGER COMPUTER AXPEP TRANBCKAFT1UW 1 A. I don't recall any specific dates. 2 Q. (By Mr. Bradley) In the submissions to the .3 CMA/ did Monsanto indicate that it knew as early as 1937, 4 that workers exposed to Halowax developed severe cases of 5 chloracne? 6 A* I don't specifically recall papers that were 7 submitted. 8 MR. FEATHERSTONE: That were what? 9 A. That were presented to the group. 10 MR. FEATHERSTONE: Okay. 11 A. CMA group. 12 Q. (By Mr. Bradley) In the CMA documents that 13 they submitted to the consensus group - by that, I mean the 14 Industry Consensus Group and the consensus group - did CMA 15 report that Monsanto knew as early as 1937 that workers 16 supposed to Halowax developed chloracne? 17 A. I don't recall. 18 Q. Have you heard of Halowax? 19 A. Yes, I have. 20 Q. What is Halowax? 21 A. Halowax was a wax that was used as a coating 22 I believe. Sometimes, a coating on wire cable. 23 Q* What was it comprised of? 24 A. It was a mixture of chlorinated organic 25 compounds, and I don't think I even know what the CONCANNON & JAEGER COMPUTER AIDED TRANSCRIPTION 1 composition is. 2 Q. Do you know whether chlorinated diphenyl was .3 part of the composition? 4 A. I don't know offhand. 5 Q. In the submission given by Monsanto to the 6 CMA, did Monsanto indicate that it knew as early as 1937 7 that if someone who had been exposed to PCBs had an 8 acne-like condition, that it could be a sign of more 9 serious systemic poisoning? 10 MR. FEATHERSTONE: Object to the form of the 11 question. 12 A. I specifically don't know. 13 Q. (By Mr* Bradley) Do you whether the CMA, when 14 it sent documents to the consensus groups, whether it 15 informed readers that Monsanto knew as early as 1937 that 16 if someone exposed to PCBs developed an acne-like 17 condition, that it could be a sign of systemic poisoning? 18 MR. FEATHERSTONE; Object to the form of the 19 question. 20 A. I don't think -- I'm not sure any of us knew 21 what systemic poisoning is. I'm not sure they would have 22 used that wording, no. 23 Q. (By Mr. Bradley) Do you know what systemic 24 poisoning is? 25 A. No, I don't. - 61 CONCANNON & JAEGER COMPUTER AIDED TRANSCRIPTION 1 Q. X guess in fairness, you're not a medical 2 doctor? .3 A. No. 4 Q. You're not atoxicologists? 5 A. No. 6 Q. Andyou're not an epidemiologist? 7 A. No. 8 Q. I'm going to show younow Plaintiff's Exhibit 9 979. 10 MR. BRADLEY: And for the record, John, I'm 11 not going to give you a copy of that only because we've 12 used it so many times, unless you want me to. 13 A. Okay. 14 Q. (By Mr.Bradley) Haveyou seen thatdocument 15 before today? 16 A. Yes, I have. 17 Q. Where did you see that? 18 A. I read it at my office at some time. 19 Q. Okay. And did you read the portion towards 20 the back that contains the round table discussion? 21 A. At one time, I've read this whole paper but I 22 don't specifically recall what's in it. 23 Q. Did you understand the paper when you read it? 24 A. I generally understood the paper and what the 25 paper was saying, yes. - 62 CONCANNON & JAEGER COMPUTER AIDED TRANSCRIPTION 1 Q. Do you know whether Monsanto/ when it made its 2 submissions to CMA, included information reflected in .3 Exhibit 979? 4 A. Most probably they did, 5 Q. And do you know whether CMA, when it made its 6 submissions to the consensus groups, whether it informed 7 its readers that Monsanto had participated in a round table 8 discussion regarding Exhibit 979? 9 A. I doubt if anybody mentioned a round table 10 discussion, 11 Q, Do you know whether the CMA submission to the 12 consensus groups indicated that Halowax was comprised in 13 part of chlorinated diphenyls, which are the same as PCBs, 14 and that it was reported as early as 1937 by Dr, Lewis 15 Schwartz that if you are exposed to a mixture of 16 chlorinated naphthalenes and chlorinated diphenyls in the 17 mixture and percentages reflected in this exhibit and you 18 developed an acne-like condition, that that is a sign of a 19 more serious systemic poisoning? 20 HR. FEATHERSTONE: Object to the form of the 21 question, 22 A. I don't know. 23 Q. (By Mr. Bradley) Did the submission to CMA 24 indicate that Monsanto knew in the 1940s that there were 25 tests that showed PCBs could cause liver damage? - 63 CONCANNON & JAEGER COMPUTER AIDED TRANSCRIPTION 1 A. Most probably. 2 Q. Did the CMA document submitted to the 3 consensus groups indicate that as early as the 1940s, 4 Monsanto knew that exposure to PCBs caused liver damage? 5 A. I doubt if CMA singled out Monsanto knew 6 something when they presented a document because they were 7 representing the industry, not a particular company. 8 Q. Did Monsanto, in its submissions to the CMA, 9 indicate that it knew, Monsanto knew as early as 1956 of 10 the toxicity of the vapors of Aroclor 1242 and 1254? 11 A. Most probably. 12 Q. And did the CMA submission to the consensus 13 groups inform readers that Monsanto knew as early as 1956 14 of the toxicity of the vapors of Aroclor 1242 and 1254? 15 A. I don't think CMA identified that Monsanto 16 knew anything. That's not the form of the presentation. 17 Q. Do you know whatpolychlorinated 18 dibenzylfurans are? 19 A. Yes. 20 Q. Are they considered to be more toxic than 21 PCBs? 22 A. They are reported to be more toxic than PCBs, 23 yes. 24 Q* On a level of two or three hundred times, do 25 you know? - 64 CONCANNON & JAEGER COMPUTER AIDED TRANS UKARTJ. UN 1 A. I don't think that's correct. 2 Q. What do you think is correct? .3 A. I think the numbers that I've heard is they're 4 reported, the order of magnitude, to be a factor of ten, 5 twenty. Something of that order. 6 Q. Did Monsanto report to CMA that 7 polychlorinated dibenzylfurans were present in PCBs 8 manufactured by Monsanto? 9 A. I don't think that Monsanto reported that to 10 CMA, no. 11 Q. Do you know whether CMA, in its submissions to 12 the consensus groups, reported that Monsanto knew 13 polychlorinated dibenzylfurans were present in PCBs 14 manufactured by Monsanto? 15 A. Again, CMA didn't report anything that said 16 that Monsanto knew it. Dibenzylfurans were covered in 17 CMA* s report. 18 Q. Did Monsanto report to CMA that chronic 19 poisoning may occur with repeated exposures to sufficient 20 concentrations of PCB vapor, and that Monsanto knew that as 21 early as 1947? 22 A. I don't think Monsanto reported information in 23 that format for those dates. 24 Q. And CMA wouldn't have reported it in that 25 format to the consensus groups? - 65 CONCANNON & JAEGER COMPUTER AIDED TRANSCRIPTIUN 1 THE WITNESS: Wouldn't have? 2 MR. BRADLEY: Would not have. .3 A. Nor because there was a TLV established for 4 vapor exposure. 5 Q. Did Monsanto report to CMA that it knew in 6 1947 that repeated expossure to PCB vapor may produce 7 internal bodily injury which may be disabling or could be 8 fatal? 9 A. I don't know, recall that. 10 Q. And that probably wasn't in what CMA 11 distributed to the consensus groups? 12 MR. FEATHERSTONE: Object to the form. 13 MR. BRADLEY: All right. Then let me ask it 14 this way. 15 Q. (By Mr. Bradley) Did CMA report to the 16 consensus groups that Monsanto knew in 1947 that repeated 17 exposures to PCB vapor may produce internal bodily injury 18 which may be disabling or could be fatal? 19 A. CMA didn't report to the consensus group that 20 Monsanto knew any particular facts at any particular time. 21 It's the same answer. 22 MR. BRADLEY: I have nothing further for this 23 witness in his personal capacity. 24 MR. FEATHERSTONE: Okay. 25 - 66 CONCANNON & JAEGER COMPUTER SIDED TRANSCRIPTION 1 o 3 4 ;r*i 5 7 Notary Public within and for the State of Missouri. 3 MY COMMISSION EXPIRES THE DAY OP 9 ^ y L U & ^ ___________ A . D . , 19 <7 J ' C 10 11 JO SE P H S S. HIBLOCK 12 NOTARY PUBLIC STATE OP MISSOURI ST .L0U13 COUNTY 13 ttt COf^USSlON EXP. JAN. 15,535 14 15 16 17 IS 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 - 67 COMCAI3HON & JAEGER Xa ^ iE of W it n e s s DEPOSITION CORRECTION SHEET In Re : Nevada Power Company v. Monsanto, et al. Upon reading the deposition and before subscribing thereto, the deponent indicated the following changes should be made: Page i f Line Reason Assigned For Change: Should Read: 7 A D i e c.A$TtA/Cr- Page r Line 2 t Should Reads M AKh-eT Reason Assigned For Change: Page V Line Reason Assigned For Change: Page 4 Line Should Read: Should Read: jc * J v^>r~g- Reason Assigned For Change: Page <? Line ^ / Reason Assigned For Change: Page Line 2- 3 Should Read: &- ftjeQsr' Should Read:^c^-Z A a h # J a. Reason Assigned For Change: aPage Line Reason Assigned For Change: Page /( Line ^ Reason Assigned For Change: Page /' Line 2 t Reason Assigned For Change: Should Read: Should Read: Should Read: Ia/ p ^ -e f t *m E OF WITNESS DEPOSITION CORRECTION SHEET In Re: Nevada Power Company v. Monsanto, et al. Upon reading the deposition and before subscribing thereto, the deponent indicated the following changes should be made: 'Page Line 2 3 ^ should Read: ^ Reason Assigned For Change: Page Line Should Read: )C 2 Reason Assigned For Change: Page 'Ac? Line 7 - ( Should Read: Reason Assigned For Change: Page ^3 Line /<? Reason Assigned For Change: 'ft- Page o dT~ Line /; Should Read: ^ 5 x. Should Read: k^A Reason Assigned For Change: Page ^ & Line Should Read: Reason Assigned For Change: Page A O Line Should Read Reason Assigned For Change: Page ^0 Line ^ ^ Should Read: ^ 7" Reason Assigned For Change I Page Line f Reason Assigned For Change: Should Read: v-C- U**/ *2- * ' <s IE OF WITNESS DEPOSITION CORRECTION SHEET In Re : Nevada Power Company v. Monsanto, et al. Upon reading the deposition and before subscribing thereto, the deponent indicated the following changes should be made: Page 2^ Line /5>"^ /* 7 Should Read: Reason Assigned For Change: Page Line C Should Read: Reason Assigned For Change: Page Line /. \ Reason Assigned For Change: Should Read: S-e-e- - Page 3 ^ Line / 2 / Reason Assigned For Change: Should Read: Page 3/ Line y / Reason Assigned For Change: Should Read: yl4^ J ^ Page Line Should Read: Reason Assigned For Change: Page 32- Line ^ Reason Assigned For Change: Should Read: a * tj Page 3^ Line Reason Assigned For Change: Should Read: 72. Page Line Should Read: fa n / l / o t/A -c sfj Reason Assigned For Change: 7 (&> OF WITNESS DEPOSITION CORRECTION SHEET In Re: Nevada Power Company v. Monsanto, et al. Upon reading the deposition and before subscribing thereto, the deponent indicated the following changes should be made: Page Line 2- f . Reason Assigned For Change: Should Read: e~"X- . J2 A m / Page ^ Line Should Read: p a Reason Assigned For Change: Page *2,^ Line Reason Assigned Fo'r Change: Should Read: /? Page L inear' Reason Assigned For Change: Should Read: A P f T j A V ^ M - Page Cf Line / ( p Should Read: Reason Assigned For Change: // Page Line / ^ Should Read: Reason Assigned For Change: *p/ / Page Q> Line Reason Assigned For Change: Should Read: ^7 rj ^ Page C ? L i n e /q Should Read: Reason Assigned For Change: Page Line Should Read: Reason Assigned For Change: C U M f U T H ti M a U L u Tr,AUO'gnir j.l i m 1 STATE OF MISSOURI ) ) ss 2 COUNTY OF ST. LOUIS ) .3 I, John T. Concannorif a Notary Public within and for 4 the State of Missouri, duly commissioned, qualified and 5 authorized to administer oaths and to take and certify to 6 depositions, do hereby certify that pursuant to Notice in 7 the civil cause now pending and undetermined in the 8 District Court of the United States, within and for the 9 District of Nevada, entitled NEVADA PONER COMPANY 10 Plaintiff, -vs- MONSANTO COMPANY, et al., Defendants, to be 11 used in the trial of said cause in said Court, I was 12 attended at the law offices of Messrs. Busch & Eppenberger, 13 100 N* Broadway, Suite 1300, in the City of St. Louis, 14 State of Missouri, by Ralph A. Bradley, attorney for the 15 Plaintiff; by Bruce A. Featherstone, attorney for the 16 Defendant, Monsanto Company; and by JOHN B. CRADDOCK, the 17 witness, in said office on March 19, 1993. 18 The said witness, JOHN H* CRADDOCK, being of sound 19 mind and being by me first carefully examined and duly 20 cautioned and sworn to testify the truth, the whole truth 21 and nothing but the truth in the case aforesaid, thereupon 22 testified as is shown in the foregoing transcript, said 23 testimony being by me reported in shorthand and caused to 24 be transcribed into typewriting, and that the foregoing 25 pages correctly set out the testimony of the aforementioned - 68 CONCANNON & JAEGER COMPUTER AIDED TRANSCRIPTION 1 witness, JOHN H. CRADDOCK, together with the questions 2 propounded by counsel and -the remarks and objections of 3 counsel thereto, and is in all respects a full, true and 4 complete transcript of the questions propounded to and the 5 answers given by said witness; and that said testimony, so 6 transcribed, was subscribed to by the witness on the 1 ;rA 7 day of W m ____________ , A. D. , 1993. 8 I FURTHER CERTIFY that I am not of counsel nor 9 attorney for any of the parties to said suit, nor related, 10 nor interested in any of the parties or their attorneys. 11 WITJNE$S MY HAND and Notarial Seal, given this r^)~^ 12 day of 2 ________/ A. D., 1993, at St. Louis, Missouri. 13 MY COMMISSION EXPIRES SEPTEMBER 12, 1994 14 15 16 JOHN T. CONCANNON, 17 Notary Public, within and for the State of Missouri 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 - 69 - CONCANNON & JAEGER 'l U X U X N . -L kji-ti-j u u i i 'i w w ki 1 April 18, 1993 2 .3 4 Bruce A. Featherstone, Esq* Kirkland & Ellis 5 1999 Broadway ~ Ste. 4000 Denver, Colorado 80202 6 7 Rei Nevada Power Company -v~ Monsanto Company, et al. 8 Dear Mr. Featherstone: 9 This letter, incorporated as the last page of Mr. 10 Craddock's deposition, taken on March 19, 1993, will serve as notice to you that his testimony is now ready for 11 reading and signing of same. You will recall you indicated a preference for him reading his deposition, rather than 12 waiving signature. 13 Enclosed please find the original signature page of Mr. Craddock's deposition, along with an eratta sheet. 14 Please have Mr. Craddock read and sign his deposition and return the original signature page to me. I will then 15 return the signature page to the original transcript, and notify Mr* Bradley of any corrections the witness may have 1 $ made* 17 Thank you for your cooperation in this regard. 18 Sincerely, 19 20 JOHN T. CONCANNON Shorthand Reporter 21 Concannon a Jaeger 22 General Court Reporters 705 Olive Street - Ste. 604 23 St. Louis, Missouri 63101 24 JTCimd 25 - 70 - CONCANNON h JAEGER